Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 27 references

Engineered Chirality of One-Dimensional Nanowires

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 Chiral nanowires at an oxide interface reveal an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction.

desk verdict Solid experimental platform with a conditional interpretation; the chiral control comparison is the real contribution, but the axial-SOC mechanism rests on an unverified and internally inconsistent potential. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05671 v1 pith:TF7IOAJM submitted 2025-02-08 cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph

Megan Briggeman , Elliott Mansfield , Johannes Kombe , François Damanet , Hyungwoo Lee , Yuhe Tang , Muqing Yu , Sayanwita Biswas
show 6 more authors
Jianan Li Mengchen Huang Chang-Beom Eom Patrick Irvin Andrew J. Daley Jeremy Levy
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph
keywords chiralityengineeredspin-orbitcouplingLaAlO3/SrTiO3interfaceconductancequantizationelectronpairinganalogquantumsimulationc-AFMlithographychiralinducedspinselectivity
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 claims that a deliberately chiral electron waveguide can be written at the LaAlO$_3$/SrTiO$_3$ interface and that its transport reveals an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction. The authors combine a serpentine tip path with a sinusoidal tip-voltage modulation shifted by $\phi = \pi/2$, producing a potential that lacks mirror symmetry. Four-terminal conductance measurements show oscillatory transmission resonances as a function of both magnetic field and chemical potential, with oscillations larger than $e^2/h$ sitting on top of the $2e^2/h$ paired plateau. They interpret these as coherent spin precession of electron pairs around an effective axial magnetic field generated by the chiral potential, and they support the interpretation with a chiral harmonic-oscillator model, a mean-field pairing calculation, and a phenomenological scattering model. If correct, the result makes chirality itself a programmable ingredient for quantum-wire transport and opens a new analog-quantum-simulation route to testing chiral-induced spin selectivity in one dimension.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the chiral harmonic-oscillator waveguide model, Eq. (S1), in which the lateral confinement center follows $A\sin(2\pi x/\lambda)$ while the vertical half-harmonic confinement is modulated by $(1+\delta\cos(2\pi x/\lambda))$; the $\pi/2$ phase offset between the two modulations makes the electron probability density trace a helical path and gives the Bloch eigenstates nonzero $\langle L_x \rangle$. On top of that, a phenomenological scattering model treats each pair as a pseudo-spin-1/2 particle in a central region with Hamiltonian $p_x^2/2m + (\alpha/\hbar)p_x\sigma_x + E_z\sigma_z$, where $\alpha$ is the axial spin-orbit strength and $E_z$ the Zeeman energy, and a Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mean-field calculation supplies the attractive pairing that stabilizes the $2e^2/h$ plateau. The scattering model's closed-form transmission probability, fitted to the transconductance fringes, produces the observed field- and energy-dependent oscillations with period $\Delta B \sim 1$ T.

What would settle it

One decisive test would be to reverse the chirality by writing the same device with $\phi = -\pi/2$: if the mechanism is right, the oscillation pattern in the $(\mu, B)$ plane should mirror rather than reproduce the original pattern. A second test is to vary the length $L$ of the chiral section, since the transmission resonances are periodic in the number of spin precessions; changing $L$ by one precession length should add or remove one oscillation at fixed field. A third test is direct local spectroscopy or a scanning-probe measurement of the patterned potential to verify that $A$, $\delta$, $\lambda$, and $\phi$ match the model used in Eq. (S1).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that combining two independently studied modulations—a lateral serpentine displacement and a vertical sinusoidal confinement modulation at relative phase $\phi = \pi/2$—produces a quasi-one-dimensional potential whose eigenstates carry nonzero axial orbital angular momentum $\langle L_x \rangle$ and, when interactions are included, a longitudinal spin-orbit coupling that locks pair spin to momentum. In transport, this shows up as conductance oscillations above the $2e^2/h$ plateau that increase in number with magnetic field and chemical potential, while the paired plateaus survive to fields up to about 18 T, much higher than in the control device. The paper's explanation is that pairs entering the chiral region precess coherently about an effective axial magnetic field $B_{\mathrm{SO}}$ produced by the chiral potential; incomplete precession before exiting suppresses transmission, producing resonances. The authors argue that single-particle alternatives—Fabry-Perot interference, a renormalized g-factor, or ordinary spin-orbit coupling alone—cannot reproduce the observed features, and that only an axial spin-orbit coupling together with attractive interactions explains oscillations exceeding $e^2/h$.

