Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 39 references

Generating phase singularities using surface exciton polaritons in an organic natural hyperbolic material

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first experimental study of hyperbolic surface exciton polaritons and shows that their ellipsometric phase response contains a single phase singularity, in contrast to the two singularities seen for ordinary surface…

desk verdict First credible HSEP observation in an organic film, but the one-vs-two phase singularity claim needs a thickness control before 'topological distinctness' is earned. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07718 v1 pith:ACLKIUBP submitted 2025-06-09 cond-mat.mes-hall physics.optics

Philip A. Thomas , William P. Wardley , William L. Barnes This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics
keywords surfaceexcitonpolaritonshyperbolicmaterialsphasesingularitiesspectroscopicellipsometryJ-aggregatesorganicnanophotonicsTDBC
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 reports what it argues is the first experimental study of hyperbolic surface exciton polaritons (HSEPs), made possible by the discovery that the organic J-aggregate dye TDBC is a type-II natural hyperbolic material with giant optical anisotropy. In prism-coupled ellipsometric measurements, the authors find that HSEPs suppress reflection completely at a single point, producing one phase singularity, whereas ordinary surface plasmon polaritons and non-hyperbolic surface exciton polaritons produce two. This difference in the number of zero-crossings of the complex reflectance ratio is presented as evidence that hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic surface polaritons are topologically distinct. If correct, the work extends hyperbolic surface polaritonics into the visible spectrum using solution-processed organic films, and predicts the same effect for infrared hyperbolic phonon polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride.

What carries the argument

The central object is the complex reflectance ratio $\rho = r_p/r_s = \tan(\Psi)e^{i\Delta}$ measured by spectroscopic ellipsometry; a surface polariton, excited only in p-polarisation, appears as a dip in $\Psi$ and a jump in $\Delta$, and a phase singularity occurs where $\rho = 0$, i.e. complete suppression of reflection. The argument turns on the number of times the $\rho$ trajectory associated with a surface polariton crosses zero as energy and angle vary: non-hyperbolic modes cross twice, forming a loop, while the hyperbolic mode crosses once. The hyperbolic nature is carried by the uniaxial optical constants of TDBC, with in-plane Lorentz oscillators giving $\mathrm{Re}(\epsilon_{xy}) < -2$ over 2.11$-$2.26 eV and a constant out-of-plane $\epsilon_z = 2.54$, which is the defining feature of a type-II natural hyperbolic material in that spectral window.

What would settle it

Measure the out-of-plane permittivity directly, for example by variable-angle spectroscopic ellipsometry on a thick TDBC film in the air/TDBC/glass geometry beyond the prism range; if $\mathrm{Im}(\epsilon_z)$ or $\mathrm{Re}(\epsilon_z)$ shows any Lorentz-oscillator feature near 2.1$-$2.4 eV, the single-singularity prediction for HSEPs would fail. Alternatively, prepare a TDBC film with a deliberately tilted or partially unaggregated population so that out-of-plane oscillators appear, and check whether the ellipsometric $\rho$ trajectory develops a second zero-crossing.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in a prism-coupled Kretschmann-Raether geometry, the ellipsometric response $\rho = r_p/r_s = \tan(\Psi)e^{i\Delta}$ of a hyperbolic surface exciton polariton crosses $\rho = 0$ exactly once, generating a single phase singularity, while the response of non-hyperbolic surface polaritons (SPPs in metals, SEPs in isotropic models, SPhPs in isotropic hBN) crosses twice and forms a closed loop in the complex $\rho$ plane. The authors attribute this difference to the hyperbolic nature of the uniaxial TDBC film, whose in-plane permittivity reaches $\mathrm{Re}(\epsilon_{xy}) = -25$ while the out-of-plane permittivity stays positive and featureless at $\epsilon_z = 2.54$. They reproduce the experimental single-singularity pattern with transfer-matrix calculations using these uniaxial constants, and show that an isotropic model of the same material yields two singularities, matching the metal SPP behaviour. They conclude that hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic surface polaritons are topologically distinct, and predict via calculations that hyperbolic surface phonon polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride will show the same single-singularity signature.

