Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 66 references

Light Polarization Sensitive Transistor Action in the van der Waals ferroelectric 4H-SnS2

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper provides the first direct experimental evidence for room-temperature ferroelectricity in the 4H polytype of SnS2, and shows that this polarization controls transistor behavior and photoresponse.

desk verdict Local PFM evidence for ferroelectric 4H-SnS2 is solid; the transistor and photogalvanic claims rest on a coercive-field estimate that mixes a lateral drain field with a tip-based PFM threshold. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10174 v1 pith:2ZZJ5KUB submitted 2026-08-10 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Abhishek Bajgain , Rabindra Basnet , Subhashree Chatterjee , Alexander Samokhvalov , Ramesh C. Budhani This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords vanderWaalsferroelectricity4H-SnS2Snpolytypesferroelectricfield-effecttransistorcircularphotogalvaniceffectpiezoresponseforcemicroscopypolarization-sensitivephotoresponseroom-temperature
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper sets out to establish that the layered semiconductor 4H-SnS2 is ferroelectric at room temperature and that this spontaneous polarization controls both its transistor behavior and its response to polarized light. The authors argue that ferroelectricity is a property of the crystal polytype: the polar 4H stacking breaks inversion symmetry, while the centrosymmetric 2H stacking does not, and they support this by contrasting the two polymorphs. They report that a three-terminal device made from a single 4H-SnS2 crystal, which serves as both channel and gate dielectric, shows gate-tunable, hysteretic, p-type transport and a photoresponse that depends on laser power, temperature, and the linear or circular polarization of the light. A sympathetic reader would care because 4H-SnS2 would be a simple, two-element van der Waals ferroelectric platform for nonvolatile memory and polarization-sensitive optoelectronics.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 4H polytype of SnS2, a hexagonal stacking with four sulfur layers per unit cell (space group P63mc) that breaks inversion symmetry and produces a net out-of-plane electric polarization; the same crystal serves simultaneously as semiconducting channel and as the ferroelectric gate dielectric in the transistor. The argument is carried by the polarization-induced internal field: bound polarization charges create band bending and hole accumulation that shows up as p-type, hysteretic transport, and the same field separates photogenerated electron-hole pairs, producing polarization-dependent photocurrent. The machinery includes the Raman Eg-mode doublet as the polytype fingerprint, PFM and KPFM domain writing as the proof of switchable polarization, and the CPGE/LPGE fitting formula I(φ) = D + C sin(2φ) + L1 sin(4φ) + L2 cos(4φ) that separates circular and linear photogalvanic contributions.

