Exciton dynamics in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides [Invited]

Galan Moody; John Schaibley; Xiaodong Xu

doi:10.1364/JOSAB.33.000C39

Journal of the Optical Society of America B
Vol. 33,
Issue 7,
pp. C39-C49
(2016)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.33.000C39

Exciton dynamics in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides [Invited]

Galan Moody, John Schaibley, and Xiaodong Xu

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Galan Moody, John Schaibley, and Xiaodong Xu, "Exciton dynamics in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides [Invited]," J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 33, C39-C49 (2016)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Related Topics
Optics & Photonics Topics
?

The topics in this list come from the Optics and Photonics Topics applied to this article.

About this Article
History
- Original Manuscript: February 8, 2016
- Revised Manuscript: March 15, 2016
- Manuscript Accepted: March 16, 2016
- Published: April 19, 2016

Accepted Manuscript
Download Accepted Manuscript
Access to this article is made available via and is subject to OSA Publishing Terms of Use.

Abstract

Since the discovery of semiconducting monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides, a variety of experimental and theoretical studies have been carried out seeking to understand the intrinsic exciton population recombination and valley relaxation dynamics. Reports of the exciton decay time range from hundreds of femtoseconds to ten nanoseconds, while the valley depolarization time can exceed one nanosecond. At present, however, a consensus on the microscopic mechanisms governing exciton radiative and non-radiative recombination is lacking. The strong exciton oscillator strength resulting in up to $\sim 20 %$ absorption for a single monolayer points to ultrafast radiative recombination. However, the low quantum yield and large variance in the reported lifetimes suggest that non-radiative Auger-type processes obscure the intrinsic exciton radiative lifetime. In either case, the electron–hole exchange interaction plays an important role in the exciton spin and valley dynamics. In this paper, we review the experiments and theory that have led to these conclusions and comment on future experiments that could complement our current understanding.

Full Article | PDF Article

Corrections

9 May 2016: A correction was made to the title.

More Like This

Nanophotonics with 2D transition metal dichalcogenides [Invited]

Alex Krasnok, Sergey Lepeshov, and Andrea Alú
Opt. Express 26(12) 15972-15994 (2018)

Large range modification of exciton species in monolayer WS₂

Ke Wei, Yu Liu, Hang Yang, Xiangai Cheng, and Tian Jiang
Appl. Opt. 55(23) 6251-6255 (2016)

Electrically tunable valley polarization and valley coherence in monolayer WSe₂ embedded in a van der Waals heterostructure [Invited]

Chitraleema Chakraborty, Arunabh Mukherjee, Liangyu Qiu, and A. Nick Vamivakas
Opt. Mater. Express 9(3) 1479-1487 (2019)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (8)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (1)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Material (Temp.)	Recombination ( $T_{1}$ ) and Coherence ( $T_{2}$ ) Times	Reference
${WSe}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1, fast} = 150 fs$	[30]
${WSe}_{2}$ (Various)	$T_{1, fast} = 210 fs$ (10 K); $T_{1, slow} = 17 ps$ (10 K); $T_{2} = 150 - 410 fs$ (50–0 K)	[31]
${WSe}_{2}$ (Various)	$T_{1, fast} \leq 10 ps$ ( $\leq 80 K$ ); $T_{1, slow} \approx 1 ns$ (290 K)	[43]
${WSe}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1} = 18 ps$	[52]
${WSe}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1} \leq 100 ps$ ( $12 μJ / {cm}^{2}$ ); $T_{1} \approx 4 ns$ ( $0.006 μJ / {cm}^{2}$ )	[53]
${WSe}_{2}$ (4 K)	$T_{1, fast} \leq 4 ps$ ; $T_{1, slow} = 33 ps$	[67]
${MoS}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1} = 300 ps$ (untreated); $T_{1} = 10.8 ns$ (passivated)	[32]
${MoS}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1} = 50 ps$	[35]
${MoS}_{2}$ (Various)	$T_{1, fast} = 5 ps$ (5 K); $T_{1, slow} \approx 100 ps$ (270 K)	[39]
${MoS}_{2}$ (300 K) [suspended]	$T_{1, fast} = 2.6 ps$ ; $T_{1, mid} = 74 ps$ ; $T_{1, slow} = 850 ps$	[40]
${MoS}_{2}$ (300 K) [supported]	$T_{1, fast} = 3.3 ps$ ; $T_{1, mid} = 55 ps$ ; $T_{1, slow} = 469 ps$	[40]
${MoS}_{2}$ (300 K)	$T_{1} = 19 ps$ ( $22 μJ / {cm}^{2}$ ); $T_{1} \approx 360 ps$ ( $3 μJ / {cm}^{2}$ )	[48]
${MoS}_{2}$ (4 K)	$T_{1} = 4 ps$	[64]
${MoSe}_{2}$ (4 K)	$T_{1} \leq 3 ps$	[42]
${MoSe}_{2}$ (30 K)	$T_{1, fast} = 1.7 ns$ ; $T_{1, slow} \approx 6 ns$	[60]

Abstract

Corrections

Cited By

Figures (8)

Tables (1)

Journal of the Optical Society of America B