Abstract
Strong lightmatter interactions in both the singleemitter and collective strong coupling regimes attract significant attention due to emerging applications in quantum and nonlinear optics as well as opportunities for modifying materialrelated properties. Exploration of these phenomena is theoretically demanding, as polaritons exist at the intersection between quantum optics, solid state physics, and quantum chemistry. Fortunately, nanoscale polaritons can be realized in small plasmonmolecule systems, enabling treatment with ab initio methods. Here, we show that timedependent densityfunctional theory calculations access the physics of nanoscale plasmonmolecule hybrids and predict vacuum Rabi splitting. By considering a system comprising a fewhundredatom aluminum nanoparticle interacting with benzene molecules, we show that cavity quantum electrodynamics holds down to resonators of a few cubic nanometers in size, yielding a singlemolecule coupling strength exceeding 200 meV due to a massive vacuum field of 4.5 V · nm^{−1}. In a broader perspective, ab initio methods enable parameterfree indepth studies of polaritonic systems for emerging applications.
Introduction
Lightmatter interaction between an optical mode and a quantum emitter is accurately described in terms of the cavity quantum electrodynamics (cQED) formalism^{1}. The interaction can be weak or strong, depending on circumstances, leading to drastically different behavior. The regime of strong lightmatter coupling, unlike its weak counterpart, leads to formation of hybrid cavityemitter eigenmodes manifested in coherent energy exchange between the subsystems occurring on timescales that are much faster than the corresponding damping rates. Thus, the emitter and the cavity form a unified lightmatter hybrid polariton, whose properties, including spontaneous emission and chemical potential, can be tuned^{2,3,4}. Because of their compositional nature, polaritons are useful for photon–photon interactions, which lead to remarkable nonlinear and quantum optical phenomena, including photon blockade and BoseEinstein condensation of exciton polaritons^{5,6,7}. On the other hand, strong lightmatter coupling may lead to changes in emitter properties, including photochemical rates^{8,9,10,11,12} and exciton transport^{13,14}.
Traditionally cavityexciton polaritons have been realized in atomic or solid state systems utilizing high qualityfactor optical cavities at low temperatures^{15}. Polaritonic behavior associated with “dressing” of the emitter by a cavity field is usually captured by traditional quantum optical approaches such as Jaynes–Cummings or Dicke models^{2,3,4,16,17}. However, these quantum optical formalisms treat matter in an extremely simplified manner, that is, as a twolevel system, leading to oversimplifications and inconsistencies in the description of the material subpart.
Advanced theoretical techniques developed recently allow for more sophisticated effects including, for example, multiple electronic resonances, accounting for atomic vibrations, and lightmatter interactions beyond the pointdipole approximation. Significant progress along these lines has been achieved by several groups using various quantum optical and quantum chemistry methods^{9,10,11,18,19,20,21}. However, typically either molecules or electromagnetic fields in these approaches are treated in a simplified manner.
Plasmonmolecule interactions can be modeled computationally using densityfunctional theory (DFT)^{22,23} and/or timedependent densityfunctional theory (TDDFT)^{24} approaches, thanks to the relatively small number of atoms involved in these interactions. Here, we model the entire plasmonexciton system by TDDFT, which allows the whole system to be treated on the same footing, enabling one to track effects related to modification of the matter subpart, which are inaccessible by purely quantum optical or classical electromagnetism methods. In fact, analytical and numerical quantum chemistry approaches, including DFT and TDDFT, have been successfully applied to study plasmonmolecule interactions, charge transfer, chemical enhancement and electromagnetic effects in surfaceenhanced Raman scattering experiments^{25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33}. However, vacuum Rabi splitting and strong plasmonmolecule coupling have not been in the focus. Yet, many recent experimental observations cannot be easily explained with current theories^{34,35,36}.
