Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 30 references

Epitaxial T centres in silicon cut optical linewidth tenfold to 30 MHz

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · glm-5.2

2026-07-08 11:11 UTC pith:OX4FG2BO

load-bearing objection First demonstration of single epitaxial T centres in SOI with waveguide coupling; 30 MHz homogeneous linewidth is real but N=1. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06272 v1 pith:OX4FG2BO submitted 2026-07-07 quant-ph

Epitaxial single T centres in silicon-on-insulator

Christian H. Christiansen , Kasper H. Nielsen , Alisha Nanwani , Sebastiano Guaraldo , E. Laurits Piehorsch , Arnulf J. Snedker-Nielsen , Magnus L. Madsen , David R. Gongora
show 21 more authors
Emanuele Brusaschi Rodrigo A. Thomas Ian Farrer D. Hieu Nguyen Georgios Kountouris Be\~nat M. d. A. Jokisch Mohammad Khalifa Claudia Piccinini Mathias {\O}. Augustesen Hugo Laurell Kokeb B. Benti Maria S. Gonzalez Amedeo Carbone Elvedin Memisevic Sangeeth Kallatt Mark K. Svendsen Marianne E. Bathen Lasse Vines Peter Granum Peter Krogstrup Stefano Paesani
This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords centresquantumsiliconsinglecoherentemissionepitaxialinterfaces
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper demonstrates that single T centres — a type of atomic-scale defect in silicon that emits telecom photons and carries a spin qubit — can be grown epitaxially in a silicon-on-insulator wafer using molecular beam epitaxy, rather than being created by the standard method of ion implantation. The central result is a measured homogeneous optical linewidth of 30(10) MHz for a single epitaxial T centre coupled to a nanophotonic waveguide, measured at 100 mK. This is roughly ten times narrower than the 310(80) MHz linewidth measured on an ion-implanted reference sample prepared from the same base substrate and characterised under identical conditions. The authors attribute the improvement to the removal of bulk crystal defects that ion implantation inevitably introduces and that cause fast charge-related decoherence. They note that spectral diffusion — a slower noise process — is not improved, which they hypothesise is because it is dominated by surface defects at oxide interfaces rather than bulk damage. The paper also verifies single-emitter operation through a second-order autocorrelation measurement yielding g(2)(0) = 0.26(3), confirming sub-Poissonian photon statistics.

Core claim

The core discovery is that epitaxial growth via MBE can produce single T centres in a silicon-on-insulator device stack whose homogeneous optical linewidth is an order of magnitude narrower than that of ion-implanted T centres measured under the same conditions. The central object is the T centre — a carbon-hydrogen complex in silicon that combines a telecom-band optical transition with a coherent electron spin — and the central mechanism is the avoidance of implantation-induced lattice damage by instead forming the defect during low-temperature crystal growth. The paper shows that this approach specifically suppresses fast decoherence channels linked to bulk defects, while leaving slower,表面

What carries the argument

T centre (carbon-hydrogen colour centre in silicon with telecom optical transition and coherent spin); molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) with delta-doped Si:C layer at 220-350°C; spectral hole-burning (two-laser pump-probe technique measuring homogeneous linewidth); silicon-on-insulator (SOI) nanophotonic waveguide platform; second-order autocorrelation g(2)(0) for single-emitter verification

Load-bearing premise

The tenfold linewidth improvement rests on a single epitaxial emitter compared against an ensemble of implanted emitters, with no statistics across multiple epitaxial devices to confirm the 30 MHz value is representative rather than a best-case result.

