Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 55 references

Hetero-Orbital Two-Component Fractional Quantum Hall States in Bilayer Graphene

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Bilayer graphene hosts a new class of fractional quantum Hall state — a 'hetero-orbital' two-component state formed where the N=0 and N=1 Landau levels cross — and its 2/5 incarnation is stronger than either parent phase.

desk verdict A genuinely new experimental FQH result at the N=0/N=1 crossing in bilayer graphene, with a plausible hetero-orbital two-component interpretation that is strengthened by honest exact-diagonalization work and weakened only by an unverified spin-inert assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14188 v2 pith:O2B7HDUD submitted 2025-06-17 cond-mat.mes-hall

Ke Huang , Ajit C. Balram , Hailong Fu , Chengqi Guo , Kenji Watanabe , Takashi Taniguchi , Jainendra K. Jain , Jun Zhu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall PACS 73.43.-f73.22.Pr
keywords fractionalquantumHalleffectbilayergraphenehetero-orbitaltwo-componentstatesLandaulevelcrossingcompositefermionsexactdiagonalizationvalleyisospindisplacement-fieldtuning
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 claims the first observation of hetero-orbital two-component fractional quantum Hall states — two-component states whose components occupy different orbital Landau levels of bilayer graphene (the $|+0\rangle$ and $|-1\rangle$ levels), brought into coincidence by an electric displacement field. At that crossing a new incompressible state, dubbed D*, forms at fillings 7/5, 10/7 and 13/9 — the parallel-vortex composite-fermion sequence $\nu = p/(2p+1)$ — and at $\nu = 7/5$ it shows a quantized Hall plateau at $R_{xy} = 5h/(7e^2)$ with an energy gap larger than that of the conventional $N=0$ 2/5 state. In sharp contrast to previously studied two-component systems, the reverse-vortex fillings (8/5, 11/7) show no analogous state, and the D* state abruptly disappears above roughly 30 T even though fractional quantum Hall states normally strengthen with magnetic field. Exact diagonalization of the intrinsically SU(2)-anisotropic interactions — the intra- and inter-component Haldane pseudopotentials are all different — accounts for the asymmetry: the (1,1) two-component state is stabilized at 2/5 and the partially polarized (1,2) state at 3/7, while nothing is stabilized at 2/3 or 3/5. If correct, the results open a new regime of multi-component quantum Hall physics in which the orbital index itself acts as the pseudospin.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the displacement-field-tuned coincidence of the $|+0\rangle$ and $|-1\rangle$ Landau levels, which converts the orbital index into a pseudospin component and makes the two-component interaction anisotropic in pseudospin space. The anisotropy is encoded in three distinct sets of Haldane pseudopotentials, $V^{0,0}_m$, $V^{1,1}_m(\theta)$ and $V^{0,1}_m(\theta)$, computed from bilayer graphene's orbital form factors; the angle $\theta$ ties the field to the N=1 orbital's n=0 weight through $B = 93.06[\cot\theta]^2$ T. The argument is carried by exact diagonalization of this anisotropic two-component Hamiltonian in spherical and disk geometries: comparing the exact ground state with the isotropic two-component composite-fermion wave functions (the (1,1) singlet at 2/5 and the (1,2) partially polarized state at 3/7) yields near-unit overlaps where the D* state is seen and poor overlaps where it is absent, and the thermodynamic energies $E(n_\uparrow, n_\downarrow)$ of the candidate configurations decide which state wins as the displacement field sweeps.