What would settle it

Measure the polarization–electric-field (P–E) or positive-up–negative-down (PUND) hysteresis directly on the same 4H-SnS2 crystal used for the transistor, and repeat the transport measurements on a device where the channel thickness is known and the gate field is calculated from the actual crystal thickness; if the coercive field comes out much larger than about 1.2 kV/cm, or if the I_d–V_g hysteresis persists unchanged when the gate field is kept below any plausible coercive field, the ferroelectric explanation fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the 4H polytype of SnS2 hosts intrinsic, switchable, out-of-plane ferroelectric polarization at room temperature, as predicted for the P63mc stacking, and that this polarization is the controlling internal field in a three-terminal transistor. Evidence offered: piezoresponse force microscopy shows 180-degree phase reversal, butterfly amplitude loops with a ~3 V coercive voltage, long retention up to 60 hours, and endurance over 20 write-erase cycles on exfoliated flakes, while identical measurements on 2H-SnS2 show no ferroelectric response. In transport, the drain current becomes asymmetric and enhanced when programming or gate voltages exceed the ~3 V switching threshold, the I_d–V_g curves are hysteretic with a memory window that tracks the PFM coercive field, and the photocurrent under 532 nm light changes sign and magnitude with gate voltage, temperature, and light helicity. The authors conclude that the built-in polarization modulates carrier density and photocarrier separation, making 4H-SnS2 the first pristine binary van der Waals semiconductor with room-temperature ferroelectricity tied to polytype and demonstrated in transistor action.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the roughly 3 V threshold seen in the transistor's drain-current measurements on a 25-micrometer channel is the same ferroelectric coercive voltage measured by PFM on a roughly 50-nanometer flake, so the gate field of about 1.5 kV/cm at 15 V is strong enough to switch or modulate the polarization; if the true coercive field is much larger, the ferroelectric interpretation of the transport hysteresis collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • 4H-SnS2 can be used as a nonvolatile ferroelectric memory element: programmed current states remain separated for at least 300 s, and written domains persist for tens of hours.
  • Polytype, not just composition, decides ferroelectric functionality in SnS2: the 2H phase remains nonpolar while the 4H phase switches, so growth conditions that select polytype control device behavior.
  • The all-SnS2 transistor architecture works because the roughly 142–250x transport anisotropy confines current to the top layers and keeps gate leakage below about 1%.
  • The photoresponse is polarization-tunable: gate voltage, light helicity, and temperature can reverse or enhance the photocurrent, and the CPGE and LPGE amplitudes peak near the temperature where ferroelectric hysteresis is largest.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: If room-temperature ferroelectricity in 4H-SnS2 is confirmed by macroscopic P–E or PUND measurements, then stacking polytype engineering becomes a general route to hidden ferroelectricity in other binary layered dichalcogenides, not just SnS2.
  • Editorial inference: The helicity-dependent photocurrent could serve as an optical readout of the ferroelectric polarization state, since the CPGE and LPGE amplitudes and the LCP–RCP separation track the hysteresis and reverse sign near 250 K.
  • Editorial inference: The reported coercive field of about 1.2 kV/cm is unusually low; if it holds, 4H-SnS2 would merit testing in low-voltage ferroelectric field-effect transistors, but that claim needs a direct measurement of coercivity on the same crystal used for transport.
  • Editorial inference: A decisive control experiment would compare nominally identical devices under light of opposite helicity at fixed gate voltage to separate true photogalvanic current from thermal or bolometric contributions; the paper's oblique-incidence geometry is consistent with CPGE but does not by itself exclude helicity-dependent absorption artifacts.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports room-temperature ferroelectricity in the 4H polytype of SnS2 and claims that the spontaneous polarization controls the electrical transport and photoresponse of a three-terminal transistor built on the same crystal. The evidence for ferroelectricity includes Raman identification of the 2H and 4H polytypes, XRD, PFM phase and amplitude hysteresis, domain writing with retention up to 60 hours, endurance over 20 cycles, thickness-dependent PFM, and a 2H PFM control. The transport section reports drain-current asymmetries under programming voltages, hysteretic transfer curves with temperature-dependent memory windows, time-dependent relaxation, and gate-dependent photocurrents under linearly and circularly polarized light, fitted with CPGE and LPGE terms. The central claim is that 4H-SnS2 is the first pristine binary van der Waals semiconductor combining switchable out-of-plane polarization with polarization-sensitive transistor action and photoresponse at room temperature.