Contemporary Physics

ISSN: 0010-7514 (Print) 1366-5812 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/tcph20

Spontaneous parametric down-conversion

Christophe Couteau

To cite this article: Christophe Couteau (2018) Spontaneous parametric down-conversion,

Contemporary Physics, 59:3, 291-304, DOI: 10.1080/00107514.2018.1488463
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00107514.2018.1488463

Published online: 09 Aug 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 6850

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 106 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcph20
CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS
2018, VOL. 59, NO. 3, 291–304
https://doi.org/10.1080/00107514.2018.1488463

Spontaneous parametric down-conversion

Christophe Couteau
Light, Nanomaterials and Nanotechnologies (L2n, ex-LNIO) – Department of Physics, Materials, Mechanics and Nanotechnologies, University of
Technology of Troyes, Troyes, France

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Spontaneous Parametric Down-Conversion (SPDC), also known as parametric fluorescence, para- Received 25 September 2017
metric noise, parametric scattering and all various combinations of the abbreviation SPDC, is a Accepted 1 June 2018
non-linear optical process where a photon spontaneously splits into two other photons of lower KEYWORDS
energies. One would think that this article is about particle physics and yet it is not, as this process Quantum optics; non-linear
can occur fairly easily on a day to day basis in an optics laboratory. Nowadays, SPDC is at the heart of optics; quantum information
many quantum optics experiments for applications in quantum cryptography, quantum simulation,
quantum metrology but also for testing fundamentals laws of physics in quantum mechanics. In this
article, we will focus on the physics of this process and highlight a few important properties of SPDC.
There will be two parts: a first theoretical one showing the particular quantum nature of SPDC, and
the second part, more experimental and in particular focusing on applications of parametric down-
conversion. This is clearly a non-exhaustive article about parametric down-conversion as there is a
tremendous literature on the subject, but it gives the necessary first elements needed for a novice
student or researcher to work on SPDC sources of light.

Even though Spontaneous Parametric Down-Conversion can be used to engineer a single-photon source [12]. To
(SPDC) has been predicted in the 1960s [1] and first finish, we will give some examples of how parametric flu-
demonstrated experimentally by Burham and Weinberg orescence was used for the demonstration of quantum
(from NASA!) in 1970 [2], this process was really used teleportation [13], quantum cryptography [14], Control-
for practical purposes only in the late 1980s and early Not (CNOT) gates [15], quantum candela [16] or for
1990s. Since then, this process is at the heart of many quantum lithography [17]. We will finish by giving some
quantum optics experiments for applications in quan- perspectives of engineering new sources of SPDC in the
tum cryptography [3], quantum computing [4], quantum hope of increasing the efficiency of this physical effect.
metrology [5] but also simply for testing fundamentals
laws of physics in quantum mechanics [6]. This review
1. Theoretical derivation of SPDC: classical case
article is clearly not exhaustive as a massive literature
exists on the subject and cannot be summarised in 15 Without going into the details of non-linear optics, let us
pages or so. Rather, this article intends to provide the nec- refresh our mind with some concepts [18]. The idea is
essary basic formalism and knowledge there is to know if that when an electromagnetic (em) wave interacts with a
one wants to work with SPDC and what it is good for. We medium full of charges, there is a dipolar-type of inter-
will not go on to explain how to build your own SPDC action between the dipoles (charges) in the medium and
source as plenty of literature already exists on this mat- the incoming em field at the frequency ω. The classi-
ter [7,8]. In that context, we will first develop some basic cal harmonic oscillator model holds which is the model
non-linear optics derived from Maxwell equations with of an electron attached to an atom-core behaving like
a focus on the exact reverse process of SPDC, namely a spring and thus like a harmonic oscillator interacting
second-harmonic generation (SHG). Then we will go on with the incoming wave. We then obtain the standard lin-
to introduce some quantum optics in a nutshell before ear complex refractive index of the medium, which would
going into the theoretical derivation of SPDC. In the sec- depend on ω. But if one starts to increase significantly the
ond part, we will develop what SPDC is used for with energy of the incoming field then this harmonic oscillator
the notion of correlated photons [9], indistinguishable will start to be anharmonic i.e. not respond linearly with
photons [10], entangled photons [11] but also how it the incident electromagnetic wave. One can simulate this

CONTACT Christophe Couteau [email protected]

© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

292 C. COUTEAU

behaviour by the following equation of motion for an the polarisation given by:
electron in the medium under such em waves by:   (2)
PiNL = ε0 χijk .Ej Ek (3)
d2 x dx e j k
+ 2γ + ω02 x + ax2 = F = − E(t), (1)
dt 2 dt m
with {i, j, k} = {x, y, z}, meaning that the second order
where the first term on the left-hand side is the motion (2)
term χijk is actually a tensor and is called the sec-
acceleration contribution, the second term is a damp- ond order non-linear susceptibility of the medium.
ing term that tends to slow down oscillations mainly Figure 1(a) represents the Feynman’s diagram of the
due to non-radiative contribution and the last two terms SPDC process where the photon γ 3 at energy ω3 splits
on the left side of the equality cause the restoring force into two twin photons (γ 2 and γ 1 ) at energies ω2 and
of the electrons towards its initial position. The anhar- ω1 . SHG would be the exact time-reverse process. Even
monicity is contained in the last term (a.x2 ) which we though very odd looking at a first glance, SPDC does fol-
can neglect in linear optics. If ignored, then one can see low energy conservation and momentum conservation
that the dependence of the motion equation is linear with rules so that:
the position x. This is no longer true at high em power,
then the electromagnetic force given by the right-hand ω3 = ω1 + ω2 , (4)
side of Equation (1) will induce non-linearities (we note
that higher terms than a.x2 can also exist). Now if one k3 = k2 + k1 and k = k3 − k2 − k1 = 0. (5)
takes two different incoming frequencies ω1 and ω2 , one These two equations are called the phase-matching
can show that this equation of motion, thanks to the last conditions and will be discussed in details later on as
quadratic term, will lead to the generation of waves at they are central for the mechanism to happen. These
ω1 and ω2 of course, but also at ω1 + ω2 , ω1 − ω2 , 2ω1 , conditions are represented in Figure 1(b) (energy con-
2ω2 and 0 (so-called optical rectification) leading to six servation) and Figure 1(c) (momentum conservation).
frequency components [18]. We can solve this equation Now one can solve the wave equation from Equation (2)
by assuming that the non-linear term is a perturbation with the usual assumptions where we consider a lossless
case of the linear one in order to end up with these six medium, collimated and monochromatic input beams,
frequencies. A particularly interesting case occurs when continuous excitation, normal incidence and we will
ω1 = ω2 = ω as this will lead to the so-called SHG at neglect the double refraction. We will also make a less-
2ω, so useful in every optics laboratory. Higher terms can reasonable assumption which is to be in the non-depleted
also exist leading to other non-linear phenomena with regime meaning that the incoming beam can give rise
more interacting waves. This classical approach is very to SHG (reverse diagram than the one presented in
useful to understand the physics of the interaction but
is rapidly complex when using the perturbation theory.
There is another equivalent way of treating the problem
by starting with Maxwell’s equations with the displace-
ment term D  and the magnetic field strength H  in a
medium which is not the vacuum. We suppose no exter-
nal charges, no currents and we suppose a non-magnetic
medium, thus we have the standards relations D  = ε0 E+
 
