Semiclassical kinetic equations for composite bosons

A. Kudlis; I. A. Aleksandrov; I. A. Shelykh; Y. S. Krivosenko

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Semiclassical kinetic equations for composite bosons

T0 review · 4 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 Composite-exciton statistics cap occupancies and block Bose condensation.

desk verdict A clearly written attempt to put composite statistics into exciton Boltzmann equations, but the microscopic estimate of the maximum occupancy is wrong, and that estimate drives the numerics. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18619 v1 pith:UL3XPVJS submitted 2024-11-27 cond-mat.mes-hall

A. Kudlis , I. A. Aleksandrov , Y. S. Krivosenko , I. A. Shelykh This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords compositebosonsexcitonsBoltzmannequationkineticequationsPauliexclusionprinciplethermalizationexciton-phononinteractionangularmomentumalgebra

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

This paper derives semiclassical Boltzmann equations for exciton thermalization that treat excitons as composite bosons made of electrons and holes, not as elementary bosons. With the standard coboson creation operators, the total exciton number is not conserved by the exciton–phonon Hamiltonian, so the authors replace the operators by angular-momentum operators that enforce a maximum occupancy $N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$ per momentum state. The resulting kinetic equation (45) contains factors $(1 - N_p/N_{p,\mathrm{max}})$ instead of the purely bosonic stimulation factors, and reduces to the standard bosonic equation when $N_{p,\mathrm{max}} \to \infty$. Numerically, the composite statistics cap the ground-state occupation at $N_{0,\mathrm{max}}$ and drive the stationary distribution toward a Fermi–Dirac-like form, so high-density excitons should not form a Bose–Einstein condensate in this model. The derivation also reproduces the paulion limit $N_{p,\mathrm{max}} = 1$.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the angular-momentum realization of truncated exciton operators, $\hat X_i^\dagger = \hat J_i^+/\sqrt{2J_i}$, with $N_{i,\mathrm{max}} = 2J_i$ the maximum number of excitons in level $i$. It is spliced into the standard Born–Markov master-equation machinery for exciton–phonon scattering: the trace of the double commutator with $\hat J_i^z$ gives closed rate equations in the approximation $\langle \hat N_i^2 \rangle \approx \langle \hat N_i\rangle^2$. The paper links the cap to microscopics by evaluating the coboson deviation $\hat\Delta_0$ at $k=0$ in linear order in occupancy, which yields $N_{0,\mathrm{max}} = 5S/(4\pi a_B^2)$ for a 2D sample of area $S$ and Bohr radius $a_B$.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be an exact diagonalization or a fermionic simulation of a few excitons coupled to phonons in a small momentum space: compute the true time-dependent occupancies and compare the stationary distribution with the prediction of Eq. (45). A cleaner check is whether the total exciton number is actually conserved by the microscopic Hamiltonian $\hat H_{SR}$ of Eq. (4) with the coboson operators (8) at finite occupancy; if the commutator $[\hat H,\hat N]$ computed with the true operators does not match the angular-momentum prediction, the statistics of Eq. (45) do not describe real excitons.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the composite statistics of excitons can be incorporated into semiclassical thermalization kinetics by promoting each momentum state to a truncated bosonic space of dimension $2J_p + 1$, realized through angular-momentum operators $\hat X_p^\dagger = \hat J_p^+/\sqrt{2J_p}$. In this representation the commutator is $[\hat X_p, \hat X_p^\dagger] = 1 - 2\hat N_p/N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$ with $N_{p,\mathrm{max}} = 2J_p$, and the many-level Boltzmann equation (45) follows from the Born–Markov master equation for the density matrix. The key structural change is the replacement of the bosonic stimulation factor $(1 + N_p)$ by $(1 + N_p(1 - N_p/N_{p,\mathrm{max}}))$ in the gain terms, with the analogous blocking in the loss terms; total particle number is conserved exactly. In the dilute limit the equation reduces to the standard bosonic Boltzmann equation, while in a realistic GaAs quantum-wire simulation the occupancy of each level saturates at $n_i = 1$ (relative to $N_{i,\mathrm{max}}$), and the asymptotic distribution resembles, but is not identical to, a Fermi–Dirac distribution. The paper concludes that high-density exciton ensembles should thermalize without forming a condensate under the assumed phonon-only scattering.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that real composite-exciton operators can be replaced by momentum-independent angular-momentum operators satisfying $[\hat X_p,\hat X_p^\dagger] = 1 - 2\hat N_p/N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$, with $N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$ fixed by a $k=0$ linear-order comparison; this substitution is assumed rather than derived from the microscopic electron–hole Hamiltonian.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At high exciton densities, the ground-state relative occupancy saturates at 1, so the model predicts no Bose–Einstein condensation under phonon-only relaxation, unlike the bosonic limit.
The stationary distribution at finite temperature resembles a Fermi–Dirac function with maximum occupancy $N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$ instead of 1, so fitted effective temperatures and chemical potentials from photoluminescence will differ from bosonic fits.
In the paulion limit $N_{p,\mathrm{max}} = 1$, spontaneous relaxation rates are twice those of bosons and fermions, giving a distinctive early-time slope in populations.
For low occupancies ($n_i \ll 1$), the equations reduce to the standard bosonic Boltzmann equations, so existing dilute-limit kinetic models remain valid in that regime.
The maximum occupancy estimate $N_{p,\mathrm{max}} = 5S/(4\pi a_B^2)$ ties the kinetic cap directly to the exciton Bohr radius, making the composite correction a material parameter.

