Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Large enhancement of nonlinear optical response of graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states produce a third-order nonlinear optical response more than twice as strong as single-state junctions and over ten times stronger than topologically trivial…

desk verdict Qualitative trend is credible, but the abstract's enhancement factors oversell the paper's own spectra. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05303 v1 pith:EOCFQA7K submitted 2024-11-26 cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph

Hanying Deng , Yaxin Li , Zhihao qu , Jing Deng , Yingji He , Fangwe Ye This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph
keywords graphenenanoribbonheterojunctionstopologicalinterfacestatesthird-ordernonlinearopticalresponsethird-harmonicgenerationquantumplasmonsdistant-neighborquantum-mechanicalmethodZ2invariantnanophotonics
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

This paper argues that the number of topological interface states in a graphene nanoribbon heterojunction is a direct control knob for its nonlinear optical response. Using a quantum-mechanical model that includes interactions beyond nearest neighbors, the authors compute third-harmonic-generation polarizabilities for three families of heterojunctions that are identical in size and carbon count but host zero, one, or multiple topological interface states. In every family, junctions with multiple interface states exceed single-state junctions by more than a factor of two and trivial junctions by more than an order of magnitude, and the presence of the states red-shifts the quantum plasmon resonance. The claim matters because it points to a geometry-based route to stronger nanoscale nonlinearity without changing material or size.

What carries the argument

The distant-neighbor quantum-mechanical (DNQM) method, a tight-binding-style calculation in which each π electron interacts with the core potential of all atoms rather than only nearest neighbors. It supplies the eigenstates, charge densities, and linear and third-order polarizabilities used to compare junctions; the argument rests on identifying the resonant transitions that pass through the topological interface states.

What would settle it

A calculation of the same heterojunctions with an independent first-principles method (for example, time-dependent density functional theory) that yields a TS2/TS1 third-harmonic peak ratio below two, or an experimental third-harmonic measurement on the synthesized 7/9/7-ZC-TS2 ribbon showing no enhancement over TS1, would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a monotone relation: within a fixed heterojunction geometry and size, the peak third-order polarizability grows with the number of topological interface states, and the relevant resonances move to lower frequency. The authors trace this to transitions that involve the topological interface states themselves: in the TS1 junctions the dominant third-harmonic peak comes from a HOMO-1 (the topological state) to LUMO+1 transition, while in TS2 junctions two topological states (HOMO-1 and HOMO-2) contribute to the strongest peak. They report quantitative factors: more than twice the third-harmonic polarizability of single-state junctions and over ten times that of trivial junctions of the same size, across zigzag-AGNR, chevron, and cove-edged families.

Load-bearing premise

The distant-neighbor quantum-mechanical model is quantitatively accurate enough that its computed polarizability ratios (rather than just their qualitative ordering) reflect the real electronic structure and optical response of these heterojunctions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Designing GNR heterojunctions with multiple nontrivial interfaces becomes a practical route to stronger third-harmonic generation at fixed size and material.
  • The topological-state-induced red shift moves quantum plasmon resonances from above 1 eV into the few-hundred-meV range, potentially aligning with infrared photonics.
  • The length-scaling of third-harmonic polarizability is steeper for multi-state junctions, so enlarging such junctions yields disproportionate gains.
  • Atomically precise bottom-up synthesis of multi-junction GNRs could translate these predictions into device measurements.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the transition-channel explanation is right, then adding a third topological interface (TS3) should continue to raise the third-harmonic peak, though possibly with diminishing returns as the states begin to hybridize.
  • The same design rule may transfer to other platforms where multiple topological interface states can be embedded, such as photonic or acoustic lattices, despite the paper's graphene-specific calculations.
  • The reported tenfold factor is computed at the dominant resonance; off-resonance enhancement would likely be smaller, so experiments should target the resonance frequency.
  • A direct experimental test could use third-harmonic microscopy on synthesized 7/9/7-ZC-TS2 versus TS1 ribbons to look for the predicted factor of two.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies third-harmonic generation (THG) polarizabilities of graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions with zero, one, or two topologically nontrivial interfaces, using the authors' distant-neighbor quantum-mechanical (DNQM) method. Three families of heterojunctions are considered: 7/9/7-Zigzag, 7/9/7-ZC, and 7/5/7-AC, each with TS0, TS1, and TS2 variants of the same length and carbon count. The main claims are that heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states have THG polarizabilities more than twice as large as those with a single state and more than ten times larger than topologically trivial ones, and that topological interface states red-shift the quantum plasmon frequency. The paper concludes that increasing the number of topological interface states can enhance the nanoscale nonlinear optical response.

