Three-dimensional canonical quantum plasmonics for finite media: exact solution in terms of the classical Green tensor

Georgii Semin; Hans-Rudolf Jauslin; Stephane Guerin

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 68 references

Three-dimensional canonical quantum plasmonics for finite media: exact solution in terms of the classical Green tensor

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that for a finite medium of arbitrary shape, the quantized electric-field operator is exactly expressible through the classical Green tensor of the medium, and that the atomic decay rate reduces to the standard…

desk verdict A serious 3D extension with a correct-looking central cancellation, but a real factor-of-2 normalization error in the Fourier basis that must be fixed before acceptance. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13029 v1 pith:HHSJPYY6 submitted 2025-04-17 quant-ph

Georgii Semin , Hans-Rudolf Jauslin , Stephane Guerin This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph

keywords quantumplasmonicscanonicalquantizationGreentensordoublecontinuumPurcelleffectlocaldensityofstatesfinite-sizemediumLippmann-Schwingerequations

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 aims to put quantum plasmonics for finite, arbitrarily shaped media on the same footing as bulk quantum optics. It constructs a canonical quantization of a dissipative and dispersive medium coupled to the electromagnetic field and proves that the electric-field observable is exactly expressible through the classical Green tensor of the medium. The central result is the spontaneous-emission decay rate of an atom near the medium, $\Gamma(r_a,\omega_a)=\frac{2\omega_a^2}{\hbar\varepsilon_0 c^2}\,\mathbf{d}\cdot\operatorname{Im}[\bar{\bar G}_m^+(r_a,r_a,\omega_a)]\cdot\mathbf{d}$, which is identical to the standard bulk formula. The reason is an exact compensation: the decay contribution from the free-field-like continuum $\Gamma_e$ is cancelled term by term by a matching piece inside $\Gamma_m$. If correct, this justifies why bulk formulas with a small added dissipative background give the right Purcell factors for finite nanostructures.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the squared-frequency operator $\Omega^2 = \Omega_0^2 + V$ acting on the direct sum of field and medium oscillator degrees of freedom, together with its double-continuum eigenfunctions $\psi^e_\kappa,\psi^m_\mu$ obtained from Lippmann-Schwinger equations. The decisive identities are the integral equations (79) and (96) for the electric-field coefficients, whose unique solutions are written as $\omega_\kappa\Phi_\kappa$ plus a convolution with the medium Green tensor, and $-\tilde\alpha(x,\nu)\frac{\nu^2}{c^2}\bar{\bar G}_m^+(r,x,\nu)\cdot n_j$; the Green-tensor LDOS identity then converts mode sums into $\operatorname{Im}\bar{\bar G}_m^+$ and produces the exact cancellation in the decay rate.

What would settle it

Compute the e-coefficients from Eq. (112) and the medium Green tensor from the Fredholm equation (108) for a small metallic sphere or slab using a standard numerical solver, and evaluate both sides of the LDOS identity (135); any discrepancy beyond numerical error would falsify the central claim. An equivalent check is to compute $\Gamma_e$ and $\Gamma_m$ separately at one emitter position and verify that their sum equals the standard formula while $\Gamma_e$ alone does not.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the canonical quantization of a finite, dissipative, dispersive medium coupled to the electromagnetic field has a double-continuous spectrum (one continuum reducing to free photons, one to medium oscillators in the uncoupling limit), and that the electric-field operator splits as $\hat E=\hat E_e+\hat E_m$. The coefficients $e_\kappa$ and $m_\mu$ multiplying the two families of creation-annihilation operators satisfy Fredholm integral equations, and the paper proves that their unique solutions are exact functionals of the classical medium Green tensor $\bar{\bar G}_m^+$ satisfying the Sommerfeld radiation condition. Using the resulting Green-tensor LDOS identity, the spontaneous-emission rate of a two-level emitter is shown to be $\Gamma(r_a,\omega_a)=\frac{2\omega_a^2}{\hbar\varepsilon_0 c^2}\,\mathbf{d}\cdot\operatorname{Im}[\bar{\bar G}_m^+(r_a,r_a,\omega_a)]\cdot\mathbf{d}$, identical to the standard bulk formula, because the $e_\kappa\otimes e_\kappa^*$ contribution in $\Gamma_m$ exactly cancels the whole of $\Gamma_e$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole diagonalization rests on the theorem that $\Omega^2=\Omega_0^2+V$ is unitarily equivalent to the uncoupled $\Omega_0^2$, a spectral result cited from earlier work and not re-derived here; if that equivalence fails for some finite geometry, the exact field-operator expressions and the decay-rate formula do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For a finite medium of arbitrary shape, the quantized electric-field operator is obtained exactly once the classical Green tensor of the medium is known, since both field coefficients are explicit functionals of that tensor.
The spontaneous-emission rate of an emitter at any position is $\frac{2\omega_a^2}{\hbar\varepsilon_0 c^2}\,\mathbf{d}\cdot\operatorname{Im}[\bar{\bar G}_m^+(r_a,r_a,\omega_a)]\cdot\mathbf{d}$, identical to the formula used in bulk treatments.
In the uncoupling limit the model reproduces the free field: the medium part of the field operator vanishes and the medium Green tensor becomes the free Green tensor.
The exact term-by-term cancellation explains why the procedure of adding a small dissipative background extending to infinity, then letting the background tend to one, gives the right Purcell factor for finite media.
The same Green-tensor formulation carries over to anisotropic and to magnetic media without changing the structure of the derivation.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the cancellation is exact for arbitrary shapes, the standard bulk Purcell formula should also hold in geometries where the added-background prescription is least plausible, such as media with strong magnetic or anisotropic response; that is a testable extension of the paper's reasoning.
The free-field-like term $\hat E_e$, although it cancels in the decay rate, could still leave observable signatures in other processes such as atom-surface dispersion forces or emitter-emitter interactions, where no analogous cancellation is guaranteed.
A practical recipe follows from the structure of the proof: solve the Fredholm equation for $\bar{\bar G}_m^+$ once numerically, then build every quantum observable from that tensor and the free modes, bypassing the direct diagonalization of the coupled Hamiltonian.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's my take on Semin, Jauslin, and Guerin. The paper is the natural 3D continuation of the authors' 1D exact solution, and the core conceptual move is sound: quantize the finite medium with a double continuum, express the field coefficients as solutions of Fredholm equations, and show they are given by the classical Green tensor. The exact cancellation in the Purcell factor is the payoff, and it does explain why the old bulk formulas with a small background work for finite media. The derivation is long but the structure is convincing, and the engagement with the literature is honest.

That said, the stress-test note is correct and it matters. The real basis in Eq. (24) is not orthonormal as claimed in Eq. (26): the cos/sin integrals over the half-space give (1/2)δ(k−k'), not δ(k−k'), so the completeness relation (27) is off by a factor of 2. This is not a harmless convention, because the spectral identity (84) uses that completeness to produce the δ⊥ term, and the same factor enters (134) and the LDOS identity. The fix is simple — insert a sqrt(2) into the basis or rescale the measure — but then every factor in the intermediate steps has to be rechecked. The final Purcell cancellation might survive, but the paper as written is internally inconsistent.

There are also smaller presentation problems. The proof of (112) says it substitutes Eq. (112) while the algebra actually uses Eq. (79), and Eq. (113) has a variable typo. The unitary equivalence theorem from [38] is a real dependency; it is plausible and cited, but the paper should either restate the theorem or make clear the result is conditional on it.

Bottom line: the paper deserves a serious referee. I would send it out, but I would not accept it in its current form. The normalization error must be fixed and the factors rechecked. Once that is done, this will be a useful reference for quantum plasmonics and macroscopic QED. It is the kind of paper I would bring to a reading group and cite.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a canonical quantization scheme for the electromagnetic field coupled to a finite, dispersive, dissipative, inhomogeneous dielectric in three dimensions. It writes the classical Hamiltonian as two oscillator continua, diagonalizes the squared-frequency operator via Lippmann-Schwinger equations, and quantizes the resulting modes in a bosonic Fock space. The electric field operator is split into an 'electromagnetic' term E_e and a 'medium' term E_m, whose coefficients are shown to satisfy Fredholm integral equations. The authors prove that these coefficients can be expressed through the classical Green tensor of the dielectric satisfying the Sommerfeld radiation condition, and they use this representation to derive a Green-tensor LDOS identity. Applying Fermi's golden rule to a two-level emitter, they obtain a decay rate in which the E_e contribution cancels exactly against a corresponding term in the E_m contribution, leaving the standard bulk Purcell formula Γ(r_a,ω_a) = (2ω_a^2/ħ ε_0 c^2) d·Im[G_m^+(r_a,r_a,ω_a)]·d. The stated goal is to justify the bulk formula for finite media and to provide exact Green-tensor expressions for quantum plasmonics.

Significance. The intended result is significant: if the derivation is correct, it extends the authors' one-dimensional exact solution [39] to three-dimensional finite media of arbitrary shape, addresses the long-standing difficulty that bulk formulas cannot be applied to finite media, and gives explicit Green-tensor expressions for all field operators and eigenfunctions. The paper is largely self-contained algebraically, with the Green-tensor solution, the LDOS identity, and the Purcell compensation derived in the text and appendices. The external input is the unitary equivalence theorem from [38], which is a reasonable reliance on prior work. The claim that the Purcell formula emerges as an exact consequence of the microscopic model, rather than as a postulate, is a genuine strength, and the cancellation mechanism between the e and m contributions is an instructive and publishable insight. However, the internal normalization consistency of the real Fourier basis must be repaired before the derivation can be considered correct as written.

major comments (3)

[§II.B, Eqs. (24), (26), (27)] The real basis functions are not orthonormal as stated. With Φ_κ(r) = (2π)^(-3/2) ε cos(k·r) or ε sin(k·r) and k restricted to half-space, evaluating Eq. (26) for κ=κ' gives (2π)^(-3) ∫ cos^2(k·r) d^3r = (1/2)δ(0), not δ(0), and the completeness relation (27) has the same factor-of-two error. This is not a harmless convention: the spectral identity (84) and the imaginary-part identity (134) both rely on this completeness, and these identities feed directly into the integral equation for e_κ (95) and the LDOS identity (135)-(136) used in the Purcell cancellation (151)-(153). As written, the derivation is internally inconsistent. The correction is straightforward, namely to insert a factor sqrt(2) in Φ_κ, but all subsequent factors in Sections III-V must then be rechecked.
[§III.F.1, Eqs. (112)-(114)] The proof of the e-coefficient solution is not valid as printed. The text says the identity (113) is obtained by replacing r by x in Eq. (112), but Eq. (112) is the statement being proved; the starting point should be the integral equation (111), not its claimed solution. In addition, Eq. (113) has β(x) on the left-hand side although the integration variable is z; the factor should presumably be β(z). The intended argument can be repaired by multiplying Eq. (111) by β(x)G(r',x), integrating over x, using Eq. (B3), and then cancelling the common term, but the printed proof is circular and needs to be rewritten.
[§II.D, paragraph after Eq. (43)] The double-continuum structure and the entire Fock-space quantization depend on the unitary equivalence of Ω^2 and Ω_0^2, cited from [38] and [44, Ch. 5] but not re-derived. Since the central claim would fail if this equivalence does not hold for some admissible finite geometry, the authors should state explicitly the hypotheses of that theorem (conditions on the coupling α and on the medium volume V) and confirm that the present model satisfies them. This is not an accusation of error, but the manuscript would be substantially easier to assess if this load-bearing input were stated.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract] The phrase 'can by written' should read 'can be written'.
[§II.G, Eqs. (58a)-(58d)] All displayed subspaces are labelled F_B^0; the subscript should follow the Fock-space level n, e.g., F_n, otherwise the definition of the Fock space is garbled.
[§V, Eqs. (149), (152), (153)] The frequency variable is used inconsistently: the prefactor and the Green-tensor arguments are sometimes written as ω and sometimes as ω_a. These equations should consistently use the atomic frequency ω_a.
[Eq. (1) and Sec. II] The notation mixes ∫ d^3k with the multi-index integral ∫ dκ; using dκ consistently throughout would improve readability.
[Appendix B, Eq. (B6)] A short derivation of Eq. (B6) from Eq. (A7) would be helpful, since Eq. (134) is a central input to the LDOS identity and the factor conventions matter.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

eκ solution (Eq. 112) is proven by assuming itself via the identity (113); the Purcell cancellation itself is otherwise non-circular.

self definitional [Section III.F.1, Eqs. (111)-(116)]
"We will show that the solution of Eq. (79) ... can be expressed ... as [Eq. (112)]. We will prove the identity [Eq. (113)] ... which implies (112). The identity (113) is obtained by replacing r by x in Eq. (112), multiplying both sides by β(r′) ¯¯G(r′, x) and taking the integral over x: ... The second term is equal to the left hand side, and thus it implies (113)."

The target statement (112) is the claimed Green-tensor expression for eκ. The paper says (113) implies (112), but then derives (113) by starting from (112) itself: it replaces r by x in Eq. (112), multiplies by β(r′)G(r′,x), integrates, and cancels the term equal to the left-hand side. The resulting identity therefore only shows that the assumed solution (112) is consistent with an equivalent rearranged identity; it does not independently show that the integral equation (111) has (112) as its solution. As written, the Green-tensor formula for eκ is an assumed ansatz rather than a derived consequence. This circular link is load-bearing because the same eκ formula is later used in Appendix B to prove the LDOS identity (135) and hence in the final Purcell cancellation (149)-(153).

full rationale

The analysis found one clear circular step, in the proof of the e-coefficient solution in Section III.F.1. There, the paper states that identity (113) implies the desired Green-tensor expression (112), but it obtains (113) by assuming (112) and manipulating it, so the central formula for eκ is not actually derived from the integral equation. This is a genuine circularity in a main result, because the same formula is subsequently used in Appendix B to prove the LDOS identity and in the Purcell calculation. The final Purcell formula itself, however, is not circular: Γe and Γm are computed from the model, the eκ⊗eκ term in Γm is exactly compensated by Γe, and the result matching the literature is an external benchmark rather than an input. The cited unitary-equivalence theorem from [38] and [44] is a self-citation with overlapping authors, but it is a parameter-free mathematical theorem with stated assumptions that does not include the paper's target results, so under the review rules it counts as independent support and was not scored as circularity. The separate normalization concern about Eq. (26) is a correctness issue, not a circularity, and is not included in the score. Overall, one central derived formula reduces to itself in the written proof, giving partial circularity and a score of 6.

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

The derivation introduces no fitted parameters. It relies on a standard microscopic Hopfield-type model, the Kramers-Kronig relation, a unitary equivalence theorem from the authors' prior work, and standard Green tensor properties. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The coupled squared-frequency operator Omega^2 = Omega_0^2 + V is unitarily equivalent to the uncoupled Omega_0^2, so the double-continuum spectrum exists.
Taken from [38] and [44, Chapter 5]; the entire diagonalization and quantization depend on it, and it is not re-derived in this paper.
domain assumption The medium is described by a continuum of independent local harmonic oscillators with coupling alpha(r, nu) = sqrt(2 epsilon_0 nu Im epsilon(r, nu) / pi), and the dielectric response satisfies the Kramers-Kronig relation (21).
This microscopic model is claimed to reproduce macroscopic Maxwell equations after integrating out the medium degrees of freedom.
standard math The Green tensor of the medium satisfies the Fredholm integral equation (108), has a unique solution with the Sommerfeld outgoing radiation condition, and satisfies reciprocity.
Standard results for dyadic Green functions in inhomogeneous media, cited to [49,50].
standard math The transverse basis {Phi_kappa} is complete for transverse fields (27), and the free-space Green tensor admits the spectral representation (A7).
Standard functional analysis of the double-curl operator, stated in Section II.B and Appendix A.
domain assumption Fermi's Golden Rule and the rotating-wave approximation apply to the emitter-field coupling.
Standard QED treatment of spontaneous emission, stated in Section V.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Three-dimensional canonical quantum plasmonics for finite media: exact solution in terms of the classical Green tensor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HHSJPYY6

@misc{pith2026250413029,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Three-dimensional canonical quantum plasmonics for finite media: exact solution in terms of the classical Green tensor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HHSJPYY6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13029}
}

read the original abstract

This article presents a comprehensive three-dimensional canonical quantization to treat quantum plasmonics for finite metallic or dielectric media of arbitrary shape. We use a microscopic model for the dissipative and dispersive medium coupled with the electromagnetic field, which is justified by the fact that if one integrates the degrees of freedom of the medium, one obtains the macroscopic Maxwell equations. Its quantization features a Hamiltonian formulation having the form of two infinite harmonic oscillators characterized by a double continuum. The diagonalized Hamiltonian is quantized by the correspondence principle, introducing creation-annihilation operators in a bosonic Fock space. The diagonal quantum Hamiltonian is the sum of two terms corresponding to the two continua. The physical observables, like, e.g., the electric field, are also the sum of two terms corresponding to the two continua, one of which had been omitted in the literature geared for an infinite bulk medium. In a second step, we show that the electric field operator can by written as linear combinations of the creation-annihilation operators with coefficients that satisfy integral equations of Fredholm type. We show that the solution of these equations can be expressed in terms of the classical Green tensor of the medium satisfying the Sommerfeld radiation condition. Finally, we consider the Purcell effect for the spontaneous emission of an atom close to the medium. We show that through an exact compensation of some terms, the Purcell factor for the system with the double continuum is proportional to the imaginary part of the Green tensor, which defines the local density of states. This result has the same form as the one obtained in the literature for bulk systems that involve a single continuum and a small dissipative background extending to infinity, and can be seen as a justification of this approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13029 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. The spectrum structure of the squared frequency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

[38]

Dorier, J

V. Dorier, J. Lampart, S. Gu´ erin, and H. R. Jauslin, Canonical quantization for quantum plasmonics with fi- nite nanostructures, Phys. Rev. A 100, 42111 (2019)

work page 2019
[39]

to three-dimensional systems with a finite medium of arbitrary shape. In contrast to the one-dimensional sys- tem, the electric field in three dimensions has transversal and longitudinal components due to the additional de- grees of freedom associated with the oscillations in three dimensions of the charges of the medium. The main result is that all the e...

work page
[1]

Solution of the e coefficients integral equation We will show that the solution of Eq. (79) for the e coefficient, eκ(r) =ωκΦκ(r) +ω2 κ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯G0+(r, z,ωκ)[ε(z,ωκ)− 1]eκ(z), (111) can be expressed in terms of the Green tensor of the medium, and of Φκ the transverse continuum eigenfunc- tions of∇×∇× , as eκ(r) =ωκΦκ(r) +ω2 κ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯Gm+(r, z,ωκ)...

work page
[2]

Solution of the m coefficients integral equation Furthermore, we next show that the solution of Eq. (96) for the m coefficient mµ(r) =−˜α(r,νµ)ν2 c2 ¯¯G0+(r, xµ,νµ)njµ + ν2 µ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯G0+(r, z,ν )[ε(z,νµ)− 1]mµ(z), (117) can also be expressed in terms of the Green tensor ¯¯Gm+(r, x,ωκ) of the medium: mx,ν,j(r) =−˜α(x,ν )ν2 c2 ¯¯Gm+(r, x,ν )· nj. (118)...

work page
[3]

M. S. Tame, K. R. McEnery, S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, J. Lee, S. A. Maier, and M. S. Kim, Quantum plasmonics, Nat. Phys. 9, 329 (2013)

work page 2013
[4]

(B3) The first equality is just (108)

Green tensor permutations The Green tensor, that satisfies (108), ¯¯Gm+(x, y) = ¯¯G0+(x, y) + Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G0(x, z) ¯¯G(z, x)), (B2) and the reciprocity ¯¯G(x, y) = ¯¯GT (y, x), have the follow- ing property: ¯¯G(x, y)− ¯¯G0(x, y) = Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G0(x, z) ¯¯G(z, y) = Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G(x, z) ¯¯G0(z, y). (B3) The first equality is just (108). The second e...

work page
[5]

Green tensor LDOS identity In this Appendix, we prove the Green tensor LDOS identity: Im[ ¯¯Gm+(x, y,ω )] = πc2 2ω3 Z dκ eκ(x)⊗ e∗ κ(y) δ(ωκ−ω) + ω2 c2 Z d3zεi(z,ω ) ¯¯Gm+(x, z,ωκ) ¯¯G∗ m+(z, y,ω ). (B5) We will use (108) and the following relations: Im ¯¯G0(x, y,ω ) = Im ¯¯G⊥ 0 (x, y,ω ) = πc2 2ω Z dκ Φκ(x)⊗ Φκ(y)δ(ωκ−ω), (B6) where Φκ are the transverse...

work page
[6]

Garrison and R

J. Garrison and R. Chiao, Quantum optics (OUP Oxford, 2008)

2008

Show all 68 references

[7]

Novotny and B

L. Novotny and B. Hecht, Principles of nano-optics (Cambridge University Press, 2012)

2012
[8]

Huttner and S

B. Huttner and S. M. Barnett, Dispersion and loss in a hopfield dielectric, Europhys. Lett. 18, 487 (1992)

1992
[9]

Z. K. Zhou, J. Liu, Y. Bao, L. Wu, C. E. Png, X. H. Wang, and C. W. Qiu, Quantum Plasmonics Get Ap- plied, Prog. Quantum Electron. 65, 1 (2019)

2019
[10]

Benisty, J.-J

H. Benisty, J.-J. Greffet, and P. Lalanne, Introduction to nanophotonics (Oxford University Press, 2022)

2022
[11]

Huttner, J

B. Huttner, J. J. Baumberg, and S. M. Barnett, Canoni- cal quantization of light in a linear dielectric., Europhys. Lett. 16, 177 (1991)

1991
[12]

Huttner and S

B. Huttner and S. M. Barnett, Quantization of the elec- tromagnetic field in dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 46, 4306 (1992)

1992
[13]

Fano, Effects of configuration interaction on intensities and phase shifts, Phys

U. Fano, Effects of configuration interaction on intensities and phase shifts, Phys. Rev. 124, 1866 (1961)

1961
[14]

S. M. Barnett, B. Huttner, and R. Loudon, Spontaneous emission in absorbing dielectric media, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3698 (1992)

1992
[15]

J. J. Hopfield, Theory of the contribution of excitons to the complex dielectric constant of crystals, Phys. Rev. 112, 1555 (1958)

1958
[16]

Friedrichs, On the perturbation of continuous spectra, Commun

K. Friedrichs, On the perturbation of continuous spectra, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1, 361 (1948)

1948
[17]

K. O. Friedrichs, Perturbation of spectra in Hilbert space, Vol. 3 (American Mathematical Soc., 1965)

1965
[18]

N. A. Bhat and J. Sipe, Hamiltonian treatment of the electromagnetic field in dispersive and absorptive struc- tured media, Phys. Rev. A 73, 063808 (2006)

2006
[19]

Wubs and L

M. Wubs and L. G. Suttorp, Transient QED effects in absorbing dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 63, 1 (2001)

2001
[20]

L. G. Suttorp and M. Wubs, Field quantization in in- homogeneous absorptive dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 70, 1 (2004), 0407045

2004
[21]

L. G. Suttorp and A. J. Van Wonderen, Fano diagonal- ization of a polariton model for an inhomogeneous ab- sorptive dielectric, Europhys. Lett. 67, 766 (2004)

2004
[22]

M. Wubs, L. G. Suttorp, and A. Lagendijk, Multiple- scattering approach to interatomic interactions and su- perradiance in inhomogeneous dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 70, 1 (2004), 0409115

2004
[23]

Scheel and S

S. Scheel and S. Buhmann, Macroscopic quantum elec- trodynamics —Concepts and applications, Acta Physica Slovaca 58, 675 (2008)

2008
[24]

Gruner and D

T. Gruner and D. G. Welsch, Correlation of radiation- field ground-state fluctuations in a dispersive and lossy dielectric, Phys. Rev. A 51, 3246 (1995)

1995
[25]

Gruner and D

T. Gruner and D. G. Welsch, Green-function approach to the radiation-field quantization for homogeneous and inhomogeneous Kramers-Kronig dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 53, 1818 (1996)

1996
[26]

H. T. Dung, L. Kn¨ oll, and D.-G. Welsch, Three- dimensional quantization of the electromagnetic field in dispersive and absorbing inhomogeneous dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 57, 3931 (1998)

1998
[27]

Scheel, L

S. Scheel, L. Kn¨ oll, and D.-G. Welsch, QED commutation relations for inhomogeneous Kramers-Kronig dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 58, 700 (1998)

1998
[28]

Drezet, Quantizing polaritons in inhomogeneous dis- sipative systems, Phys

A. Drezet, Quantizing polaritons in inhomogeneous dis- sipative systems, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023831 (2017)

2017
[29]

Vogel and D.-G

W. Vogel and D.-G. Welsch,Quantum optics (John Wiley & Sons, 2006)

2006
[30]

Matloob, R

R. Matloob, R. Loudon, S. M. Barnett, and J. Jef- fers, Electromagnetic field quantization in absorbing di- electrics, Phys. Rev. A 52, 4823 (1995)

1995
[31]

Matloob, R

R. Matloob, R. Loudon, M. Artoni, S. M. Barnett, and J. Jeffers, Electromagnetic field quantization in amplify- ing dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 55, 1623 (1997)

1997
[32]

Drezet, Dual-Lagrangian description adapted to quan- tum optics in dispersive and dissipative dielectric media, Phys

A. Drezet, Dual-Lagrangian description adapted to quan- tum optics in dispersive and dissipative dielectric media, Phys. Rev. A 94, 053826 (2016)

2016
[33]

G. W. Hanson, F. Lindel, and S. Y. Buhmann, Langevin noise approach for lossy media and the lossless limit, J. Opt. Soc. of Am. B 38, 758 (2021)

2021
[34]

Drezet, Equivalence between the Hamiltonian and Langevin noise descriptions of plasmon polaritons in a dispersive and lossy inhomogeneous medium, Phys

A. Drezet, Equivalence between the Hamiltonian and Langevin noise descriptions of plasmon polaritons in a dispersive and lossy inhomogeneous medium, Phys. Rev. A 96, 033849 (2017)

2017
[35]

Di Stefano, S

O. Di Stefano, S. Savasta, and R. Girlanda, Three- dimensional electromagnetic field quantization in absorb- ing and dispersive bounded dielectrics, Phys. Rev. A 61, 18 238031 (2000)

2000
[36]

O. D. Stefano, S. Savasta, and R. Girlanda, Mode expan- sion and photon operators in dispersive and absorbing dielectrics, J. Mod. Opt. 48, 67 (2001)

2001
[37]

S. Y. Buhmann, Dispersion Forces I, II (Springer, 2013)

2013
[40]

Dorier, S

V. Dorier, S. Gu´ erin, and H. R. Jauslin, Critical re- view of quantum plasmonic models for finite-size media, Nanophotonics 9, 3899 (2020)

2020
[41]

D. Y. Na, T. E. Roth, J. Zhu, W. C. Chew, and C. J. Ryu, Numerical framework for modeling quantum elec- tromagnetic systems involving finite-sized lossy dielectric objects in free space, Phys. Rev. A 107, 63702 (2023)

2023
[42]

Ciattoni, Quantum electrodynamics of lossy magne- todielectric samples in vacuum: Modified Langevin noise formalism, Phys

A. Ciattoni, Quantum electrodynamics of lossy magne- todielectric samples in vacuum: Modified Langevin noise formalism, Phys. Rev. A 110, 013707 (2024)

2024
[43]

Miano, L

G. Miano, L. M. Cangemi, and C. Forestiere, Quantum emitter interacting with a dispersive dielectric object: a model based on the modified Langevin noise formalism, Nanophotonics (2025)

2025
[44]

Semin, H.-R

G. Semin, H.-R. Jauslin, and S. Gu´ erin, Canonical quan- tum plasmonics for finite nanostructures: Exact solution in one dimension, Phys. Rev. A 110, 043514 (2024)

2024
[45]

Khanbekyan, L

M. Khanbekyan, L. Kn¨ oll, D.-G. Welsch, A. Semenov, and W. Vogel, QED of lossy cavities: Operator and quantum-state input-output relations, Phys. Rev. A 72, 053813 (2005)

2005
[46]

Khanbekyan, L

M. Khanbekyan, L. Kn¨ oll, and D.-G. Welsch, Input- output relations at dispersing and absorbing planar mul- tilayers for the quantized electromagnetic field containing evanescent components, Phys. Rev. A67, 063812 (2003)

2003
[47]

T. G. Philbin, Canonical quantization of macroscopic electromagnetism, New J. Phys. 12 (2010)

2010
[48]

L. D. Landau, J. S. Bell, M. Kearsley, L. Pitaevskii, E. Lifshitz, and J. Sykes, Electrodynamics of continuous media, Vol. 8 (Elsevier, 2013)

2013
[49]

Lampart, Mathematical results on many-body quantum systems, Habilitation report, Universit´ e de Bourgogne (2024), tel-04769464

J. Lampart, Mathematical results on many-body quantum systems, Habilitation report, Universit´ e de Bourgogne (2024), tel-04769464

2024
[50]

M. Reed, B. Simon, B. Simon, and B. Simon, Methods of modern mathematical physics, Vol. I-IV (Academic press New York, 1972)

1972
[51]

De Bi` evre, Local states of free bose fields, in Large Coulomb Systems: Lecture Notes on Mathematical As- pects of QED (Springer, 2006) pp

S. De Bi` evre, Local states of free bose fields, in Large Coulomb Systems: Lecture Notes on Mathematical As- pects of QED (Springer, 2006) pp. 15–61

2006
[52]

De Bi` evre, Where’s that quantum?, in Contributions in Mathematical Physics: A Tribute to Gerard G

S. De Bi` evre, Where’s that quantum?, in Contributions in Mathematical Physics: A Tribute to Gerard G. Emch (Springer, 2007) pp. 123–146

2007
[53]

Honegger and A

R. Honegger and A. Rieckers, Photons In Fock Space And Beyond (In 3 Volumes) (World Scientific, 2015)

2015
[54]

Sommerfeld, Partial differential equations in physics , Vol

A. Sommerfeld, Partial differential equations in physics , Vol. 1 (Academic press, 1949)

1949
[55]

Polyanin and A

P. Polyanin and A. V. Manzhirov, Handbook of Integral Equations: Second Edition (Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2008)

2008
[56]

Dzsotjan, A

D. Dzsotjan, A. S. Sørensen, and M. Fleischhauer, Quan- tum emitters coupled to surface plasmons of a nanowire: A Green’s function approach, Phys. Rev. B 82, 075427 (2010)

2010
[57]

S. Y. Buhmann and D.-G. Welsch, Casimir-Polder forces on excited atoms in the strong atom-field coupling regime, Phys. Rev. A 77, 012110 (2008)

2008
[58]

H¨ ummer, F

T. H¨ ummer, F. Garc´ ıa-Vidal, L. Mart´ ın-Moreno, and D. Zueco, Weak and strong coupling regimes in plasmonic QED, Phys. Rev. B 87, 115419 (2013)

2013
[59]

Sauvan, J.-P

C. Sauvan, J.-P. Hugonin, I. S. Maksymov, and P. Lalanne, Theory of the spontaneous optical emission of nanosize photonic and plasmon resonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 237401 (2013)

2013
[60]

Rousseaux, D

B. Rousseaux, D. Dzsotjan, G. Colas Des Francs, H. R. Jauslin, C. Couteau, and S. Gu´ erin, Adiabatic passage mediated by plasmons: A route towards a decoherence- free quantum plasmonic platform, Phys. Rev. B 93, 045422 (2016); Erratum Phys. Rev. B 94, 199902 (2016)

2016
[61]

Dzsotjan, B

D. Dzsotjan, B. Rousseaux, H. R. Jauslin, G. C. des Francs, C. Couteau, and S. Guerin, Mode-selective quan- tization and multimodal effective models for spherically layered systems, Physical Review A 94, 023818 (2016)

2016
[62]

Castellini, H

A. Castellini, H. R. Jauslin, B. Rousseaux, D. Dzsot- jan, G. Colas des Francs, A. Messina, and S. Gu´ erin, Quantum plasmonics with multi-emitters: application to stimulated Raman adiabatic passage, Euro. Phys. J. D 72, 223 (2018)

2018
[63]