What would settle it

A tilted-field transport measurement of the $\nu = 7/5$ D* state: if its activation gap or Hall plateau responds to the in-plane field component as a spinful or spin-transitioning state would, the spin-inert assumption fails and the pure isospin reading is wrong. A second, independent check is calculational: an exact-diagonalization study that adds Landau-level mixing — which the paper's Appendix B model explicitly omits — should reproduce the state's collapse above roughly 30 T; if the collapse cannot be produced in a spinless model with mixing, another degree of freedom (spin, trigonal warping, or a lattice-scale term) must be responsible.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that at the isospin transition where the $|+0\rangle$ and $|-1\rangle$ electron Landau levels of bilayer graphene cross, a new incompressible fractional quantum Hall state — the D* state — develops at partial filling 2/5 (total filling 7/5), and also at 3/7 and 4/9. Because the two components belong to different orbital Landau levels, the interaction between them is not SU(2)-symmetric: the pseudopotentials $V^{0,0}_m$, $V^{1,1}_m$ and $V^{0,1}_m$ are all distinct, with the magnetic-field-dependent N=1 orbital (a majority n=1 orbital carrying a growing n=0 admixture) controlling the anisotropy. Despite this, the exact ground states of the anisotropic two-component Hamiltonian at $\nu = 2/5$ and $3/7$ have near-perfect overlap with the isotropic two-component composite-fermion wave functions — the spin-singlet (1,1) state at 2/5 and the partially polarized (1,2) state at 3/7 — while at $\nu = 2/3$ and $3/5$ the overlap is poor, which explains why only one D* state appears (not the several an isotropic model would predict) and only on the $p/(2p+1)$ side. Experimentally the 7/5 D* state develops already near 7 T, shows a Hall plateau at $R_{xy} = 5h/(7e^2)$, and carries the largest gap of the three 2/5 phases, with $\Delta^{D^*}_{2/5} > \Delta^{N=0}_{2/5} > \Delta^{N=1}_{2/5}$; it then vanishes abruptly above roughly 30 T, a collapse the present calculations do not reproduce and attribute to a change of interaction regime depicted as the 'Anisotropic II' energy ordering.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that electron spin is completely frozen — fully polarized and inert — over the whole measured field range, so the D* state can be read as a purely orbital two-component (isospin) state; the paper asserts this from the exchange-enhanced spin Zeeman splitting (Section II) but offers no spin-resolved measurement, and the exact diagonalization is spinless, so if spin became active the (1,1) assignment and the theory-experiment match would need revision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Hetero-orbital two-component states are real and can be stable: a fractional quantum Hall state whose two components occupy different orbital Landau levels forms even though its interactions are strongly SU(2)-anisotropic, so two-component physics is not restricted to identical orbitals.
  • The stark split between parallel-vortex and reverse-vortex fillings — D* at 2/5, 3/7 and 4/9, none at 2/3 or 3/5 — is a fingerprint of hetero-orbital anisotropy that no homo-orbital system displays.
  • At ν = 7/5 the crossing state is the strongest of the three fractional phases, with its gap exceeding the N=0 gap by more than one kelvin across the measured range, so the level coincidence itself enhances correlations.
  • The simultaneous abrupt loss of the D* state and the merging of the N=0 and N=1 gaps near 28–30 T indicate a field-driven change in the dominant interactions — most plausibly Landau-level mixing — that a pseudopotential-only model does not yet capture.
  • The N=1 phase of 7/5 remains a candidate for non-Abelian topological order, and its rapid gap growth above roughly 20 T together with the open question of its Abelian or non-Abelian nature defines a concrete target for future experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: the same recipe should work at the mirror crossing |−0⟩/|+1⟩ on the opposite displacement-field side, where the paper already sees D* features on the negative-D axis; the field range and gap hierarchy of those mirror states give a direct check of the (1,1) and (1,2) isospin assignments.
  • Editorial extension: because the anisotropy is set by the field-dependent mixing of the n=0 orbital into the N=1 level, the disappearance field (~30 T) should shift if the parameters fixing the B–θ relation change; a calculation that includes Landau-level mixing explicitly should predict a collapse whose position moves with the Fermi velocity or hopping, which is testable in devices with different
  • Editorial extension: the parallel/reverse-vortex asymmetry can serve as a diagnostic in other materials — a two-component state at ν = 8/5 or 11/7 at a Landau-level crossing would signal near-isotropic interactions, while confirming the absence in a second platform would establish hetero-orbital anisotropy as the controlling factor.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports magnetotransport experiments in dual-gated bilayer graphene at the crossing of the N=0 and N=1 Landau levels. At partial fillings 2/5, 3/7, and 4/9, a new incompressible state ('D*') appears at the |+0> and |-1> coincidence, with a quantized Hall plateau at 5/7 h/e^2 and a measured gap that exceeds that of the parent N=0 state. The D* state disappears above about 30 T. Exact diagonalization using anisotropic Haldane pseudopotentials derived from bilayer-graphene form factors shows high overlaps of the Coulomb ground state with two-component Jain states at 2/5 and 3/7, and low overlaps at reverse-vortex fillings, supporting the interpretation of a hetero-orbital two-component FQH state.

