2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

A quantum logic gate between a solid-state

quantum bit and a photon
Hyochul Kim
1
, Ranojoy Bose
1
, Thomas C. Shen
1
, Glenn S. Solomon
2
and Edo Waks
1,2
*
Integrated nanophotonic devices create strong lightmatter
interactions that are important for the development of solid-
state quantum networks
1
, distributed quantum computers
2
and ultralow-power optoelectronics
3,4
. A key component for
many of these applications is the photonic quantum logic
gate, where the quantum state of a solid-state quantum bit
(qubit) conditionally controls the state of a photonic qubit.
These gates are crucial for the development of robust
quantum networks
57
, non-destructive quantum measure-
ments
8,9
and strong photonphoton interactions
10
. Here, we
experimentally realize a quantum logic gate between an
optical photon and a solid-state qubit. The qubit is composed
of a quantum dot strongly coupled to a nanocavity, which acts
as a coherently controllable qubit system that conditionally
ips the polarization of a photon on picosecond timescales,
implementing a controlled-NOT gate. Our results represent an
important step towards solid-state quantum networks and
provide a versatile approach for probing quantum dotphoton
interactions on ultrafast timescales.
Quantum dots are semiconductor emitters that can store
quantum information using both excitons
11
and spin
1216
. Because
they are embedded in a host material, these solid-state qubits can
be practically integrated into photonic devices without complex
atomic traps. They can also mediate two-qubit quantum operations
between distinguishable excitons conned in a single dot
17
, as well
as between two spins in vertically coupled dots
18
.
In a quantum network, quantum dots must strongly interact with
photonic qubits to create and distribute entanglement. Several
works have proposed using optical nanocavities to implement
these interactions by direct quantum logic gates
57
. These gates
exploit the strong coupling regime of cavity quantum electro-
dynamics
1922
, where a single quantum dot can greatly alter the
nanocavity spectral response
23,24
.
We realize a quantum logic gate using an InAs quantum dot
strongly coupled to a photonic crystal cavity. Figure 1a illustrates
the quantum-dot level structure, which includes a ground state |gl
and two bright exciton states, labelled |l and |2l, representing
the two anti-aligned spin congurations of the electron and hole.
The optical transitions from the ground state to the two bright exci-
tons, denoted s

and s
2
, exhibit right- and left-circularly polarized
emission, respectively, at high magnetic elds. A magnetic eld in
the sample growth direction (Faraday conguration) tunes the s

transition on resonance with the cavity while simultaneously detun-

ing the s
2
transition
25
. In this conguration, states |gl and |2l are
the qubit states of the quantum dot, and the s

transition couples
the qubit to a photon. The cavity serves the dual role of creating a
photonic interface through cavity reectivity modication
23,24
via
the s

transition, and suppressing the spontaneous emission of

the s
2
transition.
Figure 1b presents a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image
of the fabricated photonic crystal cavity (see Methods and
Supplementary Section S1 for details on device design and fabrica-
tion). These cavities exhibit high-Q modes that have a well-dened
polarization. The photonic qubit encodes quantum information
using the polarization states |Hl and |Vl rotated 458 relative to the
polarization axis of the cavity. The qubit states can be expressed
in the polarization basis that is parallel and orthogonal to the
cavity axis, denoted |xl and |yl respectively, using the relations
|Hl (|xl |yl)/

and |Vl (|yl 2|xl)/

. Upon reection
from the sample surface, the photonic qubit states will be trans-
formed to the states |Hl (r|xl |yl)/

and |Vl (|yl 2

r|xl)/

where r is the cavity reection coefcient. This reection

coefcient can be directly calculated from the Heisenberg
Langevin equations of motion (Supplementary Section S2). If the
photon is resonant with the cavity mode and the quantum dot is
in state |2l (Fig. 1c, bottom), the system behaves like a bare
cavity and r 21. The photonic qubit therefore experiences a bit
ip (|Hl |Vl and |Vl |Hl). If, however, the quantum dot is
in state |gl (Fig. 1c, top), the optical transition to the |l state will
strongly modify the reection coefcient
23,24
. When both the
photon and the s