Load-bearing premise

The single phase singularity and the type-II hyperbolic classification both rest on the assumption that the TDBC film's out-of-plane permittivity is a constant 2.54 with no oscillators; if the out-of-plane response had its own absorption or dispersion, the predicted number of singularities could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • TDBC and related J-aggregates become a room-temperature, solution-processed platform for studying hyperbolic surface polaritons at visible frequencies.
  • The single phase singularity provides an ellipsometric fingerprint that distinguishes hyperbolic from non-hyperbolic surface polaritons.
  • Complete suppression of reflection at the singularity enables phase-based sensing and modulation schemes in the visible, similar to those proposed for SPPs.
  • The same single-singularity signature is predicted for hyperbolic surface phonon polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride, extending the result to the infrared.
  • The topological distinction implies that switching a material between hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic response changes the connectivity of the $\rho$ trajectory, which could be used as a robust experimental observable.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the single-singularity signature is a general consequence of hyperbolicity, then the number of $\rho$ zero-crossings could serve as a quick experimental test for whether any new anisotropic material is hyperbolic, without needing a full dispersion measurement.
  • The paper's isotropic counterfactual, which reduces the TDBC thickness from 90 nm to 44 nm to match the $\Psi$ response, is one of several possible comparisons; a different isotropic model might place the two singularities closer together, so the topological distinction is strongest when the optical constants are constrained by independent measurements.
  • The prediction for hBN could be tested directly with the existing prism-coupling ellipsometry setup used for surface phonon polaritons, making the topological claim falsifiable in a different material class.
  • Because the phase singularity is a zero of $r_p$, the result implies that the condition for critical coupling in hyperbolic films is stricter than in isotropic films, suggesting that deliberate engineering of out-of-plane absorption could tune the number of singularities.
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 / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports prism-coupled spectroscopic ellipsometry measurements of TDBC J-aggregate films, which are modelled as uniaxial type-II hyperbolic materials with a Lorentz-oscillator in-plane response and a dispersionless out-of-plane permittivity. The authors identify a surface exciton polariton mode in the 2.2–2.5 eV range and show that the phase response contains one singularity (ρ=0 crossing), in contrast to two for Ag/Au SPPs and for an isotropic model of TDBC; analogous transfer-matrix calculations for hBN predict a similar one-vs-two difference. They conclude that hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic surface polaritons are topologically distinct and that organic J-aggregates are a platform for visible-frequency hyperbolic surface polaritonics.

