Cavity-Mediated Hybridization of Bright and Dark Excitons in an Ultrastrongly Coupled Carbon Nanotube Microcavity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) are ideal materials for studying strong light–matter coupling and related polaritonic phenomena at room temperature. SWCNTs possess strong, relatively narrow, optical absorption features arising from bright and dark exciton states, with the latter brightened by vibrational transitions in some cases. We show here that a strong light–matter interaction allows for the hybridization of the bright as well as the K-momentum dark exciton states of SWCNTs in an optical microcavity, mediated by a common cavity photon and exciton–phonon coupling. This hybridization is achieved in optically dense films of chirality-purified (6,5) SWCNTs integrated into microcavities via a lamination approach. Measured polariton dispersions are fit to a three-level Hopfield Hamiltonian model, evidencing high coupling strengths of g1 as large as 230 meV between bright excitons and cavity photons (which would correspond to a Rabi splitting Ω1 = 2g1 = 460 meV in the absence of the second oscillator) and g2 as large as 100 meV for phonon-brightened K-momentum dark excitons and cavity photons. In addition, photoluminescence is observed from the lower polariton branch with a full width at half-maximum of only 30 meV.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".