Load-bearing premise

The weakest link is the assumption that the programmed c-AFM writing procedure—a serpentine path plus a sinusoidal tip-voltage modulation with phase $\phi = \pi/2$—actually imprints the modeled chiral harmonic-oscillator potential with the assumed amplitude, wavelength, and phase into the electron gas; if the real potential is much weaker, dephased, or differently shaped, the nonzero $\langle L_x \rangle$ eigenstates and the axial spin-orbit coupling would not describe the device.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the interpretation is correct, conductance oscillations above the $2e^2/h$ plateau become a readout of engineered axial spin-orbit coupling, and their period in field and energy gives a measure of $\alpha$ and the effective g-factor of the device.
  • The pairing plateaus persisting to about 18 T imply that the chiral potential strengthens the effective attractive interaction in the waveguide, so chirality itself becomes a control knob for electron pairing.
  • Because the platform is reconfigurable, the same writing protocol can build two-dimensional superlattices of chiral segments, potentially yielding engineered or topological spin textures.
  • The device is a controllable one-dimensional testbed for chiral-induced spin selectivity, allowing experiments to vary helical radius, pitch, and end polarity independently of temperature or molecular disorder.
  • A nonzero $\langle L_x \rangle$ in the single-particle eigenstates means the chiral waveguide carries orbital angular momentum, so transport measurements could probe how axial orbital angular momentum couples to spin in quasi-one-dimensional systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct extension the authors do not pursue is that reversing the sign of $\phi$ should reverse the effective axial magnetic field, so comparing $\phi = \pi/2$ and $\phi = -\pi/2$ devices would isolate the chiral contribution from any symmetric confinement effects.
  • The scattering model suggests a quantitative test: the number of conductance oscillations at fixed field should grow by one each time the chiral section length $L$ increases by one spin-precession length, which would distinguish precession-induced resonances from Fabry-Perot interference.
  • If the mechanism carries over to molecules, the CISS effect would not need a particular material chemistry—only a chiral potential plus spin-orbit coupling—which is the analog-simulation claim the paper makes for the oxide platform.
  • The predicted coexistence of singlet and triplet pairing in the chiral region is a signature that could be sought by measuring how the $2e^2/h$ plateau splits at high field in other tailored oxide nanowires.
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 the creation of one-dimensional chiral electron waveguides at a LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface using conductive-AFM lithography that combines a lateral serpentine path with a sinusoidally modulated tip voltage, with a phase shift aimed at breaking mirror symmetry. Transport measurements on the chiral section show conductance plateaus near 2e^2/h and 4e^2/h persisting to high magnetic fields, together with transconductance oscillations that are absent in a simultaneously fabricated straight control waveguide. The authors interpret these oscillations as transmission resonances of electron pairs undergoing coherent spin precession under an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction, supported by a mean-field pairing calculation and a phenomenological scattering model discussed in the Supplementary Materials.

