Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 236 references

Excitonic quantum batteries overcome nanosecond self-discharge by storing energy in dark molecular states—triplets, fission pairs, or separated charges—as experiments with thousand-fold lifetime extensions show.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-08-01 15:50 UTC pith:QVDDMPQN

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful review chapter whose central claims rest on published experiments and hold up; the one new model — collective singlet-fission triplet harvesting — is asserted rather than derived and should be flagged as speculative. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.26436 v1 pith:QVDDMPQN submitted 2026-07-29 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.atm-clus

Molecular triplets and other metastable states for excitonic quantum batteries

Daniel Tibben , Gian Marcello Andolina , Daniel E. G\'omez , Francesco Campaioli This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.atm-clus
keywords excitonic quantum batteriessuperabsorptionsuperradiancemolecular tripletsintersystem crossingsinglet fissioncharge-separated statesorganic microcavities
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This review argues that the practical future of excitonic quantum batteries hinges on a simple trade: the same collective coupling that gives molecules superabsorption—fast, scalable charging—also makes them superradiant, so stored energy radiates away on nanosecond timescales. The common remedy is to keep the bright states for charging and the dark states for storage, tuning the coupling between the two. The paper surveys three ways to build that dark storage register: molecular triplet states populated by intersystem crossing or polariton-triplet resonance, triplet pairs made by singlet fission, and charge-separated electron–hole pairs. It points to device experiments showing a thousand-fold storage-time extension and superextensive electrical power output, and it proposes a collective 'supertransfer' channel for harvesting delocalised triplets.

Core claim

The central claim is that engineering metastability—fast population of a state that is slow to decay—can resolve the superabsorption/superradiance dilemma of organic microcavity quantum batteries. The paper identifies the design principle as: charge through a bright manifold that couples collectively to the cavity, store in a dark manifold that does not couple to radiation, and control the coupling between the two. It reviews the physical mechanisms (intersystem crossing, singlet fission, charge separation), the experimental milestones (a 40.3 µs self-discharge time versus nanoseconds, and a full charge-storage-extraction cycle with cavity-enhanced power scaling as N²), and the theoretical t

What carries the argument

The central objects are the bright and dark manifolds of a Dicke–cavity ensemble of molecular qutrits (S0, S1, T1). The bright state |B⟩ = (1/√N) Σ σ_n⁺|G⟩ couples to the cavity with enhanced coupling g√N, enabling superabsorption; the N−1 orthogonal dark states are decoupled from the field and form a storage reservoir. The paper's conceptual machinery is the 'charge bright, store dark' principle, realised by intersystem crossing (spin–orbit mediated singlet-to-triplet transfer), singlet fission (spin-allowed conversion of one singlet into two triplets), or charge separation (electron–hole separation at a type-II heterojunction). The proposed supertransfer channel L_T^(col) = √Γ Σ_i T_i is t

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the assumption that triplet pairs produced by singlet fission remain delocalised long enough for a collective acceptor channel to capture them with a rate that grows with N; if disorder or phonon-induced localisation makes triplet capture local rather than collective, the supertransfer scaling disappears.

