Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 1 cited by

Layer-Resolved Topological Metals in the Bilayer Lieb Lattice

T0 review · 2 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A bilayer Lieb lattice can host a time-reversal-invariant metal whose layer-resolved pseudo-spin Chern number stays quantized as long as local gaps remain open.

desk verdict Solid, incremental tight-binding construction: a TR-invariant pseudo-spin Chern metal on bilayer Lieb with independently tunable asymmetric edges; math is clean, novelty is real but modest. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.11009 v1 pith:236HWUQ6 submitted 2026-07-13 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.othermath-phmath.MPquant-ph

Mengjie Yang , S Rahul , Giandomenico Palumbo This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.othermath-phmath.MPquant-ph
keywords topologicalmetalpseudo-spinChernnumberbilayerLieblatticetime-reversalinvariantOAM-dependentcouplingasymmetricedgestatesdirect-gapprotectionflatbands
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper constructs a two-dimensional time-reversal-invariant topological metal on a bilayer Lieb lattice. Without orbital-angular-momentum-dependent coupling the system is a topological semimetal with zero indirect gap and a quantized layer-resolved pseudo-spin Chern number. Opposite-sign intralayer OAM coupling drives an indirect band overlap so the global spectrum becomes metallic, yet the same Chern diagnostic remains well defined and quantized provided the direct gap at every crystal momentum and the projected pseudo-spin gap stay open. The lattice also supports asymmetric edges: one side carries flat bands while the other carries a one-dimensional Dirac cone that can be gapped by a local interlayer term without destroying the opposite flat edge. The authors argue that this direct-gap-protected marker therefore diagnoses layer-resolved topology even when a residual Fermi surface is present, offering a concrete route to engineer such phases in synthetic platforms.

What carries the argument

The layer-resolved pseudo-spin Chern number Cs = (C+ − C−)/2, obtained from the positive and negative sectors of the projected operator P τz P on the locally separated occupied subspace; it stays quantized across the semimetal-to-metal transition provided those two gaps remain open.

What would settle it

Close the direct gap or the projected pseudo-spin gap (for example by raising the OAM coupling past the critical value near λ SO ≃ 0.6) and check whether Cs drops from 1 and the asymmetric edge modes disappear; or change the ribbon termination and verify whether the flat-versus-dispersive edge asymmetry is lost.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Opposite-sign intralayer OAM-dependent coupling converts the zero-indirect-gap pseudo-spin Chern semimetal into a metal while the layer-resolved pseudo-spin Chern number Cs remains quantized and well defined, so long as the direct gap at each k and the projected pseudo-spin gap of P τz P stay open.

Load-bearing premise

That a direct-gap-protected projected Chern marker remains a meaningful bulk-boundary diagnostic for a metal with a residual Fermi surface, even though it is not a quantized transport coefficient and edge character depends on termination choice.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A zero-indirect-gap pseudo-spin Chern semimetal can be continuously tuned into a metal without immediately losing its layer-resolved topological marker.
  • Asymmetric edges (flat band on one side, gappable Dirac cone on the other) become a designable feature of layer-resolved gapless phases.
  • Synthetic platforms that control hoppings and local interlayer terms can host and spectroscopically resolve these metallic topological states.
  • The same direct-gap criterion supplies a practical diagnostic for other metallic spectra that retain a locally separated occupied subspace.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the marker is only a local band-geometric diagnostic, residual Fermi-surface transport will not show a quantized Hall response; experiments must target spectral gaps and edge localization rather than DC conductance.
  • The termination dependence of the flat edge implies that cold-atom or solid-state realizations will need boundary-resolved spectroscopy, while photonic and circuit platforms can hard-wire the desired termination.
  • Non-Hermitian or interaction terms that act differently on the flat versus dispersive edges could produce skin accumulation or correlated flat-band physics without immediately destroying the bulk marker.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs a time-reversal-invariant bilayer Lieb-lattice model that realizes a zero-indirect-gap pseudo-spin Chern semimetal (parent Hamiltonian H0, Eqs. 1–2) and, upon adding opposite-sign intralayer OAM-dependent coupling HSOC (Eqs. 5–7), a metallic phase in which the global spectrum has a negative indirect gap while a layer-resolved pseudo-spin Chern number Cs remains quantized. Topology is diagnosed by the Fukui lattice Chern number of the projected sectors of P τz P, by Wilson-loop parity, and by a hybrid cylinder marker (SM Sec. S1). Ribbon spectra show asymmetric edges: one flat-band edge and one counter-propagating Dirac edge that can be selectively gapped by an edge-localized interlayer mass HB (Eq. 9), while OAM coupling bends the flat edge into a dispersive mode. The authors emphasize that Cs is a direct-gap-protected band-geometric marker rather than a quantized transport coefficient.

