OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 19, Iss. 21 — Oct. 10, 2011
  • pp: 20506–20517
« Show journal navigation

Theory of noise in high-gain surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers incorporating dipolar gain media

Israel De Leon and Pierre Berini  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 19, Issue 21, pp. 20506-20517 (2011)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.19.020506


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (946 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

A theoretical analysis of noise in high-gain surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers incorporating dipolar gain media is presented. An expression for the noise figure is obtained in terms of the spontaneous emission rate into the amplified surface plasmon-polariton taking into account the different energy decay channels experienced by dipoles in close proximity to the metallic surface. Two amplifier structures are examined: a single-interface between a metal and a gain medium and a thin metal film bounded by identical gain media on both sides. A realistic configuration is considered where the surface plasmon-polariton undergoing amplification has a Gaussian field profile in the plane of the metal and paraxial propagation along the amplifier’s length. The noise figure of these plasmonic amplifiers is studied considering three prototypical gain media with different permittivities. It is shown that the noise figure exhibits a strong dependance on the real part of the permittivities of the metal and gain medium, and that its minimum value is 4 / π ( 3.53 dB ). The origin of this minimum value is discussed. It is also shown that amplifier configurations supporting strongly confined surface plasmon-polaritons suffer from a large noise figure, which follows from an enhanced spontaneous emission rate due to the Purcell effect.

© 2011 OSA

1. Introduction

At optical frequencies, a simple metallic surface bounded by a dielectric can support transverse-magnetic polarized optical surface waves coupled to free electron oscillations called surface plasmon-polaritons (SPPs) [1

1. H. Raether, Surface Plasmons on Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer, Berlin, 1988).

]. More complex metallodielectric structures can also support SPPs, including thin metal films and stripes [2

2. P. Berini, “Long-range surface plasmon polaritons,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 1, 484–588 (2009). [CrossRef]

], metallic nanoparticles, and patterned metallic surfaces [3

3. W. L. Barnes, A. Dereux, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Surface plasmon subwavelength optics,” Nature 424, 824–830 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 4

4. S. Maier and H. Atwater, “Plasmonics: Localization and guiding of electromagnetic energy in metal/dielectric structures,” J. Appl. Phys. 98, 011101 (2005). [CrossRef]

]. These surface waves exhibit useful properties, such as strong field enhancement and localization, large bulk sensitivities, and subwavelength confinement. During the past decade, researchers have exploited these properties finding numerous applications in fields such as spectroscopy [5

5. T. Neumann, M. Johansson, D. Kambhampati, and W. Knoll, “Surface-plasmon fluorescence spectroscopy,” Adv. Funct. Mater. 12, 575–586 (2002). [CrossRef]

], nanophotonics [6

6. E. Ozbay, “Plasmonics: Merging photonics and electronics at nanoscale dimensions,” Science 311, 189–193 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], imaging [7

7. S. Kawata, Y. Inouye, and P. Verma, “Plasmonics for near-field nano-imaging and superlensing,” Nature Photon. 3, 388–394 (2009). [CrossRef]

] and biosensing [8

8. J. N. Anker, W. P. Hall, O. Lyandres, N. C. Shah, J. Zhao, and R. P. Van Duyne, “Biosensing with plasmonic nanosensors,” Nature Mater. 7, 442–453 (2008). [CrossRef]

]. However, the performance of such applications is often degraded by the large propagation losses of SPPs at visible and near-infrared wavelengths that result mainly from power dissipation in the metal.

Considerable efforts have been devoted to investigate the amplification of SPPs [9

9. J. Seidel, S. Grafstrom, and L. Eng, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmons at the interface between a silver film and an optically pumped dye solution.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 177401 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]–[19

19. M. A. Noginov, G. Zhu, A. M. Belgrave, R. Bakker, V. M. Shalaev, E. E. Narimanov, S. Stout, E. Herz, T. Suteewong, and U. Wiesner, “Demonstration of a spaser-based nanolaser,” Nature 460, 1110–1113 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] aiming to mitigate or even eliminate their large intrinsic losses in order to enable applications that exploit the full potential of SPPs. A variety of active plasmonic structures have been recently studied, including planar structures [9

9. J. Seidel, S. Grafstrom, and L. Eng, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmons at the interface between a silver film and an optically pumped dye solution.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 177401 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]–[15

15. I. P. Radko, M. G. Nielsen, O. Albrektsen, and S. I. Bozhevolnyi, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmon polaritons by lead-sulphide quantum dots at near infra-red wavelengths.” Opt. Express. 18, 18633–18641 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], nanoresonators [16

16. M. T. Hill, Y.-S. Oei, B. Smalbrugge, Y. Zhu, T. D. Vries, P. J. V. Veldhoven, F. W. M. Van Otten, T. J. Eijkemans, J. P. Turkiewicz, H. D. Waardt, E. J. Geluk, S.-H. Kwon, Y.-H. Lee, R. Notzel, and M. K. Smit, “Lasing in metallic-coated nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 1, 589–594 (2007). [CrossRef]

, 17

17. R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, T. Zentgraf, R.-M. Ma, C. Gladden, L. Dai, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, “Plasmon lasers at deep subwavelength scale,” Nature 461, 629–632 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and nanoparticles [18

18. D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman, “Surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation: quantum generation of coherent surface plasmons in nanosystems.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 027402 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 19

