Isotropic charge screening of the anisotropic black phosphorus revealed by potassium adatoms

Binbin Wang; Hengxing Ji; Jiamin Xue; Taiming Zhang; Yexin Feng; Yu Gan; Zhen Tian

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 43 references

Isotropic charge screening of the anisotropic black phosphorus revealed by potassium adatoms

T0 review · 4 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 Black phosphorus screens point charges isotropically, despite its strongly anisotropic band structure.

desk verdict First atomic-scale probe of screening isotropy in black phosphorus, visually convincing but the central 'unambiguous' claim needs a quantitative ellipticity analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06554 v1 pith:E6PGNQLN submitted 2019-08-19 cond-mat.mes-hall

Zhen Tian , Yu Gan , Taiming Zhang , Binbin Wang , Hengxing Ji , Yexin Feng , Jiamin Xue This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords blackphosphoruselectrostaticscreeningtip-inducedbandbendingpotassiumadatomsscanningtunnelingmicroscopyin-planeanisotropydielectricconstantchargedimpurityscattering

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 sets out to settle a contradiction in theory: black phosphorus is strongly anisotropic in almost every measured property, yet calculations disagree on whether it screens point charges isotropically or anisotropically. Using potassium adatoms as charged impurities and the scanning tunneling microscope's tip-induced band bending as a local probe, the authors map the screened Coulomb field around individual adatoms. They find that the charging rings are almost perfect circles, and that the tip-induced band bending is identical along the armchair and zigzag directions. A single isotropic dielectric constant reproduces the data, while an anisotropic dielectric tensor would produce visibly elliptical rings that are not observed. If correct, the result means charged-impurity scattering in black phosphorus is governed by an isotropic long-range potential despite the anisotropic electronic dispersion.

What carries the argument

The central object is the tip-induced band-bending charging ring: a circular disk in constant-current topography and a bright ring in differential conductance that forms when the STM tip locally raises the energy levels of an already ionized potassium adatom enough to put one electron back onto it. The radius of this ring as a function of sample bias is controlled by the screened Coulomb potential between the tip and the charged adatom, so the symmetry of the ring directly encodes the symmetry of the screening. The paper uses the standard TIBB model to calculate band bending versus lateral tip-adatom distance, generating the curves that fit the measured ring positions, and uses the anti-crossing shrinkage of intersecting rings from neighboring adatoms to extract the dielectric constant independently.

What would settle it

A non-circular charging ring around an isolated potassium adatom, or measurably different tip-induced band-bending linecuts along the armchair and zigzag directions, would refute the claim. A stronger test is to apply the same measurement to a material with independently established anisotropic screening: if circular rings appear there as well, the ring shape cannot be uniquely attributed to the sample's screening isotropy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that electrostatic screening of point charges in black phosphorus is isotropic, in contrast to its strongly anisotropic electron dispersion and to earlier theoretical predictions of an anisotropic dielectric tensor. The evidence is the circular shape of the tip-induced band-bending charging rings around isolated potassium adatoms: the nearly perfect circle in the topography and the nearly identical line spectroscopies along the armchair and zigzag directions. Quantitative fitting of the charging-ring radius as a function of sample bias with a single isotropic dielectric constant reproduces the measured hyperbola-like curves, whereas a 20 percent smaller dielectric constant along the zigzag direction would elongate the ring into an ellipse, which is absent. An independent measurement of the interaction between two closely spaced adatom clusters yields a dielectric constant near 13, consistent with the value used in the band-bending fits. The paper concludes that black phosphorus screens point charges isotropically at the length scales probed by the experiment.

Load-bearing premise

The circular shape of the charging ring is taken as a direct image of the screened Coulomb potential's symmetry, assuming that the microscope tip's geometry, the tunneling process, and the charging dynamics do not themselves bias the observed ring toward circularity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Charged-impurity-limited transport in black phosphorus should be modeled with an isotropic long-range Coulomb potential, even though the band structure and short-range scattering are strongly anisotropic.
Device simulations that assume the anisotropic dielectric tensor predicted by earlier density functional calculations would incorrectly predict elliptical charging patterns and should be revisited.
The STM charging-ring technique provides an atomic-scale route to measure electrostatic screening in other anisotropic layered materials such as SnS and SnSe, where only macroscopic dielectric measurements were previously available.
The near-equality of screening along the armchair and zigzag directions suggests that high-energy bands and ionic contributions compensate the anisotropic low-energy dispersion, a mechanism the paper identifies as a target for further theoretical work.
The coupled-adatom anti-crossing pattern can be read as a stability diagram of a double-quantum-dot system, with the STM tip acting as a scanning gate, extending the method to study inter-adatom interactions quantitatively.

Reading between the lines

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

The circular-ring argument implicitly assumes that the STM tip's own response is isotropic; a direct test would be to repeat the measurement with deliberately asymmetric tips or on a material with independently known anisotropic screening to see whether ring shape follows the tip or the sample.
The isotropic screening at long range likely arises from a compensation between the anisotropic low-energy electron dispersion and contributions from high-energy bands and ionic polarizability, a mechanism the paper leaves as an open theoretical problem.
A testable extension would be to measure charging rings around adatoms at varying depths or on few-layer black phosphorus, where the screening environment and dielectric response change, to determine the length scale over which isotropy persists.
If the screening is indeed isotropic, magnetotransport measurements of charged-impurity-limited mobility in black phosphorus should show less directional dependence than the band-structure anisotropy alone would suggest, which could be checked in existing transport data.

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

You should know this paper before it leaves your desk: it reports the first experimental, atomic-scale measurement of electrostatic screening around point charges in black phosphorus, and finds it isotropic. That is a genuinely new result, and it directly addresses a real split in the theory literature (refs 18–21 predict both isotropic and anisotropic screening). The TIBB method is not new, but applying it to BP is a sensible extension, and the authors do more than just look: they compare the measured charging ring against a forward TIBB simulation with an anisotropic dielectric tensor, which would produce a clear ellipse. The measured ring is plainly not that ellipse. They also extract a dielectric constant of about 13 from donor–donor interaction, independently consistent with the 12.9 used in the TIBB model. That cross-check is a real strength, and the DFT diffusion barriers for K adatoms are a nice bonus. The paper is honest about its parameters and includes the relevant literature.

Where it gets soft: the headline claim rests on the visual impression that one ring is an 'almost perfect circle.' There is no azimuthal radius profile, no fitted eccentricity, no error bar on the ring shape. The ring is around a K cluster, not a single adatom, and shows two charging events, so it is not obviously a single-point-charge response. The line spectroscopies cover only two crystal directions and are matched by a Feenstra model with several fitted parameters. The authors say 'unambiguously,' which is too strong for a by-eye judgment. A modest in-plane anisotropy—within 10–20%—could be hidden in that ring. The stress-test note worries about this, and I think the worry lands. It is not fatal: the anisotropic simulation provides a natural quantitative baseline, and the authors could extract the ring boundary and compare it to that ellipse directly. But as published, the central claim is underquantified. Minor point: tip asymmetry or anisotropic tunneling is not ruled out, though the strong agreement with the isotropic simulation makes those less likely.

Overall, this is a solid, interesting experiment with a plausible conclusion. It needs a revision that adds quantitative circularity analysis and error estimates, but it deserves referee time. I would accept it for peer review; I'd bring it to a reading group as a good example of TIBB applied to a new material, and I'd cite it if I worked on screening in anisotropic 2D systems.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an STM/STS study of potassium adatoms on black phosphorus (BP). At negative sample bias, each adatom is surrounded by a disk-like feature in topography and a bright ring in dI/dV maps, which the authors attribute to tip-induced band bending (TIBB) that neutralizes an already ionized K adatom. From the observation that an isolated K cluster produces a ring described as 'almost perfect circle', together with line spectroscopies along the armchair and zigzag directions that look similar, the authors conclude that BP screens point charges isotropically despite its strongly anisotropic band structure. The conclusion is supported by TIBB model calculations using an isotropic dielectric constant and by a comparison with a calculated ring expected from an anisotropic dielectric tensor. As a separate cross-check, the authors use the shrinkage of intersecting rings from donor-donor interaction to estimate the BP dielectric constant as about 13.

Significance. If the isotropy claim is substantiated, this is a significant result: it would be the first atomic-scale experimental measurement of point-charge screening in BP and would help resolve conflicting theoretical predictions about dielectric anisotropy. The paper's strengths include the forward TIBB modeling with several literature-based parameters, the explicit comparison to a predicted anisotropic ring, and an independent donor-donor interaction estimate of the dielectric constant that is internally consistent. The main weakness is that the central evidence for isotropy is a visually judged circular ring, with no quantitative azimuthal analysis or uncertainty estimate. Since the headline claim is precisely about circularity, this quantitative support is load-bearing.

major comments (4)

[Fig. 3a and surrounding text] The central claim that the TIBB ring is an 'almost perfect circle' is based on visual inspection. No azimuthal radius profile, fitted eccentricity, or uncertainty is reported, and the line cuts in Figs. 3b and 3c sample only the armchair and zigzag directions. A 10–20% in-plane anisotropy could plausibly be hidden in the ring shape and in two directional cuts. Please extract the ring boundary as a function of angle and compare it quantitatively with the calculated anisotropic ring shown in Fig. 3a; this comparison is needed to support the headline claim.
[Figs. 3b–3d and Table S1] The TIBB model relies on several parameters (work-function difference, tip-sample distance, dielectric constant, K energy level) that are partly chosen or fitted, and the agreement is demonstrated by overlaid curves rather than by a quantitative fit. Because the argument against anisotropy is the mismatch of the anisotropic calculation, the conclusion's sensitivity to parameter choices should be quantified, for example with a residual or chi-squared map over the relevant parameter space, rather than the qualitative statement in Table S2.
[Fig. 3a and Fig. 3b/3c] The object used for the circularity claim is a K cluster, and the authors themselves state that the two hyperbola-like features imply the cluster contains more than one K nucleus. A multi-adatom cluster is not obviously a single point-charge source, and the circular ring could reflect a particular configuration rather than the intrinsic screening symmetry. Please show that a single point-charge model applies to this cluster, or present a truly isolated adatom example.
[Section II, paragraph on TIBB interpretation] The inference from ring shape to screening isotropy assumes that the TIBB charging boundary is determined solely by the screened Coulomb potential of the tip and adatom. Direction-dependent tunneling matrix elements, tip asymmetry, or direction-dependent charging dynamics could distort the ring. The word 'unambiguously' is therefore too strong without a control experiment or a modeling step that includes such effects.

minor comments (6)

[Abstract] The phrase 'energy storages' should be 'energy storage'.
[Fig. 3 caption] 'arows' should be 'arrows'.
[Conclusion] 'underling' should be 'underlying'.
[Fig. 2c caption] The caption refers to a 'blue dotted line' but the schematic shows two blue dotted lines marking the Fermi level; please make the notation consistent.
[End of Section II] The estimate of epsilon_BP approximately 13 from donor-donor interaction should be accompanied by an uncertainty estimate, since it depends on measured ring radii and on the assumed interface dielectric expression epsilon_r = (epsilon_BP + 1)/2.
[Introduction] The statement that 'all the measured physical properties of BP reported so far' show anisotropy is broad; consider qualifying it to avoid overstatement in light of the screening result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central isotropy claim is tested against an external anisotropic prediction, not derived from a fitted parameter.

full rationale

The paper's central claim that BP screens point charges isotropically is supported by comparisons that do not reduce to the inputs. Line spectroscopies along armchair and zigzag are matched with a single Feenstra TIBB calculation using an isotropic dielectric constant (12.9), and the authors state that anisotropic screening would give different TIBB along the two directions. The measured near-circular ring is also compared with a charging ring computed from the anisotropic dielectric tensor predicted by external DFT work ([18], [20]); that forward prediction is an ellipse and is stated to differ clearly from the measurement. The anisotropic calculation is not fitted to the data, so the central claim is falsifiable rather than definitional. The later donor-donor estimate of the dielectric constant (epsilon_BP about 13) is explicitly presented as 'demonstrating the self-consistency of our analysis'; it is a consistency cross-check using the same model, not an independent prediction, and it does not carry the isotropy claim. The only self-citation (ref. [43], same author Xue) is used as an analogy in the coupled-quantum-dot discussion and is not load-bearing. The main experimental weakness, that ring circularity is assessed visually rather than by a fitted ellipticity, is a measurement-robustness concern rather than a circularity. No circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entities are introduced. The central quantitative parameters are the isotropic dielectric constant and the fitted K energy level. Several modeling assumptions, especially the direct mapping from ring shape to screening symmetry, are load-bearing. The DFT calculations and Feenstra model are standard tools.

free parameters (4)

BP dielectric constant (epsilon_BP) = 12.9 (isotropic)
Used in the Feenstra TIBB model calculation for Fig. 3d. The value is chosen as an isotropic screening parameter, while cited DFT literature gives anisotropic values around 10.2 and 12.5. It is central to the quantitative TIBB analysis.
K adatom energy level relative to Fermi (E_K) = ~230 meV
The grey horizontal line in Fig. 3d is chosen to 'best match' the measured hyperbola-like curves, effectively fitting the K level to the data.
Tip-sample distance = 0.5 nm
Chosen in the TIBB calculation, affects the ring radius and the quantitative comparison.
Work function difference between tip and sample = -0.5 eV
Chosen within the range of literature values (4.0-4.5 eV for tip, 4.5-5.0 eV for sample) to make the TIBB calculation match the data.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The Feenstra TIBB model accurately describes tip-induced band bending in this system.
Adopted from refs [16,17] without modification for black phosphorus; used for all quantitative TIBB analysis.
domain assumption K adatoms are ionized at 4.5 K and the observed ring corresponds to neutralization by tip-induced band bending.
Inferred from the bias asymmetry of the features (rings only at negative sample bias); this interpretation underpins the mapping from ring shape to screening.
ad hoc to paper The screened Coulomb potential of the tip and charged adatom is the sole determinant of the charging ring shape.
The inference of isotropic screening from circular rings assumes no anisotropic tip geometry or tunneling matrix element contributes to the ring shape. This is an unstated simplifying assumption.
domain assumption Effective dielectric constant at the K/BP interface is epsilon_r = (epsilon_BP + 1)/2.
Used to derive epsilon_BP = 13 from donor-donor interaction, assuming elementary electrostatics at a planar interface between black phosphorus and vacuum.
standard math DFT calculations provide accurate diffusion barriers and band structure.
Used to support adatom stability and diffusion; not central to the screening claim.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Isotropic charge screening of the anisotropic black phosphorus revealed by potassium adatoms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E6PGNQLN

@misc{pith2026190806554,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Isotropic charge screening of the anisotropic black phosphorus revealed by potassium adatoms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E6PGNQLN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06554}
}

read the original abstract

Black phosphorus has attracted great research interest due to its numerous applications in electronic devices, optoelectronic devices, energy storages and so on. Compared with the majority of two-dimensional materials, black phosphorus possesses a unique property, i.e. the strong in-plane anisotropy. All the properties reported so far, including its effective mass, electron mobility, light absorption, thermal conductivity and so on, have shown great anisotropy in the basal plane. This property renders black phosphorus unique applications not achievable with other two-dimensional materials. In this work, however, we discover a remarkable isotropic behavior in the strongly anisotropic black phosphorus, i.e. its electrostatic screening of point charges. We use the tip-induced band bending of a scanning tunneling microscope to map out the Coulomb field of ionized potassium adatoms on black phosphorus, and reveal its isotropic charge screening. This discovery is important for understanding electron scattering and transport in black phosphorus.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

[1]

J. Qiao, X. Kong, Z.-X. Hu, F. Yang, and W. Ji, Nat. Commun. 5, 4475 (2014)

work page 2014
[2]

L. Li, Y. Yu, G. J. Ye, Q. Ge, X. Ou, H. Wu, D. Feng, X. H. Chen, and Y. Zhang, Nat. Nanotechnol. 9, 372 (2014)

work page 2014
[3]

Y. Du, H. Liu, Y. Deng, and P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 8, 10035 (2014)

work page 2014
[4]

S. P. Koenig, R. A. Doganov, H. Schmidt, A. H. Castro Neto, and B. Özyi lmaz, Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 103106 (2014)

work page 2014
[5]

F. Xia, H. Wang, and Y. Jia, Nat. Commun. 5, 4458 (2014)

work page 2014
[6]

H. Liu, A. T. Neal, Z. Zhu, Z. Luo, X. Xu, D. Tomanek, and P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 8, 4033 (2014)

work page 2014
[7]

Castellanos-Gomez, J

A. Castellanos-Gomez, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6, 4280 (2015)

work page 2015
[8]

X. Ling, H. Wang, S. Huang, F. Xia, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 4523 (2015)

work page 2015

Show all 43 references

[9]

Castellanos-Gomez et al., 2D Mater

A. Castellanos-Gomez et al., 2D Mater. 1, 025001 (2014)

2014
[10]

Li et al., Nat

L. Li et al., Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 21 (2017)

2017
[11]

J. He, D. He, Y. Wang, Q. Cui, M. Z. Bellus, H. Y. Chiu, and H. Zhao, ACS Nano 9, 6436 (2015)

2015
[12]

Z. Luo, J. Maassen, Y. Deng, Y. Du, R. P. Garrelts, M. S. Lundstrom, P. D. Ye, and X. Xu, Nat. Commun. 6, 8572 (2015)

2015
[13]

Lee et al., Nat

S. Lee et al., Nat. Commun. 6, 8573 (2015)

2015
[14]

H. Jang, J. D. Wood, C. R. Ryder, M. C. Hersam, and D. G. Cahill, Adv. Mater. 27, 8017 (2015)

2015
[15]

Z.-Y. Ong, Y. Cai, G. Zhang, and Y.-W. Zhang, J. Phys. Chem. C 118, 25272 (2014)

2014
[16]

R. M. Feenstra, Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology B: Microelectr onics and Nanometer Structures 21, 2080 (2003). 12

2003
[17]

Y. Dong, R. M. Feenstra, M. P. Semtsiv, and W. T. Masselink, J. Appl. Phys. 103, 073704 (2008)

2008
[18]

Morita, Appl

A. Morita, Appl. Phys. A 39, 227 (1986)

1986
[19]

T. Low, R. Roldan, H. Wang, F. Xia, P. Avouris, L. M. Mo reno, and F. Guinea, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 106802 (2014)

2014
[20]

V. Wang, Y. Kawazoe, and W. T. Geng, Phys. Rev. B 91, 045433 (2015)

2015
[21]

D. A. Prishchenko, V. G. Mazurenko, M. I. Katsnelson, and A. N. Rudenko, 2D Mater. 4, 025064 (2017)

2017
[22]

L. C. Gomes, A. Carvalho, and A. H. Castro Neto, Phys. Rev. B 92, 214103 (2015)

2015
[23]

H. R. Chandrasekhar, R. G. Humphreys, U. Zwick, and M. Cardona, Phys. Rev. B 15, 2177 (1977)

1977
[24]

J. D. Wiley, W. J. Buckel, and R. L. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. B 13, 2489 (1976)

1976
[25]

Kiraly, N

B. Kiraly, N. Hauptmann, A. N. Rudenko, M. I. Katsnelson, and A. A. Khajetoorians, Nano letters 17, 3607 (2017)

2017
[26]

Qiu et al., Nano Lett

Z. Qiu et al., Nano Lett. 17, 6935 (2017)

2017
[27]

Henkelman, B

G. Henkelman, B. P. Uberuaga, and H. Jó nsson, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 9901 (2000)

2000
[28]

C. M. Park and H. J. Sohn, Adv. Mater. 19, 2465 (2007)

2007
[29]

Hao et al., Adv

C. Hao et al., Adv. Mater. 28, 3194 (2016)

2016
[30]

Kim et al., Science 349, 723 (2015)

J. Kim et al., Science 349, 723 (2015)

2015
[31]

Teichmann, M

K. Teichmann, M. Wenderoth, S. Loth, R. G. Ulbrich, J. K. Garleff, A. P. Wijnheijmer, and P. M. Koenraad, Physical review letters 101, 076103 (2008)

2008
[32]

Teichmann, M

K. Teichmann, M. Wenderoth, S. Loth, J. K. Garleff, A. P. Wijnheijmer, P. M. Koenraad, and R. G. Ulbrich, Nano Lett. 11, 3538 (2011)

2011
[33]

S. Loth, M. Wenderoth, R. G. Ulbrich, S. Malzer, and G. H. Dö hler, Phys. Rev. B 76, 235318 (2007)

2007
[34]

D. H. Lee and J. A. Gupta, Nano Lett. 11, 2004 (2011)

2011
[35]

D. H. Lee and J. A. Gupta, Science 330, 1807 (2010)

2010
[36]

V. W. Brar et al., Nat. Phys. 7, 43 (2011)

2011
[37]

Y. Wang, V. W. Brar, A. V. Shytov, Q. Wu, W. Regan, H. -Z. Tsai, A. Zettl, L. S. Levitov, and M. F. Crommie, Nat. Phys. 8, 653 (2012)

2012
[38]

Zheng, J

H. Zheng, J. Kroger, and R. Berndt, Physical review letters 108, 076801 (2012)

2012
[39]

Zheng, A

H. Zheng, A. Weismann, and R. Berndt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 226101 (2013)

2013
[40]

Wong et al., Nat

D. Wong et al., Nat. Nanotechnol. 10, 949 (2015)

2015
[41]

R. Fei, W. Li, J. Li, and L. Yang, Appl Phys Lett 107, 173104 (2015)

2015
[42]

Gaudreau, S

L. Gaudreau, S. A. Studen ikin, A. S. Sachrajda, P. Zawadzki, A. Kam, J. Lapointe, M. Korkusinski, and P. Hawrylak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 036807 (2006)

2006
[43]

J. Xue, R. Dhall, S. B. Cronin, and B. J. LeRoy, arXiv:1508.05462v1 (2015). Acknowledgments Z.T., B.W. and J.X. are supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of China (No. 2017YFA0305400), Thousand Talents Program and ShanghaiTech University. Y.G. and Y.F. are suppor...

2015 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

J. Qiao, X. Kong, Z.-X. Hu, F. Yang, and W. Ji, Nat. Commun. 5, 4475 (2014)

work page 2014

[2] [2]

L. Li, Y. Yu, G. J. Ye, Q. Ge, X. Ou, H. Wu, D. Feng, X. H. Chen, and Y. Zhang, Nat. Nanotechnol. 9, 372 (2014)

work page 2014

[3] [3]

Y. Du, H. Liu, Y. Deng, and P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 8, 10035 (2014)

work page 2014

[4] [4]

S. P. Koenig, R. A. Doganov, H. Schmidt, A. H. Castro Neto, and B. Özyi lmaz, Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 103106 (2014)

work page 2014

[5] [5]

F. Xia, H. Wang, and Y. Jia, Nat. Commun. 5, 4458 (2014)

work page 2014

[6] [6]

H. Liu, A. T. Neal, Z. Zhu, Z. Luo, X. Xu, D. Tomanek, and P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 8, 4033 (2014)

work page 2014

[7] [7]

Castellanos-Gomez, J

A. Castellanos-Gomez, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 6, 4280 (2015)

work page 2015

[8] [8]

X. Ling, H. Wang, S. Huang, F. Xia, and M. S. Dresselhaus, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 4523 (2015)

work page 2015