Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Stark Shift from Quantum Defects in Hexagonal Boron Nitride

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Defect symmetry dictates linear vs quadratic Stark shifts in hBN

desk verdict The symmetry classification of Stark shifts is the durable contribution; the CNCB3 match to experiment is a post-hoc dielectric rescaling, not a prediction. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05490 v1 pith:UDJKL4RM submitted 2025-02-08 cond-mat.mtrl-sci quant-ph

Pei Li , Ran Xu , Bing Huang , Song Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciquant-ph
keywords hexagonalboronnitrideStarkshiftsingle-photonemitterspoint-groupsymmetryzero-phononlinedielectricscreeningdensityfunctionaltheoryquantumdefects
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 seeks to explain why single-photon emitters in hexagonal boron nitride show different Stark shifts, some linear in the applied electric field and some quadratic, by attributing the behavior to the local symmetry of the emitting defect. It argues that centrosymmetric D3h defects (CB and CNCB3) produce strong quadratic shifts, that defects with Cs symmetry and out-of-plane distortion (CBON, BN, and B_DB) produce linear shifts with dipole changes around one debye, and that C2v defects give weaker quasi-quadratic shifts. If correct, measuring the shape and magnitude of the Stark shift around 2 eV would let experimenters infer the symmetry class, and sometimes the specific structure, of an emitter whose microscopic identity is otherwise unknown. The paper also maintains that the local dielectric environment substantially rescales the extracted dipole and polarizability values, so the same defect can look quantitatively different in different samples.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the defect point-group symmetries (D3h, Cs, and C2v) together with the out-of-plane distortion that breaks mirror symmetry and creates a permanent dipole along the stacking direction. These determine whether the zero-phonon-line shift, written as $\Delta ZPL = -\Delta\mu_z E_z - \tfrac12 E_z \Delta\alpha_z E_z$, is dominated by the linear term (permanent dipole change) or the quadratic term (polarizability change). The calculations use slab models with the defect embedded in the central layer, a moving average of the electrostatic potential to extract the effective local field, and a dielectric rescaling to convert the applied slab field into the field the defect actually experiences.

What would settle it

Measure the Stark shift of a single hBN emitter whose defect structure has been independently identified, for example by electron microscopy or spin resonance, and check whether the shift is linear for a Cs-symmetry defect and purely quadratic for a D3h-symmetry defect, while also reproducing the predicted polarizability magnitude within the factor-of-two dielectric uncertainty.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a symmetry-to-response mapping: the point-group symmetry of a defect in hexagonal boron nitride determines whether its zero-phonon-line Stark shift is linear or quadratic, and the fitted coefficients identify the defect. For the defect set studied, the calculations yield quadratic transition polarizabilities of about 53 and 96 cubic ångströms for the D3h defects CB and CNCB3, linear dipole changes of about 1.1 to 1.4 debye, with sign encoding the direction of out-of-plane distortion, for the Cs defects CBON, BN, and B_DB, and smaller quasi-quadratic polarizabilities for C2v defects. The VNCB defect is singled out as a candidate for the experimentally observed V-shaped Stark response because it distorts out of plane in the ground state and relaxes to a planar configuration in the excited state. The authors present the mapping as a step toward identifying unknown emitters near 2 eV and toward using defects as local dielectric sensors.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative predictions rest on the rescaling that converts the electric field applied to the slab into the effective field felt by the defect, and the paper's own dielectric constant varies from 2.69 to 3.52 depending on how the layer thickness is defined, which changes the inferred dipole changes and polarizabilities by up to a factor of about two.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Linear Stark shifts around 2 eV point to noncentrosymmetric defects with out-of-plane distortion, and the sign of the slope indicates the direction of the distortion.
  • Quadratic Stark shifts point to centrosymmetric D3h defects, with CB and CNCB3 distinguishable by their fitted polarizabilities of about 53 versus 96 cubic ångströms (or about 98 versus 161 cubic ångströms under the larger dielectric constant).
  • C2v defects should show weaker quasi-quadratic shifts, so their small quadratic response is a marker of lower symmetry without a permanent out-of-plane dipole.
  • The choice of local dielectric constant changes predicted polarizabilities by up to roughly a factor of two, so quantitative comparison with experiment requires knowing or measuring the local screening environment.
  • The experimentally observed V-shaped Stark response can be produced by a defect whose ground state is distorted out of plane but whose excited state is planar, linking a distinctive line shape to a specific structure.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the symmetry-to-Stark-shift mapping holds, Stark spectroscopy could serve as a rapid symmetry assay for unknown emitters, and intermediate or mixed behavior would signal either several emitting defects in one spot or a field-induced symmetry breaking such as a dynamic Jahn-Teller effect.
  • The strong dependence of extracted parameters on the dielectric rescaling suggests that deliberately measuring the same emitter in flakes of different thickness could turn the present uncertainty into a probe of the local screening length.
  • A testable extension would be to apply an in-plane electric field to a C2v defect: the field should break the remaining mirror symmetry and convert the quasi-quadratic shift into a linear shift, a prediction that could be checked with currently available gated hBN devices.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports first-principles (HSE-DFT with ΔSCF) calculations of the Stark shifts of eight candidate defects in hexagonal boron nitride, using 3-layer slab models with an applied out-of-plane electric field. The central claim is that the local symmetry of the defect controls the shape of the Stark shift: centrosymmetric D3h defects (CB, CNCB3) exhibit quadratic shifts, Cs defects with out-of-plane distortion (CBON, BN, B_DB) exhibit linear shifts, and C2v defects exhibit quasi-quadratic shifts. The authors fit dipole-moment and polarizability changes from the computed energy shifts, discuss the dielectric screening that converts the applied slab field to the local field, and compare the resulting values with experimental Stark data on ~2 eV emitters, proposing CNCB3 as a candidate for the quadratic emitter.

