Molecular optomechanically-induced transparency

Bin Yin; Deng Wang; Hui Jing; Jie Wang; Ke Wei; Mei-Yu Peng; Qian Zhang; Tian-Xiang Lu

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 136 references

Molecular optomechanically-induced transparency

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

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

Pith's one-line read A hybrid molecular optomechanical cavity can show induced transparency at an optical quality factor as low as 5, and moving the probe input port switches the same device from slow light to fast light.

desk verdict Standard OMIT theory applied to molecular cavity optomechanics; the low-Q transparency claim is plausible but hinges on an unreported mechanical damping rate. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05420 v1 pith:WJS6PGMM submitted 2025-02-08 physics.optics

Bin Yin , Jie Wang , Mei-Yu Peng , Qian Zhang , Deng Wang , Tian-Xiang Lu , Ke Wei , Hui Jing This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.optics

keywords optomechanicallyinducedtransparencymolecularcavityoptomechanicsplasmonicnanocavitycollectivecouplingmicrodiskslowlightfastgroupdelay

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that a hybrid molecular optomechanical device—molecules in a plasmonic nanocavity on a microdisk—can exhibit optomechanically induced transparency (OMIT) even when the optical cavity is extremely lossy, with quality factor as low as 5. In a conventional optomechanical cavity, such a transparency window requires a quality factor near $10^{7}$, because the single-photon optomechanical coupling is weak; here the collective vibration of about 100 molecules multiplies the coupling by √N and opens the window at Q=5. The paper also finds that sending the probe light through the plasmonic nanocavity produces OMIT and slow light, while sending it through the microdisk waveguide produces optomechanically induced absorption and fast light, with group delays of about +1.6 ps and -5.6 ps. If correct, this provides a chip-scale route to storing, delaying, or advancing optical signals without requiring high-Q optical resonators.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the collective-mode picture of molecular vibrations. The paper defines $B_1 = \sum_{j=1}^N b_j/\sqrt{N}$ and $B_2 = \sum_{k=1}^M b_k/\sqrt{M}$, so the optomechanical interaction in the Hamiltonian becomes $-{\hbar}g_N c^\dagger c(B_1^\dagger+B_1) - {\hbar}g_M c^\dagger c(B_2^\dagger+B_2)$ with $g_{N,M}=g\sqrt{N,M}$, and the coupling to the microdisk cavity enters as ${\hbar}J(a^\dagger c + a c^\dagger)$. From the Heisenberg–Langevin equations, the paper keeps steady-state means plus first-order sidebands $\delta A = A_- e^{-i\Delta_p t}+A_+ e^{i\Delta_p t}$, solves for the probe amplitudes $c_-$ and $a_-$, and uses input–output relations $c_{\rm out}=c_{\rm in}-\sqrt{\kappa_{ex1}}c(t)$ and $a_{\rm out}=a_{\rm in}-\sqrt{\kappa_{ex2}}a(t)$ to obtain the two transmission rates $T_c$ and $T_a$. The group delay is computed as $\tau = d\arg(t_p)/d\Delta_p$. The collective factor $g\sqrt{N}$ is what turns an otherwise impossible low-$Q$ transparency window into a predicted one, while the two-port input–output treatment is what converts port choice into a switch between slow and fast light.

What would settle it

Measure the mechanical linewidth $\gamma$ of the specific molecular Raman mode used (for example, biphenyl-4-thiol or the graphene G-band) inside the nanoparticle-on-cavity geometry at the operating pump power and temperature, then look for the predicted probe transmission window at $Q=5$ with $N\approx100$ molecules. Because the paper states the transparency window's linewidth equals $\gamma$, a measured $\gamma$ of order the 5–50 THz vibrational frequency—or any $\gamma$ exceeding $g\sqrt{N}$—would erase the window, while a MHz-to-GHz $\gamma$ with the quoted $+1.6$ ps and $-5.6$ ps group delays at the stated powers would confirm the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the central discovery is that molecular cavity optomechanics can sustain a standard OMIT spectrum at optical quality factors just above 1, a regime in which conventional optomechanical cavities show no window. The enabling identity is the collective coupling $g_N = g\sqrt{N}$ for each molecular ensemble, with single-molecule couplings $g/2\pi \sim 10\text{–}100$ GHz and vibrational frequencies $\omega_b \sim 5\text{–}50$ THz; for $N=100$ this lifts the effective optomechanical coupling above the large cavity decay rate, so a transparency window appears even at $Q=5$. In the hybrid double-cavity geometry, the photon-hopping coupling $J$ between the microdisk and the plasmonic nanocavity creates a second, cascaded transparency window, and the paper's two transmission formulas—for probe injection into the nanocavity and for injection through the waveguide—show that the same device can present either OMIT or optomechanically induced absorption (OMIA). The accompanying group delays are about $+1.6$ ps (slow light) at $P_l=0.25$ mW and $-5.6$ ps (fast light) at $P_l=0.31$ mW for $N=100$, which the paper interprets as the basis for selective storage and retrieval of optical signals.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a molecular vibrational mode can be treated as a high-quality harmonic oscillator with a decay rate $\gamma$ small enough that the transparency window—whose width the paper states equals $\gamma$—is not washed out, yet the paper never assigns $\gamma$ a numerical value.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A transparency window should appear in a molecular optomechanical cavity with optical quality factor as low as 5 when roughly 100 molecules are present, a regime where a conventional optomechanical cavity with $Q\sim 10^7$ is normally required.
Increasing the number of molecules in either ensemble raises the transmission approximately linearly with $\sqrt{N}$ or $\sqrt{M}$, so stronger collective coupling lets the device work at lower pump power, staying below the bistability threshold the paper identifies ($P_l<58$ mW for $N=100$).
In the hybrid microdisk-nanocavity system, two cascaded transparency windows appear: one is due to photon-photon coupling $J$ between the cavities, and the second has linewidth equal to the mechanical decay rate $\gamma$.
Sending the probe into the plasmonic nanocavity yields optomechanically induced transparency with slow light (group delay up to about $+1.6$ ps at $P_l=0.25$ mW), while sending it into the microdisk waveguide yields optomechanically induced absorption with fast light (about $-5.6$ ps at $P_l=0.31$ mW) for $N=100$.
The same device can therefore act as a port-selectable optical delay or advance line, providing a mechanism for storage and retrieval of external optical signals.

