Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Observation of excitons bound by antiferromagnetic correlations

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Time-resolved THz spectroscopy shows that the intra-excitonic resonance in two iridate Mott insulators appears only at temperatures where short-range antiferromagnetic correlations exist, implicating spin exchange as the binding agent.

desk verdict A smart comparative tr-TDTS study that makes a strong case for spin-mediated exciton binding, but the key absence claim above TN needs a quantitative bound before the mechanism is nailed. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05565 v1 pith:GHUN35YR submitted 2025-05-08 cond-mat.str-el

Omar Mehio , Yuchen Han , Xinwei Li , Honglie Ning , Zach Porter , Stephen D. Wilson , David Hsieh This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords HubbardexcitonsantiferromagneticcorrelationsMottinsulatorstime-resolvedTHzspectroscopyholon-doublonpairsSr2IrO4Sr3Ir2O7spin-mediatedbinding
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 sets out to show that excitons in two-dimensional Mott insulators can be bound by antiferromagnetic spin correlations rather than by the Coulomb interaction alone. Using time-resolved THz spectroscopy on the square-lattice iridates Sr2IrO4 and Sr3Ir2O7, the authors find that a transient intra-excitonic resonance appears only in the temperature range where short-range antiferromagnetic order exists. Because the two compounds have different magnetic critical behavior – 2D Heisenberg in Sr2IrO4, where short-range order persists well above the ordering temperature, and 3D Ising in Sr3Ir2O7, where it collapses at the transition – the correlation between the resonance and the spin environment can be isolated. The excitons also survive photodoping up to densities where Coulomb-bound excitons would have already undergone a Mott transition, which the authors take as further evidence against Coulomb binding as the dominant mechanism. If correct, the result establishes spin-bound Hubbard excitons as real solid-state excitations and opens a route to controlling excitons through magnetic degrees of freedom.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Hubbard exciton: a bound state of a holon (empty site) and a doublon (doubly occupied site) in a Mott insulator, stabilized because the pair moving coherently through an antiferromagnet confines the string of flipped spins between them to a finite length. The discriminating tool is the comparative temperature dependence in two materials from the same Ruddlesden–Popper iridate family that share almost identical electronic structure but belong to different magnetic universality classes – 2D Heisenberg (Sr2IrO4) vs 3D Ising (Sr3Ir2O7). The 1–1.5 THz intra-excitonic resonance, tracked by time-resolved THz spectroscopy, serves as the readout; its presence or absence tracks the spin correlation length rather than the thermodynamic order parameter.

