Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phonons

Habib Rostami; J. Luke Pimlott

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 100 references

Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phonons

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that resonant light drives ions through two distinct quantum-geometric forces—an injection force that displaces them and a shift force that only acts when time-reversal symmetry is broken.

desk verdict A genuinely new quantum-geometric decomposition of rectified Raman forces, with a clean derivation, but the clean-limit caveat on the shift force is under-sold. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.17814 v1 pith:6D2OFDPL submitted 2025-07-23 cond-mat.mes-hall

J. Luke Pimlott , Habib Rostami This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords quantumgeometrictensorinjectionforceshiftrectifiedRamanphononicvectorcoherentphononsbilayerHaldanemodelphotogalvaniceffectanalogy

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 tries to establish that the rectified Raman force—the time-averaged force resonant light exerts on ions—consists of two distinct geometric contributions: an injection force that displaces ions to a new equilibrium and an impulsive shift force that only appears when time-reversal symmetry is broken. The injection force is the unique displacive term, proportional to $1/\omega_p$ for small phonon frequency, and is built from the band-resolved quantum metric together with the interband difference of electron-phonon coupling; the shift force is built from a new phononic shift vector and the same quantum geometric tensor. Working on the bilayer Haldane model, the paper shows analytically and numerically that the injection force is largest at zero Haldane flux and even in the flux, while the shift force is odd in the flux and vanishes without it. If correct, this turns the quantum geometric tensor into a practical dial for ultrafast coherent control of shear phonons and stacking order in layered materials.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the split of the rectified Raman susceptibility into injection ($1/\omega_p$) and shift ($\beta$) channels, together with the two geometric objects that control them. The band-resolved quantum geometric tensor $Q^{mn}_{bc} = g^{mn}_{bc} - \tfrac{i}{2}\Omega^{mn}_{bc}$ packages the quantum metric and Berry curvature; the injection force uses its real part with the electron-phonon coupling difference $\Delta^{mn}_a$, while the shift force uses it with the phononic shift vector $R^{mn}_{a;\ell} = \partial_{u_a}\mathrm{Im}\,\ln v^{mn}_\ell + A^{mm}_a - A^{nn}_a$, defined as the phonon-displacement derivative of the interband velocity phase plus the difference of diagonal molecular Berry connections. A third mechanism is the exact cancellation in the clean limit of two non-geometric counterterms from the triangle and oval diagrams, which is what makes $\alpha$ the unique $1/\omega_p$ contribution; the same cancellation also selects which terms carry the resonant force.

What would settle it

A time-resolved pump-probe measurement of coherent interlayer shear phonons in a bilayer system with tunable time-reversal breaking would test the decomposition: the rectified displacement from the injection channel should stay the same sign when the Haldane flux is reversed, while the shift channel should flip sign and vanish at zero flux; observing the absence of the odd-in-flux impulsive component, or a finite shift response at zero flux, would falsify the predicted shift force.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the absorbing (resonant) regime, the Raman susceptibility is expanded in phonon frequency as $\chi_{abc}(\omega,\omega_p-\omega) \approx \alpha_{abc}(\omega)/(i\omega_p) + \beta_{abc}(\omega)$. The paper proves that $\alpha$ is the injection force and is the sole displacive channel; $\beta$ is impulsive and contains a resonant shift-force part plus off-resonant terms. For linearly polarized light, the analytic forms are $\alpha^{\mathrm{inj\text{-}LP}}_{abb}(\omega) = (\pi e^2/\hbar^2) \sum_{p,mn} f_{mn}\, g^{mn}_{bb}\, \Delta^{mn}_a\, \delta(\omega-\omega_{mn})$ and $\beta^{\mathrm{shi\text{-}LP}}_{abb}(\omega) = (\pi e^2/\hbar) \sum_{p,mn} f_{mn}\, g^{mn}_{bb}\, R^{mn}_{a;b}\, \delta(\omega-\omega_{mn})$, where $g^{mn}_{bb}$ is the band-resolved quantum metric, $\Delta^{mn}_a$ is the difference in electron-phonon coupling between bands, and $R^{mn}_{a;\ell}$ is the phononic shift vector defined via the molecular Berry connection. Under circular polarization, Berry curvature and chiral phononic shift vectors enter, giving the CP formulas in Eqs. (7) and (8). The symmetry table then fixes when each force is allowed: LP injection respects time reversal, LP shift violates it, CP shift survives time reversal but vanishes under combined parity-time reversal. In the bilayer Haldane testbed, the low-energy $k\cdot p$ solution gives closed forms $\alpha^{\mathrm{inj\text{-}LP}}_{yyy} \propto (1/4-z^2)^{3/2}\Theta(1/2-|z|)$ and $\beta^{\mathrm{shi\text{-}LP}}_{xxx} \propto z(1/4-z^2)^{1/2}\Theta(1/2-|z|)$ with $z=\delta_H/\hbar\omega$, matching the full tight-binding numerics: injection is even and largest at zero flux, shift is odd and vanishes at zero flux, and both magnitude and sign can be tuned by flux and frequency.