Significance. If the interpretation is correct, the work would demonstrate a flexible, reconfigurable solid-state platform for analog quantum simulation of chirality-related spin transport and would suggest that chiral potentials enhance electron pairing in one-dimensional oxide nanostructures. The experimental data include a valuable control device that lacks the oscillations, and a second device (Device B) shows qualitatively similar features, which strengthens the reproducibility claim. The manuscript also documents several alternative single-particle mechanisms and explains why they were discounted, which is good scientific practice. However, the central theoretical mechanism relies on a potential that is not directly measured and on a scattering model whose parameters are fitted to the observed fringes, so the paper is better viewed as proposing a plausible interpretation than as making a quantitatively verified prediction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Main text (Device A description); Materials and Methods (first paragraph); SM Sec. 3, Fig. 4 and Fig. S5 captions] The lateral modulation amplitude for Device A is stated as y_k = 10 nm in the main text, but the Materials and Methods section gives y_k = 5 nm for the same chiral section, while all model calculations use A_y = 10 nm. This internal inconsistency is load-bearing because the computed nonzero ⟨Lx⟩ and the pairing enhancement depend directly on the lateral modulation amplitude; if the actual amplitude is 5 nm, the engineered axial spin-orbit coupling and the predicted persistence of the 2e^2/h plateau could be significantly reduced. The authors must correct the discrepancy and, ideally, provide an independent determination of the realized potential amplitude in the electron gas.
  2. [SM Sec. 5, Eq. (S8) and SM Fig. S6] The scattering model is calibrated on the phenomenon it is meant to explain: the axial SOC strength α = 0.45 meV·nm and the g-factor g = 0.85 are fitted to the transconductance fringes, and the authors note a correlated range α ≲ 2 meV·nm, g ≲ 2 that produces similar patterns. The agreement shown in Fig. S6 is therefore partly built in and does not independently establish the engineered-axial-SOC mechanism. To make the interpretation falsifiable, the model should be used to predict an observable not used in the fit, such as the dependence of the number of oscillations on the device length or on the phase φ between the lateral and vertical modulations.
  3. [SM Sec. 3, Eq. (S1); Materials and Methods] The central premise that the programmed tip trajectory and voltage modulation produce the chiral potential of Eq. (S1) with the assumed amplitude, wavelength, and phase difference near π/2 is not verified in the actual electron gas. The mapping from the tip-voltage modulation to the vertical confinement modulation in the two-dimensional electron gas is indirect, and no local probe or transport-based measurement confirms the amplitude or phase of the written potential. Because a deviation of the phase from π/2 would weaken mirror-symmetry breaking and reduce ⟨Lx⟩, the manuscript should either supply such verification or explicitly frame the simulations as illustrative rather than as a quantitative model of the device.
minor comments (5)
  1. [SM Sec. 3 heading, SM Sec. 6.1 heading, SM Sec. 5, SM Sec. 6.3] Several typos should be corrected: 'dicuss' in SM Sec. 3 heading, 'Farby-Perot' in SM Sec. 6.1 heading, 'paterns' in SM Sec. 5, and 'conducatance' and 'interations' in SM Sec. 6.3.
  2. [Main text, first paragraph] The name 'Namaan and Waldeck' should be spelled 'Naaman and Waldeck'.
  3. [Main text, Conclusion] The word 'topogical' should be 'topological'.
  4. [SM Sec. 2, paragraph on Device B] The phrase 'periodic features in the 𝑤𝑒 2/ℎ plateau' appears to contain a typo; it should likely read '2𝑒2/ℎ plateau'.
  5. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption contains 'correspondigly' and should read 'correspondingly'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The central axial-SOC explanation is supported by a scattering model fitted to the very fringes it is meant to explain; the good agreement is partly built in by construction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Supplementary Materials, Sec. 5 'Scattering Model'; also used in main-text Discussion paragraph 'Conductance oscillations']
    "Since the transmission probability is related to the experimental conductance, we fit dP_t/dE to the transconductance fringes, and find consistent qualitative agreement with oscillation periods of ΔB∼1T across a range of chemical potentials. We find that α=0.45 meV nm, and g=0.85 provide the best estimates for the scattering model parameters... We have fitted the scattering model to the location of the fringes shown in Fig. 2. Maxima of the fitted scattering model are shown as green dots on top of the experimental data..."

