Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Quantum metric quadrupoles in elemental bismuth thin films

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that third-order nonlinear transport in centrosymmetric non-magnetic materials is governed by quantum metric quadrupoles, demonstrated in polycrystalline bismuth thin films up to room temperature.

desk verdict The symmetry argument for QMQs in polycrystalline films is likely correct; the experiment is suggestive but needs a thermal control to close the case. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.25725 v1 pith:NUNJLFLK submitted 2026-07-28 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Rhonald Burgos Atencia , Pavlo Makushko , Gabriele Naselli , Debottam Mandal , Paul Chekhonin , Sergey Kovalev , Steffen Kober , Zhe Wang
show 6 more authors
Igor Veremchuk Oleksiy Pashkin Fabian Ganss Maria Teresa Mercaldo Denys Makarov Carmine Ortix
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords quantummetricquadrupolethird-ordernonlineartransportthird-harmonicgenerationbismuththinfilmscentrosymmetricmaterialsRashbasurfacestatesDiracfermionspolycrystalline
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 in non-magnetic materials with inversion symmetry, third-order nonlinear transport is controlled by quantum metric quadrupoles (QMQs), the momentum-space quadrupole moments of the quantum metric, which is the real part of the quantum geometric tensor. Because this third-order response has an isotropic component, it survives spatial averaging over randomly oriented crystallites, so it should appear in ordinary polycrystalline films rather than only in pristine single crystals. The authors validate the prediction in sputtered elemental bismuth thin films, observing a third-harmonic voltage that scales as the cube of the applied current, is much stronger longitudinally than transversely, and persists to room temperature. They argue the signal is surface-dominated, matching estimates for spin-orbit-split Rashba surface states, with the quantum-metric term about four orders of magnitude above the nonlinear Drude contribution. If correct, this makes cubic transport a practical, room-temperature probe of wavefunction geometry in the largest class of solids.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the quantum metric quadrupole (QMQ): the second momentum-space moment of the trace of the band-energy-normalized non-Abelian quantum metric, $\mathrm{Tr}\,G_{\mu\nu}=\mathrm{Tr}\,g_{\mu\nu}/|\mathbf{d}|$, where for a Dirac Hamiltonian $H=\mathbf{d}\cdot\boldsymbol{\Gamma}$ the metric trace is $\mathrm{Tr}(g_{\mu\nu}) = \partial_{k_\mu}\hat{\mathbf d}\cdot\partial_{k_\nu}\hat{\mathbf d}/2$. The QMQ densities (second derivatives such as $\partial^2_{xx}\mathrm{Tr}\,G_{xx}$) integrate to the geometric third-order conductivity, which scales linearly with relaxation time $\tau$, while the competing nonlinear Drude term scales as $\tau^3$. For Rashba surface states the net QMQ diverges at the Lifshitz transition, and because the longitudinal QMQ current is isotropic in the film plane and flows in the same direction on opposite surfaces, it survives polycrystalline averaging and adds to the bulk contribution.

What would settle it

Measure the third-harmonic voltage while holding the root-mean-square current fixed but changing the current's duty cycle or frequency; if the signal tracks the thermal model rather than staying proportional to the geometric $\sigma_{x;xxx}$, the QMQ interpretation fails. Alternatively, systematically vary the surface-state penetration depth or disorder the surface: a QMQ signal should disappear when the Rashba surface states are removed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the third-order conductivity tensor in centrosymmetric non-magnetic materials hosting relativistic fermions is governed by quantum metric quadrupoles. These quadrupoles arise from both the non-Abelian quantum geometry of bulk three-dimensional Dirac fermions and the Abelian quantum geometry of spin-orbit-coupled surface states; in both cases the relevant object is the trace of the band-energy-normalized non-Abelian quantum metric, and the longitudinal response is set by its second momentum-space derivatives. The bulk and surface QMQ currents flow in the same direction at opposite surfaces, so they reinforce rather than cancel, and the longitudinal component survives averaging over random crystalline domains, unlike Berry-curvature dipole and triple surface currents. In 100 nm polycrystalline bismuth films the authors measure a third-harmonic longitudinal voltage $U_{x;xxx} \propto (I_\omega)^3$, a transverse response two orders smaller, and a $\sigma_{x;xxx}\simeq 10^{-6}\,\mathrm{A\,m/V^3}$ whose temperature dependence tracks the n-type carrier density, the fingerprint of the Rashba surface-state contribution. They further report efficient THz third-harmonic generation, placing the quantum-metric origin of the signal as the consistent explanation.

