Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 63 references

Plasmon modes in quadratic and cubic nodal line semimetals

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The order of a nodal-line semimetal band can be read from its plasmon density scaling.

desk verdict Careful RPA calculation of plasmons in higher-order NLSMs; the cubic n^{2/3} scaling is new and survives scrutiny, while the n^{3/4} law is honestly qualified, and the stress-test's Eq. (43) concern is a misreading. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08185 v1 pith:45XCZ3PY submitted 2026-08-08 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hall

Wei Li , Jing-Rong Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mes-hall PACS 73.20.Mf71.45.Gm
keywords nodallinesemimetalsplasmonsrandomphaseapproximationcarrier-densityscalingquadraticbanddispersioncubicHREELStorusFermisurface
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 asks whether the order of a nodal-line semimetal's band dispersion can be read from its collective charge oscillations. Within the random phase approximation, it derives the one-loop polarization of three-dimensional quadratic and cubic nodal-line semimetals and finds distinct long-wavelength plasmon scalings: $\omega_p\sim n^{1/2}$ for the quadratic case and $\omega_p\sim n^{2/3}$ at large doping crossing over to $\omega_p\sim n^{3/4}$ at small doping for the cubic case. These exponents matter because they are distinguishable by high-resolution electron energy-loss spectroscopy and single out the dispersion order. The paper also finds a $\sqrt{2}$ anisotropy between out-of-plane and in-plane plasmon frequencies in the thin-ring limit, but stresses that this ratio is a generic property of the torus Fermi surface and does not distinguish quadratic from cubic dispersion.

What carries the argument

The central object is the one-loop polarization (Lindhard bubble) of a torus Fermi surface, evaluated numerically from the full three-dimensional integral; its intraband coefficient $C_{++}^{\perp,z}$ carries the argument. $C_{++}^{\perp,z}$ is defined by $\mathrm{Re}\,\Pi_{++}(\Omega,q)=-(C_{++}^\perp q_\perp^2 + C_{++}^z q_z^2)/\Omega^2$, and the RPA pole gives $\Omega_p=\sqrt{4\pi e^2\epsilon C_{++}}$. The paper computes this coefficient by shell-localized Drude integration over the torus, checks it against Matsubara summation and the analytic spherical limit, and finds it dominates the interband term by two to three orders of magnitude. The density exponents follow from phase-space power counting: the carrier density scales as $n\propto \mu^{3/p}$ for large doping and $n\propto \mu^{2/p}$ in the thin-ring limit for dispersion $E\propto K^p$, which combines with the Drude prefactor to produce the quoted laws.

What would settle it

Measure the bulk energy-loss function $-\mathrm{Im}[1/\epsilon(\Omega)]$ of a candidate cubic nodal-line semimetal by reflection HREELS at densities $10^{18}$ to $10^{19}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, with the ring-pocket density fixed independently by Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations or ARPES. If the peak frequencies do not follow one of the predicted exponents ($n^{1/2}$, $n^{2/3}$, $n^{3/4}$), or if the anisotropy ratio after correcting for measured $\epsilon_\perp,\epsilon_z$ is far from $\sqrt{2}$, the RPA-based picture is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Working with the Hamiltonians $H_q = A[(k_r^2-k_z^2)\sigma_1 + 2k_r k_z \sigma_2]$ and $H_c = B[(k_r^3-3k_r k_z^2)\sigma_1 + (k_z^3-3k_z k_r^2)\sigma_2]$, with dispersions $E=\pm A K^2$ and $E=\pm B K^3$, the paper evaluates the one-loop Lindhard bubble and solves the RPA pole condition $1 - V(q)\mathrm{Re}\,\Pi(\Omega,q)=0$ in the long-wavelength limit $\max(q_\perp,q_z)\ll\Omega\ll\mu$. The intraband Drude term $-q^2 C_{++}/\Omega^2$ dominates the interband contribution by two to three orders of magnitude, so the plasmon frequency is $\Omega_p = \sqrt{4\pi e^2\epsilon C_{++}}$. Combining the numerically determined $C_{++}$ with the density-chemical-potential relations gives $\Omega_p \propto n^{1/2}$ for the quadratic NLSM in both doping regimes, and for the cubic NLSM $\Omega_p \propto n^{2/3}$ for $\tilde{k}_Q<1$ and $\Omega_p \propto n^{3/4}$ for $\tilde{k}_Q>1$. The coefficients $C_{++}^{z}/C_{++}^{\perp}$ tend to 2.003 in the thin-ring limit, so $\Omega_p^z/\Omega_p^\perp \to \sqrt{2}$. The paper is explicit that $n^{3/4}$ is only a crossover fingerprint: the cubic density of states diverges as $\rho(E)\propto E^{-1/3}$, $r_s$ exceeds unity near $n\sim 10^{18}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, and beyond-RPA correlations or an excitonic gap would alter the law.

