Review Article

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00895-3

Nanophotonics for light detection and ranging

technology
Inki Kim 1,6, Renato Juliano Martins2,6, Jaehyuck Jang3, Trevon Badloe 1, Samira Khadir2,
Ho-Youl Jung4, Hyeongdo Kim5, Jongun Kim5, Patrice Genevet 2 ✉ and Junsuk Rho 1,3 ✉

Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) technology, a laser-based imaging technique for accurate distance measurement, is con-
sidered one of the most crucial sensor technologies for autonomous vehicles, artificially intelligent robots and unmanned aerial
vehicle reconnaissance. Until recently, LiDAR has relied on light sources and detectors mounted on multiple mechanically rotat-
ing optical transmitters and receivers to cover an entire scene. Such an architecture gives rise to limitations in terms of the
imaging frame rate and resolution. In this Review, we examine how novel nanophotonic platforms could overcome the hardware
restrictions of existing LiDAR technologies. After briefly introducing the basic principles of LiDAR, we present the device speci-
fications required by the industrial sector. We then review a variety of LiDAR-relevant nanophotonic approaches such as inte-
grated photonic circuits, optical phased antenna arrays and flat optical devices based on metasurfaces. The latter have already
demonstrated exceptional functional beam manipulation properties, such as active beam deflection, point-cloud generation
and device integration using scalable manufacturing methods, and are expected to disrupt modern optical technologies. In the
outlook, we address the upcoming physics and engineering challenges that must be overcome from the viewpoint of incorporat-
ing nanophotonic technologies into commercially viable, fast, ultrathin and lightweight LiDAR systems.

L
ight detection and ranging (LiDAR) is a surveying method
that emerged after the development of its older sister: radio
detection and ranging (radar). The traditional LiDAR method
utilizes a pulsed light source to illuminate a target object; by mea-
suring the return time of the reflected light pulses (known as time
of flight (TOF)), it is possible to calculate the object distance.
LiDAR technology, traditionally classified into ground-based, air-
borne and spaceborne LiDAR, began to develop in earnest after the
invention of the laser in the 1960s1. Airborne LiDAR is commonly
mounted on aircraft and satellites mainly for measuring atmo-
spheric conditions and environmental observations. Spaceborne
LiDAR2 has been used in spacecraft for docking distance measure-
ments on the space station or in probe robots for space explora-
tion. Ground-based LiDAR, initially used for simple measurements
(mainly distance and vehicle speed), is today considered a crucial
component in diverse applications such as autonomous vehicles3,
artificially intelligent robots4 and unmanned aerial vehicle recon-
naissance5. Consumer electronic devices, including the iPhone and
iPad from Apple, Inc., Kinect indoor motion capture sensors from
the Microsoft Corporation and so forth, include LiDAR sensors for
augmented or virtual reality displays. Industry-oriented applica-
tions include LiDAR sensors for self-driving cars or robot vision in
manufacturing factories. Finally, aerial applications exploit LiDAR
sensors in drone surveillance for terrain mapping, and space appli-
cations for planetary rovers.
Several LiDAR systems have been optimized to meet the various
requirements of the application under consideration. For instance,
for consumer electronics, the device cost and footprint are impor-
tant, but the measurement accuracy, measurable distance and sys-
tem robustness are key for precision devices. Considering the use of
LiDAR in the real world and its potential economic impact, even in
the short term, there has been a considerable increase in research
and development in both the hardware and software sectors, with
the appearance of many new startups6.
As a specific, but extremely relevant, example, LiDAR system
decision times for autonomous vehicles need to be fast enough to
allow them to safely come to a full stop in case of danger3. Certain
demands related to human safety have yet to be simultaneously ful-
filled: measurement ranges of ≥150 m (or ~1 µs TOF, Box 1), the
ability to distinguish objects of 10 cm in size, a 360° real-time oper-
ational range and an optical system that overcomes poor weather
conditions and is robust to different solar illumination conditions.
On top of these requirements, it is expected that LiDAR systems will
be manufactured as compact and affordable chip-scale sensors. As
of today, however, no commercial LiDAR sensor meets all of these
requirements. The majority of commercially available LiDAR sys-
tems are based on macromechanical scanners and microelectrome-
chanical systems (MEMS) that are bulky and vulnerable to external
impact.
State-of-the-art advances in nanophotonics have recently been
considered as supporting or even alternative technologies to con-
ventional LiDAR systems (Fig. 1). In particular, several miniatur-
ized beam steering platforms, such as chip-scaled optical phased
arrays and flat optical devices based on metasurfaces, can realisti-
cally shrink the device footprint. Nanophotonic LiDAR platforms
can also offer improved imaging capabilities in terms of both scan-
ning rate and image information contents.
In this Review, we highlight the recent nanophotonic approaches
leading to ultracompact LiDAR sensors. In the first and second sec-
tions, we introduce the basic operation and delve into advanced

1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang, Republic of Korea. 2Université Côte d’Azur,
Centre de Recherche sur l’Hétéro‐Epitaxie et ses Applications (CRHEA), CNRS, Valbonne, France. 3Department of Chemical Engineering, Pohang University
of Science and Technology (POSTECH), Pohang, Republic of Korea. 4Department of Information and Communication Engineering, Yeungnam University,
Gyeongsan, Republic of Korea. 5Advanced Technology Research Center, SL Corporation, Gyeongsan, Republic of Korea. 6These authors contributed equally:
Inki Kim, Renato Juliano Martins. ✉e-mail: patrice.genevet@crhea.cnrs.fr; jsrho@postech.ac.kr

508 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
Box 1 | Basics of LiDAR imaging
The most basic ranging system of LiDAR relies on direct TOF70,104.
The concept involves monitoring the time delay Δτ between the
incident pulse of light and the backscattered signal from the tar-
get (Direct TOF measurement schematic figure). The measured
time delay gives the depth of the object as R = c Δτ
2 (left panel of
the Working principle of direct TOF, AMCW and FMCW figure),
where c is the velocity of light. Full three-dimensional (3D) scene
reconstruction with full depth information is performed by scan-
ning the two azimuthal axes.
Many automotive LiDAR systems use a pulsed
905-nm-wavelength laser as the light source. The important
parameters of the illuminated pulsed laser and direct TOF
measurement schematic are described in the Direct TOF
measurement schematic figure. The pulse width (w) is usually a
few to tens of nanoseconds, and the smaller the value of w the
higher the spatial resolution of the TOF measurement. The spatial
resolution Rres can be calculated as Rres = c w2 . As a simple example,
a 2-ns-pulsed laser can distinguish two objects 30 cm apart from
each other. Assuming a maximum distance (Rmax) to be measured,
Rmax = 200 m, the round-trip time (or Δτ) should be 1.33 µs.
Moreover, to remove any ambiguity from the range measurement,
which affects the maximum measurable distance, the pulse period
(p) should be larger than Δτ. Another important measurable
factor is range accuracy. The current state-of-the-art accuracy is
close to ±3 cm, which depends on the time counting error (0.2 ns).
Taking the different physical mechanisms into consideration,
such as the laser emission power, light propagation, interaction
of light with the scattering object (for simplicity here only
instantaneous elastic scattering and zero Doppler shift), detection
and the overall LiDAR efficiency, it is possible to derive a general
Distance
Transmitter
module (Nlaser)
CPU Pulse width
LiDAR
Period
System control and Pulse
acquisition/time
measurement
module
Receiver
module (A/R2)
propagation (Tb(R))
Detector
Image processing
and rendering
Direct TOF measurement schematic. A pulsed laser is used as the light source and the time-delayed backscattered signal from an object (car) is
detected by a photodiode. The round-trip time (or time delay) directly gives the TOF, and advanced measurement techniques such as FMCW can
simultaneously measure the velocity of a moving object. Nlaser, number of transmitted photons; β, Angular scattering probability; A/R2, solid angle for
the collection probability; T, light transmission in a given medium. Through proper image processing and rendering, the measured 3D object can be
reconstructed.
Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
Review Article
equation that governs the LiDAR process. This is known as the
LiDAR scattering form equation, given by:
A
[ ]
NLiDAR = Nlaser × β × 2 × Tf (R) × Tb (R) × η + Nb
R
where η represents LiDAR efficiency including the optical losses
and degree of overlap between the laser beam and the receiver
FOV, Tf and Tb indicate transmission of incident light and back-
scattered light, respectively, and Nb is background noise. The
information concerning the object can be obtained by solving the
equation for β. Note that several other physical processes includ-
ing inelastic and resonant scattering, absorption, Doppler shifts
and so forth are neglected but could influence the detectivity and
image rendering.
A second technique that utilizes a continuous source modulated
at a constant frequency (known as amplitude-modulated
continuous-wave, AMCW) determines the depth of a target object
using modulated intensity of a light source induced by periodic
phase shifts originating from the round-trip to the target3. This
phase difference provides a TOF of Δτ = Δϕ 2πf . Therefore, the
depth follows as R = 2c Δϕ
2πf , where Δϕ and f are the phase shift
and modulation frequency of the source, respectively (middle
panel of the Working principle of direct TOF, AMCW and FMCW
figure). AMCW LiDAR generally uses a continuous-wave laser
as a light source, which makes it promising for indoor consumer
applications. A common real-life example that includes a TOF
camera is in Microsoft Kinect devices.
Unlike the two techniques described above, a third one exploits
a continuous wave of which the frequency is modulated in the time
Forward signal
propagation (Tf(R))
Velocity
Object
Interaction
radiation/object (β)
Backward signal
Reconstructed
3D image
509
Review Article
Box 1 | Basics of LiDAR imaging (continued)
domain using a tunable laser or an electro-optic modulator (known
as frequency-modulated continuous wave, FMCW)3,105. The round
trip to the target results in periodic shifts of frequencies; the mixed
signal of the emitted source and reflected signal produces a beat
frequency, which is directly proportional to the TOF following
B
the relation, fb = τchirp Δτ , where B and τchirp are the bandwidth
and chirp period time of the frequency sweep, respectively.
Interestingly, the detected signal can have an additional frequency
shift due to the Doppler effect when the target object is in motion
with a velocity v. Owing to the Doppler frequency fd, two periodic
local maxima frequencies are observed; f+ = Δf + fd and f− = Δf − fd
a b
I ∆f
I B
∆Ф
∆τ
τ τ
Illustrations of the working principles of direct TOF (a), AMCW (b) and FMCW (c). The solid blue and red lines represent the incident pulse and the
backscattered signal from a target, respectively. The purple line shows the period of the oscillating continuous waves.
measurement principles of LiDAR (Table 1). The third and fourth
sections cover imaging strategies, sources and detectors from the
perspective of the hardware components. LiDAR specifications for
industrial applications (mainly autonomous vehicles) are also cov-
ered. We then discuss the limitations of existing LiDAR systems in
terms of their: (1) bulk volume, (2) field of view (FOV), (3) mea-
surement range and (4) computational capabilities needed to handle
real-time big datasets; and explore how recent nanophotonic solu-
tions could outperform conventional LiDAR. Sections five to eight
introduce nanophotonic approaches, mostly based on integrated
photonic circuits for optical phase-arrays, and metasurfaces. Finally,
we provide an outlook of the opportunities offered by these emerg-
ing approaches, highlighting the physics and engineering challenges
for real-life, ultrathin and lightweight LiDAR systems.
Advanced TOF techniques
Although most LiDAR systems perceive the surroundings by mea-
suring the TOF using conventional techniques such as the direct
pulsed approach, the AMCW approach or the FMCW approach
(Box 1), advanced TOF techniques of interest for solid-state LiDAR
have been proposed. In particular, photonic time-stretched tech-
nology for TOF data acquisition7 relying on a continuous time
signal stretched by various dispersion devices can overcome the
sampling limitation of an analogue-to-digital converter. One
such time-stretched TOF method8 is a single-shot imaging and
rotation-free 1D line-scanning technique with a single laser and
detector. Here, the broadband laser source is temporally modu-
lated into a discrete set of pulses of different wavelengths. Each
pulse is then diffracted at a given diffraction angle such that the
time-encoded echoes from the target contain information of both
the depth and angle, through the TOF and diffraction signals,
respectively. This enables 1D line scanning without any mechanical
movement. The figures of merit for the depth and angular detec-
tion range of such a time-stretched technique are determined by
the interval between the temporally discretized pulses, the spatial
dispersion of the optical elements for diffraction and the band-
width of the source. The time-stretched TOF method eliminates the
510 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
cT
The distance, R = 4B f + f− , and relative velocity of the target
(+ )
of vr ≈ λ20 fd = λ40 (f+ − f− ) can thus be retrieved, where λ0 is the
operating wavelength (for the sake of convenience, a triangular
frequency-modulated chirp is commonly used) (right panel of
the Working principle of direct TOF, AMCW and FMCW figure).
Thus, FMCW can simultaneously measure both the distance and
velocity of a moving target, establishing a method of detection
with an increased amount of information. The main challenges
with current methods are precisely modulating the frequency at
will using an electro-optic modulator and realizing a coherent
detection scheme.
c
f
fd
1/f τchirp
τ
fb
f+
f–
τ
mechanical rotation of LiDAR systems and may become a reliable
inertia-free LiDAR solution.
Electro-optic-sampling timing detection has been adapted for
ultrafast and subnanometre-precision TOF measurements9. Here,
the optical pulses generated by a mode-locked laser are split into
two paths: one is sent to a high-speed photodiode to convert the
pulse train into photocurrent pulses, and the other experiences
TOF delay. The photocurrent pulses are utilized to detect the rela-
tive position between peaks of the converted photocurrent pulse
trains and the optical pulses before and after experiencing the TOF
change. This relative position of optical pulses is recorded as the
output voltage as a function of relative timing between the optical
pulse and the photocurrent pulse, eventually providing the desired
depth information. TOF detection based on electro-optic-sampling
timing detection enables target depth measurement with subnano-
metre resolution and few-nanosecond acquisition times, which
leads to dynamic real-time detection of single events in microscale
devices. This method has been successfully applied to TOF-based
sensor systems such as 3D surface profilometry and strainmeters by
adapting the sensor head accordingly9.
To fulfil the demands of a miniaturized and compact LiDAR
solution, on-chip soliton microcomb-based TOF detection meth-
ods have been introduced10–12. Soliton microcombs comprised of a
series of equidistant discretized optical pulses in the time domain
can be generated using integrated silicon-based microresonators.
The generated pulse train is then utilized as the source for direct
TOF10,11 and FMCW12 (see ‘Paths towards integrated chip-scale sili-
con photonic LiDAR’).
Illumination methods of LiDAR
The detection performances of LiDAR systems depend on the scan-
ning and detecting methods and the diverse approaches available for
the treatment of the TOF information (Fig. 2a). These differences
must thus be considered when implementing nanophotonic-based
approaches.
To scan an entire 360° space, and thus recognize 3D objects
through point or parallel line scanning, a mirror rotates around
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy Review Article
Conventional LiDAR

