IEEE PHOTONICS TECHNOLOGY LETTERS, VOL. 15, NO.
4, APRIL 2003
Nonlinear Gain in Vertical-Cavity Semiconductor
Optical Amplifiers
Michael Sánchez, Pengyue Wen, Associate Member, IEEE, Matthias Gross, and Sadik Esener, Member, IEEE
Abstract—We report on the wavelength-dependent non-
linear-gain properties of a vertical-cavity semiconductor optical
amplifier. A step-like output versus input transfer curve and
bistability are found on the long wavelength side of the resonant
peak. The characteristics are caused by a dispersive nonlinearity
arising from gain saturation in the device. The nonlinear transfer
of the amplifier could be used for logic regeneration and all-optical
logic operations, while the optical injection power required to
switch the device is an order of magnitude lower than previously
reported with edge-emitting devices.
Index Terms—Nonlinearities, optical amplifiers, optical logic de-
vices, optical resonators, optical switches.
I. INTRODUCTION
O PTICAL BISTABILITIES and nonlinearities in
Fabry–Pérot semiconductor optical amplifiers (FP-
SOAs) were studied extensively in the 1980s and early 1990s
[1]. It has been demonstrated that nonlinear FPSOAs could be
used as simple logic elements [2] and to perform logic regen-
eration [3]. The vertical-cavity semiconductor optical amplifier
(VCSOA), as a specialized form of the FPSOA, has existed
for several years now. However, one finds little mention of the
nonlinear-gain characteristics of the VCSOA in the literature
[4], [5], though the same phenomenon should be observable. It
is notable that many reports of nonlinear and bistable, passive
vertical cavities exist [6], [7]. Active devices are of interest
because of the optical amplification and reduced switching
power they provide. Past authors have expressed interest in
the observation of dispersive nonlinearities and bistability in
VCSOAs, because of their theoretical advantages over edge
emitting devices [8], [9]. Primarily, light input and output (I/O)
are perpendicular to the plane of the growth wafer, allowing
easy fabrication of two-dimensional arrays. Also, the circular
geometry of the VCSOA should result in improved coupling
efficiency into the amplifier and thus reduced optical switching
power. Another advantage is the ability to easily adjust the
mirror reflectivities to optimize the device.
In this letter, we report the I/O characteristics for reflection
mode VCSOAs at several wavelengths. The transfer curves
show a strong dependence on detuning from the gain peak, and
a step-like transfer curve is found at the long wavelength side
of the resonant peak. In one of the devices, bistable operation
is achieved. This is, to our knowledge, the first observation of
dispersive nonlinear effects in an electrically pumped VCSOA.
Manuscript received August 8, 2002; revised November 18, 2002.
The authors are with the ECE Department, University of California at San
Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0407 USA (e-mail: mdsanchez@ucsd.edu).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/LPT.2003.809310
1041-1135/03$17.00 © 2003 IEEE
507
The step-like I/O characteristic (also known as differential
gain) may be used to perform all-optical logic regeneration,
and optical logic, with input optical switching power on the
order of 1 W [10]. It is also an important aspect to consider
in modeling amplifier linearity.
These I/O curves are recognizable as similar to those of
FPSOAs with nonlinear-gain media [11], which have been
analyzed by Adams [12]. We compare the predictions of that
analysis to experimental results in Section II. To clarify later
discussion, the approach is summarized here. A nonlinear index
of refraction is assumed, coupled to the strength of the optical
field in the cavity. The optical field is in turn coupled to
the carrier density through the carrier rate equation. The gain
and single-pass phase change (or detuning) are calculated by
solving the consequent set of equations and then used in the
standard Fabry–Pérot gain equations. The steady-state solution
for the single pass phase change is
(1)
The net gain is given by
(2)
where is the initial detuning, the cavity length,
the average optical intensity in the cavity, the free-space
wavelength, the change in real refractive index with
carrier concentration, the carrier concentration without an
optical field, the transparency carrier density, the lateral
confinement factor, the gain coefficient, and the loss
coefficient for the cavity. These equations define the single-pass
phase change and net gain for a Fabry–Pérot cavity as a function
of the average optical field strength in the cavity. The input and
output intensity can then be calculated from the internal field
using equations from [12]. The detuning (1) is of the same form
as the traditional equations to describe gain saturation, and
the magnitude of the shift is proportional to the material gain
and linewidth enhancement factor . The saturation
intensity damps the response of the system. The linewidth
enhancement factor also plays an important role in (2), by
relating the change in index (implicit in the definition of )
to the corresponding change in the material gain.
II. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
To provide experimental verification of these effects in VC-
SOAs, the optical output versus input optical power is measured
508
Fig. 1. Calculated output versus input of VCSOA using parameters in Table I.
Symbols are measured data, solid lines are simulation results. Measured
wavelength and detuning parameter used in simulation: (a)  = 851:560 nm,
2
 = 9:0 10 , (b)  = 851:580 nm,  = 0:0, (c)  = 851:600 nm,
0 2
 = 7:5 10 , and (d) 851.620 nm,  = 13:0 10 . 0 2
at several wavelengths across the gain window. In this experi-
ment, two electrically pumped proton-implanted VCSELs (Em-
core model 8085-1100) are biased below the lasing threshold
to be used as amplifiers. The lasing wavelengths are about 850
and 842 nm, and the VCSELs have quantum well gain regions.
The apertures are 8 and 20 m in diameter, but otherwise the
devices are identical in structure. The devices are operated in
reflection mode, so the light enters and exits the device through
the top mirror. Despite their circular symmetry, the VCSOAs
exhibit some variation in gain with polarization direction. One
polarizer is used to align the polarization of the input light with
the direction corresponding to the maximum gain of the ampli-
fier. A second polarizer is placed closer to the source laser to
control the input light intensity. A tunable laser is adjusted to
vary the detuning while the VCSOA is stabilized in a temper-
ature-controlled mount. A wavemeter (HP 86 120B) is used to
monitor the input wavelength. A high quality microscope ob-
jective lens is used to couple the input light into the amplifier
and collect the output. A beamsplitter directs a fraction of the
input and output light into power meters (Newport 818-SL w/
1830-C) for detection.
The continuous-wave input and output power is measured at
several wavelengths around the resonant gain peak. The output
versus input curves for the 8- m device are shown in Fig. 1 with
a bias 95% of threshold . Note that at short wavelengths the
transfer curve is approximately linear because the gain falls off
very quickly with increasing input power. This occurs because
the increasing photon density pushes the gain peak farther away
from the input wavelength. As the input wavelength is increased,
the nonlinearity becomes more noticeable, and the peak gain
occurs at nonzero input intensity when the detuning is to the
long wavelength side. This shift in peak gain to nonzero input
power results in the differential gain characteristic. However,
as the wavelength is further increased, the gain saturates before
the large optical intensity needed to pull the cavity mode to the
input wavelength is reached. The gain saturates too quickly in
the 8- m device to allow for a bistable transition, but that is not
the case with the 20- m VCSOA. The 20- m device was biased
closer to threshold (99% ), and also should have a larger sat-
uration power, due to the larger active volume. Fig. 2 shows the
IEEE PHOTONICS TECHNOLOGY LETTERS, VOL. 15, NO. 4, APRIL 2003
Fig. 2. Output versus input of 20-m VCSOA showing transition to bistable
regime. Solid lines connect data points. Arrows show the direction of the
hysteresis loops. (a) 842.045 nm, (b) 842.048 nm, (c) 842.052 nm, and
(d) 842.055 nm.
onset of bistability with detunings to the long wavelength side
of resonance.
Several device parameters must be determined in order
to accurately compare the predictions of (1) and (2) to the
experimental data. The mirror reflectivities and cavity length are
estimated using a scanning electron microscope cross section
of the laser die. The number of mirror pairs is counted and
the reflectivities calculated using well-known equations, as in
[13]. The confinement factor is typically nearly unity in large
aperture VCSELs [13], so a value of 1.0 is assumed. Then,
the standard equation for Fabry–Pérot gain is used to fix the
value of by comparing the calculated gain with measured
values. For this calibration step, the gain versus wavelength is
measured with very small input powers (100 nW). The effect
of the nonlinearity at this injection level is greatly reduced, so
the measurement gives an estimate of the zero-order linewidth
and resonant wavelength of the cavity [14]. The bias
condition is determined from the measured bias current.