Significance. If the spin-polarization assumption holds, this is the first observation of hetero-orbital two-component FQH states, a conceptually new class of multicomponent FQH physics. The experiments are careful: the D* state is reproduced in multiple devices, the 7/5 state shows a quantized Hall plateau at the expected value, and the energy gaps are extracted systematically from Arrhenius measurements. The exact-diagonalization calculations use Coulomb interactions with pseudopotentials fixed by the BLG band form factors, with no fitted interaction parameters, and they reproduce the qualitative difference between parallel- and reverse-vortex fillings. The manuscript is also candid about its limitations, including the unexplained high-field collapse of the D* state and the omission of LL mixing and trigonal warping. The data are made available through Harvard Dataverse, which is a strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section II and Section III] The assignment of the D* state to a hetero-orbital two-component configuration assumes that spin is fully polarized and inert over the entire 6-30 T field range. The supporting exact diagonalization is explicitly spinless, and the only justification is the qualitative statement in Section II that exchange-enhanced spin Zeeman splitting makes spin non-active, citing Refs. [35,37,39]. The D* state is observed down to B about 7 T, where the bare Zeeman energy is only about 0.8 K, and no spin-resolved measurement (e.g., tilted-field or polarization-sensitive experiment) is presented. If spin degrees of freedom are active, the observed plateau could be a conventional spinful two-component CF state in a single orbital rather than the claimed hetero-orbital state. This is load-bearing because the central novelty is the hetero-orbital nature, not merely the existence of a 2/5 plateau. Please provide direct evidence or a quantitative estimate of spin polarization across the D* regime, and discuss how the data rule out spinful alternatives.
  2. [Section III and Fig. 12 (Appendix C)] The thermodynamic-energy calculation that identifies D* with the (1,1) state is not reported in sufficient detail. The text states that E(2,0), E(1,1), and E(0,2) are computed by extrapolating finite-system results and plotted in Fig. 12, Appendix C, and that the calculation 'corroborates this scenario', but the figure is not shown in the manuscript and the text does not state the system sizes, the extrapolation procedure, or the B range over which E(1,1) lies between E(2,0) and E(0,2) and by how much. Without these quantitative results, the 'Anisotropic I' and 'Anisotropic II' scenarios in Fig. 4(c) remain schematic, and the identification of D* with (1,1) is not fully supported. Please include the actual energy curves with finite-size scaling information.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section I] The abstract uses 'parallel-flux and reverse-flux composite fermion states' while Section I and later text use 'parallel-vortex and reverse-vortex attachment'; please unify the terminology throughout.
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (B3)] In the expression for V_m^{0,1}, the prefactor appears as 'xi pi / 32' which is likely a typesetting error for sqrt(pi)/32 or pi/32; please correct it.
  3. [Fig. 10 caption] The caption writes 'Delta_{2/5}^{N=0} = 2.0 xi B - Gamma', but the main text gives Delta = 2.0 sqrt(B) - 6.8; the symbol xi appears to be a misprint for the square root.
  4. [Fig. 1(c)] The traces from device 011 and device 002 are not clearly distinguished in the legend; adding explicit device labels or different line styles would improve readability.
  5. [Introduction and Results] The paper states 'we only observed a single D* state at nu = 2/5, 3/7, and 4/9' but the abstract highlights only the 2/5 state; consider mentioning all observed fillings in the abstract for consistency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the D* state identification is grounded in transport plateaus and parameter-free exact diagonalization, with only non-load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper does not derive its central prediction from a fitted parameter or from a definitional identity. The experimental D* state is established by a Hall plateau at Rxy = 5/7 h/e^2 (Fig. 1(d)), and the theoretical support is exact diagonalization of a fixed Coulomb Hamiltonian whose pseudopotentials are computed from the BLG tight-binding form factors (Appendix B). The overlap of the exact ground state with the (1,1) Jain trial state is a comparison, not a fit: no parameter is adjusted to make the D* gap or its stability come out. The only fitted quantities, alpha = 0.13 and Gamma = 6.8 K, are used to model the conventional N = 0 gap, which is an input benchmark rather than the predicted hetero-orbital state. The assertion that spin is non-active is a stated physical assumption ('exchange-enhanced spin Zeeman splitting compared to the small valley splitting'), supported by prior work including the authors' own, but it is not derived from the D* data and it is not used to define the D* state into existence. The paper explicitly admits that the high-field disappearance is not captured by the calculations, which is a limitation, not a disguised input. No equation in the paper equates the claimed prediction to its inputs, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. Minor self-citations (e.g., Ref. [39] for device details and the valley-isospin model) are not load-bearing for the hetero-orbital claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theoretical model uses no free parameters fitted to the D* state itself: the pseudopotentials are fixed by the BLG tight-binding description, and the CF trial states come from prior theory. The fitted quantities (alpha, Gamma, D* position line) characterize conventional phases or describe the data, and are not used to predict the new state. The main assumptions are the inertness of spin, the applicability of CF Jain states, the tight-binding form factors, and the neglect of LL mixing, all stated in the paper.

