Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 47 references

Chiral charge density waves in transition metal dichalcogenide

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Chirality in 1T-TiSe2 comes from nearly degenerate CDW stacking, not phase shifts between charge components.

desk verdict Solid alternative to the phase-shift chirality story in TiSe2: DFT kills dephasing, C2 stacking is the soft degree of freedom, dual-basis supplies the optical handle; the 4.7 μeV ranking is the only real soft spot. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.10182 v1 pith:JZY4BKVO submitted 2026-07-11 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Ettore Carpene This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords chargedensitywave1T-TiSe2chiralityphasestackingdual-basisorderparametercircularlypolarizedlightgyrotropicLandautheory
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 argues that the debated chirality of the charge-density-wave phase in 1T-TiSe2 is not caused by relative phase shifts among the three order-parameter components. Density-functional total-energy calculations show those phase-shifted states sit high on a stiff potential surface and are therefore not viable ground states. Instead the relevant degree of freedom is how successive Se-Ti-Se slabs stack their CDW phases. A monoclinic C2 stacking lies only a few micro-electron-volts per formula unit above the known centrosymmetric ground state and spontaneously breaks inversion and mirror symmetries. Because the electronic charge piles up along bonds while the lattice distortion is a transverse, atom-centered mode, circularly polarized light can couple selectively to the stacking parity and lift the degeneracy between the two C2 enantiomers. The picture reconciles local-probe reports of spontaneous chirality (a racemic mixture of stacking domains) with the possibility of macroscopic, light-selected gyrotropic order.

What carries the argument

The dual-basis order parameter: charge redistribution lives on the L'g bond-modulated lattice while the periodic lattice distortion lives on the Lj transverse phonon basis; their spatial separation generates the optical coupling Gχ ∝ (E imes E*) · ẑ (σ_ls + σ_us) that acts only on same-parity C2 stackings.

What would settle it

A high-resolution bulk diffraction or second-harmonic-generation measurement that either finds no C2 domains after dark cooling or shows that circular light does not produce a net gyrotropic signal would refute the stacking-plus-optical-selection mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Phase-shifted CDW configurations are energetically prohibitive, while a monoclinic C2 phase-stacking order is nearly degenerate with the achiral P-3c1 ground state and naturally lacks inversion and mirror symmetries. The dual character of the order parameter—bond-modulated charge density versus atom-centered transverse lattice distortion—then permits a helicity-dependent free-energy term that selects one chiral domain under circular light.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on DFT energy differences of only a few micro-electron-volts per formula unit between stackings being both accurate and correctly ordered, and on the simple phenomenological couplings capturing the true free-energy landscape.

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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reassesses the microscopic origin of chirality in the CDW phase of 1T-TiSe2. Using DFT and Landau theory, it argues that mutual phase shifts among the three CDW components incur prohibitive energy costs relative to amplitude variations, ruling them out as the ground-state mechanism. Instead, it identifies a nearly degenerate monoclinic C2 CDW phase-stacking order (claimed ~4.7 μeV/f.u. above the achiral P-3c1 ground state) that breaks inversion and mirror symmetries. A dual-basis description is introduced: the electronic charge redistribution is bond-modulated (L'g vectors), while the PLD is atom-centered and transverse (Lj vectors). This spatial separation is used to derive a helicity-dependent free-energy term Gχ that lifts the degeneracy between C2 enantiomers under circularly polarized light, reconciling local-probe “spontaneous” chirality (racemic C2 domains) with bulk achirality and light-induced macroscopic gyrotropy.

