Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Mirror-mediated long-range coupling and robust phase locking of spatially separated exciton-polariton condensates

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two spatially separated exciton-polariton condensates with no planar coupling can be phase-locked by mirror feedback of their vertical emission.

desk verdict A credible first demonstration of mirror-mediated long-range phase locking in polariton condensates, with a good control, but the fringe evidence needs a more quantitative artifact check before I'd call it airtight. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.20924 v2 pith:K5VLJGV6 submitted 2025-06-26 physics.optics cond-mat.mes-hall

Shuang Liang , Hassan Alnatah , Qi Yao , Jonathan Beaumariage , Ken West , Kirk Baldwin , Adbhut Gupta , Loren N. Pfeiffer
show 2 more authors
Natalia G. Berloff David W. Snoke
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscond-mat.mes-hall
keywords exciton-polaritoncondensateslong-rangecouplingphaselockingmirrorfeedbacktime-delayedKuramotomodelpolaritoniclatticeneuromorphicphotonics
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 a new way to couple two exciton-polariton condensates that are spatially separated in a lattice: instead of relying on nearest-neighbor coupling through the plane of the sample, the vertical leakage light from each condensate is imaged by an external lens and reflected back onto the other condensate. The authors show that with this mirror feedback the two condensates become phase-locked, as evidenced by interference fringes that appear only when the feedback path is open and disappear when it is blocked. The result matters because it demonstrates a mechanism to write arbitrary long-range couplings between distant sites in a polariton lattice, a capability that existing short-range coupled lattices lack and that is a prerequisite for scalable polariton-based analog computers and neural networks.

What carries the argument

The central object is the mirror-mediated feedback loop: a planar mirror that retro-injects leakage light from each condensate onto the other after a round-trip path of roughly 24 cm (delay τ ≈ 1.6 ns), adding a term J_eff $e^{{iβ}}$ ψ_j(t−τ) to each condensate's driven–dissipative Gross–Pitaevskii equation. Projecting onto the ground trap mode and separating amplitude and phase reduces the system to two delay-coupled Kuramoto–Sakaguchi oscillators whose locking condition is an Adler equation; the key step that makes locking hold is that the delayed field is common to both condensates, so its stochastic component drops out of the phase-difference dynamics.

What would settle it

Measure the fringe visibility as the feedback spot is scanned across the target condensate: if the fringes come from phase locking, the visibility should stay roughly constant wherever the spot hits the condensate, whereas if they come from direct feedback–image interference, the visibility should track the overlap integral of the spot and the condensate image. A second control is to block the feedback and superimpose a copy of the feedback beam on the condensate image; the appearance of fringes in that configuration would show the exclusion step was insufficient.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that two geometrically isolated condensates, verified to have no in-plane coupling by overlapping their images in an interferometer, can nevertheless be locked together in phase by external mirror-mediated feedback. The authors verify this with phase-resolved interferometry: with the feedback blocked, the two condensate images show no interference; with the feedback spots directed from one condensate onto the other, fringes appear across the condensate images, indicating a deterministic phase relationship. To explain how coherence survives a round-trip delay of about 1.6 ns that exceeds the single-condensate coherence time of 200 ps to 1 ns, the paper reduces the delay-coupled Gross–Pitaevskii equations to a Kuramoto–Sakaguchi model and shows that the shared mirror path injects the same delayed field into both traps, converting a large part of the phase noise into common-mode noise that cancels in the relative phase, so the remaining effective diffusion is small enough for the locking condition to hold.