Significance. If the bulk–boundary correspondence holds in the metallic regime, the work supplies a concrete, tunable lattice realization of a layer-resolved topological metal with controllable asymmetric edges, of clear interest for photonic, topolectrical, and cold-atom platforms. Strengths include an explicit TR- and chiral-symmetric Hamiltonian, standard and reproducible diagnostics (Fukui Chern number, Wilson-loop parity, hybrid cylinder marker), clear direct/indirect gap definitions (Eq. 8), and a transparent edge-mass construction. The distinction between a residual Fermi surface and a locally gapped occupied subspace is carefully stated. The result sits usefully between Chern semimetals and feature/orbital-resolved topology and is a natural target for synthetic-matter experiments.

major comments (2)
  1. SM Sec. S1, Eqs. (S1)–(S9) and main-text Figs. 2 and 4: the hybrid cylinder marker and the colored ribbon branches rely on the projector P(kx) built from the lowest Nocc eigenvalues of the open-y ribbon. In the metallic regime (Δind < 0) this coincides with the bulk lower two-band subspace only if, for every kx, the 1D continua do not overlap, i.e. δ(kx) ≡ min_ky E3(kx,ky) − max_ky E2(kx,ky) > 0. The manuscript reports only the global Δind and the local Δdir; it never shows δ(kx). If δ(kx) < 0 on a positive-measure set of kx, the hybrid marker and edge coloring no longer diagnose the same subspace that carries bulk Cs, weakening the claimed bulk–boundary link in the metal. A plot or statement that δ(kx) > 0 throughout the Cs = 1 plateau (or an alternative projector that does not rely on energy ordering) is needed.
  2. Discussion and SM Sec. S3: the authors correctly note that Cs is not a quantized transport coefficient and that edge character depends on termination. The central claim of a “topological metal” with bulk–boundary correspondence therefore rests on the persistence of in-gap (or near-gap) boundary modes associated with the locally gapped subspace. The ribbon spectra in Fig. 4 show colored branches, but it is not quantified how much spectral weight remains inside the residual Fermi-surface continuum versus how much is pushed into true gaps by mB. A short quantitative statement (e.g., participation ratio or energy window relative to the Fermi surface) would make the diagnostic content of the edge modes in the metallic regime clearer.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Cs and the metal phase are computed from an explicit Hamiltonian and projectors, not forced by fit or self-definition.

full rationale

The derivation chain is model-first and numerical, not definitional. The parent block h(k;M) is written out in Eq. (1), the bilayer H0 in Eq. (2), and HSOC in Eqs. (5)–(6); Cs is then obtained from the Fukui lattice formula on the ± sectors of P τz P (Eq. (4)), with well-definedness conditioned on the independently evaluated direct gap Δdir and projected-pseudo-spin gap Δmin_τ (Eq. (8), SM Eqs. (S1)–(S9)). That condition is the standard requirement for a Chern marker to exist; the paper does not define Cs so that the metal is automatic, nor does it fit a parameter and re-label it as a prediction. Self-citations ([15] for the Chern-semimetal block; [38,39] for projected-spin Chern markers; feature-spectrum refs [44–46]) supply background constructions that are restated and re-used, not a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that forces the metallic-phase claim. The asymmetric edge phenomenology (flat vs Dirac, HB mass, OAM bending) is exhibited in ribbon spectra (Figs. 3–4) rather than deduced by renaming a known result. Concerns about whether the hybrid cylinder projector coincides with the bulk lower-two-band subspace when δ(kx)<0 are correctness/validity issues about bulk-boundary diagnostics in a metal; they do not make any step reduce to its inputs by construction. Score 0 with empty steps is therefore the honest finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on a non-interacting tight-binding bilayer construction, standard Chern/Wilson diagnostics, and the modeling choice that a projected layer operator defines protected sectors whenever its gap and the direct band gap stay open. Numerical parameters are hand-chosen demonstrations, not data fits. No new fundamental particle or force is introduced; the named “pseudo-spin Chern metal” is a phase characterization of this Hamiltonian family.

free parameters (4)
  • Nearest-neighbor hoppings J, K and imaginary A–C coupling M = J=-1, K=1, M=0.5i (representative)
    Hand-chosen (e.g. J=−1, K=1, M=0.5i) to realize the parent Chern-semimetal blocks; the phase diagram depends on their magnitudes and the sign of M.
  • Interlayer coupling t_⊥ = 0.01–1.5 (scan)
    Scanned numerically; Cs=1 only for small-to-moderate t_⊥ before a trivial regime (Fig. 1c).
  • OAM-coupling strength λ_SO = 0.10–0.80 (scan)
    Controls semimetal-to-metal conversion and eventual direct-gap closing near λ_SO≃0.6; chosen by hand for spectra in Figs. 2 and 4.
  • Edge mass m_B = 0–1 (scan); 0.5 used with Cs marker
    Strength of the boundary interlayer term H_B that gaps one edge only; free control parameter in ribbon calculations.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Non-interacting spinless fermions on a tight-binding bilayer Lieb lattice adequately capture the targeted topological metal and edge physics.
    Entire analysis is single-particle; interactions are only discussed as outlook.
  • domain assumption The lattice Chern number formula and Wilson-loop parity applied to spectral projectors of P τz P define a quantized layer-resolved invariant when the projected pseudo-spin gap is open.
    Invoked via Refs. [38,39,44–47] and SM Sec. S1; protection is attributed to the gap of P τz P rather than the AZ class BDI strong index.
  • domain assumption Time-reversal is implemented as T=τx K with T²=+1, and complex conjugation maps M→−M so the two layers form a TR pair.
    Eq. (3) and surrounding text; licenses the TR-invariant parent Hamiltonian.
  • standard math Standard linear algebra and Brillouin-zone discretization suffice to evaluate spectra, projectors, and hybrid Chern markers.
    Used throughout bulk and ribbon numerics; Fukui et al. lattice Chern formula [47].
  • ad hoc to paper The specific forms of H_SOC (opposite-sign intralayer A–C OAM coupling) and H_B (edge-localized τx on B sites) are the physically relevant deformations that convert the phase and gap one edge.
    Eqs. (5)–(6) and (9); chosen to preserve TR/chiral symmetry while producing the reported metal and asymmetric edges.
invented entities (2)
  • Pseudo-spin Chern metal (layer-resolved topological metal on bilayer Lieb lattice)
    purpose: Name and organize the metallic phase in which Cs remains quantized under indirect band overlap.
    Phase characterization of the constructed Hamiltonian family; not an independent particle or force. Falsifiable only via engineered spectra and edge modes in synthetic platforms.
  • Hybrid cylinder projected pseudo-spin Chern marker C_s^hyb
    purpose: Diagnose that the bulk region of a ribbon retains quantized layer topology after an edge mass is applied.
    Defined in SM Sec. S1 as a mixed real-space/momentum marker; useful diagnostic but not an independent bulk invariant beyond the usual projected-spin construction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Layer-Resolved Topological Metals in the Bilayer Lieb Lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/236HWUQ6

@misc{pith2026260711009,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Layer-Resolved Topological Metals in the Bilayer Lieb Lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/236HWUQ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.11009}
}
read the original abstract

We identify a two-dimensional time-reversal-invariant topological metallic phase on a bilayer Lieb lattice, characterized by a quantized layer--resolved pseudo-spin Chern number. Without the orbital-angular-momentum-dependent (OAM-dependent) coupling, the system gives rise to a time-reversal-invariant topological semimetal with a zero indirect gap and quantized pseudo-spin Chern number. Opposite-sign intralayer OAM-dependent coupling immediately converts the zero-indirect-gap semimetal into a metal, in which the global spectrum is metallic while the layer--resolved pseudo-spin Chern number remains well defined as long as the direct gap at each crystal momentum and the pseudo-spin gap remain open. The model also exhibits asymmetric boundary states: in the semimetallic regime, one edge hosts perfectly flat bands, whereas the opposite edge supports gapless counter-propagating modes forming a one-dimensional Dirac cone. An edge-localized interlayer coupling gaps only the counter-propagating edge states, leaving the flat-band edge essentially intact, while intralayer OAM-dependent coupling bends the exact flat band into a dispersive boundary mode without affecting the gapped Dirac edge. These results open a route toward the controlled engineering of layer--resolved topological gapless phases in synthetic and quantum materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.11009 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Bulk spectrum and parity diagnostic of the direct [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Bulk OAM-coupling-free parent spin-Chern [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Edge states for the Hamiltonian in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: OAM-coupling-driven flat-to-dispersive edge bands and topological phase transition. (a) Cylinder ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Time reversal symmetry broken quantum spin hall effect in pseudospin-1 Dirac-Rashba system

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The α-T3 lattice hosts TRS-broken QSH, valley-polarized C=1 and C=2 QAH, and α-tunable corner-mode SOTI phases.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

  1. [1]

    Thus, the full Hamiltonian H(k) =H 0(k) +H SOC(k) (7) preserves the time-reversal symmetry in Eq

    whereh AC only couples theAandCsublattices, [hAC(k)]AC =g(k), [hAC(k)]CA =g ∗(k), (6) g(k) =−i(1−e ikx)(1−e −iky).The form factor obeys g∗(k) =−g(−k), and hence the full sublattice matrix satisfiesh ∗ AC(k) =−h AC(−k).Using this relation to- gether withτ xτzτx =−τ z, one obtainsTH SOC(k)T −1 = λSO(τxτzτx)⊗h ∗ AC(k) =λ SOτz ⊗h AC(−k) =H SOC(−k). Thus, the ...

  2. [2]

    Because the lower and middle bands do not touch each other, the values ofC s in the semimetallic phase are preserved 4 Figure 3

    The regime ∆ dir >0 and ∆ ind <0 is metallic at the level of the global spectrum, yet the occupied sub- space is still separated locally in momentum. Because the lower and middle bands do not touch each other, the values ofC s in the semimetallic phase are preserved 4 Figure 3. Edge states for the Hamiltonian in Eq. (2) atλ SO = 0. (a1)m B = 0. Energy spe...

    doi:10.54499/uid/04564/2025 2025

  3. [3]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    H. Gao, J. W. Venderbos, Y. Kim, and A. M. Rappe, 6 Annual Review of Materials Research49, 153 (2019)

    2019

  5. [5]

    B. Q. Lv, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025002 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    X. Wan, A. M. Turner, A. Vishwanath, and S. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B83, 205101 (2011)

    2011

  7. [7]

    G. Xu, H. Weng, Z. Wang, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 186806 (2011)

    2011

  8. [8]

    A. A. Burkov and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 127205 (2011)

    2011

Show all 78 references
  1. [9]

    Bouhon, Q

    A. Bouhon, Q. Wu, R.-J. Slager, H. Weng, O. V. Yazyev, and T. Bzduˇ sek, Nature Physics16, 1137 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    S. M. Young, S. Zaheer, J. C. Y. Teo, C. L. Kane, E. J. Mele, and A. M. Rappe, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 140405 (2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    B. J. Wieder, Y. Kim, A. M. Rappe, and C. L. Kane, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 186402 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    Palumbo, Phys

    G. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 246801 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    C. Fang, H. Weng, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Chinese Physics B25, 117106 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    Z. Wang, B. J. Wieder, J. Li, B. Yan, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 186401 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    W. Wu, Y. Liu, S. Li, C. Zhong, Z.-M. Yu, X.-L. Sheng, Y. X. Zhao, and S. A. Yang, Phys. Rev. B97, 115125 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Salerno, N

    G. Salerno, N. Goldman, and G. Palumbo, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 013224 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Palumbo and K

    G. Palumbo and K. Meichanetzidis, Physical Review B 92, 235106 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    Andrijauskas, E

    T. Andrijauskas, E. Anisimovas, M. Raˇ ci¯ unas, A. Mekys, V. Kudriaˇ sov, I. B. Spielman, and G. Juzeli¯ unas, Phys. Rev. A92, 033617 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Palumbo, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 26LT01 (2024)

    G. Palumbo, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 26LT01 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Rahul and G

    S. Rahul and G. Palumbo, Journal of Applied Physics 139, 054302 (2026)

    2026

  13. [21]

    J. Chen, Y. Zheng, S. Yang, A. Al` u, Z.-Y. Li, and C.-W. Qiu, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 223806 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Beitlberger, M

    J. Beitlberger, M. Martin, M. Scheele, M. Matas, C. P. Romao, M. Str¨ obele, and H. J. Meyer, Zero indirect band gap and flat bands in a niobium oxyiodide cluster mate- rial (2026), arXiv:2602.16011 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2026

  15. [23]

    X. Hu, Z. Zhong, and G. A. Fiete, Scientific Reports5, 11072 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    Ying and A

    X. Ying and A. Kamenev, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 086810 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Bahari and M

