Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

All-optical magnetic imaging with spin defects in van der Waals materials at Angstrom-scale

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single boron vacancy in monolayer hBN, held a few Angstroms above a sample, reads out spin textures through exchange-shifted THz resonances.

desk verdict A promising quantum sensing proposal undermined by a numerically inconsistent central simulation; deserving of peer review, but needs revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09518 v1 pith:EQXWMYHF submitted 2024-11-14 quant-ph

Ning Wang , Jianming Cai , Chao Lei This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords magneticimagingspindefectsboronvacancyhexagonalnitrideexchangeinteractionTHzs-SNOMAngstromresolutionall-opticalreadout
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes an all-optical magnetic imaging method that claims to resolve spin textures at the Angstrom scale, going beyond the resolution limit of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) scanning magnetometry. The idea is to place a single negatively charged boron vacancy ($V_\mathrm{B}^-$) in monolayer hexagonal boron nitride (hBN) at the apex of an AFM tip and bring it within a few Angstroms of the sample, where short-range exchange interaction overtakes magnetic dipole fields. That exchange interaction shifts the probe spin's energy levels by 0.02 to 20 meV, placing its resonances in the THz range, where they can be driven with THz light and read out through spin-dependent photoluminescence. The paper argues that constant-distance scanning with this probe yields atomic-scale spatial resolution, with simulations showing individual rows of a model spin lattice becoming visible.

What carries the argument

The central object is the $V_\mathrm{B}^-$ spin defect in monolayer hBN, which serves simultaneously as the exchange-coupled sensing spin and the optically readable output. The mechanism is the direct exchange interaction $H_\mathrm{ex} = J_\mathrm{ex}\mathbf{S}_1\cdot\mathbf{S}_2$ with $J_\mathrm{ex}(r) \approx 1.641\,(e^2/2a_B)(r/a_B)^{5/2}e^{-2r/a_B}$, whose exponential dependence on spin-spin distance converts a local spin configuration into a THz-frequency splitting of the defect's triplet ground state at 3-5 Å separations. A THz s-SNOM tip confines and enhances the THz radiation that drives these resonances, and a 5 nm gold coating on the tip is simulated to give roughly a 40-fold THz field enhancement at the apex; the spin-dependent fluorescence of the defect provides the all-optical readout.

What would settle it

An experiment that holds a monolayer-hBN tip containing a single $V_\mathrm{B}^-$ center at 4 Å above a known magnetic lattice and finds no photoluminescence-detected resonance shift in the 0.02-20 meV range, or finds the shift disappears after gold coating, would directly falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a single $V_\mathrm{B}^-$ defect in monolayer hBN acts as an exchange-coupled magnetic probe: at a probe-sample separation of about 4 Å, the exponential exchange coupling shifts the defect's spin sublevels by millielectronvolt-scale energies, i.e., THz frequencies, and these resonances appear as dips in the defect's photoluminescence when a tunable THz source is applied. The paper's simulation of a constant-distance scan over a 5×5 square spin lattice with a 3 Å lattice constant shows that the exchange-frequency map distinguishes individual lattice rows, while the same scan based on dipole-dipole stray fields does not. The claim is that the exponential distance dependence of exchange makes the probe sensitive mainly to the nearest spin, giving atomic resolution without the reconstruction required for dipole-based stray-field imaging.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a single $V_\mathrm{B}^-$ center can be placed in the top atomic layer of a monolayer hBN flake mounted on a scanning tip, held at a fixed separation near 4 Å from a flat sample, without the 5 nm gold coating either quenching the direct exchange coupling or suppressing the spin-dependent fluorescence.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Constant-distance scanning with exchange readout can distinguish individual rows of a 3 Å spin lattice without a reconstruction step, which the paper shows is not achievable with dipole-based stray-field scanning at the same 4 Å height.
  • The measurement chain is fully optical — green laser excitation, THz illumination, and photoluminescence detection — so the method avoids microwave electronics, applied magnetic fields, and cryogenic operation.
  • Because the probe is a semiconductive and non-magnetic hBN flake, it minimizes perturbation of the sample compared with magnetic STM tips, allowing study of intrinsic magnetic order.
  • The protocol is compatible with standard THz s-SNOM operation, so the same setup could collect THz conductivity or carrier information and magnetic spin images of the same region.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The strong exponential distance dependence of exchange implies that height variations at the sub-Angstrom level will dominate the measured frequency map; achieving the claimed resolution therefore likely demands extremely flat samples and stable tip-height control, a practical constraint the paper acknowledges only qualitatively.
  • The same exchange-sensing strategy could in principle be applied to other optically addressable spin defects in van der Waals monolayers (for example defects in MoS$_2$ or WSe$_2$), extending the imaging protocol beyond hBN.
  • A direct test of the central mechanism would be a distance-dependent measurement of the THz resonance shift, comparing the measured $J_\mathrm{ex}(r)$ slope against Eq. (5); a mismatch would indicate that the gold coating or surface electronic states are modifying the exchange coupling.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an all-optical magnetic imaging protocol in which a single negatively charged boron vacancy (V_B^-) in monolayer hBN is placed at the apex of an AFM tip and brought to Angstrom-scale separation from a magnetic sample, so that exchange coupling (Eq. 5) splits the defect spin levels into the THz range; the splitting is detected by combining THz s-SNOM with spin-dependent photoluminescence. The authors illustrate the claimed Angstrom-scale resolution with a simulated scan of a 5x5 spin lattice (Fig. 4) and compare it with conventional dipole-field scanning. The manuscript is a theoretical proposal with no experimental implementation, and its central quantitative claims rest on Eq. (5) and the simulation in Fig. 4(b).