Load-bearing premise

The cubic nodal-line semimetal remains a semimetal in the $10^{18}$ to $10^{19}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$ density window; if an excitonic gap or another interaction-driven instability opens instead, the predicted $n^{3/4}$ scaling no longer applies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In any candidate quadratic or cubic nodal-line semimetal, the carrier-density exponent of the long-wavelength plasmon frequency is the discriminating observable: $n^{1/2}$, $n^{2/3}$, or $n^{3/4}$.
  • A high-resolution electron energy-loss measurement should resolve the $\sqrt{2}$ doublet (around 190 and 269 meV for representative parameters) when the density is above about $10^{18}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$ and the crystal is clean enough that the impurity broadening is below half the chemical potential.
  • The cubic crossover from $n^{2/3}$ to $n^{3/4}$ occurs near $n^*\sim 10^{19}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, which is reachable by ionic-liquid gating or chemical doping; the finite-momentum dispersion is roughly quadratic, $\Omega_p(q)^2 = \Omega_p(0)^2[1+\beta(q/k_F)^2]$, so the ratio test is approximately $q$-independent in the HREELS window.
  • For a general $p$-th order nodal-line semimetal in three dimensions, the same power counting predicts $\omega_p\propto n^{p/4}$ in the thin-ring limit and $\omega_p\propto n^{(p+1)/6}$ at large doping, interpolating from the linear case to the cubic case.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If a clean $n^{3/4}$ scaling were observed, it would be indirect evidence that the cubic semimetal survives as a kinetically stabilized phase without an excitonic gap; the paper itself leaves this as speculative.
  • The $\sqrt{2}$ anisotropy is fragile to dielectric anisotropy: for $\epsilon_z/\epsilon_\perp=2$ the doublet collapses to a single peak, so any ratio measurement should be paired with ellipsometry or polarized infrared spectroscopy to fix the dielectric tensor.
  • Because $n^{1/2}$ also describes conventional three-dimensional electron gases and Luttinger semimetals, a quadratic-NLSM identification requires an independent measurement of the density of states or effective mass on the ring pocket, not just the density exponent.
  • The same density-exponent logic could be tested in classical wave analogues such as photonic or acoustic nodal-line crystals, where the carrier density maps to a tunable frequency parameter, before a clean electronic higher-order candidate is identified.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies long-wavelength RPA plasmons in three-dimensional quadratic and cubic nodal-line semimetals. Starting from the low-energy Hamiltonians, the authors derive the one-loop polarization functions, evaluate intraband and interband coefficients numerically from the full Lindhard integral (with an analytic spherical-limit check and a Matsubara-summation cross-check), and solve the RPA pole condition. They report omega_p ~ n^{1/2} for quadratic NLSMs, omega_p ~ n^{2/3} at large doping and omega_p ~ n^{3/4} at small doping for cubic NLSMs, a universal thin-ring anisotropy Omega_p^z/Omega_p^perp -> sqrt(2), and a detailed experimental outlook using HREELS. The n^{3/4} law is explicitly flagged in the abstract, discussion, and conclusion as not quantitatively reliable because r_s exceeds unity in precisely that density window.

Significance. If the results hold, the density exponents and the sqrt(2) doublet would be useful fingerprints for higher-order NLSMs. The paper has several genuine strengths: the prefactor tables are backed by machine-checked numerical integration, including independent cross-checks at the spherical limit and via imaginary-frequency summation; the scaling exponents are derived from the dispersions and Drude response rather than fitted; and the authors are unusually explicit about the limitations of the n^{3/4} prediction and about the absence of a confirmed cubic-NLSM candidate. The robust contributions are the quadratic n^{1/2} law, the large-doping cubic n^{2/3} law, and the thin-ring sqrt(2) anisotropy; the small-doping cubic n^{3/4} law is a caveated RPA crossover fingerprint. The internal error in the cubic density formula described below must be corrected before the stated exponents can be accepted as following from the paper's own equations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Eq. (43), Appendix C2, Section V] The printed cubic carrier-density formulas have the wrong power of mu/B. Equation (43) gives n = (mu/B)^{1/2}/(2 pi^2)[...] for k_Q_tilde < 1 and n = (mu/B)^{1/2} k_Q_tilde/(4 pi) for k_Q_tilde > 1, i.e. n ~ mu^{1/2} and, at fixed k_Q, n ~ mu^{1/6}. The correct sphere/torus volume for E = B K^3 is n = (mu/B)/(6 pi^2) at k_Q_tilde = 0 and n = k_Q (mu/B)^{2/3}/(4 pi) for a thin torus, i.e. n ~ mu and n ~ mu^{2/3}, respectively. As printed, Eq. (41) combined with Eq. (43) yields Omega_p ~ n^{4/3} in the large-doping regime and Omega_p ~ n^3 in the thin-ring regime, not the stated n^{2/3} and n^{3/4}. This is load-bearing because the cubic exponents are central claims. The contradiction is compounded by the statement in Appendix C2 that Eq. (43) was verified by direct numerical integration to better than 10^{-7}%; the formula and the verification claim cannot both stand. The scaling exponents can be recovered by correcting Eq. (43) to the proper volume expressions, but the derivation, the verification statement, and all dependent formulas must be revised consistently.
  2. [Section VI, 'Remaining open questions' (text after Eq. (52))] The small-doping cubic exponent n^{3/4} is derived in a regime where the paper itself states that the RPA is not under control: r_s already exceeds unity at n ~ 10^18 cm^{-3}, and Ref. [19] shows that the divergent cubic density of states drives a finite-scale RG singularity at arbitrarily weak interactions. Since n^{3/4} is nevertheless presented as a headline result in the abstract, the authors should either supply a controlled beyond-RPA estimate for this regime or explicitly demote n^{3/4} to a conjectural crossover interpolation. The current 'crossover fingerprint' wording is a step in the right direction, but the abstract and conclusion still assert the n^{3/4} law as a result of this paper.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eqs. (22)-(23) and Eqs. (41)-(42)] The right-hand sides contain Omega through Omega_tilde, so these expressions are not explicit solutions for Omega_p; they should be rewritten as Omega_p^2 = ... after imposing the pole condition and eliminating Omega.
  2. [Eq. (17) versus Eq. (21)] The symbol C_{++}^{perp,z} is used for the coefficient of q^2/Omega^2 in the intraband Lindhard expression and for the coefficient of q^2 in the pole equation; these are different objects and the notation should be clarified.
  3. [Section VI, quality-factor paragraph] The sentence beginning 'The Because the anisotropy is a frequency ratio' is garbled and should be rewritten.
  4. [Appendix B and Ref. [38]] There is a typo 'exponentialy' in the numerical-procedure text, and Ref. [38] should read 'anisotropic Weyl semimetal' rather than 'ani-Weyl semimetal'.
  5. [Density formulas and N convention] The text defines N = 2 for a spin-degenerate single ring, but the density formulas in Eqs. (24) and (43) and the numerical tables use N = 1; the authors should state explicitly that the densities are per spin/valley and that physical values require multiplication by N.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the scaling exponents are derived from the model dispersion and the Lindhard integral, not fitted, and the only self-citation is used as a caveat rather than as load-bearing support.