There remain two free variables: and . The latter term
is determined in part by the material gain coefficient and
recombination lifetime [12]. These are unknown parameters,
and so is treated as a fitting variable. The value of
scales the results for intensity to the measured values of optical
power, and this scaling is asymmetric because of the unknown
coupling loss to the amplifier. Thus, two values are used, one
for the input and one for the output . The linewidth
enhancement factor is adjusted to achieve the best fit to the
shape of the I/O curves measured. The final parameters used
are given in Table I.
The calculation results are plotted along with the experi-
mental data points in Fig. 1. Reasonable agreement is found
across the wavelength range of interest, and the detunings used
in the simulation match the measured wavelengths within the
accuracy of the wavemeter. The gain is somewhat overestimated
by the theory, particularly for positive detuning (short ). The
theoretical curve also is smoother than the measured data. That
is, the calculated result cuts the corners of the step in Fig. 1(c).
The comparison suggests that some of the simplifications made
should be reconsidered for accurate modeling of VCSOAs. In
particular, the differences may be due to the absence of higher
order terms in the carrier rate equation, such as those describing
SÁNCHEZ et al.: NONLINEAR GAIN IN VERTICAL-CAVITY SEMICONDUCTOR OPTICAL AMPLIFIERS
TABLE I
PARAMETERS USED IN CALCULATION OF THEORETICAL CURVES
spontaneous emission. Another possible factor is the use of
average, rather than peak, intensity. The VCSOAs used have
quantum-well gain regions, so a calculation using the peak
field should be more accurate. Aside from these discrepancies,
the calculated curves agree with the experimental data, and the
major trends are clearly reproduced.
The wavelength dependence of several device parameters that
are regarded as constants in the calculation probably does not
play a significant role. This approximation is made because the
wavelength range of interest is very small, less than 0.1 nm. The
gain and loss coefficients , linewidth enhancement factor
, and basic refractive index all vary insignificantly over such
a small wavelength range [13], [15]. Furthermore, if the wave-
length dependence of these parameters were to affect the I/O
characteristics, it would be by inducing some asymmetry to the
reflectivity of the cavity. The gain window measured with very
low injection power does not exhibit any noticeable asymmetry.
The differential gain characteristic could prove useful. For ex-
ample, noninverting logic can be performed with such a transfer
curve [16]. All-optical logic regeneration should also be pos-
sible, as shown in [3]. For these applications, the absence of
bistability would be advantageous, since it has been shown that
an intensity spike is produced when switching at a bistable point
[12]. Furthermore, the optical switching energy used is an order
of magnitude lower than previously reported in edge-emitting
devices. Sharfin and Dagenais report a switching power of 3 W
[17], but this is a calculated result. The coupling efficiency of
their device is only 2%, so 150 W was actually used. Similarly,
Pan and Dagenais report input powers of several microwatts, but
only after correcting for a 7.3-dB 5 X coupling loss [18]. By
contrast, our results are not adjusted for coupling loss to the de-
vice, but are the total optical power delivered to the coupling
lens of the system. Fig. 1(c) shows a sharp transition at only
2 W. The best contrast ratio observed is about 5:1, which is
comparable to other FPSOAs operating under the same prin-
ciple [18], [19].
III. CONCLUSION
The I/O transfer curve of a VCSOA has been measured to
be nonlinearly dependent on wavelength and is reported for
the first time in an electrically pumped, active vertical-cavity
structure. Differential gain and bistability are found on the
long wavelength side of resonance while the gain saturates
509
extremely quickly for short wavelength detunings. A simple
model reproduces the observed behavior, indicating the cause
is the dispersive nonlinearity arising from gain saturation. To
achieve perfect simulation would require better knowledge
of device parameters and inclusion of higher order terms in
the calculation. The differential-gain characteristic could be
useful for logic regeneration and all-optical logic. The VCSOA
switches with input power levels an order of magnitude lower
than other types of FPSOAs, mainly due to reduced coupling
loss. At least, the asymmetric nonlinear-wavelength dependence
of the gain in VCSOAs should be considered in any system
design utilizing the device. At best, these nonlinearities could
open the door to a new class of applications for VCSOAs.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Kawaguchi, Bistabilities and Nonlinearities in Laser
Diodes. Norwood, MA: Artech House, 1994, pp. 99–137.
