Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

An X-shaped Majorana interferometer makes finite DC conductance itself a signature of Ising anyon non-Abelian statistics.

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

2026-07-31 21:56 UTC pith:2Z24CTWW

load-bearing objection Clean extension of their two-arm work: the X geometry opens the fermionic fusion channel and gives a finite isotropic DC conductance with a topological-spin offset—useful theory, oversold as “direct evidence.” the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.24171 v1 pith:2Z24CTWW submitted 2026-07-27 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

DC Conductance of X-shaped Majorana Interferometer reveals Non-Abelian Anyon Statistics

Domenico Giuliano , Andrea Nava , Reinhold Egger , Fabian Hassler This is my paper
classification quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Ising anyonsedge vorticesMajorana interferometernon-Abelian statisticsDC conductancechiral bosonizationfusion channelstopological spin
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.

Two-arm Majorana interferometers can only access the vacuum fusion channel of edge vortices, so their DC conductance contribution from those vortices vanishes. This paper proposes a four-terminal X-shaped geometry with a floating superconducting island bounded by Josephson line junctions. In that geometry both the vacuum and the fermionic fusion channels of Ising anyons become available. Using chiral bosonization, the authors show that the linear-response DC conductance tensor is completely isotropic and is nonzero only when edge-vortex tunneling and Majorana tunneling act together to open the fermionic channel. The resulting conductance oscillates with a gate-tunable charge parameter and carries a π/4 phase offset fixed by the anyons’ topological spin. Measuring a finite low-energy DC conductance is therefore already direct evidence for non-Abelian statistics, without needing AC or noise measurements.

Core claim

In the symmetric X-shaped chiral Majorana interferometer the linear-response DC conductance tensor is completely isotropic, G = G̃ times the all-ones matrix, and G̃ is nonzero only when simultaneous edge-vortex tunneling and Majorana tunneling activate the fermionic fusion channel of Ising anyons; the oscillations of G̃ versus gate charge display a π/4 offset fixed by the anyon topological spin.

What carries the argument

The composite edge-vortex operators HEV (vacuum channel) and H̃EV (fermionic channel) that appear in the chiral-bosonized low-energy Hamiltonian; renormalization-group flow dynamically generates a finite H̃EV rate from the product of ordinary edge-vortex tunneling and Majorana tunneling, which alone produces the finite isotropic DC conductance.

Load-bearing premise

Above-gap quasiparticles created by phase slips on the floating island can be neglected because charging energy suppresses them, so the low-energy bosonized theory remains valid at the scales that control DC transport.

What would settle it

Fabricate the symmetric X-shaped device, tune into the regime where both edge-vortex and Majorana tunneling are present, and measure whether a finite isotropic low-energy DC conductance appears that oscillates with gate charge at a π/4 offset; absence of that conductance (or of the offset) falsifies the claim.

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

If this is right

  • A finite low-energy DC conductance in this geometry is already a positive signature of non-Abelian Ising statistics.
  • The conductance tensor must be completely isotropic (all four matrix elements equal), providing an immediate experimental consistency check.
  • Gate-voltage oscillations of the conductance must carry a π/4 phase offset equal to twice the Ising topological spin.
  • Two-arm interferometers remain blind to the fermionic channel and therefore cannot show the same DC signature.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same multi-terminal logic may generalize to other non-Abelian anyon platforms once flying anyons and multiple fusion channels can be engineered.
  • Residual quasiparticle poisoning would primarily suppress the dynamically generated fermionic-channel rate, offering a diagnostic for island coherence.
  • Because the strong-coupling conductance becomes independent of gate charge, the topological-spin offset is visible only in the weak-coupling window, setting a practical temperature and length-scale target.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a symmetric four-terminal, X-shaped chiral Majorana interferometer containing a floating superconducting island and Josephson line junctions that nucleate edge vortices. Bosonization separates the theory into independent ϕ± sectors; the ϕ− sector gives no DC response, while the ϕ+ sector contains vacuum-channel edge-vortex tunneling Γ, Majorana tunneling δλ, and a fermionic-channel composite process Γ̃. A one-loop RG calculation shows that Γ and δλ generate Γ̃. Kubo theory then yields the rank-one tensor G=G̃[[1,1],[1,1]], with weak-coupling conductance oscillations in Eq. (3.12) offset by π/4 and a finite strong-coupling result in Eq. (3.21). The authors conclude that finite low-energy DC conductance, especially with the gate offset, provides direct evidence for non-Abelian Ising statistics.

