Measurement of the dynamic charge susceptibility near the charge density wave transition in ErTe$_3$

Caitlin S. Kengle; Camille Bernal-Choban; Dipanjan Chaudhuri; Eduardo Fradkin; Farzaneh Hoveyda-Marashi; Ian R. Fisher; Jin Chen; Niels de Vries; Peter Abbamonte; Qianni Jiang

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 54 references

Measurement of the dynamic charge susceptibility near the charge density wave transition in ErTe$_3$

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using meV-resolved M-EELS, this paper measures the dynamic charge susceptibility of ErTe3 near its CDW transition and finds purely relaxational dynamics with a static susceptibility that grows near the ordering wavevector as temperature…

desk verdict First meV-resolved dynamic susceptibility across a CDW transition, with a promising relaxational-dynamics result, but the static susceptibility claim is overreached and likely resolution-limited. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.14746 v3 pith:YMGGFJ4M submitted 2024-11-22 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Dipanjan Chaudhuri , Qianni Jiang , Xuefei Guo , Jin Chen , Caitlin S. Kengle , Farzaneh Hoveyda-Marashi , Camille Bernal-Choban , Niels de Vries

show 4 more authors

Tai-Chang Chiang Eduardo Fradkin Ian R. Fisher Peter Abbamonte

This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords chargedensitywavedynamicsusceptibilitymomentum-resolvedelectronenergylossspectroscopyErTe3Glaubermodelrelaxationaldynamicscriticalslowingdowndiffusiveorder

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

Using momentum-resolved electron energy loss spectroscopy (M-EELS) with about 5.6 meV energy resolution, this paper measures the dynamic charge susceptibility $\chi(q,\omega)$ of the canonical charge density wave (CDW) material ErTe3 across its primary transition at about 267 K. The electronic charge excitations are found to be purely relaxational, with no propagating collective mode, and the spectra are well described by a Glauber (diffusive) model. The relaxation rate is minimized near the CDW wavevector, indicating critical slowing down, and the extracted diffusion constant peaks around 250 K, just below the transition. In the static limit, the real part of the susceptibility grows sharply near $q_0$ as temperature decreases; the authors present this as the first experimental observation of the long-predicted divergence of $\chi(q)$ at a CDW transition, while noting that the rise continues below $T_c$ rather than peaking there.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dynamic charge susceptibility $\chi(q,\omega)$ measured by M-EELS, parameterized by the Glauber (model A) form $\chi''(q,\omega) = A(q,T) \omega / (\omega^2 + \gamma^2(q,T))$, where $\gamma$ is a relaxation rate and $A$ sets the overall scale. The loss intensity is modeled as $I = V_{\text{eff}}^2 n(\omega,T) \chi''$, with $V_{\text{eff}}$ the Coulomb matrix element and $n$ the Bose factor, so that $A$ and $\gamma$ are extracted directly from the data. The relaxation rate near the CDW wavevector is then described by a diffusion model $\gamma(q,T) = \hbar \tau^{-1} + \hbar D(T)(q-q_0)^2$, and the static susceptibility follows from $\chi'(q,0) = A/\gamma$. This chain converts raw energy-loss spectra into a temperature- and momentum-resolved picture of the charge fluctuations, including the diffusion constant and the static susceptibility.

What would settle it

A direct test would be to measure the same dynamic response with a bulk-sensitive probe, such as meV-resolved inelastic x-ray scattering at the CDW wavevector, and check whether the static susceptibility $\chi'(q_0,0)$ still rises with decreasing temperature and whether the line shape remains purely relaxational; if the bulk shows a softening collective mode or a $\chi'$ that peaks at $T_c$, the surface assumption would be invalidated. A second falsifier: extend the measurement below $T_{C2}$ and see whether $\chi'(q_0,0)$ continues to grow, saturates, or turns over, which would distinguish a genuine near-divergence from a disorder-rounded rise.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the dynamic charge susceptibility of ErTe3 near its CDW transition is dominated by relaxational, diffusive fluctuations rather than by a propagating soft electronic mode, and that the static limit of this susceptibility rises strongly near the CDW wavevector as the temperature is lowered. Fitting the M-EELS loss spectra to the Glauber (model A) form for a non-conserved order parameter, $\chi''(q,\omega) = A \omega/(\omega^2+\gamma^2)$, yields an excellent two-parameter description at all measured temperatures and momenta. The relaxation rate $\gamma$ shows a pronounced minimum at $q_0$, the signature of critical slowing down, and a parabolic momentum dependence that defines a diffusion constant $D(T)$ with a maximum near 250 K. The real part of the susceptibility in the static limit, $\chi'(q,0) = A/\gamma$, develops a peak at $q_0$ that increases with decreasing temperature, which the authors identify as the first observation of the susceptibility divergence predicted for CDW transitions since the 1970s. They also carefully note that the rise does not diverge at $T_c$ but continues to the lowest temperature measured, offering possible explanations including weak disorder or gapping of only a small fraction of the Fermi surface.

