Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 61 references

Eliashberg Theory and Superfluid Stiffness of Band-Off-Diagonal Pairing in Twisted Graphene

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A purely interband superconducting order, extended to frequency-dependent Eliashberg theory, explains V-shaped tunneling spectra and non-saturating superfluid stiffness in twisted graphene.

desk verdict Serious extension of BOD pairing to Eliashberg theory, but the no-admixture symmetry proof is linear-order only and the stiffness section uses a BCS-like ansatz. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.12435 v1 pith:AJQ5WTUC submitted 2025-01-21 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.str-el

Bernhard Putzer , Mathias S. Scheurer This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.str-el
keywords band-off-diagonalsuperconductivityEliashbergtheorytwistedgraphenesuperfluidstiffnessodd-frequencypairingintervalleyphononsT-IVCfluctuationsquantumgeometry
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 pairing state of twisted graphene superconductors that couples electrons in different bands, known as band-off-diagonal pairing, survives when the order parameter is allowed to depend on frequency, and that its distinct signatures explain two experiments that conventional pairing cannot: V-shaped tunneling spectra and superfluid stiffness that fails to saturate exponentially at low temperature. Within Eliashberg theory, the leading intervalley phonon or T-IVC fluctuation coupling produces a purely interband order parameter with an admixed odd-frequency component whose size grows with the splitting between the flat bands. The paper further shows that this interband structure lowers the temperature below which the superfluid stiffness saturates, and for a chiral state can keep the excitation spectrum nodal down to zero temperature, yielding power-law rather than exponential temperature dependence. If correct, a single mechanism accounts for both tunneling and stiffness anomalies in twisted multilayer graphene.

What carries the argument

The central object is the frequency-dependent order-parameter matrix φ(iω_n,k) in band space, obtained as the anomalous self-energy of a two-band Eliashberg equation with rainbow diagrams and no vertex corrections. Two symmetries carry the argument: the fermionic antisymmetry φ(iω_n,k)=−φ^T(−iω_n,k) and the band-space reflection symmetry σzφσz=±φ, which holds exactly when the boson coupling is the leading momentum-independent intervalley form g∝η_xσ0,η_yσ0. The reflection symmetry forbids band-diagonal admixture, while the antisymmetry, combined with band splitting, forces the odd-frequency σ_x component. For the superfluid stiffness, the machinery is a multiband mean-field expression for D_s that includes derivatives of the band dispersion, the band-splitting angle θ_k encoding quantum geometry, and the order-parameter phase φ_k.

What would settle it

Measure the penetration depth of twisted multilayer graphene down to T≈0.02Tc in a doping regime where tunneling shows a V-shaped gap: if the superfluid stiffness saturates exponentially, the chiral nodal band-off-diagonal scenario is ruled out, whereas a $T^{2}$ approach without saturation supports it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for leading-order intervalley pairing glue, given by the momentum-independent couplings g∝η_xσ0 and g∝η_yσ0, the Eliashberg order parameter remains exactly band-off-diagonal: φ(iω_n,k)=f^e_k(iω_n)σ_y+f^o_k(iω_n)σ_x, with no σ0 or σz component, even though full frequency dependence is retained. The prohibition follows from a band-space reflection symmetry σzφσz=±φ, exact in the leading-coupling limit. Because the normal state is spin-polarized, even- and odd-frequency parts mix; the odd σ_x component grows with the band splitting t and vanishes for degenerate bands. The resulting Bogoliubov spectrum E_{k,±}=±|δ_k|+$\sqrt$((ε_k−μ)^2+|Δ_k|^2) has an excitation gap much smaller than the order-parameter magnitude, which the authors identify as the origin of the V-shaped density of states. Computing the superfluid stiffness with multiband and quantum-geometric terms, they find that s-wave band-off-diagonal pairing reduces the temperature scale of exponential saturation, while a chiral band-off-diagonal state can remain nodal to T=0, producing non-saturating stiffness with universal $T^{2}$ low-temperature scaling and a potentially subleading log(T) contribution.