Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Impact of spin-orbit coupling on electron correlation corrections to the density of states in anisotropic conductors

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read At a critical spin-orbit strength, the Altshuler–Aronov correction to the density of states in an anisotropic conductor vanishes exactly, and beyond that strength it reverses sign.

desk verdict A genuine analytic result with a real soft spot: the SOC-driven cancellation and sign inversion are new and worth refereeing, but they rest on an unquantified exchange-only approximation and an abstract/main-text contradiction about the 2D regime. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05622 v1 pith:2ZCPIPGE submitted 2026-08-06 cond-mat.mes-hall

Bahruz Suleymanli , B. Tanatar This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Altshuler-Aronovcorrectiondensityofstatesspin-orbitcouplingRashbaandDresselhausanisotropicconductordisorderzero-biasanomalydimensionalcrossover
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 sets out to show that in a strongly anisotropic two-dimensional conductor with an open Fermi surface, weak disorder, and Rashba/Dresselhaus spin-orbit coupling along the conducting direction, the Altshuler–Aronov anomaly—the interaction-induced suppression of the single-particle density of states near the Fermi level—can be tuned continuously by the spin-orbit strength. Working with exchange diagrams in the diffusion channel, an impurity ladder, and RPA-screened Coulomb interactions, the calculation yields a dimensional crossover at the energy scale $\varepsilon_c\sim t_y^2\tau$. Below that scale the anomaly is a two-dimensional logarithmic dip; above it, a quasi-one-dimensional square-root anomaly. The central prediction is that the quasi-one-dimensional amplitude crosses zero at $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}/v_F\approx 0.57$, where the unperturbed density of states is restored, and becomes positive for stronger spin-orbit coupling. If correct, this gives tunneling spectroscopy a clean, spin-orbit-tunable signature of electron-correlation effects in anisotropic conductors.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coefficient $\Lambda_3$ of Eq. (42), which multiplies the quasi-one-dimensional density-of-states correction; its zero at $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}/v_F\approx 0.57$ produces the exact cancellation and the subsequent sign reversal. This coefficient is obtained from the exchange self-energy in the diffusion channel: the particle–hole bubble is dressed by an impurity ladder that collapses, after the spin trace, to the charge (singlet) diffuson, and the long-range Coulomb interaction is replaced by its RPA-screened counterpart. The helicity branches split by the longitudinal Rashba/Dresselhaus term $H_{\mathrm{SO}}=(\alpha k_x)\sigma_y-(\beta k_x)\sigma_x$ supply the band structure, while the transverse tunneling amplitude $t_y$ and elastic time $\tau$ set the crossover scale $\varepsilon_c=8t_y^2\tau$ between the two- and quasi-one-dimensional windows.

What would settle it

In a gated anisotropic spin-orbit-coupled film such as 2D Te, measure the low-temperature tunneling conductance dI/dV while sweeping the gate voltage to vary Rashba coupling; the claim predicts the zero-bias dip to shrink and the finite-bias quasi-one-dimensional anomaly to pass through zero near $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}/v_F\approx 0.57$ and then become positive. A dip that never changes sign, or a zero appearing at a substantially different spin-orbit strength, would rule out the exchange-only prediction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that spin-orbit coupling does not merely renormalize the Altshuler–Aronov density-of-states anomaly but can set its coefficient to zero and then change its sign. In the quasi-one-dimensional energy window $|\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F|>\varepsilon_c$, with $\varepsilon_c=8t_y^2\tau$, the exchange-derived correction reduces to $\delta\rho(\varepsilon)\propto -\Lambda_3\,|\tau(\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F)|^{-1/2}$, where $\Lambda_3$ is a function of $v_F$ and $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}$ given in Eq. (42). Because $\Lambda_3$ vanishes at $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}/v_F\approx 0.57$, the correlation correction cancels at that point and the unperturbed density of states is restored; for larger spin-orbit strengths the sign of $\Lambda_3$ flips and the anomaly becomes positive, decaying as energy moves away from $\varepsilon_F+\varepsilon_c$ rather than recovering like the standard negative correction. In the two-dimensional window the correction remains a negative logarithmic dip whose magnitude grows with spin-orbit strength. The paper presents this exchange-only, diffusion-channel result as a predictive, parameter-explicit account of how spin-orbit coupling modulates interaction corrections in anisotropic conductors.