Miniaturization

Nanophotonic LiDAR

Fig. 1 | A conceptual schematic of a nanophotonic LiDAR system. One promising application of LiDAR is in autonomous vehicles, where LiDAR can
detect the surrounding objects on the road. Conventional LiDAR technology used in autonomous vehicles comprises above-mentioned macromechanical
scanners or microelectromechanical systems, which are bulky and vulnerable to external impacts. Newly proposed nanophotonic LiDAR systems could not
only shrink the device form factor, but also significantly boost the device capabilities. The next breakthrough to further improving the FOV and enabling
faster scanning might not be far away with scalable chip-scale fabrication.

Table 1 | Summary of basic LiDAR approaches and their specific features

Direct TOF AMCW FMCW
Source type Pulsed laser Amplitude-modulated continuous wave Frequency-modulated continuous wave
ΔΦmin
Spatial resolution Rres ∝ Δτmin Rres ∝ f Rres ∝ Δfmin
(Rres) where Δτmin represents the where ΔΦmin represents the resolvable where Δf min represents the minimum
resolution in time counting available, minimum phase delay, which is mainly obtainable frequency difference, which
which is mainly limited by the timing limited by the achievable electronic is limited by the tuning ranges of laser
resolution of the electronics. bandwidths. systems.
Main factors limiting Pulse power (eye-safety limit) and Modulation frequency Bandwidth and coherent distance
non-ambiguous range repetition rate
Main features • Simple configuration • Commercially available TOF camera • Simultaneous measurement of distance
• Long ambiguity range • Indoor usage due to short ambiguity and velocity
range • High resolution

one axis with a multichannel light source and detector pair. Most
commercial LiDAR systems use this rotating macromechanical
approach, which includes heavy and bulky pulsed laser optics. The
inertia of the mechanical components limits the frame rate to typi-
cally <50 Hz and sometimes the durability of the system. Moreover,
the electric wiring and connectors in a mechanically rotating device
are complex, requiring inductively coupled coils as a power supply
and a photoelectric force sensor to provide feedback for motor speed
(Fig. 2b). Faster and more compact MEMS devices, which prevail in
current commercial products, are still composed of movable parts
(Fig. 2c). Reducing the size of mechanical parts to the microscale
offers the advantages of system miniaturization and lower power
consumption. However, MEMS LiDAR systems still suffer from
several shortcomings. For instance, there is an inevitable trade-off
between the deflection speed and the beam size owing to the finite
inertia of the mirror, causing efficiency reduction. Other main defi-
ciencies are: vulnerability to shocks and vibrations, limited FOV
compared with the mechanical scanning method and the presence
of spurious diffraction effects because the periodic assembly of tens
of micrometre-sized mirrors introduces periodic modulation of the
laser signal. In contrast, solid-state devices such as optical phased
arrays (OPA) and flash LiDAR resolve the problem of moving parts.
The OPA approach consists of a silicon waveguide array with
tunable phase delays. It can be orders of magnitude faster and more
reliable than mechanical LiDAR. Directional light beam scanning
at any arbitrary angle is performed by individually adjusting the
phase delay in each of the waveguides. As there are no moving
parts, OPA designs have many advantages, such as higher mechan-
ical robustness and frame rates of 100 kHz or more. Above all,
OPA systems can be further miniaturized down to the chip scale

Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 511

Review Article NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy

a Target Processed image (3D point cloud)

Scanning

LiDAR

b Macroscanner c
IC for image
Laser receiver processing

MEMS mirror
Laser emitter

Lens and
photodiode

Diode laser
Diffuser

Fig. 2 | A schematic of conventional macroscanner and MEMS-type LiDAR systems. a, The principle of LiDAR scanning and 3D depth recognition.
b, The hardware components of a macroscanner-type LiDAR device. The light source is generated by dozens of emitters and the device is rotated using
a motor. Additional light sources are required to increase the vertical resolution. c, The hardware components of a MEMS-type LiDAR device. The light
emitted from the diode laser is quickly scanned through the MEMS mirror, and the diffuser can improve the FOV in the horizontal or vertical direction.
IC, integrated chip.

Table 2 | Key features of typical, commercially available LiDAR scanning methods

Macromechanical scanning MEMS Optical phased array Flash LiDAR
Working principle Motor and rotating mirror Microscanner integrated Waveguide array with tunable phase Producing a point cloud
with actuators delays with diffractive optical
elements or light source
array
Main features • 360° horizontal FOV • Solid state • Solid state • Solid state
• Multiple channels for an • Compact and lightweight • High frame rate • Single illumination over
enhanced vertical FOV • Limited FOV • Can be further miniaturized to the the scene
• Bulky and hard to miniaturize • Low angular resolution chip scale • Large FOV
• Low mechanical durability • Vulnerable to shock and • Complementary metal oxide • Photodetector array
vibrations semiconductor (CMOS)-compatible needed
fabrication • High-power source
• Waveguide insertion loss needed

and integrated with the laser system. However, limitations exist in
terms of insertion loss and circuit integration issues. The geom-
etry of the waveguide requires a large unit cell size and spacing
between adjacent antennas, which produces multiple beams and
reduces the effective steering angle along with waveguide inser-
tion loss issues. In addition, to create a well-focused beam spot and
achieve large deflection angles (that is, a large numerical aperture),
the number of phased array unit cells has to be large, resulting in
complicated electronics.
Flash LiDAR works by generating an angular distribution of light
spots, also known as a point cloud, to illuminate a target object and
recover 3D information in one shot. There are two types of flash
LiDAR, one is a single-beam type and the other is a multibeam type.
The single-beam type device consists of a light source coupled to a
diffractive optical component that illuminates different parts of the
object. The multibeam-type device consists of a 2D vertical cavity
surface emitting laser (VCSEL) and a corresponding detector array,
such as a single-photon avalanche diode. The scattered signal is
recorded using a multichannel detector. Each channel is aligned so
that it only collects light coming from a given direction (and dif-
fraction order). A subsequent image processing algorithm enables
real-time 3D object sensing by retrieving the TOF for each single
point. Flash LiDAR requires an additional divergent optical system
capable of illuminating a wide FOV, a high-power pulsed laser to
compensate for the signal intensity dispersion in the point cloud
and sensitive detector arrays (Table 2). In particular, the laser power
is strictly limited for eye safety. To overcome this limitation and
achieve high accuracy3, so-called row-by-row electronic scanning
was recently applied to multibeam flash LiDAR using a 2D VCSEL
and single-photon avalanche diode array.

512 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
Industrial trends and needs
Research towards the development of efficient, reliable and fast
operating LiDAR systems is blooming, in both the academic and
industrial sectors. LiDAR technology is used in a variety of indus-
tries, including autonomous vehicles, artificially intelligent robots,
fully automated and unmanned factories, and atmospheric or ter-
rain observations1–6. For application in self-driving cars, drones
and even in personal tablet computers, nanophotonic-augmented
LiDAR systems represent already very fertile ground for innova-
tion towards faster operating systems. The goal would be to make
LiDAR a widespread tool for applications such as 3D land mapping,
water monitoring, underwater observation of coastal lines at higher
resolution, and investigations of fast moving clouds and jet streams.
So far, however, the rapid growth in demand for unmanned vehi-
cles is the main driving force behind the technological development
of high-performance LiDAR sensors. As defined by the Society of
Automotive Engineers International’s new standard J3016 in 201913,
autonomous driving technology is broken down into levels, ranging
from 0 to 5, depending on the degree of human intervention. At
level 3 or higher, where the software takes control over the human
driver in certain circumstances, it is essential to produce highly reli-
able and safe LiDAR systems. The most important specifications to
be considered are the measurement range, horizontal and vertical
FOV, frame rate and footprint. For instance, the measurement range
should be at least 100–200 m to meet the requirements of level 3.
To reach level 4 or higher, the forward measurement range should
be over 250 m, with ranges of ~100 m and ~40 m for rear and side
scanning, respectively. This could be achieved using synchronous
flash LiDAR or FMCW LiDAR14. Moreover, a FOV of about 120° is
required when LiDAR is attached to the front and rear headlamps15.
Most products that adopt the macromechanical scanning or
MEMS approaches use a 905-nm-wavelength source with a pulsed
TOF measurement method15. The measurement range of a macro-
mechanical scanner typically lies in the range of 100–200 m, with
recent products able to scan up to 250 m. The horizontal FOV is
the full 360°, whereas the vertical FOV is typically 30–40°, depend-
ing on the number of channels. The best spatial angular resolution
achieved is 0.2° × 0.1°. The data rate, defined as the number of rec-
ognizable points per second, ranges from 1.3 × 106 to 2.4 × 106 points
per second; significant computational challenges are then needed to
process this high volume of data and produce real-time imaging.
With the MEMS approach, products with a measuring range of up to
200 m are also available. However, the FOV is slightly reduced, only
achieving up to 100° horizontally and about 20° vertically. Thus,
additional azimuthal and vertical scanning methods, addressable
with additional diffractive optical elements, must be considered.
Review Article
Angular resolution up to 0.1° × 0.1° and data rates ranging from
3 × 104 to 6 × 106 points per second are achievable, with the frame
rate of both methods usually reaching 10–30 frames per second.
For miniaturized consumer applications, Apple, Inc., has
recently introduced a tablet containing a small LiDAR scanner
that consists of a 940 nm VCSEL with a TOF sensor that enables
distance measurements up to 5 m (ref. 16). This system not only
enables the capture of high-quality images and motion sensing,
but opens up user-friendly virtual shopping and realistic virtual
education by interacting with the relative position of objects in the
users surroundings in real time. Meanwhile, for aviation and space
applications, fast and compact LiDAR systems with submicrometre
resolution are required, while additional constraints related to the
mechanical durability need to be considered.
To achieve these properties, metasurface-based LiDAR systems
have been introduced. Their operation principle relies on subwave-
length phase control with nanostructured elements, allowing the
greatest precision in the control and modulation of the direction of
the wavefront. As a promising candidate for all-solid-state LiDAR,
metasurface-based LiDAR can, in principle, be tailored for specific
applications to fulfil the requirements of multiwavelength opera-
tion, ranging, resolution, polarization, depth precision, FOV, pro-
duction scalability and low-cost on-chip integration.
Active beam steering metasurfaces as solid-state scanners
Beam steering metasurface devices often combine metasurfaces
with an active medium such as transparent conducting oxide (TCO)
materials, multiple quantum wells (MQW), MEMS, liquid crystals
or phase-change materials. These devices are promising as alterna-
tives to point- or line-scanning LiDAR components, which usually
rely on movable mirrors and thus are vulnerable to external impacts
and vibrations. In addition, the current OPA scanning approach
suffers from insertion loss of the laser power in the optical system,
demanding high power consumption. Therefore, in such systems,
heat management also becomes a critical issue. In the following, we
analyse alternative nanophotonic approaches that could, in prin-
ciple, provide effective solutions to all of these issues.
TCO materials. In TCO materials, the beam steering capability is
attributed to the control of the charge concentration in the active
layer to modulate the effective refractive index. They have the
advantage of high-speed modulation (~10 MHz) with low voltage
bias (several volts) through a metal oxide semiconductor (MOS)
modulator. One of the most commonly used TCO materials is
indium tin oxide (ITO). In the epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) region,
where the permittivity of ITO is in the range of −1 < εITO < 1, the

