Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 72 references

Tunable Interlayer Excitons in Bilayer Graphene Nanoribbons

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Stacking two graphene nanoribbons can create long-lived interlayer excitons whose room-temperature radiative lifetime is tunable from about one nanosecond to nearly ten microseconds by changing the stacking order and ribbon widths.

desk verdict Serious GW-BSE study of bilayer GNR interlayer excitons, but the reported oscillator strengths and the tabulated lifetimes are internally inconsistent by up to a factor of 40; the 9.4 µs headline needs verification. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.10887 v1 pith:ZAXCEDJY submitted 2025-07-15 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Alexandre R. Rocha , Rodrigo G. Amorim , Wanderlã L. Scopel , Cesar E. P. Villegas This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords interlayerexcitonsgraphenenanoribbonsvanderWaalsheterostructuresGW-BSEcalculationsradiativelifetimestype-IIbandalignmentstackingorderBethe-Salpeterequation
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

Vertically stacking two armchair graphene nanoribbons is predicted to create interlayer excitons—bound electron-hole pairs whose electron and hole sit in different layers—whose brightness and radiative lifetime are controlled by the stacking order. The paper's GW-BSE calculations find room-temperature radiative lifetimes ranging from about 1 ns for a moderately bright interlayer state in a beta-stacked homobilayer to 9.4 microseconds for a very dark interlayer state in a 6-10 heterobilayer, with the interlayer absorption reaching up to 13% of the main intralayer peak. Depending on which ribbon widths are paired, the bilayer forms either a type-I or type-II band alignment, which decides whether pure interlayer excitons are favored. If these predictions hold, bilayer graphene nanoribbons would be a one-dimensional, synthetically accessible platform for tunable exciton physics in the near-infrared.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the GW-BSE many-body perturbation chain: G0W0 quasiparticle corrections to the DFT eigenvalues set the single-particle gaps, and the Bethe-Salpeter equation, truncated to six valence and six conduction bands, produces the exciton energies and envelope wavefunctions. Interlayer character is diagnosed by projecting the exciton's real-space electron density onto the layer opposite the hole, giving percentages such as 78%, 80%, and 92% for the interlayer states. Radiative lifetimes are computed with the temperature-dependent model of Eq. (4), which converts the exciton energy, effective mass, and transition dipole matrix element into a radiative rate; the same model has been benchmarked for semiconducting carbon nanotubes.

