Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Long-Lived Coherence between Incoherent Excitons revealed by Time-Resolved ARPES: An Exact Solution

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

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

Pith's one-line read Phonon dephasing converts exciton coherence into an indefinitely persisting coherence between incoherent excitons.

desk verdict The exact solution is genuine and the algebra checks out, but the headline 'long-lived coherence between incoherent excitons' rests on a special diagonal electron-phonon coupling that the paper itself concedes is model-specific. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08162 v2 pith:7PRSJRZJ submitted 2025-02-12 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Zhenlin Zhang , Wei Hu , Enrico Perfetto , Gianluca Stefanucci This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 71.35.-y79.60.-i
keywords time-resolvedARPESexcitoncoherenceexciton-phononinteractionincoherentexcitonsquantumbeatsexactlysolvablemodelexciton-polaron
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

Coherent excitons created by a below-gap pump are usually expected to lose their quantum phase as phonons scatter them; this paper shows, in an exactly solvable two-band model, that the phase is not lost but transferred. The exciton-exciton coherence between two different bright exciton species becomes a coherence between phonon-dressed incoherent excitons, and that coherence persists indefinitely. If the claim is correct, the absence of coherent excitons in a time-resolved ARPES experiment does not indicate a quasi-stationary state: the electronic density matrix keeps rotating, and TR-ARPES spectra keep showing undamped quantum beats at the exciton energy difference. The paper matters because it provides a sharp counterexample to the standard picture in which phonon dephasing erases all optical coherences once the polarization has decayed.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the exact time-dependent many-body state (Eq. (14)), which expresses the evolution of a coherent exciton as a product of a decaying amplitude $\ell(t)e^{-iE_\lambda t}$ times a superposition of the bare coherent exciton and phonon-dressed incoherent exciton states $|X^{\mathrm{inc}}_{\lambda Q}(t)\rangle$. The incoherent states are built from the Langreth function $f_q(t)=g_q(e^{-i\omega_q t}-1)/(\sqrt{N}\omega_q)$, the amplitude for having emitted one phonon; products of $f_q$'s generate the phonon cloud, and $S_Q(t)$ is their normalized overlap. The identity that carries the result is $N^{\mathrm{inc}}_{\lambda\lambda' Q}(t)=S_Q(t)X_{\lambda 0}(t)X^*_{\lambda' 0}(t)$, whose long-time limit keeps the relative phase $e^{-i(E_\lambda-E_{\lambda'})t}$ precisely because the same factor $e^{-iE_\lambda t}$ multiplies both the coherent and incoherent parts. The argument is closed by the diagonal exciton-phonon coupling (Eq. (53)), a consequence of the flat conduction band, which forbids phonon scattering between different exciton species.

