Christian Schäfer1. 1. Department of Microtechnology and Nanoscience, MC2, Chalmers University of Technology, 412 96 Göteborg, Sweden.
Abstract
The coherent interaction of a large collection of molecules with a common photonic mode results in strong light-matter coupling, a feature that has proven highly beneficial for chemistry and has introduced the research topics polaritonic and QED chemistry. Here, we demonstrate an embedding approach to capture the collective nature while retaining the full ab initio representation of single molecules─an approach ideal for polaritonic chemistry. The accuracy of the embedding radiation-reaction ansatz is demonstrated for time-dependent density-functional theory. Then, by virtue of a simple proton-tunneling model, we illustrate that the influence of collective strong coupling on chemical reactions features a nontrivial dependence on the number of emitters and can alternate between strong catalyzing and an inhibiting effect. Bridging classical electrodynamics, quantum optical descriptions, and the ab initio description of realistic molecules, this work can serve as a guiding light for future developments and investigations in the quickly growing fields of QED chemistry and QED material design.
The coherent interaction of a large collection of molecules with a common photonic mode results in strong light-matter coupling, a feature that has proven highly beneficial for chemistry and has introduced the research topics polaritonic and QED chemistry. Here, we demonstrate an embedding approach to capture the collective nature while retaining the full ab initio representation of single molecules─an approach ideal for polaritonic chemistry. The accuracy of the embedding radiation-reaction ansatz is demonstrated for time-dependent density-functional theory. Then, by virtue of a simple proton-tunneling model, we illustrate that the influence of collective strong coupling on chemical reactions features a nontrivial dependence on the number of emitters and can alternate between strong catalyzing and an inhibiting effect. Bridging classical electrodynamics, quantum optical descriptions, and the ab initio description of realistic molecules, this work can serve as a guiding light for future developments and investigations in the quickly growing fields of QED chemistry and QED material design.
The self-consistent interaction
between light and matter developed over recent years into a viable
and important tool to nonintrusively shape chemistry and materials
on demand. Specific resonator geometries (cavities) support a limited
set of eigenmodes which couple strongly to matter, resulting in new
quasiparticles, so-called polaritons. Typical realizations of those
resonators range between nanometer-sized plasmonic structures, that
can couple to individual molecules, and Fabry-Pérot cavities,
in which many molecules couple collectively.[1−6] Such a hybridization between cavity mode(s) and matter exists also
in the absence of driving, in contrast to Floquet physics, which is
often limited by induced heating and decoherence[7,8]—the mere existence of the confined
modes can alter materials. This includes the control of photochemical
reactions by coupling to electronic excitations,[9−18] ground-state chemical reactions via vibrational strong coupling,[19−24] and energy and charge transfer over macroscopic dimensions.[25−31] Furthermore, notable progress in the construction of cavities[10,32−36] has led to a steadily rising number of applications outside chemistry,
ranging from polariton-mediated lasing,[37−39] over material design,[40−43] to quantum information theory.[44−46]However, most
of the so far existing chemically relevant applications
couple many molecules collectively to a common cavity mode. On one
hand, a predictive theoretical study of chemical processes requires
a thorough description of the electronic and vibrational structure
from first principles. On the other hand, a direct evaluation of large
ensembles is prohibited by the quickly increasing computational cost.
The vast majority of theoretical studies are therefore based on simplified
models that possess a limited applicability to complex systems and
chemical reactions. Descriptions from first-principles have been restricted
to small numbers of molecules.[47−53] Notable representatives are quantum-electrodynamical density-functional
theory (QEDFT)[54−57] and cavity coupled-cluster theory.[58,59]By embedding
the majority of the molecular ensemble into a local
potential, we will discover a path to open first-principles techniques
toward collective strong-coupling with arbitrary numbers of ensemble
molecules and species. This approach represents an extension of the
radiation-reaction ansatz derived in reference (47) and inherits its computational
and conceptual simplicity, allowing an almost effortless implementation
into existing time-dependent density-functional theory (TDDFT) libraries.Electronic and nuclear dynamics influenced by light are governed
by the nonrelativistic Hamiltonian: with fixed Coulomb gauge ∇·A = 0. The electromagnetic fields follow Maxwell’s
equation; self-consistency emerges when light and matter are solved
simultaneously. As demonstrated in reference (47), the classical interaction
with light can be efficiently accounted for via the transverse component
of the dyadic Green tensor G⊥ with Er,⊥(r,ω) = iμ0ω ∫ dr′G⊥(r,r′,ω)·(−ej(r′,ω)). The Green tensor
is the formal solution of Helmholtz’s equation[60]and characterizes the electromagnetic environment.