Load-bearing premise

The central assumption is that the surface charge dynamics measured with 50 eV electrons accurately represent the bulk CDW transition in ErTe3.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The charge dynamics in ErTe3 near its CDW transition are relaxational, so theories of the transition must account for diffusive order-parameter fluctuations rather than solely soft propagating modes.
The static charge susceptibility $\chi'(q,0)$ grows near the CDW wavevector as the temperature is lowered, providing the first direct experimental evidence for the predicted divergence of $\chi(q)$ at a CDW transition, albeit with a rise that continues below $T_c$.
The diffusion constant $D(T)$ peaks around 250 K, just below $T_c$, coinciding with the temperature where a strong violation of the Wiedemann-Franz law was previously reported.
The characteristic diffusion length of the CDW fluctuations is roughly 2 to 10 lattice constants, similar to diffusive charge order in a stripe-ordered cuprate.
Density fluctuations are present at all measured momenta, indicating that a substantial fraction of valence electrons contributes to the charge response even away from $q_0$.

Reading between the lines

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

Because 50 eV electrons probe only a few atomic layers near the surface, the measured susceptibility could differ from the bulk; a bulk-sensitive measurement would test whether the surface transition and dynamics are representative.
The exponential rather than logarithmic temperature dependence of $\chi'(q_0,0)$ hints that the divergence mechanism is not simple 1D nesting; applying the same measurement to other RTe3 compounds with different rare-earth ions could map how this depends on Fermi surface morphology.
If the rise in $\chi'(q_0,0)$ continues below the second transition $T_{C2}$ or saturates at low temperature, that would discriminate between a true near-divergence and a disorder-rounded response; this is a direct extension of the reported data.
The finding that the electronic response is relaxational while phonons soften suggests that the electron-phonon coupling that drives the CDW may itself be governed by the diffusive electronic fluctuations; a time-resolved extension could test whether these relaxational dynamics control the CDW ordering kinetics.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Let me give you my read. The genuinely new thing here is the measurement itself: first meV-resolution dynamic charge susceptibility across a CDW transition, and it shows the electronic response is purely relaxational, not the soft phonon behavior seen by IXS. That is a real result and likely stands regardless of the static susceptibility issues. The elastic scattering analysis is careful, the Tc they extract matches x-ray data, and the Glauber model fits the loss spectra well with only two parameters.

The soft spots are real but not fatal to the relaxational claim. The abstract says 'divergence' while the body admits the static susceptibility does not diverge at Tc and keeps rising to low T. That's an overclaim, and the body's explanation—bare vs dressed susceptibility—is speculative. More importantly, the stress-test note is on point: the data are never deconvolved from the 5.6 meV resolution. Near q0, γ drops below the resolution scale, so A and γ from the Glauber fits are not independent. The ratio A/γ then reflects the resolution function as much as the intrinsic response. The continued rise of χ'(q0,0) to lowest temperature could be a resolution artifact. There are no error bars on A, γ, or χ', and no comparison with alternative line shapes, so the A/γ route to the static susceptibility is model-dependent. The surface sensitivity of 50 eV M-EELS is also an unaddressed assumption; the authors should at least justify that the surface response tracks the bulk CDW.

None of this kills the paper. The relaxational dynamics and the diffusivity peak near 250 K are interesting and worth reporting, and the measurement technique is genuinely new in this context. But the static susceptibility claim needs to be either backed with a resolution-deconvolved analysis or pulled back to what the data actually show.

