Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Extracting the pairing gap from van Hove singularities in rf spectra of the Fermi Hubbard model

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Van Hove singularities in rf spectra pin down the pairing gap and chemical potential of the 3D Fermi Hubbard model

desk verdict A genuinely new set of vHS-based markers for gap extraction in the lattice Fermi Hubbard model, but the paper never demonstrates the actual extraction on its own broadened spectra; worth refereeing, needs a real inversion test. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06883 v1 pith:Y434CPD4 submitted 2026-08-07 cond-mat.quant-gas

Chuping Li , Kaichao Zhang , Junru Wu , Yuxuan Wu , Dingli Yuan , Pengyi Chen , Lin Sun , Qijin Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords FermiHubbardmodelpairinggapvanHovesingularityrfspectroscopypseudogapBCS-BECcrossoveropticallatticequantumsimulation
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 sets out to make van Hove singularities in radio-frequency spectra a practical diagnostic for pairing in the three-dimensional attractive Fermi Hubbard model. It claims that four types of singular features appear at rf detunings that depend only on the pairing gap $\Delta$ and the chemical potential $\mu$, through $\nu_i = (\epsilon_i-\mu) + \sqrt{(\epsilon_i-\mu)^2+\Delta^2}$, where the $\epsilon_i$ are the four lattice band critical-point energies. If this holds, resolving any two of these features gives both $\Delta$ and $\mu$ without full spectral fitting, and at half filling one feature suffices. The authors support the claim with numerical spectra from a pair-fluctuation theory, and they show the features remain visible when lifetime and scattering broadenings are added, becoming clearer at strong coupling where back-bending diagnostics lose sensitivity. This matters because quantum-simulated 3D Fermi Hubbard systems currently lack a direct spectroscopic probe of pairing in exactly the regime where theory predictions differ most.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the van Hove singularity of the cubic-lattice dispersion, a momentum point where $\nabla_{\mathbf{k}}\xi_{\mathbf{k}}=0$ and the density of states is non-analytic. The lattice has four such points (labelled $M_0,\dots,M_3$, realised at $\Gamma$, $X$, $M$, $R$), and the rf resonance condition $\xi_{\mathbf{k}}-\nu+E_{\mathbf{k}}=0$ maps each one to a sharp feature in the rf current. The argument is carried by the kinematic relation $\nu_i=(\epsilon_i-\mu)+\sqrt{(\epsilon_i-\mu)^2+\Delta^2}$, which converts measured detunings into the two pairing parameters.

What would settle it

Measure the rf spectrum of a 3D attractive Fermi Hubbard gas at known density and interaction strength, resolve at least two van Hove features, and solve the two corresponding equations of Eq. (6) for $\Delta$ and $\mu$. If the resulting pair disagrees between different choices of vHS markers, or fails to match an independent measurement of $\mu$ (for example from band mapping), the single-gap assumption is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within the $G_0G$ T-matrix pair-fluctuation scheme, the spectral function of the attractive Fermi Hubbard model is taken to have the BCS two-branch form $A(\mathbf{k},\omega)=2\pi[u_{\mathbf{k}}^2\delta(\omega-E_{\mathbf{k}})+v_{\mathbf{k}}^2\delta(\omega+E_{\mathbf{k}})]$ with $E_{\mathbf{k}}=\sqrt{\xi_{\mathbf{k}}^2+\Delta^2}$. The paper shows that when this is fed into the rf response $I(\nu)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_{\mathbf{k}} A(\mathbf{k},\omega)f(\omega)|_{\omega=\xi_{\mathbf{k}}-\nu}$, the lattice critical points—$\Gamma(0,0,0)$, $X(\pi,0,0)$, $M(\pi,\pi,0)$, and $R(\pi,\pi,\pi)$—produce four singular features whose detunings obey $\nu_i=(\epsilon_i-\mu)+\sqrt{(\epsilon_i-\mu)^2+\Delta^2}$ with $\epsilon_i=0,\,2/3,\,4/3,\,2$ in units of $6t$. Inverting any two of these relations yields $\Delta$ and $\mu$ algebraically, and numerical spectra with phenomenological broadenings confirm that the features stay near these kinematic positions. At half filling, particle-hole symmetry fixes $\mu=1$, reducing the extraction to a single vHS measurement.

