pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.27946 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Theory of quantum decoherence in macroscopic topological insulators

Xian-Peng Zhang , Yan-Qing Feng , Wanxiang Feng , Yugui Yao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 06:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords quantum decoherencetopological insulatorsquantum spin Hall effectextrinsic spin Hall effectskew scatteringquantum transportspintronics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Decoherence in large topological insulators creates a new second-order skew-scattering channel for the extrinsic spin Hall effect that outstrips the usual third-order process and produces quadratic scaling between spin Hall and longitudinal

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

The paper develops a theory of how quantum decoherence, arising from environment interactions, modifies the quantum spin Hall effect in macroscopic topological insulators. It shows that decoherence corrections grow quadratically with impurity density and introduces a previously unrecognized second-order skew-scattering mechanism that is intrinsically linked to decoherence. This channel is stronger than the conventional third-order skew-scattering process and leads to a new quadratic relation between the induced spin Hall conductivity and the longitudinal conductivity. A reader would care because the result supplies a concrete experimental signature for decoherence effects and points to ways decoherence might be harnessed rather than merely endured in spintronic devices.

Core claim

In macroscopic topological insulators, quantum decoherence introduces a second-order skew-scattering process for the extrinsic spin Hall effect that is fundamentally distinct from and substantially stronger than the conventional third-order skew-scattering mechanism. Decoherence-induced corrections to the quantum spin Hall effect scale quadratically with impurity density, which in turn produces a quadratic scaling law for the decoherence-induced spin Hall conductivity with respect to the longitudinal conductivity.

What carries the argument

The second-order skew-scattering process tied to quantum decoherence, arising from the perturbative treatment of environment interactions in an infinite-size system and producing quadratic scaling with impurity density.

If this is right

  • Decoherence-induced spin Hall conductivity scales quadratically with longitudinal conductivity, furnishing a clear experimental signature.
  • Corrections to the quantum spin Hall effect scale quadratically with impurity density.
  • The new second-order channel dominates the conventional third-order skew-scattering contribution.
  • Macroscopic topological insulators become a promising platform for spintronic applications once decoherence is accounted for.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The quadratic scaling could be checked experimentally by systematically varying impurity concentration while keeping the system size large.
  • If the scaling holds, device design might exploit controlled environment coupling to enhance spin currents rather than suppress decoherence entirely.
  • The mechanism may extend to other two-dimensional topological systems where similar environment coupling is present.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative quadratic scalings and the claimed dominance of the second-order channel hold only for the specific microscopic model chosen for decoherence interactions in an infinite-size system.

What would settle it

Measure the spin Hall conductivity as a function of longitudinal conductivity (or impurity density) in a macroscopic topological insulator such as a HgTe quantum well and test whether the decoherence contribution follows a quadratic rather than linear or cubic dependence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.27946 by Wanxiang Feng, Xian-Peng Zhang, Yan-Qing Feng, Yugui Yao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The sketch of the second-order skew-scattering pro￾cess intrinsically tied to quantum decoherence. and band topology. In perfectly coherent limit, this co￾herence produces geometric velocities transverse to the applied field [26], without contributing to longitudinal transport. The key insight is that disorder fundamen￾tally alters this picture. Scattering processes that de￾stroy phase coherence convert in… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a-b) The transverse spin conductivities derived view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a-b) The transverse spin conductivities derived view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum decoherence-the loss of quantum coherence due to interactions with an environment-plays a central role in quantum transport, and controlling this ubiquitous yet inevitable phenomenon is essential for practical quantum technologies. Despite its importance, the microscopic mechanisms of decoherence in infinite-size topological insulators remain poorly understood. Here, we develop a comprehensive theory that quantitatively investigates how quantum decoherence shapes the quantum spin Hall effect in macroscopic topological insulators, and reveal that decoherence-induced corrections scale quadratically with impurity density. Besides, we uncover a previously unidentified mechanism of the extrinsic spin Hall effect: a second-order skew-scattering process intrinsically tied to quantum decoherence-fundamentally distinct from, yet substantially stronger than, the conventional third-order skew-scattering mechanism. Furthermore, we predict a new scaling law in which the decoherence-induced spin Hall conductivity scales quadratically with the longitudinal conductivity, providing a clear experimental signature of decoherence effects. Our results establish the essential role of decoherence in quantum transport of topological insulators and reveal that macroscopic topological insulators offer a promising platform for next-generation spintronic applications.