Reading between the lines

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

A direct experimental test would be high-density time-resolved photoluminescence in 1D or 2D systems: the ground-state occupancy should plateau at $N_{0,\mathrm{max}}$ rather than grow with excitation density, with the plateau height scaling with $S/a_B^2$.
The same angular-momentum replacement could be applied to other composite bosons (e.g., polaritons or molecules) and to exciton–exciton scattering, where the Pauli-blocking factors would compete with stimulated scattering and may change the BEC threshold density.
The momentum-independent $N_{p,\mathrm{max}}$ assumption is the most fragile part; a momentum-dependent cap would produce anisotropic blocking and could alter the shape of the stationary distribution, a check that could be done within a more microscopic theory.
If the paulion factor of two in the relaxation rate is observable, pump-probe experiments on low-dimensional systems with strong phase-space filling might distinguish composite statistics from ordinary bosonic kinetics.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague — this paper tries to do something genuinely useful: derive semiclassical Boltzmann equations for exciton-phonon thermalization that include a finite maximum occupancy per momentum state, something standard exciton kinetics ignores. The core equation (45) is a clean multilevel rate equation with factors (1 - N/Nmax) replacing bosonic stimulation, and it reduces to the usual bosonic and paulionic limits. The derivation from the assumed angular-momentum algebra is coherent, and the paper earns credit for naming the particle-number nonconservation problem for coboson operators early on. The two-level numerics illustrate the expected saturation effects qualitatively.

The soft spots are not minor. The load-bearing microscopic input — the estimate of Nmax — is wrong as written. Equation (21) defines an overlap integral C that, for the normalized wavefunction of Eq. (23), evaluates to exactly 1: it is the product of two normalized single-exciton wavefunctions squared, integrated. Equation (20) then forces Nmax = 2, not the advertised Nmax = 5S/(4πa_B^2) of Eq. (25). The authors appear to be aiming for a Pauli-exchange overlap that scales as a_B^2/S, which would give a large Nmax, but the stated integral does not do that. Since the numerics set Np,max from Eq. (25) and interpret the dilution condition (1) through it, the quantitative results and the claimed regime of compositeness effects are unsupported. The same flaw weakens the identification of N0/Nmax as the bosonization small parameter.

Beyond that, the angular-momentum algebra is posited rather than derived from the microscopic fermion Hamiltonian. That could be acceptable as a phenomenological model, but the paper presents it as the resolution of the conservation problem, and the only microscopic link is the broken Nmax estimate. The closure approximation ⟨N^2⟩≈N^2 is also an assumption stated without much justification. A minor point: the numerics leave the broadening ΔE unspecified.

