Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 62 references

Systematic investigation of dynamic nuclear polarization with boron vacancy in hexagonal boron nitride

T0 review · 3 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 Lindblad model of one electron spin and three 15N nuclei quantitatively reproduces the ODMR spectra of the boron vacancy in hBN across 10–150 mT, and shows that the standard Lorentzian fitting methods misestimate nuclear spin…

desk verdict Useful data and a plausible caution about 4-dip fitting, but the model-internal proof is confounded because the fitted spectra come from the microwave-driven steady state while the 'true' polarization is defined without microwaves. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16715 v1 pith:Z7UT2OUU submitted 2025-01-28 cond-mat.mes-hall

Yuki Nakamura , Shunsuke Nishimura , Takuya Iwasaki , Shu Nakaharai , Shinichi Ogawa , Yukinori Morita , Kenji Watanabe , Takashi Taniguchi
show 2 more authors
Kento Sasaki Kensuke Kobayashi
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords dynamicnuclearpolarizationboronvacancyhexagonalnitrideODMRLindbladequationlevelanti-crossingspin15Nhyperfineinteraction
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 tries to establish that dynamic nuclear polarization of the three 15N nuclei neighboring a boron vacancy in hexagonal boron nitride is quantitatively captured by a Lindblad master equation with one electron spin, the three nuclei, and optical pumping and relaxation channels. The authors measure ODMR spectra of h10B15N from 10 to 150 mT, including the ground-state level anticrossing, and show that this simulation reproduces them when inhomogeneous broadening and a small field misalignment are included. They then use the simulation's own predicted polarization as a benchmark and demonstrate that the standard Lorentzian four-dip fitting, whether based on dip contrast or dip area, systematically misestimates the true polarization, by factors of a few near the anticrossing. A sympathetic reader would care because this fixes the minimal model for DNP in this material and questions previously published polarization numbers extracted from ODMR fits.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the 56×56 Lindblad master equation for the density matrix of one VB- electron spin (S = 1) and its three nearest-neighbor 15N nuclei (I = 1/2), assembled in Liouville space. The Hamiltonian contains the ground-state and excited-state spin terms, hyperfine interactions written as flip-flop and flip-flip terms via A+ and A−, optical pumping and intersystem-crossing rates, and T1/T2 relaxation channels; the steady state gives both the PL intensity (ODMR spectra) and the true polarization Psim,true. The critical identity is the decomposition Ags,+ = (Axx + Ayy)/4 and Ags,− = (Axx − Ayy)/4 together with the D3h symmetry phases, which makes the flip-flop interaction dominant but the flip-flip interaction always present; the latter sets the maximum polarization. A second key piece is the empirical convolution with Lorentzian broadening ΔB = 1.78 mT meant to account for boron nuclear spins, which lets the model match the experiment at the ground-state level anticrossing.

