Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 54 references

Spin-momentum locking of polariton edge states in honeycomb lattices

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A polariton honeycomb lattice's zigzag edge states are shown to carry circular polarization locked to propagation direction, enabling helicity-switchable directional lasing.

desk verdict Solid experimental demonstration of spin-momentum locking in polariton zigzag edge states, but the 'intrinsic' claim would benefit from controls for strain and bulk polarization. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.03961 v2 pith:ZRZGD4TR submitted 2026-07-04 cond-mat.mes-hall physics.optics

Andrea Herrero Otermin , Nicola Carlon Zambon , Dheerendra Singh , Neha Bhoria , Rimi Banerjee , Christian G. Mayer , Simon Betzold , Siddhartha Dam
show 5 more authors
Monika Emmerling Sven Höfling Luis Viña Subhaskar Mandal Carlos Antón-Solanas
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics PACS 71.36.+c42.25.Ja
keywords spin-momentumlockingexciton-polaritonlatticehoneycombzigzagedgestatesTE-TMsplittingStokespolarimetryedge-statelasingspin-selectivegain
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the circular polarization handedness of zigzag edge states in exciton-polariton honeycomb lattices is intrinsically tied to the direction the polaritons travel—spin-momentum locking—and that this locking follows purely from the evanescent decay of the edge modes, not from band topology or magnetic fields. It backs the claim with full Stokes polarimetry in momentum and real space in a regular lattice, then in a stretched lattice that opens a photonic band gap. In that gapped geometry the edge states are spectrally isolated and can be made to lase; by choosing right- or left-circular pump light, the authors preferentially amplify edge states propagating in opposite directions. If correct, this gives an all-optical, ultrafast, magnetic-field-free handle on directional polariton transport and a general principle: any exponentially localized photonic edge mode should carry a spin texture fixed by its complex wavevector.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the microcavity TE-TM splitting, which acts as an effective in-plane magnetic field (Hamiltonian H_TE-TM ∝ Ω_x σ_x + Ω_y σ_y) with a double-winding momentum texture. For bulk states with real wavevector this field fixes only relative phases and leaves bulk modes linearly polarized; for edge states, the perpendicular momentum becomes imaginary, k_y → iλ_y, and the effective field acquires a y-component that is odd in k_x, producing equal-and-opposite circular polarization for counter-propagating modes. The minimal expression S3 = 2λ_y k_x/(k_x² + λ_y²) is the paper's compact identity: it shows spin-momentum locking is a universal consequence of evanescence, with

What would settle it

Measure the linear-polarization splitting (strain birefringence) of the same zigzag edge either directly via spectrally resolved polarimetry or by applying controlled external stress to the sample; if the S3 texture flips or scales with that strain, the observed locking is not due solely to the evanescent TE-TM mechanism. A second check: use a lattice with mirrored edge termination but identical strain; intrinsic spin-momentum locking should reverse handedness with the geometry.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central experimental discovery is that the S3 Stokes component of zigzag edge states in a honeycomb exciton-polariton lattice is antisymmetric under momentum reversal, |S3| ≈ 0.4, while bulk states stay linearly polarized; the sign of S3 flips between the two valleys K and K′, and the same texture appears in the stretched lattice with opposite sign. The authors trace this to the TE-TM effective spin-orbit field of the microcavity acting on states whose perpendicular momentum is imaginary (evanescent decay), which couples σ+ and σ− components unequally, giving S3 ∝ 2λ_y k_x/(k_x² + λ_y²). In the lasing regime, spin-polarized non-resonant pumping selectively amplifies one of the tw