Who is this for? People working on exciton kinetics, especially high-density and quantum-wire problems, will find the algebraic structure interesting and worth discussing. The paper is not ready as is; the Nmax derivation needs to be redone and the numerics revisited. But the equations themselves and the physical question are worth a referee's time, provided the referee checks Eq. (21) carefully. I'd send it out with the expectation of major revision.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a modification of the semiclassical Boltzmann equations for exciton-phonon thermalization to account for the composite (non-bosonic) nature of excitons. The key step is to replace the standard coboson operators by angular-momentum operators with a finite maximum occupancy N_p,max. The resulting kinetic equation (45) contains Pauli-like blocking factors (1 - N_p/N_p,max) and reduces to the usual bosonic Boltzmann equation in the limit N_p,max to infinity. The authors demonstrate that the standard coboson operators lead to nonconservation of total particle number, introduce the angular-momentum algebra to restore conservation, estimate Nmax from a microscopic overlap integral, and present numerical simulations for a two-level system and a 1D GaAs quantum wire showing that at high density the ground-state occupation saturates at Nmax rather than growing without bound.

Significance. The paper addresses an important and longstanding problem: how to incorporate the composite statistics of excitons into kinetic equations used to model thermalization experiments. The algebraic structure of Eq. (45) is clean and the limiting cases (bosonic, paulionic, fermionic) are correctly identified. The numerical results illustrate the expected qualitative physics: finite occupancy caps the ground-state population and drives the stationary distribution toward a Fermi-Dirac-like shape. However, the microscopic foundation of the model is currently not solid: the central microscopic input, the value of Nmax, is derived incorrectly, and the angular-momentum replacement is an ansatz rather than a controlled approximation. If these issues are fixed, the framework could be a useful phenomenological tool, but in its present form the quantitative predictions are not supported.

major comments (4)

[Sec. II.C, Eqs. (20)-(25)] The overlap integral C defined in Eq. (21) is exactly unity for the normalized wavefunction of Eqs. (23)-(24), because the integrand factorizes into |φ0(rα1,rβ1)|^2 |φ0(rα2,rβ2)|^2 and each factor is normalized. Substituting C=1 into Eq. (20) yields Nmax=2, not the result Nmax=5/(4π) S/a_B^2 quoted in Eq. (25). The derivation of Eq. (25) appears to evaluate a different expression, but as written the chain (20)-(25) is internally inconsistent. This error is load-bearing because all simulations in Sec. III.B set N_p,max from Eq. (25) (e.g., Ni,max=5.9×10^3) and the dilution condition (1) is interpreted through the scale Nmax; with the correct Nmax=2 the parameter regime and the quantitative predictions of Figs. 3-5 would be completely different.
[Sec. II.C, Eq. (22)] The commutator formula [Δ0, (X0†)^{N0}] ≈ N0 (X0†)^{N0} C is stated to be valid only in linear order in N0, yet it is then used to determine the saturation occupancy Nmax, i.e., the point at which the nonbosonic correction is of order one. In that regime higher-order terms in N0 cannot be neglected; the estimate is therefore not self-consistent. A justification that the linear-order coefficient alone fixes the saturation scale, or a computation retaining higher orders, is needed before Eq. (25) (or any corrected version) can be used.
[Sec. II.C, Eqs. (13)-(16)] The angular-momentum algebra is introduced as an ansatz to enforce [H,N]=0. The paper shows in Sec. II.B that the standard coboson operators lead to a nonconserving number operator, but it does not derive the replacement X_k = J^-_k / √(2J_k) from the microscopic electron-hole Hamiltonian. Consequently, Eq. (45) is a kinetic equation for a spin model whose connection to real excitons rests entirely on the unsupported algebraic identification. This should be stated explicitly as a phenomenological closure assumption, with a discussion of its expected range of validity; without this, the claim of having 'derived' kinetic equations for composite excitons is overstated.
[Sec. II.D, Eqs. (36)-(37)] The closure approximation ⟨N_i^2⟩ ≈ N_i^2 is used to express ⟨J_i^+ J_i^-⟩ and ⟨J_i^- J_i^+⟩ in terms of the average occupancies. This is a mean-field factorization that is reasonable for Poissonian statistics, but it is questionable precisely in the regime where the finite Hilbert-space dimension makes the occupancy distribution strongly sub-Poissonian near N_i,max. The paper should either justify the approximation in the saturation regime or quantify its effect on the predicted relaxation dynamics.

minor comments (5)