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper identifies a structurally simple binary van der Waals semiconductor with room-temperature ferroelectric order and demonstrates coupling of that order to transistor and photoresponse functionality, which would be of substantial interest for nonvolatile memory and photoferroelectric devices. The local PFM evidence is a clear strength: domain writing with opposite phase contrast, off-field phase and amplitude loops, long retention, repeated switching endurance, thickness-dependent switching, and the direct absence of response in the centrosymmetric 2H control together make a credible case for local ferroelectric switching. The transport and photocurrent data are extensive and, if properly connected to polarization, would be significant. However, the quantitative link between the gate field and ferroelectric switching is currently based on an inconsistent coercive-field estimate, and the absence of a 2H transistor control weakens the attribution of the electrical hysteresis to polarization. These issues are load-bearing for the transistor-action part of the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.2, Fig. 1g and Fig. 3c,e] The coercive-field estimate used to justify gate control of polarization is internally inconsistent. The PFM data in Fig. 1g show polarization switching at a tip bias of about 3 V on a roughly 50 nm thick flake, which under a uniform-field estimate gives an out-of-plane coercive field of order 600 kV/cm, not 1.2 kV/cm. The 1.2 kV/cm value quoted in Section 2.2 instead matches 3 V divided by the 25 micrometer source-drain spacing, which is a lateral in-plane field and cannot switch the out-of-plane polarization probed by PFM. Consequently, the statement that a gate field of 1.5 kV/cm is 'comparable' to the coercive field is not supported by the paper's own data, and the claim that electrostatic gating significantly modulates the ferroelectric polarization is quantitatively unsupported.
  2. [Section 2.2, Fig. 3c and Fig. 3e] The coincidence between the Vd ≥ 3 V transport threshold and the PFM coercive voltage is presented as evidence of polarization switching, but the two voltages are applied in different geometries and directions: the drain voltage acts laterally across a 25 micrometer channel, whereas the PFM voltage is applied vertically across a roughly 50 nm flake. A voltage coincidence alone cannot establish that the same switching field is involved. The observed transport threshold and the resulting hysteresis could equally arise from bias-dependent carrier injection, charge trapping, or ion migration. Direct evidence of gate- or drain-induced polarization switching, for example by performing PFM on the channel after applying the relevant bias, is needed to support the ferroelectric interpretation.
  3. [Section 2.2, Figs. 3-5] No transport or photoresponse measurements are reported for the 2H-SnS2 control crystal. The 2H polytype is used as a PFM control, which is appropriate, but the transistor hysteresis, gate dependence, and polarization-dependent photocurrent are not compared between 2H and 4H. Without that control, the polytype-specificity of the electrical and optoelectronic claims is not established, and the observed Id-Vg hysteresis and gate-tunable photoresponse could be caused by sample-specific defects, contacts, or surface adsorbates rather than by ferroelectric polarization.
  4. [Section 2.1, last paragraph] The paper itself states that 'future macroscopic P-E and PUND measurements will be valuable for quantitatively determining the intrinsic polarization and coercive field.' In the absence of such measurements, the quantitative coercive-field value used in Section 2.2 for the gate-field comparison is unverified. The paper should either obtain a direct measurement of the out-of-plane coercive field relevant to the gate geometry or substantially weaken the quantitative claims about gate-induced polarization modulation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract says 'establish a room-temperature ferroelectric state in SnS2' without specifying 4H-SnS2 in the first sentence; the scope should be clarified immediately to avoid implying that the common 2H phase is ferroelectric.
  2. [Section 2.2, 'coercive field' sentence] If the 1.2 kV/cm value is retained, the derivation must be stated explicitly; as written, the text moves from a PFM voltage threshold and a lateral drain-voltage threshold to a field value without showing how the geometry conversion was made.
  3. [Figure 3 caption] The caption says the measurement was performed 'over a duration of 20 mins,' while the text says 'monitored over 30 minutes time'; these should be reconciled.
  4. [Section 2.3, Eq. (2)] The power-law fit Iph = A Pb reports A and b without a goodness-of-fit metric; an R2 value or residual analysis should be provided to assess the fit quality.
  5. [Figure 7 caption and text] The text refers to 'fitting Iph(phi) in Figure 6(b)' when the data are in Figure 7(b); the figure reference is incorrect.
  6. [Experimental Section] The sentence 'The corresponding in-plane and out-of-plane resistivities were calculated using the measured device geometry (Figure 2b)' refers to the wrong figure; the device geometry is shown in Figure 3b.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ferroelectricity claim rests on independent PFM data, and the transport/photocurrent interpretation does not reduce to its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing inference—that 4H-SnS2 is ferroelectric at room temperature—is established by off-field PFM phase hysteresis, butterfly amplitude loops, retention tests, endurance cycling, and control experiments (Figs. 1g and 2h–l), none of which are constructed from the transistor or photocurrent data. The FET and photoresponse sections then interpret independently measured Id-Vd, Id-Vg, and Iph(φ) traces as polarization-coupled, using standard literature mechanisms (bound-charge transport, screening, CPGE/LPGE decomposition); Eq. (3) is a phenomenological fit that parameterizes helicity/linear contributions rather than a derivation that presumes ferroelectricity. The only self-citations ([15], [66], [67]) are incidental example/material-method references and are not load-bearing. The paper explicitly defers macroscopic P-E/PUND measurements, an honest limitation. The coercive-field estimate of ~1.2 kV/cm is geometrically inconsistent with the PFM 3 V/50 nm data, but this is a correctness/consistency issue, not circularity: the transport threshold is interpreted with, not derived from, the ferroelectric claim, and the conclusion would not follow by algebraic identity from its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest mainly on domain assumptions: the polytype assignment, the ferroelectric interpretation of PFM, and the field estimates for the thick-crystal FET. No new physical entity is introduced. The fitted photocurrent power law and CPGE coefficients are empirical parameters, not predictions.

