Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 8 minor 87 references

Anisotropic and tunable vortex topology in multiband iron-based superconductors

T0 review · 3 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that an x-oriented vortex in a low-spin-orbit iron-based superconductor hosts stable, unpaired Majorana zero modes over a wide chemical-potential range, even with Dirac nodes present and multiband entanglement, and that…

desk verdict The x-vortex idea is fresh and plausibly important, but the central phase diagram is only computed at kx=0, leaving the required kx=π check undone. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19096 v2 pith:CP3MFS22 submitted 2024-12-26 cond-mat.supr-con

Si-Qi Yu , Wei Cheng , Chuang Li , Xiao-Hong Pan , Gang Xu , Fu-Chun Zhang , Xin Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords Majoranazeromodesiron-basedsuperconductorsvortextopologymultibandsuperconductivitytopologicalcrystallineuniaxialstrainDiracnodesmirrorChernnumber
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 in multiband iron-based superconductors, the direction of the vortex line controls whether Majorana zero modes are stable. It shows that an x-vortex, oriented perpendicular to the Dirac axis, can have a phase diagram containing only conventional and topological superconducting phases when the spin-orbit coupling is low ($\lambda < A_3$), in contrast to the z-vortex's alternating gapless, topological-crystalline, and topological phases. In that simple regime, one unpaired Majorana zero mode sits in the vortex core across a wide chemical-potential range even while Dirac nodes remain in the electronic bands, and multiband entanglement does not destroy it. Uniaxial strain flips the sign of the anisotropy term $A'_3$ and switches between this simple diagram and a z-vortex-like complex diagram, providing a controllable knob. The paper's payoff is a plausible route to stable Majorana zero modes in iron-based nanowires and quantum devices.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the vortex line treated as a quasi-1D class D superconductor, with a vortex-phase-transition plane (VPTP) at the mirror-invariant $k_x = 0$ plane. Majorana zero modes appear when the $Z_2$ index changes sign across this plane and the quasi-1D system is fully gapped; the sign change is governed by a $\pi$ Berry phase on Fermi surfaces in the $M_x = +i$ mirror subspace. Mirror-x symmetry block-diagonalizes the six-band Hamiltonian on the VPTP, and the paper relies on the lowest band's Chern number being fixed at $-1$ in that subspace. The anisotropy is traced to how the Dirac nodes interact with the VPTP: for the x-vortex they sit inside it, and the transition from type I to type II Dirac nodes at $\lambda = A_3$ removes the $\pi$ Berry phase that would otherwise create gapless vortex phases. With strain, the mirror Chern numbers $(c_1, c_2) = (1,0)$ for $A'_3 > 0$ versus $(-1,2)$ for $A'_3 < 0$ determine whether the Berry phase crosses $\pi$ once or twice, producing the simple versus complex phase diagrams.

What would settle it

Angle-resolved photoemission on an iron-based superconductor could measure $\lambda$ and $A_3$ directly; if $\lambda$ is never found below $A_3$ in any accessible composition, the predicted low-SOC x-vortex phase cannot be realized. A second test is strain-tuned scanning tunneling microscopy on an a-axis-oriented FeSC nanowire: if uniaxial strain with $A'_3 > 0$ does not produce a zero-bias conductance peak at both ends of the wire across a broad chemical-potential range, the simple phase diagram would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the x-vortex configuration—a vortex line running along the x-direction, perpendicular to the $\Gamma$–$Z$ Dirac axis—has two distinct topological phase diagrams, and the simpler one is unique to this orientation. With $C_{4z}$ symmetry intact and low spin-orbit coupling ($\lambda < A_3$), the Dirac nodes become type II, their Fermi surfaces become non-closed, and the $\pi$ Berry phase that would normally generate gapless vortex phases becomes ill-defined; the phase diagram then collapses to a conventional region and a topological superconducting region. The topological region hosts one unpaired Majorana zero mode per vortex in the $C_{2x} = -1$ mirror subspace, stable even when Dirac and topological-insulator bands coexist. When strain breaks $C_{4z}$, the sign of $A'_3 = t'_{3x}\cos k_x - t'_{3y}\cos k_y$ selects which diagram appears: $A'_3 > 0$ preserves the simple Fu–Kane-like phase structure in the low-SOC limit, while $A'_3 < 0$ reproduces the z-vortex-like sequence of conventional, topological crystalline, and topological superconducting phases. The paper further shows that the simple phase diagram is resilient to the multiband entanglement that destabilizes z-vortex Majorana modes.

