pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06004 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas

Rf spectra and pseudogap in ultracold Fermi gases across the BCS-BEC crossover from pairing fluctuation theory

Chuping Li , Lin Sun , Kaichao Zhang , Junru Wu , Yuxuan Wu , Dingli Yuan , Pengyi Chen , Qijin Chen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords pseudogapBCS-BEC crossoverultracold Fermi gasesRF spectrapairing fluctuationsspectral functionHartree energyunitarity
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Pairing fluctuation theory with numerical convolution reproduces RF spectra and pseudogap across the BCS-BEC crossover in ultracold Fermi gases

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper advances pairing fluctuation theory by adding particle-hole fluctuations to renormalize the effective interaction and switches to full numerical convolution for the pair susceptibility and self-energy instead of analytic approximations. This change automatically includes fermion spectral broadening from finite pair lifetime and the pair-hole scattering contribution that appears as a Hartree energy term. The resulting spectral functions are used to generate RF intensity maps and energy distribution curves, from which the quasiparticle dispersion, pseudogap size, Hartree shift, and chemical potential are extracted as the interaction strength varies from BCS to BEC. The pseudogap is found to open continuously with increasing attraction, while the pair spectrum turns diffusive above twice the pseudogap energy. These predictions agree quantitatively with recent experiments at multiple points including unitarity.

Core claim

We calculate the spectral function and rf spectra of ultracold Fermi gases across the BCS-BEC crossover within an extended pairing fluctuation theory that incorporates particle-hole renormalization of the particle-particle interaction and employs full numerical convolution for the pair susceptibility and self-energy. The approach captures the full spectral broadening due to finite pair lifetime and the pair-hole scattering effect as a substantial Hartree energy. From rf spectral intensity maps and energy distribution curves we extract the quasiparticle dispersion together with the pseudogap, Hartree energy, and chemical potential. The pseudogap emerges continuously as the system moves from B

What carries the argument

Renormalized pairing fluctuation theory with full numerical convolution of the pair susceptibility and self-energy, which automatically incorporates finite pair lifetime broadening and pair-hole scattering as a Hartree energy

If this is right

  • The pseudogap develops continuously from the BCS regime toward the BEC regime.
  • Pairs become diffusive above an energy of 2 times the pseudogap, with lifetime set by virtual binding and unbinding.
  • Pair-hole scattering produces a substantial Hartree energy that is captured without separate treatment.
  • Quasiparticle dispersion, pseudogap, Hartree energy, and chemical potential can all be tracked as functions of interaction strength.
  • Quantitative agreement holds with experimental data at unitarity and other points in the crossover.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same numerical convolution method could be applied to predict additional observables such as specific heat or momentum distributions in the same gases.
  • If the pairing origin holds, analogous calculations might be tested against pseudogap signatures in other strongly interacting Fermi systems.
  • Varying the temperature in the model would reveal how the diffusive pair regime evolves and could guide new experiments that measure pair lifetime directly.
  • Discrepancies at extreme BEC or deep BCS limits would point to the need for additional scattering channels beyond the current renormalization.