What would settle it

Modify the electron-phonon coupling so that the matrix element for A-to-B exciton scattering is nonzero (for example by making the coupling momentum-dependent or by letting phonons also couple to the valence band), and recompute the long-time incoherent density matrix of Eq. (56); if the off-diagonal entries decay, the indefinite persistence is an artifact of the diagonal-coupling model. Experimentally, a TR-ARPES measurement on a material with two well-separated bright excitons below the gap should show the midpoint replica beating at $|E_A-E_B|$ for times much longer than the exciton polarization decay time, of order 15 fs in the model; the disappearance of the beats after the polarization decay would refute the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under nonresonant below-gap pumping, the exact time-dependent many-body state (Eq. (14)) factorizes into a decaying coherent part and a growing incoherent part: each bright exciton $|X_{\lambda 0}\rangle$ acquires a phonon cloud and becomes a superposition of the coherent state with amplitude $\ell(t)$ and a set of orthonormal incoherent exciton-polaron states $|X^{\mathrm{inc}}_{\lambda Q}(t)\rangle$ weighted by $\sqrt{S_Q(t)}$. The ground-to-exciton polarization decays because $\ell(t)\to 0$, but the scattering function $S_Q(t)$ grows so that the product $|\ell(t)|^2 S_Q(t)$ stays finite. Consequently the incoherent excitonic density matrix approaches $N^\infty_{\lambda\lambda' Q}\,e^{-i(E_\lambda-E_{\lambda'})t}$: an off-diagonal coherence that never dephases. The TR-ARPES signature is three valence-band replicas, at $E_A$, $E_B$ and the midpoint $(E_A+E_B)/2$, with the middle replica beating at the exciton energy difference even after all coherent excitons are gone. Resonant pumping generates only one species, so no beats occur and the incoherent populations settle into a steady, $Q$-dependent distribution peaked at $Q=0$.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that phonons can only shift an exciton's center-of-mass momentum and can never convert one exciton species into another; if a phonon could scatter the A exciton into the B exciton, the relative phase between the two species would be randomized and the indefinitely persisting coherence would dephase.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The system does not reach a steady state in the incoherent regime: the electronic reduced density matrix keeps rotating at the energy difference $E_A-E_B$, so the absence of coherent excitons cannot be taken as a sign of quasi-stationarity.
  • TR-ARPES pumped below the gap should exhibit three excitonic replicas, with the middle replica beating at the exciton energy difference, and these beats should outlive the decay of the excitonic polarization.
  • For resonant pumping, no X-X coherence is created, so no beats appear and the incoherent populations relax to a fixed distribution peaked at $Q=0$, in contrast with what a simple Bose distribution would predict.
  • Excitonic Bloch equations that discard X-X coherences from the outset are blind to this regime; an off-diagonal exciton density matrix is needed to describe the coherent-to-incoherent crossover.
  • Long-lived coherence observed in time-resolved optical experiments on the picosecond scale may be explained by an Xinc-Xinc coherence rather than by residual coherent excitons.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If real materials have nearly diagonal exciton-phonon coupling, the effect should be generic, but its lifetime will be controlled by the strength of inter-exciton phonon scattering, which the model deliberately sets to zero; measuring the beat decay time would quantify that off-diagonal scattering.
  • In polaron language, the two incoherent excitons share an identical phonon cloud, so the relative phase is a protected common-mode quantity; this is structurally similar to a decoherence-free subspace, a connection the paper does not draw.
  • A testable temperature prediction follows: within this model, increasing temperature should change the phonon-dressing amplitude but not damp the beats; strong temperature-induced damping in an experiment would signal off-diagonal coupling beyond the model.
  • The persistent rotating off-diagonal order is reminiscent of Floquet-like behavior without an external drive; the paper hints at using it for exciton-driven Floquet matter, but that use is speculative.
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. This manuscript studies a two-band semiconductor model with a flat conduction band, a dispersive valence band, statically screened Coulomb interactions, and a single phonon branch coupled k-independently to conduction electrons only (Section II). Assuming weak pumping and neglecting electron-phonon scattering during the pulse, the authors derive an exact time-dependent many-body state for positive times (Eq. 14, Appendix A), and from it exact expressions for the one-particle Green's function, the excitonic Green's function, and the phonon-traced electronic density matrix (Section III, Appendix B). The exact state decomposes into coherent excitons |X_λ0> and phonon-dressed incoherent excitons |X^inc_λQ(t)>. For resonant pumping the system evolves to an incoherent population without coherences. For nonresonant pumping, an initial X-X coherence is converted into an off-diagonal incoherent-exciton density-matrix element N^inc_λλ'Q(t) whose magnitude does not decay and whose phase oscillates as e^{-i(E_λ-E_λ')t} (Eqs. 51, 56). This produces persistent quantum beats in momentum-resolved occupations and in TR-ARPES spectra (Section IV B, Figs. 4, 5). The paper interprets this as evidence that the absence of coherent excitons does not imply a quasi-stationary state and that Xinc-Xinc coherence is a distinct, long-lived coherence channel.

