Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 51 references

Tunability of Robust Exciton-Trion Polaritons in Atomically Thin WS2 Monolayers

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports an experimental demonstration of exciton-trion polaritons in monolayer WS2, showing that the oscillator strength and decoherence of the hybrid polariton are tunable by changing the surrounding dielectric constant.

desk verdict Real data, systematic screening, but the central claim of tunable exciton-trion polaritons rests on a coupling term that never appears in the model. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07030 v1 pith:MQN4IGPS submitted 2025-06-08 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Xuguang Cao , Debao Zhang , Ji Zhou , Wanggui Ye , Changcheng Zheng , Kenji Watanabe , Takashi Taniguchi , Jiqiang Ning
show 1 more author
Shijie Xu
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords exciton-trionpolaritonsmonolayerWS2dielectricscreeningreflectancespectroscopyCoulombcouplingpolaritondecoherencetriontwo-dimensionalsemiconductors
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 reports cryogenic reflectance and photoluminescence measurements on five monolayer WS2 samples whose surrounding dielectric constant is stepped from vacuum-like (suspended film) to hBN-encapsulated ($\kappa_{\text{env}}=4.5$). The authors argue that the A exciton and the trion each couple to light, forming a three-way hybrid quasiparticle, the exciton-trion polariton, whose signature is a three-band dispersion with a middle polariton branch and a double resonance in reflectance. They find that stronger dielectric screening raises the oscillator strength of both coupled resonances, narrows their linewidths, and lengthens their decoherence times, and they attribute this to enhanced Coulomb coupling between the A exciton and the trion as the two resonance energies move closer. If correct, the work establishes the surrounding dielectric environment as a control knob for the strength and coherence of a composite photon-exciton-trion state, with consequences for many-body polaritonics and moiré engineering.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dielectric function of two interacting excitonic resonances, $\varepsilon(\omega,k)=\varepsilon_b+\sum_j \frac{4\pi\beta_j\omega_{0(j)}^2}{\omega_{0(j)}^2-\omega^2+\frac{\hbar k^2\omega_{0(j)}}{M_j}+i\gamma_j\omega}$, with $j$ labelling the A exciton and the trion; this is solved with the polariton equation $\varepsilon(\omega,k)=k^2c^2/\omega^2$. The solution gives three transverse polariton branches: a lower trion branch, an upper A-exciton branch, and a middle polariton branch whose appearance the paper reads as the fingerprint of strong Coulomb coupling between the A exciton and the trion, the coupling labelled $g_3$ in the three-oscillator spring-mass picture. Reflectance spectra are computed with Maxwell boundary conditions together with the additional boundary condition for excitonic polaritons [35], and the fitted parameters, namely oscillator strengths, dampings, and longitudinal-transverse splittings, carry the tunability argument. A dielectric scaling law $E_b^{(j)}=E_0^{(j)}\kappa_{\text{env}}^{-\alpha_j}$ connects the measured binding-energy shifts to the screening constant, and the decoherence analysis decomposes homogeneous broadening into radiative, phonon-assisted nonradiative, and pure-dephasing channels.

What would settle it

One decisive check is to refit the measured reflectance spectra with the same two-oscillator model but with the two oscillators coupled only through the shared light field, i.e., no direct exciton-trion interaction ($g_3=0$); if that control model reproduces the double-resonance reflectance and the three-branch dispersion equally well, the claim that the middle branch demonstrates strong direct Coulomb coupling between A exciton and trion would be falsified. A second check is momentum- or angle-resolved reflectance: the middle polariton branch should be directly resolvable, and its avoided crossing with the A and T branches should open wider as the dielectric screening increases.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that monolayer WS2 supports a coherent hybrid of a photon, a neutral A exciton, and a trion, whose signature is a three-band polariton dispersion with a middle branch and a double resonance in cryogenic reflectance. The trion is treated as a four-body Suris tetron, a charge-neutral Fermi polaron that can coherently superimpose with a photon. By fitting reflectance spectra of five samples with different dielectric environments, the paper finds that increasing the surrounding dielectric constant enhances the oscillator strength and longitudinal-transverse splitting of both coupled resonances while reducing their damping, and it attributes this to a strengthening of the Coulomb coupling between the A exciton and the trion as their resonance energies approach. It further argues that dielectric screening suppresses both the radiative decay of the A-exciton polariton and the intervalley K-Λ phonon-scattering relaxation channel, and that the enhanced exciton-trion coupling reduces the trion pure dephasing rate.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the middle polariton branch and the reflectance doublet prove a direct Coulomb coupling between the A exciton and the trion, even though the model used to fit the spectra, Eq. (1), contains no explicit exciton-trion interaction term, and the trion is represented as a single bosonic oscillator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Encapsulating WS2 in hBN can serve as a practical knob to raise polariton oscillator strength and narrow linewidths without changing doping or temperature.
  • The three-band dispersion with a middle branch implies a genuine photon-exciton-trion hybrid, so polaritonic devices can access both exciton and trion channels in one coherent state.
  • The identified K-Λ intervalley phonon-scattering channel means that part of the linewidth narrowing under screening is a reduction of nonradiative intervalley relaxation rather than a purely radiative effect.
  • The extracted femtosecond decoherence times, benchmarked against two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy values, indicate that ETP coherence can be engineered on the hundred-femtosecond scale by dielectric design.
  • Because the A-exciton and trion resonance energies approach each other as screening increases, the same dielectric knob that strengthens coupling also suppresses trion pure dephasing, tying the two tunable properties together.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: angle-resolved reflectance should resolve the middle polariton branch directly, and tracking how its avoided crossing with the A and T branches opens with $\kappa_{\text{env}}$ would provide a direct test that reflectance fitting alone cannot provide.
  • Editorial inference: a control calculation with the two oscillators coupled only through the common light field ($g_3=0$) would clarify how much of the observed doublet is direct exciton-trion Coulomb coupling rather than polariton-mediated coupling; the paper does not present this control.
  • Editorial inference: because the four-body trion is approximated as a single damped oscillator, a genuinely many-body Fermi-polaron treatment would be needed to separate how much of the linewidth narrowing comes from reduced phase space for scattering versus enhanced Coulomb coupling.
  • Editorial inference: if the mechanism holds, spatially patterning the dielectric environment, for example in moiré superlattices, should allow spatial modulation of ETP coupling strength, yielding arrays of coupled polaritonic sites.
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. The paper reports cryogenic reflectance and photoluminescence measurements on monolayer WS2 in five dielectric environments (suspended, on SiO2, on hBN, hBN/WS2/SiO2, hBN/WS2/hBN). It fits the reflectance spectra with a two-resonance polariton dielectric function, identifies three polariton branches, and extracts oscillator strengths, damping rates, and longitudinal-transverse splittings that vary monotonically with the effective environmental dielectric constant. The authors interpret these trends as evidence that dielectric screening tunes the Coulomb coupling between A excitons and trions, thereby demonstrating and controlling 'robust exciton-trion polaritons' (ETPs). They also propose a decoherence model that separates radiative, intervalley phonon-mediated, and pure-dephasing contributions to the fitted linewidths.

