Skip to main content
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2016 Jan 14;6:19489. doi: 10.1038/srep19489

Harnessing click detectors for the genuine characterization of light states

René Heilmann 1,*, Jan Sperling 2,*, Armando Perez-Leija 1,*, Markus Gräfe 1, Matthias Heinrich 1, Stefan Nolte 1,3, Werner Vogel 2, Alexander Szameit 1,a
PMCID: PMC4725864  PMID: 26771053

Abstract

The key requirement for harnessing the quantum properties of light is the capability to detect and count individual photons. Of particular interest are photon-number-resolving detectors, which allow one to determine whether a state of light is classical or genuinely quantum. Existing schemes for addressing this challenge rely on a proportional conversion of photons to electrons. As such, they are capable of correctly characterizing small photon fluxes, yet are limited by uncertainties in the conversion rate. In this work, we employ a divide-and-conquer approach to infallibly discerning non-classicality of states of light. This is achieved by transforming the incident fields into uniform spatial distributions that readily lend themselves for characterization by standard on-off detectors. Since the exact statistics of the light stream in multiplexed on-off detectors are click statistics, our technique is freely scalable to accommodate–in principle–arbitrarily large photon fluxes. Our experiments pave the way towards genuine integrated photon-number-resolving detection for advanced on-chip photonic quantum networks.


Quantum information science is at the cutting edge of modern physics and technology. In this context, perhaps the most ambitious goal is to realize scalable quantum information processing and computing based exclusively on linear optical configurations and photon-counting devices1,2,3. Notably, any such optical quantum-computing scheme hinges on the ability to detect and manipulate the states of light at the single-photon level: Quantum cryptography, entanglement swapping, and quantum teleportation, to name a few, would clearly be impossible without reliable single-photon-counting devices4,5,6,7,8,9,10. Moreover, exact photon counts provide access to genuine photon number statistics, and in turn are the principal means of reliably establishing the non-classicality of any type of light field11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18. Another potential application of photon-number-resolving detectors (PNRs) was recently highlighted in the context of coherent optical communications19, where they enable coherent optical communications with a performance superior to the standard quantum limit, even in the high mean photon number regime. To this date, the perhaps most noticeable scheme for PNRs is based on superconducting nanowires20. Yet, on many occasions, cryogenic measurements may be impractical, or the incident photon flux may exceed the capacity of the system. Evidently, a fundamentally different approach will be required to reconcile the demands for high speed, low noise, and maximized quantum efficiency with the ever increasing count rates required by modern technologies21,22,23,24,25.

Existing schemes for measurements at the single-photon level employ on-off detectors, e.g. avalanche photodiodes (APDs)11, and as such are inherently limited by the so-called dead time. When an APD is triggered, it typically remains “blind” for several nanoseconds thereafter, and as a result, succeeding photons impinging on the detector cannot be registered16. In addition to being detrimental to the overall detection efficiency, this effect may corrupt the very state of light one strives to characterize. Moreover, this saturation effect also introduces undesired correlations to the count sequences26.

In contrast to PNRs, on-off detectors deliver well-defined “clicks” upon excitations with any non-zero number of photons27. Consequently, the by far most accessible quantum-optical measurements are click-counting statistics, instead of actual photon counts28. The question naturally arises as to whether it is possible to circumvent the limitations of on-off detectors, and to exploit these robust and widely available components to accurately characterize multiphoton states of light.

In this work, we propose, implement, and characterize a photon counting device based on a multiplexed array of on-off detectors29,30. In our arrangement, the discrete evolution dynamics of the incident light field is manipulated so as to spatially distribute the photons uniformly between the individual channels. Crucially, the click-counts obtained from these types of multiplexed sensors are used to reliably probe the non-classicality of arbitrary light fields31. Moreover, such click-counting statistics converge to the actual photon-counting statistics as the number of on-off detectors is increased Inline graphic31.