transition are resonant with the cavity, the

reection coefcient becomes r (C 21)/(C 1), where C
2g
2
/gk is the atomic cooperativity. The parameters g, k and g
denote the cavityquantum dot coupling strength, cavity energy
decay rate and exciton decay rate for the s

transition, respectively.
In the limit C 1, r 1 and the photonic qubit remains
unchanged (|Hl |Hl and |Vl |Vl). Thus, the state of the
quantum dot controls whether the photonic qubit will experience
a bit ip, which implements a complete controlled-NOT (cNOT)
logic gate.
We initially characterized the device under continuous-wave
(c.w.) excitation using a broadband light-emitting diode (LED; see
Methods). Figure 2a plots the cavity reection spectrum as a func-
tion of magnetic eld, with the cavity excited using a vertically
polarized input eld and the reected intensity measured along
the horizontally polarized component. At 0 T, the spectrum
shows a bright peak due to the cavity, and a second peak due to
the quantum dot that is blue-detuned from the cavity resonance
by 0.11 nm. As we increase the magnetic eld the quantum dot
line splits into two peaks corresponding to the s

transition (red-
shift) and the s
2
transition (blueshift). The s

transition exhibits
an anti-crossing when tuned across the cavity resonance, which
indicates the system operates in the strong coupling regime.
Figure 2b presents a high-spectral-resolution measurement per-
formed using a tunable narrowband laser at 1.6 T (see Methods),
when the s

transition is resonant with the cavity, together with

a numerical t to a theoretical model (Supplementary Section S3).
From the numerical t we determine g/2p 12.9 GHz and
1
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, IREAP, University of Maryland, College Park and Joint Quantum Institute, University of Maryland,
College Park, Maryland 20742, USA,
2
Joint Quantum Institute, National Institute of Standards and Technology, and University of Maryland, Gaithersburg,
Maryland 20899, USA. *e-mail: edowaks@umd.edu
LETTERS
PUBLISHED ONLINE: 31 MARCH 2013 | DOI: 10.1038/NPHOTON.2013.48
NATURE PHOTONICS | VOL 7 | MAY 2013 | www.nature.com/naturephotonics 373
2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

E
QD
QD
0.5 m
QD
Cavity axis
H V
BS
Spectrometer
OL
B
PBS
HWP
BS
M
M
FM
Pump
Probe
CCD
Grating
SMF
M
M
Cavity
axis
V
H
b
d
P
r
o
b
e
P
r
o
b
e
a
c
= |
|g
|g
|
|
+
|

+
|g
|
|
+
|

|
= |+ |
Figure 1 | Implementation of a quantum dotphoton cNOToperation. a, Energy level structure of a neutral quantum dot (QD) under a magnetic eld. b,
SEM image of the fabricated device and the cavity axis relative to photon polarization. c, Illustration of cNOToperation. The polarization of an incident photon
is preserved when the quantum dot is in state |gl (top), and is rotated when the quantum dot is in state |2l (bottom). The horizontal dashed lines indicate
the degenerate energy level of the |l quantum dot state and the cavity photon state, which are split into two polariton states |P

l and |P
2
l in the strong
coupling regime. d, Measurement set-up. Pump and probe polarization is selected and measured using a PBS and a HWP. A ip mirror (FM) is used to direct
the probe signal from either the transmitted or reected port of the PBS to a single-mode bre (SMF) and then to a grating spectrometer. OL, objective lens;
BS, beam splitter; M, mirror; QD, quantum dot.
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
QD Cav
M
a
g
n
e
t
i
c

e
l
d

(
T
)
0
4
3
2
1
a
c
Wavelength (nm)
920.6 921.0 920.8
1
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y

(
a
.
u
.
)
0
b
B = 1.6 T
Wavelength (nm)
920.8 921.0
20
40
60
80
160
0
L
a
s
e
r

d
e
t
u
n
i
n
g

L

/
2

(
G
H
z
)
Wavelength (nm)
920.6 921.0 920.8
0
10
10
100
50
100
100
50
50
920.8 920.9 921.0
Wavelength (nm)

