Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 77 references

On polarons and dimerons in the two-dimensional attractive Hubbard model

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 On a square lattice, the polaron-to-dimeron transition disappears once the spin-up filling fraction exceeds about 0.2.

desk verdict A potentially important lattice effect, but the dimeron branch rests on an unproven estimator; the central claim needs a check before I'd trust the zero-transition conclusion. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.19725 v2 pith:S7Z7W3EO submitted 2024-11-29 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.quant-gas

Gerard Pascual , Jordi Boronat , Kris Van Houcke This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.quant-gas
keywords FermipolarondimeronattractiveHubbardmodeltwo-dimensionallatticediagrammaticMonteCarlovariationalansatzquasi-particleresiduepolaron-to-dimerontransition
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

This paper asks whether the polaron-to-dimeron transition seen in a two-dimensional continuum Fermi gas survives when the same system is placed on a square optical lattice. The authors find that it does at low spin-up filling, but the transition shifts to stronger attraction as filling rises and disappears above a critical spin-up filling fraction of about 0.2. For a single spin-down impurity in the attractive Hubbard model, the polaron, an impurity dressed by particle-hole excitations, then remains the ground state at all couplings and keeps a finite quasi-particle residue. This matters because it changes the predicted phase diagram of strongly imbalanced fermions in optical lattices: dilute spin-down impurities should form a superfluid at strong coupling only at low spin-up filling, while above the critical filling the system should stay a normal Fermi liquid.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two complementary tools. The first is the variational wave functions |P(Q_P)> and |M(Q_M)>, the polaron with up to one particle-hole pair and the dimeron with up to two particle-hole pairs, whose energy is obtained by solving a Fredholm equation for the kernel determinant. The second is a polaron determinant (PDet) diagrammatic Monte Carlo algorithm, in which the sum of all diagram topologies at given interaction-vertex coordinates is written as a single determinant of non-interacting propagators; this expansion is found to be sign-problem-free at any spin-up filling for the polaron propagator. A key identification is that the dimeron energy is extracted from the polaron propagator at momentum k=Q_FS, the Fermi momentum, following the continuum observation that the polaron-to-dimeron transition is a crossing of the Q=0 and |Q|=k_F polaron branches. The quasi-particle residue is read off the large-time decay of the polaron propagator.

What would settle it

Compute the dimeron energy directly from the two-particle Green's function G_updown(r,tau) on the same lattice and filling, for example rho_up around 0.29, using a method that can handle its sign-changing diagrams, and compare it with the polaron energy from G_down(k=0,tau). If the direct dimeron energy dips below the polaron energy for |U|/t greater than 6 at such filling, the paper's central claim of no transition above rho_up around 0.2 is contradicted. A simpler indirect check is to repeat the present PDet extraction at several larger L and N_up values to confirm that the PDet dimeron data points in Fig. 2 saturate; a strong system-size drift would signal that the k=Q_FS proxy is unreliable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Working with the two-dimensional attractive Fermi-Hubbard model at zero temperature with one spin-down impurity in a Fermi sea of spin-up fermions, the paper establishes that the sharp first-order transition between a polaron and a dimeron, a dressed bound pair, is not a robust feature of the lattice problem. At low spin-up filling the transition is present and approaches the continuum result, but as the filling fraction is increased the critical |U|/t grows, and beyond a filling of roughly 0.2 the transition is absent for |U|/t up to 20 and, via the variational states, for all couplings studied. In this regime the polaron energy is always lower than the dimeron energy and the polaron residue stays finite. The result is supported by two independent methods: a variational ansatz truncated at one particle-hole excitation, and a determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo algorithm that samples the bare-U expansion to orders beyond 200 without a sign problem; a direct estimator extracts the ground-state energy from the propagator without fitting.

