Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 52 references

Fractional vortex array realized at twin boundary in a nematic superconductor

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · 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 an ordinary vortex parked on a nematic twin boundary in an s-plus-d superconductor like FeSe splits into two fractional vortices, which behave as half-quantum vortices and form a meron pair with skyrmion number Q =…

desk verdict Solid GL simulation of vortex splitting at a FeSe twin boundary, but the half-quantum label is inferred, not computed. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18754 v1 pith:OXSBMWXU submitted 2024-12-25 cond-mat.supr-con

Sakiko Noda , Hiroto Adachi , Masanori Ichioka This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords fractionalvortexhalf-quantumnematicsuperconductortwinboundaryFeSemeronskyrmionGinzburg-Landautheory
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 asks what happens to an ordinary magnetic vortex when it sits exactly on a nematic twin boundary in a superconductor such as FeSe, where the superconducting pairing changes from s+d to s-d across the boundary. Using two-component Ginzburg-Landau theory, it finds that the vortex can no longer keep its s-wave and d-wave components locked together: the two cores separate, producing a pair of fractional vortices that can be treated as half-quantum vortices when the components have nearly equal weight. It then shows that this separated pair is topologically nontrivial, forming a core-up and core-down meron pair with skyrmion number Q = -1, and that the splitting and recombination should be visible in the time evolution of vortex flow along the boundary. If correct, this gives FeSe twin boundaries as a candidate real-material platform for fractional vortices and skyrmion-like textures that have long been sought in multi-component superconductors.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a two-component Ginzburg-Landau free energy for s-wave and d-wave order parameters, with a Josephson coupling term whose coefficient changes sign across the twin boundary and a cross-gradient term that produces the nematic anisotropy. The sign change forces the real part of the d-wave order parameter to flip while the s-wave component stays roughly constant, creating a region of s-plus-id character with locally broken time-reversal symmetry at the boundary. The object that carries the topological argument is the unit vector n = (n_x, n_y, n_z) built from the two order parameters; the rotation of its in-plane part and the sign change of n_z across the separated cores define the core-up and core-down merons, and integrating n dot (curl n) over a pair gives Q = -1. Time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations are then evolved to produce vortex-flow snapshots in which a conventional vortex splits on entry into the boundary and recombines on exit.

What would settle it

A local probe that resolves sub-flux-quantum magnetic fields, such as scanning SQUID or high-resolution vortex imaging, could settle the claim: the paper predicts that a vortex on a FeSe twin boundary should show a magnetic-field peak roughly half the height of a bulk vortex, two spatially separated fractional cores, and a flow process in which a bulk vortex splits on entering the boundary and recombines on leaving; observing a single unsplit core of full flux at the boundary would refute the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the nematic twin boundary acts as a line where a conventional vortex fractionalizes. In the s+d and s-d domains on either side, the relative phase between the s-wave and d-wave order parameters is locked near 0 or pi, and an ordinary vortex has a single core in both components. On the boundary itself the relative phase rotates to plus or minus pi/2, so a vortex cannot keep both components zero at the same point; instead the s-wave core and the d-wave core separate along the boundary. With the parameter choice used here, the two components contribute almost equally, so each separated core carries roughly half of a flux quantum and can be regarded as a half-quantum vortex. The separated pair is not just a flux split: the map of the unit vector n built from the two order parameters shows a core-up meron and a core-down meron whose combined skyrmion number is Q = -1, and the sequence of vortices along the boundary forms a skyrmion lattice.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that real FeSe twin boundaries behave like the idealized, barrier-free boundary in the simulation, with the s-wave and d-wave components contributing almost equally; if the actual parameters sit in a different regime, the vortex splitting into half-quantum pairs could disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A conventional vortex crossing the twin boundary splits into two fractional vortices, one centered in the s-wave component and one in the d-wave component, and this splitting is visible in the order-parameter profiles.
  • Each fractional vortex carries about half of a flux quantum in the studied parameter range, so a vortex on the boundary has a measurably lower local magnetic field than a bulk vortex.
  • The split pair is a meron-anti-meron texture with skyrmion number Q = -1, and an alternating array of such pairs along the boundary constitutes a skyrmion lattice.
  • The nematic vortex core orientation rotates by 90 degrees across the twin boundary.
  • Vortex flow parallel to the boundary shows a repeatable process: a bulk vortex is trapped, splits into two fractional vortices, and recombines when it escapes, giving a time-dependent signature for experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: if the s-wave and d-wave weights are tuned to be unequal, the boundary vortices should interpolate continuously between half-quantum and nearly conventional behavior, so the twin boundary could act as a knob for the flux fraction per vortex; the paper's brief runs with asymmetric parameters hint at this but do not quantify it.
  • Beyond the paper: the same sign-flip mechanism should produce fractional vortices at any domain wall in a two-component superconductor where the Josephson coupling changes sign, so the prediction is not limited to FeSe and could be tested in other nematic or multi-component systems.
  • Beyond the paper: because each meron pair carries Q = -1, a transport current or field sweep along the boundary may drive collective skyrmion-like motion of the vortex array, analogous to meron lattices in magnets; the paper only demonstrates trapping and escape of single vortices.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies vortex states near a nematic twin boundary in a two-component Ginzburg-Landau model for superconducting FeSe. Using time-dependent GL simulations with a sign-changing Josephson coupling c_epsilon across the boundary, the authors find that the orientation of the nematic vortex core rotates by 90 degrees between s+d and s-d domains and that a vortex placed on the twin boundary splits into two fractional vortices with separated s-wave and d-wave cores. They characterize these objects as core-up and core-down merons, assign a skyrmion number Q = -1 per fractional-vortex pair, and propose that vortex-flow experiments can observe the trapping, splitting, and recombination dynamics.

Significance. If confirmed, the prediction of alternating half-quantum vortices at FeSe twin boundaries would be a concrete and falsifiable manifestation of fractional vortices in a multi-component superconductor, with direct relevance to ongoing STM and scanning-probe experiments. The manuscript's strength is that the vortex splitting and recombination are emergent outputs of a direct numerical solution of the stated TDGL equations, not constructed by inputting the desired vortex texture, and the model inherits the established s+d GL framework. Its weakness is that the half-quantum and meron/skyrmion identifications are inferred from order-parameter weights and local field suppression rather than computed topological or flux integrals, so the quantitative new claims are not yet established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, Fig. 3(b)] The central claim that twin-boundary vortices are half-quantum is inferred from the lower internal magnetic field and from the near-equal weights of the two order-parameter components, but no direct flux integral is reported. In the two-component GL functional of Eq. (3), the flux carried by a vortex in one component depends on Kd, K̃, gamma2, and c_epsilon through the coupled Maxwell/GL equations, not on amplitude equality alone. I request a direct evaluation of Φ = ∮ A·dl or ∫ B dS around one red and one green fractional vortex, with the integration contour enclosing only that core, and a comparison with Φ0/2. Without this, the 'half-quantum vortex' label and the proposed experimental signatures are not demonstrated.
  2. [§3, Eq. (11)] The assignment Q = -1/2 to each meron is stated on the basis of the sign of the winding of the n-field, but the skyrmion number is not evaluated numerically. The integration region in Eq. (11) is not specified, and a vector-field plot alone does not establish that Q is exactly -1/2 rather than merely having that sign. Please compute Q over the region shown in Fig. 3(e), state how the integration domain is chosen around each isolated vortex, and report the numerical value.
  3. [Parameters around Eq. (3) and §2] The proposed half-quantum regime relies on nearly equal s-wave and d-wave weights and on a barrierless twin boundary. The manuscript states that 'the barrier potential at the twin-boundary is not considered' and later notes that 'fine-tuning of parameters is necessary for quantitative comparison with experimental observation.' As written, the paper does not show that the chosen parameter set (ad=bd=Kd=Tcd=1, |c_epsilon|=1.0, gamma1=1.2, gamma2=1.0, K̃=1/√2, kappa=5, T=0.1) is representative of FeSe, nor that the vortex splitting survives a moderate s/d imbalance or a finite boundary barrier. I ask for either a robustness scan over the most sensitive coefficients or a clearly scoped statement that the result is a proof of principle for the chosen model rather than a quantitative FeSe prediction.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (10) and Fig. 3(d)] The text defines η† = (Δs*, Δd*), so η†η should equal |Δs|^2 + |Δd|^2, but the manuscript writes |Δs(r)|^2 + |Δd(r)| (missing the square on the second term) and Fig. 3(d) writes n_z = (|Δs|^2 - |Δd|)/η†η (also missing a square). Please correct these expressions.
  2. [Numerical method, Eq. (4)] The prefactor 1/12 in the TDGL relaxation term of Eq. (4) is not explained; please state its origin or indicate that it is a chosen dimensionless relaxation coefficient.
  3. [Numerical setup] The manuscript reports only the system size 60×60; for reproducibility it would be helpful to state the grid spacing, time step, and convergence criterion used in the TDGL evolution.
  4. [Fig. 2(d)] The circular arrows indicating phase winding in Fig. 2(d) would be easier to interpret if the color correspondence between red/green fractional vortices and the two winding directions were made explicit in the caption or in the main text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: vortex splitting and meron/skyrmion textures are emergent outputs of the stated two-component GL dynamics, not fitted inputs or self-citation-derived conclusions.

full rationale

The paper's central results—core separation into fractional vortices, meron/skyrmion textures, and vortex splitting/recombination during flow—are obtained by numerically solving the stated two-component Ginzburg-Landau equations with explicit free-energy parameters. No equation is defined in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The symmetrized parameter choice (ad=bd=Kd=Tcd=1, |c_epsilon|=1.0, gamma1=1.2, gamma2=1.0, K_tilde=1/sqrt(2)) is an openly stated modeling regime that makes s and d weights comparable; this influences the 'half-quantum vortex' interpretation, but it is not a fit to the vortex-splitting output. The self-citations [32-34] supply standard TDGL relaxation equations, which are also attributed to external references and are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem; they do not by themselves force the claimed topological classification. The absence of a numerically integrated magnetic-flux integral and the acknowledged fine-tuning requirement are verification/correctness concerns, not circularity. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to the paper's model assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The GL free energy and its parameters are adopted from earlier FeSe modeling papers; none are fitted to the target fractional-vortex result. The central simulation then runs with those fixed inputs. The main burden is the domain assumption that two-component s±d GL with equal s and d weights and a barrierless sharp twin boundary is representative of FeSe. No new particles or forces are introduced; the fractional vortices are composite order-parameter textures, listed here because they are the new objects the paper predicts.

free parameters (7)
  • c_epsilon (Josephson coupling magnitude) = 1.0
    Magnitude chosen by hand; sign flips across the twin boundary to make s+d and s-d domains. It controls the relative locking of s and d phases.
  • gamma_1 = 1.2
    Quartic intercomponent density-density coupling; chosen to stabilize the two-component state.
  • gamma_2 = 1.0
    Quartic pair-exchange coupling; chosen with the other couplings to produce a stable s±d state.
  • K_tilde = 1/sqrt(2)
    Anisotropic gradient coupling that generates the elongated nematic vortex cores; value chosen by hand.
  • kappa (GL parameter) = 5
    Type-II penetration-depth ratio; chosen to place the system in the vortex-lattice regime.
  • temperature T = 0.1
    Reduced temperature fixed at 0.1 in all presented runs.
  • d-component coefficients ad, bd, Kd, Tcd = all set to 1
    Normalizes the d component to the s component, enforcing near-equal weights that underlie the half-quantum interpretation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The two-component Ginzburg-Landau free energy with s±d pairing is an adequate model of superconducting FeSe near the nematic twin boundary.
    Invoked via Eq. (3) and Refs. [12,13,15,17]; no microscopic derivation is given for FeSe.
  • domain assumption The twin boundary is a sharp straight line where c_epsilon changes sign discontinuously and where the barrier potential is negligible.
    The authors state "the barrier potential at the twin-boundary is not considered" and set c_epsilon = +/-1 on opposite sides of the line y=x.
  • domain assumption The time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations, derived for gapless dirty s-wave superconductors, are valid for vortex dynamics in d-wave or two-component systems.
    The authors acknowledge this caveat in the text and justify it by citing prior TDGL simulations of d-wave and cuprate vortex dynamics.
  • ad hoc to paper The chosen parameter values keep the s and d order parameters at near-equal weight, making the fractional vortices approximately half-quantum and meron-like.
    The half-quantum and meron classification in the Results depends on "both order parameters give almost equal weight"; the authors note fine-tuning is required for quantitative comparison.
invented entities (1)
  • Half-quantum fractional vortices (core-up and core-down meron pairs) localized at the nematic twin boundary independent evidence
    purpose: Central predicted object: separated s-wave and d-wave cores carrying roughly half a flux quantum each, arranged alternately along the boundary.
    The paper proposes specific observable handles: lower internal field height, half-flux magnetic signal, and a trapping, splitting, and recombination vortex flow that could be seen by STM/SQUID and transport imaging. No such observation is presented here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fractional vortex array realized at twin boundary in a nematic superconductor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OXSBMWXU

@misc{pith2026241218754,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fractional vortex array realized at twin boundary in a nematic superconductor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OXSBMWXU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18754}
}
read the original abstract

Within a framework of two-component Ginzburg-Landau theory as a model of superconducting FeSe, we study the spatial structure of vortex states in the presence of nematic twin boundary in an s + d wave nematic superconductor. The result shows that the orientation of the nematic vortex core is rotated 90 degrees across the twin boundary, and just at the twin boundary the nematic vortex becomes two fractional vortices with the topological nature of core-down and core-up merons. The exotic vortex states may be confirmed by observing the time evolution of vortex flow when the vortices are trapped in and escape from the nematic twin boundary.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18754 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) The square region of our calculation is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color) Spatial variation of the vortex states at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Hsu, J.-Y

    F.-C. Hsu, J.-Y . Luo, K.-W. Yeh, T.-K. Chen, T.-W. Huang, P. M. Wu, Y .-C. Lee, Y .-L. Huang, Y .-Y . Chu, D.-C. Yan, and M.-K. Wu, Superconductivity in the PbO-type structureα- FeSe, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 14262 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    2(g), two fractional vortices are com- bined into one conventional vortex when they escape from the twin boundary

    In Fig. 2(g), two fractional vortices are com- bined into one conventional vortex when they escape from the twin boundary. We hope for future experimental observation of vortex motion [51] to find the vortex flow as evidence of the fractional vortices. It is noted that the vortex flow direction is tilted from the perpendicular direction to the twin bounda...

    work page

  3. [3]

    A. E. B ¨ohmer and A. Kreisel, Nematicity, magnetism and su- perconductivity in FeSe, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 30, 023001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Shibauchi, T

    T. Shibauchi, T. Hanaguri, and Y . Matsuda, Exotic Supercon- ducting States in FeSe-based Materials, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 89, 102002 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Kreisel, P

    A. Kreisel, P. J. Hirschfeld, and B. M. Andersen, On the Re- markable Superconductivity of FeSe and Its Close Cousins, Symmetry 12, 1402 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    A. E. B ¨ohmer, F. Hardy, F. Eilers, D. Ernst, P. Adelmann, P. Schweiss, T. Wolf, and C. Meingast, Lack of coupling be- tween superconductivity and orthorhombic distortion in stoi- chiometric single-crystalline FeSe, Phys. Rev. B 87, 180505 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Nakayama, Y

    K. Nakayama, Y . Miyata, G. N. Phan, T. Sato, Y . Tanabe, T. Urata, K. Tanigaki, and T. Takahashi, Reconstruction of band structure induced by electronic nematicity in an fese supercon- ductor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 237001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Shimojima, Y

