1: %% LyX 1.3 created this file. For more info, see http://www.lyx.org/.
2: %% Do not edit unless you really know what you are doing.
3: \documentclass[a4paper,twocolumn,american]{revtex4}
4: \usepackage{times}
5: \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
6: \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
7: \usepackage{graphicx}
8:
9: \makeatletter
10:
11: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% LyX specific LaTeX commands.
12: %% Bold symbol macro for standard LaTeX users
13: \providecommand{\boldsymbol}[1]{\mbox{\boldmath $#1$}}
14:
15: %% Because html converters don't know tabularnewline
16: \providecommand{\tabularnewline}{\\}
17:
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% User specified LaTeX commands.
19:
20:
21: \usepackage{babel}
22: \makeatother
23: \begin{document}
24:
25: \title{Remote preparation of an atomic quantum memory}
26:
27:
28: \author{Wenjamin Rosenfeld$^{1}$, Stefan Berner$^{1}$, Jürgen Volz$^{1}$,
29: Markus Weber$^{1}$, and Harald Weinfurter$^{1,2}$}
30:
31:
32: \affiliation{$^{1}$Department für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität München,
33: D-80799 München, Germany\\
34: $^{2}$Max-Planck Institut für Quantenoptik, D-85748 Garching, Germany}
35:
36: \begin{abstract}
37: Storage and distribution of quantum information are key elements of
38: quantum information processing and quantum communication. Here, using
39: atom-photon entanglement as the main physical resource, we experimentally
40: demonstrate the preparation of a distant atomic quantum memory. Applying
41: a quantum teleportation protocol on a locally prepared state of a
42: photonic qubit, we realized this so-called remote state preparation
43: on a single, optically trapped $^{87}$Rb
44: atom. We evaluated the performance of this scheme by the full tomography
45: of the prepared atomic state, reaching an average fidelity of 82\%.
46:
47: \end{abstract}
48: \maketitle
49: Quantum teleportation\cite{Teleportations93-04} and quantum cryptography\cite{Gisin02}
50: were the first quantum communication methods experimentally demonstrated.
51: Meanwhile, first devices for secure communication became already commercially
52: available. For the next step of quantum information processing, new
53: methods and technologies are required. Many new concepts of quantum
54: information science, for example the quantum repeater\cite{Briegel98}
55: or quantum networks, all the way towards distributed quantum computing,
56: require a device interfacing photonic quantum channels and matter-based
57: quantum memories and processors.
58:
59: \noindent So far, there are two methods experimentally investigated.
60: The first employs atomic ensembles to momentarily store quantum states
61: of light. Recently, qubits encoded on single photons or qunits encoded
62: in the quantum state of an electromagnetic field have been transferred
63: to the collective state of atoms and vice versa\cite{Matsukevich04,Polzik04}.
64: An impressive experimental demonstration of a first quantum communication
65: protocol, the quantum teleportation of coherent states of light, was
66: reported very recently\cite{Polzik06}.
67:
68: \noindent In the second method the desired interface to a photonic
69: communication channel can be realized using the recently achieved
70: entanglement between a single atom and a single photon\cite{Blinov04,Volz06}.
71: This method applies directly to well-studied single quantum systems
72: like trapped neutral atoms or ions. For linear ion chains and neutral
73: atoms in optical lattices, various methods of quantum information
74: storage and processing were already demonstrated, e.g. entanglement
75: of up to 8 ions\cite{Blatt05,Wineland05}, creation of a cluster state
76: involving tens of neutral atoms\cite{Mandel03} or manipulations on
77: a neutral atom quantum shift register\cite{Meschede06}. Furthermore,
78: this interface concept can be adopted to other qubit systems, like
79: optically addressed quantum dots\cite{Sham03,Imamoglu05,Lukin06}
80: or superconducting QED-systems\cite{Schoelkopf04}, stimulating novel
81: applications in these areas as well.
82:
83: Here we report the first experimental realization of a quantum communication
84: protocol based on atom-photon entanglement. We perform full remote
85: preparation of an atomic quantum memory via teleportation of an arbitrarily
86: prepared quantum state of a single photon, using matter-light entanglement
87: as the interface between the memory device and the communication channel.
