Abstract

Optomechanical cavities have proven to be an exceptional tool to explore fundamental and applied aspects of the interaction between mechanical and optical waves. Here we demonstrate a novel optomechanical cavity based on a disk with a radial mechanical bandgap. This design confines light and mechanical waves through distinct physical mechanisms which allows for independent control of the mechanical and optical properties. Simulations foresee an optomechanical coupling rate g0 reaching 2π × 100 kHz for mechanical frequencies around 5 GHz as well as anchor loss suppression of 60 dB. Our device design is not limited by unique material properties and could be easily adapted to allow for large optomechanical coupling and high mechanical quality factors with other promising materials. Finally, our devices were fabricated in a commercial silicon photonics facility, demonstrating g0/2π = 23 kHz for mechanical modes with frequencies around 2 GHz and mechanical Q-factors as high as 2300 at room temperature, also showing that our approach can be easily scalable and useful as a new platform for multimode optomechanics.

© 2017 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Optomechanical microcavities simultaneously confine optical and mechanical modes. The interaction between these confined modes has proven to be a very rich field of study for basic science, such as macroscopic quantum phenomena [1,2], quantum simulation of condensed matter [3,4], topological phase pattern-formation of coupled oscillators [5] and non-classical states of light [6,7]. Applications of optomechanical devices have been addressed as well, including weak-force sensing [8–10], ultra-sensitive accelerometers [11], radio-frequency sources [12], multi-mode [13] and synchronous [14] oscillators, reconfigurable optical filters [15] and hybrid systems [16].

Regardless of the context, the optomechanical interaction often benefits from a strong optomechanical coupling, low optical and mechanical dissipation rates (high-Qs) and the so-called resolved sideband limit, which occurs when the mechanical mode frequency is larger than the optical mode linewidth. We choose to denote the optomechanical coupling by the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate, g0, which measures the optical cavity frequency shift induced by a mechanical mode with an amplitude equivalent to the quantum harmonic oscillator at the ground-state.

The challenge in simultaneously achieving an optimum combination of these properties is that the optical and mechanical optimization are often constrained to each other [17–19]. One promising platform is based on the optomechanical crystal cavity, where both waves are confined by bandgaps in two-dimensional periodic structures [20]. These devices were fabricated using the traditional approach of a direct write electron beam lithography. However, for massive fundamental studies and applications it is desirable to migrate the fabrication process of these devices to commercial CMOS-compatible facilities, where the photo-lithography process considerably reduces time and cost when compared to the traditional approach.

Here we propose a new optomechanical device based on a silicon microdisk with a circular mechanical grating fabricated in a CMOS-compatible foundry (Fig. 1(a)). The optical waves are confined at the disk edge in whispering gallery-like modes due to total internal reflection, whereas the mechanical modes are confined as an edge state lying within a phononic bandgap of the circular grating. We show that these two unrelated confining mechanisms relax the need for simultaneous optical and mechanical bandgaps, while keeping both optical and mechanical losses to a minimal. These relaxed requirements along with recent progress in low-loss CMOS-compatible photonic devices [21, 22] are encouraging for addressing scalable applications of optomechanical cavities. Moreover, our whispering-gallery based design is a natural candidate for addressing recent theoretical proposals concerning many optically-coupled optomechanical cavities [3–5].

 

Fig. 1 Optomechanical ring cavity. a) Schematic of a bullseye optomechanical cavity (green) supported by a central pedestal (blue). The inset illustrates the mechanical motion localized at the disk’s edge. b) Finite-element simulation (FEM) of the electric field intensity for the fundamental transverse-electric (TE) mode of a floating silicon ring resonator, which is defined by the external radius R and the ring width wring. Inset: darker (lighter) colors represent larger (lower) electric field intensity. c) Mechanical dispersion of a silicon ring as a function of wring for R = 8 µm; only modes with g0/2π > 1 kHz are shown. The marker size represents the optomechanical coupling, g0, between each mechanical mode to the TE fundamental optical mode shown in (b). Red dots represent the first order mechanical dilatational mode, whose frequency can be also approximated by a Fabry-Perot type expression vL/2wring (dashed line), where vL = 8433 m/s is the velocity of longitudinal waves in bulk silicon. Insets show the cross-section of the a few mechanical modes for wring = 1.5 µm. Red (blue) color accounts for larger (smaller) displacement field. d) Optical dispersion of TE modes as function of the ring width with azimuthal number fixed to 83 and R = 8 µm. The optical resonance frequency is quite independent of wring for larger width; for the fundamental TE mode, such frequency is constant down to wring = 1 µm. For smaller ring width, the fundamental TE mode’s frequency varies only a few percent with wring whereas the mechanical frequency changes by a factor close to 2.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Using both numerical simulations and measurements we demonstrate a tailorable mechanical bandgap up to several GHz within an experimentally accessible range of geometrical parameters. The fabricated design presented an optomechanical coupling rate of g0/2π ≈ 23 kHz for a mechanical mode in the GHz range, while simulations indicated that an order of magnitude larger optomechanical coupling rate could be achieved for an even high mechanical mode frequency. Mechanical radiation losses are also inhibited by the mechanical bandgap, which allows for a high mechanical Q-factor, essentially limited by material losses [23].

2. Design

In order to gain some insight on our final device design, we start by analyzing a floating silicon ring resonator (Fig. 1(b)). This idealized optomechanical structure benefits from the highly co-localized optical and mechanical modes defined by its geometrical constraint, in a similar way to the optical and mechanical modes responsible for forward Brillouin scattering in silicon nanowires [24]. However, in the floating ring structure, mechanical losses are reduced to material losses while optical losses are due both to material and to radiation (bending) loss.

One can also easily evaluate the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate, g0, following a perturbation theory approach for such structure:

g0xzpf=ωx=ω2E|ϵ/x|EE|ϵ|E,
where the inner products ratio between the unperturbed electric field distribution (E) measures how much the optical mode resonance frequency, ω, shifts when the dielectric constant changes from ϵ to ϵ + ∂ϵ/∂x because of the mechanical deformation given by xu, where u is the mechanical mode profile and x is a scalar parameterizing the deformation. Two main contributions are taken into account for evaluating ∂ϵ/∂x: one caused by the change in the dielectric constant spatial distribution due to the deformation of the boundaries [25] and another coming from strain-induced modifications of the refractive index (photoelastic effect) [17]. The phase-matching condition arising from Eq. (1) to describe the frequency-shift is automatically satisfied in our case, as we focus on mechanical modes with zero azimuthal order. In the above equation ∂ω/∂x is the commonly known frequency pull parameter gOM which depends on how the physical deformation is parameterized (or equivalently, on how the mode profile u is normalized). Such dependence is eliminated for g0 = gOMxzpf, where xzpf=/2meffΩm is the zero point fluctuation, ℏ is the reduced Planck’s constant, Ωm the mechanical mode’s frequency and meff the effective motional mass for the chosen parameterization [26] — indeed, experiments to probe the optomechanical coupling turn out to be sensitive to g0 instead gOM [27].

The main feature captured by this simple model is the ability to tailor the mechanical frequency from a couple to tens of GHz, while raising the optomechanical coupling rate from tens to hundreds of kHz. This is achieved by adjusting only wring while keeping R fixed. In Fig. 1(c) we also highlight the lowest order dilatational mode (red dots); larger markers account for larger g0. Such high g0 is dominated mainly by the photoelastic contribution (see Appendix F). As an example, a device with a ring radius of R = 8 µm and ring width of wring = 1 µm would have a net optomechanical coupling rate of g0/2π = 88 kHz at a mechanical frequency of 4.5 GHz (throughout the text, the silicon-on-insulator device layer was kept fixed and equal to 220 nm). Both values are one order of magnitude larger than the radial-dilatational modes in a Si disk with the same radius — a back-of-the-envelope calculation gives frequency Ωm(disk)/2πvL/2R0.5GHz, where vL = 8433 m/s is the longidutinal acoustic velocity in silicon, and vacuum coupling rate g0(disk)/2πxzpf(ω/2πR)10kHz, dominated by the moving boundary contribution [28].

On the other hand, the optical mode is nearly unaffected by changes in the ring width. The ring optical mode is similar to the mode of a disk (not shown) with same radius resulting in an essentially constant optical resonance frequency for wring > 1 µm as shown in Fig. 1(d). Indeed, the simulation shows that the fundamental TE mode changes by only a few percent for 0.5 µm < wring < 1.0 µm, mainly because the mode profile begins to slightly spread out of the ring region. The highly different azimuthal wavevectors for the optical and mechanical modes explains this opposite behavior – while a typical whispering gallery optical mode has azimuthal wavevectors equal to m/R, where m is on the order of 83 for modes at the 1550 nm wavelength, the mechanical mode has zero azimuthal wavevector.

The frequency pull parameter gOM weakly depends on the cavity radius (R) since the optical and mechanical mode profiles do not significantly alter for radii much larger than the wavelengths. Because the mechanical mode has no longitudinal dependence, its frequency should also be the same. Therefore, g0 changes only through meff1/2R1/2; the smaller R is made, the larger g0 gets. For the real bullseye cavity, however, the smallest R size is also bounded to the size of the desired circular grating. Despite idealized, this model gives an upper boundary for the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate g0 as well as an insight for the edge state mechanical mode on our real structure.

In order to mimic the optomechanical properties of the floating ring in an anchored device, we propose the bullseye optomechanical resonator. Our design consists of a silicon disk supported by a central silica pedestal and possessing a phononic shield in the form of a bullseye radial Bragg grating (see Fig. 1(a)). Circular gratings have been successfully used previously to confine photonic [29–31] and plasmonic [32–34] modes. Therefore, extending this circular grating confinement mechanism to acoustic waves should enable ring-like modes in the edge of the bullseye disk.

Similarly to the idealized ring resonator, the rather wide wring in our bullseye structure (≈ 1 µm) and high optical azimuthal numbers ensure that the optical modes are whispering-gallery like. Although higher radial order optical modes penetrate deeper inwards, for wring < 1 µm, the relevant lowest order radial mode are weakly influenced by the radial grating structure. This behavior is confirmed by the optical frequency curves shown in Fig. 2(a) and allows us to optimize the mechanical grating design without disturbing the optical properties.

 

Fig. 2 Bullseye optical modes. a) FEM simulation of the optical dispersion of quasi-TE (azimuthal number fixed to 83) bullseye modes (inset). For the fundamental mode, it is clearly seen that optical resonance frequencies are not affected by wring down to nearly 1 µm, and shift just by a few percent down to wring = 0.5 µm for a typical mechanical grating. The marker’s color label the mode profile in (b) with the same bounding box color for wring = 1 µm. b) Optical modes living in the outer ring may evanescently couple to modes within adjacent inner rings depending on the inner ring radius — by keeping the total radius R constant, increasing wring decreases the inner ring’s radius and therefore increases its corresponding mode frequency — thus deviating from the desired ring-like modes and resulting in the avoided crossings shown in (a). However, for typical mechanical gratings, the fundamental quasi-TE mode does not couple to any other mode down to wring = 0.5 µm. (Simulation parameters: a = 1 µm, w = 200 nm, t = 70 nm, R = 8 µm.)

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

The mechanical waves reflected by this circular grating (Fig. 3(a)) can be understood using the linear crystal analogue shown in Fig. 3(b). This approximation is quite precise since the interfaces interacting with a cylindrical wave traveling through the circular grating are similar to those interacting with a plane wave in a linear crystal (see Appendix D). The linear crystal approximation therefore allows for a simpler design of the mechanical bullseye Bragg grating.

