Assessing the alignment accuracy of state-of-the-art deterministic fabrication methods for single quantum dot devices
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866908657786028032 |
|---|---|
| author | Madigawa, Abdulmalik A. Donges, Jan N. Gaál, Benedek Li, Shulun Jacobsen, Martin Arentoft Liu, Hanqing Dai, Deyan Su, Xiangbin Shang, Xiangjun Ni, Haiqiao Schall, Johannes Rodt, Sven Niu, Zhichuan Gregersen, Niels Reitzenstein, Stephan Munkhbat, Battulga |
| author_facet | Madigawa, Abdulmalik A. Donges, Jan N. Gaál, Benedek Li, Shulun Jacobsen, Martin Arentoft Liu, Hanqing Dai, Deyan Su, Xiangbin Shang, Xiangjun Ni, Haiqiao Schall, Johannes Rodt, Sven Niu, Zhichuan Gregersen, Niels Reitzenstein, Stephan Munkhbat, Battulga |
| contents | The realization of efficient quantum light sources relies on the integration of self-assembled quantum dots (QDs) into photonic nanostructures with high spatial positioning accuracy. In this work, we present a comprehensive investigation of the QD position accuracy, obtained using two marker-based QD positioning techniques, photoluminescence (PL) and cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging, as well as using a marker-free in-situ electron beam lithography (in-situ EBL) technique. We employ four PL imaging configurations with three different image processing approaches and compare them with CL imaging. We fabricate circular mesa structures based on the obtained QD coordinates from both PL and CL image processing to evaluate the final positioning accuracy. This yields final position offset of the QD relative to the mesa center of $μ_x$ = (-40$\pm$58) nm and $μ_y$ = (-39$\pm$85) nm with PL imaging and $μ_x$ = (-39$\pm$30) nm and $μ_y$ = (25$\pm$77) nm with CL imaging, which are comparable to the offset $μ_x$ = (20$\pm$40) nm and $μ_y$ = (-14$\pm$39) nm obtained using the in-situ EBL method. We discuss the possible causes of the observed offsets, which are significantly larger than the QD localization uncertainty obtained from simply imaging the QD light emission from an unstructured wafer. Our study highlights the influences of the image processing technique and the subsequent fabrication process on the final positioning accuracy for a QD placed inside a photonic nanostructure. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2309_14795 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2023 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Assessing the alignment accuracy of state-of-the-art deterministic fabrication methods for single quantum dot devices Madigawa, Abdulmalik A. Donges, Jan N. Gaál, Benedek Li, Shulun Jacobsen, Martin Arentoft Liu, Hanqing Dai, Deyan Su, Xiangbin Shang, Xiangjun Ni, Haiqiao Schall, Johannes Rodt, Sven Niu, Zhichuan Gregersen, Niels Reitzenstein, Stephan Munkhbat, Battulga Optics Applied Physics The realization of efficient quantum light sources relies on the integration of self-assembled quantum dots (QDs) into photonic nanostructures with high spatial positioning accuracy. In this work, we present a comprehensive investigation of the QD position accuracy, obtained using two marker-based QD positioning techniques, photoluminescence (PL) and cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging, as well as using a marker-free in-situ electron beam lithography (in-situ EBL) technique. We employ four PL imaging configurations with three different image processing approaches and compare them with CL imaging. We fabricate circular mesa structures based on the obtained QD coordinates from both PL and CL image processing to evaluate the final positioning accuracy. This yields final position offset of the QD relative to the mesa center of $μ_x$ = (-40$\pm$58) nm and $μ_y$ = (-39$\pm$85) nm with PL imaging and $μ_x$ = (-39$\pm$30) nm and $μ_y$ = (25$\pm$77) nm with CL imaging, which are comparable to the offset $μ_x$ = (20$\pm$40) nm and $μ_y$ = (-14$\pm$39) nm obtained using the in-situ EBL method. We discuss the possible causes of the observed offsets, which are significantly larger than the QD localization uncertainty obtained from simply imaging the QD light emission from an unstructured wafer. Our study highlights the influences of the image processing technique and the subsequent fabrication process on the final positioning accuracy for a QD placed inside a photonic nanostructure. |
| title | Assessing the alignment accuracy of state-of-the-art deterministic fabrication methods for single quantum dot devices |
| topic | Optics Applied Physics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.14795 |