Physica E 7 (2000) 489–493

www.elsevier.nl/locate/physe

InAs–GaAs self-assembled quantum dot lasers: physical processes

and device characteristics
D.J. Mowbraya; ∗ , L. Harrisa , P.W. Frya , A.D. Ashmorea , S.R. Parnella , J.J. Finleya ,
M.S. Skolnicka , M. Hopkinsonb , G. Hillb , J. Clarkb
a Department of Physics, University of Sheeld, Sheeld, S3 7RH, UK
b Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Sheeld, Sheeld, S1 3JD, UK

Abstract
The gain characteristics of InAs–GaAs self-assembled quantum dot lasers are studied using two complementary techniques.
The modal gain is derived from a measurement of the normal incidence, inter-band photoconductivity. For a device containing
a single layer of dots the maximum modal gain of the ground state transition is found to be insucient for lasing action. As
a consequence lasing occurs for excited state transitions, which have a larger oscillator strength, with the precise transition
being dependent upon the device cavity length. The second technique uses the Hakki–Paoli method to determine the spectral
and current dependence of the gain. A quasi-periodic modulation of the below threshold gain is observed. This modulation is
shown to be responsible for the form of the lasing spectra, which consist of groups of lasing modes separated by non-lasing
spectral regions. Possible mechanisms for this behaviour are discussed. ? 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PACS: 42.55.Px; 78.66.−w; 42.60.Lh

Keywords: Quantum dots; Semiconductor lasers; Electro-optic devices; Modal gain; III–V semiconductors

Injection lasers with self-organised quantum dot
(QD) active regions are attracting considerable atten-
tion due to their potential for low threshold current
density (Jth ) and temperature insensitive Jth devices
[1,2]. In this paper we describe the use of two comple-
mentary techniques to study the gain characteristics
of InAs–GaAs self-organised QD lasers. These tech-
gain and the dependence of the gain spectra on injec-
tion current to be determined.
Self-organised InAs QDs were grown by molecular
beam epitaxy on a (0 0 1) GaAs substrate at a tem-
◦
perature of 500 C [3]. The QDs have a base length
of 15 nm, height 3 nm and density ∼ 5 × 1010 cm−2 .
Two laser devices were studied containing either
niques allow the magnitude of the ground state modal a single QD layer conned on either side by 1375
A of GaAs or 10 QD layers separated by 250 A  of
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-222-4561; fax: +44-114- GaAs and conned by 1000 A  GaAs layers. 16,000 A
272-8079. thick Al0:6 Ga0:4 As cladding layers were used in both
E-mail address: d.mowbray@sheeld.ac.uk (D.J. Mowbray) devices. Devices for photocurrent measurements

1386-9477/00/$ - see front matter ? 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 8 6 - 9 4 7 7 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 3 7 1 - 9
490 D.J. Mowbray et al. / Physica E 7 (2000) 489–493

