Synchronization and clustering

in a quantum dot laser

Evgeny Viktorov

Paul Mandel
Université Libre de Bruxelles

Yann Tanguy
John Houlihan
Guillaume Huyet

National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland

Andrei Vladimirov
Weierstrass Institute, Berlin, Germany
 Outline
• Self-assembled quantum dot lasers: some properties of a different laser

• Multimode lasing: clustering

• Correlation measurements: antiphase dynamics- from disordered to

« regular » switching

• Modeling: physical background

• Modeling: (non)degenerate Hopf, normal forms

 Quantum dots:
nanocrystalline gain medium
- nanoscale islands
-form spontaneously during the
epitaxial growth process on a
semiconductor substrate
-atomlike properties - "artificial atoms"
-discrete energy spectrum
- 1011 dots per cm2

Applications:

lasers
optical amplifiers
information storage
quantum computing
quantum cryptography
 A summary of laser performance:
• Low threshold current < 30 A/cm2 (Huang 2000; Park 2000)
• Modulation characteristics: 10 Gb/s (Hatori 2004, Kuntz 2005)
• CW operation up to 80°C
• Small factor < 1 or as low as 0.7 (Martinez, 2005) ??

Prospects: Reliable lasing without filamentation

and parasitic instabilities for
Lowest threshold current ultrahigh-speed applications
High temperature operation
Tunability
High quality beam
Low sensitivity to feedback
«  dream » laser
 Seminal picture

Quantum dot laser is an ensemble of independent nanolasers ???

 Multimode lasing

We know:
Multimode Spectrum:
Quantum dots have different shapes and equally separated optical frequencies
sizes:
- strong inhomogeneous broadening and
- multimode lasing

Power (a.u)
- up to 50 modes

We measure/calculate:
modal oscillation frequencies
1235 1240 1245 1250
-modal timetraces
wavelength, nm
-modal correlations
-Hilbert phases
 We measure with:

- a high bandwidth (4 GHz) detector.

Important limitation:
-an electronic spectrum analyzer
-a low bandwidth amplified InGaAs
Only TWO modes can be
detector (50 MHz, Thorlabs measured simultaneously
PDA255).
 Control parameter (pumping current)

leads to increasing :

• number of lasing modes

• asymmetry in the gain profile
• -factor - a global measure of the phase-amplitude coupling.
 Experimental timetraces
Antiphase fluctuations :

• strongly chaotic
• 40 % of the amplitude
• low frequency range : up to 50 MHz

50 MHz << 5GHz (relaxation

oscillation frequency – timescale of
field-matter interaction):

Mode-to-Mode coupling???
 Experimental timetraces

• "Chaos must shimmer through the veil

of order“, Novalis

Observations:
• total output remains nearly constant
• antiphase fluctuations : perfect antisynchronization, correlation???
 Experimental power spectra:
-different modes can have different
averaged frequencies of fluctuations
- clustering in averaged frequencies
-the spread of frequencies narrows
with increasing current from 11 MHz
to 3 MHz.
 Experimental Hilbert phases:
We define:
two modes belong to the same cluster if the difference between two Hilbert
phases is bounded
 Detection noise influence

two detectors, the same mode, phase difference.

Equally separated clusters?
Correlation dimension vs clustering
We measure the correlation
dimension of the modal signals.
-the modes from the central region of
the spectrum have lower values of the
correlation dimension, ≈2.8, and the
modes at the edges have higher
values, ≈3.3.
-the trend is similar (?) to the
distribution of frequencies across the
spectrum suggesting that the modes
from different clusters can (?) exhibit
different levels of complexity.
-we link the difference to the stochastic
processes which govern the
appearance of new lasing modes at the
edges of optical spectrum (stronger
influence of noise).
 Cross-correlation measurements:
We measure:
-normalized cross-correlation function
of all modes with respect to a reference
mode.
-a maximum value of 1 is expected
when the two modes are identical in
amplitude and phase and, therefore,
perfectly correlated.
-the time corresponding to maximum
correlations between the modes as a
function of modal frequency difference
between the two recorded modes

Results:
• this time changes randomly for low currents when the spread of the frequencies is large
• becomes linear for the higher current when the frequency spread of the fluctuations among the modes
was smaller
• linear dependence indicates the propagation of perturbations through the spectrum
“from blue to red” - oscillations are equally phase-shifted
Cross-correlation measurements:
from disorder to regularity
 Main Results
• clustering in averaged frequencies
• the spread of frequencies narrows
• oscillations can be equally phase-shifted
• Switching « from blue to red »

• MODE-TO-MODE COUPLING
 Quantum Well Laser: experiment

• nearly constant total output

• similar frequency range
• periodic modal switching
« from blue to red»
• originate from the Hopf bifurcation
(statistical analysis)

Experiments:
Institut Non-lineaire de Nice, France, 2004
 Quantum Well Laser:
more advanced modeling
• dominant mechanism – four-wave mixing

I1,I total
•  large a-factor (asymmetry in phase-
amplitude coupling) defines the unique
sequence of switching from »blue to red»

I2
• Hopf? Heteroclinic?