    The model parameters α and g are obtained by fitting dP_t/dE to the same transconductance fringes (Fig. 2B) that the paper presents as evidence for the engineered axial spin-orbit interaction. The 'good qualitative agreement' and the ΔB∼1T oscillation period are therefore consequences of the fit, not independent confirmations of the mechanism. The paper also notes a correlated family α≲2 meV·nm, g≲2 that reproduces the same fringe pattern, so the data do not single out the claimed axial SOC. The control device provides a useful baseline, but the quantitative support for 'resonances arising from an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction' reduces to a fitted curve drawn through the very data it is supposed to explain.

full rationale

The paper is honest that the scattering model is fitted to the data, and the control device provides a non-circular comparison showing that unmodulated waveguides lack the oscillations. The chiral harmonic-oscillator and helical models (SM Secs. 3.1 and 3.2) are self-contained calculations from an assumed potential, and the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov pairing simulation (SM Sec. 4) is a model demonstration rather than a fitted prediction. However, the central interpretive claim—that the oscillatory transmission resonances arise from an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction—is mainly supported by the phenomenological scattering model whose two key parameters (α and g) are fit to the transconductance fringes themselves. That agreement is built in by construction, not a prediction from an independently determined potential or SO coupling. The manuscript also contains an internal inconsistency between the main text (y_k = 10 nm) and Materials and Methods (y_k = 5 nm) for the same chiral section, and the modeled potential is never directly verified in the electron gas; these are correctness risks rather than circularity, but they reinforce that the quantitative validation of the mechanism is weaker than the presentation suggests. Accounting for the disclosed-but-load-bearing fit, the score is 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central interpretation rests on a chain of modeling assumptions: the written potential matches the assumed modulated harmonic oscillator form, the mean-field pairing theory with a phenomenological attraction captures the pairing physics, triplet pairs are perfectly backscattered at the leads, and only the two lowest subbands matter. The scattering model that produces the oscillations has two free parameters fitted to the data, and the mean-field theory has several phenomenological inputs. No new fundamental entity is introduced; the engineered axial spin-orbit interaction is an effective description whose strength is fitted.

free parameters (6)
  • axial SOC strength alpha = 0.45 meV·nm
    Fitted to the transconductance fringes in the scattering model (SM Sec. 5); the paper notes a degeneracy with g.
  • Landé g-factor g = 0.85
    Fitted together with alpha to the transconductance fringes (SM Sec. 5).
  • bare attractive interaction U0 = -5.0 meV·nm
    Phenomenological input to the mean-field HFB theory (SM Fig. S5), chosen to produce pairing.
  • Rashba SOC strengths alpha_v, alpha_l = 2.0 meV·nm each
    Inputs to the mean-field HFB theory (SM Fig. S5), taken from prior work or assumed.
  • modulation amplitudes Ay, Az = Ay = lambda = 10 nm, Az = 0.2 meV
    Inputs to the mean-field HFB theory (SM Fig. S5), not directly measured.
  • confinement and mass parameters = m_x = m_y = 1.9 m_e, m_z = 6.5 m_e, y0 = 26 nm, z0 = 8.1 nm
    Inputs from prior LAO/STO studies; not fitted in this paper but they shape the modeled eigenstates and pairing phase.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The c-AFM writing process realizes the prescribed sinusoidal lateral and vertical modulations of the electron potential (SM Eq. S1) with the intended amplitude and phase.
    The paper infers the potential landscape from the writing parameters without direct measurement of the local electron density; see SM Sec. 3 and Materials and Methods.
  • domain assumption Electron pairing is adequately described by the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mean-field theory with a phenomenological attractive interaction U(B) = U0 * sqrt(1 - (omega_c/Omega)^2).
    SM Sec. 4 invokes the mean-field theory from refs 14, 18, 22, and 23; the interaction strength and its B-dependence are assumptions.
  • ad hoc to paper Triplet pairs are perfectly backscattered at the waveguide-lead boundaries.
    SM Sec. 5 states 'we assume a perfect effective backscattering of the triplet pairs at the waveguide-lead boundary'; this is a modeling choice specific to this paper.
  • domain assumption The single-particle basis can be restricted to the lowest two transverse subbands, neglecting subband mixing.
    SM Eq. S4; validated in ref 22 for reasonable waveguide parameters, but still an assumption.
  • domain assumption Conductance is proportional to the transmitted singlet probability in the scattering model.
    SM Sec. 5 assumes the conductance measurement only detects transmitted singlets.
  • domain assumption The lever arm conversion from side-gate voltage to chemical potential is accurately determined from Coulomb diamond spectroscopy.
    Main text and Fig. S2 use Coulomb diamonds to calculate the lever arm; no error estimate for this conversion is provided.
invented entities (2)
  • Engineered axial spin-orbit interaction / effective axial magnetic field B_SO
    purpose: Explains the observed transmission oscillations as spin precession around the effective field inside the chiral waveguide.
    The strength alpha is fitted to the transconductance fringes it is invoked to explain (SM Sec. 5); no independent measurement of an axial spin-orbit field is provided. The absence of oscillations in the control device is indirect support.
  • Axial orbital angular momentum <Lx> of the eigenstates
    purpose: Shows the chiral potential produces helical single-particle states with finite Lx, which enables the axial spin-orbit coupling.
    Predicted by the chiral harmonic oscillator model (SM Sec. 3) with assumed parameters; the paper does not directly measure orbital angular momentum.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Engineered Chirality of One-Dimensional Nanowires." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TF7IOAJM

@misc{pith2026250205671,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Engineered Chirality of One-Dimensional Nanowires},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TF7IOAJM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05671}
}
abstract

The origin and function of chirality in DNA, proteins, and other building blocks of life represent a central question in biology. Observations of spin polarization and magnetization associated with electron transport through chiral molecules, known collectively as the chiral induced spin selectivity (CISS) effect, suggest that chirality improves electron transfer by inhibiting backscattering. Meanwhile, the role of coherence in the electron transport within chiral nanowires is believed to be important but is challenging to investigate experimentally. Using reconfigurable nanoscale control over conductivity at the LaAlO$_3$/SrTiO$_3$ interface, we create chiral electron potentials that explicitly lack mirror symmetry. Quantum transport measurements on these chiral regions that constitute effective nanowires for the electrons reveal oscillatory transmission resonances as a function of both magnetic field and chemical potential. We interpret these resonances as arising from an engineered axial spin-orbit interaction within the chiral region. The ability to create 1D effective electron waveguides with this specificity and complexity creates new opportunities to test, via analog quantum simulation, theories about the relationship between chirality and spin-polarized electron transport in one-dimensional geometries.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ray, Asymmetric Scattering of Polarized Electrons by Organized Organic Films of Chiral Molecules

    K. Ray, Asymmetric Scattering of Polarized Electrons by Organized Organic Films of Chiral Molecules. Science 283 (5403), 814–816 (1999), doi:10.1126/science.283.5403.814, https: //dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.283.5403.814

    doi:10.1126/science.283.5403.814 1999

  2. [2]

    Michaeli, N

    K. Michaeli, N. Kantor-Uriel, R. Naaman, D. H. Waldeck, The electron’s spin and molecular chirality - how are they related and how do they affect life processes? Chemical Society reviews 45 (23), 6478–6487 (2016), doi:10.1039/c6cs00369a, https://pubs.rsc.org/en/ content/articlelanding/2016/cs/c6cs00369a

    work page doi:10.1039/c6cs00369a 2016

  3. [3]