88: This method uses expansion of the Hilbert space of one particle of
89: the entangled pair with subsequent complete Bell-state analysis. Being
90: formally equivalent to quantum teleportation\cite{Popescu95,DeMartini98}
91: it enables the transfer of a known quantum state from the photon to
92: the atom. Recently, various approaches towards remote state preparation
93: were studied experimentally with entangled photons\cite{Kwiat05},
94: light beams\cite{Lvovsky04} and nuclear magnetic spins\cite{Gao03},
95: however without expansion of the Hilbert space and without complete
96: Bell-state analysis and thus with significantly reduced performance.
97:
98: Our experiment includes four steps: (i) Entanglement is generated
99: between the spin of a single trapped $^{87}$Rb
100: atom and the polarization of a single spontaneously emitted photon\cite{Volz06}.
101: (ii) An additional degree of freedom of the photon is used to encode
102: the quantum state we wish to transfer\cite{Popescu95}. (iii) The
103: photon is subject to a complete Bell-state measurement\cite{DeMartini98,Michler00},
104: projecting the atom into one of four well-defined states. (iv) The
105: success of the transfer is shown with full quantum state tomography
106: of the atomic qubit.
107:
108: %
109: \begin{figure}[bt]
110: \begin{center}\includegraphics{AtomPart.eps}\end{center}
111:
112:
113: \caption{\label{cap:atomPart}Schematic of atom-photon entanglement generation
114: in a spontaneous decay of a single optically trapped $^{87}\textrm{Rb}$
115: atom. (a) After optical excitation to $\mathrm{F'=0}$, the atom decays
116: into the ground state manifold $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z},\:\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}$
117: forming an entangled state between the atomic spin and the polarization
118: of the emitted photon. (b) The emitted photon is collected with a
119: microscope objective, coupled into a 5 m long single-mode optical
120: fiber and guided to the preparation setup shown in Fig. \ref{cap:preparationPart}.
121: The overall detection efficiency for the photon is about $3\cdot10^{-4}$.}
122: \end{figure}
123:
124:
125: In more detail, we first establish entanglement between a photon and
126: a single neutral $^{87}\textrm{Rb}$ atom stored in an optical dipole
127: trap\cite{Weber06}. Therefore the atom is optically excited to the
128: $5{}^{2}P_{3/2}$, $\left|F'=0,\, m_{F'}=0\right\rangle $ state (see
129: Fig. \ref{cap:atomPart} (a)). In the following spontaneous decay
130: the polarization of the emitted photon is entangled with the spin
131: state of the atom\cite{Volz06}, resulting in the maximally entangled
132: state
133:
134: \begin{equation}
135: \left|\Psi^{+}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}\left|\sigma^{+}\right\rangle +\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}\left|\sigma^{-}\right\rangle ),\end{equation}
136: where $\left|\sigma^{\pm}\right\rangle $ are the right- and left-circular
137: polarization states of the emitted photon. The two states $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}$
138: and $\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}$, defining the atomic qubit,
139: correspond to the $\left|F=1,\, m_{F}=\pm1\right\rangle $ Zeeman
140: sublevels of the $5{}^{2}S_{1/2},\: F=1$ hyperfine ground level.
