Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 73 references

Ultrastrong photon superbunching from electron shelving and time integral

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes a mechanism by which electron shelving and the time integral of fluorescence performed by a passive filter convert the single-photon emission of a Lambda-type emitter into light with ultrastrong superbunching, giving…

desk verdict A simple, likely correct mechanism for all-order superbunching via shelving plus time-integration by a filter, but Eq. (10) is wrong and the abstract overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.09873 v1 pith:HKVV7XYM submitted 2024-12-13 quant-ph

He-bin Zhang , Yuanjiang Tang , Yong-Chun Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81V80 PACS 42.50.Ar42.50.Pq
keywords photonsuperbunchingelectronshelvingfrequency-filteredcorrelationLambda-typeemittertimeintegralcavityQEDhigher-orderresonancefluorescence
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Electron shelving and the time integral performed by a spectral filter together turn the single-photon fluorescence of a Lambda-type emitter into light with ultrastrong photon superbunching. The paper shows that when the emitter is driven strongly on one transition and weakly on a shelving transition, the steady-state population of the emitting state becomes extremely small, so after each photon emission the emitter is quickly re-excited and emits tight multi-photon bursts. A filter with a bandwidth matched to the re-excitation rate integrates these bursts into temporally indistinguishable photon clusters, giving frequency-filtered correlations $g_b^{(2)}(0)$ beyond $10^{10}$ and $g_b^{(N)}(0) \approx \tilde{\rho}_{ee}^{1-N}$ for all orders. The authors argue the mechanism is universal, applies to cavity QED and to the D2 line of $^{87}$Rb, and that both the correlation degree and the frequency of the light can be tuned over broad ranges.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the frequency-filtered correlation function of the filter mode $b$, computed through the sensor-method limit $g_b^{(N)}(0) = \lim_{g_c\to 0} \langle b^{\dagger N} b^N\rangle / \langle b^\dagger b\rangle^N$. The key physical relation is $g_\sigma^{(2)}(\tau) = \rho_c^{ee}(\tau)/\tilde{\rho}_{ee}$, which ties the enormous bunching to the tiny steady-state excitation $\tilde{\rho}_{ee}$ versus the large conditional re-excitation $\rho_c^{ee}(\tau)$ after a photon is detected. Electron shelving creates the disparity: strong driving $\Omega$ on the $|g\rangle\leftrightarrow|e\rangle$ transition and weak driving $\Omega_r$ on the shelving transition $|g\rangle\leftrightarrow|a\rangle$ makes $\tilde{\rho}_{ee}$ small, while a filter of bandwidth $\kappa$ performs the time integral that converts the ensuing photon bursts into indistinguishable multi-photon clusters. The optimal bandwidth is $\kappa\approx\gamma$ in the strong-driving regime and $\kappa\approx\Omega$ in the weak-driving regime.