[Throughout] There are numerous typos, including 'maxamal' (p. 4), 'accorging' (p. 4), 'absorbtion' (p. 2), 'redistrubution' (p. 2), 'Agronovich' (should be Agranovich, p. 5), 'bosonic imit' (p. 5), and 'Similartothepresentation' (p. 6).
[Eq. (20)] Equation (20) contains a stray closing bracket in the denominator: '<∅| (X0)^{N0} (X0†)^{N0} ] |∅>'.
[Sec. II.D] The appendix is referred to as 'Appendix V', but the appendix is unnumbered; please correct the cross-reference.
[Sec. III.B] In Sec. III.B, the text 'we display only the100 lowest-energy levels' is missing a space; also the notation N_p,max should be introduced explicitly in the multilevel equations rather than only in the text.
[Sec. II.D and Sec. III.B] The two-level rate W12 in Eq. (39) is constant, while the multilevel rate in Eq. (51) includes a Lorentzian broadening; the connection between the two definitions should be explained for readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the kinetic equations are a self-contained derivation from an explicit operator ansatz; the disputed Nmax estimate is a non-circular correctness caveat.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. Equations (38)-(45) follow from the explicitly stated angular-momentum algebra (13)-(17) through a standard Born-Markov trace procedure, and the Fermi-Dirac-like stationary distributions in Fig. 4 are nontrivial outputs of those equations rather than fitted inputs. The finite maximum occupancy and total-number conservation are indeed put in by the ansatz, but the paper presents this as a proposed solution rather than as a microscopic derivation, so there is no covert equivalence between premise and conclusion. Two caveats do not raise the circularity score. First, the microscopic estimate of Nmax in Sec. II.C is not supported as written: for the normalized wavefunction (23), C in Eq. (21) equals 1, so Eq. (20) forces Nmax=2 instead of Eq. (25); this is a correctness risk for the quantitative Nmax used in Figs. 3-5, but the algebraic content of Eq. (45) is independent of that value. Second, Ref. [15] is a minor self-citation for the density-matrix method, but it is real external evidence and is not load-bearing because the master equation is re-derived in the text. Overall, no significant circularity is present; the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on an ad hoc angular-momentum algebra that enforces particle-number conservation and finite occupancy by construction. The single microscopic input is the Nmax estimate, which itself relies on a linear-order commutator and a hydrogenic wavefunction. The numerical parameters are largely illustrative, and the closure approximation on occupation fluctuations is an additional uncontrolled assumption.

free parameters (3)

Maximum occupancy N_p,max = 20 in the two-level model; 5.9e3 in the GaAs wire simulation
Controls all composite-statistics effects. Estimated from Eq. (25) using a hydrogenic wavefunction and a linear-order commutator, and assumed equal for all momentum states. The two-level example simply sets Nmax=20.
Rate prefactor W0 = 0.005 ps^-1
Hand-picked 'reasonable value' for the narrow-channel transition rates in Eq. (51). It sets the absolute thermalization timescale but does not affect the qualitative behavior.
Broadening width Delta E = not stated for the multilevel numerics
Appears in the Lorentzian energy-conservation function, Eqs. (50)-(51), and in W12. No numerical value is given for the multilevel simulations, so the figures cannot be exactly reproduced.

assumptions (6)

ad hoc to paper Excitonic operators obey the angular momentum algebra [Xi, Xj^dagger] = delta_ij (1 - Ni/Ji) with Ni,max = 2Ji.
Introduced in Sec. II.C as the proposed solution to particle-number nonconservation. It is not derived from the microscopic electron-hole Hamiltonian.
ad hoc to paper The maximum occupancy Nmax is independent of momentum.
Stated as an assumption before Eq. (25): 'the change of momentum k does not affect the exciton wave function'. This makes all momentum states equivalent in capacity.
domain assumption The commutator [Delta_0, (X0^dagger)^N0] approximately equals N0 (X0^dagger)^N0 C, and this linear-order relation is sufficient to fix Nmax.
Equation (22) is valid only in linear order in N0, yet it is used with Eq. (25) to define the full saturation occupancy Nmax. This is an approximation that may fail near saturation.
domain assumption Occupation statistics are close to Poissonian, so <Ni^2> is approximately <Ni>^2.
Used after Eqs. (34)-(35) to close the kinetic equations. The assumption is doubtful when occupancies approach Nmax, where fluctuations are strongly suppressed.
standard math Born-Markov and Born approximations: the phonon bath stays thermal and exciton-phonon correlations factorize.
Standard open-quantum-system approximations used in Sec. II.D and the Appendix to derive the master equation and the kinetic equations.
domain assumption The 1s hydrogenic wavefunction (24) describes the exciton relative motion.
Used to compute the overlap integral C and hence Nmax. It neglects possible internal-structure variations and any momentum dependence of the relative wavefunction.

