the same energy, i.e., with respect to the one-photon
transition energies. This allows comparison of the
ND-2PA coefficient for the bulk and QW
semiconductors on the same scale and also makes
comparison to the respective degenerate 2PA
coefficient easier.
Figure 6: Nondegenerate 2PA coefficient in bulk GaAs and
GaAs QW’s of different widths for the TM-TM case. The
arrows indicate valence band to conduction band transition
energies.
Due to the large energy difference of photon pairs
in the nondegenerate case, for a bulk semiconductor
there is about a hundred-fold increase in
;
over the degenerate case. The plot in Figure 6 is
generated for a pump photon energy
0.12
,
corresponding to a wavelength of 7.5μm and by
varying the probe photon energy
. We have
restricted the probe photon energy,
, to be at least
30 meV below the linear absorption edge. This is
done to keep the linear Urbach–tail absorption low. In
a QW of width 10 nm, we obtain a maximum value
for the nondegenerate 2PA coefficient of
;
≈ 3000 cm⁄GW which is approximately 36 times
larger than predicted and measured in the bulk. These
conditions of large enhancement correspond to where
the mid-IR photon is near resonance with the inter
sub-band transition.
3 CONCLUSIONS
We have predicted and verified that the use of highly
nondegenerate photon energies in two-photon
processes in direct-gap semiconductors leads to
strongly enhanced nonlinear effects. This in turn has
led to the demonstration of sensitive mid-infrared
detection and imaging using large bandgap
semiconductor detectors. It has also led to the
observation of 2-photon gain in an optically pumped
semiconductor. As expected via causality, 2-photon
processes are accompanied by nonlinear refraction
which is also measured to be enhanced in the
extremely nondegenerate case. We have calculated
that the effects of 2-photon absorption and 2-photon
gain should be considerably larger in quantum wells
than in bulk.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank Greg Salamo at the University of Arkansas
for preparing the GaAs sample, and Arthur Smirl of
the University of Iowa and Jacob Khurgin of Johns
Hopkins University for stimulating discussions. This
work was supported by the National Science
Foundation Grants ECCS-1202471, ECCS-1229563,
and DMR-1609895.
REFERENCES
Cirloganu, C. M., Padilha, L.A., Fishman, D. A., Webster,
S.,. Hagan, D. J., and Van Stryland, E. W., 2011, Opt.
Express 19, 22951-22960.
Ferdinandus, M. R., Hu, H., Reichert,, M., Hagan, D. J., and
Van Stryland, E. W., 2013, Opt. Lett. 38, 3518-3521.
Fishman, D. A, Cirloganu, C. M . Webster, S., Padilha,
L.A., Monroe, M., Hagan, D. J., and Van Stryland, E.
W 2011, Nature Photonics 5, 561-565 (2011.
Ironside, C. N., 1992, IEEE J. Quantum Electron, 28, 842-
847.
Pattanaik, H.S., Reichert, M., Hagan, D.J., and Van
Stryland,E. W., 2016a, Opt. Express 24, 1196-1205.
Pattanaik, H.S., Reichert, M., Khurgin , J. B., Hagan, D.J.,
and Van Stryland,E. W., 2016b, IEEE J. Quantum
Electron., 52, 9000114-1--9000114-14.
Reichert, M., Smirl, A.L., Salamo, G., Hagan, D. J., and
Van Stryland, E. W., 2016, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117,
073602.
Sheik-Bahae, M., Said, A.A., Wei, T.-H., Hagan, D.J., and
Van Stryland, E.W., 1990, J. Quant. Electron, 26, 760-
769.
Sheik-Bahae, M., Hutchings, D. C.,. Hagan, D. J. and Van
Stryland, E. W., 1991, IEEE J. Quant. Electron. 27,
1296-1309.
Van Stryland, E. W., Woodall, M.A., Vanherzeele, H, and
Soileau, M. J., 1985, Opt. Lett. 10, 490.