Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 59 references

Electrically tunable momentum space polarization singularities in liquid crystal microcavities

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

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that momentum-space polarization singularities can be generated and electrically tuned in a planar liquid-crystal microcavity without symmetry-breaking patterning, with positions and meron texture controlled by…

desk verdict First demonstration of electrically tunable momentum-space C-points in a liquid-crystal microcavity, but the tunability claim needs a quantitative overlay with theory before I'd call it fully verified. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07430 v1 pith:EIFLARGO submitted 2025-02-11 physics.optics

Przemys{l}aw Oliwa , Piotr Kapuściński , Maria Pop{l}awska , Marcin Muszyński , Mateusz Król , Przemys{l}aw Morawiak , Rafa{l} Mazur , Wiktor Piecek
show 5 more authors
Przemys{l}aw Kula Witold Bardyszewski Barbara Piętka Helgi Sigur{ḥsson Jacek Szczytko
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords momentumspacepolarizationsingularitiesC-pointsdiabolicalpointsliquidcrystalmicrocavityspin-orbitcouplingoflightmerontextureelectricaltuningvortex
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 claims that momentum-space polarization singularities, points where the transmitted light's polarization field becomes singular, can be created in a planar liquid-crystal microcavity without symmetry-breaking patterning, and that their position, number, and internal texture can be tuned continuously by an applied voltage. The device exploits the extreme birefringence of the nematic liquid crystal to create an effective Rashba-Dresselhaus spin-orbit coupling between two orthogonally polarized cavity modes. Voltage reorients the molecular director, changing the energy detuning between those modes and thereby moving the singularities. If the claim holds, it replaces irreversibly patterned photonic crystals with an electrically reconfigurable microscale source of tunable polarization structure in reciprocal space, which matters for spinoptronic and topological photonic applications.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a $2\times 2$ non-Hermitian $k\cdot p$ Hamiltonian, $H = h_0(k)\mathbb{1} + \mathbf{h}(k)\cdot\boldsymbol{\sigma}$, written in a rotated polarization basis, with $h_1 = \Delta + i\delta\Gamma + \delta_x k_x^2 + \delta_y k_y^2$ and $h_3 = -2\alpha k_y$. The linear-in-$k_y$ term is the Rashba-Dresselhaus spin-orbit coupling generated by the tilted director; it makes the eigenmodes circularly polarized along $k_y$ and creates the conditions for the singularities. C-point positions follow from setting the rotated Stokes parameter $S_1$ to zero, giving Eq. (6), $k_{y,\mathrm{CP}} = \pm\sqrt{ \frac{\Delta}{\Sigma(m) \frac{4Lc\sqrt{m(m+1)}}{\pi^3(2m+1)} \left(\frac{\varepsilon_{xz}}{\varepsilon_{zz}}\right)^2 - \delta_y} }$, which explains why the singularities exist only for positive detuning. Diabolical points and exceptional points follow from $h_1^2+h_3^2=0$, leading to Eq. (7). The same Hamiltonian, through Eq. (5), yields the full Stokes field, and the Berreman-Schubert transfer-matrix calculation serves as an independent numerical check.

What would settle it

Apply two different voltages that produce the same measured detuning $\Delta$ and compare the C-point positions: if they differ, the detuning-only model is wrong, because Eq. (6) would predict identical positions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a highly birefringent planar liquid-crystal microcavity, retaining many symmetries, hosts electrically tunable half-charge polarization singularities in its momentum-space band structure: lemon-type C-points with winding $w=1/2$ and star-type diabolical points with winding $w=-1/2$, the latter appearing as pairs of exceptional points under polarization-dependent losses. The C-points sit on the $k_x=0$ axis at positions set by Eq. (6), which depends on the detuning $\Delta$ and fixed cavity parameters; positive detuning admits the singularities and negative detuning removes the upper-branch ones. Angle-resolved polarization tomography of white-light transmission confirms the predicted Stokes field, showing two C-points and two diabolical points in the upper branch for $\Delta>0$, four C-points predicted in the lower branch (two outside the field of view), and continuous voltage-controlled motion of the C-points as $\Delta$ varies. The same tuning also flips the meron texture between Bloch and N\'eel type, which the authors connect to a momentum-space analogue of skyrmionic helicity switching.

