Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Stacking Polarity-Controlled Interlayer Photocarrier Dynamics in MoSe2/MoS2 Heterostructures

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Vertical stacking polarity sets the speed of interlayer charge transfer and the lifetime of interlayer excitons in MoSe2/MoS2 heterostructures.

desk verdict Opposite faces of a 3R MoS2 bilayer really do show different CT and lifetimes, but the M-vs-X assignment is not independently established, so the directional claim is circular. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.25963 v1 pith:O5NWMCJD submitted 2026-07-28 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Gbenga S. Agunbiade , Ting Zheng , Hui Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords transitionmetaldichalcogenidecarrierdynamicsrhombohedralstackingvanderWaalsheterostructuretransientabsorptionchargetransferinterlayerexcitonpolarity
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 which atomic face of a 3R-stacked MoS2 bilayer touches a MoSe2 monolayer is a global, chemical-free control knob for interlayer photocarrier dynamics. Using ultrafast pump–probe spectroscopy, the authors resolve charge-transfer times of 0.25 ps when the metal (M) face sits at the interface and 0.37 ps when the chalcogen (X) face does, while 2H-stacked MoS2 transfers charge faster than about 0.1 ps. The interlayer exciton lifetime also shifts, from roughly 40 ps (M face) to 170 ps (X face), versus about 130 ps in the 2H stack. The mechanism is stacking-induced layer polarization in 3R MoS2, which localizes the conduction-band electron in one layer and thereby modulates wavefunction overlap across the interface. If correct, this makes vertical stacking order a deterministic tuning parameter for optoelectronic devices without altering chemistry or introducing moiré disorder.

What carries the argument

The central object is stacking polarity: in 3R MoS2 the two layers are not rotated, so sulfur atoms (the X layer) align with molybdenum atoms (the M layer), making the layers inequivalent and giving an intrinsic out-of-plane polarization. This lifts the K-valley conduction-band degeneracy, localizing the lower-energy branch in the M layer. Because the 1.82 eV probe senses electrons in MoS2 and the M layer holds the quasi-equilibrium electron population, the measured rise time gives the interfacial electron-transfer rate, while the long decay gives the interlayer exciton lifetime. The 3R bilayer thus acts as a layer-polarized switch that controls how strongly MoS2 accepts and retains electron

What would settle it

Independently identify the interfacial face in an assembled device—for example, by cross-sectional scanning transmission electron microscopy or by polarization-resolved second-harmonic generation of the 3R flake before stacking—and check whether the region labeled 1L/M/X really has the M layer at the interface. If the face that the paper calls X/M shows faster charge transfer, or if both faces give the same transfer time, the stacking-polarity mechanism is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central finding is that interlayer photocarrier dynamics in MoSe2/MoS2 heterostructures depend on the stacking polarity of the MoS2 bilayer. In the inversion-symmetric 2H bilayer, the electron wavefunction spreads over both layers, giving charge transfer faster than the roughly 0.3 ps instrument resolution and an interlayer exciton lifetime near 130 ps. In a 3R bilayer, broken inversion symmetry lifts the layer degeneracy: the conduction-band minimum is predominantly localized in the metal (M) layer, which lies at the interface in one configuration and away from it in the other. When the M layer contacts MoSe2, electron transfer takes 0.25 ± 0.04 ps and the interlayer exciton recombines

