This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

The Influence of Extended Interactions on Spin Dynamics in One-dimensional Cuprates

Ta Tang [email protected] Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Department of Applied Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA    Daniel Jost Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA    Brian Moritz Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA    Thomas P. Devereaux [email protected] Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA Geballe Laboratory for Advanced Materials, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, USA
Abstract

Quasi-one-dimensional (1D) materials provide a unique platform for understanding the importance and influence of extended interactions on the physics of strongly correlated systems due to their relative structural simplicity and the existence of powerful theoretical tools well-adapted to one spatial dimension. Recently, this was highlighted by anomalous observations in the single-particle spectral function A(q,ω)A(q,\omega) of 1D cuprate chain compounds, measured by angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES), which were explained by the presence of a long-range attractive interaction. Such an extended interaction should leave its fingerprints on other observables, notably the dynamical spin structure factor S(q,ω)S(q,\omega), measured by neutron scattering or resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS). Starting from a simple Hubbard Hamiltonian in 1D and using time-dependent density matrix renormalization group (tDMRG) methods, we show that the presence of long-range attractive coupling, directly through an instantaneous Coulomb interaction VV or retarded electron-phonon (el-ph) coupling, can introduce significant spectral weight redistribution in S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) across a wide range of doping. This underscores the significant impact that extended interactions can have on dynamical correlations among particles, and the importance of properly incorporating this influence in modeling. Our results demonstrate that S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) can provide a sensitive experimental constraint, which complements ARPES measurements, in identifying key interactions in 1D cuprates, beyond the standard Hubbard model.

The origin of high-temperature superconductivity that has been found in layered, quasi-two-dimensional (2D) cuprates remains elusive despite concerted investigations over the last few decades. From the perspective of numerical simulations, although simplified Hamiltonians, such as the Hubbard model and related variants, have produced rich physics, seemingly relevant to the cuprates [1, 2, 3], insufficient evidence exists for the presence of dd-wave superconductivity in the ground state. Quasi-long-range superconductivity has been reported only on small width cylinders with a strong competition from coexisting charge order [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. Moreover, it seems superconducting correlations decay exponentially for wider clusters, indicating that superconductivity may be absent for parameters thought to be relevant to the hole-doped cuprate compounds.

While numerical difficulties in reaching the 2D limit may prevent us from saying anything definitive about superconductivity in these simplified models, additional ingredients may well be needed to provide the crucial boost for superconductivity. Assessing the impact of missing ingredients, such as phonons, whose influence has manifest as kinks or replica bands in photoemission measurements [14, 15, 16, 17, 18], or long-range interactions, is even more challenging in 2D modeling due to the additional numerical difficulty associated with adding more degrees of freedom and the associated expansion of the effective Hilbert space, and the growth of long-range entanglement. Our task may be made easier, with more numerical control and better theoretical understanding, by turning to the simpler, yet structurally similar, quasi-one-dimensional (1D) cuprates.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Dynamical spin structure factor with L=80. S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) from different models at 20% doping on an 80-site chain with broadening δ=0.1th\delta=0.1t_{h}. See Fig. S1 in the Supplementary Material for the real-space, time-dependent spin-spin correlations. Compared to the HM in (a) and HM+VV in (b), excitations in S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} in (c) are much broader and appear to be gapless across momentum q0q_{0} to π\pi. (d) EDC at q=πq=\pi. Extended el-ph coupling shifts the peak towards ω=0\omega=0 and broadens the spectra. (e) MDC at ω=0\omega=0. Green dashed line indicate q0=(1δ)π=4/5πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi=4/5\pi. While the peaks of both the HM and HM+VV are located at q0q_{0}, the extended el-ph coupling broadens and shifts the peak from q0q_{0} towards q=πq=\pi.