Load-bearing premise

The interpretation that the measured S3 is intrinsic spin-momentum locking relies on the assumption that strain-induced linear birefringence at the etched micropillar interfaces and spin polarization memory from the non-resonant reservoir do not contribute significantly to the edge-state emission polarization.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Zigzag edge states in any polariton honeycomb lattice should show spin-momentum locking whenever the TE-TM effective field is present and the edge modes are evanescent; no magnetic field or synthetic gauge field is required.
  • In a stretched honeycomb with a band gap, edge states are spectrally isolated from bulk modes, so circularly polarized pumping can selectively lase one chiral edge mode and switch its propagation direction by flipping pump helicity.
  • Because bulk states remain linearly polarized, the S3 signal is a clean spectroscopic marker of edge localization in momentum-resolved polarimetry.
  • The authors expect the same evanescent-wave spin-momentum locking to generalize to other localized edge states beyond honeycomb lattices.
  • Time-resolved measurements, proposed as a next step, would let one watch the spin texture form and spin-polarized wave packets travel along the edge.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The observed reversal of spin-momentum-locking sign between normal and stretched lattices hints that the direction of spin-locked propagation is set by microscopic hopping parameters, not by the topological invariant; if so, the propagation direction could be engineered by lattice distortions rather than by magnetic fields.
  • A direct test of the 'solely evanescent' claim would be to introduce controlled strain at the zigzag interface and watch S3 change; if the texture survives independent of strain, the intrinsic origin is confirmed, while a strong dependence would point to extrinsic contributions.
  • One could extend the scheme to arbitrary bends and disordered edges; if backscattering remains suppressed under spin-selective gain, spin-momentum locking plus a spin-polarized reservoir may act as a practical unidirectional waveguiding mechanism in polariton circuits.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the experimental observation of spin-momentum locking (SML) in zigzag edge states of honeycomb exciton-polariton lattices. Full Stokes polarimetry in momentum and real space shows opposite circular polarization for counter-propagating edge states, with |S3| ≈ 0.4 in the linear regime. In a stretched honeycomb lattice with a band gap, the S3 texture persists but reverses sign. The authors attribute the effect to the TE-TM effective spin-orbit field combined with the evanescent decay of the edge modes, deriving S3 ∝ 2λ_y k_x/(k_x^2+λ_y^2) via k_y → iλ_y. They also demonstrate helicity-controlled lasing of edge states, showing all-optical switching of the propagation direction.

Significance. If the interpretation holds, this work establishes a general mechanism for SML in photonic edge states that is distinct from topological protection, and it demonstrates a practical route to spin-controlled directional lasing. The paper's strengths include full Stokes polarimetry with momentum- and real-space maps, complementary Gross–Pitaevskii simulations, a stretched-lattice design that spectrally isolates edge states, and a lasing demonstration with clear threshold behavior. The central relation Eq. (2) is derived from the TE-TM Hamiltonian rather than fitted to the S3 data, which mitigates circularity concerns. However, the quantitative claim |S3| ≈ 0.4 lacks error bars, and the absence of strain/bulk controls leaves the 'intrinsic' interpretation underdetermined.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results, Figs. 2(c) and 3(d)] The central linear-regime evidence is the S3 map showing |S3| ≈ 0.4, but no error bars, repeated measurements, or statistical tests are provided. This is a quantitative claim that is load-bearing: if the value is within systematic offset or pixel noise, the sign correlation could be false. Please provide per-pixel or per-region uncertainties, a calibration check of the Stokes polarimetry, and a significance test for the sign difference between K and K′.
  2. [Samples and setup; Introduction (Ref. [45])] The manuscript states that strain-induced linear birefringence obscured SML in a previous experiment, yet no strain characterization of the present samples is shown. There is no control measurement demonstrating that bulk modes have S3 = 0 under identical excitation/detection conditions, nor are S1/S2 maps of the edge states presented. Without such controls, extrinsic mechanisms—strain fields, polarization-dependent losses, or detection response—could contribute to the observed S3 texture and even to the sign reversal in the stretched lattice. Please add bulk-state S3 controls and/or a linear-polarization characterization of the sample, or explicitly argue why these are negligible.
  3. [Spin-momentum locking, Eq. (2); tight-binding analysis] The derivation of Eq. (2) uses a single decay constant λ_y and is only compared to data at the level of sign, not quantitatively. The sign reversal in the stretched lattice is attributed to a tight-binding model with spin-conserving and spin-flip hoppings, but the model parameters are not independently constrained or listed. To make the 'solely from evanescent character' claim robust, please show a quantitative comparison of measured S3(kx) linecuts with Eq. (2) using λ_y extracted from the edge-state decay, or at least present the tight-binding parameters and show that the sign reversal follows without fine-tuning.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] Typo: 'scaning' should be 'scanning'.
  2. [Results, Figs. 2(d,e) and 4(d,e)] The real-space S3 maps under circularly polarized excitation are described as 'direct visualization of SML', but the pump helicity itself injects spin-polarized carriers and favors co-circular emission. These data demonstrate spin-selective gain, not the intrinsic S3 texture; please rephrase to avoid overclaiming and make clear that the intrinsic-SML evidence rests on the linearly pumped maps.
  3. [Fig. 4(a) caption] Use 'P = 0.005P_th and 1.95P_th' instead of '0.005P_th/1.95P_th' for readability; same in panels (f,g).
  4. [References] Supplementary Material is cited only as '[47]' without an entry; please provide a full citation. Also define 'Kekulé-O bond ordering' more precisely when first used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: Eq. (2) is derived from the TE-TM Hamiltonian with an evanescent boundary condition, not fitted to the measured S3, and the experimental comparisons are independent checks.

full rationale

The central prediction, Eq. (2), is obtained by replacing k_y with iλ_y in the TE-TM Hamiltonian (Eq. 1), a mathematically required substitution for exponentially localized edge states; this produces S3 ∝ 2λ_y k_x / (k_x^2 + λ_y^2) before comparison with the Stokes polarimetry data. The measured |S3| ≈ 0.4 and its sign reversal under k_x → -k_x are then compared with the formula and with Gross-Pitaevskii / tight-binding simulations, so the data are not used as inputs to the derivation. The prior strain-obscured experiment [45] and spin-selective gain [30] are external support, not self-referential proof; even though [30] shares an author, the present demonstration is independent. The absence of strain characterization and unpublished model parameters is a completeness/validity concern, not a circularity: no equation in the paper reduces to its own input. Therefore no circular step can be quoted and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or fundamental entities. All model inputs are either standard physical parameters (hoppings, TE-TM field) or parameters fitted to the measured dispersion. The main free parameters are the hopping amplitudes and the evanescent decay constant of the edge wavefunction; the decay constant is an input, not an output, of the SML derivation.

free parameters (4)
  • nearest-neighbor hopping t = 0.39 meV
    Fitted to the measured bulk dispersion along K–Γ–K′ (Fig. 2a).
  • next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' = 0.06 meV
    Fitted to the measured bulk dispersion; controls the edge-state band dispersion and group velocity.
  • evanescent decay constant λ_y of the zigzag edge state = not stated
    Used in Eq. (2) to derive S3 from the TE-TM model; its value is not extracted from the experiment, so it remains an input parameter of the effective model.
  • Tight-binding parameters for spin-conserving and spin-flip hoppings in the stretched lattice = not stated
    Invoked in the tight-binding analysis to explain the reversed group velocity in the stretched honeycomb; numerical values are not given in the main text and may have been adjusted to match the observed sign reversal.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The microcavity operates in the strong coupling regime, forming exciton-polaritons (vacuum Rabi splitting 8.4 meV).
    A prerequisite for all polariton phenomena; measured in the sample, cited from the text.
  • standard math The TE-TM splitting is described by the effective Hamiltonian H_TE-TM = Ω_x σ_x + Ω_y σ_y with Ω_x = -∂_x^2 + ∂_y^2 and Ω_y = -2∂_x∂_y (Eq. 1).
    Established model for photon/polariton pseudo-spin dynamics in planar microcavities; cited from prior literature.
  • domain assumption Edge modes are exponentially localized, so the momentum perpendicular to the edge is imaginary (k_y → iλ_y), a consequence of Maxwell's equations for evanescent fields.
    Central concept transferred from universal SML theory (Ref. [32]), not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Zigzag edge states in the honeycomb polariton lattice exist and are described by a tight-binding model with next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' (Ref. [51]).
    Standard description of photonic/polaritonic honeycomb lattices, cited from prior work.
  • domain assumption A Kekulé-like stretching of the honeycomb lattice opens a bandgap while preserving C6 symmetry (Ref. [19]).
    Used to justify the gapped phase in the stretched lattice; established in prior theoretical work.
  • domain assumption Circularly polarized non-resonant pumping spin-polarizes the exciton reservoir and preferentially amplifies co-circularly polarized modes (spin-selective gain).
    Mechanism for helicity-controlled lasing; established in Refs. [29,52] for polariton systems.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spin-momentum locking of polariton edge states in honeycomb lattices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZRZGD4TR

