Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Circular mid-infrared light can drive a fourth-order photovoltage in 2D materials by cascading two Berry-curvature effects.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 01:02 UTC pith:POK6VPHP

load-bearing objection Clean cascade idea with solid tensor mapping; the ~100 µV numbers are optimistic because Drude screening is treated too lightly. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.10012 v1 pith:POK6VPHP submitted 2026-07-10 physics.optics cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-ph

Fourth-order Optoelectronic Response from Cascaded Circular Photogalvanic and Nonlinear Hall Effects

Bhupendra Sharma , Sobhit Singh This is my paper
classification physics.optics cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-ph
keywords circular photogalvanic effectBerry curvature dipolenonlinear Hall effectfourth-order responsemonolayer Td-WTe2mid-infrared photocurrenttopological photodetectorquantum geometry
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper shows that two second-order topological responses can be chained to produce a measurable fourth-order optoelectronic signal. Circularly polarized mid-infrared light generates a steady injection photocurrent through the circular photogalvanic effect; that current builds an internal electric field that then drives a transverse nonlinear Hall voltage via the Berry curvature dipole. The final voltage scales as the fourth power of the optical field and can be amplified by more than a hundredfold simply by tilting the beam. Because the output polarity follows the sign of the Berry curvature dipole, electrostatic gating can reverse it. The authors argue that amplitude modulation plus lock-in detection isolates the frequency-doubled signal even when a large Drude background is present, turning mid-infrared light into a gate-tunable probe of quantum geometry and a candidate for topological photodetectors or frequency doublers.

Core claim

In noncentrosymmetric, time-reversal-invariant 2D materials such as monolayer Td-WTe2, circularly polarized mid-infrared light produces a dc circular-photogalvanic injection current that induces an open-circuit internal electric field; that field then drives a transverse nonlinear Hall current through the Berry curvature dipole, yielding a cascaded photovoltage that scales as E0 to the fourth power and reaches roughly 119 microvolts under 45-degree oblique illumination.

What carries the argument

The cascaded CPGE-to-nonlinear-Hall response: the effective injection coefficient beta_eff (weighted by incidence angle) sets an internal field E_int proportional to E0 squared, which is squared again by the Berry-curvature-dipole conductivity to give a transverse voltage V_x^(4) proportional to E0^4.

Load-bearing premise

The internal electric field built by the photocurrent is not fully screened by the large linear conductivity of the semimetal and can still drive the nonlinear Hall response that lock-in detection then isolates.

What would settle it

Illuminate a gated monolayer Td-WTe2 device with amplitude-modulated circular mid-infrared light at the predicted resonances (0.09 eV normal incidence or 0.11 eV at 45 degrees) and check whether a transverse voltage appears at twice the modulation frequency, scales as the fourth power of optical intensity, reverses sign with gate voltage across the Dirac point, and grows by roughly two orders of magnitude when the beam is tilted from normal to 45 degrees.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Mid-infrared light can be converted into a gate-tunable transverse voltage without external low-frequency drive.
  • Incidence angle and photon energy act as independent knobs that select which injection-tensor component dominates and can amplify the signal by more than 100 times.
  • The same platform can function as a topological frequency doubler operating at tens to hundreds of gigahertz.
  • Materials with larger Berry curvature dipole (for example projected for WMoTe4) would linearly increase the output voltage into the millivolt range.
  • The polarity of the voltage directly maps the sign of the Berry curvature dipole, enabling electrical switching of the optical response.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the cascade works, angle-resolved mid-infrared photocurrent maps become a practical spectroscopic tool for imaging Berry-curvature dipole distributions in other noncentrosymmetric 2D crystals.
  • The same internal-field intermediate step could couple CPGE to other second-order responses (for example nonlinear planar Hall or thermoelectric effects) to generate additional higher-order optical-to-electrical conversion channels.
  • Device geometries that deliberately weaken longitudinal screening while preserving the Berry curvature dipole would raise the practical voltage ceiling beyond the present estimates.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a cascaded fourth-order optoelectronic response in noncentrosymmetric TRI 2D materials: circularly polarized mid-IR light generates a CPGE injection current that builds an open-circuit internal field E_int_y, which then drives a transverse nonlinear Hall voltage via the Berry curvature dipole. Using monolayer Td-WTe2 as a prototype, the authors map the symmetry-allowed Im(η_abc) tensor from first-principles, derive the open-circuit cascade formula V_x^(4) ∝ eta_eff^{2} D_y E_0^{4} / (σ_yy^{2} σ_xx) (Eq. 10), and estimate voltages of order 1 µV (normal incidence) to ~119 µV (θ = 45°) that are gate-tunable via the sign of D_y. They argue that amplitude modulation of the pump plus lock-in at 2ω_m isolates the cascade from the linear Drude background.