Significance. If the result holds, it would provide a comparatively accessible DC-transport probe of Ising-anyon fusion, avoiding the more demanding AC, noise, or anyon-collision measurements. The paper offers an explicit effective-theory derivation rather than a fit to data, and supplies several falsifiable signatures: a rank-one conductance tensor, joint activation by edge-vortex and antisymmetric Majorana tunneling, the 1/8 gate-charge offset, and distinctive temperature and junction-separation dependences. Its impact nevertheless depends on establishing the experimental exclusivity of the zero-conductance theorem, justifying the no-quasiparticle window, and correcting the strong-coupling calculation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eqs. (3.8)-(3.10); Sec. 4] §3, Eqs. (3.8)–(3.10), and §4: The inference “finite low-energy conductance ⇒ non-Abelian statistics” is not shown to be exclusive. The zero-conductance argument assumes unit Dirac–Majorana conversion, ideal co-propagating Majorana edges, fixed parity, no bulk defects or quasiparticles, and exact device symmetry. Normal reflection/leakage at the converters, trivial subgap Andreev occupation, or residual parity switching can produce a finite DC background; in a symmetric device such a background could potentially mimic the rank-one form. §4 acknowledges the ng→ng+1/2 ambiguity but does not analyze the associated transport background. Please either derive bounds on these alternatives or moderate the sufficiency claim and specify discriminating controls: independent suppression of Γ and δλ, the 1/8 gate offset, predicted T and δa dependences, and an above-gap/normal-leakage baseline.
  2. [Sec. 2.4, after Eq. (2.18)] §2.4, after Eq. (2.18): The operating assumption ωp≫Δ appears to give an instanton sufficient energy to create above-gap quasiparticles, yet the text only states that EC suppresses such effects “in practice.” EC enters the phase-slip rate, but it is not obvious that it eliminates the available energy or guarantees relaxation before the next slip. The fixed-parity bosonized theory, generation of Γ̃, and zero-conductance theorem all require quasiparticle poisoning to be negligible on the measurement time scale. A quantitative window is needed—for example, poisoning probability per phase slip, relaxation rate versus Γ and T, and thermal exp(−Δ/T) population—together with an estimate of how a residual poisoning rate modifies G.
  3. [Sec. 3.2, Eqs. (3.14), (3.16)-(3.21)] §3.2, Eqs. (3.14), (3.16)–(3.19): The strong-coupling algebra is internally inconsistent. From the action term −(2δλ/lc)∫dτ sin(√2w2−φ+), one obtains ∂lnZ/∂δλ=2⟨sin⟩/(lcT), hence ⟨ID+⟩=(evT/2)∂lnZ/∂δλ, not Eq. (3.14) as written. Moreover, minimizing Vn+ in Eq. (3.16) gives ρ+=δλ/(lcΓ)+eV/(8πΓ), while Eq. (3.18) has δλ/(2lcΓ); the Θ-dependent part of ρ− also differs by a factor of two. The quoted Vmin has corresponding factor-of-two and eV-coefficient discrepancies. Since Eqs. (3.20)–(3.21) inherit Eq. (3.18), the strong-coupling conductance requires a full rederivation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.9)] Eq. (3.9): Calling G “completely isotropic” is potentially confusing. The matrix has eigenvalues 2G̃ and 0 and is therefore rank one rather than proportional to the identity; “fully symmetric rank-one conductance tensor” would be more precise.
  2. [Figure 3] Figure 3: Please state the numerical values of Γ/Δ, δλ/v (or φbc), and φ+ used in the plot and include the color scale. Because Eq. (3.12) is valid only under Eq. (2.38), the plotted region approaching strong coupling should also be clearly distinguished.
  3. [Eq. (2.37)] Eq. (2.37): Writing the OPE with H̃EV(τ)/Γ̃ is awkward and formally ill-defined for the stated bare value Γ̃(0)≃0. Please express the generated operator and its OPE coefficient directly, including the sign and short-time convention.
  4. [Secs. 2.5 and 3.1] In the paragraph below Eq. (3.12), “v/δ” should presumably be “v/δa.” There is also a typo (“accomodate”) in Sec. 2.5.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No significant circularity: DC conductance formulas are derived from the effective bosonized Hamiltonian and RG/OPE, not forced by definition or by a load-bearing self-citation chain.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. 2.4, Eqs. (2.16)–(2.20) and estimate (2.18)]
    "Using the bosonization rules (2.6) with the chiral boson fields ϕ1(x) and ϕ2(x), bosonized expressions for Ta and Td have previously been established: With isospin operators S±=Sx±iSy, one finds Ta∝∑±S∓e±i2ϕ1(a1) and Td∝∑±S±e±i2ϕ2(a1) [19, 25]. ... The composite EV creation or annihilation rate Γ is estimated along the lines of Refs. [25, 46], Γ≃ωp(E∗J/2EC)1/4 e−√8E∗J/EC"