free parameters (3)
  • CF mass prefactor alpha = 0.13
    Extracted from a fit of the N=0 gap to Delta = hbar e B_eff / m*_CF - Gamma with m*_CF = alpha m_e sqrt(B); the fit yields Delta = 2.0 sqrt(B) - 6.8 K. This parameter describes the conventional N=0 phase, not the new D* state.
  • Disorder broadening Gamma = 6.8 K
    Second parameter in the same fit; the authors say it is consistent with prior assessment in Ref [39].
  • |D*|(B) linear fit coefficients = slope 1.3 mV/nm/T, intercept -6.8 mV/nm
    Descriptive linear fit to the measured crossing position as a function of magnetic field; it does not enter the theoretical derivation of the D* state.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Spin degrees of freedom are fully polarized and inert in the studied field range.
    The paper argues that exchange-enhanced Zeeman splitting makes spin non-active, citing Refs [35,37,39], but no direct spin polarization measurement of the D* state is presented. This assumption underlies the interpretation of D* as a valley-orbital isospin state.
  • domain assumption Composite-fermion Jain wave functions accurately describe FQH states in the Landau levels of bilayer graphene.
    The trial states (1,1), (2,0), (0,2), etc. are Jain states; their applicability to the new hetero-orbital regime is the central question being tested, but is assumed for the interpretation of the ED overlaps.
  • domain assumption The nearest-neighbor tight-binding form factors with t=350 meV and v_F=10^6 m/s determine the B(theta) relation.
    Used in Appendix B to compute Haldane pseudopotentials; parameters are taken from DFT prior literature, not fitted in this paper.
  • domain assumption Landau level mixing is negligible for the ED calculations.
    Stated explicitly in Appendix B; the authors note LL mixing may be important later, and its omission could affect the comparison with experiment.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hetero-Orbital Two-Component Fractional Quantum Hall States in Bilayer Graphene." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O2B7HDUD

@misc{pith2026250614188,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hetero-Orbital Two-Component Fractional Quantum Hall States in Bilayer Graphene},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O2B7HDUD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14188}
}
read the original abstract

