Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Two- and many-body physics of ultracold molecules dressed by dual microwave fields

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper shows that for ultracold NaCs molecules dressed by dual microwave fields, tuning the π-field Rabi frequency to the dipolar-cancellation point maximizes the elastic-to-inelastic scattering ratio, and that an effective potential…

desk verdict Solid scattering core, useful dual-microwave potential; the self-bound many-body state needs a gauge-potential check. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.05210 v2 pith:YRRI4ZRT submitted 2025-01-09 cond-mat.quant-gas

Fulin Deng , Xinyuan Hu , Wei-Jian Jin , Su Yi , Tao Shi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas PACS 67.85.-d
keywords ultracoldpolarmoleculesmicrowaveshieldingFloquettheorymultichannelscatteringeffectiveinteractionpotentialNaCsBose-Einsteincondensatedipolarquantumgases
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

The paper studies ultracold sodium-cesium molecules dressed by two microwave fields, one circularly polarized ($\sigma_+$) and one linearly polarized ($\pi$), and asks where the dual-dressing scheme gives the best balance between elastic and inelastic collisions. Using Floquet theory and multichannel scattering, it shows that the elastic-to-inelastic collision ratio $\gamma$ is globally maximized when the $\pi$-field Rabi frequency is tuned to the point where the effective dipole-dipole interaction cancels, a regime that matches the settings of the recent experiment that produced a molecular Bose–Einstein condensate. The paper also derives an analytic effective interaction potential between dressed molecules and verifies it against numerical scattering calculations. Applying this potential to a gas of 100 molecules, it finds two ground states: a weakly correlated expanding gas and a strongly correlated self-bound gas, distinguished by the $\pi$-field strength. The significance is a predictive framework for when dual microwaves cool molecules efficiently and how the same interaction organizes the many-body state.

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective inter-molecular potential $$V_{\rm eff}(r) = \frac{C_6}{$r^{6}$}\left[\$sin^{4}$\$\theta$ + \frac{w_1}{w_2}\$sin^{2}$\$\theta$\$cos^{2}$\$\theta$ + \frac{w_0}{w_2}(3\$cos^{2}$\$\theta$-1)^2\right] + \frac{C_3}{$r^{3}$}(3\$cos^{2}$\$\theta$-1),$$ which combines the dressed dipole-dipole term $C_3$, tunable through zero at the cancellation point, with a shielding core $C_6/r^6$ generated by second-order couplings between Floquet sectors; the angular weights $w_0,w_1,w_2$ encode the anisotropy. This potential lets a single-channel model stand in for the full time-dependent multichannel problem, and it is the input to the many-body variational calculation.

What would settle it

Measure the s-wave scattering length and the elastic-to-inelastic ratio for NaCs at a collision temperature near 6 nK while sweeping the $\pi$-field Rabi frequency across the predicted cancellation point $\Omega_\pi/(2\pi) \approx 6.65$ MHz; the paper predicts a positive scattering length near $2.2\,r_0$ and a global maximum of $\gamma$ at that point, with shape resonances on either side. A shifted or suppressed maximum, or a sizable inelastic rate at cancellation, would rule out the effective-potential picture.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For NaCs molecules in a $\sigma_+$ plus $\pi$ microwave configuration, the paper claims that the good-to-bad collision ratio $\gamma = \beta_{\rm el}/\beta_{\rm inel}$ reaches its global maximum at the dipolar-cancellation point $\Omega_\pi^{(c)} \approx 2\pi\times 6.65$ MHz (with $\delta_\pi = -2\pi\times 10$ MHz), where the first-order dipole-dipole interaction vanishes and only the $C_6/r^6$ shielding core remains; at this point inelastic loss is minimized while elastic scattering stays large. The paper further claims that the effective potential $V_{\rm eff}(r)$ in Eq.~(23), derived by second-order Floquet perturbation theory including all second-order contributions, reproduces the multichannel scattering lengths for the partial waves studied, and that the same potential, used in a Jastrow-correlated variational calculation, yields both an expanding weakly correlated state (condensate fraction $0.94$) and a self-bound strongly correlated state (condensate fraction $0.53$) depending on $\Omega_\pi$.