Load-bearing premise

The extraction rests on the spectral function keeping its BCS-like two-branch form with one momentum-independent gap $\Delta$; if pairing fluctuations distort that form, the kinematic relations for the vHS detunings no longer hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two resolved vHS features determine both $\Delta$ and $\mu$ from a single dataset, with no dispersion fitting.
  • The scheme remains usable in $k_z$-integrated spectra, where the strongest signal appears at $\mathbf{k}_\parallel=(0,\pi)$.
  • At half filling, one well-resolved vHS fixes $\Delta$ because particle-hole symmetry pins $\mu=1$.
  • The features sharpen relative to the background at stronger coupling, exactly where back-bending loses sensitivity.
  • Because the detuning–gap map is kinematic, it can serve as a cross-method benchmark for comparing gap values from different many-body theories.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If a fully self-consistent treatment introduces frequency-dependent pair-fluctuation self-energy, the vHS positions may shift or soften; this can be tested by computing spectra with finite pair momentum included and comparing extracted $(\Delta,\mu)$ with the kinematic map.
  • The same reasoning should transfer to other lattice geometries whenever the band has critical points and pairing is nearly momentum-independent, though the band-energy offsets $\epsilon_i$ would change.
  • A consistency check within one dataset—extracting $(\Delta,\mu)$ from two different vHS pairs—would reveal whether a single-gap description actually holds; disagreement would signal momentum-dependent pairing beyond the BCS-like ansatz.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a spectroscopic diagnostic for the 3D attractive Fermi Hubbard model: the rf detunings of four van Hove singularities are claimed to depend only on the pairing gap Δ and the effective chemical potential μ through the algebraic relations in Eq. (6), ν_i = ε_i − μ + sqrt((ε_i − μ)^2 + Δ^2), with ε_i = 0, 2/3, 4/3, 2 in units of 6t. The authors solve the G0G T-matrix pair-fluctuation equations self-consistently for μ, Δ_sc, and Δ_pg, then compute momentum-integrated and k_z-integrated rf spectra with phenomenological broadening parameters Γ0 and Γ1. They argue that two well-resolved vHS features determine Δ and μ algebraically, and that at half filling a single feature suffices because particle-hole symmetry fixes μ = 1. The numerical section shows broadened spectra with vHS features at positions consistent with Eq. (6) and argues that the features remain identifiable under realistic broadening. The paper explicitly acknowledges that the results are obtained within a particular approximation and that other many-body schemes may give different quantitative relations.

