PHYSICAL REVIEW A 89, 043815 (2014)

Optical cavity quantum electrodynamics with dark-state polaritons

G. W. Lin,1,* Jiangbin Gong,2 J. Yang,1 Y. H. Qi,1 X. M. Lin,3 Y. P. Niu,1, and S. Q. Gong1,
1

Department of Physics, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai 200237, China
Department of Physics and Centre for Computational Science and Engineering, National University of Singapore 117542, Singapore
3
College of Physics and Energy, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350108, China
(Received 22 October 2013; revised manuscript received 13 January 2014; published 11 April 2014)
We present a theoretical scheme to study optical cavity quantum electrodynamics using dark-state polaritons.
Exploiting the highly tunable lifetimes of the photons in the form of cavity dark-state polaritons, we push
the strong coupling of single optical photons to an effective two-level emitter in a Rydberg-blockade atomic
ensemble to an unprecedented regime. The resulting JaynesCummings model with extremely strong coupling is
of fundamental interest. We discuss applications in controlled quantum Rabi oscillation, nonlinear spectroscopy of
the Jaynes-Cummings ladder, as well as the generation of nonclassical states, all based on light-matter interactions
in the optical domain.
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.89.043815

PACS number(s): 42.50.Pq, 42.50.Ct, 42.50.Dv, 42.50.Gy

I. INTRODUCTION

Strong coupling of single photons to a single quantized

emitter is the core of cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED)
[1]. By employing a high-Q cavity, the photons inside a cavity
may bounce for a considerable period, during which coherent
quantum manipulations can be performed. This possibility
has led to fundamental studies of cavity QED in both the
microwave and optical domains [28]. To further prolong
the optical cavity photon lifetimes is of both theoretical
and experimental interest to quantum optics and quantum
information processing. Along this avenue we propose a
scheme based on optical cavity dark-state polaritons (DSPs)
and Rydberg blockade [9]. First, the lifetimes of photons in
the form of DSP are highly tunable by an external control
field. Second, an effective two-level emitter emerges when
the photons are coupled with a Rydberg-blockade atomic
ensemble. The effective coupling thus achieved may be
described by the standard JaynesCummings model (JCM)
[10], and it is found that the strong-coupling values of critical
photon number n0 and critical emitter number N0 can, in
principle, far surpass the typical values achievable in current
state-of-the-art optical cavities [3,5,6].
Electromagnetic-induced transparency (EIT) [11] makes a
resonant, opaque medium transparent and also slows down the
group velocities of the light traveling in the medium. DSP due
to EIT were first discussed by Fleischhauer and Lukin [12].
They show that when a quantum field pulse is in the form
of DSP, its group velocity can be effectively manipulated by
changing a control field. By following this seminal work [12],
DSPs have been successfully demonstrated in experiments for
storage and retrieval of photons [13], single-photon filters
[14], and single-photon switches [15,16]. Based on these
well-known theoretical and experimental developments, we
consider the coupling between single photons in the form of
optical cavity DSP and an effective two-level emitter in a
Rydberg-blocked atomic ensemble. As shown below, such a

gwlin@ecust.edu.cn
niuyp@ecust.edu.cn

sqgong@ecust.edu.cn

1050-2947/2014/89(4)/043815(5)

coupling under appropriate conditions can be described by the

JCM [10], HJC = g0 (||b0 + ||b0 ), with the coupling

strength g0 way larger than a suppressed cavity decay rate

and the atomic spontaneous emission rate. Here b0 and b0

are the DSP annihilation and creation operators and ||
(, = ,) denotes the flip operator of the effective two-level
emitter. Qualitatively, the built-in advantage of our scheme (as
compared with previous approaches to the study of optical
cavity QED [3,5,6]) lies first in the increased lifetimes of the
cavity photons in the form of DSPs or, alternatively, the slowed
group velocities of the photons bouncing back and forth in the
cavity and hence the narrowed cavity-linewidth of dark-state
resonances [1720]. To illustrate the immediate applications of
our scheme, we discuss controlled quantum Rabi oscillations,
nonlinear spectroscopy of the JaynesCummings ladder, and
the generation of highly nonclassical states.
II. SYNTHESIZING THE JAYNESCUMMINGS MODEL