What would settle it

A time-resolved photoluminescence experiment on synthesized bilayer AGNRs with beta-like stacking should show radiative components near the predicted near-infrared energies with room-temperature lifetimes of roughly 1.66 ns for 6-beta, 258 ns for 3-6AGNR, and 9.4 microseconds for 6-10AGNR; absence of the microsecond component or of the predicted interlayer absorption peaks would falsify the central claim. A temperature sweep should also follow the model's square-root scaling if the parabolic-dispersion assumption is right.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, bilayer AGNRs are a working one-dimensional van der Waals platform for interlayer excitons. In 6-AGNR homobilayers, beta-stacking preserves the monolayer optical spectrum and adds an interlayer exciton at about 1.62 eV with 13% of the intralayer oscillator strength and a 1.66 ns room-temperature radiative lifetime, while alpha-stacking produces hybridized excitons spread over both layers. In heterobilayers, fully relaxed structures adopt beta-like stacking: 3-6AGNR gives a type-I alignment with an interlayer exciton at 1.57 eV living 258 ns, and 6-10AGNR gives a type-II alignment whose lowest-energy interlayer exciton sits at 1.18 eV, carries only 0.25% of the intralayer oscillator strength, and radiates in 9.39 microseconds. The paper interprets these as long-lived radiative upper bounds, noting that defects and substrates would introduce nonradiative channels and shorten measured lifetimes.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted lifetimes rest on the radiative model of Eq. (4), which assumes a parabolic exciton dispersion with a single effective mass and uses dipole matrix elements from a Bethe-Salpeter calculation truncated to six valence and six conduction bands; if those dipole strengths or masses are inaccurate, the whole 1 ns to 9.4 microsecond range shifts.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stacking order is a functional knob: beta-stacked homobilayers host a moderately bright interlayer exciton, whereas alpha-stacking hybridizes the states, and heterobilayer width combinations select type-I versus type-II alignment.
  • Interlayer radiative lifetimes at room temperature are predicted to span 1.66 ns (6-beta), 258 ns (3-6AGNR), and 9.39 microseconds (6-10AGNR), orders of magnitude longer than the 140-180 ps intralayer excitons in the same systems.
  • Interlayer excitons remain visible in absorption, with peak strengths up to 13% of the maximum absorption in the homobilayer, making them usable for near-infrared detectors or emitters.
  • Exciton binding energies above 1 eV and singlet-triplet splittings of 0.14-0.26 eV make the lowest excitons stable against thermal fluctuations and suppress intersystem crossing.
  • Because the predicted lifetimes are radiative upper bounds, clean and defect-free samples are the target for experiments, since even modest defect concentrations directly shorten measured lifetimes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next knob the paper does not explore is an out-of-plane electric field or twist angle, which in 2D homobilayers continuously shifts interlayer exciton energy and lifetime; the same tunability could plausibly be engineered in these 1D bilayers.
  • The 0.25% oscillator strength of the 9.4 microsecond state suggests a brightness-lifetime trade-off: pairing ribbons with intermediate quasiparticle gap differences might yield interlayer excitons with lifetimes in the tens to hundreds of nanoseconds while keeping them bright enough for detection.
  • The radiative model assumes a parabolic exciton dispersion; measuring the temperature dependence of the lifetime would test that assumption, since non-parabolic or multiple-mass effects would break the predicted square-root temperature scaling.
  • Because the predicted lifetimes are radiative upper bounds, a direct comparison with experiment requires time-resolved photoluminescence on synthesized quasi-free-standing bilayer ribbons, where substrate and defect effects should shorten but not eliminate the microsecond component.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports G0W0+BSE calculations for bilayer armchair graphene nanoribbons in α- and β-stackings and for 3-6 and 6-10 heterobilayers. It claims that interlayer excitons appear with type-I or type-II band alignments, oscillator strengths up to 13% of the brightest intralayer exciton, and room-temperature radiative lifetimes from 1 ns to 9.4 µs, tunable by stacking order. The authors use the Spataru model for radiative lifetimes, project exciton wavefunctions to classify intralayer/interlayer character, and explicitly state limitations such as defect-free and freestanding assumptions.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a useful prediction of tunable interlayer excitons in one-dimensional van der Waals systems and would extend the interlayer-exciton paradigm to graphene nanoribbons, with stacking order as a control parameter. Strengths include the state-of-the-art G0W0+BSE pipeline with no fitted parameters, wavefunction-based exciton classification, and room-temperature predictions that are experimentally testable. The credibility of the central lifetime claim, however, is compromised by numerical inconsistencies in the reported oscillator strengths and lifetimes.

