pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.22945 · v1 · pith:7KCIWV7Inew · submitted 2026-05-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Non-reciprocal Coulomb drag in a ballistic quantum wire

Suyang Cai , Mingyang Zheng , Nathan Rao , Glen Gillia , Rebika Makaju , Sadhvikas J. Addamane , Dominique Laroche This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 05:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Coulomb dragballistic quantum wirenon-reciprocal drag1D electron systemsmesoscopic physicselectron-electron interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

A non-reciprocal Coulomb drag signal appears in a ballistic quantum wire at strength comparable to the reciprocal component.

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

The paper measures Coulomb drag between wires where the drag wire is ballistic and nearly free of disorder. A non-reciprocal drag component is still observed with magnitude similar to the reciprocal part across the measured regime. The authors link this persistence to low-energy disorder that remains in the device, as indicated by the drag wire's conductance behavior at low bias voltages and temperatures. The non-reciprocal signal follows a power-law temperature dependence that matches a diffusive model, while the reciprocal signal's temperature dependence does not fit existing theory. Fits of bias-dependent conductance to three models extract an interaction parameter and disorder strength, yet none yields a fully consistent account of all observations.

Core claim

In a Coulomb drag device with a ballistic drag wire, a non-reciprocal component of the drag signal persists at strength comparable to the reciprocal component. This is attributed to residual low-energy disorder, consistent with the wire's low-bias and low-temperature conductance evolution. The non-reciprocal part exhibits a power-law temperature dependence matching a diffusive model, whereas the reciprocal part's temperature dependence lies outside current frameworks.

What carries the argument

The non-reciprocal component of the Coulomb drag signal, enabled by breaking of translational invariance from intrinsic disorder under the charge fluctuation formalism.

If this is right

  • The non-reciprocal drag signal follows a power-law temperature dependence that matches a diffusive model.
  • The reciprocal component's temperature dependence cannot be explained within the existing theoretical framework.
  • Fits of the drag wire's bias-voltage conductance to three models yield values for the interaction parameter and disorder level, but no model accounts for all data self-consistently.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Residual low-energy disorder may be more persistent in 1D wires than assumed when designing ballistic devices.
  • Experiments that further suppress low-energy disorder could test whether the non-reciprocal component can be eliminated.
  • The unexplained temperature dependence of the reciprocal drag points to a gap in theoretical descriptions of 1D interactions.

Load-bearing premise

The observed non-reciprocal drag signal is produced by low-energy disorder remaining in the device.

What would settle it

A measurement in which the non-reciprocal drag component vanishes once the drag wire shows perfectly quantized conductance with no low-bias anomalies or temperature-activated deviations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.22945 by Dominique Laroche, Glen Gillia, Mingyang Zheng, Nathan Rao, Rebika Makaju, Sadhvikas J. Addamane, Suyang Cai.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Schematic illustrations of the reciprocal (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Quantum wires conductance. (a) Conductance of the le [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Coulomb drag signal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Fitting for temperature dependence of signal compon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

1D-Coulomb drag serves as a platform for probing electron-electron interactions in 1D systems. Under the charge fluctuation formalism, the non-reciprocal component of Coulomb drag signal in mesoscopic devices is predicted to rely on the breaking of translational invariance due to intrinsic disorder. In this work, we report the measurement of a Coulomb drag device with a ballistic drag wire, allowing us to study the drag signal in nearly pristine quantum wires. Surprisingly, a non-reciprocal component with strength comparable to that of the reciprocal component is still detected across the measured regime, despite the drag wire being ballistic. We suggest that the non-reciprocal signal arises from low energy disorder in the device, which is consistent with the evolution of the drag wire's conductance at low biases voltages and temperatures. Additionally, the non-reciprocal component of the drag signal shows a power-law temperature dependence that coincides with a diffusive model, while the reciprocal component's temperature dependence cannot be explained under the existing framework. The bias voltage dependence of the drag wire conductance is fitted into three models to extract the interaction parameter and disorder level within the wire, but none of the models provides a fully self-consistent explanation for the data.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental measurement of Coulomb drag in a mesoscopic device with a ballistic drag wire. It claims detection of a non-reciprocal drag component whose strength is comparable to the reciprocal component across the measured regime. The authors attribute the non-reciprocal signal to low-energy disorder, citing consistency with the drag wire conductance evolution at low bias voltages and temperatures. The non-reciprocal component exhibits a power-law temperature dependence matching a diffusive model, while the reciprocal component's temperature dependence cannot be explained by existing frameworks. Bias-voltage dependence of conductance is fitted to three models to extract interaction parameters and disorder levels, but the abstract states that none provides a fully self-consistent explanation.

