Approaching quantum-limited amplification with large gain catalyzed by hybrid

nonlinear media in cavity optomechanics

Qiang Zheng,1, 2 Kai Li,1 and Yong Li1, 3
1

Beijing Computational Science Research Center, Beijing, 100084, China

School of Mathematics, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang, 550001, China
3
Synergetic Innovation Center of Quantum Information and Quantum Physics,
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui 230026, China
(Dated: May 3, 2016)

arXiv:1605.00199v1 [quant-ph] 1 May 2016

Amplifier is at the heart of almost all experiment carrying out the precise measurement of a weak
signal. An idea amplifier should have large gain and minimum added noise simultaneously. Here, we
consider the quantum measurement properties of a hybrid nonlinear cavity with the Kerr and OPA
nonlinear media to amplify an input signal. We show that our hybrid-nonlinear-cavity amplifier has
large gain in the single-value stable regime and achieves quantum limit unconditionally.
PACS numbers: 42.60.Da, 03.65.Ta, 42.50.Wk

I.

INTRODUCTION

According to the basic rule of quantum mechanics, any

amplifier always spoils the input signal by adding a certain amount of noise [1]. The added noise for a linear
phase-preserving amplifier is at least the half quantum of
the signal [2]. The non-degenerate parametric amplifier
[3], based on the coherent interaction between the signal
and idler modes driven by the pump field, is the standard
paradigm of quantum limit amplifier [4]. Utilizing the experimental achievement in realizing the non-degenerate
parametric amplifier by superconducting circuits [510],
it is used in turn to measure mechanical motion near
quantum limit [11], probe the quantum jump of a superconducting qubit [12, 13], and stabilize quantum coherence [14], etc. Moreover, other kind of amplifiers, such
as the traveling-wave parametric amplifiers [15], which
do not need the cavity but require phase-matching, and
the probabilistic amplifiers [16], which can amplify the
signal noiselessly, have also excited the wide interest.
Cavity optomechanics [17, 18], in which a mechanical
oscillator couples to an optical field by radiation pressure,
is another active realm in recent years. Many interesting progresses have been achieved, such as ground state
cooling of the mechanical resonator [19], optomechanically induced transparency [2022], optomechanical entanglement [2325] and EPR steering [26], optomechanical squeezing [2729], just to name a few. Cavity optomechanics has standout advantage to explore the quantum
behavior at macroscopic level [31], as well as quantum
information processing [32, 33], quantum-classical transition [34, 35], quantum illumination [36], and quantum
heat engine [37].
Except for these promising advances, cavity optomechanics has also been used to realize quantum limited
amplifier. A standard radiation-pressure-coupling optomechanical system can amplify the input signal with
large gain near the quantum limit if the cavity is driven
in the blue-detuned regime [38]. Some other interesting
schemes, such as the reservoir engineering [3941] and the

reversed dissipation [42], have been proposed to achieve

large gain quantum-limited amplifier. All the above mentioned cavity amplifiers are just the scattering mode of
operation. In addition to the scattering mode, the socalled operational-amplifying (op-amp) mode [43] is another kind of amplifier. The back-action originating from
the interaction between the signal and amplifier, which is
absent in the scattering mode, is essential to determine
the quantum limit of the op-amp mode amplifier [43].
Usually, using the linearly driven cavity as the op-amp
amplifier, the position of a mechanical resonator had been
measured near the quantum limit in the well-known experiment [30]. It is also an interesting question to explore
the performance of nonlinear-cavity amplifier. Actually,
the nonlinear cavity as the op-amp mode amplifier has
been used to measure the qubit with large gain in quantum limit [44, 45]. With the Kerr nonlinear medium in
the cavity, the quantum limit of the cavity amplifier in
the op-amp mode has been studied [46]. To obtain the
large gain, the amplifier operates near (but below) the
single-bistability bifurcation point [46] as close as possible. We would like to stress that this operating condition is not very robust. It is known that only a very
small perturbation of system parameter or external noise
may make the system randomly jump up and down in
the hysteresis curve.
In this paper, we suggest a hybrid-nonlinear-cavity amplifier, which is composed of a Kerr medium and a degenerate optical parametric amplifier (OPA) [47] nonlinear
medium in the cavity, as displayed in Fig. 1, to overcome
the drawback of Kerr-nonlinear-cavity amplifier. We find
that: (i) our hybrid nonlinear cavity amplifier can have
large gain in the single-value stable regime, (ii) the hybridity of Kerr and OPA is crucial to achieve the large
gain, and (iii) the nonlinear cavity amplifier operates at
the quantum limit unconditionally in the low signal frequency.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In Sec. III,
we investigate the steady state and its stability of our
hybrid nonlinear-cavity amplifier, and find in the single-

