Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 62 references

Coherent Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts of meta-grating with radiation asymmetry

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The relative phase of two coherent beams incident from opposite sides of a bilayer meta-grating controls outgoing power and Goos-Hänchen shifts at unidirectional guided resonance or circular polarized states.

desk verdict Fresh idea for phase-controlled GH shifts, but the UGR/CPS pairing on one band contradicts time-reversal symmetry and undermines the central mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07360 v2 pith:P5RGS6C7 submitted 2025-06-09 physics.optics

Ma Luo , Feng Wu This is my paper
classification physics.optics
keywords Goos-Hänchenshiftcoherentcontrolmeta-gratingunidirectionalguidedresonancecircularpolarizedstateboundinthecontinuumtemporalcoupledmodetheoryrefractiveindexsensing
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 proposes a coherent Goos-Hänchen effect: two coherent light beams hit a bilayer meta-grating from opposite sides with the same lateral wave number, and the relative phase between them controls how much power leaves through the top and bottom and how far those outgoing beams shift sideways. The central claim is that when the frequency and lateral wave number sit on a topological resonance of the grating, a unidirectional guided resonance (UGR) or a circular polarized state (CPS), the energy flux and lateral shifts become strongly phase-dependent. Using the stationary-phase method and finite-element simulations, the paper finds that UGR-enhanced shifts come with constant transmittance, while CPS-enhanced shifts come with a transmittance peak. A temporal coupled-mode analysis attributes this difference to whether direct scattering cancels (CPS) or interferes constructively with resonant radiation (UGR). The effect matters because one phase parameter could route output power and produce large, measurable shifts, with a demonstrated sensitivity to the refractive index of a gas.

What carries the argument

The central objects are two topological resonant states of the bilayer meta-grating: a unidirectional guided resonance (UGR), which radiates only to one side of the grating, and a circular polarized state (CPS), which radiates equally to both sides with a $\pm\pi/2$ phase difference between the upward and downward radiation. The argument is carried by the stationary-phase formula $S_{\mathrm{GH},u(d)} = -(\lambda/2\pi)\,\partial\varphi_{u(d)}/\partial\theta_{\mathrm{in}}$, which turns a rapidly varying outgoing phase into a large lateral shift, and by a temporal coupled-mode theory in which four ports connect through direct scattering, modeled as a uniform slab with reflection $-1/\sqrt{2}$ and transmission $i/\sqrt{2}$, plus resonant radiation with coefficients $d_3=\sqrt{\gamma}$, $d_4=-i\sqrt{\gamma}$ for the CPS and $d_1=\sqrt{2\gamma}$, $d_2=0$ for the UGR; time-reversal symmetry sets the input couplings $\kappa_j=d_j$. This port model explains why the CPS gives a Lorentzian peak or dip in transmittance while the UGR gives constant amplitude with a rapidly varying phase.

What would settle it

Measure the angular spectra of outgoing power and phase for a grating whose non-resonant scattering is deliberately made different from a uniform slab, for example by changing slit widths or slab thickness, and check whether the UGR resonance still shows a large GH shift at constant transmittance and the CPS resonance at a transmittance peak; if the classification changes, the TCMT mechanism is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the relative phase $\phi$ between two coherent plane waves incident from opposite sides of an asymmetric bilayer meta-grating is a control parameter for both the outgoing energy flux and the Goos-Hänchen shifts of the two outgoing beams, provided the operating frequency and lateral wave number are resonant with a unidirectional guided resonance or a circular polarized state. At a CPS resonance, the direct scattering of the two incident beams cancels, the outgoing field is essentially pure radiation from the resonant state, and a large negative GH shift appears together with a resonant peak or dip in transmittance. At a UGR resonance, the direct scattering interferes constructively with the resonant radiation, the outgoing amplitude stays flat while its phase varies rapidly, and the large GH shift appears with constant transmittance. When the two beams carry a phase difference $\phi$, the power splits oppositely on the two sides, and the dominant outgoing beam can have a GH shift on the order of $10^2\lambda$ in the plane-wave limit; as the resonance approaches a bound state in the continuum, the Q factor grows exponentially and the GH shift grows approximately proportionally to Q.

