Maximum non reciprocity in metasurfaces of gyrotropic rods

Anna C. Tasolamprou; Constantinos Valagiannopoulos; Ioannis Katsantonis

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 65 references

Maximum non reciprocity in metasurfaces of gyrotropic rods

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

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that optimized gyrotropic rods in a periodic array can make an all-passive metasurface transmit light in a totally different way when excited from opposite sides, with the strongest nonreciprocity occurring at the onset of

desk verdict Useful analytical design study for gyrotropic rod metasurfaces, but it promises full-wave validation it never delivers, and the central near-anomaly claims rest on the same approximate dipole-truncated model; worth refereeing, needs a real numerical check plus a fix for Eq. (7). read the letter →

arxiv 2607.13843 v1 pith:GGCSZOUV submitted 2026-07-15 physics.optics

Ioannis Katsantonis , Constantinos Valagiannopoulos , Anna C. Tasolamprou This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.optics PACS 42.25.Fx78.20.Ls

keywords nonreciprocitygyrotropicrodsmetasurfacemagneto-opticaltime-reversalsymmetrybreakingdiffractionordersWood'sanomalymagneticbias

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

The paper develops an analytical framework to design subwavelength all-passive metasurfaces that are strongly nonreciprocal, meaning they transmit light differently when illuminated from opposite sides. For individual gyrotropic rods, it introduces a metric based on the asymmetry between azimuthal dipole modes and shows that maximum nonreciprocity occurs when one dipole coefficient dominates. When these optimized rods are arranged into a periodic grating, the collective nonreciprocity peaks at the thresholds where new diffraction orders emerge, because one illumination direction sees the order as propagating while the other sees it as bound. If correct, this provides a path to tunable flat-optics isolators and directional routers that require no active or nonlinear components, only an external magnetic bias.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the nonreciprocity metric ΔS' for individual rods, which quantifies the asymmetry between the +1 and −1 azimuthal scattering coefficients, and the collective metric ΔP for the metasurface, which compares transmitted and reflected power across all diffraction orders for opposite illumination sides. The individual-rod analysis uses a dipolar approximation of the internal field, keeping only azimuthal orders u = 0 and u = ±1, and yields a closed-form condition for maximum nonreciprocity. For the array, the grating diffraction orders are computed using the addition theorem and Poisson summation, and the mechanism for enhanced nonreciprocity is the evanescent-to-propagating t

What would settle it

A full-wave numerical simulation that includes Drude losses and does not truncate the internal field at u = ±1, checking whether the metasurface's transmission from opposite sides still shows the predicted near-anomaly reversal; if the asymmetry largely disappears or the peak moves away from the Wood's anomaly thresholds, the central claim would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that magnetically biased plasmonic rods, each small relative to the wavelength, can exhibit a strong directional response quantified by the metric ΔS' = |S'_1 + S'_−1|, which vanishes without magnetic bias and reaches its maximum value of one when only one of the two azimuthal dipole coefficients survives. The authors derive a resonance condition that locates these maxima and use a multipolar decomposition to show the effect is rooted in the overlapping electric and magnetic dipole modes of opposite handedness. In the periodic metasurface, the paper shows that the transmission and reflection spectra change drastically depending on which side the wave arrives from, an

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes a lossless Drude plasma and truncates the internal field to dipolar orders u = 0 and ±1; if real losses or higher-order multipoles are significant, the predicted maximum nonreciprocity and the sharp contrast near diffraction-order thresholds would change, and the paper does not include the full-wave validation promised in its abstract.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

All-passive subwavelength metasurfaces can act as direction-dependent transmitters or isolators without nonlinear or active components, controlled by an external magnetic field.
A clear design rule emerges: operate near the threshold for the m = −1 or m = −2 diffraction order to maximize collective nonreciprocity.
The individual-rod metric provides a fast screening tool for choosing rod radius, frequency, and magnetic bias to achieve maximal directional scattering.
Reversing the magnetic bias sign swaps the favored diffraction channels, effectively acting as a dynamic switch.
The findings point to compact isolators, directional transceivers, and wavefront routers in flat-optics configurations.

Reading between the lines

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

The predicted extreme contrasts rely on the lossless Drude plasma assumption; with realistic plasmonic damping, the sharp near-anomaly features would likely broaden and the transmission asymmetry would be reduced, though the qualitative directionality may persist.
The alignment of peak nonreciprocity with Wood's anomaly suggests a general design strategy: any periodic nonreciprocal scatterer, not just gyrotropic rods, may exhibit maximal directional contrast at diffraction-order thresholds, and this could be tested with other meta-atom geometries.
A direct experimental test would compare transmitted power from opposite sides of a prototype array at wavelengths near the predicted threshold; the asymmetry should appear as a sharp function of wavelength and incidence angle, and could be used to validate the design.
The same individual-rod metric could be extended to more complex meta-atoms, such as core-shell or elliptical gyrotropic rods, where geometric asymmetry might further enhance the nonreciprocal response.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

The paper is a competent analytical design study. What's genuinely new: the delta-S' metric, the systematic maps over frequency, cyclotron frequency, and rod radius, and the observation that peak collective nonreciprocity sits near Wood-anomaly boundaries where new diffraction orders emerge. The grating derivation via addition theorem and Poisson summation is standard but not trivial, and the multipolar decomposition supports the dipole picture. Those parts I trust far more than the headline claim.

Now the soft spots, in proportion. First, the abstract and introduction promise full-wave numerical simulations, but none exist in the text. Figures 9 and 11 are field maps evaluated from the same dipole-truncated grating model, Eq. (14), and the multipolar check in Fig. 6 uses the same internal-field approximation, Eq. (5). So the central claim—opposite illumination gives a totally different transmission—is a prediction of one approximate model with no independent verification. This matters because the claimed maxima hug the diffraction-order cutoffs where kappa_m goes to zero and the model itself is admitted to face numerical issues. A separate full-wave solver could easily confirm or refute the contrast. Second, Eq. (7) as printed is numerically inconsistent: at omega/omega_p = 0.7 and omega_c/omega_p = 0.05, the left side is about 1.5 while the right side is 0.0025. Probably a typo, but a reader cannot reproduce the blue curves without a correction or derivation. Third, the Drude model is lossless; near a Wood anomaly the transition from evanescent to propagating is singular in the lossless limit, so material damping is not a minor perturbation to the claimed asymmetry.

I don't think these flaws sink the paper. The metric and optimization maps are reusable, the grating model is clearly stated, and the authors do check power conservation. But the load-bearing "totally different" claim should not be repeated as a validated result until an independent full-wave comparison appears. The right referee is someone who runs periodic-solver simulations, and they should be asked to test Fig. 7(d), Fig. 9, and Fig. 11 with a commercial or in-house code, once for lossless and once for lossy Drude.

Recommendation: send to peer review, but with a required full-wave validation section and a correction or derivation of Eq. (7). It is a solid analytical contribution to the nonreciprocal metasurface subfield. I'd bring it to a relevant reading group and would cite it for the metric and the design rule, not for the quantitative contrast predictions.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops an analytical cylindrical-wave framework for TE scattering by gyrotropic (magnetically biased) Drude rods. A single-particle nonreciprocity metric ΔS′ = |S′₁ + S′₋₁| is introduced, maximized over frequency, cyclotron frequency, and rod radius, and linked to a resonance condition in Eq. (7). The optimized rods are then arranged into an infinite periodic grating, and a dipole-truncated multiple-scattering model (Eqs. 11–14) is used to compute direction-dependent transmission/reflection, with emphasis on peaks of the collective nonreciprocity metric ΔP near the onset of new diffraction orders. Field maps and spectral curves for two representative designs (a = 0.07λp, b = 8.8a and b = 10.5a) are presented as evidence of strongly asymmetric response under opposite illumination.

Significance. If the results hold, the work offers a potentially useful design route for all-passive, magnetically tunable nonreciprocal metasurfaces. The analytical treatment of a single gyrotropic cylinder, the explicit optimization over physical parameters, and the mapping of collective nonreciprocity to Wood-anomaly conditions are valuable contributions. The paper also provides transparent definitions of metrics and a detailed multipolar decomposition, which are helpful for physical interpretation. However, the central claims rest on an approximate dipole-truncated grating model in a regime where the authors admit the model is unreliable, and the promised full-wave validation is absent. These issues currently prevent the results from being considered quantitatively established.

major comments (4)