Load-bearing premise

The fringes observed in Figure 5(a) are interpreted as interference of the two condensates' emission, requiring that the feedback spot's contribution to the imaged area is negligible; the paper rules this out only by moving the spot to one side, without giving a quantitative bound on the residual overlap.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two condensates with no measurable in-plane coupling can be phase-locked purely through external mirror feedback, verified by interferometry.
  • The coupling strength and sign can be tuned in principle by changing mirror reflectivity and round-trip optical path length, since the coupling phase β = kL shifts with mirror position.
  • Because the mechanism uses only a passive mirror, it operates as a high-bandwidth analog element without cameras, modulators, or electronic feedback loops.
  • Replacing a single mirror with a segmented micro-mirror array would allow arbitrary pairwise couplings J_ij between many sites, limited only by the field of view and numerical aperture of the imaging optics.
  • The delay-coupled phase dynamics reduce to a Kuramoto–Sakaguchi model, so established results on time-delayed oscillator networks (multiple synchronized states, bistability, oscillatory order parameter) apply to this platform.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A quantitative test of the coupling phase β would be to translate the mirror by ΔL while the condensates are locked, which should shift the interferogram phase by exactly kΔL; observing that shift would confirm that the coupling phase is the controlled parameter.
  • The common-mode noise argument implies that a single shared mirror will partially suppress relative phase noise for every pair in a many-condensate network, something pairwise-independent active couplings would not provide.
  • The exponential decay of coupling with e^{-τ/T_c} sets a practical distance limit; extending to much longer mirror paths would likely require an amplifier in the feedback arm, a change that would sacrifice the passive-element advantage.
  • Because the same mirror serves as a delay line, the scheme naturally supports hierarchical delays (short on-chip coupling, long off-chip coupling) for reservoir computing, though the paper only hints at this.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a scheme for coupling distant exciton-polariton condensates through an external mirror path rather than in-plane nearest-neighbor coupling. Two geometrically isolated condensates are created in a GaAs/AlGaAs microcavity; vertical emission from each condensate is imaged and retro-injected onto the other. The authors present interferometric evidence: with the feedback path unblocked, fringes appear across the two condensate images (Fig. 5(a)) with about 10% visibility, while blocking the feedback removes the fringes (Fig. 5(b)). They also reduce the delayed coupled GPE to a Kuramoto--Sakaguchi phase model and use a noisy Adler equation to argue that common-mode noise in the mirror path allows robust phase locking despite a round-trip delay (about 1.6 ns) longer than the single-condensate coherence time. The central claim is that this proves external, long-range, pairwise phase locking with no planar coupling, opening a route to programmable polariton networks.

