Controlled design of localized states in photonic quasicrystals
11733429 · 2023-08-22
Assignee
Inventors
- Chaney Lin (San Francisco, CA, US)
- Paul J. Steinhardt (Princeton, NJ, US)
- Salvatore Torquato (Princeton, NJ)
Cpc classification
G02B6/1225
PHYSICS
International classification
Abstract
This invention relates generally to the field of quasicrystalline structures.
Claims
1. A method for generating a three-dimensional dielectric quasicrystal heterostructure with a photonic bandstructure, comprising a) obtaining quasicrystal tilings, wherein the tilings are pentagonal quasicrystal tilings, wherein said pentagonal quasicrystal tilings are obtained as direct projections using a rhombic-icosahedron window from a five-dimensional hypercubic lattice, and b) generating a dielectric quasicrystal heterostructure from said quasicrystal tilings, wherein said dielectric quasicrystal heterostructure has a photonic bandstructure that contains degenerate, effectively localized states, lying inside a bandgap.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein said dielectric quasicrystal heterostructure of step b) is generated without introducing defects into the heterostructure.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein said degenerate, effectively localized states have precisely predictable and tunable properties.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein said precisely predictable and tunable properties are selected from the group consisting of frequencies, frequency splittings, and spatial configurations.
5. A method for generating two- and three-dimensional dielectric quasicrystal heterostructures with a controlled pre-selected bandgap properties, comprising: a) generating a family of distinct defect-free quasicrystal patterns with a pre-selected symmetry comprising pentagonal quasicrystal tilings, wherein said pentagonal quasicrystal tilings are obtained as direct projections using a rhombic-icosahedron window from a five-dimensional hypercubic lattice; and b) generating a dielectric quasicrystal heterostructures from said quasicrystal patterns wherein the said dielectric quasicrystal heterostructures have photonic band structures photonic band gaps spanning pre-selected frequencies and localized states at pre-selected frequencies inside the bandgap.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein said degenerate, effectively localized states have precisely predictable and tunable properties.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein said precisely predictable and tunable properties are selected from the group consisting of frequencies, frequency splittings, and spatial configurations.
Description
DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES
(1) The accompanying figures, which are incorporated into and form a part of the specification, illustrate several embodiments of the present invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. The figures are only for the purpose of illustrating a preferred embodiment of the invention and are not to be construed as limiting the invention.
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11) Also labeled are the SVE types occurring within each range of γ. Green, solid regions at upper and lower ends represent the continuum of states adjacent to the bandgap. Note: γ=0 (Penrose LI class) has no SVEs and no corresponding effectively localized states.
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)
(19)
(20)
DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
(21) This invention relates generally to the field of quasicrystalline structures.
(22) We study a continuum of photonic quasicrystal heterostructures derived from local isomorphism (LI) classes of pentagonal quasicrystal tilings. These tilings are obtained by direct projection from a five-dimensional hypercubic lattice. We demonstrate that, with the sole exception of the Penrose LI class, all other LI classes result in degenerate, effectively localized states, with precisely predictable and tunable properties (frequencies, frequency splittings, and densities). We show that localization and tunability are related to a mathematical property of the pattern known as “restorability,” i.e., whether the tiling can be uniquely specified given only a set of rules that fix all allowed clusters smaller than some bound.
(23) The choice of orientational symmetry, quasiperiodicity, and the fundamental repeating units (e.g., tiles, atoms, molecules) does not uniquely specify a quasicrystal; there are infinitely many space-filling arrangements of the same repeating units, with the same symmetry and same support for their diffraction patterns [1-4]. See
(24) Provided herein is an investigation of the photonic properties of pentagonal quasicrystal heterostructures across a continuous spectrum of LI classes composed of different arrangements of the same obtuse and acute rhombi. We demonstrate that these heterostructures, though defect free, possess effectively localized states within their fundamental band gaps and that the frequencies, frequency splittings, spatial configuration, and concentration of the localized states can be precisely predicted and tuned in advance by varying the LI class and/or other parameters. This flexibility and control is advantageous in the design of optical cavities for use as radiation sources [5] or sensors [6]. Existing methods for generating localized stated [7] through disorder (defects) have the challenge of identifying defect arrangements that minimize the interference between defects and, at the same time, enabling the ability to select the frequency splittings. At present, no such methodology exists for photonic quasicrystals. (For a review, see Ref. [8].)
