Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Modifying electronic and structural properties of 2D van der Waals materials via cavity quantum vacuum fluctuations: A first-principles QEDFT study

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 Cavity vacuum fluctuations can statically tune band gaps, interlayer spacing, and ferroelectric properties of two-dimensional van der Waals materials.

desk verdict First QEDFT scan of 2D vdW materials finds polarization-dependent charge localization with real consequences; the numbers come from an approximate functional that deserves a benchmark before you bet on the direct-indirect transition. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16992 v1 pith:CCJ5Y5E5 submitted 2025-07-22 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics

Hang Liu , Simone Latini , I-Te Lu , Dongbin Shin , Angel Rubio This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hallphysics.optics
keywords cavityquantumelectrodynamicsQEDFTtwo-dimensionalmaterialsvanderWaalsvacuumfluctuationschargelocalizationbandgaptuningnonlinearHalleffect
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 argues that placing a low-dimensional material inside an optical cavity changes its equilibrium properties even without any real photons: the vacuum fluctuations of the confined field push electron density to localize along the cavity polarization direction. Using quantum-electrodynamical density functional theory (QEDFT) with an LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation functional, the authors find this charge localization in a 1D hydrogen chain, monolayer h-BN and 2H-MoS2, and bilayers of 2H-MoS2 and Td-MoTe2. The localization renormalizes band edges, so gaps shrink or grow with coupling strength; an out-of-plane polarized mode turns monolayer 2H-MoS2 from a direct to an indirect gap semiconductor at a coupling of roughly $\lambda/\omega \approx 0.11$. In bilayers, out-of-plane photons compress interlayer spacing while in-plane photons expand it, which in turn tunes the ferroelectric dipole of Td-MoTe2 and its nonlinear Hall and injection-current responses. The predicted effects are claimed to be within reach of existing phonon- and plasmon-polariton cavities, up to $\lambda/\omega \approx 0.3$.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the electron-photon exchange-correlation functional of QEDFT in the local density approximation, built on the minimal-coupling Hamiltonian $\hat{p} - \hat{A}$. The functional depends only on the ratio $\lambda/\omega$ of the mode strength to photon frequency, so the paper uses $\lambda/\omega$ as the single coupling parameter. The mechanism it encodes is dynamical charge localization: the vacuum field fluctuations modify the ground-state density along the polarization vectors, and because the functional is orbital- and polarization-dependent, the resulting band, force, and current renormalizations inherit that anisotropy. This is the object that turns a cavity configuration into predicted changes in gaps, interlayer spacing, ferroelectric dipoles, Berry curvature dipoles, and injection currents.