Significance. The exact analytic solution is a valuable benchmark. The derivations in Appendices A and B are internally consistent: the orthonormality relations (Eq. 18), norm conservation (Eq. 19, modulo a typo noted below), the Green's function reductions (Eqs. 33-38), and the reduced density matrix (Eq. B36) all check out. The paper gives falsifiable, parameter-specific predictions: undamped quantum beats in TR-ARPES for nonresonant below-gap pumping, with the third replica at (E_A+E_B)/2 oscillating at frequency E_B-E_A, and identical decoherence rates for the A and B excitons. This goes beyond the excitonic Bloch equations, which omit X-X coherences by construction. The significance for real materials, however, is limited by the special structure of the model, as discussed in the major comments. The exactness of the solution within the model is not in question.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III D, Eq. (53)] The central claim of an indefinitely persisting Xinc-Xinc coherence relies on the exciton-phonon coupling being exactly diagonal and species-independent: G^{λλ'}(Q,Q') = δ_{λλ'}g_{Q'-Q}. This is not an innocuous simplification; it is a direct consequence of the flat conduction band (Eq. 7) and the k-independent, conduction-only electron-phonon coupling (Eq. 4). If phonons can scatter A into B excitons, or if the diagonal coupling is λ-dependent (G^{AA}≠G^{BB}), the phonon cloud attached to the two exciton species differs, and the phonon trace in Eq. (B34) yields a decaying overlap factor (in a displaced-oscillator picture, exp[-(1/2)Σ_q |f_A-f_B|^2]) that destroys the long-lived coherence. The one-sentence caveat in Section III D is insufficient given that the abstract and title present the effect without qualification. Please either (i) explicitly restrict the claim to this exactly solvable model, or (ii) add a quantitative robustness analysis, e.g., a perturbative treatment of off-diagonal G^{AB} or of λ-dependent diagonal couplings, estimating the Xinc-Xinc coherence lifetime in a more generic setting.
  2. [Section IV B, Eq. (56)] The statements that the Xinc-Xinc coherence 'persists indefinitely' and that 'the system does not attain a steady state' are exact only in the chosen model. Equation (56) holds because ℓ(t) and S_Q(t) reach time-independent asymptotics and because the relative phase e^{-i(E_A-E_B)t} is never randomized by species-dependent scattering. This is a model-derived upper bound on coherence lifetime, not an established property of real semiconductors. I recommend tempering the wording in the abstract and conclusions (e.g., 'within the model considered here'), or, if the general claim is to be retained, supporting it with a concrete estimate of the neglected off-diagonal coupling matrix elements for a realistic material. As written, the abstract's 'Such type of coherence is resistant to phonon dephasing' overstates the evidence.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section III A, Eq. (19)] Equation (19) is missing the sum over λ: unitary evolution implies Σ_λ |βλ(0)ℓ(t)|^2(1+Σ_Q S_Q(t)) = 1 - |α(0)|^2. The printed equation is not valid when two exciton species are excited, as in Section IV B.
  2. [Section IV] The symbol T_p is used for both pump duration and probe duration: Section IV A states 'probe duration Tp = 80 fs', while Section IV B states 'set the pump duration Tp = 10 fs', and Eq. (54) uses τ_p for the probe window. Please disambiguate these two time scales, especially because the nonresonant pump duration and the probe window are both relevant to the visibility of the beats.
  3. [Section V] In Section V, 'such as the the formation' contains a duplicated article; please correct this typo.
  4. [Section IV B] The sentence 'The decay rates are identical due to the diagonal exciton-phonon coupling, see Eq. (53), and because the electron-phonon interaction depends solely on the momentum transfer' would be clearer if it stated explicitly that the identical rates follow from the λ-independence of the diagonal coupling, not merely from momentum-transfer dependence.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the persistent Xinc-Xinc coherence is derived from the stated model, not from a fit or a load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The central derivational chain is self-contained. Starting from the model Hamiltonian (Eqs. 1-4), the paper constructs the exact many-body state (Eq. 14 and Appendix A) and obtains the excitonic Green's functions (Eqs. 34-35 and 45-46) and the reduced density matrix (Eq. 50) by direct calculation. The long-lived Xinc-Xinc coherence follows algebraically from Eq. (46), N^inc_{λλ'Q}(t) = S_Q(t,t) N^coh_{λλ'}(t), together with Eqs. (23) and (51); the common phonon-cloud factor S_Q(t) multiplies the polarization product X_{λ0}(t)X*_{λ'0}(t), so the undamped beat e^{-i(Eλ-Eλ')t} is a derived phase, not a fitted parameter or a renamed input. No data fitting appears anywhere in the paper, and no 'prediction' is statistically forced. The paper explicitly limits the scope of the claim: 'While this conclusion depends on the chosen model Hamiltonian' (Section III D), which is an honest model-dependence caveat rather than evidence of circularity. Self-citations exist (e.g., Refs. 24 and 52 for the model, the excitonic Green's function, and the decoherence-time formula), but the core results are re-derived in Appendices A and B, so these citations are not load-bearing for the mathematical claims. The diagonal exciton-phonon coupling of Eq. (53) follows from the flat conduction band and conduction-only coupling, not from the citation chain. The finding is therefore 'no significant circularity'; the minor score reflects only the presence of non-load-bearing self-citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on structural features of the model (flat conduction band, band- and k-simple electron-phonon coupling) rather than on the specific parameter values. The structural axioms guarantee the exciton-diagonal phonon coupling (Eq. 53) that preserves inter-species phase; the numerical parameters only set the regime (two bound excitons, infrared-divergent phonon dressing, complete G-X decoherence). The finite-N to continuum extrapolation is an extra premise that is not flagged.

