Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials

Eugen Dizer; Kostya S. Novoselov; Marton Kan\'asz-Nagy; Rafa{\l} O{\l}dziejewski; Richard Schmidt; Xin Chen

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 95 references

Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Dirac materials host a third Fermi-polaron branch tied to vanishing density of states at the Dirac point.

desk verdict Clean lattice calculation that finds a third polaron branch tied to vanishing DOS; the mobile-impurity claim is the softest link but does not sink the paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04161 v1 pith:OCL5WIOB submitted 2026-07-05 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.str-el

Xin Chen , Eugen Dizer , Rafa{l} O{l}dziejewski , Kostya S. Novoselov , Marton Kanász-Nagy , Richard Schmidt This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.str-el

keywords FermipolaronDiracmaterialsDirac–FermiabsorptionspectroscopyvanishingdensityofstateshoneycomblatticeChevyansatzfunctionaldeterminantapproach

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

This paper shows that quantum impurities in Dirac materials form a previously unrecognised quasiparticle, the Dirac–Fermi polaron, in addition to the familiar attractive and repulsive polarons. The new branch appears because the impurity can be dressed by particle-hole excitations that reach the Dirac point, where the density of states vanishes. The resonance survives for both attractive and repulsive interactions, for massless and gapped Dirac cones, and across the entire doping range; it disappears only when the density of states remains finite at the band crossing. Because the feature is visible in ordinary absorption or radio-frequency spectra, the authors argue that polaron spectroscopy can map Dirac points and other zeros of the density of states even when those points lie far from the Fermi surface.

What carries the argument

The Dirac–Fermi polaron resonance itself, obtained from the exact functional-determinant Loschmidt echo for static impurities and from the multi-band Chevy ansatz for mobile impurities; its existence is controlled by zeros of the bath density of states rather than by linear dispersion.

What would settle it

Measure the absorption spectrum of a mobile impurity (or exciton) in a honeycomb or TMD–graphene heterostructure while sweeping the chemical potential through the Dirac point; absence of a third resonance branch at the predicted location would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Dirac materials generically host three distinct Fermi-polaron branches—attractive, repulsive and Dirac–Fermi polarons—whose spectroscopic signature is a robust absorption resonance produced by impurity dressing with excitations near a vanishing density of states at the Dirac point (or gap edge).

Load-bearing premise

The single particle-hole Chevy ansatz remains accurate enough for mobile impurities that the Dirac–Fermi polaron still appears as a clear quasiparticle once the impurity can hop.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The new thing here is a third absorption branch—the Dirac-Fermi polaron—that appears when an impurity is dressed by particle-hole excitations near a vanishing density of states. It is not a re-label of the usual attractive or repulsive polaron, and it is not the Wigner polaron. They show it for both signs of U, across the whole doping range, and they kill it by going to a metallic nanotube with finite DOS at the crossing. That comparison is the cleanest part of the argument.

What they do well: static-impurity spectra come from the exact functional-determinant approach on the honeycomb lattice. Finite-size and temperature checks are in the SM and look solid. The Chevy ansatz is benchmarked against FDA at t_I = 0 and recovers peak positions and widths, including the DFP. The particle-hole symmetry mapping between attractive and repulsive cases is handled carefully. The T-matrix picture (true vs virtual bound state near the Dirac point or gap edge) gives a transparent microscopic origin. Citations are standard and not circular.

The soft spot is real but limited. Once the impurity is mobile they rely on the one-particle-hole Chevy wavefunction (and its multi-band version). They only show the exact FDA comparison at t_I = 0; for finite t_I they assert the qualitative structure survives and extract Z and lifetime from the one-ph self-energy. Because the DFP is a continuum resonance, higher-order particle-hole processes could shift or broaden it. That is the least secure claim. It does not erase the static result or the vanishing-DOS mechanism, both of which stand on their own.