2
value stable regime, the cavity amplifier has a large gain.
Next, in Sec. IV we explore whether our cavity amplifier can approach the quantum limit in low signal frequency regime. Finally, a conclusion is provided in the
last section. The basic properties of quantum limit of the
op-amp mode amplifier are reviewed in Appendix.
II.

HYBRID NONLINEAR CAVITY AMPLIFIER

We firstly consider the properties of the cavity amplifier, which has the hybrid nonlinear crystal composed of
a degenerate OPA and Kerr mediums. The cavity with
the resonant frequency c and the decay rate is also
strongly driven by the input laser with frequency d , as
shown in Fig. 1. In the rotating frame, the Hamiltonian
of the cavity amplifier can be written as (~ = 1 in the
following)
sys =
H
a a
+ iG(ei a
2 h.c.)
a2 a
2 + i(
a a
).
(1)
Here a
(
a ) is the annihilator (creation) operator of the
cavity field. = d c is the detuning between the
cavity field and the driving laser. G is the nonlinear
gain coefficient of the OPA, which is proportional to the
strength of the coherent pump field driving the OPA, and
is the phase of the OPA pumping field. and are
the Kerr coefficient and the strength of the cavity driving
laser, respectively.
The first term in Eq. (1) denotes the energy of the
cavity field. The second and third terms arise from the
coupling between the OPA or Kerr medium and the cavity field, respectively, and the last term is the interaction
between the cavity mode and the input driving laser.
Previously, the optomechanically induced transparency and the cooling of the mechanical resonator with
this kind of hybrid-nonlinear cavity had been investigated
[48, 49]. Very recently, the cavity with only the OPA
medium has been suggested to enhance quantum-limited
position detection [50]. And an amplified interferometer
based on the OPA medium can be used to detect the
state of a qubit [51]. Note that the amplifiers proposed
in Refs. [50, 51] are operated in the scattering mode.
In contrast, this paper explores the performance of this
hybrid-nonlinear cavity amplifier in the op-amp mode.
A.

Steady state of cavity amplifier and its stability

Taking the cavity decay into consideration, we adopt

the well-known input-output theory [52]. In this frame,
the motion of the cavity field can be described by the
Heisenberg Langevin equation, which is derived as

d
a

(2)
= i
a + 2Gei a
+ 2i
a a
2 + a
.
dt
2
Here is quantum vacuum fluctuation with zero mean.
With the strong external driving laser, the cavity mode

FIG. 1: The schematic of the cavity amplifier with the hybrid

nonlinear crystal, composed of the Kerr and OPA media. Here
z is the input signal to be probed. The output field from the
cavity is measured by the homodyne detection(HD), and the
is produced.
measurement current I(t)

can be decomposed into

a
= + d

(3)

with the coherent part = h

ai and a small quantum

fluctuation d. According to Eq. (2), the coherent part

in the steady state is determined by
= 2

4G + 2i + + 4i
n
2 16G2 + 4( + 2
n)2

(4)

with n
= ||2 being the mean photon number n
=a
a

in the cavity. Its easy to obtain the fifth-order equation

for n

A5 n
5 + A4 n
4 + A3 n
3 + A2 n
2 + A1 n
+ A0 = 0,

(5)

