
==== Front
Light Sci Appl
Light Sci Appl
Light, Science & Applications
2095-5545
2047-7538
Nature Publishing Group UK London

39237496
1591
10.1038/s41377-024-01591-2
Article
Thresholdless coherence in a superradiant laser
Oh Seung-Hoon 1
Kim Jinuk 2
Ha Junseo 1
Son Gibeom 1
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4142-6297
An Kyungwon kwan@phya.snu.ac.kr

1
1 https://ror.org/04h9pn542 grid.31501.36 0000 0004 0470 5905 Department of Physics and Astronomy & Institute of Applied Physics, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
2 https://ror.org/01az7b475 grid.410883.6 0000 0001 2301 0664 Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Daejeon, Korea
5 9 2024
5 9 2024
2024
13 23918 3 2024
14 8 2024
19 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Lasing threshold in the conventional lasers is the minimum input power required to initiate laser oscillation. It has been widely accepted that the conventional laser threshold occurring around a unity intracavity photon number can be eliminated in the input-output curve by making the so-called β parameter approach unity. The recent experiments, however, have revealed that even in this case the photon statistics still undergo a transition from coherent to thermal statistics when the intracavity mean photon number is decreased below unity. Since the coherent output is only available above the diminished threshold, the long-sought promise of thresholdless lasers to produce always coherent light has become questionable. Here, we present an always-coherent thresholdless laser based on superradiance by two-level atoms in a quantum superposition state with the same phase traversing a high-Q cavity. Superradiant lasing was observed without the conventional lasing threshold around the unity photon number and the photon statistics remained near coherent even below it. The coherence was improved by reducing the coupling constant as well as the excited-state amplitude in the superposition state. Our results pave a way toward always-coherent thresholdless lasers with more practical media such as quantum dots, nitrogen-vacancy centers and doped ions in crystals.

Coherent photon statistics is demonstrated regardless of the mean photon number in a high-Q thresholdless superradiant laser by phase-aligned two-level atoms.

Subject terms

Quantum optics
Lasers, LEDs and light sources
https://doi.org/10.13039/501100003725 National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) 2020R1A2C3009299 2020R1A2C3009299 Oh Seung-Hoon An Kyungwon issue-copyright-statement© Changchun Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics and Physics (CIOMP), CAS 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

The conventional laser necessitates a specific amount of input power, known as the lasing threshold1–3, in order to initiate laser oscillation. In quantum optics, the lasing threshold is regarded as a transition point where the intracavity mean photon number reaches an order of unity so as to make the stimulated emission process become stronger than that of spontaneous emission beyond the threshold4. The transition from a non-lasing state to a lasing one also shares similarities with the second-order phase transition observed in condensed matter systems5–7. The existence of a lasing threshold is often attributed to the energy loss to non-lasing modes. Numerous efforts have been made to minimize such loss and preserve energy. In the previous theoretical studies, it has been suggested to increase the energy transfer efficiency to a specific lasing mode from total emission, in order to realize threshold-free or thresholdless lasers. This efficiency is often formulated by the so-called β parameter8–10. Lowering the lasing threshold has been demonstrated by reducing the cavity mode volume down to or even below the wavelength scale, thereby greatly enhancing the Purcell effect11–15. Micro- and nanoscale-cavities have been demonstrated to exhibit β approaching unity by reducing the number of cavity modes coupled to the gain medium16,17.

However, it has recently been pointed out that high β alone does not guarantee the coherency of the output field for small intracavity mean photon numbers18–20. The recent experiments have reported thermal photon statistics below the conventional threshold although they observed a smooth output-vs.-input curve in the log-log scale without exhibiting any abrupt change near the threshold. This observation strongly suggests that the conventional threshold may persist as a phase transition point in the photon statistics even when the input-output curve does not indicate the existence of the threshold.

It is noteworthy that the semiclassical theory employing the Fokker-Planck equation for the interaction between coherently pumped atoms and a cavity field predicts that these atoms emit coherent photons for any input power levels21,22. In the so-called superradiant laser, a strong output could be generated with the mean photon number much less than unity in the bad cavity limit due to superradiance when a large number of trapped atoms in the cavity were pumped repeatedly in pulses23–26. Recently, the continuous-wave single-atom superradiance by utilizing the phase correlation among N coherently prepared atoms traversing a high-Q cavity one by one has been achieved by employing a phase mask called a nanohole array, exhibiting N2 scaling in the mean photon number27.