Significance. If the reported trend is quantitatively reliable, the work would offer a simple geometrical design principle—adding topological interfaces—for boosting third-order nonlinearity in graphene nanostructures, a topic of current interest for nanophotonics. The qualitative monotonic trend (TS2 > TS1 > TS0) is consistently reproduced across all three heterojunction families, and the classification of topological states is inherited from established Z2 invariants (refs. 13, 14), so the central comparison is not circular. However, the quantitative enhancement factors stated in the abstract and conclusion are not uniformly supported by the paper's own data, and the DNQM model is not benchmarked against ab initio or experimental results for these systems. The strength of the manuscript lies in the internally consistent computational exploration of a plausible mechanism; its weakness is the overstatement of the numerical factors and the absence of validation of the model's accuracy for the specific quantities claimed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and Conclusion; Figs. 3–5] The quantitative claims that 'third-order nonlinear polarizabilities of GNR heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states are more than twice as large as those with a single topological state, and more than ten times larger than those of topologically trivial heterojunctions' are not supported by the reported peak values. From Fig. 4(f), the TS2/TS1 peak ratio is 7.20e7/4.60e7 ≈ 1.6; from Fig. 5(j), it is 1.16e6/6.35e5 ≈ 1.8; only Fig. 3(f) gives a ratio above 2. For the TS2/TS0 comparison, Fig. 3(f) gives 8.60e7/1.09e7 ≈ 7.9, which the text itself correctly describes as 'more than seven times,' not more than ten. The abstract and conclusion should be revised to either state the family-specific factors or use a metric that uniformly supports the claimed bounds.
  2. [Figs. 3–5] The enhancement factors are computed from the peak value of the imaginary part of the THG polarizability at different photon energies: for example, in Fig. 3 the TS1 peak is at 0.085 eV and the TS2 peak at 0.055 eV. Because the peaks occur at different frequencies, a peak-to-peak ratio can be metric-dependent; a fixed-frequency comparison or a frequency-integrated nonlinear response may give a smaller or different enhancement. The paper should specify the chosen metric and demonstrate that the qualitative monotonic trend and the claimed quantitative factors are robust under that metric.
  3. [Methods (DNQM) and refs. 32–35] The central quantitative results depend entirely on the DNQM method with empirical parameters (Clementi-Raimondi screening constants, interaction range, on-site energies) calibrated in the authors' earlier work. The manuscript does not provide any benchmark of DNQM against ab initio calculations or experimental nonlinear optical data for GNR heterojunctions. Since the claimed enhancement factors and red-shift magnitudes are load-bearing, the authors should either validate the method for these specific systems or temper the quantitative claims to reflect the model's demonstrated accuracy.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The phrase 'our DNQM approach has been employed to computer the linear and nonlinear optical polarizabilities' contains a typo: 'computer' should be 'compute.'
  2. [Fig. 2 and Sec. II] In the 7/9/7-Zigzag-TS2 case, the text says the heterojunction supports four topological interface states with two of the same energy at each interface, while for 7/9/7-ZC-TS2 only two states at one interface are reported. This asymmetry should be explained explicitly, as it affects the interpretation of what 'multiple topological states' means in the comparison.
  3. [Fig. 2(f) and Fig. 2(h)] The energy labels in the spectrum plots are difficult to read because the red dots and text overlap; the authors should increase the clarity of these markers, for instance by using arrows or tabulated values.
  4. [Fig. 5(a-c)] The caption states that the Z2 invariants are labeled in the figure, but only some labels are legible in the reproduction; all Z2 values should be explicitly visible for each segment.
  5. [Sec. 'Geometrical configurations'] The notation 'Zigzag′' is used without a definition in the main text; it would be helpful to state explicitly that the prime denotes a different end termination (as in refs. 13, 14) and that it changes the Z2 invariant.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the topological labels come from external Z2 invariants and the THG enhancement is computed, not fitted or defined into existence.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain in the paper. The topological classification is not taken from the optical calculation: the paper uses the explicit Z2 formulas and classifications of Cao, Zhao, and Louie (refs 13 and 14), which are independent external results, to decide which heterojunction interfaces are topologically nontrivial. The labels TS0, TS1, and TS2 are thereby fixed by counting Z2-mismatched interfaces in the geometry, not by any optical output. The third-order polarizabilities are then computed with the DNQM model, whose parameters come from atomic screening constants (ref 33) and previous method-development papers by the authors (refs 32, 35). The central trend — more topological interface states give larger THG — is not an input to or a fitting target of the DNQM calculation; it emerges from the computed spectra. The quantum-plasmon red-shift is read off the same computed linear and nonlinear spectra, but that is a descriptive observation of those spectra rather than a definitional equivalence. The authors' self-citations to the DNQM method are load-bearing in the sense that the method is not re-derived here, but they are not used to import the enhancement conclusion itself, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is invoked to force the ranking. The paper's internal quantitative inconsistency (the body reports 'more than seven times' for the Zigzag family while the abstract and conclusion claim 'more than ten times') is a correctness or support weakness, not a circularity under the rubric, because it does not reduce any predicted quantity to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation. I therefore find no circular step and assign score 0.

