Charge Carrier Related Nonlinearities

Post on 23-Mar-2016

58 views 5 download

description

- frequency at which   occurs  - frequency at which n measured. 0.01. E gap. E gap. Charge Carrier Related Nonlinearities. Bandgap Renormalization (Band Filling). Absorption induced transition of an electron from valence to conduction band conserves k x,y !. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

transcript

Charge Carrier Related Nonlinearities

Egap

Before Absorption

After Absorption

Egap Egap> Egap Recombination

time

Bandgap Renormalization (Band Filling)

E

kx

ky

Absorption induced transitionof an electron from valence toconduction band conserves kx,y!

dcn 0 22 )()()(

- frequency at which occurs - frequency at which n measured

Kramers-Kronig

Conduction Band

Valence Band

Egap Egap

n

0.01

Exciton Bleaching

Most interesting case is GaAs, carrier lifetimes are nsec effective e (linewidths) meV classical dispersion (Haug & Koch) is of form . near resonance, as discussed before Ee – electron energy level to which electron excited in conduction band

Eh – electron energy level in valence band from which electron excited by absorption

122 ])[( ehe EE

Charge Carrier Nonlinearities Near Resonance

1

112 222

ap00

22

vace

geh

eRNL NxxEmn

ek

Nn

electronper section -cross absorption - densityelectron conduction

mass hole-electron reduced

/

R

gap

e

ehNm

Ex Simplest case of a 2 band model:

vac

1,2

vac

1

vac

,state steady

1 )(k

nIkk

NnNtIN

dtd R

effRRssee

e

- Get BOTH an index change AND gain!

- Stimulatedemission

Active Nonlinearities (with Gain)

Optical orelectricalpumping

Kramers-Krönig used to calculateindex change n() from ().

Ultrafast Nonlinearities Near Transparency Point

At the transparency point, the losses are balanced bygain so that carrier generation by absorption is no longer the dominant nonlinear mechanism forindex change. Of course one gets the Kerr effect + other ps and sub-ps phenomena which now dominate.

0

Gain

Loss

eN

“Transparency point”

Evolution of carrier density in time “Spectral Hole Burning”“hole” in conduction band due toto stimulated emission at maximumgain determined by maximumproduct of the density of occupiedstates in conduction band and density of unoccupied states invalence band

“Carrier Heating” (Temperature Relaxation)electron collisions return carrierdistribution to a Fermi distributionat a lower electron temperature

SHB – Spectral Hole Burning

Experiments have confirmed these calculations!

Semiconductor Response for Photon Energies Below the Bandgap As the photon frequency decreases away from the bandgap, the contribution to the electron population in the conduction band due to absorption decreases rapidly. Thus other mechanisms become important. For photon energies less than the band gap energy, a number of passive ultrafast nonlinear mechanisms contribute to n2 and 2. The theory for the Kerr effect is based on single valence and conduction bands with the electromagnetic field altering the energies of both the electrons and “holes”. There are four processes which contribute, namely the Kerr Effect, the Ramaneffect (RAM), the Linear Stark Effect (LSE) and the Quadratic (QSE) Stark Effect. Shownschematically below are the three most important ones.

dcn

NLNL

0 22 )()()(

- frequency at which occurs - frequency at which n calculated

The theoretical approach is to calculate first the nonlinearabsorption and then to use the Kramers-Kronig Relation to calculate the nonlinear index change .)(NLn

)( NL

),(),(),( ),(2

),( K.K. 212121221240201

212 xxHxxHxxGxxGEnn

EcKng

p

Here Ep (“Kane energy”) and the constant K are given in terms of the semiconductor’s properties. K=3100 cm GW-1 eV5/2

),(),( 21230201

21 xxFEnn

EK

g

p

,152

20

4

20

5

cmeK

gapEx i

i

])1(1)[(21)1(

83)1)((

43)1(

23

)1(23])1()1[(

163

])1()1[()(21)1(

321

43

49

89

165

21),(

2/32

21

22

2/111

32

2/11

21

222

2/111

22

2/12

212

2/12

2/11

21

22

2/31

2/312

212

2/31

21

32

32

212

21

22

21

32

42

41

621

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxH

112

)1(),( :12

21221

7

2/321

2121

xxxxxxxxFxx

Kerr

),(),(),( 112

)1(),(:1 RAM 2121212

2

21221

7

2/321

2121 xxHxxHxxGxxxx

xxxxFxx

])1()1[()(

)3(2])1()1[()(

)3(2

])1()1[(4421

21),(

2/11

2/1122

221

21

22

21

222/1

22/1

2222

21

22

21

22

21

22

21

2/11

2/11

1

22

22

21

22

21

921

xxxxx

xxxxxxxx

xxx

xx

xx

x

xxx

xxxxG

)(0 211 xxx

2

2

21

222

21

22

211

22

21

12/1

1221

9211)1(812

)1(21),( :1

xx

xx

xxxxx

xxxx

xxFx

21

8)1()1()1()1(

43

21),(

2/31

2/31

1

2/11

2/11

41

921xx

x

xx

xxxG )(0 211 xxx

QSE

Kerr

Quantum Confined SemiconductorsWhen the translational degrees of freedom of electrons in both the valence and conduction bandsare confined to distances of the order of the exciton Bohr radius aB, the oscillator strength is

redistributed, the bandgap increases, the density of states e(E) changes and new bound statesappear. As a result the nonlinear opticalproperties can be enhanced or reduced) in some spectral regions.

-Absorption edge movesto higher energies.-Multiple well-definedabsorption peaks due totransitions betweenconfined states-Enhanced absorptionspectrum near band edge

Quantum Wells

Example of Multi-Quantum Well (MQW) NonlinearitiesNonlinear absorption change (room temp.) measured versus intensity and convertedto index change via Kramers-Kronig

A factor of 3-4 enhancement!!

Quantum Dots

Quantum dot effects become important when thecrystallite size r0 aB (exciton Bohr radius). For example, the exciton Bohr radius forCdS aB = 3.2nm, CdSe aB = 5.6nm, CdTe aB = 7.4nm and GaAs aB = 12.5nm.

Definitive measurements were performedon very well-characterized samples byBanfi. De Giorgio et al. in range aB r0 3 aB

Measurements at1.2m (), 1.4m () and1.58m () for CdTe

Measurements at 0.79m (+) for CdS0.9Se0.1

Note the trend that Im{(3)} seems to fallwhen aB r0 !

Inde

x ch

ange

per

exc

ited

elec

tron

Nonlinear Refraction and Absorption in Quantum Dots for aB r0 3 aB:II-VI Semiconductors

Experimental QD test of the previously discussed off-resonance universal F2(x,x) and G2(x,x) functions for bulk semiconductors (discussed previously) by M. Sheik-Bahae, et. al., IEEE J. Quant. Electron. 30, 249 (1994).

gapE/0.80.6 0.70.5

2

0

-2

-4Re

al{

(3) } i

n un

its o

f 10-1

9 m2 V-2

10-18

10-19

10-21

10-20

1.0 2.01.5(/

0)4 Imag

{(3

) } in

units

of m

2 V-2

/gapE

Nanocrystals+ 0.79m 2.2 m 1.4 m 1.58m

Bulk CdS 0.69m

▼ CdTe 12, 1.4, 1.58m

To within the experimental uncertainty (factor of 2), no enhancements werefound in II-VI semiconductors for the far off-resonance nonlinearities!