\documentclass{optica-article} \journal{opticajournal} % for journals or Optica Open % Set the article type % \articletype{Research Article} % Note that article type is not required for Express journals (OE, BOE, OME and OSAC) \usepackage{lineno} \linenumbers % Turn off line numbering for Optica Open preprint submissions. %\documentclass[aps,pra,twocolumn,superscriptaddress]{revtex4-2} %\usepackage{mathtools} %\usepackage{graphicx} %\usepackage{hyperref} %\usepackage{enumerate} \begin{document} \title{Distinguishing thermal and pseudothermal light by testing the Siegert relation} \author{Xi Jie Yeo,\authormark{1} Justin Yu Xiang Peh,\authormark{1} Darren Ming Zhi Koh,\authormark{1} Christian Kurtsiefer,\authormark{1,2,*} and Peng Kian Tan\authormark{1}} \address{\authormark{1}Centre for Quantum Technologies, 3 Science Drive 2, Singapore 117543\\ \authormark{2}Department of Physics, National University of Singapore, 2 Science Drive 3, Singapore 117551} \email{\authormark{*}christian.kurtsiefer@gmail.com} %\date{\today} \begin{abstract} Thermal light, including blackbody radiation and spontaneous emission, exhibits photon bunching. Thermal light sources, however, typically yield low spectral densities, limiting their practical utility. Pseudothermal light sources with higher brightness and longer coherence time are often employed instead. While pseudothermal light also exhibits photon bunching, this property may not suffice to fully replicate the behavior of genuine thermal light. Here we demonstrate a method to directly test the Siegert relation for two sources of photon-bunched light, laser light scattered from a rotating ground glass and spontaneously emitted light from a gas discharge lamp, probing a fundamental criterion expected of thermal light. \end{abstract} % \maketitle \section{Thermal and pseudothermal light} Blackbody radiation forms stationary light fields across a broad frequency spectrum without fixed phase relationships between light at different locations or times~\cite{Davis1996}. Similarly, light with random phases between individual emission processes is produced when spontaneous emission arises from an ensemble of particles, like atoms, with motion in thermal equilibrium~\cite{Planck1900,Einstein1905,Glauber1963_PhotonCorrelations,Loudon2000}. Thermal light, including blackbody radiation~\cite{PK2016,Deng2019} and spontaneous emission from gas discharge lamps~\cite{Rebka1957,HBT1958,Morgan1966,Scarl1968}, exhibits photon bunching~\cite{HBT1954,HBT1956,Glauber1963_QuantumTheory,MandelWolf1995,Fox2006}, where the photodetection events appear closer together than as described by random Poissonian timing statistics~\cite{Glauber1963}; mathematically, this is expressed by a second order correlation function $g^{(2)}(\tau=0)>1$. However, the spectral density of blackbody radiation is determined by its surface temperature, which limits its photon bunching output brightness below practical thresholds. The broadband nature of the blackbody spectrum shortens the coherence timescale of the bunching behavior to the femtoseconds regime, rendering its photon bunching inaccessible to standard photodetectors. Alternative “pseudothermal” light sources are therefore commonly employed to demonstrate photon bunching. Typical implementations include laser beams scattered from time‑varying dispersive media, such as rotating ground glass diffusers~\cite{MS1964,Arecchi1965,Gonsiorowski1983,Scarcelli2004,Valencia2005,Zhou2017,Pieper2018,Howard2019,You2020}, or particles undergoing Brownian motion suspended in a liquid~\cite{Arecchi1967,Pecora1985,Dravins2015,PK2017}. % Such pseudothermal light sources generate bright photon-bunched light owing to the underlying laser excitation, with coherence timescales long enough to be readily resolved by available photodetectors. Here, we demonstrate that pseudothermal light can yield photon correlations distinguishable from those of thermal radiation, even though both exhibit the temporal photon bunching characteristic.% of thermal fields. \section{Signature photon bunching} We compare two photon-bunched light sources: a thermal light source based on spontaneous emissions from a Mercury (Hg) low pressure gas discharge lamp, and a pseudothermal light source based on laser light scattered off a rotating ground glass plate (see Figs.\,\ref{fig:g2_setup}(a) and (b)). \begin{figure} \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{g2_setup.