Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

A polarization path that winds twice around the Poincaré sphere's S3 axis produces a first-order plasmonic vortex, while an ∞-shaped path that avoids the axis yields a phaseless bright spot.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 23:15 UTC pith:LGB4PL7T

load-bearing objection Nice experimental switching demonstration, but the S3-encircling criterion rests on a fitted parasitic retarder — worth a serious referee, not desk reject. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.14253 v2 pith:LGB4PL7T submitted 2026-02-15 physics.optics

Revealing Hidden Topology of Complex Vector Beams via Plasmonic Interactions

Sahil Sahoo , Ahmed Lafeef EN , Andre Yaroshevsky , Peter Banzer , Yuri Gorodetski This is my paper
classification physics.optics
keywords plasmonic vortextopological chargePoincaré spherecomplex vector beamQ-plateStokes parameterssurface plasmonsstructured light
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper claims that the hidden topological information of complex vector beams can be read out through plasmonic interactions with nano-slits. Specifically, it establishes a direct correspondence between the geometry of the beam's polarization trajectory on the Poincaré sphere and the topological charge of the excited surface plasmon field. When the trajectory encircles the S3 axis twice, a first-order plasmonic vortex appears; when it forms an ∞-shape that excludes the axis, the central field is phaseless. The claim is supported by Stokes parameter measurements and numerical Jones matrix simulations that include a parasitic retardation in the Q-plate. If correct, this provides a practical way to encode and switch topological states in structured light.

Core claim

The central claim is that the topological charge of the plasmonic vortex is directly determined by how the polarization path of the incident complex vector beam circumvents the S3 axis of the Poincaré sphere. For a voltage of 2.2 V (corresponding to a Q-plate retardation δ ≈ π), the measured Stokes trajectory encircles the S3 axis twice, and a first-order plasmonic vortex (l = 1) appears at the center of a circular slit. At 1.8 V and 3.8 V (δ ≈ 1.5π and 0.5π), the trajectory forms an ∞-shape that excludes the axis, and the central spot is phaseless and bright. The paper further shows that with a spiral slit, the vortex charge combines according to l = l_CVB + m, producing a switch between l

What carries the argument

The key object is the polarization trajectory traced on the Poincaré sphere by the spatially varying Stokes vector of the complex vector beam. The topological property is the winding number of this trajectory around the S3 axis: encircling the axis twice corresponds to a nonzero geometric phase and yields a plasmonic vortex, while trajectories that do not encircle the axis produce no net phase. The experimental readout uses circular or spiral plasmonic slits that convert the incident polarization into surface plasmons, and a Jones matrix model that includes a fitted parasitic retarder T_r(3π/4, 0) to account for the observed tilt of the trajectory off the equator.

Load-bearing premise

The entire classification rests on a fitted parasitic retardation in the Q-plate (a waveplate T_r with retardation 3π/4 and orientation 0) that tilts the polarization trajectory off the equator; if this retardation is wrong or is an artifact of the Stokes measurement, the claimed connection between trajectory topology and vortex charge could fail.

What would settle it

An independent measurement of the Q-plate's actual parasitic retardation (e.g., by null ellipsometry or a separate Stokes experiment without the sample) that disagrees with the fitted T_r(3π/4, 0), combined with a check of whether the vortex still appears when the measured trajectory does not encircle S3.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the correspondence holds, the topological charge of a plasmonic vortex can be switched by simply tuning the Q-plate voltage, offering a dynamic control of optical angular momentum at the nanoscale.
  • The spiral-slit charge rule l = l_CVB + m provides a way to deterministically add or subtract topological charge through the geometry of the probing structure.
  • The ability to classify complex vector beams by their Stokes trajectory on the Poincaré sphere gives an experimentally accessible topological invariant for structured light.
  • The observed partial phase dislocations at intermediate voltages suggest that topological charge can be continuously 'tuned' through mixed regimes, potentially useful for graded optical elements.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to test whether trajectories that encircle the S3 axis more than twice produce plasmonic vortices with correspondingly higher topological charge, which would generalize the observed l = 1 case.
  • The fitted parasitic retarder T_r could be independently characterized using ellipsometry or interferometry; a direct measurement would either confirm the model or reveal an artifact in the Stokes reconstruction.
  • The ∞-shaped trajectories that do not encircle S3 might be interpreted as topologically trivial configurations that could serve as robust 'off' states in an optical routing scheme based on polarization topology.
  • The technique may extend to other plasmonic geometries, such as arrays of slits or metasurfaces, where the local polarization response could be engineered to read out more complex topological features.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experimental and numerical study of complex vector beams (CVBs) generated by a voltage-tunable liquid-crystal Q-plate and probed with plasmonic circular and spiral nano-slits. For horizontal input polarization, three voltage regimes are observed: a bright phaseless spot at 1.8 V, a first-order plasmonic vortex at 2.2 V, and a bright spot again at 3.8 V; for vertical input, the center remains dark. The authors measure the free-space Stokes parameters of the generated beams and map them onto the Poincaré sphere. They propose that the appearance of a plasmonic vortex is directly related to whether the Stokes trajectory encircles the S3 axis twice, and they support this with a multilayer LC model that includes a fitted parasitic retarder T_r(3π/4,0). Spiral-slit experiments are used to add dynamic phase and to test a charge-summation rule l = l_CVB + m.

Significance. If the central correspondence were firmly established, the paper would offer a compact and tunable way to read out hidden polarization topology through plasmonic interactions, with potential applications in structured-light metrology and topological photonics. The work has genuine strengths: direct Stokes-parameter measurements for several input polarizations, comparison with a multilayer LC model, and the use of spiral slits to introduce a controlled dynamic phase. However, the main claim is not independently established: the S3-encircling criterion is stabilized by a fitted parasitic retarder, and the voltage-to-retardation values are chosen to match the observed intensity regimes. The topological-charge assignments also rely on intensity patterns rather than direct phase measurements. These issues are load-bearing and require additional calibration and phase characterization.