Load-bearing premise

The results stand on the assumption that real iron-based superconductors can be placed in the low spin-orbit coupling regime ($\lambda < A_3$, where $A_3$ sets the topological-insulator gap) and that uniaxial strain flips the sign of the anisotropy term $A'_3$ as modeled; if materials always sit at high spin-orbit coupling, or strain does not flip that sign, the clean x-vortex Majorana phase does not occur in any known material. A second, deferred premise is that the lowest band's Chern number is fixed at $-1$ in the $M_x = +i$ subspace.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the low-spin-orbit x-vortex regime, unpaired Majorana zero modes appear over a wide chemical-potential range even when Dirac nodes coexist with topological-insulator bands, making the phase diagram insensitive to multiband entanglement.
  • Uniaxial strain flips the sign of A'_3 and switches the x-vortex between the simple two-phase diagram and the z-vortex-like complex diagram, adding a strain knob to Majorana physics in iron-based superconductors.
  • The x-vortex geometry matches the orientation of grown iron-based nanowires and nanoribbons, so Majorana zero modes should appear at both ends of such wires, amenable to tunneling-conductance correlation measurements.
  • In the high-spin-orbit regime with C4z symmetry, the x-vortex still shows gapless and Majorana vortex states split across C2x = +1 and -1 subspaces, connecting it to topological crystalline superconducting physics.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The same mirror-plane Berry-phase criterion suggests that other multiband superconductors with mirror symmetry and Dirac nodes on the vortex-phase-transition plane could exhibit the same clean x-vortex phase; the mechanism is not obviously limited to iron-based materials.
  • Editorial inference: The type-I-to-type-II Dirac transition at the crossover scale is a sharp feature that could serve as a smoking-gun signature; a band-structure study of Dirac-cone tilt under strain or doping would locate the simple phase without waiting for a full Majorana measurement.
  • Editorial inference: Since the simple phase requires weaker spin-orbit coupling and a sign-stable anisotropy term, materials among the iron-based family with intrinsically lighter pnictogen or chalcogen atoms are the most promising near-term targets for the proposed x-vortex devices.
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 / 8 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies the topology of vortex lines in a six-band BdG model of iron-based superconductors. It contrasts vortices along the z-axis (z-vortex) with vortices along the x-axis (x-vortex) and identifies a low-spin-orbit-coupling regime in which the x-vortex phase diagram contains only trivial and topological superconducting phases, supporting a single unpaired Majorana vortex despite the coexistence of Dirac and topological-insulator bands. With strain-induced C4z breaking, the sign of the inter-layer hopping A'_3 selects either this simple diagram or a complex z-vortex-like diagram. The authors explain the phase boundaries using Berry-phase and mirror-Chern-number arguments and propose x-vortex nanowires as a platform for Majorana-based quantum devices.

Significance. The central result is potentially significant: it identifies a vortex orientation that may circumvent the multiband entanglement that has complicated Majorana searches in FeSCs, and it predicts strain control of the vortex topology. The paper has genuine strengths: the model parameters are anchored to ARPES data (Ref. [55]), the phase diagrams are direct numerical outputs of the BdG Hamiltonian rather than fits, and the Berry-phase/Chern-number arguments provide testable organizing principles. The main reservation is that the decisive x-vortex invariant is only analyzed at the kx=0 mirror plane; until the kx=pi plane is shown to be trivial or included in the invariant, the headline 'simple' phase diagram is not yet established. The practical reach also depends on the physical realizability of the low-SOC regime and on the strain-hopping relation, which are assumed rather than demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Vortex topology with Dirac nodes / Vortex topology without C4z symmetry; Figs. 1(b), 3(b,c), 4] The authors state that MZMs in an x-vortex require both a sign change of the Z2 index between the mirror-invariant planes kx=0 and kx=pi and a fully gapped quasi-1D spectrum, but every phase diagram and Berry-phase calculation in the paper is performed only at kx=0. This is not a minor omission: the strain term defined in the text, A'_3 = t'_{3x} cos kx - t'_{3y} cos ky, changes sign between the two planes, so under the stated assumption t'_{3x}>t'_{3y}>0 the kx=pi plane satisfies A'_3(kx=pi,ky) = -t'_{3x} - t'_{3y} cos ky < 0 for all ky. The kx=pi plane thus lies entirely in the A'_3<0 regime that the paper associates with the complex z-vortex-like phase diagram. The kx=pi invariant and the full-kx gap structure must be computed before the simple A'_3>0 phase diagram can be claimed as the vortex-line topology. If this analysis exists in the supplementary material, it should be brought into the main text.
  2. [Vortex topology without C4z symmetry; Fig. 4] The assertion that the lowest band in the Mx=+i subspace always carries Chern number c3=-1, and the consequent result (c1,c2)=(1,0) for A'_3>0, is deferred to the supplementary material. This result is load-bearing: without it, the Berry-phase argument that the A'_3>0 diagram has only two phases (while A'_3<0 has two phase transitions in the second band) has no foundation. The main text should either prove this statement or reproduce the supplementary derivation in sufficient detail for the reader to verify it.
  3. [Theoretical model / Vortex topology without C4z symmetry] The physical realization of the predicted simple phase depends on two assumptions that are stated but not demonstrated: that the low-SOC regime (lambda < A3, with A3=1) is accessible in FeSCs, and that uniaxial strain reverses the sign of t'_{3x}-t'_{3y} in the manner assumed. The second assumption is particularly important because the entire 'tunable' claim rests on it, yet no microscopic derivation or estimate of the strain-hopping coupling is provided. I would like to see at least a quantitative estimate of the required strain, or a discussion of which candidate materials could plausibly reach lambda < A3, or both.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Theoretical model] The values of alpha, beta, t'_{3x}, t'_{3y}, and the coherence length xi are never specified, even though they enter Eq. (3) and the strain term; please list all parameters used in the figures.
  2. [Theoretical model, Eq. (3)] The expression TD(k) = A(sz sin kx + i sin ky) + A'_3 sx sin kz has a term 'i sin ky' with no Pauli matrix, which is dimensionally inconsistent as written; please correct this typo.
  3. [Introduction and discussion of Fig. 1] There are several typos: 'stabablity' in the introduction, 'lambda A3 o smaller' in the discussion of Fig. 1(b), and 'the lower ratio of MZMs evidence' should probably be 'the low ratio'.
  4. [References] References [55] and [85] are identical, and references [79] and [80] are identical; please deduplicate them.
  5. [Vortex topology without C4z symmetry] The text refers to 'A'_3 = t'_x cos kx - t'_y cos ky' and later 'A'_3 = t'_{3x} cos kx - t'_{3y} cos ky'; please use one consistent notation for the hopping amplitudes.
  6. [Vortex topology without C4z symmetry] The statement that the two phase transitions for A'_3<0 are 'placed in different C2z sections' seems to be a typo: for the x-vortex the relevant rotational symmetry is C2x, and the paper elsewhere assigns the sections by C2x.
  7. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption says the green dots indicate positions on the Fermi surface, but panels (c,d) plot Berry phase versus chemical potential; please clarify what is actually marked.
  8. [Fig. 3(f,g)] The DOS calculation reports lattice sizes Nx=120, Ny=60, Nz=30 but does not specify which directions use open versus periodic boundary conditions; please state this explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the x-vortex phase diagrams are numerical outputs of a fixed model, with only minor reliance on the authors' supplementary material for Chern-number lemmas.

