it has long been recognized that when an atom is situated in a material medium , the local electromagnetic field acting on it differs from the macroscopic one due to the gaps between the atom and the surrounding medium atoms , which are ignored on a coarse - grained macroscopic scale @xcite .
accounting for the difference between the two fields hence requires a correction  the local - field correction .
classical calculations of local - field effects , which typically have their origin in near dipole - dipole interactions , can be found in textbooks ( see , e.g. , ref .
@xcite ) . in quantum theory , investigations of local - field effects
are often related to the problem of the spontaneous decay of an excited guest atom embedded in a ( dielectric ) host .
local - field effects in spontaneous decay have been studied , e.g. , for crystals @xcite and disordered dielectrics @xcite on the basis on microscopic models for coupled atomic dipoles .    in macroscopic descriptions , local - field effects
are frequently taken into account by regarding the guest atom as being enclosed in a virtual @xcite or real ( spherical ) cavity @xcite surrounded by the medium , with the cavity size being small compared to the relevant transition wavelength .
the cavity in the former model is virtual in the sense that it does not perturb the macroscopic field .
it is filled by the atoms comprising the medium , which produce no net effect at the central position in important special cases such as cubic or random structures . in the latter model ,
the field is modified by the presence of the cavity , which is an empty region containing only the guest atom .
microscopic models often tend to agree with the virtual - cavity results @xcite , while many recent experiments on spontaneous emission in dielectrics support the real - cavity model @xcite .
it has been presumed that while the virtual - cavity model applies to interstitial atoms , the real - cavity model is specific to substitutional atoms , and that the case of substitutional atoms occurs prevalently for impurity atoms in disordered dielectrics  @xcite .    since in the approaches to the local - field effects
, the host medium has typically been assumed to be a bulk medium that extends homogeneously to infinity , the question of the effect of the size and shape of the host medium on the local field has arisen . in a macroscopic approach
, the spontaneous - decay rate of an excited atom in some free - space region can be given in terms of the imaginary part of the green tensor of the macroscopic maxwell equations , which characterizes the ( macroscopic ) environment of the atom .
this relation in principle allows for including local - field corrections for atoms embedded in arbitrary material configurations by assuming a real ( spherical ) cavity surrounding the atom and calculating the corresponding green tensor . using the real - cavity model ,
toma @xcite studied the local - field correction to the spontaneous - decay rate of an excited atom , which is located at the center of a dispersing and absorbing dielectric sphere .
reformulating the result by representing it in a form , which does not explicitly refer to the highly symmetric system considered , he made the conjecture that it may also remain valid beyond the specific example and hence also apply to other locations of the atom and other shapes of the host body .    based on a numerical computation of the respective green tensors , rahmani and
bryant @xcite considered the case of an atom at an arbitrary location within a dielectric sphere or a dielectric cube . comparing their results for the dielectric sphere including the local - field correction with earlier results disregarding the local - field correction @xcite , they suggested a rate formula , which in the case of weakly absorbing material corresponds to toma s formula .
however , since their approach relies heavily on numerical calculations , it can not produce explicit expressions for the quantities that are related to the local - field correction .
the exact analytical evaluations of the green tensors of realistic systems which have finite sizes and include a cavity can be very cumbersome . in this paper , we present an attempt to overcome this difficulty by writing the green tensor as a born series in terms of the susceptibility , where in many situations one can restrict oneself to several leading - order terms .
in particular , we show that to linear order the spontaneous - decay rate of a guest atom in a dielectric host body can be separated into a term representing the local - field correction to the decay rate in free space and a term related to the scattering green tensor of the body without the atom  a result which exactly corresponds to toma s conjecture mentioned above .
furthermore , we show that for atoms which are situated at the interior of a macroscopic body toma s conjecture remains valid beyond the linear order .
we illustrate the theory by discussing in detail the case of an atom embedded in a spherical dielectric body .    the paper is organized as follows .
the basic equations for the spontaneous - decay rate and the born expansion of the green tensor determining the rate are given in sec .
[ sec_be ] .
they are used in sec .
[ subsec_rc ] to study the problem of the local - field corrected decay rate within the frame of the real - cavity model , and a proof of toma s formula is given .
the examples of an atom embedded in a bulk dielectric medium or in a dielectric sphere are examined in sec .
[ sec_ex ] , followed by a summary ( sec .  [ sum ] ) .
consider an excited two - level electric - dipole emitter , henceforth referred to as an atom , which is positioned at @xmath0 and surrounded by dispersing and absorbing dielectric bodies .
the spontaneous - decay rate can be given in the form of @xcite @xmath1 where @xmath2 and @xmath3 are the ( real ) dipole matrix element and ( shifted ) frequency of the relevant atomic transition , respectively , and @xmath4 @xmath5 @xmath6 .
the green tensor of the bodies , @xmath7 , satisfies the equation @xmath8 ( @xmath9 , unit tensor ) together with the boundary condition @xmath10 where @xmath11 is the frequency- and space - dependent complex permittivity which satisfies the kramers  kronig relations .
note that satisfaction of the boundary condition  ( [ e4b ] ) is ensured by assuming @xmath12 @xmath13 @xmath14 .
equation ( [ e3 ] ) always applies when the atom is placed in some free - space region . separating the green tensor into bulk and scattering parts @xmath15 and @xmath16 , respectively , @xmath17 and taking into account that in the case where the bulk part refers to free space , the relation @xmath18 holds ( see , e.g. , ref .
@xcite ) , we may rewrite eq .
( [ e3 ] ) as @xmath19 where @xmath20 is the spontaneous - decay rate in free space .    if the atom is embedded in a body , application of eq .
( [ e3 ] ) requires special care in two respects .
firstly , the coincidence limit of the bulk part of the green tensor diverges when the permittivity of the body is complex , as is the case in general . only if material absorption can be neglected so that the permittivity can be regarded as being real , @xmath21
@xmath22 @xmath23 , this limit exists , @xmath24 ( see , e.g. , ref .
@xcite ) , leading to @xmath25 secondly , the green tensor of the macroscopic maxwell equations does not account for the fact that the local field felt by the atom is different from the macroscopic one in general .
that is , even if absorption is neglected , the rate formula ( [ eq.10 ] ) is not complete because it lacks the local - field corrections .      to calculate the ( scattering part of the ) green tensor for an arbitrary arrangement of dielectric bodies , it may be helpful to use an appropriate born expansion .
decomposing the permittivity as @xmath26 and assuming that the solution @xmath27 to the equation @xmath28 is known [ where @xmath29 is defined as in eq .
( [ e5 ] ) with @xmath30 instead of @xmath31 , the green tensor can be written in the form of a born series , @xmath32\nonumber\\ & \quad\times   \overline{\bm{g}}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{s}_1,\omega)\!\cdot\ !   \overline{\bm{g}}(\mathbf{s}_1,\mathbf{s}_2,\omega)\!\cdots\ !   \overline{\bm{g}}(\mathbf{s}_k,\mathbf{r}',\omega),\end{aligned}\ ] ] as can be verified using the relationships @xmath33,\\ \label{e11 } \hat{h}\,\delta_k\bm{g}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}',\omega ) = & \;\frac{\omega^2}{c^2}\chi(\mathbf{r},\omega )   \bigl[\delta_{k-1}{\bm{g}}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}',\omega )   \nonumber\\ & \ ; -\delta_k\bm{g}(\mathbf{r},\mathbf{r}',\omega)\bigr ]   \qquad\mbox{for } k>1.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the expansion ( [ e8 ] ) of the green tensor is valid for arbitrarily spatially varying @xmath34 and @xmath35 .
obviously , it may be very useful when @xmath36 can be regarded as being a ( small ) perturbation to @xmath30 such that one makes only a small error by disregarding the higher - order terms .
in particular , this is the case if the bodies are weakly polarizable , as we shall assume in the following .      for weakly polarizable bodies ,
it is natural to regard the susceptibilities of the bodies as a small perturbation to the free - space permittivity @xmath34 @xmath5 @xmath37 @xmath38 @xmath39 , i.e. , @xmath40 @xmath41 @xmath42 .
this means that we focus on frequencies that are sufficiently far from a resonance frequency of the dielectric material .
note that the small ( positive ) imaginary part of @xmath30 ensures that @xmath43 fulfills the boundary condition according to eq .
( [ e4b ] ) so that the spatial integrals in eq .
( [ e9 ] ) converge .
we have ( see , e.g. , ref .
@xcite ) @xmath44 where @xmath45 @xmath46 @xmath5 @xmath47 @xmath48 @xmath49 , @xmath50 @xmath5 @xmath51 , @xmath52 @xmath5 @xmath53 ,
@xmath54 @xmath5 @xmath55 .    separating the green tensor into bulk and scattering parts in accordance with eq .
( [ e14.2 ] ) , assuming the atom to be located in a free - space region such that @xmath56 [ cf .
( [ eq.6 ] ) ] , and applying eq .
( [ e8 ] ) , we may represent the scattering part of the green tensor in the rate formula  ( [ e14.4 ] ) as @xmath57 for @xmath58 and @xmath59 belonging to a free - space region , substitution of eq .
( [ e13 ] ) into eq .
( [ e9 ] ) yields the first- and second - order terms in the born expansion , @xmath60 and @xmath61 , respectively , as follows : @xmath62   e^{i\sqrt{1+i\eta}\,(q+q')}\end{aligned}\ ] ] [ @xmath46 @xmath5 @xmath47 @xmath48 @xmath63 , @xmath54 @xmath5 @xmath55 , @xmath64 @xmath5 @xmath65 , @xmath66 @xmath5 @xmath67 ; @xmath68 @xmath5 @xmath63 @xmath48 @xmath49 , @xmath69 @xmath5 @xmath70 , @xmath71 @xmath5 @xmath72 , @xmath73 @xmath5 @xmath74 , @xmath75   e^{i\sqrt{1+i\eta}\,(q+q')}\nonumber\\ & + \frac{k^7}{64\pi^3}\!\int\!\mathrm{d}^3s_1\ ,   \chi(\mathbf{s}_1,\omega)\ !