Significance. If the central distinction is robust, this is a valuable first experimental step: demonstrating hyperbolic surface exciton polaritons in a natural organic material at visible frequencies, with a phase-sensitive measurement that goes beyond reflectivity, and a falsifiable prediction for hBN. The authors separate model calibration from prediction by fitting optical constants to non-prism geometry before comparing the prism-coupled response, and the uniaxial transfer-matrix model reproduces the main experimental features, including the intensity dip and the phase jump. The hBN prediction is based on literature optical constants and could be tested independently. The remaining weakness is that the key one-vs-two singularity count has not yet been isolated from parameter changes in the counterfactual models.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3 (Fig. 3e-f) and Supplementary S5] The non-hyperbolic counterfactual changes two parameters at once: the isotropic TDBC model uses the same in-plane optical constants but a reduced thickness (90 nm to 44 nm), and the hBN isotropic model reduces thickness from 1500 nm to 800 nm. Since ρ=0 crossings in a Kretschmann multilayer are functions of film thickness, incidence angle, and loss, the difference in the number of crossings is not isolated to hyperbolicity. Please add fixed-thickness comparisons (isotropic at 90 nm and uniaxial at 44 nm for TDBC; analogous hBN cases) and a thickness scan over the experimental 30–200 nm range for both models, reporting the number of ρ=0 crossings in each case. If the isotropic model at 90 nm also produces a single crossing, or the uniaxial model produces two at some thickness, the claimed hyperbolic signature is thickness-dependent rather than topological.
  2. [Section 5 (Fig. 5) and Conclusion] The statement that hyperbolic and non-hyperbolic SPs are "topologically distinct" is stronger than the evidence supports. The figure shows one pair of curves at a single thickness; a count of zero-crossings of ρ along a one-dimensional dispersion curve is not by itself a topological invariant, and zeros of a complex function can appear or annihilate in pairs under small parameter perturbations. Please either provide a stability analysis showing that the one-vs-two count is robust to variations of thickness, angle range, and loss, or restrict the claim to a clear phenomenological difference rather than topological distinctness.
  3. [Supplementary S1.4 and Fig. 1c] The type-II hyperbolic classification and the single-singularity prediction rely on the assumption that ε_z = 2.54 is dispersionless with no out-of-plane oscillators. The argument that weak out-of-plane oscillators would create unobserved spectral features is a post-hoc model-selection argument based on the same TDBC films, and a finite out-of-plane absorption or dispersion in the 2.1–2.4 eV range would change the classification and could alter the singularity count. Please state this assumption and its empirical support more explicitly in the main text, and, if possible, validate the out-of-plane response with an independent sample or measurement.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Main text (Fig. 3 paragraph)] In the paragraph describing the uniaxial and isotropic model comparisons, the references "In Fig. 2c-d" and "In Fig. 2e,f" should read "Fig. 3c-d" and "Fig. 3e-f".
  2. [Data availability] The data availability statement ends with the placeholder "XXXX"; please provide the actual repository DOI or accession link.
  3. [Figure 5 caption] The inset text says the SEP and SPhP have "the same topology"; if the topological language is softened in response to the major comments, the caption wording should be adjusted accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: phase-singularity counts are measured outputs, and the hBN analogue uses independent literature constants.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. The TDBC optical constants were determined by spectroscopic ellipsometry in an air/TDBC/glass geometry (Supplementary S1.2), separately from the prism-coupling measurements used to observe phase singularities. The prism-coupled Ψ and Δ dispersions are then compared with transfer-matrix calculations using those independently determined constants, and the one-versus-two singularity count is read off from the measured and calculated response, not used as a fit target. The isotropic counterfactual is constructed from the same in-plane constants with an ad hoc thickness change (90 to 44 nm for TDBC; 1500 to 800 nm for hBN), which raises a valid question about whether thickness rather than anisotropy drives the singularity count, but this is a modeling confound, not circularity: the phase behavior is an emergent output of the calculation, and the thickness was chosen to reproduce the Ψ intensity response, not the number of phase singularities. The hBN calculations use independent literature optical constants from Caldwell et al. and are forward predictions. Self-citations to prior work by Thomas et al. are methodological (ρ-plot representation and phase-singularity control) and are not load-bearing uniqueness claims or fitted inputs. No equation or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no derivation reduces to its own input. Concerns about the uniaxial model's out-of-plane permittivity and the thickness-adjusted isotropic comparison are substantive scientific risks but fall under model-validity and confound analysis, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on fitted Lorentz oscillator parameters for TDBC, an assumed uniaxial structure with a featureless out-of-plane permittivity, and a counterfactual isotropic model with an adjusted thickness. The hBN calculations use literature optical constants and are the most independent part. No invented physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • TDBC in-plane Lorentz oscillator parameters = epsilon_inf=2.54, omega1=2.11 eV, gamma1=0.0250 eV, f1=0.682, omega2=2.31 eV, gamma2=0.447 eV, f2=0.197
    Fitted to spectroscopic ellipsometry of neat TDBC films (S1.2); these parameters set the negative in-plane permittivity and therefore the hyperbolic response.
  • Isotropic TDBC model thickness = 44 nm (vs. 90 nm in experiment)
    Chosen to reproduce a SEP mode in the isotropic transfer-matrix model (main text Fig. 3 caption); the thickness reduction is needed to make the non-hyperbolic counterfactual support a surface polariton and affects the phase singularity count comparison.
  • hBN film thicknesses for calculations = 1500 nm (anisotropic), 800 nm (isotropic)
    Chosen in S5 to place the SPhP modes in the same spectral region for the hyperbolic vs non-hyperbolic comparison; not fitted to experiment.
  • Out-of-plane permittivity of TDBC = epsilon_z = 2.54 (constant, no oscillators)
    Assumed in S1.2 and defended in S1.4 by showing that weak out-of-plane oscillators produce unobserved features; this assumption underpins the hyperbolic classification.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Maxwell's equations with the Fresnel/transfer-matrix formalism describe the layered prism/TDBC/air system.
    Used for all calculated dispersions in Figs. 3 and 4 and S2; standard electromagnetic theory.
  • domain assumption The Lorentz oscillator model captures the optical response of TDBC in the measured spectral range.
    Used in S1.2 to parameterize the permittivity; reasonable for excitonic resonances but not independently derived.
  • ad hoc to paper TDBC films are uniaxial with the optic axis normal to the substrate and no out-of-plane Lorentz oscillators.
    This is the key modeling choice that makes TDBC a type-II hyperbolic material; the authors select this model because it fits the ellipsometric data (S1.2, S1.4).
  • ad hoc to paper The number of phase singularities in the ellipsometric rho response is a stable topological invariant distinguishing hyperbolic from non-hyperbolic surface polaritons.
    The paper asserts topological distinctness (conclusion) but provides no proof or parameter-space study showing the zero-crossing count is robust to thickness, loss, or measurement range changes.
  • ad hoc to paper An isotropic model with adjusted thickness is a valid counterfactual representing non-hyperbolic SEPs.
    Used in Fig. 3e-f and Fig. 4c-d to contrast with the hyperbolic case; the thickness change from 90 to 44 nm is chosen ad hoc to recover a SEP mode.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generating phase singularities using surface exciton polaritons in an organic natural hyperbolic material." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ACLKIUBP

