Abstract

We analyze transmission characteristics of two coupled identical cavities, of either standing-wave (SW) or traveling-wave (TW) type, based on temporal coupled mode theory. Mode splitting is observed for both directly (cavity-cavity) and indirectly (cavity-waveguide-cavity) coupled cavity systems. The effects of direct and indirect couplings, if coexisting in one system, can offset each other such that no mode splitting occurs and the original single-cavity resonant frequency is retained. By tuning the configuration of the coupled cavity system, one can obtain different characteristics in transmission spectra, including splitting in transmission, zero transmission, Fano-type transmission, electromagnetically-induced-transparency (EIT)-like transmission, and electromagnetically-induced-absorption (EIA)-like transmission. It is also interesting to notice that a side-coupled SW cavity system performs similarly to an under-coupled TW cavity. The results are useful for the design of cavity-based devices for integration in nanophotonics.

©2010 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

The optical cavity has been a subject of great interest as it is a vital functional building block for filtering, modulating, buffering, and switching for integrated optical processing in nanophotonics [1-4]. Optical cavities can also be applied in the field of quantum information processing [5], optomechanics [6], sensing [7], etc. Generally speaking, optical cavities can be categorized into two groups: standing-wave (SW) cavities and traveling-wave (TW) cavities. Both types of cavities have been researched extensively. The photonic crystal cavity, distributed feed-back cavity are considered as SW cavities while the ring cavity is a typical example of a TW cavity. Interaction between a single optical cavity and a waveguide has been theoretically studied based on the temporal coupled mode theory (CMT) in Refs.[8-12]. When two or more coupled identical cavity modes exist in a system, mode splitting will naturally occur. Previous study on mode splitting in such systems was however restricted to the directly (cavity-cavity) coupled TW cavity mode for add-drop filter application [13]. SW cavity systems or systems with other types of inter-cavity coupling mechanisms are not studied. In this paper, we systematically analyze mode splittings and transmission characteristics for both directly and indirectly (cavity-waveguide-cavity) coupled cavity systems. The cavities are of either SW or TW type. Altogether we treat coupled SW cavity systems with up to ten different configurations as well as coupled TW cavities with six different configurations using CMT. The transmission amplitude, phase and corresponding group delay are considered in all the configurations. It will be shown that both direct and indirect coupling can lead to mode-splitting, and a coupled SW cavity system and a coupled TW cavity system can have the same characteristics in some cases. A coupling quality factor Qc is introduced to characterize the direct coupling between two cavity modes, which is more convenient to analyze the behavior of cavity system compared with the conventional matrix approach. The coupling between two cavity modes through waveguide is treated as indirect coupling. The mode-splitting resulted from the coupling between cavity modes can lead to different transmission spectra, including splitting in the transmission, zero transmission, Fano-transmission, electromagnetically-induced-transmission (EIT)-like transmission [14-16] and electromagnetically-induced-absorption(EIA)-like transmission. The mode splitting can also affect the phase characteristics of the transmission and lead to different dispersion features. Among our findings, it is interesting to notice that a side-coupled SW cavity system can perform the same functions as an under-coupled TW cavity system.

It is meaningful to point out that mode splitting can also occur in a single TW-cavity system by introducing structural perturbations on the cavity [17, 18]. This is however not within the scope of our study.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 gives a detailed analysis of a single SW and TW cavities, which forms the basis for our later discussions. Section 3 analyzes the mode-splitting characteristics of two directly coupled cavity modes. Both symmetrical and asymmetrical waveguide coupling configurations are considered in this section. Section 4 analyzes the mode-splitting characteristics of two indirectly coupled cavity modes. Section 5 presents our findings on two cavity mode with both direct and indirect coupling. Conclusion is given in Section 6.

2. Single SW and TW cavities

In CMT, an overall system is described in terms of a set of weakly coupled components, each of which can be analyzed using general principles [19]. A cavity, for example, is treated as an oscillator in time. For a SW cavity coupled to a waveguide, its cavity mode decays equally into the forward and backward propagating waveguide mode; while for a TW cavity, the cavity mode decays in only one direction due to momentum matching. For characterizing a cavity, we define the following parameters : ω0 (λ0) is the resonant frequency (wavelength); a is the cavity mode amplitude; si/st/sr/sd are the incident/transmitted/reflected/dropped waveguide mode amplitudes, which are normalized such that their squared values correspond to incident/transmitted/reflected/dropped power; 1/τi and 1/τw are decay rates due to intrinsic loss and waveguide coupling loss, respectively; Qi and Qw are cavity quality factors related to intrinsic loss and waveguide coupling loss, respectively; Qt is total quality factor (1/Qt =1/Qi + 1 / Qw). Note that in this paper, Qw denotes the cavity-waveguide coupling and is referred to as “waveguide coupling quality factor”, whereas Qc represents the cavity-cavity and is referred to as “cavity coupling quality factor”. The decay rates are related to the cavity quality factors by Qi = ω0τi/2 and Qw = ω0τw/2. We use δ to normalize the frequency ω, which is defined by δ = (ω - ω0)/ω0, and t(= st/si), r(= sr/si), d(= sd/si) to denote transfer functions for transmitted port, reflected port and dropped port, respectively.

 figure: Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Schematics of single cavities. (a) and (b) are SW cavities with side-coupling and shoulder-coupling configuration denoted as S1 and S2, respectively. (c) is a TW cavity denoted as T1.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Figure 1 gives the schematics of a single cavity. In this paper, we use a disk and a ring to denote a SW and a TW cavity, respectively. For SW cavities, two different waveguide coupling configurations are considered, including the side-coupling configuration (Fig. 1(a)) and the shoulder-coupling configuration (Fig. 1(b)). Since Qw denotes the total waveguide coupling quality factor for the mode considered in this paper, it is related to τw by Qw = ω0τw for the S2 configuration in Fig. 1(b)(and also for S4, S7, S9, T4 and T6 in the following discussions). Without loss of generality, we assume the cavity mode is symmetric about the vertical mirror plane perpendicular to the waveguide for S1. For the other systems mentioned in this paper, similar assumptions are made to ensure that all waveguide coupling coefficients are the same. According to CMT [11, 12, 20], the transfer functions at the transmitted ports of S1, S2 and T1, denoted by tS1, tS2 and tT1, are given in Table 1. For other ports, we can use the relations rS1 = - tS2 and rS2 = - tS1. Therefore the transfer functions for the transmitted ports of S1 and S2 are identical to those for the reflected ports of S2 and S1, respectively, except with a π phase shift. The transmission T, effective phase shift θ and group delay τ can be calculated as T = abs(t)2, θ = arg(t) and τ = (ω)/, respectively; their values at resonance are also given in Table 1.

