Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Spontaneous helix formation in polar smectic phase

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A tilted ferroelectric smectic liquid crystal spontaneously twists into a 600-nanometer helix.

desk verdict First credible evidence of spontaneous sub-micron helix in a proper ferroelectric tilted smectic; the bulk-helix interpretation still needs one more confirmation step. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04042 v1 pith:U3BHH2L4 submitted 2025-02-06 cond-mat.soft

Ewa Gorecka , Magdalena Majewska , Ladislav Fekete , Jakub Karcz , Julia Żukowska , Jakub Herman Przemys{l}aw Kula , Damian Pociecha This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.soft
keywords spontaneoushelixformationferroelectricsmecticphaseheliconicalstructurepolarnematicdepolarizationfieldliquidcrystalhelicalpitchopticalactivity
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 shows that a tilted, fully ferroelectric smectic phase—called SmCTBF, formed just below the heliconical polar nematic phase NTBF—does not stay uniform. Instead, its polarization direction spontaneously wraps into a helix with a pitch of about 600 nm, and that pitch stays almost constant across the whole temperature range of the phase. The helix is the layered analogue of the heliconical polar nematic structure: by twisting the director, the material reduces the depolarization field that would otherwise build up from bound surface charges. Weak electric fields rotate the helix axis without destroying the helix, while stronger fields unwind it and align the polarization along the field. The result establishes a new route by which soft ferroelectric fluids can avoid electrostatic energy without forming conventional domains.

What carries the argument

The central object is the heliconical director and polarization structure of the SmCTBF phase: within each smectic layer the molecules are tilted, and along the helix axis the tilt direction and in-layer polarization rotate together, so the director traces a cone. This is the tilted-smectic analogue of the NTBF heliconical polar nematic. The helix pitch of about 600 nm is what appears as the sub-micron periodicity in laser diffraction and AFM, and as optical activity with randomly distributed left- and right-handed domains. The mechanism is electrostatic: twisting the polarization direction reduces the depolarization field of the ferroelectric order without needing crystalline domain walls or lattice distortion. The same director twist also reduces the measured birefringence, connecting the optical data to the conical tilt angle through the relation used for heliconical nematics.

What would settle it

Cross-sectional freeze-fracture or resonant X-ray imaging through the cell thickness that fails to show a continuous twisted director field with a pitch near 600 nm would overturn the claim that the observed sub-micron periodicity is a bulk helix, as would a control showing that the periodicity scales with cell thickness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper demonstrates spontaneous formation of a helical structure in the proper ferroelectric tilted smectic phase SmCTBF, a layered phase with genuine ferroelectric order that forms below the heliconical polar nematic NTBF. The helical pitch is about 600 nm and remains nearly temperature-independent throughout the smectic phase. X-ray diffraction shows true layer order; birefringence shows growing molecular tilt; dielectric and polarization-reversal measurements confirm ferroelectric switching; laser diffraction and atomic force microscopy reveal a sub-micrometer periodicity of 600–700 nm; and optical-activity domains with both handedness signs appear when the helix is realigned by a weak field. The authors interpret the structure as a heliconical arrangement of tilted molecules, in which the polarization direction twists about the helix axis at an oblique angle, partially compensating the depolarization field. Under stronger fields the helix is destroyed and the polarization aligns along the applied field, producing a uniform ferroelectric state.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the 600–700 nm periodicity seen in diffraction and AFM is the bulk helical pitch of the polarization or director field, not a surface grating, layer undulation, or stripe tied to cell thickness.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SmCTBF becomes a documented case of spontaneous helix formation in a proper ferroelectric tilted smectic phase, extending the heliconical phenomenon from nematic to layered systems.
  • Because the pitch stays near 600 nm across the whole smectic range, the helix is a robust ground-state feature rather than a pretransitional fluctuation.
  • Weak electric fields rotate the helix axis but leave the helix intact, so the optical activity and diffraction pattern can be switched without erasing the chiral structure; strong fields erase the helix and create a uniform ferroelectric state.
  • The coexistence of left- and right-handed helices with equal probability means this achiral material becomes spontaneously chiral at the micron scale.
  • The depolarization field in soft ferroelectric smectics can be reduced by pure director reorientation, without the need for conventional ferroelectric domain walls.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 600 nm helix is genuinely a bulk director twist, the same material class may allow pitch tuning through molecular design, such as adding chiral or flexoelectric groups, something the paper does not explore.
  • The easy electric-field rotation of the helix axis, combined with optically active domains, suggests a route to rewritable chiral micro-optical elements, though the paper reports no device.
  • A direct test of the Bouligand-arch interpretation would be cross-sectional or depth-resolved imaging of the heliconical structure; if the arches are confirmed, the pitch could be measured in three dimensions rather than inferred from diffraction.
  • The observation may generalize to other polar tilted smectics: the same electrostatic argument that favors helices in the ferroelectric nematic phases should make heliconical smectic variants a generic ground state, not a special case.
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 reports a new proper ferroelectric tilted smectic phase, SmCTBF, formed on cooling below the heliconical ferroelectric nematic NTBF. The authors argue that the depolarization field in this polar smectic is relaxed by a spontaneously formed helical modulation of the polarization/director field with a pitch of approximately 600 nm that is nearly temperature-independent. Evidence includes laser diffraction, AFM topography, optical activity in field-induced domains, PFM, X-ray diffraction, dielectric spectroscopy, and polarization-switching current measurements. They also show that weak electric fields reorient the helix while preserving it, whereas stronger fields unwind it and align the polarization along the field.