Who is this for? CDW experimentalists and theorists who care about order-parameter fluctuations. It deserves a serious referee: the experimental window is valuable, and the issues are addressable in revision. I'd recommend sending it out, with a referee who will push on the resolution handling and the abstract/body mismatch.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports momentum-resolved electron energy-loss spectroscopy (M-EELS) measurements of ErTe3 near its higher charge-density-wave transition at TC1 ≈ 267 K. Elastic scans track the CDW satellite and its correlation length, while inelastic spectra are fit to a Glauber/diffusive model, χ''(q,ω,T) = A(q,T) ω / (ω² + γ²(q,T)). The extracted relaxation rate γ(q,T) shows a minimum near the CDW wavevector q0, which the authors interpret as critical slowing down, and a parabolic q-dependence that yields a diffusion constant D(T) peaking near 250 K. The static susceptibility is then obtained as χ'(q,0) = A/γ, which increases with decreasing temperature and is presented as the first observation of the predicted divergence of χ(q) at a CDW transition. The body text, however, explicitly states that the susceptibility does not diverge at TC1 but continues to rise to the lowest measured temperature.

Significance. If the central analysis is correct, this would be a notable experimental advance: a meV-resolution, momentum-resolved measurement of the dynamic charge susceptibility near a CDW transition, showing purely relaxational electronic dynamics that behave differently from the phonon softening seen by inelastic x-ray scattering. The observation of a q-dependent relaxation rate and a diffusivity peak just below Tc is potentially interesting and could motivate further work. However, the headline claim about the static susceptibility is model-derived rather than independently measured, and it is sensitive to instrumental resolution and to the choice of lineshape. These issues must be addressed before the result can be regarded as established.

major comments (4)

[§4, Eq. (4) and Fig. 3(d)] The fits to the M-EELS loss spectra use the raw data without any apparent deconvolution of the stated 5.6 meV FWHM energy resolution. Once γ(q0,T) falls near or below this energy scale, as it does below Tc in Fig. 3(d), the fitted Lorentzian width and amplitude become dominated by the instrument resolution rather than by the intrinsic charge dynamics. In that regime the quantity χ'(q0,0) = A/γ from Eq. (6) is not the true static susceptibility, and the continued rise in Fig. 4(b) may be an artifact. Please include a resolution convolution in the fit model or otherwise demonstrate that the extracted A and γ are unaffected down to the lowest temperatures and momenta shown.
[§4, Eq. (6)] The static susceptibility is not measured independently; it is defined as A/γ from the same Glauber model, Eq. (3), used to fit the spectra. The increase of χ'(q,0) with decreasing temperature is therefore a consequence of the fitted parameters, not an independent experimental observation. To support the claim that this increase reflects an intrinsic divergence, the authors should compare against alternative lineshapes (for example, an overdamped oscillator with a finite bare frequency) and report the fitted A(q,T) and γ(q,T) with uncertainties. Currently no error bars are given for any extracted quantity, which makes it impossible to assess the significance of the reported trends.
[Abstract and §5, Fig. 4] The abstract claims 'a divergence in the real part of χ(q,ω) in the static limit' and describes it as 'the first time' such a phenomenon has been observed, but the body text in §5 explicitly states that the susceptibility 'does not diverge at TC1' and instead continues to rise to the lowest temperature measured. The abstract should be reconciled with the body: the data support a monotonic increase, not a divergence at the transition. The wording 'first experimental observation' should also be moderated given that the quantity is extracted from a model fit rather than measured directly.
[§2, Fig. 1(c)] The 50 eV incident electron energy used in the M-EELS experiment makes the measurement strongly surface sensitive, yet the paper compares the extracted susceptibility and dynamics with bulk TC1 and bulk transport and thermodynamic properties without discussing possible surface-versus-bulk differences. If the surface CDW transition temperature or fluctuation spectrum differs from the bulk, the extracted χ(q,ω) would not describe the bulk CDW transition. Please address this limitation explicitly or qualify the conclusions accordingly.

minor comments (6)

