Dressing due to correlations strongly reduces the effect of electron-phonon coupling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the difference between the coupling of a bare carrier to phonons versus the coupling of a correlations-dressed quasiparticle to phonons, and show that latter may be weak even if the former is strong. Specifically, we analyze the effect of the hole-phonon coupling on the dispersion of the quasiparticle that forms when a single hole is doped into a cuprate layer. To model this, we start from the three-band Emery model supplemented by the Peierls modulation of the $p$-$d$ and $p$-$p$ hoppings due to the motion of O ions. We then project onto the strongly correlated $U_{dd}\rightarrow \infty$ limit where charge fluctuations are frozen on the Cu site. The resulting effective Hamiltonian describes the motion of a doped hole on the O sublattice, and its interactions with Cu spins and O phonons. We show that even though the hole-phonon coupling is moderate to strong, it leads to only a very minor increase of the quasiparticle's effective mass as compared to its mass in the absence of coupling to phonons, consistent with a weak coupling to phonons of the correlations-dressed quasiparticle. We explain the reasons for this suppression, revealing why it is expected to happen in any systems with strong correlations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".