A quantum geometric mechanism for chiral domain wall metastability: Application to twisted transition-metal dichalcogenides

Eslam Khalaf; Nisarg Chadha; Qiang Gao; Zhaoyu Han

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 54 references

A quantum geometric mechanism for chiral domain wall metastability: Application to twisted transition-metal dichalcogenides

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A chiral domain wall in a ferromagnet made from time-reversal-conjugate Chern bands binds a line of electric dipoles whose repulsion makes the wall metastable, even under reverse magnetic fields far beyond saturation.

desk verdict A genuinely new dipole mechanism for chiral walls in conjugate Chern bands, cleanly derived in an ideal limit, but with a load-bearing gap-closing caveat and a factor-of-two slip that must be fixed before the quantitative claims hold. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07443 v1 pith:JEPUFJF6 submitted 2026-08-07 cond-mat.str-el

Nisarg Chadha , Qiang Gao , Eslam Khalaf , Zhaoyu Han This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-el PACS 71.10.-w73.43.-f

keywords chiraldomainwallgeometricdipolecoefficientsecondChernformquantumgeometrytwistedMoTe2moiréferromagnetvalley-polarizedmetastablespintexture

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

Ferromagnets built from bands that are time-reversal conjugates have no net topological charge response, but this paper shows their domain walls still remember the band geometry: a wall that winds in the plane along its length carries a line of electric dipoles rather than a net charge. The dipole strength is set by a dimensionless coefficient $c_G$, a moment of the second Chern form of the occupied bands over momentum and order-parameter space. Because dipolar repulsion grows as the wall shrinks, a finite-radius chiral wall becomes metastable even when a reverse magnetic field far exceeds the ordinary saturation field. In twisted MoTe$_2$ the coefficient $c_G$ drops sharply at an internal transition between $C=1$ and $C=0$ valley-polarized ferromagnets, which the paper argues explains why a long-lived pump-probe excitation survives large reverse fields but vanishes at an intermediate displacement field while conventional magnetic diagnostics barely change.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the mixed-space second Chern form of the occupied-band projector $P(\mathbf{k};\mathbf{M}(\mathbf{r}))$ on the four-dimensional parameter space $(k_x,k_y,\theta,\phi)$, where $(\theta,\phi)$ are the Bloch-sphere angles of the spin/valley order parameter. Its order-parameter density $K(\theta)=\frac{1}{8\pi^2}\int_{\mathrm{BZ}} d^2k\, \epsilon_{abcd}\,\mathrm{Tr}[P\partial_aP\partial_bP\partial_cP\partial_dP]$ (with $a,b,c,d\in\{k_x,k_y,\theta,\phi\}$) feeds the geometric charge response, and the wall's radial profile converts $K$ into the dipole coefficient $c_G=\int_0^\pi d\theta\, K(\theta)\ln\tan(\theta/2)$. The logarithmic weight comes from integrating the $1/r$ profile of the circular-wall ansatz, and the factor $N_w$ enters because each unit of in-plane winding around the wall contributes one unit to the dipole. The energy functional $E(R)=2\pi e^2(N_w c_G)^2/(\epsilon R)+2\pi\sigma R+2\pi\mu B_z R^2$ then carries the metastability argument.

What would settle it

A direct local probe of a chiral wall in twisted MoTe$_2$ should find a radial dipole line density $p_0=-eN_w d_0 c_G/R$ with sign set by the wall winding and magnitude set by $c_G$; if scanning probes see a net wall charge instead, or if a pump-probe lifetime survives across the $C=1\to C=0$ transition where $c_G$ drops sharply, the mechanism fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a closed domain wall with winding number $N_w$ in a ferromagnet formed from time-reversal-conjugate Chern bands carries a radial dipole line density $p_0 = -e N_w d_0 c_G / R$, with $c_G = \int_0^\pi d\theta\, K(\theta) \ln\tan(\theta/2)$ and $K(\theta)$ the second Chern density of the occupied projector on the mixed space $(k_x,k_y,\theta,\phi)$; time-reversal makes $K(\theta)=-K(\pi-\theta)$, so the induced charge is equal and opposite on the two sides of the wall and the leading multipole is a dipole. This dipole produces a repulsive Coulomb energy proportional to $(N_w c_G)^2/R$ that competes with surface tension proportional to $R$ and Zeeman bias proportional to $R^2$, giving a metastable wall at $R_* = |e N_w c_G|/\sqrt{\epsilon\sigma}$ with a barrier against collapse. In the ideal limit of momentum-independent hybridization between bands of opposite Chern number $\pm C$, the coefficient saturates at $|c_G|=|C|/4\pi$, the same Chern number that would bind a skyrmion charge if the two flavors shared its sign. Hartree–Fock calculations for twisted MoTe$_2$ at hole filling $\nu=1$ find $c_G$ large in the $C=1$ valley-polarized regime and sharply reduced across the transition to the $C=0$ valley-polarized ferromagnet, connecting the mechanism to the experimental long-lived excitation.

