Dynamical Conductivity of Dirac Materials

Luxmi Rani∗ and Navinder Singh

Theoretical Physics Division, Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad-380009, India.
(Dated: July 25, 2018)
For graphene (a Dirac material) it has been theoretically predicted and experimentally observed
that DC resistivity is proportional to T 4 when the temperature is much less than Bloch- Grüneisen
(ΘBG ) temperature and T linear in opposite case (T >> ΘBG ). Going beyond the DC case, we
investigate the dynamical conductivity in graphene using the powerful method of memory function
formalism. In the DC (zero frequency regime) limit, we obtained the above mention behavior which
arXiv:1610.04697v1 [cond-mat.str-el] 15 Oct 2016

was previously obtained using the Bloch-Boltzmann kinetic equation. In the finite frequency regime,
we obtained several new results: (1) the generalized Drude scattering rate, in the zero temperature
limit, shows ω 4 behavior at low frequencies (ω << kB ΘBG /~) and saturates at higher frequencies.
We also observed the Holstein Mechanism, however, with different power laws from that in the case
of metals; (2) At higher frequencies, ω >> kB ΘBG /~, and higher temperatures T >> ΘBG , we
observed that the generalized Drude scattering rate is linear in temperature. In addition, several
other results are also obtained. With the experimental advancement of this field, these results should
be experimentally tested.

PACS numbers: 81.05.ue, 72.80.Vp, 72.80.-r

I. INTRODUCTION
In the recent years, Dirac materials have attracted
great attention due to their novel properties which origi-
nate from their linear energy dispersion and the presence
of Dirac points or lines [1, 2]. Graphene is a unique two
dimensional Dirac material, consisting of a single atom
thick layer of carbon atoms that are closely packed in
honeycomb lattice structure due to their sp2 hybridisa-
tion [3–6]. The electronic band structure of graphene ex-
′
hibits the high symmetry momentum points as Γ, K, K
′
and M. The points (K and K ) where the conduction and
valence band touch upon each other are called the Dirac
points (showing electronic energy dispersion Ek = ±|k|).
The electronic transport in graphene is governed by the
relativistic Dirac equation with massless charge carriers
(Fermion)[4, 5, 7]. The Fermi velocity of charge carriers
in graphene is roughly 106 ms−1 . Pristine graphene has
a minimum ballistic conductivity σmin = 4e2 /h[8].
Among many observable anomalous properties, DC re-
sistivity is the unique one because it is the first to be mea-
sured but the last to be understood. The experimentally
measured temperature dependent resistivity shows the
linear in temperature behavior at high temperatures and
T 4 in the Bloch- Grüneisen (BG) regime at low tempera-
ture (T << ΘBG ) [9]. The Bloch- Grüneisen (BG) tem-
perature is defined in the next section. Recent theoretical
investigations[10–12] have been conducted on graphene
by taking into account acoustic phonon limited scatter-
ing in the Bloch-Grüneisen (BG) regime. In ref. [10] the
author analytically solves the Bloch- Boltzmann equation
for electron-acoustic phonon scattering, and it is shown
that DC resistivity of graphene is proportional to T 4 in
the low temperature regime (T << ΘBG ) and T-linear in
∗ luxmiphyiitr@gmail.com, luxmi@prl.res.in
the opposite regime. On similar lines, in ref. [11, 12] the
studies of DC resistivity is done within the Boltzmann
kinetic theory for the case of electron-acoustic phonon
scattering and results agree with the previous investiga-
tions mentioned above [9].
The problem of DC transport in graphene is also
treated using Kubo’s linear response theory by several
groups [13–23]. They obtained the universal and nonuni-
versal observations of minimal conductivity in graphene
at frequency ω → 0. In the presence of electric field,
Gusynin and Sharapov [15] analytically obtained the ex-
pressions for both the diagonal and off-diagonal conduc-
tivities in graphene. It has been observed that these
conductivities show the unusual behavior with frequency,
chemical potential, and applied field caused by Dirac like
spectrum of quasi-particles in this material.
We now briefly review some recent studies of electronic
transport in graphene. Earlier, Radchenko et. al [21]
have numerically computed the DC conductivity in short
range and long range scattering regime for the case of
charged impurities [24, 25]. Further, the same authors
[22] have studied the effect of charge carriers on the trans-
port properties of graphene within both the Kubo linear
response formalism and the Bolch- Boltzmann approach.
The conductivity dependence on carrier density shows
sublinear behavior within the semiclassical Boltzmann
calculation. However, in contrast to it, the linear be-
havior is observed within the Kubo formalism.
Based on the result of Kubo method in the case of
the spin-orbital coupling impurity scattering, Liu et. al
[26] observed that the diagonal conductivity shows a in-
sulating gap at Dirac point, while in opposite case when
applying semiclassical Boltzmann approach, the predic-
tion of insulating gap is failed. It is realized that the low
energy transport can not be explained by Boltzmann the-
ory which occurs from the spin orbit coupling scattering.
Several experimental groups have studied the conduc-
 2