Fig. 3 | Active beam steering metasurfaces. a, TCO material approach: beam steering via electric gating of diffraction gratings with ITO. The diffraction
angle can be tuned using the number of periodically gated nanoantennas18. The inset at the bottom of a represents the applied voltage profile. b, MQW
approach. Left: schematic of an all-dielectric MQW metasurface. The metasurfaces were fabricated on a GaAs substrate, on which a distributed
Bragg reflector and 1,230-nm-thick MQW layer were deposited. The MQW grating has double slit patterns that enhance hybrid Mie and guided
mode resonances. Right: experimental results for the far-field intensity of the scattered light under 0 V (top) and −10 V (bottom). The light intensity is
normalized to the zeroth-order non-diffracting beam intensity at 0° (ref. 26). DBR, distributed Bragg reflector; I0, intensity of the incident light; Ir, intensity of
the reflected light; ϕ0, phase of incident light; ϕr, phase of reflected light; Va, applied voltage. c, MEMS approach. Top: the deflection angle of the transmitted
light can be modulated by suspended silicon metasurfaces actuated by MEMS. Bottom: experimental results for the far-field intensity of continuously
steered beams under the indicated voltages. Scale bars, 3 μm (ref. 28). Yellow and red metasurfaces represent the device before and after applying a voltage
bias, respectively. d, Liquid crystal approach. Top: schematic of metasurfaces and liquid-crystal-based SLMs. Bottom: measured transmission intensity
of two-level (left; 0 and 8 V, represented in blue) or three-level gating (right; 0, 3.5 and 8 V, represented in green and blue). The maximum achievable
diffraction angle is 11° (ref. 38). The colours in the metasurfaces indicate the differently applied electric bias. hLC, 1,500 nm-thick LC cell; w, 1,080 nm-wide
electrode; g, 60 nm gap between the electrodes. e, Phase-change material approach. Top: schematic of actively switchable plasmonic metasurfaces in
amorphous (left) and crystalline (right) states. Bottom: depending on the state of the active layer, the specifically designed metasurface set can have
strong resonance (expressed in brighter colours) interacting with incoming light, through which the diffraction angle of deviated beam can be switched.
The lower part of panel e represents the diffracted beam passing through amorphous and crystalline states of phase change materials, respectively.
Infrared camera images are used to observe the diffracted beam43. LCP, left circularly polarized; RCP, right circularly polarized. Figure adapted with
permission from ref. 18, ACS (a); ref. 26, Springer Nature Limited (b); ref. 28, AAAS (c); ref. 38, AAAS (d); ref. 43, Springer Nature Limited (e).

Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 513

Review Article NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy

electric field confinement increases further near the charge accu- (NIR). In ITO, it can be slightly adjusted by charge concentration
mulation layer, which is beneficial for electrically tunable nanopho- modulation, making ITO a suitable material for active beam steer-
tonic devices17. The ENZ region typically falls in the near-infrared ing technology in that region18–20.
a b
Incidence
1.0
Dynamic I0e–φ0 Ire–φr
Va = 0 V
beam steering

Normalized intensity
0.5

1.0
MQW resonators Va = –10 V

DBR 0.5
–1 +1
GaAs
y 0
x –15 –10 –5 0 5 10 15
Angle (°)

c d
Left bias Zero bias Right bias

L
Sin
SiO2 V

Sip
hLC V
g
w
0V 2.75 V

0V 2.5 V 2.9 V 3.2 V Intensity (a.u.) Intensity (a.u.)

z 20 30 30
0 10
0 10 20
–10 –10
y –30 –20 (°) –30 –20 n angle
(°)
n angle
Deflectio Deflectio

Amorphous Crystalline

RCP RCP
Amorphous Crystalline
Intensity (a.u.)

Intensity (a.u.)

RCP LCP LCP RCP

–15 –10 –5 0 5 10 15 –15 –10 –5 0 5 10 15

Angle (°) Angle (°)