In this paper, we report a thresholdless superradiant laser producing coherent light regardless of the intracavity mean photon numbers. In our experiments, we investigated the threshold behavior and the photon statistics of a superradiant laser in the setting of the single-atom superradiance. The conventional lasing threshold associated with the β parameter did not exist in the output-vs.-input curve when phase-correlated atoms (i.e., atoms prepared in a coherent superposition state) were used as a gain medium. We measured the second-order correlation of the output field in a Hanbury-Brown-Twiss configuration28 for various intracavity mean photon numbers selected between 0.1 and 10, with the range well enclosing the expected location of the conventional lasing threshold. We observed the coherent photon statistics persist even when the mean photon number was much less than unity. The coherence of the output was improved by reducing the excited-state population in the atomic superposition state and also by decreasing the atom-field coupling constant g. Our results, with a large dynamic range of superradiant lasing achievable by choosing small β parameter, suggest a possible way to achieve always-coherent thresholdless superradiant lasing with a practical medium such as semiconductor quantum dots29, nitrogen-vacancy centers30,31 and doped ions in crystals32.

Results

The conventional superradiance requires a large number of excited atoms in a confined volume in order to be initiated33,34. Recently, superradiance has been realized even when a high-Q cavity contains fewer atoms than one on average27. A phase mask for atoms, called a nanohole array35, was used to enforce phase correlation among atoms in the superposition state pumping as well as in their transit through the cavity during the interaction time τ. As a result, the atoms are initially prepared in a superradiant state described by271 Ψa=∏i=1N[cos(Θ/2)∣g⟩i+eiϕ0sin(Θ/2)∣e⟩i]

where N is the number of atoms interacting with the cavity, i denotes the atom index, g(e) denotes the ground(excited) state of the atom, ϕ0 is the common relative phase shared by all atoms and Θ is the pump pulse area or π − Θ is the azimuthal angle in the N-atom Bloch sphere. The superradiant state given by Eq. (1) can undergo superradiance immediately without the usual time delay accompanied in the conventional superradiance. In addition, the cavity helps to preserve the phase correlations among successive atoms during the cavity-field decay time 1/γc. As a result one atom on average in the cavity (N®=1) corresponds to Nc=N®/(γcτ)≫1 atoms interacting with the cavity mode effectively with γcτ≪1, so superradiance can still occur with N®<1.

The average mean photon number ⟨n⟩ and the photon statistics inside the cavity in the steady state can be obtained by solving the quantum master equation with the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian extended to multiple atoms as shown in Supplementary Note 1. The result is2 ⟨n⟩=γcΓc′ρee(gτ)2Nc+2γcΓc′∣ρeg∣gτNc2

where Γc′=2γc1+12−ρeegτ2Nc is the modified photon decay rate due to the atom-field interaction, g is the atom-cavity coupling constant, ρee=sin2(Θ/2) is the atomic-density-matrix diagonal element corresponding to the excited-state population, and |ρeg|=sin(Θ/2)cos(Θ/2) is the atomic-density matrix off-diagonal element corresponding to the atomic coherence. The first term, originating from the atomic population, corresponds to the non-collective emission. Below the conventional lasing threshold, it equals the number of thermal photon, nth, in the cavity. On the other hand, the second term occurs only when the atomic phase correlation exists. The quadratic dependency on the atom number Nc indicates it corresponds to superradiance with the mean photon number denoted as nsr. Its photon number distribution is given by a Poisson distribution Psrn∝α2nn!, corresponding to a coherent state ∣α⟩ with α=−i2γc/Γc′Nc(gτ)ρeg27 (see Supplementary Note 1 for derivation).

The present superradiant lasing in a high-Q cavity does not exhibit the conventional threshold. This can be understood as follows. When Nc≪1, each atom undergoes spontaneous emission independently, and only a small fraction corresponding to β≈gτ2 is captured by the cavity. On the other hand, when Nc≫1, individual atoms are phase correlated with each other due to the enforced phase matching condition by the nanohole array. The emission from atoms can constructively interfere in the direction of the cavity mode, resulting in the superradiance. As Nc is increased beyond unity, because of Nc2 scaling of the superradiance, the ratio of the collective- to the non-collective emission monotonically increases as Nc. As a result, there exists no additional transition like the conventional threshold once superradiance starts around Nc=1.

In the experiment, gτ≪1 is satisfied, corresponding to the Markovian regime. Under this condition, we have Γc′≃2γc, and thus at the superradiance threshold Nc=1, n≃gτ2sin2Θ212+cos2Θ2~gτ2≪1. Therefore, one can choose the value of gτ as small as possible in order to lower the smallest mean photon number the superradiance can generate. Consequently, reducing gτ has an advantage of observing the more coherent field for a target mean photon number.

Note that the Nc2-growth of the mean photon number is eventually saturated due to the coherent Rabi oscillation. In the semiclassical limit of ⟨n⟩≫1, starting from the initial azimuthal angle (π−Θ) in the N-atom Bloch sphere, the state vector rotation angle ngτ larger than Θ would result in reabsorption of the emitted photons or saturation. In the limit of (gτ)≪1≪⟨n⟩, we have n≃nsr=14sinΘgτNc2, so in order to avoid the saturation, Nc should be kept smaller than Nc,satΘ=2Θ∕sinΘgτ−2, and at Nc=Nc,sat we have nsat=Θ/gτ2∼gτ−2.

