Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 34 references

Electromagnetic waves generated by a hybrid dielectric-plasmonic dimer

T0 review · 3 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 A hybrid plasmonic-dielectric dimer scatters light as both an electric and a magnetic dipole when its two particles share a resonant frequency.

desk verdict A genuinely new rigorous expansion for a hybrid dimer; the common-resonance hypothesis is only asymptotically realized, but the theorem itself is sound. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12747 v1 pith:ZRC7ERXG submitted 2024-12-17 math.AP

Xinlin Cao , Ahcene Ghandriche , Mourad Sini This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AP MSC 35R3035C2035Q60
keywords hybriddimerplasmonicnanoparticledielectricdualpolarizationelectromagneticscatteringasymptoticexpansioncommonresonantfrequencymetamaterial
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

This paper tries to establish that a dimer made of one plasmonic nanoparticle (negative permittivity) and one dielectric nanoparticle (high positive permittivity) can, when the two particles share a resonant frequency, act on an incident electromagnetic wave as a pair of dipoles: an electric dipole generated by the plasmonic particle and a magnetic dipole generated by the dielectric particle. The authors derive an asymptotic expansion of the scattered field and its far field in the subwavelength regime, with the dominant term of order $a^{3-h}$ given explicitly in terms of the incident electric and magnetic fields at the dimer center. The significance is that such a hybrid dimer would modify both the effective electric permittivity and the effective magnetic permeability of a medium containing many such dimers, which is what a metamaterial needs. The dual polarization is not automatic: it requires a common-resonance condition connecting the material parameters of the two particles.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a Lippmann-Schwinger integral equation for the electric field, projected onto the Helmholtz decomposition subspaces (divergence-free curls, curl-free gradients, and harmonic gradients) of each scaled particle. The carriers of the argument are the polarization tensors $P^{(1)}_{0,1}$, $P^{(2)}_{0,1}$, $P^{(1)}_{0,2}$, $P^{(2)}_{0,2}$ built from eigenfunctions of the Newtonian and magnetization operators, together with the Dyadic Green kernel $\Upsilon_k(\cdot,\cdot) = k^{-2}\nabla\nabla\Phi_k(\cdot,\cdot)+\Phi_k(\cdot,\cdot)I_3$. Resonance matching enters through condition (1.11), which makes the denominators $1-k^2\eta_1 a^2\lambda^{(1)}_{n_0}(B_1)$ and $1+\eta_2\lambda^{(3)}_{n_*}(B_2)$ small, of order $a^h$, so that the Born series for the algebraic system (1.15) has a dominant block coupling the dielectric particle's magnetic moment to the incident electric field and the plasmonic particle's electric moment to the incident magnetic field.