@misc{pith2026250607718,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generating phase singularities using surface exciton polaritons in an organic natural hyperbolic material},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ACLKIUBP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07718}
}
read the original abstract

Surface polaritons (SPs) are electromagnetic waves bound to a surface through their interaction with charge carriers in the surface material. Hyperbolic SPs can be supported by optically anisotropic materials where the in-plane and out-of-plane permittivies have opposite signs. Here we report what we believe to be the first experimental study of hyperbolic surface exciton polaritons (HSEPs). We study the intensity and phase response of HSEPs in the J-aggregate TDBC (a type-II natural hyperbolic material). HSEPs can be used to generate phase singularities; the behaviour of these phase singularities is a consequence of the hyperbolic nature of TDBC. The combined intensity and phase response of non-hyperbolic and hyperbolic SPs suggests that they are topologically distinct. We predict analogous effects for hyperbolic surface phonon polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride. Our work suggests that organic materials can provide a new platform for the exploration of hyperbolic surface polaritonics at visible frequencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07718 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Chemical structure of TDBC. (b) Photograph of neat TDBC film under ambient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Results from ellipsometric prism coupling experiments in which SPPs are observed in Ag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The effect of anisotropy on the SEP dispersion. (a,b) Experimental Ψ and ∆ dispersions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The effect of anisotropy on prism coupling to HSPhPs in hBN. (a,b) Calculated Ψ and ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The combined amplitude and phase responses of HSEP (blue line), SEP (magenta line), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dutta and J

    A. Dutta and J. J. Toppari, Effect of molecular concentration on excitonic nanostructure based refractive index sensing and near-field enhanced spectroscopy.Opt. Mater. Express13, 2426– 2445 (2023). DOI: 10.1364/OME.497366

    work page doi:10.1364/ome.497366 2023

  2. [2]

    Dutta, V

    A. Dutta, V. Tiainen, H. A. Qureshi, L. Duarte and J. J. Toppari, Modeling optical constants from the absorption of organic thin films using a modified Lorentz oscillator model.Opt. Mater. Express12, 2855–2869 (2022). DOI: 10.1364/OME.459938

    work page doi:10.1364/ome.459938 2022

  3. [3]

    Kimet al., Natural Hyperbolic Dispersion with Anisotropic Epsilon-Near-Zero and Epsilon-Near-Pole in Squaraine Molecular Film.Adv

    M. Kimet al., Natural Hyperbolic Dispersion with Anisotropic Epsilon-Near-Zero and Epsilon-Near-Pole in Squaraine Molecular Film.Adv. Opt. Mater.9, 2101091 (2021). DOI: 10.1002/adom.202101091

    work page doi:10.1002/adom.202101091 2021

  4. [4]

    Y. U. Leeet al., Organic Monolithic Natural Hyperbolic Material.ACS Photon.6, 1681–1689 (2019). DOI: 10.1021/acsphotonics.9b00185

    work page doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.9b00185 2019

  5. [5]

    Epsteinet al.Highly confined in-plane propagating exciton-polaritons on monolayer semicon- ductors.2D Materials7, 035031 (2020)

    I. Epsteinet al.Highly confined in-plane propagating exciton-polaritons on monolayer semicon- ductors.2D Materials7, 035031 (2020). DOI: 10.1088/2053-1583/ab8dd4

    work page doi:10.1088/2053-1583/ab8dd4 2020

  6. [6]

    Fox, Optical Properties of Solids, 2nd ed

    M. Fox, Optical Properties of Solids, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    G., N´ u˜ nez-S´ anchez, S

    Gentile, M. G., N´ u˜ nez-S´ anchez, S. and Barnes, W. L. Optical Field-Enhancement and Subwave- length Field-Confinement Using Excitonic Nanostructures.Nano Lett.14, 2339–44 (2014). DOI: 10.1021/nl404712t

    work page doi:10.1021/nl404712t 2014

  8. [8]