Load-bearing premise

The claim that charge transfer is faster when the M face touches MoSe2 assumes the two regions of one 3R flake were correctly labeled M versus X, but the paper reports no independent measurement of which face contacted MoSe2; if the labels were assigned after seeing which region was faster, the direction of the effect becomes circular.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stacking order alone can tune charge-transfer time several-fold, from under 0.1 ps in 2H to 0.37 ps in the 3R X/M configuration, without changing chemical composition or introducing twist-angle disorder.
  • The interlayer exciton lifetime can be adjusted from about 40 ps to 170 ps simply by choosing which 3R face is interfacial.
  • Because 3R-based heterostructures make charge transfer time-resolvable, they provide a platform for studying how strain, twist angle, temperature, and dielectric environment affect the transfer process.
  • The observed pump-fluence independence shows the tuning reflects structure rather than carrier-density effects.
  • The 1L/2H control with inverted stacking shows identical dynamics, confirming that the 2H behavior is intrinsic and not dominated by substrate effects.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The directional conclusion that the M face transfers faster than the X face rests on assigning which face of one 3R flake touched MoSe2; the paper states the two surfaces cannot be optically distinguished before stacking and reports no independent face measurement, so the face labels should be treated as assigned post-hoc unless a structural probe confirms them.
  • If the layer-polarization mechanism is correct, the same face-dependent transfer and recombination should appear in other 3R TMD heterostructures, such as MoSe2/WSe2 or WS2-based pairs, where the M versus X interface can be tested with similar pump–probe experiments.
  • The slower, resolvable transfer in 3R stacks could let researchers measure charge-transfer efficiency under competing cooling and recombination channels, turning stacking polarity into a design trade-off between transfer speed and exciton lifetime in the same material pair.
  • A direct test of the face assignment would be to determine one flake's M and X faces before stacking (for example, by polarization-resolved second-harmonic generation or by cross-sectional atomic imaging of a reference device), then assemble MoSe2 on each face and check whether the 0.25 ps versus 0.37 ps split follows.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports ultrafast pump–probe measurements of interlayer photocarrier dynamics in monolayer MoSe2/bilayer MoS2 heterostructures with 2H and 3R MoS2. For the 1L/2H system the charge-transfer (CT) rise is faster than the instrument response, while two regions of a single 3R MoS2 bilayer, labelled 1L/M/X and 1L/X/M, show CT times of 0.25±0.04 ps and 0.37±0.05 ps, respectively, and interlayer exciton lifetimes of ~40 ps and ~170 ps. The paper attributes these differences to stacking-induced layer polarization in 3R MoS2, which localizes the conduction-band minimum in the M layer and modulates interfacial wavefunction overlap. The study includes pump-fluence dependence and an inverted-2H control to support the interpretation.

Significance. If the face assignment is independently established, this would be a significant advance: vertical stacking polarity would provide a spatially uniform, chemically invariant control parameter for interlayer CT and recombination in TMD heterostructures. The same-flake fabrication for the two 3R configurations is a genuine strength, as is the fluence-series control showing linear, density-independent dynamics. The 2H inversion-symmetry check is a good internal control. However, the directional claim—M-layer-at-interface faster than X-layer-at-interface—currently rests on an unverified face identification, and the probe interpretation raises a further selectivity question. The underlying qualitative mechanism is grounded in prior literature on 3R MoS2 layer polarization, but the experimental evidence for the specific polarity assignment is incomplete.

major comments (3)
  1. [Fig. 1(b) and following paragraph; Fig. 3(c),(e)] The central directional claim (1L/M/X faster than 1L/X/M) requires an independent identification of which 3R MoS2 face contacts MoSe2 in each region. The paper states the two faces "cannot be optically distinguished prior to stacking," yet no STEM, AFM, or other assignment is reported. If the labels were chosen after observing which region was faster, the 0.25 vs 0.37 ps ordering is circular. Provide an independent face assignment or recast the claim non-directionally.
  2. [Pump–probe description after Fig. 2; Fig. 3(c)-(f)] The 1.82 eV probe is degenerate for K-valley transitions of both M and X layers, as stated. The paper argues the signal is "primarily associated with electrons in the M layer" once quasi-equilibrium is established, but the CT time is extracted from the rising edge, which is precisely the pre-equilibrium regime. In 1L/X/M, electrons may first enter the interfacial X layer and subsequently relax to the lower M layer; the measured rise would then contain interlayer relaxation as well as CT. The comparison of 0.25 ps (direct transfer to M) with 0.37 ps (transfer to X plus relaxation) may conflate two processes. Please demonstrate that the X-layer contribution to the transient absorption is negligible on the 0.1–0.5 ps scale, or model the two-level population dynamics.
  3. [Pump selectivity paragraph after Fig. 2] The claim that "MoS2 is not directly photoexcited at 1.59 eV" is not self-evident for bilayer MoS2, whose indirect gap lies below 1.59 eV. Although the MoSe2 exciton absorption dominates, a small direct absorption in the MoS2 bilayer could contribute to the same 1.82 eV probe response and would be indistinguishable from CT. Since the 2H vs 3R comparison is central, please include a control measurement of the bare MoS2 bilayer (2H and 3R) under identical pump/probe conditions, or quantify the MoS2 absorption at 1.59 eV.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 3 vs Fig. 4] The fits in Fig. 3(c) and (e) report τCT = 0.22 ps and 0.38 ps, while Fig. 4 reports averages of 0.25±0.04 ps and 0.37±0.05 ps. Reconcile these values or state which dataset is shown in Fig. 3.
  2. [Sample characterization] Please state how the 3R polytype and bilayer thickness were confirmed (e.g., Raman, SHG, PL line-shape), since the entire effect depends on 3R stacking.
  3. [Statistics] Report the number of independent measurements and a statistical test for the CT-time difference between 1L/M/X and 1L/X/M. The nominal separation of 0.12 ps is about 1.9σ of the reported errors, so a simple statement of overlapping errors would be more convincing.
  4. [References] Ref. 34 is missing volume/page/DOI information, and Ref. 27 gives "Bellus, B. Z." whereas Ref. 21 gives "Bellus, M. Z."; please check the spelling.
  5. [Generality] The phrase "global control parameter" is strong for a demonstration on one 3R flake. Please acknowledge the single-flake nature or provide repeat measurements on additional flakes.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Directional stacking-polarity claim rests on unverified face assignment; specific τCT and lifetime ordering may be circular.

  1. self definitional [Sample fabrication (paragraph after Fig. 1b); Results and Fig. 3(c,e)]
    "Because the two surfaces of a 3R bilayer cannot be optically distinguished prior to stacking, we employed a single large MoS2 bilayer flake to construct both configurations. The MoS2 bilayer was first transferred onto a MoSe2 monolayer to form one heterostructure region. Subsequently, a second MoSe2 monolayer was transferred onto a different region of the same MoS2 flake. This fabrication strategy ensures that the two resulting heterostructures, labeled 1L/M/X and 1L/X/M, possess opposite stacking polarities while sharing identical MoS2 thickness and crystal quality."

    The paper's central directional result is that 1L/M/X has faster CT (0.25±0.04 ps) and shorter lifetime (40±5 ps) than 1L/X/M (0.37±0.05 ps; 160±10 ps), interpreted via the M layer being at the interface in 1L/M/X. But the paper states the two faces cannot be optically distinguished prior to stacking and reports no independent post-stacking identification. The two regions are distinguished only by transfer order; the physical labels M/X and X/M are not grounded in any measurement. If the faster/slower traces were labeled M/X and X/M after the data were taken (or by an arbitrary convention), the ordering is true by definition and the wavefunction-overlap mechanism is not independently tested. Thus the directional claim reduces to the untested label assignment.

full rationale

The experimental measurements themselves are largely self-contained: the pump–probe acquisition, the 2H inversion-symmetry control, and the pump-fluence dependence are appropriate checks. The serious issue is the mapping of measured transients to physical stacking polarity. The paper explicitly says the two 3R faces cannot be optically distinguished prior to stacking and does not describe any independent post-stacking measurement that determines which face touches MoSe2 in each region. Therefore the labels 1L/M/X and 1L/X/M used in Figs. 3–4 are not established by an independent observable; if they were assigned after observing which region rose and decayed faster, the reported ordering (0.25 ps < 0.37 ps and 40 ps < 160 ps) is guaranteed by construction and cannot test the proposed wavefunction-overlap mechanism. This is a partial circularity: the existence of two distinct stacking-dependent dynamics on the same 3R flake is supported, but the specific physical direction (M-layer interface faster) and the microscopic explanation reduce to an unverified label assignment. No other significant circular steps were found; self-citations concerning 3R MoS2 band structure are corroborated by external references and are not load-bearing.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's output is a set of fitted time constants; its physical interpretation relies on prior 3R layer-polarization results and on the assumptions listed above. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • CT time τCT (1L/M/X) = 0.25 ± 0.04 ps
    Extracted by fitting the transient rise with 1−exp(−(t−t0)/τCT) convolved with a Gaussian IRF; this is a central measured quantity.
  • CT time τCT (1L/X/M) = 0.37 ± 0.05 ps
    Same fitting model; reported as the average over pump fluences.
  • Interlayer exciton lifetime τ2 (1L/2H) = ~130 ps
    Long biexponential decay component attributed to interlayer exciton recombination.
  • Interlayer exciton lifetime τ2 (1L/M/X) = ~40 ps (40 ± 5 ps in fluence series)
    Long biexponential decay component; shorter lifetime attributed to enhanced wavefunction overlap at M interface.
  • Interlayer exciton lifetime τ2 (1L/X/M) = ~170 ps (160 ± 10 ps in fluence series)
    Long biexponential decay component; longer lifetime attributed to increased electron–hole separation.
  • Short decay component τ1 (all samples) = 10–15 ps
    Biexponential short component assigned to regions with imperfect interfacial contact; not central to the stacking-polarity claim.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The 1.59 eV pump selectively excites MoSe2, and MoS2 is not directly photoexcited.
    Load-bearing for attributing the probe signal to electrons transferred from MoSe2; bilayer MoS2 has an indirect gap below 1.59 eV, so weak direct absorption is neglected.
  • domain assumption The M layer hosts the lower-energy conduction-band branch, and the 1.82 eV probe primarily senses M-layer electrons.
    Used to interpret the rising edge as CT into the M layer; the paper admits the probe sees both layers and that M-layer sensitivity holds 'once quasi-equilibrium is established', which is questionable during the sub-picosecond rise.
  • ad hoc to paper The two regions of the same 3R flake are correctly identified as 1L/M/X and 1L/X/M.
    No independent face-identification method is given; if labels are inferred from the measured dynamics, the directional claim is circular.
  • domain assumption The short decay component τ1 is due to imperfect interfacial regions, and τ2 is due to interlayer exciton recombination.
    Attribution follows prior literature, but no spatially resolved measurement is provided to confirm the assignment in these samples.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stacking Polarity-Controlled Interlayer Photocarrier Dynamics in MoSe2/MoS2 Heterostructures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O5NWMCJD

@misc{pith2026260725963,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stacking Polarity-Controlled Interlayer Photocarrier Dynamics in MoSe2/MoS2 Heterostructures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O5NWMCJD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.25963}
}
abstract

Control of interlayer photocarrier dynamics is central to optoelectronic applications of van der Waals heterostructures, yet deterministic and spatially uniform tuning strategies remain limited. Here we show that stacking polarity provides a global control parameter for photocarrier dynamics in MoSe$_2$/MoS$_2$ heterostructures. By comparing hexagonal (2H) and rhombohedral (3R) MoS$_2$ bilayers and engineering opposite interface terminations in 3R stacking, we resolve stacking-dependent interlayer charge-transfer dynamics using ultrafast pump--probe spectroscopy. While charge transfer in the 2H heterostructure occurs faster than the experimental resolution, the 3R heterostructures show time-resolvable charge transfer that slows from $0.25$ to $0.37$~ps depending on stacking polarity. Furthermore, the interlayer exciton lifetime is tuned from $\sim$$40$ to $\sim$$170$~ps. These effects arise from stacking-induced layer polarization in 3R MoS$_2$, which modulates interfacial wavefunction overlap.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.25963 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustrations of the lattice structure, band alignment, and stacking-dependent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Sample characterization by optical microscopy and photoluminescence (PL) spec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Photocarrier dynamics measured in heterostructures composed of monolayer MoSe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Pump-fluence dependence of the photocarrier dynamics measured in heterostruc [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references

  1. [1]

    H.; Kalantar-Zadeh, K.; Kis, A.; Coleman, J

    Wang, Q. H.; Kalantar-Zadeh, K.; Kis, A.; Coleman, J. N.; Strano, M. S. Electronics and Optoelectronics of Two-Dimensional Transition Metal Dichalcogenides. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2012, 7, 699--712

    2012

  2. [2]

    H.; Sun, Y

    Lin, Z.; McCreary, A.; Briggs, N.; Subramanian, S.; Zhang, K. H.; Sun, Y. F.; Li, X. F.; Borys, N. J.; Yuan, H. T.; Fullerton-Shirey, S. K.; Chernikov, A.; Zhao, H.; McDonnell, S.; Lindenberg, A. M.; Xiao, K.; LeRoy, B. J.; Drndic, M.; Hwang, J. C. M.; Park, J.; Chhowalla, M.; Schaak, R. E.; Javey, A.; Hersam, M. C.; Robinson, J.; Terrones, M. 2D Material...

