Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 3 minor 40 references

Direct interferometric measurement of non-reciprocity induced by a plasmonic metasurface with false chirality

T0 review · 5 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 A static plasmonic metasurface with false chirality makes counter-propagating surface plasmons pick up opposite Pancharatnam-Berry phases, read out as a π shift in a Sagnac interferometer.

desk verdict Real measurement technique, but the non-reciprocity claim is assumed in the model and not established by the Sagnac geometry. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08815 v1 pith:PVOKGGP4 submitted 2025-06-10 physics.optics

Ahmed Lafeef Ettapuram Naduvilepurayil , Harel Ginat , Fernando Loren , Luis Martin-Moreno , Shmuel Sternklar , Yuri Gorodetski This is my paper
classification physics.optics
keywords surfaceplasmonpolaritonsnonreciprocityfalsechiralityPancharatnam-BerryphaseSagnacinterferometerplasmonicmetasurfacespin-momentumlockingleakageradiationmicroscopy
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 that a passive, static plasmonic metasurface whose rectangular apertures rotate along one axis is false-chiral and therefore breaks time-reversal symmetry for surface plasmons. As a consequence, counter-propagating surface plasmons acquire opposite Pancharatnam-Berry phases, and the two arms of a common-path Sagnac interferometer end up $\pi$ out of phase. This matters because non-reciprocity is normally bought with magnetic fields, moving parts, or nonlinearity, whereas here it is claimed to arise from the structure itself. The authors support the claim with k-space maps, numerical simulations, and a Jones-matrix model in which even a tiny differential loss between circular components produces a constant $\pi$ phase difference between clockwise and counter-clockwise beams.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the Pancharatnam-Berry phase $\phi_{PB} = 2\sigma\theta(x)$ acquired when a surface plasmon scatters from a rotated rectangular aperture; the rotation gradient $\Omega = \dot{\theta}(x)$ adds a spin-dependent term $-2\sigma\Omega\hat{x}$ to the momentum-matching condition, so the two propagation directions couple to different circular emission channels. The accompanying Jones-matrix model gives each direction a slightly different circular dichroism, and projection onto the orthogonal linear polarization converts that arbitrarily small differential loss $\delta$ into a full $\pi$ phase difference between the clockwise and counter-clockwise Sagnac arms.

What would settle it

A full-wave solution of Maxwell's equations for the exact static aperture pattern, computing the complex scattering amplitude for left-to-right versus right-to-left incidence at the same frequency and polarization, would settle the claim: for a passive, linear, time-even structure reciprocity forces these amplitudes to be equal, so any nonzero phase difference would show that the effective nonreciprocal model is not the full physics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a grating of rectangular apertures with orientation varying along x acts as a false-chiral medium for surface plasmons: a plasmon traveling in one direction sees a rotation gradient of one handedness, and the reverse plasmon sees the opposite handedness. This asymmetry imprints opposite Pancharatnam-Berry phases on the two counter-propagating waves, so the system is nonreciprocal without external fields, bias, motion, or nonlinearity. The authors detect the resulting $\pi$ fringe shift in a customized Sagnac interferometer, show that a symmetric hole array and a plain gold surface remain reciprocal, and verify with leakage-radiation microscopy and simulations that the plasmonic mode dispersion is spin-dependent and asymmetric. Their direction-dependent dichroic Jones-matrix model predicts a constant $\pi$ phase difference between the clockwise and counter-clockwise beams even for an arbitrarily small RCP/LCP loss $\delta$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a static, time-even pattern of rotated apertures counts as a false-chiral object, so that time reversal flips the handedness a plasmon experiences; if that classification fails, the claimed time-reversal breaking and the resulting non-reciprocity collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A passive, static plasmonic structure can produce non-reciprocity in the surface-plasmon channel without any external bias, which removes the usual requirement for magnetic or nonlinear elements in plasmonic isolator designs.
  • The custom Sagnac interferometer with crossed polarizers gives a direct, high-sensitivity readout of non-reciprocal phase, usable as a surface-plasmon-resonance phase interrogation tool.
  • The π phase shift tracks the structural handedness and period of the grating, so the same measurement can sense local dielectric changes or chiral analytes placed on the metasurface.
  • Because non-chiral hole arrays preserve reciprocity and the flat gold surface shows only the trivial π feature, the observed shift is specifically tied to the false-chiral aperture rotation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Imported into a static metasurface, the false-chirality label shifts the time-odd character from the material response to the effective interaction that a propagating plasmon sees, which connects this effect to spin-momentum locking and magnetoelectric phenomena in other photonic platforms.
  • The conversion of an arbitrarily small differential circular loss into a full π phase is structurally like weak-measurement amplification, so the same Sagnac geometry could amplify other tiny spin-dependent asymmetries in nanophotonic systems.
  • A testable extension is to vary the aperture rotation gradient or the aperture aspect ratio to tune the differential loss and check whether the phase difference stays exactly π or becomes continuous, which would discriminate between the geometric-phase mechanism and a plain loss asymmetry.
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