Tables Icon

Table 1. Comparisons between single SW and TW cavities.

 figure: Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Transmission, phase shift and group delay of single SW and TW cavity. For S1 and S2, Qi=16×104, Qw=2×104. For over-coupled T1, Qi=4×104, Qw=3.2×104. For under-coupled T1, Qw=4×104, Qi=3.2×104. We assume λ0=1550 nm here and in the following figures.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

From the Table 1 and Fig. 2, we can draw the following conclusions:

  1. When Qi-over-T1 = Qw-under-T1 = 2Qw-S1 and 1/Qw-over-T1 = 1/Qi-under-T2 = 1/Qi-S1 + 1/(2Qw-S1), the over-coupled T1 (the TW cavity with Qi > Qw), under-coupled T1 (the TW cavity with Qi < Qw) and S1 have identical transmission spectra, as is shown in Fig. 2(a). Especially, the phase shift and group delay are completely the same for under-coupled T1 and S1. Therefore, we can treat the under-coupled TW cavity as a side-coupled SW cavity. In the following analyses, a system based on under-coupled TW cavities can be replaced with its counterpart based on side-coupled SW cavities.
  2. For the SW cavity, the transmission approaches zero for S1 and unity for S2 when QiQw. For the TW cavity, the transmissivity is unity when QiQw and zero when Qi = Qw, i.e, the critical coupling condition satisfied.
  3. The over-coupled T1 exhibits the largest phase shift range (~ 2π). For S2, the phase shift range is only π. For S1 and under-coupled T1, the phase shift ranges are 2θ1 and 2θ2, respectively, where θ1=tan1[QiQt/(2Qw)]andθ2=tan1(1/Qw2/Qi21).The phase shift range can achieve π only when QiQw for S1 and Qw approaches Qi for under-coupled T1.
  4. The dispersions at resonance for S2 and over-coupled T1 are normal and thus slow-light can be obtained. While for S1 and under-coupled T1, abnormal dispersion occurs at resonance and thus fast-light takes place.

3. Two directly coupled cavity modes

In this section, we analyze the mode-splitting characteristics of two identical cavity modes with direct coupling. Two situations are considered, where the coupling waveguide(s) is(are) placed either symmetrically or asymmetrically. The coupling coefficient between the two cavity modes is denoted by μ and is related to coupling quality factor by Qc = (ω0/(2μ).

3.1. Two directly coupled cavity modes with symmetric coupling waveguides

 figure: Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Schematics of two identical coupled cavity modes with symmetric waveguide coupling. (a)-(c) consist of two SW cavities but with different waveguide coupling configurations (S3-S5). (d) consists of two TW cavities (T2).

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Figure 3 shows two identical cavity modes with direct coupling. The coupling waveguides are in symmetric placement. In these cases, the degeneracy of the two cavity modes are lifted due to the coupling, hence a split in the resonant frequencies. For two degenerate SW modes shown in Fig. 3(a), the evolution of fields a1 and a2 can be described from the CMT

ddta1=(jω01τi1τw)a11τwsia2
ddta2=(jω01τi1τw)a2a1

Therefore, the transfer functions can be given as

tS3=112Qw(1j(2δ+1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw+1j(2δ1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw)

Following the same procedure, the transfer functions for the transmitted ports of S4, S5 and T2 can be given as

tS4=12Qw(1j(2δ+1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw+1j(2δ1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw)
tS5=1Qw(1j(2δ+1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw1j(2δ1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw)
tT2=11Qw(1j(2δ+1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw+1j(2δ1/Qc)+1/Qi+1/Qw)

The transfer functions for the other ports can be obtained through the relations rS3 = tS4, d1S3 = d2S3 = d1S4 = d2S4 = -tS5/2, rS4 = - tS3, rS5 = -tT2 and dT2 = -tS5. From Eqs.(3)–(6), we can see that the two degenerate modes with frequency ω0 are split into two resonant frequencies, namely ω0ω0/(2Qc) and ω0 + ω0/(2Qc). The waveguide coupling quality factor for the two split modes still keeps at Qw. The separation of the two split resonances is solely determined by the coupling factor Qc for a fixed ω0. Figures 4 and 5 illustrate the transmission, phase shift and group delay for the transmitted ports of S3-S5 and T2, respectively.

 figure: Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for different Qc for S3 (a-c), S4 (d-f) and S5 (g-i). Qi=10×104, Qw=4×104.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

For the SW cavity system S3, a decrease in Qc reduces the depth of resonance notch and further lifts the degeneracy of the two resonances, as shown in Fig. 4(a). The splitting in the transmission turns more and more obvious with increasing coupling. However, the dispersions at the two splittings in the transmission still keep anomalous and thus fast light always takes place, as shown in Fig. 4(b) and (c), respectively. We must point out that although the mode-splitting occurs as long as the coupling exists, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the splitting occurs in the transmission spectrum. This is because that the overall transmission is determined by the superposition of the two split modes with different amplitudes and phases. Here the two splittings can be seen in the transmission only when the coupling is large enough.

For the SW cavity system S4, the peak transmission at resonance decreases initially as Qc decreases. When Qc decreases further, splitting takes place in the transmission despite that the dispersion remains normal in the two splittings in the transmission, where slow light occurs therefore. The same trends in the transmission, phase shift and group delay occur for the SW cavity system S5, which are shown in Fig. 4(g)-(i). The coupling gradually raises the transmission at original resonant wavelength. With decreasing Qc, splitting manifests itself in the transmission but normal dispersion and slow-light always take place at the two splittings in the transmission.

For the TW cavity system T2, we consider two cases: (1) over-coupling case (Qi > Qw) shown in Fig. 5. As Qc decreases gradually, the coupling increases resonance notch depth. When 1/Qc2 = 1/Qi2 − 1/Qw2, the transmission is zero at resonance and there is an abrupt π jump in the phase shift. Once Qc decreases further, splitting takes place in the transmission and the dispersion at resonances shifts from normal to anomalous. For the dispersion response, slow-light occurs at the enhanced resonance and fast-light at the two splittings in the transmission. (2) under-coupling case (Qi < Qw). The under-coupled TW cavity can be regarded as a side-coupled SW cavity, as has been pointed out in Section 2. Therefore, the transmission, phase shift and group delay characteristics for T2 in this case are completely the same as those for S3.

 figure: Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for different Qc for T2. Qi=10×104 and Qw=4×104.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

3.2. Two directly-coupled cavity modes with asymmetric coupling waveguide(s)

 figure: Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Schematics of two identical coupled cavity modes with asymmetric waveguide coupling. (a) and (b) consist of two SW cavities with different waveguide-coupling configurations, denoted by S6 and S7, respectively. (c) consists of two TW cavities denoted by T3.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

In this part, we analyze the cases that the waveguide-coupling for the two coupled cavity modes are asymmetric, which are shown in Fig. 6. The resonant frequencies for a1 and a2 are ω0 while the intrinsic quality factors are Qi1 and Qi2, respectively. The waveguide-coupling occurs only for mode a1 in all three configurations. For the S6 configuration, the CMT equations are given as follows:

ddta1=(jω01τi11τw)a1+1τwsia2
ddta2=(jω01τi2)a2a1

Therefore, the transfer function can be obtained as follows:

tS6=11Qwj2δ+1Qi2(j2δ+12Qi2+12Qi1+12Qw)2+(1Qc)2(12Qi112Qi2+12Qw)2

Following the same procedure, we can obtain the transfer functions for S7 and T3:

tS7=1Qwj2δ+1Qi2(j2δ+12Qi2+12Qi1+12Qw)2+(1Qc)2(12Qi112Qi2+12Qw)2
tT3=12Qwj2δ+1Qi2(j2δ+12Qi2+12Qi1+12Qw)2+(1Qc)2(12Qi112Qi2+12Qw)2

The transfer functions for other ports can be related to those for the transmitted port: rS6 -tS7, rS7 = −tS6.

Tables Icon

Table 2. Mode-splitting characteristic for S6 for different coupling strengths.

Table 2 provides the mode-splitting characteristic for S6 for different coupling strengths. Here (1/Q0)2 = ∣(1/Qc)2 - [1/(2Qi1) - 1 /(2Qi2) + 1/(2QW)]∣2. We can see from Table 2 that the mode-splitting depends greatly on the coupling strength: (1) when 2/Qc > 1/Qi1 -1/Qi2 + 1/Qw, the resonant frequency for the two split modes are ω0ω0/(2Q0) and ω0 + ω0/(2Q0), respectively, while the intrinsic quality factor and the waveguide coupling quality factor are the same; (2) when 2/Qc < 1/Qi1 - 1/Qi2 + 1/Qw, the resonant frequencies for the two split modes are still ω0 but the waveguide coupling quality factors are different, which are 2QwQ0/(Q0 + 2Qw) and 2QwQ0/(Q0 - 2Qw), respectively; (3) when 2/Qc = 1/Qi1 − 1/Qi2 + 1/Qw, the two split modes are degenerate, with the same resonant frequency and intrinsic quality factor and waveguide coupling quality factor. The transmissions for S6, S7 and T4 when Qi2 → ∞ are given by the following expressions:

TS6=1δ2(2/(Qi1Qw)+1/Qw2)δ2(1/Qi1+1/Qw)2+4(δ21/(4Qc2))2
TS7=δ2/Qw2δ2(1/Qi1+1/Qw)2+4(δ21/(4Qc2))2
TT3=14δ2/(Qi1Qw)δ2(1/Qi1+1/Qw)2+4(δ21/(4Qc2))2
 figure: Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Illustration of the transmission, phase shift and group delay of cavities for S6 (a-c) and S7 (d-f). Qi1=10×104, Qw=4×104 and Qi2=10×105.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

We first recall EIT equation from Ref. [21], Tab = Ω12ΓΔ2 /[Δ2Γ2 + 4(Δ2 - Ω22/4)2] , where Ω1 and Ω2 are respective Rabi frequencies of probe field and pump field, Γ is decay rate and Δ is detuning of probe field from atomic resonance. It can be seen that Eq. 12 is identical to the EIT equation if we regard ω0 δ → Δ, ω0/Qi1+ω0/Qw → Γ, ω0/Qc → Ω2 Therefore, the EIT-like transmission is a special case of mode-splitting due to the coupling between cavity modes. From Eq. 12, two conclusions can be drawn: (1) T(ω0) = 1, meaning that complete transparency can be obtained in the transmission spectrum; (2) TS6 achieves minimum at δ = 1/(2Qc) and this minimum can be zero if Qi1Qw.

Figure 7 plot the transmission, phase shift and group delay for S6 and S7. For S6, without direct coupling, the dispersion is abnormal and fast-light occurs at resonance. As the direct coupling increases, the EIT-resonance becomes obvious and the dispersion changes to normal in the EIT-like resonance. It can be seen that the delay is quite large at the EIT-like resonance, which is obviously demonstrated in Fig. 7(c) when Qc = 2 × 105. No complete transparency is achieved because we consider the loss of mode a2 here.

For S7, the transmission at resonance forms a dip with increased direct coupling, which is called EIA. The EIA is an opposite effect of EIT and enhancement of absorption in EIA results from from atomic coherence induced by optical radiation [22]. Here, it originates from the direct coupling between two modes. From Eq.13, we can see that T(ω0) = 0, meaning that complete absorption occurs in the EIA-like resonance. The dispersion is abnormal and large fast-light occurs in this EIA-like resonance, as are shown in Figs. 7(e) and (f), respectively.

For T3, when Qc → ∞, Eq. 14 is also an EIT equation. Figure 8 provides the transmission, phase shift and group delay for T3 when mode a1 is in over-coupled case (Qi1 > Qc). As direct coupling increases, a dip appears in the resonance notch first. When 1/Q2 c = (1/Qw - 1/Qi1)/Qi2, T(ω0) = 0, indicating that zero transmission is achieved with the aid of direct coupling. As the direct coupling increases further, the dip disappears and EIT-like resonance appears. Normal dispersion and large slow-light can be observed in the EIT-like resonance of T3, which are the same as that of S6. The dispersions are normal in the two splittings, where slow-light occurs. This is different from S6, where abnormal dispersion and fast-light occur in the two splittings. For under-coupled case (Qi1 < Qw), the transmission, phase shift and group delay are similar to those of S6 system.

 figure: Fig. 8.

Fig. 8. Illustration of the transmission, phase shift and group delay of cavities for T3. Qi1=10×104, Qw=4×104 and Qi2=10×105.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4. Two indirectly coupled cavity modes

In this part, we analyze two cavity modes coupled through waveguide. For the SW cavity system S8 shown in Fig. 9(a), the two cavities are connected by a waveguide, which induces a phase shift of ϕ (we neglect the waveguide dispersion here for simplicity) and thus indirect coupling between the two modes a1 and a2. We assume the two modes are degenerate. The resonant frequency, intrinsic quality factor and waveguide coupling quality factor are denoted by ω0, Qi and Qw, respectively. According to the CMT, the equations for the evolution of the cavity modes a1 and a2 in time can be given as follows:

ddta1=(jω01τi1τw)a1+1τwsi+1τw(e1τwa2)
ddta2=(jω01τi1τw)a2+1τwe(si1τwa1)
 figure: Fig. 9.