What would settle it

Measure the 15N nuclear spin polarization directly, for example by coherent nuclear spin manipulation and readout on the same h10B15N ensemble at Bz = 100–120 mT, and compare with Psim,true. If the directly measured polarization deviates from the simulated value by more than a few percent in that range, the model's benchmark—and hence the claimed error factors of the Lorentzian fits—would be falsified. A cheaper check: the unexplained experiment-only polarization peak at about 91 mT for the mS = 0 ↔ +1 transition, if traced to omitted nuclear or optical dynamics, would show that the model is incomplete.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a Lindblad simulation considering a single electron spin and three adjacent 15N nuclear spins quantitatively reproduces the measured ODMR spectra of VB- in h10B15N over 10–150 mT, including the GSLAC region. With hyperfine tensors taken from first principles, optical rates from time-resolved PL, and T2/T1 rates partly adjusted, the simulated spectra match experiment after convoluting a Lorentzian inhomogeneous broadening of ΔB = 1.78 mT and using a misalignment angle θ = 0.6°. The same simulation yields the true ground-state nuclear polarization Psim,true, and comparison shows that both contrast-based and area-based 4-dip Lorentzian fitting give inaccurate polarizations—especially near GSLAC, where level mixing invalidates the assumption that dip contrast or area reflects population; contrast-based values are closer to the truth than area-based ones. The paper also argues that the maximum polarization, about 20–30%, is limited mainly by the flip-flip hyperfine interaction, with symmetry-induced dark states playing a secondary role.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation's quantitative match rests on the assumption that the tuned relaxation parameters, the empirical 1.78 mT inhomogeneous broadening, and the 0.6-degree field misalignment together represent the real physics, so that the model's 'true' polarization is a valid benchmark for judging the fitting methods.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The minimal model for DNP in h10B15N is one electron spin plus the three nearest 15N nuclei; no larger nuclear bath is needed to reproduce the observed ODMR spectra, including at GSLAC, once inhomogeneous broadening is included.
  • Polarizations extracted from four-Lorentzian fits, especially area-based ones, are not quantitatively reliable near the anticrossing; contrast-based fitting is somewhat closer to the true polarization.
  • Previously reported nuclear spin polarizations for VB- in isotopically enriched hBN, obtained by ODMR fitting, should be re-examined.
  • The maximum achievable polarization of the three 15N nuclei is limited mainly by the flip-flip hyperfine interaction, not by nuclear spin relaxation, and is about 20–30% in the present samples.
  • Symmetry-induced dark states suppress polarization when nuclear coherence is long, but in VB- the strong flip-flip interaction makes this effect subdominant; it may matter for other hBN defects.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: the same four-dip fitting bias should appear in any ODMR analysis of VB- where electron-nuclear mixing is strong, so earlier polarization values from such fits should be treated as order-of-magnitude estimates until a direct nuclear readout is performed.
  • Inference: if the unmodeled polarization peak at about 91 mT comes from more distant nuclear spins, extending the model to include a second nuclear shell would likely shift Psim,true near that field and change the inferred error factors there.
  • Inference: the dark-state analysis suggests a concrete experiment: reduce the equivalence of the three 15N sites, for example by strain or partial isotopic substitution, and measure whether the maximum polarization rises above the roughly 30% ceiling; the model predicts it should when flip-flip and dark-state suppression are weakened.
  • Inference: a direct nuclear-spin readout at GSLAC would also test whether the optically pumped VB- can serve as a practical nuclear-memory initialization scheme in hBN; the simulated polarization of 20–30% is the relevant benchmark.
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. The paper measures ODMR spectra of the boron vacancy in isotopically engineered h10B15N over 10–150 mT, including the ground-state level anticrossing (GSLAC), and compares them with a Lindblad master-equation model that contains one electron spin and three nearest-neighbor 15N nuclear spins. After incorporating optical pumping, relaxation, microwave drive, and inhomogeneous broadening, the simulations are reported to reproduce the experimental spectra, including the GSLAC region. Using the same model, the authors generate synthetic ODMR spectra, apply the standard four-Lorentzian '4-dip' fitting, and conclude that fitted polarizations (both contrast-based and area-based) deviate substantially from the true polarization of the model, especially near the GSLAC. The paper also argues that flip-flip interactions and symmetry-related dark states limit the maximum achievable polarization.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper would establish a minimal quantitative model for DNP in V_B^- in hBN and would call into question published polarization values extracted from Lorentzian fitting. The internal simulation-to-simulation comparison in Fig. 6 is a commendable and honest approach, and the authors explicitly disclose which parameters are fitted and which experimental features are not reproduced. The qualitative account of the magnetic-field dependence and of the GSLAC spectral complexity is a valuable contribution independent of the fitting-accuracy conclusion. However, the main accuracy benchmark in Sec. V D conflates the microwave-driven state with the microwave-free steady state, and the quantitative error factors depend on several tuned parameters; these issues must be addressed before the quantitative claims are fully supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. V D, Eqs. (14)–(16), Fig. 6] The accuracy test for the 4-dip fitting compares the fitted polarizations Psim,4dip with Psim,true, which is defined in Eq. (14) as the steady state without microwave irradiation (case A). The spectra to which the fitting is applied, however, are generated in case (B) by evolving the system for 1 µs under simultaneous laser and microwave drive (Eqs. (15)–(16)), and with Bmw = 0.25 mT the Rabi frequency (γeBmw ≈ 7 MHz) is large enough over that time to change the nuclear polarization substantially. The disagreement in Fig. 6 could therefore be caused by microwave-induced depolarization rather than by a failure of the Lorentzian decomposition. The paper attributes the discrepancy to level mixing that invalidates ρ_gs,mI ∝ C_mI (Sec. V D), but it never checks the actual ground-state populations at the microwave-driven steady state against the fitted contrasts. Please compute the true mI populations of ρ(t = 1 µs) under microwave and compare them with Psim,4dip and Psim,4dip,area; if the discrepancy persists, the fitting-failure claim is established, and if it does not, the conclusion should be reframed as a microwave-perturbation effect.
  2. [Sec. III, Table II, Eq. (18), Appendix B] The quantitative reproduction of the spectra is obtained with a substantial set of inputs tuned to the experimental data: the relaxation rates k = 9, 11, 12, 13 are stated in Sec. III to be 'adjusted to match the simulation results with the experimental results'; the inhomogeneous broadening width ΔB = 1.78 mT in Eq. (18) is chosen to reproduce the spectral shape; and the misalignment angle θ = 0.6° is used although Appendix B states that θ cannot be accurately determined from the data. The agreement in Fig. 5 (right) is therefore a consistency check of a fitted model, not a parameter-free prediction. Please include a sensitivity analysis of Psim,true, Psim,4dip, and the Fig. 6 error factors with respect to these parameters (especially ΔB and θ over the 0°–1.5° range allowed by Appendix B), or provide independent measurements that fix them. Without this, the quantitative error factors quoted in Sec. V D are conditional on the tuned choices.