 

Fig. 3 Mechanical grating design. a) Each geometrical parameter of the bullseye disk controls distinct physical properties: R defines the optical frequency and free-spectral range; wring defines the mechanical frequency while the grating parameters a, w and t determine the phononic bandgap. b) Linear phononic crystal approximation for the circular grating shown in (a). c) The blue (red) lines are the mechanical bands of the linear crystal for x-polarized or z-polarized (y-polarized) modes for a = 1 µm, w = 200 nm and t = 70 nm. The insets show the mechanical deformation for the modes at the band-edge (X-point) of selected edge states. Red (blue) colors account for larger (smaller) displacement field. d) Bandgap maps for the linear crystals for x and z-polarized waves. The colored areas correspond to regions within bandgaps for different lattice period a. The regions delimited by solid lines correspond to bandgaps between the two modes around 3 GHz and 5 GHz shown in (c). Left (Right) bandgap maps as a function of w/a (t/a) for fixed t = 70 nm (w/a = 0.25). All dimensions are compatible to Si-photonics foundry based processes.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

We are interested in creating a phononic bandgap that confines the radial dilatational mechanical modes at the disk edge. These modes arise from longitudinal waves (L) propagating along the radial direction, which are mixed with shear-vertical (SV) waves due to reflection at the free-boundaries [35]. Therefore, a phononic shield with a partial bandgap for L and SV waves is enough to confine the ring-like dilatational mode. Figure 3(c) shows a typical band structure for the equivalent linear crystal; blue lines represent x-polarized (L) or z-polarized (SV) modes, whereas the red lines represent y-polarized (Shear-Horizontal, SH) modes. A partial bandgap (gray shades) is then formed between 3.2 GHz and 5 GHz.

To confine the first order mechanical dilatational mode at any desired frequency (chosen via wring), we further investigate the dependence of the partial bandgaps on the grating parameters, a, w and t (Fig. 3(d)). We also restrict the design parameters within the range accessible through Si-photonics foundries. The left graph in Fig. 3(d) shows the main bandgaps (colored regions) as a function of w/a for different values of a keeping t = 70 nm, while the right graph shows the bandgaps dependence on t/a while maintaining w/a = 0.25. As expected, raising a both shrinks the total bandgap and moves it towards lower frequencies. It is also worth noting that the bandgaps around the region of interest widens as t/a is decreased, a consequence of the larger acoustic velocity contrast between the thicker and thinner regions.

One can easily find a suitable design of a bullseye disk with larger optomechanical coupling for a given mechanical frequency using the bandgap maps in Fig. 3(d), and the relation between the mechanical frequency and the ring width from Fig. 1(c). For example, choosing a 4.0 GHz mechanical mode frequency, we determine from Fig. 1(c) that the ring width should be around wring = 1.1 µm and from the bandgap maps that a = 1 µm with w/a = 0.2 and t/a = 0.07.

In order to further evaluate this optimized design, we use (axisymmetric) Finite Element Method (FEM) simulations for the optical and mechanical modes of the whole bullseye structure to calculate the optomechanical coupling rate, g0, and the radiation limited mechanical quality factor (Qm). The results are shown in Fig. 4(a) superimposed on a mechanical density of states map of the corresponding linear crystal; higher density of states (DOS) are represented by darker regions. We choose R = 8 µm for the simulations as it is the smallest radius size that can support gratings with 5 periods confining modes down to 1 GHz (corresponding to a ≈ 1.5 µm.

 

Fig. 4 Optomechanical bullseye disk. a) FEM simulations for the mechanical dispersion of a bullseye disk (solid dots) as a function of the periodicity a for wring = 1.1 µm (dots closer to 4 Ghz) and 2.0 µm (around 2 GHz), w/a = 0.25 and t = 70 nm. The gray tone shades are proportional to the mechanical density of states (DOS) of the corresponding linear crystal, where darker regions are related to higher DOS within the mechanical grating. Only the two largest g0 modes are shown. Marker sizes are proportional to the total optomechanical coupling rate. b) Type-I and type-II displacement profile of the confined mechanical modes for wring = 1.1 (2.0) µm and a = 1.0 (1.4) µm. Type-I is the first order dilatational mode at 4.2 (2.4) GHz; type-II is a high order flapping mode at 3.8 (2.2) GHz. c) Simulated mechanical radiation loss quality factor for the type-I mode as a function of the number of grating periods (wring = 1 µm and a = 1.0 µm). The solid line is a fit for the simulated points with an exponential decay curve. The insets show the normalized mechanical displacement in log scale for zero (no clamping loss suppression) and six grating periods (≈ 60 dB of isolation from the clamping region) along with the displacement profile near the ring region.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Two mechanical mode types give notoriously high optomechanical coupling: for wring = 1.1 (2.0) µm, which tunes the mechanical frequency to approximately 4.0 GHz (2.0 GHz), the coupling rates are g0(I)/2π=77kHz (33 kHz) and g0(II)/2π=30kHz (14 kHz). Similarly to the floating ring, these couplings are dominated by the photoelastic effect due to the large strain overlap to the localized fundamental transverse electric (TE) optical mode within the outermost ring.

The type-I mode shown in Fig. 4(b) is related to the first order dilatational mode of the ring structure when its frequency is within the bandgap of the analogue linear crystal. On the other hand, the type-II mode is related to a high order flapping mode. In the floating ring structure such mode has nearly zero optomechanical coupling due to the opposite parity between the optical and mechanical modes. However, in the bullseye disk this parity is broken due to the position of the slab connecting each grating ring, resulting in a surprisingly large g0 for these flapping modes.

Since radial waves within the bandgap cannot propagate towards the pedestal, anchor losses are drastically reduced. This anchor loss suppression mechanism is manifested in the FEM simulation (using perfectly matched layers described in Appendix H) results shown in Fig. 4(c), where the mechanical quality factor grows exponentially with the number of periods in the grating. The simulation is done by following the type-I mode (for wring = 1 µm) as the number of periods is reduced from 6 to 0.

In the few GHz frequency range, the ring region strongly hybridizes to an almost continuum of modes of the inner disk limited by the groove, these hybrid modes all radiate through the pedestal. The bullseye grating indeed prevents the coupling of the outer ring mode to the inner disk continuum of modes and ensures high mechanical Q modes.

3. Experimental demonstration

We experimentally demonstrate the bullseye design in devices fabricated by a commercial foundry (Fig. 5(a)). Using a CMOS commercial foundry has several advantages towards coupled optomechanical cavity arrays as well as implementing high volume and low cost on-chip circuitry and sensing. The fabrication is based on a deep-UV optical lithography (see Appendix A) with nominal resolution of 130 nm.

 

Fig. 5 Probing mechanical modes. a) Scanning electron microscope (false color) images of typical bullseye cavities from side b) and top. c) Experimental setup. DAQ: Data Acquisition System (records optical spectra); ESA: Electrical Spectrum Analyzer (records mechanical spectra); φ: electro-optical phase modulator; MZ: Mach-Zehnder interferometer (wavelength calibration); FPC: Fiber Polarization Controller. d) Typical (intentionally undercoupled) optical resonance used to address the bullseye’s mechanical modes (Qopt ≈ 4 × 104) and exhibiting forward-backward splitting due to surface roughness back-scattering. The extrinsic coupling is tuned close to critical coupling in order to interrogate the mechanical modes. e) The transmitted noise spectrum is composed by the external phase modulator tone (pink) and several peaks due to the device’s thermal motion. The higher frequency family of peaks (red) is attributed to type-I modes whereas the lower frequency one (blue) has to do with the type-II mechanical modes. The spectrum noise-floor is above the detector shot noise (not shown) while the the detector dark noise was typically 10 dB below the shot-noise. f) Fitting the noise spectrum to the typical thermal mechanical response allows us to determine the mechanical mode frequency, quality factor and, along with knowledge of the external phase modulation, g0. For a = 1400 nm, the highest peak belonging to the type-I family shows g0/2π = 23.1 ± 0.2 kHz and Qm = 2360 ± 40.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

In order to evaluate the effects of the bullseye grating structure we fabricated devices with wring = 1.5 µm and 2.0 µm, corresponding to first order mechanical dilatational modes around 3.0 GHz (see Appendix E, Fig. 12) and 2.0 GHz respectively, while varying the bullseye pitch from a = 650 nm to 1450 nm. We have not fabricated devices with higher frequencies by this point to avoid being too close to the Foundry’s nominal resolution.

The devices are probed by a tunable laser that is evanescently coupled to the cavities through a tapered optical fiber (Fig. 5(c)) with the fiber polarization matching the bullseye’s TE mode. A lorentzian fit to the DC optical transmission signal yields intrinsic optical quality factors of 4 × 104 (κi/2π ≈ 5 GHz and free spectral range FSR ≈ 10 nm), as shown in Fig. 5(d). Although very low-loss straight silicon waveguides [22] and high-Q photonic crystal cavities [21] were demonstrated with similar fabrication processes, our optical quality factors are similar to those previously reported on other circular optical cavities, e.g. ring resonators [36, 37]. Moreover, disks without grooves with radius between 5 and 20 µm were patterned in the same chip and their optical Q-factors never exceeded 5 × 104.

By changing the distance from the fiber taper to the optical cavity we could optimize the optical coupling and achieve almost critical coupling (not shown, κeκi). We also used a similar technique to ensure the excitation of edge-localized optical modes as described in the Appendix B.

Room temperature thermal fluctuations excite the mechanical modes that modulate the phase of the intra-cavity optical field. The cavity resonance dispersion converts the phase-modulation into an amplitude modulation of the transmitted light, which can be measured using a radio-frequency (RF) spectrum analyzer. Despite the high mechanical frequencies of the fabricated device, the rather low optical quality factor (apparently limited by the foundry fabrication of circular elements) place the optomechanical cavity barely in the resolved sideband limit (κ/2 ≈ ωm). Therefore, the laser is tuned to the maximum slope of the optical mode transmission to ensure the most efficient conversion from phase to amplitude modulation.

In order to calibrate the optomechanical coupling rate, g0, the input laser beam is modulated at a frequency close to the mechanical resonance with a calibrated phase modulator [27]. Figure 5(e) shows a typical RF spectrum around the mechanical modes of a device with wring = 2.0 µm and a = 1400 nm. The modes around 2.15 GHz (red) are identified as the type-I mechanical modes whereas those around 2.00 GHz (blue) are type-II modes. The RF-calibration tone is also shown near 2.0 GHz (purple line). The flat noise-floor is dominated by intrinsic laser noise; no excess laser phase noise is observed in this frequency span.

In the RF spectrum, four or more peaks are observed for each mode type, instead of a single peak expected from axisymmetric isotropic silicon simulations — any other mechanical mode other than the type-I and type-II would be very lossy and/or have very low g0 in this isotropic approximation. We further investigate this behavior using three-dimensional numerical simulations that take into account both the in-plane anisotropy of silicon’s [38] and the fluctuations in wring throughout the cavity’s perimeter. We found that the material anisotropy together with a tiny variation of 10 nm (0.5%) in wring is enough to account for the typical 10 MHz splitting between peaks within a given mode family (see Appendix F).