invented entities (1)

Angular-momentum excitonic operators (Xi = Ji^- / sqrt(2Ji)) independent evidence
purpose: Replace the standard coboson creation and annihilation operators so that the total exciton number commutes with the Hamiltonian and each state has a finite capacity Nmax.
The resulting kinetic equations predict Fermi-like stationary distributions and modified relaxation rates that can be compared with time-resolved photoluminescence. However, the operators are a mathematical ansatz, not a new physical particle, and their equivalence to real composite-exciton operators is not established.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Semiclassical kinetic equations for composite bosons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UL3XPVJS

@misc{pith2026241118619,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Semiclassical kinetic equations for composite bosons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UL3XPVJS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18619}
}

read the original abstract

We derive semiclassical Boltzmann equations describing thermalization of an ensemble of excitons due to exciton-phonon interactions taking into account the fact that excitons are not ideal bosons but composite particles consisting of electrons and holes. We demonstrate that with a standard definition of excitonic creation and annihilation operators, one faces a problem of the total particle number nonconservation and propose its possible solution based on the introduction of operators with angular momentum algebra. We then derive a set of kinetic equations describing the evolution of the excitonic density in the reciprocal space and analyze how the composite statistics of the excitons affects the thermalization processes in the system.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18619 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Temporal evolution of the relative occupation num [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Final (asymptotic) values of the relative occupation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Temporal evolution of the relative occupation num [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Temporal evolution of the relative occupation num [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

[1]

(World Scientific, 2009)

H.HaugandS.Koch, Quantum Theory of the Optical and Electronic Properties of Semiconductors, 5th ed. (World Scientific, 2009)

work page 2009
[2]

Knox,Theory of Excitons(Academic Press, 1963) new York and London

R. Knox,Theory of Excitons(Academic Press, 1963) new York and London

work page 1963
[3]

Kavokin, J

A. Kavokin, J. Baumberg, G. Malpuech, and F. Laussy, Microcavities (Oxford University Press, 2017)

work page 2017
[4]

Tassone and Y

F. Tassone and Y. Yamamoto, Exciton-exciton scattering dynamics in a semiconductor microcavity and stimulated scattering into polaritons,Phys. Rev. B59, 10830(1999)

work page 1999
[5]

Huang, F

R. Huang, F. Tassone, and Y. Yamamoto, Experimental evidence of stimulated scattering of excitons into micro- cavity polaritons, Phys. Rev. B61, R7854 (2000)

2000
[6]

Butov, A

L. Butov, A. Ivanov, A. Imamoglu, P. Littlewood, A. Shashkin, V. Dolgopolov, K. Campman, and A. Gos- sard, Stimulated scattering of indirect excitons in cou- pled quantum wells: Signature of a degenerate bose-gas of excitons, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5608 (2001)

work page 2001
[7]

Butov, C

L. Butov, C. Lai, A. Ivanov, A. Gossard, and D. Chemla, Towards bose-einstein condensation of excitons in poten- tial traps, Nature417, 47 (2002)

work page 2002
[8]

Morita, K

Y. Morita, K. Yoshioka, and M. Kuwata-Gonokami, Ob- servation of bose-einstein condensates of excitons in a bulk semiconductor, Nat. Commun.13, 5388 (2022)

work page 2022

Show all 40 references

[9]

Gurioli, P

M. Gurioli, P. Borri, M. Colocci, M. Gulia, F. Rossi, E. Molinari, P. Selbmann, and P. Lugli, Exciton forma- 11 tion and relaxation in gaas epilayers, Phys. Rev. B58, R13403 (1998)

1998
[10]

Vinattieri, J

A. Vinattieri, J. Shah, T. Damen, D. Kim, L. Pfeiffer, M.Maialle,andL.Sham,Excitondynamicsingaasquan- tum wells under resonant excitation, Phys. Rev. B50, 10868 (1994)

1994
[11]

Eccleston, R

R. Eccleston, R. Strobel, W. Rühle, J. Kuhl, B. Feuer- bacher, and K. Ploog, Exciton dynamics in a gaas quan- tum well, Phys. Rev. B44, 1395 (1991)

1991
[12]

Hoyer, C

W. Hoyer, C. Ell, M. Kira, S. Koch, S. Chatterjee, S. Mosor, G. Khitrova, H. Gibbs, and H. Stolz, Many- body dynamics and exciton formation studied by time- resolved photoluminescence, Phys. Rev. B 72, 075324 (2005)

2005
[13]

Cadiz, C

F. Cadiz, C. Robert, E. Courtade, M. Manca, L. Mar- tinelli, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, T. Amand, A. Rowe, D. Paget, B. Urbaszek, and X. Marie, Exciton diffusion in WSe2 monolayers embedded in a van der waals het- erostructure, Appl. Phys. Lett.112, 152106 (2018)

2018
[14]

Snoke, The quantum boltzmann equation in semicon- ductor physics, Ann

D. Snoke, The quantum boltzmann equation in semicon- ductor physics, Ann. Phys.523, 87 (2011)

2011
[15]

Savenko, E

I. Savenko, E. Magnusson, and I. Shelykh, Density- matrix approach for an interacting polariton system, Phys. Rev. B83, 165316 (2011)

2011
[16]

D.Snoke, D.Braun,andM.Cardona,Carrierthermaliza- tion in Cu2O: Phonon emission by excitons, Phys. Rev. B 44, 2991 (1991)

1991
[17]

Snoke, A

D. Snoke, A. Shields, and M. Cardona, Phonon- absorption recombination luminescence of room- temperature excitons in Cu2O, Phys. Rev. B45, 11693 (1992)

1992
[18]

O’Hara and J

K. O’Hara and J. Wolfe, Relaxation kinetics of excitons in cuprous oxide, Phys. Rev. B62, 12909 (2000)

2000
[19]

Ivanov, C

A. Ivanov, C. Ell, and H. Haug, Phonon-assisted boltz- mann kinetics of a bose gas: Generic solution fort ≤ tc, Phys. Rev. E55, 6363 (1997)

1997
[20]

Potma and D

E. Potma and D. Wiersma, Exciton superradiance in ag- gregates: The effect of disorder, higher order exciton- phonon coupling and dimensionality, J. Chem. Phys. 108, 4894 (1998)

1998
[21]

Selig, G

M. Selig, G. Berghäuser, M. Richter, R. Bratschitsch, A. Knorr, and E. Malic, Dark and bright exciton for- mation, thermalization, and photoluminescence in mono- layer transition metal dichalcogenides, 2D Mater. 5, 035017 (2018)

2018
[22]

H. Chen, D. Sangalli, and M. Bernardi, First-principles ultrafast exciton dynamics and time-domain spectro- scopies: Dark-exciton mediated valley depolarization in monolayer wse2, Phys. Rev. Research4, 043203 (2022)

2022
[23]

Piermarocchi, F

C. Piermarocchi, F. Tassone, V. Savona, A. Quat- tropani, and P. Schwendimann, Exciton formation rates in GaAs/AlxGa1−xAs quantum wells, Phys. Rev. B55, 1333 (1997)

1997
[24]

Zhang, Q

M. Zhang, Q. Huang, and J. Zhou, Calculations of the time taken for excitons to form in gaas quantum wells, J. Phys. Condens. Matter.9, 10185 (1997)

1997
[25]

Piermarocchi, F

C. Piermarocchi, F. Tassone, V. Savona, A. Quattropani, and P. Schwendimann, Nonequilibrium dynamics of free quantum-well excitons in time-resolved photolumines- cence, Phys. Rev. B53, 15834 (1996)

1996
[26]

Selbmann, M

P. Selbmann, M. Gulia, F. Rossi, E. Molinari, and P. Lugli, Coupled free-carrier and exciton relaxation in optically excited semiconductors, Phys. Rev. B54, 4660 (1996)

1996
[27]

Golub, A

L. Golub, A. Scherbakov, and A. Akimov, Energy distri- butions of 2d excitons in the presence of nonequilibrium phonons, J. Phys. Condens. Matter.8, 2163 (1996)

1996
[28]

Basu and P

P. Basu and P. Ray, Energy relaxation of hot two- dimensional excitons in a gaas quantum well by exciton- phonon interaction, Phys. Rev. B45, 1907 (1992)

1992
[29]

J. Lee, E. Koteles, and M. Vassell, Luminescence linewidths of excitons in gaas quantum wells below 150 k, Phys. Rev. B33, 5512 (1986)

1986
[30]

Combescot and O

M. Combescot and O. Betbeder-Matibet, The effective bosonic hamiltonian for excitons reconsidered, Europhys. Lett. 58, 87 (2002)

2002
[31]

Combescot, O

M. Combescot, O. Betbeder-Matibet, and F. Dubin, The many-body physics of composite bosons, Physics Reports 463, 215 (2008)

2008
[32]

Combescot, O

M. Combescot, O. Betbeder-Matibet, and R. Combescot, Exciton-exciton scattering: Composite boson versus ele- mentary boson, Phys. Rev. B75, 174305 (2007)

2007
[33]

Thilagam, Influence of the pauli exclusion principle on scattering properties of cobosons, Phys

A. Thilagam, Influence of the pauli exclusion principle on scattering properties of cobosons, Phys. B: Condens. Matter. 457, 232 (2015)

2015
[34]

Katzer, M

M. Katzer, M. Selig, L. Sigl, M. Troue, J. Figueiredo, J. Kiemle, F. Sigger, U. Wurstbauer, A. Holleitner, and A. Knorr, Exciton-phonon-scattering: A competition be- tween bosonic and fermionic nature of bound electron- hole pairs (2023), arXiv:2303.11787 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2023 arXiv
[35]

Carmichael, Quantum Optics 1: Master Equations and Fokker-Planck Equations (Springer, New York, 2007)

H. Carmichael, Quantum Optics 1: Master Equations and Fokker-Planck Equations (Springer, New York, 2007)

2007
[36]

Kavokin and G

A. Kavokin and G. Malpuech,Cavity polaritons(Elsevier Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2003)

2003
[37]

Combescot, O

M. Combescot, O. Betbeder-Matibet, and F. Dubin, The many-body physics of composite bosons, Phys. Rep.463, 215 (2008)

2008
[38]

V. M. Agranovich and B. S. Toshich, Collective prop- erties of frenkel excitons, Soviet Physics JETP26, 104 (1968), translated from Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 53, 149–162 (1967)

1968
[39]

Kira and S

M. Kira and S. Koch, Many-body correlations and exci- tonic effects in semiconductor spectroscopy, Prog. Quan- tum Electron.30, 155 (2006)

2006
[40]

Madelung, Semiconductors: Data Handbook (Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2004)

O. Madelung, Semiconductors: Data Handbook (Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2004)

2004

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

(World Scientific, 2009)

H.HaugandS.Koch, Quantum Theory of the Optical and Electronic Properties of Semiconductors, 5th ed. (World Scientific, 2009)

work page 2009

[2] [2]

Knox,Theory of Excitons(Academic Press, 1963) new York and London

R. Knox,Theory of Excitons(Academic Press, 1963) new York and London

work page 1963

[3] [3]

Kavokin, J

A. Kavokin, J. Baumberg, G. Malpuech, and F. Laussy, Microcavities (Oxford University Press, 2017)

work page 2017

[4] [4]

Tassone and Y

F. Tassone and Y. Yamamoto, Exciton-exciton scattering dynamics in a semiconductor microcavity and stimulated scattering into polaritons,Phys. Rev. B59, 10830(1999)

work page 1999

[5] [5]

Huang, F

R. Huang, F. Tassone, and Y. Yamamoto, Experimental evidence of stimulated scattering of excitons into micro- cavity polaritons, Phys. Rev. B61, R7854 (2000)

2000

[6] [6]

Butov, A

L. Butov, A. Ivanov, A. Imamoglu, P. Littlewood, A. Shashkin, V. Dolgopolov, K. Campman, and A. Gos- sard, Stimulated scattering of indirect excitons in cou- pled quantum wells: Signature of a degenerate bose-gas of excitons, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5608 (2001)

work page 2001

[7] [7]

Butov, C

L. Butov, C. Lai, A. Ivanov, A. Gossard, and D. Chemla, Towards bose-einstein condensation of excitons in poten- tial traps, Nature417, 47 (2002)

work page 2002

[8] [8]

Morita, K

Y. Morita, K. Yoshioka, and M. Kuwata-Gonokami, Ob- servation of bose-einstein condensates of excitons in a bulk semiconductor, Nat. Commun.13, 5388 (2022)

work page 2022