Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger-like interactions with RIXS

Alberto Nocera; Debshikha Banerjee; Jinu Thomas; Steven Johnston

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger-like interactions with RIXS

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read RIXS spots SSH coupling by a redshifted lattice peak

desk verdict First DMRG study of RIXS in the Hubbard-SSH model gives a plausible SSH-vs-Holstein fingerprint, but the key q=0 assignment rests on phase-space inference on a 16-site OBC chain and needs finite-size checks before the experimental protocol is secure. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15981 v1 pith:C2GDGUF7 submitted 2024-12-20 cond-mat.str-el

Debshikha Banerjee , Jinu Thomas , Alberto Nocera , Steven Johnston This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-el

keywords Su-Schrieffer-Heegermodelelectron-phononcouplingresonantinelasticx-rayscatteringHubbarddensitymatrixrenormalizationgroupmulti-particleexcitationsspin-phononone-dimensionalMottinsulator

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

Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) electron-phonon coupling, in which atomic motion modulates electronic hopping, can stabilize light bipolarons and exotic ordered phases, so experimental ways to detect and measure it are needed. This paper claims that resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) on a half-filled one-dimensional Hubbard-SSH chain reveals such coupling through a distinctive signature: the lattice excitations created in the scattering process are not pure phonons but multi-particle states that also carry spin or charge. In the Mott-insulating regime these states sit at energies below the renormalized zone-center phonon and track the softened zone-boundary phonon, and the paper argues this redshift is a fingerprint of SSH-like coupling. If the claim is right, a zone-center lattice excitation seen in RIXS will appear lower in energy than the same phonon measured by optical or Raman spectroscopy, giving experimenters a direct test for SSH-like interactions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the one-dimensional half-filled Hubbard-SSH Hamiltonian with onsite optical phonons, whose interaction term $g\sum_{j,\sigma}[c^{\dagger}_{j,\sigma}c_{j+1,\sigma}(\hat{X}_{j+1}-\hat{X}_j)+\mathrm{h.c.}]$ modulates the electron hopping. The argument is carried by the full RIXS cross section computed with the density matrix renormalization group on $L=16$ chains, together with exact diagonalization of a dimer to inspect how spin correlations, hopping, double occupancy, and lattice displacement change between initial and final states. A central interpretive device is the lower boundary of the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon continuum, built from the renormalized phonon dispersion and the two-spinon continuum, which bounds the RIXS weight near $q=0$ and identifies the phonon-related feature as a multi-particle excitation rather than a bare phonon.

What would settle it

Compute the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon spectral weight for the same Hubbard-SSH parameters and check whether the RIXS feature sits at its lower boundary; alternatively, in a candidate material, measure the zone-center lattice excitation by RIXS and by optical or Raman spectroscopy and see whether the RIXS energy indeed lies below the phonon energy, as predicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the density matrix renormalization group to compute the full RIXS response of the half-filled Hubbard-SSH model on 16-site chains, and exact diagonalization on a dimer, the authors find that SSH electron-phonon coupling produces low-energy RIXS excitations that are intrinsically coupled to the charge and magnetic sectors. Because the SSH interaction modulates the hopping integral, a lattice excitation cannot be created without also disturbing the electronic subsystem; in the strong-correlation regime the lowest such excitation is best described as one phonon combined with a two-spinon excitation. Its energy is therefore below the dressed zone-center phonon energy, its intensity peaks at zone center even though the bare electron-phonon matrix element vanishes there, and the X-ray absorption main resonance shifts upward with coupling, opposite to the Holstein-model trend. The authors propose that the resulting redshift of zone-center lattice excitations relative to optical or Raman phonon energies can be used to identify and quantify SSH-like interactions.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the low-energy RIXS feature seen on a 16-site chain really is the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon continuum boundary, but that identification rests on phase-space matching rather than on computing the multi-particle spectral function directly or on finite-size scaling to the thermodynamic limit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In a material with SSH-like coupling, the zone-center lattice excitation measured by RIXS should appear at lower energy than the phonon energies measured by optical or Raman spectroscopy.
RIXS intensity from SSH phonons need not track the momentum dependence of the bare electron-phonon matrix element; the zone-center feature can be the strongest even where the coupling vanishes.
Interpretations of RIXS spectra that treat lattice excitations as renormalized phonons, such as single-site or diagrammatic approaches, will misidentify SSH-coupled systems because the true excitations are spin-phonon or charge-phonon composites.
The spin-conserving RIXS channel carries the SSH lattice fingerprint, while the non-spin-conserving channel is dominated by ordinary spin-flip excitations, so polarimetry can cleanly separate the two.
Although computed in one dimension, the mechanism of hopping modulation entangling lattice and electronic excitations should persist in higher-dimensional analogs.