Let us first consider a stream of single-photon states being routed through a uniform 1-to-Inline graphic multiplexer and onto an array of avalanche photo diodes (APDs) (see Fig. 1, top). In our approach, this is achieved by cascading Inline graphic stages of 50/50 beam splitters, yielding Inline graphic. Under these premises, every single-photon will have a probability of Inline graphic to be detected in one of the Inline graphic channels. Due to the spatially extended wave function, any two incoming photons are likely to be found in different outputs with a probability of Inline graphic: When one photon is detected, the global probability of registering the next photon in any of the remaining APDs is Inline graphic times greater than in the same one. This remains true even if the two photons enter the system simultaneously. In this manner, the fidelity of the device is expected to improve with the number of output ports, and is even independent of the type of input state31.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Top: Sketch of the 1-to-8 optical integrated multiplexer consisting of three beam splitting stages. The output fields are fed into APDs. Bottom: Output click statistic of the above multiplexer for classical attenuated laser light (blue), as well as single-photon Fock-states (green). In the experiment, both input states yield a flat uniform output statistic provided by the high quality of the optical-integrated device.

To experimentally demonstrate the functionality of our approach, we realized a discrete network of integrated 50/50 beam splitters cascaded in Inline graphic steps, yielding a total of Inline graphic output channels. These photonic structures were implemented in fused silica glass by means of the femtosecond laser writing technique32,33, see Methods. As input states we consider two limiting cases: i) Low-intensity laser light and ii) heralded single photons from a spontaneous parametric down conversion source. Note that the actual photon statistic describing laser light exhibits substantial temporally fluctuating bunching of photons. As a result, it represents a perfect test case to demonstrate the capability of our setup.

In the multiplexer, pure coherent states Inline graphic are split into eight spatially separated coherent states of equal amplitude, i.e. Inline graphic, with Inline graphic. Consequently, a perfect photon counting characterization should yield a Poissonian photon number distribution. When one instead considers the click coincidences, it can be analytically shown that the resulting click-counting statistics have to obey a binomial distribution31. Note that in case of a sub- (or super-) Poissonian photon number distribution, it likewise follows that the click statistics are sub- (or super-) binomial, respectively (see for instance Fig. 2).

Figure 2. Theoretical click-counting statistics for three different photon number distributions at an average number of clicks of 0.25 per measurement.

Figure 2

The resulting Inline graphic values are 0 for binomial, −0.22 for sub-binomial, and +0.22 for super-binomial click statistics.

In general, this behavior with respect to Inline graphic on-off detectors is mathematically described by the expectation value Inline graphic. Here, the normal ordering for the bosonic operators34 is indicated by the symbol Inline graphic, the number of APDs that click in a certain time window is Inline graphic, and the operator Inline graphic includes the photon number operator Inline graphic and accounts for a realistic detector with quantum efficiency Inline graphic and dark counts Inline graphic. In this expression, the exponential operator corresponds to the projector of the vacuum operator, and as expectation value yields the probability of zero clicks34.

In order to quantify the binomial character of the click-counting statistics, we employ the parameter

graphic file with name srep19489-m22.jpg

where Inline graphic and Inline graphicrepresent the average number of clicks and the variance thereof, respectively35. For an ideal coherent state, the mean and the variance of the click-counting statistics are analytically calculated as Inline graphic and Inline graphic, respectively, with Inline graphic. When substituting these two expressions into Eq. (1) we find that Inline graphic regardless of the quantum efficiency Inline graphic and the dark count rate Inline graphic. Accordingly, it is a sufficient criterion to differentiate between classical and non-classical light: while super-binomial click statistics such as those of realistic laser light are characterized by Inline graphic, genuine quantum entities, such as Fock states, necessarily features Inline graphic. Note that in order for this parameter to be meaningful, the ensemble has to include Inline graphic on-off detectors, otherwise measurements of any input state would produce Inline graphic36,37.

In a first set of experiments, we measured the absolute number of click coincidences Inline graphic and the relative frequencies Inline graphic for attenuated laser light, where Inline graphic again represents the number of clicks within a time window of 10 ns and Inline graphic is the total number of time windows. Further details on our setup are given in the Methods section. From these measurements, we extract a positive value Inline graphic, confirming that the click statistics is indeed super-binomial as expected for a classical light source. Beyond the Inline graphic parameter, which relies solely on second-order correlations, one can also employ the higher-order correlations contained within the matrix of moments to identify non-classical behavior (see Supplementary Information).

