Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Light-enhanced dipolar interactions between exciton polaritons

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that coupling excitons to cavity photons enhances dipolariton interactions by forcing exciton pairs to scatter at negative collision energies, yielding polariton interaction strengths up to an order of magnitude larger…

desk verdict A careful Lippmann-Schwinger treatment of dipolariton scattering with a plausible off-shell enhancement mechanism, but the headline numbers rest on an unconstrained pseudopotential cutoff and the vacuum claim in the abstract is unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.16377 v2 pith:3ZT7XAUP submitted 2024-12-20 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.quant-gas

Yasufumi Nakano , Olivier Bleu , Brendan C. Mulkerin , Jesper Levinsen , Meera M. Parish This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.quant-gas
keywords excitonpolaritonsdipolaritonsdipolarinteractionslight-mattercouplingT-matrixscatteringbilayersemiconductorstransitionmetaldichalcogenidespolariton
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 asks whether the weak mutual repulsion between exciton polaritons, which has blocked single-photon-level quantum effects, can be strengthened by giving polaritons a permanent electric dipole moment. It argues that dipolaritons in a semiconductor bilayer inherit both a large oscillator strength from intralayer excitons and a long-range dipole-dipole repulsion from interlayer excitons. The central claim is that coupling to cavity light enhances this repulsion by letting the constituent excitons scatter at negative collision energies that ordinary exciton collisions cannot reach, and that this light enhancement is stronger for the long-range dipolar channel than for short-range interactions. If correct, dipolariton interactions can be boosted to roughly an order of magnitude above conventional polaritons, bringing polariton blockade and strongly correlated photon states closer within existing bilayer systems.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-particle excitonic scattering $T$-matrix $T_{ij}(k',k;E)$, obtained from the Lippmann-Schwinger integral equation projected onto the $s$-wave channel. Interactions act only among excitons, while the cavity photons enter through the two-particle Green's function built from the polariton dispersions. The lower-polariton interaction constant $g_{LL}$ is the zero-momentum, zero-center-of-mass $T$-matrix projected onto the Hopfield coefficients, $g_{LL} = (X^L_{1,0})^4 T_{11} + (X^L_{2,0})^4 T_{22} + (Y^L_0)^4 T_{33} + 2 (X^L_{2,0})^2 (Y^L_0)^2 T_{23}$. The mechanism is that light-matter coupling evaluates these $T$-matrix elements at $E = 2E^L_0$, below any two-exciton continuum, where the $T$-matrix is strongly energy dependent; the dipolar potential $V_{\mathrm{IX}}(r) = D^2/r_0^3$ for $r<r_0$ and $D^2/r^3$ for $r>r_0$ makes this energy dependence particularly pronounced.