Since the dynamic range of the mean number of photons generated by superradiance spans from gτ2 to gτ−2, it is again preferable to have gτ values as small as possible. In the experiment to be discussed below, the dynamic range of the mean photon number covers about 4 orders of magnitude from about 0.01 to 100 (with ρee=0.50) and in this range coherent output is expected because of the superradiance.

In order to verify the absence of the conventional threshold in the present superradiant lasing, we first measured the output power as a function of the input power. The former is represented by the mean photon number ⟨n⟩ in the cavity and the latter is formulated in terms of the mean number Nc of atoms injected into the cavity during the cavity field decay time γc−1. The result is summarized in Fig. 1. Three different superposition states were tried with ρee=0.10, 0.36 and 0.50 with 0.01 uncertainty for each. For all, we observe no slope change around n=1 (horizontal dotted line), at which the conventional lasing threshold is expected if the present lasing were of ordinary one. Slope fits in the region 0.1<n<10 are 1.78 ± 0.13, 1.84 ± 0.05, and 1.93 ± 0.06, respectively, all approaching 2, and thus signifying superradiant lasing (SL).Fig. 1 The input-output curve of the superradiant lasing.

The intracavity mean photon number ⟨n⟩ proportional to the output power is plotted as a function of Nc proportional to the input power for three different phase-correlated atomic superposition states represented in the excited state population ρee=0.10(Θ=0.64, black squares), 0.36 (Θ=1.29, magenta circles) and 0.50 (Θ=1.58, blue triangle). The slope fits (not shown) in the log-log scale are 1.78±0.13(black), 1.84±0.05(magenta), and 1.93±0.06(blue), respectively. The superradiant threshold appears at Nc=1, well below which (shaded region) spontaneous emission dominates and thus all three curves converge to a unity-slope curve when plotted as a function of ρeeNc as shown in the inset. The solid curves are the solutions of the master equation describing the system. The input-output curve for ρee=0.87 (olive-colored diamonds and its associated theoretical curve shown as a solid olive-colored curve) corresponds to the conventional lasing (see the main text for more information) with a conventional threshold around unity photon number. The error bars indicate standard deviations from repeated measurements

Similar data exhibiting no slope change around unity photon number was previously obtained in the single-atom superradiance experiment27. The present data re-establish the absence of the conventional threshold in the superradiant lasing and set the stage for the photon statistics study to be presented below.

As discussed in the preceding section, the superradiant lasing occurs in a region specified by 1<Nc<Nc,sat=2Θ/sinΘgτ−2. The predicted values Nc,sat for the three cases in Fig. 1 are 84, 105, 123 for ρee=0.10,0.36 and 0.50, respectively, and the range of the corresponding mean photon numbers in the superradiant lasing are 0.0035∼16,0.011∼65,0.013∼98, respectively. These predicted values are in a fair agreement with the observation in Fig. 1.

The input-output curves are replotted in the inset of Fig. 1 as a function of ρeeNc, parameterizing the excited-state contribution in Nc. Well below the superradiance threshold Nc=1, the atomic emission is characterized by spontaneous emission, which is proportional to the excited state population. Therefore, all three curves should converge to a common line of slope of unity, which is confirmed in the inset. We also plot the case of ρee=0.87±0.01 (green diamonds), for which atoms are prepared without phase correlation (see Methods), leading to an ordinary lasing (OL) with a clear lasing threshold indicated by an abrupt change in the slope in the log-log plot. We note the center of lasing threshold around Nc~30 with ⟨n⟩~2, confirming our expectation of the conventional threshold to appear around unity photon number. This is a clear contrast to the absence of such a threshold in the superradiant lasing.

Next, in order to verify the coherent photon statistics over the range of the mean photon numbers corresponding to the superradiant lasing, we measured the second-order correlation g(2)(t) of the output photons employing the Hanbury-Brown-Twiss method (see Methods for experimental details). The results are summarized in Fig. 2.Fig. 2 The second-order correlation g(2)(t) of the superradiant lasing.

a Evolution of g(2)(t) of the ordinary lasing (OL) employing excited atoms with ρee=0.87(Θ=2.63) without atomic phase correlation for various ⟨n⟩ values sampled between 0.1 and 10. b The same for the superradiant lasing (SL) using the superposition state with ρee=0.10 (Θ=0.64). c Comparison of the two cases with Θ=π (OL, in olive-colored circles) and Θ=0.64 (SL, in black circles) for the same mean photon number n=1.0, near the conventional threshold of the ordinary lasing. d The second-order correlation at zero time delay, g(2)(0), as a function of the intracavity mean photon number ⟨n⟩ for ρee=0.87 (OL) and ρee=0.10,0.36,0.50 (SL), respectively. The solid curves in (a–c) are fits given by Eq. (S21) in Supplementary Note 1. In (d), solid(dotted) curves are polynomial fits of the quantum trajectory simulation results including(excluding) the effect of background counts. The error bars indicate standard deviations from repeated measurements

Firstly, the second-order correlation shown in Fig. 2a is the one obtained with ρee=0.87 without using the nanohole array as a comparison set. In this case, an ordinary lasing takes place. Around the unity photon number, we note photon statistics undergoes a transition from coherence (for ⟨n⟩≫1) to thermal statistics (for ⟨n⟩≪1). This transition is more clearly seen in Fig. 2d plotting the second-order correlation at zero delay time, g(2)(0).

Figure 2b summarizes the evolution of g(2)(t) for superradiant lasing with ρee=0.10(Θ=0.64) as the mean photon number changes from 0.1 to 10. The evolution of the second-order correlation at zero delay time g(2)(0) is presented in Fig. 2d for three different ρee values, 0.10, 0.36, and 0.50. Across the board, g(2)(0) remains close to unity, indicating the photon statistics are close to those of coherent light and particularly there is no abrupt change of g(2)(0) around unity photon number, in striking contrast to the case of ordinary lasing. As ⟨n⟩ is decreased, the deviation of g(2)(0) from 1 gradually grows although the deviation is much less than 1. This gradual increase is due to the contribution from non-collective emission of thermal photon statistics, corresponding to the first term in Eq. (2). We can note that the value of [g20−1] is reduced as ρee is decreased because of the reduction of spontaneous emission. For ρee=0.10, even in the region of thermal photon statistics for the case of OL such as n~0.1, we have g20≃1.1, remaining quite coherent. The correlation time of g2t for the superradiant lasing in Fig. 2b, c is given by 1Γc′=12γc[1+0.5cosΘ(gτ)2Nc]−1≈12γc. The correlation time for the ordinary lasing in Fig. 2c is larger than 12γc due to the increased fluctuation near the conventional threshold36.

Discussion

The increase of g20−1 as n is decreased as shown in Fig. 2 can be quantified by introducing a measure M of the dominance of collective contribution as M=nsr/nth=4γcΓc′ρggNc. One can show (see Supplementary Note 1)3 g20−1=1+2M(1+M)2

which monotonically decreases from 1 to 0 as M is increased: for M≪1 we get g20≈2 whereas for M≫1 we obtain g20≈1. For a given choice of ρee (= 1−ρgg), as we reduce Nc, 〈n〉 as well as M are decreased to make g20 go up as in Fig. 2d.

We are interested in the photon statistics when n≃1, around which the conventional threshold takes place for OL, exhibiting thermal photon statistics. Figure 3a shows the observed g20 for superradiant lasing as a function of ρee under the condition n=1. For different ρee, Nc is adjusted to keep the mean photon number at unity.Fig. 3 Population and gτ dependence of the second-order correlation near the conventional threshold.

a The second-order correlation g(2)(0) at zero delay time as a function of the excited-state population ρee in the composition of the phase-correlated superposition state. The atom number Nc is adjusted to keep the mean photon number ⟨n⟩≃1 around the conventional lasing threshold. Two different nanohole arrays were employed. b The same, but ρee is fixed at 0.10 or 0.50 and gτ is varied from 0.065 to 0.16 while keeping the mean number of photons close to 1. The actual mean photon numbers vary between 0.92 and 1.08 among the data points in (a) and between 0.88 and 1.03 for ρee=0.1 and between 0.90 and 1.12 for ρee=0.5 in (b). The quantum trajectory simulation (QTS) results with the actual mean photon numbers are shown as open symbols for individual data points. The shades indicate the bounds set by the QTS results. The solid curves in (a, b) represent the QTS results for exactly n=1 for guidance. The error bars indicate standard deviations from repeated measurements. The mechanical vibrations and thermal drift of the nanohole array as well as the oven temperature change during the measurement time contribute mostly to the variances associated with the vertical and horizontal error bars. The large error bars for small gτ is due to limited measurement time because of clogging the nanoholes at high atomic beam flux to produce the same mean photon number (see “Methods” section for details)

Under the present experimental conditions, n=1 occurs with Nc≫1, so the superradiance dominates in Eq. (2). With the mean photon number fixed, ρegNc would remain constant (under the Markovian approximation, 2γc∕Γc′≈1). Since Nc∝|ρeg|−1=1/ρee(1−ρee), the parameter M varies as M∝ρee−1−1. As ρee is decreased, therefore, M gets larger and thus g20 becomes smaller.