where the coefficients are given as A5 = 2564, A4 =

5123, A3 = (3842 +322 512G2 )2 , A2 = (1283 +
322 642 512G2 ), A1 = (42 + 2 16G2 )2
642 , and A0 = 42 (42 + (4G + )2 ) for = 0.
Mathematically, the fifth-order equation, which can
not be solved analytically, should have five solutions, in
which at most three roots would be stable. For the cavity amplifier being in the stable operation condition, we
should avoid the multi-stability for the fifth-order equation. In the following, we will solve the fifth-order equation Eq. (5) numerically, and choose the parameters to
make sure that Eq. (5) has a single real root, denoted it
as ns n
.
In general, the coherent part is complex. For simplicity, it is possible to choose the Kerr coefficient as
= 0 (4G )2 /(82 ) such that being real.
Here, we restrict our study to this situation. Usually,
the photon blockade induced by the Kerr interaction can
greatly suppress the photon number in the cavity. However, this mechanism does not work in our case. Re kerr = 0 n
expressing the Kerr interaction as H
(
n 1)

3
with very small value 0 1, it can produces a selfdetermined phase to ensure being real. Usually, one
can adjust the phase of the external driving laser to make
s being real. In this case we will get a seventh-order
equation for ns . To simplify, in this paper we adopt the
scheme by choosing appropriate Kerr coefficient.
Introducing the quadrature operators for the quantum
fluctuation of the cavity amplifier
x
=

1 (d +
2

),

p =

i (d
2

d),

(6)

and similarly for x

in and pin , with the standard linearizing approximation, i.e., ns 1, the equation of motion
for the quantum fluctuation can be rewritten as

d
x
= m11 x + m12 p
xin
dt

d
p
pin
= m21 x
+ m22 p
dt

(7a)
(7b)

with m11 = /2 + 2G cos , m12 = ( + 2ns

2G sin ), m21 = +6ns +2G sin , and m22 = (/2+
2G cos ). The eigenvalues of the matrix


m11 m12
M=
(8)
m21 m22
are obtained as
1,

1
(m11 + m22 ) K,
2

(9)

with K = (m11 m22 )2 + 4m12 m21 . The stability of

the cavity amplifier requires that all the eigenvalues 1, 2
must have the negative real parts. Thus, for a positive
number K > 0 with the condition

(10)
1 = m11 + m22 + K = + K < 0,
we can sustain the stability of the cavity amplifier. That
implies the cavity decay should be large enough. Physically, this can be understood as following. The OPA
as the gain medium can magnify the photon number in
the cavity, which may make it unstable. To make sure
that the cavity amplifier works in the stability regime, a
large decay rate of the cavity is necessary to suppress the
amplification of the photon number in the cavity.
B.

Gain of cavity amplifier

From the input-output relation

x + xin ,
x
out =

(11)

by solving Eq. (7) in the frequency domain, the x

quadrature of the optical field can be expressed as
x
out [] = gx []
xin + gp []
pin ,

(12)

where
gx [] = 1 + (i m22)/J[], gp [] = m12 /J[], (13)

and
J[] = m12 m21 + (im11 + )(im22 + ).

(14)

Through this
the Fourier transformation is defined
R paper, it

as C[]
= dtC(t)e
.
We define the gain of the x
quadrature as
g[] |
gx []|2 .

(15)

In Fig. 2, we plot the variation of the gain as a function

of the frequency. It displays that with the increase of the
cavity decay, the maximum value of the gain decreases
considerably. This figure also shows the gain-bandwidth
tradeoff of an amplifier: with the enhanced gain, the signal bandwidth also goes down.
From Fig. 2, it is apparent that the largest gain is obtained near = 0 with a finite bandwidth B . Assuming
that the input signal in a very narrow band B with
large gain, we can ensure that the amplifier operates in
the zero frequency limit 0. In the following, we only
focus on this limit.
Fig. 3 shows that the zero-frequency gain g[0] goes
down with the increase of the cavity decay rate. As the
OPA is the amplification medium, it is important to explore the effect of OPA on the performance of the cavity
amplifier. We find that g[0] is very sensitive to the value
of OPA coefficient G. For example, the value of g[0] goes
down from 2.4 103 to 1.2 103 with the small change
of the value of G from G = 120 to G = 118.
To obtain a large gain for the amplifier, Ref. [46] suggest that it operates approaching (but below) the singlebistability transition point for the cavity mean photon
number as close as possible. However, near this transition point, the amplifier should lose its robustness very
easily. That is, a very small random perturbation should
induce it stepping into the bistability regime, and jump
up and down randomly in the hysteresis curve. Compared with Ref. [46], our cavity amplifier has very large
amplification gain in a stable operating condition.
III.

QUANTUM LIMIT OF CAVITY

AMPLIFIER

In previous section, we investigate the amplification

property of the cavity. We find that the cavity amplifier
has large gain with the aid of hybrid nonlinear crystal
composed of the Kerr and OPA media. In this section,
we will explore whether this cavity amplifier can operate
quantum-limited in low signal frequency limit.
A.

Coupling to signal

To completely describe the performance of the cavity

amplifier, we should obtain the forward gain IF , which
characterizes the effect of the input signal on the output
current of the homodyne detection. Usually, the forward

4
8

=500 0

ln(g[])

=600 0
=700 0
4

0
300

/0 0

300

FIG. 2: The gain g[] as the function of the signal frequency

. The other parameter is G = 1200 , = 103 0 , =
100 . 0 is a parameter with the dimension of frequency.
The stability of the cavity amplifier is checked numerically
with these parameters.

homodyne detection, the current operator is defined as

Iout = (cos h x
out + sin h pout ).
(18)
Here xout and pout , determined by Eq. (17), are the corresponding output quadratures of the cavity field. According to Eq. (A3), by solving Eqs. (17) in the frequency
domain, the forward gain of the amplifier is obtained as

A 2ns
(m11 sin h m12 cos h ).
(19)
IF [0] =
J[0]
Here we only focus on the zero frequency limit. This
expression displays that the forward gain is proportional
to the cavity decay rate. It is reasonable physically: the
cavity, as the role of a detector, with large decay can
make it respond to the input signal very quickly.
B.

Without the coupling to the input signal, the homodyne current can be rewritten as

10
ln(n )
s

I0 [] = f1 []
xin + f2 []
pin .

ln(g[0])

(20)

Here the two functions f1 [] and f2 [] are derived from

Eq. (7) with the Fourier transformation. In the zero frequency limit, they are expressed as

f1 [0] = 1 /J[0], f2 [0] = 2 /J[0],

(21)

4
500

The symmetry noise spectral density

540
/

580

with
1 = J[0] m22 , 2 = J[0] m11 ,

FIG. 3: The variation of the mean photon number ns and

the zero frequency gain g[0] with respect to the cavity decay
. The other parameter is the same as Fig. 2.

gain IF is determined by Kubo formula. Here, we can

obtain it by rederiving the equations of motion for the
cavity amplifier with the signal coupled.
Under the standard linearization approximation, the
coupling between the signal and the cavity amplifier Hint
in Eq. (A1) translates into
int Ans (d + d )
z F z
(16)
H

with the linearized force operator F = A 2ns x

. For this
interaction Hamiltonian, the equation of motion for the
cavity field becomes

d
x
xin ,
(17a)
= m11 x
+ m12 p
dt

d
p
pin . (17b)
= m21 x
+ m22 p + A 2ns z
dt
Compared with Eq. (7), the equation for the operator
p is changed under the effect of this coupling. For the

(22)

and
1 = 1 cos h + m21 sin h ,
2 = 2 sin h + m12 cos h .

(23a)
(23b)

Using the correlations between the noises [53]

hxin []xin [ ]i = hpin []pin [ ]i = ( + ), (24a)
hxin []pin [ ]i = hpin []xin [ ]i = i( + ),(24b)
the symmetry noise spectral density of the homodyne
current is obtained as
SI0 I0 [0] = (21 + 22 )/J[0]2 .