In our second set of experiments, we used our device to characterize the fidelity of a heralded single-photon source based on spontaneous parametric down conversion. As in the previous case, the input state Inline graphic is spatially distributed and thus transformed according to the expression Inline graphic, where Inline graphic represents the bosonic creation operators of the Inline graphicth waveguide mode. The high fidelity of our device is confirmed by the homogeneity of the single photon number output distribution with an average of Inline graphic(see Fig. 1, bottom). Measurement data clearly demonstrates the non-classicality of the input state, with Inline graphic. At this point we emphasize that the Inline graphic parameter corresponding to pure single photon states can be estimated analytically by

graphic file with name srep19489-m48.jpg

where Inline graphic (see Supplementary Information). For the ideal case when a pure single-photon Fock state is detected by a perfect photon-counting device with detection efficiency Inline graphic and Inline graphic, Eq. (2) yields Inline graphic. In our experiments, the number of photons, which determines the number of clicks per time bin, is naturally limited by the brightness of the source. As a result, experimental Inline graphic parameters are expected to lie in the interval Inline graphic.

Additionally, we analyzed the dependence of the fidelity of our device for different source brightness levels. To this end, we determined the Inline graphic parameter for classical laser light with different attenuation ratios, as well as for single-photon states at different count rates. Figure 3 illustrates that our scheme allows for a clear distinction between classical and non-classical behavior. Note that, as the incident intensity decreases, the chance of multiple photons entering the device in any given time slot gradually converges to zero, as does the corresponding Inline graphic parameter. Whereas the sign of Inline graphic remains well defined throughout this process, the uncertainty determined by the experimental conditions [see Methods] eventually exceeds the absolute value. Nevertheless, standard quantum sources routinely feature count rates well above this limit, placing them firmly within the window of confidence of our characterization scheme.

Figure 3. Experimentally obtained Inline graphic for two different click statistics versus a variation of the average click number Inline graphic.

Figure 3

This was realized by using ND filters in the signal path. The inset shows a semilogarithmic section for the smallest achieved Inline graphics. An attenuated laser light (blue curve) is always accompanied by a positive Inline graphic (super-binomial), whereas our single photon source (green curve) constantly shows a negative Inline graphic (sub-binomial). In both cases, a coherent state (binomial photon number distribution) is covered within the error-bars at very low count rates.

In our experiments, the number of photons is naturally limited by the brightness of the source, and it determines the number of clicks per time bin. As a result, the actual detection efficiency Inline graphic of the system is directly related to the measured click statistics, Inline graphic. Therefore, by plugging our experimental Inline graphic into Eq. (2), we find a negligible noise count rate of Inline graphic, as expected from a heralded photon source (see Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Comparison between the experimentally obtained.

Figure 4

Inline graphic parameters of a heralded single photon source and our analytical expression Eq. (2) for a different average click number Inline graphic. The average click numbers Inline graphic are extracted from the experimental click statistics, (horizontal axis in Fig. (3)). This in turn provides the actual detection efficiency Inline graphic of our system. The measured values of Inline graphic, in combination with the experimental Inline graphic, yield a negligible noise count rate of Inline graphic, as expected from a heralded photon source.

In conclusion, we have introduced a new paradigm for integrated photon-number resolved measurements based on distributed sensing with multiplexed arrays of conventional on-off detectors. In this divide-and-conquer approach, the limiting factor of detector dead time is overcome by transforming the incident fields into extended uniform distributions. As such, coincidences in the same measurement channel are reliably suppressed even for highly multi-photon input states. Measuring the click statistics of the detector ensemble therefore provides the means to determine the actual photon-counting statistics. Consequently, our technique can in principle be scaled to allow for arbitrarily high numbers of incident photons, irrespective of the dead time of the individual detectors used. Our experiments pave the way towards genuine integrated photon-number-resolving detectors for advanced on-chip photonic quantum networks.

