Van Labeke et al. Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 / J. Opt. Soc. Am.

A 695

Optical characterization of nanosources used

in scanning near-field optical microscopy

D. Van Labeke, D. Barchiesi, and F. Baida

Laboratoire d’Optique P. M. Duffieux, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique,
Unité de Recherche Associée 214, Unité de Formation et de Recherche des Sciences et des Techniques,
Université de Franche-Comté, 16 route de Gray, 25030 Besançon Cedex, France

Received May 24, 1994; accepted November 21, 1994

We propose an optical method to characterize tips used in scanning near-field optical microscopy (SNOM). The
tip is a nanosource, and its optical emission is studied by an inverted scanning tunneling optical microscopy
(also called photon scanning tunneling microscopy) apparatus. Then we can obtain information about the
spatial Fourier spectrum of the source. We give the formulas connecting the detected intensity to the
properties of the nanosource and to geometric parameters of the apparatus. Our discussion is illustrated
by a simple approximation for the nanosource: the Bethe – Bouwkamp model.

1. INTRODUCTION The achievable resolution, the contrast, and the quality

Recently various techniques of scanning near-field opti-
cal microscopy (SNOM) have succeeded in expanding the
resolution of optical microscopy far below the Rayleigh
limit; a lateral resolution of 20 nm has been claimed.1,2
Description of apparatus and results are presented in the
proceedings of a recent conference on near-field optics.3
The most important part of a SNOM apparatus is a tip
that is scanned along the object at a very small distance
(a few nanometers). Positioning of the tip relative to the
sample is achieved with piezoelectric transducers.
The tip can be utilized in two different modes. In
the detection mode the tip is a passive probe that col-
lects the near field above the sample. Then the light is
guided to a detector by an optical fiber. In the emis-
sion mode the tip is used as a nanosource for illumi-
nating the sample. In this case the detected signal is
generally collected by a lens; for this reason this mode is
also called the collection mode.1,3 In scanning tunneling
optical microscopy2,4,5 (STOM), also called photon scan-
ning tunneling microscopy6 (PSTM), the tip is used in the
detection mode and the sample is illuminated by total in-
ternal reflection. SNOM apparatus working in both de-
tection and emission modes is now available.7,8 Recently
Hetch et al.9 proposed a new method of near-field mi-
croscopy: an inverted STOM/PSTM, in which the tip is
used in the emission mode and in which the detection is
made by frustration of evanescent waves.
Nowadays the tip is usually the apex of an optical
monomode glass fiber. In STOM experiments the glass
remains bare.2,4 – 6 In aperture SNOM the tip is over-
coated by a metal except for a small aperture at the apex.1
Fischer and Zapletal proposed the use of a coaxial tip.10
For enhancement of light emission or detection, more-
sophisticated tips have also been proposed: a supertip
with a fluorescent crystal at the end of a pipette,11 an
optoelectronic probe,12 and, most recently, a fiber laser
probe.13 The use of a silicon nitride tip and cantilever
of an atomic force microscope has also been suggested for
detection of both optical and force signals.14,15
0740-3232/95/040695-09$06.00
of images depend strongly on the geometry of the apex
of the tip. A small radius of curvature for the bare tip
or a small radius for the aperture is necessary to obtain
a small resolution limit. For aperture SNOM a radius
limit near 20 nm has been mentioned.1 For a glass tip it
seems that the apex should be a hemisphere of diameter
varying from 100 to 50 nm.2,16
Tips are often tested simply in SNOM experiments:
a good tip leads to good images; if bad images are
obtained, the tip is rejected. This method is rather sub-
jective and cannot lead to quantitative studies of tip
properties. Control of tips can be obtained by electronic
microscopy. This control is direct for apertures used in
SNOM, which are coated, but metallization is necessary
for bare tips used in STOM. This overcoating can modify
the tip geometry. Moreover, images made by tips permit
only visual control and do not lead to efficient knowledge
of emission or detection properties.
Direct control of the optical properties of tips is nec-
essary. Generally the optical properties of the optical
waveguide can be determined by study of the emission
pattern. However, the spatial spectrum of a nanosource
that is much smaller than the wavelength is composed
principally of evanescent waves, and far-field studies of
the emission pattern cannot be used.
We propose to characterize the optical properties of tips
by using the inverted STOM device suggested by Hetch
et al.9 : the tip is used in the emission mode, and it can
be located, by the usual piezo techniques, near the flat
face of a hemispherical lens. With a pointlike detector
we study the angular variations of the detected intensity