[Introduction] The phrase 'CDW mehavior' in the second paragraph is a typo and should read 'CDW behavior'.
[§3, text and Fig. 2] There are missing spaces in 'TC1≈ 267K and TC2≈ 159K withqC1≈ (5/7)c∗'; please format these quantities consistently.
[Fig. 4 caption] The caption uses t in χ′(q,ω=0,t) where the text and figure axes refer to temperature T; please correct the symbol.
[Supplemental Information, Eq. (S2)] The global fit to the disorder model reports the minima at σ = 2.6 and κ = 2500 but gives no uncertainties on these parameters; provide confidence intervals or standard errors to support the claim that the two fits are comparable.
[§4, Eq. (5)] The notation ℏD(T) implies D has units of energy divided by squared momentum, but the paper later refers to a 'diffusion constant' and a diffusion length λ ∼ √(Dτ). Please define the units of D explicitly and check consistency between Eqs. (5) and the definition of λ.
[§3, Fig. 2(b)] The text calls the fit a 'BCS interpolation formula' but the expression used is a mean-field order-parameter interpolation; please clarify the terminology.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the static susceptibility is a model-based extraction from independently fitted spectra, and the self-citations are methodological, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The central new result—the relaxational (Glauber) form of χ''(q,ω) and the temperature/momentum dependence of γ(q,T)—is obtained by fitting Eq. (4) to raw M-EELS spectra with only two adjustable parameters per spectrum (A, γ). The static susceptibility χ'(q,0) = A/γ in Eq. (6) is a derived quantity from those same fits, not a separate quantity fitted to the divergence. The theoretical expectation of a CDW susceptibility divergence is imported from Grüner [1], an external reference, and the paper's own Fig. 4b shows a continued rise rather than an actual divergence, so the abstract's 'divergence' wording is an interpretation of the model-extracted ratio, not a circular use of the prediction. The M-EELS response formalism relies on prior work [32,33] by the same group, but those are peer-reviewed method papers whose central formalism is independently testable and has been applied to multiple other materials; they are not uniqueness theorems and do not import the present conclusion. Self-citations such as [49,54] are used for comparison or context and are not load-bearing. No step reduces by construction to its own inputs; the main caveats (instrument resolution not deconvolved and surface sensitivity) are correctness risks rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the assumed Glauber form for the susceptibility, the proportionality of M-EELS intensity to χ'', the surface-bulk correspondence, and the diffusion model. The static susceptibility and its temperature dependence are derived from fitted parameters, not measured independently.

free parameters (6)

A(q,T) = Not listed; fit to data at each q,T
Amplitude of the Glauber model (Eq. 3), fitted to the M-EELS loss spectra.
γ(q,T) = Not listed; fit to data at each q,T
Relaxation rate in the Glauber model, fitted to the M-EELS loss spectra.
γ_q(T) = Not listed; fit to elastic scans
Width of the CDW satellite in the elastic Lorentzian fit (Eq. 2).
τ^{-1}(T) = Not listed; from diffusion model fit
Dissipation rate extracted from the parabolic fit (Eq. 5) to γ(q,T) near q0.
D(T) = Not listed; peaks near 250 K
Diffusion constant extracted from the parabolic fit (Eq. 5).
σ, κ = σ = 2.6, κ = 2500
Disorder strength and stiffness in the Nie model (Eq. S2), found by global fit.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The dynamic charge susceptibility is described by the Glauber model (Model A): χ''(q,ω) = A ω/(ω^2+γ^2).
The paper fits the energy loss spectra using this form, which describes the diffusive dynamics of a non-conserved order parameter. This is a standard model, but its applicability to ErTe3 is assumed, not derived.
domain assumption The M-EELS intensity is proportional to n(ω,T)χ''(ω,q,T) with a known Coulomb matrix element Veff.
This is a standard relationship in electron energy loss spectroscopy, but it assumes that the measured surface response is directly proportional to the bulk charge susceptibility.
domain assumption The measured surface response represents the bulk CDW behavior.
The 50 eV incident electrons are surface sensitive, but the paper does not address potential surface effects on the CDW transition. This assumption is load-bearing for interpreting the results as bulk properties.
domain assumption For momenta near q0, γ(q,T) = ℏ/τ + ℏD(q-q0)^2.
This parabolic expansion is used to extract τ and D, but the range of validity in q and T is not specified in the main text.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Measurement of the dynamic charge susceptibility near the charge density wave transition in ErTe$_3$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YMGGFJ4M

@misc{pith2026241114746,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Measurement of the dynamic charge susceptibility near the charge density wave transition in ErTe$_3$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YMGGFJ4M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.14746}
}

abstract

A charge density wave (CDW) is a phase of matter characterized by a periodic modulation of the valence electron density accompanied by a distortion of the lattice structure. The microscopic details of CDW formation are closely tied to the dynamic charge susceptibility, $\chi(q,\omega)$, which describes the behavior of electronic collective modes. Despite decades of extensive study, the behavior of $\chi(q,\omega)$ in the vicinity of a CDW transition has never been measured with high energy resolution ($\sim$meV). Here, we investigate the canonical CDW transition in ErTe$_3$ using momentum-resolved electron energy loss spectroscopy (M-EELS), a technique uniquely sensitive to valence band charge excitations. Unlike phonons in these materials, which undergo conventional softening due to the Kohn anomaly at the CDW wavevector, the electronic excitations display purely relaxational dynamics that are well described by a diffusive model. The diffusivity peaks around 250 K, just below the critical temperature. Additionally, we report, for the first time, a divergence in the real part of $\chi(q,\omega)$ in the static limit ($\omega \rightarrow 0$), a phenomenon predicted to characterize CDWs since the 1970s. These results highlight the importance of energy- and momentum-resolved measurements of electronic susceptibility and demonstrate the power of M-EELS as a versatile probe of charge dynamics in materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.14746 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Real part of the charge susceptibility [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

[1]

Gr¨ uner,Density waves in solids (CRC press, 2018)

G. Gr¨ uner,Density waves in solids (CRC press, 2018)

work page 2018
[2]

S. M. Hayden and J. M. Tranquada, Charge correla- tions in cuprate superconductors, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 15 (2023)

work page 2023
[3]

Hwang, W

J. Hwang, W. Ruan, Y. Chen, S. Tang, M. F. Crommie, Z.-X. Shen, and S.-K. Mo, Charge density waves in two- dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides, Reports on Progress in Physics (2024)

work page 2024
[4]

J´ erome, Organic conductors: From charge density wave TTF-TCNQ to superconducting (TMTSF) 2PF6, Chemical reviews 104, 5565 (2004)

D. J´ erome, Organic conductors: From charge density wave TTF-TCNQ to superconducting (TMTSF) 2PF6, Chemical reviews 104, 5565 (2004)

work page 2004
[5]

Gr¨ uner, The dynamics of charge-density waves, Re- views of modern physics 60, 1129 (1988)

G. Gr¨ uner, The dynamics of charge-density waves, Re- views of modern physics 60, 1129 (1988)

work page 1988
[6]

C.-W. Chen, J. Choe, and E. Morosan, Charge density waves in strongly correlated electron systems, Reports on Progress in Physics 79, 084505 (2016)

2016
[7]

Johannes, I

M. Johannes, I. Mazin, and C. Howells, Fermi-surface nesting and the origin of the charge-density wave in NbSe2, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Ma- terials Physics 73, 205102 (2006)

2006
[8]

Johannes and I

M. Johannes and I. Mazin, Fermi surface nesting and the origin of charge density waves in metals, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 77, 165135 (2008)

2008

Show all 54 references

[9]

P. Aebi, T. Pillo, H. Berger, and F. L´ evy, On the search for fermi surface nesting in quasi-2d materials, Journal of electron spectroscopy and related phenomena 117, 433 (2001)

2001
[10]

Rossnagel, On the origin of charge-density waves in select layered transition-metal dichalcogenides, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 23, 213001 (2011)

K. Rossnagel, On the origin of charge-density waves in select layered transition-metal dichalcogenides, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 23, 213001 (2011)

2011
[11]

Varma and A

C. Varma and A. Simons, Strong-coupling theory of charge-density-wave transitions, Physical review letters 51, 138 (1983)

1983
[12]

Eiter, M

H.-M. Eiter, M. Lavagnini, R. Hackl, E. A. Nowadnick, A. F. Kemper, T. P. Devereaux, J.-H. Chu, J. G. An- alytis, I. R. Fisher, and L. Degiorgi, Alternative route to charge density wave formation in multiband systems, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110, 64 (2013)

2013
[13]

Flicker and J

F. Flicker and J. Van Wezel, Charge order from orbital- dependent coupling evidenced by NbSe 2, Nature com- munications 6, 7034 (2015)