The basic component in our scheme is an ensemble of

N cold Rydberg atoms trapped in an optical cavity, as
illustrated in Fig. 1(a). Two stable ground states |g and
|s are resonantly coupled to the excited state |e by the
cavity mode a anda classical control field [Fig. 1(b)], with
Rabi frequencies N g and c (here we have assumed that
almost all atoms are in the reservoir state |g at all times
[12]). This hence forms the standard -type EIT configuration

[11] with the interaction Hamiltonian HEIT = N gSe a +

Ss Se c + H.c., where the collective atomic operators S =

N
1
|j gj |, with  = s,e,ra (the notation Sra will
N
j =1
appear later). Define two cavity polariton modes: a DSP mode
b0 = a cos sin Ss , and a bright-state polariton mode
b1 = a sin
, with cos = c (Ng 2 + 2c )1/2 and
+ Ss cos
sin = N g(Ng 2 + 2c )1/2 . Then the Hamiltonian HEIT can
be rewritten in terms of b0 and b1 [21]:



= Ng 2 + 2c (Se b1 + Se b1 ).
(1)
HEIT
This coupling between bright polariton mode b1 and the
excited state leads to two normal modes A with frequencies
E = (Ng 2 + 2c )1/2 . Note that DSPs are decoupled from

043815-1

2014 American Physical Society

LIN, GONG, YANG, QI, LIN, NIU, AND GONG

PHYSICAL REVIEW A 89, 043815 (2014)

conditions, one arrives at the following effective Hamiltonian:

HJC = g0 (||b0 + ||b0 ),

(2)

with g0 = R sin . When the photon number n inside the

cavity is much smaller than the atom number N , the dark-state
polariton possesses bosonic commutation relations [12] and
the effective Hamiltonian HJC then represents the JCM.
III. EMERGENCE OF STRONG-COUPLING REGIME

There are two dominant dissipative channels for the

DSP mode b0 : cavity leakage through the mirrors and the
decoherence between states |s and |g. The first is well
described by the input-output Hamiltonian [22]
  +
Hin-out =
d ()()
FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) Schematic setup of optical cavity QED
with DSP in a Rydberg-blocked atomic ensemble. (b) Atomic level
structure and transitions. (c) Possible transitions described by the
full Hamiltonian H : The bright-state polariton (denoted by b1 ) is
simultaneously coupled to the excited state |e and the Rydberg level
|ra , whereas the dark-state polariton (denoted by b0 ) is coupled
only to the Rydberg level |ra . (d) The synthesized JCM. Strong
coupling between the bright polariton and |e leads to the formation
of two normal modes A , which are effectively decoupled from the
Rydberg level |ra . With two-atom excitations to the Rydberg level
|ra  blocked, the resonant coupling of the dark-state polariton to
an effective two-level emitter then emerges as the JCM interaction,
which can be switched on or off by two control states: a ground state
|f  and a second Rydberg state |rb .

=L,R

 
i
+
=L,R



d
 ()a + H.c. ,
2

where () is the annihilation operator of the external field

which satisfies the commutation relation [(), ( )] =
(  ), L (R ) denotes the field on the left (right) side of
the cavity, and is the bare cavity decay rate without an EIT
medium. In terms of the polariton basis, Hin-out becomes [21]
  +

Hin-out =
d ()()
=L,R

 
i




H
EIT

d ()

