A review of crosstalk research for plasmonic waveguides
1 Introduction
Surface Plasmon Polariton (SPP) can break the diffraction limitation and display a promising way to achieve photonic integrated circuits (PICs)1, 2. It is widely believed that PICs based on SPP have great potential in the realization of optical interconnection information transmission technology3, 4. Recently, various plasmonic waveguide schemes have been demonstrated, such as metallic nanosphere chain waveguides5, 6, metallic wire, stripe and slab waveguides7, 8, the dielectric loaded metal9, 10, channel plasmon polaritons11, 12, metal wedges13, 14, slot and gap waveguides15-17, hybrid plasmonic waveguides18-20, etc. In current study, these plasmonic waveguides have made a good compromise between the propagation length and the mode confinement, which is helpful for achieving efficient transmission of energy. In the design of PICs, in addition to considering the transmission characteristics of a single waveguide, the influence between waveguides must be examined and weighed. Generally, there will be a certain degree of coupling and crosstalk between two adjacent waveguides inevitably due to their modes overlap. More specifically, the closer the distance between the two waveguides are, the stronger the crosstalk between them will be, which weakens the effective transmission of energy in each single waveguide. Similarly, due to the strong mode confinement of waveguides, low crosstalk can be understood as that the mode overlap between two waveguides is much weaker and almost negligible. Furthermore, in order to avoid crosstalk between waveguides, a specific distance between the waveguides must be maintained, which in turn limits the density to a certain extent. Therefore, crosstalk is widely regarded as an indispensable parameter of packing density of optical waveguides and devices. It is essential to analyze crosstalk comprehensively and study the method of suppressing crosstalk for the practical applications of plasmonic waveguide in PICs.
Some groups have conducted crosstalk research. Zia R et al.21 investigated the coupling between two-dimensional (2D) metal-dielectric-metal (MDM) plasmonic waveguides, and pointed out that such waveguides can be put at a distance of 150 nm without significant crosstalk. Liu L et al.22 investigated the coupling between 3D plasmonic slot waveguides formed on the metal film, and indicated a larger coupling length means smaller crosstalk in the two waveguides. Veronis G et al.23 proposed a method to assess crosstalk and an approach for suppressing crosstalk with the thin metal film. Bian Y et al.24 pointed out that the crosstalk between adjacent waveguides instead of the physical dimensions of the waveguide dictates the ultimate integration density of the planar photonic circuits. Song Y et al.25 numerically investigated hybrid plasmonic waveguides composed of a dielectric nanowire on a metal surface as well as crosstalk between such waveguides. Xiao J et al.26 proposed a low crosstalk structure due to the existence of subwavelength mode constraints and the weak overlap between the two waveguides. Devaux E et al.27 extrapolated a crosstalk evaluation method and clearly explained the effect of separation distance on crosstalk. Han Z et al.28 enumerated different types of waveguides have different propagation losses, and put forward that it is more meaningful to compare the absolute values of coupling length with the propagation length of SPPs in a single plasmonic waveguide. Huang C C et al.29 deemed that no coupling occurs between waveguides if the value of the ratio of coupling length to mean propagation length exceeds 10. Shruti et al.30 showed that the field decays much slower in the dielectric compared to that of the metal, replacing the dielectric by metallic strip reduces the crosstalk. Chen L et al.31 presented a graphene-based hybrid plasmonic waveguide with ultra-low crosstalk by analyzing the ratio of coupling length to propagation length. Ma A et al.32 studied a classical surface plasmon polariton waveguide by the improved coupled mode theory, and presented a crosstalk evaluation method based on power comparison. Kuznetsov E V et al.33 demonstrated the suppression of crosstalk between two dielectric nanowaveguides by placing an auxiliary linear waveguide between loaded waveguides spaced by one wavelength. He X et al.34 proposed an ultralow loss graphene-based hybrid plasmonic waveguide with lower crosstalk, which is much better than those reported in hybrid plasmonic waveguides31. Moreover, there are other plasmonic waveguides based on crosstalk researches have been published35-44.
In this paper, we review the recent research progress of crosstalk between plasmonic waveguides. Firstly, we introduced three methods for evaluating crosstalk based on the comparison of different parameters of waveguides. Then, according to the influence on waveguide performances and the entire circuit, we summarized four approaches of reducing crosstalk into two categories, including changing waveguide placement and inserting medium.