  3. [Sec. V B, Fig. 4(a)] The paper reports a prominent polarization peak near Bz ≈ 91 mT that appears only in the mS = 0 ↔ +1 transition and does not exist in the simulated Psim,4dip, and attributes it to physics not included in the model (such as more distant nuclear spins or complex optical transitions). This is an acknowledged limitation, but it should be weighed against the central claim that the three-nucleus Lindblad model 'successfully reproduces the experimental spectra' over the full 10–150 mT range. The revised version should state explicitly which experimental features are and are not reproduced (for example, by excluding the 91-mT feature from the quantitative reproduction claim), and should discuss whether the 91-mT feature affects the Fig. 6 comparison between Pexp,4dip and Psim,4dip at nearby fields.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. V D] The 4-dip fitting procedure is not fully specified; please provide the number of free parameters, the initial-guess strategy, any constraints on line widths and positions, and how the fits are performed at fields where more than four resonances appear, since this fitting procedure is itself the object of the accuracy test.
  2. [Eqs. (17) and (19)] Please define the contrast C_mI and area A_mI explicitly in terms of the Lorentzian fit parameters and state the normalization convention; the current text defines these quantities only verbally.
  3. [Fig. 7 and Sec. V E] The simulations in the maximum-polarization section use θ = 0°, whereas the comparison with experiment uses θ = 0.6°; please state why and verify that the conclusions of Secs. V E and V F are robust to this choice.
  4. [Table II] The four adjusted rates (k = 9, 11, 12, 13) should be marked as such in the table itself, and the text should give their numerical values explicitly rather than only through the expressions 1/(180 ns), 1/(2 ms)/2, and 1/(200 µs).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the model is partly calibrated to the measured ODMR spectra, but the central claim about 4-dip fitting inaccuracy is a model-internal comparison that does not reduce to the fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's principal new claim is that conventional 4-dip Lorentzian fitting, whether contrast- or area-based, does not accurately recover the true 15N nuclear spin polarization. This claim is obtained by simulating ODMR spectra within a Lindblad model, applying the same 4-dip fitting to those simulated spectra, and comparing the resulting Psim,4dip or Psim,4dip,area with the directly computed Psim,true (Eq. 14). The comparison is internal to the model and is not equivalent, by construction, to any single fitted parameter. The hyperfine tensors used in the model come from independent first-principles calculations (Ref. 23, Gao et al.), and the optical transition rates are determined from separate time-resolved PL measurements. Some relaxation rates (k = 9, 11, 12, and 13), the inhomogeneous broadening width (Delta-B = 1.78 mT), and Ags,zz are adjusted to match the experimental spectra, so the agreement between simulated and experimental ODMR spectra is partly a calibration result rather than an ab initio prediction. However, that calibration is disclosed and is not the target of the paper's falsifiable conclusion. The paper does not invoke a self-citation chain or uniqueness theorem to force its choice of model; the cited prior work by some of the present authors (Refs. 26 and 46) is not load-bearing for the central quantitative conclusions. The skeptic's concern that Psim,true is a no-microwave steady state while the fitted spectra are generated under microwave drive, so the discrepancy may partly reflect microwave-induced depolarization rather than fitting failure, is a legitimate scientific objection to the benchmark, but it is a correctness or interpretation issue, not a circular reduction of the argument to its own inputs. No equation is defined in terms of the conclusion, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Accordingly, the derivation chain is not circular, and the paper should receive a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central simulation carries six fitted or hand-set parameters (axial hyperfine from ODMR, six optical rates from time-resolved PL, four relaxation rates adjusted to experiment, empirical broadening width, misalignment angle, microwave amplitude). The multi-dip mixing structure at GSLAC emerges from externally sourced DFT hyperfine tensors, which is genuine predictive content, but the quantitative agreement is purchased in part by parameters tuned to the same data. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Ags,zz (ground state axial hyperfine) = -64 MHz
    Derived from experimental ODMR dip spacing (Table I caption, Sec. III): 'Ags,zz = -64 MHz is derived from the experimental data.' It sets the energy splittings the simulation reproduces.
  • Optical transition rates (Gamma_L, Gamma_0, gamma_e0, gamma_e1, gamma_g0, gamma_g1 plus p,q) = 2.14 us^-1, 0.10 us^-1, 2.0 ns^-1, 0.74 ns^-1, 38 us^-1, 5.6 us^-1
    Fitted to time-resolved PL using a five-level rate equation model (Appendix C); these enter the Lindblad equation as processes k=1 to 6, with p and q as initial population parameters of that fit.
  • T2 in GS and nuclear T1, T2 (rates k=9,11,12,13) = 1/180 ns, 1/2 ms, 1/200 us
    Table II note: 'adjusted to match the simulation results with the experimental results.' These directly shape the simulated spectra and the simulated true polarization.
  • Inhomogeneous broadening width Delta-B = 1.78 mT (50 MHz / gamma_e)
    Empirically chosen so that the convolved simulation reproduces the experimental spectral shape near GSLAC (Eq. 18, Sec. V C).
  • Magnetic field misalignment angle theta = 0.6 degrees
    Used throughout the simulation; Appendix B admits the PL data cannot determine theta accurately, so 0.6 degrees is a hand-set value.
  • Microwave amplitude Bmw = 0.25 mT (near GSLAC)
    A simulation input chosen for the GSLAC comparison spectra (Sec. V C).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DFT hyperfine tensors for GS (D3h) and ES (C2v) from Ref. 23 are accurate when scaled to 15N by gamma_15N/gamma_14N = -1.4.
    All hyperfine parameters except Ags,zz come from first-principles calculations in Gao et al. (Ref. 23), scaled by the isotope gyromagnetic ratio (Sec. III).
  • domain assumption Mirror symmetry of VB- forces A_xz = A_yz = A_zx = A_zy = 0, so hyperfine terms reduce to flip-flop and flip-flip forms (Eqs. 2 to 4, Appendix A).
    Used to derive the GSLAC field range Eq. (9) and the dominance of flip-flop over flip-flip interactions.
  • domain assumption The five-level optical model with rates of Fig. 1(b), and negligible ES electron and nuclear T1, captures the optical cycle.
    Underlies the Lindblad jump operators (Table II); the paper explicitly neglects electron and nuclear T1 relaxations in the excited state.
  • ad hoc to paper Inhomogeneous broadening from the boron nuclear spin bath and other sources can be represented as a static Lorentzian magnetic field distribution (Eq. 18) rather than as dynamical spins.
    This convolution is what makes simulated GSLAC spectra match experiment (Sec. V C); the paper notes boron spins are the main source of experimental linewidth (Ref. 37) but treats them as static.
  • domain assumption Only the three nearest-neighbor 15N nuclear spins participate in DNP dynamics; all other nuclear spins act only as static broadening.
    The model dimension of 56 requires this; the paper invokes other nuclear spins or faster optical transitions as possible causes of the un-reproduced 91 mT feature (Sec. V B).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Systematic investigation of dynamic nuclear polarization with boron vacancy in hexagonal boron nitride." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z7UT2OUU

