Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Negative refraction in time-varying, strongly-coupled plasmonic antenna-ENZ systems

T0 review · 4 major / 5 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 Gold antennas strongly coupled to an epsilon-near-zero film boost optically induced negative refraction by more than 15,000 times.

desk verdict A credible and significant demonstration that strongly coupled antenna-ENZ metasurfaces boost time-varying negative refraction by four orders of magnitude, with a parameter-free model that mostly holds up; the main gaps are missing data and error bars, plus an unvalidated local-chi3 assumption at high local fields. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03908 v3 pith:NQ6YPWHV submitted 2019-08-11 physics.optics

V. Bruno , C. DeVault , S. Vezzoli , Z. Kudyshev , T. Huq , S. Mignuzzi , A. Jacassi , S. Saha
show 9 more authors
Y.D. Shah S.A. Maier D.R.S. Cumming A. Boltasseva M. Ferrera M. Clerici D. Faccio R. Sapienza V.M. Shalaev
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords negativerefractionphaseconjugationepsilon-near-zerostrongcouplingplasmonicantennastime-varyingmetasurfacefour-wavemixingITOfilm
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

An array of gold nano-antennas on a 40-nanometre film of indium tin oxide is shown to act as a time-varying metasurface: a pump pulse at frequency $\omega$ drives a nonlinear polarization oscillating at $2\omega$, generating phase-conjugate and negative-refracted beams from a weak probe. The paper claims that strong coupling between the antenna plasmon resonance and the film's epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) mode raises the conversion efficiency of these beams to about 1 percent and more than 15,000 times the efficiency of the bare film, over a band roughly 300 nanometres wide. The practical significance is that this strong nonlinear response is reached with readily accessible pump intensities of about 0.5 GW/cm$^2$, so subwavelength films could control light with light using modest laser powers.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the strongly coupled antenna–ENZ system itself: the gold antennas' plasmonic resonance and the ENZ mode of the thin ITO film hybridize into upper and lower polariton branches, with a measured Rabi splitting of about 386 meV that exceeds the average damping, so the system stores a large share of its energy inside the film. The quantitative identity that carries the argument is the reciprocity-based four-wave-mixing formula, Eq. (1) of the paper, $$E(\omega) \propto \int_{V_{\mathrm{ITO}}} \varepsilon_0 \$chi^{{(3)}}$(\omega)\, $E_p^{2}$(\omega) E_s^*(\omega)\cdot E_{\mathrm{det}}(\omega)\, dV,$$ where $E_p$ is the pump field, $E_s$ is the probe field, and $E_{\mathrm{det}}$ is the field that a detector point source creates inside the ITO. Taking the ratio of the generated field for the metasurface and for bare ITO cancels unmeasured spectral constants and yields the normalized efficiency $\eta_{\mathrm{norm}} = |E_{\mathrm{metasurface}}|^2/|E_{\mathrm{ITO}}|^2$, which the film's enhanced energy density explains.