    Stete, W

    F. Stete, W. Koopman, C. Henkel, O. Benson, G. Kewes and M. Bargheer, Optical Spectra of Plasmon–Exciton Core–Shell Nanoparticles: A Heuristic Quantum Approach.ACS Photonics 10, 2511–2520 (2023). DOI: 10.1021/acsphotonics.2c01975

    work page doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.2c01975 2023

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Lidzey, D.G., Coles, D.M. (2015). Strong Coupling in Organic and Hybrid-Semiconductor Mi- crocavity Structures. In: Comoretto, D. (eds) Organic and Hybrid Photonic Crystals. Springer, Cham

    2015

  2. [10]

    M., Caillard, L., Radja, A., Thissen, P., Gordon, J

    Roodenko, K., Nguyen, H. M., Caillard, L., Radja, A., Thissen, P., Gordon, J. M., Gartstein, Y. N., Malko, A. V. & Chabal, Y. J. Anisotropic Optical Properties of Thin-Film Thiacarbocyanine Dye Aggregates.J. Phys. Chem. C117, 20186–20192 (2013). DOI: 10.1021/jp407056t

    2013 doi

  3. [11]

    E. S. H. Kanget al., Organic Anisotropic Excitonic Optical Nanoantennas.Advanced Science 9, 2201907 (2022). DOI: 10.1002/advs.202201907

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    W. L. Barnes, Surface plasmon–polariton length scales: a route to sub-wavelength optics.J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt.8, S87 (2006). DOI: 10.1088/1464-4258/8/4/S06

    2006 doi

  5. [13]

    W. L. Barnes, Particle plasmons: Why shape matters.Am. J. Phys.84, 593–601 (2016). DOI: 10.1119/1.4948402

    2016 doi

  6. [14]

    S¨ onnichsen, T

    C. S¨ onnichsen, T. Franzl, T. Wilk, G. von Plessen and J. Feldmann, Drastic Reduction of Plasmon Damping in Gold Nanorods.Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 077402 (2002). DOI: 10.1103/Phys- RevLett.88.077402

    2002 doi

  7. [15]

    C. R. Lawrence, and J. R. Sambles, Critical edge studies of highly absorbing Langmuir-Blodgett films.Thin Solid Films210/211, 693–695 (1992). DOI: 10.1016/0040-6090(92)90376-M 24

    1992 doi

  8. [16]

    Berini, Long-range surface plasmon polaritons.Adv

    P. Berini, Long-range surface plasmon polaritons.Adv. Opt. Photon.1, 484–588 (2009). DOI: 10.1364/AOP.1.000484

    2009 doi

  9. [17]

    P. T. Worthing, and W. L. Barnes, Coupling efficiency of surface plasmon polaritons to radiation using a corrugated surface; angular dependence.J. Mod. Opt.49, 1453–1462 (2010). DOI: 10.1080/09500340110105911

    2010 doi

  10. [18]

    G. P. Bryan-Brown, M. C. Jory, S. J. Elston and J. R. Sambles, Diffraction Grating Char- acterization Via the Excitation of Surface Plasmons.J. Mod. Opt.40, 959–964 (2007). DOI: 10.1080/09500349314550961

    2007 doi

  11. [19]

    W. L. Barnes, Fluorescence near interfaces: The role of photonic mode density.J. Mod. Opt. 45, 661–699 (1998). DOI: 10.1080/09500349808230614

    1998 doi

  12. [20]

    S. V. Baieva, T. K. Hakala and J. J. Toppari, Strong coupling between surface plasmon polaritons and Sulforhodamine 101 dye.Nanoscale Res. Lett.7, 191 (2012). DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-7-191

    2012 doi

  13. [21]

    F. H. L. Koppens, D. E. Chang and F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo, Graphene Plasmonics: A Platform for Strong Light–Matter Interactions.Nano Lett.11, 3370–3377 (2011). DOI: 10.1021/nl201771h

    2011 doi

  14. [22]

    Kretschmann and H

    E. Kretschmann and H. Raether, Radiative Decay of Non Radiative Surface Plasmons Excited by Light.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Naturforschung A23, 2135–2136 (1968). DOI: 10.1515/zna-1968-1247