full rationale

The claimed scaling laws are derived, not fitted: the plasmon frequency follows from the intraband Drude polarizability ReΠ++ ∝ q²/Ω² C++(k̃Q), with C++ computed numerically from the Lindhard integral, and the carrier density n(μ) is obtained from the Fermi-surface volume. Eliminating μ between Ωp(μ) and n(μ) gives the quoted exponents, so the prediction is not equivalent to an input by construction. The paper explicitly labels the exponents postdictive and benchmarks n^{1/2} against the independent Luttinger-semimetal result. The one self-citation, Ref. [19], is invoked to flag the cubic-NLSM interaction instability and to bound the n^{3/4} window; this is a caveat that undercuts the RPA prediction rather than forcing it, so it is not load-bearing. The √2 anisotropy is likewise a computed coefficient ratio from the Lindhard integration, not an imposed ansatz. I therefore find no circular step. Separately, there is a serious internal-consistency defect in the printed cubic density formula, Eq. (43) and App. C2: the printed (μ/B)^{1/2} prefactor contradicts the n∝μ and n∝(μ/B)^{2/3} relations used in Sec. V, and the claim that this formula was verified to better than 10^{-7}% by numerical integration appears incompatible with the printed expression. This is a correctness/consistency problem, not a circularity problem, and it does not change the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The scaling exponents are derived from the dispersion and density relations, not fitted to data. The free parameters listed are representative inputs for physical-unit predictions. The most fragile pillars are RPA validity in the small-doping cubic regime and the assumed stability of the semimetal phase, both explicitly flagged in the paper.

free parameters (2)
  • Material parameter set for quantitative predictions = A = 5 eV nm^2, B = 10 eV nm^3, k_Q = 0.5 nm^-1, epsilon = 10
    Representative estimates chosen by hand; the scaling exponents do not depend on them, but the physical-unit energies, crossover density n* ~ 10^19 cm^-3, and detectability curves do.
  • Total plasmon linewidth in mock spectra = gamma_tot = 40 meV
    Assumed broadening based on impurity estimates; used in Figures 6 and 8 and in the resolvability discussion, not in the scaling exponents.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption RPA one-loop polarizability is valid where the scaling laws are asserted.
    The paper restricts to r_s << 1 and acknowledges r_s > 1 in the cubic small-doping window, so the n^{3/4} law sits partly outside this axiom's validity.
  • domain assumption Single-ring, single-band low-energy Hamiltonian (Eqs. 1 and 3) describes a real material.
    The paper notes candidate materials are layered, multiband, and none is established as effectively single-band; coexisting pockets add Drude weight and can mask the doublet.
  • domain assumption Zero-temperature and long-wavelength regime max(q_perp, q_z) << |Omega| << mu.
    Used to set Im Pi = 0 and intraband dominance in Sections III and IV.
  • ad hoc to paper Cubic NLSM semimetal phase is kinetically stabilized in the 10^18 to 10^19 cm^-3 window.
    Ref [19] finds the cubic nodal line is unstable to arbitrarily weak four-fermion interactions; if an excitonic gap opens, the n^{3/4} scaling is replaced by a gapped dispersion, as the paper itself states.
  • domain assumption Isotropic dielectric background for the sqrt(2) prediction.
    The paper later generalizes to uniaxial dielectrics in Eq. (53) and notes a dielectric contrast rho = 2 collapses the doublet to a single peak.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Plasmon modes in quadratic and cubic nodal line semimetals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/45XCZ3PY

@misc{pith2026260808185,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Plasmon modes in quadratic and cubic nodal line semimetals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/45XCZ3PY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08185}
}
abstract

Nodal line semimetals (NLSMs) host distinctive topological properties and unconventional collective excitations. While plasmons in linear NLSMs are well studied, those of higher-order dispersive NLSMs remain poorly understood. We investigate plasmon modes in 3D quadratic and cubic NLSMs within the random phase approximation (RPA), valid for $r_s\ll1$ but breaking down in the small-doping cubic regime where the density of states diverges. Deriving the one-loop polarizability and evaluating its coefficients numerically from the full 3D Lindhard integral, we find distinct carrier-density scaling laws: quadratic NLSMs exhibit $\omega_p\sim n^{1/2}$, while cubic NLSMs show $\omega_p\sim n^{2/3}$ at large doping crossing over to $\omega_p\sim n^{3/4}$ at small doping. The $n^{3/4}$ law is not quantitatively reliable: the diverging density of states drives $r_s>1$ already at $n\sim10^{18}$ cm$^{-3}$, limiting the observable window to at most $10^{18}\lesssim n\lesssim10^{19}$ cm$^{-3}$; below this, beyond-RPA correlations are essential. These scalings originate from the power-law density of states and intraband (Drude) response, and are analogous in phase-space power counting to bilayer and trilayer graphene, respectively. The long-wavelength intraband polarization dominates the plasmon frequency, while interband contributions are subleading (two to three orders of magnitude smaller for $\Omega\ll\mu$). Both systems share a plasmon anisotropy $\Omega_p^z/\Omega_p^\perp\to\sqrt{2}$ in the thin-ring limit, a generic consequence of the torus Fermi-surface geometry. This $\sqrt{2}$ doublet, though observable by HREELS, cannot distinguish quadratic from cubic dispersion; the density scaling exponent is the true distinguishing signature. Our results provide a framework for the collective dynamics of higher-order dispersive NLSMs and suggest experimentally testable signatures accessible by HREELS.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08185 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Quadratic NLSM: (a) numerically re-determined intraband coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Cubic NLSM: (a) numerically re-determined intraband coefficient [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Schematic carrier-density scaling of the plasmon frequency (illustrative; the quantitative prefactors and physical-unit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Plasmon energy in physical units (meV) vs. carrier density for the cubic NLSM at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Schematic HREELS energy-loss spectrum for a cubic NLSM in the thin-ring regime ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Finite-momentum plasmon dispersion of the cubic NLSM from the full-trace Lindhard bubble. Shown is Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Energy-loss spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Detectability map for the cubic NLSM in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [19]

    B. Q. Lv, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Experimental perspective on three-dimensional topological semimetals, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025002 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [1]

    In the long-wavelength limit, the intraband contribution ReΠ ++ dominates over the interband contributions. For thequadratic NLSM, the carrier densitynis related to the chemical potential byn∝(µ/A) 3/2 at large doping (µ > Ak2 Q, ˜kQ <1); at small doping (µ < Ak 2 Q, ˜kQ >1) the relation crosses over ton∝(µ/A) 3/2˜kQ (see App. C). In both regimes, solving...

    work page

  3. [2]

    Figure 9 shows a detectability map in the (n, ˜kQ) parameter space

    The peak widths are set by the total linewidthγ tot ∼40 meV estimated above, and the splitting (∼79 meV) exceeds the combined width, confirming that the doublet is resolvable (marginally, near the lower edge of the accessible window) in a realistic HREELS measurement. Figure 9 shows a detectability map in the (n, ˜kQ) parameter space. The white dashed lin...

    work page

  4. [3]

    Quadratic NLSM for the quadratic NLSM K(k, q) =A 2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 −k 2 z ( q (kx +q x)2 + (ky +q y)2 −k Q)2 −(k z +q z)2 +4A2( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)kz( q (kx +q x)2 + (ky +q y)2 −k Q)(kz +q z).(A6) a.ImΠ Ret in finite temperature Carrying out the analytic continuationiω n →ω+iδ, we have ImΠret(Ω,q) = N 16π2 X α,α′ =±1 Z d3k 1 +αα ′ K(k, q) EkEk+q × h nF...

    work page

  5. [4]

    Cubic NLSM For the cubic NLSM, the core functionK(k, q)≡Tr [H0(k)H0(k+q)]/2 arising from the trace over Green’s functions follows fromH c 0 =B k3 r −3k rk2 z σ1 + k3 z −3k zk2 r σ2 and evaluates to the cubic polynomial (distinct from the quadratic case): K(k, q) =B2 h k3 r −3k rk2 z k′3 r −3k ′ rk′2 z + k3 z −3k zk2 r k′3 z −3k ′ zk′2 r i ,(A26) withk r =...

    work page

  6. [5]