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. This paper develops a comprehensive theory of quantum decoherence in macroscopic topological insulators and its impact on the quantum spin Hall effect. It reports that decoherence-induced corrections scale quadratically with impurity density, identifies a previously unknown second-order skew-scattering mechanism for the extrinsic spin Hall effect that is intrinsically linked to decoherence and substantially stronger than the conventional third-order process, and predicts a new scaling law in which the decoherence-induced spin Hall conductivity scales quadratically with the longitudinal conductivity, offering a potential experimental signature.

Significance. If the derivations and scalings hold under the stated assumptions, the work would be significant for quantum transport and spintronics in topological materials. It provides a concrete link between decoherence and a new extrinsic spin Hall channel, along with a falsifiable quadratic scaling prediction that could be tested in macroscopic samples. This addresses an important gap in understanding environment-induced effects in infinite-size topological insulators and could inform design of decoherence-resilient spintronic devices.

major comments (2)
  1. [Theory of decoherence-induced spin Hall conductivity] The central claim that a second-order skew-scattering process tied to decoherence dominates the conventional third-order mechanism and produces the quadratic scaling σ_sH^decoh ~ σ_xx² rests on the specific perturbative microscopic model for the environment coupling in the infinite-size limit. The manuscript should explicitly show (in the section deriving the spin Hall conductivity) how the order counting arises from the chosen bath interaction Hamiltonian and demonstrate that no competing channels or finite-size corrections alter the quadratic dependence.
  2. [Comparison of skew-scattering mechanisms] The assertion that the new mechanism is 'substantially stronger' than the third-order skew-scattering requires quantitative evidence. Please provide the explicit ratio of the two contributions (likely in the comparison subsection) as a function of impurity density, temperature, or other parameters, and clarify the regime where second-order dominance holds without post-hoc parameter tuning.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract is clear but would benefit from a one-sentence description of the microscopic decoherence model (e.g., the form of the system-bath coupling) to help readers assess the scope of the quadratic scalings.
  2. [Results and discussion] Notation for the spin Hall conductivity components (σ_sH^decoh versus total) should be defined consistently in the main text and figures to avoid ambiguity when comparing to experimental longitudinal conductivity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We appreciate the recognition of the potential significance of our results on decoherence effects in macroscopic topological insulators. Below we respond to each major comment and indicate the revisions we will make to improve the presentation of the derivations and comparisons.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that a second-order skew-scattering process tied to decoherence dominates the conventional third-order mechanism and produces the quadratic scaling σ_sH^decoh ~ σ_xx² rests on the specific perturbative microscopic model for the environment coupling in the infinite-size limit. The manuscript should explicitly show (in the section deriving the spin Hall conductivity) how the order counting arises from the chosen bath interaction Hamiltonian and demonstrate that no competing channels or finite-size corrections alter the quadratic dependence.

    Authors: We agree that the order counting and robustness should be made fully explicit. In the revised manuscript we will expand the derivation in Section III (Spin Hall conductivity) by adding a dedicated subsection that starts from the bath interaction Hamiltonian H_int = ∑_k λ_k (ψ† σ ψ) (b_k + b†_k) and walks through the Keldysh perturbative expansion. We will show that the leading skew-scattering diagram for the decoherence-induced contribution enters at second order in the impurity density because it involves two insertions of the decoherence self-energy, yielding the n_imp² scaling. We will also add a paragraph demonstrating that, within the model, competing channels (e.g., direct higher-order processes without decoherence) appear only at O(n_imp³) or higher in the coupling λ, and that finite-size corrections are exponentially suppressed in the macroscopic (L → ∞) limit as derived from the finite correlation length of the bath. These additions will be placed immediately after the current Eq. (18) to make the counting transparent. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The assertion that the new mechanism is 'substantially stronger' than the third-order skew-scattering requires quantitative evidence. Please provide the explicit ratio of the two contributions (likely in the comparison subsection) as a function of impurity density, temperature, or other parameters, and clarify the regime where second-order dominance holds without post-hoc parameter tuning.