Load-bearing premise

The whole cancellation and sign reversal depend on the Hartree contribution being genuinely negligible; the paper asserts this smallness for a long-range Coulomb interaction but does not calculate it, and a comparable Hartree term would shift or erase the critical spin-orbit point.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Tunneling spectroscopy on an anisotropic spin-orbit-coupled film should show, as a function of bias, a logarithmic low-energy dip, a crossover at $\varepsilon_c$, and then a spin-orbit-enhanced quasi-one-dimensional anomaly that can vanish and become positive.
  • At spin-orbit strengths above the critical value, the positive correction decreases as $|\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F|$ increases beyond $\varepsilon_F+\varepsilon_c$, which is the opposite energy trend to the standard negative Altshuler–Aronov correction.
  • The crossover energy $\varepsilon_c=8t_y^2\tau$ itself does not move with spin-orbit coupling; spin-orbit coupling changes only the amplitude and sign of the anomaly in each window.
  • Stronger spin-orbit coupling widens the non-perturbative exclusion zone near the Fermi level, since the lower cutoff $|\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F|_{\min}$ set by the 10% perturbation condition grows monotonically with $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An extension the paper leaves implicit: because the same diffusion-channel self-energy also controls the interaction correction to conductivity, the sign-changing anomaly in the density of states should have a counterpart in the conductivity correction, which the paper does not compute.
  • The specific number $\sqrt{\alpha^2+\beta^2}/v_F\approx 0.57$ is a quantitative target: including the Hartree diagram in the same diffusion-channel calculation would show whether the zero shifts or acquires a residual offset, and a gate-tunable Rashba film could test it directly.
  • Since the paper's two asymptotic expressions do not match exactly at $\varepsilon_c$, numerically evaluating Eq. (26) across the crossover would produce a sharper prediction for the shape of the tunneling signature near the dimensional crossover.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper calculates the Altshuler–Aronov interaction correction to the single-particle density of states (DOS) for a strongly anisotropic 2D conductor with an open Fermi surface, weak spin-independent disorder, and longitudinal Rashba/Dresselhaus spin-orbit coupling. Working from a coupled-wire model with helicity-split bands, the authors use Matsubara diagrammatics, impurity-ladder-dressed density vertices, and RPA-screened Coulomb interaction to derive asymptotic exchange-only results: a logarithmic 2D anomaly for |ε−εF|<εc and a quasi-1D square-root anomaly for |ε−εF|>εc. The paper's central claim is that at a critical SOC strength the quasi-1D correction vanishes exactly and, for stronger SOC, changes sign, producing a positive DOS anomaly with inverted energy dependence.