Significance. If the energy hierarchy and optical selection rules hold, the work offers a coherent resolution of the long-standing chirality paradox in 1T-TiSe2 and supplies a concrete, falsifiable mechanism for light-controlled gyrotropic order. Strengths include the clear DFT demonstration that charge is bond-modulated rather than atom-centered (Figs. 2–3), the explicit exclusion of phase-shifted states via a stiff energy landscape (Supplementary Note 3), and the symmetry-based classification of the four non-equivalent stackings (Fig. 4). The dual-basis construction and the form of Gχ are original and could generalize to other TMDs with transverse PLDs. The central numerical claim, however, sits at the few-μeV scale where DFT rankings for layered vdW systems are known to be fragile; without robustness checks the significance remains conditional.

major comments (2)
  1. [Figs. 4j–m, 5b; DFT energy comparisons] The load-bearing numerical premise is the DFT energy hierarchy of the four double-slab stackings (Figs. 4j–m, 5b): P-3c1 ground state, C2 only 4.7 μeV/f.u. higher, C2/c and P321 substantially higher. This ranking fixes the interlayer coupling γ in Eq. (5) and underpins both the spontaneous-chirality (racemic C2 domains) and light-selection narratives. At the few-μeV/f.u. scale, absolute total-energy differences in vdW-layered TMDs are sensitive to exchange-correlation functional, dispersion correction, k-mesh, cutoff and smearing. No cross-functional benchmarks (e.g., SCAN, r2SCAN, optB88-vdW), convergence tables or error estimates are supplied. Without such tests the near-degeneracy—and therefore the entire physical picture—remains unverified.
  2. [Eq. (6); Supplementary Note 4C; Fig. 5c] The chiral optical term Gχ (Eq. 6) is introduced as the lowest-order coupling arising from the dual-basis nature of the order parameter, yet its microscopic derivation is deferred to Supplementary Note 4C and the prefactor δ is a free phenomenological constant (illustrative values |E|=1, δ/Ψ³₀=0.05 are used in Fig. 5c). While the selection rule that Gχ vanishes for opposite-parity (P-3c1) and is finite for same-parity (C2) stackings is symmetry-allowed, the claim that circular light can macroscopically select one enantiomer requires at least an order-of-magnitude estimate of δ from the underlying electronic structure or a statement of the experimental field strengths needed. Absent that, the optical-induction mechanism remains schematic.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract, main text, Fig. 4] Space-group notation is inconsistent: P3c1, P-3c1 and P¯3c1 appear interchangeably; the correct centrosymmetric group should be fixed throughout.
  2. [Fig. 5; Supplementary Note 4D] Fig. 5b inset and the free-energy contour in Fig. 5a would benefit from explicit numerical values of the fitted Landau parameters μ, ν, γ so that the barrier heights can be reproduced independently.
  3. [Supplementary Note 3; main-text discussion] The phrase “prohibitive energy costs” for phase-shifted states is qualitative; a quantitative comparison (energy cost per degree of phase shift versus amplitude variation) in the main text would strengthen the claim that phase fluctuations are irrelevant.
  4. [Introduction and concluding discussion] Several recent experimental works on chiral CDW signatures (e.g., circular dichroism, photoinduced dynamics) are cited but not quantitatively confronted with the predicted domain statistics or optical selection rules; a short comparison paragraph would improve experimental contact.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

DFT stacking energies and charge maps are independent ab-initio inputs; Landau free-energy parameters (and the free prefactor δ in Gχ) are subsequently fitted/illustrated against those points, producing only mild quantitative circularity in barrier shapes and light-induced splittings.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Fig. 5b and surrounding text (Landau energy landscape section)]
    "The solid, coloured lines in panel 5b fit of the DFT data according to Eqs. 4-5 with a unique set of parameters μ , u and γ … establishing that the free energy barrier between P 3c1 and C2 structures is the narrowest."

    The continuous free-energy surfaces and the quantitative statement that the P-3c1–C2 barrier is the narrowest are obtained by fitting the phenomenological Landau functional (plus interlayer term Gc) to the discrete DFT total energies of the four stackings. The barrier heights and landscape topology are therefore partly by construction of the fit rather than independent predictions; only the underlying DFT energy ordering itself is ab-initio.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Eq. 6 and Fig. 5c caption (Chiral induction section)]
    "Gχ = δΨ³₀ [(E imes E*) ·ẑ] (σ_ls + σ_us) … (numerical values |E|=1 and δ/Ψ³₀ = 0.05 are used)"

    The overall scale δ of the chiral optical coupling is a free phenomenological constant chosen by hand for the illustrative plots of Fig. 5c. The magnitude of the light-induced free-energy splitting is therefore not a prediction but an input; only the selection rule that Gχ vanishes for opposite-parity (P-3c1) stackings and is nonzero for same-parity (C2) stackings follows from symmetry.