Load-bearing premise

The electrical-tuning prediction assumes that voltage only changes the energy difference between the two polarized cavity modes, while all other optical parameters of the cavity remain fixed; if reorienting the liquid crystal molecules also changes those other parameters, the predicted motion of the singularities would not match the experiments.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Applying voltage alone can continuously move the C-points in momentum space and change how many singularities are present, with no changes to the sample.
  • The sign of the detuning acts as a switch in this Rashba-Dresselhaus regime: positive detuning produces C-points and diabolical points in the upper branch, while negative detuning removes them.
  • The same electrical knob flips the meron texture between Bloch-type and N\'eel-type, which also reorients the M\"obius-strip discontinuity of the polarization ellipse in reciprocal space.
  • The authors argue the platform is suited for tunable lasing, strong light-matter coupling, and non-Hermitian photonic studies, since the cavity keeps many symmetries and can be driven with gain.
  • Because the singularities are located at specific emission angles, voltage selection of the detuning selects which transmitted beam angle carries a chosen circular polarization and winding.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension the authors do not pursue: if the director reorientation changes $\delta_y$ or $\alpha$ as well as $\Delta$, their Eq. (6) predicts the C-point trajectory would bend or move off the $k_x=0$ axis, so mapping the full Stokes field at high voltages would distinguish detuning-only tuning from parameter-dependent tuning.
  • The mechanism should transfer to other birefringent cavities with electrically controllable director orientation, so the operating wavelength could be shifted by changing the Bragg mirrors without altering the singularity physics.
  • Because the C-points sit at specific emission angles, the device could act as a voltage-addressed polarization router: a beam emitted at a chosen angle would carry a selected handedness and meron texture, a functionality the paper mentions only as a future direction.
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 manuscript reports the generation and electrical tuning of momentum-space polarization singularities in the far-field transmission of a planar liquid-crystal microcavity. The authors combine angle-resolved Stokes tomography with two theoretical approaches: a 2x2 non-Hermitian k.p Hamiltonian and a Berreman-Schuberttransfer-matrix calculation. They identify lemon-type C-points with winding w=1/2 and star-type diabolical-point/exceptional-point structures with w=-1/2, and they show that the C-point positions and their Bloch/Néel meron texture change with applied voltage through the resulting detuning. The central claim is that this provides electrically tunable, multiple half-charge momentum-space polarization singularities in a microcavity that does not require nanopatterning.

Significance. If fully substantiated, the result would be a useful step beyond static photonic-crystal-slab implementations of momentum-space polarization singularities, because the tuning is electrical, continuous, and reversible in a planar geometry. The paper is commendable for combining experiment, an ab initio 2x2 Hamiltonian without phenomenological fitting parameters, and full transfer-matrix simulations, and for openly discussing the limitations of the 2x2 model. The data are deposited in a public repository, which is a further strength. However, the quantitative verification of the tunability claim is currently incomplete, and this is what prevents the paper from being accepted as is.