(25) We show that the existence and tunability of these states is related to the fact that, except for a countable subset of measure zero, the continuous spectrum of LI classes is not restorable [9, 10]. A restorable tiling can be uniquely specified given only a set of rules that fix all allowed clusters smaller than some bound; a well-known example is the Penrose tiling [11], which satisfies J. Conway's “town theorem” [12], a specific type of restorability. Conversely, non-restorable means that there exist local configurations of rhombi whose density can be made arbitrarily small by continuously scanning through the spectrum of LI classes. We find that it is these configurations that become the tunable localization sites.
(26) Tilings and definitions—The tilings are obtainable as direct projections from a five-dimensional hypercubic lattice or as duals to an overlapping set of five periodically spaced grids [13-15]. We use periodic approximants to compute the bandstructure and verify convergence with the level of approximant.
(27) The approximants are generated using the “generalized dual method” described in Refs. [15] and [16], with one modification: instead of r.sub.i=(cos 2πi/5, sin 2πi/5), the star vectors are chosen as follows:
{circumflex over (r)}.sub.0=(1,0), {circumflex over (r)}.sub.1=(cos 2π/5, sin 2π/5),
{circumflex over (r)}.sub.2(n)=(−1,τ.sub.n.sup.−1).Math.({circumflex over (r)}.sub.0,{circumflex over (r)}.sub.1),
{circumflex over (r)}.sub.3(n)=−(τ.sub.n.sup.−1,τ.sub.n.sup.−1).Math.({circumflex over (r)}.sub.0,{circumflex over (r)}.sub.1),
{circumflex over (r)}.sub.4(n)=(τ.sub.n.sup.−1,−1).Math.({circumflex over (r)}.sub.0,{circumflex over (r)}.sub.1),
where τ.sub.n=F.sub.n+1/F.sub.n (=1/1, 2/1, 3/2, 5/3, . . . ) and F.sub.n is the nth Fibonacci number (F.sub.0=F.sub.1=1). Examples from different LI classes are shown in
(28) The displacement of the ith grid from the origin is the phase γ.sub.i, and the sum of the phases γ=Σ.sup.4.sub.i=0γ.sub.i labels the LI class of the tiling. Two tilings are locally isomorphic (up to inversion) if, and only if, the sum of their phases γ=Σ.sup.4.sub.i=0γ.sub.i, γ′=Σ.sup.4.sub.i=0γ′.sub.i are related by
|−½+{γ}|=|−½+{γ′}|, (Equation 1)
where {γ} denotes the fractional part of γ. The distinct values of γ lie within the interval [0, 0.5]; γ=0 corresponds to the Penrose tiling. Any γ can be mapped to an equivalent one γ′ within the interval [0, 0.5]] via
γ′=½−|−½+{γ}|. (Equation 2)
Moreover, γ, γ′ε[0, 0.5] and γ′≠γ′, then γ is not locally isomorphic to γ′.