Load-bearing premise

The measured signal is attributed to quantum metric quadrupoles assuming that the polycrystalline bismuth surfaces are described by a simple spin-split surface-state model and that resistance changes from Joule heating do not contribute to the 37.5 Hz third-harmonic voltage.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The quantum metric becomes measurable in centrosymmetric, non-magnetic polycrystalline films, removing the single-crystal requirement for geometry-induced nonlinear transport.
  • Third-harmonic transport can serve as a room-temperature diagnostic of wavefunction geometry: the measured $\sigma_{x;xxx}/\sigma_{x;x}$ ratio is independent of mobility, pointing to a purely geometric origin.
  • Any material with linearly dispersing bulk bands or Rashba surface states, such as Dirac semimetals or noble-metal surfaces, should host QMQ-driven cubic response, so screening for large QMQ densities identifies new candidate materials.
  • The surface QMQ contribution can be tuned through carrier density because of its divergence at the Rashba Lifshitz transition, offering electrical or chemical control of the nonlinearity.
  • Polycrystalline bismuth films act as efficient THz third-harmonic sources, suggesting low-cost upconverters compatible with large-area fabrication.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A clean thermal control, comparing the third-harmonic response under pulsed versus continuous current at fixed average power, would separate any Joule-heating contribution from the geometric term; the paper reports a linear current-voltage curve but no explicit thermal model for the 37.5 Hz drive.
  • If the QMQ assignment is correct, the third-order conductivity of polycrystalline films should scale inversely with the penetration depth of the surface states and should be suppressible by a surface treatment that removes or disorders the Rashba bands.
  • The same mechanism could generate fifth- or higher-order harmonic responses from higher moments of the quantum metric, and the divergence at the Lifshitz transition might be probed by electrostatic gating in a narrow-gap Rashba film.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper argues that third-order nonlinear transport in centrosymmetric, non-magnetic materials is governed by quantum metric quadrupoles (QMQs), which arise from both the non-Abelian quantum geometry of bulk Dirac fermions and the Abelian quantum geometry of spin-orbit-coupled surface states. The authors derive the QMQ contribution to the third-order conductivity, show that it survives spatial averaging in polycrystalline films, and validate the prediction experimentally in 100-nm-thick polycrystalline bismuth films. The experimental evidence consists of a 37.5 Hz third-harmonic voltage measurement that follows U_{x;xxx} = R^{(3)}(I_ω)^3, a linear first-harmonic I-V curve, temperature-dependent magnetotransport, and THz third-harmonic generation centered at 350 GHz. The measured σ_{x;xxx} ≈ 10^-6 A m/V^3 is compared to a Rashba surface-state model with assumed parameters, leading to the claim that the response is dominated by surface-state QMQs.

Significance. If confirmed, the result would establish a new zero-field transport probe of wavefunction geometry in the largest class of materials—centrosymmetric, non-magnetic systems—and would demonstrate that this probe works in scalable polycrystalline thin films at room temperature. The conceptual advance that the QMQ-induced current has an isotropic component that survives domain averaging, unlike second-order Berry-curvature responses, is significant and well argued. The paper also provides a concrete candidate platform (bismuth) and quantitative estimates. However, the experimental validation is not yet airtight because the central low-frequency third-harmonic measurement lacks a thermal control, the quantitative comparison uses unmeasured surface parameters, and the core theoretical derivation is relegated to the Supplemental Material.