Recent synthesis progress on the doped 1D-chain cuprate Ba2xSrxCuO3+δ\mathrm{Ba}_{2-x}\mathrm{Sr}_{x}\mathrm{CuO}_{3+\delta} [19] provides an excellent opportunity for testing theoretical models against experiments. Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES) data on this doped 1D-chain in conjunction with numerical simulations revealed the presence of a strong, extended, attractive interaction [19]. Such an effective strong and extended attractive interaction likely originates from extended electron-phonon (el-ph) couplings [20]. It was found in later numerical work [21], that the extended el-ph coupling reproduces well the doping dependence of salient ARPES spectral features, which has been shown to enhance superconducting pairing correlations in 1D and have important implications for realizing a dd-wave superconducting ground state in the structurally similar layered 2D cuprates. This extended el-ph coupling can significantly suppress the static spin-spin correlation [21] otherwise obtained from the Hubbard model, while only slightly affecting the exponent of the single particle correlations. This motivates us to unravel the spin-spin correlation in frequency through the dynamical spin structure factor S(q,ω)S(q,\omega), which can be used to further refine how the el-ph interactions impact the spin dynamics beyond the simple Hubbard model. As we will show, S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) may provide a sensitive probe on the presence and influence of extended el-ph interactions in the 1D cuprates.

In this work, we compute the dynamical spin structure factor S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) influenced by extended, attractive couplings on a 1D chain for various hole doping concentrations δ\delta. We demonstrate that the addition of such extended interactions can introduce significant qualitative and quantitative changes to S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) as a function of δ\delta. The two-spinon excitations at the zone edge significantly broaden and soften, even becoming gapless across the momentum range (1δ)πqπ(1-\delta)\pi\leq q\leq\pi when the extended interactions come from el-ph coupling, while also leading to an apparent shift in the “2kFk_{\textrm{F}}” momentum position towards π\pi, compared to the simple Hubbard model [2kF=(1δ)π2k_{\textrm{F}}=(1-\delta)\pi] .

The Hubbard model (HM) is purely electronic

Hel=thijσ(c^iσc^jσ+h.c.)+Uin^in^i,H_{el}=-t_{h}\sum_{\left<ij\right>\sigma}(\hat{c}^{\dagger}_{i\sigma}\hat{c}_{j\sigma}+h.c.)+U\sum_{i}\hat{n}_{i\uparrow}\hat{n}_{i\downarrow}, (1)

where c^iσ\hat{c}^{\dagger}_{i\sigma} (c^iσ\hat{c}_{i\sigma}) is the charge creation (annihilation) operator on site ii for spin σ\sigma, n^iσ\hat{n}_{i\sigma} is the charge number operator on site ii for spin σ\sigma, and UU is the on-site repulsion. To avoid confusion with the time variable tt, we use tht_{h} to denote the hopping integral. We consider two forms of extended, attractive couplings to modify this simple HM. In one case, we introduce an effective nearest-neighbor attractive interaction, which has been used in prior work to well-reproduce the apparent single-particle spectra from ARPES experiments [19], to produce an extended-Hubbard model (HM+VV) given by

Hv=Hel+Vijn^in^j,H_{v}=H_{el}+V\sum_{\left<ij\right>}\hat{n}_{i}\hat{n}_{j}, (2)

where n^i\hat{n}_{i} and n^j\hat{n}_{j} are total charge number operators on neighboring sites. In the other case, we add local optical phonons with coupling to the on-site and nearest-neighbor charge densities to the HM, resulting in a Hubbard-extended Holstein model (HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}[20, 21]

