Fig. 3.

Comparison between theory and experiments. a Pos(2D), b FWHM(2D), d Pos(G), e FWHM(G) as a function of T_e for ps-excited Raman spectra. Error bars represent the 95% confidence level in the best fitting procedure. Solid diamonds in a,b,d,e represent the corresponding CW measurements. FWHM(2D) are used to determine the e–e contribution (γ_ee) to the Dirac cones broadening, shown in c (blue lines). Pos(G) and FWHM(G) are compared with theoretical predictions accounting for e–ph interaction in presence of electronic broadening (an additional RT anharmonic damping ∼2 cm^−1 10 is included in the calculated FWHM(G)). Black lines are the theoretical predictions for γ_ee = 0 eV, while blue lines take into account an electronic band broadening linearly proportional to T_e (γ_ee = α_ek_BT_e). From the fit of γ_ee in c, we get $\frac{{\alpha }_e{k}_{\mathrm{B}}}{hc}$ = 0.51 cm⁻¹K⁻¹ (thickest blue line). Values of $\frac{{\alpha }_e{k}_{\mathrm{B}}}{hc}$ = 0.46,0.55 cm⁻¹K⁻¹, corresponding to 99% confidence boundaries, are also shown (thin light blue lines)