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the pairing glue is the leading momentum-independent intervalley coupling g∝η_xσ0,η_yσ0 acting on a spin-polarized normal state without intervalley coherence; the stiffness conclusions additionally assume a BCS-like temperature dependence of the gap magnitude.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Purely interband order with no intraband admixture is a robust property of leading-order intervalley phonon and T-IVC-fluctuation pairing even with full Matsubara-frequency dependence, extending the mean-field band-off-diagonal picture to Eliashberg theory.
  • The odd-frequency σ_x component grows monotonically with flat-band splitting and vanishes for degenerate bands, giving a band-structure-dependent signature that can be probed in different twist angles or fillings.
  • Band-off-diagonal pairing makes the tunneling density of states V-shaped, with an excitation gap much smaller than the order-parameter magnitude, consistent with STM spectra that conventional band-diagonal pairing cannot reproduce.
  • For s-wave band-off-diagonal pairing the superfluid stiffness saturation temperature is suppressed relative to band-diagonal pairing, while for chiral band-off-diagonal pairing in the nodal regime the stiffness does not exponentially saturate and obeys T^2 scaling at low temperature.
  • A single band-off-diagonal state can therefore simultaneously explain V-shaped tunneling spectra and the recently observed non-saturating superfluid stiffness in twisted multilayer graphene.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the stiffness section uses a BCS-like Δ(T) ansatz rather than the self-consistent Eliashberg Δ(T), the quantitative saturation temperatures could shift when the two are combined, but the qualitative nodal-regime non-saturation should survive.
  • The same symmetry argument may apply to other flavor-polarized flat-band superconductors with intervalley-like coupling, where odd-frequency admixture would generically appear whenever the paired bands are nondegenerate.
  • A direct doping-dependent test is suggested by the paper: samples whose tunneling spectra are V-shaped (nodal) should show non-saturating superfluid stiffness, while samples with U-shaped (gapped) spectra should saturate exponentially.
  • If the chiral nodal regime explains the stiffness data, one should see a competition between conventional and geometric contributions to D_s at low temperature, since their leading T^2 corrections have opposite signs.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. Putzer and Scheurer study band-off-diagonal (BOD) superconductivity in twisted graphene within Eliashberg theory. In a spin-polarized two-band model with pairing mediated by intervalley phonons or by T-IVC fluctuations (which they argue are both described by the momentum-independent vertices in Eq. (9)), they solve the nonlinear multiband Eliashberg equation and claim that the order parameter remains purely band-off-diagonal, taking the form phi(i omega_n, k) = f_e(k, i omega_n) sigma_y + f_o(k, i omega_n) sigma_x (Eq. (20)), with the odd-frequency sigma_x component increasing with the band splitting t. Numerical analytic continuation gives a spectral function with enhanced subgap weight relative to an intravalley band-diagonal comparison state. The second half of the paper derives a mean-field multi-band superfluid-stiffness formula including quantum-geometric terms and shows, for s-wave and chiral BOD order parameters, that the interband structure reduces or removes the temperature scale for exponential saturation of D_s(T); for the chiral state a low-temperature scaling analysis yields T^2 and log T contributions.