L
/2 = 10 GHz

L
/2 = 0 GHz

L
/2 = 10 GHz
d
e
f

+
Figure 2 | Device characterizations under c.w. excitation. a, Cavity spectrum measured using a broadband LED as a function of magnetic eld at a
temperature of 4.3 K. b, Cavity spectrum measured using a tunable narrowband diode laser at a magnetic eld of 1.6 T. The red solid line is a t to a
theoretical model. c, Cavity spectrum measured using a broadband LED as a function of diode laser frequency, which is swept across the s
2
transition
of the quantum dot (QD) at a magnetic eld of 1.6 T. When the pump laser is resonant with the s
2
transition, the dip induced by the quantum dot is
inhibited. df, Cavity spectra for pump laser detunings of D
L
/2p10, 0 and 210 GHz, respectively, relative to the s
2
transition.
LETTERS
NATURE PHOTONICS DOI: 10.1038/NPHOTON.2013.48
NATURE PHOTONICS | VOL 7 | MAY 2013 | www.nature.com/naturephotonics 374
2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

k/2p31.9 GHz (Quality factor Q10,200). The measured
values of g and k satisfy the strong coupling condition g .k/4,
proving that the device operates in the strong coupling regime
1924
.
To populate the |2l state, we excited the sample with a tunable
narrowband laser while simultaneously probing the cavity
spectrum with the broadband LED. Figure 2c shows the spectrum
as a function of detuning between the tunable laser and the
s
2
transition (D
L
/2p) using a pump power of 1.8 mW (measured
before the objective lens). When the pump laser is resonant with
the s
2
transition it creates a strong modication of the cavity
spectrum. Figure 2df plots the measured spectrum for specic
laser detunings of 10, 0 and 210 GHz, respectively. At 0 GHz
detuning, the central dip in the cavity spectrum is suppressed
because the quantum dot is incoherently pumped into the |2l
state. This suppression quickly vanishes at both red- and blue-
detuned pump wavelengths.
To demonstrate quantum gate operation, we used short optical
pulses to prepare the initial qubit state of the quantum dot and gen-
erate the photonic qubit. A 10 ps pump pulse resonant with the s
2
transition prepared the state of the quantum dot through coherent
Rabi oscillations, while an attenuated 75 ps probe pulse served as
the photonic qubit (see Methods). We selected these pulse durations
to be short compared to the lifetime of the |2l state (Supplementary
Section S4), and also to ensure that the probe pulse spectrum was
narrower than the spectral dip in Fig. 2b.
Figure 3a plots the probe intensity as a function of the square
root of the average pump power P, where we set the incident
probe pulse to be vertically polarized and measured the reected
pulse along the horizontal polarization axis. The gure displays
the results for both 80 ps and 4 ns pumpprobe delays. The data
reveal a clear oscillatory behaviour for 80 ps delay due to Rabi oscil-
lation between states |gl and |2l, where a pump power of 0.12 mW
achieves a p-pulse. These oscillations vanish at 4 ns delay because
the quantum dot has decayed back to the ground state before the
photonic qubit interacts with the cavity. The contrast of the Rabi
oscillations degrades with increasing pump intensity, an effect that
we attribute to phonon-mediated excitation-induced dephasing
26,27
.
To obtain the full time-resolved reection spectrum, we tuned
the probe beam frequency across the cavity resonance. Figure 3b
e shows the measured probe intensity for 0, p, 2p and 3p pump
pulse amplitudes for both 80 ps and 4 ns delays, together with
theoretical ts. At 80 ps delay, the spectrum oscillates between
the bare cavity lineshape and the lineshape of a strongly
coupled cavityquantum dot system. The blue solid curves in
Fig. 3c and e represent the ideal bare cavity spectra when the
quantum dot is excited to the |2l state with unity probability.
In Fig. 3c, the measured signal at 80 ps delay for the cavity res-
onant wavelength (920.97 nm) achieves 95% of the maximum
predicted value. From this value we calculate the occupation prob-
ability of the |2l state to be 0.93+0.04 after a p pulse
(Supplementary Section S5). We attribute the small reduction
from unity probability to the spontaneous decay of the |2l
state that may occur before the photonic qubit has nished inter-
acting with the cavity.
Figure 4 shows pumpprobe measurements for the four possible
combinations of input and output photon polarizations (see
Methods). We tuned the probe beam frequency across the cavity res-
onance while pumping the s
2
transition with a p pulse.
Measurements taken at 80 ps delay correspond to a quantum dot
in the |2l state with high probability, while at 4 ns delay the
quantum dot has decayed back to state |gl. In Fig. 4a we set the inci-
dent polarization to be vertically polarized, as in Fig. 3c, but
measured the probe intensity along the vertical polarization axis
instead. In this case we observed the reverse behaviour, where a
quantum dot in state |2l produces a minimum measured intensity
at the cavity resonant wavelength, while a quantum dot in state |gl
creates a maximum. Figure 4bd plots the remaining combinations
of input and output polarizations.
Optimal gate operation is attained when the input eld is res-
onant with the quantum dot s