What would settle it

If subsequent measurements on multiple epitaxial T-centre devices show homogeneous linewidths comparable to or worse than the 310 MHz implanted reference, the claimed advantage of epitaxial growth would not hold.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Epitaxial T centres could become the default fabrication route for silicon quantum photonics if the 30 MHz linewidth is confirmed across many devices, since it avoids ion-implantation damage without abandoning CMOS-compatible processing.
  • The ability to grow T centres in a defined delta-doped layer opens routes to vertical heterostructure engineering, such as embedding T centres within p-i-n junctions for Stark tuning and electrically controlled photon emission.
  • Combining epitaxial growth with isotopically purified 28Si and deuterium could further reduce decoherence, potentially approaching the transform-limited linewidth set by the excited-state lifetime.
  • The observation that spectral diffusion is not improved by epitaxial growth narrows the remaining problem to surface and interface defects, giving a concrete target for passivation or surface treatment strategies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the 30 MHz linewidth is representative rather than a best-case outlier, epitaxial T centres would be approaching the regime where photon indistinguishability — required for entanglement swapping in quantum networks — becomes feasible without cavity enhancement.
  • The fact that homogeneous broadening improves but spectral diffusion does not suggests two distinct defect populations: bulk damage curable by epitaxial growth and surface/interface damage requiring different mitigation, which could be tested by systematically varying the capping layer thickness or interface chemistry.
  • The delta-doping approach could be extended to other silicon colour centres (G, W, I) mentioned in the paper, potentially offering the same implantation-free advantage to a broader family of telecom emitters.
  • If MBE growth proves compatible with the thermal budget of CMOS back-end-of-line processing, epitaxial colour centres could be integrated directly above control electronics, a path not available to ion-implanted centres whose depth control is limited to ~100 nm straggle.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports the epitaxial growth of single T centres in silicon-on-insulator (SOI) via molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), using a carbon δ-doping approach on thinned float-zone SOI. The authors fabricate nanophotonic waveguides in the grown material and demonstrate single-emitter operation via resonant excitation and g(2)(0) = 0.26(3). The central result is a homogeneous optical linewidth of 30(10) MHz for an epitaxial single T centre, measured by spectral hole-burning, which is approximately ten-fold narrower than the 310(80) MHz measured on an ion-implanted reference sample under comparable conditions. The inhomogeneous broadening (30.3 GHz vs. 24.6 GHz) and spectral diffusion are not improved, which is reported honestly. The work is timely and addresses a recognised materials challenge for silicon colour-centre quantum photonics.

Significance. The demonstration of epitaxially grown single T centres in an SOI stack compatible with nanophotonic device fabrication is a genuine advance. The MBE process—thinning, buffer growth at 650 °C, δ-doped Si:C at 220–350 °C, and capping at 400 °C—is described with sufficient detail for reproduction. The hole-burning methodology is standard and the same protocol is applied to both epitaxial and implanted samples derived from the same base SOI substrate, making the comparison internally consistent. The honest reporting that inhomogeneous broadening and spectral diffusion are not improved, while homogeneous broadening is, is a strength that adds credibility. The work opens clear engineering routes (heterostructures, 28Si, Stark tuning) that are appropriately outlined.