Significance. If validated, this result establishes a new mechanism of depolarization-field relief in polar smectics and a smectic analogue of the heliconical NTBF phase. The sub-micron, almost temperature-independent pitch and the coexistence of opposite chiral domains are novel and of broad interest to the ferroelectric liquid-crystal community. The paper is strengthened by converging evidence from several independent techniques, by the clear identification of the phase sequence, and by direct measurements of ferroelectric switching. However, the identification of the periodic structure as a bulk helix relies on a tentative AFM interpretation and on diffraction from thin planar cells, so the bulk-helix assignment needs to be reinforced before the central claim is fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results and Discussion, Fig. 4 and Fig. S4] The central claim that the ~600 nm periodicity is a bulk helical pitch of the director/polarization field is not yet conclusively separated from surface or layer-undulation artifacts. The AFM evidence in Fig. S4 is explicitly described as "weak wavy patterns ... most probably the Bouligand arches", a tentative identification, and the laser diffraction data were obtained in planar cells 1.5–3 μm thick. A periodic surface grating or periodic layer buckling in such thin cells would produce the same diffraction spacing and similar AFM topography, and the optical activity in Fig. 5 is only observed after field-induced realignment to homeotropic geometry and is not quantified as a function of thickness. To make the bulk-helix assignment load-bearing, the authors should show that the pitch is independent of cell thickness (e.g., a thickness series), provide cross-sectional or tomographic imaging, or quantitatively exclude a surface-grating origin of the diffraction.
  2. [Figure 4a and main text] The assertion that the helical pitch is "nearly constant" across the entire SmCTBF temperature range is supported by only a small number of laser diffraction points and a single AFM measurement, and no error bars or measurement uncertainties are provided. Since this temperature independence is a headline result, the authors should report the number of independent measurements, the uncertainty in each pitch value, and ideally data from several cell thicknesses so that the plateau claim can be evaluated quantitatively.
  3. [Supporting Information, optical birefringence section and Eq. (1); Fig. 2] The conical tilt angle of the SmCTBF phase is deduced from a birefringence model that relies on a power-law extrapolation of Δn_NF with three free parameters (Δn0, Tc, γ), and the paper itself states that Δn values in the smectic phase "are not fully reliable" because the alignment degrades. This weakens the quantitative support for the "heliconical" (tilted) description of the smectic structure, which is part of the central claim. An independent measurement of the tilt angle, such as from the temperature dependence of the smectic layer spacing or from conoscopy, and a propagation of the fitting uncertainty would be needed to solidify this point.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and main text] There are several typographical errors: "favorured" in the abstract should be "favored", "Conversly" in the main text should be "Conversely", and the SI contains "Spontanous electric polariztion" and "Suplementarny results". These should be corrected.
  2. [Author affiliations] The affiliation for the Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, lists "Prague, Poland"; Prague is in the Czech Republic, not Poland. The address should be corrected.
  3. [Supporting Information, Figure S6 caption] The caption of Figure S6 appears to be truncated ("Figure S6. s. applied voltage...") and should be restored to a complete sentence describing the measured quantities and the cell geometry.
  4. [Introduction, NTBF abbreviation] The abbreviation NTBF is introduced without a definition; consider spelling out "twist-bend ferroelectric nematic" at first use to help readers unfamiliar with the earlier literature.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the claimed SmCTBF helix is supported by independent diffraction, AFM, PFM, and optical-activity measurements; the paper's self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the SmCTBF phase spontaneously forms a sub-micron helix. The derivation chain is experimental: DSC and XRD establish the phase sequence, dielectric and switching-current measurements establish polar order, and laser diffraction, AFM, PFM, and field-induced optical activity are used to detect the ~600 nm periodicity and its handedness. The helical pitch is measured directly from diffraction spot positions and AFM stripe spacing; no parameter is fitted to the helix data and then renamed as a prediction. The tilt-angle estimate uses the external twist-bend relation from ref [17] with an NF birefringence power-law extrapolation, but this is characterization, not a prediction of the helix periodicity. Self-citations to refs [4], [22], [23], and [24] support the prior identification and nomenclature of NTBF and SmCF phases, but the present helix claim does not reduce to those citations: the experimental evidence in Figures 4-6 and S4-S5 is new and independent. The tentative AFM interpretation as 'most probably the Bouligand arches' is an empirical identification, and the possibility of surface gratings or layer undulations is a correctness risk, not a circularity, because the conclusion is not equivalent to the input by construction. The score reflects minor self-citations that are not load-bearing.