Load-bearing premise

The whole split of the force into a unique displacive injection part and an impulsive shift part relies on sending scattering and dephasing rates to zero before taking the band gap to zero, so the non-geometric counterterms cancel exactly; with finite disorder this cancellation breaks down and additional terms may appear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Resonant displacive Raman driving in any two-band absorbing system is fixed by the quantum metric and the interband electron-phonon coupling difference, so those two quantities become the design targets for coherent-phonon control.
The shift force provides a resonant impulsive mechanism that is switched on only by breaking time-reversal symmetry, giving an all-optical way to launch directional lattice motion in magnetically or flux-biased layered systems.
The odd-in-flux dependence computed in the bilayer Haldane model means reversing the sign of the magnetic flux reverses the direction of the shift-driven shear displacement while leaving the injection displacement direction unchanged.
Frequency tuning across interband thresholds can reverse the sign of the injection force itself, so coherent phonon oscillations can be phase-locked or reversed by choosing the pump frequency.
The analytical low-energy formulas reproduce the full tight-binding spectra, showing that the two-band description captures the essential geometric forces beyond the simple graphene limit.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural extension, not made in the paper, is that the same $\alpha/\beta$ decomposition should apply to other bosonic modes coupled to electrons, such as magnons or exciton-polaritons, wherever interband transitions and a coupling difference between bands exist.
The phononic shift vector could be tabulated for real materials from first principles and used to predict which layered compounds show flux- or magnetization-switchable coherent phonon emission.
Since the cancellation that makes the injection force unique fails with finite disorder, a testable extension is to compute the disorder-broadened response and look for an impulsive correction to the displacive channel in dirty samples.
The current-induced circularly polarized shear force reported in the supplemental material suggests an optical phonon-based readout of DC currents, analogous to using gyration photocurrents to probe current flow.

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

You should read this one: it extends the injection/shift logic from photogalvanic currents to rectified Raman forces, defines a phononic shift vector, and packages it with a symmetry table that is actually useful. The supplemental material is explicit: Kadanoff-Baym derivation, four diagrams, and a numerically friendly form of the shift vector. This is a step beyond the authors' own earlier work on bilayer graphene, and the bilayer Haldane example gives a concrete test: injection force even in the Haldane gap, shift force odd and vanishing at zero flux. The low-energy analytic results match the tight-binding numerics qualitatively, and they say so openly.

The soft spot is the cancellation that makes the decomposition work. The clean-limit proof in SM III C sends both scattering rates to zero at fixed gap before the gap goes to zero. With finite interband dephasing, the counter terms from the triangle and oval diagrams do not cancel, and the leftover contributes to the constant (impulsive) part of the response. The paper does not estimate that remainder. That matters for experiments, where dephasing is meV-scale, but it does not break the main claim: the injection force is still the unique 1/ω_p term, because the counter terms carry no pole in the phonon frequency. So the stress-test note overshoots when it says the injection term is contaminated. What is true is that the shift-force formula in Eqs. (4)-(8) is a clean-limit result, and the main text should say that plainly.

Minor: the CP results require a current-induced momentum shift to break C3 symmetry, which is a bit of a detour, but the physics is sensible.

This paper deserves a serious referee. If I were handling it, I'd ask the authors to add a paragraph on finite-Γ,γ corrections to the shift force, and to note that the symmetry table and formulas are clean-limit statements. A conditional accept with that request is the right outcome.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a quantum-geometric theory of rectified Raman forces in optically driven crystals. Using a Kadanoff-Baym Green's function approach, the authors decompose the resonant second-order Raman susceptibility into an injection force (displacive, singular as 1/ω_p) and a shift force (impulsive, β-term), expressed through the band-resolved quantum geometric tensor, the interband electron-phonon coupling difference Δ, and a newly defined phononic shift vector R. The theory is applied to interlayer shear phonons in the bilayer Haldane model, with analytical low-energy k·p results and full tight-binding numerical spectra for both linearly and circularly polarized light. The central claim is that these forces provide a distinct quantum-geometric mechanism for ultrafast coherent control of lattice dynamics.

