Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Unveiling the Miniband Structure of Graphene Moir\'e Superlattices via Gate-dependent Terahertz Photocurrent Spectroscopy

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

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

Pith's one-line read Gate-dependent terahertz photocurrent spectroscopy can detect and size the tiny 1–20 meV energy gaps at both satellite Dirac points of graphene/hBN moiré superlattices, including a conduction-band gap other techniques have missed.

desk verdict Plausible first evidence for a local conduction-band gap in graphene/hBN moirés, but the Δe values are threshold estimates from a lineshape classification that needs control experiments. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16927 v1 pith:WVOYUW4G submitted 2025-07-22 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Juan A. Delgado-Notario , Stephen R. Power , Wojciech Knap , Manuel Pino , JinLuo Cheng , Daniel Vaquero , Takashi Taniguchi , Kenji Watanabe
show 4 more authors
Jesús E. Velázquez-Pérez Yahya M. Meziani Pablo Alonso-González José M. Caridad
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords terahertzphotocurrentspectroscopygraphene/hBNmoirésuperlatticesminibandstructuresatelliteDiracpointsenergygapsshiftBerrycurvaturedetection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that sweeping the Fermi level with a gate while irradiating graphene/hBN moiré superlattices with terahertz light at several frequencies exposes details of their miniband structure that transport and photoemission cannot resolve. The core observation is a frequency-dependent switch in the photocurrent lineshape at the satellite Dirac points: a sign-changing response at low frequencies (intraband, plasma-wave rectification) gives way to a stable minimum at high frequencies (interband transitions), and the switch frequency is read as the size of the local energy gap. On that basis the paper reports a valence-band gap of about 17 meV and a conduction-band gap of about 1.2 meV in devices with different twist angles, arguing that the conduction-band gap exists despite remaining invisible to electrical and ARPES measurements. If the interpretation holds, zero-bias terahertz photocurrent spectroscopy becomes a sub-meV-resolution bandstructure probe and a route to sensitive low-noise terahertz detectors based on moiré materials.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the zero-bias photocurrent responsivity measured as a function of carrier density at discrete terahertz frequencies between 0.075 and 4.7 THz while the Fermi level is swept through the satellite Dirac points. The interpretive machinery is a lineshape dichotomy: a sign-changing response that vanishes at the satellite Dirac point is classified as intraband (plasma-wave rectification), while a pronounced stable minimum at the satellite Dirac point is classified as interband, and the frequency at which that transition occurs is converted into an energy gap via the photon energy. Supporting this assignment are tight-binding bandstructure calculations that locate the avoided crossings and local gaps, joint-density-of-states and optical-conductivity calculations showing interband spectral weight turning on at those energies, and shift-conductivity tensor components whose sign and multi-peak structure match the measured photocurrent patterns.

What would settle it

Measure the same devices with scanning tunnelling spectroscopy at 10 K: if no local gap of the reported size appears at the conduction-band satellite Dirac point, or if the gap energy does not match the photocurrent step, the lineshape assignment fails. Alternatively, hold the frequency above the purported gap and dope the channel far above the sDP; if the stable minimum persists where interband transitions are Pauli-blocked, another mechanism is generating it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that gate-dependent, zero-bias terahertz photocurrent measurements are sensitive to the avoided crossings and tiny energy gaps of graphene/hBN moiré minibands, including a non-zero local gap at the conduction-band satellite Dirac point that predictions call for but no prior experiment has resolved. The authors show that near both satellite Dirac points the photoresponse lineshape changes from intraband (sign change at the sDP) to interband (a stable minimum at the sDP) as the excitation frequency is raised, and the lowest frequency at which the interband signature appears gives the gap size. They extract a valence-band gap of about 17 meV for a device with a twist angle near 1.6 degrees and a conduction-band gap of about 1.2 meV for a device near 0.9 degrees, with the conduction-band gap ranging between roughly 0.6 and 12 meV across devices and varying with misalignment angle. Tight-binding bandstructure and conductivity calculations reproduce the gaps, the interband spectral onset, and the multi-peaked photocurrent patterns, which the authors assign to shift photocurrents rooted in the Berry curvature of the gapped minibands.