5 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that a passive plasmonic metasurface made of spatially rotated rectangular apertures is an example of 'false chirality' and therefore breaks time-reversal symmetry, causing counter-propagating surface plasmons to acquire opposite Pancharatnam-Berry phases. The authors describe a custom Sagnac interferometer with Kretschmann excitation and report a pi fringe shift across the SP resonance for rotated-aperture gratings that is absent for a circular-hole array. Supporting measurements include k-space leakage-radiation microscopy under RCP/LCP excitation and eigenmode simulations of the mode dispersion. The central model is a pair of direction-dependent Jones matrices (Eq. 2) from which the pi phase difference is derived.

Significance. If established, the claim would be significant: static, passive, linear structures are generally believed to be reciprocal under Lorentz reciprocity, and demonstrating nonreciprocity without magnetic bias, motion, or nonlinearity would have broad implications for isolation and sensing. The experimental apparatus is original in combining a Sagnac geometry with k-space imaging, and the inclusion of a control hole-array experiment and spin-resolved mode measurements is a strength. However, the central theoretical step is circular, the false-chirality classification of a static time-even structure is not consistent with Barron's definition cited by the authors, and the measured observable is not shown to be a Lorentz reciprocity violation. The significance therefore rests entirely on the unproven central premise.

major comments (5)
  1. [Experimental Results and Discussion, false-chiral grating experiment (p. 8)] The classification of the static rotated-aperture array as false chiral is the load-bearing assumption and it is not supported. The text argues that 'under TR the plasmon encounters an opposite rotation handedness' (p. 8), but this time-reverses the propagating wave, not the structure: a static array of rotated apertures is unchanged under time reversal. Barron's false chirality, which the authors cite, requires a time-odd influence such as a magnetic field or motion; a time-even geometrical pattern cannot by itself break time-reversal symmetry in a passive linear medium. The nonreciprocity claim therefore lacks a valid theoretical basis.
  2. [Jones-matrix model preceding Eq. (2)] The derivation leading to Eq. (2) is circular with respect to the central claim. The matrices R_CW = diag(1,1-delta) and R_CCW = diag(1-delta,1) assume a direction-dependent circular loss delta, which is precisely the nonreciprocity the paper sets out to prove. Equation (2) then obtains a pi phase difference as a mathematical consequence of these assumed matrices; delta is a free parameter with no independent measurement and no microscopic derivation from Maxwell's equations is given. The statement that 'even for a tiny RCP/LCP loss, a constant phase difference of pi arises' is also misleading, since the transmitted amplitude through the analyzer is proportional to delta and vanishes in the delta-to-0 limit; the pi is a phase of a post-selected weak component, not a phase difference of the full counter-propagating beams.
  3. [Sagnac interferometer and Fig. 3] The Sagnac comparison of clockwise and counter-clockwise beams does not constitute a Lorentz reciprocity test. The experiment compares +k and -k beams reflected from the same side of the sample; a reciprocal, time-even structure without mirror symmetry can produce different reflection phases for opposite in-plane wavevectors, for example through asymmetric diffraction or non-normal-incidence effects. To establish nonreciprocity the authors would need a two-port test with the input and output ports exchanged (or an equivalent sample-flip measurement), together with extracted fringe phases and error bars, which are not reported. The observed fringe shift alone is therefore inconclusive.
  4. [Proximity experiment, Fig. 7] The proximity experiment reported in Fig. 7 is a null result that is not reconciled with the model. When the excitation spot is centered between two false-chiral gratings with separations d = 70 um and d = 40 um, the interferograms are said to be 'similar to the reciprocal case' and the additional pi phase 'vanishes' (p. 15). If counter-propagating SPs acquired a pi phase whenever they traversed a false-chiral structure, this geometry should still exhibit the effect over at least part of the spot. The authors' suggestion of 'additional losses in SP propagation and coupling to light' is qualitative and unquantified; this discrepancy weakens the causal link between the metasurface and the observed fringe shift.
  5. [Jones-matrix model, numerical confirmation (p. 14)] The manuscript states that 'we have confirmed this simple analytical model with numerical simulations, obtaining a sign change in the TE reflection coefficient depending on the propagation direction' (p. 14), but no simulation parameters, numerical data, or figure are provided. The eigenmode k-space simulations in Figs. 4 and 5 compute dispersion modes, not the TE reflection coefficient or the CW/CCW phase difference, so they do not document the claimed confirmation. This missing support leaves the central equation without independent verification.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and p. 4] There is a typographical error: 'Krestchmann' should be 'Kretschmann' (p. 4); also 'a-priori' should be 'a priori' (p. 8).
  2. [Eq. (2)] The transition between the circular basis used for the Jones matrices and the linear basis used for the input state is not written out; the explicit action of the transformation matrix on the input and output linear states should be given so the result i(delta/2)|up arrow> can be followed step by step.
  3. [Fig. 3(b)] The claimed 'disappearance of the phase dislocation' is presented only through interferograms; a quantitative phase profile or fringe cross-section would make the pi shift verifiable.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The central non-reciprocity claim reduces to assumed direction-dependent Jones matrices and a false-chirality label that already encodes the time-reversal asymmetry under test.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Experimental Results and Discussion, paragraph introducing Eq. (2)]
    "The opposite handedness of the counter propagating beams reflected from a rotated apertures’ array can be conveniently modeled by direction-dependent dichroic Jones matrices, RCW = ... and RCCW = ... We assume for the sake of the model that the losses do not reduce the degree of polarization. Accordingly, the field loss due to the differential emission 1 > δ > 0 is selectively applied to a corresponding circular state depending on the propagation direction. This calculation yields that even for a tiny RCP/LCP loss, a constant phase difference of π arises between the CW and the CCW beams."