major comments (3)
  1. [§II, Eq. (3) and Figs. 3–4] The S3-encircling criterion used to distinguish the vortex regime from the phaseless regimes is stabilized by the fitted parasitic retarder T_r(3π/4,0). The paper states that this retarder is introduced 'to properly represent the measured results' and provides no independent polarimetric calibration of the Q-plate or a control experiment without it. Because the three retardation values δ≈1.5π, π, and 0.5π are also selected to match the observed intensity regimes, the model-to-data comparison is partly circular. An independent Jones-matrix or polarimetric characterization of the Q-plate, including uncertainties on γ and β, is required before the trajectory topology can be claimed to cause the vortex.
  2. [§II and §III, Figs. 2 and 6] The existence of a first-order plasmonic vortex is inferred solely from a dark center in the intensity pattern; no phase measurement (e.g., interferometric LRM or spatial phase retrieval) is reported. A dark center is necessary but not sufficient for a phase singularity with l=1. In the spiral-slit experiments, the claimed switching between l=2 and l=0 is likewise read off intensity images without quantifying the phase. Direct phase retrieval or a reference vortex measurement with known charge is needed to support the topological-charge assignments.
  3. [§II, after Fig. 5, and §IV] The central claim that a vortex appears exactly when the Stokes trajectory encircles S3 twice is not derived or independently tested; the text itself uses 'we may suggest' and 'we suspect.' Moreover, an ideal radial beam at δ=π lies on the equator and winds twice around S3, yet the paper states it should produce a bright spot rather than a vortex. The distinction only emerges after introducing the fitted T_r tilt. This makes the criterion model-dependent. A derivation from the slit-coupling phase, or a controlled experiment with an independently calibrated retarder, is needed to establish the suggested link.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 11 caption] The caption says 'retardations of δ≈1.5π, π and π' for the |V⟩ case, while the text describes δ≈0.5π for 3.8 V. This appears to be a typo.
  2. [§III] The sentence beginning 'In worth mentioning that since |H/V⟩ = 1/√2 (|D⟩ ± |A⟩ ...' is incomplete and has formatting issues; please rewrite it.
  3. [Appendix labels] The text refers to 'Appendix 1' in the Fig. 3 caption, while the appendices are labeled A1 and A2. Standardize the cross-references.
  4. [§II, Figs. 3–5] An uncertainty of ±0.05π is quoted for δ, but no error bars, repetitions, or fitting procedure are described for the Stokes data or the voltage-to-retardation map. Please clarify how this uncertainty was obtained.
  5. [§II, Fig. 5] The convention for 2ψ modulo 2π is stated, but the polarization ellipse orientation is usually defined modulo π. Please clarify how the unwrapped 2ψ is computed from the measured ellipse data.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the parasitic-retarder fit is acknowledged and the central correlation is empirical, with an independent spiral-slit check.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the plasmonic vortex appears when the measured Stokes trajectory encircles the S3 axis twice. This correlation is established from free-space Stokes measurements taken with the sample removed, not from the plasmonic intensity data. The retarder Tr(3π/4,0) is explicitly fitted — 'we find out that a retarder Tr(3π/4,0) should be used to properly represent the measured results' — and the paper acknowledges this as a model ingredient rather than presenting it as an independent prediction. The numerical model is then used for comparison, but the topological classification is read from the experimental Stokes trajectories themselves. The vortex observation at 2.2 V and the absence of vortex at 1.8 V and 3.8 V are independent experimental facts, and the spiral-slit experiment provides an additional nontrivial consistency check through the charge summation l = l_CVB + m, observed as a switch between l=2 and l=0. The self-citations [34,35] support a standard spiral-slit dynamic-phase technique and are not load-bearing for the main topological conclusion. The paper's own hedged language ('we may suggest', 'we suspect') shows that the S3-to-vortex link is a hypothesis consistent with the data rather than a derivation forced by construction. Thus no circular step, self-definitional reduction, or fitted-input-called-prediction can be identified on the basis of the presented equations and measurements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on two calibration layers that are not independently verified: (1) a parasitic waveplate T_r(3π/4, 0) added to the model 'to properly represent the measured results' (Section II, Eq. 3), and (2) an inferred voltage→retardation map (1.8V→≈1.5π, 2.2V→≈π, 3.8V→≈0.5π, claimed ±0.05π) with no error analysis. The wrapped-angle convention for 2ψ, the fully-polarized assumption for Stokes normalization, and the local-radial-polarizer model of the ring slit are standard domain assumptions. No new physical entities are postulated. The background mechanisms — Q-plate Jones calculus, PB-phase vortex generation, LRM readout — are established in the cited literature, some of it from the same group (refs 34-35) but independently reproduced in the broader literature.

free parameters (4)
  • Parasitic retarder retardation γ = 3π/4
    Chosen (Eq. 3) so the numerical model reproduces the measured Stokes trajectories; the paper attributes the tilt to parasitic Q-plate retardation but does not measure it.
  • Parasitic retarder orientation β = 0
    Same fit as γ; part of T_r.
  • Voltage-to-retardation map δ(V_Q) = ≈1.5π (1.8V), ≈π (2.2V), ≈0.5π (3.8V), ±0.05π
    Assigned so the model matches the three observed plasmonic regimes; the δ(V) formula in Section II is not used to predict the voltages.
  • LC-stack layer count N and per-layer rotation = unspecified
    Eq. 1 layers N rotated retarders; N is never specified and the model is evaluated in the Δ≫Θ limit.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Jones calculus describes the Q-plate as a stack of N rotated retarders (Eq. 1-2), with the δ/N→δ limit for large N
    Standard paraxial treatment of birefringent waveplates; the layer stack is a modeling device.
  • domain assumption A ring slit acts as a local radial polarizer whose SP excitation is set by the local projection of the incident field
    Standard in the field (refs 34-38); no derivation of the coupling amplitude from the slit geometry is given in the paper.
  • ad hoc to paper A uniform parasitic retardation exists after the Q-plate and is representable by a waveplate T_r(γ,β)
    Introduced with fitted values (γ=3π/4, β=0) to match measured Stokes data; no independent characterization is provided.
  • domain assumption The beam is fully polarized so that S'_i = S_i/S_0 is valid
    Stated in Section II; depolarization is neglected.
  • domain assumption LRM intensities map directly to the SP interference field in the slit center
    Standard LRM practice (ref 49); no calibration of measured intensity to SP amplitude is shown.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 13593 in / 19390 out tokens · 183996 ms · 2026-08-02T23:15:56.043409+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Structured light beams with space-variant polarization can be efficiently generated using voltage-tunable nematic liquid-crystal (Q-plate). By appropriately selecting the input state and the retardation of the Q-plate, an optical field acquires a spatially structured polarization distribution that is capable of encoding non-trivial topological information across the beam profile. These features can be directly read out through interaction with plasmonic nano-structures, such as circular and spiral slits. Here we show that, upon illumination, polarization-dependent excitation of surface plasmons converts the hidden topology of the polarization structure into observable intensity distributions, including plasmonic vortices and characteristic interference patterns, while the tunability of the input parameters enables a rich variety of distinct topological forms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.14253 by Ahmed Lafeef EN, Andre Yaroshevsky, Peter Banzer, Sahil Sahoo, Yuri Gorodetski.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Surface plasmon interference: (a–c) Experimentally measured SPs field for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Experimental and numerical Stokes parameters: (a–c) Experimental measurements at applied voltages of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Encircling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Stokes-vector winding: a–c Evolution of 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Dynamic phase: (a,a1) SEM image of spiral [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Encircled one-loop polarization vectors: Stokes-parameter trajectories on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Partial phase: SP wavefront interference for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Output-state tilting: (a,a1) Stokes parameters for a quarter-wave plate (QWP) oriented at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: (a–c) Experimental measurements at applied voltages of 1.8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Stokes parameters plotted on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: Numerical Stokes-parameter evolution on the Poincar´e sphere for (a–c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: (a,b) Numerical 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15: Numerical results for Stokes-parameter trajectories on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Forbes, M

    A. Forbes, M. De Oliveira, and M. R. Dennis, Structured light, Nature Photonics15, 253 (2021)

    2021

  2. [2]

    C. He, Y. Shen, and A. Forbes, Towards higher-dimensional structured light, Light: Science & Applications11, 205 (2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    Chekhova and P

    M. Chekhova and P. Banzer,Polarization of Light: In Classical, Quantum, and Nonlinear Optics(Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    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

  5. [5]

    Rubinsztein-Dunlop, A

    H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, A. Forbes, M. V. Berry, M. R. Dennis, D. L. Andrews, M. Mansuripur, C. Denz, C. Alpmann, P. Banzer, T. Bauer,et al., Roadmap on structured light, Journal of Optics19, 013001 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    Naidoo, F

    D. Naidoo, F. S. Roux, A. Dudley, I. Litvin, B. Piccirillo, L. Marrucci, and A. Forbes, Controlled generation of higher-order poincar´ e sphere beams from a laser, Nature Photonics10, 327 (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    Corona-Aquino, Z

    S. Corona-Aquino, Z. Ibarra-Borja, O. Calder´ on-Losada, B. Piccirillo, V. Vicu˜ na-Hern´ andez, T. Moctezuma-Quistian, H. Cruz-Ram ´ ırez, D. Lopez-Mago, and A. B. U’Ren, Generation of heralded vector-polarized single photons in remotely controlled topological classes, Physical Review Applied21, 034030 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    Alpmann, C

    C. Alpmann, C. Sch¨ oler, and C. Denz, Elegant gaussian beams for enhanced optical manipulation, Applied Physics Letters 106(2015)

    2015

  9. [9]

    Liesener, M

    J. Liesener, M. Reicherter, T. Haist, and H. J. Tiziani, Multi-functional optical tweezers using computer-generated holograms, Optics Communications185, 77 (2000)

    2000

  10. [10]

    E. R. Dufresne and D. G. Grier, Optical tweezer arrays and optical substrates created with diffractive optics, Review of scientific instruments69, 1974 (1998)

    1974

  11. [11]

    A. Mair, A. Vaziri, G. Weihs, and A. Zeilinger, Entanglement of the orbital angular momentum states of photons, Nature 412, 313 (2001)

    2001

  12. [12]

    Mirhosseini, O

    M. Mirhosseini, O. S. Maga˜ na-Loaiza, M. N. O’Sullivan, B. Rodenburg, M. Malik, M. P. Lavery, M. J. Padgett, D. J. 14 Gauthier, and R. W. Boyd, High-dimensional quantum cryptography with twisted light, New Journal of Physics17, 033033 (2015)

    2015

  13. [13]

    Harter, Z

    J. Harter, Z. Zhao, J.-Q. Yan, D. Mandrus, and D. Hsieh, A parity-breaking electronic nematic phase transition in the spin-orbit coupled metal cd2re2o7, Science356, 295 (2017)

    2017

  14. [14]

    Li, Y.-P

    Z.-X. Li, Y.-P. Ruan, P. Chen, J. Tang, W. Hu, K.-Y. Xia, and Y.-Q. Lu, Liquid crystal devices for vector vortex beams manipulation and quantum information applications, Chinese optics letters19, 112601 (2021)

    2021

  15. [15]

    Milione, M

    G. Milione, M. P. Lavery, H. Huang, Y. Ren, G. Xie, T. A. Nguyen, E. Karimi, L. Marrucci, D. A. Nolan, R. R. Alfano, et al., 4×20 gbit/s mode division multiplexing over free space using vector modes and aq-plate mode (de) multiplexer, Optics letters40, 1980 (2015)

    1980

  16. [16]

    Yang and A

    C.-H. Yang and A. Y.-G. Fuh, Complex beam shaping based on an equivalent q-plate system and analysis of its properties using digital holography polarization imaging, Scientific Reports7, 2769 (2017)

    2017

  17. [17]

    J. Yao, S. Wu, X. Li, J. Liu, Q. Zhan, and A. Wang, Generation of arbitrary vector vortex beam using a single q-plate, Laser & Photonics Reviews19, 2402290 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    X. Yi, Y. Liu, X. Ling, X. Zhou, Y. Ke, H. Luo, S. Wen, and D. Fan, Hybrid-order poincar´ e sphere, Physical Review A 91, 023801 (2015)

    2015

  19. [19]

    Cardano, E

    F. Cardano, E. Karimi, S. Slussarenko, L. Marrucci, C. de Lisio, and E. Santamato, Polarization pattern of vector vortex beams generated by q-plates with different topological charges, Applied optics51, C1 (2012)

    2012

  20. [20]

    L. Han, J. Qi, C. Gao, and F. Li, Controllable reverse energy flow in the focus of tightly focused hybrid vector beams, Optics Express32, 36865 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    Fickler, L

    R. Fickler, L. Kopf, and M. Ornigotti, Higher-order poincar´ e spheres and spatiospectral poincar´ e beams, Physical Review Research6, 033298 (2024)

    2024

  22. [22]

    Bauer, P

    T. Bauer, P. Banzer, E. Karimi, S. Orlov, A. Rubano, L. Marrucci, E. Santamato, R. W. Boyd, and G. Leuchs, Observation of optical polarization m¨ obius strips, Science347, 964 (2015)

    2015

  23. [23]

    J. J. Nivas, F. Cardano, Z. Song, A. Rubano, R. Fittipaldi, A. Vecchione, D. Paparo, L. Marrucci, R. Bruzzese, and S. Amoruso, Surface structuring with polarization-singular femtosecond laser beams generated by a q-plate, Scientific Reports7, 42142 (2017)

    2017

  24. [24]

    Marrucci, C

    L. Marrucci, C. Manzo, and D. Paparo, Optical spin-to-orbital angular momentum conversion in inhomogeneous anisotropic media, Physical review letters96, 163905 (2006)

    2006

  25. [25]

    J. C. Quiceno-Moreno, D. Marco, M. d. M. S´ anchez-L´ opez, E. Solarte, and I. Moreno, Analysis of hybrid vector beams generated with a detuned q-plate, Applied Sciences10, 3427 (2020)

    2020

  26. [26]

    W. Shu, X. Ling, X. Fu, Y. Liu, Y. Ke, and H. Luo, Polarization evolution of vector beams generated by q-plates, Photonics Research5, 64 (2017)

    2017

  27. [27]

    P. A. Quinto-Su, Interferometric measurement of arbitrary propagating vector beams that are tightly focused, Optics Letters48, 3693 (2023)

    2023

  28. [28]

    M. A. Al Khafaji, C. M. Cisowski, H. Jimbrown, S. Croke, S. P´ adua, and S. Franke-Arnold, Single-shot characterization of vector beams by generalized measurements, Optics Express30, 22396 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    Camacho-Morales, M

    R. Camacho-Morales, M. Rahmani, S. Kruk, L. Wang, L. Xu, D. A. Smirnova, A. S. Solntsev, A. Miroshnichenko, H. H. Tan, F. Karouta,et al., Nonlinear generation of vector beams from algaas nanoantennas, Nano letters16, 7191 (2016)

    2016

  30. [30]

    V. Aita, D. J. Roth, A. Zaleska, A. V. Krasavin, L. H. Nicholls, M. Shevchenko, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, and A. V. Zayats, Longitudinal field controls vector vortex beams in anisotropic epsilon-near-zero metamaterials, Nature Communications 16, 3807 (2025)

    2025

  31. [31]

    T. W. Ebbesen, H. J. Lezec, H. Ghaemi, T. Thio, and P. A. Wolff, Extraordinary optical transmission through sub- wavelength hole arrays, nature391, 667 (1998)

    1998

  32. [32]

    Prinz, M

    E. Prinz, M. Hartelt, G. Spektor, M. Orenstein, and M. Aeschlimann, Orbital angular momentum in nanoplasmonic vortices, ACS Photonics10, 340 (2023)

    2023

  33. [33]

    W. A. Murray and W. L. Barnes, Plasmonic materials, Advanced materials19, 3771 (2007)

    2007

  34. [34]

    Gorodetski, A

    Y. Gorodetski, A. Niv, V. Kleiner, and E. Hasman, Observation of the spin-based plasmonic effect in nanoscale structures, Physical review letters101, 043903 (2008)

    2008

  35. [35]

    Gorodetski, A

    Y. Gorodetski, A. Drezet, C. Genet, and T. W. Ebbesen, Generating far-field orbital angular momenta from near-field optical chirality, Physical review letters110, 203906 (2013)

    2013

  36. [36]

    G. M. Lerman, A. Yanai, and U. Levy, Demonstration of nanofocusing by the use of plasmonic lens illuminated with radially polarized light, Nano letters9, 2139 (2009)

    2009

  37. [37]

    L. Yin, V. K. Vlasko-Vlasov, J. Pearson, J. M. Hiller, J. Hua, U. Welp, D. E. Brown, and C. W. Kimball, Subwavelength focusing and guiding of surface plasmons, Nano letters5, 1399 (2005)