major comments (4)
  1. [Methods: Harmonic transport measurement; Fig. 3(d)]
  2. [Fig. 3(g) and surrounding text]
  3. [Main text: Theory and Fig. 1(a)]
  4. [Fig. 3(f) and text following]
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Fig. 2]
  2. [Fig. 2 caption]
  3. [General notation]
  4. [Main text after Fig. 3]

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

The paper's derivation of third-order transport from quantum metric quadrupoles is self-contained; no circular step reduces the prediction to the measurement by construction.

full rationale

The central theory is derived in the paper rather than imported: the third-order conductivity is obtained from a semiclassical treatment of Bloch electrons and expressed through the trace of the non-Abelian band-energy normalized quantum metric and its quadrupole moments, with the bulk Dirac and Rashba surface-state evaluations performed from explicit Hamiltonians. The experimental third-harmonic voltage is independently measured and converted to a conductivity via a stated formula relating U_3ω to σ_x;xxx; this is a standard extraction, not a restatement of the theoretical expression. The comparison justifying the quantum-metric interpretation is supported by separate model calculations that contrast the QMQ term with the nonlinear Drude term, and the bulk contribution with the surface contribution. Although the Rashba surface-state estimate relies on assumed parameters (α_R = 0.5 eV Å, m* = 0.01 m_e, l_d = 5 nm) plus a relaxation time obtained from optical conductivity, these are inputs stated in the text and are not fitted to the measured third-harmonic data, so the predicted magnitude is not forced by construction. Self-citations appear only as contextual references to prior experiments on bismuth and THz setups; they do not carry the load of the derivation. The lack of an explicit thermal control for the 37.5 Hz third-harmonic measurement is a legitimate experimental concern about alternative mechanisms, but it is not a definitional circularity. Accordingly, the derivation chain is self-contained and no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation assumes semiclassical transport and specific model Hamiltonians for bismuth. Free parameters are the Rashba surface-state parameters used to estimate the magnitude of the effect. The quantum metric quadrupole is a derived moment of the quantum metric, not a new invented entity. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Rashba spin-orbit strength alpha_R = 0.5 eV Angstrom
    Chosen for the surface-state theoretical estimate (Fig. 3g and main text); not independently measured in these films, and it directly controls the predicted surface QMQ conductivity.
  • Rashba effective mass m* = 0.01 m_e
    Chosen for the surface-state estimate (Fig. 3g); not independently measured, and it sets the band curvature and the Lifshitz transition position.
  • Surface-state penetration depth l_d = 5 nm
    Assumed to convert the surface sheet response into an effective volume conductivity; directly scales the claimed sigma_x;xxx magnitude in Fig. 3(g).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Semiclassical Boltzmann transport with a constant relaxation time tau describes the third-order current.
    Invoked in the main text: 'Treating the dynamics of Bloch electrons at the semiclassical level...'. The separation between the quantum metric term (linear in tau) and the nonlinear Drude term (cubic in tau) is central to the interpretation.
  • domain assumption The four-band isotropic Dirac model H = d dot Gamma captures the non-Abelian quantum geometry of bismuth's L-point electron pockets.
    Used to compute the bulk QMQ densities in Fig. 1(a)-(f); bismuth is not an isotropic Dirac semimetal, so this is an idealized representative model.
  • domain assumption Surface states of Bi(111) are described by a simple Rashba Hamiltonian with parameters alpha_R, m*, and l_d.
    Used for the estimate in Fig. 3(g) and for the divergence at the Lifshitz transition; the parameters are not independently determined in this work.
  • standard math Kramers degeneracy in centrosymmetric systems allows a non-Abelian quantum metric trace formalism.
    The paper uses the trace of the non-Abelian quantum metric for twofold-degenerate bands, following refs [35,36] and the Supplemental Material.
  • domain assumption Spatial averaging over randomly oriented crystalline domains leaves a nonzero isotropic component of the third-order conductivity.
    The paper states this is the reason the effect survives in polycrystalline films, but the formal derivation is in the Supplemental Material, which was not available for review.
  • domain assumption The hole pocket at the T point of bismuth has negligible quantum metric contribution.
    The main text states: 'the large hole pocket at the T point lacks non-trivial quantum geometric properties', so the analysis focuses on electron pockets and surfaces.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum metric quadrupoles in elemental bismuth thin films." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NUNJLFLK