19. M. A. Noginov, G. Zhu, A. M. Belgrave, R. Bakker, V. M. Shalaev, E. E. Narimanov, S. Stout, E. Herz, T. Suteewong, and U. Wiesner, “Demonstration of a spaser-based nanolaser,” Nature 460, 1110–1113 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] that incorporate gain media in the form of semiconductor nanowires, quantum dots and quantum wells, laser dyes in solution or in polymers, and erbium-doped glass. In such a vigorous research field, studying the noise characteristics of plasmonic amplifiers is an important task. Recently, Thylén and colleagues [20

20. L. Thylen, P. Holmstrom, A. Bratkovsky, J. Li, and S.-Y. Wang, “Limits on integration as determined by power dissipation and signal-to-noise ratio in loss-compensated photonic integrated circuits based on metal/quantum-dot materials,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 46, 518–524 (2010). [CrossRef]

] studied the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) degradation induced by signal amplification in plasmonic systems, and De Leon and Berini [21

21. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]

] measured the amplified spontaneous emission (ASE) in a long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifier at a near infrared wavelength finding an effective input noise power of 3.3 photons per mode.

In this paper, we present a theoretical and numerical study of the noise properties of high gain planar SPP amplifiers incorporating dipolar gain media. We consider two important planar structures, namely, a single interface between a metal and a gain medium, and a thin metal film bounded by identical gain media on both sides. A realistic configuration is considered where the SPP undergoing amplification has a Gaussian field profile in the plane of the metal and paraxial propagation along the amplifier’s length. This represents an experimental situation where a three-dimensional Gaussian beam is coupled at the input of these structures. An expression for the noise figure of these SPP amplifiers is obtained in terms of the spontaneous emission rate into the amplified SPP taking into account the different energy decay channels experienced by dipoles in close proximity to the metallic surface [22

22. R. R. Chance, A. Prock, and R. Silbey, “Molecular fluorescence and energy transfer near interfaces,” Adv. Chem. Phys. 37, 1–65 (1978). [CrossRef]

, 23

23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

]. The theory is applied to three variations of each structure considering silver as the metal region and three prototypical dipolar gain media that exhibit different permittivities.

2. Amplifier geometries

The two SPP amplifier geometries considered for our analysis are illustrated in cross-sectional view over the (x,y)-plane in Figs. 1(a) and (b). The first structure consists of a planar interface between a metal and a gain medium, and a the second one consists of a metal film of thickness tm bounded by identical gain media on both sides. The structures are invariant along the x-axis. The metal and gain medium are characterized by the relative permittivities ɛm = ɛm + iɛm and ɛg = ɛg + g respectively, where ɛm and ɛm are negative quantities and ɛg and ɛg are positive quantities (eiωt time-harmonic dependance implicit). The gain medium is dipolar (e.g., dye molecules, rare-earth ions, semiconductor quantum dots) and isotropic, with finite length along the z axis, bounded by passive regions for z < −la and z > 0 that define the amplifier’s input and output planes, respectively [see Fig. 1(c)]. The passive regions are taken to be identical to the active region except that the medium bounding the metal has ɛg = 0.

The single-interface structure supports SPPs with fields that peak at the interface and decay exponentially into both media [1

1. H. Raether, Surface Plasmons on Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer, Berlin, 1988).

]. Provided that tm is small enough, the metal-film structure supports SPP modes formed through symmetric or asymmetric coupling of single-interface SPPs on each surface of the film. The symmetric mode is termed the long-range SPP (LR-SPP) [2

2. P. Berini, “Long-range surface plasmon polaritons,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 1, 484–588 (2009). [CrossRef]

] as it exhibits a low propagation loss, whereas the asymmetric mode exhibits a large propagation loss and hence it is termed the short-range SPP (SRSPP). The large propagation loss of the SRSPP renders impractical its use for amplification purposes. Hence, in what follows we shall study only the noise properties of LRSPP and single-interface SPP amplifiers.

Both single-interface SPPs and LRSPPs can propagate freely over the (x,z)-plane. However, we shall restrict our analysis to paraxial SPP “beams” with Gaussian field distribution in the plane of the metal, to which we shall refer as Gaussian SPPs. Inspired by the arrangement proposed by Kogelnik and Yariv [24

24. H. Kogelnik and A. Yariv, “Considerations of noise and schemes for its reduction in laser amplifiers,” Proc. IEEE 52, 165–172 (1964). [CrossRef]

] in their analysis of noise in Gaussian photon amplifiers, we assume that the Gaussian SPP propagates in +z direction having it waist, w0, located at the amplifier’s output plane, as depicted in Fig. 1(c). Thus, the main electric field component of the Gaussian SPP in the amplifier region is given by
Ey,ι(x,y,z)=Ey,ι(y)q˜ι(z)exp{iκι[z+x22q˜ι(z)]}.
(1)
In this expression and throughout the manuscript, the subscript ι indicates the number of interfaces along the y axis of a particular structure and is employed to identify quantities associated with single-interface SPPs (ι = 1) and LRSPPs (ι = 2); Ey,ι (y) is the transverse electric field distribution along the y axis, whose magnitude is sketched on Figs. 1(a) and (b); κι = βι + ι/2 is the SPP complex propagation constant with βι and γι being the phase and mode power gain coefficients, respectively; and ι(z) = z + izR,ι is the complex beam parameter that defines the evolution of the Gaussian SPP along z, with zR,ι=βιw02/2 being the Rayleigh range.

In practice, the amplifier architectures described above can be realized (for example) by using an optically pumped dipolar gain medium with the amplifier region (−la < z < 0) defined by the optical pump extension [12

12. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Amplification of long-range surface plasmons by a dipolar gain medium,” Nature Photon. 4, 382–387 (2010). [CrossRef]

], and end-fire coupling a three-dimensional Gaussian beam to the input of the structure with its waist (focus) located at the amplifier output plane (z = 0).