    T. Shimojima, Y . Suzuki, T. Sonobe, A. Nakamura, M. Sakano, J. Omachi, K. Yoshioka, M. Kuwata-Gonokami, K. Ono, H. Kumigashira, A. E. B¨ohmer, F. Hardy, T. Wolf, C. Meingast, H. v. L¨ohneysen, H. Ikeda, and K. Ishizaka, Lifting of xz/yz or- bital degeneracy at the structural transition in detwinned fese, Phys. Rev. B 90, 121111 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    D. Liu, C. Li, J. Huang, B. Lei, L. Wang, X. Wu, B. Shen, Q. Gao, Y . Zhang, X. Liu, Y . Hu, Y . Xu, A. Liang, J. Liu, P. Ai, L. Zhao, S. He, L. Yu, G. Liu, Y . Mao, X. Dong, X. Jia, F. Zhang, S. Zhang, F. Yang, Z. Wang, Q. Peng, Y . Shi, J. Hu, T. Xiang, X. Chen, Z. Xu, C. Ch...

    2018

  2. [10]

    P. O. Sprau, A. Kostin, A. Kreisel, A. E. B ¨ohmer, V . Taufour, P. C. Canfield, S. Mukherjee, P. J. Hirschfeld, B. M. Andersen, and J. C. S. Davis, Discovery of orbital-selective Cooper pairing in FeSe, Science 357, 75 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Song, Y .-L

    C.-L. Song, Y .-L. Wang, P. Cheng, Y .-P. Jiang, W. Li, T. Zhang, Z. Li, K. He, L. Wang, J.-F. Jia, H.-H. Hung, C. Wu, X. Ma, X. Chen, and Q.-K. Xue, Direct Observation of Nodes and Twofold Symmetry in FeSe Superconductor, Science332, 1410 (2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    Song, Y .-L

    C.-L. Song, Y .-L. Wang, Y .-P. Jiang, L. Wang, K. He, X. Chen, J. E. Ho ffman, X.-C. Ma, and Q.-K. Xue, Suppression of Su- perconductivity by Twin Boundaries in FeSe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 137004 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Watashige, Y

    T. Watashige, Y . Tsutsumi, T. Hanaguri, Y . Kohsaka, S. Kasa- hara, A. Furusaki, M. Sigrist, C. Meingast, T. Wolf, H. v. L¨ohneysen, T. Shibauchi, and Y . Matsuda, Evidence for Time- Reversal Symmetry Breaking of the Superconducting State near Twin-Boundary Interfaces in FeSe...

    2015

  6. [14]

    Sigrist, K

    M. Sigrist, K. Kuboki, P. A. Lee, A. J. Millis, and T. M. Rice, Influence of twin boundaries on Josephson junctions between high-temperature and conventional superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 53, 2835 (1996)

    1996

  7. [15]

    Hashimoto, Y

    T. Hashimoto, Y . Ota, H. Q. Yamamoto, Y . Suzuki, T. Shi- mojima, S. Watanabe, C. Chen, S. Kasahara, Y . Matsuda, 6 T. Shibauchi, K. Okazaki, and S. Shin, Superconducting gap anisotropy sensitive to nematic domains in FeSe, Nature Com- munications 9, 282 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Lu, Y .-Y

    D.-C. Lu, Y .-Y . Lv, J. Li, B.-Y . Zhu, Q.-H. Wang, H.-B. Wang, and P.-H. Wu, Elliptical vortex and oblique vortex lattice in the FeSe superconductor based on the nematicity and mixed super- conducting orders, npj Quantum Materials 3, 12 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    S. Y . Song, C. Hua, L. Bell, W. Ko, H. Fangohr, J. Yan, G. B. Hal ´asz, E. F. Dumitrescu, B. J. Lawrie, and P. Maksy- movych, Nematically Templated V ortex Lattices in Supercon- ducting FeSe, Nano Letters 23, 2822 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    A. V . Putilov, C. Di Giorgio, V . L. Vadimov, D. J. Trainer, E. M. Lechner, J. L. Curtis, M. Abdel-Hafiez, O. S. V olkova, A. N. Vasiliev, D. A. Chareev, G. Karapetrov, A. E. Koshelev, A. Y . Aladyshkin, A. S. Mel’nikov, and M. Iavarone, V ortex- core properties and vortex-la...