Load-bearing premise

The single-channel description assumes the induced gauge potential and higher-order Born-Oppenheimer corrections are negligible at the distances that matter for scattering and for the self-bound gas, even though the gauge correction reaches about ten percent for large angular-momentum channels and becomes essential for molecules trapped at megahertz frequencies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At the dipolar-cancellation point, evaporative cooling of NaCs should proceed most efficiently, and the paper notes this matches the parameter choice of the experiment that achieved a molecular BEC.
  • The analytic effective potential gives a single-channel description that reproduces multichannel scattering lengths for $m_0 = 0, \pm 1, \pm 2$, so future scattering calculations can use the simple potential instead of the full Floquet problem.
  • The many-body calculation predicts that varying $\Omega_\pi$ across the cancellation point crosses from an expanding weakly correlated gas (near-unit condensate fraction) to a self-bound strongly correlated gas (condensate fraction about 0.5) with a flattened, disc-like shape.
  • Because $\beta_{\rm el}$ peaks at both shape resonances and the cancellation point while $\beta_{\rm inel}$ peaks only at resonances, the ratio $\gamma$ has local maxima at resonances but its global maximum at cancellation; experiments should therefore operate exactly at cancellation rather than near a resonance.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the effective potential remains accurate at higher densities, the self-bound state at $\Omega_\pi/(2\pi)=5.9$ MHz with peak density $5.6\times 10^{13}$ cm$^{-3}$ offers a test bed for beyond-mean-field effects in dipolar molecules, analogous to quantum droplets in atomic gases.
  • The paper's comparison with the megahertz-trap result suggests a direct testable boundary: the single-channel $V_{\rm eff}$ should fail for molecules held in traps with frequencies near 1 MHz, where the gauge potential becomes essential; measuring scattering in such a trap would map where the effective-potential description breaks down.
  • The same Floquet second-order machinery could be applied to other polarization combinations or to fermionic molecules, where the good-to-bad ratio at cancellation may control whether p-wave pairing survives inelastic losses.
  • One could test the predicted bimodal momentum distribution of the self-bound state in time-of-flight expansion: the peak at low $k$ from the condensate and the high-$k$ tail from uncondensed molecules should be distinguishable.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies ultracold NaCs molecules dressed by two microwave fields of distinct polarizations (σ+ and π). It develops a Floquet-based multichannel scattering framework for the time-dependent two-body interaction, extracts elastic and inelastic scattering rates and the good-to-bad collision ratio γ, and identifies a regime, at the π-field detuning/cancellation point, where γ is globally maximal. The authors also derive an analytic effective potential Veff(r) (Eq. 23) as a second-order Floquet perturbation result, compare it with the adiabatic Born-Oppenheimer potential, and validate single-channel scattering against the multichannel calculation. Using Veff in a Jastrow variational many-body calculation, they predict two ground-state branches: a weakly correlated expanding gas at Ωπ/(2π)=6.5 MHz and a strongly correlated self-bound gas at Ωπ/(2π)=5.9 MHz, with a condensate fraction of 0.53 and peak density 5.6×10^13 cm^-3. The appendices provide the single-molecule eigenstates, interaction matrix elements, perturbation coefficients, and a treatment of induced gauge potentials.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper provides a practical single-channel effective potential for dual-microwave-shielded polar molecules, an experimentally relevant prediction for optimal evaporative cooling, and a concrete scenario for a strongly correlated self-bound molecular gas. The manuscript has notable strengths: the Floquet multichannel machinery is internally consistent; the analytic potential correctly reduces to the known single-microwave result in the Ωπ→0 limit; the appendices give explicit matrix elements and perturbative coefficients; and the prediction that γ is maximized at the dipolar-cancellation point is falsifiable and matches the experimental choice of parameters in Ref. [28]. The main risk is that the many-body self-bound-state prediction is obtained from the fitted single-channel potential Veff alone, in a regime where the same paper's Appendix D shows that gauge and scalar Born-Oppenheimer corrections are not negligible.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV.D, Eq. (29), App. D] The self-bound gas state at Ωπ/(2π)=5.9 MHz, with peak density 5.6×10^13 cm^-3 and condensate fraction 0.53, is computed from the many-body Hamiltonian (Eq. 29) that uses only Veff(r), while the gauge potential and scalar potential derived in App. D are neglected. App. D itself reports that the total potential Vtot(m) deviates from Veff by a relative error reaching about 10% for m=10 at Ωπ/(2π)=4 MHz, with the deviation concentrated inside the shielding core (Fig. 8). The paper argues that this is unimportant for low-energy scattering because high-|m| partial waves are centrifugally suppressed, but that argument does not transfer to the dense self-bound state, where the mean interparticle spacing is only a few r0 and the Jastrow wavefunction samples short distances and many partial waves. The two-body scattering checks in Fig. 3 therefore do not constrain the many-body calculation in the regime where the approximation error is largest. This is load-bearing for the paper's central many-body claim. The authors should either repeat the variational calculation with the full Born-Oppenheimer Hamiltonian (Eq. D1), or at least with the gauge and scalar corrections of Eq. (D15) included, and show that the self-bound branch and its observables are stable, or clearly reframe the self-bound prediction as a property of the fitted single-channel model and quantify the resulting uncertainty.
  2. [Sec. IV.A, Fig. 2(c), Eq. (23)] The validation chain of the effective potential is partly circular. Although Eq. (23) is derived from second-order perturbation theory, the text states that at lower Ωπ the analytic Veff deviates from the adiabatic potential V0,1^(ad) and that the agreement is improved by 'numerically fitting the adiabatic potential according to Eq. (23)' (Sec. IV.A, Fig. 2(c)). Since V0,1^(ad) is an eigenenergy of the same Floquet Hamiltonian used in the multichannel scattering calculation, the subsequent agreement between single-channel and multichannel scattering lengths (Fig. 3) demonstrates internal consistency of the functional form with fitted coefficients, but it is not an independent validation of the analytically derived C3, C6, w0, and w1. The manuscript should state the fitting procedure explicitly, report the fitted coefficient values and residuals, and qualify the claim that the effective potential is 'derived and subsequently validated' when fitted values are used away from the Ωπ→0 limit.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV.D] The text 'Friedal oscillation' should read 'Friedel oscillation'.
  2. [App. D, Eq. (D10)] The displayed formula for Vsc contains corrupted glyphs that make the expression unreadable; the scalar potential definition should be typeset correctly.
  3. [Abstract] There are grammatical errors in the abstract: 'introduces addition control knob' and 'our work pave the way' should be corrected.
  4. [Sec. IV.C] The observation that γ is globally maximal at the cancellation point is made for a fixed δπ and a fixed temperature (6 nK); the claim should be qualified so that 'global' is understood within the explored parameter slice.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the effective potential is derived by second-order perturbation theory and checked against independent multichannel scattering; the many-body outputs are not used as fit inputs.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. Equation (23) is obtained analytically by second-order perturbation theory from the Floquet Hamiltonian (Eqs. 10–11), with the coefficients in App. C expressed in terms of Euler angles and single-molecule energies, not fitted to scattering or many-body observables. The multichannel scattering calculation solves the original Floquet Hamiltonian independently, so the agreement in Fig. 3 is a genuine check rather than a refit. The many-body Hamiltonian (Eq. 29) uses Veff and produces quantities such as density, condensate fraction, and g2 that were not inputs to the potential construction. Figure 2(c) discloses an optional numerical fit of Veff to the adiabatic potential curve; this improves the potential representation but the scattering lengths and many-body states are computed from that potential rather than fitted to those targets. App. D identifies a real limitation—gauge and scalar potentials contribute roughly 10% corrections at short range for high m—but this is a correctness/accuracy risk for the dense self-bound state, not a circular reduction. The self-citations to Refs. [40] and [44] are methodological (the single-microwave limit and the variational Jastrow ansatz) and the present derivation does not rely on them as unverified load-bearing premises. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's own equations or citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a set of standard and domain-specific modeling assumptions, plus the numerical fitting of effective potential coefficients. No new forces, particles, or fundamentally new entities are introduced. The main ledger items are the fitted potential coefficients and the Born-Oppenheimer/gauge-neglect assumptions that make the single-channel model possible.