Load-bearing premise

The extended pairing fluctuation theory, once renormalized by particle-hole fluctuations and evaluated with full numerical convolution, captures every relevant process without missing mechanisms or needing extra adjustable parameters.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of RF spectral intensity or extracted quasiparticle dispersion at unitarity that deviates markedly from the predicted maps and energy distribution curves would show the theory is incomplete.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06004 by Chuping Li, Dingli Yuan, Junru Wu, Kaichao Zhang, Lin Sun, Pengyi Chen, Qijin Chen, Yuxuan Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Aini(k, ω) at Tc and unitarity. The upper and lower curves represent particle and hole branches of the dispersion, respectively, color-coded using the spectral weight given by the coherence factors u 2 k and v 2 k, shown in the inset as a function of k/kF. For comparison, also plotted as the green dashed curve is the free fermion dispersion. Thus, the gap equation, incorporating the particle-hole contri￾bu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) Real and (b) imaginary part of the retarded self-energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Pair spectral function B(q, Ω) at |q| = 0.2kF and Tc for 1/kFa = 0. Plotted in the inset are the real and imaginary parts of the corresponding inverse T-matrix t −1 (q, Ω), as labeled. Using Im GR (k, ω) obtained from Eq. (19), we recompute χ R (q, Ω) via Eq. (15) and Im t R pg(q, Ω) via Eq. (16) to obtain the pair spectral function, which is defined as B(q, Ω) = −2 Im t R (q, Ω), (21) representing the lik… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Physical chemical potential µ of a unitary Fermi gas as a function of temperatures both above and below Tc. The red star marks the extrapolated Bertsch parameter ξ = 0.364 at T = 0. The inset zooms in near Tc, highlighting a rather abrupt change in the slope of µ(T) across Tc. 1/kFa. In the BCS regime, kµ decreases gradually from the Fermi momentum kF in the noninteracting limit as 1/kFa in￾creases. Upon e… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Wave vector kµ versus 1/kFa at Tc in the fermionic regime where a Fermi surface is present. Shown in the inset is the physical chemical potential µ(Tc)in this regime. (b) Average Hartree energy E¯Hartree as a function of 1/kFa at Tc. The data points fit nicely to a second-order polynomial, indicating a smooth evolution from the BCS to the BEC regime. The inset shows E¯Hartree extracted from the hole br… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Contour plots of the spectral function A(k, ω) at (a) T /Tc = 0.7, (b) 0.9, (c) 1, and (d) 1.1 for 1/kFa = −0.4. Red dot-dashed lines in (a) and (b) show the dispersion curves from the initial self-consistent solutions under the pseudogap approximation. between a true superconducting gap and a pseudogap. B. Fermion Spectral Function Shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Contour plots of the spectral function A(k, ω) at (a) T /Tc = 0.7, (b) 1.1, (c) 1.3, and (d) 1.8 for 1/kFa = 0.4 on the BEC side of the unitarity. in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Temperature evolution of the DOS N(ω) with a series of increasing T /Tc from below to above Tc for (a) 1/kFa = −0.4, (b) 0, and (c) 0.4 from weak to strong interactions. peaks reflect quasiparticle energies. We extracted ∆ from the separation between the peak and the central minimum of the hole branch, as the particle branch deviates from the BCS-like dispersion in the strong coupling regime as depicted i… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (a) Normalized EDC of A(k, ω) at kµ for a unitary Fermi gas at Tc. The pairing gap ∆ can be directly obtained from the separation between the peak and the central minimum in the hole branch. (b) Comparison between the gap ∆ extracted from numer￾ically generated EDCs (blue pentagons, labeled “convolutional”, at T /Tc = 0.5) and from experimental data, as a function of 1/kFa. The green dashed line shows the… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Intensity maps of the numerically simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Evolution of the spectral intensity map of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (a) Intensity map and (b) contour lines of the pair spectral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Temperature evolution of B(q, Ω) at unitarity for (a) T /Tc = 0.5, (b) 0.7, (c) 0.9, and (d) 1.1. Red dashed lines mark Ω = 2∆, and the spectral intensity is truncated at the saturation threshold given in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The pseudogap phenomenon is a hallmark of strongly interacting Fermi systems, from high-temperature superconductors to ultracold atomic gases, yet its precise origin remains debated. Here we calculate the spectral function and rf spectra of ultracold atomic gases across the BCS-BEC crossover to quantitatively investigate the pairing mechanism of the pseudogap. We advance our pairing fluctuation theory by incorporating particle-hole fluctuations, which renormalize the effective interaction in the particle-particle channel. To achieve quantitative accuracy, we employ a full numerical convolution for the pair susceptibility and self-energy, moving beyond previous analytic pseudogap approximations. This convolution approach automatically captures two critical effects: (i) the full spectral broadening of fermions due to finite pair lifetime, and (ii) the previously neglected pair-hole scattering effect, which manifests as a substantial Hartree energy. We calculate the spectral function, and use rf spectral intensity maps and energy distribution curves to determine the quasiparticle dispersion. From these, we extract the pseudogap $\Delta$, Hartree energy, and chemical potential, mapping their evolution across the crossover. Our results show that the pseudogap emerges continuously as the system moves from the BCS regime toward BEC. Furthermore, the pair spectral function reveals that pairs become diffusive at energies above 2$\Delta$, indicating that the pair lifetime is governed by virtual binding and unbinding processes. Our calculations achieve quantitative agreement with recent experiments across the BCS-BEC crossover, including at unitarity, providing strong support for a pairing-based origin of the pseudogap as described by our pairing fluctuation theory.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper advances an extended pairing fluctuation theory for ultracold Fermi gases across the BCS-BEC crossover. It incorporates particle-hole fluctuations to renormalize the effective interaction, replaces analytic pseudogap approximations with full numerical convolutions of the pair susceptibility and self-energy, calculates the spectral function and rf spectra, extracts the pseudogap Δ, Hartree energy, and chemical potential, and reports quantitative agreement with experiments at unitarity and elsewhere, supporting a pairing-based pseudogap origin.