3. Theoretical approach

The noise figure of an optical amplifier is defined as the ratio of the SNR measured at the input port to the SNR measured at the output port. For a single mode amplifier and for optical signals characterized by Poisson statistics (e.g., coherent light signals) it is given by [25

25. E. Desurvire, Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers (Wiley-Interscience, 1994).

]
NF=2nN+1G+nN(nN+1)G2n0,
(2)
where, G is the optical gain of the amplifier, nN is the mean ASE photon number at the output port, and n0 is the mean signal photon number at the input port. Each term in Eq. (2) can be traced back to a particular noise contribution. The first term is associated with the signal’s beat and shot noise, while the second term is associated with the ASE’s beat and shot noise.

For a high gain amplifier (G ≫ 1) with a large enough input signal such that Gn0nN, the noise characteristics are dominated by the signal’s beat noise term, 2nN/G. In this limit, the amplifier’s ASE output power takes the form [21

21. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]

] PN = Ahν0Gξγ−1, where h is Plank’s constant, ν0 is the optical frequency, ξ is the effective spontaneous emission rate per unit volume into the particular optical mode being amplified, and A is its effective transverse area. Then, using the relation nN = PN(Bν0)−1, with Bν being the optical detection bandwidth centred around ν0, the noise figure can be approximated as
NF2ξγABν.
(3)

For the structures in Fig. (1), the input SNR is degraded due to the SPP propagation losses in the passive section preceding the amplifier region, as well as additional losses caused by imperfect signal coupling into the structure. As a result, the amplifier’s noise figure is degraded. To account for this, the right hand side of Eq. (3) must be divided by the transmittance of the input passive section, T (0 ≤ T ≤ 1) [25

25. E. Desurvire, Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers (Wiley-Interscience, 1994).

]. Here, we shall use Eq. (3) to describe the minimum noise figure of these amplifiers in the limit where T → 1 (efficient signal coupling and low-loss passive section). The results can then be scaled by the factor 1/T to represent other cases.

Fig. 1 Amplifier geometries considered: cross-sectional view of (a) a single interface between a metal and a gain medium, and (b) a metal film of thickness tm bounded by identical gain media on both sides; (c) top view of either (a) or (b). The metal and the gain media are characterized by the complex permittivities ɛm and ɛg, respectively. The active structure consists of an amplifier region of length la, limited by passive regions for z < –la and z > 0. A Gaussian SPP propagates through the amplifier in the +z direction having its beam waist, w0, located at z = 0.

The remainder of this section is devoted to finding appropriate expressions for A and ξ in Eq. (3) to describe the noise figure of the SPP amplifiers under consideration. The analysis is restricted to single-mode amplifiers with high gain. The high-gain restriction, G ≫ 1, is in principle feasible for both amplifier architectures considered here [26

26. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Modeling surface plasmon-polariton gain in planar metallic structures,” Opt. Express 17, 20191–2020 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The single mode restriction is certainly satisfied for the single-interface SPP amplifier, as only one bound mode is supported by the structure; it is also satisfied to a very good approximation for the LRSPP amplifier because the SRSPP is rapidly (in a short length) absorbed by the metal.

3.1. Effective mode area

The effective mode area is the equivalent transverse area of the mode assuming a constant field distribution over the transverse plane. Different definitions of effective mode area exist (see for example Ref. [27

27. R. F. Oulton, G. Bartal, D. F. P. Pile, and X. Zhang, “Confinement and propagation characteristics of subwave-length plasmonic modes,” New J. Phys. 10, 105018 (2008). [CrossRef]

] and references therein) because the choice of the constant field value is not unique. Here, we adopt the commonly used statistical measure [28

28. A. E. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, California, 1986).

]
Aι=[Iι(x,y)dxdy]2[Iι(x,y)]2dxdy,
(4)
where
Iι(x,y)|Ey,ι(x,y,z=0)|2=|Ey,ι(y)|2exp(βιzR,ιx2)
(5)
is the transverse mode intensity distribution at the output plane of the amplifier, and the integrals in Eq. (4) run over the entire (x,y) plane. Since both the single-interface SPP and the LRSPP have a very small fraction of their fields inside the metal, one can approximate Ey,ι (y) in Eq. (5) simply by the evanescent field in the gain region(s), which upon substitution in Eq. (4) yields
Aι=ιδιπw02,
(6)
with δι being the e−1 field penetration depth into the gain medium

3.2. Effective spontaneous emission rate per unit volume

We regard the gain medium as an ensemble of isotropically oriented dipoles in an excited state. Dipoles located far from the metal surface relax through spontaneous emission into bulk modes; however, those located close to the metal surface experience additional energy decay channels, such as spontaneous emission into SPPs and radiative modes of the structure, and non-radiative energy transfer to electron-hole pairs in the metal [29

29. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Theory of surface plasmon-polariton amplification in planar structures incorporating dipolar gain media,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 161401(R) (2008). [CrossRef]

]. We are interested in the spontaneous emission into SPPs in order to describe the amplifier’s noise. To this end, we describe the radiative properties of individual dipoles close to the metal surface following the well-known Chance-Prock-Silbey model [22

22. R. R. Chance, A. Prock, and R. Silbey, “Molecular fluorescence and energy transfer near interfaces,” Adv. Chem. Phys. 37, 1–65 (1978). [CrossRef]

] as reformulated by Ford and Weber [23

23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

]. This aspect of the present theory has reproduced measured results on a LRSPP amplifier with reasonable agreement [21

21. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]

].

For a dipole located at a distance y0 from the metal surface, the spontaneous emission rate into SPPs with arbitrary propagation directions can be written as (see Appendix A.1)
Γι(y0)=Γ0ReuιduS(u,y0).
(7)
Here, Γ0 is the dipole’s spontaneous emission rate in the bulk (no metal present), S(u,y) is the dipole’s power dissipation density normalized to its total dissipation in the bulk, and u is the in-plane wave-vector normalized to the dipole’s far-field wavenumber. The integral runs over the range of wave-vectors, uι, associated with the single-interface SPP (ι = 1) or LRSPP (ι = 2). Averaging Eq. (7) over dipole positions yields the effective spontaneous emission rate:
Γι=Γ0ιδιgdyReuιduS(u,y0),
(8)
where the integration range g is taken over the entire gain medium (or media).

The excited state dipole density is also a position dependent quantity, as it is inversely proportional to the total spontaneous emission rate (in general it also depends on the pump intensity distribution [29

29. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Theory of surface plasmon-polariton amplification in planar structures incorporating dipolar gain media,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 161401(R) (2008). [CrossRef]

] which is assumed uniform here). It is then convenient to define an effective excited state density in terms of the mode power gain coefficient as
Nι=γι+αισe(ν0)=2βg2g(ν0)Γ0π(γι+αι),
(9)
where αι is the mode power attenuation coefficient characterizing the optical losses of the structure (e.g., absorption in the metal, scattering loss and ground-state absorption of dipoles) such that the term (γι + αι) represents the material gain of the gain medium, σe is the dipole’s emission cross-section, g(ν) is the dipole’s emission linewidth, and βg=2πɛg/λ0 is the wavenumber in the gain medium, with λ0 being the wavelength in vacuum. In defining Eq. (9) we have implicitly assumed that the gain medium is a four-level system and that σe is not affected by the presence of the metal surface.

It follows that over a narrow optical bandwidth Bν centred around ν0, such that Bνg(ν) ≈ Bνg(ν0), the total spontaneous emission rate per unit volume into the Gaussian SPP can be written as [21

21. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]

]
ξι=g(ν0)BνNιΓιFι,
(10)
where Fι = θι/π is the geometrical spontaneous emission factor, with θι = 2(w0βι)−1. This factor is included to account only for the spontaneous emission with in-plane wave-vectors falling within the convergence angle of the Gaussian SPP in the propagation direction [see Fig. 1(c)].

3.3. Noise figure of a high-gain SPP amplifier

An expression for the noise figure of the SPP amplifiers considered here is obtained by using Eqs. (6) to (10) into (3), yielding
NFι=2KιηιgdyReuιduS(u,y),
(11)
where Kι=4βg2/(π3/2βι) and ηι = γι/(γι + αι) is the amplifier quantum efficiency [30

30. C. H. Henry, “Theory of spontaneous emission noise in open resonators and its application to lasers and optical amplifiers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 4, 288–297 (1986). [CrossRef]

], namely, the ratio of stimulated emission not dissipated to the total stimulated emission. For the LRSPP amplifier, this equation must be solved numerically. However, for the single-interface SPP amplifier, one can obtain a simple analytical expression (see Appendix A.2) given by
NFι=4η1π(ɛmɛg+ɛm)3/2.
(12)
In deriving this result we have assumed that |ɛm| ≫ |ɛm|, |ɛm| > ɛg and ɛm < 0, which is generally the case for metals at visible and near infrared wavelengths.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Single-interface SPP amplifier

As indicated previously, the noise figure of the single-interface SPP amplifier can be obtained numerically and analytically. Figure 2(a) shows the values of NF1 as a function of the wavelength calculated analytically using Eq. (12) (dashed curves) and by solving numerically Eq. (11) (markers). For the latter, the integration limits with respect to u are obtained as the full-width at first minima of the pole in S(u,y) associated with the single-interface SPP. We observe a very good agreement between the two results.

Fig. 2 High gain noise figure (a,c) and normalized spontaneous emission rates in logarithmic scale (b,d) as a function of the wavelength, calculated for the two SPP amplifiers in Fig. 1 using silver (Drude model) as the metal and three gain media exhibiting different ɛg. The vertical dashed lines in (a,c) indicate the location of the SPP energy asymptote for the case ɛg = 13.8. The horizontal dashed lines in (a,c) mark the noise figure value of 4/π. ηι = 1 is assumed for all calculations. NF1, 〈Γ1〉: single-interface SPP. NF2, 〈Γ2〉: LRSPP.

Clearly, NF1 depends strongly on the material permittivities and operation wavelength. From Eq. (12) we note that the noise figure reaches a minimum value of NF1=4/π2.25 when |ɛm| ≫ ɛg and η1 = 1. This is observed in Fig. 2(a), as NF1 approaches such a minimum value (indicated by the horizontal dashed line) at infrared wavelengths because ɛm acquires a large magnitude (∼ 100) in this range. The condition |ɛm| ≫ ɛg is more demanding for a gain medium with a large permittivity; hence, a noise figure degradation is observed as ɛg increases. Also, from Eq. (12) we note that NF1 = ∞ when ɛg = ɛm, which occurs at the energy asymptote of the SPP dispersion curve. This is observed in Fig. 2(a) for the case ɛg = 13.8, as NF1 increases sharply for wavelengths approaching the energy asymptote (indicated by the vertical dashed line). A similar trend is observed at shorter wavelengths for the cases with lower ɛg, for which the energy asymptote occurs at shorter wavelengths outside the simulation range.

