
A clever method from Caltech researchers now makes it possible to unravel complex electron-lattice interactions, potentially transforming how we understand and design quantum and electronic materials.
Researchers at Caltech have developed a faster and more effective technique for calculating large sets of Feynman diagrams, which are visual tools used by physicists to describe how particles interact. This new approach has already helped them solve the long-unsolved polaron problem, a major challenge in physics and materials science. Their work provides a more accurate way to predict how electrons move through both traditional and quantum materials.
Back in the 1940s, physicist Richard Feynman introduced a method to represent interactions between fundamental particles, such as electrons and photons, using simple two-dimensional sketches made of straight and wavy lines meeting at points (vertices). While they appear straightforward, these diagrams enable researchers to calculate the likelihood of specific particle collisions, also known as scattering events.
Because particles can interact in numerous ways, scientists must use many diagrams to capture all possible scenarios. Each diagram corresponds to a mathematical formula, so combining all of them allows physicists to calculate quantitative values for interaction outcomes and scattering probabilities.
“Summing all Feynman diagrams with quantitative accuracy is a holy grail in theoretical physics,” says Marco Bernardi, professor of applied physics, physics, and materials science at Caltech. “We have attacked the polaron problem by adding up all the diagrams for the so-called electron-phonon interaction, essentially up to an infinite order.”
In a paper published in Nature Physics, the Caltech team uses its new method to precisely compute the strength of electron-phonon interactions and to predict associated effects quantitatively. The lead author of the paper is graduate student Yao Luo, a member of Bernardi’s group.
For some materials, such as simple metals, the electrons moving inside the crystal structure will interact only weakly with its atomic vibrations. For such materials, scientists can use a method called perturbation theory to describe the interactions that occur between electrons and phonons, which can be thought of as “units” of atomic vibration. Perturbation theory is a good approximation in these systems because each successive order or interaction becomes decreasingly important. That means that computing only one or a few Feynman diagrams – a calculation that can be done routinely – is sufficient to obtain accurate electron-phonon interactions in these materials.
Introducing Polarons
But for many other materials, electrons interact much more strongly with the atomic lattice, forming entangled electron-phonon states known as polarons. Polarons are electrons accompanied by the lattice distortion they induce. They form in a wide range of materials including insulators, semiconductors, materials used in electronics or energy devices, as well as many quantum materials. For example, an electron placed in a material with ionic bonds will distort the surrounding lattice and form a localized polaron state, resulting in decreased mobility due to the strong electron-phonon interaction. Scientists can study these polaron states by measuring how conductive the electrons are or how they distort the atomic lattice around them.
Perturbation theory does not work for these materials because each successive order is more important than the last. “It’s basically a nightmare in terms of scaling,” says Bernardi. “If you can calculate the lowest order, it’s very likely that you cannot do the second order, and the third order will just be impossible. The computational cost typically scales prohibitively with interaction order. There are too many diagrams to compute, and the higher-order diagrams are too computationally expensive.”
Summing Feynman Diagrams
Scientists have searched for a way to add up all the Feynman diagrams that describe the many, many ways that the electrons in such a material can interact with atomic vibrations. Thus far, such calculations have been dominated by methods where scientists can tune certain parameters to match an experiment. “But when you do that, you don’t know whether you’ve actually understood the mechanism or not,” says Bernardi. Instead, his group focuses on solving problems from “first principles,” meaning beginning with nothing more than the positions of atoms within a material and using the equations of quantum mechanics.
When thinking about the scope of this problem, Luo says to imagine trying to predict how the stock market might behave tomorrow. To attempt this, one would need to consider every interaction between every trader over some period to get precise predictions of the market’s dynamics. Luo wants to understand all the interactions between electrons and phonons in a material where the phonons interact strongly with the atoms in the material. But as with predicting the stock market, the number of possible interactions is prohibitively large. “It is actually impossible to calculate directly,” he says. “The only thing we can do is use a smart way of sampling all these scattering processes.”
Betting on Monte Carlo
Caltech researchers are addressing this problem by applying a technique called diagrammatic Monte Carlo (DMC), in which an algorithm randomly samples spots within the space of all Feynman diagrams for a system, but with some guidance in terms of the most important places to sample. “We set up some rules to move effectively, with high agility, within the space of Feynman diagrams,” explains Bernardi.
The Caltech team overcame the enormous amount of computing that would have normally been required to use DMC to study real materials with first principle methods by relying on a technique they reported last year that compresses the matrices that represent electron-phonon interactions. Another major advance is nearly removing the so-called “sign problem” in electron-phonon DMC using a clever technique that views diagrams as products of tensors, mathematical objects expressed as multi-dimensional matrices.
“The clever diagram sampling, sign-problem removal, and electron-phonon matrix compression are the three key pieces of the puzzle that have enabled this paradigm shift in the polaron problem,” says Bernardi.
In the new paper, the researchers have applied DMC calculations in diverse systems that contain polarons, including lithium fluoride, titanium dioxide, and strontium titanate. The scientists say their work opens up a wide range of predictions that are relevant to experiments that people are conducting on both conventional and quantum materials—including electrical transport, spectroscopy, superconductivity, and other properties in materials that have strong electron-phonon coupling.