Significance. If the central decomposition is correct, the paper establishes a conceptually new link between band geometry/topology and coherent phonon excitation: the injection force is governed by the quantum metric and EPC differences, while the shift force is governed by a phononic shift vector and appears in the resonant absorbing regime. The derivation is explicit and largely self-contained in the Supplemental Material, including the four Feynman diagrams, the algebraic cancellation of counterterms, and a numerically accessible form of the shift vector. The analytical low-energy formulas are cross-checked against full Brillouin-zone numerics, and the material parameters are taken from prior literature rather than fitted to the target response. The main concerns identified below—the clean-limit restriction of the cancellation and the overgeneralized symmetry statement about time-reversal breaking—are significant but appear reparable within the manuscript's scope.

major comments (2)

[SM III C and main-text Eq. (2)] The decomposition χ ≈ α/(iω_p) + β, and with it the statement that the injection force is the sole displacive component, relies on the cancellation γΔ_abc + γO_abc = 0. The proof in SM III C explicitly takes the clean limit Γ,γ → 0 at fixed band gap and only later lets the gap vanish. For finite interband dephasing γ and intraband scattering Γ, the cancellation fails and the leftover terms in SM Eq. (S46) remain. The manuscript provides no estimate of the magnitude of this remainder, nor does it show that the remainder does not alter the 1/ω_p coefficient or the β coefficients in the physically relevant regime of meV-scale scattering rates. Since the main text claims that Eqs. (4)–(8) fully describe the resonant rectified Raman force, this is a load-bearing gap that should be addressed either by quantifying the finite-scattering remainder or by explicitly restricting the predictions to the intrinsic clean limit.
[Abstract, 'Shift and injection force', and Table I] The abstract and the introduction state that the shift force emerges 'when time-reversal symmetry is broken.' According to Table I, however, only the LP shift force βshi-LP is T-odd; the CP shift force βshi-CP contains the T-even combinations g⊗R± and Ω⊗R± and is instead forbidden under PT (and vanishes under C3 symmetry in the specific model). Thus the symmetry requirement is polarization dependent: LP shift needs T-breaking, while CP shift needs T, PT, and C3-breaking conditions that are not captured by the blanket phrase in the abstract. The text should be corrected to state the polarization-dependent symmetry conditions and to avoid overgeneralizing the abstract's claim.

minor comments (4)

[Eq. (5)] The subscript ℓ in Eq. (5) is used before it is defined; the definition of ℓ (ℓ = b for linear, ℓ = ± for chiral) should be given immediately after the equation.
[SM III D and main text around Eq. (2)] The off-resonant contributions βoff,1 and βoff,2 in the SM are important for the completeness of the decomposition, but the main text only mentions them in passing; a sentence in the main text explicitly naming the two off-resonant families and their physical origin would help readers assess what is omitted from Eqs. (4)–(8).
[Fig. 3 and SM Sec. V] Because the numerical spectra are computed in the clean limit with delta-function resonances, the figure captions should state this explicitly so that the absence of scattering broadening is not mistaken for a numerical artifact.
[Title and affiliations] The manuscript contains apparent typographical artifacts such as 'Phono ns' in the title and 'Ba th' in the affiliation; these should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Raman-force decomposition is derived from a generic Hamiltonian, and the same-author inputs are model parameters, not fitted predictions.

full rationale

The paper's claimed derivation chain is self-contained. The rectified Raman susceptibility χ_abc is obtained by a Kadanoff-Baym variational calculation from the generic Hamiltonian (Eq. 3), yielding the four diagrammatic contributions in SM Secs. I-II; the resonant parts are then algebraically reduced to Eqs. (4)-(8) using the definitions of the band-resolved QGT, the EPC difference, and the phononic shift vector. No parameter is fitted to the injection or shift results: the model parameters γ0, γ1, γ3, γ′, and β3 are taken from the cited literature, and the swept quantities (frequency, magnetic flux, momentum shift) are independent variables. The only same-author inputs are the bilayer-graphene interlayer EPC operator (Eq. 10) and the low-energy k·p EPC, taken from refs. [15,16]; these are input Hamiltonian models, not normative derivations of the force decomposition, and the central generic formulas do not reduce to them. The cancellation γ△+γO=0 (SM Eq. S49) is proved explicitly by term-by-term algebra in the stated clean intrinsic limit, with the order of limits spelled out in SM Sec. III C; the finite-Γ,γ remainder is an acknowledged validity caveat, not a hidden fit or definitional identity. The analytic low-energy formulas (12)-(13) are checked against full-Brillouin-zone numerics without adjusting parameters to force agreement. I therefore find no circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The model parameters are all taken from prior literature, and the swept quantities (frequency, Haldane flux, current shift) are independent variables, so the ledger does not contain fitted parameters. The main inputs are the standard many-body formalism, the bilayer Haldane model, the bilayer-graphene EPC model, and the clean-limit protocol. The two newly introduced constructs (phononic shift vectors) are defined in terms of band-structure quantities and lack an independent experimental handle.