What would settle it

Measure the lower-polariton interaction strength, for example through polariton blockade or four-wave mixing, as a function of interlayer-exciton detuning in a MoS2 homobilayer microcavity. If $g_{LL}$ does not peak at finite negative $\delta_{\mathrm{IX}}$ and then fall as the polariton approaches the lower hybrid-exciton edge, or if its magnitude is not several times the conventional-polariton value, the central claim would be contradicted. Alternatively, an exact microscopic two-indirect-exciton calculation using the bilayer Coulomb Hamiltonian and evaluating the $T$-matrix at $E = 2E^L_0$ would test whether the pseudopotential's off-shell energy dependence is realistic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the lower-polariton interaction constant $g_{LL}$ in a bilayer dipolariton system is substantially enhanced when light-matter coupling shifts the two-polariton collision energy below any two-exciton threshold. Summing the full Born series through a Lippmann-Schwinger equation, the authors find that the excitonic $T$-matrix grows with increasing negative collision energy, and grows more strongly for the long-range dipolar IX-IX interaction than for the short-range DX-DX interaction. Consequently, a polariton with a significant indirect-exciton fraction but still a non-negligible photon fraction can have interactions many times larger than a conventional bilayer polariton. The effect is missed by standard Born-approximation treatments, is sensitive to the dielectric environment, and is largest for transition metal dichalcogenide bilayers in vacuum.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted size of the enhancement rests on the assumed shape of the dipolar interaction potential at short distances, whose cutoff is fixed only by matching one zero-momentum scattering amplitude, so the energy dependence that drives the effect is not independently pinned down.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Dipolariton interactions can be enhanced by roughly an order of magnitude over conventional bilayer polaritons while keeping a substantial photon fraction, making single-photon-level nonlinearities more accessible.
  • The enhancement grows with layer separation and dipole moment, so increasing the interlayer separation is a direct experimental lever on $g_{LL}$.
  • The optimal operating point is a TMD homobilayer in vacuum with $\delta_{\mathrm{IX}} \lesssim \min(0,\delta_C)$ and $\delta_C \lesssim \Omega$, where the lower polariton has both a large indirect-exciton fraction and a non-negligible photon fraction.
  • Standard Born-approximation treatments underestimate the interactions because they miss the energy dependence of the $T$-matrix; the off-shell approximation, which evaluates exciton scattering at the polariton energy, reproduces the exact result over a wide range of detunings.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the same off-shell enhancement mechanism should operate in other long-range-interacting polariton platforms, such as Rydberg exciton-polaritons or electrically induced dipoles in single layers, where the $T$-matrix has comparable energy dependence; measuring $g_{LL}$ versus detuning in those systems would test the mechanism's generality.
  • Editorial inference: because the enhancement is controlled by the collision energy relative to the two-exciton threshold, engineering the polariton dispersion through photon mass, multiple cavity modes, or phonon coupling could allow dynamic tuning of interactions rather than only static detuning.
  • Editorial inference: the predicted sensitivity to the dielectric environment implies that changing the cladding or encapsulation of the bilayer should shift $g_{LL}$; an experiment tracing $g_{LL}$ across different substrates would provide a clean test of the pseudopotential's short-distance cutoff.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a theory of dipolariton-polariton scattering in semiconductor bilayers, starting from a four-mode Hamiltonian that couples a cavity photon to two direct excitons and one indirect exciton. The interaction is treated with model pseudopotentials for DX-DX and IX-IX scattering whose parameters are matched to microscopic Born amplitudes, and scattering is solved exactly using a coupled-channel Lippmann-Schwinger equation. The central claim is that light-matter coupling enhances dipolariton interactions by forcing excitons to scatter at negative collision energies, that this enhancement is larger for long-range dipolar interactions than for short-range intralayer ones, and that the effect can reach an order of magnitude relative to conventional polaritons. The paper also claims that the largest interactions occur for TMD bilayers in vacuum.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper identifies a concrete and experimentally relevant route to strongly enhanced polariton nonlinearities: hybrid interlayer excitons in TMD bilayers, where the dipole moment and the light-matter coupling act synergistically. The work goes beyond the standard Born approximation used in earlier dipolariton theories and provides a tractable coupled-channel formalism with a direct check of the off-shell approximation against the full calculation. The paper is careful in deriving the Green's functions and the projection onto s-wave scattering, and it makes a falsifiable prediction about the dependence of the LP-LP interaction on detuning and layer separation. However, the most headline quantitative claims, especially the 'vacuum' optimum and the order-of-magnitude enhancement, rest on model assumptions whose robustness is not fully demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Conclusions] The abstract states that 'the largest dipolariton interactions are achieved for transition metal dichalcogenide bilayers in vacuum,' but no calculation of the dielectric environment appears in the main text or the Supplemental Material. The microscopic Hamiltonian in SM Eq. (S5) uses a uniform dielectric constant, and the only mention of non-uniform dielectric effects is a remark that they do not significantly change the DX-DX Born result. The claim about vacuum is therefore unsupported by the presented results; either a concrete calculation comparing vacuum, encapsulated, or substrate-screened geometries must be added, or the claim should be removed or substantially tempered.
  2. [Eq. (7) and SM Eq. (S14)] The short-distance cutoff r0 of the dipolar pseudopotential is fixed solely by matching the zero-momentum Born amplitude g_IX^(0) from a microscopic model. This matching constrains only the q=0 Fourier component of the potential. The enhancement mechanism, however, relies on the off-shell energy dependence of the T-matrix at the negative collision energy E=2E_L^0, which is not constrained by this matching. A different, equally reasonable short-range regularization that reproduces the same g_IX^(0) could therefore change the quantitative predictions in Fig. 3, including the claimed order-of-magnitude enhancement and the ordering between dipolar and intralayer interactions. The authors should demonstrate robustness of the central quantitative claims to the choice of short-distance cutoff shape, for example by comparing several regularizations or by adding an effective-range constraint.
  3. [Model, Eq. (1), and Exciton interaction potentials] The paper describes the calculation as 'exact' but neglects DX-IX interactions, as stated in the main text. Since the central result gLL in Eq. (10) includes the cross-channel T23 term, a direct short-range DX-IX scattering potential would modify the coupled-channel T-matrix and could alter the quantitative enhancement. The statement that including such interactions 'would generally lead to a further enhancement' is an assertion without a calculation. The authors should either provide an estimate of these omitted terms or explicitly frame the results as applying to a model with diagonal exciton interactions only.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2(b) and Eq. (9)] The fit value a2D/a0=0.42 is mentioned in the caption but the fitting procedure and the range of collision energies used are not described; a brief note in the text or SM would help reproducibility.
  2. [Fig. 3(a)] The caption says that black dashed lines show the off-shell approximation for each value of d/a0, but visually only one black dashed line appears; please clarify whether the lines coincide or whether the caption should read 'black dashed lines' collectively.
  3. [Eq. (8) and SM Eq. (S29)] The main text presents the s-wave projected potential V(k',k) without explicitly defining its relation to the l-wave projection V^(l)(k',k) used in the SM; defining this in the main text would improve readability.
  4. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption lists parameters including t/epsilon_X=0.33, but the tunneling parameter is later set by t=t0 exp(-d/a0) with t0 determined at d/a0=1; specifying this consistency in the caption would avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the light-enhanced dipolariton interaction is computed from explicit Lippmann-Schwinger equations, with pseudopotential parameters matched to zero-momentum Born amplitudes rather than to the predicted negative-energy enhancement.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that light-matter coupling enhances dipolariton interactions by forcing excitons to scatter at negative collision energies, and that this enhancement is larger for long-range dipolar than for short-range intralayer interactions—is obtained by solving the coupled Lippmann-Schwinger equation, Eq. (8), with the model potentials in Eqs. (6) and (7). The potential parameters are fixed in the Supplemental Material by matching only the zero-momentum Born amplitudes to microscopic values: V0 = 6εX/π (SM Eq. S13) and r0 = 3πD^2/g_IX^(0) (SM Eq. S14). This matching constrains the on-shell, zero-energy first-order Born amplitude; it does not specify the off-shell T-matrix at the negative collision energies E = 2EL0 that drive the claimed enhancement. That off-shell energy dependence is an emergent output of the integral equation, so the central prediction is not equivalent to the fitted input. The paper also internally validates the mechanism: the off-shell approximation—evaluating Eq. (8) without light-matter coupling but at polariton energies—reproduces the exact calculation over a large detuning range in Fig. 3(a), showing that the light coupling enters through the collision energy rather than being inserted by hand. Self-citations to the same authors' Ref. [48] are used for context, for the generalized Lippmann-Schwinger framework, and for the conventional-polariton comparison, but Eq. (8) and the Green's functions are displayed and derived in the paper and Supplemental Material, so the argument does not reduce to a self-citation. The residual caveat—that r0 is fixed only by the zero-momentum Born amplitude, so the off-shell T-matrix may be sensitive to the potential shape—is a model-robustness concern, not a circularity: no equation in the paper defines the claimed enhancement in terms of the fitted r0. Overall, the derivation is self-contained and not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation introduces no new physical entities. It relies on model interaction potentials whose parameters are matched to microscopic Born amplitudes, on a set of standard scattering axioms, and on simplifying assumptions about the bilayer geometry and mass ratios.