For suitable temperatures and=or bias conditions

all the photoexcited carriers escape from the QDs
before recombining. Under these conditions the ab-
sorption strength (A) of the QDs can be determined
from the magnitude of the photocurrent (I ) and the
relationship I = APe=hc, where P is the total inci-
dent optical power at wavelength . To determine the
ground state absorption the background photocurrent
is rst removed by assuming a linear variation with
energy (see inset to Fig. 1). This allows the magnitude
of the photocurrent associated with the QD ground
state transition to be determined which, with the inci-
dent optical power (measured with a calibrated power
meter) and the above equation, gives a peak absorp-
tion of A = (2 ± 0:6) × 10−4 . 1
The value A = (2 ± 0:6) × 10−4 represents the frac-
tional plane wave absorption for normal incidence on a
single-dot plane. To determine the modal gain (g) for
inplane propagation of light in a waveguide structure,
the corresponding absorption coecient ((≡ −g)) is
calculated. This is related to A by
Fig. 1. Photocurrent (PC) and electroluminescence (EL) spectra of
a mesa device. The inset shows the ground state (GS) photocurrent  = ln((1 − A)1=D ) ef ; (1)
transition after removal of the background. The solid points in the
inset show the result of a Gaussian t to the experimental data.
where D is the average dot spacing. The rst term
in Eq. (1) (ln((1 − A)1=D ) ≈ A=D as A
1) represents
the plane wave absorption for an innite stack of dot
layers. The second term, ef , is the geometric conver-
consisted of 400 m diameter circular mesas with sion factor from the plane wave-to-wave guide geom-
annular metal top contacts. Laser devices were of etry, and is given by
the form of SiN-coated ridges of width 20 m [4].
I (0)
Photocurrent was excited using monochromated light ef = Pi=∞ ; (2)
from a tungsten-halogen projector lamp (power den- i=−∞ I (iD)
sity ∼ 3 mWcm−2 ) and was detected using standard
lockin techniques. High-resolution emission spec-
tra were recorded using a double grating 0.85 m
spectrometer and a liquid-nitrogen-cooled Ge p–i–n
photodiode. All measurements were performed for a
device temperature of 80 K.
Fig. 1 shows a photocurrent spectrum of a reversed
biased mesa device (Vbias ≈ −2:0 V) and an elec-
troluminescence spectrum of a forward biased mesa
(Vbias ≈ +1:5 V; I = 500 mA), both recorded for the
single-layer QD structure. In both spectra a series of
features are observed in the range 1.2–1.4 eV, which
where I (x) is the transverse optical intensity prole,
determined numerically using a three-layer model. For
a measured dot density of 5 × 1010 cm−2 , a value  =
(7 ± 3) cm−1 is obtained for the ground state modal
absorption. Because the maximum gain of a QD transi-
tion has a numerical value equal to the absorption [5],
the maximum ground state modal gain, gmod max
, for the
1 This is the value appropriate to the bias conditions for las-
ing action (Vbias = +1:5 V) and is larger than the value de-
termined from the present photocurrent measurements which
corresponds to Vbias = −2 V. The value for Vbias = +1:5 V is ob-
tained from an extrapolation of values measured over the bias
are attributed to transitions between QD-conned hole
range −1 V6Vbias 68 V. This variation of the absorption with
and electron states. A broad, rising background is ob- bias arises from an electric-eld-induced separation of the elec-
served in the photocurrent spectrum, the origin of tron and hole wave functions which results in a reduction of the
which is unclear. transition oscillator strength for increasing reverse bias.
 D.J. Mowbray et al. / Physica E 7 (2000) 489–493 491

present single-layer device is (7 ± 3) cm−1 . Although

the light propagation direction for the photocurrent
