MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410479331 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.5c03051

Correlated Lattice Fluctuations in CsPbBr<sub>3</sub> Quantum Dots Give Rise to Long-Lived Electronic Coherence

2025· article· en· W4410479331 on OpenAlexafffund
Arnab Ghosh, Albert Liu, Simon C. Boehme, Patrick Brosseau, Dmitry N. Dirin, Maksym V. Kovalenko, Patanjali Kambhampati

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaH2020 European Research CouncilCanada Foundation for InnovationBasic Energy SciencesSony
KeywordsQuantum dotCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)PhysicsLattice (music)Condensed matter physicsQuantumCoherence timeQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electronic coherence is central to numerous areas of science, from quantum biology to quantum materials. In quantum materials, lead-halide perovskite (LHP) quantum dots (QDs) have been shown to support electronic coherence through observation of coherent single-photon emission and superfluorescence arising from spatial coherence at low temperatures. In contrast, direct measurement of temporal coherence between exciton states has been lacking. Here, we employ coherent multi-dimensional spectroscopy to observe an electronic coherence between exciton states in CsPbBr 3 QDs that is long-lived at room temperature, surviving nearly three times longer than the electronic dephasing time. This observation of a long-lived electronic coherence at room temperature points to nearly perfectly correlated lattice fluctuations for each excitonic state in the superposition. These experiments reveal that the properties of LHP QDs extend to lattice dynamics that give rise to correlated fluctuations in the basis exciton states, a process that may next be optimized by design.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207