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

The central helix claim rests on measured periodicity, not on a derived free energy. The only fitted parameters appear in the birefringence-based tilt-angle estimate, which is not essential to the existence of the helix. The key domain assumptions are that birefringence changes report only molecular tilt, that chiral domains arise from spontaneous symmetry breaking, and that the polarization is genuinely ferroelectric.

free parameters (3)
  • Delta n_0 (NF birefringence prefactor)
    Fitted in SI power-law Delta n_NF = Delta n_0 (T_c - T)^gamma to extrapolate NF birefringence into the NTBF/SmCTBF range; used to compute conical tilt angle. Values not stated in text.
  • T_c (power-law critical temperature)
    Fitting parameter in the NF birefringence extrapolation used for the tilt-angle estimate.
  • gamma (power-law exponent)
    Fitting parameter in the NF birefringence extrapolation; no uncertainty is propagated to the deduced tilt angle.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Birefringence of the heliconical phase obeys Delta n_NTBF = Delta n_NF (3 cos^2 theta - 1)/2 from ref [17], with Delta n_NF extrapolated by a power law.
    Used in SI to convert measured birefringence into conical tilt angle theta; assumes no other mechanism, such as a change in orientational order, affects Delta n.
  • domain assumption Achiral molecules can spontaneously form chiral helical structures with equal left- and right-handed domains.
    Needed to interpret opposite-sign optical activity domains as coexisting enantiomorphic helices rather than external chirality.
  • domain assumption The observed switching current and PFM response identify proper ferroelectric order with polarization reversible by an electric field.
    Supports assignment of SmCTBF as a proper ferroelectric phase; assumes no hidden antiferroelectric or ionic contribution dominates the response.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spontaneous helix formation in polar smectic phase." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U3BHH2L4

