Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 50 references

Near-unity quantum interference of transverse spatial modes in an ultra-compact inverse-designed photonic device

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read An inverse-designed 3 µm by 3 µm mode beamsplitter achieves Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility up to 99.56 percent, with every design above 98 percent, showing that transverse spatial modes can support near-unity quantum interference in compact…

desk verdict A solid, reproducible demonstration of near-unity HOM visibility in inverse-designed mode beamsplitters; the missing crosstalk numbers are a real but minor gap. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.08668 v1 pith:G4LL2BNM submitted 2025-05-13 quant-ph

Jamika Ann Roque , Daniel Peace , Simon White , Emanuele Polino , Sayantan Das , Farzard Ghafari , Sergei Slussarenko , Nora Tischler
show 1 more author
Jacquiline Romero
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords Hong-Ou-Mandelinterferencetransversespatialmodesinversedesignintegratedphotonicsmodebeamsplittersiliconmultimodewaveguidequantum
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports that a silicon photonic component produced by inverse design—a beamsplitter that operates on the transverse spatial mode of light in a waveguide, not on separate paths—can create near-unity Hong-Ou-Mandel interference between two photons. The best device shows a measured visibility of 99.56±0.64 percent, three copies of the same design average 99.38±0.41 percent, and every tested design exceeds 98 percent, all in a device footprint of 3 µm by 3 µm. The claim matters because transverse spatial modes are a relatively unused degree of freedom in integrated quantum photonics, and this result suggests inverse-designed components can deliver the compact, reproducible mode mixing needed to exploit them.

What carries the argument

The central object is an inverse-designed $3\,\mu\mathrm{m} \times 3\,\mu\mathrm{m}$ mode beamsplitter that mixes the two lowest transverse electric modes (TE0 and TE1) of a multimode silicon waveguide. Its topology is produced by adjoint-method topology optimization that minimizes the squared deviation of simulated S-parameters from a target transmission of $\sqrt{0.5}$ for each input–output pair, with level-set constraints on minimum feature size; the same optimizer also produces the mode multiplexers and demultiplexers. The theoretical analysis compresses the device into a two-port transfer matrix with transmission amplitudes $t_i$, reflection amplitudes $r_i$, and three phases, leading to an effective splitting ratio $\eta_{\rm eff}=t_0^2/(r_0^2+t_0^2)$ and a predicted Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility $V_{\rm HOM}=-2\eta_{\rm eff}(1-\eta_{\rm eff})\cos\alpha\,I_{\rm overlap}(0)/(1-2\eta_{\rm eff}+2\eta_{\rm eff}^2)$, which is the formula against which the measurements are checked.

What would settle it

Measure the mode content of the device output with a mode-resolving demultiplexer or near-field imaging while injecting one photon per input mode; if a non-negligible fraction of the power appears in TE2, TE3, radiation modes, or as multiplexer cross-talk, the two-port model behind Eq. (5) would not describe the interference and the reported visibility would need reinterpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At the paper's core is the demonstration that inverse-designed transverse-mode beamsplitters behave as high-quality Hong-Ou-Mandel interferometers. Using a device that couples the TE0 and TE1 modes of a multimode silicon waveguide, the authors measure V_HOM = 99.56 ± 0.64 percent for their best copy, with an average of 99.38 ± 0.41 percent over three copies of the same design; the three different inverse-designed beamsplitters all exceed 98 percent. Measured visibilities agree with the prediction of a lossy, unbalanced, asymmetric beamsplitter model, Eq. (5), based on the classically measured effective splitting ratio; the best device, at η_eff = 48.77 percent, would reach about 99.95 percent with a perfect source. The paper positions this as evidence that inverse-designed multimode components are suitable building blocks for compact integrated quantum photonic circuits.

Load-bearing premise

The results stand on the assumption that the device behaves as a lossy two-port beamsplitter that only mixes the two lowest waveguide modes, with the multiplexers delivering one clean photon in each mode; if appreciable power leaks into higher modes or radiation, or cross-talk enters at the multiplexers, the measured visibility no longer isolates two-mode interference.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Transverse spatial modes can be used as a practical degree of freedom for integrated quantum photonic circuits, adding Hilbert-space dimension without adding extra waveguide paths.
  • The same inverse-design procedure can produce different splitting ratios and mode counts in the same footprint; the paper reports a three-port beamsplitter designed in the same area.
  • Because the visibility depends only on the effective splitting ratio and the phase $\alpha$, balanced losses do not destroy the quantum interference, so lossy but balanced devices remain useful.
  • Simulated fabrication robustness keeps theoretical visibility above 85 percent for a ±5 nm bias and above 90 percent for ±2.5 nm, indicating that near-unity interference survives realistic manufacturing tolerances.
  • The measured visibilities are close to the source limit, so improving the photon-pair source should push the on-chip visibility toward the predicted 99.95 percent without changing the device.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • By extension, the near-source-limited visibility implies that a straightforward test—repeating the experiment with a higher-indistinguishability source on the same chip—should raise measured values above 99.9 percent; the paper does not run that test.
  • By extension, the same 3 µm design area and optimization recipe could plausibly be scaled to more than two transverse modes for qudit operations, but the paper only demonstrates two-mode mixing and a simulated three-port tritter, so this remains an extrapolation.
  • By extension, if balanced loss is all that matters for HOM visibility, then quantum components may tolerate higher insertion loss than classical components in the same platform, which could relax fabrication constraints for multimode quantum devices.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports the design, fabrication, and quantum characterization of inverse-designed transverse-mode beamsplitters in a 3 µm × 3 µm footprint on a silicon-on-insulator platform. The device under test is a chain consisting of grating couplers, an inverse-designed two-mode multiplexer, the mode beamsplitter, and a demultiplexer. The authors measure Hong-Ou-Mandel interference between TE0 and TE1 spatial modes, reporting a maximum visibility of 99.56 ± 0.64% from a single device, an average visibility across three identical copies of Design B of 99.38 ± 0.41%, and visibilities above 98% for all three inverse-designed beamsplitter designs. The theoretical benchmark is obtained from Eq. (5) using the classically measured effective splitting ratio η_eff and an independently measured source visibility of 99.57 ± 0.30%. Fabrication-bias simulations are used to argue robustness of the designs.

