Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 3, 2026

Determination of the Excitation and Coupling Rates Between Light Emitters and Surface Plasmon Polaritons
Published on: July 21, 2018
Deterministic coupling of site-controlled quantum emitters in monolayer WSe2 to plasmonic nanocavities
Yue Luo1,2, Gabriella D Shepard1,2, Jenny V Ardelean3
1Department of Physics, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Abstract:
Solid-state single-quantum emitters are crucial resources for on-chip photonic quantum technologies and require efficient cavity-emitter coupling to realize quantum networks beyond the single-node level1,2. Monolayer WSe2, a transition metal dichalcogenide semiconductor, can host randomly located quantum emitters3-6, while nanobubbles7 as well as lithographically defined arrays of pillars in contact with the transition metal dichalcogenide act as spatially controlled stressors8,9. The induced strain can then create excitons at defined locations. This ability to create zero-dimensional (0D) excitons anywhere within a 2D material is promising for the development of scalable quantum technologies, but so far lacks mature cavity integration and suffers from low emitter quantum yields. Here we demonstrate a deterministic approach to achieve Purcell enhancement at lithographically defined locations using the sharp corners of a metal nanocube for both electric field enhancement and to deform a 2D material. This nanoplasmonic platform allows the study of the same quantum emitter before and after coupling. For a 3 × 4 array of quantum emitters we show Purcell factors of up to 551 (average of 181), single-photon emission rates of up to 42 MHz and a narrow exciton linewidth as low as 55 μeV. Furthermore, the use of flux-grown WSe2 increases the 0D exciton lifetimes to up to 14 ns and the cavity-enhanced quantum yields from an initial value of 1% to up to 65% (average 44%).
Related Concept Videos
Quantum Numbers
The Quantum-Mechanical Model of an Atom
Spin–Spin Coupling: Two-Bond Coupling (Geminal Coupling)
The central atom need not be NMR-active because its electrons are affected by the electron polarization of the spin-active atoms. However, spin information is transmitted less effectively than in one-bond coupling, and 2J values are usually weaker than 1J values. The energy of...
Spin–Spin Coupling: Three-Bond Coupling (Vicinal Coupling)
The extent of coupling depends on the C‑C bond length, the two H‑C‑C angles, any electron-withdrawing substituents, and the dihedral angle between the involved orbitals. The...
G-protein Coupled Receptors
Spin–Spin Coupling: One-Bond Coupling