Reading between the lines

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

We infer a quantitative threshold the paper leaves implicit: for fixed single-molecule coupling $g$ and mechanical decay $\gamma$, there is a minimum molecule number $N^\ast$ at which the effective coupling $g\sqrt{N^\ast}$ exceeds the losses needed to open the low-$Q$ window; measuring $N^\ast$ as a function of $Q$ would test the mechanism directly.
We infer that the port-switching result makes the device a natural two-port optical buffer: a signal entering from one port is slowed and stored, and switching the launching port retrieves or advances it; the paper states the storage/retrieval motivation but does not develop the routing protocol.
We infer that the missing numerical value of $\gamma$ is the main practical risk: at room temperature, molecular Raman vibrational lines are frequently THz broad, and since the transparency window linewidth is stated to equal $\gamma$, a THz-scale $\gamma$ would erase the predicted $Q=5$ window. A measurement of $\gamma$ in the proposed geometry is therefore the decisive follow-up test.
We infer that unequal molecular ensemble sizes $N\neq M$ could produce asymmetric double transparency windows with different depths or widths, offering a spectral-shaping tool the paper does not explore.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a straightforward application of the standard linearized OMIT formalism to molecular cavity optomechanics, with the genuinely new pieces being the collective sqrt(N) enhancement and the port-selected OMIT/OMIA switch. The derivation is clean and internally consistent, but the headline claim—transparency at optical Q as low as 5—rests on the molecular decay rate gamma, and the paper never tells you its value. That is the soft spot to press.

What the paper does well: it builds a hybrid plasmonic-microdisk model, includes two molecular ensembles, derives transmission for both probe ports, and checks stability in Appendix C. The parameters (g ~ 10–100 GHz, omega_b ~ 5–50 THz, Q ~ 1–100) come from the cited experimental literature, and the comparison between conventional and molecular COM at a fixed pump power is instructive. The port-dependent OMIT/OMIA and the picosecond group delays follow directly from the model.

The problems, in order of size:

1. gamma is load-bearing and unreported. In Sec. III.B they state the OMIT window linewidth equals the mechanical decay rate. For room-temperature molecular vibrations, gamma/2pi is typically 0.1–3 THz, not the MHz–kHz scale of conventional optomechanics. At Q=5, kappa_c/2pi is tens of THz, so the cooperativity C is suppressed unless gamma is tiny. The figures show a sharp window, which implies they used a small gamma. They need to state the value and show the result survives at realistic linewidths. Without that, the low-Q claim is not demonstrated for real molecules.

2. The 'otherwise unattainable' framing overstates the contrast. At fixed pump power and fixed cavity, molecular COM's much larger g gives a clear advantage, but conventional COM can compensate with higher photon number up to stability or thermal limits. The comparison should be framed as 'at the same external parameters,' not in absolute terms.

3. The group delays are ~1.6 ps and -5.6 ps. Using 'storage and retrieval of optical signals' is aspirational. Fine as a direction, but not a demonstrated memory.

The derivation itself looks sound; the formulas are standard and I did not see an internal inconsistency. The missing gamma is an omission, not a defect in the math. This paper deserves a serious referee, who should require a stated gamma and a parameter scan over the realistic range before accepting the central claim.

I would bring it to a reading group as an example of applying OMIT to a new regime, and I might cite it if I worked on molecular optomechanics, but only after the gamma issue is resolved.

Recommendation: send it to review, but the referee should insist on the gamma numbers.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper considers a hybrid molecular cavity optomechanical system: a plasmonic nanocavity formed by a metal nanoparticle and molecular vibrations on a microdisk, coupled to the microdisk whispering-gallery mode. Using a linearized Heisenberg-Langevin treatment, the authors derive the probe-field transmission for two input-output ports (plasmonic nanocavity or microdisk) and the corresponding group delay. The central claims are: (i) molecular COM with collective coupling g\sqrt{N} can show an OMIT window for optical quality factors as low as Q=5, which the abstract says is unattainable in conventional COM; (ii) choosing the probe port switches between OMIT and OMIA; and (iii) this yields tunable slow or fast light and a route to signal storage and retrieval. Appendix C provides a mean-field stability analysis.

Significance. If the low-Q claim is supported by experimentally realistic parameters, this is a useful contribution that brings OMIT into the molecular optomechanics regime and demonstrates port-controlled transparency/absorption. The analytic derivation is standard and internally consistent; the input-output formulas are explicit; the parameters are sourced from prior experimental literature; and the paper includes a stability check. The main weakness is that the mechanical decay rate \gamma, which controls the OMIT window width, is never specified, so the headline low-Q prediction is not yet demonstrated for real molecules. In addition, the 'otherwise unattainable' comparison with conventional COM needs qualification.

major comments (3)

[Sec. II, Eq. (3); Sec. III.B] The molecular mechanical damping rate \gamma is introduced in Eq. (3) but is never assigned a numerical value anywhere in the main text or appendices. Section III.B states that the second transparency window has a linewidth equal to the decay rate of the mechanical mode, so \gamma directly controls the visibility of the central low-Q result. For \omega_c=193 THz and Q=5, the cavity amplitude decay rate is \kappa_c/2\pi \approx 19.3 THz; if \gamma/2\pi is taken from typical room-temperature molecular Raman linewidths (0.1-3 THz), the mechanical sidebands are broad and the effective optomechanical cooperativity g_N^2 |c_s|^2/(\kappa_c \gamma) is suppressed by orders of magnitude relative to the narrow-linewidth assumption. The authors need to state \gamma, justify it from SERS or Raman measurements, and show that the Q=5 transparency window in Fig. 2(i) survives at that value.
[Abstract; Sec. III.A and Fig. 2] The claim that a transparency window at low Q is 'otherwise unattainable in a conventional COM system' is too strong. In conventional OMIT, the effective optomechanical coupling is proportional to the square root of the intracavity pump photon number, so a conventional COM system with sufficiently high pump power can reach the same cooperativity and produce a comparable transparency window at low Q. The numerical comparison in Fig. 2 uses P_l = 1 mW for both systems; the correct statement is that low-Q transparency is attainable at this fixed pump power with molecular collective coupling, not that it is unattainable in principle. Please rephrase the claim and, if the intended comparison is under practical power constraints, state those constraints explicitly.
[Sec. II, Eq. (2) and Sec. III.B] The collective-mode treatment B_1 = \sum_j b_j / \sqrt{N} assumes that the N molecules are identical, weakly excited, and form a single harmonic collective oscillator with decay rate \gamma. For molecular vibrations at room temperature, inhomogeneous broadening and anharmonicity can invalidate the single-oscillator approximation. The manuscript does not discuss how \gamma or the collective mode is affected by the distribution of molecular environments in the plasmonic hotspot. This is not a mathematical error, but it is a load-bearing physical assumption for the predicted narrow transparency window; a brief discussion of its validity or a limiting parameter estimate is needed.

minor comments (5)