free parameters (6)
  • Coulomb coupling strength u = 0.3 eV (hand-chosen input)
    Sets the exciton binding energies E_A ≈ 0.54 eV and E_B ≈ 1.03 eV through the Bethe-Salpeter equation (5). It is an input, not fitted to the coherence claim.
  • Inverse screening length κ = 1.2 (hand-chosen input)
    Sets the Yukawa range and therefore the number and binding of exciton states; chosen together with u to give two bound states.
  • Electron-phonon coupling scale g0 = 0.1 eV with profile (cos q + 1)
    Sets the decoherence time τ_decoh ≈ 14.8 fs through Eq. (52). Its value determines how fast coherence is transferred, not whether Xinc-Xinc coherence persists.
  • Phonon frequency scale ω0 = 0.45 eV with dispersion sin|q|
    Sets phonon energies and the oscillation periods of S_Q(t) and ℓ(t); also controls the infrared behavior via ω_q ~ q near q=0.
  • Pump Rabi frequency Ω = e0 d = 10^-5 eV
    Keeps the system in the linear-response regime |α(0)|² ≈ 1 where the closed-form expressions apply.
  • Pump frequency and duration (ω_P, T_P) = ω_P = 0.54, 1.03, 0.99 eV; T_P = 40, 40, 10 fs
    Protocol knobs. The nonresonant choice ω_P = 0.99 eV simultaneously populates A and B excitons, creating the initial X-X coherence that the claim concerns.
assumptions (8)
  • ad hoc to paper Flat conduction band, ϵ^c_k = const (Section II), making exciton wavefunctions and energies Q-independent (Eqs. 7-8).
    Chosen for solvability. Together with the band-diagonal e-ph coupling it produces the exciton-diagonal phonon coupling of Eq. (53), the structural reason why the relative phase between A and B excitons survives; a dispersive conduction band would generically break it.
  • ad hoc to paper Electron-phonon coupling acts only on conduction electrons and is k-independent (Eq. 4).
    Needed for the factorization ansatz (A6) that solves the hierarchy (A5); valence-band e-ph scattering is absent by construction. This is a modeling input, not a derived fact.
  • domain assumption Electron-phonon scattering is negligible during the pump pulse (Section II, paragraph after Eq. 10).
    Justifies writing the state at t=0 as a purely electronic superposition (Eq. 11) with no phonons. Assumed valid when the phonon-generation timescale exceeds the pump duration T_P.
  • domain assumption Weak pump, linear response with |α(0)|² ≈ 1 (invoked in Eqs. 24 and B16).
    The closed-form results are derived in the linear-response regime; the relation N^coh_{λλ'} = X_{λ0}X*_{λ'0} carries O(1-|α(0)|²) corrections that are dropped. The numerics use Rabi frequency 10^-5 eV, consistent with this.
  • domain assumption Radiative recombination is neglected, so the particle number in each band is conserved for t>0 (Section II).
    Removes a decay channel for total exciton number; required for the conservation law (Eq. 31) used to argue the coherence does not vanish asymptotically.
  • domain assumption Single acoustic phonon mode with ω_q = 0.45 sin|q| eV and g_q = 0.1(cos q + 1) eV (Section IV).
    The q→0 behavior (g_q finite, ω_q ~ q) makes Σ_q (g_q/ω_q)² infrared-divergent in the N → ∞ limit, which drives |ℓ(t)|² → 0 and complete transfer to incoherent excitons. The specific dispersion sets the numerical timescales.
  • domain assumption The thermodynamic-limit interpretation: plateau and 'persists indefinitely' statements extrapolate from finite-N (N=280) exact results.
    For finite N the exact S_Q(t) (Eq. 17) is quasi-periodic rather than convergent; the steady-state language in Section IV A implicitly relies on the N → ∞ limit. This is unflagged in the text.
  • domain assumption Static Yukawa-screened Coulomb interaction U_k = 4πu/(k²+κ²) (Section II).
    Produces the Rydberg-like series (two bound states A and B with the chosen parameters). The specific potential shape is not essential to the coherence mechanism but sets E_A and E_B, hence the beat frequency.
invented entities (2)
  • Incoherent exciton states |Xinc_{λQ}(t)⟩ (phonon-dressed excitons, exciton-polarons), Eq. (15)
    purpose: Gives a state-level representation of incoherent excitons, allowing the definition of Xinc-Xinc coherence N^inc_{λλ'Q}(t) = S_Q(t,t') N^coh_{λλ'}(t,t') (Eq. 46) and the reduced density matrix (Eq. 50).
    A formal device within the solvable model, not a new particle or force. Its observable signature (undamped TR-ARPES beats) is a model prediction with no material-specific parameters, so there is no falsifiable handle outside the paper.
  • The Xinc-Xinc coherence as a distinct persistent quantity, Eq. (51)
    purpose: The paper's central claimed phenomenon: an off-diagonal density-matrix element among incoherent excitons that survives phonon dephasing and oscillates at E_A - E_B.
    The phase factor e^{-i(E_λ-E_λ')t} is inherited from the coherent amplitudes by construction of the exact wavefunction; whether it survives in real materials depends on inter-exciton phonon scattering, which Eq. (53) sets to zero. No independent evidence is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-Lived Coherence between Incoherent Excitons revealed by Time-Resolved ARPES: An Exact Solution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7PRSJRZJ