    Elementary EV tunneling operators and the bare rate Γ are taken from the authors’ prior two-arm work [25] (and [19,46]). This is ordinary technical reuse, not a load-bearing circularity: the present paper’s central claim—that the multi-terminal geometry activates ˜Γ and yields a finite isotropic DC tensor with π/4 offset—is a new calculation that does not follow by definition from those inputs (in [25] the corresponding DC contribution vanishes).

full rationale

This is a self-contained theoretical proposal. The isotropic tensor G = G̃[[1,1],[1,1]], the necessity of simultaneous Γ and δλ (via dynamically generated ˜Γ), and the π/4 gate offset are obtained by explicit calculation: chiral bosonization of the four-terminal model (Sec. 2), one-loop RG/OPE generation of the fermionic-channel operator (Eqs. 2.35–2.39), and Kubo evaluation of the current–current correlator in weak and strong coupling (Sec. 3, Eqs. 3.9–3.12 and 3.21). None of these steps reduces by construction to an input parameter or to a fitted quantity. Self-citations to the authors’ two-arm AC paper [25] supply the elementary EV operators Ta,d, the rate estimate Γ, and the instanton technique; those are standard building blocks for an extension and do not dictate the new result that DC conductance is finite only when the ψ fusion channel opens in the X geometry (the two-arm geometry of [25] has vanishing DC). The topological-spin phase enters from the bosonic commutator algebra and the double-pair structure of ˜HEV, not from an imported uniqueness theorem. No data fits, no renaming of known empirical patterns, and no self-definitional loop. Score 1 only for ordinary, non-load-bearing reliance on prior same-author technical machinery.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 7 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard anyon and bosonization machinery plus several domain assumptions about the hybrid TI/SC/magnet platform and on the controlled neglect of quasiparticles and asymmetry. No parameters are fitted to experimental data; device scales (Γ, δλ, δa, EC, EJ) remain free physical inputs. The X-shaped floating-island geometry is a proposed device, not a new fundamental entity.