    2019

  11. [19]

    L. N. Bulaevskii, V . V . Kuzii, and A. A. Sobyanin, Supercon- ducting system with weak coupling to the current in the ground state, JETP Lett. 25, 314 (1977)

    1977

  12. [20]

    Sellier, C

    H. Sellier, C. Baraduc, F. Lefloch, and R. Calemczuk, Half- Integer Shapiro Steps at the 0−π Crossover of a Ferromagnetic Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 257005 (2004)

    2004

  13. [21]

    Dewes, T

    A. Dewes, T. Gaber, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, and E. Goldobin, Semifluxon molecule under control, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 247001 (2008)

    2008

  14. [22]

    J. R. Kirtley, Fundamental studies of superconductors using scanning magnetic imaging, Reports on Progress in Physics73, 126501 (2010)

    2010

  15. [23]

    C. C. Tsuei, J. R. Kirtley, C. C. Chi, L. S. Yu-Jahnes, A. Gupta, T. Shaw, J. Z. Sun, and M. B. Ketchen, Pairing symmetry and flux quantization in a tricrystal superconducting ring of YBa2Cu3O7−δ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 593 (1994)

    1994

  16. [24]

    Hilgenkamp, Ariando, H.-J

    H. Hilgenkamp, Ariando, H.-J. H. Smilde, D. H. A. Blank, G. Rijnders, H. Rogalla, J. R. Kirtley, and C. C. Tsuei, Order- ing and manipulation of the magnetic moments in large-scale superconductingπ-loop arrays, Nature 422, 50 (2003)

    2003

  17. [25]

    Mannhart, H

    J. Mannhart, H. Hilgenkamp, B. Mayer, C. Gerber, J. R. Kirtley, K. A. Moler, and M. Sigrist, Generation of magnetic flux by single grain boundaries of YBa 2Cu3O7−x, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2782 (1996)

    1996

  18. [26]

    V . P. Mineev, M. M. Salomaa, and O. V . Lounasmaa, Superfluid 3He in rotation, Nature 324, 333 (1986)

    1986

  19. [27]

    O. V . Lounasmaa and E. Thuneberg, V ortices in rotating super- fluid 3He, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96, 7760 (1999)

    1999

  20. [28]

    J. H. Kim, D. Hong, K. Lee, and Y . Shin, Critical energy dissi- pation in a binary superfluid gas by a moving magnetic obstacle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 095302 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    J. H. Jung and Y . Shin, Half-quantum-vortex generation in a two-component Bose-Einstein condensate by an oscillatory magnetic obstacle, Phys. Rev. A 107, 053304 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Sigrist and K

    M. Sigrist and K. Ueda, Phenomenological theory of unconven- tional superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys.63, 239 (1991)

    1991

  23. [31]

    Sigrist and D

    M. Sigrist and D. F. Agterberg, The Role of Domain Walls on the V ortex Creep Dynamics in Unconventional Superconduc- tors, Progress of Theoretical Physics 102, 965 (1999)

    1999

  24. [32]

    Babaev, V ortices with Fractional Flux in Two-Gap Super- conductors and in Extended Faddeev Model, Phys

    E. Babaev, V ortices with Fractional Flux in Two-Gap Super- conductors and in Extended Faddeev Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 067001 (2002)

    2002

  25. [33]

    Matsunaga, M

    Y . Matsunaga, M. Ichioka, and K. Machida, V ortex state in double transition superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 157001 (2004)

    2004

  26. [34]

    Matsunaga, M

    Y . Matsunaga, M. Ichioka, and K. Machida, Flux flow and pin- ning of the vortex sheet structure in a two-component supercon- ductor, Phys. Rev. B 70, 100502 (2004)

    2004

  27. [35]

    Ichioka, Y

    M. Ichioka, Y . Matsunaga, and K. Machida, Magnetization process in a chiral p-wave superconductor with multidomains, Phys. Rev. B 71, 172510 (2005)

    2005

  28. [36]