Significance. The central claim is clear, falsifiable, and potentially important: SOC would provide a control knob for the Altshuler–Aronov anomaly, with a distinctive spectroscopic signature in tunneling measurements. The analytic derivation is self-contained and produces compact, parameter-explicit formulas (Eqs. (34), (41), (42)) and a concrete experimental prediction, which are strengths of the manuscript. However, the advertised cancellation and sign reversal rest on two unquantified approximations—neglect of the Hartree contribution and a per-helicity treatment of the RPA screening denominator—so the significance of the result is, at this stage, conditional.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. I, before Eq. (7)] The Hartree contribution is neglected on the basis of a one-sentence assertion that its large momentum transfer makes it parametrically suppressed for the long-range Coulomb interaction, but no estimate or diagrammatic evaluation is provided. In the standard Altshuler–Aronov treatment, the Hartree diagram contributes in the same small-q diffusion channel and enters the prefactor of the DOS anomaly (in Fermi-liquid language, through combinations such as 1−F); it is not generally negligible for a Coulomb interaction. The exact cancellation at Λ3=0 and the sign reversal beyond it follow from the exchange-only prefactor in Eq. (41), so this point is load-bearing. Please include the Hartree diagram calculation or a quantitative bound showing that it is subleading over the q-range contributing to Eq. (25).
  2. [Eq. (23) versus Eq. (25)] The RPA screened interaction in Eq. (23) has a polarization denominator containing the sum over both helicity branches, Σσ ρσ0 Vσ1(q)/(|ω|+Vσ1(q)). Equation (25), by contrast, uses a denominator with only the single-band factor 2πe2ρσ0Vσ1(q). Unless a per-helicity screening approximation is intended and justified, the q-integration leading to Eqs. (26), (34), and (41) is not the direct consequence of the stated RPA screening. Because this affects the definition of Λ3 and hence the predicted critical SOC and sign reversal, the approximation must be stated explicitly or the calculation corrected.
  3. [Eq. (42) and Sec. V] The critical condition Λ3=0 in Eq. (42) contains the electron charge e together with vF; in natural units (ℏ=1, e=1) the plotted critical value √(α̃2+β̃2)=0.57 is obtained only after a further choice for vF (effectively vF=1). Since the dimensionless ratio vF/e2 is material dependent, the critical SOC strength is not universal as presented. Please state the units and the dependence on vF/e2, and indicate the range of vF/e2 over which a zero of Λ3 exists.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV, after Eq. (34)] The text says SOC 'suppresses the overall amplitude' of the 2D anomaly, whereas the Abstract and Conclusions say SOC 'enhances the magnitude' of the logarithmic dip; please reconcile these statements with an explicit sign convention for δρ.
  2. [Eqs. (43)–(44) and Fig. 8] The perturbative validity condition introduces η0=0.1 without discussion; please comment on the sensitivity of |ε−εF|min to this choice.
  3. [Figs. 5 and 6] The asymptotic formula Eq. (41) is plotted at |ε−εF|/εc as small as 1.1, where c2≈0.9 and the condition c2≪1 is not satisfied; a numerical evaluation of Eq. (27) in the crossover region would make the approach of ρ̃ to unity at the critical SOC more convincing.
  4. [Sec. III] The text around Figs. 2–4 contains duplicated sentences and repeated captions; please clean up the presentation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the critical SOC value is a derived root of Eq. (42), not a fit, and the sole self-citation (Ref. [46]) is non-load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained. Starting from the explicit Hamiltonian and dispersion Eq. (1), the paper evaluates the impurity ladders, RPA screening, and exchange self-energy in Matsubara space, ending in the closed-form DOS corrections Eqs. (34) and (41). The advertised cancellation and sign reversal are obtained by solving the derived condition Λ3 = 0 in Eq. (42), and the value sqrt(α̃²+β̃²) = 0.57 is presented as a numerical consequence of that expression, not as an input fitted to the advertised conclusion. No experimental data or external benchmark is used, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The only self-citation is Ref. [46], cited in Sec. II together with the independent Ref. [45] for the standard 1D Rashba/Dresselhaus Hamiltonian; the rest of the calculation is carried out in the text, so this citation is not load-bearing. The exchange-only approximation, with the Hartree contribution neglected in Sec. I before Eq. (7), is explicitly stated and is a genuine correctness and validity risk—the sign and magnitude of the predicted cancellation could change if the Hartree term is comparable—but it is an approximation rather than a circularity, because the target result is not assumed in the input. The score of 2 reflects the single minor self-citation, not a circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central calculation rests on the standard AA diagrammatic assumptions plus two model-specific inputs: the coupled-wire open Fermi surface with longitudinal Rashba/Dresselhaus SOC, and the neglect of Hartree diagrams. The Hartree neglect is the only assumption that is both load-bearing for the cancellation/sign-reversal claim and asserted without derivation. No parameters are fitted to experimental data; η0 and N are display thresholds. No new entities are invented.