The mechanical mode fitting and calibration give typical mechanical quality factors of Qm = 2300 at room temperature which are also confirmed by pump-probe experiments (see Appendix E), and optomechanical coupling rates as high as g0/2π = 23 kHz for the type-I mode shown in Fig. 5(e). The g0 values are in good agreement with the simulated values when silicon’s anisotropic elasticity is taken into account (see Appendix F, Fig. 9(b)). Figure 5(f) shows the corresponding spectral density of displacement fluctuations (Sxx) for the type-I mode with largest transduction, revealing a displacement sensitivity, given by the background noise, on the order of 5×1018m/Hz for a typical input optical power of Pin = 250 µW.

In order to understand how the bullseye grating structure is preventing mechanical loss, we compare the measured mechanical spectra — obtained from a series of devices with varying values of a — with the mechanical modes obtained from the axisymmetric numerical model of the bullseye cavity. Figure 6(a) shows the normalized (see Appendix C) measurement results for both type-I and type-II modes as well as the calculated band-edge frequency related to the third and fourth bands on Fig. 3(d) (dashed lines). The corresponding linear crystal’s DOS is superimposed to the calculated mechanical modes on Fig. 6(b). Neither the axisymmetric nor the linear model capture the in-plane anisotropy of silicon or any wring azimuthal fluctuations, nonetheless those simulations reproduce most of the features observed in the measured spectra; inside the bandgap the calculated optomechanical coupling is as high as 30 kHz and the mechanical mode is mostly confined within the wring (Fig. 6(c)), resulting in high mechanical quality factors. Outside the bandgap, the once confined mechanical mode can couple to grating band modes and leak energy through the pedestal. This effect is clearly seen for a between 1.2 and 1.3 µm in Fig. 6(a); despite the large calculated optomechanical coupling of 27 kHz, the mechanical mode spreads inside the circular grating resulting in a larger mechanical leakage and a small signal to noise ratio transduction signal. On the other hand, even inside the high DOS region (dark shaded regions of Fig. 6(b)), the mechanical modes might not couple to the grating bands (due to polarization mismatch) and result both in high optomechanical coupling and large mechanical quality factors; the a = 1.0 µm spectra is one such example. Deeper into the grating bands, however, any mechanical polarization travels through the grating and the mechanical Q-factor drops drastically down to a few hundreds as observed for a = 0.85 µm (Qm ≈ 400) and a = 0.8 µm (Qm ≈ 100). These results show a path to design a device with high mechanical quality factor and optomechanical coupling by adopting a simple one-dimensional model for the band structure and floating rings to infer the mechanical modes frequencies.

 

Fig. 6 Bullseye experimental demonstration. a) Mechanical spectra as a function of a for fixed wring = 2 µm, w/a = 0.2815, t = 70 nm and silicon layer of 220 nm. The vertical axis is normalized in order to account only for the optomechanical response (see Appendix C). The dashed lines account for the simulated edges for shear-horizontal (upper) and longitudinal (lower) waves, which dictate the isolation between type-II and type-I modes, respectively, and the pedestal. b) Simulated mechanical modes for an axisymmetric structure with the same parameters as those in (a). Larger (smaller) marker size accounts for larger (smaller) optomechanical coupling rate to the first order TE mode shown in Fig. 3(a). The red (blue) color is a guide to the mechanical modes of type-I (type-II). The gray tone shades are proportional to the mechanical DOS for the corresponding linear crystal, where darker (lighter) regions are related to higher (smaller) density of states (DOS) within the mechanical grating. c) Calculated mechanical mode displacement profile for selected type-I modes. Red (blue) colors represent larger (zero) mechanical displacement.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4. Conclusion

In summary, we present a new design for an optomechanical bullseye cavity with independent confinement approaches for optical and mechanical modes. Such strategy allows for tailorable mechanical modes up to 8 GHz and with g0/2π as large as 200 kHz. We experimentally demonstrate the bullseye optomechanical cavity using a standard optical lithography fabrication technique in a commercial CMOS foundry, resulting in modes between 2 GHz and 3 GHz with mechanical quality factors as high as 2300 at room temperature. The whispering gallery optical modes presented quality factors as high as 4 × 104 and optomechanical coupling rate on the order of g0/2π = 23 kHz, close to what is expected at these frequencies. Coupling between a single mechanical mode and multiple optical modes is also shown (Appendix E) and could be applied to efficient wavelength conversion [39]. Such applications could achieve commercial feasibility by substituting the taper by integrated waveguides with grating couplers [40, 41] along with hermetic packaging.

Our results in the bullseye disk can be compared to forward Brillouin scattering in silicon nanowires [24, 42, 43], since the optical and mechanical modes involved are quite similar — indeed, the silicon nanowire can be seen as a bullseye cavity with infinite radius. Our results show that the bullseye circular grating presents a clear improvement of an order of magnitude in the mechanical Q-factor when compared to the silicon nanowire for the same mechanical mode profile.

On the other hand, the optomechanical interaction demonstrated for wring = 0.45 µm nanowires (equivalent to g0/2π ≈ 200 kHz according to recently proposed conversion formulas [43] if the nanowire is bended into a 12 µm radius ring) is an order of magnitude stronger than in our fabricated bullseye cavities with wring = 2.0 µm. Interestingly, this equivalent nanowire g0 matches our bullseye simulations for wring = 0.45 µm, strongly indicating that further experiments regarding the bullseye design shall achieve an order of magnitude enhancement in the optomechanical coupling rate by shrinking the ring width.

As compared to other high mechanical frequency silicon disks proposals [44] whose high mechanical Q-factor relies on the smallness of the pedestal, our design has the advantage of mechanical frequency tailorability without perturbing the optical frequency. Comparing to optomechanical crystals such as the nanobeam [17] and the snowflake [20] designs, the bullseye disk leads to similar mechanical frequencies and should achieve a g0 value comparable to the snowflake’s, although still an order of magnitude lower than the nanobeam. However, our design still has an advantage in tailorability, for it uncouples the optical and mechanical designs, without increasing mechanical losses.

Finally, the CMOS flexibility allied with the ability to independently tailor both optical and mechanical modes, along with improvements in fabrication to enhance the optical Q-factor, could then be explored in the design of large arrays of coupled oscillators; whispering-gallery optical modes turn out to be a more natural approach for optically-coupled cavities [14]. This would allow for coupling between many non-colocalized optical modes enabling a novel route towards the investigation of multimode optomechanical phenomena, in a approach essentially different from, yet very competitive to, those based on optomechanical crystals.

Appendix

A. Sample fabrication

The devices were fabricated through the EpiXfab initiative at IMEC on a silicon-on-insulator wafer (top silicon layer of 220 nm over 2 µm of buried silicon oxide). Simple disks were first patterned on the top silicon layer through deep UV lithography and plasma etching. A similar (aligned) patterning cycle was then performed to make the circular grooves, although now the plasma would only etch 150 nm of silicon instead of the whole 220 nm layer. Finally, an in-house post-process step was performed to selectively and isotropically remove the buried oxide using diluted hydrofluoric acid in order to mechanically release the bullseye cavities.

It should be noticed that alignment errors affect performance only by producing an effective ring eccentricity, resulting in the same effects described in Appendix F. However the foundry’s overlay accuracy is better than 30 nm, which is unlikely to couple the clockwise and counterclockwise optical modes.

B. Experimental protocol

In order to couple light to the optical modes confined at the bullseye’s outer ring, the taper-cavity distance was slowly decreased through a sub-micron positioning system while the optical transmission was simultaneously monitored in a broad wavelength range (≈ 100 nm). The reduced overlap between the taper’s guided mode and inner bullseye modes ensures that we are not accessing inner modes when the taper is far from the cavity, since all optical modes have alike optical quality factors. After such mode identification, the taper is positioned closer to the cavity to increase the optical coupling and hence the phase/frequency to amplitude transduction provided by the cavity.

C. Mechanical spectra normalization

The detected current spectra is related to the mechanical noise spectra as [27]:

SII(Ω)=g02K(Ω)xzpf2Ω2Sxx(Ω)+ϕ022K(Ω)ENBWδ(ΩΩmod)+Sshot(Ω),
where K(Ω) is the cavity transduction function, Sshot(Ω) is the detector shot-noise, ϕ0 is the imprinted phase on the laser by the electro-optical phase modulator, ENBW is the noise-equivalent band-width of the electrical spectrum analyzer and Ωmod is the phase-modulation frequency. Figure 6(a) shows a series of mechanical spectra which were normalized by the phase modulator calibration tone (not shown) such that each curve is proportional to g02/xzpf2Sxx(Ω). After normalization each spectra is plotted in the same vertical dB scale.

D. The linear crystal approximation

In this section we further justify the linear crystal approximation. The main idea behind it is that the curvature of cylindrically symmetric grating interfaces will not affect small wavelength radially-polarized waves and will be scattered like plane waves by plane interfaces. In order to better understand such approximation, we compare both plane and circular gratings infinite along the z-direction, like shown in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b). These structures may be connected to the proposed slab-like ones by an effective medium approximation: the bulk longitudinal, vL, and shear, vS, velocities of the infinite media are rescaled to reproduce the corresponding slab velocities of the etched grating regions. Such procedure is analogue to the effective index approximation often used in optical waveguides [45, 46]. We shall focus on longitudinal waves since these are more closely approximate the bullseye’s dilatational modes.

 

Fig. 7 The linear grating approximation. a) Linear and b) circular gratings used to illustrate the validity of the linear crystal approximation in predicting bandgaps. Material properties: ρ1 = 2329 kg/m3, ρ2 = 0.001ρ1, c11 = 165.6 GPa, c44 = 79.5 GPa, vL,j=c11/ρj, vS,j=c44/ρj (j = 1, 2); geometric parameters: a = 1000 nm, w/a = 0.2815. c) Transmission spectra for linear and circular gratings (for varying r0) calculated through the transfer-matrix method. Such spectra clearly show that the linear approximation works better in the short-wavelength limit, where ωr0/vL ≫ 1.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

Elastic normal modes in an isotropic solid may be described by the particle velocity field, v(r), and its eigenvalue equation [35]

vL2(v(r))vS2×(×v(r))+ω2v(r)=0
where vL (vS) is the bulk velocity of longitudinal (shear) waves and ω is the normal mode’s frequency. Therefore, for longitudinal plane waves traveling along the x-direction, the solution to Eq. (3) is
vrect=(Aeiωx/vL+Beiωx/vL)x^
whereas cylindrically symmetric longitudinal waves in the r-direction may be written as
vcirc=(AH1(1)(ωrvL)+BH1(2)(ωrvL))r^,
where H1(1) and H1(2) are first-order Hankel functions of the first and second kind, respectively, which asymptotically become cylindrical waves for ωr/vL ≫1.

Both vrect and vcirc are of the form Avin+Bvout, the coefficients A and B depending on boundary conditions while vin and vout describe counter-propagating waves. Furthermore, the solutions have constant value (by construction) along interfaces matching their symmetry. Therefore, a transfer-matrix approach may be used to calculate the transmission of elastic waves through a finite number of homogeneous layers such as in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b) [47]. Such spectrum is suitable for locating the structure’s bandgaps because waves within it will be strongly reflected even by a finite grating. Our goal is then reduced to evaluating the range of parameters for which the linear and circular gratings have similar transmission spectra.

The transfer-matrix approach relies on writing the velocity field in every medium (labeled j) as vj = Ajvin + Bjvout and matching the boundary conditions (continuity of particle velocity and normal force [35]) on each interface. For example, such procedure allows us to express A2 and B2 as linear combinations of A1 and B1,

(A2B2)=M21(A1B1),
where the square matrix M21 is the so called transfer-matrix, which will depend on the symmetry of the problem.