The microscopic paramagnetic current j serves as driving
inhomogeneity, i.e., oscillating charges emit light. In addition,
we have the freedom to assume that parts of the system behave as a
local and a potentially isotropic linear medium εr and μr which shape via the Helmholtz
equation the electromagnetic environment, represented by G. In this way, G can subsume large fractions of a system
while we free computational resources for the microscopic system described
by j. The local radiation-reaction potential V̂rr(t) = −R̂·Er,⊥(t), with Er,⊥(t) = Ft–1(iμ0ωG⊥(ω))∗Ṙ(t) and recalling that Ṙ(t) = ∫ dr(−ej(rt)), is obtained from
the derivative of the dipole moment provided by the real-time TDDFT
propagation. It acts on the microscopic currents via the Schrödinger
equation and manifests the self-consistent interaction with transverse
fields within the long-wavelength approximation. This allows us to
extend, for example, TDDFT with the self-consistent classical interaction
between an electromagnetic environment and matter by simply adding vrr(rt) = er·E(t) to the usual Kohn–Sham equations. We
will focus in the following on polaritonic chemistry, i.e., electromagnetic
environments that embody Fabry–Pérot-like eigenmodes
and a large number of emitters. Clearly, G, and with
it the presented embedding radiation-reaction ansatz, is generic and
able to account for any kind of complex environment.[47]In the collective strong-coupling regime between
many molecules
and a cavity, single photon processes dominate, and the individual
effect of the cavity field acting on a single molecule is comparably
weak. The electronic and vibrational excitation structure remains
then largely unaffected; the combined light-matter system hybridizes
based on those bare excitations (see SI for a detailed discussion). As long as this condition is satisfied,
i.e., as long as light and matter do not couple ultra-strongly, it
is safe to separate the matter ensemble into two parts. The first
describes a single “impurity” molecule contributing
the paramagnetic current j, which will be obtained as
a solution to Schrödinger’s equation. The second accounts
for all the remaining molecules as polarizable material εr(r,ω) = 1 + χE(r,ω). Surely this separation is also
convenient to account for two different species, e.g., the reactive
molecule and its solvent. In this sense, the problem of chemical reactions
in collective light-matter coupling can be seen as an impurity problem;
a single molecule undergoing a reaction is influenced by a large electromagnetic
environment.Knowing the bare Green tensor G0 (empty
cavity), we can obtain the “ensemble-dressed” dyadic
Green tensor with the help of the Dyson equation: We assumed here (and earlier) that the generic
susceptibility P(r,ω) = ε0 ∫ dr3χ(r,r′,ω)·E(r′,ω) is local χ(r,r′, ω) ≈ χ(r,ω)δ(r – r′). In many situations, the orientation of emitters within
a gas or fluid will be random, and its average polarizability is consequentially
isotropic.For a dilute ensemble satisfying the long wavelength
approximation,
the widely believed regime of polaritonic chemistry, the response
can be approximated as χE(r″,ω) ≈ χE(r0,ω)θ(r ∈ VE) ≈ χ(ω)VEδ(r – r0). Then, is evaluated at the position of the explicit
molecule and VE is the volume occupied
by the ensemble of emitters. This simplifies further for the widely
used one-dimensional Fabry–Pérot cavitieswith G⊥(ω)
≈ ϵcϵcT/[G0–1(ω) –
ω2/c2VEϵcT·χE(ω)·ϵc]. Cavity losses are accounted for by adding a weak cavity-decay
rate η. The remaining task is now to identify χE(ω). The (dipolar) polarization can be conveniently
obtained from the density–density response function[61] as R(ω) = ∫ dr(−e)rδρ(rω) = α(ω)·δElocal(ω) = ∫ dr ∫
dr′(−e2)rχρρ(r,r′,ω)r′·δElocal(ω),
a standard task for any TDDFT code. The induced dipole is related
to the polarization density P(ω) used in Maxwell’s
equation:such that χE(ω) = NEVE–1ϵ0–1α(ω), if E ≈ δElocal. This approximation is reasonable if we focus on weak external fields.