In Fig. 3b, g20 is measured as a function of gτ for a fixed n value of unity. In experiments, τ determined by the velocity of atoms in a beam is fixed and g is varied by adjusting the vertical location [in y in Fig. 4b] of the nanohole array with respect to the cavity mode (along x) (see Methods for details). Note that the parameter M does not have explicit dependence on gτ. The dependence comes through Nc for keeping the mean photon number constant for different gτ values. Again, from Eq. (2), ∣ρeg∣gτNc= constant, and thus M∝1−ρeeNc∝1gτρee−1−1, which explains why g20−1 gets smaller as gτ is reduced. More intuitively, for smaller gτ, we need larger Nc to keep the same photon number and this makes M larger and thus g20−1 smaller.Fig. 4 Experimental setup.

a The experimental schematic for photon statistic measurement. 138Ba atoms in a beam go through a nanohole array with the hole spacing equal to the atomic transition wavelength and are exposed to a pump field (in y direction) to be excited to a superposition state with the same phase for all atoms. The nanoholes are aligned with the antinodes of a high-Q cavity resonant with the atom. The output from the cavity is fed to the Hanbury-Brown-Twiss arrangement made of a 50:50 beam-splitter (BS) and two single-photon counting modules (SPCMs). The second-order correlation of the output field is obtained from all possible pairs of counting events on two detectors recorded with a field programmable gate array (FPGA). b The scanning electron microscope image of the nanohole array used in the superradiant lasing experiment. Each rectangular hole measures 0.35λ×0.25λ

Our results in Figs. 1–3 indicate that it is better to make gτ as small as possible in order to extend the dynamic range, spanning from gτ2 to gτ−2, of superradiant lasing as much as possible. Moreover, it is advantageous to employ ρee as small as possible in the phase-correlated atomic superposition state given by Eq. (1) in order to make M as large as possible and thus to make g20−1 as small as possible, i.e., more coherent output. Smaller gτ, in addition to the advantage of larger dynamic range, also helps to make more coherent output for a given mean number of photons in the cavity.

In conclusion, we have investigated the photon statistics of a superradiant laser operating with two-level atoms prepared in the same superposition state traversing a high-Q cavity. Superradiance was observed when Nc, the number of atoms traversing the cavity during the cavity-field decay time, is larger than unity. Although the so-called β parameter was much less than unity, once the superradiance occurs with Nc>1, the mean intracavity photon number versus the mean intracavity atom number in the log-log plot did not exhibit the conventional lasing threshold, which is expected around a unity mean photon number. The photon statistics obtained from the measured second-order correlation function remained close to coherent statistics, not exhibiting any threshold behavior across the unity photon number. It was in contrast to the clear transition between thermal and coherent photon statistics observed in the ordinary lasing performed in the same setup with population inversion only. The coherence of the output was improved by reducing the excited-state population in the atomic superposition state and also by decreasing the atom-field coupling constant g. The dynamic range of superradiant lasing spanned four orders of magnitude in the intracavity mean photon number. Our result suggests a possible route to take for realizing always-coherent thresholdless lasers independent of the intracavity photon number based on practical gain media such as quantum dots, nitrogen-vacancy centers, and doped ions in crystals.

Materials and methods

The schematic of our experimental setup is shown in Fig. 4a. 138Ba atoms in a beam traverse a high-Q Fabry-Perot cavity in the z direction. We utilize 1S0 and 3P1 levels as two levels interacting with the cavity resonance. The atoms in the ground state go through a nanohole array in Fig. 4b with hole spacing in both x and y directions matched with the transition wavelength of the 1S0 ↔ 3P1 transition (λ=791nm) before they are excited to a superposition state by a traveling-wave pump laser field propagating in the y direction. The nanoholes are aligned with the antinodes of the TEM00 mode of the cavity. As a result, the atoms are excited to the superposition state as in Eq. (1) with a common relative phase ϕ0 for all atoms. The pump intensity is adjusted to achieve a desired pulse area Θ. For the superradiant lasing experiment, the strong coupling condition is satisfied with (ḡ,γa,γc)/2π=(256,25,119)kHz, where ḡ represents the atom-cavity coupling spatially averaged over individual nanoholes and γa(γc) corresponds to the atomic (cavity) decay rate (both half widths).

For the ordinary lasing experiment, the nanohole array was replaced with a rectangular aperture (250 µm × 25 µm) and the atomic beam was tilted by 0.22 mrad in order to achieve the traveling-wave atom-cavity interaction36. Atoms were fully excited with the pump pulse area Θ close to π. The actual excited state population was ρee=0.87±0.01 because of the finite width Δv≃0.24v0 of the velocity distribution of the atomic beam with the mean velocity v0≃820ms−1. In this case, the atoms underwent non-collective emission in the cavity. The strong coupling condition was also satisfied with a reduced coupling constant ḡ′/2π=190kHz due to the traveling-wave interaction. Both experiments (SL, OL) were done in the Markovian regime (gτ≪1) with short interaction time τ≃0.10μs.