Significance. If the central claim is established, this is a useful and experimentally practical diagnostic: vHS-based markers survive partial momentum integration, become more prominent at strong coupling, and avoid full spectral fitting. The derivation of Eq. (6) is transparent and the algebraic inversion is simple. The paper also gives credit for being self-consistent: it solves the G0G equations numerically, identifies concrete observable EDCs at k_∥ = (0, π) as the most favorable, and candidly states the approximation-dependent limitations in the conclusion. However, the numerical support is substantially internal to the same BCS-like/G0G framework used to derive the kinematic relations, and the central extraction step is not actually performed on the broadened spectra. This currently limits the strength of the 'robust route' claim and requires additional numerical demonstration before the protocol can be regarded as validated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.E, Eq. (10)] The proposed two-marker inversion is never actually applied to positions read from broadened spectra. The text states that 'using the parameters of Fig. 4(c) ... the M1 and M2 detunings extracted from the spectrum' yield μ ≈ 1.0 and Δ ≈ 0.5, but no algorithm (peak detection, local maximum, or fit) is described, and the values coincide with the kinematic detunings obtained from the known self-consistent (μ, Δ). For the central claim to be supported, the authors must demonstrate the full pipeline: compute the broadened I(ν) and I(k, ν), identify feature positions with a specified operational definition, invert Eq. (10), and compare the resulting (Δ, μ) with the self-consistent input values for representative (U, n) and for several Γ0, Γ1 values, reporting the bias and any associated uncertainty.
  2. [Sec. III.B and Sec. II.D] Broadening-induced shifts of the vHS feature positions are asserted but not quantified. The paper claims that features 'remain centered close to the kinematic detunings' and are 'only weakly sensitive' to Γ0 and Γ1, but no numerical measure of the shift is given. Because the un-broadened features are logarithmic divergences (M1, M2) or square-root onsets (M0, M3), the maxima of the broadened asymmetric features can shift by an amount of order Γ. With Δ = 0.207 at U_c, n = 0.1 (Fig. 1) and Γ0 = Γ1 = 0.05, such a shift is a substantial fraction of Δ and of the inter-marker spacing; for overlapping features such as M0 and M1 in Fig. 4(c,d) the bias is likely larger. This directly affects the accuracy of the inversion, so a quantitative analysis is needed.
  3. [Sec. IV and Eq. (9)] The validation is circular with respect to the spectral-function ansatz. The broadened spectra are generated from Eq. (9), which is based on the same BCS-like two-branch quasiparticle form used to derive Eq. (6); the numerical results therefore cannot test whether a more general spectral function, such as one with a frequency-dependent pair-fluctuation self-energy or one obtained from the GG or G0G0 schemes, would place the vHS features at the same detunings. The conclusion explicitly acknowledges this limitation. The paper should state more prominently, including in the abstract, that the protocol is established within the G0G/BCS-like approximation, and should either provide independent benchmarks (e.g., spectra from a different approximation or from quantum Monte Carlo data where available) or clearly frame the results as a consistency check rather than a validation of the kinematic relations.
  4. [Eq. (8) and Eq. (9)] The phenomenological self-energy in Eq. (8) has a nonzero real part, but its effect on the vHS detuning positions is not analyzed. The kinematic relations in Eq. (6) are derived from the resonance condition ξ_k − ν + E_k = 0 with E_k = sqrt(ξ_k^2 + Δ^2), which ignores the real part of Σ^R_pg. In the full spectral function of Eq. (9), the quasiparticle dispersion is modified by ReΣ^R_pg, so the actual peak locations in Figs. 4–7 may differ from Eq. (6) not only through broadening but also through a real energy shift. The paper should either show that ReΣ^R_pg produces a negligible shift at the vHS momenta, or include this shift in the inversion formula.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The vertical lines in Fig. 4 are labeled collectively as 'M0–M3 vHSs'; since some of these detunings nearly coincide at n = 1, please distinguish the individual markers with different line styles or a legend.
  2. [Eq. (7)] The k_z-integrated expression contains an unexplained factor [1 − f(...)]^3 and a prefactor 1/π^3; please provide the full derivation or correct the expression, since Eq. (7) is used to generate the k_z-integrated spectra in Figs. 5–7.
  3. [Sec. II.D] The statement that Γ0 and Γ1 'become negligible at low temperatures due to the formation of stable pairing' is not supported by any temperature-dependent calculation; please clarify whether all presented results use fixed Γ0 = Γ1 = 0.05 and how the parameters are expected to scale with temperature.
  4. [Sec. III (terminology)] After broadening, the features are no longer true van Hove singularities but rounded maxima; consider using 'van Hove features' or 'vHS remnants' when referring to the broadened spectra to avoid overstating the singularity.
  5. [Reference [48]] The Supplemental Material citation lacks an arXiv identifier or DOI, which makes it difficult for readers to locate the self-consistent equations and the additional numerical results for n = 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and 0.8.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The kinematic relation itself is a legitimate model derivation, but the extraction validation in Sec. III.E is circular: the M1/M2 detunings are computed from the same self-consistent Δ,μ via Eq. (5), so inverting Eq. (10) returns exactly those inputs; broadening robustness is asserted, not measured.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.E, 'Extraction protocol for Δ and μ', near Eqs. (10)-(11)]
    "For concreteness, using the parameters of Fig. 4(c) (n=1, U=Uc), the M1 and M2 detunings extracted from the spectrum yield µ≈1.0 and ∆≈0.5, in quantitative agreement with the self-consistent input values."