Alternatively, the Clausius–Mossotti relation[62] provides a simple and reliable solution for isotropic systems It might not always be possible or desirable
to obtain the embedding kernel from first-principles, and instead
simplified approaches such as the Drude-Lorentz model present easily
accessible alternatives.Equipped with the necessary framework,
we are now able to describe
the dynamic of single molecules in collective strong coupling relevant
for polaritonic chemistry. We start by demonstrating the emergence
of collective states for realistic systems from first-principles and
validating the embedding radiation-reaction ansatz. We then shift
our focus to chemistry and illustrate for a simple proton-tunneling
model how chemical reactions are modified via collective vibrational
strong-coupling.The embedding radiation-reaction ansatz has
been implemented into
GPAW[63]—a simple task as the local potential
is easily combined with the TDDFT framework. This allows us to validate
the previous conceptions for a realistic system, here chosen to be
a chain of sodium dimers in H-aggregate configuration oriented along
the z direction. We follow the computational flow-chart
illustrated in the table of contents (TOC) graphic with the simplification First, we obtain the bare response of a single
sodium dimer with a width given by the radiation-reaction potential[47] with the cross-sectional area A = 102 Å2. Next, we obtain the polarizability
α(ω) which defines G⊥(ω) and with it the corresponding
embedding radiation-reaction potential. Finally, a linear-response
calculation of a single sodium dimer that is affected by the ensemble-dressed
cavity is performed.Figure sets the
embedding approach (red) in relation with the direct response of N
sodium dimers (black) coupled to the cavity mode. The spectra obtained
from the embedding approach describe thus the response of a single molecule (e.g., the red molecule in the TOC graphic)
and the spectral strength characterizes how strong this single molecule
will contribute to the collective bright and dark
polaritonic states. We expect therefore that the embedded response
recovers the correct excitation poles of the collective states, but
its spectral strength is that of the contribution of a single molecule
to the collective state—precisely what Figure demonstrates. The most notable difference
is of course that the embedding approach describes the response of
a single dimer, i.e., most of the spectral density is located in the
dark state, which is not visible in the direct N-dimers + cavity calculations.
The more molecules that couple collectively, the smaller (∝1/N, e.g., (2Na2)/(4Na2) ≈ 2)
the contribution of a single molecule. Excitation energies and the
asymmetry of the spectral weight are in excellent agreement. As expected,
the embedding approach recovers the ‘with 1/N decreasing’ contribution of the single molecule to the collective
state (see SI for an extended discussion).
While the embedding approach sets its focus on the dynamic of single
molecules, it allows recovery of the spectra of the full collective
state (see SI for a detailed discussion).
The direct calculations exhibit a weak blue-shift that can be removed
by increasing the distance between dimers from 10 to 20 Å (magenta).
Its origin lies in the Coulomb-mediated dipole–dipole interactions
between the chain elements. Coulomb mediated couplings could be included
in the longitudinal component of the embedding radiation-reaction
ansatz or simply via commonly available techniques such as PCM or
frozen-density embedding.[64−66] This bright/dark state behavior
represents the hallmark of collective strong coupling and is at the
heart of polaritonic chemistry.[1,67] However, if our single
impurity molecule is detuned from the ensemble and cavity, the impurity
will heavily out-weight all other molecules at the avoided crossing
between impurity molecule and the polaritonic states (see SI and ref (68)).
Figure 1
Photoabsorption of Na2 chains coupled
to a single cavity
mode with ℏωc = 2.98 eV and ℏηc = 10–2ℏωc. The
response is calculated either directly using the TDDFT + radiation
reaction for all N dimers (black) or using the embedding radiation-reaction
approach (red) where only a single dimer is calculated explicitly.
Different combinations of light-matter coupling strengths and particle numbers N are illustrated. Vertical gray-dashed lines serve as a guide to
the eye for specific polaritonic resonances. Please refer to the text
for further explanations. The excitations have been artificially broadened;
see the SI for numerical details.
