arxiv: 2602.20454 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-24 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Recognition: no theorem link

Photogalvanic effect in few layer graphene

Zhaohang Li , Kainan Chang , Haoyu Li , Yuxuan Gao , Wei Xin , Jinluo Cheng , Haiyang Xu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 20:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords photogalvanic effectshift currentjerk currentfew-layer grapheneABA stackinginversion symmetrynonlinear conductivity

0 comments

The pith

A nonvanishing shift current emerges only in ABA-stacked trilayer graphene due to its broken inversion symmetry.

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

This paper investigates the nonlinear photogalvanic effect in few-layer graphene structures with AA, AB, AAA, ABA, and ABC stackings. It calculates shift-current and jerk-current conductivities via a tight-binding model across terahertz to visible frequencies. The central result is that shift current appears solely in ABA trilayers because only that stacking lacks inversion symmetry, reaching a peak value of about 1.21 times 10 to the minus 13 ampere meters per volt squared at optimal doping. Jerk current occurs in every stacking but requires an added in-plane electric field and varies with chemical potential. These relations between stacking symmetry, band structure, and external fields supply concrete rules for building tunable photocurrent devices from layered graphene.

Core claim

Our symmetry analysis reveals that a nonvanishing shift current emerges only in ABA-stacked trilayer graphene due to its broken inversion symmetry, with a peak conductivity reaching approximately 1.21 × 10^{-13} A·m/V² at optimal doping. In contrast, the jerk current, permitted in all structures, requires an in-plane static electric field and exhibits pronounced spectral tunability with chemical potential.

What carries the argument

Symmetry analysis of inversion properties across stacking orders, paired with tight-binding calculations of shift-current and jerk-current conductivities over a broad frequency range.

If this is right

Polarization-sensitive photodetectors can be realized specifically with ABA trilayer graphene without needing an external field.
Jerk-current devices allow spectral tuning by adjusting chemical potential or the static electric field in any stacking.
The results give explicit design rules for nonlinear photocurrent elements in van der Waals heterostructures.
The wide frequency window supports applications spanning terahertz detection to visible-light harvesting.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Stacking-order control may be extended to other two-dimensional materials to induce or suppress nonlinear photocurrents through symmetry engineering.
Heterostructures that combine ABA trilayers with additional layers could increase conductivity values or introduce new tunability knobs.
Doping-dependent frequency selection suggests graphene-based components for wavelength-specific optoelectronics.
Measurements on suspended versus supported samples would test whether substrate effects alter the predicted peak conductivity.

Load-bearing premise

The tight-binding model accurately captures the electronic states and nonlinear optical responses across the full frequency range for the listed stacking orders without requiring higher-level corrections.

What would settle it

An experiment measuring zero or much smaller shift current conductivity than predicted in ABA-stacked trilayer graphene at the optimal doping and frequencies would disprove the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.20454 by Haiyang Xu, Haoyu Li, Jinluo Cheng, Kainan Chang, Wei Xin, Yuxuan Gao, Zhaohang Li.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: (f) presents the jerk conductivity spectra of AAA-TG, which exhibit pronounced peaks at approximately 0.51 eV related to the single-photon transition within a set of linear bands, analogous to the mechanism observed in AA-BG. Furthermore, a comparative analysis also reveals good agreement between AAA-TG’s conductivity spectra and the superposition of monolayer responses at µ = 0, ±0.255 eV, scaled by a … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We systematically investigate the nonlinear photogalvanic effect in few-layer graphene with various stacking orders, including AA- and AB-stacked bilayers, and AAA-, ABA-, and ABC-stacked trilayers. Using a tight-binding model to describe the electronic states, the shift current conductivity and jerk current conductivity are calculated over a broad spectral range from terahertz to visible frequencies. Our symmetry analysis reveals that a nonvanishing shift current emerges only in ABA-stacked trilayer graphene due to its broken inversion symmetry, with a peak conductivity reaching approximately $1.21 \times 10^{-13}$ A$\cdot$m/V$^2$ at optimal doping. In contrast, the jerk current, permitted in all structures, requires an in-plane static electric field and exhibits pronounced spectral tunability with chemical potential. These findings establish a comprehensive symmetry-band-field coupling paradigm for nonlinear photocurrents in layered graphene and provide design principles for tunable, polarization-sensitive photodetection and energy-harvesting devices based on van der Waals heterostructures.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper's main claim reverses the inversion symmetry between ABA and ABC trilayer, so the reported shift-current result does not hold.