free parameters (2)
  • η0 (perturbative validity threshold) = 0.1
    Chosen by hand in Eq. (44) to define |ε-ε_F|_min and used in Fig. 8; it does not affect the main cancellation or sign-reversal formulas, but it is an arbitrary input.
  • N (number of transverse channels) = 100
    Used in Sec. V to plot the renormalized DOS per conducting channel in Figs. 6-7; a display choice, not fitted to data.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The system is in the weak-disorder diffusive window k_F l >> 1, with |ω_m|τ << 1, q_x l_σ << 1, and t_y τ << 1.
    Invoked before Eq. (12) as the validity limit for the impurity-ladder and diffusion-operator approximations. If violated, the diffuson form I1 and screened interaction Eq. (23) do not apply.
  • domain assumption Impurities are spin-independent and scatter only within a single tube (no inter-tube impurity scattering).
    Stated in Sec. II after Eq. (2). Inter-tube scattering would couple transverse wires and could alter the diffusive ladder and the dimensional crossover scale.
  • domain assumption The Hartree contribution to the self-energy is parametrically suppressed for long-range Coulomb interaction and can be neglected.
    Asserted in Sec. I before Eq. (7) without a supporting estimate. The central sign-reversal and cancellation result is obtained from exchange diagrams only, so this assumption directly supports the main claim.
  • domain assumption RPA dynamical screening with the 2D Coulomb kernel V0(q)=2πe²/q is sufficient, and only the charge/singlet diffuson contributes after the spin trace.
    Used in Eq. (19) and after Eq. (11). This is the standard AA screening model; triplet diffusons are not considered.
  • domain assumption The Fermi surface remains in the strong-anisotropy regime v_F > sqrt(α²+β²) and 2t_y/(v_F k_F) << 1, so the helicity branches preserve chirality on the two sheets.
    Stated in Sec. II after Eq. (1); the sign of vσ_x and the open-FS structure rely on these inequalities.
  • standard math Standard contour integration, residue theorem, and Matsubara summation techniques are valid for the analytic continuations.
    Used throughout Sec. III and Appendix A; no nonstandard mathematics is introduced.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Impact of spin-orbit coupling on electron correlation corrections to the density of states in anisotropic conductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2ZCPIPGE

@misc{pith2026260805622,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Impact of spin-orbit coupling on electron correlation corrections to the density of states in anisotropic conductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2ZCPIPGE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05622}
}
abstract

We study Altshuler-Aronov-type interaction corrections to the single-particle density of states (DOS) in a strongly anisotropic 2D conductor with an open Fermi surface (FS) and weak disorder, in the presence of coexisting Rashba and Dresselhaus spin-orbit couplings (SOCs) constrained to the longitudinal direction. The low-energy band consists of two warped sheets weakly tunnel-coupled transversely; SOC splits the sheets into helicity branches with a fixed spin axis. Working in a Matsubara space, we compute the exchange contribution in the diffusion channel with dynamically screened Coulomb interaction and an impurity ladder. The resulting DOS anomaly exhibits a dimensional crossover governed by the transverse coupling scale $\varepsilon_c$. Close to the Fermi level ($|\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F|<\varepsilon_c$), the system behaves two-dimensionally, featuring a logarithmic DOS dip whose magnitude is enhanced by intrinsic SOCs. Further from the Fermi level ($|\varepsilon-\varepsilon_F|\!>\!\varepsilon_c$), the system behaves quasi-one-dimensionally, featuring a sharper square-root singularity whose amplitude is remarkably enhanced by the SOCs. Notably, we identify a critical SOC strength at which these spin-orbit effects exactly cancel the electron-correlation correction, perfectly restoring the unperturbed density of states. Furthermore, increasing the SOC beyond this critical point inverts the sign of the anomaly entirely, yielding a positive DOS correction. This sign reversal fundamentally alters the energy dependence, such that at energies beyond $\varepsilon_F + \varepsilon_c$, the positive correction decays to smaller values as energy increases, opposite to the standard negative correction. This contrasting trend provides a distinct spectroscopic signature of SOC-modulated correlation effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05622 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Fermi surface for a strongly anisotropic 2D band. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Ladder approximation for calculating impurity ver ×G(k [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5. Effects of Rashba and Dresselhaus SOCs on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Dimensionless density of states per transverse con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Evolution of the dimensionless density of states per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Integration contours in the continuous complex fre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. B. Miller, D. M. Zumb¨ uhl, C. M. Marcus, Y. B. Lyanda-Geller, D. Goldhaber-Gordon, K. Campman, and A. C. Gossard, Gate-Controlled Spin-Orbit Quantum In- terference Effects in Lateral Transport, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 076807 (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    (31) back into Eq

    +iΦ 2(Φ2 2 −Φ 2 1) Φ1 ×ln 1− √ 2Φ1 + Φ2 1 1 + √ 2Φ1 + Φ2 1 ! −2−3/2 Φ2(Φ2 1 −Φ 2 2)−iΦ 2(Φ2 2 + Φ2 1) Φ1 × arctan 1√ 2Φ1 −1 + arctan 1√ 2Φ1 + 1 # .(31) Substituting Eq. (31) back into Eq. (28) allows us to perform theφ-integration. In the regimec 2 ≫1, Eq. (31) simplifies substantially; inserting this simplification into Eq. (28) we arrive at an expressio...

    work page 2026

  3. [3]

    A. D. Caviglia, M. Gabay, S. Gariglio, N. Reyren, C. Can- cellieri, and J.-M. Triscone, Tunable Rashba Spin-Orbit Interaction at Oxide Interfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 126803 (2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    L. Guo, Y. Yan, R. Xu, J. Li, and C. Zeng, Zero- Bias Conductance Peaks Effectively Tuned by Gating- Controlled Rashba Spin-Orbit Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 11 126, 057701 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Mariani, L

    E. Mariani, L. I. Glazman, A. Kamenev, and F. von Op- pen, Zero-bias anomaly in the tunneling density of states of graphene, Phys. Rev. B76, 165402 (2007)

    2007

  6. [6]

    Wang, D.-K

    Z. Wang, D.-K. Ki, H. Chen, H. Berger, A. H. Mac- Donald, and A. F. Morpurgo, Strong interface-induced spin-orbit interaction in graphene on WS 2, Nature Com- munications6, 8339 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Wakamura, F

    T. Wakamura, F. Reale, P. Palczynski, S. Gu´ eron, C. Mattevi, and H. Bouchiat, Strong Anisotropic Spin- Orbit Interaction Induced in Graphene by Monolayer WS2, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 106802 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    F¨ ul¨ op, A

    B. F¨ ul¨ op, A. M´ arffy, S. Zihlmann, M. Gmitra, E. T´ ov´ ari, B. Szentp´ eteri, M. Kedves, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Fabian, C. Sch¨ onenberger, P. Makk, and S. Csonka, Boosting proximity spin orbit coupling in graphene/WSe2 heterostructures via hydrostatic pres- sure, npj 2d materials and applications5, 82 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    L. Sun, L. Rademaker, D. Mauro, A. Scarfato, ´A. P´ asztor, I. Guti´ errez-Lezama, Z. Wang, J. Martinez- Castro, A. F. Morpurgo, and C. Renner, Determining spin-orbit coupling in graphene by quasiparticle interfer- ence imaging, Nature Communications14, 3771 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Endo and Y

    A. Endo and Y. Iye, Origin of positive magnetoresis- tance in small-amplitude unidirectional lateral superlat- tices, Phys. Rev. B72, 235303 (2005)

    2005

  3. [11]

    A. Endo, S. Katsumoto, and Y. Iye, Commensurability oscillations in the Hall resistance of unidirectional lateral superlattices, Phys. Rev. B103, 235303 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Blumenstein, J

    C. Blumenstein, J. Sch¨ afer, S. Mietke, S. Meyer, A. Dollinger, M. Lochner, X. Y. Cui, L. Patthey, R. Matzdorf, and R. Claessen, Atomically controlled quantum chains hosting a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid, Nature Physics7, 776 (2011)