Photoabsorption of Na2 chains coupled
to a single cavity
mode with ℏωc = 2.98 eV and ℏηc = 10–2ℏωc. The
response is calculated either directly using the TDDFT + radiation
reaction for all N dimers (black) or using the embedding radiation-reaction
approach (red) where only a single dimer is calculated explicitly.
Different combinations of light-matter coupling strengths and particle numbers N are illustrated. Vertical gray-dashed lines serve as a guide to
the eye for specific polaritonic resonances. Please refer to the text
for further explanations. The excitations have been artificially broadened;
see the SI for numerical details.Using the embedding radiation-reaction ansatz is
substantially
cheaper than calculating the full dimer chain explicitly. While the
cost of the latter outgrows quickly all available computational resources,
our embedding approach retains the cost of a single-dimer calculation.
This computational advantage opens up the possibility to investigate
far more complex systems and will allow us to consider polaritonic
chemistry truly from first principles.During a chemical reaction,
structural changes of the molecule
will alter its vibrational spectrum. In between the reactant and product
state, the molecule will spend time in intermediate configurations
which will likely feature different vibrational energies and oscillator
strengths. The closer this detuned vibration is to the collective
polaritonic states, the stronger its contribution will outweigh the
individual contribution of an ensemble molecule (see, e.g., SI Figure 1). While the reactant configuration
will therefore play a negligible role in the polaritonic state, during
the reaction our individual molecule might play a dominant role. Even
if the number of dark states might be large, the bright states can
play a dominant role in this scenario.Let us illustrate this
concept for a simple proton-tunneling model
that is designed to represent ground-state reactions. A tilted double
well potential v(x, t) = x × 10−3 − x2 × 1.25 × 10−3 + x4 × (1 + 0.4/[1 + e−(]) × 10−4 (in a.u.) shown
in Figure is slightly
deformed over a time frame of approximately tp ≈ 0.1 ps. Such a deformation results in a weak excitation
of the proton wave function and leads to a finite probability to overcome
the barrier from the left to the right well. The amount of nuclear
density that overcomes the barrier will be considered as an indication
for the reactivity in our model. The role of the ensemble molecules
is to modify the interaction between cavity mode and our impurity
molecule; Figure b
illustrates an exemplary F–1iωG(ω). Importantly, the collective coupling
between cavity and ensemble has to be strong enough to induce beatings
within the time frame of the reaction. This defines a minimal hybridization
strength in G(ω) for a given reaction speed 1/ΩRabi ∼ TRabi < τreaction—a quick reaction demands a large hybridization.
We consider the ensemble in the following as a generic second species
which is represented by a Drude–Lorentz model
Figure 2
(a) Potential energy surface before (black)
and after (red) the
deformation. Dashed horizontal lines indicate eigenvalues of the respective
static single-proton Schrödinger equation. (b) Time-domain
convolution-argument F–1iωG(ω) for g0/ℏωc = 0.0135, γe = 0.025ωc, η = 10–4ωc (see
text for elaboration). Only for sizable hybridization strength can
we observe the Rabi period on the time scale of the reaction time.