Significance. The significance is conditional on the no-admixture claim (Eq. (20)) being established beyond the linearized level. If it is, the paper constitutes a nontrivial extension of the static mean-field BOD proposal of Ref. [26] to frequency-dependent pairing, with a concrete prediction for an odd-frequency admixture that grows with band splitting, and it offers a single mechanism for two experimental observations (V-shaped tunneling spectra and non-saturating superfluid stiffness). The paper's strengths are concrete: the numerical protocol is explicit (grid sizes, parameters, iteration and rescaling strategy), BOD and band-diagonal results are obtained with identical numerical methods, the limitations of the analytic continuation and of the low-temperature log T term are stated openly, and Appendix D provides scaling fits with quoted coefficients. The main weaknesses are the incompleteness of the no-admixture proof at the nonlinear level (major comment 1) and the fact that the stiffness section is a separate mean-field BCS-type calculation, not a direct evaluation using the Eliashberg solutions (major comment 2).

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IIC (Eqs. (13)-(18)); Secs. IIID and IIIA] The claim that a symmetry prohibits admixing a band-diagonal component is not established for the nonlinear gap equation. Eq. (17) as displayed is automatically satisfied: on the support of the kernel (14), the delta functions delta_{alpha,beta'} delta_{alpha',beta} enforce beta=alpha' and beta'=alpha, so alpha alpha' beta beta' = 1 identically. The decoupling expressed by Eq. (18) is the block-diagonality of the linearized kernel between the sectors alpha alpha'=+1 and alpha alpha'=-1, and it therefore constrains only the eigenvectors of the linearized equation (13). The full equation (10) is solved with the anomalous propagator (8), whose last term, alpha alpha' Phi*_{-alpha,-alpha'} (Phi_{++} Phi_{--} - Phi_{+-} Phi_{-+}), couples the two sectors once both components are nonzero: for example, Phi_{++} acquires a source proportional to Phi*_{--} Phi_{+-} Phi_{-+}. The pure off-diagonal and pure diagonal subspaces are each invariant under iteration, so the BOD fixed point is consistent with Eq. (10), but mixed fixed points are not excluded by symmetry. The numerical protocol of Sec. IIID seeds the iteration only with the pure linearized eigenvectors, and no free-energy functional is evaluated anywhere in the paper, although Fig. 3(b) shows first-order transitions for t/t' >~ 0.81 where the paper itself notes that the linearized T_c is not the actual transition temperature. Since the form (20), the spectral-function result, and the stiffness analysis all presuppose a strictly off-diagonal order parameter, I ask the authors to either prove the decoupling at the nonlinear level or demonstrate numerically, by iterating mixed seeds and by comparing free energies of the normal, BOD, and mixed candidates, that the global minimum is purely band-off-diagonal.
  2. [Sec. IV (Eq. (25); Fig. 5)] The superfluid-stiffness results are not computed from the Eliashberg solutions of Sec. III. Fig. 5 uses the BCS temperature profile Delta(T) = 1.764 T_c Delta_0 tanh(1.74 sqrt(T_c/T - 1)) together with parameters (T_c = 2.5 t, t' = -2.2 t) that are unrelated to those of the Eliashberg calculation (t' = 1/2, lambda/t' = 2 sqrt(15) in Sec. IIID), and the odd-frequency sigma_x component of Eq. (20), one of the paper's new results, is absent from the BdG Hamiltonian (24). The section is explicitly a mean-field calculation following Ref. [54], which is acceptable in itself, but the abstract and conclusion present the stiffness behavior as a property of band-off-diagonal pairing without flagging that it rests on a BCS-like ansatz rather than on the self-consistent frequency-dependent solution. I request that the authors justify the BCS ansatz and the neglect of the odd-frequency component, for instance by estimating their effect on the saturation scale, or explicitly delimit Sec. IV as an independent phenomenological model calculation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'we two found candidate solutions' (Sec. IIIA), 'degenrate' (Sec. IIC), 'mometa' (Sec. IIIA), 'Edgecase' (Sec. IV), 'limit limit' (Appendix B), 'Withing' (Appendix A), and 'Elishberg' in Ref. [47].
  2. [Fig. 5(a) caption] The sentence 'For the gapped / nodal nature of the BdG excitation spectrum the value of mu is of no relevance for the k-independent order parameter' is incorrect in general, because the nodal condition in the spectrum (23), |delta_k| = sqrt((epsilon_k - mu)^2 + |Delta|^2), depends explicitly on mu, and it is inconsistent with the mu-dependent gapped/nodal tuning described for the chiral state in panels (b) and (c).
  3. [Sec. IIID and Fig. 3] Please add a convergence statement for the grids used (N_k = 7 x 7, N_m = 38 with interpolated cutoff), in particular for the location of the first-order boundary t/t' ~ 0.81 and for the magnitude of |Delta| in Fig. 3(b).
  4. [Sec. IV and Appendix C] The estimate that the q-dependent order-parameter corrections are 'at most of the order of 10^-4' relative to Eq. (25) is stated without the parameters used in the numerical evaluation; please provide them so the estimate can be reproduced.
  5. [Appendix B, after Eq. (B3)] The condition '2|epsilon_k| <= |delta_k|' appears to be missing the chemical potential, since the surrounding analysis uses (epsilon_k - mu)^2 and the limiting expressions for E_{k,-} depend on |epsilon_k - mu|; the condition should presumably read 2|epsilon_k - mu| <= |delta_k|.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Eliashberg no-admixture result and stiffness predictions derive from explicit model symmetries and numerical solution, not from fitted values; self-citations to Ref. [26] are background, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (pure band-off-diagonal Eliashberg order parameter, Eq. (20)) is obtained by solving the gap equation (10) with the coupling in Eq. (9). The block-diagonal symmetry in Eq. (17) is derived from the kernel (14) for the stated intervalley coupling, not assumed as the conclusion; the numerical iteration of the full nonlinear equation (10) yields BOD solutions while band-diagonal seeds converge to the trivial solution (Sec. IIIA). The stiffness section (Sec. IV) uses an explicitly stated BCS-like ansatz for Δ(T) and a derived expression (25); the comparison between finite and zero band splitting is an internal calculation, not a fit to the phenomenon it is used to explain. Citations to Ref. [26] (which shares an author with the present paper) supply the model couplings, the T-IVC equivalence, and mean-field background, but the Eliashberg extension, spectral-function analysis, and stiffness formula are independently derived here. The no-admixture proof is presented for the linearized equation, and the existence or absence of mixed nonlinear fixed points is a correctness question (possible overclaim), not a circularity: no result in the paper is defined in terms of its conclusion or reduced to a fitted parameter.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on a two-band model with several chosen parameters and on physical assumptions about the normal state and coupling form. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced; the BOD state and even/odd frequency mixing are configurations of the existing electron and boson fields.

