Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Exciton Enhanced Giant Correlated Stoke AntiStokes Scattering of Multiorder Phonons in Semiconductor

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read At 4 K, red-sideband exciton resonance makes LO-phonon anti-Stokes Raman scattering in ZnTe nanobelts grow quadratically with pump power, with a Stokes–anti-Stokes correlation parameter of 26.5 per milliwatt, two to four orders of…

desk verdict Real, clean observation of quadratic anti-Stokes scattering in ZnTe at 4 K, but the 'giant correlation' claim is not yet established because a hot-phonon population can mimic the same power dependence. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08527 v1 pith:62K5XHQI submitted 2024-11-13 cond-mat.mes-hall

Jia-Min Lai , Haonan Chang , Feilong Song , Xiaohong Xu , Ping-Heng Tan , Jun Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords correlatedStokes-anti-StokesscatteringZnTenanobeltsexcitonresonanceanti-StokesRamanLOphononsphononcoolingquantumphotonpairs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

At 4 K, with continuous-wave 532 nm light tuned to the red side of the ZnTe exciton, the anti-Stokes Raman signal of longitudinal optical phonons grows with the square of the pump power while the Stokes component stays linear. The paper interprets this as correlated Stokes–anti-Stokes (SaS) scattering, in which the phonon created by a Stokes event is annihilated by the anti-Stokes event, so the anti-Stokes photons inherit a stronger-than-linear power dependence. Fitting the intensity ratio to the SaS model gives a correlation parameter $C_{\mathrm{SaS}} = 26.5 \pm 0.2\,\mathrm{mW}^{-1}$, two orders of magnitude above twisted-bilayer graphene and four orders above AB-stacked graphene and diamond. Because the correlated anti-Stokes channel outweighs the thermal channel, the extracted LO phonon temperature stays below the exciton/lattice temperature, indicating that SaS scattering mitigates laser heating of that single phonon mode. The authors propose exciton-resonant SaS scattering as a low-power route to multiorder quantum-correlated photon pairs.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is correlated Stokes–anti-Stokes (SaS) scattering: a Stokes event first creates a phonon, and a subsequent anti-Stokes event annihilates that same phonon, so the anti-Stokes intensity scales as $P^2$ rather than $P$. The quantitative workhorse is Eq. (2), which writes $I_{\mathrm{aS}}/I_{\mathrm{S}}$ as a thermal spontaneous term plus a correlated term proportional to $C_{\mathrm{SaS}} P$, with $C_{\mathrm{SaS}}$ the effective anti-Stokes response per milliwatt of pump and $r = \gamma/\gamma_c = 1$ for continuous-wave excitation, so the correlated term is linear in power. The second ingredient is the exciton resonance factor $\varepsilon = \frac{(E_S - E_X)^2 + (\kappa_X/2)^2}{(E_{\mathrm{aS}} - E_X)^2 + (\kappa_X/2)^2}$, which accounts for the different Stokes and anti-Stokes cross sections as the exciton energy and linewidth move with temperature. The paper also uses a thermal calibration $T_X = 4 + 0.19 P^{0.65}$ from the exciton peak shift to predict the baseline $I_{\mathrm{aS}}/I_{\mathrm{S}}$ that laser heating alone would produce; the large gap between this baseline and the measured power law is the evidence for the correlated term.