[Fig. 1(c) and Fig. 2(j)] Fig. 1(c) is difficult to read: the legend symbols and parameter table in Fig. 2(j) are partially illegible, and the axis labels in the color maps are small. Please redraw with larger fonts and clearer markers.
[Sec. II and Appendix C] There are several typographical errors: 'parametic' should be 'parametric' in Sec. II, and Appendix C contains 'sovling' and 'difine' instead of 'solving' and 'define'.
[Sec. III.D and Fig. 4 caption] In the Fig. 4 caption, the description of the fast-light panels (g)-(h) refers to panels '(c)-(d)' instead of '(g)-(h)'.
[Sec. II] The model introduces two molecular ensembles B_1 and B_2, but most numerical results set M=0; the physical motivation for the second ensemble should be stated more concretely in the main text rather than only in the deposition-process discussion.
[Sec. III.D] The group-delay values are of order 1-6 ps; the connection to 'storage and retrieval of optical signals' would be more convincing if the delay-bandwidth product or a comparison with the probe pulse duration were given.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the low-Q molecular OMIT and port-controlled transparency/absorption are computed consequences of a standard optomechanical model with parameters from independent experimental literature, not fitted inputs relabeled as predictions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a standard optomechanical modeling exercise. The paper writes the Hamiltonian (Eqs. 1-2) with a collective molecular coupling g_N=g√N, which is explicitly a definition cited to independent collective-molecular-optomechanics work (Refs. 26,27,88,89), then linearizes the Heisenberg-Langevin equations (Eq. 3), solves the first-order sideband equations (Eqs. 6-8) with the standard ansatz, and applies input-output relations to obtain T_c (Eq. 9) and T_a (Eq. 10). The plotted transparency, absorption, and group-delay curves are generated from these algebraic formulas using parameter values (ωb≈5-50 THz, g/2π≈10-100 GHz, Q=1-100, J/2π≈0.1-10 THz) taken from published experimental work (Refs. 15,24,39,40,43,44,50). No parameter is fitted to the computed OMIT spectra, and the central low-Q claim is not assumed as an input: it is a derived consequence of the collective coupling appearing in the transmission formula. The observed √N scaling of the transmission is indeed a direct consequence of defining g_N=g√N, but the paper presents it as such, and it is not load-bearing for the main conclusions about low-Q transparency or port-selected OMIT/OMIA. The extensive self-citations appear as background examples of prior OMIT theory (e.g., Refs. 67-77) rather than as premises containing the target result; the load-bearing coupling and cavity parameters trace to independent experimental references, not to a self-citation chain. The main weakness is that the molecular decay rate γ is introduced in Eq. (3) but never assigned a numerical value in the main text or appendices, which affects the quantitative robustness of the Q=5 transparency prediction; however, that is an unstated-parameter concern, not a circular reduction. The derivation is self-contained against the cited inputs, so no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several model assumptions that are standard in OMIT theory but not all are stated with their numerical prerequisites. The most important are the collective √N enhancement with identical molecules, the small mechanical damping γ, and the critical-coupling input-output relation. No data is fitted; all parameters are borrowed from the cited experimental range or chosen for illustration.

free parameters (7)

Single-molecule optomechanical coupling g = g/2π = 30 GHz in figures; 10-100 GHz in literature
Sets the strength of the molecular optomechanical interaction; central to the transparency window.
Number of molecules N (and M) = N=100, M=0 in most figures; N=1,50,100 in parametric scans
Collective coupling g√N is the reason OMIT survives at low Q; N is an idealizing assumption of identical molecules.
Mechanical damping γ = Not stated in text
Directly controls the OMIT window width; no numerical value is given, and the effect only exists if γ is small.
Optical quality factor Q of plasmonic cavity = Q=5 and 80 for molecular COM; Q=10^7 and 8×10^5 for conventional COM
The low-Q claim is the central result; these values are chosen to illustrate it.
Pump power Pl = 1 mW (Fig. 2), 0.5 mW (Figs. 4-5), up to 0.31 mW for τmin
Chosen to be below the bistability threshold (58 mW, App. C) and to produce clear spectra.
Intercavity coupling J = J/2π = 3 THz in double-cavity case; J=0 in single-cavity
Controls the cascaded transparency window; within the experimental range 0.1-10 THz.
Molecular vibration frequency ωb = ωb/2π = 25 THz
Chosen within the 5-50 THz range; sets the probe detuning resonance.

assumptions (5)

standard math Input-output theory for a single-sided cavity with critical coupling κ_ex=κ
Used to derive transmission in Eqs. (9) and (A4); Appendix B relaxes it.
standard math Linear response: the probe is weak and the system is expanded to first order around steady state
Sec. II after Eq. (3); the standard OMIT approximation.
domain assumption Molecules are identical and couple equally to the cavity, forming two collective bright modes B1, B2, so the per-mode coupling scales as g√N
Introduced after Eq. (1); neglects disorder and inhomogeneous broadening, which would suppress the collective enhancement.
domain assumption Molecular vibrations are damped harmonic oscillators with a Markovian decay γ
Eq. (3); the value of γ is not stated and is load-bearing for OMIT visibility.
domain assumption The system operates in the monostable region Pl < 58 mW
Appendix C; protects the steady-state linearization from bistability.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Molecular optomechanically-induced transparency." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WJS6PGMM

@misc{pith2026250205420,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Molecular optomechanically-induced transparency},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WJS6PGMM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05420}
}

read the original abstract

Molecular cavity optomechanics (COM), characterized by remarkably efficient optomechanical coupling enabled by a highly localized light field and ultra-small effective mode volume, holds significant promise for advancing applications in quantum science and technology. Here, we study optomechanically induced transparency and the associated group delay in a hybrid molecular COM system. We find that even with an extremely low optical quality factor, an obvious transparency window can appear, which is otherwise unattainable in a conventional COM system. Furthermore, by varying the ports of the probe light, the optomechanically induced transparency or absorption can be achieved, along with corresponding slowing or advancing of optical signals. These results indicate that our scheme provides a new method for adjusting the storage and retrieval of optical signals in such a molecular COM device.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05420 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Transmission rate of the probe field as a function of the optical detuning [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. (a) Transmission rate of the probe field as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. OMIT (a-b) and OMIA (c-d). Transmission rate as a function of the optical detuning [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Transmission rate as a function of the optical detuning [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Stability analysis. Mean photon number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

136 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

[1]

Aspelmeyer, T

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Cavity optomechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014)

2014
[2]

Metcalfe, Applications of cavity optomechanics, Appl

M. Metcalfe, Applications of cavity optomechanics, Appl. Phys. Rev. 1, 031105 (2014)

2014
[3]

Aspelmeyer, P

M. Aspelmeyer, P. Meystre, and K. Schwab, Quantum op- tomechanics, Physics Today 65, 29 (2012)

2012
[4]

T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, Cavity optomechanics: back-action at the mesoscale, Science 321, 1172 (2008)

2008
[5]

Brennecke, S

F. Brennecke, S. Ritter, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Cavity optomechanics with a bose-einstein condensate, Science 322, 235 (2008)

2008
[6]