    1968 doi

  15. [23]

    Tompkins and E

    H. Tompkins and E. A. Irene, Handbook of Ellipsometry. William Andrew Publishing (2005)

    2005

  16. [24]

    V. G. Kravetset al., Graphene-protected copper and silver plasmonics.Sci. Rep.4, 5517 (2014). DOI: 10.1038/srep05517

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    G., Schedin, F

    Kravets, V. G., Schedin, F. & Grigorenko, A. N. Extremely Narrow Plasmon Resonances Based on Diffraction Coupling of Localized Plasmons in Arrays of Metallic Nanoparticles.Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 087403 (2008). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.087403

    2008 doi

  18. [26]

    Diest, V

    K. Diest, V. Liberman, D. M. Lennon, P. B. Welander & M. Rothschild Aluminum plasmonics: optimization of plasmonic properties using liquid-prism-coupled ellipsometry.Opt. Express21, 28638–28650 (2013). DOI: 10.1364/OE.21.028638

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    DOI: 10.1021/ac- sphotonics.7b01176

    Tsurimaki, Y.et al.Topological Engineering of Interfacial Optical Tamm States for Highly Sen- sitive Near-Singular-Phase Optical Detection.ACS Photon.5, 929–938 (2018). DOI: 10.1021/ac- sphotonics.7b01176

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    V.et al.Biosensing with the singular phase of an ultrathin metal-dielectric nanophotonic cavity.Nat

    Sreekanth, K. V.et al.Biosensing with the singular phase of an ultrathin metal-dielectric nanophotonic cavity.Nat. Commun.9, 369 (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-02860-6

    2018 doi

  21. [29]

    P. A. Thomas, W. J. Tan, H. A. Fernandez and W. L. Barnes, A new signature for strong light–matter coupling using spectroscopic ellipsometry.Nano Lett.20, 6412–6419 (2020). DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c01963

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    Ermolaevet al.Topological phase singularities in atomically thin high-refractive-index ma- terials.Nat

    G. Ermolaevet al.Topological phase singularities in atomically thin high-refractive-index ma- terials.Nat. Commun.13, 2049 (2022). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-29716-4

    2022 doi

  23. [31]

    Carini, R

    G. Carini, R. Niemann, N. S. Mueller, M. Wolf, and A. Paarmann, Surface Phonon Polariton Ellipsometry.ACS Photon.12, 792–800 (2025). DOI: 10.1021/acsphotonics.4c01790 25

    2025 doi

  24. [32]

    L. Gu, J. Livenere, G. Zhu, E. E. Narimanov and M. A. Noginov, Quest for organic plasmonics. Appl. Phys. Lett.103, 021104 (2013). DOI: 10.1063/1.4813240

    2013 doi

  25. [33]

    Takatori, T

    K. Takatori, T. Okamoto, K. Ishibashi and R. Micheletto, Surface exciton polaritons supported by a J-aggregate-dye/air interface at room temperature.Opt. Lett.42, 3876–3879 (2017). DOI: 10.1364/OL.42.003876

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    V. G. Kravetset al., Singular phase nano-optics in plasmonic metamaterials for label-free single- molecule detection.Nat. Mater.12, 304–309 (2013). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat3537

    2013 doi

  27. [35]

    Niuet al., Giant optical anisotropy in a quasi-one-dimensional crystal.Nature Photon.12, 392–396 (2018)

    S. Niuet al., Giant optical anisotropy in a quasi-one-dimensional crystal.Nature Photon.12, 392–396 (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41566-018-0189-1

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    G. A. Ermolaevet al., Giant optical anisotropy in transition metal dichalcogenides for next- generation photonics.Nat. Commun.12, 854 (2021). DOI: doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21139-x

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    T. W. Ebbesen, Hybrid Light–Matter States in a Molecular and Material Science Perspective. Acc. Chem. Res.49, 2403–2412 (2016). DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00295

    2016 doi

  30. [38]

    W. S. Rodney and I. H. Malitson, Refraction and Dispersion of Thallium Bromide Iodide.J. Opt. Soc. Am.46, 956–961 (1956). DOI: 10.1364/JOSA.46.000956

    1956 doi

  31. [39]

    J. D. Caldwellet al., Sub-diffractional volume-confined polaritons in the natural hyperbolic material hexagonal boron nitride.Nat. Commun.5, 5221 (2014). DOI: 10.1038/ncomms6221 26

    2014 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.