Extending this argument to N media,

(ANBN)=MN,N1M32M21(A1B1).

Assuming loss less media and denoting the incident and reflected waves by vin and vout, respectively, energy conservation further requires |A1|2=|B1|2+|AN|2; BN = 0 is expected since there can be no reflected wave traveling within the last medium. The transmission spectrum is then calculated by evaluating the ratio |AN/A1|2 for every frequency of interest.

Figure 7c) shows the transmission spectra calculated by this transfer-matrix approach for the linear and circular grating. As the radius of the smallest interface, r0, decreases, it is clearly seen that the linear approximation starts to fail. On the other hand the transmission through the linear and circular gratings always disagree for low frequencies even for higher r0 values. These results summarize our initial thesis: the linear grating suitably approximates the circular one as long as the wavelength is small compared to the layers’ radius.

From Eq. (4) and (5), such conclusions can be made more quantitative. The validity of the linear approximation depends mainly on how well cylindrical waves approximate the Hankel functions that analytically solve the problem. Therefore, the linear crystal approximation is expected to work better for higher values of ωr/vL.

Calculation of transfer-matrices

Here we show the details about the calculations of the transfer-matrices for linearly and cylindrically symmetric problems. Such calculations rely on the boundary conditions of continuity of the velocity field, v, and of the normal force given by Tn^, T representing the stress tensor.

The stress tensor may be expressed as a function of the·generalized Hooke’s law as T = C : S, where C is the 4-th rank stiffness tensor and S is the strain tensor, also given by the symmetric gradient of the displacement field, S=Su. For normal modes, the harmonic temporal behavior implies that v=iωu.

For the planar interface described by vrect (Eq. (4)), the boundary conditions become continuity of vrect and of Tx^ at a interface plane, x = w, between media 1 and 2. We therefore get the transfer-matrix

M21=(vL,1ρ1+vL,2ρ22vL,2ρ2exp{2iwωvL,1i(vL,1+vL,2)wωvL,1vL,2}vL,2ρ2vL,1ρ12vL,2ρ2exp{i(vL,1+vL,2)wωvL,1vL,2}vL,2ρ2vL,1ρ12vL,2ρ2exp{2iwωvL,1+i(vL,1vL,2)wωvL,1vL,2}vL,1ρ1+vL,2ρ22vL,2ρ2exp{i(vL,1vL,2)wωvL,1vL,2})
where ρj and vL,j are respectively the density and bulk longitudinal velocity in medium j.

Now for the cylindrical symmetric problem, we use the continuity of vcirc from Eq. (5) and the corresponding normal force, Tr^ at a cylindrical surface r = a separating media 1 and 2, to obtain

M21=iπ4vL,22ρ2(d1t12t21d2)
with matrix elements given by
d1=H1(1)(aωvL,1){avL,2ρ2ωH0(2)(aωvL,2)+2(vS,12ρ1vS,22ρ2)H1(2)(aωvL,2)}avL,1ρ1ωH0(1)(aωvL,1)H1(2)(aωvL,2)d2=H1(1)(aωvL,2){avL,1ρ1ωH0(2)(aωvL,1)+2(vS,22ρ2vS,12ρ1)H1(2)(aωvL,1)}avL,2ρ2ωH0(1)(aωvL,2)H1(2)(aωvL,1)t12=avL,2ρ2ωH0(2)(aωvL,2)H1(2)(aωvL,1)+{2(vS,12ρ1vS,22ρ2)H1(2)(aωvL,1)avL,1ρ1ωH0(2)(aωvL,1)}H1(2)(aωvL,2)t21=avL,2ρ2ωH0(1)(aωvL,2)H1(1)(aωvL,1){2(vS,12ρ1vS,22ρ2)H1(1)(aωvL,1)avL,1ρ1ωH0(1)(aωvL,1)}H1(1)(aωvL,2)
where now the shear velocities vS,j explicitly appear in the transfer-matrix in contrast to Eq. (7). This can be understood from the evaluation of the strain field, since the gradient of the radial displacement field u(r) also has a φ-component for these cylindrical symmetric solutions.

E. Pump-probe mechanical spectroscopy

A way to characterize an harmonic oscillator is by looking at its response due to a harmonic driving force. In optomechanical systems, this can be done to probe the mechanical modes with improved signal-to-noise ratio [24]. To do so, we used a pump-probe scheme as illustrated in Fig. 8(a). A strong amplitude modulated pump laser drives the mechanical mode through radiation pressure. The mechanical oscillation turns into modulation of the optical resonance frequency, which can be measured in the transmission of a weak probe laser tuned to an optical mode with similar transverse profile but a few free spectral ranges away from the pumped mode; this strategy is necessary to isolate the probe signal from amplitude modulation coming directly from the pump laser.

 

Fig. 8 Pump-probe measurements. a) An amplitude modulated pump laser (red) locked to the half-linewidth of an optical resonance harmonically drives the mechanical mode through radiation pressure force; a probe laser (blue) tuned to an optical resonance with equal transverse profile but a few free spectral ranges away, reads the driven motion through the optomechanical interaction. b) The signal gain compared to the thermal driven motion strongly depends on the modulation amplitude and input power of the pump laser. The dashed line shows the unity gain, above which the pump-probe scheme is actually advantageous. c) In order to avoid contamination of the probe signal by the pump, the beams are launched in opposite directions and isolated from each other through optical circulators. A bandpass filter tuned to the probe band further improves the degree of isolation. d) A Fano lineshape arises from interference between the driven mechanical motion and the broadband Kerr effect. Such lineshape may be fitted to yield the mechanical mode’s frequency and quality factor. e) The pump-probe measurement agrees to the thermally driven one; although having a similar signal-to-noise ratio, the pump-probe spectrum has a much high extinction.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

The gain in signal relative to the thermally driven mechanical spectrum can be quantified by comparing the displacement noise spectrum in both cases. The thermal spectrum is given by the well known expression [26]

Sxx(thermal)(Ω)=2γkBT/meff(Ωm2Ω2)2+(γΩ)2

Now to find the displacement noise spectrum for the optically driven case, we solve the equations of motion for the pumped optical mode’s amplitude, a, and for the excited mechanical mode’s displacement, x,

a˙=(iΔ+κ2)aiGxa+κeain(1+δcosΩmodt)
x¨+γx˙+Ωm2x=Gmeff|a|2,
where G = g0/xzpf. The last term in Eq. (9) accounts for the modulated pump laser, where |ain|2 is the incident photon flux (the input pump power reads ωp|ain|2 where ωp is the pump laser frequency), Ωmod the modulation frequency, δ describes the modulation depth and κe is the extrinsic loss rate. The coupling terms describe the optical frequency shift in Eq. (9) and radiation pressure in (10). The remaining parameters concern the modes regardless of optomechanical interaction: Δ is the pump laser’s detuning to the optical resonance, κ is the total optical loss rate, Ωm is the mechanical resonance frequency, γ the mechanical loss rate, meff the mechanical mode’s effective mass and ħ is the reduced Planck constant.

The dominant terms of the solution to Eq. (9) and (10) should be either static or oscillating with the modulation frequency. Therefore,

a=α0+αeiΩmodt+α+eiΩmodtx=x0+12(x1eiΩmodt+x1*eiΩmodt)

By keeping the pump power low so that dynamical backaction may be ignored and by absorbing static optical resonance shifts in Δ, one gets

x1=2Gmeffα0*α+α0α+*Ωm2Ωmod2+iγΩmod
with
α0=κeainiΔ+κ/2
α=κeainδi(Δ+Ωmod)+κ/2
α+=κeainδi(ΔΩmod)+κ/2

The displacement noise spectrum associated to this solution would show an infinitely narrow peak at Ωmod, which when integrated should lead to the driven variance

Δx2=(xx)2=|x1|22.

Apart from transduction constants, the actually measured peak has its width limited both by the modulator’s linewidth and by the spectrum analyzer’s Effective Noise BandWidth (ENBW). In this experiment we used an electro-optical modulator driven by a sub-Hz linewidth radio-frequency signal generator, whereas an ENBW of ≈ 100 kHz was enough to resolve the mechanical resonances. Therefore, the peak’s width was always limited by ENBW and such peak intensity as a function of Ωmod reads

Sxx(driven)(Ωmod)=2πENBWΔx2=4πENBW(Gmeff)2|(α0*α+α0α+*)|2(Ωm2Ωmod2)2+(γΩmod)2

It is worth noting that, although similar experimental setups are used for probing the thermal and driven noises, the driven noise acquisition requires using the spectrum analyzer actually as a demodulator tuned to the modulator’s frequency Ωmod.

Now the gain in signal obtained by this pump-probe strategy may be easily expressed from Eq. (8) and (16):

gain=2πENBW|G(α0*α+α0α+*)|2γmeffkBT

It immediately follows from Eq. (17) that the gain should benefit both from a high input pump power and from a large modulation depth. It also follows that the pump-probe measurement is most effective when the pump laser is tuned to the half-linewidth of the pumped resonance (see Fig. 8(a)) and that it is limited to the cavity’s bandwidth κ.

Figure 8b) shows a plot of the gain as a function of the input power and modulation depth for cavity parameters matching our devices (see Fig. 5 and main text). The black dashed line shows the curve of unity gain, above which the pump-probe method is indeed advantageous.

We performed pump-probe measurements following the setup of Fig. 8(c). An electro-optical modulator driven by a RF-signal generator modulates the pump laser which is then guided towards the cavity. In order to avoid the thermo-optical instability, the pump laser is actively locked to the blue side of an optical resonance at half-linewidth. The counter-propagating probe laser is launched from the opposite direction and tuned to the half-linewidth of an optical mode of the same transverse family but a few free-spectral-range (FSR) apart (≈ 20 nm) — notice that, in constrast to similar pump-probe configurations for studying Brillouin scattering [24], there is no optomechanically backscattered light since the mechanical mode has zero azimuthal number. Optical circulators and a bandpass filter ensure that the photocurrent seen by the electrical spectrum analyzer is only due to the probe transmission. Under typical experimental conditions, pump power around 100 µW and modulation depth of 5 %, the gain would be approximately 25 dB according to Fig. 8.

The measured pump-probe spectrum is a bit more complicated than Eq. (16) due to other optical nonlinearities. Broadband nonlinear effects such as Kerr, free carrier dispersion and free carrier absorption interfere with the narrow-band optomechanical effect into a Fano lineshape (Fig. 8(d)). These extra nonlinearities may be lumped into a frequency independent complex parameter kNL, so that we may fit the Fano resonances to the expression

SII(Ωmod)=|kNL+kOMΩm2Ωmod2+iγΩmod|2
which allows for calculating the quality factor of each mechanical mode; the Q-factors calculated by such approach agree to those calculated from the thermal noise spectrum shown in Fig. 5 of the main text.

The main advantage of the pump-probe method in these devices is the much larger extinction near mechanical resonances compared to the thermal spectrum, as shown in Figs. 8(d) and 8(e). Such large extinction allows for easily locating the mechanical modes which can be further studied (including g0 measurements) in the direct detection setup of Fig. 5(b).

F. Effects of eccentricity and anisotropy on the bullseye’s mechanical modes

In this section we show how silicon’s elastic anisotropy and possible fluctuations in wring lead to a more thorough comprehension of the mechanical spectra shown in Fig. 5.

