Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 31 references

Orbital dynamics during an ultrafast insulator to metal transition

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Time-resolved RIXS shows that the laser-driven insulator-metal transition in V2O3 begins with a sub-picosecond change in V 3d orbital excitations and ends, by 50 ps, in a state electronically indistinguishable from the hot metal.

desk verdict First femtosecond soft X-ray RIXS through a Mott transition; the central claim survives the fitting caveats, and the paper deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02603 v1 pith:CCGLK7BS submitted 2019-08-07 cond-mat.str-el

Sergii Parchenko , Eugenio Paris , Daniel McNally , Elsa Abreu , Marcus Dantz , Elisabeth M. Bothschafter , Alexander H. Reid , William F. Schlotter
show 15 more authors
Ming-Fu Lin Scott F. Wandel Giacomo Coslovich Sioan Zohar Georgi L. Dakovski Joshua. J. Turner Stefan Moeller Yi Tseng Milan Radovic Conny Saathe Marcus Agaaker Joseph E. Nordgren Steven L. Johnson Thorsten Schmitt Urs Staub
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords ultrafastRIXSV2O3insulator-metaltransitionorbitalexcitationsMott-Hubbardtime-resolvedspectroscopystronglycorrelatedelectronsd-d
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 aims to show that femtosecond time-resolved resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) can resolve how the vanadium 3d orbitals of the Mott insulator V2O3 respond when a laser pulse drives it into a metallic state. Probing the lowest-lying d-d orbital excitation at ~0.2 eV, the authors find that the orbital spectrum changes on a sub-picosecond timescale and that by 50 ps it closely matches the equilibrium high-temperature paramagnetic metal: the dynamic peak-height ratio is 1.29 ± 0.06, compared with 1.31 ± 0.02 for the static insulator-to-metal comparison. A transient partial recovery of the peak on a 1–5 ps timescale at lower fluence is presented as evidence of an intermediate, non-thermal state, possibly linked to transient V–V dimerization. This matters because it gives a direct, element-specific view of orbital dynamics in a photoinduced phase transition, information that optical and photoemission probes cannot provide.

What carries the argument

The observable that carries the argument is the amplitude and width of the lowest-lying d-d orbital excitation at ~0.2 eV energy loss in V L-edge RIXS, assigned to the $e_g^\pi \to a_{1g}$ transition between V 3d $t_{2g}$-derived orbitals. Time-resolved RIXS at the vanadium L-edge provides element-selective, orbital-resolved spectra, and the dynamics are extracted by fitting each spectrum to a sum of four Gaussians representing the low-energy d-d peak, a higher d-d peak, a charge-transfer peak, and fluorescence, with the higher-energy components held fixed at their pre-time-zero values. The ratio of the low-energy d-d peak heights before and after the transition connects the dynamic measurement to the equilibrium insulator-metal comparison, and it is the quantitative bridge on which the claim of electronic indistinguishability rests.