full rationale

The derivation chain is: fix the six-band FeSC Hamiltonian parameters to ARPES data [55]; diagonalize the BdG Hamiltonian of an x-oriented vortex; read off zero-energy modes from the lowest eigenvalue on the kx=0 plane; and explain the resulting phase boundaries afterward with Berry phases and mirror Chern numbers. None of the phase boundaries are fitted parameters: the model parameters (C, M0, B, B3, A, A3, etc.) are stated before any vortex computation, and the phase diagrams are direct numerical outputs. The Chern-number statements ('the lowest band ... carries a Chern number of -1 in the Mx=+i subspace [77]', 'two phase transition points correspond to Berry phases of pi and 3pi [77]') are deferred to the authors' own supplementary material; this is a self-citation, but it is a mathematical lemma derived from the same Hamiltonian, not a fit or a renaming of the phase diagram. The reviewer's concern about the missing kx=pi plane is a completeness gap in proving the quasi-1D class-D winding, not a circular reduction. Accordingly no step equates an output to an input by construction; the central claim has independent content.

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

No new particles or forces are introduced; the x-vortex is a configuration of existing degrees of freedom, not an invented entity. The ledger is dominated by hand-chosen model parameters (some from prior ARPES work) and by topological claims whose proofs are deferred to the supplement. These are the main costs the reader pays upstream.