@misc{pith2026250208162,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-Lived Coherence between Incoherent Excitons revealed by Time-Resolved ARPES: An Exact Solution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7PRSJRZJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08162}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the exciton dynamics in an exactly solvable two-band model for semiconductors. The model incorporates light-matter, electron-electron and electron-phonon interactions, and captures exciton formation as well as the transition from the coherent to the incoherent regime. We analyze excitonic polarization, populations and coherences, with special focus on their impact in Time-Resolved and Angle-Resolved Photoemission Spectroscopy (TR-ARPES). For nonresonant pumping with below-gap photon energies, TR-ARPES spectra reveal distinct excitonic replica and quantum beats persisting in the incoherent regime. These are due to a coherence between different species of {\em incoherent} excitons. Such type of coherence is resistant to phonon dephasing, indicating that it follows different dynamics than those governing the coherences considered so far.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08162 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Top) Band structure and pump profiles. The arrows indi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Momentum resolved carrier occupations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. TR-ARPES spectra for different pump-probe delays [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Exciton polarizations and (b) momentum-resolved carrier [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Coherent phonon motions and ordered vacancy compound mediated quantum path interference in Cu-poor CuIn$_{x}$Ga$_{(1-x)}$Se$_2$ (CIGS) with attosecond transient absorption

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Attosecond transient absorption on Cu-poor CIGS reveals coherent A1g phonons in chalcopyrite and ordered vacancy compound phases, and 18.6 fs oscillations attributed to electronic quantum path interference between the...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    (32) and (33)

    One-particle Green’s Function We calculate the one-particle lesser Green’s function defined in Eqs. (32) and (33). For the coherent contribution we have Gcoh cck(t,t′) =i⟨Ψ (t′)| ˆP coh ˆc† ke−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆck ˆP coh|Ψ (t)⟩ =i X λλ′ βλ(t)β∗ λ′(t′)ℓ(t)ℓ∗(t′)e−iEλteiEλ′t′ ⟨Xλ′0| ˆc† ke−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆck|Xλ0⟩. (B1) 11 The state ˆck|Xλ0⟩ is an eigenstate of ˆH wit...

    work page

  2. [2]

    (44) N coh λλ′ (t,t′) =⟨Ψ (t′)| ˆP coh ˆX† λ′0e−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆXλ0 ˆP coh|Ψ (t)⟩ = X λ1λ2 βλ1(t)β∗ λ2(t′)ℓ(t)ℓ∗(t′)e−iEλ1teiEλ2t′ ⟨Xλ20| ˆX† λ′0e−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆXλ0|Xλ10⟩

    Excitonic Green’s Function We start from the coherent contribution in Eq. (44) N coh λλ′ (t,t′) =⟨Ψ (t′)| ˆP coh ˆX† λ′0e−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆXλ0 ˆP coh|Ψ (t)⟩ = X λ1λ2 βλ1(t)β∗ λ2(t′)ℓ(t)ℓ∗(t′)e−iEλ1teiEλ2t′ ⟨Xλ20| ˆX† λ′0e−i ˆH(t′−t) ˆXλ0|Xλ10⟩. (B13) From the anti-commutation relation of electrons and orthonormalization of excitonic wavefunctions we have ˆXλQ|...