major comments (4)
  1. [Experimental results, Fig. 4 and Eq. (6)] The central claim that the C-points are electrically tuned is supported only by a sequence of Stokes-phase images in Fig. 4 and Fig. S7. The paper does not plot the measured C-point coordinates in momentum space against the prediction of Eq. (6), nor against the Berreman model, as a function of detuning. This matters because Eq. (6) contains delta_y and Sigma(m), and the SM equations (S3)-(S4) show that delta_y and alpha depend on the director angle theta, which is precisely what the voltage changes. The text even notes that 'the sign of delta_y varies with theta' after Eq. (6). Therefore, the observed motion cannot be attributed to the detuning mechanism alone unless all coefficients are evaluated at each voltage. A quantitative overlay of measured and predicted C-point trajectories, with the voltage-dependent parameters specified, is needed to substantiate the tunability claim.
  2. [Methods, 'Non-Hermitian modification of 2-mode Hamiltonian'] The authors themselves state that the 2x2 Hamiltonian is inadequate and that fourth-order terms and coupling to Bragg modes are necessary to reproduce the observed C-points, e.g., the additional C-points in the lower branch. Since Eq. (6) is derived from this 2x2 Hamiltonian in the Supplemental Material (Section I.B), the quantitative accuracy of Eq. (6) for the C-point trajectory is not established by the derivation alone. The paper should either validate Eq. (6) against the Berreman model over the full voltage range, or state explicitly which features of the observed tuning are expected to survive beyond the 2x2 approximation.
  3. [Diabolical points, Eq. (7) and Fig. 4] The abstract and introduction claim electrically tunable multiple half-charge polarization singularities, which includes the diabolical points/exceptional points as well as C-points. However, the tuning demonstration in Fig. 4 and Fig. S7 covers only the lemon-type C-points. No experimental series is shown in which the positions of the diabolical points or exceptional points change with voltage, even though Eq. (7) predicts a detuning dependence. Without such data, the claim of tunability of the full set of singularities is too broad.
  4. [Experimental results, Stokes tomography methodology] The manuscript reports no error bars or uncertainties on the measured Stokes parameters or on the extracted positions of the C-points and diabolical points. The text acknowledges in Fig. 2 that 'experimental errors in the measured Stokes parameters can increase' at high angles, but no quantitative uncertainty analysis is provided. Given that the tunability claim rests on comparing singularity positions across voltage settings, reporting uncertainties on those positions is necessary for a quantitative assessment.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (6) and following text] The sentence 'the sign of delta_y varies with theta' is important but terse; the authors should specify the range of theta or the cavity thickness condition under which delta_y changes sign, since this directly affects the existence of C-points.
  2. [Fig. 4 and Fig. S7] These figures would benefit from numeric axis labels and explicit voltage or detuning values in the panels. Currently the reader cannot determine the actual angular positions of the singularities or the voltage step sizes from the figure alone.
  3. [Affiliation list] There are typographical errors in the affiliations: 'Instiute' should be 'Institute' in two places.
  4. [Eq. (6) typesetting] Equation (6) contains visible LaTeX artifacts ('/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex') that should be corrected to a standard square-root symbol.
  5. [Supplemental Material, Figs. S13-S14] The captions state that the opposite sign of s3 is due to the opposite sign of the angle for experiment and theory; this is worth explaining in the main text or in a sentence in the caption, as it may confuse readers regarding the comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the C-point positions follow analytically from a parameter-free k·p Hamiltonian and standard Berreman transfer-matrix calculations, with the molecular tilt angle set by the measured detuning rather than by the singularity positions.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. Equation (6) (and its supplement Eq. S34) gives the C-point wavevector ky,CP as an explicit analytical solution of the condition S1 = S2 = 0 in the Hermitian limit of the two-mode Hamiltonian, using coefficients (Δ, δy, εxz, εzz, Σ) that are computed from the dielectric tensor and cavity geometry (SM Eqs. S1–S8), not fitted to the observed C-point locations. The molecular tilt angle θ is set by matching the measured mode detuning (SM Section I.C: θ = 1.02θr and 0.98θr for positive and negative detuning, where θr is the zero-detuning angle), which is a different observable from the singularity position; the C-point prediction is therefore a nontrivial consequence of the model rather than a restatement of its input. The independent Berreman–Schubert transfer-matrix calculation uses the same physical parameters and reproduces the measured Stokes textures and singularity positions, providing an external cross-check rather than a self-referential loop. Self-citations to the authors' prior work (e.g., Refs. [30–32,35–38]) supply the Hamiltonian framework and past validation, but the present experimental observations and the analytic derivation stand independently. The acknowledged discrepancy for negative detuning, where the 2×2 Hamiltonian misses extra C-points in the lower branch and the authors invoke Bragg-mode interactions, is a model limitation explicitly addressed in the text, not a circular reduction. Finally, the lack of a quantitative overlay of measured C-point trajectories onto Eq. (6) in Fig. 4 is an evidence-strength concern about how completely the tunability is verified, not a circularity: the data are not being used to define the prediction. Overall, no step in the derivation chain reduces by construction to its own inputs.

