Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

EMS Press eBooks

Phase transitions in Dicke models

Klaus Hepp

Published Jun 29, 2022• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Dicke models are important caricatures of non-relativistic quantum electrodynamics (QED). The rigorous results on superradiance in closed and open Dicke models achieved 50 years ago by Lieb and Hepp still drive modern experimental and theoretical research in cavity QED and will be reviewed in this essay, together with more recent developments.

DOI
10.4171/90-1/23

Related papers

Dynamics of a generalized Dicke model for spin-1 atoms

Ofri Adiv, A. S. Parkins

The Dicke model is a staple of theoretical cavity quantum electrodynamics (cavity QED), describing the interaction between an ensemble of atoms and a single radiation mode of an optical cavity. It is studied both quantum mechanically and semiclassically for two-level atoms, and demonstrates a rich variety of dynamics such as phase transitions, phase multistability, and chaos. In this work we explore an open, spin-1 Dicke model with independent co and counterrotating coupling terms as well as a quadratic Zeeman shift enabling control over the atomic energy-level structure. We investigate the stability of operator and moment equations under two approximations and show the system undergoes phase transitions. To compliment these results, we relax the aforementioned approximations and investigate the system semiclassically. We show evidence of phase transitions to steady-state and oscillatory superradiance in this semiclassical model, as well as the emergence of chaotic dynamics. The varied and complex behaviors admitted by the model highlights the need to more rigorously map its dynamics.

arXiv:2403.01716•Physical Review A•Aug 2, 2024•3 citations

Dicke model

Mor M. Roses, Emanuele G. Dalla Torre

The Dicke model is a fundamental model of quantum optics, which describes the interaction between light and matter. In the Dicke model, the light component is described as a single quantum mode, while the matter is described as a set of two-level systems. When the coupling between the light and matter crosses a critical value, the Dicke model shows a mean-field phase transition to a superradiant phase. This transition belongs to the Ising universality class and was realized experimentally in cavity quantum electrodynamics experiments. Although the superradiant transition bears some analogy with the lasing instability, these two transitions belong to different universality classes.

PLoS ONE•Sep 4, 2020•27 citations

Comments on "Controlling Discrete and Continuous Symmetries in Superradiant Phase Transitions with Circuit QED Systems "

Yu Yi-Xiang, Jinwu Ye, W. M. Liu +1 more

Recently, the authors of the commented PRL presented the $ N=\infty $ solution of the $ U(1)/Z_2 $ Dicke model studied by us previously. Here we point out that (1) The authors missed an important transformation relating the two parameter regimes, so their separate discussions on the two regimes is redundant. (2) Both $ N=\infty $ classical limit and $ 1/N $ quantum fluctuations have been achieved in two of our previously published papers. It is the $ 1/N $ quantum fluctuations which lead to the non-trivial new quantum phenomena. In view of only a few $ N=2\sim 9 $ qubits inside a circuit QED microwave cavity, they can be tested in near future experiments. (3) Several possible experimental implementations of the $ U(1)/Z_2 $ Dicke model have been proposed before and recently experimentally realized.

arXiv:1506.06382•Jun 21, 2015•1 citation

Adequacy of the Dicke model in cavity QED: A counter-no-go statement

András Vukics, P. Domokos

The long-standing debate whether the phase transition in the Dicke model can be realized with dipoles in electromagnetic fields is still an unsettled one. The well-known statement often referred to as the ``no-go theorem'' asserts that the so-called ${A}^{2}$ term, missing from the Dicke model, is relevant and prevents the system from undergoing a phase transition. At variance with this common belief, in this paper we prove that the Dicke model does give a proper description of the interaction of light field with the internal excitation of atoms. The phase transition and the spontaneous formation of a transverse-electric mean field cannot be excluded by principle. We point out that the proper treatment of the single-mode approximation is crucial, wherefore we present a systematic derivation of the dipole gauge inside a perfect Fabry-P\'erot cavity from first principles. Besides the impact on the debate around the Dicke phase transition, such a cleanup of the theoretical ground of cavity QED is important because currently there are many emerging experimental approaches to reach strong or even ultrastrong coupling between dipoles and photons, which demand a correct treatment of the Dicke model parameters.

arXiv:1206.0752•Physical Review A•Nov 6, 2012•68 citations

Introduction to the Dicke Model: From Equilibrium to Nonequilibrium, and Vice Versa

Peter Kirton, Mor M. Roses, Jonathan Keeling +1 more

Abstract The Dicke model describes the coupling between a quantized cavity field and a large ensemble of two‐level atoms. When the number of atoms tends to infinity, this model can undergo a transition to a superradiant phase, belonging to the mean‐field Ising universality class. The superradiant transition was first predicted for atoms in thermal equilibrium and was recently realized with a quantum simulator made of atoms in an optical cavity, subject to both dissipation and driving. This progress report offers an introduction to some theoretical concepts relevant to the Dicke model, reviewing the critical properties of the superradiant phase transition and the distinction between equilibrium and nonequilibrium conditions. In addition, it explains the fundamental difference between the superradiant phase transition and the more common lasing transition. This report mostly focuses on the steady states of atoms in single‐mode optical cavities, but it also mentions some aspects of real‐time dynamics, as well as other quantum simulators, including superconducting qubits, trapped ions, and using spin–orbit coupling for cold atoms. These realizations differ in regard to whether they describe equilibrium or nonequilibrium systems.