    The model's input is the non-reciprocity under test: RCW and RCCW differ by applying loss δ to opposite circular components for the two propagation directions. Equation (2) then calculates a π phase difference from this assumed δ. The 'prediction' is a mathematical consequence of the chosen direction-dependent matrices, not a derivation of non-reciprocity from the static structure. The measured phase shift may be real, but the non-reciprocal mechanism is inserted by hand rather than derived.

  2. self definitional [Experimental Results and Discussion, 'Direct Measurement of a Structure Non-reciprocity', paragraph introducing Fig. 3]
    "Clearly, the SP wave propagating through this structure is characterized by a false chirality, since under TR the plasmon encounters an opposite rotation handedness."

    The structure is labeled 'false chiral' precisely because counter-propagating plasmons experience opposite rotation handedness, i.e., the directional asymmetry the paper aims to demonstrate. False chirality is then invoked to conclude non-reciprocity. The conclusion is thus built into the classification rather than derived from the static, time-even aperture pattern. Barron's false chirality requires a time-odd influence; the paper's criterion is the very TR-breaking effect it claims to predict.

full rationale

The paper contains genuine experimental observations (the Sagnac fringe shift and the spin-dependent k-space modes in the LRM experiment), and the numerical simulations are self-contained. However, the central interpretation reduces to two circular moves. First, Eq. (2) assumes direction-dependent dichroic Jones matrices whose diagonal losses δ already encode the non-reciprocity; the π phase difference is then read back out of the assumed matrices, so it is not a first-principles prediction. Second, the 'false chirality' label is assigned because 'under TR the plasmon encounters an opposite rotation handedness'—the very counter-propagating asymmetry at issue—and then used to conclude time-reversal breaking. The Fig. 7 proximity experiment's null result (the π phase vanishes) is acknowledged by the authors as 'evidence of a very weak interaction,' further weakening the causal link. The self-citations [31,32] are not scored as circular because the PB-phase momentum equation is an independently established result and the LRM simulations are self-contained. Score 6 reflects partial circularity: the measured phase shift is a real observable, but the claimed non-reciprocity is assumed in the model and in the classification.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The model's only free parameter is delta, the direction-dependent circular loss, which is itself the non-reciprocity to be proven. The false-chirality classification assumes the conclusion, and no independent evidence is given for direction-dependent dichroism in a static structure. The paper thus pulls the key effect from a hat.