free parameters (1)
  • Effective potential coefficients (C3, C6, w0/w2, w1/w2) = Omega_pi-dependent; numerically fit to the adiabatic potential when the analytic form deviates
    In Sec. IV.A and Fig. 2c, the paper fits the adiabatic potential to Eq. (23) to improve accuracy; these fitted coefficients are then used in scattering and many-body calculations.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Rigid-rotor model restricted to J=0,1 rotational manifolds
    Sec. II; ignores hyperfine structure and higher rotational states, which are present in real NaCs but are assumed not to affect the shielding physics.
  • domain assumption Rotating-wave approximation keeps only the difference frequency omega = omega+ - omega_pi
    Sec. II, after Eq. (2); terms at omega+ and omega_pi (GHz scale) are neglected.
  • domain assumption Born-Oppenheimer separation of internal and relative motion
    Sec. III.A; used to define the adiabatic potential; assumes internal dynamics much faster than center-of-mass motion.
  • domain assumption Universal short-range loss model with capture boundary condition and CvdW/r^6
    Sec. III; short-range physics is modeled rather than computed from ab initio molecular potentials.
  • domain assumption Floquet sector truncation at ncut=5
    Sec. III; convergence is asserted for the scanned parameters, but no systematic convergence data are shown.
  • domain assumption Variational Jastrow ansatz and cluster expansion truncated to finite order
    Sec. IV.D; the many-body ground state is obtained variationally with N=100, not exactly.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two- and many-body physics of ultracold molecules dressed by dual microwave fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YRRI4ZRT