@misc{pith2026250116715,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Systematic investigation of dynamic nuclear polarization with boron vacancy in hexagonal boron nitride},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z7UT2OUU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16715}
}
abstract

Dynamic nuclear polarization (DNP) using the boron vacancy ($\mathrm{V_B^-}$) in hexagonal boron nitride (hBN) has gained increasing attention. Understanding this DNP requires systematically investigating the optically detected magnetic resonance (ODMR) spectra and developing a model that quantitatively describes its behavior. Here, we measure the ODMR spectra of $\mathrm{V_B^-}$ in $\mathrm{h}^{10}\mathrm{B}^{15}\mathrm{N}$ over a wide magnetic field range, including the ground state level anti-crossing (GSLAC), and compare them with the results of the Lindblad-based simulation that considers a single electron spin and three neighboring $^{15}\mathrm{N}$ nuclear spins. Our simulation successfully reproduces the experimental spectra, including the vicinity of GSLAC. It can explain the overall behavior of the magnetic field dependence of the nuclear spin polarization estimated using the Lorentzian fitting of the spectra. Despite such qualitative agreement, we also demonstrate that the fitting methods cannot give accurate polarizations. Finally, we discuss that symmetry-induced mechanisms of $\mathrm{V_B^-}$ limit the maximum polarization. Our study is an essential step toward a quantitative understanding of DNP using defects in hBN and its quantum applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16715 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a). It is a wide-gap semiconductor with a bandgap of ∼ 6.0 eV [28]. The negatively charged vacancy at the boron site is referred to as V− B . The electrons localized in this defect form multiple levels within the band gap, such as the orbital ground state (GS) and excited state (ES), which are spin triplets, and the metastable sin￾glet state (MS) [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. ODMR spectra at an optical power of 0.73 mW. (a) Magnetic field dependence of the spectra is shown on a color [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Magnetic field dependence of the polarization of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Comparison of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. ODMR spectra near GSLAC at various magnetic fields [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Configuration of the hyperfine interactions between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: shows experimental data of the time-resolved PL obtained at Bz = 35 mT. The optical powers are set at 0.18 and 0.73 mW, indicated by light blue and pink markers, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Weber, W