Load-bearing premise

The charge-response formula (Eq. (6)) assumes the occupied subspace stays gapped throughout the interpolation over momentum and order-parameter space, yet connecting valley-polarized states with opposite Chern numbers necessarily closes that gap, so the quantitative values of $c_G$ and the predicted energies depend on higher-order and nonadiabatic corrections being small near the resulting chiral edge modes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In conjugate-Chern ferromagnets, a chiral domain wall with winding $N_w$ remains metastable under reverse fields several times the saturation field, because the dipole barrier prevents collapse as long as the optimal radius $R_*$ stays larger than the wall width $d_0$.
The coefficient $c_G$ acts as a dynamical fingerprint of band quantum geometry: the long-lived pump-probe excitation in twisted MoTe$_2$ should disappear precisely where $c_G$ drops across the intra-VP topological transition, while coercive field and $T_c$ stay nearly constant.
Because the two lowest-energy IVC branches (MM versus MX/XM stacked) carry different $c_G$, displacement-field sweeps should show hysteresis in the domain-wall lifetime.
Optical switching of moir\'e Chern ferromagnets inherits a tradeoff: chiral walls give long-lived retention of written reversed domains and a finite nucleation threshold, so writing is robust but erasure is slow.
In the idealized limit, $|c_G|=|C|/4\pi$, so the same Chern number that would bind a skyrmion charge in same-Chern ferromagnets instead controls a dipole in conjugate-Chern ferromagnets.

Reading between the lines

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

If the mechanism holds, $c_G$ could be extracted from pump-probe or noise measurements as a function of displacement field, providing a tabletop probe of the mixed momentum–order-parameter second Chern form rather than just the Berry curvature of the equilibrium band.
The mechanism is not limited to Chern bands: the paper notes that topologically trivial bands with nontrivial quantum geometry should also give nonzero $c_G$, so a trivial-band ferromagnet with large Berry curvature fluctuations is a clean test case where the ideal quantization is absent but metastability may persist.
In a fractional Chern ferromagnet, the charge bound to the wall should fractionalize, suggesting that chiral walls may carry fractional dipole moments and produce fractional signatures in local probes—an extension the paper flags but does not develop.
The $O(1)$ regularization dependence of the dipolar-energy coefficient (noted in the supplemental material) means quantitative predictions of lifetimes and nucleation barriers are cutoff-sensitive; comparing measured lifetimes versus temperature or field with the fitted shape of $E(R)$ could calibrate this coefficient.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things you should know. The central idea is genuinely new: in a ferromagnet built from time-reversal-conjugate Chern bands, a chiral domain wall binds no net charge but can bind a radial dipole line density controlled by c_G, a moment of the second Chern form in mixed momentum–order-parameter space. Prior skyrmion work covers same-Chern textures with net charge; the dipole response here is not in the cited literature. The ideal-limit derivation is clean, the symmetry argument for K(θ)=−K(π−θ) checks out, and the HF numerics show c_G dropping sharply across the VP C=1→C=0 transition, which is an economical explanation of the pump-probe puzzle.

What the paper does well: the theory is self-contained—c_G is computed from the projector family, not fitted to the experiment. Finite-size scaling is honestly discussed, including the mesh-dependent Chern-number outliers near the topological boundary. The supplement's Aharonov-Casher calculation is a useful robustness test, and the authors flag the active-band non-convergence explicitly.