Pirkkalainen, S

J.-M. Pirkkalainen, S. Cho, F. Massel, J. Tuorila, T. Heikkil ¨a, P. Hakonen, and M. Sillanp ¨a¨a, Cavity optomechanics medi- 9 0 3 6 9 N = 1 N = 50 N = 100 |cs|2 /10 3 0 100 200 Pl (mW) FIG. 6. Stability analysis. Mean photon number |cs|2 as a function of the pump power Pl at different N. ated by a quantum two-level system, Nat. Commun. 6, 6981 (2015)

2015
[7]

B.-B. Li, L. Ou, Y . Lei, and Y .-C. Liu, Cavity optomechanical sensing, Nanophotonics 10, 2799 (2021)

2021
[8]

Zhu, C.-S

G.-L. Zhu, C.-S. Hu, Y . Wu, and X.-Y . L ¨u, Cavity optome- chanical chaos, Fundamental Research 3, 63 (2023)

2023

Show all 136 references

[9]

J. Xu, Y . Mao, Z. Li, Y . Zuo, J. Zhang, B. Yang, W. Xu, N. Liu, Z. J. Deng, W. Chen, X. Keyu, Q. Cheng-Wei, Z. Zhihong, J. Hui, and L. Ken, Single-cavity loss-enabled nanometrology, Nat. Nanotechnology , 1 (2024)

2024
[10]

P.-B. Li, Y . Gu, Q.-H. Gong, and G.-C. Guo, Quantum- information transfer in a coupled resonator waveguide, Phys. Rev. A 79, 042339 (2009)

2009
[11]

Flick, N

J. Flick, N. Rivera, and P. Narang, Strong light-matter cou- pling in quantum chemistry and quantum photonics, Nanopho- tonics 7, 1479 (2018)

2018
[12]

Galego, F

J. Galego, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, and J. Feist, Cavity-induced modifications of molecular structure in the strong-coupling regime, Phys. Rev. X 5, 041022 (2015)

2015
[13]

Toninelli, I

C. Toninelli, I. Gerhardt, A. Clark, A. Reserbat-Plantey, S. G¨otzinger, Z. Ristanovi´c, M. Colautti, P. Lombardi, K. Ma- jor, I. Deperasi ´nska, et al., Single organic molecules for pho- tonic quantum technologies, Nat. Materials 20, 1615 (2021)

2021
[14]

M. K. Schmidt, R. Esteban, F. Benz, J. J. Baumberg, and J. Aizpurua, Linking classical and molecular optomechanics descriptions of sers, Far. Dis. 205, 31 (2017)

2017
[15]

Roelli, C

P. Roelli, C. Galland, N. Piro, and T. J. Kippenberg, Molecular cavity optomechanics as a theory of plasmon-enhanced raman scattering, Nat. Nanotech. 11, 164 (2016)

2016
[16]

Esteban, J

R. Esteban, J. J. Baumberg, and J. Aizpurua, Molecular op- tomechanics approach to surface-enhanced raman scattering, Acc. Chem. Res. 55, 1889 (2022)

2022
[17]

picocavities

F. Benz, M. K. Schmidt, A. Dreismann, R. Chikkaraddy, Y . Zhang, A. Demetriadou, C. Carnegie, H. Ohadi, B. De Nijs, R. Esteban, J. Aizpurua, and J. J. Baumberg, Single-molecule optomechanics in “picocavities”, Science 354, 726 (2016)

2016
[18]

S. I. Bozhevolnyi and N. A. Mortensen, Plasmonics for emerg- ing quantum technologies, Nanophotonics 6, 1185 (2017)

2017
[19]

Roelli, H

P. Roelli, H. Hu, E. Verhagen, S. Reich, and C. Galland, Nanocavities for molecular optomechanics: their fundamen- tal description and applications, arXiv:2409.12537

arXiv
[20]

Z. Li, Y . Li, Q. You, M. Wang, C. Zhu, Y . Yang, H. Luan, and P. Wang, Magnetic purcell enhancement by plasmon-induced magnetic resonance of the nanoparticle-on-mirror configura- tion, Phys. Rev. A 110, 013516 (2024)

2024
[21]

K. A. Willets and R. P. Van Duyne, Localized surface plasmon resonance spectroscopy and sensing, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 58, 267 (2007)

2007
[22]

Patra, B

B. Patra, B. Kafle, and T. G. Habteyes, Molecular optome- chanics induced hybrid properties in soft materials filled plas- monic nanocavities, Nano Letters 23, 5108 (2023)

2023
[23]

Y . Xu, H. Hu, W. Chen, P. Suo, Y . Zhang, S. Zhang, and H. Xu, Phononic cavity optomechanics of atomically thin crystal in plasmonic nanocavity, ACS Nano 16, 12711 (2022)

2022
[24]

M. D. Anderson, S. Tarrago Velez, K. Seibold, H. Flayac, V . Savona, N. Sangouard, and C. Galland, Two-color pump- probe measurement of photonic quantum correlations medi- ated by a single phonon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 233601 (2018)

2018
[25]

S. M. Ashrafi, R. Malekfar, A. R. Bahrampour, and J. Feist, Optomechanical heat transfer between molecules in a nanoplasmonic cavity, Phys. Rev. A100, 013826 (2019)

2019
[26]

Zhang, J

Y . Zhang, J. Aizpurua, and R. Esteban, Optomechanical col- lective effects in surface-enhanced raman scattering from many molecules, ACS Photonics 7, 1676 (2020)

2020
[27]

Huang, G

J. Huang, G. S. Agarwal, and Z. Zhang, Collective quantum entanglement in molecular cavity optomechanics arXiv:2405.12102

arXiv
[28]

F. Zou, L. Du, Y . Li, and H. Dong, Amplifying frequency up- converted infrared signals with a molecular optomechanical cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 153602 (2024)

2024
[29]

W. Chen, P. Roelli, H. Hu, S. Verlekar, S. P. Amirtharaj, A. I. Barreda, T. J. Kippenberg, M. Kovylina, E. Verhagen, A. Mart´ınez, and C. Galland, Continuous-wave frequency up- conversion with a molecular optomechanical nanocavity, Sci- ence 374, 1264 (2021)

2021
[30]

Xomalis, X

A. Xomalis, X. Zheng, R. Chikkaraddy, Z. Koczor-Benda, E. Miele, E. Rosta, G. A. Vandenbosch, A. Mart ´ınez, and J. J. Baumberg, Detecting mid-infrared light by molecular fre- quency upconversion in dual-wavelength nanoantennas, Sci- ence 374, 1268 (2021)

2021
[31]

Lombardi, M

A. Lombardi, M. K. Schmidt, L. Weller, W. M. Deacon, F. Benz, B. de Nijs, J. Aizpurua, and J. J. Baumberg, Pulsed molecular optomechanics in plasmonic nanocavities: From nonlinear vibrational instabilities to bond-breaking, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011016 (2018)

2018
[32]

M. K. Schmidt and M. J. Steel, Molecular optomechanics in the anharmonic regime: from nonclassical mechanical states to mechanical lasing, New J. Phys. 26, 033041 (2024)

2024
[33]

Liu and K.-D

J. Liu and K.-D. Zhu, Room temperature optical mass sensor with an artificial molecular structure based on surface plasmon optomechanics, Photon. Res. 6, 867 (2018)

2018
[34]

Liu and K.-D

J. Liu and K.-D. Zhu, Coupled quantum molecular cavity op- tomechanics with surface plasmon enhancement, Photon. Res. 5, 450 (2018)

2018
[35]

Tabatabaei, M

M. Tabatabaei, M. Najiminaini, K. Davieau, B. Kaminska, M. R. Singh, J. J. Carson, and F. Lagugn ´e-Labarthet, Tun- able 3d plasmonic cavity nanosensors for surface-enhanced raman spectroscopy with sub-femtomolar limit of detection, Acs. Photonics 2, 752 (2015)

2015
[36]

Sadhanasatish, K

T. Sadhanasatish, K. Augustin, L. Windgasse, A. Chrostek- Grashoff, M. Rief, and C. Grashoff, A molecular optomechan- ics approach reveals functional relevance of force transduction across talin and desmoplakin, Sci. Adv. 9, eadg3347 (2023)

2023
[37]

L. A. Jakob, W. M. Deacon, Y . Zhang, B. de Nijs, E. Pavlenko, S. Hu, C. Carnegie, T. Neuman, R. Esteban, J. Aizpurua, and J. J. Baumberg, Giant optomechanical spring effect in plas- monic nano-and picocavities probed by surface-enhanced ra- 10 man scattering, Nat. Commun. 14,...

2023
[38]

Boehmke Amoruso, R

A. Boehmke Amoruso, R. A. Boto, E. Elliot, B. de Nijs, R. Es- teban, T. F ¨oldes, F. Aguilar-Galindo, E. Rosta, J. Aizpurua, and J. J. Baumberg, Uncovering low-frequency vibrations in surface-enhanced raman of organic molecules, Nat. Commun. 15, 6733 (2024)

2024
[39]

Shlesinger, K

I. Shlesinger, K. G. Cogn ´ee, E. Verhagen, and A. F. Koen- derink, Integrated molecular optomechanics with hybrid di- electric–metallic resonators, ACS Photonics 8, 3506 (2021)

2021
[40]

Shlesinger, J

I. Shlesinger, J. Vandersmissen, E. Oksenberg, E. Verhagen, and A. F. Koenderink, Hybrid cavity-antenna architecture for strong and tunable sideband-selective molecular raman scat- tering enhancement, Sci. Adv. 9, eadj4637 (2023)

2023
[41]

M. K. Dezfouli, R. Gordon, and S. Hughes, Molecular op- tomechanics in the anharmonic cavity-qed regime using hy- brid metal–dielectric cavity modes, ACS Photonics 6, 1400 (2019)

2019
[42]

Abutalebi, S

S. Abutalebi, S. M. Ashrafi, H. R. Askari, and A. Bahrampour, Single-photon generation at room temperature using molecu- lar optomechanics in a hybrid photonic-plasmonic cavity, Opt. Mater. Express 14, 2134 (2024)

2024
[43]

Thakkar, M

N. Thakkar, M. T. Rea, K. C. Smith, K. D. Heylman, S. C. Quillin, K. A. Knapper, E. H. Horak, D. J. Masiello, and R. H. Goldsmith, Sculpting fano resonances to control pho- tonic–plasmonic hybridization, Nano Letters 17, 6927 (2017)

2017
[44]

F. Pan, K. C. Smith, H. L. Nguyen, K. A. Knapper, D. J. Masiello, and R. H. Goldsmith, Elucidating energy pathways through simultaneous measurement of absorption and trans- mission in a coupled plasmonic–photonic cavity, Nano Letters 20, 50 (2020)

2020
[45]

Kamandar Dezfouli, R

M. Kamandar Dezfouli, R. Gordon, and S. Hughes, Modal the- ory of modified spontaneous emission of a quantum emitter in a hybrid plasmonic photonic-crystal cavity system, Phys. Rev. A 95, 013846 (2017)

2017
[46]

Gurlek, V

B. Gurlek, V . Sandoghdar, and D. Mart´ın-Cano, Manipulation of quenching in nanoantenna–emitter systems enabled by ex- ternal detuned cavities: A path to enhance strong-coupling, ACS Photonics 5, 456 (2018)

2018
[47]

A. I. Barreda, M. Zapata-Herrera, I. M. Palstra, L. Mer- cad´e, J. Aizpurua, A. F. Koenderink, and A. Mart´ınez, Hybrid photonic-plasmonic cavities based on the nanoparticle-on-a- mirror configuration, Photon. Res. 9, 2398 (2021)

2021
[48]

Lu, W.-J

Y .-W. Lu, W.-J. Zhou, Y . Li, R. Li, J.-F. Liu, L. Wu, and H. Tan, Unveiling atom-photon quasi-bound states in hybrid plasmonic-photonic cavity, Nanophotonics 11, 3307 (2022)

2022
[49]

W. Li, R. Liu, J. Li, J. Zhong, Y .-W. Lu, H. Chen, and X.- H. Wang, Highly efficient single-exciton strong coupling with plasmons by lowering critical interaction strength at an excep- tional point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 143601 (2023)

2023
[50]

Zhang, S

Y . Zhang, S. Zhang, H. Wu, J. Wang, G. Lin, and A. P. Zhang, Miniature computational spectrometer with a plas- monic nanoparticles-in-cavity microfilter array, Nat. Com- mun. 15, 3807 (2024)

2024
[51]

Barzanjeh, A

S. Barzanjeh, A. Xuereb, S. Gr ¨oblacher, M. Paternostro, C. A. Regal, and E. M. Weig, Optomechanics for quantum technolo- gies, Nat. Phys. 18, 15 (2022)

2022
[52]

Kleckner, I

D. Kleckner, I. Pikovski, E. Jeffrey, L. Ament, E. Eliel, J. Van Den Brink, and D. Bouwmeester, Creating and verifying a quantum superposition in a micro-optomechanical system, New J. Phys. 10, 095020 (2008)

2008
[53]

A. I. Lvovsky, B. C. Sanders, and W. Tittel, Optical quantum memory, Nat. photonics 3, 706 (2009)

2009
[54]

Y . Lei, F. K. Asadi, T. Zhong, A. Kuzmich, C. Simon, and M. Hosseini, Quantum optical memory for entanglement dis- tribution, Optica 10, 1511 (2023)

2023
[55]

S. Weis, R. Rivi `ere, E. Del ´eglise, S.and Gavartin, O. Arcizet, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, Optomechanically in- duced transparency, Science 330, 1520 (2010)

2010
[56]