@misc{pith2026250204042,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spontaneous helix formation in polar smectic phase},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U3BHH2L4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04042}
}
read the original abstract

In soft ferroelectric crystals, the depolarization field can be reduced by periodic distortion of the polarization direction. In the polar nematic and tilted smectic phases, this process is energetically favorured , as it only requires changes in the director orientation. We demonstrate the spontaneous formation of a helical structure in the proper ferroelectric tilted smectic (SmCTBF) phase, the phase is formed below the heliconical polar nematic (NTBF) phase. The helical pitch in the smectic phase is approximately 600 nm and remains nearly constant across the entire temperature range of the phase. Under weak electric fields, the helix reorients while its structure remains largely intact; however, in stronger fields, the helix is destroyed as the electric polarization aligns along the electric field.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04042 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Optical birefringence vs. temperature measured in thin (~1.8-m￾thick) planar cell with parallel rubbing at both surfaces. The polar properties of the nematic and smectic phases were confirmed by dielectric spectroscopy and polarization reversal current measurements. Although interpretation of dielectric spectroscopy results for strongly polar materials can be challenging [18, 19], the data clearly indicate, that up… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Molecular structure of the studied compound. (b) Layer spacing, d, (in SmCTBF phase) and averaged longitudinal distance of molecules in NF and NTBF phases deduced form X-ray diffraction studies (black circles) and the width (FWHM) of the related diffraction signal (blue squares) measured vs. temperature; note that the signal becomes instrumental-resolution-limited in smectic phase. (c) 2D X-ray diffraction patte… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Textures of NF, NTBF and SmCTBF phase in planar cell with parallel rubbing direction, stripes visible in the image of NTBF and SmCTBF are related to the cell thickness, the stripes related to the helix (in the inset) can be observed only in the vicinity of NTBF-NF phase transition where the helix unwinds. Near the transition to the SmCTBF phase, the helical pitch of the NTBF phase reaches around 600 nm and remains a… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Helical pitch vs. temperature and in the inset light diffraction patterns in NTBF and SmCTBF phases, the intensive spots are from diffraction on helical structure. (b) Models of heliconical arrangement of molecules in NTBF and SmCTBF phases, color gradient of rods …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Texture of SmCTBF phase obtained upon cooling the sample from NTBF phase in 3-m-thick cell with parallel rubbing on both surfaces. (b) Application of weak electric field across the cell thickness (<1V/m), realigned the helix form planar to homeotropic position, t…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Laser light diffraction patterns in SmCTBF phase from the planar cell ~ 2.5-m-thick with in-plane electrodes. (a) Under applied voltage only the diffraction spots along the field directions are visible. When electric field is switched off two sets of diffraction spots…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Spontaneous Twist of Ferroelectric Smectic Blocks in Polar Fluids

    cond-mat.soft 2025-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Achiral BOE-NO2 molecules show twisted ferroelectric smectic blocks, inheriting the chiral ground state of the ferroelectric nematic phase into layered smectic phases.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [4]

    Spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in polar fluid - heliconical ferroelectric nematic phase

    J. Karcz, J. Herman, N. Rychłowicz, P. Kula, E. Górecka, J. Szydlowska, P. W. Majewski, D. Pociecha, “Spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking in polar fluid - heliconical ferroelectric nematic phase” Science 2024, 384, 1096–1099

    work page 2024

  2. [14]

    Spontaneous symmetry breaking in polar fluids

    C. J. Gibb, J. Hobbs, D. I. Nikolova, T. Raistrick, S. R. Berrow, A. Mertelj, N. Osterman, N. Sebastián, H. F. Gleeson, R. J. Mandle, “ Spontaneous symmetry breaking in polar fluids” Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 5845

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    Domains, Domain Walls and Defects in Perovskite Ferroelectric Oxides: A Review of Present Understanding and Recent Contributions