What would settle it

One decisive test would be to run the same tr-TDTS measurement on a quasi-2D Mott insulator with negligible antiferromagnetic exchange (for example a non-magnetic Mott insulator): if a similar intra-excitonic resonance appeared and survived above any magnetic ordering temperature, the spin-binding claim would be falsified. Alternatively, a high-resolution temperature scan of the 1 THz peak in Sr3Ir2O7 that shows the peak persisting but broadening asymmetrically above TN would indicate the apparent disappearance is a lineshape artifact rather than true dissociation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the transient 1 THz (in Sr3Ir2O7) and 1.5 THz (in Sr2IrO4) Lorentzian features observed in the photo-induced THz conductivity are intra-excitonic transitions of Hubbard excitons – bound holon–doublon pairs – whose binding is mediated by the antiferromagnetic exchange interaction. In Sr3Ir2O7, the resonance disappears sharply above the Néel temperature TN = 285 K, tracking the rapid loss of short-range antiferromagnetic correlations; in Sr2IrO4, it persists up to 300 K (T/TN = 1.3) because short-range Heisenberg correlations survive far above TN = 230 K. The authors further show that the excitonic peak does not shift or broaden up to photodoping densities near the expected excitonic Mott transition, and that the photo-excited state at low temperature is more conductive than the equilibrium paramagnetic state above TN, ruling out simple conductivity screening as the cause of the temperature dependence. They conclude that the excitons can only exist where short-range antiferromagnetic correlations develop, so the binding is spin-mediated rather than predominantly Coulombic.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ~1 THz Lorentzian in Sr3Ir2O7 is genuinely an intra-excitonic transition of a holon–doublon pair, and that its disappearance above the Néel temperature reflects dissociation of the bound state rather than a broadening, fitting artifact, or screening effect from increased conductivity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If spin-exchange binding is the operative mechanism, the intra-excitonic transition frequency in any such Mott insulator should scale with the zone-boundary magnon energy (the exchange scale), a ratio the authors already show holds between Sr2IrO4 and Sr3Ir2O7.
  • The persistence of the exciton at densities near the predicted excitonic Mott transition implies that spin-bound excitons are far more stable to screening than Coulomb-bound excitons, so magnetically ordered or correlated hosts could support exciton condensates or fluids at higher densities.
  • The temperature dependence of the excitonic response provides a new, non-equilibrium probe of short-range antiferromagnetic correlations: the appearance threshold of the intra-excitonic peak marks the onset of the correlation length sufficient for binding.
  • Because the two compounds share nearly identical electronic structure, the contrast in excitonic behavior is attributable to the difference in magnetic universality classes, making the pair a controlled test bed for spin-mediated binding.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to tune the magnetic exchange in a single compound (e.g., via pressure, chemical doping, or magnetic field) and verify that the intra-excitonic peak frequency and its temperature onset shift accordingly; the paper does not report such a continuous tuning.
  • If spin-mediated binding dominates, then the same mechanism should bind like-charged carriers (holon–holon or doublon–doublon pairs); the authors note this as a possible route to Cooper pairing, but the current data only address the oppositely charged pair.
  • The fluence-invariance result suggests that the exciton binding energy is set by the exchange scale rather than by the Coulomb scale, so in materials with larger exchange the excitonic Mott transition density should be correspondingly higher; this could be checked across the iridate family or in other 2D Mott insulators such as the cuprates.
  • A natural follow-up is to measure the full time-resolved spectrum at the highest fluences and look for the predicted excitonic Mott transition at densities beyond 1e14 cm-2, where the peak would eventually shift or dissociate; the paper reports no sign up to 4 mJ/cm2, leaving the location of that transition open.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports time-resolved THz spectroscopy measurements on the square-lattice iridates Sr2IrO4 and Sr3Ir2O7, aiming to establish that Hubbard excitons (holon-doublon bound states) are stabilized by antiferromagnetic spin correlations rather than by Coulomb attraction. The authors observe a transient Drude-to-Lorentz crossover in Sr3Ir2O7 below TN, assign the emergent ~1 THz mode to an intra-excitonic transition, and compare its temperature dependence with that of Sr2IrO4. They find that the excitonic response persists up to 300 K in Sr2IrO4 but disappears above TN in Sr3Ir2O7, which they attribute to the rapid loss of short-range AFM correlations in the bilayer compound. Additional fluence-dependent measurements show no detectable redshift or broadening up to 4 mJ/cm2, which the authors interpret as evidence against primarily Coulomb-mediated binding. The main conclusion is that HEs exist only below the temperature scale at which short-range AFM correlations develop.

Significance. If the conclusions hold, this would be an important experimental step toward establishing spin-mediated exciton binding in a solid-state Mott insulator, a mechanism long discussed in the context of strongly correlated systems. The comparative choice of Sr2IrO4 (2D Heisenberg) and Sr3Ir2O7 (3D Ising) is well motivated, and the Drude-to-Lorentz crossover in Fig. 2c is convincing evidence for the transient formation of a bound state in Sr3Ir2O7. The fluence robustness of the intra-excitonic line is a valuable and potentially discriminating observation. The manuscript is clearly written and the experiments are described in sufficient detail to be reproduced. However, the central temperature-dependence claim currently rests on an absence claim that is not quantitatively established, and the frequency-integrated data used to support the correlation-length correspondence are not specific to the Lorentzian spectral weight.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods I.C; Figs. 3c,d and S4] The central inference that HEs disappear above TN in Sr3Ir2O7 rests on the claim that the Lorentzian component becomes undetectable for T>TN. The Methods state that for T>TN the Drude model did not fit the data and therefore no Drude-Lorentz fit is plotted, while Fig. S4 shows only positive, featureless Δσ1 and Δσ2. This absence claim is not quantitatively established: a Lorentzian whose center frequency is redshifted below the ~0.8 THz low-frequency cutoff, or whose linewidth is heavily broadened around 1 THz, would produce positive, slowly varying Δσ1 and Δσ2 across the measured band and could mimic the reported metallic response. I request a model comparison that includes a broadened and/or red-shifted Lorentzian together with Drude-like terms for the T>TN data, and an upper bound on the HE spectral weight as a function of temperature. Without such a bound, the data do not exclude persistence of the intra-excitonic transition above TN in broadened or red-shifted form, so the paper's central conclusion is not yet fully supported.
  2. [Methods I.A and Fig. 3e] The frequency-integrated ΔEmax traces in Fig. 3e are used to argue that the excitonic response tracks the AFM correlation length. However, anchoring the EOS gate to the peak of the static THz field makes the measured amplitude sensitive to Drude weight, carrier mobility, and carrier lifetime in addition to Lorentzian spectral weight. The sharp superlinear increase near TN in Sr3Ir2O7 could therefore reflect changes in the transient metallic response rather than the onset of HE oscillator strength. The authors should show that the temperature dependence of ΔEmax is reproduced by the Lorentzian component of the frequency-resolved fits, or otherwise separate the Drude and Lorentz contributions in the temperature-dependent data.
  3. [Fig. 4a and the paragraph beginning 'Although the Mott gap...'] The comparison between the instantaneous DC conductivity at 80 K (~220 Ω−1cm−1, extrapolated from the Drude component) and the equilibrium DC conductivity at 300 K (<50 Ω−1cm−1) is used to argue that the enhanced equilibrium conductivity above TN cannot explain the loss of the HE. This comparison is suggestive but not conclusive: the extrapolated Drude DC value carries the uncertainty of the Drude-Lorentz decomposition, and the relevant screening comparison is with the actual transient dielectric environment in the paramagnetic phase, not with the equilibrium state at 300 K. Reporting the confidence interval of the extrapolated conductivity and, if possible, a measurement of the transient conductivity at T>TN would strengthen the argument.
minor comments (4)
  1. [References] Reference [12] is assigned to two different works (C. S. Chiu et al., Science 365, 251 (2019) and O. Mehio et al., Nature Physics 19, 1876 (2023)); the duplicate numbering should be corrected.
  2. [Introduction, last paragraph] There is a typo in 'laregely unaffected'; it should read 'largely unaffected'.
  3. [Supplemental Methods I.B.1] The phrase 'experimetnal extraction' should read 'experimental extraction'.
  4. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption describes panels (c) and (d), but the figure contains panels (b) and (c); the panel references should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central inference is a comparative experimental observation, and the prior self-citation is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that a transient 1 THz Lorentzian in Sr3Ir2O7 is a Hubbard-exciton intra-excitonic transition whose viability tracks short-range AFM correlations. This is a comparative experimental inference, not a derivation from fitted inputs. The Lorentzian and Drude spectral weights are fit parameters, but the conclusion is drawn from their temperature and fluence dependence across the independent variable T/TN and from the time-dependent Drude-to-Lorentzian crossover; the conclusion is not the fit itself. The identification of the 1 THz mode as a Hubbard exciton rests on multiple independent observations: absence in equilibrium, population transfer from Drude to Lorentzian spectral weight, and a frequency ratio versus magnon energies, so it does not reduce to a self-citation. The citation of the authors' prior Sr2IrO4 assignment ([12] and [S12]) is a normal reference to an experimentally falsifiable prior result, not a load-bearing uniqueness theorem or an ansatz smuggled in by citation. The main weakness is the unmodeled possibility of a broadened or red-shifted Lorentzian above TN; the paper explicitly states that for T > TN 'the Drude model did not fit the data' and therefore 'we did not plot a fit to a Drude-Lorentz model,' inferring the disappearance of the Lorentzian from a positive, featureless response. That is an evidential gap or a modeling limitation, not circularity. No step in the derivation equates a prediction to an input by construction, and the central claim retains independent empirical content.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new theoretical entities. The main assumptions are about the comparability of the two materials, the validity of literature correlation-length data, the thin-film extraction of optical conductivity, and the interpretation of the absence of the Lorentzian above TN.