@misc{pith2026250105210,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two- and many-body physics of ultracold molecules dressed by dual microwave fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YRRI4ZRT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.05210}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the two- and many-body physics of the ultracold polar molecules dressed by dual microwaves with distinct polarizations. Using Floquet theory and multichannel scattering calculations, we identify a regime with the largest elastic-to-inelastic scattering ratio which is favorable for performing evaporative cooling. Furthermore, we derive and, subsequently, validate an effective interaction potential that accurately captures the dynamics of microwave-shielded polar molecules (MSPMs). We also explore the ground-state properties of the ultracold gases of MSPMs by computing physical quantities such as gas density, condensate fraction, momentum distribution, and second-order correlation. It is shown that the system supports a weakly correlated expanding gas state and a strongly correlated self-bound gas state. Since the dual-microwave scheme introduces addition control knob and is essential for creating ultracold Bose gases of polar molecules, our work pave the way for studying two- and many-body physics of the ultracold polar molecules dressed by dual microwaves.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.05210 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematics of the dressed-state energy levels. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Effective potential. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) Scattering cross section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Total and condensate densities along the radial and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Normalized second-order correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Comparison of the adiabatic potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Supersolid Phases in Ultracold Gases of Microwave Shielded Polar Molecules

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Elliptically polarized microwaves induce anisotropic dipolar interactions in microwave-shielded NaCs molecules, and path-integral Monte Carlo simulations show a supersolid phase appears at experimentally accessible pa...

  2. Effective potential and scattering length of shielding polar molecules

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A static electric field added to an elliptically polarized microwave shield can cancel the attractive dipole part of the effective potential, leaving a purely repulsive interaction with no shallow bound states.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [40]

    Qi, Z.-Y

    R. Qi, Z.-Y. Shi, and H. Zhai, Fermion pairing across a dipolar interaction induced resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 045302 (2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [48]

    Lepers, R

    M. Lepers, R. Vexiau, M. Aymar, N. Bouloufa-Maafa, and O. Dulieu, Long-range interactions between polar alkali-metal diatoms in external electric fields, Phys. Rev. A 88, 032709 (2013)

    2013

  3. [28]

    X.-Y. Chen, A. Schindewolf, S. Eppelt, R. Bause, M. Duda, S. Biswas, T. Karman, T. Hilker, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Field-linked resonances of polar molecules, Nature 614, 59 (2022)

    2022

  4. [1]

    as the unit for energy. In Fig. 5(a) and (b), we plot the total and conden- sate densities for the expanding and self-bound states, re- spectively. Here the condensate density can be obtained by diagonalizing the first-order correlation function, i.e., G1(r, r′)= ⟨ΨN∣ ˆψ†(r′) ˆψ(r)∣ ΨN⟩= ∑ℓ≥0 Nℓ ¯φℓ(r) ¯φ∗ ℓ(r′), where Nℓ (sorted in descending order) is t...