Significance. If the raw observation of non-reciprocal drag in a nominally ballistic wire holds with adequate controls and statistics, the result would be of moderate significance for 1D interaction physics, as it appears to contradict the expectation that non-reciprocity requires explicit breaking of translational invariance by strong disorder. The paper's transparency in stating model inconsistencies is a positive feature, but the absence of a self-consistent mechanism reduces the interpretive value.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central interpretive claim—that the non-reciprocal signal 'arises from low energy disorder'—is undercut by the explicit statement that 'none of the models provides a fully self-consistent explanation for the data' when fitting bias-voltage dependence to extract interaction parameter and disorder level. This inconsistency is load-bearing because the disorder level is invoked to explain the non-reciprocal component.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The reciprocal component's temperature dependence 'cannot be explained under the existing framework,' which directly affects the reliability of separating reciprocal and non-reciprocal contributions and undermines the overall charge-fluctuation interpretation used for the non-reciprocal signal.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and for acknowledging the transparency in our reporting of model inconsistencies. We respond to the major comments point by point below and will make revisions to the abstract as appropriate to address the concerns about interpretive claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central interpretive claim—that the non-reciprocal signal 'arises from low energy disorder'—is undercut by the explicit statement that 'none of the models provides a fully self-consistent explanation for the data' when fitting bias-voltage dependence to extract interaction parameter and disorder level. This inconsistency is load-bearing because the disorder level is invoked to explain the non-reciprocal component.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract could be revised to better reflect the tentative nature of our suggestion. The primary evidence for low-energy disorder comes from the conductance measurements of the drag wire at low bias voltages and temperatures, which show deviations from ideal ballistic behavior indicative of disorder effects. The model fittings are secondary and, as we explicitly state, do not provide full consistency. We will update the abstract to emphasize that the non-reciprocal signal is consistent with low-energy disorder effects but that quantitative modeling remains incomplete. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The reciprocal component's temperature dependence 'cannot be explained under the existing framework,' which directly affects the reliability of separating reciprocal and non-reciprocal contributions and undermines the overall charge-fluctuation interpretation used for the non-reciprocal signal.

    Authors: The reciprocal and non-reciprocal components are separated experimentally based on their symmetry properties under reversal of the drive current direction. This experimental distinction does not depend on the temperature dependence models. We report the unexplained temperature dependence of the reciprocal component as an observation that existing theories do not account for, which is itself a finding of interest. The charge-fluctuation interpretation is applied specifically to the non-reciprocal component's power-law temperature dependence matching the diffusive model, and we do not claim it explains the reciprocal part. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Pure experimental report with no derivation chain or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The manuscript is an experimental measurement paper reporting observed non-reciprocal Coulomb drag signals in a fabricated device. It performs bias-voltage fits to three external models but explicitly states none is fully self-consistent, and notes the reciprocal component's temperature dependence cannot be explained under existing frameworks. No equations, ansatzes, or predictions are derived that reduce to fitted inputs or self-citations by construction. The central claim rests on direct data, with the disorder suggestion presented as a hypothesis rather than a closed derivation. This matches the default non-circular case for measurement reports.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities identified; the work is an experimental measurement report.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5769 in / 1009 out tokens · 26396 ms · 2026-05-25T05:44:36.854695+00:00 · methodology

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

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Voit, One-dimensional fermi liquids, Reports on Progress in Physics 58, 977 (1995)

    J. Voit, One-dimensional fermi liquids, Reports on Progress in Physics 58, 977 (1995)

    work page 1995

  2. [2]

    Luttinger, An exactly soluble model of a many-fermion system, Journal of mathematical physics 4, 1154 (1963)

    J. Luttinger, An exactly soluble model of a many-fermion system, Journal of mathematical physics 4, 1154 (1963)

    work page 1963

  3. [3]

    Tomonaga, Remarks on bloch’s method of sound waves applied to many-fermion problems, Progress of Theoretical Physics 5, 544 (1950)

    S.-i. Tomonaga, Remarks on bloch’s method of sound waves applied to many-fermion problems, Progress of Theoretical Physics 5, 544 (1950)

    work page 1950

  4. [4]

    Auslaender, H

    O. Auslaender, H. Steinberg, A. Yacoby, Y. Tserkovnyak, B. Halperin, K. Baldwin, L. Pfeiffer, and K. West, Spin- charge separation and localization in one dimension, Science 308, 88 (2005)

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Jompol, C

    Y. Jompol, C. Ford, J. Griffiths, I. Farrer, G. Jones, D. Anderson, D. Ritchie, T. Silk, and A. Schofield, Prob- ing spin-charge separation in a tomonaga-luttinger liquid , Science 325, 597 (2009)

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    Steinberg, G

    H. Steinberg, G. Barak, A. Yacoby, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, B. I. Halperin, and K. Le Hur, Charge fractional- ization in quantum wires, Nature Physics 4, 116 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Bockrath, D

    M. Bockrath, D. H. Cobden, J. Lu, A. G. Rinzler, R. E. Smalley, L. Balents, and P. L. McEuen, Luttinger-liquid behaviour in carbon nanotubes, Nature 397, 598 (1999)

    work page 1999

  8. [8]

    A. M. Chang, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Observation of chiral luttinger behavior in elec- tron tunneling into fractional quantum hall edges, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2538 (1996)

    work page 1996

  9. [9]

    Xiang, T

    R. Xiang, T. Inoue, Y. Zheng, A. Kumamoto, Y. Qian, Y. Sato, M. Liu, D. Tang, D. Gokhale, J. Guo, et al. , One-dimensional van der waals heterostructures, Science 367, 537 (2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    M. A. Quantum, M. Aghaee, A. Alcaraz Ramirez, Z. Alam, R. Ali, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov, M. Astafev, A. Barzegar, B. Bauer, et al., Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in inas–al hybrid devices, Nature 638, 651 (2025)

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    A. D. Franklin, M. C. Hersam, and H.-S. P. Wong, Carbon nanotube transistors: Making electronics from molecules, Science 378, 726 (2022)

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    D. J. Klaassen, L. Eek, A. N. Rudenko, E. D. van’t Westende, C. Castenmiller, Z. Zhang, P. L. de Boeij, A. van Houselt, M. Ezawa, H. J. Zand- vliet, et al. , Realization of a one-dimensional topo- logical insulator in ultrathin germanene nanoribbons, Nature communications 16, 2059 (2025)

    work page 2059

  13. [13]

    B. N. Narozhny and A. Levchenko, Coulomb drag, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 025003 (2016)

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    T. J. Gramila, J. P. Eisenstein, A. H. MacDon- ald, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Mutual fric- tion between parallel two-dimensional electron systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1216 (1991)

    work page 1991

  15. [15]

    Klesse and A

    R. Klesse and A. Stern, Coulomb drag between quantum wires, Phys. Rev. B 62, 16912 (2000)

    work page 2000

  16. [16]

    Pustilnik, E

    M. Pustilnik, E. G. Mishchenko, L. I. Glaz- man, and A. V. Andreev, Coulomb drag by small momentum transfer between quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 126805 (2003)

    work page 2003

  17. [17]

    Yamamoto, M

    M. Yamamoto, M. Stopa, Y. Tokura, Y. Hirayama, and S. Tarucha, Negative coulomb drag in a one-dimensional wire, Science 313, 204 (2006)

    work page 2006

  18. [18]

    Laroche, G

    D. Laroche, G. Gervais, M. Lilly, and J. Reno, Positive and negative coulomb drag in verti- cally integrated one-dimensional quantum wires, Nature nanotechnology 6, 793 (2011)

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    Laroche, G

    D. Laroche, G. Gervais, M. Lilly, and J. Reno, 1d-1d coulomb drag signature of a luttinger liquid, Science 343, 631 (2014)

    work page 2014

  20. [20]

    Fuchs, R

    T. Fuchs, R. Klesse, and A. Stern, Coulomb drag be- tween quantum wires with different electron densities, Phys. Rev. B 71, 045321 (2005) . 8

    work page 2005

  21. [21]

    Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processe s

    L. Onsager, Reciprocal relations in irreversible processe s. i., Phys. Rev. 37, 405 (1931)

    work page 1931

  22. [22]

    Makaju, H

    R. Makaju, H. Kassar, S. M. Daloglu, A. Huynh, D. Laroche, A. Levchenko, and S. J. Addamane, Nonreciprocal coulomb drag between quan- tum wires in the quasi-one-dimensional regime, Phys. Rev. B 109, 085101 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Zheng, R