Significance. If the cascade is experimentally accessible, the work supplies a concrete optical route to fourth-order responses at moderate fields, converts mid-IR light into a gate-switchable transverse voltage, and turns the nonlinear Hall effect into a spectroscopic probe of quantum geometry. Strengths include a clean derivation from standard CPGE and semiclassical BCD formulas, first-principles values of Im(η_abc) and D_y that match prior literature, explicit geometric enhancement factors (~127 at 45°), and falsifiable predictions for spectral/angular switching and polarity reversal with gating. These features make the proposal of genuine interest for topological photodetection and frequency doubling, provided the intermediate-field magnitude survives realistic screening.

major comments (2)
  1. Eq. (10) and the subsequent voltage estimates rest on the open-circuit relation E_int_y = −eta_eff η E_0^{2}/σ_yy remaining large enough to drive a measurable BCD response. Because V^(4)_x ∝ 1/σ_yy^{2}, the same large Drude conductivity that appears in the denominator strongly suppresses the intermediate field. The manuscript acknowledges a “massive linear Drude background” but invokes only amplitude modulation + lock-in at 2ω_m; that argument addresses detection noise, not the physical magnitude of E_int itself. The numerical estimates adopt σ ≈ 10^{-4} S, τ = 5 ps and E_0 = 10^5 V/m without a self-consistent treatment of residual conductivity at ω_m, contact/substrate shunting, or screening length. A quantitative estimate of the screened E_int (or an explicit device-geometry calculation) is required to anchor the ~100 µV claim.
  2. The cascade assumes that the CPGE-generated dc field can be treated as a quasi-static drive for the BCD conductivity χ_xyy (Eq. 9) while the optical frequency remains in the mid-IR. The text cites that BCD dominates up to ~1 THz, yet the intermediate field is generated by continuous optical rectification and is subject to the same scattering and dielectric environment as any other dc bias. Clarification is needed on whether finite-frequency corrections, photo-induced carrier heating, or contact equilibration times alter the effective au that multiplies D_y, and how these corrections propagate into the quoted voltages.
minor comments (4)
  1. Table I and Fig. 3 report peak Im(η) values at τ = 5 ps; the main text should state explicitly whether these are sheet conductivities and how the conversion from bulk Wannier results is performed.
  2. The geometric enhancement factor of ~127 (Eq. 13) is evaluated at the Im(η_yyz) resonance; a short note on the corresponding factor at the Im(η_yxy) resonance would complete the comparison.
  3. Fig. 4(b) colormap of β_eff(θ,ω) would benefit from an explicit color-bar scale and a statement of the units used for the plotted quantity.
  4. The SM is referenced for modulation-frequency roll-off and BCD convergence; a one-sentence summary of the key numerical checks in the main text would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: cascade formula is a transparent product of independent second-order tensors computed ab initio; self-citations are peripheral.