read the letter

The central result does not stand up. The abstract states that only ABA trilayer graphene has a nonvanishing shift current because it breaks inversion symmetry, with a peak value around 1.21 × 10^{-13} A m/V². But standard point-group analysis has it backwards: ABA (Bernal) stacking keeps an inversion center while ABC does not. Shift current is a second-order response forbidden by inversion, so the nonzero conductivity they assign to ABA cannot be explained by the symmetry they give.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript systematically investigates the nonlinear photogalvanic effect (shift and jerk currents) in few-layer graphene with AA/AB bilayer and AAA/ABA/ABC trilayer stackings. A tight-binding model is used to compute the electronic states and the frequency-dependent conductivities from THz to visible range; symmetry analysis is invoked to identify allowed responses. The central result is that nonvanishing shift current appears exclusively in ABA-stacked trilayer graphene owing to broken inversion symmetry, reaching a peak value of approximately 1.21 × 10^{-13} A·m/V² at optimal doping, while jerk current is permitted in all structures when an in-plane static field is applied.

Significance. If the symmetry assignments and numerical results hold, the work supplies concrete stacking-order selection rules and spectral tunability maps that could guide design of polarization-sensitive, doping-tunable photodetectors and energy-harvesting devices in van der Waals heterostructures. The explicit tight-binding calculations combined with symmetry selection rules constitute a clear, falsifiable framework across multiple stackings.

major comments (1)

[Abstract / symmetry analysis] Abstract and symmetry-analysis section: the claim that nonvanishing shift current occurs only in ABA trilayer 'due to its broken inversion symmetry' is inconsistent with standard point-group classification. ABA (Bernal) stacking belongs to D_{3d} and possesses an inversion center, while ABC stacking belongs to D_3 and lacks inversion. Because shift current is a second-order response strictly forbidden by inversion, the reported non-zero conductivity (1.21 × 10^{-13} A·m/V²) cannot be attributed to the ABA structure as stated. This symmetry reversal is load-bearing for the paper’s central conclusion on stacking selectivity.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract states that conductivities were obtained from a tight-binding model but does not specify the hopping parameters, the precise form of the Hamiltonian, or the k-point sampling used; these details are required for reproducibility.
No comparison to existing experimental photogalvanic data or to higher-level (e.g., GW or DFT) calculations is provided to benchmark the reported peak value.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The identified inconsistency in the symmetry classification is a substantive point that requires correction. We address it directly below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract / symmetry analysis] Abstract and symmetry-analysis section: the claim that nonvanishing shift current occurs only in ABA trilayer 'due to its broken inversion symmetry' is inconsistent with standard point-group classification. ABA (Bernal) stacking belongs to D_{3d} and possesses an inversion center, while ABC stacking belongs to D_3 and lacks inversion. Because shift current is a second-order response strictly forbidden by inversion, the reported non-zero conductivity (1.21 × 10^{-13} A·m/V²) cannot be attributed to the ABA structure as stated. This symmetry reversal is load-bearing for the paper’s central conclusion on stacking selectivity.

Authors: We agree with the referee that our symmetry assignment contains an error. ABA-stacked trilayer graphene indeed belongs to the D_{3d} point group and possesses inversion symmetry, whereas ABC stacking belongs to D_3 and lacks an inversion center. Shift current, being a second-order response, must vanish under inversion. Our tight-binding calculations produced a non-zero shift current only for the trilayer structure we had labeled ABA. This indicates that the stacking labels in our symmetry discussion were inadvertently swapped. We will revise the abstract, symmetry-analysis section, and all related statements to correctly attribute the non-zero shift current to ABC-stacked trilayer graphene (D_3, broken inversion). The numerical value of the peak conductivity and the overall conclusions on stacking selectivity and tunability remain unchanged; only the symmetry labels and explanatory text will be corrected. This revision will be implemented in the next version of the manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; explicit tight-binding calculations and symmetry rules produce the reported conductivity as output