Significance. If the quantitative claims were fully supported, the protocol would be a conceptually interesting route to atomic-scale magnetic imaging that avoids STM currents and mechanical detection while retaining all-optical readout. The paper is commendably explicit about the challenges it faces and gives a forward calculation with no fitting to target data. However, the central resolution demonstration is currently not reproducible from the stated model, and the quantitative applicability of the exchange formula is not established. With corrected simulations and explicit parameter choices, the concept remains potentially valuable, but at present the central claim is not yet convincingly quantified.

major comments (4)
  1. [Magnetic imaging of spin textures, Fig. 4(b)] The simulated resonance-frequency range of 0.7–1.1 THz in Fig. 4(b) is not reproducible from Eq. (5) at the stated geometry. With a_B = 0.529 Å and r = 4 Å, Eq. (5) gives J ≈ 0.95 meV ≈ 0.23 THz for a single pair; at r = 5 Å it gives ≈ 9 GHz. Even including a factor of 1.5 or 2 from the spin eigenvalue difference in Eq. (7), and summing over several nearest neighbors, the plotted range would require either a substantially smaller tip–sample distance (≈ 3.3–3.6 Å) or an unstated multiplicative factor. The paper must either specify the full simulation inputs (sample spin quantum number, number of neighbors, actual distances used) or redo the simulation so that the central resolution claim follows from the stated model.
  2. [Single spin magnetic interactions, Eq. (5)] Equation (5) is the Herring–Flicker exchange expression for two hydrogenic 1s orbitals, characterized by the Bohr radius a_B. Applying it to a V_B^- center in hBN and arbitrary sample spins requires a justification of the effective Bohr radii, orbital overlaps, and screening; the exponential dependence makes the quantitative predictions extremely sensitive to the choice of length scale. The text cites Ref. [32] only for an order-of-magnitude consistency check, but the simulated THz frequencies and the claimed Angstrom resolution depend quantitatively on Eq. (5). Please provide a derivation or a more direct ab initio or model-based justification for the parameters used, or clearly frame the protocol as order-of-magnitude only.
  3. [Magnetic imaging via integration of spin defects with THz s-SNOM, Fig. 3] The protocol places a 5 nm gold layer around the tip to enhance the THz field while requiring a single V_B^- center at the tip apex to couple via exchange at a 4 Å probe–sample separation. The manuscript does not specify whether the gold coating covers the apex defect. If it does, the coating will screen the exchange interaction and prevent the direct van der Waals contact required for the Angstrom-scale exchange coupling; if it does not, the THz field enhancement at the exact position of the defect is not the one shown in Fig. 3(b). This is a load-bearing feasibility point for the proposed integration and needs to be addressed explicitly.
  4. [Magnetic imaging via integration of spin defects with THz s-SNOM, readout paragraph] The readout scheme assumes that a THz-frequency transition of the exchange-split V_B^- ground state can be detected through spin-dependent photoluminescence. Established ODMR contrast for V_B^- is reported at microwave frequencies, and the manuscript provides no argument or estimate that the intersystem crossing remains spin-selective at the meV splittings considered here. Without such an estimate, the all-optical readout at THz frequencies is not quantitatively supported.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The phrase 'order of milivolts' should read 'order of millielectronvolts (meV)', matching the units used elsewhere in the paper.
  2. [Magnetic imaging via integration of spin defects with THz s-SNOM] The word 'metioned' in the sentence about the constant-distance scheme should be 'mentioned'.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'probe-to-sample distance diving into Angstrom range' should be rephrased, for example as 'the probe-to-sample distance reaching the Angstrom range'.
  4. [Single spin magnetic interactions, Eq. (2)] The text 'reduced Plank constant' should be 'reduced Planck constant'.
  5. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption of Fig. 4 appears with corrupted character glyphs in the submitted source; please ensure the final PDF renders the caption as readable text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the protocol is a forward simulation from an externally cited exchange formula.