A. H. Safavi-Naeini, T. M. Alegre, J. Chan, M. Eichenfield, M. Winger, Q. Lin, J. T. Hill, D. E. Chang, and O. Painter, Electromagnetically induced transparency and slow light with optomechanics, Nature (London) 472, 69 (2011)

2011
[57]

M. J. Burek, J. D. Cohen, S. M. Meenehan, N. El-Sawah, C. Chia, T. Ruelle, S. Meesala, J. Rochman, H. A. Atikian, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, M. D. Lukin, O. Painter, and M. Lonˇcar, Diamond optomechanical crystals, Optica 3, 1404 (2016)

2016
[58]

J. D. Teufel, D. Li, M. S. Allman, K. Cicak, A. J. Sirois, J. D. Whittaker, and R. W. Simmonds, Circuit cavity electrome- chanics in the strong-coupling regime, Nature (London) 471, 204 (2011)

2011
[59]

C. Dong, J. Zhang, V . Fiore, and H. Wang, Optomechanically induced transparency and self-induced oscillations with bo- goliubov mechanical modes, Optica 1, 425 (2014)

2014
[60]

Shen, C.-H

Z. Shen, C.-H. Dong, Y . Chen, Y .-F. Xiao, F.-W. Sun, and G.- C. Guo, Compensation of the kerr effect for transient optome- chanically induced transparency in a silica microsphere, Opt. Lett. 41, 1249 (2016)

2016
[61]

X. Zhou, F. Hocke, A. Schliesser, A. Marx, H. Huebl, R. Gross, and T. J. Kippenberg, Slowing, advancing and switching of microwave signals using circuit nanoelectrome- chanics, Nat. Phys. 9, 179 (2013)

2013
[62]

L. Tang, J. Tang, M. Chen, F. Nori, M. Xiao, and K. Xia, Quan- tum squeezing induced optical nonreciprocity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 083604 (2022)

2022
[63]

Xiong, Z.-X

H. Xiong, Z.-X. Liu, and Y . Wu, Highly sensitive optical sensor for precision measurement of electrical charges based on optomechanically induced difference-sideband generation, Opt. Lett. 42, 3630 (2017)

2017
[64]

C. Kong, H. Xiong, and Y . Wu, Coulomb-interaction- dependent effect of high-order sideband generation in an op- tomechanical system, Phys. Rev. A 95, 033820 (2017)

2017
[65]

Xiong, L.-G

H. Xiong, L.-G. Si, and Y . Wu, Precision measurement of elec- trical charges in an optomechanical system beyond linearized dynamics, Appl. Phys. Lett. 110, 171102 (2017)

2017
[66]

Ojanen and K

T. Ojanen and K. Børkje, Ground-state cooling of mechanical motion in the unresolved sideband regime by use of optome- chanically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. A 90, 013824 (2014)

2014
[67]

H. L ¨u, Y . Jiang, Y .-Z. Wang, and H. Jing, Optomechanically induced transparency in a spinning resonator, Photon. Res. 5, 367 (2017)

2017
[68]

Sun, M.-Y

R.-T. Sun, M.-Y . Peng, T.-X. Lu, J. Wang, Q. Zhang, Y .- F. Jiao, and H. Jing, Multicolor nonreciprocal optical ampli- fier with spinning active optomechanics, Phys. Rev. A 109, 023520 (2024)

2024
[69]

Zhang, Y

J. Zhang, Y . Li, and Y . Zhang, Nonreciprocal optomechani- cally induced transparency and enhanced ground-state cooling in a reversed-dissipation cavity system, Opt. Express 32, 499 (2024)

2024
[70]

H. L ¨u, C. Wang, L. Yang, and H. Jing, Optomechanically in- duced transparency at exceptional points, Phys. Rev. Appl.10, 014006 (2018)

2018
[71]

Y . Pan, H. L. Zhang, Y . F. Jiao, D. Y . Wang, S. L. Su, and H. Jing, Optomechanically induced transparency on excep- tional surfaces, arXiv:2404.18526
[72]

Jing, S ¸

H. Jing, S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, Z. Geng, J. Zhang, X.-Y . L¨u, B. Peng, L. Yang, and F. Nori, Optomechanically-induced transparency 11 in parity-time-symmetric microresonators, Sci. Rep. 5, 9663 (2015)

2015
[73]

M. Peng, H. Zhang, Q. Zhang, T.-X. Lu, I. M. Mirza, and H. Jing, Nonreciprocal slow or fast light in anti- PT - symmetric optomechanics, Phys. Rev. A 107, 033507 (2023)

2023
[74]

T.-X. Lu, X. Xiao, L.-S. Chen, Q. Zhang, and H. Jing, Magnon-squeezing-enhanced slow light and second-order sideband in cavity magnomechanics, Phys. Rev. A 107, 063714 (2023)

2023
[75]

Jiao, T.-X

Y .-F. Jiao, T.-X. Lu, and H. Jing, Optomechanical second- order sidebands and group delays in a kerr resonator, Phys. Rev. A 97, 013843 (2018)

2018
[76]

L. Li, W. Nie, and A. Chen, Transparency and tunable slow and fast light in a nonlinear optomechanical cavity, Sci. Rep. 6, 35090 (2016)

2016
[77]

Lu, Z.-S

T.-X. Lu, Z.-S. Li, B. Yin, J. Wang, X. Xiao, and H. Jing, Magnetic-field-direction-controlled slow light and second- order sidebands in a cavity-magnon optomechanical system, Opt. Express 32, 48302 (2024)

2024
[78]

Fiore, Y

V . Fiore, Y . Yang, M. C. Kuzyk, R. Barbour, L. Tian, and H. Wang, Storing optical information as a mechanical exci- tation in a silica optomechanical resonator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 133601 (2011)

2011
[79]

D. P. Lake, M. Mitchell, D. D. Sukachev, and P. E. Barclay, Processing light with an optically tunable mechanical mem- ory, Nat. Commun. 12, 663 (2021)

2021
[80]

M. B. Kristensen, N. Kralj, E. C. Langman, and A. Schliesser, Long-lived and efficient optomechanical memory for light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 100802 (2024)

2024
[81]

Verhagen, S

E. Verhagen, S. Del ´eglise, S. Weis, A. Schliesser, and T. J. Kippenberg, Quantum-coherent coupling of a mechanical os- cillator to an optical cavity mode, Nature (London) 482, 63 (2012)

2012
[82]

K. W. Murch, K. L. Moore, S. Gupta, and D. M. Stamper- Kurn, Observation of quantum-measurement backaction with an ultracold atomic gas, Nat. Phys. 4, 561 (2008)

2008
[83]

Akahane, T

Y . Akahane, T. Asano, B.-S. Song, and S. Noda, Fine-tuned high-q photonic-crystal nanocavity, Opt. Express 13, 1202 (2005)

2005
[84]

J. Liu, K. Usami, A. Naesby, T. Bagci, E. S. Polzik, P. Lodahl, and S. Stobbe, High-q optomechanical gaas nanomembranes, Appl. Phys. Lett. 99, 243102 (2011)