The photon statistics were obtained by measuring the second-order correlation of the output employing the Hanbury-Brown-Twiss arrangement composed of a 50:50 beam-splitter and two photon-counting detectors as shown in Fig. 4. These detectors, denoted as single-photon counting module had 60% quantum efficiency and low dark counts, the rate of which was less than 500 counts per second (cps). The background counts were about 8×103cps due to the scatter of the cavity locking laser beam and the thermal radiation from the atomic beam oven. The counting rate of the lasing output associated with one intracavity photon on average was about 1.0×105cps in comparison. The arrival times of photons on each detector were recorded with a field-programmable gate array and the second-order correlation was calculated in real time from all possible parings of the recorded count events36. The unit time or time bin for constructing the second-order correlation function was 6.3 ns.

The nanohole array aperture is prone to hole clogging due to barium atoms sticking around the holes at high atomic beam flux. For the data taken with gτ<0.08 in Fig. 3b, we had to use high atomic beam flux in order to keep the intracavity mean photon fixed number around unity. To avoid the hole clogging problem, the measurement time was set at 3 min, during which the total number of photon counting events was about 1/4 of those for other data points with gτ>0.1, thus resulting in a relatively low signal-to-noise ratio.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information for “Thresholdless coherence in a superradiant laser”

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41377-024-01591-2.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Korea Research Foundation(Grant No. 2020R1A2C3009299).

Author contributions

K.A. conceived the experiment. S.O. performed the experiment. S.O. and J.K. performed theoretical analysis. S.O. and K.A. wrote the manuscript. All authors participated in discussions.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.
==== Refs
References