free parameters (4)
  • Photocurrent power-law prefactor A = 27.02 nA/(W/cm2)^b
    Fitted to the photocurrent-versus-power data in Eq. (2), Figure 5(c); it sets the scale for the claimed sublinear response.
  • Photocurrent power-law exponent b = 0.31
    Fitted exponent used to infer trap-assisted recombination and polarization screening from the same data it describes.
  • Raman temperature coefficient chi = -0.014 +/- 0.001 cm^-1 K^-1
    Linear fit of the A1g+Eg Raman shift versus temperature in Eq. (1), used to compare interlayer coupling with other 2D materials.
  • CPGE and LPGE fit coefficients (C, L1, L2, D) = Not tabulated; plotted versus temperature
    Coefficients fitted to I(phi) in Eq. (3) to separate circular and linear photogalvanic contributions; no values or uncertainties are reported.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The wine-red crystal is the 4H polytype (P63mc) based on the Raman Eg doublet and c-axis spacing; no full structure refinement is provided.
    The polytype assignment underpins the entire correlation between crystal symmetry and ferroelectricity.
  • domain assumption PFM/KPFM responses are caused by intrinsic ferroelectric polarization, not electrostatic or electrochemical artifacts.
    Controls are extensive, but the paper states that macroscopic P-E and PUND measurements are still needed.
  • domain assumption Current in the FET is confined to the top layers because out-of-plane resistivity is 142 to 250 times larger than in-plane resistivity, so a 100 micrometer crystal can function as channel and gate dielectric.
    The resistor-network model in Supplementary Note S6 uses this anisotropy to justify the unusual device geometry.
  • ad hoc to paper The gate field is uniform and equal to Vg/t, and the estimated coercive field of 1.2 kV/cm from lateral drain bias is the relevant switching field.
    This comparison is introduced specifically to argue that a 15 V gate can influence ferroelectric polarization; the field conversion is not geometrically valid.
  • domain assumption The CPGE coefficient C in Eq. (3) isolates helicity-dependent photocurrent with no linear-polarization contamination.
    No 2H control or polarization calibration is reported, so the assignment of C to circular photogalvanic effect is not independently verified.
  • domain assumption The correlation between Raman mode anomalies, hysteresis area, and photocurrent implies lattice-polarization coupling.
    The correlations are qualitative and are not modeled quantitatively, so alternative thermal or trapping explanations are not excluded.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Light Polarization Sensitive Transistor Action in the van der Waals ferroelectric 4H-SnS2." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2ZZJ5KUB

@misc{pith2026260810174,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Light Polarization Sensitive Transistor Action in the van der Waals ferroelectric 4H-SnS2},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2ZZJ5KUB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10174}
}
read the original abstract

Van der Waals (vdW) ferroelectric semiconductors provide a unique platform for exploring the interplay between spontaneous polarization, electronic transport, ion migration, and photocarrier generation at the nanoscale. Here, we establish a room-temperature ferroelectric state in SnS2 and its sensitivity to structural polytype by directly contrasting the centrosymmetric 2H-phase with the polar 4H-phase. Raman spectroscopy distinguishes the 2H and 4H polymorphs of SnS2 through their characteristic phonon fingerprints. Piezoresponse force microscopy confirms room-temperature ferroelectricity in the 4H phase, while the 2H phase exhibits no ferroelectric response. The built-in polarization in a three-terminal transistor device of the 4H-SnS2 is modulated significantly by electrostatic gating and on exposure to linear and circularly polarized light. This device reveals polarization-controlled output characteristics with distinct gate-voltage induced hysteretic response and thermally activated carrier transport, confirming p-type semiconducting behavior strongly coupled to ferroelectric polarization. The photoresponse likewise exhibits polarization-assisted carrier separation, sublinear power-law scaling, a nonmonotonic temperature response correlated with the characteristic Raman modes, ferroelectric hysteresis, and a pronounced dependence on the circular and linear polarization states of the incident laser beam. These results establish 4H-SnS2 as a promising material system for polarization-driven electronic and optoelectronic technologies, including nonvolatile memory and photoferroelectric functionalities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10174 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Structural, optical, and ferroelectric characterization of 4H-SnS2. (a) EDS spectrum of a CVT-grown 4H-SnS2 single crystal showing Sn and S peaks. The inset displays EDS elemental mapping of Sn and S over a larger area of the crystal. (b) X-ray diffraction (XRD) pattern of the same single crystal showing strong (00L) reflections, confirming preferential orientation along the c-axis. (c) Raman spectrum of 4H-SnS2, hi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Out-of-plane ferroelectric characterization of 4H-SnS2 nanoflakes. (a,b) Time￾dependent evolution of the surface potential distribution measured by non-contact KPFM after local ferroelectric domain writing on a ~100 nm thick 4H-SnS2 flake. Opposite polarization states were locally generated by applying ±9 V DC biases through the conductive AFM tip, and the corresponding surface potential contrast was recorded immedi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Temperature and gate-voltage-dependent transport characteristics of the 4H-SnS2 ferroelectric-FET. (a) Transfer characteristics (Id-Vg) measured at a fixed drain voltage of Vd = +3 V over the temperature range 80–300 K, illustrating the evolution of channel conduction with temperature; arrows indicate the sweep direction, highlighting the hysteretic behavior. (b) Id as a function of temperature measured at fixed gat… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Photoresponse characteristics of the 4H-SnS2 FET. (a) Time-dependent photocurrent Iph(t) measured at a fixed drain voltage of Vd = +3 V under periodic on–off illumination with a 532 nm laser (0.21 W/cm2 ), showing reproducible photocurrent switching and step-like curre…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The effects of sequential application of gate voltage (Vg = ‒15 V) and exposure to light (with the same flux as in the light-only experiment) on the resistance of the channel of 4H￾SnS2. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Circular photogalvanic effect of the 4H-SnS2. (a) Transfer characteristics (Iph-Vg) measured at a fixed drain voltage of Vd = +1 V over the temperature range 100–300 K under LCP and RCP light. (b) The polarization-dependent photocurrent as a function of QWP angle φ at …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. Zhao, Z. Gao, Z. Hong, H. Guo, Z. Cheng, Y. Li, L. Shang, L. Zhu, J. Zhang, Z. Hu, Advanced Science 2025, 12, 2413808

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    Felton, J

    J. Felton, J. Harknett, J. Page, Z. Yang, N. Alghofaili, J. N. O’Shea, L. Eaves, Y. Kohama, M. T. Greenaway, A. Patanè, Nat Commun 2025, 16, 922

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    R. Quhe, Z. Di, J. Zhang, Y. Sun, L. Zhang, Y. Guo, S. Wang, P. Zhou, Nat. Nanotechnol. 2024, 19, 173

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    H. Wang, X. Qian, Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 5027

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    S. Wu, J. Deng, X. Wang, J. Zhou, H. Jiao, Q. Zhao, T. Lin, H. Shen, X. Meng, Y. Chen, J. Chu, J. Wang, Nat Commun 2024, 15, 8743

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    T. Li, A. Lipatov, H. Lu, H. Lee, J.-W. Lee, E. Torun, L. Wirtz, C.-B. Eom, J. Íñiguez, A. Sinitskii, A. Gruverman, Nat Commun 2018, 9, 3344

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    C. Jia, S. Wu, J. Fan, C. Luo, M. Fan, M. Li, L. He, Y. Yang, H. Zhang, ACS Nano 2023, 17, 6534

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Huang, D

    C.-Y. Huang, D. G. Chica, Z.-H. Cui, T. Handa, M. Thinel, N. Olsen, Y. Liu, M. E. Ziebel, G. He, Y. Shao, C. A. Occhialini, J. Pelliciari, D. N. Basov, M. Sfeir, A. Pasupathy, V. Bisogni, D. R. Reichman, X. Roy, X. Zhu, Nat Commun 2025, 16, 1896

    work page 2025

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    W. F. Io, S.-Y. Pang, L. W. Wong, Y. Zhao, R. Ding, J. Mao, Y. Zhao, F. Guo, S. Yuan, J. Zhao, J. Yi, J. Hao, Nat Commun 2023, 14, 7304

    2023

  2. [10]

    J. Deng, Y. Liu, M. Li, S. Xu, Y. Lun, P. Lv, T. Xia, P. Gao, X. Wang, J. Hong, Small 2020, 16, 1904529

    2020

  3. [11]