assumptions (7)

standard math Kadanoff-Baym variational formalism: the atomic force is obtained from the derivative of the inverse Green's function with respect to phonon displacement, and the susceptibility from second-order variation with respect to the vector potential.
Used in the SM Sec. I (Eqs. S1-S16) as the starting point; standard quantum many-body perturbation theory.
standard math Matsubara summation identities for one, two, and three Green's functions (Eqs. S20-S22).
Used in SM Sec. II to evaluate the diagrams; standard results.
domain assumption The molecular Berry connection and Mead's formalism for derivatives of Bloch states with respect to nuclear coordinates (refs 49,50).
Invoked in the definition of the phononic shift vector in Eq. (5) and the covariant derivative in Eq. (S33).
domain assumption Bilayer Haldane Hamiltonian Eq. (9) with literature parameters describes the electronic band structure of the two-layer system with flux φ and sublattice gap δ.
This is the model used for all numerical results; parameters γ0, γ1, γ3, γ' from refs 76-78.
domain assumption The interlayer shear-phonon EPC is taken from Bernal bilayer graphene (Eq. 10) with Grüneisen parameter β3=5.24, and is assumed unchanged by the Haldane flux.
Entering Eq. (10) and the low-energy form M(τσ_y, σ_x); the paper states flux modifies only intralayer phases.
domain assumption The clean intrinsic limit: Γ,γ→0 at fixed gap, then gap→0 last, giving exact cancellation of counter terms (SM Sec. III C).
Defines the intrinsic response and is required for the injection force to be the sole displacive term; finite disorder would break the cancellation.
domain assumption A DC current induces a rigid Fermi-surface shift δp and a linear-in-δp correction to the Fermi distribution (Boltzmann approximation).
Used in SM Sec. V to enable circular-polarization forces by breaking C3 symmetry.

invented entities (2)

Phononic shift vector R^mn_{a;ℓ}
purpose: Measures the change in ionic momentum associated with an interband electronic transition, expressing the shift Raman force.
Defined in Eq. (5) from the phase derivative of the velocity matrix element and the molecular Berry connections; it is a theoretical quantity with no direct experimental signature independent of the response it parameterizes.
Phononic chiral shift vector R^mn_{a;±}
purpose: Describes the circular-polarization counterpart of the shift force.
Defined in Eq. (8) and SM Eq. (S42); same status as the linear shift vector.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phonons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6D2OFDPL

@misc{pith2026250717814,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phonons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6D2OFDPL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.17814}
}

read the original abstract

We identify {\em injection} and {\em shift} rectified Raman forces, which are phononic counterparts of the photogalvanic effect, that drive lattice vibrations and trigger transient emergent properties. These forces are governed by the {\em quantum geometric tensor}, a {\em phononic shift vector}, and interband asymmetries in the electron-phonon coupling. The injection force acts displacively, while -- unlike conventional impulsive mechanisms -- the shift force emerges impulsively in the resonant interband absorbing regime when time-reversal symmetry is broken. Using the bilayer Haldane model, we quantify the injection and shift forces acting on interlayer shear phonons through both analytical and numerical methods. Strikingly, we reveal strong tunability, both in magnitude and direction, of the rectified forces by varying the driving frequency and magnetic flux, uncovering a distinct quantum geometric mechanism for ultrafast and coherent manipulation of quantum materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.17814 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. LP injection and shift shear forces susceptibilities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

[1]

Demsar, Nature Physics 12, 202 (2016)

J. Demsar, Nature Physics 12, 202 (2016)

2016
[2]

0 α inj− LP yyy (ω )/α ◦(ω ) (a) analytic numeric − 15 − 10 − 5 0 5 α inj− LP yyy (ω )/ ¯α (c) φ = 0 φ = π/ 100 φ = π/ 80 φ = π/ 60 − 1 0 1 δH/ ¯hω − 0. 4 − 0. 2
[3]

4 β shi− LP xxx (ω )/β ◦(ω ) (b) 0 1 2 3 ¯hω/ 2µ − 10 − 5 0 5 β shi− LP xxx (ω )/ ¯β (d) UVB→ LCB LCB→ UCB UVB→ UCB FIG. 3. LP injection and shift shear forces susceptibilities in the bilayer Haldane model. Panels (a) and (b) show the injection and shift response functions, respectively, as func- tions of the T -breaking Haldane gap, exhibiting even and o...
[4]

C. Bao, P. Tang, D. Sun, and S. Zhou, Nature Reviews Physics 4, 33 (2022)

2022
[5]

by setting ℓ = ± for the chiral components (with p± = pb ±ipc), and it is the phononic equivalent of the chiral shift vector describing the gyration photocurrent as discussed in detail in Ref. [ 33]. The analytical expres- sions for the shift and injection force functions given in Eqs. ( 4)–(8) summarize the main results of this study. TABLE I. Symmetry p...
[6]