    M. Bahari and M. V. Hosseini, Phys. Rev. B99, 155128 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    G. G. Pyrialakos, A. Apostolidis, M. Khajavikhan, N. V. Kantartzis, and D. N. Christodoulides, Phys. Rev. B107, 174313 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    J.-W. Dong, Z. Wang, and S. Zhou, Phys. Rev. B107, 045127 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Zhou, Z.-Q

    Y.-C. Zhou, Z.-Q. Sun, H.-S. Lai, X.-C. Sun, C. He, and Y.-F. Chen, Laser & Photonics Reviews18, 2400826 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    W. Zhao, Z. Tao, Y. Zhang, B. Shen, Z. Han, P. Kn¨ uppel, Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Emergence of chern metal in a moir´ e kondo lattice (2025), arXiv:2506.14063 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Cerjan and T

    A. Cerjan and T. A. Loring, Phys. Rev. B106, 064109 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    Cheng, A

    W. Cheng, A. Cerjan, S.-Y. Chen, E. Prodan, T. A. Lor- ing, and C. Prodan, Nature Communications14, 3071 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    H. Pan, X. Li, Z. Qiao, C.-C. Liu, Y. Yao, and S. A. Yang, New Journal of Physics16, 123015 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    S. S. Krishtopenko, I. Yahniuk, D. B. But, V. I. Gavrilenko, W. Knap, and F. Teppe, Phys. Rev. B94, 245402 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    L. C. Xie, H. C. Wu, L. Jin, and Z. Song, Phys. Rev. B 104, 165422 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    L. Xie, L. Jin, and Z. Song, Science Bulletin68, 255 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Z. Cui, X. Zhang, M. Peng, Q. Wei, M. Yan, and G. Chen, Applied Physics Letters126, 021702 (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    Y. Liu, H. Wang, H. Liu, P. Lai, Y. Tang, H. Cheng, and S. Chen, Phys. Rev. B113, 075307 (2026)

    2026

  30. [38]

    W. Deng, X. Huang, J. Lu, V. Peri, F. Li, S. D. Huber, and Z. Liu, Nature Communications11, 3227 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Sheng, Z

    D. Sheng, Z. Weng, L. Sheng, and F. Haldane, Physical review letters97, 036808 (2006)

    2006

  32. [40]

    Prodan, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics80, 125327 (2009)

    E. Prodan, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics80, 125327 (2009)

    2009

  33. [41]

    K.-S. Lin, G. Palumbo, Z. Guo, Y. Hwang, J. Blackburn, D. P. Shoemaker, F. Mahmood, Z. Wang, G. A. Fiete, B. J. Wieder, and B. Bradlyn, Nature Communications 15, 550 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    W. A. Benalcazar, B. A. Bernevig, and T. L. Hughes, Science357, 61 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    Schindler, A

    F. Schindler, A. M. Cook, M. G. Vergniory, Z. Wang, S. S. P. Parkin, B. A. Bernevig, and T. Neupert, Science Advances4, eaat0346 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    F. K. Kunst, G. van Miert, and E. J. Bergholtz, Phys. Rev. B97, 241405 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Liu, C.-M

    L. Liu, C.-M. Miao, Q.-F. Sun, and Y.-T. Zhang, Physical Review B110, 205415 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Wang, Y.-C

    B. Wang, Y.-C. Hung, X. Zhou, T. Ong, and H. Lin, Fea- ture spectrum topology (2023), arXiv:2310.14832 [cond- mat.mtrl-sci]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Y.-T. Yao, X. Zhou, Y.-C. Hung, H. Lin, A. Bansil, and T.-R. Chang, Phys. Rev. B109, 155143 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Wang, Y.-C

    B. Wang, Y.-C. Hung, H. Lin, S. Li, R.-H. He, and A. Bansil, Phys. Rev. B111, 195102 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    Fukui, Y

    T. Fukui, Y. Hatsugai, and H. Suzuki, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan74, 1674 (2005)

    2005

  42. [50]

    We retain the subscript “SO” inH SOC andλ SO as a label for consistency with all figures. Physically, this term is an orbital-angular-momentum-dependent (OAM- dependent) sublattice coupling rather than genuine spin– orbit coupling, sinceτ z labels a layer/orbital pseudospin, n...

