Skip to content
RESEARCH · QUANTUM PHOTONICS

A thin crystal emits single photons, but matching them is harder

A study newly published by Nature Communications shows why a good single-photon source is not automatically a good source of matching quantum light.

Published Source report Sources checked
Reading tools for text size, copying, printing and your reading list
My reading list
Optical micrograph labeling a monolayer MoTe2 flake on a silicon dioxide/silicon substrate, with a 5-micrometer scale bar.
Archival optical micrograph of a monolayer MoTe2 flake, May 2015.chenbinzero

Researchers at the Technical University of Denmark used a two-layer crystal of molybdenum ditelluride, or MoTe2, to produce near-infrared photons with very little unwanted multiphoton emission. But a separate interference test exposed a tougher challenge: getting successive photons to behave alike. The work appeared as an accepted journal article on November 11; its principal results were already public in an October 6 preprint revision.[1][2]

The distinction matters because quantum-photonic devices need more than isolated flashes. In an interference experiment, sufficiently similar photons arriving at a beamsplitter are more likely to leave through the same output than distinguishable photons. That behavior is a resource for quantum information processing.[2]

The team shaped the crystal over tiny pillars and introduced defects with an electron beam. At about four degrees above absolute zero, selected sites emitted individual photons. A carefully chosen laser excitation reduced background light, yielding a fitted multiphoton-correlation measure, g²(0), of 0.010±0.004 for the best-result emitter, which was encapsulated in hexagonal boron nitride. Lower values on this measure indicate stronger suppression of simultaneous multiple photons. It does not mean 99% of excitation attempts produced a useful photon.[2]

For the matching test, the researchers delayed one photon to meet a later photon from the same emitter. Across the full 12.5-nanosecond integration window, their interference visibility was 7.1%, with an uncertainty of 0.9 percentage points, after correcting for photon bunching. Visibility measures the contrast between interfering and noninterfering cases, not source efficiency.[2]

Selecting only detections in much narrower time windows increased that contrast, reaching about 60% with the tightest filtering. That timing selection discards detection events. This is the useful comparison: the higher number describes a selected part of the record, not a source that makes every photon match that well. The paper identifies rapid loss of coherence as the main limitation.[2]

The photons span roughly 1090–1200 nanometers, short of the telecom bands targeted for low-loss fiber networks. Better optical cavities and excitation methods are proposed next steps. The concrete test is whether a future device can deliver strong interference without relying on such restrictive event selection.[2]

Keep your reading trail

Evidence & context

2 linked sources

Cryogenic photon-emission experiment. Journal publication follows an October preprint revision; time-selected interference is not source efficiency.

How to read the evidence and dates

An announcement records what an organization stated. An experiment reports an observation. A simulation or resource estimate depends on its assumptions. QubitWire’s analysis connects these sources; the labels are not quality scores.

Published is the article’s first QubitWire publication. Updated marks a substantive content change. Sources checked records a review of the underlying evidence. An older paper can support a new explanation, and another press release about the same work is not independent replication.

QubitWire take

Emitting one photon at a time and making successive photons indistinguishable are separate tests; selecting detection times improves the latter score by discarding events.

Sources

  1. MoTe2 single-photon emission and interference — Wyborski and colleagues

    Peer-reviewed accepted manuscript published November 11, 2026. Earlier public results were revised October 6.

  2. October 6 revised preprint: single-photon purity and two-photon interference in MoTe2

    Full experimental methods, full-window and temporally postselected visibility. First preprint August 28, 2025.

READ NEXT

Continue exploring

All Research stories
  1. More on photonics

    Researchers isolate a tiny quantum mirror’s reflected light

    A semiconductor dot inside a tapered nanowire reflects light one photon at a time. The experiment solves a collection problem, while fluctuations still weaken its average reflection.

    Published · Source report · Sources checked · About 3 min read
  2. More on photonics

    A photon count cannot tell you when a quantum computer wins

    A new H100 simulation study proposes a common comparison for light-based computers. Its useful lesson is to check the task and output rate before declaring an advantage.

    Published · Source report · Sources checked · About 3 min read