Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Polarons in two-dimensional polar materials: All-coupling variational theory

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single effective constant, αm, controls the Fröhlich polaron in a 2D polar monolayer at all coupling strengths.

desk verdict The energy functional is a real contribution, but the polaron mass formula in Eq. (102) drops the trial-action mass term 4C/W^3 derived in Eq. (99), so the mass numbers are internally inconsistent and need correction. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10930 v1 pith:FYPX4KSZ submitted 2025-07-15 cond-mat.mes-hall

A. Kudlis , V. Shahnazaryan , I. V. Tokatly This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall PACS 71.38.-k
keywords polaron2DpolarmaterialsFröhlichFeynmanpath-integralvariationalmethodLOphonondispersionnonlocaldielectricscreeningeffectivemassrenormalizationLyddane-Sachs-Tellerrelation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that a polaron in a strictly two-dimensional polar monolayer, an electron or hole dressed by longitudinal optical phonons, can be described at arbitrary coupling strength by a variational theory whose main material dependence enters through one dimensionless effective constant, $\alpha_m$. It derives the LO phonon dispersion and electron-phonon coupling of a 2D monolayer from macroscopic polarizabilities and the transverse optical phonon frequency, then generalizes the Feynman path-integral variational method to this momentum-dependent, dispersive setting. The result is an upper bound on the polaron ground-state energy that reduces exactly to second-order perturbation theory for weak coupling and to the Gaussian Landau-Pekar functional for strong coupling, together with a formula for the renormalized polaron mass. A sympathetic reader would care because this yields parameter-free predictions for the new generation of polar monolayers, where the nonlocal dielectric screening makes the standard three-dimensional Fröhlich theory inapplicable.

What carries the argument

The engine is the macroscopic continuum description of a 2D polar layer, Eqs. (4)-(5), in which the ions are represented by a mass-weighted displacement field $\xi$ coupled to the electric field through the potential $W_{2D}$. That description produces the nonlocal Lyddane-Sachs-Teller relation for LO phonons, Eq. (22), and the coupling amplitude $V_q$ of Eq. (45). The effective parameter $\alpha_m$ is the maximal value of the nonlocal Fröhlich function $\alpha(q)$, and the Feynman variational functional of Eqs. (93)-(94), with variational parameters $v$ and $w$, is the mechanism that interpolates between the weak- and strong-coupling limits; the same parameters feed the mass renormalization through $M_F$ in Eq. (104).