2 Theory of crosstalk evaluation
2.1 A method based on the ratio of coupling length to mean attenuation length
In the study of crosstalk between plasmonic slot waveguides, Veronis G et al.23 proposed a crosstalk evaluation method based on the ratio of coupling length to mean attenuation length. In two adjacent waveguides system, the complex propagation constant is the basic parameter to calculate crosstalk. Here,
As is known to all, loss of energy exists in the transmission of plasmonic waveguide, such as Ohmic losses (the loss comes mainly from the metal absorption). In the system composed of two adjacent waveguides, the energy is transferred periodically between the two waveguides due to coupling and crosstalk, which further increases the loss. In each coupling period, there is a maximum in power coupled from one waveguide to the other, that is, the maximum transfer power
here,
For two plasmonic waveguides that transmit energy independently, the stronger the coupling between them is, the greater the crosstalk is. Typically, when coupling length exceeds the corresponding propagation length of the waveguide, the crosstalk of the coupling system can be deemed very small31, 45. This method is suitable for crosstalk evaluation between waveguides with complex structures, such as the long-range air-hole assisted subwavelength waveguides proposed in Ref.46. From formulas (1) and (2), shorter coupling length
2.2 A method based on the ratio of the electric field intensity in the adjacent waveguide to the one in the main waveguide
In exploring the coupling characteristics of the channel plasmon-polariton waveguides, Devaux E et al.27 proposed a crosstalk evaluation method considering the electric field density. Unlike the former method, this method is mainly based on the ratio of the electric field intensity in the adjacent waveguide to the one in the main waveguide. According to theoretical derivation, when the coupling distance is equal to the coupling length
where Δ
The unit of
2.3 A method based on the ratio of the output power in the second waveguide to the input power in the first waveguide
By improving coupled mode theory, Ma A et al.32 proposed a crosstalk evaluation method in wedge plasmon polariton waveguides. This method is based on the ratio of the output power in the second waveguide to the input power in the first waveguide. To simplify the model, they assume that the initial transmission optical power of the first waveguide
here,
This crosstalk evaluation method is based on the comparison of optical power during the propagation of two waveguides, and can be widely used in the crosstalk analysis of plasmonic waveguides. Unlike the above two crosstalk evaluation methods, this method obtains the normalized crosstalk power at the given propagation distance. Meanwhile, only at a unified propagation distance, comparing the crosstalk between the two systems is meaningful. It is worth noting that this crosstalk evaluation method is based on the propagation distance. By using improved coupled mode theory, this method can better describe the crosstalk of a more complex multi-waveguide system. Obviously, the larger the power of the second waveguide is, the stronger the crosstalk is. By comparing the intensity of crosstalk in a particular propagation distance, we can design the lower crosstalk structure.
3 Approach of reducing crosstalk—changing waveguide placement
3.1 Increasing separation distance
Among the above-mentioned theory, increasing coupling length can reduce crosstalk effectively. In general, the common method of increasing coupling length is to increase the separation distance. Using the first crosstalk evaluation method, Ref.23 studied the crosstalk of four structures, which are all formed on the same thin metal film, as shown in
Fig. 1. Four different waveguide schematics ((a), (b), (c), (d)) and the dependences of (e) coupling length L c and (f) maximum transfer power P max on separation distance D 23.
Using the second crosstalk evaluation method, Ref.27 studies the directional coupler based on channel plasmon-polariton waveguides.
Fig. 2. (a ) The schematic of two adjacent parallel channel plasmonpolariton waveguides. (b ) The crosstalk performance with specific parameters 27.
Using the third crosstalk evaluation method, Ref.32 analyzed the normalized crosstalk power of wedge plasmon polariton (WPP) waveguides at different separation distances and waveguide lengths
Fig. 3. (a ) The 2D and (b ) 3D schematic diagrams of two WPP waveguides. Normalized crosstalk power of WPP waveguides under different parameters with wedge height (c ) h =0.5 μm and (d ) h =1.6 μm 32.
All the three crosstalk evaluation methods imply that increasing the separation distance between plasmonic waveguides can effectively reduce crosstalk. The problem of this approach is that it needs more space in the overall design. In other words, this approach limits the density of the device integration to some extent. Usually, to make a tradeoff between small dimension and minimum crosstalk, the processing conditions of waveguide devices and the proximity effect of photolithography should be taken into account. More specifically, the separation distance of waveguides should not be too small, for example, for silicon nanowire waveguides, it should be more than 150 nm. The separation distance of plasmonic waveguides needs to be adjusted according to the actual situation.
3.2 Changing the relative position of hybrid waveguides
For the hybrid waveguide composed of multilayer materials, the crosstalk between adjacent waveguides can be reduced by changing the relative position of the overall waveguide structure.
Fig. 4. Schematic diagrams of (a) hybrid waveguide and (b) its rotation, (c) distribution of Ey field for rotation hybrid waveguide, (d) coupling length L c and (e) maximum power transfer P max as functions of the separation D , the red solid line and blue dotted line represent the results of the two structures of (a) and (b), respectively 25.
Obviously, this approach of reducing crosstalk by changing the relative position can be well applied to the hybrid waveguides with complex structure, but it may not work well when the waveguide structure is simple. Moreover, this approach may increase the difficulty of fabrication, and the transmission characteristics of the original waveguide should be maintained as much as possible when changing the relative position. By adjusting the relative position of the hybrid waveguides, the crosstalk can be further reduced, and the ultradense integration PICs could be realized without changing the transmission characteristics of the waveguide.