What would settle it

A direct numerical solution of Maxwell's equations for two Drude/Lorentz spheres whose parameters violate $k_{0,1}^2 = k_{0,2}^2 + \lambda^{(3)}_{n_*}(B_2) k_{p,2}^2$ should show that no common resonance exists and that the scattered field's dominant term lacks either the electric-dipole or the magnetic-dipole contribution; matching the far-field formula (1.19) would require frequency-dependent permittivities that satisfy this equality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim, Theorem 1.1, is that under Assumption 1 the scattered field of the dimer admits the expansion $E^s(x) = k^2 \sum_{m=1}^2 [\Upsilon_k(x,z_m)\cdot\tilde{R}_m - \nabla_y\Phi_k(x,z_m)\times\tilde{Q}_m] + O(a^{\min(3;7-2h-3t;10-2h-7t)})$, where $(\tilde{Q}_1,\tilde{R}_1,\tilde{Q}_2,\tilde{R}_2)$ solves the algebraic system (1.15). Corollary 1.2 isolates the leading term: $E^s(x) = \pm k^2 a^{3-h} [ (\eta_2/d_0) \Upsilon_k(x,z_0)\cdot P^{(2)}_{0,2}\cdot E^{\mathrm{Inc}}(z_0) - ik(\eta_0/c_0)\nabla\Phi_k(x,z_0)\times P^{(1)}_{0,1}\cdot H^{\mathrm{Inc}}(z_0) ] + O(a^{\min(3-h+t;3;10-2h-7t;9-3h-5t)})$, with an analogous far-field formula. In words, at a common resonant frequency the dimer radiates as a magnetic dipole, whose strength is set by the dielectric particle's polarization tensor $P^{(2)}_{0,2}$ applied to the incident electric field, and as an electric dipole, set by the plasmonic particle's tensor $P^{(1)}_{0,1}$ applied to the incident magnetic field; both terms scale as $a^{3-h}$. The same object therefore polarizes both the electric and the magnetic component of light.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that real materials can be tuned so that the dielectric resonance of one particle and the plasmonic resonance of the other occur at the same incident frequency; the paper derives this as the parameter relation $k_{0,1}^2 = k_{0,2}^2 + \lambda^{(3)}_{n_*}(B_2) k_{p,2}^2$, and if that relation cannot be met, the simultaneous dual polarization and the dominant term of Corollary 1.2 do not occur.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The dominant scattered field is a linear combination of electric and magnetic dipole radiation with both terms of the same order $a^{3-h}$, so the dimer is not merely a stronger scatterer but a genuinely dual-polarizing one.
  • If the incident frequency moves away from the common resonance, the dimer behaves like a single nanoparticle; the dual polarization is tied to simultaneous resonance of both particles.
  • Under the condition $4-h-4t>0$, the error terms in (1.13) and (1.14) shrink as $a\to 0$, so the dipole approximation is quantitative, not merely qualitative.
  • A cluster of such dimers arranged in a bounded domain should produce an effective medium whose permittivity and permeability are both modulated; the authors state this as the intended next step.
  • For spherical particles the polarization tensors are proportional to the identity, so the leading dipole effect is isotropic and depends on the incident fields rather than on particle orientation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors leave implicit that condition (7.5) depends on the eigenvalues $\lambda^{(3)}_{n_*}(B_2)$ and $\lambda^{(1)}_{n_0}(B_1)$, so changing the particle shapes could realize the common resonance even when the material parameters alone do not satisfy the identity.
  • A direct numerical Maxwell solve for two Lorentz-model spheres should show that when (7.5) is violated the scattered far field lacks either the electric-dipole or the magnetic-dipole term, and when it holds the ratio of the two dipole amplitudes should follow the formula in Corollary 1.2.
  • Since the ball polarization tensors are isotropic, any directional dual-polarization response would have to come from non-spherical particle shapes; the asymptotic framework already permits different domains $B_1$ and $B_2$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies time-harmonic electromagnetic scattering by a subwavelength hybrid dimer consisting of one high-permittivity dielectric nano-particle D1 and one plasmonic nano-particle D2, separated by a distance d = α0 a^t with 0<t<1. Under Assumption 1, which includes the contrast scaling η1 = η0 a^{-2} and the common-resonance tuning conditions (1.11), the authors derive an asymptotic expansion of the scattered field and its far-field pattern (Theorem 1.1, Eqs. (1.13)–(1.14)) in terms of four vector unknowns solving the 12×12 linear algebraic system (1.15). Inverting this system by a Born series and keeping the dominant terms yields Corollary 1.2: the leading scattered field is a combination of an electric-dipole term produced by the dielectric particle and a magnetic-dipole term produced by the plasmonic particle, both of order a^{3-h}, with explicit polarization tensors P^{(2)}_{0,2} and P^{(1)}_{0,1}. Section 7.1 attempts to justify the tuning conditions (1.11) via the Lorentz model, leading to the material-parameter relation (7.5). The proof is a long chain of a-priori estimates, spectral decompositions of the Newtonian and Magnetization operators, Taylor expansions, and error-order bookkeeping; several key estimates are imported from the authors' earlier works [9], [11], and [20].