P for the displacement, where P is the polarisation vector
of the medium, and B  = μ0 H  for the magnetic field. The
polarisation vector P accounts for the usual charge dis-
placement in a medium due to an applied external em
field. By playing around with Maxwell’s equations, one
can show the following known wave equation:

1 ∂ 2E 1 ∂ 2 P
 2E
∇ − = (2)
c2 ∂t 2 ε0 c2 ∂t 2 Figure 1. (a) Feynman’s diagram of SPDC where one photon at
energy ω3 splits into two twin photons at energies ω2 and ω1
with the polarisation P = P L + P NL
containing both the and (b) representation of energy conservation of SPDC, (c) is the
linear (L) and the non-linear (NL) terms. SPDC (and representation of momentum conservation of SPDC and (d) is a
SHG for that matter) is a three-wave interaction only and schematic of SPDC where a UV pump laser generates red SPDC
thus we will only consider the first non-linear term for photons coming out of the crystal in two cone shapes.
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 293

Figure 1(a)) but without significant energy loss for the (first order Taylor expansion of the sinc function) of
excitation beam or so (the so-called pump beam, with the SHG intensity as a function of the length of the
two photons at frequency ω coming from the same pump crystal. Otherwise, the sinc function ensures a periodic
laser in this case). This assumption can be quite wrong energy exchange between the em pump field (the incom-
as the incoming beam can be more or less completely ing beam) and the created waves. This phase-matching
depleted for SHG if one is careful with phase-matching condition is crucial for an efficient non-linear effect and
conditions. accounts for the wave vector conservation of the process.
For SPDC on the other hand, we are (unfortu- In order to get the phase-matching condition right, one
nately) completely in the regime of no-pump depletion needs to have:
as parametric down-conversion is an extremely ineffi- n3 ω3 n1 ω1 n2 ω2
cient process. Under such assumptions, one can solve the k1 + k2 = k3 = = + , (11)
c c c
Equation (2) by looking for a solution of the form:
which is an impossible condition to be satisfied with most
E3 (z, t) = A3 e i(k3 z−ω3 t)
+ c.c. (6) materials as n1 (ω1 ) < n2 (ω2 ) < n3 (ω3 ) for ω1 < ω2 <
ω3 , i.e. for ‘normal’ dispersion. This is where birefrin-
‘c.c.’ being the complex conjugate term and k3 = n3 .ω3 /c gent crystals are used as they possess two (uniaxial) or
and n23 = εL (ω3 ) where L stands for the linear part only. three (biaxial) different refractive indices along differ-
We thus look for a solution for the polarisation of the ent symmetry axes which can satisfy the phase-matching
form: condition. In the particular case of SHG, it is fairly easy to
P3 (z, t) = ℘3 .ei(k3 z−ω3 t) + c.c (7) have ne (ω1 ) = no (ω3 = 2ω1 ) with o and e the so-called
ordinary and extraordinary axes for uniaxial non-linear
with crystals (see Figure 1(d)).
℘3 = 4ε0 deff E1 E2 . (8) SPDC is the reverse process of sum-frequency gener-
ation (SFG which is non-degenerate SPDC, i.e. different
E1 and E2 being the amplitudes of the em fields 1 and wavelengths for the two output photons) or SHG (degen-
2. deff = 1/2χeff is a complicated but known parame- erate SPDC, i.e. same wavelengths for the two output
ter depending on the strength of the non-linearity of photons) which would correspond to the process called
the material and on geometrical factors all of which are parametric amplification in classical non-linear optics.
properties of the material (as an example, for beta bar- This process occurs when a strong pump beam at ω3 is
ium borate (BBO) type II, we have deff = (d11 sin(3φ) + combined with a weak signal beam at ω1 to give rise to an
d22 cos(3φ)cos(2θ)). One can then find the following amplified signal at ω1 but also to a second signal called the
equation from Equations (2–3) and (6–8): idler beam at ω2 . Using the same type of equation than
the one derived in (9), we have this time:
d 2 A3 dA3 4deff ω3
2
+ 2ik3 =− A1 A2 ei(k1 +k2 −k3 )z . (9) dA1 ω1 (2)
dz dz c2 =i χ A3 A∗2 eik.z , (12)
dz n1 c eff
This last equation can be further reduced by assum-
ing the slow varying amplitude approximation and thus dA2 ω2 (2)
neglect the first term compared to the second term (also =i χ A3 A∗1 eik.z . (13)
dz n2 c eff
a standard approximation in non-linear optics) on the
left-hand side of this equation. It is then straightforward These equations leading to the so-called Manley-Rowe
to find the solution of such equation under the non- relations can be solved supposing that k = 0 and lead
depleted pump approximation by integration between 0 to:

and L (length of the crystal) and considering that Ii = ω2 n1 A3 ∗
A2 (z) = i A (0) sinh(αz), (14)
2ni ε0 c|Ai |2 is the optical intensity of beam i: ω1 n2 |A3 | 1
 2
2 ω2 I I
8deff 3 1 2 2 sin k.L/2 A1 (z) = A1 (0) cosh(αz), (15)
I3 = L
n1 n2 n3 ε0 c3 k.L/2 (2) 
χ |A3 | ω2 ω1
= I3max .sinc2 (k.L/2) (10) α = eff . (16)
c n2 n1
with the so-called phase-matching parameter k = k1 + From these solutions of the parametric amplification pro-
k2 − k3 (we use scalar notations for easier use). One cess, we can clearly see that if there is no initial incident
can see from Equation (10) that ideally, one would want power at frequency ω1 , i.e. if A1 (0) = 0, then the signal
to have k ∼ 0 in order to have a quadratic increase and the idler beams would not exist and SPDC would
294 C. COUTEAU

not be possible. In other words, classical non-linear optics oscillator, allowing to go up and down in the energy lad-
‘does not allow’ SPDC to exist. Clearly, we see the limi- der of the oscillator, which in the case of quantum optics,
tations of the classical treatment of non-linear optics in is called a photon. We have then the following relations:
order to derive SPDC. For that, a quantum description of †
the phenomena is needed [19,20]. âl |vac = |1l , (18)

âl |1l  = |vac, (19)