    work page

  5. [2]

    V. V. Flambaum and M. G. Kozlov, Enhanced sensitiv- ity to the time variation of the fine-structure constant and mp/me in diatomic molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 150801 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [3]

    T. A. Isaev, S. Hoekstra, and R. Berger, Laser-cooled raf as a promising candidate to measure molecular parity violation, Phys. Rev. A 82, 052521 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [4]

    J. J. Hudson, D. M. Kara, I. J. Smallman, B. E. Sauer, M. R. Tarbutt, and E. A. Hinds, Improved measurement of the shape of the electron, Nature 473, 493 (2011)

    2011

  8. [5]

    T. A. Collaboration, J. Baron, W. C. Campbell, D. De- Mille, J. M. Doyle, G. Gabrielse, Y. V. Gurevich, P. W. Hess, N. R. Hutzler, E. Kirilov, I. Kozyryev, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, M. F. Parsons, E. S. Petrik, B. Spaun, A. C. Vutha, and A. D. West, Order of magnitude smaller limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron, Science 343, 269 (2014), ...

    doi:10.1126/science.1248213 2014

Show all 57 references
  1. [6]

    Andreev, D

    V. Andreev, D. G. Ang, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, G. Gabrielse, J. Haefner, N. R. Hutzler, Z. Lasner, C. Meisenhelder, B. R. O’Leary, C. D. Panda, A. D. West, E. P. West, X. Wu, and A. Collaboration, Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron, Na- ture 562, 355 (2018)

    2018

  2. [7]

    N. R. Hutzler, Polyatomic molecules as quantum sen- sors for fundamental physics, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 044011 (2020)

    2020

  3. [8]

    R. V. Krems, Cold controlled chemistry, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 10, 4079 (2008)

    2008

  4. [9]

    M.-G. Hu, Y. Liu, D. D. Grimes, Y.-W. Lin, A. H. Gheorghe, R. Vexiau, N. Bouloufa-Maafa, O. Dulieu, T. Rosenband, and K.-K. Ni, Di- rect observation of bimolecular reactions of ul- tracold krb molecules, Science 366, 1111 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aay9531

    2019 doi

  5. [10]

    Liu and K.-K

    Y. Liu and K.-K. Ni, Bimolecular Chemistry in the Ul- tracold Regime, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 73, 73 (2022). 12

    2022

  6. [11]

    DeMille, Quantum computation with trapped polar molecules, Phys

    D. DeMille, Quantum computation with trapped polar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 067901 (2002)

    2002

  7. [12]

    Sawant, J

    R. Sawant, J. A. Blackmore, P. D. Gregory, J. Mur-Petit, D. Jaksch, J. Aldegunde, J. M. Hutson, M. R. Tarbutt, and S. L. Cornish, Ultracold polar molecules as qudits, New Journal of Physics 22, 013027 (2020)

    2020

  8. [13]

    P. Rabl, D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, M. D. Lukin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and P. Zoller, Hybrid quantum processors: Molecular ensembles as quantum memory for solid state circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 033003 (2006)

    2006

  9. [14]

    C. M. Tesch and R. de Vivie-Riedle, Quantum compu- tation with vibrationally excited molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 157901 (2002)

    2002

  10. [15]

    M. L. Wall, K. Maeda, and L. D. Carr, Realizing un- conventional quantum magnetism with symmetric top molecules, New J. Phys. 17, 025001 (2015)

    2015

  11. [16]

    V. V. Albert, J. P. Covey, and J. Preskill, Robust encod- ing of a qubit in a molecule, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031050 (2020)

    2020

  12. [17]

    Micheli, G

    A. Micheli, G. K. Brennen, and P. Zoller, A toolbox for lattice-spin models with polar molecules, Nature Physics 2, 341 (2006)

    2006

  13. [18]

    Altman, K

    E. Altman, K. R. Brown, G. Carleo, L. D. Carr, E. Dem- ler, C. Chin, B. DeMarco, S. E. Economou, M. A. Eriks- son, K.-M. C. Fu, M. Greiner, K. R. Hazzard, R. G. Hulet, A. J. Koll´ ar, B. L. Lev, M. D. Lukin, R. Ma, X. Mi, S. Misra, C. Monroe, K. Murch, Z. Nazario, K.-K. Ni, A....