    The 'detunings extracted from the spectrum' are the vertical-line positions shown in Fig. 4(c), which are computed from Eq. (5)/(6) using the self-consistent input (µ,∆) from the G0G calculation. No peak-finding algorithm for the broadened EDCs is described, and no broadened peak positions are reported. Substituting those input-derived ν_i into the inversion formula Eq. (10) identically gives back the same ∆ and µ. The quoted 'quantitative agreement' is therefore an algebraic identity, not a validation that features measured in broadened spectra can be inverted to recover ∆ and µ. The central protocol is thus checked only against the very parameters that generated the markers.

  2. self definitional [Section III.B, 'rf current and sensitivity to broadening']
    "The apparent peak maxima may change slightly when features overlap, but the underlying vHS markers are only weakly sensitive to Γ0 and Γ1 within the parameter range at low temperature."

    If the 'underlying vHS markers' are defined as the kinematic detunings of Eq. (5) (the vertical lines), then their insensitivity to Γ0 and Γ1 holds by definition, because Eq. (5) contains no broadening parameters. The paper never measures or tabulates the positions of the broadened spectral maxima in Figs. 4-7 and compares them to ν_i. Thus the statement that the features remain 'centered close to the kinematic detunings' is an assertion that the observed marker equals the defined marker, not a quantitative result from the broadened spectra. The shift of the observable peak under broadening—which is what matters for the claimed extraction—is left unquantified.

full rationale

The paper's core derivation of the vHS detuning relations, Eq. (6): ν_i = ε_i - μ + sqrt((ε_i-μ)^2 + Δ^2), is a standard algebraic consequence of the assumed BCS-like two-branch spectral function A(k,ω) = 2π[u_k^2 δ(ω-E_k)+v_k^2 δ(ω+E_k)] with E_k = sqrt(ξ_k^2+Δ^2), together with the rf resonance condition ξ_k - ν + E_k = 0. That part is self-contained and not circular: given the stated quasiparticle ansatz, the kinematic locations are determined solely by μ and Δ. The paper also acknowledges (in the Conclusion) that this ansatz is approximation-dependent and that different schemes (G0G0, G0G, GG) give different Δ values, which is an honest limitation rather than a circular move. The circularity lies in the validation of the proposed extraction protocol. In Sec. III.E, the authors claim that the M1 and M2 detunings 'extracted from the spectrum' give back the input μ≈1.0 and Δ≈0.5. But the spectra are computed from the same G0G self-consistent solution, and the vertical markers in Fig. 4 are placed at the Eq. (5) detunings computed from those same input parameters. Inverting Eq. (10) with these exact input-derived ν_i is a tautology. The paper does not demonstrate that the positions of the broadened, overlapping features in Figs. 4-7 actually coincide with those kinematic detunings to within the claimed accuracy; no error bars, bias estimates, or independent extraction from the broadened curves are given. The broadening-robustness claim in Sec. III.B is likewise definitional if 'vHS markers' means the Eq. (5) locations. The self-citations to the G0G formalism (Refs. [39,45,52]) are not load-bearing for this circularity, because the BCS-like spectral structure is independently standard and the experimental support cited includes external measurements. Overall, the central mathematical relation is independent, but the paper's headline practical claim—that two well-resolved singularities in a real broadened spectrum determine Δ and μ—is validated only by construction. Score 5 reflects one concrete by-construction validation step while the underlying derivation retains independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the BCS-like spectral ansatz with a single gap, the G0G pair-fluctuation approximation, the lowest-order rf response, and a phenomenological broadening model. There are no new conserved quantities, particles, or forces. The free parameters are the two broadening constants and, in a sense, the pseudogap energy scale itself, which is the target of extraction rather than an input. The paper acknowledges the approximation dependence but provides no independent external benchmark.