What would settle it

Repeat the pump-probe measurement with antennas of length 250 nm and 650 nm detuned from the ENZ wavelength and compare the conversion efficiency with the resonant 460 nm case; the strong-coupling explanation predicts a drop of nearly an order of magnitude, so observing no such drop would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a strongly coupled plasmonic-ENZ metasurface turns degenerate four-wave mixing into negative refraction and phase conjugation with a measured efficiency of about 1 percent across 1200–1700 nm, exceeding the bare ENZ film by a factor greater than 15,000. The system is a square lattice of gold rectangular antennas on a 40 nm ITO film whose real permittivity crosses zero near 1400 nm; the antenna resonance and the ENZ mode hybridize into two polariton branches with a Rabi splitting of roughly 386 meV (about 32 percent), placing the system in the strong-coupling regime. FDTD simulations show that at the ENZ wavelength the local energy density inside the ITO film is enhanced by more than a factor of 50, and a model based on the nonlinear polarization $P \propto E_p^2 E_s^*$ integrated over the ITO volume reproduces the measured enhancement spectrum. The paper concludes that strong coupling works by concentrating pump and probe energy inside the ENZ layer, and it reports that gold antennas on glass without the ITO film give no detectable signal.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the ITO film's response is an instantaneous, local cubic (Kerr) nonlinearity described by a single coefficient $\chi^{(3)}$, with the same Drude permittivity, even though strong coupling pushes the local pump intensity inside the film more than fifty times higher than in the bare film, where free-carrier and other non-Kerr effects are known to appear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, optically induced negative refraction and phase conjugation in ENZ films become practical with compact subwavelength devices at pump powers near 0.5 mW.
  • The same strong-coupling geometry should enhance any $\chi^{(3)}$-driven process in the ENZ film, including self-phase modulation and harmonic generation, wherever the field energy is concentrated.
  • Antenna length and periodicity provide a tuning knob: changing them shifts the polariton branches and therefore the working wavelengths across the 1200–1700 nm band.
  • Because the normalized efficiency is the squared ratio of generated fields, the model predicts that improved field confinement translates into approximately quadratic gains in conversion efficiency.
  • The roughly 300-nm bandwidth is about three times broader than the bare ENZ film's response, so strong coupling does not only amplify the effect but widens the usable spectral window.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The energy-density mechanism implies that the conversion efficiency should scale with the square of the local field-enhancement factor, so one could engineer the antenna geometry to maximize efficiency at a chosen wavelength without changing the ITO material.
  • The detuned-antenna comparison is currently simulated; building and measuring the 250 nm and 650 nm antenna samples would provide a direct experimental test of the strong-coupling role.
  • At the local intensities produced by the >50-fold field enhancement, ITO may develop free-carrier or other non-Kerr nonlinearities; if so, the instantaneous $\chi^{(3)}$ model would need augmentation, and the efficiency spectrum could gain pump-intensity-dependent features.
  • A pump-probe delay scan could separate instantaneous Kerr response from slower material responses, since an instantaneous nonlinearity should follow the pump envelope with no delayed tail.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports experiments and simulations on a metasurface consisting of gold nano-antennas on a 40 nm indium-tin-oxide (ITO) film near its epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) wavelength. It claims that strong coupling between the antenna plasmon and the ENZ mode produces optically induced negative refraction and phase conjugation with an efficiency of order 1%, a more than 15,000-fold enhancement over the bare ITO film, and that this enhancement is quantitatively explained by a reciprocity-based four-wave mixing model that uses FDTD-computed linear fields and a literature value of the ITO third-order susceptibility. The model is parameter-free in the normalized-efficiency ratio and is compared with measurements for two lattice periodicities, 600 nm and 800 nm.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a significant result: it would demonstrate an efficient and relatively low-power time-varying metasurface based on strong coupling between plasmonic antennas and an ENZ film, and it would provide a predictive model connecting the linear energy-density enhancement to the nonlinear conversion efficiency. The paper's use of a reciprocity integral over linear FDTD fields, with no free parameters fitted to the efficiency data, is a notable strength, as is the anchoring of the linear material response to measured ellipsometry and transmission. The agreement with two lattice periods and the inclusion of a gold-on-glass control are also positive features. The main risks are the model's reliance on an unperturbed, local, instantaneous Kubo- or Kerr-type chi-3 response at strongly enhanced local fields, the lack of measured detuned-antenna controls, and the absence of uncertainty quantification for the central enhancement factor.

major comments (4)
  1. [Model and data analysis, Eq. (1)/(7), Fig. 2(b)] The quantitative explanation assumes that the ITO response is a local, instantaneous chi^(3) with an unperturbed Drude permittivity, while Fig. 2(b) shows that the local |E|^2 in the ITO is enhanced by more than a factor of 50 relative to the bare film. At the stated pump intensity of 0.5 GW/cm^2, the local intensity reaches tens of GW/cm^2, a regime in which ITO is known to exhibit free-carrier and other non-Kerr dynamics (Refs. 20-23) with order-unity refractive-index changes. Such pump-induced changes would alter the linear fields used in Eq. (1) and therefore the predicted normalized efficiency in Eq. (2). Please provide evidence that the Kerr-only description remains valid at these local intensities, for example a measured pump-intensity dependence of the enhancement or a comparison with a free-carrier model, or explicitly delimit the pump range over which the model applies.
  2. [Experiments, Fig. 3(c)] The claim that strong coupling itself is responsible for the enhancement rests on a simulated-only detuned-antenna control. The text states that the FWM efficiency drops by nearly an order of magnitude for antenna lengths of 250 nm and 650 nm, thereby 'highlighting the role played by strong coupling,' but these curves are FDTD results obtained with the same local-chi^(3) assumption. They do not experimentally isolate strong coupling from generic near-field enhancement produced by resonant plasmonic antennas. It would be important to measure at least one detuned antenna length, or otherwise vary the coupling strength experimentally, and show the corresponding efficiency drop.
  3. [Experiments, Fig. 3(d), and Refs. [49]] The central quantitative claim of a greater-than-15,000-fold enhancement is presented without error bars or uncertainty analysis, and the data availability statement is a placeholder ('INSERT DOI HERE'). Without statistical characterization of the measured efficiencies, the reader cannot assess the reproducibility of the enhancement factor or the significance of the model-experiment agreement. Please add error bars or an equivalent uncertainty analysis (for example, repeated measurements and calibration uncertainties) and provide the actual repository link.
  4. [Experiments and nonlinear FDTD simulations] The experiment is described as a degenerate four-wave-mixing process with pump and probe at the same wavelength, but the nonlinear FDTD simulations blue-shift the probe by 100 nm from the pump 'in order to discriminate the output NR and PC fields.' Because the local field distributions and the ITO permittivity vary over this bandwidth, the simulated efficiency need not exactly match the degenerate case. Please justify that this 100 nm offset does not materially affect the predicted normalized efficiency, or simulate the degenerate case with an appropriate field-separation procedure.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'Rabi level spitting' contains a typo; it should read 'Rabi level splitting.'
  2. [Fig. 1(b)] The SEM image does not include a scale bar or a statement of magnification; please add one so that the antenna dimensions can be verified visually.
  3. [Fig. 3(c)] The y-axis of Fig. 3(c) is labeled 'NR efficiency (%)' but the tick labels are not visible in the reproduction; please ensure the axis is readable and state whether the 1 GW/cm^2 experimental curve is raw data or has been smoothed or normalized.
  4. [Model and data analysis, Eqs. (1)-(2)] The statement that Eq. (2) 'directly estimates the trend of the normalised efficiency ... from the energy density calculation shown in Fig. 2(c)' is not immediately obvious, because Eq. (1) is a field-overlap integral over the product E_p^2 E_s^* E_det, not simply a local energy density. Please clarify how the energy-density plot relates to the full reciprocity integral.
  5. [Experiments] The gold-on-glass control is valuable, but the statement that the gold antennas alone 'do not produce a detectable signal' would be more informative with a quantitative upper bound or noise floor for the detection system.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the efficiency enhancement is computed from measured linear permittivity and literature χ(3) with no free parameters, and the ratio cancels the fitted constants.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an experimentally measured 15000-fold enhancement of negative refraction and phase conjugation in a strongly coupled antenna-ENZ metasurface, plus a quantitative model for that enhancement. The model uses Eq. (1)/(7), a reciprocity integral over the ITO volume with the nonlinear polarization P ∝ χ(3) E_p^2 E_s^*, and then Eq. (2), the ratio of the computed metasurface efficiency to the bare-ITO efficiency. All fields in this integral are obtained from linear FDTD simulations whose permittivity is anchored to measured ellipsometry (Fig. 1a), and the χ(3) value is taken from an external literature source (Ref. [47]). No parameter is fitted to the measured NR/PC efficiency data; in fact, the unknown spectral dependence of χ(3), the film thickness, and other constants cancel in the ratio of Eq. (2), so the prediction is parameter-free. The measured efficiency enhancement is therefore an independent check of the model rather than an input to it. The simulated detuned-antenna controls (L = 250 and 650 nm) are not experimentally measured, which weakens the causal attribution to strong coupling specifically, but this is an evidentiary limitation rather than a circular step: the simulation still uses the same independent linear-field calculation. Self-citations to prior ENZ negative-refraction work (e.g., Ref. [7]) are background context and are not load-bearing for the quantitative enhancement claim. No self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, or self-citation-uniqueness chain is present. The derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on three domain assumptions about the ITO material response (Drude permittivity, pure local χ(3), no antenna nonlinearity) and one standard mathematical tool (reciprocity). The single fitted value is the strong-coupling constant g, used for linear characterization, not for the FWM prediction.

free parameters (1)
  • coupling constant g in coupled harmonic oscillator model = 193.1 meV
    Fitted to the measured transmission minima (ENZ and antenna branches) in the supplementary information, yielding Rabi splitting 386.2 meV. This fit characterizes the linear strong-coupling regime and is not used as an input to the FWM model.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption ITO permittivity is described by a Drude model fitted to ellipsometry and remains valid under pulsed optical pumping.
    Used in all FDTD simulations; explicitly shown in Fig. 1(a) but the intensity dependence of the permittivity is not accounted for.
  • domain assumption The nonlinear polarization in the ENZ film is local and given by P = ε0 χ(3) E_p^2 E_s^*, with χ(3) taken from literature (Humphrey and Kuciauskas).
    This is the basis of Eq. 1 and the nonlinear FDTD; it assumes no free-carrier or thermal contributions.
  • standard math The reciprocity theorem can be applied with a point-like detector source in the far field, and the integral over the ITO volume captures the entire FWM signal.
    Standard result in nonlinear optics (O'Brien et al., Ref. [48]); used to derive Eq. 1.
  • domain assumption The gold antennas contribute no significant nonlinear signal.
    Used to attribute all enhancement to the ITO film's nonlinearity; the control experiment (antennas on glass) is mentioned but with no quantitative noise floor given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Negative refraction in time-varying, strongly-coupled plasmonic antenna-ENZ systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NQ6YPWHV

@misc{pith2026190803908,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Negative refraction in time-varying, strongly-coupled plasmonic antenna-ENZ systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NQ6YPWHV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03908}
}
read the original abstract

Time-varying metasurfaces are emerging as a powerful instrument for the dynamical control of the electromagnetic properties of a propagating wave. Here we demonstrate an efficient time-varying metasurface based on plasmonic nano-antennas strongly coupled to an epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) deeply sub-wavelength film. The plasmonic resonance of the metal resonators strongly interacts with the optical ENZ modes, providing a Rabi level spitting of ~30%. Optical pumping at frequency {\omega} induces a nonlinear polarisation oscillating at 2{\omega} responsible for an efficient generation of a phase conjugate and a negative refracted beam with a conversion efficiency that is more than four orders of magnitude greater compared to the bare ENZ film. The introduction of a strongly coupled plasmonic system therefore provides a simple and effective route towards the implementation of ENZ physics at the nanoscale

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03908 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FDTD simulation of the normalised energy den￾sity (calculated as the |E| 2 -field distribution normalised to the input |E| 2 ) in (a) for the 2D nano-antennas pattern on top of a 40 nm layer of ITO. (b) Depth profile of the normalised en￾ergy density across the metasurface [dashed white line in (a)]. (c) Shows the normalised energy density versus wavelength calculated at the two points indicated with “1” and “2” in … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Simulations and experiments. (a) Nonlinear FDTD simulation of input probe beam. The arrow indicates probe direction (pump not shown), the red shaded area shows the metasurface area, and the dashed line indicates location of E-field source. (b) Phase conjugated (PC) and negative re￾fracted (NR) beam are generated at the metasurface. (c) NR efficiency (NR energy normalised to input probe energy, ex￾pressed in %) simul… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Theoretical model and measurements. (a) NR efficiency ηnorm as measured for the antenna-ITO coupled sys￾tem (red) for a pump intensity 0.5 GW/cm2 and periodicity 600 nm and, (b) for periodicity 800 nm (antenna length is 460 nm in both cases). pump field, Es the probe field and P is the microscopic source of the measured fields of the NR and PC beams. By making use of the reciprocity theorem, one can cal￾culate the e… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Dispersion relation of the air-ENZ-glass three-layered system (see inset) for 40 nm ITO film. The long (short) range [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Wavelengths of the transmission minimum as a function of antenna length. Blue (Red) dots: minimum experimental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. T. Mendonça, Theory of photon acceleration (CRC Press, 2000)

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    Nation, J

    P. Nation, J. Johansson, M. Blencowe, and F. Nori, Re- views of Modern Physics84, 1 (2012). 5

    work page 2012

  3. [3]

    Yablonovitch, Physical Review Letters 62, 1742 (1989)

    E. Yablonovitch, Physical Review Letters 62, 1742 (1989)

    work page 1989

  4. [4]

    Westerberg, S

    N. Westerberg, S. Cacciatori, F. Belgiorno, F. Dalla Pi- azza, and D. Faccio, New Journal of Physics16, 075003 (2014)

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Prain, S

    A. Prain, S. Vezzoli, N. Westerberg, T. Roger, and D. Faccio, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 133904 (2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Bacot, M

    V. Bacot, M. Labousse, A. Eddi, M. Fink, and E. Fort, Nature Physics 12, 972 (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Vezzoli, V

    S. Vezzoli, V. Bruno, C. DeVault, T. Roger, V. M. Sha- laev, A. Boltasseva, M. Ferrera, M. Clerici, A. Dubietis, and D. Faccio, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 043902 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Maslovski and S

    S. Maslovski and S. Tretyakov, Journal of Applied Physics 94, 4241 (2003)

    work page 2003

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Pendry, Science322, 71 (2008)

    J. Pendry, Science322, 71 (2008)

    2008

  2. [10]

    Shaltout, A

    A. Shaltout, A. Kildishev, and V. Shalaev, Optical Ma- terials Express 5, 2459 (2015)

    2015

  3. [11]

    D. L. Sounas and A. Alù, Nature Photonics 11, 774 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    A. M. Shaltout, V. M. Shalaev, and M. L. Brongersma, Science 364, eaat3100 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Sartorello, N

    G. Sartorello, N. Olivier, J. Zhang, W. Yue, D. J. Gosz- tola, G. P. Wiederrecht, G. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, ACS photonics 3, 1517 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    L. H. Nicholls, F. J. Rodríguez-Fortuño, M. E. Nasir, R. M. Córdova-Castro, N. Olivier, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, Nature Photonics11, 628 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    De Angelis, H

    M.Rahmani,G.Leo,I.Brener,A.V.Zayats,S.A.Maier, C. De Angelis, H. Tan, V. F. Gili, F. Karouta, R. Oulton, et al., Opto-Electronic Advances1, 180021 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    L.H.Nicholls,T.Stefaniuk,M.E.Nasir,F.J.Rodríguez- Fortuño, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, Nature com- munications 10, 2967 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Ciattoni, A

    A. Ciattoni, A. Marini, C. Rizza, and C. Conti, Light: Science & Applications7, 5 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Liberal and N

    I. Liberal and N. Engheta, Nature Photonics 11, 149 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    A. Alu, M. G. Silveirinha, A. Salandrino, and N. En- gheta, Physical review B75, 155410 (2007)

    2007

  12. [20]

    M. Z. Alam, I. De Leon, and R. W. Boyd, Science352, 795 (2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Caspani, R

    L. Caspani, R. P. M. Kaipurath, M. Clerici, M. Ferrera, T. Roger, J. Kim, N. Kinsey, M. Pietrzyk, A. Di Falco, V. M. Shalaev, A. Boltasseva, and D. Faccio, Phys. Rev. Lett. , 233901 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    Clerici, N

    M. Clerici, N. Kinsey, C. DeVault, J. Kim, E. G. Carnemolla, L. Caspani, A. Shaltout, D. Faccio, V. Sha- laev, A. Boltasseva, et al. , Nature communications 8, 15829 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    E. G. Carnemolla, L. Caspani, C. DeVault, M. Clerici, S. Vezzoli, V. Bruno, V. M. Shalaev, D. Faccio, A. Boltas- seva, and M. Ferrera, Optical Materials Express8, 3392 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Marini and F

    A. Marini and F. G. De Abajo, Scientific reports6, 20088 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    Capretti, Y

    A. Capretti, Y. Wang, N. Engheta, and L. Dal Negro, Acs Photonics 2, 1584 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    T. S. Luk, D. De Ceglia, S. Liu, G. A. Keeler, R. P. Prasankumar, M. A. Vincenti, M. Scalora, M. B. Sinclair, and S. Campione, Applied Physics Letters106, 151103 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Capretti, Y

    A. Capretti, Y. Wang, N. Engheta, and L. Dal Negro, Optics letters 40, 1500 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    M. Z. Alam, S. A. Schulz, J. Upham, I. De Leon, and R. W. Boyd, Nature Photonics12, 79 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Törmä and W

    P. Törmä and W. L. Barnes, Reports on Progress in Physics 78, 013901 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    De Liberato, C

    S. De Liberato, C. Ciuti, and I. Carusotto, Physical Re- view Letters 98, 103602 (2007)

    2007

  23. [31]

    A. Benz, S. Campione, S. Liu, I. Montano, J. Klem, A. Allerman, J. Wendt, M. Sinclair, F. Capolino, and I. Brener, Nature communications4, 2882 (2013)

    2013

  24. [32]

    Thompson, G

    R. Thompson, G. Rempe, and H. Kimble, Physical Re- view Letters 68, 1132 (1992)

    1992

  25. [33]

    Yoshie, A

    T. Yoshie, A. Scherer, J. Hendrickson, G. Khitrova, H. Gibbs, G. Rupper, C. Ell, O. Shchekin, and D. Deppe, Nature 432, 200 (2004)

    2004

  26. [34]

    J. D. Plumhof, T. Stöferle, L. Mai, U. Scherf, and R. F. Mahrt, Nature materials13, 247 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    A. Amo, J. Lefrère, S. Pigeon, C. Adrados, C. Ciuti, I. Carusotto, R. Houdré, E. Giacobino, and A. Bramati, Nature Physics 5, 805 (2009)

    2009

  28. [36]

    Y. C. Jun, J. Reno, T. Ribaudo, E. Shaner, J.-J. Greffet, S. Vassant, F. Marquier, M. Sinclair, and I. Brener, Nano letters 13, 5391 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    S. A. Schulz, A. A. Tahir, M. Z. Alam, J. Upham, I. De Leon, and R. W. Boyd, Physical Review A 93, 063846 (2016)

    2016

  30. [38]

    Campione, J

    S. Campione, J. R. Wendt, G. A. Keeler, and T. S. Luk, Acs Photonics 3, 293 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    J. R. Hendrickson, S. Vangala, C. Dass, R. Gibson, J. Goldsmith, K. Leedy, D. E. Walker Jr, J. W. Cleary, W. Kim, and J. Guo, ACS Photonics5, 776 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    N. C. Passler, C. R. Gubbin, T. G. Folland, I. Razdol- ski, D. S. Katzer, D. F. Storm, M. Wolf, S. De Liberato, J. D. Caldwell, and A. Paarmann, Nano letters18, 4285 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Vassant, A

    S. Vassant, A. Archambault, F. Marquier, F. Pardo, U. Gennser, A. Cavanna, J.-L. Pelouard, and J.-J. Gr- effet, Physical review letters109, 237401 (2012)

    2012

  34. [42]

    Campione, S

    S. Campione, S. Liu, A. Benz, J. F. Klem, M. B. Sinclair, and I. Brener, Physical Review Applied4, 044011 (2015)

    2015

  35. [43]

    Campione, I

    S. Campione, I. Kim, D. de Ceglia, G. A. Keeler, and T. S. Luk, Optics express24, 18782 (2016)

    2016

  36. [44]

    E. L. Runnerstrom, K. P. Kelley, E. Sachet, C. T. Shel- ton, and J.-P. Maria, ACS Photonics4, 1885 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    Express 20, 23971 (2012)

    S.Vassant,J.-P.Hugonin,F.Marquier, andJ.-J.Greffet, Opt. Express 20, 23971 (2012)

    2012

  38. [46]

    Ciattoni, A

    A. Ciattoni, A. Marini, C. Rizza, M. Scalora, and F. Biancalana, Phys. Rev. A87, 053853 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    J. L. Humphrey and D. Kuciauskas, Journal of Applied Physics 100, 113123 (2006)

    2006

  40. [49]

    Supplementary Information: Negative refraction in time-varying, strongly-coupled plasmonic antenna-ENZ system V

    Data relevant to this work is available for download at INSERT DOI HERE. Supplementary Information: Negative refraction in time-varying, strongly-coupled plasmonic antenna-ENZ system V. Bruno1,†, C. DeVault2,3,†, S. Vezzoli4,†, Z. Kudyshev2,3, T. Huq4, S. Mignuzzi4, A. Jacassi...

    1908 arXiv

  41. [50]

    Vassant, A

    S. Vassant, A. Archambault, F. Marquier, F. Pardo, U. Gennser, A. Cavanna, J.-L. Pelouard, and J.-J. Greffet, Physical review letters 109, 237401 (2012)

    2012

  42. [51]

    Vassant, J.-P

    S. Vassant, J.-P. Hugonin, F. Marquier, and J.-J. Greffet, Opt. Express20, 23971 (2012)

    2012

  43. [52]

    Törmä and W

    P. Törmä and W. L. Barnes, Reports on Progress in Physics78, 013901 (2014)

    2014

  44. [53]

    O’Brien, H

    K. O’Brien, H. Suchowski, J. Rho, A. Salandrino, B. Kante, X. Yin, and X. Zhang, Nature Materials14, 379 EP (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

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