    Naaman, Y

    R. Naaman, Y. Paltiel, D. H. Waldeck, Chiral molecules and the electron spin.Nature Reviews Chemistry 3 (4), 250–260 (2019), doi:10.1038/s41570-019-0087-1, https://www.nature. com/articles/s41570-019-0087-1

    doi:10.1038/s41570-019-0087-1 2019

  4. [4]

    Evers, et al., Theory of Chirality Induced Spin Selectivity: Progress and Challenges

    F. Evers, et al., Theory of Chirality Induced Spin Selectivity: Progress and Challenges. Ad- vanced materials 34 (13), e2106629 (2022), doi:10.1002/adma.202106629,http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/adma.202106629

    doi:10.1002/adma.202106629 2022

  5. [5]

    R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers. Intl. J. of Theoretical Physics 21, 467 (1982)

    work page 1982

  6. [6]

    Altman, et al

    E. Altman, et al. , Quantum Simulators: Architectures and Opportunities. PRX Quantum 2 (1), 017003 (2021), doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.017003, https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.017003

    doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.017003 2021

  7. [7]

    Greiner, O

    M. Greiner, O. Mandel, T. Esslinger, T. W. Hansch, I. Bloch, Quantum phase transition from a superfluid to a Mott insulator in a gas of ultracold atoms. Nature 415 (6867), 39–44 (2002), doi:10.1038/415039a, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/415039a

    doi:10.1038/415039a 2002

  8. [8]

    K. M. O’Hara, S. L. Hemmer, M. E. Gehm, S. R. Granade, J. E. Thomas, Observation of a strongly interacting degenerate Fermi gas of atoms.Science (New York, N.Y.)298 (5601), 2179– 2182 (2002), doi:10.1126/science.1079107, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/ science.1079107. 12

    doi:10.1126/science.1079107 2002

Show all 27 references
  1. [9]

    Bourdel, et al., Experimental study of the BEC-BCS crossover region in lithium 6.Physical review letters 93 (5), 050401 (2004), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.050401, http://link

    T. Bourdel, et al., Experimental study of the BEC-BCS crossover region in lithium 6.Physical review letters 93 (5), 050401 (2004), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.050401, http://link. aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.050401

    2004 doi

  2. [10]

    Singha, et al., Two-Dimensional Mott-Hubbard Electrons in an Artificial Honeycomb Lat- tice

    A. Singha, et al., Two-Dimensional Mott-Hubbard Electrons in an Artificial Honeycomb Lat- tice. Science 332 (6034), 1176–1179 (2011), doi:10.1126/science.1204333,http://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.1204333

    2011 doi

  3. [11]

    J. R. Abo-Shaeer, C. Raman, J. M. Vogels, W. Ketterle, Observation of vortex lattices in Bose- Einstein condensates. Science (New York, N.Y.) 292 (5516), 476–479 (2001), doi:10.1126/ science.1060182, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1060182

    2001 doi

  4. [12]

    Y. J. Lin, R. L. Compton, K. Jimenez-Garcia, J. V. Porto, I. B. Spielman, Synthetic magnetic fields for ultracold neutral atoms. Nature 462 (7273), 628–632 (2009), doi: 10.1038/nature08609, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature08609

    2009 doi

  5. [13]

    Krinner, D

    S. Krinner, D. Stadler, D. Husmann, J.-P. Brantut, T. Esslinger, Observation of quantized conductance in neutral matter. Nature 517 (7532), 64–67 (2015), doi:10.1038/nature14049, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature14049

    2015 doi

  6. [14]

    Briggeman, et al., One-dimensional Kronig–Penney superlattices at the LaAlO 3 /SrTiO 3 interface

    M. Briggeman, et al., One-dimensional Kronig–Penney superlattices at the LaAlO 3 /SrTiO 3 interface. Nature physics pp. 1–6 (2021), doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01217-z, https://www. nature.com/articles/s41567-021-01217-z