Now the soft spots, in proportion. One is load-bearing and the authors concede it: Eq. (6), the second-Chern-form charge response, requires a finite spectral gap over the whole interpolation. They state this fails when connecting VP states with opposite Chern numbers, and that chiral edge modes can modify the charge redistribution—but then they use Eq. (6) to define c_G and derive the metastability energy. Without a controlled treatment of the crossing, c_G is not proven to be path-independent; a different interpolation or regularization could change K(θ) near the degeneracy and shift the integral. That does not kill the qualitative mechanism, but it does mean the predicted R* and field thresholds are not yet rigorous.

The second issue is a smaller algebraic slip: for the stated ansatz Eq. (5), r−R=(d0/2) ln tan(θ/2), so Eq. (10) should read p0=−e N_w d0/(2R) c_G, not −e N_w d0/R c_G. That factor of two propagates into Eq. (12) and the quantitative predictions. It is easily fixed and the mechanism should survive the correction.

A third, minor-but-real concern: the numerical c_G values in tMoTe2 are not converged with respect to active-band truncation—the authors say so in the SM. They restrict to two bands per flavor because the continuum parameters are fit to those bands, but a more microscopic computation could shift magnitudes. Treat the phase-diagram values as provisional. The companion experiment is still unpublished, so the central comparison cannot be independently checked yet.

Who gets value: condensed-matter theorists working on moiré ferromagnets, quantum geometry, and the tMoTe2 pump-probe experiments. This paper deserves a serious referee: the idea is important enough and the derivation transparent enough. My recommendation is to engage, asking for (i) a controlled treatment of the gap-closing or at least a robustness check of c_G against different interpolations, (ii) the factor-of-two fix, (iii) converged c_G estimates or systematic error bars, and (iv) release of the numerical data. If the gap-closing changes c_G substantially, the quantitative link to experiment would need rethinking, but the dipole mechanism itself would likely stand.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that in a two-flavor ferromagnet formed from time-reversal-conjugate Chern bands, a chiral domain wall with in-plane winding N_w binds a radial dipole line density p0 = -e N_w d0 c_G/R, where c_G = ∫ dθ K(θ) ln tan(θ/2) is a moment of the second Chern form of the occupied projector on the combined space (kx, ky, θ, φ). The resulting dipolar repulsion competes with surface tension and Zeeman bias, producing a metastable circular domain with radius R* = |e N_w c_G|/√(εσ) at zero field. Using a continuum model of twisted MoTe2, the authors compute c_G in Hartree-Fock and find that it is large in the C=1 valley-polarized regime and drops sharply in the C=0 regime, which they propose explains the long-lived pump-probe excitation and its disappearance at intermediate displacement field in Ref. [1].

Significance. If the central derivation is correct, the paper identifies a genuinely new geometric response: whereas textures in same-Chern ferromagnets bind a net charge, textures in Chern-conjugate ferromagnets bind a dipole, with strength set by a second-Chern-form moment c_G. The paper is self-contained in that c_G is computed from the projector family rather than fit to the experiment it explains. Strengths include the transparent ideal-limit derivation in Eqs. (14)-(18), the clean symmetry argument for K(θ) = -K(π-θ), the explicit continuum-model numerics with finite-size scaling, and the falsifiable prediction that c_G changes sharply across the VP C=1 to C=0 transition. These strengths are offset by a factor-of-two error in the central formula, an unresolved gap-closing/regularization issue in the definition of c_G, and the admitted lack of active-band convergence in the numerical c_G values.

major comments (4)