@misc{pith2026260725725,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum metric quadrupoles in elemental bismuth thin films},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NUNJLFLK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.25725}
}
read the original abstract

The nonlinear transport properties of solids are deeply rooted in the quantum geometry of their electronic wavefunctions, which is encoded in the quantum geometric tensor. Its real part, known as the quantum metric, has been recently identified as a primary origin of nonlinear transport in quantum materials where time-reversal and inversion symmetries are not simultaneously present. Consequently, the influence of the quantum metric on the largest class of materials -- non-magnetic and centrosymmetric systems -- has remained entirely elusive. Here, we demonstrate that third-order transport in centrosymmetric materials hosting relativistic fermions is governed by quantum metric quadrupoles (QMQs). We show that these QMQs can originate from both the non-Abelian quantum geometry of bulk three-dimensional Dirac fermions and the Abelian quantum geometry of spin-orbit-coupled surface states. In stark contrast to all zero-field nonlinear transport signatures known to date, the current driven by these QMQs persists as a robust, non-vanishing observable even in highly scalable polycrystalline thin films. We experimentally validate this quantum metric footprint by measuring nonlinear transport in thin films of elemental bismuth, observing a robust, surface-dominated, and broadband third-harmonic generation that persists up to room temperature. Our findings uncover a hidden role of the quantum metric in polycrystalline systems, establishing third-order nonlinear transport as a high-precision diagnostic tool of wavefunction geometry under ambient conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.25725 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. P. Provost and G. Vallee, Communications in Mathe- matical Physics76, 289 (1980)

    1980

  2. [2]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 206602 (2004)

    2004

  3. [3]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  4. [4]

    N. A. Sinitsyn, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 20, 023201 (2007)

    2007

  5. [5]

    Sodemann and L

    I. Sodemann and L. Fu, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 216806 (2015)

    2015

  6. [6]

    Ortix, Advanced Quantum Technologies4, 2100056 (2021)

    C. Ortix, Advanced Quantum Technologies4, 2100056 (2021)

    2021

  7. [7]

    Z. Z. Du, H.-Z. Lu, and X. C. Xie, Nature Reviews Physics3, 744 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    Su´ arez-Rodr´ ıguez, F

    M. Su´ arez-Rodr´ ıguez, F. de Juan, I. Souza, M. Gobbi, F. Casanova, and L. E. Hueso, Nature Materials24, 1005 (2025)

    work page 2025

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Ma, S.-Y

    Q. Ma, S.-Y. Xu, H. Shen, D. MacNeill, V. Fatemi, T.-R. Chang, A. M. Mier Valdivia, S. Wu, Z. Du, C.-H. Hsu, S. Fang, Q. D. Gibson, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, R. J. Cava, E. Kaxiras, H.-Z. Lu, H. Lin, L. Fu, N. Gedik, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature565, 337 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    Lesne, Y

    E. Lesne, Y. G. Saˇ glam, R. Battilomo, M. T. Mercaldo, T. C. van Thiel, U. Filippozzi, C. Noce, M. Cuoco, G. A. Steele, C. Ortix, and A. D. Caviglia, Nature Materials 22, 576 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    K. Kang, T. Li, E. Sohn, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nature Materials18, 324 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Ho, C.-H

    S.-C. Ho, C.-H. Chang, Y.-C. Hsieh, S.-T. Lo, B. Huang, T.-H.-Y. Vu, C. Ortix, and T.-M. Chen, Nature Elec- tronics4, 116 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Isobe, S.-Y

    H. Isobe, S.-Y. Xu, and L. Fu, Science Advances6 (2020), 10.1126/sciadv.aay2497

    2020 doi

  6. [14]

    P. He, H. Isobe, D. Zhu, C.-H. Hsu, L. Fu, and H. Yang, Nature Communications12, 698 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Makushko, S

    P. Makushko, S. Kovalev, Y. Zabila, I. Ilyakov, A. Pono- maryov, A. Arshad, G. L. Prajapati, T. V. A. G. de Oliveira, J.-C. Deinert, P. Chekhonin, I. Veremchuk, T. Kosub, Y. Skourski, F. Ganss, D. Makarov, and C. Ortix, Nat. Electron.7, 207 (2024), 2310.15225

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    T¨ orm¨ a, Phys

    P. T¨ orm¨ a, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 240001 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    J. Yu, B. A. Bernevig, R. Queiroz, E. Rossi, P. T¨ orm¨ a, and B.-J. Yang, npj Quantum Materials10, 101 (2025)

    2025

  10. [18]

    Peotta and P

    S. Peotta and P. T¨ orm¨ a, Nature Communications6, 8944 (2015). 9

    2015

  11. [19]

    J. Yu, C. J. Ciccarino, R. Bianco, I. Errea, P. Narang, and B. A. Bernevig, Nature Physics20, 1262 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Y. Gao, S. A. Yang, and Q. Niu, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 166601 (2014)

    2014

  13. [21]

    K. Das, S. Lahiri, R. B. Atencia, D. Culcer, and A. Agar- wal, Phys. Rev. B108, L201405 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    Kaplan, T

    D. Kaplan, T. Holder, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 026301 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    Jiang, T

    Y. Jiang, T. Holder, and B. Yan, Reports on Progress in Physics88, 076502 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Gao, Y.-F

    A. Gao, Y.-F. Liu, J.-X. Qiu, B. Ghosh, T. V. Trevisan, Y. Onishi, C. Hu, T. Qian, H.-J. Tien, S.-W. Chen, M. Huang, D. B´ erub´ e, H. Li, C. Tzschaschel, T. Dinh, Z. Sun, S.-C. Ho, S.-W. Lien, B. Singh, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. C. Bell, H. Lin, T.-R. Chang, C. R. Du, A. ...

    2023

  17. [25]

    N. Wang, D. Kaplan, Z. Zhang, T. Holder, N. Cao, A. Wang, X. Zhou, F. Zhou, Z. Jiang, C. Zhang, S. Ru, H. Cai, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Yan, and W. Gao, Nature621, 487 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    G. Sala, M. T. Mercaldo, K. Domi, S. Gariglio, M. Cuoco, C. Ortix, and A. D. Caviglia, Science389, 822 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    M. T. Mercaldo, M. Cuoco, and C. Ortix, Phys. Rev. B 111, 155442 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    G. Sala, E. Longo, M. T. Mercaldo, S. Gariglio, M. Cuoco, R. Mantovan, C. Ortix, and A. D. Caviglia, Nature Materials (2026), 10.1038/s41563-026-02617-3

    2026 doi

  21. [29]

    Y. Fang, J. Cano, and S. A. A. Ghorashi, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 106701 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    Mandal, S

    D. Mandal, S. Sarkar, K. Das, and A. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. B110, 195131 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    S. M. Young, S. Zaheer, J. C. Y. Teo, C. L. Kane, E. J. Mele, and A. M. Rappe, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 140405 (2012)

    2012

  24. [32]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    B. Yan, B. Stadtm¨ uller, N. Haag, S. Jakobs, J. Seidel, D. Jungkenn, S. Mathias, M. Cinchetti, M. Aeschlimann, and C. Felser, Nature Communications6, 10167 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Salikhov, M

    R. Salikhov, M. Lysne, P. Werner, I. Ilyakov, M. Sch¨ uler, T. V. A. G. de Oliveira, A. Ponomaryov, A. Arshad, G. L. Prajapati, J.-C. Deinert, P. Makushko, D. Makarov, T. Cowan, J. Fassbender, J. Lindner, A. Lindner, C. Or- tix, and S. Kovalev, npj Spintronics3, 3 (2025)