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

The central claim rests on the empirical DNQM model and the topological classification of GNRs, both taken from prior literature. No new physical entities are introduced. The main free parameter is the set of DNQM model parameters, which are adopted from the authors' earlier calibration and not re-validated here.

free parameters (1)
  • DNQM empirical parameters (Clementi-Raimondi screening constants, interaction range, on-site energies) = Adopted from ref 33; not re-fitted here
    The computed polarizabilities and transition energies depend directly on these parameters. They were calibrated in earlier work by the same authors and are not independently validated in this paper.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Z2 invariant classification of AGNR, chevron, and cove-edged GNR segments from refs 13 and 14 correctly identifies the topological phases and the presence of interface states.
    The heterojunction design and the counting of topological interface states rely entirely on this classification. If the Z2 assignment is wrong for any segment, the reported number of topological states would be incorrect.
  • domain assumption The DNQM method accurately computes the electronic structure, transition dipole moments, and third-order polarizabilities of GNR heterojunctions.
    All numerical results, including the enhancement factors and red-shifts, are produced by this semi-empirical model. The paper provides no independent benchmark against density functional theory or experiment.
  • domain assumption The heterojunctions are symmetric enough that the second-order nonlinear response vanishes, so the third-order response is the leading nonlinearity.
    The text states 'Due to their structural symmetry, the second-order nonlinear process is not allowed.' This assumption justifies focusing on the third-order response.
  • domain assumption The peak of the imaginary part of the THG polarizability coinciding with the zero of the real part defines a 'quantum plasmon' resonance.
    This identification, from refs 30 and 32, is used to characterize the red-shift of quantum plasmons. It is a standard interpretation in the authors' prior work but is not derived here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Large enhancement of nonlinear optical response of graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EOCFQA7K

@misc{pith2026241205303,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Large enhancement of nonlinear optical response of graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EOCFQA7K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05303}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the nonlinear optical response of graphene nanoribbon (GNR) heterojunctions both without and with one or multiple topological interface states. By implementing a distant-neighbor quantum-mechanical (DNQM) method, we demonstrate a pronounced enhancement of the nonlinear optical response of GNR heterojunctions as the number of topological states at their interfaces increases. Specifically, we find that GNR heterojunctions with multiple topological interface states exhibit a notably stronger third-order nonlinear optical response in comparison with the similarly sized counterparts with a single topological interface state or without such states. Furthermore, we observe that the presence of topological interface states in GNR heterojunctions can induce a significant red-shift in their quantum plasmon frequency. Our results reveal the potential to enhance the nonlinear optical response at the nanoscale by increasing the number of topological interface states in graphene nanostructures or other topological systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05303 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The geometrical configuration of GNR heterojuncti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Charge density distributions of topological inte [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Real and imaginary parts of linear and third-order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Real and imaginary parts of linear and third-order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: GNR heterojunctions consist of (a) two N = 7 zigzag-terminated AGNRs with a K = 5 cove-edged GNR inserted between them, (b) an N = 7 zigzag′ -terminated and an N = 7 zigzag-terminated AGNRs with a K = 5 cove-edged GNR inserted between them, and (c) two N = 7 zigzag′ -t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    It is es- tablished that various GNRs with unit cells exhibiting spatial symmetries, such as armchair GNRs (AGNRs), chevron GNRs and cove-edged GNRs, possess symmetry- protected topological phases [ 13, 14]. The topological phase of these GNRs is determined by their width, edge, and end termination, and is characterized by a Z2 invari- ant with a value of...