free parameters (3)
  • bare EV tunneling rate Γ (and generated Γ̃)
    Set by the instanton estimate Eq. (2.18) involving EJ, EC and by RG flow; treated as an input scale that must satisfy the weak- or strong-coupling window. Not fitted to data.
  • Majorana tunneling combination δλ = λb − λc (and φbc, φ±)
    Junction-dependent amplitudes assumed tunable by finger gates; enter the conductance amplitude and the dynamical generation of Γ̃. Chosen by the experimentalist, not fitted.
  • junction separation δa = a2 − a1 relative to v/Δ
    Must satisfy δa > v/Δ for the fermionic channel to open; controls whether RG equations (2.35) or (2.40) apply and the T, δa dependence of G̃.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Chiral Majorana edge modes exist at SC–magnet interfaces on a 3D TI surface and convert to Dirac channels with unit probability.
    Stated in Sec. 2.1 and Introduction; paper itself notes that clear experimental evidence is still lacking.
  • domain assumption Ising anyon fusion rule σ × σ ∼ I + ψ and topological spin sσ = 1/16.
    Used throughout Secs. 1–2.4 to identify vacuum vs fermionic composite EV processes and the π/4 offset.
  • standard math Chiral bosonization dictionary (2.6)–(2.12) correctly represents the four Majorana modes and Dirac–Majorana matching.
    Standard for 1D chiral fermions; invoked from Sec. 2.2 onward.
  • domain assumption Regime EJ ≫ EC with rare, simultaneous quantum phase slips on the floating island, giving the composite rate Γ in (2.18).
    Sec. 2.1 and 2.4; required for the EV tunneling operators HEV, H̃EV.
  • ad hoc to paper Above-gap quasiparticles generated by instantons are negligible at the working temperature because EC suppresses them.
    Explicitly assumed after Eq. (2.18) in Sec. 2.4; load-bearing for coherence of EV dynamics.
  • ad hoc to paper Device is geometrically symmetric (equal lengths, equal EJ, equal velocities) so that H = H(+) + H(−) decouples and the conductance tensor is isotropic.
    Stated in Sec. 2.1; asymmetric case deferred. Isotropy of G is a direct consequence.
  • domain assumption No unpaired localized MZMs inside the interferometer (or their only effect is an ng → ng + 1/2 shift).
    Assumed at the start of Sec. 2; discussed as a caveat in Sec. 4.
invented entities (2)
  • X-shaped four-terminal chiral Majorana interferometer with central floating SC island no independent evidence
    purpose: Geometry that opens the fermionic Ising fusion channel and makes DC conductance a non-Abelian witness.
    Proposed device architecture, not a new particle or force; independent evidence would be successful fabrication and the predicted conductance pattern.
  • Composite EV tunneling operator H̃EV in the fermionic fusion channel no independent evidence
    purpose: Encodes the ψ-channel process that alone produces finite DC conductance; dynamically generated from Γ and δλ.
    Constructed via bosonization and OPE/RG in Secs. 2.4–2.5; its existence is the theoretical novelty. Falsifiable via the predicted G̃(δλ, Γ, ng) dependence.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-grok45-kimik3 · 25730 in / 4068 out tokens · 98834 ms · 2026-07-31T21:56:09.974697+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose a four-terminal, X-shaped chiral Majorana interferometer with a central floating superconducting island, enabling the direct detection of the non-Abelian statistics of Ising anyons via the linear-response DC conductance tensor in charge transport experiments. Here, Ising anyons are realizable as edge vortices nucleated at Josephson line junctions defining the superconducting island, where both edge-vortex and Majorana-fermion tunneling processes can occur. We show that in such a multi-terminal Majorana interferometer, both the vacuum and the fermionic fusion channel for Ising anyons are possible. This is in contrast to two-arm interferometers, where only the vacuum fusion channel is accessible and the DC conductance contribution from edge vortices always vanishes. Using a low-energy effective theory derived via chiral bosonization, we find that in the X-shaped interferometer, the DC conductance tensor is completely isotropic, yielding a non-zero conductance when simultaneous edge-vortex and Majorana tunneling activates the fermionic fusion channel. Apart from conductance oscillations in a gate-tunable charge parameter, which display an offset related to the anyon topological spin, measuring a finite conductance can already provide direct evidence for non-Abelian statistics in this geometry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.24171 by Andrea Nava, Domenico Giuliano, Fabian Hassler, Reinhold Egger.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic setup for a symmetric X-shaped chiral Majorana interferometer formed on the surface of a topological insulator. The surface is proximitized by a conventional superconductor (SC, orange) in the region defining the interferometer. The outer regions are proximitized by magnetic materials of opposite magnetization (M↑ and M↓, indicated by red and blue regions, respectively). At interfaces between mag… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic illustration of composite EV tunneling processes in the X-shaped Majorana interferometer, see Secs. 2.4 and 2.5 for details. We show the center part of figure 1, with the four Josephson line junctions surrounding the floating central SC island. Left panel: Clockwise (solid green arrowed lines) and counter-clockwise (dashed green arrowed lines) EV tunneling processes in the vacuum fusion channel. … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Linear-response DC conductance G˜ = Gmax sin(π/4−φ+/2+2πng) in Eq. (3.12), which determines the conductance tensor (3.9) in the weak-coupling regime of an X-shaped Majorana interferometer, see Eq. (2.38). (a) 2D color-scale plot for the conductance amplitude Gmax in the plane spanned by temperature T (in units of ∆) and δa = a2 − a1 (in units of lc = v/∆), see figure 1. As T decreases and δa increases, the… 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