Fig. 9. Schematics of two coupled cavity modes through waveguide. (a) and (b) are two SW cavity modes indirectly coupled through one waveguide (S8 and S9). (c) is two TW cavity modes indirectly coupled by two waveguides (T4).

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Therefore, the transfer functions for the transmitted wave and reflected wave can be expressed:

tS8=e(1γ0)21γ02ej2ϕ
rS8=γ0γ0ej2ϕ+2γ02ej2ϕ1γ02ej2ϕ

where γ0 = −1/[2Qw (+1/(2Qi)+1/(2Qw))]. γ is actually the transfer function of the reflected port for the single side-coupled SW cavity, as has been pointed before. Therefore, the two cavities can be regarded as two reflecting mirrors of a Fabry-Perot etalon. The two mirrors have an amplitude reflectance of γ and transmission of 1+γ. Eqs.(17) and (18) can be regarded as transfer functions for the transmission and reflectance of the Fabry-Perot etalon, respectively. From Eq.(17) for S8, we can see that the resonant frequency is modified due to introduction of the waveguide. Eq.(17) can be rewritten as:

tS8=e(11Qw(1+e)22ej(2δ+sinϕQw)+1Qi+1+cosϕQw+1Qw(1e)22ej(2δsinϕQw)+1Qi+1cosϕQw)

Table 3 provides the mode-splitting characteristics for S8 for different ϕ introduced by the waveguide. We consider three cases here: (1) when ϕ= (m is an integer), tS8 = (−1)m(j2δ + 1 /Qi)/(j2δ + 1/Qi+2/Qw), which is the expression for S1, except that Qw is modified to Qw/2. In this case, the two modes a1 and a2 can be regarded as one mode with a waveguide coupling quality factor of Qw/2; (2) when ϕ=(m + 1/2)π, the indirect coupling due to the waveguide leads to mode splitting and the frequencies of the two split modes are ω0 ± ω0sinϕ/(2Qw). However, the waveguide coupling quality factors for the two modes are still Qw. Therefore, the transmission spectrum keeps symmetric. Note that the maximum resonant frequency separation between the two split modes is ω0/Qw. (3) when ϕ/2, the frequencies of the two split modes are ω0 ± ω0sin ϕ /(2Qw). Not only the resonant frequency is modified, but also the waveguide coupling quality factors (Qw) are changed, which is different from the mode-splitting in the direct coupling case. For the mode with a frequency of ω0 + ω0sinϕ/(2Qw), the waveguide coupling quality factor is modified to Qw/(1 -cosϕ). For the mode with a frequency of ω0 - ω0sinϕ/(2Qw), the waveguide coupling quality factor is modified to Qw/(1 + cosϕ). Figure 11 plots the transmission, phase shift and group delay when ϕ = 0.785 rad. We can see from Fig. 10 that the transmission ia asymmetrical in this case due to different waveguide coupling quality factors and resonant frequencies of the two split modes. This is actually a kind of Fano-transmission which can be potentially used for lowering power threshold in bistable optical devices and for sensing applications [10].

Tables Icon

Table 3. Mode-splitting characteristic for S8 for different f introduced by waveguide.

 figure: Fig. 10.

Fig. 10. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for S8 system. The black and red lines are for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qi=2×105 and Qw=4×104. The phase shift induced by the waveguide is ϕ=0.785 rad.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

If the two modes are non-degenerate (ω1 and ω2), the EIT-like and EIA-like transmission can be obtained, which have been demonstrated in both TW ring cavity and SW PhC cavity [23-25]. Here we just compare this kind of EIT-like transmission with the EIT-like transmission between two degenerate modes shown for the S6 system. When 1 /τwω1ω2 ≫ 1 /τi and ϕ = − (m is an integer), the transmission T and reflection R(= abs(r2)) are denoted by TS8=1−δ2/Qw2/[δ2/Qw2+(δ2−(Δω/(2ω0))2)2] and RS8 = 1 − Ts8, respectively. ω0 = (ω1+ω2)/2 and Δω = ∣ω1ω2∣ and Qi → ∞ is assumed. By comparing with the EIT equation given in Section 3.2, we can see that there are actually the EIT-like resonance and EIA-like resonance for ω0 if we regard ω0δ → Δ, ω0/Qw → Γ, Δω → Ω2. T(ω0) = 1 and T(ω1) = T(ω2) = 0. The dashed line in Fig. 9(a) describes the path for EIT-like resonance mode and thus the phase shift for each round is 2ϕ+ arg(γ1)+ arg(γ2). The maximum transmission in the EIT-like resonance occurs at ϕ(ω0) = −. The transmission, phase shift and group delay characteristics are similar to S6 system, which are demonstrated in Figs. 7(a)–(c).

For S9 system, we can use the CMT to obtain the transfer functions of transmitted port and reflected port. We can also treat the whole system as a Fabry-Perot etalon. The two cavities works as two mirrors. According to the transfer functions for S2, the amplitude transmission for the two mirrors are −γ1 and −γ2 and the amplitude reflectance are −γ1 −1 and -γ2 −1, respectively. Therefore, we can easily obtain the transfer functions for S9 system:

tS9=γ1γ2e1(1+γ1)(1+γ2)ej2ϕ
rS9=(1+γ1)+(1+2γ1)(1+γ2)e1(1+γ1)(1+γ2)ej2ϕ

Here we just consider the case that the two modes are degenerate (γ1 = γ2). Eq. (20) can be rewritten as:

tS9=1/(8Qw2sinϕ)[j(δ+cot(ϕ/2)/4Qw)+1/(2Qi)+1/(4Qw)][j(δtan(ϕ/2)/4Qw)+1/(2Qi)+1/(4Qw)]

It can be seen from Eq. (22) that the two degenerate resonances are split into two: ω0ω0cot(ϕ/2)/4Qw and ω0 + ω0tan(ϕ/2)/4Qw. The intrinsic quality factor and waveguide coupling quality factor of the two modes are Qi and 2Qw, respectively. Therefore, the resonant frequency separation is quite sensitive to ϕ and can be changed just by adjusting ϕ. This is a distinct feature for S9 compared with S8. Figure 11plots the transmission, phase shift and group delay for S9 when ϕ = −0.2 rad and ϕ = 1.57 rad. We can draw two conclusions from Fig. 11 and Eq. (22):

(1) When 0 < sin2 ϕ < Qi2/(Qw + Qi)2 , there is a splitting in the transmission and the frequencies of the two splittings in the transmission are ω0ω0(cosϕ±1(1+Qw/Qi)2sin2ϕ)/(4Qwsinϕ). When Qi >> Qw, the two frequencies are ω0 and ω0ω0/(2Qwtanϕ), respectively, and the peak transmission achieves unity. From Figs. 11(a)-(c), we can see that the dispersion and delay characteristics for each splitting are similar to those of S2.