    work page

  2. [2]

    1(a-c) consist of the follow- ing configurations: two N = 7 zigzag-terminated AG- NRs ( Z2 = 1) with an N = 9 zigzag-terminated AGNR (Z2 = 1) embedded between them (Fig

    The three het- erojunctions shown in Figs. 1(a-c) consist of the follow- ing configurations: two N = 7 zigzag-terminated AG- NRs ( Z2 = 1) with an N = 9 zigzag-terminated AGNR (Z2 = 1) embedded between them (Fig. 1(a)); an N = 7 zigzag′-terminated (Z2 = 0), an N = 9 zigzag-terminated (Z2 = 1) and an N = 7 zigzag-terminated ( Z2 = 1) AGNRs (Fig. 1(b)); and ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Thus, we focus on the linear and third-order optical response, assuming that the in- cident electric field is x-polarized

    Due to their structural symmetry, the second-order nonlin- ear process is not allowed. Thus, we focus on the linear and third-order optical response, assuming that the in- cident electric field is x-polarized. We first consider the 7/9/7-Zigzag-TS0, 7/9/7-Zigzag-TS1 and 7/9/7-Zigzag- TS2 heterojunctions. As discussed above, these three heterojunctions consi...

    work page

  4. [4]

    215 eV, as denoted by the black dots in Figs

    22 eV and 0 . 215 eV, as denoted by the black dots in Figs. 3(a-c), respectively. In Figs. 3(d-f), we show the real and imaginary parts of the third-order nonlinear polarizabilities, γ xxxx(3ω ), cor- responding to the third-harmonic generation (THG), of 7/9/7-Zigzag-TS0, 7/9/7-Zigzag-TS1 and 7/9/7-Zigzag- TS2 heterojunctions, respectively. The spectra cl...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Wen, Choreographed entanglement dances: Topo- logical states of quantum matter, Science 363, eaal3099 (2019)

    X.G. Wen, Choreographed entanglement dances: Topo- logical states of quantum matter, Science 363, eaal3099 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Y. E. Kraus, Y. Lahini, Z. Ringel, M. Verbin, and O. Zilberberg, Topological states and adiabatic pumping in quasicrystals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 106402 (2012)

    2012

  7. [7]

    Zheng and X

    C. Zheng and X. Liu, Superconductivity and topological quantum states in two-dimensional moir /acute.ts1e superlattices, Quantum Front. 3, 17 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Z. Yang, F. Gao, X. Shi, X. Lin, Z. Gao, Y. Chong, and B. Zhang, Topological acoustics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 114301 (2015)

    2015

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    G. Ma, M. Xiao, and C. T. Chan, Topological phases in acoustic and mechanical systems, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 281 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    S. D. Huber, Topological mechanics, Nat. Phys. 12, 621 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    Ozawa, H

    T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zil- berberg, et al., Topological photonics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 9 91, 015006 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    H. Deng, X. Chen, N. C. Panoiu, and F. Ye, Topological surface plasmons in superlattices with changing sign of the average permittivity, Opt. Lett. 41, 4281 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    H. Deng, Y. Chen, C. Huang, and F. Ye, Topologi- cal interface modes in photonic superlattices contain- ing negative-index materials, Europhys. Lett. 124, 64001 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    T. D. Stanescu, V. Galitski, and S. Das Sarma, Topolog- ical states in two-dimensional optical lattices, Phys. Rev . A 82, 013608 (2010)

    2010

  7. [15]

    F. Zhao, T. Cao, and S. G. Louie, Topological phases in graphene nanoribbons tuned by electric fields, Phys. Rev. lett. 127, 166401 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Gr ¨ oning, S