Reading between the lines

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

A direct calculation of the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon spectral function would turn the phase-space identification into a quantitative check; the present paper does not provide it.
Away from half-filling, the same entangling mechanism should produce phonon-holon or phonon-charge composites, and the zone-center redshift might then be controlled by doping rather than exchange energy.
The predicted redshift could be tested in quasi-one-dimensional Mott insulators with known dimerization tendencies by comparing RIXS zone-center loss features with Raman or optical phonon energies in the same material.
Quantifying the redshift as a function of coupling strength and Hubbard $U$ may provide a practical estimator of the SSH coupling strength, analogous to how phonon softening at the zone boundary is already used.

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

The useful thing here is the contrast: the paper computes RIXS for the 1D Hubbard-SSH model with DMRG and finds the lattice response does not track the dressed phonon like in Holstein; instead the q=0 feature sits near the softened zone-boundary phonon energy. That is a concrete, falsifiable signature of SSH coupling, and it is genuinely new. The DMRG machinery is standard, the phonon Hilbert-space convergence is shown, and the ED dimer analysis is a nice piece of direct evidence: the first excited state in the RIXS spectrum changes the spin-spin correlation and double occupancy, whereas the Holstein dimer does not. That part deserves credit.

The soft spot is the identification of the q=0 peak as a one-phonon plus two-spinon continuum. The red-dashed lower boundary in Fig. 1 is built from the renormalized phonon dispersion and the two-spinon lower edge; no two-particle spectral function is computed, and there is no finite-size scaling. The open boundary conditions and the central-core-hole approximation break translation invariance, so a zone-boundary phonon can leak into the q=0 channel. In an infinite periodic system the bare SSH vertex vanishes at q=0, so the leakage interpretation would kill the protocol prediction (RIXS below Raman). The paper's Fig. 3 comparison to B(q=π) does not rule this out because the phonon spectral function at q=π has a peak at exactly the energy where the q=0 RIXS feature appears. So the multi-particle interpretation is plausible but not yet demonstrated.

Two smaller gaps: no data or code are shipped, and the peak positions in Fig. 4 have no uncertainty estimates. These are minor compared to the finite-size question. The concern does not make the paper wrong; it means the quantitative claim runs ahead of the evidence. The ED result shows the excitation is not purely phononic, which is the core contrast with Holstein, but it does not pin down the phonon+two-spinon composition on a chain.

I would send this to a serious referee. The question is important for the RIXS community and the first DMRG calculation for this model is a real contribution. The revision should include L-scaling or a direct convolution calculation, and a more measured statement about the protocol. With that, this will be a useful paper.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents DMRG calculations of RIXS spectra for the one-dimensional half-filled Hubbard-Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model with local phonons, supplemented by exact diagonalization on a two-site dimer. The central finding is that SSH-type electron-phonon coupling produces lattice-related RIXS features that are not pure phonon excitations: the q=0 feature appears at energies below the q=0 dressed phonon and near the softened zone-boundary phonon energy, and the authors interpret it as a one-phonon-plus-two-spinon continuum. On this basis they propose an experimental protocol: a zone-center RIXS lattice feature appearing below the optical/Raman phonon energy would indicate an SSH-like interaction.

