Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 51 references

TE graphene plasmons keep Cherenkov angle sensitive to particle velocity up to TeV/c momenta, the paper argues, enabling a tunable on-chip detector.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

TE graphene plasmons with near-unity mode index make the Cherenkov angle sensitive to particle velocity up to TeV/c, extending detector range beyond conventional materials.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection The new idea is plausible, but the TeV-scale detection claim is missing the angular resolution analysis that would make it true. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2508.20896 v1 pith:YEYYIEFS submitted 2025-08-28 physics.optics

Transverse-electric Cherenkov Radiation for TeV-Scale Particle Detection

Zhixiong Xie , Xiao Lin , Song Zhu , Chunyu Huang , Yu Luo , Hao Hu This is my paper
classification physics.optics
keywords Cherenkov radiationgraphene plasmonsparticle detectorstransverse-electric modesmode refractive indexrelativistic particlesTeV-scale detection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's central claim is that a new kind of two-dimensional Cherenkov radiation, excited by transverse-electric (TE) graphene plasmons rather than bulk material modes, keeps the emission angle sensitive to particle velocity far into the TeV/c regime, where conventional aerogel or gas detectors go blind. Because the TE plasmon mode index is n = 1.0014, nearly equal to vacuum's refractive index, the condition cos θ = c/(nv) stays steep even for particle velocities extremely close to the speed of light. With graphene's chemical potential tuned to 0.165 eV, the paper reports a detectable momentum range beyond 5 TeV/c, about two orders of magnitude above current Cherenkov detectors. A second practical claim is robustness: the TE mode's long transverse decay length allows particle–graphene separations of 50 nm or more without losing emission intensity, a major advantage over conventional TM graphene plasmons that need few-nanometer gaps. If correct, the work points to an ultracompact, electrically reconfigurable, on-chip particle identification device.

Core claim

The paper reports that a swift charged particle travelling parallel to suspended monolayer graphene excites TE graphene plasmons whose mode refractive index is n = q/k₀ = 1.0014 at 70 THz. Because the Cherenkov angle obeys cos θ = c/(nv), this near-unity index keeps the emission angle strongly dependent on particle velocity even when β = v/c is between 0.9989 and 0.9999. As a result, the angle changes from 1.146° at β = 0.9989 to 2.808° at β = 0.9999, and small velocity differences between electrons, pions, kaons, and protons produce distinguishable angles up to momenta of tens of GeV/c. Raising the graphene chemical potential to 0.165 eV extends the distinguishable momentum range beyond 5 T

What carries the argument

TE graphene plasmon: a transverse-electric surface wave on monolayer graphene, with the electric field in the graphene plane and a mode refractive index q/k₀ = 1.0014 at 70 THz, obtained from the dispersion relation in Eq. (1). Its near-unity mode index makes the Cherenkov angle relation cos θ = 1/(nβ) steep in the ultrarelativistic limit, so tiny velocity changes translate into measurable angle changes. Phase matching between the particle line and the plasmon isofrequency contour, q·v_e = ω, selects the two emission directions. The mode's low transverse decay rate is what keeps excitation efficient at large particle–graphene separations.

Load-bearing premise

The whole TeV/c detection claim rests on resolving angle differences between particle species that shrink to around 10⁻⁷ radians at 5 TeV/c; no angular resolution or signal-to-noise analysis is given in the paper.