It is worth mentioning that SPPs at wavelengths close to the energy asymptote suffer from extremely large propagation losses; thus, achieving a high gain with such SPPs is very challenging.

The noise figure degradation observed for increasing values of ɛg and for wavelengths approaching the energy asymptote follows from the Purcell effect [32

32. A. Hryciw, Y. Jun, and M. Brongersma, “Plasmon-enhanced emission from optically-doped MOS light sources,” Opt. Express 17, 185–192 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], as the spontaneous emission rate is enhanced due to an increased confinement of the SPP. This is shown in Fig. 2(b), which plots the normalized spontaneous emission rate into single-interface SPPs as a function of the wavelength for the three gain media. Clearly, the rate increases with increasing ɛg. In particular for ɛg = 13.8, the spontaneous emission rate is enhanced by more than an order of magnitude in the visible wavelength region relative to that in the other two cases.

4.2. LRSPP amplifier

Figure 2(c) shows the calculated values of NF2 as a function of the wavelength for a silver film of thickness tm = 20 nm. We note that for long wavelengths, NF2 approaches the same minimum value as that of NF1. However, in this case, the overall noise figure spectrum is significantly improved with respect to NF1. In particular, for the two cases with smaller ɛg, NF2 is weakly dependent on the wavelength and close to the minimum value over the visible and infrared range. On the other hand, for ɛg = 13.8, NF2 presents a slight increment over the infrared region as the wavelength shortens and increases sharply for wavelengths approaching the energy asymptote, as it was also observed for NF1. The comparatively small noise figure of the LRSPP amplifier is a direct consequence of a smaller spontaneous emission rate into LRSPPs, as indicated by the results in Figure 2(d), which plots the normalized spontaneous emission rate into LRSPPs as a function of the wavelength for the three different gain media.

Fig. 3 (a) High gain noise figure of the LRSPP amplifier as a function of the wavelength and for several values of tm. NF1 is also shown for reference. (b) The values of fa and − fb in Eq. (13) plotted as a function of the wavelength and for several values of tm. ηι = 1 and ɛg = 2.25 are assumed for all calculations.

4.3. Minimum noise figure

It can be shown that a high-gain Gaussian photon amplifier (i.e., a Gaussian beam propagating through a bulk gain medium) with unitary amplifier quantum efficiency has a noise figure of NF0 = 2 (3 dB), and that such a value corresponds to the theoretical minimum for high-gain phase-insensitive photon amplifiers [25

25. E. Desurvire, Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers (Wiley-Interscience, 1994).

]. On the other hand, the Gaussian SPP amplifiers studied here have a minimum noise figure of 4/π(3.53dB). To understand this difference we consider a Gaussian photon amplifier and a Gaussian SPP amplifier, both having a unitary amplifier quantum efficiency, identical gain media, and the same optical bandwidth. From the theory in Section 3 (with proper adaptations for the photon amplifier case) one obtains an expression for NFι normalized to NF0, given by
(NFιNF0)dB=(ΓιΓ0/2)dBfa+(FιAιF0A0)dBfb,
(13)
where (·)dB = 10log10(·) Γ0/; 2, A0=w02π and F0 = (w0βg)−2 are parameters of the Gaussian photon amplifier, namely, the spontaneous emission rate (generated into one polarization state only), the effective mode area at the beam waist, and the geometrical spontaneous emission factor, respectively.

The first term on the right hand side of Eq. (13), fa, relates the rates of spontaneous emission noise (emitted in all directions) in the SPP and photon amplifiers; the second term, fb, relates their ability to couple such noise into the amplified mode. Figure 3(b) plots fa and − fb for different values of tm assuming ɛg = 2.25. Consider the results in the visible wavelength range. We note that when tm is very small (ι = 2), fa is also very small (〈Γ2〉 ≪ Γ0/2) because the density of LRSPP modes is small; however, fb is very large (F2A2F0A0) because A2 → ∞ as tm → 0. On the other hand, when tm = ∞ (ι = 1), fa is very large because the density of SPP modes is large, while fb is small because the SPP is well confined, causing A1A0. A gradual transition between these two cases is observed as tm increases. Nonetheless, (NFι/NF0)dB is always positive across the spectrum with values that depend strongly on tm at short wavelengths and remain essentially constant (∼ 0.53 dB) at long wavelengths. From this analysis, we observe that the minimum noise figure of these Gaussian SPP amplifiers results from the interplay between the noise generated into SPPs propagating in all directions, given by 〈Γι〉, and the coupling efficiency of such noise into the Gaussian SPP, given by the product FιAι.

It is important to mention that fa is fundamental, as it depends only on the physical properties of the dipole ensemble and metallic structure. This is not the case for fb, as it depends partly on the properties of the Gaussian SPP, such as the relation between the divergence angle and the beam waist. Thus the minimum noise figure of 4/π may not be a fundamental limit.

5. Summary

In summary, we have presented a theoretical analysis of noise in high-gain single-mode SPP amplifiers incorporating a dipolar gain medium. Two active plasmonic structures were examined: an interface between a metal and a gain medium supporting the single-interface SPP, and a thin metal film bounded by identical gain media on both sides supporting the LRSPP. A realistic configuration was considered where the SPP undergoing amplification has a Gaussian field profile in the plane of the metal and paraxial propagation along the amplifier’s length (Gaussian SPP). An expression for the noise figure was obtained in terms of the spontaneous emission rate into the Gaussian SPP taking into account the different energy decay channels experienced by dipoles in close proximity to the metallic surface. It was shown that the noise figure of these amplifiers exhibits a strong dependance on the real part of the permittivities of the metal (ɛm) and gain medium (ɛg) and that the figure is degraded in amplifiers with large ɛg. From an analytical expression derived for the noise figure of the single-interface SPP amplifier, it was shown that the noise figure diverges at the SPP energy asymptote (ɛm = ɛg) and that in the high-gain limit it approaches a minimum value of 4/π(3.35dB) when |ɛm| ≫ ɛg. Numerical calculations indicated that these extrema apply also to the LRSPP amplifier; however, the noise figure in this case is significantly smaller than that of the single-interface SPP amplifier over the same wavelength range. The origin of the minimum noise figure of these SPP amplifiers was discussed, showing that it results from the interplay between the rate of spontaneous emission noise into SPPs and the coupling efficiency of such noise into the Gaussian SPP.