A. S. Disa, T. F. Nova, and A. Cavalleri, Nature Physics 17, 1087 (2021)

2021
[7]

de la Torre, D

A. de la Torre, D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen, S. Gerber, J. W. McIver, and M. A. Sentef, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 041002 (2021)

2021
[8]

C.-J. Yang, J. Li, M. Fiebig, and S. Pal, Nature Reviews Materials 8, 518 (2023)

2023

Show all 100 references

[9]

E. J. Sie, C. M. Nyby, C. D. Pemmaraju, S. J. Park, X. Shen, J. Yang, M. C. Hoﬀmann, B. K. Ofori-Okai, R. Li, A. H. Reid, S. Weathersby, E. Mannebach, N. Finney, D. Rhodes, D. Chenet, A. Antony, L. Bali- cas, J. Hone, T. P. Devereaux, T. F. Heinz, X. Wang, and A. M. Lindenberg...

2019
[10]

Soranzio, M

D. Soranzio, M. Peressi, R. J. Cava, F. Parmigiani, and F. Cilento, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 032033 (2019)

2019
[11]

Y. Yan, E. B. Gamble Jr., and K. A. Nelson, The Journal of Chemical Physics 83, 5391 (1985)

1985
[12]

L. Dhar, J. A. Rogers, and K. A. Nelson, Chemical Re- views 94, 157 (1994)

1994
[13]

H. J. Zeiger, J. Vidal, T. K. Cheng, E. P. Ippen, G. Dres- selhaus, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Phys. Rev. B 45, 768 (1992)

1992
[14]

G. A. Garrett, T. F. Albrecht, J. F. Whitaker, and R. Merlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3661 (1996)

1996
[15]

Merlin, Solid State Communications 102, 207 (1997)

R. Merlin, Solid State Communications 102, 207 (1997)

1997
[16]

T. E. Stevens, J. Kuhl, and R. Merlin, Phys. Rev. B 65, 144304 (2002)

2002
[17]

Giorgianni, M

F. Giorgianni, M. Udina, T. Cea, E. Paris, M. Caputo, M. Radovic, L. Boie, J. Sakai, C. W. Schneider, and S. L. Johnson, Communications Physics 5, 103 (2022)

2022
[19]

Rostami, Phys

H. Rostami, Phys. Rev. B 107, 165418 (2023)

2023
[20]

J. P. Provost and G. G. Vallee, Commun. Math. Phys. 76, 289 (1980)

1980
[21]

M. V. Berry, Proc. R. Soc. 392, 45 (1984)

1984
[22]

Resta, The European Physical Journal B 79, 121 (2011)

R. Resta, The European Physical Journal B 79, 121 (2011)

2011
[23]

Nagaosa and T

N. Nagaosa and T. Morimoto, Advanced Materials 29, 1603345 (2017)

2017
[24]

T¨ orm¨ a, S

P. T¨ orm¨ a, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Nature Re- views Physics 4, 528 (2022)

2022
[25]

T¨ orm¨ a,Phys

P. T¨ orm¨ a,Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 240001 (2023)

2023
[26]

Liu, X.-B

T. Liu, X.-B. Qiang, H.-Z. Lu, and X. C. Xie, National Science Review , nwae334 (2024)

2024
[27]

Verma, P

N. Verma, P. J. Moll, T. Holder, and R. Queiroz, arXiv:2504.07173
[28]

Jiang, T

Y. Jiang, T. Holder, and B. Yan, arXiv:2503.04943

arXiv
[29]

Nagaosa, J

N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1539 (2010)

2010
[30]

Peotta and P

S. Peotta and P. T¨ orm¨ a,Nature Communications 6, 8944 (2015)

2015
[31]

Hirobe, T

Y. Hirobe, T. Kitamura, and Y. Yanase, arXiv:2505.13065

arXiv
[32]

Morimoto and N

T. Morimoto and N. Nagaosa, Science Advances 2, e1501524 (2016)

2016
[33]

Holder, D

T. Holder, D. Kaplan, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 6 033100 (2020)

2020
[35]

Orenstein, J

J. Orenstein, J. Moore, T. Morimoto, D. Torchinsky, J. Harter, and D. Hsieh, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 12, 247 (2021)

2021
[37]

Q. Ma, A. G. Grushin, and K. S. Burch, Nature Mate- rials 20, 1601 (2021)

2021
[38]

Morimoto, S

T. Morimoto, S. Kitamura, and N. Nagaosa, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 92, 072001 (2023)

2023
[39]

Q. Ma, R. Krishna Kumar, S.-Y. Xu, F. H. L. Koppens, and J. C. W. Song, Nature Reviews Physics 5, 170 (2023)

2023
[40]

W. J. Jankowski and R.-J. Slager, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 186601 (2024)

2024
[41]

Onishi and L

Y. Onishi and L. Fu, arXiv:2401.13847

arXiv
[42]

C. Wang, Y. Gao, and D. Xiao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 277201 (2021)

2021
[43]

N. Wang, D. Kaplan, Z. Zhang, T. Holder, N. Cao, A. Wang, X. Zhou, F. Zhou, Z. Jiang, C. Zhang, S. Ru, H. Cai, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Yan, and W. Gao, Nature 621, 487 (2023)

2023
[44]

Gao, Y.-F

A. Gao, Y.-F. Liu, J.-X. Qiu, B. Ghosh, T. V. Trevisan, Y. Onishi, C. Hu, T. Qian, H.-J. Tien, S.-W. Chen, M. Huang, D. B´ erub´ e, H. Li, C. Tzschaschel, T. Dinh, Z. Sun, S.-C. Ho, S.-W. Lien, B. Singh, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. C. Bell, H. Lin, T.-R. Chang, C. R. Du, A. ...

2023
[45]

Kaplan, T

D. Kaplan, T. Holder, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 026301 (2024)

2024
[46]

Murotani, T

Y. Murotani, T. Fujimoto, and R. Matsunaga, arXiv:2505.07189
[47]

J. Yu, C. J. Ciccarino, R. Bianco, I. Errea, P. Narang, and B. A. Bernevig, Nature Physics 20, 1262 (2024)

2024
[48]

J. Hu, W. Li, H. Wang, and K. Chang, arXiv:2410.09677

arXiv
[49]

Pellitteri, Z

G. Pellitteri, Z. Dai, H. Hu, Y. Jiang, G. Menichetti, A. Tomadin, B. A. Bernevig, and M. Polini, arXiv:2502.04221
[50]

J. E. Sipe and A. I. Shkrebtii, Phys. Rev. B 61, 5337 (2000)

2000
[51]

S. M. Young and A. M. Rappe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 116601 (2012)

2012
[52]

A. Bohm, B. Kendrick, and M. E. Loewe, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry 41, 53 (1992)

1992
[53]

C. A. Mead, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 51 (1992)

1992
[54]

P. H. Tan, W. P. Han, W. J. Zhao, Z. H. Wu, K. Chang, H. Wang, Y. F. Wang, N. Bonini, N. Marzari, N. Pugno, G. Savini, A. Lombardo, and A. C. Ferrari, Nature Ma- terials 11, 294 (2012)

2012
[55]

A. C. Ferrari and D. M. Basko, Nature Nanotechnology 8, 235 (2013)

2013
[56]

Boschetto, L

D. Boschetto, L. Malard, C. H. Lui, K. F. Mak, Z. Li, H. Yan, and T. F. Heinz, Nano Letters 13, 4620 (2013)

2013
[57]

Y. Zhao, X. Luo, H. Li, J. Zhang, P. T. Araujo, C. K. Gan, J. Wu, H. Zhang, S. Y. Quek, M. S. Dresselhaus, and Q. Xiong, Nano Letters 13, 1007 (2013)

2013
[58]

Pizzi, S

G. Pizzi, S. Milana, A. C. Ferrari, N. Marzari, and M. Gibertini, ACS Nano 15, 12509 (2021)

2021
[59]

F. M. Bartram, Y.-C. Leng, Y. Wang, L. Liu, X. Chen, H. Peng, H. Li, P. Yu, Y. Wu, M.-L. Lin, J. Zhang, P.-H. Tan, and L. Yang, npj Quantum Materials 7, 84 (2022)

2022
[60]

S. Fang, S. Duan, X. Wang, S. Chen, L. Li, H. Li, B. Jiang, C. Liu, N. Wang, L. Zhang, X. Wen, Y. Yao, J. Zhang, D. Xie, Y. Luo, and W. Xu, Nature Photonics 17, 531 (2023)

2023
[61]

Zhang, J

J. Zhang, J. Han, G. Peng, X. Yang, X. Yuan, Y. Li, J. Chen, W. Xu, K. Liu, Z. Zhu, W. Cao, Z. Han, J. Dai, M. Zhu, S. Qin, and K. S. Novoselov, Light: Science & Applications 9, 174 (2020)

2020
[62]

M. Y. Zhang, Z. X. Wang, Y. N. Li, L. Y. Shi, D. Wu, T. Lin, S. J. Zhang, Y. Q. Liu, Q. M. Liu, J. Wang, T. Dong, and N. L. Wang, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021036 (2019)

2019
[63]

Fukuda, K

T. Fukuda, K. Makino, Y. Saito, P. Fons, A. V. Kolobov, K. Ueno, and M. Hase, Applied Physics Letters 116, 093103 (2020)

2020
[64]