50 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Bartolomei, M

    H. Bartolomei, M. Kumar, R. Bisognin, A. Marguerite, J.-M. Berroir, E. Bocquillon et al., Fractional statistics in anyon collisions,Science368(2020) 173, DOI

    2020

  2. [2]

    Nakamura, S

    J. Nakamura, S. Liang, G.C. Gardner and M. Manfra,Direct observation of anyonic braiding statistics,Nature Physics16(2020) 931, DOI

    2020

  3. [3]

    Nayak, S.H

    C. Nayak, S.H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman and S. Das Sarma,Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation,Rev. Mod. Phys.80(2008) 1083, DOI

    2008

  4. [4]

    Beenakker,Search for non-Abelian Majorana braiding statistics in superconductors, SciPost Phys

    C.W.J. Beenakker,Search for non-Abelian Majorana braiding statistics in superconductors, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes(2020) 15, DOI

    2020

  5. [5]

    Barkeshli, P

    M. Barkeshli, P. Bonderson, M. Cheng and Z. Wang,Symmetry fractionalization, defects, and gauging of topological phases,Phys. Rev. B100(2019) 115147, DOI

    2019

  6. [6]

    T. Dvir, G. Wang, N. van Loo, C.-X. Liu, G.P. Mazur, A. Bordin et al.,Realization of a minimal Kitaev chain in coupled quantum dots,Nature614(2023) 445, DOI. [7]Microsoft Quantumcollaboration,InAs-Al hybrid devices passing the topological gap protocol,Phys. Rev. B107(2023) 245423, DOI

    2023

  7. [8]

    ten Haaf, Q

    S.L.D. ten Haaf, Q. Wang, A.M. Bozkurt, C.-X. Liu, I. Kulesh, P. Kim et al.,A two-site Kitaev chain in a two-dimensional electron gas,Nature630(2024) 329, DOI

    2024

  8. [9]

    Aghaee, A

    M. Aghaee, A. Alcaraz Ramirez, Z. Alam, R. Ali, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov et al., Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in InAs–Al hybrid devices,Nature638 (2025) 651, DOI. 18 Prepared for submission (JQuant)

    2025

  9. [10]

    van Loo, F

    N. van Loo, F. Zatelli, G.O. Steffensen, B. Roovers, G. Wang, T. Van Caekenberghe et al., Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain,Nature650(2026) 334, DOI

    2026

  10. [11]

    Aghaee, Z

    M. Aghaee, Z. Alam, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov, T. Asimakidis, M. Astafev et al.,20 Second Parity Lifetime in an InAs–Pb Tetron Device, (2026) URL [2606.03884]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  11. [12]

    Zatelli, B

    F. Zatelli, B. Roovers, N. van Loo, A. Lombardi, J.D.T. Luna, S. Miles et al.,Majorana parity qubit in coupled minimal Kitaev chains, (2026) URL [2607.09511]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  12. [13]

    Stenger, N.T

    J.P.T. Stenger, N.T. Bronn, D.J. Egger and D. Pekker,Simulating the dynamics of braiding of Majorana zero modes using an IBM quantum computer,Phys. Rev. Res.3(2021) 033171, DOI

    2021

  13. [14]

    Harle, O

    N. Harle, O. Shtanko and R. Movassagh,Observing and braiding topological Majorana modes on programmable quantum simulators,Nature Communications14(2023) 2286, DOI

    2023

  14. [15]

    Prada, P

    E. Prada, P. San-Jose, M.W.A. de Moor, A. Geresdi, E.J.H. Lee, J. Klinovaja et al.,From Andreev to Majorana bound states in hybrid superconductor–semiconductor nanowires, Nature Reviews Physics2(2019) 575, DOI

