pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.15637 · v1 · pith:2KFDJB2Fnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · ⚛️ physics.optics

Chiral-Mode Control around a Hermitian Diabolic Point in Discrete Non-Hermitian Coupled Resonators

Kota Yagi , Takahiro Uemura , Yuto Moritake , Adam Mock , Masaya Notomi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 19:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics
keywords chiral mode selectionasymptotic exceptional pointdiabolic pointnon-Hermitian perturbationcoupled resonatorseigenvalue scalingphotonic chirality controlresonator arrays
0
0 comments X

The pith

Infinitesimal complex perturbations near a Hermitian diabolic point induce chiral-mode selection via an asymptotic exceptional point.

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

The paper shows that in a chain of three coupled single-mode resonators, an extremely small complex frequency shift applied near a Hermitian diabolic point causes the optical modes to select a preferred circulation direction. This selection is organized by an asymptotic exceptional point, where the modes approach coalescence only in the limit as the perturbation vanishes while the Hamiltonian at the exact point stays diagonalizable. The frequency splitting between modes follows a distinctive three-halves power law in the perturbation strength instead of the usual square-root scaling. In a wider two-parameter space the same structure creates branches of ordinary exceptional points that meet at the asymptotic point, giving two distinct routes to flip between chiral states. The authors note that under fine enough control the direct route through the asymptotic point can outperform the route that crosses exceptional-point pairs.

Core claim

Near a Hermitian diabolic point in a discrete system of coupled single-mode resonators, an infinitesimal complex onsite perturbation induces chiral-mode selection governed by an asymptotic exceptional point. An AEP denotes a Hermitian DP equipped with a non-Hermitian perturbation that induces an asymptotically defective effective Hamiltonian. The eigenvectors coalesce in the asymptotic limit toward the DP, although the Hamiltonian at the point itself remains diagonalizable. The associated eigenvalue response exhibits the anomalous fractional-power scaling Δλ ∝ ε^{3/2}. In a broader two-parameter perturbation space, ordinary EPs lie on exceptional-line branches that meet at the AEP. A finiteb

What carries the argument

The asymptotic exceptional point (AEP), a Hermitian diabolic point equipped with a non-Hermitian perturbation that makes the effective Hamiltonian asymptotically defective so eigenvectors coalesce only in the limit while the point itself stays diagonalizable.

If this is right

  • Direct switching from an achiral state to a chiral state is realized via the AEP.
  • Reversal between opposite chiral states occurs when a bias sweep crosses an EP pair near the AEP.
  • The AEP and EP-pair operating points exhibit different performance characteristics inside a finite-resolution averaging model.
  • Under sufficiently high control resolution the AEP operating point becomes more favorable than the EP-pair operating point.
  • The mechanism supplies a concrete route toward compact and low-energy chiral photonic devices.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same asymptotic coalescence might appear in larger resonator lattices or in continuous waveguides with similar degeneracies.
  • Dynamic electrical or optical tuning of the onsite perturbation could turn the AEP into a real-time chiral switch in integrated circuits.
  • The three-halves scaling could serve as a diagnostic signature when searching for analogous points in acoustic or mechanical resonator arrays.
  • Combining the AEP with topological protection might produce chiral modes that remain robust against fabrication disorder.

Load-bearing premise

The minimal three-resonator discrete model accurately captures the essential non-Hermitian dynamics and chiral response of the broader class of coupled-resonator systems under infinitesimal complex onsite perturbations.

What would settle it

Measure the eigenvalue splitting versus perturbation amplitude in a fabricated three-resonator photonic device tuned near the diabolic point; confirmation requires the splitting to scale exactly as the three-halves power of the amplitude rather than linearly or as the square root.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.15637 by Adam Mock, Kota Yagi, Masaya Notomi, Takahiro Uemura, Yuto Moritake.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: In a two-resonator system, the eigenmodes con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic of coupled resonator systems and mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a)–(c) shows the eigenvalues λj , the chirality χj , and the phase rigidity rj := | ⟨a˜j |aj ⟩ |/ p ⟨a˜j |a˜j ⟩ ⟨aj |aj ⟩, as functions of ε. Here, |aj ⟩ and ⟨a˜j | denote the right and left eigenstates, respectively. The phase rigidity quan￾tifies the nonorthogonality of left and right eigenstates in a non-Hermitian system. In non-Hermitian optics, the closely related Petermann factor Kj is often used as… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Scaling of the eigenvalue splitting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Results for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Eigenvalue structure at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Finite-resolution comparison of the direct AEP operating point and the EP-pair operating point. (a) Chirality map [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Power-law dependence of the eigenvalue splitting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Comparison between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Transition processes between the target subspace [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Complementary single-branch achiral-to-chiral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Dependence of the figure of merit (FoM) on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Motivated by the prospect of chiral-mode control in compact photonic systems, we analyze discrete coupled single-mode resonators. Using the minimal three-resonator model, we show that an infinitesimal complex onsite perturbation near a Hermitian diabolic point (DP) induces chiral-mode selection, governed by what we term an asymptotic exceptional point (AEP). Here, an AEP denotes a Hermitian DP equipped with a non-Hermitian perturbation that induces an asymptotically defective effective Hamiltonian. The eigenvectors coalesce in the asymptotic limit toward the DP, although the Hamiltonian at the point itself remains diagonalizable. Operationally, this AEP response realizes chirality switching from an achiral state to a chiral state. The associated eigenvalue response exhibits the anomalous fractional-power scaling ${\Delta}{\lambda} \propto {\varepsilon}^{3/2}$, distinct from the square-root response of an ordinary exceptional point (EP). We further show that, in a broader two-parameter perturbation space, ordinary EPs lie on exceptional-line branches that meet at the AEP. A finitebias control sweep crosses these branches at an EP pair, enabling chirality reversal between opposite chiral states. The central message is therefore that the AEP organizes two related routes for chirality switching: direct switching from an achiral state to a chiral state via the AEP, and switching between opposite chiral states via an EP pair in the vicinity of the AEP. Within a finite-resolution averaging model, these two operating points exhibit different practical performance characteristics, and under sufficiently high control resolution, the AEP operating point can become more favorable than the EP-pair operating point, suggesting a route toward compact and low-energy chiral photonic devices.

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 analyzes a minimal three-resonator model of discrete coupled single-mode resonators. It shows that an infinitesimal complex onsite perturbation near a Hermitian diabolic point induces chiral-mode selection governed by an asymptotic exceptional point (AEP), with the eigenvalue response exhibiting anomalous fractional-power scaling Δλ ∝ ε^{3/2}. In a two-parameter perturbation space, ordinary exceptional points lie on exceptional-line branches meeting at the AEP, enabling chirality reversal between opposite chiral states via an EP pair. The work compares practical performance characteristics under finite-resolution averaging and suggests implications for compact, low-energy chiral photonic devices.

Significance. If the central results hold, the paper provides an analytical demonstration of a distinct non-Hermitian response mechanism around a Hermitian diabolic point, introducing the AEP concept and highlighting fractional scaling that differs from standard square-root exceptional-point behavior. The direct perturbation analysis of the three-resonator Hamiltonian yields clear predictions for eigenvector coalescence in the asymptotic limit and organizes two routes for chirality switching. This could be relevant for photonic device design, though the strength lies primarily in the minimal-model derivation rather than in extensive numerical validation or experimental mapping.

major comments (1)
  1. [minimal three-resonator model and AEP analysis] The derivation of the AEP, eigenvector coalescence, and Δλ ∝ ε^{3/2} scaling is performed on the characteristic equation of the specific 3×3 non-Hermitian matrix in the minimal-model section. The manuscript does not verify whether this leading-order fractional scaling and the organization of exceptional-line branches persist when the discrete lattice is enlarged (e.g., four resonators) or when next-nearest-neighbor couplings are added; such a check is load-bearing for the claim that the AEP governs chiral-mode selection in the broader class of coupled-resonator systems.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract introduces the AEP but does not explicitly state that the Hamiltonian remains diagonalizable exactly at the diabolic point; adding one clarifying sentence would improve readability.
  2. [perturbation space discussion] Notation for the complex onsite perturbation ε and the two-parameter space could be made more uniform between the text and any accompanying figures to avoid minor ambiguity in branch labeling.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thoughtful review and for identifying this important point regarding the scope of our analysis. We respond to the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The derivation of the AEP, eigenvector coalescence, and Δλ ∝ ε^{3/2} scaling is performed on the characteristic equation of the specific 3×3 non-Hermitian matrix in the minimal-model section. The manuscript does not verify whether this leading-order fractional scaling and the organization of exceptional-line branches persist when the discrete lattice is enlarged (e.g., four resonators) or when next-nearest-neighbor couplings are added; such a check is load-bearing for the claim that the AEP governs chiral-mode selection in the broader class of coupled-resonator systems.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript performs the derivation exclusively on the 3×3 characteristic equation of the minimal model and does not include explicit checks for larger lattices or additional couplings. The minimal three-resonator system was deliberately chosen to enable a fully analytical treatment that reveals the asymptotic coalescence and the 3/2 scaling without approximation. While the abstract and introduction frame the results in the context of discrete coupled resonators more generally, we do not provide a rigorous demonstration that the AEP mechanism persists unchanged outside the minimal model. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section that explicitly states the scope of the analytical results, clarifies that extensions to N>3 resonators or next-nearest-neighbor terms would require numerical verification, and notes that such extensions lie beyond the present work. This revision will ensure the claims accurately reflect what has been shown. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained perturbation analysis

full rationale

The paper derives the AEP concept and the Δλ ∝ ε^{3/2} scaling directly from the characteristic equation of its minimal 3×3 non-Hermitian Hamiltonian under infinitesimal complex onsite perturbation near the Hermitian DP. No step defines a quantity in terms of itself, renames a fitted parameter as a prediction, or relies on a load-bearing self-citation chain. The central claims follow from explicit matrix diagonalization and asymptotic analysis within the stated discrete model, making the derivation self-contained rather than tautological.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the three-resonator discrete model and the newly introduced definition of the asymptotic exceptional point; no free parameters are explicitly fitted in the abstract description.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The dynamics of the coupled single-mode resonators can be captured by a finite-dimensional non-Hermitian Hamiltonian matrix.
    Standard modeling choice in non-Hermitian optics invoked for the minimal three-resonator system.
invented entities (1)
  • Asymptotic Exceptional Point (AEP) no independent evidence
    purpose: To describe the asymptotic coalescence of eigenvectors near a Hermitian diabolic point under non-Hermitian perturbation while the Hamiltonian at the point remains diagonalizable.
    New term and concept introduced in the paper to organize the observed chiral response and scaling.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5850 in / 1263 out tokens · 47888 ms · 2026-05-19T19:49:20.910506+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Although the eigenvalues vary continuously, the eigenstates exhibit singular chiral-mode selection in the limitε→0

    (b) Chiralityχ j as a function ofε. Although the eigenvalues vary continuously, the eigenstates exhibit singular chiral-mode selection in the limitε→0. (c) Phase rigidities as functions ofε, showing that the singularity becomes increasingly pronounced asε→0. where†denotes the Hermitian conjugate. Then the basis vectors and the Hamiltonian in the eigenbasi...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The most striking feature appears in the eigenstates near the DP

    This EP corresponds primarily to the coalescence of modes originating from|L 0⟩; consequently, the resulting eigenmode does not exhibit OAM chirality. The most striking feature appears in the eigenstates near the DP. Fig. 2(b) shows that, although the unper- turbed system atε= 0 does not select either chirality, an arbitrarily small nonzero perturbation i...

    work page

  3. [3]

    (B8) Thus, in the angular-momentum (k-) space,V ± act as unidirectional shift operators

    AEP-based chirality generation in N-site systems The perturbationsV ± generalize to theN-site system as V+ = N−1X j=0 e−i2πj/N |j⟩ ⟨j|= N−1X j=0 |kj−1⟩ ⟨kj|, V− = N−1X j=0 ei2πj/N |j⟩ ⟨j|= N−1X j=0 |kj⟩ ⟨kj−1|. (B8) Thus, in the angular-momentum (k-) space,V ± act as unidirectional shift operators. The full Hamiltonian in- cluding both perturbations is H=...

    work page

  4. [4]

    III, combining two perturbations enables chirality reversal

    EP-based chirality reversal in N-site systems As discussed for the three-resonator system in Sec. III, combining two perturbations enables chirality reversal. TheN-site analogue of Eq. (25) is obtained by parame- terizing the perturbations in Eq. (B9) as ε+ ε− ! = cosθsinθ −sinθcosθ ! α β ! .(B17) 15 Degenerate Modes Achiral Standing-wave Modes FIG. 8. Co...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Explicit definitions ofFoM AEP andFoM EP To compare the direct AEP and EP-pair operating points as chirality switching, we introduced in the main text the engineering figure of merit FoM = C(ρ) (1 + ∆(ρ))(1 + Γ(ρ)) (E1) Here,C(ρ) denotes the normalized chirality-change ratio defined in Eq. (34), ∆(ρ) is the required sweep amplitude along the real-part con...

    work page

  6. [6]

    As a direct comparison with the achiral-to-chiral operation via the AEP, we also consider a complementary single- branch perturbation-sweep interpretation of the same EP branch

    Complementary achiral-to-chiral FoM for the EP branch For the main-text comparison, the EP-based operat- ing point is treated in its natural role as a full chirality- reversal process between two opposite-chirality states. As a direct comparison with the achiral-to-chiral operation via the AEP, we also consider a complementary single- branch perturbation-...

    work page

  7. [7]

    One-dimensional averaging along the loss direction We next examine the robustness of the above defini- tions with respect to the averaging scheme by considering 20 one-dimensional broadening only along the imaginary- direction control axis. As the simplest model for the case in which gain/loss uncertainty is the dominant source of control error, we consid...

    work page

  8. [8]

    X. Zhu, H. Ramezani, C. Shi, J. Zhu, and X. Zhang, Physical Review X4, 031042 (2014)

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    C. Shi, M. Dubois, Y. Chen, L. Cheng, H. Ramezani, Y. Wang, and X. Zhang, Nature Communications7, 11110 (2016)

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    K.¨Ozdemir, S

    S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, S. Rotter, F. Nori, and L. Yang, Nature Materials18, 783 (2019)

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    El-Ganainy, K

    R. El-Ganainy, K. G. Makris, M. Khajavikhan, Z. H. Musslimani, S. Rotter, and D. N. Christodoulides, Na- ture Physics14, 11 (2018)

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Miri and A

    M.-A. Miri and A. Al` u, Science363, eaar7709 (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    W. D. Heiss, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical45, 444016 (2012)

    work page 2012

  14. [14]

    Berry, Czechoslovak Journal of Physics54, 1039 (2004)

    M. Berry, Czechoslovak Journal of Physics54, 1039 (2004)

    work page 2004

  15. [15]

    Doppler, A

    J. Doppler, A. A. Mailybaev, J. B¨ ohm, U. Kuhl, A. Girschik, F. Libisch, T. J. Milburn, P. Rabl, N. Moi- seyev, and S. Rotter, Nature537, 76 (2016)

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    Heiss and H

    W. Heiss and H. Harney, The European Physical Journal D - Atomic, Molecular, Optical and Plasma Physics17, 149 (2001)

    work page 2001

  17. [17]

    Allen, M

    L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, Physical Review A45, 8185 (1992)

    work page 1992

  18. [18]

    A. M. Yao and M. J. Padgett, Advances in Optics and Photonics3, 161 (2011)

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    K. J. Vahala, Nature424, 839 (2003)

    work page 2003

  20. [20]

    Wang, J.-Y

    J. Wang, J.-Y. Yang, I. M. Fazal, N. Ahmed, Y. Yan, H. Huang, Y. Ren, Y. Yue, S. Dolinar, M. Tur, and A. E. Willner, Nature Photonics6, 488 (2012)

    work page 2012

  21. [21]

    A. E. Willner, K. Pang, H. Song, K. Zou, and H. Zhou, Applied Physics Reviews8, 041312 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Zhang, X

    Z. Zhang, X. Qiao, B. Midya, K. Liu, J. Sun, T. Wu, W. Liu, R. Agarwal, J. M. Jornet, S. Longhi, N. M. Lit- chinitser, and L. Feng, Science368, 760 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    W. E. Hayenga, M. Parto, J. Ren, F. O. Wu, M. P. Hokmabadi, C. Wolff, R. El-Ganainy, N. A. Mortensen, D. N. Christodoulides, and M. Khajavikhan, ACS Pho- tonics6, 1895 (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Zhang, H

    Z. Zhang, H. Zhao, D. G. Pires, X. Qiao, Z. Gao, J. M. Jornet, S. Longhi, N. M. Litchinitser, and L. Feng, Light: Science & Applications9, 179 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. Stobbe, A. Rauschenbeu- tel, P. Schneeweiss, J. Volz, H. Pichler, and P. Zoller, Nature541, 473 (2017)

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    Y. Xu, L. Li, H. Jeong, S. Kim, I. Kim, J. Rho, and Y. Liu, Science Advances9, eadf3510 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Kato,Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, repr

    T. Kato,Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, repr. of the 1980 ed ed., Classics in Mathematics (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 1995)

    work page 1980

  28. [28]

    Z. Lin, H. Ramezani, T. Eichelkraut, T. Kottos, H. Cao, and D. N. Christodoulides, Physical Review Letters106, 213901 (2011)

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Yin and X

    X. Yin and X. Zhang, Nature Materials12, 175 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    P. Miao, Z. Zhang, J. Sun, W. Walasik, S. Longhi, N. M. Litchinitser, and L. Feng, Science353, 464 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Wiersig, Physical Review A84, 063828 (2011)

    J. Wiersig, Physical Review A84, 063828 (2011)

    work page 2011

  32. [32]

    Peng, S ¸

    B. Peng, S ¸. K. ¨Ozdemir, M. Liertzer, W. Chen, J. Kramer, H. Yılmaz, J. Wiersig, S. Rotter, and L. Yang, 21 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences113, 6845 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    A. Ø. Svela, J. M. Silver, L. Del Bino, S. Zhang, M. T. M. Woodley, M. R. Vanner, and P. Del’Haye, Light: Science & Applications9, 204 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    H. Lee, A. Kecebas, F. Wang, L. Chang, S. K. ¨Ozdemir, and T. Gu, eLight3, 20 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    A. Mock, D. Sounas, and A. Al` u, ACS Photonics6, 2056 (2019)

    work page 2056

  36. [36]

    C. F. Fong, Y. Ota, Y. Arakawa, S. Iwamoto, and Y. K. Kato, Physical Review Research3, 043096 (2021)

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Takiguchi, R

    M. Takiguchi, R. Kuruma, Y. Moritake, P. Heidt, M. Ono, E. Kuramochi, H. Sumikura, and M. No- tomi, inCLEO 2026(Optica Publishing Group, 2026) , STH2D.7

    work page 2026

  38. [38]

    W. R. Sweeney, C. W. Hsu, S. Rotter, and A. D. Stone, Physical Review Letters122, 093901 (2019)

    work page 2019

  39. [39]

    Chen, S ¸

    W. Chen, S ¸. Kaya ¨Ozdemir, G. Zhao, J. Wiersig, and L. Yang, Nature548, 192 (2017)

    work page 2017

  40. [40]

    J. Zhu, C. Wang, C. Tao, Z. Fu, H. Liu, F. Bo, L. Yang, G. Zhang, and J. Xu, Physical Review A108, L041501 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    H. A. Haus and W. Huang, Proceedings of the IEEE79, 1505 (1991)

    work page 1991

  42. [42]

    Yariv, Y

    A. Yariv, Y. Xu, R. K. Lee, and A. Scherer, Optics Let- ters24, 711 (1999)

    work page 1999

  43. [43]

    M. V. Berry, Journal of Modern Optics50, 63 (2003)

    work page 2003

  44. [44]

    E. N. Bulgakov, I. Rotter, and A. F. Sadreev, Physical Review E74, 056204 (2006)

    work page 2006

  45. [45]

    Wiersig, Physical Review Research5, 033042 (2023)

    J. Wiersig, Physical Review Research5, 033042 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Schomerus, Physical Review Research6, 013044 (2024)

    H. Schomerus, Physical Review Research6, 013044 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Feshbach, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Sci- ence8, 49 (1958)

    H. Feshbach, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Sci- ence8, 49 (1958)

    work page 1958

  48. [48]

    J. Moro, J. V. Burke, and M. L. Overton, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications18, 793 (1997)

    work page 1997

  49. [49]

    Nomura, N

    M. Nomura, N. Kumagai, S. Iwamoto, Y. Ota, and Y. Arakawa, Optics Express17, 15975 (2009)

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Ellis, M

    B. Ellis, M. A. Mayer, G. Shambat, T. Sarmiento, J. Har- ris, E. E. Haller, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, Nature Photonics5, 297 (2011)

    work page 2011

  51. [51]

    Takata and M

    K. Takata and M. Notomi, Physical Review Applied7, 054023 (2017)

    work page 2017

  52. [52]

    Brunstein, R

    M. Brunstein, R. Braive, R. Hostein, A. Beveratos, I. Robert-Philip, I. Sagnes, T. J. Karle, A. M. Yacomotti, J. A. Levenson, V. Moreau, G. Tessier, and Y. D. Wilde, Optics Express17, 17118 (2009)

    work page 2009

  53. [53]

    Notomi, T

    M. Notomi, T. Tanabe, A. Shinya, E. Kuramochi, and H. Taniyama, Advances in Optical Technologies2008, 568936 (2008)

    work page 2008

  54. [54]

    Tanabe, K

    T. Tanabe, K. Nishiguchi, E. Kuramochi, and M. No- tomi, Optics Express17, 22505 (2009)

    work page 2009

  55. [55]

    Bacon, I

    S. Iadanza, Physical Review B102, 10.1103/Phys- RevB.102.245404 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2020

  56. [56]

    C. J. Chen, J. Zheng, T. Gu, J. F. McMillan, M. Yu, G.- Q. Lo, D.-L. Kwong, and C. W. Wong, Optics Express 19, 12480 (2011)

    work page 2011

  57. [57]

    Intonti, N

    F. Intonti, N. Caselli, S. Vignolini, F. Riboli, S. Kumar, A. Rastelli, O. G. Schmidt, M. Francardi, A. Gerardino, L. Balet, L. H. Li, A. Fiore, and M. Gurioli, Applied Physics Letters100, 033116 (2012)

    work page 2012

  58. [58]

    Uemura, Y

    T. Uemura, Y. Moritake, T. Yoda, H. Chiba, Y. Tanaka, M. Ono, E. Kuramochi, and M. Notomi, Science Ad- vances10, eadp7779 (2024)

    work page 2024