major comments (2)
  1. [III.B, Table I, Eq. (4)] The quoted oscillator strengths and the tabulated lifetimes are mutually inconsistent. For 6-10AGNR the text states that IX has ~0.25% of the oscillator strength of X1, with energies Ω_IX=1.18 eV and Ω_X1=1.29 eV. Since f ∝ Ω|μ|^2, Eq. (4) gives τ0(IX)/τ0(X1) = (Ω_X1/Ω_IX)/(f_IX/f_X1) ≈ 437. The table gives τ0(X1)=4.34 ps and τ0(IX)=83.7 ns, i.e., a ratio of ~1.9×10^4, a factor ~44 discrepancy that directly affects the headline 9.4 µs lifetime (if the tabulated intralayer τ0 is retained, the predicted τ_RT for IX is ~0.2 µs; if the tabulated IX τ0 is correct, the oscillator-strength ratio should be ~0.006%, not 0.25%). For 6β-stacking the same check fails: with f_IX/f_X1=0.13, Ω_X1=1.30 eV and Ω_IX=1.62 eV, Eq. (4) predicts τ0(IX)/τ0(X1) ≈6.2, whereas Table I implies 0.032 ns / 0.79 ps ≈40. The 6-10 intralayer row is also internally inconsistent: τ_RT/τ0 = 180 ps / 4.34 ps ≈41, while Eq. (4) with M_S=0.398 and Ω=1.29 eV gives ≈106. The authors need to provide the raw transition dipoles and reconcile these numbers; as written, the central lifetime range is not self-consistent.
  2. [II, Eq. (4); III.B] The radiative model of Spataru et al. is applied to interlayer excitons without validation. Equation (4) assumes a parabolic exciton dispersion and a single effective mass M_S, and for the interlayer states reported here (charge-transfer-like, 80–92% electron–hole separation, small dipoles) this assumption is not established. The 9.4 µs lifetime scales as sqrt(M_S)/μ_S^2, so uncertainties in the dipole or mass—which are computed from a BSE truncated to six valence and six conduction bands—propagate directly to the central claim. Please provide convergence tests of μ_S and M_S with respect to BSE band number and k-grid, and, if possible, compute the exciton dispersion Ω_S(Q) to justify the parabolic approximation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table I] The column headers are inconsistent: intralayer τ_RT entries are in ps (e.g., 6β-stacking is 140 ps in the text), while interlayer τ_RT entries are in ns; the τ0 columns similarly mix ps and ns. Please use uniform units or separate columns.
  2. [I and Abstract] The Introduction states that heterobilayer lifetimes range from 258 ns to 9.4 µs, while the Abstract says the range is from 1 ns to 9.4 µs; please clarify which systems define the stated range.
  3. [III.B] The phrase 'oscillator strength that is ~0.25% of exciton X1 as depicted in the inset of Fig. 3e' is ambiguous because the inset caption says it shows normalized transition dipoles, not oscillator strengths; please define the quantity actually plotted.
  4. [General] There are several typos: 'diserable' in Sec. III.C, 'zoon-in' in the Fig. 2 caption, 'resamble' in the Fig. 1 caption, and 'the, suggesting' in Sec. III.A.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: exciton energies, oscillator strengths, and lifetimes are computed outputs of G0W0+BSE and the Spataru radiative model, not fits to the target results.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Ground-state DFT produces the structural and single-particle inputs; G0W0 corrects the quasiparticle energies; the BSE is then solved with the computed kernel to yield exciton eigenvalues, envelope functions, and transition dipole matrix elements; finally Eq. (4) converts those independent outputs (Omega_S, mu_S, M_S, a0) into radiative lifetimes. None of the quantities entering Eq. (4) is fitted to the lifetime values reported in Table I, and the interlayer exciton lifetimes are not used as inputs anywhere in the calculation. The Spataru lifetime model is an external formula (Ref. 50) benchmarked on carbon nanotubes, and the single-layer results are checked against experimental lifetimes exceeding 100 ps, so the radiative formula is not a self-imported ansatz. The self-citations (Refs. 7, 26, 37) are used for convergence parameters, monolayer band-gap benchmarks, and future-work suggestions; they do not define the present interlayer exciton results. The manuscript does contain an apparent numerical tension between the 0.25% oscillator-strength statement and Table I's tau_0 for the 6-10AGNR interlayer exciton when inserted into Eq. (4), but an internal inconsistency is a correctness concern rather than circularity: the prediction is not equivalent to its input by construction.