full rationale

The paper's core derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense: Eq. (5), the exponential exchange coupling Jex(r), is attributed to Herring and Flicker [31], an external source, and the claimed THz splittings are computed forward from that expression rather than fitted to the paper's own imaging target. The magnetic imaging simulation in Fig. 4 is a direct application of Eq. (7) summing J_i_ex St*Si over sample spins with the stated lattice constant and height; no parameter is tuned to reproduce the plotted 0.7-1.1 THz range as a fitted output. The consistency check against DFT calculations cites [32], an external and not self-authored result, and even if that comparison were erroneous it would not make the derivation circular. There is no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' prior work and no ansatz smuggled in via self-citation; the cited sources for the exchange formula and experimental precedents are independent. The internal numerical mismatch between Eq. (5) at r = 4 Angstrom and the plotted frequencies in Fig. 4(b) is a correctness and quantitative-validity concern, not a circularity, and is therefore outside this pass.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All free parameters and axioms are assumptions imported from prior theory or chosen for the simulation; no new particles or interactions are introduced. The main unresolved load-bearing items are the transferability of the exchange formula and the physical placement of the defect at the tip apex.

free parameters (1)
  • Exchange prefactor in Jex(r) = 1.641 e^2/(2a_B) (r/a_B)^(5/2)
    Equation (5) uses the Herring-Flicker asymptotic exchange expression. For V_B^- and a generic sample spin this prefactor is not material-specific; the paper only checks order-of-magnitude consistency with DFT in ref [32].
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption V_B^- center in monolayer hBN can be addressed optically and its spin states read out via photoluminescence.
    Assumed throughout; cited experiments used few-layer or bulk hBN, and monolayer demonstration is still in progress.
  • domain assumption Exchange interaction formula (Eq. 5) applies to V_B^- sample spin pairs.
    The formula is derived for simple two-electron systems and transferred to defect-sample pairs, with only order-of-magnitude validation against a related DFT study.
  • domain assumption A 5 nm Au coating enhances the THz field 40x without blocking exchange coupling.
    Stated in the protocol and Fig. 3; no experimental or ab initio verification that the coating preserves the Angstrom-scale exchange pathway.
  • domain assumption The probe remains at a constant 4 Angstrom distance during AFM scanning.
    Assumed for the resolution simulation; in practice contact or tapping mode at 4 Angstrom separation is not demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of All-optical magnetic imaging with spin defects in van der Waals materials at Angstrom-scale." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EQXWMYHF

@misc{pith2026241109518,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: All-optical magnetic imaging with spin defects in van der Waals materials at Angstrom-scale},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EQXWMYHF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09518}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetic imaging with ultra-high spatial resolution is crucial to exploring the magnetic textures of emerging quantum materials. We propose a novel magnetic imaging protocol that achieves Angstrom-scale resolution by combining spin defects in van der Waals materials and terahertz scattering scanning near-field optical microscopy (THz s-SNOM). Spin defects in the atomic monolayer enable the probe-to-sample distance diving into the Angstrom range where the exchange interactions between the probe and sample spins become predominant. This exchange interaction leads to energy splitting of the probe spin in the order of millielectronvolts, corresponding to THz frequencies. With THz optics and the spin-dependent fluorescence of the probe spin, the interaction energy can be resolved entirely through optical methods. Our proposed all-optical magnetic imaging protocol holds significant promise for investigating magnetic textures in condensed matter physics due to its excellent compatibility and high spatial resolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09518 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Illustration of single defects spin magnetometer cou [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Magnetic interactions versus probe-to-sample dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Enhancement of the THz field by tip. (a) The struc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Simulated scanning resonance frequency of the tip [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [32]

    Proximity-Induced Exchange Interaction: a New Pathway for Quantum Sensing using Spin Centers in Hexagonal Boron Nitride

    L. Shen, D. Xiao, and T. Cao, “Proximity-induced ex- change interaction: a new pathway for quantum sensing using spin centers in hexagonal boron nitride,” (2024), arXiv:2404.05208 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Huang, G

    B. Huang, G. Clark, E. Navarro-Moratalla, D. R. Klein, R. Cheng, K. L. Seyler, D. Zhong, E. Schmidgall, M. A. McGuire, D. H. Cobden, et al., Nature 546, 270 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [2]

