Optical bistability and multistability via double dark resonance in graphene nanostructure
Hossein Asadpour Seyyed†, , Solookinejad G, Panahi M, Ahmadi Sangachin E
Department of Physics, Marvdasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Marvdasht, Iran

 

† Corresponding author. E-mail: s.hosein.asadpour@gmail.com

Abstract
Abstract

Electrons in graphene nanoribbons can lead to exceptionally strong optical responses in the infrared and terahertz regions owing to their unusual dispersion relation. Therefore, on the basis of quantum optics and solid-material scientific principles, we show that optical bistability and multistability can be generated in graphene nanostructure under strong magnetic field. We also show that by adjusting the intensity and detuning of infrared laser field, the threshold intensity and hysteresis loop can be manipulated efficiently. The effects of the electronic cooperation parameter which are directly proportional to the electronic number density and the length of the graphene sample are discussed. Our proposed model may be useful for the nextgeneration all-optical systems and information processing based on nano scale devices.

PACS: 42.50.–p;42.65.pc
1. Introduction

Atomic coherence and quantum interference are the basic mechanism for controlling the optical properties of the medium. The discovery of electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT)[1,2] has led to many interesting phenomena such as lasing without population inversion,[3] enhanced Kerr nonlinearity,[4] electron localization,[5,6] optical bistability (OB),[725] and other interesting phenomena.[2633] Among these, optical bistability has been developed due to its potential application in all optical switching and optical transistors which are necessary for quantum computing and quantum communications. The bistable threshold intensity and hysteresis loop can be controlled by several and different methods such as field-induced transparency,[7] quantum interference,[811] phase fluctuation,[1214] squeezed state field,[1517] etc.[1825]

It should be pointed that similar phenomena based on atomic coherence and quantum interference in semiconductor quantum wells and quantum dots have also been analyzed due to their important applications in opto–electronic and solid-state quantum information science.[3440] There are many proposals for controlling the OB and OM in semiconductor quantum wells and quantum dots.[4145] For example, Wang and Yu[41] investigated the OB behavior in an asymmetric three-coupled quantum well structure inside a unidirectional ring cavity. They found that by controlling the assisting coherent driven field and the frequency detuning of the two control laser fields the appearance and disappearance of OB can be easily controlled. In another study by Wang and Yu,[42] OB and OM behaviors in polaronic materials doped with nanoparticles inside an optical ring cavity have been discussed. Li[43] studied the behavior of OB in a semiconductor quantum well system with tunneling-induced interference. In our recent study, we studied the behaviors of OB and OM by biexciton coherence in a multiple quantum well nanostructure.[45]

More recently, due to unique selection rules of graphene which results from its magneto-optical properties and the peculiar thin graphite layers some researchers are interested to investigate the optical properties of graphene.[4649] Graphene has unusual electronic and optical properties stemming from linear, massless dispersion of electrons near the Dirac point and the chiral character of electron states.[5052] Magneto–optical properties of graphene and thin graphite layers are particularly peculiar, showing multiple absorption peaks and unique selection rules for transitions between Landau levels.[46,47] The strong optical nonlinearity of graphene, like most of its unique electrical and optical properties, stems from the linear energy dispersion of carriers near the K, K′ points of the Brillouin zone. As a result, the electron velocity induced by an incident electromagnetic wave is a nonlinear function of induced electron momentum. The nonlinear electromagnetic response of classical charges with linear energy dispersion has been studied theoretically.[5355] Moreover, graphene has the outstanding optical properties,[56,57] such as strong light-graphene interaction, broadband and high-speed operation. It seems to be a good candidate for designing tunable optical device that operates in both THz and optical frequency ranges due to the tenability of the charge carrier density and conductivity by the bias voltage of graphene. In strong magnetic field regime the generation of polarized-entangle photon and nonlinear frequency conversion of THz surface plasmons based on the nonlinear optical interaction have been analyzed.[5861] In addition, it has been demonstrated that the bilayer graphene can exhibit a giant and tunable second-order optical nonlinearity and may have potential applications in new compact photonic and optoelectronic devices.[62] Graphene in a magnetic field can be compared with coupled quantum well heterostructures, where one can also achieve a fully resonant nonlinear optical interaction involving a cascade of allowed intersubband transitions.[58,59] The formation and ultraslow propagation of infrared spatial solitons originating from the balance between nonlinear effects and the dispersion properties of the graphene under infrared excitation have been discussed.[63] The matched infrared soliton pairs based on four-wave mixing (FWM) in Landau-quantized graphene by using the density-matrix method and perturbation theory have been discussed by Ding et al.[64] It is found that the matched spatial soliton pairs can propagate through a two-dimensional crystal of graphene and their carrier frequencies are adjustable within the infrared frequency regime. In our recent study, we showed the possibility of controlling the group index switching in graphene under the action of strong magnetic and infrared laser fields,[65] and discussed the absorption, dispersion, and group velocity of light via incoherent pumping field in a four-level Landau-quantized graphene nanostructure.[66] To the best of our knowledge, the controls of optical bistability and multistability in Landau-quantized graphene nanostructure with double dark resonances have not yet been reported. In the present work, we study the OB and OM properties in a unidirectional ring cavity doped by four-level Landau-quantized graphene nanostructure. Our proposed model is mainly based on Ref. [63], however, our work is drastically different from that. First and foremost is that we are interested in showing the controllability of the optical bistability and multistability behaviors. Second, the properties of OB and OM can be controlled in double dark resonances conditions. Third, a very important advantage of our investigation can be used for the optimal design of graphene system to achieve low-threshold all-optical bistable and multistable systems.

2. Model and equations

In the presence of a strong magnetic field a doped graphene system with four level energy levels that form a ladder-type configuration is shown in Fig. 1. According to the peculiar selection rules of graphene, i.e., Δ|n| = ±1 (n is the energy quantum number) as opposed to Δn = ±1 for electrons, the chosen transitions between Landau levels are dipole allowed. Such a system has been already used for studying the giant optical nonlinearity, nonlinear frequency conversion, generation of entangled photons, and formation of ultraslow solitons.[58,59,6164] For a magnetic field in the range of 0.01 T–10 T, the optical transitions between the adjacent Landau levels (LLs) in graphene fall into the infrared-to-THz region. The electric field vector of the system can be represented by with ej and kj (j = 1,2) being the unit vectors of polarization direction and wave vector, respectively.

Fig. 1. (a) LLs near the K point superimposed on the electronic energy dispersion without a magnetic field E = ±vF |p|. The magnetic field condenses the original states in the Dirac cone into discrete energies. The LLs in graphene are unequally spaced: (b) Energy level diagram and optical transitions in graphene interacting with two continuous-wave control fields, a cycling coupling field, and a weak pulsed probe field. The states |1〉, |2〉, |3〉, and |4〉 correspond to the LLs with energy quantum numbers n = −2,−1, 0, and 1, respectively. Graphene monolayer is a one-atom-thick monolayer of carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal lattice, which we will treat as a perfect two-dimensional (2D) crystal structure in the xy plane.

The optical excitation via a linearly polarized continuous-wave (CW) laser control field induces the intra-LL transitions |2〉 ↔ |3〉 and |3〉 ↔ |4〉. It is known that a linearly polarized laser field can be decomposed into two circularly polarized elements. Therefore, the electric field strength of the control field can be written as where and are the unit vectors of the right-hand circularly (RHC) and left-hand circularly (LHC) polarized basis respectively and can be expressed as and More specifically, the RHC (LHC) polarized component with the carrier frequency ω2 is used to drive the transition |2〉 ↔ |3〉 (|3〉 ↔ |4〉), a weak incident probe pulse with right-hand circular polarization interacts with the intra-LL transition |1〉 ↔ |2〉 with the amplitude Ep and carrier frequency ωp. The effective mass Hamiltonian for a single layer graphene (in the xy plane) in the absence of an external optical field and under the magnetic field Bẑ (perpendicular to the plane of graphene) can be given by:

where vF = 3γ0/(2ħa) ≈ 106 m/s (γ0 ∼ 2.8 eV and a = 1.42Å are the nearest-neighbor hopping energy and C–C spacing, respectively) is a band parameter (Fermi velocity), denotes the generalized momentum operator, is the electron momentum operator, e is the electron charge, and A is the vector potential, which is equal to (0, Bx) for a static magnetic field. The vector potential of the optical field (Aopt = icE/ω) can be added to the vector potential of the magnetic field in the generalized momentum operator in the Hamiltonian. Therefore, the interaction Hamiltonian can be written as

Based on Eq. (2), the density matrix of Dirac electrons in graphene coupled to the infrared laser field can be expressed by using the Liouville’s equation of motion

where In general, the decay rate of the graphene is combined into the evolution equation by a relaxation matrix which can be defined by which originates from disorder, interaction with phonons, and carrier–carrier interactions. As a result, the density matrix equations of motion for four-level graphene system can be written as

where Δp = ωp – (εn=−1εn=−2)/ħ, Δ2 = ω2 − (εn=0εn=−1)/ħ, and Δ3 = ω3 − (εn=1εn=0)/ħ represent the corresponding frequency detunings with being the energy of the Landau level for electron near the Dirac point, and the magnetic length; Ωp = (μ21·ep)Ep/(2ħ), and are the corresponding one-half Rabi-frequencies with

being the dipole matrix element for the relevant optical transition. The total decay rates Γi j (ij) are given by Γ41 = γ4, Γ42 = γ2 + γ4, Γ43 = γ3 + γ4, Γ31 = γ3, and Γ32 = γ3 + γ2, and γj (j = 2,3,4) corresponds to the decay rate of the state |j〉.

Now, we consider a medium of length L composed of the above described graphene system immersed in ring cavity.[24] Under slowly varying envelop approximation, the dynamic response of the probe beam is governed by Maxwell’s equations:

where P(ωp) is the induced polarization and given by P(ωp) = 12ρ21, and N is the number density of the electrons in the sample. In the steady-state, the term ∂Ep/∂t in Eq. (4a) is equal to zero. Then, equation (2) can be easily given as follows:

For a perfectly tuned cavity, the boundary conditions in the steady-state limit between the incident field and transmitted field are

where L is the length of the graphene sample and is on the order of nanometer. Note that the second term on the right-hand side of Eq. (4d) is the feedback mechanism due to the reflection from mirror and is responsible for the bistable behavior. According to the mean-field limit and by using the boundary condition, the steady state behavior of polarized transmitted field is given by

where and are the normalized input and output fields, respectively. The parameter is the cooperative parameter for graphene in a ring cavity and related to the electronic concentration N and the length of graphene sample.

3. Results and discussion

Now some numerical studies under the steady-state conditions are shown in Figs. 25. It is noted that the carrier frequency of the probe field can be estimated to be approximately the same as the transition frequency which is on the order of ω21 ∼ 2.39 × 1013 s−1 for graphene at a magnetic field of B = 1 T.[5864] When the magnetic field reaches up to 5 T the transition frequency is estimated to be ω21 ∼ 5.34 × 1013 s−1. In the present work, taking the magnetic field B = 3 T and ωc =1014 s−1, it is confirmed that the bistable curve is located within the infrared region. According to the numerical estimate based on Refs. [58], [59], and [67] we can take a reasonable value for the decay rate γ2 = 3 × 1013 s−1, and assuming γ4 = γ3 = γ2 these values depend on the sample quality and the substrate used in the experiment.[5861] Besides, the dipole moment between the transitions |1〉 ↔ |2〉 in the graphene has a magnitude on the order The electron concentration is N ≃ 5 × 1012 cm−2 and the substrate dielectric constant is εr ≃ 4.5.[6770] The dependence of the optical bistability on RHC signal in the absence of LHC field is shown in Fig. 2(a).

Fig. 2. Plots of output filed versus input field for different values of (a) RHC field and (b) detuning of RHC field. The selected parameters are γ2 = 3 × 1013 s−1, γ4 = γ3 = γ2, Δp = 0, Δ3 = 0, N ≃ 5 × 1012 cm−2, L = 90 nm, and εr ≃ 4.5.

It is found that increasing RHC field leads to a significant decrease of the bistable threshold. Physically, in the absence of LHC signal the LLs |1〉, |2〉, and |3〉 constitute a usual ladder-type configuration which owns the property of the EIT. Therefore, increasing the RHC field between LLs |2〉 and |3〉 dramatically reduces the absorption for probe light which makes the cavity field easier to reach saturation. The effect of frequency detuning of the RHC field on input–output field intensity is displayed in Fig. 2(a). It can be seen that in the nonresonance condition of RHC field, i.e. Δc = ±3γ2, the optical bistability is converted into the optical multistability. The reason for the existence of OM is that y in Eq. (5) is not a cubic polynomial of the variable x in certain parameter regimes. Thus, the detuning of RHC signal can influence the absorption, dispersion and Kerr nonlinearity of the graphene medium which leads to the appearance of OM. It is profitable to note that the second term on the righthand side of Eq. (5), namely f (x) ≡ −i21(x), is essential for OB or OM to take place. The form of f (x) shows the Kerr nonlinearity and complicated dependences of absorption and dispersion on various system parameters including frequency detuning and intensity of coupling field. For OB, f (x) is a linear and quadratic polynomial in x, while for OM, f (x) is not a linear nor quadratic polynomial in x (the explicit expression of f (x) is so complicated that it will not be presented here). The effects of both RHC and LHC signal fields on output-input intensity field are shown in Fig. 3(a).

Fig. 3. Plots of output filed versus input field for different values of (a) RHC and LHC fields and (b) detunings of RHC and LHC field. The other parameters are same as those in Fig. 2.

We find that when two coupling fields (RHC and LHC) are on, the threshold of optical bistability increases due to enhancing the absorption spectrum in the presence of LHC field. Physically, the presence of LHC field between LLs |3〉 and |4〉 dramatically enhances the absorption for probe field which makes the cavity field harder to reach saturation. However, by increasing the both values of RHC and LHC fields, the thresholds of bistability reduce respectively. In this case, the effects of frequency detuning of RHC and LHC fields on output–input intensity fields are demonstrated in Fig. 3(b). It is found that the threshold and hysteresis cycle shape change obviously due to the variational frequency detunings of the RHC and LHC fields. The reason for the above result can be qualitatively explained as follows. The variational frequency detunings of RHC and LHC fields can dramatically modify the absorption, dispersion and Kerr nonlinearity of the graphene sample. So, we can see that the variational frequency detuning of coupling field leads to changing the threshold of OM. The dependences of output–input intensity fields in the resonance and nonresonance conditions of probe light are displayed in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. Plots of output filed versus input field for different values of (a) resonance condition of probe light and (b) nonresonance condition of probe light. The selected parameters are γ2 = 3 × 1013 s−1, γ4 = γ3 = γ2, Δp = Δ2 = Δ3 = 0, N ≃ 5 × 1012 cm−2, L = 90 nm, and εr ≃ 4.5.

It can be seen that for resonance condition (Δp = 0), the thresholds of OB vanish for strong RHC and weak LHC fields, while thresholds of OB increase for weak RHC and strong LHC fields. In other words, the intensity threshold of OB increases when we enhance the LHC field and reduce the RHC field. However, in nonresonance condition of weak probe light, changing the intensities of RHC and LHC signals leads to converting the OB into OM. The effects of frequency detuning of RHC and LHC fields on output–input intensity field for two cases and are shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. Plots of output filed versus input field for different values of detuning of RHC and LHC fields. (a) and (b) . The other parameters are same as those in Fig. 2.

It can be seen that for enhancing the frequency detuning leads to increasing the threshold of OB and for and enhancing the frequency detuning leads to switching from OM to OB. At the end, the effects of the electron concentration N and length of graphene sample on the output–input intensity field are depicted in Figs. 6(a) and 6(b), respectively.

Fig. 6. Plots of output filed versus input field for different values of (a) electron concentration and (b) length of graphene sample. The selected parameters for (a) are Δp = Δ2 = Δ3 = 0 and and for (b) are Δp = 5γ2, Δ2 = Δ3 = 0, and The other selected parameters are as those in Fig. 2.

It can be easily seen that reducing the electron concentration N and graphene sample length leads to reducing OB and OM intensity threshold. Physically, reducing the electron concentration N and graphene sample length makes the cavity field easier to reach saturation, therefore the thresholds of OB and OM decrease due to reducing the absorption of weak probe light. We can see that even for L=30nm of sample length the OM is converted into OB. This is very interesting results for controlling the OM and OB in optical devices on a nano scale. Before ending this paper, we give some explanations about our work as follows. In fact, Like the laser-driven atomic medium or ensemble consisting of many single atoms,[71] here we only consider a graphene monolayer in the graphene ensemble interacting with optical fields for the sake of simplification of the calculation. It should be emphasized that the optical conductivity of a graphene layer is proportional to its effective thickness or surface density of atoms.[72,73] In spite of the fact that the effective thickness of a graphene layer is around one angstrom and the vacuum wavelength of the optical waves under consideration is around one micron through our calculation and analysis, it is possible to observe such behaviors by making use of the graphene ensemble. In view of rapid advance in graphene material, we believe that the realization of optical bistability will be accessible experimentally in the near future.

4. Conclusions

In this work, we theoretically investigate the optical bistability and multistability in a four-level graphene system under strong magnetic field. By manipulating the absorption and nonlinear optical properties of this optical system via the quantum interference created by RHC and LHC fields, the optical bistability and multistability can be controlled by changing the frequency detuning of optical field. The effects of electron concentration and the length of graphene sample on the OB and OM are also discussed. we find that with these different physical parameters, one can build more efficient all-optical switches and logic gate devices on a nano scale for optical computing and quantum information processing.

Reference
1Wu YYang X 2005 Phys. Rev. 71 053806
2Harris S E1997Phys. Today5036
3Zhao YZhao YHuang DWu C 1996 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B: Opt. Phys. 13 1614
4Hamedi H RAsadpour S HSahrai M 2013 Optik 124 366
5Wang ZYu B 2014 Laser Phys. Lett. 11 035201
6Shui TWang ZYu B 2015 J. Opt. Soc. Am. 32 210
7Walls D FZoller PSteyn-Ross M L 1981 IEEE J. Quantum Electron 17 380
8Li J H 2007 Physica 228 148
9Li J H X YLuo J MHuang Q J 2006 Phys. Rev. 74 053801
10 X YLi J HLiu J BLuo J M 2006 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 39 5161
11Wang ZXu M 2009 Opt. Commun. 282 1574
12Gong SDu SXu ZPan S 1996 Phys. Lett. 222 237
13Hu XXu Z 2001 J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 3 35
14Cheng D CLiu C PGong S Q 2006 Opt. Commun. 263 111
15Singh SRai JBowden C MPostan A 1992 Phys. Rev. 45 5160
16Antón M ACalderón O G 2002 J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 4 91
17Antón M ACalderón O GCarrëno F 2003 Phys. Lett. 311 297
18Wang HGoorskey D JXiao M 2001 Phys. Rev. 65 011801
19Joshi AXiao M 2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 143904
20Brown AJoshi AXiao M 2003 Appl. Phys. Lett. 83 1301
21Joshi ABrown AWang HXiao M 2003 Phys. Rev. 67 041801
22Joshi AYang WXiao M 2004 Phys. Rev. 70 041802
23Chang HWu HXie CWang H 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 213901
24Joshi AYang WXiao M 2005 Opt. Lett. 30 905
25Joshi AXiao M 2006 Phys. Rev. 74 013817
26Wu YYang X 2004 Phys. Rev. 70 053818
27Wu YYang X 2007 Phys. Rev. 76 054425
28Si L GYang W XLou X YHao X YYang X 2010 Phys. Rev. 82 013836
29Yang W XHou J MLin Y YLee R K 2009 Phys. Rev. 79 033825
30Si L GYang W XYang X 2009 J. Opt. Soc. Am. 26 478
31Wu YDeng L 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 143904
32Asadpour S HEslami-Majd A 2012 J. Lumin. 132 1477
33Wu YYang X 2007 Appl. Phys. Lett. 91 094104
34Yang X XLi Z WWu Y 2005 Phys. Lett. 340 320
35Yang W XChen A XLee R KWu Y 2011 Phys. Rev. 84 013835
36Yang X XLi Z WWu Y 2005 Phys. Lett. 340 320
37Yang W XChen A XSi L GJiang KYang XLee R K 2010 Phys. Rev. 81 023814
38Yang W XHou J MLee R K 2008 Phys. Rev. 77 033838
39Chen A X 2011 Opt. Express 19 11944
40Asadpour S HSahrai MSadighi Bonabi RSoltani AMahrami H 2011 Physica 43 1759
41Wang ZYu B 2013 J. Appl. Phys. 113 113101
42Wang ZYu B 2014 Laser Phys. Lett. 11 115903
43Li J H 2007 Phys. Rev. 75 155329
44Li J HYang X 2006 Eur. Phys. J. 53 449
45Asadpour S HRahimpour Soleimani H 2014 Physica 440 124
46Sadowski M LMartinez GPotemski MBerger CHeer W A 2006 Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 266405
47Abergel D S LFal’ko V I 2007 Phys. Rev. 75 155430
48Ho Y HChiu Y HLin D HChang C PLin M F 2010 ACS Nano 4 1465
49Booshehri L GMielke C HRickel D GCrooker S AZhang QRen LHaroz E HRustagi AStanton C JJin ZSun ZYan ZTour J MKono J 2012 Phys. Rev. 85 205407
50Nair R RBlake PGrigorenko A NNovoselov K SBooth T JStauber TPeres N M RGeim A K 2008 Science 320 1308
51Castro Neto A HGuinea FPeres N M RNovoselov K SGeim A K 2009 Rev. Mod. Phys. 81 109
52Yankowitz MXue J MCormode DSanchez-Yamagishi J DWatanabe KTaniguchi TJarillo-Herrero PJacquod PLeRoy B J 2012 Nat. Phys. 8 382
53Orlita MFaugeras CPlochocka PNeugebauer PMartinez GMaude DBarra A LSprinkle MBerger Cde Heer W APotemski M 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 267601
54Orlita MFaugeras CSchneider J MMartinez GMaude D KPotemski M 2009 Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 166401
55Crassee ILevallois JWalter A LOstler MBostwick ARotenberg ESeyller Tvan der Marel DKuzmenko A B 2011 Nat. Phys. 7 48
56Liu MYin XUlin-Avila EGeng BZentgraf TJu LWang FZhang X 2011 Nature 474 64
57Bonaccorso FSun ZHasan TFerrari A 2010 Nat. Photon. 4 611
58Yao X HBelyanin A 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 255503
59Tokman MYao X HBelyanin A 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 077404
60Yao X HBelyanin A 2013 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 25 054203
61Yao X HTokman MBelyanin A 2014 Proc. SPIE 8980 89801A
62Wu S FMao LJones A MYao WZhang C WXu X D 2012 Nano Lett. 12 2032
63Ding CYu rLi J HHao XWu Y 2014 J. Appl. Phys. 115 234301
64Ding CYu RLi J HHao XWu Y 2014 Phys. Rev. 90 043819
65Asadpour S HHamedi HRahimpour Soleimani H 2015 Laser Phys. Lett. 12 045202
66Asadpour S HHamedi HRahimpour Soleimani H 2015 Physica 71 123
67Jiang ZHenriksen E ATung L CWang Y JSchwartz M EHan M YKim PStormer H L 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 197403
68Nesterov M LBravo-Abad JYu Nikitin AGarcia-Vidal F JMartin-Moreno L 2013 Laser Photon. Rev. 7 L7
69Cheh JZhao H2011arXiv preprint: 1107.3696
70Lee K SLu T MZhang X C 2002 IEEE Circ. Dev. Mag. 18 23
71Scully M OZubairy M S1997Quantum OpticsCambridgeCambridge University Press
72Guo G YEbert H 1995 Phys. Rev. 51 12633
73Kosevich Y A 1997 Solid State Commun. 104 321