Sign of viscous magnetoresistance in electron fluids

Andrew Lucas; Ipsita Mandal

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 31 references

Sign of viscous magnetoresistance in electron fluids

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 The paper argues that in bulk crystals, electron hydrodynamic flow always produces positive magnetoresistance, no matter how strong the density inhomogeneity, so negative magnetoresistance cannot be a signature of viscosity.

desk verdict A solid, honest extension of the perturbative results, with a useful experimental diagnostic, but the 'always positive' claim outruns the 1D-periodic proof. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.04886 v2 pith:22JFC36G submitted 2019-08-13 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hall

Ipsita Mandal , Andrew Lucas This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mes-hall

keywords electronhydrodynamicsmagnetoresistanceviscousflowGurzhieffectinhomogeneousmediakinetictheoryFermiliquidballistic-to-hydrodynamiccrossover

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

In sufficiently clean metals, electrons can flow like a viscous fluid, and physicists have disagreed about whether that flow makes the electrical resistance rise or fall when a magnetic field is applied. This paper argues that in a bulk crystal the answer is unambiguous: magnetoresistance is always positive in the hydrodynamic regime, no matter how strong and irregular the density inhomogeneity, and the same positive sign persists across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover in weakly disordered samples. The negative magnetoresistance seen in clean systems is a narrow-channel phenomenon, coming from a Hall voltage that builds up across the channel but cannot survive in a continuous medium. The consequence, if the paper is right, is that the magnetic-field sensitivity of a resistance minimum becomes a practical test: a bulk resistance minimum that vanishes at modest fields is a viscous effect, not an impurity-scattering one. The authors flag that their exact calculation treats density variations along only one direction and leave the fully two-dimensional problem open.

What carries the argument

The central object in the hydrodynamic half is the linearized set of charge, energy, and momentum conservation equations for a Fermi liquid in a magnetic field, with local density $n(y)$, shear viscosity $\eta$, and Hall viscosity $\eta_H$ varying periodically in one spatial direction. In a two-dimensional isotropic Fermi liquid these viscosities obey $\eta(B)=\eta_0/(1+(2\omega_c\tau_{ee})^2)$ and $\eta_H(B)=2\omega_c\tau_{ee}\eta(B)$, which ties the magnetic-field response to the viscous mean free path $\ell_{ee}=v_F\tau_{ee}$. The key identity is the exact formula for the longitudinal resistivity $\rho_{yy}$ as a sum of positive-semidefinite terms involving $(\partial_y(1/n))^2$, $(\Psi-\langle n\rangle^{-1}B(\eta_H/\eta)\partial_y(1/n))^2$, and thermal-conductivity corrections, where $\Psi$ is the periodic antiderivative of $n-\langle n\rangle$. In the kinetic-theory half the load-bearing object is the charge-density spectral weight $A_{nn}(k)$; a projection trick reduces the Boltzmann-equation inversion to a small matrix whose entries are Bessel functions $J_{n-\tilde{n}}(k\ell_B)$, so the resistivity across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover can be evaluated from the disorder spectrum $|\mu(k)|^2$.

What would settle it

Measure $\rho(B)$ at low temperature in a bulk two-dimensional electron system whose width is much larger than the viscous mean free path and whose density is deliberately made inhomogeneous; a decrease of resistance as $B^2$ grows—$\partial\rho/\partial(B^2)<0$—would contradict the central claim. Alternatively, solve the hydrodynamic equations on a fully two-dimensional periodic density landscape and search numerically for a regime with negative magnetoresistance, which the paper leaves open.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that in a bulk (quasi-)two-dimensional electron fluid the longitudinal magnetoresistance is positive for any magnetic field, independent of the strength of inhomogeneity, and that this also holds for weakly disordered metals near the onset of viscous flow. The mechanism is the continuity of the electrochemical potential in a continuous medium: the local Hall voltage that would appear in a narrow channel cannot simply terminate, so a field-dependent circulating current $J_y$ flows between regions of different density, and its dissipation adds positive contributions to the bulk resistivity $\rho_{yy}$. Solving the hydrodynamic equations exactly for a periodic one-dimensional density profile yields a positive-semidefinite conductivity tensor and an explicit formula for $\rho_{yy}$; estimating the terms with sharp density domains and Fermi-liquid viscosity $\eta(B)=\eta_0/(1+(2\omega_c\tau_{ee})^2)$ shows the magnetoresistance is positive at both small and large $B$. In the kinetic-theory calculation near the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover, the resistivity rises rapidly with magnetic field regardless of the microscopic collision integral, and the zero-field non-monotonic temperature dependence of the resistivity, the bulk analogue of the Gurzhi effect, disappears once $\ell_B$ is even modestly smaller than the inhomogeneity scale.

Load-bearing premise

The argument's load-bearing premise is that transport in a bulk crystal with density variations in both directions behaves like the exactly solved case with variations in only one direction; the authors state that the fully two-dimensional problem is left to future work, so if two-dimensional flow paths can short-circuit the field-dependent dissipation, the 'always positive' conclusion could fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In a bulk sample, a resistance minimum whose depth is destroyed by a modest magnetic field is evidence for viscous electron flow, and can be separated from impurity-scattering minima that are far less field-sensitive.
Negative magnetoresistance in a hydrodynamic conductor is a geometry effect; it should only be expected in narrow channels, not in bulk transport measurements.
The magnetoresistance remains positive even when the microscopic collision operator is changed, so the sign is a robust property of momentum-conserving electron-electron scattering rather than a quirk of the relaxation-time approximation.
Near the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover, the positive magnetoresistance appears already at small fields, so magnetotransport can diagnose the onset of viscous flow before full hydrodynamics is established.
The field strength at which $\rho(B)$ starts to climb is set by the ratio of the inhomogeneity length scale to the viscous mean free path, so measurements of magnetoresistance could be used to estimate $\ell_{ee}(T)$.

Reading between the lines

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

If the 'always positive' claim is right, then previously reported negative magnetoresistance in wide samples must originate elsewhere—for example, in current-path geometry, contacts, or two-dimensional percolation around density domains—and a direct narrow-versus-wide comparison on the same crystal would separate those mechanisms.
Because $\ell_{ee}\sim T^{-2}$ in a Fermi liquid, the magnetic-field scale at which the resistivity starts rising should itself track $T^{-2}$; fitting $\rho(B)$ across temperatures could extract the temperature-dependent viscosity without needing a zero-field subtraction.
The authors' 1D shortcoming is directly testable: numerically solving the same hydrodynamic equations on a genuinely two-dimensional periodic density landscape would show whether a 2D current path can thread around density domains and lower the resistance, which is the case left open in the paper.
A designed periodic density modulation (for instance, a lithographic superlattice) with a tunable field could provide a controlled check of the predicted scaling $\rho_{yy}\sim (B w)^2/\eta(n_1,B)$ at small $B$.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things about this paper. First, the core physics claim — that bulk magnetoresistance in an electron fluid is positive in the weakly inhomogeneous regime across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover — is solid and useful, and the extreme sensitivity of the bulk Gurzhi effect to a magnetic field is a genuinely simple experimental diagnostic. Second, the more aggressive part of the abstract, 'regardless of the strength of inhomogeneity,' is not actually proven. The exact hydrodynamic solution covers one-dimensional periodic inhomogeneity only; the extension to two dimensions is a stated expectation, not a result.

What is new: Eq. (22c) is a clean closed-form resistivity for a 1D periodic density profile at arbitrary inhomogeneity strength (within the constant-viscosity hydrodynamics they set up), and the kinetic-theory calculation with multiple collision operators extends the perturbative Refs [20,21] to finite B, reproducing Ref [15] at B=0. The numerical results show that a bulk resistance minimum from viscous effects should vanish in a modest magnetic field, which separates it from Kondo-like minima. That is a valuable prediction.

The paper is admirably honest. It explicitly states the one-dimensional shortcoming and says the 2D problem is left to future work. The Sec. 3.3 sentence that positive magnetoresistance across the crossover for large-amplitude 2D inhomogeneity 'has not been demonstrated' is easy to miss but is there. My main complaint is that the abstract and conclusion do not carry that caveat; they say 'always positive' without the qualifier. The derivation also treats η and ηH as constants in the exact solution, then uses position-dependent η in the cartoon estimates — a modeling inconsistency that is not harmful for the qualitative conclusion but does weaken the 'exact' label.

The kinetic-theory model has one free cutoff (nmax), but the qualitative results are robust to the choice of collision operator, so that is a minor point. The citation pattern is fine; the paper builds on [20,21] and [15] and credits them.

Bottom line: this is a paper worth refereeing, not desk-rejecting. I would ask for the global claim to be softened to match the 1D-periodic proof, or for a 2D numerical demonstration. For the subfield of electron hydrodynamics, it is a useful contribution. I'd bring it to the group and would cite it if I worked on magnetotransport.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript addresses the sign of magnetoresistance in two-dimensional electron fluids in which electron-electron collisions dominate. In the hydrodynamic section, the authors solve the linearized hydrodynamic equations for a periodic medium inhomogeneous in one direction, obtaining exact expressions for the conductivity and resistivity (Eqs. (21)-(22c)), and use a two-density cartoon to estimate the small- and large-field behavior. They find that the small-B derivative of rho_yy can be negative only for parameter regimes they argue are not physical, and they conclude that bulk magnetoresistance is positive regardless of inhomogeneity strength. In the kinetic-theory section, they compute the density spectral weight for weakly inhomogeneous media in a solvable Boltzmann model and in a model with a hierarchy of odd-harmonic lifetimes, finding positive magnetoresistance across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover and showing that the bulk Gurzhi resistance minimum is destroyed by a small magnetic field. The abstract draws the strong conclusions that negative magnetoresistance is not a signature of viscous bulk flow and that magnetic-field sensitivity is a diagnostic for the Gurzhi effect.

Significance. The result, if it held in full generality, would resolve a recent controversy: it would refute the idea that negative magnetoresistance is a signature of viscous flow in a bulk crystal, and it would propose a practical experimental test (extreme sensitivity of a bulk resistance minimum to a magnetic field) for the Gurzhi effect. The paper has real strengths: the derivation of Eq. (22c) is algebraic and self-contained; the B=0 limit reproduces Ref. [15] and the weak-field kinetic-theory limit reproduces Refs. [20,21]; the spectral-weight computation places the magnetic field inside the propagator rather than treating it perturbatively; and the qualitative conclusions are checked with more than one collision model. The proposed magnetic-field diagnostic is falsifiable and would be useful to experimental groups. However, the headline generality of the claim is not supported by the calculations, as detailed in the major comments.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 2.2 (Eqs. (21)-(22c))] The exact result behind the abstract's 'regardless of the strength of inhomogeneity' claim is derived only for media inhomogeneous in one direction, n=n(y), with the transport coefficients in Eqs. (21)-(22c). The authors explicitly state that 'the one shortcoming in our argument is... that the system was only inhomogeneous in one of the two directions' and leave a final 2D resolution to elsewhere. In a 2D inhomogeneous medium, current may detour around density domains, so the Hall-field pattern and the signs of the various B^2 cross-terms are not fixed by the 1D solution; the one-sentence heuristic about local Hall effects is not a calculation. Moreover, in the 1D geometry rho_xx=0 (Eq. (22a)), so the 'bulk' magnetoresistance is assessed through a specific orientation (rho_yy) that has no direct 2D analogue. The central claim therefore needs either a 2D calculation or a restriction to unidirectional inhomogeneity.
[Sec. 3.3 (crossover, after Fig. 3)] The crossover calculation is explicitly restricted to weakly inhomogeneous media (Sec. 3.1), yet the text concedes that positive magnetoresistance for large-amplitude inhomogeneity 'has not been demonstrated' and only asserts 'we see no reason for this to not be the case.' Because the abstract and conclusion present positive magnetoresistance and the magnetic-field test for the Gurzhi effect as general statements, this leaves another load-bearing gap. This sentence should be backed by a numerical or analytic estimate, or the generality of the claim should be reduced.
[Eqs. (22c)-(27)] The exact expression (22c) is positive semidefinite as a transport coefficient, but it does not by itself prove that d(rho_yy)/d(B^2) > 0 for all profiles: the small-B estimate (24) contains a negative contribution, and the conclusion that magnetoresistance is positive rests on the scaling condition (25) combined with hydrodynamic inequalities and the assumption z >= 1. Thus the hydrodynamic section establishes a useful class of models, but the claim 'always positive' is not a theorem; the authors should state the precise sufficient conditions (e.g., the regime of validity of the estimates in Eqs. (23)) or prove monotonicity directly for periodic n(y).

minor comments (3)

[Sec. 3.3 (after Eq. (50))] The reference to 'Figure 4' in the sentence after Eq. (50) appears to be a typo; the first panel showing rho as a function of xi/l_ee at fixed l_B/xi is Figure 2, while Figure 4 is first used in Section 3.4.
[Reference [6]] The author string of Ref. [6] lists 'E. V. Levinson' twice; the first occurrence appears to be a typographical error, presumably for G. M. Gusev.
[Sec. 2.1 (Eq. (4))] The symbol omega_c is used in Eq. (4) but is not defined until Eq. (36) in Sec. 3.2; it should be defined at first use, for example by omega_c = v_F B / p_F.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the magnetoresistance sign is computed from hydrodynamic and kinetic-theory equations, with external consistency checks rather than fitted inputs.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. In Sec. 2.2, the hydrodynamic resistivity tensor, Eq. (22c), is obtained by solving the conservation equations (1) for a periodic 1D medium; the magnetic field enters explicitly through the Lorentz terms in (1c)-(1d), and the sign of the magnetoresistance is then estimated from the resulting positive-semidefinite expression combined with the specified B-dependence of the viscosity, Eq. (4). No parameter is fitted to the desired sign of ∂ρ/∂(B^2). In Sec. 3, the kinetic-theory spectral weight A_nn(k) is evaluated from Eq. (40) with B inside the inverted operator via (39a) and (41)-(49); the computation is numerical but parameter-free apart from the model choices stated (point-like screened impurities, relaxation-time or harmonic-hierarchy collision integrals). The B=0 limit is checked against Ref. [15] and the weak-field hydrodynamic limit against Refs. [20,21]; these are external consistency checks, not inputs that carry the positive-magnetoresistance conclusion. Self-citations ([11], [15], [25]) are used for previously derived formulas and an exact block-matrix trick, not to assert the predicted sign by authority. The paper's own stated shortcoming—that the exact hydrodynamic solution treats inhomogeneity in only one direction and the 2D problem is left to elsewhere—is an explicitly acknowledged limitation of completeness, not a circular step: it is an open gap, not a disguised assumption presented as a derived result. Overall, the derivation chain is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the hydrodynamic modeling, the 1D-periodic reduction for strong inhomogeneity, and the spectral-weight kinetic theory for the crossover. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The only hand-chosen model knob is n_max. The most fragile entry is the 1D-to-2D reduction, which the authors themselves acknowledge.

free parameters (1)

n_max (odd-harmonic cutoff) = 3 or 5 (with sqrt(T_F/T))
Chosen by hand in Sec. 3.4 to model the hierarchy of odd-harmonic lifetimes in the collision operator. The authors show the positive-magnetoresistance conclusion is unchanged for both collision models and several n_max, so it is not load-bearing.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption 2D isotropic Fermi liquid with dispersion epsilon ~ p^z has eta0 ~ n p_F l_ee and l_ee ~ T^{-2} n^{(2z-1)/2}.
Used in Sec. 2.2, Eqs. (4)-(6), to estimate the sign of the small-B correction. The conclusion that z >= 1 for known systems is the core of the hydrodynamic positivity argument.
domain assumption Hydrodynamic equations (1) with constant eta, eta_H, zeta, no vorticity susceptibility, and no bulk viscosity describe the electron fluid.
Sec. 2, Eq. (1). Standard electron hydrodynamics, but an assumption; the listed neglected terms could matter in special systems.
domain assumption A medium periodic and inhomogeneous in only one direction y captures bulk transport in a metal with arbitrary 2D inhomogeneity.
Sec. 2.2, after Eq. (27). The authors flag this as a shortcoming and defer the 2D solution; it is the weakest link in the broad claim.
domain assumption Weak-inhomogeneity resistivity formula rho_ij = (1/n0^2) int k_i k_j |mu(k)|^2 A_nn(k) (Eq. 29, from Ref. [25]).
Sec. 3.1. Imported from memory matrix and Born-approximation theory; not re-derived in this paper.
domain assumption Boltzmann model with collision operators (35), (51), or (53), conserving n=0, +/-1 harmonics and optionally odd harmonics up to n_max, is adequate across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover.
Secs. 3.2-3.4. Toy model whose quantitative accuracy is limited; the authors argue the conclusion is robust to the choice.
domain assumption Impurity potential |mu(k)|^2 proportional to e^{-2 k xi}/(k + k_TF)^2.
Sec. 3.3, Eq. (50), from Ref. [15]. It fixes the disorder spectrum used in every numerical figure.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Sign of viscous magnetoresistance in electron fluids." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/22JFC36G

@misc{pith2026190804886,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Sign of viscous magnetoresistance in electron fluids},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/22JFC36G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.04886}
}

read the original abstract

In sufficiently clean metals, it is possible for electrons to collectively flow as a viscous fluid at finite temperature. These viscous effects have been predicted to give a notable magnetoresistance, but whether the magnetoresistance is positive or negative has been debated. We argue that regardless of the strength of inhomogeneity, bulk magnetoresistance is always positive in the hydrodynamic regime. We also compute transport in weakly inhomogeneous metals across the ballistic-to-hydrodynamic crossover, where we also find positive magnetoresistance. The non-monotonic temperature dependence of resistivity in this regime (a bulk Gurzhi effect) rapidly disappears upon turning on any finite magnetic field, suggesting that magnetotransport is a simple test for viscous effects in bulk transport, including at the onset of the hydrodynamic regime.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

[15]

Kinetic theory of transport for inhomogeneous electron fluids

A. Lucas and S. A. Hartnoll. “Kinetic theory of transport for inhomogeneous electron ﬂuids”,Physical Review B97 045105 (2018), arXiv:1706.04621

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[1]

Minimum of resistance in impurity-free conductors

R. N. Gurzhi. “Minimum of resistance in impurity-free conductors”, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics 17 521 (1963)

work page 1963
[2]

Hydrodynamic electron flow in high-mobility wires

M. J. M. de Jong and L. W. Molenkamp. “Hydrodynamic electron ﬂow in high-mobility wires”, Physical Review B51 11389 (1995), arXiv:cond-mat/9411067

work page Pith review arXiv 1995
[3]

Negative local resistance due to viscous electron backﬂow in graphene

D. A. Bandurin et al. “Negative local resistance due to viscous electron backﬂow in graphene”, Science 351 1055 (2016), arXiv:1509.04165

arXiv 2016
[4]

Observation of the Dirac ﬂuid and the breakdown of the Wiedemann-Franz law in graphene

J. Crossno et al. “Observation of the Dirac ﬂuid and the breakdown of the Wiedemann-Franz law in graphene”, Science 351 1058 (2016), arXiv:1509.04713

arXiv 2016
[5]

Super-ballistic ﬂow of viscous electron ﬂuid through graphene constric- tions

R. Krishna Kumar et al . “Super-ballistic ﬂow of viscous electron ﬂuid through graphene constric- tions”, Nature Physics 13 1182 (2017), arXiv:1703.06672

arXiv 2017
[6]

Viscous electron flow in mesoscopic two-dimensional electron gas

E. V. Levinson, G. M. Gusev, A. D. Levin, E. V. Levinson, and A. K. Bakarov. “Viscous electron ﬂow in mesoscopic two-dimensional electron gas”, AIP Advances 8 025318 (2018), arXiv:1802.09619

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[7]

Fluidity onset in graphene

D. A. Bandurin, A. V. Shytov, L. S. Levitov, R. K. Kumar, A. I. Berdyugin, M. Ben Shalom, I. V. Grigorieva, A. K. Geim, and G. Falkovich. “Fluidity onset in graphene”, Nature Communications 9 4533 (2018), arXiv:1806.03231

arXiv 2018

Show all 31 references

[8]

Imaging viscous ﬂow of the Dirac ﬂuid in graphene using a quantum spin magnometer

M. J. H. Ku et al. “Imaging viscous ﬂow of the Dirac ﬂuid in graphene using a quantum spin magnometer”, arXiv:1905.10791

1905 arXiv
[9]

Visualizing Poiseuille ﬂow of hydrodynamic electrons

J. A. Sulpizio et al. “Visualizing Poiseuille ﬂow of hydrodynamic electrons”, arXiv:1905.11662

1905 arXiv
[10]

Hydrodynamics of electrons in graphene

A. Lucas and K. C. Fong. “Hydrodynamics of electrons in graphene”, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 30 053001 (2018), arXiv:1710.08425

2018 arXiv
[11]

Higher-than-ballistic conduction of viscous electron ﬂows

H. Guo, E. Ilseven, G. Falkovich, and L. Levitov. “Higher-than-ballistic conduction of viscous electron ﬂows”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 3068 (2017), arXiv:1607.07269

2017 arXiv
[12]

Shallow water analogy for a ballistic ﬁeld eﬀect transistor: New mech- anism of plasma wave generation by dc current

M. Dyakonov and M. Shur. “Shallow water analogy for a ballistic ﬁeld eﬀect transistor: New mech- anism of plasma wave generation by dc current”, Physical Review Letters 71 2465 (1993)

1993
[13]

Hydrodynamic description of transport in strongly correlated electron systems

A. V. Andreev, S. A. Kivelson, and B. Spivak. “Hydrodynamic description of transport in strongly correlated electron systems”, Physical Review Letters 106 256804 (2011), arXiv:1011.3068

2011 arXiv
[14]

Transport in inhomogeneous quan- tum critical ﬂuids and in the Dirac ﬂuid in graphene

A. Lucas, J. Crossno, K. C. Fong, P. Kim, and S. Sachdev. “Transport in inhomogeneous quan- tum critical ﬂuids and in the Dirac ﬂuid in graphene”, Physical Review B93 075426 (2016), arXiv:1510.01738

2016 arXiv
[16]

Kinetic theory of electronic transport in random magnetic ﬁelds

A. Lucas. “Kinetic theory of electronic transport in random magnetic ﬁelds”, Physical Review Letters 120 116603 (2018), arXiv:1710.11141

2018 arXiv
[17]

Negative magnetoresistance in viscous ﬂow of two-dimensional electrons

P. S. Alekseev. “Negative magnetoresistance in viscous ﬂow of two-dimensional electrons”, Physical Review Letters 117 166601 (2016), arXiv:1603.04587. 13

2016 arXiv
[18]

Colossal negative magnetoresistance in a two-dimensional electron gas

Q. Shi, P. D. Martin, Q. A. Ebner, M. A. Zudov, L. N. Pfeiﬀer, and K. W. West. “Colossal negative magnetoresistance in a two-dimensional electron gas”, Physical Review B89 201301 (2014)

2014
[19]

Measuring Hall viscosity of graphene’s electron ﬂuid

A. I. Berdyugin et al. “Measuring Hall viscosity of graphene’s electron ﬂuid”, Science 364 162 (2019), arXiv:1806.01606

2019 arXiv
[20]

Viscous magnetoresistance of correlated electron liquids

A. Levchenko, H-Y. Xie, and A. V. Andreev. “Viscous magnetoresistance of correlated electron liquids”, Physical Review B95 121301 (2017), arXiv:1612.09275

2017 arXiv
[21]

Hydrodynamic ﬂows of non-Fermi liquids: magne- totransport and bilayer drag

A. A. Patel, R. A. Davison, and A. Levchenko. “Hydrodynamic ﬂows of non-Fermi liquids: magne- totransport and bilayer drag”, arXiv:1706.03775

arXiv
[22]

Resistance minimum in dilute magnetic alloys

J. Kondo. “Resistance minimum in dilute magnetic alloys”, Progress of Theoretical Physics 32 37 (1964)

1964
[23]

Electron hydrodynamics with a polygonal Fermi surface

C. Q. Cook and A. Lucas. “Electron hydrodynamics with a polygonal Fermi surface”, Physical Review B99 235148 (2019), arXiv:1903.05652

2019 arXiv
[24]

Parity-violating hydrody- namics in 2+1 dimensions

K. Jensen, M. Kaminski, P. Kovtun, R. Meyer, A. Ritz, and A. Yarom. “Parity-violating hydrody- namics in 2+1 dimensions”, Journal of High Energy Physics 05 102 (2012), arXiv:1112.4498

2012 arXiv
[25]

Memory matrix theory of magnetotransport in strange metals

A. Lucas and S. Sachdev. “Memory matrix theory of magnetotransport in strange metals”, Physical Review B91 195122 (2015), arXiv:1502.04704

2015 arXiv
[26]

Stokes paradox in electronic Fermi liquids

A. Lucas. “Stokes paradox in electronic Fermi liquids”, Physical Review B95 115425 (2017), arXiv:1612.00856

2017 arXiv
[27]

Stokes paradox, back reﬂections and interaction- enhanced conductance

H. Guo, E. Ilseven, G. Falkovich, and L. Levitov. “Stokes paradox, back reﬂections and interaction- enhanced conductance”, arXiv:1612.09239

arXiv
[28]

Fermion collisions in two dimensions

P. Ledwith, H. Guo, and L. Levitov. “Fermion collisions in two dimensions”, arXiv:1708.01915

arXiv
[29]

Head-on collisions and scale-dependent viscosity in two-dimensional electron systems

P. Ledwith, H. Guo, A. V. Shytov, and L. Levitov. “Head-on collisions and scale-dependent viscosity in two-dimensional electron systems”, arXiv:1708.02376

arXiv
[30]

The hierarchy of excitation lifetimes in two-dimensional Fermi gases

P. J. Ledwith, H. Guo, and L. Levitov. “The hierarchy of excitation lifetimes in two-dimensional Fermi gases”, Annals of Physics 411 167913 (2019), arXiv:1905.03751

2019 arXiv
[31]

Solution of the Boltzmann equation in a random magnetic ﬁeld

P. Hedegard and A. Smith. “Solution of the Boltzmann equation in a random magnetic ﬁeld”, Physical Review B51 10869 (1995), arXiv:cond-mat/9411023. 14

1995 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [15]

Kinetic theory of transport for inhomogeneous electron fluids

A. Lucas and S. A. Hartnoll. “Kinetic theory of transport for inhomogeneous electron ﬂuids”,Physical Review B97 045105 (2018), arXiv:1706.04621

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[2] [1]

Minimum of resistance in impurity-free conductors

R. N. Gurzhi. “Minimum of resistance in impurity-free conductors”, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics 17 521 (1963)

work page 1963

[3] [2]

Hydrodynamic electron flow in high-mobility wires

M. J. M. de Jong and L. W. Molenkamp. “Hydrodynamic electron ﬂow in high-mobility wires”, Physical Review B51 11389 (1995), arXiv:cond-mat/9411067

work page Pith review arXiv 1995

[4] [3]

Negative local resistance due to viscous electron backﬂow in graphene

D. A. Bandurin et al. “Negative local resistance due to viscous electron backﬂow in graphene”, Science 351 1055 (2016), arXiv:1509.04165

arXiv 2016

[5] [4]

Observation of the Dirac ﬂuid and the breakdown of the Wiedemann-Franz law in graphene

J. Crossno et al. “Observation of the Dirac ﬂuid and the breakdown of the Wiedemann-Franz law in graphene”, Science 351 1058 (2016), arXiv:1509.04713

arXiv 2016

[6] [5]

Super-ballistic ﬂow of viscous electron ﬂuid through graphene constric- tions

R. Krishna Kumar et al . “Super-ballistic ﬂow of viscous electron ﬂuid through graphene constric- tions”, Nature Physics 13 1182 (2017), arXiv:1703.06672

arXiv 2017

[7] [6]

Viscous electron flow in mesoscopic two-dimensional electron gas

E. V. Levinson, G. M. Gusev, A. D. Levin, E. V. Levinson, and A. K. Bakarov. “Viscous electron ﬂow in mesoscopic two-dimensional electron gas”, AIP Advances 8 025318 (2018), arXiv:1802.09619

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[8] [7]

Fluidity onset in graphene

D. A. Bandurin, A. V. Shytov, L. S. Levitov, R. K. Kumar, A. I. Berdyugin, M. Ben Shalom, I. V. Grigorieva, A. K. Geim, and G. Falkovich. “Fluidity onset in graphene”, Nature Communications 9 4533 (2018), arXiv:1806.03231

arXiv 2018