arxiv: v2 [cond-mat.quant-gas] 9 May 2018

Transcription

1 Evolution of Temporal Coherence in Confined Exciton-Polariton Condensates arxiv: v2 [cond-mat.quant-gas] 9 May 2018 M. Klaas, 1 H. Flayac, 2 M. Amor, 1 I. G. Savenko, 3, 4 S. Brodbeck, 1 T. Ala-Nissila, 5, 6 S. Klembt, 1 C. Schneider, 1 and S. Höfling 1, 7 1 Technische Physik, Wilhelm-Conrad-Röntgen-Research Center for Complex Material Systems, Universität Würzburg, Am Hubland, D Würzburg, Germany 2 Institute of Theoretical Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland 3 Center for Theoretical Physics of Complex Systems, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), Daejeon 34051, Republic of Korea. 4 Institute of Semiconductor Physics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, , Russia 5 Department of Maematical Sciences and Department of Physics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK 6 COMP Centre of Excellence at e Department of Applied Physics, P.O. Box 11000, FI Aalto, Finland 7 SUPA, School of Physics and Astronomy, University of St Andrews, St Andrews KY16 9SS, United Kingdom We study e influence of spatial confinement on e second-order temporal coherence of e emission from a semiconductor microcavity in e strong coupling regime. The confinement, provided by etched micropillars, has a favorable impact on e temporal coherence of solid state quasicondensates at evolve in our device above reshold. By fitting e experimental data wi a microscopic quantum eory based on a quantum jump approach, we scrutinize e influence of pump power and confinement and find at phonon-mediated transitions are enhanced in e case of a confined structure, in which e modes split into a discrete set. By increasing e pump power beyond e condensation reshold, temporal coherence significantly improves in devices wi increased spatial confinement, as revealed in e transition from ermal to coherent statistics of e emitted light. PACS numbers: Ln,05.30.Jp,42.50.Ar, c Introduction. The temporal coherence of a source of radiation is a key quantity at distinguishes laserlike devices from ermal emitters. While e first-order coherence function g (1) (τ), which is e correlator of field amplitudes at different times, reflects e coherence of e emitted photons, its second-order counterpart g (2) (τ) involves intensity correlation and gives insights into emission statistics. In conventional semiconductor lasers, which rely on stimulated emission and population inversion, e emission statistics transits from ermal (below lasing reshold) to coherent as revealed by g (2) (τ = 0) = 2 and 1, respectively. An example of a light emitting device which may operate as a coherent light source wiout population inversion is a semiconductor microcavity in e strong light-matter coupling regime [1]. The strong coupling results in e emergence of hybrid eigenmodes called exciton-polaritons (later, polaritons) [2, 3]. Being lowmass bosons, ey can undergo a dynamic Bose Einstein condensation (BEC) process at elevated temperatures. Analogous to a conventional laser operating in e weak coupling regime (e.g. e vertical cavity surface emitting laser, VCSEL), e formation of a BEC of polaritons is accompanied by a nonlinear increase of emitted light intensity and a drop in spectral linewid [1]. The latter is a typical yet not unambiguous signature of first-order temporal coherence of e emitted radiation. A more sophisticated approach relying on Michelson interferometry was discussed in Ref. [4], where strongly enhanced coherence times in e regime of polariton lasing were demonstrated by using low-noise pump sources. Corresponding to cold atom BECs, first-order spatial coherence has been discussed as a key criterion for e claim of a polariton BEC [5 8]; however, e second-order coherence function, representing anoer important signature of coherent light, is less well understood. From a eoretical point of view, e second order correlation function of e polariton system has been analyzed for e case of weak [9 12] and strong [13] coherent resonant pumping. However, under non-resonant injection, one difficulty arises from e lack of an accurate eoretical quantum description of g (2) (τ) behavior in real conditions, such as finite temperatures. Indeed, common meods are based on stochastic Gross-Pitaevskii [14 16] equations or expectation value evolution [17] at rely on severe assumptions regarding high-order correlations such as coherence functions. Additionally, e g (2) (τ 0) dependence could not be addressed by semiclassical models. As a consequence of ese complications, reports on e second-order coherence function in polariton systems have not been fully conclusive, being raer phenomenological in combined experimental and eoretical works. A second difficulty is based on published experimental results where, in most cases, a surprisingly slow drop of g (2) (0) above reshold is commonly observed in twodimensional (2D) microcavities [18 20] wi a persisting value significantly above unity, us implying a strong deviation from Poissonian photon statistics. An increase in g (2) (0) wi increasing pump power has