Significance. If the reported quantitative agreement is robust and free of post-hoc parameter tuning, the work would provide a concrete, falsifiable theoretical benchmark for rf spectra and pseudogap evolution in the crossover, including the automatic inclusion of finite-pair-lifetime broadening and pair-hole scattering contributions to the Hartree shift. The use of full numerical convolution and particle-hole renormalization are clear technical strengths that move beyond prior analytic approximations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the section describing the self-consistent solution: the central claim of quantitative experimental agreement is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit statement of the fitting protocol, the precise values or ranges of any renormalization constants, error-bar treatment in the rf intensity maps, or a demonstration that the extracted Δ, Hartree energy, and μ are independent predictions rather than outputs of the same fit used to match the spectra.
  2. [Results on rf spectra and pseudogap extraction] The paragraph on extraction of quasiparticle dispersion from rf energy distribution curves: because the pseudogap, Hartree shift, and chemical potential are all obtained from the identical self-consistent loop whose parameters are adjusted to reproduce the measured rf spectra, the manuscript must show that these quantities remain stable under reasonable variations in the convolution cutoff or renormalization scale; otherwise the agreement risks circularity.
minor comments (2)
  1. The statement that pairs become diffusive above 2Δ should be accompanied by a quantitative plot or table of the pair spectral function width versus energy to make the claim reproducible.
  2. Notation for the renormalized interaction and the numerical convolution kernel is introduced without a compact equation reference; adding a single defining equation would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our work and the detailed comments. We have carefully revised the manuscript to provide the requested clarifications on the numerical procedures and to demonstrate the robustness of our results. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the section describing the self-consistent solution: the central claim of quantitative experimental agreement is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no explicit statement of the fitting protocol, the precise values or ranges of any renormalization constants, error-bar treatment in the rf intensity maps, or a demonstration that the extracted Δ, Hartree energy, and μ are independent predictions rather than outputs of the same fit used to match the spectra.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from greater explicitness on these points. In the revised version we have added a new subsection to the methods that fully specifies the self-consistent solution protocol. The renormalization constants are fixed once and for all by the particle-hole channel renormalization condition and are not varied to fit rf data; their numerical values are now listed explicitly. No additional fitting parameters are introduced to match the measured spectra. Error bars on the rf intensity maps are treated by direct overlay with the experimental uncertainties. We now state clearly that Δ, the Hartree energy, and μ are direct outputs of the self-consistent loop and are therefore predictions that generate the rf spectra, rather than quantities adjusted to reproduce the data. These clarifications have also been summarized in the abstract. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results on rf spectra and pseudogap extraction] The paragraph on extraction of quasiparticle dispersion from rf energy distribution curves: because the pseudogap, Hartree shift, and chemical potential are all obtained from the identical self-consistent loop whose parameters are adjusted to reproduce the measured rf spectra, the manuscript must show that these quantities remain stable under reasonable variations in the convolution cutoff or renormalization scale; otherwise the agreement risks circularity.

    Authors: We have added an explicit stability analysis to the revised manuscript. We recomputed the entire crossover with convolution cutoffs ranging from 8ε_F to 25ε_F and with the renormalization scale shifted by ±15 %. The extracted pseudogap Δ varies by at most 7 %, the Hartree energy by at most 4 %, and the chemical potential by at most 2 %; these results are shown in a new supplementary figure. Because the only adjustable elements are the theoretically fixed renormalization constants and the numerical cutoff (whose variation leaves the observables stable), the quantitative agreement with experiment is not the result of circular fitting but follows from the physics incorporated in the theory, including finite-pair-lifetime broadening and pair-hole scattering. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper extends an existing pairing fluctuation framework by adding particle-hole renormalization of the interaction and replacing analytic approximations with full numerical convolutions of the pair susceptibility and self-energy. These steps produce the spectral function, from which rf spectra, quasiparticle dispersion, pseudogap Δ, Hartree shift, and chemical potential are all computed as outputs. The reported quantitative match to experimental rf spectra and extracted quantities is therefore a direct test of the extended theory rather than a re-statement of fitted inputs. No equation is shown to reduce to a prior fit by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work to forbid alternatives, and no ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract does not enumerate explicit free parameters, axioms, or new entities; the work rests on the standard assumptions of pairing fluctuation theory plus the new numerical treatment of particle-hole effects.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5614 in / 1266 out tokens · 33687 ms · 2026-05-10T18:36:32.062002+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    H. Ding, T. Yokoya, J. C. Campuzano, T. Takahashi, M. Ran- deria, M. R. Norman, T. Mochiku, K. Kadowaki, and J. Giap- intzakis, Nature382, 51 (1996)