=L,R

the excited state because

does not contain b0 . We assume
a parameter regime with N g  c or cos( ) 1. That is,
in the DSP language, light group velocity vg = c cos2 [12]
is much slower than light velocity c in free space (a vacuum).
This parameter regime is different from that in Ref. [7] for
studies of the Kerr effect with atomic ensembles.
Next we consider a Rydberg level |ra  which is resonantly
coupled to level |s by external laser fields with (two-photon)
Rabi frequency R [Fig. 1(b)]. The interaction between the
Rydberg atoms contribute an additional large energy aa if
two atoms are excited to |ra  [9]. By using the above-defined
collective atomic operators and Ss = b1 cos b0 sin , the
Hamiltonian for this additional coupling and Rydberg block

ade is found to be HI = aa Sra Sra Sra Sra + [R Sra (b1 cos
b0 sin ) + H.c.], yielding a full-system Hamiltonian H =

HEIT
+ HI . Figure 1(c) depicts this full Hamiltonian in the
polariton picture. In particular, because we have chosen
cos( ) 1, it is straightforward to realize the condition
|E |  R cos . As such, the interference of excitation
pathways through the doublet modes of A [see Fig. 1(d)]
cancels the coupling of the Rydberg level |ra  to b1 . As
a theoretical approximation, we can then discard the term

[R Sra b1 cos + H.c.] in H . Furthermore, if R sin aa ,

only single-atom excitation to |ra  is allowed [9]. Hence only
one or zero Rydberg excitation to |ra , whose configuration
is denoted by | or |, needs to be considered. Under these

0
b0 +
2


1
b1 + H.c. ,
2

(3)

with 0 = cos2 and 1 = sin2 . Under the condition

(Ng 2 + 2c )1/2  0 ,1 ,e (e denotes the spontaneous emission rate of state |e), the DSP mode b0 and the two normal
modes A+ and A due to the formation of bright-state
polaritons can be considered as three well-separated modes
independently coupled to the continuous fields outside the

cavity. The expressions of Hin-out and Hin-out
then suggest that
the DSP mode b0 dissipates in the same way as a bare cavity
mode, except for a modified cavity leakage rate 0 = cos2 .
This process can hence be describe by the master equation [22]

t 0 = 0 (2b0 0 b0 b0 b0 0 0 b0 b0 ),

(4)

where 0 is the reduced density operator associated with the

DSP mode. Since our EIT regime has cos 1, the cavityphoton lifetime t0 1/0 = 1/( cos2 ) is now significantly
prolonged. As a physical understanding, this is precisely
because of the slowed light group velocity, vg = c cos2
[12], which makes it possible for DSP to bounce back and
forth inside a cavity for a much longer period. Regarding the
decoherence between states |s and |g, we note that, for a
cold atomic ensemble, the decoherence time can be up to
hundreds of milliseconds [23]. Thus we can ignore this second
dissipation channel so long as our considerations are within
such a decoherence time scale.

043815-2

OPTICAL CAVITY QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS WITH . . .

In cavity QED, a strong coupling of light-matter interaction

is with regard to various decay or decoherence rates. For our
synthesized JCM we hope to achieve g0  (0 , ), where
denotes the decay rate of a Rydberg state. To examine whether
this is true, we note first 2 kHz [24]. Next we assume
that an optical cavity traps an ensemble of N = 200 1000
cold atoms within the volume V (2 m)3 [25,26]. Typically, the relevant cavity parameters are (gmax ,,e )/(2 )
(25,8,5.2) MHz [27], where gmax is the maximal individual
coupling strength seen by an atom located at the light-intensity
maxima. The blockade interaction energy of the n-s (n > 100)
Rydberg states is aa /(2 ) 200 MHz [24]. Let us now
choose cos = 0.01 and R /(2 ) = 10 MHz, one finds
(g0 ,0 )/(2 ) (10,0.001) MHz, R cos /(2 ) = 0.1 MHz,
and 1 /(2 ) 8 MHz. Choosing even smaller values of cos
would no longer make sense because then the prolonged
photon lifetime t0 = 1/( cos2 ) would be extended beyond
the millisecond regime (the upper boundary of our time
scale is set by 1/ , the lifetime of Rydberg states). For N
atoms resonantly coupled to the cavity mode, the effective
single-atom cavity coupling strength is [20]