(29) A vertex environment is a configuration of tiles that shares a common vertex. There are sixteen distinct vertex environments (up to rotation), and every LI class has a characteristic distribution of vertex environments (see Refs. [16] or [18]). The X, Y, Z, and ST vertices (using the notation of Refs. [13, 14, 19]) play an important role in our discussion. They are shown in
(30) Setting up bandstructure calculation—We compute the photonic bandstructure of dielectric heterostructures constructed by placing, on the tile vertices and oriented normal to the tiling plane, an array of parallel, infinitely long cylindrical rods with dielectric constant 11.56 (silicon) and radius 0.18a (filling fraction .sup.˜12.5%) in a background of air. The same radius (equivalently, same filling fraction) is chosen for all structures to allow for fair comparison. Examples of such dielectric structures are shown in
(31) Maxwell's equations are solved for states with transverse magnetic (TM) polarization, i.e., with the electric field oriented parallel to the cylindrical axis (the z-axis in
(32) For quasicrystals, the photonic bandgaps and the neighboring bands are known to be highly isotropic [22, 23]. Therefore, we simplify our analysis by restricting our computation of spectra to the Γ=(0, 0) and M=(b, 0) symmetry points, where b is one of the basis vectors of the reciprocal lattice. These are defined for the hexagonal first Brillouin zone, corresponding to the rhombic unit cell of the approximant.
(33) Results—Whenever a SVE appears in a tiling, the TM bandstructure contains states in which the electric field is highly concentrated on the SVE, either on one isolated site or on many sites.
(34) Take one of these states and let r be the radial distance from the central vertex. We observe that the energy density u(r) (the square of the field) peaks around r≈a—where the first nearest neighbors are located—then drops to ≤0.1% of the peak by around r≈2a. The field thus appears to be highly localized on the SVE. However, because some states are observed to have support on multiple sites, they may not be localized in the strict sense but, instead, may be multifractal, critical states [24, 25]. Determining whether this is the case is worthy of further investigation. Here, we describe the states as effectively localized.
(35) The number of effectively localized states is directly related to the number of SVEs. We empirically observe that there is one state for every X vertex (
n.sub.loc≡N.sub.X+N.sub.Y+2N.sub.Z+3N.sub.ST, (Equation 3)
where N.sub.V is the number of SVEs of type V. For different renditions from the same LI class, the number will differ.
(36) In the infinite-system limit, the fraction of effectively localized states for LI class γ is given by
φ(γ)=F.sub.X(γ)+F.sub.Y(γ)+2F.sub.Z(γ)+3F.sub.ST(γ), (Equation 4)
where F.sub.V is the density of SVEs of type V, shown in
(37) Let ω.sub.i.sup.L, ω.sub.i.sup.H be the lower and upper frequencies of the ith band. It is useful to define, for a given tiling, the upper band edge frequency ω.sub.+ and the lower band edge frequency ω.sub.− as follows:
ω.sub.+≡ω.sup.L.sub.N,ω.sub.−≡ω.sup.H.sub.N−n.sub.loc (Equation 5)
where N is the number of vertices in the unit cell.
(38) First, ω.sub.+ and ω.sub.− do not change significantly versus the degree of the approximant, characterized by N. This indicates that these quantities quickly converge to the values of the ideal, infinite system.
(39) Second, ω.sub.+ and ω.sub.− remain approximately constant versus γ. For the Penrose LI class, the region between ω.sub.− and ω.sub.+ is called the fundamental bandgap. Extending this definition to all LI classes, we find that the effectively localized states counted by Equation 3 are high-frequency states lying within the fundamental bandgap.
(40) Finally, the fraction of these states appears to stay constant, as the degree of the approximant increases. This is contrary to what we would expect if these effectively localized states arose from defects. We thus conclude that these effectively localized states are not defects, but are, rather, robust states that arise due to the SVEs.
(41)
(42) We also observe that the characteristic frequencies do not vary significantly versus γ, which suggests that these states are primarily attributable to the presence of SVEs and not to the global structure of the tiling. This supports a hypothesis, based on the study of one unspecified LI class [26-28], that these states can be described as local resonances between closely neighboring scatterers that are arranged in highly symmetric configurations. Further evidence is that the four SVEs have the largest numbers of adjacent acute rhombi (at least four); all other vertex environments contain fewer than four adjacent acute rhombi.