I3
• Simplified equations,

I4
four-wave mixing and global coupling: 0 200 400 600 800 1000
time(ns)

dE m
 1 1  i  G m  1E m    pm E k E p E k p m , #
dt 2
k,p
N
 dF m  P  F m 1    m k |E k | 2 . #
dt
k
 Two types of semiconductor lasers
Quantum Well Laser
 -factor 4-5
• homogemeous material
• strong carrier diffusion
• total output remains nearly constant
• antiphase fluctuations
• low frequency range
• periodic, 100 % of the amplitude
• the same frequency of oscillations for all
modes
Quantum Dot Laser
 -factor <1, increasing with the current
• inhomogemeous material
• small carrier diffusion
• total output remains nearly constant
• antiphase fluctuations
• low frequency range
• chaotic, 40 % of the amplitude
• different frequences of oscillations,
clustering
 Physical model
• Equations:
dE j
 1 1  i G j  n k , E k ;k  1 N   1E j #
dt 2
N
dn j

dt
 P1  n j   n j   g jk  n  , E  ;  1 N |E k | 2 #
k

The modal gains G j  n k , E k ;k  1 N 

and the cross-coupling coefficient g jk  n  , E  ;  1 N 

typically depend on four-wave-mixing processes and inhomogeneous broadening,

but physical mechanisms are complex and not fully understood yet
 Challenge
Quantum dot laser is an ensemble of independent nanolasers ???
carrier capture and recombination in individual quantum dots are random
processes so each quantum dot couples to its own excited carrier

• Conclusion:
UNCORRELATED OUTPUT FROM THE DIFFERNET QUANTUM DOTS

We assume:
• Modes are globally coupled
• Hopf bifurcation
• Inhomogeneous broadening (different shapes/sizes) results in different frequencies of oscillations

Two main effects to describe:

-frequency clustering
-antiphase state
 Degenerate Hopf
• Equations:
dE j
 1 1  i G j  n k , E k ;k  1 N   1E j #
dt 2
N
dn j

dt
 P1  n j   n j   g jk  n  , E  ;  1 N |E k | 2 #
k

First “good” approximation: frequency dependent parameters are equal

Gj n k , E k ;k  1 N  fn j , |E k | 2  #
g jk n  , E  ;  1 N  g and g kk n  , E  ;  1 N  1 #

Degenerate Hopf, normal form equations:

N N N
 t z j    i z j  az j  |z k | 2  bz j  z 2k  cz j |z j | 2  c  z k |z k | 2  O5
N
k 1 k 1 k 1
 Hopf: nondegeneracy
- the modes have different average oscillation frequencies.
- we relate this non-degeneracy to the high degree of inhomogeneous broadening.

weak perturbation of the linear part

N N N
2
 t z j    i j z j  az j  |z k |  bz j  z 2k  cz j |z j |  c
2
 z k |z k | 2  O5
N
k 1 k 1 k 1

Phase approximation: Kuramoto, Hansel

Global linear coupling do not exhibit phase clustering behavior right after Hopf bifurcation
(Okuda,1993)

Nonlinear coupling: frequency clustering? antiphase state?

 Normal forms, N=5
0.7

200
0.6

150
0.5

100
0.4

50 0.3

5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 29920 29930 29940 29950 29960

0.7

0.65

0.6

0.55

0.5

0.45

5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000

 Normal forms, N=5: clustering
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
0.65
-500
0.6

0.55
-1000
0.5
-1500
0.45

2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 -2000

0.35

0.6 -2000

0.5 -2020

0.4 -2040

0.3 -2060

0.2
9920 9940 9960 9980 10000

9992 9994 9996 9998 10000

0.65 -1990

0.6
-1995
0.55
-2000
0.5

0.45 -2005

9992 9994 9996 9998 10000 9920 9940 9960 9980 10000
 conclusion
Modal oscillations in quantum dot laser
result from the global coupling and exhibit
clustering and antiphase state.
Thank you!