Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Optimized Fabrication Procedure for High-Quality Graphene-based Moir\'e Superlattice Devices

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper presents a fabrication protocol that claims to make high-quality twisted graphene moiré devices with sub-0.1° twist-angle accuracy by controlling a wavefront during pickup.

desk verdict A genuinely useful, clearly written fabrication protocol from the group that pioneered these devices; the main soft spot is an unquantified twist-angle offset, but that is a typical protocol paper limitation, not a fatal flaw. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.15853 v1 pith:3HXT3T7M submitted 2025-07-21 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Shuwen Sun , Pablo Jarillo-Herrero This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords twistedbilayergraphenemoirésuperlatticedrytransfermagicangledevicefabricationvanderWaalsheterostructurestwistcontrol
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 is a detailed, experience-informed recipe for fabricating twisted graphene moiré superlattice devices, with magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene as the main example. It argues that the usual sources of failure—heterostrain, twist-angle disorder, and lattice relaxation—can be largely controlled by a modified dry-transfer procedure. The key choices are rigorous flake selection, laser cutting the graphene into isolated pieces, a pre-cleaned bubble-free graphite bottom gate, and picking up the graphene at 0.02 µm/s at room temperature. The most critical step is claimed to be this slow, smooth pickup, which keeps the stamp's contact wavefront pinned at a straight hBN edge and minimizes bubble formation. If the protocol works as claimed, researchers can routinely land in the magic-angle window near 1.1° and get devices that show the expected correlated insulating and superconducting states.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the wavefront: the moving boundary where the PC film meets the wafer during stamp engagement and disengagement. A straight crystal edge of the top hBN flake serves as an anchor that pins the wavefront, letting the operator selectively pick up one laser-cut graphene piece at a time; the stage is driven at 0.02 µm/s so the wavefront advances smoothly without over-engaging, straining, or bubble trapping. Around this mechanism, the protocol builds supporting elements: a custom transfer stage with 2 microradian rotation resolution, vector-graphics alignment drawings, rigorous flake selection (graphene pieces at least 20 by 30 µm, hBN with a straight edge, graphite gates 3–10 nm thick), AFM tip-cleaning of the bottom gate, and laser ablation to isolate graphene pieces before pickup.

What would settle it

Fabricate a batch of devices with the same nominal target angle and extract the actual twist angle from the carrier density at the superlattice gap (or by nano-beam electron diffraction). If the mean offset between target and final angle is not approximately 0.05° or the spread exceeds 0.1°, the protocol's angle-control claim fails. A second, more direct test of the load-bearing step is to pick up otherwise identical stacks at 0.2, 0.05, and 0.02 µm/s and compare bubble areal density: no reduction with slower speed would contradict the paper's assertion that smooth slow pickup is the most critical procedure.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that high-quality graphene moiré superlattices with a precise twist angle are achievable through a modified dry-transfer protocol in which every step is chosen to protect the cleanliness and strain state of the interfaces. The authors identify the wavefront—the moving line where the polycarbonate stamp film contacts the wafer—as the main control object: it must be parallel to a straight crystal edge of the top hBN flake, and it must advance and retract slowly enough that it pins at that edge and sweeps over each laser-cut graphene piece without trapping bubbles. They recommend engaging and disengaging at 0.02 µm/s at room temperature, avoiding high-temperature transfer that could relax the twist angle, using a DC-current heating method when the Z-stage shows hysteresis, and over-engaging only on the final graphene piece to squeeze out trapped bubbles. Representative results show devices with global twist angles around 1.05°–1.06° that display Landau fans, correlated insulator states, and superconducting domes with critical temperatures near 1.7 K. The protocol is presented as transferable to other graphene-based moiré structures such as twisted double bilayer graphene, trilayer graphene, and quasicrystals.