@misc{pith2026260703961,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spin-momentum locking of polariton edge states in honeycomb lattices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZRZGD4TR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.03961}
}
read the original abstract

Transverse-electric/Transverse-magnetic splitting in dielectric-mirror microcavities introduces an effective spin-orbit coupling for photons. While the bulk states remain linearly polarized, for exponentially localized edge states in a photonic lattice, this coupling induces elliptical polarization whose handedness is locked to the propagation direction, analogous to the transverse spin of evanescent electromagnetic waves. We reveal spin-momentum locking through Stokes polarimetry of zigzag edge states in a honeycomb exciton-polariton lattice. The effect persists in a stretched honeycomb supporting a photonic bandgap, where spin-polarized carrier injection enables selective lasing of either chiral edge states. Our results provide a route toward ultrafast spin-controlled unidirectional propagation in polariton systems without external magnetic fields.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03961 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (d), reveals that spin-momentum locking persists in the stretched lattice. Interestingly, its sign is reversed relative to the normal honeycomb lattice [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references

  1. [45]

    Milićević, T

    M. Milićević, T. Ozawa, P. Andreakou, I. Carusotto, T. Jacqmin, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, L. Le Gratiet, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Edge states in polariton honeycomb lattices, 2D Materials2, 034012 (2015)

    2015

  2. [1]

    F. D. M. Haldane and S. Raghu, Possible Realization of Directional Optical Waveguides in Photonic Crystals with Broken Time-Reversal Symmetry, Physical Review Letters100, 013904 (2008)

    2008

  3. [2]

    Z. Wang, Y. Chong, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljačić, Observation of unidirectional backscattering-immune topological electromagnetic states, Nature461, 772–775 (2009)

    2009

  4. [3]

    H. Zhao, X. Qiao, T. Wu, B. Midya, S. Longhi, and L. Feng, Non-hermitian topological light steering, Science 365, 1163 (2019)

    2019

  5. [4]

    Bahari, A

    B. Bahari, A. Ndao, F. Vallini, A. El Amili, Y. Fainman, and B. Kanté, Nonreciprocal lasing in topological cavities of arbitrary geometries, Science358, 636 (2017)

    2017

  6. [5]

    St-Jean, V

    P. St-Jean, V. Goblot, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, T.Ozawa, L.LeGratiet, I.Sagnes, J.Bloch,andA.Amo, Lasing in topological edge states of a one-dimensional lat- tice, Nature Photonics11, 651 (2017)

    2017

  7. [6]

    M. A. Bandres, S. Wittek, G. Harari, M. Parto, J. Ren, M. Segev, D. N. Christodoulides, and M. Khajavikhan, Topological insulator laser: Experiments, Science359, eaar4005 (2018)

    2018

  8. [7]

    J.-H. Choi, W. E. Hayenga, Y. G. N. Liu, M. Parto, B. Bahari, D. N. Christodoulides, and M. Khajavikhan, Room temperature electrically pumped topological insu- lator lasers, Nature Communications12, 3434 (2021)

    2021

Show all 54 references
  1. [8]