What would settle it

Measure the filtered second- and third-order correlations from a single trapped $^{87}$Rb atom (or an equivalent Lambda emitter) at $\Omega \gg \Omega_r$ and $\kappa \approx \gamma$: the prediction is $g_b^{(2)}(0) \approx \tilde{\rho}_{ee}^{-1}$ and exponential growth $g_b^{(N)}(0) \approx \tilde{\rho}_{ee}^{1-N}$ with order; observing values orders of magnitude below this, or a plateau in $N$, would falsify the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the normalized frequency-filtered correlation functions of the emitted light obey $g_b^{(N)}(0) \approx \tilde{\rho}_{ee}^{1-N}$ in the regime $\Omega \gg \gamma, \Omega_r$ with $\kappa \approx \gamma$, where $\tilde{\rho}_{ee}$ is the steady-state excitation probability of the driven transition. Because shelving in the auxiliary ground state $|a\rangle$ makes $\tilde{\rho}_{ee}$ extremely small, the second-order correlation can exceed $10^{10}$ and the correlation grows exponentially with the order $N$, a degree of superbunching the authors state has been 'hitherto unreachable' under ordinary conditions. The physical origin is the combination of electron shelving—which suppresses the steady-state population of the emitting channel while leaving the conditional re-excitation probability after a photon emission close to one—and the time integral of fluorescence performed by a filter, which collects the resulting multi-photon bursts into clusters. The authors also demonstrate the mechanism for a concrete $^{87}$Rb implementation and show it extends to cavity QED systems, where the superbunching survives up to intermediate coupling strengths.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the assumption that a real optical filter can be modeled as a weakly coupled harmonic oscillator with negligible backaction on the emitter, so that the $g_c\to 0$ limit in Eq. (8) gives the true frequency-filtered correlation function for all orders $N$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single Lambda-type emitter followed by a tunable filter becomes a source of superbunching light with $g_b^{(2)}(0)$ exceeding $10^{10}$, a regime beyond what bright-squeezed-vacuum experiments have achieved.
  • Higher-order correlations grow exponentially with $N$, meaning the source naturally produces multi-photon clusters or bundles with controlled statistics.
  • Because the mechanism relies only on level structure and dissipation, it transfers to any emitter with a shelving level, including the $^{87}$Rb D$_2$ line and cavity QED platforms, with superbunching surviving up to intermediate coupling strengths.
  • Both the degree of correlation and the center frequency of the superbunching light can be tuned over broad ranges by adjusting the drive strengths, the filter bandwidth, and the filter detuning, with the product of correlation and emission intensity reaching its upper limit at $\Omega \gg \gamma$ and $\kappa \approx \gamma$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same shelving-plus-time-integral mechanism should apply to any bosonic output channel of a Lambda-type system, so analogous superbunching should appear in phonon, magnon, or microwave-photon emission as long as the filter bandwidth is matched to the re-excitation rate.
  • Scanning the filter bandwidth at fixed drives should reproduce the conditional excitation dynamics $\rho_c^{ee}(\tau)$, effectively turning the superbunching peak position into a spectroscopic probe of the shelving time.
  • A quantum dot in a photonic-crystal cavity—a platform the paper lists as available—could combine the shelving mechanism with the cavity acting as the filter, giving on-chip superbunching without a separate external narrow-band filter.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a mechanism for generating frequency-filtered light with ultrastrong second- and higher-order photon bunching from a resonantly driven Λ-type emitter. The idea is to combine electron shelving (a weakly driven auxiliary transition depopulates the ground state of the main transition) with time integration by a Lorentzian filter or cavity. The central theoretical step is a master-equation model in which the filter is a damped bosonic mode; in the limit gc→0, normalized equal-time moments of the filter mode are identified with the frequency-filtered correlations (Eq. 8). Using an analytic steady-state solution for the emitter (Appendix A) and master-equation numerics, the authors show that g_b^(2)(0) can reach extremely large values and that g_b^(N)(0) approximately scales as ρ_ee^(1-N). They also demonstrate tunability and propose implementations with 87Rb and with cavity QED.

Significance. If the main mechanism is correct, the paper offers a conceptually simple and experimentally accessible route to photon superbunching of all orders, with no fitted parameters. The analytic steady-state solution in Appendix A and the broad parameter scans are useful contributions. However, the central claim of ultrastrong higher-order correlations rests on the all-order sensor-method identification in Eq. (8), and the analytical expression in Eq. (10) appears to be inconsistent; both points need attention. The cavity QED extension with finite gc provides a valuable robustness check but does not by itself resolve these issues.