    A. Pramanick, A. D. Prewitt, J. S. Forrester, J. L. Jones, “Domains, Domain Walls and Defects in Perovskite Ferroelectric Oxides: A Review of Present Understanding and Recent Contributions ” Critical Reviews in Solid State and Materials Sciences, 2012, 37, 243–275

    work page 2012

  4. [2]

    Medle Rupnik, E

    P. Medle Rupnik, E. Hanžel, M. Lovšin, N. Osterman, C. J. Gibb, R. J. Mandle, N. Sebastián, A. Mertelj, „Antiferroelectric Order in Nematic Liquids: Flexoelectricity Versus Electrostatics“ Adv. Sci. 2025, 2414818

    work page 2025

  5. [3]

    Double Splay Nematic Order in Confined Polar Fluids

    Z. Ma, M. Jiang, A. Sun, S.u Yi, J. Yang, M. Huang, S. Aya, Q -H Wei, “Double Splay Nematic Order in Confined Polar Fluids” arXiv preprint 2024, DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.12336

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.12336 2024

  6. [5]

    Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya-like interaction in ferroelectrics and antiferroelectrics

    H. J. Zhao, P. Chen, S. Prosandeev, S. Artyukhin, L. Bellaiche, “Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya-like interaction in ferroelectrics and antiferroelectrics” Nat. Mater. 2021, 20, 341–345

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    Emergent helical texture of electric dipoles

    D. D. Khalyavin, R. D. Johnson, F. Orlandi, P. G. Radaelli, A. Belik, “Emergent helical texture of electric dipoles ”. Science 2020, 369, 680- 684

    work page 2020

  8. [7]

    Nishikawa, K

    H. Nishikawa, K. Shiroshita, H. Higuchi, Y. Okumura, Y. Haseba, S. Yamamoto, K. Sago, H. Kikuchi, „A Fluid Liquid -Crystal Material with Highly Polar Order“ Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1702354

    work page 2017

Show all 25 references
  1. [8]

    A nematic to nematic transformation exhibited by a rod-like liquid crystal

    R. J. Mandle, S. J. Cowling, J. W. Goodby, “A nematic to nematic transformation exhibited by a rod-like liquid crystal” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2017, 19, 11429–11435

    2017

  2. [9]

    Splay Nematic Phase

    A. Mertelj , L. Cmok, N. Sebastián, R. J. Mandle, R. R. Parker, A. C. Whitwood, J. W. Goodby, M. Čopič , “Splay Nematic Phase” Phys. Rev. X 2018, 8, 041025

    2018

  3. [10]

    First- principles experimental demonstration of ferroelectricity in a thermotropic nematic liquid crystal: Polar domains and striking electro -optics

    X. Chen, E. Korblova, D. Dong, X. Wei, R. Shao, L. Radzihovsky, M. A. Glaser, J. E. Maclennan, D. Bedrov, D. M. Walba, N. A. Clark , “First- principles experimental demonstration of ferroelectricity in a thermotropic nematic liquid crystal: Polar domains and striking electro -...

    2020

  4. [11]

    Development of Helical Cholesteric Structure in a Nematic Liquid-Crystal Due to Dipole-Dipole Interaction

    A. G. Khachaturyan, “Development of Helical Cholesteric Structure in a Nematic Liquid-Crystal Due to Dipole-Dipole Interaction” J. Phys. Chem. Solids 1975, 36, 1055-1061

    1975

  5. [12]

    Flexoelectricity versus Electrostatics in Polar Nematic Liquid Crystals

    L. Paik, J. V. Selinger , “Flexoelectricity versus Electrostatics in Polar Nematic Liquid Crystals ” arXiv preprint 2024, DOI:10.48550/arXiv.2408.10347

    2024 doi arXiv

  6. [13]

    Chiral ground states of ferroelectric liquid crystals

    P. Kumari, B. Basnet, M. O. Lavrentovich, O. D. Lavrentovich, “Chiral ground states of ferroelectric liquid crystals” Science 2024, 383, 1364

    2024

  7. [15]

    The Smectic ZA Phase: Antiferroelectric Smectic Order as a Prelude to the Ferroelectric Nematic

    X. Chen, V. Martinez, E. Korblova, G. Freychet, M. Zhernenkov, M. A. Glaser, C. Wang, C. Zhu, L. Radzihovsky, J. E. Maclennan, D. M. Walba, N. A. Clark, “The Smectic ZA Phase: Antiferroelectric Smectic Order as a Prelude to the Ferroelectric Nematic” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 202...