2015
[14]

Craven and S

R. Craven and S. Meyer, Specific heat and resistivity near the charge-density-wave phase transitions in 2H- TaSe2 and 2H-TaS2, Physical Review B 16, 4583 (1977)

1977
[15]

Z. Z. Wang, M. Saint-Lager, P. Monceau, M. Renard, P. Gressier, A. Meerschaut, L. Guemas, and J. Rouxel, Charge density wave transport in (TaSe4)2I, Solid state communications 46, 325 (1983)

1983
[16]

Ru and I

N. Ru and I. Fisher, Thermodynamic and transport properties of YTe3, LaTe3, and CeTe3, Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics73, 033101 (2006)

2006
[17]

Overhauser, Observability of charge-density waves by neutron diffraction, Physical Review B 3, 3173 (1971)

A. Overhauser, Observability of charge-density waves by neutron diffraction, Physical Review B 3, 3173 (1971)

1971
[18]

Hodeau, M

J. Hodeau, M. Marezio, C. Roucau, R. Ayroles, A. Meerschaut, J. Rouxel, and P. Monceau, Charge- density waves in NbSe3 at 145K: Crystal structures, X- ray and electron diffraction studies, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 11, 4117 (1978)

1978
[19]

N. Ru, C. Condron, G. Margulis, K. Shin, J. Laverock, S. Dugdale, M. Toney, and I. Fisher, Effect of chemical pressure on the charge density wave transition in rare- earth tritellurides RTe3, Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 77, 035114 (2008)

2008
[20]

Moore, V

R. Moore, V. Brouet, R. He, D. Lu, N. Ru, J.-H. Chu, I. Fisher, and Z.-X. Shen, Fermi surface evolu- tion across multiple charge density wave transitions in ErTe3, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Ma- terials Physics 81, 073102 (2010)

2010
[21]

Clerc, C

F. Clerc, C. Battaglia, H. Cercellier, C. Monney, H. Berger, L. Despont, M. Garnier, and P. Aebi, Fermi surface of layered compounds and bulk charge density wave systems, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 19, 355002 (2007)

2007
[22]

B. Hu, B. Cheng, R. Yuan, T. Dong, A. Fang, W. Guo, Z. Chen, P. Zheng, Y. Shi, and N. Wang, Optical study of the multiple charge-density-wave transitions in ErTe3, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 84, 155132 (2011)

2011
[23]

Degiorgi, B

L. Degiorgi, B. Alavi, G. Mih´ aly, and G. Gr¨ uner, Com- plete excitation spectrum of charge-density waves: Op- tical experiments on K 0.3MoO3, Physical Review B 44, 7808 (1991)

1991
[24]

Perucchi, L

A. Perucchi, L. Degiorgi, and R. Thorne, Optical inves- tigation of the charge-density-wave phase transitions in NbSe3, Physical Review B 69, 195114 (2004)

2004
[25]

Maschek, S

M. Maschek, S. Rosenkranz, R. Heid, A. Said, P. Giraldo-Gallo, I. Fisher, and F. Weber, Wave-vector- dependent electron-phonon coupling and the charge- density-wave transition in TbTe 3, Physical Review B 91, 235146 (2015)

2015
[26]

Maschek, D

M. Maschek, D. Zocco, S. Rosenkranz, R. Heid, A. H. Said, A. Alatas, P. Walmsley, I. Fisher, and F. Weber, Competing soft phonon modes at the charge-density- wave transitions in dyte3, Physical Review B 98, 094304 (2018)

2018
[27]

A. Q. Baron, High-resolution inelastic x-ray scattering i: Context, spectrometers, samples, and superconductors, Synchrotron Light Sources and Free-Electron Lasers: accelerator physics, instrumentation and science appli- cations , 2131 (2020)

2020
[28]

D. E. Moncton, J. Axe, and F. DiSalvo, Neutron scat- tering study of the charge-density wave transitions in 2H-TaSe2 and 2H-NbSe 2, Physical Review B 16, 801 (1977)

1977
[29]

M. Sato, H. Fujishita, S. Sato, and S. Hoshino, Neu- tron inelastic scattering and x-ray structural study of the charge-density-wave state in K 0.3MoO3, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 18, 2603 (1985)

