Resonant dipole–dipole interaction in confined and strong-coupling dielectric geometries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the electromagnetic response function of an electric dipole located within a dielectric geometry, we derive the mathematical equivalence between the classical response and quantum mechanical resonant dipole–dipole interaction between two quantum objects (atoms, quantum dots, etc). Cooperative spontaneous emission likewise emerges from this equivalence. We introduce a practical numerical technique using finite difference time domain for calculating both dipole–dipole interaction and collective spontaneous emission in confined dielectric structures, where strong light–matter coupling might arise. This method is capable of obtaining resonant dipole–dipole interaction over a wide range of frequencies in a single run. Our method recaptures the results of quantum mechanical second order perturbation theory for weak light–matter coupling. In strong coupling situations such as near a photonic band edge, second order Rayleigh–Schrödinger perturbation theory leads to divergences, and instead Brillouin–Wigner perturbation theory is required. This is equivalent to the use of a variational wavefunction to describe the exciton transfer between initial and final states. We introduce a system of coupled classical oscillators, that describes resonant dipole–dipole interaction and vacuum Rabi splitting in the strong-coupling regime, and that provides an effective numerical scheme based on the finite difference time domain method. This includes the effects of quantum entanglement and the correlation of quantum fluctuations. We discuss the crossover to Forster energy transfer when quantum correlations between the dipoles are damped by strong environmental interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".