major comments (2)
  1. The headline claim — a ten-fold reduction in homogeneous linewidth for epitaxial T centres — rests on a single emitter measurement (Δ_hom = 30(10) MHz, black marker in Fig. 3a) compared against an ensemble of implanted emitters (310(80) MHz). The N=1 issue is compounded by the asymmetric comparison: a single best-case epitaxial emitter versus an ensemble average for implanted samples, where ensemble hole-burning averages over all emitters including poor ones. The text states (final paragraph of the 'Characterisation of homogeneous linewidths' section) that 'No substantial difference is observed in the spectral hole widths measured on the single T centre and the ensemble of T centres in the epitaxially grown sample,' but no explicit linewidth values or fit results for the epitaxial ensemble are reported. Providing these numbers (or at minimum tabulating the hole widths and fit qualities)
  2. The inhomogeneous broadening is slightly worse for epitaxial samples (30.3(5) GHz vs. 24.6(4) GHz), raising the possibility that the single emitter measured sits in a locally favourable strain environment. Without statistics across multiple single emitters, selection bias cannot be excluded. The manuscript should explicitly acknowledge this as a limitation and, if additional devices were measured, report their linewidths even if they are broader. If only one device was measured, this should be stated transparently.
minor comments (6)
  1. Fig. 1d: The colour-centre depth distribution for the epitaxial case is shown schematically, but no experimental depth verification (e.g., SIMS or cross-section PL) is provided. Adding or citing such data would strengthen the claim of nanometre-scale positional control.
  2. Fig. 2c, right panel: The exponential decay of g(2)(|Δt|) with a 34(5) μs time constant is attributed to spectral diffusion. It would help to state explicitly whether this decay was measured at a specific excitation power and whether it is expected to be power-dependent.
  3. Appendix C states that the implanted reference sample shows 50× larger PL intensity than the grown samples. This large difference in brightness could affect the hole-burning comparison (e.g., through different signal-to-background ratios). A brief discussion of whether background levels were comparable during the hole-burning measurements would be useful.
  4. The annealing temperature of 510 °C is stated as close to optimal for implanted material [15, 16], but Appendix A shows annealing tests only up to 540 °C. It would be helpful to note whether higher temperatures were tested and whether they degraded the T-centre signal, to justify the choice of 510 °C.
  5. The g(2)(0) = 0.26(3) value indicates residual multi-photon or background contribution. A brief note on the dominant source (background laser leakage vs. second emitter) would aid interpretation of the single-emitter measurement quality.
  6. Reference [9] is dated 2026; if this is a forward reference or preprint, the citation should be updated to its published form if available.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. The referee correctly identifies that our headline homogeneous linewidth result rests on a single emitter measurement and that the asymmetric comparison (single epitaxial emitter vs. ensemble implanted) is a limitation. We agree that additional transparency is needed and will revise the manuscript accordingly. On the question of selection bias, we acknowledge this as a legitimate concern and will add explicit discussion. We cannot, at this time, provide statistics across multiple single emitters, which we state honestly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The headline claim — a ten-fold reduction in homogeneous linewidth for epitaxial T centres — rests on a single emitter measurement (Δ_hom = 30(10) MHz, black marker in Fig. 3a) compared against an ensemble of implanted emitters (310(80) MHz). The N=1 issue is compounded by the asymmetric comparison: a single best-case epitaxial emitter versus an ensemble average for implanted samples, where ensemble hole-burning averages over all emitters including poor ones. The text states that 'No substantial difference is observed in the spectral hole widths measured on the single T centre and the ensemble of T centres in the epitaxially grown sample,' but no explicit linewidth values or fit results for the epitaxial ensemble are reported. Providing these numbers (or at minimum tabulating the hole widths and fit qualities) is requested.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the headline comparison rests on N=1 for the single-emitter case and that the comparison is asymmetric: a single epitaxial emitter versus an ensemble-averaged implanted sample. We agree this needs to be stated more transparently and the data provided. Regarding the epitaxial ensemble: the orange markers in Fig. 3a already show the hole-burning data for the epitaxial ensemble, and the manuscript states that no substantial difference is observed between the single-emitter and ensemble hole widths at a given excitation power. We will add an explicit table of hole widths and fit qualities for the epitaxial ensemble measurements at each excitation power, alongside the single-emitter value, so the reader can verify this claim directly. We will also add a sentence acknowledging the asymmetric nature of the comparison (single best-case emitter vs. ensemble average) as a limitation of the current study. However, we note that the internal consistency between the single-emitter and ensemble hole widths in the epitaxial sample (both significantly narrower than the implanted ensemble) provides evidence that the 30 MHz result is not an artefact of measuring a single anomalously narrow hole. We will temper the headline claim in the abstract and main text to state 'as narrow as 30 MHz' rather than presenting this as a general result for all epitaxial emitters. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The inhomogeneous broadening is slightly worse for epitaxial samples (30.3(5) GHz vs. 24.6(4) GHz), raising the possibility that the single emitter measured sits in a locally favourable strain environment. Without statistics across multiple single emitters, selection bias cannot be excluded. The manuscript should explicitly acknowledge this as a limitation and, if additional devices were measured, report their linewidths even if they are broader. If only one device was measured, this should be stated transparently.