free parameters (3)
  • Γ0 (pair lifetime broadening) = 0, 0.05 (in units of 6t)
    Phenomenological parameter introduced in Eq. (8) to model quasiparticle peak broadening. The paper treats it as adjustable and does not fit it to data, but its value affects the visibility and centering of vHS features.
  • Γ1 (single-particle scattering background) = 0, 0.05 (in units of 6t)
    Second phenomenological broadening parameter in Eq. (8). Same as above; the paper claims vHS positions are 'weakly sensitive' to it within the range considered, but the claim is not quantified.
  • Δpg (pseudogap energy scale) = self-consistent, e.g., Δ=0.207 (units of 6t) for U=Uc, n=0.1
    Introduced via Σpg ≈ -Δpg^2 G0(-K), projecting the T-matrix self-energy onto a single energy scale. This is an approximation parameter that determines the total gap Δ used in the spectral function and hence in the vHS relations. It is computed self-consistently, but it is the quantity the paper aims to extract, so it is both an axiom and an output.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The fermionic self-energy can be decomposed into a superfluid condensate part and a pseudogap part, with the pseudogap captured by Σ_pg(K) ≈ -Δ_pg^2 G0(-K) (Q≈0 dominance).
    This is the G0G pair-fluctuation approximation, stated in Sec. II.A and acknowledged in the conclusion as an approximation that may not hold in fully self-consistent theories. The spectral function (Eq. 9) depends on this approximation.
  • domain assumption The spectral function retains BCS-like two-branch quasiparticle form with a single, momentum-independent gap Δ.
    Used in deriving the central kinematic relations (Eqs. 5-6) from the resonance condition. The paper argues this is supported by experiments, but it is an assumption about the strongly interacting system.
  • domain assumption The rf response is given by the lowest-order (T-matrix) expression in Eq. (3), with the final state being a non-interacting state.
    Standard linear response theory for rf spectroscopy, but it neglects final-state interactions and higher-order processes.
  • ad hoc to paper The phenomenological broadening parameters Γ0 and Γ1 are constant (not frequency-dependent) and have a limited effect on vHS positions.
    The broadening model in Eq. (8) is introduced ad hoc to simulate experimental conditions. The paper shows numerically that the vHS features remain centered near kinematic detunings, but this is not a first-principles result.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Extracting the pairing gap from van Hove singularities in rf spectra of the Fermi Hubbard model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y434CPD4

@misc{pith2026260806883,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Extracting the pairing gap from van Hove singularities in rf spectra of the Fermi Hubbard model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y434CPD4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06883}
}
abstract

We show that van Hove singularities in rf spectra of the 3D attractive Fermi Hubbard model provide a robust route to extracting the pairing gap. Four types of singularities are classified, and their spectral positions are shown to depend solely on the pairing gap $\Delta$ and chemical potential $\mu$ through simple algebraic relations. Measuring two well-resolved singularities therefore determines both parameters without requiring full spectral fitting. Numerical simulations incorporating phenomenological lifetime and scattering broadenings confirm that these features remain visible in both momentum-integrated and $k_z$-integrated spectra, and become more pronounced at stronger coupling where conventional back-bending methods lose sensitivity. At half filling, particle-hole symmetry fixes $\mu$, reducing the extraction to a single singularity measurement. These results establish vHS analysis as a practical spectroscopic diagnostic for pairing in quantum-simulated 3D Fermi Hubbard systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06883 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Representative spectral function of the 3D attractive FHM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) rf current I(ν), i.e., the momentum-integrated rf spec￾trum, at Tc for U/6t = −1.8 and n = 0.1. The four types of vHSs are labeled on the curve. (b) The z-integrated, partially momentum-resolved rf spectrum I(k, ν) plotted along the projected face-diagonal direction k∥ = (k, k). The red dashed lines align the corresponding vHS features in (a) and (b). where kz0 (kx, ky, ν), defined as the root of ξk − ν + Ek = 0… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. (b). As the density (and chemical potential) increases to￾ward half filling, the left-edge peak and the M1 peak approach each other, and the spectral weight of the former becomes so suppressed that the M1 peak becomes dominant. Upon broad￾ening, the two features merge into a single dominant peak, as seen in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The kz-integrated, (kx, ky)-resolved rf spectra I(k, ν) at Tc along the face-diagonal direction k∥ = (k, k) for (a) n = 0.1, U = Uc, (b) n = 0.1, U/6t = −2, (c) n = 1, U = Uc, and (d) n = 1, U/6t = −2. The same color saturation value is applied across all panels to enh…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: EDCs I(k∥, ν) at the center and edge of the first Brillouin zone for (a) n = 0.1, U = Uc, (b) n = 0.1, U/6t = −2, (c) n = 1, U = Uc, and (d) n = 1, U/6t = −2. The blue solid and red dashed lines denote the EDCs at k∥ = (0, 0) and k∥ = (π, π), respectively. The vertical…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Q. J. Chen, J. Stajic, S. N. Tan, and K. Levin, BCS–BEC crossover: From high-temperature superconductors to ultracold superfluids, Phys. Rep.412, 1 (2005). 8