2 2 (a) 3µm Intensity (a.u.) (b) (c) P 1.5 P k (װ μm-1) k (װ μm ) Energy (ev) Energy (ev) (d) (e) P 2P k (װ μm-1) k (װ μm-1) FIG. 1: (a) Scanning electron microscope image of a processed 6 µm micropillar under study. (b, c) Energy dispersion measured in photoluminescense (PL) for an 8 µm pillar below and above reshold, respectively. (d, e) Emission from e planar sample below and above reshold, respectively. The black dashed lines show e eoretical dispersion from a coupled oscillator model wi a detuning of -8/-7.8 mev for e micropillar/planar structure, and e white dashed parabolas and lines show e cavity mode and exciton, respectively. even been reported bo for GaAs- and CdTe-based samples [19, 23, 24]. It is reasonable to assume at ese peculiarities are e result of a large number of states in e continuous dispersion of polaritons confined in planar microcavities, which can contribute to e condensation phenomena and unavoidably lead to mode competition effects. Such effects furer convolute e coherence phenomena inherent to polariton condensation. Therefore ey are considered as anoer main obstacle towards a precise understanding of e evolution of second-order temporal coherence in solid state condensates beyond a phenomenological level. In is Letter, we present a combined experimental and eoretical study of e power dependance of e g (2) function in bo confined and planar strongly coupled microcavity structures. Spatial confinement has previously been used to enhance condensation processes in trap structures and micropillars [25 28]; in our case, spatial confinement in 6 to 12 µm diameter etched micropillars allows us to form polariton condensates for which g (2) (0) above reshold reaches a plateau wi values larger an unity. This g (2) (0) plateau value decreases wi tightened optical confinement, reflecting e enhancement of coherence in such structures. When confinement is sufficiently tight to support single-mode condensation, we observe a characterisitc drop of g (2) (0) towards unity wi increasing population [29, 34]. Interestingly, Ref. [4] reports a relatively low g (2) (0) value of 1.1 wi a CdTe sample, which can feature significant photonic potential disorder (potential dep of up to 1-2 mev [21]) and is erefore able to naturally trap e polariton condensate. Ref. [29] deals wi a sample design based on a hybrid photonic crystal grating to reach tight photonic confinement and is also able to observe a fully coherent state. However, e important role of is energy landscape engineering is neier adressed in a systematic way nor eoretically described in is work. Our results are supported by a stochastic quantum trajectory approach which provides insight into e interplay between state occupation, particle fluctuations, and photon coherence. In particular, we show at accounting for dissipative polariton-phonon interaction and polariton self-interactions in a fully quantum manner is sufficient to retrieve e (resolution limited) g (2) (0) behavior in confined structures, where a discrete dispersion assists e condensation. Experimental details. The sample under study is a high-q AlGaAs alloy-based λ/2 planar microcavity wi twelve GaAs quantum wells of 13 nm wid, each located in e optical antinodes of e confined electromagnetic field wi 23 (27) AlGaAs/AlAs mirror pairs in e top (bottom) distributed Bragg reflector. The Q-factor was experimentally estimated to exceed for highly photonic structures. To provide lateral confinement of e polariton modes, we fabricated micropillars wi nominal diameters of 6, 8, 10, and 12 µm. Electron cyclotron resonance-reactive ion etching was used for a deep etching of e cavity. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of a micropillar is shown in Fig. 1(a). We extracted e Rabi-splitting of e device via white light reflection and found a value of 10.1 mev for e heavy hole-based exciton [20]. The sample was pumped wi a pulsed Ti:Sa laser tuned to e first Bragg minimum of e stop band located at a waveleng of 749 nm. The pulse wid was 2 ps and e nominal resolution of e single-photon detectors was 40 ps, which can be used to extract e secondorder correlation function at zero time delay g (2) (0) [23, 30]. The finite leng of e emission pulse effectively acts as a time filter in is configuration [30], as only photons emitted from e reservoir wiin e relaxation time are correlated[31]. For excitation beam diameters smaller an e pillar wid, we gain high sensitivity of e output to e spatial position of e laser, leading to excitement of e desired optical modes [32]. However, using narrow beams breaks e homogeneity of e pumping scheme, where small pumping spots lead to a repulsive potential at drives e polaritons away from e center (i.e. out of e ground state) ereby causing condensation at high energies and k vectors [33]. To suppress is effect and ensure a homogeneous excitation of e sample, we expanded e beam diameter to 40 µm, a

3 3 (a) (b) (a) FIG. 2: (a) Normalized g (2) (0) measurement of e planar sample (red) and e 6µm pillar sample (black) taken at 7P, displaying e difference in e g (2) (0) value between e confined and 2D system. (b) Comparison between pillars of varying diameter and planar emission. For large pump powers, g (2) (0) reaches a plateau mainly determined by e pillar diameter and us e confinement of e system. value more an ree times larger an our largest pillar wid. Moreover, to furer improve excitation homogeneity, a closed optical aperture and lens were used for beamshaping. Experimental results and discussion. The optical confinement provided by e micropillar gives rise to a characteristic set of discrete optical modes in e lower polariton dispersion, as seen in Fig. 1(b). In contrast, for e case of e planar (unetched) structure, e dispersion has a continuous parabolic shape (Fig. 1(d)). Above a distinct reshold occuring at pump powers around 45 W/cm2 (P ), we observe e formation of polariton condensate in bo e planar and e structured samples (Figs. 1(c,e)) (see supplementary informations for details on e input output characteristics). The temporal second-order correlation function is given as g (2) (τ ) = hi(t + τ )I(t)i, hi(t)ihi(t + τ i (1) where I(t) is e emission intensity at time t, and h..i reads time averaging. For e photon statistics measurements, we use a Hanbury Brown and Twiss configuration wi two avalanche photodiodes for single photon counting [20, 23, 30]. The light emitted from e sample is filtered by a monochromator wi a nominal resolution of 0.2 mev. To avoid errors caused by interaction wi higher-energy states, special care has been taken to only measure e photons emitted around e energy of e ground state rough e use of a spectrometer. Figure 2(a) shows e g (2) (τ ) measurements for e planar sample and e smallest investigated pillar (6 µm). The difference in height of e τ = 0 peaks illustrates e difference in e g (2) (0) value at P = 7P. The data has been normalized to e average of e side peak emission. The increase of e central peak around τ = 0 at and above reshold can be attributed to an enhanced n > 2- (b) FIG. 3: (a) Experimental and (b) eoretical g (2) (0) dependence on pump power in e 6 µm micropillar device, wi (b) depicting a fully coherent emission state. photon emission probability, and indicates at a fully coherent state is not yet formed. To estimate e actual S, e integrated intensity of e value of g (2) (0) = N0 /N τ = 0 peak, defined as N0, is divided by e average S = Ns /n, where n is e intensity of e τ 6= 0 peaks, N number of side peaks and Ns is e integrated side peak intensity. Figure 2(b) shows g (2) (0) measurements as a function of pump power for e planar sample and different micropillar sizes. In e case of e 6 µm micropillar, above reshold e system reaches a nearly coherent state approaching g (2) (0) = 1, wi a value of g (2) (0) = 1.03 at approximately P = 5.5*P. For e larger micropillars and e planar structure, g (2) (0) is significantly increased at excitation powers above P = 4*P, and remains almost constant at a certain value which increases wi micropillar size until a maximum in e planar structure. The fact at e polariton system does not reach a fully coherent state of g (2) (0) = 1 is in qualitative agreement wi previous reports [19, 20, 23, 30], where e effect has been assigned to a reservoir depletion triggered by polariton self-scattering from e ground state into higher-energy states. Our simulations indicate at such behavior refers to multimode polariton lasing from e ground state and e existence of a finite set of emitting k-values, which lead to an increase in g (2) (0). Bo of ese effects should be suppressed in e pillar structures on account of e discrete mode spectrum resulting from optical confinement. In e case of e 6 µm device, e mode spacing from e ground state to e first excited state amounts to around 0.8 mev, which drastically reduces e condensate depletion effect at cryogenic temperatures [34]. This allows for e observation of a coherent state in e smallest micropillar device. Theoretical description. The coherent interactions are defined by e Hamiltonian X X ˆ= H E (kn ) a ˆ k a ˆk + Uk1 k2 p a ˆ k1 a ˆ k2 a ˆk1 +p a ˆk2 p, k k1,k2,p (2) where a ˆk are bosonic operators for e lower branch polaritons confined by e structure. The condensation oc-

4 4 curs in e lower polariton modes, erefore it is necessary to work directly wi bosonic polariton operators obtained after a Bogoliubov transformation from e exciton photon fields [22]. The mode energies E (k n ) are set by e dispersion relation 2E (k n) = E ph (k n) + E ex (k n) ± [E ph (k n) + E ex (k n)] 2 + Ω 2 R. (3) Wiin e cylindrical geometry imposed by e pillars, e discrete photonic and excitonic energy levels are respectively defined by E ph (k n) = δ + 2 kn/2m 2 ph and E ex (k n) = 2 kn/2m 2 ex. The cavity photon and exciton effective masses are m ph = 10 5 m 0 and m ex = 0.25m 0, respectively, in terms of e free electron mass m 0. k n is e n zero of e Bessel function J 0(k, R) for a trap of radius R, if we assume at e nonresonant pump does not inject angular momentum in e system. δ = 8 mev is e photonic detuning and Ω R = 10 mev is e Rabi splitting. Finally, e interaction term U k1 k 2 p accounts for e polariton-polariton elastic scattering which requires energy-momentum conservation. The incoherent processes are treated by means of quantum trajectories [35], detailed in Ref. [36], where stochastic quantum jumps are applied to randomly collapse e system wavefunction. This allows to account for e following: (i) Inelastic polariton interactions wi a ermal phonon ba of mean population n (T ) following a Bose Einstein distribution, and in particular e emission or absorbtion of phonons to relax or gain energy wi scattering rate γ ph k 1 k 2. (ii) The incoherent injection of polaritons wi rate P from e exciton reservoir. (iii) Polariton radiative decay at rate κ k = /τ k, where τ k is e characteristic lifetime (see [42]). In our simulations, we set an energy cutoff of E max = 4 mev above e bottom of e polariton dispersion and excite e nearest state wi e incoherent pump. By increasing e system diameter, we erefore sample e dispersion wi a growing number of states as imposed by Eq. (3). The duration of e pulses absorbed by e cavity is significantly enhanced due to e interaction wi e long-living exciton reservoir, which extends over several polariton lifetimes. Therefore, to reduce e computational cost required by a two-time analysis of e second-order correlations required by a pulsed excitation scheme, we assume e e system has time to reach its steady-state statistics along e pulse. To mimic e Hanbury Brown and Twiss setup, we en record e quantum jump events associated wi radiative decays and reconstruct e delayed correlations [37] g (2) k (τ) = â k (0) â k (τ) â k (τ) â k (0) â k (τ) â k (τ) â k (0) â k (0). (4) Then, e equal time correlations accounting for e finite temporal resolution of e detector T res are obtained as g (2) k,res (0) = T res 0 T res 0 G (2) k (τ) dτ n k (τ) n k (0) dτ, (5) where G (2) k (τ) is e numerator of Eq. 4 and n k(τ) = â kâk. Figure 3(a) displays e experimental results of g (2) (0) evolution in e 6 µm device. In Fig. 3(b), we show e eoretical results obtained for e ground state g (2) 0,res (0) function in e case of e 6 µm pillar at 5 K; in principal, we eoretically FIG. 4: Experimental and eoretical values of g (2) (0) exhibiting e continuous increase of temporal coherence wi increased system size for a comparable emitted groundstate intensity at pump powers far above reshold for all systems. reproduce e rise and fall of e correlation functions versus e pump power. In particular, e initial rise in e coherence function has not been previously modeled [38]. Such a feature emerges wiin our approach