Load-bearing premise

The reported gap sizes rest on the assumption that a stable photocurrent minimum at the satellite Dirac point can only be produced by interband transitions, so that the lowest frequency showing that minimum equals the gap energy; if gate-dependent coupling, plasmonic rectification, or thermoelectric effects can also produce such a minimum at high frequencies, the extracted gap values would not be unique.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same technique should give quantitative miniband gap values in a single zero-bias device, including gaps below 1 meV that transport and photoemission cannot resolve.
  • The reported nonzero conduction-band gap settles a debated prediction: the conduction-band satellite Dirac point of graphene/hBN carries a small, twist-angle-dependent local gap rather than a gapless crossing.
  • Above-gap illumination produces bulk shift photocurrents whose sign and multi-peak structure carry fingerprints of the Berry curvature and band texture of the moiré minibands.
  • In devices with twist angles below 1 degree, responsivity is enhanced by factors of 1.5–5 near the satellite Dirac points and noise-equivalent power drops to about 0.2 of its main-Dirac-point value, pointing to moiré superlattices as promising zero-bias terahertz detectors.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension not pursued in the paper is to apply the same lineshape rule to other inversion-broken moiré systems, such as twisted transition-metal dichalcogenide bilayers, where few-meV gaps are predicted but hard to isolate.
  • Because the central step is a lineshape classification, an independent cross-check on the same device—for example scanning tunnelling spectroscopy at the conduction-band satellite Dirac point—would either confirm or overturn the conduction-band gap claim.
  • If the sub-meV resolution claim holds, sweeping the excitation frequency continuously rather than using discrete laser lines should reveal the full ladder of avoided crossings at the conduction-band sDP, not only the smallest gap.
  • The non-monotonic angle dependence of the conduction-band gap implies that gap size is not a simple decreasing function of twist angle, so a systematic twist-angle series of devices would test the tight-binding prediction more directly than the five devices presented.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports gate-dependent zero-bias terahertz photocurrent measurements on graphene/hBN moiré superlattices with twist angles between 0.4° and 1.6°, and interprets the frequency-dependent lineshape of the photoresponse near the satellite Dirac points (sDPs). At low frequencies the photoresponse changes sign across the sDP (attributed to intraband, plasmon-assisted rectification), while at higher frequencies it develops a stable minimum at the sDP (attributed to interband transitions). The frequency at which this switch occurs is used to estimate energy gaps at the valence-band sDP (Δh ≈ 17 meV for device A) and at the conduction-band sDP (Δe ≈ 10, 1.2, and 0.6 meV for devices A, D, and E). Tight-binding band structures, joint density of states, and shift-conductivity calculations for MLG/hBN are presented and compared qualitatively with the measurements, and the above-gap photocurrent is assigned to quantum geometric shift currents. The paper also reports enhanced responsivity and reduced noise-equivalent power near the sDPs for devices with θ < 1°.

Significance. If the central interpretive step is valid, the technique would fill a real gap in the experimental toolkit: it would allow detection and size estimation of the tiny (~meV) local gaps at the conduction-band sDP, which have been predicted but not observed by transport, tunnelling, capacitance, or ARPES. The work has several genuine strengths: multiple device architectures (SC, MC, IDGT) and both MLG and BLG channels; high-mobility samples; a calculation pipeline that uses literature tight-binding parameters and does not fit the photocurrent data, avoiding circularity; and a falsifiable prediction of a non-monotonic angle dependence of the conduction-band local gaps. The NEP analysis is a useful practical addition. However, the significance is conditional: the gap values rest on a two-regime lineshape classification that is not independently validated, and the quantitative uncertainty in the extracted gaps is not assessed. The shift-current assignment, while plausible, is also not uniquely established by the presented data.