Load-bearing premise

The protocol's promise of hitting the magic-angle window depends on an empirically guessed correction of about 0.05°—target slightly higher because the final twist angle usually comes out smaller—and the paper provides no statistics showing that this offset is reproducible or transferable to other setups.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Other groups can reproduce magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene and related moiré devices without years of trial-and-error, improving the field's reproducibility.
  • Devices made with the protocol should consistently show the expected Landau fans, correlated insulating states, and superconductivity, making new moiré physics easier to confirm.
  • Because the wavefront is controlled, bubble-free usable regions are larger, so each flake yields more working devices.
  • Room-temperature pickup avoids thermally induced twist-angle relaxation, so final angles stay near the targeted magic-angle window.
  • The same recipe can be extended to other graphene moiré structures, allowing systematic comparison across twisted double bilayer, trilayer, and quasicrystal devices.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A controlled speed comparison—0.2, 0.05, and 0.02 µm/s on identical stacks—could quantify how much of the claimed quality actually comes from the slow pickup rather than from the other protocol elements; the paper does not report such a comparison.
  • The 0.05° target offset may itself be a relaxation effect, meaning it could depend on flake size, hBN thickness, and time at elevated temperature; if so, a predictive model of relaxation would make the offset unnecessary.
  • Wavefront tracking with machine vision and automated Z-stage feedback could remove the artisanal skill required by this protocol and is a natural next step beyond the automated assembly approaches the paper mentions.
  • An explicit test of the room-temperature requirement would be to assemble stacks at 25°C, 50°C, and 80°C and compare final twist angles and bubble densities; the paper argues for room temperature but does not provide this comparison.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a detailed, step-by-step protocol for fabricating graphene-based moiré superlattice devices using a modified dry-transfer technique. It covers exfoliation and flake selection, preparation of PC/PDMS stamps, graphene laser ablation, fabrication of pre-cleaned graphite bottom gates, pickup of twisted graphene using a top hBN flake at submicron speeds, encapsulation, and Hall-bar patterning. The central claim is that this experience-informed protocol yields highly uniform devices with precise twist angles, with the most critical step being smooth pickup of pre-cut graphene at 0.02 µm/s at room temperature. The protocol is illustrated with figures and supported by representative transport data, most of which are adapted from prior publications.

Significance. If the protocol indeed delivers devices with high spatial uniformity and twist-angle accuracy in the magic-angle regime, it would be a valuable resource for the moiré materials community, which currently faces significant reproducibility challenges (ref. 26). The paper's strengths include its unusually concrete operational parameters (speeds, temperatures, laser powers, AFM forces), its use of freely available software, and its explicit discussion of failure modes and remedies. The manuscript also honestly identifies the experience-based nature of several calibration steps. However, the central validation claim is not backed by new quantitative data in this paper, and the key twist-angle calibration offset is presented without statistical support. These gaps are load-bearing because the protocol's promise of 'desired twist angles' rests directly on them.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4.16 Note] The empirically calibrated offset of ~0.05° between the targeted and final twist angle is the single load-bearing parameter connecting the transfer procedure to the central claim of precise twist angles. The note states that the final angle is 'generally smaller' and that 1.13° is targeted for MATBG, but no device count, distribution, measurement method, or cross-setup reproducibility is provided. Because goniometer tilt, rotation-stage calibration, PC/PDMS deformation, and thermal relaxation can all shift the achieved angle, this offset may be setup-dependent. Without statistics, a user of this protocol at another institution cannot know whether to apply this offset, and a systematic miss of the magic-angle window would invalidate the protocol's promised outcome. I request that the authors either provide the supporting statistics (e.g., target versus measured twist angle for a series of devices) or explicitly reframe the claim to state that the offset is setup-specific and must be recalibrated locally.
  2. [Representative Results and Fig. 8] The representative results used to support the protocol's effectiveness are almost entirely adapted from prior publications (refs 2, 15, 22), not from devices fabricated with the exact procedure described in this paper. While these data demonstrate the group's established device quality, they do not validate this specific protocol's yield, twist-angle accuracy, or uniformity. This is a load-bearing issue because the abstract claims that 'the resulting graphene moiré superlattice devices exhibit high uniformity and desired twist angles.' I recommend that the authors present at least a modest amount of new data from devices made with this protocol—for example, a table listing target vs. measured twist angles, bubble-free area fractions, or low-temperature transport metrics for a consecutive series of devices—or clearly stated that the validation is implicit in previously published work.
  3. [§3.4.12–3.4.14 and Discussion] The paper repeatedly states that the 0.02 µm/s pickup speed at room temperature is 'most critical' and that it 'minimizes bubble formation.' This is a plausible and physically motivated claim, but no quantitative evidence is given, such as bubble density or areal coverage comparisons at different speeds or temperatures. Since the uniformity claim is central, I ask the authors to either provide quantitative characterization or soften the claim to reflect that it is based on qualitative experience.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The phrase 'sub-0.1° accuracy' would benefit from a definition: is this the precision of the rotation stage, the accuracy of the final twist angle after relaxation, or the sample-to-sample spread? The protocol would be clearer if this distinction were made.
  2. [Step 3.3.8] The description of the wavefront as 'colorful right edge' is clear in context but could be confusing to a reader without the figure; consider adding a parenthetical explanation that the wavefront is the interference fringe at the contact line.
  3. [Step 3.2.14] The applied AFM normal force is given as 'a few tens of nN'; providing a typical value or range would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Step 3.4.16 Note] The note says the final angle is 'generally smaller' by about 0.05°, but it does not state how this was measured (e.g., from Landau fan superlattice density or from transport). Adding one sentence on the measurement method would help readers assess the reliability of this calibration.
  5. [Fig. 8C] The caption says 'statistics of the optimal doping Tc among 14 MATBG devices' but only a subset of data points is visible; clarify whether all 14 are shown or whether some are omitted for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the 0.05° twist-angle offset is an unvalidated empirical calibration, not a self-referential prediction.