4 Approach of reducing crosstalk— inserting medium
4.1 Using a metallic strip
The approach of reducing crosstalk by changing waveguide placement has a limit in a certain extent, and it is unfavorable to increase the packing density of dense integration. In order to avoid aforementioned fault, Shruti et al.30 put forward an alternative and effective approach. By inserting a metallic strip between two plasmonic waveguides, they proposed a hybrid waveguide structure and investigated the crosstalk.
As shown in
Fig. 5. Schematic configuration of the two parallel hybrid silicon plasmonic waveguides (HSPW) (a) without and (b) with metallic strip. The maximum power transfer P max versus specific parameters (separation distance D , height h and width w of the metallic strip) (c ) without and (d ) with metallic strip 30.
This approach is mainly based on the principle that the field attenuation in the dielectric is much slower than that in the metal. And more notably, the insertion of a metallic strip between the two waveguides not only causes a certain energy loss for the transmitting energy of waveguides, but also greatly increases the difficulty for fabrication of the device. However, in the same size space of PICs, the crosstalk between the two plasmonic waveguides is significantly lower than that without the metallic strip.
4.2 Placing an auxiliary waveguide
In addition to inserting metal strips, the auxiliary waveguide can also be inserted to help reduce crosstalk. Kuznetsov E V et al.33 adopted an auxiliary linear waveguide between two dielectric nanowaveguides to suppress the crosstalk (
Fig. 6. (a ) The schematics of the surface plasmon waveguide system with the auxiliary waveguide. The distribution of the absolute values of the electric fields at waveguides (b ) with and (c ) without the auxiliary waveguide 33.
The added auxiliary waveguide has only a small amount of energy compared to the waveguide with initial energy. In order to clarify the effect of auxiliary waveguide on crosstalk suppression, the distribution of the absolute value of the electric field in each waveguide is shown in
5 Discussions
To sum up, we have reviewed the research work of crosstalk between plasmonic waveguides. The theoretical studies involved in the evaluation of crosstalk are briefly reviewed. Generally, most methods for evaluating crosstalk closely relate to the impact of coupling length on crosstalk, that is, the larger the coupling length is, the smaller the crosstalk is. Therefore, crosstalk can also be roughly measured by calculating the coupling length between the two waveguides. Whereas, the three crosstalk evaluation methods listed in this paper focus on different parameters of the waveguides, which make it possible to evaluate crosstalk effectively by choosing the specific method reasonably according to different real applications. Moreover, the main approaches to reduce crosstalk have been illustrated as two categories with examples. One means is changing waveguide placement while the other one is inserting medium. Concerning changing waveguide placement, the transmission characteristics of the waveguide itself is not affected, but more space is taken up, which will reduce the integration of PICs. Conversely, when using the method of inserting medium, crosstalk between waveguides can be obviously reduced in smaller space. However, the inserted medium can weaken the transmission characteristics of waveguide to some extent, which will increase the loss of transmission energy. Facing real application, one should consider the characteristics of different types of waveguides and the actual circuit requirements simultaneously, thus to choose appropriate crosstalk suppression method which is beneficial to improve the density of PICs.
It is widely believed that plasmonic waveguide has potential applications in optical interconnection due to its low crosstalk. Crosstalk is an inevitable issue we have to pay close attention to in PICs and optical interconnection applications. Except for the aforementioned methods, there are other similar extended methods can be considered. For example, when applying the approach of inserting metallic strips, silver strips could be replaced with gold or aluminum. Regarding the approach of placing auxiliary waveguide, different materials and different structures other than silicon waveguide could be introduced. Although we mainly review the crosstalk between two adjacent waveguides, it also lays a foundation for the study of crosstalk between multiple waveguides, such as triple-waveguide coupler47. In addition, it can be used as a reference exploring the optimized structure of graphene plasmonic waveguides48, 43. Ref.49 proposed an original method for coupling control by using adiabatic elimination scheme, and it provided a new way in achieving dense optical waveguiding with negligible crosstalk. In short, we believe that the crosstalk research between plasmonic waveguides would work for crosstalk study of other type waveguides, and provide references for design of waveguides and relevant devices used in PICs and optical interconnection fields.
6 Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Shenzhen Science Technology and Innovation Commission (JCYJ20160427174443407, JCY20160331114526190).
7 Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
[3]
[8] P Berini. Long-range surface plasmon polaritons. Adv Opt Photonics, 2009, 1: 484-588.
[40]
Article Outline
Junxian Ma, Dezheng Zeng, Yatao Yang, Can Pan, Li Zhang, Haidong Xu. A review of crosstalk research for plasmonic waveguides[J]. Opto-Electronic Advances, 2019, 2(4): 180022.