N
1
g = 
g2,
N j =1 j
with gj being the atom-cavity coupling strength of atom j .
For N  1, in general the collectively enhanced coupling
strength [26]

 N


gj2  gmax .
N g = 
j =1

In our numerical
experiments we shall use a highly conservative estimate N g = 3gmax . With all these numerical values,
one finds
that all the assumptions for our theory; namely,
|E | N g  (R cos ,0 ,1 ,e ) and g0 aa , are valid
and at the same time a strong-coupling regime defined by
g0  (0 , ) emerges.
To quantitatively characterize the strong coupling of our
synthesized JCM, we calculate three important quantities [3]
from the above three rates g0 , 0 , . Specifically,
n0 =

C 102 103 . Clearly, then, in principle our scheme may

suppress the n0 value to date by 104 and enhance the C
value to date by 105 .
IV. CONTROLLED QUANTUM RABI OSCILLATION

If initially we put DSPs in a Fock state denoted by |n and

prepare the atoms in state |, then the joint atom-cavity state
oscillates
between |n, and |n 1, at the Rabi frequency

2g0 n, with the time-evolving state given by

|(t) = cos( ng0 t)|n, i sin( ng0 t)|n 1,. (8)

This quantum Rabi oscillation is sustained far beyond the bare
cavity lifetime. Furthermore, the Rydberg blockade may be
used to realize a controlled quantum Rabi oscillation. Assume
that there are two atomic control states: a ground state |f 
and a second Rydberg state |rb  [Fig. 1(d)]. A single Rydberg
excitation in the state |rb  will prevent the Rabi oscillation,
because the coupling of the cavity polariton b0 with the
transition | | would be far off resonance under the
Rydberg-blockade interaction [24].
The above picture offers a good test bed to examine our
theoretical assumptions using numerical experiments. In our
numerical calculations we do not adiabatically eliminate the
bright-state polariton mode b1 and the Rydberg blockade is
not assumed to be ideal. Two Rydberg levels |ra  and |rb  with
the same blockade energy are considered. Simulations are
performed using the following master equation for the density
operator of the intracavity system: t = i[H + Hab ,] +
where
0 D(b0 ) + 1 D(b1 ) + D(Sra ) + e D(Se ),
D(A) = 2AA A A A A, with A = (b0 ,b1 ,Sra ,Se ),
and Hab being the extra Rydberg blockade between states
|ra  and |rb  (contributing a blockade energy denoted by
ab ). Our results with appropriate parameters are depicted
in Fig. 2, in terms of the populations in states |2, and
|1, versus time t, with the initial state |2, |f  or
|2, |rb . Perfect quantum Rabi oscillation (persisting for
tens of microseconds before showing considerable damping)
is seen for the first case but almost no population transfer is
seen in the latter case. These numerical results, which are
based on realistic values of system parameters, validate our

(5)

1
|2,|f
|1,|f
|2,|r

0.8

20
2 cos

108 ,
g02
2R

(6)

g02
108 ,
20

(7)

0.6

|1,|r

N0 =

2
2

108 ,
2g02
22R

PHYSICAL REVIEW A 89, 043815 (2014)

C=

0.4
0.2

where the critical polariton number n0 determines the impact of

a single polariton on two-level emitters, the critical number N0
describes how many emitters are required to affect the optical
cavity polaritons, and the cooperativity parameter C = 1/N0 .
Strong coupling requires n0 1 and N0 1 (or C  1). Our
values of n0 , N0 , and C listed above indicates an extremelystrong-coupling regime. Remarkably, present values of n0 ,
N0 , and C achieved in current state-of-the-art optical cavities
[3,5,6] are only n0 104 103 , N0 103 102 , and

0
0

0.02

0.04

0.06

t (s)

FIG. 2. (Color online) Population P of |2, and |1, versus

time t with the initial state |2, |f  or |2, |rb , assuming
that (gmax ,,e )/(2 ) = (25,8,5.2) MHz [27], (aa ,ab , )/(2
)=
(200,200,0.001) MHz [24], R /(2 ) = 10 MHz, N = 200, N g =
3gmax , and cos = 0.01.