full rationale

This manuscript is an experimental fabrication protocol, not a derivation chain, so the circularity patterns involving equations, uniqueness theorems, or fitted parameters renamed as predictions do not apply. The single empirical calibration in the paper is the twist-angle offset in Step 3.4.16 Note: “Based on experience, the final twist angle in the device is generally smaller than the angle targeted during the transfer process. Therefore, it is usually set to be slightly higher (~0.05°) than the ‘magic angle’.” This offset is an input to the recipe, explicitly derived from experience rather than from a fit to data within this paper, and it is not used to generate a predicted quantity that is then compared with the same data. The absence of yield statistics for this offset is a real reproducibility and validation concern, but it is not circularity. The representative results in Fig. 8 are adapted from earlier publications by the same group, but the paper presents them as illustrative outcomes and also cites independent groups achieving comparable results, so the validation is not exclusively self-referential. No load-bearing step reduces by definition to its own input, and no self-citation is invoked as a mathematical or uniqueness constraint. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The protocol rests on domain assumptions about moiré physics and transfer mechanics, plus several hand-tuned parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Twist-angle target offset = ~0.05° above magic angle
    Step 3.4.16 Note; empirically compensates for final-angle shrinkage, no statistics.
  • Graphene pickup speed = 0.02 µm/s
    Steps 3.4.12 and 3.4.14; chosen for smooth wavefront and minimal bubbles.
  • hBN pickup temperature = 50-80°C, upper limit 120°C
    Steps 3.3.4-3.3.10; balances PC adhesion and avoids thermal relaxation.
  • Laser ablation power = 60-150 mW
    Step 3.1.3; set to cut graphene without damaging SiO2.
  • Gate cleaning AFM force = few tens of nN
    Step 3.2.14; chosen to remove polymer residue without scratching.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Achieving sub-0.1° twist-angle accuracy is necessary for accessing the magic-angle regime in TBG
    Stated in Introduction; underlies the entire goal of the protocol.
  • domain assumption A straight hBN crystal edge can pin the transfer wavefront and act as an anchor for selective flake pickup
    Discussion and Steps 3.3.8, 3.4.12; this is the mechanical basis for the alignment strategy.
  • domain assumption Smooth, slow pickup at room temperature minimizes bubble formation and twist-angle relaxation
    Discussion; the core claim of the protocol's quality rests on this physical assumption.
  • domain assumption Bubble-free interfaces and clean (AFM-tip-cleaned) gates are required for high device quality
    Steps 3.2.14-3.2.16 and Discussion; supported by prior literature but assumed here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optimized Fabrication Procedure for High-Quality Graphene-based Moir\'e Superlattice Devices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3HXT3T7M

@misc{pith2026250715853,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optimized Fabrication Procedure for High-Quality Graphene-based Moir\'e Superlattice Devices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3HXT3T7M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.15853}
}
read the original abstract