(43) From these observations, we expect the TM spectrum around the fundamental bandgap varies with γ according to
(44) We thus discover that the Penrose LI class is exceptional for being the only class with no effectively localized TM states; as a consequence, it has the largest outer bandgap. All other LI classes have, generically, effectively localized TM states within the fundamental bandgap with predictable and tunable degeneracies (
(45) Discussion—Our results reveal a deep connection between the localized states and restorability. A quasicrystal pattern is restorable if it can be uniquely specified given only a set of rules that fix the allowed clusters within a circle whose radius is smaller than some bound [9]. The bound can be used to derive a lower limit on the density of configurations of any given size, including the special vertex environments (SVEs). The restorable LI classes [10, 16] correspond to γ=nτ(n∈Z), a countable subset of measure zero in the spectrum of all LI classes described by the continuous parameter γ. The localization sites occur with non-negligible density and, hence, may be multifractal critical states [24, 25] rather than localized in the strict sense.
(46) By contrast, within the uncountable set of nonrestorable LI classes, γ may be varied such that the densities of some configurations can be made arbitrarily small, as illustrated in
(47) While our study is only in the case of vertex environments, the same may apply for larger configurations—that is, there may be larger clusters of obtuse and acute rhombi that are sites of localized states and there may be sequences of LI classes for which their density approaches zero. Similar thresholds almost surely apply to LI classes obtained by extensions of the dual method that are parameterized by additional degrees of freedom aside from γ (such as lattices dual to quasiperiodic pentagrids), and it may be worth studying such examples for the purpose of applications. The study here, though, establishes the basic principles.
EXAMPLES
(48) The following examples are provided in order to demonstrate and further illustrate certain preferred embodiments and aspects of the present invention and are not to be construed as limiting the scope thereof.
Example 1
(49) Effectively Localized States: Localized Versus Extended
(50) This Example reports on two studies that explore to what extent the effectively localized states are truly extended or localized. The studies presented here do not lead to definitive conclusions, but are intended to inform and guide how further studies might be performed. A couple notes on terminology: Because only effectively localized states are discussed here, we drop the effectively localized” descriptor. Moreover, all states of a given type (e.g., ST.sub.1 type, Z.sub.1 type) are said to form a miniband.
(51) Observing that the states within a miniband are degenerate would support the hypothesis that the states are localized and not extended. In Example 2, we examine whether the states within a miniband have a measurable difference in frequency. We identify and estimate the uncertainty stemming from discretization of the unit cell to numerically solve Maxwell's equations for the photonic bandstructure. The band width (i.e., the difference between the maximum and minimum eigenfrequencies in a miniband) is also estimated. We observe that the uncertainty is typically larger than the band width and, therefore, the frequencies of states within the miniband cannot be discriminated from one another (if the differences are theoretically nonzero). The results are also consistent with the states forming a miniband being degenerate in frequency.
(52) There are some effectively localized states in which the electric field is concentrated on a single SVE site. We refer to such states as single site (SS) states. There are other effectively localized states in which the field is distributed over multiple SVE sites. Such states are referred to as multiple site (MS) states. A characteristic feature of a localized state is an exponential falloff of the energy density from the localized site. In Example 3, we check whether the exponential falloff is observed in examples of SS and MS states to determine to what extent the states are localized. The results show that both SS and MS states are composed of exponentially localized field configurations, which are centered on individual SVE sites.
Example 2
(53) Degenerate States in Minibands
(54) To determine whether the frequencies of a set of states forming a miniband can be discriminated from one another, we need an estimate of the numerical uncertainty stemming from the procedure used to compute the bandstructure. In this Example, we estimate the uncertainty that stems from the fact that, when numerically solving Maxwell's equations, an initial step is to discretize the unit cell into a grid of pixels.
(55) The number of pixels N×N per unit cell, which we call the resolution, is a simulation parameter that can be changed. In the N.fwdarw.∞ limit (assuming the pixels are uniformly distributed in the unit cell), the pixelated unit cell approaches the ideal unit cell. However, for all simulations, N is necessarily finite. Therefore, the discretized unit cell is always an approximation of—and never equal to—the analytically defined unit cell. This approximation leads to some amount of numerical uncertainty in the computed values of frequency ω. We call this the uncertainty from resolution and denote it by dω.
