## Measurement of photon correlations with multipixel photon counters

## Dmitry Kalashnikov, and Leonid Krivitsky*

Data Storage Institute, Agency for Science Technology and Research (A-STAR), 5 Engineering Drive I, 117608 Singapore *Corresponding author: Leonid\_Krivitskiy@dsi.a-star.edu.sg

Development  of  reliable  photon  number  resolving  detectors  (PNRD),  devices  which  are  capable  to  distinguish 1,2,3.. photons, is of a great importance for quantum optics and its applications. A new class of affordable PNRD is based on multipixel photon counters (MPPC). Here we review results of experiments on using MPPCs for direct characterization of squeezed vacuum (SV) states, generated via parametric downconversion (PDC). We use MPPCs to  measure  the  second  order  normalized  intensity  correlation  function  ( )  and  directly  detect  the  two-mode squeezing  of  SV  states.  We  also  present  a  method  of  calibration  of  crosstalk  probability  in  MPPCs  based  on measurements of coherent states.

## 1. Introduction

Multiphoton  entangled  states  hold  the promise  to advance  both  practical  and  fundamental  aspects  of future quantum technologies. They play an important role in linear optical quantum  computation  [1-3], quantum  metrology  [4],  imaging  [5,  6],  and  tests  of fundamentals  of  quantum  mechanics  [7].  Accurate measurement of such states is also of crucial importance for security analysis in quantum cryptography  [8],  and  in  implementation  of  quantum teleportation [9] and entanglement swapping [10] protocols.

Two  major challenges in experimental studies of multiphoton entangled states are their generation and measurement. The first challenge can be addressed, for example,  by  using  pulsed  laser  with  high-peak  power values  in  various  nonlinear  optical  processes,  possibly enhanced by using cavities and/or nonlinear waveguides.  The  detailed  analysis  of  the  generation problem is outside the scope of this paper, and we direct readers to detailed reviews on this subject [11, 12]. The measurement problem will be addressed here in greater details.  We  consider  direct  detection  of  multiphoton states  by  using  specialized  photon  number  resolving detectors (PNRD) -devices where the produced outcome  corresponds  to  the  number  of  photons  in  an optical pulse.

Conventional single photon detectors, such as avalanche photodiode (APD) and photomultiplier tubes (PMT),  discriminate  only  between  'zero  photons'  and 'one photon or more' because of the 'dead time' effect [13]. The straightforward way to overcome this limitation  relies  upon  splitting  the  incoming  optical pulse  into  different  spatial  (or  temporal)  modes,  and detection of single photons in each mode by independent APDs [14-16]. The photon number distribution is then derived  from  the  joint  statistics  of  APD  responses. Although  a  remarkable  resolution  of  up  to  9  photons was demonstrated with temporal multiplexing, future expansion of such schemes is limited by the necessity to use more  beamsplitters and  photodetectors, which makes such schemes bulky and challenging to operate. Moreover,  since  the  detection  of  multiphoton  events requires simultaneous firing of several detectors, their non-unity quantum efficiency leads to the loss of a large fraction of multiphoton events.

The next approach is based on using cryogenic detectors, such as visible-light photon counters (VLPC) and transition edge sensors (TES) [17-22]. These devices have moderate photon number resolution (up to 7-9  photons),  low  noise  (&lt;1  c/s),  and  high  quantum efficiency  (~80%).  One  of  the  approaches  relies  upon integration of several niobium nitride superconducting nanowire  single  photon  detectors  into  a  waveguide, which results in low jitter and fast recovery time [23]. However, the main limitation of the mentioned above technologies  is  the  requirement  of  cryogenic  cooling (down to 0.1K for TES, 6K for VLPC, and below 10K for superconducting  nanowire),  which  is  expensive  and demands highly skilled operation.

Another class of devices can be used as PNRD without the necessity of  cryogenic  cooling.  Here we  mention  a hybrid photomultiplier tube, which demonstrates discrimination of up to 3 photons [24]. A resolution of up to  5  photons  was  demonstrated  with  a  single  InGAs detector by careful characterization of the early stage of the  avalanche  [25].  Another  approach  is  based  on  SiAPD  with  a  strongly  modulated  lateral  electric  field profile  realized  by  modulated  doping  profile  of  p-n junctions [26]. The high speed and discrimination of up to  4  photons  has  been  demonstrated, but the realized device has comparatively low quantum efficiency (~8 %) and  exhibits  the  space-charge  effect,  which  prevents resolution of higher number of photons.

Recently a new approach for realization of the PNRD was  suggested based on silicon multipixel photon counters  (MPPCs)  [27].  In  MPPC  several  hundred silicon APDs, referred to as pixels, are integrated into a single chip of several millimeter size, see Fig.1a,b. Each pixel outputs a pulse signal when it detects a photon. Signals  from  all  the  fired  pixels  are  summed  at  the output of the MPPC.  The  chip  of the MPPC  is illuminated by a diffused light in order to minimize the probability of a single pixel to be hit by several photons. Thus the amplitude of the MPPC output is, in an ideal case,  equivalent  to  the  number  of  detected  incident photons,  see  Fig.1c.  The  concept  of  MPPC  is  in  some sense similar to the traditional approach of separating an  incoming  pulse  into  multiple  spatial  modes  and detection by independent APDs, which is similar to the concept of single photon CCD  cameras  (EMCCD, ICCD).  However,  it  provides  striking  advantages  in compactness,  ease-of-use, photon-number  resolution, and cost. Currently, MPPCs find their applications in quantum optics experiments [28-33], as well as in highenergy physics experiments as photosensors for scintillate detectors [34].

Fig.1 (a) Principle of MPPC operation. A diffused light is impinging on the MPPC matrix, consisting of few hundreds of APD pixels. Signals from  all  the  pixels  are  summarized  at  the  output.  (b)  Photo  of  the MPPC chip with 400 pixels. The scale bar corresponds to 1.5 mm. (c) Example  of  a  histogram  of  the  MPPC  output  for  coherent  state. Different peaks correspond to the resolution of photon numbers.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-85eadbae-64c6-4ba1-abe2-174ac729ce58.jpg)

The major drawbacks of MPPC are relatively high dark counts, and the optical crosstalk among pixels. The high dark count rate is due to a large number of individual APDs in the MPPC matrix, with each of the APD gives its contribution to the dark noise, contributing a bit to the  dark  noise.  The  dark  noise  can  be  significantly reduced by cooling MPPC and providing time gating to the  signal.  In  contrast,  the  crosstalk  requires  more elaborated  attention.    The  crosstalk  occurs  because secondary  photons,  which  are  re-emitted  during  the avalanche in the pixel, may  trigger simultaneous additional photon counts in neighboring pixels [35, 36]. Since  the  crosstalk  happens  almost  simultaneously with  the  detection  event,  it  is  undistinguishable  from the actual counts, and thus its impact requires accurate theoretical modelling and characterization.

In this paper we review experiments on using MPPCs for  characterization  of  various  entangled  multiphoton states.  Primary  objects  of  our  studies  are squeezed vacuum (SV) states, generated via parametric downconversion (PDC), which is the nonlinear process producing  pairs  of  strongly  correlated  photons.  We explore  different  regimes  of  PDC  and  measure  the normalized  second-order  intensity  correlation  function of  SV  states,  and  also  directly  detect  the  two-mode squeezing. We also present a novel method of calibration of MPPC crosstalk probability based on the measurement  of  the  correlation  function  of  coherent light.

The  paper  is  organized  as  follows.  In  Section  2  we derive the algorithm of obtaining the normalized second-order correlation function ( ) from the MPPC data,  introduce  a  model  of  the  MPPC  crosstalk,  and model the MPPC saturation. In Section 3 we describe an  experiment,  where  we  use  the  MPPC  to  measure of  SV  states  with  much  less  than  one  photon  per pulse. In Section 4 we present a method of calibration of the crosstalk probability of MPPCs  based  on measurements  of  coherent  states,  and  test  it  with several commercially available devices. In Section 5 we describe  an  experiment,  where  MPPCs  are  used  for direct observation of the two-mode squeezing of relatively  bright  SV  states  with  up  to  10  photons  per pulse. The results are summarized in the Conclusions section.

## 2. Theoretical modelling of the MPPC

## 2.1 Measurement of correlation functions

Characterization of various states of light in quantum optics is conveniently performed in terms of normalized Glauber's  correlation  functions  (CFs)  [37].  The th order CF at zero time delay is defined as

$$g ^ { ( l ) } = \langle a ^ { + l } a ^ { l } \rangle / \langle a ^ { + } a \rangle ^ { l } \text{ \quad \ \ } ( 1 )$$

Where are photon  creation  and  annihilation operators, respectively. The remarkable feature of normalized CFs is that they are insensitive  to optical losses and finite efficiencies of the detectors, which may be  not  always  precisely  known  in  experiments  [38]. Here we focus on the analysis of the second-order CF, .

Conventionally is  measured  in  a  Hanbury-Brown and Twiss (HBT) setup consisting of two single photon detectors with their outputs addressed to a coincidence circuit. Let be the measured number of coincidences of photocounts of two detectors, and is  the  measured  number  of  photocounts  of  individual photodetectors, then is given by:

$$( 2 )$$

Let  us  now  consider  measurement  of using  the MPPC. We can treat each pair of pixels in the MPPC matrix as a single HBT setup. The number of such HBT setups  is  equal  to  the  number  of -combination  of : , where is the total number of pixels in the matrix (typically ). Let be the number  of detected photon events ( ). The total number of pairwise coincidences is given by ∑ , where is the number  of  2-combinations  in , which  describes  the contribution of a  detected photon event into twofold  coincidences.  The  total  amount  of  photocounts  is given by ∑ . In analogy with Eq.(2), is calculated  as  a  ratio  of  the  number  of  pairwise coincidences per  one  HBT  setup  to  the  squared  total number of detected photons per one detector (pixel):

$$g ^ { ( 2 ) } = \left ( \frac { N _ { C o i n c / ( m ^ { 2 } / _ { 2 } ) } } { N _ { \tau \sim \tau \sim 1 } / m ^ { 2 } } \right ) = 2 \sum _ { k = 2 } ^ { \infty } C _ { 2 } ^ { k } \, N _ { k } / ( \Sigma _ { k = 1 } ^ { \infty } k N _ { k } ) ^ { 2 } \quad ( 3 )$$

Thus,  once  the  histogram  of  detected -photon  events is obtained in the experiment, see Fig. 1c, can be directly calculated from Eq.(3). Moreover, any spatially resolving  single-photon  detector can  be  used for  these measurements,  such  as,  for  instance,  single-photon sensitive charge coupling devices (EMCCD, ICCD) [39, 40].

## 2.2 Modelling the crosstalk in MPPC

Let  us  now  take  into  account  the  MPPC  crosstalk, which  is  introduced  through  the  crosstalk  probability for one  pixel The model  under  consideration is restricted to the  second  order  crosstalk  under  the assumption of low mean photon number of the detected light, and  the  following  condition  for  the  crosstalk probability  has  to  be  fulfilled .  One  can express  the  number  of -photon  events with crosstalk probability through the corresponding number of events in the absence of crosstalk as follows:

$$\varepsilon ^ { 2 } N _ { 1 }, \quad \quad \ \ ( 4 a )$$

Where the second term on the right corresponds to the  number  of  single  photon  events  converted  to two-photon  events, and  the third term  is the number  of  single  photon  events  converted  to  3photon events.

$$N _ { 2 } \,, \quad ( 4 b )$$

Where the second term on the right corresponds to the  number  of  two-photon  events  converted  into three-photon  events,  the  third  term  arises  due  to the impact from one-photon events, and the fourth term describes two-photon events influenced by the double crosstalk. Finally,

$$( 4 c )$$

In Eq.(4c) the second term on the right is the number of photon  events  being  converted  by  crosstalk  into photon  events,  and  the  third  term  is  the number of photon events that gained an extra photon  due  to  crosstalk  to  become photon  events; the fourth term represents the number of photon events converted into -photon  events due to double crosstalk, and the fifth term is the number of photon events which contributed to photon events, also due to double crosstalk.

Assuming  the  crosstalk  model  mentioned  above,  the numerator and the denominator of Eq.3 in the presence of the crosstalk take the form:

$$\underset { \colon o i n c, C T } { \colon } & = ( 1 + 2 p + 4 p ^ { 2 } ) \sum \nolimits _ { k = 2 } ^ { \infty } C _ { 2 } ^ { k } \, N _ { k } + \\ & \quad p ( 1 + 3 p ) \sum \nolimits _ { k = 1 } ^ { \infty } k \, N _ { k }, \quad ( 5 a )$$

$$\dot { \ } o t a l, C T = ( 1 + p + 2 p ^ { 2 } ) \sum _ { k = 1 } ^ { \infty } k \, N _ { k }. \quad ( 5 b )$$

From Eqs.(3, 5a, 5b) takes the following form:

$$g ^ { ( 2 ) } \left ( N _ { T o t a l, C T } \right ) = A g _ { 0 } ^ { ( 2 ) } + B \frac { 1 } { N _ { T o t a l, C T } }, \quad ( 6 )$$

where ∑ ∑ is the initial second order correlation of light, and

$$\frac { r ^ { 4 p ^ { - } } } { \psi ^ { 2 \vee 2 } }, \quad \ \ B \equiv \frac { r ^ { p ( 1 + 3 p ) } } { 1 + \psi + 2 \psi ^ { 2 } }.$$

There are two main conclusions followed from Eq.(6). First, the measured by the MPPC, is different from the of the incident light by a normalization coefficient and an additive term scaling as . Second, the crosstalk probability can be easily measured using some light source with known , for instance  coherent  light  with =1.  Both  of  these aspects will be addressed experimentally in Sections 3 and 4.

## 2.3 Modelling saturation in MPPC

In  case  when  beams  of  relatively  high  intensities  are considered,  saturation  of  the  MPPCs  has  to  be  taken into  account  by  assuming  that  each  MPPC  can  only resolve up to photocounts, given by the number of illuminated pixels. When more than photons incident on the detector, not more than photocounts will be produced. For modeling of a realistic MPPC, we follow [28, 30], where the loss and crosstalk are considered as Bayesian processes. Let us denote 〈  ̂〉 as  the  mean  number  of  photons  impinging  on  the detector, as a crosstalk probability , and as a quantum  efficiency  of  each  MPPC  pixel,  which  also accounts for  losses  in  an  optical  system.  The  positiveoperator valued measure (POVM) effecting the measurement  of photons  with  crosstalk  with  one MPPC, for is:

$$\tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde {  \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde \tilde { \tilde \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde \tilde \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde { \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde { \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \ tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde \tilde                                                                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                        }                                                                                                                                                                                                       .$$

where is  the  number  of -combinations  of . The finite quantum  efficiency of detection of incident photons is described by the following POVM:

where is  the  number  of -combinations  of . By combining the two, a set of POVMs that would predict the  outcome  of  the  MPPC  with  loss,  saturation  and crosstalk is obtained:

$$\Pi _ { N } = \begin{cases} \sum _ { n = [ N / 2 ] } ^ { N } \sum _ { k = n } ^ { \infty } B _ { n, k, N } | k \rangle \langle k |, \ N < N _ { m a x } \\ I - \sum _ { k = 0 } ^ { N _ { m a x } } \Pi _ { k } \end{cases}, \ N = N _ { m a x }$$

where

$$\begin{smallmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix}$$

The -moment operator of the photocount is given by

$$\widehat { N } ^ { m } = \Sigma _ { N = 0 } ^ { N _ { m a x } } N ^ { m } \Pi _ { N }. \text{ \quad \ \ } \text{(8)}$$

Eq.(8)  allows  calculation  of  a  mean  and  a  variance  of photocounts, which will be used in Section 5 to reveal suppression of intensity fluctuations of two-mode squeezed vacuum states.

## 3. Assessing photon bunching with MPPC

In this section we describe an experiment, where we use the MPPC  for  measurements  of  the  second  order correlation  function  (CF)  of  coherent  and  squeezed vacuum  (SV)  states.  Let  us  consider  the  PDC  in frequency degenerate collinear regime. In this case the signal and idler photons are indistinguishable, and the state produced is a single-mode squeezed vacuum, with the  state  vector  given  by  a  superposition  of  evennumber Fock states [41]:

$$| \psi \rangle = \Sigma _ { n = 0 } ^ { \infty } C _ { 2 n } | 2 n \rangle$$

The  index is related  to  the  ensembles  of  modes, accessed via multimode detection [41]. The state vector of a coherent state is

$$| \psi _ { c o h } \rangle = \Sigma _ { n = 0 } ^ { \infty } C _ { n } | n \rangle \text{ \quad \ \ } ( 1 0 )$$

The  probability  amplitudes  in  Eq.(9,  10)  obey  the Poissonian  distribution,  with | |   √   〈 〉 〈 〉 and | |   √   〈  〉 〈  〉 where 〈 〉 〈  〉 , are the mean  photon  numbers,  respectively.  From  Eqs.(1,  9, 10),  one  can  show  that  for  the  case  of  multimode detection,  the  measured 〈 〉 for  the  SV state, where is the inverse  number  of  detected frequency  and  spatial  modes,  while for  the coherent state. However, as one can see from Eq.(6), the crosstalk  modifies  the  initial  second-order  correlation function.

The detailed description of the experimental setup is  presented  elsewhere  [31].  In  brief,  a  ns-pulsed Nd:YAG laser at 266 nm is used to pump a BBO crystal,  where  PDC  occurs,  see  Fig.2.  Collinear PDC photons  at  532  nm  are  directed  to  a  MPPC module  (Hamamatsu  C10751-02,  400  pixels).  The MPPC is sealed into a custom-made housing with a coated  optical  window  and  is  thermoelectrically cooled  down  to  -4.5ºC  to  reduce  the  dark  noise.  A digital oscilloscope is used to capture the analogue output  from  the  MPPC  and  plot  the  histogram  of its amplitude. The results of the measurements on the coherent state are obtained with a pulsed laser at  532  nm.  The  MPPC  dark  noise  and  ambient luminescence of the setup are measured by extinguishing PDC by tilting the polarization of the pump  at  90  degrees  by  a  HWP.  The  noise  is estimated to be 0.001 photon/pulse, and  it is subtracted from the PDC signal. The measurement time is increased for the values of  photocounts in the range of less than 0.01 photon/pulse in order to mitigate the statistical impact of the noise.

The results of the MPPC measurements are compared with the ones obtained by a traditional HBT experiment,  by  using  a  50/50  beam  splitter  and  two APDs,  whose  outputs  are  addressed  to  a  coincidence circuit.

Fig.2 Schematic of the experimental setup for measurement of photon bunching. PDC in collinear regime is generated in a BBO crystal, which is pumped by a pulsed UV-laser (pump). PDC photons (signal and idler) with the same wavelengths impinge onto the MPPC. is  inferred from the MPPC response histogram using Eq.(3).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-44dfc69d-2513-4526-928d-e855006b978c.jpg)

First, measurements are carried out with the MPPC by measuring coherent states produced by the laser. The dependence of on the mean number of photocounts, calculated  using  Eq.(3), is shown  in  Fig.3a  (black dashed  trace,  squares).  We  consider  the  Poissonian statistics of photocounts. The standard deviation of each photon-number component is calculated as the square root of the  total number  of  counts.  The  standard deviations values are propagated according to Eqs.(3, 6) for calculation  of  corresponding  error  bars  for  the crosstalk  probability  and .  The  curve  is  fitted  by Eq.(6) with being the only fitting parameter (here we consider  only  linear  terms  in ). The  value  of  the crosstalk  probability  is  found  to  be . As shown in Fig.3a, although excess two-photon correlations  are  not  expected  for  the  coherent  state ( ), the dependence of CF obtained by the MPPC exhibits strong photon bunching due to the crosstalk.

Fig.3 (a) Dependence of on  the mean number of photocounts per pulse, obtained via MPPC for the coherent state (black dashed trace, squares) and for the single-mode SV state (red solid trace, circles). The curves are experimental fits. (b) Comparison of the dependence of the inferred on the mean number of photocounts per pulse for singlemode squeezed vacuum, measured by the MPPC (red solid trace), with the  one  obtained  with  a  traditional  HBT  setup  (black  dashed  trace, squares).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-7ae9d2a6-aa29-495b-8bcc-5644e7d5cd81.jpg)

Next,  measurements  of  the  single-mode  SV  state  are made. Analogous to the previous case, the dependence of is calculated from the MPPC  amplitude histograms according to Eq.(3). The result is shown in Fig.3a (red solid trace, circles) and fitted by Eq.(6). From the obtained results it is clearly seen that on top of the crosstalk reveals additional two-photon correlations,  which  are  attributed  to  the  two-photon nature of the SV.

In order to infer the actual of the SV state from the MPPC measurements, Eq.(6) is used with the value of obtained from  the earlier measurements  of  the coherent state. The resulting curve is shown in Fig.3b (red solid trace). The results are compared with the ones obtained in the HBT experiment, which are also shown in Fig.3b (black dashed trace, squares). The results of the  measurements  with  MPPC  and  HBT  setup  show reasonable  agreement.  Slight  deviation  is  most  likely caused by inaccuracies in adjustment of relative quantum efficiencies of MPPC and APDs.

The obtained results demonstrate that with a proper account for the crosstalk, MPPC detectors can be used for measurements of the second-order correlation function. It is worth mentioning that a similar algorithm can be used for the measurement of higherorder correlation functions by using just a single MPPC [31].

## 4. Calibration of MPPC crosstalk using coherent states

As  it  was  demonstrated  in  the  previous  section,  the crosstalk modifies the initial statistics of photons, and that is why its accurate calibration is needed. A widely implemented approach is based on the measurement of the  photocount  distribution  of  dark  noise  [34,  42]. Assuming that dark counts obey a Poisson distribution, one  can  calculate  the  expected  mean  number  of  dark counts 〈 〉 . The probability of the crosstalk is calculated  as  the  difference  between  the  number  of single photon events expected from the Poisson distribution with the mean 〈 〉 and the actual number of single photon events observed for the dark noise. This approach allows calibration of the crosstalk without  much  effort.  However,  the  method  is  highly sensitive  to  statistical  errors  for  the  case  of  low-noise detectors, which are of most practical interest.

Other  methods  rely  on  statistical  modeling  of  the measured  photon  statistics  of  well  characterized  light sources  and  solving  an  inverse  problem.  However,  in the analysis either the probability of crosstalk has been analyzed as one of several fitting parameters [30] or the assumption has been made that for a given pixel only one crosstalk event could occur, which may not always be the case [28, 31, 43].

Here  we  develop  an  alternative  approach  which  is based on the measurements  of the second order correlation  function.  From  Eq.(6)  it  follows  that  the crosstalk probability can be found from measurements of the correlation function for some source with known statistics,  such  as,  a  coherent  source  with . Remarkably,  since is  insensitive  to  optical  losses, the method does not require a-priori knowledge of the quantum efficiency of the detector under test. Here we experimentally test the approach with several commercially available MPPCs.

We  use  a  ns-pulsed  Nd:YAG  laser  at  532  nm  which provides a good quality coherent state ( ). The laser beam is attenuated by a variable filter and  then  impinges  onto  the  MPPC,  see  Fig.4.  Three different MPPC's (Hamamatsu, C10507-11-XXXU series)  with  100,  400,  1600  pixels  per  chip  with  the corresponding pixel sizes of  100x100 μm 2 ,  50x50  μm 2 , and 25x25 μm 2  are studied. The temperature of MPPC can be varied thermoelectrically from the room temperature down to -8ºC. The dark noise is measured by blocking the laser beam and then subtracted from the signal. The signals from MPPCs are digitized and used for evaluation of . The experimental dependence of is fitted with Eq.(6) with being a single fitting parameter.

Fig.4 Schematic of the experimental setup for calibration of the MPPC crosstalk probability. A pulsed laser at 532 nm is used as a source of coherent states. Attenuator allows controlling the average number of photons  impinging  onto  MPPC.  Three  different  MPPCs  have  been tested  at  different  temperatures.  Crosstalk  probability  is  calculated from the measured using Eq.(6).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-9eabc88d-9303-4293-9ce6-b734f3f75584.jpg)

The  resulting  dependencies  of for  three different  detectors  at  -4.5ºC  are  shown  in  Fig.5.  The crosstalk  probabilities ,  are  obtained  from  fits  of  the experimental data which yield typical values of coefficient  of  determination  (COD)  0.983-0.99.  For  the sake of future comparison with the conventional method  of  crosstalk  calibration  using  dark  noise [34,  42],  we  calculate  the  expression +2 ,  which  is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Experimental results of crosstalk calibration

| Pixel size, μm 2   |   Dark counts/pulse | p+2p 2     | p DC        |
|--------------------|---------------------|------------|-------------|
| 100x100            |               0.021 | 0.87±0.01  | 0.610±0.015 |
| 50x50              |               0.008 | 0.21±0.005 | 0.23±0.03   |
| 25x25              |               0.002 | 0.07±0.002 | 0.10±0.11   |

Fig.5  Dependencies  of on  the  mean  number  of  photocounts  per pulse measured by the MPPC at -4.5ºC with 25x25 μm 2  (black squares, dashed line), 50x50 μm 2  (red circles, dotted line), and 100x100 μm 2  pixel size (blue triangles, solid line). Lines are fits to experimental data.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-550bbbc1-0aa1-4d1d-b513-a11b0c9f7a3f.jpg)

From  the  presented  results it follows, that those detectors  with  larger  pixel  size  have  larger  crosstalk. This  result  is  qualitatively  confirmed  by  other  groups using alternative calibration techniques, and explained by the quadratic dependence of the crosstalk probability on the gain of the detector  [44,  45].  The gain of  each pixel is given by , where is the capacitance of the pixel and , where is the breakdown  voltage  and is  the  operational  voltage [44]. Detectors with larger size of the pixels have larger capacitance, and consequently exhibit larger probability of crosstalk.

Additionally, the crosstalk is measured at four different temperatures of 25ºC, 12.5ºC, 5ºC, - 4.5ºC for the MPPC with  50x50  μm 2   pixel  size.  The  estimated  crosstalk probabilities  are  obtained  similar  to  the  above  and shown  in  Fig.6  (red  squares).  The  dependence  of  the crosstalk probability on the temperature is again attributed to the corresponding change of the gain [34]. The results  are  compared with  those  obtained  by  the method based on the measurement of dark counts. For each  detector  under  test,  the  number  of  dark  counts measurements  is  intentionally  chosen  to  be  ~40  % larger than the number of measurements of . Even in this case, the method based on the measurement of gives  the  crosstalk  probability  with  significantly smaller experimental uncertainty, see Fig.6. Thus the method  represents  considerable  practical  interest  for characterization of low-noise MPPCs.

Fig.6 Dependence of crosstalk probability found from measurements (red squares), and measured from the dark noise (black circles) on temperature for the MPPC with 50x50 μm 2  pixel size. Solid line is a fit with a quadratic function.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-15021c27-867f-4f43-a6b5-e60ef10bd2ae.jpg)

## 5. Measurement of two-mode squeezing with MPPC

So far we considered the use of MPPC  in  the measurements of squeezed vacuum (SV) states, in the regime of less than one photon per pulse. In this section we describe the application of the MPPC to the study of relatively bright SV states.

Let  us  consider  PDC  in  frequency  non-degenerate regime. The state vector, of the SV state, can be written in the Fock-state basis as follows [46]:

$$| \psi \rangle = \sum _ { n = 0 } ^ { \infty } C _ { n } \, | n \rangle _ { s } | n \rangle _ { i }, \text{ \quad \ \ } ( 1 1 )$$

where | ⟩ denotes the Fock-state of n photons in the  th  mode,  where denote  signal  and  idler  modes respectively,  and | | is the  probability  amplitude. Strong correlation between the photon numbers in the signal and idler modes results in the suppression of the variance of their difference below the classical limit [47, 48].  This  effect,  referred  to  as  a two-mode  squeezing, can be quantified by the noise reduction factor ( ), given by

$$\ell = \frac { V a r ( \widehat { N } _ { s } - \widehat { N } _ { l } ) } { \langle \widehat { N } _ { s } + \widehat { N } _ { l } \rangle }, \text{ \quad \ \ } \text{ (1 2)}$$

where ̂ and ̂ are the photocounts of the detectors in the signal and idler modes respectively, and 〈  ̂ 〉 stands for  the  mean  value  of  an  observable ̂ for  a  given quantum state. For the coherent light photon numbers in  two  modes  are  statistically  independent  and  thus NRF is equal to unity. In the PDC process the number of photons in conjugated modes are strongly correlated and NRF is less than unity. Thus NRF measurements allow convenient characterization of multiphoton entangled states.

The  two-mode  squeezing  can  be  studied  with  various types of photodetectors, depending on the photon fluxes of  the  PDC.  At  a  moderate  gain,  when  the  SV  state contains several photons per pulse, it is essential that the  detector  is  able  to  resolve  several  simultaneously impinging photons. Here we use the MPPC to directly observe the two-mode squeezing of relatively bright SV state of up to almost 10 photons per pulse.

The variance of the difference of photocount numbers in signal and idler modes is given by

$$\begin{array} { c } \text{Var} \, \langle \widehat { N _ { s } } - \widehat { N _ { t } } \rangle = \langle \widehat { N _ { s } } ^ { 2 } \rangle - \langle \widehat { N _ { s } } \rangle ^ { 2 } + \langle \widehat { N _ { t } } ^ { 2 } \rangle - \langle \widehat { N _ { t } } \rangle ^ { 2 } - \\ 2 \langle \widehat { N _ { s } } \widehat { N _ { t } } \rangle + 2 \langle N _ { s } \rangle \langle N _ { i } \rangle \end{array}$$

From Eqs.(7, 8, 12, 13) the NRF can be calculated for any given two-mode state. Further we assume that two MPPCs, used in joint detection, have the same values of , , and . When 〈  ̂〉 the model  yields for the coherent state which is greater than unity-the value expected for a lossy PNRD without the crosstalk.  Thus,  the  effect  of  the  crosstalk  for  small photon  numbers  results  in  the  increase  of  the . Also,  as 〈  ̂〉 for  the  SV  state  the  model  yields . Thus  the  difference  in values for  the coherent  and  SV  states  is  equal  to  the quantum  efficiency of the detectors differing from the absolute q.e. due to the presence of crosstalk [32, 49]. Numerical calculations show that the effect  of  saturation  decreases  the with  increasing 〈  ̂〉 (see Fig.8a).

The  experimental  setup  is  shown  in  Fig.7.  The  4th harmonic of Nd:YAG pulsed laser at 266 nm (repetition rate 20kHz, 30 nsec pulse width) is used as a pump two 5  mm  length  BBO  crystals  where  PDC  occurs.  Each crystal  is  cut  for  collinear  frequency  non-degenerate type I PDC with signal and idler modes at nm and nm, respectively. The half-wave plate and polarization beamsplitter (PBS) (not shown) are used to change  the  pump  power.  After  passing  through  the BBOs the pump beam is rejected by a UV-mirror while

PDC radiation passed through it. The signal and idler beams are split by a dichroic mirror (DM): the former is transmitted  and  the  latter  is  reflected.  At  each  arm there are lenses (f=500 mm) with their front focuses at the  BBOs.  Two  iris  apertures  are  set  according  to after the lenses, selecting the conjugated spatial  modes  [48].  The  irises  are  set  to  10  mm  and 11.36  mm  in  the  arms  with  500  nm  and  568  nm, respectively. The spatially selected spectral bandwidth of  PDC  is  calculated  to  be  3  nm.  The  PDC  is  then collected by lenses (f=200 mm) and formed a beam spot of  1.2  mm  at  the  MPPC  chip.  The  ambient  light  is suppressed by means of interference filters centered at 500 and 568 nm, respectively, both being 15 nm FWHM and a peak transmission of 95%. Two identical MPPCs, model Hamamatsu 10751-02, are used. The saturation behavior  is  checked  by  measuring  the  dependence  of photocounts versus the number of incident photons (see inset in Fig.8a), and it is found to be identical for both MPPCs.  The  crosstalk  values  are  checked  by  the method described in Section 4, and the values are found to be identical. A  0.1dB neutral density filter is introduced in one of the arms  to equilibrate the quantum efficiencies of MPPCs at different wavelengths. Both MPPCs are cooled to reduce the dark noise, see Section 3. The signals from the MPPCs are digitized by an AD card (NI PCI-5154) and discriminated  according  to  their  amplitudes.  The  AD card is synchronized with a pump laser and detection window  was  set  to  70  ns.  For  each  power  level  10 6 triggers are collected. The data analysis is done using LabView and Mathlab software. The MPPC dark noise and ambient luminescence of the setup are measured similarly to the procedure described in Section 3. The measurements  performed  at  different  pump  powers provide the dependence of NRF and on the number of photocounts per pulse.

Similar measurements are performed for the coherent  light emitted  from  an  attenuated  cw Nd:YAG laser ( at 532 nm) which is chopped by an acoustic optical modulator (AOM) at the frequency of 20 kHz with the pulse duration of 30 ns. Then it is fed into a single mode fiber and collimated by a lens (f=6,24 mm) at the MPPCs. Interference filters centered at 532 nm with 1.5 nm FWHM are used to filter out an ambient light.

Fig.7 Schematic of the experimental setup for measurement of the twomode squeezing. PDC in collinear regime is generated in a BBO crystal, which is pumped by a pulsed UV-laser (pump). PDC photons (signal and  idler)  have  different  wavelengths.  They  are  split  by  a  dichroic mirror  (DM)  and  addressed  to  two  MPPCs. NRF  and are calculated from joint statistics of photocounts.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-c6da4342-dd6c-459c-9530-f985678cf5c7.jpg)

Fig.8a shows the experimental data and theoretical fits of versus 〈 〉 ̂ for the coherent and SV states. From the difference of the measured for the two states close to 〈  ̂〉 , one finds the experimental value of the effective quantum efficiency for the SV state at 568 nm. The value yields , and it isfurther used  for the conversion of photocounts to photon numbers. Effective quantum efficiency for the coherent state  at  532  nm  is  found  from assuming  the dependence  of  quantum  efficiency  on  the  wavelength, provided by the manufacturer, and yielding . The theoretical fits of the data to the model yield , and for  the  coherent  state,  and and for the  SV  state.  These parameters yield for the coherent state, and , which are in good agreement with the experimental values of used for the calculation of photon numbers.

The  results  clearly  demonstrate  that gradually decreases  with  the  increasing 〈 〉 ̂ for both  studied states, which is caused by the saturation of the MPPC. At the same time, the for the SV state lies below the one for the coherent state-a signature of squeezing. The crosstalk elevates the at low 〈 〉 ̂ to values above unity, as predicted by the theory. Surprisingly, the obtained value of appears to be much smaller than the one expected from the MPPC with 400 pixels. We have found that the MPPC modules do not allow reliable discrimination of photon numbers beyond 〈 〉 ̂ due  to  the  limitations  of  the  built-in electronic circuitry, which is inaccessible for adjustment.  This  might  also be the cause  of the deviation  of  the  measured from  the  theoretical prediction for 〈 〉 ̂ . Note that reliable photon number resolution up to 20 photons was demonstrated with similar detectors using customized electronics [50]. Also,  the obtained value of is  higher  than  an earlier result, obtained for the same detector, see Section 4, [32] which  can  be  due  to  the  presence  of  higher-order crosstalk events which are not considered in the present model.

Fig.8  (a)  Dependence  of  the  NRF  on  the  mean  number  of  photons measured for the coherent state (black squares) and the SV state (red circles). The theoretical fits for the NRF are performed in the range of up to 6 photons (vertical dashed line), which marks the range of reliable photon  number  resolution.  The  inset  shows  the  mean  number  of photocounts versus the mean number of incident photons in one of the MPPCs  for  the  coherent  state.  (b)  Dependence  of on  the  mean number  of  photons  measured  for  coherent  light  (black  squares)  and squeezed vacuum (red circles).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0059v1-figure-be54d25d-f815-443a-8b7c-33a8561d0cce.jpg)

It  is  also  of  interest  to  analyze  the  dependence of  the second order intensity correlation function, defined here as [37].  For  PDC  it  is shown  in  Fig.8b  (red  circules),  and  demonstrates  the rise with the decreasing of the number of photons per pulse, according to 〈 〉 , where is  an  inverse number of detected modes. At the same time, for coherent  states  was  almost  constant, yielding , despite of the cross-talk and the  dark  noise  which  still  presents  in  both  MPPCs (black  squares).  It  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  the crosstalk and dark counts in two MPPCs are uncorrelated and do not contribute to . It is worth to compare this result with the one obtained in [31, 32], where only a single MPPC was used for the measurements  of .  In  that  case  the  crosstalk  has added  considerable  'false'  correlations,  mimicking  in this way the true photon bunching.

## Conclusions

In  conclusion,  we  experimentally  studied  detection  of various non-classical states of light with photon number resolving MPPCs. Based on the developed algorithm of obtaining the second order correlation function and the  nonlinear  crosstalk  model,  we  measured for coherent and squeezed vacuum states. It was demonstrated  that  the  crosstalk  leads  to  additional terms in the correlation function for both of the studied states. The presented analysis can be directly applied to other  types  of  spatially  resolving  detectors  such  as, single photon resolving ICCD and EMCCD, as well as for measurements of higher order correlation functions.

We  also presented a new accessible method for calibration  of  the  MPPC  crosstalk  probability.  The method relies on the fundamental properties of coherent states, and the generalized crosstalk model. It was tested for three commercial MPPCs with different pixel  sizes  and  at  different  temperatures.  The  new method exhibited much less uncertainty in determination of the crosstalk probability compared to conventional  method  based  on  measurements  of  dark noise. The method may represent practical interest for applications, and future development of optimized low noise MPPCs.

Finally, we  used  MPPCs  to  reveal  the two-mode squeezing of relatively bright SV states. We developed a theoretical  POVM  model,  which  accounts  for  MPPC saturation and finite quantum efficiency. We analyzed fluctuations  of  the  difference  of  the  intensities  in  two modes by measuring for coherent and SV states.

We demonstrated that the crosstalk in the MPPC leads to  an  increase  of  the for  both  coherent  and  SV states.  Moreover  we  analyzed  the  effect  of  the  MPPC saturation,  which  leads  to  the  decrease  of with increasing  photon  numbers.  We also  showed  that,  in contrast to the measurements by a single MPPC, was  not  affected  by  the  crosstalk.  The  experimental data agrees with the trend of the presented theoretical model which takes into account the saturation and the crosstalk.  Our  results  extended  the  use  of  MPPCs for the characterization of quantum light in a significantly broader dynamic  range than that of conventional SPADs,  thus  allowing  access  to  affordable  detectors with photon number resolution.

Currently, implementation of the MPPC technology is restricted by several technical issues, where the problem of the crosstalk is the major one. Development of  advanced  techniques  of  chip  fabrication  and  better optical  isolation  of  pixels,  will  allow  to  mitigate  the problem of crosstalk, and open the way  towards implementation of the MPPC technology in the broad range  of applications ranging  from  the  studies of atomic-photon interfaces to astronomy applications.

## Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Maria V. Chekhova, Timur Sh. Iskhakov  and  Si  Hui  Tan  for  their  contributions  at various stages of this project. We acknowledge financial support by A-STAR Investigatorship grant.

## References and links

- 1. E.  Knill,  R.  Laflamme,  G.J.  Milburn,  'A  scheme  for  efficient  quantum  computation  with  linear optics,' Nature 409, 46-52 (2001).
- 2. P. Kok, W.J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T.C. Ralph, J.P. Dowling, G.J. Milburn, 'Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits,' Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 135-175 (2007).
- 3. J.L. O'Brien, 'Optical quantum computing,' Science 318, 1567-1570 (2007).
- 4. M.W.  Mitchell,  J.S.  Lundeen,  A.M.  Steinberg,  'Super-resolving  phase  measurements  with  a multiphoton entangled state,' Nature, 429, 161-164 (2004).
- 5. P. Walther, J.-W. Pan, M. Aspelmeyer, R Ursin, S. Gasparoni, A. Zeilinger, 'De Broglie wavelength of a non-local four-photon state,' Nature, 429, 158-161 (2004).
- 6. I.B.  Bobrov.  D.A.  Kalashnikov,  and  L.A.  Krivitsky,  'Imaging  of  spatial  correlations  of  two-photon states', Phys. Rev. A 89, 043814 (2014).
- 7. L. Pezzé and A. Smerzi, 'Mach-Zehnder interferometry at the Heisenberg limit with coherent and squeezed vacuum light,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(7), 073601 (2008).
- 8. G.  Brassard,  N.  Lütkenhaus,  T.  Mor,  and  B.C.  Sanders  'Limitations  on  practical  quantum cryptography,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1330-1333 (2000).
- 9. D.  Bouwmeester,  J.-W.  Pan,  K.  Mattle,  M.  Eibl,  H.  Weinfurter,  and  A.  Zeilinger  'Experimental quantum teleportation,' Nature 390, 575-579 (1997).
- 10. M. Żukowski, A. Zeilinger, M.A. Horne, and M.A. Ekert, 'Event-ready-detectors' Bell experiment via entanglement swapping,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 4287-4290 (1993).
- 11. F. Dell'Anno,  S.  De  Siena,  F.  Illuminati,  'Multiphoton  quantum  optics  and  quantum  state engineering,' Physics Reports 428, 53-168 (2006).
- 12. J.-W.  Pan,  Z.-B.  Chen,  C.-Y.  Lu,  H.  Weinfurter,  A.  Zeilinger,  and  M.  Zukowski,  'Multiphoton entanglement and interferometry,' Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 777-838 (2012).
- 13. R.  H.  Hadfield,  'Single-photon  detectors  for  optical  quantum  information  applications'  Nature Photonics, 3, 696-705, (2009).
- 14. D. Achilles, C. Silberhorn, C. Sliwa, K. Banaszek, and I.A. Walmsley, "Fiber assisted detection with photon-number resolution," Opt. Lett. 28, 2387-2389 (2003).
- 15. M.  J.  Fitch,  B.  C.  Jacobs,  T.  B.  Pittman,  J.  D.  Franson,  "Photon-number  resolution  using  timemultiplexed single-photon detectors," Phys. Rev. A 68, 043814 (2003).
- 16. M. Mičuda, O. Haderka, M. Ježek, "High-efficiency photon-number-resolving multichannel detector," Phys Rev A 78, 025804 (2008).
- 17. S. Takeuchi, J. Kim, Y. Yamamoto, H.H. Hogue, 'Development of a high quantum-efficiency singlephoton counting system,' Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 1063-1065 (1999).
- 18. J. Kim, S. Takeuchi, Y. Yamamoto, H.H. Hogue, 'Multiphoton detection using visible light photon counter,' Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 902-904 (1999).
- 19. E.  Waks,  K.  Inoue,  E.  Diamanti,  Y.  Yamamoto,  'High-efficiency  photon-number  detection  for quantum information processing,' IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant. 9, 1502-1511 (2003).
- 20. B.  Cabrera,  R.  M.  Clarke,  P.  Colling,  A.  J.  Miller,  S.  Nam,  R.  W.  Romani,  'Detection  of  single infrared, optical, and ultraviolet photons using superconducting transition edge sensors,' Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 735 (1998).
- 21. D. Rosemberg, A.E. Lita, A.J. Miller, S.W. Nam, 'Noise-free high-efficiency photon-number-resolving detectors,' Phys Rev A, 71, 061803R (2005).
- A.E. Lita, A.J. Miller, S.W. Nam, "Counting near-infrared single- photons with 95% efficiency," Opt.
- 22. Express 16, 3032-3040 (2008).
- 23. D. Sahin, and et al. 'Waveguide photon-number-resolving detectors for quantum photonic integrated circuits,' Appl. Phys. Lett, 103, 111116 (2013).
- 24. M. Bondani, A. Allevi, A. Agliati, A. Andreoni, "Self-consistent characterization of light statistics," J. Mod. Opt 56, 226 - 231, (2009).
- 25. B. E. Kardynal, Z. L. Yuan A. J. Shields, "An avalanche-photodiode-based photon-number-resolving detector," Nature Photonics 2, 425-428 (2008).
- 26. O.  Thomas,  Z.L.  Yuan  and  A.J.  Shields  'Practical  photon  number  detection  with  electric  fieldmodulated silicon avalanche photodiodes,' Nature Communication 3, 644 (2012).
- 27. Hamamatsu web-page http://jp.hamamatsu.com/
- 28. I. Afek, A. Natan, O. Ambar, Y. Silberberg, 'Quantum state measurements using multipixel photon detectors,' Phys. Rev. A 79, 043830 (2009).
- 29. S.-H. Tan, L. A. Krivitsky, B. -G. Englert 'Measuring Quantum Correlations using Lossy PhotonNumber-Resolving Detectors with Saturation' Pre-print: arXiv:1210.8022.
- 30. M.  Ramilli,  A.  Allevi,  V.  Chmill,  M.  Bondani,  M.  Caccia,  A.  Andreoni,  'Photon-number  statistics with silicon photomultipliers,'  J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 27, 852-862 (2010).
- 31. D.A.  Kalashnikov,  S.-H.  Tan,  M.V.  Chekhova,  L.A.  Krivitsky,  'Accessing  photon  bunching  with photon number resolving multi-pixel detector,' Opt. Express 19, 9352-9363 (2011).
- 32. D.A. Kalashnikov, S.-H. Tan, L.A. Krivitsky, 'Crosstalk calibration of multi-pixel photon counters using coherent states', Opt. Express 20, 5044-5051 (2012).
- 33. D. A. Kalashnikov, S.-H. Tan, T. Sh. Iskhakov, M. V. Chekhova, and L. A. Krivitsky 'Measurement of two-mode squeezing with photon number resolving multipixel detectors', Opt. Lett. 37, 2829-2831 (2012).
- 34. A.  Vacheret  and  et  al.  'Characterization  and  Simulation  of  the  Response  of  Multi  Pixel  Photon Counters to Low Light Levels,' Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 656, 69-83 (2011).
- 35. A. Spinelli and A. L. Lacaita, 'Physics and numerical simulation of single photon avalanche diodes,' IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev. 44(11), 1931-1943 (1997) .
- 36. I.  Rech,  A.  Ingargiola,  R.  Spinelli,  I.  Labanca,  S.  Marangoni,  M.  Ghioni,  and  S.  Cova,  'Optical crosstalk in single photon avalanche diode arrays: a new complete model,' Opt. Express 16, 83818394 (2008).
- 37. R.J. Glauber, Quantum Optics and Electronics (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1965).
- 38. M. Avenhaus, K. Laiho, M. V. Chekhova, and C. Silberhorn, 'Accessing higher order correlations in quantum optical states by time multiplexing,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 063602 (2010).
- 39. O. Haderka, J. Perina, Jr., M. Hamar, and J. Perina, 'Direct measurement and reconstruction of nonclassical features of twin beams generated in spontaneous parametric down-conversion,' Phys. Rev. A 71(3), 033815 (2005).
- 40. J.-L. Blanchet, F. Devaux, L. Furfaro, and E. Lantz, 'Measurement of sub-shot-noise correlations of spatial fluctuations in the photon-counting regime,' Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 233604 (2008).
- 41. D. N. Klyshko, Photons and Nonlinear Optics (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1988).
- 42. M. Yokoyama, A. Minamino, S. Gomi, K. Ieki, N. Nagai, T. Nakaya, K. Nitta, D. Orme, M. Otani, T. Murakami, T. Nakadaira, and M. Tanaka, 'Performance of multi-pixel photon counters for the T2K near detectors,' Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 622, 567-573 (2010).
- 43. P.  Eraerds,  M.  Legré,  A.  Rochas,  H.  Zbinden,  and  N.  Gisin,  'SiPM  for  fast  photon-counting  and multiphoton detection,' Opt. Express 15, 14539-14549 (2007).
- 44. Hamamatsu web-page http://jp.hamamatsu.com/products/sensor-ssd/4010/index\_en.html
- 45. A. L. Lacaita, F. Zappa, S. Bigliardi, and M. Manfredi, 'On the bremsstrahlung origin of hot-carrierinduced photons in silicon devices,' IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev. 40(3), 577-582 (1993).
- 46. D.N. Klyshko, 'The nonclassical light', Phys. Usp. 39, 573-596 (1996).
- 47. A.  Heidmann,  R.J.  Horowicz,  S.  Reynaud,  E.  Giacobino,  C.  Fabre  and  G.  Camy,  'Observation  of quantum noise reduction on twin laser beams', Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 2555-2557 (1987).
- 48. I.N. Agafonov, M.V. Chekhova, and G. Leuchs, 'Two-color bright squeezed vacuum', Phys. Rev. A 82, 011801 (2010).
- 49. I.  N.  Agafonov,  M.V.  Chekhova,  T.  S.  Iskhakov,  A.  N.  Penin,  G.  O.  Rytikov,  O.  A.  Shcherbina, 'Absolute calibration of photodetectors: photocurrent multiplication versus photocurrent subtraction' Opt. Lett. 36, 1329 (2011).
- 50. L. Dovrat, M. Bakstein, D. Istrati, A. Shaham, H. S. Eisenberg, 'Measurements of the dependence of the photon-number distribution on the number of modes in parametric down-conversion', Opt. Express 20, 2266-2276 (2012).
Dmitry Kalashnikov Leonid A. Krivitsky
Measurement of photon correlations with multipixel photon counters
Development of reliable photon number resolving detectors (PNRD), devices
which are capable to distinguish 1,2,3.. photons, is of a great importance for
quantum optics and its applications. A new class of affordable PNRD is based on
multipixel photon counters (MPPC). Here we review results of experiments on
using MPPCs for direct characterization of squeezed vacuum (SV) states,
generated via parametric downconversion (PDC). We use MPPCs to measure the
second order normalized intensity correlation function (g^(2)) and directly
detect the two-mode squeezing of SV states. We also present a method of
calibration of crosstalk probability in MPPCs based on g^(2) measurements of
coherent states.