141:
142: %
143: \begin{figure}[bt]
144: \begin{center}\includegraphics{PreparationPart.eps}\end{center}
145:
146:
147: \caption{\label{cap:preparationPart}Schematic setup for preparing the state
148: from Eq. (\ref{eq:spatialState}) on the spatial degree of freedom
149: of the photon and for the subsequent Bell-state measurement. The interferometric
150: phase setting $(\alpha,\phi)$ allows to prepare any desired superposition
151: of the spatial modes $\left|a\right\rangle $ and $\left|b\right\rangle $
152: without affecting the polarization degree of freedom. The following
153: polarizing beam-splitter (PBS) together with the polarization measurement
154: in $\left|\pm45°\right\rangle $ basis enable a complete Bell-state
155: analysis in the combined polarization/spatial-mode Hilbert space of
156: the photon.}
157: \end{figure}
158:
159:
160: For the next step the emitted photon is coupled into a single-mode
161: optical fiber (Fig. \ref{cap:atomPart} (b)) and guided to the setup
162: shown in Fig. \ref{cap:preparationPart}, where the state we wish
163: to transfer is imprinted onto the photon. For this purpose we extend
164: the Hilbert space of the photon by using two spatial modes as an additional
165: degree of freedom. The photon is coherently split into the two spatial
166: modes $\left|a\right\rangle $ and $\left|b\right\rangle $ by means
167: of a polarization independent Mach-Zehnder interferometer, resulting
168: in the spatial state $\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|a\right\rangle +\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|b\right\rangle $.
169: The phase $\alpha$ is determined by the optical path-length difference
170: between the two interferometer arms. Next, the two spatial modes acquire
171: an additional phase difference $\phi$, resulting in the state\begin{equation}
172: \textrm{e}^{i\phi}\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|a\right\rangle +\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|b\right\rangle \label{eq:spatialState}\end{equation}
173:
174:
175: \noindent of the photonic qubit. In order to prepare a well-defined
176: state, precise control over the interferometric phases $(\alpha,\phi)$
177: is necessary. Therefore the optical path-length differences in the
178: interferometric setup are actively stabilized with the help of an
179: additional stabilization laser and an electronic feedback loop, allowing
180: measurement times of up to 24 hours. By inserting a rotatable glass
181: plate into the stabilization beam we can change these path-length
182: differences and thus precisely control the phase setting.
183:
184: Next, in order to transfer the state given by Eq. (\ref{eq:spatialState})
185: onto the spin state of the atom, a Bell-state measurement in the polarization/spatial
186: mode Hilbert space of the photon is performed. This is done by combining
187: the two modes $\left|a\right\rangle $ and $\left|b\right\rangle $
188: on a polarizing beam-splitter and analyzing the photon polarization
189: in each output port (see Fig. \ref{cap:preparationPart}). The polarization
190: analyzer detects $\left|\pm45°\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|H\right\rangle \pm\left|V\right\rangle )$
191: polarized photons by means of four single photon counting Si avalanche
192: photo diodes (APD1..4). Since the PBS transmits horizontal $\left|H\right\rangle $
193: and reflects vertical $\left|V\right\rangle $ polarization, a coherent
194: superposition of orthogonal polarizations from both modes is necessary
195: to obtain $\left|\pm45°\right\rangle $ in the output of the PBS.
196: For example to get $\left|+45°\right\rangle $ in the PBS output with
197: detectors 1 and 2, $\left|H\right\rangle $ polarization has to be
198: transmitted from mode $\left|b\right\rangle $ and coherently added
199: to $\left|V\right\rangle $ polarization reflected from mode $\left|a\right\rangle $.
200: This corresponds to the Bell-state $\left|\Psi^{+}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|V\right\rangle \left|a\right\rangle +\left|H\right\rangle \left|b\right\rangle )$.
201: Accordingly, the $\left|-45°\right\rangle $ polarization corresponds
202: to the $\left|\Psi^{-}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|V\right\rangle \left|a\right\rangle -\left|H\right\rangle \left|b\right\rangle )$
203: state, while in the other output of the PBS the states $\left|\Phi^{\pm}\right\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|H\right\rangle \left|a\right\rangle \pm\left|V\right\rangle \left|b\right\rangle )$
204: are detected.
205:
206: \noindent The Bell-state detection projects the atomic qubit onto
207: one of the four states
208:
209: \begin{equation}
210: \begin{array}{c}
211: \left|\Phi_{1}\right\rangle =\textrm{e}^{i\phi}\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}+\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}\\
212: \left|\Phi_{2}\right\rangle =\textrm{e}^{i\phi}\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}-\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}\\
213: \left|\Phi_{3}\right\rangle =\textrm{e}^{i\phi}\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}-\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}\\
214: \left|\Phi_{4}\right\rangle =\textrm{e}^{i\phi}\cos(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}+\sin(\frac{\alpha}{2})\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}\end{array}\label{eq: RSPStates}\end{equation}
215: where $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x},\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}\pm\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z})$.