transition (920.96 nm). Figure 4e

shows the probability table for the quantum gate under this operat-
ing condition (Supplementary Section S6). When the quantum dot
is in state |2l, the probabilities of a bit ip are P
HV
0.93+0.03
and P
VH
0.98+0.04, giving the gate delity (the probability of
being in the correct output state) for the two input polarizations.
When the quantum dot is in state |gl, the gate delities are given
by P
VV
0.58+0.04 and P
HH
0.61+0.07. The reduction in
gate delity in this case is due to nite cooperativity and spectral
wandering, consistent with the contrast measured in Fig. 2b under
monochromatic excitation.
In conclusion, we have demonstrated a quantum gate between a
quantum dot and a photon, an important enabler for robust and




30
20
10
0
0
P ( W)
1 2 3
80 ps delay
4 ns delay

2
3
a
pulse No pump
2 pulse 3 pulse
40
30
20
10
0
920.9 921.0
b c
920.9 921.0
I
min
I
max
40
30
20
10
920.9 921.0
80 ps delay
4 ns delay
d e
920.9 921.0
Wavelength (nm) Wavelength (nm)
Wavelength (nm) Wavelength (nm)
0
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
40
30
20
10
0
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
40
30
20
10
0
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
Figure 3 | Demonstration of controlled bit ip by pulsed pumpprobe
excitation. a, Plot of the change in measured intensity of the probe signal
along the H-polarization direction as a function of the square root of average
pump power at 80 ps (blue circles) and 4 ns (red squares) pumpprobe
delay time. The probe beam wavelength is resonant with the cavity
(920.97 nm). be, Probe signal intensity (H-polarized) as a function of
excitation wavelength at 0 (b), p (c), 2p (d) and 3p (e) pumping
conditions. Blue circles, 80 ps delay; red squares, 4 ns delay. Solid lines are
ts to a theoretical model.
NATURE PHOTONICS DOI: 10.1038/NPHOTON.2013.48
LETTERS
NATURE PHOTONICS | VOL 7 | MAY 2013 | www.nature.com/naturephotonics 375
2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