    L. Li, M. Wu, ACS Nano 2017, 11, 6382

    2017

  4. [12]

    S. Fang, M. Wang, X. Yang, Z. Yang, Q. Li, Z. Luo, J. Lu, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 195202

    2024

  5. [14]

    F. Liu, L. You, K. L. Seyler, X. Li, P. Yu, J. Lin, X. Wang, J. Zhou, H. Wang, H. He, S. T. Pantelides, W. Zhou, P. Sharma, X. Xu, P. M. Ajayan, J. Wang, Z. Liu, Nat Commun 2016, 7, 12357

    2016

  6. [15]

    Chatterjee, R

    S. Chatterjee, R. Basnet, R. Nepal, R. C. Budhani, Nanoscale 2026

    2026

  7. [16]

    Y. Zhou, D. Wu, Y. Zhu, Y. Cho, Q. He, X. Yang, K. Herrera, Z. Chu, Y. Han, M. C. Downer, H. Peng, K. Lai, Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 5508

    2017

  8. [17]

    Vysochanskii, K

    Yu. Vysochanskii, K. Glukhov, M. Maior, K. Fedyo, A. Kohutych, V. Betsa, I. Prits, M. Gurzan, Ferroelectrics 2011, 418, 124

    2011

  9. [18]

    P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, M. M. Maior, S. B. Molnar, Yu. M. Vysochanskii, P. J. M. van Bentum, H. van Kempen, Phys. Rev. B 1993, 48, 6014

    1993

  10. [19]

    C. He, J. Zhang, L. Gong, P. Yu, Front. Phys. 2024, 19, 43202

    2024

  11. [20]

    Ghosh, M

    T. Ghosh, M. Samanta, A. Vasdev, K. Dolui, J. Ghatak, T. Das, G. Sheet, K. Biswas, Nano Lett. 2019, 19, 5703

    2019

  12. [21]

    W. Wang, Y. Meng, Y. Zhang, Z. Zhang, W. Wang, Z. Lai, P. Xie, D. Li, D. Chen, Q. Quan, D. Yin, C. Liu, Z. Yang, S. Yip, J. C. Ho, Advanced Materials 2023, 35, 2210854

    2023

  13. [22]

    S. Yuan, X. Luo, H. L. Chan, C. Xiao, Y. Dai, M. Xie, J. Hao, Nat Commun 2019, 10, 1775

    2019

  14. [23]

    Zhang, Y

    S. Zhang, Y. Liu, Z. Sun, X. Chen, B. Li, S. L. Moore, S. Liu, Z. Wang, S. E. Rossi, R. Jing, J. Fonseca, B. Yang, Y. Shao, C.-Y. Huang, T. Handa, L. Xiong, M. Fu, T.-C. Pan, D. 29 Halbertal, X. Xu, W. Zheng, P. J. Schuck, A. N. Pasupathy, C. R. Dean, X. Zhu, D. H. Cobden, X. ...

    2023

  15. [24]

    Y. Ran, C. Meng, Z. Lu, H. Wang, Y. Ma, D. Xie, Q. Li, H. Zhu, Small Structures 2025, 6, 2400621

    2025

  16. [25]

    S. Shah, P. Mohammadi, B. G. Singidas, K. A. Smith, Y. Gu, L. J. Langston, B. Taylor, R. P. Siebenaller, M. A. Susner, R. Rao, S.-W. Cheong, H. Kadobayashi, R. V. Sarmago, Z. Liu, T. Matsuoka, S. Singh, J. L. Musfeldt, npj 2D Mater Appl 2026, 10, 40

    2026

  17. [26]

    Selhorst, S

    R. Selhorst, S. Lough, J. Jiang, B. S. Conner, J. T. Goldstein, A. N. Giordano, E. Rowe, M. Ishigami, R. Pachter, M. A. Susner, R. Rao, Chem. Mater. 2024, 36, 7822

    2024

  18. [27]

    T. Choi, S. Lee, Y. J. Choi, V. Kiryukhin, S.-W. Cheong, Science 2009, 324, 63

    2009

  19. [28]

    Zhang, M

    F. Zhang, M. Li, Y. Zhu, M. Zhao, S. Xie, M. Wei, Y. Li, Z. Hu, M. Li, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 2017, 695, 3178