free parameters (2)
  • Exciton Bohr radius a0 (assumed holon-doublon separation) = 0.4 nm
    Used to estimate the Coulomb-bound exciton Mott density dc ~ 6e14 cm^-2; the smallest possible separation is assumed, which maximizes dc and makes the observed robustness seem more unusual.
  • Drude-Lorentz model parameters (L_HE, omega_HE, gamma_HE, L_phonon, etc.) = fitted at each time delay and temperature
    The central claim depends on the presence or absence of the HE Lorentzian term; with up to 11 free parameters, the model is flexible enough that the extracted Lorentzian strength could be affected by correlations among parameters.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Sr2IrO4 and Sr3Ir2O7 have essentially identical low-energy electronic structure (Jeff=1/2 lower and upper Hubbard bands), so differences in excitonic response are attributable to magnetism.
    Invoked in the Introduction (paragraph after Fig. 1) and used to justify the comparative method; any difference in band structure could confound the temperature dependence.
  • domain assumption The AFM correlation length data from references [26] and [32] accurately represent the short-range correlations in the measured crystals, and the correlation length is the relevant control parameter.
    Used in Fig. 1c,d and in the interpretation of Fig. 3e; the authors do not measure correlation length in their own samples.
  • domain assumption The thin film approximation (penetration depth of pump >> probe) and the linear electrodynamic relation Eq. S1 correctly extract the transient optical conductivity from the reflectivity change.
    The reliability of the extracted sigma depends on this approximation; the authors state the mismatch is over an order of magnitude, but no direct validation is shown for the transient case.
  • ad hoc to paper The disappearance of the Lorentzian peak above TN in Sr3Ir2O7 is a loss of the exciton population, not a broadening beyond the measurement frequency range or a fitting artifact.
    This is the load-bearing inference of the paper; no quantitative upper limit on the exciton contribution is given for T > TN.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observation of excitons bound by antiferromagnetic correlations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GHUN35YR

@misc{pith2026250505565,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observation of excitons bound by antiferromagnetic correlations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GHUN35YR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05565}
}
abstract

Two-dimensional Mott insulators host antiferromagnetic (AFM) correlations that are predicted to enhance the attractive interaction between empty (holons) and doubly occupied (doublons) sites, creating a novel pathway for exciton formation. However, experimental confirmation of this spin-mediated binding mechanism remains elusive. Leveraging the distinct magnetic critical properties of the Mott antiferromagnets Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ and Sr$_3$Ir$_2$O$_7$, we show using time-resolved THz spectroscopy that excitons only exist at temperatures below where short-range AFM correlation develops. The excitons remain stable up to photodoping densities approaching the predicted excitonic Mott insulator-to-metal transition, revealing a unique robustness against screening. Our results establish the viability of spin-bound excitons and introduce opportunities for excitonic control through magnetic degrees of freedom.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D. G. Clarke, Physical Review B 48, 7520 (1993)

    work page 1993

  2. [2]

    In the paramagnetic phase of Sr 3Ir2O7, only a positive change in both real and imaginary parts of the optical conductivity is resolved at all time delays (Fig

    is very sensitive to temperature and becomes undetectable above TN (Figs 3c,d). In the paramagnetic phase of Sr 3Ir2O7, only a positive change in both real and imaginary parts of the optical conductivity is resolved at all time delays (Fig. S4). Although a Drude model does not perfectly fit these spectra (Methods [37]), the positive response indicates tha...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Huang, C

    T.-S. Huang, C. L. Baldwin, M. Hafezi, and V. Galitski, Physical Review B 107, 075111 (2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Pairing of holes by confining strings in antiferromag- nets,

    F. Grusdt, E. Demler, and A. Bohrdt, “Pairing of holes by confining strings in antiferromag- nets,” (2022), arXiv:2210.02321 [cond-mat]

    arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Dichotomy of heavy and light pairs of holes in the $t-J$ model

    A. Bohrdt, E. Demler, and F. Grusdt, “Dichotomy of heavy and light pairs of holes in the t− J model,” (2022), arXiv:2210.02322 [cond-mat]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Lenarˇ ciˇ c and P

    Z. Lenarˇ ciˇ c and P. Prelovˇ sek, Physical Review B90, 235136 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    Lenarˇ ciˇ c and P

    Z. Lenarˇ ciˇ c and P. Prelovˇ sek, Physical Review Letters111, 016401 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Shinjo, Y

    K. Shinjo, Y. Tamaki, S. Sota, and T. Tohyama, Physical Review B 104, 205123 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Wr´ obel and R

    P. Wr´ obel and R. Eder, Physical Review B66, 035111 (2002)

    2002

  2. [10]

    Bohrdt, L

    A. Bohrdt, L. Homeier, I. Bloch, E. Demler, and F. Grusdt, Nature Physics 18, 651 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    Koepsell, J

    J. Koepsell, J. Vijayan, P. Sompet, F. Grusdt, T. A. Hilker, E. Demler, G. Salomon, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Nature 572, 358 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    G. Ji, M. Xu, L. H. Kendrick, C. S. Chiu, J. C. Br¨ uggenj¨ urgen, D. Greif, A. Bohrdt, F. Grusdt, E. Demler, M. Lebrat, and M. Greiner, Physical Review X 11, 021022 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    C. S. Chiu, G. Ji, A. Bohrdt, M. Xu, M. Knap, E. Demler, F. Grusdt, M. Greiner, and 11 D. Greif, Science 365, 251 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    Hirthe, T

    S. Hirthe, T. Chalopin, D. Bourgund, P. Bojovi´ c, A. Bohrdt, E. Demler, F. Grusdt, I. Bloch, and T. A. Hilker, Nature 613, 463 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    Mehio, X

    O. Mehio, X. Li, H. Ning, Z. Lenarˇ ciˇ c, Y. Han, M. Buchhold, Z. Porter, N. J. Laurita, S. D. Wilson, and D. Hsieh, Nature Physics 19, 1876 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Terashige, T

    T. Terashige, T. Ono, T. Miyamoto, T. Morimoto, H. Yamakawa, N. Kida, T. Ito, T. Sasagawa, T. Tohyama, and H. Okamoto, Science Advances 5, eaav2187 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Alpichshev, F

    Z. Alpichshev, F. Mahmood, G. Cao, and N. Gedik, Physical Review Letters 114, 017203 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    Novelli, D

    F. Novelli, D. Fausti, J. Reul, F. Cilento, P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, A. A. Nugroho, T. T. M. Palstra, M. Gr¨ uninger, and F. Parmigiani, Physical Review B 86, 165135 (2012)

    2012

  11. [19]

    D. J. Lovinger, M. Brahlek, P. Kissin, D. M. Kennes, A. J. Millis, R. Engel-Herbert, and R. D. Averitt, Physical Review B 102, 115143 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    G¨ ossling, R

    A. G¨ ossling, R. Schmitz, H. Roth, M. W. Haverkort, T. Lorenz, J. A. Mydosh, E. M¨ uller- Hartmann, and M. Gr¨ uninger, Physical Review B 78, 075122 (2008)

    2008

  13. [21]

    Z. Chen, Y. Wang, S. N. Rebec, T. Jia, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, B. Moritz, R. G. Moore, T. P. Devereaux, and Z.-X. Shen, Science 373, 1235 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    B. J. Kim, H. Jin, S. J. Moon, J.-Y. Kim, B.-G. Park, C. S. Leem, J. Yu, T. W. Noh, C. Kim, S.-J. Oh, J.-H. Park, V. Durairaj, G. Cao, and E. Rotenberg, Physical Review Letters 101, 076402 (2008)

    2008

  15. [23]

    S. J. Moon, H. Jin, W. S. Choi, J. S. Lee, S. S. A. Seo, J. Yu, G. Cao, T. W. Noh, and Y. S. Lee, Physical Review B 80, 195110 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    J. H. Seo, G. H. Ahn, S. J. Song, X. Chen, S. D. Wilson, and S. J. Moon, Scientific Reports 7, 10494 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    J. Kim, D. Casa, M. H. Upton, T. Gog, Y.-J. Kim, J. F. Mitchell, M. van Veenendaal, M. Daghofer, J. van den Brink, G. Khaliullin, and B. J. Kim, Physical Review Letters 108, 177003 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    G. Cao, J. Bolivar, S. McCall, J. E. Crow, and R. P. Guertin, Physical Review B 57, R11039 (1998)

    1998

  19. [27]

    Fujiyama, H

    S. Fujiyama, H. Ohsumi, T. Komesu, J. Matsuno, B. J. Kim, M. Takata, T. Arima, and H. Takagi, Physical Review Letters 108, 247212 (2012). 12

    2012

  20. [28]

    Gretarsson, N

    H. Gretarsson, N. Sung, M. H¨ oppner, B. Kim, B. Keimer, and M. Le Tacon, Physical Review Letters 116, 136401 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    J. Kim, A. H. Said, D. Casa, M. H. Upton, T. Gog, M. Daghofer, G. Jackeli, J. van den Brink, G. Khaliullin, and B. J. Kim, Physical Review Letters 109 (2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    Moretti Sala, V

    M. Moretti Sala, V. Schnells, S. Boseggia, L. Simonelli, A. Al-Zein, J. G. Vale, L. Paolasini, E. C. Hunter, R. S. Perry, D. Prabhakaran, A. T. Boothroyd, M. Krisch, G. Monaco, H. M. Rønnow, D. F. McMorrow, and F. Mila, Physical Review B 92, 024405 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    D. G. Mazzone, Y. Shen, H. Suwa, G. Fabbris, J. Yang, S.-S. Zhang, H. Miao, J. Sears, K. Jia, Y. G. Shi, M. H. Upton, D. M. Casa, X. Liu, J. Liu, C. D. Batista, and M. P. M. Dean, Nature Communications 13, 913 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Suwa, S.-S

    H. Suwa, S.-S. Zhang, and C. D. Batista, Physical Review Research 3, 013224 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    J. G. Vale, S. Boseggia, H. C. Walker, R. S. Springell, E. C. Hunter, R. S. Perry, S. P. Collins, and D. F. McMorrow, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 31, 185803 (2019)

    2019

  26. [34]

    R. A. Kaindl, D. H¨ agele, M. A. Carnahan, and D. S. Chemla, Physical Review B 79, 045320 (2009)

    2009

  27. [35]

    R. A. Kaindl, M. A. Carnahan, D. H¨ agele, R. L¨ ovenich, and D. S. Chemla, Nature423, 734 (2003)

    2003

  28. [36]

    Zhang, Y

    Q. Zhang, Y. Wang, W. Gao, Z. Long, J. D. Watson, M. J. Manfra, A. Belyanin, and J. Kono, Physical Review Letters 117, 207402 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    Hogan, Z

    T. Hogan, Z. Yamani, D. Walkup, X. Chen, R. Dally, T. Z. Ward, M. P. M. Dean, J. Hill, Z. Islam, V. Madhavan, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 257203 (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    See Supplemental Material at URL for the experimental details and extended data figures

  31. [39]

    G. Ahn, S. J. Song, T. Hogan, S. D. Wilson, and S. J. Moon, Scientific Reports 6, 32632 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Okamoto, T

    H. Okamoto, T. Miyagoe, K. Kobayashi, H. Uemura, H. Nishioka, H. Matsuzaki, A. Sawa, and Y. Tokura, Physical Review B 83, 125102 (2011)

    2011

  33. [41]

    Steinleitner, P

    P. Steinleitner, P. Merkl, P. Nagler, J. Mornhinweg, C. Sch¨ uller, T. Korn, A. Chernikov, and R. Huber, Nano Letters 17, 1455 (2017)

    2017

  34. [42]

    Poellmann, P

    C. Poellmann, P. Steinleitner, U. Leierseder, P. Nagler, G. Plechinger, M. Porer, R. Brats- chitsch, C. Sch¨ uller, T. Korn, and R. Huber, Nature Materials 14, 889 (2015)

    2015

  35. [43]

    Lenarˇ ciˇ c, M

    Z. Lenarˇ ciˇ c, M. Eckstein, and P. Prelovˇ sek, Physical Review B92, 201104 (2015). 13

    2015

  36. [44]

    P. D. C. King, T. Takayama, A. Tamai, E. Rozbicki, S. M. Walker, M. Shi, L. Patthey, R. G. Moore, D. Lu, K. M. Shen, H. Takagi, and F. Baumberger, Physical Review B 87, 241106 (2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    S. Song, S. Kim, G. H. Ahn, J. H. Seo, J. L. Schmehr, M. Aling, S. D. Wilson, Y. K. Kim, and S. J. Moon, Physical Review B 98, 035110 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Foulquier, M

    P. Foulquier, M. Civelli, M. Rozenberg, A. Camjayi, J. Bobadilla, D. Colson, A. Forget, P. Thu´ ery, F. Bertran, P. L. F` evre,et al. , The European Physical Journal B 96, 42 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Watanabe, T

    H. Watanabe, T. Shirakawa, and S. Yunoki, Physical Review B 89, 165115 (2014)

    2014

  40. [48]

    Hsieh, F

    D. Hsieh, F. Mahmood, D. H. Torchinsky, G. Cao, and N. Gedik, Physical Review B 86, 035128 (2012)

    2012

  41. [49]

    G. Cao, Y. Xin, C. S. Alexander, J. E. Crow, P. Schlottmann, M. K. Crawford, R. L. Harlow, and W. Marshall, Phys. Rev. B 66, 214412 (2002)

    2002

  42. [50]

    Chernikov, C

    A. Chernikov, C. Ruppert, H. M. Hill, A. F. Rigosi, and T. F. Heinz, Nature Photonics 9 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    Klingshirn, Semiconductor Optics (Springer, 2007)

    C. Klingshirn, Semiconductor Optics (Springer, 2007)

    2007

  44. [52]

    Wang and T

    F. Wang and T. Senthil, Physical Review Letters 106, 136402 (2011)

    2011

  45. [53]

    Y. K. Kim, N. H. Sung, J. D. Denlinger, and B. J. Kim, Nature Physics 12, 37 (2016)

    2016

  46. [54]

    X. Li, S. E. Cooper, A. Krishnadas, A. de la Torre, R. S. Perry, F. Baumberger, D. M. Silevitch, D. Hsieh, T. F. Rosenbaum, and Y. Feng, Physical Review B 104, L201111 (2021)

    2021

  47. [55]

    K. L. Seyler, A. de la Torre, Z. Porter, E. Zoghlin, R. Polski, M. Nguyen, S. Nadj-Perge, S. D. Wilson, and D. Hsieh, Physical Review B 102, 201113 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Porras, J

    J. Porras, J. Bertinshaw, H. Liu, G. Khaliullin, N. H. Sung, J.-W. Kim, S. Francoual, P. Stef- fens, G. Deng, M. M. Sala, A. Efimenko, A. Said, D. Casa, X. Huang, T. Gog, J. Kim, B. Keimer, and B. J. Kim, Physical Review B 99, 085125 (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    J. H. Mentink, K. Balzer, and M. Eckstein, Nature Communications 6 (2015)

    2015

  50. [58]

    Chaudhary, D

    S. Chaudhary, D. Hsieh, and G. Refael, Phys. Rev. B 100, 220403 (2019). 14 Figure 1 | Hubbard excitons and the magnetic critical properties of insulating Ruddlesden-Popper iridates. a Schematic of a free holon (purple) and doublon (orange) moving through an AFM lattice. Top to...

    2019

  51. [59]

    Static optical conductivity In order to extract the photo-induced changes to the optical conductivity from the tr- TDTS measurement, an equilibrium optical response is needed. At low temperatures (< 100 K), Sr3Ir2O7 is transmissive enough to be measured using static TDTS in th...

  52. [60]

    Resonant internal quantum transitions and femtosecond radiative decay of excitons in monolayer WSe 2,

    Transient optical conductivity The transient changes to the index of refraction ∆˜ n(ω), and consequently the optical conductivity, can be determined from ∆ ˜E(ω) ˜E(ω) since it is equal to ∆˜r(ω) ˜r(ω) , which depends on ∆˜n(ω) [S7]. We use the thin film approximation [S7] in...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.