To do so, we first perform three dimensional finite element simulations of the ring structure (Fig. 9(a)) focusing on quasi-radially polarized modes. In order to clearly understand how the anisotropy affects the modes, we write silicon’s stiffness tensor:

C(η)=(c11c12c12000c12c11c12000c12c12c11000000c44*(η)000000c44*(η)000000c44*(η))
where
c44*(η)=ηc44+(1η)c11c122
η being a simulation parameter that continuously switches from an isotropic approximation (η = 0) to the real anisotropic stiffness tensor for silicon (η = 1); c11 = 165.6 GPa, c12 = 63.9 GPa and c44 = 79.5 GPa are the stiffness constants for anisotropic silicon.

 

Fig. 9 Effect of anisotropy on mechanical modes. a) A three-dimensional FEM simulation shows the dilatational mode and 3 extra mechanical modes for an isotropic approximation (η = 0), all of which couple to the ring-like optical mode at similar optomechanical coupling rates. These 4 modes are hybridized as silicon’s anisotropy is taken into account (η > 0, such that the exact anisotropy is approached as η approaches 1). The measured splitting of nearly 10 MHz, however, may be better understood as a combination between anisotropy and fluctuations in wring (see Fig. 10). b) Numerical calculations for the dilatational mode shows that the total optomechanical coupling rate g0 (black) diminishes towards the measured values as anisotropy is taken into account following the trend of the dominant photoelastic contribution (red); the smaller moving boundary contribution (green) barely changes.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

 

Fig. 10 Effect of eccentricity on mechanical modes. a) Simulated mechanical dispersion as a function of b/a for a silicon ring (inset) with anisotropic stiffness. A splitting of ∼ 10 MHz arises as b exceeds a by 0.5%. The eccentricity-induced mode hybridization is such that the former type A mode gives origin to two branches with similar mode profiles, hence similar optomechanical couplings. b) A similar splitting behavior also shows up for bullseye simulations (performed for half-structure with symmetric boundary conditions). Because the real fluctuations are random, such mechanism may be responsible for the multiple peaks observed within the RF spectra.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

The three-dimensional isotropic simulation (η = 0) shows 4 modes with large optomechanical coupling to the outer ring optical mode: the azimuthally symmetric dilatational mode (type A) and three extra ones that break the azimuthal symmetry, two of which (type B and B*) are degenerate and connected by π/2 rotations. As η is raised to 1, the 4 modes get more hybridized and their splitting actually becomes smaller; also, the twofold degeneracy is not broken since the anisotropic stiffness (or more generally, silicon’s cubic structure) is still symmetric under π rotations (Fig. 9(a)). On the other hand, the optomechanical coupling rate for the Type A mode gets closer to the measured value g0/2π = 23.1 ± 0.2 kHz as η approaches 1 due to the further localization of mechanical strain around the ring region, which suppresses the photoelastic effect (Fig. 9(b)). However, the B, B* and C modes still have very small g0.

There remains the problem of understanding the multiple peaks within each family. A quick estimation would show that a splitting of 10 MHz in Ωm ≈ 2 GHz could be caused by a fluctuation of 10 nm on wring = 2 µm; controlling such geometric fluctuations is far beyond the limits of deep UV lithography.

To further investigate whether such wring fluctuations are a reasonable explanation for the observed 10 MHz splitting, one has to show not only that the splitting arises from such fluctuations, but that these also cause more modes to have a high g0. Therefore, we performed another set of three-dimensional finite element simulations of ring structures, now assuming the more realistic anisotropic stiffness tensor C(η = 1) and varying the eccentricity of the devices as shown in Fig. 10 by keeping a = wring and varying b; this is the most simple way of simulating such fluctuations without recurring to more complicated stochastic methods while still getting a lot of physical insight.

Figure 10(a) shows the ring dispersion as a function of b/a. It is clearly seen that the mode hybridization caused by eccentricity leads to splittings on the order of 10 MHz. Additionally, from the highlighted mode profiles, it would be expected two modes with large g0 (those where expansions or compression are always in phase) instead of only one for the perfectly circular device.

Such conclusions are reproduced when investigating the actual bullseye disk as shown in Fig. 10(b), whose simulations were performed for half-bullseye with symmetric boundary conditions along a diameter. The Type A mode basically breaks up in two branches whose separation reaches 12 MHz as b/a approaches 1.005. Again, both branches should show similar optomechanical couplings. Finally, such considerations can be extended to explain a higher number of peaks within each family by recalling that the wring variations intrinsic to the fabrication process are of a random nature.

G. Scalable and tailorable bullseye optomechanical cavities

In order to check whether the actual dimensions match the nominal values, we fitted SEM images of the bullseye devices. The images were acquired in a NOVA 200 Nanolab Dual Beam (FIB-SEM) System and later processed to correct residual astigmatism. We rescale each SEM image to ensure that the diameter measured along the image’s x- and y-directions are equal. The validity of such scaling is confirmed by comparing the eccentricity impact on the mechanical mode splitting (Fig. 10), suggesting that diameter fluctuations should be lower than 1% of the wring width (20 nm). Also, we calibrate the absolute distance scale by assuming that each disk diameter is equal to the nominal one 24 µm.

All size measurements are within the nominal value to the fitting error — our fitting algorithm has an uncertainty of ±15 nm (±2 pixels), which is much larger than statistical errors for every fitted image. These results, shown in Fig. 11, demonstrate the scalability of bullseye optomechanical disks to a precision of 15 nm in CMOS-compatible Foundries, an important step towards commercial applications of optomechanical resonators.

Finally, we demonstrate mechanical tailorability by exploring the dependence of the mechanical frequency on wring. To do so, we characterized a set of bullseye devices with wring = 1.5 µm which are expected to have mechanical resonances related to Type I and Type II modes slightly below 3 GHz according to Fig. 1. Figure 12 shows pump-probe measurements for such set of devices over the linear crystal DOS. Like for those devices with wring = 2.0 µm, the linear crystal DOS and mechanical resonances agree (except for a small displacement in a) and again two main families of resonances are noticed, corresponding to Type I and Type II mechanical mode profiles.

 

Fig. 11 Scaling the bullseye disk fabrication. a) An array of bullseye cavities is shown with constant wring = 2.0 µm and varying a and w. The central row is the optomechanically characterized one (see Fig. 5). SEM images of the lower row devices were fitted (red curves) as shown in the inset in order to check the geometrical parameters. b) The ring-width wring matches the nominal value within the fitting error, as well as the c) groove width w. The fitting uncertainty is dominated by systematic error, ±2 pixels, intrinsic to our fitting algorithm. d) w/a also matches the nominal values within error bars. The higher error bars for smaller w/a values is due to the relative importance of the ± 2 pixels of systematic error compared to both w and a.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

 

Fig. 12 Mechanical modes for wring = 1.5 µm. Pump-probe spectra as function of a for bullseye disks with wring = 1.5 µm and w/a = 0.28; the mechanical mode frequencies along with extinction and quality factor approximately matches the linear crystal DOS (gray scale), like observed for wring = 2.0 µm.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

H. Perfectly matched layer parameters in FEM simulations

When simulating the bullseye’s radiation loss (Fig. 4(c)), we used a semi-spherical perfectly matched layer (PML) below the device’s pedestal. Inside the PML, the spherical radial coordinate r is stretched by Δr according to:

Δr=sλξp(1i)Δwξ
where ξ is a dimensionless coordinate varying between 0 (close to the pedestal) to 1 (at the end of the computational domain); λ = 1.874 µm is the typical mechanical wavelength, s = 4 a scale factor, p = 4 the curvature parameter and Δw = 1.5πλ is the PML’s width along the radial direction. The Q-factor is then obtained from the eigenfrequency Ω as Qm = Re[Ω]/2Im[Ω].

Funding

Sao Paulo State Research Foundation (FAPESP) (2012/17610-3, 2012/17765-7, 2013/06360-9); National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development (CNPq) (550504/2012-5); Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Paulo Dainese for fruitful discussions and CCS-UNICAMP for providing the electron microscopy infrastructure.

References and links

1. J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

2. Y. Chen, “Macroscopic quantum mechanics: theory and experimental concepts of optomechanics,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 104001 (2013). [CrossRef]  

3. M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015). [CrossRef]  

4. M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015). [CrossRef]  

5. V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

6. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014). [CrossRef]  

7. R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

8. S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

9. S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

10. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

11. A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012). [CrossRef]  

12. X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

13. K. E. Grutter, M. I. Davanço, and K. Srinivasan, “Slot-mode optomechanical crystals: a versatile platform for multimode optomechanics,” Optica 2, 994–1001 (2015). [CrossRef]  

14. M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012). [CrossRef]  

15. P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012). [CrossRef]  

16. K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016). [CrossRef]  

17. J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012). [CrossRef]  

18. D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

19. H. Rokhsari, T. Kippenberg, T. Carmon, and K. J. Vahala, “Radiation-pressure-driven micro-mechanical oscillator,” Opt. Express 13, 5293–5301 (2005). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

20. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

21. R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

22. S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010). [CrossRef]  

23. A. N. Cleland, Foundations of Nanomechanics: From Solid-State Theory to Device Applications, (Springer, 2003). [CrossRef]  

24. R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015). [CrossRef]  

25. S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002). [CrossRef]  

26. M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014). [CrossRef]  

27. M. L. Gorodetsky, A. Schliesser, G. Anetsberger, S. Deléglise, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Determination of the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate using frequency noise calibration,” Opt. Express 18, 23236–23246 (2010). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

28. X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012). [CrossRef]  

29. D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998). [CrossRef]  

30. J. S. A. Yariv, “Annular Bragg defect mode resonators,” JOSA B 20, 2285–2291 (2003). [CrossRef]  

31. S. Schönenberger, N. Moll, T. Stöferle, R. F. Mahrt, B. J. Offrein, S. Götzinger, V. Sandoghdar, J. Bolten, T. Wahlbrink, T. Plötzing, M. Waldow, and M. Först, “Circular Grating Resonators as Small Mode-Volume Microcavities for Switching,” Opt. Express 17, 5953–5964 (2009). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

32. H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

33. Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011). [CrossRef]  

34. J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

35. B. A. Auld, Acoustic Fields and Waves in Solids, (Krieger, 1990).

36. M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014). [CrossRef]  

37. K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

38. M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010). [CrossRef]  

39. J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012). [CrossRef]  

40. G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

41. M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

42. R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015). [CrossRef]  

43. R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016). [CrossRef]  

44. W. C. Jiang, X. Lu, J. Zhang, and Q. Lin, “High-frequency silicon optomechanical oscillator with an ultralow threshold,” Opt. Express 20, 15991–15996 (2012). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

45. E. A. J. Marcatili, “Dielectric rectangular waveguide and directional coupler for integrated optics,” Bell Syst. Tech. J 48, 2071–2102 (2013). [CrossRef]  