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure1.eps} \end{center} \caption{ (a) Thermal light source based on a Mercury (Hg) vapor gas discharge lamp, (b) pseudothermal light generated by laser light scattered off a rotating ground glass diffuser. (c) Hanbury-Brown--Twiss interferometer to measure the second-order photodetection time correlations $g^{(2)}(\tau)$. (BPF: bandpass filter, LP: linear polariser, RGG: rotating ground glass, BS: fibre-based beamsplitter, APD: avalanche photodetectors, SMF: single mode fibre) } \label{fig:g2_setup} \end{figure} For thermal light, the spontaneous emission around 546.1\,nm from the Hg lamp is selected by a 546\,nm spectral filter with a 3\,nm optical passband. Multiple spectral emission lines due to hyperfine splitting resulting from a natural mix of Hg isotopes with non-zero nuclear spins are captured. The presence of multiple emissions that are mutually incoherent reduce the resulting $g^{(2)}(0)$ from the ideal thermal light value of 2. The spectrally filtered light is transmitted through a linear polariser to increase interferometric visibility, and projected into a single spatial mode by a single mode optical fibre. Pseudothermal light is prepared by scattering light from a 780\,nm distributed feedback laser focused on a rotating ground glass difffuser of grit 1500 (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2_setup}(b).) The bare tip of an optical fiber (single mode for 780\,nm) is positioned about 19\,cm away from the illuminated spot to collect light scattered from the ground glass. % Light scattered from a rotating ground glass is expected to show photon bunching described by a second order correlation function $g^{(2)}(\tau)$ with a Gaussian profile~\cite{Estes1971,Jakeman1975,Pusey1976,Kuusela2017}, \begin{equation} g^{(2)}(\tau) = 1 + e^{-\left(\frac{\tau}{\tau_{\text{RGG}}}\right)^{2}}\,, \end{equation} where $\tau_{\text{RGG}}$ is the coherence timescale of the photon bunching signature of this source. The focal spot size $\phi$ of the beam on the ground glass surface is about 4\,$\mu$m in diameter, and positioned at a radial distance $R$ of about 10\,mm from the rotation axis. A motor rotates the ground glass with a period $T\approx4$\,ms. With the scattered light collected at a distance of 19\,cm away, which is significantly larger than the spot size of $\phi=4\,\mu$m, the coherence timescale $\tau_{\text{RGG}}$ is predicted~\cite{Estes1971,Jakeman1975,Pusey1976,Kuusela2017} as $\tau_{\text{RGG}} \approx \phi T/(4 \pi R)$, or $\tau_{\text{RGG}}\approx130$\,ns for our parameters. \begin{figure} \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./ch4-Siegert/normal_g2/g2_compare.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure2.eps} \end{center} \caption{Photon bunching signatures. (a) The Hg lamp exhibits photon bunching with $g_{\text{Hg}}^{(2)}(\tau=0)=1.142\pm0.007$ and coherence timescale $\tau_{\text{Hg}}=0.35\pm0.02\,$ns (both numeric values are results of fits, solid line). (b) Results for scattered light from the rotating ground glass yield $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2)}(0)=1.859\pm0.002$ and $\tau_{\text{RGG}}=277.5\pm0.6\,$ns. The error bars plotted are the standard deviations assuming Poissonian shot noise. } \label{fig:g2} \end{figure} To detect for photon bunching signatures in light from the two sources, a Hanbury-Brown--Twiss (HBT) interferometer (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2_setup}(c)) is used. For this, light from a source is sent through a beamsplitter to illuminate a pair of actively quenched Silicon avalanche photodiodes (APD). The photo-detection events were then timestamped into timebins of 64\,ps duration, from which detection time differences between the detectors were histogrammed, and histograms were fitted with Gaussian models as illustrated in Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2}. The timestamp contributes a timing jitter of about 20\,ps standard deviation, and each Si APD adds another 35\,ps in full width at half maximum (FWHM) in timing jitter to the measurement. Light from both the Hg lamp and the rotating ground glass exhibit temporal photon bunching. The fitted peak $g_{\text{Hg}}^{(2)}(\tau=0)=1.142\pm0.007$ is significantly lower than the theoretical thermal light peak $g^{(2)}(\tau=0)=2$, as anticipated from the contribution of