    O. Gr ¨ oning, S. Wang, X. Yao, C. A. Pignedoli, G. Borin Barin, C. Daniels, A. Cupo, V. Meunier, X. Feng, A. Narita, et al., Engineering of robust topological quantum phases in graphene nanoribbons, Nature 560, 209 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    T. Cao, F. Zhao, and S. G. Louie, Topological phases in graphene nanoribbons: junction states, spin centers, and quantum spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 076401 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    Y.-L. Lee, F. Zhao, T. Cao, J. Ihm, and S. G. Louie, Topological phases in cove-edged and chevron graphene nanoribbons: Geometric structures, Z2 invariants, and junction states, Nano Lett. 18, 7247 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    G. D. Nguyen, H.-Z. Tsai, A. A. Omrani, T. Marangoni,M. Wu, D. J. Rizzo, G. F. Rodgers, R. R. Cloke,R. A. Durr, Y. Sakai, et al., Atomically pre- cise graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions from a single molecular precursor, Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 1077 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Z. Liu, Z. Chen, C. Wang, et al., Bottom-up, on-surface- synthesized armchair graphene nanoribbons for ultra- high-power micro-supercapacitors, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 17881 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Z. Chen, A. Narita, K. M¨ ullen, Graphene nanoribbons: on-surface synthesis and integration into electronic de- vices. Adv. Mater. 32, 2001893 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    X. Liu, G. Li, A. Lipatov, T. Sun and A. Sinitskii, Chevron-type graphene nanoribbons with a reduced en- ergy band gap: Solution synthesis, scanning tunneling microscopy and electrical characterization, Nano Res. 13 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Zhang, X

    W. Zhang, X. Chen, Y. V. Kartashov, V. V. Konotop, and F. Ye, Coupling of edge states and topological Bragg solitons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 254103 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Veenstra, O

    J. Veenstra, O. Gamayun, X. Guo, A. Sarvi, C. V. Mein- ersen, and C. Coulais, Non-reciprocal topological soliton s in active metamaterials, Nature 627, 528 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Sabour and Y

    K. Sabour and Y. V. Kartashov, Topological solitons in coupled su–schrieffer–heeger waveguide arrays, Opt. Lett. 49, 3580 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    S. Xia, D. Kaltsas, D. Song, I. Komis, J. Xu, A. Szameit, H. Buljan, K. G. Makris, and Z. Chen, Nonlinear tun- ing of pt symmetry and non-hermitian topological states, Science 372, 72 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Wang, L.-J

    Y. Wang, L.-J. Lang, C. H. Lee, B. Zhang, and Y. Chong, Topologically enhanced harmonic generation in a nonlin- ear transmission line metamaterial, Nat. Commun. 10, 1102 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    J. W. You, Z. Lan, and N. C. Panoiu, Four-wave mixing of topological edge plasmons in graphene metasurfaces, Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz3910 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    H. Deng, Z. Qu, Y. He, C. Huang, N. C. Panoiu, and F. Ye, Topologically enhanced nonlinear optical response of graphene nanoribbon heterojunctions, Quantum Front. 2, 11 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Hendry, P

    E. Hendry, P. J. Hale, J. Moger, A. Savchenko, and S. A. Mikhailov, Coherent nonlinear optical response of graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 097401 (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    Y. Wang, M. Tokman, and A. Belyanin, Second-order nonlinear optical response of graphene, Phys. Rev. B 94, 195442 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    J. D. Cox, I. Silveiro, and F. J. Garc /acute.ts1ıa de Abajo, Quan- tum effects in the nonlinear response of graphene plas- mons, ACS Nano 10, 1995 (2016)

    2016

  25. [33]

    J. D. Cox and F. J. Garcia de Abajo, Nonlinear graphene nanoplasmonics, Acc. Chem. Res. 52, 2536 (2019)

    2019

  26. [34]

    D. Z. Manrique, J. W. You, H. Deng, F. Ye, and N. C. Panoiu, Quantum plasmon engineering with interact- ing graphene nanoflakes, J. Phys. Chem. C 121, 27597 (2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    Ezawa, Metallic graphene nanodisks: Electronic and magnetic properties, Phys

    M. Ezawa, Metallic graphene nanodisks: Electronic and magnetic properties, Phys. Rev. B 76, 245415 (2007)

    2007

  28. [36]

    H. Deng, D. Z. Manrique, X. Chen, N. C. Panoiu, and F. Ye, Quantum mechanical analysis of nonlinear optical re- sponse of interacting graphene nanoflakes, APL Photon. 3 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Clementi and D.-L

    E. Clementi and D.-L. Raimondi, Atomic screening con- stants from scf functions, J. Chem. Phys. 38, 2686 (1963)

    1963

  30. [38]

    R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear optics 3rd ed. Taylor & Francis, London (2003)

    2003

  31. [39]

    H. Deng, C. Huang, Y. He, and F. Ye, Quantum plasmon enhanced nonlinear wave mixing in graphene nanoflakes, Chin. Phys. B 30, 044213 (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    See Supplemental Material for (1) calculation of charge density distributions and eigenenergy spectra of GNR heterojunctions; (2) calculation of the linear and third- order nonlinear optical response of GNR heterojunctions

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.