far from the spherical face of the lens (Fig. 1).
In this paper we study this device theoretically, calcu-
late the detected intensity, and show how the detected
signal is connected to the optical properties of the tip.
In Sections 2 and 3 we give some notation and specify
theoretically the optical properties of the tip: the tip is
completely defined by its two-dimensional (2D) Fourier
transform of the emitted field in a reference plane. Then
we calculate the angular variations of the detected inten-
 1995 Optical Society of America
696 J. Opt. Soc. Am. A / Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995
(a)
Fig. 1. Schematic of the apparatus proposed for optical charac-
terization of the nanosources, showing coordinates and various
parameters used in the calculations. The origin of the coordi-
nates is the center of the plane face of the hemispherical lens.
The direction of detection is marked by angles uD and cD . A
polarizer can be put in front of the detector, its direction indicated
by fD measured from the plane (Oz – OD).
sity and show how they are related to the Fourier spec-
trum of the nanosource.
To illustrate this formalism we calculate the de-
tected intensity for a simple model of a nanosource used
in SNOM theoretical papers: the Bethe – Bouwkamp
approximation.
2. NOTATION
The coordinate axes are named as is usual in SNOM
theoretical and experimental papers: the scanning plane
is the x – y one; it is also named transverse plane. The z
axis corresponds to the direction of the tip approach.
All three-dimensional (3D) vectors are labeled by a bold-
face capital letter; the corresponding small italic letter
means the projection on the transverse plane (2D vec-
tor). For instance, R ­ sx, y, zd ­ sr, zd. We denote by
su, v, wd the components of the wave vectors, with expo-
nents to distinguish the various vectors: K ­ su, v, wd ­
sk, wd.
For Fourier transforms we adopt the notation of
Champeney17 :
1 ZZ
F srd ­ F skd exps1ik ? rddk ,
4p 2
ZZ
F skd ­ F srd exps2ik ? rddr ,
where a script letter indicates a Fourier transform in the
spatial frequency space.
3. NANOSOURCE
In small-aperture SNOM a tapered tip is used as a
nanosource for scanning the sample at a very small dis-
Van Labeke et al.
tance. We suppose that the emission is in vacuum and
monochromatic (circular frequency v). The tip position
is RT ­ srT , zT d. The tip will be optically defined by
its light emission. We denote by E0 srd the electric field
emitted by the tip in a reference plane, P0 , when the tip
is at the origin of the coordinate system sRT ­ 0d.
Therefore we decided to characterize the nanosource by
the 2D Fourier transform of the reference field E0 srd:
ZZ
E 0 skd ­ E0 srd exps2ik ? rddr . (2)
For SNOM applications the properties of the spatial spec-
trum of the reference field are very important and must
be studied theoretically or determined experimentally.
The choice of tip center and reference plane P0 is rather
arbitrary but remains significant for both experimental
and theoretical discussion: RT is the tip position, and
sample – tip distances are measured from P0 . For tips
described in Ref. 1, the choice is quite simple: P0 is the
aperture plane, and RT is the center of the aperture. For
a conical tip2 the choice is less trivial; it could be the apex
of the tip or the center of curvature of this apex.
For a general position of the tip sRT fi 0d the electric
field at point R in vacuum can be easily calculated18 :
1
E1 sR; RT d ­
4p 2
ZZ
3 E 0 skdexpf1ik ? sr 2 rT d 1 ijz 2 zT jw1 skdgdk ,
(3)
where w1 skd is a function of the transverse wave vector k:
q
w1 skd ­ v 2yc2 2 k2 . (4)
Formula (3) is a plane-wave expansion and can be
interpreted17,18 as propagation of the field in terms of
plane waves with wave vector K ­ sk, w1 d. Integral
(3) is a 2D Fourier transform in which the integration
runs over the whole space of 2D spatial frequencies k.
So expansion (3) contains both propagating waves and
evanescent waves.
The low spatial frequencies of the source spectrum
lead to propagating waves and the high spatial frequen-
cies to evanescent ones: The low spatial frequencies
verify that k2 , v 2yc2 ; thus w1 is real and the correspond-
ing waves are propagating ones. But for the high spatial
frequencies, k2 . v 2yc2 , w1 is purely imaginary and the
corresponding waves that exponentially decay along the
z axis are evanescent.
Equation (3) simply expresses that when the tip is
located at point RT the spatial spectrum of the field in
vacuum at point R is
(1)
E 1 skd ­ E 0 skd exps2ik ? rT d expf1ijz 2 zT jw1 skdg .
(5)
The first exponential reflects the transverse translation
of the tip from the origin of the coordinate system. The
second exponential depends on the z distance from the
tip center to point R. For low spatial frequencies it also
leads to a phase modification of the spectrum. But for
high spatial frequencies w1 skd is purely imaginary, and
Van Labeke et al. Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 / J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 697