(2) When Qi2/(Qw + Qi)2 ≤ sin2 ≤ 1, there is no splitting in the transmission although the mode-splitting still exists. The transmission maximum/minimum occurs at ω0ω0cotϕ / (4Qw). From Figs. 11(d)-(e), it is actually a second-order peak filter for the transmitted port and notch filter for the reflected port.

 figure: Fig. 11.

Fig. 11. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for S9 system. The black line and red line are for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qi=8×105 and Qw=8×104. ϕ = −0.2 rad for (a)-(c) and ϕ = 1.57 rad for (d)-(f).

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

For two TW cavity modes indirectly coupled by two waveguides (T4) shown in Fig. 9(d), through CMT analysis in [24], its transfer functions are the same as those of two SW cavity modes directly coupled by one waveguide (S8), namely tT4 = tS8 and dT4 = rS8. Since the resonance mode in S8 is standing wave and both forward and backward modes are stimulated simultaneously, the transmission in the waveguide is bi-directional, as is shown in Fig. 9(a); therefore only one waveguide is enough to couple the two standing modes in the two SW cavities. However, for cascaded TW cavity system T4, the resonance mode is traveling wave and thus two waveguides are needed to form a closed path for the coupling. The propagation path for the EIT-like resonance mode is shown in Fig. 9(c).

5. Two cavity modes with both indirect and direct couplings

 figure: Fig. 12.

Fig. 12. Schematic of two coupled cavity modes with direct and indirect couplings. (a) two SW cavity modes coupled by one waveguide (S10). (b) and (c) are two TW cavity modes coupled by one waveguide (T5) and two waveguides (T6), respectively.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

In this section, we consider the case that both direct coupling and indirect coupling through waveguide are introduced. The resonant frequencies of the two cavity modes are ω1 and ω2, respectively. The quality factors for the two cavity modes are the same. For the system (S10) shown in Fig. 12(a), the transfer functions are given by:

tS10=e1+γ1+γ2+γ1γ2(e+jQw/Qc)(ejQw/Qc)1γ1γ2(e+jQw/Qc)2
rS10=γ1+γ2ej2ϕ+2γ1γ2e(e+jQw/Qc)1γ1γ2(e+jQw/Qc)2

Here we just consider the case of the two degenerate modes (γ1 = γ2). Both direct coupling and indirect coupling through waveguide can lead to mode-splitting and lift the degeneracy of the two resonance modes. For the mode splitting induced by direct coupling, the frequency difference between the two split modes is inversely proportional to the Qc. For the mode splitting induced by indirect coupling, the frequency difference between the two split modes greatly depends on the phase shift ϕ. From Eq. (23), we can see that these two effects can offset each other so that the original resonant frequency is retained if sin ϕ = −Qw/Qc. However, we must point out that although the resonant frequencies for these two modes are the same, the waveguide coupling quality factors are modified to Qw/(1 + 2Qwcosϕ) and Qw/(1 − 2Qwcosϕ), respectively. Figure 13 provides the transmission, phase shift and group delay for S10 system when sinϕ = −Qw/Qc is satisfied. In this case, it turns to be a second order notch filter for the transmission and peak filter for the reflectance.

 figure: Fig. 13.

Fig. 13. The transmission, phase shift and group delay of S10. The black line (t) and red line (r) denote the transmission for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qw = 4×104, Qi = 2×105, Qc = 4.0067×105, ϕ= -0.1 rad.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

For two TW cavity modes coupled by one waveguide together with direct coupling (T5) shown in Fig. 12(b), we can deduce the transfer function as follows:

tT5=e12γ12γ2+(4+j2QwQce+QwQcQwQc)γ1γ21jQwQc(2e+jQwQc)γ1γ2

Here we just consider the case that the two modes are degenerate (γ1 = γ2). From Eq.(25), we can see that when Qw ≤ 2Qc and sinϕ = −1, the resonant frequencies for the two split modes are still ω0. The waveguide coupling quality factors are modified to QwQc/(Qc+2QwQw(2QcQw))andQwQc/(Qc2QwQw(2QcQw)), respectively. Figure 14 provides the transmission, phase shift and group delay for T5 system when the mode-splitting due to direct coupling is offset by indirect coupling through waveguide in resonant frequency. Both the over-coupling (Qi > Qw) and the under-coupling (Qi < Qw) cases are provided. In both cases, they are actually second order filter.

 figure: Fig. 14.

Fig. 14. The transmission, phase shift and group delay of T5 when the direct coupling is offset by the indirect coupling through waveguide in resonant frequency. Qc = 2 × 104, ϕ = -1.57 rad. Qw = 4×104 and Qi = 2×105 for two under-coupled TW cavities and Qw = 2×105 and Qi = 4×104 for two over-coupled TW cavities.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

For two TW coupled cavity modes with both direct coupling and indirect coupling through two waveguides (T6) shown in Fig. 12(d), the transfer functions are completely the same as those of S10 system, namely tT6 = tS10 and dT6 = rS10.

6. Conclusion

In the paper, the mode-splitting in coupled SW and TW cavities are analyzed based on the temporal CMT. Both the direct coupling and indirect coupling through waveguide can lead to the mode-splitting. For two directly coupled identical cavity modes with symmetrical waveguide coupling configuration (S3-S5 and T2), the resonant frequency is split and the separation between the two resonant frequencies is proportional to the coupling strength. For T2 in the over-coupling case, a zero transmission can be obtained by appropriately choosing the coupling. For two directly coupled identical cavity modes with asymmetrical waveguide positioning (S6, S7 and T3), the two split modes can be different either in resonant frequency or in waveguide coupling quality factor, depending on the strength of coupling. In special cases, the EIT-like and EIA-like transmission spectra can be obtained in these configurations. For two coupled cavity modes through indirect waveguide coupling, both the resonant frequency and waveguide coupling quality factor can be different for the two split modes and thus asymmetrical Fano-transmission can be obtained (S8 and T4). The separation between the two split modes can be easily controlled, in the case for S9, by changing the phase shift introduced by the waveguide. The direct and indirect coupling mechanisms can be concurrently deployed in cavity systems to retain original resonant frequency but the waveguide coupling quality factors are still modified (S10, T5 and T6). This research will be useful for the design of cavity-based devices for integration in nanophotonics, either to mitigate the crosstalk due to the coupling between cavities in densely packed photonics chips or to optimize the coupling between cavities for designing new functional photonics devices.

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research (SSF) and the Swedish Research Council (VR).