tivity measurement in different frequency regimes (vis- Where C = [j1 , H]. H is the total Hamiltonian of the
ible, infrared, near infrared and ultraviolet) [4, 27–33]. system. And the memory function can be written as
From experimental investigations, it has been observed [36, 38–40];
that conductivity versus carrier density shows linear to
sublinear behavior. Experimentally, Zhang et. al [32] zχ(z)
M (z, T ) ≃ . (4)
obtained the AC conductivity σ(ω) in tetrahertz (THz) χ0
frequency range 0.2-1.2 THz. At present, σ(ω) ∝ ω 4 is
not observed. Using the above relation, we obtain an approximate ex-
However, theoretical investigations of dynamical con- pression for the memory function
ductivity due to electron-acoustic phonon scattering in
hhC; Ciiz=0 − hhC; Ciiz
graphene is lacking. In this paper, we present our results M (z, T ) = . (5)
of the calculation of dynamical conductivity of graphene zχ0
using the memory function formalism. The memory Defining φ(z) = hhC; Ciiz , the memory function can be
function formalism was pioneered by Mori and Zwanzig written as,
[34, 35]. This is one of the most useful method known
as, projection operator method. The basic idea of this [φ(0) − φ(z)]
M (z, T ) = . (6)
method is to study the time correlation function system- (zχ0 )
atically in the case of many body correlated systems.
Götze and Wölfle [36] put this method on a more use- In the present work, we consider a two dimensional
ful footing by introducing their perturbative scheme and dirac material having linear isotropic energy dispersion
used that to solve the electrical conductivity in simple (ǫk = ~vf |~k|), where k is the momentum and vf is the
metals by taking into account different interactions. We Fermi velocity. Also in the whole analytical calculation
use the Götze - Wölfle method to investigate the dynam- we consider the system of units where ~ = 1 and kB = 1.
ical conductivity of graphene. Thus, to study the memory function for Dirac material
This paper is organized as follows. In section II, we with electron-phonon scattering [41], we write the follow-
will discuss the memory function formalism to calculate ing Hamiltonian,
the dynamical conductivity in graphene. In section III,
the results and discussion of dynamical conductivity due H = Helectrons + Helectron−phonon (7)
to electron-acoustic phonon scattering in graphene will Here
be explained analytically and numerically. Finally, we X
will summarize our results and present our conclusions. He− = ǫk c†kσ ckσ (8)
kσ
X h i
II. MEMORY FUNCTION FORMALISM He− −ph = D(k − k′ )c†kσ ck′ σ bk−k′ + H. c. . (9)
k, k′ ,σ

Our aim is to study the dynamical conductivity of a
two dimensional (2D) Dirac material such as graphene
using the Memory function formalism. Following the
previous work [36–38], we are going to use an alternative
representation of conductivity from Kubo’s formalism i.e.
χ0
σ(z, T ) = i . (1)
z − M (z, T )
Here M(z) is the memory function. z = ω + iδ is the
complex frequency and we have taken the limit δ → 0.
χ0 represents the static limit of correlation function (i.e.
χ0 = N e/m). First, we will calculate the memory func-
tion. The memory function can be expressed through the
current-current correlation function:
Z ∞
χ(z) = hhj1 ; j1 ii = i eizt h[j1 , j1 ]idt. (2)
0 ~ω
Here inner h......i describes canonical ensemble averages
and outer h......i represents Laplace transform of the ex-
pectation value of the same. It was shown in [36, 38–40]
that the correlation function can be written as:
hhC; Ciiz=0 − hhC; Ciiz
χ(z) = . (3)
z2
Here, c†kσ (ckσ ) is the creation (annihilation) operator
having spin σ and momentum k. b†k−k′ (bk−k′ ) is the
phonon creation (annihilation) operator having phonon
wave vector q = k − k′ . The coefficient D(k − k′ ) in the
electron phonon Hamiltonian is given by the expression
for acoustic phonon’s [8, 10]i.e.
 1/2 "  2 #1/2
~ q
D(q) = −i × D0 q 1 − (10)
2ρm ωq 2kf
Here, D0 is the deformation potential coupling constant
for graphene, ρm is surface mass density. The phonons
are considered as longitudinal accoustic having a disper-
sion of the form ωq = vs q. Here vs is the sound velocity,
and q is the phonon momentum. In the present case, we
have the condition [10] kBq ≤ min(ΘBG , ΘD ) with ΘD is
ǫ
the Debye temperature, and ΘBG = 2( vvfs ) kBf the Bloch
Grüneisen temperature. ǫf is the Fermi energy. For our
computation, we need to compute C and the correlator
hhC; Ciiz . For this, we use the expression for electrical
current as j = Σkσ vx (k)c†kσ ckσ , where vx (k) is the veloc-
ity of carriers with momentum k in the x- direction. Now
 3