What would settle it

Measure the triplet-capture rate of the proposed donor–acceptor cavity as a function of the number of donor molecules N at fixed acceptor geometry and detuning. If the rate grows linearly with N, supertransfer is confirmed; if it saturates at a value set by individual molecules (or grows as √N at best), the collective supertransfer assumption fails.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If dark-manifold storage works as claimed, excitonic quantum batteries can extend storage from nanoseconds to microseconds or beyond while retaining superextensive charging power, making room-temperature solid-state energy storage realistic.
  • The reported cavity-enhanced power scaling (P_cav ∝ N²) implies collective effects can survive the incoherent steps of charge separation and transport, so strong coupling can be exploited all the way to the electrical output of a device, not just in optical spectroscopy.
  • A collective triplet acceptor channel, if realised, would give a scalable route from singlet fission to harvested triplets, avoiding the local capture bottleneck of isolated chromophores.
  • If triplets with hour-scale lifetimes can be integrated with fast intersystem crossing, the combination points toward storage times meaningful for practical optoelectronic devices.
  • The framework—engineering metastability in a driven-dissipative quantum system—extends beyond organic cavities to other platforms, offering a general strategy for quantum energy storage.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension: in the proposed model, the supertransfer enhancement should produce a linear dependence of triplet capture rate on donor number N only while triplet pairs remain delocalised; measuring the capture rate as a function of donor density and magnetic-field-induced localisation would separate collective from hopping-mediated transfer.
  • The same charge-bright/store-dark principle could be applied to other collective quantum systems, e.g., trapped-ion or atomic ensembles, by identifying a metastable dark manifold and a controlled coupling to the bright charger; such a cross-platform translation is implicit in the paper's outlook but not worked out.
  • If the polariton-triplet hybridisation trade-off generalises (the stronger the charging resonance, the shorter the storage lifetime), then a two-step protocol—fast resonant charging followed by rapid detuning—could avoid the lifetime erosion; the paper does not analyse this, but it follows directly from its lifetime equation.
  • The paper's emphasis on ergotropy rather than stored energy suggests a concrete benchmark for future devices: report extractable work, not just population lifetimes; such a standard would make different metastable-state strategies directly comparable.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This review chapter examines strategies for extending the energy-storage lifetime of excitonic quantum batteries, which are limited by superradiant decay of bright singlet excitons. The unifying principle is to charge through a bright manifold and store energy in a dark metastable manifold. The paper reviews three implementations: population of molecular triplets via intersystem crossing or polariton-triplet coupling, generation of triplet pairs via singlet fission, and formation of charge-separated states. It discusses the theory of cavity-exciton interactions, open-system modelling, and recent experiments, notably Refs. [32,33], reporting thousand-fold increases in self-discharge time and superextensive electrical power. The authors also propose a minimal model of collective triplet harvesting via a collective Lindblad channel in Sec. IV B, claiming supertransfer scaling linearly with donor and acceptor numbers.

Significance. If its central claims hold, the review provides a timely and useful synthesis of a fast-moving experimental area, and the design principle (bright charger, dark storage) is clearly articulated. The paper's strengths include a careful pedagogical treatment of Dicke physics and open quantum systems, a comprehensive reference list, and explicit recognition of limitations such as the failure of mean-field theory. The experimental results from Refs. [32,33] (the latter involving the authors) are peer-reviewed and independently supported where cited. However, the novel theoretical element—collective triplet supertransfer—is underdeveloped and currently speculative, which tempers the paper's original contribution. The review will be valuable if the claims are properly qualified and internal inconsistencies resolved.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (49)] The collective triplet-acceptor channel L_T^(col)=√Γ Σ_i T_i is introduced as a proposal, but the subsequent claim that it 'opens to capturing delocalised triplets' and yields supertransfer scaling linearly with N_D and N_A is not derived. The channel does not contain any acceptor degrees of freedom, so the dependence on N_A is undefined; the scaling with N_D presumes identical fixed-phase coupling of all donor sites to a single acceptor mode and full delocalization of the triplet pairs, whereas the same section's Hamiltonian (Eq. (46)) uses short-range exponential triplet hopping and short-range exchange χ_ij. The text acknowledges that disorder and dephasing cause localisation, but the scaling statement is unqualified. Given that this model underpins the 'scalable triplet harvesting' outlook in Sec. VI, the authors should either provide a microscopic derivation (e.g., from a delocalise
  2. [Sec. I vs Sec. V] The Introduction states that Hymas et al. [33] 'realised the first full charge-discharge cycle of an excitonic quantum battery', but Sec. V ('Charge-separated states') states explicitly that this device is 'not, strictly speaking, a battery' and behaves as a 'cavity-enhanced photodiode' with no controllable charge-store-discharge cycle. This is a direct contradiction on a load-bearing point: the review's narrative of extended storage lifetime rests on the interpretation of this experiment. The authors should harmonise the two statements, either by rephrasing the Introduction to say the device demonstrates superextensive discharge in a photodiode geometry, or by explaining what 'full charge-discharge cycle' means operationally in the Introduction.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II B] Duplicated sentences appear in the same paragraph: 'A single confined mode does so for all the emitters at once...' is immediately followed by 'A single confined mode can do so for many emitters at once...' with overlapping content, and similarly 'Sharing a mode in this way also changes how the system loses energy' is followed by 'Sharing a mode in this way also modifies how the system exchanges energy with its environment'. Please merge or rephrase to remove redundancy.
  2. [Table I] The values of J_D, J_A and ΔE are given without uncertainties or details of the fitting procedure, although they are imported from Ref. [32]. Since the detuning sweep is central to the discussion in Sec. III B, please state the source explicitly and provide error bars if available, or note that these are representative values.
  3. [Sec. II C] Minor typographical issues: 'can be decomposed it into' should read 'can be decomposed into'; 'significanlty' should be 'significantly'. These occur in the discussion of the cavity field and the Dicke model.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the self-cited experiments are independent external evidence, and the collective supertransfer channel is an explicitly proposed ansatz, not a derived prediction.

