Conditional dynamics of interacting quantum dots

Science

Volumn 320, Issue 5877, 2008, Pages 772-775

  Robledo, Lucio ^a   Elzerman, Jeroen ^a   Jundt, Gregor ^a   Atatüre, Mete ^b   Högele, Alexander ^a   Fält, Stefan ^a   Imamoglu, Atac ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

QUANTUM DOT;

MEASUREMENT METHOD; QUANTUM MECHANICS;

ARTICLE; ELECTRIC CURRENT; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; ELECTRON; ELECTRON SPIN RESONANCE; ENERGY; LASER; POLARIZATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTUM MECHANICS; QUANTUM YIELD;

EID: 46449139344     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1155374     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. P. M. Petroff, A. Lorke, A. Imamoglu, Phys. Today 54, 46 (2001).
2. X. Li et al., Science 301, 809 (2003).
3. M. O. Scully, M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1997).
4. R. Hanson, L. P. Kouwenhoven, J. R. Petta, S. Tarucha, L. M. K. Vandersypen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1217 (2007).
5. M. Atatüre et al., Science 312, 551 (2006); published online 5 April 2006 (10.1126/science.1126074).
6. J. Berezovsky et al., Science 314, 1916 (2006); published online 9 November 2006 (10.1126/science.1133862).
7. M. Atatüre, J. Dreiser, A. Badolato, A. Imamoglu, Nat. Phys. 3, 101 (2007).
8. M. Kroner et al., preprint available at http://arxiv.org/abs/ 0710.4901.
9. M. H. Mikkelsen, J. Berezovsky, N. G. Stoltz, L. A. Coldren, D. D. Awschalom, Nat. Phys. 3, 770 (2007).
10. D. Loss, D. P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
11. J. R. Petta et al., Science 309, 2180 (2005); published online 1 September 2005 (10.1126/science.1116955).
12. H. J. Krenner et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 057402 (2005).
13. E. A. Stinaff et al., Science 311, 636 (2006); published online 11 January 2006 (10.1126/science.1121189).
14. S. Fält et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 106401 (2008).
15. T. Calarco, A. Datta, P. Fedichev, E. Pazy, P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 68, 012310 (2003).
16. C. Hettich et al., Science 298, 385 (2002); published online 5 September 2002 (10.1126/science.1075606).
17. T. Unold, K. Mueller, C. Lienau, T. Elsaesser, A. D. Wieck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 137404 (2005).
18. M. Bayer et al., Phys. Rev. B 65, 195315 (2002).
19. D. Gammon, E. S. Snow, B. V. Shanabrook, D. S. Katzer, D. Park, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 3005 (1996).
20. In principle, states |1〉 or |5〉 or |6〉 and |7〉 could be split because of electron tunneling, but each of these resonances will only occur at substantially different gate voltages because of the fact that the tunneling strength is much smaller than the relevant Coulomb interaction energies.
21. R. J. Warburton et al., Nature 405, 926 (2000).
22. 0, which becomes bright because of the mixing (14).
23. B. Alén, F. Bickel, K. Karrai, R. J. Warburton, P. M. Petroff, Appl. Phys. Lett. 83, 2235 (2003).
24. The gate voltage scale for the absorption measurements is slightly different from that of PL because of technical reasons (28).
25. To illustrate the observed effect clearly, the intensity of the probe laser is chosen such that it saturates the corresponding ground state transition, whereas the pump laser is set to five times the saturation intensity.
26. In addition to the strong shifted red absorption that occurs for a resonant blue laser (around 1334.63 meV), we also see a weak red absorption around 1261.04 meV even when the blue laser is not resonant. This effect, which is not present when the blue laser is turned off, indicates that even a nonresonant blue laser has a small probability to lift the tunneling resonance between states |2〉, |3〉, and |4〉. This is most likely due to the creation of charges in nearby impurity sites, which can shift the effective gate voltage felt by the CQD. Also, a faint diagonal absorption line is visible around the shifted resonance, which is due to two-photon resonance between states |1〉 and |6〉.
27. We have assumed that all excited states are lifetime-broadened.
28. Materials and methods are available on Science Online.
29. This work is supported by National Centre of Competence in Research Quantum Photonics (NCCR QP), research instrument of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), and European Union Research Training Network Engineering, Manipulation, and Characterization of Quantum States of Matter and Light (EMALI). The authors thank K. Weiss for experimental assistance.