free parameters (1)
  • delta = not specified (0 < delta < 1)
    The differential circular loss in R_CW and R_CCW is introduced ad hoc to break reciprocity. Its physical origin is not derived, and no value is measured or fitted from data; the pi phase result depends on its existence, not its magnitude.
assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption A system possessing false chirality is nonreciprocal
    The paper relies on ref 20 to assert that false chirality implies non-reciprocity, but it misapplies the definition to a static, time-even pattern of rotated apertures, which is not a false-chiral object in Barron's sense.
  • standard math Lorentz reciprocity and Maxwell's equations for static passive media
    The paper invokes Lorentz reciprocity and Onsager relations but then claims a static passive structure violates them. The standard theory predicts reciprocal response for such a structure, which is in direct tension with the paper's conclusion.
invented entities (1)
  • Direction-dependent circular dichroism (delta)
    purpose: To make counter-propagating surface plasmons experience different losses for opposite circular polarizations, which is the non-reciprocal behavior under test.
    This property is assumed in the Jones matrices R_CW and R_CCW. A static, non-magnetic, passive structure cannot exhibit direction-dependent circular dichroism under Lorentz reciprocity, and no independent evidence is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Direct interferometric measurement of non-reciprocity induced by a plasmonic metasurface with false chirality." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PVOKGGP4

@misc{pith2026250608815,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Direct interferometric measurement of non-reciprocity induced by a plasmonic metasurface with false chirality},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PVOKGGP4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08815}
}
read the original abstract

Nonreciprocity is an important scientific concept related to the broken symmetry of light propagation through a system in forward and reverse directions. This effect lies in the origin of various applications including signal processing, noise reduction, unidirectional propagation and sensing. Here we show that propagation of Surface Plasmons (SP) within a structure having a false chirality exhibits a non-reciprocity. The SP waves propagating in opposite directions within the structure acquire opposite Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) phases. To detect this phase difference we introduce a novel interferometric technique based on a customized Sagnac set-up. The main advantages of our proposed system are high sensitivity to non-reciprocal phase changes, high precision incidence angle alignment and the inspection of the k-space enabled by sufficiently wide range of incidence angles. We believe that a pivotal role of the non-reciprocity and its detection in numerous physical and chemical processes suggests a wide range of practical applications as well as deeper scientific insights.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08815 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sagnac Interferometer Setup (see details in the text). Inset (a) illustrates SPP [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Hole Array experiment (Exp HA) featuring reciprocal light-matter interaction. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. False chiral grating experiment. (a) The SEM image of the ShP - Shorter period [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The inverted leakage-radiation microscopy (LRM) setup and the k-space represen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The k-space representation of SP dispersion modes for the false-chiral metasurface [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Poincar´e sphere representation of the transport of the polarization state by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Experiment to study the effect of the beam incidence’s proximity to the metasurface. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Faraday’s diary: Being the various philosophical notes of experimental investigation, Vol

    Faraday, M. Faraday’s diary: Being the various philosophical notes of experimental investigation, Vol. IV, Nov. 12, 1839 - June 26, 1847; George Bell and Sons, Ltd: London, 1933

    work page 1933

  2. [2]

    Electromagnetic nonreciprocity

    Caloz, C.; Alu, A.; Tretyakov, S.; Sounas, D.; Achouri, K.; Deck-L \'e ger, Z.-L. Electromagnetic nonreciprocity. Physical Review Applied 2018, 10, 047001

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes

    Onsager, L. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. I. Physical Review 1931, 37, 405

    work page 1931

  4. [4]

    Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes

    Onsager, L. Reciprocal relations in irreversible processes. II. Physical Review 1931, 38, 2265

    work page 1931

  5. [5]

    Casimir, H. B. G. On Onsager's principle of microscopic reversibility. Reviews of Modern Physics 1945, 17, 343

    work page 1945

  6. [7]

    S.; Mirmoosa, M

    Asadchy, V. S.; Mirmoosa, M. S.; Diaz-Rubio, A.; Fan, S.; Tretyakov, S. A. Tutorial on electromagnetic nonreciprocity and its origins. Proceedings of the IEEE 2020, 108, 1684--1727

    work page 2020

  7. [8]

    Reciprocity, spatial mapping and time reversal in electromagnetics; Springer Science & Business Media, 2011

    Altman, C.; Suchy, K. Reciprocity, spatial mapping and time reversal in electromagnetics; Springer Science & Business Media, 2011

    work page 2011

  8. [9]