the second exponential has more drastic effects: propa- emitted field. The polarizer direction is indicated by the
gation along the z axis corresponds to a low-pass filtering angle fD , measured from the plane sz 2 RD d. fD ­ 0
of high spatial harmonics. corresponds to (TE) polarization; fD ­ 90± corresponds
The spectrum E 0 skd completely determines the to (TM) polarization. The axis of the polarizer is thus
nanosource emission. It is a vectorial function, but defined by vector
only two components are necessary because the three 8
>
components are not independent. The emitted field < 2sinscD dcossfD d 2 cosscD dcossuD dsinsfD d
>
must verify Maxwell’s equation DivfE1 sR; RT dg ­ 0, PD ­ cosscD dcossfD d 2 sinscD dcossuD dsinsfD d . (8)
which implies for the spatial spectrum the relation >
>
: sinsuD dsinsfD d

uE0 skdx 1 vE0 skdy 1 w1 skdE0 skdz ­ 0 . (6)

For calculating the detected signal we need first the inci-
dent field on the lens. This field is characterized by its
4. OPTICAL CHARACTERIZATION plane-wave expansion E 1 skd in the plane z ­ 0. By us-
OF THE NANOSOURCE ing Maxwell’s equations and boundary conditions we can
For SNOM applications the tip must be very small easily calculate the transmitted spectrum E 2 skd for z ­ 0
(20 nm), and the spatial spectrum of the nanosource in the glass. The two spectra are linearly connected by
$
contains many high frequencies; the function E 0 skd a 3 3 3 transfer matrix T skd:
does not vanish for k2 . v 2yc2 . The quality of the
$
images obtained by SNOM experiments depends E 2 skd ­ T skd ? E 1 skd . (9)
strongly on the exact shape of the source spectrum
E 0 skd, and it would be very important to determine The coefficients of this matrix are directly related to the
this spectrum experimentally. An ordinary source, Fresnel transmission coefficient of the vacuum – glass in-
larger than the wavelength, can be characterized by terface. Moreover, fields E 1 skd and E 2 skd verify $a di-
study of the far-field radiation pattern. For an opti- vergence equation such as Eq. (6), and the matrix T skd
cal fiber the angular variations of the light intensity has an infinity of equivalent expressions. We choose for
radiated by the end of the fiber lead to information on simplicity
$
T skd
0 1
B 2w1 skd 2u2 sn2 2 1d 2uvsn2 2 1d
B 1 0C
C
B fw skd 1 w2 skdg fw1 skd 1 w2 skdgfn2 w1 skd 1 w2 skdg fw1 skd 1 w2 skdgfn2 w1 skd 1 w2 skdg C
B 1 C
B 2uvsn2 2 1d 2w1 skd 2v2 sn2 2 1d C
­B B 1 0C
C.
B
B fw 1 skd 1 w 2 skdgfn w1 skd 1 w2 skdg
2 w1 skd 1 w2 skd fw1 skd 1 w2 skdgfn2 w1 skd 1 w2 skdg C
C
B
@ 22u 22v C
0A
fn2 w1 skd 1 w2 skdg fn2 w1 skd 1 w2 skdg
(10)
the structure of the modes. This method cannot be em- In formula (10), w1 and w2 are functions of the transverse
ployed for a nanosource, because its spectrum contains wave vector k. They are the z components of the wave
many high frequencies that cannot be detected in the far vectors in vacuum and in air, respectively. w1 is defined
field. in Eq. (4), and w2 has a similar definition:
For studying the high frequencies of the nanosource
s
we propose to use the setup drawn in Fig. 1. We use v2
a hemispherical lens composed of a transparent material w2 skd ­ n2 2 k2 . (11)
c2
but with a large index n. The tip is located at RT in
front of the plane face of the lens. The light is detected
It is $
difficult to study completely the properties of the ma-
after the lens, in the far field, by a detector with a small
trix T skd in a single paper, because that matrix is formed
collecting spherical angle dV. The detection axis points
of six nonvanishing complex coefficients that are functions
to the center of the sphere. For simplicity, the origin of
of two variables u and v. However, obvious symmetry
the coordinates is the center of the hemisphere, and the
properties fTxx su, vd ­ Tyy sv, ud, Txy su, vd ­ Tyx su, vd . . .g
z ­ 0 plane is the plane face of the lens. The direction
simplify the discussion. In Figs. 2 and 3 some results
of detection is thus simply labeled by the two angles uD
are plotted; the index of the hemisphere is n ­ 1.85. In
and cD . When uD ­ 0, the direction of detection is along
Fig. 2 we compare the variations of jTxx j and jTyy j versus
the z axis. cD ­ 0 corresponds to the sx – zd plane. The
uyk0 and for v ­ 0. In order to show some 2D studies,
coordinates of the detector are thus
we have plotted surfaces of variations of jTxx j and jTxy j
RD ­ sxD , yD , zD d versus uyk0 and vyk0 in Fig. 3.
The transmitted field, at point R in the glass, can also
­ fRD sinsuD dcosscD d, RD sinsuD dsinscD d, be expressed as a plane-wave expansion:
RD cossuD dg . (7)
1 ZZ
E2 sR; RT d ­ E 2 skdexpf1ik ? r 1 izw2 skdgdk .
A linear polarizer can be put in front of the detector 4p 2
and can be useful in determining some component of the (12)
698 J. Opt. Soc. Am. A / Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 Van Labeke et al.