    2021

  14. [19]

    Lahaye, C

    T. Lahaye, C. Menotti, L. Santos, M. Lewenstein, and T. Pfau, The physics of dipolar bosonic quantum gases, Reports on Progress in Physics 72, 126401 (2009)

    2009

  15. [20]

    Karman and J

    T. Karman and J. M. Hutson, Microwave shielding of ultracold polar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 163401 (2018)

    2018

  16. [21]

    Lassabli` ere and G

    L. Lassabli` ere and G. Qu´ em´ ener, Controlling the scat- tering length of ultracold dipolar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 163402 (2018)

    2018

  17. [22]

    L. D. Marco, G. Valtolina, K. Matsuda, W. G. To- bias, J. P. Covey, and J. Ye, A degenerate fermi gas of polar molecules, Science 363, 853 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aau7230

    2019 doi

  18. [23]

    Duda, X.-Y

    M. Duda, X.-Y. Chen, A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, J. von Milczewski, R. Schmidt, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Tran- sition from a polaronic condensate to a degenerate fermi gas of heteronuclear molecules, Nat. Phys.19, 720 (2023)

    2023

  19. [24]

    Anderegg, S

    L. Anderegg, S. Burchesky, Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, T. Karman, E. Chae, K.-K. Ni, W. Ketterle, and J. M. Doyle, Observation of microwave shielding of ultracold molecules, Science 373, 779 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abg9502

    2021 doi

  20. [25]

    J. Lin, G. Chen, M. Jin, Z. Shi, F. Deng, W. Zhang, G. Qu´ em´ ener, T. Shi, S. Yi, and D. Wang, Microwave shielding of bosonic narb molecules, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031032 (2023)

    2023

  21. [26]

    Bigagli, C

    N. Bigagli, C. Warner, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, I. Steven- son, T. Karman, and S. Will, Collisionally Stable Gas of Bosonic Dipolar Ground State Molecules, Nat. Phys. 19, 1579 (2023)

    2023

  22. [27]

    Schindewolf, R

    A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, X.-Y. Chen, M. Duda, T. Kar- man, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Evaporation of microwave- shielded polar molecules to quantum degeneracy, Nature 607, 677 (2022)

    2022

  23. [29]

    Bigagli, W

    N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, B. Bulatovic, T. Kar- man, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, Observation of bose- einstein condensation of dipolar molecules, Nature 631, 289 (2024)

    2024

  24. [30]

    X.-Y. Chen, S. Biswas, S. Eppelt, A. Schindewolf, F. Deng, T. Shi, S. Yi, T. A. Hilker, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Ultracold field-linked tetratomic molecules, Nature 626, 283 (2024)

    2024

  25. [31]

    F. Deng, X. Chen, X. Luo, W. Zhang, S. Yi, and T. Shi, Formation and dissociation of field-linked tetramers (2024), arXiv:2405.13645 [Quantum Physics]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [32]

    You and M

    L. You and M. Marinescu, Prospects for p-wave paired bardeen-cooper-schrieffer states of fermionic atoms, Phys. Rev. A 60, 2324 (1999)

    1999

  27. [33]

    M. A. Baranov, M. S. Mar’enko, V. S. Rychkov, and G. V. Shlyapnikov, Superfluid pairing in a polarized dipo- lar fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 66, 013606 (2002)

    2002

  28. [34]

    Shi, J.-N

    T. Shi, J.-N. Zhang, C.-P. Sun, and S. Yi, Singlet and triplet bardeen-cooper-schrieffer pairs in a gas of two- species fermionic polar molecules, Phys. Rev. A 82, 033623 (2010)

    2010

  29. [35]

    C. Zhao, L. Jiang, X. Liu, W. M. Liu, X. Zou, and H. Pu, Hartree-fock-bogoliubov theory of dipolar fermi gases, Phys. Rev. A 81, 063642 (2010)

    2010

  30. [36]

    Wu and J

    C. Wu and J. E. Hirsch, Mixed triplet and singlet pair- ing in ultracold multicomponent fermion systems with dipolar interactions, Phys. Rev. B 81, 020508 (2010)