Significance. If the multi-particle interpretation is correct, the paper provides a useful and nontrivial fingerprint for SSH-like interactions in correlated materials, with a concrete, falsifiable experimental prediction. The DMRG calculations are nontrivial and the authors demonstrate convergence with respect to the local phonon Hilbert-space size for XAS and for RIXS at representative parameters. The comparison with the Hubbard-Holstein model is instructive and the paper is generally careful about parameter choices, including the regime below the hopping-inversion coupling. The protocol prediction is not circular: it is a prediction of the computed model and is not used to set any model constants. The main weakness is that the central assignment to a one-phonon-plus-two-spinon continuum is inferred from phase-space boundaries on a 16-site open chain rather than demonstrated by a direct multi-particle spectral function or finite-size scaling, and the central spectroscopic prediction inherits that uncertainty.

major comments (3)

[Results, Fig. 1 and Fig. 3; Discussion] The central claim that the low-energy q=0 RIXS feature is a one-phonon-plus-two-spinon excitation rests entirely on the agreement between the RIXS peak and the red dashed lower boundary in Fig. 1. That boundary is constructed by adding the renormalized phonon dispersion (extracted from B(q,ω) on the same L=16 open chain) to the thermodynamic-limit two-spinon lower boundary. The paper does not compute a momentum-resolved convolution of the phonon and two-spinon responses, nor does it show any finite-size scaling in L. Because the open boundary conditions and the local core-hole potential break translational invariance, the apparent q=0 intensity could in principle contain a substantial contribution from the zone-boundary phonon through momentum leakage despite the vanishing bare e-ph vertex at q=0. The authors should either compute a direct multi-particle spectral function (for example a convolution of B(q,ω) with the two-spinon response) or perform an L-scaling analysis, and ideally also analyze the final states contributing to the q=0 RIXS peak, before the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon assignment and the associated prediction can be regarded as secure.
[Discussion, last paragraph] The proposed experimental protocol states that 'the energy of the zone center lattice excitations measured in a RIXS experiment will be lower than the values measured with optical or Raman spectroscopy if they arise from an SSH-like interaction.' This prediction is presented as a robust experimental consequence, but it is only as secure as the L=16 interpretation criticized above. The paper does not compute the optical or Raman response of the model, so the quantitative comparison is indirect: it compares RIXS at q=0 with B(q=0) and B(q=π) in Fig. 3, not with an actual optical/Raman phonon energy including possible anharmonic or multi-phonon effects. The authors should either compute the relevant optical/Raman spectral function within the same model or explicitly discuss how the computed q=0 B(q,ω) peak energy maps to the experimental optical/Raman quantity, and they should state what finite-size or boundary effects could shift the predicted difference.
[Results, Fig. 4 and Supplementary Note 7] The ED dimer correlation functions in Fig. 4 show that the final state of the low-energy RIXS excitation differs from the ground state in spin correlation, hopping, double occupancy, and displacement, which supports coupling to the electronic sector. However, the two-site dimer cannot host a two-spinon continuum in the thermodynamic sense, so the ED results do not by themselves confirm the one-phonon-plus-two-spinon assignment. The text should be more careful to distinguish the established statement (the lattice excitation is entangled with electronic/magnetic degrees of freedom) from the specific two-spinon interpretation, which requires an extended-chain analysis. The complementary HH dimer results in Supplementary Note 7 are useful, but they quantify the contrast with the Holstein case rather than validating the two-spinon assignment.

minor comments (4)