(56) We denote the frequency range of a miniband (i.e., the difference between the largest and smallest frequencies in a miniband) by Δω and call it the band width. To resolve the frequency differences between states within a miniband—if the states are not degenerate—the uncertainty dω must be less than Δω, i.e.,
Δω>dω (Equation 6)
(57) However, as we show below, our estimates indicate that dω/Δω˜10.sup.2. Therefore, within the uncertainties, the observations are consistent with the states forming a miniband being degenerate in frequency.
(58) Uncertainty from Resolution
(59) We obtain an estimate of the uncertainty from resolution d! using the following procedure: We first choose an LI class γ and make a rendition (i.e., choose a set of phases γ.sub.i and degree of approximant). Next, we compute the bandstructure of this rendition, first using 512×512 pixels in the unit cell. Let ω.sup.i.sub.512 denote the ith largest eigenfrequency. We then compute the bandstructure of the same rendition, now using 1024×1024 resolution. Let ω.sup.i.sub.1024 denote the ith largest eigenfrequency computed at 1024×1024 resolution. The relative change δω.sup.i in the computed values of the frequencies
(60)
gives an estimate of dω/ω.
(61) We compute δω.sup.i for all of the states lying in the minibands. We repeat this calculation for three LI classes (γ=0:42; 0:45; 0:50), three renditions from each LI class, and six values of the dielectric constant ε. The results are shown in
(62) We observe that all of the values of δω.sup.i are less than 0:3%. This upper bound gives a conservative estimate of dω/ω:
dω/ω˜3×10.sup.−3 (Equation 8)
(63) Using a typical frequency of these states ω˜0:3 (in units of 2πc/a), we obtain an estimate of the absolute uncertainty from resolution dω (the main result):
dω=(dω/ω)ω˜(3×10.sup.−3)0.3˜10.sup.−3. (Equation 9)
(64) There are some additional observations that can be made from
(65) Band Width
(66) We now turn to an estimate the band width Δω. Our procedure is as follows: We first choose an LI class γ, make a rendition (i.e., choice of degree of approximant and choice of phases γ.sup.i whose sum is γ), and compute the bandstructure. The bandstructure will, in general, contain minibands. For each miniband, the band width Δω is computed by subtracting the minimum frequency in the miniband from the maximum frequency in the miniband. The band widths are plotted in
(67) The minibands—with the possible exception of the X miniband—have a band width Δω that does not systematically increase as the number of SVEs increases. Moreover, it appears that
Δω˜10.sup.−4. (Equation 10)(4.15)
(The ST2 band is an exception, which has band width 10.sup.−5.)
(68) We have estimated the uncertainty due to finite resolution (pixelization) to be dω˜10.sup.−3 and the band width to be Δω˜10.sup.−4. Our estimates show that the uncertainty is greater than the band width. Thus, the frequencies of different states within a given miniband cannot be discriminated from one another. The results are consistent with the states forming a miniband being degenerate in frequency. Initial studies using increased resolutions up to 2048×2048 show that Δω decreases with resolution, which is also consistent with the minibands comprising degenerate states.
Example 3
(69) Exponentially Localized Electric-Field Energy Density
(70) A characteristic feature of a localized state is an exponential falloff of the energy density from the localized site. In this Example, we check whether the exponential falloff is observed in examples of SS and MS states to determine to what extent the states are localized. Three states are examined. The states are frequency eigenstates of the same rendition (i.e., the same phases γ.sub.i and same approximant) of LI class γ=0:45.