    2025

  27. [35]

    Y.-Q. Ma, S. Chen, H. Fan, and W.-M. Liu, Phys. Rev. B81, 245129 (2010)

    2010

  28. [36]

    Ding, C.-X

    H.-T. Ding, C.-X. Zhang, J.-X. Liu, J.-T. Wang, D.-W. Zhang, and S.-L. Zhu, Phys. Rev. A109, 043305 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Gabriele, C

    F. Gabriele, C. Ortix, M. Cuoco, and F. Forte, Phys. Rev. B112, 155421 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Wawrzik, J

    D. Wawrzik, J. I. Facio, and J. van den Brink, Materials Today Physics33, 101027 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    X. Wang, T. Hou, Z. Yang, S. Li, T. Jin, C. Xiao, Z. Sofer, D.-C. Qi, G. Chang, and X. Renshaw Wang, Newton2(2026)

    2026

  32. [40]

    Z. Zhu, J. Wang, H. Zuo, B. Fauqu´ e, R. D. McDonald, Y. Fuseya, and K. Behnia, Nature Communications8, 15297 (2017)

    2017

  33. [41]

    Collaudin, B

    A. Collaudin, B. Fauqu´ e, Y. Fuseya, W. Kang, and K. Behnia, Phys. Rev. X5, 021022 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    S.-Y. Yang, K. Chang, and S. S. P. Parkin, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 022029(R) (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    M. P. Vecchi and M. S. Dresselhaus, Phys. Rev. B10, 771 (1974)

    1974

  36. [44]

    Schindler, Z

    F. Schindler, Z. Wang, M. G. Vergniory, A. M. Cook, A. Murani, S. Sengupta, A. Y. Kasumov, R. Deblock, S. Jeon, I. Drozdov, H. Bouchiat, S. Gu´ eron, A. Yazdani, B. A. Bernevig, and T. Neupert, Nature Physics14, 918 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Fu and C

    L. Fu and C. L. Kane, Phys. Rev. B76, 045302 (2007)

    2007

  38. [46]

    Altland and M

    A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Phys. Rev. B55, 1142 (1997)

    1997

  39. [47]

    Li, J.-G

    C.-Z. Li, J.-G. Li, L.-X. Wang, L. Zhang, J.-M. Zhang, D. Yu, and Z.-M. Liao, ACS Nano10, 6020 (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Krupinski, A

    M. Krupinski, A. Zarzycki, Y. Zabila, and M. Marsza lek, Materials13, 3246 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    J. P. Michenaud and J. P. Issi, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics5, 3061 (1972)

    1972

  42. [50]

    Liu and R

    Y. Liu and R. E. Allen, Phys. Rev. B52, 1566 (1995)

    1995

  43. [51]

    S. Lai, H. Liu, Z. Zhang, J. Zhao, X. Feng, N. Wang, C. Tang, Y. Liu, K. S. Novoselov, S. A. Yang, and W.-b. Gao, Nature Nanotechnology16, 869 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    H. Yu, X. Li, Y.-Q. Bie, L. Yan, L. Zhou, P. Yu, and G. Yang, Nature Communications16, 7698 (2025)

    2025

  45. [53]

    Melzer, J

    M. Melzer, J. I. M¨ onch, D. Makarov, Y. Zabila, G. S. Ca˜ n´ on Berm´ udez, D. Karnaushenko, S. Baunack, F. Bahr, C. Yan, M. Kaltenbrunner, and O. G. Schmidt, Advanced Materials27, 1274 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    M. S. Meged, A. D. Zaitsev, P. S. Demchenko, and M. K. Khodzitsky, Journal of Infrared, Millimeter, and Tera- hertz Waves44, 503 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Ulbricht, E

    R. Ulbricht, E. Hendry, J. Shan, T. F. Heinz, and M. Bonn, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 543 (2011)

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.