from e photon counting process. Indeed, below reshold, emission events are rare, making e system evolution quasi-unitary, and erefore e system essentially displays Poissonian statistics. This behavior cannot be reproduced by a master equation treatment at predicts a ermal g 2=2 value. The statistics en reveal a competition between coherence and ermalization at e peak until e condensation reshold is reached, and coherence is established. Figure 4 depicts e combined experimental and eoretical results of e g (2) (0) value far above condensation reshold for a comparable output intensity of e ground state for e series of micropillar devices and e 2D planar reference structure. We reveal a e dependence of temporal coherence on confinement by observing a significant drop in g (2) (0) wi system size. Furer, we were able to eoretically recreate e increase in e second-order correlation function versus e system size above reshold. Such features mainly result from e nontrivial polariton-phonon scattering rate dependence wi respect to state separation (see [42]). Coherence is favored for smaller pillars, where relaxation towards e ground state is consequently more efficient. Note at we have considered e multimode emission here by computing e second-order correlation g (2) out (0) over e total output field â out = k κk â k + â in following e input-output eory [39]. These results underline e power of e quantum jump approach for a discrete polariton mode scheme, and support e conclusion at e presence of optical confinement strongly improves e coherence of our polariton laser. Conclusion. We have evaluated e effect of optical confinement on e temporal coherence function behavior of a polariton condensate. Experimentally, we observed a significantly decreased g (2) (τ = 0) value above e polariton lasing reshold in tightly confined systems, as compared to more planar polariton microcavity reference stuctures. By combining our experimental data wi a microscopic model based on e quantum jump approach, we were able to successfully describe e coherence evolution in our polariton devices, which is of paramount importance for e design of nextgeneration coherent polariton light sources. This beneficial effect of mode localization can furer serve in oer open

5 5 dissipative quantum systems like photonic condensates [40], strongly localized excitons dressed to cavity fields [41] as well as e entire community working on semiconductor lasers. Acknowledgments The auors would like to ank e State of Bavaria for financial support. We ank Monika Emmerling and Adriana Wolf for expert sample processing and Joel Rasmussen (RE- CON) for a critical reading of our manuscript.. T.A-N. has been supported in part by e Academy of Finland rough its CoE grants and I.G.S. acknowledges e support of e Institute for Basic Science in Korea (project IBS-R024-D1), e Australian Research Councils Discovery Projects funding scheme (project DE ), Russian Science Foundation (project ) and President of Russian Federation (project ). Funding by e EP- SRC wiin e Hybrid Polaritonics grant (EP/M025330/1) is gratefully acknowledged. C.S. and M.K. ank e DFG wiin e project Schn Funding by e EPSRC wiin e Hybrid Polaritonics grant (EP/M025330/1) is gratefully acknowledged. S.K. acknowledges e European Commission for e H2020 Marie Skodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) fellowship (Topopolis). [1] A. Imamoglu, R. J. Ram, S. Pau, and Y. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. A 53, 4250 (1996). [2] C. Weisbuch, M. Nishioka, A. Ishikawa, and Y. Arakawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 3314 (1992). [3] A. V. Kavokin, J. J. Baumberg, G. Malpuech, and F. P. Laussy, Microcavities (Oxford University Press, 2006). [4] A. P. D. Love, D. N. Krizhanovskii, D. M. Whittaker, R. Bouchekioua, D. Sanvitto, S. A. Rizeiqi, R. Bradley, M. S. Skolnick, P. R. Easam, R. Andreacute, and L. S. Dang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, (2008). [5] B. Deveaud-Plédran, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 29, A138 (2012). [6] J. Kasprzak, M. Richard, S. Kundermann, A. Baas, P. Jeambrun, J. M. J. Keeling, F. M. Marchetti, M. H. Szymańska, R. André, J. L. Staehli, V. Savona, P. B. Littlewood, B. Deveaud, and L. S. Dang, Nature 443, 409 (2006). [7] H. Deng, D. Press, S. Götzinger, G. S. Solomon, R. Hey, K. H. Ploog, and Y. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, (2006). [8] J. Fischer, I. G. Savenko, M. D. Fraser, S. Holzinger, S. Brodbeck, M. Kamp, I. A. Shelykh, C. Schneider, and S. Höfling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, (2014). [9] T. C. H. Liew, and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, (2010). [10] M.-A. Lemonde, N. Didier, and A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. A 90, (2014). [11] A. Verger, C. Ciuti, and I. Carusotto, Phys. Rev. B 73, (2006). [12] H. Flayac, and V. Savona, arxiv: [13] S. S. Demirchyan, T. A. Khudaiberganov, I. Yu. Chestnov, and A. P. Alodzhants, J. Opt. Technol. 84, 75 (2017). [14] M. Wouters and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. B 79, (2009). [15] H. Haug, T. Doan, H. T. Cao, and D. T. Thoai, Phys. Rev. B 85, (2012). [16] I. G. Savenko, T. C. H. Liew, and I. A. Shelykh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, (2013). [17] I. G. Savenko, E. B. Magnusson, and I. A. Shelykh, Phys. Rev. B 83, (2011). [18] H. Deng, G. Weihs, D. Snoke, J. Bloch, and Y. Yamamoto, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 100, (2003). [19] J.-S. Tempel, F. Veit, M. Aßmann, L. E. Kreilkamp, A. Rahimi-Iman, A. Löffler, S. Höfling, S. Reitzenstein, L. Worschech, A. Forchel, and M. Bayer, Phys. Rev. B 85, (2012). [20] A. Rahimi-Iman, A. V. Chernenko, J. Fischer, S. Brodbeck, M. Amor, C. Schneider, A. Forchel, S. Höfling, S. Reitzenstein, and M. Kamp, Phys. Rev. B 86, (2012). [21] D. N. Krizhanovskii, K. G. Lagoudakis, M. Wouters, B. Pietka, R. A. Bradley, K. Guda, D. M. Whittaker, M. S. Skolnick, B. Deveaud-Pldran, M. Richard, R. Andr, and Le Si Dang, Phys. Rev. B 80, (2009). [22] C. Ciuti, P. Schwendimann, and A. Quattropani, Phys. Rev. B 63, [23] J. Kasprzak, M. Richard, A. Baas, B. Deveaud, R. Andre, J.-P. Poizat, and L. S. Dang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, (2008). [24] T. Horikiri, P. Schwendimann, A. Quattropani, S. Höfling, A. Forchel, and Y. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. B 81, (2010). [25] G. Dasbach, M. Schwab, M. Bayer, D. Krizhanovskii, and A. Forchel, Phys. Rev. B 66, (2002). [26] D. Bajoni, P. Senellart, E. Wertz, I. Sagnes, A. Miard, A. Lemaitre, and J. Bloch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, (2008). [27] T. Klein, S. Klembt, E. Durupt, C. Kruse, D. Hommel, and M. Richard, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, (2015). [28] C. Schneider, K. Winkler, M. D. Fraser, M. Kamp, Y. Yamamoto, E. A. Ostrovskaya, and S. Höfling, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, (2017). [29] S. Kim, B. Zhang, Z. Wang, J. Fischer, S. Brodbeck, M. Kamp, C. Schneider, S. Hfling, and H. Deng, Phys. Rev. X 6, (2016). [30] H. Deng, G. Weihs, C. Santori, J. Bloch, and Y. Yamamoto, Science 298, 199 (2002). [31] M. Aßmann, J. S. Tempel, F. Veit, M. Bayer, A. Rahimi- Iman, A. Lffler, S. Hfling, S. Reitzenstein, L. Worschech, and A. Forchel, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 1804 (2011). [32] V. Kalevich, M. Afanasiev, V. Lukoshkin, D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, K. Kavokin, S. Tsintzos, Z. Hatzopoulos, P. Savvidis, and A. Kavokin, Phys. Rev. B 91, (2015). [33] L. Ferrier, E. Wertz, R. Johne, D. D. Solnyshkov, P. Senellart, I. Sagnes, A. Lemaitre, G. Malpuech, and J. Bloch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, (2011). [34] M. Amor, S. Weißenseel, J. Fischer, M. Kamp, C. Schneider, and S. Höfling, Opt. Express 22, (2014). [35] K. Mølmer, Y. Castin, and J. Dalibard, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 10, 524 (1993). [36] H. Flayac, I. Savenko, M. Möttönen, and T. Ala-Nissila, Phys. Rev. B 92, (2015). [37] H. Flayac, and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113,

6 6 (2014). [38] P. Schwendimann, and A. Quattropani, Phys. Rev. B 77, (2008). [39] M. J. Collett, and C. W. Gardiner, Phys. Rev. A 30, 1386 (1984). [40] J. Klaers, J. Schmitt, F. Vewinger, and M. Weitz, Nature 468, 545 (2010). [41] C. P. Dietrich, A. Steude, L. Tropf, M. Schubert, N. M. Kronenberg, K. Ostermann, S. Höfling, and M. C. Gaer, Science Advances 2, e (2016). [42] See Supplemental Material for eoretical and experimental details, which includes Refs. [43-44]. [43] G. Roumpos, M. Lohse, W. H. Nitsche, J. Keeling, M. H. Szymańska, P. B. Littlewood, A. Löffler, S. Höfling, L. Worschech, A. Forchel, and Y. Yamamoto, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 6467 (2012). [44] C. Piermarocchi, F. Tassone, V. Savona, A. Quattropani and P. Schwendimann, Phys. Rev. B 53, (1996).