What would settle it

Embed a monolayer 2H-MoS2 in a phonon-polariton or plasmon-polariton cavity with clearly characterized out-of-plane polarization and coupling near $\lambda/\omega \approx 0.2$, and measure the optical absorption edge: the theory predicts a roughly 0.22 eV redshift relative to the bare monolayer and a direct-to-indirect transition already at $\lambda/\omega \approx 0.11$. Observing no shift, a blueshift, or a transition at a substantially different coupling would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that cavity vacuum fluctuations induce a universal charge localization along the photon polarization direction in low-dimensional materials, and this single mechanism controls a broad set of material responses. For out-of-plane (z) polarized photons, electrons accumulate at the atoms along z, which raises the valence band at $\Gamma$ in monolayer 2H-MoS2 by 0.58 eV at $\lambda/\omega = 0.5$ and converts the 1.71 eV direct gap into a 1.18 eV indirect gap; for in-plane (x,y) polarized photons, electrons localize in-plane, leaving the gap direct but smaller. In bilayers the same localization changes interlayer spacing—lowering it for z polarization and raising it for x,y polarization—so the band gap, the out-of-plane ferroelectric dipole of Td-MoTe2, the Berry curvature dipole, and the injection current all become functions of coupling strength and polarization. The authors further claim a universal low-coupling scaling $E_g(\lambda/\omega) = E_g(0) + \kappa (\lambda/\omega)^2$ with polarization-dependent coefficients $\kappa$.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation leans on a local-density approximation for electron-photon exchange-correlation, and the van der Waals correction between layers is applied without photon-induced updates; if that functional misplaces or overestimates the vacuum-induced charge localization, the predicted shifts in gaps, spacings, and dipoles would not occur at the claimed sizes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Monolayer 2H-MoS2 in a z-polarized cavity should show a measurable direct-to-indirect gap transition once $\lambda/\omega$ reaches about 0.11, with a 0.22 eV gap reduction at $\lambda/\omega = 0.2$.
  • Bilayer 2H-MoS2 and Td-MoTe2 interlayer spacing can be decreased or increased by choosing out-of-plane versus in-plane cavity polarization, which is a static, contact-free alternative to pressure.
  • The ferroelectric dipole of bilayer Td-MoTe2 grows under out-of-plane coupling and shrinks under in-plane coupling, giving a cavity knob for switchable polarization.
  • The Berry curvature dipole peak and the 0.70 eV injection-current peak in bilayer Td-MoTe2 can be shifted and resized (by up to 50% for the injection current) at $\lambda/\omega = 0.2$.
  • All effects scale quadratically with $\lambda/\omega$ at low coupling, so even experimentally modest couplings around 0.1 should produce observable changes in absorption or spacing.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The analogy with pressure effects suggests that any 2D material known to be pressure-sensitive, not just the ones studied here, might be tunable by cavity vacuum fields; the paper hints at this via its comparison with pressure studies but does not compute a pressure-equivalent calibration.
  • Two in-plane modes with unequal strengths would break the in-plane symmetry of the crystal, potentially inducing effects such as valley population imbalance or a nonzero $D_x$ Berry curvature dipole; the authors mention this possibility but do not calculate it.
  • A cleaner test of the underlying mechanism would be to measure the predicted charge redistribution directly, for instance by electron microscopy of a cavity-embedded monolayer, where the theory expects polarization-dependent electron accumulation at specific atoms.
  • The universality claim could be checked on gapless systems like graphene or on correlated materials such as 1T-TaS2, where even a small cavity-induced density shift might alter the charge-density-wave transition temperature; this is an extrapolation beyond the paper's explicit examples.
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 paper presents QEDFT calculations—using an in-house modified Quantum Espresso code with the LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation functional—for the 1D hydrogen chain, monolayer h-BN, monolayer and bilayer 2H-MoS2, and bilayer Td-MoTe2 coupled to one out-of-plane (z) polarized cavity mode or two in-plane (x,y) polarized modes at a fixed photon energy of 0.1 eV. The central findings are that cavity vacuum fluctuations induce charge localization along the photon polarization directions, which narrows or broadens bands, shifts valley energies, tunes band gaps (including a direct-to-indirect transition in monolayer 2H-MoS2 at λ/ω ≈ 0.11), modifies interlayer spacing in bilayers in a polarization-dependent manner, and changes ferroelectric dipole, Berry curvature dipole, and injection current in bilayer Td-MoTe2. The paper also provides quadratic fits for band-gap evolution in the weak-coupling regime and estimates an experimentally accessible coupling range.