free parameters (6)
  • band splitting t = t/t' = 0.8 in Fig. 1(a); varied over 0 to ~1 in Eliashberg scans; t>0 and t' = -2.2t in stiffness plots
    Controls the splitting of the two flat bands; central to the even/odd frequency mixing and to the stiffness saturation scale. Chosen to mimic Hartree-Fock bands, not fitted to experimental stiffness data.
  • intervalley coupling strength λ = λ/t' = 2√15
    Effective electron-boson coupling in Eqs. (9)-(10); sets the Tc scale and the overall order parameter strength.
  • boson dispersion parameters ω0 and ω' = ω0/t' = 4, ω'/t' = 6
    Choice for the gapped boson dispersion in Eq. (3); the authors state the main features do not depend crucially on the form.
  • chemical potential μ = adjusted to keep filling ν̃=1 in Eliashberg scans; in stiffness μ=2.5t or -2.16t
    Sets filling in Sec. IID and selects gapped vs nodal chiral regimes in Fig. 5, so it controls which stiffness scenario applies.
  • chiral state admixture η = η=0.2
    Hand-picked coefficient mixing even and odd basis functions for the chiral order parameter; affects whether the chiral state is nodal or gapped.
  • Tc/t ratio = Tc=2.5t
    Sets the temperature scale in the stiffness calculations; without a microscopic determination of Tc it is a chosen input.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Migdal-Eliashberg approximation: vertex corrections are neglected, with the crossed diagram in Fig. 1(c) dropped.
    Invoked in Sec. IIA before Eq. (6); standard for phonon-mediated pairing but less controlled for fluctuation-mediated pairing in correlated flat bands.
  • domain assumption Normal-state self-energy is set to zero; interaction-induced band renormalizations are absorbed into ξk.
    Sec. IIA after Eq. (6); the calculation keeps only the anomalous self-energy, so frequency-dependent normal-state damping is absent.
  • domain assumption The normal state is spin-polarized and has no intervalley coherence.
    Sec. IIA states 'we here focus for simplicity on a spin-polarized normal state'; if T-IVC order coexists, the band basis and conclusions change, and the paper refers to Ref. [26] for that case.
  • domain assumption Bloch states obey chiral symmetry C and the microscopic intervalley coupling matrices are odd under C, giving g_A1 = λ η_x σ0 and g_B1 = λ η_y σ0.
    Sec. IIB, Eq. (9); the no-admixture symmetry depends on this leading momentum-independent coupling form.
  • domain assumption Bosonic modes are fully gapped with ωq>0, and the two T-IVC fluctuation components share one dispersion.
    Sec. IIB, Eq. (11); used to simplify the gap equation to Eq. (10).
  • domain assumption Finite numerical grids and frequency cutoffs accurately represent the continuum solution.
    Sec. IID uses N_k=7x7 and N_m=38 with interpolation; no convergence checks or error bars are shown.
  • ad hoc to paper For the superfluid stiffness, the order parameter follows the BCS-like temperature dependence Δ(T)=1.764Tc Δ0 tanh(1.74 sqrt(Tc/T - 1)) rather than the Eliashberg solution.
    Sec. IV after Eq. (25); this ansatz is not derived from the frequency-dependent gap equation and may affect the stiffness saturation behavior.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Eliashberg Theory and Superfluid Stiffness of Band-Off-Diagonal Pairing in Twisted Graphene." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AJQ5WTUC

@misc{pith2026250112435,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Eliashberg Theory and Superfluid Stiffness of Band-Off-Diagonal Pairing in Twisted Graphene},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AJQ5WTUC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.12435}
}
abstract

Recently, band-off-diagonal superconductivity has been proposed [Nat. Commun. 14, 7134 (2023)] as a candidate pairing state for twisted graphene systems. Based on mean-field theory, it was shown that it not only naturally emerges from both intervalley electron-phonon coupling and fluctuations of the nearby correlated insulator, but also exhibits nodal and gapped regimes as indicated by scanning tunneling microscopy experiments. Here we study band-off-diagonal pairing within Eliashberg theory. We show that despite the additional frequency dependence, the leading-order description of both intervalley coherent fluctuations or intervalley phonons exhibits a symmetry prohibiting admixture of an intraband component to the interband pairing state. It is found that even- and odd-frequency pairing mix, which originates from the reduced number of flavor degrees of freedom in the normal state. From analytic continuation, we obtain the electronic spectral function showing that, also within Eliashberg theory, the interband nature leads to an enhanced spectral weight below the order-parameter energy compared to band-diagonal pairing. Finally, we also study the superfluid stiffness of band-off-diagonal pairing, taking into account multi-band and quantum geometry effects. It is shown that for $s$-wave and chiral momentum dependencies, conventionally leading to fully gapped phases, an interband structure reduces the temperature scale below which the stiffness saturates. Depending on parameters, for the chiral state, this scale can even be suppressed all the way to zero temperature leading to a complex competition of multiple dispersive and geometrical contributions. Our results show that interband pairing might also be able to explain more recent stiffness measurements in the superconducting state of twisted multilayer graphene.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12435 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a) Plot of the electronic band structure ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: We plot the relative oddness (a), defined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4: Waterfall plots consisting of the analytically [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Panel (a) shows the superfluid stiffness as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Plot of the particle-like minus band [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: We show the four BdG bands (a) along the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Terms of the superfluid stiffness that feature universal scaling in the nodal regime (panel (a)), close to the boundary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [26]

    Nodal band-off-diagonal superconductivity in twisted graphene superlattices,

    M. Christos, S. Sachdev, and M. S. Scheurer, “Nodal band-off-diagonal superconductivity in twisted graphene superlattices,” Nature Communications14, 7134 (2023), arXiv:2303.17529 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [54]