1985
[30]

Balcar and S

E. Balcar and S. W. Lovesey, Theory of Magnetic Neu- tron and Photon Scattering (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989)

1989
[31]

A. T. Boothroyd, Principles of Neutron Scattering from Condensed Matter (Oxford University Press, U.K., 2020)

2020
[32]

S. Vig, A. Kogar, M. Mitrano, A. Husain, L. Ven- ema, M. Rak, V. Mishra, P. Johnson, G. Gu, E. Frad- 7 kin, et al. , Measurement of the dynamic charge re- sponse of materials using low-energy, momentum- resolved electron energy-loss spectroscopy (M-EELS), SciPost Physics 3, 026 (2017)

2017
[33]

Abbamonte and J

P. Abbamonte and J. Fink, Collective charge excitations studied by electron energy-loss spectroscopy (2024), arXiv:2404.04670 [cond-mat.str-el]

2024 arXiv
[34]

Chaix, G

L. Chaix, G. Ghiringhelli, Y. Peng, M. Hashimoto, B. Moritz, K. Kummer, N. B. Brookes, Y. He, S. Chen, S. Ishida, et al. , Dispersive charge density wave exci- tations in Bi 2Sr2CaCu2O8 +δ, Nature Physics 13, 952 (2017)

2017
[35]

Ibach and D

H. Ibach and D. L. Mills, Electron energy loss spec- troscopy and surface vibrations (Academic press, 2013)

2013
[36]

Kogar, S

A. Kogar, S. Vig, A. Thaler, M. Wong, Y. Xiao, D. Reig- i-Plessis, G. Cho, T. Valla, Z. Pan, J. Schneeloch, et al., Surface collective modes in the topological insulators Bi2Se3 and Bi 0.5Sb1.5Te3−xSex, Physical review letters 115, 257402 (2015)

2015
[37]

Kogar, M

A. Kogar, M. S. Rak, S. Vig, A. A. Husain, F. Flicker, Y. I. Joe, L. Venema, G. J. MacDougall, T. C. Chiang, E. Fradkin, et al. , Signatures of exciton condensation in a transition metal dichalcogenide, Science 358, 1314 (2017)

2017
[38]

Mitrano, A

M. Mitrano, A. Husain, S. Vig, A. Kogar, M. Rak, S. Rubeck, J. Schmalian, B. Uchoa, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, et al. , Anomalous density fluctuations in a strange metal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 5392 (2018)

2018
[39]

A. A. Husain, M. Mitrano, M. S. Rak, S. Rubeck, B. Uchoa, K. March, C. Dwyer, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. D. Gu, et al., Crossover of charge fluctua- tions across the strange metal phase diagram, Physical Review X 9, 041062 (2019)

2019
[40]

S. Xue, M. Wang, Y. Li, S. Zhang, X. Jia, J. Zhou, Y. Shi, X. Zhu, Y. Yao, and J. Guo, Observation of nodal-line plasmons in ZrSiS, Physical Review Letters 127, 186802 (2021)

2021
[41]

A. A. Husain, E. W. Huang, M. Mitrano, M. S. Rak, S. I. Rubeck, X. Guo, H. Yang, C. Sow, Y. Maeno, B. Uchoa, et al. , Pines’ demon observed as a 3D acoustic plasmon in Sr2RuO4, Nature 621, 66 (2023)

2023
[42]

C. S. Kengle, S. I. Rubeck, M. Rak, J. Chen, F. Hov- eyda, S. Bettler, A. Husain, M. Mitrano, A. Edelman, P. Littlewood, et al. , Non-RPA behavior of the valence plasmon in SrTi 1−xNbxO3, Physical Review B 108, 205102 (2023)

2023
[43]

Straquadine, M

J. Straquadine, M. Ikeda, and I. Fisher, Evidence for realignment of the charge density wave state in ErTe 3 and TmTe3 under uniaxial stress via elastocaloric and elastoresistivity measurements, Physical Review X 12, 021046 (2022)

2022
[44]

Yumigeta, Y

K. Yumigeta, Y. Qin, H. Li, M. Blei, Y. Attarde, C. Kopas, and S. Tongay, Advances in Rare-Earth Tritelluride Quantum Materials: Structure, Properties, and Synthesis, Advanced Science 8, 2004762 (2021)