What would settle it

A diagrammatic Monte Carlo calculation on the Hamiltonian of Eqs. (44)-(45) that finds a ground-state energy below the variational bound of Eq. (93) for any physical parameter set would disprove the claim that the functional bounds the exact energy; on the phonon side, a high-resolution measurement of the LO branch in a monolayer where $r_0 \gg r_\infty$, spanning momenta where Eq. (22) predicts strong upward bending, would test the dispersion directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a genuine two-dimensional polaron is governed by a nonlocal generalization of the Fröhlich constant, $\alpha_m = (r_t/a_B)(\sqrt{r_0} - \sqrt{r_\infty})/(\sqrt{r_0} + \sqrt{r_\infty})$. Starting from the macroscopic Lagrangian of a delta-localized polar layer, it obtains the LO phonon dispersion $\omega_{l,q}^2 = \omega_t^2(1 + r_0 q)/(1 + r_\infty q)$ and the momentum-dependent electron-phonon coupling $V_q$, and then builds the Feynman variational upper bound $E \le \hbar\omega_t (v - w)^2/(2v) - \hbar\omega_t \alpha_m I_F(\sigma_0, \sigma_t; v, w)$, with $I_F$ defined by a two-dimensional integral in Eq. (94). Minimizing over the variational parameters $v$ and $w$ gives the all-coupling binding energy, which in the weak limit reduces exactly to second-order perturbation theory and in the strong limit to the Gaussian Landau-Pekar functional. The same variational point yields the polaron mass increment $\delta m = \alpha_m m_e M_F(\sigma_0, \sigma_t; v, w)$, and the paper argues that $\alpha_m$ alone controls the overall coupling strength, with the crossover between weak and strong coupling near $\alpha_m \approx 5$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a real polar monolayer behaves as a single isotropic, local harmonic optical mode confined to a delta-function layer; if multiple optical branches, anisotropy, or nonlocal elastic couplings become significant, the LO dispersion and electron-phonon coupling on which every later formula rests are modified.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For weakly coupled monolayers such as hBN and GaN, where $\alpha_m \lesssim 1$, the Feynman binding energies lie within a few percent of the weak-coupling results, so the simpler approximation remains adequate for energies.
  • Polaron masses are far more sensitive: for HfS2 the weak-coupling mass is more than three times smaller than the Feynman estimate, so transport and mobility estimates require the all-coupling mass.
  • The weak-to-strong crossover sits near $\alpha_m \approx 5$, roughly half the bulk three-dimensional value and above the surface-polaron threshold, placing genuine 2D polarons between the two known regimes.
  • In the strong-coupling limit the theory reduces to the Gaussian Landau-Pekar functional with the proper q-dependent phonon dispersion, correcting simplified treatments that omit phonon dispersion.
  • For the representative materials studied, none has $\alpha_m$ above the crossover, indicating that most known polar monolayers remain in a regime where weak-coupling energies are reasonable but mass renormalization is not.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is a diagrammatic Monte Carlo calculation on the exact Hamiltonian of Eqs. (44)-(45); since the Feynman result is an upper bound, the exact energy should lie below it, and the gap would calibrate the variational error quantitatively.
  • If the single-mode isotropic premise holds, the same $\alpha_m$ should also organize polaron-exciton, trion, and finite-temperature transport problems, because those quasiparticles inherit the same LO-phonon vertex and dispersion.
  • For anisotropic or multi-branch monolayers, the scalar potential $W_{2D}$ would need a tensor or multi-mode generalization; the structure of the derivation suggests the Feynman functional would survive with modified $\sigma_0$, $\sigma_t$, and $\alpha_m$, but that extension is not shown in this paper.
  • Because $\alpha_m$ is built from measurable polarizabilities and the TO frequency, the theory could be folded into ab initio workflows to screen many monolayers for strong polaron effects without solving the full polaron problem.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper develops a macroscopic continuum theory of Fr\"ohlich polarons in strictly two-dimensional polar monolayers. Starting from a Lagrangian density with a delta-localized ionic displacement field coupled to the electrostatic field, the authors derive the LO-phonon dispersion and the electron-phonon coupling, introduce a single effective dimensionless coupling constant \alpha_m, and then construct a Feynman path-integral variational theory. The main results are a variational upper bound for the polaron ground-state energy, Eqs. (93)-(94), which reduces to second-order perturbation theory for \alpha_m \ll 1 and to the Gaussian Landau-Pekar functional for \alpha_m \gg 1, and a companion expression for the polaron effective mass, Eqs. (102)-(104). The theory is applied to six polar monolayers (hBN, GaN, AlN, HfSe2, HfS2, ZrS2) in Table I, yielding statements about the weak-to-strong-coupling crossover and about the inadequacy of weak-coupling mass estimates.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper provides the first all-coupling variational description for genuine 2D polar monolayers with dispersive LO phonons and q-dependent coupling, organized by the single effective constant \alpha_m. The energy derivation has genuine strengths: no parameter is fitted to the polaron energies being predicted, the input parameters come from external literature, and the Feynman bound correctly reduces to the stated weak- and strong-coupling limits. However, the quantitative claim of high accuracy in the intermediate regime is not benchmarked for the actual 2D dispersive model, and the mass formula is internally inconsistent as written. These issues affect the numerical tables and the mass-related conclusions, although the underlying energy formalism appears sound and correctable.