\int\!\mathrm{d}^3s_2\,\chi(\mathbf{s}_2,\omega )   e^{i\sqrt{1+i\eta}\,(q_1+q_{12}+q_2 ) }   \nonumber\\ & \quad\times\bigl[a_1a_{12}a_2\bm{i }   -a_1a_{12}b_2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2   -a_1b_{12}a_2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12}\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 }   \nonumber\\ & \qquad -b_1a_{12}a_2\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1\tilde{\bm{u}}_1   + a_1b_{12}b_2(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 }   \!\cdot\!\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2 )   \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12}\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2\nonumber\\ & \qquad + b_1a_{12}b_2(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1   \!\cdot\!\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2 )   \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2   + b_1b_{12}a_2(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1   \!\cdot\!\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 } )   \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 }   \nonumber\\ & \qquad -b_1b_{12}b_2(\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1   \!\cdot\!\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 } )   ( \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_{12 }   \!\cdot\!\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2 )   \tilde{\mathbf{u}}_1\tilde{\mathbf{u}}_2\bigr]\end{aligned}\ ] ] [ @xmath76 @xmath5 @xmath47 @xmath48 @xmath77 , @xmath78 @xmath5 @xmath77 @xmath48 @xmath79 , @xmath80 @xmath5 @xmath79 @xmath48 @xmath49 ; @xmath81 @xmath5 @xmath82 , @xmath83 @xmath5 @xmath84 ,
@xmath85 @xmath5 @xmath86 for @xmath87 @xmath88 @xmath89 .
consider an excited two - level atom embedded in an arbitrary dispersing and absorbing dielectric body characterized by @xmath11 . in order to find the spontaneous - decay rate including local - field corrections , we employ the real - cavity model ,
that is to say , we assume that the atom is located at the center of an empty - space region of the form of a spherical cavity of radius @xmath90 , as sketched in fig .
[ schematic](a ) , where we have denoted the cavity volume by @xmath91 , the volume of the host body without the cavity by @xmath92 ( the overall volume of the host body being @xmath93 @xmath5 @xmath94 ) , and all the remaining space by @xmath95 .
hence , the permittivity of the system changes to @xmath96     into ( b ) @xmath97 and ( c ) @xmath98 ; the dot indicates the position of the guest atom . ]
the cavity radius @xmath90 is a model parameter representing an average distance from the atom to the nearest neighboring atoms constituting the host body ; it has to be determined from other ( preferably microscopic ) calculations or experiments .
note that the real - cavity model is applicable provided that the unperturbed host body is homogeneous ( and isotropic ) in the region where the guest atom is implanted , @xmath99      restricting our attention to the first - order term in the born expansion ( [ e14.6 ] ) , the ( scattering ) green tensor corresponding to @xmath100 can be calculated from eq .
( [ e14.1 ] ) , where after some manipulations one obtains @xmath101\nonumber\\ & \qquad = \bm{g}_\mathrm{c}^{(1 ) }   ( \mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\omega_\mathrm{a } )   + \bm{g}_\mathrm{b}^{(1 ) }   ( \mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\omega_\mathrm{a})\end{aligned}\ ] ] [ @xmath46 @xmath5 @xmath102 @xmath48 @xmath63 , @xmath54 @xmath5 @xmath103 , where , again to linear order in the susceptibility , @xmath104\end{gathered}\ ] ] is the scattering green tensor of a spherical cavity embedded in a bulk medium of susceptibility @xmath105 @xmath106 @xmath107 [ cf .
[ schematic](b ) ] , and @xmath108   \nonumber\\ & -\frac{k_\mathrm{a}^4\chi(\omega_\mathrm{a})}{16\pi^2 }   \int_{b\cup v }   \mathrm{d}^3s\ ,   e^{(2i-\eta)q}\bigl[a^2\bm{i}+(b^2 - 2ab )   \tilde{\mathbf{u}}\tilde{\mathbf{u}}\bigr]\end{aligned}\ ] ] is the scattering part of the green tensor of the host body without the cavity [ cf .
[ schematic](c ) ] .
the result can be verified by applying eq .
( [ e14.2 ] ) [ together with eqs .
( [ e8 ] ) and ( [ e14.1 ] ) ] to the two systems mentioned and using eq .
( [ e15.2 ] ) .
equations ( [ e15.3])([e15.5 ] ) show that @xmath16 in the rate formula ( [ e14.4 ] ) can be written as the sum of two terms , where the first term , @xmath97 , only depends on the cavity radius and the local permittivity of the host body at the position of the atom , whereas the second term , @xmath98 , is determined by the properties of the host body in the absence of the atom .
hence , the term in the decay rate which is proportional to @xmath109 can be regarded as being the local - field correction to the uncorrected term proportional to @xmath110 .
the fact that the local - field correction additively enters the rate formula is due to the linear expansion in @xmath36 .
inspection of the second - order term in the born expansion , eq .
( [ e16 ] ) , indicates that in general , terms depending on both the cavity and the ( unperturbed ) host body will appear which may lead to a breakdown of the additivity .
however , as shown in sec .
[ subsec_con ] , there are situations where a generalization beyond the linear approximation is possible .    equations ( [ e15.4 ] ) and ( [ e15.5 ] ) can be further evaluated by introducing a spherical coordinate system whose origin coincides with the position of the atom , @xmath111 where @xmath112 and @xmath113 , respectively , refer to the inner and outer boundary areas of the integration volumes sketched in figs .
[ schematic](b ) and [ schematic](c ) . performing the radial integral in eq .
( [ e15.4 ] ) , we find , on recalling eq .
( [ e14 ] ) , @xmath114 ( @xmath115 @xmath5 @xmath116 ) with @xmath117   = -\frac{k_\mathrm{a}\chi(\omega_\mathrm{a})}{16\pi^2 }   \int_0^{2\pi}\mathrm{d}\phi\int_0^\pi\mathrm{d}\theta\sin\theta   \biggl\{e^{(2i-\eta)q } \nonumber\\ & \times\biggl[\biggl(\frac{1}{3q^3}-\frac{2i}{3q^2 }   -\frac{5}{3q}+\frac{i}{2}\biggr)\bm{i }   + \biggl(\frac{1}{q^3}-\frac{2i}{q^2}+\frac{3}{q }   -\frac{i}{2}\biggr )   \tilde{\mathbf{s}}\tilde{\mathbf{s}}\biggr ]   \nonumber\\ & \hspace{9ex } + 4i\,\mathrm{ei}[(2i\!-\!\eta)q]\biggl(\frac{1}{3}\bm{i }   -\tilde{\mathbf{s}}\tilde{\mathbf{s}}\biggr)\biggr\}\end{aligned}\ ] ] [ @xmath118 @xmath5 @xmath119 ; @xmath120 @xmath5 @xmath121 ; @xmath122 , exponential integral ] . using the fact that @xmath115 is independent of @xmath123 and @xmath124 as well as the relation @xmath125 from eq .
( [ e19 ] ) we obtain @xmath126 in particular , when the radius of the cavity is much smaller than the atomic transition wavelength , @xmath127 then eq .  ( [ e19.1 ] ) reduces to @xmath128\bm{i}.\ ] ] substitution of this result together with eq .
( [ e19b1 ] ) into eq .
( [ e15.3 ] ) reveals that to linear order in @xmath36 , @xmath129\bm{i }   \\
+ \bm{g}_\mathrm{b}^{(1 ) }   ( \mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\omega_\mathrm{a } )   + o(k_\mathrm{a}r_\mathrm{c}).\end{gathered}\ ] ]    for a homogeneous host body which is star - shaped w.r.t .
the position of the atom ( i.e. , every point on the outer boundary area can be connected to the atomic position by a straight line that lies entirely within the body ) , @xmath98 as given by eq .
( [ e15.5 ] ) can be evaluated in a similar manner . using again spherical coordinates and recalling eq .
( [ e14 ] ) , we may evaluate the radial integrals in eq .
( [ e15.5 ] ) to obtain @xmath130   -\bm{f}_0(0)\nonumber\\ & \quad -\bigl[\lim_{\eta\to 0_+}\lim_{q\to\infty }   \bm{f}_\eta(q)-\bm{f}_0(0)\bigr ]   = \lim_{\eta\to 0_+}\bm{f}_\eta[q_\mathrm{o}(\phi,\theta)]\end{aligned}\ ] ] [ @xmath131 @xmath5 @xmath132 @xmath5 @xmath133 , where henceforth @xmath113 denotes the outer boundaries of the host body .    substituting eq .
( [ e18 ] ) into eq .
( [ e14.4 ] ) , we find that to linear order in @xmath36 the local - field corrected spontaneous - decay rate of an atom within a body can be given as follows : @xmath134 where @xmath135 is the free - space decay rate as given in eq .
( [ e14.5 ] ) , @xmath136 and @xmath137 equations ( [ e24])([e24.2 ] ) are valid for an atom embedded in a weakly polarizable , dispersing and absorbing body of arbitrary size and shape .
note that only @xmath138 takes into account the effect of local - field correction , while @xmath139 , which is simply determined by the scattering part of the green tensor of the host body without the cavity , reflects the uncorrected influence of the size and shape of the body on the decay rate .
in particular , the first two terms in eq .
( [ e24.1 ] ) obviously result from irreversible energy transfer from the atom to the surrounding matter .
if these two terms are dominant over the last one , effectively no radiation is emitted .
we conclude this section by making two remarks concerning the necessary conditions under which eq .
( [ e24 ] ) provides a good approximation to the spontaneous - decay rate .
( i ) the permittivity often appears in the green tensor as a common factor @xmath140 [ cf .
( [ e46 ] ) in sec .  [ subsec_oc ] ] . to be on the conservative side , one should then take @xmath141 [ with @xmath142 @xmath5 @xmath143 rather than @xmath36 as the small parameter .
( ii ) equation ( [ e24.1 ] ) already contains terms of the order of @xmath144 .
thus @xmath144 , not @xmath145 , should be much smaller than unity for the linear approximation to yield a good estimation of the decay rate .
the cavity radius @xmath90 represents the average distance between the atom and the constituents of the body .
for , say , @xmath146 @xmath147 @xmath148 , it is sufficient to require that , so that .      toma @xcite has found that in the special case of an atom situated at the center of a homogenous , dielectric sphere , the real - cavity model ( fig .  [ sphere ] in the case where ) leads to        the relation @xmath149\biggr\}\bm{i}\nonumber\\ & \quad+\biggl(\frac{3\varepsilon}{2\varepsilon+1}\biggr)^2   \bm{g}_\mathrm{b}^{(1 ) }   ( \mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\mathbf{r}_\mathrm{a},\omega_\mathrm{a } )   + o(k_\mathrm{a}r_\mathrm{c}),\end{aligned}\ ] ] @xmath150 @xmath5 @xmath151 , where @xmath152 is the scattering green tensor of the homogeneous dielectric sphere , whose geometry dependence is  for @xmath58 @xmath5 @xmath49 @xmath5 @xmath102 at the sphere center  entirely given by its dependence on the sphere radius @xmath153 . as already mentioned in sec .