Moir\'e superlattices constitute a versatile platform to investigate emergent phenomena arising from the interplay of strong correlations and topology, while offering flexible in situ tunability. However, the fabrication of such moir\'e superlattices is challenging. It is difficult to achieve highly uniform devices with a precise twist angle because of the unintentional introduction of heterostrain, twist angle disorder, and angle/lattice relaxation during the nanofabrication process. This article introduces an optimized, experience-informed protocol for fabricating high-quality graphene-based moir\'e superlattice devices, focusing on a modified dry transfer technique. The transfer process is performed in a highly tunable, custom-built transfer setup that enables precise position, angle, and temperature control. By combining rigorous flake selection criteria, pre-cleaned bubble-free bottom gates, and graphene laser ablation, the moir\'e superlattice is constructed by deliberately overlaying twisted graphene flakes at a submicron speed at room temperature. Through precise control of the transfer process, the resulting graphene moir\'e superlattice devices exhibit high uniformity and desired twist angles. This optimized protocol addresses existing challenges in the fabrication of graphene-based moir\'e superlattice devices and paves the way for further advances in the rapidly evolving field of moir\'e materials.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Cao, Y. et al. Correlated insulator behaviour at half -filling in magic -angle graphene superlattices. Nature. 556 (7699), 80–84 (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Cao, Y. et al. Unconventional superconductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices. Nature. 556 (7699), 43–50 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Andrei, E.Y. et al. The marvels of moiré materials. Nature Reviews Materials . 6 (3), 201–206 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Chen, G. et al. Evidence of a gate -tunable Mott insulator in a trilayer graphene moiré superlattice. Nature Physics. 15 (3), 237–241 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Correlated Insulating States in Twisted Double Bilayer Graphene

    Burg, G.W., Zhu, J., Taniguchi, T., Watanabe, K., MacDonald, A.H., Tutuc, E. Correlated Insulating States in Twisted Double Bilayer Graphene. Physical Review Letters . 123 (19), 197702 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Cao, Y. et al. Tunable correlated states and spin -polarized phases in twisted bilayer– bilayer graphene. Nature. 583 (7815), 215–220 (2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Shen, C. et al. Correlated states in twisted double bilayer graphene. Nature Physics . 16 (5), 520–525 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Liu, X. et al. Tunable spin- polarized correlated states in twisted double bilayer graphene. Nature. 583 (7815), 221–225 (2020)

    work page 2020

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    He, M. et al. Symmetry breaking in twisted d ouble bilayer graphene. Nature Physics . 17 (1), 26–30 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    Tunable strongly coupled superconductivity in magic-angle twisted trilayer graphene

    Park, J.M., Cao, Y., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T., Jarillo -Herrero, P. Tunable strongly coupled superconductivity in magic-angle twisted trilayer graphene. Nature. 590 (7845), 249– 255 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Pauli-limit violation and re-entrant superconductivity in moiré graphene

    Cao, Y., Park, J.M., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T., Jarillo-Herrero, P. Pauli-limit violation and re-entrant superconductivity in moiré graphene. Nature. 595 (7868), 526–531 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Hao, Z. et al. Electric field –tunable superconductivity in alternating -twist magic -angle trilayer graphene. Science. 371 (6534), 1133–1138 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Park, J.M. et al. Robust superconductivity in magic -angle multilayer graphene family. Nature Materials. 21 (8), 877–883 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Zhang, Y. et al. Promotion of supercondu ctivity in magic -angle graphene multilayers. Science. 377 (6614), 1538–1543 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    Cao, Y. et al. Nematicity and competing orders in superconducting magic-angle graphene. Science. 372 (6539), 264–271 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Sharpe, A.L. et al. Emergent ferromagnetism near three-quarters filling in twisted bilayer graphene. Science. 365 (6453), 605–608 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Serlin, M. et al. Intrinsic quantized anomalous Hall effect in a moiré heterostructure. Science. 367 (6480), 900–903 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Chen, G. et al. Tunable correlated Chern insulator and ferromagnetism in a moiré superlattice. Nature. 579 (7797), 56–61 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Strain - Engineering of Twist -Angle in Graphene/hBN Superl attice Devices

    De Sanctis, A., Mehew, J.D., Alkhalifa, S., Withers, F., Craciun, M.F., Russo, S. Strain - Engineering of Twist -Angle in Graphene/hBN Superl attice Devices. Nano Letters . 18 (12), 7919–7926 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Kazmierczak, N.P. et al. Strain fields in twisted bilayer graphene. Nature Materials. 20 (7), 956–963 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Rotational Disorder in Tw isted Bilayer Graphene

    Beechem, T.E., Ohta, T., Diaconescu, B., Robinson, J.T. Rotational Disorder in Tw isted Bilayer Graphene. ACS Nano. 8 (2), 1655–1663 (2014)

    2014

  14. [22]

    Uri, A. et al. Mapping the twist-angle disorder and Landau levels in magic-angle graphene. Nature. 581 (7806), 47–52 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Zondiner, U. et al. Cascade of phase transitions and Dirac revivals in magic-angle graphene. Nature. 582 (7811), 203–208 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Wang, D. et al. Thermally Induced Graphene Rotation on Hexagonal Boron Nitride. Physical Review Letters. 116 (12), 126101 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    Woods, C.R. et al. Macroscopic self-reorientation of interacting two-dimensional crystals. Nature Communications. 7 (1), 10800 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    Reproducibility in the fabrication and physics of moiré materials