2. Theoretical derivation of SPDC: quantum where a single photon in mode l is created from the vac-
case uum state |vac and a single photon in mode l ‘disappears’
In order to do so, let us recall some basic quantum optics for instance due to absorption from a single dipole. One
properties. Quantum optics is the realm of electromag- can show that the quantised free radiation Hamiltonian
netism and Maxwell’s equations when one deals with would look like:
     
single photons. Indeed, a process such as SPDC tells you 1 † 1
ĤR = ωl N̂l + = ωl âl âl + ,
that spontaneously, a photon pair can suddenly ‘appear’ 2 2
l l
somewhere in the universe ex-nihilo. Once again, energy (20)
and momentum conservation hold but nevertheless, a where N̂l is the photon number operator giving rise to
photon in a particular optical mode can spontaneously the number Nl of photons in the electromagnetic mode l.
be created. In order to account for such phenomena (and Within this context, quantum optics allows and explains
many others in quantum optics), one needs to quan- perfectly the possibility of spontaneously creating a pho-
tise the electromagnetic field. This article is certainly not ton of a certain energy in a given optical mode. Thus a
about that and one can find excellent textbooks on the photon of high energy can split into two (or more but
matter [21]. We will just give a quick overview of what is less likely) photons of lower energies that were not pre-
required to know. The general principle is to start with viously around when the interaction with the non-linear
Maxwell’s equations and use a spatial Fourier expansion medium takes place. In order to describe the phenom-
of the em field in order to solve these equations. It is ena, we can infer an effective interaction Hamiltonian for
also wiser to work with the vector potential A  rather SPDC which would look like:
than directly with the electric field E  . If one works in  
ĤSPDC = iκ(â1 â2 â3 eik.r−iω.t + â1 â2 â3 e−ik.r+iω.t )
† † †
the so-called Coulomb gauge where ∇. A = 0 (which tells
you that photons are transverse!) then one can end up  
= iκ(âi âs âp eik.r−iω.t + âi âs âp e−ik.r+iω.t )
† † †
with an equation that looks very much like the one of
(21)
an harmonic oscillator with the derivation of conjugate
canonical variables just like in the case of a quantised har- with the first term of the Hamiltonian accounting for SFG
monic oscillator. It is then straightforward to apply the or SHG (if ω1 = ω2 ) and the creation of a SHG photon at
rules of a quantum harmonic oscillator but this time for ω3 = 2ω2 with ω = ω3 − ω1 − ω2 . The second term
the vector potential of the electromagnetic field. By doing of the Hamiltonian accounts for SPDC where one pho-
so, one can show the following relation: ton (the pump beam) ‘disappears’ to create one photon
at ω1 and one photon at ω2 in the non-degenerate case
 εl ikl .r  where the two frequencies are different. We can clearly
 r) =
A( l (e âl + e−ikl .r âl )
†
ωl see in (21) that SPDC and SHG do compete and do exist
l
at the same time. In most of what follows in this article, we
 (+) (r) + A
=A  (−) (r) (17) will focus on degenerate SPDC with ω1 = ω2 thus ‘giving
birth’ to twin photons in this case. Note that from now on,
with the sum over the l optical modes accessible in this we will use the indices {s, i, p} rather than {1, 2, 3} when
universe (quite a few then) and the two quantum opera- talking about the three-wave mixing phenomenon SPDC.
tors, â being the photon annihilation operator (account- We have p for the incoming pump photon at high energy
ing for the disappearance of a photon) and ↠the photon and the twin photons i for idler and s for signal (note that
creation operator (accounting for the appearance of a these names are given more for historical reasons). We
photon). By the same token, A  is also an operator. l is the must stress that the constant κ is given by:
vector direction of the em field associated to these pho- 
2 deff ωp ωs ωi
tons and εl is the amplitude of the associated classical field κ= (22)
with energy ωl equals to that of a single photon in the 3 ε0 V 2ε0 V
l mode. â and ↠are the equivalent creation and annihi- with the usual meanings for deff , V and the three frequen-
lation operators of a quantum of energy for a harmonic cies. Now in a more concrete way we can estimate what
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 295

happens to an incoming pump beam with Np number of This expansion is thus a Poisson distribution that char-
pump photons impinging on a non-linear crystal by look- acterises SPDC and thus not an on-demand supply of
ing at the effect of the SPDC Hamiltonian from (21) on photon pairs but rather a probabilistic one. From (25),
the incoming state |0s , 0i , Np  describing Np pump pho- we see that for a certain probability to have one pair
tons and 0 photon in the signal mode and 0 photon in the (proportional to κ 2 ) we have a non-zero chance to have
idler mode. We use the Schrödinger equation in time and two pairs (with probability to be κ 4 /4) when one add
look for the state: the second order term, etc. . . . In other words, most of
t the incoming state (the pump beam) is left untouched
1
i ∫ ĤSPDC (t  )dt  and only a small portion (10−5 to 10−12 ) goes into pro-
|ψ(t) = e 0 |0s , 0i , Np . (23)
ducing a twin pair of down-converted photons. We also
κ is rather small so it means that SPDC is very inefficient see that the double-pair generation increases if the pump
and that most of the pump beam is unperturbed by the power is increased too much and that is not something
SPDC process. We can thus make a Taylor expansion of one would necessarily want for most experiments using
the exponential Hamiltonian up to the first order and find single twin photon pairs. Finally, we must stress that in
that: formula (25), we ‘increase’ the probability of being in
the |1s , 1i , Np − 1 state by performing a so-called coin-
1 t
|ψ(t) ≈ C0 |0s , 0i , Np  + C1 ∫ ĤSPDC (t  )dt  |0s , 0i , Np  cidence measurement between the idler and the signal
i 0 photon in a quantum optics experiment. Practically, we
+ ..., (24) look at a double-detection event on two detectors (one
pointing towards the idler photons and the other one
where Ci are the coefficients of the Taylor expansion towards the signal photons) in a very short time-scale of
present for the normalisation of the wave function. In the 10 ns or so. One can show that accidental events in such a
case of 1st order, we only have C0 and C1 ≈ 1 − C0 again short time window are very low and thus a coincidence
for the sake of working with normalised states. As we are event corresponds to the detection of a pair of SPDC
looking for perfect phase-matching, including in energy photons. This is the practical way of getting rid of the vac-
too, then we have ω ≈ 0 thus the integral term in (24) is uum state, or rather the initial state |0s , 0i , Np , where we
† †
a Dirac function and we can apply the operators âi , âs , âp collapse the wave function unto the one-and-more-pair-
on the incoming state |0s , 0i , Np  and find: coincidence state, thus getting rid of the contribution
from this dominant non-creation of pairs state. Mandel