full rationale

The central claim (Eq. 10) is obtained by substituting the open-circuit CPGE field E_int_y = −β_eff η E0^{2}/σ_yy into the standard BCD nonlinear Hall conductivity χ_xyy ∝ D_y, yielding V^(4)_x ∝ D_y β_eff^{2} E0^{4}. Both β_ab (via Im(η_abc)) and D_y are computed independently from Wannier-interpolated DFT bands on dense k-grids; the paper reports numerical values (Table I, Fig. 3–4) that can be checked against external literature (Liu et al., Zhang et al.). No parameter is fitted to the target voltage and then re-used as a prediction. The only self-citation of note is Ref. [43] (same authors) for a larger-BCD material used solely in a scaling projection, not in the WTe2 derivation itself. Screening/Drude issues affect physical plausibility of the numerical estimate but do not render the algebraic cascade tautological. Hence the derivation is self-contained against its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard semiclassical and quantum-kinetic formulas for CPGE and BCD, My and TRS selection rules, the open-circuit balance that converts photocurrent into an internal field, and a handful of numerical parameters chosen for the voltage estimates. No new particles or forces are postulated; the cascade itself is a sequential application of two known second-order responses.

free parameters (5)
  • scattering time τ = 5 ps
    Fixed at 5 ps for all numerical estimates of Im(η) peaks and V^(4); controls both the magnitude of the nonlinear Hall conductivity and the roll-off with modulation frequency.
  • optical field amplitude E0 = 10^5 V/m
    Chosen as 10^5 V/m to obtain the quoted microvolt-scale voltages; the E0^4 scaling makes the absolute number highly sensitive to this choice.
  • longitudinal sheet conductivities σ_xx ≈ σ_yy = 10^{-4} S
    Set to 10^{-4} S for a 2D system; appear squared in the denominator of V^(4) and therefore dominate the absolute scale.
  • device length l_x = 1 μm
    Taken as 1 μm to convert current density into voltage; linear prefactor in Eq. 10.
  • BCD magnitude |Dy| = 0.07 Å
    Peak value 0.07 Å used for the largest voltage estimates; obtained from DFT but still a numerical input that linearly scales V^(4).
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption CPGE injection rate is given by the standard quantum-kinetic expression involving interband Berry connections and group-velocity differences (Eq. 3).
    Taken from the established literature (de Juan et al., Sipe & Shkrebtii) and used without re-derivation.
  • domain assumption BCD-induced nonlinear Hall conductivity is the semiclassical expression χ_abb ∝ τ Dy / (1 + i ω_m τ) (Eq. 6).
    Standard Boltzmann-transport result of Sodemann & Fu; assumed valid for the dc internal field.
  • domain assumption Open-circuit steady state balances CPGE current by an opposing Ohmic current, yielding E_int_y = −j_CPG / σ_yy (Eq. 8).
    Standard photovoltaic open-circuit condition; load-bearing for converting photocurrent into the driving field of the second stage.
  • standard math Mirror My and time-reversal symmetry restrict the allowed components of Im(η_abc) to the four pairs listed in Table I.
    Group-theoretic selection rule applied to the point group of Td-WTe2.
  • ad hoc to paper Amplitude modulation of the optical pump plus lock-in at 2ω_m cleanly isolates the cascaded signal from the linear Drude background.
    Asserted without quantitative noise or screening calculation; essential for claiming experimental accessibility.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 14722 in / 3245 out tokens · 27403 ms · 2026-07-14T01:02:07.908202+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The interplay between nonlinear optical transitions and topological band structure offers a route to control photocurrents. We reveal a fourth-order optoelectronic response that emerges due to an interlink between the circular photogalvanic effect (CPGE) and the Berry curvature dipole (BCD) in noncentrosymmetric 2D materials. Using monolayer $\Td$-WTe$_2$ as a prototype, we predict that circularly polarized mid-infrared light produces a steady dc injection current that induces an internal electric field, which in turn drives a transverse nonlinear Hall response through BCD. The resulting cascaded photovoltage scales as the fourth power of the optical field $E_0^4$. By mapping the full injection current tensor, we show that this cascaded voltage is strongly tunable by the optical geometry: normal incidence drives an in-plane resonance $\mathrm{Im}(\eta_{yxy})$, whereas oblique illumination ($\theta = 45^{\circ}$) recruits a dominant out-of-plane component $\mathrm{Im}(\eta_{yyz})$ and amplifies the signal by more than two orders of magnitude (${\sim}10^2~\mu$V). While the massive linear Drude background typically screens nonlinear responses in semimetals, we argue that the amplitude modulation of the optical pump allows lock-in detection to cleanly isolate the frequency-doubled cascaded response. The proposed mechanism converts mid-infrared light into a gate-tunable transverse signal, providing a route for probing quantum geometry and realizing topological photodetectors and frequency doublers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10012 by Bhupendra Sharma, Sobhit Singh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Crystal structure of monolayer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Schematic of the fourth-order cascaded optoelectronic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) CPGE injection-current spectrum Im( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) The BCD component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

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

55 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    By mapping the full injection current tensor, we show that this cascaded voltage is strongly tunable by the optical geometry: normal incidence drives an in-plane resonance Im(η yxy), whereas oblique illumination (θ= 45 ◦) recruits a dominant out-of-plane component Im(η yyz) and amplifies the signal by more than two orders of magnitude (∼10 2 µV). While th...

  2. [2]

    The proposed CPGE→NLHE cascade establishes a fundamentally distinct route to nonlinear Hall physics

    We develop a microscopic theory of this cascaded CPGE→NLHE re- sponse and apply it to monolayerT d-WTe2. The proposed CPGE→NLHE cascade establishes a fundamentally distinct route to nonlinear Hall physics. Dy jCPG y jNLH x W Te (b) My (a) ̂y ̂x V(4) x ℏω CPL ! X S Y ! -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 E-EF (eV) EFEF Γ X S Y Γ (c) -1 -0.5 0E−EF(eV)0.5 1 FIG. 1. (a) Crystal ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  3. [3]

    sweet spot

    No current flows along ˆxbecause βxz ∝Im(η xxy) isM y-forbidden. For an oblique beam Incident CPL E = E0cos(ωt) Injection current jyCPG ∝ E0 2 dc E-Field rectification Eyint ∝ E0 2 NLH current jxNLH ∝ (Eyint)2 dc build-up BCD (Dy ) activated Ohmic readout from modulated frequency (𝝎𝒎) 4th order NLH voltage Vx (4) ∝ E0 4 Measuring final fourth-order voltag...

  4. [4]

    Jiang, T

    Y. Jiang, T. Holder, and B. Yan, Reports on Progress in Physics88, 076502 (2025)

    2025

  5. [5]

    Orenstein, J

    J. Orenstein, J. Moore, T. Morimoto, D. Torchinsky, J. Harter, and D. Hsieh, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics12, 247 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Provost and G

    J. Provost and G. Vallee, Communications in Mathemat- ical Physics76, 289 (1980)

    1980

  7. [7]

    G. Sala, E. Longo, M. T. Mercaldo, S. Gariglio, M. Cuoco, R. Mantovan, C. Ortix, and A. D. Caviglia, Nature Materials , 1 (2026)

    2026

  8. [8]

    Nagaosa, J

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

    2010

  9. [9]

    Sodemann and L

    I. Sodemann and L. Fu, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 216806 (2015)

    2015

  10. [10]

    Ma, S.-Y

    Q. Ma, S.-Y. Xu, H. Shen, D. MacNeill, V. Fatemi, T.-R. Chang, A. M. Mier Valdivia, S. Wu, Z. Du, C.-H. Hsu, et al., Nature565, 337 (2019)

    2019

  11. [11]

    S.-Y. Xu, Q. Ma, H. Shen, V. Fatemi, S. Wu, T.-R. Chang, G. Chang, A. M. M. Valdivia, C.-K. Chan, Q. D. Gibson,et al., Nature Physics14, 900 (2018)

    2018

  12. [12]

    Singh, J

    S. Singh, J. Kim, K. M. Rabe, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 046402 (2020)

    2020

  13. [13]

