Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Fermi lune and transdimensional orbital magnetism in rhombohedral multilayer graphene

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Electron interactions in five-to-nine-layer rhombohedral graphene reshape the Fermi surface into a crescent that breaks time-reversal symmetry, generating in-plane orbital magnetism and current-direction-dependent resistance as large as…

desk verdict A genuinely new mean-field metallic state ('Fermi lune') in rhombohedral multilayer graphene, with a solid symmetry analysis and a plausible phase diagram — but the transport pillar is a single device with no quantitative theory comparison, so the paper needs serious referee revision, not a desk reject. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05414 v1 pith:5DZRVMTC submitted 2025-05-08 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.str-el

Min Li , Qingxin Li , Xin Lu , Hua Fan , Kenji Watanabe , Takashi Taniguchi , Yue Zhao , Xin-Cheng Xie
show 2 more authors
Lei Wang Jianpeng Liu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.str-el
keywords Fermilunerhombohedralmultilayergraphenetransdimensionalorbitalmagnetismnon-reciprocaltransportHartree-FocktheoryspontaneoussymmetrybreakinganomalousHalleffectCherninsulator
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 claims that in slightly electron-doped rhombohedral multilayer graphene with roughly five to nine layers, electron-electron interactions spontaneously reorganize the Fermi surface into a crescent shape, named the Fermi lune, that breaks time-reversal, threefold-rotation, and mirror symmetries. In this transdimensional regime, where the film is thick enough to support vertical orbital motion yet thin enough to remain quantum coherent, the lune hosts circulating currents that produce magnetic moments both within and perpendicular to the layers, a state the authors call transdimensional orbital magnetism. The same broken symmetries make forward and backward electrical currents experience very different Fermi velocities, yielding large intrinsic non-reciprocal longitudinal resistance; the measured value reaches 22.9% in a nine-layer device. If correct, the work establishes a new symmetry-broken metallic state whose transport and magnetic responses are controlled by Fermi-surface geometry rather than by spin.

What carries the argument

The Fermi lune is the central object: a crescent-shaped Fermi-energy contour that emerges from the double-ring non-interacting Fermi surface once long-range, double-gate-screened Coulomb interactions are treated with unrestricted Hartree-Fock, a self-consistent mean-field treatment of the electron-electron interaction. The argument's load-bearing steps are a perturbative renormalization-group procedure that enhances the low-energy continuum model parameters through remote-band screening, and projection of the Coulomb interaction onto a low-energy window ($E_C^*\sim 0.3$ eV) with one conduction and one valence band per spin and valley. The lune's geometry, a strongly asymmetric distribution of occupied states, directly carries the non-reciprocity and the orbital magnetism; the in-plane orbital magnetization $M_y \sim \langle \hat{z}\hat{v}_x\rangle$ scales with sample thickness, which is why the effect grows with layer number.

What would settle it

Cool a 9-layer device into the TOM phase under in-plane magnetic fields of opposite directions and measure $\delta R_{xx}/R_{xx}$ at fixed carrier density and displacement field; the Fermi-lune mechanism predicts that the sign of the non-reciprocity should follow the selected magnetic domain, whereas a heating or contact artifact would be insensitive to the cooling-field direction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a new interaction-driven ground state in rhombohedral multilayer graphene: the Fermi lune. Starting from a non-interacting double-ring Fermi surface in the presence of a displacement field, long-range intra-valley Coulomb interactions drive a spontaneously symmetry-broken metal whose Fermi contour is a crescent that breaks time-reversal ($T$), threefold rotation ($C_3$), and mirror ($M_y$) symmetries while preserving the combined $M_yT$ symmetry (the TOM-$y$ state) or, in a second variant, breaks $C_3$ and $M_yT$ while preserving $M_y$ (the TOM-$x$ state). The lune produces strongly asymmetric Fermi velocities for forward- and backward-moving carriers, identified as the microscopic origin of giant non-reciprocal longitudinal transport. It also supports coherent orbital current loops both in-plane and out-of-plane, giving orbital magnetizations of order $1$-$10\,\mu_B$ per electron whose in-plane component grows nearly linearly with layer number. Hartree-Fock phase diagrams for four to nine layers show the TOM states occupying most of the parameter space for seven and nine layers, and a superlattice-potential calculation shows that the lune can fold into an isolated Chern-number-1 conduction band, a transdimensional Chern insulator whose quantized anomalous Hall effect responds hysteretically to an in-plane magnetic field.

Load-bearing premise

The paper treats the measured non-reciprocal resistance and the companion transdimensional anomalous Hall effect as intrinsic, single-domain signatures of the Fermi-lune Hartree-Fock state rather than artifacts of current-induced heating, multi-domain averaging, contact effects, or mixing of longitudinal and Hall voltages.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Fermi-lune state should show no Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations in out-of-plane magnetic fields, because the lune's asymmetric velocities suppress closed cyclotron orbits; the paper reports this absence up to $12$ T.
  • The non-reciprocal longitudinal resistance and the transdimensional anomalous Hall effect should appear and vanish together as density or displacement field crosses the TOM phase boundary; the measured phase boundary in the nine-layer device is consistent with this expectation.
  • In seven- and nine-layer samples the TOM states dominate the mean-field phase diagram, whereas four-layer systems are mostly spin/valley-polarized, predicting a sharp layer-number threshold for the lune.
  • Coupling a lune state to a superlattice potential of the right period should produce a correlated Chern insulator with Chern number $1$ and in-plane orbital magnetization on the order of $3\,\mu_B$ per electron, with a quantized anomalous Hall effect that is hysteretic in an in-plane magnetic field.
  • The six degenerate magnetic domains of the TOM-$y$ state imply domain walls and $\mathbb{Z}_6$ vortices at their intersections, so the thermal ordering transition should be governed by proliferation of those defects.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test the paper does not perform: if a single Fermi-lune domain can be prepared, for instance by cooling in a weak in-plane magnetic field, the non-reciprocal resistance should become antisymmetric under current reversal and its sign should flip when the domain is switched, whereas a heating artifact would not track the domain orientation.
  • The paper stops short of computing $\delta R_{xx}/R_{xx}$ from the Hartree-Fock band structure; doing so would let theory predict the size, sign, and density dependence of the 22.9% signal and help separate the intrinsic lune mechanism from contact or mixing artifacts.
  • The same lune mechanism may appear in other layered metals once the out-of-plane mean free path is comparable to the film thickness; the paper names multilayer transition metal dichalcogenides as a natural venue, so checking for current-direction-dependent resistance there is a testable extension.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a combined theory-and-transport study of slightly electron-doped rhombohedral multilayer graphene (RMG) with 4 to 9 layers. The central claim is that electron-electron interactions drive a spontaneous symmetry-broken metallic state, the 'Fermi lune,' in which the Fermi surface has a crescent shape and breaks time-reversal, C3, and mirror symmetries. This state is argued to produce large in-plane orbital magnetization ('transdimensional orbital magnetism'), a transdimensional anomalous Hall effect, and giant intrinsic non-reciprocal longitudinal transport. Unrestricted self-consistent Hartree-Fock calculations are presented for several layer numbers, showing TOM_y, TOM_x, and SVP phases as a function of density and displacement field. The experimental part reports a 22.9% non-reciprocal longitudinal resistance signal in a 9-layer device at D = 0.9 V/nm and n = 1.5e12 cm^-2, together with the absence of quantum oscillations in the claimed Fermi-lune regime. A superlattice-potential version of the state is also shown to produce a Chern band with quantized anomalous Hall response to in-plane fields.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper identifies a genuinely new class of interaction-driven Fermi-surface topology in a widely studied material platform, with an unusual combination of broken symmetries and orbital magnetism. The theoretical work is ambitious and largely transparent: the unrestricted Hartree-Fock search over 128 order parameters, the explicit phase diagrams for N = 4 through 9 layers, and the numerical evaluation of in-plane orbital magnetization via coupling to a small in-plane field are concrete and useful. The model parameters are taken from prior literature rather than fitted to the transport data, and the measured non-reciprocal signal is not used as an input, so the core theoretical prediction is not circular. However, the experimental identification of the Fermi-lune state rests on transport signatures whose intrinsic, single-domain origin is not established by the present manuscript, and the calculated phase diagram does not extend into the experimentally claimed region. These gaps are substantive because the paper's headline experimental number, 22.9%, is not accompanied by a quantitative transport calculation.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV, Fig. 3(c)] The claim that the measured 22.9% non-reciprocal resistance is an intrinsic signature of the Fermi-lune state is not supported by any quantitative transport calculation. Table I only establishes that delta_Rxx is symmetry-allowed, while the text states that the asymmetry of forward and backward Fermi velocities produces the effect; no Boltzmann or Kubo calculation of delta_Rxx/Rxx from the TOM_y band structure is given, so neither the magnitude, sign, nor density dependence of the measured signal is compared with theory. Without such a calculation, current-induced heating, contact rectification, or admixture of the Hall voltage into Rxx cannot be excluded, and the central experimental claim remains unquantified.
  2. [Sec. IV, Fig. 2(f) and Sec. VI] The six degenerate TOM_y domains shown in Fig. 2(f) would have opposite non-reciprocal responses for opposite in-plane orbital magnetizations, so a multi-domain sample would see cancellation of the odd-in-current longitudinal asymmetry. The measurement in Fig. 3 is not accompanied by any poling protocol, domain-imbalance estimate, or single-domain detection, and the paper itself acknowledges in Sec. VI that six domains will form domain walls and Z6 vortices. The authors need to explain how the observed large odd-in-I signal survives in a multi-domain sample, or demonstrate single-domain behavior, before the signal can be attributed to the intrinsic Fermi-lune state.
  3. [Sec. V, Fig. 4(a) and Fig. 3(a)] The calculated Hartree-Fock phase diagram in Fig. 4(a) for N = 9 covers displacement fields only up to D = 0.7 V/nm, while the measured transdimensional AHE and non-reciprocal transport region in Fig. 3(a) is D ≈ 0.75–0.95 V/nm. The paper describes the agreement as 'perfect,' but no calculation is shown in the measured field range. The authors should extend the HF calculations to the measured range, or present a quantitative argument (for example, using renormalized parameters) for why the TOM_y phase should persist to D ≈ 0.9 V/nm.
  4. [Supp. S4, S5] The theoretical phase diagram depends on the low-energy window E*_C ≈ 0.3 eV, the cutoff ratio L_s/(n_cut a0), and the RG treatment that assumes approximate particle-hole symmetry, as stated in Supp. S4. No sensitivity analysis is provided for these choices, nor is the dependence on the 46x46 k-mesh or the n_cut = 1 band truncation discussed. Since the Fermi-lune state is the central prediction, the authors should show that the TOM_y phase and its orbital magnetization are robust to reasonable variations of these numerical and RG parameters, and should quantify the effect of the particle-hole breaking terms that are neglected in the RG flow.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The header for the last column reads 'δRxx = σ+xx−R−xx', which mixes conductivity and resistance notation; this should be corrected to R+xx − R−xx or defined consistently.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'transidimensional' for 'transdimensional,' 'foward-moving' for 'forward-moving,' 'ennealayer' for 'nine-layer,' 'stongally' for 'trigonally,' and 'vanishment' for 'vanishing.' These should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. IV] The text states that the non-reciprocal signal is 'in perfect agreement with theoretical expectation,' but no theoretical curve or quantitative prediction is shown; the wording should be softened until such a comparison is provided.
  4. [Supp. S1] The definition of the measured Rxx should state explicitly whether the four-terminal longitudinal voltage contacts exclude the Hall contribution, and how the AC lock-in current sign is reversed to define Rxx(+I) and Rxx(−I).
  5. [Sec. VI / Ref. [33]] Reference [33] is cited as 'Manuscript in preparation (2025)' for a more comprehensive experimental study; if possible, the authors should provide additional details of the planned study or remove the reliance on unpublished work.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Core Hartree-Fock derivation of the Fermi lune is self-contained and uses no fitted transport parameters; the experimental TOM identification leans on companion paper [17] (overlapping authors) and an unquantified 'perfect agreement' claim, giving a mild self-citation score of 3.