full rationale

The load-bearing numerical claims (phase-shift energy costs prohibitive relative to amplitude variations; C2 only ~4.7 μ eV/f.u. above P-3c1 while C2/c and P321 lie higher; bond-centered charge redistribution versus atom-centered transverse PLD) are obtained from explicit DFT total-energy and charge-density calculations on the four double-slab stackings and the relaxed P-3c1 structure. These are external numerical inputs, not forced by the subsequent Landau construction. The free-energy functional (Eqs. 4–5) is the standard three-component Landau expansion plus a phenomenological interlayer term; its coefficients μ, u, γ are fitted to the DFT points (Fig. 5b) merely to interpolate a continuous landscape and to confirm that the P-3c1–C2 barrier is the lowest. The chiral optical term Gχ (Eq. 6) is likewise a lowest-order symmetry-allowed coupling whose overall scale δ is free and is set by hand for illustration. Because the paper never presents the fitted continuous barriers or the numerical size of the light-induced splitting as independent first-principles predictions, the circularity remains minor and non-load-bearing for the qualitative conclusions (near-degeneracy of C2, parity selection rules that leave P-3c1 optically inert, statistical racemic mixture under dark cooling). No self-citation uniqueness theorems or definitional tautologies appear. Score 2 reflects only the ordinary phenomenological fitting step.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on three layers: (1) standard DFT total-energy comparisons whose absolute accuracy at the few-μeV scale is assumed rather than demonstrated; (2) a conventional three-component Landau free energy for trigonal CDW order, augmented by two phenomenological interlayer and chiral couplings whose coefficients are fitted to the DFT points; (3) the dual-basis identification of charge (L′g) versus lattice (Lj) periodicities that licenses the form of Gχ. No new particles or forces are postulated, but the free parameters and the DFT-accuracy assumption are load-bearing.

free parameters (4)
  • Landau coefficients μ, ν
    Temperature-independent coefficients in the single-slab free energy (Eq. 4); fitted jointly with γ to the DFT energy landscape of Fig. 5b (Supplementary Note 4D).
  • interlayer coupling γ
    Phenomenological constant in Gc (Eq. 5) that lifts the degeneracy of the four double-slab stackings; fitted to the DFT energy hierarchy.
  • chiral optical coefficient δ
    Pre-factor of the helicity-dependent term Gχ (Eq. 6); set by hand to δ/Ψ0³ = 0.05 for the illustrative curves in Fig. 5c–d, not derived from first principles.
  • illustrative field strength |E|=1
    Numerical value used only for plotting the light-tilted barriers in Fig. 5c–d; not a physical prediction.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The free energy of a three-component trigonal CDW order parameter takes the standard Landau form of Eq. 4 (Cowley 1980).
    Invoked as the starting point for the single-slab landscape; standard but not re-derived from a microscopic Hamiltonian.
  • domain assumption PBE-GGA with Grimme-D3 van der Waals correction yields reliable total-energy differences of a few μeV per formula unit between CDW stackings.
    Underpins the claim that C2 is only 4.7 μeV/f.u. above P-3c1 and that C2/c and P321 are substantially higher; no functional or convergence tests for this scale are reported.
  • ad hoc to paper The lowest-order chiral light-coupling term has the form Gχ ∝ [(E × E*) · ẑ](σ_ls + σ_us) (Eq. 6).
    Derived in Supplementary Note 4C from the dual-basis interaction; the algebraic structure is symmetry-motivated, but the existence and sign of a nonzero δ are postulated.
  • domain assumption Atomic displacements of the CDW are the eigenvectors of the L1− soft transverse optical phonon, giving δu ∝ ẑ × Mj (Eq. 2).
    Standard result from prior phonon calculations (Bianco et al., Guster et al.); used to fix the PLD patterns of all stackings.
invented entities (2)
  • dual-basis CDW order parameter (bond-modulated L′g charge vs atom-centered Lj PLD) independent evidence
    purpose: Explains why charge density and lattice distortion have different spatial periodicities and licenses a nonzero optical coupling to light helicity.
    Constructed from the DFT charge-density difference and the known transverse phonon eigenvectors; the separation into two bases is the paper’s conceptual contribution.
  • chiral optical free-energy term Gχ
    purpose: Provides the mechanism by which circularly polarized light lifts the degeneracy of C2 enantiomers.
    Phenomenological term whose form follows from the dual basis and parity factors; magnitude is a free parameter δ.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chiral charge density waves in transition metal dichalcogenide." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JZY4BKVO

@misc{pith2026260710182,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chiral charge density waves in transition metal dichalcogenide},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JZY4BKVO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.10182}
}
abstract

The emergence of chirality in the charge density wave (CDW) phase of 1$T$-TiSe$_2$ has recently attracted significant attention, yet its microscopic origin remains debated. The prevailing interpretation attributes chirality to a relative phase shift between the charge density components. Here, using density functional theory and symmetry analysis, it is demonstrated that such phase-shifted states entail prohibitive energy costs, rendering them unlikely candidates for the ground state. Instead, a nearly degenerate metastable CDW phase stacking order with monoclinic symmetry is identified, that naturally breaks mirror and inversion symmetries. The CDW in 1$T$-TiSe$_2$ possesses a dual physical nature: the electronic charge redistribution is intrinsically bond-modulated, while the periodic lattice distortion is atom-centered transverse. This spatial separation allows a specific optical coupling mechanism where circularly polarized light breaks the energetic degeneracy between chiral domains. These results reconcile conflicting experimental observations, identifying the "spontaneous" chirality observed in local probes as a statistical distribution of CDW phase stacking domains, while establishing the mechanism for macroscopic, light-induced gyrotropic order.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10182 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a) 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Top/bottom panels refer to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (a) Propagation vectors (colored arrows) used in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) The eight equivalent absolute minima of the free e [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: (a) Constant free energy contour plot including the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references

  1. [1]

    3) is carved within the dotted sub-cells, in perfect agreement with the DFT results (Fig

    is defined by the black, solid unit cell, the corresponding charge density (gray color scale, Eq. 3) is carved within the dotted sub-cells, in perfect agreement with the DFT results (Fig. 2). Although, both PLD and CDW derive from the same order parameter (Eq. 1), the fact that the charge density is physically rooted in the bonding orbitals ( L′ g basis), ...

  2. [2]

    is [ 30] (see Supplemen- tary Note 4 [ 29]): G(T ) − G1 = Ψ 4 0 [ − 3µ + ν 2 ( 1 − T TC ) (η2 1 + η2 2 + η2

  3. [3]

    Below the critical temperature TC , the free energy landscape exhibits eight equivalent global minima located at ˜ηj = ± √ 1 − T /T C

    + µ 4 (η2 1 + η2 2 + η2 3)2 + ν 4 (η4 1 + η4 2 + η4 3) ] (4) Here, the coefficients µ and ν (both positive) are temperature-independent, and the amplitudes Ψ j = Ψ 0ηj are expressed using dimensionless fractional coor- dinates ηj . Below the critical temperature TC , the free energy landscape exhibits eight equivalent global minima located at ˜ηj = ± √ 1 − ...

  4. [4]

    J. A. Wilson, F. J. Di Salvo, and S. Mahajan, Charge- density waves and superlattices in the metallic layered transition metal dichalcogenides, Adv. Phys. 24, 117-201 (1975)

    1975

  5. [5]

    F. J. Di Salvo, D. E. Moncton, and J. V. Waszczak, Electronic properties and superlattice formation in the semimetal TiSe 2, Phys. Rev. B 14, 4321 (1976)

    1976

  6. [6]

    Suzuki, A

    N. Suzuki, A. Yamamoto, and K. Motizuki, Microscopic Theory of the CDW State of 1 T -TiSe2, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 54, 4668 (1985)

    1985

  7. [7]

    Bianco, M

    R. Bianco, M. Calandra, and F. Mauri, Electronic and vi- brational properties of TiSe 2 in the charge-density-wave phase from first principles, Phys. Rev. B 92, 094107 (2015)