major comments (3)
  1. [V C; Eqs. (99)-(104); Table I] The moving-polaron bound contains an internal inconsistency that directly affects all reported polaron masses. Expanding the trial action for a drifting electron gives E0 = \hbar(V-W) + (U^2/2)(m_e + 4C/W^3) in Eq. (99). With C = (m_e W/4)(V^2-W^2), the trial contribution to the coefficient of U^2/2 is m_e[1+(v^2-w^2)/w^2] = m_e v^2/w^2. The electron-phonon contribution in Eqs. (100)-(104) is \alpha_m m_e M_F(v,w). Therefore the total coefficient of U^2/2 is m_e v^2/w^2 + \alpha_m m_e M_F, not m_e + \alpha_m m_e M_F as written in Eq. (102). The missing term is not a higher-order correction: already at \alpha_m = 0 with fixed v > w, Eq. (99) forces a mass coefficient m_e v^2/w^2, while Eqs. (102)-(104) would return m_e. Since Table I and the statement that weak-coupling masses underestimate the variational mass by a factor of three to four are based on Eq. (102), all m^F columns and the mass-related conclusions must be recomputed with the corrected expression.
  2. [V B and Sec. VI] The central claim that the Feynman functional provides a high-quality interpolation at intermediate coupling is not benchmarked for the actual 2D dispersive model. The authors correctly check the weak- and strong-coupling limits (Eqs. (95)-(96)) and cite diagrammatic Monte Carlo agreement for the standard three-dimensional model, but no exact or near-exact numerical result is presented for the Hamiltonian (44)-(45) with the q-dependent frequency \omega_{l,q} and coupling V_q. Since the intermediate-\alpha_m statements in Table I (for example, weak-coupling energies within 5-10% of the Feynman result) rely on this accuracy, the manuscript should either add a numerical benchmark for representative (\sigma_0,\sigma_t) or explicitly qualify the accuracy claim.
  3. [II A, Eq. (5), and Conclusion] The derivation assumes a single, isotropic, local transverse-optical mode for the monolayer. The authors acknowledge this and mention extensions to multiple branches and anisotropy as future work. However, the material-specific predictions in Table I are presented as quantitative results for real monolayers, and no evidence is given that the single-branch isotropic description is sufficient for the six listed compounds. The manuscript should either add a brief justification of the single-branch model for these materials or describe the results as illustrative rather than quantitative predictions.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The text says "In Sec. VI we consider the polaron ground state in the weak- and strong-coupling limits"; this should refer to Sec. IV.
  2. [III D] The sentence bounding \alpha(q) writes "\epsilon_\infty^{-1}(q) - \epsilon_\infty^{-1}(q)"; the second term should be the static inverse dielectric function \epsilon_0^{-1}(q) (or equivalently 1/\epsilon_\infty - 1/\epsilon_0).
  3. [Eq. (48)] The symbol m inside the square root should be m_e for clarity, because m is also used for the reduced ionic mass in Eq. (3).
  4. [Fig. 3] The color scale in each panel is not described numerically; please provide explicit ranges or color bars so the claimed factor-of-two variation is transparent.
  5. [Fig. 4(g)] The histogram of the crossover coupling \alpha_m^* would be more informative if the number of random samples and the sampling distribution in the (\sigma_0,\sigma_t) region were stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the variational derivation is self-contained and uses externally sourced material parameters.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Sections II and III construct the phonon Lagrangian and the electron-phonon Hamiltonian from the stated macroscopic continuum ansatz (Eqs. (4) and (5)) without fitting any polaron energy or mass. The LO phonon dispersion (Eq. (22)) is derived from that Lagrangian and is independently supported by first-principles references [31,32,34] and by experiment [42]. The weak-coupling result (Eq. (55)), the Landau-Pekar functionals (Eqs. (63) and (69)), and the Feynman variational bound (Eqs. (93) and (94)) are all derived from the same Hamiltonian rather than imported as inputs, and the stated limiting reductions (Eqs. (95) and (96)) are explicit mathematical checks. The material parameters entering Table I come from external experimental and first-principles sources, and no parameter is fitted to the polaron binding energies or masses being reported. The self-citation to Ref. [37] is used for motivation and consistency, but the relevant formalism is rederived in the present paper, so it is not load-bearing. The possible algebraic inconsistency between Eq. (99) and Eq. (102) in the mass derivation is a correctness concern, not a circularity, and does not affect the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameter is fitted to the polaron energies or masses presented. The Feynman variational parameters v and w are minimized internally and are not experimental fits. The derivation relies on the macroscopic continuum model of Sec. II, the electrostatic-only electron-phonon coupling, and the Gaussian trial action. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • v and w (Feynman variational parameters) = Not reported; numerical minimization of Eq. (93)
    Internal parameters of the Gaussian trial action. They are not fitted to experimental polaron energies or masses, and they do not encode the target outputs, but the numerical predictions depend on their optimized values.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Wick rotation and Gaussian functional integration over the phonon field produce the effective action of Eq. (74).
    Standard path-integral manipulation used without proof in Sec. V A.
  • domain assumption The 2D crystal is described by the isotropic, single-TO-mode macroscopic Lagrangian density of Eqs. (4)-(5), with W2D = (1/2)ωt^2 ξ^2 − γξ·E − (α∞/2)E^2.
    This is the foundation for the LO phonon dispersion and electron-phonon coupling; it assumes one relevant optical branch, isotropy, and locality in the displacement-electric-field coupling.
  • domain assumption The carrier couples to phonons only through the long-range electrostatic potential; TO phonons, acoustic phonons, and short-range deformation potentials are neglected.
    Justifies keeping only the LO term in Eq. (40) and the Fröhlich coupling of Eq. (45), following the standard Fröhlich model.
  • domain assumption The Feynman Gaussian trial action with two variational parameters v and w remains a high-quality variational class for the dispersive, q-dependent 2D problem.
    This is central to the all-coupling claim; no exact numerical benchmark is provided for the genuine 2D dispersive case, only citations of 3D and surface quasi-2D Monte Carlo agreement.
  • domain assumption The material parameters r0, r∞, ωt, m_e and m_h taken from cited literature are accurate enough for quantitative monolayer predictions.
    Table I uses literature values without propagating their uncertainties into the reported polaron energies and masses.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polarons in two-dimensional polar materials: All-coupling variational theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FYPX4KSZ

@misc{pith2026250710930,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polarons in two-dimensional polar materials: All-coupling variational theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FYPX4KSZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10930}
}
read the original abstract

We present a detailed and self-contained theoretical study of polarons in two-dimensional (2D) polar materials, which extends the classical macroscopic theory of Fr\"ohlich polarons to the 2D case. The theory is fully determined by experimentally accessible parameters, the static and optical 2D polarizabilities of a monolayer, the frequency of transverse optical phonons, and the effective mass of charge carriers. We define a single dimensionless parameter, which characterizes the coupling of electrons with longitudinal optical phonons, analyze both weak- and strong-coupling regimes, and adopt the Feynman variational path-integral approach for a high-quality interpolation between these limits. Our results provide insight into the ground-state energy and effective mass of polarons in the new generation of 2D polar monolayers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.10930 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of a polaron in a polar lattice. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Colour map of the dimensionless weak-coupling in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Normalized variational energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a)-(f): binding energy as a function of the coupling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]

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. Trion polaron problem in bulk and two-dimensional materials

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A Lee-Low-Pines variational theory generalized to the three-body trion yields phonon-renormalized electron-hole and electron-electron interactions and material-specific trion polaron binding energies in bulk perovskit...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Hydrogen-like trial wavefunction For the simplest and frequently used hydrogenic trial wave function [35] in 2D, ψH = r 2 π 1 a e−r/a, (59) the kinetic energy is D ψH ˆp2 e 2me ψH E = ℏ2 2mea2 , (60) and the density form factor reads, gq = 1 1 + (aq)2/4 3/2 . (61) Hence, the Landau–Pekar energy as a function of the variational parameter a is as follows, E...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Gaussian trial wavefunction Another popular variational ansatz, which typically giveslowerenergy, employs thenormalizedGaussianthat in 2D reads, ψG(r) = r 1 πa2 e−r2/2a2 . (65) The corresponding expectation value of the kinetic en- ergy coincides with the one for hydrogenic ansatz, D ψG ˆp2 e 2me ψG E = ℏ2 2mea2 , (66) 8 while the form factor is now gq(a)...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Devreese, Fröhlich polarons

    J. Devreese, Fröhlich polarons. Lecture course includ- ing detailed theoretical derivations – 10th edition, arXiv:1611.06122 (2016)

    arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    J. T. Devreese, ed.,Polarons in Ionic Crystals and Polar Semiconductors (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1972)

    work page 1972

  5. [5]

    A. S. Alexandrov and J. T. Devreese,Advances in Po- laron Physics, Vol. 159 (Springer, 2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    L. D. Landau and S. I. Pekar, The effective mass of the polaron, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz18, 419 (1948)

    1948

  7. [7]

    L. D. Landau, Electron motion in crystal lattices, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion3, 664 (1933)

    work page 1933

  8. [8]

    S. I. Pekar, Local quantum states of electrons in an ideal ion crystal, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz16, 341 (1946)

    1946

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    R. P. Feynman, Slow electrons in a polar crystal, Physical Review 97, 660 (1955)

    1955

  2. [10]

    Fröhlich, H

    H. Fröhlich, H. Pelzer, and S. Zienau, Xx. properties of slow electrons in polar materials, The London, Edin- burgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science41, 221 (1950)

    1950

  3. [11]

    T. Lee, F. Low, and D. Pines, The motion of slow elec- trons in a polar crystal, Physical Review90, 297 (1953)

    1953

  4. [12]

    A. S. Mishchenko, N. V. Prokof’Ev, A. Sakamoto, and B. V. Svistunov, Diagrammatic quantum monte carlo study of the fröhlich polaron, Physical Review B62, 6317 (2000)

    2000

  5. [13]

    Rosenfelder and A

    R. Rosenfelder and A. W. Schreiber, On the best quadratic approximation in feynman’s path integral treatment of the polaron, Physics Letters A 284, 63 (2001)

    2001

  6. [14]

    N. V. Prokof’ev and B. V. Svistunov, Polaron problem by diagrammatic quantum monte carlo, Physical Review Letters 81, 2514 (1998)

    1998

  7. [15]

    Franchini, M

    C. Franchini, M. Reticcioli, M. Setvin, and U. Diebold, Polarons in materials, Nature Reviews Materials6, 560 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    T. Hahn, S. Klimin, J. Tempere, J. T. Devreese, and C. Franchini, Diagrammatic monte carlo study of fröhlich polaron dispersion in two and three dimensions, Physical Review B97, 134305 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    J. T. Devreese and A. S. Alexandrov, Fröhlich polaron and bipolaron: recent developments, Reports on Progress in Physics72, 066501 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    W. H. Sio, C. Verdi, S. Poncé, and F. Giustino, Ab initio theory of polarons: Formalism and applications, Physical Review B99, 235139 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    Giustino, Electron-phonon interactions from first prin- ciples, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 015003 (2017)

    F. Giustino, Electron-phonon interactions from first prin- ciples, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 015003 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    W. H. Sio, C. Verdi, S. Poncé, and F. Giustino, Polarons from first principles, without supercells, Physical Review Letters 122, 246403 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    F. M. Peeters, W. Xiaoguang, and J. T. Devreese, Ground-state energy of a polaron in n dimensions, Phys- ical Review B33, 3926 (1986)

    1986

  14. [22]

    Sak, Theory of surface polarons, Physical Review B6, 3981 (1972)

    J. Sak, Theory of surface polarons, Physical Review B6, 3981 (1972)

    1972

  15. [23]

    Xiaoguang, F

    W. Xiaoguang, F. Peeters, and J. T. Devreese, Exact and approximate results for the ground-state energy of a fröhlich polaron in two dimensions, Physical Review B 31, 3420 (1985)

    1985

  16. [24]

    C. Chen, J. Avila, S. Wang, Y. Wang, M. Mucha- Kruczynski, C. Shen, R. Yang, B. Nosarzewski, T. P. Devereaux, G. Zhang,et al., Emergence of interfacial po- larons from electron–phonon coupling in graphene/h-bn van der waals heterostructures, Nano Letters18, 1082 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Li and Z.-W

    P.-F. Li and Z.-W. Wang, Optical absorption of fröhlich polaron in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides, Journal of Applied Physics123, 204308 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. Mishchenko, A. Carvalho, and A. Castro Neto, 2d materials and van der waals het- erostructures, Science353, aac9439 (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    Z. Wang, S. McKeown Walker, A. Tamai, Y. Wang, Z. Ristic, F. Bruno, A. De La Torre, S. Riccò, N. Plumb, M. Shi, et al. , Tailoring the nature and strength of electron–phonon interactions in the srtio 3 (001) 2d elec- tron liquid, Nature Materials15, 835 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    M. Kang, S. W. Jung, W. J. Shin, Y. Sohn, S. H. Ryu, T. K. Kim, M. Hoesch, and K. S. Kim, Holstein polaron in a valley-degenerate two-dimensional semiconductor, Nature Materials17, 676 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    C. Chen, J. Avila, E. Frantzeskakis, A. Levy, and M. C. Asensio, Observation of a two-dimensional liquid of fröh- lich polarons at the bare srtio3 surface, Nature Commu- nications 6, 8585 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Cudazzo, I

    P. Cudazzo, I. V. Tokatly, and A. Rubio, Dielectric screening in two-dimensional insulators: Implications for excitonic and impurity states in graphane, Physical Re- view B84, 085406 (2011)

    2011

  23. [31]

    L. V. Keldysh, Coulomb interaction in thin semiconduc- tor and semimetal films, JETP Lett.29, 658 (1979)

    1979

  24. [32]

    N. S. Rytova, The screened potential of a point charge in a thin film, Moscow University Physics Bulletin22, 18 (1967)

    1967

  25. [33]

    W.H.SioandF.Giustino,Unifiedabinitiodescriptionof fröhlich electron-phonon interactions in two-dimensional and three-dimensional materials, Physical Review B105, 115414 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Sohier, M