[Model & Methods and Supplementary Note 6] The main text states that the DMRG results are 'verified' as converged with respect to both m and Np, but Supplementary Note 6 presents convergence tests only for Np. Please provide the m-convergence data or point explicitly to where it is shown.
[Fig. 1 caption] The caption should specify the parameters used for the two-spinon boundary (for example J=4t^2/U) and should define the construction of the red one-phonon-plus-two-spinon boundary more explicitly, since this boundary is central to the main claim.
[Throughout] The notation for the phonon spectral function is inconsistent: it is written as B(q,ω) in the main text and B(q,Ω) in Fig. 3 and in some supplementary panels. Please use one convention consistently.
[Results, Fig. 3] The sentence in the text comparing the RIXS onset to 'the q=π/a phonon mode' would be clearer if it referred explicitly to the renormalized zone-boundary phonon energy extracted from B(q=π/a,ω), rather than to the bare mode, since the softening is an important part of the argument.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the RIXS prediction is a self-contained numerical result.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is a DMRG computation of RIXS spectra for a well-defined Hubbard-SSH Hamiltonian. The predicted low-energy feature is not obtained by fitting a parameter and then renaming it as a prediction; instead, the RIXS response is computed directly from Eq. (2)-(3) and compared with independently computed phonon, spin, and charge correlation functions. The red dashed one-phonon-plus-two-spinon boundary is a consistency check built from the computed renormalized phonon dispersion and the analytic two-spinon boundary, not a fit to the RIXS peak. The protocol prediction that the zone-center RIXS energy lies below optical/Raman phonon energies is falsifiable and does not enter the calculation as an input. Self-citations appear as method references, parameter-validity checks, and a concurrent Holstein-model comparison, but the Holstein contrast is independently reproduced in the Supplemental Material via dimer exact diagonalization and DMRG comparisons, so the cited concurrent work is not load-bearing for the SSH conclusion. Finite-size and boundary-condition caveats are acknowledged by the authors and affect robustness of the interpretation, but they do not make the derivation circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim relies on standard quantum mechanics (Kramers-Heisenberg), a standard validity condition for the linear SSH model, and an interpretive phase-space construction for the multi-particle excitation. The free parameters (Vc, Gamma/2, eta) are chosen for numerical practicality and are verified not to change the qualitative conclusions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)

Core-hole potential Vc = -8t
Chosen to model the attractive potential of the core hole in the RIXS intermediate state; the paper states conclusions are not sensitive to its precise value (Supplementary Note 4).
Inverse core-hole lifetime Gamma/2 = t/4
Chosen as a broadening parameter for the RIXS and XAS spectra; the paper states conclusions are insensitive to it.
Final-state broadening eta = 0.2t
Chosen to provide numerical resolution in the spectral functions; it is a computational broadening, not a physical parameter.

assumptions (5)

standard math Kramers-Heisenberg formula for RIXS cross-section (Eq. 3)
The RIXS intensity is computed from the second-order Kramers-Heisenberg amplitude, the standard quantum mechanical description of resonant scattering.
domain assumption Linear approximation for the SSH effective hopping restricts the coupling to g<=0.4
The paper uses teff approximately -t + g<X_i - X_{i+1}> and restricts g to avoid sign inversion, which would signal breakdown of the linear model; the critical coupling gc is computed in Supplementary Note 2.
domain assumption The spin-conserving RIXS channel can be isolated in 1D systems via polarimetry
The paper focuses on the spin-conserving channel, citing Ref. [40] for experimental isolation; this is a practical assumption for the proposed protocol.
ad hoc to paper The one-phonon plus two-spinon continuum lower boundary is constructed from the renormalized phonon dispersion and the two-spinon continuum
This phase-space construction (red dashed lines in Fig. 1) is used to infer the multi-particle nature of the RIXS feature, but it is not derived from a direct calculation of the multi-particle spectral weight.
domain assumption DMRG results on L=16 chains are representative of the thermodynamic limit
All DMRG results are for L=16 chains with open boundary conditions; the paper does not provide finite-size scaling for the RIXS spectra, so continuum thresholds and peak positions are assumed to be representative.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger-like interactions with RIXS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C2GDGUF7