Significance. If the central attribution is fully supported, this is a valuable demonstration that inverse-designed ultra-compact multimode components can be operated in the quantum regime with near-unity interference visibility. The paper has several genuine strengths: the source visibility is measured independently, the HOM prediction is not obtained by fitting the HOM data but from the separately characterized η_eff, multiple device copies are measured, and fabrication-tolerance simulations are included. The 3 µm × 3 µm footprint is substantially smaller than previous transverse-mode beamsplitter implementations, and the reproducibility across nominally identical devices is a useful practical result for integrated quantum photonics. The main caveat is that the experiment characterizes the whole multiplexer-beamsplitter-demultiplexer chain, and the manuscript does not yet establish that the near-unity visibility is attributable to the inverse-designed beamsplitter in isolation rather than to the combined response of the full device.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (5), Fig. 7] The central attribution of the measured near-unity HOM visibility to the inverse-designed mode beamsplitter is not fully supported without characterizing the surrounding multiplexer/demultiplexer. The device under test is a chain of grating couplers, a two-mode multiplexer, the beamsplitter, and a demultiplexer, but the main text reports no measured extinction ratios for the multiplexer/demultiplexer (the |S32|^2 and |S42|^2 terms in Eq. (8) are only optimization targets), nor the higher-order-mode content at the beamsplitter input. Since Eq. (5) models a two-port beamsplitter acting on |TE0,TE1>, any crosstalk amplitude in the mode multiplexers changes the input state and hence the visibility; the measured ≈99.5% visibility indirectly bounds this crosstalk, but the bound is not quantified. Please report the measured mux/demux extinction ratios and demonstrate (analytically or numerically) that the residual crosstalk changes the predicted V_HOM by less than the reported uncertainty.
  2. [Section 4, Fig. 7(b), Section 5] The theoretical benchmark in Fig. 7(b) is computed from η_eff 'based on classical characterisation' (Supplement 9.3), but the main text does not specify whether η_eff was measured on the full device or simulated for the beamsplitter alone, nor the uncertainty in η_eff and its propagation through Eq. (5). In addition, the prediction assumes cosα = −1; the text says the optimized designs are 'consistent with energy conservation' but does not report a measured or simulated value of α for each device. Please clarify these points and give the propagated uncertainty of the predicted visibility so that the agreement in Fig. 7(b) can be assessed quantitatively.
  3. [Section 4, Fig. 7(b)] The reproducibility claim rests on the average visibility 99.38 ± 0.41% across 'three identical devices,' but the text does not state whether this is the standard deviation or standard error of the three fitted visibilities, and it does not specify how many copies of Designs A and C were measured. Because reproducibility is a central claim of the paper, please define the averaging procedure and report the per-design device counts and per-copy uncertainties.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5] The statement that a perfect SPDC source would give visibilities 'up to 99.95%' with the best device appears inconsistent with the quoted η_eff = 48.77% for Design B: Eq. (5) yields approximately 99.88% for that value. Please reconcile the numbers or rephrase the claim.
  2. [Section 4, Fig. 7] The main text reports the source visibility of 99.57 ± 0.30% but does not show the corresponding off-chip HOM dip or its raw data; including this measurement in the main text or supplement would make the source-limited comparison in Fig. 7(b) more transparent.
  3. [Section 1, Abstract] The claim that the device is 'the smallest transverse mode beamsplitters for 1550 nm photons to date' is supported only by a rough comparison with the 60 µm grating-based device in Ref. [25]; please provide a broader comparison or qualify the claim as applying to the designs considered here.
  4. [Section 3, Eq. (2)] The phrase 'the coefficient amplitudes should be symmetric' in the context of a lossless beamsplitter should be stated more precisely as |t1| = |t2| and |r1| = |r2| under the chosen phase convention, to avoid confusion with the separate notion of an unbalanced splitting ratio.
  5. [Data availability] Given that the central quantitative result is a visibility of 99.56 ± 0.64%, the paper would benefit from including the raw coincidence-count data and fit residuals as supplementary material rather than only providing them on request.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the theoretical HOM visibility is an independent benchmark computed from classically characterized η_eff and the measured source visibility, not from the HOM coincidence data.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison is between measured on-chip Hong-Ou-Mandel visibilities and the prediction of Eq. (5), which uses the classically characterized effective splitting ratio η_eff and the independently measured source visibility. No parameter of the model is fitted to the HOM coincidence data, so the agreement in Fig. 7(b) is a genuine, falsifiable benchmark. The only auxiliary assumption is α=π, which the paper justifies through the energy-conservation condition (Eq. 2) and prior simulation observations; this is a stated physical assumption rather than an input that has been renamed as a prediction, and it is not extracted from the measured dip. The paper does not rely on a load-bearing self-citation, an imported uniqueness theorem, or a redefinition of a known result. Potential concerns about unmeasured multiplexer crosstalk or higher-order mode content bear on attribution and completeness, but they do not make the derivation circular. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained, and no circular step can be identified with the quoted evidence.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to the HOM data. The effective splitting ratio η_eff is measured classically, the overlap integral is set by the independently measured source visibility, and the relative phase α is assumed to be π. The central claim additionally relies on the two-mode subspace approximation and on the multiplexer preparing clean TE0/TE1 inputs.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The two-mode transfer matrix (Eq. 1) fully describes the beamsplitter; no coupling to higher-order transverse modes or radiation.
    The inverse-designed device is simulated and measured only on TE0/TE1 ports; the model and HOM visibility formula (Eq. 5) live in this subspace.
  • domain assumption The input state is one photon in TE0 and one photon in TE1 with negligible cross-talk from the mode multiplexer.
    The multiplexer design (Eq. 8) minimizes cross-talk, but the fabricated extinction ratio is not reported in the main text.
  • domain assumption The relative phase α satisfies α=π by energy conservation (Eq. 2).
    The device has about 1 dB loss, and output phases are stated to be consistent with energy conservation but not directly measured; Eq. (5) uses cos α=-1.
  • domain assumption The HOM dip shape follows the triangular model of Ref. [39].
    Visibility is extracted by fitting the coincidence curve with this model; a mismatch would bias the extracted visibility.
  • domain assumption SPINS optimization and FDTD verification accurately predict fabricated device behavior within a ±5 nm fabrication bias.
    The robustness analysis (Fig. 5) relies on simulated S-parameters under etch bias, assuming the real fabrication is within this window.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Near-unity quantum interference of transverse spatial modes in an ultra-compact inverse-designed photonic device." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G4LL2BNM

@misc{pith2026250508668,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Near-unity quantum interference of transverse spatial modes in an ultra-compact inverse-designed photonic device},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G4LL2BNM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08668}
}
abstract