[ sec_intro ] , he made the conjecture that this relation might be more generally valid for ( i ) bodies of arbitrary sizes and shapes and ( ii ) arbitrary positions of the atom , provided that the atom is not on the body surface .
let us study the validity of this conjecture in more detail .
it can easily be seen that to linear order in @xmath36 , eq .
( [ e21 ] ) obviously reduces to eq .
( [ e18 ] ) , so the results of sec .  [ linear ] show that in this order the conjecture is true even under the more general conditions of inhomogeneous host bodies , provided that the requirement ( [ e15.2 ] ) for the applicability of the real - cavity model is valid .
moreover , we will demonstrate in the following that eq .
( [ e21 ] ) remains valid beyond the linear order in @xmath36 , provided that the respective host body can be regarded as being homogeneous in the vicinity of the atom , i.e. , @xmath154 with @xmath155 being some small positive number .
we begin with the case of a homogeneous body , in which case satisfaction of the condition ( [ e15.2b ] ) simply ensures that the entire cavity lies inside the body .
we first recall that @xmath156 determines the electric field reaching the point @xmath0 , in which it has originated , after being scattered at the surfaces of inhomogeneity [ cf .
[ schematic](a ) ] . at the cavity surface the electric field
can be separated into two parts , namely , one part that is ( multiply ) reflected at this surface and eventually returns to the point @xmath0 , and one part that is eventually transmitted to the exterior of the cavity .
the contribution due to the reflected part is obviously given by @xmath157 [ cf .
[ schematic](b ) ] , which reads @xcite @xmath158\biggr\}\bm{i}\nonumber\\ & \quad+o(k_\mathrm{a}r_\mathrm{c}).\end{aligned}\ ] ] in an infinitely extended body [ cf .  fig .
[ schematic](b ) ] , the transmitted part at a point @xmath58 outside the cavity is determined by the green tensor @xcite @xmath159 [ @xmath46 @xmath5 @xmath47 @xmath48 @xmath102 , @xmath54 @xmath5 @xmath160 , @xmath161 @xmath5 @xmath162 , and @xmath64 and @xmath66 according to eq .
( [ e14 ] ) ] . the coefficient @xmath163 ( which corresponds to @xmath164 in ref .
@xcite ) is given by @xmath165 '   -[z_0j_1(z_0)]'h_1^{(1)}(z_0)}{j_1(z_0)[z_1h_1^{(1)}(z_1 ) ] '   -\varepsilon[z_0j_1(z_0)]'h_1^{(1)}(z_1)}\,,\ ] ] where @xmath166 @xmath5 @xmath116 , @xmath167 @xmath5 @xmath168 ( the primes denote derivatives w.r.t . @xmath166 and @xmath167 ) , and @xmath169 and @xmath170 are the spherical bessel and hankel functions , respectively
. inspection of eq .
( [ e21e ] ) shows that @xmath171 substitution of this result into eq .
( [ e21d ] ) leads to @xmath172 where @xmath173 is the green tensor of the infinite body without the cavity [ according to eqs .
( [ e13 ] ) and ( [ e14 ] ) with @xmath174 . in other words , the electric field transmitted through the cavity surface to a point outside
the cavity is equal to the field that would be transmitted to the same point in the absence of the cavity , multiplied by a global factor . by means of the general symmetry property ( see ,
e.g. , ref .
@xcite ) @xmath175 we also have @xmath176 i.e. , the electric field transmitted through the cavity surface from an arbitrary point outside the cavity is also equal to the corresponding result in the absence of the cavity , multiplied by the same factor .
for a finite body , the electric field will be ( multiply ) reflected from the body s outer surface , eventually giving rise to a field at @xmath0 . without the cavity , processes of this kind are taken into account by replacing the infinite - body green tensor @xmath177 with its finite - body counterpart @xmath178 . combining this observation with eqs .
( [ e21 g ] ) and ( [ e21i ] ) , we conclude , on recalling the linearity of maxwell s equations , that the electric field which is transmitted though the cavity surface , scattered at the outer body surface , and finally retransmitted into the cavity is given by @xmath179 so combining eqs .
( [ e21c ] ) and ( [ e21j ] ) , we arrive at eq .
( [ e21 ] ) .    in this derivation
, we have disregarded processes involving scattering of the field at the cavity surface from the outside .
processes of this kind can indeed be neglected , because their contributions are of orders higher than @xmath180 . to see this
, note that for a cavity in bulk material [ fig .
[ schematic](b ) ] the field at a point @xmath58 outside the cavity originating in a point @xmath59 outside the cavity via scattering at the cavity surface , is characterized by @xcite @xmath181,\end{gathered}\ ] ] where @xmath182 '   -[z_0j_m(z_0)]'j_m(z_1)}{j_m(z_0)[z_1h_m^{(1)}(z_1 ) ] '   -[z_0j_m(z_0)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_1)}\,,\\ & b_m^n=-\frac{j_m(z_0)[z_1j_m(z_1 ) ] '   -\varepsilon[z_0j_m(z_0)]'j_m(z_1)}{j_m(z_0)[z_1h_m^{(1)}(z_1 ) ] '   -\varepsilon[z_0j_m(z_0)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_1)},\end{aligned}\ ] ] and the tensors @xmath183 and @xmath184 do not depend on @xmath90 . using the relations @xcite
@xmath185,\\ \label{e21n } & h_m^{(1)}(z ) = -\frac{i(2m-1)!!}{z^{m+1 } }   \bigl[1+o(z^2)\bigr],\end{aligned}\ ] ] one can easily show that @xmath186,\quad b_m^n = o\bigl[(k_\mathrm{a}r_\mathrm{c})^{2m+1}\bigr],\ ] ] so eq .
( [ e21k ] ) leads to @xmath187.\ ] ] processes involving reflections of the field at the cavity surface from the outside hence start to contribute in third order of @xmath146 and therefore do not need to be included in eq .
( [ e21 ] ) .
so far we have demonstrated the validity of the relation ( [ e21 ] ) for homogeneous dielectric bodies of arbitrary shapes provided that the atom is situated at the interior of the body , such that the condition ( [ e15.2b ] ) is satisfied .
note that this condition practically coincides with the condition ( [ e15.2 ] ) for the applicability of the real - cavity model .
the arguments given above can be extended to inhomogeneous bodies .
if the condition ( [ e15.2b ] ) is satisfied , one can divide such a body into a more or less small homogeneous part containing the cavity plus an inhomogeneous rest .
equations  ( [ e21 g ] ) , ( [ e21i ] ) , and ( [ e21p ] ) then still describe the propagation of the electric field inside the homogeneous part of the body , and the effect of the inhomogeneous part can be taken into account by the scattering at the ( fictitious ) surface dividing the two parts .
consequently , we are again left with eq .
( [ e21 ] ) .    substituting eq .
( [ e21 ] ) into eq .
( [ e14.4 ] ) and recalling eq .
( [ e14.5 ] ) , we can again cast the local - field corrected spontaneous - decay rate in the form of of eq .
( [ e24 ] ) , where now @xmath188\biggr\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath189 \!\cdot\mathbf{d}_\mathrm{a}\ ] ] [ @xmath150 @xmath5 @xmath190 .
recall that @xmath98 is the ( unperturbed ) scattering part of the green tensor of the host body without the cavity .
needless to say that to linear order in  @xmath36 , eqs .
( [ e22.2 ] ) and ( [ e22.2b ] ) reduce to eqs .
( [ e24.1 ] ) and ( [ e24.2 ] ) , respectively .
in particular in the case of weakly absorbing matter , it may be sufficient to retain in eqs .
( [ e22.2 ] ) and ( [ e22.2b ] ) only terms to linear order in @xmath191 . from eqs .
( [ e24 ] ) , ( [ e22.2 ] ) , and ( [ e22.2b ] ) it then follows that when @xmath192 then @xmath193 can be given in the form @xmath194 where @xmath195 and @xmath196 is the uncorrected decay rate as given by eq .
( [ eq.10 ] ) with @xmath156 @xmath106 @xmath197 .
rahmani and bryant @xcite concluded from a numerical computation of the green tensor of a dielectric sphere that contains a ( small ) empty sphere at an arbitrary position inside the material that the local - field corrected spontaneous decay rate has the form @xmath193
@xmath5 @xmath198 @xmath38 @xmath199 , where the shift term @xmath199 is due to absorption . comparing with eq .
( [ eq.61 ] ) [ together with eq .
( [ eq.62 ] ) ] , we see that this is indeed the case when the effect of absorption is sufficiently weak and in particular , the inequality ( [ eq.60 ] ) holds .
however , from eqs .
( [ e24 ] ) , ( [ e22.2 ] ) , and ( [ e22.2b ] ) it is clearly seen that in general , @xmath193 can not be given in the form assumed in ref .
note that already the analytical solution for the special case considered in ref .
@xcite implies that this form can not be true in general .
in the case of bulk material , we have @xmath98 @xmath5 @xmath14 , so eq .  ( [ e24 ] ) simplifies to @xmath200 where @xmath201 is given by eq .
( [ e22.2 ] ) @xcite , which to linear order in @xmath36 reduces to eq .
( [ e24.1 ] ) .
in particular , when material absorption can be neglected , @xmath150 @xmath22 @xmath202 , we simply have  @xcite @xmath203 [ which follows directly from eq .
( [ eq.61 ] ) with @xmath196 @xmath5 @xmath204 , cf .
( [ eq.10 ] ) ] .
note that in this case the virtual - cavity model leads to @xmath205 ( see , e.g. , ref .
it is not difficult to see that to linear order in @xmath36 both eq .  ( [ e0 ] ) and eq .  ( [ e0a ] )
lead to @xmath206\gamma_0,\ ] ] i.e. , the first - order theory for the spontaneous decay rate does not distinguish between the virtual- and the real - cavity model @xcite , provided that absorption can be disregarded .
let us consider an atom in a homogeneous dielectric sphere as sketched in fig .
[ sphere ] and first calculate the spontaneous - decay rate to linear order in @xmath36 . in particular , we need to calculate @xmath139 as given by eq .
( [ e24.2 ] ) with @xmath98 from eq .