major comments (2)
  1. [III.B, Eq. (10)] The explicit expression for g_sigma^(2)(tau) is not a valid normalized correlation function. It tends to 0 as tau→∞ instead of the required 1, and for small tau its leading behaviour is proportional to -2Ω^2 tau/γ times a positive prefactor in the stated weak-driving regime, so the function takes negative values. The expression also diverges at γ^2 = 2Ω^2. Since this equation is used to justify the optimal filter bandwidth κ ≈ Ω and the qualitative evolution in Fig. 3(c), it must be corrected or replaced by a correct formula.
  2. [II, Eq. (8)] The central equivalence between the frequency-filtered correlation defined by Eqs. (3)-(5) and the gc→0 limit of equal-time filter-mode moments is asserted for all orders N with a citation to Ref. [54], but no derivation is given, and the finite-gc cavity results in Sec. IV B do not test the gc→0 limit itself. For the paper's central scaling g_b^(N) ≈ ρ_ee^(1-N) to be supported, the authors should either prove or directly verify this equivalence for N = 3 and 4 (for example, by comparing Eq. (8) with a direct evaluation of Eq. (3)), or state precisely the conditions under which the cited method is known to apply to N-th order moments.
minor comments (6)
  1. [III.A] The word 'Thereofre' in the paragraph discussing Fig. 3 should be corrected to 'Therefore'.
  2. [VI] The word 'vaild' in the conclusion should be 'valid'.
  3. [III.B, Eq. (10)] The delay variable should be τ consistently, not t, and the derivation or source of the expression should be provided.
  4. [Fig. 4] The caption should state explicitly which values of N are plotted and which line corresponds to each N, since the legend is not clear.
  5. [Appendix C] The sentence 'as a functions' should be 'as a function', and the dressed-state splitting Ω̄ should be defined before it is used in the text.
  6. [Introduction] The phrase 'hitherto unreachable' is too strong given that Ref. [33] also reports giant high-order correlations; the authors should soften this claim or provide a quantitative comparison with the values achieved in that work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the central predictions follow from a stated master equation plus an externally cited sensor method; the two same-first-author citations are ancillary and do not define the result into existence.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained at the level that matters. The frequency-filtered correlation is defined in Eq. (3), and the computational shortcut of representing it by a weakly coupled bosonic sensor, Eq. (8), is taken from the external reference [54], not from the present authors' prior work. The steady-state analytic solutions in Appendix A are obtained directly from the stated master equation (1), and Eq. (9) follows from the quantum-regression factorization G_sigma^(2)(tau) = rho_tilde_ee rho^c_ee(tau), cited to the external textbook [55]. The central scaling g_b^(N)(0) ~ rho_tilde_ee^(1-N) is presented as an output of the numerical solution (Fig. 4) and an approximate closed-form statement in Eq. (B4), not as a fitted input. No parameter is adjusted to external data, and the predicted correlation values are consequences of the model rather than renamed inputs. The two self-citations by the first author are not load-bearing: Ref. [56] is used only to name/define the conditional excitation rho^c_ee(tau), and Ref. [67] is used only to supply the detailed rubidium Hamiltonian for the implementation section. Neither is invoked as a uniqueness theorem, and neither is needed to establish the generic Lambda-system mechanism. The all-order validity of Eq. (8) is assumed from the external sensor-method literature; if that method failed for N>2, the quantitative claim would be weakened, but that is a correctness risk, not a circularity. Overall, the central claim is not equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The model relies on a standard quantum-optics master equation, the sensor method for filtered correlations, and the known physics of shelving. The free parameters listed are control knobs of the proposed scheme, not hidden fitted constants.