514 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
Huang et al. reported an active beam steering device working
at 1,550 nm wavelength relying on a MOS modulator in the form
of a Au top grating, Al2O3 spacer and an ITO–Au back electrode18.
When a voltage of 1 V or more is applied to the MOS capacitor,
charge accumulation occurs in the ITO layer, thereby changing its
effective refractive index. The ITO carrier concentration changes
with the applied voltage. Given the charge concentration in the ITO
layer, the thickness of the accumulation layer (only few nanometres)
can be calculated, and the near-field and far-field characteristics of
the device predicted. A phase shift of 184° and reflectance change of
∼30% were measured by applying a 2.5 V gate bias with a modula-
tion speed of up to 10 MHz. A capacitance value of 14 fF μm−2 is
expected, with a capacitance per unit area of 100 Ω per wire (where
the total area of the grating is 50 × 0.2 μm2) giving a calculated
switching power consumption as low as 2.5 fJ. In addition, by apply-
ing an electric gating to a number of nanoridge configurations, the
deflecting angle of the ±1 diffraction orders can be adjusted, result-
ing in a scanning area of −40° to 40° (that is, an 80° FOV) with only
3 V of applied voltage (Fig. 3a).
The tuning range can be further extended by using different
antenna materials with optimized structure parameters, or a dual
gating method. Shirmanesh et al.19 reported a device consisting of
an Al fishbone antenna with an active ITO layer between two gate
dielectric layers, on top of an Al back reflector. This solution pro-
vides two gates; one between the top antenna and the ITO layer, and
the other between the back reflector and the ITO layer19. The gate
dielectric layers are made of alumina/hafnium oxide nanolaminate
structures because of their simultaneous high breakdown field and
high permittivity characteristics. Each characteristic is related to the
applied voltage and charge accumulation, respectively. The experi-
ments operating at 1,550 nm demonstrated that a voltage of about
6.5 V is enough to enable 89% reflectance modulation and a phase
shift of about 300°.
One downside of integrating large (>λ) phase-shifting pixels
is the appearance of side lobes occurring due to the diffraction of
light by the pixel array, giving rise to undesired parasitic effects. By
integrating plasmonic elements in phase-shifting pixels, the grat-
ing lobes can be avoided, offering an alternative platform for active
optical phased arrays. Lesina et al. proposed a plasmonic pixel for
beam steering applications in reflective array configurations21. The
overall design consists of a simple plasmonic antenna placed on a
thin oxide layer on a substrate covered by a Au backplane and an
ITO layer. The ITO layer experiences a change in the ENZ region
when a voltage is applied, causing the environment surrounding
the nanoantenna to switch from dielectric to metallic. A reflec-
tive nanoantenna placed in the close vicinity of ITO experiences
an abrupt modulation of its resonance, causing a large phase shift
(almost 2π) in its reflection coefficient. With the possibility of pack-
ing subwavelength phase-tunable elements, reflective tunable ITO
resonators are highly promising for 1D and dual-band beam steer-
ing systems. Unfortunately, plasmonic elements come with high
losses, which limit their overall reflection coefficient to around 0.2.
An alternative approach is to use the reconfigurable capabilities
of an ENZ metasurface augmented with resonant dielectric rods.
Liberal et al. theoretically investigated this behaviour, showing that
the transmission spectrum of the metasurface is characterized by a
Fano resonance. The metasurface behaviour changes from a per-
fect magnetic conductor to an epsilon-and-mu-near-zero material
response for which −1 < εITO and μITO < 1, exhibiting the so-called
epsilon-and-mu-near-zero tunnelling, characterized by its perfect
transmission peak and zero-phase advance22.
MQWs. Widely used in various high-end optoelectronic devices,
MQW architectures are promising candidates for realizing fast
optical index modulation relying on electro-optic modulation
in the visible and shorter-NIR bands, and have the potential to
Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
Review Article
achieve high speed optical and electrical modulation up to giga-
hertz speeds. Passive semiconductor-based metasurfaces operat-
ing at visible wavelengths have already been demonstrated23,24, and
more recently, refractive index modulation has been realized using
the quantum-confined Stark effect25 by applying an electric bias to
the MQW. The most noticeable advantage of semiconductor meta-
surfaces is that they can be monolithically grown directly on group
III–V wafers and simultaneously combined with a light source, such
as light emitting diodes (LEDs), edge emitters and VCSELs.
Wu et al. developed a technique to implement an active metasur-
face on a GaAs substrate with a distributed Bragg reflector structure
and a 1.2-μm-thick undoped MQW layer26. The MQW can modu-
late the real part of the refractive index in the range of 0.01–0.05 in
the near-bandgap region around 915–920 nm, and can be further
enhanced by combining the metasurface with a hybrid of Mie reso-
nances and guided mode resonances with tunable MQW structures
(Fig. 3b). Specifically, a partially etched double-slit MQW grating
structure produced reflectance dips near 916 nm and 963 nm. This
hybrid resonant mode enhances the electro-optic modulation near
917 nm with a 7 V bias, resulting in ~270% reflectance modulation
and a 70° phase shift. The electro-optic modulation of the real part
of the refractive index of the MQW induces a redshift of reflected
light that can then be applied to beam steering applications. For
instance, a bias of about 3 V resulted in a scanning angle of about
10° (that is, a 20° FOV) (Fig. 3b).
MEMS-integrated active metasurfaces. The MEMS approach can
also be useful for implementing active metasurfaces. This approach
resembles the conventional LiDAR scanning methods, where
MEMS technology is exploited as a movable mirror, but the reflec-
tive properties of the MEMS mirrors are controlled by metasurfaces
for large-angle dynamic beam steering. Beam steering can be real-
ized with MEMS through two mechanisms: (1) the actuation of the
substrate holding the metasurface and (2) the actuation of the meta-
surface itself.
Arbabi et al. introduced a tunable varifocal metalens system
based on MEMS. Two amorphous-silicon lenses were fabricated,
one on glass and the other on a Si3N4 membrane27. Spacer layers were
attached on top of each lens during the assembly process to control
the distance between the two optical components, inducing focal
point variation. The experiments showed that the position of the
focal point of a 915 nm focused diode laser could shift about 60 μm,
with a modulation speed of 2–4 kHz. This approach, unfortunately,
necessitates relatively high-voltage bias (up to 80 V) to achieve dis-
placements of the membranes of only several micrometres.
Holsteen et al.28 proposed a platform of actuating nanobeam
metasurfaces to enable temporal colour control, dynamic beam
steering, and light focusing in the visible range with a modulation
speed of 1 MHz and a bias of only 2–3 V. The device was fabricated
on a silicon-on-insulator substrate and could change its optical
properties by actuating a suspended Si nanobeam metasurface. The
Mie resonance was controlled by a MEMS to adjust the Fabry–Perot
resonant mode occurring between the substrate and Si metasurface.
Using this mechanism, temporal colour control and beam steering
were achieved by gradually changing the metasurface array size. As
a result, the beam steering covered an angle of 12° (that is, a 24°
FOV) at 600 nm with a 12 V bias. In addition, a tunable lens system
could gradually shift focus from 26 to 5 μm with a 2.2 V bias using
this approach (Fig. 3c).
Advanced mechanically tunable metasurfaces could improve
the beam shaping and steering applications as well. Until now, a
variety of strain-induced optical metamaterials have been intro-
duced to control the resonance spectrum of plasmonic and dielec-
tric resonators29–32, to switch holographic images and modulate the
focal point of lenses33–35. Such approaches could be further devel-
oped (along with MEMS integration) to realize continuous beam
515
Review Article
scanning with high spatial resolution. Beam scanning control meth-
ods with two-axis MEMS mirrors (for example, Lissajous scanning)
can improve the temporal (several tens of megahertz) and spatial
resolution (a few degrees) of LiDAR systems36. In addition to the
beam steering applications, MEMS have been used to demonstrate
dynamic photodetectors featuring a large FOV of 42°, with the goal
of reducing the size of photodetector pixel arrays37.
Liquid crystals. An SLM, which can control the wavefront of light
by modulating the phase or intensity of incoming light with liquid
crystals, has been applied to video projection, hologram genera-
tion and LiDAR technology, but the large pixel size (on the order
of micrometres) reduced the resolution of the projected images and
degraded the wavefront quality due to diffraction. Furthermore, the
FOV defined by the angular coverage of the first diffractive order
was also limited to a maximum of a few degrees. However, integrat-
ing metasurfaces with liquid crystal technology could open a prom-
ising pathway to active beam manipulating devices.
Li et al. proposed a metasurface-based miniaturized SLM tech-
nique that can modulate the transmitted light wavefront with min-
iaturized pixels38 (Fig. 3d). A TiO2 metasurface, designed according
to the Huygens principle, showed both high transmittance, by mini-
mizing backscattered light through the optimization of the electric
and magnetic dipole resonance, and coverage of the entire 2π phase
delay. A 205-nm-high metasurface structure was inserted into a liq-
uid crystal sandwich cell, which enabled three-level phase retarda-
tions according to the liquid crystal molecule orientation (0°, 45°
and 90°) in the wavelength range of 660–670 nm. The metasurface–
SLM device relied on a unit cell consisting of three nanodisks to
increase the diffraction efficiency, with simulations predicting a 48%
diffraction efficiency for the first order at 665 nm. Experimentally,
a three-level phase-modulating SLM was tested for a metasurface
with 1 μm pixel size. Applying bias voltages of 0, 3.5 and 8 V resulted
in first-order deflection at an angle of about 11° (that is, a 22° FOV)
(Fig. 3d). The demonstrated diffraction efficiency was relatively
low, about 15%, and could be further increased to 36% with a larger
pixel size and stable gating method. The intention in using metasur-
faces in traditional SLM devices is to reduce both the pixel size (by
about 1/3) and the liquid crystal thickness (by about 1/2). Although
these reported results did not show any drastic improvement in the
switching or scanning rates (limited by the liquid crystal modula-
tion speed of several kilohertz), liquid crystal actuation in a min-
iaturized cell could improve the modulation speed for applications
requiring high-frame-rate LiDAR imaging.
Phase-change materials. The biggest advantage of switchable and
reconfigurable phase-change materials is that they can be directly
incorporated within metallic or dielectric metasurfaces39–42. In par-
ticular, chalcogenide phase-change materials such as GeSbTe alloys
can be switched between amorphous and crystalline states quickly
(in nanoseconds) and repeatedly (~105 cycles) through external
thermal, optical and electric stimuli42. They also possess a high
refractive index contrast in the infrared region and non-volatile
characteristics.
Yin et al. proposed beam switching and bifocal zoom lens
devices using active plasmonic metasurfaces (Fig. 3e)43. They were
composed of a 50-nm-thick active Ge3Sb2Te6 layer, a 15-nm-thick
ZnS:SiO2 capping layer to prevent oxidation and a 40-nm-thick
Au metasurface. The active layer was in its amorphous state when
deposited and switched to the crystalline state when heated at
160 °C. At a wavelength of 3.1 µm, there was a high refractive index
contrast between the amorphous (n ≈ 3.5 + 0.001i) and crystal-
line states (n ≈ 6.5 + 0.06i), with negligible loss. The lens can also
be equipped with two different sets of plasmonic elements, each
with a different plasmon resonance. In the amorphous state, one
set showed a resonance at 3.1 µm, whereas the other set resonated
516 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
at 2.28 µm. In the crystalline state, the resonances moved to 4.1 µm
and 3.1 µm, respectively. Thus, each antenna interacted with both
the amorphous and crystalline states, and thereby shifted a diffrac-
tion angle of a diffracted beam. This strategy could also be exploited
to realize focal length shifting lenses.
Vanadium dioxide (VO2), a material that exhibits a metal–insula-
tor transition, can also be used for thermally tunable metasurfaces.
The VO2 undergoes a phase change at a lower temperature than
GeSbTe alloys (for example, 68 °C for VO2 and 160 °C for Ge3Sb2Te6)
and induces refractive index modulation from the visible to NIR
region44–46. The index modulation of the VO2 layer itself is not very
large in the visible to NIR region (ΔRe(n) ≈ 0.5 and 1.4 at 600 nm
and 1,200 nm, respectively), but plasmonic or dielectric metasur-
faces could improve its switching time (by around several millisec-
onds), degree of spectrum modulation and radiation pattern47–49.
In conclusion, most beam steering metasurface devices dem-
onstrated so far provide only 1D point scanning and a maximum
FOV that is similar to the minimum standard of existing commer-
cially available products (around 30° to 40°). Continuous 1D line
scanning and 2D point scanning have not yet been demonstrated.
Furthermore, most ITO-based plasmonic active devices work close
to an absorption resonance and thus suffer from low diffraction effi-
ciency. In addition, the modulation speed still needs to be improved
up to several megahertz, as the tuning speed of micrometre-scale
liquid-crystal-based devices is limited to several kilohertz. Another
limitation is the strong correlation between amplitude and phase
modulation, causing a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Metasurfaces for structured illumination and flash LiDAR
The FOV of the current state-of-the-art beam steering metasur-
faces, ranging from 20° to 40°, is still far narrower than the scanning
range required for current commercially viable LiDAR systems that
demand full scene scanning. Note that full scene scanning can be
achieved with the combination of multiple LiDAR sensors, thus a
range of 60° to 120° for a single sensor could still be sufficient if sys-
tem design workarounds are implemented. To overcome the limita-
tions of the conventional LiDAR scanning approach, flash LiDAR
uses a diffractive optical element (DOE)-based point-spreading
component to project light at large angles. Overall, these struc-
tured illumination schemes have several advantages as they do not
require beam scanning and can reduce the load on depth compu-
tation and the corresponding processing units. For a simple case,
the acquisition time (Tacq) of a single shot for point/line-scanning
and flash-type-scanning LiDAR with a detailed specification of
90° × 10° total angle view, 0.2° × 0.2° spatial resolution, 450 × 50 pix-
els (Nx × Ny) and 10 frames per second (FPS) is calculated as follows.
Tacq for point/line/flash-scanning methods is calculated as Tacq = 1/
(FPS × Nx × Ny) = 4.44 µs, Tacq = 1/(FPS × Ny) = 222 µs and Tacq = 1/
(FPS) = 100 ms, respectively50. Thus, compared with scanning meth-
ods demanding fast microsecond scan speeds and processing times,
flash-type LiDAR (or structured illumination) can employ simpler
scanning and processing units, requiring millisecond scanning or
processing times. However, to precisely manipulate the structured
beam path and to scan farther, additional optical components such
as fisheye lenses or high-power lasers are still required. This is a one
specific area where metasurface-based approaches could have a major
influence. The DOE manipulates the wavefront of light by modulat-
ing the phase using micro-sized etched structures, generating a point
cloud in both the transmission and reflection modes. For this reason,
scrambling metasurfaces, large-area beam deflectors with pixelated
metasurfaces and other structured illuminating methods are promis-
ing alternatives to the conventional DOE, offering a smaller footprint
and simplifying the optical system (removing the requirement for a
fisheye lens, for example). Integrating metasurfaces directly on top of
a light source array is of interest to adjust the number of individual
pixels operating according to the scan range or purpose.
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy Review Article
a b
Conventional DOE Metasurface DOE Laser

Iris Sample

2 µm

NA = 0.9

30° 60°

DOE
Camera
Collimator
VCSEL array

c d
1
θ = 15°

θ = 10°

θ = 8°

Normalized intensity
x axis (mm) θ = 6°

SiO2 θ = 4°
Total TiO2
SiO2
S-pol
TiO2
P-pol
SiO2 θ = 2°
GaP n
a.u.
0 MQW
12 30 –30 GaP p
θ = 0°
Au
8
60 –60
0
4 y
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
90 –90 z axis (mm)
0
x

Fig. 4 | Point-cloud-generating metasurfaces and device integration. a, Metasurface DOEs compared with conventional DOEs. The scanning electron
microscope (SEM) image (top right) shows fabricated 2D metasurfaces, the Fourier space image (bottom right) shows transmitted light from a
metasurface DOE. The dashed circles represent diffraction angles of 30° and 60° (ref. 51). b, Scrambling metasurfaces. Top: schematic of the experimental
set-up for scrambling metasurfaces to produce a point cloud. Bottom: experimental results for a point cloud covering 4π space at 633 nm (ref. 52).
Dashed yellow box shows a certain part of the point cloud patterns with uniform intensity and distance between neighboring points. c, LED-integrated
metasurfaces. Top: the working mechanism of the LED-integrated metasurfaces. A hybrid Bragg grating–Si metasurface, called a resonant cavity LED
(RCLED), can deflect collimating beams by about 30°. Bottom: emission pattern of hybrid RCLED with Si metasurfaces63. S-pol and P-pol indicate
transverse-electric polarized light and transverse-magnetic polarized light, respectively. The layer diagram represents the normalized (to the maximum
power) intensity of the angular emission spectrum corresponding to the diffraction angle (in the semicircle). d, VCSEL-integrated metasurfaces. Left:
optical microscope image (top) and SEM images (middle and bottom) of 10 × 10 array metasurfaces. Each array has a different deflection angle and
depending on the electric gating, wide-ranging dynamic beam steering is possible. Scale bars represent 10 mm (top), 1 mm (middle left), 200 μm (middle
right) and 100 μm (bottom right). Right: the measured far-field deflected beam intensity on the xz plane where deflecting angles θ vary up to 15° (ref. 65).
The y axis represents x axis displacement where the scale of each section is 2 mm (black arrow). Figure adapted with permission from ref. 51, ACS (a);
ref. 52, Springer Nature Limited (b); ref. 63, John Wiley and Sons (c); ref. 65, Springer Nature Limited (d).