different spectral lines. Furthermore, the short coherence timescale of $\tau_{\text{Hg}}=0.35\pm0.02\,$ns makes it difficult for standard photodetectors to resolve the timing of photo-detection pairs. In contrast, the output from the rotating ground glass exhibits a noticeably stronger photon bunching behaviour with $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2)}(\tau=0)=1.859\pm0.002$, and a coherence timescale $\tau_{\text{RGG}}=277.5\pm0.6\,$ns that is 3 orders longer, and thus straightforward to resolve with readily available detectors. This makes scattering light from a rotating ground glass a popular pseudothermal light source to demonstrate photon bunching. \section{Testing the Siegert relation} Thermal light exhibits photon timing correlations, including the characteristic photon bunching, that satisfy the Siegert relation~\cite{Siegert1943,Pike1974,Jakeman1980,Lemieux1999,Ferreira2020,Las2022} \begin{equation} g^{(2)}(\tau) = 1 + \lvert g^{(1)}(\tau) \rvert ^{2}\,, \label{eqn:siegert} \end{equation} where $g^{(1)}(\tau)$ is the first order correlation function, and its modulus $\lvert g^{(1)}(\tau) \rvert$ is the interferometric visibility. The $g^{(2)}(\tau)$ can be determined by photon bunching measurements in a HBT interferometer as shown in the previous section, and is adopted as a general test for thermal light due to its practical ease and convenience. The $g^{(1)}(\tau)$ can be obtained with a Michelson interfereometer scanning over a range of optical path length differences. This can be difficult as the scanning range needs to be on the order of the coherence timescale. For the example above with $\tau_{\text{RGG}}=277.5\,$ns, this would necessitate an impractical scan over 83\,metres of path length difference. \begin{figure} \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{g2X_setup.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure3.eps} \end{center} \caption{Experimental setup for measuring interferometric photon correlations $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$. The delay fibers are chosen to introduce an optical delay of $\Delta=2.22\,\mu$s for testing scattered light from the rotating ground glass, and $\Delta=10\,$ns for testing light from the Hg lamp. (BS: Beamsplitter, APD: avalanche photodetectors) } \label{fig:g2X_setup} \end{figure} Alternatively, an asymmetric Mach-Zehnder interferometer~\cite{Ferrantini2025,Kulkov2024,Guerin2025} can be used to test the Siegert relation via an interferometric correlation $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$ (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2X_setup}). This reveals both the second order correlation function $g^{(2)}(\tau)$ and the modulus of the first order correlation function $\lvert g^{(1)}(\tau) \rvert$ simultaneously. This method has the advantage of being phase independent by measuring $\lvert g^{(1)}(\tau) \rvert$ instead of $g^{(1)}(\tau)$, and does not require a range of optical path length differences. The respective light fields $E_{A,B}(t)$ at the output ports $A,B$ of an intensity-balanced interferometer are \begin{equation} E_{A,B}(t) = \frac{E(t) \pm E(t+\Delta)}{\sqrt{2}}\,, \label{eqn:fields} \end{equation} where $E(t)$ is the input light field of the interferometer. The fixed optical delay $\Delta$ is introduced by a single-mode optical fiber, chosen to be much larger than the expected characteristic coherence time of the light. Photoevents in our implementation are detected by Silicon avalanche photodetectors (APDs) at the output ports of the interferometer and timestamped. The interferometric photon correlation $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$ between the photodetectors is \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} g^{(2X)}(\tau) = &\frac{\langle E^{*}_{A}(t+\tau)E^{*}_{B}(t)E_{B}(t)E_{A}(t+\tau)\rangle}{ \langle E^{*}_{A}(t)E_{A}(t)\rangle \langle E^{*}_{B}(t)E_{B}(t)\rangle}\\ \end{aligned} \label{eqn:g2X} \end{equation} where $\langle\dots\rangle$ is the ensemble average over measurement time $t$, and $\tau$ is the two-photoevent coincidence timing separation. Upon expansion of Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:g2X}) using Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:fields}), it can be shown~\cite{lebreton2013exp,XJ2023} that the non-zero terms are \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} g^{(2X)}(\tau) = &\frac{1}{4}\,g^{(2)}(\tau+\Delta)+ \frac{1}{4}\,g^{(2)}(\tau-\Delta) \\ + &\frac{1}{2}[g^{(2)}(\tau) - |g^{(1)}(\tau)|^{2}]\,. \end{aligned} \label{eqn:zerotime} \end{equation} The temporal photon bunching $g^{(2)}(\tau=0)$ signature would now manifest into two side peaks $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$ at $1/4$ of its original amplitude, positioned at photo-detection time delays $\tau=\pm\Delta$. If the test light obeys the Siegert relation Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:siegert}), % such that $g^{(2)}(\tau) - |g^{(1)}(\tau)|^{2}=1$, and recalling that the optical delay length is chosen such that $g^{(2)}(\tau=\Delta)=1$, then $g^{(2X)}(\tau=0)=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{2}=1$. This results in a flat coincidence floor around $\tau=0$. \begin{figure} \begin{center} % \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./ch4-Siegert/cross_g2/g2X_compare.eps} \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figure4.eps} \end{center} \caption{Experimental results for interferometric photon correlations. (a) Light from the Hg lamp shows two bunching side peaks $g_{\text{Hg}}^{(2X)}(\tau=\pm\Delta)=1.044\pm0.003$ at reduced amplitudes, with $\tau_{\text{Hg}}=0.41\pm0.03\,$ns. (b) Scattered light from the rotating ground glass exhibits a central bunching peak (blue dashed lines) $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2X)}(\tau=0)=1.412\pm0.002$ and two smaller side peaks $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2X)}(\tau=\pm\Delta)=1.206\pm0.002$, with $\tau_{\text{RGG}}=172.8\pm0.6\,$ns. The solid line shows a fit to Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:zerotime}). The error bars plotted are the standard deviations assuming Poissonian shot noise. } \label{fig:g2X} \end{figure} Experimental results of $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$ for the two light sources tested in this work are shown in Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2X}. The flat region near $\tau=0$ for light emitted by the Hg lamp suggests good agreement with the Siegert relation, and therefore compatible with expectations for thermal light. Light prepared by the rotating ground glass setup shows a non-flat bunching feature around $\tau=0$, clearly violating the Siegert relation ($g^{(2)}(\tau) -|g^{(1)}(\tau)|^{2}\neq1$, see Fig.\,\ref{fig:g2X} (b)). The fit of the experimental $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2X)}(\tau)$ to Eq.\,(\ref{eqn:zerotime}) yields a central bunching peak $g_{\text{RGG}}^{(2X)}(0)=1.412\pm0.002$ and $-|g^{(1)}(0)|^{2}=-0.421\pm0.003$. However, although the amplitude of $|g^{(1)}(0)|^{2}$ is similar to the central bunching peak amplitude, its coherence timescale $\tau_{c}=149\pm2\,$ns is shorter than $\tau_{\text{RGG}}=172.8\pm0.6\,$ns, and so it does not fully cancel out the bunching feature around $\tau=0$. This deviation from the expectation for thermal light suggests the rotating ground glass source to be considered a pseudothermal light source, and not a thermal light source. \section{Conclusion} We find that the test of the Siegert relation can be a useful tool to distinguish thermal from pseudothermal light, providing additional information beyond the observation of photon bunching. Therefore, probing for the interferometric photon correlation $g^{(2X)}(\tau)$ can be a stronger witness of thermal light. % \begin{acknowledgments} \section*{Funding} This research is supported by the Quantum Engineering Programme through NRF2021-QEP2-03-P02, the Ministry of Education, and the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore. %\end{acknowledgments} \section*{Disclosures} The authors declare no conflicts of interest. % \bibliography{references} \begin{thebibliography}{10} \newcommand{\enquote}[1]{``#1''} \bibitem{Davis1996} C.~C. Davis, \emph{Lasers and electro-optics} (Cambridge university press, 1996). \bibitem{Planck1900} M.~Planck, \enquote{{\"U}ber irreversible strahlungsvorgänge,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Ann. Phys.}} \textbf{306}, 69--122 (1900). \bibitem{Einstein1905} A.~Einstein, \enquote{{Einstein's Proposal of the Photon Concept—a Translation of the Annalen der Physik Paper of 1905},} {\protect\JournalTitle{Am. J. Phys.}} \textbf{33}, 367--374 (1965). \bibitem{Glauber1963_PhotonCorrelations} R.