043815-3

LIN, GONG, YANG, QI, LIN, NIU, AND GONG

PHYSICAL REVIEW A 89, 043815 (2014)

theory. That is, the full optical cavity system can indeed be
well described by the JCM derived in Eq. (2).
V. NONLINEAR SPECTROSCOPY OF
JAYNESCUMMINGS LADDER

In the absence of any loss, exact diagonalization of the JCM

Hamiltonian in Eq. (2) yields a set of eigenstates

|n = (|n, + |n 1,)/ 2,

(9)

with corresponding energy eigenvalues En, = n0 + g0 n

(0 is cavity frequency). The anharmonicity of Jaynes
Cummings ladder predicts the existence of n-photon resonances at the frequencies

n = (n0 ng0 )/n = 0 g0 / n.

(10)
For n = 1, the states |1 are equivalently observed spectroscopically as the vacuum Rabi splitting. This effect can, at
least in principle, be explained classically as the normal-mode
splitting of two coupled linear oscillators [28]. It has been
suggested that an observation of nonlinear spectroscopy of
JaynesCummings ladder with the square root of photon
number n is sufficient to signal the quantum-mechanical nature
of the cavity mode [29]. This has been clearly demonstrated
in microwave cavity QED [30]. Regarding optical cavity
QED using a single two-level atom, the authors of Ref. [6]
observed some effects of JaynesCummings ladder via some
photon-blockade effect and the work of Ref. [5] showed
the two-photon state |2 which, however, overlaps the onephoton state |1 at one end.
For our synthesized JCM, the effective cavity decay rate
is highly tunable by EIT and as such it is now possible
to control and separate the different peaks of the Jaynes
Cummings ladder, even for n > 2. To that end we study
the transmission through the optical cavity, a quantity proportional to the mean number of DSPs. In Fig. 3, we

show the cavity transmission T b0 b0  as a function of

()/g0 for cos = {0.5,0.1,0.01}, using the steady-state
solution of the master equation, t  = i[HJC + Hdri ,  ] +
0 D(b0 )  + D( )  , where  is the reduced density operator for DSPs and the effective two-level emitter, () =
0 (detuning), = ||, D(A) carries the same meaning

as before, and Hdri = E ei()t b0 + Eei()t b0 [31], with

|3

0.8

0.6
0.4

cos=0.5
cos=0.1
cos=0.01

|2
|4
|1

0.2
0

0.8 0.6
()/g0

0.4

0.2

FIG. 3. (Color online) Cavity transmission T b0 b0  as a function of ()/g0 for cos = {0.5,0.1,0.01}. Other common parameters are /(2 ) = 8 MHz [27], /(2 ) = 0.001 MHz [24],
g0 /(2 ) = 10 MHz, and E/(2 ) = 0.5 MHz.

E being the effective driving-field amplitude. From Fig. 3,

one clearly sees the well-separated multipeak structure of the
JaynesCummings ladder as cos is decreased.
The sharp multipeak structure of the JaynesCummings
ladder afforded by DSPs also represents an alternative means
to control photons by photons [20,32]. It is also interesting to
note a very recent study [33] regarding the all-optical control of
the quantum fluctuations of a light beam using the cavity bright
polaritons rather than DSPs. Because the bright polaritons
are associated with two broad side peaks in the cavity EIT
transmission spectrum [1820], the sharp transmission peaks
obtained here based upon DSPs should motivate a different
route for experimental studies.

