Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Domain-Selective Enhancement of Second Harmonic Generation in Monolayer MoS$_2$ via Ferroelectricity-Controlled Photodoping

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Ferroelectric-polarization-controlled photodoping at the MoS2/LiNbO3 interface enhances the second-order susceptibility, raising second-harmonic intensity by up to ~70% under resonant excitation.

desk verdict A well-controlled experiment showing power- and domain-selective SHG enhancement in MoS2/PPLN, but the photodoping mechanism at 800 nm is asserted rather than demonstrated and needs explicit testing before the title claim holds. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.29152 v1 pith:SIVKNREX submitted 2026-07-31 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics

David Hernández-Pinilla , Line Jelver , María Jesús Martínez-Morillo , César Hernando-Fuente , Miquel Cherta , Guillermo López-Polin , Joel D. Cox , Luisa E. Bausá
show 1 more author
Mariola O Ramírez
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics
keywords ferroelectricphotodopingsecondharmonicgenerationmonolayerMoS2lithiumniobatechi(2)tuningtwo-photonresonance2Dmaterialsall-opticalmodulation
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

The paper is trying to establish that the ferroelectric domain pattern of a lithium niobate substrate can be used as an all-optical, contact-free control knob for the second-order nonlinear response of a monolayer semiconductor. It reports that the second-harmonic intensity from monolayer MoS2 on periodically poled LiNbO3 is up to ~70% higher on upward-polarized domains than on downward-polarized ones, provided the excitation is near the two-photon C-band resonance and the power is high enough. The enhancement is explained by polarization-dependent photodoping that accumulates electrons in the monolayer on one type of domain, and ab initio calculations are used to show that electron doping indeed raises χ(2) at the relevant resonance. If the claim holds, it offers a simple, reconfigurable route to patterned frequency conversion without any electrical contacts.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is domain-selective photodoping at the MoS2/LiNbO3 interface: downward band bending above upward-polarized ferroelectric domains drives photoexcited electrons into the monolayer, while domains of opposite polarization leave the monolayer's density essentially unchanged. The SHG response is tied to the doping state through the relation I_2ω ∝ |χ(2)|^2 I_ω^2, so the ratio I_2ω/I_ω^2 directly tracks changes in χ(2) with illumination power. The spectral location that matters is the two-photon resonance with the C interband transition of MoS2, near 440 nm for the second-harmonic field, where the calculations and experiment place the largest doping-induced change in χ(2)

What would settle it

Monitor the trion/exciton ratio in photoluminescence (or another doping probe) of the MoS2 monolayer under 800 nm illumination at the powers used in the SHG measurements; if the electron density on upward-polarized domains does not increase with power, the SHG contrast cannot be caused by photodoping.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper shows that monolayer MoS2 on a periodically poled lithium niobate crystal emits spatially patterned second-harmonic light whose intensity differs by up to ~70% between ferroelectric domains of opposite polarization. The contrast appears only on the polar surface, grows with excitation power, peaks when the fundamental wavelength drives the two-photon C-band transition, and is independent of the relative crystal orientation between MoS2 and LiNbO3, ruling out interference or interfacial symmetry coupling. The authors attribute the effect to photodoping: on upward-polarized domains, light-induced charge transfer accumulates electrons in the monolayer (density changes ~10^14 cm^-2), a