( [ e19b2 ] ) together with eq .
( [ e19 ] ) . noting that @xmath207\ ] ] ( cf .
[ sphere ] ) is independent of @xmath124 , performing the @xmath124-integral , and using the fact that @xmath208 @xmath5 @xmath209 for a radially ( @xmath210 ) oriented dipole and @xmath208 @xmath5 @xmath211 for a tangentially ( @xmath212 ) oriented dipole , we find @xmath213,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath214   e^{(2i-\eta)q_\mathrm{o}}\nonumber\\ & + 4i\biggl(\frac{1}{3}-z\biggr )   \mathrm{ei}[(2i-\eta)q_\mathrm{o}],\\[1ex ] \label{e28 } f_\eta^\parallel(q_\mathrm{o},z )   = & \ ; f_\eta^\perp[q_\mathrm{o},(1-z)/2],\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath131 according to eq .
( [ e25 ] ) , with @xmath215 being replaced by  @xmath216 .    in order to exactly calculate @xmath139 [ eq .  ( [ e22.2b ] ) ] , we make use of the exact green tensor for a dielectric sphere as given in ref .
@xcite , leading to @xmath217 ^ 2 \biggr\},\end{gathered}\ ] ] @xmath218 }   { ( nk_\mathrm{a}l_\mathrm{a})\mathrm{d}l_\mathrm{a}}\biggr)^2   \biggr]\biggr\},\end{gathered}\ ] ] where @xmath219 '   -[z_1h_m^{(1)}(z_1)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_0 ) }   { \varepsilon j_m^{(1)}(z_1)[z_0h_m^{(1)}(z_0 ) ] '   -[z_1j_m^{(1)}(z_1)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_0)}\,,\\ \label{e37 } & c^m_m=-\frac{h_m^{(1)}(z_1)[z_0h_m^{(1)}(z_0 ) ] '   -[z_1h_m^{(1)}(z_1)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_0 ) }   { j_m^{(1)}(z_1)[z_0h_m^{(1)}(z_0 ) ] '   -[z_1j_m^{(1)}(z_1)]'h_m^{(1)}(z_0)}\,,\end{aligned}\ ] ] with @xmath166 @xmath106 @xmath220 , @xmath167 @xmath106 @xmath221 .      to compare the exact decay rate [ eq .
( [ e24 ] ) together with eqs .
( [ e14.5 ] ) , and ( [ e22.2 ] ) as well as eqs .
( [ e34 ] ) and/or ( [ e35 ] ) ] with the decay rate obtained in the linear born approximation [ eq .
( [ e24 ] ) together with eqs .
( [ e14.5 ] ) , ( [ e24.1 ] ) , and ( [ e26 ] ) ] ,
let us consider , for simplicity , the case where the atom is positioned at the center of the sphere .
setting @xmath222 @xmath5 @xmath14 and hence , in eqs .
( [ e26])([e28 ] ) , and carrying out the @xmath216 integral in eq .
( [ e26 ] ) , we derive @xmath223 with @xmath224e^{(2i-\eta)k_\mathrm{a}r}\biggr\},\end{gathered}\ ] ] giving @xmath225e^{2ik_\mathrm{a}r}\biggr\}\end{gathered}\ ] ] for any finite radius @xmath153 , and approaching zero in the limit @xmath153 @xmath226 @xmath227 ( which has to be taken before performing the limit @xmath228 @xmath226 @xmath14 ) . when material absorption is small enough such that @xmath229 @xmath41 @xmath230 , and the radius of the sphere is large @xmath231 @xmath232 @xmath42 , then eq .  ( [ e24 ] ) together with eqs .
( [ e24.1 ] ) and ( [ e44.1 ] ) reduces to [ @xmath105 @xmath22 @xmath233 @xmath234\gamma_0   -\frac{\chi(\omega_\mathrm{a})}{2}\cos(2k_\mathrm{a}r)\gamma_0.\ ] ] note that eq .
( [ e2 ] ) differs from eq .
( [ e1 ] ) in the second term , which reflects the finite size of the sphere .    when the atom is on center , only the terms in eqs .
( [ e34 ] ) and ( [ e35 ] ) contribute to the exact @xmath235 , cf .
( [ e21 m ] ) and ( [ e21n ] ) , and hence we find @xmath236.\ ] ] combining eqs .
( [ e24 ] ) , ( [ e22.2 ] ) , and ( [ e45 ] ) , we arrive at @xmath237 which can be shown to agree with eq .
( [ e44.1 ] ) to linear order in @xmath36 . in a more sophisticated linearization of eq .
( [ eq.80 ] ) with respect to @xmath36 , it may be advantageous to leave the @xmath36-dependence in the exponentials appearing in the coefficient @xmath238 unchanged .
in particular , for sufficiently small material absorption , @xmath229 @xmath41 @xmath230 , and for a sufficiently large sphere ,
@xmath231 @xmath232 @xmath42 , this kind of linear approximation leads to [ @xmath105 @xmath22 @xmath233 @xmath239\gamma_0\\   -\frac{\chi(\omega_\mathrm{a})}{2}\ ,   \cos\bigl[2\mathrm{re}(n)k_\mathrm{a}r\bigr ]   e^{-2\mathrm{im}(n)k_\mathrm{a}r}\gamma_0,\end{gathered}\ ] ] recall eqs .
( [ e2.1 ] ) and ( [ e47 ] ) .
@xmath5 @xmath240 and ( b ) @xmath150 @xmath5 @xmath241 as a function of the sphere radius @xmath153 .
the radius of the real ( empty - space ) cavity is @xmath90 @xmath5 @xmath242 . for comparison ,
the decay rate in a bulk medium of the same permittivity ( dotted lines ) is also plotted . ]
comparison of eq .
( [ e46 ] ) with eq .
( [ e2 ] ) indicates that with increasing size of the sphere , the validity of the linear born approximation to the decay rate becomes less satisfying in two respects .
( i ) the oscillating term is not damped , and ( ii ) there is an accumulated error in the phase . the former effect is insignificant as long as @xmath243 @xmath41 @xmath42 .
this restriction still allows for a large range of sphere sizes ; for example , for @xmath145 @xmath22 @xmath244 and @xmath245 @xmath5 @xmath246 @xmath22 @xmath247 , the condition follows .
figure  [ cnt ] shows the dependence on the sphere radius of the local - field corrected spontaneous - decay rates according to the exact equation ( [ eq.80 ] ) and the linear born expansion [ eq .
( [ e24 ] ) together with eqs .
( [ e24.1 ] ) and ( [ e44.1 ] ) ] for two values of the permittivity . for the parameters used , we have @xmath144 @xmath5 @xmath248 , so that the first two terms in the curly brackets in eq .
( [ eq.80 ] ) , which arise from absorption , are negligibly small compared to the last one . as expected from eqs .
( [ e2 ] ) and ( [ e46 ] ) , the decay rate oscillates with the sphere radius around the bulk value . for small spheres ,
the linear born expansion is seen to be in good agreement with the exact result .
it is further seen that , as the sphere radius increases , an increasing phase shift develops between the exact rate and the rate in the linear born approximation . a comparison of figs .
[ cnt](a ) and ( b ) reveals that this phase shift is larger for larger values @xmath249 .
@xmath5 @xmath250 as a function of @xmath145 ( @xmath251 @xmath5 @xmath252 ) , for real - cavity radii @xmath90 @xmath5 @xmath242 and @xmath253 . ]
the dependence of the decay rate on the imaginary part of the susceptibility is illustrated in fig .
[ ci ] for two values of the real - cavity radius .
it can be seen that the disagreement between the curves representing the linear born expansion and the exact result increases with increasing material absorption or decreasing cavity radius , i.e. , with an increase in the combined factor @xmath144 . in particular ,
if in the case where @xmath90 @xmath5 @xmath242 , @xmath145 changes from @xmath254 to @xmath255 , then @xmath256 changes from @xmath257 to @xmath37 , and the agreement worsens from being very good to being moderately good . for the larger cavity radius @xmath90 @xmath5 @xmath258 , which physically means a more dilute medium
, @xmath256 varies from @xmath259 to @xmath260 for the same variation of @xmath145 . throughout this range ,
the combined factor remains much smaller than one and a good agreement is observed .
basing on a numerical computation of @xmath261 as given by eq .
( [ e26 ] ) in the linear born approximation , we have also studied the case when the atom is localized at an arbitrary position inside the sphere .     @xmath5 @xmath240 and radius and ( b ) @xmath153 @xmath5 @xmath262 .
the real - cavity radius is @xmath90 @xmath5 @xmath242 .
the solid ( dashed ) curves refer to radially ( tangentially ) oriented transition dipole moments . ]
figure [ offcnt ] compares the position dependences of the local - field corrected decay rate , as given by eq .
( [ e24 ] ) together with eqs .
( [ e24.1 ] ) and ( [ e26 ] ) , and the uncorrected rate according to eq .
( [ eq.10 ] ) ( which is valid if absorption is neglected ) , with the second term being given by eq .
( [ e26 ] ) , for two sphere radii ( for the uncorrected rate beyond the linear born approximation , see also ref .
@xcite ) . from the figure
it is seen that when @xmath222 @xmath13 @xmath14 , i.e. , when the atom is not localized at the center of the sphere , radial and tangential dipole orientations have to be distinguished , especially when the sphere radius exceeds the wavelength of the radiation emitted by the atom , such that interference effects begin to play a role .
note that the whispering gallery resonances which may give rise to strong enhancement near the rim of the sphere are not manifested here .
the existence of these resonances requires larger values of the real part of the permittivity or larger sphere radii .
unfortunately , in such cases the linear born expansion is too rough an approximation to the decay rate . from the figure
it is further seen that for the parameters used , the local - field correction increases the decay rate ; the amount of increase is determined essentially by the last term in eq .
( [ e24.1 ] ) .    in fig .
[ dp ] the dependence of the local - field corrected decay rate on the sphere radius is illustrated .
it can be seen that the further the atom is displaced from the sphere center , the smaller the amplitudes of oscillation of the decay rate become .