    Tanaka, H

    Y . Tanaka, H. Yamamori, T. Yanagisawa, T. Nishio, and S. Ari- sawa, Experimental formation of a fractional vortex in a super- conducting bi-layer, Physica C: Superconductivity and its Ap- plications 548, 44 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    A. A. Zyuzin, J. Garaud, and E. Babaev, Nematic skyrmions in odd-parity superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 167001 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    P. T. How and S.-K. Yip, Half quantum vortices in a nematic superconductor, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043192 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    M. A. Silaev, Stable fractional flux vortices and unconventional magnetic state in two-component superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 83, 144519 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    J. C. Pi ˜na, C. C. de Souza Silva, and M. V . Miloˇsevi´c, Stability of fractional vortex states in a two-band mesoscopic supercon- ductor, Phys. Rev. B 86, 024512 (2012)

    2012

  33. [41]

    Iguchi, R

    Y . Iguchi, R. A. Shi, K. Kihou, C.-H. Lee, M. Barkman, A. L. Benfenati, V . Grinenko, E. Babaev, and K. A. Moler, Supercon- ducting vortices carrying a temperature-dependent fraction of the flux quantum, Science 380, 1244 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    R. Kato, Y . Enomoto, and S. Maekawa, E ffects of the surface boundary on the magnetization process in type-II superconduc- tors, Phys. Rev. B 47, 8016 (1993)

    1993

  35. [43]

    Machida and H

    M. Machida and H. Kaburaki, Direct simulation of the time- dependent Ginzburg-Landau equation for type-II superconduct- ing thin film: V ortex dynamics and V-I characteristics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3206 (1993)

    1993

  36. [44]

    Sadovskyy, A

    I. Sadovskyy, A. Koshelev, C. Phillips, D. Karpeyev, and A. Glatz, Stable large-scale solver for Ginzburg–Landau equa- tions for superconductors, Journal of Computational Physics 294, 639 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    Schmid, A time dependent Ginzburg-Landau equation and its application to the problem of resistivity in the mixed state, Physik der kondensierten Materie 5, 302 (1966)

    A. Schmid, A time dependent Ginzburg-Landau equation and its application to the problem of resistivity in the mixed state, Physik der kondensierten Materie 5, 302 (1966)

    1966

  38. [46]

    A. E. Koshelev, I. A. Sadovskyy, C. L. Phillips, and A. Glatz, Optimization of vortex pinning by nanoparticles using simu- lations of the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau model, Phys. Rev. B 93, 060508 (2016)

    2016

  39. [47]

    Y . Sera, T. Ueda, H. Adachi, and M. Ichioka, Relation of su- perconducting pairing symmetry and non-magnetic impurity ef- fects in vortex states, Symmetry 12, 175 (2020)

    2020

  40. [48]

    I. P. Zhang, J. C. Palmstrom, H. Noad, L. Bishop-Van Horn, Y . Iguchi, Z. Cui, E. Mueller, J. R. Kirtley, I. R. Fisher, and K. A. Moler, Imaging anisotropic vortex dynamics in FeSe, Phys. Rev. B 100, 024514 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    X. Z. Yu, W. Koshibae, Y . Tokunaga, K. Shibata, Y . Taguchi, N. Nagaosa, and Y . Tokura, Transformation between meron and skyrmion topological spin textures in a chiral magnet, Nature 564, 95 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    S.-Z. Lin, A. Saxena, and C. D. Batista, Skyrmion fractionaliza- tion and merons in chiral magnets with easy-plane anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B 91, 224407 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    Augustin, S

    M. Augustin, S. Jenkins, R. F. L. Evans, K. S. Novoselov, and E. J. G. Santos, Properties and dynamics of meron topologi- cal spin textures in the two-dimensional magnet CrCl 3, Nature Communications 12, 185 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    Togawa, K

    Y . Togawa, K. Harada, T. Akashi, H. Kasai, T. Matsuda, F. Nori, A. Maeda, and A. Tonomura, Direct observation of rectified motion of vortices in a niobium superconductor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 087002 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.