    Dikopoltsev, T

    A. Dikopoltsev, T. H. Harder, E. Lustig, O. A. Egorov, J. Beierlein, A. Wolf, Y. Lumer, M. Emmerling, C. Schneider, S. Höfling, M. Segev, and S. Klembt, Topo- logical insulator vertical-cavity laser array, Science373, 1514 (2021). 6

    2021

  2. [9]

    Mittal, V

    S. Mittal, V. V. Orre, D. Leykam, Y. Chong, and M. Hafezi, Photonic Anomalous Quantum Hall Effect, Physical Review Letters123, 043201 (2019)

    2019

  3. [10]

    Chénier, B

    A. Chénier, B. d’Aligny, F. Pellerin, P.-E. Blanchard, T. Ozawa, I. Carusotto, and P. St-Jean, Quantized hall drift in a frequency-encoded photonic chern insulator, Phys. Rev. X16, 011020 (2026)

    2026

  4. [11]

    Roberts, B

    N. Roberts, B. Salter, J. Binysh, P. J. Mosley, and A. Souslov, Twisted optical fibres as photonic topolog- ical insulators, Nature Photonics20, 324–331 (2026)

    2026

  5. [12]

    Schine, A

    N. Schine, A. Ryou, A. Gromov, A. Sommer, and J. Si- mon, Synthetic Landau levels for photons, Nature534, 671 (2016)

    2016

  6. [13]

    L. W. Clark, N. Schine, C. Baum, N. Jia, and J. Si- mon, Observation of Laughlin states made of light, Na- ture582, 41 (2020)

    2020

  7. [14]

    Wang, F.-M

    C. Wang, F.-M. Liu, M.-C. Chen, H. Chen, X.-H. Zhao, C. Ying, Z.-X. Shang, J.-W. Wang, Y.-H. Huo, C.-Z. Peng, X. Zhu, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Realization of fractional quantum Hall state with interacting photons, Science384, 579 (2024)

    2024

  8. [15]

    C. L. Kane and E. J. Mele,Z2 Topological Order and the Quantum Spin Hall Effect, Physical Review Letters95, 146802 (2005)

    2005

  9. [16]

    C. L. Kane and E. J. Mele, Quantum Spin Hall Effect in Graphene, Physical Review Letters95, 226801 (2005)

    2005

  10. [17]

    B. A. Bernevig, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin hall effect and topological phase transition in hgte quantum wells, Science314, 1757–1761 (2006)

    2006

  11. [18]

    L. Lu, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljačić, Topological photonics, Nature Photonics8, 821–829 (2014)

    2014

  12. [19]

    Wu and X

    L.-H. Wu and X. Hu, Scheme for achieving a topologi- cal photonic crystal by using dielectric material, Physical Review Letters114, 223901 (2015)

    2015

  13. [20]

    Ozawa, H

    T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zil- berberg, and I. Carusotto, Topological photonics, Re- views of Modern Physics91, 015006 (2019)

    2019

  14. [21]

    Arora, T

    S. Arora, T. Bauer, R. Barczyk, E. Verhagen, and L. Kuipers, Direct quantification of topological protec- tion in symmetry-protected photonic edge states at tele- com wavelengths, Light: Science & Applications10, 9 (2021)

    2021

  15. [22]

    C. A. Rosiek, G. Arregui, A. Vladimirova, M. Albrecht- sen, B. Vosoughi Lahijani, R. E. Christiansen, and S. Sto- bbe, Observation of strong backscattering in valley-hall photonic topological interface modes, Nature Photonics 17, 386–392 (2023)

    2023

  16. [23]

    S. Xu, Y. Wang, and R. Agarwal, Absence of topological protection of the interface states inZ2 photonic crystals, Physical Review Letters131, 053802 (2023)

    2023

  17. [24]

    Lévêque, Y

    G. Lévêque, Y. Pennec, P. Szriftgiser, A. Amo, and A. Martínez, Scattering-matrix approach for a quanti- tative evaluation of the topological protection in valley photoniccrystals,PhysicalReviewA108,043505(2023)

    2023

  18. [25]