(25)

Substituting Eq. (25) into Eqs. (A4), the noise spectrum density of the imprecision noise Szz [0] is obtained
as
Szz [0] = SI0 I0 [0]/|IF [0]|2 .

(26)

For the linearized back-action force F = A 2ns x, it

can also be reexpressed as
F [] = h1 []
xin + h2 []
pin .

(27)

5
In the limit w 0,

h1 [0] = A 2ns m22 /J[0],

h2 [0] = A 2ns m12 /J[0].

IV.

(28a)
(28b)

Similarly, the corresponding symmetry noise spectrum of

the back-action force is given as
SF F [0] = A2 (m212 + m222 )ns /J[0]2 .

(29)

in the low frequency limit.

C.

Quantum limit of cavity amplifier

To make the op-amp mode cavity amplifier work near

the quantum limit, we must consider the correlation between the imprecision noise and the back-action force.
Previously, the utility of using this correlations is an wellknown idea in the gravitational wave field [54]. By making use of Eq. (A8), after some extensive but straightforward calculations, the correlation between the current
and the back-action force in the limit w 0 is obtained
as
1 cos h + 2 sin h
(30)
SzF [0] =
2J[0](m12 cos h m11 sin h )
with 1 = m22 J[0]+(m222 +m212 ), and 2 = (m12 m11 +
m22 m21 ) m12 J[0].
Substituting Eqs. (26), (29) and (30) into the left-hand
side of Eq. (A10), straightforward calculation yields

CONCLUSION

In summary, in the system that the nonlinear cavity with a degenerate OPA and Kerr media, we demonstrate that as the op-amp mode of operation, the cavity amplifier has the large gain. We also find that the
added noise by the nonlinear cavity amplifier is quantumlimited. Distinct from only the Kerr medium in the
cavity, which realizes the large gain by operating near
the single-bistable transition, the cavity amplifier with
OPA and Kerr nonlinear mediums can have large gain
in single-value stable regime. As this paper only investigates the low input signal frequency limit, in the future it
will be an exciting topic to explore the effect of the bandwidth on the performance of this hybrid OPA and Kerr
nonlinear cavity amplifier. Our study may be relevant to
the implement of ultrasensitive probing the feeble signal.
Acknowledgments

We thank A. Metelmann for his helpful discussions.

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 11365006, No.
11364006 No. 11422437), the 973 program (Grants No.
2012CB922104 and No. 2014CB921403), and the National Natural Science Foundation of Guizhou Province
QKHLHZ[2015]7767.

1 (m12 cos h + ( + m22 ) sin h ) 2Appendix A: General condition of quantum-limited

] .
Szz [0]SF F [0](SzF [0])2 = [
amplification
4
(m12 cos h m11 sin h )
(31)
Here, we review the main aspects of the quantum limit
Its easy to see
of cavity amplifier in op-amp mode [43]. The input signal
1
z to be probed interacts with the cavity photon number
(32)
Szz [0]SF F [0] (SzF [0])2 .
4
n
=a
a
as
That implies the cavity amplifier unconditionally works
int = A
H
a a
z.
(A1)
in the quantum limit. To obtain this result, we use
m11 = + m22 .
It is a standard radiation-pressure coupling in cavity
Last but not least, for a quantum limited amplifier, the
optomechanical system, if z denotes the position of a
signal susceptibility zz [] should satisfy the following
nanomechanical oscillator. This dispersive interaction is
two optimal conditions [55]
also used to probe the state of the superconducting qubit
q
[56]. Here A is a constant, and F = A
a a
is the back

|zz | =
Szz []/SF F [],
(33a)
action force. The interaction can shift the frequency of
ReSzF []
Rezz
the cavity field and the phase of the output field. To
=
(33b)

