pith. sign in

arxiv: 2308.06222 · v2 · submitted 2023-08-11 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.supr-con

High-temperature superconductivity induced by the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon coupling

Xun Cai , Zi-Xiang Li , Hong Yao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 07:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.supr-con
keywords superconductivityelectron-phonon couplingSu-Schrieffer-Heeger modelHolstein modelquantum Monte Carlohigh-Tc superconductivityphase coherencestrong coupling
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon coupling yields higher superconducting Tc than the Holstein model by boosting both pairing and phase coherence.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper performs numerically exact quantum Monte Carlo simulations on Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon models to compare their superconductivity with Holstein models. It establishes that the SSH versions reach higher transition temperatures, with the gap largest in the strong-coupling regime. The advantage traces to SSH phonons creating strong electron pairing while also stabilizing the phase coherence of the resulting Cooper pairs. A sympathetic reader would care because the result identifies a concrete mechanism that could guide material searches toward higher-Tc superconductivity at ambient pressure.

Core claim

Numerical simulations demonstrate that the superconducting critical temperature in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon coupling model exceeds that of the Holstein model, particularly in the strong-coupling regime. This enhancement arises because SSH phonons not only induce strong electron pairing but also facilitate the phase coherence of Cooper pairs.

What carries the argument

The Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon interaction, which modulates electron hopping amplitudes rather than on-site energies and thereby couples lattice distortions to both pairing and long-range phase order.

Load-bearing premise

The Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron-phonon interaction captures the dominant physics in materials that could realize the reported high-Tc mechanism.

What would settle it

Quantum Monte Carlo results on an SSH model showing Tc values no higher than the corresponding Holstein model under matched parameters and dimensions would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2308.06222 by Hong Yao, Xun Cai, Zi-Xiang Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Quantum phase diagram of the SSH model at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. QMC results of superconductivity in the anti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) The QMC results of superfluid stiffness [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Experimental quest for high-temperature and room-temperature superconductivity (SC) at ambient pressure has been a long-standing research theme in physics. It has also been desired to construct reliable microscopic mechanisms that may achieve high-temperature SC. Here we systematically explore SC in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) electron-phonon coupling models by performing numerically-exact quantum Monte-Carlo simulations. Our results reliably showed that superconducting $T_c$ of the SSH models is high, remarkably higher than those in the Holstein models, particularly in strong electron-phonon coupling regime. This is mainly because SSH phonons can not only induce strong pairing between electrons but also help the phase coherence of Cooper pairs, thus realizing higher $T_c$. As mechanism of higher-$T_c$ of the SSH models could be potentially relevant to realistic materials, it paves a promising way to find higher-temperature SC in the future.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports results from numerically exact quantum Monte Carlo simulations of the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) electron-phonon coupling model on lattices, claiming that the superconducting Tc is substantially higher than in the corresponding Holstein model, especially at strong coupling. The higher Tc is attributed to the SSH interaction simultaneously generating strong electron pairing and assisting the phase coherence of Cooper pairs.

Significance. If the numerical results hold under scrutiny, the work identifies a concrete microscopic mechanism by which a particular form of electron-phonon coupling can produce higher Tc than the Holstein interaction, thereby expanding the set of model Hamiltonians that can be explored for high-temperature superconductivity.

minor comments (3)
  1. Abstract: the statement that the simulations are 'numerically exact' and yield 'remarkably higher' Tc would be strengthened by a brief parenthetical reference to the largest system sizes, the range of coupling strengths examined, and the method used to extract Tc (e.g., crossing of correlation ratios or finite-size scaling).
  2. Results section: direct side-by-side plots or tables comparing Tc(λ) for SSH versus Holstein at identical parameters would make the central comparison more transparent; currently the quantitative difference is asserted but not shown in a single figure.
  3. Discussion: the final sentence on possible material relevance is appropriately hedged, but a short paragraph clarifying which real materials might realize dominant SSH-type coupling (as opposed to Holstein) would help readers assess the broader implications.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary and recommendation of minor revision. We are pleased that the potential significance of identifying a microscopic mechanism for enhanced Tc via SSH coupling is recognized.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results from direct QMC simulation

full rationale

The paper reports Tc values obtained from numerically exact quantum Monte Carlo simulations of the SSH and Holstein Hamiltonians. The central claim (higher Tc in SSH, especially at strong coupling, due to pairing plus phase coherence) is presented as a direct numerical outcome rather than a fitted functional form, a self-referential definition, or a result forced by prior self-citations. No equation or step reduces a reported prediction to an input parameter by construction, and the material-relevance sentence is explicitly hedged. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract contains no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the claim rests on the applicability of standard SSH and Holstein Hamiltonians and on the numerical exactness of the QMC method.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5686 in / 1151 out tokens · 19404 ms · 2026-05-24T07:21:00.781061+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 88 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Keimer, S