full rationale

The paper computes shift-current and jerk-current conductivities directly from a tight-binding Hamiltonian for each stacking order over a broad frequency range. The symmetry analysis is invoked only to explain which structures yield nonzero shift current; the numerical peak value 1.21 × 10^{-13} A·m/V² is an output of that calculation at optimal doping, not an input. No parameters are fitted to the target conductivity, no self-citation chain justifies the central result, and the derivation does not reduce to its own inputs by construction. The reported nonvanishing conductivity for ABA trilayer follows from the model evaluation rather than from re-labeling or self-definition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the applicability of the tight-binding approximation to nonlinear responses and the completeness of the symmetry classification for the five stackings; no free parameters beyond doping level are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

free parameters (1)

optimal doping level
Peak conductivity is reported at optimal doping, implying a value chosen to maximize the reported effect.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Tight-binding model sufficiently describes electronic states for calculating shift and jerk current conductivities over THz to visible range
Invoked to obtain the conductivity spectra and symmetry-allowed components.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5490 in / 1350 out tokens · 54409 ms · 2026-05-15T20:18:54.467229+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

[1]

A. M. Cook, B. M. Fregoso, F. de Juan, S. Coh, and J. E. Moore, Design principles for shift current photovoltaics, Nat. Commun. 8, 14176 (2017)

work page 2017
[2]

M. O. Sauer, A. Taghizadeh, U. Petralanda, M. Ovesen, K. S. Thygesen, T. Olsen, H. Cornean, and T. G. Peder- sen, Shift current photovoltaic eﬀiciency of 2D materials, npj Comput. Mater. 9, 35 (2023)

work page 2023
[3]

Zheng, K

Z. Zheng, K. Chang, and J. L. Cheng, Gate voltage in- duced injection and shift currents in AA- and AB-stacked bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 108, 235401 (2023)

work page 2023
[4]

Zheng, Y

Z. Zheng, Y. Song, Y. W. Shan, W. Xin, and J. L. Cheng, Optical coherent injection of carrier and current in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085407 (2022)

work page 2022
[5]

G. B. Osterhoudt, L. K. Diebel, M. J. Gray, X. Yang, J. Stanco, X. Huang, B. Shen, N. Ni, P. J. W. Moll, Y. Ran, and K. S. Burch, Colossal mid-infrared bulk pho- tovoltaic effect in a type-I Weyl semimetal, Nat. Mater. 18, 471 (2019)

work page 2019
[6]

Shockley and H

W. Shockley and H. J. Queisser, Detailed balance limit of eﬀiciency of p‐n junction solar cells, J. Appl. Phys. 32, 510 (1961)

work page 1961
[7]

J. E. Sipe and A. I. Shkrebtii, Second-order optical re- sponse in semiconductors, Phys. Rev. B 61, 5337 (2000)

work page 2000
[8]

Postlewaite, A

A. Postlewaite, A. Raj, S. Chaudhary, and G. A. Fi- ete, Quantum geometry and nonlinear optical responses in rhombohedral trilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 110, 245122 (2024)

work page 2024
[9]

K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov, Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films, Science 306, 666 (2004)

work page 2004
[10]

Nastos and J

F. Nastos and J. E. Sipe, Optical rectification and shift currents in GaAs and GaP response: Below and above the band gap, Phys. Rev. B 74, 035201 (2006)

work page 2006
[11]

R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear optics , 3rd ed. (Academic, Florida, 2008)

work page 2008
[12]

S. M. Young and A. M. Rappe, First principles calcu- lation of the shift current photovoltaic effect in ferro- electrics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 116601 (2012)

work page 2012
[13]

Akamatsu, T

T. Akamatsu, T. Ideue, L. Zhou, Y. Dong, S. Kitamura, M. Yoshii, D. Yang, M. Onga, Y. Nakagawa, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, J. Laurienzo, J. Huang, Z. Ye, T. Mo- rimoto, H. Yuan, and Y. Iwasa, A van der Waals inter- face that creates in-plane polarization and a spontaneous photovoltaic effect, Science 372, 68 (2021)

work page 2021
[14]