Franke, S

S. Franke, S. Hughes, M. K. Dezfouli, P. T. Kristensen, K. Busch, A. Knorr, and M. Richter, Quantization of quasinormal modes for open cavities and plasmonic cav- ity quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 213901 (2019)

2019
[64]

Medina, F

I. Medina, F. J. Garc´ ıa-Vidal, A. I. Fern´ andez- Dom´ ınguez, and J. Feist, Few-mode field quantization of arbitrary electromagnetic spectral densities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 093601 (2021)

2021
[65]

S´ anchez-Barquilla, F

M. S´ anchez-Barquilla, F. J. Garc´ ıa-Vidal, A. I. Fern´ andez-Dom´ ınguez, and J. Feist, Few-mode field quantization for multiple emitters, Nanophotonics 11, 4363 (2022)

2022
[66]

Lednev, D

M. Lednev, D. F. de la Pradilla, F. Lindel, E. Moreno, F. J. Garc´ ıa-Vidal, and J. Feist, Spatially resolved pho- ton statistics of general nanophotonic systems (2024), arXiv:2411.19777 [quant-ph]

2024
[67]

Knoll, S

L. Knoll, S. Scheel, and D.-G. Welsch, QED in dispersing and absorbing media (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0006121 [quant-ph]

2003 arXiv
[68]

Xiang and Y

Z. Xiang and Y. Lu, Electromagnetic dyadic green’s func- tion in cylindrically multilayered media, IEEE Trans. Mi- crowave Theory Tech. 44, 614 (1996)

1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [38]

Dorier, J

V. Dorier, J. Lampart, S. Gu´ erin, and H. R. Jauslin, Canonical quantization for quantum plasmonics with fi- nite nanostructures, Phys. Rev. A 100, 42111 (2019)

work page 2019

[2] [39]

to three-dimensional systems with a finite medium of arbitrary shape. In contrast to the one-dimensional sys- tem, the electric field in three dimensions has transversal and longitudinal components due to the additional de- grees of freedom associated with the oscillations in three dimensions of the charges of the medium. The main result is that all the e...

work page

[3] [1]

Solution of the e coefficients integral equation We will show that the solution of Eq. (79) for the e coefficient, eκ(r) =ωκΦκ(r) +ω2 κ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯G0+(r, z,ωκ)[ε(z,ωκ)− 1]eκ(z), (111) can be expressed in terms of the Green tensor of the medium, and of Φκ the transverse continuum eigenfunc- tions of∇×∇× , as eκ(r) =ωκΦκ(r) +ω2 κ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯Gm+(r, z,ωκ)...

work page

[4] [2]

Solution of the m coefficients integral equation Furthermore, we next show that the solution of Eq. (96) for the m coefficient mµ(r) =−˜α(r,νµ)ν2 c2 ¯¯G0+(r, xµ,νµ)njµ + ν2 µ c2 Z V d3z ¯¯G0+(r, z,ν )[ε(z,νµ)− 1]mµ(z), (117) can also be expressed in terms of the Green tensor ¯¯Gm+(r, x,ωκ) of the medium: mx,ν,j(r) =−˜α(x,ν )ν2 c2 ¯¯Gm+(r, x,ν )· nj. (118)...

work page

[5] [3]

M. S. Tame, K. R. McEnery, S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, J. Lee, S. A. Maier, and M. S. Kim, Quantum plasmonics, Nat. Phys. 9, 329 (2013)

work page 2013

[6] [4]

(B3) The first equality is just (108)

Green tensor permutations The Green tensor, that satisfies (108), ¯¯Gm+(x, y) = ¯¯G0+(x, y) + Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G0(x, z) ¯¯G(z, x)), (B2) and the reciprocity ¯¯G(x, y) = ¯¯GT (y, x), have the follow- ing property: ¯¯G(x, y)− ¯¯G0(x, y) = Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G0(x, z) ¯¯G(z, y) = Z V d3zβ (z) ¯¯G(x, z) ¯¯G0(z, y). (B3) The first equality is just (108). The second e...

work page

[7] [5]

Green tensor LDOS identity In this Appendix, we prove the Green tensor LDOS identity: Im[ ¯¯Gm+(x, y,ω )] = πc2 2ω3 Z dκ eκ(x)⊗ e∗ κ(y) δ(ωκ−ω) + ω2 c2 Z d3zεi(z,ω ) ¯¯Gm+(x, z,ωκ) ¯¯G∗ m+(z, y,ω ). (B5) We will use (108) and the following relations: Im ¯¯G0(x, y,ω ) = Im ¯¯G⊥ 0 (x, y,ω ) = πc2 2ω Z dκ Φκ(x)⊗ Φκ(y)δ(ωκ−ω), (B6) where Φκ are the transverse...

work page

[8] [6]

Garrison and R

J. Garrison and R. Chiao, Quantum optics (OUP Oxford, 2008)

2008