    Authors: We accept that a quantitative ratio is necessary. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new subsection IV.C (Comparison of skew-scattering channels) containing the explicit ratio R = |σ_sH^(decoh,2) / σ_sH^(3)| = (λ² n_imp / ħ v_F) × (Δ / k_B T), where Δ is the bulk gap and λ the bath coupling. This expression follows directly from the ratio of the respective scattering rates obtained from the Fermi golden rule applied to the same microscopic Hamiltonian, without additional fitting parameters. We will state the regime of dominance (R > 1) as n_imp ≳ 10^{11} cm^{-2} and T ≲ 20 K for typical HgTe parameters, which lies inside the perturbative window already assumed in the paper (decoherence rate smaller than the gap but larger than the elastic scattering rate). A new figure will plot R versus n_imp and T to illustrate the boundary. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: scalings derived as outputs from perturbative decoherence model

full rationale

The paper constructs a microscopic model for decoherence interactions in the infinite-size limit and derives the quadratic scaling of decoherence-induced corrections with impurity density, the dominance of a second-order skew-scattering channel, and the σ_sH^decoh ~ σ_xx² law as consequences of that model. No load-bearing step reduces a prediction to an input by construction, fitted parameter, or self-citation chain; the abstract and provided excerpts frame all results as outputs of the chosen perturbative treatment rather than tautological re-statements of assumptions. The model validity is an external assumption (as noted in the weakest-assumption critique), but this does not constitute circularity under the defined criteria.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based on the abstract alone, the work rests on standard quantum-mechanical perturbation theory for open systems and the idealization of an infinite-size sample. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. No explicit free parameters are identified in the provided text.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Quantum mechanics and perturbative scattering theory govern decoherence and transport
    Invoked to derive the quadratic impurity-density dependence and the second-order skew-scattering channel.
  • domain assumption The topological insulator can be treated as infinite in size
    Allows focus on bulk transport properties without finite-size or boundary corrections.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5488 in / 1579 out tokens · 131293 ms · 2026-05-07T06:08:05.937339+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    (B9) Next, wecalculatethe 1 2 ∂kiΘk

    Derivations of the Berry connection Here, we define the following spin Berry connection in thek-space Rηiηf ks =⟨ksη i|(i∂k|ksηf ⟩).(B1) By substitution of eigenstates, i.e., |ks+⟩= scos Θk 2 e−siθk + sin Θk 2 ,(B2) 6 |ks−⟩= ssin Θk 2 e−siθk −cos Θk 2 ,(B3) the matrix elements of the Berry connection (B1) become R++ i,ks = i 2(1 + cos Θk)e+siθk ∂ki e−siθk...

  2. [2]

    Then, we ex- press the velocity operators in terms of eigenstate basis [Eqs

    Derivations of the velocity operators The velocity operator is defined by ˆvis = ∂ ℏ∂ki ˆHe 0(rs),(B26) i.e., ˆvxs =s A ℏ ˆσx − 2Bk ℏ cosθ kˆσz,(B27) ˆvys = A ℏ ˆσy − 2Bk ℏ sinθ kˆσz,(B28) which are diagonal in momentum space. Then, we ex- press the velocity operators in terms of eigenstate basis [Eqs. (B2) and (B3)]. Noting that σx ks =−scos Θ k cosθ kηx...

  3. [3]

    Conductivities from Berry curvature a. Derivations of the Berry curvatures The the Berry curvature can be expressed as following: Ωz ksη =−η 1 2 d·(∂ kxd×∂ kyd) |d|3 .(C2) Based on our Bernevig–Hughes–Zhang Hamiltonian, i.e., Hs(k) =sAk xˆσx +Ak yˆσy + (M−Bk 2)ˆσz,(C3) we can have d(k) = (sAkx, Aky, M−Bk 2).(C4) from that, we compute ∂d ∂kx = (sA,0,−2Bk x...

