arXiv:2610.32292
High Resolution Hyperspectral Quantum Infrared Imaging with Undetected Photons
Aadi Suketu Bharatia, Vidya Prakash Muppalla, Ananya Asthana, Priyanka Kandankel, Tanmoy Chakraborty, Sreelaja Nair, Anshuman Kumar
Abstract
Quantum sensing in the infrared regime often demands the use of expensive and cryogenically operated detectors. Nonlinear interferometry has paved the way for information transfer from the infrared to the near--infrared or visible regime in various quantum technologies. A particularly interesting application of these interferometers involves spectrally--resolved quantum imaging using undetected photons, enabled by the use of temperature--tunable parametric amplifiers. In this work, we demonstrate spectrally resolved transmission imaging with undetected photons around 1550 nm using a spontaneous parametric down conversion based folded nonlinear interferometric scheme, registering the attenuation of a zebrafish larva as a biological feasibility test. We characterize and calibrate the interferometer, having achieved spectrally resolved interference fringes with a maximum baseline visibility of $\sim 74\%$ in the near--infrared regime. Phase--stepped readout of a grating spectrometer gives a resolving power of $\sim1460$ (from the spectrometer's point spread function) at 1550 nm, and $\sim 730$ from the coherence length, the finest reported for imaging with undetected photons, over an instantaneous spectral window of $\approx 51$ cm$^{-1}$.
AI Summary
The paper investigates spectrally resolved infrared transmission imaging with undetected photons, using visible/near-infrared detection to interrogate samples around $1550\,\mathrm{nm}$. It implements a folded, single-crystal nonlinear interferometer: a $532\,\mathrm{nm}$ continuous-wave pump traverses temperature-controlled PPLN twice, producing signal–idler pairs near $810/1550\,\mathrm{nm}$. The sample is traversed twice by the idler, while a grating spectrometer records signal interference as the idler mirror is phase-stepped. Transmission maps are reconstructed by raster scanning and normalizing wavelength-dependent fringe visibility to a substrate reference. Calibration gives a peak background-subtracted visibility of $74.4\%$. Fringe periods agree with energy conservation across a usable $1539.4$–$1551.6\,\mathrm{nm}$ idler window, approximately $51\,\mathrm{cm}^{-1}$, defined by visibility of at least $0.05$. The single-channel coherence envelope implies an instrument-limited spectral resolution of $4.4\,\mathrm{cm}^{-1}$, or resolving power $R\approx1460$, corresponding to about 12 independent spectral elements across that window. Separately, the measured SPDC bandwidth is $8.9\,\mathrm{cm}^{-1}$, corresponding to $R\approx730$. An estimated mean occupation below $3.7\times10^{-6}$ photons per mode supports operation in the spontaneous regime. Demonstrations image a printed carbon-ink target and a fixed zebrafish larva; acquisitions take approximately 12 and 8 hours, respectively. The stated spatial-resolution limit is the approximately $1\,\mathrm{mm}$ idler-beam FWHM, making the larva measurement sub-resolution. Other limitations include low visibility and unreliable background subtraction away from the spectral peak, chromatic mode mismatch, and wavelength-dependent image shifts of approximately $2\,\mathrm{mm}$. The biological measurement is presented as a feasibility test.
Central claim may not hold: The claimed 4.4 cm−1 spectrometer resolution is inferred from an envelope containing both source-spectrum and channel-response effects, without the independent calibration or deconvolution needed to identify it with the spectrometer PSF. The resolving power of approximately 730 describes the full SPDC source bandwidth, not an independently measured imaging spectral resolution. Appendix C gives incorrect formulas for quadratic-extremum refinement and visibility uncertainty, leaving the quantitative image-processing procedure unreliable as documented.
Written by gpt-6.1-sol from the paper's full text. Automated: it can be wrong.