    B. Keimer, S. A. Kivelson, M. R. Norman, S. Uchida, and J. Zaanen, Nature 518, 179 (2015)

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    S. A. Kivelson, I. P. Bindloss, E. Fradkin, V. Oganesyan, J. M. Tranquada, A. Kapitulnik, and C. Howald, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 1201 (2003)

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Sachdev, Rev

    S. Sachdev, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 913 (2003)

    work page 2003

  4. [4]

    P. A. Lee, N. Nagaosa, and X.-G. Wen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 17 (2006)

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    X. Chen, P. Dai, D. Feng, T. Xiang, and F.-C. Zhang, National Science Review 1, 371 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Lee, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 9, 261 (2018)

    D.-H. Lee, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 9, 261 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    R. M. Fernandes, A. I. Coldea, H. Ding, I. R. Fisher, P. J. Hirschfeld, and G. Kotliar, Nature 601, 35 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. 108, 1175 (1957)

    work page 1957

  9. [9]

    J. R. Schrieffer, Theory of Superconductivity (W. A. Benjamin, 1964)

    work page 1964

  10. [10]

    Esterlis, S

    I. Esterlis, S. A. Kivelson, and D. J. Scalapino, npj Quan- tum Materials 3, 59 (2018)

    work page 2018

  11. [11]

    R. T. Scalettar, N. E. Bickers, and D. J. Scalapino, Phys. Rev. B 40, 197 (1989)

    work page 1989

  12. [12]

    J. E. Moussa and M. L. Cohen, Phys. Rev. B 74, 094520 (2006)

    work page 2006

  13. [13]

    A. S. Alexandrov, Europhysics Letters 56, 92 (2001)

    work page 2001

  14. [14]

    N. V. Prokof’ev and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2514 (1998)

    work page 1998

  15. [15]

    Bonca, S

    J. Bonca, S. A. Trugman, and I. Batistic, Phys. Rev. B 60, 1633 (1999)

    work page 1999

  16. [16]

    B. K. Chakraverty, J. Ranninger, and D. Feinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 433 (1998)

    work page 1998

  17. [17]

    Holstein, Annals of Physics 8, 325 (1959)

    T. Holstein, Annals of Physics 8, 325 (1959)

    work page 1959

  18. [18]

    R. M. Noack, D. J. Scalapino, and R. T. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 778 (1991)

    work page 1991

  19. [19]

    J. K. Freericks, M. Jarrell, and D. J. Scalapino, Phys. Rev. B 48, 6302 (1993)

    work page 1993

  20. [20]

    Macridin, G

    A. Macridin, G. A. Sawatzky, and M. Jarrell, Phys. Rev. B 69, 245111 (2004)

    work page 2004

  21. [21]

    Berger, P

    E. Berger, P. Valasek, and W. von der Linden, Phys. Rev. B 52, 4806 (1995)

    work page 1995

  22. [22]

    Jeckelmann and S

    E. Jeckelmann and S. R. White, Phys. Rev. B 57, 6376 (1998)

    work page 1998

  23. [23]

    Marsiglio, Phys

    F. Marsiglio, Phys. Rev. B 42, 2416 (1990)

    work page 1990

  24. [24]

    R. T. Clay and R. P. Hardikar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 096401 (2005)

    work page 2005

  25. [25]

    Werner and A

    P. Werner and A. J. Millis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 146404 (2007)

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Johnston, E

    S. Johnston, E. A. Nowadnick, Y. F. Kung, B. Moritz, R. T. Scalettar, and T. P. Devereaux, Phys. Rev. B 87, 235133 (2013)

    work page 2013

  27. [27]

    Z.-X. Li, M. L. Cohen, and D.-H. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 100, 245105 (2019)

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    Wang, W.-S

    D. Wang, W.-S. Wang, and Q.-H. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 92, 195102 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Esterlis, B

    I. Esterlis, B. Nosarzewski, E. W. Huang, B. Moritz, T. P. Devereaux, D. J. Scalapino, and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. B 97, 140501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Esterlis, S

    I. Esterlis, S. A. Kivelson, and D. J. Scalapino, Phys. Rev. B 99, 174516 (2019)

    work page 2019

  31. [32]

    C. Chen, X. Y. Xu, Z. Y. Meng, and M. Hohenadler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 077601 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [33]

    Cohen-Stead, K

    B. Cohen-Stead, K. Barros, Z. Meng, C. Chen, R. T. Scalettar, and G. G. Batrouni, Phys. Rev. B 102, 161108 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [34]

    Z. Han, S. A. Kivelson, and H. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 167001 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [35]

    Nosarzewski, E

    B. Nosarzewski, E. W. Huang, P. M. Dee, I. Esterlis, B. Moritz, S. A. Kivelson, S. Johnston, and T. P. Dev- ereaux, Phys. Rev. B 103, 235156 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [36]

    Z.-X. Li, T. P. Devereaux, and D.-H. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 100, 241101 (2019)

    work page 2019

  36. [37]

    Y. Wang, I. Esterlis, T. Shi, J. I. Cirac, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 043258 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [38]

    N. C. Costa, T. Blommel, W.-T. Chiu, G. Batrouni, and R. T. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 187003 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [39]

    Q.-Y. Wang, Z. Li, W.-H. Zhang, Z.-C. Zhang, J.-S. Zhang, W. Li, H. Ding, Y.-B. Ou, P. Deng, K. Chang, J. Wen, C.-L. Song, K. He, J.-F. Jia, S.-H. Ji, Y.-Y. Wang, L.-L. Wang, X. Chen, X.-C. Ma, and Q.-K. Xue, Chinese Physics Letters 25, 3403 (2008)

    work page 2008

  39. [40]

    Nagamatsu, N

    J. Nagamatsu, N. Nakagawa, T. Muranaka, Y. Zenitani, and J. Akimitsu, Nature 410, 63 (2001)

    work page 2001

  40. [41]

    Honerkamp, H

    C. Honerkamp, H. C. Fu, and D.-H. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 75, 014503 (2007)

    work page 2007

  41. [42]

    Gao, Z.-Y

    M. Gao, Z.-Y. Lu, and T. Xiang, Phys. Rev. B91, 045132 (2015)

    work page 2015

  42. [43]

    J. M. An and W. E. Pickett, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4366 (2001)

    work page 2001

  43. [44]

    Q. Song, T. L. Yu, X. Lou, B. P. Xie, H. C. Xu, C. H. P. Wen, Q. Yao, S. Y. Zhang, X. T. Zhu, J. D. Guo, R. Peng, and D. L. Feng, Nature Communications 10, 758 (2019)

    work page 2019

  44. [45]

    J. J. Lee, F. T. Schmitt, R. G. Moore, S. Johnston, Y.-T. 6 Cui, W. Li, M. Yi, Z. K. Liu, M. Hashimoto, Y. Zhang, D. H. Lu, T. P. Devereaux, D.-H. Lee, and Z.-X. Shen, Nature 515, 245 (2014)

    work page 2014

  45. [46]

    Z.-X. Li, F. Wang, H. Yao, and D.-H. Lee, Science Bul- letin 61, 925 (2016)

    work page 2016

  46. [47]

    Z. Chen, Y. Wang, S. N. Rebec, T. Jia, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, B. Moritz, R. G. Moore, T. P. Dev- ereaux, and Z.-X. Shen, Science 373, 1235 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abf5174

    work page doi:10.1126/science.abf5174 2021

  47. [48]

    T. Tang, B. Moritz, C. Peng, Z.-X. Shen, and T. P. De- vereaux, Nature Communications 14, 3129 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [49]

    Wang, Y.-M

    H.-X. Wang, Y.-M. Wu, Y.-F. Jiang, and H. Yao, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2211.02031 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  49. [50]

    Z. Li, G. Antonius, M. Wu, F. H. da Jornada, and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 186402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  50. [51]

    W. P. Su, J. R. Schrieffer, and A. J. Heeger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1698 (1979)

    work page 1979

  51. [52]

    A. J. Heeger, S. Kivelson, J. R. Schrieffer, and W. P. Su, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60, 781 (1988)

    work page 1988

  52. [53]

    J. Sous, M. Chakraborty, R. V. Krems, and M. Berciu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 247001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  53. [54]

    Nocera, J

    A. Nocera, J. Sous, A. E. Feiguin, and M. Berciu, Phys. Rev. B 104, L201109 (2021)

    work page 2021

  54. [55]

    Weber, F

    M. Weber, F. F. Assaad, and M. Hohenadler, Physical Review B 91, 245147 (2015)

    work page 2015

  55. [56]

    Weber, F

    M. Weber, F. Parisen Toldin, and M. Hohenadler, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023013 (2020)

    work page 2020

  56. [57]

    Xing, W.-T

    B. Xing, W.-T. Chiu, D. Poletti, R. T. Scalettar, and G. Batrouni, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 017601 (2021)

    work page 2021

  57. [58]

    Cai, Z.-X

    X. Cai, Z.-X. Li, and H. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 247203 (2021)

    work page 2021

  58. [59]

    Cai, Z.-X

    X. Cai, Z.-X. Li, and H. Yao, Phys. Rev. B 106, L081115 (2022)

    work page 2022

  59. [60]

    G¨ otz, S

    A. G¨ otz, S. Beyl, M. Hohenadler, and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085151 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [61]

    C. Feng, B. Xing, D. Poletti, R. Scalettar, and G. Ba- trouni, Phys. Rev. B 106, L081114 (2022)

    work page 2022

  61. [62]

    G¨ otz, M

    A. G¨ otz, M. Hohenadler, and F. F. Assaad, arXiv:2307.07613

    work page arXiv

  62. [63]

    Li and S

    S. Li and S. Johnston, npj Quantum Materials 5, 40 (2020)

    work page 2020

  63. [64]

    Li and S

    S. Li and S. Johnston, arXiv e-prints arXiv:2205.12678

    work page arXiv

  64. [65]

    Q.-G. Yang, D. Wang, and Q.-H. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 106, 245136 (2022)

    work page 2022

  65. [66]

    Wang, Y.-F

    H.-X. Wang, Y.-F. Jiang, and H. Yao, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2211.09143 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  66. [67]

    K.-S. Kim, Z. Han, and J. Sous, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2308.01961 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  67. [68]

    B. Xing, C. Feng, R. Scalettar, G. G. Batrouni, and D. Poletti, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2308.03846 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  68. [69]

    Malkaruge Costa, B

    S. Malkaruge Costa, B. Cohen-Stead, A. Tanjaroon Ly, J. Neuhaus, and S. Johnston, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2307.10058 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  69. [70]

    Tanjaroon Ly, B

    A. Tanjaroon Ly, B. Cohen-Stead, S. Malkaruge Costa, and S. Johnston, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2307.10809 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  70. [71]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Sous, D. R. Reichman, M. Berciu, A. J. Millis, N. V. Prokof’ev, and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. X 13, 011010 (2023)

    work page 2023

  71. [72]

    Zhang, N

    C. Zhang, N. V. Prokof’ev, and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. B 105, L020501 (2022)

    work page 2022

  72. [73]

    Zhang, N

    C. Zhang, N. V. Prokof’ev, and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035143 (2021)

    work page 2021

  73. [74]

    Wu and S.-C

    C. Wu and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 71, 155115 (2005)

    work page 2005

  74. [75]

    Li, Y.-F

    Z.-X. Li, Y.-F. Jiang, and H. Yao, Phys. Rev. B 91, 241117 (2015)

    work page 2015

  75. [76]

    Li, Y.-F

    Z.-X. Li, Y.-F. Jiang, and H. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 267002 (2016)

    work page 2016

  76. [77]

    Z. C. Wei, C. Wu, Y. Li, S. Zhang, and T. Xiang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 250601 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [78]

    Wang, Y.-H

    L. Wang, Y.-H. Liu, M. Iazzi, M. Troyer, and G. Harcos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 250601 (2015)

    work page 2015

  78. [79]

    Li and H

    Z.-X. Li and H. Yao, Annual Review of Condensed Mat- ter Physics 10, 337 (2019)

    work page 2019

  79. [80]

    Assaad and H

    F. Assaad and H. Evertz, World-line and determinan- tal quantum monte carlo methods for spins, phonons and electrons, in Computational Many-Particle Physics, edited by H. Fehske, R. Schneider, and A. Weiße (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008) pp. 277–356

    work page 2008

  80. [81]

    P. W. Anderson, Science 235, 1196 (1987)

    work page 1987

Showing first 80 references.