“We have successfully described polarons in materials using DMC, but the method we developed could also help study strong interactions between light and matter, or even provide the blueprint to efficiently add up Feynman diagrams in entirely different physical theories,” says Bernardi.
Reference: “First-principles diagrammatic Monte Carlo for electron–phonon interactions and polaron” by Yao Luo, Jinsoo Park and Marco Bernardi, 10 July 2025, Nature Physics.
DOI: 10.1038/s41567-025-02954-1
The work was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing program, the National Science Foundation, and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science User Facility. Luo was partially funded by an Eddleman Graduate Fellowship. Calculations of transport and polarons in oxides were supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and Clarkson Aerospace Corp.
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
9 Comments
Scientists have searched for a way to add up all the Feynman diagrams that describe the many, many ways that the electrons in such a material can interact with atomic vibrations. They have successfully described polarons in materials using DMC.
VERY GOOD!
Please ask researchers to think deeply:
Are the polarons related to topological vortices?
If researchers are interested in topological vortices, please browse https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1927657274920383767 (If the link is not blocked).
Why are you asking us to ask them? Ask them yourself. If you don’t even have the ability to do that, what does it say about your other abilities, say the ability to do science?
There is another reason why asking is futile. Suppose you are right – and all the scientific theories thus far are wrong, and all scientists are scheming liars, and all scientific magazines are in on the scheme. So what? That still doesn’t prove that your ideas are correct. You have to prove your ideas correct regardless of the stupidity of the current theories.
And you know what would convince us that your ideas are correct? If your awesome framework could predict things about nature that the current models cannot. Then you can genuinely say that your framework is better than what we have. That’s the way to get credibility. You haven’t done that – your framework makes no predictions. You haven’t even done the work to even explain known things with your framework. You fail because you are incompetent, not because the world is conspiring against you.
Thank you for your browsing and comments, and for your sincere suggestions.
However, unfortunately, we live in different worlds. In your world, there are particles bestowed by God, demons, and angels. In your world, two sets of cobalt-60 rotating in opposite directions are mirror images of each other, regardless of symmetry. In your world, a cat both dead and alive is a beloved gentleman, always eloquently lecturing from podiums in major universities. The world you see from your perspective has no filth, ugliness, or shame — you are far too fortunate.
Congratulations!
Yes, we don’t know some things. That’s what the frontier of knowledge looks like. By definition.
But in your worldview, you seem to know nothing.
Where are your conclusions? Where are your experiments to verify your conclusions?
VERY GOOD!
That’s what the frontier of YOUR knowledge looks like. Congratulations!
Still you are avoiding answering my questions from last post:
Where are your conclusions?
Where are your experiments to verify your conclusions?
At this point, I assume that you have no answers. Your only job is to rail against those who are at least trying to find out the answers.
@AG3
These links ( https://www.zhihu.com/column/c_1278787135349633024?page=1, https://www.zhihu.com/column/c_1884524011255492993, and https://www.zhihu.com/column/c_1884371896562333239 ) contain all the answers you seek. However, your god, devil, and angel have long made you deaf and senseless. In your world, it’s acceptable to define the difference between two particles as identical, the sameness of topological vortices as different, and two sets of cobalt-60 rotating in opposite directions as two mutually mirrored objects. These are all Nobel-worthy contributions—no joke, and nothing to laugh about.
Have you applied DMC calculations to thorium titanate yet ?
( or, shhh, they are not ready for that one yet )
A recent breakthrough in quantum field theory (QFT) achieved a full summation of all Feynman diagrams in a strongly coupled regime using melonic tensor models. This commentary provides a comparative interpretation through the lens of the Quantum-Extended Thermodynamic Gravity Hypothesis (Q-TGH). In Q-TGH, particle interactions and quantum corrections arise from thermodynamic responses of the vacuum’s entropy field, not virtual particle loops. We argue that the melonic summation corresponds to integrating over quantized entropy flow configurations, and that Q-TGH naturally explains convergence, dominance, and scale regulation without invoking infinities or artificial renormalization.
Feynman diagrams have long served as the central computational tool in perturbative quantum field theory. However, at strong coupling, the infinite series of loop corrections becomes analytically intractable. The recent summation of all such diagrams in melonic models reveals that even complex QFT amplitudes can be captured in a closed form.
This invites a reexamination of field interactions from a deeper physical foundation. The Quantum-Extended Thermodynamic Gravity Hypothesis (Q-TGH) proposes that fundamental forces emerge from the statistical mechanics of vacuum entropy. Entropy gradients, not abstract field strengths, drive motion, structure, and interaction.
Feynman Diagrams as Entropy Configurations
In QFT, diagrams represent quantum fluctuations around classical fields. In Q-TGH, these fluctuations are interpreted as microstate transitions in the vacuum entropy field $S(x, t)$.
We propose that each Feynman diagram corresponds to a discrete entropy flow topology. Summing diagrams thus corresponds to computing the partition function over all possible entropy field modes: