Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 61 references

Nonreciprocal metasurfaces with epsilon-near-zero materials

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A silicon-on-ITO metasurface shows ultrafast nonreciprocal optical transmission, with forward and backward light behaving differently in a narrow band around the epsilon-near-zero wavelength.

desk verdict The experiment is plausible but the paper's own simulation says the effect should not happen, so the mechanism is unproven. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11920 v2 pith:2F5SGOJH submitted 2025-01-21 physics.optics physics.app-ph

Albert Mathew , Rebecca Aschwanden , Aditya Tripathi , Piyush Jangid , Basudeb Sain , Thomas Zentgraf , Sergey Kruk This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsphysics.app-ph
keywords nonreciprocalopticsmetasurfaceepsilon-near-zeroindiumtinoxideopticalisolatornonlinearultrafastswitchingnanophotonics
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 reports a metasurface—a flat array of subwavelength silicon disks on a film of indium tin oxide (ITO)—that transmits light differently depending on whether the light hits it from the front or the back. The asymmetry is switched on only by the light itself, at peak intensities of 40–70 GW/cm$^2$, and appears in a narrow band (1200–1300 nm) centered on the wavelength where ITO's permittivity crosses zero. Because the nonlinearity of ITO in that epsilon-near-zero regime is known to recover in a few hundred femtoseconds, the authors argue that the nonreciprocal response is ultrafast, unlike earlier nonlinear metasurface diodes that relied on slow thermal or phase-change dynamics. If correct, this is the first demonstration of nanoscale nonreciprocity that is not limited by slow material dynamics, opening a route to isolators and nonreciprocal wavefront control on a chip.

What carries the argument

The central object is the hybrid nanoresonator formed by a silicon nanodisk on an indium tin oxide film whose permittivity crosses zero at approximately 1230 nm, the epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) regime. The structure lacks mirror symmetry along the propagation direction, so forward and backward illumination produce different resonant near-field intensity distributions inside the ITO layer. In linear optics this asymmetry is invisible in the far field, but once the ITO's intensity-dependent refractive index is excited, the two directions experience different nonlinear index modulations and therefore different transmissions. The ENZ nonlinearity carries the argument: it supplies the large, fast refractive-index change that converts the geometric asymmetry into a nonreciprocal response.

What would settle it

A direct time-resolved measurement of the metasurface's own switching and recovery would settle the ultrafast claim: if the transmission contrast recovers on a nanosecond or longer timescale, or if pump–probe traces show a thermal component, the central claim fails. A simpler check is to repeat the forward/backward measurement with the sample flipped multiple times and with reported error bars, since the asserted contrast appears at one intermediate intensity only.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a silicon-on-ITO metasurface exhibits nonlinear, self-biased optical nonreciprocity with an ultrafast response. In the linear regime the forward and backward transmissions are identical, as reciprocity demands, even though the near-field distributions inside the ITO film are strongly asymmetric. At intermediate intensities (around 52 GW/cm$^2$), the light-induced change of the ITO refractive index near its epsilon-near-zero wavelength (1230 nm) suppresses backward transmission while leaving forward transmission close to the linear value, producing a forward/backward transmission contrast that peaks in the 1200–1300 nm range. Numerical simulations using the ITO nonlinearity taken from the literature reproduce the effect and also predict a nonreciprocal phase accumulation in the transmitted field. The authors infer the switching speed from the known sub-picosecond response of the ITO nonlinearity—rise time no longer than 200 fs and recovery around 360 fs—rather than by directly measuring the switching time of the fabricated sample.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the assumption that the ITO film inside the fabricated metasurface has the same large, sub-picosecond nonlinear refractive-index change assumed from the literature, and that the observed forward/backward contrast at 52 GW/cm$^2$ is caused by that nonlinearity rather than by heating or damage.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A flat, bias-free optical isolator can be built from a single subwavelength-thick layer, with no magnet and no slow material transition.
  • Because the nonreciprocity appears in both amplitude and phase of the transmitted field, the same mechanism can be distributed across a metasurface to create different wavefronts for forward versus backward light, such as lenses, deflectors, or holograms.
  • The operating band is tied to the ENZ wavelength, so choosing or tuning an ENZ material should shift the nonreciprocal band to other spectral regions.
  • The intensity requirement (40–70 GW/cm$^2$) restricts current operation to pulsed laser sources, but the authors argue that this is technical rather than fundamental and could be lowered by resonant engineering.
  • Fast, self-biased nonreciprocity opens a path to nanoscale routing and switching in LiDAR, optical communications, and machine vision.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper infers the switching time from literature values for bare ITO, but the metasurface sample itself was not time-resolved; a direct pump–probe measurement of this exact device would be the natural next experiment.
  • If the ultrafast claim holds, a natural extension is to excite the ENZ nonlinearity with lower peak powers by coupling to high-Q resonances such as bound states in the continuum, trading a fraction of speed for practical power levels.
  • The amplitude and phase nonreciprocity could be combined with spatial grading of the silicon disks to make metasurfaces whose forward and backward functionalities are independent, effectively making an optical component whose two sides are different devices.
  • Other ENZ platforms, such as conducting polymers, could reproduce the mechanism at different wavelengths or lower powers, but only if their nonlinear coefficients and recovery times match the ITO values assumed here.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a silicon-on-ITO metasurface that exhibits nonlinear nonreciprocal transmission in the 1200–1300 nm wavelength range at peak intensities of 40–70 GW/cm^2. The authors attribute this effect to the epsilon-near-zero (ENZ) nonlinearity of the ITO film, with different near-field distributions for forward and backward propagation leading to asymmetric refractive-index modulation. They support the design with COMSOL simulations, present experimental transmission spectra for forward and backward illumination at three intensities, and claim that the nonreciprocity extends to both amplitude and phase, with an ultrafast response inferred from prior measurements of ITO's nonlinearity.

Significance. If fully validated, this would be the first demonstration of a nanoscale nonreciprocal metasurface whose response is not limited by thermal or phase-transition dynamics, potentially opening a route to ultrafast nonreciprocal wavefront control. The use of an ENZ material in a purposely asymmetric metasurface for nonlinear nonreciprocity is a plausible and interesting concept. However, the paper's central claims currently rest on an internal contradiction between the simulation and experimental description, an unmeasured phase nonreciprocity, and an inferred rather than measured switching time. The experimental transmission data themselves are suggestive but lack error bars and thermal controls, so the significance is conditional on resolving these issues.

major comments (4)
  1. [Numerical results, Fig. 2c and Experimental results] There is an internal contradiction in the theoretical support. The caption of Fig. 2c states 'Line show identical forward/backward transmission,' yet the experimental section says the observed nonreciprocity is 'as predicted theoretically in Fig. 2c.' If the nonlinear simulation actually predicts identical forward and backward transmission, it cannot serve as evidence for the ENZ-based nonreciprocity claimed in the experiment. The authors must either provide simulation results that show a forward/backward contrast (and correct the caption), or explicitly acknowledge that the simulation does not reproduce the measured nonreciprocity and present an alternative theoretical explanation. As written, the central attribution of the observed contrast to the proposed ENZ mechanism is unsupported.
  2. [Abstract and Fig. 2d] The claim that 'nonreciprocity of the metasurface extends to both amplitude and phase' is not supported by the evidence presented. Figure 2d plots the phase difference between the linear and nonlinear regimes, not a forward/backward phase contrast. No experimental phase measurements are reported anywhere in the manuscript. The abstract and summary overstate the result; the authors should either provide actual forward/backward phase data (simulated or measured) or restrict the nonreciprocity claim to amplitude.
  3. [Summary, last paragraph] The ultrafast response claim is inferred from the literature (ref. [37]) rather than measured for this sample. The experiments use 230 fs pulses at 1 MHz repetition rate, which gives a substantial average power at the reported peak intensities; thermal accumulation could in principle contribute to the observed transmission changes, especially at the higher intensities where saturation is reported. No pump-probe or time-resolved measurement is presented, and no control experiments are shown to rule out thermal effects. To support the central claim of an ultrafast ENZ-based nonreciprocity, the authors need to measure the switching dynamics directly or provide evidence that the response follows the sub-picosecond ITO nonlinearity rather than slower thermal dynamics.
  4. [Experimental results, Fig. 3] The key experimental result—the forward/backward transmission contrast at 52 GW/cm^2—is presented without error bars, repeated measurements, or a detailed description of the alignment procedure for sample flipping. Sample flipping can introduce small changes in beam incidence angle or focal position, and these could produce apparent asymmetries. The authors should include error bars, multiple trials, and a control measurement (e.g., monitoring a linear reference sample under the same flipping procedure) to demonstrate that the contrast is not a measurement artifact.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2c caption] The caption contains a typo: 'Line show identical forward/backward transmission' should be 'Lines show identical forward/backward transmission.'
  2. [Summary, last paragraph] The phrase 'Single largest constrain' should be 'Single largest constraint'; similar typographical issues ('constrains' for 'constraints') appear in the introduction.
  3. [Experimental setup] The transmission is referenced to the ITO-coated glass substrate, but the manuscript does not show the reference spectrum or explain how the substrate contribution is subtracted from the metasurface measurement; adding this detail would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Ref. [37] and materials] The nonlinear refractive index is taken from ref. [37], but the manuscript does not discuss whether the fabricated ITO film in this work has the same ENZ wavelength and nonlinearity magnitude as the film in that reference; a brief comparison (e.g., ellipsometry data near the ENZ wavelength) would strengthen the argument.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ITO nonlinear parameters come from an independent measurement, the metasurface design is optimized for linear transmission and field contrast, and no prediction is obtained by fitting the measured nonreciprocal contrast.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The nonlinear refractive index of ITO is taken from the independent prior measurement of Alam et al. (ref. [37]) at a stated 50 GW/cm^2 peak power density, and the linear optical constants of the fabricated ITO are from the authors' own ellipsometry. The COMSOL design optimization targets linear transmission and forward/backward field contrast, not the experimentally observed transmission contrast. The experimental nonreciprocity is measured by flipping the sample, and the simulation is not calibrated to that contrast. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing claim rests on a self-citation; the cited prior work by the same group (refs. [21,31,34]) is contextual rather than essential. The paper does contain an internal inconsistency: Fig. 2c is captioned "Line show identical forward/backward transmission," which contradicts the text's claim that the observed nonreciprocity was "predicted theoretically in Fig. 2c," and the ultrafast response is inferred from ref. [37] rather than measured here. These are correctness or evidential weaknesses, not circularity, because the theory input does not already contain the target nonreciprocal output.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the design geometry, the prior ITO nonlinearity, and the assumption that the observed contrast is free of experimental artifacts. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Metasurface geometry = Si disk height 357 nm, diameter 458 nm, period 636 nm, ITO thickness 310 nm
    Selected via COMSOL optimization to maximize linear transmission and forward/backward field contrast; not independently measured or varied in experiment.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Forward and backward illumination produce different near-field distributions inside the ITO film, even though linear far-field transmission is identical.
    This is the core mechanism of the paper, verified in simulation (Fig. 2a,b) but not directly measured experimentally.
  • domain assumption The ITO nonlinear response is the same as reported in ref. [37], with 200 fs rise and 360 fs recovery, and remains intact in the fabricated metasurface.
    Used for simulations and for the ultrafast claim; not measured in this sample.
  • domain assumption The measured transmission asymmetry is not caused by sample misalignment, damage, or thermal effects at 1 MHz repetition rate.
    No error analysis or control experiments for these artifacts are provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonreciprocal metasurfaces with epsilon-near-zero materials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2F5SGOJH

@misc{pith2026250111920,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonreciprocal metasurfaces with epsilon-near-zero materials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2F5SGOJH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11920}
}
abstract

Nonreciprocal optics enables asymmetric transmission of light when its sources and detectors are exchanged. A canonical example -- optical isolator -- enables light propagation in only one direction, similar to how electrical diodes enable unidirectional flow of electric current. Nonreciprocal optics today, unlike nonreciprocal electronics, remains bulky. Recently, nonlinear metasurfaces opened up a pathway to strong optical nonreciprocity at the nanoscale. However, demonstrations to date were based on optically slow nonlinearities involving thermal effects or phase transition materials. In this work, we demonstrate a nonreciprocal metasurface with an ultra-fast optical response based on indium tin oxide in its epsilon-near-zero regime. It operates in the spectral range of 1200-1300 nm with incident power densities of 40-70 GW/cm$^2$. Furthermore, the nonreciprocity of the metasurface extends to both amplitude and phase of the forward/backward transmission opening a pathway to nonreciprocal wavefront control at the nanoscale.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11920 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Nonreciprocal transmission of light through a hybrid Si-ITO metasurface. (a) Concept image of nonreciprocal trans [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Numerical results for Si-ITO metasurface. (a) Calculated linear forward transmission. Inset: corresponding near-field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Experimental results. (a,b) White light transmission and nonlinear transmission at incident power of 7, 52 and 82 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    M. Z. Alam, I. De Leon, and R. W. Boyd, Large optical nonlinearity of indium tin oxide in its epsilon-near-zero region, Science 352, 795 (2016)

    2016

  2. [1]

    S. S. Kruk and Y. S. Kivshar, Functional Meta-Optics and Nanophotonics Governed by Mie Resonances, ACS Photonics 4, 2638 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [2]

    S. M. Kamali, E. Arbabi, A. Arbabi, and A. Faraon, A re- view of dielectric optical metasurfaces for wavefront con- trol, Nanophotonics 7, 1041 (2018)

    2018

  4. [3]

    W. T. Chen, A. Y. Zhu, and F. Capasso, Flat optics with dispersion-engineered metasurfaces, Nature Reviews Ma- terials 5, 604 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [4]

    Peng, S ¸

    B. Peng, S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, W. Chen, F. Nori, and L. Yang, What is and what is not electromagnetically induced transparency in whispering-gallery microcavities, Nat. Commun. 5, 1 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Caloz, A

    C. Caloz, A. Al` u, S. Tretyakov, D. Sounas, K. Achouri, and Z. L. Deck-L´ eger, Electromagnetic Nonreciprocity, Physical Review Applied 10, 047001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [6]

    K. Y. Yang, J. Skarda, M. Cotrufo, A. Dutt, G. H. Ahn, M. Sawaby, D. Vercruysse, A. Arbabian, S. Fan, A. Al` u, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, Inverse-designed non-reciprocal pulse router for chip-based LiDAR, Nature Photonics 2020 14:6 14, 369 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [7]

    W. Yang, J. Qin, J. Long, W. Yan, Y. Yang, C. Li, E. Li, J. Hu, L. Deng, Q. Du, and L. Bi, A self-biased non- reciprocal magnetic metasurface for bidirectional phase modulation, Nature Electronics 2023 6:3 6, 225 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 61 references
  1. [8]

    Yu and S

    Z. Yu and S. Fan, Complete optical isolation created by indirect interband photonic transitions, Nature Photon- ics 2009 3:2 3, 91 (2009)

    2009

  2. [9]

    M. S. Kang, A. Butsch, and P. S. J. Russell, Recon- figurable light-driven opto-acoustic isolators in photonic crystal fibre, Nature Photonics 5, 549 (2011)

    2011

  3. [10]

    N. A. Estep, D. L. Sounas, J. Soric, and A. Al` u, Magnetic-free non-reciprocity and isolation based on parametrically modulated coupled-resonator loops, Na- ture Physics 10, 923 (2014)

    2014

  4. [11]

    E. A. Kittlaus, W. M. Jones, P. T. Rakich, N. T. Ot- terstrom, R. E. Muller, and M. Rais-Zadeh, Electrically driven acousto-optics and broadband non-reciprocity in silicon photonics, Nature Photonics 2020 15:1 15, 43 (2020)

    2020

  5. [12]

    H. Tian, J. Liu, A. Siddharth, R. N. Wang, T. Bl´ esin, J. He, T. J. Kippenberg, and S. A. Bhave, Magnetic-free silicon nitride integrated optical isolator, Nature Photon- ics 2021 15:11 15, 828 (2021)

    2021

  6. [13]

    C. C. Wanjura, J. J. Slim, J. del Pino, M. Brunelli, E. Verhagen, and A. Nunnenkamp, Quadrature nonre- ciprocity in bosonic networks without breaking time- reversal symmetry, Nature Physics 2023 19:10 19, 1429 (2023)

    2023

  7. [14]

    M. Yu, R. Cheng, C. Reimer, L. He, K. Luke, E. Puma, L. Shao, A. Shams-Ansari, X. Ren, H. R. Grant, L. Jo- hansson, M. Zhang, and M. Lonˇ car, Integrated electro- optic isolator on thin-film lithium niobate, Nature Pho- tonics 2023 17:8 17, 666 (2023)

    2023

  8. [15]

    D. B. Sohn, O. E. ¨Orsel, and G. Bahl, Electrically driven optical isolation through phonon-mediated photonic Aut- ler–Townes splitting, Nature Photonics 2021 15:11 15, 822 (2021)

    2021

  9. [16]

    X. Ji, J. Liu, J. He, R. N. Wang, Z. Qiu, J. Riemens- berger, and T. J. Kippenberg, Compact, spatial-mode- interaction-free, ultralow-loss, nonlinear photonic inte- grated circuits, Communications Physics 2022 5:1 5, 1 (2022)

    2022

  10. [17]

    M. D. Tocci, M. J. Bloemer, M. Scalora, J. P. Dowling, and C. M. Bowden, Thin-film nonlinear optical diode, Applied Physics Letters 66, 2324 (1995)

    1995

  11. [18]

    Anand, R

    B. Anand, R. Podila, K. Lingam, S. R. Krishnan, S. Siva Sankara Sai, R. Philip, and A. M. Rao, Optical Diode Action from Axially Asymmetric Nonlinearity in an All-Carbon Solid-State Device, Nano Letters 13, 5771 (2013)

    2013

  12. [19]

    J. Tang, F. Zhang, F. Zhou, X. Tang, X. Dai, and S. Lu, Broadband nonlinear optical response in GeSe nanoplates and its applications in all-optical diode, Nanophotonics 7 9, 2007 (2020)

    2020

  13. [20]

    C. Wan, E. H. Horak, J. King, J. Salman, Z. Zhang, Y. Zhou, P. Roney, B. Gundlach, S. Ramanathan, R. H. Goldsmith, and M. A. Kats, Limiting Optical Diodes En- abled by the Phase Transition of Vanadium Dioxide, ACS Photonics 5, 2688 (2018)

    2018

  14. [21]

    Koshelev, S

    K. Koshelev, S. Kruk, E. Melik-Gaykazyan, J.-H. Choi, A. Bogdanov, H.-G. Park, and Y. Kivshar, Subwave- length dielectric resonators for nonlinear nanophotonics., Science 367, 288 (2020)

    2020

  15. [22]

    Zubyuk, L

    V. Zubyuk, L. Carletti, M. Shcherbakov, and S. Kruk, Resonant dielectric metasurfaces in strong optical fields, APL Materials 9, 060701 (2021)

    2021

  16. [23]

    Poutrina and A

    E. Poutrina and A. Urbas, Multipolar interference for non-reciprocal nonlinear generation, Scientific Reports 6, 25113 (2016)

    2016

  17. [24]

    K. H. Kim, Asymmetric Second-Harmonic Generation with High Efficiency from a Non-chiral Hybrid Bilayer Complementary Metasurface, Plasmonics 16, 77 (2021)

    2021

  18. [25]

    Lawrence, D

    M. Lawrence, D. R. Barton, and J. A. Dionne, Nonrecip- rocal Flat Optics with Silicon Metasurfaces, Nano Letters 18, 1104 (2018)

    2018

  19. [26]

    Jin and C

    B. Jin and C. Argyropoulos, Self-Induced Passive Non- reciprocal Transmission by Nonlinear Bifacial Dielec- tric Metasurfaces, Physical Review Applied 13, 054056 (2020)

    2020

  20. [27]

    Cheng, R

    L. Cheng, R. Alaee, A. Safari, M. Karimi, L. Zhang, and R. W. Boyd, Superscattering, superabsorption, and nonreciprocity in nonlinear antennas, ACS Photonics 8, 585 (2021), doi: 10.1021/acsphotonics.0c01637

    2021 doi

  21. [28]

    Antonellis, R

    N. Antonellis, R. Thomas, M. A. Kats, I. Vitebskiy, and T. Kottos, Nonreciprocity in Photonic Structures with Phase-Change Components, Physical Review Ap- plied 11, 024046 (2019)

    2019

  22. [29]

    Karakurt, C

    I. Karakurt, C. H. Adams, P. Leiderer, J. Boneberg, and R. F. Haglund, Jr., Nonreciprocal switching of VO¡sub¿2¡/sub¿ thin films on microstructured surfaces, Optics Letters, Vol. 35, Issue 10, pp. 1506-1508 35, 1506 (2010)

    2010

  23. [30]

    Shitrit, J

    N. Shitrit, J. Kim, D. S. Barth, H. Ramezani, Y. Wang, and X. Zhang, Asymmetric Free-Space Light Transport at Nonlinear Metasurfaces, Physical Review Letters 121, 046101 (2018)

    2018

  24. [31]

    S. S. Kruk, L. Wang, B. Sain, Z. Dong, J. Yang, T. Zent- graf, and Y. Kivshar, Asymmetric parametric generation of images with nonlinear dielectric metasurfaces, Nat. Photonics 16, 561 (2022)

    2022

  25. [32]

    S. Kruk, A. Poddubny, D. Smirnova, L. Wang, A. Slobozhanyuk, A. Shorokhov, I. Kravchenko, B. Luther-Davies, and Y. Kivshar, Nonlinear light gen- eration in topological nanostructures, Nature Nanotech- nology 14, 126 (2019)

    2019

  26. [33]

    Boroviks, A

    S. Boroviks, A. Kiselev, K. Achouri, and O. J. F. Mar- tin, Demonstration of a plasmonic nonlinear pseudodi- ode, Nano Letters 23, 3362 (2023)

    2023

  27. [34]

    Tripathi, C

    A. Tripathi, C. F. Ugwu, V. S. Asadchy, I. Faniayeu, I. Kravchenko, S. Fan, Y. Kivshar, J. Valentine, and S. S. Kruk, Nanoscale optical nonreciprocity with nonlinear metasurfaces, Nature Communications 15, 5077 (2024)

    2024

  28. [35]

    J. King, C. Wan, T. J. Park, S. Deshpande, Z. Zhang, S. Ramanathan, and M. A. Kats, Electrically tunable VO2–metal metasurface for mid-infrared switching, lim- iting and nonlinear isolation, Nature Photonics 18, 74 (2024)

    2024

  29. [36]

    Cotrufo, A

    M. Cotrufo, A. Cordaro, D. L. Sounas, A. Polman, and A. Al` u, Passive bias-free non-reciprocal metasurfaces based on thermally nonlinear quasi-bound states in the continuum, Nature Photonics 18, 81 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Caspani, R

    L. Caspani, R. P. Kaipurath, M. Clerici, M. Ferrera, T. Roger, J. Kim, N. Kinsey, M. Pietrzyk, A. Di Falco, V. M. Shalaev, A. Boltasseva, and D. Faccio, Enhanced Nonlinear Refractive Index in ϵ-Near-Zero Materials, Physical Review Letters 116, 233901 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    W. Shi, H. Liu, and Z. Wang, Polarization-independent large third-order-nonlinearity of orthogonal nanoanten- nas coupled to an epsilon-near-zero material, Nanomate- rials 11, 3424 (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    J. Deng, Y. Tang, S. Chen, K. Li, A. V. Zayats, and G. Li, Giant enhancement of second-order nonlinearity of epsilon-near-zero medium by a plasmonic metasurface, Nano Letters 20, 5421 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    P. Xie, Y. Deng, Q. Ding, X. Zheng, Z. Zhou, Y. Kivshar, and W. Wang, Strong coupling of resonant metasurfaces with epsilon-near-zero guided modes, Nano Letters 24, 9027 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    Minerbi, S

    E. Minerbi, S. Sideris, J. B. Khurgin, and T. Ellenbo- gen, The role of epsilon near zero and hot electrons in enhanced dynamic thz emission from nonlinear metasur- faces, Nano Letters 22, 6194 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    M. Z. Alam, S. A. Schulz, J. Upham, I. De Leon, and R. W. Boyd, Large optical nonlinearity of nanoantennas coupled to an epsilon-near-zero material, Nature Photon- ics 12, 79 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    W. Ma, C. Zhou, D. Chen, S. You, X. Wang, L. Wang, L. Jin, L. Huang, D. Wang, and A. E. Miroshnichenko, Active quasi-bic metasurfaces assisted by epsilon-near- zero materials, Optics Express 31, 13125 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    S. A. Schulz, L. C. Wynne, and A. Di Falco, Optical metasurfaces based on epsilon-near-zero materials: To- wards low power nonlinear optics, in 2020 22nd Interna- tional Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (IC- TON) (IEEE, 2020) pp. 1–4

    2020

  38. [46]

    Vatani, B

    S. Vatani, B. Barahimi, and M. K. Moravvej-Farshi, All- optical azo-based modulator topped with si metasurfaces, Scientific Reports 12, 21490 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Z. Wang, P. Zhou, and G. Zheng, Electrically switchable highly efficient epsilon-near-zero metasurfaces absorber with broadband response, Results in Physics 14, 102376 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Z. T. Xie, J. Wu, H. Fu, and Q. Li, Tunable electro-and all-optical switch based on epsilon-near-zero metasurface, IEEE Photonics Journal 12, 1 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    C. Liu, M. Z. Alam, K. Pang, K. Manukyan, O. Reshef, Y. Zhou, S. Choudhary, J. Patrow, A. Pennathurs, H. Song, et al., Photon acceleration using a time-varying epsilon-near-zero metasurface, ACS Photonics 8, 716 (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    Kaissner, J

    R. Kaissner, J. Li, W. Lu, X. Li, F. Neubrech, J. Wang, and N. Liu, Electrochemically controlled metasurfaces with high-contrast switching at visible frequencies, Sci- ence Advances 7, eabd9450 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Karst, M

    J. Karst, M. Floess, M. Ubl, C. Dingler, C. Malacrida, T. Steinle, S. Ludwigs, M. Hentschel, and H. Giessen, Electrically switchable metallic polymer nanoantennas, Science 374, 612 (2021). 8

    2021

  44. [52]

    Ellipsometry data for the refractive index of ito(n&k), 10.5281/zenodo.14208280 (2024)

    2024 doi

  45. [53]

    D. T. Pierce and W. E. Spicer, Electronic structure of amorphous si from photoemission and optical studies, Physical Review B 5, 3017 (1972)

    1972

  46. [54]

    I. H. Malitson, Interspecimen comparison of the refrac- tive index of fused silica, Josa 55, 1205 (1965)

    1965

  47. [55]

    Karst, M

    J. Karst, M. Floess, M. Ubl, C. Dingler, C. Malacrida, T. Steinle, S. Ludwigs, M. Hentschel, and H. Giessen, Electrically switchable metallic polymer nanoantennas, Science 374, 612 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    Kaissner, J

    R. Kaissner, J. Li, W. Lu, X. Li, F. Neubrech, J. Wang, and N. Liu, Electrochemically controlled metasurfaces with high-contrast switching at visi- ble frequencies, Science Advances 7, eabd9450 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.abd9450

    2021 doi

  49. [57]

    Khorasaninejad, W

    M. Khorasaninejad, W. T. Chen, R. C. Devlin, J. Oh, A. Y. Zhu, and F. Capasso, Metalenses at visible wavelengths: Diffraction-limited focusing and subwave- length resolution imaging, Science 352, 1190 (2016), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aaf6644

    2016 doi

  50. [58]

    Paniagua-Dom ´ ınguez, Y

    R. Paniagua-Dom ´ ınguez, Y. F. Yu, E. Khaidarov, S. Choi, V. Leong, R. M. Bakker, X. Liang, Y. H. Fu, V. Valuckas, L. A. Krivitsky, and A. I. Kuznetsov, A metalens with a near-unity numerical aperture, Nano Letters 18, 2124 (2018), pMID: 29485885, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs....

    2018 doi

  51. [59]

    Zheng, H

    G. Zheng, H. M¨ uhlenbernd, M. Kenney, G. Li, T. Zent- graf, and S. Zhang, Metasurface holograms reaching 80% efficiency, Nature nanotechnology 10, 308 (2015)

    2015

  52. [60]

    L. Wang, S. Kruk, H. Tang, T. Li, I. Kravchenko, D. N. Neshev, and Y. S. Kivshar, Grayscale transparent meta- surface holograms, Optica 3, 1504 (2016)

    2016

  53. [61]

    Y. F. Yu, A. Y. Zhu, R. Paniagua-Dom \’\inguez, Y. H. Fu, B. Luk’yanchuk, and A. I. Kuznetsov, High- transmission dielectric metasurface with 2$π$ phase con- trol at visible wavelengths, Laser & Photonics Reviews9, 412 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.