What would settle it

Use a beam of known-momentum particles (e.g., 25 GeV/c pions and protons) passing 5–50 nm above a suspended graphene monolayer with chemical potential 0.145 eV, and measure the Cherenkov angle. The paper predicts distinct angles for electron, pion, kaon, and proton at this momentum. If the observed peak angles do not match the predicted values, or if tuning the chemical potential to 0.165 eV fails to move the angles as predicted, the core velocity-angle mapping is wrong.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Particle identification by Cherenkov angle becomes possible for momenta exceeding 1 TeV/c, a regime currently inaccessible to silica-aerogel and gas Cherenkov detectors.
  • Tuning the graphene chemical potential with a gate voltage shifts the detection window, so one device can cover different momentum ranges without physical reconfiguration.
  • The long transverse decay length of the TE mode relaxes the beam–sample alignment constraint to tens of nanometers, reducing collision and sample-damage risks.
  • The same mechanism extends to other low-index surface modes, such as TM plasmons in ultrathin metal slabs or surface phonon polaritons in thin polar films, broadening the operational frequency range.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A practical TeV/c detector would likely combine Cherenkov-angle data with momentum or time-of-flight information, because at 5 TeV/c the angle differences between particle species are far smaller than current detector angular resolution; the paper does not address this system-level requirement.
  • Detection sensitivity at extreme momenta is governed by the steepness of the TE plasmon dispersion near the interband edge, so engineering that dispersion—for example through substrate choice—could optimize angular resolution rather than merely shifting the velocity threshold.
  • If the TE plasmon linewidth can be narrowed by improving graphene mobility, the same structure could also serve as a compact tunable free-electron light source with controllable polarization, a direction the paper notes but does not develop.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Cherenkov-radiation detector concept based on transverse-electric (TE) graphene plasmons. A charged particle moving above suspended monolayer graphene excites TE graphene plasmons whose mode index is close to unity (n ≈ 1.0014 at 70 THz). From cosθ = 1/(βn), the Cherenkov angle remains sensitive to particle velocity at high Lorentz factors, unlike conventional bulk Cherenkov detectors. The authors compute the angular power spectral density, show the emission angle changes from 1.146° to 2.808° as β goes from 0.9989 to 0.9999, and demonstrate via Figure 4 that by tuning the graphene chemical potential (μc = 0.145–0.165 eV) the detectable momentum range can be extended beyond 5 TeV/c. They also show that TE plasmon excitation is robust to particle–graphene separation, unlike TM graphene plasmons.

Significance. If fully substantiated, the proposal would be a conceptually interesting route to ultrahigh-energy particle identification using a compact, electrically tunable 2D platform. The dispersion input from the Kubo conductivity model is standard, and the near-unity mode index of TE graphene plasmons is a real and well-motivated physical feature. The separation-robustness result (Figure 5) is a useful quantitative comparison with TM modes. The central detection claim, however, hinges on an angular-resolution and signal-to-noise analysis that is absent from the manuscript; without it, the TeV-scale sensitivity is not demonstrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Figure 4] The central claim that μc = 0.165 eV allows distinguishing particles at momenta >5 TeV/c is not supported by a resolution budget. From cosθ = 1/(βn) with n = 1.0014, the Cherenkov angle saturates as θ∞ − θ ≈ (mc²/p)²/(2θ∞). At p = 5 TeV/c, a proton gives θ∞ − θ ≈ 3.3×10⁻⁸ rad, and the proton–kaon separation is Δθ ≈ 2.4×10⁻⁷ rad (0.00024 mrad). This is three orders of magnitude below the ~0.1 mrad angular resolution typical of state-of-the-art Cherenkov/RICH detectors. The manuscript provides no angular-resolution or photon-statistics analysis anywhere; Figure 3b only shows that loss broadens the linewidth, without quantifying resolvability. This issue is load-bearing for the headline 'two orders of magnitude beyond existing detectors' claim.
  2. [Section 2, Figure 2 and text after it] The text states: 'As the particle velocity increases, the altered particle wavevector makes the propagation angle of TE graphene plasmons decrease.' This directly contradicts Eq. cosθ = 1/(βn) and the paper's own Figure 2/3 values: increasing β from 0.9989 to 0.9999 increases θ from 1.146° to 2.808°. The sign error is likely typographical, but it appears in a key explanatory passage and should be corrected.
  3. [Section 2, Figure 3b] The claim that 'the angular power spectral density still shows a high angular resolution for the relativistic particle' when relaxation time is reduced to 0.025 ps is qualitative. No quantitative linewidth or resolving power is given. Since the paper's detection concept depends on resolving small angular differences, the full-width-at-half-maximum of the angular distribution should be compared against the required angular separation between particle species at the momenta of interest.
  4. [Section 2, Eq. (1) and parameter choices] The mode index n = 1.0014 is obtained for μc = 0.145 eV at f0 = 70 THz. For μc = 0.165 eV, the mode index and the resulting angle–momentum curves are shown only as dashed lines in Figure 4, but the corresponding n values are not reported. Since the sensitivity at TeV scales depends critically on how close n is to unity, the paper should list the numerical values of n (or the implied velocity threshold) for each μc used in Figure 4.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous OCR-like typographical artifacts: 'bule' instead of 'blue', 'ߠ' instead of θ, '࢟૙' instead of y0, and inconsistent use of 'ߪ' for sigma. A careful proofread is needed.
  2. [Section 2, Figure 4 inset] The inset is described as plotting both the influence of chemical potential on the dispersion and a comparison with aerogel-based detectors. This is hard to read in the provided figure; consider separating these into two panels or adding explicit axis labels.
  3. [References, [12] and [13]] Reference [12] (S. S. Kistler, Nature 1931) appears unrelated to aerogel detectors; likely a citation error. Reference [13] is a general aerogel chemistry review; please verify the relevance.
  4. [Supporting Information] The text references 'Section S6, Supplementary Information' but the supplementary file is not part of this manuscript. Ensure it is available or remove the pointer.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: computed TE-plasmon dispersion and standard Cherenkov kinematics drive the angle-momentum curves; self-citations are background only.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. Eq. (1) is the TE-wave dispersion relation obtained from boundary conditions with the Kubo conductivity; the near-unity mode index n=1.0014 at 70 THz is a computed output, not a fitted parameter. The Cherenkov angle follows from phase matching q·v=ω and θ=arccos(k_z/q)=arccos(1/(βn)), and the particle momenta enter through the standard relativistic relation β=p/√(p²+m²). The chemical potentials μc=0.145–0.165 eV are scanned design inputs that change the computed dispersion; they are not fitted to the target angles, and no experimental Cherenkov data are used to tune the outputs. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. 18, 23, 26, 28, 37, 50) appear in the introduction/conclusion as background on prior 2D Cherenkov work, TE plasmons, or velocity-threshold lowering; none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the basis for the angle-momentum relation. The absence of a detector angular-resolution budget in support of the >5 TeV/c identification claim is a genuine experimental-feasibility concern, but it is not a circularity: the claimed angles are computed consequences of the dispersion and kinematics, not equivalent to the inputs by construction. Hence no circular step is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central derivation rests on standard electrodynamics and the Kubo model for graphene. The only ad hoc element is the implicit assumption that theoretically computed angle differences are practically resolvable at TeV momenta. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • chemical potential mu_c = 0.145 eV (also 0.155, 0.165 eV)
    Sets the TE plasmon dispersion and the detectable momentum range; chosen by hand as a design parameter, not fitted to data.
  • relaxation time tau = 0.1 ps (varied 0.025 to 0.1 ps)
    Models graphene loss; chosen as a material parameter; affects the angular linewidth of the radiation.
  • operating frequency f0 = 70 THz
    Reference frequency where the mode index n = 1.0014 is quoted and figures are computed; chosen for illustration, within the TE band set by mu_c.
  • particle-graphene separation y0 = 5 nm (varied to 50 nm)
    Set in the base calculation; the robustness claim is about varying this parameter, so it is a scenario parameter, not a fitted constant.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Graphene optical response is described by the local Kubo conductivity with parameters mu_c and tau
    Used in Section 2 to compute TE dispersion and angular power spectra; nonlocal effects are neglected because the mode index is near unity.
  • domain assumption The dispersion relation Eq. (1) for TE graphene plasmons, obtained from electromagnetic boundary conditions, is correct
    Central to the phase-matching condition; standard derivation, but not proved in the text.
  • domain assumption The charged particle is treated as a point current moving at fixed velocity along an infinite straight line
    Standard Cherenkov theory; used to compute the Fourier spectrum and angular power spectral density.
  • ad hoc to paper The detectable momentum range follows from the computed angle-velocity relation without an explicit detector angular resolution or photon-statistics model
    The paper claims TeV/c reach while the angular separation between species at high momenta is tiny; this assumption is load-bearing for the practical detection claim.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transverse-electric Cherenkov Radiation for TeV-Scale Particle Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YEYYIEFS

@misc{pith2026250820896,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transverse-electric Cherenkov Radiation for TeV-Scale Particle Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YEYYIEFS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20896}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Cherenkov radiation enables high-energy particle identification through its velocity-dependent emission angle, yet conventional detectors fail to detect momenta beyond tens of GeV/c owing to the absence of natural materials with near-unity refractive indices. We overcome this limitation by demonstrating directional Cherenkov radiation from transverse-electric (TE) graphene plasmons, excited by a swift charged particle travelling above suspended monolayer graphene. Crucially, TE graphene plasmons exhibit a near-unity mode index, sustaining high sensitivity of the Cherenkov angle to relativistic velocities up to the TeV/c regime. The radiation further maintains exceptional robustness against particle-graphene separation changes, enabled by the TE mode's low transverse decay rate. This ultracompact platform is electrically tunable, allowing on-chip, reconfigurable detection of ultrahigh-energy particles and extending measurable momenta by two orders of magnitude beyond existing detectors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.20896 by Chunyu Huang, Hao Hu, Song Zhu, Xiao Lin, Yu Luo, Zhixiong Xie.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of TE graphene plasmon Cherenkov radiation. (a) Structural setup. A swift charged particle travels in vacuum parallel to the surface of a suspended graphene structure at a velocity ̅ݒ ୣ = ݖ̂ݒୣ, with a separation distance ݕ ଴from the graphene sheet. The monolayer graphene is separated from the silicon dioxide (SiO2) substrate by a suspended layer and is in contact with gold electrodes. The relativ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Fourier spectrum of TE graphene plasmon Cherenkov radiation. (a-c) The studied particle velocities are ߚ = 0.9999, 0.9994 and 0.9989, respectively, leading to the emission angle of 2.808°, 2.144° and 1.146°, respectively. Here, the particle velocity is normalized by the light speed in vacuum, i.e., ߚ = ݒୣ/ܿ, and the white arrows indicate the directions of Poynting vector S. The red and yellow solid curves … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Energy loss of a swift charged particle emitting TE graphene plasmons. (a) The angular power spectral density as a function of the normalized particle velocity ߚ and the Cherenkov angle ߠ with ߬ = 0.1 ps. (b) Influence of the relaxation time on the angular power spectral density. The studied particle velocities are ߚ = 0.9989, 0.9994 and 0.9999 (as indicated by the yellow, green, and purple marks in (a), r… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Performance of particle detection with TE graphene plasmon Cherenkov radiation. Cherenkov angles ߠ versus the particle momenta for four elementary particles: electron (red), pion (blue), kaon (yellow), and proton (purple). The inset plots the influence of the chemical potential on the dispersion curve of TE graphene plasmons, and comparison of performance between this method and conventional method using a… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Influence of the particle-graphene separation ࢟ ૙on the emission intensity of graphene plasmon Cherenkov radiation. (a) The angular power spectral density as a function of the emission angle ߠ and the particle-graphene separation ݕ ଴for (a) TM mode or (b) TE mode. In (a, b), the insets plot the angular power spectral density and emission angle of the swift charged particle at ݕ = ଴5 nm and ݕ = ଴50 nm. (c) … view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Introduction Cherenkov radiation, first experimentally discovered by P. A. Cherenkov in 1934,

    work page 1934

  2. [2]

    I. M. Frank, I. Tamm, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 1937 , 14,

    work page 1937

  3. [3]

    P. A. Cherenkov, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 1934 , 2,

    work page 1934

  4. [4]

    Chamberlain, E

    O. Chamberlain, E. Segrè, C. Wiegand, T. Ypsilantis, Phys. Rev. 1955 , 100,

    work page 1955

  5. [5]

    I. M. Frank, Science 1960 , 131,

    work page 1960

  6. [6]

    J. - E. Augustin, A. M. Boyarski, M. Breidenbach, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1974 , 33,

    work page 1974

  7. [7]

    J. J. Aubert, U. Becker, P. J. Biggs, J. Burger, M. Chen, G. Everhart, P. Goldhagen, J. Leong, T. McCorriston, T. G. Rhoades, M. Rohde, S . C. C. Ting, and S . L . Wu, Y . Y . Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1974 , 33,

    work page 1974

  8. [8]

    Nappi, Nucl

    E. Nappi, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 1998 , 6,

    work page 1998

  9. [9]

    Ypsilantis, J

    T. Ypsilantis, J. Seguinot, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 1994 , 343,

    work page 1994

  10. [10]

    A. A. Alves Jr, L. M. Andrade Filho, A. F. Barbosa, et al. (LHCb Collaboration) J. Instrum. 2008 , 3, S08005

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    Abashian, K

    A. Abashian, K. Gotow, N. Morgan, et al. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 2002 , 479,

    work page 2002

  12. [12]

    S. S. Kistler, Nature 1931 , 127,

    work page 1931

  13. [13]

    Adinolf, G

    M. Adinolf, G. Aglieri Rinella, E. Albrecht, et al. (LHCb RICH Collaboration) Eur. Phys. J. C 2013 , 73,

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    [15,16] Meanwhile, r esonance transition radiation in photonic crystals has been introduced, demonstrating a strong sensitivity to particle momentum above 500 GeV/ c

    To mitigate the loss typically associated with conventional metamaterials, a solid composite invisible material has been developed that a chieves ideal electromagnetic transparency by regulating its internal polarization properties. [15,16] Meanwhile, r esonance transition radiation in photonic crystals has been introduced, demonstrating a strong sensitiv...

    work page 2007

  15. [15]

    A. C. Pierre, G. M. Pajonk, Chem. Rev. 2002 , 102,

    work page 2002

  16. [16]

    Ginis, J

    V . Ginis, J. Danckaert, I. Veretennicoff, P. Tassin , Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014 , 113, 167402

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    D. Ye, L. Lu, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Soljačić, L. Ran , Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2016 , 113 , 2568

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    C. Wang, X. Hu, L. Peng, J. Tang, L. Ran, S. Zhang, D. Ye, Adv . Mater . 2024 , 36 , 2308298

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    X. Lin, S. Easo, Y . Shen, H. Chen, B. Zhang, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Soljačić, I. Kaminer, Nat. Phys. 2018 , 14,

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    X. Lin, H. Hu, S. Easo, Y . Yang, Y . Shen, K. Yin, M. P. Blago, I. Kaminer, B. Zhang, H. Chen, J. Joannopoulos, M. Soljačić, Y . Luo, Nat. Commun. 2021 , 12 , 5554 . 11

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    S. Xi, H. Chen, T. Jiang, L. Ran, J. Huangfu, B. - I. Wu, J. A. Kong, M. Chen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009 , 103, 194801

    work page 2009

  22. [22]

    H. Chen, M. Chen, Mater. Today 2011 , 14, 34

    work page 2011

  23. [23]

    Genevet, D

    P. Genevet, D. Wintz, A. Ambrosio, A. She, R. Blanchard, F. Capasso, Nat. Nanotechnol. 2015 , 10, 804

    work page 2015

  24. [24]

    Z. Duan, X. Tang, Z. Wang, Y . Zhang, X. Chen, M. Chen, Y . Gong, Nat. Commun. 2017 , 8, 14901

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    H. Hu, X. Lin, Y . Luo , Prog . Electromagn . Res. 2021 , 171,

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    F. Liu, L. Xiao, Y . Ye, M. Wang, K. Cui, X. Feng, W. Zhang, Y . Huang, Nat. Photonics 2017 , 11,

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    H. Peng, T. W. Huang, K. Jiang, R. Li, C. N. Wu, M. Y . Yu, C. Riconda, S. Weber, C. T. Zhou, S. C. Ruan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023 , 131, 145003

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    Y . Adiv, H. Hu, S. Tsesses, R. Dahan, K. Wang, Y . Kurman, A. Gorlach, H. Chen, X. Lin, G. Bartal, I. Kaminer, Phys. Rev. X 2023 , 13, 011002

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    X. Guo, C. Wu, S. Zhang, D. Hu, S. Zhang, Q. Jiang, X. Dai, Y . Duan, X. Yang, Z. Sun, S. Zhang, H. Xu, Q. Dai, Nat . Commun. 2023 , 14,