    Jackson, J. D. Classical electrodynamics, 3rd ed.; John Wiley & Sons, 1998

    work page 1998

Show all 40 references
  1. [10]

    Effet tourbillonnaire optique

    Sagnac, G. Effet tourbillonnaire optique. La circulation de l' \'e ther lumineux dans un interf \'e rographe tournant. J. Phys. Theor. Appl. 1914, 4, 177--195

    1914

  2. [11]

    A.; Galiffi, E.; Guenneau, S.; Craster, R

    Huidobro, P. A.; Galiffi, E.; Guenneau, S.; Craster, R. V.; Pendry, J. B. Fresnel drag in space--time-modulated metamaterials. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2019, 116, 24943--24948

    2019

  3. [12]

    Enhancement of the Sagnac effect due to nonlinearly induced nonreciprocity

    Kaplan, A.; Meystre, P. Enhancement of the Sagnac effect due to nonlinearly induced nonreciprocity. Optics Letters 1981, 6, 590--592

    1981

  4. [13]

    Directionally asymmetrical bistability in a symmetrically pumped nonlinear ring interferometer

    Kaplan, A.; Meystre, P. Directionally asymmetrical bistability in a symmetrically pumped nonlinear ring interferometer. Optics Communications 1982, 40, 229--232

    1982

  5. [14]

    Light-induced nonreciprocity, field invariants, and nonlinear eigenpolarizations

    Kaplan, A. Light-induced nonreciprocity, field invariants, and nonlinear eigenpolarizations. Optics Letters 1983, 8, 560--562

    1983

  6. [15]

    Pozar, D. M. Microwave engineering: theory and techniques, 4th ed.; John wiley & sons, 2011

    2011

  7. [16]

    Barron, L. D. True and false chirality and absolute asymmetric synthesis. Journal of the American Chemical Society 1986, 108, 5539--5542

    1986

  8. [17]

    Barron, L. D. True and false chirality and parity violation. Chemical Physics Letters 1986, 123, 423--427

    1986

  9. [18]

    Symmetry and molecular chirality

    Barron, L. Symmetry and molecular chirality. Chemical Society Reviews 1986, 15, 189--223

    1986

  10. [19]

    M.; Raab, R

    de Figueiredo, I. M.; Raab, R. A pictorial approach to macroscopic space-time symmetry, with particular reference to light scattering. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 1980, 369, 501--516

    1980

  11. [20]

    Y.; Kivshar, Y

    Bliokh, K. Y.; Kivshar, Y. S.; Nori, F. Magnetoelectric effects in local light-matter interactions. Physical review letters 2014, 113, 033601

    2014

  12. [21]

    A.; Monticone, F

    Hassani Gangaraj, S. A.; Monticone, F. Drifting electrons: nonreciprocal plasmonics and thermal photonics. ACS photonics 2022, 9, 806--819

    2022

  13. [22]

    A.; Hanson, G

    Hassani Gangaraj, S. A.; Hanson, G. W.; Silveirinha, M. G.; Shastri, K.; Antezza, M.; Monticone, F. Unidirectional and diffractionless surface plasmon polaritons on three-dimensional nonreciprocal plasmonic platforms. Physical Review B 2019, 99, 245414

    2019

  14. [23]

    Nonreciprocal transmission of electromagnetic waves with nonlinear active plasmonic metasurfaces

    Guo, T.; Argyropoulos, C. Nonreciprocal transmission of electromagnetic waves with nonlinear active plasmonic metasurfaces. Physical Review B 2022, 106, 235418

    2022

  15. [24]

    Generalized theory of interference, and its applications: Part I

    Pancharatnam, S. Generalized theory of interference, and its applications: Part I. Coherent pencils. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences-Section A. 1956; pp 247--262

    1956

  16. [25]

    Generalized theory of interference and its applications: Part II

    Pancharatnam, S. Generalized theory of interference and its applications: Part II. Partially coherent pencils. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences-section a. 1956; pp 398--417

    1956

  17. [26]

    Berry, M. V. The adiabatic phase and Pancharatnam's phase for polarized light. Journal of Modern Optics 1987, 34, 1401--1407

    1987

  18. [27]

    P.; Nolte, S.; Alberucci, A

    Jisha, C. P.; Nolte, S.; Alberucci, A. Geometric phase in optics: from wavefront manipulation to waveguiding. Laser & Photonics Reviews 2021, 15, 2100003