Load-bearing premise

The central premise is that 800-nm light, which has lower energy than the bandgap of monolayer MoS2, still produces the domain-selective photodoping that the paper's SHG explanation relies on; that photodoping was previously observed under above-gap visible light, not at 800 nm, and is not directly verified here.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single substrate can imprint a permanent, reconfigurable spatial pattern of nonlinear optical strength onto a 2D layer, simply by choosing the polarization of the pump.
  • The power dependence offers an optical gain mechanism: the higher the intensity, the more the doping, and the more the SHG, which could be used to sharpen or switch nonlinear signals.
  • Because the modulation is strongest on resonance, the effect provides a way to sense or amplify small changes in carrier density through a nonlinear optical readout.
  • The same electrode-free doping approach might be applied to other nonlinear or optoelectronic processes in monolayer semiconductors, such as third-harmonic generation or photoluminescence.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not show absorption of the 800 nm pump in MoS2; if photodoping is confirmed at this sub-bandgap wavelength, the effect would open a generic route for below-gap all-optical control; if not, the SHG contrast would need a different explanation.
  • The supra-quadratic slope (~2.3) on Pup domains hints at a positive feedback between pump and χ(2) that could enable optical bistability; a pump-probe experiment could test whether the response has a relaxation time set by carrier recombination.
  • By switching the ferroelectric polarization of the substrate (or using a ferroelectric with switchable domains), the same sample could be reprogrammed between 'enhanced' and 'non-enhanced' SHG regions, offering rewritable nonlinear photonics.
  • The doping-density scale (~10^14 cm^-2) is similar to what gates achieve, so the method might replace electrical gating in studies of nonlinear susceptibilities where contacts are undesirable.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports spatially resolved second-harmonic generation (SHG) imaging of monolayer MoS2 transferred onto periodically poled LiNbO3 (PPLN). A pronounced SHG intensity modulation (up to ~70%) is observed between ferroelectric domains of opposite out-of-plane polarization, with maximum intensity on upward-polarized (Pup) domains under 780–900 nm fundamental excitation. Control experiments using polarization decoupling of MoS2 and LiNbO3 signals, a nonpolar Y-cut substrate, and bare-substrate comparison rule out interference and symmetry-coupling artifacts. The authors attribute the modulation to ferroelectricity-controlled photodoping: photoexcited electrons accumulate at the MoS2/LiNbO3 interface on Pup domains, n-doping the monolayer and enhancing its second-order susceptibility near the C interband resonance. First-principles DFT calculations of χ(2) for doped monolayer MoS2 show a similar trend. The claim is presented as a contact-free, all-optical route to spatially tune nonlinear optical responses.