@misc{pith2026241215981,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger-like interactions with RIXS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C2GDGUF7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15981}
}

read the original abstract

Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH)-like electron-phonon (e-ph) interactions can drive the formation of light (bi)polarons and several novel states of matter. It is, therefore, prudent to develop experimental protocols for identifying such couplings in real materials and quantifying their strength. Here, we investigate how resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) probes e-ph interactions in the one-dimensional half-filled Hubbard-SSH model with onsite phonons. Using the density matrix renormalization group method, we compute the full RIXS response and find that the lattice excitations generated during the scattering process inevitably couple to the system's charge and magnetic sectors, resulting in combined multi-particle excitations that cannot be easily disentangled from one another. While this aspect complicates the interpretation of RIXS experiments, we outline how it can be leveraged to identify and quantify SSH-like interactions in quantum materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15981 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. The evolution of the (a) XAS, (b),(c) RIXS, (d),(e) phonon spectral function, (f),(g) dynamical charge and (h),(i) spin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. A comparison between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Normalized RIXS spectra at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

[1]

Barišić, J

S. Barišić, J. Labbé, and J. Friedel, Tight binding and transition-metal superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.25, 919 (1970)

work page 1970
[3]

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

1979
[4]

Jackiw and C

R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Solitons with fermion number ½, Phys. Rev. D13, 3398 (1976)

1976
[5]

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

1988
[6]

E. J. Meier, F. A. An, and B. Gadway, Observation of the topological soliton state in the Su–Schrieffer–Heeger model, Nature communications7, 13986 (2016)

work page 2016
[7]

Bid and A

S. Bid and A. Chakrabarti, Topological properties of a class of Su-Schrieffer-Heeger variants, Physics Letters A 423, 127816 (2022)

work page 2022
[8]

M. M. Möller, G. A. Sawatzky, M. Franz, and M. Berciu, Type-II Dirac semimetal stabilized by electron-phonon coupling, Nature Communications8, 2267 (2017)

work page 2017
[9]

Li and S

S. Li and S. Johnston, Quantum Monte Carlo study of lattice polarons in the two-dimensional three-orbital Su– Schrieffer–Heeger model, npj Quantum Materials 5, 40 (2020)

work page 2020

Show all 55 references

[10]

Cohen-Stead, K

B. Cohen-Stead, K. Barros, R. Scalettar, and S. John- ston, A hybrid Monte Carlo study of bond-stretching electron–phonon interactions and charge order in BaBiO3, npj Computational Materials9, 40 (2023)

2023
[11]

C. Feng, B. Xing, D. Poletti, R. Scalettar, and G. Batrouni, Phase diagram of the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger- Hubbard model on a square lattice, Phys. Rev. B106, L081114 (2022)

2022
[12]

A. Götz, S. Beyl, M. Hohenadler, and F. F. Assaad, Valence-bond solid to antiferromagnet transition in the two-dimensional Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model by Langevin dynamics, Phys. Rev. B105, 085151 (2022)

2022
[13]

Malkaruge Costa, B

S. Malkaruge Costa, B. Cohen-Stead, and S. Johnston, Kekulé valence bond order in the honeycomb lattice optical Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model and its relevance to graphene, Phys. Rev. B110, 115130 (2024)

2024
[14]

Cai, Z.-X

X. Cai, Z.-X. Li, and H. Yao, Robustness of antiferro- magnetism in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B106, L081115 (2022)

2022
[15]

X. Cai, Z. Han, Z.-X. Li, S. A. Kivelson, and H. Yao, Quantum spin liquid from electron-phonon coupling, arXiv:2408.04002 (2024)

2024
[16]

J. Sous, M. Chakraborty, R. V. Krems, and M. Berciu, Light bipolarons stabilized by Peierls electron-phonon coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 247001 (2018)

2018
[17]

Nocera, J

A. Nocera, J. Sous, A. E. Feiguin, and M. Berciu, Bipo- laron liquids at strong peierls electron-phonon couplings, Phys. Rev. B104, L201109 (2021)

2021
[18]