Significance. If the experimental interpretation is correct, the work is a significant proof-of-principle: it would demonstrate a passive, high-bandwidth method for arbitrary long-range coupling between polariton condensates, going beyond the short-range geometric coupling of existing lattice simulators. The paper has several strengths: the control experiment with the feedback blocked is a meaningful check; the theoretical reduction to classical phase-oscillator models is clearly laid out and not used as a fitting target; and the experiment is presented with a step-by-step logic that is easy to follow. However, the load-bearing experimental identification of phase locking is not yet quantitatively secure, and the proposed noise-cancellation mechanism for surviving the long delay appears inconsistent with the mutual-injection geometry. These issues are addressable with additional measurements and analysis, but they currently prevent full acceptance of the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III, step 5, Fig. 5] The central claim that the fringes in Fig. 5(a) arise from phase locking of the two condensates, rather than from direct interference of the feedback beam with the condensate images, is not quantitatively established. The text states that the feedback spot was moved to one side of condensate 2 and that the image overlap included 'only a tiny fraction of this spot,' but no upper bound on this fraction is given, and no point-spread function or two-dimensional visibility map is provided. Because the reported fringe visibility is only about 10%, a small residual overlap of the feedback spot with the condensate images could account for the observed contrast without any global phase locking. A concrete test would be to record the interferometer output with condensate 2 unexcited while the feedback spot is present, or to map the fringe visibility and phase spatially across the full condensate area to show that the entire condensate participates coherently.
  2. [Section III, step 2, Fig. 2(b)] The 'no in-plane coupling' null result is asserted from the absence of interference fringes in Fig. 2(b), but no quantitative upper bound on the coupling is given. Without an estimate of the maximum coherent fraction that could have been hidden in the noise, the later attribution of phase locking exclusively to the external mirror path is not falsifiable. The authors should fit the overlapping-image interferogram with a model that includes a small coherent component and report an upper bound on the fringe visibility (or on the in-plane coupling strength) under the same experimental conditions used for the locking measurement.
  3. [Section V, Eqs. (15)-(18)] The explanation of how phase coherence survives the 1.6 ns delay relies on a common-mode noise cancellation that appears inconsistent with the experimental geometry. The text states that 'both traps receive the same delayed field,' but in the mutual-injection configuration described by Eq. (2) and Section III, each condensate receives a delayed copy of the other condensate's field, not a common external field. The independent phase noises ξ1 and ξ2 of the two condensates therefore enter the relative-phase equation as (ξ2−ξ1)/2, and the claim that the effective relative-phase diffusion σ_ϕ is far smaller than the single-condensate diffusion σ is not justified. This undermines Eq. (18) and the statement that the locked linewidth is 'orders of magnitude narrower' than σ. The authors should either reformulate the noise model for mutual injection and show that the Adler-equation locking condition is met with realistic parameters, or explicitly restrict the common-mode claim to path-length noise such as mirror vibrations.
  4. [Section III, step 6 and Fig. 5(c)] The experimental evidence for 'deterministic phase locking' is based on a single line cut with a fringe visibility of about 10%, and no error bars, no number of acquisitions, and no statistical analysis are reported. A time-integrated fringe pattern at such low contrast does not by itself demonstrate a stable, deterministic relative phase; it could also reflect partial or intermittent correlation. The authors should provide multiple independent frames or a histogram of the extracted relative phase over time, together with the uncertainty in the visibility, to support the word 'deterministic' and to allow the reader to assess the significance of the 10% visibility.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'pure, high-bandwidth analogt element' contains a typo; it should read 'analog element.'
  2. [Section IV, first paragraph] The word 'explicity' should be 'explicitly.'
  3. [Eq. (2)] The sentence defining J and Jeff is grammatically awkward and should be split for clarity: 'J is the coupling strength between condensates; when coherence filtered, it becomes Jeff = J e^{-τ/Tc}.'
  4. [Section V, first paragraph] The phrase 'after only 200 ps < Tc < 1 ns' could be misread; it should be clarified that the single-trap coherence time Tc lies in the range 200 ps to 1 ns, so the delay τ ≈ 1.6 ns exceeds Tc.
  5. [Supplementary Material, Section II] The manuscript uses 'an spatial light modulator'; the correct article is 'a spatial light modulator.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the phase-locking observation is an independent experimental result, and the analytical model is a standard reduction to delayed Kuramoto dynamics, not a fit to the claimed outcome.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The central experimental claim—that two geometrically isolated condensates become phase locked when vertical emission is retro-injected via a mirror—is established by the interferometric data in Fig. 5(a) and the blocked-feedback control in Fig. 5(b). The observation is not used as a fitting target anywhere in the theory. The analytical model begins with an explicitly assumed delayed-feedback coupling term in the driven-dissipative Gross–Pitaevskii equation, Eq. (2). Under the stated assumptions (A1)–(A3), projection onto the ground trap mode and adiabatic elimination of the amplitude reduce the system to the delayed Kuramoto–Sakaguchi phase equations, Eq. (6), and then to the two-oscillator system, Eq. (7). This is a mathematical reduction of a model that contains the coupling term by construction; it does not pretend to derive the existence of coupling from first principles. The later discussion of why coherence survives the 1.6 ns delay introduces a common-noise decomposition and a noisy Adler equation, Eq. (16), with parameters K, τ, Tc, Δω, and σ that are not extracted from the measured fringe visibility; the model merely states a locking condition, Eq. (17). The paper does cite prior work by the same research group for context, sample details, and the XY polariton framework, but these citations are not load-bearing for the new claim: the mathematical result invoked for delay effects is the external Yeung–Strogatz analysis [46]. The weakest point of the manuscript is experimental, not circular: the exclusion of direct interference between the feedback spot and the condensate images in Section III, step 5 is qualitative, with no quantitative upper bound on the overlapping fraction of the feedback spot. That is an underdetermination of the measurement interpretation, not a case of an input being defined in terms of the output. Accordingly, no circularity step can be exhibited and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claim stands on several unmeasured parameters in the theory: the coupling strength K, the relative phase diffusion sigma_phi, the detuning Delta_omega, and the propagation phase beta. The theory therefore demonstrates plausibility, not prediction. The stated assumptions A1-A3 and equal-energy tuning are reasonable but not independently verified in the experiment.