Significance. If correct, the paper would establish a general and computationally tractable mechanism for statically controlling electronic and structural properties of 2D van der Waals materials through cavity vacuum fields, extending first-principles QEDFT from molecules and 3D crystals to layered systems. The systematic scan over materials, polarizations, and coupling strengths, together with the concrete predictions (critical λ/ω, band-gap shifts of ~0.5 eV, polarization-dependent interlayer spacing), is a useful contribution to the cavity-materials-engineering literature. The main limitations are that the quantitative predictions rest on an approximate LDA electron-photon exchange functional whose frequency scaling is unvalidated, and that no input data or code is released, which hinders independent reproducibility and benchmarking.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, third paragraph] The statement 'This implies that QEDFT yields the same outcomes for different values of λ_β and ω_β as long as their ratio remains the same' attributes to QEDFT a scaling property that in fact holds only for the specific LDA electron-photon exchange functional used here, not for the exact QEDFT functional. Exact QEDFT ground states depend on the absolute photon frequency through matter–photon energy denominators (e.g., ω − Δε), so the ratio-only scaling is an uncontrolled approximation. This is load-bearing because all phase diagrams (Figs. 1g, 2f, 3e–f, 4e–f) and the experimental estimates in Section 3 (which cite phonon- and plasmon-polariton cavities with ω different from 0.1 eV) are expressed solely in terms of λ/ω. Please (i) rephrase the text to make explicit that the ratio scaling is a property of the LDA electron-photon functional, and (ii) provide a numerical test at a second absolute photon energy (e.g., 0.05 eV and 0.2 eV) for a representative case, such as monolayer 2H-MoS2 with the z-polarized mode at λ/ω = 0.2, showing that the density change and band-gap shift are unchanged within numerical accuracy, or quantify the deviation. Without such a test, the transfer of the predicted threshold λ/ω = 0.11 to the cavities invoked in the paper is not established.
  2. [Section 2 (Grimme-D3 paragraph) and Section 3 (paragraph after Fig. 3)] The interlayer-spacing results are obtained with an unmodified Grimme-D3 correction, and the paper explicitly notes that the electron-photon functional does not modify the vdW parametrization. Nevertheless, the conclusion that 'fluctuating cavity photons modulate vdW interactions' is presented as the mechanism for the spacing changes. As computed, the spacing changes arise from the electron-photon forces acting on the ions through the LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation potential, not from a cavity-modified dispersion term; calling this a modification of vdW interactions is an interpretation rather than a demonstrated microscopic mechanism. To substantiate the 'vdW engineering' claim, please test the sensitivity of the interlayer spacing to the D3 parameters (for example, a ±10% rescaling of the C6 coefficients) at one representative coupling, or alternatively analyze whether the photon-induced force is dominated by electrostatic charge redistribution rather than by a change in dispersion forces.
  3. [Section 2 and Section 3 (quantitative predictions)] No benchmark of the LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation functional is provided for the systems studied; the quantitative predictions—ΔEg = 0.53 eV for monolayer 2H-MoS2, the critical λ/ω = 0.11, and the 50.5% enhancement of injection current in bilayer Td-MoTe2—therefore carry unknown errors. The functional is derived from the homogeneous electron gas in a cavity, and its accuracy for gapped 2D semiconductors is not self-evident. Please add a validation on a small system where exact or wavefunction QED results are available (e.g., H2 or a one-dimensional chain in a cavity), or at least compare the LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation potential against an exact reference for a model 2D system. This is necessary to support the 'quantitative predictions' wording used in Section 3.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The phrase 'state-of-the-art QEDFT' overstates the level of the electron-photon exchange-correlation approximation; suggest 'QEDFT with the LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation approximation' or similar.
  2. [Figure 1(g) and accompanying text] The text states that at λ/ω = 0.5 the in-plane xy modes give ΔE_xy ~ 3ΔE_z, but the quadratic fits in the regime 0 ≤ λ/ω ≤ 0.1 give κ_z = 6.85 eV and κ_xy = 1.25 eV, i.e., the z mode has the larger effect at small coupling. Please clarify whether the ordering changes because the quadratic fit is valid only up to 0.1, and if so, state the crossover coupling strength or note the limited fit range explicitly.
  3. [References] References [37] and [45] appear to be the same article (C. Schäfer et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118, e2110464118 (2021)). Please merge or correct the duplication.
  4. [Section 2, last paragraph of Computational methods] The sentence 'The electron-photon exchange potential has a weight of 1 for each photon mode' is unclear; please specify whether this refers to the occupation factor in the LDA construction and how it scales with the number of modes.
  5. [Data Availability Statement] The statement that data are 'not publicly available at this time' is a hindrance to reproducibility for a first-principles study; depositing the input files, pseudopotentials, and Wannier90 outputs would strengthen the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported band-gap shifts, direct-indirect transition, interlayer-spacing changes, and ferroelectric/nonlinear-response modifications are self-consistent QEDFT outputs rather than restatements of the functional's inputs or fitted target properties.