    Authors: We agree that selection bias cannot be excluded with N=1 and that this should be stated explicitly. Only one single emitter was measured via hole-burning in this work, and we will state this transparently in the revised manuscript. We will add a paragraph in the Discussion section explicitly acknowledging that (i) only one single emitter was characterised via hole-burning, (ii) the slightly worse inhomogeneous broadening in the epitaxial sample means we cannot rule out that the measured emitter sits in a locally favourable strain environment, and (iii) statistics across multiple single emitters are needed to confirm that the observed linewidth reduction is representative. We cannot provide additional single-emitter linewidth data at this time, as no other single emitters were measured under hole-burning conditions in this study. We believe this honest accounting is important and will frame the result as a proof-of-principle demonstration rather than a statistically established result. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity found. This is a purely experimental paper with no derivation chain to reduce to its inputs.

full rationale

This paper reports direct experimental measurements of optical linewidths for epitaxial T centres in silicon. The central claim—a 30(10) MHz homogeneous linewidth—comes from a hole-burning measurement where the hole width is 60(20) MHz, and the homogeneous linewidth is taken as half the hole width following standard spectroscopic practice cited to external references [6, 13, 14, 23]. There is no theoretical derivation, no fitted-parameter prediction, no uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz that could be circular. The comparison to the implanted reference sample (310(80) MHz) uses the same measurement protocol on a sample fabricated via a process described in Ref [16], which shares some co-authors. However, Ref [16] provides a fabrication recipe for the reference sample, not a theoretical premise or load-bearing claim for the epitaxial result. The epitaxial sample's linewidth is independently measured, not derived from or defined in terms of the implanted sample's properties. The attribution of the linewidth improvement to 'removal of bulk defects' is explicitly stated as a hypothesis in the Discussion ('can be explained by'), not presented as a derived prediction. No step in the paper reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities
free parameters (6)
  • MBE growth temperature for δ-doped Si:C layer = 220-350 °C (range)
    Chosen to facilitate carbon incorporation under kinetically limited conditions; not independently derived.
  • Si:C δ-doped layer thickness = 9 nm
    Selected layer thickness for carbon doping; no justification given for this specific value.
  • Capping layer growth temperature = 400 °C
    Chosen to balance crystal quality with carbon diffusion suppression; not independently optimized.
  • Buffer layer growth temperature = 650 °C
    Selected for crystal quality; standard MBE practice.
  • Post-growth annealing temperature = 510 °C
    Selected based on optimization for implanted material (Ref [16]); Appendix A shows a scan but 510 °C is chosen for all reported experiments.
  • Capping layer thickness = 105 nm
    Chosen to reach total ~220 nm device layer thickness; not independently derived.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption T centres form self-assembled where carbon atoms recombine with diffusing hydrogen in the δ-doped layer during MBE growth.
    Invoked in the description of the epitaxial process (Fig. 1d inset and surrounding text). Based on Ref [17]; not independently verified in this paper.
  • standard math Homogeneous linewidth can be estimated as half the spectral hole width in hole-burning measurements at powers well below saturation.
    Standard spectroscopic assumption cited from Refs [6, 13, 14, 23]. Used in the linewidth extraction in Fig. 3.
  • domain assumption Spectral diffusion in epitaxial samples is dominated by surface-based defects (dangling bonds at oxide interfaces) rather than bulk defects.
    Stated in the Discussion as an explanation for why spectral diffusion is not improved. This is a hypothesis, not independently verified in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 13401 in / 3402 out tokens · 255783 ms · 2026-07-08T11:11:17.641401+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Spin-photon interfaces based on silicon quantum emitters offer a scalable platform for quantum computing and networking. However, achieving coherent photon emission remains a primary challenge due to stringent material quality requirements. To overcome this, we utilise high-purity molecular-beam epitaxy (MBE) to epitaxially incorporate single T centres in silicon-on-insulator (SOI) wafers. We demonstrate single T-centre emission coupled to a nanophotonic waveguide and observe significant suppression of homogeneous broadening, yielding optical linewidths as narrow as 30 MHz using natural silicon for crystal growth. These results establish epitaxial T centres as a robust foundation for coherent spin-photon interfaces in silicon quantum photonics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06272 by Alisha Nanwani, Amedeo Carbone, Arnulf J. Snedker-Nielsen, Be\~nat M. d. A. Jokisch, Christian H. Christiansen, Claudia Piccinini, David R. Gongora, D. Hieu Nguyen, E. Laurits Piehorsch, Elvedin Memisevic, Emanuele Brusaschi, Georgios Kountouris, Hugo Laurell, Ian Farrer, Kasper H. Nielsen, Kokeb B. Benti, Lasse Vines, Magnus L. Madsen, Marianne E. Bathen, Maria S. Gonzalez, Mark K. Svendsen, Mathias {\O}. Augustesen, Mohammad Khalifa, Peter Granum, Peter Krogstrup, Rodrigo A. Thomas, Sangeeth Kallatt, Sebastiano Guaraldo, Stefano Paesani.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: c-d. We start by thinning the top 220 nm-thick silicon layer, nominally (001)-oriented, of a standard float-zone (FZ) 4 ′′ SOI wafer to a thickness of 70 nm using a back-etching process. The wafer is then inserted into a dedicated high￾purity MBE chamber for epitaxial growth of colour centres in silicon. In the MBE, we first grow an additional silicon buffer layer at a temperature of 650 ◦C, sufficient to … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: b. The rest of the PLE spectrum (orange sections in Fig. 2b) represents contributions from a small ensemble of T centres present in the waveguide, which are spectrally separated from the single emitter we operate. A second￾order autocorrelation measurement of the emission from the individual epitaxial T centre, exhibiting clear anticorrelation at zero time delay, is shown in Fig. 2c. A second-order correla… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Redjem, A