Significance. The work addresses an interesting and timely problem — active optical control of second-order nonlinearity in 2D semiconductors. The experimental design is strong: the polarization decoupling (Fig. 3a,b), the Y-cut control (Fig. 3d), and the wavelength tracking of the C resonance (Fig. 2c) convincingly exclude the most obvious artifacts. The DFT calculations are a genuine first-principles computation with no parameters fitted to the SHG data, and the theory-experiment comparison is qualitative rather than a fit, which is appropriate. If the photodoping mechanism is verified under the actual excitation conditions, the result would constitute a significant advance, demonstrating a built-in, non-volatile, spatially selective control of SHG without external contacts. However, the central mechanism currently rests on an unverified transfer of the photodoping effect from above-gap visible illumination (ref 24) to the sub-bandgap 800–840 nm fundamental used here. This weakens the support for the main interpretation and leaves room for alternative power-activated mechanisms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results, Fig. 4 and text after Fig. 4c] The proposed mechanism requires photocarrier generation under 800–840 nm excitation (1.55–1.48 eV), which is below the ~1.85 eV bandgap of monolayer MoS2. The only direct evidence for domain-selective photodoping comes from ref. 24 and Fig. S4a, obtained under intense visible, above-gap illumination; the manuscript identifies no sub-gap absorption or carrier-generation channel at the SHG wavelengths. In addition, the fundamental itself generates ~400 nm light (SHG from both MoS2 and LiNbO3) that could photodope the monolayer, creating a self-enhancing feedback that is neither characterized nor excluded. Since the power-dependent contrast (Fig. 4b, slopes 1.99 vs 2.26) is the core evidence for a light-driven χ(2) enhancement, the lack of verification that the 800–840 nm beam actually changes the carrier density in Pup domains is load-bearing. The authors should measure the doping under th
  2. [Fig. 4c and power-dependence analysis] The normalization I2ω/Iω^2 used to extract relative changes in χ(2) assumes that the local fundamental intensity at the monolayer is identical on Pup and Pdown domains and that no power-dependent linear losses occur. If doping modifies the linear absorption or reflection at 800 nm or 400 nm, the observed increase in normalized SHG could partly reflect a change in the local pump field rather than χ(2) itself. The manuscript does not report linear reflectance/transmission under the same excitation conditions. The authors should either measure these quantities or present an argument that such linear changes are negligible, to make the χ(2) attribution quantitative.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'autor' in the corresponding-author line; 'Bril louin' in the computational methods; 'taking to account' near Fig. 4c. The χ(2) formatting is inconsistent (χ2 vs χ(2)).
  2. [Fig. 1d legend] The labels 'max' and 'min' in Fig. 1d are unclear; please clarify whether they refer to the intensity scale or to domain orientation.
  3. [References] Reference 24 is central to the photodoping mechanism; the text should state explicitly the excitation wavelength and intensity used in that work, to make the transfer of conditions transparent.
  4. [Computational Methods] The doping density of 10^14 cm^-2 is stated to come from PL analysis but the manuscript does not specify how this density maps to the experimental conditions in the SHG measurements; a brief discussion of the uncertainty in this value would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction found; the SHG enhancement is an independent experimental observation and the DFT chi2(doping) calculation is not fitted to the SHG data. The main caveat (extrapolating photodoping to sub-gap 800 nm excitation) is an evidentiary gap, not a circularity.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing chain is: (1) observe domain-selective, power-dependent SHG contrast in 1L-MoS2 on z-cut PPLN; (2) infer that the contrast tracks a ferroelectric-domain-dependent photodoping process; (3) support this with ab initio calculations of chi2 for doped MoS2. No step in this chain reduces to its own input by construction. The DFT calculation is genuinely parameter-free with respect to the SHG data: doping is introduced by changing electron number with a compensating background ('Doping was introduced by changing the total number of electrons in the unit and introducing a homogeneous compensating background'), and the resulting chi2 spectra are compared qualitatively with experiment ('The consistency between experimental and theoretical results further supports the interpretation...'), not fitted. The carrier-density input (~10^14 cm^-2) comes from PL analysis of the same material system (Fig. S4a), which is a separate linear-optical measurement, not derived from the SHG data. The citation to ref. 24 for domain-selective photodoping is a self-citation with overlapping authors, but it is used as prior experimental evidence rather than as a uniqueness theorem or an ansatz that already contains the present conclusion; moreover, the paper provides its own control on the nonpolar Y-cut surface (Fig. 3d) and its own PL-vs-SHG correlation. The most serious weakness is the assumption that 800 nm (1.55 eV) sub-gap illumination produces the same photodoping as the above-gap visible illumination used in the PL experiments; the paper does not identify a sub-gap carrier-generation channel or measure the in-situ carrier density during SHG. That is a load-bearing empirical premise, but it is an unverified transfer of excitation conditions, not a circular definition or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Under the hard rules, this is correctness risk, not circularity, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are introduced; 'photodoping' is a carrier-accumulation mechanism inherited from the authors' prior work (ref 24), not a new entity, and its independent evidence is external to this paper and not reproduced under the SHG excitation conditions. The central claim rests on one measured input (doping density from PL), one inherited mechanism (photodoping on P_up), and one methodological bet (IPA at the C resonance). The DFT is genuine first-principles work, but its magnitude is set by a carrier density measured in the same sample system, and its validity regime is asserted rather than demonstrated for the doped cases.

free parameters (3)
  • DFT doping density = n = 10^14 cm^-2 (also 10^13 cm^-2 in SI)
    Input to the χ(2) calculation; taken from the authors' PL-based estimate of electron accumulation on P_up domains (ref 24, Fig. S4a), not derived within the theory. The predicted enhancement magnitude scales with this choice.
  • Phenomenological damping (broadening) = 50 meV
    Applied uniformly to computed spectra to mimic finite lifetimes; standard practice, minor influence on relative trends.
  • Conduction-band truncation = 10 lowest unoccupied bands
    Truncation of the sum-over-states in the length-gauge χ(2) formula; no convergence test is reported.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Independent-particle approximation (IPA) is adequate for the C-band SHG peak of doped monolayer MoS2
    The χ(2) calculation (GPAW, length-gauge) neglects electron-hole interaction; ref 46 is cited for the claim that the C peak is only mildly affected, but the paper does not quantify this for the doped cases. If excitonic corrections change the doping trend, the theory-experiment agreement is unproven.
  • domain assumption Photodoping on P_up domains is active under the 800 nm fundamental
    The mechanism requires photocarrier generation at 1.55 eV, below the ~1.85 eV direct bandgap of monolayer MoS2; the paper inherits the photodoping premise from ref 24 (visible light) and from PL measurements (Fig. S4) made under different excitation, without demonstrating the carrier-generation channel at 800 nm.
  • domain assumption I2ω ∝ |χ(2)|² Iω² with no correction for linear-absorption or local-field changes
    The 'effective χ(2)' is extracted by normalizing SHG by the square of the fundamental power; power- or doping-dependent changes in absorption (e.g., C-band blueshift with doping) are folded into the effective susceptibility, so the microscopic claim about χ(2) is not cleanly separated from spectral shifts.
  • standard math Doping modeled by a uniform compensating background charge in a small unit cell
    Standard GPAW methodology (changing total electron number with jellium background); acceptable, though coarsely discretized at the 7×7×1 k-grid used.
  • domain assumption Sum over 10 lowest unoccupied bands converges the χ(2) spectrum
    The length-gauge sum is truncated at 10 conduction bands; no convergence test is reported, though the C transition should be captured within this window.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Domain-Selective Enhancement of Second Harmonic Generation in Monolayer MoS$_2$ via Ferroelectricity-Controlled Photodoping." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SIVKNREX