References and links

1. F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007). [CrossRef]  

2. L. Zhang, M. Song, T. Wu, L. Zou, R. G. Beausoleil, and A. E. Willner, “Embedded ring resonators for mi-crophotonic applications,” Opt. Lett. 33, 1978–1980 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

3. M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008). [CrossRef]  

4. S. Xiao, M. H. Khan, H. Shen, and M. Qi, “A highly compact third-order silicon microring add-drop filter with a very large free spectral range, a flat passband and a low delay dispersion,” Opt. Express 15, 14765–14771 (2007). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

5. K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008). [CrossRef]  

6. M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

7. T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008). [CrossRef]  

8. B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997). [CrossRef]  

9. M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003). [CrossRef]  

10. S. Fan, “Sharp asymmetric line shapes in side-coupled waveguide-cavity systems,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 908–910 (2002). [CrossRef]  

11. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B. S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13, 1202–1214 (2005). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

12. C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999). [CrossRef]  

13. M. A. Popovic, C. Manolatou, and M. Watts, “Coupling-induced resonant frequency shifts in coupled dielectric multi-cavity filters,” Opt. Express 14, 1208–1222 (2006). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

14. Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007). [CrossRef]  

15. K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

16. D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004). [CrossRef]  

17. Z. Zhang, M. Dainese, L. Wosinski, and M. Qiu, “Resonance-splitting and enhanced notch depth in SOI ring resonators with mutual mode coupling,” Opt. Express 16, 4621–4630 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

18. B. E. Little, J. Laine, and S. T. Chu, “Surface-roughness-induced contradirectional coupling in ring and disk resonators,” Opt. Lett. 22, 4–6 (1997). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

19. J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

20. Q. Li, F. F. Liu, Z. Y. Zhang, M. Qiu, and Y. K. Su, “System performances of on-chip silicon microring delay line for RZ, CSRZ, RZ-DB and RZ-AMI signals,” J. Lightwave Technol. 26, 3744–3751 (2008). [CrossRef]  

21. Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

22. M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999). [CrossRef]  

23. X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

24. Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

25. S. Manipatruni, P. Dong, Q. Xu, and M. Lipson, “Tunable superluminal propagation on a silicon micro-chip,” Opt. Lett. 33, 2928–2930 (2008). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
    [Crossref]
  2. L. Zhang, M. Song, T. Wu, L. Zou, R. G. Beausoleil, and A. E. Willner, “Embedded ring resonators for mi-crophotonic applications,” Opt. Lett. 33, 1978–1980 (2008).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  3. M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  4. S. Xiao, M. H. Khan, H. Shen, and M. Qi, “A highly compact third-order silicon microring add-drop filter with a very large free spectral range, a flat passband and a low delay dispersion,” Opt. Express 15, 14765–14771 (2007).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  5. K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  6. M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  7. T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  8. B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
    [Crossref]
  9. M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
    [Crossref]
  10. S. Fan, “Sharp asymmetric line shapes in side-coupled waveguide-cavity systems,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 908–910 (2002).
    [Crossref]
  11. Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B. S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13, 1202–1214 (2005).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  12. C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
    [Crossref]
  13. M. A. Popovic, C. Manolatou, and M. Watts, “Coupling-induced resonant frequency shifts in coupled dielectric multi-cavity filters,” Opt. Express 14, 1208–1222 (2006).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  14. Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
    [Crossref]
  15. K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  16. D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
    [Crossref]
  17. Z. Zhang, M. Dainese, L. Wosinski, and M. Qiu, “Resonance-splitting and enhanced notch depth in SOI ring resonators with mutual mode coupling,” Opt. Express 16, 4621–4630 (2008).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  18. B. E. Little, J. Laine, and S. T. Chu, “Surface-roughness-induced contradirectional coupling in ring and disk resonators,” Opt. Lett. 22, 4–6 (1997).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  19. J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).
  20. Q. Li, F. F. Liu, Z. Y. Zhang, M. Qiu, and Y. K. Su, “System performances of on-chip silicon microring delay line for RZ, CSRZ, RZ-DB and RZ-AMI signals,” J. Lightwave Technol. 26, 3744–3751 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  21. Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  22. M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
    [Crossref]
  23. X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  24. Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  25. S. Manipatruni, P. Dong, Q. Xu, and M. Lipson, “Tunable superluminal propagation on a silicon micro-chip,” Opt. Lett. 33, 2928–2930 (2008).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]

2009 (2)

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2008 (7)

2007 (4)

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
[Crossref]

S. Xiao, M. H. Khan, H. Shen, and M. Qi, “A highly compact third-order silicon microring add-drop filter with a very large free spectral range, a flat passband and a low delay dispersion,” Opt. Express 15, 14765–14771 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2006 (2)

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. A. Popovic, C. Manolatou, and M. Watts, “Coupling-induced resonant frequency shifts in coupled dielectric multi-cavity filters,” Opt. Express 14, 1208–1222 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2005 (1)

2004 (1)

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

2003 (1)

M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
[Crossref]

2002 (1)

S. Fan, “Sharp asymmetric line shapes in side-coupled waveguide-cavity systems,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 908–910 (2002).
[Crossref]

1999 (2)

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
[Crossref]

1997 (2)

B. E. Little, J. Laine, and S. T. Chu, “Surface-roughness-induced contradirectional coupling in ring and disk resonators,” Opt. Lett. 22, 4–6 (1997).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

1995 (1)

Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Akahane, Y.

Akulshin, A. M.

M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
[Crossref]

Aoki, K.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Arakawa, Y.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Asano, T.

Barreiro, S.

M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
[Crossref]

Beausoleil, R. G.

Boyd, R. W.

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Camacho, R.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Chan, J.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Chang, H.

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Chen, Y. L.

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Chu, S. T.

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

B. E. Little, J. Laine, and S. T. Chu, “Surface-roughness-induced contradirectional coupling in ring and disk resonators,” Opt. Lett. 22, 4–6 (1997).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Dainese, M.

Dong, P.

Eichenfield, M.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Fan, S.

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Fan, “Sharp asymmetric line shapes in side-coupled waveguide-cavity systems,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 908–910 (2002).
[Crossref]

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

Forchel, A.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Foresi, J.

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

Fuller, K. A.

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Guimard, D.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Guo, G. C.

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Haus, H. A.

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

Hofling, S.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Iwamoto, S.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Jiang, W.

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Joannopoulos, J. D.

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

Johnson, S. G.

J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

Kako, S.

M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
[Crossref]

Kamp, M.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Khan, M. H.

Khan, M. J.

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

Kobayashi, N.

K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Kuramochi, E.

M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008).
[Crossref]

Kwon, S. H.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Kwong, D. L.

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Laine, J.

Laine, J. P.

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

Lezama, M.

M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
[Crossref]

Li, Q.

Li, Y.

Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Lipson, M.

S. Manipatruni, P. Dong, Q. Xu, and M. Lipson, “Tunable superluminal propagation on a silicon micro-chip,” Opt. Lett. 33, 2928–2930 (2008).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Little, B. E.