    2011

  5. [13]

    Tegenkamp, D

    C. Tegenkamp, D. L¨ ukermann, H. Pfn¨ ur, B. Slomski, G. Landolt, and J. H. Dil, Fermi Nesting between Atomic Wires with Strong Spin-Orbit Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 266401 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    J. Park, S. W. Jung, M.-C. Jung, H. Yamane, N. Ko- sugi, and H. W. Yeom, Self-Assembled Nanowires with Giant Rashba Split Bands, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 036801 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    N. Ossi, L. Bitton, D. B. Gutman, and A. Frydman, Zero-bias anomaly in a two-dimensional granular insu- lator, Phys. Rev. B87, 115137 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Ovadyahu, Interaction-induced spatial correlations in a disordered glass, Phys

    Z. Ovadyahu, Interaction-induced spatial correlations in a disordered glass, Phys. Rev. B105, 235101 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    B. L. Altshuler and A. G. Aronov, Zero bias anomaly in tunnel resistance and electron-electron interaction, Solid State Communications30, 115 (1979)

    1979

  10. [18]

    A. L. Efros and B. I. Shklovskii, Coulomb gap and low temperature conductivity of disordered systems, Journal of Physics C Solid State Physics8, L49 (1975)

    1975

  11. [19]

    Bockrath, D

    M. Bockrath, D. H. Cobden, J. Lu, A. G. Rinzler, R. E. Smalley, L. Balents, and P. L. McEuen, Luttinger-liquid behaviour in carbon nanotubes, Nature (London)397, 598 (1999)

    1999

  12. [20]

    Turco, M

    E. Turco, M. Aapro, S. C. Ganguli, N. Krane, R. Drost, N. Sobrino, A. Bernhardt, M. Jur ´ ıˇ cek, R. Fasel, P. Ruffieux, P. Liljeroth, and D. Jacob, Demonstrat- ing Kondo behavior by temperature-dependent scan- ning tunneling spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Res.6, L022061 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    J. H. Pixley, D. A. Huse, and S. Das Sarma, Rare- Region-Induced Avoided Quantum Criticality in Disor- dered Three-Dimensional Dirac and Weyl Semimetals, Phys. Rev. X6, 021042 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    H. Li, R. Hanus, C. A. Polanco, A. Zeidler, G. Koblm¨ uller, Y. K. Koh, and L. Lindsay, GaN thermal transport limited by the interplay of dislocations and size effects, Phys. Rev. B102, 014313 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Y. Yao, S. Huang, R. Cao, Z. Zhang, and et.al., Dislocation-assisted electron and hole transport in GaN epitaxial layers, Nature Communications16, 6448 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Reiche and M

    M. Reiche and M. Kittler, Electronic and Opti- cal Properties of Dislocations in Silicon, Crystals6, 10.3390/cryst6070074 (2016)

    2016 doi

  17. [25]

    L.-J. Yin, H. Jiang, J.-B. Qiao, and L. He, Direct imaging of topological edge states at a bilayer graphene domain wall, Nature Communications7, 11760 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Thiel, C

    S. Thiel, C. W. Schneider, L. F. Kourkoutis, D. A. Muller, N. Reyren, A. D. Caviglia, S. Gariglio, J.-M. Triscone, and J. Mannhart, Electron Scattering at Dis- locations in LaAlO 3/SrTiO3 Interfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 046809 (2009)

    2009

  19. [27]

    H. Xue, D. Jia, Y. Ge, Y.-j. Guan, Q. Wang, S.-q. Yuan, H.-x. Sun, Y. D. Chong, and B. Zhang, Observation of Dislocation-Induced Topological Modes in a Three- Dimensional Acoustic Topological Insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 214301 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Bergmann, Weak localization in thin films: a time- of-flight experiment with conduction electrons, Physics Reports107, 1 (1984)

    G. Bergmann, Weak localization in thin films: a time- of-flight experiment with conduction electrons, Physics Reports107, 1 (1984)

    1984

  21. [29]