free parameters (2)
  • Omega_r/Omega (shelving parameter) = small, e.g., 10^-2 to 10^-4 in the plotted scans
    The ultrastrong correlation relies on this ratio being small so the emitter is mostly shelved in |a> and rho_tilde_ee is small. It is a physical control parameter, not fitted to data, but it is the key knob that makes the claim work.
  • kappa/gamma (filter bandwidth relative to decay) = approximately 1 in the strong-driving regime, approximately Omega/gamma in the weak-driving regime
    The filter bandwidth is tuned to match the correlation peak of the emission. This is a hand-chosen parameter in the demonstration, and it directly determines the magnitude of g_b^(2)(0).
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Lindblad master equation with Markovian decay terms is the correct open-system description.
    Used in Eqs. (1), (6), and (11) to model the emitter, filter, and cavity systems.
  • domain assumption The sensor method of Ref. [54] correctly gives frequency-filtered correlations in the gc->0 limit.
    Invoked in Eq. (8) for all orders N; the paper does not re-derive this equivalence.
  • domain assumption The factorization g_sigma^(2)(tau) = rho_ee^c(tau) / rho_tilde_ee holds for the Lambda system.
    Used in Eq. (9) and explained via the collapse of the emitter to |g> after a photon emission; the paper cites Ref. [56] for this result.
  • standard math Wigner-Eckart theorem and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for the 87Rb D2 line.
    Used in Sec. IV A, Eqs. (14)-(17), to compute the physical couplings.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ultrastrong photon superbunching from electron shelving and time integral." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HKVV7XYM

@misc{pith2026241209873,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ultrastrong photon superbunching from electron shelving and time integral},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HKVV7XYM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.09873}
}
read the original abstract

Photon correlation is at the heart of quantum optics and has important applications in quantum technologies. Here we propose a universally applicable mechanism that can generate the superbunching light with ultrastrong second-order and higher-order correlations hitherto unreachable. This mechanism arises from the combined effect of electron shelving and time integral of fluorescence based on a cascaded quantum system comprising an emitter and a filter or a cavity QED system, and has high experimental feasibility according to current experimental techniques. Besides, both the correlation degrees and the frequency of the light can be flexibly varied over broad ranges. Both the research and technological applications on strong correlations can be extensively facilitated due to this readily accessible and manipulated mechanism for generating photon correlation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.09873 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) Schematic of the cascaded quantum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) Normalized frequency-filtered secon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (Color online) Normalized frequency-filtered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (Color online) Normalized second-order correlatio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) (a) Scheme to generate superbunching [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Product [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (Color online) Normalized frequency-filtered secon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [54]

    Dayan, A

    B. Dayan, A. S. Parkins, T. Aoki, E. P. Ostby, K. J. Vahala, and H. J. Kimble, Science 319, 1062 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [1]

    describing the evolution of the emitter shown in Fig. 1. Under steady-state condition, we obtain the analytical solutions of the density matrix elements of the emitter as follows ˜ρgg = Ω 2 r(2γ 2 + Ω 2 + 2Ω 2 r) M , ˜ρaa = Ω 4 + Ω 2 r(2γ 2 − Ω 2 + 2Ω 2 r) M , ˜ρee = 2Ω 2Ω 2 r M , ˜ρge = 2iγΩΩ 2 r M , ˜ρae = −Ω 3Ω r + 2ΩΩ 3 r M , ˜ρga = −iγΩ 2Ω r M , (A1)...

    work page

  3. [2]

    J. S. Bell, Physics Physique Fizika 1, 195 (1964)

    1964

  4. [3]

    can be equivalently repre- sented in a simple form g(N ) b (0) = lim gc→0 ⟨b†(0)N b(0)N ⟩ ⟨b†(0)b(0)⟩N , (8) in the steady-state limit of the emitter system. III. PHOTON SUPERBUNCHING In Figs. 2(a) and (b), we present the frequency-filtered correlation g(2) b (0) as functions of Ω , Ω r, and κ. As illus- trated in the upper right corner of Fig. 2(a), when ...

    work page

  5. [4]

    5(a), the superbunching effect with extremely strong second-order and higher-order correlations can be achieved, as the case presented in earlier sections

    Therefore, it can be inferred that using the emitter shown in Fig. 5(a), the superbunching effect with extremely strong second-order and higher-order correlations can be achieved, as the case presented in earlier sections. B. Cavity QED system To facilitate the study of frequency-filtered correlation, we adopt the formalism proposed in Ref. [ 54], where the...

    work page

  6. [5]

    R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 84 (1963)