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

No parameters are fitted in this paper; all numerical outputs come from standard DFT, G0W0, and BSE calculations plus the Spataru lifetime model. The central assumptions are that these approximations remain valid for finite-width, freestanding, defect-free bilayer AGNRs, and especially that the one-dimensional radiative lifetime model works for interlayer excitons. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption G0W0 quasiparticle corrections on top of PBE accurately describe band gaps and band alignments of AGNRs.
    Used throughout Section II and III to obtain QP band structures; validated for single-layer AGNRs in Ref. [7], but not for bilayer interlayer states.
  • domain assumption The Bethe-Salpeter equation in the Tamm-Dancoff approximation with six highest occupied and six lowest unoccupied bands captures the lowest-energy excitons.
    Section II states this band number is sufficient; no explicit convergence table for the bilayer systems is shown in the main text.
  • domain assumption The Spataru et al. model for one-dimensional radiative lifetimes applies to interlayer excitons in bilayer GNRs.
    Eq. (4) assumes parabolic exciton dispersion and a single effective mass; the model is benchmarked against single-layer systems, not interlayer excitons.
  • domain assumption PBE-D2 relaxed alpha/beta stacking geometries and about 3.3 angstrom interlayer distances persist in realistic samples.
    Section II and III; substrates, defects, and non-ideal registries would alter band edges and exciton character, as the authors acknowledge.
  • domain assumption Ideal hydrogen-passivated armchair edges with no defects.
    Section III; synthesized ribbons may have edge disorder, which would change band-edge states and the interlayer exciton picture.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tunable Interlayer Excitons in Bilayer Graphene Nanoribbons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZAXCEDJY

@misc{pith2026250710887,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tunable Interlayer Excitons in Bilayer Graphene Nanoribbons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZAXCEDJY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.10887}
}
read the original abstract

Vertically stacked van der Waals structures are promising platforms that enable layer engineering, opening new avenues for the quantum control of elementary excitations, including optically generated bound electron-hole pairs. Here we employ excited-state density functional calculations to demonstrate strong interlayer excitonic coupling in one-dimensional van der Waals nanostructures derived from armchair graphene nanoribbons. The excitonic response exhibits prominent peaks in the near-infrared range, mainly attributed to intralayer excitons, while interlayer excitations with absorption peak strengths of up to 13\% of the maximum absorption are also observed. Both type-I and type-II band alignments are found, which promote the formation of intralayer and interlayer excitons. Notably, interlayer excitons in these systems exhibit long-lived radiative lifetimes at room temperature, ranging from 1 nanosecond to 9.4 microseconds. Our calculations suggest the potential to tune the excitonic response and lifetimes of bilayer graphene nanoribbons via careful engineering of the stacking order.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.10887 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic representation of bilayer 6-AGNRs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Layer-projected QP band structure for (a) 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Layer-projected quasiparticle band structure for (a) 3-6AGNR and (d) 6-10AGNR stacking bilayer structures. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

72 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    author A. K. Katiyar , author A. T. Hoang , author D. Xu , author J. Hong , author B. J. Kim , author S. Ji , and author J.-H. Ahn , journal Chem. Rev. volume 124 , pages 318 ( year 2023 )

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    author O. A. Moses , author L. Gao , author H. Zhao , author Z. Wang , author M. L. Adam , author Z. Sun , author K. Liu , author J. Wang , author Y. Lu , author Z. Yin , et al. , journal Mater. Today volume 50 , pages 116 ( year 2021 )

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Cheng , author R

    author Z. Cheng , author R. Cao , author K. Wei , author Y. Yao , author X. Liu , author J. Kang , author J. Dong , author Z. Shi , author H. Zhang , and author X. Zhang , journal Adv. Sci. volume 8 , pages 2003834 ( year 2021 )

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Shahbaz , author M

    author I. Shahbaz , author M. Tahir , author L. Li , and author Y. Song , journal Mater. Today volume 77 , pages 142 ( year 2024 )

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Cudazzo , author I

    author P. Cudazzo , author I. V. Tokatly , and author A. Rubio , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 84 , pages 085406 ( year 2011 )

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Latini , author T

    author S. Latini , author T. Olsen , and author K. S. Thygesen , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 92 , pages 245123 ( year 2015 )

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    author C. E. P. Villegas and author A. R. Rocha , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 109 , pages 165425 ( year 2024 )

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Yu , author X

    author S. Yu , author X. Wu , author Y. Wang , author X. Guo , and author L. Tong , journal Adv. Mater. volume 29 , pages 1606128 ( year 2017 )

    work page 2017

Show all 72 references
  1. [9]