A.Appendix

A.1. Spontaneous emission rate for a dipole over a metal surface

The total power dissipated by an isotropically oriented dipole located at a distance y0 from the metal plane is given by [23

23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

]
(y0)=Γ0hν0Re0duS(u,y0).
(A.1)
where
S(u,y0)=u21u2[u2RTM+(u,y0)+(1u2)RTM(u,y0)+RTE+(u,y0)]
(A.2)
is the dipoles’s power dissipation density normalized to the total power dissipated by the dipole far away from the metal surface, with RTE,TM±(u,y0)=1±rTE,TMexp(i2y0βg1u2), and with (rTE and rTM being the Fresnel reflection coefficients for transverse-electric polarized waves (electric field parallel to the metal surface) and transverse-magnetic polarized waves (magnetic field parallel to the metal surface), respectively. The remaining parameters in Eqs. (A.1) and (A.2) are defined in the main text. The power dissipated into a particular SPP (propagating in arbitrary directions) can then be obtained by integrating Eq. (A.2) over the range of normalized in-plane wave-vectors, uι, associated with the SPP [23

23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

]. Thus, one can represent the dipole’s spontaneous emission rate into a particular SPP (ι = 1,2) as
Γι(y0)=ι(y0)hν0=Γ0ReuιduS(u,y0).
(A.3)

A.2. Analytical expression for NF1

The power dissipated by an isotropically oriented dipole located at a distance y0 from the metal surface into single-interface SPPs can be obtained analytically as [23

23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

]
1(y0)=Γ0hν0Re[π(κ1/β0)5(ɛg)2(ɛm)1/2exp(2κ1y0ɛg/ɛm)],
(A.4.)
where κ1 = β0[ɛgɛm/(ɛg + ɛm)]1/2 is the SPP complex propagation constant, with β0 = 2π/λ0. It follows from Eq. (A.3) that
Reu1duS(u,y0)=π(β1/β0)5(ɛg)2(ɛm)1/2exp(2β1y0ɛg/ɛm)+O(ɛm),
(A.5)
where β1 = β0[ɛgɛm/(ɛg + ɛm)]1/2 is the SPP phase coefficient. In deriving Eq.(A.5) we have used a Taylor expansion to obtain the real part in Eq. (A.4), assuming that |ɛm| ≫ |ɛm|, |ɛm| > ɛg and ɛm < 0, as this is generally true for metals at visible and near infrared wavelengths. Then, neglecting the term O(ɛm) in Eq. (A.5) because it is small, and performing a straightforward integration over the space coordinate yields
0dyReu1duS(u,y)λ04ɛgɛm2(ɛg+ɛm)2.
(A.6)
Using this result and the expression for β1 into Eq. (11) yields Eq. (12).

References and links

1.

H. Raether, Surface Plasmons on Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer, Berlin, 1988).

2.

P. Berini, “Long-range surface plasmon polaritons,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 1, 484–588 (2009). [CrossRef]

3.

W. L. Barnes, A. Dereux, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Surface plasmon subwavelength optics,” Nature 424, 824–830 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

S. Maier and H. Atwater, “Plasmonics: Localization and guiding of electromagnetic energy in metal/dielectric structures,” J. Appl. Phys. 98, 011101 (2005). [CrossRef]

5.

T. Neumann, M. Johansson, D. Kambhampati, and W. Knoll, “Surface-plasmon fluorescence spectroscopy,” Adv. Funct. Mater. 12, 575–586 (2002). [CrossRef]

6.

E. Ozbay, “Plasmonics: Merging photonics and electronics at nanoscale dimensions,” Science 311, 189–193 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

S. Kawata, Y. Inouye, and P. Verma, “Plasmonics for near-field nano-imaging and superlensing,” Nature Photon. 3, 388–394 (2009). [CrossRef]

8.

J. N. Anker, W. P. Hall, O. Lyandres, N. C. Shah, J. Zhao, and R. P. Van Duyne, “Biosensing with plasmonic nanosensors,” Nature Mater. 7, 442–453 (2008). [CrossRef]

9.

J. Seidel, S. Grafstrom, and L. Eng, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmons at the interface between a silver film and an optically pumped dye solution.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 177401 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

10.

M. Ambati, S. H. Nam, E. Ulin-Avila, D. A. Genov, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, “Observation of stimulated emission of surface plasmon polaritons,” Nano Lett. 8, 3998–4001 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

J. Grandidier, G. Colas des Francs, S. Massenot, A. Bouhelier, L. Markey, J.-C. Weeber, C. Finot, and A. Dereux, “Gain-assisted propagation in a plasmonic waveguide at telecom wavelength,” Nano Lett. 9, 2935–2939 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12.

I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Amplification of long-range surface plasmons by a dipolar gain medium,” Nature Photon. 4, 382–387 (2010). [CrossRef]

13.