1. Scully MO Lamb WE Jr. Quantum theory of an optical maser. I. General theory Phys. Rev. 1967 159 208 226 10.1103/PhysRev.159.208
Scully, M. O. & Lamb, W. E. Jr. Quantum theory of an optical maser. I. General theory. Phys. Rev. 159, 208–226 (1967).10.1103/PhysRev.159.208
2. Yamamoto Y Machida S Björk G Microcavity semiconductor laser with enhanced spontaneous emission Phys. Rev. A 1991 44 657 668 10.1103/PhysRevA.44.657 9905716
Yamamoto, Y., Machida, S. & Björk, G. Microcavity semiconductor laser with enhanced spontaneous emission. Phys. Rev. A 44, 657–668 (1991).9905716 10.1103/PhysRevA.44.657
3. Ning CZ What is laser threshold? IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant. Electron. 2013 19 1503604 10.1109/JSTQE.2013.2259222
Ning, C. Z. What is laser threshold? IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant. Electron. 19, 1503604 (2013).10.1109/JSTQE.2013.2259222
4. Björk G Karlsson A Yamamoto Y Definition of a laser threshold Phys. Rev. A 1994 50 1675 1680 10.1103/PhysRevA.50.1675 9911059
Björk, G., Karlsson, A. & Yamamoto, Y. Definition of a laser threshold. Phys. Rev. A 50, 1675–1680 (1994).9911059 10.1103/PhysRevA.50.1675
5. DeGiorgio V Scully MO Analogy between the laser threshold region and a second-order phase transition Phys. Rev. A 1970 2 1170 1177 10.1103/PhysRevA.2.1170
DeGiorgio, V. & Scully, M. O. Analogy between the laser threshold region and a second-order phase transition. Phys. Rev. A 2, 1170–1177 (1970).10.1103/PhysRevA.2.1170
6. Haken H Cooperative phenomena in systems far from thermal equilibrium and in nonphysical systems Rev. Mod. Phys. 1975 47 67 121 10.1103/RevModPhys.47.67
Haken, H. Cooperative phenomena in systems far from thermal equilibrium and in nonphysical systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 67–121 (1975).10.1103/RevModPhys.47.67
7. De Martini F Thresholdless microlaser Phys. Rev. A 1992 46 4220 4233 10.1103/PhysRevA.46.4220 9908623
De Martini, F. et al. Thresholdless microlaser. Phys. Rev. A 46, 4220–4233 (1992).9908623 10.1103/PhysRevA.46.4220
8. Yokoyama H Brorson SD Rate equation analysis of microcavity lasers J. Appl. Phys. 1989 66 4801 4805 10.1063/1.343793
Yokoyama, H. & Brorson, S. D. Rate equation analysis of microcavity lasers. J. Appl. Phys. 66, 4801–4805 (1989).10.1063/1.343793
9. Protsenko I Quantum theory of a thresholdless laser Phys. Rev. A 1999 59 1667 1682 10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1667
Protsenko, I. et al. Quantum theory of a thresholdless laser. Phys. Rev. A 59, 1667–1682 (1999).10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1667
10. Khurgin JB Noginov MA How do the Purcell factor, the Q-factor, and the beta factor affect the laser threshold? Laser Photon. Rev. 2021 15 2000250 10.1002/lpor.202000250
Khurgin, J. B. & Noginov, M. A. How do the Purcell factor, the Q-factor, and the beta factor affect the laser threshold? Laser Photon. Rev. 15, 2000250 (2021).10.1002/lpor.202000250
11. De Martini F Jacobovitz GR Anomalous spontaneous–stimulated-decay phase transition and zero-threshold laser action in a microscopic cavity Phys. Rev. Lett. 1988 60 1711 1714 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1711 10038120
De Martini, F. & Jacobovitz, G. R. Anomalous spontaneous–stimulated-decay phase transition and zero-threshold laser action in a microscopic cavity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1711–1714 (1988).10038120 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1711
12. Khajavikhan M Thresholdless nanoscale coaxial lasers Nature 2012 482 204 207 10.1038/nature10840 22318604
Khajavikhan, M. et al. Thresholdless nanoscale coaxial lasers. Nature 482, 204–207 (2012).22318604 10.1038/nature10840
13. Prieto I Near thresholdless laser operation at room temperature Optica 2015 2 66 69 10.1364/OPTICA.2.000066
Prieto, I. et al. Near thresholdless laser operation at room temperature. Optica 2, 66–69 (2015).10.1364/OPTICA.2.000066
14. Ota Y Thresholdless quantum dot nanolaser Opt. Express 2017 25 19981 19994 10.1364/OE.25.019981 29041684
Ota, Y. et al. Thresholdless quantum dot nanolaser. Opt. Express 25, 19981–19994 (2017).29041684 10.1364/OE.25.019981
15. Jagsch ST A quantum optical study of thresholdless lasing features in high-β nitride nanobeam cavities Nat. Commun. 2018 9 564 10.1038/s41467-018-02999-2 29422492
Jagsch, S. T. et al. A quantum optical study of thresholdless lasing features in high-β nitride nanobeam cavities. Nat. Commun. 9, 564 (2018).29422492 10.1038/s41467-018-02999-2
16. Chow WW Jahnke F Gies C Emission properties of nanolasers during the transition to lasing Light Sci. Appl. 2014 3 e201 10.1038/lsa.2014.82
Chow, W. W., Jahnke, F. & Gies, C. Emission properties of nanolasers during the transition to lasing. Light Sci. Appl. 3, e201 (2014).10.1038/lsa.2014.82
17. Azzam SI Ten years of spasers and plasmonic nanolasers Light Sci. Appl. 2020 9 90 10.1038/s41377-020-0319-7 32509297
Azzam, S. I. et al. Ten years of spasers and plasmonic nanolasers. Light Sci. Appl. 9, 90 (2020).32509297 10.1038/s41377-020-0319-7
18. Kreinberg S Emission from quantum-dot high-β microcavities: transition from spontaneous emission to lasing and the effects of superradiant emitter coupling Light Sci. Appl. 2017 6 e17030 10.1038/lsa.2017.30 30167281
Kreinberg, S. et al. Emission from quantum-dot high-β microcavities: transition from spontaneous emission to lasing and the effects of superradiant emitter coupling. Light Sci. Appl. 6, e17030 (2017).30167281 10.1038/lsa.2017.30
19. Kreinberg S Thresholdless transition to coherent emission at telecom wavelengths from coaxial nanolasers with excitation power dependent β-factors Laser Photon. Rev. 2020 14 2000065 10.1002/lpor.202000065