2021
[45]

H. Yao, J. A. Robertson, E.-A. Kim, and S. A. Kivelson, Theory of stripes in quasi-two-dimensional rare-earth tellurides, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 74, 245126 (2006)

2006
[46]

M. Holt, P. Zschack, H. Hong, M. Y. Chou, and T.- C. Chiang, X-ray studies of phonon softening in tise 2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3799 (2001)

2001
[47]

Imry and S.-k

Y. Imry and S.-k. Ma, Random-field instability of the ordered state of continuous symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 1399 (1975)

1975
[48]

L. Nie, G. Tarjus, and S. A. Kivelson, Quenched disor- der and vestigial nematicity in the pseudogap regime of the cuprates, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 7980 (2014)

2014
[49]

S. Lee, E. W. Huang, T. A. Johnson, X. Guo, A. A. Husain, M. Mitrano, K. Lu, A. V. Zakrzewski, G. A. de la Pe˜ na, Y. Peng,et al. , Generic character of charge and spin density waves in superconducting cuprates, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, e2119429119 (2022)

2022
[50]

W. L. McMillan, Landau theory of charge-density waves in transition-metal dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. B 12, 1187 (1975)

1975
[51]

W. L. McMillan, Theory of discommensurations and the commensurate-incommensurate charge-density- wave phase transition, Phys. Rev. B 14, 1496 (1976)

1976
[52]

P. M. Chaikin, T. C. Lubensky, and T. A. Witten, Prin- ciples of condensed matter physics , Vol. 10 (Cambridge university press Cambridge, 1995)

1995
[53]

E. D. Kountz, J. Zhang, J. A. W. Straquadine, A. G. Singh, M. D. Bachmann, I. R. Fisher, S. A. Kivelson, and A. Kapitulnik, Anomalous thermal transport and strong violation of wiedemann-franz law in the critical regime of a charge density wave transition, Phys. Rev. B 104, L24...

2021
[54]

Mitrano, S

M. Mitrano, S. Lee, A. A. Husain, L. Delacretaz, M. Zhu, G. de la Pe˜ na Munoz, S. X.-L. Sun, Y. I. Joe, A. H. Reid, S. F. Wandel, G. Coslovich, W. Schlot- ter, T. van Driel, J. Schneeloch, G. D. Gu, S. Hart- noll, N. Goldenfeld, and P. Abbamonte, Ultrafast time- resolved x-ra...

2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Gr¨ uner,Density waves in solids (CRC press, 2018)

G. Gr¨ uner,Density waves in solids (CRC press, 2018)

work page 2018

[2] [2]

S. M. Hayden and J. M. Tranquada, Charge correla- tions in cuprate superconductors, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 15 (2023)

work page 2023

[3] [3]

Hwang, W

J. Hwang, W. Ruan, Y. Chen, S. Tang, M. F. Crommie, Z.-X. Shen, and S.-K. Mo, Charge density waves in two- dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides, Reports on Progress in Physics (2024)

work page 2024

[4] [4]

J´ erome, Organic conductors: From charge density wave TTF-TCNQ to superconducting (TMTSF) 2PF6, Chemical reviews 104, 5565 (2004)

D. J´ erome, Organic conductors: From charge density wave TTF-TCNQ to superconducting (TMTSF) 2PF6, Chemical reviews 104, 5565 (2004)

work page 2004

[5] [5]

Gr¨ uner, The dynamics of charge-density waves, Re- views of modern physics 60, 1129 (1988)

G. Gr¨ uner, The dynamics of charge-density waves, Re- views of modern physics 60, 1129 (1988)

work page 1988

[6] [6]

C.-W. Chen, J. Choe, and E. Morosan, Charge density waves in strongly correlated electron systems, Reports on Progress in Physics 79, 084505 (2016)

2016

[7] [7]

Johannes, I

M. Johannes, I. Mazin, and C. Howells, Fermi-surface nesting and the origin of the charge-density wave in NbSe2, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Ma- terials Physics 73, 205102 (2006)

2006

[8] [8]

Johannes and I

M. Johannes and I. Mazin, Fermi surface nesting and the origin of charge density waves in metals, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 77, 165135 (2008)

2008