from the electron-phonon interaction part of the Hamil- sion becomes

tonian (Eqn.9) we get, qBG
q3
Z q
ImM (ω, T ) = M0 dq × 1 − (q/2kf )2
X kf
C= [vx (k) − vx (k′ )][D(k − k′ )c†kσ ck′ σ bk−k′ − H.c.]. 0
(
k,k′ 1 ωq eβω − 1
× × (1 − ) β(ω−ω )
(11) eβωq − 1 ω (e q − 1)

With this expression, two particle correlator φ(z) = )

hhC; Cii can be computed as follows,
+(terms with ω → −ω).. . (16)
X X
φ(z) = − [vx (k) − vx (k′ )][vx (p) − vx (p′ )]
k,k′ ,σ p,p′ The details of the calculations are given in Appendix
′ ⋆ ′ [A]. Here, qBG being the Bloch- Grüneisen momentum.
D(k − k )D (p − p )
DD EE As discussed in Appendix [A], in the graphene case, the
c†kσ ck′ σ bk−k′ ; b†p−p′ c†p′ cp the radius of Fermi circle is smaller as compare to De-
X X bye circle. In the scattering process, we need to consider
− [vx (k) − vx (k′ )][vx (p) − vx (p′ )] those phonons whose wave vector is less than the Fermi
k,k′ ,σ p,p′ wave vector. Therefore, the upper cut off values of q inte-
D⋆ (k − k′ )D(p − p′ ) gral is to be 2kf . Further, to obtain the information from
DD EE the above expression, we analysed it in special limiting
c†k′ σ ckσ b†k−k′ ; bp−p′ c†p cp′ .(12) cases that are discussed in the next section III. Consider
first the zero frequency limit.
Further, simplifications of the correlation function
hhc†kσ ck′ σ bk−k′ ; b†p−p′ c†p′ cp ii leads to [38]:
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1
− [fk (1 − fk′ )(1 + nωk−k′ )
ǫk − ǫk − ωk−k′ + z
′ Case-I: DC limit case (at zero frequency)
−fk′ (1 − fk )nωk−k′ ]δp,k δp,k′ . (13) Consider ω → 0 then in the (Eqn.16), curly bracket term
will become

Here fk = hc†k ck i, fk′ = hc†k′ ck′ i are the Fermi-Dirac eβω − 1

 
ωq
(1 − ) β(ω−ω ) + (terms with ω → −ω)..
distribution functions and, nωk−k′ = hb†k−k′ bk−k′ i is the ω (e q − 1)

Bose-Einstein distribution function. Similarly the second 2βωq

factor of φ(z) can be simplified with the combine result ≈ (17)
1 − e−βωq
X 2 With this expression, the imaginary part of the memory
φ(z) = |D(k − k′ )| [vx (k) − vx (k′ )]2
function (Eqn.16) can be written as,
k,k′
Z qBG
×[f (1 − f ′ )(1 + n− )) − f ′ (1 − f )n− ] q3
q
  ImM (0) = 2M0 dq × 1 − (q/2kf )2
1 1 0 kf
× + . (14)
(ǫk − ǫk′ − ω− + z) (ǫk − ǫk′ − ω− − z) 1 βωq
× βωq × (18)
e − 1 1 − e−βωq
Here we have used the notation f = fk ; f ′ = fk′ ; n− =
nωk−k′ ; and ω− = ωk−k′ . Using x = βωq and βvs qBG = βkB ΘBG = ΘTBG and
Using the above expression in Eqn.6, the imaginary qBG ≈ 2kf , we obtain
part of the memory function can be written as, Z βvs qBG
x4 1 − (x/2kf βvs )2
p
2M0
ImM (0) = dx ×
π X 2 kf β 4 vs4 0 (ex − 1)(1 − e−x )
ImM (ω, T ) = |D(k − k′ )| [vx (k) − vx (k′ )]2
χ0 ′ 2M0