free parameters (4)
  • K (bare coupling strength) = not measured; arbitrary in simulations (e.g., K=100 in Figs. 6 and 7)
    The locking condition depends on K e^(-tau/Tc). The paper does not estimate K independently, so the theory's conclusion relies on K being large enough, which is not verified by a separate measurement.
  • sigma_phi (relative phase diffusion rate) = not measured; assumed much smaller than sigma
    The linewidth narrowing result (Eq. 18) depends on sigma_phi being small. The paper asserts this due to common-mode noise but does not quantify it.
  • Delta_omega (detuning between condensates) = not measured; assumed within locking range
    The locked phase offset in the model depends on Delta_omega. The experiment tunes the two condensates to equal energy only within spectral resolution, so the detuning is unknown.
  • beta (static phase offset of feedback) = not controlled in the experiment
    The locking phase (in-phase vs anti-phase) depends on beta, set by the optical path length. The paper does not measure or tune beta, so this parameter is uncontrolled in the experimental demonstration.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A1: Each condensate occupies only the ground harmonic mode of its trap.
    Invoked in Section IV to reduce the GPE to coupled ordinary differential equations.
  • domain assumption A2: The spatial displacement of the feedback beam is neglected on the scale of the mode function.
    Invoked in Section IV, stated as 'Spatial displacement r-hat is neglected on the scale of psi(r)'.
  • domain assumption A3: Pump and nonlinear loss balance so that the amplitude quickly reaches a steady value.
    Invoked in Section IV to set A(t) = A = sqrt(P/Gamma) and focus on phase dynamics.
  • domain assumption The two condensates have equal single-particle energies E0.
    Stated in Section IV: 'we assume to be equal for the two condensates, since experimentally the two condensates are tuned to have nearly the same energy.'
  • domain assumption The external feedback is the only significant coupling between the condensates.
    Based on the absence of interference in the no-feedback control (Section III, step 2), but the sensitivity of that null measurement is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mirror-mediated long-range coupling and robust phase locking of spatially separated exciton-polariton condensates." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K5VLJGV6

@misc{pith2026250620924,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mirror-mediated long-range coupling and robust phase locking of spatially separated exciton-polariton condensates},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K5VLJGV6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.20924}
}
read the original abstract

Lattice arrays are valuable simulators for complex mathematical problems, but physical systems typically allow only short-range coupling. We demonstrate a method for independently tunable, long-range interactions between polariton condensates in two-dimensional lattices by using vertical emission and external imaging to couple arbitrary sites. Two geometrically isolated condensates are phase-locked without planar coupling, verified via phase-resolved interferometry. Analytical modeling reveals mechanisms for robust coherence. The mirror-based scheme, free of cameras or modulators, offers a pure, high-bandwidth analogt element. Extension to dense graphs via segmented micro-mirrors is limited only by imaging optics, enabling scalable, energy-efficient polaritonic hardware for neuromorphic computation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.20924 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Two independent condensates. a) Real-space image. The dashed circles indicate the pump laser positions. The excitation power is P = 1.5 Pth. The threshold power Pth is defined in the Supplementary Material. b) Energy vs. in-plane wave vector image of the two condensates under the same conditions. Each has energy profile given by the spectral resolution of the imaging spectrometer used. We prove that the two condensa… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) The layout of the optical setup. (b) The inter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Interference of the image of Condensate 1 and its [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Real-space image of Condensate 1 and its feed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Interference of two condensates through the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Temporal evolution of the order parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Temporal evolution of the phase difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Emission enhanced exciton-polariton condensates with optical feedback

    physics.optics 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Delayed optical feedback from a polariton condensate's own emission resonantly seeds the next pulse and enhances output intensity by up to 110%.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Marandi, Z

    A. Marandi, Z. Wang, K. Takata, R. L. Byer, and Y. Ya- mamoto, Network of time-multiplexed optical parametric oscillators as a coherent Ising machine, Nature Photonics 8, 937 (2014)

    2014

  2. [2]

    Nixon, E

    M. Nixon, E. Ronen, A. A. Friesem, and N. Davidson, Observing geometric frustration with thousands of cou- pled lasers, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 184102 (2013)

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    M. Sao, H. Watanabe, Y. Musha, and A. Utsunomiya, Application of digital annealer for faster combinatorial optimization, Fujitsu Scientific and Technical Journal55, 45 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    J. Chou, S. Bramhavar, S. Ghosh, and W. Herzog, Ana- log coupled oscillator based weighted ising machine, Sci- entific Reports9, 14786 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Tatsumura, A

    K. Tatsumura, A. R. Dixon, and H. Goto, Fpga-based simulated bifurcation machine, in2019 29th Interna- tional Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Ap- plications (FPL)(IEEE, 2019) pp. 59–66