Scrambling metasurfaces. Diffractive elements are often used to structures suffer from low efficiency, poor beam intensity unifor-
scan 3D objects with a single-shot illumination/flash. Unfortunately, mity and a limited FOV. As a large FOV with high efficiency and
conventional DOEs realized by periodic binary-phase grating beam intensity uniformity demands element periodicities that are

Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 517

Review Article
smaller than the operating wavelength, and multiple phase level
modulation is realized by controlling the etching depth of the DOE,
the fabrication process can be an issue. A diffractive metasurface
enhances transmission efficiency and improves the FOV and other
performance metrics, such as the working wavelength, device form
factor and polarized illumination. Ni et al.51 developed a metasur-
face DOE to achieve 2D spot array illumination with a 120° × 120°
FOV (Fig. 4a). Using vectorial electromagnetic simulations, the Si
metasurface structure can be optimized to operate at the telecom-
munication wavelength of 1,550 nm with up to 81% diffraction
efficiency51.
Li et al. developed an amorphous-silicon-based scrambling
metasurface inspired by Lambertian surfaces that appear uniformly
bright from all viewing angles52. They overcome the drawback of
most DOE and Lambertian surfaces, which only operate in the
half space (that is, working as either a half-spherical-reflection or
half-spherical-transmission type). The scrambling metasurface
comprising well-designed nanorods diffracts light in both the trans-
mission and reflection modes with the same intensity. Such so-called
transflective metasurfaces satisfy both the appropriate phase delay
condition (δr = δt = π), where δr and δt are the phase delays derived
from the geometric phase in the reflection and transmission modes,
respectively, and the appropriate reflection and transmission coef-
ficient conditions (rl = rs = tl = ts), where rl, rs, tl and ts represent the
reflection and transmission coefficients of light propagating with
a polarization parallel to the long and short axes of the nanorods,
respectively. These metasurfaces have a theoretical polarization
conversion efficiency of 27% for both reflected and transmitted
light, which was then experimentally verified using a blazed grating
and a 2 × 2 beam splitter. The fabricated device operates between
470 and 650 nm, and the diffraction angle is close to 90° (that is,
a 180° FOV)52. Using the same principle, numerous sub-diffracted
beams can be generated that exhibit the same intensity in the reflec-
tion and transmission modes, with both reflected and transmitted
signals covering the half-spherical space (or 2π space). Therefore,
a cloud of random points can be generated to cover the entire 4π
space (Fig. 4b). For example, according to the calculation, a unit
pixel consisting of a 100 × 100 array of nanostructures is designed,
and then arranged into 10 × 10 pixelated arrays to produce 4,044
randomly distributed diffracted sub-beams that scatter over the
entire 4π space with the same intensity (Fig. 4b)52. For certain appli-
cations, uniform-backscattering half-space (2π-space) metasurfaces
can also be designed53.
Large-area metasurface beam deflectors. Li et al. proposed
large-area pixelated metasurfaces that can control the scattered
light within each pixel subunit and adjust the far field of the scat-
tered beams through a 21 × 21 pixel array54. A laser beam at 940 nm
produced a 441 point array on a 2D screen located 1 m away from
the device. The largest diffraction beam angle was about 15°. The
device had several limitations, such as a small angle of diffraction,
a limited number of sub-diffracted beams, a strong non-diffracted
beam intensity and low diffraction efficiency. Those drawbacks can
be overcome with novel design methodologies such as scrambling
metasurfaces, or using low-loss dielectric materials such as GaN or
TiO2. With the scrambling metasurface design technology along
with large-area fabrication technology at a smaller resolution, a
metasurface-based flash LiDAR able to scatter a point cloud with
high efficiency over the entire 4π spherical space could be realized,
in principle.
Other structured illumination approaches. Jin et al. proposed a
metasurface phase mask producing rotating point-spread function
for depth sensing55. The illuminating light passes through a phase
mask to form a double-helix point-spread function that features a
distinctive intensity distribution (that is, different rotating angle)
518 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
depending on the distance between the light source and mask. By
exploiting the structured illumination properties of the light beam,
the distance of different objects can be retrieved by numerically
decoding the local orientation of the double-helix point-spread
function. However, the approach is still marred by a small numeri-
cal aperture of 0.02 and low spatial resolution of 10 mm (depth
difference).
Guo et al. introduced single-shot metalens depth sensors that
take advantage of two differently defocused images captured at
different spots56. The system is composed of two complementary
off-axis metalenses with distinct focal lengths. Multiple photosen-
sor pixels capture two differently defocused images in a single shot
and the optical information is exploited to retrieve the distance
information using a depth-reconstruction algorithm. This approach
achieves 10 cm spatial resolution with a millimetre-scale metalens.
The remaining challenges here are the small FOV, low spatial reso-
lution and limited distinguishable distance, which could be over-
come using actively focusable tunable metalenses.
More conventional structured light, such as beams carrying
orbital angular momentum or non-diffracting Bessel beams, have
also been used in depth measurements57–61. As bulky optical com-
ponents such as Q-plates or axicons are required for these systems,
metasurfaces are expected to play an important role in the miniatur-
ization of these optical devices. Overall, structured illumination has
many advantages as it does not require active lightning components
and can reduce the load on the depth computation and correspond-
ing processing units62.
In conclusion, the efficiency of structured light illumination
devices should be improved further (for example, to produce a
polarization conversion efficiency of scrambling metasurface
>60%). Compared with scanning methods, the incident laser beam
is divided into an array of several thousands of beam spots, split-
ting the power into many weaker diffracted beams. In their current
form, these devices can only achieve depth measurements over a
range of a few metres.
Device-integrated metasurfaces
A big leap forwards in the miniaturization of LiDAR would be to
integrate both the source and the beam shaping devices into a sin-
gle compound system. Depending on the application, LiDAR uses
light sources such as fibre lasers, micro-chip lasers, diode lasers
and LEDs. To adjust the beam properties of each source, additional
components are generally needed, making the entire system bulky.
Monolithic device-integrated metasurfaces combined with light
sources are an alternative to control the characteristics of the emit-
ted beams during the processing of the devices at the chip-level.
LED emission control by metasurfaces. LEDs emit incoherent and
Lambertian-shaped light. They have numerous advantages such as
low cost, low power consumption and a long lifespan, but require
additional bulky optical systems to tailor the properties of the emit-
ted light. Owing to the large angular distribution of the LED emis-
sion, it is difficult to integrate metasurfaces, because the latter are
generally designed assuming a unidirectional, coherent plane wave
source. However, two recent studies have demonstrated metasur-
faces emitting directional light from LEDs.
Khaidarov et al.63 developed a technique to control the emit-
ted beam properties from a GaP LED by integrating it with meta-
surfaces. This approach solved the problem of the broad k-space
distribution by incorporating a Fabry–Perot resonator structure63
(Fig. 4c). A hybrid Bragg Au RCLED was constructed by installing a
Bragg mirror made up of multilayers of TiO2 and SiO2 on the front
and a Au reflector on the back of a GaP LED. This design drasti-
cally reduced the divergent angle emitted from the LED, emitting a
mostly collimated light source normal to the LED surface. On the
LED exit facet, an amorphous-silicon-based metasurface device
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
was assembled to steer and shape the emitted beam according to
the phase profile of the metasurface. As a proof of concept, a meta-
surface that deflected the emitted beam by about 30° and one that
generated a vortex beam were combined with LEDs. However, the
plug wall efficiency, given by the ratio between the emitted power
and the pump beam power, was still low (3%).
Iyer et al. demonstrated unidirectional luminescence using inco-
herent light-emitting phase-array metasurfaces; the metasurfaces
guided the incoherent emission in a certain direction and also
produced around sevenfold photoluminescence enhancement64.
Unlike conventional metasurfaces used to engineer the wave-
front of a coherent light source, the proposed metasurface directly
manipulates the local density of optical states for far-field radia-
tion, which amplifies or suppresses the outcoupling efficiency of
light towards a certain direction. The fabricated metasurface com-
prised light-emitting phased pillars made of an InGaN/GaN MQW
sandwiched by GaN post on the substrate and 100 nm GaN cap-
ping layer. The MQW could be excited by optical pumping using a
405 nm LED and the emitted light experienced a phase delay when
passing through the GaN post towards the substrate. The GaN
posts were designed to have an in-plane phase gradient so that the
induced momentum modifies the local density of optical states in
certain channels for far-field radiation. This selective modifica-
tion of the outcoupling channels can lead to asymmetric and uni-
directional emission, and the enhancement of photoluminescence
towards the selected channel. This metasurface design methodol-
ogy for engineering the photoluminescence direction of incoherent
emission may boost miniaturization of beam steering devices with-
out an external source.
VCSEL control by metasurfaces. Unlike LEDs, VCSELs emit a
coherent laser beam perpendicular to the wafer surface. VCSELs
consist of a pair of distributed Bragg reflector layers sandwiching
a MQW gain medium. They feature unique lasing performance,
including low power consumption, wafer-level testing, a circular
output beam profile and CMOS-compatible large-scale 2D array
manufacturing processes. As VCSELs are a versatile laser source,
they have been implemented in various applications, namely fibre
optics, optical communications, laser manufacturing, smart glasses
and all LiDAR-related applications including mixed reality head-
sets, 3D sensing applications, gesture recognition systems, gaming,
robotics and automotive systems. However, until recently, the diver-
gence of single-mode VCSEL emission usually exceeded 10°, requir-
ing additional optical components.
Xie et al. reported arbitrary beam shaping of VCSELs within
a compact system by integrating the laser structures with ultra-
thin flat optical metasurfaces to realize a metasurface-integrated
VCSEL array65 (Fig. 4d). Combining VCSELs with an outcoupling
metasurface that satisfies the collimating phase profile results in
a considerable reduction of the divergence to 0.83°. Furthermore,
as the metasurface structures are monolithically fabricated on
Review Article
the VCSEL device, the interconnection loss of light is minimized,
with confirmed transmission efficiencies as high as 80%. The
metasurface-integrated VCSEL devices, beam steering light at dif-
ferent angles ranging from 0 to 15° was demonstrated (Fig. 4d). The
on-chip device can program light to be emitted in a desired direc-
tion in real-time by programming a bias on the specific electrode
on each pixel. This demonstration offers a realistic implementation
of metasurfaces combined with laser sources for on-chip LiDAR
applications without compromising the overall lasing character-
istics, while benefiting from well-developed packaging solutions,
electrical injection techniques and analysis theories compatible
with state-of-the-art VCSEL technology. Recently, arbitrary profiles,
including point clouds, have been implemented on VCSELs, offer-
ing new avenues for compact point-cloud LiDAR systems66.
The important issues in device (for example, LED or
VCSEL)-integrated metasurfaces that must be addressed are find-
ing proper dielectric materials for monolithic device fabrication
and corresponding scalable manufacturing methods for device inte-
gration. First, to obtain high-efficiency integrated devices, proper
low-loss materials and interconnection designs between the light
source and beam steering components should be considered. The
receiving optical units (including focusing lenses and photodetec-
tors) could also be integrated in a single chip.
Paths towards integrated chip-scale silicon photonic LiDAR
The integration of full LiDAR technology, including the light emis-
sion, steering and detection, on a single CMOS-compatible chip
is an ultimate goal of the nanophotonic LiDAR14. This implemen-
tation will be further accelerated by compact Si-based systems or
advanced FMCW-type chip-scale LiDAR, which require more
robust coherent illumination and detection schemes.
Martin et al. demonstrated full FMCW LiDAR capabilities on a
single miniaturized chip (9 mm2) by embedding a distributed feed-
back laser connected to the chip via grating couplers. Scanning was
performed using several Mach–Zehnder interferometers activated
by thermal phase shifters in the OPA scheme, and detection was
performed using differential balanced detectors with phase stabil-
ity on the chip67 (Fig. 5a). Although this work is a tour de force in
LiDAR implementation and miniaturization, further efforts are
needed to improve the presented 70° FOV, 1.9 kHz scanning speed
and 28 cm resolution. Furthermore, as FMCW LiDAR techniques
require coherent sources, the ranging distance could only reach
60 m (Fig. 5a), thus imposing an additional limitation for some
applications, such as for self-driving cars.
TOF measurements for LiDAR combined with frequency
comb waveguides offer various advantages over established stan-
dards LiDAR techniques68–70. Earlier studies showed that although
dual-comb approaches are effective, they still have large footprints.
The footprint can be reduced by complementing the LiDAR sys-
tems with on-chip integrated OPAs. Trocha et al. showed dissipa-
tive Kerr soliton states in microresonator-based optical frequency