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    C. Wang, X. Chen, Z. Gong, R. Chen, H. Hao, H. Wang, Y . Yang, L. Tony, B. Zhang, H. Chen, X. Lin , Rep. Prog. Phys. 2024 , 87, 126401

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    S. Liu, P. Zhang, W. Liu, S. Gong, R. Zhong, Y . Zhang, M. Hu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012 , 109, 153902

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    A. N. Grigorenko, M. Polini, K. S. Novoslov, Nat. Photonics 2012 , 6,

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    G. X. Ni, A. S. Mcleod, Z. Sun, L. Wang, L. Xiong, K. W. Post, S. S. Sunku, B. - Y . Jiang, J. Hone, C. R. Dean, M. M. Fogler, D. N. Basov, Nature 2018 , 557,

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Q. Xu, T. Ma, M. Danesh, B. N. Shivananju, S. Gan, J. Song, C. W. Qiu, H. M. Cheng, W. Ren, Q. Bao, Light Sci. Appl. 2017 , 6, e16204

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    F. Tay, X. Lin, X. Shi, H. Chen, I. Kaminer, B. Zhang, Adv. Sci. 2023 , 10, 2300760

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    R. Chen, Z. Gong, Z. Wang, X. Xi, B. Zhang, Y . Yang, B. Zhang, I. Kaminer, H. Chen, X. Lin, Sci. Adv. 2025 , 11, eads5113

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Y . Luo, J. Zhao, A. Fieramosca, Q. Guo , H. Kang, X. Liu, T. C. H. Liew, D. Sanvitto, Z. An, S. Ghosh, Z. Wang, H. Xu , Q. Xiong, Light Sci. Appl . 2024 , 13,

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Y . Shi, Y . Gan, Y . Chen, Y . Wang, S. Ghosh, A. Kavokin, Q. Xiong, Nat. Mater. 2025 , 24,

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    H. Hu, X. Lin, D. Liu, H. Chen, B. Zhang, Y . Luo, Adv. Sci. 2022 , 9, 2200538

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    V . G. Veselago, The electrodynamics of substances with simultaneously negative values of permittivity and permeability. Sov. Phys. Usp. 1968 , 10,

    work page 1968

  41. [41]

    S. A. Maier, Plasmonics: Fundamentals and Applications , Springer, New York, NY 2007

    work page 2007

  42. [42]

    Y . M. Qing, Y . Wang, Z. Yang, J. Wu, S. Yu, Phys. Rev. A 2024 , 109, 013504

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    Ahmad, S

    Z. Ahmad, S. S. Oh, E. A. Muljarov , Phys. Rev. Res. 2024 , 6, 023185

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    Z. Xu, S. Bao, J. Liu, J. Chang, X. Kong, V . Galdi, T. J. Cui, Laser Photonics Rev. 2024 , 18, 2300763

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    Q. Ye, J. Wang, Z. Liu, Z. - C. Deng, X. - T. Kong, F. Xing, X. - D. Chen, W. - Y . Zhou, C. - P. Zhang, J. - G. Tian, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013 , 102, 021912

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    Y . V . Bludov, D. A. Smirnova, Y . S. Kivshar, N. M. R. Peres, M. I. Vasilevskiy, Phys. Rev. B 2014 , 89, 035406

    work page 2014

  47. [47]

    S. A. Mikhailov, K. Ziegler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007 , 99, 016803

    work page 2007

  48. [48]

    G. W. Hanson , J. Appl. Phys. 2008 , 103 , 064302

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Broaddus, T

    P. Broaddus, T. Egenolf, D. S. Black, M. Murillo, C. Woodahl, Y . Miao, U. Niedermayer , R. L. Byer, K. J. Leedle, O. Solgaard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024 , 132, 085001. 12

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Z. Y . Liu, Q. Q. Wang, C. Y . Yang, K. Chen, D. D. Li, B. H. Lu, P. X. Yang, Y . D. Yang, Opt. Express 2025 , 33, 14737

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    Zhang, H

    X. Zhang, H. Hu, X. Lin, L. Shen, B. Zhang, H. Chen, npj 2D Mater . Appl . 2020 , 4,

    work page 2020

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.