A two-dimensional electron system exposed to a strong magnetic field produces a plethora of strongly interacting fractional quantum Hall (FQH) states, the complex topological orders of which are revealed through exotic emergent particles, such as composite fermions, fractionally charged Abelian and non-Abelian anyons. Much insight has been gained by the study of multi-component FQH states, where spin and pseudospin indices of the electron contribute additional correlation. Traditional multi-component FQH states develop in situations where the components share the same orbital states and the resulting interactions are pseudospin independent; this homo-orbital nature was also crucial to their theoretical understanding. Here, we study "hetero-orbital" two-component FQH states, in which the orbital index is part of the pseudospin, rendering the multi-component interactions strongly SU(2) anisotropic in the pseudospin space. Such states, obtained in bilayer graphene at the isospin transition between N = 0 and N = 1 electron Landau levels, are markedly different from previous homo-orbital two-component FQH states. In particular, we observe strikingly different behaviors for the parallel-flux and reverse-flux composite fermion states, and an anomalously strong two-component 2/5 state over a wide range of magnetic field before it abruptly disappears at a high field. Our findings, combined with detailed theoretical calculations, reveal the surprising robustness of the hetero-orbital FQH effects, significantly enriching our understanding of FQH physics in this novel regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14188 by the authors.

Figure 5
Figure 5. Fig.5. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. 𝑅xx 7/5 (D) sweeps at fixed B-fields as labeled in the plot. From device 002 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Magnetic field evolution of the D * state at ν = 7/5, 10/7, 13/9 in device 011. (a) – (c), 𝑅xx 7/5 (D), 𝑅xx 10/7 (D) and 𝑅xx 13/9 (D) sweeps at selected B-fields as labeled in the plot. The D * state is marked by a * symbol. ΔD is as defined in the main [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Energy gap of the N = 0 phase of 7/5. (a) Arrhenius plots and fits for the N = 0 state at different B-fields as labeled. We normalized Rxx(T) by Rxx measured at T = 1.33 K to better compare the data taken at different magnetic fields. (b) 𝛥2/5 𝑁=0 as a function of B e…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This could potentially explain the disappearance of the D* state at very large B

    state never becomes a ground state. This could potentially explain the disappearance of the D* state at very large B. (b) (2,0) (0,2)(1,1) (c) (a) 0.0 0.5 1.0 sphere disk 0 10 20 30 40 0.0 0.5 1.0𝜓ex 𝜓 2 = 2/5 = 2/3 B (T) ΔD E (1,1) (2,0) (0,2) (1,1) (2,0) (0,2) |−1ۧ|+0ۧ D* Isotropic Anisotropic I ΔD E (1,1) (2,0) (0,2) ΔD E Anisotropic II |−1ۧ|+0ۧ 12 Ack...

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    J. K. Jain, Composite Fermions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607561

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511607561 2007

  3. [3]

    Halperin and J

    B. Halperin and J. K. Jain, Fractional Quantum Hall Effects: New Developments (World Scientific, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1142/11751

    doi:10.1142/11751 2020

  4. [4]

    R. L. Willett, The quantum Hall effect at 5/2 filling factor, Reports on Progress in Physics 76, 076501 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/76/7/076501

    doi:10.1088/0034-4885/76/7/076501 2013

  5. [5]

    J. S. Xia, W. Pan, C. L. Vicente, E. D. Adams, N. S. Sullivan, H. L. Stormer, D. C. Tsui, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. Baldwin, and K. W. West, Electron correlation in the second Landau level: A competition between many nearly degenerate quantum phases, Physical Review Letters 93, 176809 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.176809

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.176809 2004

  6. [6]

    Kumar, G

    A. Kumar, G. A. Csathy, M. J. Manfra, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Non-conventional Odd- Denominator Fractional Quantum Hall States in the Second Landau Level, Physical Review Letters 105, 246808, 246808 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.246808

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.246808 2010

  7. [7]

    Read and E

    N. Read and E. Rezayi, Beyond paired quantum Hall states: Parafermions and incompressible states in the first excited Landau level, Physical Review B 59, 8084 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.59.8084

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.59.8084 1999

  8. [8]

    Grosfeld and K

    E. Grosfeld and K. Schoutens, Non-Abelian Anyons: When Ising Meets Fibonacci, Physical Review Letters 103, 076803 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.076803

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.076803 2009

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Hormozi, N

    L. Hormozi, N. E. Bonesteel, and S. H. Simon, Topological Quantum Computing with Read- Rezayi States, Physical Review Letters 103, 160501 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.160501 0 10 20 30 40 -0.44 -0.40 -0.36 -0.32 anti-3-cluster Read-Rezayi in N = 1 LL (2,0) J...

    2009 doi

  2. [10]

    W. Zhu, S. S. Gong, F. D. M. Haldane, and D. N. Sheng, Fractional Quantum Hall States at ν = 13/5 and 12/5 and Their Non-Abelian Nature, Physical Review Letters 115, 126805 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.126805

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    J. A. Hutasoit, A. C. Balram, S. Mukherjee, Y. H. Wu, S. S. Mandal, A. Wójs, V. Cheianov, and J. K. Jain, The enigma of the ν = 2+3/ 8 fractional quantum Hall effect, Physical Review B 95 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.125302

    2017 doi

  4. [12]

    W. N. Faugno, J. K. Jain, and A. C. Balram, Non-Abelian fractional quantum Hall state at 3/7- filled Landau level, Physical Review Research 2, 033223 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033223

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    A. C. Balram, Transitions from Abelian composite fermion to non-Abelian parton fractional quantum Hall states in the zeroth Landau level of bilayer graphene, Physical Review B 105, L121406 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.105.L121406

    2022 doi

  6. [14]

    Papić, F

    Z. Papić, F. D. M. Haldane, and E. H. Rezayi, Quantum Phase Transitions and the ν = 5/2 Fractional Hall State in Wide Quantum Wells, Physical Review Letters 109, 266806 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.266806

    2012 doi

  7. [15]

    Barkeshli, C

    M. Barkeshli, C. Nayak, Z. Papic, A. Young, and M. Zaletel, Topological Exciton Fermi Surfaces in Two-Component Fractional Quantized Hall Insulators, Physical Review Letters 121 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.026603

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    Jolicoeur, C

    T. Jolicoeur, C. Toke, and I. Sodemann, Quantum Hall ferroelectric helix in bilayer graphene, Physical Review B 99 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.99.115139

    2019 doi

  9. [17]

    Z. Zhu, D. N. Sheng, and I. Sodemann, Widely Tunable Quantum Phase Transition from Moore- Read to Composite Fermi Liquid in Bilayer Graphene, Physical Review Letters 124, 097604 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.097604

    2020 doi

  10. [18]

    Khanna, K

    U. Khanna, K. Huang, G. Murthy, H. A. Fertig, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Zhu, and E. Shimshoni, Phase diagram of the ν = 2 quantum Hall state in bilayer graphene, Physical Review B 108 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.L041107

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    Y. Liu, D. Kamburov, M. Shayegan, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, and K. W. Baldwin, Anomalous Robustness of the ν = 5/2 Fractional Quantum Hall State near a Sharp Phase Boundary, Physical Review Letters 107, 176805, 176805 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.176805

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    Falson, D

    J. Falson, D. Tabrea, D. Zhang, I. Sodemann, Y. Kozuka, A. Tsukazaki, M. Kawasaki, K. von Klitzing, and J. H. Smet, A cascade of phase transitions in an orbitally mixed half-filled Landau level, Science Advances 4 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat8742

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    R. R. Du, A. S. Yeh, H. L. Stormer, D. C. Tsui, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Fractional Quantum Hall Effect around ν = 3/2: Composite Fermions with a Spin, Physical Review Letters 75, 3926 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3926

    1995 doi

  14. [22]

    B. E. Feldman, A. J. Levin, B. Krauss, D. A. Abanin, B. I. Halperin, J. H. Smet, and A. Yacoby, Fractional Quantum Hall Phase Transitions and Four-Flux States in Graphene, Physical Review Letters 111 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.076802

