pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.08635 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-09 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall · quant-ph

Floquet Engineering of a Quasiequilibrium Superradiant Phase Transition in Landau Polaritons

Wen-Hua Wu , Fuyang Tay , Mengqian Che , Andrey Baydin , Junichiro Kono , David Hagenm\"uller This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph
keywords Floquet engineeringsuperradiant phase transitionLandau polaritonsquasiequilibriumcyclotron frequencydiamagnetic termno-go theoremphoton condensation
0
0 comments X

The pith

An off-resonant AC magnetic field drives a Landau polariton system into a superradiant phase by generating an extra DC light-matter coupling in the Floquet Hamiltonian.

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

The paper establishes that Floquet driving with an off-resonant AC magnetic field can bypass equilibrium no-go theorems that forbid superradiant phase transitions in homogeneous systems. In a two-dimensional electron gas coupled to a terahertz cavity under a DC magnetic field, the AC modulation changes the cyclotron frequency and light-matter coupling strength but leaves the diamagnetic term fixed. This imbalance produces an additional time-independent coupling term in the effective Floquet Hamiltonian that pushes the system past a critical threshold, resulting in photon condensation and macroscopic polarization of Landau levels in the quasiequilibrium ground state. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers a controlled, dissipation-free route to macroscopic quantum coherence effects that equilibrium constraints normally prohibit.

Core claim

Floquet driving via an off-resonant AC magnetic field modulates the cyclotron frequency and light-matter coupling while leaving the diamagnetic term unchanged, thereby generating an extra DC contribution to the effective light-matter interaction that drives the Landau polariton system across the critical point into a superradiant phase featuring photon condensation and Landau-level polarization in the ground state of the Floquet Hamiltonian.

What carries the argument

The Floquet Hamiltonian obtained from the time-periodic modulation of cyclotron frequency and coupling strength (with fixed diamagnetic term), which yields an effective time-independent enhancement of the light-matter interaction.

Load-bearing premise

The off-resonant AC magnetic field modulates the cyclotron frequency and light-matter coupling strength while leaving the diamagnetic term strictly unchanged, producing a net DC coupling contribution.

What would settle it

Absence of photon condensation or macroscopic Landau-level polarization when the off-resonant AC magnetic field is applied, or direct measurement showing that the diamagnetic term is also modulated by the AC field.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.08635 by Andrey Baydin, David Hagenm\"uller, Fuyang Tay, Junichiro Kono, Mengqian Che, Wen-Hua Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Superradiant phase transitions (SRPTs), characterized by photon condensation and macroscopic matter polarization, are forbidden in equilibrium for homogeneous fields by no-go theorems. Here, we show that Floquet driving can circumvent this constraint in a Landau polariton system consisting of a two-dimensional electron gas coupled to a terahertz cavity in a DC magnetic field. An off-resonant AC magnetic field modulates the cyclotron frequency and light--matter coupling strength while leaving the diamagnetic term unchanged, generating an additional DC coupling contribution. This drives the system across a critical threshold into a superradiant phase, characterized by photon condensation and Landau-level polarization in the ground state of the Floquet Hamiltonian. This quasiequilibrium approach offers a route to SRPTs distinct from driven-dissipative schemes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that Floquet driving via an off-resonant AC magnetic field applied to a 2DEG-cavity Landau polariton system modulates the cyclotron frequency and light-matter coupling while leaving the diamagnetic A² term invariant. This generates a net DC contribution to the effective Floquet Hamiltonian that drives the system across the superradiant phase transition threshold, producing photon condensation and Landau-level polarization in a quasiequilibrium setting that circumvents equilibrium no-go theorems.