216: State $\left|\Phi_{1}\right\rangle $ is already equivalent to the
217: photonic state from Eq. (\ref{eq:spatialState}). The states $\left|\Phi_{2}\right\rangle $,
218: $\left|\Phi_{3}\right\rangle $, and $\left|\Phi_{4}\right\rangle $
219: can be transformed into $\left|\Phi_{1}\right\rangle $ by applying
220: the operation $\hat{\sigma}_{x}$, $\hat{\sigma}_{y}$, or $\hat{\sigma}_{z}$,
221: respectively on the atom.
222:
223: After completion of the transfer of the state from the photon to the
224: atom we perform the analysis of the atomic state\cite{Volz06}. First,
225: a certain superposition of $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}$ and
226: $\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}$ is transfered to a different
227: hyperfine level ($\left|F=2\right\rangle $) by means of a state-selective
228: STIRAP process. The polarization of the transfer pulse defines which
229: superposition is being transferred and thus allows the choice of the
230: measurement basis. The following hyperfine-state analysis measures
231: the fraction of population which was transferred by removing atoms
232: in the state $\left|F=2\right\rangle $ from the trap. This method
233: allows to analyze the state of the atom in any desired basis and thus
234: to reconstruct the density matrix of the state by combining measurements
235: in 3 complementary bases. The characterization of the entangled atom-photon
236: state with this method yields a fidelity of $87\%$.
237:
238: \noindent In order to evaluate the performance of our preparation
239: scheme, we prepared different states of the atom by varying the phase
240: settings $(\alpha,\phi)$. Then we performed a full quantum state
241: tomography of the atomic qubit for each of the four detected Bell
242: states separately. Fig. \ref{cap:measurement01} exemplarily shows
243: a measurement where we set $\alpha=90°$ while rotating $\phi=0...330°$
244: in steps of $30°.$ Let us consider, e.g., the state which is prepared
245: when the photon is registered in detector APD1. This state can be
246: decomposed in three complementary bases as
247:
248: \begin{equation}
249: \begin{array}{c}
250: \left|\Phi_{1}\right\rangle =\cos(\frac{1}{2}(\phi+\frac{\pi}{2}))\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}+i\cdot\sin(\frac{1}{2}(\phi+\frac{\pi}{2}))\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}\\
251: =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\textrm{e}^{i\phi}\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}+\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x})\\
252: =\cos(\frac{1}{2}\phi)\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{y}+i\cdot\sin(\frac{1}{2}\phi)\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{y}.\end{array}\end{equation}
253:
254:
255: %
256: \begin{figure}[bt]
257: \begin{center}\includegraphics{BlochSphere.eps}\end{center}
258:
259:
260: \caption{\label{cap:BlochSphere}Bloch-sphere representation of the states
261: prepared on the atomic qubit. The basis states in the equatorial plane
262: are defined as $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x},\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}\pm\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z})$
263: and $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{y},\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{y}:=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}\pm i\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z})$.
264: The angles $(\alpha,\phi)$ can be interpreted as usual polar coordinates
265: with respect to the x-axis. The numbers 1-4 depict the corresponding
266: measurements from Table \ref{tab:Results}. The insets exemplarily
267: show measured density matrices of the atomic qubit (real part) for
268: four selected states.}
269: \end{figure}
270:
271:
272: \noindent While the projections of $\left|\Phi_{1}\right\rangle $
273: onto $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{x}$ and $\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}$
274: are equal and constant, we observe a dependence on $\phi$ for the
275: projection onto $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z},\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z}$
276: and $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{y},\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{y}$.
277: By combining all three measurements we determined the density matrix
278: of each prepared atomic state. From this we derived the fidelity (which
279: is the probability to find the atom in the state expected from Eq.