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, the paper provides a rigorous asymptotic framework for hybrid dielectric-plasmonic dimers and establishes a precise sense in which such a dimer can act simultaneously as an electric and a magnetic dipole, with the potential to tailor both effective permittivity and effective permeability. Strengths of the paper include the explicit error orders in (1.13)–(1.14) and (1.18)–(1.19), the closed-form expressions of the polarization tensors for the case of balls in Section 7.2, the careful inversion of the algebraic system via Born series, and the systematic treatment of the mutual interaction between the two particles. The main limitation is that the advertised physical realizability of the exact common-resonance condition (1.11) is not established: Section 7.1 gives only a leading-order justification, and Assumption 1 requires exact equalities. This does not invalidate the conditional theorem, but it leaves a load-bearing gap between the mathematical statement and the physical conclusion of dual polarization.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 7.1, Assumption 1(4), Eq. (1.11)] The Lorentz-model discussion in Section 7.1 establishes the common-resonance condition (1.11) only at leading order. After equating (7.3) and (7.4), the text explicitly states that the dielectric and plasmonic resonances coincide 'up to an additive small error term,' and the displayed relation (7.5) is obtained by keeping only the dominant terms. Since Assumption 1(4) and Theorem 1.1 require the exact equalities (1.11) with Re(c0) and Re(d0) positive, no admissible parameter set satisfying the hypothesis is actually exhibited. The formal theorem remains valid as a conditional statement, but the paper's physical claim that a hybrid dimer can polarize both the incident electric and magnetic fields depends on this realization step. Please either prove exact solvability of (1.11) within the Lorentz model, for instance by an implicit-function or fixed-point argument in the small parameters ξ1, ξ2 and a^h, or reformulate the main theorem under an approximate-resonance hypothesis and carry the resulting extra error terms through (1.13), (1.14), (1.18), and (1.19).
  2. [Section 5, Lemma 2.4 and Proposition 2.5, Eqs. (5.4), (5.57), (5.65)] The estimates for the plasmonic particle D2 require a uniform lower bound on the denominators |1 + η2 λ^{(3)}_n(B2)| for n ≠ n*, as used in (5.4), (5.57), and (5.65); similarly, the dielectric estimates require uniform control of |1 - k^2 a^2 η1 λ^{(1)}_n(B1)| for n ≠ n0. Assumption 1 tunes only the single eigenvalues n* and n0 through (1.11) and does not rule out small denominators for other modes. Without an explicit spectral-gap assumption, or an estimate on the spectral projection onto the complementary eigenspaces, the sums over n ≠ n* in (5.4) and the analogous sums in (5.57) and (5.65) are not controlled uniformly as a → 0. Please add such a non-resonance condition to Assumption 1, or prove that it follows from (1.6) and (1.11) for the eigenvalue branches under consideration.
  3. [Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 3.1, invertibility condition 4-h-4t>0] The Born-series inversion of the algebraic system (1.15)/(3.3) is justified only under the condition 4-h-4t>0, but the individual estimates leading to the error bounds in (4.10)–(4.12) use powers of d^{-1} and d^{-2} in combination with the a-priori estimates from Proposition 2.5. The derivation of the final error order min(3; 7-2h-3t; 10-2h-7t) in (1.13) should display explicitly how the condition 4-h-4t>0 ensures that all competing terms are indeed dominated by the stated order; in particular, the estimate |R1 - R̃1| in (4.12) contains a term a^{9-2h} d^{-8}, which is only controlled using d = α0 a^t and the stated inequality. This is a completeness issue in the proof of the main expansion rather than an incorrect claim, but the verification should be written out so the condition on t and h is seen to be necessary.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title and front matter] The title contains typographical errors: 'W A VES' and 'DIELETRIC' should read 'WAVES' and 'DIELECTRIC'; also 'a-prior estimates' should be 'a-priori estimates' throughout.
  2. [Eq. (1.14) and Eq. (4.6)] The far-field formula in (1.14) uses ik x̂ × Q̃m, while the corresponding derivation in (4.6) writes ik x̂ ⊗ Q̃m; the two notations should be reconciled, with the cross-product form being the correct one for a vector term.
  3. [Eq. (4.14)] The orders in (4.14) mix powers of a and d inconsistently, e.g. 'O(a11−2hd−5)' and later 'O(min(11−2h−5t;14−3h−8t))'; since d = α0 a^t, the exponents should be expressed uniformly in a and t.
  4. [Eq. (6.17) and Eq. (6.25)] The constant tensor K in (6.17) is displayed as a 9×3 array, but the notation is not standard; moreover, the symbol K⊥ used in (6.25) is never defined. Please clarify the convention and how the block structure acts on vectors.
  5. [Eq. (7.3)] The expression '± Im 2(c0)ah' in (7.3) is unclear; presumably it should be a term involving Im(c0)^2 a^h or |Im(c0)|^2 a^h. Please correct the typo and the surrounding formula.
  6. [Section 7.1, Eq. (7.4)] The choice of ξ2 in the Lorentz model is given in a displayed formula involving square roots, but the condition that ξ2 be real and small is not verified for the proposed parameter ranges; a short consistency check would make the derivation more robust.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the dimer expansion follows from the Maxwell system under an explicit resonance assumption, and the cited prior results are supporting lemmas rather than the target conclusion.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. Starting from the time-harmonic Maxwell system (1.1), the paper converts the problem into the Lippmann–Schwinger equation (2.3), projects onto the Helmholtz subspaces, establishes the a-priori estimates of Proposition 2.5 from the resolvent structure and the resonance condition (1.11), and then derives the algebraic system (1.15)/(3.3) by evaluating the integral equation with the scattering coefficients W_j and V_j. The final expansions (1.13)–(1.14) and the dominant term (1.18) are obtained by solving that algebraic system via a Born series. The resonance condition (1.11) is an input assumption, not an output fitted to the scattered field; the coefficients P^(1)_0,1, P^(2)_0,2 and the Green functions are computed independently from the shapes B1, B2 and the Maxwell kernel. No equation defines the predicted dipole amplitudes in terms of the scattered field being predicted. The proof does rely on the authors' earlier works ([9], [11], [19], [20]) for a-priori estimates, spectral existence, and tensor values, but those are published results that do not themselves contain the hybrid-dimer expansion, so the self-citations are supporting lemmas rather than the conclusion. The Lorentz-model discussion in Section 7.1 derives the matching condition (7.5) only to leading order and states the equality 'up to an additive small error term', so the exact realizability of Assumption 1 is not exhibited; this is a correctness/feasibility gap in the hypothesis, not a circularity in the derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a set of standard operator-theoretic facts, shape assumptions that guarantee non-trivial polarization tensors, the Lorentz-model justification of the resonance condition, and a-priori estimates imported from the authors' earlier work. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • c0 = complex constant, |c0| ~ O(1), Re(c0)>0
    Detuning parameter in the resonance condition (1.11); not fitted, assumed to characterize the small denominator for the dielectric resonance.
  • d0 = complex constant, |d0| ~ O(1), Re(d0)>0
    Detuning parameter in the resonance condition (1.11); not fitted, assumed to characterize the small denominator for the plasmonic resonance.
  • h = in (0,1)
    Exponent controlling the size of the resonance denominators in (1.11); chosen by hand to define the asymptotic regime.
  • t = in (0,1) with 4-h-4t>0
    Exponent controlling the gap distance d = alpha0 a^t in (1.5); chosen by hand.
  • eta0 = complex constant, Re(eta0)>0
    Scaled permittivity of the dielectric particle in (1.6); a model input, not fitted.
  • eta2 = ~1, Re(eta2)<0
    Permittivity contrast of the plasmonic particle in (1.6); a model input, not fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math L2-Helmholtz decomposition (2.1) and spectral properties of Newtonian and Magnetization operators (Remark 2.3)
    Used throughout to project the electric field onto div-free, curl-free, and gradient-harmonic subspaces.
  • domain assumption Shape non-degeneracy conditions (1.9)-(1.10): certain integrals of eigenfunctions over B1 and B2 are non-vanishing
    These conditions ensure the polarization tensors P(1)_0,1 and P(2)_0,2 are non-zero, so the leading-order dipole terms do not vanish.
  • domain assumption Lorentz model (7.1) as the physical model for the permittivity, used to justify (1.11)
    The paper uses this model to argue that the common-resonance condition (1.11) can be satisfied by choosing material parameters satisfying (7.5).
  • domain assumption A-priori estimates for a single dielectric nanoparticle from [9], imported in Lemma 2.4 and parts of Propositions 2.5 and 2.7
    The dimer analysis relies on these existing estimates for the dielectric component; they are cited, not reproven.
  • standard math Well-posedness of the time-harmonic Maxwell scattering problem with Silver-Muller radiation condition
    Used to justify existence and uniqueness of the scattered field; cited to [12] and [27].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electromagnetic waves generated by a hybrid dielectric-plasmonic dimer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZRC7ERXG

@misc{pith2026241212747,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electromagnetic waves generated by a hybrid dielectric-plasmonic dimer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZRC7ERXG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12747}
}
read the original abstract

We know that the electric field generated by a plasmonic nano-particle (with negative permittivity) is given as a polarization of the incident electric field. Similarly, the electric field produced by a dielectric nano-particle (with positive but high permittivity) is given as a polarization of the incident magnetic field. In this work, we demonstrate that a hybrid dimer composed of two closely coupled nano-particles, one plasmonic and the other dielectric can polarize both the incident electric and magnetic fields. Consequently, such hybrid dimers have the potential to modify both the electric permittivity and magnetic permeability of the surrounding medium. However, this dual modification occurs only when the two nano-particles share common resonant frequencies. We derive the asymptotic expansion of the fields generated by these hybrid dimers in the subwavelength regime for incident frequencies near their shared resonant frequencies.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [9]

    X. Cao, A. Ghandriche and M. Sini, The electromagnetic wa ves generated by a cluster of nano-particles with high refractive indices, Journal of the London Mathematical Soc iety, 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [11]

    X. Cao, A. Ghandriche and M. Sini, From all-dieletric na noresonators to extended quasi-static plasmonic resonato rs. arXiv:2312.15149

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [20]

    Ghandriche and M

    A. Ghandriche and M. Sini, Photo-acoustic inversion us ing plasmonic contrast agents: The full Maxwell model, Journal of Differential Equations, volume 341, 1–78, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [1]

    J. F. Ahner, V. V. Dyakin, V. Ya. Raevskii and R. Ritter, On series solutions of the magnetostatic integral equation, Zh. Vychisl. Mat. Mat. Fiz, number 4, volume 39, pages 630-63 7, 1999

    work page 1999

  5. [2]

    Ammari, B

    H. Ammari, B. Fitzpatrick, H. Kang, M. Ruiz, S. Yu and H. Zh ang, Mathematical and computational methods in photonics and phononics, volume 235, American Mathematica l Soc, 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [3]

    Ammari, B

    H. Ammari, B. Li and J. Zou, Mathematical analysis of elec tromagnetic scattering by dielectric nano-particles with high refractive indices, Transactions of the American Math ematical Society, volume 376, no. 01, 39–90, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [4]

    Amrouche, C

    C. Amrouche, C. Bernardi, M. Dauge and V. Girault, Vector potentials in three-dimensional non-smooth domains, Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences, 21 (9), 1998

    work page 1998

  8. [5]

    Baffou, R

    G. Baffou, R. Quidant, and C. Girard, Heat generation in pl asmonic nanostructures: Influence of morphology, Applied Physics Letters, vol. 94, num. 15, 2009

    work page 2009

Show all 34 references
  1. [6]

    Bohren and D.R

    C.F. Bohren and D.R. Huffmann, Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles, Wiley–Interscience, New York, 2004

    2004

  2. [7]

    Catchpole and A

    K. Catchpole and A. Polman, Plasmonic solar cells, Opt. E xpress 16, 21793-21800 (2008)

    2008

  3. [8]

    X. Cao, A. Mukherjee and M. Sini. Effective Medium Theory f or Heat Generation Using Plasmonics: A Parabolic Transmission Problem Driven by the Maxwell System. arXiv:2 411.18091

  4. [10]

    X. Cao, A. Ghandriche and M. Sini, Optical Inversion Usi ng Plasmonic Contrast Agents. arXiv preprint:2408.13793 (2024). 60 CAO, GHANDRICHE AND SINI

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Colton and R

    D. Colton and R. Kress, Inverse acoustic and electromag netic scattering theory, 93, 2019, Springer Nature

    2019

  6. [13]

    Dautray and J

    R. Dautray and J. L. Lions, Mathematical Analysis and Nu merical Methods for Science and Technology Volume 3 Spectral Theory and Applications. 1st ed. Berlin, Heidelbe rg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2000

    2000

  7. [14]

    Dyakin and V.Ya

    V.V. Dyakin and V.Ya. Rayevskii, Investigation of an eq uation of electrophysics, U.S.S.R Computational Mathe- matics and Mathematical Physics, Volume 30, Number 1, Pages 213-217, 1990

    1990

  8. [15]

    X. Fan, W. Zheng and D. Singh, Light scattering and surfa ce plasmons on small spherical particles. Light Sci Appl 3, e179 (2014)

