Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Exciton properties: learning from a decade of measurements on halide perovskites and transition metal dichalcogenides

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2306.14036 v1 pith:I6JMQIZP submitted 2023-06-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.chem-ph

Exciton properties: learning from a decade of measurements on halide perovskites and transition metal dichalcogenides

classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.chem-ph
keywords measurementsleadmonolayerstmdcdevicedichalcogenidesdifferentexciton
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The exciton binding energy ($E_b$) is a key parameter that governs the physics of many optoelectronic devices. At their best, trustworthy and precise measurements of $E_b$ challenge theoreticians to refine models, are a driving force in advancing the understanding a material system, and lead to efficient device design. At their worst, inaccurate $E_b$ measurements lead theoreticians astray, sew confusion within the research community, and hinder device improvements by leading to poor designs. This review article seeks to highlight the pros and cons of different measurement techniques used to determine $E_b$, namely, temperature-dependent photoluminescence, resolving Rydberg states, electroabsorption, magnetoabsorption, scanning tunneling spectroscopy, and fitting the optical absorption. Due to numerous conflicting $E_b$ values reported for halide perovskites (HP) and transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDC) monolayers, an emphasis is placed on highlighting these measurements in attempt to reconcile the variance between different measurement techniques. By considering the published data en masse, we argue the experiments with the clearest indicators are in agreement on the following values: ~350 - 450 meV for TMDC monolayers between SiO$_2$ and vacuum, ~150 - 200 meV for hBN-encapsulated TMDC monolayers, ~200 - 300 meV for common lead-iodide 2D HPs, and ~10 meV for methylammonium lead iodide.

discussion (0)

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