280: (\ref{eq: RSPStates})) for each detector and every setting of $(\alpha,\phi)$.
281: The mean fidelity over all points and all four analyzed Bell-states
282: in this measurement is $82.6\%$. We performed 4 sets of measurements
283: of this kind preparing various states on different circles on the
284: Bloch sphere (see Fig. \ref{cap:BlochSphere}). Altogether, 42 different
285: states were prepared with a mean fidelity of $82.2\%$ (see Table
286: \ref{tab:Results}).
287:
288: %
289: \begin{table}[bt]
290: \begin{center}\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
291: \hline
292: \#&
293: $\alpha$&
294: $\phi$&
295: F\tabularnewline
296: \hline
297: \hline
298: 1&
299: $90°$&
300: $0..330°$&
301: $82.6\%\pm0.40\%$ \tabularnewline
302: \hline
303: 2&
304: $0..330°$&
305: $0°$&
306: $79.7\%\pm0.65\%$\tabularnewline
307: \hline
308: 3&
309: $0..330°$&
310: $90°$&
311: $84.2\%\pm0.45\%$\tabularnewline
312: \hline
313: 4&
314: $109.5°$&
315: $0..330°$&
316: $82.2\%\pm0.46\%$\tabularnewline
317: \hline
318: \end{tabular}\end{center}
319:
320:
321: \caption{\label{tab:Results}Summary of the experimental results. The table
322: shows the fidelity F, which is the probability of a successful state
323: transfer, averaged over all 4 detected Bell-states and all 12 points
324: within one measurement set.}
325: \end{table}
326:
327:
328: There are several sources of imperfections which affect the achieved
329: preparation fidelity. The most important factors are the limited purity
330: of the generated entangled atom-photon state and imperfections in
331: the atomic state detection, yielding together a reduced entanglement
332: fidelity of $87\%$. Taking into account this error source we get
333: a corrected fidelity of $\frac{0.82}{0.87}\approx94\%$ for the preparation/teleportation
334: process alone. This value is limited by the finite visibility of the
335: interferometer and Bell-state analyzer (about $96\%$), the mechanical
336: instability of the interferometer and the residual birefringence of
337: its components. The coherence of the prepared states decays on a time
338: scale of about $10\mathrm{\mu s}$ and does not influence the current
339: measurement. This decay is caused solely by dephasing due to magnetic
340: stray fields, resulting from instabilities of the magnetic field compensation.
341: Longer coherence times can be achieved by using an improved compensation
342: method.
343:
344: The presented experiment demonstrates the faithful remote preparation
345: of arbitrary quantum states of a single atom without the need of a
346: direct interaction between the information carrier (photon) and the
347: quantum memory (atom). Our implementation uses a quantum teleportation
348: protocol to transfer the state of a photonic qubit onto the atom with
349: an average preparation fidelity as high as $82\%$. The long coherence
350: time of atomic ground states\cite{Cline94} makes such a system well
351: suited for future applications. In particular, the combination with
352: recent achievements in experiments with trapped atoms and ions makes
353: advanced schemes like quantum networks or the quantum repeater - almost
354: - state of the art. One could employ systems with a few atoms, where
355: some are used for tasks like computation, storage and entanglement
356: purification, others for establishing the communication link to neighboring
357: nodes via entanglement swapping. This way one profits from both, the
358: high fidelity and flexibility of quantum logic operations on atoms
359: or ions and the efficient transmission of photonic qubits that are
360: ideally suited for efficient long distance distribution of quantum
361: information.
362:
363: This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and
364: the European Commission through the EU Project QAP (IST-3-015848)
365: and the Elite Network of Bavaria through the excellence program QCCC.