What would settle it

Measure the Stokes–anti-Stokes photon cross-correlation $g^{(2)}(0)$ in the same ZnTe nanobelt under the same 2.33 eV, 4 K conditions: true correlated SaS pairs give $g^{(2)}(0) > 1$, whereas independent thermal or resonance-tuned Raman processes give $g^{(2)}(0) \approx 1$. Alternatively, repeat the power series off resonance or with a different phonon mode and check whether the quadratic anti-Stokes growth disappears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that ZnTe nanobelts, excited at 4 K by a low-power continuous-wave 2.33 eV laser on the red sideband of the exciton, exhibit correlated Stokes–anti-Stokes scattering of multiorder LO phonons with an unprecedentedly large correlation constant. The evidence is the power law: anti-Stokes intensity of the LO mode rises as $P^2$ while Stokes intensity rises as $P$, so $I_{\mathrm{aS}}/I_{\mathrm{S}}$ is linear in $P$ with fitted $C_{\mathrm{SaS}} = 26.5 \pm 0.2\,\mathrm{mW}^{-1}$ (Eq. 2); the same behavior appears for 2LO, and at high power a 3LO anti-Stokes peak appears with no measurable Stokes partner. The paper attributes the enhancement to the exciton resonance (light-hole and heavy-hole excitons), which both boosts the anti-Stokes cross-section and selects LO phonons, and to the low phonon population at 4 K, which suppresses thermal anti-Stokes background. A consequence is that anti-Stokes scattering can exceed Stokes scattering under several hundred microwatts and that the LO phonon temperature extracted from line shifts stays below the local lattice temperature, evidence for SaS-induced mitigation of laser heating. This is put forward as a new material platform for multiorder correlated phonon-photon pairs under continuous excitation.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the quadratic pump-power dependence of the anti-Stokes signal is uniquely produced by correlated Stokes–anti-Stokes scattering, rather than by power-dependent resonance tuning, carrier effects, or a different nonlinear process; the predicted thermal baseline rests on a fitted sublinear heating calibration from the exciton peak.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At pump powers of a few hundred microwatts, anti-Stokes LO intensity in ZnTe exceeds its Stokes counterpart at 4 K, and a 3LO anti-Stokes peak can appear with no measurable Stokes peak.
  • Because only LO phonon modes show the quadratic trend while TO and substrate Si modes stay linear, the exciton resonance selects which phonon branch participates in the correlated pairs.
  • The LO phonon temperature extracted from peak positions remains below the exciton temperature under illumination, so correlated SaS scattering acts as mode-specific mitigation of laser heating at low temperature.
  • $C_{\mathrm{SaS}} = 26.5 \pm 0.2\,\mathrm{mW}^{-1}$ implies the correlated term dominates over thermal anti-Stokes at low power and low temperature, enabling SaS studies with continuous-wave rather than pulsed high-power lasers.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The exciton-resonance enhancement should transfer to other polar semiconductors with strong Fröhlich electron-phonon coupling, such as CdTe, ZnO, or GaN, where tuning to the red sideband of an exciton may produce similarly large $C_{\mathrm{SaS}}$; this is a testable extension, not claimed by the paper.
  • A direct Hanbury Brown–Twiss measurement of the Stokes–anti-Stokes cross-correlation $g^{(2)}(0)$ would confirm or refute the quantum-correlated-pair interpretation independently of the power-law fit.
  • If the thermal resistance between the LO phonon and the bath is small, the same correlated anti-Stokes channel could in principle cool the whole sample under sustained illumination, an idea the paper only hypothesizes.
  • The red-sideband resonance strategy may extend beyond semiconductor phonons to molecular vibrations and cavity optomechanics modes, where the excitation can be tuned below resonance to drive correlated photon pair emission.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports power-dependent Raman measurements on ZnTe nanobelts at 4 K under 2.33 eV continuous-wave excitation tuned to the red sideband of the exciton. The anti-Stokes intensity of the LO and 2LO phonon modes grows approximately quadratically with laser power while the Stokes intensity grows linearly, giving an anti-Stokes/Stokes intensity ratio proportional to power. Fitting Eq. (2) yields a correlation parameter CSaS = 26.5 ± 0.2 mW⁻¹, which the authors claim is two to four orders of magnitude larger than values reported for graphene and diamond. The paper attributes this behavior to exciton-resonance-enhanced correlated Stokes–anti-Stokes (SaS) scattering, reports multiorder anti-Stokes signals up to 3LO, and infers that the correlated process mitigates laser heating of the LO phonon mode, resulting in an LO phonon temperature below the lattice temperature.

Significance. If the interpretation is correct, the work would be a significant advance: correlated SaS scattering under low-power continuous-wave excitation with a very large correlation parameter, potentially relevant for phonon-based quantum photonics and local thermometry. The experimental dataset is substantial, including temperature-dependent and power-dependent spectra, multiple samples, and a model for the resonance factor. The quadratic anti-Stokes power dependence is a nontrivial signature and the multiorder observation is novel. However, the central claim that the observed behavior arises from true correlated photon-pair scattering is supported only by indirect power-law fits; no direct photon-correlation measurement is reported, and alternative mechanisms involving hot-phonon populations are not excluded. The comparison of CSaS across materials and the phonon-cooling inference also rely on assumptions that need additional support.

major comments (5)
  1. [Results and Discussion, Fig. 2 and Eq. (2)] The quadratic anti-Stokes power dependence is not unique evidence for correlated SaS scattering. With ZnTe excited near the exciton resonance, photogenerated carriers and excitons can relax by emitting LO phonons; if the nonequilibrium LO phonon population grows as n_LO ∝ P, then IaS ∝ n_LO * I_pump ∝ P² and IS ∝ (n_LO + 1) * I_pump ≈ P, giving IaS/IS ∝ P, identical to the observed power laws in Fig. 2(c). The linear Stokes behavior of the TO and Si modes (Fig. S4) does not rule out this mechanism because LO phonons are the dominant relaxation channel in polar semiconductors via Fröhlich coupling (Ref. 38). Without a direct measurement of the Stokes–anti-Stokes photon correlation, e.g., g^(2)(0), the fitted CSaS in Eq. (2) should be regarded as a phenomenological response coefficient rather than a demonstration of correlated photon-pair generation.
  2. [Fig. 3(c) and heating calibration T_X = 4 + 0.19 P^0.65] The thermal baseline used to isolate the correlated component is derived from the power-dependent exciton redshift, fitted as T_X = 4 + 0.19 P^0.65. This exponent 0.65 is not predicted by Eq. (S3), which gives a linear relation, and the calibration assumes the entire redshift is thermal. Power-dependent carrier density or resonance tuning could also shift the exciton energy, making the inferred baseline and hence the magnitude of the correlated component uncertain. The resonance-factor model of Eq. (1) also contains a fitted prefactor k = 13.9; the statement that this cannot be attributed to the ω⁴ dependence and instrumental response is not quantified. The comparison between the blue and red dots in Fig. 3(c) therefore does not provide an independent confirmation of the correlated contribution.
  3. [Fig. 4(c) and phonon-cooling inference] The conclusion that the LO phonon temperature is lower than the exciton temperature relies on calibrating phonon peak positions against temperature at a fixed low power (300 µW) and then applying this calibration to high-power data. This assumes that the only power-induced effect on the phonon peak position is heating, but carrier density and strain can also shift phonon frequencies. Furthermore, under a strongly non-equilibrium phonon population, the anti-Stokes/Stokes ratio cannot be converted into a thermodynamic temperature. The cooling-efficiency parameter ξ is introduced without an independent determination, so the quantitative statement that correlated SaS scattering mitigates laser heating of the LO mode is not supported.
  4. [Fig. 4(a) and comparison with graphene/diamond] The CSaS values are compared directly across experiments performed under different excitation conditions and materials without normalizing the resonance factor ε and the decay-rate ratio r in Eq. (2). In this work r = 1 because a continuous-wave laser is used, whereas the cited pulsed experiments may have r ≠ 1; the exciton-resonance enhancement in ZnTe is not divided out. The claim of a correlation 'two or four orders of magnitude' larger is therefore not established from these fits alone. A normalized quantity, such as the second-order correlation function or the pair-generation rate per incident photon, should be reported for a fair comparison.
  5. [Fig. S8 and 70 K data] The absence of a quadratic anti-Stokes power dependence at 70 K, where the anti-Stokes resonance is maximal according to Fig. 3(b), is a serious inconsistency with the claim that exciton resonance enhances the correlated process. The statement that this is 'presumably due to the variation in the correlation coefficient CSaS' is not supported by any measurement or model. This point should be addressed quantitatively, for example by measuring the power dependence at 70 K over a wider power range or by showing that the required threshold power exceeds the available range.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title and Abstract] The title and abstract use 'Stoke' instead of 'Stokes' in 'Stoke AntiStokes' and 'correlated Stoke–anti-Stokes scattering'; this should be corrected throughout.
  2. [Eq. (2)] The subscript for the Stokes intensity in Eq. (2) appears garbled in the typeset version (I_S versus I_L); please check the typesetting.
  3. [Fig. 4(c)] Figure 4(c) would benefit from error bars or a discussion of the measurement uncertainty on the extracted temperatures.
  4. [Reference [41]] Reference [41] (Blattner et al.) appears to have an incorrect year; J. Appl. Phys. 43 was published in 1972, not 2003.
  5. [Definition of CSaS] The paper would be clearer if it explicitly defined what physical quantity CSaS represents beyond 'effective response of the anti-Stokes line per unit of pump power', including the relationship between CSaS and the underlying photon-pair correlation strength.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; the quadratic anti-Stokes signature is an independent observable and the fitted C_SaS parameter is not reused as evidence for that signature.

full rationale

This manuscript does not exhibit a circular derivation chain in the sense defined here. The central empirical claim is that the anti-Stokes LO Raman intensity grows quadratically with pump power while the Stokes intensity grows linearly; this power law is established directly from power-dependent spectra in Fig. 2(c)-(e) and Fig. S4, and the paper explicitly identifies this nonlinear power dependence as the evidence for correlated SaS scattering. That evidence does not come from the fitted correlation parameter. Eq. (2) is later used only to parametrize the observed intensity ratio: fitting Eq. (2) to obtain C_SaS = 26.5 mW^-1 is a parameter estimate from the data, not a prediction of the same data. Fig. 4(b) plots the fitted model at different phonon populations, so it is a model extrapolation rather than a circular confirmation. The thermal/resonance baseline in Fig. 3(c) is computed from temperature-dependent fits (Eq. (1), Varshni and linewidth parameters) together with the power-temperature calibration T_X = 4 + 0.19 P^0.65; that calibration is taken from the exciton peak shift, not from the I_aS/I_S ratio used as the target observable, so the comparison is a model-versus-data contrast rather than the same quantity on both sides. The self-citations in the text, refs. [38] and [42], provide background on resolved-sideband Raman cooling and Fröhlich coupling in ZnTe; they are not load-bearing for the power-law signature or for the fitted C_SaS. The paper itself acknowledges in Fig. S8 and the surrounding text that the quadratic I_aS dependence was not observed at 70 K and interprets this as a variation of C_SaS with excitation conditions; this is an admitted limitation and post hoc explanation, not a circular reduction. The main scientific caveat, that a quadratic anti-Stokes power law could in principle be mimicked by nonequilibrium hot LO-phonon populations or by power-dependent resonance shifts, and that no direct photon-correlation (g^(2)) measurement is reported, is an identifiability and external-validity concern rather than a circularity step, because the manuscript does not define the predicted quantity as the fitted quantity. No step in the paper reduces, by construction or by self-citation, to its own input.}

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central quantitative claim rests on phenomenological fits (CSaS, resonance and heating parameters) rather than on a parameter-free derivation; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • CSaS = 26.5 ± 0.2 mW^-1
    Fitted from the power-dependent IaS/IS data using Eq. (2); this value is the basis of the 'giant correlation' claim and is used to compute Fig. 4(b).
  • k factor in Eq. (1) = 13.9
    Fitted in the temperature-dependent IaS/IS model; the large value is attributed to SaS correlation but also absorbs any unmodeled resonance or instrumental factors.
  • Debye temperature beta in Varshni fit = 180 K
    Fitted in Eq. (1) to the temperature-dependent ratio; used to support the resonance model.
  • Varshni parameters alpha and c = Not quoted separately
    Fitted to describe exciton energy and linewidth vs temperature in Eq. (1).
  • Heating calibration TX(P) = 4 + 0.19 P^0.65 = 0.19, 0.65
    Fitted to the exciton peak position vs power; used to compute the thermal and resonance baseline in Fig. 3(c).
  • Power-law exponents m in Stokes/anti-Stokes fits = m ~ 1 (Stokes), m ~ 2 (anti-Stokes)
    Fitted exponents supporting the correlated scattering signature.
  • Phonon temperature calibration = Not specified numerically
    Maps phonon peak positions in power-dependent spectra to temperatures using temperature-dependent spectra; assumes a unique mapping.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The theory of Eq. (2) (Ref. [35]) applies to ZnTe under CW excitation with r = gamma/gamma_c = 1.
    The paper adopts a theory developed for general SaS scattering without justifying that the ZnTe exciton-phonon system satisfies the same decay-rate hierarchy. Stated in 'Then we evaluate the strength of SaS correlation'.
  • domain assumption The phonon population at 4 K is the thermal Bose-Einstein value n = 1.10e-33 and the correlated Stokes process does not itself modify the phonon population.
    Used to set the thermal baseline; if the laser creates a non-thermal phonon population, the inferred CSaS would change.
  • standard math The intensity ratio IaS/IS is given by the product of a resonance factor epsilon and thermal population plus a power-dependent correlated term (Eq. 1 and 2).
    This is the standard Raman scattering expression; the resonance factor form is assumed.
  • domain assumption The exciton peak position is a faithful thermometer for the local lattice temperature under illumination.
    Used to convert power to temperature; carrier density and screening effects can shift the exciton energy independently of temperature.
  • domain assumption The phonon peak position shift with temperature is solely due to phonon temperature, not to power-dependent resonance or Fano effects.
    Used to claim that LO phonon temperature is lower than exciton temperature (Fig. 4(c)).
  • domain assumption Two-photon absorption and other nonlinear processes are negligible at the low excitation powers used.
    Invoked to exclude alternative explanations for the quadratic anti-Stokes dependence; supported partly by the linear power dependence of TO and Si modes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exciton Enhanced Giant Correlated Stoke AntiStokes Scattering of Multiorder Phonons in Semiconductor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/62K5XHQI

@misc{pith2026241108527,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exciton Enhanced Giant Correlated Stoke AntiStokes Scattering of Multiorder Phonons in Semiconductor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/62K5XHQI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08527}
}
read the original abstract

The correlated Stoke antiStokes (SaS) scattering plays a crucial role in quantum information processing, such as heralded light sources, Fock state dynamics, and write read protocol for quantum memory. However, several reported materials exhibit low degree of SaS correlation and require high-power pulse laser excitation, limiting further applications. Herein, we explore the giant correlated multiorder SaS scattering under low power continuous laser excitation through red-sideband resonance of exciton in semiconductor ZnTe nanobelts. At low temperatures, we observe an unexpectedly strong anti-Stokes signal for multiorder longitudinal optical phonons, with SaS correlations two or four orders of magnitude larger than reported results. Furthermore, we observed the mitigation of laser heating effect for longitudinal optical phonon in SaS scattering. This finding paves a new pathway to study multiorder quantum correlated photon pairs produced through exciton-resonant Raman scattering.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Cardona, in Light Scattering in Solids II: Basic Concepts and Instrumentation, edited by M

    M. Cardona, in Light Scattering in Solids II: Basic Concepts and Instrumentation, edited by M. Cardona, and G. Güntherodt (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1982), pp. 19

    work page 1982

  2. [2]

    Berciaud, M

    S. Berciaud, M. Y . Han, K. F. Mak, L. E. Brus, P. Kim, and T. F. Heinz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 227401 (2010)

    work page 2010

  3. [3]

    Faugeras, B

    C. Faugeras, B. Faugeras, M. Orlita, M. Potemski, R. R. Nair, and A. K. Geim, ACS Nano 4, 1889 (2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    A. G. Souza Filho, A. Jorio, J. H. Hafner, C. M. Lieber, R. Saito, M. A. Pimenta, G. Dresselhaus, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Phys. Rev. B 63, 241404 (2001)

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    D. N. Klyshko, Sov. J. Quantum Electron. 7, 755 (1977)

    work page 1977

  6. [6]

    Jorio, M

    A. Jorio, M. Kasperczyk, N. Clark, E. Neu, P. Maletinsky, A. Vijayaraghavan, and L. Novotny, Nano Lett. 14, 5687 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Jorio, M

    A. Jorio, M. Kasperczyk, N. Clark, E. Neu, P. Maletinsky, A. Vijayaraghavan, and L. Novotny, Phys. Status Solidi B 252, 2380 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Kasperczyk, A

    M. Kasperczyk, A. Jorio, E. Neu, P. Maletinsky, and L. Novotny, Opt. Lett. 40, 2393 (2015)

    work page 2015

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    F. S. de Aguiar Júnior, C. H. Monken, M. F. Santos, R. de Melo e Souza, A. Saraiva, B. Koiller, and A. Jorio, Phys. Status Solidi B 256 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    F. S. d. A. Júnior, A. Saraiva, M. F. Santos, B. Koiller, R. d. M. e. Souza, A. P. Pena, R. A. Silva, C. H. Monken, and A. Jorio, Phys. Rev. B 99 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    C. D. Tschannen, M. Frimmer, T. L. Vasconcelos, L. Shi, T. Pichler, and L. Novotny, Nano Lett. 22, 3260 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Bashkansky, F

    M. Bashkansky, F. K. Fatemi, and I. Vurgaftman, Opt. Lett. 37 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Kasperczyk, F

    M. Kasperczyk, F. S. de Aguiar Junior, C. Rabelo, A. Saraiva, M. F. Santos, L. Novotny, and A. Jorio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 243603 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    Saraiva, F

    A. Saraiva, F. S. d. A. Júnior, R. de Melo e Souza, A. P. Pena, C. H. Monken, M. F. Santos, B. Koiller, and A. Jorio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    F. S. de Aguiar Júnior, C. H. Monken, and A. Jorio, Phys. Rev. B 109 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Vento, S

    V . Vento, S. Tarrago Velez, A. Pogrebna, and C. Galland, Nat. Commun. 14 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    K. C. Lee et al., Nat. Photonics 6, 41 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    Bin, X.-Y

    Q. Bin, X.-Y . Lü, F. P. Laussy, F. Nori, and Y . Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 053601 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    M. K. Schmidt, R. Esteban, G. Giedke, J. Aizpurua, and A. González-Tudela, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    Esteban, J

    R. Esteban, J. J. Baumberg, and J. Aizpurua, Acc. Chem. Res. 55, 1889 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Akiba, K

    K. Akiba, K. Kashiwagi, M. Arikawa, and M. Kozuma, New J. Phys. 11, 013049 (2009)

    2009

  14. [22]

    K. C. Lee et al., Science 334, 1253 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    D. G. England, K. A. G. Fisher, J.-P. W. MacLean, P. J. Bustard, K. Heshami, K. J. Resch, and B. J. Sussman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 073603 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    M. D. Anderson, S. Tarrago V elez, K. Seibold, H. Flayac, V . Savona, N. Sangouard, and C. Galland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 233601 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    S. T. Velez, K. Seibold, N. Kipfer, M. D. Anderson, V . Sudhir, and C. Galland, Phys. Rev. X 9 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    J. Fan, A. Dogariu, and L. J. Wang, Opt. Lett. 30, 1530 (2005)

    2005

  19. [27]

    L. J. Wang, C. K. Hong, and S. R. Friberg, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 3, 346 (2001)

    2001

  20. [28]

    G. O. Ariunbold, B. Semon, S. Nagpal, and P. Adhikari, Appl Spectrosc 73, 1099 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Baltog, M

    I. Baltog, M. Baibarac, I. Smaranda, and S. Lefrant, Journal of Physics B -Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics 44 (2011)

    2011

  22. [30]

    M. K. Schmidt, R. Esteban, A. González-Tudela, G. Giedke, and J. Aizpurua, ACS Nano 10, 6291 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    C. D. Tschannen, M. Frimmer, G. Gordeev, T. L. Vasconcelos, L. Shi, T. Pichler, S. Reich, S. Heeg, and L. Novotny, ACS Nano 15, 12249 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Roelli, C

    P. Roelli, C. Galland, N. Piro, and T. J. Kippenberg, Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 164 (2016)

    2016

  25. [33]

    Benz et al., Science 354, 726 (2016)

    F. Benz et al., Science 354, 726 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    L. A. Jakob et al., Nat. Commun. 14 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    C. A. Parra-Murillo, M. F. Santos, C. H. Monken, and A. Jorio, Phys. Rev. B 93, 125141 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    Y . Shen, T. Watanabe, D. A. Arena, C. C. Kao, J. B. Murphy, T. Y . Tsang, X. J. Wang, and G. L. Carr, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    H. P. Wagner, M. Kühnelt, W. Langbein, and J. M. Hvam, Phys. Rev. B 58, 10494 (1998)

    1998

  30. [38]

    Zhang, Q

    J. Zhang, Q. Zhang, X. Z. Wang, L. C. Kwek, and Q. H. Xiong, Nat. Photonics 10, 600 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    Madelung, U

    O. Madelung, U. Rössler, and M. Schulz, Landolt–Bornstein Numerical Data and Functional Relationships in Science and Technology, Group III: Condensed Matter. Semiconductors: II–VI and I–VII Compounds (Springer, Heidelberg, 1999), V ol. 17B

    1999

  32. [40]

    Y . P. Varshni, Physica 34, 149 (1967)

    1967

  33. [41]

    R. J. Blattner, L. K. Walford, and T. O. Baldwin, J. Appl. Phys. 43, 935 (2003)

    2003

  34. [42]

    Lai, Y .-J

    J.-M. Lai, Y .-J. Sun, Q.-H. Tan, P.-H. Tan, and J. Zhang, Nano Lett. 22, 7129 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    T. Shin, S. W. Teitelbaum, J. Wolfson, M. Kandyla, and K. A. Nelson, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 194705 (2015). Supplementary Materials for Exciton Enhanced Giant Correlated Stoke–Anti-Stokes Scattering of Multiorder Phonons in Semiconductor Jia-Min Lai1,2,3, Haonan Chang1,3, Feilong ...

    2015

  36. [44]

    S1, the red shift of exciton energy is attributed to laser heating effect

    Laser heating effect As seen in Fig. S1, the red shift of exciton energy is attributed to laser heating effect. When the laser beam is focused on the surface of ZnTe, the energy in the nonradiative transition process is transformed into heat energy. According to the work of Ya...

  37. [45]

    Y . Yang, H. Yan, Z. Fu, B. Yang, L. Xia, Y . Xu, J. Zuo, and F. Li, J. Phy. Chem. B 110, 846 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.