    W. Redjem, A. Durand, T. Herzig, A. Benali, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, A. Y . Kuznetsov, H. Nguyen, S. Cueff, J.-M. G´erard, et al., Single artificial atoms in silicon emitting at telecom wavelengths, Nature Electronics3, 738 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Bergeron, C

    L. Bergeron, C. Chartrand, A. Kurkjian, K. Morse, H. Riemann, N. Abrosimov, P. Becker, H.-J. Pohl, M. Thewalt, and S. Simmons, Silicon-integrated telecommunications photon- spin interface, PRX Quantum1, 020301 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Durand, Y

    A. Durand, Y . Baron, W. Redjem, T. Herzig, A. Benali, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, A. Y . Kuznetsov, J.-M. G ´erard, I. Robert-Philip, M. Abbarchi, V . Jacques, G. Cassabois, and A. Dr ´eau, Broad diversity of near-infrared single-photon emitters in silicon, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 083602 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Simmons, Scalable fault-tolerant quantum technologies with silicon color centers, PRX Quantum5, 010102 (2024)

    S. Simmons, Scalable fault-tolerant quantum technologies with silicon color centers, PRX Quantum5, 010102 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    C.-M. Lee, F. Islam, S. Harper, M. A. Buyukkaya, D. Higginbottom, S. Simmons, and E. Waks, High-efficiency single photon emission from a silicon t-center in a nanobeam, ACS Photonics10, 3844 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    DeAbreu, C

    A. DeAbreu, C. Bowness, A. Alizadeh, C. Chartrand, N. A. Brunelle, E. R. MacQuarrie, N. R. Lee-Hone, M. Ruether, M. Kazemi, A. T. K. Kurkjian, S. Roorda, N. V . Abrosimov, H.-J. Pohl, M. L. W. Thewalt, D. B. Higginbottom, and S. Simmons, Waveguide-integrated silicon t centres, Optics Express31, 15045 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Islam, C.-M

    F. Islam, C.-M. Lee, S. Harper, M. H. Rahaman, Y . Zhao, N. K. Vij, and E. Waks, Cavity-enhanced emission from a silicon t center, Nano Letters24, 319 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Johnston, U

    A. Johnston, U. Felix-Rendon, Y .-E. Wong, and S. Chen, Cavity-coupled telecom atomic source in silicon, Nature Communications15, 2350 (2024)

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    Sandholzer, I

    K. Sandholzer, I. Berkman, P. De ´ak, C. Errando-Herranz, P.-P. Filippatos, A. Gali, A. Gritsch, and A. Reiserer, Single-photon emitters and spin-photon interfaces in silicon, Appl. Phys. Rev. 13, 021341 (2026)

    work page 2026

  10. [10]

    D. B. Higginbottom, A. T. K. Kurkjian, C. Chartrand, M. Kazemi, N. A. Brunelle, E. R. MacQuarrie, J. R. Klein, N. R. Lee-Hone, J. Stacho, M. Ruether, C. Bowness, L. Bergeron, A. DeAbreu, S. R. Harrigan, J. Kanaganayagam, D. W. Marsden, T. S. Richards, L. A. Stott, S. Roorda, K. J. Morse, M. L. W. Thewalt, and S. Simmons, Optical observation of single spin...

    work page 2022

  11. [11]

    Distributed Quantum Computing in Silicon

    F. Afzal, M. Akhlaghi, S. J. Beale, O. Bedroya, K. Bell, L. Bergeron, K. Bonsma-Fisher, P. Bychkova, Z. M. Chaisson, et al., Distributed quantum computing in silicon, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01704 (2024)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    H. Song, X. Zhang, L. Komza, N. Fiaschi, Y . Xiong, Y . Zhi, S. Dhuey, A. Schwartzberg, T. Schenkel, G. Hautier,et al., Entanglement of a nuclear spin qubit register in silicon photonics, Nature Nanotechnology21, 53 (2026)

    work page 2026

  13. [13]

    Bowness, S

    C. Bowness, S. A. Meynell, M. Dobinson, C. Clear, K. Jooya, N. Brunelle, M. Keshavarz, K. Boos, M. Gascoine, S. Taherizadegan, C. Simon, M. L. Thewalt, S. Simmons, and D. B. Higginbottom, Laser-induced spectral diffusion and excited-state mixing of silicon t centers, PRX Quantum6, 030350 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Zhang, N

    X. Zhang, N. Fiaschi, L. Komza, H. Song, T. Schenkel, and A. Sipahigil, Laser-induced spectral diffusion of t centers in 6 silicon nanophotonic devices, PRX Quantum6, 030351 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    MacQuarrie, C

    E. MacQuarrie, C. Chartrand, D. Higginbottom, K. Morse, V . Karasyuk, S. Roorda, and S. Simmons, Generating t centres in photonic silicon-on-insulator material by ion implantation, New Journal of Physics23, 103008 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    A. J. Snedker-Nielsen, D. R. Gongora, M. L. Madsen, C. H. Christiansen, E. L. Piehorsch, M. Ø. Augustesen, E. Memisevic, S. Kallatt, R. A. Thomas, M. K. Svendsen,et al., Colour centre formation in silicon-on-insulator for on-chip photonic integration, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.17919 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  17. [17]

    Aberl, E

    J. Aberl, E. P. Navarrete, M. Karaman, D. H. Enriquez, C. Wilflingseder, A. Salomon, D. Primetzhofer, M. A. Schubert, G. Capellini, T. Fromherz,et al., All-epitaxial self-assembly of silicon color centers confined within sub-nanometer thin layers using ultra-low temperature epitaxy, Advanced Materials36, 2408424 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Salomon, J