46. K. Okamoto, Fundamentals of Optical Waveguides (Academic, 2006).

47. P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978). [CrossRef]  

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  2. Y. Chen, “Macroscopic quantum mechanics: theory and experimental concepts of optomechanics,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 104001 (2013).
    [Crossref]
  3. M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  4. M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  5. V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).
  6. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
    [Crossref]
  7. R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  9. S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  10. X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  11. A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  12. X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  13. K. E. Grutter, M. I. Davanço, and K. Srinivasan, “Slot-mode optomechanical crystals: a versatile platform for multimode optomechanics,” Optica 2, 994–1001 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  14. M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  15. P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  16. K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
    [Crossref]
  17. J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  18. D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  19. H. Rokhsari, T. Kippenberg, T. Carmon, and K. J. Vahala, “Radiation-pressure-driven micro-mechanical oscillator,” Opt. Express 13, 5293–5301 (2005).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  20. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  21. R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.
  22. S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
    [Crossref]
  23. A. N. Cleland, Foundations of Nanomechanics: From Solid-State Theory to Device Applications, (Springer, 2003).
    [Crossref]
  24. R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  25. S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
    [Crossref]
  26. M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
    [Crossref]
  27. M. L. Gorodetsky, A. Schliesser, G. Anetsberger, S. Deléglise, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Determination of the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate using frequency noise calibration,” Opt. Express 18, 23236–23246 (2010).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  28. X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  29. D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
    [Crossref]
  30. J. S. A. Yariv, “Annular Bragg defect mode resonators,” JOSA B 20, 2285–2291 (2003).
    [Crossref]
  31. S. Schönenberger, N. Moll, T. Stöferle, R. F. Mahrt, B. J. Offrein, S. Götzinger, V. Sandoghdar, J. Bolten, T. Wahlbrink, T. Plötzing, M. Waldow, and M. Först, “Circular Grating Resonators as Small Mode-Volume Microcavities for Switching,” Opt. Express 17, 5953–5964 (2009).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  32. H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  33. Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
    [Crossref]
  34. J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  35. B. A. Auld, Acoustic Fields and Waves in Solids, (Krieger, 1990).
  36. M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
    [Crossref]
  37. K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.
  38. M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
    [Crossref]
  39. J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
    [Crossref]
  40. G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  41. M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  42. R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
    [Crossref]
  43. R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
    [Crossref]
  44. W. C. Jiang, X. Lu, J. Zhang, and Q. Lin, “High-frequency silicon optomechanical oscillator with an ultralow threshold,” Opt. Express 20, 15991–15996 (2012).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  45. E. A. J. Marcatili, “Dielectric rectangular waveguide and directional coupler for integrated optics,” Bell Syst. Tech. J 48, 2071–2102 (2013).
    [Crossref]
  46. K. Okamoto, Fundamentals of Optical Waveguides (Academic, 2006).
  47. P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
    [Crossref]

2016 (3)

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
[Crossref]

2015 (6)

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

K. E. Grutter, M. I. Davanço, and K. Srinivasan, “Slot-mode optomechanical crystals: a versatile platform for multimode optomechanics,” Optica 2, 994–1001 (2015).
[Crossref]

M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
[Crossref]

M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

2014 (7)

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
[Crossref]

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2013 (3)

Y. Chen, “Macroscopic quantum mechanics: theory and experimental concepts of optomechanics,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 104001 (2013).
[Crossref]

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

E. A. J. Marcatili, “Dielectric rectangular waveguide and directional coupler for integrated optics,” Bell Syst. Tech. J 48, 2071–2102 (2013).
[Crossref]

2012 (9)

W. C. Jiang, X. Lu, J. Zhang, and Q. Lin, “High-frequency silicon optomechanical oscillator with an ultralow threshold,” Opt. Express 20, 15991–15996 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
[Crossref]

2011 (2)

Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2010 (3)

M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
[Crossref]

M. L. Gorodetsky, A. Schliesser, G. Anetsberger, S. Deléglise, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Determination of the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate using frequency noise calibration,” Opt. Express 18, 23236–23246 (2010).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

2009 (2)

2005 (1)

2003 (2)

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. S. A. Yariv, “Annular Bragg defect mode resonators,” JOSA B 20, 2285–2291 (2003).
[Crossref]

2002 (2)

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

1998 (1)

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

1978 (1)

P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
[Crossref]

Alegre, T. P.

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

Anant, V.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Anetsberger, G.

Armani, D. K.

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Aspelmeyer, M.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Auld, B. A.

B. A. Auld, Acoustic Fields and Waves in Solids, (Krieger, 1990).

Baets, R.

R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

Bagheri, M.

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Balram, K. C.

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

Barea, L. A. M.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Barnard, A.

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

Bazin, A.

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

Benisty, H.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Bianucci, P.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

Blasius, T. D.

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

Bogaerts, W.

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

Bolten, J.

Bowen, W. P.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Brawley, G. A.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Brendel, C.

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

Brongersma, M. L.

Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
[Crossref]

Bulu, I.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Carmon, T.

Chan, J.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Chen, L.

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Chen, Y.

Y. Chen, “Macroscopic quantum mechanics: theory and experimental concepts of optomechanics,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 104001 (2013).
[Crossref]

Cleland, A. N.

A. N. Cleland, Foundations of Nanomechanics: From Solid-State Theory to Device Applications, (Springer, 2003).
[Crossref]

Cuche, A.

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

da SilvaBenevides, R.

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

Davanço, M. I.

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

K. E. Grutter, M. I. Davanço, and K. Srinivasan, “Slot-mode optomechanical crystals: a versatile platform for multimode optomechanics,” Optica 2, 994–1001 (2015).
[Crossref]

Degiron, A.

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Deléglise, S.

Deotare, P. B.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Devaux, E.

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Dumon, P.

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

Ebbesen, T. W.

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Fan, L.

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Fink, Y.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Först, M.

Forstner, S.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Frank, I. W.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Frateschi, N. C.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Garcia-Vidal, F. J.

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Genet, C.

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Gondarenko, A.

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Gorodetsky, M. L.

Götzinger, S.

Gröblacher, S.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Groeblacher, S.

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Grutter, K. E.

Gu, T.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Guilherme, F. M.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Hamidfar, T.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

Harris, G. I.

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Hati, A.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Hill, J. T.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Hong, S.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Hopcroft, M. A.

M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
[Crossref]

Houdre, R.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Howe, D. A.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Hsieh, P.-C.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Huang, K. C. Y.

Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
[Crossref]

Huang, S.-W.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Huang, Y.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Humphreys, C. L.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Ibanescu, M.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Ilic, R.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Jiang, W. C.

Joannopoulos, J.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Johnson, S.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Jun, Y. C.

Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
[Crossref]

Kenny, T. W.

M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
[Crossref]

Kessler, S.

Kippenberg, T.

Kippenberg, T. J.

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. L. Gorodetsky, A. Schliesser, G. Anetsberger, S. Deléglise, and T. J. Kippenberg, “Determination of the vacuum optomechanical coupling rate using frequency noise calibration,” Opt. Express 18, 23236–23246 (2010).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Knittel, J.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Krause, A.

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Krause, A. G.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

Krauss, T. F.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Kuyken, B.

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

Kwong, D.-L.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Labilloy, D.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Lezec, H. J.

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Li, Y.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Lin, Q.

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

W. C. Jiang, X. Lu, J. Zhang, and Q. Lin, “High-frequency silicon optomechanical oscillator with an ultralow threshold,” Opt. Express 20, 15991–15996 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Linke, R. A.

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Lipson, M.

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Lo, G.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Loncar, M.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Lu, X.

Luan, X.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Luiz, G. de Oliveira

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

Mahrt, R. F.

Manipatruni, S.

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

Marcatili, E. A. J.

E. A. J. Marcatili, “Dielectric rectangular waveguide and directional coupler for integrated optics,” Bell Syst. Tech. J 48, 2071–2102 (2013).
[Crossref]

Marom, E.

P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
[Crossref]

Marquardt, F.

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
[Crossref]

M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
[Crossref]

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Martin-Moreno, L.

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

MayerAlegre, T. P.

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

McEuen, P.

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

McGarvey-Lechable, K.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

McMillan, J. F.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Meenehan, S.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

Moll, N.

Nix, W. D.

M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
[Crossref]

Norte, R. A.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Oesterle, U.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Offrein, B. J.

Okamoto, K.

K. Okamoto, Fundamentals of Optical Waveguides (Academic, 2006).

Painter, O.

M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Patel, D.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

Peano, V.

M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
[Crossref]

Plant, D. V.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

Plötzing, T.

Poot, M.

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Prams, S.

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Quan, Q.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Rezende, G. F. M.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Riedinger, R.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Rokhsari, H.

Rubinsztein-Dunlop, H.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Safavi-Naeini, A. H.

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Sandoghdar, V.

Santos, F. G.

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

Schliesser, A.

Schmidt, M.

M. Schmidt, S. Kessler, V. Peano, O. Painter, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical creation of magnetic fields for photons on a lattice,” Optica 2, 635–641 (2015).
[Crossref]

M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
[Crossref]

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

Schönenberger, S.

Selvaraja, S. K.

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

Shang, J.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Sheridan, E.

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Skorobogatiy, M.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Slater, J. A.

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Smith, C. J. M.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Song, J. D.

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

Souza, M. C. M. M.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Spillane, S. M.

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Srinivasan, K.

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

K. E. Grutter, M. I. Davanço, and K. Srinivasan, “Slot-mode optomechanical crystals: a versatile platform for multimode optomechanics,” Optica 2, 994–1001 (2015).
[Crossref]

Stöferle, T.

Sun, X.

X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
[Crossref]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Swaim, J. D.

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Szorkovszky, A.

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Tang, H. X.

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
[Crossref]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Thourhout, D. V.

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

Vahala, K. J.

H. Rokhsari, T. Kippenberg, T. Carmon, and K. J. Vahala, “Radiation-pressure-driven micro-mechanical oscillator,” Opt. Express 13, 5293–5301 (2005).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Vallini, F.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

Van Laer, R.

R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

van Ooijen, E. D.

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Van Thourhout, D.

R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

Wahlbrink, T.

Waldow, M.

Wang, D.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Weisberg, O.

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Weisbuch, C.

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Wen, G.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Wiederhecker, G.

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

Wiederhecker, G. S.

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. C. M. M. Souza, L. A. M. Barea, F. Vallini, F. M. Guilherme, G. S. Wiederhecker, N. C. Frateschi, G. F. M. Rezende, G. S. Wiederhecker, and N. C. Frateschi, “Embedded coupled microrings with high-finesse and close-spaced resonances for optical signal processing,” Opt. Express 22, 20179–20186 (2014).
[Crossref]

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Winger, M.

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

Wong, C. W.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Xu, L.

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

Yariv, A.

P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
[Crossref]

Yariv, J. S. A.

J. S. A. Yariv, “Annular Bragg defect mode resonators,” JOSA B 20, 2285–2291 (2003).
[Crossref]

Yeh, P.

P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
[Crossref]

Yi, J.-M.

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Yu, M.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Zhang, J.

Zhang, M.

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

Zhang, X.

X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
[Crossref]

Zhang, Y.

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Zheng, J.