    M. Zheng, R. Makaju, R. Gazizulin, S. J. Ad- damane, and D. Laroche, Tunable reciprocal and nonreciprocal contributions to 1d coulomb drag, Nature Communications 16, 6963 (2025)

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    S. M. Tabatabaei, D. S´ anchez, A. L. Yeyati, and R. S´ anchez, Andreev-coulomb drag in coupled quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 247701 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Tang, J.-W

    Y. Tang, J.-W. Lee, A. Tylan-Tyler, H. Lee, M. Tomczyk, M. Huang, C.-B. Eom, P. Irvin, and J. Levy, Frictional drag between superconducting laalo3/srtio3 nanowires, Semiconductor Science and Technology 35, 09LT01 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Y. V. Nazarov and D. V. Averin, Current drag in capacitively coupled luttinger constrictions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 653 (1998)

    work page 1998

  27. [27]

    Kamenev and Y

    A. Kamenev and Y. Oreg, Coulomb drag in normal metals and superconductors: Diagrammatic approach, Phys. Rev. B 52, 7516 (1995)

    work page 1995

  28. [28]

    Levchenko and A

    A. Levchenko and A. Kamenev, Coulomb drag at zero temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 026805 (2008)

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    S´ anchez, R

    R. S´ anchez, R. L´ opez, D. S´ anchez, and M. B¨ uttiker, Mesoscopic coulomb drag, bro- ken detailed balance, and fluctuation relations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 076801 (2010)

    work page 2010

  30. [30]

    Kaasbjerg and A.-P

    K. Kaasbjerg and A.-P. Jauho, Correlated coulomb drag in capacitively coupled quantum-dot structures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 196801 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Borin, I

    A. Borin, I. Safi, and E. Sukhorukov, Coulomb drag effect induced by the third cumulant of current, Phys. Rev. B 99, 165404 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Y. Tang, A. Tylan-Tyler, H. Lee, J.-W. Lee, M. Tomczyk, M. Huang, C.-B. Eom, P. Irvin, and J. Levy, Long-range non-coulombic electron–electron interactions between laalo3/srtio3 nanowires, Advanced Materials Interfaces 6, 1900301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    Anderson, A

    L. Anderson, A. Cheng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watan- abe, and P. Kim, Coulomb drag between a carbon nanotube and monolayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 257701 (2021)

    work page 2021

  34. [34]

    Zheng, R

    M. Zheng, R. Makaju, R. Gazizulin, A. Levchenko, S. J. Addamane, and D. Laroche, Quasi- 1d coulomb drag in the nonlinear regime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 236301 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    S. Lal, S. Rao, and D. Sen, Transport through quasiballistic quantum wires: The role of contacts, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 026801 (2001)

    work page 2001

  36. [36]

    Tarucha, T

    S. Tarucha, T. Honda, and T. Saku, Reduc- tion of quantized conductance at low tempera- tures observed in 2 to 10 µ m-long quantum wires, Solid state communications 94, 413 (1995)

    work page 1995

  37. [37]

    Yacoby, H

    A. Yacoby, H. L. Stormer, N. S. Wingreen, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. Baldwin, and K. W. West, Nonuni- versal conductance quantization in quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4612 (1996)

    work page 1996

  38. [38]

    E. Levy, A. Tsukernik, M. Karpovski, A. Palevski, B. Dwir, E. Pelucchi, A. Rudra, E. Kapon, and Y. Oreg, Luttinger-liquid behavior in weakly disordered quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 196802 (2006)

    work page 2006

  39. [39]

    D. L. Maslov, Transport through dirty luttinger liquids connected to reservoirs, Phys. Rev. B 52, R14368 (1995)

    work page 1995

  40. [40]

    Zheng, R

    M. Zheng, R. Makaju, R. Gazizulin, A. Levchenko, S. J. Addamane, and D. Laroche, Quasi-one-dimensional coulomb drag between spin-polarized quantum wires, Phys. Rev. B 113, L121408 (2026)

    work page 2026

  41. [41]

    E. Levy, I. Sternfeld, M. Eshkol, M. Karpovski, B. Dwir, A. Rudra, E. Kapon, Y. Oreg, and A. Palevski, Experimental evidence for luttinger liquid behavior in sufficiently long gaas v-groove quantum wires, Phys. Rev. B 85, 045315 (2012)

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    C. L. Kane and M. P. A. Fisher, Transmis- sion through barriers and resonant tunneling in an interacting one-dimensional electron gas, Phys. Rev. B 46, 15233 (1992)

    work page 1992