probe this phase shift, we adopt the homodyne detec|zz |

Szz []SF F []
tion, where the output from the cavity field a
out (t) is
in order to saturate the inequality Eq. (A7). Usually, the
mixed with a reference beam. The homodyne current
condition Eq. (33a) can be satisfied by tuning of the cou is described by
I(t)
pling strength A between the signal and detector. And
p
the condition Eq. (33b) implies that Imzz [] = 0, which
= B /2[eih a
I(t)
out (t) + h.c.].
(A2)
can be achieved for a damped harmonic oscillator working far from the resonant. In this paper, we assume that
Here B is the dimensional constant, and h is the phase
the conditions in Eqs. (33a) and Eqs. (33b) are achieved
of the reference beam. Without loss of generality, we set
and our cavity amplifier works in the the zero signal freB = 1 throughout this paper.
quency limit, thus we mainly concentrate on the quantum
Supposing that the coupling between the signal and
limit inequality Eq. (A10).
the cavity amplifier is weak enough, according to linear

6
response theory [57], as a good approximation, the output current should linearly relate to the input signal
Z

hI(t)i = hI0 (t)i +

dt IF (t t )h
z (t )i.
(A3)

Here hI0 (t)i is the current without the coupling to the

signal.
From this linear relation, the imprecision noise spectral
density is introduced as
Szz [] SI0 I0 []/|IF []|

(A4)

in the frequency domain, which describes the effective

signal fluctuation referred from the current noise. Here
the symmetrized spectral density of output fluctuation is
defined as
Z
1
1
I(0)}i

dteiwt h{I(t),
= (SII []+SII [])
SII [] =
2
2
(A5)
with the average h i taking with respect to the state of the
uncoupled detector. The noise spectral density is defined
as
I[
]i.
2( + )SII [] = hI[]

(A6)

the effective temperature TN [], which has the standard

bound [43, 58]
q
1
kB TN []
( Szz []SF F [] (ReSzF [])2 ImSzF []),
~w
~
(A7)
where SF F [] is the noise spectral density of the backaction force, and SzF [] describes the correlation between the back-action and impression noises
SzF [] = SIF []/IF [].

(A8)

The symmetry spectrum is defined as

1

SIF [] = (SIF [] + SIF

[]).
2

(A9)

Note the fact that there is no the reverse gain F I = 0

has been used in deriving Eq. (A7).
For the simplest case that the signal frequency is much
smaller than the relevant quantity, we can consider the
zero signal frequency limit 0. Under this condition,
Eq. (A7) reduces to the Heisenberg inequality [59]
Szz [0]SF F [0] (SzF [0])2 ~2 /4.

(A10)

Except for the imprecision noise, the back-action noise

is another essential side for the op-amp mode of operation. As a result, the total added noise produced by
the cavity amplifier, is composed of the back-action noise
originated from Eq. (A1) and the imprecision noise in
Eq. (A4). The total added noise can be considered as

This corresponds to the fact that the amplifier must add

noise at least the same as the zero-point fluctuation of
the signal source kB TN /~ 21 . We would like to stress
that even though the quantum limit of the op-amp mode
resembles to the counterpart of the scattering mode, they
are completely different. There is no back-action in the
scattering mode.

[1] M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf, Nature(London)

406, 1039 (2000).
[2] C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. D 26, 1817 (1982).
[3] W. H. Louisell, A. Yariv, and A. E. Siegman, Phys. Rev.
124, 1646 (1961); J. P. Gordon, W. H. Louisell, and L.
R. Walker, Phys. Rev. 129, 481 (1963).
[4] B. R. Mollowand R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 160, 1076
(1967); B. R. Mollowand R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 160,
1097 (1967).
[5] B. Yurke, P. G. Kaminsky, R. E. Miller, E. A. Whittaker, A. D. Smith, A. H. Silver, and R.W. Simon, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 60, 764 (1988); B. Yurke, L. R. Corruccini,
P. G. Kaminsky, L.W. Rupp, A. D. Smith, A. H. Silver,
R.W. Simon, and E. A. Whittaker, Phys. Rev. A 39, 2519
(1989); R. Movshovich, B. Yurke, P. G. Kaminsky, A. D.
Smith, A. H. Silver, R. W. Simon, and M. V. Schneider,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1419 (1990).
[6] M. A. Castellanos-Beltran, K. D. Irwin, G. C. Hilton, L.
R. Vale, and K. W. Lehnert, Nat. Phys. 4, 929 (2008).
[7] T. Yamamoto, K. Inomata, M. Watanabe, K. Matsuba,
T. Miyazaki, W. D. Oliver, Y. Nakamura, and J. S. Tsai,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 042510 (2008).
[8] N. Bergeal, F. Schackert, M. Metcalfe, R. Vijay, V. E.
Manucharyan, L. Frunzio, D. E. Prober, R. J. Schoelkopf,

S. M. Girvin, and M. H. Devoret, Nature (London) 465,

64 (2010).
N. Bergeal, R. Vijay, V. E. Manucharyan, I. Siddiqi, R. J.
Schoelkopf, S. M. Girvin, and M. H. Devoret, Nat. Phys.
6, 296 (2010).
M. Hatridge, R. Vijay, D. H. Slichter, John Clarke, and
I. Siddiqi, Phys. Rev. B 83, 134501 (2011).
J. Teufel, T. Donner, M. Castellanos-Beltran, J. Harlow,
and K. Lehnert, Nat. Nanotechnol. 4, 820 (2009).
R. Vijay, D. H. Slichter, and I. Siddiqi, Phys. Rev. Lett.
106, 110502 (2011).
M. Hatridge, S. Shankar, M. Mirrahimi, F. Schackert, K.
Geerlings, T. Brecht, K. M. Sliwa, B. Abdo, L. Frunzio,
S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, Science
339, 178 (2013).
R. Vijay, C. Macklin, D. H. Slichter, S. J. Weber, K.W.
Murch, R. Naik, A. N. Korotkov, and I. Siddiqi, Nature
(London) 490, 77 (2012).
B. H. Eom, P. K. Day, H. G. LeDuc, and J. Zmuidzinas,
Nat. Phys. 8, 623 (2012).
J. Fiur
asek, Phys. Rev. A 70, 032308 (2004); G. Y. Xiang, T. C. Ralph, A. P. Lund, N. Walk, and G. J. Pryde,
Nat. Photonics 4, 316 (2010); S. Pandey, Z. Jiang, J.
Combes, and C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. A 88, 033852

[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]

[14]
[15]
[16]

7
(2013).
[17] M. Aspelmeyer, P. Meystre, and K. C. Schwab, Phys.
Today 65, 29 (2012).
[18] M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt,
Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014).
[19] I. Wilson-Rae, N. Nooshi, W. Zwerger, and T. J. Kippenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 093901 (2007); F. Marquardt,
J. P. Chen, A. A. Clerk, and S. M. Girvin, ibid. 99,
093902 (2007).
[20] G. S. Agarwal and S. Huang, Phys. Rev. A 81, 041803(R)
(2010); W. Xiong, D. Jin,1 Y. Qiu, C. H. Lam, and J. Q.
You, Phys. Rev. A 93, 023844 (2016).
[21] S. Weis, R. Riviere, S. Deleglise, E. Gavartin, O. Arcizet,
A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, Science 330, 1520
(2010).
[22] A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. P. M. Alegre, J. Chan, M. Eichenfield, M. Winger, Q. Lin, J. T. Hill, D. E. Chang, and O.
Painter, Nature (London) 472, 69 (2011).
[23] L. Tian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 233602 (2013); Y. D.
Wang and A. A. Clerk, ibid. 110, 253601 (2013).
[24] Sh. Barzanjeh, M. Abdi,G. J.Milburn, P. Tombesi, and
D. Vitali, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 130503 (2012).
[25] T. A. Palomaki, J. D. Teufel, R. W. Simmonds, and K.
W. Lehnert, Science 342, 710 (2013).
[26] Q. Y. He and M. D. Reid, Phys. Rev. A 88, 052121
(2013).
[27] A. Kronwald, F. Marquardt, A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. A
88, 063833 (2013).
[28] E. E. Wollman, C. U. Lei, A. J. Weinstein, J. Suh, A.
Kronwald, F. Marquardt, A. A. Clerk, K. C. Schwab,
Science, 349, 952 (2015).
[29] K. Qu and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A 91, 063815
(2015).
[30] J. B. Hertzberg, T. Rocheleau, T. Ndukum, M. Savva,
A. A. Clerk, K. C. Schwab Nat. Phys. 6, 213 (2010).
[31] L. F. Buchmann, L. Zhang, A. Chiruvelli, and P.
Meystre, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 210403 (2012).
[32] S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett.
90, 137901 (2003).
[33] K. Stannigel, P. Rabl, A. S. Sorensen, M. D. Lukin, and
P. Zoller Phys. Rev. A 84, 042341(2011).
[34] W. Marshall, C. Simon, R. Penrose, and D.
Bouwmeester, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 130401 (2003).
[35] F. Xue, Y. X. Liu, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. B
76, 064305 (2007).
[36] Sh. Barzanjeh, S. Guha, C. Weedbrook, D. Vitali, J. H.
Shapiro, and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 080503
(2015).
[37] K. Zhang, F. Bariani, and P. Meystre, Phys. Rev. Lett.
112, 150602 (2014).