|ψ(t) = C0 |0s , 0i , Np  + κC1 e−ik.r |1s , 1i , Np − 1. et al. also demonstrated that the number of events for
(25) parametric down-conversion has to be the same as for
In order to bring out a true parallel with the SHG case the pump photons. In other words, one pump photon
(from Equation (10)), we must recall that the measured might split into two SPDC photons but the number of
em intensity ISPDC will be proportional to the square of pair-event created has to be at the most the number of
the wave function from (25). Thus the phase-matching incoming photons, assuming every photon is converted
condition in wave vector does appear (like in SPDC). and no higher order occurs. It is obvious experimentally
Unlike SHG, SPDC is a linear function with the pump but not trivial. Finally, unlike the reverse case of SHG
power which is not trivial to see at first when looking at which requires a non-zero ‘seed’ signal A1 (0) in order
(25). For that, we need to go back to (21) and assume that for any SPDC photons to exist, thanks to the properties
the pump power is so strong that it can be considered of the creation operators, we can start from zero photons
like a classical em field âp ≈ Ep and as a result, ISPDC will in the idler and signal states and create them using the
be proportional to Ip only, unlike the SHG phenomena Hamiltonian in (21). To wrap up on the theory of SPDC,
from (10). For SPDC, one pump photon only splits into we can claim that the fact that only quantum formalism
two photons but only one photon in each mode so the can explain the existence of SPDC photons, is actually
dependence is clearly linear even though it is a non-linear one of the many peculiar properties of parametric fluo-
process. We also recall that C0 C1 . This is actually one rescence and that what makes it unique for applications
of the major issues of SPDC, it is the fact that SPDC is a in quantum optics as we will learn later on.
very inefficient process which hinders many applications
in quantum information and quantum cryptography for
3. Practical case: BBO crystal for SPDC
instance. We also assumed that we only have the first
two terms in the Taylor expansion of (24) but if âp ≈ Ep Practically in the laboratory there are many aspects
is strong enough (sometimes necessary if one wants to that should be taken care of in order to generate
get enough SPDC effect) then higher order terms appear. ‘efficient’ SPDC in an optical set-up. First of all, the
296 C. COUTEAU

phase-matching condition k = 0 has to be fulfilled

as much as possible. As it was mentioned earlier it is
quite unlikely to find a natural material which fulfil the
condition ni (ωi ) = ns (ωs ) < np (ωp ) with ωi = ωs < ωp
except when using birefringent crystals which may pos-
sess two (uniaxial crystals) or three (biaxial crystals)
different indices for a given wavelength. Another impor-
tant point is that we want non-collinear phase-matching
leading to different wave vectors directions for the three
waves involved thus more easily selected thereafter (see
schematic Figure 1(d)). This makes the theory more dif-
ficult but ensures at the end the spatial separation of
the twin photons. Let us take the most common non-
linear crystal used for SPDC up to now: barium borate
β − Ba(BO2 )2 or BBO. It is a negative (meaning that the Figure 2. Graphs representing the Sellmeier equations of BBO
direction having a low refractive index is the fast axis. with ne (θ) for θ = 90° (bottom curve, in black) and no (top curve,
At right angles to it is the slow axis, with a high index in red) as a function of the wavelength λ. The middle (pink) curve
of refraction, ne < no ) uniaxial crystal (meaning it has is ne (θ = 31.7°). We have phase-matching between 400 nm and
800 nm (the two grey circles) when we fulfil a condition where
an optical axis OA) with two different indices ne and no ne (ωs ) = no (2ωp ). This is the phase-matching for SHG condition
for extraordinary and ordinary indices. BBO is transpar- for this particular case at these particular wavelengths for a type I
ent from 190 to 3300 nm and with indices given by the non-linear BBO crystal and in a collinear configuration.
Sellmeier equations which are, for example, for type I
down-conversion (e → o + o):
phase-matching and with a pump at 400 nm and hope
0.0184
no = 2.27405 + − 0.0155λ2 , (26) to get a pair of 800 nm photons. The pink curve (middle
λ2 − 0.0179 curve) is n(θ = 31.7◦ ) where we can see that for a pump
beam at 400 nm (very common in the laboratory) we
0.0128
ne = 2.3730 + − 0.0044λ2 (27) can have phase-matching at 800 nm (the two grey circles)
λ2 − 0.0156 where we fulfil a condition where ne (ωs ) = no (2ωp ). This
with λ given in μm. We recall the relation of the extraor- is the phase-matching condition for this particular case at
dinary index of refraction with the angle θ from the these particular wavelengths for type I and in a collinear
optical axis is given by the ellipsoid equation for indices: configuration. This simple case is for illustration but the
most general case cannot be evaluated without the help
n2e n2o of numerics. The idea is to solve Equation (5) in a vec-
n2 (θ) = . (28)
n2e cos2 θ + n2o sin2 θ tor form |k = kp − ks − ki | = 0. In order to do so, one
needs to work in spherical coordinates and determine
So typically, when the pump beam enters the crystal with
nine parameters to fulfil the phase-matching conditions
a certain angle θ with the optical axis OA, the extraor-
given by the Equations (4) and (5): three parameters for
dinary index will be different for different angles, as
the wavelength i, s, p, three angles θ for each wave and
opposed to the ordinary index. For BBO, phase-matching
three angles ϕ for each wave. Clearly one can set λp , λs , λi
conditions occur with an extraordinary beam only and
for the three waves if we want to work at certain wave-
one can have two types of phase-matching:
lengths and in the degenerate case. We can also decide to
e → o + o type I, set θs for instance (and not be in the collinear case such as
in Figure 1(d)) and we can show that for a uniaxial crystal,
there is no dependence with ϕp and that there is the rela-
e → e + o type II,
tion ϕs = π + ϕi . We are finally left with three parame-
ters (θp , θi , ϕs ) to determine using Equations (4) and (5).
e → o + e type II.
For more information in the calculation part, see the
Figure 1(d) represents a type II configuration. Figure 2 article from NIST by Boeuf et al. from 2000 [22]. The fol-
represents the two curves for the Sellmeier equations of lowing website maintained by NIST: spdcalc.org allows
BBO with n(θ) for θ = 90◦ (in black, bottom curve) and you to enter your own parameters and gives you all sorts
no (in red, top curve) as a function of the wavelength of information such as the phase-matching curves or the
λ. We will take the simple case where we have collinear joint spectral distribution. In particular, one derives from
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 297

given by:
  