    De Juan, A

    F. De Juan, A. G. Grushin, T. Morimoto, and J. E. Moore, Nature communications8, 15995 (2017)

    2017

  14. [14]

    J. E. Sipe and A. I. Shkrebtii, Phys. Rev. B61, 5337 (2000)

    2000

  15. [15]

    D. Rees, K. Manna, B. Lu, T. Morimoto, H. Borrmann, C. Felser, J. Moore, D. H. Torchinsky, and J. Orenstein, Science advances6, eaba0509 (2020)

    2020

  16. [16]

    H. Yu, X. Li, Y.-Q. Bie, L. Yan, L. Zhou, P. Yu, and G. Yang, Nature Communications16, 7698 (2025)

    2025

  17. [17]

    H. Li, C. Zhang, C. Zhou, C. Ma, X. Lei, Z. Jin, H. He, B. Li, K. T. Law, and J. Wang, Nature Communications 15, 7779 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    Mandal, S

    D. Mandal, S. Sarkar, K. Das, and A. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. B110, 195131 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Liu, A.-Q

    X.-Y. Liu, A.-Q. Wang, D. Li, T.-Y. Zhao, X. Liao, and Z.-M. Liao, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 026305 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    Y. Fang, J. Cano, and S. A. A. Ghorashi, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 106701 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    R. W. Boyd,Nonlinear Optics, 3rd ed. (Academic Press, Inc., USA, 2008)

    2008

  22. [22]

    Y. R. Shen,Principles of nonlinear optics(Wiley- Interscience, New York, NY, USA, 1984)

    1984

  23. [23]

    Monoszlai, P

    B. Monoszlai, P. S. Nugraha, G. T´ oth, G. Pol´ onyi, L. P´ alfalvi, L. Nasi, Z. Ollmann, E. J. Rohwer, G. G¨ aumann, J. Hebling,et al., Optics express28, 12352 (2020)

    2020

  24. [24]

    Du, H.-Z

    Z. Du, H.-Z. Lu, and X. Xie, Nature Reviews Physics3, 744 (2021)

    2021

  25. [25]

    F. Qin, R. Chen, and C. H. Lee, Communications Physics 7, 368 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    Note1, The BCD induced NLHE is measured using low- frequency electrical currents (typically 10–1000 Hz) be- cause higher frequencies rapidly diminish the signal

  27. [27]

    Hence, a rank- npolar tensor component withN y indices equal toy transforms with an overall factor of (−1) Ny

    Note2, UnderM y mirror, everyy-index contributes a minus sign, whilexandzindices do not. Hence, a rank- npolar tensor component withN y indices equal toy transforms with an overall factor of (−1) Ny

  28. [28]

    S. D. Ganichev and W. Prettl, Journal of physics: Con- densed matter15, R935 (2003)

    2003

  29. [29]

    R. Bai, X. Du, R. Zhou, Y. Zhu, X. Zhang, Y. Liu, Z. Yan, H. Ma, W. Gao, and C. Jiang, ACS nano19, 15724 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    Zhang, Y

    Y. Zhang, Y. Sun, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. B97, 041101(R) (2018)

    2018

  31. [31]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Van Den Brink, C. Felser, and B. Yan, 2D Materials5, 044001 (2018)

    2018

  32. [32]

    V. I. Belinicher and B. I. Sturman, Soviet Physics Us- pekhi23, 199 (1980)

    1980

  33. [33]

    Sturman and V

    B. Sturman and V. Fridkin, Photovoltaic and photo- refractive effects in noncentrosymmetric materials (2021)

    2021

  34. [34]

    Furthermore, computational details are also provided in the SM

    See Supplemental Material at href for additional details on the computational framework (Wannier-DFT bands fitting and convergence of injection current tensor and BCD), modulation frequency dependence of fourth order output and injection photocurrent from yxy component. Furthermore, computational details are also provided in the SM

  35. [35]

    Liu, Z.-G

    Y. Liu, Z.-G. Zhu, and G. Su, Phys. Rev. B109, 085117 (2024)

    2024

  36. [36]