The transverse spatial mode of photons is an untapped resource for scaling up integrated photonic quantum computing. To be practically useful for improving scalability, reliable and high-visibility quantum interference between transverse spatial modes on-chip needs to be demonstrated. We show repeatable quantum interference using inverse-designed transverse mode beamsplitters that have an ultra-compact footprint of 3 $\mu m$ $\times$ 3 $\mu m$ -- the smallest transverse mode beamsplitters for 1550 nm photons to date. We measure a Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility of up to 99.56$\pm$0.64 % from a single device, with an average visibility across three identical devices of 99.38$\pm$0.41 %, indicating a high degree of reproducibility. Our work demonstrates that inverse-designed components are suitable for engineering quantum interference on-chip of multimode devices, paving the way for future compact integrated quantum photonic devices that exploit the transverse spatial mode of photons for high-dimensional quantum information.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.08668 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Four possible combinations for two photons incident on a beamsplitter. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Schematic diagram of the photonic chip for measuring quantum interference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Simulation setup for the inverse-designed transverse mode beamsplitter. Mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Inverse-designed transverse mode beamsplitters. (a) Final design of each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Simulated fabrication robustness. (a) Simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Simplified experimental setup for the HOM interference measurements. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Measured on-chip HOM visibilities. (a) Normalised coincidences versus relative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [25]

    Quantum interference between transverse spatial waveguide modes,

    A. Mohanty, M. Zhang, A. Dutt,et al., “Quantum interference between transverse spatial waveguide modes,” Nat. communications 8, 1–7 (2017)

    work page 2017

  2. [1]

    Quantum computing review: A decade of research,

    S. K. Soodet al., “Quantum computing review: A decade of research,” IEEE Trans. on Eng. Manag.71, 6662–6676 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [2]

    Archives of quantum computing: research progress and challenges,

    V. Sood and R. P. Chauhan, “Archives of quantum computing: research progress and challenges,” Arch. Comput. Methods Eng.31, 73–91 (2024)

    2024

  4. [3]

    The potential and global outlook of integrated photonics for quantum technologies,

    E. Pelucchi, G. Fagas, I. Aharonovich,etal., “The potential and global outlook of integrated photonics for quantum technologies,” Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 194–208 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    Photonic quantum information processing: A concise review,

    S. Slussarenko and G. J. Pryde, “Photonic quantum information processing: A concise review,” Appl. Phys. Rev.6 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [5]

    A manufacturable platform for photonic quantum computing,

    P. Team, “A manufacturable platform for photonic quantum computing,” Nature pp. 1–3 (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [6]

    Scaling and networking a modular photonic quantum computer,

    H. Aghaee Rad, T. Ainsworth, R. Alexander,et al., “Scaling and networking a modular photonic quantum computer,” Nature pp. 1–8 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [7]

    Advances in chip-scale quantum photonic technologies,

    L. Lu, X. Zheng, Y. Lu,etal., “Advances in chip-scale quantum photonic technologies,” Adv. Quantum Technol.4, 2100068 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    Very-large-scale integrated quantum graph photonics,

    J. Bao, Z. Fu, T. Pramanik,et al., “Very-large-scale integrated quantum graph photonics,” Nat. Photonics 2023 17:7 17, 573–581 (2023)

    2023

  2. [9]

    Multidimensional fiber-to-chip optical processing using photonic integrated circuits,

    Y. Wan, X. Cao, C. Cai,et al., “Multidimensional fiber-to-chip optical processing using photonic integrated circuits,” Laser & Photonics Rev.18, 2300853 (2024)

    2024

  3. [10]

    Progress in integrated and fiber optics for time-bin based quantum information processing,

    N. Montaut, A. George, M. Monika,et al., “Progress in integrated and fiber optics for time-bin based quantum information processing,” Adv. Opt. Technol.14, 1560084 (2025)

    2025

  4. [11]

    On-chip frequency-bin quantum photonics,

    K. V. Myilswamy, L. M. Cohen, S. Seshadri,et al., “On-chip frequency-bin quantum photonics,” Nanophotonics pp. 1–16 (2024)

    2024

  5. [12]

    Femtosecond laser micromachining for integrated quantum photonics,

    G. Corrielli, A. Crespi, and R. Osellame, “Femtosecond laser micromachining for integrated quantum photonics,” Nanophotonics 10, 3789–3812 (2021)

    2021

  6. [13]

    Multimode silicon photonics,

    C. Li, D. Liu, and D. Dai, “Multimode silicon photonics,” Nanophotonics8, 227–247 (2018)

    2018

  7. [14]

    Roadmap on multimode photonics,

    “Roadmap on multimode photonics,” J. Opt.24, 083001 (2022)

    2022

  8. [15]

    Multi-dimensional data transmission using inverse-designed silicon photonics and microcombs,

    K. Y. Yang, C. Shirpurkar, A. D. White,etal., “Multi-dimensional data transmission using inverse-designed silicon photonics and microcombs,” Nat. communications13, 7862 (2022)