(71) We first establish notation. Let E.sup.2(r) be the electric-field energy density of a frequency eigenstate from a miniband, where r denotes the position in the unit cell. Let x denote the position of the central vertex of one of the sites of the SVE type corresponding to the miniband. We compute the maximum value of the energy density E.sup.2(r) around a circle of radius r centered at x
(72)
as well as the average value of the energy density around the circle of radius r centered at x:
(73)
(74) The first state we consider is an ST.sub.1 MS state. Its electric field distribution E(r) is shown in the left panel of
(75) In
(76) The analysis is repeated for an ST2 SS state. Its electric field distribution E(r) is shown in the left panel of
(77) The third state we examine is an X MS state. Its electric field distribution E(r) is shown in the left panel of
(78) The above analysis suggests that the frequency eigenstates—both SS and MS—are composed of exponentially localized configurations centered on individual SVE sites.
Example 4
(79) Photonic Bandstructure Calculation
(80) We compute the photonic bandstructure of dielectric heterostructures constructed by placing, on the tile vertices and oriented normal to the tiling plane, an array of parallel, infinitely long cylindrical rods with dielectric constant 11:56 (silicon) and radius 0:18a (filling fraction ˜12.5%) in a background of air. The same radius (equivalently, same filling fraction) is chosen for all structures to allow for fair comparison. An example of such a dielectric structure is shown in
(81) Maxwell's equations are solved for states with transverse magnetic (TM) polarization, i.e., with the electric field oriented parallel to the cylindrical axis (the z-axis in
(82) For quasicrystals, the photonic bandgaps and the neighboring bands are known to be highly isotropic [22, 23]. Therefore, we simplify our analysis by restricting our computation of spectra to the Γ=(0; 0) and M=(b; 0) symmetry points, where b is one of the basis vectors of the reciprocal lattice. These are defined for the hexagonal first Brillouin zone, corresponding to the rhombic unit cell of the approximant. (Because the basis vectors of the rhombic unit cell are not equal in magnitude, the hexagonal first Brillouin zone is attened/stretched along one of the symmetry directions.)
Example 5
(83) Decorations and Air-Localized States
(84) In this Example, we present results showing that the presence of effectively localized states persists upon changing the decoration of the tiling. Two further choices of decoration are studied, one in which the scatterers are placed at tile centers, and one in which the scatterers are placed at the centroids of the Delaunay-triangulated tiling. The latter construction can be performed simply as follows: Take a tile (fat or skinny) and draw perpendicular bisectors from each edge, extending into the interior of the tile, until the bisectors each encounter another bisector. (Because the rhombus tiles are not squares, there will never be a point of intersection between more than two bisectors). At that point of intersection, place a scatterer. By this construction, every tile will contain two scatterers.
(85) Following the same procedure as discussed in Example 4 to calculate the TM bandstructure, we find that both center-decorated structures and Delaunay-decorated structures have effectively localized states. The X, Y, Z and ST vertex environments continue to be SVEs. The center-decorated structures have one additional SVE in the W vertex environment. The decorated SVEs are shown in
(86) We continue to observe effectively localized states lying in the fundamental bandgap in which the field is concentrated in the dielectric component. However, there is an additional novelty in the center-decorated structures. There are states in which the field is concentrated in the air component. Representative examples of these “air-localized states” are shown in
(87) Although the invention has been described with reference to these preferred embodiments, other embodiments can achieve the same results. Variations and modifications of the present invention will be obvious to those skilled in the art and it is intended to cover in the appended claims all such modifications and equivalents. The entire disclosures of all applications, patents, and publications cited above, and of the corresponding application are hereby incorporated by reference.