2011
[85]

Bagci, A

T. Bagci, A. Simonsen, S. Schmid, L. G. Villanueva, E. Zeuthen, J. Appel, J. M. Taylor, A. Sørensen, K. Usami, A. Schliesser, and E. S. Polzik, Optical detection of radio waves through a nanomechanical transducer, Nature (London) 507, 81 (2014)

2014
[86]

Thompson, B

J. Thompson, B. Zwickl, A. Jayich, F. Marquardt, S. Girvin, and J. Harris, Strong dispersive coupling of a high-finesse cav- ity to a micromechanical membrane, Nature (London) 452, 72 (2008)

2008
[87]

P. T. Kristensen and S. Hughes, Modes and mode volumes of leaky optical cavities and plasmonic nanoresonators, ACS Photonics 1, 2 (2014)

2014
[88]

C. P. Sun, Y . Li, and X. F. Liu, Quasi-spin-wave quantum memories with a dynamical symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 147903 (2003)

2003
[89]

Emary and T

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

2003
[90]

Zhang, F

H. Zhang, F. Saif, Y . Jiao, and H. Jing, Loss-induced trans- parency in optomechanics, Opt. Express 26, 25199 (2018)

2018
[91]

C. W. Gardiner and M. J. Collett, Input and output in damped quantum systems: Quantum stochastic differential equations and the master equation, Phys. Rev. A 31, 3761 (1985)

1985
[92]

He and K.-D

F. He and K.-D. Zhu, Single molecule photonic transistor and router through plasmonic nanocavity, Appl. Phys. B 129, 65 (2023)

2023
[93]

Xiong, L.-G

H. Xiong, L.-G. Si, A.-S. Zheng, X. Yang, and Y . Wu, Higher- order sidebands in optomechanically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. A 86, 013815 (2012)

2012
[94]

Forn-D ´ıaz, L

P. Forn-D ´ıaz, L. Lamata, E. Rico, J. Kono, and E. Solano, Ultrastrong coupling regimes of light-matter interaction, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025005 (2019)

2019
[95]

Frisk Kockum, A

A. Frisk Kockum, A. Miranowicz, S. De Liberato, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Ultrastrong coupling between light and matter, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 19 (2019)

2019
[96]

Hu, S.-Y

D. Hu, S.-Y . Huang, J.-Q. Liao, L. Tian, and H.-S. Goan, Quantum coherence in ultrastrong optomechanics, Phys. Rev. A 91, 013812 (2015)

2015
[97]

Dovzhenko, S

D. Dovzhenko, S. Ryabchuk, Y . P. Rakovich, and I. Nabiev, Light–matter interaction in the strong coupling regime: con- figurations, conditions, and applications, Nanoscale 10, 3589 (2018)

2018
[98]

J. D. P. Machado and Y . M. Blanter, Quantum nonlinear dynamics of optomechanical systems in the strong-coupling regime, Phys. Rev. A 94, 063835 (2016)

2016
[99]

W. Qin, A. F. Kockum, C. S. Mu ˜noz, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Quantum amplification and simulation of strong and ultrastrong coupling of light and matter, Phys. Reports 1078, 1 (2024), quantum amplification and simulation of strong and ultrastrong coupling of light and matter

2024
[100]

2 (g-i)]

However, in the case of multiple molecules [26, 27], the collective effects can significantly enhance the effective optomechanical coupling, thus achieving an obvious trans- parency window [see Figs. 2 (g-i)]. Notably, transparent win- dows can still appear even at extremely l...
[101]

X. Y . Zhang, Y . Q. Guo, P. Pei, and X. X. Yi, Optomechan- ically induced absorption in parity-time-symmetric optome- chanical systems, Phys. Rev. A 95, 063825 (2017)

2017
[102]

B. P. Hou, L. F. Wei, and S. J. Wang, Optomechanically in- duced transparency and absorption in hybridized optomechan- ical systems, Phys. Rev. A 92, 033829 (2015)

2015
[103]

X. Y . Zhang, Y . H. Zhou, Y . Q. Guo, and X. X. Yi, Dou- ble optomechanically induced transparency and absorption in parity-time-symmetric optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. A 98, 033832 (2018)

2018
[104]

Xu and Y

X.-W. Xu and Y . Li, Controllable optical output fields from an optomechanical system with mechanical driving, Phys. Rev. A 92, 023855 (2015)

2015
[105]

Y . Li, Y . Y . Huang, X. Z. Zhang, and L. Tian, Optical direc- tional amplification in a three-mode optomechanical system, Opt. Express 25, 18907 (2017)

2017
[106]

L.-G. Si, H. Xiong, M. S. Zubairy, and Y . Wu, Optomechani- cally induced opacity and amplification in a quadratically cou- pled optomechanical system, Phys. Rev. A95, 033803 (2017)

2017
[107]

Narula, R

R. Narula, R. Panknin, and S. Reich, Absolute raman matrix elements of graphene and graphite, Phys. Rev. B 82, 045418 (2010)

2010
[108]

A. Ø. Svela, J. M. Silver, L. Del Bino, S. Zhang, M. T. Wood- ley, M. R. Vanner, and P. Del’Haye, Coherent suppression of backscattering in optical microresonators, Light. Sci. Appl 9, 204 (2020)

2020
[109]

Vitali, S

D. Vitali, S. Gigan, A. Ferreira, H. R. B ¨ohm, P. Tombesi, A. Guerreiro, V . Vedral, A. Zeilinger, and M. Aspelmeyer, Op- tomechanical entanglement between a movable mirror and a cavity field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 030405 (2007)

2007
[110]

Jiao, S.-D

Y .-F. Jiao, S.-D. Zhang, Y .-L. Zhang, A. Miranowicz, L.- M. Kuang, and H. Jing, Nonreciprocal optomechanical entan- glement against backscattering losses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 143605 (2020)

2020
[111]

Liu, Y .-F

J.-X. Liu, Y .-F. Jiao, Y . Li, X.-W. Xu, Q.-Y . He, and H. Jing, Phase-controlled asymmetric optomechanical entanglement 12 against optical backscattering, Sci. China-Phy. Mech. Astron. 66, 230312 (2023)

2023
[112]

Ghobadi, S

R. Ghobadi, S. Kumar, B. Pepper, D. Bouwmeester, A. I. Lvovsky, and C. Simon, Optomechanical micro-macro entan- glement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 080503 (2014)

2014
[113]

T. M. Karg, B. Gouraud, C. T. Ngai, G.-L. Schmid, K. Ham- merer, and P. Treutlein, Light-mediated strong coupling be- tween a mechanical oscillator and atomic spins 1 meter apart, Science 369, 174 (2020)

2020
[114]