Significance. The symmetry-based classification is the paper's strongest contribution: it is simple, consistent with the calculated relaxed geometries, and makes a falsifiable experimental prediction that the linear-versus-quadratic character of the Stark shift can be used to identify the symmetry class of individual hBN emitters. The paper also deserves credit for explicitly analyzing the sensitivity of the results to the thickness convention used to define the slab dielectric constant (Eq. 1, Fig. 4, Table I), rather than hiding this dependence. However, because the quantitative match to experiment for the leading candidate CNCB3 is obtained only by adopting a dielectric constant that contradicts the paper's own local-field slope, the numerical predictions and the specific defect assignment are not yet robust. The classification itself, being largely symmetry-based, survives this concern.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Eq. (1), Fig. 4(c,d), Table I] The claimed agreement between the CNCB3 polarizability and the experimental ~150 Å3 value is obtained only by adopting εh,⊥=3.52, but the local-field slope computed in Fig. 4(c,d) fixes εh,⊥≈2.69: the moving-averaged electrostatic potential gives 0.0185 eV/Å for an applied field of 0.05 eV/Å, a screening factor of 0.37. With the paper's own computed screening factor, the fitted CNCB3 polarizability is 96.5 Å3, a 36% underestimate, and the linear-defect dipole moments are ~1.15 D rather than ~1.5 D. The manuscript should therefore either (i) determine the local-field factor for the 3-layer defect slab from first principles, consistently with the 5- and 9-layer calculation, or (ii) present the CNCB3 match not as a prediction but as an illustration of the dielectric-convention sensitivity, and state clearly that the quantitative assignment is convention-dependent.
  2. [Section III, Fig. 5b, Table I] The statement that the calculated linear dipole moments are "consistent with experiment value from -0.9 to 0.9 D" is not supported by the numbers: with εh,⊥=2.69, CBON (1.15 D) and B_DB (-1.14 D) lie outside that range, and with εh,⊥=3.52 all three values (1.49, 1.87, -1.49 D) exceed it substantially. This should be reworded or supplemented with a justification for comparing to a broader experimental distribution, since this comparison is part of the linear-defect identification.
  3. [Section III, CNCB3 discussion and Fig. 2] The classification of CNCB3 as a quadratic emitter and the fitted polarizability rely on fixing D3h symmetry by excluding the dynamic Jahn-Teller effect, as the text states ("the dynamic JT effect is not included to fix the symmetry"). This is a load-bearing assumption for the paper's main candidate assignment: if the JT effect is active, the degeneracy of the e'' state is lifted, inversion can be broken, and a linear Stark component would appear. The authors should quantify the JT stabilization energy (e.g., from a symmetry-broken calculation including electron-phonon coupling) or otherwise justify that the D3h approximation is valid at the relevant energies and timescales, and show that the quadratic Stark behavior is robust to this approximation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II] The sentence "The projector augmented wave (PAW) potentials ... is used" contains a subject-verb agreement error; it should be "are used."
  2. [Section III and Table I] The polarizability values are written as bare numbers with a trailing "3" (e.g., "53.0 3", "95.6 3"); the unit "ų" should be inserted consistently in the text and the table.
  3. [Section III] The origin of the adopted εh,⊥=3.52 is not explained: Fig. 4b states that the thickness-rescaled value can reach 3.25, and the text does not show how 3.52 follows from any specific thickness convention; please provide the thickness leading to 3.52 and relate it to the physical interlayer distance.
  4. [Section III] The statement that the CNCB3 ZPL of 2.04 eV is "not far" from 1.88 eV should be quantified, since the difference is 0.16 eV; please report the experimental line width or the range of reported ZPL values used for the comparison.