    2021

  19. [28]

    Geometric phase from Aharonov--Bohm to Pancharatnam--Berry and beyond

    Cohen, E.; Larocque, H.; Bouchard, F.; Nejadsattari, F.; Gefen, Y.; Karimi, E. Geometric phase from Aharonov--Bohm to Pancharatnam--Berry and beyond. Nature Reviews Physics 2019, 1, 437--449

    2019

  20. [29]

    General setting for Berry's phase

    Samuel, J.; Bhandari, R. General setting for Berry's phase. Physical Review Letters 1988, 60, 2339

    1988

  21. [30]

    The pancharatnam-berry phase: Theoretical and experimental aspects; InTech Rijeka, Croatia, 2012

    De Zela, F. The pancharatnam-berry phase: Theoretical and experimental aspects; InTech Rijeka, Croatia, 2012

    2012

  22. [31]

    L.; Saha, S.; Gautier, J.; Li, M.; Genet, C.; Mart \' n-Moreno, L

    Lor \'e n, F.; Paravicini-Bagliani, G. L.; Saha, S.; Gautier, J.; Li, M.; Genet, C.; Mart \' n-Moreno, L. Microscopic analysis of spin-momentum locking on a geometric phase metasurface. Physical Review B 2023, 107, 165128

    2023

  23. [32]

    Generalized approach to plasmonic phase modulation in topological bi-gratings

    Fox, M.; Gorodetski, Y. Generalized approach to plasmonic phase modulation in topological bi-gratings. Applied Physics Letters 2022, 120, 031105

    2022

  24. [33]

    The optical fibre Sagnac interferometer: an overview of its principles and applications

    Culshaw, B. The optical fibre Sagnac interferometer: an overview of its principles and applications. Measurement Science and Technology 2005, 17, R1

    2005

  25. [34]

    Present and future of surface plasmon resonance biosensors

    Homola, J. Present and future of surface plasmon resonance biosensors. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 2003, 377, 528--539

    2003

  26. [35]

    Topologically protected plasmonic phases in randomized aperture gratings

    Fox, M.; Gorodetski, Y. Topologically protected plasmonic phases in randomized aperture gratings. Scientific Reports 2023, 13, 1006

    2023

  27. [36]

    Spin-momentum locking breakdown on plasmonic metasurfaces

    Lor \'e n, F.; Genet, C.; Mart \' n-Moreno, L. Spin-momentum locking breakdown on plasmonic metasurfaces. Physical Review B 2023, 108, 155144

    2023

  28. [37]

    Pancharatnam--Berry phase in space-variant polarization-state manipulations with subwavelength gratings

    Bomzon, Z.; Kleiner, V.; Hasman, E. Pancharatnam--Berry phase in space-variant polarization-state manipulations with subwavelength gratings. Optics Letters 2001, 26, 1424--1426

    2001

  29. [38]

    Weak measurements of light chirality with a plasmonic slit

    Gorodetski, Y.; Bliokh, K.; Stein, B.; Genet, C.; Shitrit, N.; Kleiner, V.; Hasman, E.; Ebbesen, T. Weak measurements of light chirality with a plasmonic slit. Physical Review Letters 2012, 109, 013901

    2012

  30. [39]

    Polarized light

    Collett, E. Polarized light. Fundamentals and applications; New York : Marcel Dekker, 1992 mcitethebibliography main_ref.bbl0000664000000000000000000000201015022035236012006 0ustar rootroot [1] #1 \@makeother `\ =1 `\ =2 @aux @aux [1] #1 * @ifundefined endmcitethebibliography ...

    1992

  31. [40]

    Polarized light

    Collett, E. Polarized light. Fundamentals and applications; New York : Marcel Dekker, 1992 mcitethebibliography document xattr -dr com.apple.quarantine /path/to/texmaker.appmain.tex0000664000000000000000000015245015022035236011231 0ustar rootroot [journal=jacsat,manuscript=art...

    1992

  32. [41]

    g j R=ry ^u

    Collett, E. Polarized light. Fundamentals and applications; New York : Marcel Dekker, 1992 mcitethebibliography document xattr -dr com.apple.quarantine /path/to/texmaker.appPoincare_NR1.pdf0000664000000000000000000033765415022035236012511 0ustar rootroot 4 0 obj << /Type /XObj...

    1992 arXiv

Pith tools

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