    Altland, B

    A. Altland, B. Simons, and M. Zirnbauer, Theories of low-energy quasi-particle states in disordered d-wave su- perconductors, Physics Reports359, 283 (2002)

    2002

  22. [30]

    B. L. Altshuler and A. Aronov, Contribution to the the- ory of disordered metals in strongly doped semiconduc- tors, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics50 (1979)

    1979

  23. [31]

    B. L. Altshuler, A. G. Aronov, and P. A. Lee, Interaction Effects in Disordered Fermi Systems in Two Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.44, 1288 (1980)

    1980

  24. [32]

    Altshuler and A

    B. Altshuler and A. Aronov, Chapter 1 - Elec- tron–Electron Interaction In Disordered Conductors, in Electron–Electron Interactions in Disordered Systems, Modern Problems in Condensed Matter Sciences, Vol. 10, edited by A. Efros and M. Pollak (Elsevier, 1985) pp. 1– 153

    1985

  25. [33]

    A. M. Finkel’shtein, Influence of Coulomb interaction on the properties of disordered metals, Soviet Journal of Ex- perimental and Theoretical Physics57, 97 (1983)

    1983

  26. [34]

    H. Fukuyama, Chapter 2 - interaction effects in the weakly localized regime of two- and three-dimensional disordered systems, inElectron–Electron Interactions in Disordered Systems, Modern Problems in Condensed Matter Sciences, Vol. 10, edited by A. Efros and M. Pol- lak (Else...

    1985

  27. [35]

    Y. A. Firsov, E. P. Nakhmebov, V. N. Prigodin, and W. Weller, Corrections from Electron-Electron Interac- tion to the One-Particle Density of States in Strongly Anisotropic Two-Dimensional Systems, physica status solidi (b)141, 111 (1987)

    1987

  28. [36]

    Y. A. Firsov, E. P. Nakhmedov, V. N. Prigodin, and W. Weller, Low-Temperature Conductivity of a Weakly Disordered, Strongly Anisotropic Two-Dimensional Sys- 12 tem with Electron—Electron Interaction. Application to Germanium Bicrystals and to Surface Superlattices, physica sta...

    1988

  29. [37]

    Caliskan and M

    S. Caliskan and M. Kumru, High-order perturbation cor- rections to the density of states of disordered metals in a magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B85, 205148 (2012)

    2012

  30. [38]

    Zhou and H

    C. Zhou and H. Guo, Altshuler-Aronov effects in nonequi- librium disordered nanostructures, Phys. Rev. B100, 045413 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    Carbillet, V

    C. Carbillet, V. Cherkez, M. A. Skvortsov, M. V. Feigel’man, F. Debontridder, L. B. Ioffe, V. S. Stolyarov, K. Ilin, M. Siegel, D. Roditchev, T. Cren, and C. Brun, Spectroscopic evidence for strong correlations between lo- cal superconducting gap and local Altshuler-Aronov den...

    2020

  32. [40]

    Kuzmiak, M

    M. Kuzmiak, M. Kopˇ c ´ ık, F. Koˇ suth, V. Vaˇ no, J. Haniˇ s, T. Samuely, V. Latyshev, O. Onufriienko, V. Koman- ick´ y, J. Kaˇ cmarˇ c ´ ık, M.ˇZemliˇ cka, M. Gmitra, P. Szab´ o, and P. Samuely, Disorder- and magnetic field–tuned fermionic superconductor-insulator transitio...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Liz´ ee, M

    M. Liz´ ee, M. Stosiek, I. Burmistrov, T. Cren, and C. Brun, Local density of states fluctuations in a two- dimensional superconductor as a probe of quantum dif- fusion, Phys. Rev. B107, 174508 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    G. Shi, F. Gao, Z. Li, R. Zhang, I. Gornyi, D. Gutman, and Y. Li, Quantum corrections to the magnetoconduc- tivity of surface states in three-dimensional topological insulators, Nature Communications14, 10.1038/s41467- 023-38256-4 (2023)

    2023 doi

  35. [43]

    Moˇ skov´ a and M

    A. Moˇ skov´ a and M. Moˇ sko, States-conserving density of states for Altshuler-Aronov effect: Heuristic derivation, Solid State Communications284-286, 56 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    Huang and S

    Y. Huang and S. Das Sarma, Electronic transport, metal- insulator transition, and Wigner crystallization in transi- tion metal dichalcogenide monolayers, Phys. Rev. B109, 245431 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Rollb¨ uhler and H

    J. Rollb¨ uhler and H. Grabert, Tunneling Density of States of the Interacting Two-Dimensional Electron Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 166402 (2003)

    2003

  38. [46]

    C. L. Romano, S. E. Ulloa, and P. I. Tamborenea, Level structure and spin-orbit effects in quasi-one-dimensional semiconductor nanostructures, Phys. Rev. B71, 035336 (2005)

    2005

  39. [47]

    Suleymanli, E

    B. Suleymanli, E. Nakhmedov, F. Tatardar, and B. Tanatar, The diagrammatic method of Berezinskii for one-dimensional disordered wire with spin–orbit interac- tion, Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanos- tructures146, 115550 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    C. L. Kane, R. Mukhopadhyay, and T. C. Lubensky, Fractional quantum hall effect in an array of quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 036401 (2002)

    2002

  41. [49]

    Klinovaja and D

    J. Klinovaja and D. Loss, Topological edge states and fractional quantum hall effect from umklapp scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 196401 (2013)

    2013

  42. [50]

    A. A. Burkov, A. S. N´ u˜ nez, and A. H. MacDon- ald, Theory of spin-charge-coupled transport in a two- dimensional electron gas with Rashba spin-orbit interac- tions, Phys. Rev. B70, 155308 (2004)

    2004

  43. [51]

    Abrikosov, L

    A. Abrikosov, L. Gorkov, and I. Dzyaloshinski,Methods of Quantum Field Theory in Statistical Physics, Dover Books on Physics (Dover Publications, 2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    G. B. Arfken, H. J. Weber, and F. E. Harris, Chapter 11 - Complex Variable Theory, inMathematical Methods for Physicists (Seventh Edition), edited by G. B. Arfken, H. J. Weber, and F. E. Harris (Academic Press, Boston,

  45. [53]

    Altland and B

    A. Altland and B. Simons,Condensed Matter Field Theory, Cambridge books online (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

  46. [54]

    Hamaguchi,Basic Semiconductor Physics(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009)

    C. Hamaguchi,Basic Semiconductor Physics(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009)

    2009

  47. [55]

    C. Niu, G. Qiu, Y. Wang, Z. Zhang, M. Si, W. Wu, and P. D. Ye, Gate-tunable strong spin-orbit interaction in two-dimensional tellurium probed by weak antilocaliza- tion, Phys. Rev. B101, 205414 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    S ¸a¸ sıo˘ glu, S

    E. S ¸a¸ sıo˘ glu, S. C ¸ alı¸ skan, and M. Kumru, Critical be- havior of density of states near Fermi energy in low- dimensional disordered metals, Phys. Rev. B79, 035123 (2009)

    2009

  49. [57]

    L. Liu, J. Niu, L. Xiang, J. Wei, D.-L. Li, J.-F. Feng, X.-F. Han, X.-G. Zhang, and J. M. D. Coey, Symmetry- dependent electron-electron interaction in coherent tun- nel junctions resolved by measurements of zero-bias anomaly, Phys. Rev. B90, 195132 (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    Geldiyev, M

    B. Geldiyev, M. ¨Unzelmann, P. Eck, T. Kißlinger, J. Schusser, T. Figgemeier, P. Kagerer, N. Tezak, M. Krivenkov, A. Varykhalov, A. Fedorov, L. Nicola ¨ ı, J. Min´ ar, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, K. Shimada, D. Di Sante, G. Sangiovanni, L. Hammer, M. A. Schnei- der, H. Bentmann, an...

    2023

  51. [2013]

    seventh edition ed., pp. 469–550

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.