This is for people who do polaron spectroscopy in 2D materials or cold atoms, and for anyone who wants a concrete spectral fingerprint of Dirac points far from the Fermi surface. The math is standard and reproducible in principle; no free parameters enter the central claim. I would send it to referees. The mobile-impurity caveat is something a referee can ask them to flag more clearly, not a reason to desk-reject.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies absorption spectra of quantum impurities coupled to fermionic baths with honeycomb (Dirac) band structures. Using the exact functional-determinant approach for static impurities and a multi-band Chevy variational ansatz for mobile impurities, it identifies a third spectral branch—the Dirac-Fermi polaron (DFP)—arising from impurity dressing by particle-hole excitations near a vanishing density of states at the Dirac point (or gap edge). The DFP is shown to coexist with conventional attractive and repulsive polarons for both signs of the interaction and across the full doping range; it is suppressed when the DOS remains finite (metallic nanotubes) and is tied to virtual or in-gap two-body bound states. The authors argue that polaron spectroscopy thereby probes band-structure features far from the Fermi surface and is experimentally accessible in TMD-graphene heterostructures and ultracold atoms.

Significance. If the DFP is indeed a generic, spectroscopically sharp feature of Dirac materials, the work supplies a concrete, parameter-free diagnostic of vanishing DOS that is complementary to ARPES or transport and works at energies far from the Fermi surface. The exact FDA spectra for the static case, the particle-hole symmetry relation, the T-matrix interpretation of virtual bound states, and the explicit experimental proposals (X-ray absorption, RF spectroscopy, exciton-impurity heterostructures) constitute solid, falsifiable contributions. The multi-platform framing and the clear distinction between massless, massive, and finite-DOS geometries strengthen the claim that the phenomenon is not an artifact of a particular model.

major comments (1)

[Variational ansatz / SM “Quasiparticle weight and lifetime”] The assertion that the DFP remains a genuine quasiparticle once the impurity is mobile (finite residue Z and lifetime, “not an artifact of the static limit”) rests on the truncated one-particle-hole Chevy ansatz (main-text Eq. (4) and SM multi-band generalization). The only quantitative benchmark against the exact FDA is performed at t_I = 0 (Fig. 2a vs 2c). For t_I comparable to t the paper reports only that “the qualitative spectral structure is fully preserved” and extracts Z and τ from the one-ph self-energy (SM Fig. 3). Because the DFP is a continuum resonance associated with a virtual bound state near the Dirac point, higher-order particle-hole processes can shift, broaden or suppress it. A two-ph calculation, a small-lattice exact diagonalization, or at least a systematic comparison of residues versus t_I/t would be needed to secure the mobile-impurity claim that is central to the

minor comments (4)

[Variational ansatz] The main-text discussion of the mobile case is deferred almost entirely to the SM (“see Ref. [73]”). A short paragraph or inset figure showing at least one representative mobile spectrum (or the evolution of the three peak positions with t_I) would make the claim self-contained for readers who do not immediately consult the supplement.
[Fig. 3c / Metallic regime] Fig. 3c (metallic nanotube) is shown only for a single (6 imes30) geometry. A brief statement of how the residual spectral weight near the would-be DFP scales with circumference or with residual DOS would strengthen the contrast with the vanishing-DOS cases.
[SM / Quasiparticle weight] Notation for the artificial broadening switches between η (FDA) and ε (variational) without a single clarifying sentence; a uniform symbol and a short remark that all reported lifetimes are lower-bounded by 1/ε would avoid confusion.
[Absorption spectrum / Fig. 2] The particle-hole symmetry relation S_{-U,-μ}(τ)=S_{U,∞}(τ)S_{U,μ}(τ) is powerful; stating the corresponding spectral-function mapping explicitly would help readers map the repulsive panels onto the attractive ones without mental gymnastics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: DFP resonances are direct numerical outputs of the lattice Hamiltonian via exact FDA (static) and Chevy self-consistency (mobile), with no fitted parameters or definitional loops.