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

ACS Photonics (1)

J.-M. Yi, A. Cuche, E. Devaux, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Visible Light with a Plasmonic Aperture Antenna,” ACS Photonics 1, 365–370 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Adv. Mater. (1)

S. Forstner, E. Sheridan, J. Knittel, C. L. Humphreys, G. A. Brawley, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and W. P. Bowen, “Ultrasensitive Optomechanical Magnetometry,” Adv. Mater. 26, 6348–6353 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Appl. Phys. Lett. (3)

J. Chan, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, and O. Painter, “Optimized optomechanical crystal cavity with acoustic radiation shield,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 081115 (2012).
[Crossref]

X. Sun, X. Zhang, and H. X. Tang, “High-Q silicon optomechanical microdisk resonators at gigahertz frequencies,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 173116 (2012).
[Crossref]

D. Labilloy, H. Benisty, C. Weisbuch, T. F. Krauss, C. J. M. Smith, R. Houdre, and U. Oesterle, “High-finesse disk microcavity based on a circular Bragg reflector,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1314–1316 (1998).
[Crossref]

Bell Syst. Tech. J (1)

E. A. J. Marcatili, “Dielectric rectangular waveguide and directional coupler for integrated optics,” Bell Syst. Tech. J 48, 2071–2102 (2013).
[Crossref]

IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. (1)

S. K. Selvaraja, W. Bogaerts, P. Dumon, D. V. Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Sub-nanometer Linewidth Uniformity in Silicon Nanophotonic Waveguide Devices Using CMOS Fabrication Technology,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Phys. 16, 316 (2010).
[Crossref]

J. Microelectromech. Syst. (1)

M. A. Hopcroft, W. D. Nix, and T. W. Kenny, “What is the Young’s Modulus of Silicon?” J. Microelectromech. Syst. 19, 229–238 (2010).
[Crossref]

J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. (1)

Y. Chen, “Macroscopic quantum mechanics: theory and experimental concepts of optomechanics,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 46, 104001 (2013).
[Crossref]

JOSA (1)

P. Yeh, A. Yariv, and E. Marom, “Theory of Bragg fiber*,” JOSA 68, 1196–1201 (1978).
[Crossref]

JOSA B (1)

J. S. A. Yariv, “Annular Bragg defect mode resonators,” JOSA B 20, 2285–2291 (2003).
[Crossref]

Nano Lett. (1)

X. Sun, J. Zheng, M. Poot, C. W. Wong, and H. X. Tang, “Femtogram Doubly Clamped Nanomechanical Resonators Embedded in a High-Q Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal Nanocavity,” Nano Lett. 12, 2299–2305 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Nature (5)

D. K. Armani, T. J. Kippenberg, S. M. Spillane, and K. J. Vahala, “Ultra-high-Q toroid microcavity on a chip,” Nature 421, 925–928 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator,” Nature 500, 185–189 (2014).
[Crossref]

R. Riedinger, S. Hong, R. A. Norte, J. A. Slater, J. Shang, A. G. Krause, V. Anant, M. Aspelmeyer, and S. Gröblacher, “Non-classical correlations between single photons and phonons from a mechanical oscillator,” Nature 530, 313–316 (2016).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

J. Chan, T. P. MayerAlegre, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, A. Krause, S. Groeblacher, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, “Laser cooling of a nanomechanical oscillator into its quantum ground state,” Nature 478, 89–92 (2011).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

G. S. Wiederhecker, L. Chen, A. Gondarenko, and M. Lipson, “Controlling photonic structures using optical forces,” Nature 462, 633–636 (2009).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Nature Commun. (3)

J. T. Hill, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. Chan, and O. Painter, “Coherent optical wavelength conversion via cavity optomechanics,” Nature Commun. 3, 1196 (2012).
[Crossref]

Y. C. Jun, K. C. Y. Huang, and M. L. Brongersma, “Plasmonic beaming and active control over fluorescent emission,” Nature Commun. 2, 283 (2011).
[Crossref]

P. B. Deotare, I. Bulu, I. W. Frank, Q. Quan, Y. Zhang, R. Ilic, and M. Lončar, “All optical reconfiguration of optomechanical filters,” Nature Commun. 3, 846 (2012).
[Crossref]

Nature Photon. (3)

K. C. Balram, M. I. Davanço, J. D. Song, and K. Srinivasan, “Coherent coupling between radiofrequency, optical and acoustic waves in piezo-optomechanical circuits,” Nature Photon. 10, 346–352 (2016).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, B. Kuyken, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Interaction between light and highly confined hypersound in a silicon photonic nanowire,” Nature Photon. 9, 199–203 (2015).
[Crossref]

A. G. Krause, M. Winger, T. D. Blasius, Q. Lin, and O. Painter, “A high-resolution microchip optomechanical accelerometer,” Nature Photon. 6, 768–772 (2012).
[Crossref]

New J. Phys. (2)

M. Schmidt, V. Peano, and F. Marquardt, “Optomechanical Dirac physics,” New J. Phys. 17, 023025 (2015).
[Crossref]

R. Van Laer, A. Bazin, B. Kuyken, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Net on-chip Brillouin gain based on suspended silicon nanowires,” New J. Phys. 17, 115005 (2015).
[Crossref]

Opt. Express (5)

Optica (2)

Phy. Rev. X (1)

V. Peano, C. Brendel, M. Schmidt, and F. Marquardt, “Topological Phases of Sound and Light,” Phy. Rev. X 5, 031011 (2015).

Phys. Rev. A (1)

R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, “Unifying Brillouin scattering and cavity optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 053828 (2016).
[Crossref]

Phys. Rev. E (1)

S. Johnson, M. Ibanescu, M. Skorobogatiy, O. Weisberg, J. Joannopoulos, and Y. Fink, “Perturbation theory for Maxwell’s equations with shifting material boundaries,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 066611 (2002).
[Crossref]

Phys. Rev. Lett. (4)

S. Forstner, S. Prams, J. Knittel, E. D. van Ooijen, J. D. Swaim, G. I. Harris, A. Szorkovszky, W. P. Bowen, and H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, “Cavity Optomechanical Magnetometer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 120801 (2012).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Zhang, G. S. Wiederhecker, S. Manipatruni, A. Barnard, P. McEuen, and M. Lipson, “Synchronization of Micromechanical Oscillators Using Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233906 (2012).
[Crossref]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, J. T. Hill, S. Meenehan, J. Chan, S. Gröblacher, and O. Painter, “Two-Dimensional Phononic-Photonic Band Gap Optomechanical Crystal Cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 153603 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

M. Bagheri, M. Poot, L. Fan, F. Marquardt, and H. X. Tang, “Photonic Cavity Synchronization of Nanomechanical Oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 213902 (2013).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Rev. Mod. Phys. (1)

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, “Cavity optomechanics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391–1452 (2014).
[Crossref]

Sci. Rep. (1)

X. Luan, Y. Huang, Y. Li, J. F. McMillan, J. Zheng, S.-W. Huang, P.-C. Hsieh, T. Gu, D. Wang, A. Hati, D. A. Howe, G. Wen, M. Yu, G. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, “An integrated low phase noise radiation-pressure-driven optomechanical oscillator chipset,” Sci. Rep. 4, 6842 (2014).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Science (1)

H. J. Lezec, A. Degiron, E. Devaux, R. A. Linke, L. Martin-Moreno, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Beaming Light from a Subwavelength Aperture,” Science 297, 820–822 (2002).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Other (5)

K. McGarvey-Lechable, T. Hamidfar, D. Patel, L. Xu, D. V. Plant, and P. Bianucci, “Slow Light Enhancement of Q-factors in Fabricated Photonic Crystal Ring Resonators,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.100.

B. A. Auld, Acoustic Fields and Waves in Solids, (Krieger, 1990).

A. N. Cleland, Foundations of Nanomechanics: From Solid-State Theory to Device Applications, (Springer, 2003).
[Crossref]

R. da SilvaBenevides, G. de Oliveira Luiz, F. G. Santos, G. Wiederhecker, and T. P. Alegre, in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, OSA Technical Digest (online) (Optical Society of America, 2016), paper JTh2A.99.