    work page

  3. [3]

    (B23) The many-body reduced density matrix at all timet reads ˆρel(t) =Trph{|Ψ (t)⟩⟨Ψ (t)|} = ∞X ¯M=0 1 ¯M! X ¯q1...¯q ¯M ˆ⊮el ˆb¯q ¯M

    Many-Body Reduced Density Matrix We extend the definition ofα(t) andβ(t) to positive times as α(t> 0) =α(0), β (t> 0) =β(0) (B22) and the definition offq(t) andℓ(t) at negative times as fq(t< 0) = 0, ℓ (t< 0) = 1. (B23) The many-body reduced density matrix at all timet reads ˆρel(t) =Trph{|Ψ (t)⟩⟨Ψ (t)|} = ∞X ¯M=0 1 ¯M! X ¯q1...¯q ¯M ˆ⊮el ˆb¯q ¯M... ˆb¯q1...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Boschini, M

    F. Boschini, M. Zonno, and A. Damascelli, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 015003 (2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    J. A. Sobota, S. Yang, J. G. Analytis, Y . L. Chen, I. R. Fisher, P. S. Kirchmann, and Z.-X. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 117403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Grubi ˇsi´c ˇCabo, J

    A. Grubi ˇsi´c ˇCabo, J. A. Miwa, S. S. Grønborg, J. M. Riley, J. C. Johannsen, C. Cacho, O. Alexander, R. T. Chapman, E. Springate, M. Grioni, J. V . Lauritsen, P. D. C. King, P. Hof- mann, and S. Ulstrup, Nano Letters 15, 5883 (2015), pMID: 26315566, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b01967

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b01967 2015

  7. [7]

    Ulstrup, A

    S. Ulstrup, A. G. ˇCabo, J. A. Miwa, J. M. Riley, S. S. Grønborg, J. C. Johannsen, C. Cacho, O. Alexander, R. T. Chapman, E. Springate, M. Bianchi, M. Dendzik, J. V . Lauritsen, P. D. C. King, and P. Hofmann, ACS Nano 10, 6315 (2016), pMID: 27267820, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.6b02622

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.6b02622 2016

  8. [8]

    Schmitt, P

    F. Schmitt, P. S. Kirchmann, U. Bovensiepen, R. G. Moore, L. Rettig, M. Krenz, J.-H. Chu, N. Ru, L. Perfetti, D. H. Lu, M. Wolf, I. R. Fisher, and Z.-X. Shen, Science 321, 1649 (2008), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1160778

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1160778 2008

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Bertoni, C

    R. Bertoni, C. W. Nicholson, L. Waldecker, H. H ¨ubener, C. Monney, U. De Giovannini, M. Puppin, M. Hoesch, E. Springate, R. T. Chapman, C. Cacho, M. Wolf, A. Rubio, and R. Ernstorfer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 277201 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    Mad ´eo, M

    J. Mad ´eo, M. K. L. Man, C. Sahoo, M. Campbell, V . Pareek, E. L. Wong, A. Al-Mahboob, N. S. Chan, A. Karmakar, B. M. K. Mariserla, X. Li, T. F. Heinz, T. Cao, and K. M. Dani, Science 370, 1199 (2020), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aba1029

    2020 doi

  3. [11]

    M. K. L. Man, J. Mad´eo, C. Sahoo, K. Xie, M. Campbell, V . Pa- reek, A. Karmakar, E. L. Wong, A. Al-Mahboob, N. S. Chan, D. R. Bacon, X. Zhu, M. M. M. Abdelrasoul, X. Li, T. F. Heinz, F. H. da Jornada, T. Cao, and K. M. Dani, Science Advances 7, eabg0192 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    S. Dong, M. Puppin, T. Pincelli, S. Beaulieu, D. Christiansen, H. H¨ubener, C. W. Nicholson, R. P. Xian, M. Dendzik, Y . Deng, Y . W. Windsor, M. Selig, E. Malic, A. Rubio, A. Knorr, M. Wolf, L. Rettig, and R. Ernstorfer, Natural Sciences 1, e10010 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    J. K. Freericks, H. R. Krishnamurthy, and T. Pruschke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 136401 (2009)

    2009

  6. [14]