B. E. Little, J. Laine, and S. T. Chu, “Surface-roughness-induced contradirectional coupling in ring and disk resonators,” Opt. Lett. 22, 4–6 (1997).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

Liu, F. F.

Manipatruni, S.

Manolatou, C.

M. A. Popovic, C. Manolatou, and M. Watts, “Coupling-induced resonant frequency shifts in coupled dielectric multi-cavity filters,” Opt. Express 14, 1208–1222 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

Meade, R. D.

J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

Nishioka, M.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Noda, S.

Y. Akahane, T. Asano, B. S. Song, and S. Noda, “Fine-tuned high-Q photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Opt. Express 13, 1202–1214 (2005).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
[Crossref]

Nomura, M.

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Notomi, M.

M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008).
[Crossref]

Okano, M.

M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
[Crossref]

Painter, O.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Popovic, M. A.

Povinelli, M. L.

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Qi, M.

Qiu, M.

Rosenberger, A. T.

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Sandhu, S.

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Schlereth, T. W.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Sekaric, L.

F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
[Crossref]

Shakya, J.

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Shen, H.

Smith, D. D.

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Song, B. S.

Song, M.

Stichel, T.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Su, Y. K.

Sunner, T.

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

Tanabe, T.

M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008).
[Crossref]

Tomita, M.

K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Totsuka, K.

K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Vahala, K. J.

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Villeneuve, P. R.

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

Vlasov, Y. A.

F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
[Crossref]

Watts, M.

Willner, A. E.

Winn, J. N.

J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

Wong, C. W.

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Wosinski, L.

Wu, T.

Xia, F.

F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
[Crossref]

Xiao, M.

Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Xiao, S.

Xiao, Y. F.

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Xu, Q.

S. Manipatruni, P. Dong, Q. Xu, and M. Lipson, “Tunable superluminal propagation on a silicon micro-chip,” Opt. Lett. 33, 2928–2930 (2008).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Yang, X.

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Yu, M.

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Zhang, L.

Zhang, Z.

Zhang, Z. Y.

Zou, L.

Zou, X. B.

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Appl. Phys. Lett. (2)

T. Sunner, T. Stichel, S. H. Kwon, T. W. Schlereth, S. Hofling, M. Kamp, and A. Forchel, “Photonic crystal cavity based gas sensor,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 261112 (2008).
[Crossref]

S. Fan, “Sharp asymmetric line shapes in side-coupled waveguide-cavity systems,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 908–910 (2002).
[Crossref]

IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. (1)

B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, H. A. Haus, J. Foresi, and J. P. Laine, “Microring resonator channel dropping filters,” IEEE J. Lightwave Technol. 15, 998–1005 (1997).
[Crossref]

IEEE J. Quantum Electron. (1)

C. Manolatou, M. J. Khan, S. Fan, P. R. Villeneuve, H. A. Haus, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Coupling of modes analysis of resonance channel add-drop filters,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 1322–1331 (1999).
[Crossref]

J. Lightwave Technol. (1)

Nature (1)

M. Eichenfield, R. Camacho, J. Chan, K. J. Vahala, and O. Painter, “A picogram- and nanometre-scale photonic-crystal optomechanical cavity,” Nature 459, 550–555 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Nature Photon. (2)

F. Xia, L. Sekaric, and Y. A. Vlasov, “Ultra-compact optical buffers on a silicon chip,” Nature Photon. 1, 65–71 (2007).
[Crossref]

M. Notomi, E. Kuramochi, and T. Tanabe, “Large-scale arrays of ultrahigh-Q coupled nanocavities,” Nature Photon. 2, 741–747 (2008).
[Crossref]

Nature Photonics (1)

K. Aoki, D. Guimard, M. Nishioka, M. Nomura, S. Iwamoto, and Y. Arakawa, “Coupling of quantum-dot light emission with a three-dimensional photonic-crystal nanocavity,” Nature Photonics 2, 688–692 (2008).
[Crossref]

Opt. Express (4)

Opt. Lett. (3)

Phys. Rev. A (4)

D. D. Smith, H. Chang, K. A. Fuller, A. T. Rosenberger, and R. W. Boyd, “Coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 063804 (2004).
[Crossref]

Y. Li and M. Xiao, “Observation of of quantum interference between dressed states in electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 4959–4962 (1995).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Lezama, S. Barreiro, and A. M. Akulshin, “Electromagnetically induced absorption,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 4732 (1999).
[Crossref]

Y. F. Xiao, X. B. Zou, W. Jiang, Y. L. Chen, and G. C. Guo, “Analog to multiple electromagnetically induced transparency in all-optical drop-filter systems,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 063833 (2007).
[Crossref]

Phys. Rev. B (1)

M. Okano, S. Kako, and S. Noda. “Coupling between a point-defect cavity and a line-defect waveguide in three-dimensional photonic crystal,” Phys. Rev. B 68, 235110 (2003).
[Crossref]

Phys. Rev. Lett. (3)

K. Totsuka, N. Kobayashi, and M. Tomita, “Slow light in coupled-resonator-induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 213904 (2007).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Yang, M. Yu, D. L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “All-optical analog to electromagnetically induced transparency in multiple coupled photonic crystal cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173902 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Q. Xu, S. Sandhu, M. L. Povinelli, J. Shakya, S. Fan, and M. Lipson, “Experimental realization of an on-chip all-optical analogue to electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 123901 (2006).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Other (1)

J. D. Joannopoulos, S. G. Johnson, J. N. Winn, and R. D. Meade, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (second edition) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008).

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (14)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Schematics of single cavities. (a) and (b) are SW cavities with side-coupling and shoulder-coupling configuration denoted as S1 and S2, respectively. (c) is a TW cavity denoted as T1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Transmission, phase shift and group delay of single SW and TW cavity. For S1 and S2, Qi=16×104, Qw=2×104. For over-coupled T1, Qi=4×104, Qw=3.2×104. For under-coupled T1, Qw=4×104, Qi=3.2×104. We assume λ0=1550 nm here and in the following figures.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Schematics of two identical coupled cavity modes with symmetric waveguide coupling. (a)-(c) consist of two SW cavities but with different waveguide coupling configurations (S3-S5). (d) consists of two TW cavities (T2).
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for different Qc for S3 (a-c), S4 (d-f) and S5 (g-i). Qi=10×104, Qw=4×104.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for different Qc for T2. Qi=10×104 and Qw=4×104.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6. Schematics of two identical coupled cavity modes with asymmetric waveguide coupling. (a) and (b) consist of two SW cavities with different waveguide-coupling configurations, denoted by S6 and S7, respectively. (c) consists of two TW cavities denoted by T3.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7. Illustration of the transmission, phase shift and group delay of cavities for S6 (a-c) and S7 (d-f). Qi1=10×104, Qw=4×104 and Qi2=10×105.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. Illustration of the transmission, phase shift and group delay of cavities for T3. Qi1=10×104, Qw=4×104 and Qi2=10×105.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 9. Schematics of two coupled cavity modes through waveguide. (a) and (b) are two SW cavity modes indirectly coupled through one waveguide (S8 and S9). (c) is two TW cavity modes indirectly coupled by two waveguides (T4).
Fig. 10.
Fig. 10. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for S8 system. The black and red lines are for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qi=2×105 and Qw=4×104. The phase shift induced by the waveguide is ϕ=0.785 rad.
Fig. 11.
Fig. 11. The transmission, phase shift and group delay for S9 system. The black line and red line are for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qi=8×105 and Qw=8×104. ϕ = −0.2 rad for (a)-(c) and ϕ = 1.57 rad for (d)-(f).
Fig. 12.
Fig. 12. Schematic of two coupled cavity modes with direct and indirect couplings. (a) two SW cavity modes coupled by one waveguide (S10). (b) and (c) are two TW cavity modes coupled by one waveguide (T5) and two waveguides (T6), respectively.
Fig. 13.
Fig. 13. The transmission, phase shift and group delay of S10. The black line (t) and red line (r) denote the transmission for the transmitted port and reflected port, respectively. Qw = 4×104, Qi = 2×105, Qc = 4.0067×105, ϕ= -0.1 rad.
Fig. 14.
Fig. 14. The transmission, phase shift and group delay of T5 when the direct coupling is offset by the indirect coupling through waveguide in resonant frequency. Qc = 2 × 104, ϕ = -1.57 rad. Qw = 4×104 and Qi = 2×105 for two under-coupled TW cavities and Qw = 2×105 and Qi = 4×104 for two over-coupled TW cavities.

Tables (3)

Tables Icon

Table 1. Comparisons between single SW and TW cavities.

Tables Icon

Table 2. Mode-splitting characteristic for S6 for different coupling strengths.

Tables Icon

Table 3. Mode-splitting characteristic for S8 for different f introduced by waveguide.

Equations (25)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

d dt a 1 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 1 τ w ) a 1 1 τ w s i a 2
d dt a 2 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 1 τ w ) a 2 a 1
t S 3 = 1 1 2 Q w ( 1 j ( 2 δ + 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w + 1 j ( 2 δ 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w )
t S 4 = 1 2 Q w ( 1 j ( 2 δ + 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w + 1 j ( 2 δ 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w )
t S 5 = 1 Q w ( 1 j ( 2 δ + 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w 1 j ( 2 δ 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w )
t T 2 = 1 1 Q w ( 1 j ( 2 δ + 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w + 1 j ( 2 δ 1 / Q c ) + 1 / Q i + 1 / Q w )
d dt a 1 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 1 1 τ w ) a 1 + 1 τ w s i a 2
d dt a 2 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 2 ) a 2 a 1
t S 6 = 1 1 Q w j 2 δ + 1 Q i 2 ( j 2 δ + 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q i 1 + 1 2 Q w ) 2 + ( 1 Q c ) 2 ( 1 2 Q i 1 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q w ) 2
t S 7 = 1 Q w j 2 δ + 1 Q i 2 ( j 2 δ + 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q i 1 + 1 2 Q w ) 2 + ( 1 Q c ) 2 ( 1 2 Q i 1 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q w ) 2
t T 3 = 1 2 Q w j 2 δ + 1 Q i 2 ( j 2 δ + 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q i 1 + 1 2 Q w ) 2 + ( 1 Q c ) 2 ( 1 2 Q i 1 1 2 Q i 2 + 1 2 Q w ) 2
T S 6 = 1 δ 2 ( 2 / ( Q i 1 Q w ) + 1 / Q w 2 ) δ 2 ( 1 / Q i 1 + 1 / Q w ) 2 + 4 ( δ 2 1 / ( 4 Q c 2 ) ) 2
T S 7 = δ 2 / Q w 2 δ 2 ( 1 / Q i 1 + 1 / Q w ) 2 + 4 ( δ 2 1 / ( 4 Q c 2 ) ) 2
T T 3 = 1 4 δ 2 / ( Q i 1 Q w ) δ 2 ( 1 / Q i 1 + 1 / Q w ) 2 + 4 ( δ 2 1 / ( 4 Q c 2 ) ) 2
d dt a 1 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 1 τ w ) a 1 + 1 τ w s i + 1 τ w ( e 1 τ w a 2 )
d dt a 2 = ( j ω 0 1 τ i 1 τ w ) a 2 + 1 τ w e ( s i 1 τ w a 1 )
t S 8 = e ( 1 γ 0 ) 2 1 γ 0 2 e j 2 ϕ
r S 8 = γ 0 γ 0 e j 2 ϕ + 2 γ 0 2 e j 2 ϕ 1 γ 0 2 e j 2 ϕ
t S 8 = e ( 1 1 Q w ( 1 + e ) 2 2 e j ( 2 δ + sin ϕ Q w ) + 1 Q i + 1 + cos ϕ Q w + 1 Q w ( 1 e ) 2 2 e j ( 2 δ sin ϕ Q w ) + 1 Q i + 1 cos ϕ Q w )
t S 9 = γ 1 γ 2 e 1 ( 1 + γ 1 ) ( 1 + γ 2 ) e j 2 ϕ
r S 9 = ( 1 + γ 1 ) + ( 1 + 2 γ 1 ) ( 1 + γ 2 ) e 1 ( 1 + γ 1 ) ( 1 + γ 2 ) e j 2 ϕ
t S 9 = 1 / ( 8 Q w 2 sin ϕ ) [ j ( δ + cot ( ϕ / 2 ) / 4 Q w ) + 1 / ( 2 Q i ) + 1 / ( 4 Q w ) ] [ j ( δ tan ( ϕ / 2 ) / 4 Q w ) + 1 / ( 2 Q i ) + 1 / ( 4 Q w ) ]
t S 10 = e 1 + γ 1 + γ 2 + γ 1 γ 2 ( e + j Q w / Q c ) ( e j Q w / Q c ) 1 γ 1 γ 2 ( e + j Q w / Q c ) 2
r S 10 = γ 1 + γ 2 e j 2 ϕ + 2 γ 1 γ 2 e ( e + j Q w / Q c ) 1 γ 1 γ 2 ( e + j Q w / Q c ) 2
t T 5 = e 1 2 γ 1 2 γ 2 + ( 4 + j 2 Q w Q c e + Q w Q c Q w Q c ) γ 1 γ 2 1 j Q w Q c ( 2 e + j Q w Q c ) γ 1 γ 2

Metrics