scalable quantum networks
57
, and the generation of strong
photonphoton interactions
10
. The switching contrast and gate
speed could be improved by using photonic crystal cavity designs
with smaller mode volumes
28
, and by better alignment of the
quantum dot with the high-eld mode of the cavity
22
. These
results can also be extended to qubits based on electron and hole
spins of charged quantum dots, which exhibit signicantly longer
coherence times
1216,18
. The current device implementation can be
adapted to a planar integrated architecture by using a waveguide-
coupled cavityquantum dot system
29
. When combined with local
quantum dot tuning methods
30
, these devices provide a potential
route towards quantum information processing on a chip.
Methods
Device fabrication. The sample consisted of a 160 nm GaAs layer on top of a 1 mm
AlGaAs sacricial layer grown by molecular beam epitaxy. A single layer of self-
assembled InAs quantum dots (density of 1050 mm
22
) was grown in the centre of
the GaAs layer. A distributed Bragg reector composed of 10 layers of GaAs and
AlAs was grown below the photonic crystal layer and acted as a high reectivity
mirror, enabling the device to behave as a one-sided cavity
23
. Photonic crystal
cavities with a three-hole defect (L3 cavity) were fabricated using electron beam
lithography, followed by Cl
2
-based dry etching, and nally wet-etch removal of the
AlGaAs sacricial layer using hydrouoric acid.
Measurement set-up. The sample was mounted in a continuous-ow liquid-helium
cryostat and cooled to 4.3 K. The sample mount was surrounded by a
superconducting magnet able to apply magnetic elds of up to 7 T. Sample
excitation and collection were performed by confocal microscopy using an objective
lens with a numerical aperture of 0.68. The polarization axis for excitation and
collection was set by a half-wave plate (HWP) and analysed by a polarizing
beamsplitter (PBS), as illustrated in Fig. 1d. The collected signal was focused into a
single-mode bre to spatially lter only the cavity-coupled signal and isolate a single
transverse mode, and then measured by a grating spectrometer and nitrogen-cooled
charge-coupled device (CCD) camera. The resolution of the spectrometer camera
system was 7 GHz.
Continuous-wave measurement. The cavity spectrum was measured using either a
broadband LED or a tunable diode laser. The LED was used as a white light source
with dominant emission in the wavelength range 900950 nm. The diode laser had a
narrow linewidth (.300 kHz) that could be continuously tuned between 920 and
940 nm. The high-resolution cavity spectrum in Fig. 2b was measured by
continuously sweeping the tunable laser frequency over the cavity resonance and
measuring the reected laser signal. Each data point in Fig. 2b was obtained by
tting the measured laser signal with a Gaussian function, where the frequency and
scattering intensity of each data point were obtained from the Gaussian t.
Figure 2cf was obtained by sweeping a diode laser frequency over the s
2
transition
to pump the |2l state, while simultaneously probing the cavity spectrum with the
broadband LED. Background noise due to inelastic scattering from the pump was
subtracted in Fig. 2df. The contrast of the dip induced by the quantum dot in
Fig. 2d and f was measured to be 25% on resonance with the s

transition, which
was lower than the measured contrast in Fig. 2b due to limited spectrometer
resolution as well as off-resonant excitation of the s

transition by the pump laser.

Pumpprobe pulse measurement. The pump and probe were generated using two
time-synchronized Ti:sapphire lasers. The sample was maintained at 4.3 K, and a
magnetic eld of 35 T was applied depending on the detuning between the
quantum dot and the cavity. The lasers were synchronized by piezo feedback in the
probe laser cavity, which locked its clock frequency to the pump laser with an
accuracy of 100 fs. The delay between the pump and probe was controlled
electronically by a phase-lock loop in the synchronization electronics. The pump
pulse duration, initially 2 ps, was expanded to 10 ps by spectral ltering, and the
probe pulse duration, initially 5 ps, was ltered to 75 ps using separate grating
spectrometers. After ltering, the probe beam passed through an intensity stabilizer.
The pumpprobe delay was measured by a single-photon avalanche photodiode
with 30 ps resolution. The probe beam power was set to 1 nW, measured before the
objective lens. The coupling efciency of the probe into the cavity mode has been
measured previously to be 0.16% (ref. 31). This efciency, together with the laser
repetition rate of 76 MHz, indicates that the mean number of probe photons per
pulse coupled to the cavity was 0.1. In addition to the probe signal detected in the
CCD, an inelastic scattering of the pump was observed. This background, measured





Wavelength (nm)
Wavelength (nm) Wavelength (nm)
Wavelength (nm)
a
c d
b e
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
25
20
15
10
5
0
920.9 921.0
80 ps delay
4 ns delay
50
40
30
20
10
0
920.9 921.0
50
40
30
20
10
0
920.9 921.0
20
15
10
5
0
920.9 921.0
0.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y