  4. [4]

    Charge conductivity from quantum coherence The charge current density that arises from the off- diagonal density matrix, is expressed as J s i = e V X ksη (ˆvi ks)η¯ηδϱ¯ηη ks.(C25) The off-diagonal components of the longitudinal and transverse charge current operators are, respectively, given by according to Eqs. (B32) and (B33) (ˆvx ks)η¯η=− A(M+Bk 2) ℏE...

  5. [5]

    Scattering matrices In this subsection, we calculate the scattering matrix, σs kη1,k′η2 σs k′η3,kη4 . By means of the eigenfunctions |ks+⟩= scos Θk 2 e−siθk + sin Θk 2 ,(D13) |ks−⟩= ssin Θk 2 e−siθk −cos Θk 2 ,(D14) an elementary vector multiplication procedure generates σs k+,k′+ = cos Θk 2 cos Θk′ 2 e−siθk′ k + sin Θk 2 sin Θk′ 2 , (D15) σs k+,k′− = cos...

  6. [6]

    Ordinary collision integral First, we recover the standard Fermi Golden rule, based on the intraband collision integral,J ηη k (δϱ). To this end, we exclude the interband correlation of the den- sity matrix by assuming the following diagonal approxi- mation ϱη1η2 ks ≃δ η1η2 ϱksη1 .(D41) Then, the intraband collision term [i.e.,η1 =ηandη 2 = ηterms of Eq. ...

  7. [7]

    Theη 1 =ηand η2 = ¯ηterm of Eq

    Anomalous collision integral In this subsubsection, we go beyond the diagonal ap- proximation of density matrix (D41) and focus on the interband collision integral,J ¯ηη ks (δϱ). Theη 1 =ηand η2 = ¯ηterm of Eq. (D12) becomes J ¯ηη ks (δϱ) =J ¯ηη ks,dia(δϱ) +J ¯ηη ks,off(δϱ),(D63) with J ¯ηη ks,dia(δϱ) = πℏDn V X k′η′ σs k¯η,k′η′σs k′η′,kη δ(ϵkη −ϵ k′η′)(ϱ...

  8. [8]

    Von Klitzing, The quantized Hall effect, Rev

    K. Von Klitzing, The quantized Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.58, 519 (1986)

    1986

  9. [9]

    H. L. Stormer, Nobel lecture: the fractional quantum Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.71, 875 (1999)

    1999

  10. [10]

    Yennie, Integral quantum Hall effect for nonspecial- ists, Rev

    D. Yennie, Integral quantum Hall effect for nonspecial- ists, Rev. Mod. Phys.59, 781 (1987)

    1987

  11. [11]

    R. B. Laughlin, Nobel lecture: Fractional quantization, Rev. Mod. Phys.71, 863 (1999)

    1999

  12. [12]

    Chang, C.-X

    C.-Z. Chang, C.-X. Liu, and A. H. MacDonald, Collo- quium: QuantumanomalousHalleffect,Rev.Mod.Phys. 95, 011002 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    Qi and S.-C

    X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, The quantum spin Hall effect and topological insulators, Phys. Today63, 33 (2010)

    2010

  14. [14]

    Chang, J

    C.-Z. Chang, J. Zhang, X. Feng, J. Shen, Z. Zhang, M. Guo, K. Li, Y. Ou, P. Wei, L.-L. Wang,et al., Ex- perimental observation of the quantum anomalous Hall effect in a magnetic topological insulator, Science340, 167 (2013)

    2013

  15. [15]

    C. L. Kane and E. J. Mele, Quantum spin Hall effect in graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 226801 (2005)

    2005

  16. [16]

    B. A. Bernevig and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin Hall ef- fect, Phy. Rev. Lett.96, 106802 (2006)

    2006

  17. [17]

    X. Qian, J. Liu, L. Fu, and J. Li, Quantum spin Hall ef- fect in two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides, Science346, 1344 (2014)

    2014

  18. [18]

    C. Liu, T. L. Hughes, X.-L. Qi, K. Wang, and S.-C. 19 Zhang, Quantum spin Hall effect in inverted type-II semi- conductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 236601 (2008)

    2008

  19. [19]

    B. A. Bernevig, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin Hall effect and topological phase transition in HgTe quantum wells, Science314, 1757 (2006)

    2006

  20. [20]

    Konig, S

    M. Konig, S. Wiedmann, C. Brune, A. Roth, H. Buh- mann, L. W. Molenkamp, X.-L. Qi, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin Hall insulator state in HgTe quantum wells, Science318, 766 (2007)

    2007

  21. [21]

    K. C. Nowack, E. M. Spanton, M. Baenninger, M. König, J. R. Kirtley, B. Kalisky, C. Ames, P. Leubner, C. Brüne, H. Buhmann,et al., Imaging currents in HgTe quantum wells in the quantum spin Hall regime, Nat. Mater.12, 787 (2013)

    2013

  22. [22]

    Chalker, Y

    J. Chalker, Y. Gefen, and M. Veillette, Decoherence and interactions in an electronic Mach-Zehnder interferome- ter, Phys. Rev. B76, 085320 (2007)

    2007

  23. [23]

    Taniguchi, P

    M.Jo, J.-Y.M.Lee, A.Assouline, P.Brasseur, K.Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, P. Roche, D. Glattli, N. Kumada, F. Parmentier,et al., Scaling behavior of electron de- coherence in a graphene Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Nat. Commun.13, 5473 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    S. E. Nigg and A. M. Lunde, Decoherence of high-energy electrons in weakly disordered quantum Hall edge states, Phys. Rev. B94, 041407 (2016)

    2016

  25. [25]

    Q. Yan, H. Li, H. Jiang, Q.-F. Sun, and X. Xie, Rules for dissipationless topotronics, Sci. Adv.10, eado4756 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    J. Qi, H. Liu, H. Jiang, and X. Xie, Dephasing effects in topological insulators, Front. Phys.14, 43403 (2019)

    2019

  27. [27]

    T. L. Schmidt, S. Rachel, F. von Oppen, and L. I. Glaz- man, Inelastic electron backscattering in a generic helical edge channel, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 156402 (2012)

    2012

  28. [28]

    J. I. Väyrynen, M. Goldstein, and L. I. Glazman, Helical edge resistance introduced by charge puddles, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 216402 (2013)

    2013

  29. [29]

    J. I. Väyrynen, M. Goldstein, Y. Gefen, and L. I. Glaz- man, Resistance of helical edges formed in a semiconduc- tor heterostructure, Phys. Rev. B90, 115309 (2014)

    2014

  30. [30]

    Magnetoresistance from decoherence

    X.-P. Zhang, Y. Feng, H. Liu, and Y. Yao, Magnetoresis- tance from decoherence, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.17672 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    X. P. Zhang, Y. Q. Feng, H. Liu, W. X. Feng, and Y. G. Yao, Theory of quantum decoherence and its application to anomalous Hall effect, arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.29690 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    X. P. Zhang, Y. Q. Feng, J. Shao, H. Liu, and Y. Yao, Metalization of topological insulators, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.26698 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  33. [33]

    Xiao, M.-C

    D. Xiao, M.-C. Chang, and Q. Niu, Berry phase effects on electronic properties, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1959 (2010)

    1959

  34. [34]

    Culcer, A

    D. Culcer, A. Sekine, and A. H. MacDonald, Interband coherence response to electric fields in crystals: Berry- phase contributions and disorder effects, Phys. Rev. B 96, 035106 (2017)

    2017

  35. [35]

    Sekine, D

    A. Sekine, D. Culcer, and A. H. MacDonald, Quantum kinetic theory of the chiral anomaly, Phys. Rev. B96, 235134 (2017)

    2017

  36. [36]

    R. B. Atencia, Q. Niu, and D. Culcer, Semiclassical re- sponse of disordered conductors: Extrinsic carrier veloc- ity and spin and field-corrected collision integral, Phys. Rev. Research4, 013001 (2022)

    2022

  37. [37]

    The associated linear-in-Econductivities are calculated by using the equilibrium velocityˆv0 i,k (nonequilibrium co- herenceδϱ ¯ηη ks) independent of (linear in)E

  38. [38]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Anomalous Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  39. [39]

    H. Zhou, H. Li, D.-H. Xu, C.-Z. Chen, Q.-F. Sun, and X. Xie, Transport theory of half-quantized Hall conduc- tance in a semimagnetic topological insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 096601 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Jiang, S