@xmath5 @xmath263 and ( b ) @xmath222 @xmath5 @xmath264 off center of a dielectric sphere of permittivity as a function of the sphere radius in linear born approximation .
the cavity radius is @xmath146 @xmath5 @xmath148 .
the solid ( dashed ) curves refer to radially ( tangentially ) oriented transition dipole moments . for comparison ,
the curves for an atom at the center are also shown . ]
expressing the spontaneous - decay rate of an excited atom in the presence of dielectric bodies in terms of the scattering part of the associated green tensor of the macroscopic maxwell equations and expanding the green tensor in a born series enables one to systematically approach arbitrary geometries . in particular , in the case of weakly polarizable bodies it may be possible to neglect higher - order terms in the born expansion and approximate the scattering part of the green tensor by the term linear in the susceptibility , and the decay rate accordingly .    using the real - cavity model of the local - field correction
, we have applied the theory to the problem of the local - field correction to the spontaneous - decay rate of an excited atom embedded in a dispersing and absorbing dielectric body of arbitrary size and shape . in this way
, we have derived a rate formula , which , within the linear born approximation , applies to atoms in arbitrary dielectric bodies , and have given explicit conditions of its validity . to illustrate the results , we have considered the case of an atom at an arbitrary position inside spherical body in more detail .
it has surprisingly turned out that the rate formula found in linear born approximation agrees , to linear order in the susceptibility , with a rate formula suggested by toma @xcite from his study of the real - cavity model in the special and analytically solvable case of a spherically symmetric system .
we have then shown that this quite general formula indeed applies to atoms in dielectric bodies of arbitrary sizes and shapes , provided that the atoms are not in the very vicinity of the surfaces of the bodies .
so it can be shown that the scattering part of the green tensor that enters the basic formula for the decay rate can always be decomposed into a term that only depends on the properties of the local environment of the guest atom and the local - field corrected scattering part of the green tensor of the host body without the guest atom , where the correction simply appears in form of a factor .
in particular , the former term can be substantially determined by the absorptive properties of the host body , thereby giving rise to a shift of the decay rate .
finally , we note that in the same spirit as in the treatment of the spontaneous decay , the born expansion can also be employed in studying other phenomena of the atom
field interaction in realistic systems whose green tensors are not known or analytically too involved .
typical examples may be the casimir - polder interaction of a ground - state atom with an inhomogeneous body @xcite , the resonance fluorescence of an atom near such a body , or the resonant energy transfer between atoms embedded in realistic bodies .
we would like to thank m.  s.  toma for discussions .
thanks the alexander von humboldt stiftung and the national program for basic research of vietnam for support .
this work was supported by the deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft .


two - level emitters interacting with a cavity photon mode are widely studied in quantum optics with respect to spontaneous emission and superradiance  @xcite , cooperativity and lasing  @xcite , as well as the emission of nonclassical light  @xcite . for sufficiently weak light - matter coupling ,
when the photon - dressing of emitter states is negligibly small , the emitter - cavity system can be studied with the quantum optical master equation , usually in combination with the rotating - wave approximation  @xcite .
the quantum optical master equation fails at strong light - matter coupling , to the extent that it predicts unphysical emission at zero temperature if the number of photons in the ground state is finite  @xcite .    the correct theoretical description of systems with ( ultra-)strong light - matter coupling  @xcite has attracted increasing interest recently  @xcite .
essentially , the quantum optical master equation has to be replaced by a master equation expressed in the photon - dressed emitter eigenstates  @xcite . while the master equation remains markovian , which is justified because of the weak emitter - environment and cavity - environment couplings  @xcite , it now requires full diagonalization of the interacting emitter - cavity hamiltonian .
such an equation was used in recent studies of photon blockade effects  @xcite , spontaneous conversion of virtual to real photons  @xcite , and the emission of nonclassical light from a single emitter  @xcite .    in this paper
we study the emission of few emitters in a cavity , with particular focus on the photon statistics of the emitted light .
our goal is the characterization of temperature and coupling regimes where nonclassical light  @xcite is generated .
a major result will be the identification of two clearly distinguished neighboring regimes with pronounced sub - poissonian and super - poissonian photon statistics at strong coupling .
our results are obtained with the full input - output formalism  @xcite and master equation  @xcite without further approximations . to understand the relevance of the different approximations involved in traditional quantum optics treatments we make two comparisons .
first , we compare the results that are obtained when the counter - rotating light - matter interaction terms are included in the hamiltonian to those when they are dropped .
second , we contrast the results obtained with the full master equation with results from the quantum optical master equation
. the latter comparison will clearly show the necessity of using the correct master equation already at weak coupling if the photon statistics is of interest .
this issue has been studied conclusively for a single emitter in ref .
@xcite , which also contains glauber function plots for few emitters in the supplemental material but omits the further analysis of the situation that we give here .
the paper is organized as follows . in sec .
[ sec : model ] we introduce the physical situation under study together with the master equation used for its analysis . in sec .
[ sec : spectra ] we discuss the emission spectra in relation to the energy spectra of the emitter - cavity hamiltonian , while the statistics of the emitted photons is studied in sec .
[ sec : statistics ] .
we conclude in sec .
[ sec : concl ] .
the appendices collect further information on the theoretical approach .
[ app : inout ] gives details of the input - output formalism . in app .
[ app : me ] we derive the master equation , and give a few analytical results for the photon statistics in app .
[ app : analyt ] .
the interaction of @xmath1 two - level emitters with a single cavity photon mode is described by the dicke model  @xcite @xmath2 where the operator @xmath3 annihilates ( creates ) a cavity photon with frequency @xmath4 and @xmath5 ( @xmath6 ) is the corresponding lowering ( raising ) operator for the @xmath7th emitter with transition energy @xmath8 . throughout this work ,
we consider the resonant case @xmath9 . we allow for different emitter - photon coupling strengths for the co - rotating ( @xmath10 ) and counter - rotating ( @xmath11 ) interaction terms .
changing @xmath11 relative to @xmath10 interpolates between the tavis - cummings ( tc ) limit ( @xmath12 ) without and the dicke limit ( @xmath13 ) with counter - rotating terms . both situations can be realized experimentally  @xcite .
the rotating - wave approximation consists in replacing the dicke by the tc limit .
dissipation arises from the coupling of the emitters and the cavity to the environment . for a bosonic environment
the coupling terms are of the form @xmath14 where @xmath15 is a ( hermitian ) emitter or cavity operator and the @xmath16 are bosonic operators for the environment photons ( at frequencies @xmath17 with coupling constants @xmath18 ) . as the operator @xmath15 we choose the field operator @xmath19 for the coupling of the cavity and the transition operator @xmath20 for the coupling of the @xmath7th emitter to the environment .    at sufficiently weak coupling to the environment
, the emitter - cavity system density matrix @xmath21 obeys a markovian master equation  @xcite @xmath22 - { \mathrm i}\frac{1}{2 } \sum_\omega \xi(\omega ) \big [ s_\omega^\dagger s_\omega , \rho(t ) \big ] \nonumber\\   & & + \frac{1}{2 } \sum_\omega \chi(\omega ) \big ( \big [ s_\omega \rho(t ) , s_\omega^\dagger \big ] + \big [ s_\omega , \rho(t ) s_\omega^\dagger \big ] \big ) \ , , \nonumber\\\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath23 is the projection of @xmath15 onto transitions between eigenstates @xmath24 , @xmath25 of @xmath26 with energy difference @xmath27 ( see app .  [ app : me ] for a derivation ) . for the sake of notational simplicity we state the master equation for a single coupling term  .
multiple coupling terms lead to additional contributions of the same form .    the functions @xmath28 and @xmath29 in eq .
follow from the environment spectral function @xmath30 and its analytical continuation @xmath31 into the upper half plane , with @xmath32 . for a thermal environment with inverse temperature
@xmath33 we get @xmath34 \quad & \text { if } \omega > 0 \ ; , \\[0.25ex ]   \gamma(-\omega ) n(-\omega , t ) & \text { if } \omega < 0 \end{cases}\ ] ] and @xmath35    \quad & \text { if } \omega > 0 \ ; , \\[0.25ex ]   - { \mathop{{\rm re}}}\gamma(-\omega + { \mathrm i}0^+ ) n(-\omega , t ) & \text { if } \omega < 0 \ ; , \end{cases}\ ] ] with the bose - einstein distribution function @xmath36 note that in the zero temperature limit @xmath37 such that the master equation   contains only dissipative terms for transitions @xmath38 with positive energy @xmath39 , i.e. , dissipation correctly leads to energy decrease .
in particular , the problem of unphysical emission from the ground state encountered for the quantum optical master equations is resolved .    in the present work we assume an ohmic spectral function @xmath40 for the cavity - environment coupling , and use @xmath41 in all numerical computations . to reduce the number of free parameters we assume the same spectral function @xmath42 for the emitter - environment couplings .
the respective environment temperatures are also identical .      as we show in app .
[ app : me ] , the master equation   splits into two equations of motion @xmath43 for the matrix elements @xmath44 of the density operator . in these equations , @xmath45 and @xmath46 s_{k , n } + { \mathrm i}e_n \,.\ ] ] the general solution of eq .
is @xmath47 because @xmath48 for all @xmath49 , the off - diagonal elements of @xmath50 decay exponentially .
hence , the stationary state fulfills @xmath51 the diagonal elements @xmath52 are determined by the stationary solution of the pauli master equation  . if the system is coupled to a thermal environment as in eqs .   and
, the stationary solution of eq .   is the thermal state @xmath53 of the system corresponding to the temperature @xmath54 of the environment .
the emission spectrum and photon statistics can now be computed through a standard input - output formalism ( see app .  [
app : inout ] ) , which leads to the projected cavity - environment coupling operator @xmath55 describing the emission .
the correlation functions of @xmath56 and @xmath57 characterize the properties of the emitted light .
the emission spectrum of the cavity is @xmath58 and the second - order glauber function @xcite reads @xmath59 note that evaluation of eqs .
,   requires diagonalization of the hamiltonian @xmath26 .    because the stationary state @xmath60 from eq .
is diagonal in the eigenbasis @xmath25 of @xmath26 , we can evaluate the @xmath61-integration in eq .
analytically as @xmath62 ^ 2 + [ { \mathop{{\rm re}}}(z_m+z_n)]^2 } \ , .
\nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] the emission spectrum @xmath63 is the sum of lorentz peaks with width @xmath64 at the respective transition energies @xmath65 , which according to eq .   are shifted relative to the transition energies @xmath66 of the closed system by a lamb shift that results from coupling to the environment .
it is instructive to compare the master equation   to the quantum optical master equation  @xcite @xmath67 - { \mathrm i}\sum_\pm \frac{\xi_\pm}{2 } [ s_\pm^\dagger s_\pm , \rho(t ) ] \\   & & + \sum_\pm \frac{\chi_\pm}{2 } \big ( \big [ s_\pm \rho(t ) , s_\pm^\dagger \big ] + \big [ s_\pm , \rho(t ) s_\pm^\dagger \big ] \big ) \ ; , \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ] which is obtained by replacing the projected operators @xmath68 with the ` bare ' operators @xmath69 , and by assuming @xmath70 , @xmath71 in the vicinity of a typical transition energy @xmath72 .
note that @xmath73 for the cavity - environment coupling and @xmath74 for the emitter - environment coupling .
evidently this approximation can be valid only for weak light - matter coupling @xmath75 , when the dressing of emitter states by cavity photons can be neglected . because the quantum optical master equation does not distinguish between energy - increasing and energy - decreasing transitions , which are equally contained in the unprojected operator @xmath15 because of hermiticity
, it can lead to unphysical predictions such as emission out of the ground state .
furthermore , because failure to observe the above distinction is tantamount to a high - temperature approximation , one will expect that the quantum optical master equation fails at the prediction of non - thermal photon statistics at low temperatures .
therefore , we use the more general master equation  .
the first characterization of the light generated in the cavity is provided by the emission spectrum . because the emission spectrum depends on the ( lamb - shifted ) energy spectrum of the dicke hamiltonian we start with a discussion of the eigenvalues of @xmath26 for few emitters , before we turn to the actual function @xmath63 obtained from numerical solution of the master equation  .      to construct the energy spectrum of @xmath26 we notice first that the eigenstates of @xmath1 uncoupled two - level emitters can be classified as angular momentum eigenstates with total angular momentum @xmath76 .
since @xmath26 commutes with the total angular momentum operator , states with different @xmath77 do not mix even at finite coupling @xmath78 . for fixed @xmath77
, the @xmath79 quantum number @xmath80 can assume the values @xmath81 , and a corresponding emitter eigenstate has energy @xmath82 .
note that for @xmath83 the classification in terms of @xmath77 , @xmath80 is not exhaustive , since different emitter states can have identical values .
however , these states give the same contribution to the emission spectrum .
the cavity photon eigenstates are fock states @xmath25 with energies @xmath84 .    schematic energy level pattern for the construction of the spectrum of the dicke model .
horizontal arrows depict the co - rotating interaction terms in eq .
( coupling constant @xmath10 ) , diagonal arrows depict the counter - rotating terms ( @xmath11 ) . ]    for given @xmath77 we can arrange the eigenstates of the uncoupled emitter - cavity system as the rungs of a ladder diagram as in fig .  [
fig : ladder ] .
working at resonance @xmath85 , the energy @xmath86 of each state is given by the total number of emitter and cavity excitations .
the co - rotating light - matter interaction terms in @xmath26 preserve the number of excitations and connect states at the same energy level ( horizontal arrows in fig .
[ fig : ladder ] ) .
the counter - rotating terms change the number of excitations by two ( diagonal arrows in fig .
[ fig : ladder ] ) .
this simple scheme explains many properties of the energy spectra of @xmath26 shown in fig .
[ fig : e ] .
eigenvalues of @xmath26 in eq .   for @xmath13 ( panels a - c ) and @xmath12 ( panels d - f ) as functions of the coupling strength @xmath10 .
panels ( a , b ) show the results for one emitter , whereas the number of emitters is @xmath87 in panels ( b , e ) and @xmath88 in panels ( c , f ) . ]    for @xmath89 it is @xmath90 , and we recover the jaynes - cummings ladder  @xcite for @xmath12 . the lowest level
( @xmath91 , @xmath92 ) does not couple to any other state and hence leads to the @xmath10-independent eigenvalue zero of @xmath26 [ see fig .
[ fig : e](d ) ] .
every other level consists of two ladder rungs .
they lead to the eigenvalues @xmath93 , for @xmath94 . for @xmath13 corrections
arise from coupling between states at different height in the ladder but the energy level pattern remains discernible [ fig .
[ fig : e](a ) ] .    for @xmath87
[ see fig .
[ fig : e](b , e ) ] we have either triplet ( @xmath95 ) or singlet ( @xmath96 ) emitter states . for @xmath12 , the triplet states lead to the eigenvalue zero ( @xmath92 ) , the two eigenvalues @xmath97 ( @xmath98 ) , and the three eigenvalues @xmath99 , @xmath100 for @xmath101 .
the singlet states do not couple with each other and lead to the @xmath10-independent eigenvalues @xmath102 for @xmath103 .
it follows that the eigenvalues @xmath99 for @xmath101 are twofold degenerate ( one triplet , one singlet state ) .
this degeneracy is lifted for @xmath13 , but the energies of the singlet states remain fixed .    for @xmath88
we have quadruplet ( @xmath104 ) and doublet ( @xmath105 ) emitter states .
the ladder scheme for the doublet is equal to that for @xmath89 and hence leads to the same energy spectrum , apart from the fact that all energies are shifted up by @xmath106 when going from @xmath107 to @xmath108 .
notice that the doublet states are two - fold degenerate , because the angular momentum classification of the emitter states is not unique in this case .
the quadruplet states lead to one ( starting at zero for @xmath109 ) , two ( at @xmath106 ) , three ( at @xmath110 ) , and four ( at @xmath99 with @xmath111 ) additional eigenvalues in figs .
[ fig : e](f ) . because of the close vicinity of many states in the energy spectrum the corrections resulting from the counter - rotating terms for @xmath13 are large .
this trend continues if @xmath1 is increased further .      in fig .
[ fig : spectra ] we show the emission spectrum @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters at different coupling strength @xmath10 and environment temperature @xmath113 .
these data , as well as those for the glauber function @xmath114 shown later , have been computed with a maximal number of @xmath115 cavity photons in the numerical diagonalization of @xmath26 , which is sufficient for the given parameter combinations .
emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters . panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] + emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters . panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] + emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] emission spectra @xmath63 for @xmath112 emitters . panels ( i - iii ) show results for @xmath13 , panels ( iv - vi ) for @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the environment temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ]    for low temperatures @xmath122 , only the first possible transition into the ground state contributes to the emission spectrum .
it leads to the single peak in panels ( i ) and ( iii ) of fig .
[ fig : spectra ] . with increasing temperature transitions involving
higher excited states begin to contribute . for example
the two peaks in panels ( ii ) , ( iv ) correspond to the transition from the 2nd to the 1st excited state and from the 3rd excited to the ground state . as could be deduced already from panels ( b ) , ( e ) in fig .
[ fig : e ] , the transitions tend to have smaller energies in the tc limit than in the dicke limit , which leads to the red shift of the emission peaks in panel ( v ) relative to those in panel ( ii ) .
however , at not too strong coupling the low - lying states still have comparable energies , and the emission spectra look similar .
the situation changes at ultrastrong coupling when the co - rotating and counter - rotating terms are of equal magnitude ( panels ( iii ) , ( vi ) ) .
in addition to the markedly different peak energies the peak height has now decreased by two orders of magnitude in the dicke limit , but not in the tc limit .
the decrease of peak height can be recognized in the @xmath72-integrated emission spectrum @xmath123 shown in fig .
[ fig : intspectra ] .
the equality with the given expectation value follows directly from eq .  .
only in the dicke limit , but not in the tc limit , the total emission becomes small again at ultrastrong coupling and low temperatures .
still , one sees that both plots agree nicely for not too strong coupling ( @xmath124 ) .
this observation sets the upper limit of the coupling strength ( here , for @xmath112 emitters ) below which the presence or absence of counter - rotating interaction terms does not affect the light emission significantly .
we will find the same behavior for the glauber function .
( color online ) expectation value @xmath125 for @xmath112 emitters , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 .
panel ( a ) shows the result for @xmath13 , panel ( b ) for @xmath12 .
crosses mark the parameters used in fig .
[ fig : spectra ] . ,
title="fig : " ] ( color online ) expectation value @xmath125 for @xmath112 emitters , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 .
panel ( a ) shows the result for @xmath13 , panel ( b ) for @xmath12 .
crosses mark the parameters used in fig .
[ fig : spectra ] .
, title="fig : " ]
a basic decision on the possible generation of nonclassical light is possible with the glauber function @xmath126 at zero time delay . for @xmath127
the emitted photons have a poissonian distribution , while @xmath128 indicates super - poissonian statistics .
thermal light has @xmath129 .
by contrast , @xmath130 indicates nonclassical light with sub - poissonian photon statistics .
further information on photon ( anti-)bunching is provided by the full time - dependent function @xmath114 .      the glauber function @xmath126 for one emitter ( @xmath89 ) is shown in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ext ] . two distinct regions can be identified in the dicke limit in panel ( a ) ( where @xmath13 )
. a triangular region with @xmath130 , which stretches out along the vertical axis , indicates the emission of nonclassical light with sub - poissonian photon statistics at low temperatures and moderate - to - strong light - matter coupling .
it lies below an elongated region with strongly super - poissonian photon statistics ( @xmath131 ) at larger coupling , which extends diagonally towards higher temperatures .
both regions are embedded in the background of thermal light with @xmath132 .
the situation is distinctly different in the tc limit ( @xmath12 ) in panel ( b ) , where the super - poissonian region is pushed back in favor of a second sub - poissonian region that continues towards ultrastrong coupling .
note , however , that the emission of nonclassical light in the first sub - poissonian region is observed equally in both limits .
( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay for one emitter ( @xmath107 ) , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 .
panel ( a ) shows the result for @xmath13 , panel ( b ) for @xmath12 .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots.,title="fig : " ] ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay for one emitter ( @xmath107 ) , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 .
panel ( a ) shows the result for @xmath13 , panel ( b ) for @xmath12 .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots.,title="fig : " ]    ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 , for @xmath112 emitters ( top panels a , c ) and @xmath108 emitters ( bottom panels b , d ) , the left panels ( a , b ) show results for @xmath13 , whereas @xmath12 in panels ( c , d ) .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots .
, title="fig : " ] ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 , for @xmath112 emitters ( top panels a , c ) and @xmath108 emitters ( bottom panels b , d ) , the left panels ( a , b ) show results for @xmath13 , whereas @xmath12 in panels ( c , d ) .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots .
, title="fig : " ] + ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 , for @xmath112 emitters ( top panels a , c ) and @xmath108 emitters ( bottom panels b , d ) , the left panels ( a , b ) show results for @xmath13 , whereas @xmath12 in panels ( c , d ) .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots .
, title="fig : " ] ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 at zero time - delay as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 , for @xmath112 emitters ( top panels a , c ) and @xmath108 emitters ( bottom panels b , d ) , the left panels ( a , b ) show results for @xmath13 , whereas @xmath12 in panels ( c , d ) .
note that all values @xmath133 are assigned the same ( dark - red ) color in the density plots .
, title="fig : " ]      the distinctive features of the glauber function persist for multiple emitters ( see fig .
[ fig : g2_chart ] ) , but the regions are shifted to smaller couplings @xmath10 as the number of emitters increases from one to three .    the obvious similarity between @xmath126 for @xmath134 emitters visible in figs .
[ fig : g2_chart_ext ] ,  [ fig : g2_chart ] can be expressed as an approximate relation between the respective emitter - cavity coupling @xmath10 . in the dicke limit ( @xmath13 )
we find that the features of @xmath126 are closely reproduced under the scaling @xmath135 . in the tc limit ( @xmath12 ) features
are reproduced under the scaling @xmath136 .
interestingly , the proper scaling of @xmath10 depends on the presence of counter - rotating interaction terms in the hamiltonian .
this difference is in contrast to the semiclassical theory where the mean cavity photon number in the steady state scales @xmath137 both in the dicke and tc limit .
not surprisingly , the glauber function @xmath126 is more sensitive to the details of light - matter coupling than the semiclassical theory that neglects quantum correlations in favor of a mean - field approximation .    our arguments in favor of the above scaling relations depend on several observations , which we now develop for the tc limit ( @xmath12 ) .
without counter - rotating interaction terms the hamiltonian @xmath26 commutes with the operator @xmath138 , which counts the total number of excitations .
hence , @xmath26 is block diagonal with blocks of the form @xmath139 , where @xmath140 denotes the eigenvalue of @xmath141 , @xmath142 is the identity matrix , and the matrix block @xmath143 contains the @xmath10-independent matrix elements of the co - rotating interaction terms in @xmath26 . from this form of the blocks it is evident that the eigenvectors of @xmath26 do not depend on @xmath10 , i.e. , the matrix elements of @xmath144 that enter eq .
are constant . the dependence of @xmath126 on @xmath10 results from the eigenvalues only , which determine the occupation of the states in the stationary ( thermal ) state and the prefactors of @xmath144 . if we can show that the eigenvalues scale approximately as @xmath145 the above relation follows .
let us focus on the low lying states that give the dominant contribution in the interesting temperature regimes .
these states can be found in the ladder diagram of states in fig .
[ fig : ladder_rwa_a ] .
they must be connected to the ground state at energy zero by a diagonal arrow that gives the action of the operator @xmath146 , i.e. , of @xmath147 .    schematic energy level pattern .
horizontal arrows depict the co - rotating interaction terms in eq .
( coupling constant @xmath10 ) , diagonal arrows illustrate the action of the cavity photon annihilation operator @xmath146 . ]    for the denominator @xmath125 of @xmath126 from eq .
states contribute which are separated by one vertical step in the ladder diagram .
the energy of the most relevant first excited state is given by @xmath148 , which has the postulated scaling .
this scaling of the first excited state for few emitters has been verified experimentally in ref .
@xcite .    for the numerator @xmath149 of @xmath126 , where each operator appears twice ,
states contribute which are separated by two vertical steps on the ladder .
now the second excited state is most relevant , which is the linear combination of the two ( @xmath107 ) or three ( @xmath150 ) vertical rungs that occur for @xmath151 excitations .
the corresponding @xmath152 or @xmath153 matrix from the above block decomposition of @xmath26 is @xmath154 diagonalization gives the energies @xmath155 for @xmath89 , while @xmath156 for @xmath157 . with the approximation @xmath158 , which is good enough for a rule of thumb , this is again the postulated scaling .
put together , the energies that enter the computation of @xmath126 scale roughly as @xmath145 , which concludes our argument in favor of the observed relation `` @xmath136 '' in the tc limit .    in the dicke limit
@xmath13 the block decomposition of @xmath26 is not possible because of the counter - rotating interaction terms .
the eigenvectors of @xmath26 now depend on @xmath10 , and the previous argument can not be easily translated
. however , inspection of the energy spectra in fig .
[ fig : e ] strongly suggests that the observed relation is still related to an approximate relation between the eigenvalues of @xmath26 for different @xmath1 , now with the scaling @xmath135 .
results for the glauber function obtained with the quantum optical master equation   are shown in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_qo ] in the dicke limit @xmath13 .
in stark contrast to the results from figs .  [
fig : g2_chart_ext ] ,  [ fig : g2_chart ] the quantum optical master equation does not predict the emission of nonclassical light with sub - poissonian photon statistics in any part of the parameter space .
the situation does not improve in the tc limit @xmath12 where @xmath159 = 0 $ ] and the quantum optical master equation gives the stationary ( thermal ) state @xmath160 leading to @xmath161 independent of the number of emitters @xmath1 , the coupling strength @xmath10 , or the temperature @xmath113 , thus always predicting the emission of thermal light . while it may not be surprising that the quantum optical master equation fails , because the weak coupling condition @xmath162 is not satisfied , it is remarkable that it fails to capture any features from the previous glauber function plots in figs .
[ fig : g2_chart_ext ] ,  [ fig : g2_chart ] .
this failure highlights the importance of using the correct master equation not only for strong light - matter coupling but also if one is interested in properties following from higher - order correlation functions , such as the photon statistics obtained from the second order glauber function .
( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 computed with the quantum optical master equation  , shown as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 for @xmath13 .
panel ( a ) gives the result for @xmath107 emitter , whereas @xmath112 in panel ( b ) .
, title="fig : " ] ( color online ) glauber function @xmath126 computed with the quantum optical master equation  , shown as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 for @xmath13 .
panel ( a ) gives the result for @xmath107 emitter , whereas @xmath112 in panel ( b ) .
, title="fig : " ]      a further property to distinguish classical and nonclassical light is the time - coincidence statistics of the emitted photons , which can be deduced from the time - dependent glauber function @xmath114 . for classical light
, @xmath114 has a non - positive initial slope at @xmath163 .
this indicates photon bunching , i.e. , that the probability of observing two photons at equal times is larger than the probability of observing them at different times .
conversely , a positive slope indicates photon antibunching , which is possible only for nonclassical light . in the long - time limit , @xmath164 in all cases
.    in fig .
[ fig : g2_time ] we plot @xmath114 for the parameter combinations marked in the two upper panels in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart ] .
we see that @xmath114 is always a strictly monotonic function of @xmath165 .
therefore , in the present situation photon bunching and antibunching coincide precisely with super - poissonian and sub - poissonian photon statistics . only if @xmath166 in panel ( ii ) the function @xmath114 oscillates slightly , but the overall decay is still indicative of photon bunching .
glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters . panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] + glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] + glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters . panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ] glauber function @xmath114 as a function of time for @xmath112 emitters .
panels ( i - iii ) show the results for @xmath13 , whereas in panels ( iv - vi ) @xmath12 .
the emitter - cavity coupling strength and the bath temperature are @xmath116 , @xmath117 in panels ( i , iv ) , @xmath118 , @xmath119 in panels ( ii , v ) , and @xmath120 , @xmath121 in panels ( iii , vi).,title="fig : " ]
our analysis of the light generated by few emitters in a cavity reveals a non - trivial dependence of the photon statistics on the light - matter coupling and temperature .
clearly identifiable parameters regimes with sub- and super - poissonian photon statistics appear at strong and ultrastrong coupling , and lie immediately next to each other .
tuning of the light - matter coupling or change of the temperature can thus have a tremendous effect on the photon statistics . as a general trend we find strong signatures of nonclassical light at strong coupling .
thermal photon statistics , on the other hand , requires weak coupling or high temperatures : it is the exception rather than the rule at low temperatures .
the photon statistics , and to a lesser degree also the total emission , is strongly influenced by the presence of counter - rotating light - matter interaction terms in the hamiltonian .
these terms are responsible for the prevalence of super - poissonian over sub - poissonian light at ultrastrong coupling .
not surprisingly , the convenient rotating - wave approximation ( i.e. , identification of the dicke by the tc limit ) gives the wrong prediction when the coupling becomes too large .
nevertheless , the scenarios with and without counter - rotating terms are surprisingly similar at not too strong coupling , which shows that generation of nonclassical light is not a peculiar effect arising from the fine - tuning of interaction terms in the hamiltonian but a rather robust feature .
we have provided an approximate rule to relate the emission of few emitters to the emission of a single emitter , under appropriate scaling of the coupling constant . in accordance with this rule , the features of the glauber function observed for one emitter occur at comparably smaller values of the individual emitter - cavity coupling in the case of a few emitters .
the reason is that all emitters interact with the same cavity mode , which magnifies the effects of resonant emission and ( re-)absorption of cavity photons .
broadly speaking , generation of nonclassical light is easier with more emitters because the required coupling of each individual emitter to the cavity mode can be reduced .
our analysis of strong light - matter coupling required use of the full input - output formalism and of the full master equation , which carefully distinguishes between transitions at different energies . if this correct treatment is replaced by the standard quantum optical master equation results change completely .
especially , the prediction of nonclassical light does not survive the additional approximations made in the replacement .
while the quantum optical master equation could not be expected to work at strong coupling , its outright failure at describing any of the distinctive features observed in the photon statistics shows that use of the right master equation is essential in all situations , perhaps apart from extremely weak coupling .
the price one has to pay is full diagonalization of the hamiltonian .
we here focus on the system at thermal equilibrium .
future work should address emission if the system is driven coherently through external photon sources .
this will require addition of explicitly time - dependent periodic terms to the hamiltonian , and thus combination of the present master equation with the floquet formalism .
by contrast , a perturbative expansion in the driving strength is sufficient only for weak off - resonant driving , but then the possible new effects would be weak too .
this work was supported by deutsche forschungsgemeinschaft through sonderforschungsbereich 652 project b5 .
we follow standard input - output theory  @xcite . the interaction hamiltonian in eq .   for the cavity - environment coupling in the continuum limit
is @xmath167 where @xmath168 is the environment density of states and @xmath169 the cavity - environment coupling function , i.e. , the environment spectral function is @xmath170 . @xmath171 together with the free hamiltonian @xmath172 of the environment photons and the commutator @xmath173 = \delta(\omega - \omega')$ ]
lead to the equation of motion @xmath174 for the field quadratures of the environment . for @xmath175 , the formal solution of eq .