R. A. Muniz and J. E. Sipe, Coherent control of optical injection of spin and currents in topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 89, 205113 (2014)

work page 2014
[15]

B. M. Fregoso, Bulk photovoltaic effects in the presence of a static electric field, Phys. Rev. B 100, 064301 (2019)

work page 2019
[16]

W. Xin, W. Zhong, Y. Shi, Y. Shi, J. Jing, T. Xu, J. Guo, W. Liu, Y. Li, Z. Liang, X. Xin, J. Cheng, W. Hu, H. Xu, and Y. Liu, Low-dimensional-materials-based photode- tectors for next-generation polarized detection and imag- ing, Adv. Mater. 36, 2306772 (2024)

work page 2024
[17]

Bonaccorso, Z

F. Bonaccorso, Z. Sun, T. Hasan, and A. C. Ferrari, Graphene photonics and optoelectronics, Nat. Photonics 4, 611 (2010)

work page 2010
[18]

Guha and S

S. Guha and S. Chakrabarty, Graphene and its deriva- tives (GO, rGO and GQD): a comprehensive review of their role in combating COVID-19, Adv. Phys. X 10, 2435278 (2025)

work page 2025
[19]

Falorsi, M

F. Falorsi, M. Dembecki, C. Eckel, M. Kolek Martinez de Azagra, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. Statz, and R. T. Weitz, Landauer resistivity dipole at one-dimensional de- fect revealed via near-field photocurrent nanoscopy, Nano Lett. 25, 8495 (2025)

work page 2025
[20]

Hipolito, T

F. Hipolito, T. G. Pedersen, and V. M. Pereira, Nonlin- ear photocurrents in two-dimensional systems based on graphene and boron nitride, Phys. Rev. B 94, 045434 (2016)

work page 2016
[21]

J. L. Cheng, J. E. Sipe, S. W. Wu, and C. Guo, Intraband divergences in third order optical response of 2D systems, APL Photonics 4, 034201 (2018)

work page 2018
[22]

Y. Mao, C. Attaccalite, and D. G. Ovalle, Moiré amplifi- cation of highly tunable shift current response in twisted trilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 111, 195408 (2025)

work page 2025
[23]

Chuang, J.-Y

Y.-C. Chuang, J.-Y. Wu, and M.-F. Lin, Analytical cal- culations on low-frequency excitations in AA-stacked bi- layer graphene, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 81, 124713 (2012)

work page 2012
[24]

S. J. Brun and T. G. Pedersen, Intense and tunable second-harmonic generation in biased bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 91, 205405 (2015)

work page 2015
[25]

Cortés, O

N. Cortés, O. Negrete, F. J. Peña, and P. Vargas, Gate- tunable charge carrier electrocaloric effect in trilayer graphene, Sci. Rep. 11, 22000 (2021)

work page 2021
[26]

C.-K. Chan, N. H. Lindner, G. Refael, and P. A. Lee, Photocurrents in Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 95, 041104 (2017) . 12

work page 2017
[27]

Chang, Y

K. Chang, Y. Meng, Y. Qian, Y. Shan, L. Wang, and J. L. Cheng, Gate voltage tunable second harmonic generation in monolayer and bilayer black phosphene, Phys. Rev. B 113, 045408 (2026)

work page 2026
[28]

J. L. Cheng, J. E. Sipe, and S. W. Wu, Third-order optical nonlinearity of three-dimensional massless Dirac fermions, ACS Photonics 7, 2515 (2020)

work page 2020
[29]

J. L. Cheng, N. Vermeulen, and J. E. Sipe, Third order optical nonlinearity of graphene, New J. Phys. 16, 053014 (2014). 13 TABLE I. Symmetry and band structure of few-layer graphene. The labels A and B represent the two inequivalent carbon atoms. The electronic couplings are parameterized by: γ0 for the intralayer nearest-neighbor hopping, γ1 for the int...

work page 2014