full rationale

The central predictions of the paper are numerical outputs of a QEDFT calculation with a fixed photon energy of 0.1 eV and variable mode strength λ, and with specified polarization vectors. Nothing in the derivation forces the band-gap transition at λ/ω ≈ 0.11, the ΔEg ≈ 0.5 eV shifts in 2H-MoS2, or the polarization-dependent interlayer-spacing changes; these emerge from the self-consistent Kohn-Sham solution and are not imposed as targets. The quadratic κ coefficients shown in Figs. 1(g), 2(f), and 3(f) are explicitly labeled 'numerical fitting' in the small-coupling regime, and the paper independently notes that this scaling is consistent with the low-coupling behavior of the adopted electron-photon exchange functional. The statement in Sec. 2 that QEDFT yields the same outcomes for equal λ/ω is clearly presented as a consequence of the LDA electron-photon exchange functional's functional dependence, not as an exact-QEDFT theorem and not as a fitted prediction. Whether exact QEDFT ground states of gapped materials depend on absolute ω is a legitimate validity and transferability question for the LDA functional, but it is a correctness or benchmarking concern, not a circular reduction: the paper does not define its predicted effects in terms of the same ratio it claims to predict. The method rests on prior work by the same group (Refs. [39,40,45]) for the electron-photon LDA exchange-correlation functional, and that citation is load-bearing in the practical sense that the calculations use that functional. However, the cited functional is a parameter-free LDA approximation with stated assumptions and does not itself encode the target material-specific results; it is therefore independent evidence rather than an unverified self-citation chain. The paper also discloses several limitations — the LDA electron-photon functional does not include photon-induced corrections to the Grimme-D3 vdW parametrization, excitonic effects are omitted because QED-BSE still needs to be developed, and data are not publicly released. These caveats weaken the quantitative claims but do not make any prediction equivalent to an input by construction. Overall, no specific step in the derivation reduces, by the paper's own equations or by the cited prior work, to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the approximate electron-photon functional and the idealized cavity model. No new physical entities are proposed.

free parameters (2)
  • Photon energy ω = 0.1 eV
    Chosen for all calculations; the results are reported in terms of λ/ω, but the absolute energy sets the cavity mode frequency and may affect the validity of the low-energy approximation.
  • Light-matter coupling strength λ/ω = 0 to 0.5 (scanned)
    Varies from 0 to 0.5 to explore tunability; experimental estimate is 0.03 to 0.3. Not fitted to a target, but a control parameter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The LDA electron-photon exchange-correlation functional from Refs. [39,40,45] is accurate for 2D materials in cavities.
    The paper relies on this approximate functional without validation against higher-level methods or experiment.
  • domain assumption The minimal coupling Hamiltonian with one or two photon modes is sufficient.
    Real cavities have many modes and losses; the paper idealizes to one or two modes.
  • domain assumption The Grimme-D3 vdW correction, parameterized for free space, remains valid for cavity-modified densities.
    The paper states the electron-photon functional does not include photon-induced corrections on vdW parametrization, yet uses D3 for interlayer forces.
  • domain assumption The PBE functional accurately describes exchange-correlation in these 2D semimetals and semiconductors.
    PBE is a standard DFT approximation; its accuracy for the specific band gaps and interlayer properties is not benchmarked here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modifying electronic and structural properties of 2D van der Waals materials via cavity quantum vacuum fluctuations: A first-principles QEDFT study." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CCJ5Y5E5

@misc{pith2026250716992,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modifying electronic and structural properties of 2D van der Waals materials via cavity quantum vacuum fluctuations: A first-principles QEDFT study},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CCJ5Y5E5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16992}
}
abstract

Structuring the photon density of states and light-matter coupling in optical cavities has emerged as a promising approach to modifying the equilibrium properties of materials through strong light-matter interactions. In this article, we employ state-of-the-art quantum electrodynamical density functional theory (QEDFT) to study the modifications of the electronic and structural properties of two-dimensional (2D) van der Waals (vdW) layered materials by the cavity vacuum field fluctuations. We find that cavity photons modify the electronic density through localization along the photon polarization directions, a universal effect observed for all the 2D materials studied here. This modification of the electronic structure tunes the material properties, such as the shifting of energy valleys in monolayer h-BN and 2H-MoS$_2$, enabling tunable band gaps. Also, it tunes the interlayer spacing in bilayer 2H-MoS$_2$ and T$_\text{d}$-MoTe$_2$, allowing for adjustable ferroelectric, nonlinear Hall effect, and optical properties, as a function of light-matter coupling strength. Our findings open an avenue for engineering a broad range of 2D layered quantum materials by tuning vdW interactions through fluctuating cavity photon fields.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16992 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Hydrogen chain and monolayer BN coupled to linearly polarized cavity photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Monolayer 2H-MoS2 coupled to linearly polarized cavity photons. The coupling strength is 𝜆 𝜔 = 0.5 in panels (a)-(e) for the case with light-matter coupling. (a,b) Cavity-induced variation of the electron density in 2H-MoS2 coupled to (a) a photon polarized along out-of-plane (𝑧) direction and (b) two photons polarized along in-plane (𝑥 and 𝑦) directions. (c,d) Electronic bands and PDOS of 2H-MoS2 coupled to (c) the… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Bilayer 2H-MoS2 coupled to linearly polarized cavity photons. The coupling strength is 𝜆 𝜔 = 0.5 in panels (a)-(d) for the case with light-matter coupling. (a,b) Cavity-induced variation of electron density in the bilayer 2H-MoS2 coupled to (a) a photon polarized along out-of-plane 𝑧 direction and (b) two photons polarized along in-plane 𝑥 and 𝑦 directions. (c) Electronic bands modified by the mode with 𝑧 polarizati… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Bilayer Td-MoTe2 coupled to linearly polarized cavity photons. The coupling strength is 𝜆 𝜔 = 0.2 in panels (a)-(d) for the case with light-matter coupling. (a,b) Cavity-induced variation of electron density in the bilayer Td-MoTe2 coupled to (a) a photon polarized alo…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cavity-modified (a,b) Berry curvature dipole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Strongly correlated electron-photon systems,