    Lau, C.N., Bockrath, M.W., Mak, K.F., Zhang, F. Reproducibility in the fabrication and physics of moiré materials. Nature. 602 (7895), 41–50 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Castellanos-Gomez, A. et al. Deterministic transfer of two -dimensional materials by all- dry viscoelastic stamping. 2D Materials. 1 (1), 011002 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Fast pick up technique for high quality heterostructures of bilayer graphene and hexagonal boron nitride

    Zomer, P.J., Guimarães, M.H.D., Brant, J.C., Tombros, N., van Wees, B.J. Fast pick up technique for high quality heterostructures of bilayer graphene and hexagonal boron nitride. Applied Physics Letters. 105 (1), 013101 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Wang, L. et al. One-Dimensional Electrical Contact to a Two-Dimensional Material. Science. 342 (6158), 614–617 (2013)

    2013

  22. [30]

    Moiré bands in twisted double -layer graphene

    Bistritzer, R., MacDonald, A.H. Moiré bands in twisted double -layer graphene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 108 (30), 12233–12237 (2011)

    2011

  23. [31]

    Uri, A. et al. Superconductivity and strong interactions in a tunable moiré quasicrystal. Nature. 620 (7975), 762–767 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Xia, L.-Q. et al. Topological bands and correlated states in helical trilayer graphene. Nature Physics. 21 (2), 239–244 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Quantum Oscillations in Two -Dimensional Insulators Induced by Graphite Gates

    Zhu, J., Li, T., Young, A.F., Shan, J., Mak, K.F. Quantum Oscillations in Two -Dimensional Insulators Induced by Graphite Gates. Physical Review Letters. 127 (24), 247702 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Synthesis and Characterization of Hexagonal Boron Nitride as a Gate Dielectric

    Jang, S.K., Youn, J., Song, Y.J., Lee, S. Synthesis and Characterization of Hexagonal Boron Nitride as a Gate Dielectric. Scientific Reports. 6 (1), 30449 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Kim, K. et al. van der Waals Heterostructures with High Accuracy Rotational Alignment. Nano Letters. 16 (3), 1989–1995 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    Cao, Y. et al. Superlattice-Induced Insulating States and Valley-Protected Orbits in Twisted Bilayer Graphene. Physical Review Letters. 117 (11), 116804 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    Response of graphene to femtosecond high-intensity laser irradiation

    Roberts, A., Cormode, D., Reynolds, C., Newhouse -Illige, T., LeRoy, B.J., Sandhu, A.S. Response of graphene to femtosecond high-intensity laser irradiation. Applied Physics Letters. 99 (5), 051912 (2011)

    2011

  30. [38]

    Flavour Hund’s coupling, Chern gaps and charge diffusivity in moiré graphene

    Park, J.M., Cao, Y., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T., Jarillo-Herrero, P. Flavour Hund’s coupling, Chern gaps and charge diffusivity in moiré graphene. Nature. 592 (7852), 43–48 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Li, H. et al. Electrode-Free Anodic Oxidation Nanolithography of Low -Dimensional Materials. Nano Letters. 18 (12), 8011–8015 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Simultaneous transport and tunneling spectroscopy of moiré graphene: Distinct observation of the superconducting gap and signatures of nodal superconductivity

    Park, J.M., Sun, S., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T., Jarillo-Herrero, P. Simultaneous transport and tunneling spectroscopy of moiré graphene: Distinct observation of the superconducting gap and signatures of nodal superconductivity . Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16410 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Long, G. et al. Achieving Ultrahigh Carrier Mobility in Two-Dimensional Hole Gas of Black Phosphorus. Nano Letters. 16 (12), 7768–7773 (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Haigh, S.J. et al. Cross-sectional imaging of individual layers and buried interfaces of graphene-based heterostructures and superlattices. Nature Materials. 11 (9), 764–767 (2012)

    2012

  35. [43]

    Wang, W. et al. Clean assembly of van der Waals heterostructures using silicon nitride membranes. Nature Electronics. 6 (12), 981–990 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Masubuchi, S. et al. Autonomous robotic searching and assembly of two -dimensional crystals to build van der Waals superlattices. Nature Communications. 9 (1), 1413 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Mannix, A.J. et al. Robotic four-dimensional pixel assembly of van der Waals solids. Nature Nanotechnology. 17 (4), 361–366 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.