    Perfetto, D

    E. Perfetto, D. Sangalli, A. Marini, and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. B 94, 245303 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Mueller and E

    T. Mueller and E. Malic, npj 2D Materials and Applications 2, 29 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Haug and S

    H. Haug and S. W. Koch, Quantum theory of the optical and electronic properties of semiconductors (world scientific, 2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    Lindberg and S

    M. Lindberg and S. W. Koch, Phys. Rev. B 38, 3342 (1988)

    1988

  10. [18]

    S. W. Koch, M. Kira, G. Khitrova, and H. M. Gibbs, Nature Materials 5, 523 (2006)

    2006

  11. [19]

    Moody, C

    G. Moody, C. Kavir Dass, K. Hao, C.-H. Chen, L.-J. Li, A. Singh, K. Tran, G. Clark, X. Xu, G. Bergh ¨auser, E. Malic, A. Knorr, and X. Li, Nature Communications 6, 8315 (2015)

    2015

  12. [20]

    Jakubczyk, K

    T. Jakubczyk, K. Nogajewski, M. R. Molas, M. Bartos, W. Langbein, M. Potemski, and J. Kasprzak, 2D Materials 5, 031007 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Jakubczyk, G

    T. Jakubczyk, G. Nayak, L. Scarpelli, W.-L. Liu, S. Dubey, N. Bendiab, L. Marty, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, F. Masia, G. Nogues, J. Coraux, W. Langbein, J. Renard, V . Bouchiat, and J. Kasprzak, ACS Nano 13, 3500 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Thr ¨anhardt, S

    A. Thr ¨anhardt, S. Kuckenburg, A. Knorr, T. Meier, and S. W. Koch, Phys. Rev. B 62, 2706 (2000)

    2000

  15. [23]

    Selig, G

    M. Selig, G. Bergh ¨auser, A. Raja, P. Nagler, C. Sch ¨uller, T. F. Heinz, T. Korn, A. Chernikov, E. Malic, and A. Knorr, Nature Communications 7, 13279 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    S. Brem, M. Selig, G. Berghaeuser, and E. Malic, Scientific Reports 8, 8238 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Selig, G

    M. Selig, G. Bergh ¨auser, M. Richter, R. Bratschitsch, A. Knorr, and E. Malic, 2D Materials 5, 035017 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Sangalli, E

    D. Sangalli, E. Perfetto, G. Stefanucci, and A. Marini, The European Physical Journal B 91, 171 (2018). 15

    2018

  19. [27]

    Stefanucci and E

    G. Stefanucci and E. Perfetto, SciPost Physics 18, 009 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Zhang, Y

    X.-X. Zhang, Y . You, S. Y . F. Zhao, and T. F. Heinz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 257403 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Toyozawa, Progress of Theoretical Physics20, 53 (1958)

    Y . Toyozawa, Progress of Theoretical Physics20, 53 (1958)

    1958

  22. [30]

    Jiang, R

    J. Jiang, R. Saito, K. Sato, J. S. Park, G. G. Samsonidze, A. Jo- rio, G. Dresselhaus, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Phys. Rev. B 75, 035405 (2007)

    2007

  23. [31]

    Shree, M

    S. Shree, M. Semina, C. Robert, B. Han, T. Amand, A. Baloc- chi, M. Manca, E. Courtade, X. Marie, T. Taniguchi, K. Watan- abe, M. M. Glazov, and B. Urbaszek, Phys. Rev. B 98, 035302 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    H.-Y . Chen, D. Sangalli, and M. Bernardi, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 107401 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    Cudazzo, Phys

    P. Cudazzo, Phys. Rev. B 102, 045136 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Antonius and S

    G. Antonius and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085111 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    H. D. Sun, T. Makino, N. T. Tuan, Y . Segawa, Z. K. Tang, G. K. L. Wong, M. Kawasaki, A. Ohtomo, K. Tamura, and H. Koinuma, Applied Physics Letters 77, 4250 (2000)

    2000

  28. [36]

    Shahnazaryan, I

    V . Shahnazaryan, I. Iorsh, I. A. Shelykh, and O. Kyriienko, Phys. Rev. B 96, 115409 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Erkensten, S

    D. Erkensten, S. Brem, and E. Malic, Phys. Rev. B 103, 045426 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Perfetto, Y

    E. Perfetto, Y . Pavlyukh, and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 016801 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    H.-Y . Chen, D. Sangalli, and M. Bernardi, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043203 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Rustagi and A