  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. IV 'Giant non-reciprocal longitudinal transport', Fig. 3(a) and the 'transdimensional AHE' definition in Sec. I/III with Ref. [17]]
    "When D∼ 0.75−0.95 V/nm and n∼ 0.9−1.5× 1012 cm−2, the system exhibits transdimensional AHE indicating the presence of spontanous in-plane orbital magnetization, and the corresponding phase boundary is marked by the red solid line in Fig. 3(a). The substantial intrinsic non-reciprocal transport signal is in perfect agreement with theoretical expectation."

    The load-bearing evidence that the measured region hosts the Fermi-lune TOM state is the 'transdimensional AHE', reported in companion paper [17] by an overlapping author list, not demonstrated here. The only links supplied here are the red phase boundary in Fig. 3(a) and the symmetry-allowed δRxx entry in Table I: no quantitative δRxx/Rxx or TDAHE value is computed from the TOM band structure, and the calculated phase diagram (Fig. 4, D ≤ 0.7 V/nm) does not cover the measured D = 0.75-0.95 V/nm window. The 'perfect agreement with theoretical expectation' thus has no quantitative theory-experiment reduction: the phase is identified as TOM because it shows TDAHE and δRxx, while the TOM theory predicts both, with the TDAHE measurement residing in the overlapping-authors companion paper.

full rationale

The Fermi-lune state is produced by unrestricted Hartree-Fock on a continuum model whose parameters (Vppπ = -2.7 eV, Vppσ = 0.48 eV, r0 = 0.184a0 from [42]; ℏvF = 5.253 eV·Å, t⊥ = 0.34 eV, ℏv⊥ = 0.335 eV·Å from [43]; εBN = 4, ds = 40 nm) are taken from prior literature and standard device geometry, and none is fitted to the measured Rxx(I) or AHE data. The crescent Fermi surface, the six degenerate TOM_y domains, the in-plane orbital magnetization values (1-10 μB per electron), and the symmetry-allowed δRxx entry in Table I are outputs of the self-consistent calculation and symmetry analysis, so the theory side of the derivation chain is not circular by construction. The RG renormalization of the continuum parameters is cited to [31] from the same group, but the flow equations (S9) are stated in the paper and rest on the standard graphene RG of Vafek-Kang [30] with experimental confirmation [46], so that self-citation is not load-bearing. The experimental side is partly self-contained: the non-reciprocal Rxx(I) traces (Fig. 3) and the absence of quantum oscillations in the candidate phase (Supp. Fig. 2) are shown here. What is not self-contained is the identification of the measured region (D ≈ 0.75-0.95 V/nm, n ≈ 0.9-1.5×10^12 cm^-2) as the TOM/Fermi-lune phase: that rests on the transdimensional AHE of companion paper [17] by overlapping authors, and the calculated phase diagram (Fig. 4) stops at D ≤ 0.7 V/nm, below the measured window. The phrase 'perfect agreement with theoretical expectation' is not backed by a quantitative calculation of δRxx/Rxx or the TDAHE magnitude, so the agreement claim reduces to symmetry-allowedness plus the companion measurement. These are gaps of self-citation and of quantitative comparison; they do not make the central derivation circular, because the Fermi lune is neither defined by the observed transport observables nor produced by fitting the data. The claimed giant non-reciprocity could in principle have extrinsic causes (multi-domain cancellation, heating, contact or Hall admixture), but that is a falsifiability and robustness concern, not a circularity of the derivation chain.