Fig. 5 | Photonics integrated LiDAR approaches. a, On-chip design integrated LiDAR system. A distributed feedback laser was used to drive the system.
Using a two-channel procedure—transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX)—it is possible to measure speed (bottom left) and range (bottom right) at a distance
of 60 m with only 5 mW of emitted laser power using fast Fourier transform spectra to increase the range67. FM DFB, frequency modulated distributed
feedback laser; BPD, balanced photodiode; DLI, delay line interferometer; iPH, phase shifters channels; E, emitted field; R, reflected field; BPD, balanced
photodiode; FC, fibre circulator; LO, local oscillator. b, Microcomb-based LiDAR. Top: experimental scheme to set up dual-comb experiments. Bottom:
measured profile of a bullet moving at a speed of 150 m s−1 (ref. 10) dotted lines represent the limits of measurement. DKS, dissipative Kerr soliton states;
OCT, optical coherence tomography used to compare the results. c, Massively parallel coherent laser ranging using a soliton microcomb. Single-comb
photon tagging and applied frequency modulation function. Bottom: set-up (left) and ranging experiment (right) (ref. 12). E(t) and E(ω) correspond to
the electric field in the time and frequency domain, respectively. trep, period of the modulation; ωp, central frequency; μ, the spectral limits; AFG, arbitrary
function generator; EOM, electrical optical modulator; DEMUX, the demultiplexer; CIRC, optical circulator. d, Inversely designed Lorentzian resonator
on silicon-on-insulator to implement non-reciprocal transmission71. Left: illustration of the optical path to perform the experiment. Right: design of the
resonator. EDFA, erbium doped fibre amplifier; PD, photodiode. Figure adapted with permission from ref. 67, IEEE (a); ref. 10, AAAS (b); ref. 12, Springer
Nature Limited (c); and ref. 71, Springer Nature Limited (d).

Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology 519

Review Article NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy

combs10. A pair of free-running continuous-wave lasers pumped emitted–received signal with the other signal used as a reference in
dual Kerr comb generators detuned by 96 kHz. The signal comb a balanced photodiode. The other local oscillator comb was again
was then divided by a 50:50 fibre coupler, corresponding to the divided into two parts, one routed to the measurement photodiode
a b
SN1/RX iPH
BPD #2 Ultrafast ranging
BPD #3
BPD #4
FM DFB 75 BPD #5 Bullet
laser BPD #6 Collimator 150 m s−1
25 BPD #7
#8
Dual DKS set-up
BPD
#9 E
BPD Lens
LO R R
SN2/TX #2
Si3N4
E #3
#4
#5 Air gun
#6
#7
#8
Time (10 µs per division)
#9
Dual-DKS-comb (dynamic)
FC
DLI 2 Swept-source OCT (static)
BPD
ϕ shift

Profile (mm)
1
60
5
Speed (km h−1)

Distance (m)

40 0
0
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
–5
0 Position (1 mm per division)
20 40 60 0 20 40 60
Time (s) Time (s)

c
E(t ) E(t ) trep trep

t t
E(ω) E(ω) ∆ω
~sech2

ω ω

Si3N4 CIRC
EOM ω–µ
CW pump (x–µ,v–µ)
90/10
AFG
ω+µ ωp
Digital signal
processing

DEMUX

(x0,v0)
θ0
Si3N4 50/50

θ+µ
x–µ,v–µ ... x0,v0 ... x+µ,v+µ
(x+µ,v+µ)
v

d
Distance measurement set-up Drop waveguide

PD3 Port 3 Port 4

Oscilloscope
Fano resonator
Port 3

PD1 PD2
1 µm
Port 1 Port 2
Circulator Circulator

Laser source Port 1 Port 2

EDFA
Fibre delay Bus waveguide 10 µm
50/50

520 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
and the other one to the heterodyne reference. Measurement times
as short as 10.4 ns and a maximum possible distance acquisition
rate of 96.4 MHz were demonstrated. This allowed the profile of an
air-gun bullet moving at a speed of 150 m s−1 to be measured (Fig.
5b) and moving objects with speeds up to ~140 km s−1 to be tracked.
Riemensberger et al. used soliton pulse streams generated by a
photonic-integrated microresonator to perform parallel LiDAR
(Fig. 5c)12 and prove the transfer of the chirp from the continuum
source to each of the microcomb subpulses. The source was split
into multiple channels. Each channel contained distance and veloc-
ity information leading to massively parallel ranging. This multi-
channel ranging was tested by measuring a flywheel spinning at
228 Hz. Pulse trains were diffracted around the circumference of
the wheel by a transmission grating, and the reflected signals of
each channel were collected and analysed for parallel distance and
velocity measurements. The results showed sampling rates of 3
megapixels per second from 30 channels, or around 194 THz. This
LiDAR system has the potential to greatly increase the frame rate
of coherent ranging (that is, FMCW) through parallelization. The
work showed the viability of chip-scale dissipative Kerr solitons to
act as an alternative optical source in high-performance LiDAR sys-
tems. The remarkable measurement speed overcomes the required
time to perform real-time decisions for commercial applications by
orders of magnitude.
Another important aspect to take into account when realizing
compact-form factor LiDAR is the losses introduced when coupling
light into chips. Nonlinear silicon photonics is an excellent candi-
date to overcome the limited capabilities of conventional LiDAR
systems, especially in terms of scalability, narrow bandwidth and
high insertion loss in large-scale integrated photonic systems. To
that end, Yang et al. proposed an inversely designed two ports
Fano-resonance device with a high-Q silicon racetrack resonator
coupled to a silicon bus waveguide with near unity transmission71.
At the same time, optical ranging up to 60 m with ~40 m ambiguity
distance can be realized. Such progress could lead to LiDAR tech-
nology with scalable energy-efficient form factors (Fig. 5d).
For integrated OPA-based devices, the high number of tun-
able elements required to achieve the necessary performance
can be an issue. For instance, high-resolution beam steering in a
millimetre-sized OPA would require millions of adjustable emit-
ters, interfering together to produce the desired far-field pattern.
Attempting to simplify the control architecture, Davoyan et al.
introduced the concept of a perimeter-controlled architecture to
shape the far-zone radiation when an excessive number of tunable
elements are included72. In addition, unusual designs, such as a
serpentine OPA, were proposed based on a serially interconnected
array of low-loss grating waveguides to control more than 16,000
resolvable spots and a FOV of 36.5° × 5.5° (ref. 73). There have also
been attempts to overcome large unit footprints, and thus widen the
FOV, by using an asymmetric antenna array. However, side lobes
then create background noise, so more effort is needed to improve
the overall directivity74,75.
The path towards a fully integrated chip-scale and functional
LiDAR device with illumination, beam steering and detector is now
established. Although recent work has made considerable advances,
innovation is needed to overcome underlying issues such as the low
FOV, losses, limited range and complex fabrication process. The
works highlighted in this section have tackled some of these prob-
lems, but none has been able to solve all of them simultaneously and
demonstrate an attractive chip-scale integrated LiDAR device.
Outlook
Nanophotonics has the potential to miniaturize and redesign avail-
able LiDAR systems with potentially far-reaching implications in
industry by enhancing the beam steering capabilities, and real-
izing embedded and compact light sources. However, stringent
Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
Review Article
performance requirements have to be satisfied before nanophotonic
devices can realistically be implemented into industrial applications.
Specifically, the envisioned LiDAR would feature: a high frame rate
(tens of megathertz), a large FOV (a range of 60–120°) and a high
spatial resolution (tens of centimetres of depth resolution and 0.1–
0.2° of angular resolution) over long and short distances with a high
signal-to-noise ratio. The nanophotonic approaches discussed in
this Review can achieve effective beam steering76,77 and could soon
benefit from artificial intelligence-assisted device design method-
ologies to further increase their efficiency78–84. In addition, for the
practical use of metasurface-based devices, CMOS-compatible scal-
able nanomanufacturing techniques such as deep ultraviolet lithog-
raphy85–87 and functional nanoimprinting lithography should be
further developed23,88–91.
Nanophotonic LiDAR technology is expected to improve receiv-
ing optical units, miniaturizing the optical lens systems used to
collect the return light pulses in TOF LiDAR systems92,93. Once a
multibeam emitting (or flash-type emitting) strategy is realized with
metasurface technology, the receiver part also has to be constructed
with a 2D array (or 3D shaped-detectors) to achieve high spatial
resolution and decrease the entire device footprint. Here, a flat met-
alens array that can be incorporated with CMOS sensors to form a
receiving lens unit should be explored. Furthermore, TOF imaging
technology requires fast acquisition and high-efficiency compound
photodiodes operating in the short-wavelength infrared (1,300 to
2,000 nm)94–96—that is, beyond the sensitivity of silicon-based pho-
todiodes, which is mainly below 1,000 nm—concerted efforts in
developing highly sensitive detectors in this region are still needed.
At present, InGaAs-based photodetectors are frequently used, which
enable optical absorption near 1,100 nm, but the manufacturing
costs of such compound photodiodes are much higher than those
for silicon. Alternative materials such as germanium-on-silicon or
strain-engineered silicon, which extend optical absorption towards
shorter wavelengths, could be useful97,98.
Research and product development relying on
nanophotonic-augmented LiDAR platforms are actively being con-
ducted also in the industry sector99–101. Lumotive is producing an
ultra-compact fully solid-state LiDAR system relying on metasur-
faces through conventional 0.13 μm CMOS semiconductor foundry.
It combines liquid crystals with a 120° FOV resonant metasurface
to scan a 1D frame at 25 μs. The metasurfaces comprise of a reflec-
tive rail-form copper surface, where liquid crystals are embedded
inside the structure. By applying a voltage to the liquid crystal cell,
the local reflection phase can be modulated, allowing line scan-
ning to be realized. Such mechanism can be applied in standardized
wavelengths of 905 or 1,550 nm. Such new approach leverages two
active metasurfaces, for both reflection and reception channels, that
act in parallel to steer and collect the light with active directional
control101.
Limitations of this technology are 1D scanning only, relatively
low FOV and moderate liquid crystal actuation speeds. Samsung
has developed an all-solid-state scanner using a metaphotonic SLM
comprising tunable plasmonic nanoresonator arrays. Each nanores-
onator consists of a Au nanoantenna on top of an ITO layer on an Al
back reflector. By applying two different electric biases to the top and
bottom layers, the device can independently modulate the ampli-
tude and phase over 360°, providing full wavefront modulation102.
The devices achieved only an 8° scanning angle and 1% diffraction
efficiency, but with a considerable switching speed of 5.4 MHz and
energy consumption of 283 fJ µm−2. The proof-of-concept LiDAR
system was able to detect a distance of 4.7 m with a scanning angle
range of 6° × 4°, spatial angle resolution of 0.2° × 0.2° and operating
wavelength of 1.56 µm (ref. 102) (Fig. 6).
System-level performance should also be addressed, particu-
larly thermal robustness, humidity resilience and vibration stability.
Thermal management is critical for device performance given that
521
Review Article NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy

a Interconnect wire through Au for the b

Steered top gate (Vt)
beam

E H
k
Incident r
beam
Length

Vt Au

Upper insulator Upper

ITO interface
Lower
Channel Lower insulator interface
Vb AI
z

Period (Λ)
x
y
Λc
Interconnect wire through
AI for the bottom gate (Vb)

c d e

Object Distance (m)