    2010

  31. [37]

    Levinsen, N

    J. Levinsen, N. R. Cooper, and G. V. Shlyapnikov, Topological px + ipy superfluid phase of fermionic polar molecules, Phys. Rev. A 84, 013603 (2011)

    2011

  32. [38]

    M. A. Baranov, M. Dalmonte, G. Pupillo, and P. Zoller, Condensed matter theory of dipolar quantum gases, Chem. Rev. 112, 5012 (2012)

    2012

  33. [39]

    Shi, S.-H

    T. Shi, S.-H. Zou, H. Hu, C.-P. Sun, and S. Yi, Ultracold fermi gases with resonant dipole-dipole interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 045301 (2013)

    2013

  34. [41]

    Deng, X.-Y

    F. Deng, X.-Y. Chen, X.-Y. Luo, W. Zhang, S. Yi, and T. Shi, Effective potential and superfluidity of microwave-shielded polar molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 183001 (2023)

    2023

  35. [42]

    Read and D

    N. Read and D. Green, Paired states of fermions in two dimensions with breaking of parity and time-reversal symmetries and the fractional quantum hall effect, Phys. Rev. B 61, 10267 (2000)

    2000

  36. [43]

    D. A. Ivanov, Non-abelian statistics of half-quantum vor- tices in p-wave superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 268 (2001)

    2001

  37. [44]

    Stevenson, S

    I. Stevenson, S. Singh, A. Elkamshishy, N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, C. H. Greene, and S. Will, Three- body recombination of ultracold microwave-shielded po- lar molecules (2024), arXiv:2407.04901 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

    2024

  38. [45]

    W.-J. Jin, F. Deng, S. Yi, and T. Shi, Bose-einstein con- densates of microwave-shielded polar molecules (2024), arXiv:2406.06412 [cond-mat.quant-gas]. 13

    2024 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Langen, J

    T. Langen, J. Boronat, J. S´ anchez-Baena, R. Bomb ´ ın, T. Karman, and F. Mazzanti, Dipolar droplets of strongly interacting molecules (2024), arXiv:2407.09391 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Idziaszek and P

    Z. Idziaszek and P. S. Julienne, Universal rate constants for reactive collisions of ultracold molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 113202 (2010)

    2010

  41. [49]

    B. Xu, F. Yang, R. Qi, H. Zhai, and P. Zhang, Synthetic mutual gauge field in microwave-shielded polar molecular gases (2024), arXiv:2410.10806 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2024

  42. [50]

    T. Shi, E. Demler, and J. Ignacio Cirac, Variational study of fermionic and bosonic systems with non-Gaussian states: Theory and applications, Annals of Physics 390, 245 (2018), arXiv:1707.05902 [quant-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    J. B. Aviles, Extension of the hartree method to strongly interacting systems, Annals of Physics 5, 251 (1958)

    1958

  44. [52]

    Yi and L

    S. Yi and L. You, Trapped atomic condensates with anisotropic interactions, Phys. Rev. A 61, 041604 (2000)

    2000

  45. [53]

    Yi and L

    S. Yi and L. You, Trapped condensates of atoms with dipole interactions, Phys. Rev. A 63, 053607 (2001)

    2001

  46. [54]

    E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, Nobel lecture: Bose- einstein condensation in a dilute gas, the first 70 years and some recent experiments, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 875 (2002)

    2002

  47. [55]

    C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, in Bose–Einstein Condensation in Dilute Gases (Cam- bridge University Press, 2008) p. i–iv

    2008

  48. [56]

    de Boer and A

    J. de Boer and A. Michels, Contribution to the quantum- mechanical theory of the equation of state and the law of corresponding states. determination of the law of force of helium, Physica 5, 945 (1938)

    1938

  49. [57]

    de Boer and A

    J. de Boer and A. Michels, The influence of the in- teraction of more than two molecules on the molecular distribution-function in compressed gases, Physica 6, 97 (1939). 14 Appendix A: Single-molecule eigenstates and two-body interactions In the basis {∣0, 0⟩ ,∣1, 1⟩ ,∣1, 0⟩ ...

    1939

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.