SciPost Submission Page
General simulation method for spontaneous parametric down- and parametric up-conversion experiments
by Felix Riexinger, Mirco Kutas, Björn Haase, Patricia Bickert, Daniel Molter, Michael Bortz, and Georg von Freymann
This is not the latest submitted version.
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Felix Riexinger |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202203_00008v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | March 9, 2022, 10:40 a.m. |
| Submitted by: | Felix Riexinger |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approaches: | Theoretical, Computational |
Abstract
Spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) sources are an important technology for quantum sensing and imaging. We demonstrate a general simulation method, based on modeling from first principles, reproducing the spectrally and spatially resolved absolute counts of a SPDC experiment. By additionally simulating parametric up- and down-conversion processes with thermal photons as well as effects of the optical system we accomplish good agreement with the experimental results. This method is broadly applicable and allows for the separation of contributing processes, virtual characterization of SPDC sources, and enables the simulation of many quantum based applications.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2022-9-22 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202203_00008v1, delivered 2022-09-22, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.5739
Strengths
1) Excellent agreement between the theoretical/numerical results an the experimental data. 2) The paper is very well written and clear in the exposition of the theory and the comparison with experiments. 3) The results are novel enough to deserve publication.
Weaknesses
1) Few of the starting elements overlap with Ref. [24] by some of the same authors 2) A more detailed comparison with Ref. [24] is needed to enucleate better the novelty elements
Report
Requested changes
the authors should significantly expand the considerations and comparisons with Ref.[24] either in the conclusions, or, better, at the end of Section 3. they should present a one-to-one comparison of the results of Section 3 with the results of Ref. [24]. This would help the reader to understand better the elements of novelty, significance and originality of the present paper.