full rationale

This is a review chapter whose load-bearing experimental claims—a thousand-fold extension of self-discharge time (Ref. [32]) and a full charge–storage–extraction cycle with superextensive electrical power (Ref. [33])—are taken from the authors' own published device papers. Under the stated rules, published, externally falsifiable experimental results count as independent evidence even when self-cited; the paper does not invoke a private uniqueness theorem or a prior theory by the same authors to rule out alternatives. The theoretical core (Dicke bright/dark manifolds, intersystem-crossing rates, triplet-pair spin structure) is standard material re-derived with explicit Hamiltonians, not imported by citation. The one new element, the collective triplet acceptor channel L_T^(col)=√Γ Σ_i T_i in Eq. (49), is explicitly introduced as a proposal ('we propose to consider') rather than as a first-principles result. Its supertransfer scaling is a direct mathematical consequence of the assumed symmetric Lindblad operator, and the paper openly lists the conditions under which it would hold, namely minimising disorder and dephasing to prevent localisation and requiring delocalised triplets. Asserting a consequence of one's own model definition is not circular when the definition is labelled as an ansatz and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The mismatch that Eq. (49) contains no acceptor-site operators yet the text claims linear N_A scaling is a derivation/correctness gap, not a circular reduction. Therefore no circular step is established.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard open-quantum-system assumptions plus an unvalidated collective-capture model in Sec IV B; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • collective triplet capture rate Γ
    Introduced in Eq (49) as the rate of the collective triplet-acceptor channel; the claimed linear-in-N supertransfer scaling depends on this parameter and on the collective form of the jump operator.
  • singlet fission coupling ν_ij
    Introduced in Eq (47); controls the fission rate in the proposed model; no value or estimate is provided.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Each molecule is a three-level qutrit with at most one excitation (Frenkel exciton reduction).
    Sec II C, Eq (20); used to build the battery Hamiltonian and all subsequent models.
  • domain assumption The open-system dynamics are described by a Born–Markov secular GKSL master equation.
    Sec II C, Eq (29); used to model cavity loss, singlet decay, and intersystem crossing.
  • domain assumption Triplets are optically dark and only the S0–S1 transition couples to the cavity.
    Sec II A; the basis for the storage mechanisms; if triplets had sizeable dipole moments, the lifetime advantage would be reduced.
  • ad hoc to paper The collective triplet capture channel L_T^(col)=√Γ Σ_i T_i is a valid description of acceptor harvesting.
    Sec IV B, Eq (49); the linear supertransfer scaling is a direct consequence of this assumed operator, not derived from a microscopic model of the acceptor.
  • ad hoc to paper Triplet pairs remain delocalized in extended media long enough for supertransfer to occur.
    Sec IV B; the proposal requires delocalized triplet pairs, but the paper acknowledges disorder and dephasing may cause localization.

reviewed 2026-08-01 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Molecular triplets and other metastable states for excitonic quantum batteries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QVDDMPQN