    J. Bloch, A. Cavalleri, V. Galitski,et al., “Strongly correlated electron-photon systems,” Nature606, 41 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Nonlinear phononics as an ultrafast route to lattice control,

    M. Först, C. Manzoni, S. Kaiser,et al., “Nonlinear phononics as an ultrafast route to lattice control,” Nat. Phys.7, 854 (2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Nonlocal nonlinear phononics,

    M. Henstridge, M. Först, E. Rowe,et al., “Nonlocal nonlinear phononics,” Nat. Phys.18, 457–461 (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Towards properties on demand in quantum materials,

    D. N. Basov, R. D. Averitt, and D. Hsieh, “Towards properties on demand in quantum materials,” Nat. Mater.16, 1077 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Engineering crystal structures with light,

    A. S. Disa, T. F. Nova, and A. Cavalleri, “Engineering crystal structures with light,” Nat. Phys.17, 1087 (2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Polariton panorama,

    D. N. Basov, A. Asenjo-Garcia, P. J. Schuck,et al., “Polariton panorama,” Nanophotonics10, 549 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    An ultrafast symmetry switch in a Weyl semimetal,

    E. J. Sie, C. M. Nyby, C. D. Pemmaraju,et al., “An ultrafast symmetry switch in a Weyl semimetal,” Nature565, 61–66 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Manipulating Weyl quasiparticles by orbital-selective photoexcitation in WTe2,

    M. X. Guan, E. Wang, P. W. You,et al., “Manipulating Weyl quasiparticles by orbital-selective photoexcitation in WTe2,” Nat. Commun.12, 1885 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Terahertz field-induced metastable magnetization near criticality in FePS3,

    B. Ilyas, T. Luo, A. von Hoegen,et al., “Terahertz field-induced metastable magnetization near criticality in FePS3,” Nature 636, 609 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    Terahertz field-induced ferroelectricity in quantum paraelectric SrTiO3,

    X. Li, T. Qiu, J. Zhang,et al., “Terahertz field-induced ferroelectricity in quantum paraelectric SrTiO3,” Science364, 1079–1082 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Metastable ferroelectricity in optically strained SrTiO3,

    T. F. Nova, A. S. Disa, M. Fechner, and A. Cavalleri, “Metastable ferroelectricity in optically strained SrTiO3,” Science 364, 1075–1079 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Simulating terahertz field-induced ferroelectricity in quantum paraelectric srtio3,

    D. Shin, S. Latini, C. Schäfer,et al., “Simulating terahertz field-induced ferroelectricity in quantum paraelectric srtio3,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 167401 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    Possible light-induced superconductivity in K3C60 at high temperature,

    M. Mitrano, A. Cantaluppi, D. Nicoletti,et al., “Possible light-induced superconductivity in K3C60 at high temperature,” Nature530, 461–464 (2016). 12

    2016

  6. [14]

    Photo-induced superconductivity,

    A. Cavalleri, “Photo-induced superconductivity,” Contemp. Phys.59, 31–46 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Colloquium: Nonthermal pathways to ultrafast control in quantum materials,