@misc{pith2026260729152,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Domain-Selective Enhancement of Second Harmonic Generation in Monolayer MoS$_2$ via Ferroelectricity-Controlled Photodoping},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SIVKNREX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.29152}
}
abstract

Hybrid heterostructures combining two-dimensional semiconductors with ferroelectric materials offer a versatile route to actively control light-matter interactions at the nanoscale. Here, we report all-optical, light-induced domain-selective control of second-harmonic generation (SHG) in monolayer molybdenum disulfide (MoS$_2$) integrated with periodically poled lithium niobate (LiNbO$_3$). Spatially resolved SHG imaging reveals a pronounced modulation of the nonlinear optical response of monolayer MoS$_2$ governed by the ferroelectric domain pattern of the underlying substrate. A strong SHG contrast is observed between domains of opposite polarization, with a marked dependence on both the excitation wavelength and the incident optical power. The comparison between ferroelectric domains that either enable or do not exhibit light-driven photodoping in the MoS$_2$ monolayer provides a direct assessment of the role of carrier density in the nonlinear optical response. We find that ferroelectric-polarization-controlled photodoping at the MoS$_2$/LiNbO$_3$ interface enhances the effective second-order susceptibility, $\chi^2$, producing an increase in SHG intensity of up to ~70% under resonant excitation conditions. Ab initio calculations corroborate that charge doping modifies the electronic band structure of MoS$_2$ and strongly affects $\chi^2$ in the resonant regime, providing microscopic support for the experimentally observed modulation. The results highlight the combination of light intensity and ferroelectricity as a powerful knob for band-structure modulation in 2D materials and reconfigurable nonlinear optical responses, opening pathways toward programmable frequency conversion, smart light modulators, and advanced nonlinear photonic functionalities in integrated hybrid platforms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.29152 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spatial modulation of SHG in 1L-MoS2 on PPLN. a) Optical micrograph of a large-area 1L￾MoS2 transferred onto a z-cut (polar) surface of PPLN substrate, with the armchair direction of the 1L￾MoS2 (y-axis) aligned parallel to the ferroelectric domain walls (LiNbO3 y-axis). The 1L-MoS2 region is indicated by the dashed line. b) Schematic illustration of the 1L-MoS2/LiNbO3 heterostructure used in SHG experiments. The sp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. a displays representative SHG maps obtained at different fundamental wavelengths between 780 and 900 nm, while keeping the fundamental beam power constant. Within this spectral range, the SHG intensity of 1L-MoS2 is markedly enhanced on both Pup and Pdown domains, reaching maximum values near 840 nm due to the two￾photon resonance with the C interband transition of 1L-MoS2, located at 440 nm. Figure 2b compares the … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Polarization dependence of SHG modulation. Spatial distribution of the integrated SHG intensity recorded at normal incidence for orthogonal input-output light polarization configurations in two different flakes, with the 1L-MoS2 armchair direction oriented (a) parallel and (b) perpendicular to the ferroelectric domain walls of LiNbO3. Arrows indicate the linear polarization state of the fundamental and the correspon… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Manzeli, D

    S. Manzeli, D. Ovchinnikov, D. Pasquier, O. V. Yazyev, A. Kis, 2D transition metal dichalcogenides. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017, 2, 17033. DOI: 10.1038/natrevmats.2017.33

    doi:10.1038/natrevmats.2017.33 2017

  2. [2]

    K. F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan, T. F. Heinz, Atomically Thin MoS₂: A New Direct-Gap Semiconductor . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105, 136805. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.136805

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.136805 2010

  3. [3]