[Section II.B, Eq. (7)] Equation (7) is numerically inconsistent as printed. For the operating point ω/ωp = 0.7 and ωc/ωp = 0.05 used throughout the paper, the left-hand side equals approximately 1.53, while the right-hand side is 2.5×10⁻³. The equation therefore cannot describe the blue lines in Fig. 2, which are claimed to follow from (7). Since the single-rod optimization selects operating points based on these resonance loci, this is a load-bearing error. The authors must correct the equation, provide its derivation, and confirm that the blue lines in Fig. 2 correspond to the corrected condition.
[Section III.B and III.C] The abstract and Section I promise 'full-wave numerical simulations' validating the nonreciprocal response. No such comparison appears in the text. The field maps in Figs. 9 and 11 are evaluations of Eq. (14), not independent full-wave solutions. Moreover, in Section III.B the authors state that the 'overall approximate approach ... faces numerical issues' near the actual peaks of ΔP, yet the headline claim is that peak collective nonreciprocity coincides with the emergence of new diffraction orders. This is precisely the Rayleigh–Wood-anomaly regime where the dipole-truncated model is least secure. An independent full-wave validation, or at least a convergence study with higher azimuthal harmonics, is required to support the central claim.
[Section II.C, Fig. 6] The multipolar decomposition used to argue that electric and magnetic dipole modes dominate is computed from the same approximate internal field (Eq. 5) that underlies the scattering coefficients. Figure 6 therefore does not independently verify the dipole truncation; it restates it. The conclusion that quadrupole contributions are weak is built into the ansatz rather than demonstrated. A comparison with a full-wave solver or a higher-order multipole expansion (e.g., including u = ±2) is needed to confirm that the truncation is quantitatively accurate in the parameter ranges used.
[Section II.B and III.B] The optimization and demonstration are not fully independent. The rods are selected to maximize |S′₁ + S′₋₁|, which directly creates asymmetric scattering patterns; the grating built from these rods then inherits a degree of directional asymmetry. The collective ΔP metric in Eq. (17) is a different observable, but the connection would be more convincing if the authors compared the optimized rods with non-optimized, less asymmetric rods under the same grating parameters, or showed that the collective enhancement exceeds what the single-particle asymmetry alone would produce. This would strengthen the claim that the near-anomaly behavior is a collective effect rather than simply a restatement of the selection criterion.

minor comments (4)

[Various] Typos: 'truely' in the Introduction; 'quadrapole' in Section II.C; 'th other' and 'nonlinearity' in Section III.B (should be 'the other' and 'nonreciprocity'). The phrase 'blows up' for Eq. (7) is misleading since ΔS′ is bounded by unity.
[Fig. 3] The four polar curves are not labeled with their corresponding rod radii or frequencies. Adding a legend or explicit labels would improve readability.
[Captions] Captions for Fig. 4 and Fig. 7 use a/λ0 while the text uses a/λp; the notation should be made consistent.
[Section III.B] The statement that 'nonreciprocity gets, on average, boosted' and the phrase 'increasing the maximum nonlinearity' in the discussion of Fig. 7(c) are imprecise; the intended term is likely 'nonreciprocity'.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Central ΔP result at Wood's anomalies is emergent (not circular), but the multipolar 'validation' of the dipole truncation and the single-particle nonreciprocity demonstration both reduce to their own inputs.

self definitional [Section II.C (Multipolar Expansion), Eq. (5) vs Eqs. (8)-(10), Fig. 6]
"In Fig. 6, we present the spectral distribution of the electric dipole (ED), magnetic dipole (MD), and higher-order multipoles (EQ, DQ) making the total scattering efficiency (10). It is observed that the response is predominantly governed by the electric and magnetic dipole modes, while quadrupole contributions remain comparatively weak. This behavior validates the dipolar approximation adopted in (5)."

The multipole moments (8)-(9) are computed from the polarization current J=(ε⁻¹)·(I−ε)·(∇×H) with H the internal field of Eq. (5), which the text previously truncated 'by keeping only the orders u=0 and u=±1.' The conclusion that electric/magnetic dipole modes dominate while quadrupoles stay weak is therefore a property of the truncated field fed into the integrals; the decomposition contains no u=±2 content and cannot test whether the truncation is accurate. Saying 'This behavior validates the dipolar approximation adopted in (5)' is the approximation confirming itself. The abstract's mechanism claim — 'this extreme behavior stems from the phase-matched asymmetric excitation and interference of localized electric and magnetic dipole modes' — rests on exactly this self-confirming decomposi
self definitional [Section II.B (Maximally Nonreciprocal Cylinders), Eq. (6), Figs. 2-3]
"In every single map of Fig. 2 we optimize the metric ΔS′ to ensure that it takes unitary value; in this sense, we obtain maximally nonreciprocal particles without sweeping the parameter ωc/ωp. ... Therefore, we obtain s(φ,0) = s(φ,π) because ΔS′ ∼= 1 and the asymmetry with respect to horizontal (x) axis is an indication of how nonreciprocally our rods behave."