    A. Rustagi and A. F. Kemper, Phys. Rev. B 99, 125303 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Malakhov, G

    M. Malakhov, G. Cistaro, F. Mart ´ın, and A. Pic ´on, Communi- cations Physics 7, 196 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    Steinhoff, M

    A. Steinhoff, M. Florian, M. R ¨osner, G. Sch ¨onhoff, T. O. Wehling, and F. Jahnke, Nature communications 8, 1166 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    Rustagi and A

    A. Rustagi and A. F. Kemper, Phys. Rev. B 97, 235310 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    Christiansen, M

    D. Christiansen, M. Selig, E. Malic, R. Ernstorfer, and A. Knorr, Phys. Rev. B 100, 205401 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Zhu, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phe- nomena 204, 75 (2015), organic Electronics

    X.-Y . Zhu, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phe- nomena 204, 75 (2015), organic Electronics

    2015

  38. [46]

    Tanimura, K

    H. Tanimura, K. Tanimura, and P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, Phys. Rev. B 100, 115204 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    Dendzik, R

    M. Dendzik, R. P. Xian, E. Perfetto, D. Sangalli, D. Kut- nyakhov, S. Dong, S. Beaulieu, T. Pincelli, F. Pressacco, D. Curcio, S. Y . Agustsson, M. Heber, J. Hauer, W. Wurth, G. Brenner, Y . Acremann, P. Hofmann, M. Wolf, A. Marini, G. Stefanucci, L. Rettig, and R. Ernstorfer,...

    2020

  40. [48]

    Wallauer, R

    R. Wallauer, R. Perea-Causin, L. M¨unster, S. Zajusch, S. Brem, J. G ¨udde, K. Tanimura, K.-Q. Lin, R. Huber, E. Malic, and U. H ¨ofer, Nano Letters 21, 5867 (2021), pMID: 34165994, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c01839

    2021 doi

  41. [49]

    Fukutani, R

    K. Fukutani, R. Stania, C. Il Kwon, J. S. Kim, K. J. Kong, J. Kim, and H. W. Yeom, Nature Physics 17, 1024 (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    Perfetto, D

    E. Perfetto, D. Sangalli, A. Marini, and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. Mater. 3, 124601 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Perfetto, S

    E. Perfetto, S. Bianchi, and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. B 101, 041201 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Perfetto, A

    E. Perfetto, A. Marini, and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. B 102, 085203 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Perfetto and G

    E. Perfetto and G. Stefanucci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 106401 (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    Y .-H. Chan, D. Y . Qiu, F. H. da Jornada, and S. G. Louie, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2301957120 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Stefanucci and E

    G. Stefanucci and E. Perfetto, Phys. Rev. B103, 245103 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    Chernikov, T

    A. Chernikov, T. C. Berkelbach, H. M. Hill, A. Rigosi, Y . Li, B. Aslan, D. R. Reichman, M. S. Hybertsen, and T. F. Heinz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 076802 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    K. He, N. Kumar, L. Zhao, Z. Wang, K. F. Mak, H. Zhao, and J. Shan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 026803 (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    D. C. Langreth, Phys. Rev. B 1, 471 (1970)

    1970

  51. [59]

    Kira and S

    M. Kira and S. Koch, Progress in Quantum Electronics 30, 155 (2006)

    2006

  52. [60]

    Ivanov, H

    C. Ivanov, H. Barentzen, and M. Girardeau, Physica A: Statis- tical Mechanics and its Applications 140, 612 (1987)

    1987

  53. [61]

    Combescot and O

    M. Combescot and O. Betbeder-Matibet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 016403 (2004)

    2004

  54. [62]

    Toyozawa,Optical processes in solids (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2003)

    Y . Toyozawa,Optical processes in solids (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2003)

    2003

  55. [63]

    Bar-Ad and I

    S. Bar-Ad and I. Bar-Joseph, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2491 (1991)

    1991

  56. [64]

    S. Sim, D. Lee, A. V . Trifonov, T. Kim, S. Cha, J. H. Sung, S. Cho, W. Shim, M.-H. Jo, and H. Choi, Nature Communica- tions 9, 351 (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    A. V . Trifonov, A. S. Kurdyubov, I. Y . Gerlovin, D. S. Smirnov, K. V . Kavokin, I. A. Yugova, M. Aßmann, and A. V . Kavokin, Phys. Rev. B 102, 205303 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.