    A. B. Khanikaev, S. Hossein Mousavi, W.-K. Tse, M. Kargarian, A. H. MacDonald, and G. Shvets, Photonic topological insulators, Nature Materials12, 233–239 (2012)

    2012

  19. [26]

    Hafezi, S

    M. Hafezi, S. Mittal, J. Fan, A. Migdall, and J. M. Tay- lor, Imaging topological edge states in silicon photonics, Nature Photonics7, 1001–1005 (2013)

    2013

  20. [27]

    Yang, Z.-K

    Z.-Q. Yang, Z.-K. Shao, H.-Z. Chen, X.-R. Mao, and R.- M. Ma, Spin-momentum-locked edge mode for topologi- cal vortex lasing, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 013903 (2020)

    2020

  21. [28]

    H. Ando, T. Sogawa, and H. Gotoh, Photon-spin con- trolled lasing oscillation in surface-emitting lasers, Appl. Phys. Lett.73, 566 (1998)

    1998

  22. [29]

    F.-K. Hsu, W. Xie, Y.-S. Lee, S.-D. Lin, and C.-W. Lai, Ultrafast spin-polarized lasing in a highly photoexcited semiconductor microcavity at room temperature, Phys. Rev. B91, 195312 (2015)

    2015

  23. [30]

    Carlon Zambon, P

    N. Carlon Zambon, P. St-Jean, M. Milićević, A. Lemaître, A. Harouri, L. Le Gratiet, O. Bleu, D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, I. Sagnes, S. Ravets, A. Amo, and J. Bloch, Optically controlling the emission chirality of microlasers, Nature Photonics13, 283 (2019)

    2019

  24. [31]

    Widmann, J

    S. Widmann, J. Bellmann, J. Düreth, S. Dam, C. G. Mayer, P. Gagel, S. Betzold, M. Emmerling, S. Mandal, R. Banerjee, T. C. H. Liew, R. Thomale, S. Höfling, and S. Klembt, Artificial gauge fields and dimensions in a polariton hofstadter ladder, Nature Communications17, 1586 (2026)

    2026

  25. [32]

    T. V. Mechelen and Z. Jacob, Universal spin-momentum locking of evanescent waves, Optica3, 118 (2016)

    2016

  26. [33]

    P. Shi, L. Du, C. Li, A. V. Zayats, and X. Yuan, Trans- verse spin dynamics in structured electromagnetic guided waves, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, e2018816118 (2021)

    2021

  27. [34]

    Hosten and P

    O. Hosten and P. Kwiat, Observation of the Spin Hall Effect of Light via Weak Measurements, Science319, 787 (2008)

    2008

  28. [35]

    Parappurath, F

    N. Parappurath, F. Alpeggiani, L. Kuipers, and E. Ver- hagen, Direct observation of topological edge states in sil- icon photonic crystals: Spin, dispersion, and chiral rout- ing, Science Advances6, eaaw4137 (2020)

    2020

  29. [36]

    Carusotto and C

    I. Carusotto and C. Ciuti, Quantum fluids of light, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 299 (2013)

    2013

  30. [37]

    Kusudo, N

    K. Kusudo, N. Y. Kim, A. Löffler, S. Höfling, A. Forchel, and Y.Yamamoto, Stochasticformation ofpolaritoncon- densates in two degenerate orbital states, Physical Re- view B87, 214503 (2013)

    2013

  31. [38]

    Klembt, T

    S. Klembt, T. H. Harder, O. A. Egorov, K. Winkler, R. Ge, M. A. Bandres, M. Emmerling, L. Worschech, T. C. H. Liew, M. Segev, C. Schneider, and S. Höfling, Exciton-polariton topological insulator, Nature562, 552–556 (2018)

    2018

  32. [39]

    Jacqmin, I

    T. Jacqmin, I. Carusotto, I. Sagnes, M. Abbarchi, D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Direct observation of dirac cones and a flatband in a honeycomb lattice for polaritons, Physical Review Letters112, 116402 (2014)

    2014

  33. [40]

    Kavokin, G

    A. Kavokin, G. Malpuech, and M. Glazov, Optical Spin Hall Effect, Physical Review Letters95, 136601 (2005)

    2005

  34. [41]

    Leyder, M

    C. Leyder, M. Romanelli, J. P. Karr, E. Giacobino, T. C. H. Liew, M. M. Glazov, A. V. Kavokin, G. Malpuech, and A. Bramati, Observation of the op- tical spin Hall effect, Nature Physics3, 628 (2007)

    2007

  35. [42]

    Kammann, T

    E. Kammann, T. C. H. Liew, H. Ohadi, P. Cilibrizzi, P. Tsotsis, Z. Hatzopoulos, P. G. Savvidis, A. V. Ka- vokin, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Nonlinear optical spin hall effect and long-range spin transport in polariton lasers, Physical Review Letters109, 036404 (2012)

    2012

  36. [43]

    V. G. Sala, D. D. Solnyshkov, I. Carusotto, T. Jacqmin, A. Lemaître, H. Terças, A. Nalitov, M. Abbarchi, E. Ga- lopin, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, G. Malpuech, and A. Amo, Spin-orbit coupling for photons and polaritons in mi- crostructures, Phys. Rev. X5, 011034 (2015). 7

    2015

  37. [44]

    C. E. Whittaker, T. Dowling, A. V. Nalitov, A. V. Yulin, B. Royall, E. Clarke, M. S. Skolnick, I. A. Shelykh, and D. N. Krizhanovskii, Optical analogue of dresselhaus spin–orbit interaction in photonic graphene, Nature Pho- tonics15, 193–196 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Weisbuch, M

    C. Weisbuch, M. Nishioka, A. Ishikawa, and Y. Arakawa, Observation of the coupled exciton-photon mode split- ting in a semiconductor quantum microcavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 3314 (1992)

    1992

  39. [47]

    (2026), see Supplementary Material for additional de- tails

    2026

  40. [48]

    Michaelis de Vasconcellos, A

    S. Michaelis de Vasconcellos, A. Calvar, A. Dousse, J. Suffczyński, N. Dupuis, A. Lemaître, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, P. Voisin, and P. Senellart, Spatial, spectral, and polarization properties of coupled micropillar cavi- ties, Applied Physics Letters99, 101103 (2011)

    2011

  41. [49]

    Houdré, C

    R. Houdré, C. Weisbuch, R. P. Stanley, U. Oesterle, P. Pellandini, and M. Ilegems, Measurement of cavity- polariton dispersion curve from angle-resolved photo- luminescence experiments, Physical Review Letters73, 2043–2046 (1994)

  42. [50]

    Z. P. Wang, Q. B. Li, Q. Tan, Z. J. Huang, and J. H. Shi, Method of measuring the practical retardance and judgingthefastorslowaxisofaquarter-waveplate,Mea- surement39, 729–735 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    Mangussi, M

    F. Mangussi, M. Milićević, I. Sagnes, L. L. Gratiet, A. Harouri, A. Lemaître, J. Bloch, A. Amo, and G. Usaj, Multi-orbitaltightbindingmodelforcavity-polaritonlat- tices, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter32, 315402 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Lindemann, G

    M. Lindemann, G. Xu, T. Pusch, R. Michalzik, M. R. Hofmann, I. Žutić, and N. C. Gerhardt, Ultrafast spin- lasers, Nature568, 212–215 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    Klaas, O

    M. Klaas, O. A. Egorov, T. C. H. Liew, A. Nalitov, V. Marković, H. Suchomel, T. H. Harder, S. Betzold, E. A. Ostrovskaya, A. Kavokin, S. Klembt, S. Höfling, and C. Schneider, Nonresonant spin selection methods and polarization control in exciton-polariton conden- sates, Physic...

    2019

  46. [54]

    B. Real, N. C. Zambon, P. St-Jean, I. Sagnes, A. Lemaître, A. Harouri, S. Ravets, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Chiral emission induced by optical zeeman effect in polariton micropillars, Phys. Rev. Research3, 043161 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.