    Xiao , author M

    author J. Xiao , author M. Zhao , author Y. Wang , and author X. Zhang , journal Nanophotonics volume 6 , pages 1309 ( year 2017 )

    2017

  2. [10]

    author J. R. Schaibley , author H. Yu , author G. Clark , author P. Rivera , author J. S. Ross , author K. L. Seyler , author W. Yao , and author X. Xu , journal Nat. Rev. Mat. volume 1 , pages 1 ( year 2016 )

    2016

  3. [11]

    Wang , author A

    author G. Wang , author A. Chernikov , author M. M. Glazov , author T. F. Heinz , author X. Marie , author T. Amand , and author B. Urbaszek , journal Rev. Mod. Phys. volume 90 , pages 021001 ( year 2018 a )

    2018

  4. [12]

    author N. P. Wilson , author W. Yao , author J. Shan , and author X. Xu , journal Nature volume 599 , pages 383 ( year 2021 )

    2021

  5. [13]

    Li , author Z

    author W. Li , author Z. Yang , author M. Sun , and author J. Dong , journal Rev. Phys. volume 9 , pages 100077 ( year 2022 )

    2022

  6. [14]

    Ovesen , author S

    author S. Ovesen , author S. Brem , author C. Linder \"a lv , author M. Kuisma , author T. Korn , author P. Erhart , author M. Selig , and author E. Malic , journal Commun. Phys. volume 2 , pages 23 ( year 2019 )

    2019

  7. [15]

    Jiang , author S

    author Y. Jiang , author S. Chen , author W. Zheng , author B. Zheng , and author A. Pan , journal Light: Sci. Appl. volume 10 , pages 72 ( year 2021 )

    2021

  8. [16]

    author I. C. Gerber , author E. Courtade , author S. Shree , author C. Robert , author T. Taniguchi , author K. Watanabe , author A. Balocchi , author P. Renucci , author D. Lagarde , author X. Marie , et al. , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 99 , pages 035443 ( year 2019 )

    2019

  9. [17]

    Deilmann and author K

    author T. Deilmann and author K. S. Thygesen , journal Nano Lett. volume 18 , pages 2984 ( year 2018 )

    2018

  10. [18]

    Miller , author A

    author B. Miller , author A. Steinhoff , author B. Pano , author J. Klein , author F. Jahnke , author A. Holleitner , and author U. Wurstbauer , journal Nano Lett. volume 17 , pages 5229 ( year 2017 )

    2017

  11. [19]

    Nagler , author M

    author P. Nagler , author M. V. Ballottin , author A. A. Mitioglu , author F. Mooshammer , author N. Paradiso , author C. Strunk , author R. Huber , author A. Chernikov , author P. C. Christianen , author C. Sch \"u ller , et al. , journal Nat. Commun. volume 8 , pages 1551 ( ...

    2017

  12. [20]

    Wang , author Y.-H

    author Z. Wang , author Y.-H. Chiu , author K. Honz , author K. F. Mak , and author J. Shan , journal Nano Lett. volume 18 , pages 137 ( year 2018 b )

    2018

  13. [21]

    Peimyoo , author T

    author N. Peimyoo , author T. Deilmann , author F. Withers , author J. Escolar , author D. Nutting , author T. Taniguchi , author K. Watanabe , author A. Taghizadeh , author M. F. Craciun , author K. S. Thygesen , et al. , journal Nat. Nanotech. volume 16 , pages 888 ( year 2021 )

    2021

  14. [22]

    Palummo , author M

    author M. Palummo , author M. Bernardi , and author J. C. Grossman , journal Nano Lett. volume 15 , pages 2794 ( year 2015 )

    2015

  15. [23]

    Arora , author M

    author A. Arora , author M. Dr \"u ppel , author R. Schmidt , author T. Deilmann , author R. Schneider , author M. R. Molas , author P. Marauhn , author S. Michaelis de Vasconcellos , author M. Potemski , author M. Rohlfing , et al. , journal Nat. Commun. volume 8 , pages 639 ...