    The radial integral runs overK∈[0, K max] withK max = 8K F , beyond which the integrand is exponentialy suppressed (convergence<0.1%)

    Numerical procedure and reproducibility The prefactor tables (Tables II–VII) and all physical-unit figures are generated by a single shell-localisedq→0 integration code; the angular grid,q 2 extrapolation, and ˜Ω cross-checks are described where each coefficient is quoted. The radial integral runs overK∈[0, K max] withK max = 8K F , beyond which the integ...

    work page 2000

  7. [6]

    quadratic NLSM The spectral function takes the form A(ω,k) =− 1 π Tr Im Gret 0 (ω,k) = sgn(ω+µ) (ω+µ) 1r A2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 2 × " δ ω+µ+ r A2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 2 ! +δ ω+µ− r A2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 2 !# ,(C1) which is manifestly positive on both branches (the overall sign conventionA=−Tr[ImG ret]/πenforcesA(ω,k)≥0, the standard s...

    work page

  8. [7]

    Cubic NLSM The density of fermion satisfy n= Z d3k (2π)3 Z 0 −∞ dωA(ω,k) = Z d3k (2π)3 Z 0 −∞ dωsgn(ω+µ) (ω+µ) 1r B2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 3 × " δ ω+µ+ r B2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 3 ! +δ ω+µ− r B2 ( q k2x +k 2y −k Q)2 +k 2z 3 !# ,(C5) where the spectral functionA(ω,k) is defined with the same sign conventionA=−Tr[ImG ret]/πas in Eq. (C1), so that...

    work page

Show all 63 references
  1. [8]

    A. H. C. Neto, F. Guinea, N. M. R. Peres, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, The electronic properties of graphene, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 109 (2009)

    2009

  2. [9]

    V. N. Kotov, B. Uchoa, V. M. Pereira, F. Guinea, and A. H. C. Neto, Electron-electron interactions in graphene: Current status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 1067 (2012)

    2012

  3. [10]

    Vafek and A

    O. Vafek and A. Vishwanath, Dirac fermions in solids: From high-T c cuprates and graphene to topological insulators and Weyl semimetals, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.5, 83 (2014)

    2014

  4. [11]

    T. O. Wehling, A. M. Black-Schaffer, and A. V. Balatsky, Dirac materials, Adv. Phys.63, 1 (2014)

    2014

  5. [12]

    H. Weng, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Topological semimetals predicted from first-principles calculations, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter28, 303001 (2016)

    2016

  6. [13]

    C. Fang, H. Weng, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Topological nodal line semimetals, Chin. Phys. B25, 117106 (2016)

    2016

  7. [14]

    Yan and C

    B. Yan and C. Felser, Topological materials: Weyl semimetals, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.8, 337 (2017)

    2017

  8. [15]

    M. Z. Hasan, S.-Y. Xu, I. Belopolski, and S.-M. Huang, Discovery of Weyl fermion semimetals and topological Fermi arc states, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.8, 289 (2017)

    2017

  9. [16]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Weyl and Dirac semimetals in three-dimensional solids, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

  10. [17]

    H. Gao, J. W. F. Venderbos, Y. Kim, and A. M. Rappe, Topological semimetals from first principles, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.49, 153 (2019)

    2019

  11. [18]

    B. Lv, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy and its application to topological materials, Nat. Rev. Phys.1, 609 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    M. Z. Hasan, G. Chang, I. Belopolski, G. Bian, S.-Y. Xu, and J.-X. Yin, Weyl, Dirac and high-fold chiral fermions in topological quantum matter, Nat. Rev. Mat.6, 784 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    B. J. Wieder, B. Bradlyn, J. Cano, Z. Wang, M. G. Vergniory, L. Elcoro, A. A. Soluyanov, C. Felser, T. Neupert, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Topological materials discovery from crystal symmetry, Nat. Rev. Mat.7, 196 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    L. M. Schoop, M. N. Ali, C. Straßer, A. Topp, A. Varykhalov, D. Marchenko, V. Duppel, S. S. P. Parkin, B. V. Lotsch, and C. R. Ast, Dirac metal in the intermetallic zrsis, Nat. Commun.7, 11696 (2016). 33