(a) Potential energy surface before (black)
and after (red) the
deformation. Dashed horizontal lines indicate eigenvalues of the respective
static single-proton Schrödinger equation. (b) Time-domain
convolution-argument F–1iωG(ω) for g0/ℏωc = 0.0135, γe = 0.025ωc, η = 10–4ωc (see
text for elaboration). Only for sizable hybridization strength can
we observe the Rabi period on the time scale of the reaction time.Figure (top) shows
the absolute influence of resonant collective light-matter coupling
on the accumulated proton tunneling for various combinations of fundamental
coupling and ensemble size. The influence of the ensemble on the reaction
depends largely on the single-particle coupling strength to our impurity
molecule and is, even for Nensemble =
0 (see top), already noticeably increased. Smaller coupling values
(e.g., g0/ℏωc =
0.0027) show the tendency to decrease this effect when increasing
the ensemble size, as one would intuitively expect. Increasing the
fundamental light-matter coupling does not only shift the resulting
curve to smaller Nensemble values but
furthermore intensifies the overall trend. In the extreme case of g0/ℏωc = 0.0135, we observe
initially an increase in catalysis followed by an inhibiting effect
for larger Nensemble. However, Figure (bottom) illustrates
that the proton-tunneling dynamic features a complex, alternating
dependence on Nensemble. The latter is
fluctuating between a 100% increase and almost full inhibition of
proton-tunneling. Particularly striking is that the magnitude of the
cavity influence remains comparable between Nensemble = 0 and Nensemble = 104 or even increases in the case of g0/ℏωc = 0.00054 (yellow). Even for Nensemble > 108 can fading resonances
be observed. Figure (bottom) would suggest that, depending on cavity parameters; selected
resonances; and the mixture of reactant, product and solvent, a chemical
reaction can be selectively catalyzed or inhibited. Both catalyzing[69] and inhibiting effects have been observed in
experiments using either vibrational[19,20] or electronic
strong coupling.[9,12]
Figure 3
(Top) Absolute cavity influence on reactivity
CR = ∫0d/[1 –
(∫–∞0dxn(x,t) – ∫0∞dxn(x,t))] – CR for increasing
the number of ensemble emitters. (Bottom) relative cavity influence
CR/CR in percent. The dependence
of the cavity influence on the number of ensemble molecules Nensemble is nontrivial and far from a simple
1/Nensemble trend. Decoherences, for ensemble
and cavity, are included but show no particularly striking effect
as detailed in the SI. We use a Drude–Lorentz
model with ℏωp = 6.387 × 10–4 eV. The first excitations are aligned at t = 0
ℏωc = 0.046721 eV = ℏωE = ℏω0–1; the cavity decay rate is
fixed to η = 10–4ωc. For
large ensembles and coupling values, the light-matter hybridization
reaches significant values which calls the semi-classical description
into question. We start to enter this domain around Nensemble = 104 for the largest coupling.
(Top) Absolute cavity influence on reactivity
CR = ∫0d/[1 –
(∫–∞0dxn(x,t) – ∫0∞dxn(x,t))] – CR for increasing
the number of ensemble emitters. (Bottom) relative cavity influence
CR/CR in percent. The dependence
of the cavity influence on the number of ensemble molecules Nensemble is nontrivial and far from a simple
1/Nensemble trend. Decoherences, for ensemble
and cavity, are included but show no particularly striking effect
as detailed in the SI. We use a Drude–Lorentz
model with ℏωp = 6.387 × 10–4 eV. The first excitations are aligned at t = 0
ℏωc = 0.046721 eV = ℏωE = ℏω0–1; the cavity decay rate is
fixed to η = 10–4ωc. For
large ensembles and coupling values, the light-matter hybridization
reaches significant values which calls the semi-classical description
into question. We start to enter this domain around Nensemble = 104 for the largest coupling.Figure (top) illustrates
that the influence of collective light-matter coupling is sensitive
to the energetic alignment between the ensemble, cavity mode, and
reacting system. The associated charge-transfer dynamic is shown in Figure (bottom). Such a
complex behavior for our simple model demonstrates that the influence
of collective strong coupling on chemical reactivity can be highly
situational—a strong argument for the importance of ab initio approaches.
Figure 4
Top, absolute cavity influence on reactivity
CR = ∫0d/[1 −
(∫–∞0dxn(x,t) – ∫0∞dxn(x,t))] – CR for an
increasing number of ensemble emitters for different energetic alignments
between cavity/ensemble frequency and bare excitation frequency of
our impurity molecule. Bottom, proton-tunneling (∫–0dxn(x,t) – ∫0dxn(x,t)) for Nensemble = 20. The complex excitation structure leads to a
nontrivial influence on the proton tunneling. In contrast to the other
parameters, the smallest frequency tends to inhibit the proton-tunneling
process. We fixed the cavity volume V in all calculations
to the value of the resonant alignment. It is apparent from the behavior
with increasing ensemble number Nensemble that the specific effect of the cavity on the chemical reactivity
is sensitive to the energetic alignment between cavity, ensemble,
and reacting molecule as well as the hybridization between those systems.
Top, absolute cavity influence on reactivity
CR = ∫0d/[1 −
(∫–∞0dxn(x,t) – ∫0∞dxn(x,t))] – CR for an
increasing number of ensemble emitters for different energetic alignments
between cavity/ensemble frequency and bare excitation frequency of
our impurity molecule. Bottom, proton-tunneling (∫–0dxn(x,t) – ∫0dxn(x,t)) for Nensemble = 20. The complex excitation structure leads to a
nontrivial influence on the proton tunneling. In contrast to the other
parameters, the smallest frequency tends to inhibit the proton-tunneling
process. We fixed the cavity volume V in all calculations
to the value of the resonant alignment. It is apparent from the behavior
with increasing ensemble number Nensemble that the specific effect of the cavity on the chemical reactivity
is sensitive to the energetic alignment between cavity, ensemble,
and reacting molecule as well as the hybridization between those systems.Recall that the influence on the reactivity will
depend not only
on the energetic alignment between the reactant, product, solvent,
and cavity but also its hybridization strength in relation to the
reaction time. Identifying the specific influence of collective strong
coupling on a chemical reaction remains an open and theoretically
challenging problem. While the chosen proton-tunneling system is too
simplistic to draw direct connections to the experiment, it demonstrates
the feasibility of the introduced embedding radiation-reaction approach.
Furthermore, it illustrates clearly that the cavity influence on chemical
reactivity can persist even at a large Nensemble and that the catalyzing and inhibiting effect could be present for
the same chemical reaction. Recent work[22−24,70] showed promising progress, and yet much remains to be investigated.
A conclusive understanding will likely demand a collaborative effort
involving experimental work, ab initio theory, and
simplified models.To conclude, by embedding an ensemble of
molecules into the recently
proposed radiation-reaction potential,[47] we have been able to tackle the conundrum of a first-principles
description of the material structure combined with the collective
light-matter interaction involving a large number of emitters. The
embedding ansatz is trivial to implement into existing time-dependent
density-functional theory libraries as it adds a simple local potential.
This allowed us to treat collective strong coupling from first-principles
featuring an arbitrarily large number of emitters with marginal additional
computational cost compared to ordinary real-time TDDFT calculations.
Last, by tuning the cavity in the infrared regime, we demonstrated
that the modification of proton-tunneling reactions via collective
strong coupling can possess a nontrivial dependence on the number
of ensemble molecules, featuring domains of a 100% increase in reactivity
but also near full inhibition. Cavity losses decrease the effect of
collective strong coupling on the tunneling process but have an overall
negligible influence (see SI).This
work paves the way to tackling new regimes of theoretical
chemistry, accounting for the self-consistent interaction between
light with macroscopic systems while focusing on the microscopic dynamic
of single subsystems—entirely from first principles. This allows
us to relax previous simplifications to only single or few molecules
with artificially increased coupling strength.[22,51,53,68] Already our
here illustrated simple proton-tunneling model exhibited nontrivial
behavior with the number of emitters. We can expect that complex multistep
chemical reactions will further complicate this trend—a strong
argument for the need of first-principles techniques. The seamless
combination of embedding radiation-reaction and quantum-electrodynamical
density-functional theory, especially the recently developed local-density
approximation,[56] ensures that quantum-corrections
of the light-matter interaction can be properly accounted for if necessary.
Possible extensions include a consistent treatment of near-field effects
that are relevant for solvation, plasmonic environments, and J/H aggregates.
Equipped with this toolset, describing consistently the seminal experimental
work in polaritonic chemistry[1−3] moves within reach.
Authors: James A Hutchison; Tal Schwartz; Cyriaque Genet; Eloïse Devaux; Thomas W Ebbesen Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2012-01-10 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: David M Coles; Niccolo Somaschi; Paolo Michetti; Caspar Clark; Pavlos G Lagoudakis; Pavlos G Savvidis; David G Lidzey Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: Rohit Chikkaraddy; Bart de Nijs; Felix Benz; Steven J Barrow; Oren A Scherman; Edina Rosta; Angela Demetriadou; Peter Fox; Ortwin Hess; Jeremy J Baumberg Journal: Nature Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Simone Latini; Dongbin Shin; Shunsuke A Sato; Christian Schäfer; Umberto De Giovannini; Hannes Hübener; Angel Rubio Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-08-03 Impact factor: 11.205