H\displaystyle H =\displaystyle= Hel+ω0ia^ia^i\displaystyle H_{el}+\omega_{0}\sum_{i}\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{i}\hat{a}_{i} (3)
+g0in^i(a^i+a^i)+g1ijn^i(a^j+a^j),\displaystyle\quad+g_{0}\sum_{i}\hat{n}_{i}(\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{i}+\hat{a}_{i})+g_{1}\sum_{\left<ij\right>}\hat{n}_{i}(\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{j}+\hat{a}_{j}),

where a^i\hat{a}^{\dagger}_{i} and a^i\hat{a}_{i} are the phonon ladder operators on site ii, n^i\hat{n}_{i} is the total charge number operator on site ii, ω0\omega_{0} is the phonon frequency, g0g_{0} is the on-site el-ph coupling, g1g_{1} is the nearest-neighbor el-ph coupling, and ij\left<ij\right> sums over nearest-neighbors.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Dynamical spin structure factor with L=40. S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) for model Hamiltonians at doping concentrations as indicated on a 40-site chain with broadening η=0.2th\eta=0.2t_{h}. Row A is for the Hubbard model (HM), row B is for the extended-Hubbard model (HM+VV), and row C is for the Hubbard-extended Holstein model (HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}). Each of the spectra have been normalized to their separate maxima. Columns 1-6 correspond to 0%-50% doping. S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) has been obtained from the real-space, time-dependent spin-spin correlation (see Fig. S2 in the Supplementary Material). For the HM, as doping level δ\delta increases, the excitation gap at q=πq=\pi becomes larger, while the ω=0\omega=0 peak’s momentum position q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi becomes smaller. For the HM+VV, the excitation gap at q=πq=\pi has softened relative to the HM across all doping. For the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, the extended el-ph couplings broadens the excitation peaks in the momentum range (1δ)πqπ(1-\delta)\pi\leq q\leq\pi, with noticeable spectral weight extending to low frequencies (or even zero at small doping).

To solve for the ground states of these models, we use the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) [22, 23] method; and for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} we employ a local basis optimization (LBO) [24] for the phonon degrees of freedom in Eq. 3. We then use time-dependent DMRG (tDMRG) [25, 26, 27], with a dynamical LBO [28] for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, to calculate the correlator

S(r,t)=s^L/2+rz(t)s^L/2z(0)s^L/2+rz(0)s^L/2z(0),S(r,t)=\left<\hat{s}^{z}_{L/2+r}(t)\hat{s}^{z}_{L/2}(0)\right>-\left<\hat{s}^{z}_{L/2+r}(0)\hat{s}^{z}_{L/2}(0)\right>, (4)

which is measured at uniformly spaced discrete time steps tn=nδtt_{n}=n\delta t, n=0,1,,Nn=0,1,\cdots,N, until reaching the maximum time T=NδtT=N\delta t. S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) is then obtained by Fourier transform. To reduce the effect of the cutoff at finite time TT, a decaying window function 𝒲σ(t)\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t), where 𝒲σ(T)0\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(T)\approx 0, is multiplied to the time signal. The resulting spectra is

Sσ(q,ω)\displaystyle S_{\sigma}(q,\omega) =\displaystyle= 1LreiqreiωtS(r,t)𝒲σ(t)𝑑t,\displaystyle\frac{1}{L}\sum_{r}e^{-iqr}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{i\omega t}S(r,t)\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t)dt,
\displaystyle\approx δtLrn2(ei(ωtnqr)S(r,tn))𝒲σ(t)dt.\displaystyle\frac{\delta t}{L}\sum_{r}\sum_{n}2\Re(e^{i(\omega t_{n}-qr)}S(r,t_{n}))\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t)dt.

We use a window function 𝒲σ(t)=eσ22t2\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t)=e^{-\frac{\sigma^{2}}{2}t^{2}}, whose Fourier transformation [𝒲σ(t)]\mathcal{F}\left[\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t)\right] is a Gaussian with standard deviation σ\sigma. This window function broadens the spectra

Sσ(q,ω)=S(q,ω)[𝒲σ(t)].S_{\sigma}(q,\omega)=S(q,\omega)*\mathcal{F}\left[\mathcal{W}_{\sigma}(t)\right]. (6)

We compute and compare S(q,w)S(q,w) at various doping levels δ\delta for the three models: HM, HM+VV and HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}. Unless otherwise stated, the spectra have been evaluated for parameters U=8thU=8t_{h} and V=thV=-t_{h} for the HM+VV or ω0=0.2th\omega_{0}=0.2t_{h}, g0=0.3thg_{0}=0.3t_{h}, and g1=0.15thg_{1}=0.15t_{h} for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}. These parameters have been shown to well-reproduce features in the experimental single-particle spectra as measured by ARPES [19, 21].