    Band geometry, berry curvature, and superfluid weight,

    L. Liang, T. I. Vanhala, S. Peotta, T. Siro, A. Harju, and P. Törmä, “Band geometry, berry curvature, and superfluid weight,” Phys. Rev. B95, 024515 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [1]

    Graphene bilayers with a twist,

    E. Y. Andrei and A. H. MacDonald, “Graphene bilayers with a twist,” Nature Materials19, 1265 (2020)

    2020

  4. [2]

    Superconductivity and strong correlations in moiréflat bands,

    L. Balents, C. R. Dean, D. K. Efetov, and A. F. Young, “Superconductivity and strong correlations in moiréflat bands,” Nature Physics16, 725 (2020)

    2020

  5. [3]

    A microscopic perspec- tive on moirématerials,

    K. P. Nuckolls and A. Yazdani, “A microscopic perspec- tive on moirématerials,” Nature Reviews Materials9, 460 (2024)

    2024

  6. [4]

    Evidence for unconventional superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,

    M. Oh, K. P. Nuckolls, D. Wong, R. L. Lee, X. Liu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and A. Yazdani, “Evidence for unconventional superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,” Nature600, 240 (2021)

    2021

  7. [5]

    Evidence for unconventional superconductivity in twisted trilayer graphene,

    H. Kim, Y. Choi, C. Lewandowski, A. Thomson, Y. Zhang, R. Polski, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Al- icea, and S. Nadj-Perge, “Evidence for unconventional superconductivity in twisted trilayer graphene,” Nature 606, 494 (2022)

    2022

  8. [6]

    Vestigial singlet pair- ing in a fluctuating magnetic triplet superconductor and its implications for graphene superlattices,

    P. P. Poduval and M. S. Scheurer, “Vestigial singlet pair- ing in a fluctuating magnetic triplet superconductor and its implications for graphene superlattices,” Nature Com- munications 15, 1713 (2024)

    2024

Show all 61 references
  1. [7]

    Cascade of electronic transitions in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene,

    D. Wong, K. P. Nuckolls, M. Oh, B. Lian, Y. Xie, S. Jeon, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yaz- dani, “Cascade of electronic transitions in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene,” Nature582, 198 (2020)

    2020

  2. [8]

    Cascade of phase transitions and dirac revivals in magic-angle graphene,

    U. Zondiner, A. Rozen, D. Rodan-Legrain, Y. Cao, 12 R. Queiroz, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Oreg, F. von Oppen, A. Stern, E. Berg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and S. Ilani, “Cascade of phase transitions and dirac revivals in magic-angle graphene,” Nature582, 203 (2020)

    2020

  3. [9]

    Tunable strongly coupled supercon- ductivity in magic-angle twisted trilayer graphene,

    J. M. Park, Y. Cao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, “Tunable strongly coupled supercon- ductivity in magic-angle twisted trilayer graphene,” Na- ture 590, 249 (2021)

    2021

  4. [10]

    Electric field–tunable superconductivity in alternating-twist magic-angle trilayer graphene,

    Z. Hao, A. M. Zimmerman, P. Ledwith, E. Khalaf, D. H. Najafabadi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Vishwanath, and P. Kim, “Electric field–tunable superconductivity in alternating-twist magic-angle trilayer graphene,” Science 371, 1133 (2021)

    2021

  5. [11]

    Zero-field superconducting diode effect in small-twist-angle trilayer graphene,

    J.-X. Lin, P. Siriviboon, H. D. Scammell, S. Liu, D. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, M. S. Scheurer, and J. I. A. Li, “Zero-field superconducting diode effect in small-twist-angle trilayer graphene,” Na- ture Physics18, 1221 (2022)

    2022

  6. [12]

    Dirac revivals drive a resonance response in twisted bi- layer graphene,

    E. Morissette, J.-X. Lin, D. Sun, L. Zhang, S. Liu, D.Rhodes, K.Watanabe, T.Taniguchi, J.Hone, J.Polla- nen, M. S. Scheurer, M. Lilly, A. Mounce, and J. I. A. Li, “Dirac revivals drive a resonance response in twisted bi- layer graphene,” Nature Physics (2023), 10.1038/s41567- ...