    2023

  8. [16]

    To be or not to be polar: the ferroelectric and antiferroelectric nematic phases

    E. Cruickshank, P. Rybak, M. M. Majewska, S. Ramsay, C. Wang, C. Zhu, R. Walker, J. M. D. Storey, C. T. Imrie, E. Gorecka, D. Pociecha, “To be or not to be polar: the ferroelectric and antiferroelectric nematic phases” ACS Omega 2023, 8, 36562–36568

    2023

  9. [17]

    The temperature dependence of the heliconical tilt angle in the twist-bend nematic phase of the odd dimer CB7CB

    C. Meyer, G. R. Luckhurst, I. Dozov, “The temperature dependence of the heliconical tilt angle in the twist-bend nematic phase of the odd dimer CB7CB” J. Mater. Chem. C 2015, 3, 318-328

    2015

  10. [18]

    Dielectric spectroscopy of ferroelectric nematic liquid crystals: Measuring the capacitance of insulating in terfacial layers

    N. A. Clark, X. Chen, J. E. MacLennan, M. A. Glaser, “Dielectric spectroscopy of ferroelectric nematic liquid crystals: Measuring the capacitance of insulating in terfacial layers ” Phys. Rev. Res. 2024, 6, 013195

    2024

  11. [19]

    Interpretation of dielectric spectroscopy measurements of ferroelectric nematic liquid crystals

    V. Matko, E. Gorecka, D. Pociecha, J. Matraszek, N. Vaupotic, “Interpretation of dielectric spectroscopy measurements of ferroelectric nematic liquid crystals” Phys. Rev. Res. 2024, 6, L042017

    2024

  12. [20]

    On the molecular origins of the ferroelectric splay nematic phase

    R.J Mandle, N. Sebastián, J. Martinez -Perdiguero, A. Mertelj, “On the molecular origins of the ferroelectric splay nematic phase” Nat Commun. 2021, 12, 4962

    2021

  13. [21]

    P. Kumari. O. Kurochkin, V. G. Nazarenko, O. D. Lavrentovich, D. Golovaty, P. Sternberg, „Co nic sections in ferroelectric nematics: Experiments and mathematical modeling“ Phys. Rev. Res . 2024, 6, 043207

    2024

  14. [22]

    G. J. Strachan, E. Górecka, J. Szydłowska, A. Makal, D. Pociecha, Nematic and smectic phases with proper ferroelectric order, Adv. Science, 2024, 2409754

    2024

  15. [23]

    Hobbs , C

    J. Hobbs , C. J. Gibb, D. Pociecha, J. Szydłowska, E. Górecka, R. J. Mandle, Polar order in a fluid like ferroelectric with a tilted lamellar structure – observation of a polar smectic C (SmCP) phase, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2024, e202416545

    2024

  16. [24]

    Karcz, N

    J. Karcz, N. Rychłowicz, M. Czarnecka, A. Kocot, J. Herman, P. Kula, “Enantiotropic ferroelectric nematic phase in a single compound“. Chem. Commun. 2023, 59, 14807-14810

    2023

  17. [25]

    Bouligand, M

    Y. Bouligand, M. -O. Soyer, S. Puiseux -Dao, „La structure fibr illaire et l'orientation des chromosomes chez les Dinoflagellés“ Chromosoma 1968, 24, 251–287. Supporting information 6 Experimental methods: Calorimetric studies: For differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) studi...

    1968

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.