T
4
kk 4
= qBG
×[(1 − f )f ′ n− ] kf ΘBG
" Z ΘBG
(eβω − 1)
p
T x4 1 − (x/(ΘBG /T ))2
× δ(ǫk − ǫk′ − ω− + ω) − × dx
ω 0 (ex − 1)(1 − e−x )
4 Z z 4p
x 1 − (x/z)2
# 
2M0 T 4
..(terms with ω → −ω) . (15) = qBG x −x )
dx
kf ΘBG 0 (e − 1)(1 − e
 4
2M0 T 4
= qBG × J4 (z) (19)
After simplification, the final memory function expres- kf ΘBG
 4

Here, we have the following function[10]: the above equation as:

3
2M0 ω ′ x′ p
Z
z ImM (ω) = 3 dx × 1 − (x′ /ωBG )2
p
xn 1 − (x/z)2
Z
Jn (z) = dx (20) vs 0 ωBG
0 (1 − e−x )(ex − 1) ′
eβx x′
 
× βx′ 1−
The asymptotic limit of this function, for n > 0 an inte- e −1 ω
Z ωBG 3
ger, is given by Jn (∞) = n!ζ(n), with ζ(n) the Riemann 2M0 x′ p
Zeta function. In particular, for n = 4, it has the values + 3 dx′ × 1 − (x′ /ωBG )2
vs ω ωBG
ζ(4) = π 4 /90 .
eβω
 ′ 
x
Subcase(1): for low temperature behavior T << ΘBG , × βx′ −1 . (25)
z → ∞, Jn (∞) = 4!ζ(4). Thus, e −1 ω
At T → 0, the first term of Eqn.25 provides the dominat-
2M0

T
4
4!π 4 ing contribution (because second term is exponentially
4
ImM (0) = qBG × small). Thus, the imaginary part of the memory function
kf ΘBG 90
becomes
ImM (0) ∝ T 4 . (21)
ω 3
x′ p x′
 
2M0
Z
Subcase(2): for high temperature behavior T >> ΘBG , ImM (ω) = dx′ × 1 − (x′ /ωBG )2 1 −
π vs3 ωBG ω
z → zero. Then J4 (z) ≈ 16 × z 3 (see Appendix B). 0

Therefore, we find that the imaginary part of memory (26)

function at high temperature becomes Let x′ /ωBG = y, thus we have
"Z ω
3
2M0 ωBG ωBG p
dy × y 3 1 − y 2 −
 
2M0 T 4 π ImM (ω) =
ImM (0) = qBG × 3
vs 0
kf ΘBG 16 #
Z ωω
ImM (0) ∝ T. (22) ωBG BG p
dy × y 4 1 − y 2 ) (27)
ω 0
These results are in agreement with the existing theoret-
ical and experimental data reported in literature [9–12]. At ω << ωBG , On solving the integral, we obtain
Case-II: Finite frequency regime (at zero tempera- M0 ω 4
ImM (ω) =
ture) 10vs3 ωBG
In T → 0 limit case, the ultralow behavior can be an- ImM (ω) ∝ ω 4 . (28)
alyzed in Eqn.16 at all frequencies. Thus the expression 4
ω

in curly
bracket leads to 1 − ωq eβωq at ω > ωq , and Thus ω dependence of scattering rate is obtained in
ωq βω given Dirac material case. However, in metals, it shows
ω −1 e at ω < ωq .
the ω 5 dependence.
qBG
In the case ω >> ωBG , T → 0, the imaginary part of
q3
Z q
ImM (ω) = M0 dq × 1 − (q/2kf )2 the memory function is
kf 3
0
2M0 ωBG ′ x′ p
Z
1  ωq  βωq ImM (ω) = 3 dx × 1 − (x′ /ωBG )2
× Θ(ω − ωq ) 1 − e vs 0 ωBG
eβωq
−1 ω ′
eβx x′
Z qBG  
q3
q
+M0 dq × 1 − (q/2kf )2 × βx′ 1− (29)
kf e −1 ω
0
1 ω
q
 Again let x′ /ωBG = y, thus we have
× βωq Θ(ωq − ω) − 1 eβω . (23)
e −1 ω
"Z
3 1
2M0 ωBG p
Z ω
ωq 3
q ImM (ω) = 3
dy × y 3 1 − y 2 −
ImM (ω) = M0 dωq × 1 − (ωq /2kf vs )2 vs 0
0 kf vs4 Z 1 #
eβωq