We first show results for relatively long chains with L=80L=80 and relatively long total times to produce high resolution spectra with small finite-size effects to elucidate the spectral changes for representative doping δ=20%\delta=20\%. As shown in Figs. 1(a) and (b), both the simple HM and HM+VV have gapless spectra at momentum q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi, and with increasing momentum from q0q_{0} to π\pi, the excitation gap grows monotonically. Similar to the overall renormalization of the single-particle bandwidth and Fermi velocity with the introduction of the extended Hubbard interaction [19, 21], the spectra for the HM+VV [shown in panel (b)] between q0q_{0} to π\pi are noticeably softer than the spectra of the simple HM. In other words, a spectral gap at q=πq=\pi extends to higher energies in the absence of extended interaction VV.

The introduction of extended el-ph coupling produces qualitative differences in S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) compared to both the HM and HM+VV. For the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, shown in Fig. 1(c), the lowest excitation peak becomes significantly broadened across momenta q(q0,π)q\in(q_{0},\pi), with spectral weight extending to very low energy (approaching ω=0\omega=0). As a comparison of the three models, we plot the energy distribution curves (EDC) at q=πq=\pi in Fig. 1(d), highlighting both the softening of the gap in the HM+VV and the significant broadening and low energy spectral weight caused by the extended el-ph couplings.

An additional, but not so obvious, difference induced by the extended el-ph coupling occurs in the apparent “2kF2k_{F}” position. We show the momentum distribution curves (MDC) at ω=0\omega=0 in Fig. 1(e). For both the HM and HM+VV, the spectral peak position is well defined at q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi. The introduction of extended el-ph coupling broadens and shifts the peak towards π\pi.

Due to the numerical complexities associated with the addition of phonons, we perform the remaining simulations on short 40-site chains. The resulting spectral resolution is sufficient to demonstrate the impact of extended interactions on S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) as a function of hole doping δ\delta, and the differences between an effective attractive interaction VV and extended el-ph coupling.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: MDC and EDC vs models. MDCs and EDCs for different models at different doping from 10%10\% to 50%50\% on the 40-site chain. Darker colors correspond to results at lower doping. Left column: MDCs at ω=0\omega=0. For both the HM and HM+VV, the gapless “2kF2k_{F}” peak appears at q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi, marked by the dashed vertical lines. At lower doping, this peak shifts away from q0q_{0} toward q=πq=\pi with the addition of extended el-ph coupling. Right column: EDCs at q=πq=\pi. The HM+VV has lower peak positions compared to the HM across all doping, but with similar peak widths. Compared to the HM and HM+VV, the features in the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} are broader and the spectral weight extends to lower energy, even at relatively high doping levels. The peak positions themselves, compared to the HM, have lower energy at low doping (δ<30%\delta<30\%), but this becomes more comparable at high doping.

In Fig. 2, we show S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) for different models (rows) with increasing doping δ\delta (columns). The time-dependent spin-spin correlators in real-space S(r,t)S(r,t) can be found in Fig. S2 of the Supplementary Material. Even with the lower resolution afforded on the 40-site chain, one still sees that both the HM and HM+VV at doping level δ\delta possess gapless S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) spectra at momentum q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi. In each case, for momenta from q0q_{0} to π\pi, this excitation gap grows monotonically. As doping δ\delta increases, q0q_{0} becomes smaller and the gap at π\pi becomes larger (see Fig. 2 rows A and B). Compared to the simple HM, the HM+VV has a smaller excitation gap at q=πq=\pi across all doping levels, as also seen in the higher resolution spectra of Fig. 1.

