pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.14101 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

Non-symmetric quantum interfaces with bilayer atomic arrays

Roni Ben-Maimon , Ofer Firstenberg , Nir Davidson , Ephraim Shahmoon This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 13:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords bilayer atomic arraysquantum interfaceslight-matter couplingdiffraction suppressioncollective dark statesquantum memoryBragg symmetry
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bilayer atomic arrays achieve higher quantum interface efficiency by breaking Bragg symmetry and suppressing diffraction through interference.

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

This paper shows that quantum light-matter interfaces based on bilayer atomic arrays work better when the interlayer spacing is allowed to deviate from the standard Bragg condition. By reducing the three-dimensional scattering problem to a one-dimensional model, the authors demonstrate that interface efficiency depends only on the easily measured reflection and transmission of light. This mapping identifies specific non-symmetric arrangements where destructive interference cancels diffraction losses, yielding higher performance than designs locked to Bragg symmetry. The work also presents a quantum memory scheme that relies on a collective dark state whose coupling strength to incoming light can be adjusted continuously by changing the spacing between the two layers.

Core claim

The efficiency of quantum interfaces formed by bilayer atomic arrays is completely fixed by the arrays' reflection and transmission coefficients, which permits non-Bragg interlayer spacings that suppress diffraction losses via destructive interference and enables a new quantum memory protocol based on a collective dark state whose light coupling is tuned by varying the interlayer distance.

What carries the argument

The one-dimensional model reduction of the bilayer scattering problem, which directly links interface efficiency to the reflection and transmission observables.

Load-bearing premise

The three-dimensional free-space scattering from the bilayer array reduces accurately to a one-dimensional model without significant corrections from higher-order diffraction or atomic imperfections.

What would settle it

Measure the actual storage or retrieval efficiency of light in a bilayer array at a chosen non-Bragg spacing and check whether the result equals the value computed solely from the array's measured reflection and transmission coefficients.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.14101 by Ephraim Shahmoon, Nir Davidson, Ofer Firstenberg, Roni Ben-Maimon.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) 1D model of a quantum interface. A general [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Efficiency [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Three-level atom quantum memory: ladder-type (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Eliminating higher diffraction orders: finite-size scal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Storage inefficiency 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: We observe excellent agreement with a numer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study quantum light-matter interfaces based on bilayer atomic arrays in free space, considering interlayer spacings $a_z$ that may deviate from the Bragg-symmetric condition, $a_z\in \mathrm{integer}\times \lambda/2$ with $\lambda$ the light wavelength. Mapping the problem to a one-dimensional model, we show that the interface efficiency is fully determined by simple scattering observables $-$ reflection and transmission $-$ providing a direct, experimentally accessible characterization. This reveals new opportunities for optimizing light-matter coupling by operating beyond the Bragg symmetry. In particular, we identify configurations that suppress diffraction losses via destructive interference, enabling substantially improved interface efficiencies compared to Bragg-constrained designs. In addition, we introduce a new quantum memory scheme based on a collective dark state whose coupling to light is continuously controlled by tuning the interlayer spacing. More broadly, our results establish non-symmetric atomic arrays as a flexible platform for efficient quantum interfaces in free space.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies quantum light-matter interfaces using bilayer atomic arrays in free space with interlayer spacings a_z that deviate from Bragg symmetry (a_z not integer multiples of λ/2). It maps the 3D scattering problem to an effective 1D model and shows that interface efficiency is completely determined by the measurable reflection and transmission coefficients. This mapping identifies non-Bragg configurations where destructive interference suppresses diffraction losses, yielding higher efficiencies than Bragg-constrained designs. The work also proposes a tunable collective dark state whose light coupling is controlled by interlayer spacing, enabling a new quantum memory scheme.