    C. Gong, L. Li, Z. Li, H. Ji, A. Stern, Y. Xia, T. Cao, W. Bao, C. Wang, Y. Wang, et al., Nature 546, 265 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [3]

    Qi and S.-C

    X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057 (2011)

    2011

  5. [4]

    M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010)

    2010

  6. [5]

    J. Coey, W. Pickett, et al., MRS bulletin 38, 1040 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [6]

    Santamaria, J

    J. Santamaria, J. Garcia-Barriocanal, Z. Sefrioui, and C. Leon, International Journal of Modern Physics B 27, 1330013 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [7]

    Dieny and M

    B. Dieny and M. Chshiev, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 025008 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 46 references
  1. [8]

    Wiesendanger, H.-J

    R. Wiesendanger, H.-J. G¨ untherodt, G. G¨ untherodt, R. J. Gambino, and R. Ruf, Physical Review Letters 65, 247 (1990)

    1990

  2. [9]

    Wiesendanger, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 1495 (2009)

    R. Wiesendanger, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 1495 (2009)

    2009

  3. [10]

    Baumann, W

    S. Baumann, W. Paul, T. Choi, C. P. Lutz, A. Ardavan, and A. J. Heinrich, Science 350, 417 (2015)

    2015

  4. [11]

    Willke, Y

    P. Willke, Y. Bae, K. Yang, J. L. Lado, A. Ferr´ on, T. Choi, A. Ardavan, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, A. J. Hein- rich, and C. P. Lutz, Science 362, 336 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    K. Yang, W. Paul, S.-H. Phark, P. Willke, Y. Bae, T. Choi, T. Esat, A. Ardavan, A. J. Heinrich, and C. P. Lutz, Science 366, 509 (2019)

    2019

  6. [13]

    Rugar, R

    D. Rugar, R. Budakian, H. J. Mamin, and B. W. Chui, Nature 430, 10.1038/nature02658

    doi

  7. [14]

    Kaiser, A

    U. Kaiser, A. Schwarz, and R. Wiesendanger, Nature 446, 522 (2007)

    2007

  8. [15]

    M. Ye, H. Seo, and G. Galli, npj Computational Mate- rials 5, 44 (2019)

    2019

  9. [16]

    Aharonovich, D

    I. Aharonovich, D. Englund, and M. Toth, Nature Pho- tonics 10, 631 (2016)

    2016

  10. [17]

    Chakraborty, L

    C. Chakraborty, L. Kinnischtzke, K. M. Goodfellow, R. Beams, and A. N. Vamivakas, Nature Nanotechnology 10, 507 (2015)

    2015

  11. [18]

    Gottscholl, M

    A. Gottscholl, M. Kianinia, V. Soltamov, S. Orlin- skii, G. Mamin, C. Bradac, C. Kasper, K. Krambrock, A. Sperlich, M. Toth, et al., Nature materials 19, 540 5 (2020)

    2020

  12. [19]

    Gottscholl, M

    A. Gottscholl, M. Diez, V. Soltamov, C. Kasper, A. Sper- lich, M. Kianinia, C. Bradac, I. Aharonovich, and V. Dyakonov, Science Advances 7, eabf3630 (2021)

    2021

  13. [20]

    H. L. Stern, Q. Gu, J. Jarman, S. Eizagirre Barker, N. Mendelson, D. Chugh, S. Schott, H. H. Tan, H. Sir- ringhaus, I. Aharonovich, et al., Nature communications 13, 618 (2022)

    2022

  14. [21]

    Haykal, R

    A. Haykal, R. Tanos, N. Minotto, A. Durand, F. Fabre, J. Li, J. Edgar, V. Ivady, A. Gali, T. Michel,et al., Nature Communications 13, 4347 (2022)

    2022

  15. [22]

    A. J. Ramsay, R. Hekmati, C. J. Patrickson, S. Baber, D. R. Arvidsson-Shukur, A. J. Bennett, and I. J. Lux- moore, Nature Communications 14, 461 (2023)

    2023

  16. [23]

    Vaidya, X

    S. Vaidya, X. Gao, S. Dikshit, I. Aharonovich, and T. Li, Advances in Physics: X 8, 2206049 (2023)

    2023

  17. [24]

    Gottscholl, M

    A. Gottscholl, M. Diez, V. Soltamov, C. Kasper, D. Krauße, A. Sperlich, M. Kianinia, C. Bradac, I. Aharonovich, and V. Dyakonov, Nature communica- tions 12, 4480 (2021)