[Eqs. (10)-(13)] Solving the domain-wall profile in Eq. (5) gives r - R = (d0/2) ln tan(θ/2), not r - R = d0 ln tan(θ/2). Substituting into Eq. (10) therefore yields p0 = -e N_w d0/(2R) c_G. The factor of two propagates into the dipolar energy: Eq. (12) should have coefficient π e^2 (N_w c_G)^2 / (2 ε R) rather than 2π e^2 (N_w c_G)^2 / (ε R), and the zero-field R* and E* in Eq. (13) are each smaller by a factor of two. Because the experimental comparison uses these quantitative estimates, the numerical predictions need to be updated; the existence of the mechanism is not affected.
[Eqs. (6)-(11)] The charge response in Eq. (6) is derived under the assumption of a finite spectral gap for the projector family P[k; M(r)] over the full parameter space. As the authors state after Eq. (8), this condition fails for the interpolation between VP states with opposite Chern numbers, which is exactly the regime where the paper predicts a large c_G. The definition of K(θ) and c_G in Eqs. (8) and (11) is therefore not manifestly regularization-independent: a different interpolation path, or a small symmetry-preserving perturbation, can change the singular contribution near the degeneracy and hence c_G and the metastability energy in Eq. (12). The manuscript needs either an explicit treatment of the degenerate-point contribution (for example through the chiral edge-mode sector) or a numerical demonstration that c_G is stable under symmetry-preserving deformations of the interpolation in Eq. (1).
[Supplemental Material, Fig. S3] The Supplemental states that two active bands per spin-valley is not enough to converge c_G, yet the main-text Fig. 2 results are obtained with exactly this cutoff. Since the numerical values of c_G are used to locate the VP C=1 to C=0 transition and to make the experimental comparison, the quantitative claims are not yet fully supported. A convergence study with more active bands (with continuum-model parameters refit if necessary) or a clear estimate of the systematic error from the truncation is required before the numbers in Fig. 2 can be taken as quantitative.
[Supplemental Material, conjugate Aharonov-Casher bands] The Supplemental states that for the AC-band calculation 'the active bands remain isolated and the interpolating HF Hamiltonian remains gapped.' This statement is difficult to reconcile with a rank-one occupied projector whose Chern number changes from +1 to -1 along the interpolation; a gap must close somewhere. Please clarify the rank of the occupied subspace used in that calculation, and explain how the numerical evaluation of K(θ) handles the band-crossing point.

minor comments (5)

[Eqs. (8)-(9)] Eq. (8) writes K as a function of both θ and φ, but Eq. (9) then states K(θ, φ) ≡ K(θ); consider defining K(θ) directly after the symmetry argument to avoid the redundant notation.
[Eq. (13)] The notation R*_{N_w} is introduced without definition in the sentence following Eq. (13); define it explicitly as the zero-field radius for a wall of winding N_w.
[tMoTe2 section and Fig. 2] The mapping between the computed layer bias u_D and the experimental displacement field D in Ref. [1] is not given; since the comparison relies on a narrow D window, a sentence on the conversion (including any offset or lever-arm factor) would improve reproducibility.
[Footnote 46] Footnote 46 dismisses the in-plane stiffness contribution to the N_w^2/R energy as 'rather small' with a citation; because this term is of the same order in N_w and R as the dipolar term, a quantitative bound or explicit estimate should be given in the main text.
[End Matter, parameter table] For WSe2, the statement that ψ = -128° is equivalent to the +128° convention in Ref. [32] after reversing the reciprocal-space orientation is too terse; specify the reciprocal-vector convention (e.g., orientation of q_j) so that a reader reproducing the model obtains the same band structure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: c_G is computed from HF projectors, not fitted to experiment; self-citations are motivational or testbed only.

full rationale

No circular step is present. The central quantity c_G is computed from the occupied-projector family obtained by diagonalizing the Hartree-Fock trial Hamiltonians of Eq. (1) and then evaluating the integral in Eq. (11) directly; it is not fitted to the pump-probe experiment [1] or to any experimental observable. The charge-response formula Eq. (6) is taken from external references [42-44], and the numerical c_G values are checked against conjugate-LL and AC-band Hartree-Fock calculations in the Supplemental Material, including finite-size scaling. Self-citations ([1], [50], [55]) are used for motivation, experimental comparison, or as a testbed model, not as the load-bearing step: removing them leaves Eqs. (6)-(13) unchanged. The acknowledged gap-closing failure of Eq. (6) between opposite-Chern VP states (paragraph after Eq. (8)) is an admitted limitation that could change the quantitative c_G, and Eq. (10) appears to miss a factor of 2 relative to Eqs. (5) and (11); both are correctness or consistency caveats, not circular reductions. No fitted parameter is renamed a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors, and no known result is merely relabeled.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard model parameters inherited from prior literature, a specific variational construction of the texture-dependent projector family, and a response formula whose gap condition is not met at the VP-to-VP interpolation. The genuinely new object is c_G, which is not fitted to the experiment and carries independent falsifiable predictions.

free parameters (4)