    J. Weber, W. Koehl, J. Varley, A. Janotti, B. Buck- ley, C. Van de Walle, and D. D. Awschalom, Quan- tum computing with defects, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 8513 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    Atat¨ ure, D

    M. Atat¨ ure, D. Englund, N. Vamivakas, S.-Y. Lee, and J. Wrachtrup, Material platforms for spin-based photonic quantum technologies, Nature Reviews Materials 3, 38 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    D. D. Awschalom, R. Hanson, J. Wrachtrup, and B. B. Zhou, Quantum technologies with optically interfaced solid-state spins, Nature Photonics 12, 516 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Wolfowicz, F

    G. Wolfowicz, F. J. Heremans, C. P. Anderson, S. Kanai, H. Seo, A. Gali, G. Galli, and D. D. Awschalom, Quan- tum guidelines for solid-state spin defects, Nature Re- views Materials 6, 906 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Childress and R

    L. Childress and R. Hanson, Diamond NV centers for quantum computing and quantum networks, MRS bul- letin 38, 134 (2013)

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Rondin, J.-P

    L. Rondin, J.-P. Tetienne, T. Hingant, J.-F. Roch, P. Maletinsky, and V. Jacques, Magnetometry with nitrogen-vacancy defects in diamond, Reports on Progress in Physics 77, 056503 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    Schirhagl, K

    R. Schirhagl, K. Chang, M. Loretz, and C. L. Degen, Nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond: nanoscale sen- sors for physics and biology, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 65, 83 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Casola, T

    F. Casola, T. Van Der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond, Nature Reviews Materials 3, 1 (2018)

    2018

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Castelletto and A

    S. Castelletto and A. Boretti, Silicon carbide color centers for quantum applications, Journal of Physics: Photonics 2, 022001 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Gottscholl, M

    A. Gottscholl, M. Kianinia, V. Soltamov, S. Orlin- skii, G. Mamin, C. Bradac, C. Kasper, K. Krambrock, A. Sperlich, M. Toth, I. Aharonovich, and V. Dyakonov, Initialization and read-out of intrinsic spin defects in a van der waals crystal at room temperature, Nature Ma- terial...

    2020

  3. [11]

    Gottscholl, M

    A. Gottscholl, M. Diez, V. Soltamov, C. Kasper, A. Sper- lich, M. Kianinia, C. Bradac, I. Aharonovich, and V. Dyakonov, Room temperature coherent control of spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride, Science Advances 7, eabf3630 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    J. Zhou, H. Lu, D. Chen, M. Huang, G. Q. Yan, F. Al- Matouq, J. Chang, D. Djugba, Z. Jiang, H. Wang, et al., Sensing spin wave excitations by spin defects in few- layer-thick hexagonal boron nitride, Science Advances 10, eadk8495 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Sasaki, Y

    K. Sasaki, Y. Nakamura, H. Gu, M. Tsukamoto, S. Naka- harai, T. Iwasaki, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Ogawa, Y. Morita, and K. Kobayashi, Magnetic field imaging by hBN quantum sensor nanoarray, Applied Physics Letters 122, 244003 (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Liang, Y

    H. Liang, Y. Chen, C. Yang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, G. Eda, and A. A. Bettiol, High sensitivity spin defects in hbn created by high-energy he beam irradiation, Ad- vanced Optical Materials 11, 2201941 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    Kumar, F

    P. Kumar, F. Fabre, A. Durand, T. Clua-Provost, J. Li, J. Edgar, N. Rougemaille, J. Coraux, X. Marie, P. Renucci, C. Robert, I. Robert-Philip, B. Gil, G. Cass- abois, A. Finco, and V. Jacques, Magnetic imaging with spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride, Physical Review Appli...