is @xmath176 we define input ( output ) field operators @xmath177 and make use of the spectral function @xmath40 to obtain the input - output relation @xmath178 where @xmath56 denotes the positive frequency component of @xmath179 , i.e. , @xmath56 acts as a lowering operator .
the explicit definition of @xmath56 in the system - energy eigenbasis is given in eq .  .
we consider the dissipative dynamics of the system density matrix in the weak system - environment coupling limit . for strong coupling within the system
the quantum optical master equation predicts unphysical emission from the ground state  @xcite .
going one step back in the derivation of the quantum optical master equation , the second - order time - convolutionless projection operator method  @xcite gives a time - local master equation leading to consistent results including the counter - rotating terms  @xcite .
nevertheless , this master equation does in general not generate positive dynamics  @xcite .
this problem was resolved by a recently derived master equation in the system eigenbasis  @xcite and we here recapitulate its derivation .    the total hamiltonian is the sum of the contribution of the system , @xmath26 , the contribution of the reservoir , @xmath180 , and the interaction @xmath171 .
we note that the interaction hamiltonian in eq .
is of the general form @xmath181 , where @xmath15 ( @xmath182 ) is a hermitian system ( reservoir ) operator . a more general coupling @xmath183 can also be considered , but leads to the same qualitative results .
the dynamics of the density operator @xmath184 of the total system in the interaction picture is described by the von neumann equation @xmath185 \,.\ ] ] as a notational convenience , we mark operators in the interaction picture with a hat . the interaction hamiltonian and the density operator in the interaction picture
are defined as @xmath186 where the time evolution operator of the uncoupled system and reservoir is @xmath187    in the limit of weak system - reservoir coupling several approximations are performed .
first of all , within the born approximation initial factorization of the density operator is assumed , @xmath188 , and the back - action of the system onto the reservoir is neglected , @xmath189 .
secondly , the markov approximation is performed by replacing @xmath190 at retarded times @xmath61 with @xmath50 at the local time @xmath165 . in the third place , assuming that the reservoir correlation time is small compared to the relaxation time of the system , the time integration is extended to infinity to arrive at the born - markov equation of motion @xmath191 \big ] \big\ } { { \mathrm d}}\tau \,,\ ] ] where @xmath192 denotes the partial trace over the reservoir degrees of freedom and @xmath193 is assumed .
we further assume a thermal reservoir state @xmath194 and define the reservoir correlation function @xmath195 to evaluate the traces in eq .  .
this yields the master equation @xmath196 c(\tau ) { { \mathrm d}}\tau + \text{h.c . } \,,\ ] ] where h.c .  denotes the hermitian conjugate .
we introduce the transition operators in eq .   that are the discrete fourier components of the interaction picture @xmath197 , i.e. , @xmath198 equivalently , @xmath199 = -\omega s_\omega$ ] .
in addition , we introduce the even and odd fourier transforms of the reservoir correlation function @xmath200 for a thermal photon reservoir with spectral function @xmath201 the functions @xmath28 and @xmath29 are given in eqs .   and  .
with these definitions we find @xmath202 \nonumber\\   & & + \text{h.c . }
\,.\end{aligned}\ ] ] eq .
is the standard born - markov master equation in the system energy - eigenbasis .
it contains the dissipative parts proportional to @xmath28 and the lamb - shift terms proportional to @xmath29 .
because eq .   is not of lindblad type , it does , in general , not preserve the positivity of the density operator .    inspecting eq .
we recognize that it contains oscillating terms proportional to @xmath203 .
if we assume that the relaxation of the system is slow compared with all oscillations @xmath203 we can neglect the contribution from terms with @xmath204 . this approximation is called secular or rotating - wave approximation and the master equation in the schrdinger picture simplifies to the result given in eq .  .
this equation is the lindblad master equation that includes the lamb shift of the unperturbed system energies @xmath205 as well as reservoir induced dissipation effects to lowest order in the system - reservoir interaction strength .
as is already known in the literature , special care has to be taken if the spectrum of @xmath26 is degenerate @xcite .
but even if the eigenvalues @xmath205 are non - degenerate we may have situations where energy differences are degenerate , i.e.  @xmath206 for @xmath207 .
the consequences of these two different types of degeneracy can be understood when we decompose the density matrix into blocks .
in particular , we write @xmath208 ( @xmath209 ) for the matrix containing the elements @xmath210 ( @xmath211 ) with @xmath212 and @xmath213 .
the master equation   in this block notation reads @xmath214 where the summations are over different system energies only , and the complex function @xmath215 is introduced .
we see that the last two lines in this equation are block - diagonal . for @xmath216 , the kronecker - delta in the first line
evaluates to @xmath217 such that diagonal blocks couple to diagonal blocks , only . for @xmath218 ,
the first line contains terms with @xmath219 only , such that non - diagonal blocks do not couple to diagonal ones . nevertheless , a non - diagonal block @xmath220 couples to another non - diagonal block @xmath221 with @xmath222 if the respective transition energies are degenerate .
thus , energy level degeneracy introduces a block structure implying that a diagonal density matrix element couples to non - diagonal elements within diagonal blocks whereas energy transition degeneracy leads to a coupling of non - diagonal blocks to different non - diagonal blocks .
we remark that both subtleties have their origin in the rotating wave approximation . on the one hand
, this approximation leads to the lindblad structure of eq .  .
on the other hand , it results in strict kronecker delta s between the two transition energies @xmath223 and @xmath72 .
consider a situation where each degeneracy in the spectrum of @xmath26 as well as in their differences is lifted by a small @xmath224 parameter .
then , each block contains a single element only , implying that the equations for the diagonal density matrix elements no longer couple to non - diagonal elements .
in addition , any non - diagonal element of the density matrix evolves independently from all other elements .
this behavior does not change when we let each @xmath225 . in this limit ,
the equations become independent of the @xmath224 parameters , but are different from the @xmath226 case .
in particular , for every non - zero @xmath225 we get the two equations   and   for the diagonal and non - diagonal density matrix elements .
we remark that in real physical systems one will never have perfectly equal or equidistant energies because each small perturbation will lift the degeneracies . in the theoretical description
we may argue that the lamb shift lifts degeneracies .
nevertheless , we have to keep in mind , that with eqs .   to   we can not study effects that rely on degenerate energies or degenerate transitions , e.g.  the perfectly harmonic oscillator or a system composed of completely uncoupled identical subsystems are not correctly described .
in this section we derive analytical results for the glauber @xmath126-function in the tc limit ( @xmath227 ) for a single emitter ( @xmath89 ) .    according to the argumentation in sec .
[ sec : stats_scale ] , the dominant contribution to the denominator of @xmath126 in eq .   at low temperatures
is that of the first excited state with energy @xmath228 .
specifically , the denominator @xmath125 is approximated by @xmath229 in this expression the exponential @xmath230 is the thermal population of the first excited state and the prefactor @xmath231 is the squared transition matrix element of @xmath56 between the first excited state and the ground state .
the most relevant state for the numerator of @xmath126 at low temperatures is the lowest eigenstate with energy @xmath232 of the @xmath233 matrix given in eq .  .
to evaluate the matrix elements of the operators @xmath234 we have to consider the four possible transition sequences @xmath235 , where @xmath236 denotes the ground state and @xmath237 are the two eigenstates with energies @xmath238 .
this yields the expression @xmath239 ^ 2 ( \omega_0 - g)^2 \nonumber\\   & & + \frac{1}{4 } \big [ \omega_0 - ( \sqrt{2 } - 1 ) g \big ] ( \omega_0 ^ 2 - g^2 ) \big [ \omega_0 - ( \sqrt{2 } + 1 ) g \big ] \nonumber\\   & & + \frac{3 - \sqrt{8}}{8 } \big [ \omega_0 - ( \sqrt{2 } + 1 ) g \big]^2 ( \omega_0 + g)^2 \bigg\ } { \mathrm e}^{-\beta ( 2 \omega_0 - \sqrt{2 } g ) } \nonumber\\\end{aligned}\ ] ] approximating the numerator of @xmath126 .
( color online ) analytical results for the glauber function @xmath126 for one emitter ( @xmath107 ) , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 in the tc limit .
panel ( a ) shows the result following from eqs .   and  , whereas in panel ( b ) the result is refined for @xmath240 as explained in the text.,title="fig : " ] ( color online ) analytical results for the glauber function @xmath126 for one emitter ( @xmath107 ) , as a function of temperature @xmath113 and coupling strength @xmath10 in the tc limit .
panel ( a ) shows the result following from eqs .   and  , whereas in panel ( b ) the result is refined for @xmath240 as explained in the text.,title="fig : " ]    the results belonging to eqs .   and
are plotted in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ana](a ) . compared to the exact numerical results in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ext](b ) a good agreement appears for @xmath241 and low temperatures . for high values of @xmath242
the first excited state becomes closer and closer to the ground state such that the finite temperature leads to significant contributions from transitions not involving the ground state .
for this reason , the upper part of fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ana](a ) is not well reproduced .
in contrast , the lower part of fig .  [ fig : g2_chart_ana](a ) is not in accordance with the exact numerical results because our assumption of low temperatures @xmath243 does not include the limit @xmath244 .    to improve the results in regions with @xmath240 we additionally have to take into account the transition sequences @xmath245 for the denominator and @xmath246 for the numerator . the result
is shown in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ana](b ) , where the agreement to the exact results in fig .
[ fig : g2_chart_ext](b ) is now very good for all temperatures and @xmath247 .
note that at @xmath248 a crossing of the eigenvalues of the second and third excited state occurs , as can be seen in fig .
[ fig : e](d ) .
this indicates that the role of these states in the calculation of @xmath126 is interchanged .
the impact of these eigenvalue - crossings would analytically be reproduced if we include contributions to @xmath126 from higher excited states .
47ifxundefined [ 1 ] ifx#1 ifnum [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo ifx [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo `` `` # 1''''@noop [ 0]secondoftwosanitize@url [ 0 ]
 + 12$12  & 12#1212_12%12@startlink[1]@endlink[0]@bib@innerbibempty @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop _ _  ( ,  ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop _ _
( , ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop _ _ ,  , vol .
( ,  ,  ) @noop _ _ ( ,  ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop _ _  ( ,  ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop _ _ ( ,  ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( )