    2016

  15. [23]

    Neupane, I

    M. Neupane, I. Belopolski, M. M. Hosen, D. S. Sanchez, R. Sankar, I. Belopolski, S.-Y. Xu, D. Koumoulis, C.-C. Lee, Y. J. Wang,et al., Observation of a three-dimensional topological dirac semimetal phase in high-mobility zrsis, Phys. Rev. B 93, 201104(R) (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    Z.-M. Yu, W. Wu, X.-L. Sheng, Y. X. Zhao, and S. A. Yang, Quadratic and cubic nodal lines stabilized by crystalline symmetry, Phys. Rev. B99, 121106(R) (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    L. Li, S. Chesi, C. Yin, and S. Chen, 2π-flux loop semimetals, Phys. Rev. B96, 081116(R) (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    J.-R. Wang, W. Li, and C.-J. Zhang, Possible instabilities in quadratic and cubic nodal-line fermion systems with correlated interactions, Phys. Rev. B102, 085132 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    Zhang, Z.-M

    Z. Zhang, Z.-M. Yu, and S. A. Yang, Magnetic higher-order nodal lines, Phys. Rev. B103, 115112 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Z.-M. Yu, Z. Zhang, G.-B. Liu, W. Wu, X.-P. Li, R.-W. Zhang, S. A. Yang, and Y. Yao, Encyclopedia of emergent particles in three-dimensional crystals, Sci. Bull.67, 375 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Tang, X. Dai, S. Zhang, Z. Cao, and Y. Xiang, Design of a higher-order nodal-line semimetal in a spring-shaped acoustic topological crystal, Phys. Rev. B106, 184101 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    G. F. Giuliani and G. Vignale,Quantum Theory of the Electron Liquid(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005)

    2005

  23. [31]

    S. A. Maier,Plasmonics: Fundamentals and Applications(Springer, New York, 2007)

    2007

  24. [32]

    Wunsch, T

    B. Wunsch, T. Stauber, F. Sols, and F. Guinea, Dynamical polarization of graphene at finite doping, New J. Phys.8, 318 (2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    E. H. Hwang and S. D. Sarma, Dielectric function, screening, and plasmons in two-dimensional graphene, Phys. Rev. B 75, 205418 (2007)

    2007

  26. [34]

    P. K. Pyatkovskiy, Dynamical polarization, screening, and plasmons in gapped graphene, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter21, 025506 (2009)

    2009

  27. [35]

    Chang, J

    H.-R. Chang, J. Zhou, H. Zhang, and Y. Yao, Probing the topological phase transition via density oscillations in silicene and germanene, Phys. Rev. B89, 201411(R) (2014)

    2014

  28. [36]

    Stauber, Plasmonics in Dirac systems: from graphene to topological insulators, J

    T. Stauber, Plasmonics in Dirac systems: from graphene to topological insulators, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter26, 123201 (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    S. D. Sarma and E. H. Hwang, Collective modes of the massless Dirac plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 206412 (2009)

    2009

  30. [38]

    Lv and S.-C

    M. Lv and S.-C. Zhang, Dielectric function, Friedel oscillation and plasmons in Weyl semimetals, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B27, 135077 (2013)

    2013

  31. [39]

    Panfilov, A

    I. Panfilov, A. A. Burkov, and D. A. Pesin, Density response in Weyl metals, Phys. Rev. B89, 245103 (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

    Zhou, H.-R

    J. Zhou, H.-R. Chang, and D. Xiao, Plasmon mode as a detection of the chiral anomaly in Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B91, 035114 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Sadhukhan, A

    K. Sadhukhan, A. Politano, and A. Agarwal, Novel undamped gapless plasmon mode in a tilted type-II Dirac semimetal, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 046803 (2020)

    2020

  34. [42]

    C.-X. Yan, F. Zhang, C.-Y. Tan, H.-R. Chang, J. Zhou, Y. Yao, and G. Guo, Anomalous acoustic plasmons in two- dimensional over-tilted Dirac bands, arXiv:2211.11266 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    P. K. Pyatkovskiy and T. Chakraborty, Dynamical polarization and plasmons in a two-dimensional system with merging Dirac points, Phys. Rev. B93, 085145 (2016)