K. Okamoto, Fundamentals of Optical Waveguides (Academic, 2006).

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 (12)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1 Optomechanical ring cavity. a) Schematic of a bullseye optomechanical cavity (green) supported by a central pedestal (blue). The inset illustrates the mechanical motion localized at the disk’s edge. b) Finite-element simulation (FEM) of the electric field intensity for the fundamental transverse-electric (TE) mode of a floating silicon ring resonator, which is defined by the external radius R and the ring width wring. Inset: darker (lighter) colors represent larger (lower) electric field intensity. c) Mechanical dispersion of a silicon ring as a function of wring for R = 8 µm; only modes with g0/2π > 1 kHz are shown. The marker size represents the optomechanical coupling, g0, between each mechanical mode to the TE fundamental optical mode shown in (b). Red dots represent the first order mechanical dilatational mode, whose frequency can be also approximated by a Fabry-Perot type expression vL/2wring (dashed line), where vL = 8433 m/s is the velocity of longitudinal waves in bulk silicon. Insets show the cross-section of the a few mechanical modes for wring = 1.5 µm. Red (blue) color accounts for larger (smaller) displacement field. d) Optical dispersion of TE modes as function of the ring width with azimuthal number fixed to 83 and R = 8 µm. The optical resonance frequency is quite independent of wring for larger width; for the fundamental TE mode, such frequency is constant down to wring = 1 µm. For smaller ring width, the fundamental TE mode’s frequency varies only a few percent with wring whereas the mechanical frequency changes by a factor close to 2.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2 Bullseye optical modes. a) FEM simulation of the optical dispersion of quasi-TE (azimuthal number fixed to 83) bullseye modes (inset). For the fundamental mode, it is clearly seen that optical resonance frequencies are not affected by wring down to nearly 1 µm, and shift just by a few percent down to wring = 0.5 µm for a typical mechanical grating. The marker’s color label the mode profile in (b) with the same bounding box color for wring = 1 µm. b) Optical modes living in the outer ring may evanescently couple to modes within adjacent inner rings depending on the inner ring radius — by keeping the total radius R constant, increasing wring decreases the inner ring’s radius and therefore increases its corresponding mode frequency — thus deviating from the desired ring-like modes and resulting in the avoided crossings shown in (a). However, for typical mechanical gratings, the fundamental quasi-TE mode does not couple to any other mode down to wring = 0.5 µm. (Simulation parameters: a = 1 µm, w = 200 nm, t = 70 nm, R = 8 µm.)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3 Mechanical grating design. a) Each geometrical parameter of the bullseye disk controls distinct physical properties: R defines the optical frequency and free-spectral range; wring defines the mechanical frequency while the grating parameters a, w and t determine the phononic bandgap. b) Linear phononic crystal approximation for the circular grating shown in (a). c) The blue (red) lines are the mechanical bands of the linear crystal for x-polarized or z-polarized (y-polarized) modes for a = 1 µm, w = 200 nm and t = 70 nm. The insets show the mechanical deformation for the modes at the band-edge (X-point) of selected edge states. Red (blue) colors account for larger (smaller) displacement field. d) Bandgap maps for the linear crystals for x and z-polarized waves. The colored areas correspond to regions within bandgaps for different lattice period a. The regions delimited by solid lines correspond to bandgaps between the two modes around 3 GHz and 5 GHz shown in (c). Left (Right) bandgap maps as a function of w/a (t/a) for fixed t = 70 nm (w/a = 0.25). All dimensions are compatible to Si-photonics foundry based processes.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4 Optomechanical bullseye disk. a) FEM simulations for the mechanical dispersion of a bullseye disk (solid dots) as a function of the periodicity a for wring = 1.1 µm (dots closer to 4 Ghz) and 2.0 µm (around 2 GHz), w/a = 0.25 and t = 70 nm. The gray tone shades are proportional to the mechanical density of states (DOS) of the corresponding linear crystal, where darker regions are related to higher DOS within the mechanical grating. Only the two largest g0 modes are shown. Marker sizes are proportional to the total optomechanical coupling rate. b) Type-I and type-II displacement profile of the confined mechanical modes for wring = 1.1 (2.0) µm and a = 1.0 (1.4) µm. Type-I is the first order dilatational mode at 4.2 (2.4) GHz; type-II is a high order flapping mode at 3.8 (2.2) GHz. c) Simulated mechanical radiation loss quality factor for the type-I mode as a function of the number of grating periods (wring = 1 µm and a = 1.0 µm). The solid line is a fit for the simulated points with an exponential decay curve. The insets show the normalized mechanical displacement in log scale for zero (no clamping loss suppression) and six grating periods (≈ 60 dB of isolation from the clamping region) along with the displacement profile near the ring region.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5 Probing mechanical modes. a) Scanning electron microscope (false color) images of typical bullseye cavities from side b) and top. c) Experimental setup. DAQ: Data Acquisition System (records optical spectra); ESA: Electrical Spectrum Analyzer (records mechanical spectra); φ: electro-optical phase modulator; MZ: Mach-Zehnder interferometer (wavelength calibration); FPC: Fiber Polarization Controller. d) Typical (intentionally undercoupled) optical resonance used to address the bullseye’s mechanical modes (Qopt ≈ 4 × 104) and exhibiting forward-backward splitting due to surface roughness back-scattering. The extrinsic coupling is tuned close to critical coupling in order to interrogate the mechanical modes. e) The transmitted noise spectrum is composed by the external phase modulator tone (pink) and several peaks due to the device’s thermal motion. The higher frequency family of peaks (red) is attributed to type-I modes whereas the lower frequency one (blue) has to do with the type-II mechanical modes. The spectrum noise-floor is above the detector shot noise (not shown) while the the detector dark noise was typically 10 dB below the shot-noise. f) Fitting the noise spectrum to the typical thermal mechanical response allows us to determine the mechanical mode frequency, quality factor and, along with knowledge of the external phase modulation, g0. For a = 1400 nm, the highest peak belonging to the type-I family shows g0/2π = 23.1 ± 0.2 kHz and Qm = 2360 ± 40.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6 Bullseye experimental demonstration. a) Mechanical spectra as a function of a for fixed wring = 2 µm, w/a = 0.2815, t = 70 nm and silicon layer of 220 nm. The vertical axis is normalized in order to account only for the optomechanical response (see Appendix C). The dashed lines account for the simulated edges for shear-horizontal (upper) and longitudinal (lower) waves, which dictate the isolation between type-II and type-I modes, respectively, and the pedestal. b) Simulated mechanical modes for an axisymmetric structure with the same parameters as those in (a). Larger (smaller) marker size accounts for larger (smaller) optomechanical coupling rate to the first order TE mode shown in Fig. 3(a). The red (blue) color is a guide to the mechanical modes of type-I (type-II). The gray tone shades are proportional to the mechanical DOS for the corresponding linear crystal, where darker (lighter) regions are related to higher (smaller) density of states (DOS) within the mechanical grating. c) Calculated mechanical mode displacement profile for selected type-I modes. Red (blue) colors represent larger (zero) mechanical displacement.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7 The linear grating approximation. a) Linear and b) circular gratings used to illustrate the validity of the linear crystal approximation in predicting bandgaps. Material properties: ρ1 = 2329 kg/m3, ρ2 = 0.001ρ1, c11 = 165.6 GPa, c44 = 79.5 GPa, v L , j = c 11 / ρ j , v S , j = c 44 / ρ j (j = 1, 2); geometric parameters: a = 1000 nm, w/a = 0.2815. c) Transmission spectra for linear and circular gratings (for varying r0) calculated through the transfer-matrix method. Such spectra clearly show that the linear approximation works better in the short-wavelength limit, where ωr0/vL ≫ 1.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8 Pump-probe measurements. a) An amplitude modulated pump laser (red) locked to the half-linewidth of an optical resonance harmonically drives the mechanical mode through radiation pressure force; a probe laser (blue) tuned to an optical resonance with equal transverse profile but a few free spectral ranges away, reads the driven motion through the optomechanical interaction. b) The signal gain compared to the thermal driven motion strongly depends on the modulation amplitude and input power of the pump laser. The dashed line shows the unity gain, above which the pump-probe scheme is actually advantageous. c) In order to avoid contamination of the probe signal by the pump, the beams are launched in opposite directions and isolated from each other through optical circulators. A bandpass filter tuned to the probe band further improves the degree of isolation. d) A Fano lineshape arises from interference between the driven mechanical motion and the broadband Kerr effect. Such lineshape may be fitted to yield the mechanical mode’s frequency and quality factor. e) The pump-probe measurement agrees to the thermally driven one; although having a similar signal-to-noise ratio, the pump-probe spectrum has a much high extinction.
Fig. 9
Fig. 9 Effect of anisotropy on mechanical modes. a) A three-dimensional FEM simulation shows the dilatational mode and 3 extra mechanical modes for an isotropic approximation (η = 0), all of which couple to the ring-like optical mode at similar optomechanical coupling rates. These 4 modes are hybridized as silicon’s anisotropy is taken into account (η > 0, such that the exact anisotropy is approached as η approaches 1). The measured splitting of nearly 10 MHz, however, may be better understood as a combination between anisotropy and fluctuations in wring (see Fig. 10). b) Numerical calculations for the dilatational mode shows that the total optomechanical coupling rate g0 (black) diminishes towards the measured values as anisotropy is taken into account following the trend of the dominant photoelastic contribution (red); the smaller moving boundary contribution (green) barely changes.
Fig. 10
Fig. 10 Effect of eccentricity on mechanical modes. a) Simulated mechanical dispersion as a function of b/a for a silicon ring (inset) with anisotropic stiffness. A splitting of ∼ 10 MHz arises as b exceeds a by 0.5%. The eccentricity-induced mode hybridization is such that the former type A mode gives origin to two branches with similar mode profiles, hence similar optomechanical couplings. b) A similar splitting behavior also shows up for bullseye simulations (performed for half-structure with symmetric boundary conditions). Because the real fluctuations are random, such mechanism may be responsible for the multiple peaks observed within the RF spectra.
Fig. 11
Fig. 11 Scaling the bullseye disk fabrication. a) An array of bullseye cavities is shown with constant wring = 2.0 µm and varying a and w. The central row is the optomechanically characterized one (see Fig. 5). SEM images of the lower row devices were fitted (red curves) as shown in the inset in order to check the geometrical parameters. b) The ring-width wring matches the nominal value within the fitting error, as well as the c) groove width w. The fitting uncertainty is dominated by systematic error, ±2 pixels, intrinsic to our fitting algorithm. d) w/a also matches the nominal values within error bars. The higher error bars for smaller w/a values is due to the relative importance of the ± 2 pixels of systematic error compared to both w and a.
Fig. 12
Fig. 12 Mechanical modes for wring = 1.5 µm. Pump-probe spectra as function of a for bullseye disks with wring = 1.5 µm and w/a = 0.28; the mechanical mode frequencies along with extinction and quality factor approximately matches the linear crystal DOS (gray scale), like observed for wring = 2.0 µm.

Equations (25)

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

g 0 x zpf = ω x = ω 2 E | ϵ / x | E E | ϵ | E ,
S II ( Ω ) = g 0 2 K ( Ω ) x zpf 2 Ω 2 S x x ( Ω ) + ϕ 0 2 2 K ( Ω ) ENBW δ ( Ω Ω m o d ) + S shot ( Ω ) ,
v L 2 ( v ( r ) ) v S 2 × ( × v ( r ) ) + ω 2 v ( r ) = 0
v rect = ( A e i ω x / v L + B e i ω x / v L ) x ^
v circ = ( A H 1 ( 1 ) ( ω r v L ) + B H 1 ( 2 ) ( ω r v L ) ) r ^ ,
( A 2 B 2 ) = M 21 ( A 1 B 1 ) ,
( A N B N ) = M N , N 1 M 32 M 21 ( A 1 B 1 ) .
M 21 = ( v L , 1 ρ 1 + v L , 2 ρ 2 2 v L , 2 ρ 2 exp { 2 i w ω v L , 1 i ( v L , 1 + v L , 2 ) w ω v L , 1 v L , 2 } v L , 2 ρ 2 v L , 1 ρ 1 2 v L , 2 ρ 2 exp { i ( v L , 1 + v L , 2 ) w ω v L , 1 v L , 2 } v L , 2 ρ 2 v L , 1 ρ 1 2 v L , 2 ρ 2 exp { 2 i w ω v L , 1 + i ( v L , 1 v L , 2 ) w ω v L , 1 v L , 2 } v L , 1 ρ 1 + v L , 2 ρ 2 2 v L , 2 ρ 2 exp { i ( v L , 1 v L , 2 ) w ω v L , 1 v L , 2 } )
M 21 = i π 4 v L , 2 2 ρ 2 ( d 1 t 12 t 21 d 2 )
d 1 = H 1 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) { a v L , 2 ρ 2 ω H 0 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) + 2 ( v S , 1 2 ρ 1 v S , 2 2 ρ 2 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) } a v L , 1 ρ 1 ω H 0 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) d 2 = H 1 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) { a v L , 1 ρ 1 ω H 0 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) + 2 ( v S , 2 2 ρ 2 v S , 1 2 ρ 1 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) } a v L , 2 ρ 2 ω H 0 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) t 12 = a v L , 2 ρ 2 ω H 0 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) + { 2 ( v S , 1 2 ρ 1 v S , 2 2 ρ 2 ) H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) a v L , 1 ρ 1 ω H 0 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) } H 1 ( 2 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) t 21 = a v L , 2 ρ 2 ω H 0 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 2 ) H 1 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) { 2 ( v S , 1 2 ρ 1 v S , 2 2 ρ 2 ) H 1 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) a v L , 1 ρ 1 ω H 0 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 1 ) } H 1 ( 1 ) ( a ω v L , 2 )
S x x ( thermal ) ( Ω ) = 2 γ k B T / m eff ( Ω m 2 Ω 2 ) 2 + ( γ Ω ) 2
a ˙ = ( i Δ + κ 2 ) a i G x a + κ e a in ( 1 + δ cos Ω mod t )
x ¨ + γ x ˙ + Ω m 2 x = G m eff | a | 2 ,
a = α 0 + α e i Ω mod t + α + e i Ω mod t x = x 0 + 1 2 ( x 1 e i Ω mod t + x 1 * e i Ω mod t )
x 1 = 2 G m eff α 0 * α + α 0 α + * Ω m 2 Ω mod 2 + i γ Ω mod
α 0 = κ e a in i Δ + κ / 2
α = κ e a in δ i ( Δ + Ω mod ) + κ / 2
α + = κ e a in δ i ( Δ Ω mod ) + κ / 2
Δ x 2 = ( x x ) 2 = | x 1 | 2 2 .
S x x ( driven ) ( Ω mod ) = 2 π ENBW Δ x 2 = 4 π ENBW ( G m eff ) 2 | ( α 0 * α + α 0 α + * ) | 2 ( Ω m 2 Ω mod 2 ) 2 + ( γ Ω mod ) 2
gain = 2 π ENBW | G ( α 0 * α + α 0 α + * ) | 2 γ m eff k B T
S I I ( Ω mod ) = | k NL + k OM Ω m 2 Ω mod 2 + i γ Ω mod | 2
C ( η ) = ( c 11 c 12 c 12 0 0 0 c 12 c 11 c 12 0 0 0 c 12 c 12 c 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 44 * ( η ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 44 * ( η ) 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 44 * ( η ) )
c 44 * ( η ) = η c 44 + ( 1 η ) c 11 c 12 2
Δ r = s λ ξ p ( 1 i ) Δ w ξ

Metrics