Significance. If the central claim were established, this would be a valuable demonstration of a three-way hybrid photon-A exciton-trion quasiparticle in a monolayer semiconductor, with a dielectric knob for tuning its oscillator strength and coherence. The experimental sample series is well conceived, and the systematic reflectance and PL data across five dielectric configurations constitute a useful dataset. The paper also makes a creditable attempt to separate dielectric effects from carrier-density effects using the T/A intensity ratio. However, the central interpretation is not supported by the model actually used: the dielectric function in Eq. (1) contains no explicit exciton-trion coupling term, so the three-branch dispersion and reflectance doublet attributed to 'strong Coulomb coupling' are equally expected from two independent oscillators coupled only through the common light field. As a result, the main conclusion that the spectra demonstrate ETPs rather than two independent resonances is not established by the presented analysis.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III.B, Eq. (1)] The dielectric function in Eq. (1) is a sum of two independent Lorentz oscillators; no term proportional to an A-exciton-trion coupling g3 appears in Eq. (1), in the polariton equation Eq. (2), or in the fitted parameters of Table I. Since Eq. (2) is already cubic in k^2 with two oscillator poles, it yields three polariton branches and double-resonance reflectance lineshapes even when the two oscillators are coupled only through the common radiation field. The statement in Section III.C that the middle polariton branch 'represents a strong Coulomb coupling between the A excitons and the trions' is therefore not justified by the model. To establish the ETP claim, the authors must include an explicit coupling term, fit it, and compare with the uncoupled two-resonance model.
  2. [Section III.C and Table I] The claimed dielectric tuning of oscillator strength and decoherence is a direct readout of the fitted parameters (4πβA, 4πβT, γA, γT), not an independent prediction. The paper reports no uncertainties, parameter correlations, or model-selection tests against simpler alternatives, such as a single-resonance model or an uncoupled two-resonance model. Consequently, the monotonic trends in Figures 3a and 3b do not by themselves establish the proposed mechanism; a falsifiable prediction, such as the doping- or field-dependence of the middle branch or an independent coherence measurement, is needed.
  3. [Section III.B and Fig. 2b] The treatment of the four-body Suris tetron/Fermi polaron as a single bosonic oscillator with one resonance frequency and one damping rate is a strong simplification. The paper cites many-body theories for exciton-trion polaritons, but it does not show that the single-oscillator ansatz captures the key physics of the charged-exciton resonance, especially the coupling to the Fermi sea. This assumption is load-bearing for the identification of the T resonance as a trion-polariton rather than a generic charged-exciton resonance; the authors should justify it from a microscopic model or substantially soften the claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The background dielectric constant ε_b = 15.4 for the suspended WS2 sample is strikingly larger than the values (2.3–2.8) for the other samples; the authors should explain this parameter or discuss its physical origin.
  2. [Section III.C] The dispersion curves with γ ≠ 0 are plotted as real curves in Figures 2c–g, but with complex frequencies the definition of a dispersion relation needs to be specified; please state how the γ ≠ 0 curves are obtained.
  3. [Section III.D, Eq. (3)] The extraction of γ_rad(A) and γ_non(A) from the maximum reflectance amplitude is only sketched; the derivation and the assumptions behind the polaritonic Elliott formula should be stated more explicitly.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical and grammatical issues: 'in-suit' (Section III.A) should be 'in-situ', 'Descripts' (Section III.B) should be 'describes', 'dielectronic' (Conclusions) should be 'dielectric', and 'Elliot formula' (Section III.D) should be 'Elliott formula'.
  5. [Abstract and title] The term 'robust ETPs' is not defined; please specify what robustness means in this context, for example stability across dielectric environments, linewidth narrowing, or persistence of the three-branch dispersion.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Central ETP demonstration is an output of the fitted two-oscillator model; the claimed g3 Coulomb-coupling mechanism never appears in the equations.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.B, Eq. (1); Section III.C, discussion of Figs. 2c-g lower panels]
    "ε(ω,k)=ε_b+Σ_j 4πβ_j ω_0j^2/(ω_0j^2−ω^2+ℏk^2ω_0j/M_j+iγ_jω) ... For the calculated dispersion with γ=0 ... the energy-momentum dispersion consists of three bands ... the emergence of an exciton-like mixed polariton branch (MPB) represents a strong Coulomb coupling between the A excitons and the trions [33]."

    Table I supplies the fitted ω_0j, 4πβ_j, and γ_j; Eq. (2) is cubic in k^2 for any two Lorentz oscillators, so three transverse branches are a generic mathematical consequence of Eq. (1)+(2) even when no g3 exciton-trion coupling term is present. The paper never fits, extracts, or checks g3, yet uses the middle branch as evidence for 'strong Coulomb coupling.' The claimed demonstration of robust ETPs and its dielectric tuning therefore reduces to the same two-oscillator ansatz that produced the calculated dispersion; the model output is being used to validate the model assumption.

full rationale

The reflectance measurements themselves are real, and no load-bearing self-citation was found: the cited theoretical anchor [19] and the dielectric-interaction framework [33] are external works, not author self-citations. The main circularity is structural. Eq. (1) is a sum of two independent Lorentz oscillators with no explicit g3 coupling term, and the three-band dispersion from Eq. (2) is a generic consequence of two resonances coupled through the common light field. Citing the MPB as proof of 'strong Coulomb coupling between the A excitons and the trions' imports the conclusion that the equations do not contain; the central evidence for ETPs is thus an output of the fitted model rather than an independent result. The tunability of oscillator strength and decoherence is likewise a readout of the Table I fitted parameters, though the underlying spectral changes are observed. Because the claimed central demonstration reduces to the two-oscillator fitting ansatz, but the paper does contain genuine experimental data and external theoretical support, the circularity is partial rather than total.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new postulated entities; the 'exciton-trion polariton' is borrowed from prior theoretical literature (Rana et al. 2021). However, the central claims rest on a large set of fitted oscillator parameters (35 values across five samples), an empirical binding-energy scaling law with fitted exponents, and several domain assumptions about the applicability of bulk dielectric theory and specific decoherence mechanisms. The free parameters are not independently measured, and the axioms are not validated against a microscopic 2D theory.

free parameters (10)
  • epsilon_b (background dielectric constant) = 15.4 (suspended), 2.7 (WS2/SiO2), 2.3 (WS2/hBN), 2.8 (hBN/WS2/SiO2), 2.8 (hBN/WS2/hBN)
    Fitted to each reflectance spectrum; sets the baseline dielectric response and affects the polariton dispersion.
  • hbar*omega_0(T) (trion resonance energy) = 2.0546, 2.0550, 2.0496, 2.0546, 2.0506 eV
    Fitted trion resonance frequency for each sample; used with omega_0(A) to compute the resonance separation that drives the claimed coupling increase.
  • hbar*omega_0(A) (A exciton resonance energy) = 2.0850, 2.0783, 2.0774, 2.0795, 2.0795 eV
    Fitted A exciton resonance frequency for each sample; its shift toward the trion energy is used to argue for enhanced Coulomb coupling.
  • 4*pi*beta_T (trion polarizability) = 0.0055, 0.0158, 0.0150, 0.0160, 0.0170
    Fitted oscillator strength parameter for the trion; the increasing trend with screening is a central result.
  • 4*pi*beta_A (A exciton polarizability) = 0.0210, 0.0230, 0.0250, 0.0260, 0.0279
    Fitted oscillator strength parameter for the A exciton; the increasing trend with screening is a central result.
  • hbar*gamma_T (trion damping) = 0.0128, 0.0112, 0.0090, 0.0084, 0.0060 eV
    Fitted homogeneous broadening for the trion; the decreasing trend is interpreted as reduced dephasing under stronger screening.
  • hbar*gamma_A (A exciton damping) = 0.0070, 0.0037, 0.0026, 0.0022, 0.0017 eV
    Fitted homogeneous broadening for the A exciton; the decreasing trend is used to claim longer coherence under stronger screening.
  • alpha_T (empirical scaling exponent for trion binding energy) = Not stated numerically
    Fitted to the trion binding energy versus kappa_env data in Fig. 1c; part of the empirical scaling law E_b = E0 * kappa_env^(-alpha).
  • alpha_AT (empirical scaling exponent for charged biexciton binding energy) = Not stated numerically
    Fitted to the charged biexciton binding energy versus kappa_env data in Fig. 1c; used to attribute binding energy changes to dielectric screening.
  • E0_b(T) and E0_b(AT) (vacuum binding energies in the scaling law) = Not stated numerically
    Introduced as normalization constants in the empirical scaling relation; they are fit parameters, not independently measured.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Lagois dielectric theory for two interacting excitonic resonances (Eqs. 1-2) is valid for atomically thin WS2 monolayers, including the use of Pekar's additional boundary condition.
    This theory was developed for bulk semiconductors and quantum wells; its direct application to a 2D monolayer with a Fermi polaron trion is assumed without comparison to a microscopic 2D model (Section III.B).
  • domain assumption The trion, described in the text as a four-body Suris tetron/Fermi polaron, can be represented as a single bosonic Lorentz oscillator with one resonance frequency and one damping rate.
    The paper itself emphasizes the four-body nature of the trion (Section I), yet Eq. (1) treats it as a simple harmonic oscillator, neglecting the Fermi sea continuum and energy-dependent self-energy.
  • domain assumption The energy of the K-Lambda exciton relative to the K-K exciton shifts with dielectric screening as given by cited GW calculations (refs [50,51]), and this shift explains the reduction of gamma_non^K-Lambda.
    The K-Lambda exciton energy is not directly measured in this work; the explanation of the decoherence trend rests on external theoretical calculations that have not been verified in these exact samples (Section III.D).
  • domain assumption The polaritonic Elliott formula (Eq. 3) and the scaling relation gamma_rad ∝ f(A)/kappa_env apply to monolayer WS2 and allow the decomposition of the measured damping gamma_A into radiative and non-radiative contributions.
    The decomposition in Section III.D uses these relations without independent verification of the proportionality constant or the applicability of the formula to a 2D monolayer with strong dielectric screening variations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tunability of Robust Exciton-Trion Polaritons in Atomically Thin WS2 Monolayers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MQN4IGPS

@misc{pith2026250607030,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tunability of Robust Exciton-Trion Polaritons in Atomically Thin WS2 Monolayers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MQN4IGPS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07030}
}
read the original abstract

Herein, we present an experimental demonstration of the robust exciton-trion polaritons (ETPs) by measuring and simulating the resonance reflectance spectra of various configurational WS2 monolayers with different dielectric screenings. Moreover, the oscillator strength and decoherent behavior of such hybrid ETPs can be tuned via utilizing dielectric screening effect. The effect is attributed to the regulation of the Coulomb coupling between excitons and trions by changing the surrounding dielectric constant. The demonstration and tunability of the robust ETPs offers a novel pathway for researching novel phases of quantum matter in a quantum many-body physics regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07030 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. d), which are consistent with the values previ￾ously measured by the optical two-dimensional coherent spectroscopy technology [42]. Small T2(T ) means that γp(T ) is a dominant factor in the trion dephasing pro￾cess because of the quite long recombination time T1(T ) , [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    K. F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan, and T. F. Heinz, Atomically thin MoS 2: a new direct-gap semiconductor, Physical Review Letters105, 136805 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    X. Xu, W. Yao, D. Xiao, and T. F. Heinz, Spin and pseudospins in layered transition metal dichalcogenides, Nature Physics10, 343 (2014)

    2014

  3. [3]

    Chernikov, T

    A. Chernikov, T. C. Berkelbach, H. M. Hill, A. Rigosi, Y. Li, B. Aslan, D. R. Reichman, M. S. Hybertsen, and T. F. Heinz, Exciton binding energy and nonhydrogenic Rydberg series in monolayer WS 2, Physical Review Let- ters113, 076802 (2014)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    A. V. Stier, N. P. Wilson, G. Clark, X. Xu, and S. A. Crooker, Probing the influence of dielectric environment on excitons in monolayer WSe 2: insight from high mag- netic fields, Nano Letters16, 7054 (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Q. H. Wang, K. Kalantar-Zadeh, A. Kis, J. N. Cole- man, and M. S. Strano, Electronics and optoelectronics of two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides, Na- ture Nanotechnology7, 699 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    K. F. Mak, K. He, C. Lee, G. H. Lee, J. Hone, T. F. Heinz, and J. Shan, Tightly bound trions in monolayer MoS2, Nature Materials12, 207 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Y. You, X. X. Zhang, T. C. Berkelbach, M. S. Hybert- sen, D. R. Reichman, and T. F. Heinz, Observation of biexcitons in monolayer WSe 2, Nature Physics11, 477 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    G. Wang, A. Chernikov, M. M. Glazov, T. F. Heinz, X. Marie, T. Amand, and B. Urbaszek, Colloquium: 8 Excitons in atomically thin transition metal dichalco- genides, Reviews of Modern Physics90, 021001 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    X. Liu, T. Galfsky, Z. Sun, F. Xia, E. C. Lin, Y. H. Lee, S. K´ ena-Cohen, and V. M. Menon, Strong light-matter coupling in two-dimensional atomic crystals, Nature Pho- tonics9, 30 (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    M. W. Berz, L. C. Andreani, E. F. Steigmeier, and F. K. Reinhart, Exchange splitting of light hole excitons in Al1−xGaxAs-GaAs quantum wells, Solid State Commu- nications80, 553 (1991)

    1991

  3. [11]

    Emmanuele, M

    R. Emmanuele, M. Sich, O. Kyriienko, V. Shahnazaryan, F. Withers, A. Catanzaro, P. Walker, F. Benimetskiy, M. Skolnick, A. Tartakovskii,et al., Highly nonlinear trion-polaritons in a monolayer semiconductor, Nature Communications11, 3589 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Zhang, F

    L. Zhang, F. Wu, S. Hou, Z. Zhang, Y. H. Chou, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. R. Forrest, and H. Deng, Van der Waals heterostructure polaritons with moir´ e- induced nonlinearity, Nature591, 61 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    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 MoS 2 homobilayers, Nature Communi- cat...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Sidler, P

    M. Sidler, P. Back, O. Cotlet, A. Srivastava, T. Fink, M. Kroner, E. Demler, and A. Imamoglu, Fermi polaron- polaritons in charge-tunable atomically thin semiconduc- tors, Nature Physics13, 255 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    E. Liu, J. van Baren, Z. Lu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, D. Smirnov, Y. C. Chang, and C. H. Lui, Exciton-polaron Rydberg states in monolayer MoSe 2 and WSe 2, Nature Communications12, 6131 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Y. Ni, D. Huang, D. Liang, A. Liu, X. Liu, K. Samp- son, Z. Liu, J. Quan, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi,et al., Valley-mediated singlet-and triplet-polaron interactions and quantum dynamics in a doped WSe 2 monolayer, Physical Review Letters134, 036901 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    D. K. Efimkin and A. H. MacDonald, Exciton-polarons in doped semiconductors in a strong magnetic field, Physi- cal Review B97, 235432 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Kyriienko, D

    O. Kyriienko, D. Krizhanovskii, and I. Shelykh, Nonlin- ear quantum optics with trion polaritons in 2D monolay- ers: conventional and unconventional photon blockade, Physical Review Letters125, 197402 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    F. Rana, O. Koksal, M. Jung, G. Shvets, A. N. Vami- vakas, and C. Manolatou, Exciton-trion polaritons in doped two-dimensional semiconductors, Physical Review Letters126, 127402 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    K. Wei, Q. Liu, Y. Tang, Y. Ye, Z. Xu, and T. Jiang, Charged biexciton polaritons sustaining strong nonlin- earity in 2D semiconductor-based nanocavities, Nature Communications14, 5310 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Geick, C

    R. Geick, C. Perry, and G. Rupprecht, Normal modes in hexagonal boron nitride, Physical Review146, 543 (1966)

    1966

  14. [22]

    Cadiz, E

    F. Cadiz, E. Courtade, C. Robert, G. Wang, Y. Shen, H. Cai, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, H. Carrere, D. La- garde,et al., Excitonic linewidth approaching the homo- geneous limit in MoSe 2-based van der waals heterostruc- tures, Physical Review X7, 021026 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Y. Xu, C. Horn, J. Zhu, Y. Tang, L. Ma, L. Li, S. Liu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. C. Hone,et al., Creation of moir´ e bands in a monolayer semiconductor by spatially periodic dielectric screening, Nature Materials20, 645 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    Nagler, M

    P. Nagler, M. V. Ballottin, A. A. Mitioglu, M. V. Durnev, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, A. Chernikov, C. Sch¨ uller, M. M. Glazov, P. C. Christianen,et al., Zeeman splitting and inverted polarization of biexciton emission in mono- layer WS2, Physical Review Letters121, 057402 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    S. Y. Chen, T. Goldstein, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and J. Yan, Coulomb-bound four-and five-particle inter- valley states in an atomically-thin semiconductor, Nature Communications9, 3717 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    M. He, P. Rivera, D. Van Tuan, N. P. Wilson, M. Yang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. Yan, D. G. Mandrus, H. Yu,et al., Valley phonons and exciton complexes in a monolayer semiconductor, Nature communications11, 618 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    E. Liu, J. van Baren, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. C. Chang, and C. H. Lui, Valley-selective chiral phonon replicas of dark excitons and trions in monolayer WSe 2, Physical Review Research1, 032007 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    Z. Li, T. Wang, C. Jin, Z. Lu, Z. Lian, Y. Meng, M. Blei, S. Gao, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe,et al., Emerging photoluminescence from the dark-exciton phonon replica in monolayer WSe 2, Nature Communications10, 2469 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Chernikov, A

    A. Chernikov, A. M. van Der Zande, H. M. Hill, A. F. Rigosi, A. Velauthapillai, J. Hone, and T. F. Heinz, Elec- trical tuning of exciton binding energies in monolayer WS2, Physical Review Letters115, 126802 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Mouri, Y

    S. Mouri, Y. Miyauchi, and K. Matsuda, Tunable pho- toluminescence of monolayer MoS 2 via chemical doping, Nano Letters13, 5944 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Y. Lin, X. Ling, L. Yu, S. Huang, A. L. Hsu, Y. H. Lee, J. Kong, M. S. Dresselhaus, and T. Palacios, Di- electric screening of excitons and trions in single-layer MoS2, Nano Letters14, 5569 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    Kyl¨ anp¨ a¨ a and H

    I. Kyl¨ anp¨ a¨ a and H. P. Komsa, Binding energies of exciton complexes in transition metal dichalcogenide monolayers and effect of dielectric environment, Physical Review B 92, 205418 (2015)

    2015

  25. [33]

    Lagois, Dielectric theory of interacting excitonic reso- nances, Physical Review B16, 1699 (1977)

    J. Lagois, Dielectric theory of interacting excitonic reso- nances, Physical Review B16, 1699 (1977)

    1977

  26. [34]

    Schultheis and K

    L. Schultheis and K. Ploog, Reflectance of two- dimensional excitons in GaAs-AlGaAs quantum wells, Physical Review B30, 1090 (1984)

    1984

  27. [35]

    Pekar, The theory of electromagnetic waves in a crystal in which excitons are produced, Soviet Physics JETP6, 785 (1958)

    S. Pekar, The theory of electromagnetic waves in a crystal in which excitons are produced, Soviet Physics JETP6, 785 (1958)

    1958

  28. [36]

    Klingshirn, Semiconductor optics, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (2007)

    C. Klingshirn, Semiconductor optics, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    S. Wu, L. Cheng, and Q. Wang, Exciton states and absorption spectra in freestanding monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides: a variationally optimized diag- onalization method, Physical Review B100, 115430 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    K. H. Pantke and I. Broser, Damping dispersion of ex- citonic polaritons in CdS, Physical Review B48, 11752 (1993)

    1993

  31. [39]

    L. C. Andreani and F. Bassani, Exchange interaction and polariton effects in quantum-well excitons, Physical Re- view B41, 7536 (1990)

    1990

  32. [40]

    Froehlicher, E

    G. Froehlicher, E. Lorchat, and S. Berciaud, Charge ver- sus energy transfer in atomically thin graphene-transition metal dichalcogenide van der waals heterostructures, 9 Physical Review X8, 011007 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Z. Qiu, M. Trushin, H. Fang, I. Verzhbitskiy, S. Gao, E. Laksono, M. Yang, P. Lyu, J. Li, J. Su,et al., Giant gate-tunable bandgap renormalization and exci- tonic effects in a 2D semiconductor, Science Advances5, eaaw2347 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    K. Hao, L. Xu, P. Nagler, A. Singh, K. Tran, C. K. Dass, C. Schu¨ller, T. Korn, X. Li, and G. Moody, Coherent and incoherent coupling dynamics between neutral and charged excitons in monolayer MoSe 2, Nano Letters16, 5109 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    K. Hao, L. Xu, F. Wu, P. Nagler, K. Tran, X. Ma, C. Sch¨ uller, T. Korn, A. H. MacDonald, G. Moody,et al., Trion valley coherence in monolayer semiconductors, 2D Materials4, 025105 (2017)

    2017

  36. [44]

    Selig, G

    M. Selig, G. Berg¨ auser, A. Raja, P. Nagler, C. Sch¨ uller, T. F. Heinz, T. Korn, A. Chernikov, E. Malic, and A. Knorr, Excitonic linewidth and coherence lifetime in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides, Nature Communications7, 13279 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    Z. Jin, X. Li, J. T. Mullen, and K. W. Kim, Intrinsic transport properties of electrons and holes in monolayer transition-metal dichalcogenides, Physical Review B90, 045422 (2014)

    2014

  38. [46]

    Ferreira, R

    B. Ferreira, R. Rosati, J. M. Fitzgerald, and E. Malic, Signatures of dark excitons in exciton-polariton optics of transition metal dichalcogenides, 2D Materials10, 015012 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Kira and S

    M. Kira and S. W. Koch, Many-body correlations and excitonic effects in semiconductor spectroscopy, Progress in Quantum Electronics30, 155 (2006)

    2006

  40. [48]

    M. M. Glazov, T. Amand, X. Marie, D. Lagarde, L. Bouet, and B. Urbaszek, Exciton fine structure and spin decoherence in monolayers of transition metal dichalcogenides, Physical Review B89, 201302 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    J. M. Fitzgerald, J. J. Thompson, and E. Malic, Twist angle tuning of moir´ e exciton polaritons in van der waals heterostructures, Nano Letters22, 4468 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    Zibouche, M

    N. Zibouche, M. Schlipf, and F. Giustino, GW band structure of monolayer MoS 2 using the SternheimerGW method and effect of dielectric environment, Physical Re- view B103, 125401 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    H. Su, D. Xu, S. W. Cheng, B. Li, S. Liu, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, T. C. Berkelbach, J. C. Hone, and M. Delor, Dark-exciton driven energy funneling into di- electric inhomogeneities in two-dimensional semiconduc- tors, Nano Letters22, 2843 (2022). V. SUPPOR TING INFORMA TI...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.