free parameters (3)
  • V0 = 6εX/π
    Height of DX-DX soft-core potential, fixed by matching the Born approximation to the microscopic result g_DX^(0) ≈ 6εX a0^2 (SM Eq. S13).
  • r0 = r0 = 3πd²/(2µa0 g_IX^(0))
    Short-distance cutoff of IX-IX dipolar potential, fixed by matching the Born approximation to the microscopic IX-IX interaction (SM Eq. S14).
  • a2D = a2D/a0 = 0.42
    2D scattering length fitted to the low-energy T-matrix of the model DX-DX interaction for comparison with the universal low-energy expression (Fig. 2b, main text).
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Two-particle scattering is solved via the Lippmann-Schwinger equation with s-wave projection.
    Used throughout the derivation of the T-matrix (Eq. 8 and SM Eq. S29).
  • domain assumption Excitons and cavity photons are treated as structureless bosons; light does not modify exciton wavefunctions.
    The model Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) and the discussion following Eq. (6) assume bosonic operators and neglect light-induced changes to the exciton wave function.
  • domain assumption The IX-IX potential has the form of a soft repulsive core plus a 1/r^3 dipolar tail (Eq. 7), with parameters matched to microscopic Born amplitudes.
    The potential shape and the matching of r0 and V0 are described in Eq. (7) and SM Sec. I.
  • domain assumption DX-IX interactions are neglected because they are short-range and smaller than the retained terms.
    Stated in the 'Exciton interaction potentials' section, with the caveat that including them would further enhance interactions.
  • domain assumption Equal electron and hole masses and homogeneous bilayer (homobilayer) with equal DX and IX masses.
    Assumed in the model section and SM, leading to µ = mX/4 and mX = m_e + m_h.
  • domain assumption The cavity photon mass is taken as 10^-5 mX.
    Standard approximation for a microcavity photon, stated in the model section.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Light-enhanced dipolar interactions between exciton polaritons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3ZT7XAUP

@misc{pith2026241216377,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Light-enhanced dipolar interactions between exciton polaritons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3ZT7XAUP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.16377}
}
read the original abstract

We consider the scenario of excitons in a semiconductor bilayer that are strongly coupled to cavity photons, leading to the formation of dipolar exciton polaritons (dipolaritons). Using a realistic pseudopotential for the dipolar interactions, we exactly determine the scattering between dipolaritons, accounting for the hybridization between interlayer and intralayer excitons. Similar to conventional non-dipolar polaritons, we find that the light-matter coupling enhances the interactions between dipolaritons by forcing excitons to scatter at energies that would otherwise be forbidden in ordinary exciton-exciton collisions. However, we show that this light enhancement is larger for long-range dipolar interactions than for short-range intralayer interactions, and is sensitive to the (non-uniform) dielectric environment of the bilayer. Crucially, we find that the largest dipolariton interactions are achieved for transition metal dichalcogenide bilayers in vacuum. Our results thus reveal the optimal dipolariton setup for realizing strong photon correlations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.16377 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic of the dipolariton in a bilayer. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Schematic of the DX-DX (left) and IX-IX (right) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) LP-LP interaction constant at zero momentum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Excitonic oscillator-strength saturation dominates polariton-polariton interactions

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-01 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    By fitting the lower and upper polariton Bogoliubov dispersions simultaneously, the authors find that oscillator-strength saturation contributes about 96% of the polariton-polariton interaction in a GaAs microcavity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [48]

    O. Bleu, G. Li, J. Levinsen, and M. M. Parish, Po- lariton interactions in microcavities with atomically thin semiconductor layers, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043185 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    A. V. Kavokin, J. Baumberg, G. Malpuech, and F. Laussy, Microcavities, 2nd ed. (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [2]

    Carusotto and C

    I. Carusotto and C. Ciuti, Quantum fluids of light , Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 299 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [3]

    Kasprzak, M

    J. Kasprzak, M. Richard, S. Kundermann, A. Baas, P. Jeambrun, J. M. J. Keeling, F. Marchetti, M. Szyma´ nska, R. Andr´ e, J. Staehli,et al., Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton polaritons , Nature 443, 409 (2006)

    work page 2006

  5. [4]

    Balili, V

    R. Balili, V. Hartwell, D. Snoke, L. Pfeiffer, and K. West, Bose-Einstein condensation of microcavity polaritons in a trap, Science 316, 1007 (2007)

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    H. Deng, H. Haug, and Y. Yamamoto, Exciton-polariton Bose-Einstein condensation, Reviews of Modern Physics 82, 1489 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [6]

    A. Amo, J. Lefr` ere, S. Pigeon, C. Adrados, C. Ciuti, I. Carusotto, R. Houdr´ e, E. Giacobino, and A. Bramati, Superfluidity of polaritons in semiconductor microcavi- ties, Nature Physics 5, 805 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [7]

    K. G. Lagoudakis, M. Wouters, M. Richard, A. Baas, I. Carusotto, R. Andr´ e, L. S. Dang, and B. Deveaud- Pl´ edran,Quantized vortices in an exciton-polariton con- densate, Nature Physics 4, 706 (2008)

    work page 2008

Show all 72 references
  1. [8]

    Sanvitto, F

    D. Sanvitto, F. M. Marchetti, M. H. Szyma´ nska, G. Tosi, M. Baudisch, F. P. Laussy, D. N. Krizhanovskii, M. S. Skolnick, L. Marrucci, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, J. Bloch, C. Tejedor, and L. Vi˜ na,Persistent currents and quantized vortices in a polariton superfluid , Nature Physics 6, 5...

    2010

  2. [9]

    Lerario, A

    G. Lerario, A. Fieramosca, F. Barachati, D. Ballarini, K. S. Daskalakis, L. Dominici, M. De Giorgi, S. A. Maier, G. Gigli, S. K´ ena-Cohen, and D. Sanvitto,Room- temperature superfluidity in a polariton condensate , Na- ture Physics 13, 837 (2017)

    2017

  3. [10]

    St-Jean, V

    P. St-Jean, V. Goblot, E. Galopin, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, T. Ozawa, L. Le Gratiet, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Lasing in topological edge states of a one- dimensional lattice, Nature Photonics 11, 651 (2017)

    2017

  4. [11]

    Klembt, T

    S. Klembt, T. H. Harder, O. A. Egorov, K. Winkler, R. Ge, M. A. Bandres, M. Emmerling, L. Worschech, T. C. H. Liew, M. Segev, C. Schneider, and S. H¨ ofling, Exciton-polariton topological insulator , Nature 562, 552 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    Gianfrate, O

    A. Gianfrate, O. Bleu, L. Dominici, V. Ardizzone, M. De Giorgi, D. Ballarini, G. Lerario, K. W. West, L. N. Pfeiffer, D. D. Solnyshkov, D. Sanvitto, and G. Malpuech, Measurement of the quantum geometric tensor and of the anomalous Hall drift , Nature 578, 381 (2020)

    2020

  6. [13]

    Pieczarka, E

    M. Pieczarka, E. Estrecho, S. Ghosh, M. Wurdack, M. Steger, D. W. Snoke, K. West, L. N. Pfeiffer, T. C. H. Liew, A. G. Truscott, and E. A. Ostrovskaya, Topological phase transition in an all-optical exciton-polariton lattice, Optica 8, 1084 (2021)

    2021

  7. [14]

    D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, P. St-Jean, S. Ravets, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Microcavity polaritons for topo- logical photonics, Opt. Mater. Express 11, 1119 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    Wertz, A

    E. Wertz, A. Amo, D. D. Solnyshkov, L. Ferrier, T. C. H. Liew, D. Sanvitto, P. Senellart, I. Sagnes, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, A. V. Kavokin, G. Malpuech, and J. Bloch, Propaga- tion and Amplification Dynamics of 1D Polariton Con- densates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 216404 (2012)

    2012

  9. [16]

    T. Gao, P. S. Eldridge, T. C. H. Liew, S. I. Tsintzos, G. Stavrinidis, G. Deligeorgis, Z. Hatzopoulos, and P. G. Savvidis, Polariton condensate transistor switch , Phys. Rev. B 85, 235102 (2012)

    2012

  10. [17]

    Ballarini, M

    D. Ballarini, M. De Giorgi, E. Cancellieri, R. Houdr´ e, E. Giacobino, R. Cingolani, A. Bramati, G. Gigli, and D. Sanvitto, All-optical polariton transistor, Nature Com- munications 4, 1778 (2013)

    2013

  11. [18]

    H. Li, F. Chen, H. Jia, Z. Ye, H. Zhou, S. Luo, J. Shi, Z. Sun, H. Xu, H. Xu, T. Byrnes, Z. Chen, and J. Wu, All-optical temporal logic gates in localized exciton polari- tons, Nature Photonics 18, 864 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Sanvitto and S

    D. Sanvitto and S. K´ ena-Cohen, The road towards po- laritonic devices, Nature Materials 15, 1061 (2016)

    2016

  13. [20]

    Verger, C

    A. Verger, C. Ciuti, and I. Carusotto, Polariton quan- tum blockade in a photonic dot , Phys. Rev. B 73, 193306 (2006)

    2006

  14. [21]

    Mu˜ noz-Matutano, A

    G. Mu˜ noz-Matutano, A. Wood, M. Johnsson, X. Vidal, B. Q. Baragiola, A. Reinhard, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, J. Bloch, A. Amo, G. Nogues, B. Besga, M. Richard, and 6 T. Volz, Emergence of quantum correlations from inter- acting fibre-cavity polaritons , Nature Materials 18, 213 (2019)

    2019

  15. [22]

    Delteil, T

    A. Delteil, T. Fink, A. Schade, S. H¨ ofling, C. Schneider, and A. ˙Imamo˘ glu,Towards polariton blockade of confined exciton–polaritons, Nature materials 18, 219 (2019)

    2019

  16. [23]

    Gerace, H

    D. Gerace, H. E. T¨ ureci, A. Imamoglu, V. Giovannetti, and R. Fazio, The quantum-optical Josephson interfer- ometer, Nature Physics 5, 281 (2009)

    2009

  17. [24]

    Gerace, F

    D. Gerace, F. Laussy, and D. Sanvitto, Quantum nonlin- earities at the single-particle level , Nature Materials 18, 200 (2019)

    2019

  18. [25]

    T. C. H. Liew, The future of quantum in polariton systems: opinion , Optical Materials Express 13, 1938 (2023)

    2023

  19. [26]

    Rivera, J

    P. Rivera, J. R. Schaibley, A. M. Jones, J. S. Ross, S. Wu, G. Aivazian, P. Klement, K. Seyler, G. Clark, N. J. Ghimire, et al., Observation of long-lived interlayer exci- tons in monolayer MoSe2–WSe2 heterostructures, Nature communications 6, 6242 (2015)

    2015

  20. [27]

    Arora, M

    A. Arora, M. Dr¨ uppel, R. Schmidt, T. Deilmann, R. Schneider, M. R. Molas, P. Marauhn, S. Michaelis de Vasconcellos, M. Potemski, M. Rohlfing, et al., Interlayer excitons in a bulk van der Waals semiconductor , Nature communications 8, 639 (2017)

    2017

  21. [28]

    E. V. Calman, M. M. Fogler, L. V. Butov, S. Hu, A. Mishchenko, and A. K. Geim, Indirect excitons in van der Waals heterostructures at room temperature, Na- ture Communications 9, 1895 (2018)

    2018

  22. [29]

    Horng, T

    J. Horng, T. Stroucken, L. Zhang, E. Y. Paik, H. Deng, and S. W. Koch, Observation of interlayer excitons in MoSe2 single crystals , Phys. Rev. B 97, 241404 (2018)

    2018

  23. [30]

    Niehues, A

    I. Niehues, A. Blob, T. Stiehm, S. M. de Vasconcellos, and R. Bratschitsch, Interlayer excitons in bilayer MoS2 under uniaxial tensile strain, Nanoscale 11, 12788 (2019)

    2019

  24. [31]

    X. Sun, E. Malic, and Y. Lu, Dipolar many-body com- plexes and their interactions in stacked 2D heterobilayers, Nature Reviews Physics 6, 439 (2024)

    2024

  25. [32]

    Deilmann and K

    T. Deilmann and K. S. Thygesen, Interlayer excitons with large optical amplitudes in layered van der Waals mate- rials, Nano letters 18, 2984 (2018)

    2018

  26. [33]

    I. C. Gerber, E. Courtade, S. Shree, C. Robert, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, A. Balocchi, P. Renucci, D. Lagarde, X. Marie, and B. Urbaszek, Interlayer ex- citons in bilayer MoS2 with strong oscillator strength up to room temperature, Phys. Rev. B 99, 035443 (2019)

    2019

  27. [34]

    Leisgang, S

    N. Leisgang, S. Shree, I. Paradisanos, L. Sponfeldner, C. Robert, D. Lagarde, A. Balocchi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, X. Marie, et al. , Giant Stark splitting of an exciton in bilayer MoS2, Nature nanotechnology 15, 901 (2020)

    2020

  28. [35]

    Lorchat, M

    E. Lorchat, M. Selig, F. Katsch, K. Yumigeta, S. Tongay, A. Knorr, C. Schneider, and S. H¨ ofling, Excitons in Bi- layer MoS2 Displaying a Colossal Electric Field Splitting and Tunable Magnetic Response , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 037401 (2021)

    2021

  29. [36]

    Cristofolini, G

    P. Cristofolini, G. Christmann, S. I. Tsintzos, G. Delige- orgis, G. Konstantinidis, Z. Hatzopoulos, P. G. Savvidis, and J. J. Baumberg, Coupling Quantum Tunneling with Cavity Photons , Science 336, 704 (2012)

    2012

  30. [37]

    Togan, H.-T

    E. Togan, H.-T. Lim, S. Faelt, W. Wegscheider, and A. Imamoglu, Enhanced Interactions between Dipolar Po- laritons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 227402 (2018)

    2018

  31. [38]

    Datta, M

    B. Datta, M. Khatoniar, P. Deshmukh, F. Thouin, R. Bushati, S. De Liberato, S. K. Cohen, and V. M. Menon, Highly nonlinear dipolar exciton-polaritons in bi- layer MoS2, Nature communications 13, 6341 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    Louca, A

    C. Louca, A. Genco, S. Chiavazzo, T. P. Lyons, S. Ran- derson, C. Trovatello, P. Claronino, R. Jayaprakash, X. Hu, J. Howarth, et al. , Interspecies exciton interac- tions lead to enhanced nonlinearity of dipolar excitons and polaritons in MoS2 homobilayers, Nature Communi- ca...

    2023

  33. [40]

    Ciuti, V

    C. Ciuti, V. Savona, C. Piermarocchi, A. Quattropani, and P. Schwendimann,Role of the exchange of carriers in elastic exciton-exciton scattering in quantum wells , Phys. Rev. B 58, 7926 (1998)

    1998

  34. [41]

    Tassone and Y

    F. Tassone and Y. Yamamoto, Exciton-exciton scattering dynamics in a semiconductor microcavity and stimulated scattering into polaritons, Phys. Rev. B 59, 10830 (1999)

    1999

  35. [42]

    Byrnes, P

    T. Byrnes, P. Recher, and Y. Yamamoto, Mott tran- sitions of exciton polaritons and indirect excitons in a periodic potential, Phys. Rev. B 81, 205312 (2010)

    2010

  36. [43]

    A. V. Nalitov, M. Vladimirova, A. V. Kavokin, L. V. Butov, and N. A. Gippius, Nonlinear optical probe of indirect excitons, Phys. Rev. B 89, 155309 (2014)

    2014

  37. [44]

    V. A. Maslova and N. S. Voronova, Spatially-indirect and hybrid exciton–exciton interaction in MoS2 homobilayers, 2D Materials 11, 025006 (2024)

    2024

  38. [45]

    Byrnes, G

    T. Byrnes, G. V. Kolmakov, R. Y. Kezerashvili, and Y. Yamamoto, Effective interaction and condensation of dipolaritons in coupled quantum wells , Phys. Rev. B 90, 125314 (2014)

    2014

  39. [46]

    A. V. Nalitov, D. D. Solnyshkov, N. A. Gippius, and G. Malpuech, Voltage control of the spin-dependent in- teraction constants of dipolaritons and its application to optical parametric oscillators , Phys. Rev. B 90, 235304 (2014)

    2014

  40. [47]

    E. R. Christensen, A. Camacho-Guardian, O. Cotlet, A. Imamoglu, M. Wouters, G. M. Bruun, and I. Caru- sotto, Microscopic theory of polariton-polariton interac- tions, Phys. Rev. B 110, 195435 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    J. A. ´Cwik, P. Kirton, S. De Liberato, and J. Keeling, Excitonic spectral features in strongly coupled organic po- laritons, Phys. Rev. A 93, 033840 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    The Sup- plemental Material includes reference to [52, 70–72]

    See the Supplemental Material for details on the Born ap- proximation for exciton-exciton interactions, details on the scattering integral equation, and the behaviors of the polariton interaction constant and the Hopfield co- efficients at different photon and IX detunings. Th...

  43. [51]

    Khurgin, Excitonic radius in the cavity polariton in the regime of very strong coupling , Solid State Communica- tions 117, 307 (2001)

    J. Khurgin, Excitonic radius in the cavity polariton in the regime of very strong coupling , Solid State Communica- tions 117, 307 (2001)

    2001

  44. [52]

    Levinsen, G

    J. Levinsen, G. Li, and M. M. Parish, Microscopic de- scription of exciton-polaritons in microcavities , Physical Review Research 1, 033120 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    G. Li, O. Bleu, J. Levinsen, and M. M. Parish, Theory of polariton-electron interactions in semiconductor mi- crocavities, Phys. Rev. B 103, 195307 (2021)

    2021

  46. [54]

