In the field of quantum information and quantum computing, entanglement plays an essential role. Entanglement preservation is an important issue as realistic quantum systems are affected by decoherence and entanglement losses due to the interaction with their environment. For example, in spite of an exponential decay of a single qubit, the entanglement between two qubits may completely disappear at a finite time; a phenomenon known as “entanglement sudden death” . Recently, interest has been given in cases that qubits can be strongly coupled to plasmonic nanostructures, like, for example, an one-dimensional plasmonic waveguide  or a two-dimensional lattice of metal-coated dielectric nanoparticles . In such systems the strong interaction with the surface plasmons leads to significant entanglement between the two qubits. Here, we consider the interaction of two initially entangled qubits interacting individually with a two-dimensional lattice of metal-coated dielectric nanoparticles. We consider two cases for the qubits, a pair of regular two-level systems and a pair of V-type systems where one transition is the qubit and the other level acts as an umbrella level . We consider the entanglement dynamics for different initial conditions of the qubits. The specific plasmonic nanostructure leads to strongly modified spontaneous emission rates of individual quantum systems (strong suppression in certain cases) and, in addition, to strongly anisotropic Purcell effect for orthogonal dipoles, that in turn can be used for simulating quantum interference in spontaneous emission . We use these effects for significantly prolonging entanglement dynamics near the plasmonic nanostructure in both cases, in comparison to the cases that the qubits are in free space.
1. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 140404 (2004).
2. A. Gonzalez-Tudela, D. Martin-Cano, E. Moreno, L. Martin-Moreno, C. Tejedor, and F. J. Garcia-Vidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 020501 (2011).
3. N. Iliopoulos, A. F. Terzis, V. Yannopapas, and E. Paspalakis, Ann. Phys. 365, 38 (2016).
4. S. Das and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A 81, 052341 (2010).
5. V. Yannopapas, E. Paspalakis, and N. V. Vitanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 063602 (2009).