    2016

  3. [3]

    K.; Grigorieva, I

    Geim, A. K.; Grigorieva, I. V. Van der Waals Heterostructures. Nature 2013, 499, 419--425

    2013

  4. [4]

    O.; Duan, X.; Cheng, H.-C.; Huang, Y.; Duan, X

    Liu, Y.; Weiss, N. O.; Duan, X.; Cheng, H.-C.; Huang, Y.; Duan, X. Van der Waals Heterostructures and Devices. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2016, 1, 16042

    2016

  5. [5]

    S.; Mishchenko, A.; Carvalho, A.; Neto, A

    Novoselov, K. S.; Mishchenko, A.; Carvalho, A.; Neto, A. H. C. 2D Materials and van der Waals Heterostructures. Science 2016, 353, aac9439

    2016

  6. [6]

    L.; Rivera, P.; Yu, H

    Seyler, K. L.; Rivera, P.; Yu, H. Y.; Wilson, N. P.; Ray, E. L.; Mandrus, D. G.; Yan, J. Q.; Yao, W.; Xu, X. D. Signatures of Moir\'e-Trapped Valley Excitons in MoSe _2 /WSe _2 Heterobilayers. Nature 2019, 567, 66

    2019

  7. [7]

    C.; Lu, X

    Tran, K.; Moody, G.; Wu, F. C.; Lu, X. B.; Choi, J.; Kim, K.; Rai, A.; Sanchez, D. A.; Quan, J. M.; Singh, A.; Embley, J.; Zepeda, A.; Campbell, M.; Autry, T.; Taniguchi, T.; Watanabe, K.; Lu, N. S.; Banerjee, S. K.; Silverman, K. L.; Kim, S.; Tutuc, E.; Yang, L.; MacDonald, A. H.; Li, X. Q. Evidence for Moir\'e Excitons in van der Waals Heterostructures....

    2019

  8. [8]

    H.; Regan, E

    Jin, C. H.; Regan, E. C.; Yan, A. M.; Utama, M. I. B.; Wang, D. Q.; Zhao, S. H.; Qin, Y.; Yang, S. J.; Zheng, Z. R.; Shi, S. Y.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Tongay, S.; Zettl, A.; Wang, F. Observation of Moir\'e Excitons in WSe _2 /WS _2 Heterostructure Superlattices. Nature 2019, 567, 76--80

    2019

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    J.; Turchanin, A.; Marie, X.; Gerber, I

    Paradisanos, I.; Shree, S.; George, A.; Leisgang, N.; Robert, C.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Warburton, R. J.; Turchanin, A.; Marie, X.; Gerber, I. C.; Urbaszek, B. Controlling Interlayer Excitons in MoS _2 Layers Grown by Chemical Vapor Deposition. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 2391

    2020

  2. [10]

    Chen, J.; Zhao, X.; Grinblat, G.; Chen, Z.; Tan, S. J. R.; Fu, W.; Ding, Z.; Abdelwahab, I.; Li, Y.; Geng, D.; Liu, Y.; Leng, K.; Liu, B.; Liu, W.; Tang, W.; Maier, S. A.; Pennycook, S. J.; Loh, K. P. Homoepitaxial Growth of Large-Scale Highly Organized Transition Metal Dichal...

    2018

  3. [11]

    I.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Ye, Z

    Liang, J.; Yang, D.; Wu, J.; Dadap, J. I.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Ye, Z. Optically Probing the Asymmetric Interlayer Coupling in Rhombohedral-Stacked MoS _2 Bilayer. Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 041005

    2022

  4. [12]

    G.; Hummer, K.; Franchini, C

    He, J. G.; Hummer, K.; Franchini, C. Stacking Effects on the Electronic and Optical Properties of Bilayer Transition Metal Dichalcogenides MoS _2 , MoSe _2 , WS _2 , and WSe _2 . Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 075409

    2014

  5. [13]

    J.; Akashi, R.; Morikawa, D.; Harasawa, A.; Yaji, K.; Kuroda, K.; Miyamoto, K.; Okuda, T.; Ishizaka, K.; Arita, R.; Iwasa, Y

    Suzuki, R.; Sakano, M.; Zhang, Y. J.; Akashi, R.; Morikawa, D.; Harasawa, A.; Yaji, K.; Kuroda, K.; Miyamoto, K.; Okuda, T.; Ishizaka, K.; Arita, R.; Iwasa, Y. Valley-dependent spin polarization in bulk MoS _2 with broken inversion symmetry. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2014, 9, 611--617

    2014

  6. [14]

    T.; Liang, J.; Ideue, T.; Siu, T.; Awan, K

    Yang, D.; Wu, J.; Zhou, B. T.; Liang, J.; Ideue, T.; Siu, T.; Awan, K. M.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Iwasa, Y.; Franz, M.; Ye, Z. Spontaneous-Polarization-Induced Photovoltaic Effect in Rhombohedrally Stacked MoS _2 . Nat. Photonics 2022, 16, 469--474