free parameters (5)
  • A3 = 1
    Sets the TI gap scale and defines the low/high SOC boundary (lambda vs A3); chosen by hand, not fitted to data.
  • Delta0 (superconducting gap amplitude) = 2
    Gap amplitude in the vortex ansatz Delta(r) = Delta0 tanh(r/xi)e^{i phi}; taken for calculation convenience (Ref [77]), not fitted.
  • A'_3 (strain-induced inter-layer hopping) = +/- A3 in Fig. 4; sign is the control
    The sign of A'_3 is the central control parameter that selects the simple vs z-like x-vortex phase diagram; magnitude chosen for illustration.
  • Six-band tight-binding parameters = C=4, D=0, D3=-2, M0=6, B=16, B3=-3, A=10
    Chosen to be consistent with ARPES on FeSeTe (Ref [55]); inputs from prior experiment, not fitted to the vortex results.
  • Coherence length xi = not stated in main text (supplementary [77])
    Sets the vortex core size in the gap profile; a hand-chosen scale that can affect finite-size numerics.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The six-band tight-binding model with s+- pairing and the stated parameters faithfully represents the low-energy electronic structure of iron-based superconductors.
    The entire calculation is performed in this model; if it misses essential physics such as orbital-dependent gaps or disorder, the phase diagrams may not apply to real FeSCs. Invoked in 'Theoretical model'.
  • domain assumption A vortex line along x can be treated as a quasi-1D class D system, and the existence of MZMs is governed by the Z2 index change at the mirror-invariant VPTP plus a fully gapped quasi-1D spectrum.
    Borrowed from Hosur et al. [79]; applied to the x-vortex without an independent derivation for the in-plane vortex geometry. Invoked in 'Vortex topology with Dirac nodes'.
  • ad hoc to paper The lowest band in the Mx=+i subspace always carries Chern number -1, and the Berry phase of the second band varies as described in the text.
    These load-bearing topological facts are used to explain the phase diagrams; their derivation is only in the missing supplementary material [77].
  • domain assumption Uniaxial strain is correctly modeled by A'_3 = t'_{3x} cos kx - t'_{3y} cos ky, with the sign controlled by compression or tension along x.
    The mapping from external strain to the sign of A'_3 is asserted, not derived from elasticity or ab initio calculation. Invoked in 'Vortex topology without C4z symmetry'.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anisotropic and tunable vortex topology in multiband iron-based superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CP3MFS22

@misc{pith2026241219096,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anisotropic and tunable vortex topology in multiband iron-based superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CP3MFS22}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19096}
}
read the original abstract

Building on the multiband nature of iron-based superconductors (FeSCs), we have uncovered pronounced anisotropy in Majorana vortex topology arising from the interaction between vortex orientation and multiple electronic topologies. This anisotropy manifests in two distinct vortex configurations: the z-vortex and x-vortex, oriented perpendicular and parallel to the Dirac axis (z-axis for FeSCs), respectively. The x-vortex exhibits a unique duality, displaying two distinct topological phase diagrams. One is strikingly simple, comprising only trivial and topological superconducting phases, and remains resilient to multiband entanglement. The other mirrors the z-vortex's complex diagram, featuring alternating trivial, topological crystalline and topological superconducting phases. Crucially, the former is exclusive to the x-vortex and supports unpaired Majorana vortices across a wide parameter range, even with Dirac nodes in electronic bands. Notably, uniaxial strain can modulate these x-vortex phases, enabling the x-vortex to support both stable Majorana vortices and rich exotic physics in a controllable manner. Moreover, we propose that the x-vortex offers promising advantages for developing iron-based superconducting quantum devices. Our findings introduce a novel paradigm in vortex topology within multiband superconducting systems, highlighting the x-vortex as a promising platform for exploring Majorana physics and advancing iron-based superconducting quantum technology.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19096 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic representation of the Brillouin zone [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a)-(c) The electronic band structure and Dirac points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Schematic diagram of the orbital. The right side of (a) illustrates lattice deformation along the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) and (b) show the electronic band structures for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. D. Christianson, E. A. Goremychkin, R. Osborn, S. Rosenkranz, M. D. Lumsden, C. D. Malliakas, I. S. Todorov, H. Claus, D. Y. Chung, M. G. Kanatzidis, R. I. Bewley, and T. Guidi, Nature 456, 930 (2008)

    2008

  2. [2]

    I. I. Mazin, D. J. Singh, M. D. Johannes, and M. H. Du, Physical Review Letters 101, 057003 (2008)

    2008

  3. [3]

    P. A. Lee and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 78, 144517 (2008)

    2008

  4. [4]

    Cvetkovic and Z

    V. Cvetkovic and Z. Tesanovic, Europhys. Lett.85, 37002 (2009)

    2009

  5. [5]

    Hanaguri, S

    T. Hanaguri, S. Niitaka, K. Kuroki, and H. Takagi, Sci- ence 328, 474 (2010)

    2010

  6. [6]

    D. Wang, J. Xu, Y.-Y. Xiang, and Q.-H. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 82, 184519 (2010)

    2010

  7. [7]

    Pietosa, D

    J. Pietosa, D. J. Gawryluk, R. Puzniak, A. Wisniewski, J. Fink-Finowicki, M. Kozlowski, and M. Berkowski, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 24, 265701 (2012)

    2012

  8. [8]

    S. V. Borisenko, V. B. Zabolotnyy, A. A. Kordyuk, D. V. Evtushinsky, T. K. Kim, I. V. Morozov, R. Follath, and B. B¨ uchner, Symmetry4, 251 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    W. Lin, Q. Li, B. C. Sales, S. Jesse, A. S. Sefat, S. V. Kalinin, and M. Pan, ACS Nano 7, 2634 (2013)

    2013

  2. [10]

    H. H. Chang, C. C. Chang, Y. Y. Chiang, J. Y. Luo, P. M. Wu, C. M. Tseng, Y. C. Lee, Y. R. Wu, Y. T. Hsieh, M. H. Wen, M. J. Wang, and M. K. Wu, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 27, 025015 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    Chen, C.-C