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

The central claim rests on a handful of parameters that are not independently measured: the molecular tilt angle, the mirror strengths, and a generic cavity thickness for the Hamiltonian. These are adjusted to match detunings and linewidths. The paper does not introduce new physical entities; the 'node anti-meron' and 'Bloch/Néel meron' labels are classifications of measured polarization textures, not postulates.

free parameters (5)
  • Molecular tilt angle θ (Sample A simulation) = 31.4 deg
    Chosen in the Berreman transfer matrix to match the experimental dispersion and detuning; no independent measurement of the director tilt is reported (SM Section II.B).
  • Molecular tilt angle θ (Sample B simulation) = 33.5 deg
    Chosen for the negative detuning sample to reproduce the observed dispersion (SM Section II.B).
  • Relative tilt angles in Hamiltonian = 1.02θr and 0.98θr
    Adjusted to produce positive and negative detuning in the 2-mode Hamiltonian; the reference angle θr is where Δ = 0 (SM Section I.C).
  • Mirror strength parameters ζX, ζY = 82 and 78 µm^-1
    Set the cavity photon lifetimes and linewidths in the Hamiltonian; values are chosen rather than measured (SM Section I.C).
  • Cavity thickness L in Hamiltonian = 2120 nm
    Used for the generic 2-mode Hamiltonian calculation with modes m = 13 and 12; this is not the actual sample cavity thickness (1163 or 2385 nm), making the Hamiltonian predictions qualitative (SM Section I.C).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The planar microcavity can be described by a two-mode paraxial Hamiltonian with complex coefficients in the Rashba-Dresselhaus regime.
    Invoked in the 'Two-mode photonic Hamiltonian' section; the authors later show the simplified 2x2 model misses two C-points in the lower branch, so this axiom is only approximately valid.
  • domain assumption The liquid crystal layer is a homogeneous uniaxial birefringent medium with a single director tilt angle and no in-plane spatial variation.
    Used in the Berreman transfer matrix (SM Section II.B) and in the Hamiltonian; anchoring layers, director gradients, and any spatial inhomogeneity under voltage are neglected.
  • domain assumption The applied voltage changes only the director tilt angle and hence the detuning Δ, leaving other Hamiltonian coefficients effectively unchanged.
    Underlies the electrical tunability interpretation of Fig. 4; no voltage-to-tilt calibration is provided, and the voltage dependence of α, δx, δy, and δΓ is not measured.
  • standard math The k·p perturbation expansion from ref [38] gives the correct mode coupling and rotation matrix for the cavity.
    The Hamiltonian derivation relies on this prior perturbation theory; the truncation of the mode basis and the first-order corrections are assumed valid for the RD regime.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electrically tunable momentum space polarization singularities in liquid crystal microcavities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EIFLARGO

@misc{pith2026250207430,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electrically tunable momentum space polarization singularities in liquid crystal microcavities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EIFLARGO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07430}
}
read the original abstract

Momentum space polarization singularities of light appear as vectorial twists in the scattered and radiated far field patterns of exotic photonic structures. They relate to important concepts such as bound states in the continuum, spatiotemporal light steering, polarization M\"obius strips, Berry curvature and associated topological photonic phenomena. Polarization singularities, such as completely circularly polarized C-points, are readily designed in real space through interference of differently polarized beams. In momentum space, they require instead sophisticated patterning of photonic crystal slabs of reduced symmetries in order to appear in the corresponding band structure with scarce in-situ tunability. Here, we show that momentum space singularities can be generated and, importantly, electrically tuned in the band structure of a highly birefringent planar liquid crystal microcavity that retains many symmetries. Our results agree with theoretical predictions and offer exciting possibilities for integration of momentum space polarization singularities in spinoptronic technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.07430 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Senthilkumaran, and S