VI. GENERATION OF SCHRODINGER

CAT STATE

One can also generate the Schrodinger cat state in the optical
domain using our synthesized JCM. Suppose the atoms
are
initially prepared in the superposition state (|f  + |rb )/ 2
and the DSP mode b0 is prepared in the vacuum state |vac.
Then a classical field is introduced to resonantly drive the DSP,

with a on-resonance driving Hamiltonian Hdri = E b0 + Eb0 .

If the initial state is |f  and under the condition of g0  0 , ,
the resonant driving field will not excite the dark-state
polariton b0 due to normal-mode splitting [3]. If the initial
state is |rb , the JaynesCummings interaction is turned off
by Rydberg blockade, the polariton b0 under the condition
|E|  0 will evolve into a coherent state |, with = Et
and t is the duration of the driving field. So the final state of
this atom-cavity system is in the Schrodinger cat state given
by

|cat = (|f |vac + |rb |)/ 2.

(11)

The size of the Schrodinger cat is expected to be large with the

prolonged cavity photon lifetime. Such kind of Schrodinger
cat states can be useful in understanding many fundamental
topics [34].

VII. CONCLUSIONS

We have presented a theoretical scheme for the study

of optical cavity quantum electrodynamics using DSPs in
a Rydberg-blocked atomic ensemble. Exploiting the long
lifetimes of DSPs and Rydberg blockade, we are able to
push the coupling of single optical photons to an effective
two-level emitter, which is well described by the standard
JCM, to an unprecedented strong regime. The key quality
factors of the synthesized JCM model are given by n0 108 ,
N0 108 , and C 108 . These values far surpass the typical
values achievable in current state-of-the-art optical cavities
[3,5,6]. Our numerical simulations confirm our theoretical
analysis. We have also discussed immediate applications in
quantum optics, including controlled quantum Rabi oscillation, nonlinear spectroscopy of the JaynesCummings ladder,
and the generation of nonclassical states, all in the optical
domain.

043815-4

OPTICAL CAVITY QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS WITH . . .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by the National Natural

Sciences Foundation of China (Grants No. 11204080,

[1] H. J. Kimble, Phys. Scr. 76, 127 (1998).

[2] J. M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73,
565 (2001).
[3] R. Miller, T. E. Northup, K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, A. D.
Boozer, and H. J. Kimble, J. Phys. B 38, 551 (2005).
[4] H. J. Kimble, Nature (London) 453, 1023 (2008).
[5] I. Schuster, A. Kubanek, A. Fuhrmanek, T. Puppe, P. W. H.
Pinkse, K. Murr, and G. Rempe, Nat. Phys. 4, 382 (2008).
[6] K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, R. Miller, A. D. Boozer, T. E.
Northup, and H. J. Kimble, Nature (London) 436, 87 (2005).
[7] For studies of the Kerr effect in cavity QED with atomic
ensembles, see A. Imamoglu, H. Schmidt, G. Woods, and M.
Deutsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1467 (1997); ,81, 2836 (1998);
P. Grangier, D. F. Walls, and K. M. Gheri, ibid. 81, 2833 (1998).
[8] For studies of the Kerr effect in cavity QED with single atom,
see S. Rebic, S. M. Tan, A. S. Parkins, and D. F. Walls, J. Opt.
B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 1, 490 (1999); M. J. Werner
and A. Imamoglu, Phys. Rev. A 61, 011801 (1999); A. D.
Greentree, J. A. Vaccaro, S. R. de Echaniz, A. V. Durrant, and
J. P. Marangos, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 2, 252
(2000).
[9] M. D. Lukin, M. Fleischhauer, R. Cote, L. M. Duan,
D. Jaksch, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 037901
(2001).
[10] E. T. Jaynes and F. W. Cummings, Proc. IEEE 51, 89 (1963);
B. W. Shore and P. L. Knight, J. Mod. Opt. 40, 1195 (1993).
[11] S. E. Harris, Phys. Today 50 (7), 36 (1997).
[12] M. Fleischhauer and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5094
(2000).
[13] M. D. Eisaman, A. Andre, F. Massou, M. Fleischhauer, A. S.
Zibrov, and M. D. Lukin, Nature (London) 438, 837 (2005).
[14] T. Peyronel, O. Firstenberg, Q. Y. Liang, S. Hofferberth, A. V.
Gorshkov, T. Pohl, M. D. Lukin, and V. Vuletic, Nature (London)
488, 57 (2012).
[15] W. Chen, K. M. Beck, R. Bucker, M. Gullans, M. D. Lukin,
H. Tanji-Suzuki, and V. Vuletic, Science 341, 768 (2013).
[16] S. Baur, D. Tiarks, G. Rempe, and S. Durr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112,
073901 (2014).
[17] M. D. Lukin, M. Fleishhauer, M. O. Scully, and V. L.
Velichansky, Opt. Lett. 23, 295 (1998); H. Wang, D. J. Goorskey,
W. H. Burkett, and M. Xiao, ibid. 25, 1732 (2000).

