Cited by 324Quantum optics and atomic interactionsStrong Light-Matter InteractionsSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices

Spontaneous and induced atomic decay in photonic band structures

Kofman, A.G., Kurizki, G., Sherman, B.·1994·Journal of Modern Optics

Abstract

We present a comprehensive quantum electrodynamical analysis of the interaction between a continuum with photonic band gaps (PBGs) or frequency cut-off and an excited two-level atom, which can be either ‘bare’ or ‘dressed’ by coupling to a near-resonant field mode. A diversity of novel features in the atom and field dynamics is shown to arise from the non-Markovian character of radiative decay into such a continuum of modes. Firstly the excited atom is shown to evolve, by spontaneous decay, into a superposition of non-decaying single-photon dressed states, each having an energy in a different PBG, and a decaying component. This superposition is determined by the atomic resonance shift, induced by the spontaneously emitted photon, into or out of a PBG. The main novel feature exhibited by the decaying excited-state component is the occurrence of beats between the shifted atomic resonance frequency and the PBG cut-off frequencies, corresponding to a non-Lorentzian emission spectrum. Secondly the induced decay of a resonantly driven atom into such a continuum exhibits a cascade of transitions down the ladder of dressed states, which are labelled by decreasing photon numbers of the driving mode. Remarkably, this cascade is terminated at the dressed-state doublet, from which all subsequent transitions to lower doublets are forbidden because they fall within the PBG. This doublet then becomes an attractor state for the populations of higher-lying doublets. As a result, the photon-number distribution of the driving mode becomes strongly sub-Poissonian.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09500349414550381

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Non-Markovian dynamics better preserve quantum information due to backflow of quantum information from the reservoir to the central spin.

    “Furthermore, it is well-known that non-Markovian dynamics better preserve quantum information, as non-Markovianity induces a backflow of quantum information from the reservoir to the central spin [106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 55 · Cited by 324

Authors
Kofman, A. G., Kurizki, G., & Sherman, B.
Affiliations
Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
Venue
Journal of Modern Optics
Published
1994-02
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
353-384
ISSN
  • 0950-0340 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-3044
OpenAlex
W2069106725
Cited by
324
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Modern Optics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Strong Light-Matter Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Semiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Keywords
photonic band gap, spontaneous emission, dressed states, non-Markovian dynamics, two-level atom, atom-field interaction, sub-Poissonian statistics, cutoff frequency, quantum electrodynamics, resonance shift

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review