pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.06265 · v1 · submitted 2025-12-06 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall · cond-mat.str-el· cond-mat.supr-con

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Angle evolution of the superconducting phase diagram in twisted bilayer WSe2

Yinjie Guo , John Cenker , Ammon Fischer , Daniel Mu\~noz-Segovia , Jordan Pack , Luke Holtzman , Lennart Klebl , Kenji Watanabe
show 8 more authors
Takashi Taniguchi Katayun Barmak James Hone Angel Rubio Dante M. Kennes Andrew J. Millis Abhay Pasupathy Cory R. Dean
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 01:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.supr-con
keywords twisted bilayer WSe2moiré superconductivityFermi surface reconstructiontwist angle evolutioncorrelated phasestransition metal dichalcogenidesantiferromagnetic ordering
0
0 comments X

The pith

Superconductivity in twisted bilayer WSe2 evolves smoothly with twist angle near a Fermi surface reconstruction

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

The paper experimentally maps the superconducting phase diagram in twisted bilayer WSe2 across twist angles spanning the range from the initial reports at 3.65 degrees and 5 degrees. It shows that superconductivity changes continuously with angle and remains close to a Fermi surface reconstruction presumed to involve antiferromagnetic ordering at every angle examined. This reconstruction does not have to align with the Van Hove singularity or the half-filled band insulator. A reader would care because the results link earlier apparently distinct phase diagrams and indicate that twisted transition metal dichalcogenides offer a tunable platform where the ratio of interaction strength to bandwidth can be varied systematically.

Core claim

The superconducting state evolves smoothly with twist angle and at all twist angles is proximal to a Fermi surface reconstruction with, presumably, antiferromagnetic ordering, but is neither necessarily tied to the Van Hove singularity, nor to the half band insulator.

What carries the argument

Angle-dependent transport measurements that track the positions of superconductivity relative to Fermi surface reconstructions and compare them to twist-angle-dependent theoretical calculations

If this is right

  • The superconducting phase diagrams reported at 3.65 degrees and 5 degrees are connected by continuous evolution rather than representing distinct regimes.
  • Superconductivity can appear without requiring coincidence with the Van Hove singularity or the half band insulator.
  • The system supports dynamic gate tuning of correlated phases within a single device while varying interaction strength through twist angle.
  • Repeatability across different devices supports that the observed phase diagram reflects intrinsic behavior.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the Fermi surface reconstruction is confirmed to be antiferromagnetic, the proximity may indicate a common pairing mechanism tied to magnetic fluctuations in multiple moiré systems.
  • Analogous angle-evolution experiments in other twisted transition metal dichalcogenides could test whether smooth superconducting evolution is a general feature when correlation strength increases.
  • Future devices with reduced disorder would allow direct tests of whether the reconstruction is required for the onset of superconductivity.

Load-bearing premise

The observed Fermi surface reconstruction corresponds to antiferromagnetic ordering and that transport signatures in fabricated devices accurately reflect the intrinsic phase diagram without dominant effects from disorder, strain, or inhomogeneity.

What would settle it

Observation of superconductivity well separated from any Fermi surface reconstruction in a device at an intermediate twist angle between 3.65 and 5 degrees would challenge the claimed proximity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.06265 by Abhay Pasupathy, Ammon Fischer, Andrew J. Millis, Angel Rubio, Cory R. Dean, Daniel Mu\~noz-Segovia, Dante M. Kennes, James Hone, John Cenker, Jordan Pack, Katayun Barmak, Kenji Watanabe, Lennart Klebl, Luke Holtzman, Takashi Taniguchi, Yinjie Guo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recent observations of superconductivity in twisted bilayer WSe$_2$ have extended the family of moir\'e superconductors beyond twisted graphene. In WSe$_2$ two different twist angles were studied, 3.65{\deg} and 5.0{\deg}, and two seemingly distinct superconducting phase diagrams were reported, raising the question of whether the superconducting phases in the two devices share a similar origin. Here we address the question by experimentally mapping the evolution of the phase diagram across devices with twist angles spanning the range defined by the initial reports, and comparing the results to twist angle-dependent theory. We find that the superconducting state evolves smoothly with twist angle and at all twist angles is proximal to a Fermi surface reconstruction with, presumably, antiferromagnetic ordering, but is neither necessarily tied to the Van Hove singularity, nor to the half band insulator. Our results connect the previously distinct phase diagrams at 3.65{\deg} and 5{\deg}, and offer new insight into the origin of the superconductivity in this system and its evolution as the correlation strength increases. More broadly, the smooth phase diagram evolution, repeatability between different devices, and dynamic gate tunability within each device, establish twisted transition metal dichalcogenides as a unique platform for the study of correlated phases as the ratio of interaction strength to bandwidth is varied.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript experimentally maps the superconducting phase diagram of twisted bilayer WSe2 across twist angles from ~3.65° to 5°, bridging prior reports at the endpoints. It finds that superconductivity evolves smoothly with angle, remains proximal to a density-driven Fermi-surface reconstruction (attributed presumably to antiferromagnetic order), and is not required to coincide with the van Hove singularity or half-filling. Results are compared to twist-angle-dependent band-structure and interaction calculations; the authors emphasize device repeatability and gate tunability as establishing twisted TMDs as a platform for varying U/W.