    1963

  7. [6]

    is identical to that of a cavity QED system as depicted in Fig. 5(d), which is a well-developed platform in experi- ments and can be implemented in various systems includ- ing Fabry-Perot cavity coupled to a single atom [ 46, 47], whispering gallery mode coupled to a single atom [ 48, 49] or NV color center in diamond [ 50], and photonic-crystal 7 cavity ...

    work page

  8. [7]

    (C1) In Fig

    becomes the following form H = ∆ bb†b + (Ω σeg + Ω rσga + gcσegb + H.c.). (C1) In Fig. 7, we show the frequency-filtered correlation g(2) b (0) as a function of ∆ b. It reveals that the ultra- strong superbunching correlation of the filtered field is well maintained when the filtering frequency is tuned over a broad range. Moreover, due to the effect of sideba...

    work page

Show all 73 references
  1. [8]

    Einstein, B

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)

    1935

  2. [9]

    Aspect, P

    A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460 (1981)

    1981

  3. [10]

    R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. 130, 2529 (1963)

    1963

  4. [11]

    Bennett and G

    C. Bennett and G. Brassard, Theoretical Computer Sci- ence - TCS 560, 175 (1984)

    1984

  5. [12]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, Nature 409, 46 (2001)

    2001

  6. [13]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 010401 (2006)

    2006

  7. [14]

    Shih, An introduction to quantum optics: photon and biphoton physics (CRC press, 2020)

    Y. Shih, An introduction to quantum optics: photon and biphoton physics (CRC press, 2020)

    2020

  8. [15]

    C. H. Bennett, F. Bessette, G. Brassard, L. Salvail, and J. Smolin, Journal of Cryptology 5, 3 (1992)

    1992

  9. [16]

    J. L. O’Brien, A. Furusawa, and J. Vučković, Nature Pho- tonics 3, 687 (2009)

    2009

  10. [17]

    H. J. Kimble, M. Dagenais, and L. Mandel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 691 (1977)

    1977

  11. [18]

    Grangier, G

    P. Grangier, G. Roger, A. Aspect, A. Heidmann, and S. Reynaud, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 687 (1986)

    1986

  12. [19]

    Michler, A

    P. Michler, A. Kiraz, C. Becher, W. V. Schoenfeld, P. M. Petroff, L. Zhang, E. Hu, and A. Imamoˇ glu, Science 290, 2282 (2000)

    2000

  13. [20]

    Lounis and W

    B. Lounis and W. E. Moerner, Nature 407, 491 (2000)

    2000

  14. [21]

    Kurtsiefer, S

    C. Kurtsiefer, S. Mayer, P. Zarda, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 290 (2000)

    2000

  15. [22]

    Ficek and S

    Z. Ficek and S. Swain, Quantum interference and coher- ence: theory and experiments , Vol. 100 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2005)

    2005

  16. [23]

    C. C. Leon, A. Rosławska, A. Grewal, O. Gunnarsson, K. Kuhnke, and K. Kern, Science Advances 5, eaav4986 (2019)

    2019

  17. [24]

    Manceau, K

    M. Manceau, K. Y. Spasibko, G. Leuchs, R. Filip, and M. V. Chekhova, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 123606 (2019)

    2019

  18. [25]

    Ye, H.-B

    Z. Ye, H.-B. Wang, J. Xiong, and K. Wang, Photon. Res. 10, 668 (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    K. Y. Spasibko, D. A. Kopylov, V. L. Krutyanskiy, T. V. Murzina, G. Leuchs, and M. V. Chekhova, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 223603 (2017)

    2017

  20. [27]

    Schaeverbeke, R

    Q. Schaeverbeke, R. A vriller, T. Frederiksen, and F. Pi s- tolesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 246601 (2019)

    2019

  21. [28]

    Marconi, J

    M. Marconi, J. Javaloyes, P. Hamel, F. Raineri, A. Lev- enson, and A. M. Yacomotti, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011013 (2018)

    2018

  22. [29]

    del Valle, New Journal of Physics 15, 025019 (2013)

    E. del Valle, New Journal of Physics 15, 025019 (2013)

    2013

  23. [30]

    C. S. Muñoz, E. del Valle, A. G. Tudela, K. Müller, S. Lichtmannecker, M. Kaniber, C. Tejedor, J. J. Fin- ley, and F. P. Laussy, Nat Photonics 8, 550 (2014)

    2014

  24. [31]

    Q. Bin, Y. Wu, and X.-Y. Lü, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 10 073602 (2021)

    2021

  25. [32]

    R. Liu, A. Fang, Y. Zhou, P. Zhang, S. Gao, H. Li, H. Gao, and F. Li, Phys. Rev. A 93, 013822 (2016)

    2016

  26. [33]

    Jahnke, C

    F. Jahnke, C. Gies, M. Assmann, M. Bayer, H. A. Ley- mann, A. Foerster, J. Wiersig, C. Schneider, M. Kamp, and S. Hofling, Nat Commun 7, 11540 (2016)

    2016

  27. [34]

    Meuret, L

    S. Meuret, L. H. G. Tizei, T. Cazimajou, R. Bourrellier, H. C. Chang, F. Treussart, and M. Kociak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 197401 (2015)

    2015

  28. [35]

    Boitier, A

    F. Boitier, A. Godard, N. Dubreuil, P. Delaye, C. Fabre, and E. Rosencher, Nature Communications 2, 425 (2011)

    2011

  29. [36]

    Zhang, Y

    L. Zhang, Y. Lu, D. Zhou, H. Zhang, L. Li, and G. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A 99, 063827 (2019)

    2019

  30. [37]

    Zhou, F.-l

    Y. Zhou, F.-l. Li, B. Bai, H. Chen, J. Liu, Z. Xu, and H. Zheng, Phys. Rev. A 95, 053809 (2017)

    2017

  31. [38]

    C. Qin, Y. Li, Y. Yan, J. Li, X. Li, Y. Song, X. Zhang, S. Han, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, G. Zhang, R. Chen, J. Hu, Z. Yang, X. Liu, L. Xiao, and S. Jia, Super-bunching light with giant high-order correlations and extreme mul- ti-photon events (2024), arXiv:2409.05419 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Bin, X.-Y

    Q. Bin, X.-Y. Lü, F. P. Laussy, F. Nori, and Y. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 053601 (2020)

    2020

  33. [40]

    D. E. Chang, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Nature Pho- tonics 8, 685 (2014)

    2014

  34. [41]

    Jechow, M

    A. Jechow, M. Seefeldt, H. Kurzke, A. Heuer, and R. Menzel, Nature Photonics 7, 973 (2013)

    2013

  35. [42]

    Mouloudakis and P

    G. Mouloudakis and P. Lambropoulos, Phys. Rev. A 102, 023713 (2020)

    2020

  36. [43]

    G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A 1, 1445 (1970)

    1970

  37. [44]

    Lubin, D

    G. Lubin, D. Oron, U. Rossman, R. Tenne, and V. J. Yallapragada, ACS Photonics 9, 2891 (2022)

    2022

  38. [45]

    J. C. López Carreño, C. Sánchez Muñoz, D. Sanvitto, E. del Valle, and F. P. Laussy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 196402 (2015)

    2015

  39. [46]

    Bin, X.-Y

    Q. Bin, X.-Y. Lü, L.-L. Zheng, S.-W. Bin, and Y. Wu, Phys. Rev. A 97, 043802 (2018)

    2018

  40. [47]

    Akopian, N

    N. Akopian, N. H. Lindner, E. Poem, Y. Berlatzky, J. A vron, D. Gershoni, B. D. Gerardot, and P. M. Petroff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 130501 (2006)

    2006

  41. [48]

    Hennessy, A

    K. Hennessy, A. Badolato, M. Winger, D. Gerace, M. Atatü re, S. Gulde, S. Fält, E. L. Hu, and A. Imamoˇ glu, Nature 445, 896 (2007)

    2007

  42. [49]

    Sallen, A

    G. Sallen, A. Tribu, T. Aichele, R. André, L. Besombes, C. Bougerol, M. Richard, S. Tatarenko, K. Kheng, and J. P. Poizat, Nature Photonics 4, 696 (2010)

    2010

  43. [50]

    Ulhaq, S

    A. Ulhaq, S. Weiler, S. M. Ulrich, R. Roß bach, M. Jetter, and P. Michler, Nature Photonics 6, 238 (2012)

    2012

  44. [51]

    R. J. Thompson, G. Rempe, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1132 (1992)

    1992

  45. [52]

    A. Boca, R. Miller, K. M. Birnbaum, A. D. Boozer, J. McKeever, and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 233603 (2004)

    2004

  46. [53]

    T. Aoki, B. Dayan, E. Wilcut, W. P. Bowen, A. S. Parkins, T. J. Kippenberg, K. J. Vahala, and H. J. Kim- ble, Nature 443, 671 (2006)

    2006

  47. [55]

    Y.-S. Park, A. K. Cook, and H. Wang, Nano Letters 6, 2075 (2006)

    2006

  48. [56]

    Yoshie, A

    T. Yoshie, A. Scherer, J. Hendrickson, G. Khitrova, H. M . Gibbs, G. Rupper, C. Ell, O. B. Shchekin, and D. G. Deppe, Nature 432, 200 (2004)

    2004

  49. [57]

    Knöll, W

    L. Knöll, W. Vogel, and D.-G. Welsch, Phys. Rev. A 42, 503 (1990)

    1990

  50. [58]

    Nienhuis, Phys

    G. Nienhuis, Phys. Rev. A 47, 510 (1993)

    1993

  51. [59]

    del Valle, A

    E. del Valle, A. Gonzalez-Tudela, F. P. Laussy, C. Teje- dor, and M. J. Hartmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 183601 (2012)

    2012

  52. [60]

    D. A. Steck, Quantum and Atom Optics (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Zhang, S.-p

    H.-b. Zhang, S.-p. Wu, and G.-x. Li, Phys. Rev. A 102, 053717 (2020)

    2020

  54. [62]

    Nagourney, J

    W. Nagourney, J. Sandberg, and H. Dehmelt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2797 (1986)

    1986

  55. [63]

    Sauter, W

    T. Sauter, W. Neuhauser, R. Blatt, and P. E. Toschek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1696 (1986)

    1986

  56. [64]

    J. C. Bergquist, R. G. Hulet, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Wineland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1699 (1986)

    1986

  57. [65]

    M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 101 (1998)

    1998

  58. [66]

    J. Volz, M. Weber, D. Schlenk, W. Rosenfeld, J. Vrana, K. Saucke, C. Kurtsiefer, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 030404 (2006)

    2006

  59. [67]

    Hofmann, M

    J. Hofmann, M. Krug, N. Ortegel, L. Gérard, M. Weber, W. Rosenfeld, and H. Weinfurter, Science 337, 72 (2012)

    2012

  60. [68]

    van Leent, M

    T. van Leent, M. Bock, R. Garthoff, K. Redeker, W. Zhang, T. Bauer, W. Rosenfeld, C. Becher, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010510 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    G. K. Woodgate, Elementary Atomic Structure (Oxford Scientific, Oxford, 2000)

    2000

  62. [70]

    D. M. Brink and G. R. Satchler, Angular Momentum (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1994)

    1994

  63. [71]

    J. L. Meunier, European Journal of Physics 8, 114 (1987)

    1987

  64. [72]

    Zhang, G

    H.-b. Zhang, G. Yang, G.-m. Huang, and G.-x. Li, Phys. Rev. A 99, 033803 (2019)

    2019

  65. [73]

    Lounis and M

    B. Lounis and M. Orrit, Reports on Progress in Physics 68, 1129 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.