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Kalinin, G

    K. Kalinin, G. Mourgias-Alexandris, H. Ballani, N. G. Berloff, J. H. Clegg, D. Cletheroe, C. Gkantsidis, I. Haller, V. Lyutsarev, F. Parmigiani, L. Pickup, and A. Rowstron, Analog Iterative Machine (AIM): using light to solve quadratic optimization problems with mixed variables, arXiv:2304.12594 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    N. A. Aadit, A. Grimaldi, M. Carpentieri, L. Theogara- jan, J. M. Martinis, G. Finocchio, and K. Y. Camsari, Massively parallel probabilistic computing with sparse ising machines, Nature Electronics5, 460 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Pierangeli, G

    D. Pierangeli, G. Marcucci, and C. Conti, Large-scale photonic ising machine by spatial light modulation, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 213902 (2019)

    2019

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Veraldi, D

    D. Veraldi, D. Pierangeli, S. Gentilini, M. C. Stri- nati, J. Sakellariou, J. S. Cummins, A. Kamaletdinov, M. Syed, R. Z. Wang, N. G. Berloff, D. Karanikolopou- los, P. G. Savvidis, and C. Conti, Fully programmable spatial photonic Ising machine by focal plane division, Physic...

    2025

  2. [10]

    Lucas, Ising formulations of many np problems, Fron- tiers in physics2, 5 (2014)

    A. Lucas, Ising formulations of many np problems, Fron- tiers in physics2, 5 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    R. Z. Wang, G. Li, S. Gentilini, M. C. Strinati, C. Conti, andN.G.Berloff,Phaseretrievalviagain-basedphotonic xy-hamiltonian optimization, arXiv:2505.04766 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  4. [12]

    K. P. Kalinin and N. G. Berloff, Networks of non- equilibrium condensates for global optimization, New J. Phys.20, 113023 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Leleu, Y

    T. Leleu, Y. Yamamoto, P. L. McMahon, and K. Aihara, Destabilization of local minima in analog spin systems by correction of amplitude heterogeneity, Physical Review Letters122, 040607 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    Kamaletdinov and N

    A. Kamaletdinov and N. G. Berloff, Coupling light with matter for identifying dominant subnetworks, arXiv:2405.17296 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Hamze, J

    F. Hamze, J. Raymond, C. A. Pattison, K. Biswas, and H. G. Katzgraber, Wishart planted ensemble: A tunably rugged pairwise ising model with a first-order phase tran- sition, Physical Review E101, 052102 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Stroev, N

    N. Stroev, N. G. Berloff, and N. Davidson, Benchmarking the optimization of optical machines with the planted solutions, Communications Physics7, 374 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Stroev and N

    N. Stroev and N. G. Berloff, Analog photonics computing for information processing, inference, and optimization, Adv. Quantum Technol.6, 2300055 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    M. Syed, K. Kalinin, and N. Berloff, Beyond digital: Har- nessing analog hardware for machine learning, inMa- chine Learning with New Compute Paradigms(2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Pierangeli, G

    D. Pierangeli, G. Marcucci, and C. Conti, Adiabatic evo- lutiononaspatial-photonicisingmachine,Optica7,1535 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Töpfer, P.Cilibrizzi, W.Langbein,andP.G.Lagoudakis, Realizing the classical XY Hamiltonian in polariton sim- ulators, Nat

    N.G.Berloff, M.Silva, K.Kalinin, A.Askitopoulos, J.D. Töpfer, P.Cilibrizzi, W.Langbein,andP.G.Lagoudakis, Realizing the classical XY Hamiltonian in polariton sim- ulators, Nat. Mater.16, 1120 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    B. P. Marsh, R. M. Kroeze, S. Ganguli, S. Gopalakrish- nan, J. Keeling, and B. L. Lev, Entanglement and replica symmetry breaking in a driven-dissipative quantum spin glass, arXiv:2307.10176 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Kasprzak, M

    J. Kasprzak, M. Richard, S. Kundermann, A. Baas, P. Jeambrun, J. M. J. Keeling, F. Marchetti, M. Szy- mańska, R. André, J. Staehli, V. Savona, P. Littlewood, B. Deveaud, and L. S. Dang, Bose–Einstein condensation of exciton polaritons, Nature443, 409 (2006)

    2006

  15. [23]

    K. P. Kalinin and N. G. Berloff, Simulating Ising and potts models and external fields with non-equilibrium condensates, arXiv:1806.11457 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Wertz, L