    2017

  16. [24]

    Arora , author T

    author A. Arora , author T. Deilmann , author P. Marauhn , author M. Dr \"u ppel , author R. Schneider , author M. R. Molas , author D. Vaclavkova , author S. M. de Vasconcellos , author M. Rohlfing , author M. Potemski , et al. , journal Nanoscale volume 10 , pages 15571 ( ye...

    2018

  17. [25]

    Jindal , author D

    author V. Jindal , author D. Jana , author T. Deilmann , and author S. Ghosh , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 102 , pages 235204 ( year 2020 )

    2020

  18. [26]

    author C. E. P. Villegas , author E. Marinho , author P. Venezuela , and author A. R. Rocha , journal Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. volume 26 , pages 13251 ( year 2024 )

    2024

  19. [27]

    author M. G. Burdanova , author M. Liu , author M. Staniforth , author Y. Zheng , author R. Xiang , author S. Chiashi , author A. Anisimov , author E. I. Kauppinen , author S. Maruyama , and author J. Lloyd-Hughes , journal Adv. Funct. Mater. volume 32 , pages 2104969 ( year 2022 )

    2022

  20. [28]

    Xiang , author T

    author R. Xiang , author T. Inoue , author Y. Zheng , author A. Kumamoto , author Y. Qian , author Y. Sato , author M. Liu , author D. Tang , author D. Gokhale , author J. Guo , et al. , journal Science volume 367 , pages 537 ( year 2020 )

    2020

  21. [29]

    Guo , author R

    author J. Guo , author R. Xiang , author T. Cheng , author S. Maruyama , and author Y. Li , journal ACS nanosci. Au. volume 2 , pages 3 ( year 2021 )

    2021

  22. [30]

    Tian , author W

    author C. Tian , author W. Miao , author L. Zhao , and author J. Wang , journal Rev. Phys. volume 10 , pages 100082 ( year 2023 )

    2023

  23. [31]

    author C. E. P. Villegas , author M. R. S. Tavares , author G.-Q. Hai , and author P. Vasilopoulos , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 88 , pages 165426 ( year 2013 )

    2013

  24. [32]

    Wang , author H

    author H. Wang , author H. S. Wang , author C. Ma , author L. Chen , author C. Jiang , author C. Chen , author X. Xie , author A.-P. Li , and author X. Wang , journal Nat. Rev. Phys. volume 3 , pages 791 ( year 2021 )

    2021

  25. [33]

    Tripathi and author P

    author S. Tripathi and author P. S. Khare , journal J. Opt. volume 53 , pages 3227 ( year 2024 )

    2024

  26. [34]

    Prezzi , author D

    author D. Prezzi , author D. Varsano , author A. Ruini , author A. Marini , and author E. Molinari , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 77 , pages 041404 ( year 2008 )

    2008

  27. [35]

    Tries , author S

    author A. Tries , author S. Osella , author P. Zhang , author F. Xu , author C. Ramanan , author M. Kl \"a ui , author Y. Mai , author D. Beljonne , and author H. I. Wang , journal Nano Lett. volume 20 , pages 2993 ( year 2020 )

    2020

  28. [36]

    o de , author R. Fasel , author X. Feng , author K. M \

    author R. Denk , author M. Hohage , author P. Zeppenfeld , author J. Cai , author C. A. Pignedoli , author H. S \"o de , author R. Fasel , author X. Feng , author K. M \"u llen , author S. Wang , et al. , journal Nat. Commun. volume 5 , pages 4253 ( year 2014 )

    2014

  29. [37]

    author C. E. P. Villegas , author P. B. Mendon c a , and author A. R. Rocha , journal Sci. Rep. volume 4 , pages 6579 ( year 2014 )

    2014

  30. [38]

    Wang , author A

    author X.-Y. Wang , author A. Narita , and author K. M \"u llen , journal Nat. Rev. Chem. volume 2 , pages 0100 ( year 2017 )

    2017

  31. [39]

    Chen , author A

    author Z. Chen , author A. Narita , and author K. M \"u llen , journal Adv. Mater. volume 32 , pages 2001893 ( year 2020 )

    2020

  32. [40]

    author M. H. Oliveira , Jr , author J. M. J. Lopes , author T. Schumann , author L. A. Galves , author M. Ramsteiner , author K. Berlin , author A. Trampert , and author H. Riechert , journal Nat. Commun volume 6 , pages 7632 ( year 2015 )

    2015

  33. [41]

    Onida , author L

    author G. Onida , author L. Reining , and author A. Rubio , journal Rev. Mod. Phys. volume 74 , pages 601 ( year 2002 )

    2002

  34. [42]

    Giannozzi , author S

    author P. Giannozzi , author S. Baroni , author N. Bonini , author M. Calandra , author R. Car , author C. Cavazzoni , author D. Ceresoli , author G. L. Chiarotti , author M. Cococcioni , author I. Dabo , et al. , journal J. Phys.: Condens. Matter volume 21 , pages 395502 ( ye...

    2009

  35. [43]

    Grimme , journal J

    author S. Grimme , journal J. Comput. Chem. volume 27 , pages 1787 ( year 2006 )

    2006

  36. [44]

    author R. W. Godby and author R. J. Needs , journal Phys. Rev. Lett. volume 62 , pages 1169 ( year 1989 )

    1989

  37. [45]

    Bruneval and author X

    author F. Bruneval and author X. Gonze , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 78 , pages 085125 ( year 2008 )

    2008

  38. [46]

    Rohlfing and author S

    author M. Rohlfing and author S. G. Louie , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 62 , pages 4927 ( year 2000 ), ://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.62.4927

    2000 doi

  39. [47]

    Wang and author J

    author S. Wang and author J. Wang , journal Jour. Phys. Chem. C volume 116 , pages 10193 ( year 2012 )

    2012

  40. [48]

    Sangalli , author A

    author D. Sangalli , author A. Ferretti , author H. Miranda , author C. Attaccalite , author I. Marri , author E. Cannuccia , author P. Melo , author M. Marsili , author F. Paleari , author A. Marrazzo , et al. , journal J. Phys. Condens. Matter. volume 31 , pages 325902 ( year 2019 )

    2019

  41. [49]

    Reho , author A

    author R. Reho , author A. R. Botello-M \'e ndez , author D. Sangalli , author M. J. Verstraete , and author Z. Zanolli , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 110 , pages 035118 ( year 2024 )

    2024

  42. [50]

    author C. D. Spataru , author S. Ismail-Beigi , author R. B. Capaz , and author S. G. Louie , journal Phys. Rev. Lett. volume 95 , pages 247402 ( year 2005 )

    2005

  43. [51]

    Sahu , author H

    author B. Sahu , author H. Min , author A. MacDonald , and author S. K. Banerjee , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 78 , pages 045404 ( year 2008 )

    2008

  44. [52]

    R \"u hle , journal Solar energy volume 130 , pages 139 ( year 2016 )

    author S. R \"u hle , journal Solar energy volume 130 , pages 139 ( year 2016 )

    2016

  45. [53]

    Wirtz , author A

    author L. Wirtz , author A. Marini , author M. Gr \"u ning , author C. Attaccalite , author G. Kresse , and author A. Rubio , journal Phys. Rev. Lett. volume 100 , pages 189701 ( year 2008 )

    2008

  46. [54]

    Zhu and author H

    author X. Zhu and author H. Su , journal Jour. Phys. Chem. C volume 114 , pages 17257 ( year 2010 )

    2010

  47. [55]

    Lou , journal RSC Advances volume 7 , pages 52053 ( year 2017 )

    author P. Lou , journal RSC Advances volume 7 , pages 52053 ( year 2017 )

    2017

  48. [56]

    Ge and author T

    author Y. Ge and author T. S. Fisher , journal Frontiers in Nanotechnology volume 4 , pages 999292 ( year 2022 )