    T. Sohier, M. Calandra, and F. Mauri, Two-dimensional fröhlich interaction in transition-metal dichalcogenide monolayers: Theoretical modeling and first-principles calculations, Physical Review B94, 085415 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Sohier, M

    T. Sohier, M. Gibertini, M. Calandra, F. Mauri, and N. Marzari, Breakdown of optical phonons’ splitting in two-dimensionalmaterials,NanoLetters 17,3758(2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    Q.Chen, W.Wang,andF.M.Peeters,Magneto-polarons in monolayer transition-metal dichalcogenides, Journal of 15 Applied Physics123 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    However, the polaron mass shows a much stronger dependence on the coupling strength

    provides reasonable estimates of the polaron ener- gies, close to the Feynman variational results. However, the polaron mass shows a much stronger dependence on the coupling strength. In fact, for some materials studied in this work, we observed that the weak coupling approxi-...

  30. [38]

    Poncé, M

    S. Poncé, M. Royo, M. Stengel, N. Marzari, and M. Gib- ertini, Long-range electrostatic contribution to electron- phonon couplings and mobilities of two-dimensional and bulk materials, Physical Review B107, 155424 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    W. H. Sio and F. Giustino, Polarons in two-dimensional atomic crystals, Nature Physics19, 629 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Shahnazaryan, A

    V. Shahnazaryan, A. Kudlis, and I. V. Tokatly, Polarons and exciton-polarons in two-dimensional polar materials, arXiv:2502.03657 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Born and K

    M. Born and K. Huang,Dynamical theory of crystal lat- tices (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1954)

    1954

  34. [42]

    Kittel, Quantum Theory of Solids (Wiley, 1987)

    C. Kittel, Quantum Theory of Solids (Wiley, 1987)

    1987

  35. [43]

    An anisotropic generalization can be worked out straight- forwardly

  36. [44]

    That is, to simplify formulas, the dielectric constant ε of the environment is absorbed into the defi- nition of r0 and r∞

    We notice that the polarizabilitiesα0 and α∞ refer to a freestanding 2D layer, whereas the corresponding screen- ing length are defined for the layer in the dielectric en- vironment. That is, to simplify formulas, the dielectric constant ε of the environment is absorbed into t...

  37. [45]

    J. Li, L. Wang, Y. Wang, Z. Tao, W. Zhong, Z. Su, S. Xue, G. Miao, W. Wang, H. Peng, J. Guo, and X. Zhu, Observation of the nonanalytic behavior of opti- cal phonons in monolayer hexagonal boron nitride, Nat. Commun. 15, 1938 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    The exact maximizer ofα(κ) has a cumbersome closed form, whereas the maximizer ofα(κ)[(1 +r0κ)/(1 +r∞κ)]1/4, which equalsαm, is both simple and physically transpar- ent

    It is worth emphasizing thatαm is the upper bound of the function α(κ) rather than its true maximum. The exact maximizer ofα(κ) has a cumbersome closed form, whereas the maximizer ofα(κ)[(1 +r0κ)/(1 +r∞κ)]1/4, which equalsαm, is both simple and physically transpar- ent

  39. [47]

    R. P. Feynman,Statistical mechanics. A set of lectures (W. A. Benjamin, Reading, Mass, 1972)

    1972

  40. [48]

    Sanders, D

    N. Sanders, D. Bayerl, G. Shi, K. A. Mengle, and E. Kioupakis, Electronic and optical properties of two- dimensional gan from first-principles, Nano Letters17, 7345–7349 (2017)

    2017

  41. [49]

    L. Zhao, S. Xu, M. Wang, and S. Lin, Probing the thermodynamic stability and phonon transport in two- dimensional hexagonal aluminum nitride monolayer, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C120, 27675 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    Li, F.-n

    W. Li, F.-n. Xue, P.-b. Zhao, and Y. Lu, Electronic struc- ture and phonon transport properties of hfse2 under in- plane strain and finite temperature, Physica Scripta99, 105916 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    Wang, Y.-S

    H. Wang, Y.-S. Lan, B. Dai, X.-W. Zhang, Z.-G. Wang, and N.-N. Ge, Improved thermoelectric performance of monolayer hfs2 by strain engineering, ACS Omega 6, 29820 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    A.PanditandB.Hamad,Theeffectoffinite-temperature and anharmonic lattice dynamics on the thermal conduc- tivity of zrs2 monolayer: self-consistent phonon calcula- tions, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter33, 425405 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

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