  5. [Section III] Several language issues appear, including "especically" in the Introduction, "experimental date 0.24 D" for "experimental data", "external magnetic field is a effective to flip" for "is an effective way to flip", and "nevertheless its might be not the case" for "it might not be the case"; these should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Stark coefficients are computed from the paper's own DFT data; experimental values are used only for comparison, and alternative dielectric rescaling is disclosed as a convention, not a fitted input.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The Stark coefficients (Δμ, Δα) are obtained by fitting the DFT-computed ZPL shift versus applied field using Eq. (2), which is a standard polynomial expansion; the symmetry classification (linear for Cs out-of-plane, quadratic for D3h, quasi-quadratic for C2v) follows from the computed geometry and energy-level data, not from the experimental values being matched. Experimental Stark data (Refs. 13–15) are cited only for comparison and are not used to constrain the fits. The one arguably delicate input is the dielectric rescaling: the paper reports its own DFT-derived εh,⊥ ≈ 2.69 and also an alternative value 3.52 obtained by a different thickness convention, explicitly labeling it as an adopted convention ('Once we adopt ϵh,⊥ = 3.52, the calculated Stark shift parameters can be readjusted'). This is a transparent sensitivity statement rather than a hidden fit to the 150 ų experimental polarizability, and the central conclusion about symmetry-controlled linear versus quadratic behavior is unchanged under either value. The self-citations (Refs. 11, 20, 21, 35, 37) provide candidate defect structures and prior background, but none is load-bearing for the Stark derivation or used to forbid alternative interpretations. No equation is identical by construction to its input, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard DFT and Delta-SCF modeling plus three paper-specific choices: the HSE mixing parameter, the dielectric-constant rescaling, and the neglect of dynamic Jahn-Teller effects for CNCB3. The dielectric-constant choice is the most consequential because it scales all reported polarizabilities by roughly two. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • HSE mixing parameter alpha = 0.32
    Chosen to reproduce the experimental optical gap of hBN around 6 eV; affects all computed defect level positions and ZPL energies. Section II.
  • Out-of-plane dielectric constant epsilon_h,perp = 2.69 (default), 3.52 (alternative)
    The Stark parameters in Table I are re-reported under epsilon equal to 3.52, and this alternative value is used to bring the CNCB3 polarizability close to the experimental value of about 150 ų. The choice is not uniquely determined by the calculations.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption HSE with alpha equal to 0.32 gives reliable ground-state electronic structure for hBN defects.
    Used for all energy diagrams and ZPL calculations; no benchmark against higher-level theory is provided. Section II.
  • domain assumption Delta-SCF gives reliable excited-state energies and geometries.
    Excited-state ZPL positions and relaxation are obtained with Delta-SCF; the paper notes slab quantum-confinement shifts but assumes the optical transition is unchanged. Sections II and III.
  • domain assumption Eq. (2) with only linear and quadratic terms describes the Stark shift.
    High-order hyperpolarizability is assumed negligible at the applied fields; no hBN-specific verification is given. Eq. (2) in Section III.
  • domain assumption The 6 by 6 trilayer slab with 18 Å vacuum and Gamma-point sampling is converged.
    Defect calculations are done in this slab, even though the local-field slope is calibrated on 5- and 9-layer slabs. Section II and Fig. 4.
  • domain assumption The moving-average electrostatic potential slope equals the local field at the defect.
    Used to convert applied field to effective local field; depends on the slab construction. Fig. 4c and 4d.
  • ad hoc to paper Dynamic Jahn-Teller effects are absent for CNCB3, fixing D3h symmetry.
    The text explicitly says 'the dynamic JT effect is not included to fix the symmetry.' The quadratic-shift classification for CNCB3 relies on this symmetry choice.
  • domain assumption The multilayer dielectric response is captured by Eq. (1) with a single defined slab thickness.
    Eq. (1) rescales the vacuum and slab dielectric constant; the paper shows the result is sensitive to the thickness definition, so this assumption directly affects all fitted Stark parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stark Shift from Quantum Defects in Hexagonal Boron Nitride." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UDJKL4RM