(
1
0
3

c
o
u
n
t
s

s

1
)
|V
in
|H
in
|H
out
|V
in
|H
out
|V
in
|V
out
|H
in
|V
out
|V
out
QD state | g
QD state |
|H
in
|V
in
|H
in
|H
out
|V
out
|H
out
Figure 4 | cNOToperations for all four combinations of inputoutput polarizations. ad, Cavity spectra are measured with a p-pulse pump for 80 ps (blue
circles) and 4 ns (red squares) pumpprobe delay using the four possible combinations of input polarization |al
in
and measured polarization |bl
out
, where a,b
[[H, V]. Solid lines are ts to a theoretical model. e, Measured probability P
ab
at 80 ps pumpprobe delay when a quantum dot is pumped to state |2l by
a p-pulse (top) and at 4 ns delay when it has relaxed back to state |gl (bottom). QD, quantum dot.
LETTERS
NATURE PHOTONICS DOI: 10.1038/NPHOTON.2013.48
NATURE PHOTONICS | VOL 7 | MAY 2013 | www.nature.com/naturephotonics 376
2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

to be 5% at the p pulse condition and increasing to 14% at the 3p pulse condition,
was subtracted for Fig. 3.
Measurement of complete inputoutput photon polarization probabilities. A
HWP placed between the PBS and the objective lens was used to rotate the input
photon polarization to either H or V. After reection, the photon underwent a
second pass through the HWP due to the optical conguration of the set-up. When
the HWP was oriented at 08, a detection event from the transmitted port of the PBS
corresponded to a photon polarized in the H direction after reection, while a
detection event from the reected port corresponded to V polarization. In contrast,
when the HWP was rotated 458, a detection event at the transmission port of the PBS
corresponded to a V-polarized photon after reection from the cavity, while the
reection port corresponded to an H-polarized photon. This additional rotation was
taken into account in the data in Fig. 4a and d.
Received 18 September 2012; accepted 8 February 2013;
published online 31 March 2013
References
1. Cirac, J. I., Zoller, P., Kimble, H. J. & Mabuchi, H. Quantum state transfer and
entanglement distribution among distant nodes in a quantum network. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 78, 32213224 (1997).
2. Raussendorf, R. & Briegel, H. J. A one-way quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett.
86, 51885191 (2001).
3. Chang, D. E., Sorensen, A. S., Demler, E. A. & Lukin, M. D. A single-photon
transistor using nanoscale surface plasmons. Nature Phys. 3, 807812 (2007).
4. Hwang, J. et al. A single-molecule optical transistor. Nature 460, 7680 (2009).
5. Childress, L., Taylor, J. M., Srensen, A. S. & Lukin, M. D. Fault-tolerant
quantum communication based on solid-state photon emitters. Phys. Rev. Lett.
96, 070504 (2006).
6. Waks, E. & Vuckovic, J. Dipole induced transparency in drop-lter cavity
waveguide systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 153601 (2006).
7. Van Loock, P. et al. Hybrid quantum repeater using bright coherent light. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 96, 240501 (2006).
8. Rauschenbeutel, A. et al. Coherent operation of a tunable quantum phase gate in
cavity QED. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 51665169 (1999).
9. Volz, J., Gehr, R., Dubois, G., Esteve, J. & Reichel, J. Measurement of the internal
state of a single atom without energy exchange. Nature 475, 210213 (2011).
10. Duan, L. M. & Kimble, H. J. Scalable photonic quantum computation through
cavity-assisted interactions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 127902 (2004).
11. Stievater, T. H. et al. Rabi oscillations of excitons in single quantum dots. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 87, 133603 (2001).
12. Press, D., Ladd, T. D., Zhang, B. & Yamamoto, Y. Complete quantum
control of a single quantum dot spin using ultrafast optical pulses. Nature 456,
218221 (2008).
13. Xu, X. et al. Optically controlled locking of the nuclear eld via coherent dark-
state spectroscopy. Nature 459, 11051109 (2009).
14. Latta, C. et al. Conuence of resonant laser excitation and bidirectional
quantum-dot nuclear-spin polarization. Nature Phys. 5, 758763 (2009).