    2022

  9. [16]

    Edge-guided inverse design of digital metamaterial-based mode multiplexers for high-capacity multi-dimensional optical interconnect,

    A. Sun, S. Xing, X. Deng,etal., “Edge-guided inverse design of digital metamaterial-based mode multiplexers for high-capacity multi-dimensional optical interconnect,” Nat. Commun. 2025 16:116, 1–12 (2025)

    2025

  10. [17]

    Compactsilicon10-modemulti/demultiplexerforhybridmode-andpolarisation-division multiplexing system,

    W.Jiang,J.Miao,andT.Li,“Compactsilicon10-modemulti/demultiplexerforhybridmode-andpolarisation-division multiplexing system,” Sci. reports9, 13223 (2019)

    2019

  11. [18]

    Metamaterial-basedmaxwell’sfisheyelensformultimodewaveguidecrossing,

    H.XuandY.Shi,“Metamaterial-basedmaxwell’sfisheyelensformultimodewaveguidecrossing,”Laser&Photonics Rev. 12, 1800094 (2018)

    2018

  12. [19]

    Ultra-broadband multimode waveguide crossing via subwavelength transmitarray with bound state,

    X. Guo, Z. Wang, Y. Zhang,etal., “Ultra-broadband multimode waveguide crossing via subwavelength transmitarray with bound state,” Laser & Photonics Rev.17, 2200674 (2023)

    2023

  13. [20]

    Low-lossandlow-crosstalkmultimodewaveguidebendonsilicon,

    “Low-lossandlow-crosstalkmultimodewaveguidebendonsilicon,”Opt.Express,Vol.26,Issue13,pp.17680-17689 26, 17680–17689 (2018)

    2018

  14. [21]

    Reconfigurable and scalable multimode silicon photonics switch for energy-efficient mode-division-multiplexing systems,

    R. B. Priti and O. Liboiron-Ladouceur, “Reconfigurable and scalable multimode silicon photonics switch for energy-efficient mode-division-multiplexing systems,” J. Light. Technol.37, 3851–3860 (2019)

    2019

  15. [22]

    On-chip coherent conversion of photonic quantum entanglement between different degrees of freedom,

    L.-T. Feng, M. Zhang, Z.-Y. Zhou,et al., “On-chip coherent conversion of photonic quantum entanglement between different degrees of freedom,” Nat. communications7, 11985 (2016)

    2016

  16. [23]

    On-chip transverse-mode entangled photon pair source,

    L.-T. Feng, M. Zhang, X. Xiong,etal., “On-chip transverse-mode entangled photon pair source,” npj Quantum Inf.5, 2 (2019)

    2019

  17. [24]

    Measurement of subpicosecond time intervals between two photons by interference,

    C.-K. Hong, Z.-Y. Ou, and L. Mandel, “Measurement of subpicosecond time intervals between two photons by interference,” Phys. review letters59, 2044 (1987)

    1987

  18. [26]

    Transverse mode-encoded quantum gate on a silicon photonic chip,

    L.-T. Feng, M. Zhang, X. Xiong,et al., “Transverse mode-encoded quantum gate on a silicon photonic chip,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 060501 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Nanophotonic inverse design with spins: Software architecture and practical considerations,

    L. Su, D. Vercruysse, J. Skarda,etal., “Nanophotonic inverse design with spins: Software architecture and practical considerations,” Appl. Phys. Rev.7, 11407 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Adjoint shape optimization applied to electromagnetic design,

    “Adjoint shape optimization applied to electromagnetic design,” Opt. Express, Vol. 21, Issue 18, pp. 21693-2170121, 21693–21701 (2013)

    2013

  21. [29]

    Inverse design of an ultra-compact broadband optical diode based on asymmetric spatial mode conversion,

    F. Callewaert, S. Butun, Z. Li, and K. Aydin, “Inverse design of an ultra-compact broadband optical diode based on asymmetric spatial mode conversion,” Sci. Reports 2016 6:16, 1–10 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    Inverse design and characterization of compact, broadband, and low-loss chip-scale photonic power splitters,

    S. E. Hansen, G. Arregui, A. N. Babar,et al., “Inverse design and characterization of compact, broadband, and low-loss chip-scale photonic power splitters,” Mater. for Quantum Technol.4, 016201 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Inverse-designed lithium niobate nanophotonics,

    C. Shang, J. Yang, A. M. Hammond,et al., “Inverse-designed lithium niobate nanophotonics,” ACS Photonics10, 1019–1026 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Inverse-designed counter-tapered coupler based broadband and compact silicon mode multiplexer/demultiplexer,