    2005

  38. [38]

    W. Chen, D. C. Abeysinghe, R. L. Nelson, and Q. Zhan, Plasmonic lens made of multiple concentric metallic rings under radially polarized illumination, Nano letters9, 4320 (2009)

    2009

  39. [39]

    Spektor, E

    G. Spektor, E. Prinz, M. Hartelt, A.-K. Mahro, M. Aeschlimann, and M. Orenstein, Orbital angular momentum multiplication in plasmonic vortex cavities, Science Advances7, eabg5571 (2021)

    2021

  40. [40]

    D.-J. Yang, Y. Li, Y.-Q. Zhang, L. Liu, Y.-H. Xie, X. Fu, J.-C. Liu, and Q.-Q. Wang, Plasmonic toroidal vortices, Laser & Photonics Reviews18, 2400474 (2024)

    2024

  41. [41]

    G. M. Vanacore, G. Berruto, I. Madan, E. Pomarico, P. Biagioni, R. Lamb, D. McGrouther, O. Reinhardt, I. Kaminer, B. Barwick,et al., Ultrafast generation and control of an electron vortex beam via chiral plasmonic near fields, Nature materials18, 573 (2019)

    2019

  42. [42]

    B. Wang, W. Liu, M. Zhao, J. Wang, Y. Zhang, A. Chen, F. Guan, X. Liu, L. Shi, and J. Zi, Generating optical vortex 15 beams by momentum-space polarization vortices centred at bound states in the continuum, Nature Photonics14, 623 (2020)

    2020

  43. [43]

    Y. Zhou, X. Ye, S. Liu, S. Chen, D. Tang, and F. Fan, Simultaneous chiral polarization and edge enhancement imaging enabled by a single geometric-phase-based element, Optics Letters48, 5085 (2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    Zhang, R

    Y. Zhang, R. Zhang, X. Li, L. Ma, C. Liu, C. He, and C. Cheng, Radially polarized plasmonic vector vortex generated by a metasurface spiral in gold film, Optics express25, 32150 (2017)

    2017

  45. [45]

    Zhang, Y

    R. Zhang, Y. Zhang, L. Ma, X. Zeng, X. Li, Z. Zhan, X. Ren, C. He, C. Liu, and C. Cheng, Nanoscale optical lattices of arbitrary orders manipulated by plasmonic metasurfaces combining geometrical and dynamic phases, Nanoscale11, 14024 (2019)

    2019

  46. [46]

    H. Zhou, C. Zhao, C. He, L. Huang, T. Man, and Y. Wan, Optical computing metasurfaces: applications and advances, Nanophotonics13, 419 (2024)

    2024

  47. [47]

    Abdollahramezani, O

    S. Abdollahramezani, O. Hemmatyar, and A. Adibi, Meta-optics for spatial optical analog computing, Nanophotonics9, 4075 (2020)

    2020

  48. [48]

    C. P. Jisha, S. Nolte, and A. Alberucci, Geometric phase in optics: from wavefront manipulation to waveguiding, Laser & Photonics Reviews15, 2100003 (2021)

    2021

  49. [49]

    Hohenau, J

    A. Hohenau, J. Krenn, A. Drezet, O. Mollet, S. Huant, C. Genet, B. Stein, and T. Ebbesen, Surface plasmon leakage radiation microscopy at the diffraction limit, Optics express19, 25749 (2011)

    2011

  50. [50]

    G. G. Stokes, On the composition and resolution of streams of polarized light from different sources, Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society9, 399 (1851)

  51. [51]

    A. Sit, F. Di Colandrea, A. D’Errico, and E. Karimi, Spatially twisted liquid-crystal devices, APL Photonics9(2024)

    2024

  52. [52]

    G. M. Lerman, L. Stern, and U. Levy, Generation and tight focusing of hybridly polarized vector beams, Optics express 18, 27650 (2010)

    2010