15. Brunner, D. et al. A coherent single-hole spin in a semiconductor. Science 325,
7072 (2009).
16. Vamivakas, A. N. et al. Observation of spin-dependent quantum jumps via
quantum dot resonance uorescence. Nature 467, 297300 (2010).
17. Li, X. et al. An all-optical quantum gate in a semiconductor quantum dot.
Science 301, 809811 (2003).
18. Kim, D., Carter, S. G., Greilich, A., Bracker, A. S. & Gammon, D. Ultrafast optical
control of entanglement between two quantum-dot spins. Nature Phys. 7,
223229 (2011).
19. Reithmaier, J. P. et al. Strong coupling in a single quantum dotsemiconductor
microcavity system. Nature 432, 197200 (2004).
20. Yoshie, T. et al. Vacuum Rabi splitting with a single quantum dot in a photonic
crystal nanocavity. Nature 432, 200203 (2004).
21. Peter, E. et al. Excitonphoton strong-coupling regime for a single quantum dot
embedded in a microcavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 067401 (2005).
22. Hennessy, K. et al. Quantum nature of a strongly coupled single quantum
dotcavity system. Nature 445, 896899 (2007).
23. Englund, D. et al. Controlling cavity reectivity with a single quantum dot.
Nature 450, 857861 (2007).
24. Srinivasan, K. & Painter, O. Linear and nonlinear optical spectroscopy of a
strongly coupled microdiskquantum dot system. Nature 450, 862865 (2007).
25. Reitzenstein, S. et al. Exciton spin state mediated photonphoton coupling
in a strongly coupled quantum dot microcavity system. Phys. Rev. B 82,
121306 (2010).
26. Forstner, J., Weber, C., Danckwerts, J. & Knorr, A. Phonon-assisted damping
of Rabi oscillations in semiconductor quantum dots. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91,
127401 (2003).
27. Ramsay, A. J. A review of the coherent optical control of the exciton and
spin states of semiconductor quantum dots. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 25,
103001 (2010).
28. Ohta, R. et al. Strong coupling between a photonic crystal nanobeam cavity and a
single quantum dot. Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 173104 (2011).
29. Bose, R., Sridharan, D., Solomon, G. S. & Waks, E. Observation of strong
coupling through transmission modication of a cavity-coupled photonic crystal
waveguide. Opt. Express 19, 53985409 (2011).
30. Faraon, A., Majumdar, A., Kim, H., Petroff, P. & Vuckovic, J. Fast electrical
control of a quantum dot strongly coupled to a photonic-crystal cavity. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 104, 047402 (2010).
31. Bose, R., Sridharan, D., Solomon, G. S. & Waks, E. Large optical Stark shifts in
semiconductor quantum dots coupled to photonic crystal cavities. Appl. Phys.
Lett. 98, 121109 (2011).
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge support from the Army Research Ofce Multidisciplinary
University Research Initiative on hybrid quantum interactions (grant no. W911NF09104),
a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Defense Science Ofce grant
(grant no. W31P4Q0910013), the Physics Frontier Center at the Joint Quantum Institute,
and the Ofce of Naval Research Applied Electromagnetics Center. E.W. acknowledges
support from the National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Development
(CAREER) award (grant no. ECCS 0846494) and a DARPA Young Faculty Award (grant
no. N660011114121).
Author contributions
H.K. and E.W. conceived and designed the experiment, and prepared the manuscript. H.K.
carried out the measurements and analysed the data. R.B. and T.C.S. contributed to the
measurements and sample design. E.W. and H.K. carried out the theoretical analysis. G.S.S.
provided samples grown by molecular beam epitaxy.
Additional information
Supplementary information is available in the online version of the paper. Reprints and
permissions information is available online at www.nature.com/reprints. Correspondence and
requests for materials should be addressed to E.W.
Competing nancial interests
The authors declare no competing nancial interests.
NATURE PHOTONICS DOI: 10.1038/NPHOTON.2013.48
LETTERS
NATURE PHOTONICS | VOL 7 | MAY 2013 | www.nature.com/naturephotonics 377