Electromagnetically induced transparency in first- and second-harmonic-generated extinction coefficients in plasmonic nanohybrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have developed a theory of the first- and second-harmonic-generated extinction coefficients in plasmonic nanohybrids. We consider that a nanohybrid is made of an ensemble of interacting metallic nanoparticles (MNPs). The surface plasmon polaritons (SPPs) for the MNPs and the dipole-dipole interaction (DDI) between nanoparticles are calculated. Using the quantum mechanical density matrix method, we have obtained analytical expressions for the first- and second-harmonic-generated extinction coefficients in the presence of the SPP and DDI fields. These analytical expressions can be useful for scientists and engineers to compare their experiments and make new plasmonic devices. We have predicted that there is a noticeable enhancement in the extinction coefficients due to an extra contribution from the SPPs present in the nanohybrid. We found that there are two types of contributions to the extinction coefficients. The first is called the photonic extinction coefficient induced by the probe field. The second is called the polaritonic extinction coefficient produced by the SPP field. The enhancement phenomenon can be used to fabricate the nanoamplifiers and nanosensors from plasmonic nanohybrids. Next, we have compared theory with experimental data of the Au-MNPs and Au/Ag core-shell metallic nanorods for the first harmonic extinction coefficient. Similarly, we have also compared our theory with experimental data of the Au/Ag core-shell MNPs for the second harmonic extinction coefficient. Good agreement between theory and experiments is found. Further, we predicted the phenomenon of the electromagnetically induced transparency in the first- and second-harmonic-generated extinction coefficients due to DDI coupling. In other words, the nanohybrid becomes transparent for the first- and second-harmonic-generated extinction processes. Additionally, we found that a peak in the extinction coefficient splits into two peaks due to DDI coupling. Due to the strong coupling between the exciton and DDI polaritons, the excitonic state splits into two states and produces two excitons. These two excitons are responsible for the two peaks. This finding can be used to fabricate nanoswitches (i.e., ON = one peak, OFF = two peaks) and nanosensors using plasmonic nanohybrids.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".