For the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} with δ>0\delta>0 (Fig. 2 row C), the lowest excitation peak is significantly broadened across momentum q(q0,π)q\in(q_{0},\pi) at all doping levels, and there is noticeable spectral weight extending to very low energy (even approaching ω=0\omega=0 at low doping).

As a comparison of the three models, we plot the energy distribution curves (EDC) at q=πq=\pi in the right column of Fig. 3, demonstrating broadened peaks and low energy spectral weight caused by the extended el-ph couplings. In terms of the peak positions at q=πq=\pi, compared to the HM, the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} has lower energy peaks at low doping (δ<30%\delta<30\%), but the peak positions at higher doping are more comparable; however, at all doping levels the spectra of the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1} are significantly broadened compared to both the HM and HM+VV. We also show the momentum distribution curves (MDC) at ω=0\omega=0 obtained from Fig. 2 in the left column of Fig. 3. For both the HM and HM+VV, the spectral peaks are well defined at q0=(1δ)πq_{0}=(1-\delta)\pi. With extended el-ph coupling, the peaks broaden and shift toward π\pi at small doping, as observed with higher resolution on the 80-site chain.

We have shown that the extended el-ph coupling induces significant changes to the spin dynamics across a wide range of doping levels. Specifically, without the extended el-ph coupling, S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) is gapless at momentum q0=2kF=(1δ)πq_{0}=2k_{F}=(1-\delta)\pi and has a gap that widens from q0q_{0} to π\pi. The extended el-ph coupling significantly broadens the excitations across this momentum range and introduces noticeable spectral weight down to zero energy for doping levels up to at least 50%, as examined here. Compared to HM, the peak positions at q=πq=\pi are softened at smaller doping but remain comparable, yet broad, at higher doping levels. There is also a shift of q0q_{0} from 2kF2k_{F} towards π\pi caused by the extended el-ph coupling. We also have demonstrated that an effective attractive interaction VV can not emulate well all these quantitative, or even qualitative changes in S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) induced by the extended el-ph coupling.

Compared to the enhancement of the holon folding branch seen in the single particle spectral function A(q,ω)A(q,\omega), which is relatively weak and disappears quickly as the doping level increases, [19, 21] the impact of el-ph coupling can be more readily observed in S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) across a wide range of doping due to the modification of spectral weight. The position of q0q_{0}, the peak positions at q=πq=\pi, and the general shape of both MDC and EDC cuts at lower doping can provide vital clues about the strength of extended el-ph coupling in these materials. Our work points out that a promising and perhaps more sensitive experimental assessment of extended el-ph coupling in the doped 1D cuprates can come, for example, from measurements of S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) by resonant inelastic X-ray scattering (RIXS) [29].

Acknowledgements.
We are grateful for detailed discussions with Jiarui Li, Wei-Sheng Lee, Z.-X. Shen, and Yao Wang. This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Division of Materials Sciences and Engineering, under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515. The computational results utilized the resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Some of the computing for this project was performed on the Sherlock cluster. We would like to thank Stanford University and the Stanford Research Computing Center for providing computational resources and support that contributed to these research results.

References

  • Dagotto [1994] E. Dagotto, Correlated electrons in high-temperature superconductors, Reviews of Modern Physics 66, 763 (1994).
  • Arovas et al. [2022] D. P. Arovas, E. Berg, S. A. Kivelson, and S. Raghu, The Hubbard Model, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 13, 239 (2022).
  • Qin et al. [2022] M. Qin, T. Schäfer, S. Andergassen, P. Corboz, and E. Gull, The Hubbard Model: A Computational Perspective, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 13, 275 (2022).
  • White and Scalapino [1997] S. R. White and D. J. Scalapino, Ground states of the doped four-leg tt-J{{J}} ladder, Physical Review B 55, R14701 (1997).
  • Ehlers et al. [2017] G. Ehlers, S. R. White, and R. M. Noack, Hybrid-space density matrix renormalization group study of the doped two-dimensional Hubbard model, Physical Review B 95, 125125 (2017).
  • LeBlanc et al. [2015] J. P. F. LeBlanc, A. E. Antipov, F. Becca, I. W. Bulik, G. K.-L. Chan, C.-M. Chung, Y. Deng, M. Ferrero, T. M. Henderson, C. A. Jiménez-Hoyos, E. Kozik, X.-W. Liu, A. J. Millis, N. V. Prokof’ev, M. Qin, G. E. Scuseria, H. Shi, B. V. Svistunov, L. F. Tocchio, I. S. Tupitsyn, S. R. White, S. Zhang, B.-X. Zheng, Z. Zhu, E. Gull, and (Simons Collaboration on the Many-Electron Problem), Solutions of the Two-Dimensional Hubbard Model: Benchmarks and Results from a Wide Range of Numerical Algorithms, Physical Review X 5, 041041 (2015).
  • Jiang and Devereaux [2019] H.-C. Jiang and T. P. Devereaux, Superconductivity in the doped Hubbard model and its interplay with next-nearest hopping tt^{\prime}Science 365, 1424 (2019).
  • Chung et al. [2020] C.-M. Chung, M. Qin, S. Zhang, U. Schollwöck, and S. R. White (The Simons Collaboration on the Many-Electron Problem), Plaquette versus ordinary dd-wave pairing in the t{t}^{\prime}-Hubbard model on a width-4 cylinder, Phys. Rev. B 102, 041106 (2020).
  • Jiang et al. [2020] Y.-F. Jiang, J. Zaanen, T. P. Devereaux, and H.-C. Jiang, Ground state phase diagram of the doped Hubbard model on the four-leg cylinder, Physical Review Research 2, 033073 (2020).
  • Jiang et al. [2021] S. Jiang, D. J. Scalapino, and S. R. White, Ground-state phase diagram of the tt-tt^{\prime}-J{{J}} model, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, e2109978118 (2021).
  • Gong et al. [2021] S. Gong, W. Zhu, and D. N. Sheng, Robust dd-wave superconductivity in the square-lattice tt-J{{J}} model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 097003 (2021).
  • Jiang et al. [2022] S. Jiang, D. J. Scalapino, and S. R. White, Pairing properties of the tt-tt^{\prime}-t′′t^{\prime\prime}-J{{J}} model, Phys. Rev. B 106, 174507 (2022).
  • Qin et al. [2020] M. Qin, C.-M. Chung, H. Shi, E. Vitali, C. Hubig, U. Schollwöck, S. R. White, S. Zhang, and (Simons Collaboration on the Many-Electron Problem), Absence of Superconductivity in the Pure Two-Dimensional Hubbard Model, Physical Review X 10, 031016 (2020).
  • Lanzara et al. [2001] A. Lanzara, P. V. Bogdanov, X. J. Zhou, S. A. Kellar, D. L. Feng, E. D. Lu, T. Yoshida, H. Eisaki, A. Fujimori, K. Kishio, J.-I. Shimoyama, T. Noda, S. Uchida, Z. Hussain, and Z.-X. Shen, Evidence for ubiquitous strong electron–phonon coupling in high-temperature superconductors, Nature 412, 510 (2001).