4.7
3

Vertical (°)
2
Pulse laser
Photo- 3.4
detector 1

0 2.7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tunable
Horizontal (°)
metasurface

Fig. 6 | All-solid-state active metaphotonic spatial light modulator (SLM). a, Schematic of nanobeam-shaped active metasurface array. Λc, channel
period. b, Cross-section of the unit cell, comprising the top Au metasurface, active ITO middle layer and bottom Al reflector layer. Active beam steering
cab be realized by adjusting top and bottom electric bias. E, electric field; H, magnetic field; k, wave vector. c, Schematic of a 3D LiDAR experimental
set-up. d, Scanned objects. e, Measured 3D depth image using the metaphotonic SLM. The scanned angle range, spatial angle resolution and distance are
6° × 4°, 0.2° × 0.2° and 4.7 m, respectively102. Here, the horizontal and vertical directions (x and y axis labels) are relative to the ground. Figure adapted
with permission from ref. 102, Springer Nature Limited.

most current LiDAR systems consume about 10–20 W of power,
and heat generation can become severe over long periods of use. In
automotive applications, because the LiDAR sensors are integrated
into vehicles that generate lots of heat, the sensors should be able to
function between −40 °C and 150 °C, according to the Automotive
Electronic Council qualification or AEC-Q100, grade 0. Here,
dielectric or refractory materials such as W or TiN should be used.
In a similar vein, materials that are sensitive to moisture and tend
to oxidize, such as certain metals, should be avoided. Wire-type
heaters and anti-fog coating technology could be integrated into
LiDAR systems for de-icing and defrosting. Finally, vibration sta-
bility is required to maintain precise scanning, alignment and light
detection under uncontrollable external impacts. As nanophotonic
LiDAR systems can be monolithically manufactured, some of these
issues could be resolved.
Metasurfaces combined with liquid crystals, LEDs and VCSELs
could drastically reduce the footprint of LiDAR devices, integrating
the emission, scanning and receiving components into a single unit.
The designer capabilities of the nanophotonic solutions discussed
in this Review, in terms of beam shaping, polarization and oper-
ating wavelength, will enable real-life, fast, ultra-thin, lightweight
and high-end LiDAR systems in the near future. At the moment,
state-of-the-art LiDAR generally uses VCSEL array-type direct
TOF sensors. The light illumination components are composed of
10,000–20,000 VCSEL arrays (but to increase the signal-to-noise
ratio, around 5,000 point sources are illuminated in a single-shot) to
control a beam path from each laser cell, a microlens array is needed
and, according to desired purposes, additional external lenses are
required, making the entire system bulky. Ultracompact nanopho-
tonic LiDAR should not only match the performance of commercial
counterparts, but should also provide better solutions for emerging
applications such as indoor robots or drones with full 4π spherical
space measurements, omnidirectional cameras, smartphones and
closed-circuit television. For those applications, spherical detector
arrays, or nanophotonic-augmented angle-sensitive nanowire pho-
todetectors should be developed103.
Beyond such enhanced performance, supplanting current
LiDAR technologies requires new and cheap solutions with excep-
tional maturation speed to market from conception to delivery. This
is certainly a challenge for the new startups and companies that are
focusing on active beam control with nanophotonic components.
Received: 26 August 2020; Accepted: 10 March 2021;
Published online: 6 May 2021