@misc{pith2026250205490,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stark Shift from Quantum Defects in Hexagonal Boron Nitride},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UDJKL4RM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05490}
}
read the original abstract

Color centers in hexagonal boron nitride have emerged as promising candidates for quantum information applications, owing to their efficient and bright single photon emission. Despite the challenges in directly characterizing these emitters, the interaction between external fields and defects, such as the Stark shift, offers valuable insights into their local geometric configurations. In this study, we focus on clarifying the possible origin of the distinct Stark shift characteristics observed experimentally, particularly in the emission range around 2 eV. We find that the local symmetry of the defects plays a crucial role in determining the nature of the Stark shift, which can be either linear or quadratic. Additionally, the local dielectric environment significantly influences the Stark shift response. Our calculations not only enhance the understanding of the micro-structure of these hitherto unknown emitters but also pave the way for their more effective utilization as single-photon sources and qubits in quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.05490 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Possible defects as single photon source in hBN. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The energy diagram of defects we consider. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The localized wavefunction of defect states that are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The dielectric property of slab model. (a) The layer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The Stark shift of defects with various symmetry. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Zhang, Y

    G. Zhang, Y. Cheng, J.-P. Chou, and A. Gali, Material platforms for defect qubits and single-photon emitters, Appl. Phys. Rev.7, 031308 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    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, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 906 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Sajid, M

    A. Sajid, M. J. Ford, and J. R. Reimers, Single-photon emitters in hexagonal boron nitride: a review of progress, Rep. Prog. Phys.83, 044501 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    A. R.-P. Montblanch, M. Barbone, I. Aharonovich, M. Atatüre, and A. C. Ferrari, Layered materials as a platform for quantum technologies, Nat. Nanotechnol. 18, 555 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    T. T. Tran, K. Bray, M. J. Ford, M. Toth, and I. Aharonovich, Quantum emission from hexagonal boron nitride monolayers, Nat. Nanotechnol.11, 37 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    T. T. Tran, C. Elbadawi, D. Totonjian, C. J. Lobo, G. Grosso, H. Moon, D. R. Englund, M. J. Ford, I. Aharonovich, and M. Toth, Robust multicolor single photon emission from point defects in hexagonal boron nitride, ACS Nano10, 7331 (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    Hayee, L

    F. Hayee, L. Yu, J. L. Zhang, C. J. Ciccarino, M. Nguyen, A. F. Marshall, I. Aharonovich, J. Vučković, P. Narang, T. F. Heinz, et al., Revealing multiple classes of stable quantum emitters in hexagonal boron nitride with cor- related optical and electron microscopy, Nat. Mater.19, 534 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Kianinia, C

    M. Kianinia, C. Bradac, B. Sontheimer, F. Wang, T. T. Tran, M. Nguyen, S. Kim, Z.-Q. Xu, D. Jin, A. W. Schell, et al., All-optical control and super-resolution imaging of quantum emitters in layered materials, Nat. Commun.9, 874 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    X. Xu, Z. O. Martin, D. Sychev, A. S. Lagutchev, Y. P. Chen, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, V. M. Shalaev, and A. Boltasseva, Creating quantum emitters in hexagonal boron nitride deterministically on chip-compatible sub- strates, Nano Lett.21, 8182 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    Grosso, H

    G. Grosso, H. Moon, B. Lienhard, S. Ali, D. K. Efe- tov, M. M. Furchi, P. Jarillo-Herrero, M. J. Ford, I. Aharonovich, and D. Englund, Tunable and high- purity room temperature single-photon emission from atomicdefectsinhexagonalboronnitride,Nat.Commun. 8, 705 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Li, J.-P