  • Cuk et al. [2005] T. Cuk, D. H. Lu, X. J. Zhou, Z.-X. Shen, T. P. Devereaux, and N. Nagaosa, A review of electron–phonon coupling seen in the high-Tc{{T_{c}}} superconductors by angle-resolved photoemission studies (ARPES), physica status solidi (b) 242, 11 (2005).
  • Lee et al. [2006] J. Lee, K. Fujita, K. McElroy, J. A. Slezak, M. Wang, Y. Aiura, H. Bando, M. Ishikado, T. Masui, J.-X. Zhu, A. V. Balatsky, H. Eisaki, S. Uchida, and J. C. Davis, Interplay of electron–lattice interactions and superconductivity in Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δNature 442, 546 (2006).
  • He et al. [2018] Y. He, M. Hashimoto, D. Song, S.-D. Chen, J. He, I. M. Vishik, B. Moritz, D.-H. Lee, N. Nagaosa, J. Zaanen, T. P. Devereaux, Y. Yoshida, H. Eisaki, D. H. Lu, and Z.-X. Shen, Rapid change of superconductivity and electron-phonon coupling through critical doping in Bi-2212, Science 362, 62 (2018).
  • Kulić [2000] M. L. Kulić, Interplay of electron–phonon interaction and strong correlations: The possible way to high-temperature superconductivity, Physics Reports 338, 1 (2000).
  • Chen et al. [2021] 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, Anomalously strong near-neighbor attraction in doped 1D cuprate chains, Science 373, 1235 (2021).
  • Wang et al. [2021] Y. Wang, Z. Chen, T. Shi, B. Moritz, Z.-X. Shen, and T. P. Devereaux, Phonon-Mediated Long-Range Attractive Interaction in One-Dimensional Cuprates, Physical Review Letters 127, 197003 (2021).
  • Tang et al. [2023] T. Tang, B. Moritz, C. Peng, Z.-X. Shen, and T. P. Devereaux, Traces of electron-phonon coupling in one-dimensional cuprates, Nature Communications 14, 3129 (2023).
  • White [1992] S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Physical Review Letters 69, 2863 (1992).
  • White [1993] S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Physical Review B 48, 10345 (1993).
  • Zhang et al. [1998] C. Zhang, E. Jeckelmann, and S. R. White, Density Matrix Approach to Local Hilbert Space Reduction, Physical Review Letters 80, 2661 (1998).
  • Vidal [2003] G. Vidal, Efficient Classical Simulation of Slightly Entangled Quantum Computations, Physical Review Letters 91, 147902 (2003).
  • White and Feiguin [2004] S. R. White and A. E. Feiguin, Real-Time Evolution Using the Density Matrix Renormalization Group, Physical Review Letters 93, 076401 (2004).
  • Paeckel et al. [2019] S. Paeckel, T. Köhler, A. Swoboda, S. R. Manmana, U. Schollwöck, and C. Hubig, Time-evolution methods for matrix-product states, Annals of Physics 411, 167998 (2019).
  • Brockt et al. [2015] C. Brockt, F. Dorfner, L. Vidmar, F. Heidrich-Meisner, and E. Jeckelmann, Matrix-product-state method with a dynamical local basis optimization for bosonic systems out of equilibrium, Physical Review B 92, 241106 (2015).
  • Ament et al. [2011] L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill, and J. van den Brink, Resonant inelastic x-ray scattering studies of elementary excitations, Reviews of Modern Physics 83, 705 (2011).