    2021

  18. [25]

    Huang, J

    M. Huang, J. Zhou, D. Chen, H. Lu, N. J. McLaughlin, S. Li, M. Alghamdi, D. Djugba, J. Shi, H. Wang, et al., Nature communications 13, 5369 (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    X. Lyu, Q. Tan, L. Wu, C. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Z. Mu, J. Z´ u˜ niga-P´ erez, H. Cai, and W. Gao, Nano Letters22, 6553 (2022)

    2022

  20. [27]

    I. O. Robertson, S. C. Scholten, P. Singh, A. J. Healey, F. Meneses, P. Reineck, H. Abe, T. Ohshima, M. Kianinia, I. Aharonovich, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.10560 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Rizzato, M

    R. Rizzato, M. Schalk, S. Mohr, J. C. Hermann, J. P. Lei- bold, F. Bruckmaier, G. Salvitti, C. Qian, P. Ji, G. V. As- takhov, et al., Nature Communications 14, 5089 (2023)

    2023

  22. [29]

    Sasaki, Y

    K. Sasaki, Y. Nakamura, H. Gu, M. Tsukamoto, S. Naka- harai, T. Iwasaki, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Ogawa, Y. Morita, et al., Applied Physics Letters 122 (2023)

    2023

  23. [30]

    Durand, T

    A. Durand, T. Clua-Provost, F. Fabre, P. Kumar, J. Li, J. Edgar, P. Udvarhelyi, A. Gali, X. Marie, C. Robert, J. G´ erard, B. Gil, G. Cassabois, and V. Jacques, Physical Review Letters 131 (2023), 10.1103/phys- revlett.131.116902

    2023 doi

  24. [31]

    Herring and M

    C. Herring and M. Flicker, Phys. Rev. 134, A362 (1964)

    1964

  25. [33]

    T. L. Cocker, V. Jelic, R. Hillenbrand, and F. A. Heg- mann, Nature Photonics 15, 558 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Zhang, X

    J. Zhang, X. Chen, S. Mills, T. Ciavatti, Z. Yao, R. Mescall, H. Hu, V. Semenenko, Z. Fei, H. Li, et al., ACS Photonics 5, 2645 (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    Maissen, S

    C. Maissen, S. Chen, E. Nikulina, A. Govyadinov, and R. Hillenbrand, Acs Photonics 6, 1279 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    X. Hu, G. Zhang, J. Qian, J. L¨ u, Y. Zhu, and Y. Peng, Nano Lett. 24, 7757 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Appel, E

    P. Appel, E. Neu, M. Ganzhorn, A. Barfuss, M. Batzer, M. Gratz, A. Tsch¨ ope, and P. Maletinsky, Review of Scientific Instruments 87 (2016), 10.1063/1.4952953

    2016 doi

  30. [38]

    T. X. Zhou, R. J. St¨ ohr, and A. Yacoby, Applied Physics Letters 111 (2017), 10.1063/1.4995813

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    Siyushev, M

    P. Siyushev, M. Nesladek, E. Bourgeois, M. Gulka, J. Hruby, T. Yamamoto, M. Trupke, T. Teraji, J. Isoya, and F. Jelezko, Science 363, 728 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    W. S. Huxter, M. F. Sarott, M. Trassin, and C. L. Degen, Nature Physics (2023), 10.1038/s41567-022-01921-4

    2023 doi

  33. [41]

    Song, Q.-C

    T. Song, Q.-C. Sun, E. Anderson, C. Wang, J. Qian, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. A. McGuire, R. St¨ ohr, D. Xiao, T. Cao, J. Wrachtrup, and X. Xu, Science 374, 1140 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Tetienne, T

    J.-P. Tetienne, T. Hingant, J.-V. Kim, L. H. Diez, J.- P. Adam, K. Garcia, J.-F. Roch, S. Rohart, A. Thiav- ille, D. Ravelosona, and V. Jacques, Science 344, 1366 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    Q. Lu, F. Wang, D. Wu, S. Slivken, and M. Razeghi, Nature Communications 10 (2019), 10.1038/s41467-019- 10395-7

    2019 doi

  36. [44]

    Safian, G

    R. Safian, G. Ghazi, and N. Mohammadian, Optical Engineering 58, 1 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Casola, T

    F. Casola, T. Van Der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Nature Re- views Materials 3, 1 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    M. W. N. Ngambou, P. Perrin, I. Balasa, O. Brinza, A. Valentin, V. Mille, F. B´ en´ edic, P. Goldner, A. Tal- laire, and J. Achard, Materials for Quantum Technology 2, 045001 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

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