    W. Jiang, S. Mao, and J. Hu, “Inverse-designed counter-tapered coupler based broadband and compact silicon mode multiplexer/demultiplexer,” Opt. Express31, 33253–33263 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Scalable and low crosstalk silicon mode exchanger for mode division multiplexing system enabled by inverse design,

    G. Zhang and O. Liboiron-Ladouceur, “Scalable and low crosstalk silicon mode exchanger for mode division multiplexing system enabled by inverse design,” IEEE Photonics J.13, 1–13 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    100nm broadband and ultra-compact multi-dimensional multiplexed photonic integrated circuit for high-capacity optical interconnects,

    R. Shen, R. Shen, F. Hu,et al., “100nm broadband and ultra-compact multi-dimensional multiplexed photonic integrated circuit for high-capacity optical interconnects,” Photonics Res. Vol. 12, Issue 12, pp. 2891-290012, 2891–2900 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Cmos-compatible ultra-compact silicon multimode waveguide bend based on inverse design method,

    S. Yang, H. Jia, J. Niu,et al., “Cmos-compatible ultra-compact silicon multimode waveguide bend based on inverse design method,” Opt. Commun.523, 128733 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Super-compact universal quantum logic gates with inverse-designed elements,

    L. He, D. Liu, J. Gao,et al., “Super-compact universal quantum logic gates with inverse-designed elements,” Sci. Adv. 9, eadg6685 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Multiphoton quantum interference at ultracompact inverse-designed multiport beam splitter,

    S.-Y. Huang, S. Kumar, J. Huster,et al., “Multiphoton quantum interference at ultracompact inverse-designed multiport beam splitter,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.00114 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Two-photon interference: the hong–ou–mandel effect,

    F. Bouchard, A. Sit, Y. Zhang,et al., “Two-photon interference: the hong–ou–mandel effect,” Reports on Prog. Phys. 84, 012402 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Anti-symmetrization reveals hidden entanglement,

    A. Fedrizzi, T. Herbst, M. Aspelmeyer,et al., “Anti-symmetrization reveals hidden entanglement,” New J. Phys.11, 103052 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Adjoint method and inverse design for nonlinear nanophotonic devices,

    T. W. Hughes, M. Minkov, I. A. Williamson, and S. Fan, “Adjoint method and inverse design for nonlinear nanophotonic devices,” ACS Photonics5, 4781–4787 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Exploring the fundamental limits of integrated beam splitters with arbitrary phase via topology optimization,

    A. Nanda, M. Kues, and A. Calà Lesina, “Exploring the fundamental limits of integrated beam splitters with arbitrary phase via topology optimization,” Opt. Lett.49, 1125 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    Analytical level set fabrication constraints for inverse design,

    D. Vercruysse, N. V. Sapra, L. Su,et al., “Analytical level set fabrication constraints for inverse design,” Sci. Reports 2019 9:19, 1–7 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Entanglement distillation rates exceeding the direct transmission bound,

    F. Ghafari, J. Dias, L. K. Shalm,et al., “Entanglement distillation rates exceeding the direct transmission bound,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.21133 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Robust approach for time-bin-encoded photonic quantum information protocols,

    S. J. U. White, E. Polino, F. Ghafari,etal., “Robust approach for time-bin-encoded photonic quantum information protocols,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 180802 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing,

    Y. Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders, and S. Kais, “Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing,” Front. Phys.8, 589504 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Realization of quantum algorithms with qudits,

    E. O. Kiktenko, A. S. Nikolaeva, and A. K. Fedorov, “Realization of quantum algorithms with qudits,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.12003 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Simple factorization of unitary transformations,

    H. de Guise, O. Di Matteo, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto, “Simple factorization of unitary transformations,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 022328 (2018)

    2018

  40. [48]

    Robust architecture for programmable universal unitaries,

    M. Y. Saygin, I. Kondratyev, I. Dyakonov,et al., “Robust architecture for programmable universal unitaries,” Phys. review letters124, 010501 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Experimental realization of any discrete unitary operator,

    M. Reck, A. Zeilinger, H. J. Bernstein, and P. Bertani, “Experimental realization of any discrete unitary operator,” Phys. review letters73, 58 (1994)

    1994

  42. [50]

    Optimal design for universal multiport interferometers,

    W. R. Clements, P. C. Humphreys, B. J. Metcalf,et al., “Optimal design for universal multiport interferometers,” Optica 3, 1460–1465 (2016)

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.