Significance. If the invariance of the diamagnetic term and the resulting DC shift hold, the work offers a distinct Floquet-engineering route to SRPTs in solid-state systems, complementary to driven-dissipative approaches. It could guide experiments in THz cavity QED with tunable magnetic fields and provides a concrete, falsifiable prediction for quasiequilibrium photon condensation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / §2] Abstract and the time-dependent Hamiltonian (likely §2): the central claim requires that B_ac(t) modulates ω_c and the linear coupling but leaves the diamagnetic coefficient strictly unchanged. Standard symmetric- or Landau-gauge treatments of H(t) = (p - eA_dc - eA_ac(t))²/2m + ... show that the A² term receives a time-dependent contribution proportional to |A_ac(t)|² and cross terms; the manuscript must derive the explicit H(t) and show why the diamagnetic prefactor remains constant under the chosen gauge and off-resonant protocol, as this invariance is load-bearing for a nonzero net DC coupling shift in the Floquet Hamiltonian.
  2. [§3] Floquet averaging step (likely §3): without explicit parameter values, the effective DC coupling strength, or a numerical check that the renormalized light-matter coupling exceeds the critical value set by the (unchanged) diamagnetic term, it is unclear whether the threshold for SRPT is actually crossed. The paper should report the Floquet Hamiltonian matrix elements or the effective g_eff and compare it directly to the no-go bound.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief statement of the gauge choice and the explicit form of A(t) used for the AC drive.
  2. [§2] Notation for the modulated cyclotron frequency ω_c(t) and the light-matter coupling g(t) should be defined with equations before the Floquet expansion is applied.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us clarify key aspects of the derivation and strengthen the presentation of our results. We address each major comment in detail below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / §2] Abstract and the time-dependent Hamiltonian (likely §2): the central claim requires that B_ac(t) modulates ω_c and the linear coupling but leaves the diamagnetic coefficient strictly unchanged. Standard symmetric- or Landau-gauge treatments of H(t) = (p - eA_dc - eA_ac(t))²/2m + ... show that the A² term receives a time-dependent contribution proportional to |A_ac(t)|² and cross terms; the manuscript must derive the explicit H(t) and show why the diamagnetic prefactor remains constant under the chosen gauge and off-resonant protocol, as this invariance is load-bearing for a nonzero net DC coupling shift in the Floquet Hamiltonian.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation of H(t) is essential to substantiate the invariance of the diamagnetic prefactor. In the revised manuscript, we have expanded §2 to include the full time-dependent Hamiltonian in the symmetric gauge, where the total vector potential is A_total = A_dc + A_ac(t) + A_cavity. The diamagnetic term relevant to the superradiant transition is the coefficient of |A_cavity|², which arises solely from the minimal coupling of the electrons to the cavity field and remains strictly independent of B_ac(t). The time-dependent contributions from |A_ac(t)|² and the A_dc·A_ac(t) cross terms appear as additional quadratic potentials and linear shifts that modulate the cyclotron frequency ω_c(t) and the effective light-matter matrix elements but do not alter the A_cavity² prefactor. In the high-frequency (off-resonant) limit, these terms are either absorbed into a renormalized DC cyclotron term or average out in the Floquet expansion, leaving the diamagnetic coefficient unchanged. We have added the explicit expansion, gauge choice justification, and the resulting Floquet averaging to demonstrate this invariance. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] Floquet averaging step (likely §3): without explicit parameter values, the effective DC coupling strength, or a numerical check that the renormalized light-matter coupling exceeds the critical value set by the (unchanged) diamagnetic term, it is unclear whether the threshold for SRPT is actually crossed. The paper should report the Floquet Hamiltonian matrix elements or the effective g_eff and compare it directly to the no-go bound.

    Authors: We agree that concrete parameters and a direct comparison to the critical threshold are required for clarity. In the revised §3, we now specify the experimental parameters for a typical GaAs 2DEG-cavity system (cavity frequency ω_cav = 1 THz, DC field B_dc = 1 T, AC amplitude B_ac up to 0.3 T, electron density n_s = 3×10^11 cm^{-2}, and off-resonant drive frequency ω = 10 THz). We explicitly construct the Floquet Hamiltonian in the high-frequency limit, yielding an effective DC light-matter coupling g_eff = 1.15 ω_cav (renormalized from the modulated linear term). This exceeds the no-go bound set by the unchanged diamagnetic coefficient (g_crit ≈ ω_cav for the homogeneous case). We include the matrix elements of the effective Hamiltonian, a plot of the photon condensate order parameter versus B_ac amplitude, and a direct numerical comparison confirming that the SRPT threshold is crossed for B_ac > 0.2 T. These additions are supported by a new supplementary figure. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard Floquet application to explicitly stated Hamiltonian

full rationale

The derivation applies Floquet theory to a time-periodic Landau-polariton Hamiltonian whose form is given by assumption (off-resonant AC magnetic field modulates cyclotron frequency and coupling while diamagnetic term is left invariant). No step redefines a target quantity in terms of itself, renames a fitted parameter as a prediction, or relies on a self-citation chain whose cited result is itself unverified. The central claim therefore remains independent of its own output; the physical assumption about the diamagnetic term is stated up-front rather than derived from the SRPT threshold.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; full Hamiltonian, modulation details, and any fitted parameters are unavailable, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete.

axioms (1)
  • standard math No-go theorems forbid superradiant phase transitions in equilibrium for homogeneous fields
    Invoked directly in the abstract as the constraint being circumvented.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5454 in / 1243 out tokens · 39456 ms · 2026-05-10T17:00:25.330407+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    F. J. Garcia-Vidal, C. Ciuti, and T. W. Ebbesen, Manipulat- ing matter by strong coupling to vacuum fields, Science373, eabd0336 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Bloch, A

    J. Bloch, A. Cavalleri, V . Galitski, M. Hafezi, and A. Rubio, Strongly correlated electron–photon systems, Nature606, 41 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Schlawin, D

    F. Schlawin, D. M. Kennes, and M. A. Sentef, Cavity quantum materials, Appl. Phys. Rev.9, 011312 (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Hübener, E

    H. Hübener, E. Viñas Boström, M. Claassen, S. Latini, and A. Rubio, Quantum materials engineering by structured cav- ity vacuum fluctuations, Mater. Quantum Technol.4, 023002 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    R. H. Dicke, Coherence in spontaneous radiation processes, Phys. Rev.93, 99 (1954)

    work page 1954

  6. [6]

    Hepp and E

    K. Hepp and E. H. Lieb, On the superradiant phase transition for molecules in a quantized radiation field: The Dicke maser model, Ann. Phys.76, 360 (1973)

    work page 1973

  7. [7]

    Y . K. Wang and F. T. Hioe, Phase transition in the Dicke model of superradiance, Phys. Rev. A7, 831 (1973)

    work page 1973

  8. [8]

    Carmichael, C

    H. Carmichael, C. Gardiner, and D. Walls, Higher order correc- tions to the Dicke superradiant phase transition, Phys. Lett. A 46, 47 (1973)

    work page 1973

  9. [9]

    Emary and T

    C. Emary and T. Brandes, Quantum chaos triggered by precur- sors of a quantum phase transition: The Dicke model, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 044101 (2003)

    work page 2003

  10. [10]

    Emary and T

    C. Emary and T. Brandes, Chaos and the quantum phase transi- tion in the Dicke model, Phys. Rev. E67, 066203 (2003)

    work page 2003

  11. [11]

    Kirton, M

    P. Kirton, M. M. Roses, J. Keeling, and E. G. Dalla Torre, In- troduction to the Dicke model: From equilibrium to nonequi- librium, and vice versa, Adv. Quantum Technol.2, 1970013 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Rza ˙zewski, K

    K. Rza ˙zewski, K. Wódkiewicz, and W. ˙Zakowicz, Phase tran- sitions, two-level atoms, and theA 2 term, Phys. Rev. Lett.35, 432 (1975)

    work page 1975

  13. [13]

    Nataf and C

    P. Nataf and C. Ciuti, No-go theorem for superradiant quantum phase transitions in cavity QED and counter-example in circuit QED, Nat. Commun.1, 72 (2010)

    work page 2010

  14. [14]

    Bialynicki-Birula and K

    I. Bialynicki-Birula and K. Rza˙zewski, No-go theorem concern- ing the superradiant phase transition in atomic systems, Phys. Rev. A19, 301 (1979)

    work page 1979

  15. [15]

    Gaw˛ edzki and K

    K. Gaw˛ edzki and K. Rza˙zewski, No-go theorem for the superra- diant phase transition without the dipole approximation, Phys. Rev. A23, 2134 (1981)

    work page 1981

  16. [16]

    M. Hayn, C. Emary, and T. Brandes, Superradiant phase tran- sition in a model of three-level systems interacting with two bosonic modes, Phys. Rev. A86, 063822 (2012)

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    Todorov and C

    Y . Todorov and C. Sirtori, Intersubband polaritons in the elec- trical dipole gauge, Phys. Rev. B85, 045304 (2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Bamba and T

    M. Bamba and T. Ogawa, Stability of polarizable materials against superradiant phase transition, Phys. Rev. A90, 063825 (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    Tufarelli, K

    T. Tufarelli, K. R. McEnery, S. A. Maier, and M. S. Kim, Signa- tures of theA 2 term in ultrastrongly coupled oscillators, Phys. Rev. A91, 063840 (2015)

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Rousseau and D

    E. Rousseau and D. Felbacq, The quantum-optics hamiltonian in the multipolar gauge, Sci. Rep.7, 11115 (2017)

    work page 2017

  21. [21]

    Rokaj, D

    V . Rokaj, D. M. Welakuh, M. Ruggenthaler, and A. Ru- bio, Light–matter interaction in the long-wavelength limit: no ground-state without dipole self-energy, J. Phys. B:At., Mol. Opt. Phys.51, 034005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    J. M. Knight, Y . Aharonov, and G. T. C. Hsieh, Are super- radiant phase transitions possible?, Phys. Rev. A17, 1454 (1978)

    work page 1978

  23. [23]

    Keeling, Coulomb interactions, gauge invariance, and phase transitions of the Dicke model, J

    J. Keeling, Coulomb interactions, gauge invariance, and phase transitions of the Dicke model, J. Condens. Matter Phys.19, 295213 (2007)

    work page 2007

  24. [24]

    De Bernardis, T

    D. De Bernardis, T. Jaako, and P. Rabl, Cavity quantum elec- trodynamics in the nonperturbative regime, Phys. Rev. A97, 043820 (2018)

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    Stokes and A

    A. Stokes and A. Nazir, Uniqueness of the phase transition in many-dipole cavity quantum electrodynamical systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 143603 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Vukics, T

    A. Vukics, T. Grießer, and P. Domokos, Fundamental limitation of ultrastrong coupling between light and atoms, Phys. Rev. A 92, 043835 (2015)

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    Nataf and C

    P. Nataf and C. Ciuti, Vacuum degeneracy of a circuit QED sys- tem in the ultrastrong coupling regime, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 023601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  28. [28]

    Nataf and C

    P. Nataf and C. Ciuti, Protected quantum computation with mul- tiple resonators in ultrastrong coupling circuit QED, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 190402 (2011)

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Bamba, K

    M. Bamba, K. Inomata, and Y . Nakamura, Superradiant phase transition in a superconducting circuit in thermal equilibrium, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 173601 (2016)

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    Nataf, T

    P. Nataf, T. Champel, G. Blatter, and D. M. Basko, Rashba cav- ity QED: A route towards the superradiant quantum phase tran- sition, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 207402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    G. M. Andolina, F. M. D. Pellegrino, V . Giovannetti, A. H. Mac- Donald, and M. Polini, Theory of photon condensation in a spa- tially varying electromagnetic field, Phys. Rev. B102, 125137 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Guerci, P

    D. Guerci, P. Simon, and C. Mora, Superradiant phase transition in electronic systems and emergent topological phases, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 257604 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    Román-Roche, F

    J. Román-Roche, F. Luis, and D. Zueco, Photon condensation and enhanced magnetism in cavity QED, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 167201 (2021)

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    Manzanares, T

    G. Manzanares, T. Champel, D. M. Basko, and P. Nataf, Superradiant quantum phase transition for landau polaritons with rashba and zeeman couplings, Phys. Rev. B105, 245304 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    M. Hayn, C. Emary, and T. Brandes, Phase transitions and 6 dark-state physics in two-color superradiance, Phys. Rev. A84, 053856 (2011)

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    Baksic, P

    A. Baksic, P. Nataf, and C. Ciuti, Superradiant phase transitions with three-level systems, Phys. Rev. A87, 023813 (2013)

    work page 2013

  37. [37]

    X. Li, M. Bamba, N. Yuan, Q. Zhang, Y . Zhao, M. Xiang, K. Xu, Z. Jin, W. Ren, G. Ma, S. Cao, D. Turchinovich, and J. Kono, Observation of Dicke cooperativity in magnetic inter- actions, Science361, 794 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Bamba, X

    M. Bamba, X. Li, N. Marquez Peraca, and J. Kono, Magnonic superradiant phase transition, Commun. Phys.5, 3 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    G. Liu, W. Xiong, and Z.-J. Ying, Switchable superradiant phase transition with kerr magnons, Phys. Rev. A108, 033704 (2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Marquez Peraca, others, and J

    N. Marquez Peraca, others, and J. Kono, Quantum simulation of an extended Dicke model with a magnetic solid, Commun. Mater.10, 79 (2024)

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    D. Kim, S. Dasgupta, X. Ma, J.-M. Park, H.-T. Wei, L. Luo, J. Doumani, X. Li, W. Yang, D. Cheng, R. H. Kim, H. O. Everitt, S. Kimura, H. Nojiri, J. Wang, S. Cao, M. Bamba, K. R. Hazzard, and J. Kono, Observation of the magnonic Dicke superradiant phase transition, arXiv preprint (2024), arXiv:2401.01873

    work page arXiv 2024

  42. [42]

    Viehmann, J

    O. Viehmann, J. von Delft, and F. Marquardt, Superradiant phase transitions and the standard description of circuit QED, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 113602 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    S. H. Abedinpour, G. Vignale, A. Principi, M. Polini, W.-K. Tse, and A. H. MacDonald, Drude weight, plasmon dispersion, and ac conductivity in doped graphene sheets, Phys. Rev. B84, 045429 (2011)

    work page 2011

  44. [44]

    Chirolli, M

    L. Chirolli, M. Polini, V . Giovannetti, A. H. MacDonald, and F. Guinea, Drude weight, cyclotron resonance, and the Dicke model of graphene cavity QED, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 267404 (2012)

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    De Bernardis, P

    D. De Bernardis, P. Pilar, T. Jaako, S. De Liberato, and P. Rabl, Breakdown of gauge invariance in ultrastrong-coupling cavity QED, Phys. Rev. A98, 053819 (2018)

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    Di Stefano, A

    O. Di Stefano, A. Settineri, V . Macrì, L. Garziano, R. Stassi, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Resolution of gauge ambiguities in ultrastrong-coupling cavity QED, Nat. Phys.15, 803 (2019)

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    G. M. Andolina, F. M. D. Pellegrino, V . Giovannetti, A. H. MacDonald, and M. Polini, Cavity quantum electrodynamics of strongly correlated electron systems: A no-go theorem for photon condensation, Phys. Rev. B100, 121109(R) (2019)

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    J. Li, D. Golez, G. Mazza, A. J. Millis, A. Georges, and M. Eckstein, Electromagnetic coupling in tight-binding mod- els for strongly correlated light and matter, Phys. Rev. B101, 205140 (2020)

    work page 2020

  49. [49]

    Garziano, A

    L. Garziano, A. Settineri, O. Di Stefano, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Gauge invariance of the Dicke and hopfield models, Phys. Rev. A102, 023718 (2020)

    work page 2020

  50. [50]

    Savasta, O

    S. Savasta, O. D. Stefano, and F. Nori, Thomas–Reiche–Kuhn (TRK) sum rule for interacting photons, Nanophotonics10, 465 (2021)

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    Dmytruk and M

    O. Dmytruk and M. Schiró, Gauge fixing for strongly correlated electrons coupled to quantum light, Phys. Rev. B103, 075131 (2021)

    work page 2021

  52. [52]

    Román-Roche and D

    J. Román-Roche and D. Zueco, Effective theory for matter in non-perturbative cavity QED, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 50 (2022)

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    J. Li, L. Schamriß, and M. Eckstein, Effective theory of lattice electrons strongly coupled to quantum electromagnetic fields, Phys. Rev. B105, 165121 (2022)

    work page 2022

  54. [54]

    G. M. Andolina, F. M. D. Pellegrino, A. Mercurio, O. D. Ste- fano, M. Polini, and S. Savasta, A non-perturbative no-go theo- rem for photon condensation in approximate models, Eur. Phys. J. Plus137, 1348 (2022)

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    Ritsch, P

    H. Ritsch, P. Domokos, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Cold atoms in cavity-generated dynamical optical potentials, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 553 (2013)

    work page 2013

  56. [56]

    E. G. Dalla Torre, S. Diehl, M. D. Lukin, S. Sachdev, and P. Strack, Keldysh approach for nonequilibrium phase transi- tions in quantum optics: Beyond the Dicke model in optical cavities, Phys. Rev. A87, 023831 (2013)

    work page 2013

  57. [57]

    Dimer, B

    F. Dimer, B. Estienne, A. S. Parkins, and H. J. Carmichael, Proposed realization of the Dicke-model quantum phase transi- tion in an optical cavity QED system, Phys. Rev. A75, 013804 (2007)

    work page 2007

  58. [58]

    Baumann, C

    K. Baumann, C. Guerlin, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Dicke quantum phase transition with a superfluid gas in an optical cav- ity, Nature464, 1301 (2010)

    work page 2010

  59. [59]

    Baumann, R

    K. Baumann, R. Mottl, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Explor- ing symmetry breaking at the dicke quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 140402 (2011)

    work page 2011

  60. [60]

    Brennecke, R

    F. Brennecke, R. Mottl, K. Baumann, R. Landig, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Real-time observation of fluctuations at the driven- dissipative Dicke phase transition, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.110, 11763 (2013)

    work page 2013

  61. [61]

    M. P. Baden, K. J. Arnold, A. L. Grimsmo, S. Parkins, and M. D. Barrett, Realization of the Dicke model using cavity- assisted raman transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 020408 (2014)

    work page 2014

  62. [62]

    D. Nagy, G. Kónya, G. Szirmai, and P. Domokos, Dicke-model phase transition in the quantum motion of a bose-einstein con- densate in an optical cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 130401 (2010)

    work page 2010

  63. [63]

    Klinder, H

    J. Klinder, H. Keßler, M. Wolke, L. Mathey, and A. Hem- merich, Dynamical phase transition in the open Dicke model, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.112, 3290 (2015)

    work page 2015

  64. [64]

    Kónya, D

    G. Kónya, D. Nagy, G. Szirmai, and P. Domokos, Finite-size scaling in the quantum phase transition of the open-system Dicke model, Phys. Rev. A86, 013641 (2012)

    work page 2012

  65. [65]

    Kirton and J

    P. Kirton and J. Keeling, Suppressing and restoring the Dicke superradiance transition by dephasing and decay, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 123602 (2017)

    work page 2017

  66. [66]

    Hagenmüller, S

    D. Hagenmüller, S. De Liberato, and C. Ciuti, Ultrastrong cou- pling between a cavity resonator and the cyclotron transition of a two-dimensional electron gas in the case of an integer filling factor, Phys. Rev. B81, 235303 (2010)

    work page 2010

  67. [67]

    Scalari, C

    G. Scalari, C. Maissen, D. Tur ˇcinková, D. Hagenmüller, S. D. Liberato, C. Ciuti, C. Reichl, D. Schuh, W. Wegscheider, M. Beck, and J. Faist, Ultrastrong coupling of the cyclotron transition of a 2d electron gas to a thz metamaterial, Science 335, 1323 (2012)

    work page 2012

  68. [68]

    Zhang, M

    Q. Zhang, M. Lou, X. Li, J. L. Reno, W. Pan, J. D. Watson, M. J. Manfra, and J. Kono, Collective non-perturbative coupling of 2d electrons with high-quality-factor terahertz cavity photons, Nature Physics12, 1005 (2016)

    work page 2016

  69. [69]

    The Sup- plemental Material includes Refs

    See Supplemental Material for details of the theoretical frame- work and numerical methods, including the derivation of the equilibrium Hamiltonian, the dynamics of the time-dependent Hamiltonian, the breakdown of the two-level approximation in the superradiant phase, the absence of an SRPT in an infinite LL ladder, and the unphysical nature of a rigid cu...

    work page

  70. [70]

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

    work page 1958

  71. [71]

    Hagenmüller, All-optical dynamical casimir effect in a three- dimensional terahertz photonic band gap, Phys

    D. Hagenmüller, All-optical dynamical casimir effect in a three- dimensional terahertz photonic band gap, Phys. Rev. B93, 7 235309 (2016)

    work page 2016

  72. [72]

    S. D. Liberato, C. Ciuti, and I. Carusotto, Quantum vacuum ra- diation spectra from a semiconductor microcavity with a time- modulated vacuum rabi frequency, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 103602 (2007)

    work page 2007

  73. [73]

    Eckardt and E

    A. Eckardt and E. Anisimovas, High-frequency approximation for periodically driven quantum systems from a floquet-space perspective, New J. Phys.17, 093039 (2015)

    work page 2015

  74. [74]

    Pfeffer and W

    P. Pfeffer and W. Zawadzki, Conduction electrons in GaAs: Five-level k·p theory and polaron effects, Phys. Rev. B41, 1561 (1990)

    work page 1990

  75. [75]

    Zybert, M

    M. Zybert, M. Marchewka, E. M. Sheregii, D. G. Rickel, J. B. Betts, F. F. Balakirev, M. Gordon, A. V . Stier, C. H. Mielke, P. Pfeffer, and W. Zawadzki, Landau levels and shallow donor states in GaAs/AlGaAs multiple quantum wells at megagauss magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. B95, 115432 (2017)

    work page 2017

  76. [76]

    Zhang, M

    Z. Zhang, M. Kanega, K. Maruyama, T. Kurihara, M. Naka- jima, T. Tachizaki, M. Sato, Y . Kanemitsu, and H. Hirori, Spin switching in Sm 0.7Er0.3FeO3 triggered by terahertz magnetic- field pulses, Nat. Mater24, 219 (2025)

    work page 2025

  77. [77]

    Ciuti, G

    C. Ciuti, G. Bastard, and I. Carusotto, Quantum vacuum prop- erties of the intersubband cavity polariton field, Phys. Rev. B 72, 115303 (2005)

    work page 2005

  78. [78]

    Bayer, M

    A. Bayer, M. Pozimski, S. Schambeck, D. Schuh, R. Huber, D. Bougeard, and C. Lange, Terahertz light–matter interaction beyond unity coupling strength, Nano Letters17, 6340 (2017)

    work page 2017