    Using the definition of the exciton Bohr radius a0 = ε/(2µe2), thus gives D2 = d2/(2µa0)

    For the case of aligned electric dipoles, each with dipole moment ed, we have D2 = e2d2/ε, where e denotes the elementary charge and ε denotes the dielectric constant 7 of the material. Using the definition of the exciton Bohr radius a0 = ε/(2µe2), thus gives D2 = d2/(2µa0)

  47. [55]

    J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano, Modern Quantum Me- chanics (Cambridge University Press, 2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Wouters, Resonant polariton-polariton scattering in semiconductor microcavities, Phys

    M. Wouters, Resonant polariton-polariton scattering in semiconductor microcavities, Phys. Rev. B 76, 045319 (2007)

    2007

  49. [57]

    G. Li, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Microscopic cal- culation of polariton scattering in semiconductor micro- cavities, Phys. Rev. B 104, 245404 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    G. Li, O. Bleu, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Enhanced Scattering between Electrons and Exciton-Polaritons in a Microcavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 197401 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    S. S. Kumar, B. C. Mulkerin, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Trion resonance in polariton-electron scat- tering, Phys. Rev. B 108, 125416 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    S. A. Morgan, M. D. Lee, and K. Burnett, Off-shell T matrices in one, two, and three dimensions , Phys. Rev. A 65, 022706 (2002)

    2002

  53. [61]

    S. K. Adhikari, Quantum scattering in two dimensions , American Journal of Physics 54, 362 (1986)

    1986

  54. [62]

    Hofmann and W

    J. Hofmann and W. Zwerger, Universal relations for dipo- lar quantum gases , Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013088 (2021)

    2021

  55. [63]

    For simplicity, we use η = 1

    The tunneling constant takes the form t = t0eη(−d/a0), where η is a parameter that depends on the material and the surrounding environment [36]. For simplicity, we use η = 1. We further determine t0 by using parameters inspired by recent MoS 2 homobilayer experiments [34, 39],...

  56. [64]

    Schindler and R

    C. Schindler and R. Zimmermann, Analysis of the exciton-exciton interaction in semiconductor quantum wells, Phys. Rev. B 78, 045313 (2008)

    2008

  57. [65]

    R. M. Lee, N. D. Drummond, and R. J. Needs, Exciton- exciton interaction and biexciton formation in bilayer systems, Phys. Rev. B 79, 125308 (2009)

    2009

  58. [66]

    S. I. Tsintzos, A. Tzimis, G. Stavrinidis, A. Trifonov, Z. Hatzopoulos, J. J. Baumberg, H. Ohadi, and P. G. Savvidis, Electrical Tuning of Nonlinearities in Exciton- Polariton Condensates , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 037401 (2018)

    2018

  59. [67]

    Rosenberg, Y

    I. Rosenberg, Y. Mazuz-Harpaz, R. Rapaport, K. West, and L. Pfeiffer, Electrically controlled mutual interactions of flying waveguide dipolaritons, Phys. Rev. B 93, 195151 (2016)

    2016

  60. [68]

    Rosenberg, D

    I. Rosenberg, D. Liran, Y. Mazuz-Harpaz, K. West, L. Pfeiffer, and R. Rapaport, Strongly interacting dipolar-polaritons, Science Advances 4, eaat8880 (2018)

    2018

  61. [69]

    Liran, R

    D. Liran, R. Rapaport, J. Hu, N. Lydick, H. Deng, and L. Pfeiffer, Electrically Controlled Photonic Circuits of Field-Induced Dipolaritons with Huge Nonlinearities , Phys. Rev. X 14, 031022 (2024)

    2024

  62. [70]

    W. H. Dickhoff and D. V. Van Neck, Many-body theory exposed! Propagator description of quantum mechanics in many-body systems (World Scientific Publishing Com- pany, 2008)

    2008

  63. [71]

    Kyriienko, E

    O. Kyriienko, E. B. Magnusson, and I. A. Shelykh, Spin dynamics of cold exciton condensates , Phys. Rev. B 86, 115324 (2012)

    2012

  64. [72]

    de la Fuente Pico, J

    D. de la Fuente Pico, J. Levinsen, E. Laird, M. M. Parish, and F. M. Marchetti, Rydberg excitons and polaritons in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides in a magnetic field, arXiv:2410.00783 (2024). 1 Supplemental Material: Light-enhanced dipolar interactions between exci...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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