Load-bearing premise

The coupled-mode explanation assumes that, away from resonance, the grating scatters light exactly like a uniform dielectric slab (reflection $-1/\sqrt{2}$, transmission $i/\sqrt{2}$) and that each resonant mode radiates with the exact coefficients used in the model; if the real grating's non-resonant phases or mode-port couplings differ, the predicted constant-versus-peak transmittance distinction could fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Varying $\phi$ near $\pi/2$ or $3\pi/2$ routes the dominant outgoing power to one side of the grating and gives that beam a large negative or positive GH shift, so a single phase delay acts as an optical routing and beam-displacement control.
  • At a UGR resonance the GH enhancement occurs at constant transmittance, so a high-power output beam can still acquire a large lateral shift instead of being suppressed at a transmission peak.
  • At a CPS resonance the GH enhancement coincides with a transmittance peak or dip, and the outgoing field is essentially pure resonant radiation because direct scattering cancels.
  • As the UGR or CPS approaches a bound state in the continuum, the Q factor grows exponentially and the magnitude of the GH shift grows approximately proportionally to Q, opening a route to very large shifts by tuning structural or synthetic parameters.
  • The sensitivity of the Gaussian-beam GH shift to $\phi$, up to $0.2111\lambda$ per degree, is large enough that a 100-$\lambda$ air cell whose refractive index changes from 1 to 1.0001 would produce a measurable shift of about $0.76\lambda$, supporting a gas refractive-index sensor.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same phase-routing logic should apply to any two-port resonant scatterer with asymmetric radiation, not only bilayer all-dielectric gratings, so the coherent GH scheme could be ported to plasmonic or photonic-crystal platforms with similar UGR or CPS states.
  • Because the stationary-phase prediction is a plane-wave limit, finite Gaussian beams under-report the resonant shift whenever the beam divergence exceeds the resonance width; the paper's Gaussian-beam numbers already show this, and one could map the suppression quantitatively by varying the beam waist.
  • A direct experimental check of the temporal coupled-mode distinction would tune the non-resonant scattering, for example by changing the slit widths or slab thickness, and test whether the UGR case still shows constant transmittance at the GH peak; if the constant-versus-peak classification shifts, the assumed direct-scattering coefficients are the cause.
  • The sensor estimate assumes the phase delay path can be made 100$\lambda$ and that the outgoing beam position can be imaged to sub-wavelength precision, so an experiment varying gas pressure and measuring the beam centroid would test this directly.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a scheme for coherent Goos-Hänchen (GH) shifts in which two coherent plane waves impinge on a bilayer meta-grating from opposite sides with the same lateral wave number, and the relative phase φ between them controls the energy flux and lateral shifts of the two outgoing beams. The authors identify a structure whose band structure supposedly contains both a unidirectional guided resonance (UGR) at negative kx and a circular polarized state (CPS) at positive kx, and they use the stationary-phase method and temporal coupled mode theory (TCMT) to claim that UGR excitation is accompanied by constant transmittance while CPS excitation is accompanied by a transmittance peak. Numerical FEM simulations for plane-wave and Gaussian-beam incidence are presented, and a refractive-index sensing application is proposed.

Significance. If correct, the proposal would offer a simple phase-only control of both the direction and the lateral shift of outgoing light, with potential applications in beam steering and sensing. The paper contains extensive FEM data and a TCMT model that reproduces the qualitative Lorentzian line shapes. However, the central claim rests on the coexistence of a UGR and a CPS in the same band at opposite kx values, which is inconsistent with time-reversal symmetry for a passive reciprocal structure; this undermines the physical basis of the entire paper.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II, Fig. 2(c,d); Sec. III A, Eqs. (4)–(14)] The claimed coexistence of a UGR at akx/2π = −0.201 and a CPS at akx/2π = +0.201 on the same band contradicts time-reversal symmetry. For a passive reciprocal structure, time reversal maps the radiation coefficients as c_up(−kx) = c_down*(kx) and c_down(−kx) = c_up*(kx), so the directionality satisfies η(−kx) = −η(kx). A CPS with η = 0 must therefore map to another CPS with η = 0, not to a UGR with η = 1. The TCMT in Sec. III A encodes the same inconsistency: the CPS radiation amplitudes (d3 = √γ, d4 = −i√γ) time-reverse to another CPS, not to the UGR amplitudes (d1 = √(2γ), d2 = 0). The central distinction between constant and peak transmittance for UGR and CPS is therefore built on an impossible mode pairing.
  2. [Sec. II, Fig. 4] The claim that the subset of systems with both UGR and CPS forms a two-dimensional surface in the four-dimensional parameter space (w1, w2, kx, Δp) is not supported by the presented data. Figure 4 shows a single one-dimensional scan with w2 fixed at 0.296a and only w1 varied; no data are shown for varying w2. The numerical evidence demonstrates at most a one-dimensional curve, so the asserted codimension and dimensionality of the subset are not established.
  3. [Sec. III A, Eqs. (8)–(11)] The TCMT explanation assumes that the direct scattering of the two incident beams equals that of a uniform dielectric slab with reflection and transmission coefficients −1/√2 and i/√2, respectively. These values are not derived from the actual slab thickness, frequency, or incidence angle, and no comparison with the FEM scattering background is provided. Because the constant-versus-peak transmittance distinction is attributed to the interference between this direct scattering and the resonant radiation, the mechanism explanation is not quantitatively justified if these coefficients differ from the actual values.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption refers to a 'TM polarized incident plane wave,' but the manuscript analyzes TE modes with Ey out of plane; this should be corrected to TE.
  2. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption states that the incident angle is fixed to the resonant angle at ±29.5°, while the text and Fig. 5 use ±21.5°; these numbers should be reconciled.
  3. [Sec. III A, after Eq. (14)] The text says 'versus ∆ g' when describing Fig. 6(e); this should be 'versus ∆p'.
  4. [Title page] The PACS numbers are placeholders ('00.00.00, 00.00.00, 00.00.00, 00.00.00') and should be removed or replaced with actual classification codes.
  5. [Eq. (2)] The far-field expression in Eq. (2) does not explicitly state that the lower incident beam has the same amplitude as the upper one; later the text assumes cin = 1 for both, so this assumption should be stated at the equation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular step found: GH shifts come from FEM phases; TCMT postdicts line shapes from independently extracted mode parameters.