Methods

Fabrication & characterization

The multiplexing waveguide network was fabricated by means of the direct femtosecond laser inscription in fused silica glass30,31. It is designed to match the technical standards of the attached V-groove fiber array with 127 μm pitch which collects the photon outcome and feeds it into single-photon click-detectors. In order to inject weak laser light, different neutral density (ND) filters were placed into the beam of a laser diode emitting at 808 nm. The attenuated light was coupled into a single mode (SM) polarization maintaining (PM) fiber attached to the input wave guide of the multiplexer with a maximum photon flux of 2 million per second. For the other set of experiments, single photons of 815 nm were generated by spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC) in a BiB3O6 crystal and coupled into two SM and PM fibers. One of the fibers was directly connected to a single-photon detector to provide a herald for the other twin photon, which was delivered directly to the device’s injection site. The heralding efficiency before the glass chip was 18% yielding 65 thousand coincidences per second. By using the second photon as trigger, we can suppress any noticeable influence of dark counts. For reasons of experimental convenience, the signal photon flux was again controlled by an appropriate choice of ND filters in order to change the vacuum component of the state.

Measurement methods & errors

The photon clicks by our APDs were collected by a time tagging card capable to handle up to 16 detectors at the same time with a timing resolution of 168 ps. The coincidence time window, wherein two or more clicks are interpreted as a joint event, was set to Inline graphic for all measurements. In turn, the number of measurements for attenuated laser light was determined by Inline graphic, where Inline graphic is the overall recording time. In contrast, the number of quantum measurements was determined by the photon flux of the trigger photons, and therefore remains independent of the coincidence time window. In both cases, the overall measurement time was chosen in a way to collect at least 100 million non-zero click events, ranging from 44 seconds up to more than 60 hours. The employed APDs had a dark-count rate of less than per second, a timing jitter of 350 ps and a dead time of 20 ns.

The accuracy of the calculated QB parameter is chiefly dependent on the number of measurements. In an ideal set of data, the frequencies Ck would be distributed according to the graphs shown in Fig. 1. If a measurement is terminated before the highest number of joint clicks yields a non-zero quantity, it cannot perfectly match the (sub- or super-) binomial distribution. Consequently, the extracted QB parameter is subject to a systematic uncertainty. A second source of errors results from imperfections in the splitting ratio of the multiplexing device, corresponding to small deviations from the ideal case of homogeneously distributed outputs (see Fig. 2). This also influences the coincidence click statistics and, hence, the error for the QB parameter. In turn, the resulting overall range of error defines a certain minimum count rate.

We would like to emphasize that our method is capable of reliably identifying the signature of the input state, whether classical or quantum (see Fig. 3), without the need for any corrections or post processing of raw data.

Additional Information

How to cite this article: Heilmann, R. et al. Harnessing click detectors for the genuine characterization of light states. Sci. Rep. 6, 19489; doi: 10.1038/srep19489 (2016).

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Information
srep19489-s1.docx (33.6KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

Financial support by the German Ministry of Education and Research (Center for Innovation Competence programme, grant no. 03Z1HN31), the Thuringian Ministry for Education, Science and Culture (Research group Spacetime, grant no. 11027-514) and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (grant no. NO462/6-1 and SFB 652) is gratefully acknowledged. M. Heinrich was supported by the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina (grants no. LPDR 2014-03).

Footnotes

Author Contributions J.S. and A.P.-L. conceived the idea, R.H. and M.G. designed the samples and performed the measurements. R.H., J.S. and A.P.-L. analysed the data. A.S. and W.V. supervised the project. R.H., J.S., A.P.-L., M.G., M.H., S.N., W.V. and A.S. discussed the results and co-wrote the manuscript.