    2022

  7. [15]

    I.; Jones, D.; Ye, Z

    Wu, J.; Yang, D.; Liang, J.; Werner, M.; Ostroumov, E.; Xiao, Y.; Watanabe, K.; Taniguchi, T.; Dadap, J. I.; Jones, D.; Ye, Z. Ultrafast Response of Spontaneous Photovoltaic Effect in 3R-MoS _2 -Based Heterostructures. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eade3759

    2022

  8. [16]

    M.; Yoshii, M.; Matsuoka, S.; Kitamura, S.; Hasegawa, T.; Ogawa, N.; Morimoto, T.; Ideue, T.; Iwasa, Y

    Dong, Y.; Yang, M. M.; Yoshii, M.; Matsuoka, S.; Kitamura, S.; Hasegawa, T.; Ogawa, N.; Morimoto, T.; Ideue, T.; Iwasa, Y. Giant Bulk Piezophotovoltaic Effect in 3R-MoS _2 . Nat. Nanotechnol. 2023, 18, 36--41

    2023

  9. [17]

    Transient Absorption Measurements of Excitonic Dynamics in 3R-MoS _2

    Agunbiade, G.; Rafizadeh, N.; Scott, R.; Zhao, H. Transient Absorption Measurements of Excitonic Dynamics in 3R-MoS _2 . Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 035410

    2024

  10. [18]

    S.; Rafizadeh, N.; Zheng, T.; Zhao, H

    Agunbiade, G. S.; Rafizadeh, N.; Zheng, T.; Zhao, H. Fast Superdiffusive Transport of Dipolar Excitons in 3R-Stacked MoS _2 Bilayers. ACS Nano 2025, 19, 41244--41251

    2025

  11. [19]

    Ultrafast Laser Spectroscopy of Two-Dimensional Materials beyond Graphene

    Ceballos, F.; Zhao, H. Ultrafast Laser Spectroscopy of Two-Dimensional Materials beyond Graphene. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2017, 27, 1604509

    2017

  12. [20]

    F.; Zhang, Y.; Jin, C.; Sun, Y.; Tongay, S.; Wu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, F

    Hong, X.; Kim, J.; Shi, S. F.; Zhang, Y.; Jin, C.; Sun, Y.; Tongay, S.; Wu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, F. Ultrafast Charge Transfer in Atomically Thin MoS _2 /WS _2 Heterostructures. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2014, 9, 682--686

    2014

  13. [21]

    Z.; Chiu, H

    Ceballos, F.; Bellus, M. Z.; Chiu, H. Y.; Zhao, H. Ultrafast Charge Separation and Indirect Exciton Formation in a MoS _2 -MoSe _2 van der Waals Heterostructure. ACS Nano 2014, 8, 12717--12724

    2014

  14. [22]

    M.; Wang, J.; Gong, Z

    Zhu, H. M.; Wang, J.; Gong, Z. Z.; Kim, Y. D.; Hone, J.; Zhu, X. Y. Interfacial Charge Transfer Circumventing Momentum Mismatch at Two-Dimensional van der Waals Heterojunctions. Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 3591--3598

    2017

  15. [23]

    L.; Chen, Y

    Wu, L. L.; Chen, Y. Z.; Zhou, H. Z.; Zhu, H. M. Ultrafast Energy Transfer of Both Bright and Dark Excitons in 2D van der Waals Heterostructures Beyond Dipolar Coupling. ACS Nano 2019, 13, 2341--2348

    2019

  16. [24]

    R.; Russo, M.; Liu, F.; Trovatello, C.; Maiuri, M.; Bai, Y.; Zhu, X.; Conte, S

    Policht, V. R.; Russo, M.; Liu, F.; Trovatello, C.; Maiuri, M.; Bai, Y.; Zhu, X.; Conte, S. D.; Cerullo, G. Dissecting Interlayer Hole and Electron Transfer in Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Heterostructures via Two-Dimensional Electronic Spectroscopy. Nano Lett. 2021, 21, 4738--4743

    2021

  17. [25]

    F.; Hill, H

    Rigos, A. F.; Hill, H. M.; Li, Y. L.; Chernikov, A.; Heinz, T. F. Probing Interlayer Interactions in Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Heterostructures by Optical Spectroscopy: MoS _2 /WS _2 and MoSe _2 /WSe _2 . Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 5033--5038