Fang, J.-L

Y .-L. Fang, J.-L. Zhao, D.-X. Chen, Y .-H. Zhou, Y . Zhang, Q.-C. Wu, C.-P. Yang, and F. Nori, Entanglement dynamics in anti- PT -symmetric systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033022 (2022)

2022
[115]

T.-X. Lu, B. Li, Y . Wang, D.-Y . Wang, X. Xiao, and H. Jing, Directional quantum-squeezing-enabled nonrecip- rocal enhancement of entanglement, Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 064001 (2024)

2024
[116]

K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, R. Miller, A. D. Boozer, T. E. Northup, and H. J. Kimble, Photon blockade in an optical cav- ity with one trapped atom, Nature (London) 436, 87 (2005)

2005
[117]

Faraon, I

A. Faraon, I. Fushman, D. Englund, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuˇckovi´c, Coherent generation of non-classical light on a chip via photon-induced tunnelling and blockade, Nat. Phys. 4, 859 (2008)

2008
[118]

Rabl, Photon blockade effect in optomechanical systems, Phys

P. Rabl, Photon blockade effect in optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 063601 (2011)

2011
[119]

Nunnenkamp, K

A. Nunnenkamp, K. Børkje, and S. M. Girvin, Single-photon optomechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 063602 (2011)

2011
[120]

Huang, A

R. Huang, A. Miranowicz, J.-Q. Liao, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Nonreciprocal photon blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 153601 (2018)

2018
[121]

Liao and F

J.-Q. Liao and F. Nori, Photon blockade in quadratically coupled optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. A 88, 023853 (2013)

2013
[122]

Zuo, Y .-F

Y . Zuo, Y .-F. Jiao, X.-W. Xu, A. Miranowicz, L.-M. Kuang, and H. Jing, Chiral photon blockade in the spinning kerr res- onator, Opt. Express 32, 22020 (2024)

2024
[123]

Bin, X.-Y

Q. Bin, X.-Y . L¨u, S.-W. Bin, and Y . Wu, Two-photon blockade in a cascaded cavity-quantum-electrodynamics system, Phys. Rev. A 98, 043858 (2018)

2018
[124]

Su, J.-S

X. Su, J.-S. Tang, and K. Xia, Nonlinear dissipation-induced photon blockade, Phys. Rev. A 106, 063707 (2022)

2022
[125]

X.-Y . Yao, H. Ali, F.-L. Li, and P.-B. Li, Nonreciprocal phonon blockade in a spinning acoustic ring cavity coupled to a two- level system, Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 054004 (2022)

2022
[126]

I. S. Grudinin, H. Lee, O. Painter, and K. J. Vahala, Phonon laser action in a tunable two-level system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 083901 (2010)

2010
[127]

Zhang, B

J. Zhang, B. Peng, S ¸. K. ¨Ozdemir, K. Pichler, D. O. Krimer, G. Zhao, F. Nori, Y .-x. Liu, S. Rotter, and L. Yang, A phonon laser operating at an exceptional point, Nat. Photonics 12, 479 (2018)

2018
[128]

H. Jing, S. K. ¨Ozdemir, X.-Y . L¨u, J. Zhang, L. Yang, and F. Nori, PT -symmetric phonon laser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 053604 (2014)

2014
[129]

Jiang, S

Y . Jiang, S. Maayani, T. Carmon, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Nonre- ciprocal phonon laser, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 064037 (2018)

2018
[130]

T.-X. Lu, Y . Wang, K. Xia, X. Xiao, L.-M. Kuang, and H. Jing, Quantum squeezing induced nonreciprocal phonon laser, Sci. China-Phy. Mech. Astron. 67, 1 (2024)

2024
[131]

Zhang, C.-L

Y .-L. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, C.-S. Yang, H. Jing, C.-H. Dong, G.- C. Guo, and X.-B. Zou, Phase-controlled phonon laser, New J. Phys. 20, 093005 (2018)

2018
[132]

Gavartin, P

E. Gavartin, P. Verlot, and T. J. Kippenberg, A hybrid on-chip optomechanical transducer for ultrasensitive force measure- ments, Nat. Nanotech 7, 509 (2012)

2012
[133]

J. Wang, Q. Zhang, Y .-F. Jiao, S.-D. Zhang, T.-X. Lu, Z. Li, C.-W. Qiu, and H. Jing, Quantum advantage of one-way squeezing in weak-force sensing, Appl. Phys. Rev.11, 031409 (2024)

2024
[134]

Zhao, S.-D

W. Zhao, S.-D. Zhang, A. Miranowicz, and H. Jing, Weak- force sensing with squeezed optomechanics, Sci. China-Phy. Mech. Astron. 63, 224211 (2020)

2020
[135]

Zhang, J

Q. Zhang, J. Wang, T.-X. Lu, R. Huang, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Quantum weak force sensing with squeezed magnomechanics, Sci. China-Phy. Mech. Astron. 67, 100313 (2024)

2024
[136]

Bin, X.-Y

S.-W. Bin, X.-Y . L¨u, T.-S. Yin, G.-L. Zhu, Q. Bin, and Y . Wu, Mass sensing by quantum criticality, Opt. Lett.44, 630 (2019)

2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Aspelmeyer, T

M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Cavity optomechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014)

2014

[2] [2]

Metcalfe, Applications of cavity optomechanics, Appl

M. Metcalfe, Applications of cavity optomechanics, Appl. Phys. Rev. 1, 031105 (2014)

2014

[3] [3]

Aspelmeyer, P

M. Aspelmeyer, P. Meystre, and K. Schwab, Quantum op- tomechanics, Physics Today 65, 29 (2012)

2012

[4] [4]

T. J. Kippenberg and K. J. Vahala, Cavity optomechanics: back-action at the mesoscale, Science 321, 1172 (2008)

2008

[5] [5]

Brennecke, S

F. Brennecke, S. Ritter, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Cavity optomechanics with a bose-einstein condensate, Science 322, 235 (2008)

2008

[6] [6]

Pirkkalainen, S

J.-M. Pirkkalainen, S. Cho, F. Massel, J. Tuorila, T. Heikkil ¨a, P. Hakonen, and M. Sillanp ¨a¨a, Cavity optomechanics medi- 9 0 3 6 9 N = 1 N = 50 N = 100 |cs|2 /10 3 0 100 200 Pl (mW) FIG. 6. Stability analysis. Mean photon number |cs|2 as a function of the pump power Pl at different N. ated by a quantum two-level system, Nat. Commun. 6, 6981 (2015)

2015

[7] [7]

B.-B. Li, L. Ou, Y . Lei, and Y .-C. Liu, Cavity optomechanical sensing, Nanophotonics 10, 2799 (2021)

2021

[8] [8]

Zhu, C.-S

G.-L. Zhu, C.-S. Hu, Y . Wu, and X.-Y . L ¨u, Cavity optome- chanical chaos, Fundamental Research 3, 63 (2023)

2023