    2019

  15. [16]

    Bonderson, A

    P. Bonderson, A. Kitaev and K. Shtengel,Detecting Non-Abelian Statistics in theν= 5/2 Fractional Quantum Hall State,Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 016803, DOI

    2006

  16. [17]

    Bonderson,Non-Abelian Anyons and Interferometry(2007), DOI

    P. Bonderson,Non-Abelian Anyons and Interferometry(2007), DOI

    2007

  17. [18]

    Fendley, M.P

    P. Fendley, M.P. Fisher and C. Nayak,Boundary conformal field theory and tunneling of edge quasiparticles in non-Abelian topological states,Annals of Physics324(2009) 1547, DOI

    2009

  18. [19]

    Fendley, M.P.A

    P. Fendley, M.P.A. Fisher and C. Nayak,Edge states and tunneling of non-Abelian quasiparticles in theν= 5/2quantum Hall state andp+ipsuperconductors,Phys. Rev. B 75(2007) 045317, DOI

    2007

  19. [20]

    Beenakker, P

    C.W.J. Beenakker, P. Baireuther, Y. Herasymenko, İ. Adagideli, L. Wang and A.R. Akhmerov,Deterministic Creation and Braiding of Chiral Edge Vortices,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 146803, DOI

    2019

  20. [21]

    Beenakker, A

    C.W.J. Beenakker, A. Grabsch and Y. Herasymenko,Electrical detection of the Majorana fusion rule for chiral edge vortices in a topological superconductor,SciPost Phys.6(2019) 022, DOI

    2019

  21. [22]

    Hassler, A

    İnanç Adagideli, F. Hassler, A. Grabsch, M. Pacholski and C.W.J. Beenakker,Time-resolved electrical detection of chiral edge vortex braiding,SciPost Phys.8(2020) 013, DOI

    2020

  22. [23]

    Hassler, A

    F. Hassler, A. Grabsch, M.J. Pacholski, D.O. Oriekhov, O. Ovdat, I. Adagideli et al., Half-integer charge injection by a Josephson junction without excess noise,Phys. Rev. B 102(2020) 045431, DOI

    2020

  23. [24]

    I.M. Flór, A. Donís-Vela, C.W.J. Beenakker and G. Lemut,Dynamical simulation of the injection of vortices into a Majorana edge mode,Phys. Rev. B108(2023) 235309, DOI

    2023

  24. [25]

    A. Nava, R. Egger, F. Hassler and D. Giuliano,Non-Abelian Anyon Statistics through ac Conductance of a Majorana Interferometer,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 146604, DOI

    2024

  25. [26]

    Nilsson and A.R

    J. Nilsson and A.R. Akhmerov,Theory of non-Abelian Fabry-Perot interferometry in topological insulators,Phys. Rev. B81(2010) 205110, DOI

    2010

  26. [27]

    Clarke and K

    D.J. Clarke and K. Shtengel,Improved phase-gate reliability in systems with neutral Ising anyons,Phys. Rev. B82(2010) 180519, DOI

    2010

  27. [28]

    C.-Y. Hou, F. Hassler, A.R. Akhmerov and J. Nilsson,Probing Majorana edge states with a flux qubit,Phys. Rev. B84(2011) 054538, DOI

    2011

  28. [29]

    Grosfeld and A

    E. Grosfeld and A. Stern,Observing Majorana bound states of Josephson vortices in topological superconductors,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences108(2011) 11810, DOI. 19 Prepared for submission (JQuant)

    2011

  29. [30]

    Ariad and E

    D. Ariad and E. Grosfeld,Signatures of the topological spin of Josephson vortices in topological superconductors,Phys. Rev. B95(2017) 161401, DOI

    2017

  30. [31]

    Kitaev,Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond,Ann

    A. Kitaev,Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond,Ann. Phys. (N. Y.)321(2006) 2, DOI

    2006

  31. [32]

    Fu and C.L

    L. Fu and C.L. Kane,Probing Neutral Majorana Fermion Edge Modes with Charge Transport,Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 216403, DOI

    2009

  32. [33]

    Akhmerov, J

    A.R. Akhmerov, J. Nilsson and C.W.J. Beenakker,Electrically Detected Interferometry of Majorana Fermions in a Topological Insulator,Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 216404, DOI

    2009

  33. [34]

    Røising and S.H

    H.S. Røising and S.H. Simon,Size constraints on a Majorana beam-splitter interferometer: Majorana coupling and surface-bulk scattering,Phys. Rev. B97(2018) 115424, DOI

    2018

  34. [35]

    Shapiro, A.D

    D.S. Shapiro, A.D. Mirlin and A. Shnirman,Microwave response of a chiral Majorana interferometer,Phys. Rev. B104(2021) 035434, DOI

    2021

  35. [36]

    Huang, D

    L. Huang, D. Qian and J. Wang,Revealing superconducting chiral edge modes via resistance distributions,Phys. Rev. B113(2026) 014503, DOI

    2026

  36. [37]

    Amet, C.T

    F. Amet, C.T. Ke, I.V. Borzenets, J. Wang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi et al.,Supercurrent in the quantum Hall regime,Science352(2016) 966, DOI

    2016

  37. [38]

    Lee, K.-F

    G.-H. Lee, K.-F. Huang, D.K. Efetov, D.S. Wei, S. Hart, T. Taniguchi et al.,Inducing superconducting correlation in quantum Hall edge states,Nature Physics13(2017) 693, DOI

    2017

  38. [39]

    A. Uday, G. Lippertz, K. Moors, H.F. Legg, R. Joris, A. Bliesener et al.,Induced superconducting correlations in a quantum anomalous Hall insulator,Nature Physics20 (2024) 1589, DOI

    2024

  39. [40]

    Lee and H.-S

    J.-Y.M. Lee and H.-S. Sim,Non-Abelian anyon collider,Nature Communications13(2022) 6660, DOI

    2022

  40. [41]

    Tang and G

    J. Tang and G. v. Chen,Non-Abelian Anyon Braiding with Quantum-Antidot Interferometry, (2026) URL [2606.24930]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  41. [42]

    de Wit, E

    S.R. de Wit, E. Duman, A.M. Bozkurt, A. Brinkman and I. Adagideli,Manipulating the topological spin of Majoranas, (2026) URL [2505.06334]

    arXiv 2026

  42. [43]

    Gogolin, A.A

    A.O. Gogolin, A.A. Nersesyan and A.M. Tsvelik,Bosonization and Strongly Correlated Systems, Cambridge University Press (1998)

    1998

  43. [44]

    Hasan and C.L

    M.Z. Hasan and C.L. Kane,Topological insulators,Rev. Mod. Phys.82(2010) 3045, DOI

    2010

  44. [45]

    von Delft and H

    J. von Delft and H. Schoeller,Bosonization for beginners — refermionization for experts, Annalen der Physik510(1998) 225, DOI

    1998

  45. [46]

    Schön and A

    G. Schön and A. Zaikin,Quantum coherent effects, phase transitions, and the dissipative dynamics of ultra small tunnel junctions,Physics Reports198(1990) 237, DOI

    1990

  46. [47]

    J. Li, G. Fleury and M. Büttiker,Scattering theory of chiral Majorana fermion interferometry,Phys. Rev. B85(2012) 125440, DOI

    2012

  47. [48]

    Strübi, W

    G. Strübi, W. Belzig, M.-S. Choi and C. Bruder,Interferometric and Noise Signatures of Majorana Fermion Edge States in Transport Experiments,Phys. Rev. Lett.107(2011) 136403, DOI

    2011

  48. [49]

    Altland and B.D

    A. Altland and B.D. Simons,Condensed Matter Field Theory, Cambridge University Press (2010), [ISBN 9780521845083], DOI

    2010

  49. [50]

    J. Cardy,Conformal Field Theory and Statistical Mechanics, in theLes Houches Summer School: Session 89: Exacts Methods in Low-Dimensional Statistical Physics and Quantum Computing, (2008) [0807.3472]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  50. [51]

    Campagnano, P

    G. Campagnano, P. Lucignano and D. Giuliano,Chirality and current-current correlation in fractional quantum Hall systems,Phys. Rev. B93(2016) 075441, DOI. 20

    2016