2010
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.81.241302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Temporal monitoring of nonresonant feeding of semiconductor nanocavity modes by quantum dot multiexciton transitions

Abstract: We experimentally investigate the nonresonant ͑⌬E Ͼ 5 meV͒ feeding of photons into the optical mode of a two-dimensional photonic crystal nanocavity by quantum dot multiexciton transitions. Power-dependent photoluminescence measurements reveal a superlinear power dependence of the mode emission, indicating that the emission stems from multiexcitons. By monitoring the temporal evolution of the photoluminescence spectrum, we observe a clear anticorrelation of the mode and single exciton emission; the mode emissi… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
50
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
1
50
1
Order By: Relevance
“…1 Cavity QED experiments in semiconductor quantum dots (QDs) 2 gave rise to a number of applications, particularly in quantum information processing and quantum networking, 3,4 as well as for single-photon emitters. [5][6][7] This is partly due to the simultaneous confinement of excitons and photons 2,[8][9][10][11] in these systems. If the two-level system is coherently driven by strong resonant excitation, mixed exciton-photon states (dressed states) are formed, which are at the origin of the wellknown Mollow triplet 12 observed in the optical emission of atoms 13 and QDs under resonant excitation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1 Cavity QED experiments in semiconductor quantum dots (QDs) 2 gave rise to a number of applications, particularly in quantum information processing and quantum networking, 3,4 as well as for single-photon emitters. [5][6][7] This is partly due to the simultaneous confinement of excitons and photons 2,[8][9][10][11] in these systems. If the two-level system is coherently driven by strong resonant excitation, mixed exciton-photon states (dressed states) are formed, which are at the origin of the wellknown Mollow triplet 12 observed in the optical emission of atoms 13 and QDs under resonant excitation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the two-level system is coherently driven by strong resonant excitation, mixed exciton-photon states (dressed states) are formed, which are at the origin of the wellknown Mollow triplet 12 observed in the optical emission of atoms 13 and QDs under resonant excitation. [14][15][16] Strong cavity emission also occurs even when the QD emitter is not in resonance with the cavity, 9 and several cavity-feeding mechanisms have been proposed 10,11 for this phenomenon, including the intermediation by acoustic phonons. 17 Simultaneous coupling of more than one QD to the same cavity mode (CM) is also possible when there is sufficient spectral and spatial overlap.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eventually it was realized [2,43,44] that the very non-resonant coupling, |Δ| > 10 meV, was dependent on the excitation energy and power of the QD and arose due to multi-excitons in the QD and their Coulomb-mediated correlations with carriers in the wetting layer. In the weak excitation regime, the spectrally very long-ranged couplings did not occur.…”
Section: Quantum Dot Decay Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where the "row-stacked" version of the matrix X is 43) employing the vec operation yields and where the coupling matrix is given by…”
Section: Numerical Implementationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore both the powerdependent and time-resolved response of the excitation and emission can be simultaneously studied, with the temporal resolution limited only by the duration of the laser pulse. For LIA, the radiative lifetime of an emitter is measured through the nonlinear response of the timeaveraged emission intensity, which is inherently different from time-resolved photo-detection methods using streak cameras [12] or photon correlation measurements [13].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%