measurements is normal to that for inplane waveguide
propagation, measurements of laser devices demon-
strate that the ground state emission has an inplane
(TE) polarisation. Hence the polarisation direction for
the two congurations is identical.
max
The value of gmod = (7 ± 3) cm−1 determined for
a single-dot layer is considerably smaller than that
of comparable InGaAs quantum well lasers, where
values of ∼ 50–100 cm−1 are typical [6]. This rela-
max
tively small value of gmod has signicant consequences
for the properties of laser devices as it is comparable to
the internal cavity loss (i ), which typically has a value
in the range ∼ 2–10 cm−1 [7,8]. As a consequence
lasing on the ground state transition may not be possi-
ble and instead lasing may occur on an excited state,
which generally exhibit a higher oscillator strength.
The relative oscillator strengths of the lowest three
transitions are shown in the upper inset of Fig. 2 where
their spontaneous emission intensities are plotted as a
function of current. With increasing current the tran- Fig. 2. Emission spectra of a single QD layer, 2 mm cavity
sition intensities saturate as a result of state lling [9]. laser device showing lasing occurring on the second excited state
Higher transitions exhibit a higher saturated intensity, transition. The uppermost spectrum shows the lasing emission from
which may re
ect a higher degeneracy of the under-
lying states [9], consistent with a higher maximum
gain.
The behaviour of the single-layer QD laser is shown
in Fig. 2 where emission spectra for a 2 mm cavity
device are displayed. The emission from the ground
state transition saturates at low currents, indicating
that the gain of this transition is insucient to over-
come i plus mirror losses ((1=L) ln(R) ≈ 5:7 cm−1 ).
a 5 mm cavity occurring on the rst excited state. The upper inset
shows the evolution with current of the spontaneous emission from
the QD transitions. The lower inset shows an emission spectrum
(I = 1:3Ith ) of the 10 QD layer, 2 mm cavity device, recorded
from a series of small windows formed in the top contact.
loss from the dots and resulting in the optimum tem-
perature performance [11].
The second technique applied to study QD gain
characteristics uses the Hakki–Paoli method [11].
A similar behaviour is observed for the rst excited Here the net loss coecient,
, of the cavity is related
state transition and lasing eventually occurs via the to the peak-to-valley ratio, r, of the Fabry–Perot-like
second excited state transition. A 5 mm cavity device oscillations, observed in the below threshold sponta-
exhibits a similar behaviour (uppermost spectra in Fig. neous emission, by
2) except that the reduced mirror loss ((1=L) ln(R) ≈  1=2 
1 1 r +1
2:3 cm−1 ) now permits lasing via the rst excited
= ln(R) + ln 1=2 ; (3)
state. For none of the cavity lengths studied is lasing
on the ground state transition possible for the single
ectivity and L is the cavity
layer device [10]. The present results demonstrate that
the maximum ground state gain of a quantum dot laser
) can be determined.
is relatively small and that unless care is taken with
the design, ground state lasing may not be possible.
Lasing on the ground state transition is desirable as
carriers in the corresponding dot states are the most
L L r −1
where R is the mirror re
length. Hence by measuring r as a function of wave-
length the gain spectrum (= −
Fig. 3 shows a series of sub-threshold emission
spectra for the 10 QD layer device and a 0.5 mm
cavity length (Ith = 21 mA). Close to threshold the
emission intensity is modulated by the Fabry–Perot
strongly conned, hence minimising thermal carrier oscillations (see lower inset), the peak-to-valley ratio
492 D.J. Mowbray et al. / Physica E 7 (2000) 489–493