Tanjaroon Ly, B

A. Tanjaroon Ly, B. Cohen-Stead, S. Malkaruge Costa, and S. Johnston, Comparative study of the supercon- ductivity in the Holstein and optical Su-Schrieffer-Heeger models, Phys. Rev. B108, 184501 (2023)

2023
[19]

Zhang, J

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

2023
[20]

X.Cai, Z.-X.Li,andH.Yao,High-temperaturesupercon- ductivity induced by the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger electron- phonon coupling, arXiv:2308.06222 (2023)

2023 arXiv
[21]

Mitrano, S

M. Mitrano, S. Johnston, Y.-J. Kim, and M. P. M. Dean, Exploring quantum materials with resonant inelastic x- ray scattering, Phys. Rev. X14, 040501 (2024)

2024
[22]

L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, and J. van den Brink, Determining the electron-phonon coupling strength from resonant inelastic x-ray scattering at transition metal L- edges, Europhysics Letters95, 27008 (2011)

2011
[23]

J. N. Hancock, G. Chabot-Couture, and M. Greven, Lat- tice coupling and Franck–Condon effects in K-edge res- onant inelastic x-ray scattering, New Journal of Physics 12, 033001 (2010)

2010
[24]

Yavaş, M

H. Yavaş, M. van Veenendaal, J. van den Brink, L. J. P. Ament, A. Alatas, B. M. Leu, M.-O. Apostu, N. Wizent, G. Behr, W. Sturhahn, H. Sinn, and E. E. Alp, Observa- tion of phonons with resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter22, 485601 (2010)

2010
[25]

W. S. Lee, S. Johnston, B. Moritz, J. Lee, M. Yi, K. J. Zhou, T. Schmitt, L. Patthey, V. Strocov, K. Kudo, Y. Koike, J. van den Brink, T. P. Devereaux, and Z. X. Shen, Role of lattice coupling in establishing elec- tronic and magnetic properties in quasi-one-dimensional cuprat...

2013
[26]

T. P. Devereaux, A. M. Shvaika, K. Wu, K. Wohlfeld, C. J. Jia, Y. Wang, B. Moritz, L. Chaix, W.-S. Lee, Z.-X. Shen, G. Ghiringhelli, and L. Braicovich, Directly charac- terizing the relative strength and momentum dependence ofelectron-phononcouplingusingresonantinelasticx-ray ...

2016
[27]

Rossi, R

M. Rossi, R. Arpaia, R. Fumagalli, M. Moretti Sala, D. Betto, K. Kummer, G. M. De Luca, J. van den Brink, M. Salluzzo, N. B. Brookes, L. Braicovich, and G. Ghir- inghelli, Experimental determination of momentum- resolved electron-phonon coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 027001 (2019)

2019
[28]

J. Q. Lin, H. Miao, D. G. Mazzone, G. D. Gu, A. Nag, A. C. Walters, M. García-Fernández, A. Barbour, J. Pel- liciari, I. Jarrige, M. Oda, K. Kurosawa, N. Momono, K.- J. Zhou, V. Bisogni, X. Liu, and M. P. M. Dean, Strongly correlated charge density wave in La2−xSrxCuO4 ev- ide...

2020
[29]

Y. Y. Peng, A. A. Husain, M. Mitrano, S. X.-L. Sun, T. A. Johnson, A. V. Zakrzewski, G. J. MacDougall, A. Barbour, I. Jarrige, V. Bisogni, and P. Abbamonte, 6 Enhanced electron-phonon coupling for charge-density- wave formation in La1.8−xEu0.2SrxCuO4+δ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 0...

2020
[30]

Braicovich, M

L. Braicovich, M. Rossi, R. Fumagalli, Y. Peng, Y. Wang, R. Arpaia, D. Betto, G. M. De Luca, D. Di Castro, K. Kummer, M. Moretti Sala, M. Pagetti, G. Balestrino, N. B. Brookes, M. Salluzzo, S. Johnston, J. van den Brink, and G. Ghiringhelli, Determining the electron- phonon co...