    S. Li, J.-P. Chou, A. Hu, M. B. Plenio, P. Udvarhelyi, G. Thiering, M. Abdi, and A. Gali, Giant shift upon strain on the fluorescence spectrum of vnnb color cen- ters in h-bn, npj Quantum Inf.6, 85 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    N. R. Jungwirth, B. Calderon, Y. Ji, M. G. Spencer, M. E. Flatté, and G. D. Fuchs, Temperature dependence of wavelength selectable zero-phonon emission from sin- gle defects in hexagonal boron nitride, Nano Letters16, 6052 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    G. Noh, D. Choi, J.-H. Kim, D.-G. Im, Y.-H. Kim, H. Seo, and J. Lee, Stark tuning of single-photon emitters in hexagonal boron nitride, Nano Lett.18, 4710 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Y. Xia, Q. Li, J. Kim, W. Bao, C. Gong, S. Yang, Y. Wang, and X. Zhang, Room-temperature giant stark effect of single photon emitter in van der waals material, Nano Letters 19, 7100 (2019). 6

    2019

  7. [15]

    Nikolay, N

    N. Nikolay, N. Mendelson, N. Sadzak, F. Böhm, T. T. Tran, B. Sontheimer, I. Aharonovich, and O. Benson, Very large and reversible stark-shift tuning of single emit- ters in layered hexagonal boron nitride, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 041001 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    C. Jin, F. Lin, K. Suenaga, and S. Iijima, Fabrication of a freestanding boron nitride single layer and its defect assignments, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 195505 (2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    O.L.Krivanek, M.F.Chisholm, V.Nicolosi, T.J.Penny- cook, G. J. Corbin, N. Dellby, M. F. Murfitt, C. S. Own, Z. S. Szilagyi, M. P. Oxley,et al., Atom-by-atom struc- tural and chemical analysis by annular dark-field electron microscopy, Nature464, 571 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    S. A. Tawfik, S. Ali, M. Fronzi, M. Kianinia, T. T. Tran, C. Stampfl, I. Aharonovich, M. Toth, and M. J. Ford, First-principles investigation of quantum emission from hbn defects, Nanoscale9, 13575 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Sajid, J

    A. Sajid, J. R. Reimers, and M. J. Ford, Defect states in hexagonal boron nitride: Assignments of observed prop- erties and prediction of properties relevant to quantum computation, Phys. Rev. B97, 064101 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Li and A

    S. Li and A. Gali, Bistable carbon-vacancy defects in h- bn, Front. Quantum Sci. Technol.1, 1007756 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Li and A

    S. Li and A. Gali, Identification of an oxygen defect in hexagonal boron nitride, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.13, 9544 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    C. Jara, T. Rauch, S. Botti, M. A. Marques, A. Noram- buena, R. Coto, J. Castellanos-Águila, J. R. Maze, and F. Munoz, First-principles identification of single photon emitters based on carbon clusters in hexagonal boron ni- tride, J. Phys. Chem. A125, 1325 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Mendelson, D

    N. Mendelson, D. Chugh, J. R. Reimers, T. S. Cheng, A. Gottscholl, H. Long, C. J. Mellor, A. Zettl, V. Dyakonov, P. H. Beton, S. V. Novikov, C. Jagadish, H. H. Tan, M. J. Ford, M. Toth, C. Bradac, and I. Aharonovich, Identifying carbon as the source of visi- ble single-photon ...

    2021

  16. [24]

    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, Nat. Mater. 20, 1079 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set, Comput. Mater. Sci.6, 15 (1996)

    1996

  18. [26]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  19. [27]

    P. E. Blöchl, Projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  20. [28]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, From ultrasoft pseudopoten- tials to the projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 59, 1758 (1999)

    1999

  21. [29]

    Grimme, J

    S. Grimme, J. Antony, S. Ehrlich, and H. Krieg, A con- sistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (dft-d) for the 94 ele- ments h-pu, J. Chem. Phys.132, 154104 (2010)

    2010

  22. [30]

    J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, and M. Ernzerhof, Hybrid func- tionals based on a screened coulomb potential, J. Chem. Phys. 118, 8207 (2003)

    2003

  23. [31]

    Cassabois, P

    G. Cassabois, P. Valvin, and B. Gil, Hexagonal boron nitride is an indirect bandgap semiconductor, Nat. Pho- tonics 10, 262 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    A. Gali, E. Janzén, P. Deák, G. Kresse, and E. Kaxiras, Theory of spin-conserving excitation of the n- v- center in diamond, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 186404 (2009)

    2009

  25. [33]

    K. Li, T. J. Smart, and Y. Ping, Carbon trimer as a 2 ev single-photon emitter candidate in hexagonal boron nitride: A first-principles study, Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, L042201 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Barcza, and V

    Z.Benedek, R.Babar, Á.Ganyecz, T.Szilvási, Ö.Legeza, G. Barcza, and V. Ivády, Symmetric carbon tetramers forming spin qubits in hexagonal boron nitride, npj Com- put. Mater. 9, 187 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    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