~J. Glauber, \enquote{Photon correlations,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{10}, 84--86 (1963). \bibitem{Loudon2000} R.~Loudon, \emph{The Quantum Theory of Light} (Oxford, UK, 2000). \bibitem{PK2016} P.~K. Tan, A.~H. Chan, and C.~Kurtsiefer, \enquote{{Optical intensity interferometry through atmospheric turbulence},} {\protect\JournalTitle{MNRAS}} \textbf{457}, 4291--4295 (2016). \bibitem{Deng2019} Y.~Deng, H.~Wang, X.~Ding, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Quantum interference between light sources separated by 150 million kilometers,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{123}, 080401 (2019). \bibitem{Rebka1957} R.~V. Rebka, G. A.and~Pound, \enquote{Time-correlated photons,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Nature}} \textbf{180}, 1035--1036 (1957). \bibitem{HBT1958} R.~H. Brown and R.~Twiss, \enquote{Interferometry of the intensity fluctuations in light. ii. an experimental test of the theory for partially coherent light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Proc. R. Soc. Lond.}} \textbf{243}, 291--319 (1958). \bibitem{Morgan1966} B.~L. Morgan and L.~Mandel, \enquote{Measurement of photon bunching in a thermal light beam,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{16}, 1012--1015 (1966). \bibitem{Scarl1968} D.~B. Scarl, \enquote{Measurements of photon correlations in partially coherent light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev.}} \textbf{175}, 1661--1668 (1968). \bibitem{HBT1954} R.~H. Brown and R.~Q. Twiss, \enquote{Lxxiv. a new type of interferometer for use in radio astronomy,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Lond. Edinb. Dublin philos. mag. j. sci.}} \textbf{45}, 663--682 (1954). \bibitem{HBT1956} R.~H. Brown and R.~Q. Twiss, \enquote{Correlation between photons in two coherent beams of light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Nature}} \textbf{177}, 27--29 (1956). \bibitem{Glauber1963_QuantumTheory} R.~J. Glauber, \enquote{The quantum theory of optical coherence,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev.}} \textbf{130}, 2529--2539 (1963). \bibitem{MandelWolf1995} L.~Mandel and E.~Wolf, \emph{Optical coherence and quantum optics} (Cambridge university press, 1995). \bibitem{Fox2006} M.~Fox, \emph{Quantum optics: An Introduction}, Oxford Master Series in Physics (OUP Oxford, 2006). \bibitem{Glauber1963} R.~J. Glauber, \enquote{Photon correlations,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{10}, 84--86 (1963). \bibitem{MS1964} W.~Martienssen and E.~Spiller, \enquote{{Coherence and Fluctuations in Light Beams},} {\protect\JournalTitle{Am. J. Phys.}} \textbf{32}, 919--926 (1964). \bibitem{Arecchi1965} F.~Arecchi and R.~Bonifacio, \enquote{Theory of optical maser amplifiers,} {\protect\JournalTitle{IEEE J. Quantum Electron.}} \textbf{1}, 169--178 (1965). \bibitem{Gonsiorowski1983} T.~Gonsiorowski and J.~C. Dainty, \enquote{Correlation properties of light produced by quasi-thermal sources,} {\protect\JournalTitle{J. Opt. Soc. Am.}} \textbf{73}, 234--237 (1983). \bibitem{Scarcelli2004} G.~Scarcelli, A.~Valencia, and Y.~Shih, \enquote{Experimental study of the momentum correlation of a pseudothermal field in the photon-counting regime,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. A}} \textbf{70}, 051802 (2004). \bibitem{Valencia2005} A.~Valencia, G.~Scarcelli, M.~D'Angelo, and Y.~Shih, \enquote{Two-photon imaging with thermal light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{94}, 063601 (2005). \bibitem{Zhou2017} Y.~Zhou, F.~Li, B.~Bai, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Superbunching pseudothermal light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. A}} \textbf{95}, 053809 (2017). \bibitem{Pieper2018} K.~Pieper, A.~Bergmann, R.~Dengler, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Using a pseudo-thermal light source to teach spatial coherence,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Eur. J. Phys.}} \textbf{39}, 045303 (2018). \bibitem{Howard2019} L.~A. Howard, G.~G. Gillett, M.~E. Pearce, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Optimal imaging of remote bodies using quantum detectors,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{123}, 143604 (2019). \bibitem{You2020} C.~You, M.~A. Quiroz-Ju\'{a}rez, A.~Lambert, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Identification of light sources using machine learning,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Appl. Phys. Rev.