    Ruchi, P. Senthilkumaran, and S. K. Pal, Phase singular- ities to polarization singularities, International Journal of Optics 2020, 2812803 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Wang, C.-H

    Q. Wang, C.-H. Tu, Y.-N. Li, and H.-T. Wang, Polar- ization singularities: Progress, fundamental physics, and prospects, APL Photonics6, 040901 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    K. Y. Bliokh, M. A. Alonso, and M. R. Dennis, Geomet- ric phases in 2D and 3D polarized fields: geometrical, dynamical, and topological aspects, Reports on Progress in Physics82, 122401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Y. Shen, Q. Zhang, P. Shi, L. Du, X. Yuan, and A. V. Zayats, Optical skyrmions and other topological quasi- particles of light, Nature Photonics18, 15 (2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    Milione, H

    G. Milione, H. I. Sztul, D. A. Nolan, and R. R. Alfano, Higher-order Poincaré sphere, Stokes parameters, and the angular momentum of light, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 053601 (2011)

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Cardano, E

    F. Cardano, E. Karimi, L. Marrucci, C. de Lisio, and E.Santamato,Generationanddynamicsofopticalbeams with polarization singularities, Opt. Express 21, 8815 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Y. Zeng, G. Hu, K. Liu, Z. Tang, and C.-W. Qiu, Dynam- ics of topological polarization singularity in momentum space, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 176101 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Zhang, A

    Y. Zhang, A. Chen, W. Liu, C. W. Hsu, B. Wang, F. Guan, X. Liu, L. Shi, L. Lu, and J. Zi, Observation of polarization vortices in momentum space, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 186103 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Guo, M. Xiao, Y. Zhou, and S. Fan, Arbitrary polar- ization conversion with a photonic crystal slab, Advanced Optical Materials7, 1801453 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    J. Wang, H. Li, Y. Ma, M. Zhao, W. Liu, B. Wang, S. Wu, X. Liu, L. Shi, T. Jiang, and J. Zi, Routing val- ley exciton emission of a WS2 monolayer via delocalized Bloch modes of in-plane inversion-symmetry-broken pho- tonic crystal slabs, Light: Science & Applications9, 148 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    A. D. Kiselev, Singularities in polarization resolved an- gular patterns: transmittance of nematic liquid crystal cells, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter19, 246102 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    C. Guo, M. Xiao, Y. Guo, L. Yuan, and S. Fan, Meron spin textures in momentum space, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 106103 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    H. M. Doeleman, F. Monticone, W. den Hollander, A. Alù, and A. F. Koenderink, Experimental observa- tion of a polarization vortex at an optical bound state in the continuum, Nature Photonics12, 397 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    W. Liu, B. Wang, Y. Zhang, J. Wang, M. Zhao, F. Guan, X. Liu, L. Shi, and J. Zi, Circularly polarized states spawning from bound states in the continuum, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 116104 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    X. Yin, J. Jin, M. Soljačić, C. Peng, and B. Zhen, Ob- servation of topologically enabled unidirectional guided resonances, Nature580, 467 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    F. Wang, X. Yin, Z. Zhang, Z. Chen, H. Wang, P. Li, Y. Hu, X. Zhou, and C. Peng, Fundamentals and appli- cations of topological polarization singularities, Frontiers in Physics10, 10.3389/fphy.2022.862962 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    W. Ye, Y. Gao, and J. Liu, Singular points of polariza- tions in the momentum space of photonic crystal slabs, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 153904 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    H. Qin, Z. Su, M. Liu, Y. Zeng, M.-C. Tang, M. Li, Y. Shi, W. Huang, C.-W. Qiu, and Q. Song, Arbitrarily polarized bound states in the continuum with twisted photonic crystal slabs, Light: Science & Applications12, 66 (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    K. Y. Bliokh, M. A. Alonso, D. Sugic, M. Perrin, F. Nori, and E. Brasselet, Polarization singularities and möbius stripsinsoundandwater-surfacewaves,PhysicsofFluids 33, 077122 (2021), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/5.0056333/13832609/077122_1_online.pdf