    2015

  8. [8]

    Guster, E

    B. Guster, E. Canadell, M. Pruneda, and P. Ordej´ on, First principles analysis of the CDW instability of single- layer 1T -TiSe2 and its evolution with charge carrier den- sity, 2D Mater. 5, 025024 (2018)

    2018

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    J. A. Holy, K. C. Woo, M. V. Klein, and F. C. Brown, Raman and infrared studies of superlattice formation in TiSe2, Phys. Rev. B 16, 3628 (1977)

    1977

  2. [10]

    Chen, Y.-H

    P. Chen, Y.-H. Chan, X.-Y. Fang, Y. Zhang, M.Y. Chou, S.-K. Mo, Z. Hussain, A.-V. Fedorov, and T.-C. Chiang, Charge density wave transition in single-layer titanium diselenide, Nat. Commun. 6, 8943 (2015)

    2015

  3. [11]

    Cercellier, C

    H. Cercellier, C. Monney, F. Clerc, C. Battaglia, L. De- spont, M. G. Garnier, H. Beck, P. Aebi, L. Patthey, H. Berger, and L. Forr´ o, Evidence for an Excitonic Insulator Phase in 1 T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 146403 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    Monney et al., Temperature-dependent photoemission on 1 T -TiSe2: Interpretation within the exciton conden- sate phase model, Phys

    C. Monney et al., Temperature-dependent photoemission on 1 T -TiSe2: Interpretation within the exciton conden- sate phase model, Phys. Rev. B 81, 155104 (2010)

    2010

  5. [13]

    van Wezel, P

    J. van Wezel, P. Nahai-Williamson, and S. S. Saxena, Exciton-phonon-driven charge density wave in TiSe 2, Phys. Rev. B 81, 165109 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    T. E. Kidd, T. Miller, M. Y. Chou, and T.-C. Chiang, Electron-Hole Coupling and the Charge Density Wave Transition in TiSe 2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 226402 88, 226402 (2002)

    2002

  7. [15]

    Kaneko, Y

    T. Kaneko, Y. Ohta, and S. Yunoki, Exciton-phonon co- operative mechanism of the triple- q charge-density-wave and antiferroelectric electron polarization in TiSe 2, Phys. Rev. B 97, 155131 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Hedayat et al

    H. Hedayat et al. , Excitonic and lattice contributions to 7 the charge density wave in 1T -TiSe2 revealed by a phonon bottleneck, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 023029 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Kim et al

    K. Kim et al. , Origin of the chiral charge density wave in transition-metal dichalcogenide, Nat. Phys. 2, 1919 (2024)

    1919

  10. [18]

    Zhang, K

    S. Zhang, K. Luo, and T. Zhang, Understanding chiral charge-density wave by frozen chiral phonon, npj Com- putational Materials 10, 264 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Zhang et al

    R. Zhang et al. , Second-harmonic generation in atomi- cally thin 1 T -TiSe2 and its possible origin from charge density wave transitions, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085409 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    Wickramaratne, S

    D. Wickramaratne, S. Subedi, D. H. Torchinsky, G. Karapetrov, and I. I. Mazin, Photoinduced chiral charge density wave in TiSe 2, Phys. Rev. B 105, 054102 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Xuefei G. et al. , In-Plane Anisotropy of Charge Density Wave Fluctuations in 1 T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 13610 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Qingzheng Q. et al. , Photoinduced Dynamics and Mo- mentum Distribution of Chiral Charge Density Waves in 1T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 116904 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Qian X. et al. , Observation of Circular Dichroism In- duced by Electronic Chirality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 126402 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Ishioka, Y

    J. Ishioka, Y. H. Liu, K. Shimatake, T. Kurosawa, K. Ichimura, Y. Toda, M. Oda, and S. Tanda, Chiral Charge-Density Waves, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 176401 (2010)

    2010

  17. [25]

    Kim, K.-H

    H. Kim, K.-H. Jin, and H. W. Yeom, Electronically Seamless Domain Wall of Chiral Charge Density Wave in 1 T -TiSe2, Nano Lett. 24, 14323 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Xu et al

    S.-Y. Xu et al. , Spontaneous gyrotropic electronic order in a transition-metal dichalcogenide, Nature 578, 545 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    van Wezel, Chirality and orbital order in charge den- sity waves, EPL 96, 67011 (2011)

    J. van Wezel, Chirality and orbital order in charge den- sity waves, EPL 96, 67011 (2011)

    2011

  20. [28]

    Castellan, S

    J.-P. Castellan, S. Rosenkranz, R. Osborn, Qing’an Li, K. E. Gray, X. Luo, U. Welp, G. Karapetrov, J. P. C. Ruff, and J. van Wezel, Chiral Phase Transition in Charge Or- dered 1 T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 196404 (2013)

    2013

  21. [29]

    Z. Nie, Y. Wang, D. Chen, and S. Meng, Unraveling Hidden Charge Density Wave Phases in 1 T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 196401 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    W. L. McMillan, Landau theory of charge-density waves in transition-metal dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. B 12, 1187-1196 (1975)

    1975

  23. [31]

    International Tables for Crystallography , Volume A, Part 7 (Editor Theo Hahn, Springer, Dordrecht, The Nether- lands, 2005)

    2005

  24. [32]

    [ 32–44]

    See Supplemental Material at link to Supplementary Material for additional computational results, which in- cludes Refs. [ 32–44]

  25. [33]

    Cowley, Structural phase transitions I

    R.A. Cowley, Structural phase transitions I. Landau th e- ory, Advances in Physics, 29, 1-110 (1980)

    1980

  26. [34]

    G. H. Fecher, J. C. K¨ ubler, and C. Felser, Chirality in the Solid State: Chiral Crystal Structures in Chiral and Achiral Space Groups. Materials 15, 5812 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Giannozzi et al

    P. Giannozzi et al. , QUANTUM ESPRESSO: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simula- tions of materials, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 21 395502, (2009)

    2009

  28. [36]

    Giannozzi et al

    P. Giannozzi et al. , Advanced capabilities for materials modelling with Quantum ESPRESSO, J. Phys.: Con- dens. Matter 29, 465901 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Giannozzi et al

    P. Giannozzi et al. , Quantum ESPRESSO toward the exascale, J. Chem. Phys. 152, 154105 (2020)

    2020

  30. [38]

    Prandini, A

    G. Prandini, A. Marrazzo, I. E. Castelli, N. Mounet, and N. Marzari, Precision and efficiency in solid-state pseu- dopotential calculations, npj Comput. Mater. bf 4, 72 (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    Grimme, Semiempirical GGA-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction, J

    S. Grimme, Semiempirical GGA-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction, J. Comp. Chem. 27, 1787 (2006)

    2006

  32. [40]

    Barone et al

    V. Barone et al. , Role and effective treatment of disper- sive forces in materials: Polyethylene and graphite crys- tals as test cases, J. Comp. Chem. 30, 934 (2009)

    2009

  33. [41]

    Grimme et al

    S. Grimme et al. , A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correc- tion (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H-Pu, J. Chem. Phys 132, 154104 (2010)

    2010

  34. [42]

    Chakraborty, K

    D. Chakraborty, K. Berland, and T. Thonhauser, Next- Generation Nonlocal van der Waals Density Functional, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 5893-5911 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    H. T. Stokes and D. M. Hatch, FINDSYM: program for identifying the space-group symmetry of a crystal, J. Appl. Cryst. 38, 237 (2005)

    2005

  36. [44]

    M. B. Walker and R. L. Withers, Stacking of charge- density waves in 1 T transition-metal dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. B 28, 2766 (1983)

    1983

  37. [45]

    W. L. McMillan, Microscopic model of charge-density waves in 2 H-TaSe2, Phys. Rev. B 16, 643 (1977)

    1977

  38. [46]

    Momma and F

    K. Momma and F. Izumi, VESTA 3 for three-dimensional visualization of crystal, volumetric and morphology data, J. Appl. Crystallogr. 44, 1272-1276 (2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    Guo et al

    X. Guo et al. , In-Plane Anisotropy of Charge Density Wave Fluctuations in 1 T -TiSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett 135, 136102 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.