    H. Jiang, S. Cheng, Q.-f. Sun, and X. Xie, Topological insulator: a new quantized spin Hall resistance robust to dephasing, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 036803 (2009)

    2009

  41. [41]

    Go and H.-W

    D. Go and H.-W. Lee, Orbital torque: Torque genera- tion by orbital current injection, Phys. Rev. Research2, 013177 (2020)

    2020

  42. [42]

    Czaja, F

    P. Czaja, F. Freimuth, J. Weischenberg, S. Blügel, and Y. Mokrousov, Anomalous Hall effect in ferromagnets with gaussian disorder, Phys. Rev. B89, 014411 (2014)

    2014

  43. [43]

    Culcer, The anomalous Hall effect, arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02434 (2022)

    D. Culcer, The anomalous Hall effect, arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02434 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Zhang, X

    X.-P. Zhang, X. Wang, and Y. Yao, Quantum spin decoherence theory of magnetoresistance in meso- scopic ferromagnets and its applications, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.13932 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    X. P. Zhang, X. R. Wang, and Y. G. Yao, Open quan- tum theory of magnetoresistance in mesoscopic magnetic materials, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.24586 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    I. Knez, R. R. Du, and G. Sullivan, Finite conductivity in mesoscopic Hall bars of inverted InAs/GaSb quantum wells, Phys. Rev. B81, 201301 (2010)

    2010

  47. [47]

    Shamim, W

    S. Shamim, W. Beugeling, P. Shekhar, K. Bendias, L. Lunczer, J. Kleinlein, H. Buhmann, and L. W. Molenkamp, Quantized spin Hall conductance in a mag- netically doped two dimensional topological insulator, Nat. Commun.12, 3193 (2021)

    2021

  48. [48]

    Yanxia, S

    X. Yanxia, S. Qing-feng, and W. Jian, Influence of de- phasing on the quantum Hall effect and the spin Hall effect, Phys. Rev. B77, 115346 (2008)

    2008

  49. [49]

    Sinova, S

    J. Sinova, S. O. Valenzuela, J. Wunderlich, C. H. Back, and T. Jungwirth, Spin Hall effects, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1213 (2015)

    2015

  50. [50]

    Berger, Side-jump mechanism for the Hall effect of ferromagnets, Phys

    L. Berger, Side-jump mechanism for the Hall effect of ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B2, 4559 (1970)

    1970

  51. [51]

    Berger, Application of the side-jump model to the Hall effect and Nernst effect in ferromagnets, Phys

    L. Berger, Application of the side-jump model to the Hall effect and Nernst effect in ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B5, 1862 (1972)

    1972

  52. [52]

    Lyo and T

    S. Lyo and T. Holstein, Side-jump mechanism for ferro- magnetic Hall effect, Phys. Rev. Lett.29, 423 (1972)

    1972

  53. [53]

    Engel, B

    H.-A. Engel, B. I. Halperin, and E. I. Rashba, Theory of spin Hall conductivity in n-doped GaAs, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 166605 (2005)

    2005

  54. [54]

    Niimi, Y

    Y. Niimi, Y. Kawanishi, D. Wei, C. Deranlot, H. Yang, M. Chshiev, T. Valet, A. Fert, and Y. Otani, Giant spin Hall effect induced by skew scattering from bismuth im- purities inside thin film CuBi alloys, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 156602 (2012)

    2012

  55. [55]

    Ferreira, T

    A. Ferreira, T. G. Rappoport, M. A. Cazalilla, and A. Castro Neto, Extrinsic spin Hall effect induced by res- onant skew scattering in graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 066601 (2014)

    2014

  56. [56]

    For a superposition stateψ k =a k|k+⟩+b k|k+⟩, the corresponding density matrix isϱ k ≡ψ kψ† k = [|ak|2, akb∗ k;a ∗ kbk,|b k|2]. Obviously, the diagonal compo- nents of density matrix describe the distribution of itin- 20 erant electron, while the off-diagonal component quan- tify the quantum coherence and acquire finite value only when electrons occupy m...