522 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology

NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
References
1. Smullin, L. D. & Fiocco, G. Optical echoes from the moon. Nature 194,
1267 (1962).
2. Christian, J. A. & Cryan, A. A survey of LiDAR technology and its use in
spacecraft relative navigation. In Proc. AIAA Guidance, Navigation and
Control Conference. 1–7 (American Institute of Aeronautics And
Astronautics, 2013).
3. Royo, S. & Ballesta-Garcia, M. An overview of lidar imaging systems for
autonomous vehicles. Appl. Sci. 9, 4093 (2019).
4. Kaul, L., Zlot, R. & Bosse, M. Continuous-time three-dimensional mapping
for micro aerical vehicles with a passively actuated rotating laser scanner. J.
Field Robot. 33, 103–132 (2016).
5. Ham, Y., Han, K. K., Lin, J. J. & Goparvar-Fard, M. Visual monitoring of
civil infrastructure systems via camera-equipped unmanned aerial vehicles
(UAVs): a review of related works. Visual. Eng. 4, 1 (2016).
6. LiDAR drives forwards. Nat. Photon. 12, 441 (2018).
7. Jiang, Y., Karpf, S. & Jalali, B. Time-stretch lidar as a spectrally scanned
time-of-flight ranging camera. Nat. Photon. 14, 14–18 (2020).
8. Mahjoubfar, A. et al. Time stretch and its applications. Nat. Photon. 11,
3451–351 (2017).
9. Na, Y. et al. Ultrafast, sub-nanometre-precision and multifunctional
time-of-flight detection. Nat. Photon. 14, 355–360 (2020).
10. Trocha, P. et al. Ultrafast optical ranging using microresonator soliton
frequency combs. Science 359, 887–891 (2018).
11. Suh, M.-G. & Vahala, K. J. Soliton microcomb range measurement. Science
359, 884–887 (2018).
12. Riemensberger, J. et al. Massively parallel coherent laser ranging using a
soliton microcomb. Nature 581, 164–170 (2020).
13. Shuttleworth, J. AE Standards News: J3016 automated-driving graphic
update. SAE Inernational https://www.sae.org /news/2019/01/
sae-updates-j3016- automated-driving- graphic (2019).
14. Hecht, J. Lasers for LiDAR: FMCW lidar: an alternative for self-driving
cars. LaserFocusWorld https://www.laserfocusworld.com/ home/
article/16556322/ lasers-for-lidar- fmcw-lidar-an- alternative-for-
selfdriving-cars (2019).
15. LiDAR for Automotive and Industrial Applications 2019: Market &
Technology Report (Yole Développement, 2019).
16. Shpunt, A. & Erlich, R. Scanning depth engine. US patent 10,261,578
(2019).
17. Kinsey, N., DeVault, C., Boltasseva, A. & Shalaev, V. M. Near-zero-index
materials for photonics. Nat. Rev. Mater. 4, 742–760 (2019).
18. Huang, Y.-W. et al. Gate-tunable conducting oxide metasurfaces. Nano Lett.
16, 5319–5325 (2016).
19. Kafaie Shirmanesh, G., Sokhoyan, R., Pala, R. A. & Atwater, H. A.
Dual-gated active metasurfaces at 1550 nm with wide (>300°) phase
tenability. Nano Lett. 18, 2957–2963 (2018).
20. Park, J., Kang, J.-H., Kim, S. J., Liu, X. & Brongersma, M. L. Dynamic
reflection phase and polarization control in metasurfaces. Nano Lett. 17,
407–413 (2017).
21. Lesina, A. C., Goodwill, D., Bernier, E., Ramunno, L. & Berini, P. Tunable
plasmonic metasurfaces for optical phased arrays. IEEE J. Sel. Top.
Quantum Electron. 27, 4700116 (2020).
22. Liberal, I., Li, Y. & Engheta, N. Reconfigurable epsilon-near-zero
metasurfaces via photonic doping. Nanophotonics 7, 1117–1127 (2018).
23. Brière, G. et al. An etching-free approach toward large-scale light-emitting
metasurfaces. Adv. Opt. Mater. 7, 1801271 (2019).
24. Chen, B. H. et al. GaN metalens for pixel-level full-color routing at visible
light. Nano Lett. 17, 6345–6352 (2017).
25. Lee, J. et al. Ultrafast electrically tunable polaritonic metausrfaces. Adv. Opt.
Mater. 2, 1057–1063 (2014).
26. Wu, P. C. et al. Dynamic beam steering with all-dielectric electro-optic
III–V multiple quantum-well metasurfaces. Nat. Commun. 10, 3654 (2019).
27. Arbabi, E. et al. MEMS-tunable dielectric metasurface lens. Nat. Commun.
9, 812 (2018).
28. Holsteen, A. L., Cihan, A. F. & Brongersma, M. L. Temporal color mixing
and dynamic beam shaping with silicon metasurfaces. Science 365, 257–260
(2019).
29. Pryce, I. M., Aydin, K., Kelaita, Y. A., Briggs, R. M. & Atwater, H. A. Highly
strained compliant optical metamaterials with large frequency tenability.
Nano Lett. 10, 4222–4227 (2010).
30. Cui, Y., Zhou, J., Tamma, V. A. & Park, W. Dynamic tuning and symmetry
lowering of Fano resonance in plasmonic nanostructure. ACS Nano 6,
2385–2393 (2012).
31. Gutruf, P. et al. Mechanically tunable dielectric resonator metasurfaces at
visible frequencies. ACS Nano 10, 133–141 (2016).
32. Reeves, J. B. et al. Tunable infrared metasurface on a soft polymer scaffold.
Nano Lett. 18, 2802–2806 (2018).
33. Malek, S. C., Ee, H.-S. & Agarwal, R. Strain multiplexed metasurface
holograms on a stretchable substrate. Nano Lett. 17, 3641–3645 (2017).
Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
Review Article
34. Ee, H.-S. & Agarwal, R. Tunable metasurface and flat optical zoom lens on
a stretchable substrate. Nano Lett. 16, 2818–2823 (2016).
35. She, A., Zhang, S., Shian, S., Clarke, D. R. & Capasso, F. Adaptive
metalenses with simultaneous electrical control of focal length, astigmatism,
and shift. Sci. Adv. 4, eaap9957 (2018).
36. Wang, J., Zhang, G. & You, Z. Design rules for dense and rapid Lissajous
scanning. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 6, 101 (2020).
37. Oshita, M., Takahashi, H., Ajiki, Y. & Kan, T. Reconfigurable surface
plasmon resonance photodetector with a MEMS deformable cantilever. ACS
Photon. 7, 673–679 (2020).
38. Li, S.-Q. et al. Phase-only transmissive SLM based on tunable dielectric
metasurfaces. Science 364, 1087–1090 (2019).
39. Wuttig, M., Bhaskaran, H. & Taubner, T. Phase-change materials for
non-volatile photonic applications. Nat. Photon. 11, 465–276 (2017).
40. Gholipour, B., Zhang, J., MacDonald, K. F., Hewak, D. W. & Zheludev, N. I.
An all-optical, non-volatile, bidirectional, phase-change meta-switch. Adv.
Mater. 25, 3050–3054 (2013).
41. Rensberg, J. et al. Active optical metasurfaces based on defect-engineered
phase-transition materials. Nano Lett. 16, 1050–1055 (2016).
42. De Galarreta, C. R. et al. Reconfigurable multilevel control of hybrid
all-dielectric phase-change metasurfaces. Optica 7, 476–484 (2020).
43. Yin, X. et al. Beam switching and bifocal zoom lensing using active
plasmonic metasurfaces. Light Sci. Appl. 6, e17016 (2017).
44. Lei, D. Y., Appavoo, K., Sonnefraud, Y., Haglund, R. F. & Maier, S. A.
Single-particle plasmon resonance spectroscopy of phase transition in
vanadium dioxide. Opt. Express 35, 3988–3990 (2010).
45. Kaplan, G., Aydin, K. & Scheuer, J. Dynamically controlled plasmonic
nano-antenna phase array utilizing vanadium dioxide. Opt. Mater. Exp. 5,
2513–2524 (2015).
46. Butakov, N. A. et al. Switchable plasmonic-dielectric resonators with
metal-insulator transitions. ACS Photon. 5, 371–377 (2018).
47. Zhu, Z., Evans, P. G., Haglund, R. F. & Valentine, J. G. Dynamically
reconfigurable metadevice employing nanostructured phase-change
materials. Nano Lett. 17, 4881–4885 (2017).
48. Kim, S.-J. et al. Reconfigurable all-dielectric Fano metasurfaces for strong
full-space intensity modulation of visible light. Nanoscale Horiz. 5,
1088–1095 (2020).
49. Savaliya, P. B., Gupta, N. & Dhawan, A. Steerable plasmonic nanoantennas:
active beam steering of radiation patterns using phase change materials.
Opt. Express 27, 31567–31586 (2019).
50. Gnecchi, S. & Jackson, C. A 1 × 16 SiPM array for automotive 3D imaging
LiDAR systems. In International Image Sensor Workshop (IISW) 133–136
(International Image Sensor Society, 2017).
51. Ni, Y. et al. Metasurface for structured light projection over 120° field of
view. Nano Lett. 20, 6719–6724 (2020).
52. Li, Z. et al. Full-space cloud of random points with a scrambling
metasurface. Light. Sci. Appl. 7, 63 (2018).
53. Chen, K. et al. 2π-space uniform-backscattering metasurfaces enabled with
geometric phase and magnetic resonance in visible light. Opt. Express 28,
12331–12341 (2020).
54. Li, N. et al. Large-area pixelated metasurface beam deflector on a 12-inch
glass wafer for random point generation. Nanophotonics 8, 1855–1861
(2019).
55. Jin, C. et al. Dielectric metasurfaces for distance measurements and
three-dimensional imaging. Adv. Photon. 1, 036001 (2019).
56. Guo, Q. et al. Compact single-shot metalens depth sensors inspired by eyes
of jumping spiders. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 22959–22965 (2019).
57. Devlin, R. C., Ambrosio, A., Rubin, N. A., Mueller, J. P. B. & Capasso, F.
Arbitrary spin-to-orbital angular momentum conversion of light. Science
17, 896–901 (2017).
58. Mahmood, N. et al. Twisted non-diffracting beams through all dielectric
meta-axicon. Nanoscale 11, 20571–20578 (2019).
59. Lavery, M. P. J., Speirits, F. C., Barnett, S. M. & Padgett, M. J. Detection of a
spinning object using light’s orbital angular momentum. Science 341,
537–540 (2013).
60. Cvijetic, N., Milione, G., Ip, E. & Wang, T. Detecting lateral motion using
light’s orbital angular momentum. Sci. Rep. 5, 15422 (2015).
61. Dorrah, A. H., Zamboni-Rached, M. & Mojahedi, M. Experimental
demonstration of tunable refractometer based on orbital angular
momentum of longitudinally structured light. Light Sci. Appl. 7, 40 (2018).
62. Geng, J. Structured-light 3D surface imaging: a tutorial. Adv. Opt. Photon.
3, 128–160 (2011).
63. Khaidarov, E. et al. Control of LED Emission with functional dielectric
metasurfaces. Laser Photon. Rev. 14, 1900235 (2020).
64. Iyer, P. P. et al. Unidirectional luminescence from InGaN/GaN
quantum-well metasurfaces. Nat. Photon. 14, 543–548 (2020).
65. Xie, Y.-Y. et al. Metasurface-integrated vertical cavity surface-emitting lasers
for programmable directional lasing emissions. Nat. Nanotechnol. 15,
125–130 (2020).
523
Review Article
66. Wang, Q.-H. et al. On-chip generation of structured light via metasurface
integrated vertical cavity surface emitting lasers. Laser Photon. Rev. 15,
2000385 (2021).
67. Martin, A. et al. Photonic integrated circuit-based FMCW coherent LiDAR.
J. Lightwave Technol. 36, 4640–4645 (2018).
68. Minoshima, K. & Matsumoto, H. High-accuracy measurement of 240-m
distance in an optical tunnel by use of a compact femtosecond laser. Appl.
Opt. 39, 5512–5517 (2000).
69. Schuhler, N., Salvadé, Y., Lévêque, S., Dändliker, R. & Holzwarth, R.
Frequency-comb-referenced two-wavelength source for absolute distance
measurement. Opt. Lett. 31, 3101–3103 (2006).
70. Coddington, I., Swann, W. C., Nenadovic, L. & Newbury, N. R. Rapid and
precise absolute distance measurements at long range. Nat. Photon. 3,
351–356 (2009).
71. Yang, K. Y. et al. Inverse-designed non-reciprocal pulse router for
chip-based LiDAR. Nat. Photon. 14, 369–374 (2020).
72. Davoyan, A. & Atwater, H. Perimeter-control architecture for optical phased
arrays and metasurfaces. Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 024038 (2020).
73. Dostart, N. et al. Serpentine optical phased arrays for scalable integrated
photonic lidar beam steering. Optica 7, 726–733 (2020).
74. Hutchison, D. N. et al. High-resolution aliasing-free optical beam steering.
Optica 3, 887–890 (2016).
75. Komljenovic, T., Helkey, R., Coldren, L. & Bowers, J. E. Sparse aperiodic
arrays for optical beam forming and LIDAR. Opt. Express 25, 2511–2528
(2017).
76. Shaltout, A. M. et al. Spatiotemporal light control with frequency-gradient
metasurfaces. Science 365, 374–377 (2019).
77. Shaltout, A. M., Shalaev, V. M. & Brongersma, M. L. Spatiotemporal light
control with active metasurfaces. Science 364, eaat3100 (2019).
78. Liu, Z. et al. Compounding meta-atoms into metamolecules with hybrid
artificial intelligence techniques. Adv. Mater. 32, 1904790 (2020).
79. Ma, W., Cheng, F., Xu, Y., Wen, Q. & Liu, Y. Probabilistic representation
and inverse design of metamaterials based on a deep generative model with
semi-supervised learning strategy. Adv. Mater. 31, 1901111 (2019).
80. Liu, Z., Zhu, D., Rodrigues, S. P., Lee, K.-T. & Cai, W. Generative model for
the inverse design of metasurfaces. Nano Lett. 18, 6570–6576 (2018).
81. Malkiel, I. et al. Plasmonic nanostructure design and characterizations via
deep learning. Light. Sci. Appl. 7, 60 (2018).
82. So, S., Badloe, T., Noh, J., Bravo-Abad, J. & Rho, J. Deep learning enabled
inverse design in nanophotonics. Nanophotonics 9, 1041–1057 (2020).
83. So, S. & Rho, J. Designing nanophotonic structure using conditional-deep
convolutional generative adversarial networks. Nanophotonics 8, 1255–1261
(2019).
84. Elsawy, M. M. R., Lanteri, S., Duvigneau, R., Fan, J. A. & Genevet, P.
Numerical optimization methods for metasurfaces. Laser Photon. Rev. 14,
1900445 (2020).
85. She, A., Zhang, S., Shian, S., Clarke, D. R. & Capasso, F. Large area
metalenses: design, characterization, and mass manufacturing. Opt. Express
26, 1573–1585 (2018).
86. Park, J.-S. et al. All-glass, large metalens at visible wavelength using deep
ultraviolet projection lithography. Nano Lett. 19, 8673–8682 (2019).
87. Li, N. et al. Large-area metasurface on CMOS-compatible fabrication
platform: driving flat optics from lab to fab. Nanophotonics 9, 3071–3087
(2020).
88. Kim, K., Yoon, G., Baek, S., Rho, J. & Lee, H. Facile nanocasting of
dielectric metasurfaces with sub-100 nm resolution. ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 11, 26109–26115 (2019).
89. Yoon, G., Kim, K., Huh, D., Lee, H. & Rho, J. Single-step manufacturing of
hierarchical dielectric metalens in the visible. Nat. Commun. 11, 2268
(2020).
90. Odom, T. W., Love, J. C., Wolfe, D. B., Paul, K. E. & Whitesides, G. M.
Improved pattern transfer in soft lithography using composite stamps.
Langmuir 18, 5314–5320 (2002).
91. Henzie, J., Lee, M. H. & Odom, T. W. Multiscale patterning of plasmonic
metamaterials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2, 549–554 (2007).
524 Nature Nanotechnology | VOL 16 | May 2021 | 508–524 | www.nature.com/naturenanotechnology
NATURe NAnoTechnoLogy
92. Chen, W. T. et al. A broadband achromatic metalens for focusing and
imaging in the visible. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 220–226 (2018).
93. Wang, S. et al. A broadband achromatic metalens in the visible. Nat.
Nanotechnol. 13, 227–232 (2018).
94. Fadaly, E. M. T. et al. Direct-bandgap emission from hexagonal Ge and
SiGe alloys. Nature 580, 205–209 (2020).
95. Ferrari, S., Carsten, S. & Wolfram, P. Waveguide-integrated superconducting
nanowire single-photon detectors. Nanophotonics 7, 1725–1758 (2018).
96. Yang, Y. et al. Ferroelectric enhanced performance of GeSn/Ge
dual-nanowire photodetector. Nano Lett. 20, 3872–3879 (2020).
97. Kuzmenko, K. et al. 3D LIDAR imaging using Ge-on-Si single-photon
avalanche diode detectors. Opt. Express 28, 1330–1344 (2020).
98. Katiyar, A. K., Thai, K. Y., Yun, W. S., Lee, J. & Ahn, J.-H. Breaking the
absorption limit of Si toward SWIR wavelength range via strain
engineering. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb0576 (2020).
99. Akselrod, G. M. Optics for automotive lidar: metasurface beam steering
enables solid-state, high-performance lidar. LaserFocusWorld https://www.
laserfocusworld. com/optics/article/ 14036818/metasurface- beam-steering-
enables-solidstate- highperformance-lidar (2019).
100. Wallace, J. Lumotive and Himax collaborate on metasurface approach to
beam steering for lidar. LaserFocusWorld https://www.laserfocusworld. com/
optics/article/ 14039216/lumotive- and-himax-collaborate-
on-metasurface-approach- to-beam-steering- for-lidar (2019).
101. Akselrod, G. M., Yang, Y. & Bowen, P. Tunable liquid crystal metasurfaces.
US patent 10,665,953 (2020).
102. Park, J. et al. All-solid-state spatial light modulator with independent phase
and amplitude control for three-dimensional LiDAR applications. Nat.
Nanotechnol. 16, 69–75 (2021).
103. Yi, S. et al. Subwavelength angle-sensing photodetectors inspired by
directional hearing in small animals. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 1143–1147 (2018).
104. Lee, J., Kim, Y. J., Lee, K., Lee, S. & Kim, S. W. Time-of-flight measurement
with femtosecond light pulses. Nat. Photon. 4, 716–720 (2010).
105. Behroozpour, B., Sandborn, P. A. M., Wu, M. C. & Boser, B. E. Lidar system
architectures and circuits. IEEE Commun. Mag. 55, 135–142 (2017).
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by industry-university strategic grants funded
by SL Corporation and LG Innotek, and the National Research Foundation (NRF)
grants (grant numbers NRF-2019R1A2C3003129, NRF-2019R1A5A8080290, CAMM-
2019M3A6B3030637, NRF-2018M3D1A1058998 and NRF-2015R1A5A1037668) funded
by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), Republic of Korea. J.R. and P.G. acknowledge
the Korea–France Science and Technology Amicable Relationships programme (grant
number NRF-2020K1A3A1A21024374) funded by the MSIT, Republic of Korea. P.G. and
R.J.M. acknowledge the financial support from the European Research Council (ERC
POC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
(Project i-LiDAR, grant number 874986). I.K. acknowledges the NRF Sejong Science
fellowship (grant number NRF-2021R1C1C2004291) funded by the MSIT, Republic
of Korea. J.J. acknowledges a fellowship from the Hyundai Motor Chung Mong-Koo
Foundation and the NRF fellowship (grant number NRF-2019R1A6A3A13091132)
funded by the Ministry of Education, Republic of Korea. The authors thank J. Park, J.
Kim and S. Jang for discussions.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Correspondence should be addressed to P.G. or J.R.
Peer review information Nature Nanotechnology thanks Pierre Berini and the other,
anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.
© Springer Nature Limited 2021