 1 1 

t = Lc − . (29)
ne no 
The spatial walk-off, or transverse walk-off is due to
the fact again that the material is birefringent and as such
the energy propagation or the Poynting vector is not nec-
essarily in the same direction as the wave vector of the
down-converted photons. This is the case for the ordi-
nary wave o but not for the extraordinary wave e and we
thus end up with an angle ρ between the two waves at the
output of the crystal given by:
1 dne
ρ=− . (30)
ne dθ
Once again, this will be very important for the produc-
tion of entangled photons as one must not have any kind
Figure 3. Graph representing the two outcoming cones of SPDC of information (temporal or otherwise) in order to pro-
for a type II BBO crystal. This is an experimental transverse cut of duce pure entanglement. There are easy ways to avoid
SPDC at 810 nm behind a BBO crystal. The two circles represent the these ‘labelling’ by using compensating crystals (see [8]
two extraordinary and ordinary beams. In this particular case, we
can observe two intersection points (where polarisation entangle- for instance). One more thing we should emphasise is the
ment occurs). We can also observe that one circle is slightly bigger fact that for SPDC, the conservation of momentum has
than the other one due to crystal tilting and meaning that the two an uncertainty to it (Equation (5)) and we have rather:
wavelengths for signal and idler are slightly different.
k3 = k2 + k1 + k (31)

and the equation still holds. That is the reason why, these
these calculations that for a type II SPDC in BBO with
two cones actually form two rings when one makes a
a pump laser at 405 nm, giving rise to 810 nm down-
transversal view-cut along the propagation direction of
converted photons, we have an angle of about 3° between
the SPDC photons (see Figure 3). One way to overcome
the idler and the signal waves coming out of the crystal in
this situation is to select spectrally with narrow-band fil-
a cone shape (see Figure 1(d) for a schematic). Figure 3
ters (from 1 to 10 nm) the down-converted photon pairs,
presents an experimental result of the double cone emis-
on top of a spatial (with angles) and temporal (with
sion of SPDC in type II BBO. In this case, we have two
coincidence detections) selection [11,23].
different circles as opposed to the type I case. Figure 3
represents the notorious picture of the parametric down-
converted cones coming out of the crystal with photons 4. SPDC used for applications
with orthogonal polarisations for the two different cones
4.1. Single-photon source
(extraordinary e/V cone and ordinary o/H photons). This
is an experimental transverse cut of SPDC at 810 nm The first striking effect with SPDC is the fact that we
behind a BBO crystal done by scanning across a 2D plane end up with twin photons created at the same time and
parallel and away from the non-linear crystal using an which are indistinguishable. One foresees that this could
optical fibre linked to a single-photon detector. We will be useful for some low-signal level communications and
see later on that it can lead to polarisation entangled pairs was predicted by Mandel and Rarity (c. 1984) as a joint
of photons. For that, one will need to take two things into measurement can ensure their ‘twin-ness’. Derived from
account that are inherent to SPDC: the temporal walk-off that, the first application was the localisation of a one-
and the spatial walk-off. For the temporal walk-off, also photon state using SPDC by [24]. This led to heralded
known as the longitudinal walk-off, it simply shows that single-photon sources using SPDC providing strong
as the crystal has two indices along which the ‘e’ and the photon antibunching which is again a clear quantum
‘o’ photons follow, they will travel differently (different property of light. This is good for quantum information
group velocities) and be temporally different when com- processing (QIP) although more for proofs of principle.
ing out of the crystal (the length of the crystal is typically Real single-photon sources such as quantum dots, NV
on the order of 1 mm). One photon will come out of the centres, atoms, etc . . . are still preferable. Figure 4(a)
crystal before the other one. This temporal difference is is an example of a heralded single-photon source where
298 C. COUTEAU

Figure 4. (a) Example of a heralded single-photon source using SPDC from a periodically poled potassium titanyl phosphate crystal
(PPKTP). The crystal produces a pair of collinear photons with orthogonal polarisations which are first separated by a polarising beam-
splitter (PBS), so that the idler photon serves as a heralding event for the signal photon sent onto a non-polarising BS for a measurement
(2) (2) (2)
of the g c function (so-called HBT). (b) g c (τ ) function for three different coincidence windows showing g c (τ ) ≈ 0.07 for the lowest
coincidence window [12].

the authors used this time collinear source of orthogo- a limited use as a source of single photons as multiple pair
nal twin photons that were separated in polarisation [12]. creation is always present.
One photon was detected (idler photon in Figure 4(a))
and served to herald the arrival of the signal photon on
the other side which was then detected using a stan- 4.2. Source of indistinguishable photons
dard Hanbury-Brown and Twiss (HBT) interferometer In 1987, the group of Leonard Mandel realised a two-
known in quantum optics for the determination of single photon interferometry and observed this time a photon
photons. Figure 4(b) presents the photon antibunching bunching effect. This experiment consisted in creating
characteristics of this system as a function of the time two twin photons by SPDC and then made them inter-
coincidence window for the detection. We can show that fere on a beamsplitter (BS) (cf. Figure 5). Quantum-
the quality of this autocorrelation g(2) degrades as the mechanically, one can show that the two outcomes where
intensity of the pump increases and that is due to the fact the photons come out in different ports interfere destruc-
that the emission of SPDC follows a Poisson statistics as tively and remain only the cases where the photons come
discussed previously with Equation (24). Thus SPDC has out together from the BS, they bunch. This shows bosonic

Figure 5. (a) Experimental set-up of the first two indistinguishable photon experiment pioneered by Hong, Ou and Mandel [10]. This
was done by doing SPDC in a monopotassium phosphate in a non-collinear phase-matching condition. The BS is moved to change the
delay between the arrival times of the photons onto the BS. (b) Coincidence measurements of the photon pairs detected by D1 and D2
as a function of the path delay at the BS with a clear dip observed.
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 299

properties for photons due to the fact that the quantum before and φ is a phase that can be modified. Figure 6(a)
operators of annihilation and creation of photons are represents a schematic of the experiment carried on by
used (oppositely, fermions like electrons would go away Kwiat et al. [11], while Figure 6(b) shows a diagram of
from each other). The photons are said indistinguish- the geometry of the process. Figure 6(c) demonstrates
able as they must be from the same optical mode in clearly that there are strong correlations in polarisation
order for the interferences to occur and this is called the between the two entangled photons. This entangled state
Hong-Ou-Mandel effect [10]. and this technique was used to violate Bell’s inequali-
ties and brought up a lot of discussions regarding the
4.3. Entangled photons so-called Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox.

Following these experiments, researchers used para-

metric down-converted photons for creating entangled 4.4. Quantum teleportation
photons in polarisation for violating Bell’s inequalities. One of the most famous uses of entanglement is certainly
Figure 6 presents the original article where they man- when it was applied to demonstrate quantum teleporta-
aged, using a type-II BBO crystal, to create two inter- tion. The idea of teleportation is that two protagonists
sections of the output cones by tilting their BBO crystal (usually called Alice and Bob) share a common pair of
(see also Figure 3). They then selected the intersection EPR particles (in this case photons) that they will use in
of the two parts of the cones of the twin photons with order to teleport a quantum state (which does not have to
orthogonal polarisations. As with the right conditions it be known) from Alice to Bob. Figure 7(a) shows the gen-
is impossible to tell which photon is which anymore, you eral principle of creating a pair of entangled/EPR photons
cannot predict the result of the measured polarisation (2 and 3) distributed between Alice and Bob and Alice
of the photon at one intersection. What you do know uses her photon 2 to make a so-called Bell state measure-
though is the fact that parallel measurements will give ment (BSM) with the photon to be teleported (photon 1)
you perfect anti-correlation in polarisation. Figure 1(d) is [13]. Using a classical channel of information, Alice tells
a schematic of the two output cones from idler and signal Bob what BSM-type of measurement she made (but not
and Figure 3 provides experimental data where we have a the result) so that Bob can act accordingly on his pho-
transverse cut of the two twin beams produced. At the ton n°3 and recover the quantum state of the teleported
intersection, one ends up with the following entangled photon 1. Figure 7(b) represents the experimental set-
state: up developed in 1997 at the University of Innsbruck. A
1 first pair of entangled photon is created by a pump beam
|ψ = √ (|Hi |Vs  + eiφ |Vi |Hs ), (32)
2 where photon 3 will be going to Bob and photon 2 will
where H is for horizontal polarisation and V is for ver- be going to Alice. Alice then makes a BSM on a BS with
tical polarisation, s and i stand for signal and idler like photon 1 to be teleported which is in fact coming from