    E. Wertz, L. Ferrier, D. Solnyshkov, R. Johne, D. San- vitto, A. Lemaître, I. Sagnes, R. Grousson, A. V. Ka- vokin, P. Senellart, G. Malpuech, and J. Bloch, Spon- taneous formation and optical manipulation of extended polariton condensates, Nature Physics6, 860 (2010)

    2010

  17. [25]

    Manni, K

    F. Manni, K. G. Lagoudakis, T. C. Liew, R. André, and B. Deveaud-Plédran, Spontaneous pattern formation in a polariton condensate, Physical Review Letters107, 106401 (2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    G. Tosi, G. Christmann, N. Berloff, P. Tsotsis, T. Gao, Z. Hatzopoulos, P. Savvidis, and J. Baumberg, Sculpting oscillators with light within a nonlinear quantum fluid, Nature Physics8, 190 (2012)

    2012

  19. [27]

    G. Tosi, G. Christmann, N. Berloff, P. Tsotsis, T. Gao, Z. Hatzopoulos, P. Savvidis, and J. Baumberg, Geomet- rically locked vortex lattices in semiconductor quantum fluids, Nature Communications3, 1 (2012)

    2012

  20. [28]

    R. Su, J. Wang, J. Zhao, J.Xing, W.Zhao, C. Diederichs, T. C. Liew, and Q. Xiong, Room temperature long-range coherent exciton polariton condensate flow in lead halide perovskites, Science Advances4, eaau0244 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    K. Peng, W. Li, N. G. Berloff, X. Zhang, and W. Bao, Room temperature polaritonic soft-spin xy hamiltonian in organic–inorganic halide perovskites, Nanophotonics 13, 2651 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    Winkler, J

    K. Winkler, J. Fischer, A. Schade, M. Amthor, R. Dall, J. Geßler, M. Emmerling, E. A. Ostrovskaya, M. Kamp, C. Schneider, and S. Höfling, A polariton condensate in a photonic crystal potential landscape, New Journal of Physics17, 023001 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    Balili, V

    R. Balili, V. Hartwell, D. Snoke, L. Pfeiffer, and K. West, Bose-Einstein condensation of microcavity polaritons in a trap, Science316, 1007 (2007)

    2007

  24. [32]

    E. A. Cerda-Mendez, D. N. Krizhanovskii, K. Biermann, R. Hey, M. S. Skolnick, and P. V. Santos, Dynamic exciton-polariton macroscopic coherent phases in a tun- able dot lattice, Physical Review B86, 100301 (2012)

    2012

  25. [33]

    Dufferwiel, F

    S. Dufferwiel, F. Fras, A. Trichet, P. Walker, F. Li, L. Giriunas, M. Makhonin, L. Wilson, J. Smith, E. Clarke,et al., Strong exciton-photon coupling in open semiconductor microcavities, Applied Physics Let- 10 ters104(2014)

    2014

  26. [34]

    K. P. Kalinin and N. G. Berloff, Polaritonic network as a paradigm for dynamics of coupled oscillators, Phys. Rev. B100, 245306 (2019)

    2019

  27. [35]

    K. P. Kalinin, A. Amo, J. Bloch, and N. G. Berloff, Po- laritonicxy-isingmachine,Nanophotonics9,4127(2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    Alnatah, S

    H. Alnatah, S. Liang, Q. Wan, J. Beaumariage, K. West, K. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, M. C. A. Tam, Z. R. Wasilewski, and D. W. Snoke, Strong coupling of polari- tons at room temperature in a GaAs/AlGaAs structure, arXiv:2502.12338 (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    Alnatah, P

    H. Alnatah, P. Comaron, S. Mukherjee, J. Beaumariage, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. West, K. Baldwin, M. Szymańska, and D. W. Snoke, Critical fluctuations in a confined driven- dissipative quantum condensate, Science Advances10, eadi6762 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Alnatah, S

    H. Alnatah, S. Liang, Q. Yao, Q. Wan, J. Beaumariage, K. West, K. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, and D. W. Snoke, Bose–Einstein condensation of polaritons at room tem- perature in a GaAs/AlGaAs structure, ACS Photonics (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Steger, C

    M. Steger, C. Gautham, D. W. Snoke, L. Pfeiffer, and K. West, Slow reflection and two-photon generation of microcavity exciton–polaritons, Optica2, 1 (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    Nelsen, G