    2013 doi

  15. [23]

    Y. Zeng, J. I. A. Li, S. A. Dietrich, O. M. Ghosh, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, High-Quality Magnetotransport in Graphene Using the Edge-Free Corbino Geometry, Physical Review Letters 122, 137701 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.137701

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    Huang, P

    K. Huang, P. Wang, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, K. W. Baldwin, Y. Liu, and X. Lin, Resymmetrizing Broken Symmetry with Hydraulic Pressure, Physical Review Letters 123, 206602 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.206602

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    X. G. Wu, G. Dev, and J. K. Jain, Mixed-Spin Incompressible States in the Fractional Quantum Hall-Effect, Physical Review Letters 71, 153 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.153 20

    1993 doi

  18. [26]

    I. V. Kukushkin, K. v. Klitzing, and K. Eberl, Spin Polarization of Composite Fermions: Measurements of the Fermi Energy, Physical Review Letters 82, 3665 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.3665

    1999 doi

  19. [27]

    S. C. Davenport and S. H. Simon, Spinful composite fermions in a negative effective field, Physical Review B 85, 245303 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.245303

    2012 doi

  20. [28]

    A. C. Balram, C. Tőke, A. Wójs, and J. K. Jain, Fractional quantum Hall effect in graphene: Quantitative comparison between theory and experiment, Physical Review B 92, 075410 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.92.075410

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    J. P. Eisenstein, G. S. Boebinger, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, and S. He, New Fractional Quantum Hall State in Double-layer Two-Dimensional Electron Systems, Physical Review Letters 68, 1383 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.1383

    1992 doi

  22. [30]

    Y. W. Suen, L. W. Engel, M. B. Santos, M. Shayegan, and D. C. Tsui, Observation of a ν = 1/2 Fractional Quantum Hall State in a Double-layer Electron System, Physical Review Letters 68, 1379 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.1379

    1992 doi

  23. [31]

    J. I. A. Li, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Excitonic superfluid phase in double bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 13, 751 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys4140

    2017 doi

  24. [32]

    X. Liu, J. I. A. Li, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, B. I. Halperin, P. Kim, and C. R. Dean, Crossover between strongly coupled and weakly coupled exciton superfluids, Science 375, 205 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg1110

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    Q. H. Shi, E. M. Shih, D. Rhodes, B. Kim, K. Barmak, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Z. Papic, D. A. Abanin, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Bilayer WSe2 as a natural platform for interlayer exciton condensates in the strong coupling limit, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 577 (2022). https://do...

    2022 doi

  26. [34]

    N. C. Bishop, M. Padmanabhan, K. Vakili, Y. P. Shkolnikov, E. P. De Poortere, and M. Shayegan, Valley polarization and susceptibility of composite fermions around a filling factor ν = 3/2, Physical Review Letters 98 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.266404

    2007 doi

  27. [35]

    B. M. Hunt, J. I. A. Li, A. A. Zibrov, L. Wang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. Hone, C. R. Dean, M. Zaletel, R. C. Ashoori, and A. F. Young, Direct measurement of discrete valley and orbital quantum numbers in bilayer graphene, Nature Communications 8, 948, 948 (2017). https://...

    2017 doi

  28. [36]

    J. I. A. Li, C. Tan, S. Chen, Y. Zeng, T. Taniguehi, K. Watanabe, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Even- denominator fractional quantum Hall states in bilayer graphene, Science 358, 648 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2521

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    A. A. Zibrov, C. Kometter, H. Zhou, E. M. Spanton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. P. Zaletel, and A. F. Young, Tunable interacting composite fermion phases in a half-filled bilayer-graphene Landau level, Nature 549, 360 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23893

    2017 doi

  30. [38]

    J. Li, Y. Tupikov, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and J. Zhu, Effective Landau Level Diagram of Bilayer Graphene, Physical Review Letters 120, 047701 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.047701

    2018 doi

  31. [39]