    2023 doi

  7. [13]

    Pauli-limit violation and re-entrant superconductivity in moirégraphene,

    Y. Cao, J. M. Park, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, “Pauli-limit violation and re-entrant superconductivity in moirégraphene,” Nature 595, 526 (2021)

    2021

  8. [14]

    Competition of electron-phonon mediated superconduc- tivity and stoner magnetism on a flat band,

    R. Ojajärvi, T. Hyart, M. A. Silaev, and T. T. Heikkilä, “Competition of electron-phonon mediated superconduc- tivity and stoner magnetism on a flat band,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 054515 (2018)

    2018

  9. [15]

    Pairing in graphene- based moiré superlattices,

    M. S. Scheurer and R. Samajdar, “Pairing in graphene- based moiré superlattices,” Phys. Rev. Research 2, 033062 (2020)

    2020

  10. [16]

    Pairing symmetry of twisted bilayer graphene: A phenomenological synthe- sis,

    E. Lake, A. S. Patri, and T. Senthil, “Pairing symmetry of twisted bilayer graphene: A phenomenological synthe- sis,” Phys. Rev. B106, 104506 (2022)

    2022

  11. [17]

    Super- conductivity, correlated insulators, and Wess-Zumino- Witten terms in twisted bilayer graphene,

    M. Christos, S. Sachdev, and M. S. Scheurer, “Super- conductivity, correlated insulators, and Wess-Zumino- Witten terms in twisted bilayer graphene,” Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Science 117, 29543 (2020), the T-IVC state was denoted IVC+ in this paper, arXiv:2007....

    2020 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Charged skyrmions and topological ori- gin of superconductivity in magic-angle graphene,

    E. Khalaf, S. Chatterjee, N. Bultinck, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Vishwanath, “Charged skyrmions and topological ori- gin of superconductivity in magic-angle graphene,” Sci- ence Advances7 (2021), 10.1126/sciadv.abf5299

    2021 doi

  13. [19]

    Corre- lated Insulators, Semimetals, and Superconductivity in Twisted Trilayer Graphene,

    M. Christos, S. Sachdev, and M. S. Scheurer, “Corre- lated Insulators, Semimetals, and Superconductivity in Twisted Trilayer Graphene,” Phys. Rev. X12, 021018 (2022), arXiv:2106.02063 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Symme- try constraints on superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene: Fractional vortices,4e condensates, or nonuni- tary pairing,

    E. Khalaf, P. Ledwith, and A. Vishwanath, “Symme- try constraints on superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene: Fractional vortices,4e condensates, or nonuni- tary pairing,” Phys. Rev. B105, 224508 (2022)

    2022

  15. [21]

    The- ory of zero-field superconducting diode effect in twisted trilayer graphene,

    H. D. Scammell, J. I. A. Li, and M. S. Scheurer, “The- ory of zero-field superconducting diode effect in twisted trilayer graphene,” 2D Materials9, 025027 (2022)

    2022

  16. [22]

    Theory of correlated insulators and superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,

    G. Shavit, E. Berg, A. Stern, and Y. Oreg, “Theory of correlated insulators and superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 247703 (2021)

    2021

  17. [23]

    Unconven- tional superconductivity due to interband polarization,

    V. Crépel, T. Cea, L. Fu, and F. Guinea, “Unconven- tional superconductivity due to interband polarization,” Phys. Rev. B105, 094506 (2022)

    2022

  18. [24]

    Double-dome Unconventional Superconductivity in Twisted Trilayer Graphene,

    Z. Zhou, J. Jiang, P. Karnatak, Z. Wang, G. Wag- ner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Schönenberger, S. A. Parameswaran, S. H. Simon, and M. Baner- jee, “Double-dome Unconventional Superconductivity in Twisted Trilayer Graphene,” arXiv e-prints (2024), arXiv:2404.09909 [cond-mat...

    2024

  19. [25]

    Quadratic Dirac fermions and the competition of or- dered states in twisted bilayer graphene,

    J. Ingham, T. Li, M. S. Scheurer, and H. D. Scammell, “Quadratic Dirac fermions and the competition of or- dered states in twisted bilayer graphene,” arXiv e-prints (2023), arXiv:2308.00748 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Theory of phonon-mediated superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,

    F. Wu, A. H. MacDonald, and I. Martin, “Theory of phonon-mediated superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 257001 (2018)

    2018

  21. [28]

    Twisted bilayer graphene: A phonon-driven superconductor,

    B. Lian, Z. Wang, and B. A. Bernevig, “Twisted bilayer graphene: A phonon-driven superconductor,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 257002 (2019)

    2019

  22. [29]

    Pair- ing in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene: Role of phonon and plasmon umklapp,

    C. Lewandowski, D. Chowdhury, and J. Ruhman, “Pair- ing in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene: Role of phonon and plasmon umklapp,” Phys. Rev. B 103, 235401 (2021)

    2021

  23. [30]

    Does filling-dependent band renormalization aid pairing in twisted bilayer graphene?

    C. Lewandowski, S. Nadj-Perge, and D. Chowdhury, “Does filling-dependent band renormalization aid pairing in twisted bilayer graphene?” npj Quantum Materials6, 82 (2021)

    2021

  24. [31]

    Euler Obstructed Cooper Pairing in Twisted Bi- layer Graphene: Nematic Nodal Superconductiv- ity and Bounded Superfluid Weight,

    J. Yu, M. Xie, F. Wu, and S. Das Sarma, “Euler Obstructed Cooper Pairing in Twisted Bi- layer Graphene: Nematic Nodal Superconductiv- ity and Bounded Superfluid Weight,” arXiv e-prints (2022), 10.48550/arXiv.2202.02353, arXiv:2202.02353 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    2022 doi arXiv

  25. [32]

    Bandstructureandsuperconductivityintwistedtrilayer graphene,

    V. o. T. Phong, P. A. Pantaleón, T. Cea, and F. Guinea, “Bandstructureandsuperconductivityintwistedtrilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. B104, L121116 (2021)

    2021

  26. [33]

    Strong electron–phonon coupling in magic- angle twisted bilayer graphene,

    C. Chen, K. P. Nuckolls, S. Ding, W. Miao, D. Wong, M. Oh, R. L. Lee, S. He, C. Peng, D. Pei, Y. Li, C. Hao, H. Yan, H. Xiao, H. Gao, Q. Li, S. Zhang, J. Liu, L. He, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, C. Li, X. Han, D. Pan, Z. Liu, X. Dai, C. Liu...

    2024

  27. [34]

    Electron–k-phonon interaction in twisted bi- layer graphene,

    C.-X. Liu, Y. Chen, A. Yazdani, and B. A. Bernevig, “Electron–k-phonon interaction in twisted bi- layer graphene,” Phys. Rev. B110, 045133 (2024)

    2024

  28. [35]

    Quantum textures of the many-body wavefunctions in magic-angle graphene,

    K. P. Nuckolls, R. L. Lee, M. Oh, D. Wong, T. Soe- jima, J. P. Hong, D. Călugăru, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, B.A.Bernevig, K.Watanabe, T.Taniguchi, N.Regnault, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Yazdani, “Quantum textures of the many-body wavefunctions in magic-angle graphene,” Na- ture 620, 525 (2023)

    2023

  29. [36]

    Superfluid stiffness of twisted multilayer graphene su- perconductors,

    A. Banerjee, Z. Hao, M. Kreidel, P. Ledwith, I. Phin- ney, J. M. Park, A. M. Zimmerman, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, R. M. Westervelt, P. Jarillo-Herrero, P. A. 13 Volkov, A. Vishwanath, K. Chung Fong, and P. Kim, “Superfluid stiffness of twisted multilayer graphene su- percondu...

    2024 arXiv

  30. [37]

    The superconduct- ing penetration depth from the semiclassical model,

    B. S. Chandrasekhar and D. Einzel, “The superconduct- ing penetration depth from the semiclassical model,” An- nalen der Physik505, 535 (1993)

    1993

  31. [38]

    Magneticpenetration depth in unconventional superconductors,

    R.ProzorovandR.W.Giannetta,“Magneticpenetration depth in unconventional superconductors,” Superconduc- tor Science and Technology19, R41 (2006)

    2006

  32. [39]

    Bounds on the superconducting transition temperature: Applications to twisted bilayer graphene and cold atoms,

    T. Hazra, N. Verma, and M. Randeria, “Bounds on the superconducting transition temperature: Applications to twisted bilayer graphene and cold atoms,” Phys. Rev. X 9, 031049 (2019)

    2019

  33. [40]

    Superfluid Stiffness and Flat-Band Superconductivity in Magic-Angle Graphene Probed by cQED,

    M. Tanaka, J. Î-j. Wang, T. H. Dinh, D. Rodan-Legrain, S. Zaman, M. Hays, B. Kannan, A. Almanakly, D. K. Kim, B. M. Niedzielski, K. Serniak, M. E. Schwartz, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. A. Grover, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and W. D. Oliver, “Superfluid...

    2024 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Topology- bounded superfluid weight in twisted bilayer graphene,

    F. Xie, Z. Song, B. Lian, and B. A. Bernevig, “Topology- bounded superfluid weight in twisted bilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 167002 (2020)

    2020

  35. [42]

    Geometric and conventional contribution to the superfluid weight in twisted bilayer graphene,

    X. Hu, T. Hyart, D. I. Pikulin, and E. Rossi, “Geometric and conventional contribution to the superfluid weight in twisted bilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 237002 (2019)

    2019

  36. [43]

    Super- conductivity, superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems,

    P. Törmä, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, “Super- conductivity, superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems,” Nature Reviews Physics4, 528 (2022)

    2022

  37. [44]

    Dirac revivals drive a resonance response in twisted bilayer graphene,

    E. Morissette, J.-X. Lin, D. Sun, L. Zhang, S. Liu, D. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, J. Pol- lanen, M. S. Scheurer, M. Lilly, A. Mounce, and J. I. A. Li, “Dirac revivals drive a resonance response in twisted bilayer graphene,” Nature Physics19, 1156 (2023)

    2023

  38. [45]

    Pairing in graphene- based moiré superlattices,

    M. S. Scheurer and R. Samajdar, “Pairing in graphene- based moiré superlattices,” Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033062 (2020)

    2020

  39. [46]

    Band structure of twisted bilayer graphene: Emergent symme- tries, commensurate approximants, and wannier obstruc- tions,

    L. Zou, H. C. Po, A. Vishwanath, and T. Senthil, “Band structure of twisted bilayer graphene: Emergent symme- tries, commensurate approximants, and wannier obstruc- tions,” Phys. Rev. B98, 085435 (2018)

    2018

  40. [47]

    Interactions between electrons and lattice vibrations in a superconductor,

    G. Elishberg, “Interactions between electrons and lattice vibrations in a superconductor,” Soviet Physics JETP11 (1960)

    1960

  41. [48]

    Migdal, interaction between electrons and lattice vibrations in a normal metal,

    A. B. Migdal, “Migdal, interaction between electrons and lattice vibrations in a normal metal,” Soviet Physics JETP 34 (1958)

    1958

  42. [49]

    Eliashberg theory: a short review,

    F. Marsiglio, “Eliashberg theory: a short review,”417, 168102 (2020), 1911.05065 [cond-mat]

    2020 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Interplay of coulomb and electron-phonon interactions in graphene,

    D. M. Basko and I. L. Aleiner, “Interplay of coulomb and electron-phonon interactions in graphene,” Phys. Rev. B 77, 041409 (2008)

    2008

  44. [51]

    Odd-parity superconductivity from phonon- mediated pairing: Application tocuxbi2se3,

    P. M. R. Brydon, S. Das Sarma, H.-Y. Hui, and J. D. Sau, “Odd-parity superconductivity from phonon- mediated pairing: Application tocuxbi2se3,” Phys. Rev. B 90, 184512 (2014)

    2014

  45. [52]

    Mechanism, time-reversal symmetry, and topology of superconductivity in noncentrosymmet- ric systems,

    M. S. Scheurer, “Mechanism, time-reversal symmetry, and topology of superconductivity in noncentrosymmet- ric systems,” Phys. Rev. B93, 174509 (2016)

    2016

  46. [53]

    ana_cont: Python pack- age for analytic continuation,

    J. Kaufmann and K. Held, “ana_cont: Python pack- age for analytic continuation,” (2021), arXiv:2105.11211 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Revisiting flat band super- conductivity: Dependence on minimal quantum metric and band touchings,

    K.-E. Huhtinen, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, A. Chew, B. A. Bernevig, and P. Törmä, “Revisiting flat band super- conductivity: Dependence on minimal quantum metric and band touchings,” Phys. Rev. B106, 014518 (2022). Appendix A: Nambu Formalism Expanding the propagators (4a,4b) in the...

    2022

  48. [56]

    sinh(β p ξ2 k + ∆2) p ξ2 k + ∆2 cosh(βδk) + cosh(β p ξ2 k + ∆2) (C1) − X ± tanh β 2 Ek,± (di∆I 2)(dj∆I 2) Ek,± + 2 (∂iθk)(dj∆I

  49. [57]

    + (di∆I 2)(∂jθk) δk∆ ξ2 k + ∆2 ± δk p ξ2 k + ∆2 ! # − 2 U (di∆I 2)(dj∆I

  50. [58]

    U <0 is the attractive on-site interaction

    (C2) where di∆I 2 ≡ d∆I 2 dqi q=0 . U <0 is the attractive on-site interaction. Within our momentum-space model, there is no canonical choice for this parameter. However, as mentioned in the main text the corrections arising from Eq. (C1) are negligible compared to the main co...

  51. [59]

    Here, we neglect the explicit electron-momentum dependencek

    These derivatives are highly nontrivial to compute, as they seems to require solving the gap equation at non-zero Cooper pair momentumq. Here, we neglect the explicit electron-momentum dependencek. We start the discussion by studying the BdG Hamiltonian (24) at finiteq HBdG(q)...

  52. [60]

    (C8) The eigensystem ofH0 can be computed analytically and is denoted by E0 i , |ψ0 i ⟩

    = H0 + ∆I 2H1, with H0 = HBdG(q = 0)|∆I 2=0, H1 =   0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 −i 0 0   . (C8) The eigensystem ofH0 can be computed analytically and is denoted by E0 i , |ψ0 i ⟩ . The first order corrections to the states read as |ψ1 i ⟩ = ∆I 2 X j̸=i ⟨ψ0 j |H1|ψ0 i ⟩...

  53. [61]

    Consequently, we can exactly rewrite∂∆I 2 |ψi⟩|∆I 2=0 = 1 ∆I 2 |ψ1 i ⟩

    Specifically, the terms of interest are of the form∂∆I 2 |ψi⟩|∆I 2=0, which means that only the terms linear in∆I 2 contribute. Consequently, we can exactly rewrite∂∆I 2 |ψi⟩|∆I 2=0 = 1 ∆I 2 |ψ1 i ⟩. The remaining derivatives are therefore found as ∂∆I 2 ∂qi Ej|q=0,∆I 2=0 = ⟨ψ...

Pith tools

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