    2015

  18. [26]

    H.; Hong, H.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Q.; Huang, W.; Cao, T.; Qiao, R

    Ji, Z. H.; Hong, H.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Q.; Huang, W.; Cao, T.; Qiao, R. X.; Liu, C.; Liang, J.; Jin, C. H.; Jiao, L. Y.; Shi, K. B.; Meng, S.; Liu, K. H. Robust Stacking-Independent Ultrafast Charge Transfer in MoS _2 /WS _2 Bilayers. ACS Nano 2017, 11, 12020--12026

    2017

  19. [27]

    Z.; Zhao, H

    Pan, S.; Ceballos, F.; Bellus, B. Z.; Zhao, H. Ultrafast Charge Transfer between MoTe _2 and MoS _2 Monolayers. 2D Mater. 2017, 4, 015033

    2017

  20. [28]

    F.; Lee, C.; Hone, J.; Shan, J.; Heinz, T

    Mak, K. F.; Lee, C.; Hone, J.; Shan, J.; Heinz, T. F. Atomically Thin MoS _2 : A New Direct-Gap Semiconductor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105, 136805

    2010

  21. [29]

    Low-Temperature Photocarrier Dynamics in Monolayer MoS _2

    Korn, T.; Heydrich, S.; Hirmer, M.; Schmutzler, J.; Schueller, C. Low-Temperature Photocarrier Dynamics in Monolayer MoS _2 . Appl. Phys. Lett. 2011, 99, 102109

    2011

  22. [30]

    Effect of Dielectric Environment on Excitonic Dynamics in Monolayer WS _2

    Fu, Y.; He, D.; He, J.; Bian, A.; Zhang, L.; Liu, S.; Wang, Y.; ; Zhao, H. Effect of Dielectric Environment on Excitonic Dynamics in Monolayer WS _2 . Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 6, 1901307

    2019

  23. [31]

    A.; Rouleau, C

    Wang, K.; Huang, B.; Tian, M.; Ceballos, F.; Lin, M.-W.; Mahjouri-Samani, M.; Boulesbaa, A.; Puretzky, A. A.; Rouleau, C. M.; Yoon, M.; Zhao, H.; Xiao, K.; Duscher, G.; Geohegan, D. B. Interlayer Coupling in Twisted WSe _2 /WS _2 Bilayer Heterostructures Revealed by Optical Sp...

    2016

  24. [32]

    Z.; Zhao, Y

    Zhou, H. Z.; Zhao, Y. D.; Zhu, H. M. Dielectric Environment-Robust Ultrafast Charge Transfer between Two Atomic Layers. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2019, 10, 150--155

    2019

  25. [33]

    Y.; Guzelturk, B.; Li, G

    Ma, E. Y.; Guzelturk, B.; Li, G. Q.; Cao, L. Y.; Shen, Z. X.; Lindenberg, A. M.; Heinz, T. F. Recording Interfacial Currents on the Subnanometer Length and Femtosecond Time Scale by Terahertz Emission. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaau0073

    2019

  26. [34]

    S.; Zhao, H

    Zheng, T.; Low, E.; Rafizadeh, N.; Burch, K. S.; Zhao, H. Ultrafast and Highly Mobile Photocarriers in Monolayer WSe _2 Doped by -RuCl _3 . Nano Lett

  27. [35]

    Efficient interlayer electron transfer in a MoTe _2 /WS _2 /MoS _2 trilayer heterostructure

    Pan, S.; Valencia-Acuna, P.; Kong, W.; Liu, J.; Ge, X.; Xie, W.; Zhao, H. Efficient interlayer electron transfer in a MoTe _2 /WS _2 /MoS _2 trilayer heterostructure. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2021, 118, 253106

    2021

  28. [36]

    G.; Pugno, N

    Purdie, D. G.; Pugno, N. M.; Taniguchi, T.; Watanabe, K.; Ferrari, A. C.; Lombardo, A. Cleaning Interfaces in Layered Materials Heterostructures. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 5387

    2018

  29. [37]

    Kim, Y.; Herlinger, P.; Taniguchi, T.; Watanabe, K.; Smet, J. H. Reliable Postprocessing Improvement of van der Waals Heterostructures. ACS Nano 2019, 13, 14182--14190 mcitethebibliography document

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.