PHYSICAL REVIEW A 89, 043815 (2014)

No. 11274112, and No. 61275215), the Fundamental Research

Funds for the Central Universities (Grants No. WM1214019,
No. WM1114024, and No. WM1313003).

[18] G. Hernandez, J. P. Zhang, and Y. F. Zhu, Phys. Rev. A 76,

053814 (2007).
[19] H. B. Wu, J. Gea-Banacloche, and M. Xiao, Phys. Rev. Lett.
100, 173602 (2008).
[20] M. Mucke, E. Figueroa, J. Bochmann, C. Hahn, K. Murr,
S. Ritter, C. J. Villas-Boas, and G. Rempe, Nature (London)
465, 755 (2010).
[21] G. W. Lin, J. Yang, X. M. Lin, Y. P. Niu, and S. Q. Gong,
arXiv:1308.3007.
[22] D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Optics (Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 1994).
[23] A. I. Lvovsky, B. C. Sanders, and W. Titte, Nat. Photonics 3,
706 (2009).
[24] M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mlmer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82,
2313 (2010).
[25] N. Brahms, T. Botter, S. Schreppler, D. W. C. Brooks,
and D. M. Stamper-Kurn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 133601
(2012).
[26] Y. Colombe, T. Steinmetz, G. Dubois, F. Linke, D. Hunger, and
J. Reichel, Nature (London) 450, 272 (2007).
[27] J. McKeever, A. Boca, A. D. Boozer, J. R. Buck, and H. J.
Kimble, Nature (London) 425, 268 (2003).
[28] Y. Zhu, D. J. Gauthier, S. E. Morin, Q. Wu, H. J. Carmichael,
and T. W. Mossberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2499 (1990).
[29] H. J. Carmichael, P. Kochan, and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. Lett.
77, 631 (1996).
[30] J. M. Fink, M. Goppl, M. Baur, R. Bianchetti, P. J. Leek,
A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Nature (London) 454, 315 (2008).
[31] Under the condition (Ng 2 + 2c )1/2  0 ,1 ,e , the driving
frequencies for the dark-state polariton and the bright-state
polaritons are well separated, thus one can drive independently
the dark-state polaritons by an external classical field.
[32] T. Kampschulte, W. Alt, S. Brakhane, M. Eckstein, R. Reimann,
A. Widera, and D. Meschede, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 153603
(2010).
[33] J. A. Souza, E. Figueroa, H. Chibani, C. J. Villas-Boas, and
G. Rempe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 113602 (2013).
[34] M. Brune, E. Hagley, J. Dreyer, X. Matre, A. Maali,
C. Wunderlich, J. M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 77, 4887 (1996); S. Haroche, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 1083
(2013).

043815-5