Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 49 references

Meroniums in Spin-Orbit Coupled Bose Gases

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a Rashba spin-orbit coupled two-component Bose gas can host four topological spin phases, including 'meroniums' formed by a meron and an antimeron with zero net topological charge.

desk verdict Variational textures with an honest core, but the abstract overclaims and the phase diagram lacks contact with the model's known competing states. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.03849 v2 pith:DWGGUQWW submitted 2025-09-04 cond-mat.quant-gas

Bo Chen , Xiaojing Jin , Jiatao Tan , Boyang Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords Bose-EinsteincondensateRashbaspin-orbitcouplingmeronantimeronmeroniumtopologicalspintexturehalfvortexspiralphase
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 argues that a two-component Bose gas with Rashba spin-orbit coupling and harmonic trapping supports four topologically distinct spin phases. Two of them, the ordinary half vortex (HV) and a new spherical-wave half vortex (SWHV), carry meron charge ±1/2. The other two, double-peak (DP) and spin-spiral (SS), are equal superpositions of a meron and an antimeron, giving zero net topological charge; the paper names these 'meroniums'. The central result is a phase diagram, obtained by minimizing a trial energy functional, showing where each phase is stable as interactions and spin-orbit strength vary. A sympathetic reader would care because it proposes a concrete cold-atom setting for composite topological objects with vanishing topological charge, which in magnetic materials are of interest for avoiding Hall-effect motion.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the trial wave function of Eq. (4), φn=e^{ikr} e^{inθ}[f(r), g(r)e^{iθ}], whose two-dimensional spherical-wave factor e^{ikr} carries the finite-momentum character of the SO-coupled condensate and whose spinor part winds by half an integer to remain single-valued. Time reversal generates a degenerate partner φ0^T; the superposition φs=αφ0+βφ0^T with α=β=1/√2 produces the zero-charge meroniums. The energy functional and the energy difference ΔE determine kc and the sign of ΔE, which classify the phases; the skyrmion charge assigns their topology.

What would settle it

Run a full imaginary-time evolution of the two-component Gross-Pitaevskii equations without imposing the n=0 ansatz, starting from random initial conditions at the parameters of Fig. 3; if the converged state has a plane-wave or stripe form (or an n≠0 vortex), the reported HV/SWHV/DP/SS classification is not the ground-state structure. Experimentally, spin-resolved absorption imaging of the trapped cloud should reveal the spiral pattern of the SS phase if it exists; its absence at the predicted g′/g and k0 values would rule out the meronium phases.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a two-component Rashba spin-orbit coupled Bose gas in a harmonic trap hosts four topologically distinct spin phases. Starting from the single-particle ground-state circle at |k|=k0 and mapping the degenerate states onto the system boundary, the authors construct a trial wave function φn=e^{ikr}e^{inθ}[f(r), g(r)e^{iθ}] and, for n=0, minimize the mean-field energy. Depending on parameters, the energy minimum sits at kc=0 or kc≈k0, and the time-reversed partner can form an equal superposition when the energy difference ΔE is negative. This yields HV and SWHV (merons, Q=1/2) and DP and SS (meroniums, Q=0). The SS state's combination e^{ikcr}+e^{-ikcr} creates a

Load-bearing premise

The trial wavefunction with angular momentum n=0 (plus its time-reversed superposition) is assumed to be the true low-energy state; the paper never solves the full Gross-Pitaevskii equation or compares against the plane-wave and stripe states that are known to be the low-energy states of this system.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the variational classification is correct, the Rashba SO-coupled Bose gas is a setting where both individual merons and composite meron–antimeron pairs ('meroniums') exist as distinct thermodynamic phases, selectable by tuning g′/g and k0.
  • The spherical-wave half vortex shows that a half-integer vortex can coexist with a finite-momentum condensate, so vortex cores need not be static defects but can carry a propagating radial wave.
  • The SS phase's spiral density pattern is a direct observable signature: spin-resolved imaging should show interleaved high/low densities of the two components rotating along the radial direction.
  • Because DP and SS have zero net topological charge, they would move without a transverse (Hall-like) force, the same property that motivates skyrmionium and bimeronium research in magnets.
  • The phase diagram predicts the SWHV phase only for g′<g and the SS phase only for g′>g, with SS expanding at stronger spin-orbit coupling—so the stability of meroniums can be controlled by interaction asymmetry.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The n=0 restriction is an assumption, not a result; extending the variational family to n≠0 could reveal additional phases or shift the present boundaries, since nothing in the Hamiltonian selects n=0 a priori.
  • A direct full Gross-Pitaevskii comparison with the plane-wave and stripe phases is the natural next test; if those states win, the reported phases may be metastable rather than ground states, though metastable topological states can still be physically realized.
  • The meronium concept could be exported to other SO-coupled or synthetic-gauge-field settings, such as Fermi gases or optical lattices, where the same half-vortex building blocks appear.
  • The spiral modulation of the SS phase might be observable in momentum-space or time-of-flight images, since e^{ikr} and e^{-ikr} components should manifest as two counter-propagating matter-wave peaks.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies a two-component Rashba spin-orbit coupled Bose gas in a 2D harmonic trap. The authors introduce a variational ansatz, Eq. (4), of the form e^{ikr}(f(r), g(r)e^{iθ})^T with angular momentum n=0, minimize the mean-field energy E(φ0) (Eq. 5) with respect to f,g at fixed k, and then examine superpositions with the time-reversed state (Eq. 7). Depending on whether the optimal k vanishes and on the sign of the energy difference ΔE (Eq. 8), they classify four phases: HV, SWHV, DP, and SS. The latter two, called 'meroniums', are claimed to be meron-antimeron pairs with zero topological charge. Density profiles, spin textures, and phase diagrams are presented.

Significance. If the reported states are true (meta)stable solutions of the full Gross-Pitaevskii equation, the meronium phases would be new and potentially useful topological spin textures in spin-orbit coupled BECs, with the zero-charge property relevant to avoiding skyrmion-Hall-type dynamics. The paper's energy functional derivation is transparent, and the four-phase classification from kc and ΔE is a well-defined variational result. However, the evidence presented does not yet establish the physical existence of these phases: the minimization is restricted to a single-ansatz family, no imaginary-time evolution is actually shown despite the abstract's claim, no comparison is made with the known plane-wave/stripe competitors, and the topological charge values are asserted rather than demonstrated. Thus the significance is conditional on substantial additional validation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (4), Eq. (5), Fig. 3] The central existence claim is supported only by minimization of Eq. (5) within the restricted ansatz Eq. (4) with n=0 and the extra factor e^{ikr}. The ansatz does not include the plane-wave or stripe states of Refs. [48,49], which are the known low-energy states of the homogeneous Rashba SOC Bose gas. No energy comparison with those competitors in the trap is reported, and no full imaginary-time evolution of the GPE is shown, notwithstanding the abstract's claim that this method was used. Consequently Fig. 3 is a phase diagram of the trial family, not of the model. The authors should either perform imaginary-time evolution for representative parameters and demonstrate convergence to HV/SWHV/DP/SS, or explicitly compute the energies of the plane-wave and stripe ansätze (and other vortex candidates) and show that the reported states are lower or metastable.
  2. [Eq. (9), 'Spin configuration'] The topological charges Q=±1/2 for HV/SWHV are stated without showing the evaluation of Eq. (9). For φ0=(f, g e^{iθ})^T, Q depends on the asymptotic ratio f(∞)/g(∞) and on the core boundary conditions; the paper does not specify these limits or present the integral. Since f,g are numerical solutions and vanish at the trap edge, the meron classification is not automatic. Include the explicit calculation of Eq. (9) for the variational solutions, including the boundary contributions.
  3. [Eq. (8)] The DP/SS classification requires ΔE<0 for the superposition state. From Eq. (8), ΔE ∝ (g'−g) I, with I=∫[(f^2−g^2)^2 − 2f^2g^2]. The sign of I is not reported for the parameter sets used. Since I can be positive or negative depending on the spatial overlap of f and g, the phase boundaries in Fig. 3 are not reproducible from the presented data. Please report the computed I (or the minimizing |α|,|β|) for representative points in each phase region.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract vs main text] The abstract uses 'radial wave half vortex (RWHV)' while the main text and figure captions use 'spherical wave half vortex (SWHV)'. Please unify the terminology.
  2. [Fig. 1] In Fig. 1, the horizontal axis of (b1) is labeled 'ka' whereas (b2) and (b3) use 'ka⊥'; if this is the same dimensionless variable, fix the label.
  3. [After Eq. (7)] The text states that for ΔE<0 the system condenses into α=β=1/√2, but the explicit superposition spinor is not written. Displaying φ_s and its densities would make the DP/SS phase analysis easier to follow.
  4. [Introduction, Ref. [42]] The statement that a bimeronium was 'experimentally observed' in Ref. [42] should be checked; if that reference is a theoretical study, the claim should be rephrased.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Meronium zero-charge claim is built into the variational ansatz; energy phase diagram is independent but uncontrolled.

  1. self definitional [Eq. (7), Table I, and 'Spin configuration' section]
    "The calculation shows that the charges of DP and SS phases are both zero. Basically, they are superpositions of meron and antimeron as demonstrated in Eq. (7), that is, they are the meronium states."

    DP and SS are not independently discovered states. They are defined as equal-weight superpositions φ_s = (φ0 + Tφ0)/√2 whenever ΔE<0 (Eq. 7 and Table I), and the paper has already established that φ0 (HV or SWHV) is a meron with Q=+1/2 and that Tφ0 is its time-reversed antimeron with Q=-1/2. The zero topological charge of such a superposition is a built-in property of the construction, not a consequence of solving the Hamiltonian. The 'calculation yields zero' restates the ansatz; the only remaining dynamical content is the energy condition ΔE<0 from Eq. (8).

  2. renaming known result [Introduction, paragraphs 3-4]
    "A skyrmion and anti-skyrmion can form a pair, the so-called skyrmionium [29-37], with a zero topological charge. ... Recently, a new state named as bimeronium is experimentally observed [42], which is a combination of two bimerons with opposite topological charges, resulting in a zero net topological charge. ... Here, we name them as meroniums. Meronium is a new state that has never been experimental observed or theoretically discussed."

    A meron-antimeron pair with zero net topological charge is the same class of composite object as the previously cited skyrmionium (skyrmion+antiskyrmion) and bimeronium (two bimerons of opposite charge). The paper does not introduce a new topological invariant or a genuinely new composite; it introduces the new name 'meronium' for the meron-antimeron pair and presents the renaming as a new state. The actual novelty would be the specific Rashba-SOC realization and its variational stability, not the topological object itself.

full rationale

The variational energy minimization is self-contained and not circular: the paper solves for f(r), g(r), and k within the trial family of Eq. (4), evaluates E(φ0) via Eq. (5), and maps where each of the four states is the variational minimum (Figs. 1-3). That part has genuine independent content. Circularity appears when the paper presents the topology of DP/SS as a calculated result: DP and SS are constructed from the start as equal superpositions of a meron and its time-reversed antimeron (Eq. 7), so their zero topological charge is an input of the ansatz, not a prediction. The claim that meronium is a new state is also a renaming of known zero-charge composites (skyrmionium/bimeronium) cited by the paper itself. Separately, the abstract says 'By employing the imaginary-time evolution method,' but the body text only reports variational minimization of the energy functional; the asserted Q=±1/2 calculation for HV/SWHV is also not shown. These are omissions/correctness concerns, not circularity, but they further weaken the existence claim. No load-bearing self-citation is present. Overall, the central meronium topology reduces by construction, while the variational phase diagram provides partial independent support, giving a moderate circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central calculation rests on a variational trial wavefunction whose form is chosen by hand. The free parameters are the wave vector k and the radial functions f and g. The paper introduces no new physical constants or particles, but the 'meronium' label is a new name for states that are constructed as superpositions. The main axioms are the ansatz and the mean-field approximation.

free parameters (1)
  • spherical wave vector k = k=0 or k≈k0 depending on g' and k0
    The variational parameter in the ansatz Eq. (4); its minimizing value kc determines whether the state is a HV/SWHV or DP/SS.
assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper The trial wavefunction form of Eq. (4), including the spherical wave factor e^{ikr} and restriction to n=0
    This is the core ansatz. No proof is given that the true ground state lies in this family.
  • domain assumption The system is well described by a single condensate wavefunction for each spin component
    Mean-field treatment of the two-component BEC, standard for dilute Bose gases.
  • ad hoc to paper The variational states found are the relevant states of the system
    The energy is minimized only within the ansatz; no comparison with plane-wave or stripe phases, and no full GPE simulation.
  • standard math The spin direction is given by n = φ†σφ with the normalized φ
    Standard definition for spin texture in a spinor BEC.
invented entities (1)
  • meronium (DP and SS phases)
    purpose: To name the zero-topological-charge states formed by a meron and an antimeron in this SO-coupled BEC.
    The meronium is defined entirely within the variational ansatz; no experimental observation or independent theoretical evidence is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Meroniums in Spin-Orbit Coupled Bose Gases." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DWGGUQWW

@misc{pith2026250903849,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Meroniums in Spin-Orbit Coupled Bose Gases},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DWGGUQWW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.03849}
}
abstract

In this work we demonstrate the existence of new types of topological states in a two-component Bose gas with Rashba spin-orbit couplings. We construct a wave function by mapping the degenerate ground states to the circular boundary of the system, and further consider its superposition with the time-reversed counterpart. By employing the imaginary-time evolution method, we identify four types of topological phases. The first one is the well-known half vortex(HV). The second one is called radial wave half vortex(RWHV), which is a combination of HV with a radial wave factor $e^{ikr}$. The spin configurations show that both HV and RWHV are merons. The third and fourth types are of particular interest. The third one is a combination of HV and anti-HV. The spin densities of this phase demonstrates peak structures and the peaks of spin up and spin down densities are mismatched, and hence we call it the double peak (DP) phase. The fourth type is a combination of RWHV and anti-RWHV, due to the superposition of the radial wave factor $e^{ikr}$ and $e^{-ikr}$ the spin densities demonstrate a spiral pattern, then it's called spin spiral (SS) phase. They are both combinations of meron and antimeron. Here, we name them as meroniums. The topological charges of the four phases are calculated and the spin distributions are demonstrated.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03849 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (Color online) (a1), (a2) and (a3) demonstrate the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: (Color online) The spin and total particle densities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (Color online) The phase diagrams for different SO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    T. H. R. Skyrme,Proc. R. Soc. A 260, 127 (1961)

    work page 1961

  2. [2]

    Ho, Phys

    T. Ho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 742 (1998)

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    Al Khawaja and H

    U. Al Khawaja and H. Stoof, Nature 411, 918 (2001)

    work page 2001

  4. [4]

    L. S. Leslie, A. Hansen, K. C. Wright, B. M. Deutsch, and N. P. Bigelow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 250401 (2009)

    work page 2009

  5. [5]

    J.-y. Choi, W. J. Kwon, and Y.-i. Shin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 035301 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    S. L. Sondhi, A. Karlhede, S.A. Kivelson, and E. H. Rezayi, Phys. Rev. B 47, 16419 (1993)

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    S. E. Barrett, G. Dabbagh, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, and R. Tycko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 5112 (1995)

    work page 1995

  8. [8]

    U. K. R¨ oßler, A. N. Bogdanov, and C. Pfleiderer, Nature 442, 797 (2006)

    2006

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Muhlbauer, B

    S. Muhlbauer, B. Binz, F. Jonietz, C. Pfleiderer, A. Rosch, A. Neubauer, R. Georgii, and P. Boni, Science 323, 915 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    A. Fert, N. Reyren, V. Cros, Nature Reviews Materials 2, 1 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    A. N. Bogdanov, C. Panagopoulos, Nature Reviews Physics 2, 492 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Tokura, N

    Y. Tokura, N. Kanazawa, Chemical Reviews 121, 2857(2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Lima Fernandes, S

    I. Lima Fernandes, S. Bl¨ ugel, S. Lounis, Nature Commu- nications 13, 1 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Tsesses, E

    S. Tsesses, E. Ostrovsky, K. Cohen, B. Gjonaj, N. H. Lindner, and G. Bartal, Science 361, 993 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    L. Du, A. Yang, A. V. Zayats, X. Yuan, Nature Physics 15, 650 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Van Mechelen and Z

    T. Van Mechelen and Z. Jacob, Opt. Mater. Express 9, 95 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    S.-Z. Lin, A. Saxena, and C. D. Batista, Phys. Rev. B 91, 224407 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    Y. A. Kharkov, O. P. Sushkov, and M. Mostovoy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 207201 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    G¨ obel, A

    B. G¨ obel, A. Mook, J. Henk, I. Mertig, and O. A. Treti- akov, Phys. Rev. B 99, 060407(R) (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Zhang, J

    X. Zhang, J. Xia, L. Shen, M. Ezawa, O. A. Tretiakov, G. Zhao, X. Liu, and Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. B 101, 144435 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    C. Guo, M. Xiao, Y. Guo, L. Yuan, and S. Fan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 106103 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Shinjo, T

    T. Shinjo, T. Okuno, R. Hassdorf, K. Shigeto, and T. Ono, Science 289, 930 (2000)

    2000

  15. [23]

    Wintz, C

    S. Wintz, C. Bunce, A. Neudert, M. K¨ orner, T. Strache, M. Buhl, A. Erbe, S. Gemming, J. Raabe, C. Quitmann, and J. Fassbender, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 177201 (2013)

    2013

  16. [24]

    Van Waeyenberge, A

    B. Van Waeyenberge, A. Puzic, H. Stoll, K. W. Chou, T. Tyliszczak, R. Hertel, M. F¨ ahnle, H. Br¨ uckl, K. Rott, G. Reiss, I. Neudecker, D. Weiss, C. H. Back, and G. Sch¨ utz, Nature 444, 461 (2006)

    2006

  17. [25]

    X. Z. Yu, W. Koshibae, Y. Tokunaga, K. Shibata, Y. Taguchi, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Nature 564, 95 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Gao, S.-G

    N. Gao, S.-G. Je, M.-Y. Im, J.W. Choi, M. Yang, Q. Li, T.Y. Wang, S. Lee, H.-S. Han, K.-S. Lee, W. Chao, C. Hwang, J. Li, Z.Q. Qiu, Nat. Commun. 10, 5603 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    X. Lu, R. Fei, L. Zhu, and L. Yang, Nat. Commun. 11, 4724 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Augustin, S

    M. Augustin, S. Jenkins, R. F. L. Evans, K. S. Novoselov, and E. J. G. Santos, Nat. Commun. 12, 185 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Zhang, J

    X. Zhang, J. Xia, Y. Zhou, D. Wang, X. Liu, W. Zhao, and M. Ezawa, Phys. Rev. B 94, 094420 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    A. G. Kolesnikov, M. E. Stebliy, A. S. Samardak, and A. V. Ognev, Sci. Rep. 8, 16966 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    Hagemeister, A

    J. Hagemeister, A. Siemens, L. R´ ozsa, E. Y. Vedme- denko, and R. Wiesendanger, Phys. Rev. B 97, 174436 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    Zhang, F

    S. Zhang, F. Kronast, G. van der Laan, and T. Hesjedal, Nano Lett. 18, 1057 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    L. Bo, R. Zhao, C. Hu, Z. Shi, W. Chen, X. Zhang, and M. Yan, J. Phys. Appl. Phys. 53, 195001 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    S. A. Obadero, Y. Yamane, C. A. Akosa, and G. Tatara, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014458 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Seng, et al., Adv

    B. Seng, et al., Adv. Funct. Mater. 31, 2102307 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    J. Tang, Y. Wu, W. Wang, L. Kong, B. Lv, W. Wei, J. Zang, M. Tian, and H. Du, Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 1086 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    S. Yang, Y. Zhao, K. Wu, Z. Chu, X. Xu, X. Li, J. ˚ Akerman, and Y. Zhou, Nat. Commun. 14, 3406 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    Komineas, Phys

    S. Komineas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 117202 (2007)

    2007

  31. [39]

    Zhang, M

    X. Zhang, M. Ezawa, and Y. Zhou, Sci. Rep. 5, 9400 (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    C. Heo, N. S. Kiselev, A. K. Nandy, S. Bl¨ ugel, and T. Rasing, Sci. Rep. 6, 27146 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    L. Shen, J. Xia, X. Zhang, M. Ezawa, O. A. Tretiakov, X. Liu, G. Zhao, and Y. Zhou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 037202 (2020)

    2020

  34. [42]

    Zhang, J

    X. Zhang, J. Xia, M. Ezawa, O. A. Tretiakov, H. T. Diep, G. Zhao, X. Liu, Y. Zhou, Appl. Phys. Lett. 118, 052411 (2021)

    2021

  35. [43]

    M.W. Ray, E. Ruokokoski, S. Kandel, M. M¨ ott¨ onen, and D. S. Hall, Nature (London) 505, 657 (2014)

    2014

  36. [44]

    M.W. Ray, E. Ruokokoski, K. Tiurev, M. M¨ ott¨ onen, and D. S. Hall, Science 348, 544 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    D. S. Hall, M.W. Ray, K. Tiurev, E. Ruokokoski, A. H. Gheorghe, and M. M¨ ott¨ onen, Nat. Phys.12, 478 (2016)

    2016

  38. [46]

    C.-J. Wu, I. Mondragon-Shem, and X.-F. Zhou, Chinese Physics Letters, 28 097102, 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Ramachandhran, B

    B. Ramachandhran, B. Opanchuk, X.-J. Liu, H. Pu, P. D. Drummond, and H. Hu, Phys. Rev. A 85, 023606 (2012)

    2012

  40. [48]

    Wang, C Gao, C.-M

    C. Wang, C Gao, C.-M. Jian, and H. Zhai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 160403 (2010)

    2010

  41. [49]

    Zhai, Rep

    H. Zhai, Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 026001 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.