Atom-in-cavity model

The following figures and data are our benchmarking results (for detailed discussion please see ref¹).

Figure 14. Population dynamics of the 2-state atom-in-cavity model with 400 standing wave modes. In each panel, the black and red dashed lines represent the population of the atomic ground and excited state, respectively. Panel (a): NaF-cc. Panel (b): NaF-cx. Panel (c): NaF-TW. Panel (d): NaF-TW2. Panel (e): NaF-HW. Panel (f) NaF-HW2. Panel (g): SH-1. Panel (h): SH-2. Panel (i): SH-3. The numerically exact results produced by truncated configuration interaction (taken from refs ² and ³) are demonstrated by solid lines with corresponding colors in each panel. data

Figure 15. Population dynamics of the 3-state atom-in-cavity model with 400 standing wave modes. In each panel, the black, red and blue dashed lines represent the population of the first, second and third atomic state, respectively. Panel (a): NaF-cc. Panel (b): NaF-cx. Panel (c): NaF-TW. Panel (d): NaF-TW2. Panel (e): NaF-HW. Panel (f) NaF-HW2. Panel (g): SH-1. Panel (h): SH-2. Note that SH-3 is not applicable for this 3-state model. The numerically exact results produced by truncated configuration interaction (taken from refs ² and ³) are demonstrated by solid lines with corresponding colors in each panel. data

1 B. Wu, B. Li, X. He, X. Cheng, J. Ren and J. Liu, "Nonadiabatic field: A conceptually novel approach for nonadiabatic quantum molecular dynamics ", J. Chem. Theory Comput. 21, 3775-3813 (2025). ↩

2 N. M. Hoffmann, C. Schäfer, A. Rubio, A. Kelly, H. Appel, "Capturing vacuum fluctuations and photon correlations in cavity quantum electrodynamics with multitrajectory Ehrenfest dynamics.", Phys. Rev. A 99, 063819 (2019). ↩ ↩

3 N. M. Hoffmann, C. Schäfer,N. Säkkinen, A. Rubio, H. Appel, A. Kelly, "Benchmarking semiclassical and perturbative methods for real-time simulations of cavity-bound emission and interference", J. Chem. Phys. 151, 244113 (2019). ↩ ↩