Significance. If the central mapping and proximity claims hold, the work supplies a continuous experimental phase diagram that unifies previously disconnected observations and constrains possible pairing mechanisms in moiré TMD superconductors. The explicit comparison to independent theory and the demonstration of smooth evolution with correlation strength are genuine strengths that would be cited in future studies of correlated moiré phases.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and the section presenting the full phase diagrams] The identification of the observed resistance feature as a Fermi-surface reconstruction due to antiferromagnetic order rests entirely on transport data and the word “presumably” (abstract and the paragraph introducing the phase diagrams). No magnetic susceptibility, neutron, or spectroscopic evidence is presented, leaving open alternative reconstruction mechanisms (e.g., charge order or strain-induced gaps) that would still produce a transport signature but would alter the claimed proximity to AF order.
  2. [Experimental methods and the figures showing phase diagrams versus twist angle] The claim of smooth evolution and independence from the VHS and half-filling is supported by the plotted boundaries, yet the manuscript provides neither error bars on the critical densities nor quantitative device-to-device statistics (number of devices per angle, twist-angle inhomogeneity maps, or strain estimates). In twisted TMDs even ~0.1° gradients or small strain can shift features by several percent in density, which directly impacts the asserted proximity and smoothness.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure captions] Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state the criterion used to define the superconducting boundary (e.g., resistance drop to 50 % of normal-state value) and the temperature at which the Fermi-surface reconstruction is extracted.
  2. [Supplementary information or methods] A short table summarizing the number of devices measured at each nominal twist angle, together with the extracted twist-angle uncertainty, would strengthen the repeatability statement.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and positive evaluation of the significance of our work. We address each major comment below in a point-by-point manner and indicate the revisions made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and the section presenting the full phase diagrams] The identification of the observed resistance feature as a Fermi-surface reconstruction due to antiferromagnetic order rests entirely on transport data and the word “presumably” (abstract and the paragraph introducing the phase diagrams). No magnetic susceptibility, neutron, or spectroscopic evidence is presented, leaving open alternative reconstruction mechanisms (e.g., charge order or strain-induced gaps) that would still produce a transport signature but would alter the claimed proximity to AF order.

    Authors: We agree that the assignment of the observed transport feature to antiferromagnetic order is inferred from the density-driven resistance signature combined with comparison to twist-angle-dependent band-structure and interaction calculations that predict antiferromagnetic ordering near the relevant fillings. Direct magnetic or spectroscopic probes are not included in this study, as they present significant technical challenges for these micron-scale moiré devices. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the discussion to explicitly acknowledge alternative mechanisms such as charge order or strain-induced gaps, updated the abstract and phase-diagram section to use more cautious language, and clarified that the claimed proximity is to a density-driven Fermi-surface reconstruction whose microscopic origin is supported by theory and consistency with prior reports on related systems. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Experimental methods and the figures showing phase diagrams versus twist angle] The claim of smooth evolution and independence from the VHS and half-filling is supported by the plotted boundaries, yet the manuscript provides neither error bars on the critical densities nor quantitative device-to-device statistics (number of devices per angle, twist-angle inhomogeneity maps, or strain estimates). In twisted TMDs even ~0.1° gradients or small strain can shift features by several percent in density, which directly impacts the asserted proximity and smoothness.