    2022

  8. [16]

    Healey, S

    A. Healey, S. Scholten, T. Yang, J. Scott, G. Abrahams, I. Robertson, X. Hou, Y. Guo, S. Rahman, Y. Lu, et al., Quantum microscopy with van der Waals heterostruc- tures, Nature Physics 19, 87 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Huang, J

    M. Huang, J. Zhou, D. Chen, H. Lu, N. J. McLaughlin, S. Li, M. Alghamdi, D. Djugba, J. Shi, H. Wang, and C. R. Du, Wide field imaging of van der Waals ferromag- net Fe3GeTe2 by spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride, Nature communications 13, 5369 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Jiang, J

    L. Jiang, J. S. Hodges, J. R. Maze, P. Maurer, J. M. 15 Taylor, D. G. Cory, P. R. Hemmer, R. L. Walsworth, A. Yacoby, A. S. Zibrov, and M. D. Lukin, Repetitive readout of a single electronic spin via quantum logic with nuclear spin ancillae, Science 326, 267 (2009)

    2009

  11. [19]

    Neumann, J

    P. Neumann, J. Beck, M. Steiner, F. Rempp, H. Fedder, P. R. Hemmer, J. Wrachtrup, and F. Jelezko, Single-shot readout of a single nuclear spin, Science 329, 542 (2010)

    2010

  12. [20]

    Waldherr, Y

    G. Waldherr, Y. Wang, S. Zaiser, M. Jamali, T. Schulte- Herbr¨ uggen, H. Abe, T. Ohshima, J. Isoya, J. Du, P. Neu- mann, and J. Wrachtrup, Quantum error correction in a solid-state hybrid spin register, Nature 506, 204 (2014)

    2014

  13. [21]

    T. H. Taminiau, J. Cramer, T. van der Sar, V. V. Do- brovitski, and R. Hanson, Universal control and error cor- rection in multi-qubit spin registers in diamond, Nature Nanotechnology 9, 171 (2014)

    2014

  14. [22]

    Lovchinsky, A

    I. Lovchinsky, A. O. Sushkov, E. Urbach, N. P. de Leon, S. Choi, K. D. Greve, R. Evans, R. Gertner, E. Bersin, C. M¨ uller, L. McGuinness, F. Jelezko, R. L. Walsworth, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Nuclear magnetic resonance detection and spectroscopy of single proteins using quan...

    2016

  15. [23]

    X. Gao, S. Vaidya, K. Li, P. Ju, B. Jiang, Z. Xu, A. E. L. Allcca, K. Shen, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, S. A. Bhave, Y. P. Chen, Y. Ping, and T. Li, Nuclear spin polarization and control in hexagonal boron nitride, Nature Materials 21, 1024 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    R. Gong, X. Du, E. Janzen, V. Liu, Z. Liu, G. He, B. Ye, T. Li, N. Y. Yao, J. H. Edgar, E. A. Henriksen, and C. Zu, Isotope engineering for spin defects in van der Waals ma- terials, Nature Communications 15, 104 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    S. Ru, Z. Jiang, H. Liang, J. Kenny, H. Cai, X. Lyu, R. Cernansky, F. Zhou, Y. Yang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguch, F. Li, T. S. Koh, X. Liu, F. Jelezko, A. A. Bettiol, and W. Gao, Robust nuclear spin polarization via ground-state level anticrossing of boron vacancy de- fects in he...

    2024

  18. [26]

    Sasaki, T

    K. Sasaki, T. Taniguchi, and K. Kobayashi, Nitrogen iso- tope effects on boron vacancy quantum sensors in hexag- onal boron nitride, Applied Physics Express 16, 095003 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Clua-Provost, A

    T. Clua-Provost, A. Durand, Z. Mu, T. Rastoin, J. Frauni´ e, E. Janzen, H. Schutte, J. H. Edgar, G. Seine, A. Claverie, X. Marie, C. Robert, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, and V. Jacques, Isotopic control of the boron-vacancy spin defect in hexagonal boron nitride, Physical Review Lett...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Zunger, A

    A. Zunger, A. Katzir, and A. Halperin, Optical properties of hexagonal boron nitride, Physical Review B 13, 5560 (1976)

    1976

  21. [29]

    Baber, R

    S. Baber, R. N. E. Malein, P. Khatri, P. S. Keatley, S. Guo, F. Withers, A. J. Ramsay, and I. J. Luxmoore, Excited state spectroscopy of boron vacancy defects in hexagonal boron nitride using time-resolved optically de- tected magnetic resonance, Nano Letters 22, 461 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Clua-Provost, Z

    T. Clua-Provost, Z. Mu, A. Durand, C. Schrader, J. Hap- pacher, J. Bocquel, P. Maletinsky, J. Frauni´ e, X. Marie, C. Robert, G. Seine, E. Janzen, J. H. Edgar, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, and V. Jacques, Spin-dependent photody- namics of boron-vacancy centers in hexagonal boron ni- ...