    2022

  49. [57]

    author J. S. Wilson , author A. K \"o hler , author R. H. Friend , author M. K. Al-Suti , author M. R. Al-Mandhary , author M. S. Khan , and author P. R. Raithby , journal Jour. Chem. Phys. volume 113 , pages 7627 ( year 2000 )

    2000

  50. [58]

    Tang , author B

    author H. Tang , author B. Neupane , author S. Neupane , author S. Ruan , author N. K. Nepal , and author A. Ruzsinszky , journal Sci. Rep. volume 12 , pages 3008 ( year 2022 )

    2022

  51. [59]

    Shuai , author D

    author Z. Shuai , author D. Beljonne , author R. Silbey , and author J. Br \'e das , journal Phys. Rev. Lett. volume 84 , pages 131 ( year 2000 )

    2000

  52. [60]

    Chen , author L

    author L. Chen , author L. Zhu , and author Z. Shuai , journal Jour. Phys. Chem. A volume 110 , pages 13349 ( year 2006 )

    2006

  53. [61]

    Kistner-Morris , author A

    author J. Kistner-Morris , author A. Shi , author E. Liu , author T. Arp , author F. Farahmand , author T. Taniguchi , author K. Watanabe , author V. Aji , author C. H. Lui , and author N. Gabor , journal Nat. Commun. volume 15 , pages 4075 ( year 2024 )

    2024

  54. [62]

    Rickhaus , author R

    author P. Rickhaus , author R. Maurand , author M.-H. Liu , author M. Weiss , author K. Richter , and author C. Sch \"o nenberger , journal Nat. Commun. volume 4 , pages 2342 ( year 2013 )

    2013

  55. [63]

    Zhang , author Y

    author F.-M. Zhang , author Y. He , and author X. Chen , journal Appl. Phys. Lett. volume 94 ( year 2009 )

    2009

  56. [64]

    author C. E. P. Villegas and author M. R. Tavares , journal Appl. Phys. Lett. volume 96 , pages 186101 ( year 2010 )

    2010

  57. [65]

    author C. E. P. Villegas and author M. R. Tavares , journal Appl. Phys. Lett. volume 101 ( year 2012 )

    2012

  58. [66]

    author W. Y. Rojas , author C. E. P. Villegas , and author A. R. Rocha , journal Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. volume 21 , pages 26027 ( year 2019 )

    2019

  59. [67]

    Raja , author A

    author A. Raja , author A. Chaves , author J. Yu , author G. Arefe , author H. M. Hill , author A. F. Rigosi , author T. C. Berkelbach , author P. Nagler , author C. Sch \"u ller , author T. Korn , et al. , journal Nat. Comm. volume 8 , pages 15251 ( year 2017 )

    2017

  60. [68]

    author J. M. Garcia-Lastra and author K. S. Thygesen , journal Phys. Rev. Lett. volume 106 , pages 187402 ( year 2011 )

    2011

  61. [69]

    author A. C. Riis-Jensen , author M. N. Gjerding , author S. Russo , and author K. S. Thygesen , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 102 , pages 201402 ( year 2020 )

    2020

  62. [70]

    Wing , author J

    author D. Wing , author J. B. Haber , author R. Noff , author B. Barker , author D. A. Egger , author A. Ramasubramaniam , author S. G. Louie , author J. B. Neaton , and author L. Kronik , journal Phys. Rev. Mat. volume 3 , pages 064603 ( year 2019 )

    2019

  63. [71]

    Wang , author G

    author Y. Wang , author G. Yu , author M. R \"o sner , author M. I. Katsnelson , author H.-Q. Lin , and author S. Yuan , journal Phys. Rev. X volume 12 , pages 021055 ( year 2022 )

    2022

  64. [72]

    Zhong , author S

    author H. Zhong , author S. Gao , author G. Zhang , author Z. Xu , author J. Zhou , author X. Li , author C. Lu , and author Y. Wang , journal Phys. Rev. B volume 108 , pages 205131 ( year 2023 )

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.