    Splendiani, L

    A. Splendiani, L. Sun, Y. Zhang, et al. Emerging Photoluminescence in Monolayer MoS2. Nano Lett. 2010, 10(4), 1271. DOI: 10.1021/nl903868w

    doi:10.1021/nl903868w 2010

  4. [4]

    K. He, N. Kumar, L. Zhao, et al. Tightly Bound Excitons in Monolayer WSe₂. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 113, 026803. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.026803

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.026803 2014

  5. [5]

    Säynätjoki, L

    A. Säynätjoki, L. Karvonen, H. Rostami, et al. Ultra-strong nonlinear optical processes and trigonal warping in MoS 2 layers. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 893. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00749-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-017-00749-4 2017

  6. [6]

    Autere, H

    A. Autere, H. Jussila, Y. Dai, Y. Wang, H. Lipsanen, Z. Sun, Nonlinear Optics with 2D Layered Materials . Adv. Mater . 2018, 30, 1705963. DOI: 10.1002/adma.201705963

    doi:10.1002/adma.201705963 2018

  7. [7]

    W. Kim, G. Jeong, J. Oh, et al. Exciton-Sensitized Second-Harmonic Generation in 2D Heterostructures. ACS Nano 2023, 17, 20580. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.3c07428

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.3c07428 2023

  8. [8]

    Huang, Y

    W. Huang, Y. Xiao, F. Xia, X. Chen, T. Zhai, Second Harmonic Generation Control in 2D Layered Materials: Status and Outlook. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024, 34, 2310726. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202310726

    work page doi:10.1002/adfm.202310726 2024

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Mouri, Y

    S. Mouri, Y . Miyauchi, K . Matsuda, Tunable Photoluminescence of Monolayer MoS2 via Chemical Doping. Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 5944 DOI: 10.1021/nl403036h

    2013 doi

  2. [10]

    B. W. H. Baugher, H. O. H. Churchill, Y. Ya ng, P. Jarillo-Herrero, Optoelectronic devices based on electrically tunable p–n diodes in a monolayer dichalcogenide. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2014, 9, 262. DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2014.25

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Pucher, S

    T. Pucher, S. Puebla, V. Zamora, et al. Strong Electrostatic Control of Excitonic Features in MoS 2 by a Free -Standing Ultrahigh - Ferroelectric Perovskite , Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024, 34, 2409447. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202409447

    2024 doi

  4. [12]

    M. G. Harats, J. N. Kirchhof, M. Qiao, K. Greben, K. I. Bolotin, Dynamics and efficient conversion of excitons to trions in non-uniformly strained monolayer WS2. Nat. Photonics 2020, 14, 324. DOI: 10.1038/s41566-019-0581-5

    2020 doi

  5. [13]

    H. Lee, S. Kim, S. Eom, et al. Quantum tunneling high -speed nano -excitonic modulator. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 8725. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-52813-5

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    G. Zhu, L. Zhang, W. Li, et al. Room-temperature high-speed electrical modulation of excitonic distribution in a monolayer semiconductor . Nat. Commun. 2023, 14,

    2023

  7. [15]

    Seyler, J

    K. Seyler, J. Schaibley, P. Gong , et al. Electrical control of second -harmonic generation in a WSe 2 monolayer transistor. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2015, 10, 407. DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.73

    2015 doi

  8. [16]

    Y. Dai, Y. Wang, S. Das, et al. Electrical Control of Interband Resonant Nonlinear Optics in Monolayer MoS 2. ACS Nano 2020, 14, 8442. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.0c02642

    2020 doi

  9. [17]

    J. Wang, N. Han, Z. Luo, et al. Electrically Tunable Second Harmonic Generation in Atomically Thin ReS 2. ACS Nano 2022, 16 (5), 6404. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.2c00514

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    H. Wu, H. Chen, J. Han, et al. Electrically Tunable Strong Exciton Resonance of Second Harmonic Generation in van der Waals Heterostructures. Adv. Opt. Mater. 2025, 13, 2403535. DOI: 10.1002/adom.202403535

    2025 doi

  11. [19]

    T. Jin, J. Mao, J. Gao, C. Han, K. P. Loh, A.T.S. Wee, W. Chen, Ferroelectrics - Integrated Two -Dimensional Devices toward Nex t-Generation Electronics . ACS Nano 2022, 16, 13595. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.2c07281

    2022 doi

  12. [20]

    Pacchioni, Ferroelectrics meet transition metal dichalcogenides

    G. Pacchioni, Ferroelectrics meet transition metal dichalcogenides. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2023, 8, 644. DOI: 0.1038/s41578-023-00602-9

    2023

  13. [21]

    Kamaei, X

    S. Kamaei, X. Liu, A. Saeidi, et al. Ferroelectric gating of two -dimensional semiconductors for the integration of steep -slope logic and neuromorphic devices. Nat. Electron. 2023, 6, 658. DOI: 10.1038/s41928-023-01018-7

    2023 doi

  14. [22]

    F. Yang, H. K. Ng, X. Ju, et al. Emerging Opportunities for Ferroelectric Field-Effect Transistors: Integration of 2D Materials. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024, 34, 2310438. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202310438

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    G. Wu, B. Tian, L. Liu , et al. Programmable transition metal dichalcogenide homojunctions controlled by nonvolatile ferroelectric domains. Nat. Electron. 2020, 3, 43. DOI: 10.1038/s41928-019-0350-y

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    Fernandez-Tejedor, D

    M.O Ramírez, J. Fernandez-Tejedor, D. Gallego, et al. Light-Induced Ferroelectric Modulation of p-n Homojunctions in Monolayer MoS 2. Adv. Opt. Mater. 2024, 12, 2400624. DOI: 10.1002/adom.202400624

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    Fernández-Martínez, J

    J. Fernández-Martínez, J. J. Ronquillo, G. López-Polín, H. P. van der Meulen, M. O Ramírez, L. E. Bausá, Pyroelectric Doping Reversal of MoS 2 p-n Junctions on Ferroelectric Domain Walls Probed by Photoluminescence. Adv. Opt. Mater. 2025, 13, 2500891. DOI: 10.1002/adom.202500891

    2025 doi

  18. [26]

    J. Weng, Z. Zhang, T. He, et al. WSe2 pn Homojunction Photodetector Engineered by In Situ Ferroelectric doping. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2506469. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202506469

    2025 doi

  19. [27]

    B. Wen, J. Li, J. Huang, et al. Ultrahigh-Response of WSe 2 Homojunction Photodetectors Induced by Ferroelectric Domains in Periodically Poled Lithium Niobate. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, e19097. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202519097

    2025 doi

  20. [28]

    Lee, H -J

    S-J. Lee, H -J. Chuang, A. L. Yeats, et al. Ferroelectric Modulation of Quantum Emitters in Monolayer WS 2. ACS Nano 2024, 18, 25349. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.4c10528

    2024 doi

  21. [29]

    D. Li, X. Huang, Z. Xiao, et al. Polar coupling enabled nonlinear optical filtering at MoS2/ferroelectric heterointerfaces. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1422. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15191-2

    2020 doi

  22. [30]

    D. Li, X. Huang, Q. Wu, L. Zhang, Y. Lu, X. Hong, Ferroelectric Domain Control of Nonlinear Light Polarization in MoS 2 via PbZr 0.2Ti0.8O3 Thin Films and Free - Standing Membranes. Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2208825. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202208825

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    W. Dong, H. Tan, J. Zou, et al. Optical Switching of Robust Ferroelectric Polarization o n Epitaxial Hf 0.5Zr0.5O2 Integrated with BaTiO 3. Nano-Micro Lett . 2026, 18, 239. DOI: 10.1007/s40820-026-02090-2

    2026 doi

  24. [32]

    V. V. Temnov, P. Vavassori, All-optical polarization switching in ferroelectrics. Nat. Photonics 2024, 18, 529. DOI: 10.1038/s41566-024-01452-9

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    Kwaaitaal, D.G

    M. Kwaaitaal, D.G. Lourens, C.S.Davies, et al. Epsilon-near-zero regime enables permanent ultrafast all -optical reversal of ferroelectric polarization. Nat. Photonics 2024, 18, 569. DOI: 10.1038/s41566-024-01420-3

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    M. F. Sarott, M. J. Müller, J. Lehmann, B. J. Burgat, M. Fiebig, M. Trassin, Reversible Optical Control of Polarization in Epitaxial Ferroelectric Thin Films. Adv. Mater. 2024, 36, 2312437. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202312437

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    Zhang, M

    H. Zhang, M. C. Nagashree, R. F. Webster, et al. Optical Control of Ferroelectric Imprint in BiFeO 3. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2025, 35, 2502700. DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202502700

    2025 doi

  28. [36]

    J. Niu, J. Lyu, J. Li, et al. All-Optical Control of Bidirectional Polarization Switching in Ferroelectric Heterostructures for Neuromorphic and In-Memory Computing. Adv. Sci. 2026, e22092. DOI: 10.1002/advs.202522092

    2026 doi

  29. [37]

    C. Chen, Y. Zhou, L. Tong, Y. Pang, J. Xu, Emerging 2D Ferroelectric Devices for In-Sensor and In -Memory Computing . Adv. Mater. 2025, 37, 2400332. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202400332

    2025 doi

  30. [38]

    J. Du, D. Xie, Q. Zhang, et al. A robust neuromorphic vision sensor with optical control of ferroelectric switching . Nano Energy 2021, 89, 106439. DOI: 10.1016/j.nanoen.2021.106439

    2021

  31. [39]

    Trovatello, A

    C. Trovatello, A. Marini, X. Xu, et al. Optical parametric amplification by monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides. Nat. Photonics 2021, 15, 6. DOI: 10.1038/s41566- 020-00728-0

    2021 doi

  32. [40]

    Klimmer, O

    S. Klimmer, O. Ghaebi, Z. Gan, et al. All-optical polarization and amplitude modulation of second-harmonic generation in atomically thin semiconductors. Nat. Photonics 2021, 15, 837. DOI: 10.1038/s41566-021-00859-y

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    Y. Hu, D. Zhu, S. Lu , et al. Integrated electro-optics on thin -film lithium niobate. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2025, 7, 237. DOI: 10.1038/s42254-025-00825-5

    2025 doi

  34. [42]

    A. Boes, L. Chang, C. Langrock, et al. Lithium niobate photonics: Unlocking the electromagnetic spectrum . Science 2023, 379, eabj4396. DOI: 10.1126/science.abj4396

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    Fragemann, V

    A. Fragemann, V. Pasiskevicius, F. Laurell, Second -order nonlinearities in the domain walls of periodically poled KTiOPO4. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 85, 375. DOI: 10.1063/1.1775031

    2004 doi

  36. [44]

    J. J. Mortensen, A. H. Larsen, M. Kuisma, et al. GPAW: An open Python package for electronic structure calculations . J. Chem. Phys. 2024, 160(9), 092503. DOI: 10.1063/5.0182685

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Taghizadeh, K

    A. Taghizadeh, K. S. Thygesen, T.G. Pedersen, Two -Dimensional Materials with Giant Optical Nonlinearities near the Theoretical Upper Limit. ACS Nano 2021, 15(4), 7155. DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.1c00344

    2021 doi

  38. [46]

    Grüning, C

    M. Grüning, C. Attaccalite, Second harmonic generation in h -BN and MoS 2 monolayers: Role of Electron -Hole Interaction. Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 081102(R). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.89.081102

    2014 doi

  39. [47]

    Castellanos-Gómez, M

    A. Castellanos-Gómez, M. Buscema, R. Molenaar, et al. Deterministic transfer of two-dimensional materials by all -dry viscoelastic stamping . 2D Mater . 2014, 1, 011002. DOI: 10.1088/2053-1583/1/1/01100 Supporting Information Domain-Selective Enhancement of Second Harmonic Gen...

    2014 doi

  40. [49]

    Física de Materiales, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid 28049, Spain

    Dept. Física de Materiales, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid 28049, Spain

  41. [50]

    Instituto Nicolás Cabrera, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid 28049, Spain

  42. [51]

    POLIMA - Center for Polariton-driven Light−Matter Interactions, University of Southern Denmark, DK-5230 Odense M, Denmark

  43. [52]

    Condensed Matter Physics Center (IFIMAC), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid 28049, Spain

  44. [53]

    Spectral dependence of SH G intensity in 1L-MoS2 (blue)

    Danish Institute for Advanced Study, University of Southern Denmark, DK -5230 Odense M, Denmark Figure S1. Spectral dependence of SH G intensity in 1L-MoS2 (blue). The differential reflectance spectrum of 1L -MoS2 (black) is shown for comparison with the C -band resonance. The...

  45. [6701]

    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-42568-w

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.