The Dynamics of Quantum States of Light in Lossy Coupled-Cavity Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonclassical states of light possess unique properties such as squeezing, antibunching, and entanglement, which have led to various interesting applications in quantum computing, quantum teleportation, and quantum information. However, practical implementation of some of these potential applications are hindered due to our lack of insight into how to treat loss in the system. The inclusion of loss is very important, as it can in some cases largely destroy the nonclassical properties of the light. The focus of this thesis is on squeezed states, as these are one of the most useful and important quantum states of light. First, I present a theoretical treatment of the nonclassical properties of squeezed states generated via parametric down conversion in a leaky cavity. By solving the Lindblad master equation for such a system, I analytically demonstrate that the exact time dependent solution is a squeezed thermal state. In addition, I examine the dynamics of generated nonclassical states of light in lossy coupled-cavity systems. I then apply the formalism developed to a coupled resonator optical waveguide structure and present the results for squeezed vacuum states. I next examine the coupled-cavity optical waveguide system as a platform to produce counterpropagating continuous variable entangled states. Using a tight-binding approximation, I develop analytic time-dependent expressions for the number of photons in each cavity, as well as for the correlation variance between the photons in different pairs of cavities. These expressions can be used to engineer the pumping configurations as well as the physical properties of the structure. Finally, employing a numerical singular value decomposition method, I show how the biphoton wave function can be Schmidt decomposed numerically, which together with the previously-developed analytic expressions provides a powerful computational platform. This is important as it can not only be used to check the validity of the approximations made in obtaining analytic expressions but can also be used to explore some interesting cases that were not possible to treat analytically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".