Kreinberg, S. et al. Thresholdless transition to coherent emission at telecom wavelengths from coaxial nanolasers with excitation power dependent β-factors. Laser Photon. Rev. 14, 2000065 (2020).10.1002/lpor.202000065
20. Carroll MA Thermal, quantum antibunching and lasing thresholds from single emitters to macroscopic devices Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021 126 063902 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.063902 33635683
Carroll, M. A. et al. Thermal, quantum antibunching and lasing thresholds from single emitters to macroscopic devices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 063902 (2021).33635683 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.063902
21. Lu N Bergou JA Quantum theory of a laser with injected atomic coherence: quantum noise quenching via nonlinear processes Phys. Rev. A 1989 40 237 249 10.1103/PhysRevA.40.237
Lu, N. & Bergou, J. A. Quantum theory of a laser with injected atomic coherence: quantum noise quenching via nonlinear processes. Phys. Rev. A 40, 237–249 (1989).10.1103/PhysRevA.40.237
22. Krause J Scully MO Walther H Quantum theory of the micromaser: symmetry breaking via off-diagonal atomic injection Phys. Rev. A 1986 34 2032 2037 10.1103/PhysRevA.34.2032
Krause, J., Scully, M. O. & Walther, H. Quantum theory of the micromaser: symmetry breaking via off-diagonal atomic injection. Phys. Rev. A 34, 2032–2037 (1986).10.1103/PhysRevA.34.2032
23. Bohnet JG A steady-state superradiant laser with less than one intracavity photon Nature 2012 484 78 81 10.1038/nature10920 22481360
Bohnet, J. G. et al. A steady-state superradiant laser with less than one intracavity photon. Nature 484, 78–81 (2012).22481360 10.1038/nature10920
24. Norcia MA Superradiance on the millihertz linewidth strontium clock transition Sci. Adv. 2016 2 e1601231 10.1126/sciadv.1601231 27757423
Norcia, M. A. et al. Superradiance on the millihertz linewidth strontium clock transition. Sci. Adv. 2, e1601231 (2016).27757423 10.1126/sciadv.1601231
25. Laske T Winter H Hemmerich A Pulse delay time statistics in a superradiant laser with calcium atoms Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019 123 103601 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.103601 31573286
Laske, T., Winter, H. & Hemmerich, A. Pulse delay time statistics in a superradiant laser with calcium atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 103601 (2019).31573286 10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.103601
26. Laguna Kristensen S Subnatural linewidth superradiant lasing with cold 88Sr atoms Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023 130 223402 10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.223402 37327424
Laguna Kristensen, S. et al. Subnatural linewidth superradiant lasing with cold 88Sr atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 223402 (2023).37327424 10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.223402
27. Kim J Coherent single-atom superradiance Science 2018 359 662 666 10.1126/science.aar2179 29269423
Kim, J. et al. Coherent single-atom superradiance. Science 359, 662–666 (2018).29269423 10.1126/science.aar2179
28. Brown RH Twiss RQ Correlation between photons in two coherent beams of light Nature 1956 177 27 29 10.1038/177027a0
Brown, R. H. & Twiss, R. Q. Correlation between photons in two coherent beams of light. Nature 177, 27–29 (1956).10.1038/177027a0
29. Scheibner M Superradiance of quantum dots Nat. Phys. 2007 3 106 110 10.1038/nphys494
Scheibner, M. et al. Superradiance of quantum dots. Nat. Phys. 3, 106–110 (2007).10.1038/nphys494
30. Bradac C Room-temperature spontaneous superradiance from single diamond nanocrystals Nat. Commun. 2017 8 1205 10.1038/s41467-017-01397-4 29089492
Bradac, C. et al. Room-temperature spontaneous superradiance from single diamond nanocrystals. Nat. Commun. 8, 1205 (2017).29089492 10.1038/s41467-017-01397-4
31. Angerer A Superradiant emission from colour centres in diamond Nat. Phys. 2018 14 1168 1172 10.1038/s41567-018-0269-7
Angerer, A. et al. Superradiant emission from colour centres in diamond. Nat. Phys. 14, 1168–1172 (2018).10.1038/s41567-018-0269-7
32. Zuikov VA Optical superradiance in a LaF3:Pr3+ crystal Laser Phys. 1999 9 951 954
Zuikov, V. A. et al. Optical superradiance in a LaF3:Pr3+ crystal. Laser Phys. 9, 951–954 (1999).
33. Dicke RH Coherence in spontaneous radiation processes Phys. Rev. 1954 93 99 110 10.1103/PhysRev.93.99
Dicke, R. H. Coherence in spontaneous radiation processes. Phys. Rev. 93, 99–110 (1954).10.1103/PhysRev.93.99
34. Skribanowitz N Observation of Dicke superradiance in optically pumped HF gas Phys. Rev. Lett. 1973 30 309 312 10.1103/PhysRevLett.30.309
Skribanowitz, N. et al. Observation of Dicke superradiance in optically pumped HF gas. Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 309–312 (1973).10.1103/PhysRevLett.30.309
35. Lee M Three-dimensional imaging of cavity vacuum with single atoms localized by a nanohole array Nat. Commun. 2014 5 3441 10.1038/ncomms4441 24603683
Lee, M. et al. Three-dimensional imaging of cavity vacuum with single atoms localized by a nanohole array. Nat. Commun. 5, 3441 (2014).24603683 10.1038/ncomms4441
36. Choi W Observation of sub-Poisson photon statistics in the cavity-QED microlaser Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006 96 093603 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.093603 16606264
Choi, W. et al. Observation of sub-Poisson photon statistics in the cavity-QED microlaser. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 093603 (2006).16606264 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.093603