Supplementary Material

DMRG details for L=80

Refer to caption
Figure S1: Time-dependent spin-spin correlations in real space on a chain with L=80. |S(r,t)|\left|S(r,t)\right| (see Eq.4) for different models at 20% dopings on 80-site chains. (a) Hubbard model (HM), (b) extended Hubbard model (HM+VV), and (c) Hubbard-extended Holstein model (HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}). Each plot is normalized to its own maximum.

In the DMRG algorithm, we keep up to m=800m=800 states for all models and a bare phonon basis n=20n=20 and an optimal LBO phonon basis no=3n_{o}=3 for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}. To find the ground state, we perform up to 36 DMRG sweeps and then perform up to 900900 time evolution steps in tDMRG with time interval δt=0.05th1\delta t=0.05t_{h}^{-1}. For the simple HM, the DMRG ground state truncation error was around 1×1081\times 10^{-8} and the maximum truncation error for time evolution was around 1.4×1061.4\times 10^{-6}. For the HM+VV, the DMRG ground state truncation error was around 1.3×1081.3\times 10^{-8} and the maximum truncation error for time evolution was around 2.1×1062.1\times 10^{-6}. Finally, for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, the DMRG ground state truncation error with respect to mm was around 6.8×1076.8\times 10^{-7}, with an LBO phonon basis truncation error around 4.3×1064.3\times 10^{-6}; and for time evolution of the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, the maximum truncation error with respect to mm was around 1.1×1051.1\times 10^{-5}, with a maximum truncation error of the dynamical LBO basis around 7.9×1057.9\times 10^{-5}.

DMRG details for L=40

Refer to caption
Figure S2: Time-dependent spin-spin correlation in real space. |S(r,t)|\left|S(r,t)\right| (see Eq.4) from different models at different dopings on 40-site chains. Row A is for Hubbard model (HM), row B is for extended Hubbard model (HM+VV), and row C is for Hubbard-extended Holstein model (HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}). Each plot is normalized to its own maximum.

For the 40-site chain, we kept a number of DMRG block basis states up to m=800m=800 for all models, with a number of bare phonons up to n=20n=20 and the number of optimal LBO phonons equal to no=3n_{o}=3 for the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}. We perform up to 30 DMRG sweeps to determine the ground state and then perform up to 600600 time evolution steps with time interval δt=0.05th1\delta t=0.05t_{h}^{-1}. For a doping level δ=20%\delta=20\% as an example, we list the truncation errors in our simulations. For the HM, the ground state truncation error was around 3×10103\times 10^{-10}, and the maximum truncation error for time evolution was around 1×1061\times 10^{-6}. For the HM+VV, the ground state truncation error was around 3×10103\times 10^{-10}, and the maximum truncation error for the time evolution was around 2×1062\times 10^{-6}. For the HM+g0g_{0}+g1g_{1}, the ground state final sweep truncation error with respect to mm was around 1×1071\times 10^{-7} and the LBO phonon basis truncation error was around 4×1064\times 10^{-6}. During time evolution with the dynamical LBO, the maximum truncation error with respect to mm was around 1×1051\times 10^{-5} and the maximum truncation error of the phonon basis was around 2×1052\times 10^{-5}. The truncation errors at other doping levels are close to these values (within a factor of 2\sim 2 to 3).

Dependence on g1g_{1}

To demonstrate the spectral dependence on the extended el-ph coupling, we plot full spectra as a function of doping in Fig. S3, and then extract MDCs at ω=0\omega=0 and EDCs at q=πq=\pi in Fig. S4, for different values of g1g_{1}. For g1=0g_{1}=0, the MDCs and EDCs are similar to the results of the HM, as the local Holstein coupling primarily renormalizes the effective on-site Hubbard interaction. One sees the previously discussed modifications to the spectra that appear as one increases g1g_{1} to 0.1th0.1t_{h} in the second row of Fig. S3 and further increases g1g_{1} to 0.15th0.15t_{h} in the third row, as in Fig. 2 of the main text. Corresponding real-space and time-dependent spectra can be found in Fig. S5.

Refer to caption
Figure S3: S(q,ω)S(q,\omega) for different values of the extended el-ph interaction g1g_{1}.
Refer to caption
Figure S4: MDC and EDC vs extended el-ph coupling strength g1g_{1}. Doping from 10%10\% to 50%50\%. Darker color indicates lower doping. Left column: MDCs at ω=0\omega=0. Right column: EDCs at q=πq=\pi. For g1=0g_{1}=0, both the EDCs and MDCs are similar to those obtained in the HM. Evident changes associated with increasing g1g_{1} include a shift of q0q_{0} in the MDCs, broadening of peaks in the EDCs, and a softening of EDC peaks at lower doping levels.
Refer to caption
Figure S5: S(r,t)S(r,t) for different values of the extended el-ph interaction g1g_{1}.