  43. [51]

    See supplemental material

  44. [52]

    Beugeling, J

    W. Beugeling, J. C. Everts, and C. Morais Smith, Phys. Rev. B86, 195129 (2012)

    2012

  45. [53]

    F. K. Kunst, G. van Miert, and E. J. Bergholtz, Phys. Rev. B99, 085426 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    S. H. Kooi, G. van Miert, and C. Ortix, Physical Review B102, 041122 (2020)

    2020

  47. [55]

    Y. Yang, J. Lu, M. Yan, X. Huang, W. Deng, and Z. Liu, Physical Review Letters126, 156801 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    Y.-Q. Zhu, Z. Zheng, G. Palumbo, and Z. D. Wang, Phys- ical Review B111, 195107 (2025)

    2025

  49. [57]

    D.-S. Ma, Y. Xu, C. S. Chiu, N. Regnault, A. A. Houck, Z. Song, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 266403 (2020)

    2020

  50. [58]

    Yao and Z

    S. Yao and Z. Wang, Physical Review Letters121, 086803 (2018)

    2018

  51. [59]

    R. Lin, T. Tai, M. Yang, L. Li, and C. H. Lee, Frontiers 7 of Physics18, 53605 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    Okuma and M

    N. Okuma and M. Sato, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 83 (2023)

    2023

  53. [61]

    Yang and C

    M. Yang and C. H. Lee, Advanced Science 10.1002/advs.202523989 (2026)

    2026 doi

  54. [62]

    Yang and C

    M. Yang and C. H. Lee, Communications Physics9, 210 (2026)

    2026

  55. [63]

    Yang and C

    M. Yang and C. H. Lee, Physical Review Letters133, 136602 (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    Yang and C

    M. Yang and C. H. Lee, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.17295 10.48550/arXiv.2507.17295 (2025), arXiv:2507.17295 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025 doi

  57. [65]

    C. Wu, B. A. Bernevig, and S.-C. Zhang, Physical Review Letters96, 106401 (2006)

    2006

  58. [66]

    Peotta and P

    S. Peotta and P. T¨ orm¨ a, Nature Communications6, 8944 (2015)

    2015

  59. [67]

    T¨ orm¨ a, Physical Review Letters131, 240001 (2023)

    P. T¨ orm¨ a, Physical Review Letters131, 240001 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    M. Yang, L. Yuan, and C. H. Lee, Communications Physics8, 388 (2025)

    2025

  61. [69]

    Mukherjee, A

    S. Mukherjee, A. Spracklen, D. Choudhury, N. Goldman, P. ¨Ohberg, E. Andersson, and R. R. Thomson, Physical Review Letters114, 245504 (2015)

    2015

  62. [70]

    K. Fang, Z. Yu, and S. Fan, Nature Photonics6, 782 (2012)

    2012

  63. [71]

    A. Dutt, M. Minkov, Q. Lin, L. Yuan, D. A. Miller, and S. Fan, Nature communications10, 3122 (2019)

    2019

  64. [72]

    A. Dutt, Q. Lin, L. Yuan, M. Minkov, M. Xiao, and S. Fan, Science367, 59 (2020)

    2020

  65. [73]

    W. Zhu, S. Hou, Y. Long, H. Chen, and J. Ren, Physical Review B97, 075310 (2018)

    2018

  66. [74]

    X. Zhou, W. Zhang, H. Sun, and X. Zhang, Physical Review B107, 035152 (2023)

    2023

  67. [75]

    S. Taie, H. Ozawa, T. Ichinose, T. Nishio, S. Nakajima, and Y. Takahashi, Science Advances1, e1500854 (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    Goldman, D

    N. Goldman, D. F. Urban, and D. Bercioux, Physical Review A83, 063601 (2011)

    2011

  69. [77]

    Lv, Y.-X

    Q.-X. Lv, Y.-X. Du, Z.-T. Liang, H.-Z. Liu, J.-H. Liang, L.-Q. Chen, L.-M. Zhou, S.-C. Zhang, D.-W. Zhang, B.- Q. Ai, H. Yan, and S.-L. Zhu, Physical Review Letters 127, 136802 (2021)

    2021

  70. [78]

    Layer-Resolved Topological Metals in the Bilayer Lieb Lattice

    M. R. Slot, T. S. Gardenier, P. H. Jacobse, G. C. P. van Miert, S. N. Kempkes, S. J. M. Zevenhuizen, C. M. Smith, D. Vanmaekelbergh, and I. Swart, Nature Physics 13, 672 (2017). S1 Supplemental Material for “Layer-Resolved Topological Metals in the Bilayer Lieb Lattice” Mengji...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.