In the detected intensity formula, only the coefficient

AsuD , cD , fD d is important; it depends on angles uD , cD ,
fD and is directly connected to the Fourier spectrum of
the nanosource E 0 skD d.
By measuring the detected intensity for various angles,
we can get information about the variations of E 0 skd.
Equation (14) relates the spatial frequencies to the de-
tection angles. The low spatial frequencies correspond
to n sinsud , 1. The high spatial frequencies are de-
tected for angles u above the limit angle u1 for index
n fsinsu1 d ­ 1yng. Equation (14) clearly shows the limi-
tation of the proposed method. The spatial frequencies
(a) that can be detected are limited by the index of the lens,
kD , nsvycd.
When the tip is far from the plane interface of the
hemisphere, the exponential occurring in formula (14)
is negligible for high spatial frequencies, and only low
spatial frequencies can be detected skD , svycd; uD , u1 d.
But when the tip is close to the z ­ 0 plane, high spatial
frequencies can be detected svyc , kD , n vyc, i.e., u1 ,
uD , py2d.
The relation between the detected intensity and the
spatial spectrum of the nanosource is not very simple

( b)
Fig. 2. Monodimensional variations of the modulus of transfer
matrix coefficients for an air – glass diopter. Index of glass
n ­ 1.85; k0 ­ 2pyl, where l is the vacuum wavelength.
sad jTxx su, v ­ 0dj, sbd jTyy su, v ­ 0dj.

The detector is in vacuum and far from the hemisphere

sRD .. ld. So for calculating the detected field we can
use the well-known asymptotic expansion of a plane-wave
spectrum.18,19 We keep the direction scD , uD d fixed and
let RD go to infinity:

2i exps1ik2 RD d
limfE2 sRD ! `; RT dg ­ w2 skD d
2p RD
$ (a)
3 T skD d ? E 1 skD d , (13)

where k2 ­ nsvycd and kD is the transverse wave vector

in the direction of detection:

kD ­ k2 sxD yRD , yD yRD d

­ nsvycd fsinsuD dcosscD d, sinsuD dsinscD dg . (14)

Because the detection direction points toward the center

of the hemisphere, the optical properties of the spheri-
cal interface are simply described by a transmission co-
efficient t, which is a constant, independent of suD , cD d.
The calculation of the time-averaged detected power into
the solid angle dV, for a polarization direction fD , can
now be easily ended:

nc
dID ­t jAsuD , cD , fD dj2 dV ( b)
32p 3
nc $ Fig. 3. Two-dimensional variations of transfer matrix coef-
­t 3
jw2 skD dPD ? T skD d ? E 0 skD d ficients for an air – glass diopter. Index of glass n ­ 1.85;
32p k0 ­ 2pyl, where l is the vacuum wavelength. (a) jTxx su, vdj,
3 expf1ijzT jw1 skD dgj2 dV . (15) (b) jTxy su, vdj.
Van Labeke et al. Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 / J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 699