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

The Fermi-lune state emerges from a specific combination of continuum model, RG renormalization, double-gate screening, and unrestricted Hartree-Fock. The calculation is parameterized by the low-energy cutoff and the renormalization endpoint; the robustness of the instability to these choices is not reported. No new physical entity (particle, force, dimension) is introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Low-energy window E*_C = 0.3 eV
    Energy cutoff inside which Coulomb interactions are treated non-perturbatively; chosen in Sec. S4, affects the renormalized v_F and t_perp via log(E_C/E*_C).
  • Renormalization cutoff ratio L_s/(n_cut a0) = used in place of E_C/E*_C
    Chosen to set the RG flow endpoints; the paper states any value of the same order gives the same log-enhanced parameters, but the value itself is not derived.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Coulomb interaction is dominated by intra-valley density-density terms; intervalley and exchange-correlation terms beyond Hartree-Fock are neglected.
    Used to derive V_intra in Sec. III and Sec. S5; intervalley term claimed two orders of magnitude weaker at n~1e12 cm^-2.
  • ad hoc to paper The RG renormalization assumes approximate particle-hole symmetry in the low-energy window, even though the system breaks it.
    Sec. S4 states the particle-hole breaking terms are negligible outside the low-energy window, which is needed to get RG equations S9.
  • domain assumption One conduction and one valence band per spin and valley (n_cut=1) are sufficient to describe the low-energy correlated state.
    Sec. S5 truncates the projected Coulomb interaction to n_cut=1 bands.
  • domain assumption The vertical mean free path estimated from bulk graphite conductivity applies to the 5-9 layer devices, defining the transdimensional regime.
    Sec. II and Sec. S2 use l_perp~2nm from Drude estimates to argue NL>=5 enters the transdimensional regime.
  • domain assumption Hartree-Fock mean-field theory captures the Fermi-lune ground state; quantum fluctuations and superconductivity are not considered.
    The central prediction of the Fermi lune relies on unrestricted HF in Sec. III and S5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fermi lune and transdimensional orbital magnetism in rhombohedral multilayer graphene." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5DZRVMTC

@misc{pith2026250505414,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fermi lune and transdimensional orbital magnetism in rhombohedral multilayer graphene},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5DZRVMTC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05414}
}
read the original abstract

The symmetry and geometry of the Fermi surface play an essential role in governing the transport properties of a metallic system. A Fermi surface with reduced symmetry is intimately tied to unusual transport properties such as anomalous Hall effect and nonlinear Hall effect. Here, combining theoretical calculations and transport measurements, we report the discovery of a new class of bulk Fermi surface structure with unprecedented low symmetry, the ``Fermi lune", with peculiar crescent shaped Fermi energy contours, in rhombohedral multilayer graphene. This emergent Fermi-lune structure driven by electron-electron interactions spontaneously breaks time-reversal, mirror, and rotational symmetries, leading to two distinctive phenomena: giant intrinsic non-reciprocity in longitudinal transport and a new type of magnetism termed ``transdimensional orbital magnetism". Coupling the Fermi lune to a superlattice potential further produces a novel Chern insulator exhibiting quantized anomalous Hall effect controlled by in-plane magnetic field. Our work unveils a new symmetry breaking state of matter in the transdimensional regime, which opens an avenue for exploring correlated and topological quantum phenomena in symmetry breaking phases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.05414 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5 Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Longitudinal resistance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Hartree-Fock phase diagrams of slightly charge-doped RMG in the parameter space of carrier density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3 G O Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: phase diagram, evolution of M as Nlayer Supplementary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 (c) doped RMG. In Supplementary Fig. 3(a), we show the Fermi surfaces of typical symmetry-breaking states in 9-layer …
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 0 ky 0.2 E (eV 0 ky 0.2 E (eV 0 ky 0.2 E (eV 0.2 rgy (eV) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: N=9 (a)D=0.1 V/nm (b)D=0.2 V/nm (c)D=0.3 V/nm (d)D=0.3 V/nm, N = 3,5,7 I. M. Lifshits, Soviet Physics Uspekhi 22, 904 (1979). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: N=9 (a)D=01 V/nm (b)D=02 V/nm (c)D=03 V/nm (d)D=03 V/nmN = 357 K. Liu, J. Zheng, Y. Sha, B. Lyu, F. Li, Y. Park, Y. Ren, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Jia, W. Luo, Z. Shi, J. Jung, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. I. Kaganov and I. M. Lifshits, Soviet Physics Uspekhi 22, 904 (1979)

    work page 1979

  2. [2]

    Springford, M

    M. Springford, M. Springford, et al., Electrons at the Fermi surface (Cambridge University Press, 2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  4. [4]

    Du, H.-Z

    Z. Du, H.-Z. Lu, and X. Xie, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 744 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Yasuda, T

    K. Yasuda, T. Morimoto, R. Yoshimi, M. Mogi, A. Tsukazaki, M. Kawamura, K. S. Takahashi, M. Kawasaki, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Nature Nanotechnology 15, 831 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    N. J. Zhang, J.-X. Lin, D. V. Chichinadze, Y. Wang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and J. I. A. Li, Nature Materials 23, 356 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    X. Wan, A. M. Turner, A. Vishwanath, and S. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B 83, 205101 (2011)

    2011

  8. [8]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    A. C. Potter, I. Kimchi, and A. Vishwanath, Nature Communications 5, 5161 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    P. J. W. Moll, N. L. Nair, T. Helm, A. C. Potter, I. Kimchi, A. Vishwanath, and J. G. Analytis, Nature 535, 266 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    Serlin, C

    M. Serlin, C. Tschirhart, H. Polshyn, Y. Zhang, J. Zhu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Balents, and A. Young, Science (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    A. L. Sharpe, E. J. Fox, A. W. Barnard, J. Finney, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. A. Kastner, and D. Goldhaber-Gordon, Science 365, 605 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Polshyn, J

    H. Polshyn, J. Zhu, M. Kumar, Y. Zhang, F. Yang, C. Tschirhart, M. Serlin, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. MacDonald, et al., Nature , 1 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    C. L. Tschirhart, M. Serlin, H. Polshyn, A. Shragai, Z. Xia, J. Zhu, Y. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. E. Huber, and A. F. Young, Science 372, 1323 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abd3190

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    J. Liu, Z. Ma, J. Gao, and X. Dai, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031021 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Liu and X

    J. Liu and X. Dai, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 367 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Q. Li, H. Fan, M. Li, Y. Xu, J. Song, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, H. Jiang, X. C. Xie, J. Hone, C. Dean, Y. Zhao, J. Liu, and L. Wang, Transdimensional anomalous hall effect in rhombohedral thin graphite (2025), arXiv:2505.03891 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    A. K. Dutta, Phys. Rev. 90, 187 (1953)

    1953

  11. [20]

    S. C. de la Barrera, S. Aronson, Z. Zheng, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Q. Ma, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and R. Ashoori, Nature Physics 18, 771 (2022)

    2022

  12. [22]

    T. Han, Z. Lu, G. Scuri, J. Sung, J. Wang, T. Han, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, H. Park, and L. Ju, Nature Nanotechnology 19, 181 (2024)

    2024

  13. [23]

    K. Liu, J. Zheng, Y. Sha, B. Lyu, F. Li, Y. Park, Y. Ren, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Jia, W. Luo, Z. Shi, J. Jung, and 20 G. Chen, Nature nanotechnology 19, 188 (2024)

    2024

  14. [24]

    Z. Dong, M. Davydova, O. Ogunnaike, and L. Levitov, Phys. Rev. B 107, 075108 (2023)

    2023

  15. [25]

    J.-X. Lin, Y. Wang, N. J. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and J. I. A. Li, Spontaneous momentum polarization and diodicity in bernal bilayer graphene (2023), arXiv:2302.04261 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [26]

    H. Zhou, T. Xie, A. Ghazaryan, T. Holder, J. R. Ehrets, E. M. Spanton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, E. Berg, M. Serbyn, et al., Nature 598, 429 (2021)

    2021

  17. [27]