    A. A. Zibrov, E. M. Spanton, H. Zhou, C. Kometter, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Even-denominator fractional quantum Hall states at an isospin transition in monolayer graphene, Nature Physics 14, 930 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0190-0

    2018 doi

  32. [40]

    Huang, H

    K. Huang, H. L. Fu, D. R. Hickey, N. Alem, X. Lin, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and J. Zhu, Valley Isospin Controlled Fractional Quantum Hall States in Bilayer Graphene, Physical Review X 12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.12.049901 21

    2022 doi

  33. [41]

    Y. Liu, S. Hasdemir, D. Kamburov, A. L. Graninger, M. Shayegan, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, K. W. Baldwin, and R. Winkler, Even-denominator fractional quantum Hall effect at a Landau level crossing, Physical Review B 89 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.165313

    2014 doi

  34. [42]

    C. Y. Wang, A. Gupta, Y. J. Chung, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, K. W. Baldwin, R. Winkler, and M. Shayegan, Highly Anisotropic Even-Denominator Fractional Quantum Hall State in an Orbitally Coupled Half-Filled Landau Level, Physical Review Letters 131 (2023). https://doi.org/10...

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    B. I. Halperin, Theory of the Quantized Hall Conductance, Helvetica Physica Acta 56, 75 (1983). https://doi.org/10.5169/seals-115362

    1983 doi

  36. [44]

    B. I. Halperin, P. A. Lee, and N. Read, Theory of the Half-Filled Landau-Level, Physical Review B 47, 7312 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.47.7312

    1993 doi

  37. [45]

    Park and J

    K. Park and J. K. Jain, Phase Diagram of the Spin Polarization of Composite Fermions and a New Effective Mass, Physical Review Letters 80, 4237 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.4237

    1998 doi

  38. [46]

    X. Liu, G. Farahi, C.-L. Chiu, Z. Papic, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Yazdani, Visualizing broken symmetry and topological defects in a quantum Hall ferromagnet, Science 375, 321 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abm3770

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    J. Li, H. Fu, Z. Yin, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and J. Zhu, Metallic Phase and Temperature Dependence of the ν = 0 Quantum Hall State in Bilayer Graphene, Physical Review Letters 122, 097701 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.097701

    2019 doi

  40. [48]

    Maher, C

    P. Maher, C. R. Dean, A. F. Young, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, K. L. Shepard, J. Hone, and P. Kim, Evidence for a spin phase transition at charge neutrality in bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 9, 154 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2528

    2013 doi

  41. [49]

    H. Fu, K. Huang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and J. Zhu, Gapless Spin Wave Transport through a Quantum Canted Antiferromagnet, Physical Review X 11, 021012 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.11.021012

    2021 doi

  42. [50]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Fractional Quantization of the Hall-Effect - a Hierarchy of Incompressible Quantum Fluid States, Physical Review Letters 51, 605 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.51.605

    1983 doi

  43. [51]

    Jung and A

    J. Jung and A. H. MacDonald, Accurate tight-binding models for the π bands of bilayer graphene, Physical Review B 89 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.035405

    2014 doi

  44. [52]

    A. C. Balram, C. Tőke, A. Wójs, and J. K. Jain, Spontaneous polarization of composite fermions in the n =1 Landau level of graphene, Physical Review B 92, 205120 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.92.205120

    2015 doi

  45. [53]

    Arciniaga and M

    M. Arciniaga and M. R. Peterson, Landau level quantization for massless Dirac fermions in the spherical geometry: Graphene fractional quantum Hall effect on the Haldane sphere, Physical Review B 94 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.035105

    2016 doi

  46. [54]

    W. H. Hsiao, Landau quantization of multilayer graphene on a Haldane sphere, Physical Review B 101 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.101.155310

    2020 doi

  47. [55]

    R. K. Dora and A. C. Balram, Competition between fractional quantum Hall liquid and electron solid phases in the Landau levels of multilayer graphene, Physical Review B 108 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.235153

    2023 doi

Pith tools

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