366:
367: %
368: \begin{figure*}[bt]
369: \begin{center}\includegraphics{Measurement01.eps}\end{center}
370:
371:
372: \caption{\label{cap:measurement01}Tomographic dataset of the prepared atomic
373: states for $\alpha=90°,\ \phi=0...330°$. The figures show the probability
374: p to find the atom in the state $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}$
375: (left), $\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{x}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}-\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z})$
376: (middle) and $\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{y}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|\uparrow\right\rangle _{z}+i\left|\downarrow\right\rangle _{z})$
377: (right), respectively, after a photon detection in detector 1 (red,
378: filled) and 2 (blue, hollow) (upper row), 3 (green, filled) and 4
379: (magenta, hollow) (lower row). Each data-point is evaluated from 150-350
380: measurement processes from which we calculate the depicted statistical
381: errors (one standard deviation). The mean fidelity of the 12 states
382: prepared in this measurement is $82.6\%$. The acquisition of the
383: full dataset was realized within approximately three days at an event
384: rate of 10-20 per minute.}
385: \end{figure*}
386:
387:
388: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
389: \bibitem{Teleportations93-04}C. H. Bennett et al. \emph{}Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{70}, 1895 (1993);
390: D. Bouwmeester et al. \emph{}Nature \textbf{390}, 575 (1997); I. Marcikic
391: et al. \emph{}Nature \textbf{421}, 509 (2003); M. Riebe et al. \emph{}Nature
392: \textbf{429}, 734 (2004); M. D. Barrett et al. \emph{}Nature \textbf{429},
393: 737 (2004).
394: \bibitem{Gisin02}N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, H. Zbinden. Reviews of modern Physics
395: \textbf{74}, 145 (2002).
396: \bibitem{Briegel98}H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J.I. Cirac, P. Zoller. Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{81},
397: 5932 (1998).
398: \bibitem{Matsukevich04}D. Matsukevich, A. Kuzmich. Science \textbf{306}, 663 (2004).
399: \bibitem{Polzik04}B. Julsgaard et al. \emph{}Nature \textbf{432}, 482 (2004).
400: \bibitem{Polzik06}J. Sherson et al. quant-ph/0605095.
401: \bibitem{Blinov04}B.B. Blinov, D.L. Moehring, L.M. Duan, C. Monroe. Nature \textbf{428},
402: 153 (2004).
403: \bibitem{Volz06}J. Volz et al. \emph{}Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{96}, 030404 (2006).
404: \bibitem{Blatt05}H. Häffner et al. \emph{}Nature \textbf{438}, 643 (2005).
405: \bibitem{Wineland05}D. Leibfried et al. Nature \textbf{438}, 639 (2005).
406: \bibitem{Mandel03}O. Mandel et al. Nature \textbf{425}, 937 (2003).
407: \bibitem{Meschede06}Y. Miroshnychenko et al\emph{.} Nature \emph{}\textbf{442}, 151 (2006).
408: \bibitem{Sham03}X. Li et al. Science \textbf{301}, 809 (2003).
409: \bibitem{Imamoglu05}A. Badolato et al. Science \textbf{308}, 1158 (2005).
410: \bibitem{Lukin06}L. Childress et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{96}, 070504 (2006).
411: \bibitem{Schoelkopf04}A. Wallraff et al. Nature \textbf{431}, 162 (2004).
412: \bibitem{Popescu95}S. Popescu. quant-ph 9501020 (1995).
413: \bibitem{DeMartini98}D. Boschi et al. \emph{}Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{80}, 1121 (1998).
414: \bibitem{Kwiat05}N. Peters. et al. \emph{}Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{94}, 150502 (2005).
415: \bibitem{Lvovsky04}S.A. Babichev, B. Brezger, A.I. Lvovsky. Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{92},
416: 047903 (2004).
417: \bibitem{Gao03}X. Peng et. al. \emph{}Phys. Lett. A \textbf{306}, 271 (2003).
418: \bibitem{Michler00}M. Michler. PhD-thesis, University of Vienna (2000).
419: \bibitem{Weber06}M. Weber, J. Volz, K. Saucke, C. Kurtsiefer, H. Weinfurter. Phys.
420: Rev. A \textbf{73}, 043406 (2006).
421: \bibitem{Cline94}R.A. Cline, J.D. Miller, M.R. Matthews, D.J. Heinzen. Opt. Lett. \textbf{19},
422: 207 (1994).
423: \end{thebibliography}
424:
425: \end{document}
426: