Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Chemistry
Comment on "Quantum theory of collective strong coupling of molecular vibrations with a microcavity mode"
arXiv
Authors: Luis A. Martinez-Martinez, Joel Yuen-Zhou
Year
2017
Paper ID
7586
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
117
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We have found missing terms and incorrect signs in the secular master equations reported by Del Pino et. al., New J. Phys., 17 (2015), 053040 for vibrational polariton relaxation. Inclusion of these terms and signs are essential to yield correct (vanishing) pure dephasing rates between polariton states, as well as coherence transfer pathways between polaritons and dark states. We provide corrected expressions for the master equations as well as comparisons with the results reported by the authors. Even though the main conclusions of the article are not significantly altered, the corrections are important to provide a proper description of all possible polariton relaxation mechanisms within the invoked approximations, especially when applying the theory to model nonlinear spectroscopy of vibrational polaritons.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Chemistry research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We have found missing terms and incorrect signs in the secular master equations reported by Del Pino et.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.