[38] F. Massel, T. T. Heikkil

a, J. M. Pirkkalainen, S. U. Cho,
H. Saloniemi, P. Hakonen, and M. A. Sillanp
a
a, Nature
(London) 480, 351 (2011).
[39] A. Metelmann and A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112,
133904 (2014).
[40] A. Metelmann and A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. X 5, 021025
(2014).
[41] X. Y. L
u, Y. Wu, J. R. Johansson, H. Jing, J. Zhang,
and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 093602 (2015).
[42] A. Nunnenkamp, V. Sudhir, A. K. Feofanov, A. Roulet,
and T. J. Kippenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 023604
(2014).
[43] A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt,
and R. J. Schoelkopf, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1155 (2010).
[44] F. R. Ong, M. Boissonneault, F. Mallet, A. PalaciosLaloy, A. Dewes, A. C. Doherty, A. Blais, P. Bertet, D.
Vion, D. Esteve, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 167002 (2011).
[45] S. Khan, R. Vijay, I. Siddiqi and A. A. Clerk, New. J.
Phys. 16, 113032 (2014).
[46] C. Laflamme and A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. A 83, 033803
(2011).
[47] G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 023601 (2006). H.
Chen and J. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A 79, 063826 (2009); D.
Wang, Y. Zhang, and M. Xiao, Phys. Rev. A 87, 023834
(2013).
[48] S. Shahidani, M. H. Naderi, and M. Soltanolkotabi, Phys.
Rev. A 88, 053813 (2013).
[49] S. Shahidani, M. H. Naderi, M. Soltanolkotabi, Sh.
Barzanjeh, J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, 31, 1087 (2014).
[50] V. Peano, H. G. L. Schwefel, Ch. Marquardt, and F.
Marquardt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 243603 (2015).
[51] Sh. Barzanjeh, D. P. DiVincenzo, and B. M. Terhal,
Phys. Rev. B 90, 134515 (2014).
[52] D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Optics
(Springer, Berlin, 2008), 2nd ed..
[53] C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise (Springer,
Berlin, 2000).
[54] A. Buonanno and Y. Chen, Phys. Rev. D 64, 042006
(2001).
[55] A. A. Clerk, S. M. Girvin, and A. D. Stone, Phys. Rev.
B 67, 165324 (2003).
[56] A. Blais, R. S. Huang, A. Wallraff, S. M. Girvin, and R.
J. Schoelkopf, Phys. Rev. A 69, 062320 (2004).
[57] A. Altland and B. Simons, Condensed matter field thory
(Cambridege University Press, Cambridege, 2006).
[58] A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. B 70, 245306 (2004).
[59] V. B. Braginsky and F. Y. Khalili, Quantum Measurement (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,
1992).