because of the occurrence of a square

$ modulus in Eq. (15) More realistic models of the SNOM tip have been
and because the transfer matrix T skD d is not constant. proposed. By using a modal expansion of the fields,
A simple inspection of Figs. 2 and 3 clearly shows that Roberts24 calculated the efficiency of a conical tip with
the variations of the Tij coefficients are important and a small aperture. With the localized Green’s dyadic
complicated. So variations of the detected intensity do method, Dereux and colleagues studied the emission
not directly correspond to the variations of the spatial properties of 2D models of tips (see Refs. 25 and 26 and
spectrum of the source. references therein). The multiple-multipole method is
Moreover, the transfer matrix is not diagonal, and the used by Novotny et al.27 to describe light propagation in
components of the Fourier spectrum are mixed in the de- 2D nanometer light structures.
tected intensity. However, by choosing some simple ge- Unfortunately, these methods are quite complicated
ometry for the detection angles, we can extract only one and need long computing times, and only numerical
component of E 0 skD d. For instance, with TE polariza- results are presented in the literature. Moreover, be-
tion sfD ­ 0d, by detection in the x – z plane scD ­ 0d cause of time and memory constraints, the studies
and in the y –z plane scD ­ py2d, the AsuD , cD , fD ­ 0d are actually restricted to 2D studies. In contrast, the
coefficient is proportional, respectively, to E0 skD dx and Bethe – Bouwkamp method leads to analytical formulas,
E0 skD dy : which explains why this model is extensively used in near-
field calculations.28 – 30 For the reasons given above, to
illustrate the calculations of Section 4 with an example,
2w2 skD dw1 skD d
AsuD , 0, 0d ­ expf1ijzT jw1 skD dg we decided to use the Bethe – Bouwkamp model for the
w2 skD d 1 w1 skD d tip emission. We consider a circular aperture of radius
∑ ∏
v a in a perfectly metallic thin screen. The aperture plane
3 E0 n sinsuD d, 0 , is the x –y plane. The incident field arrives along the
c
z axis and is polarized along the x axis, and its amplitude
2w2 skD dw1 skD d is Ei . Taking the origin of the coordinates at the center
AsuD , py2, 0d ­ expf1ijzT jw1 skD dg
w2 skD d 1 w1 skD d of the aperture sRT ­ 0d, the electric field in the aperture
∑ ∏ has for expression22
v
3 E 0 0, n sinsuD d . (16)
c x
4iv 2a2 2 x2 2 2y 2
fE0 sx, ydgx ­ 2 Ei ,
3pc sa2 2 x2 2 2y 2 d1/2
However, in general the emission of the source has no
symmetry, E 0 skD d remains a function of two variables, 4iv xy
fE0 sx, ydgy ­ 2 Ei , (17)
and a complete study of the detected intensity versus 3pc sa2 2 x2 2 2y 2 d1/2
angles uD , cD and for various polarizations is necessary
for characterization of the nanosource. and the Fourier transform of these functions can be
performed by use of a relation connected to Hankel
transforms31 :
5. THEORETICAL EXAMPLE:
Z p
BETHE–BOUWKAMP NANOSOURCE a
x yJ0 sxyd sinsayd .
p dx ­ p (18)
Rigorous calculation of the emission electric field by a 0 a2 2 x 2 y
real nanosource is a very difficult problem that has not
been solved. For an aperture tip the simplest model is We thus obtain
to suppose that the properties of the tip can be correctly
described by calculation of the emission of a small cir- 28ik0 a3 Ei
E 0 skd ­ F 0 skd , (19)
cular aperture in a metallic screen. That is a classical 3
problem in diffraction theory. The most drastic approxi-
mation is to suppose that the field in the aperture is where
the incident field: this is the well-known Kirchhoff ap-
3v2 a2 u4 1 3v2 1 a2 u2 v2 ,
proximation. The results of such an approximation can sF0 dx ­ 2 cossakd 2 4
1 sinsakd
be found, for example, in Jackson’s textbook,20 in which a k a3 k 5
a comparison between a scalar theory and the vectorial 3uv uvs23 1 a2 u2 1 a2 v2 d .
Smythe method is presented. But when the diameter of sF0 dy ­ 1 cossakd 2 4
1 sinsakd
a k a3 k 5
the aperture is small compared with the wavelength, the
Kirchhoff approximation is no longer valid because bound- (20)
ary conditions have to be taken into account and because
the field in the aperture can no longer be approximated In formulas (19) and
p (20) k is the length of the transverse
by the incident field. wave vector k ­ u2 1 v2 .
In 1944 Bethe21 presented a more rigorous method: Figures 4 and 5 present the variations of functions
he derived the diffracted field from a fictitious magnetic F 0 skd. In Fig. 4 the variations of sF0 dx and sF0 dy are
charge and currents in the hole. In 1950 Bouwkamp plotted versus uya and vya. For sF0 dx the surface looks
corrected a mistake in Bethe’s equations for the near like a sinc function [Fig. 4(a)], but it is not symmetri-
field.22 Recently calculations were performed on a more cal in the two variables u and v. This nonsymmetry ap-
realistic screen, with nonvanishing thickness and finite pears directly in field equation (17) and is caused by the
conductivity; a bibliography can be found in Ref. 23. polarization direction of the incident field, which breaks
700 J. Opt. Soc. Am. A / Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 Van Labeke et al.