    2024

  23. [31]

    W. Lee, V. S. Liu, Z. Zhang, S. Kim, R. Gong, X. Du, K. Pham, T. Poirier, Z. Hao, J. H. Edgar, P. Kim, C. Zu, E. J. Davis, and N. Y. Yao, Intrinsic high-fidelity spin polarization of charged vacancies in hexagonal boron ni- tride, (2024), arXiv:2406.11953

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    X. Lyu, Q. Tan, L. Wu, C. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Z. Mu, J. Z´ u˜ niga-P´ erez, H. Cai, and W. Gao, Strain quantum sensing with spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride, Nano Letters 22, 6553 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Durand, T

    A. Durand, T. Clua-Provost, F. Fabre, P. Kumar, J. Li, J. H. Edgar, P. Udvarhelyi, A. Gali, X. Marie, C. Robert, J. M. G´ erard, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, and V. Jacques, Optically active spin defects in few-layer thick hexago- nal boron nitride, Physical Review Letters 131, 116902 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    H. Gu, M. Tsukamoto, Y. Nakamura, S. Nakaharai, T. Iwasaki, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Ogawa, Y. Morita, K. Sasaki, and K. Kobayashi, Systematic char- acterization of nanoscale h-BN quantum sensor spots cre- ated by helium-ion microscopy, Physical Review Applied 22, 054026 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Misonou, K

    D. Misonou, K. Sasaki, S. Ishizu, Y. Monnai, K. M. Itoh, and E. Abe, Construction and operation of a tabletop system for nanoscale magnetometry with single nitrogen- vacancy centers in diamond, AIP Advances 10, 025206 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    H. Gu, Y. Nakamura, K. Sasaki, and K. Kobayashi, Multi-frequency composite pulse sequences for sensitivity enhancement in hexagonal boron nitride quantum sensor, Applied Physics Express 16, 055003 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Haykal, R

    A. Haykal, R. Tanos, N. Minotto, A. Durand, F. Fabre, J. Li, J. H. Edgar, V. Iv´ ady, A. Gali, T. Michel, A. Dr´ eau, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, and V. Jacques, Decoherence of V− B spin defects in monoisotopic hexagonal boron nitride, Nature Communications 13, 4347 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Iv´ ady, G

    V. Iv´ ady, G. Barcza, G. Thiering, S. Li, H. Hamdi, J.- P. Chou, ¨O. Legeza, and A. Gali, Ab initio theory of the negatively charged boron vacancy qubit in hexagonal boron nitride, npj Computational Materials 6, 41 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    J. R. Reimers, J. Shen, M. Kianinia, C. Bradac, I. Aharonovich, M. J. Ford, and P. Piecuch, Photolumi- nescence, photophysics, and photochemistry of the V B − defect in hexagonal boron nitride, Physical Review B 102, 144105 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    Auzinsh, A

    M. Auzinsh, A. Berzins, D. Budker, L. Busaite, R. Fer- ber, F. Gahbauer, R. Lazda, A. Wickenbrock, and H. Zheng, Hyperfine level structure in nitrogen-vacancy centers near the ground-state level anticrossing, Physical Review B 100, 075204 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Busaite, R

    L. Busaite, R. Lazda, A. Berzins, M. Auzinsh, R. Ferber, and F. Gahbauer, Dynamic 14N nuclear spin polarization in nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond, Physical Review B 102, 224101 (2020)

    2020

  34. [42]

    Dr´ eau, M

    A. Dr´ eau, M. Lesik, L. Rondin, P. Spinicelli, O. Arcizet, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Avoiding power broadening in optically detected magnetic resonance of single NV de- fects for enhanced dc magnetic field sensitivity, Physical Review B 84, 195204 (2011)

    2011

  35. [43]

    Jacques, P

    V. Jacques, P. Neumann, J. Beck, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, J. Meijer, F. Kaiser, G. Balasubrama- nian, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Dynamic polarization of single nuclear spins by optical pumping of nitrogen- vacancy color centers in diamond at room temperature, Physical Revie...

    2009

  36. [44]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cam- bridge University Press, 1997). 16

    1997

  37. [45]

    Ruskuc, C.-J

    A. Ruskuc, C.-J. Wu, J. Rochman, J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Nuclear spin-wave quantum register for a solid-state qubit, Nature 602, 408 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Sasaki and E

    K. Sasaki and E. Abe, Suppression of pulsed dynamic nu- clear polarization by many-body spin dynamics, Physical Review Letters 132, 106904 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Mendelson, Z.-Q

    N. Mendelson, Z.-Q. Xu, T. T. Tran, M. Kianinia, J. Scott, C. Bradac, I. Aharonovich, and M. Toth, Iden- tifying carbon as the source of visible single photon emis- sion from hexagonal boron nitride, Nature Materials 20, 321 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    Chejanovsky, A

    N. Chejanovsky, A. Mukherjee, J. Geng, Y.-C. Chen, Y. Kim, A. Denisenko, A. Finkler, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, D. B. R. Dasari, P. Auburger, A. Gali, J. H. Smet, and J. Wrachtrup, Single-spin resonance in a van der Waals embedded paramagnetic defect, Nature Materials 20, 1079 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    N.-J. Guo, S. Li, W. Liu, Y.-Z. Yang, X.-D. Zeng, S. Yu, Y. Meng, Z.-P. Li, Z.-A. Wang, L.-K. Xie, R.-C. Ge, J.-F. Wang, Q. Li, J.-S. Xu, Y.-T. Wang, J.-S. Tang, A. Gali, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Coherent control of an ultra- bright single spin in hexagonal boron nitride at ro...