Load-bearing premise

The dimeron ground-state energy is obtained from the single-particle polaron propagator evaluated at the Fermi momentum, a relation carried over from continuum studies; if this momentum-to-dimeron identification is not accurate at finite lattice filling, the reported disappearance of the transition could be an artifact of the energy estimate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At spin-up filling below about 0.2, the polaron-to-dimeron transition exists and shifts to larger |U|/t as filling increases, matching the continuum two-dimensional result in the low-filling limit.
  • Above rho_up around 0.2 in the attractive Hubbard model, a single spin-down impurity remains a polaron at all couplings, and the dimeronic branch never becomes the ground state.
  • The polaron quasi-particle residue Z_0 remains finite for all couplings at rho_up around 0.29, consistent with an earlier lattice polaron calculation.
  • In cold-atom experiments with two-dimensional optical lattices, a small density of spin-down impurities should form a superfluid at strong coupling only at low spin-up filling; above the critical filling the strongly polarized gas should remain a normal Fermi liquid.
  • The new determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo estimator gives polaron energies directly without self-energy fitting, and the algorithm samples diagram orders above 200 with fixed sign even at U/t=-20.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The sign-problem-free property of the polaron determinant series at arbitrary spin-up filling is not explained by any symmetry in the paper; if it holds for a finite density of spin-down fermions rather than a single impurity, the algorithm could extend to the full strongly polarized Hubbard model phase diagram.
  • The upper-bound argument places the rigorous ceiling for the transition at rho_up around 0.7, well above the observed 0.2; narrowing this gap with improved variational states or a direct dimeron propagator would either strengthen or revise the disappearance claim.
  • The same determinant Monte Carlo approach could be applied to other lattice geometries or to mass-imbalanced impurities, where the bandwidth and Fermi-surface shape might restore or further suppress the transition.
  • If the polaron remains stable with finite residue at all couplings for rho_up above 0.2, the fate of a dilute gas of impurities is a normal Fermi liquid rather than a superfluid, suggesting a filling-controlled quantum phase transition in the strongly polarized Hubbard model that could be mapped experimentally by measuring the impurity spectral function.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the two-dimensional attractive Fermi-Hubbard model with one spin-down impurity and a finite filling fraction of spin-up fermions. The authors use a Chevy-type variational Ansatz with up to one particle-hole pair and a determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo (PDet) method expanded in the bare coupling U. They report polaron and dimeron energies, quasiparticle residues, and a phase diagram as a function of U/t and spin-up filling. The central claim is that the polaron-to-dimeron transition present in the continuum and at low lattice filling disappears above a critical spin-up filling fraction close to 0.2, so that for rho_up >~ 0.2 the polaron always has lower energy and a finite residue.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the result is significant: it identifies lattice filling as a control parameter that can destroy the polaron-dimeron transition, with direct implications for ultracold atoms in optical lattices and for the phase diagram of the strongly spin-polarized Hubbard model. The paper also contributes a technical advance: a sign-problem-free determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo algorithm for the impurity problem, with a direct estimator for the quasiparticle energy that avoids self-energy fitting. The demonstrated agreement between PDet and the variational polaron energy at rho=0.29 is a concrete strength, and the calculations have no fitted parameters. The main risk is not internal inconsistency of the polaron calculation but the unvalidated identification of the dimeron energy from the single-particle propagator at k=Q_FS.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Fig. 4] The central claim is stated inconsistently. The abstract says 'we do not observe any polaron-to-dimeron transition for a range of spin-up filling fractions rho_up between 0.1 and 0.4', while the body states that the transition disappears beyond a filling fraction of about 20%. Figure 4(b), for rho_up = 101/312 ≈ 0.11, shows a transition with the crossing region magnified in the inset, and Figure 4(c), for rho_up ≈ 0.23, shows no transition. The abstract's range is therefore contradicted by the body's own data. The abstract and Fig. 4 must be reconciled; if the intended claim is 'no transition above rho_up ≈ 0.2', the phrase 'between 0.1 and 0.4' is incorrect and should be fixed.