Rodriguez-Vega, Z.-X

M. Rodriguez-Vega, Z.-X. Lin, A. Leonardo, A. Ernst, M. G. Vergniory, and G. A. Fiete, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 13, 4152 (2022)

2022
[65]

Zhong, S

H. Zhong, S. Yang, C. Cao, X.-Y. Feng, and J. Dai, arXiv:2504.06739

arXiv
[66]

Wu and J

M. Wu and J. Li, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2115703118 (2021)

2021
[67]

Yang and S

Q. Yang and S. Meng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 136902 (2024)

2024
[68]

Yasuda, E

K. Yasuda, E. Zalys-Geller, X. Wang, D. Bennett, S. S. Cheema, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxi- ras, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and R. Ashoori, Science 385, 53 (2024)

2024
[69]

Q. Yang, M. Wu, and J. Li, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 9, 7160 (2018)

2018
[70]

X. Wang, K. Yasuda, Y. Zhang, S. Liu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, L. Fu, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 367 (2022)

2022
[71]

R. Bian, R. He, E. Pan, Z. Li, G. Cao, P. Meng, J. Chen, Q. Liu, Z. Zhong, W. Li, and F. Liu, Science 385, 57 (2024)

2024
[72]

X. Miao, M. Miloˇ sevi´ c, and C. Zhang, Physica B: Con- densed Matter 694, 416427 (2024)

2024
[73]

X. Sun, Q. Xia, T. Cao, and S. Yuan, Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports 163, 100927 (2025)

2025
[74]

Qin and A

W. Qin and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 097001 (2021)

2021
[75]

L. P. Kadanoﬀ and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Me- chanics (W. A. Benjamin, Inc., 1962)

1962
[76]

Rostami and E

H. Rostami and E. Cappelluti, npj 2D Materials and Ap- plications 5, 50 (2021)

2021
[77]

See Supplemental Material for the Kadanoﬀ-Baym derivation of the RF susceptibility Feynman diagrams, derivation of injection, shift and oﬀ-resonant RF suscep- tibilities, the reformulation of the phononic shift vector, and numerical results for CP injection and shift RF
[78]

von Baltz and W

R. von Baltz and W. Kraut, Phys. Rev. B 23, 5590 (1981)

1981
[79]

A. B. Kuzmenko, I. Crassee, D. van der Marel, P. Blake, and K. S. Novoselov, Phys. Rev. B 80, 165406 (2009)

2009
[80]

N. M. R. Peres, F. Guinea, and A. H. Castro Neto, Phys. Rev. B 73, 125411 (2006)

2006
[81]

Cappelluti and G

E. Cappelluti and G. Profeta, Phys. Rev. B 85, 205436 (2012)

2012
[82]

F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015 (1988)

1988
[83]

Sorn, Phys

S. Sorn, Phys. Rev. B 98, 125145 (2018)

2018
[84]

Mondal and S

S. Mondal and S. Basu, Phys. Rev. B 108, 045307 (2023)

2023
[85]

Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phono ns

E. McCann and M. Koshino, Rep. Prog. Phys. 76, 056053 (2013). Supplemental Material: “Quantum Geometric Injection and Shift Optical Forces Drive Coherent Phono ns” J. Luke Pimlott 1, ∗ and Habib Rostami 1, † 1Department of Physics, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Ba th BA2...

2013
[86]

Oﬀ-Resonant contribution from diagrams (a) and (b): βoﬀ ,1 abc 7
[87]

Numerically-Accessible Phononic Shift Vector 8 V

Oﬀ-Resonant contribution from diagrams (c) and (d): βoﬀ ,2 abc 8 IV. Numerically-Accessible Phononic Shift Vector 8 V. Numerical result for CP injection and shift force 10 References 11 I. KADANOFF-BA YM GREEN’S FUNCTION APPROACH TO DERIVING RAMAN SUSCEPTIBILITY In the presenc...
[88]

S1a, which also describes the resonant displacive (injection) Raman force

Oﬀ-Resonant contribution from diagrams (a) and (b): βoﬀ ,1 abc We begin with the oﬀ-resonant component of the triangle diagram in Fig. S1a, which also describes the resonant displacive (injection) Raman force. Taking the principal value part of the clean limit of Eq. ( S28) yi...
[89]

S1c, d, corresponding to the terms given in Eqs

Oﬀ-Resonant contribution from diagrams (c) and (d): βoﬀ ,2 abc Here we analyze the two oval diagrams in Fig. S1c, d, corresponding to the terms given in Eqs. ( S25) and ( S26), which contribute to the susceptibility as χC abc(ω) +χD abc(ω) = −e2 2ω2 ∑ p { ∑ m fmM mm a;bc + ∑ m...
[90]