MoTe2/WSe2 continuum model parameters (a0, m*, V, psi, w) = MoTe2: a0=3.47 A, m*/me=0.62, V=11.2 meV, psi=91 deg, w=-13.3 meV; WSe2: a0=3.32 A, m*/me=0.43, V=9.0 meV, psi=-128…
Inherited from fits to first-principles bands in Ref [32]; they set the band geometry and the c_G values reported in Figs. 2 and 3.
Dual-gate screening parameters (epsilon, d, l) = epsilon=16.7, d=30 nm, l=a0 (Eq. A10)
Interaction kernel used in HF; chosen following Ref [32]. The VP/IVC competition and the magnitude of c_G depend on them.
Active band count per spin-valley = 2 bands per flavor
The authors state (Supplemental, Fig. S3) that 2 active bands per spin-valley is not enough to converge c_G; the reported tMoTe2 values depend on this truncation.
Variational interpolation form in Eq. (1) = |cos(theta)| and sin(theta) weights
The projector family P[k; M] is built from this specific interpolation between VP and IVC HF states; c_G is defined through this family. A different parameterization would change c_G quantitatively, as the paper itself notes by choosing this form to avoid fine-tuned zeros.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The second-Chern-form response, Eq. (6), gives the induced charge density of a slowly varying texture.
Standard result (Refs [42-44]) for gapped projectors; the paper applies it to textures that pass through gap closings, a condition it acknowledges is violated (paragraph after Eq. (8)).
domain assumption Two flavors related by time reversal with opposite Chern numbers, plus an internal U(1) spin symmetry, describe tMoTe2 at nu=1.
Standard spin-valley locking in tTMDs; used throughout to construct the conjugate-band setup.
ad hoc to paper The variational family H_MF(theta, phi) in Eq. (1), interpolating between VP and IVC HF states, captures the low-energy order-parameter manifold.
This interpolation is constructed in this work; c_G is defined via its ground-state projectors. The choice of |cos(theta)| and sin(theta) weights is motivated by symmetry but not uniquely determined.
domain assumption The circular chiral-wall ansatz, Eq. (4)-(5), with winding N_w and width d0, describes the relevant experimental textures.
The metastability energy Eq. (12) and the c_G weighting in Eq. (11) follow from this specific profile; real walls may deviate, changing O(1) coefficients.
domain assumption The in-plane stiffness contribution to the N_w^2/R energy is negligible in tMoTe2.
Stated in footnote [46], citing the small value in tMoTe2. If this term were not small, the metastability competition would not be governed by c_G.
domain assumption Hartree-Fock at nu=1 gives a reliable phase diagram for VP and IVC states in the continuum model.
The c_G phase diagram (Fig. 2a) rests on HF energies; the authors report close competition between VP and IVC, consistent with prior numerics, but HF is an approximation.

invented entities (1)

Geometric dipole coefficient c_G independent evidence
purpose: Quantifies the dipole density bound to a chiral domain wall in conjugate Chern bands; the central observable of the mechanism.
c_G makes falsifiable predictions: it is large in the C=1 VP phase and drops across the intra-VP transition, predicting where long-lived excitations appear in pump-probe experiments, and it predicts hysteresis in wall lifetime versus displacement field. These are handles outside the paper itself.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A quantum geometric mechanism for chiral domain wall metastability: Application to twisted transition-metal dichalcogenides." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JEPUFJF6

@misc{pith2026260807443,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A quantum geometric mechanism for chiral domain wall metastability: Application to twisted transition-metal dichalcogenides},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JEPUFJF6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07443}
}

abstract

Band topology can have an imprint on the excitations of a ferromagnet. A known example is quantum Hall ferromagnets and their lattice analogs; when both flavors have the same Chern number $C$, a smooth skyrmion texture binds charge $-eC$ per unit winding. Here, we consider instead the case of conjugate Chern bands related by time-reversal. We show that, despite the vanishing net charge response, a smooth texture can be associated with a dipole response---a domain wall (DW) with an in-plane winding along its length can bind a nonzero dipole density transverse to the wall. The strength of this dipole density is controlled by a dimensionless coefficient $c_G$. Although not quantized, the geometric dipole coefficient $c_G$ is a moment of the second Chern form of the occupied projector in mixed (momentum and order-parameter) space and is generally nonzero. The dipole-decorated DW can thus become metastable at a finite radius due to the competition between dipolar repulsion and the usual surface tension, even at a finite Zeeman field. In a realistic model of twisted MoTe$_2$, we find that $c_G$ drops sharply across a transition within the valley-polarized (VP) phase from a $C=1$ to a $C=0$ ferromagnet. This naturally explains recent pump-probe experiments~\cite{exp} at hole filling $\nu=1$, in which a long-lived excitation survives reverse fields far exceeding the saturation field but disappears at an intermediate displacement field despite only weak changes in conventional magnetic diagnostics. Metastable spin textures thus serve as a sensitive probe of band quantum geometry, and as an intrinsic bottleneck for fast optical control of moir\'e ferromagnets in Chern-conjugate bands.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07443 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** shows the phase diagram and variation of cG across a range of θM and uD. Projecting interactions.— We diagonalize Eq. (A1) in a truncated plane-wave basis and retain the two highest valence bands from each flavor. The stability to the plane-wave cutoff is discussed in the Supplemental Material. Denoting the corresponding electron operators by cmτ,k, with m = 1, 2, the interaction projected into this [PITH_FULL_IM… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