separated by non-lasing spectral regions, 2 the posi-

tions of which coincide with the maxima of the below
threshold gain spectrum. A similar modulation of the
below threshold gain has been observed in a quan-
tum well (QW) laser by Arzhanov et al. [12]. This
behaviour was explained in terms of the penetration
Fig. 3. Below threshold emission spectra of a 0.5 mm cavity device
at 80 K. The lower inset shows the Fabry–Perot oscillations. The
upper inset shows a calculated gain spectrum for I = 20 mA and
a lasing spectrum (I = 40 mA).
of which increases with increasing current, consistent
with decreasing loss (increasing gain). The upper in-
set to Fig. 3 shows a gain spectrum for a current of 20
of the cavity optical mode through the nite thickness
cladding layers and a resultant periodic modulation,
which feeds back in to the cavity gain, due to inter-
ference eects in the substrate. A similar mechanism
has recently been proposed by O’ Reilly et al. [13] to
explain the lasing spectra of QD lasers. In contrast to
the case of a QW laser the modulation of the gain is
expected to be observable in a QD laser above thresh-
old due to strong inhomogeneous spectral broaden-
ing which results from the presence of non-interacting
carriers localised in dierent dots [4]. Although the
period of the gain modulation observed in the present
device agrees reasonably with the predictions of Refs.
[12,13], the depth of the modulation appears to be too
large. Using Eq. (2) of Ref. [13] with a calculated
cladding layer penetration depth of 9:3 m−1 and a
cladding layer thickness of 1:6 m, a gain modula-
tion of only ∼ 10−9 cm−1 is calculated, very much
smaller than the observed modulation (∼ 10 cm−1 ).
Although the model of Refs. [12,13] is therefore
able to explain the periodicity of the observed gain
modulation, 3 when used with parameters relevant to
the present device it predicts a very small leakage of
mA. This spectrum is calculated by rst extracting the light into the substrate and hence an extremely small
spectral dependence of the Fabry–Perot peak-to-valley gain modulation. However there exists experimen-
ratio (r) from the corresponding spectrum of Fig. 3,
and then using Eq. (3) with a calculated value for the
mirror term of −23:5 cm−1 (corresponding to an R of
0.31) to determine the gain (≡ −
). Close to thresh- recorded from a series of small windows formed in
old the gain maximum occurs above the ground state
energy, the corresponding gain for which saturates to
a negative value. This result demonstrates that for the
present, short cavity device that the ground state gain
is insucient for lasing action to occur.
The gain spectrum shown in the inset to Fig. 3
exhibits a quasi-periodic modulation, which is also
visible in the emission spectra of Fig. 3. This modula-
tion, which has a period ∼ 50 A and depth ∼ 10 cm−1 ,
is closely linked to the form of the above threshold
lasing spectra, an example of which (I = 40 mA) is
shown in the upper inset of Fig. 3. The spectrum con-
sists of three groups of longitudinal cavity modes,
tal evidence for signicant light leakage through the
cladding layers, as demonstrated in the upper inset
of Fig. 2. This inset shows an emission spectrum,
the top contact of a 2 mm cavity device, for I = 1:3Ith .
In addition to the expected broad spontaneous emis-
sion, lasing modes are observed, consistent with the
leakage of some inter-cavity stimulated emission
through the cladding layers. The mechanism responsi-
ble for light leakage and the resultant gain modulation
in the present device hence remains unclear. Possible
2 In longer cavity devices the number of mode groups can be
considerably larger e.g. ∼ 10 for a 2 mm cavity (Ref. [4]).
3 Recent measurements on devices with dierent substrate thick-
nesses demonstrate a good agreement between the measured lasing
mode group spacing and the predictions of the theoretical model
(P.M. Smowton, private communication).
 D.J. Mowbray et al. / Physica E 7 (2000) 489–493
explanations include lasing on a higher-order trans-
verse mode, which would exhibit a greater penetra-
tion through the cladding layers than the fundamental
mode, or leakage enhanced by scattering from the
random spatial distribution of QDs.
In conclusion, two dierent techniques have been
applied to study the gain characteristics of QD lasers.
The maximum ground state modal gain for a sin-
gle layer of dots is shown to be relatively low. A
quasi-periodic modulation of the below-threshold gain
is shown to determine the form of the subsequent las-
ing spectra.
We wish to thank M. Al-Khafaji for the structural
measurements and P.N. Robson, P.M. Smowton, E.P.
O’Reilly, E.A. Avrutin and A.I. Onischenko for useful
discussions. This work is supported by the Engineer-
ing and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
UK Grant Numbers GR=L95489 and GR=L28821.
References
[1] Y. Arakawa, H. Sakaki, Appl. Phys. Lett. 40 (1982) 939.
[2] D. Bimberg, M. Grundmann, N.N. Ledetsov, Quantum Dot
Heterostructures, Wiley, Chichester, 1998.
493
[3] M.J. Steer, D.J. Mowbray, W.R. Tribe, M.S. Skolnick,
M.D. Sturge, M. Hopkinson, A.G. Cullis, C.R. Whitehouse,
R. Murray, Phys. Rev. B 54 (1996) 17 738.
[4] L. Harris, D.J. Mowbray, M.S. Skolnick, M. Hopkinson,
G. Hill, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73 (1998) 969.
[5] M. Grundmann, D. Bimberg, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 36 (1997)
4181.
[6] L.A. Coldren, S.W. Corzine, Diode Lasers and Photonic
Integrated Circuits, Wiley, New York, 1995.
[7] A.E. Zhukov, A.R. Kovsh, V.M. Ustinov, A.Yu. Egorov,
N.N. Ledentsov, A.F. Tsatsul’nikov, M.V. Maximov, Yu.M.
Shernyakov, V.I. Kopchatov, A.V. Lunev, P.S. Kop’ev, D.
Bimberg, Zh.I. Alferov, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 14 (1999)
118.
[8] N. Kirstaedter, O.G. Schmidt, N.N. Ledentsov, D. Bimberg,
V.M. Ustinov, A.Yu. Egorov, A.E. Zhukov, M.V. Maximov,
P.S. Kop’ev, Zh.I. Alferov, Appl. Phys. Lett. 69 (1996)
1226.
[9] M. Grundmann, D. Bimberg, Phys. Rev. B 55 (1997) 9740.
[10] H. Shoji, Y. Nakata, K. Mukai, Y. Sugiyama, M. Sugawara,
N. Yokoyama, H. Ishikawa, IEEE J. Quantum. Electron. 3
(1997) 188.
[11] B.W. Hakki, T.L. Paoli, J. Appl. Phys. 44 (1973) 4113.

[12] E.V. Arzhanov, A.P. Bogatov, V.P. Konyaev, O.M. Nikitian,
V.I. Shvekin, Quantum Electron. 24 (1994) 581.
[13] E.P. O’Reilly, A.I. Onischenko, E.A. Avrutin, D.
Bhattacharyya, J.H. Marsh, Electron. Lett. 34 (1998)
2035.