In response to the above, quantum electrodynamics densityfunctional theory (QEDDFT) has been developed recently^{19}, enabling the modeling of strong coupling between electromagnetic cavity modes and electronic excitations^{37,38}. While the commonlyused TDDFT approaches with classical description of electric fields may not be able to describe the full range of quantum optical phenomena that QEDDFT aims at, we demonstrate in this paper that the cavity mode created by a localized surface plasmon resonance as well as its strong coupling with excitons can be described already within the standard TDDFT. In the following, we argue that theoretical predictions obtained at the nanometer scale may in fact be useful for understanding and modeling of more extended systems. We use TDDFT to study the optical response of aluminum (Al) nanoparticles composed of a few hundred atoms coupled with one to eight benzene molecules. Thereby we show that cavity quantum electrodynamics holds down to resonators on the order of a few cubic nanometers. In the case of an Al_{201} particle we observe a singlemolecule coupling strength of 200 meV due to a very large vacuum field of 4.5 V · nm^{−1}, while for a large number of molecules, the molecules perturb the system increasing the mode volume and decreasing the permolecule coupling strength. For larger Al_{586} and Al_{1289} nanoparticles the coupling strengths are smaller and follow well the \(\sqrt N\) dependence of coherent coupling with the number N of molecules.
Results
Modeling strong coupling with TDDFT
We model lightmatter interactions by employing the realtimepropagation (RT) TDDFT approach^{39} based on the localized basis sets^{40,41} as implemented in the opensource GPAW package^{42,43}. This RTTDDFT code is combined with extensive analysis tools^{44} that are utilized for analyzing the electronhole transition contributions to resonances and visualizing them as transition contribution maps (TCM)^{44,45}. See Methods for detailed description. We consider a proofofprinciple plasmonic system based on idealized Al nanoparticles. The freeelectronlike electronic structure of Al greatly simplifies the analysis in contrast to noble metals with delectronscreened plasmons. In addition, Al has attracted recent interest as an alternative plasmonic material^{46}.
Our model systems consist of Al nanoparticles (regular truncated octahedra with 201, 586, and 1289 atoms, approximate diameters of 1.8, 2.7, and 3.6 nm, respectively) and benzene molecules (see Supplementary Fig. 1). The Al_{201} nanoparticle exhibits a plasmon resonance at ℏω_{Al} = 7.7 eV (Fig. 1a), the collective nature of which is recognizable in the TCM (Fig. 1b)^{44}. The benzene molecule has a doublydegenerate resonance at ℏω_{B} = 7.1 eV with a transition dipole moment μ_{1} = 4.35 D (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 2).
When the nanoparticle and benzene molecules are placed in proximity (bottom part of Fig. 1a) their resonances couple and form two polaritons. The lower (at 6.9 eV) and upper (at 7.7 eV) polaritons are, respectively, mixed symmetric and antisymmetric plasmonmolecule states as apparent in the TCMs of the coupled system (Fig. 1d, e). A comparison with the TCMs of the uncoupled constituents (Fig. 1b, c) reveals the individual contributions to the polaritons. The lowenergy (≲2 eV) transitions near the Fermi level form the plasmon, while the contribution from about −2 to 3 eV originates from the molecular exciton. Crucially, the two polaritonic states in Fig. 1d, e differ with respect to the sign of the molecular contributions. In case of the lower polariton (LP) plasmonic and molecular transitions are inphase, while for the upper polariton (UP) they are outofphase. This, respectively, symmetric and antisymmetric combination is also clearly visible in the induced densities (Fig. 1a). At the LP the dipoles of both particle and molecules are parallel, while they are antiparallel at the UP. Such an arrangement is archetypal for a strongly coupled system. This observation is valid also for the other systems discussed below, indicating the presence of strong or nearstrong coupling already in the case of a single molecule placed 3 Å away from the Al_{201} particle. We note here, that the density of states of the molecular elements in the coupled system does not significantly differ from its uncoupled counterpart (Supplementary Fig. 3).