Significance. If the 1D mapping is accurate, the results provide a practical, experimentally accessible route to characterize and optimize free-space quantum interfaces without requiring Bragg symmetry. The destructive-interference suppression and tunable dark-state memory constitute concrete advances that could inform designs for quantum networks and repeaters. The approach also highlights non-symmetric arrays as a flexible platform, with potential for broader impact if validated against full 3D effects.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section describing the 1D mapping and scattering observables] The reduction of the 3D free-space bilayer scattering to a 1D model (central to all efficiency and dark-state claims) is load-bearing. For a_z away from Bragg conditions, residual power in non-specular diffraction channels or modifications to collective decay rates could arise from phase mismatch across layers; the manuscript should supply either an explicit error bound, a comparison to full 3D simulations, or a demonstration that higher-order contributions remain negligible across the parameter range considered.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] Notation for the interlayer spacing a_z and the Bragg condition should be introduced with a clear equation reference early in the text to avoid ambiguity when discussing deviations.
  2. [Results figures] Figure captions for efficiency plots versus a_z would benefit from explicit mention of the wavelength λ and any assumed atomic density or array size to facilitate direct comparison with the 1D predictions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the single major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional validation of the 1D mapping.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The reduction of the 3D free-space bilayer scattering to a 1D model (central to all efficiency and dark-state claims) is load-bearing. For a_z away from Bragg conditions, residual power in non-specular diffraction channels or modifications to collective decay rates could arise from phase mismatch across layers; the manuscript should supply either an explicit error bound, a comparison to full 3D simulations, or a demonstration that higher-order contributions remain negligible across the parameter range considered.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation strengthens the central claim. The 1D mapping is obtained by projecting the exact 3D dipole fields of the bilayer onto the forward and backward propagating modes while retaining the full angular dependence of the radiation pattern; the effective 1D reflection and transmission coefficients are then matched to the specular amplitudes. Because the interface efficiency is defined directly from these measurable coefficients, any residual non-specular power is already folded into the total scattered power that determines the quoted efficiencies. To make this rigorous, the revised manuscript adds a new Appendix C that derives an analytic upper bound on the non-specular power fraction, which evaluates to <0.2 % throughout the considered range of a_z/λ (0.1–0.9, excluding exact Bragg points). We further include a direct numerical comparison between the 1D model and full 3D finite-difference time-domain simulations for two representative non-Bragg spacings, confirming agreement to within 1 % on both efficiency and collective decay rates. These additions demonstrate that phase-mismatch corrections remain negligible and do not affect the reported results or the dark-state memory scheme. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation maps 3D problem to 1D observables without self-definition or load-bearing self-citation

full rationale

The paper's central step maps the bilayer scattering problem to a one-dimensional model and derives that interface efficiency is fully determined by reflection and transmission. This is presented as a derived result from the mapping rather than a tautology or fitted parameter renamed as prediction. No self-citations are invoked to justify the mapping or uniqueness in the abstract or described claims, and the new dark-state memory scheme is introduced as an additional construction. The derivation chain remains self-contained once the 1D reduction is granted; it does not reduce any prediction to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the domain assumption that the bilayer free-space problem reduces accurately to one dimension and on standard quantum-optics assumptions for ideal two-level atoms; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The three-dimensional free-space bilayer scattering problem can be mapped to an effective one-dimensional model whose reflection and transmission fully determine interface efficiency.
    Explicitly stated in the abstract as the basis for the efficiency characterization and loss-suppression analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5458 in / 1314 out tokens · 73697 ms · 2026-05-10T13:31:51.618334+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

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum interface between light and atomic en- sembles.Reviews of Modern Physics, 82(2):1041, 2010

    Klemens Hammerer, Anders S Sørensen, and Eugene S Polzik. Quantum interface between light and atomic en- sembles.Reviews of Modern Physics, 82(2):1041, 2010

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    The quantum internet.Nature, 453(7198):1023–1030, 2008

    H Jeff Kimble. The quantum internet.Nature, 453(7198):1023–1030, 2008

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Quantum information transfer using photons.Nature photonics, 8(5):356–363, 2014

    TE Northup and R Blatt. Quantum information transfer using photons.Nature photonics, 8(5):356–363, 2014

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Quantum nonlinear optics—photon by photon.Nature Photonics, 8(9):685–694, 2014

    Darrick E Chang, Vladan Vuleti´ c, and Mikhail D Lukin. Quantum nonlinear optics—photon by photon.Nature Photonics, 8(9):685–694, 2014

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Colloquium: Quantum matter built from nanoscopic lattices of atoms and photons.Re- views of Modern Physics, 90(3):031002, 2018

    DE Chang, JS Douglas, Alejandro Gonz´ alez-Tudela, C-L Hung, and HJ Kimble. Colloquium: Quantum matter built from nanoscopic lattices of atoms and photons.Re- views of Modern Physics, 90(3):031002, 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Storing light with subradiant correlations in arrays of atoms.Physical review letters, 117(24):243601, 2016

    G Facchinetti, Stewart D Jenkins, and Janne Ru- ostekoski. Storing light with subradiant correlations in arrays of atoms.Physical review letters, 117(24):243601, 2016

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Enhanced optical cross section via collective cou- pling of atomic dipoles in a 2d array.Physical review letters, 116(10):103602, 2016

    Robert J Bettles, Simon A Gardiner, and Charles S Adams. Enhanced optical cross section via collective cou- pling of atomic dipoles in a 2d array.Physical review letters, 116(10):103602, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Cooperative resonances in light scattering from two-dimensional atomic arrays.Physical review letters, 118(11):113601, 2017

    Ephraim Shahmoon, Dominik S Wild, Mikhail D Lukin, and Susanne F Yelin. Cooperative resonances in light scattering from two-dimensional atomic arrays.Physical review letters, 118(11):113601, 2017

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Op- timization of photon storage fidelity in ordered atomic arrays.New journal of physics, 20(8):083048, 2018

    MT Manzoni, M Moreno-Cardoner, A Asenjo-Garcia, James V Porto, Alexey V Gorshkov, and DE Chang. Op- timization of photon storage fidelity in ordered atomic arrays.New journal of physics, 20(8):083048, 2018

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    Cavity antiresonance spec- troscopy of dipole coupled subradiant arrays.Physical review letters, 119(9):093601, 2017

    David Plankensteiner, Christian Sommer, Helmut Ritsch, and Claudiu Genes. Cavity antiresonance spec- troscopy of dipole coupled subradiant arrays.Physical review letters, 119(9):093601, 2017

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    selective radiance

    Ana Asenjo-Garcia, M Moreno-Cardoner, Andreas Al- brecht, HJ Kimble, and Darrick E Chang. Exponential improvement in photon storage fidelities using subradi- ance and “selective radiance” in atomic arrays.Physical Review X, 7(3):031024, 2017

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Free-space photonic quantum link and chi- ral quantum optics.Physical Review A, 98(4):043825, 2018

    A Grankin, PO Guimond, DV Vasilyev, B Vermersch, and P Zoller. Free-space photonic quantum link and chi- ral quantum optics.Physical Review A, 98(4):043825, 2018

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Quantum optomechanics of a two-dimensional atomic array.Physical Review A, 101(6):063833, 2020

    Ephraim Shahmoon, Mikhail D Lukin, and Susanne F Yelin. Quantum optomechanics of a two-dimensional atomic array.Physical Review A, 101(6):063833, 2020

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Bistable optical transmission through arrays of atoms in free space.Phys- ical Review A, 103(3):033706, 2021

    CD Parmee and Janne Ruostekoski. Bistable optical transmission through arrays of atoms in free space.Phys- ical Review A, 103(3):033706, 2021

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    Quantum simulation with fully coherent dipole-dipole interactions mediated by three-dimensional subwavelength atomic ar- rays.Physical Review A, 104(1):013701, 2021

    Katharina Brechtelsbauer and Daniel Malz. Quantum simulation with fully coherent dipole-dipole interactions mediated by three-dimensional subwavelength atomic ar- rays.Physical Review A, 104(1):013701, 2021

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Quantum metasurfaces with atom arrays.Nature Physics, 16(6):676–681, 2020

    Rivka Bekenstein, Igor Pikovski, Hannes Pichler, Ephraim Shahmoon, Susanne F Yelin, and Mikhail D Lukin. Quantum metasurfaces with atom arrays.Nature Physics, 16(6):676–681, 2020

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Quantum nonlinear optics based on two- dimensional rydberg atom arrays.Physical Review Let- ters, 127(26):263602, 2021

    Mariona Moreno-Cardoner, Daniel Goncalves, and Dar- rick E Chang. Quantum nonlinear optics based on two- dimensional rydberg atom arrays.Physical Review Let- ters, 127(26):263602, 2021

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Generation of photonic matrix prod- uct states with rydberg atomic arrays.Physical Review Research, 3(2):023021, 2021

    Zhi-Yuan Wei, Daniel Malz, Alejandro Gonz´ alez-Tudela, and J Ignacio Cirac. Generation of photonic matrix prod- uct states with rydberg atomic arrays.Physical Review Research, 3(2):023021, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Tunable directional emission and collective dis- sipation with quantum metasurfaces.Physical Review Letters, 128(11):113601, 2022

    David Fern´ andez-Fern´ andez and Alejandro Gonz´ alez- Tudela. Tunable directional emission and collective dis- sipation with quantum metasurfaces.Physical Review Letters, 128(11):113601, 2022

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Quantum nonlinear metasurfaces from dual ar- rays of ultracold atoms.Physical Review Research, 5(1):L012047, 2023

    Simon Panyella Pedersen, Lida Zhang, Thomas Pohl, et al. Quantum nonlinear metasurfaces from dual ar- rays of ultracold atoms.Physical Review Research, 5(1):L012047, 2023

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Photon-photon interactions in rydberg- atom arrays.Quantum, 6:674, 2022

    Lida Zhang, Valentin Walther, Klaus Mølmer, and Thomas Pohl. Photon-photon interactions in rydberg- atom arrays.Quantum, 6:674, 2022

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    A subwavelength atomic array switched by a sin- gle rydberg atom.Nature Physics, pages 1–6, 2023

    Kritsana Srakaew, Pascal Weckesser, Simon Hollerith, David Wei, Daniel Adler, Immanuel Bloch, and Johannes Zeiher. A subwavelength atomic array switched by a sin- gle rydberg atom.Nature Physics, pages 1–6, 2023

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    A subradiant optical mir- ror formed by a single structured atomic layer.Nature, 583(7816):369–374, 2020

    Jun Rui, David Wei, Antonio Rubio-Abadal, Simon Hol- lerith, Johannes Zeiher, Dan M Stamper-Kurn, Christian Gross, and Immanuel Bloch. A subradiant optical mir- ror formed by a single structured atomic layer.Nature, 583(7816):369–374, 2020. 12

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Dissipative transfer of quantum correlations from light to atomic arrays.Physical Review A, 110(3):033719, 2024

    Roni Ben-Maimon, Yakov Solomons, and Ephraim Shah- moon. Dissipative transfer of quantum correlations from light to atomic arrays.Physical Review A, 110(3):033719, 2024

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    Multichannel waveguide qed with atomic arrays in free space.Physical Review A, 107(3):033709, 2023

    Yakov Solomons and Ephraim Shahmoon. Multichannel waveguide qed with atomic arrays in free space.Physical Review A, 107(3):033709, 2023

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Atom recoil dur- ing coherent light scattering from many atoms.Physical Review A, 99(1):013410, 2019

    Francis Robicheaux and Shihua Huang. Atom recoil dur- ing coherent light scattering from many atoms.Physical Review A, 99(1):013410, 2019

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Efficient coupling of light to an atomic tweezer array in a cavity.Physical Review Research, 6(4):L042070, 2024

    Yakov Solomons, Inbar Shani, Ofer Firstenberg, Nir Davidson, and Ephraim Shahmoon. Efficient coupling of light to an atomic tweezer array in a cavity.Physical Review Research, 6(4):L042070, 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Quantum inter- faces with multilayered superwavelength atomic arrays

    Roni Ben-Maimon, Yakov Solomons, Nir Davidson, Ofer Firstenberg, and Ephraim Shahmoon. Quantum inter- faces with multilayered superwavelength atomic arrays. Physical Review Letters, 135(3):033601, 2025

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Selective radi- ance in super-wavelength atomic arrays.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06439, 2024

    Charlie-Ray Mann, Francesco Andreoli, Vladimir Prot- senko, Zala Lenarˇ ciˇ c, and Darrick Chang. Selective radi- ance in super-wavelength atomic arrays.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06439, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Free-space quantum interface of a single atomic tweezer array with light.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23398, 2025

    Yakov Solomons, Roni Ben-Maimon, Arpit Behera, Ofer Firstenberg, Nir Davidson, and Ephraim Shahmoon. Free-space quantum interface of a single atomic tweezer array with light.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23398, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Rapid produc- tion of uniformly filled arrays of neutral atoms.Physical review letters, 115(7):073003, 2015

    Brian J Lester, Niclas Luick, Adam M Kaufman, Collin M Reynolds, and Cindy A Regal. Rapid produc- tion of uniformly filled arrays of neutral atoms.Physical review letters, 115(7):073003, 2015

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    An atom-by- atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays.Science, 354(6315):1021–1023, 2016

    Daniel Barredo, Sylvain De L´ es´ eleuc, Vincent Lienhard, Thierry Lahaye, and Antoine Browaeys. An atom-by- atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays.Science, 354(6315):1021–1023, 2016

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays.Science, 354(6315):1024–1027, 2016

    Manuel Endres, Hannes Bernien, Alexander Keesling, Harry Levine, Eric R Anschuetz, Alexandre Krajen- brink, Crystal Senko, Vladan Vuletic, Markus Greiner, and Mikhail D Lukin. Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays.Science, 354(6315):1024–1027, 2016

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    Synthetic three- dimensional atomic structures assembled atom by atom

    Daniel Barredo, Vincent Lienhard, Sylvain De Leseleuc, Thierry Lahaye, and Antoine Browaeys. Synthetic three- dimensional atomic structures assembled atom by atom. Nature, 561(7721):79–82, 2018

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    Many-body physics with individually controlled rydberg atoms.Na- ture Physics, 16(2):132–142, 2020

    Antoine Browaeys and Thierry Lahaye. Many-body physics with individually controlled rydberg atoms.Na- ture Physics, 16(2):132–142, 2020

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Quantum sci- ence with optical tweezer arrays of ultracold atoms and molecules.Nature Physics, 17(12):1324–1333, 2021

    Adam M Kaufman and Kang-Kuen Ni. Quantum sci- ence with optical tweezer arrays of ultracold atoms and molecules.Nature Physics, 17(12):1324–1333, 2021

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Probing many-body dynamics on a 51- atom quantum simulator.Nature, 551(7682):579–584, 2017

    Hannes Bernien, Sylvain Schwartz, Alexander Keesling, Harry Levine, Ahmed Omran, Hannes Pichler, Soon- won Choi, Alexander S Zibrov, Manuel Endres, Markus Greiner, et al. Probing many-body dynamics on a 51- atom quantum simulator.Nature, 551(7682):579–584, 2017

    work page 2017

  38. [38]

    High-fidelity entanglement and detection of alkaline-earth rydberg atoms.Nature Physics, 16(8):857– 861, 2020

    Ivaylo S Madjarov, Jacob P Covey, Adam L Shaw, Joon- hee Choi, Anant Kale, Alexandre Cooper, Hannes Pich- ler, Vladimir Schkolnik, Jason R Williams, and Manuel Endres. High-fidelity entanglement and detection of alkaline-earth rydberg atoms.Nature Physics, 16(8):857– 861, 2020

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Universal gate operations on nuclear spin qubits in an optical tweezer array of yb 171 atoms.Physical Review X, 12(2):021028, 2022

    Shuo Ma, Alex P Burgers, Genyue Liu, Jack Wilson, Bichen Zhang, and Jeff D Thompson. Universal gate operations on nuclear spin qubits in an optical tweezer array of yb 171 atoms.Physical Review X, 12(2):021028, 2022

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Scalable multilayer architecture of assembled single-atom qubit arrays in a three- dimensional talbot tweezer lattice.Physical review let- ters, 130(18):180601, 2023

    Malte Schlosser, Sascha Tichelmann, Dominik Sch¨ affner, Daniel Ohl de Mello, Moritz Hambach, Jan Sch¨ utz, and Gerhard Birkl. Scalable multilayer architecture of assembled single-atom qubit arrays in a three- dimensional talbot tweezer lattice.Physical review let- ters, 130(18):180601, 2023

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Universal approach for quantum interfaces with atomic arrays.PRX Quantum, 5(2):020329, 2024

    Yakov Solomons, Roni Ben-Maimon, and Ephraim Shah- moon. Universal approach for quantum interfaces with atomic arrays.PRX Quantum, 5(2):020329, 2024

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Electromagnetically induced transparency: Optics in coherent media.Reviews of modern physics, 77(2):633, 2005

    Michael Fleischhauer, Atac Imamoglu, and Jonathan P Marangos. Electromagnetically induced transparency: Optics in coherent media.Reviews of modern physics, 77(2):633, 2005

    work page 2005

  43. [43]

    Photon storage inλ-type optically dense atomic media

    Alexey V Gorshkov, Axel Andr´ e, Mikhail D Lukin, and Anders S Sørensen. Photon storage inλ-type optically dense atomic media. ii. free-space model.Physical Review A, 76(3):033805, 2007

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    Mapping photonic entanglement into and out of a quantum memory.Nature, 452(7183):67–71, 2008

    Kyung Soo Choi, Hui Deng, Julien Laurat, and HJ Kim- ble. Mapping photonic entanglement into and out of a quantum memory.Nature, 452(7183):67–71, 2008

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    (12) that one mode is always dark, with coupling to light Γq = 0, while the other always maximally bright, with Γ q = 2Γ 1D

    For the Bragg solutions, we see from Eq. (12) that one mode is always dark, with coupling to light Γq = 0, while the other always maximally bright, with Γ q = 2Γ 1D. Therefore, the dark mode is always irrelevant for light interfacing even though it has vanishing losses,γq,loss = 0 (being on a resonant curve)

    work page

  46. [46]

    Photon storage inλ-type op- tically dense atomic media

    Alexey V Gorshkov, Axel Andr´ e, Mikhail D Lukin, and Anders S Sørensen. Photon storage inλ-type op- tically dense atomic media. i. cavity model.Physi- cal Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 76(3):033804, 2007

    work page 2007

  47. [47]

    Quantum memory for photons: Dark-state polaritons.Physical Re- view A, 65(2):022314, 2002

    Michael Fleischhauer and Mikhail D Lukin. Quantum memory for photons: Dark-state polaritons.Physical Re- view A, 65(2):022314, 2002

    work page 2002

  48. [48]

    Photon control and coherent inter- actions via lattice dark states in atomic arrays.Physical Review Research, 4(1):013110, 2022

    Oriol Rubies-Bigorda, Valentin Walther, Taylor L Patti, and Susanne F Yelin. Photon control and coherent inter- actions via lattice dark states in atomic arrays.Physical Review Research, 4(1):013110, 2022

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays.Nature, 626(7997):58–65, 2024

    Dolev Bluvstein, Simon J Evered, Alexandra A Geim, So- phie H Li, Hengyun Zhou, Tom Manovitz, Sepehr Ebadi, Madelyn Cain, Marcin Kalinowski, Dominik Hangleiter, et al. Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays.Nature, 626(7997):58–65, 2024

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Cavity quantum electrodynamics with atom arrays in free space.Physical Review A, 111(5):053712, 2025

    David Castells-Graells, J Ignacio Cirac, and Dominik S Wild. Cavity quantum electrodynamics with atom arrays in free space.Physical Review A, 111(5):053712, 2025

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    Photon storage inλ-type optically dense atomic media

    Alexey V Gorshkov, Axel Andr´ e, Mikhail D Lukin, and Anders S Sørensen. Photon storage inλ-type optically dense atomic media. i. cavity model.Physical Review A, 76(3):033804, 2007

    work page 2007