arXiv:1805.09828•Advanced Quantum Technologies•Oct 16, 2018•373 citations

The Dicke model in quantum optics: Dicke model revisited

B. M. Garraway

A short review of recent developments of the Dicke model in quantum optics is presented. The focus is on the model in a cavity at zero temperature and in the rotating wave approximation. Topics discussed include spectroscopic structures, the giant quantum oscillator, entanglement and phase transitions.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Feb 14, 2011•401 citations
Dicke models are important caricatures of non-relativistic quantum electrodynamics (QED). The rigorous results on superradiance in closed and open Dicke models achieved 50 years ago by Lieb and Hepp still drive modern experimental and theoretical research in cavity QED and will be reviewed in this essay, together with more recent developments.
The Dicke model is a staple of theoretical cavity quantum electrodynamics (cavity QED), describing the interaction between an ensemble of atoms and a single radiation mode of an optical cavity. It is studied both quantum mechanically and semiclassically for two-level atoms, and demonstrates a rich variety of dynamics such as phase transitions, phase multistability, and chaos. In this work we explore an open, spin-1 Dicke model with independent co and counterrotating coupling terms as well as a quadratic Zeeman shift enabling control over the atomic energy-level structure. We investigate the stability of operator and moment equations under two approximations and show the system undergoes phase transitions. To compliment these results, we relax the aforementioned approximations and investigate the system semiclassically. We show evidence of phase transitions to steady-state and oscillatory superradiance in this semiclassical model, as well as the emergence of chaotic dynamics. The varied and complex behaviors admitted by the model highlights the need to more rigorously map its dynamics.
The Dicke model is a fundamental model of quantum optics, which describes the interaction between light and matter. In the Dicke model, the light component is described as a single quantum mode, while the matter is described as a set of two-level systems. When the coupling between the light and matter crosses a critical value, the Dicke model shows a mean-field phase transition to a superradiant phase. This transition belongs to the Ising universality class and was realized experimentally in cavity quantum electrodynamics experiments. Although the superradiant transition bears some analogy with the lasing instability, these two transitions belong to different universality classes.
Recently, the authors of the commented PRL presented the $ N=\infty $ solution of the $ U(1)/Z_2 $ Dicke model studied by us previously. Here we point out that (1) The authors missed an important transformation relating the two parameter regimes, so their separate discussions on the two regimes is redundant. (2) Both $ N=\infty $ classical limit and $ 1/N $ quantum fluctuations have been achieved in two of our previously published papers. It is the $ 1/N $ quantum fluctuations which lead to the non-trivial new quantum phenomena. In view of only a few $ N=2\sim 9 $ qubits inside a circuit QED microwave cavity, they can be tested in near future experiments. (3) Several possible experimental implementations of the $ U(1)/Z_2 $ Dicke model have been proposed before and recently experimentally realized.
The long-standing debate whether the phase transition in the Dicke model can be realized with dipoles in electromagnetic fields is still an unsettled one. The well-known statement often referred to as the ``no-go theorem'' asserts that the so-called A2{A}^{2}A2 term, missing from the Dicke model, is relevant and prevents the system from undergoing a phase transition. At variance with this common belief, in this paper we prove that the Dicke model does give a proper description of the interaction of light field with the internal excitation of atoms. The phase transition and the spontaneous formation of a transverse-electric mean field cannot be excluded by principle. We point out that the proper treatment of the single-mode approximation is crucial, wherefore we present a systematic derivation of the dipole gauge inside a perfect Fabry-P\'erot cavity from first principles. Besides the impact on the debate around the Dicke phase transition, such a cleanup of the theoretical ground of cavity QED is important because currently there are many emerging experimental approaches to reach strong or even ultrastrong coupling between dipoles and photons, which demand a correct treatment of the Dicke model parameters.
Abstract The Dicke model describes the coupling between a quantized cavity field and a large ensemble of two‐level atoms. When the number of atoms tends to infinity, this model can undergo a transition to a superradiant phase, belonging to the mean‐field Ising universality class. The superradiant transition was first predicted for atoms in thermal equilibrium and was recently realized with a quantum simulator made of atoms in an optical cavity, subject to both dissipation and driving. This progress report offers an introduction to some theoretical concepts relevant to the Dicke model, reviewing the critical properties of the superradiant phase transition and the distinction between equilibrium and nonequilibrium conditions. In addition, it explains the fundamental difference between the superradiant phase transition and the more common lasing transition. This report mostly focuses on the steady states of atoms in single‐mode optical cavities, but it also mentions some aspects of real‐time dynamics, as well as other quantum simulators, including superconducting qubits, trapped ions, and using spin–orbit coupling for cold atoms. These realizations differ in regard to whether they describe equilibrium or nonequilibrium systems.