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    Briggeman, et al

    M. Briggeman, et al. , Engineered spin-orbit interactions in LaAlO3/SrTiO3-based 1D ser- pentine electron waveguides. Science advances 6 (48) (2020), doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba6337, http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba6337

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    Cen, et al

    C. Cen, et al. , Nanoscale control of an interfacial metal–insulator transition at room temperature. Nature materials 7 (4), 298–302 (2008), https://scholar.google.com/ citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=SOYo5jgAAAAJ&citation_for_ view=SOYo5jgAAAAJ:d1gkVwhDpl0C. 13

    2008

  9. [17]

    C. Cen, S. Thiel, J. Mannhart, J. Levy, Oxide nanoelectronics on demand. Science (New York, N.Y.)323 (5917), 1026–1030 (2009), doi:10.1126/science.1168294,https://www.science. org/doi/10.1126/science.1168294

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    Annadi, et al

    A. Annadi, et al. , Quantized Ballistic Transport of Electrons and Electron Pairs in LaAlO3/SrTiO3 Nanowires. Nano letters 18 (7), 4473–4481 (2018), doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett. 8b01614, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b01614

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    Briggeman, et al., Pascal conductance series in ballistic one-dimensional LaAlO3/SrTiO3 channels

    M. Briggeman, et al., Pascal conductance series in ballistic one-dimensional LaAlO3/SrTiO3 channels. Science 367 (6479), 769–772 (2020), doi:10.1126/science.aat6467, https:// science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/367/6479/769.full.pdf

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    L. I. Glazman, A. V. Khaetskii, Nonlinear Quantum Conductance of a Lateral Microconstraint in a Heterostructure. Europhysics letters 9 (3), 263–267 (1989), doi:10.1209/0295-5075/9/3/013, http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/9/3/013/pdf

    1989 doi

  13. [21]

    N. K. Patel, et al., Ballistic transport in one dimension: additional quantisation produced by an electric field. Journal of physics. Condensed matter: an Institute of Physics journal 2 (34), 7247 (1990), http://stacks.iop.org/0953-8984/2/i=34/a=018

    1990

  14. [22]

    Damanet, et al., Spin-orbit-assisted electron pairing in one-dimensional waveguides.Physical review

    F. Damanet, et al., Spin-orbit-assisted electron pairing in one-dimensional waveguides.Physical review. B, Condensed matter 104 (12), 125103 (2021), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.104.125103, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.125103

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    Mikheev, et al

    E. Mikheev, et al. , A clean ballistic quantum point contact in strontium titanate. Nature electronics pp. 1–8 (2023), doi:10.1038/s41928-023-00981-5, https://www.nature.com/ articles/s41928-023-00981-5

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Gutierrez, E

    R. Gutierrez, E. D ´ıaz, R. Naaman, G. Cuniberti, Spin-selective transport through he- lical molecular systems. Physical Review B: Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 85 (8), 081404 (2012), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.85.081404, https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevB.85.081404. 14

    2012 doi

  17. [25]

    H. J. Eckvahl, et al. , Direct observation of chirality-induced spin selectivity in electron donor-acceptor molecules. Science (New York, N.Y.) 382 (6667), 197–201 (2023), doi: 10.1126/science.adj5328, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adj5328

    2023 doi

  18. [26]

    Cheng, et al

    G. Cheng, et al. , Sketched oxide single-electron transistor. Nature nanotechnology 6 (6), 343–347 (2011), doi:10.1038/nnano.2011.56, https://scholar.google.com/ citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=SOYo5jgAAAAJ&citation_for_ view=SOYo5jgAAAAJ:aqlVkmm33-oC

    2011 doi

  19. [27]

    A. D. Caviglia, et al. , Tunable Rashba Spin-Orbit Interaction at Oxide Interfaces. Physical review letters 104 (12), 126803 (2010), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.126803, http://dx. doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.126803. Acknowledgments We acknowledge helpful discussions with T...

    2010 doi

Pith tools

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