    J.-S. You, S. Fang, S.-Y. Xu, E. Kaxiras, and T. Low, Phys. Rev. B98, 121109(R) (2018)

    2018

  37. [37]

    Hecht,Optics(Pearson, 2012)

    E. Hecht,Optics(Pearson, 2012)

    2012

  38. [38]

    J. L. Boland, D. A. Damry, C. Q. Xia, P. Sch¨ onherr, D. Prabhakaran, L. M. Herz, T. Hesjedal, and M. B. Johnston, ACS photonics10, 1473 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    Z. Ni, B. Xu, M.- ´A. S´ anchez-Mart´ ınez, Y. Zhang, K. Manna, C. Bernhard, J. Venderbos, F. De Juan, C. Felser, A. G. Grushin,et al., npj Quantum Materi- als5, 96 (2020)

    2020

  40. [40]

    Cheng, D

    B. Cheng, D. Cheng, T. Jiang, W. Xia, B. Song, M. Mootz, L. Luo, I. E. Perakis, Y. Yao, Y. Guo,et al., Nature Communications15, 785 (2024)

    2024

  41. [41]

    Crescentini, S

    M. Crescentini, S. F. Syeda, and G. P. Gibiino, IEEE Sensors Journal22, 10137 (2021)

    2021

  42. [42]

    Zurich Instruments, Hall effect measurements, accessed: 2026-06-01

    2026

  43. [43]

    K. Kang, T. Li, E. Sohn, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nature materials18, 324 (2019)

    2019

  44. [44]

    Ma, S.-Y

    Q. Ma, S.-Y. Xu, C.-K. Chan, C.-L. Zhang, G. Chang, Y. Lin, W. Xie, T. Palacios, H. Lin, S. Jia,et al., Nature Physics13, 842 (2017)

    2017

  45. [45]

    M. Chen, K. Lee, J. Li, L. Cheng, Q. Wang, K. Cai, E. E. Chia, H. Chang, and H. Yang, ACS nano14, 3539 (2020)

    2020

  46. [46]

    Sharma, M

    B. Sharma, M. P. Ghimire, D. B. Shahi, D. Bhattarai, 6 Y. Sun, J.-S. You, J. van den Brink, and S. Singh, Phys. Rev. B112, 235433 (2025)

    2025

  47. [47]

    G. B. Osterhoudt, L. K. Diebel, M. J. Gray, X. Yang, J. Stanco, X. Huang, B. Shen, N. Ni, P. J. Moll, Y. Ran, et al., Nature materials18, 471 (2019)

    2019

  48. [48]

    C. Liu, J. Guo, L. Yu, J. Li, M. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Shi, and D. Dai, Light: Science & Applications10, 123 (2021)

    2021

  49. [49]

    Bhargava, Appl

    R. Bhargava, Appl. Spectrosc.66, 1091 (2012)

    2012

  50. [50]

    M. J. Baker, J. Trevisan, P. Bassan, R. Bhargava, H. J. Butler, K. M. Dorling, P. R. Fielden, S. W. Fogarty, N. J. Fullwood, K. A. Heys,et al., Nature protocols9, 1771 (2014)

    2014

  51. [51]

    Hodgkinson and R

    J. Hodgkinson and R. P. Tatam, Measurement science and technology24, 012004 (2013)

    2013

  52. [52]

    F. K. Tittel, D. Richter, and A. Fried, inSolid-state mid- infrared laser sources(Springer, 2003) pp. 458–529

    2003

  53. [53]

    Rogalski, Opto-electronics review20, 279 (2012)

    A. Rogalski, Opto-electronics review20, 279 (2012)

    2012

  54. [54]

    Corsi, Journal of modern optics57, 1663 (2010)

    C. Corsi, Journal of modern optics57, 1663 (2010)

    2010

  55. [55]

    Isobe, S.-Y

    H. Isobe, S.-Y. Xu, and L. Fu, Science advances6, eaay2497 (2020)

    2020