[1]

Xiong, C

R. Xiong, C. Qin, Z. Han, N. Chadha, Q. Gao, W. Holtz- mann, W. Li, J. Cai, Y. Guo, W. Guo, Q. Chen, S. L. Brantly, S. Bonkowsky, C. Huang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. F. Young, X. Xu, E. Khalaf, and C. Jin, To appear (2026)

work page 2026
[2]

Z. Han, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, B. A. Bernevig, and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. X14, 041004 (2024)

work page 2024
[3]

Bultinck, E

N. Bultinck, E. Khalaf, S. Liu, S. Chatterjee, A. Vish- wanath, and M. P. Zaletel, Phys. Rev. X10, 031034 (2020)

2020
[4]

Lian, Z.-D

B. Lian, Z.-D. Song, N. Regnault, D. K. Efetov, A. Yaz- dani, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B103, 205414 (2021)

2021
[5]

Khalaf, S

E. Khalaf, S. Chatterjee, N. Bultinck, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Vishwanath, Science Advances7, eabf5299 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.abf5299

doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf5299 2021
[6]

Kang and O

J. Kang and O. Vafek, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 246401 (2019)

2019
[7]

Y. H. Kwan, P. J. Ledwith, C. F. B. Lo, and T. Devakul, Phys. Rev. B109, 125141 (2024)

work page 2024
[8]

X. Hu, T. Hyart, D. I. Pikulin, and E. Rossi, Phys. Rev. B105, L140506 (2022)

2022

Show all 54 references

[9]

Park, K.-X

J.-G. Park, K.-X. Zhang, H. Cheong, J. H. Kim, C. A. Belvin, D. Hsieh, H. Ning, and N. Gedik, Rev. Mod. Phys.98, 025003 (2026)

2026
[10]

L. An, X. Pan, Z. Qiu, et al., Nature Communications16 (2025), 10.1038/s41467-025-59691-5, arXiv:2407.13674 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025 arXiv
[11]

F. Xu, X. Chang, J. Xiao, Y. Zhang, F. Liu, Z. Sun, N. Mao, N. Peshcherenko, J. Li, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, L. Lu, J. Jia, D. Qian, Z. Shi, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, S. Jiang, and T. Li, Nature Physics (2025), 10.1038/s41567-025-02804-0, arXiv:2406.09687 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025 arXiv
[12]

X. Liu, Y. He, C. Wang, X.-W. Zhang, T. Cao, and D. Xiao, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 146401 (2024)

2024
[13]

Qiu and F

W.-X. Qiu and F. Wu, Physical Review B112, 085132 (2025), arXiv:2502.11010 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025 arXiv
[14]

Qiu and F

W.-X. Qiu and F. Wu, Physical Review B111, L121104 (2025), arXiv:2407.03317 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2025 arXiv
[15]

Li, W.-X

B. Li, W.-X. Qiu, and F. Wu, Physical Review B109, L041106 (2024), arXiv:2310.02217 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2024 arXiv
[16]

Li, W.-X

B. Li, W.-X. Qiu, F. Wu, and A. H. MacDon- ald, National Science Review13, nwaf570 (2026), arXiv:2509.07360 [cond-mat.str-el]

2026
[17]

Hu, Y.-M

J.-X. Hu, Y.-M. Xie, and K. T. Law, Phys. Rev. B107, 075424 (2023)

2023
[18]

S. L. Sondhi, A. Karlhede, S. A. Kivelson, and E. H. Rezayi, Physical Review B47, 16419 (1993)

1993
[19]

Schmeller, J

A. Schmeller, J. P. Eisenstein, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4290 (1995)

1995
[20]

S. E. Barrett, G. Dabbagh, L. N. Pfeiffer, K. W. West, and R. Tycko, Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 5112 (1995)

1995
[21]

Bayot, E

V. Bayot, E. Grivei, S. Melinte, M. B. Santos, and M. Shayegan, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 4584 (1996)

1996
[22]

J. Yu, S. A. Parameswaran, B. A. Foutty, Y. H. Kwan, M. E. Barber, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Z.-X. Shen, and B. E. Feldman, Nat. Commun.14, 6679 (2023)

2023
[23]

Melinte, E

S. Melinte, E. Grivei, V. Bayot, and M. Shayegan, Phys. 7 Rev. Lett.82, 2764 (1999)

1999
[24]

J. Cai, E. Anderson, C. Wang, X. Zhang, X. Liu, W. Holtzmann, Y. Zhang, F. Fan, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Ran, T. Cao, L. Fu, D. Xiao, W. Yao, and X. Xu, Nature622, 63 (2023)

2023
[25]

H. Park, J. Cai, E. Anderson, Y. Zhang, J. Zhu, X. Liu, C. Wang, W. Holtzmann, C. Zhang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J.-H. Chu, T. Cao, L. Fu, W. Yao, D. Xiao, and X. Xu, Nature622, 74 (2023)

2023
[26]

Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Kang, J. Zhu, P. Knueppel, C. Vaswani, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nature622, 69 (2023)

2023
[27]

F. Xu, Z. Sun, T. Jia, C. Liu, C. Xu, C. Li, Y. Gu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Tongay, J. Jia, Y. Zhang, S. Liu, and T. Li, Physical Review X13, 031037 (2023)

2023
[28]

Devakul, V

T. Devakul, V. Crepel, Y. Zhang, and L. Fu, Nature Communications12, 6730 (2021)

2021
[29]

A. P. Reddy, F. Alsallom, Y. Zhang, T. Devakul, and L. Fu, Physical Review B108, 085117 (2023)

2023
[30]

W.-X. Qiu, B. Li, X.-J. Luo, and F. Wu, Physical Review X13, 041026 (2023), arXiv:2305.01006 [cond-mat.mes- hall]

2023 arXiv
[31]

T. Wang, M. Wang, W. Kim, S. G. Louie, L. Fu, and M. P. Zaletel, arXiv preprint (2023), arXiv:2312.12531 [cond-mat.str-el]

2023 arXiv
[32]

T. Wang, T. Devakul, M. P. Zaletel, and L. Fu, arXiv preprint (2023), arXiv:2306.02501 [cond-mat.str-el]

2023 arXiv
[33]

Zhang, C

X.-W. Zhang, C. Wang, X. Liu, Y. Fan, T. Cao, and D. Xiao, Nature Communications15, 4223 (2024)

2024
[34]

M. Wang, X. Wang, and O. Vafek, arXiv preprint (2024), arXiv:2405.14811 [cond-mat.str-el]

2024 arXiv
[35]

Wu and S

F. Wu and S. Das Sarma, Physical Review B102, 165118 (2020), arXiv:2005.10254 [cond-mat.str-el]

2020 arXiv
[36]

H. Pan, F. Wu, and S. Das Sarma, Physical Review Re- search2, 033087 (2020), arXiv:2004.04168 [cond-mat.str- el]

2020 arXiv
[37]

F. Wu, T. Lovorn, E. Tutuc, I. Martin, and A. H. Mac- Donald, Physical Review Letters122, 086402 (2019), arXiv:1807.03311 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2019 arXiv
[38]

W. Li, E. Redekop, C. W. Beach, C. Zhang, X. Zhang, X. Liu, W. Holtzmann, C. Hu, E. Anderson, H. Park, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J.-H. Chu, L. Fu, T. Cao, D. Xiao, A. F. Young, and X. Xu, arXiv preprint (2025), arXiv:2507.22354 [cond-mat.str-el]

2025 arXiv
[39]

Khalaf, N

E. Khalaf, N. Bultinck, A. Vishwanath, and M. P. Zaletel, arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.14827 (2020), arXiv:2009.14827

2020 arXiv
[40]

Y. H. Kwan, G. Wagner, N. Bultinck, S. H. Simon, and S. A. Parameswaran, Phys. Rev. X12, 031020 (2022)

2022
[41]

Kharitonov, Phys

M. Kharitonov, Phys. Rev. B85, 155439 (2012)

2012
[42]

X.-L. Qi, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Physical Re- view B78, 195424 (2008)

2008
[43]

D. Xiao, J. Shi, D. P. Clougherty, and Q. Niu, Physical Review Letters102, 087602 (2009)

2009
[44]

Y. Zhao, Y. Gao, and D. Xiao, Physical Review B104, 144203 (2021)

2021
[45]

(8) changes sign

Both properties follow from the symmetry action on the projector family: aU(1) spin rotation conjugatesPby a k- andθ-independent unitary, which cancels cyclically in the trace, while time reversal sends (k, θ, ϕ)→(−k, π− θ, ϕ+π), under which only the single∂ θ appearing in eac...
[46]

How- ever, its value is rather small in tMoTe 2 [13]

A caveat here is that the in-plane stiffness term generi- cally also contributes to an energy scaling asN2 w/R. How- ever, its value is rather small in tMoTe 2 [13]. [47]µreceives both spin and orbital contributions. Spin– valley locking fixes the spin part, while the orbital ...
[48]

H.-Y. Xie, P. Ghaemi, M. Mitrano, and B. Uchoa, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , e2401644121 (2024)

2024
[49]

Aharonov and A

Y. Aharonov and A. Casher, Physical Review A19, 2461 (1979)

1979
[50]

J. Shi, N. Morales-Dur´ an, E. Khalaf, and A. H. MacDonald, Physical Review B110, 035130 (2024), arXiv:2404.13455 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2024 arXiv
[51]

C. Fang, M. J. Gilbert, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B86, 115112 (2012)

2012
[52]

H. C. Po, A. Vishwanath, and H. Watanabe, Nature communications8, 50 (2017)

2017
[53]

X. Cai, H. Pan, Y. Wang, A. Rasmita, S. Yang, Y. Zhao, W. Wang, R. Duan, R. He, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Z. Liu, J. Zuniga-Perez, B. Yang, and W. Gao, Nature 650, 580 (2026)

2026
[54]

Holtzmann, W

W. Holtzmann, W. Li, E. Anderson, J. Cai, H. Park, C. Hu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J.-H. Chu, D. Xiao, et al., Nature649, 1147 (2026)

2026
[55]

Morales-Dur´ an, N

N. Morales-Dur´ an, N. Wei, J. Shi, and A. H. MacDonald, Physical Review Letters132, 096602 (2024). 8 End Matter Continuum model for twisted TMD homobilayers.— We model the valence bands of twisted TMD homobi- layers using the continuum Hamiltonian introduced in Ref. [37], wit...

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Xiong, C

R. Xiong, C. Qin, Z. Han, N. Chadha, Q. Gao, W. Holtz- mann, W. Li, J. Cai, Y. Guo, W. Guo, Q. Chen, S. L. Brantly, S. Bonkowsky, C. Huang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. F. Young, X. Xu, E. Khalaf, and C. Jin, To appear (2026)

work page 2026

[2] [2]

Z. Han, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, B. A. Bernevig, and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. X14, 041004 (2024)

work page 2024

[3] [3]

Bultinck, E

N. Bultinck, E. Khalaf, S. Liu, S. Chatterjee, A. Vish- wanath, and M. P. Zaletel, Phys. Rev. X10, 031034 (2020)

2020

[4] [4]

Lian, Z.-D

B. Lian, Z.-D. Song, N. Regnault, D. K. Efetov, A. Yaz- dani, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B103, 205414 (2021)

2021

[5] [5]

Khalaf, S

E. Khalaf, S. Chatterjee, N. Bultinck, M. P. Zaletel, and A. Vishwanath, Science Advances7, eabf5299 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.abf5299

doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf5299 2021

[6] [6]

Kang and O

J. Kang and O. Vafek, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 246401 (2019)

2019

[7] [7]

Y. H. Kwan, P. J. Ledwith, C. F. B. Lo, and T. Devakul, Phys. Rev. B109, 125141 (2024)

work page 2024

[8] [8]

X. Hu, T. Hyart, D. I. Pikulin, and E. Rossi, Phys. Rev. B105, L140506 (2022)

2022