  28. [36]

    M. E. Turiansky, A. Alkauskas, L. C. Bassett, and C. G. Van de Walle, Dangling bonds in hexagonal boron nitride as single-photon emitters, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 127401 (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    S. Li, P. Li, and A. Gali, Native antisite defects in h-bn, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.01133 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Mackoit-Sinkevičien˙ e, M

    M. Mackoit-Sinkevičien˙ e, M. Maciaszek, C. G. Van de Walle, and A. Alkauskas, Carbon dimer defect as a source of the 4.1 ev luminescence in hexagonal boron nitride, Appl. Phys. Lett.115, 212101 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    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, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01601 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Chou and A

    J.-P. Chou and A. Gali, Nitrogen-vacancy diamond sen- sor: novel diamond surfaces from ab initio simulations, MRS Commun. 7, 551 (2017)

    2017

  33. [41]

    Laturia, M

    A. Laturia, M. L. Van de Put, and W. G. Vandenberghe, Dielectric properties of hexagonal boron nitride and tran- sitionmetaldichalcogenides: frommonolayertobulk,npj 2D Mater. Appl.2, 6 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    Alaerts, Y

    L. Alaerts, Y. Xiong, S. Griffin, and G. Hautier, First- principles study of the stark shift effect on the zero- phonon line of the nv center in diamond, Phys. Rev. Mater. 8, 106201 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    M. E. Bathen, L. Vines, and J. Coutinho, First-principles calculations of stark shifts of electronic transitions for defects in semiconductors: the si vacancy in 4h-sic, J. Phys. Condens. Matter.33, 075502 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    De Santis, M

    L. De Santis, M. E. Trusheim, K. C. Chen, and D. R. En- glund, Investigation of the stark effect on a centrosym- metric quantum emitter in diamond, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 147402 (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    J. R. Maze, A. Gali, E. Togan, Y. Chu, A. Trifonov, E. Kaxiras, and M. D. Lukin, Properties of nitrogen- vacancy centers in diamond: the group theoretic ap- proach, New J. Phys.13, 025025 (2011)

    2011

  38. [46]

    Udvarhelyi, T

    P. Udvarhelyi, T. Clua-Provost, A. Durand, J. Li, J. H. Edgar, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, V. Jacques, and A. Gali, A planar defect spin sensor in a two-dimensional mate- rial susceptible to strain and electric fields, npj Comput. Mater. 9, 150 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Iwański, K

    J. Iwański, K. P. Korona, M. Tokarczyk, G. Kowalski, A. K. Dąbrowska, P. Tatarczak, I. Rogala, M. Bilska, M. Wójcik, S. Kret, et al., Revealing polytypism in 2d boron nitride with uv photoluminescence, npj 2D Mater. 7 Appl. 8, 72 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    N. Ohba, K. Miwa, N. Nagasako, and A. Fukumoto, First-principles study on structural, dielectric, and dy- namical properties for three bn polytypes, Phys. Rev. B 63, 115207 (2001)

    2001

  41. [49]

    P.Kumar, Y.S.Chauhan, A.Agarwal,andS.Bhowmick, Thickness and stacking dependent polarizability and di- electric constant of graphene–hexagonal boron nitride composite stacks, J. Phys. Chem. C120, 17620 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    Zhigulin, J

    I. Zhigulin, J. Horder, V. Ivády, S. J. White, A. Gale, C. Li, C. J. Lobo, M. Toth, I. Aharonovich, and M. Kian- inia, Stark effect of blue quantum emitters in hexagonal boron nitride, Phys. Rev. Appl.19, 044011 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    King-Smith and D

    R. King-Smith and D. Vanderbilt, Theory of polarization of crystalline solids, Phys. Rev. B47, 1651 (1993)

    1993

  44. [52]

    Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: the geometric phase approach, Rev

    R. Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: the geometric phase approach, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66, 899 (1994)

    1994

  45. [53]

    N. A. Spaldin, A beginner’s guide to the modern theory of polarization, J. Solid State Chem.195, 2 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    Udvarhelyi, R

    P. Udvarhelyi, R. Nagy, F. Kaiser, S.-Y. Lee, J.Wrachtrup,andA.Gali,Spectrallystabledefectqubits with no inversion symmetry for robust spin-to-photon in- terface, Phys. Rev. Appl.11, 044022 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

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