    2017

  20. [29]

    Huang, E

    Y. Huang, E. Sutter, J. T. Sadowski, M. Cotlet, O. L. A. Monti, D. A. Racke, M. R. Neupane, D. Wickramaratne, R. K. Lake, B. A. Parkinson, P. Sutter, ACS Nano 2014, 8, 10743

    2014

  21. [30]

    De Stefano, O

    S. De Stefano, O. Durante, A. Sessa, A. Politano, G. D’Olimpio, T. Dadiani, E. Faella, A. Dinescu, C. Parvulescu, C. Hetherington, C.-N. Kuo, C. S. Lue, M. Aldrigo, M. Passacantando, A. Di Bartolomeo, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2025, 17, 50901

    2025

  22. [31]

    M. Wu, J. Li, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2021, 118, e2115703118

    2021

  23. [32]

    A. J. Smith, P. E. Meek, W. Y. Liang, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 1977, 10, 1321

    1977

  24. [33]

    Z. Ma, Z. Yao, Y. Cheng, X. Zhang, B. Guo, Y. Lyu, P. Wang, Q. Li, H. Wang, A. Nie, A. Aspuru-Guzik, Nano Energy 2020, 67, 104276

    2020

  25. [34]

    P. Wang, S. Sun, W. Zhao, J. Wang, S. Jin, X. Lai, J. Jian, Chemical Engineering Journal 2025, 504, 158239

    2025

  26. [35]

    Y. Liu, Y. Sun, W. Lu, H. Wang, Z. Wang, B. Yu, T. Li, K. Zeng, Journal of Materiomics 2020, 6, 109

    2020

  27. [36]

    Ponath, K

    P. Ponath, K. Fredrickson, A. B. Posadas, Y. Ren, X. Wu, R. K. Vasudevan, M. Baris Okatan, S. Jesse, T. Aoki, M. R. McCartney, D. J. Smith, S. V. Kalinin, K. Lai, A. A. Demkov, Nat Commun 2015, 6, 6067

    2015

  28. [37]

    M. R. Osanloo, M. L. Van de Put, A. Saadat, W. G. Vandenberghe, Nat Commun 2021, 12, 5051

    2021

  29. [38]

    D. Sen, H. Ravichandran, S. Imam, S. Ghosh, K. Mukhopadhyay, M. Y. Bashir, T. S. Ie, V. Mazanek, J. Luxa, C. Chen, J. M. Redwing, Z. Sofer, S. Sahay, M. G. Kanatzidis, S. Das, Nat Commun 2026, 17, 2840

    2026

  30. [39]

    Zhen, H.-Y

    Z.-Q. Zhen, H.-Y. Wang, Acta Physica Polonica: A 2020, 137, 1095

    2020

  31. [40]

    W. Cao, M. Huang, C.-H. Yeh, K. Parto, K. Banerjee, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 2020, 67, 1310

    2020

  32. [41]

    G.-L. Yuan, J. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 95, 252904

    2009

  33. [42]

    Gruverman, D

    A. Gruverman, D. Wu, J. F. Scott, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 100, 097601

    2008

  34. [43]

    Grigoriev, M

    A. Grigoriev, M. M. Azad, J. McCampbell, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2011, 82, 124704

    2011

  35. [44]

    Ramamoorthy, R

    H. Ramamoorthy, R. Somphonsane, J. Radice, G. He, J. Nathawat, C.-P. Kwan, M. Zhao, J. P. Bird, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2017, 32, 084005

    2017

  36. [45]

    Z. Zhou, S. Wang, Z. Zhou, Y. Hu, Q. Li, J. Xue, Z. Feng, Q. Yan, Z. Luo, Y. Weng, R. Tang, X. Su, F. Zheng, K. Okamoto, H. Funakubo, L. Kang, L. Fang, L. You, Nat Commun 2023, 14, 8254

    2023

  37. [46]

    E. Li, W. He, R. Wang, C. Zhang, H. Zhou, Y. Liu, Y. Yuan, K. P. Loh, J. Chu, W. Li, Nat Commun 2025, 16, 9382

    2025

  38. [47]

    S. Wang, L. Liu, L. Gan, H. Chen, X. Hou, Y. Ding, S. Ma, D. W. Zhang, P. Zhou, Nat Commun 2021, 12, 53

    2021

  39. [48]