What would settle it

A re-analysis of the same time-resolved spectra with all four Gaussian components free at each delay, resolving whether the fitted 0.2 eV amplitude still drops sub-picosecond and recovers to a ratio of about 1.29 at 50 ps, would settle whether the fixed-composition constraint produced the dynamics; alternatively, a higher-resolution time-resolved measurement that resolves the higher-lying d-d peak and shows it changing within the first 5 ps would falsify the fixed-Gaussian assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the orbital response of V2O3 to ultrafast photoexcitation is a two-stage process: a prompt, sub-picosecond change in the lowest V 3d d-d excitation, followed by a transient recovery on a few-picosecond timescale, and then a slower approach to a state whose V L-edge RIXS spectrum is electronically indistinguishable from the high-temperature paramagnetic metallic phase. The authors quantify this with the ratio of the 0.2 eV d-d peak heights before and after the transition, R = 1.31 ± 0.02 for the static antiferromagnetic-insulator-to-paramagnetic-metal comparison and R = 1.29 ± 0.06 for the dynamic measurement at 50 ps, and by the close match between the 50 ps spectrum and the convolved equilibrium metallic spectrum. They interpret the sub-ps drop as laser-driven redistribution of electrons that depopulates the V 3d valence band, and the intermediate-time plateau at 12 mJ/cm2 as a transient re-localization effect associated with laser-induced V–V dimerization, which relaxes once the lattice thermalizes. A transient suppression of integrated spectral weight at high fluence is attributed to strong depopulation of the 3d band.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's load-bearing premise is that the four-Gaussian fit can attribute all spectral changes at every delay to the amplitude and width of the 0.2 eV d-d peak while holding the higher d-d, charge-transfer, and fluorescence components fixed; if those components shift or reshape during the transition, the extracted time traces would be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Within ~50 ps of a 12–24 mJ/cm2 pump, V2O3's V 3d orbital spectrum is electronically the same as the equilibrium paramagnetic metal, so the optically driven insulator-metal transition ends in a thermalized metallic state on that timescale.
  • The sub-ps drop in the 0.2 eV d-d peak height means the first electronic response is an orbital-occupation redistribution that is faster than the lattice-driven structural transition.
  • The 1–5 ps partial recovery or plateau at 12 mJ/cm2, if confirmed, means a transient electronic or structural state, possibly V–V dimerization, can temporarily offset the delocalization associated with the insulator-metal transition.
  • The transient suppression of integrated d-d intensity at high fluence implies that at strong excitation the RIXS signal itself depends on the instantaneous 3d occupation, so peak height alone is not a direct measure of orbital occupation.
  • The close match between the dynamic ratio and the static ratio provides a quantitative endpoint for time-resolved RIXS studies of photoinduced transitions in correlated oxides.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the higher-energy Gaussian components are allowed to vary during the fit, the apparent sub-ps dynamics might partly reflect spectral-weight transfer between the low-energy d-d peak and higher-lying d-d excitations rather than a pure depopulation; comparing L2- and L3-edge RIXS would test this.
  • The dimerization-delay link could be tested directly by performing the same pump-probe RIXS measurement on samples with engineered V–V distances, such as strained films or Cr-doped V2O3, or by combining RIXS with simultaneous ultrafast diffraction.
  • The fixed-Gaussian protocol could be validated on a control system with no phase transition, where the fit should return zero time-dependent change; a non-zero result would indicate that the constraint itself creates artificial dynamics.
  • If the 50 ps state is truly electronically indistinguishable from the paramagnetic metal, time-resolved RIXS could serve as a standard endpoint detector for photoinduced insulator-metal transitions in other correlated oxides, complementing optical and photoemission probes.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports femtosecond time-resolved V L-edge resonant inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) measurements on V2O3 thin films, tracking the evolution of the lowest-lying d-d orbital excitation (~0.2 eV) after ultrafast 800 nm laser excitation. The authors extract the amplitude and FWHM of this peak from four-Gaussian fits and observe a sub-picosecond drop, a fluence-dependent partial recovery on the 1-5 ps scale, and a later (50 ps) spectrum that they compare with the equilibrium paramagnetic metallic state. The central quantitative claim is that the transient state at 50 ps is 'electronically indistinguishable' from the high-temperature metal, supported by the peak-height ratio R_dynamic = 1.29 ± 0.06 versus R_static = 1.31 ± 0.02, and by a visual comparison of the 50 ps spectrum with the convolved equilibrium PM spectrum. The authors interpret the sub-ps response as laser-driven depopulation of V 3d states and the intermediate recovery as a consequence of transient V-V dimerization.

Significance. If the central claim is quantitatively robust, this work is a significant methodological demonstration: time-resolved RIXS with element and orbital specificity can probe orbital dynamics during an ultrafast insulator-to-metal transition, going beyond the momentum-integrated information of ARPES or optical reflectivity. The paper strengthens its case by comparing the transient spectra against independently measured equilibrium synchrotron spectra convolved to the experimental resolution, by reporting two pump fluences, and by stating the fitting assumptions explicitly. The main risk is that the extraction of the 0.2 eV d-d peak dynamics relies on a four-Gaussian fit in which all higher-energy components are held fixed; this assumption is acknowledged in the Methods but its influence on the quoted uncertainties and on the central 'electronically indistinguishable' claim is not tested.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods, last paragraph; Fig. 4; Eq. for R] The central quantitative claim rests on the amplitude and FWHM of the 0.2 eV d-d peak extracted from a four-Gaussian fit in which 'the parameters for the higher lying d-d excitation, the charge transfer excitation and the fluorescence contribution were kept fixed for simplicity to the values obtained for the data taken before t0.' This is a load-bearing assumption: if any of these components shifts in energy, broadens, or changes in intensity during the photoinduced transition, the fitted background under the 0.2 eV peak changes and the time traces of its amplitude and width are biased. The quoted statistical uncertainty on R_dynamic (±0.06) does not include this systematic effect; a delay-dependent baseline shift of only a few percent could move R_dynamic by more than its quoted error. I request a sensitivity analysis: refit at representative delays (e.g., t < 0, ~0.5 ps, 5 ps, 50 ps) with the fixed parameters floated within their static uncertainties, or with an alternative background model, and report how R_dynamic and the time traces change. Without such a test, the 'electronically indistinguishable' claim is not supported at the stated precision.
  2. [Results, paragraph on Fig. 4b; SFig. 6] The paper states that the total spectral weight of the d-d excitation remains constant across the thermal transition, yet in the time-resolved data 'it indeed appears that the integrated intensity is somewhat depressed' at short delays (SFig. 6). This observation is at odds with the assumed line-shape model of a single Gaussian of constant area on a fixed background, and it suggests the fixed-parameter fit may be biasing the early-delay FWHM and amplitude traces. Please quantify the integrated intensity as a function of delay, show the fitted spectra with residuals for representative delays (t < 0, ~0.5 ps, 5 ps, 50 ps), and discuss explicitly whether the depression is robust to the fitting model. This is needed to validate the sub-ps FWHM dynamics and the fluence-dependent intermediate response.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'V Ledge' should be 'V L-edge' for correct nomenclature.
  2. [Page 4, Figure 1 caption] The caption says the blue curve is 'taken at 50K' and the violet at '20K', but the text later refers to the LCLS data at 50 K; please clarify which data set is used as the initial equilibrium state for the pump-probe experiment.
  3. [Page 10, Methods] The word 'mononchromator' is a typo and should be 'monochromator'.
  4. [Page 5, text near Fig. 3] The notation for the t2g orbital is inconsistent: 'eπg' appears in some places and 'epg' in others; use a consistent typesetting for the π subscript.
  5. [Figure 4 caption] The color bar in panel (a) labels states IN, PE, DM, TE, but the acronyms are not defined in the caption; define them in the caption or in the main text before first use.
  6. [References] Reference 4 uses 'Science 321 (1649)' without a page range or article number; please complete the bibliographic details.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the transient-state comparison is checked against independently measured equilibrium spectra; the fixed-Gaussian fitting constraint is a modeling limitation, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

This is an experimental pump-probe RIXS paper with no derivation whose output is defined by its inputs. The central claim—that the state at 50 ps is electronically indistinguishable from the equilibrium paramagnetic metal—is checked by comparing time-resolved LCLS spectra with equilibrium synchrotron (ADRESS) spectra convolved to the LCLS resolution. The quantitative support, R_dynamic = 1.29 ± 0.06 versus R_static = 1.31 ± 0.02, is a comparison of two independently measured and independently fitted peak-height ratios; neither ratio is used as a fitting constraint for the other. The dimerization scenario is imported from an external ultrafast diffraction experiment (ref. 16) and is explicitly labeled speculative ('it is plausible to speculate'), so the reasoning is not circular. The only overlapping-author citations are instrument/methods references (refs. 24 and 30) and an analogy to VO2 (ref. 21); none is load-bearing for the main claim. The Methods final paragraph states that higher-lying Gaussian components were kept fixed at pre-t0 values; this is a fitting assumption that could bias the extracted 0.2 eV peak parameters, but it is not circular because the static PM comparison spectra are external and the dynamic ratio is not defined in terms of the static ratio. No self-definitional, fitted-input-called-prediction, imported-uniqueness, or ansatz-smuggled-in-via-citation step is present.

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

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The 'dimerized' transient state mentioned in the interpretation is inferred from prior ultrafast diffraction work (ref. 16) and is invoked speculatively, not postulated as a new entity. All the free parameters are fit outputs or fixed components of the spectral model, not theoretical constants.

free parameters (4)
  • Peak amplitude of the 0.2 eV d-d excitation = varies with pump-probe delay (Fig. 4a)
    Central dynamic observable, extracted by fitting the RIXS spectra with four Gaussians.
  • FWHM of the 0.2 eV d-d excitation = varies with pump-probe delay (Fig. 4b)
    Second central dynamic observable, obtained from the same Gaussian fit.
  • Parameters of the higher-energy RIXS components (d-d B, charge transfer C, fluorescence D) = fixed to pre-time-zero values
    Assumed time-independent to stabilize the fit; if they change during the transition, the extracted d-d peak dynamics would be biased.
  • Ratio R of d-d peak heights between AFI and PM states = 1.31 ± 0.02 (static), 1.29 ± 0.06 (dynamic at 50 ps)
    Used to claim the transient state is electronically indistinguishable from the high-temperature metallic state.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The 0.2 eV RIXS feature is a d-d orbital excitation (eπg to a1g) of V3+ in the t2g manifold.
    Standard interpretation for transition metal oxides, following ref. 25; underlies the orbital-dynamics interpretation.
  • domain assumption The equilibrium PM RIXS spectrum convolved with the LCLS energy resolution is a valid reference for the 50 ps transient state.
    Used to conclude the transient is electronically indistinguishable from the metal; assumes no additional broadening or lineshape differences caused by the pump.
  • ad hoc to paper The four-Gaussian fit with fixed higher-energy parameters remains valid across all delay times.
    Specific modeling choice made for this analysis; the paper does not assess the sensitivity of the extracted dynamics to this assumption.
  • domain assumption The V2O3 thin film is not damaged by the pump fluences used (12 and 24 mJ/cm2), which are below the measured damage threshold of 100 mJ/cm2.
    If laser damage occurred, the observed spectral changes could be misinterpreted as electronic dynamics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Orbital dynamics during an ultrafast insulator to metal transition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CCGLK7BS

@misc{pith2026190802603,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Orbital dynamics during an ultrafast insulator to metal transition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CCGLK7BS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02603}
}
read the original abstract

Phase transitions driven by ultrashort laser pulses have attracted interest both for understanding the fundamental physics of phase transitions and for potential new data storage or device applications. In many cases these transitions involve transient states that are different from those seen in equilibrium. To understand the microscopic properties of these states, it is useful to develop elementally selective probing techniques that operate in the time domain. Here we show fs-time-resolved measurements of V Ledge Resonant Inelastic X-Ray Scattering (RIXS) from the insulating phase of the Mott- Hubbard material V2O3 after ultrafast laser excitation. The probed orbital excitations within the d-shell of the V ion show a sub-ps time response, which evolve at later times to a state that appears electronically indistinguishable from the high-temperature metallic state. Our results demonstrate the potential for RIXS spectroscopy to study the ultrafast orbital dynamics in strongly correlated materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02603 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. RIXS spectra of insulating V2O3 taken at the SXR beamline of the LCLS (blue curve: top) taken at 50K and at the ADRESS beamline of the Swiss Light Source (violet curve: bottom) taken at 20K. Both spectra are normalized to main peak intensity at ~0.2 eV. The red line is a fit to a sum of Gaussian functions representing d-d (A and B) excitations, charge transfer (C) excitations and fluorescence (D) contributions to th… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Imada, A

    M. Imada, A. Fujimori and Y. Tokura, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1039 (1998)

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Cavalleri, C

    A. Cavalleri, C. Toth, C. W. Siders, J. A. Squier, F. Raksi, P. Forget and J. C. Kieffer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (23) (2001)

    work page 2001

  3. [3]

    Polli, M

    D. Polli, M. Rini, S. Wall, R. W. Schoenlein, Y. Tomioka, Y. Tokura, G. Cerullo and A. Cavalleri, Nature Mat. 6 (9), 643-647 (2007)

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    dimerized

    Time dependence of the RIXS peak amplitude (a) and the full width at half maximum (FWHM) (b) for two excitation fluences. The insets show the dependence over the first few picoseconds after the excitation. The color bar on the bottom of panel (a) refers to different transient states with an initial (IN), an immediate photo excited (PE), a “dimerized” (DM)...

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Schmitt, P

    F. Schmitt, P. S. Kirchmann, U. Bovensiepen, R. G. Moore, L. Rettig, M. Krenz, J.-H. Chu, N. Ru, L. Perfetti, D. H. Lu, M. Wolf, I. R. Fisher and Z.-X. Shen, Science 321 (1649) (2008)

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    Yusupov, T

    R. Yusupov, T. Mertelj, V. V. Kabanov, S. Brazovskii, P. Kusar, J. H. Chu, I. R. Fisher and D. Mihailovic, Nature Physics 6 (9), 681-684 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Eichberger, H

    M. Eichberger, H. Schafer, M. Krumova, M. Beyer, J. Demsar, H. Berger, G. Moriena, G. Sciaini and R. J. D. Miller, Nature 468 (7325), 799-802 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Beaud, A

    P. Beaud, A. Caviezel, S. O. Mariager, L. Rettig, G. Ingold, C. Dornes, S.-W. Huang, J. A. Johnson, M. Radovic, T. Huber, T. Kubacka, A. Ferrer, H. T. Lemke, M. Chollet, D. Zhu, J. M. Glownia, M. Sikorski, A. Robert, H. Wadati, M. Nakamur, M. Kawasaki, Y. Tokura, S. L. Johnson and U. Staub, Nature Mat. 13, 923 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    D. B. McWhan and J. P. Remeika, Physical Review B-Solid State 2 (9), 3734-3750 (1970)

    1970

  2. [10]

    D. B. McWhan, A. Menth, J. P. Remeika, W. F. Brinkman and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 7 (5), 1920-1931 (1973)

    1973

  3. [11]

    R. M. Moon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 (8), 527-529 (1970)

    1970

  4. [12]

    G. A. Thomas, D. H. Rapkine, S. A. Carter, A. J. Millis, T. F. Rosenbaum, P. Metcalf and J. M. Honig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (11), 1529-1532 (1994)

    1994

  5. [13]

    J. H. Park, L. H. Tjeng, A. Tanaka, J. W. Allen, C. T. Chen, P. Metcalf, J. M. Honig, F. M. F. de Groot and G. A. Sawatzky, Phys. Rev. B 61 (17), 11506-11509 (2000)

    2000

  6. [14]

    A. I. Poteryaev, J. M. Tomczak, S. Biermann, A. Georges, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, T. Saha-Dasgupta and O. K. Andersen, Phys. Rev. B 76 (8), 085127 (2007)

    2007

  7. [15]

    Singer, J

    A. Singer, J. G. Ramirez, I. Valmianski, D. Cela, N. Hua, R. Kukreja, J. Wingert, O. Kovalchuk, J. M. Glownia, M. Sikorski, M. Chollet, M. Holt, I. K. Schuller and O. G. Shpyrko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (20) (2018). 12

    2018

  8. [16]

    Abreu, S

    E. Abreu, S. M. Wang, J. G. Ramirez, M. K. Liu, J. D. Zhang, K. Geng, I. K. Schuller and R. D. Averitt, Phys. Rev. B 92 (8) (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Lantz, B

    G. Lantz, B. Mansart, D. Grieger, D. Boschetto, N. Nilforoushan, E. Papalazarou, N. Moisan, L. Perfetti, V. L. R. Jacques, D. Le Bolloc'h, C. Laulhe, S. Ravy, J. P. Rueff, T. E. Glover, M. P. Hertlein, Z. Hussain, S. Song, M. Chollet, M. Fabrizio and M. Marsi, Nature Comm. 8, ...

    2017

  10. [18]

    Kotani and S

    A. Kotani and S. Shin, Rev. Mod.Phys. 73 (1), 203-246 (2001)

    2001

  11. [19]

    L. J. P. Ament, M. van Veenendaal, T. P. Devereaux, J. P. Hill and J. van den Brink, Rev. Mod.Phys. 83 (2), 63 (2011)

    2011

  12. [20]

    Schlappa, K

    J. Schlappa, K. Wohlfeld, K. J. Zhou, M. Mourigal, M. W. Haverkort, V. N. Strocov, L. Hozoi, C. Monney, S. Nishimoto, S. Singh, A. Revcolevschi, J. S. Caux, L. Patthey, H. M. Ronnow, J. van den Brink and T. Schmitt, Nature 485 (7396), 82-U108 (2012)

    2012

  13. [21]

    Braicovich, J

    L. Braicovich, J. van den Brink, V. Bisogni, M. Moretti Sala, L. J. P. Ament, N. B. Brookes, G. M. De Luca, M. Salluzzo, T. Schmitt, V. N. Strocov and G. Ghiringhelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (7), 4 (2010)

    2010

  14. [22]

    H. W. He, A. X. Gray, P. Granitzka, J. W. Jeong, N. P. Aetukuri, R. Kukreja, L. Miao, S. A. Breitweiser, J. P. Wu, Y. B. Huang, P. Olalde-Velasco, J. Pelliciari, W. F. Schlotter, E. Arenholz, T. Schmitt, M. G. Samant, S. S. P. Parkin, H. A. Durr and L. A. Wray, Phys. Rev. B 94...

    2016

  15. [23]

    C. F. Hague, J. M. Mariot, V. Ilakovac, R. Delaunay, M. Marsi, M. Sacchi, J. P. Rueff and W. Felsch, Phys. Rev. B 77 (4), 045132 (2008)

    2008

  16. [24]

    M. P. M. Dean, Y. Cao, X. Liu, S. Wall, D. Zhu, R. Mankowsky, V. Thampy, X. M. Chen, J. G. Vale, D. Casa, J. Kim, A. H. Said, P. Juhas, R. Alonso-Mori, J. M. Glownia, A. Robert, J. Robinson, M. Sikorski, S. Song, M. Kozina, H. Lemke, L. Patthey, S. Owada, T. Katayama, M. Yabas...

    2016

  17. [25]

    W. F. Schlotter, J. J. Turner, M. Rowen, P. Heimann, M. Holmes, O. Krupin, M. Messerschmidt, S. Moeller, J. Krzywinski, R. Soufli, M. Fernandez-Perea, N. Kelez, S. Lee, R. Coffee, G. Hays, M. Beye, N. Gerken, F. Sorgenfrei, S. Hau-Riege, L. Juha, J. Chalupsky, V. Hajkova, A. P...

    2012

  18. [26]

    Benckiser, L

    E. Benckiser, L. Fels, G. Ghiringhelli, M. M. Sala, T. Schmitt, J. Schlappa, V. N. Strocov, N. Mufti, G. R. Blake, A. A. Nugroho, T. T. M. Palstra, M. W. Haverkort, K. Wohlfeld and M. Grueninger, Phys. Rev. B 88 (20) (2013)

    2013

  19. [27]

    Schmitt, L

    T. Schmitt, L. C. Duda, A. Augustsson, J. H. Guo, J. Nordgren, J. E. Downes, C. McGuinness, K. E. Smith, G. Dhalenne, A. Revcolevshci, M. Klemm and S. Horn, Surface Review and Letters 9 (2), 1369-1374 (2002)

    2002

  20. [28]

    Bisogni, S

    V. Bisogni, S. Catalano, R. J. Green, M. Gibert, R. Scherwitzl, Y. B. Huang, V. N. Strocov, P. Zubko, S. Balandeh, J. M. Triscone, G. Sawatzky and T. Schmitt, Nature Comm. 7, 13017 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    Abbate, F

    M. Abbate, F. M. F. Degroot, J. C. Fuggle, Y. J. Ma, C. T. Chen, F. Sette, A. Fujimori, Y. Ueda and K. Kosuge, Phys. Rev. B 43 (9), 7263-7267 (1991)

    1991

  22. [30]

    S. Wall, S. Yang, L. Vidas, M. Chollet, J. M. Glownia, M. Kozina, T. Katayama, T. Henighan, M. Jiang, T. A. Miller, D. A. Reis, L. A. Boatner, O. Delaire and M. Trigo, Science 362 (6414), 572-+ (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    V. N. Strocov, T. Schmitt, U. Flechsig, T. Schmidt, A. Imhof, Q. Chen, J. Raabe, R. Betemps, D. Zimoch, J. Krempasky, X. Wang, M. Grioni, A. Piazzalunga and L. Patthey, J. Synch. Rad. 17, 631-643 (2010)

    2010

Pith tools

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