    T.-K. Chen, C.-C. Chang, H.-Y. Tang, H.-H. Chang, Y.- R. Wu, M.-H. Wen, Y.-C. Lee, M.-J. Wang, M.-K. Wu, F.-R. Chen, and D. V. Dyck, Mater. Res. Express 1, 015026 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    H. Miao, T. Qian, X. Shi, P. Richard, T. K. Kim, M. Hoesch, L. Y. Xing, X.-C. Wang, C.-Q. Jin, J.-P. Hu, and H. Ding, Nat Commun 6, 6056 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    P. K. Nag, R. Schlegel, D. Baumann, H.-J. Grafe, R. Beck, S. Wurmehl, B. B¨ uchner, and C. Hess, Sci Rep 6, 27926 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    S. S. Zhang, J.-X. Yin, G. Dai, H. Zheng, G. Chang, I. Belopolski, X. Wang, H. Lin, Z. Wang, C. Jin, and M. Z. Hasan, Phys. Rev. B 99, 161103 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    M. Chen, Q. Tang, X. Chen, Q. Gu, H. Yang, Z. Du, X. Zhu, E. Wang, Q.-H. Wang, and H.-H. Wen, Physical Review B 99, 014507 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    J.-X. Yin, S. Zhang, G. Dai, Y. Zhao, A. Kreisel, G. Macam, X. Wu, H. Miao, Z.-Q. Huang, J. H. Mar- tiny, B. Andersen, N. Shumiya, D. Multer, M. Litskevich, Z. Cheng, X. Yang, T. Cochran, G. Chang, I. Belopol- ski, L. Xing, X. Wang, Y. Gao, F.-C. Chuang, H. Lin, Z. Wang, C. Ji...

    2019

  9. [17]

    D. Wu, J. Jia, J. Yang, W. Hong, Y. Shu, T. Miao, H. Yan, H. Rong, P. Ai, X. Zhang, C. Yin, J. Liu, H. Chen, Y. Yang, C. Peng, C. Li, S. Zhang, F. Zhang, F. Yang, Z. Wang, N. Zong, L. Liu, R. Li, X. Wang, Q. Peng, H. Mao, G. Liu, S. Li, Y. Chen, H. Luo, X. Wu, Z. Xu, L. Zhao, ...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Iguchi, R

    Y. Iguchi, R. A. Shi, K. Kihou, C.-H. Lee, M. Barkman, 6 A. L. Benfenati, V. Grinenko, E. Babaev, and K. A. Moler, Science 380, 1244 (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Zheng, Q

    Y. Zheng, Q. Hu, H. Ji, I. Timoshuk, H. Xu, Y. Li, Y. Gao, X. Yu, R. Wu, X. Lu, K. Kihou, V. Gri- nenko, E. Babaev, N. F. Q. Yuan, B. Lv, and H. Ding, arXiv:2407.18610

    arXiv

  12. [20]

    Q. Z. Zhou, B. R. Chen, B. K. Xiang, I. Timoshuk, J. Ga- raud, Y. Li, K. Y. Liang, Q. S. He, Z. J. Li, P. H. Zhang, K. Z. Yao, H. X. Yao, V. Grinenko, and Y. H. Wang, arXiv:2408.05902

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    I. A. Nekrasov, Z. V. Pchelkina, and M. V. Sadovskii, Jetp Lett. 88, 543 (2008)

    2008

  14. [22]

    D. J. Singh, Phys. Rev. B 78, 094511 (2008)

    2008

  15. [23]

    Hao and J

    N. Hao and J. Hu, Physical Review X 4, 031053 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    Z. Ye, Y. Zhang, F. Chen, M. Xu, J. Jiang, X. Niu, C. Wen, L. Xing, X. Wang, C. Jin, B. Xie, and D. Feng, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031041 (2014)

    2014

  17. [26]

    S. V. Borisenko, D. V. Evtushinsky, Z.-H. Liu, I. Moro- zov, R. Kappenberger, S. Wurmehl, B. B¨ uchner, A. N. Yaresko, T. K. Kim, M. Hoesch, T. Wolf, and N. D. Zhigadlo, Nature Phys 12, 311 (2016)

    2016

  18. [27]

    X. Wu, S. Qin, Y. Liang, H. Fan, and J. Hu, Physical Review B 93, 115129 (2016)

    2016

  19. [28]

    Hao and J

    N. Hao and J. Hu, National Science Review 6, 213 (2019)

    2019

  20. [29]

    L. Chen, B. Liu, G. Xu, and X. Liu, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 023166 (2021)

    2021

  21. [30]

    S. Qin, C. Fang, F.-C. Zhang, and J. Hu, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011030 (2022)

    2022

  22. [31]

    X. Ma, G. Wang, R. Liu, T. Yu, Y. Peng, P. Zheng, and Z. Yin, Phys. Rev. B 106, 115114 (2022)

    2022

  23. [32]

    F. Yang, G. N. Phan, R. Zhang, J. Zhao, J. Li, Z. Lu, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, M. Ma, G. Gu, X. Dong, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Chinese Phys. Lett. 40, 017401 (2023)

    2023

  24. [33]

    Fu and C

    L. Fu and C. L. Kane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 096407 (2008)

    2008

  25. [34]

    G. Xu, B. Lian, P. Tang, X.-L. Qi, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 047001 (2016)

    2016

  26. [35]

    Zhang, K

    P. Zhang, K. Yaji, T. Hashimoto, Y. Ota, T. Kondo, K. Okazaki, Z. Wang, J. Wen, G. D. Gu, H. Ding, and S. Shin, Science 360, 182 (2018)

    2018

  27. [36]

    S. Qin, L. Hu, X. Wu, X. Dai, C. Fang, F.-C. Zhang, and J. Hu, Science Bulletin 64, 1207 (2019)

    2019

  28. [37]

    Hu and R.-X

    L.-H. Hu and R.-X. Zhang, Nat Commun 15, 2337 (2024)

    2024

  29. [38]

    L. Cao, G. Li, W. Liu, Y.-B. Liu, H. Chen, Y. Xing, L. Kong, F. Yang, Q. Hu, M. Li, X. Zhou, Z. Chen, C. Ke, L. Hu, G.-H. Cao, C. Wu, H. Ding, and H.-J. Gao, Chinese Phys. Lett. 41, 117401 (2024)

    2024

  30. [39]

    Moore and N

    G. Moore and N. Read, Nuclear Physics B 360, 362 (1991)

    1991

  31. [40]

    D. A. Ivanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 268 (2001)

    2001

  32. [41]

    Kitaev, Annals of Physics 303, 2 (2003)

    A. Kitaev, Annals of Physics 303, 2 (2003)

    2003

  33. [42]

    Das Sarma, C

    S. Das Sarma, C. Nayak, and S. Tewari, Phys. Rev. B 73, 220502 (2006)

    2006

  34. [43]

    Nayak, S

    C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1083 (2008)

    2008

  35. [44]

    Liang, Z

    Q.-F. Liang, Z. Wang, and X. Hu, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 99, 50004 (2012)

    2012

  36. [45]

    Wu, Q.-F

    L.-H. Wu, Q.-F. Liang, and X. Hu, Science and Tech- nology of Advanced Materials 15, 064402 (2014)

    2014

  37. [46]

    Liang, Z

    Q.-F. Liang, Z. Wang, and X. Hu, Phys. Rev. B 89, 224514 (2014)

    2014

  38. [47]

    J.-X. Yin, Z. Wu, J.-H. Wang, Z.-Y. Ye, J. Gong, X.-Y. Hou, L. Shan, A. Li, X.-J. Liang, X.-X. Wu, J. Li, C.-S. Ting, Z.-Q. Wang, J.-P. Hu, P.-H. Hor, H. Ding, and S. H. Pan, Nature Phys 11, 543 (2015)

    2015

  39. [48]

    D. Wang, L. Kong, P. Fan, H. Chen, S. Zhu, W. Liu, L. Cao, Y. Sun, S. Du, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. Gu, L. Fu, H. Ding, and H.-J. Gao, Science 362, 333 (2018)

    2018

  40. [49]

    C. M. Yim, C. Trainer, R. Aluru, S. Chi, W. N. Hardy, R. Liang, D. Bonn, and P. Wahl, Nature Communica- tions 9, 2602 (2018)

    2018

  41. [50]

    M. Chen, X. Chen, H. Yang, Z. Du, X. Zhu, E. Wang, and H.-H. Wen, Nature Communications 9, 970 (2018)

    2018

  42. [51]

    Q. Liu, C. Chen, T. Zhang, R. Peng, Y.-J. Yan, C.-H.- P. Wen, X. Lou, Y.-L. Huang, J.-P. Tian, X.-L. Dong, G.-W. Wang, W.-C. Bao, Q.-H. Wang, Z.-P. Yin, Z.-X. Zhao, and D.-L. Feng, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041056 (2018)

    2018

  43. [52]

    C. Chen, Q. Liu, T. Z. Zhang, D. Li, P. P. Shen, X. L. Dong, Z.-X. Zhao, T. Zhang, and D. L. Feng, Chinese Physics Letters 36, 057403 (2019)

    2019

  44. [53]

    Machida, Y

    T. Machida, Y. Sun, S. Pyon, S. Takeda, Y. Kohsaka, T. Hanaguri, T. Sasagawa, and T. Tamegai, Nature Ma- terials 18, 811 (2019)

    2019

  45. [54]

    L. Kong, S. Zhu, M. Papaj, H. Chen, L. Cao, H. Isobe, Y. Xing, W. Liu, D. Wang, P. Fan, Y. Sun, S. Du, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. Gu, L. Fu, H.-J. Gao, and H. Ding, Nature Physics 15, 1181 (2019)

    2019

  46. [56]

    W. Liu, L. Cao, S. Zhu, L. Kong, G. Wang, M. Papaj, P. Zhang, Y.-B. Liu, H. Chen, G. Li, F. Yang, T. Kondo, S. Du, G.-H. Cao, S. Shin, L. Fu, Z. Yin, H.-J. Gao, and H. Ding, Nature Communications 11, 5688 (2020)

    2020

  47. [57]

    S. Zhu, L. Kong, L. Cao, H. Chen, M. Papaj, S. Du, Y. Xing, W. Liu, D. Wang, C. Shen, F. Yang, J. Schnee- loch, R. Zhong, G. Gu, L. Fu, Y.-Y. Zhang, H. Ding, and H.-J. Gao, Science 367, 189 (2020)

    2020

  48. [58]

    Zhang, W

    T. Zhang, W. Bao, C. Chen, D. Li, Z. Lu, Y. Hu, W. Yang, D. Zhao, Y. Yan, X. Dong, Q.-H. Wang, T. Zhang, and D. Feng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 127001 (2021)

    2021

  49. [59]

    L.-H. Hu, X. Wu, C.-X. Liu, and R.-X. Zhang, Phys Rev Lett 129, 277001 (2022)

    2022

  50. [60]

    E. J. K¨ onig and P. Coleman, Physical Review Letters 122, 207001 (2019)

    2019

  51. [61]

    S. Qin, L. Hu, C. Le, J. Zeng, F.-c. Zhang, C. Fang, and J. Hu, Physical Review Letters 123, 027003 (2019)

    2019

  52. [62]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Qin, K. Jiang, and J. Hu, National Science Review 10, nwac121 (2023)

    2023

  53. [63]

    X. Wu, S. B. Chung, C. Liu, and E.-A. Kim, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013066 (2021)

    2021

  54. [64]

    C.-K. Chiu, T. Machida, Y. Huang, T. Hanaguri, and F.-C. Zhang, Science Advances 6 (2020)

    2020

  55. [65]

    Hanaguri, K

    T. Hanaguri, K. Kitagawa, K. Matsubayashi, Y. Mazaki, Y. Uwatoko, and H. Takagi, Phys. Rev. B 85, 214505 (2012)

    2012

  56. [66]

    L. Kong, L. Cao, S. Zhu, M. Papaj, G. Dai, G. Li, P. Fan, W. Liu, F. Yang, X. Wang, S. Du, C. Jin, L. Fu, H.-J. 7 Gao, and H. Ding, Nature Communications 12, 4146 (2021)

    2021

  57. [67]

    P. Fan, F. Yang, G. Qian, H. Chen, Y.-Y. Zhang, G. Li, Z. Huang, Y. Xing, L. Kong, W. Liu, K. Jiang, C. Shen, S. Du, J. Schneeloch, R. Zhong, G. Gu, Z. Wang, H. Ding, and H.-J. Gao, Nature Communications 12, 1348 (2021)

    2021

  58. [68]

    M. Li, G. Li, L. Cao, X. Zhou, X. Wang, C. Jin, C.-K. Chiu, S. J. Pennycook, Z. Wang, and H.-J. Gao, Nature 606, 890 (2022)

    2022

  59. [69]

    W. Liu, Q. Hu, X. Wang, Y. Zhong, F. Yang, L. Kong, L. Cao, G. Li, Y. Peng, K. Okazaki, T. Kondo, C. Jin, J. Xu, H.-J. Gao, and H. Ding, Quantum Frontiers 1, 20 (2022)

    2022

  60. [70]

    J. Li, G. N. Phan, X. Wang, F. Yang, Q. Hu, K. Jia, J. Zhao, W. Liu, R. Zhang, Y. Shi, S. Li, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Chinese Phys. B 33, 017401 (2023)

    2023

  61. [71]

    Q. Hu, S. Qin, Y. Peng, Y. Song, W. Liu, Y. Cheng, R. Zhang, Y. Hu, C. Meng, Y. Huang, J. Li, C. Jin, B. Lv, J. Xu, and H. Ding, arXiv:2411.01585

    arXiv

  62. [72]

    H. H. Chang, C. C. Chang, Y. Y. Chiang, J. Y. Luo, P. M. Wu, C. M. Tseng, Y. C. Lee, Y. R. Wu, Y. T. Hsieh, M. H. Wen, M. J. Wang, and M. K. Wu, Superconductor Science and Technology 27, 025015 (2014)

    2014

  63. [73]

    Y.-R. Tao, L. Fan, Z.-Y. Wu, X.-C. Wu, and Z.-H. Wang, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 751, 20 (2018)

    2018

  64. [74]

    J. Liu, W. Cui, H. Wang, D. Zhao, B. Zuo, Y. Zhu, X. Liu, Z. Zhang, B. Sun, L. Wang, H. Chang, K. He, Q.- K. Xue, and H. Liu, Superconductor Science and Tech- nology 35, 065010 (2022)

    2022

  65. [75]

    T. Liu, C. Y. Wan, H. Yang, Y. Zhao, B. Xie, W. Zheng, Z. Yi, D. Guan, S. Wang, H. Zheng, C. Liu, L. Fu, J. Liu, Y. Li, and J. Jia, Nature 633, 71 (2024)

    2024

  66. [76]

    C. Y. Wan, Y. Zhao, Y. Li, J. Jia, and J. Liu, Quantum Frontiers 3, 20 (2024)

    2024

  67. [77]

    See supplementary materials for the details

  68. [78]

    Z. Wang, P. Zhang, G. Xu, L. K. Zeng, H. Miao, X. Xu, T. Qian, H. Weng, P. Richard, A. V. Fedorov, H. Ding, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Physical Review B 92, 115119 (2015)

    2015

  69. [80]

    Hosur, P

    P. Hosur, P. Ghaemi, R. S. K. Mong, and A. Vishwanath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 097001 (2011)

    2011

  70. [81]

    Z. Yan, Z. Wu, and W. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 257001 (2020)

    2020

  71. [82]

    Yi, Z.-K

    M. Yi, Z.-K. Liu, Y. Zhang, R. Yu, J.-X. Zhu, J. Lee, R. Moore, F. Schmitt, W. Li, S. Riggs, J.-H. Chu, B. Lv, J. Hu, M. Hashimoto, S.-K. Mo, Z. Hussain, Z. Mao, C. Chu, I. Fisher, Q. Si, Z.-X. Shen, and D. Lu, Nature Communications 6, 7777 (2015)

    2015

  72. [83]

    Z. K. Liu, M. Yi, Y. Zhang, J. Hu, R. Yu, J.-X. Zhu, R.- H. He, Y. L. Chen, M. Hashimoto, R. G. Moore, S.-K. Mo, Z. Hussain, Q. Si, Z. Q. Mao, D. H. Lu, and Z.-X. Shen, Physical Review B 92, 235138 (2015)

    2015

  73. [84]

    R. P. Day, G. Levy, M. Michiardi, B. Zwartsenberg, M. Zonno, F. Ji, E. Razzoli, F. Boschini, S. Chi, R. Liang, P. K. Das, I. Vobornik, J. Fujii, W. N. Hardy, D. A. Bonn, I. S. Elfimov, and A. Damascelli, Physical Review Let- ters 121, 076401 (2018)

    2018

  74. [85]

    Zhang, Z

    P. Zhang, Z. Wang, X. Wu, K. Yaji, Y. Ishida, Y. Ko- hama, G. Dai, Y. Sun, C. Bareille, K. Kuroda, T. Kondo, K. Okazaki, K. Kindo, X. Wang, C. Jin, J. Hu, R. Thomale, K. Sumida, S. Wu, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, H. Ding, G. D. Gu, T. Tamegai, T. Kawakami, M. Sato, and S. Shin, Nat...

    2019

  75. [86]

    R. P. Day, M. X. Na, M. Zingl, B. Zwartsenberg, M. Michiardi, G. Levy, M. Schneider, D. Wong, P. Dosanjh, T. M. Pedersen, S. Gorovikov, S. Chi, R. Liang, W. N. Hardy, D. A. Bonn, S. Zhdanovich, I. S. Elfimov, and A. Damascelli, Physical Review B 105, 155142 (2022)

    2022

  76. [87]

    X. Ma, G. Wang, R. Liu, T. Yu, Y. Peng, P. Zheng, and Z. Yin, Physical Review B 106, 115114 (2022)

    2022

  77. [88]

    M. Kim, S. Choi, W. H. Brito, and G. Kotliar, Physical Review Letters 132, 136504 (2024)

    2024

  78. [89]

    Li, S.-D

    Y.-F. Li, S.-D. Chen, M. Garc ´ ıa-D ´ ıez, M. I. Iraola, H. Pfau, Y.-L. Zhu, Z.-Q. Mao, T. Chen, M. Yi, P.-C. Dai, J. A. Sobota, M. Hashimoto, M. G. Vergniory, D.- H. Lu, and Z.-X. Shen, Physical Review X 14, 021043 (2024)

    2024

  79. [90]

    Li, X.-J

    C. Li, X.-J. Luo, L. Chen, D. E. Liu, F.-C. Zhang, and X. Liu, National Science Review 9, nwac095 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.