@misc{pith2026260726436,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Molecular triplets and other metastable states for excitonic quantum batteries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QVDDMPQN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.26436}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Excitonic quantum batteries, based on organic fluorescent molecules embedded in optical microcavities, offer a room-temperature platform for studying collective effects in energy storage and developing applications. Recent experiments have offered evidence of superabsorption, a collective enhancement to the light absorption rate of organic molecules which leads to a scalable power density. However, they have also highlighted the challenge posed by rapid radiative decay of fluorescent molecules, which limits the energy storage lifetime. Current strategies to overcome this trade-off focus on controlling the coupling between the absorbing manifold and that used for energy storage. In this chapter, we review three implementations of this design principle: transferring energy from optically excited states to long-lived dark triplet states, generating triplet pairs and higher-spin states through singlet exciton fission, and forming charge-separated states. We discuss each mechanism from both theoretical and experimental perspectives, with particular emphasis on recent device implementations that have extended storage times by several orders of magnitude. We conclude with a cross-platform outlook on the role of metastable states across coherent and room-temperature implementations, from neutral atom arrays to masers and colour centres.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.26436 by Daniel E. G\'omez, Daniel Tibben, Francesco Campaioli, Gian Marcello Andolina.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Development of excitonic quantum batteries.—Timeline of key milestones, challenges, and outlooks in excitonic quantum batteries. Quantum batteries were first proposed in the early 2010s [1, 4, 5], which established the link between collective effects and superextensive charging power. A pivotal milestone came in 2018 with the proposal of Ferraro et al. [8] for a solid-state, optically charged Dicke quantum… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Metastable states for excitonic quantum batteries.—Three mechanisms for channelling energy from bright, optically active states into long-lived dark manifolds that protect the stored energy from radiative loss. (a) Intersystem crossing: following absorption, the bright singlet S1 either fluoresces back to the ground state S0 at the radiative rate γr or undergoes a non-radiative transition to the lowest tri… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Microcavity–based quantum battery design and its energy dynamics.— (a) The device is based on a multilayered organic microcavity where donor (charging) and acceptor (storage) layers are spatially separated. (b) Resonant pumping (γp) results in strong coupling between donor and cavity JD, facilitating rapid charging via superabsorption [31] to polariton states. Cavity interactions with the acceptor JA allow… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Full-cyle quantum battery device design.—(a) Schematic of the layered structure of the quantum battery, describing the function and composition of each component. Ultrafast pump and probe laser pulses are used to charge and measure the superextensive charging of the device. To characterise the system outside the cavity, electrical control devices are fabricated by removing the bottom mirror, thereby elimin… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Superextensive scaling of charging power in a model quantum battery.— Systematic increases in the ratio P max cav /P max ctrl with N, determined from photocurrent￾voltage measurements, indicate superextensive scaling of dis￾charging power, consistent with a collective extraction mech￾anism enabled by strong coupling. Adapted with permission from Hymas et al. [33]. approach faces three limitations. First, t… view at source ↗

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

236 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Alicki and M

    R. Alicki and M. Fannes, Entanglement boost for ex- tractable work from ensembles of quantum batteries, Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics87, 1 (2013)

    2013

  2. [2]

    I. H. Deutsch, Harnessing the power of the second quan- tum revolution, PRX Quantum1, 020101 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    Binder, L

    F. Binder, L. A. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, and G. Adesso, eds.,Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime, Fundamental Theories of Physics, Vol. 195 (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Binder, S

    F. Binder, S. Vinjanampathy, K. Modi, and J. Goold, Quantum thermodynamics of general quantum pro- cesses, Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics91, 032119 (2015)

    2015

  5. [5]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. Pollock, F. Binder, L. C´ eleri, J. Goold, S. Vinjanampathy, and K. Modi, Enhancing the Charg- ing Power of Quantum Batteries, Physical Review Let- ters118, 150601 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    Campaioli, S

    F. Campaioli, S. Gherardini, J. Q. Quach, M. Polini, and G. M. Andolina, Colloquium: Quantum batteries, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 031001 (2024)

    2024

  7. [7]

    Ferraro, F

    D. Ferraro, F. Cavaliere, M. G. Genoni, G. Benenti, and M. Sassetti, Opportunities and challenges of quantum batteries, Nature Reviews Physics8, 86 (2026)

    2026

  8. [8]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pellegrini, and M. Polini, High-Power Collective Charging of a Solid-State Quantum Battery, Physical Review Letters 120, 117702 (2018)

    2018

  9. [9]

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

    1954

  10. [10]

    Gross and S

    M. Gross and S. Haroche, Superradiance: An essay on the theory of collective spontaneous emission, Phys. Rep.93, 301 (1982)

    1982

  11. [11]

    J. M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, Manipulat- ing quantum entanglement with atoms and photons in a cavity, Rev. Mod. Phys.73, 565 (2001)

    2001

  12. [12]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Quantum versus classical many-body batter- ies, Physical Review B99, 1 (2019)

    2019

  13. [13]

    Juli` a-Farr´ e, T

    S. Juli` a-Farr´ e, T. Salamon, A. Riera, M. N. Bera, and M. Lewenstein, Bounds on the capacity and power of quantum batteries, Physical Review Research2, 023113 (2020)

    2020

  14. [14]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pellegrini, 20 and M. Polini, Reply to the comment on ”high-power collective charging of a solid-state quantum battery” by haowei xu and ju li, arXiv:2412.01830 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    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)

    2010

  16. [16]

    A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, S. De Liberato, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Ultrastrong coupling between light and matter, Nature Reviews Physics1, 19 (2019)

    2019

  17. [17]

    Crescente, M

    A. Crescente, M. Carrega, M. Sassetti, and D. Ferraro, Ultrafast charging in a two-photon Dicke quantum bat- tery, Physical Review B102, 1 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    Gemme, G

    G. Gemme, G. M. Andolina, F. M. D. Pellegrino, M. Sassetti, and D. Ferraro, Off-resonant Dicke quan- tum battery: Charging by virtual photons, Batteries9, 197 (2023)

    2023

  19. [19]

    R. G. DeVoe and R. G. Brewer, Observation of su- perradiant and subradiant spontaneous emission of two trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 2049 (1996)

    2049

  20. [20]

    Genway, W

    S. Genway, W. Li, C. Ates, B. P. Lanyon, and I. Lesanovsky, Generalized Dicke nonequilibrium dy- namics in trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 023603 (2014)

    2014

  21. [21]

    Aedo and L

    I. Aedo and L. Lamata, Analog quantum simulation of generalized Dicke models in trapped ions, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042317 (2018)

    2018

  22. [22]

    J. Wen, Z. Wen, P. Peng, and G.-Q. Li, Dicke–ising quantum battery of an ion chain driven by a mechanical oscillator, Chinese Physics B34, 100302 (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    Scheibner, T

    M. Scheibner, T. Schmidt, L. Worschech, A. Forchel, G. Bacher, T. Passow, and D. Hommel, Superradiance of quantum dots, Nat. Phys.3, 106 (2007)

    2007

  24. [24]

    Rain` o, M

    G. Rain` o, M. A. Becker, M. I. Bodnarchuk, R. F. Mahrt, M. V. Kovalenko, and T. St¨ oferle, Superfluorescence from lead halide perovskite quantum dot superlattices, Nature563, 671 (2018)

    2018

  25. [25]

    Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S

    I. Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S. E. Thomas, M. Maffei, S. C. Wein, M. Pont, N. Belabas, S. Prasad, A. Harouri, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, I. Sagnes, N. Somaschi, A. Auff` eves, and P. Senellart, Experimental analysis of energy transfers between a quantum emitter and light fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 260401 (2023)

    2023

  26. [26]

    Bradaˇ c, M

    C. Bradaˇ c, M. T. Johnsson, M. van Breugel, B. Q. Baragiola, R. Martin, M. L. Juan, G. K. Brennen, and T. Volz, Room-temperature spontaneous superradiance from single diamond nanocrystals, Nat. Commun.8, 1205 (2017)

    2017

  27. [27]

    Angerer, K

    A. Angerer, K. Streltsov, T. Astner, S. Putz, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, J. Isoya, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto, J. Schmiedmayer, and J. Majer, Superradiant emission from colour centres in diamond, Nat. Phys.14, 1168 (2018)

    2018

  28. [28]

    Y.-D. Qu, Y. Zhang, P. Ni, C. Shan, D. Hunger, and K. Mølmer, Superradiance from nitrogen-vacancy cen- ters coupled to an ultranarrow optical cavity, Physical Review A111, 033711 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    D. G. Lidzey, D. D. C. Bradley, M. S. Skolnick, T. Vir- gili, S. Walker, and D. M. Whittaker, Strong exciton– photon coupling in an organic semiconductor microcav- ity, Nature395, 53 (1998)

    1998

  30. [30]

    Keeling and S

    J. Keeling and S. K´ ena-Cohen, Bose–einstein conden- sation of exciton-polaritons in organic microcavities, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.71, 435 (2020)

    2020

  31. [31]

    J. Q. Quach, K. E. McGhee, L. Ganzer, D. M. Rouse, B. W. Lovett, E. M. Gauger, J. Keeling, G. Cerullo, D. G. Lidzey, and T. Virgili, Superabsorption in an or- ganic microcavity: Toward a quantum battery, Science Advances8, 3160 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    D. J. Tibben, E. Della Gaspera, J. van Embden, P. Rei- neck, J. Q. Quach, F. Campaioli, and D. E. G´ omez, Extending the self-discharge time of dicke quantum bat- teries using molecular triplets, PRX Energy4, 023012 (2025)

    2025

  33. [33]

    bright triplets

    will be discussed in more detail in Sec. V. B. Polariton-triplet energy transfer In this section, we explain how triplets can be popu- latedviaa direct coupling with the cavity. At moderate to high dye concentrations, molecular aggregation can endow triplet states with a partial singlet charactervia random disorder [198–200]. These “bright triplets” ac- q...

    2025

  34. [34]

    Hymas, J

    K. Hymas, J. B. Muir, D. Tibben, J. van Embden, T. Hirai, C. J. Dunn, D. E. G´ omez, J. A. Hutchison, T. A. Smith, and J. Q. Quach, Superextensive electrical power from a quantum battery, Light Sci. Appl.15, 168 (2026)

    2026

  35. [35]

    Ostroverkhova, Organic Optoelectronic Materials: Mechanisms and Applications, Chemical Reviews116, 13279 (2016)

    O. Ostroverkhova, Organic Optoelectronic Materials: Mechanisms and Applications, Chemical Reviews116, 13279 (2016)

    2016

  36. [36]

    Fassioli, R

    F. Fassioli, R. Dinshaw, P. C. Arpin, and G. D. Sc- holes, Photosynthetic light harvesting: Excitons and coherence, Journal of the Royal Society Interface11, 10.1098/rsif.2013.0901 (2014)

    arXiv 2013

  37. [37]

    O. V. Mikhnenko, P. W. Blom, and T. Q. Nguyen, Ex- citon diffusion in organic semiconductors, Energy and Environmental Science8, 1867 (2015)

    2015

  38. [38]

    Corry, D

    B. Corry, D. Jayatilaka, and P. Rigby, Determining a flu- orophore’s transition dipole moment from fluorescence lifetime measurements in solvents of varying refractive index, Methods Appl. Fluoresc.4, 045001 (2016)

    2016

  39. [39]

    Camposeo, T

    A. Camposeo, T. Virgili, F. Lombardi, G. Cerullo, D. Pisignano, and M. Polini, Quantum batteries: A materials science perspective, Adv. Mater.37, 2415073 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    J. Liu, D. Segal, and G. Hanna, Loss-Free Excitonic Quantum Battery, Journal of Physical Chemistry C 123, 18303 (2019)

    2019

  41. [41]

    Gherardini, F

    S. Gherardini, F. Campaioli, F. Caruso, and F. C. Binder, Stabilizing open quantum batteries by sequen- tial measurements, Physical Review Research2, 013095 (2020)

    2020

  42. [42]

    F. H. Kamin, F. T. Tabesh, S. Salimi, F. Kheiran- dish, and A. C. Santos, Non-Markovian effects on charg- ing and self-discharging processes of quantum batteries, New J. Phys.22, 083007 (2020)

    2020

  43. [43]

    Bai and J.-H

    S.-Y. Bai and J.-H. An, Floquet engineering to reacti- vate a dissipative quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A102, 060201 (2020)

    2020

  44. [44]

    Song, H.-B

    W.-L. Song, H.-B. Liu, B. Zhou, W.-L. Yang, and J.- H. An, Remote charging and degradation suppression for the quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 090401 (2024)

    2024

  45. [45]

    Xu, H.-G

    K. Xu, H.-G. Li, H.-J. Zhu, and W.-M. Liu, Inhibiting the self-discharging process of quantum batteries in non- Markovian noises, Phys. Rev. E109, 054132 (2024)

    2024

  46. [46]

    A. H. A. Malavazi, R. Sagar, B. Ahmadi, and P. R. Dieguez, Two-time weak-measurement protocol for er- gotropy protection in open quantum batteries, PRX En- ergy4, 023011 (2025)

    2025

  47. [47]

    J. Q. Quach and W. J. Munro, Using Dark States to Charge and Stabilize Open Quantum Batteries, Physi- cal Review Applied14, 1 (2020)

    2020

  48. [48]

    Dou, Y.-Q

    F.-Q. Dou, Y.-Q. Lu, Y.-J. Wang, and J.-A. Sun, Ex- tended Dicke quantum battery with interatomic interac- tions and driving field, Physical Review B105, 115405 (2022). 21

    2022

  49. [49]

    Dong, P.-B

    X.-L. Dong, P.-B. Li, and Y.-F. Xiao, Near-perfect su- perabsorption in a disordered dicke quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A113, 043701 (2026)

    2026

  50. [50]

    N. J. Hestand and F. C. Spano, Expanded Theory of H- and J-Molecular Aggregates: The Effects of Vibronic Coupling and Intermolecular Charge Transfer, Chemical Reviews118, 7069 (2018)

    2018

  51. [51]

    Davidson, A

    S. Davidson, A. Fruchtman, F. A. Pollock, and E. M. Gauger, The dark side of energy transport along exci- tonic wires: On-site energy barriers facilitate efficient, vibrationally mediated transport through optically dark subspaces, Journal of Chemical Physics153, 134701 (2020)

    2020

  52. [52]

    Davidson, F

    S. Davidson, F. A. Pollock, and E. Gauger, Eliminating radiative losses in long-range exciton transport, Physi- cal Review X Quantum3, 020354 (2022)

    2022

  53. [53]

    Li and N

    J. Li and N. Wu, Collective charging of an organic quan- tum battery, Phys. Rev. E111, 044118 (2025)

    2025

  54. [54]

    N. M. Gallagher, A. Olankitwanit, and A. Rajca, High- spin organic molecules, The Journal of Organic Chem- istry80, 1291 (2015)

    2015

  55. [55]

    Kabe and C

    R. Kabe and C. Adachi, Organic long persistent lumi- nescence, Nature550, 384 (2017)

    2017

  56. [56]

    Hirata, Recent advances in materials with room- temperature phosphorescence: Photophysics for triplet exciton stabilization, Adv

    S. Hirata, Recent advances in materials with room- temperature phosphorescence: Photophysics for triplet exciton stabilization, Adv. Opt. Mater.5, 1700116 (2017)

    2017

  57. [57]

    E. Soto, F. Leon, M. Romero, V. Castaing, S. Bajo, H. M ´ ıguez, G. Lozano, and J. Campos, A photoex- cited triplet state germylene with a half-life of hours at room temperature, Nature Chemistry 10.1038/s41557- 026-02153-2 (2026)

    doi:10.1038/s41557- 2026

  58. [58]

    C. M. Marian, Understanding and controlling intersys- tem crossing in molecules, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.72, 617 (2021)

    2021

  59. [59]

    de Silva, Inverted singlet–triplet gaps and their rele- vance to thermally activated delayed fluorescence, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters10, 5674 (2019)

    P. de Silva, Inverted singlet–triplet gaps and their rele- vance to thermally activated delayed fluorescence, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters10, 5674 (2019)

    2019

  60. [60]

    Y. Wang, H. Wu, and Q. Zhao, Metastability-induced solid-state quantum batteries for powering microwave quantum electronics, arXiv:2410.21900 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    M. J. Y. Tayebjee, S. N. Sanders, E. Kumarasamy, L. M. Campos, M. Y. Sfeir, and D. R. McCamey, Quintet mul- tiexciton dynamics in singlet fission, Nature Physics13, 182 (2017)

    2017

  62. [62]

    Casanova, Theoretical modeling of singlet fission, Chemical Reviews118, 7164 (2018)

    D. Casanova, Theoretical modeling of singlet fission, Chemical Reviews118, 7164 (2018)

    2018

  63. [63]

    A. B. Pun, A. Asadpoordarvish, E. Kumarasamy, M. J. Y. Tayebjee, D. Niesner, D. R. McCamey, S. N. Sanders, L. M. Campos, and M. Y. Sfeir, Ultra-fast in- tramolecular singlet fission to persistent multiexcitons by molecular design, Nature Chemistry11, 821 (2019)

    2019

  64. [64]

    M. B. Smith and J. Michl, Singlet fission, Chem. Rev. 110, 6891 (2010)

    2010

  65. [65]