    A. De La Torre, D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen,et al., “Colloquium: Nonthermal pathways to ultrafast control in quantum materials,” Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 041002 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Light-inducedemergentphenomenain2Dmaterialsandtopologicalmaterials,

    C.Bao,P.Tang,D.Sun,andS.Zhou,“Light-inducedemergentphenomenain2Dmaterialsandtopologicalmaterials,” Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 33–48 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Floquet dynamics in light-driven solids,

    M. Nuske, L. Broers, B. Schulte,et al., “Floquet dynamics in light-driven solids,” Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043408 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Mapping light-dressed floquet bands by highly nonlinear optical excitations and valley polarization,

    A. Galler, A. Rubio, and O. Neufeld, “Mapping light-dressed floquet bands by highly nonlinear optical excitations and valley polarization,” The J. Phys. Chem. Lett.14, 11298–11304 (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Manipulating matter by strong coupling to vacuum fields,

    F. J. Garcia-Vidal, C. Ciuti, and T. W. Ebbesen, “Manipulating matter by strong coupling to vacuum fields,” Science 373, eabd0336 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    Engineering quantum materials with chiral optical cavities,

    H. Hübener, U. De Giovannini, C. Schäfer,et al., “Engineering quantum materials with chiral optical cavities,” Nat. Mater. 20, 438–442 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Quantum materials engineering by structured cavity vacuum fluctuations,

    H. Hübener, E. V. Boström, M. Claassen,et al., “Quantum materials engineering by structured cavity vacuum fluctuations,” Mater. for Quantum Technol.4, 023002 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    Cavity engineering of solid-state materials without external driving,

    I.-T. Lu, D. Shin, M. K. Svendsen,et al., “Cavity engineering of solid-state materials without external driving,” Adv. Opt. Photon.17, 441–525 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Breakdown of topological protection by cavity vacuum fields in the integer quantum hall effect,

    F. Appugliese, J. Enkner, G. L. Paravicini-Bagliani,et al., “Breakdown of topological protection by cavity vacuum fields in the integer quantum hall effect,” Science375, 1030–1034 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    Weakened topological protection of the quantum hall effect in a cavity,

    V. Rokaj, J. Wang, J. Sous,et al., “Weakened topological protection of the quantum hall effect in a cavity,” Phys Rev Lett 131, 196602 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Cavity-mediated thermal control of metal-to-insulator transition in 1T-TaS2,

    G. Jarc, S. Y. Mathengattil, A. Montanaro,et al., “Cavity-mediated thermal control of metal-to-insulator transition in 1T-TaS2,” Nature622, 487–492 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Structure and control of charge density waves in two-dimensional 1T-TaS2,

    A. W. Tsen, R. Hovden, D. Wang,et al., “Structure and control of charge density waves in two-dimensional 1T-TaS2,” Proc. National Acad. Sci.112, 15054–15059 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Cavity quantum materials,

    F. Schlawin, D. M. Kennes, and M. A. Sentef, “Cavity quantum materials,” Appl. Phys. Rev.9, 011312 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Band gap in graphene induced by vacuum fluctuations,

    O. V. Kibis, O. Kyriienko, and I. A. Shelykh, “Band gap in graphene induced by vacuum fluctuations,” Phys. Rev. B 84, 195413 (2011)

    2011

  21. [29]

    Cavity quantum electrodynamical chern insulator: Towards light-induced quantized anomalous hall effect in graphene,

    X. Wang, E. Ronca, and M. A. Sentef, “Cavity quantum electrodynamical chern insulator: Towards light-induced quantized anomalous hall effect in graphene,” Phys. Rev. B99, 235156 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    Berry phase and topology in ultrastrongly coupled quantum light-matter systems,

    K. Masuki and Y. Ashida, “Berry phase and topology in ultrastrongly coupled quantum light-matter systems,” Phys. Rev. B107, 195104 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Engineering topology in graphene with chiral cavities,

    C. B. Dag and V. Rokaj, “Engineering topology in graphene with chiral cavities,” Phys. Rev. B110, L121101 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    The ferroelectric photo ground state of SrTiO3: Cavity materials engineering,

    S. Latini, D. Shin, S. A. Sato,et al., “The ferroelectric photo ground state of SrTiO3: Cavity materials engineering,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA118, e2105618118 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Quantumelectrodynamiccontrolofmattercavity-enhancedferroelectric phase transition,

    Y.Ashida,A.m.c.İmamoğlu,J.Faist, et al.,“Quantumelectrodynamiccontrolofmattercavity-enhancedferroelectric phase transition,” Phys. Rev. X10, 041027 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Dynamic localization of a charged particle moving under the influence of an electric field,

    D. Dunlap and V. Kenkre, “Dynamic localization of a charged particle moving under the influence of an electric field,” Phys. Rev. B34, 3625 (1986)

    1986

  27. [35]

    Controlling the magnetic state of the proximate quantum spin liquid𝛼-RuCl3 with an optical cavity,

    E. Viñas Boström, A. Sriram, M. Claassen, and A. Rubio, “Controlling the magnetic state of the proximate quantum spin liquid𝛼-RuCl3 with an optical cavity,” npj Comput. Mater.9, 202 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Cavity-renormalized quantum criticality in a honeycomb bilayer antiferromagnet,

    L. Weber, E. Viñas Boström, M. Claassen,et al., “Cavity-renormalized quantum criticality in a honeycomb bilayer antiferromagnet,” Commun. Phys.6, 247 (2023)

    2023

  29. [38]

    A perspective on ab initio modeling of polaritonic chemistry: The role of non-equilibrium effects and quantum collectivity,

    D. Sidler, M. Ruggenthaler, C. Schäfer,et al., “A perspective on ab initio modeling of polaritonic chemistry: The role of non-equilibrium effects and quantum collectivity,” The J. Chem. Phys.156, 230901 (2022)

    2022

  30. [39]

    Electron-photon exchange-correlation approximation for quantum-electrodynamical density-functional theory,

    I.-T. Lu, M. Ruggenthaler, N. Tancogne-Dejean,et al., “Electron-photon exchange-correlation approximation for quantum-electrodynamical density-functional theory,” Phys. Rev. A109, 052823 (2024)

    2024

  31. [40]

    Cavity-enhanced superconductivity in MgB2 from first-principles quantum electrodynamics (QEDFT),

    I.-T. Lu, D. Shin, M. K. Svendsen,et al., “Cavity-enhanced superconductivity in MgB2 from first-principles quantum electrodynamics (QEDFT),” Proc. National Acad. Sci.121, e2415061121 (2024)

    2024

  32. [41]

    2d materials and van der waals heterostructures,

    K. S. Novoselov, A. Mishchenko, A. Carvalho, and A. H. C. Neto, “2d materials and van der waals heterostructures,” Science 353, aac9439 (2016)

    2016

  33. [42]

    Advancedcapabilitiesformaterialsmodellingwithquantumespresso,

    P.Giannozzi,O.Andreussi,T.Brumme, et al.,“Advancedcapabilitiesformaterialsmodellingwithquantumespresso,” J. Physics: Condens. Matter29, 465901 (2017)

    2017

  34. [43]

    Generalized gradient approximation made simple,

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, “Generalized gradient approximation made simple,” Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 3865–3868 (1996)

    1996

  35. [44]

    Octopus, a computational framework for exploring light-driven phenomena and quantum dynamics in extended and finite systems,

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, M. J. Oliveira, X. Andrade,et al., “Octopus, a computational framework for exploring light-driven phenomena and quantum dynamics in extended and finite systems,” The J. chemical physics152 (2020)

    2020

  36. [45]

    Making ab initio QED functional(s): Nonperturbative and photon-free effective frameworks for strong light–matter coupling,

    C. Schäfer, F. Buchholz, M. Penz,et al., “Making ab initio QED functional(s): Nonperturbative and photon-free effective frameworks for strong light–matter coupling,” Proc. National Acad. Sci.118, e2110464118 (2021)

    2021

  37. [46]

    A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H-Pu,

    S. Grimme, J. Antony, S. Ehrlich, and H. Krieg, “A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H-Pu,” The J. Chem. Phys.132, 154104 (2010)

    2010

  38. [47]

    Influence of out-of-plane response on optical properties of two-dimensional 13 materials: First principles approach,

    L. Matthes, O. Pulci, and F. Bechstedt, “Influence of out-of-plane response on optical properties of two-dimensional 13 materials: First principles approach,” Phys. Rev. B94, 205408 (2016)