    A. Salomon, J. Aberl, E. Prado Navarrete, M. Karaman, O. E. Lang, D. Primetzhofer, P. De ´ak, ´A. Gali, T. Fromherz, and M. Brehm, Telecom light-emitting diodes based on nanoconfined self-assembled silicon-based color centers, ACS photonics12, 2364 (2025)

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Self-Assembled Telecom Color Centers in Silicon and Their Growth Environment

    J. Marb ¨ock, E. P. Navarrete, M. Karaman, O. E. Lang, T. Fromherz, M. O. Liedke, A. Wagner, M. Brehm, and J. Aberl, Self-assembled telecom color centers in silicon and their growth environment, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.06766 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Beaufils, W

    C. Beaufils, W. Redjem, E. Rousseau, V . Jacques, A. Y . Kuznetsov, C. Raynaud, C. V oisin, A. Benali, T. Herzig, S. Pezzagna,et al., Optical properties of an ensemble of g- centers in silicon, Physical Review B97, 035303 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Komza, P

    L. Komza, P. Samutpraphoot, M. Odeh, Y .-L. Tang, M. Mathew, J. Chang, H. Song, M.-K. Kim, Y . Xiong, G. Hautier,et al., Indistinguishable photons from an artificial atom in silicon photonics, Nature communications15, 6920 (2024)

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Gower, G

    J. Gower, G. Davies, E. C. Lightowlers, and A. Safonov, The i centre: A hydrogen related defect in silicon,Defects in Semiconductors 19, Materials Science Forum Materials Science Forum,258, 289 (1997)

    work page 1997

  23. [23]

    A. E. Siegman,Lasers(University science books, 1986)

    work page 1986

  24. [24]

    Spectral tuning of single T centres by the Stark effect

    M. Dobinson, F. Hufnagel, S. A. Meynell, C. Bowness, M. Gascoine, W. Wasserman, P. K. Shandilya, C. Dangel, M. L. Thewalt, S. Simmons,et al., Spectral tuning of single t centres by the stark effect, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.25170 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    A. M. Day, M. Sutula, J. R. Dietz, A. Raun, D. D. Sukachev, M. K. Bhaskar, and E. L. Hu, Electrical manipulation of telecom color centers in silicon, Nature Communications15, 4722 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Somaschi, V

    N. Somaschi, V . Giesz, L. De Santis, J. Loredo, M. P. Almeida, G. Hornecker, S. L. Portalupi, T. Grange, C. Anton, J. Demory, et al., Near-optimal single-photon sources in the solid state, Nature Photonics10, 340 (2016)

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    R. Uppu, F. T. Pedersen, Y . Wang, C. T. Olesen, C. Papon, X. Zhou, L. Midolo, S. Scholz, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig,et al., Scalable integrated single-photon source, Science advances6, eabc8268 (2020)

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    N. Tomm, A. Javadi, N. O. Antoniadis, D. Najer, M. C. L¨obl, A. R. Korsch, R. Schott, S. R. Valentin, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig,et al., A bright and fast source of coherent single photons, Nature Nanotechnology16, 399 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Chartrand, L

    C. Chartrand, L. Bergeron, K. J. Morse, H. Riemann, N. V . Abrosimov, P. Becker, H.-J. Pohl, S. Simmons, and M. L. W. Thewalt, Highly enriched 28Sireveals remarkable optical linewidths and fine structure for well-known damage centers, Phys. Rev. B98, 195201 (2018)

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Kazemi, M

    M. Kazemi, M. Keshavarz, M. E. Turiansky, J. L. Lyons, N. V . Abrosimov, S. Simmons, D. B. Higginbottom, and M. L. W. Thewalt, Giant isotope effect on the excited-state lifetime and emission efficiency of the silicon t center, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 053602 (2026). 7 Appendix A: Annealing tests To investigate the robustness of the grown emitters to high-temp...

    work page 2026