To determine the fidelity of TDDFT for modeling strong coupling, we calculated the photoabsorption spectra of Al_{201}, Al_{586}, and Al_{1289} coupled to N benzene molecules, whose dipole moment is aligned collinearly with that of the plasmon vacuum field. The molecules are placed at the corners of two opposing {100} facets of the particles (Supplementary Fig. 1) and structural relaxation is neglected for simplicity. The coupled systems exhibit the LP and UP modes, the splitting of which increases with the number of molecules, see Fig. 2 (TCMs show similar symmetric/antisymmetric mixtures of plasmonic and molecular transitions, see Supplementary Fig. 4). The Rabi splitting of the absorption spectra for Al_{201} and one benzene molecule equals 730 meV, a value comparable to the plasmon width. A nonnegligible part of the UP/LP separation originates, however, from the plasmonexciton detuning and the coupling strength g is 200 meV for one benzene, a value smaller than the geometrical mean of the plasmon and exciton widths (300 meV). The strong coupling condition is, however, fulfilled for N ≥ 3 for Al_{201} and for larger N for larger particles.
Coherent coupling and mode volumes
One signature of collective coherent coupling is the squareroot dependence of g on the number N of identical excitons with transition dipole moment μ_{1} interacting with an optical cavity in the standard QED expression,
where \(E_{{\mathrm{vac}}} = \sqrt {\hbar \omega _{{\mathrm{Al}}}/(2\varepsilon _0V)}\) is the vacuum field and V is the volume of the electromagnetic mode^{15}. Using the Al_{201} particle as an example, the expected scaling is shown in Fig. 3 by the black dotted line using μ_{1} of a benzene molecule and \(E_{{\mathrm{vac}}}^{(201)} = 4.5\,{\mathrm{V}}\, \cdot \,{\mathrm{nm}}^{  1}\) with ℏω_{Al} = 7.7 eV and V = 3.3 nm^{3} corresponding to the volume of the Al_{201} particle, which is an adequate estimate for a nanometersized particle^{47}. To estimate the coupling strengths g from our firstprinciples data, we fit the absorption spectra with a coupled harmonic oscillator model^{48} (see Supplementary Note 1), yielding the g values shown as symbols in Fig. 3. We notice that the coupling strength values obtained using the standard QED expression of Eq. (1), which is insensitive to spatial variations in the electric field, are larger than the ones derived from coupled oscillator fitting. A similar observation holds for the larger particles Al_{586} and Al_{1289}, except, that due to larger volumes, their respective vacuum fields \((E_{{\mathrm{vac}}}^{(586)} = 2.6\,{\mathrm{V}} \cdot {\mathrm{nm}}^{  1},\,E_{{\mathrm{vac}}}^{(1289)} = 1.8\,{\mathrm{V}} \cdot {\mathrm{nm}}^{  1})\) and coupling strengths are reduced.
Coupling efficiencies
Equation (1) is accurate under the condition that all excitonic modes are coherently coupled with the same, maximal rate to the cavity. This is true for structures such as FabryPérot cavities, photonic crystal slabs, or micropillars, in which the antinode of the mode is accessible to excitonic modes of molecules or semiconductors by precise placement via trapping or doping^{3,15}. For isolated plasmonic particles the maximum of its mode is, however, typically inside the particle^{47}, such as in the present case. Consequently, the molecular coherent dipole moment interacting with the cavity is smaller than its maximum value of 4.35 D, and it is estimated to be in the range from 2 to 4 D, increasing with the size of the nanoparticle. The reduction of the coherent dipole moment is typically expressed in terms of an efficiency factor η determined by the ratio of the mode energy density at the position of the exciton to its maximum value^{49}.
Before extracting efficiency factors η from the TDDFT data, we estimate their values on the basis of classical electromagnetic calculations, which are acceptable at a semiquantitative level for picocavities^{50}, using a local Drudepermittivity tailored to match the TDDFT absorption spectrum for Al_{201}. We find that in the spatial region occupied by the benzene molecule the efficiency η ranges from 0.3 to 0.5 (Fig. 4a), due to the rapid decrease of the plasmoninduced electric field. However, such a low value of η predicted by calculating the mode profile of a bare cavity might not hold in practice. It is known that the presence of a material with a refractive index greater than the background causes additional field localization, increasing the coupling strength^{49}. While a single benzene molecule cannot be meaningfully described in terms of a refractive index, it causes a similar effect. This is supported by the electric nearfield enhancements calculated with TDDFT (Fig. 4b–d). In comparison to the field of the plasmon in the bare nanoparticle, in the LP/UP of the coupled system the benzene molecule focuses the electric field, modifying the cavity and, consequently, its vacuum field^{49}.