REFERENCES
(88) 1. Levine, D. and Steinhardt, P. J. (1984) “Quasicrystals: A New Class of Ordered Structures,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 53(26), 2477-2480. 2. Levine, D. and Steinhardt, P. J. (1986) “Quasicrystals. I. Definition and Structure,” Phys. Rev. B 34(2), 596-616. 3. Socolar, J. E. S. and Steinhardt, P. J. (1986) “Quasicrystals. II. Unit-Cell Configurations,” Phys. Rev. B 34(2), 617-647. 4. Steinhardt, P. J. and DiVincenzo, D. P. (1999) Quasicrystals: The State of the Art, World Scientic, Singapore. 5. Altug, H. et al. (2006) “Ultrafast Photonic Crystal Nanocavity Laser,” Nat. Phys. 2, 484. 6. El-Kady, I. et al. (2006) “Application of Photonic Crystals in Submicron Damage Detection and Quantification,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 88(25), 253109. 7. Chan, Y. S. et al. (1998) “Photonic Band Gaps in Two Dimensional Photonic Quasicrystals,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80(5), 956-959. 8. Vardeny, Z. V. et al. (2013) “Optics of Photonic Quasicrystals,” Nat. Photonics 7, 177. 9. Levitov, L. S. (1988) “Local Rules for Quasicrystals,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 119, 627-666. 10. Ingersent, K. and Steinhardt, P. J. (1990) “Matching Rules and Growth Rules for Pentagonal Quasicrystal Tilings,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 64(17), 2034-2037. 11. Penrose, R. (1974) “The Role of Aesthetics in Pure and Applied Mathematical Research,” Bulletin of the Institute of Mathematics and Its Applications 10, 266-271. 12. Gardner, M. (1972) “Mathematical Games,” Sci. Am 226, 115. 13. de Bruijn, N. G. (1981) “Lambda Calculus Notation with Nameless Dummies, a Tool for Automatic Formula Manipulation, with Application to the Church-Rosser Theorem,” Indagationes Mathematicae (Proceedings) 84, 39. 14. de Bruijn, N. G. (1981) “Algebraic Theory of Penrose's Non-Periodic Tilings of the Plane. II,” Indagationes Mathematicae (Proceedings) 84(1), 53-66. 15. Socolar, J. E. S. et al. (1985) “Quasicrystals with Arbitrary Orientational Symmetry,” Phys. Rev. B 32(8), 5547-5550. 16. Lin, C. et al. (2017) “Corrigendum: Hyperuniformity Variation with Quasicrystal Local Isomorphism Class,” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29(47), 479501. 17. Entin-Wohlman, O. et al. (1988) “Penrose Tiling Approximants,” Journal of Physics France 49(4), 587-598. 18. Zobetz, E. and Preisinger, A. (1990) “Vertex Frequencies in Generalized Penrose Patterns,” Acta Crystallogr Sect. A 46(12), 962-970. 19. Pavlovitch, A. et al. (1989) “Statistics of ‘Worms’ in Penrose Tilings,” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 22(20), 4347. 20. Joannopoulos, J. D. et al. (2011) Photonic Crystals: Molding the Flow of Light, Princeton University Press. 21. Johnson, S. G. and Joannopoulos, J. D. (2001) “Block-Iterative Frequency-Domain Methods for Maxwell's Equations in a Planewave Basis,” Opt. Express 8(3), 173-190. 22. Rechtsman, M. C. et al. (2008) “Optimized Structures for Photonic Quasicrystals,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 101(7), 073902. 23. Florescu, M. et al. (2009) “Complete Band Gaps in Two-Dimensional Photonic Quasicrystals,” Phys. Rev. B 80(15), 155112. 24. Tokihiro, T. et al. (1988) “Exact Eigenstates on a Two-Dimensional Penrose Lattice and Their Fractal Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. B 38(9), 5981-5987. 25. Repetowicz, P. et al. (1998) “Exact Eigenstates of Tight-Binding Hamiltonians on the Penrose Tiling,” Phys. Rev. B 58(20), 13482-13490. 26. Wang, K. (2006) “Light Wave States in Two-Dimensional Quasiperiodic Media,” Phys. Rev. B 73(23), 235122. 27. Wang, K. (2007) “Structural Effects on Light Wave Behavior in Quasiperiodic Regular and Decagonal Penrose-Tiling Dielectric Media: A Comparative Study,” Phys. Rev. B 76(8), 085107. 28. Wang, K. (2010) “Light Localization in Photonic Band Gaps of Quasiperiodic Dielectric Structures,” Phys. Rev. B 82(4), 045119.