major comments (4)
  1. [Existence and size of energy gaps at the satellite Dirac points (Figures 3b, 4b-c; Note 8)] The central inference of an intraband-to-interband crossover is based on a binary lineshape classification that is asserted, not demonstrated. The measured zero-bias photocurrent contains all mechanisms, and the intraband contribution itself (Eq. S3) has a frequency-dependent prefactor δU(n,f) that the authors show depends on the density of states (Note 6). Since plasmon-assisted rectification and photo-thermoelectric effects are explicitly invoked for the low-frequency response in the same devices, and these mechanisms are known to produce non-monotonic gate-dependent signals at THz frequencies, the assignment "stable minimum at the sDP = interband" is not unique. No control experiment (e.g., polarization rotation, a non-moiré device, or subtraction of the intraband background) is presented. This is load-bearing for the reported Δh and Δe values and for the claimed first observation of a non-zero Δe. Please provide a direct test of the assignment or a quantitative model of the alternative mechanisms' frequency and gate dependence.
  2. [Gap extraction and uncertainty (Figures 3b, 4c, 5c; Note 8; Table 1)] The gap values are extracted from a sparse discrete frequency grid with no uncertainty estimates. For example, device A's valence sDP switches between 2.5 and 4.1 THz (~10–17 meV), device B's conduction sDP switches between 0.075 and 0.3 THz (0.31–1.24 meV), and device E's between 0.075 and 0.15 THz (0.31–0.62 meV); the quoted values (17, 1.2, 0.6 meV) are threshold frequencies, not measured transition onsets. Figure 5c plots these against calculated gaps without any error bars, and Table 1 claims a resolution "<0.6 meV" based on the smallest measured gap rather than a calibrated threshold width. Please provide a procedure for estimating the systematic and statistical uncertainty in the threshold frequency, and for separating the resolution limit from the observed gap values.
  3. [Quantum geometric photocurrents (Figure 6)] The assignment of the above-gap photocurrent to quantum geometric shift currents is not uniquely established. The evidence cited (peak at sDP, linear polarization, θ-sensitivity) is also consistent with other interband and hot-carrier photocurrent mechanisms. The comparison between the measured RI(n) and the calculated σxxy(EF) in Figures 6j-l is qualitative; no amplitude scaling, no polarization-dependence test (e.g., half-wave plate rotation), and no comparison of the relative weights of the σxxx, σyyy, and σxxy components is shown. Please provide a more direct experimental test of the shift-current mechanism, or soften the attribution so that the central gap-extraction claim does not depend on it.
  4. [Monolayer/bilayer equivalence (Introduction; Device E; Figure 5c)] The manuscript asserts that monolayer and bilayer graphene devices are equivalent for this study (Introduction), but this is not demonstrated. Device E is bilayer graphene and contributes a Δe data point (≈0.6 meV), yet the tight-binding and shift-conductivity calculations are for MLG/hBN only. Since the conduction-band miniband structure of BLG/hBN differs from MLG/hBN (different valley degeneracy, band curvature, and gap texture), including the BLG result in Figure 5c and Table S4 without a BLG-specific calculation weakens the generic claim. Please justify the equivalence or provide BLG calculations.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Quantum geometric photocurrents (sentence in main text)] The sentence "the peaked RI(n) observed at the doping levels ±nSP cannot be explained by intraband activity but it is more characteristic of intraband transitions" contains a typo; the second "intraband" should be "interband".
  2. [Figure 3b discussion] The phrase "the latter lineshape is a clear indication" overstates the certainty of the interpretation; suggest "is consistent with" to reflect the level of proof offered.
  3. [Table 1] In Table 1, the ARPES energy-resolution row cites Ref. 27, but the ARPES reference used in the text for graphene/hBN is Ref. 22; please check the citation mapping.
  4. [Note 8] The description of device D's switch as "above 0.3 THz" is ambiguous because the measured frequencies are 0.075, 0.15, 0.3, and 0.6 THz; it would be clearer to state that the interband lineshape first appears at 0.6 THz for device D.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the measured gap values come from an independent frequency-threshold lineshape measurement, and the tight-binding calculation uses literature parameters rather than values fitted to the photocurrent data.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The headline gap values (for example Δh ≈ 17 meV, Δe ≈ 10, 1.2 or 0.6 meV) are extracted by identifying the lowest THz frequency at which the gate-dependent photocurrent lineshape at a satellite Dirac point changes from a sign-reversing (intraband) form to a stable minimum (interband), e.g. 'a photoresponse of interband origin is already evident and stable at frequencies above 0.3 THz... suggests an approximate size of Δe ≈ 1.2 meV' (Note 8). This is a direct frequency-threshold measurement and is not obtained by feeding experimental photocurrent values into the model. The tight-binding band structures and shift conductivities in Figures 5 and 6 use literature parameters stated in Methods (Vppπ0 = -2.7 eV, Vppσ0 = 0.48 eV, etc.) and are compared with experiment after the fact; the measured gaps are not used as fitting inputs. Equation 1 for the responsivity enhancement is derived in Note 6 from the standard intraband expression R_I = -δU^2/(4P) dσ/dVBG together with literature Fermi velocities and valley degeneracies, so it is not a fit to the present devices. The only self-citations (Refs. 27 and 29) support generic graphene THz-detection baselines and are not load-bearing for the central miniband-gap claim. A genuine limitation is acknowledged in Note 7: transport shows no thermally activated response at the conduction-band sDP, so the Δe claim rests on the interband lineshape classification; however, that is an interpretational or correctness risk rather than a reduction of the claimed prediction to its own inputs.

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

The central analysis introduces no fitted free parameters: the tight-binding model uses literature Slater-Koster parameters and measured twist angles; the gap estimates come from discrete-frequency lineshape thresholds rather than fits. The main assumptions are interpretive: the intraband/interband lineshape classification, the dominance of shift currents above the gap, and the equivalence of monolayer and bilayer graphene devices. These are reasonable but not independently proven within the paper.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Tight-binding Hamiltonian parameters (εC=0, εB=3.34 eV, εN=-1.4 eV, Vppπ0=-2.7 eV, Vppσ0=0.48 eV, r0=0.453 Å) are taken from the literature.
    Used to compute band structures and gaps; values are not fitted to the photocurrent data in this paper.
  • domain assumption The low-frequency photocurrent is described by R_I = -(δU^2/4P)(dσ/dV_BG) and is dominated by intraband plasma wave rectification.
    Underpins the intraband interpretation and Eq.1; taken from Refs 8-11 in SI Note 6.
  • ad hoc to paper A sign-changing photocurrent at the sDP indicates intraband response; a stable minimum at the sDP indicates interband (gap) response.
    Central interpretive rule used to extract Δh and Δe from the frequency-dependent lineshapes (Figures 3,4); not independently validated within the paper.
  • ad hoc to paper Above-gap photocurrents with peaked response at sDPs are dominated by quantum geometric shift currents, not by thermoelectric, bolometric, or injection mechanisms.
    Assigned as "reasonable" in the Quantum geometric photocurrents section based on qualitative agreement with calculated σxxy; no polarization dependence or explicit exclusion of other mechanisms.
  • ad hoc to paper Monolayer and bilayer graphene devices are equivalent for the miniband spectroscopy in this study.
    Stated without quantitative comparison in the Results section; device E is BLG while A-D are MLG.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unveiling the Miniband Structure of Graphene Moir\'e Superlattices via Gate-dependent Terahertz Photocurrent Spectroscopy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WVOYUW4G

@misc{pith2026250716927,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unveiling the Miniband Structure of Graphene Moir\'e Superlattices via Gate-dependent Terahertz Photocurrent Spectroscopy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WVOYUW4G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16927}
}
read the original abstract

Moir\'e superlattices formed at the interface between stacked two-dimensional atomic crystals offer limitless opportunities to design materials with widely tunable properties and engineer intriguing quantum phases of matter. However, despite progress, precise probing of the electronic states and tantalizingly complex band textures of these systems remain challenging. Here, we present gate-dependent terahertz photocurrent spectroscopy as a robust technique to detect, explore and quantify intricate electronic properties in graphene moir\'e superlattices. Specifically, using terahertz light at different frequencies, we demonstrate distinct photocurrent regimes evidencing the presence of avoided band crossings and tiny (~1-20 meV) inversion-breaking global and local energy gaps in the miniband structure of minimally twisted graphene and hexagonal boron nitride heterostructures, key information that is inaccessible by conventional electrical or optical techniques. In the off-resonance regime, when the radiation energy is smaller than the gap values, enhanced zero-bias responsivities arise in the system due to the lower Fermi velocities and specific valley degeneracies of the charge carriers subjected to moir\'e superlattice potentials. In stark contrast, above-gap excitations give rise to bulk photocurrents -- intriguing optoelectronic responses related to the geometric Berry phase of the constituting electronic minibands. Besides their fundamental importance, these results place moir\'e superlattices as promising material platforms for advanced, sensitive and low-noise terahertz detection applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16927 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Moiré THz devices. a, Illustration of a moiré pattern with long wavelength λM, generated by aligning graphene (red) and hBN (blue) honeycomb lattices by an angle θ below 2 degrees. b, Schematic of the bandstructure of the graphene/hBN moiré superlattices featuring a new generation of Dirac fermions (so-called secondary or superlattice Dirac points, sDPs), the appearance of gaps at the main (Δ) and superlattice Dirac… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Electrical and optoelectronic characteristics of graphene moiré devices. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Low temperature photocurrent spectroscopy measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [3]