1 (¯hω )2β oﬀ , 1− CP xyx (ω )/ ˜β1 (b) 0 1 2 3 ¯hω/ 2µ 0 20 40 60 β oﬀ , 2− LP yyy (ω )/ ˜β2 (c) 0 1 2 3 ¯hω/ 2µ − 0. 05
[91]

05 β oﬀ , 2− CP xyx (ω )/ ˜β2 (d) φ = 0 φ = π/ 100 φ = π/ 80 φ = π/ 60 δpy = 0 δpy = 0.02¯h a0 δpy = 0.04¯h a0 δpy = 0.06¯h a0 FIG. S2. Spectra for the (a) LP and (b) CP component of oﬀ-resonan t shear Raman force contribution βoﬀ ,1 abc (ω) (Eq. S52) multiplied by ( ℏω)2, and...
[92]

L. P. Kadanoﬀ and G. Baym, Quantum Statistical Mechanics (W. A. Benjamin, Inc., 1962)

1962
[93]

Rostami and E

H. Rostami and E. Cappelluti, npj 2D Materials and Applications 5, 50 (2021)

2021
[94]

Rostami and E

H. Rostami and E. Cappelluti, Phys. Rev. B 103, 125415 (2021)

2021
[95]

G. D. Mahan, Many Particle Physics (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 2000)

2000
[96]

Holder, D

T. Holder, D. Kaplan, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033100 (2020)

2020
[97]

Rostami, Phys

H. Rostami, Phys. Rev. B 106, 155405 (2022)

2022
[98]

Ahn, G.-Y

J. Ahn, G.-Y. Guo, and N. Nagaosa, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041041 (2020)

2020
[99]

Watanabe and Y

H. Watanabe and Y. Yanase, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011001 (2021)

2021
[100]

G. B. Ventura, D. J. Passos, J. M. B. Lopes dos Santos, J. M. Vi ana Parente Lopes, and N. M. R. Peres, Phys. Rev. B 96, 035431 (2017)

2017
[101]

D. E. Parker, T. Morimoto, J. Orenstein, and J. E. Moore, Phys. Rev. B 99, 04521 (2019)

2019
[102]

Gao, Y.-F

A. Gao, Y.-F. Liu, J.-X. Qiu, B. Ghosh, T. V. Trevisan, Y. O nishi, C. Hu, T. Qian, H.-J. Tien, S.-W. Chen, M. Huang, D. B´ erub´ e, H. Li, C. Tzschaschel, T. Dinh, Z. Sun, S.-C. Ho, S.- W. Lien, B. Singh, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. C. Bell, H. Lin, T.-R. Chang, C. R. Du, A...

2023
[103]

Takasan, T

K. Takasan, T. Morimoto, J. Orenstein, and J. E. Moore, Phys. Rev. B 104, L161202 (2021)

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Demsar, Nature Physics 12, 202 (2016)

J. Demsar, Nature Physics 12, 202 (2016)

2016

[2] [2]

0 α inj− LP yyy (ω )/α ◦(ω ) (a) analytic numeric − 15 − 10 − 5 0 5 α inj− LP yyy (ω )/ ¯α (c) φ = 0 φ = π/ 100 φ = π/ 80 φ = π/ 60 − 1 0 1 δH/ ¯hω − 0. 4 − 0. 2

[3] [3]

4 β shi− LP xxx (ω )/β ◦(ω ) (b) 0 1 2 3 ¯hω/ 2µ − 10 − 5 0 5 β shi− LP xxx (ω )/ ¯β (d) UVB→ LCB LCB→ UCB UVB→ UCB FIG. 3. LP injection and shift shear forces susceptibilities in the bilayer Haldane model. Panels (a) and (b) show the injection and shift response functions, respectively, as func- tions of the T -breaking Haldane gap, exhibiting even and o...

[4] [4]

C. Bao, P. Tang, D. Sun, and S. Zhou, Nature Reviews Physics 4, 33 (2022)

2022

[5] [5]

by setting ℓ = ± for the chiral components (with p± = pb ±ipc), and it is the phononic equivalent of the chiral shift vector describing the gyration photocurrent as discussed in detail in Ref. [ 33]. The analytical expres- sions for the shift and injection force functions given in Eqs. ( 4)–(8) summarize the main results of this study. TABLE I. Symmetry p...

[6] [6]

A. S. Disa, T. F. Nova, and A. Cavalleri, Nature Physics 17, 1087 (2021)

2021

[7] [7]

de la Torre, D

A. de la Torre, D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen, S. Gerber, J. W. McIver, and M. A. Sentef, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 041002 (2021)

2021

[8] [8]

C.-J. Yang, J. Li, M. Fiebig, and S. Pal, Nature Reviews Materials 8, 518 (2023)

2023