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 885 (2008)

    2008

  3. [3]

    Zwerger(ed.),The BCS-BEC crossover and the unitary Fermi gas, V ol

    W. Zwerger(ed.),The BCS-BEC crossover and the unitary Fermi gas, V ol. 836 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Quantum simulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nat. Phys.8, 267 (2012)

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    R. A. Hart, P. M. Duarte, T.-L. Yang, X. Liu, T. Paiva, E. Khatami, R. T. Scalettar, N. Trivedi, D. A. Huse, and R. G. Hulet, Observation of antiferromagnetic correlations in the Hubbard model with ultracold atoms, Nature519, 211 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Quantum simulations with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Science357, 995 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    Jaksch, C

    D. Jaksch, C. Bruder, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner, and P. Zoller, Cold bosonic atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 3108 (1998)

    1998

  8. [8]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Feshbach res- onances in ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    2010

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Timusk and B

    T. Timusk and B. Statt, The pseudogap in high-temperature su- perconductors: an experimental survey, Rep. Prog. Phys.62, 61 (1999)

    1999

  2. [10]

    Q. J. Chen, I. Kosztin, B. Jank ´o, and K. Levin, Pairing fluc- tuation theory of superconducting properties in underdoped to overdoped cuprates, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 4708 (1998)

    1998

  3. [11]

    Q. J. Chen, Z. Q. Wang, R. Boyack, S. L. Yang, and K. Levin, When superconductivity crosses over: From BCS to BEC, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 025002 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    R. T. Scalettar, E. Y . Loh, J. E. Gubernatis, A. Moreo, S. R. White, D. J. Scalapino, R. L. Sugar, and E. Dagotto, Phase dia- gram of the two-dimensional negative-UHubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 1407 (1989)

    1989

  5. [13]

    Kyung, S

    B. Kyung, S. Allen, and A.-M. S. Tremblay, Pairing fluctuations and pseudogaps in the attractive Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 64, 075116 (2001)

    2001

  6. [14]

    Honerkamp and W

    C. Honerkamp and W. Hofstetter, Ultracold Fermions and the SU(N)Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 170403 (2004)

    2004

  7. [15]

    Mondaini, P

    R. Mondaini, P. Nikoli ´c, and M. Rigol, Mott-insulator–to– superconductor transition in a two-dimensional superlattice, Phys. Rev. A92, 013601 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Moreo and D

    A. Moreo and D. J. Scalapino, Cold attractive spin polarized Fermi lattice gases and the doped positiveUHubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 216402 (2007)

    2007

  9. [17]

    Paiva, R

    T. Paiva, R. R. dos Santos, R. T. Scalettar, and P. J. H. Den- teneer, Critical temperature for the two-dimensional attractive Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B69, 184501 (2004)

    2004

  10. [18]

    V . B. Shenoy, Phase diagram of the attractive Hubbard model with inhomogeneous interactions, Phys. Rev. B78, 134503 (2008)

    2008

  11. [19]

    Micnas, J

    R. Micnas, J. Ranninger, and S. Robaszkiewicz, Superconduc- tivity in narrow-band systems with local nonretarded attractive interactions, Rev. Mod. Phys.62, 113 (1990)

    1990

  12. [20]

    Gor’kov and T

    L. Gor’kov and T. Melik-Barkhudarov, Contribution to the the- ory of superfluidity in an imperfect Fermi gas, Sov. Phys. JETP 13, 1018 (1961)

