Title:    Direct-write projection lithography of quantum dot micropillar single photon sources: data

Citation
Androvitsaneas Petros, Clark Rachel, Jordan Matthew, et al.  (2023). Direct-write projection lithography of quantum dot micropillar single photon sources: data. Cardiff University. https://doi.org/10.17035/d.2023.0257041928

Dataset Details

Publisher: Cardiff University

Date (year) of data becoming publicly available: 2023

Data format: .xlsx

Software Required: Excel

Estimated total storage size of dataset: Less than 100 megabytes

DOI : 10.17035/d.2023.0257041928

DOI URL: http://doi.org/10.17035/d.2023.0257041928

Related URL: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0155968

Description

The data are part of a series of experiments that charactrise the properties of semiconductor devices known as micropillars. The Q-factors measured are a figure of merit for the quality of the sidewall roughness of the etched structures (Fig.2). Further to that the properties of semiconductor nanostructures enclosed within the micropillars are neasured, using the second order correlation of the photons emitted along with the non-classical interference observed between subsequent photons produced by the quantum dot micropillar devices (Fig.3), reflecting the quality of the photons produced.

The file is structured as follows each sheet corresponds to a part of each figure found within the manuscript with title "Direct-write projection lithography of quantum dot micropillar single
photon sources", e.g. Fig.2(a), the detailed description may be found below.

Sheet Fig.2(a): in column A the wavelength and in B the counts for the mesured data, in D the wavelength and E the corresponding values for the fitted data.

Sheet Fig.2(b): in column A the wavelength and in B the normalised reflectivity for the mesured data, in E the wavelength and F the corresponding values for the fitted data.

Sheet Fig.2(c): in column A the diameter of the micropillars measured, in B the measured Q-factor for each micropillar and in C the corresponding error for the measured Q, in E the diameter and F the corresponding values for the fit to the model used.

Sheet Fig.2(d): in column A the diameter of the micropillars measured, in B the measured Q-factor for each micropillar and in C the corresponding error for the measured Q, in E the diameter and F the corresponding values for the fit to the model used.

Sheet Fig.2(d): in column A the diameter of the micropillars measured, in B the measured Q-factor for each micropillar and in C the corresponding error for the measured Q, in F the diameter and G the corresponding values for the fit to the model used.

Sheet Fig.3(a) The square root of power applied in column A and the measured count-rate in column B.

Sheet Fig.3(b) In column A the time difference between the coincidences and in B the normalised g2.

Sheet Fig.3(d) In column A the time difference between the excitation pulse and the fluorescence bin Counts in B. In column D the wavelength and in Column E the counts measured for the CW resonant scattering and cross-polarised detection for the doublet under investigation, for the plotted inset figure.

Sheet Fig.3(e) In column A the time difference between the coincidencesand in B the normalised g2 for orthogonally polarised arms of the HOM setup.

Sheet Fig.3(f) In column A the time difference between the coincidences and in B the normalised g2 for co-polarised arms of the HOM setup.

Research results based upon these data are published at http://doi.org/10.1063/5.0155968