    H. Zhou, L. Holleis, Y. Saito, L. Cohen, W. Huynh, C. L. Patterson, F. Yang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Science 375, 774 (2022), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abm8386

    2022 doi

  18. [28]

    Zhang, R

    Y. Zhang, R. Polski, A. Thomson, ´E. Lantagne-Hurtubise, C. Lewandowski, H. Zhou, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Alicea, and S. Nadj-Perge, Nature 613, 268 (2023)

    2023

  19. [29]

    C. Li, F. Xu, B. Li, J. Li, G. Li, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, J. Shen, L. Lu, J. Jia, F. Wu, X. Liu, and T. Li, Nature 631, 300 (2024)

    2024

  20. [31]

    Z. Guo, X. Lu, B. Xie, and J. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 110, 075109 (2024)

    2024

  21. [32]

    See Supplementary Materials for: (a) details of the device fabrication and transport measurements of 9-layer rhombohedral graphene, (b) quantum oscillation data for the different symmetry-breaking states, (c) estimate of vertical mean free path, (d) details of the continuum mo...

  22. [33]

    Li et al., Manuscript in preparation (2025)

    Q. Li et al., Manuscript in preparation (2025)

    2025

  23. [34]

    Liu and L

    J. Liu and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 087202 (2017)

    2017

  24. [35]

    Artyukhin, K

    S. Artyukhin, K. T. Delaney, N. A. Spaldin, and M. Mostovoy, Nature materials 13, 42 (2014)

    2014

  25. [36]

    Q. N. Meier, M. Lilienblum, S. M. Griffin, K. Conder, E. Pomjakushina, Z. Yan, E. Bourret, D. Meier, F. Lichtenberg, E. K. H. Salje, N. A. Spaldin, M. Fiebig, and A. Cano, Phys. Rev. X 7, 041014 (2017)

    2017

  26. [37]

    B. Qin, C. Ma, Q. Guo, X. Li, W. Wei, C. Ma, Q. Wang, F. Liu, M. Zhao, G. Xue, J. Qi, M. Wu, H. Hong, L. Du, Q. Zhao, P. Gao, X. Wang, E. Wang, G. Zhang, C. Liu, and K. Liu, Science 385, 99 (2024), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.ado6038

    2024 doi

  27. [38]

    Masubuchi, M

    S. Masubuchi, M. Ono, K. Yoshida, K. Hirakawa, and T. Machida, Applied Physics Letters 94 (2009)

    2009

  28. [39]

    H. Li, Z. Ying, B. Lyu, A. Deng, L. Wang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and Z. Shi, Nano letters 18, 8011 (2018)

    2018

  29. [40]

    L. Wang, I. Meric, P. Y. Huang, Q. Gao, Y. Gao, H. Tran, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, L. M. Campos, D. A. Muller, J. Guo, P. Kim, J. Hone, K. L. Shepard, and C. R. Dean, Science 342, 614 (2013)

    2013

  30. [41]

    J. C. Slater and G. F. Koster, Phys. Rev. 94, 1498 (1954)

    1954

  31. [42]

    Moon and M

    P. Moon and M. Koshino, Phys. Rev. B 90, 155406 (2014)

    2014

  32. [43]

    Y. Jang, Y. Park, J. Jung, and H. Min, Phys. Rev. B 108, L041101 (2023)

    2023

  33. [44]

    J. Y. Lee, E. Khalaf, S. Liu, X. Liu, Z. Hao, P. Kim, and A. Vishwanath, Nature communications 10, 5333 (2019)

    2019

  34. [45]

    Gonzalez, F

    J. Gonzalez, F. Guinea, and V. M. A. H., Nuclear Physics B 424, 595 (1994)

    1994

  35. [46]

    D. C. Elias, R. Gorbachev, A. Mayorov, S. Morozov, A. Zhukov, P. Blake, L. Ponomarenko, I. Grigorieva, K. Novoselov, F. Guinea, et al., Nature Physics 7, 701 (2011)

    2011

  36. [47]

    Vafek and J

    O. Vafek and J. Kang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 257602 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.