M. C. Gather, K. Meerholz, N. Danz, and K. Leosson, “Net optical gain in a plasmonic waveguide embedded in a fluorescent polymer.” Nature Photon. 4, 457–461 (2010). [CrossRef]

14.

P. M. Bolger, W. Dickson, A. V. Krasavin, L. Liebscher, S. G. Hickey, D. V. Skryabin, and A. V. Zayats, “Amplified spontaneous emission of surface plasmon polaritons and limitations on the increase of their propagation length,” Opt. Lett. 35, 1197–1199 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

I. P. Radko, M. G. Nielsen, O. Albrektsen, and S. I. Bozhevolnyi, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmon polaritons by lead-sulphide quantum dots at near infra-red wavelengths.” Opt. Express. 18, 18633–18641 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

M. T. Hill, Y.-S. Oei, B. Smalbrugge, Y. Zhu, T. D. Vries, P. J. V. Veldhoven, F. W. M. Van Otten, T. J. Eijkemans, J. P. Turkiewicz, H. D. Waardt, E. J. Geluk, S.-H. Kwon, Y.-H. Lee, R. Notzel, and M. K. Smit, “Lasing in metallic-coated nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 1, 589–594 (2007). [CrossRef]

17.

R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, T. Zentgraf, R.-M. Ma, C. Gladden, L. Dai, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, “Plasmon lasers at deep subwavelength scale,” Nature 461, 629–632 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman, “Surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation: quantum generation of coherent surface plasmons in nanosystems.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 027402 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

19.

M. A. Noginov, G. Zhu, A. M. Belgrave, R. Bakker, V. M. Shalaev, E. E. Narimanov, S. Stout, E. Herz, T. Suteewong, and U. Wiesner, “Demonstration of a spaser-based nanolaser,” Nature 460, 1110–1113 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20.

L. Thylen, P. Holmstrom, A. Bratkovsky, J. Li, and S.-Y. Wang, “Limits on integration as determined by power dissipation and signal-to-noise ratio in loss-compensated photonic integrated circuits based on metal/quantum-dot materials,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 46, 518–524 (2010). [CrossRef]

21.

I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]

22.

R. R. Chance, A. Prock, and R. Silbey, “Molecular fluorescence and energy transfer near interfaces,” Adv. Chem. Phys. 37, 1–65 (1978). [CrossRef]

23.

G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]

24.

H. Kogelnik and A. Yariv, “Considerations of noise and schemes for its reduction in laser amplifiers,” Proc. IEEE 52, 165–172 (1964). [CrossRef]

25.

E. Desurvire, Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers (Wiley-Interscience, 1994).

26.

I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Modeling surface plasmon-polariton gain in planar metallic structures,” Opt. Express 17, 20191–2020 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

R. F. Oulton, G. Bartal, D. F. P. Pile, and X. Zhang, “Confinement and propagation characteristics of subwave-length plasmonic modes,” New J. Phys. 10, 105018 (2008). [CrossRef]

28.

A. E. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, California, 1986).

29.

I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Theory of surface plasmon-polariton amplification in planar structures incorporating dipolar gain media,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 161401(R) (2008). [CrossRef]

30.

C. H. Henry, “Theory of spontaneous emission noise in open resonators and its application to lasers and optical amplifiers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 4, 288–297 (1986). [CrossRef]

31.

W. L. Barnes, “Electromagnetic crystals for surface plasmon polaritons and the extraction of light from emissive devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 17, 2170–2182 (1999). [CrossRef]

32.

A. Hryciw, Y. Jun, and M. Brongersma, “Plasmon-enhanced emission from optically-doped MOS light sources,” Opt. Express 17, 185–192 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

33.

M. Nezhad, K. Tetz, and Y. Fainman, “Gain assisted propagation of surface plasmon polaritons on planar metallic waveguides,” Opt. Express 12, 4072–4079 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

34.

C. Chen, P. Berini, D. Feng, S. Tanev, and V. P. Tzolov, “Efficient and accurate numerical analysis of multilayer planar optical waveguides in lossy anisotropic media,” Opt. Express 7, 260–272 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(130.2790) Integrated optics : Guided waves
(140.4480) Lasers and laser optics : Optical amplifiers
(240.6680) Optics at surfaces : Surface plasmons
(260.3910) Physical optics : Metal optics

ToC Category:
Optics at Surfaces

History
Original Manuscript: July 25, 2011
Revised Manuscript: September 3, 2011
Manuscript Accepted: September 3, 2011
Published: October 3, 2011

Citation
Israel De Leon and Pierre Berini, "Theory of noise in high-gain surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers incorporating dipolar gain media," Opt. Express 19, 20506-20517 (2011)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-19-21-20506