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    Y. Shen, X. Wang, Z. Xie, C. Min, X. Fu, Q. Liu, M. Gong, and X. Yuan, Optical vortices 30 years on: OAM manipulation from topological charge to multiple singularities, Light: Science & Applications8, 90 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Freund, A

    I. Freund, A. I. Mokhun, M. S. Soskin, O. V. Angelsky, and I. I. Mokhun, Stokes singularity relations, Opt. Lett. 27, 545 (2002)

    2002

  14. [22]

    W. Liu, W. Liu, L. Shi, and Y. Kivshar, Topological po- larization singularities in metaphotonics, Nanophotonics 10, 1469 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    J. Ni, C. Huang, L.-M. Zhou, M. Gu, Q. Song, Y. Kivshar, and C.-W. Qiu, Multidimensional phase singularities in nanophotonics, Science 374, eabj0039 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    S. Kim, B. H. Woo, S.-C. An, Y. Lim, I. C. Seo, D.-S. Kim, S. Yoo, Q.-H. Park, and Y. C. Jun, Topological control of 2D perovskite emission in the strong coupling regime, Nano Letters21, 10076 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    N. H. M. Dang, S. Zanotti, E. Drouard, C. Chevalier, G. Trippé-Allard, M. Amara, E. Deleporte, V. Ardiz- zone, D. Sanvitto, L. C. Andreani, C. Seassal, D. Gerace, and H. S. Nguyen, Realization of polaritonic topological charge at room temperature using polariton bound states i...

    2022

  18. [26]

    Ardizzone, F

    V. Ardizzone, F. Riminucci, S. Zanotti, A. Gianfrate, M. Efthymiou-Tsironi, D. G. Suàrez-Forero, F. Todisco, M. De Giorgi, D. Trypogeorgos, G. Gigli, K. Baldwin, L. Pfeiffer, D. Ballarini, H. S. Nguyen, D. Gerace, and D. Sanvitto, Polariton Bose-Einstein condensate from a boun...

    2022

  19. [27]

    A. Chen, W. Liu, Y. Zhang, B. Wang, X. Liu, L. Shi, L. Lu, and J. Zi, Observing vortex polarization singu- larities at optical band degeneracies, Phys. Rev. B99, 180101 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    X. Zhao, J. Wang, X. Wang, L. Shi, and J. Zi, Emer- gence of momentum-space topological half vortices in an anisotropic cavity, Phys. Rev. Appl.20, 054059 (2023). 10

    2023

  21. [29]

    Zayats, Spin–orbit interactions of light, Nature Photonics 9, 796 (2015)

    K.Y.Bliokh, F.J.Rodríguez-Fortuño, F.Nori,andA.V. Zayats, Spin–orbit interactions of light, Nature Photonics 9, 796 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    M. Król, I. Septembre, P. Oliwa, M. Kędziora, K. Łempicka-Mirek, M. Muszyński, R. Mazur, P. Moraw- iak, W. Piecek, P. Kula, W. Bardyszewski, P. G. Lagoudakis, D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Annihilation of exceptional points from different Dirac val...

    2022

  23. [31]

    Rechcińska, M

    K. Rechcińska, M. Król, R. Mazur, P. Morawiak, R. Mirek, K. Łempicka, W. Bardyszewski, M. Ma- tuszewski, P. Kula, W. Piecek, P. G. Lagoudakis, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Engineering spin-orbit syn- thetic Hamiltonians in liquid-crystal optical cavities, Sci- ence 366, 727 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    M. Król, K. Rechcińska, H. Sigurdsson, P. Oliwa, R. Mazur, P. Morawiak, W. Piecek, P. Kula, P. G. Lagoudakis, M. Matuszewski, W. Bardyszewski, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Realizing optical persistent spin helix and Stern-Gerlach deflection in an anisotropic liquid crystal micr...