ωq
 ωBG p
× βωq 1− dy × y 4 1 − y 2 ) (30)
e −1 ω ω 0
Z ωBG
ωq 3 On solving the integral in the above limits, we obtain,
q
+ M0 dωq × 1 − (ωq /2kf vs )2
kf vs4
" #
ω 3
M0 ωBG 4 ω  π
BG
eβω

ωq
 ImM (ω) = −
× βωq −1 . (24) vs3 15 ω 16
e −1 ω " #
b
ImM (ω) = a − . (31)
Here we consider ωBG = 2vs kf and x′ = ωq , then rewrite ω
 5

4M ω3 πM ω 4
Here, a = 15 0 BG
and b = 16v0 BG
. Thus in the high ω and T regime ImM (ω)
vs3 3
s
frequency limit it saturates. ω = 0; T << ΘBG T 4.
Case-III: Finite frequency regime (at finite tempera- ω = 0; T >> ΘBG T.
ture) ω << ωBG ; T → 0 ω4.
Consider ω >> ΘBG , T then in Eqn.16, curly bracket
ω >> ωBG ; T → 0 [a − ωb ].
term can be simplified as
ω >> ΘBG , T ; T << ΘBG ∝ constant.
eβω − 1
 
ωq ω >> ΘBG , T ; T >> ΘBG ∝ T.
(1 − ) + (terms with ω → −ω)..
ω (eβ(ω−ωq ) − 1)
TABLE I. The results of imaginary part of the memory func-
≈ 2(eβωq + 1) (32) tion in different limiting cases.
In this case the Eqn.16 becomes
s 2 βωq
2M0 qBG 3

q (e + 1)
Z
ImM (ω, T ) = q 1− dq
kf 0 2kf (eβωq − 1) 2
s ω~0

ImM(ω~0, T)/ImM(0)
2
2M0 qBG 3
  
q βωq
Z
= q 1− coth dq 1.5
kf 0 2kf 2 T
(33)
1
ΘBG
Using x = βωq and βvs qBG = βkB ΘBG = T .
 4 Z ΘBG 0.5 4
2M0 T 4
T T
ImM (ω, T ) = qBG × dx × x3
kf ΘBG 0
x 0
p 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
× 1 − (x/(ΘBG /T ))2 × coth T(K)
2
 4  
2M0 T 4 Θ BG
= qBG × J3 . (34) FIG. 1. Variation of the imaginary part of the memory func-
kf ΘBG T tion with temperature at zero frequency.
Rz
Here J3 (z) = 0 dx × x3 1 − (x/z)2 × coth x2 .
p

In the low temperature case: T << ΘBG , z → ∞,
4
J3 (z) = z4 the resulting Eqn.34 is
N 2 D2
M0 4 frequency (ImM(0)= 32π3 χ0 ρ0m vs ). From Fig.1, we observe
ImM (ω, T ) = q that ImM(0, T) shows T 4 behavior at very low temper-
2kf BG
atures (T << ΘBG ) and T-linear behavior at high tem-
ImM (ω, T ) ∝ constant. (35) peratures (T >> ΘBG ). These features are in agree-
In the high temperature case: T >> ΘBG , z → 0, ment with experimental data [9]. In Fig.2, we depict
3 the variation of ImM (ω, T ) as a function of tempera-
J3 (z) = πz8 the resulting Eqn.34 is
ture at different frequencies. It shows that on increasing
the frequency, scattering rate (ImM (ω)) shifts upward.
 
πM0 4 T
ImM (ω, T ) = q It is also observed that scattering rate shows linear be-
4kf BG ΘBG
havior at high temperature, while at low temperature it
ImM (ω, T ) ∝ T. (36) shows saturation. We notice that even at zero temper-
Hence the scattering rate is linearly dependent on tem- ature there is finite scattering. This is nothing but the
perature in high temperature case when T >> ΘBG and Holstein mechanism for the present case.
ω >> ΘBG , T . All the above mentioned results in differ-
ent limiting cases are given in the table I. The frequency dependent behavior of imaginary part
of memory function at zero temperature is shown in Fig-
ure 3. From Fig.3, we observed that in the low frequency
limit (~ω << kB ΘBG ), ImM (ω, 0)/ImM (0) shows ω 4
In the general case, we need to perform the integral behavior. While, at high frequency limit it becomes con-
in Eqn.16 numerically. With ~ = 6.582 × 10−16 eV.s and stant. In Fig.4, we depict the variation of imaginary
Boltzmann constant kB = 8.617×10−5eV /K, we perform part of memory function with frequency at various tem-
the integral by setting frequency in energy units (in eV). peratures. It is observed that the ImM (ω, T )/ImM (0)
Now we present our numerical results. increases with the increase in temperature at lower fre-
In Fig.1, we show the variation of the imaginary part quency regime while at the higher frequencies, it shows
of the scaled memory function with temperature at zero saturation behavior.
 6

3 ature and T-linear at high temperature [8–10, 12].

ω = 1eV The Holstein mechanism [42] which is the finite ab-
ω = 2eV sorption of electromagnetic energy at zero temperature is
ImM(ω, T)/ ImM(0)
ω = 3eV also predicted by our calculations in 2D Dirac materials.
2.5
ω = 4eV However with different scaling behavior (Table I). In the
Holstein mechanism a photon generates an electron-hole
pair along with the emission of a phonon (i.e. phonon
2 assisted scattering). We predict that the scattering in-
creases as ω 4 in low temperature limit (refer to Table
I).
1.5 Both at high frequencies and at high temperatures
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
T(K) (T >> ΘBG ), we have observed the linear behavior
of memory function with temperature, while at low
FIG. 2. Variation of the imaginary part of the memory func- temperature scattering rate (ImM (ω, T )) becomes con-
tion with temperature at different frequencies. stant. These temperature and frequency dependent re-
sults should be experimentally tested.

2
T ~ 0K
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ImM(ω, T~0)/ ImM(0)

1.5
We thank to Nabyendu Das and Pankaj Bhalla for use-
1 ful suggestions and discussions.

0.5
Appendix A: Derivation of Eqn.16

0
0 1 2 3 In the present study, we consider graphene (as a
ω (eV) Dirac material), having linear isotropic energy disper-
sion (ǫf = vf |~k|). To simplify equation (15), we insert
FIG. 3. Variation of the imaginary part of the memory func-
[vx (k) − vx (k′ )]2 = vf2 (1 − cosθ) and convert the sums
tion with frequency at zero temperature for graphene.
into integrals in Eqn.15. We further reduced it by con-
sidering that k is pointing along the x-direction and k ′
subtends an angle θR with it. Also we insert an integrated
2 delta function(1 = dqδ(q−|k−k′ |)) over q and resulting
expression is
ImM(ω, T)/ ImM(0)

1.5
πN 2 vf2
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
2
T=200K ImM (ω) = dqD q kdk k ′ dk ′
1 T=300K (2π)4 χ0 0 0 0
Z 2π
T=400K
dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − |k − k′ |)
0.5 0
×[(1 − f )f ′ n− ]
0 "
0 1 2 3 (eβω − 1)
ω (eV) × δ(ǫk − ǫk′ − ω− + ω) −
ω
#
FIG. 4. Variation of the imaginary part of the memory func-
tion with frequency at different temperatures. ..(terms with ω → −ω) . (A1)

Shift the integration variables to ǫk = vf k, ǫ′k = vf k ′ ,

IV. CONCLUSIONS
dǫ = vf dk. And for our convenience, we use the notation
ǫk = ǫ and ǫ′k = ǫ′ .
We have presented a theoretical study of dynamical
conductivity of a Dirac material by using the memory ∞ ∞
1 ∞ ∞
Z Z Z Z
function formalism with electron- acoustic phonon scat- ⇒ kdk k ′ dk ′ = ǫdǫ ǫ′ dǫ′
0 0 vf4 0 0
tering. We have reproduced the zero frequency (DC) p
′
results namely, T 4 behavior of resistivity at low temper- δ(q − |k − k |) = δ(q − k 2 + k ′2 − 2kk ′ cos θ) (A2)
 7
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
πN 2 2 Now performing the ǫ′ integral using the property of the
ImM (ω) = 4 2 dqD q ǫdǫ ǫ′ dǫ′
(2π) χ0 vf 0 0 0 delta functions. The resulting memory function expres-
Z 2π sion becomes,
1 p
dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − ǫ2 + ǫ′2 − 2ǫǫ′ cos θ) πN 2
Z ∞ Z ∞
q2 1
0 vf ImM (ω) = dǫ dqDq2 ×
4
(2π) χ0 0 kf (1 − q22 )
q
′ 0
×[(1 − f )f n− ] 4kf
 βω
(e − 1) 1 1
× δ(ǫ − ǫ′ − ω− + ω) − ... × βǫ
ω e + 1 eβωq − 1
 "
(eβω − 1) 1
(terms with ω → −ω)... (A3) × × βǫ β(ω−ω )
ω e e q + 1

Where, θ is the scattering angle. We are considering a

#
degenerate system, and the magnitude of Fermi energy −..(terms with ω → −ω).. . (A7)
is much greater than kB T . Thus, in graphene, electron-
acoustic phonon scattering occurs in a very thin layer And, then solvingR +∞the integration over ǫ using the elemen-
close to the Fermi surface. Within this ǫ ≈ ǫ′ ≈ ǫf , the tary method −∞ dx exe+1 ex+a
x
1
+1 The integral becomes
.
integral over θ can be simplified as follows: Z ∞ βǫ
e 1
Z 2π
1p 2 Iǫ = dǫ βǫ βǫ+β(ω−ω
e +1e q) + 1
Iθ = dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − ǫ + ǫ′2 − 2ǫǫ′ cos θ) 0
0 v f (ω − ωq )
Z 2π = β(ω−ω ) (A8)
=
p
dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − kf 2(1 − cos θ)) e q − 1

And thus the imaginary part of memory function is

Z0 π Z qBG
πN 2 q2 1
p
= dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − kf 2(1 − cos θ)) ImM (ω) = dq × Dq2 ×
4
q
0 (2π) χ0 0 kf (1 − q22 )
Z 2π p 4kf
+ dθ(1 − cosθ)δ(q − kf 2(1 − cos θ)) (A4) (
βω
π 1 (e − 1) (ω − ωq )
× βωq ×
Here change to x = 1 − cosθ e −1 ω eβ(ω−ωq ) − 1
)
Z 2 √
x +(terms with ω → −ω) (A9)
Iθ = dx √ δ(q − kf 2x)
2x − x 2
0
Z 0 √
x Using the relation Dq from Eqn.10, defining M0 =
− dx √ δ(q − kf 2x) N 2 D02
2x − x 2
2 32π 3 χ ρ v , and ωq = vs q, we have
Z 2 0 m s
x √ Z qBG
dx √ q3 1
q
=2 δ(q − kf 2x) ImM (ω) = M dq × 1 − (q/2kf )2 βωq
2x − x 2 0
0 k e −1
Z 2kf 0 f
t3 1 (
=2 dt 4 q 2 δ(q − t) ωq eβω − 1
0 2kf t
(1 − t2
) × (1 − ) β(ω−ω ) +
kf2 4kf2 ω (e q − 1)

q2 1 q2 1
)
=2 3q = (A5) (terms with ω → −ω).. . (A10)
2kf (1 − q22 ) kf3 (1 − q22 )
q
4kf f 4k

Substituting this value the θ-integral into the memory

function approximation. Thus the imaginary part of the Appendix B: Some useful relations
memory function can be written as
Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞
πN 2 ′ 2 q2 We have used the following relation:
ImM (ω) = dǫ dǫ dq × D q ×
(2π)4 χ0 0
Z z 4p
0 0 kf x 1 − (x/z)2
1 1 1 Jn = −x )(ex − 1)
dx (B1)
×q × βǫ 0 (1 − e
q2 (e + 1) (e βǫ′ + 1)
(1 − 4k2 ) For small z case, let x = z cos(θ) then above integral
f
" becomes
1 (eβω − 1) Z π/2 5
z cos4 (θ) sin2 (θ)ez cos(θ)
× βωq δ(ǫ − ǫ′ − ω− + ω) − Jn = dθ
(e − 1) ω (ez cos(θ) − 1)2
# 0
πz 3
(terms with ω → −ω).. (A6) ≈ (B2)
16

[1] J. Cayssol, C. R. Physique 14, 760778 (2013).
[2] T. O. Wehling, A. M. Black-Schaffer, and A. V. Balatsky,
Advances in Physics, Vol. 63, 1 (2014).
[3] K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang,
Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, A. A. Firsov,
Science 306, 666 (2004).
[4] K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang,
M. I. Katsnelson, I. V. Grigorieva, S. V. Dubonos, and
A. A. Firsov, Nature 438, 197 (2005).
[5] Y. Zhang, Y.-W. Tan, H. L. Stormer, and P. Kim, Nature
438, 201 (2005).
[6] M. J. Allen, V. C. Tung, and R. B. Kaner, Chem. Rev.
110, 132 (2010).
[7] P. Avouris, Z. Chen, and V. Perebeinos, Nature Nan-
otechnology 2, 605 (2007).
[8] S. D. Sarma, S. Adam, E. H. Hwang, and E. Rossi,
Rev.Mod. Phys. 83, 407(2011).
[9] D. K. Efetov and P. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 256805
(2010).
[10] E. Muñoz, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 24, 195302 (2012).
[11] E. H. Hwang and S. D. Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 77, 115449
(2008).
[12] K. Kaasbjerg, K. S. Thygesen, and K. W. Jacobsen,
Phys. Rev. B 85, 165440 (2012).
[13] K. Ziegler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 266802 (2006).
[14] K. Ziegler, Phys. Rev. B 75, 233407 (2007).
[15] V. P. Gusynin and S. G. Sharapov, Phys. Rev. B 73,
245411 (2006).
[16] E. G. Mishchenko, Eur. Phys. Lett. 83, 17005 (2008).
[17] E. G. Mishchenko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 246802 (2009).
[18] K. Nomura and A. H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98,
076602 (2007).
[19] L. A. Falkovsky and A.A. Varlamov, Eur. Phys. J. B 56,
281 (2007).
[20] J. Horng, C-F Chen, B. Geng, C.r Girit, Y. Zhang, Z.
Hao, H. A. Bechtel, M. Martin, A. Zettl, M. F. Crom-
mie, Y. R. Shen, and F. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 83, 165113
(2011).
[21] T. M. Radchenko, A. A. Shylau, and I. V. Zozoulenko,
Phys. Rev. B 86, 035418 (2012).
[22] T. M. Radchenko, A. A. Shylau, and I. V. Zozoulenko,
Phys. Rev. B 87, 195448 (2013).
8
[23] G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics (Physics of Solids
and Liquids), Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers
(2000).
[24] Q. Li, E. H. Hwang, E. Rossi, and S. Das Sarma,Phys.
Rev. Lett.107, 156601 (2011).
[25] J. Yan and M. S. Fuhrer, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 206601
(2011).
[26] Z. Liu, L. Jiang, and Y. Zheng, Scientific Reports 6,
23762 (2016).
[27] N.M.R. Peres , T. Stauber, and A. H. Castro Neto, Euro.
Phys. Lett. 84, 38002 (2008).
[28] Z. Q. Li, E. A. Henriksen, Z. Jiang, Z. Hao, M. C. Mar-
tin,P. Kim, H. L. Stormer and D. N. Basov, Nature Phys.
Lett. 4, 532 (2008).
[29] T. Stauber, N.M.R. Peres, and A. K. Geim, Phys. Rev.
B 78, 085432 (2008).
[30] K. I. Bolotin, K. J. Sikes, J. Hone, H. L. Stormer, and P.
Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 096802 (2008).
[31] J. Heo, H. J. Chung, S.-H Lee, H. Yang, D. H. Seo, J.
K. Shin, U-In Chung, S. Seo, E. H. Hwang, and S. D.
Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 84, 035421 (2011).
[32] W. Zhang,P. H. Q. Pham, E. R. Browna and P. J.
Burkeb, Nanoscale 6, 13895 (2014).
[33] C-H Park, N. Bonini, T. Sohier, and G. Samsonidze,
Nano Lett. 14, 1113 (2014).
[34] R. Zwanzig, Phys. Rev. 124, 983 (1961).
[35] H. Mori, Progr. Theor. Phys. 33, 423 (1965).
[36] W. Götze and P. Wölfle, Phys. Rev. B 6, 1226 (1972).
[37] R. Kubo, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 12, 570 (1957).
[38] N. Singh, Electronic Transport Theories: From Weakly
to Strongly Correlated Materials, (Taylor and Francis
Group, CRC Press) (2016).
[39] N. Das and N. Singh, ArXiv e-prints,arXiv:1509.03418
(2015).
[40] P. Bhalla, N. Das, and N. Singh, Phys. Lett. A, 380, 2000
(2016).
[41] J. M. Ziman, Electrons and Phonons: The Theory of
Transport Phenomena in Solids (Oxford Classic Texts in
the Physical Sciences) (2001).
[42] T. Holstein, Ann. Phys. 29, 410 (1964).