1 dID
BDC ­
I1 dV
16tn3 k0 4 a4 $
­ 3
j cossuD dPD ? T skD d ? F 0 skD d
9p
3 expf1ijzT jw1 skD dgj2 . (21)

The strength of the numerical factor at the beginning

of Eq. (21) determines the relative intensity of the de-
tected signal compared with the energy power falling
on the aperture area. This coefficient is proportional to
sk0 ad4 ­ s2payld4 ; therefore the efficiency of the tip emis-
sion is strongly enhanced when the tip radius is increased.
The angular and the polarization properties of the BDC
coefficient are contained in the squared function.
To illustrate this equation we have first plotted in Fig. 6
(a)
some studies of BDC variations versus the angle of inci-
dence, for various tip radii and for increasing values of tip
distance. The laser wavelength is l ­ 600 nm, and the
index of the hemisphere is n ­ 1.85. The transmission
coefficient is t ­ 0 ­ 96. Figures 6(a) and 6(b) are cal-
culated with the detector in the x – z plane sc ­ 0d and in
TM polarization sf ­ 90 ±d. Figures 6(c) and 6(d) are cal-
culated with c ­ 90± (detection in the y – z plane) and in

( b)
Fig. 4. Spatial Fourier spectrum of the field emitted by a
Bethe – Boukamp aperture of radius a in a thin perfect metal.
E 0 skd ­ s28ik0 a3 Ei dy3F
F 0 skd. The incident field arrives along
the z axis and is polarized along the x axis; its amplitude is Ei .
(a) fF0 su, vdgx versus kya, (b) fF0 su, vdgy versus kya.

(a)
the cylindrical symmetry of the aperture. Variations of
sF0 dy are more complicated [Fig. 4(b)], and sF0 dy vanishes
for u ­ 0 or v ­ 0. To show the influence of the aper-
ture radius on the Fourier spectrum of the source, we
present in Fig. 5 the variations of sF0 dx and sF0 dy ver-
sus uyk0 for v ­ 0 and vyk0 ­ 1, respectively. In these
graphs uyk0 ­ 1 corresponds to the limit between homo-
geneous and evanescent waves. A source of light with a
flat spectrum is a necessary condition to produce a good
image in near-field microscopy. For a ­ 20 nm, this con-
dition seems to be reached, as sF0 dx is rather constant
from uyk0 ­ 0 to uyk0 ­ 4. But the field emitted by the
aperture is polarized, and the other component, sF0 dy , has
to be taken into account in the discussion [Fig. 5(b)].
By introducing Eqs. (19) and (20) into Eq. (15), we can
end the calculation of the detected power. The incident ( b)
intensity is defined by the Poynting vector, but it is useful Fig. 5. Influence of aperture radius on the spatial Fourier spec-
to introduce the total power incident upon the aperture: trum of the field emitted by a Bethe – Boukamp aperture of radius
area: Ii ­ scE0 2y8pdpa2. By introducing this definition a in a thin perfect metal. E 0 skd ­ s28ik0 a3 Ei dy3F F 0 skd. The
incident field arrives along the z axis and is polarized along the
we can characterize the detected intensity by a bidirec- x axis; its amplitude is Ei . sF0 dx is studied for vyk0 ­ 0 and
tional detection coefficient (BDC), similar to coefficients versus uyk0 . sF0 dy is studied for vyk0 ­ 1 and versus uyk0 . (a)
used in optical scattering measurement31 : fF0 su, v ­ 0dgx versus uyk0 , (b) fF0 su, vyk0 ­ 1dgy versus uyk0 .
Van Labeke et al. Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 / J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 701

(a) (c)

( b) (d)
Fig. 6. Influence of aperture radius, of tip distance, and of polarization on BDC variations. Incident wavelength l ­ 600 nm; index of
the hemisphere n ­ 1.85. (a) Aperture radius a ­ 20 nm, detection in the x – z plane sc ­ 0d, TM polarization sf ­ py2d; (b) aperture
radius a ­ 200 nm, detection in the x – z plane sc ­ 0d, TM polarization sf ­ py2d; (c) aperture radius a ­ 20 nm, detection in the y – z
plane sc ­ 90±d, TE polarization sf ­ 0d; (d) aperture radius a ­ 200 nm, detection in the y – z plane sc ­ 90±d, TE polarization sf ­ 0d.

TE polarization sf ­ 0d. For such an index the limit be- 6. CONCLUSION

tween homogeneous and evanescent waves is u1 ­ 32.72±.
All the curves clearly show a decrease of the evanescent
part when the tip distance zT is increased. For a small
aperture radius a ­ 20 nm [Figs. 6(a) and 6(c)] and at
small tip separation, the evanescent parts of the curves
have the same strength as the homogeneous parts. In
this case the spatial Fourier spectrum of the tip field is
rather constant (see Fig. 4), and the curves reflect the
variations of the transmission matrix T : for instance the
extremum occurring for u ­ u1 .
When the aperture radius is increased, the high-
frequency part of the tip spectrum decreases in com-
parison with the low-frequency part. One can observe
this phenomenon simply by comparing Figs. 6(a) and 6(b)
with Figs. 6(c) and 6(d), respectively. We can also notice
in these figures the enhancement of the numerical value
of the BDC coefficient when a is increased.
In Fig. 7 are plotted surface of variations of the BDC
coefficient versus uD and cD for two polarizations sfD ­ 0
and fD ­ py2d. The aperture radius is a ­ 20 nm. The
tip– surface distance is zT ­ 20 nm.
We have proposed an optical method to study the opti-
cal properties of tips utilized in scanning near-field op-
tical microscopy (STOM), or photon-scanning tunneling
microscopy (PSTM). By using an inverted STOM/PSTM
we can obtain information about the spatial Fourier spec-
trum of the source. We give the formulas connecting the
detected intensity to the properties of the nanosource and
to the geometric parameters of the apparatus. Our dis-
cussion is illustrated by use of a simple approximation for
the nanosource: the Bethe –Bouwkamp model.
To be optically characterized, the tips must be tested
in the emission modes. However, the optical reciprocal
theorem leads to a simple relation between emission and
detection properties of a probe. So the characterization
method suggested in this paper can also be used to test
the tips used in STOM/PSTM and in reflection SNOM.
Initial experimental results are contained in Ref. 9.
But a comparison with the formulas proposed in this
paper is difficult, because in Ref. 9 important experi-
mental parameters, such as tip diameter and tip– surface
702 J. Opt. Soc. Am. A / Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995
(a)
( b)
Fig. 7. Variations of the BDC coefficient versus angles uD and
cD for two polarizations. Incident wavelength l ­ 600 nm;
index of the hemisphere n ­ 1.85; aperture radius a ­ 20 nm;
tip surface distance zT ­ 10 nm. (a) TE polarization sfD ­ 0d,
(b) TM polarization sfD ­ py2d.
distance are not known. We think that an optical char-
acterization of the nanosource is important for SNOM ap-
plications and that experimental work remains to be done.
Important theoretical points also remain to be dis-
cussed. In our calculations we have supposed that the
vicinity of the lens surface does not modify the emission
properties of the tip: the coupling between the tip and
the lens surface has been neglected. We intend to take
this effect into account in future papers by using the mul-
tilayer formalism that two of us have proposed to model
STOM.32 We also propose to pursue this research by a
theoretical comparison of the emission properties of the
aperture tip and of a conical tip.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank D. Pohl for a useful and interesting
discussion. We are also grateful to B. Hetch, H. Heinzel-
mann, and D. W. Pohl for sending us the preprint of
their paper.9
The authors’ telephone number is 33 81 66 6414; FAX
number is 33 81 66 6423.
Van Labeke et al.
REFERENCES
1. E. Betzig, J. K. Trautman, T. D. Harris, J. S. Weiner, and
R. L. Kostelar, “Breaking the diffraction barrier: optical
microscopy on a nanometric scale,” Science 251, 1468 – 1470
(1991).
2. D. Courjon, C. Bainier, and M. Spajer, “ Imaging of submi-
cron index variations by scanning optical tunneling,” J. Vac.
Sci. Technol. B 10, 2436 – 2439 (1992).
3. D. W. Pohl and D. Courjon, eds., Near Field Optics, NATO
Advanced Scientific Institutes Series E, Vol. 242 (Kluwer,
Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1993).
4. R. C. Reddick, R. J. Warmack, and T. L. Ferrel, “New form
of scanning optical microscopy,” Phys. Rev. B 39, 767 – 770
(1989).
5. D. Courjon, K. Sarayeddine, and M. Spajer, “Scanning tun-
neling optical microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 71, 23 – 28 (1989).
6. F. de Fornel, J. P. Goudonnet, L. Salomon, and E. Lesniew-
ska, “An evanescent field optical microscope,” in Optical
Storage and Scanning Technology, T. Wilson, ed., Proc. Soc.
Photo. Opt. Instrum. Eng. 1139, 77 – 84 (1984).
7. R. D. Grober, T. D. Harris, J. K. Trautman, and E. Betzig,
“Design and implementation of a low temperature near-
field scanning optical microscope,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 65,
626 – 631 (1994).
8. T. D. Harris, R. D. Grober, J. K. Trautman, and E. Betzig,
“Super-resolution imaging spectroscopy,” Appl. Spectrosc.
48, 14A – 21A (1994).
9. B. Hetch, H. Heinzelmann, and D. W. Pohl, “Combined aper-
ture SNOM/PSTM: best of both worlds?” Ultramicroscopy
(to be published).
10. U. Ch. Fischer and M. Zapletal, “The concept of the coaxial
tip as a probe for scanning near field optical microscopy
and steps towards a realization,” Ultramicroscopy 42 – 44,
393 – 398 (1991).
11. K. Lieberman, S. Harush, A. Lewis, and R. Kopelman, “A
light source smaller than the optical wavelength,” Science
247, 59 – 61 (1990).
12. H. U. Danzelbrink and U. C. Fischer, “The concept of an
optoelectronic probe for near-field microscopy,” in Ref. 3,
pp. 303 – 308.
13. E. Betzig, S. G. Grubb, R. J. Chichester, D. J. DiGiovanni,
and J. S. Weiner, “Fiber laser probe for near-field scan-
ning optical microscopy,” Applied Phys. Lett. 63, 3550 – 3552
(1993).
14. F. Baida, D. Courjon, and G. Tribillon, “combination of a
fiber and a silicon nitride tip as a bifunctional detector:
first results and perspectives,” in Ref. 3, pp. 71 – 78.
15. M. H. P. Moers, R. G. Tack, O. F. J. Noordman, F. B. Sege-
rink, N. F. Van Hulst, and B. Bölger, “Combined photon
scanning tunneling microscope and atomic force microscope
using silicon nitride probes,” in Ref. 3, pp. 79 – 86.
16. M. Spajer and A. Jalocha, “The reflection near-field optical
microscope: an alternative to STOM,” in Ref. 3, pp. 87 – 96.
17. D. C. Champeney, Fourier Transforms and Their Applica-
tions (Academic, London, 1973), Chap. 3.
18. J. J. Stamnes, Waves in Focal Regions (Hilger, Bristol, UK,
1986).
19. G. C. Sherman, J. J. Stamnes, and E. Lalor, “Asymp-
totic approximations to angular-spectrum representations,”
J. Math. Phys. 17, 760 – 776 (1976).
20. J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics 2nd ed. (Wiley,
New York, 1975), Sec. 9.12.
21. H. A. Bethe, “Theory of diffraction by small holes,” Phys.
Rev. 66, 163 – 182 (1944).
22. C. J. Bouwkamp, “Diffraction theory,” Rep. Phys. 27, 35 –
100 (1954).
23. A. Roberts, “Electromagnetic theory of diffraction by a circu-
lar aperture in a thick perfectly conducting screen,” J. Opt.
Am. Soc. A 4, 1970 – 1983 (1987).
24. A. Roberts, “Small hole coupling of radiation into a near-field
probe.” J. Appl. Phys. 70, 4045 – 4049 (1992).
25. O. Martin, A. Dereux, and Ch. Girard, “Iterative scheme
for computing exactly the total field propagating in dielec-
tric structures of arbitrary forms,” J. Opt. Soc. Am A 11,
1073 – 1080 (1994).
Van Labeke et al.
26. A. Castiaux, A. Dereux, and J. P. Vigneron, “Electromag-
netic fields in two-dimensional models of near-field optical
microscope tips,” Ultramicroscopy (to be published).
27. L. Novotny, D. W. Pohl, and P. Regli, “Light propagation
through nanometer-sized structures: the two-dimensional-
aperture scanning near-field optical microscope,” J. Opt. Soc.
Am. A 11, 1768 – 1779 (1994).
28. A. T. Harootunian, “Near-field scanning optical microscopy
and Raman microscopy,” Ph.D. thesis (Cornell University,
Ithaca, N.Y.) and references therein.
29. D. Van Labeke and D. Barchiesi, “Probes for scanning
tunneling optical microscopy: a theoretical comparison,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10, 2193 – 2201 (1993).
Vol. 12, No. 4 / April 1995 / J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 703
30. D. Barchiesi and D. Van Labeke, “Scanning tunneling op-
tical microscopy (STOM). Theoretical study of polarization
effects with two models of tip,” in Ref. 3, pp. 179 – 188.
31. J. C. Stover, Optical Scattering Measurement and Analysis
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1990), Chap. 1.
32. D. Barchiesi and D. Van Labeke, “A perturbative diffraction
theory of a multilayer system: application to near-field
microscopy SNOM and STOM,” Ultramicroscopy (to be
published).