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. H. Raether, Surface Plasmons on Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer, Berlin, 1988).
  2. P. Berini, “Long-range surface plasmon polaritons,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 1, 484–588 (2009). [CrossRef]
  3. W. L. Barnes, A. Dereux, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Surface plasmon subwavelength optics,” Nature 424, 824–830 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. S. Maier and H. Atwater, “Plasmonics: Localization and guiding of electromagnetic energy in metal/dielectric structures,” J. Appl. Phys. 98, 011101 (2005). [CrossRef]
  5. T. Neumann, M. Johansson, D. Kambhampati, and W. Knoll, “Surface-plasmon fluorescence spectroscopy,” Adv. Funct. Mater. 12, 575–586 (2002). [CrossRef]
  6. E. Ozbay, “Plasmonics: Merging photonics and electronics at nanoscale dimensions,” Science 311, 189–193 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. S. Kawata, Y. Inouye, and P. Verma, “Plasmonics for near-field nano-imaging and superlensing,” Nature Photon. 3, 388–394 (2009). [CrossRef]
  8. J. N. Anker, W. P. Hall, O. Lyandres, N. C. Shah, J. Zhao, and R. P. Van Duyne, “Biosensing with plasmonic nanosensors,” Nature Mater. 7, 442–453 (2008). [CrossRef]
  9. J. Seidel, S. Grafstrom, and L. Eng, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmons at the interface between a silver film and an optically pumped dye solution.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 177401 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. M. Ambati, S. H. Nam, E. Ulin-Avila, D. A. Genov, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, “Observation of stimulated emission of surface plasmon polaritons,” Nano Lett. 8, 3998–4001 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. J. Grandidier, G. Colas des Francs, S. Massenot, A. Bouhelier, L. Markey, J.-C. Weeber, C. Finot, and A. Dereux, “Gain-assisted propagation in a plasmonic waveguide at telecom wavelength,” Nano Lett. 9, 2935–2939 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Amplification of long-range surface plasmons by a dipolar gain medium,” Nature Photon. 4, 382–387 (2010). [CrossRef]
  13. M. C. Gather, K. Meerholz, N. Danz, and K. Leosson, “Net optical gain in a plasmonic waveguide embedded in a fluorescent polymer.” Nature Photon. 4, 457–461 (2010). [CrossRef]
  14. P. M. Bolger, W. Dickson, A. V. Krasavin, L. Liebscher, S. G. Hickey, D. V. Skryabin, and A. V. Zayats, “Amplified spontaneous emission of surface plasmon polaritons and limitations on the increase of their propagation length,” Opt. Lett. 35, 1197–1199 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. I. P. Radko, M. G. Nielsen, O. Albrektsen, and S. I. Bozhevolnyi, “Stimulated emission of surface plasmon polaritons by lead-sulphide quantum dots at near infra-red wavelengths.” Opt. Express. 18, 18633–18641 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. M. T. Hill, Y.-S. Oei, B. Smalbrugge, Y. Zhu, T. D. Vries, P. J. V. Veldhoven, F. W. M. Van Otten, T. J. Eijkemans, J. P. Turkiewicz, H. D. Waardt, E. J. Geluk, S.-H. Kwon, Y.-H. Lee, R. Notzel, and M. K. Smit, “Lasing in metallic-coated nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 1, 589–594 (2007). [CrossRef]
  17. R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, T. Zentgraf, R.-M. Ma, C. Gladden, L. Dai, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang, “Plasmon lasers at deep subwavelength scale,” Nature 461, 629–632 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman, “Surface plasmon amplification by stimulated emission of radiation: quantum generation of coherent surface plasmons in nanosystems.” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 027402 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. M. A. Noginov, G. Zhu, A. M. Belgrave, R. Bakker, V. M. Shalaev, E. E. Narimanov, S. Stout, E. Herz, T. Suteewong, and U. Wiesner, “Demonstration of a spaser-based nanolaser,” Nature 460, 1110–1113 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. L. Thylen, P. Holmstrom, A. Bratkovsky, J. Li, and S.-Y. Wang, “Limits on integration as determined by power dissipation and signal-to-noise ratio in loss-compensated photonic integrated circuits based on metal/quantum-dot materials,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 46, 518–524 (2010). [CrossRef]
  21. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Spontaneous emission in long-range surface plasmon-polariton amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. B 83, 081414(R) (2011). [CrossRef]
  22. R. R. Chance, A. Prock, and R. Silbey, “Molecular fluorescence and energy transfer near interfaces,” Adv. Chem. Phys. 37, 1–65 (1978). [CrossRef]
  23. G. W. Ford and W. H. Weber, “Electromagnetic interactions of molecules with metal surfaces.” Phys. Rep. 113, 195–287 (1984). [CrossRef]
  24. H. Kogelnik and A. Yariv, “Considerations of noise and schemes for its reduction in laser amplifiers,” Proc. IEEE 52, 165–172 (1964). [CrossRef]
  25. E. Desurvire, Erbium Doped Fiber Amplifiers (Wiley-Interscience, 1994).
  26. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Modeling surface plasmon-polariton gain in planar metallic structures,” Opt. Express 17, 20191–2020 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. R. F. Oulton, G. Bartal, D. F. P. Pile, and X. Zhang, “Confinement and propagation characteristics of subwave-length plasmonic modes,” New J. Phys. 10, 105018 (2008). [CrossRef]
  28. A. E. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, California, 1986).
  29. I. De Leon and P. Berini, “Theory of surface plasmon-polariton amplification in planar structures incorporating dipolar gain media,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 161401(R) (2008). [CrossRef]
  30. C. H. Henry, “Theory of spontaneous emission noise in open resonators and its application to lasers and optical amplifiers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 4, 288–297 (1986). [CrossRef]
  31. W. L. Barnes, “Electromagnetic crystals for surface plasmon polaritons and the extraction of light from emissive devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 17, 2170–2182 (1999). [CrossRef]
  32. A. Hryciw, Y. Jun, and M. Brongersma, “Plasmon-enhanced emission from optically-doped MOS light sources,” Opt. Express 17, 185–192 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. M. Nezhad, K. Tetz, and Y. Fainman, “Gain assisted propagation of surface plasmon polaritons on planar metallic waveguides,” Opt. Express 12, 4072–4079 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. C. Chen, P. Berini, D. Feng, S. Tanev, and V. P. Tzolov, “Efficient and accurate numerical analysis of multilayer planar optical waveguides in lossy anisotropic media,” Opt. Express 7, 260–272 (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited