Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 96 references

Electrodynamics of tilted Dirac/Weyl materials: A unique platform for unusual surface plasmon polaritons

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 This paper claims that the electronic tilt of Dirac and Weyl cones changes Maxwell’s equations inside the material, giving surface plasmon polaritons a new, tilt-controlled spectrum.

desk verdict A promising catalog of tilt-dependent SPP spectra is undermined by a wrong sign and an invalid cancellation in the step from Eq. (14) to Eq. (15), so the central results are not established as written. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07082 v1 pith:J73HXAIG submitted 2019-08-19 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-scigr-qc

Zahra Jalali-Mola , S. A. Jafari This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-scigr-qc PACS 73.20.Mf
keywords tiltedWeylsemimetalDiracmaterialsurfaceplasmonpolaritonaxionelectrodynamicsdeformedspacetimemetricFermiarcSPP-forbiddenregiondispersion
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 claims that the tilt of a Dirac or Weyl cone—encoded as a deformation of the spacetime metric felt by electrons—also changes the form of Maxwell’s equations in the material. As a result, surface plasmon polaritons at the interface with vacuum acquire new spectra: the saturation frequency follows $\Omega_s = \Omega_p / \sqrt{1 + (1-\zeta^2)/\epsilon_r}$, approaches the bulk plasmon frequency at the type-I/type-II boundary $\zeta=1$, and can even exceed it for over-tilted cones. The authors map the full orientation dependence of the surface plasmon dispersion against the propagation direction $q$, the axion vector $b$ (which controls Fermi arcs), and the tilt vector $\zeta$, predicting SPP-forbidden windows, soft modes at short wavelengths, kinks, negative group velocity, and an instability wavevector set by $\zeta$ alone. This matters because it turns surface plasmon measurements into a route for mapping both the tilt and the Fermi-arc characteristics of candidate materials.

What carries the argument

The central object is the deformed Minkowski metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ of Eq. (3), with off-diagonal time-space entries $-\zeta_i$, which encodes the tilt in the dispersion $g^{\mu\nu} k_\mu k_\nu = 0$. This metric is used to raise indices of the field-strength tensor $F_{\mu\nu}$, producing the tilt-mixed fields $\bar{E}$ and $\bar{B}$ of Eq. (6), and hence the modified inhomogeneous Maxwell equations (12)–(13). The derivation then runs through the wave equation (16), the surface-mode ansatz with evanescent decay $\gamma$, and the boundary conditions at the vacuum interface; the tilt-dependent SPP dispersions and formulas such as Eqs. (22) and (38) are the output of that machinery.

What would settle it

Compute the surface plasmon dispersion from the microscopic polarization tensor of the tilted cone without imposing the tilted metric on the photon field; if the saturation frequency in Eq. (22) shows no $\zeta$ dependence, or if a candidate material shows no orientation asymmetry between $q\parallel\zeta$ and $q\perp\zeta$ in measured SPP spectra, the central claim is refuted. A sharper test: for $q\perp\zeta$ in a tilted Dirac material the paper predicts the $\zeta=0$ spectrum, so observing a tilt-induced shift in that geometry would contradict the theory.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper’s central claim is that the tilt parameter $\zeta$ enters the inhomogeneous Maxwell equations through the same deformed metric $g_{\mu\nu}$ that governs the tilted cone, replacing the field-strength components by $\bar{E}=E+\zeta\times B$ and $\bar{B}=B(1-\zeta^2)+\zeta(\zeta\cdot B)+\zeta\times E$. Solving the modified wave equation for surface modes at a vacuum interface yields SPP dispersions whose large-momentum saturation frequency obeys $\Omega_s = \Omega_p/\sqrt{1+(1-\zeta^2)/\epsilon_r}$, so the familiar non-tilted value shifts upward with tilt and reaches $\Omega_p$ as $\zeta\to 1$; for $1<\zeta<\sqrt{1+\epsilon_r}$ the surface mode sits above the bulk plasmon, and beyond that it becomes unstable. Depending on the relative orientation of $q$, $b$, and $\zeta$, the same equations produce SPP-forbidden regions where bulk plasmons take over, soft SPP modes with vanishing frequency at large $q$ when $\zeta\to 1$, a kink that freezes the group velocity, negative group velocity at short wavelengths, and a tilt-only instability wavevector. The paper presents this as a new ‘spacetime-interface’ electrodynamics: the SPP lives on the boundary between Minkowski vacuum and the tilted cone’s effective geometry.

Load-bearing premise

The entire derivation assumes that the electromagnetic fields themselves obey Maxwell equations written in the same tilted metric that describes the electronic dispersion; if only the electrons feel the tilt and the photon remains in flat Minkowski spacetime, the modified wave equation and all predicted surface plasmon features do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In tilted Dirac matter, the surface plasmon saturation frequency is set by $\zeta$ and $\epsilon_r$ through $\Omega_s = \Omega_p/\sqrt{1+(1-\zeta^2)/\epsilon_r}$, so measuring $\Omega_s$ gives a direct map of the tilt parameter.
  • For over-tilted cones ($\zeta>1$), surface modes with $\Omega_s>\Omega_p$ become possible, extending the SPP band beyond where ordinary conductors support surface modes; at the horizon value $\zeta=1$ the SPP becomes dispersionless and stops at a kink, filtering out large-wavevector modes.
  • In tilted Weyl matter with the axion vector in the surface (Fermi arcs), a tilt transverse to the Fermi arc closes the SPP-forbidden gap that the axion parameter alone would open, while a tilt parallel to the Fermi arc widens it.
  • For a facet with no Fermi arcs, strong tilt forbids long-wavelength propagation and introduces an instability wavevector $q_{\rm inst}$ that depends only on $\zeta$, so the tilt acts as a tunable SPP filter.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the metric-level coupling is right, the same $\zeta$-induced mixing of $E$ and $B$ should appear in other electromagnetic phenomena beyond SPPs—for example in the Casimir force, near-field heat transfer, or the optical response of tilted Dirac/Weyl films, where it would create anisotropies absent in upright cones.
  • The predicted $q_{\rm inst}$ being independent of the axion parameter suggests a clean laboratory check: near-field optical microscopy on a tilted Weyl surface could measure the cutoff wavevector as a function of tilt, testing the $\zeta$-only scaling without needing to control the axion parameter.
  • The orientation dependence of $\Omega_s$ in Eq. (22) could be inverted into a material-characterization tool: because the direction of $\zeta$ is fixed by the crystal while $q$ is chosen experimentally, measuring the SPP dispersion for $q\parallel\zeta$ versus $q\perp\zeta$ distinguishes tilt from mere anisotropic effective mass, which would not produce the same $(1-\zeta^2)$ scaling.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper proposes an extension of Maxwell electrodynamics for tilted Dirac and Weyl semimetals in which the tilt vector ζ is encoded in the spacetime metric g_{μν} of Eq. (3). The authors define the field strength in this metric (Eqs. (5)-(6)), derive modified inhomogeneous Maxwell equations (Eqs. (12)-(13)), and then study surface plasmon polaritons at a planar interface between the tilted material and vacuum or a simple dielectric. They treat tilted Dirac matter (b^μ = 0) and tilted Weyl matter with b^μ = (0,b) or (b0,0), covering different orientations of the propagation vector q, the axion vector b, and ζ. The central claims are a tilt-dependent SPP saturation frequency (Eq. (22)), SPP-forbidden regions controlled by axion and tilt parameters, soft modes at large q when ζ→1, SPP branches above the bulk plasmon frequency, negative group velocity, and a tilt-dependent instability wave vector.

Significance. The paper is systematic and addresses a question of current interest: whether SPP spectroscopy can map tilt and Fermi-arc parameters. The analytic benchmark against Hofmann and Das Sarma (Ref. [81]) in the ζ = 0 limit is a useful check, and Eq. (22) is a simple falsifiable prediction. If the proposed electrodynamics were correct, the orientation-resolved SPP catalog would be a valuable resource. However, two load-bearing steps in Section II are not valid as written: the sign of Faraday's law in Eq. (10) and the cancellation leading to Eq. (15). In addition, the promotion of the electronic tilt to a metric for the photon field is assumed rather than derived from the microscopic Hamiltonian. Consequently, the dispersion relations and figures of Sections III-V are not established.

major comments (3)
  1. [II, Eq. (10)] Equation (10) states ∇×E = c^{-1} ∂B/∂t, which is Faraday's law with the wrong sign; the standard form is ∇×E = -c^{-1} ∂B/∂t. This is not a typographical detail, because Eq. (10) is used immediately afterward to eliminate ∂B/∂t (equivalently B) from Eq. (14). With the harmonic convention e^{-iωt}, the sign determines the relation between B and ∇×E that enters the cancellation claimed in Eq. (15).
  2. [II, Eqs. (14)-(15)] The transition from Eq. (14) to Eq. (15) is not a consequence of Eq. (10). For constant ζ and e^{-iωt} fields, Eq. (14) gives D = ... + ζ×B - (ic/ω)∇×(ζ×E) + ... . Even accepting the printed sign of Eq. (10), B = (ic/ω)∇×E, so the two terms combine to (ic/ω)[ζ×(∇×E) - ∇×(ζ×E)], and the vector identity yields ζ×(∇×E) - ∇×(ζ×E) = ∇(ζ·E) - ζ(∇·E). This is not zero for the evanescent SPP profiles of Eq. (17); for the q∥ζ configuration of Section III, ∇·E = iqE_x - γE_z, which is generically nonzero. With the correct minus sign in Faraday's law the sum is generically nonzero as well. Therefore Eq. (15) does not follow from Eq. (14). Since Eq. (15) is inserted into the wave equation Eq. (16) and is used to build the matrices in Eqs. (18), (24), (27), (31), (34), (35) and all dispersion formulas and figures in Sections III-V, the central SPP predictions are unproven as written. The ζ = 0 limit removes the tilt-dependent terms and therefore cannot validate the new ζ-dependent predictions.
  3. [II, Eqs. (3)-(6) and (16)] The foundational assumption of the paper is that the tilt in the electronic dispersion can be promoted to the spacetime metric g_{μν} of Eq. (3) and that the electromagnetic field strength in the material is obtained by raising indices with this metric, as in Eqs. (5)-(6). This is not a consequence of the Hamiltonian in Eq. (1). The tilt modifies the electronic current-response (polarization) tensor, but the photon field in the medium does not automatically live in a deformed spacetime; in standard effective-field-theory treatments of Weyl and axion electrodynamics, the axion term arises from integrating out fermions while the photon remains in Minkowski spacetime. A concrete test would be to compute the current-current correlation function from Eq. (1) and derive the SPP dispersion from the resulting nonlocal conductivity without altering the kinematic Maxwell equations. Unless that calculation reproduces Eqs. (19)-(22), the spectra reported here are conditional on an unvalidated modeling assumption. Because this assumption is the input to every dispersion relation in the paper, it is load-bearing.
minor comments (4)
  1. [III, Fig. 2] The text around Fig. 2 says the black solid curve corresponds to εr = 1 while the blue and green curves correspond to εr = 1 and 13, respectively, which conflicts with the figure legend (black ζ = 0, blue and green ζ = 0.9 with εr = 1 and 13); please clarify the intended values.
  2. [I, Introduction] The Introduction contains the typographical error "Nernts effect" (should be Nernst effect).
  3. [IV A, footnote after Eq. (26)] The footnote after Eq. (26) says "Note that in there are some typos in the equations of the above reference" without specifying which equations or typos are meant; if the authors wish to caution readers about Ref. [81], the specific issues should be identified, or the footnote should be removed.
  4. [III, Eqs. (18)-(25)] The abbreviations λ² = 1-ζ² and λ′² = 2-ζ² are introduced in Eqs. (18) and (25) without a single defining statement; collecting these definitions in one place in Section II would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: SPP dispersions are derived analytically from the stated metric-based Maxwell model with ζ and b as inputs, and the ζ=0 limit is checked against external benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper starts from the tilted-Weyl Hamiltonian (Eq. 1), defines the tilt vector ζ through the dispersion (Eq. 2), and then introduces the metric gμν (Eq. 3) that reproduces that dispersion covariantly (Eq. 4). The modified Maxwell equations and the barred fields (Eqs. 5-6) are constructed mathematically from this metric, with the physical assumption stated explicitly ('Departing from the point that the tilt deformation ... can be encoded into the spacetime metric, it would be natural to explore how does the modified metric affect the Maxwell theory?'). The SPP spectra are then obtained by solving the wave equation (Eq. 16) with the displacement field (Eq. 15) under standard boundary conditions; no parameter is fitted to the computed SPP dispersions. The tilt and axion parameters ζ and b are inputs, not outputs. The ζ=0 limit reduces to the known results of Hofmann and Das Sarma (Ref. 81) and Ritchie's Ωs = Ωp/√(1+1/εr), providing an external benchmark. Self-citations [41,51] are used to motivate the metric language, but the essential metric-dispersion relation is re-derived in Eqs. (1)-(4), and the cited polarization-tensor result is stated with assumptions independent of the target SPP calculation; it is therefore background evidence rather than a load-bearing circular step. Any algebraic concern about the Eq. (14)-(15) cancellation is a correctness issue, not a circularity, and does not change this verdict.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central predictions are functions of material inputs ζ and b, neither of which is fitted to the target output. The modeling assumptions listed are the load-bearing premises. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • tilt vector ζ=(ζx,ζy,ζz)
    Input material parameter characterizing the cone tilt; scanned over values 0.1 to 0.99 in figures and proposed to be mapped by SPP measurements. Not fitted to data here.
  • axion parameter b (or b0)
    Input from the Weyl node separation or energy offset; enters via ωb=8πg_a c b/εr and ωb0. Scanned in figures, not fitted.
assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper The tilt vector ζ in the electron dispersion can be promoted to a full spacetime metric gμν of Eq. (3), and the electromagnetic field strength Fμν in this medium is obtained by raising indices with this metric, Eqs. (5)-(6).
    This is the central modeling step. The paper asserts that the electron metric is also the metric for the photon fields without a microscopic derivation from the polarization tensor.
  • domain assumption The bulk electromagnetic response is described by a local Drude dielectric function ε(ω)=εr(1-Ωp^2/ω^2) with a scalar background εr, and the two opposite-tilt Weyl nodes contribute additively with no inter-node scattering.
    Used in Eq. (18) and the discussion after Eq. (15); this is a standard but simplifying model for doped semimetals, not derived here.
  • standard math The axion term θF̃F with θ=-2b0t+2b·r is metric-independent and retains its Minkowski form in the tilted metric.
    The paper invokes the topological nature of the theta term in Section II. This is a standard result, though its coupling through ga is taken from prior literature.
  • domain assumption The interface boundary conditions are continuity of Ex, Ey, Dz, and B, with no surface current from the axion term.
    Stated after Eq. (17). If the theta term induces a surface Hall conductivity, these conditions may need modification; the paper relies on them to derive the SPP dispersion.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electrodynamics of tilted Dirac/Weyl materials: A unique platform for unusual surface plasmon polaritons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J73HXAIG

@misc{pith2026190807082,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electrodynamics of tilted Dirac/Weyl materials: A unique platform for unusual surface plasmon polaritons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J73HXAIG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07082}
}
abstract

The electrodynamics of Weyl semimetals (WSMs) is an extension of Maxwell's theory where in addition to field strength tensor $F_{\mu\nu}$, an axion field enters the theory which is parameterized by a four-vector $b^\mu=(b_0,\bf b)$. In the tilted Weyl matter (TWM) an additional set of parameters ${\bf\zeta}=(\zeta_x,\zeta_y,\zeta_z)$ enter the theory that can be encoded into the metric of the spacetime felt by electrons in TWM. This allows an extension of Maxwell's electrodynamics that describes electric and magnetic fields in TWMs and tilted Dirac material (TDM) when $b^\mu=0$. The tilt parameter $\bf\zeta$ appearing as off-diagonal metric entries mixing time and space components mingles $\bf E$ and $\bf B$ fields whereby modifies the inhomogeneous Maxwell's equations. Surface plasmon polariton (SPP) in these systems describes the propagation of electromagnetic waves at the {\it interface of two different spacetime geometries}. In the case of TDM, we find a characteristic dependence of SPP spectrum on the tilt parameter $\zeta$ which can be used map $\zeta$ from SPP measurements. In the case of TWM, depending on whether the interface with vacuum supports a Fermi arc or not, and whether the propagation direction is along the Fermi arc or transverse to it, we find many unusual spectral features for SPP modes. Our detailed study of the dependence of SPP spectra on the arrangements of three vectors $(\bf b, q,\zeta)$, the first two of which are at our control, can be utilized to map the tilt characteristics and Fermi arc characteristics from SPP measurements.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07082 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) Schematic illustration of the geometry of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Same as Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (Color online) The SPP dispersion on the TWM. The TWM occupies the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Same as Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Trend of upper (red) and lower (blue) bounds [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (Color online) The SPP dispersion in the tilted Weyl for fixed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The trend in terms of the energy scale of SPP curves, as well as the SPP-forbidden region is similar to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (Color online) Nonreciprocity effect in TWMs: Note that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (Color online) Conventions are same as Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: In this case the tilt does not gap out the low-q part of the SPP dispersion. But still the typical behavior that the SPP-forbidden region expands by increasing ωb, as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. (Color online) Conventions for arrow are as previous fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. (Color online) Conventions for arrows are as before. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. (Color online) The SPP dispersion in the tilted Weyl for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [81]

    B. Feng, O. Sugino, R.-Y . Liu, J. Zhang, R. Yukawa, M. Kawa- mura, T. Iimori, H. Kim, Y . Hasegawa, H. Li, L. Chen, K. Wu, H. Kumigashira, F. Komori, T.-C. Chiang, S. Meng, and I. Mat- suda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 096401 (2017)

    work page 2017

  2. [1]

    (30) The resulting SPP and bulk plasmon dispersion is plotted in Fig

    +q2ϵ1λ′2± √ ω4c−4ϵ4 2 +q4ϵ2 1ζ 4 + 2q2ω2c−2ϵ1ϵ2 2λ′2. (30) The resulting SPP and bulk plasmon dispersion is plotted in Fig. 8. The trend in terms of the energy scale of SPP curves, as well as the SPP-forbidden region is similar to Fig. 4. The difference is that in Fig. 4, the tilt parameter ζ gives rise to a much wider SPP-forbidden region than the presen...

  3. [2]

    (31) As it can be seen from the above tensor, the only matrix ele- ment which is dependent on the tilt parameter isT11

    0 0 0 −γ2 1 −iqγ1 +iω2 c2ϵ2 0 −iqγ1−iω2 c2ϵ2 q2  − ω2 c2ϵ11. (31) As it can be seen from the above tensor, the only matrix ele- ment which is dependent on the tilt parameter isT11. But this block of the matrix is the trivial root for determinant. Hence in this case, the decay constant (coming from the lower 2× 2 block) will be independed of the tilting:...

  4. [3]

    J. D. Jackson, Classical electrodynamics, 3rd ed. (Wiley, New York, NY, 1999)

    1999

  5. [4]

    M. Z. Hasan and J. E. Moore, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 2, 55 (2011)

    2011

  6. [5]

    Yan and C

    B. Yan and C. Felser, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 8, 337 (2017)

    2017

  7. [6]

    Wilczek, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1799 (1987)

    1987

  8. [7]

    Qi and S.-C

    X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Physics Today 63, 33 (2010)

    2010

Show all 96 references
  1. [8]

    Goswami and S

    P. Goswami and S. Tewari, Phys. Rev. B 88, 245107 (2013)

    2013

  2. [9]

    Y . Chen, S. Wu, and A. A. Burkov, Phys. Rev. B 88, 125105 (2013)

    2013

  3. [10]

    X.-L. Qi, E. Witten, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B 87, 134519 (2013)

    2013

  4. [11]

    M. M. Vazifeh and M. Franz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 027201 (2013)

    2013

  5. [12]

    Hosur and X

    P. Hosur and X. Qi, Comptes Rendus Physique 14, 857 (2013), topological insulators / Isolants topologiques

    2013

  6. [13]

    Ouellet and Z

    J. Ouellet and Z. Bogorad, Phys. Rev. D 99, 055010 (2019). 15

    2019

  7. [14]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

  8. [15]

    B. Q. Lv, H. M. Weng, B. B. Fu, X. P. Wang, H. Miao, J. Ma, P. Richard, X. C. Huang, L. X. Zhao, G. F. Chen, Z. Fang, X. Dai, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Phys. Rev. X 5, 031013 (2015)

    2015

  9. [16]

    L. Lu, Z. Wang, D. Ye, L. Ran, L. Fu, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljaˇci´c, Science 349, 622 (2015)

    2015

  10. [17]

    S.-Y . Xu, I. Belopolski, N. Alidoust, M. Neupane, G. Bian, C. Zhang, R. Sankar, G. Chang, Z. Yuan, C.-C. Lee, S.-M. Huang, H. Zheng, J. Ma, D. S. Sanchez, B. Wang, A. Bansil, F. Chou, P. P. Shibayev, H. Lin, S. Jia, and M. Z. Hasan, Sci- ence 349, 613 (2015)

    2015

  11. [18]

    N. Xu, H. M. Weng, B. Q. Lv, C. E. Matt, J. Park, F. Bisti, V . N. Strocov, D. Gawryluk, E. Pomjakushina, K. Conder, N. C. Plumb, M. Radovic, G. Aut ´es, O. V . Yazyev, Z. Fang, X. Dai, T. Qian, J. Mesot, H. Ding, and M. Shi, Nature Communica- tions 7, 11006 EP (2016)

    2016

  12. [19]

    Huang, T

    L. Huang, T. M. McCormick, M. Ochi, Z. Zhao, M.-T. Suzuki, R. Arita, Y . Wu, D. Mou, H. Cao, J. Yan, N. Trivedi, and A. Kaminski, Nature Materials 15, 1155 EP (2016)

    2016

  13. [20]

    M. Z. Hasan, S.-Y . Xu, I. Belopolski, and S.-M. Huang, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 8, 289 (2017)

    2017

  14. [21]

    H. B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, Phys. Lett. B 130, 389 (1983)

    1983

  15. [22]

    A. A. Zyuzin and A. A. Burkov, Phys. Rev. B 86, 115133 (2012)

    2012

  16. [23]

    D. E. Kharzeev, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 75, 133 (2014)

    2014

  17. [24]

    Ma and D

    J. Ma and D. A. Pesin, Phys. Rev. B 92, 235205 (2015)

    2015

  18. [25]

    Fujikawa, Phys

    K. Fujikawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1195 (1979)

    1979

  19. [26]

    Zee, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell (Princeton Univer- sity Press, 2010)

    A. Zee, Quantum Field Theory in a Nutshell (Princeton Univer- sity Press, 2010)

    2010

  20. [27]

    M. E. Peskin and D. V . Schroeder,An Introduction To Quantum Field Theory (Avalon Publishing, 1995)

    1995

  21. [28]

    Brazovskii and N

    S. Brazovskii and N. Kirova, Ann. Phys. 403, 184 (2019)

    2019

  22. [29]

    A. A. Soluyanov, D. Gresch, Z. Wang, Q. Wu, M. Troyer, X. Dai, and B. A. Bernevig, Nature 527, 495 (2015)

    2015

  23. [30]

    K. Deng, G. Wan, P. Deng, K. Zhang, S. Ding, E. Wang, M. Yan, H. Huang, H. Zhang, Z. Xu, J. Denlinger, A. Fedorov, H. Yang, W. Duan, H. Yao, Y . Wu, S. Fan, H. Zhang, X. Chen, and S. Zhou, Nature Physics 12, 1105 EP (2016)

    2016

  24. [31]

    Y . Wu, D. Mou, N. H. Jo, K. Sun, L. Huang, S. L. Bud’ko, P. C. Canfield, and A. Kaminski, Phys. Rev. B 94, 121113 (2016)

    2016

  25. [32]

    A. A. Zyuzin and R. P. Tiwari, JETP Letters 103, 717 (2016)

    2016

  26. [33]

    Tchoumakov, M

    S. Tchoumakov, M. Civelli, and M. O. Goerbig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 086402 (2016)

    2016

  27. [34]

    Katayama, A

    S. Katayama, A. Kobayashi, and Y . Suzumura, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 132, 012003 (2008)

    2008

  28. [35]

    Sugawara, M

    S. Sugawara, M. Tamura, N. Tajima, R. Kato, M. Sato, Y . Nishio, and K. Kajita, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.79, 113704 (2010)

    2010

  29. [36]

    M. O. Goerbig, J.-N. Fuchs, G. Montambaux, and F. Pi ´echon, Phys. Rev. B 78, 045415 (2008)

    2008

  30. [37]

    M. O. Goerbig, J.-N. Fuchs, G. Montambaux, and F. Pi ´echon, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 85, 57005 (2009)

    2009

  31. [38]

    Kajita, Y

    K. Kajita, Y . Nishio, N. Tajima, Y . Suzumura, and A. Kobayashi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 83, 07002 (2014)

    2014

  32. [39]

    S ´ari, C

    J. S ´ari, C. T ˝oke, and M. O. Goerbig, Phys. Rev. B 90, 155446 (2014)

    2014

  33. [40]

    H.-J. Noh, J. Jeong, E.-J. Cho, K. Kim, B. I. Min, and B.-G. Park, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 016401 (2017)

    2017

  34. [41]

    Morinari, T

    T. Morinari, T. Himura, and T. Tohyama, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 78, 023704 (2009)

    2009

  35. [42]

    Farajollahpour, Z

    T. Farajollahpour, Z. Faraei, and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B 99, 235150 (2019)

    2019

  36. [43]

    Jalali-Mola and S

    Z. Jalali-Mola and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B 100, 075113 (2019)

    2019

  37. [44]

    Xu, R.-L

    Y . Xu, R.-L. Chu, and C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 136402 (2014)

    2014

  38. [45]

    H. Weng, C. Fang, Z. Fang, B. A. Bernevig, and X. Dai, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011029 (2015)

    2015

  39. [46]

    X. Wan, A. M. Turner, A. Vishwanath, and S. Y . Savrasov, Physical Review B 83, 205101 (2011)

    2011

  40. [47]

    G. E. V olovik, Physics-Uspekhi61, 89 (2018)

    2018

  41. [48]

    Trescher, B

    M. Trescher, B. Sbierski, P. W. Brouwer, and E. J. Bergholtz, Phys. Rev. B 91, 115135 (2015)

    2015

  42. [49]

    Ferreiros, A

    Y . Ferreiros, A. A. Zyuzin, and J. H. Bardarson, Phys. Rev. B 96, 115202 (2017)

    2017

  43. [50]

    Z.-M. Yu, Y . Yao, and S. A. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 077202 (2016)

    2016

  44. [51]

    Jalali-Mola and S

    Z. Jalali-Mola and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B98, 195415 (2018)

    2018

  45. [52]

    Jalali-Mola and S

    Z. Jalali-Mola and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B98, 235430 (2018)

    2018

  46. [53]

    S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B 100, 045144 (2019)

    2019

  47. [54]

    G. E. V olovik, JETP Letters104, 645 (2016)

    2016

  48. [55]

    M. Yan, H. Huang, K. Zhang, E. Wang, W. Yao, K. Deng, G. Wan, H. Zhang, M. Arita, H. Yang, Z. Sun, H. Yao, Y . Wu, S. Fan, W. Duan, and S. Zhou, Nature Communications 1 (2017), 10.1038/s41467-017-00280-6

    2017 doi

  49. [56]

    Ryder, Introduction to General Relativity (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2009)

    L. Ryder, Introduction to General Relativity (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2009)

    2009

  50. [57]

    Padmanabhan, Gravitation: F oundations and Frontiers (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    T. Padmanabhan, Gravitation: F oundations and Frontiers (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

  51. [58]

    X.-F. Zhou, X. Dong, A. R. Oganov, Q. Zhu, Y . Tian, and H.-T. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 085502 (2014)

    2014

  52. [59]

    Lopez-Bezanilla and P

    A. Lopez-Bezanilla and P. B. Littlewood, Phys. Rev. B 93, 241405 (2016)

    2016

  53. [60]

    Verma, A

    S. Verma, A. Mawrie, and T. K. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. B 96, 155418 (2017)

    2017

  54. [61]

    R. H. Ritchie, Phys. Rev. 106, 874 (1957)

    1957

  55. [62]

    A. D. Boardman, Electromagnetic surface modes (John Wiley & Sons, 1982)

    1982

  56. [63]

    Raether, Surface Plasmonson Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, V olume

    H. Raether, Surface Plasmonson Smooth and Rough Surfaces and on Gratings (Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, V olume

  57. [64]

    Zhang, L

    J. Zhang, L. Zhang, and W. Xu, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 45, 113001 (2012)

    2012

  58. [65]

    Homola, S

    J. Homola, S. S. Yee, and G. Gauglitz, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 54, 3 (1999)

    1999

  59. [66]

    Sarid and W

    D. Sarid and W. A. Challener, Modern Introduction to Surface Plasmons: Theory, Mathematica Modeling, and Applications (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

  60. [67]

    S. A. Maier, P. G. Kik, H. A. Atwater, S. Meltzer, E. Harel, B. E. Koel, and A. A. G. Requicha, Nature Materials 2, 229 (2003)

    2003

  61. [68]

    A. V . Zayats and I. I. Smolyaninov, Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics 5, S16 (2003)

    2003

  62. [69]

    W. L. Barnes, A. Dereux, and T. W. Ebbesen, nature 424, 824 (2003)

    2003

  63. [70]

    Hermann, V

    C. Hermann, V . A. Kosobukin, G. Lampel, J. Peretti, V . I. Sa- farov, and P. Bertrand, Phys. Rev. B 64, 235422 (2001)

    2001

  64. [71]

    Nemova and R

    G. Nemova and R. Kashyap, Opt. Lett. 31, 2118 (2006)

    2006

  65. [72]

    J. N. Anker, W. P. Hall, O. Lyandres, N. C. Shah, J. Zhao, and R. P. Van Duyne, Nature Materials 7, 442 EP (2008), review Article

    2008

  66. [73]

    Westphalen, U

    M. Westphalen, U. Kreibig, J. Rostalski, H. Lth, and D. Meiss- ner, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 61, 97 (2000)

    2000

  67. [74]

    Zijlstra, J

    P. Zijlstra, J. W. M. Chon, and M. Gu, Nature 459, 410 EP (2009)

    2009

  68. [75]

    Stenzel, A

    O. Stenzel, A. Stendal, K. V oigtsberger, and C. von Bor- czyskowski, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 37, 337 (1995). 16

    1995

  69. [76]

    D. M. KOLB, Surface Polaritons, edited by V . AGRANOVICH and D. MILLS, Modern Problems in Condensed Matter Sci- ences, V ol. 1 (Elsevier, 1982) pp. 299 – 329

    1982

  70. [77]

    Y .-K. Kim, P. M. Lundquist, J. A. Helfrich, J. M. Mikrut, G. K. Wong, P. R. Auvil, and J. B. Ketterson, Applied Physics Letters 66, 3407 (1995)

    1995

  71. [78]

    J. B. Pendry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3966 (2000)

    2000

  72. [79]

    Yang and N

    B.-J. Yang and N. Nagaosa, Nature Communications 5, 4898 EP (2014), article

    2014

  73. [80]

    V . M. Agranovich,Surface polaritons, V ol. 1 (Elsevier, 2012)

    2012

  74. [82]

    Carrol, Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity (Pearson, 2013)

    S. Carrol, Spacetime and Geometry: An Introduction to General Relativity (Pearson, 2013)

    2013

  75. [83]

    T. O. Wehling, A. M. Black-Schaffer, and A. V . Balatsky, Adv. Phys. 63, 1 (2014)

    2014

  76. [84]

    Hofmann and S

    J. Hofmann and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B93, 241402 (2016)

    2016

  77. [85]

    Tamaya, T

    T. Tamaya, T. Kato, K. Tsuchikawa, S. Konabe, and S. Kawa- bata, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 31, 305001 (2019)

    2019

  78. [86]

    Chang, S.-Y

    G. Chang, S.-Y . Xu, S.-M. Huang, D. S. Sanchez, C.-H. Hsu, G. Bian, Z.-M. Yu, I. Belopolski, N. Alidoust, H. Zheng, T.-R. Chang, H.-T. Jeng, S. A. Yang, T. Neupert, H. Lin, and M. Z. Hasan, Scientific Reports 7, 1688 (2017)

    2017

  79. [87]

    F. M. D. Pellegrino, M. I. Katsnelson, and M. Polini, Phys. Rev. B 92, 201407 (2015)

    2015

  80. [88]

    Grosso and G

    G. Grosso and G. P. Parravicini, Solid State Physics (Elsevier Science, 2000)

    2000

  81. [89]

    M. P. Marder, Condensed matter physics (John Wiley & Sons, 2010)

    2010

  82. [90]

    Kittel, Introduction to solid state physics, V ol

    C. Kittel, Introduction to solid state physics, V ol. 8 (Wiley New York, 1976)

    1976

  83. [91]

    Faraei and S

    Z. Faraei and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B 100, 035447 (2019)

    2019

  84. [92]

    A. B. Sushkov, J. B. Hofmann, G. S. Jenkins, J. Ishikawa, S. Nakatsuji, S. Das Sarma, and H. D. Drew, Phys. Rev. B 92, 241108 (2015)

    2015

  85. [93]

    Faraei, T

    Z. Faraei, T. Farajollahpour, and S. A. Jafari, Phys. Rev. B 98, 195402 (2018)

    2018

  86. [95]

    Witten, La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento 39, 313 (2016)

    E. Witten, La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento 39, 313 (2016)

    2016

  87. [96]

    Berini and I

    P. Berini and I. D. Leon, Nature Photonics 6, 16 (2011)

    2011

  88. [111]

    Springer-Verlag, 1988, 1988)

    ISBN 978-3-540-17363-2. Springer-Verlag, 1988, 1988)

    1988

Pith tools

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