Controlling the Synchronization of Quantum Cascade Lasers with Negative Optoelectronic Feedback by Direct Current Modulation

  • Hussein H. WariedEmail author
Research paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Physics section


In this study, I presented the synchronization of quantum cascade semiconductor lasers with optoelectronic negative feedback under the effect of direct current modulation. I investigated the synchronization quality by using the rate equations model. In both open-loop system and closed-loop system, the direct current modulation in transmitter laser and receiver laser has significant effects on the correlation coefficient. In both cases, we can use the direct current modulation to minimize the effect of mismatch in delay times on the synchronization quality. Also, the effect of modulation frequency in lasers has been analyzed. The correlation coefficient has a high value with increasing the modulation frequency in both lasers. Furthermore, the present results indicate that the correlation coefficient tends to high values at the negative value of the difference in the modulation frequency between the lasers in comparison with the positive value of the difference. The correlation coefficient has different behaviors when the delay time in transmitter laser is larger than the delay time in receiver laser or vice versa.


Quantum cascade lasers Synchronization Rate equation model Negative optoelectronic feedback Direct current modulation 



The author thanks Prof. Dr. Raad Sami Fyath for stimulating discussions and Mr. Adel Almayahi for language revision of this paper.


  1. Chan SC, Liu JM (2005) Microwave frequency division and multiplication using an optically injected semiconductor laser. IEEE J Quantum Electron 41:1142–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Faist J, Capasso F, Sivco DL, Sirtori C, Hutchinson AL, Cho AY (1994) Quantum cascade laser. Science 264:553–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Farias B, De Silans TP, Chevrollier M, Oria M (2005) Frequency bistability of a semiconductor laser under a frequency-dependent feedback. Phys Rev Lett 94(173902):1–4Google Scholar
  4. Fischer I, Liu Y, Davis P (2000) Synchronization of chaotic semiconductor laser dynamics on subnanosecond time scales and its potential for chaos communication. Phys Rev A 62(011801):1–4Google Scholar
  5. Hwang S, Liu J (1999) Attractors and basins of the locking–unlocking bistability in a semiconductor laser subject to strong optical injection. Opt Commun 169:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kohler R, Tredicucci A, Beltram F, Beere HE, Linfield EH, Davies AG, Ritchie DA, Iotti RC, Rossi F (2002) Terahertz semiconductor-heterostructure laser. Nature 417(6885):156–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kusumoto K, Ohtsubo J (2002) 1.5-GHz message transmission based on synchronization of chaos in semiconductor lasers. Opt Lett 27:989–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Larger L, Goedgebuer J-P, Delorme F (1998) Optical encryption system using hyperchaos generated by an optoelectronic wavelength oscillator. Phys Rev E 57:6618–6624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lee CH, Shin SY (1993) Self-pulsing, spectral bistability, and chaos in a semiconductor laser diode with optoelectronic feedback. Appl Phys Lett 62:922–924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lin FY, Liu JM (2003) Nonlinear dynamics of a semiconductor laser with delayed negative optoelectronic feedback. IEEE J Quantum Electron 39:562–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nizette M, Erneus T, Gavrielides A, Kovanis V, Simpson T (2002) Bistability of pulsating intensities for double-locked laser diodes. Phys Rev E 65(056610):1–5Google Scholar
  12. Ohtsubo J (2012) Semiconductor lasers: stability, instability and chaos. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Rajesh S, Nandakumaran V (2006) Control of bistability in a directly modulated semiconductor laser using delayed optoelectronic feedback. Phys D 213:113–120MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sivaprakasam S, Shore K (1999) Signal masking for chaotic optical communication using external-cavity diode lasers. Opt Lett 24:1200–1202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Takiguchi Y, Fujino H, Ohtsubo J (1999) Experimental synchronization of chaotic oscillations in externally injected semiconductor lasers in a low-frequency fluctuation regime. Opt Lett 24:1570–1572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Tang S, Liu J (2001) Chaotic pulsing and quasi-periodic route to chaos in a semiconductor laser with delayed opto-electronic feedback. IEEE J Quantum Electron 37:329–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Turovets S, Dellunde J, Shore K (1997) Nonlinear dynamics of a laser diode subjected to both optical and electronic feedback. J Opt Soc Am B 14:200–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vicente R, Tang S, Mulet J, Mirasso CR, Liu JM (2006) Synchronization properties of two self-oscillating semiconductor lasers subject to delayed optoelectronic mutual coupling. Phys Rev E 73(047201):1–4Google Scholar
  19. Vitiello MS, Tredicucci A (2011) Tunable emission in THz quantum cascade lasers. IEEE Trans Terahertz Sci Technol 1:76–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Waried H (2017) Modulation response and relative intensity noise spectra in quantum cascade lasers. Phys Chem Res 5:377–394Google Scholar
  21. Waried H (2018a) Synchronization of quantum cascade lasers with negative optoelectronic feedback. Rec Adv Electr Electron Eng 11:167–175Google Scholar
  22. Waried HH (2018b) Synchronization of quantum cascade lasers with mutual optoelectronic coupling. Chin J Phys 56:1113–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Williams BS (2007) Terahertz quantum-cascade lasers. Nat Photon 1:517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Xia GQ, Wu ZM, Jia XH (2005) Theoretical investigation on commanding the bistability and self-pulsation of bistable semiconductor laser diode using delayed optoelectronic feedback. J Lightw Technol 23:4296–4304CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Physics Department, Sciences CollegeUniversity of Thi-QarNasiriyahIraq

Personalised recommendations