    2016

  39. [48]

    Cavity control of excitons in two-dimensional materials,

    S. Latini, E. Ronca, U. De Giovannini,et al., “Cavity control of excitons in two-dimensional materials,” Nano Lett. 19, 3473–3479 (2019)

    2019

  40. [49]

    Electrically tuneable nonlinear anomalous hall effect in two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenides WTe2 and MoTe2,

    Y. Zhang, J. van den Brink, C. Felser, and B. Yan, “Electrically tuneable nonlinear anomalous hall effect in two-dimensional transition-metal dichalcogenides WTe2 and MoTe2,” 2D Mater.5, 044001 (2018)

    2018

  41. [50]

    Light-induced ideal Weyl semimetal in hgte via nonlinear phononics,

    D. Shin, A. Rubio, and P. Tang, “Light-induced ideal Weyl semimetal in hgte via nonlinear phononics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 016603 (2024)

    2024

  42. [51]

    Wannier90 as a community code: new features and applications,

    G. Pizzi, V. Vitale, R. Arita,et al., “Wannier90 as a community code: new features and applications,” J. Physics: Condens. Matter32, 165902 (2020)

    2020

  43. [52]

    Optoelectronic manifestation of orbital angular momentum driven by chiral hopping in helical Se chains,

    B. Kim, D. Shin, S. Namgung,et al., “Optoelectronic manifestation of orbital angular momentum driven by chiral hopping in helical Se chains,” ACS Nano17, 18873–18882 (2023)

    2023

  44. [53]

    Second-order optical response in semiconductors,

    J. E. Sipe and A. I. Shkrebtii, “Second-order optical response in semiconductors,” Phys. Rev. B61, 5337–5352 (2000)

    2000

  45. [54]

    Multiple photon field-induced topological states in bulk hgte,

    D. Shin, I.-T. Lu, B. Fan,et al., “Multiple photon field-induced topological states in bulk hgte,” arXiv:2506.23494

    arXiv

  46. [55]

    Equilibrium non-linear phononics by electric field fluctuations of terahertz cavities,

    E. V. Boström, M. H. Michael, C. Eckhardt, and A. Rubio, “Equilibrium non-linear phononics by electric field fluctuations of terahertz cavities,” arXiv:2409.19063

    arXiv

  47. [56]

    Reshaping the phonon energy landscape of nanocrystals inside a terahertz plasmonic nanocavity,

    X. Jin, A. Cerea, G. C. Messina,et al., “Reshaping the phonon energy landscape of nanocrystals inside a terahertz plasmonic nanocavity,” Nat. Commun.9, 763 (2018)

    2018

  48. [57]

    High-quality nanocavities through multimodal confinement of hyperbolic polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride,

    H. Herzig Sheinfux, L. Orsini, M. Jung,et al., “High-quality nanocavities through multimodal confinement of hyperbolic polaritons in hexagonal boron nitride,” Nat. Mater.23, 499 (2024)

    2024

  49. [58]

    Colloquium: Excitons in atomically thin transition metal dichalco- genides,

    G. Wang, A. Chernikov, M. M. Glazov,et al., “Colloquium: Excitons in atomically thin transition metal dichalco- genides,” Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 021001 (2018)

    2018

  50. [59]

    2D transition metal dichalcogenides,

    S. Manzeli, D. Ovchinnikov, D. Pasquier,et al., “2D transition metal dichalcogenides,” Nat. Rev. Mater.2, 17033 (2017)

    2017

  51. [60]

    The electronic properties of single-layer and multilayer MoS2 under high pressure,

    X. Fan, C.-H. Chang, W. T. Zheng,et al., “The electronic properties of single-layer and multilayer MoS2 under high pressure,” The J. Phys. Chem. C119, 10189–10196 (2015)

    2015

  52. [61]

    Thickness and strain effects on electronic structures of transition metal dichalcogenides: 2H-MX2 semiconductors (M = Mo, W; X = S, Se, Te),

    W. S. Yun, S. W. Han, S. C. Hong,et al., “Thickness and strain effects on electronic structures of transition metal dichalcogenides: 2H-MX2 semiconductors (M = Mo, W; X = S, Se, Te),” Phys. Rev. B85, 033305 (2012). 14

    2012

Pith tools

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