    Zhang, H . et al. Layer-Dependent Electromechanical Response in Twisted Graphene Moiré Superlattices . ACS Nano 18, 17570-17577 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c01794

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c01794 2013

  2. [4]

    Cao, Y. et al. Unconventional superconductivity in magic -angle graphene superlattices. Nature 556, 43–50 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature26160

    doi:10.1038/nature26160 2018

  3. [5]

    Chen, G . et al. Tunable Orbital Ferromagnetism at Noninteger Filling of a Moiré Superlattice. NanoLett. 22, 1, 238 –245 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c03699

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c03699 2022

  4. [6]

    Wang, Y. et al. Local Gate Enhanced Correlated Phases in Twisted Monolayer –Bilayer Graphene. ACS Nano 18, 27, 17707 –17714 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c02733 37

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c02733 2024

  5. [7]

    Rodan-Legrain, D. et al. Highly tunable junctions and non-local Josephson effect in magic- angle graphene tunnelling devices. Nat. Nanotechnol 16, 769 –775 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00894-4

    doi:10.1038/s41565-021-00894-4 2021

  6. [8]

    Portolés, E. et al. A tunable monolithic SQUID in twisted bilayer graphene. Nat Nanotechnol. 17, 1159–1164 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-022-01222-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41565-022-01222-0 2022

  7. [9]

    Wang, Z. et al. Van Hove Singularity -Enhanced Raman Scattering and Photocurrent Generation in Twisted Monolayer –Bilayer Graphene . ACS Nano . 18, 36, 25183 –25192 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c07302

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c07302 2024

  8. [10]

    Ma, C. et al. Intelligent infrared sensing enabled by tunable moiré quantum geometry. Nature 604, 266-272 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04548-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04548-w 2022

Show all 60 references
  1. [11]

    Isobe, H., Xu, S.-Y. & Fu, L. High -frequency rectification via chiral Bloch electrons. Sci Adv. 6, eaay2497 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aay2497

    2023 doi

  2. [12]

    & Polini, M

    Tomadin, A., Guinea, F. & Polini, M. Generation and morphing of plasmons in graphene superlattices. Phys. Rev. B. 90, 161406 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.161406

    2014 doi

  3. [13]

    Fahimniya, A., Dong, Z., Kiselev, E. I. & Levitov, L. Synchronizing Bloch -Oscillating Free Carriers in Moiré Flat Bands. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 256803 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.256803

    2021 doi

  4. [14]

    Otteneder, M. et al. Terahertz Photogalvanics in Twisted Bilayer Graphene Close to the Second Magic Angle. NanoLett. 20, 7152 –7158 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c02474

    2020 doi

  5. [15]

    Seifert, P. et al. Magic-Angle Bilayer Graphene Nanocalorimeters: Toward Broadband, Energy-Resolving Single Photon Detection. NanoLett. 20, 3459 –3464 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c00373

    2020 doi

  6. [16]

    Ma, Q. et al. Photocurrent as a multiphysics diagnostic of quantum materials. Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 170 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-022-00551-2

    2023 doi

  7. [17]

    Xiong, Y. et al. Atomic configuration controlled photocurrent in van der Waals homostructures. 2D Mater. 8, 035008 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/abe762

    2021 doi

  8. [18]

    Chaudhary, S. et al. Shift-current response as a probe of quantum geometry and electron - electron interactions in twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Research 4, 013164 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.013164 38

    2022 doi

  9. [19]

    Nathawat, J. et al. Signatures of hot carriers and hot phonons in the re-entrant metallic and semiconducting states of Moiré -gapped graphene. Nat. Commun. 14, 1507 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-37292-4

    2023 doi

  10. [20]

    Kim, H. et al. Accurate Gap Determination in Monolayer and Bilayer Graphene/h -BN Moiré Superlattices. NanoLett 18, 7732 –7741 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b03423

    2018 doi

  11. [21]

    & van den Brink, J

    Ortix, C., Yang, L. & van den Brink, J. Graphene on incommensurate substrates: Trigonal warping and emerging Dirac cone replicas with halved group velocity. Phys. Rev. B. 86, 81405 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.86.081405

    2012 doi

  12. [22]

    Wang, E. et al. Gaps induced by inversion symmetry breaking and second-generation Dirac cones in graphene/hexagonal boron nitride. Nat. Phys. 12, 1111 –1115 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3856

    2016 doi

  13. [23]

    Kapfer, M. et al. Programming twist angle and strain profiles in 2D materials. Science 381, 677-681 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade9995

    2023 doi

  14. [24]

    Pizzocchero, F. et al. The hot pick -up technique for batch assembly of van der Waals heterostructures. Nat. Commun. 7, 11894 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11894

    2016 doi

  15. [25]

    J., Guimarães, M

    Zomer, P. J., Guimarães, M. H. D., Brant, J. C., Tombros, N. & van Wees, B. J. Fast pick up technique for high quality heterostructures of bilayer graphene and hexagonal boron nitride. Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 013101 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4886096

    2014 doi

  16. [26]

    Bandurin, D. A. et al. Resonant terahertz detection using graphene plasmons. Nat Commun. 9, 5392 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07848-w

    2018 doi

  17. [28]

    Castelló, O. et al. Impact of device resistances in the performance of graphene -based terahertz photodetectors. Front. Optoelectron. 17, 19 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1007/s12200-024-00122-6

    2024 doi

  18. [29]

    Delgado-Notario, J. A. et al. Enhanced terahertz detection of multigate graphene nanostructures. Nanophotonics. 11, 519 –529 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1515/nanoph- 2021-0573

    2022 doi

  19. [31]

    Vicarelli, L. et al. Graphene field -effect transistors as room -temperature terahertz detectors. Nat Mater 11, 865–871 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat3417

    2012 doi

  20. [32]

    R., Mucha-Kruczyński, M., Chen, X

    Wallbank, J. R., Mucha-Kruczyński, M., Chen, X. & Fal’ko, V. I. Moiré superlattice effects in graphene/boron-nitride van der Waals heterostructures. Ann Phys 527, 359–376 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.201400204

    2015 doi

  21. [34]

    & Low, T

    Guinea, F. & Low, T. Band structure and gaps of triangular graphene superlattices. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 368, 5391–5402 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0214

    2010

  22. [35]

    Da Silva, A.M. et al. Transport and particle-hole asymmetry in graphene on boron nitride. Phys. Rev. B 91, 245422 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.91.245422

    2015 doi

  23. [36]

    Han, T. et al. Accurate Measurement of the Gap of Graphene/hBN Moirè Superlattice through Photocurrent Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 146402 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.146402

    2021 doi

  24. [39]

    Topological Bloch bands in graphene superlattices

    Song, J.C.W, Samutpraphoot, P & Levitov, L.S. Topological Bloch bands in graphene superlattices. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 10879 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1424760112

    2015 doi

  25. [40]

    Krishna-Kumar, R. et al . Terahertz photocurrent probe of quantum geometry and interactions in magic -angle twisted bilayer graphene. Nat. Mater. (2025) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-025-02180-3

    2025 doi

  26. [41]

    Zhu, M.J. et al. Edge currents shunt the insulating bulk in gapped graphene. Nat. Comm. 8, 14552 (2017) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14552

    2017 doi

  27. [42]

    Pedersen, T.G. et al . Optical properties of graphene antidot lattices Phys. Rev. B 77, 245431 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.245431

    2008 doi

  28. [43]

    Unveiling the Miniband Structure of Graphene Moiré Superlattices via Gate-dependent Terahertz Photocurrent Spectroscopy

    Zeng, Z. et al. Gate voltage induced injection and shift currents in AA - and AB-stacked bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 108, 235401 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.235401 40 Supporting Information for “Unveiling the Miniband Structure of Graphene Moiré Superlattice...

    2023 doi

  29. [44]

    Purdie, D. G. et al. Cleaning interfaces in layered materials heterostructures. Nat Commun 9, 5387 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07558-3

    2018 doi

  30. [45]

    Gammelgaard, L. et al. Graphene transport properties upon exposure to PMMA processing and heat treatments. 2D Mater 1 035005 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053- 1583/1/3/035005

    2014 doi

  31. [46]

    Eckmann, A. et al. Raman Fingerprint of Aligned Graphene/h-BN Superlattices. NanoLett 13, 5242–5246 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1021/nl402679b

    2013 doi

  32. [47]

    Schäpers, A

    A. Schäpers, A. et al. Raman imaging of twist angle variations in twisted bilayer graphene at intermediate angles. 2D Mater. 9 045009 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/ac7e59

    2022 doi

  33. [48]

    Ribeiro-Palau, R. et al. Twistable electronics with dynamically rotatable heterostructures. Science 361, 690–693 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat6981

    2018 doi

  34. [49]

    Wallbank, J. R. et al. Excess resistivity in graphene superlattices caused by umklapp electron-electron scattering Nat Phys 15, 32–36 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567- 018-0278-6

    2019 doi

  35. [50]

    Caridad, J.M. et al. Room-Temperature Plasmon-Assisted Resonant THz Detection in Single-Layer Graphene Transistors. NanoLett. 24, 935−942 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c04300

    2024 doi

  36. [51]

    Zak, A. et al. Antenna-Integrated 0.6 THz FET Direct Detectors Based on CVD Graphene. Nano Lett 14, 5834–5838 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1021/nl5027309

    2014 doi

  37. [52]

    Bandurin, D. A. et al. Dual origin of room temperature sub-terahertz photoresponse in graphene field effect transistors. Appl Phys Lett 112, 141101 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5018151

    2018 doi

  38. [53]

    Rehman, A. et al. Temperature dependence of current response to sub-terahertz radiation of AlGaN/GaN and graphene transistors. Appl Phys Lett 121, 213503 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0129507 64

    2022 doi

  39. [54]

    Tomadin, A., Tredicucci, A., Pellegrini, V., Vitiello, M. S. & Polini, M. Photocurrent- based detection of terahertz radiation in graphene. Appl Phys Lett 103, 211120 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4831682

    2013 doi

  40. [55]

    Caridad, J.M. et al. Gate electrostatics and quantum capacitance in ballistic graphene devices. Phys.Rev.B 99, 195408 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.99.195408

    2019 doi

  41. [56]

    Das Sarma, S., Adam, S., Hwang, E. H. & Rossi, E. Electronic transport in two- dimensional graphene. Rev Mod Phys 83, 407–470 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.83.407

    2011 doi

  42. [57]

    Morozov, S. V et al. Giant Intrinsic Carrier Mobilities in Graphene and Its Bilayer. Phys Rev Lett 100, 16602 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.016602

    2008 doi

  43. [58]

    Dean, C. R. et al. Boron nitride substrates for high-quality graphene electronics. Nat Nanotechnol 5, 722–726 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2010.172

    2010 doi

  44. [59]

    Hwang, E. H. & Das Sarma, S. Acoustic phonon scattering limited carrier mobility in two-dimensional extrinsic graphene. Phys Rev B 77, 115449 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.115449

    2008 doi

  45. [60]

    Sunku, S. S. et al. Nano-photocurrent Mapping of Local Electronic Structure in Twisted Bilayer Graphene. Nano Lett 20, 2958–2964 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b04637

    2020 doi

  46. [61]

    Yankowitz, M. et al. Emergence of superlattice Dirac points in graphene on hexagonal boron nitride. Nat Phys 8, 382–386 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2272

    2012 doi

  47. [62]

    Yu, G. L. et al. Hierarchy of Hofstadter states and replica quantum Hall ferromagnetism in graphene superlattices. Nat Phys 10, 525–529 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2979

    2014 doi

  48. [63]

    & Shvets, G

    Jung, M. & Shvets, G. Emergence of tunable intersubband-plasmon-polaritons in graphene superlattices. Advanced Photonics 5, 026004 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1117/1.AP.5.2.026004

    2023 doi

  49. [64]

    Ashcroft, N. W. & Mermin, N. D. Solid state physics. Holt-Saunders, (1976)

    1976

  50. [65]

    Sun, X. et al. Correlated states in doubly-aligned hBN/graphene/hBN heterostructures. Nature Comm. 12, 7196 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27514-y 65

    2021 doi

  51. [66]

    & Koshino, M

    Moon, P. & Koshino, M. Electronic properties of graphene/hexagonal-boron-nitride moiré superlattice. Phys. Rev. B 90, 155406 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.155406

    2014 doi

  52. [67]

    Jung, J. et al. Moiré band model and band gaps of graphene on hexagonal boron nitride. Phys. Rev. B 96, 85442 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.96.085442

    2017 doi

Pith tools

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