    S. V. Kalinin, D. A. Bonnell, Phys. Rev. B 2001, 63, 125411

    2001

  40. [49]

    Meyer, R

    R. Meyer, R. Waser, J. Appl. Phys. 2006, 100, 051611. 30

    2006

  41. [50]

    M. Si, A. K. Saha, S. Gao, G. Qiu, J. Qin, Y. Duan, J. Jian, C. Niu, H. Wang, W. Wu, S. K. Gupta, P. D. Ye, Nat Electron 2019, 2, 580

    2019

  42. [51]

    Toprasertpong, M

    K. Toprasertpong, M. Takenaka, S. Takagi, Appl. Phys. A 2022, 128, 1114

    2022

  43. [52]

    Si, P.-Y

    M. Si, P.-Y. Liao, G. Qiu, Y. Duan, P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 2018, 12, 6700

    2018

  44. [53]

    Toprasertpong, M

    K. Toprasertpong, M. Takenaka, S. Takagi, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 2022, 69, 7113

    2022

  45. [54]

    Zhang, C

    K. Zhang, C. Bao, Q. Gu, X. Ren, H. Zhang, K. Deng, Y. Wu, Y. Li, J. Feng, S. Zhou, Nat Commun 2016, 7, 13552

    2016

  46. [55]

    R. Yan, J. R. Simpson, S. Bertolazzi, J. Brivio, M. Watson, X. Wu, A. Kis, T. Luo, A. R. Hight Walker, H. G. Xing, ACS Nano 2014, 8, 986

    2014

  47. [56]

    Calizo, A

    I. Calizo, A. A. Balandin, W. Bao, F. Miao, C. N. Lau, Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 2645

    2007

  48. [57]

    Yoon, Y.-W

    D. Yoon, Y.-W. Son, H. Cheong, Nano Lett. 2011, 11, 3227

    2011

  49. [58]

    Cheng, J

    X. Cheng, J. Peng, Y. Cao, Z. Zhong, J. Hu, Q. Yang, Y. Zhuang, J. Wang, J. Chu, H. Huang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2025, 126, 171105

    2025

  50. [59]

    Zhang, W

    J. Zhang, W. Xu, L. Wang, Z. Zheng, F. Liu, P. Yu, G. Yang, Crystal Growth & Design 2023, 23, 1259

    2023

  51. [60]

    J. Huo, J. Huo, J. Gao, L. Li, T. T. T. Tun, J. Peng, H. Zheng, Y. Shi, K.-W. Ang, Nat Commun 2026, 17, 1468

    2026

  52. [61]

    Huang, S

    M. Huang, S. Luo, H. Qiao, B. Yao, Z. Huang, Z. Wang, Q. Bao, X. Qi, Small Science 2024, 4, 2300246

    2024

  53. [62]

    W. Guo, H. Xu, F. Sun, Y. Liu, Y. Ma, W. Liu, Y. Zhao, Z. Sun, J. Luo, Angewandte Chemie International Edition 2025, 64, e202421463

    2025

  54. [63]

    Li, J.-K

    D. Li, J.-K. Qin, B. Zhu, L.-Q. Yue, P.-Y. Huang, C. Zhu, F. Zhou, L. Zhen, C.-Y. Xu, ACS Nano 2024, 18, 9636

    2024

  55. [64]

    J. W. McIver, D. Hsieh, H. Steinberg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, N. Gedik, Nature Nanotech 2012, 7, 96

    2012

  56. [65]

    Valov, R

    I. Valov, R. Waser, J. R. Jameson, M. N. Kozicki, Nanotechnology 2011, 22, 254003

    2011

  57. [66]

    Bajgain, S

    A. Bajgain, S. P. Jana, S. Chatterjee, A. Samokhvalov, T. Parker, J. D. Demaree, A. Asthana, C. Shock, R. C. Budhani, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2025, 127, 083301

    2025

  58. [67]

    Bajgain, Novel Growth Strategy for Vanadium-Doped WSe2 Films With Tunable Optoelectronic Properties

    A. Bajgain, Novel Growth Strategy for Vanadium-Doped WSe2 Films With Tunable Optoelectronic Properties. M.S., Morgan State University, United States -- Maryland, 2025

    2025

Pith tools

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