    2021

  25. [33]

    D. W. Berreman, Optics in stratified and anisotropic me- dia: 4×4-matrix formulation, J. Opt. Soc. Am.62, 502 (1972)

    1972

  26. [35]

    Mazur, P

    K.Lekenta, M.Król, R.Mirek, K.Łempicka, D.Stephan, R. Mazur, P. Morawiak, P. Kula, W. Piecek, P. G. Lagoudakis, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Tunable opti- cal spin Hall effect in a liquid crystal microcavity, Light: Science & Applications7, 74 (2018)

    2018

  27. [36]

    M. Król, H. Sigurdsson, K. Rechcińska, P. Oliwa, K. Tyszka, W. Bardyszewski, A. Opala, M. Matuszewski, P. Morawiak, R. Mazur, W. Piecek, P. Kula, P. G. Lagoudakis, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Observation of second-order meron polarization textures in optical mi- crocavities, O...

    2021

  28. [37]

    Łempicka-Mirek, M

    K. Łempicka-Mirek, M. Król, H. Sigurdsson, A. Win- cukiewicz, P. Morawiak, R. Mazur, M. Muszyński, W. Piecek, P. Kula, T. Stefaniuk, M. Kamińska, L. D. Marco, P. G. Lagoudakis, D. Ballarini, D. Sanvitto, J. Szczytko, and B. Piętka, Electrically tunable Berry curvature and stro...

    2022

  29. [38]

    Oliwa, W

    P. Oliwa, W. Bardyszewski, and J. Szczytko, Quantum mechanical-like approach with non-Hermitian effective Hamiltonians in spin-orbit coupled optical cavities, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013324 (2024)

    2024

  30. [39]

    See Supplemental Materials

  31. [40]

    Kavokin, J

    A. Kavokin, J. J. Baumberg, G. Malpuech, and F. P. Laussy, Microcavities(OUP Oxford, 2007)

    2007

  32. [41]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, Ex- ceptional topology of non-Hermitian systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015005 (2021)

    2021

  33. [42]

    W. Chen, Q. Yang, Y. Chen, and W. Liu, Evolution and global charge conservation for polarization singularities emerging from non-Hermitian degeneracies, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118, e2019578118 (2021)

    2021

  34. [43]

    R. Su, E. Estrecho, D. Biegańska, Y. Huang, M. Wur- dack, M. Pieczarka, A. G. Truscott, T. C. H. Liew, E. A. Ostrovskaya, and Q. Xiong, Direct measurement of a non-Hermitian topological invariant in a hybrid light- matter system, Science Advances7, eabj8905 (2021)

    2021

  35. [44]

    Richter, T

    S. Richter, T. Michalsky, C. Sturm, B. Rosenow, M. Grundmann, and R. Schmidt-Grund, Exceptional points in anisotropic planar microcavities, Physical Re- view A95, 10.1103/physreva.95.023836 (2017)

    2017 doi

  36. [45]

    C.Liu, J.Jiang, C.Zhang, Q.Wang, H.Zhang, D.Zheng, Y. Li, Y. Ma, H. Algaidi, X. Gao, Z. Hou, W. Mi, J.-m. Liu, Z.Qiu,andX.Zhang,Controllableskyrmionicphase transition between Néel skyrmions and Bloch skyrmionic bubbles in van der Waals ferromagnet Fe3−δGeTe2, Ad- vanced Scienc...

    2023

  37. [46]

    T. Zhu, C. Guo, J. Huang, H. Wang, M. Orenstein, Z. Ruan, and S. Fan, Topological optical differentiator, Nature Communications12, 680 (2021)

    2021

  38. [47]

    C. Guo, M. Xiao, M. Orenstein, and S. Fan, Structured 3d linear space–time light bullets by nonlocal nanopho- tonics, Light: Science & Applications10, 160 (2021)

    2021

  39. [48]

    Ornelas, I

    P. Ornelas, I. Nape, R. de Mello Koch, and A. Forbes, Non-local skyrmions as topologically resilient quan- tum entangled states of light, Nature Photonics 10.1038/s41566-023-01360-4 (2024)

    2024 doi

  40. [49]

    Muszyński, M

    M. Muszyński, M. Król, K. Rechcińska, P. Oliwa, M. Kędziora, K. Łempicka-Mirek, R. Mazur, P. Moraw- iak, W. Piecek, P. Kula, P. G. Lagoudakis, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Realizing persistent-spin-helix lasing in the regime of Rashba-Dresselhaus spin-orbit coupling in a dye-fi...

    2022

  41. [50]

    Cilibrizzi, H

    P. Cilibrizzi, H. Sigurdsson, T. C. H. Liew, H. Ohadi, A. Askitopoulos, S. Brodbeck, C. Schneider, I. A. She- lykh, S. Höfling, J. Ruostekoski, and P. Lagoudakis, Half- skyrmion spin textures in polariton microcavities, Phys. Rev. B94, 045315 (2016)

    2016

  42. [51]

    Y. Li, X. Ma, X. Zhai, M. Gao, H. Dai, S. Schu- macher, and T. Gao, Manipulating polariton condensates by Rashba-Dresselhaus coupling at room temperature, Nature Communications13, 3785 (2022)

    2022

  43. [52]

    Colas, L

    D. Colas, L. Dominici, S. Donati, A. A. Pervishko, T. C. Liew, I. A. Shelykh, D. Ballarini, M. de Giorgi, A. Bra- mati, G. Gigli, E. d. Valle, F. P. Laussy, A. V. Kavokin, and D. Sanvitto, Polarization shaping of Poincaré beams by polariton oscillations, Light: Science & Appli...

    2015

  44. [53]

    Larocque, D

    H. Larocque, D. Sugic, D. Mortimer, A. J. Taylor, R.Fickler, R.W.Boyd, M.R.Dennis,andE.Karimi,Re- constructing the topology of optical polarization knots, Nature Physics14, 1079 (2018)

    2018

  45. [54]

    strength ofδ-mirrors

    Y.-M. R. Hu, E. A. Ostrovskaya, and E. Estrecho, Wave- packet dynamics in a non-Hermitian exciton-polariton system, Phys. Rev. B108, 115404 (2023). Electrically tunable momentum space polarization singularities in liquid crystal microcavities PrzemysławOliwa, 1 Piotr Kapuścińs...

    2023 arXiv

  46. [55]

    The dis- persion relations of refractive index forTiO2 and SiO2 layers are presented in Fig

    Sample A Sample A consists of two Distributed Bragg Reflec- tors (DBRs) centered at 550 nm, made from 6 pairs of TiO2/SiO2 layers, with SiO2 as the top layer. The dis- persion relations of refractive index forTiO2 and SiO2 layers are presented in Fig. S12. In this calculation,...

  47. [56]

    The dis- persion relations of refractive index forTiO2 and SiO2 layers are presented in Fig

    Sample B Sample B consists of two Distributed Bragg Reflec- tors (DBRs) centered at 530 nm, made from 6 pairs of TiO2/SiO2 layers, with SiO2 as the top layer. The dis- persion relations of refractive index forTiO2 and SiO2 layers are presented in Fig. S12. In this calculation,...

  48. [57]

    Oliwa, W

    P. Oliwa, W. Bardyszewski, and J. Szczytko, Quantum mechanical-like approach with non-Hermitian effective Hamiltonians in spin-orbit coupled optical cavities, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013324 (2024)

    2024

  49. [58]

    Łempicka, W

    K.Rechcińska, M.Król, R.Mazur, P.Morawiak, R.Mirek, K. Łempicka, W. Bardyszewski, M. Matuszewski, P. Kula, W. Piecek, P. G. Lagoudakis, B. Piętka, and J. Szczytko, Engineering spin-orbit synthetic Hamiltonians in liquid- crystal optical cavities, Science366, 727 (2019)

    2019

  50. [59]

    D. W. Berreman, Optics in stratified and anisotropic me- dia: 4 ×4-matrix formulation, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 62, 502 (1972)

    1972

  51. [60]

    Schubert, Polarization-dependent optical parameters of arbitrarily anisotropic homogeneous layered systems, Phys

    M. Schubert, Polarization-dependent optical parameters of arbitrarily anisotropic homogeneous layered systems, Phys. Rev. B53, 4265 (1996)

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.