    2016

  36. [44]

    S. Ahn, E. H. Hwang, and H. Min, Collective modes in multi-Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B95, 041102(R) (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    Wang, G.-Z

    J.-R. Wang, G.-Z. Liu, and C.-J. Zhang, Polarization, plasmon, and Debye screening in doped 3d ani-Weyl semimetal, arXiv:1706.03582 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Yan, P.-W

    Z. Yan, P.-W. Huang, and Z. Wang, Collective modes in nodal line semimetals, Phys. Rev. B93, 085138 (2016)

    2016

  39. [47]

    Rhim and Y

    J.-W. Rhim and Y. B. Kim, Anisotropic density fluctuations, plasmons, and Friedel oscillations in nodal line semimetal, New J. Phys.18, 043010 (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Cao, H.-R

    J. Cao, H.-R. Chang, X. Feng, Y. Yao, and S. A. Yang, Plasmons in a two-dimensional nonsymmorphic nodal-line semimetal, Phys. Rev. B107, 115168 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Tchoumakov and W

    S. Tchoumakov and W. Witczak-Krempa, Dielectric and electronic properties of three-dimensional Luttinger semimetals with a quadratic band touching, Phys. Rev. B100, 075104 (2019)

    2019

  42. [50]

    Mauri and M

    A. Mauri and M. Polini, Dielectric function and plasmons of doped three-dimensional Luttinger semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 100, 165115 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Mandal, Search for plasmons in isotropic Luttinger semimetals, Ann

    I. Mandal, Search for plasmons in isotropic Luttinger semimetals, Ann. Phys.406, 173 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Wang and I

    J. Wang and I. Mandal, Anatomy of plasmons in generic Luttinger semimetals, Eur. Phys. J. B96, 132 (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Dutta, B

    D. Dutta, B. Ghosh, B. Singh, H. Lin, A. Politano, A. Bansil, and A. Agarwal, Collective plasmonic modes in the chiral multifold fermionic material CoSi, Phys. Rev. B105, 165104 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    Sensarma, E

    R. Sensarma, E. H. Hwang, and S. D. Sarma, Dynamic screening and low-energy collective modes in bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B82, 195428 (2010)

    2010

  47. [55]

    O. V. Gamayun, Dynamical screening in bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B84, 085112 (2011)

    2011

  48. [56]

    P. M. Krstaji´ c, B. V. Duppen, and F. M. Peeters, Plasmons and their interaction with electrons in trilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B88, 195423 (2013)

    2013

  49. [57]

    S. Xue, M. Wang, Y. Li, S. Zhang, X. Jia, J. Zhou, Y. Shi, X. Zhu, Y. Yao, and J. Guo, Observation of nodal-line plasmons in ZrSiS, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 186802 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    Y. Li, M. Wang, Y. Li, S. Xue, J. Li, Z. Tao, X. Han, J. Zhou, Y. Shi, J. Guo, and X. Zhu, Nodal-line plasmons in ZrSiX (X = S, Se, Te) and their temperature dependence, Phys. Rev. B107, 155421 (2023)

    2023

  51. [59]

    Islam and A

    S. Islam and A. A. Zyuzin, Plasmon modes in nodal-line semimetals, Phys. Rev. B104, 245301 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Y. Shao, S. Moon, N. Nandkishore,et al., Topological semimetal plasmons, Sci. Adv.8, eadd6169 (2022). 34

    2022

  53. [61]

    S. Ahn, E. J. Mele, and Y. M. Lu, Collective modes in multi-weyl semimetals, Sci. Rep.6, 34023 (2016)

    2016

  54. [62]

    Wang and R

    Y. Wang and R. M. Nandkishore, Interplay between short-range correlated disorder and coulomb interaction in nodal-line semimetals, Phys. Rev. B96, 115130 (2017)

    2017

  55. [63]

    G. D. Mahan,Many-Particle Physics, 3rd ed. (Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2000)

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.