To estimate the coupling efficiencies η from the TDDFTderived coupling strengths (Fig. 3), we extract their values as modifications of the slope predicted by Eq. (1). The resulting dependencies \(g = \eta \sqrt N {\rm{\mu}} _1E_{{\mathrm{vac}}}\) are shown as dashed lines in Fig. 3. For Al_{201}, the corresponding value η_{201} = 0.47 gives a good agreement for N ≤ 3, but for N > 3 the coupling strengths fall below the slope set by η_{201}. Such a deviation for large N is not observed for the two larger particles, which, respectively, have efficiency factors of η_{586} = 0.61 and η_{1289} = 0.78. These larger efficiencies imply that the plasmonic modes of the larger particles are used more efficiently than in the case of Al_{201}. Minor deviations seen for the two larger nanoparticles for N < 3 are probably caused by inaccurate fitting of the absorption spectra as the LP and UP are not clearly separated.
To test the effect of a diminishing overlap between the vacuum field of the cavity and the molecular exciton, we calculated the dependence of coupling strength on the nanoparticlemolecule separation (Fig. 5). The Rabi splitting of LP and UP decreases with increasing separation and the reduction of the coupling efficiency^{49} leads to a decrease in the coupling strength (Fig. 5b).
Discussion
The coupling efficiencies estimated from classical electromagnetic and TDDFT calculations are consistent. The addition of molecules leads to a systematic red shift of the plasmon (Supplementary Fig. 5), which is largest for Al_{201} and scales approximately inversely with particle volume in agreement with earlier predictions^{51}. The red shift happens simultaneously with strong coupling and complicates the analysis. While the calculations yield a \(\sqrt N\) dependence of the coupling strength for the larger particles (Al_{586}, Al_{1289}), for the smallest particle (Al_{201}) the efficiency varies with the number of benzene molecules for N ≳ 3. In the Al_{201} case, the volume occupied by the molecules is nonnegligible relative to the particle volume and every additional molecule changes the properties of the nanoscale cavity and subsequently modifies the coupling.
From the perspective of classical electromagnetism, the molecules can be represented as a polarizable background with excitons modelled by Lorentzians^{52}. This background can be treated as part of the cavity and consequently modifies its local optical density of states (LDoS)^{49,53}. This modification manifests itself as focusing of the electric field around the molecules, clearly visible for Al_{201} coupled with one benzene molecule (Fig. 4c, d), in comparison to the resonance of Al_{201} alone (Fig. 4b). These LDoS modifications increase the mode volume, decreasing (or at least not enhancing) the coupling strength per molecule. Such changes of the cavity induced by adding molecules are not visible for larger particles, as for Al_{586} and Al_{1289} the coupling strengths follow the \(\sqrt N\) dependence.
In conclusion, we demonstrated the suitability of firstprinciples TDDFT for studying strong coupling between plasmons and molecular excitons. This approach allows us to capture relevant interactions at the atomic level. This is important for studying coupling of molecules to picocavities slightly larger than the molecules themselves^{50,54} as well as ultrastrong coupling that leads to modification of the molecular ground state^{18,55}. Furthermore, we have shown the degree to which the simple cQED description holds for small systems. For small singleparticle cavities, such as the Al_{201} particle considered here, the presence of molecules modifies the cavity and, consequently, its mode volume. The mode volume, in turn, affects the coupling strength, whose value does not increase as quickly as predicted by QED. This slower increase of g is noticeable for the Al_{201} particle, but for larger sizes (Al_{586}, Al_{1289}) deviations from Eq. (1) become negligible. Despite the deviations between a simple cQED formula and TDDFT calculations, the order of magnitude agreement between them is quite remarkable. In particular, it is rather surprising that such a simple formula at all holds at such small scales. Based on the obtained coupling strengths, calculated mode volumes and field enhancements, reaching single/fewmolecule ultrastrong coupling for singleparticle cavities may prove challenging.
Methods
DFT and TDDFT calculations
The DFT and TDDFT calculations were carried out using the PerdewBurkeErnzerhof (PBE)^{56} exchangecorrelation functional in the adiabatic limit. The spectra were calculated using the δkick technique^{39} in the linearresponse regime and employing the dipole approximation for lightmatter interaction. The default projector augmentedwave^{57} data sets and doubleζ polarized (dzp) basis sets provided in GPAW were used. The dzp basis set of Al includes diffuse 3p functions, which are important for describing plasmon resonances^{58}. To minimize spurious effects due to the basisset superposition error, the socalled ghostatom approach was used separately for each nanoparticle size to keep the total system basis set as intact as possible despite the changing number of surrounding molecules. In general, while the used basis sets might not be adequate for yielding numerical values at the completebasisset limit, they are expected to be sufficient for the purposes of the present work. A grid spacing parameter of 0.3 Å was chosen to represent densities and potentials, and the molecules/particles were surrounded by a vacuum region of at least 6 Å. The Hartree potential was evaluated on a larger grid with at least 120 Å vacuum around the system and a coarser grid spacing of 1.2 Å, and subsequently refined to the original grid. For the time propagation, we used a time step of Δt = 15 as and total propagation time of at least T = 30 fs. The spectra were broadened using Lorentzian spectral broadening with η = 0.1 eV corresponding to a full width at halfmaximum of 0.2 eV. Codes for reproducing the calculations are available (see Code availability).
Transition contribution map (TCM)
A TCM is used for visualizing the KohnSham (KS) electronhole transition contributions to photoabsorption. Briefly, the photoabsorption crosssection S(ω) is expressed in the basis of occupied (i) and unoccupied (a) KS states as \(S(\omega ) = \mathop {\sum}\nolimits_{ia} S_{ia}(\omega )\)^{44}. In TCM, the elements of the matrix S_{ia}(ω) at a chosen resonance energy are plotted on a Gaussianbroadened twodimensional plane spanned by the energy axes for occupied and unoccupied KS states. The color indicates the sign of the transition contribution: positive (red) or negative (blue), and the color intensity indicates the magnitude of the contribution. The maps are augmented with the corresponding densities of states, and a diagonal line is drawn to indicate the KS eigenvalue difference corresponding to ω. See ref. ^{44} for a detailed description of TCM construction.
Software used
DFT calculations were carried out using the GPAW package^{42,43} with localized basis sets (LCAO mode)^{41}. TDDFT calculations were conducted using the LCAORTTDDFT implementation in GPAW^{40} and analyzed using the TCM tools therein^{44}. The ASE library^{59} was used for constructing the atomic structures. The NumPy^{60} and Matplotlib^{61} Python packages, the VMD software^{62,63}, and Inkscape were used for processing data and generating figures.
Data availability
The atomic structures and the photoabsorption spectra are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3242317. The coupling strengths and other fitting parameters are listed in Supplementary Tables 1–4. Other data that support the findings of this study are available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Code availability
Codes reproducing the data at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3242317 are available at the same location.
References
 1.
Scully, M. O. & Zubairy, M. S. Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1997).
 2.
Törmä, P. & Barnes, W. L. Strong coupling between surface plasmon polaritons and emitters: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 013901 (2015).
 3.
Baranov, D. G., Wersäll, M., Cuadra, J., Antosiewicz, T. J. & Shegai, T. Novel nanostructures and materials for strong light–matter interactions. ACS Photonics 5, 24–42 (2018).
 4.
Kockum, A. F., Miranowicz, A., De Liberato, S., Savasta, S. & Nori, F. Ultrastrong coupling between light and matter. Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 19–40 (2019).
 5.
Yoshie, T. et al. Vacuum Rabi splitting with a single quantum dot in a photonic crystal nanocavity. Nature 432, 200–203 (2004).
 6.
Birnbaum, K. M. et al. Photon blockade in an optical cavity with one trapped atom. Nature 436, 87–90 (2005).
 7.
Kasprzak, J. et al. Bose–einstein condensation of exciton polaritons. Nature 443, 409–414 (2006).
 8.
Hutchison, J. A., Schwartz, T., Genet, C., Devaux, E. & Ebbesen, T. W. Modifying chemical landscapes by coupling to vacuum fields. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 51, 1592–1596 (2012).
 9.
Herrera, F. & Spano, F. C. Cavitycontrolled chemistry in molecular ensembles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 238301 (2016).
 10.
Galego, J., GarciaVidal, F. J. & Feist, J. Suppressing photochemical reactions with quantized light fields. Nat. Commun. 7, 13841 (2016).
 11.
MartínezMartínez, L. A., Ribeiro, R. F., CamposGonzálezAngulo, J. & YuenZhou, J. Can ultrastrong coupling change groundstate chemical reactions? ACS Photonics 5, 167–176 (2018).
 12.
Munkhbat, B., Wersäll, M., Baranov, D. G., Antosiewicz, T. J. & Shegai, T. Suppression of photooxidation of organic chromophores by strong coupling to plasmonic nanoantennas. Sci. Adv. 4, eaas9552 (2018).
 13.
Feist, J. & GarciaVidal, F. J. Extraordinary exciton conductance induced by strong coupling. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 196402 (2015).
 14.
Zhong, X. et al. Nonradiative energy transfer mediated by hybrid lightmatter states. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 6202–6206 (2016).
 15.
Khitrova, G., Gibbs, M., Kira, M., Koch, S. W. & Scherer, A. Vacuum Rabi splitting in semiconductors. Nat. Phys. 2, 81–90 (2006).
 16.
Jaynes, E. T. & Cummings, F. W. Comparison of quantum and semiclassical radiation theories with application to the beam maser. Proc. IEEE 51, 89–109 (1963).
 17.
Garraway, B. M. The dicke model in quantum optics: Dicke model revisited. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 1137–1155 (2011).
 18.
Galego, J., GarciaVidal, F. J. & Feist, J. Cavityinduced modifications of molecular structure in the strongcoupling regime. Phys. Rev. X 5, 041022 (2015).
 19.
Ruggenthaler, M. et al. Quantumelectrodynamical densityfunctional theory: bridging quantum optics and electronicstructure theory. Phys. Rev. A. 90, 012508 (2014).
 20.
Ling Luk, H., Feist, J., Toppari, J. J. & Groenhof, G. Multiscale molecular dynamics simulations of polaritonic chemistry. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 4324–4335 (2017).
 21.
Neuman, T., Esteban, R., Casanova, D., GarciaVidal, F. J. & Aizpurua, J. Coupling of molecular emitters and plasmonic cavities beyond the pointdipole approximation. Nano. Lett. 18, 2358–2364 (2018).
 22.
Hohenberg, P. & Kohn, W. Inhomogeneous electron gas. Phys. Rev. 136, B864–B871 (1964).
 23.
Kohn, W. & Sham, L. J. Selfconsistent equations including exchange and correlation effects. Phys. Rev. 140, A1133–A1138 (1965).
 24.
Runge, E. & Gross, E. K. U. Densityfunctional theory for timedependent systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 997–1000 (1984).
 25.
Arenas, J. F., Woolley, M. S., Otero, J. C. & Marcos, J. I. Chargetransfer processes in surfaceenhanced raman scattering. franckcondon active vibrations of pyrazine. J. Phys. Chem. 100, 3199–3206 (1996).
 26.
Arenas, J. F. et al. The role of chargetransfer states of the metaladsorbate complex in surfaceenhanced raman scattering. J. Chem. Phys. 116, 7207–7216 (2002).
 27.
Bjerneld, E. J., Svedberg, F., Johansson, P. & Käll, M. Direct observation of heterogeneous photochemistry on aggregated ag nanocrystals using raman spectroscopy: The case of photoinduced degradation of aromatic amino acids. J. Phys. Chem. A 108, 4187–4193 (2004).
 28.
Zhao, L. L., Jensen, L. & Schatz, G. C. Pyridineag20 cluster: a model system for studying surfaceenhanced raman scattering. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 2911–2919 (2006).
 29.
Jensen, L., Aikens, C. M. & Schatz, G. C. Electronic structure methods for studying surfaceenhanced raman scattering. Chem. Soc. Rev. 37, 1061–1073 (2008).
 30.
Morton, S. M. & Jensen, L. A discrete interaction model/quantum mechanical method to describe the interaction of metal nanoparticles and molecular absorption. J. Chem. Phys. 135, 134103 (2011).
 31.
Corni, S. & Tomasi, J. Theoretical evaluation of raman spectra and enhancement factors for a molecule adsorbed on a complexshaped metal particle. Chem. Phys. Lett. 342, 135–140 (2001).
 32.
Lombardi, J. & Birke, R. A unified approach to surfaceenhanced raman spectroscopy. J. Phys. Chem. C. 112, 5605–5617 (2008).
 33.
Shegai, T., Vaskevich, A., Rubinstein, I. & Haran, G. Raman spectroelectrochemistry of molecules within individual electromagnetic hot spots. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 14390–14398 (2009).
 34.
Hutchison, J. A. et al. Tuning the workfunction via strong coupling. Adv. Mater. 25, 2481–2485 (2013).
 35.
Orgiu, E. et al. Conductivity in organic semiconductors hybridized with the vacuum field. Nat. Mater. 14, 1123–1129 (2015).
 36.
Thomas, A. et al. Groundstate chemical reactivity under vibrational coupling to the vacuum electromagnetic field. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55, 11462–11466 (2016).
 37.
Flick, J., Ruggenthaler, M., Appel, H. & Rubio, A. Atoms and molecules in cavities, from weak to strong coupling in quantumelectrodynamics (qed) chemistry. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 3026–3034 (2017).
 38.
Flick, J., Rivera, N. & Narang, P. Strong lightmatter coupling in quantum chemistry and quantum photonics. Nanophotonics 7, 1479–1501 (2018).
 39.
Yabana, K. & Bertsch, G. F. Timedependent localdensity approximation in real time. Phys. Rev. B 54, 4484–4487 (1996).
 40.
Kuisma, M. et al. Localized surface plasmon resonance in silver nanoparticles: atomistic firstprinciples timedependent densityfunctional theory calculations. Phys. Rev. B 91, 115431 (2015).
 41.
Larsen, A. H., Vanin, M., Mortensen, J. J., Thygesen, K. S. & Jacobsen, K. W. Localized atomic basis set in the projector augmented wave method. Phys. Rev. B 80, 195112 (2009).
 42.
Mortensen, J. J., Hansen, L. B. & Jacobsen, K. W. Realspace grid implementation of the projector augmented wave method. Phys. Rev. B 71, 035109 (2005).
 43.
Enkovaara, J. et al. Electronic structure calculations with GPAW: a realspace implementation of the projector augmentedwave method. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 22, 253202 (2010).
 44.
Rossi, T. P., Kuisma, M., Puska, M. J., Nieminen, R. M. & Erhart, P. Kohn–sham decomposition in realtime timedependent densityfunctional theory: an efficient tool for analyzing plasmonic excitations. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 4779–4790 (2017).
 45.
Malola, S., Lehtovaara, L., Enkovaara, J. & Häkkinen, H. Birth of the localized surface plasmon resonance in monolayerprotected gold nanoclusters. ACS Nano 7, 10263–10270 (2013).
 46.
Knight, M. W. et al. Aluminum for plasmonics. ACS Nano 8, 834–840 (2014).
 47.
Koenderink, A. F. On the use of Purcell factors for plasmon antennas. Opt. Lett. 35, 4208–4210 (2010).
 48.
Wu, X., Gray, S. K. & Pelton, M. Quantumdotinduced transparency in a nanoscale plasmonic resonator. Opt. Express 18, 23633–23645 (2010).
 49.
Yang, Z.J., Antosiewicz, T. J. & Shegai, T. Role of material loss and mode volume of plasmonic nanocavities for strong plasmonexciton interactions. Opt. Express 24, 20373–20381 (2016).
 50.
Benz, F. et al. Singlemolecule optomechanics in “picocavities”. Science 354, 726–729 (2016).
 51.
Antosiewicz, T. J., Apell, S. P., Claudio, V. & Käll, M. A simple model for the resonance shift of localized plasmons due to dielectric particle adhesion. Opt. Express 20, 524–533 (2012).
 52.
Antosiewicz, T. J., Apell, S. P. & Shegai, T. Plasmon–exciton interactions in a coreshell geometry: from enhanced absorption to strong coupling. ACS Photonics 1, 454–463 (2014).
 53.
Zhang, C., Chen, B.Q. & Li, Z.Y. Optical origin of subnanometer resolution in tipenhanced raman mapping. J. Phys. Chem. C. 119, 11858–11871 (2015).
 54.
Chikkaraddy, R. et al. Singlemolecule strong coupling at room temperature in plasmonic nanocavities. Nature 535, 127–130 (2016).
 55.
George, J. et al. Ultrastrong coupling of molecular materials: spectroscopy and dynamics. Faraday Discuss. 178, 281–294 (2015).
 56.
Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996).
 57.
Blöchl, P. E. Projector augmentedwave method. Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953–17979 (1994).
 58.
Rossi, T. P., Lehtola, S., Sakko, A., Puska, M. J. & Nieminen, R. M. Nanoplasmonics simulations at the basis set limit through completenessoptimized, local numerical basis sets. J. Chem. Phys. 142, 094114 (2015).
 59.
Larsen, A. et al. The Atomic Simulation Environment—A Python library for working with atoms. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 29, 273002 (2017).
 60.
van der Walt, S., Colbert, S. C. & Varoquaux, G. The NumPy Array: a structure for efficient numerical computation. Comput. Sci. Eng. 13, 22 (2011).
 61.
Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90–95 (2007).
 62.
Humphrey, W., Dalke, A. & Schulten, K. VMD—visual molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Graph. 14, 33 (1996).
 63.
Stone, J. An Efficient Library for Parallel Ray Tracing and Animation. Master’s thesis, Computer Science Department, University of MissouriRolla (1998).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge financial support from the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Polish National Science Center via project 2017/25/B/ST3/00744, and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie SkłodowskaCurie grant agreement No 838996. T.J.A. acknowledges support from the Project HPCEUROPA3 (INFRAIA20161730897), with the support of the EC Research Innovation Action under the H2020 Programme. We acknowledge the computational resources provided by the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing at PDC, Stockholm, and by the ICMUW (Grant #G556).
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
T.P.R. and T.J.A. performed the calculations and data analysis. T.S. and T.J.A. conceived the general approach. T.J.A. coordinated the project. T.P.R., T.S., P.E., and T.J.A. planned the research and wrote the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information: Nature Communications would like to thank the Daniel SanchezPortal and other, anonymous, reviewers for their contributions to the peer review of this work. Peer review reports are available.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Rossi, T.P., Shegai, T., Erhart, P. et al. Strong plasmonmolecule coupling at the nanoscale revealed by firstprinciples modeling. Nat Commun 10, 3336 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467019113155
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Further reading

Abundance of cavityfree polaritonic states in resonant materials and nanostructures
The Journal of Chemical Physics (2021)

Absorption Reduction of Large Purcell Enhancement Enabled by Topological StateLed Mode Coupling
Physical Review Letters (2021)

Plasmon excitations in chemically heterogeneous nanoarrays
Physical Review B (2020)

Quantum versus optical interaction contribution to giant spectral splitting in a strongly coupled plasmon–molecules system
Photonics Research (2020)

Relevance of the Quadratic Diamagnetic and SelfPolarization Terms in Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics
ACS Photonics (2020)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.