    2014

  9. [16]

    M. J. Friedman, Mathematical study of the nonlinear sin gular integral magnetic field equation. I. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 39 (1), 14–20, 1980

    1980

  10. [17]

    M. J. Friedman, Mathematical study of the nonlinear sin gular integral magnetic field equation. III. SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis, volume 12, number 4, pages 536-54 0, 1981

    1981

  11. [18]

    M. J. Friedman and J. E. Pasciak, Spectral Properties fo r the Magnetization Integral Operator, Mathematics of Computation, 43 (168), 447–453, 1984

    1984

  12. [19]

    Ghandriche, Mathematical Analysis of Imaging Modal ities Using Bubbles or Nano-particles as Contrast Agents

    A. Ghandriche, Mathematical Analysis of Imaging Modal ities Using Bubbles or Nano-particles as Contrast Agents. Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria. 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Ghandriche and M

    A. Ghandriche and M. Sini, Simultaneous Reconstructio n of Optical and Acoustical Properties in Photoacoustic Imaging Using Plasmonics, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathemat ics, vol. 83, num. 4, 1738-1765, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Hao and G

    E. Hao and G. C. Schatz, Electromagnetic fields around si lver nano-particles and dimers, The Journal of chemical physics, volume 120, number 1, pages 357–366, 2004

    2004

  15. [23]

    Jahani and Z

    S. Jahani and Z. Jacob, All-dielectric metamaterials, Nat. Nanotechnol. 11 (2016) 23–36

    2016

  16. [24]

    Kuznetsov, A.E

    A.I. Kuznetsov, A.E. Miroshnichenko, M.L. Brongersma , Y.S. Kivshar and B. Luk’yanchuk, Optically resonant dielectric nanostructures, Science, vol. 354, num. 6314, 2 016

  17. [25]

    J. Liu, Z. Meng and J. Zhou. High Electric Field Enhancem ent Induced by Modal Coupling for a Plasmonic Dimer Array on a Metallic Film. Photonics 2024, 11, 183. https://d oi.org/10.3390/photonics11020183

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    S. A. Maier, Plasmonics: fundamentals and application s, Springer, 2007

    2007

  19. [27]

    Mitrea, M

    D. Mitrea, M. Mitrea and J. Pipher, Vector potential the ory on nonsmooth domains in R3 and applications to electromagnetic scattering. The Journal of Fourier Analys is and Applications 3, 131–192, 1997

    1997

  20. [28]

    Novotny and B

    L. Novotny and B. Hecht, Principles of Nano-Optics. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; 2012

    2012

  21. [29]

    Paniagua-Domingueza, B

    R. Paniagua-Domingueza, B. Luk’yanchuk and A. I.Kuzne tsova, Control of scattering by isolated dielectric nanoan - tennas. Chapter 3 in ’dielectric Metamaterials Fundamenta ls, Designs, and Applications’ Woodhead Publishing Series in Electronic and Optical Materials, 2020

    2020

  22. [30]

    Kiselev and O

    A. Kiselev and O. J. F. Martin, Controlling the magnetic and electric responses of dielectric nano-particles via near-field coupling. Phys. Rev. B 106, 205413 – Published 23 N ovember, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    V. Ya. Raevskii, Some properties of the operators of pot ential theory and their application to the investigation of the basic equation of electrostatics and magnetostatics, Theo retical and Mathematical Physics, Volume 100, Number 3, pages 1040–1045, 1994

    1994

  24. [32]

    Schweizer, On Friedrichs inequality, Helmholtz dec omposition, vector potentials, and the div-curl lemma, Springer, 2018

    B. Schweizer, On Friedrichs inequality, Helmholtz dec omposition, vector potentials, and the div-curl lemma, Springer, 2018

    2018

  25. [33]

    Tzarouchis and A

    D. Tzarouchis and A. Sihvola, Light Scattering by a Diel ectric Sphere: Perspectives on the Mie Resonances, Applied Sciences, VOL. 8, NUM. 2, 2018

    2018

  26. [34]

    J. Wang, S. Wu, W. Yang and X. Tiana. Strong anapole–plas mon coupling in dielectric–metallic hybrid nanostruc- tures. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 26, 23429-23437, 2024

    2024

Pith tools

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