    M. B. Smith and J. Michl, Recent Advances in Singlet Fission, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry64, 361 (2013)

    2013

  66. [66]

    A. J. Musser, M. Liebel, C. Schnedermann, T. Wende, T. B. Kehoe, A. Rao, and P. Kukura, Evidence for coni- cal intersection dynamics mediating ultrafast singlet ex- citon fission, Nat. Phys.11, 352 (2015)

    2015

  67. [67]

    Miyata, F

    K. Miyata, F. S. Conrad-Burton, F. L. Geyer, and X.- Y. Zhu, Triplet pair states in singlet fission, Chem. Rev. 119, 4261 (2019)

    2019

  68. [68]

    M. J. Y. Tayebjee, D. R. McCamey, and T. W. Schmidt, Beyond Shockley–Queisser: Molecular Ap- proaches to High-Efficiency Photovoltaics, Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters6, 2367 (2015)

    2015

  69. [69]

    M. T. Trinh, Y. Zhong, Q. Chen, T. Schiros, S. Jockusch, M. Y. Sfeir, M. Steigerwald, C. Nuck- olls, and X. Zhu, Intra- to intermolecular singlet fission, Journal of Physical Chemistry C119, 1312 (2015)

    2015

  70. [70]

    M. I. Collins, D. R. McCamey, and M. J. Y. Tayebjee, Fluctuating exchange interactions enable quintet mul- tiexciton formation in singlet fission, The Journal of Chemical Physics151, 164104 (2019)

    2019

  71. [71]

    K. E. Smyser and J. D. Eaves, Singlet fission for quan- tum information and quantum computing: the parallel JDE model, Scientific Reports10, 1 (2020)

    2020

  72. [72]

    R. J. Hudson, T. S. C. MacDonald, J. H. Cole, T. W. Schmidt, T. A. Smith, and D. R. McCamey, A frame- work for multiexcitonic logic, Nature Reviews Chem- istry8, 136 (2024)

    2024

  73. [73]

    L. A. Mart ´ ınez-Mart ´ ınez, M. Du, R. F. Ribeiro, S. K´ ena-Cohen, and J. Yuen-Zhou, Polariton-assisted singlet fission in acene aggregates, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 9, 1951 (2018)

    1951

  74. [74]

    Climent, J

    C. Climent, J. Galego, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and J. Feist, Not dark yet for strong light-matter coupling to accel- erate singlet fission dynamics, Cell Rep. Phys. Sci.3, 100841 (2022)

    2022

  75. [75]

    Wallner, C

    L. Wallner, C. Remnant, and O. Vendrell, Strong- coupling modification of singlet-fission dynamical path- ways, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A128, 8897 (2024)

    2024

  76. [76]

    Campaioli, A

    F. Campaioli, A. Pagano, D. Jaschke, and S. Mon- tangero, Optimization of ultrafast singlet fission in one- dimensional rings towards unit efficiency, PRX Energy 3, 043003 (2024)

    2024

  77. [77]

    Fukuzumi, K

    S. Fukuzumi, K. Ohkubo, and T. Suenobu, Long-lived charge separation and applications in artificial photo- synthesis, Acc. Chem. Res.47, 1455 (2014)

    2014

  78. [78]

    A. A. Bakulin, A. Rao, V. G. Pavelyev, P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, M. S. Pshenichnikov, D. Niedzialek, J. Cornil, D. Beljonne, and R. H. Friend, The role of driving energy and delocalized states for charge sep- aration in organic semiconductors, Science335, 1340 (2012)

    2012

  79. [79]

    Y. Hou, X. Zhang, K. Chen, D. Liu, Z. Wang, Q. Liu, J. Zhao, and A. Barbon, Charge separation, charge re- combination, long-lived charge transfer state formation and intersystem crossing in organic electron donor/ac- ceptor dyads, Journal of Materials Chemistry C7, 12048 (2019)

    2019

  80. [80]

    Aprile, L

    C. Aprile, L. Maretti, M. Alvaro, J. C. Scaiano, and H. Garcia, Long-lived (minutes) photoinduced charge separation in a structured periodic mesoporous tita- nia containing 2,4,6-triphenylpyrylium as guest, Dalton Transactions , 5465 (2008)

    2008

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 1, 2026.