[2] W. F. Sharfin and M. Dagenais, “High-contrast, 1.3 m optical and gate
with gain,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 48, pp. 1510–1512, June 1986.
[3] K. Nonaka, Y. Noguchi, T. Hiroyuki, and T. Kurokawa, “Digital signal
regeneration with side-injection-light-controlled bistable laser diode as
a wavelength converter,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 7, pp. 29–31,
Jan. 1995.
[4] D. Widenmann, B. Moeller, R. Michalzik, and K. J. Ebeling, “Perfor-
mance characteristics of vertical-cavity semiconductor laser amplifiers,”
Electron. Lett., vol. 32, pp. 342–343, Feb. 1996.
[5] C. Tombling, T. Saitoh, and T. Mukai, “Performance predictions for
vertical-cavity semiconductor laser amplifiers,” IEEE J. Quantum Elec-
tron., vol. 30, pp. 2491–2499, Nov. 1994.
[6] J. P. Debray et al., “Low threshold InGaAlAs monolithic vertical cavity
bistable device at 1.5 m wavelength,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 70, pp.
2858–2860, May 1997.
[7] B. G. Sfez et al., “External-beam switching in monolithic bistable GaAs
quantum well étalons,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 57, pp. 1849–1851, Oct.
1990.
[8] P. Pakdeevanich and M. Adams, “Measurement and modeling of reflec-
tive bistability in 1.55 m laser diode amplifiers,” IEEE J. Quantum
Electron., vol. 35, pp. 1894–1903, June 1999.
[9] M. Bohn and J. McInerney, “Bistable output of an optically pumped
vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 14, pp.
3430–3436, Dec. 1997.
[10] P. Wen, M. Sanchez, M. Gross, and S. Esener, “Low input intensity, high
contrast optical AND gate based on vertical-cavity semiconductor op-
tical amplifiers (VCSOAs),” OSA Trends Optics Photon., vol. 77, Nov.
2002.
[11] N. Ogasawara and R. Ito, “Static and dynamic properties of nonlinear
semiconductor laser amplifiers,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 25, pp.
L739–L742, Sept. 1986.
[12] M. J. Adams, “Time dependent analysis of active and passive optical
bistability in semiconductors,” Inst. Elect. Eng. Proc. J, vol. 132, pp.
343–348, Dec. 1985.
[13] T. E. Sale, Vertical Cavity Surface Emitting Lasers. Somerset, U.K.:
Research Studies, 1995, pp. 31–48 53 176.
[14] Z. Pan, H. Lin, and M. Dagenais, “Switching power dependence on de-
tuning and current in bistable diode laser amplifiers,” Appl. Phys. Lett.,
vol. 58, pp. 687–689, Feb. 1991.
[15] S. Adachi, GaAs and Related Materials : Bulk Semiconducting and
Superlattice Properties. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific, 1994, pp.
453–489.
[16] J. E. Midwinter, “‘Light’ electronics, myth or reality,” Inst. Elect. Eng.
Proc. J, vol. 132, pp. 371–383, Dec. 1985.
[17] W. F. Sharfin and M. Dagenais, “Room-temperature optical bistability
in InGaAsP/InP amplifiers and implications for passive devices,” Appl.
Phys. Lett., vol. 46, pp. 819–821, May 1985.
[18] Z. Pan and M. Dagenais, “Subnanosecond optically addressable gener-
alized optical crossbar switch with an aggregate throughput rate of 4.2
Gbit/s,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 62, pp. 2185–2187, May 1993.
[19] W. F. Sharfin and M. Dagenais, “Femtojoule optical switching in non-
linear semiconductor laser amplifiers,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 48, pp.
321–322, Feb. 1991.