From electrons to photons: Quantum- inspired modeling in nanophotonics Steven G. Johnson, MIT...
-
Upload
virginia-wilcox -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
0
Transcript of From electrons to photons: Quantum- inspired modeling in nanophotonics Steven G. Johnson, MIT...
From electrons to photons: Quantum-inspired modeling in nanophotonics
Steven G. Johnson, MIT Applied Mathematics
Nano-photonic media (-scale)
synthetic materials
strange waveguides
3d structures
hollow-core fibersoptical phenomena
& microcavities
[B. Norris, UMN] [Assefa & Kolodziejski, MIT]
[Mangan, Corning]
1887 1987
Photonic Crystalsperiodic electromagnetic media
2-D
periodic intwo directions
3-D
periodic inthree directions
1-D
periodic inone direction
can have a band gap: optical “insulators”
Electronic and Photonic Crystalsatoms in diamond structure
wavevector
elec
tron
ene
rgy
Per
iod
ic M
ediu
mB
loch
wav
es:
Ban
d D
iagr
amdielectric spheres, diamond lattice
wavevector
phot
on f
requ
ency
interacting: hard problem non-interacting: easy problem
Electronic & Photonic Modelling
Electronic Photonic
• strongly interacting —tricky approximations
• non-interacting (or weakly), —simple approximations (finite resolution) —any desired accuracy
• lengthscale dependent (from Planck’s h)
• scale-invariant —e.g. size 10 10
Option 1: Numerical “experiments” — discretize time & space … go
Option 2: Map possible states & interactions using symmetries and conservation laws: band diagram
Fun with Math
r ∇ ×
r E =−
1c
∂∂t
r H =i
ωc
r H
r ∇ ×
r H =ε
1c
∂∂t
r E +
r J =i
ωc
εr E
0
dielectric function (x) = n2(x)
First task:get rid of this mess
∇ ×
1ε
∇ ×r H =
ωc
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟
2 r H
eigen-operator eigen-value eigen-state
∇ ⋅r H =0
+ constraint
Electronic & Photonic Eigenproblems
∇ ×
1ε
∇ ×r H =
ωc
⎛ ⎝ ⎜
⎞ ⎠ ⎟
2 r H
Electronic Photonic
€
−h2
2m∇ 2 + V
⎛
⎝ ⎜
⎞
⎠ ⎟ψ = Eψ
simple linear eigenproblem(for linear materials)
nonlinear eigenproblem(V depends on e density ||2)
—many well-known computational techniques
Hermitian = real E & , … Periodicity = Bloch’s theorem…
Periodic Eigenproblemsif eigen-operator is periodic, then Bloch-Floquet theorem applies:
r H (
r x ,t)=e
ir k ⋅r x −ωt( ) r
H r k (r x )can choose:
periodic “envelope”planewave
Corollary 1: k is conserved, i.e. no scattering of Bloch wave
Corollary 2: given by finite unit cell,so are discrete n(k) r H r k
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem
H(x,y) ei(kx – t)€
∇+ ik( ) ×1
ε∇ + ik( ) × Hn =
ωn2
c 2Hn
€
∇+ ik( ) ⋅H = 0
where:
constraint:
1
Want to solve for n(k),& plot vs. “all” k for “all” n,
Finite cell discrete eigenvalues n
Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Photonic Band Gap
TM bands
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 11 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
—Bloch’s theorem: solutions are periodic in k
kx
ky
first Brillouin zone= minimum |k| “primitive cell”
€
2π
a
M
X
irreducible Brillouin zone: reduced by symmetry
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 2a1 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis (N)
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
H =H(xt) = hmbm(xt)m=1
N
∑ solve: ˆ A H =ω2 H
Ah=ω2Bh
Aml = bmˆ A bl Bml = bm blf g = f* ⋅g∫
finite matrix problem:
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 2b1 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
€
(∇ + ik) ⋅H = 0— must satisfy constraint:
Planewave (FFT) basis
H(xt) = HGeiG⋅xt
G∑
€
HG ⋅ G + k( ) = 0constraint:
uniform “grid,” periodic boundaries,simple code, O(N log N)
Finite-element basisconstraint, boundary conditions:
Nédélec elements[ Nédélec, Numerische Math.
35, 315 (1980) ]
nonuniform mesh,more arbitrary boundaries,
complex code & mesh, O(N)[ figure: Peyrilloux et al.,
J. Lightwave Tech.21, 536 (2003) ]
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 3a1 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
Ah=ω2Bh
Faster way:— start with initial guess eigenvector h0
— iteratively improve— O(Np) storage, ~ O(Np2) time for p eigenvectors
Slow way: compute A & B, ask LAPACK for eigenvalues— requires O(N2) storage, O(N3) time
(p smallest eigenvalues)
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 3b1 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
Ah=ω2BhMany iterative methods:
— Arnoldi, Lanczos, Davidson, Jacobi-Davidson, …, Rayleigh-quotient minimization
Solving the Maxwell Eigenproblem: 3c1 Limit range of k: irreducible Brillouin zone
2 Limit degrees of freedom: expand H in finite basis
3 Efficiently solve eigenproblem: iterative methods
Ah=ω2BhMany iterative methods:
— Arnoldi, Lanczos, Davidson, Jacobi-Davidson, …, Rayleigh-quotient minimization
for Hermitian matrices, smallest eigenvalue 0 minimizes:
ω02 =min
h
h' Ahh'Bh
minimize by preconditioned conjugate-gradient (or…)
“variationaltheorem”
Band Diagram of 2d Model System(radius 0.2a rods, =12)
E
HTM
a
freq
uenc
y
(2π
c/a)
= a
/
X
M
X M irreducible Brillouin zone
r k
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Photonic Band Gap
TM bands
gap forn > ~1.75:1
The Iteration Scheme is Important(minimizing function of 104–108+ variables!)
Steepest-descent: minimize (h + f) over … repeat
€
02 = min
h
h' Ah
h'Bh= f (h)
Conjugate-gradient: minimize (h + d)— d is f + (stuff): conjugate to previous search dirs
Preconditioned steepest descent: minimize (h + d) — d = (approximate A-1) f ~ Newton’s method
Preconditioned conjugate-gradient: minimize (h + d)— d is (approximate A-1) [f + (stuff)]
The Iteration Scheme is Important(minimizing function of ~40,000 variables)
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
E E E E E E EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Ñ
ÑÑ Ñ Ñ Ñ ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
J
JJ
JJ
JJ
J J J J J J J JJ JJJJJJJJJJJJ
0.000001
0.00001
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
1 10 100 1000
# iterations
% e
rror
preconditionedconjugate-gradient no conjugate-gradient
no preconditioning
The Boundary Conditions are Tricky
E|| is continuous
E is discontinuous
(D = E is continuous)
Any single scalar fails: (mean D) ≠ (any ) (mean E)
Use a tensor
€
−1 −1
⎛
⎝
⎜ ⎜ ⎜
⎞
⎠
⎟ ⎟ ⎟
E||
E
The -averaging is ImportantQuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
B B
B
B
BB
B
B
B B
BB
B
J
JJ
J
J J
JJ J
J J
J J
HH
H H H H H H HH H H H
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
10 100resolution (pixels/period)
% e
rror
backwards averaging
tensor averaging
no averaging
correct averagingchanges order of convergencefrom ∆x to ∆x2
(similar effectsin other E&M
numerics & analyses)
Gap, Schmap?
a
freq
uenc
y
X M
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Photonic Band Gap
TM bands
But, what can we do with the gap?
Intentional “defects” in 2dQuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
a
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
(Same computation, with supercell = many primitive cells)
Microcavity Blues
For cavities (point defects)frequency-domain has its drawbacks:
• Best methods compute lowest- bands, but Nd supercells have Nd modes below the cavity mode — expensive
• Best methods are for Hermitian operators, but losses requires non-Hermitian
Time-Domain Eigensolvers(finite-difference time-domain = FDTD)
Simulate Maxwell’s equations on a discrete grid,+ absorbing boundaries (leakage loss)
• Excite with broad-spectrum dipole ( ) source
Response is manysharp peaks,
one peak per modecomplex n [ Mandelshtam,
J. Chem. Phys. 107, 6756 (1997) ]
signal processing
decay rate in time gives loss
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Signal Processing is Tricky
complex n
?
signal processing
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Decaying signal (t) Lorentzian peak ()
FFT
a common approach: least-squares fit of spectrum
fit to:
€
A
(ω −ω0)2 + Γ 2
QuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
E E E E E
E
E E E E E0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Fits and UncertaintyQuickTime™ and aGraphics decompressorare needed to see this picture.
EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
E
EEEEE
E
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
E
EEEEEEE
E
E
EEEE
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Portion of decaying signal (t) Unresolved Lorentzian peak ()
actual
signalportion
problem: have to run long enough to completely decay
There is a better way, which gets complex to > 10 digits
Unreliability of Fitting Process
= 1+0.033i
= 1.03+0.025i
sum of two peaks
Resolving two overlapping peaks isnear-impossible 6-parameter nonlinear fit
(too many local minima to converge reliably)
Sum of two Lorentzian peaks ()
There is a better way, which gets
complex for both peaksto > 10 digits
Quantum-inspired signal processing (NMR spectroscopy):
Filter-Diagonalization Method (FDM)[ Mandelshtam, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 6756 (1997) ]
Given time series yn, write:
€
yn = y(nΔt) = ake−iωk nΔt
k
∑
…find complex amplitudes ak & frequencies k
by a simple linear-algebra problem!
Idea: pretend y(t) is autocorrelation of a quantum system:
€
ˆ H ψ = ih∂
∂tψ
say:
€
yn = ψ (0) ψ (nΔt) = ψ (0) ˆ U n ψ (0)
time-∆t evolution-operator:
€
ˆ U = e−i ˆ H Δt / h
Filter-Diagonalization Method (FDM)[ Mandelshtam, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 6756 (1997) ]
€
yn = ψ (0) ψ (nΔt) = ψ (0) ˆ U n ψ (0)
€
ˆ U = e−i ˆ H Δt / h
We want to diagonalize U: eigenvalues of U are ei∆t
…expand U in basis of |(n∆t)>:
€
Um,n = ψ (mΔt) ˆ U ψ (nΔt) = ψ (0) ˆ U m ˆ U ˆ U n ψ (0) = ym +n +1
Umn given by yn’s — just diagonalize known matrix!
Filter-Diagonalization Summary[ Mandelshtam, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 6756 (1997) ]
Umn given by yn’s — just diagonalize known matrix!
A few omitted steps: —Generalized eigenvalue problem (basis not orthogonal) —Filter yn’s (Fourier transform):
small bandwidth = smaller matrix (less singular)
• resolves many peaks at once • # peaks not known a priori • resolve overlapping peaks • resolution >> Fourier uncertainty