References

  1. Kok P. et al. Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits. Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 135 (2007). [Google Scholar]
  2. Knill E., Laflamme R. & Milburn G. J. A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics. Nature 409, 46–52 (2000). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Humphreys P. C. et al. I. A. Linear Optical Quantum Computing in a Single Spatial Mode. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 150501 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gräfe M. et al. On-chip generation of high-order single-photon W-states. Nature Photonics 8, 791–795 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  5. Afek I., Ambar O. & Silberberg Y. High-NOON states by mixing quantum and classical light. Science 328, 879–881 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Morin O. et al. Witnessing trustworthy single-photon entanglement with local homodyne measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 130401 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Papp S. B. et al. Characterization of multipartite entanglement for one photon shared among four optical modes. Science 324, 764–768 (2009). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kimble1 H. J. The quantum internet. Nature 453, 1023–1030 (2008). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Silberhorn C. Detecting quantum light. Contemp. Phys. 48, 143 (2007). [Google Scholar]
  10. Lita A. E., Miller A. J. & Nam S. W. Counting near-infrared single-photons with 95% efficiency. Opt. Express 16, 3032 (2008). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Chrapkiewicz R. Photon counts statistics of squeezed and multimode thermal states of light on multiplexed on–off detectors. JOSA B , 31, B8–B13 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  12. Hadfield R. H., Single-photon detectors for optical quantum information applications. Nature Photonics 3, 696–705 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  13. Allevi A. & Bondani M. Statistics of twin-beam states by photon-number resolving detectors up to pump depletion. JOSA B , 31, B14–B19 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  14. Achilles D., Silberhorn C., Sliwa C., Banaszek K. & Walmsley I. A. Fiber assisted detection with photon-number resolution,” Opt. Lett. 28, 2387–2389 (2003). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Levine Z. H. et al. Photon-number uncertainty in a superconducting transition edge sensor beyond resolved-photon-number determination. JOSA B , 31, B20–B24 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  16. Kalashnikov D. & Krivitsky L. Measurement of photon correlations with multipixel photon counters. JOSA B , 31, B25–B33 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  17. O’Brien J. L. Optical quantum computing. Science 318, 1567–1570 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Sridhar N. et al. Direct measurement of the Wigner function by photon-number-resolving detection. JOSA B , 31, B34–B40 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  19. Becerra F. E., Fan J. & Migdall A. Photon number resolution enables quantum receiver for realistic coherent optical communications. Nature Photonics 9, 48–53 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  20. Divochiy A. et al. Superconducting nanowire photon-number-resolving detector at telecommunication wavelengths. Nature Photonics 2, 302–306 (2008). [Google Scholar]
  21. Fujiwara M. & Sasaki M. Direct measurement of photon number statistics at telecom wavelengths using a charge integration photon detector. Appl. Opt. 46, 3069–3074 (2007). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Gol’tsman G. N. et al. Picosecond superconducting single-photon optical detector. Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 705 (2001). [Google Scholar]
  23. Dauler E. A. et al. Multi-Element Superconducting Nanowire Single-Photon Detector. IEEE Trans. Appl. Superconductivity 17, 279–284 (2007). [Google Scholar]
  24. Korneev A. et al. Sensitivity and gigahertz counting performance of NbN superconducting single-photon detectors. Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 5338–5340 (2004). [Google Scholar]
  25. Robinson B. S. et al. 781-Mbit/s photon-counting optical communications using a superconducting nanowire detector. Opt. Lett. 31, 444–446 (2006). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Coldenstrodt-Ronge R. B. & Silberhorn C. Avalanche photo-detection for high data rate applications, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys . 40, 3909–3921 (2007). [Google Scholar]
  27. Zambra G. et al. Experimental Reconstruction of Photon Statistics without Photon Counting. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 063602 (2005). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Luis A., Sperling J. & Vogel W. Nonclassicality phase-space functions: more insight with less detectors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 103602 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Fitch M. J., Jacobs B. C., Pittman T. B. & Franson J. D. Photon-number resolution using time-multiplexed single-photon detectors. Phys. Rev. A 68, 043814 (2003). [Google Scholar]
  30. Afek I., Natan A., Ambar O. & Silberberg Y., Quantum state measurements using multipixel photon detectors. Phys. Rev. A 79, 043830 (2009). [Google Scholar]
  31. Sperling J., Vogel W. & Agarwal G. S. True photocounting statistics of multiple on-off detectors. Phys. Rev. A 85, 023820 (2012). [Google Scholar]
  32. Davis K. M., Miura K., Sugimoto N. & Hirao K. Writing waveguides in glass with a femtosecond laser. Opt. Lett. 21, 1729–1731 (1996). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Marshall G. D. et al. Laser written waveguide photonic quantum circuits. Opt. Express 17, 12546–12554 (2009). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Sperling J., Vogel W. & Agarwal G. S. Correlation measurements with on-off detectors. Phys. Rev. A 88, 043821 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  35. Vogel W. & Welsch D.-G. Quantum Optics 3rd ed (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2006). [Google Scholar]
  36. Sperling J., Vogel W. & Agarwal G. S. Sub-Binomial Light. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 093601 (2012). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Bartley T. J. et al. Direct Observation of Sub-Binomial Light. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 173602 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Information
srep19489-s1.docx (33.6KB, docx)

Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES