Silicon Mach-Zehnder Waveguide Interferometer on Silicon-on-Silicon (SOS) Substrate Incorporating the Integrated Three-Terminal Field-Effect Device as an Optical Signal Modulation Structure

Chuang, Ricky W.; Hsu, Mao Teng; Chou, Shen Horng; Lee, Yao Jen

doi:10.1587/transele.e94.c.1173

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This has motivated the exploration of alternative platforms for monocrystalline silicon photonics that avoid the use of the BOX layer, in order to maximize their transparency. It is noted that silicon-on-silicon [40,41] is in principle an alternative to SOI suitable for mid-IR applications. Indeed, doping silicon to create index contrast for vertical optical confinement is the original proposed silicon photonics platform predating SOI [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Silicon photonics beyond silicon-on-insulator

Chiles

Fathpour

2017

J. Opt.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The standard platform for silicon photonics has been ridge or channel waveguides fabricated on silicon-on-insulator (SOI) wafers. SOI waveguides are so versatile and the technology built around it is so mature and popular that silicon photonics is almost regarded as synonymous with SOI photonics. However, due to several shortcomings of SOI photonics, novel platforms have been recently emerging. The shortcomings could be categorized into two sets: (a) those due to using silicon as the waveguide core material; and (b) those due to using silicon dioxide as the bottom cladding layer. Several heterogeneous platforms have been developed to address the first set of shortcomings. In such important heterogeneous integrated photonic platforms, the top silicon layer of SOI is typically replaced by a thin film of another optical material with a refractive index higher than the buried oxide (BOX) bottom cladding layer. Silicon is still usually preferred as the substrate of choice, but silicon has no optical functionality. In contrast, the second category of solutions aim at using silicon as the core waveguide material, while resolving issues related to the BOX layer. Particularly, one of the main drawbacks of SOI is that the BOX layer induces high optical loss in the mid-wavelength infrared (mid-IR) range. Accordingly, a host of platforms have been proposed, and some have been demonstrated, in which the BOX is replaced with insulating materials that have low intrinsic loss in the mid-IR. Examples are sapphire, lithium niobate, silicon nitride and air (suspended Si membrane waveguides). Although silicon is still the preferred substrate, sometimes a thin film of silicon, on which the optical waveguide is formed, is directly placed on top of another substrate (e.g., sapphire or lithium niobate). These alternative substrates act as both mechanical support and the lower cladding layer. In addition to the demands of mid-IR photonics, the non-SOI platforms can potentially offer other advantages and flexibilities. Examples are different, and sometimes interesting, guided mode properties (e.g., single-mode and single-polarization behavior), enhanced dispersion engineering (wideband anomalous regimes), as well as ease of fabrication and higher thermal conductivity in some cases. The objective of this article is to review this category of non-SOI photonic platforms that use silicon as the waveguide core layer and discuss their challenges and opportunities.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%