The rods are selected to reach the unitary maximum of ΔS′, a condition the text defines as 'one of the two dipolar coefficients S′_{±1} gets almost equal to unity and the other vanishes.' With a single azimuthal mode dominating, the identity s(φ,0)=s(φ,π) follows immediately from the definition of the scattering coefficients — the paper states the causal link ('because ΔS′ ∼= 1') — and the x-asymmetric radiation pattern is the same dipolar imbalance displayed in the far field. The 'maximal nonreciprocity' demonstrated in Fig. 3 is thus the selection criterion (6) restated by construction, not an independent test of the rods' behavior; the optimized operating points were chosen to maximize precisely the quantity the figure exhibits.

full rationale

The central numerical claim — that optimized gyrotropic rod arrays show strong direction-dependent transmission with the collective metric ΔP peaking near the onset of new diffraction orders (Section III.B, Figs. 7-11) — is emergent from the grating model (11)-(14) and is not circular in derivation: ΔP is not a re-expression of the single-particle ΔS′, no parameter is fitted to make the peaks appear, and the Wood-anomaly coincidence is computed from lattice sums (13) and the 1/κ_m factors of Eq. (14) rather than encoded in the metric's definition. The two flagged steps are genuine by-construction reductions: (1) the multipolar 'validation' of the dipole truncation uses the self-same truncated field (5), so the dipole-dominance conclusion is the assumption reported as confirmation; (2) the demonstration of single-particle nonreciprocity (s(φ,0)=s(φ,π), x-asymmetric patterns) is the ΔS′=1 selection criterion displayed, as the text itself says ('because ΔS′ ∼= 1'). Both are secondary to the collective result, whose channel-by-channel spectral curves and field maps contain content not forced by the selection. However, the manuscript's own limitations weigh on the central claim: it concedes the model 'faces numerical issues' exactly at the Wood-anomaly boundaries where ΔP is maximal and deliberately samples away from the true peaks; the Introduction promises 'validating the overall nonreciprocal response through full-wave numerical simulations,' yet no such independent solver appears — Figs. 9 and 11 evaluate the same approximate Eq. (14); and the energy-conservation sums in Figs. 8/10 are internal consistency checks, not external benchmarks. These are correctness/validation risks rather than circularity and are therefore weighed but not scored as circular steps. The self-citation to [52] for the grating derivation is a published, standard multipole-lattice reduction restated in Eqs. (11)-(14), so it is not load-bearing circularity. Overall: partial circularity in supporting and mechanism claims, with the central collective prediction retaining independent content within an externally unverified model — score 5.

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

No unobserved particles or physical entities are introduced; the nonreciprocity metric delta-S' is a mathematical observable, not an entity. The main load-bearing additions are modeling choices: lossless Drude plasma, dipolar truncation, and selected operating points.

free parameters (4)

cyclotron frequency ratio omega_c/omega_p = 0.05
Fixed in all examples and figures; chosen by hand rather than swept in the device demonstrations.
operational frequencies for optimized rods = 0.719, 0.712, 0.702, 0.682 (for a/lambda_p = 0.04, 0.05, 0.06, 0.07)
Selected from the delta-S' maps of Fig. 2 to force delta-S' near unity; the single-particle 'maximum' is fitted to the metric.
rod radius a/lambda_p = 0.04, 0.05, 0.06, 0.07
Restricted to the window where the dipolar truncation keeps the metric well-behaved; boundaries are chosen by hand (a<0.04 is omni-directional, a>0.07 excites higher harmonics).
grating half-period b/a and incidence angle theta = b=8.8a, theta=17 degrees; b=10.5a, theta=56 degrees
Chosen from the collective nonreciprocity map Fig. 7(d) near diffraction-order onsets; peak positions depend on the truncated model.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Lossless Drude plasma model with no collision frequency, with epsilon_t and epsilon_c as in Eqs. (2)-(3)
Used throughout; power-conservation checks require losslessness, and real plasmonic materials have damping that will reduce and shift the claimed maxima.
domain assumption Dipolar truncation of the internal field H_g to u=0, +/-1 (Eq. 5) and corresponding truncation in the grating analysis
Load-bearing for the metric and for the array formulas (11)-(14); the authors exclude larger rods to keep it valid, but the multipolar check uses the same approximate field and is not independent.
standard math Cylindrical wave addition theorem and Poisson summation formulas are applied as in refs. [51]-[53]
Used to derive the grating scattering field (12)-(14); standard results but not re-derived here.
domain assumption Plane-wave excitation and TE_z polarization only
Restricts applicability; the gyrotropic response for TM waves or finite beams is not treated.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Maximum non reciprocity in metasurfaces of gyrotropic rods." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GGCSZOUV

@misc{pith2026260713843,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Maximum non reciprocity in metasurfaces of gyrotropic rods},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GGCSZOUV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.13843}
}

read the original abstract

Efficiently breaking time-reversal symmetry at the subwavelength scale remains a cornerstone challenge for advanced electromagnetic wave manipulation. This work presents a rigorous analytical framework, based on cylindrical wave expansion, to investigate and optimize the nonreciprocal scattering of transverse electric waves by magnetically biased plasmonic rods. An intuitive metric is introduced to quantify the breaking of time-reversal symmetry via the asymmetric lifting of degeneracy between azimuthal modes of opposite angular momentum, hosted by the gyrotropic particles. Leveraging this metric, a comprehensive mapping of the multiparametric space of operational frequency, cyclotron frequency, and cylinder optical size isolates regimes of maximum nonreciprocity. A detailed multipolar decomposition reveals that this extreme behavior stems from the phase-matched asymmetric excitation and interference of localized electric and magnetic dipole modes. Moving from individual, isolated meta-atoms to collective photonic systems, the optimized cylinders are arranged into a periodic grating. Under oblique incidence, the combination of geometric asymmetry and magnetic mode splitting, forces the metasurface to transmit light in a totally different way when excited by opposite sides. The reported findings and design principles offer a versatile blueprint for the development of dynamically tunable flat-optics isolators, directional transceivers, and advanced wavefront routers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.13843 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. The nonreciprocity metric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. The scattering response [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (8 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The magnitude of the scattering magnetic field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. The real part of the scattering magnetic field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. The contribution of each of the terms ED (electric dipole), MD (magnetic dipole), electric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. The nonreciprocity metric (17) of the diffractive metasurface comprising of the optimal particles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. The transmissive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. Spatial distribution of the magnetic field relative magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_9.png]

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. The transmissive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: FIG. 11. Spatial distribution of the magnetic field relative magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references

[1]

rotational preference

from the opposite of theu=−1term (S ′ −1) is proportional to 6 how nonreciprocal is the regarded particle; indeed, it vanishes by setting the cyclotron frequency equal to zero (ω c = 0). For this reason, let us define as a good metric of nonreciprocity, the quantity: ∆S′ = S′ 1 +S ′ −1 .(6) With use of approximations of Bessel and Hankel functions with sm...
[2]

A. R. Davoyan, A. M. Mahmoud, and N. Engheta, Optical isolation with epsilon-near-zero metamate- rials, Optics Express21, 3279 (2013)

2013
[3]

Jalas, A

D. Jalas, A. Petrov, M. Eich, W. Freude, S. Fan, Z. Yu, R. Baets, M. Popovic, A. Melloni, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Vanwolleghem, C. R. Doerr, and H. Renner, What is - and what is not - an optical isolator, Nature Photonics7, 579 (2013)

2013
[4]

V . S. Asadchy, M. S. Mirmoosa, A. Diaz-Rubio, S. Fan, and S. A. Tretyakov, Tutorial on electromag- netic nonreciprocity and its origins, Proceedings of the IEEE108, 1684 (2020)

2020
[5]

A. C. Tasolamprou, M. Kafesaki, C. M. Soukoulis, E. N. Economou, and T. Koschny, Chiral topo- logical surface states on a finite square photonic crystal bounded by air, Phys. Rev. Appl.16, 044011 (2021)

2021
[6]

A. S. Ansari, A. K. Iyer, and B. Gholipour, Asymmetric transmission in nanophotonics, Nanophoton- ics12, 2639 (2023)

2023
[7]

S. A. Mann, D. L. Sounas, and A. Al `u, Broadband delay lines and nonreciprocal resonances in unidi- rectional waveguides, Physical Review B100, 020303 (2019)

2019
[8]

Z. Tan, F. Fan, X. Dong, J. Cheng, and S. Chang, Nonreciprocal terahertz beam steering based on magneto-optic metagratings, Scientific Reports9(2019)

2019

Show all 65 references

[9]

J. Yan, I. Katsantonis, I. Draganidis, K. Kourtzanidis, A. Monti, S. Vellucci, M. Barbuto, F. Bilotti, and M. Kafesaki, Reconfigurable metasurface based on plasma cylinders, Physical Review Research 7, 013287 (2025)

2025
[10]

S. G. Kilic, U. Kilic, M. Schubert, E. Schubert, and C. Argyropoulos, Self-induced nonreciprocity from asymmetric photonic topological insulators, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 044009 (2025)

2025
[11]

Monticone and A

F. Monticone and A. Alu, Metamaterial, plasmonic and nanophotonic devices, Reports on Progress in Physics80(2017)

2017
[12]

Z. Wang, Y . D. Chong, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljaˇci´c, Reflection-free one-way edge modes in a gyromagnetic photonic crystal, Physical Review Letters100, 013905 (2008)

2008
[13]

V . G. Ataloglou, S. Taravati, and G. V . Eleftheriades, Metasurfaces: physics and applications in wire- less communications, National Science Review10, nwad164 (2023). 25

2023
[14]

J. Y . Chin, T. Steinle, T. Wehlus, D. Dregely, T. Weiss, V . I. Belotelov, B. Stritzker, and H. Giessen, Nonreciprocal plasmonics enables giant enhancement of thin-film faraday rotation, Nature Communi- cations4(2013)

2013
[15]

K. Fang, Z. Yu, V . Liu, and S. Fan, Ultracompact nonreciprocal optical isolator based on guided resonance in a magneto-optical photonic crystal slab, Optics Letters36, 4254 – 4256 (2011)

2011
[16]

Ju, R.-X

C. Ju, R.-X. Wu, Z. Li, Y . Poo, S.-Y . Liu, and Z.-F. Lin, Manipulating electromagnetic wave propa- gating non-reciprocally by a chain of ferrite rods, Optics Express25, 22096 (2017)

2017
[17]

Barbuto, A

M. Barbuto, A. Monti, S. Vellucci, M. G. H. Alijani, T. Giagnacovo, G. Laghi, F. Capelli, M. Grande, O. Gazeli, I. Katsantonis, J. Yan, K. Kourtzanidis, R. Filippone, G. D. Iorio, A. D. Iorio, M. Kafesaki, M. Gherardi, A. Toscano, and F. Bilotti, Modeling and characterization ...

2025
[18]

Pakniyat, A

S. Pakniyat, A. M. Holmes, G. W. Hanson, S. A. H. Gangaraj, M. Antezza, M. G. Silveirinha, S. Jam, and F. Monticone, Non-reciprocal, robust surface plasmon polaritons on gyrotropic interfaces, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation68, 3718 (2020)

2020
[19]

F. R. Prud ˆencio and M. G. Silveirinha, Optical isolation of circularly polarized light with a spontaneous magnetoelectric effect, Physical Review A93(2016)

2016
[20]

S. Wang, M. Shah, and J. D. Crow, Studies of the use of gyrotropic and anisotropic materials for mode conversion in thin-film optical-waveguide applications, Journal of Applied Physics43, 1861 (1972)

1972
[21]

G. W. Ford and S. A. Werner, Scattering and absorption of electromagnetic waves by a gyrotropic sphere, Physical Review B18, 6752 (1978)

1978
[22]

D. O. Smith, Magneto-optical scattering from multi-layer magnetic and dielectric films, Optica Acta 12, 13 (1965)

1965
[23]

J. L.-W. Li, W.-L. Ong, and K. H. R. Zheng, Anisotropic scattering effects of a gyrotropic sphere characterized using the t-matrix method, Physical Review E85, 036601 (2012). 26

2012
[24]

G. P. Zouros, G. D. Kolezas, E. Almpanis, and K. L. Tsakmakidis, Three-dimensional giant invisibility to superscattering enhancement induced by zeeman-split modes, ACS Photonics8, 1407 (2021)

2021
[25]

Qiu, L.-W

C.-W. Qiu, L.-W. Li, T.-S. Yeo, and S. Zouhdi, Scattering by rotationally symmetric anisotropic spheres: potential formulation and parametric studies, Physical Review E75, 026609 (2007)

2007
[26]

Zhong, J

S. Zhong, J. E. Moore, and I. Souza, Gyrotropic magnetic effect and the magnetic moment on the fermi surface, Physical Review Letters116, 077201 (2016)

2016
[27]

E. J. K ¨onig, M. Dzero, A. Levchenko, and D. A. Pesin, Gyrotropic hall effect in berry-curved materi- als, Physical Review B.99, 155404 (2019)

2019
[28]

S. A. Tarasenko, Scattering induced spin orientation and spin currents in gyrotropic structures, JETP Letters84, 199 (2006)

2006
[29]

Valagiannopoulos, S

C. Valagiannopoulos, S. A. H. Gangaraj, and F. Monticone, Zeeman gyrotropic scatterers: Res- onance splitting, anomalous scattering, and embedded eigenstates, Nanomater. Nanotechnol.8, 184798041880808 (2018)

2018
[30]

A. V . Rogacheva, V . A. Fedotov, A. S. Schwanecke, and N. I. Zheludev, Giant gyrotropy due to electromagnetic-field coupling in a bilayered chiral structure, Physical Review Letters97, 177401 (2006)

2006
[31]

´Smigaj, J

W. ´Smigaj, J. Romero-Vivas, B. Gralak, L. Magdenko, B. Dagens, and M. Vanwolleghem, Magneto- optical circulator designed for operation in a uniform external magnetic field, Optics Letters35, 568 (2010)

2010
[32]

D. L. Sounas, T. Kodera, and C. Caloz, Electromagnetic modeling of a magnetless nonreciprocal gyrotropic metasurface, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation61, 221 (2013)

2013
[33]

Z. Wang, Z. Wang, J. Wang, B. Zhang, J. Huangfu, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Solja ˇci´c, and L. Ran, Gyrotropic response in the absence of a bias field, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA109, 13194 (2012)

2012
[34]

Y . H. Lu, M. H. Cho, J. B. Kim, G. J. Lee, Y . P. Lee, and J. Y . Rhee, Magneto-optical enhancement through gyrotropic gratings, Optics Express16, 5378 (2008)

2008
[35]

Huang, Y

L. Huang, Y . Duan, J. Liu, Y . Zeng, G. Ma, H. Pang, S. Gao, and W. Zhang, Bioinspired gyrotropic metamaterials with multifarious wave adaptability and multifunctionality, Advanced Optical Materials 8, 2000012 (2020)

2020
[36]

H. Pan, M. K. Chen, D. P. Tsai, and S. Wang, Nonreciprocal pancharatnam-berry metasurface for unidirectional wavefront manipulations, Optics Express32, 25632 (2024). 27

2024
[37]

S. H. Mousavi, A. B. Khanikaev, J. Allen, M. Allen, and G. Shvets, Gyromagnetically induced trans- parency of metasurfaces, Physical Review Letters112, 117402 (2014)

2014
[38]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos, Study of an electrically anisotropic cylinder excited magnetically by a straight strip line, Progress In Electromagnetics Research73, 297 (2007)

2007
[39]

Caloz, A

C. Caloz, A. Al `u, S. Tretyakov, D. Sounas, K. Achouri, and Z.-L. Deck-L´eger, Electromagnetic non- reciprocity, Physical Review Applied10, 047001 (2018)

2018
[40]

J. A. Bittencourt, Fundamentals of Plasma Physics (Springer, New York, NY , 2010)

2010
[41]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos, How nonreciprocal is an effective permittivity matrix?, Microwave and Op- tical Technology Letters56, 2018 (2014)

2018
[42]

Abramowitz and I

M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, Dover Books on Mathemat- ics (Dover Publications, Mineola, NY , 1965)

1965
[43]

Katsantonis, A

I. Katsantonis, A. C. Tasolamprou, T. Koschny, E. N. Economou, M. Kafesaki, and C. Valagiannopou- los, Giant enhancement of nonreciprocity in gyrotropic heterostructures, Scientific Reports13, 21986 (2023)

2023
[44]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos, N. L. Tsitsas, and G. Fikioris, Convergence analysis and oscillations in the method of fictitious sources applied to dielectric scattering problems, Journal of the Optical Society of America A29, 1 (2011)

2011
[45]

V . A. Es’kin, A. V . Ivoninsky, A. V . Kudrin, and C. Krafft, Poynting vector behaviour during the resonance scattering of a plane electromagnetic wave by a gyrotropic cylinder, Physica Scripta91, 015502 (2015)

2015
[46]

Maekawa and H

S. Maekawa and H. Fukuyama, Magnetoresistance in two-dimensional disordered systems: Effects of zeeman splitting and spin-orbit scattering, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan50, 2516 (1981)

1981
[47]

Alaee, C

R. Alaee, C. Rockstuhl, and I. Fernandez-Corbaton, An electromagnetic multipole expansion beyond the long-wavelength approximation, Optics Communications407, 17 (2018)

2018
[48]

Takou, A

E. Takou, A. C. Tasolamprou, O. Tsilipakos, Z. Viskadourakis, M. Kafesaki, G. Kenanakis, and E. N. Economou, Anapole tolerance to dissipation losses in thermally tunable water-based metasurfaces, Phys. Rev. Appl.15, 014043 (2021)

2021
[49]

Savinov, V

V . Savinov, V . A. Fedotov, and N. I. Zheludev, Toroidal dipolar excitation and macroscopic electro- magnetic properties of metamaterials, Physical Review B89, 205112 (2014)

2014
[50]

C. A. Balanis, Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England, 2012). 28

2012
[51]

J. A. Stratton, Electromagnetic Theory, IEEE Press Series on Electromagnetic Wave Theory (Wiley- Blackwell, Hoboken, NJ, 2007)

2007
[52]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos, P. Alitalo, and S. A. Tretyakov, On the minimal scattering response of pec cylinders in a dielectric cloak, IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters13, 403 (2014)

2014
[53]

P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach, Methods of Theoretical Physics, Pure & Applied Physics S. (McGraw- Hill, New York, NY , 1953)

1953
[54]

V . O. Byelobrov, T. L. Zinenko, K. Kobayashi, and A. I. Nosich, Periodicity matters: Grating or lattice resonances in the scattering by sparse arrays of subwavelength strips and wires, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine57, 34 (2015)

2015
[55]

In this sense, the transmissionT m and reflectionR m coefficients form∈ Mare determined

the background incident fieldH inc =e −ik0(xcosθ+ysinθ) . In this sense, the transmissionT m and reflectionR m coefficients form∈ Mare determined. Hence, the transmitted magnetic field reads:H tran(x, y) =P m∈M Tme−ik0(xcosθ m+ysinθ m) while the reflected magnetic field is equ...
[56]

Tagay and C

Z. Tagay and C. Valagiannopoulos, Highly selective transmission and absorption from metasurfaces of periodically corrugated cylindrical particles, Physical Review B98, 115306 (2018)

2018
[57]

Hessel and A

A. Hessel and A. A. Oliner, A new theory of wood’s anomalies on optical gratings, Applied Optics4, 1275 (1965)

1965
[58]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos and S. A. Tretyakov, Symmetric absorbers realized as gratings of pec cylinders covered by ordinary dielectrics, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation62, 5089 (2014)

2014
[59]

N. L. Tsitsas and C. Valagiannopoulos, Anomalous refraction into free space with all-dielectric binary metagratings, Physical Review Research2, 033526 (2020)

2020
[60]

C. P. Mavidis, A. C. Tasolamprou, E. N. Economou, C. M. Soukoulis, and M. Kafesaki, Polaritonic cylinders as multifunctional metamaterials: Single scattering and effective medium description, Phys. Rev. B102, 155310 (2020)

2020
[61]

EIC Pathfinder Open 2022

will introduce geometric anisotropy, an avenue that can be exploited to break spatial symme- tries alongside time-reversal symmetry for more sophisticated wavefront manipulation. Finally, exploring the interplay between magnetic bias and intrinsic optical activity within chira...

2022
[62]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos and P. Alitalo, Electromagnetic cloaking of cylindrical objects by multilayer or uniform dielectric claddings, Physical Review B85, 115402 (2012)

2012
[63]

C. A. Valagiannopoulos, Electromagnetic scattering of the field of a metamaterial slab antenna by an arbitrarily positioned cluster of metallic cylinders, Progress In Electromagnetics Research114, 51 (2011)

2011
[64]

A. C. Tasolamprou, O. Tsilipakos, M. Kafesaki, C. M. Soukoulis, and E. N. Economou, Toroidal eigenmodes in all-dielectric metamolecules, Phys. Rev. B94, 205433 (2016)

2016
[65]

Katsantonis, M

I. Katsantonis, M. Manousidaki, A. D. Koulouklidis, C. Daskalaki, I. Spanos, C. Kerantzopoulos, A. C. Tasolamprou, C. M. Soukoulis, E. N. Economou, S. Tzortzakis, M. Farsari, and M. Kafesaki, Strong and broadband pure optical activity in 3d printed thz chiral metamaterials, Ad...

2023

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

rotational preference

from the opposite of theu=−1term (S ′ −1) is proportional to 6 how nonreciprocal is the regarded particle; indeed, it vanishes by setting the cyclotron frequency equal to zero (ω c = 0). For this reason, let us define as a good metric of nonreciprocity, the quantity: ∆S′ = S′ 1 +S ′ −1 .(6) With use of approximations of Bessel and Hankel functions with sm...

[2] [2]

A. R. Davoyan, A. M. Mahmoud, and N. Engheta, Optical isolation with epsilon-near-zero metamate- rials, Optics Express21, 3279 (2013)

2013

[3] [3]

Jalas, A

D. Jalas, A. Petrov, M. Eich, W. Freude, S. Fan, Z. Yu, R. Baets, M. Popovic, A. Melloni, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Vanwolleghem, C. R. Doerr, and H. Renner, What is - and what is not - an optical isolator, Nature Photonics7, 579 (2013)

2013

[4] [4]

V . S. Asadchy, M. S. Mirmoosa, A. Diaz-Rubio, S. Fan, and S. A. Tretyakov, Tutorial on electromag- netic nonreciprocity and its origins, Proceedings of the IEEE108, 1684 (2020)

2020

[5] [5]

A. C. Tasolamprou, M. Kafesaki, C. M. Soukoulis, E. N. Economou, and T. Koschny, Chiral topo- logical surface states on a finite square photonic crystal bounded by air, Phys. Rev. Appl.16, 044011 (2021)

2021

[6] [6]

A. S. Ansari, A. K. Iyer, and B. Gholipour, Asymmetric transmission in nanophotonics, Nanophoton- ics12, 2639 (2023)

2023

[7] [7]

S. A. Mann, D. L. Sounas, and A. Al `u, Broadband delay lines and nonreciprocal resonances in unidi- rectional waveguides, Physical Review B100, 020303 (2019)

2019

[8] [8]

Z. Tan, F. Fan, X. Dong, J. Cheng, and S. Chang, Nonreciprocal terahertz beam steering based on magneto-optic metagratings, Scientific Reports9(2019)

2019