  2. [Results, Eq. (11), and Fig. 2] The no-transition conclusion at rho_up ≈ 0.29 rests on identifying the dimeron energy with E_{N_up}(k=Q_FS, tau=infinity) obtained from the single-particle propagator G_down, not from the two-particle propagator G_updown, which the authors state suffers from a sign problem. This identification is imported from the continuum polaron-molecule literature (Refs. [38,45]). On a lattice, the band is not Galilean invariant, so the optimal momentum of the dimeronic branch need not be Q_FS, and the trial state c^dagger_{Q_FS,down}|FS> may have only a small overlap with a tightly bound pair at U/t = -20, making the large-tau projection in Eq. (10) unreliable. Since the M(Q_M=0) variational Ansatz is only an upper bound, the true dimeron could lie lower and cross the polaron branch precisely in the strong-coupling region where the paper claims no transition. The text itself notes that at small U the PDet 'dimeron' joins the bare-dimer branch, i.e. the noninteracting single-particle energy at Q_FS, which underscores that the estimator does not directly measure a two-body bound state. I ask the authors to validate the k=Q_FS estimator against an unambiguous two-particle calculation, for example G_updown at moderate |U| where the sign problem is manageable, or exact diagonalization on a small lattice, and to report the overlap of the trial state with the dimeronic branch.
  3. [Fig. 4 and Conclusion] The disappearance of the transition for rho_up above about 0.2 is shown only at the variational level in Fig. 4; PDet results are presented only at rho_up ≈ 0.29. Given that the PDet dimeron estimator is the least controlled element of the paper, an unbiased check at one additional filling in the critical region, such as rho_up ≈ 0.23 or 0.11, would materially strengthen the central claim. Without such a check, the statement 'Both methods give qualitatively consistent results' should be qualified as applying to the single filling where PDet was run.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the algorithm is 'sign-problem free at any filling of spin-up fermions', but the body reports empirically that all sampled configurations had the same sign at the studied parameters and provides no symmetry argument. Please qualify this as an empirical observation or provide a proof.
  2. [Results, upper-bound paragraph] The bound argument showing that no transition can occur beyond rho_up ≈ 0.7 is only an upper bound on the critical filling; it does not by itself locate the disappearance at rho_up ≈ 0.2. Please clarify that the 0.2 threshold comes from the variational curves in Fig. 4 and not from this bound.
  3. [Fig. 2] The PDet data points in Fig. 2 appear without statistical error bars. Please add uncertainties, especially for the dimeron branch at large |U|/t, where the projection may be slow.
  4. [Methods, Ref. [73]] The PDet algorithm and the direct energy estimator are described only briefly and partly deferred to Ref. [73], which is 'in preparation'. Please include a fuller algorithmic description or cite a preprint with the details, so that the sign-free property and the estimator can be independently reproduced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the polaron and dimeron energies are genuine computations from the Hubbard Hamiltonian, and the PDet dimeron branch, though obtained from the single-particle propagator at momentum Q_FS, is a stated physical identification rather than a tautological fit.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is not derived from fitted parameters: U/t is an input, energies are computed from the Hamiltonian, and the variational Ansatze and the PDet Monte Carlo scheme are described explicitly. The polaron energy at k=0 and the 'dimeron' energy at k=Q_FS are both obtained from the same single-particle propagator G_down, defined in Eq. (8), via the estimator in Eq. (11). The paper states this openly: 'we determine the energy of the dimeron state by considering the Fermi polaron propagator with a finite quasi-momentum at the Fermi level. More precisely, we use Eq. (11) with k at the Fermi surface.' The two-particle Green's function G_updown is acknowledged to have a sign problem, and this alternative route is imported from continuum Refs. [38,45]. This identification is a physical assumption, not a circular definition: the label 'dimeron' is not defined as E_{N_up}(k=Q_FS), and the numerical finding that this energy lies above the k=0 polaron branch is not built into Eq. (11). If the continuum relation fails on the lattice at finite filling, the no-transition conclusion would be weakened, but that is a correctness risk, not circular reasoning. The only self-citations are Ref. [69] for the PDet algorithm (by coauthor Van Houcke) and Ref. [73] 'in preparation'; both are methodological and non-load-bearing for the physical conclusion, and the sign-free property is verified in this work. Low-filling results reproduce the continuum transition, providing an independent check. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained, with no prediction reducing to its input by construction.

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

The computation relies on the Hubbard model as the domain assumption, the one-particle-hole truncation of the variational space, the empirical sign-problem-free behavior of the PDet expansion, and the continuum-derived relation between the polaron branch at the Fermi momentum and the dimeron ground state. No free parameters are fitted to data; U/t is the coupling input. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The one-particle-hole variational Ansatz captures the ground state of both polaron and dimeron branches.
    Equations (2) and (3) truncate the Hilbert space to at most one particle-hole excitation; the accuracy of this truncation is assumed, borrowing from continuum studies, and is tested only qualitatively against PDet for the polaron at rho=0.29.
  • ad hoc to paper The dimeron ground-state energy can be obtained from the single-particle polaron propagator at momentum k=Q_FS (Fermi momentum).
    This relation is imported from continuum results [38,45] and used without proof on the lattice; it is the basis for the PDet dimeron points in Fig. 2.
  • domain assumption The determinant diagrammatic expansion in bare U, Eq. (9), converges and is sign-problem-free for the studied parameters.
    The sign-problem-free property is observed empirically ('all configurations sampled have the same sign') and not proven; convergence is checked by plateau in tau but not by systematic order-by-order resummation.
  • domain assumption The Fermi sea is chosen as a non-degenerate, translationally invariant closed-shell state with periodic boundary conditions.
    Stated in the Model section; this choice fixes the available momenta and may affect finite-size extrapolation, though finite-size effects are said to be negligible.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On polarons and dimerons in the two-dimensional attractive Hubbard model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/S7Z7W3EO

@misc{pith2026241119725,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On polarons and dimerons in the two-dimensional attractive Hubbard model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/S7Z7W3EO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.19725}
}
abstract

A two-dimensional spin-up ideal Fermi gas interacting attractively with a spin-down impurity in the continuum undergoes, at zero temperature, a first-order phase transition from a polaron to a dimeron state. Here we study a similar system on a square lattice, by considering the attractive 2D Fermi-Hubbard model with a single spin-down and a finite filling fraction of spin-up fermions. We study polaron and dimeron quasi-particle properties via variational Ansatz up to one particle-hole excitation. Moreover, we develop a determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo algorithm for this problem based on expansion in bare on-site coupling $U$. This algorithm turns out to be sign-problem free at any filling of spin-up fermions, allowing one to sample very high diagram order (larger than $200$ in our study) and to do simulations for large $U/t$ (we go up to $U/t=-20$ with $t$ the hopping strength). Both methods give qualitatively consistent results. With variational Ansatz we go to even larger on-site attraction. In contrast with the continuum case, we do not observe any polaron-to-dimeron transition for a range of spin-up filling fractions $\rho_{\uparrow}$ between $0.1$ and $0.4$. % (away from the low-filling limit). The polaron state always gives a lower energy and has a finite quasi-particle residue.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.19725 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Quasi-particle residue [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: The quasiparticle energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4: Quasi-particle energies as function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nemeth and D

    J. Nemeth and D. W. L. Sprung, Relative proton number in neutron star matter, Phys. Rev.176, 1496 (1968)

    work page 1968

  2. [2]

    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 Phys.13, 255 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

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

    1933

  4. [4]

    L. D. Landau and S. I. Pekar, Effective mass of a polaron, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.18, 419 (1948)

    1948

  5. [5]

    Massignan, M

    P. Massignan, M. Zaccanti, and G. M. Bruun, Polarons, dressed molecules and itinerant ferromagnetism in ultra- cold Fermi gases, Reports on Progress in Physics77, 034401 (2014)

    2014

  6. [6]

    Demler, Universal many-body response of heavy impurities coupled to a Fermi sea: a review of recent progress, Reports on Progress in Physics81, 024401 (2018)

    R.Schmidt, M.Knap, D.A.Ivanov, J.-S.You, M.Cetina, 6 and E. Demler, Universal many-body response of heavy impurities coupled to a Fermi sea: a review of recent progress, Reports on Progress in Physics81, 024401 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Scazza, M

    F. Scazza, M. Zaccanti, P. Massignan, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Repulsive Fermi and Bose polarons in quan- tum gases, Atoms10, 10.3390/atoms10020055 (2022)

    doi:10.3390/atoms10020055 2022

  8. [8]

    M. M. Parish and J. Levinsen, Fermi polarons and be- yond (2023), arXiv:2306.01215 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Schirotzek, C.-H

    A. Schirotzek, C.-H. Wu, A. Sommer, and M. W. Zwier- lein, Observation of Fermi polarons in a tunable Fermi liquid of ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 230402 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    Nascimbène, N

    S. Nascimbène, N. Navon, K. J. Jiang, L. Tarruell, M. Te- ichmann, J. McKeever, F. Chevy, and C. Salomon, Col- lective oscillations of an imbalanced Fermi gas: Axial compression modes and polaron effective mass, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 170402 (2009)

    2009

  3. [11]

    Kohstall, M

    C. Kohstall, M. Zaccanti, M. Jag, A. Trenkwalder, P. Massignan, G. M. Bruun, F. Schreck, and R. Grimm, Metastability and coherence of repulsive polarons in a strongly interacting Fermi mixture, Nature485, 615 (2012)

    2012

  4. [12]

    Koschorreck, D

    M. Koschorreck, D. Pertot, E. Vogt, B. Fröhlich, M. Feld, and M. Köhl, Attractive and repulsive Fermi polarons in two dimensions, Nature485, 619 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Zhang, W

    Y. Zhang, W. Ong, I. Arakelyan, and J. E. Thomas, Polaron-to-polaron transitions in the radio-frequency spectrum of a quasi-two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 235302 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    A. N. Wenz, G. Zürn, S. Murmann, I. Brouzos, T. Lompe, and S. Jochim, From few to many: Observing the formation of a Fermi sea one atom at a time, Science342, 457 (2013), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1240516

    2013 doi

  7. [15]

    W.Ong, C.Cheng, I.Arakelyan,andJ.E.Thomas,Spin- imbalanced quasi-two-dimensional Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 110403 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Cetina, M

    M. Cetina, M. Jag, R. S. Lous, J. T. M. Walraven, R. Grimm, R. S. Christensen, and G. M. Bruun, Deco- herence of impurities in a Fermi sea of ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 135302 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Cetina, M

    M. Cetina, M. Jag, R. S. Lous, I. Fritsche, J. T. M. Walraven, R. Grimm, J. Levinsen, M. M. Parish, R. Schmidt, M. Knap, and E. Demler, Ultra- fast many-body interferometry of impurities cou- pled to a Fermi sea, Science354, 96 (2016), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/s...

    2016 doi

  10. [18]

    Scazza, G

    F. Scazza, G. Valtolina, P. Massignan, A. Recati, A. Am- ico, A. Burchianti, C. Fort, M. Inguscio, M. Zaccanti, and G. Roati, Repulsive Fermi polarons in a resonant mixture of ultracold 6Liatoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 083602 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Mukherjee, Z

    B. Mukherjee, Z. Yan, P. B. Patel, Z. Hadzibabic, T. Yef- sah, J. Struck, and M. W. Zwierlein, Homogeneous atomic Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 123401 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Z. Yan, P. B. Patel, B. Mukherjee, R. J. Fletcher, J. Struck, and M. W. Zwierlein, Boiling a unitary Fermi liquid, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 093401 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Darkwah Oppong, L

    N. Darkwah Oppong, L. Riegger, O. Bettermann, M. Höfer, J. Levinsen, M. M. Parish, I. Bloch, and S. Fölling, Observation of coherent multiorbital polarons in a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 193604 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    G. Ness, C. Shkedrov, Y. Florshaim, O. K. Diessel, J. von Milczewski, R. Schmidt, and Y. Sagi, Observation of a smooth polaron-molecule transition in a degenerate Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. X10, 041019 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Fritsche, C

    I. Fritsche, C. Baroni, E. Dobler, E. Kirilov, B. Huang, R. Grimm, G. M. Bruun, and P. Massignan, Stability and breakdown of Fermi polarons in a strongly interacting Fermi-Bose mixture, Phys. Rev. A103, 053314 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    M.-G. Hu, M. J. Van de Graaff, D. Kedar, J. P. Corson, E.A.Cornell,andD.S.Jin,Bosepolaronsinthestrongly interacting regime, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 055301 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    N. B. Jørgensen, L. Wacker, K. T. Skalmstang, M. M. Parish, J. Levinsen, R. S. Christensen, G. M. Bruun, and J. J. Arlt, Observation of attractive and repulsive polarons in a Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 055302 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Z. Z. Yan, Y. Ni, C. Robens, and M. W. Zwierlein, Bose polarons near quan- tum criticality, Science368, 190 (2020), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aax5850

    2020 doi

  19. [27]

    M. Skou, T. Skov, N. Jørgensen, K. Nielsen, A. Camacho- Guardian, T. Pohl, G. Bruun, and J. Arlt, Non- equilibrium quantum dynamics and formation of the Bose polaron, Nat. Phys.17, 731 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Prokof’ev and B

    N. Prokof’ev and B. Svistunov, Fermi-polaron problem: Diagrammatic Monte Carlo method for divergent sign- alternating series, Phys. Rev. B77, 020408 (2008)

    2008

  21. [29]

    N. V. Prokof’ev and B. V. Svistunov, Bold diagrammatic Monte Carlo: A generic sign-problem tolerant technique for polaron models and possibly interacting many-body problems, Phys. Rev. B77, 125101 (2008)

    2008

  22. [30]

    Vlietinck, J

    J. Vlietinck, J. Ryckebusch, and K. Van Houcke, Quasi- particle properties of an impurity in a Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. B87, 115133 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Vlietinck, J

    J. Vlietinck, J. Ryckebusch, and K. Van Houcke, Dia- grammatic Monte Carlo study of the Fermi polaron in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. B89, 085119 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    McGuire, Interacting fermions in one dimension

    J. McGuire, Interacting fermions in one dimension. ii. attractive potential, J. Math. Phys.7, 123 (1966)

    1966

  25. [33]

    Chevy, Universal phase diagram of a strongly interact- ing Fermi gas with unbalanced spin populations, Phys

    F. Chevy, Universal phase diagram of a strongly interact- ing Fermi gas with unbalanced spin populations, Phys. Rev. A74, 063628 (2006)

    2006

  26. [34]

    Combescot and S

    R. Combescot and S. Giraud, Normal state of highly po- larized Fermi gases: Full many-body treatment, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 050404 (2008)

    2008

  27. [35]

    M. M. Parish, Polaron-molecule transitions in a two- dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A83, 051603 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    Zöllner, G

    S. Zöllner, G. M. Bruun, and C. J. Pethick, Polarons and molecules in a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 83, 021603 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    M. M. Parish and J. Levinsen, Highly polarized Fermi gases in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. A87, 033616 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    C. Peng, R. Liu, W. Zhang, and X. Cui, Nature of the polaron-molecule transition in Fermi polarons, Phys. Rev. A103, 063312 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    M. Punk, P. T. Dumitrescu, and W. Zwerger, Polaron-to- molecule transition in a strongly imbalanced Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A80, 053605 (2009)

    2009

  32. [40]

    Mora and F

    C. Mora and F. Chevy, Ground state of a tightly bound composite dimer immersed in a Fermi sea, Phys. Rev. A 80, 033607 (2009). 7

    2009

  33. [41]

    G. M. Bruun and P. Massignan, Decay of polarons and molecules in a strongly polarized Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 020403 (2010)

    2010

  34. [42]

    Schmidt and T

    R. Schmidt and T. Enss, Excitation spectra and rf response near the polaron-to-molecule transition from the functional renormalization group, Phys. Rev. A83, 063620 (2011)

    2011

  35. [43]

    C. J. M. Mathy, M. M. Parish, and D. A. Huse, Trimers, molecules, and polarons in mass-imbalanced atomic Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 166404 (2011)

    2011

  36. [44]

    Trefzger and Y

    C. Trefzger and Y. Castin, Impurity in a Fermi sea on a narrowfeshbachresonance: Avariationalstudyofthepo- laronic and dimeronic branches, Phys. Rev. A85, 053612 (2012)

    2012

  37. [45]

    Cui, Fermi polaron revisited: Polaron-molecule tran- sition and coexistence, Phys

    X. Cui, Fermi polaron revisited: Polaron-molecule tran- sition and coexistence, Phys. Rev. A102, 061301 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    V. E. Colussi, F. Caleffi, C. Menotti, and A. Recati, Lat- tice polarons across the superfluid to Mott insulator tran- sition, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 173002 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Santiago-García, S

    M. Santiago-García, S. G. Castillo-López, and A. Camacho-Guardian, Lattice polaron in a Bose- Einstein condensate of hard-core bosons, New Journal of Physics26, 063015 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Sorella, Numerical evidence of Luttinger- and Fermi- liquid behavior in the two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys

    S. Sorella, Numerical evidence of Luttinger- and Fermi- liquid behavior in the two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B49, 12373 (1994)

    1994

  41. [49]

    D. M. Edwards, Magnetism in Single-Band Models: Ex- act One-Dimensional Wave Functions Generalised to Higher Dimensions, Progress of Theoretical Physics Sup- plement101, 453 (1990)

    1990

  42. [50]

    H. Hu, J. Wang, and X.-J. Liu, Super Fermi polaron and Nagaokaferromagnetismin atwo-dimensional squarelat- tice, Phys. Rev. A110, 023314 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    Amelio and N

    I. Amelio and N. Goldman, Polaron spectroscopy of in- teracting Fermi systems: Insights from exact diagonal- ization, SciPost Phys.16, 056 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Amelio, G.Mazza, andN

    I. Amelio, G.Mazza, andN. Goldman,Polaronformation in insulators and the key role of hole scattering processes: Band insulators, charge density waves and mott transi- tion, arXiv:2408.01377 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Greiner, D

    F.Grusdt, M.Kánasz-Nagy, A.Bohrdt, C.S.Chiu, G.Ji, M. Greiner, D. Greif, and E. Demler, Parton theory of magnetic polarons: Mesonic resonances and signatures in dynamics, Phys. Rev. X8, 011046 (2018)

    2018

  46. [54]

    Grusdt, A

    F. Grusdt, A. Bohrdt, and E. Demler, Microscopic spinon-chargon theory of magnetic polarons in thet−j model, Phys. Rev. B99, 224422 (2019)

    2019

  47. [55]

    Blomquist and J

    E. Blomquist and J. Carlström, Unbiased description of magnetic polarons in a Mott insulator, Commun. Phys. 3, 172 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    K.K.Nielsen, M.A.Bastarrachea-Magnani, T.Pohl,and G. M. Bruun, Spatial structure of magnetic polarons in strongly interacting antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B104, 155136 (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    Koepsell, J

    J. Koepsell, J. Vijayan, P. Sompet, F. Grusdt, T. A. Hilker, E. Demler, G. Salomon, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Imaging magnetic polarons in the doped Fermi-Hubbard model, Nature572, 358 (2019)

    2019

  50. [58]

    Jaksch, C

    D. Jaksch, C. Bruder, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner, and P. Zoller, Cold bosonic atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 3108 (1998)

    1998

  51. [59]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Quantum simulations with ultra- cold atoms in optical lattices, Science357, 995 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    W. S. Bakr, J. I. Gillen, A. Peng, S. Fölling, and M. Greiner, A quantum gas microscope for detecting sin- gle atoms in a Hubbard-regime optical lattice, Nature 462, 74 (2009)

    2009

  53. [61]

    J. F. Sherson, C. Weitenberg, M. Endres, M. Cheneau, I. Bloch, and S. Kuhr, Single-atom-resolved fluorescence imaging of an atomic Mott insulator, Nature467, 68 (2010)

    2010

  54. [62]

    L. W. Cheuk, M. A. Nichols, M. Okan, T. Gersdorf, V. V. Ramasesh, W. S. Bakr, T. Lompe, and M. W. Zwierlein, Quantum-gasmicroscopeforfermionicatoms,Phys.Rev. Lett.114, 193001 (2015)

    2015

  55. [63]

    Haller, J

    E. Haller, J. Hudson, A. Kelly, D. A. Cotta, B. Peaude- cerf, G. D. Bruce, and S. Kuhr, Single-atom imaging of fermions in a quantum-gas microscope, Nature Physics 11, 738 (2015)

    2015

  56. [64]

    M. F. Parsons, F. Huber, A. Mazurenko, C. S. Chiu, W. Setiawan, K. Wooley-Brown, S. Blatt, and M. Greiner, Site-resolved imaging of fermionic6Liin an optical lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 213002 (2015)

    2015

  57. [65]

    Omran, M

    A. Omran, M. Boll, T. A. Hilker, K. Kleinlein, G. Sa- lomon, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Microscopic observation of pauli blocking in degenerate fermionic lattice gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 263001 (2015)

    2015

  58. [66]

    G. J. A. Edge, R. Anderson, D. Jervis, D. C. McKay, R. Day, S. Trotzky, and J. H. Thywissen, Imaging and addressing of individual fermionic atoms in an optical lattice, Phys. Rev. A92, 063406 (2015)

    2015

  59. [67]

    Verstraten, K

    J. Verstraten, K. Dai, M. Dixmerias, B. Peaudecerf, T. de Jongh, and T. Yefsah, In-situ imaging of a single- atom wave packet in continuous space, arXiv:2404.05699 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    Combescot, S

    R. Combescot, S. Giraud, and X. Leyronas, Analytical theory of the dressed bound state in highly polarized Fermi gases, Europhysics Letters88, 60007 (2010)

    2010

  61. [69]

    Van Houcke, F

    K. Van Houcke, F. Werner, and R. Rossi, High-precision numerical solution of the Fermi polaron problem and large-order behavior of its diagrammatic series, Phys. Rev. B101, 045134 (2020)

    2020

  62. [70]

    A. N. Rubtsov, Quantum Monte Carlo determinantal al- gorithm without Hubbard-stratonovich transformation: a general consideration (2003), arXiv:cond-mat/0302228 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2003 arXiv

  63. [71]

    A. N. Rubtsov and A. I. Lichtenstein, Continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo method for fermions: Beyond aux- iliary field framework, Journal of Experimental and The- oretical Physics Letters80, 61 (2004)

    2004

  64. [72]

    Burovski, N

    E. Burovski, N. Prokof’ev, and B. Svistunov, Truncated- determinant diagrammatic Monte Carlo for fermions with contact interaction, Phys. Rev. B70, 193101 (2004)

    2004

  65. [73]

    Pascual, J

    G. Pascual, J. Boronat, and K. Van Houcke, in prepara- tion

  66. [74]

    Hartke, B

    T. Hartke, B. Oreg, C. Turnbaugh, N. Jia, and M. Zwier- lein, Direct observation of nonlocal fermion pairing in anattractiveFermi-Hubbardgas,Science381,82(2023), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.ade4245

    2023 doi

  67. [75]

    M. Xu, L. H. Kendrick, A. Kale, Y. Gang, C. Feng, S. Zhang, A. W. Young, M. Lebrat, and M. Greiner, A neutral-atom Hubbard quantum simulator in the cryogenic regime, Nature 10.1038/s41586-025-09112-w (2025)

    2025 doi

  68. [76]

    Chalopin, P

    T. Chalopin, P. Bojović, S. Wang, T. Franz, A. Sinha, Z. Wang, D. Bourgund, J. Obermeyer, F. Grusdt, A. Bohrdt, L. Pollet, A. Wietek, A. Georges, T. Hilker, 8 and I. Bloch, Probing the magnetic origin of the pseudo- gap using a Fermi-Hubbard quantum simulator (2025), arXiv:arX...

    2025

  69. [77]

    Chen, X.-C

    Y.-X.Wang, H.-J.Shao, Y.-S.Zhu, D.-Z.Zhu, H.-N.Sun, S.-Y. Chen, X.-C. Yao, Y.-A. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Ho- mogeneous fermionic Hubbard gases in a flattop optical lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 043403 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

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