    1961

  13. [21]

    Nozieres and S

    P. Nozieres and S. Schmitt-Rink, Bose condensation in an at- tractive fermion gas: From weak to strong coupling supercon- ductivity, J. Low Temp. Phys.59, 195 (1985)

    1985

  14. [22]

    L. P. Kadanoff and P. C. Martin, Theory of many-particle sys- tems. II. Superconductivity, Phys. Rev.124, 670 (1961)

    1961

  15. [23]

    Q. J. Chen,Generalization of BCS theory to short coher- ence length superconductors: A BCS-BEC crossover sce- nario, Ph.D. thesis, University of Chicago (2000), see also arXiv:1801.06266

    2000 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Tchernyshyov, Noninteracting cooper pairs inside a pseudo- gap, Phys

    O. Tchernyshyov, Noninteracting cooper pairs inside a pseudo- gap, Phys. Rev. B56, 3372 (1997)

    1997

  17. [25]

    Haussmann, Properties of a Fermi liquid at the superfluid transition in the crossover region between BCS superconduc- tivity and Bose-Einstein condensation, Phys

    R. Haussmann, Properties of a Fermi liquid at the superfluid transition in the crossover region between BCS superconduc- tivity and Bose-Einstein condensation, Phys. Rev. B49, 12975 (1994)

    1994

  18. [26]

    Haussmann, M

    R. Haussmann, M. Punk, and W. Zwerger, Spectral functions and rf response of ultracold fermionic atoms, Phys. Rev. A80, 063612 (2009)

    2009

  19. [27]

    Schneider, L

    U. Schneider, L. Hackerm ¨uller, J. P. Ronzheimer, S. Will, S. Braun, T. Best, I. Bloch, E. Demler, S. Mandt, D. Rasch, et al., Fermionic transport and out-of-equilibrium dynamics in a homogeneous Hubbard model with ultracold atoms, Nat. Phys. 8, 213 (2012)

    2012

  20. [28]

    Mitra, P

    D. Mitra, P. T. Brown, E. Guardado-Sanchez, S. S. Kondov, T. Devakul, D. A. Huse, P. Schauß, and W. S. Bakr, Quantum gas microscopy of an attractive Fermi–Hubbard system, Nat. Phys.14, 173 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Hackerm ¨uller, U

    L. Hackerm ¨uller, U. Schneider, M. Moreno-Cardoner, T. Kita- gawa, T. Best, S. Will, E. Demler, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and B. Paredes, Anomalous expansion of attractively interacting Fermionic atoms in an optical lattice, Science327, 1621 (2010)

    2010

  22. [30]

    M. Gall, C. F. Chan, N. Wurz, and M. K ¨ohl, Simulating a Mott insulator using attractive interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 010403 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    P. T. Brown, E. Guardado-Sanchez, B. M. Spar, E. W. Huang, T. P. Devereaux, and W. S. Bakr, Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy of a Fermi–Hubbard system, Nat. Phys.16, 26 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Zhu et al

    D.-Z. Zhu et al. , Observation of superfluidity in a 3D attractive fermionic Hubbard model (2026), submitted to Nature

    2026

  25. [33]

    T ¨orm¨a, Physics of ultracold Fermi gases revealed by spectro- scopies, Phys

    P. T ¨orm¨a, Physics of ultracold Fermi gases revealed by spectro- scopies, Phys. Scr.91, 043006 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    C. J. Vale and M. Zwierlein, Spectroscopic probes of quantum gases, Nat. Phys.17, 1305 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    T ¨orm¨a and P

    P. T ¨orm¨a and P. Zoller, Laser probing of atomic cooper pairs, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 487 (2000)

    2000

  28. [36]

    C. Chin, M. Bartenstein, A. Altmeyer, S. Riedl, S. Jochim, J. Denschlag, and R. Grimm, Observation of the pairing gap in a strongly interacting Fermi gas, Science305, 1128 (2004)

    2004

  29. [37]

    C. H. Schunck, Y .-i. Shin, A. Schirotzek, and W. Ketterle, De- termination of the fermion pair size in a resonantly interacting superfluid, Nature454, 739 (2008)