Figure 6. (a) Set-up of the first experiment of two entangled photon experiment done by Kwiat et al. where a BBO crystal is pumped at
351 nm for SPDC in a non-collinear critical phase-matching condition. (b) Schematic of the famous two SPDC cones coming off the crystal
with orthogonal polarisations and spatial selection to select only the photons at the intersection. (c) Visibility measurements leading to
a Bell parameter S > 2.5 and proving that the photons are indeed entangled [11].
300 C. COUTEAU

coincidence measurement. Using a similar set-up, entan-

glement swapping was also realised [25] and now people
try to store single photons and entangled photons into
quantum memories from specific materials [26].

4.5. Quantum cryptography

This teleportation experiment and some others at the
time certainly sparked a lot of interest in the broad field of
quantum information. In particular, it was shown earlier
on that using entanglement and the no-cloning theorem
in quantum mechanics, one could make a very secure
protocol based on quantum cryptography (at least on
paper). The basic idea proposed is that the polarisa-
tion state of a photon (say horizontal or vertical) can be
thought of as a quantum bit of information, or a qubit.
Thus a pair of EPR photons can represent a two-qubit
source. Figure 8(a,b) presents two experiments realis-
ing quantum cryptography using entangled photons. In
Figure 8(a), the authors use polarisation entangled pho-
tons [14] but in Figure 8(b), the group from Nicolas
Gisin in Geneva used the so-called time-bin entangle-
ment based on James Franson’s idea from 1991 [27].
In this case, the idea is simply to create twin photons
(say A and B) and to send each of them in a Mach-
Zehnder interferometer with a long (L) and a short path
(S). Then if one gets a coincidence measurement, assum-
Figure 7. (a) Principle of the teleportation experiment where we
send an initial state 1 and Alice proceeds in doing a Bell state mea- ing that beforehand we use a pulse pump beam itself
surement (BSM) with one entangled photon from the EPR source in a superposition of L and S paths, there is no way to
(2). This initial state is the one to be teleported. The other entan- tell whether the photons took both the short paths or
gled photon of the EPR pair (3) is sent to Bob who receives a clas- the long paths [28]. All we know is that they have both
sical information from Alice onto what measurement he should taken the same path in order to get a coincidence mea-
do in order to recover Alice’s initial state, thus effectively teleport-
ing the initial state 1 to state 3 from Alice to Bob. (b) Schematic surement. This very powerful method of entangling pho-
of the experiment where a strong pulse of pump photons first tons allowed the Geneva group (and others thereafter)
creates an EPR entangled pair (2 and 3) to share between Alice to use non-degenerate SPDC to get one photon at the
and Bob. This pump pulse of light is then sent back again into the pair at, say 900 nm in the silicon detection window, and
non-linear crystal to create another pair of SPDC photon (1 and 4) a photon at 1550 nm [29]. This wavelength is not cho-
where one photon of the pair will be the initial state to teleport
sen randomly as it corresponds to the wavelength used in
(path 1) and the other one will be used as a trigger to create the
heralded photon source (4) [13]. the world communication network thus bringing quan-
tum cryptography into the scene of a mature application.
Of course, science is not that easy and other problems
have been encountered like inefficient detectors, prob-
the creation of another pair of EPR photons by sending lem with maintaining stable interferometers, etc. . . . The
back the pump beam into the crystal. This time one pho- carrier of information has been tested on optical tables
ton of the pair is photon 1 and the other one will be used but also in fibres (visible or telecom) and in free-space.
to herald the arrival of photon 1 for Alice to make the Now there are projects to point to satellites to do satellite
BSM. We note that in order to synchronise the whole pro- communication quantum cryptography [30].
cess, the authors use a pulse excitation with a well-known
arrival time for each time (within the pump pulse) and
4.6. Quantum computation
photon 4 is used to herald the arrival of photon 1 to be
teleported. Finally, the equivalent classical communica- Following these remarkable advances in quantum com-
tion between Alice and Bob is done by the fact that they munication, it did not take long before SPDC was used for
have to communicate together to see when they made a running experiments on quantum computation. This is
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 301

Figure 8. (a) Schematic of the quantum cryptography protocol using polarisation entangled photons using the SPDC method of Kwiat
et al. (Figure 6). Each photon from a pair is sent to Alice and Bob where they verify that the photons are indeed entangled in order to use
them as an encryption key. H polarisation can be the ‘+1’ bit of information and V polarisation can be the ‘−1’ bit of information [14].
(b) Quantum cryptography was also realised in telecommunication fibres where polarisation is not preserved. For that, Tittel et al. used
the so-called time-energy entanglement or time-bin entanglement to generate entangled photons [28].

still a very much on-going task where groups around the

world demonstrated basic algorithms, error-correction
codes and more using entangled photons from SPDC.
SPDC can only generate two quantum bits (qubits) at
the time (at least in polarisation) and people have been
working actively in order to get 2, 3 up to 10 pairs of
entangled photons in a given experiment [11,31–36].
Figure 9 plots the number of polarisation entangled pho-
tons created by SPDC as a function of time. At this linear
rate, we will reach 20 entangled photons in 2037. Unfor-
tunately, the trend does not follow Moore’s law and it
seems pretty clear it may even reach a plateau at some
point using this technique. Nevertheless, it is still pri-
mordial to show basic quantum information protocols
using SPDC and entangled photons. Also shows the need
for new sources of entangled photons.The first real prac- Figure 9. Number of polarisation entangled photons in time
tical implementation of an optical gate was realised in using SPDC. The black squares are experimental results with the
2003 with entangled photons [15]. This was the first reference and the line (red) is a linear fit. At this linear rate, we will
experimental all-optical quantum controlled-NOT gate reach 20 entangled photons in 2037.
302 C. COUTEAU

(CNOT gate). This experiment and many others followed 4.7. Quantum metrology and more
the so-called KLM proposal (published by E. Knill, R.
SPDC allows also other types of less-obvious applica-
Laflamme and G. Milburn in 2001 and it was the first arti-
tions. One of them is the use of entanglement in order
cle published in Nature of the twenty-first century [37].
to perform super-resolution phase measurements [17].
The KLM proposal showed that using non-deterministic
The basic idea is to create a so-called NOON state writ-
gates, single photons, efficient and discriminating single-
ten as |N, 0 + |0, N where N is the number of photons
photon detectors, it was possible to perform an all-optical
in a given mode. In this case, using interferometry,
√ one
computer using only linear optics such as BSs, wave-
can show a phase resolution given by ϕ = 1/ N. The
plates, etc. . . . Figure 10(a) presents the basic principle
concept of ‘quantum lithography’ was thus born although
of this CNOT gate with a control qubit and a target qubit.
there is still much more improvement to be done before
Each qubit can have a 0 or a 1 state and the CNOT gate
this concept can actually be put in practice. One exam-
tells you if the control qubit is in the 0 state, then the
ple was to use entangled photons for measuring protein
state of the target state is unchanged whereas if the con-
concentration [41].
trol qubit is in the 1 state, then the target state will have its
Another idea that came out fairly earlier on when
state flip from 0 to 1 or from 1 to 0. This scheme used by
SPDC photons were characterised is the idea that one
O’Brien et al. was a coincidence basis gate which is non-
could use twin photons for metrology. The concept of
deterministic [15]. Figure 10(b) represents the so-called
quantum metrology uses light for setting the standards
dual-rail encoding where spatial superposition with a
that define units of measurement (the candela) for light.
BS is realised in order to implement this scheme. This,
The quantum candela project aims at developing stan-
combined with entangled photons in polarisation and
dards for photon metrology from the signal level of
conditional detections showed that the gate was realised
existing radiometric standards and reaches the smallest
1/9th of the time. Since then, this scheme was improved.
grains of light which are single photons. Through pho-
Using SPDC, it has been used to implement basic con-
ton correlation measurements, it was shown that one
cepts in quantum processing through the proof of CNOT
could calibrate very accurately photons detectors, again
gates [15], Shor’s algorithm [38], one-way quantum com-
a very important application for radiometric metrology
putation [39] or boson sampling type of gates [40]. There
[16,5,42].
is a wide literature on the subject and it is still very much
Finally, we must mention that originally, parametric
on-going [4].
fluorescence and entangled photons generated with them

Figure 10. (a) Schematic of the CNOT gate realised in [15]. (b) Polarisation-encoded photonic qubits can be converted into spatially
encoded qubits, suitable for the gate shown in (a) and (c) schematic of the experimental CNOT gate. Pairs of energy degenerate photons
are incident from the left of the diagram. They then follow the gate procedure in the middle before being detected on the right-hand
side [15].
 CONTEMPORARY PHYSICS 303

where used for testing the very foundations of quantum Bouwmeester, John Rarity, Christoph Simon, Antia Lamas-
mechanics such as the wave-particle duality, non-locality Linares, Gabriel Durkin and John Howell but also Gregor
via the violation of Bell’s inequalities wherein 2015, three Weihs, Chris Erven, Rolf Horn and Kevin Resch for fruitful and
sometimes very entangled discussions. The author thanks L. Le
experiments finally closed all the loop-holes associated to Cunff for Figure 1-d and C. Altuzarra and S. Vezzoli for working
these tests and put an end to hidden variables introduced on the data of Figure 3.
by John Bell in the 1960s. Two of them used SPDC for that
purpose [43,44]. Born’s rule of quantum mechanics was Disclosure statement
also tested with a heralded single-photon source using
SPDC going through a three-slit interferometer [6]. This No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
was done in order to show that quantum interference is
a two-amplitude effect and that no three-amplitude term Notes on contributor
exists in quantum mechanics. Christophe Couteau is an associate professor at one of the
French University of Technology in Troyes. Christophe’s inter-
5. Future for SPDC ests are mainly in quantum optics, quantum technologies, non-
linear optics and semiconductor optics. He has worked in var-
The future for SPDC is still very bright and nowadays, ious places on these subjects such as the University of Oxford
SPDC is used as a tool more than anything, for vari- in the UK, the University of Waterloo in Canada but also at the
Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. His research
ous applications and we can classify the applications into interests span from fundamental to applied physics and has
three main categories: a-foundations of physics and in been entangled with quantum optics for many years, still trying
particular of quantum mechanics, b-QIP and c-quantum to figure out what are photons and how to catch them.
metrology via the quantum candela project and quan-
tum sensors. Within QIP, we can split into three sub- References
categories: quantum cryptography, quantum computing
[1] Louisell WH, Yariv A, Siegman AE. Quantum fluctuations
and quantum communications. There are other sec- and noise in parametric processes I. Siegman Phys Rev.
ondary potential applications for optical lithography but 1961;124:1646–1654.
the odds that any application will come out of this are [2] Burnham DC, Weinberg DL. Observation of simultane-
pretty low, quantum imaging, also very narrow field and ity in parametric production of optical photon pairs. Phys
quantum sensing which has a higher potential. Rev Lett. 1970;25:84–87.
[3] Gisin N, Ribordy G, Tittel W, et al. Quantum cryptogra-
Now the challenge of tomorrow is to actually engineer
phy. Rev Mod Phys. 2002;74:145–195.
new technologies to create efficient SPDC and not just [4] O’Brien JL. Optical quantum computing. Science. 2007;
using the natural crystal birefringence. Several groups are 318:1567–1570.
attempting to do so by several means, either by using con- [5] Cheung JY, Chunnilall CJ, Woolliams ER, et al. The quan-
fined light into optical fibres [45], in silicon-on-insulator tum candela: a re-definition of the standard units for
waveguides [46] but also by careful engineering of semi- optical radiation. J Mod Opt. 2007;54:373–396.
[6] Sinha U, Couteau C, Jennewein T, et al. Ruling out
conductor Bragg-type of structure in order to obtain multi-order interference in quantum mechanics. Science.
parametric down-conversion directly on an optical chip 2010;329:418–421.
[47]. By the same token, using two four-wave mixing [7] Dehlinger D, Mitchell MW. Entangled photon appa-
processes, Silverstone et al. managed to create SPDC pho- ratus for the undergraduate laboratory. Am J Phys.
tons directly on a chip made of silicon-on-insulator [46]. 2002;70:898–902.
[8] Dehlinger D, Mitchell MW. Entangled photons, nonlocal-
A direct 3-photon has also been shown using cascaded
ity, and Bell inequalities in the undergraduate laboratory.
SPDC [48]. Recently, an electrically injected photon pair Am J Phys. 2002;70:903–910.
at room temperature was even demonstrated with is the [9] Friberg S, Hong CK, Mandel L. Measurement of time
first evidence of SPDC obtained by electrical pump- delays in the parametric production of photon pairs. Phys
ing rather than optical pumping [49]. More recently, we Rev Lett. 1985;54:2011–2013.
should mention the very interesting work on enhancing [10] Hong CK, Ou ZY, Mandel L. Measurement of subpicosec-
ond time intervals between two photons by interference.
SPDC effect using non-linearities in metamaterials [50]. Phys Rev Lett. 1987;59:2044–2046.
As such, it is safe to say that research in SPDC has thus a [11] Kwiat PG, Mattle K, Weinfurter H, et al. New high-
bright future ahead. intensity source of polarization-entangled photon pairs.
Phys Rev Lett. 1995;75:4337–4341.
[12] Bocquillon E, Couteau C, Razavi M, et al. Coherence mea-
Acknowledgements sures for heralded single-photon sources. Phys Rev A.
The author would like to point out that most of this work 2009;79:726.
was done when the author was at the University of Oxford [13] Bouwmeester D, Pan J-W, Mattle K, et al. Experimental
from 2000 to 2002 and as such, would like to thank, Dik quantum teleportation. Nature. 1997;390:575–579.
304 C. COUTEAU

[14] Jennewein T, Simon C, Weihs G, et al. Quantum [32] Pan J-W, Daniell M, Gasparoni S, et al. Experimental
cryptography with entangled photons. Phys Rev Lett. demonstration of four-photon entanglement and high-
2000;84:4729–4732. fidelity teleportation. Phys Rev Lett. 2001;86:4435–4438.
[15] O’Brien JL, Pryde GJ, White AG, et al. Demonstration [33] Zhao Z, Chen Y-A, Zhang A-N, et al. Experimental
of an all-optical quantum controlled-NOT gate. Nature. demonstration of five-photon entanglement and open-
2003;426:264–267. destination teleportation. Nature. 2004;430:54–58.
[16] Chen X-H, Zhai Y-H, Zhang D, et al. Absolute self- [34] Lu C-Y, Zhou X-Q, Guhne O, et al. Experimental
calibration of the quantum efficiency of single-photon entanglement of six photons in graph states. Nat Phys.
detectors. Opt Lett. 2006;31:2441. 2007;3:91–95.
[17] Mitchell MW, Lundeen JS, Steinberg AM. Super-resolving [35] Yao X-C, Wang T-X, Xu P, et al. Observation of eight-
phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state. photon entanglement. Nat Photonics. 2012;6:225–228.
Nature. 2004;429:161–164. [36] Wang X-L, Chen L-K, Li W, et al. Experimental ten-
[18] Schubert M, Wilhelmi B. Nonlinear optics and quantum photon entanglement. Phys Rev Lett. 2016;117:1997.
electronics. Hoboken: John Wiley; 1986. [37] Knill E, Laflamme R, Milburn GJ. A scheme for effi-
[19] Hong CK, Mandel L. Theory of parametric frequency cient quantum computation with linear optics. Nat.
down conversion of light. Phys Rev A. 1985;31:2409– 2001;409:46–52.
2418. [38] Martín-López E, Laing A, Lawson T, et al. Experimental
[20] Rubin MH, Klyshko DN, Shih YH, et al. Theory of two realization of Shor’s quantum factoring algorithm using
photon entanglement in type-II optical parametric down- qubit recycling. Nat Photonics. 2012;6:773–776.
conversion. Phys Rev A. 1994;50:5122–5133. [39] Walther P, Resch KJ, Rudolph T, et al. Experimental one-
[21] Loudon R. The quantum theory of light. 3rd ed. Oxford: way quantum computing. Nat. 2005;434:169–176.
Oxford University Press; 2000. [40] Tillmann M, Dakić B, Heilmann R, et al. Experimental
[22] Boeuf N, Branning D, Chaperot I, et al. Calculating char- boson sampling. Nat Photonics. 2013;7:540–544.
acteristics of noncollinear phase matching in uniaxial and [41] Crespi A, Lobino M, Matthews JCF, et al. Measuring pro-
biaxial crystals. Opt Eng. 2000;39:1016. tein concentration with entangled photons. Appl Phys
[23] Kurtsiefer C, Oberparleiter M, Weinfurter H. High effi- Lett. 2012;100:233704.
ciency entangled photon pair collection in type II para- [42] Giovannetti V, Lloyd S, Maccone L. Advances in quantum
metric fluorescence. Phys Rev A. 2001;64:1981. metrology. Nat Photonics. 2011;5:222–229.
[24] Hong CK, Mandel L. Experimental realization of a local- [43] Giustina M, Versteegh MAM, Wengerowsky S, et al.
ized one-photon state. Phys Rev Lett. 1986;56:58–60. Significant-loophole-free test of Bell’s Theorem with
[25] Pan J-W, Bouwmeester D, Weinfurter H, et al. Experi- entangled photons. Phys Rev Lett. 2015;115:195.
mental entanglement swapping: entangling photons that [44] Shalm LK, Meyer-Scott E, Christensen BG, et al. Strong
never interacted. Phys Rev Lett. 1998;80:3891–3894. loophole-free test of local realism. Phys Rev Lett.
[26] Zhang H, Jin X-M, Yang J, et al. Preparation and storage of 2015;115:250402.
frequency-uncorrelated entangled photons from cavity- [45] Li X, Voss PL, Sharping JE, et al. Optical-fiber source of
enhanced spontaneous parametric downconversion. Nat polarization-entangled photons in the 1550 nm telecom
Photonics. 2011;5:628–632. band. Phys Rev Lett. 2005;94:195.
[27] Franson JD. Bell inequality for position and time. Phys [46] Silverstone JW, Bonneau D, Ohira K, et al. On-chip quan-
Rev Lett. 1989;62:2205–2208. tum interference between silicon photon-pair sources.
[28] Tittel W, Brendel J, Zbinden H, et al. Quantum cryptog- Nat. Photonics. 2014;8:104–108.
raphy using entangled photons in energy-time Bell states. [47] Horn RT, Abolghasem P, Bijlani BJ, et al. Mono-
Phys Rev Lett. 2000;84:4737–4740. lithic source of photon pairs. Phys Rev Lett. 2012;108:
[29] Fasel S, Alibart O, Tanzilli S, et al. High-quality asyn- 153605.
chronous heralded single-photon source at telecom wave- [48] Hamel DR, Shalm LK, Hübel H, et al. Direct generation of
length. N J Phys. 2004;6:163. three-photon polarization entanglement. Nat Photonics.
[30] Bourgoin J-P, Gigov N, Higgins BL, et al. Experimen- 2014;8:801–807.
tal quantum key distribution with simulated ground-to- [49] Boitier F, Orieux A, Autebert C, et al. Electrically injected
satellite photon losses and processing limitations. Phys photon-pair source at room temperature. Phys Rev Lett.
Rev A. 2015;92:226. 2014;112:183901.
[31] Bouwmeester D, Pan J-W, Daniell M, et al. Observation [50] Davoyan A, Atwater H. Quantum nonlinear light emis-
of three-photon Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger entangle- sion in metamaterials: broadband Purcell enhancement of
ment. Phys Rev Lett. 1999;82:1345–1349. parametric downconversion. Optica. 2018;5:608.