    Authors: We have added error bars to the critical densities in the revised phase diagrams, estimated from the width of the resistive transitions. A new supplementary section now reports the number of devices measured at each twist angle, together with available estimates of twist-angle inhomogeneity obtained from spatial transport mapping. We note that the observed smooth evolution is reproduced across multiple devices fabricated under identical conditions, which provides evidence for the robustness of the trends. Comprehensive strain mapping was not performed for every device; however, the consistency of the phase boundaries across the angle range and the agreement with independent theoretical calculations support that the reported proximity and smoothness are not artifacts of uncontrolled strain or inhomogeneity. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Direct magnetic susceptibility, neutron scattering, or spectroscopic confirmation of antiferromagnetic order, which lies outside the transport and theoretical comparison scope of the present work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Experimental mapping of superconducting phase diagram shows smooth twist-angle evolution with no reduction to self-defined or fitted inputs

full rationale

The paper reports direct transport measurements of the superconducting boundaries and Fermi-surface reconstruction features across a range of twist angles in fabricated twisted bilayer WSe2 devices. These observations are compared to independent theoretical calculations of the band structure and correlation effects. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed prediction or uniqueness result to a parameter fitted from the same dataset, nor does any central claim rest on a self-citation chain that itself lacks external verification. The presumptive identification of the reconstruction as antiferromagnetic is explicitly labeled as such and does not alter the experimental phase-diagram mapping itself. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on interpretation of transport measurements and standard moire band-structure modeling; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard assumptions underlying moire band-structure and interaction calculations for TMD bilayers
    Invoked when comparing experimental phase diagrams to twist-angle-dependent theory.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5613 in / 1229 out tokens · 109731 ms · 2026-05-17T01:35:26.475538+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We find that the superconducting state evolves smoothly with twist angle and at all twist angles is proximal to a Fermi surface reconstruction with, presumably, antiferromagnetic ordering, but is neither necessarily tied to the Van Hove singularity, nor to the half band insulator.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Surface Functional Renormalization Group for Layered Quantum Materials

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Surface fRG extension shows d-wave superconductivity from the 2D Hubbard model persists across most interlayer couplings but splits into two regimes separated by a narrow region of incommensurate spin-density-wave and...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Y. Xia, Z. Han, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nature637, 833 (2025)

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Y. Guo, J. Pack, J. Swann, L. Holtzman, M. Cothrine, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. G. Mandrus, K. Barmak, J. Hone, A. J. Millis, A. Pasupathy, and C. R. Dean, Nature637, 839 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y. Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Nature556, 80 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Yankowitz, S

    M. Yankowitz, S. Chen, H. Polshyn, Y. Zhang, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, D. Graf, A. F. Young, and C. R. Dean, Science363, 1059 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    X. Lu, P. Stepanov, W. Yang, M. Xie, M. A. Aamir, I. Das, C. Urgell, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, G. Zhang, A. Bachtold, A. H. MacDonald, and D. K. Efetov, Na- ture574, 653 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    J. M. Park, Y. Cao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature590, 249 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Z. Hao, A. M. Zimmerman, P. Ledwith, E. Khalaf, D. H. Najafabadi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Vishwanath, and P. Kim, Science371, 1133 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    H. Zhou, T. Xie, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Nature598, 434 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    H. Zhou, L. Holleis, Y. Saito, L. Cohen, W. Huynh, C. L. Patterson, F. Yang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Science375, 774 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Zhang, R

    Y. Zhang, R. Polski, A. Thomson, ´E. Lantagne- Hurtubise, C. Lewandowski, H. Zhou, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Alicea, and S. Nadj-Perge, Nature613, 268 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    C. Li, F. Xu, B. Li, J. Li, G. Li, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, J. Shen, L. Lu, J. Jia, F. Wu, X. Liu, and T. Li, Nature631, 300 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Holleis, C

    L. Holleis, C. L. Patterson, Y. Zhang, Y. Vituri, H. M. Yoo, H. Zhou, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, E. Berg, S. Nadj-Perge, and A. F. Young, Nature Physics21, 444 (2025)

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Y. Choi, Y. Choi, M. Valentini, C. L. Patterson, L. F. W. Holleis, O. I. Sheekey, H. Stoyanov, X. Cheng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Nature 639, 342 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    C. L. Patterson, O. I. Sheekey, T. B. Arp, L. F. W. Holleis, J. M. Koh, Y. Choi, T. Xie, S. Xu, Y. Guo, H. Stoyanov, E. Redekop, C. Zhang, G. Babikyan, D. Gong, H. Zhou, X. Cheng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watan- abe, M. E. Huber, C. Jin, ´E. Lantagne-Hurtubise, J. Al- icea, and A. F. Young, Nature641, 632 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    T. Han, Z. Lu, Z. Hadjri, L. Shi, Z. Wu, W. Xu, Y. Yao, A. A. Cotten, O. Sharifi Sedeh, H. Weldeyesus, J. Yang, J. Seo, S. Ye, M. Zhou, H. Liu, G. Shi, Z. Hua, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, P. Xiong, D. M. Zumb¨ uhl, L. Fu, and L. Ju, Nature643, 654 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Wang, E.-M

    L. Wang, E.-M. Shih, A. Ghiotto, L. Xian, D. A. Rhodes, C. Tan, M. Claassen, D. M. Kennes, Y. Bai, B. Kim, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, X. Zhu, J. Hone, A. Rubio, A. N. Pasupathy, and C. R. Dean, Nature Materials19, 861 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Y. Tang, L. Li, T. Li, Y. Xu, S. Liu, K. Barmak, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. H. MacDonald, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nature 2020 579:7799579, 353 (2020)

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    E. C. Regan, D. Wang, C. Jin, M. I. Bakti Utama, B. Gao, X. Wei, S. Zhao, W. Zhao, Z. Zhang, K. Yu- migeta, M. Blei, J. D. Carlstr¨ om, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Tongay, M. Crommie, A. Zettl, and F. Wang, Nature579, 359 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    H. Li, S. Li, E. C. Regan, D. Wang, W. Zhao, S. Kahn, K. Yumigeta, M. Blei, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, S. Tongay, A. Zettl, M. F. Crommie, and F. Wang, Na- ture 2021 597:7878597, 650 (2021)

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    Y. Xu, S. Liu, D. A. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, V. Elser, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nature 2020 587:7833587, 214 (2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Anderson, F.-R

    E. Anderson, F.-R. Fan, J. Cai, W. Holtzmann, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, D. Xiao, W. Yao, and X. Xu, Science381, 325 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    T. Li, S. Jiang, B. Shen, Y. Zhang, L. Li, Z. Tao, T. De- vakul, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nature600, 641 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    B. A. Foutty, C. R. Kometter, T. Devakul, A. P. Reddy, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and B. E. Feldman, Science384, 343 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    J. Cai, E. Anderson, C. Wang, X. Zhang, X. Liu, W. Holtzmann, Y. Zhang, F. Fan, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Ran, T. Cao, L. Fu, D. Xiao, W. Yao, and X. Xu, Nature , 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Kang, J. Zhu, P. Kn¨ uppel, C. Vaswani, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nature622, 69 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    H. Park, J. Cai, E. Anderson, Y. Zhang, J. Zhu, X. Liu, C. Wang, W. Holtzmann, C. Hu, Z. Liu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J.-H. Chu, T. Cao, L. Fu, W. Yao, C.-Z. Chang, D. Cobden, D. Xiao, and X. Xu, Nature622, 74 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    F. Xu, Z. Sun, T. Jia, C. Liu, C. Xu, C. Li, Y. Gu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, J. Jia, Z. Shi, S. Jiang, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, and T. Li, Physical Review X13, 031037 (2023)

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    Simulat- ing high-temperature superconductivity in moir´ e WSe2,

    Y. Xia, Z. Han, J. Zhu, Y. Zhang, P. Kn¨ uppel, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, “Simulat- ing high-temperature superconductivity in moir´ e WSe2,” (2025), arXiv:2508.02662 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    T. Arp, O. Sheekey, H. Zhou, C. L. Tschirhart, C. L. Pat- terson, H. M. Yoo, L. Holleis, E. Redekop, G. Babikyan, 9 T. Xie, J. Xiao, Y. Vituri, T. Holder, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. E. Huber, E. Berg, and A. F. Young, Nature Physics20, 1413 (2024)

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    Impact of Spin-Orbit Coupling on Superconductivity in Rhombohedral Graphene,

    J. Yang, X. Shi, S. Ye, C. Yoon, Z. Lu, V. Kakani, T. Han, J. Seo, L. Shi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, F. Zhang, and L. Ju, “Impact of Spin-Orbit Coupling on Superconductivity in Rhombohedral Graphene,” (2025), arXiv:2408.09906 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Zhang, G

    Y. Zhang, G. Shavit, H. Ma, Y. Han, C. W. Siu, A. Mukherjee, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. Hsieh, C. Lewandowski, F. von Oppen, Y. Oreg, and S. Nadj- Perge, Nature641, 625 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Fischer, L

    A. Fischer, L. Klebl, V. Cr´ epel, S. Ryee, A. Rubio, L. Xian, T. O. Wehling, A. Georges, D. M. Kennes, and A. J. Millis, Phys. Rev. X (2025), 10.1103/gfzx-rrcr

    work page doi:10.1103/gfzx-rrcr 2025

  33. [33]

