Figure 1

(a) The schematic of the coupled QD-cavity system. It is driven by a laser pulse, and the cavity output is monitored. (b) The cavity transmission calculated by three different models: the quantum optical (red), semiclassical linear (blue) and nonlinear (black) model at low (${\Omega }_0/2\pi =1$ GHz) peak intensity of the driving pulse. All three models match quite well. The input pulse is also shown (green dashed line). The oscillation in the cavity output is due to Rabi oscillation of the photon between the QD and the cavity. The inset shows the cavity transmission spectrum in the presence and in the absence of the strongly coupled QD. The split resonances are separated approximately by twice the coherent dot-cavity interaction strength $g$. The spectral shape of laser pulses with pulse lengths of 5 ps (blue dashed line) and 40 ps (green dashed line) is also shown. Parameters used for the simulations are $g/2\pi =25$ GHz, $\kappa /2\pi =29$ GHz, and $\gamma /2\pi =1$ GHz.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 2

Comparison between the temporal cavity transmission obtained via the quantum optical (red dashed line) and the semiclassical nonlinear (black solid line) models. The cavity transmission is normalized by the maximum cavity transmission, and plots are vertically offset for clarity. The two models match quite well at low and high driving power, but at intermediate power, they differ. The inset shows the coherence, calculated as $(\langle a^{†}\sigma \rangle -\langle a^{†}\rangle \langle \sigma \rangle )/{\Omega }_0^2$, integrated over time as a function of the driving strength ${\Omega }_0$. We observe that quantity increases in the intermediate driving power. Parameters used for the simulations are $g/2\pi =25$ GHz and $\kappa /2\pi =29$ GHz.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 3

The temporal cavity output obtained from the full quantum optical simulation as a function of (a) the dot-cavity coupling strength $g$ (here $\kappa /2\pi =20$ GHz; $\delta =0$ and ${\gamma }_d=0$), (b) the cavity field decay rate $\kappa$ (here $g/2\pi =20$ GHz; $\delta =0$ and ${\gamma }_d=0$), (c) the dot cavity detuning $\delta$ (here $g/2\pi =\kappa /2\pi =20$ GHz and ${\gamma }_d=0$), and (d) the pure QD dephasing rate ${\gamma }_d$ (here $g/2\pi =\kappa /2\pi =20$ GHz and $\delta =0$). For all the simulations a low excitation power (${\Omega }_0/2\pi =2$) is assumed.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 4

The normalized cavity transmission for different pulse durations. The pulse duration is changed from 5 to 50 ps. We observe oscillation in the cavity output, although the oscillation frequency decreases with increasing pulse width. This can be explained by the reduced overlap between the pulse and the coupled dot-cavity system in frequency domain.Reuse & Permissions

Figure 5

Experimentally measured time-resolved transmission of 40-ps pulses through a strongly coupled dot-cavity system for three different powers (averaged over the pulse repetition period): (a) $0.1$ nW, (b) $0.23$ nW, and (c) 1 nW. The powers are measured in front of the objective lens in the confocal microscopy setup. For this specific system cavity field decay rate $\kappa /2\pi =29$ GHz, and coherent dot-cavity coupling strength $g/2\pi =25$ GHz. Clear oscillations are observed in the cavity transmission, consistent with the the theoretical predictions. We also observe decreasing oscillation with increasing laser power due to QD saturation.Reuse & Permissions