Regimes of cavity QED under incoherent excitation: From weak to deep strong coupling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prototypical system constituted by a two-level atom interacting with a quantized single-mode electromagnetic field is described by the quantum Rabi model (QRM). The QRM is potentially valid at any light-matter interaction regime, ranging from the weak (where the decay rates exceeds the coupling rate) to the deep strong coupling (where the interaction rate exceeds the bare transition frequencies of the subsystems). However, when reaching the ultrastrong coupling regime, several theoretical issues may prevent the correct description of the observable dynamics of such a system: (i) the standard quantum optics master equation fails to correctly describe the interaction of this system with the reservoirs; (ii) the correct output photon rate is no longer proportional to the intracavity photon number; and (iii) they appear to violate gauge invariance. Here, we study the photon flux emission rate of this system under the incoherent excitation of the two-level atom for any light-matter interaction strength and consider different effective temperatures. The dependence of the emission spectra on the coupling strength is the result of the interplay between energy levels, matrix elements of the observables, and the density of states of the reservoirs. Within this approach, we also study the occurrence of light-matter decoupling in the deep strong-coupling regime and show how all of the obtained results are gauge invariant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".