    F. Xie, L. Chen, S. Sur, Y. Fang, J. Cano, and Q. Si, Physical Review Letters134, 136503 (2025)

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    Topological Chiral Su- perconductivity Mediated by Intervalley Antiferromag- netic Fluctuations in Twisted Bilayer WSe 2,

    W. Qin, W.-X. Qiu, and F. Wu, “Topological Chiral Su- perconductivity Mediated by Intervalley Antiferromag- netic Fluctuations in Twisted Bilayer WSe 2,” (2025), arXiv:2409.16114 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Klebl, A

    L. Klebl, A. Fischer, L. Classen, M. M. Scherer, and D. M. Kennes, Physical Review Research5, L012034 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    A. V. Chubukov, Physical Review B111(2025), 10.1103/PhysRevB.111.014507

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.111.014507 2025

  37. [37]

    Displacement-Field-Driven Transition between Superconductivity and Valley Fer- romagnetism in Transition Metal Dichalcogenides,

    H.-J. Yang and Y.-T. Hsu, “Displacement-Field-Driven Transition between Superconductivity and Valley Fer- romagnetism in Transition Metal Dichalcogenides,” (2025), arXiv:2508.21119 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Christos, Physical Review Letters135(2025), 10.1103/7z4z-vlj8

    M. Christos, Physical Review Letters135(2025), 10.1103/7z4z-vlj8

    work page doi:10.1103/7z4z-vlj8 2025

  39. [39]

    Zhu, Y.-Z

    J. Zhu, Y.-Z. Chou, M. Xie, and S. Das Sarma, Physical Review B111, L060501 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    F. Wu, T. Lovorn, E. Tutuc, I. Martin, and A. H. Macdonald, Physical Review Letters122(2019), 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.086402

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.122.086402 2019

  41. [41]

    Cr´ epel and A

    V. Cr´ epel and A. Millis, Physical Review Research6 (2024), 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.033127

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6.033127 2024

  42. [42]

    Stoner instabilities and Ising excitonic states in twisted transition metal dichalcogenides,

    A. Ghiotto, L. Wei, L. Song, J. Zang, A. B. Tazi, D. Os- trom, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. C. Hone, D. A. Rhodes, A. J. Millis, C. R. Dean, L. Wang, and A. N. Pasupathy, “Stoner instabilities and Ising excitonic states in twisted transition metal dichalcogenides,” (2024), arXiv:2405.17316 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    J. Zang, J. Wang, J. Cano, and A. J. Millis, Physical Review B104, 075150 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed

    M. Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed. (Dover Publications, Mineola, N.Y, 2004)

    work page 2004

  45. [45]

    Y. J. Uemura, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter16, S4515 (2004)

    work page 2004

  46. [46]

    Mu˜ noz-Segovia, V

    D. Mu˜ noz-Segovia, V. Cr´ epel, R. Queiroz, and A. J. Millis, Physical Review B112, 085111 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Site-polarized Mott phases competing with a correlated metal in twisted WSe2,

    S. Ryee, L. Klebl, G. Rai, A. Fischer, V. Cr´ epel, L. Xian, A. Rubio, D. M. Kennes, R. Valent´ ı, A. J. Millis, A. Georges, and T. O. Wehling, “Site-polarized Mott phases competing with a correlated metal in twisted WSe2,” (2025), arXiv:2506.22325 [cond-mat]

    work page arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    J. Pack, Y. Guo, Z. Liu, B. S. Jessen, L. Holtzman, S. Liu, M. Cothrine, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. G. Man- drus, K. Barmak, J. Hone, and C. R. Dean, Nature Nanotechnology19, 948 (2024)

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    L. Wang, I. Meric, P. Y. Huang, Q. Gao, Y. Gao, H. Tran, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, L. M. Campos, D. A. Muller, J. Guo, P. Kim, J. Hone, K. L. Shepard, and C. R. Dean, Science342, 614 (2013)

    work page 2013

  50. [50]

    Devakul, V

    T. Devakul, V. Cr´ epel, Y. Zhang, and L. Fu, Nature communications12, 6730 (2021)

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    Metzner, Reviews of Modern Physics84, 299 (2012)

    W. Metzner, Reviews of Modern Physics84, 299 (2012)

    work page 2012

  52. [52]

    Profe, D

    J. Profe, D. M. Kennes, and L. Klebl, SciPost Physics Codebases , 026 (2024). METHODS Device fabrication Device images and structure illustrations are shown in Fig. SI 1. We use similar fabrication process described the previous literature [2, 27, 48]. The device consists of tWSe 2 with graphite as top and bottom gates, hBN as the dielectric spacer. Devic...

    work page 2024