}} \textbf{7}, 021404 (2020). \bibitem{Arecchi1967} F.~T. Arecchi, M.~Giglio, and U.~Tartari, \enquote{Scattering of coherent light by a statistical medium,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev.}} \textbf{163}, 186--194 (1967). \bibitem{Pecora1985} R.~Pecora, \emph{Dynamic light scattering: applications of photon correlation spectroscopy} (Springer Science \& Business Media, 1985). \bibitem{Dravins2015} D.~Dravins, T.~Lagadec, and P.~D. Nu{\~n}ez, \enquote{Optical aperture synthesis with electronically connected telescopes,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Nat. Commun.}} \textbf{6}, 6852 (2015). \bibitem{PK2017} P.~K. Tan and C.~Kurtsiefer, \enquote{{Temporal intensity interferometry for characterization of very narrow spectral lines},} {\protect\JournalTitle{MNRAS}} \textbf{469}, 1617--1621 (2017). \bibitem{Estes1971} L.~E. Estes, M.~Narducci, and R.~A. Tuft, \enquote{Scattering of light from a rotating ground glass$\ast$,} {\protect\JournalTitle{J. Opt. Soc. Am.}} \textbf{61}, 1301--1306 (1971). \bibitem{Jakeman1975} E.~Jakeman, \enquote{The effect of wavefront curvature on the coherence properties of laser light scattered by target centres in uniform motion,} {\protect\JournalTitle{J. Phys. A}} \textbf{8}, L23 (1975). \bibitem{Pusey1976} P.~N. Pusey, \enquote{Photon correlation study of laser speckle produced by a moving rough surface,} {\protect\JournalTitle{J. Phys. D}} \textbf{9}, 1399--1409 (1976). \bibitem{Kuusela2017} T.~A. Kuusela, \enquote{Measurement of the second-order coherence of pseudothermal light,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Am. J. Phys.}} \textbf{85}, 289--294 (2017). \bibitem{Siegert1943} A.~J.~F. Siegert, \emph{On the Fluctuations in Signals Returned by Many Independently Moving Scatterers}, Radiation Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1943). \bibitem{Pike1974} H.~Z. Cummins and E.~R. Pike, \emph{Photon correlation and light beating spectroscopy} (Springer Science+Business Media, 1974). \bibitem{Jakeman1980} E.~Jakeman, \enquote{On the statistics of k-distributed noise,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General}} \textbf{13}, 31 (1980). \bibitem{Lemieux1999} P.-A. Lemieux and D.~J. Durian, \enquote{Investigating non-gaussian scattering processes by using nth-order intensity correlation functions,} {\protect\JournalTitle{J. Opt. Soc. Am. A}} \textbf{16}, 1651--1664 (1999). \bibitem{Ferreira2020} D.~Ferreira, R.~Bachelard, W.~Guerin, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Connecting field and intensity correlations: The siegert relation and how to test it,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Am. J. Phys.}} \textbf{88}, 831--837 (2020). \bibitem{Las2022} P.~Lass{\`e}gues, M.~A.~F. Biscassi, M.~Morisse, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Field and intensity correlations: the siegert relation from stars to quantum emitters,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Eur. Phys. J. D}} \textbf{76}, 246 (2022). \bibitem{Ferrantini2025} J.~Ferrantini, J.~Crawford, S.~Kulkov, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Multifrequency-resolved Hanbury Brown-Twiss effect,} {\protect\JournalTitle{APL Photonics}} \textbf{10}, 026113 (2025). \bibitem{Kulkov2024} S.~Kulkov, T.~Potuckova, E.~Bernasconi, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Inter-pixel cross-talk as background to two-photon interference effects in SPAD arrays,} {\protect\JournalTitle{JINST}} \textbf{19}, P12015 (2024). \bibitem{Guerin2025} W.~Guerin, M.~Hugbart, S.~Tolila, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Stellar intensity interferometry in the photon-counting regime,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Comptes Rendus. Physique}} \textbf{26(G1)}, 659-679 (2025). \bibitem{lebreton2013exp} A.~Lebreton, I.~Abram, R.~Braive, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Unequivocal differentiation of coherent and chaotic light through interferometric photon correlation measurements,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. Lett.}} \textbf{110}, 163603 (2013). \bibitem{XJ2023} X.~J. Yeo, E.~Ernst, A.~Leow, \emph{et~al.}, \enquote{Direct measurement of the coherent light proportion from a practical laser source,} {\protect\JournalTitle{Phys. Rev. A}} \textbf{109}, 013706 (2024). \end{thebibliography} \end{document}