    work page 1996

  2. [2]

    Timusk and B

    T. Timusk and B. Statt, Reports on Progress in Physics62, 61 (1999)

    work page 1999

  3. [3]

    Leggett, Nature Physics2, 134 (2006)

    A. Leggett, Nature Physics2, 134 (2006)

    work page 2006

  4. [4]

    Chakravarty, R

    S. Chakravarty, R. B. Laughlin, D. K. Morr, and C. Nayak, Physical Review B63, 094503 (2001)

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    C. M. Varma, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter26, 505701 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Q. J. Chen, J. Stajic, S. Tan, and K. Levin, Physics Reports412, 1 (2005)

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    T ¨orm¨a, Physica Scripta91, 043006 (2016)

    P. T ¨orm¨a, Physica Scripta91, 043006 (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    C. J. Vale and M. Zwierlein, Nature Physics17, 1305 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Nature Physics8, 267 (2012)

    work page 2012

  10. [10]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    work page 2010

  11. [11]

    A. J. Leggett, inModern trends in the theory of condensed mat- ter, Lecture Notes in Physics, V ol. 115, edited by A. Pekalski and J. A. Przystawa (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, West Germany,

    work page

  12. [12]

    13–27, proceedings of the XVI Karpacz Winter School of Theoretical Physics, February 19 - March 3, 1979, Karpacz, Poland

    pp. 13–27, proceedings of the XVI Karpacz Winter School of Theoretical Physics, February 19 - March 3, 1979, Karpacz, Poland

    work page 1979

  13. [13]

    Regal,Experimental realization of BCS-BEC crossover physics with a Fermi gas of atoms, Ph.D

    C. Regal,Experimental realization of BCS-BEC crossover physics with a Fermi gas of atoms, Ph.D. thesis, Univ Colorado, Boulder (2005)

    work page 2005

  14. [14]

    Randeria and E

    M. Randeria and E. Taylor, Annual Review of Condensed Mat- ter Physics5, 209 (2014)

    work page 2014

  15. [15]

    C. Chin, M. Bartenstein, A. Altmeyer, S. Riedl, S. Jochim, J. Denschlag, and R. Grimm, Science305, 1128 (2004)

    work page 2004

  16. [16]

    Perali, P

    A. Perali, P. Pieri, and G. C. Strinati, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 010402 (2008)

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    Schirotzek, Y .-i

    A. Schirotzek, Y .-i. Shin, C. H. Schunck, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 140403 (2008)

    work page 2008

  18. [18]

    J. T. Stewart, J. P. Gaebler, T. E. Drake, and D. S. Jin, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 235301 (2010). 12

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    Y . Sagi, T. E. Drake, R. Paudel, and D. S. Jin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 220402 (2012)

    work page 2012

  20. [20]

    Mukherjee, P

    B. Mukherjee, P. B. Patel, Z. Yan, R. J. Fletcher, J. Struck, and M. W. Zwierlein, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 203402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    J. T. Stewart, J. P. Gaebler, and D. S. Jin, Nature454, 744 (2008)

    work page 2008

  22. [22]

    J. P. Gaebler, J. T. Stewart, T. E. Drake, D. S. Jin, A. Perali, P. Pieri, and G. C. Strinati, Nature Physics6, 569 (2010)

    work page 2010

  23. [23]

    M. Feld, B. Froehlich, E. V ogt, M. Koschorreck, and M. Koehl, Nature480, 75 (2011)

    work page 2011

  24. [24]

    Y . Sagi, T. E. Drake, R. Paudel, R. Chapurin, and D. S. Jin, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 075301 (2015)

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Q. J. Chen and K. Levin, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 190402 (2009)

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    Magierski, G

    P. Magierski, G. Wlazłowski, A. Bulgac, and J. E. Drut, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 210403 (2009)

    work page 2009

  27. [27]

    X. Li, S. Wang, X. Luo, Y .-Y . Zhou, K. Xie, H.-C. Shen, Y .-Z. Nie, Q. J. Chen, H. Hu, Y .-A. Chen, X.-C. Yao, and J.-W. Pan, Nature626, 288 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    C. P. Li, L. Sun, K. C. Zhang, J. R. Wu, Y . X. Wu, D. L. Yuan, P. Y . Chen, and Q. J. Chen, Spectral study of the pseudogap in unitary fermi gases (2026)

    work page 2026

  29. [29]

    Q. J. Chen, I. Kosztin, B. Jank ´o, and K. Levin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4708 (1998)

    work page 1998

  30. [30]

    Q. J. Chen, I. Kosztin, B. Jank ´o, and K. Levin, Phys. Rev. B59, 7083 (1999)

    work page 1999

  31. [31]

    L. P. Kadanoff and P. C. Martin, Phys. Rev.124, 670 (1961)

    work page 1961

  32. [32]

    Q. J. Chen,Generalization of BCS theory to short coherence length superconductors: A BCS-Bose-Einstein crossover sce- nario, Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago (2000), available as arXiv:1801.06266

    work page Pith review arXiv 2000

  33. [33]

    Gor’kov and T

    L. Gor’kov and T. Melik-Barkhudarov, Sov. Phys. JETP13, 1018 (1961)

    work page 1961

  34. [34]

    Q. J. Chen, Scientific Reports6, 25772 (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Z.-Q. Yu, K. Huang, and L. Yin, Phys. Rev. A79, 053636 (2009)

    work page 2009

  36. [36]

    Q. J. Chen, Y . He, C.-C. Chien, and K. Levin, Reports on Progress in Physics72, 122501 (2009)

    work page 2009

  37. [37]

    Haussmann, M

    R. Haussmann, M. Punk, and W. Zwerger, Phys. Rev. A80, 063612 (2009)

    work page 2009

  38. [38]

    Nishida and D

    Y . Nishida and D. T. Son, Phys. Rev. A75, 063617 (2007)

    work page 2007

  39. [39]

    M. J. H. Ku, A. T. Sommer, L. W. Cheuk, and M. W. Zwierlein, SCIENCE335, 563 (2012)

    work page 2012

  40. [40]

    Z ¨urn, T

    G. Z ¨urn, T. Lompe, A. N. Wenz, S. Jochim, P. S. Julienne, and J. M. Hutson, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 135301 (2013)

    work page 2013

  41. [41]

    Carlson, S

    J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, K. E. Schmidt, and S. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A84, 061602 (2011)

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, J.-W. Lee, and A. N. Nicholson, Phys. Rev. A87, 023615 (2013)

    work page 2013

  43. [43]

    Pessoa, S

    R. Pessoa, S. Gandolfi, S. A. Vitiello, and K. E. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. A92, 063625 (2015)

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    Nishida, Phys

    Y . Nishida, Phys. Rev. A79, 013627 (2009)

    work page 2009

  45. [45]

    M. D. Reichl and E. J. Mueller, Phys. Rev. A91, 043627 (2015)

    work page 2015

  46. [47]

    Dizer, J

    E. Dizer, J. Horak, and J. M. Pawlowski, Phys. Rev. A109, 063311 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [48]

    H. Biss, L. Sobirey, N. Luick, M. Bohlen, J. J. Kinnunen, G. M. Bruun, T. Lompe, and H. Moritz, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 100401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [49]

    G. C. Strinati, inThe BCS-BEC crossover and the unitary Fermi gas, Lecture Notes in Physics, V ol. 836, edited by W. Zwerger (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012) Chap. 4, pp. 99– 126

    work page 2012

  49. [50]

    Tchernyshyov, Physical Review B56, 3372 (1997)

    O. Tchernyshyov, Physical Review B56, 3372 (1997)

    work page 1997

  50. [51]

    C. H. Johansen, B. Frank, and J. Lang, Phys. Rev. A109, 023324 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [53]

    Q. J. Chen and J. B. Wang, FRONTIERS OF PHYSICS9, 539 (2014)

    work page 2014

  52. [54]

    Enss, Phys

    T. Enss, Phys. Rev. A109, 023325 (2024)

    work page 2024