"Phase transitions" in small systems: Why standard threshold definitions fail for nanolasers. (April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lippi, G.L.; Wang, T.; Puccioni, G.P.
• Is Part Of: Chaos, solitons and fractals. Volume 157(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-04
• Subjects: Micro-/nanolasers -- Laser threshold -- Phase transition -- Topological analysis; Chaotic behavior in systems -- Periodicals; Solitons -- Periodicals; Fractals -- Periodicals; Chaotic behavior in systems; Fractals; Solitons; Periodicals; 003.7
• DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.111850
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0960-0779

Abstract

Highlights: We show that different common definitions of laser threshold are in disagreement with one another. We prove that the disagreement stems from the laser-size dependence of the indicators used for threshold identification. A scale-independent laser threshold definition is proposed, together with two measurement schemes. We show the limitations of a conventional rate equation model, which make the laser threshold disappear. The main papers on which the discussion on threshold is based are discussed in the manuscript. Abstract: Since the development of micro- and nanolasers, the question of laser threshold has been subject to debate. Different definitions have been used to try and establish its occurrence, often encountering major obstacles. We examine a set of common physical definitions which we apply to measurements taken in a micro-VCSEL. Their predictions not only clearly disagree, pointing to different pump values at which the laser should cross threshold, but they also correspond to autocorrelation values which demonstrate very low field coherence. A topological analysis of the rate equations, with average spontaneous emission added to the lasing mode, clearly identifies the contradictions and explains the origin of the discrepancies. Additional considerations help understanding the failure of the approach and highlight the path towards a unique and general definition of threshold in all lasers, irrespective of their sizes. A critical scrutiny of the assumptions made in the rate equations with spontaneous emission illustrates their strength and weaknesses and better defines the bounds within which their predictions hold. We remark in the conclusions how the main results of this paper could hold for other small systems.