    2008

  30. [38]

    Schirotzek, Y .-i

    A. Schirotzek, Y .-i. Shin, C. H. Schunck, and W. Ketterle, Determination of the superfluid gap in atomic Fermi gases by quasiparticle spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 140403 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    Q. J. Chen, Y . He, C.-C. Chien, and K. Levin, Theory of radio frequency spectroscopy experiments in ultracold Fermi gases and their relation to photoemission in the cuprates, Rep. Prog. Phys.72, 122501 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    J. T. Stewart, J. P. Gaebler, and D. S. Jin, Using photoemission spectroscopy to probe a strongly interacting Fermi gas, Nature 454, 744 (2008)

    2008

  33. [42]

    Y . Sagi, T. E. Drake, R. Paudel, R. Chapurin, and D. S. Jin, Breakdown of the Fermi liquid description for strongly inter- acting Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 075301 (2015)

    2015

  34. [43]

    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,et al., Observation and quantification of the pseudogap in unitary Fermi gases, Nature 626, 288 (2024). 9

    2024

  35. [44]

    Datta, V

    S. Datta, V . N. Singh, and P. Majumdar, Radio-frequency spec- troscopy of the attractive Hubbard model in a trap, Phys. Rev. A89, 053609 (2014)

    2014

  36. [45]

    Q. J. Chen, I. Kosztin, B. Jank´o, and K. Levin, Superconducting transitions from the pseudogap state:d-wave symmetry, lattice, and low-dimensional effects, Phys. Rev. B59, 7083 (1999)

    1999

  37. [46]

    Q. J. Chen, K. Levin, and I. Kosztin, Superconducting phase coherence in the presence of a pseudogap: Relation to specific heat, tunneling, and vortex core spectroscopies, Phys. Rev. B 63, 184519 (2001)

    2001

  38. [47]

    Q. J. Chen and K. Levin, Momentum resolved Radio Frequency spectroscopy in trapped Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 190402 (2009)

    2009

  39. [48]

    (2026), see Supplemental Material for details of the pairing fluctuation theory, and additional numerical results for differ- ent densities

    2026

  40. [49]

    Czycholl,Solid State Theory, V olume 1: Basics: Phonons and Electrons in Crystals(Springer Nature, 2023)

    G. Czycholl,Solid State Theory, V olume 1: Basics: Phonons and Electrons in Crystals(Springer Nature, 2023)

    2023

  41. [50]

    pairing approxima- tion

    J. Maly, B. Jank ´o, and K. Levin, Numerical studies of thes- wave pseudogap state and relatedT c: the “pairing approxima- tion” theory, Physica C321, 113 (1999)

    1999

  42. [51]

    M. R. Norman, M. Randeria, H. Ding, and J. C. Campuzano, Phenomenology of the low-energy spectral function in high-Tc superconductors, Phys. Rev. B57, R11093 (1998)

    1998

  43. [52]

    C. Li, L. Sun, K. Zhang, J. Wu, Y . Wu, D. Yuan, P. Chen, and Q. Chen, rf spectra and pseudogap in ultracold Fermi gases across the BCS-BEC crossover from pairing fluctuation theory (2026), arXiv:2604.06004 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2026 arXiv

  44. [53]

    J. P. Gaebler, J. T. Stewart, T. E. Drake, D. S. Jin, A. Perali, P. Pieri, and G. C. Strinati, Observation of pseudogap behaviour in a strongly interacting Fermi gas, Nat. Phys.6, 569 (2010)

    2010

  45. [54]

    Shao, Y .-X

    H.-J. Shao, Y .-X. Wang, D.-Z. Zhu, Y .-S. Zhu, H.-N. Sun, S.-Y . Chen, C. Zhang, Z.-J. Fan, Y . Deng, X.-C. Yao,et al., Antifer- romagnetic phase transition in a 3D fermionic Hubbard model, Nature632, 267 (2024)

    2024

  46. [55]

    K. K. Nielsen, M. Zwierlein, and G. M. Bruun, Dual spec- troscopy of quantum simulated Fermi-Hubbard systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 043401 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

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