    B. Nelsen, G. Liu, M. Steger, D. W. Snoke, R. Balili, K. West, and L. Pfeiffer, Dissipationless flow and sharp threshold of a polariton condensate with long lifetime, Physical Review X3, 041015 (2013)

    2013

  33. [41]

    H.Alnatah, Q.Yao, J.Beaumariage, S.Mukherjee, M.C. Tam, Z. Wasilewski, K. West, K. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, and D. W. Snoke, Coherence measurements of polari- tons in thermal equilibrium reveal a power law for two- dimensional condensates, Science Advances10, eadk6960 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    H. Deng, G. Weihs, C. Santori, J. Bloch, and Y. Ya- mamoto, Condensation of semiconductor microcavity ex- citon polaritons, Science298, 199 (2002)

    2002

  35. [43]

    Abbarchi, A

    M. Abbarchi, A. Amo, V. Sala, D. Solnyshkov, H. Flayac, L. Ferrier, I. Sagnes, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, G. Malpuech,et al., Macroscopic quantum self-trapping and Josephson oscillations of exciton polaritons, Nature Physics9, 275 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Sanvitto, F

    D. Sanvitto, F. Marchetti, M. Szymańska, G. Tosi, M. Baudisch, F. P. Laussy, D. Krizhanovskii, M. Skol- nick, L. Marrucci, A. Lemaitre, J. Bloch, C. Tejedor, and L. Vina, Persistent currents and quantized cortices in a polariton superfluid, Nature Physics6, 527 (2010)

    2010

  37. [45]

    Lagoudakis, T

    K. Lagoudakis, T. Ostatnick` y, A. Kavokin, Y. G. Rubo, R. André, and B. Deveaud-Plédran, Observation of half- quantumvorticesinanexciton-polaritoncondensate,Sci- ence326, 974 (2009)

    2009

  38. [46]

    M. S. Yeung and S. H. Strogatz, Time delay in the ku- ramoto model of coupled oscillators, Physical Review Letters82, 648 (1999)

    1999

  39. [47]

    Kuramoto and Y

    Y. Kuramoto and Y. Kuramoto, Chemical waves, Chem- ical Oscillations, Waves, and Turbulence , 89 (1984)

    1984

  40. [48]

    Adler, A study of locking phenomena in oscillators, Proceedings of the IRE34, 351 (1946)

    R. Adler, A study of locking phenomena in oscillators, Proceedings of the IRE34, 351 (1946)

    1946

  41. [49]

    G. E. Uhlenbeck and L. S. Ornstein, On the theory of the brownian motion, Physical Review36, 823 (1930)

    1930

  42. [50]

    K. P. Kalinin, P. G. Lagoudakis, and N. G. Berloff, Mat- ter wave coupling of spatially separated and unequally pumped polariton condensates, Phys. Rev. B97, 094512 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    Mirek, A

    R. Mirek, A. Opala, M. Furman, M. Król, K. Tyszka, B. Seredyński, W. Pacuski, J. Suffczyński, J. Szczytko, M. Matuszewski,et al., Neural networks based on ultra- fast time-delayed effects in exciton polaritons, Physical Review Applied17, 054037 (2022)

    2022

  44. [52]

    Opala, S

    A. Opala, S. Ghosh, T. C. Liew, and M. Matuszewski, Neuromorphic computing in ginzburg-landau polariton- lattice systems, Physical Review Applied11, 064029 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    Q. Wang, C. C. Wanjura, and F. Marquardt, Training coupled phase oscillators as a neuromorphic platform us- ing equilibrium propagation, Neuromorphic Computing and Engineering4, 034014 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    Baldi and F

    P. Baldi and F. Pineda, Contrastive learning and neural oscillations, Neural computation3, 526 (1991)

    1991

  47. [55]

    R. Z. Wang, J. S. Cummins, M. Syed, N. Stroev, G. Pas- tras, J. Sakellariou, S. Tsintzos, A. Askitopoulos, D. Ve- raldi, M. Calvanese Strinati,et al., Efficient computation using spatial-photonic ising machines with low-rank and circulant matrix constraints, Communications Phy...

    2025

  48. [56]

    remembers

    M. S. Könz, W. Lechner, H. G. Katzgraber, and M. Troyer, Embedding overhead scaling of optimiza- tion problems in quantum annealing, PRX Quantum2, 040322 (2021). Supplementary Materials for: Mirror-mediated long-range coupling and robust phase locking of spatially separated ex...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.