    2023

  42. [50]

    Yang, T.-X

    Y.-Z. Yang, T.-X. Zhu, Z.-P. Li, X.-D. Zeng, N.-J. Guo, S. Yu, Y. Meng, Z.-A. Wang, L.-K. Xie, Z.-Q. Zhou, Q. Li, J.-S. Xu, X.-Y. Gao, W. Liu, Y.-T. Wang, J.- S. Tang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Laser direct writing of visible spin defects in hexagonal boron nitride for ap- plic...

    2023

  43. [51]

    S. C. Scholten, P. Singh, A. J. Healey, I. O. Robertson, G. Haim, C. Tan, D. A. Broadway, L. Wang, H. Abe, T. Ohshima, M. Kianinia, P. Reineck, I. Aharonovich, and J.-P. Tetienne, Multi-species optically addressable spin defects in a van der Waals material, Nature Com- municat...

    2024

  44. [52]

    R. N. Patel, R. E. K. Fishman, T.-Y. Huang, J. A. Gus- dorff, D. A. Fehr, D. A. Hopper, S. A. Breitweiser, B. Po- rat, M. E. Flatt´ e, and L. C. Bassett, Room temperature dynamics of an optically addressable single spin in hexag- onal boron nitride, Nano Letters 24, 7623 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    H. L. Stern, C. M. Gilardoni, Q. Gu, S. Eizagirre Barker, O. F. J. Powell, X. Deng, S. A. Fraser, L. Follet, C. Li, A. J. Ramsay, H. H. Tan, I. Aharonovich, and M. Atat¨ ure, A quantum coherent spin in hexagonal boron nitride at ambient conditions, Nature Materials 23, 1379 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    I. O. Robertson, B. Whitefield, S. C. Scholten, P. Singh, A. J. Healey, P. Reineck, M. Kianinia, D. A. Broadway, I. Aharonovich, and J.-P. Tetienne, A universal mech- anism for optically addressable solid-state spin pairs, (2024), arXiv:2407.13148

    2024

  47. [55]

    X. Gao, S. Vaidya, K. Li, S. Dikshit, S. Zhang, P. Ju, K. Shen, Y. Jin, Y. Ping, and T. Li, Single nuclear spin detection and control in a van der Waals material, (2024), arXiv:2409.01601

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Singh, I

    P. Singh, I. O. Robertson, S. C. Scholten, A. J. Healey, H. Abe, T. Ohshima, H. H. Tan, M. Kian- inia, I. Aharonovich, D. A. Broadway, P. Reineck, and J.-P. Tetienne, Violet to near-infrared optical address- ing of spin pairs in hexagonal boron nitride (2024), arXiv:2409.20186

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    J. P. Tetienne, L. Rondin, P. Spinicelli, M. Chipaux, T. Debuisschert, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Magnetic- field-dependent photodynamics of single NV defects in diamond: an application to qualitative all-optical mag- netic imaging, New Journal of Physics 14, 103033 (2012)

    2012

  50. [58]

    P. Yu, H. Sun, M. Wang, T. Zhang, X. Ye, J. Zhou, H. Liu, C.-J. Wang, F. Shi, Y. Wang, and J. Du, Excited- state spectroscopy of spin defects in hexagonal boron ni- tride, Nano Letters 22, 3545 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    Whitefield, M

    B. Whitefield, M. Toth, I. Aharonovich, J.-P. Tetienne, and M. Kianinia, Magnetic field sensitivity optimization of negatively charged boron vacancy defects in hBN, Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies , 2300118 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    P. E. Spindler, P. Sch¨ ops, A. M. Bowen, B. Endeward, and T. F. Prisner, Shaped pulses in EPR, in eMagRes (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2016) pp. 1477–1492

    2016

  53. [61]

    Sasaki, K

    K. Sasaki, K. M. Itoh, and E. Abe, Determination of the position of a single nuclear spin from free nuclear preces- sions detected by a solid-state quantum sensor, Physical Review B 98, 121405 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    J. A. Gyamfi, Fundamentals of quantum mechanics in Liouville space, European Journal of Physics 41, 063002 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

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