full rationale

The paper starts from the microscopic honeycomb Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) with on-site U and hoppings t, t_I. Absorption spectra are obtained either exactly via the functional-determinant Loschmidt echo (Eq. 3, FDA) for static impurities or from the truncated Chevy variational equations (Eq. 4 and multi-band SM generalization) for mobile impurities. The three branches (AP, RP, DFP) appear as peaks in the computed A(ω); their positions, residues Z and lifetimes are extracted from the self-energy poles after the fact. No parameter is fitted to spectral data and then re-used as a prediction; the vanishing-DOS mechanism is an interpretation of those outputs, not an input. Self-citations (Chevy, FDA, mass-gap papers) supply standard methods whose validity is independently established in the literature and are not load-bearing uniqueness claims. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and non-circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a standard tight-binding honeycomb Hamiltonian plus an on-site impurity interaction, solved by established many-body techniques (FDA exact for static impurities; truncated Chevy for mobile). No free parameters are fitted to external data; interaction strengths and hoppings are chosen for illustration. The only invented entity is the named quasiparticle itself, whose existence is a computational output rather than an extra postulate.

free parameters (3)

U/t (interaction strength) = ±5 or -20
Set by hand to |U/t|=5 or 20 for spectral visibility; not fitted to experiment. Results claimed to be robust for a range of |U|.
t_I/t (impurity hopping ratio) = 0 or 1
Varied from 0 (static) to 1 (mass-balanced); chosen to illustrate mobile limit, not fitted.
artificial broadening η or ε = 0.01t–0.1t
Numerical Lorentzian width (0.01t–0.1t) used to resolve peaks; does not affect existence of DFP.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Nearest-neighbor tight-binding honeycomb Hamiltonian with optional staggered sublattice potential Δ correctly captures the Dirac (or gapped Dirac) band structure of the bath.
Standard model for graphene, TMDs, and optical-lattice realizations; invoked from the Model section onward.
standard math Functional determinant approach yields the exact Loschmidt echo (and thus absorption spectrum) for a static impurity coupled to a quadratic fermionic bath.
Classic result of Levitov et al.; used for all static spectra in Figs. 2–3.
domain assumption Truncation of the impurity wave-function to at most one particle-hole excitation (Chevy ansatz) is sufficient to locate the DFP resonance for mobile impurities.
Standard variational approximation in polaron literature; benchmarked only against static FDA, then asserted for finite t_I.
domain assumption On-site contact interaction U n_c n_d is an adequate model of impurity-bath scattering in both solid-state and cold-atom platforms.
Common simplification; longer-range or momentum-dependent interactions are neglected.

invented entities (1)

Dirac-Fermi polaron (DFP)
purpose: Name and conceptual identification of the third absorption resonance that appears when the bath DOS vanishes at a Dirac point or gap edge.
The spectral feature is a computational output of the FDA/Chevy calculations; the name and interpretation as a distinct quasiparticle branch are introduced by the authors. No independent experimental observation is claimed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OCL5WIOB

@misc{pith2026260704161,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OCL5WIOB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04161}
}

read the original abstract

We investigate band-structure effects on the absorption spectra of quantum impurities in Dirac materials. We uncover the formation of novel quasiparticles -- Dirac-Fermi polarons -- emerging from the dressing of impurities by excitations near the Dirac point. These quasiparticles are remarkably robust, persisting for both attractive and repulsive interactions, and across the full range of electron and hole doping. We show that their spectroscopic signature is a generic feature of Dirac materials, accessible with established techniques in both solid-state and ultracold atomic platforms. Our results establish polaron spectroscopy as a powerful probe of Dirac points at energies far from the Fermi surface, providing direct access to band-structure effects beyond conventional approaches.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04161 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Absorption spectrum of a static impurity ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (6 more)

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. The honeycomb lattice is constructed with lattice vectors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png]

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. FDA absorption spectra for an interaction strength of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png]

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Properties of the three polaron branches extracted from the Padé approximant of the impurity spectral function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Self-energy calculated from the variational ansatz at total momentum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Inverse two-body [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Schematic illustration of the interacting density of states (DOS) governing the emergence of the Dirac-Fermi polaron [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith

[1]

Massignan, R

P. Massignan, R. Schmidt, G. E. Astrakharchik, A. Imamoglu, M. Zwierlein, J. J. Arlt, and G. M. Bruun, (2025), 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09618

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09618 2025
[2]

Sidler, P

M. Sidler, P. Back, O. Cotlet, A. Srivastava, T. Fink, M. Kroner, E. Demler, and A. Imamoglu, Nat. Phys. 13, 255 (2017)

2017
[3]

and Ji, Geoffrey and Greiner, Markus and Greif, Daniel and Demler, Eugene, Phys

Grusdt, Fabian and Kánasz-Nagy, Márton and Bohrdt, Annabelle and Chiu, Christie S. and Ji, Geoffrey and Greiner, Markus and Greif, Daniel and Demler, Eugene, Phys. Rev. X8, 011046 (2018)

2018
[4]

Koepsell, D

J. Koepsell, D. Bourgund, P. Sompet, S. Hirthe, A. Bohrdt, Y. Wang, F. Grusdt, E. Demler, G. Salomon, C. Gross, and I. Bloch, Science374, 82 (2020)

2020
[5]

Smoleński, P

T. Smoleński, P. E. Dolgirev, C. Kuhlenkamp, A. Popert, Y. Shimazaki, P. Back, X. Lu, M. Kroner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, I. Esterlis, E. Demler, and A. Imamoğlu, Nature595, 53 (2021)

2021
[6]

V. E. Colussi, F. Caleffi, C. Menotti, and A. Recati, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 173002 (2023)

2023
[7]

Huang, K

D. Huang, K. Sampson, Y. Ni, Z. Liu, D. Liang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, H. Li, E. Martin, J. Levin- sen, M. M. Parish, E. Tutuc, D. K. Efimkin, and X. Li, Phys. Rev. X13, 011029 (2023)

2023
[8]

M. L. Prichard, Z. Ba, I. Morera, B. M. Spar, D. A. Huse, E. Demler, and W. S. Bakr, Nat. Phys.21, 1548 (2025)

2025

Show all 95 references

[9]

G. D. Mahan, Phys. Rev.163, 612 (1967)

1967
[10]

Nozières and C

P. Nozières and C. T. De Dominicis, Phys. Rev.178, 1097 (1969)

1969
[11]

Benjamin, I

D. Benjamin, I. Klich, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 247002 (2014)

2014
[12]

Gupta, Z

S. Gupta, Z. Hadzibabic, M. W. Zwierlein, C. A. Stan, K. Dieckmann, C. H. Schunck, E. G. M. van Kempen, B. J. Verhaar, and W. Ketterle, Science300, 1723 (2003)

2003
[13]

Schirotzek, C.-H

A. Schirotzek, C.-H. Wu, A. Sommer, and M. W. Zwier- lein, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 230402 (2009)

2009
[14]

Kohstall, M

C. Kohstall, M. Zaccanti, M. Jag, A. Trenkwalder, P. Massignan, G. M. Bruun, F. Schreck, and R. Grimm, Nature485, 615 (2012)

2012
[15]

Koschorreck, D

M. Koschorreck, D. Pertot, E. Vogt, B. Fröhlich, M. Feld, and M. Köhl, Nature485, 619 (2012)

2012
[16]

Cotleţ, S

O. Cotleţ, S. Zeytinoˇ glu, M. Sigrist, E. Demler, and A. Imamoˇ glu, Phys. Rev. B93, 054510 (2016)

2016
[17]

von Milczewski, F

J. von Milczewski, F. Rose, and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. A105, 013317 (2022)

2022
[18]

Duda, X.-Y

M. Duda, X.-Y. Chen, A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, J. von Milczewski, R. Schmidt, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Nat. Phys.19, 720 (2023)

2023
[19]

Y. Xu, S. Liu, D. A. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, V. Elser, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nature587, 214 (2020)

2020
[20]

B. Gao, M. Ghafariasl, M. Jalali Mehrabad, T.-S. Huang, L. Zhang, D. Session, P. Upadhyay, R. Ma, G. Alsha- lan, D. G. Suárez Forero, S. Sarkar, S. Park, H. Jang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. Xie, Y. Zhou, and M. Hafezi, (2025), arXiv:2504.11530 [cond-mat.str-el]

2025 arXiv
[21]

L. Wang, F. Menzel, F. Pichler, P. Knüppel, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, M. Knap, and T. Smoleński, (2025), arXiv:2512.16552 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025
[22]

Zhang, L

L. Zhang, L. Gu, H. S. Adlong, A. Christianen, E. Dizer, R. Ni, R. Ma, S. Park, H. Jang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watan- abe, I. Esterlis, R. Schmidt, A. Imamoglu, and Y. Zhou, (2025), arXiv:2512.16631 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025
[23]

E. Liu, M. Wilson, J. Hu, A. Zimmerman, A. Mathew, T. Ouyang, A. Shi, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, T. F. Heinz, Y.-C. Chang, and C. H. Lui, (2026), arXiv:2601.11914 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2026
[24]

K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D.-e. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov, Science306, 666 (2004)

2004
[25]

K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M. I. Katsnelson, I. V. Grigorieva, S. V. Dubonos, and A. A. Firsov, Nature438, 197 (2005)

2005
[26]

Bistritzer and A

R. Bistritzer and A. H. MacDonald, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 108, 12233 (2011). 7

2011
[27]

McCann and M

E. McCann and M. Koshino, Reports on Progress in Physics76, 056503 (2013)

2013
[28]

Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature556, 43 (2018)

2018
[29]

S. Xu, M. M. Al Ezzi, N. Balakrishnan, A. Garcia- Ruiz, B. Tsim, C. Mullan, J. Barrier, N. Xin, B. A. Piot, T. Taniguchi, K. Katayama, A. Carvalho, A. Mishchenko, A. Geim, V. Fal’ko, S. Adam, A. H. Cas- tro Neto, K. Novoselov, and Y. Shi, Nat. Phys.17, 619 (2021)

2021
[30]

S. S. Dindorkar, A. S. Kurade, and A. H. Shaikh, Chem- ical Physics Impact7, 100325 (2023)

2023
[31]

K. L. Lee, B. Gremaud, R. Han, B.-G. Englert, and C. Miniatura, Phys. Rev. A80, 043411 (2009)

2009
[32]

G.-B. Jo, J. Guzman, C. K. Thomas, P. Hosur, A. Vish- wanath, and D. M. Stamper-Kurn, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 045305 (2012)

2012
[33]

Gross and I

C. Gross and I. Bloch, Science357, 995 (2017)

2017
[34]

Hofstetter and T

W. Hofstetter and T. Qin, J. Phys. B51, 082001 (2018)

2018
[35]

Chalopin, P

T. Chalopin, P. Bojović, D. Bourgund, S. Wang, T. Franz, I. Bloch, and T. Hilker, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 053402 (2025)

2025
[36]

C. Lobo, A. Recati, S. Giorgini, and S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 200403 (2006)

2006
[37]

C. Fey, P. Schmelcher, A. Imamoglu, and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. B101, 195417 (2020)

2020
[38]

L. B. Tan, O. Cotlet, A. Bergschneider, R. Schmidt, P. Back, Y. Shimazaki, M. Kroner, and A. Imamoglu, Phys. Rev. X10, 021011 (2020)

2020
[39]

H.Hu, J.Wang, andX.-J.Liu,Phys.Rev.A110,023314 (2024)

2024
[40]

Pimenov, Phys

D. Pimenov, Phys. Rev. B109, 195153 (2024)

2024
[41]

Amelio and N

I. Amelio and N. Goldman, SciPost Phys.16, 056 (2024)

2024
[42]

Amelio, G

I. Amelio, G. Mazza, and N. Goldman, Phys. Rev. B 110, 235302 (2024)

2024
[43]

Vashisht, I

A. Vashisht, I. Amelio, L. Vanderstraeten, G. M. Bruun, O. K. Diessel, and N. Goldman, Nature Commun.16, 4918 (2025)

2025
[44]

Tarruell, D

L. Tarruell, D. Greif, T. Uehlinger, G. Jotzu, and T. Esslinger, Nature483, 302 (2012)

2012
[45]

A. K. Sorout, S. Sarkar, and S. Gangadharaiah, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter32, 415604 (2020)

2020
[46]

R. Fan, L. Sun, X. Shao, Y. Li, and M. Zhao, ChemPhys- Mater2, 30 (2023)

2023
[47]

T. O. Wehling, M. I. Katsnelson, and A. I. Lichtenstein, Phys. Rev. B80, 085428 (2009)

2009
[48]

T. O. Wehling, S. Yuan, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. K. Geim, and M. I. Katsnelson, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 056802 (2010)

2010
[49]

Z. H. Ni, L. A. Ponomarenko, R. R. Nair, R. Yang, S. Anissimova, I. V. Grigorieva, F. Schedin, P. Blake, Z. X. Shen, E. H. Hill, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, Nano Letters10, 3868 (2010)

2010
[50]

T.O.Wehling, A.M.Black-Schaffer, andA.V.Balatsky, Advances in Physics63, 1 (2014)

2014
[51]

Bloch, J

I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008)

2008
[52]

Bloch, J

I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbène, Nature Phys. 8, 267 (2012)

2012
[53]

Schäfer, T

F. Schäfer, T. Fukuhara, S. Sugawa, Y. Takasu, and Y. Takahashi, Nature Rev. Phys.2, 411 (2020)

2020
[54]

Demler, Rep

R.Schmidt, M.Knap, D.A.Ivanov, J.-S.You, M.Cetina, and E. Demler, Rep. Prog. Phys.81, 024401 (2018)

2018
[55]

Cetina, M

M. Cetina, M. Jag, R. S. Lous, I. Fritsche, J. T. M. Wal- raven, R. Grimm, J. Levinsen, M. M. Parish, R. Schmidt, M. Knap, and E. Demler, Science354, 96 (2016)

2016
[56]

G. Wang, A. Chernikov, M. M. Glazov, T. F. Heinz, X. Marie, T. Amand, and B. Urbaszek, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 021001 (2018)

2018
[57]

M. Knap, A. Shashi, Y. Nishida, A. Imambekov, D. A. Abanin, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. X2, 041020 (2012)

2012
[58]

For a mobile impurity, the perturbation operator is given by ˆV † = ˆd† q, creating an impurity with momentumq
[59]

W. S. Bakr, J. I. Gillen, A. Peng, S. Fölling, and M. Greiner, Nature462, 74 (2009)

2009
[60]

Koepsell, J

J. Koepsell, J. Vijayan, P. Sompet, F. Grusdt, T. A. Hilker, E. Demler, G. Salomon, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Nature572, 358 (2019)

2019
[61]

Gross and W

C. Gross and W. S. Bakr, Nat. Phys.17, 1316 (2021)

2021
[62]

Sohmen, M

M. Sohmen, M. J. Mark, M. Greiner, and F. Ferlaino, SciPost Phys.15, 182 (2023)

2023
[63]

Endres, H

M. Endres, H. Bernien, A. Keesling, H. Levine, E. R. Anschuetz, A. Krajenbrink, C. Senko, V. Vuletic, M. Greiner, and M. D. Lukin, Science354, 1024 (2016)

2016
[64]

Browaeys and T

A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Nat. Phys.16, 132 (2020)

2020
[65]

A. M. Kaufman and K.-K. Ni, Nat. Phys.17, 1324 (2021)

2021
[66]

Klein, M

J. Klein, M. Lorke, M. Florian, F. Sigger, L. Sigl, S. Rey, J. Wierzbowski, J. Cerne, K. Müller, E. Mitterreiter, P. Zimmermann, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, U. Wurst- bauer, M. Kaniber, M. Knap, R. Schmidt, J. J. Finley, and A. W. Holleitner, Nature Commun.10, 2755 (2019)

2019
[67]

Schacherl, M

B. Schacherl, M. Tagliavini, H. Kaufmann-Heimeshoff, J. Göttlicher, M. Mazzanti, K. Popa, O. Walter, T.Pruessmann, C.Vollmer, A.Beck, R.S.K.Ekanayake, J. A. Branson, T. Neill, D. Fellhauer, C. Reitz, D. Schild, D.Brager, C.Cahill, C.Windorff, T.Sittel, H.Ramanan- toanina, M. W...

2025
[68]

P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. Lett.18, 1049 (1967)

1967
[69]

Wang, AAPPS Bull.33, 20 (2023)

J. Wang, AAPPS Bull.33, 20 (2023)

2023
[70]

L. S. Levitov and G. B. Lesovik, ZhETF Pisma Redakt- siiu58, 225 (1993)

1993
[72]

An Elementary Derivation of Levitov’s For- mula,

I. Klich, “An Elementary Derivation of Levitov’s For- mula,” inQuantum Noise in Mesoscopic Physics, edited by Y. V. Nazarov (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht,
[73]

[70– 72, 75, 83, 92]

See Supplementary Material for details on the nu- merical implementation, the variational treatment of mobile impurities and the quasiparticle nature of the DFP; the Supplementary Material includes Refs. [70– 72, 75, 83, 92]
[74]

Winkler, G

K. Winkler, G. Thalhammer, F. Lang, R. Grimm, J.HeckerDenschlag, A.J.Daley, A.Kantian, H.P.Büch- ler, and P. Zoller, Nature441, 853–856 (2006)

2006
[76]

M. M. Parish and J. Levinsen, Phys. Rev. A87, 033616 (2013)

2013
[77]

X. Chen, E. Dizer, E. R. Rodríguez, and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 193401 (2025)

2025
[78]

H. S. Adlong, E. Dizer, R. Schmidt, A. Imamoglu, and A. Christianen, (2025), arXiv:2512.16651 [cond-mat.str- el]

2025
[79]

J.Wang, X.-J.Liu, andH.Hu,Phys.Rev.A105,043320 8 (2022)

2022
[80]

Wang, X.-J

J. Wang, X.-J. Liu, and H. Hu, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 175301 (2022)

2022
[81]

E. R. Rodríguez, M. Gievers, and R. Schmidt, arXiv:2511.19191 (2025)

2025 arXiv
[82]

D. G. Thomas and J. J. Hopfield, Phys. Rev. Lett.7, 316 (1961)

1961
[84]

De Santis, A

D. De Santis, A. G. Salvador, N. Bazhan, S. Erne, M. Prüfer, C. Guarcello, D. Valenti, J. Schmied- mayer, and E. Demler, (2025), arXiv:2509.25147 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

2025 arXiv
[85]

A. G. Salvador, I. Morera, M. H. Michael, P. E. Dol- girev, D. Pavicevic, A. Liu, A. Cavalleri, and E. Demler, (2025), arXiv:2501.16856 [cond-mat.str-el]

2025 arXiv
[86]

S. Lisi, X. Lu, T. Benschop, T. A. de Jong, P. Stepanov, J. R. Duran, F. Margot, I. Cucchi, E. Cappelli, A. Hunter,et al., Nat. Phys.17, 189 (2021)

2021
[87]

Popert, Y

A. Popert, Y. Shimazaki, M. Kroner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Imamoğlu, and T. Smoleński, Nano Letters22, 7363 (2022)

2022
[88]

Rosenzweig, H

P. Rosenzweig, H. Karakachian, D. Marchenko, K. Küster, and U. Starke, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 176403 (2020)

2020
[89]

L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill, and J. van den Brink, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 705 (2011)

2011
[90]

Ryu and Y

S. Ryu and Y. Hatsugai, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 077002 (2002)

2002
[91]

N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015001 (2018)

2018
[92]

Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials

M. Gievers, M. Wagner, and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 053401 (2024). Supplementary Material for “Emergent Fermi polarons in Dirac materials” Xin Chen1, Eugen Dizer1, Rafał Ołdziejewski2, Kostya S. Novoselov3,4, Marton Kanász-Nagy5, and Richard Schmidt1 1Institut für Theo...

2024
[93]

L. S. Levitov and G. B. Lesovik, ZhETF Pisma Redaktsiiu58, 225 (1993)

1993
[94]

L. S. Levitov, H.-W. Lee, and G. B. Lesovik, Journal of Mathematical Physics37, 4845 (1996)

1996
[95]

An Elementary Derivation of Levitov’s Formula,

I. Klich, “An Elementary Derivation of Levitov’s Formula,” inQuantum Noise in Mesoscopic Physics, edited by Y. V. Nazarov (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2003) pp. 397–402

2003
[96]

Gievers, M

M. Gievers, M. Wagner, and R. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 053401 (2024)

2024
[97]

Chevy, Phys

F. Chevy, Phys. Rev. A74, 063628 (2006)

2006
[98]

Scazza, M

F. Scazza, M. Zaccanti, P. Massignan, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Atoms10, 55 (2022)

2022

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Massignan, R

P. Massignan, R. Schmidt, G. E. Astrakharchik, A. Imamoglu, M. Zwierlein, J. J. Arlt, and G. M. Bruun, (2025), 10.48550/arXiv.2501.09618

arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09618 2025

[2] [2]

Sidler, P

M. Sidler, P. Back, O. Cotlet, A. Srivastava, T. Fink, M. Kroner, E. Demler, and A. Imamoglu, Nat. Phys. 13, 255 (2017)

2017

[3] [3]

and Ji, Geoffrey and Greiner, Markus and Greif, Daniel and Demler, Eugene, Phys

Grusdt, Fabian and Kánasz-Nagy, Márton and Bohrdt, Annabelle and Chiu, Christie S. and Ji, Geoffrey and Greiner, Markus and Greif, Daniel and Demler, Eugene, Phys. Rev. X8, 011046 (2018)

2018

[4] [4]

Koepsell, D

J. Koepsell, D. Bourgund, P. Sompet, S. Hirthe, A. Bohrdt, Y. Wang, F. Grusdt, E. Demler, G. Salomon, C. Gross, and I. Bloch, Science374, 82 (2020)

2020

[5] [5]

Smoleński, P

T. Smoleński, P. E. Dolgirev, C. Kuhlenkamp, A. Popert, Y. Shimazaki, P. Back, X. Lu, M. Kroner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, I. Esterlis, E. Demler, and A. Imamoğlu, Nature595, 53 (2021)

2021

[6] [6]

V. E. Colussi, F. Caleffi, C. Menotti, and A. Recati, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 173002 (2023)

2023

[7] [7]

Huang, K

D. Huang, K. Sampson, Y. Ni, Z. Liu, D. Liang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, H. Li, E. Martin, J. Levin- sen, M. M. Parish, E. Tutuc, D. K. Efimkin, and X. Li, Phys. Rev. X13, 011029 (2023)

2023

[8] [8]

M. L. Prichard, Z. Ba, I. Morera, B. M. Spar, D. A. Huse, E. Demler, and W. S. Bakr, Nat. Phys.21, 1548 (2025)

2025