2020
[31]

C. D. Dashwood, A. Geondzhian, J. G. Vale, A. C. Pakpour-Tabrizi, C. A. Howard, Q. Faure, L. S. I. Veiga, D. Meyers, S. G. Chiuzbăian, A. Nicolaou, N. Jaouen, R. B. Jackman, A. Nag, M. García-Fernández, K.-J. Zhou, A. C. Walters, K. Gilmore, D. F. McMorrow, and M. P. M. Dean, ...

2021
[32]

Gilmore, Quantifying vibronic coupling with resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, Phys

K. Gilmore, Quantifying vibronic coupling with resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.25, 217 (2023)

2023
[33]

Capone, W

M. Capone, W. Stephan, and M. Grilli, Small-polaron formation and optical absorption in Su-Schrieffer-Heeger and Holstein models, Phys. Rev. B56, 4484 (1997)

1997
[34]

Nocera, U

A. Nocera, U. Kumar, N. Kaushal, G. Alvarez, E. Dagotto, and S. Johnston, Computing resonant in- elastic x-ray scattering spectra using the density ma- trix renormalization group method, Scientific Reports8, 11080 (2018)

2018
[35]

Bieniasz, S

K. Bieniasz, S. Johnston, and M. Berciu, Beyond the single-site approximation modeling of electron-phonon coupling effects on resonant inelastic x-ray scattering spectra, SciPost Phys.11, 062 (2021)

2021
[37]

L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill, and J. van den Brink, Resonant inelastic x-ray scattering studies of elementary excitations, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 705 (2011)

2011
[38]

Malkaruge Costa, B

S. Malkaruge Costa, B. Cohen-Stead, A. T. Ly, J. Neuhaus, and S. Johnston, Comparative determinant quantum Monte Carlo study of the acoustic and optical variants of the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. B 108, 165138 (2023)

2023
[39]

Braicovich, L

L. Braicovich, L. J. P. Ament, V. Bisogni, F. Forte, C. Aruta, G. Balestrino, N. B. Brookes, G. M. De Luca, P. G. Medaglia, F. M. Granozio, M. Radovic, M. Sal- luzzo, J. van den Brink, and G. Ghiringhelli, Disper- sion of magnetic excitations in the cuprateLa2CuO4 and CaCuO2 c...

2009
[40]

See supplementary online materials for further details re- garding our methods and additional results
[41]

Bisogni, S

V. Bisogni, S. Kourtis, C. Monney, K. Zhou, R. Kraus, C. Sekar, V. Strocov, B. Büchner, J. van den Brink, L. Braicovich, T. Schmitt, M. Daghofer, and J. Geck, Femtosecond dynamics of momentum-dependent mag- netic excitations from resonant inelastic x-ray scattering in CaCu2O3,...

2014
[42]

Alvarez, The density matrix renormalization group for strongly correlated electron systems: a generic im- plementation, Computer Physics Communications 180, 1572 (2009)

G. Alvarez, The density matrix renormalization group for strongly correlated electron systems: a generic im- plementation, Computer Physics Communications 180, 1572 (2009)

2009
[43]

Banerjee, J

D. Banerjee, J. Thomas, A. Nocera, and S. John- ston, Ground-state and spectral properties of the doped one-dimensional optical Hubbard-Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. B107, 235113 (2023)

2023
[44]

Kourtis, J

S. Kourtis, J. van den Brink, and M. Daghofer, Exact diagonalization results for resonant inelastic x-ray scat- tering spectra of one-dimensional Mott insulators, Phys. Rev. B 85, 064423 (2012)

2012
[45]

Forte, M

F. Forte, M. Cuoco, C. Noce, and J. van den Brink, Doping dependence of magnetic excitations of one- dimensional cuprates as probed by resonant inelastic x- ray scattering, Phys. Rev. B83, 245133 (2011)

2011
[47]

Kumar, A

U. Kumar, A. Nag, J. Li, H. C. Robarts, A. C. Walters, M. García-Fernández, R. Saint-Martin, A. Revcolevschi, J. Schlappa, T. Schmitt, S. Johnston, and K.-J. Zhou, Unraveling higher-order contributions to spin excitations probed using resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, Phys....

2022
[48]

Z. Li, C. J. Chandler, and F. Marsiglio, Perturbation theory of the mass enhancement for a polaron coupled to acoustic phonons, Phys. Rev. B83, 045104 (2011)

2011
[49]

Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger-like interactions using RIXS

R. Staudt, M. Dzierzawa, and A. Muramatsu, Phase di- agram of the three-dimensional Hubbard model at half filling, The European Physical Journal B - Condensed Matter and Complex Systems17, 411 (2000). Supplementary Material for “Identifying and quantifying Su-Schrieffer-Heeger...

2000 arXiv
[50]

Nocera and G

A. Nocera and G. Alvarez, Spectral functions with the density matrix renormalization group: Krylov-space approach for correction vectors, Phys. Rev. E94, 053308 (2016)

2016
[51]

T. D. Kühner and S. R. White, Dynamical correlation functions using the density matrix renormalization group, Phys. Rev. B 60, 335 (1999)

1999
[52]

Jeckelmann, Dynamical density-matrix renormalization-group method, Phys

E. Jeckelmann, Dynamical density-matrix renormalization-group method, Phys. Rev. B66, 045114 (2002)

2002
[53]

Banerjee, J

D. Banerjee, J. Thomas, A. Nocera, and S. Johnston, Ground-state and spectral properties of the doped one-dimensional optical Hubbard-Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. B107, 235113 (2023)

2023
[54]

Forte, M

F. Forte, M. Cuoco, C. Noce, and J. van den Brink, Doping dependence of magnetic excitations of one-dimensional cuprates as probed by resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, Phys. Rev. B83, 245133 (2011)

2011
[55]

Klauser, J

A. Klauser, J. Mossel, J.-S. Caux, and J. van den Brink, Spin-exchange dynamical structure factor of theS = 1/2 Heisenberg chain, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 157205 (2011)

2011
[56]

Bhaseen, F

M. Bhaseen, F. Essler, and A. Grage, Itinerancy effects on spin correlations in one-dimensional mott insulators, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics71, 020405 (2005)

2005
[57]

Thomas, D

J. Thomas, D. Banerjee, A. Nocera, and S. Johnston, Theory of electron-phonon interactions in extended correlated systems probed by resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, arXiv:2412.12995 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[58]

Nocera, J

A. Nocera, J. Sous, A. E. Feiguin, and M. Berciu, Bipolaron liquids at strong peierls electron-phonon couplings, Phys. Rev. B 104, L201109 (2021)

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Barišić, J

S. Barišić, J. Labbé, and J. Friedel, Tight binding and transition-metal superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.25, 919 (1970)

work page 1970

[2] [3]

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

1979

[3] [4]

Jackiw and C

R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Solitons with fermion number ½, Phys. Rev. D13, 3398 (1976)

1976

[4] [5]

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

1988

[5] [6]

E. J. Meier, F. A. An, and B. Gadway, Observation of the topological soliton state in the Su–Schrieffer–Heeger model, Nature communications7, 13986 (2016)

work page 2016

[6] [7]

Bid and A

S. Bid and A. Chakrabarti, Topological properties of a class of Su-Schrieffer-Heeger variants, Physics Letters A 423, 127816 (2022)

work page 2022

[7] [8]

M. M. Möller, G. A. Sawatzky, M. Franz, and M. Berciu, Type-II Dirac semimetal stabilized by electron-phonon coupling, Nature Communications8, 2267 (2017)

work page 2017

[8] [9]

Li and S

S. Li and S. Johnston, Quantum Monte Carlo study of lattice polarons in the two-dimensional three-orbital Su– Schrieffer–Heeger model, npj Quantum Materials 5, 40 (2020)

work page 2020