full rationale

Neither the GH shifts nor the constant-versus-peak transmittance distinction is a fitted input. The stationary-phase GH shifts in Figs. 5-6 are obtained by applying Eq. (3) to FEM scattering phases, and the same FEM scattering spectra independently show the constant/peak difference. The TCMT in Sec. III A uses the eigenmode decay rate γ, the band slope ωr,1, and the defining radiation coefficients of the UGR/CPS (d1=√(2γ), d2=0; d3=√γ, d4=-i√γ) to reproduce those line shapes; none of these parameters is tuned to match a GH-shift value. Self-citations to the authors' previous GH-shift and TCMT papers appear as method references or motivation, not as the load-bearing justification for the central claim, so they do not constitute circularity. The time-reversal objection to the UGR/CPS pairing is a physical-correctness concern about the mode classification, not a circularity of the derivation chain, and does not change this verdict.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The quantitative predictions depend on a specific numerically found grating geometry and on TCMT parameters, including γ, ω_r,1, and direct scattering coefficients, extracted from or approximated for the same system. The qualitative UGR versus CPS distinction is also visible in direct FEM scattering, so the model assumptions do not by themselves generate the central observation.

free parameters (3)
  • Structural parameters (t, G, w1, w2, Δp) of the meta-grating = t=0.355a, G=0.045a, w1=0.25a, w2=0.296a, Δp=0.354a for the main system; variations in Fig. 4
    Chosen by numerical search to realize a band with both UGR and CPS. The central demonstration and all GH shift results use this design; no analytic design rule is given.
  • TCMT parameters γ (decay rate) and ω_r,1 (band slope) = Not listed numerically; extracted from FEM band structure as constants
    Used to generate analytic line shapes in Eqs. (8)-(14). The values come from the same simulations that produce the data being explained, not from an independent measurement.
  • Direct scattering coefficients = -1/√2 and i/√2
    Approximated as the reflection and transmission of a uniform slab with thickness 2t+G. This is an ad hoc simplification of the actual grating scattering and is not derived from the grating's band structure.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Maxwell's equations and the Helmholtz equation govern the field; Bloch theorem applies for periodic grating.
    Used throughout Sec. II to compute band structures and eigenmodes.
  • domain assumption Material refractive indices n_g=3.4767 and n_b=1.444 are constant and dispersionless at the operating wavelength.
    Assumed in all FEM simulations; real Si and SiO2 have dispersion and loss.
  • standard math The stationary-phase method, Artmann formula Eq. (3), gives the GH shift from the phase slope of the outgoing plane wave.
    Central tool; assumes the beam is sufficiently collimated for a single phase slope to describe the shift.
  • domain assumption The two incident beams are perfectly coherent, equal amplitude, and have exactly the same lateral wavenumber with opposite normal components.
    The whole scheme is defined by this idealization; real beam splitters and phase delays introduce imbalance.
  • ad hoc to paper The subset of systems with both UGR and CPS forms a two-dimensional surface in the (w1, w2, kx, Δp) parameter space.
    Stated from limited numerical scans in Fig. 4; not proven analytically or covered exhaustively.
  • ad hoc to paper TCMT coupling coefficients relate to radiation rates by time-reversal symmetry with κ_j=d_j, and the direct scattering of the grating is that of a uniform slab.
    Simplifies the actual grating to a symmetric cavity with four ports; validity is checked only by qualitative agreement with FEM.
  • domain assumption The topological classification of BIC, UGR, and CPS via the radiation asymmetry pseudopolarization is taken from prior literature.
    The paper relies on the definitions and topological charges established in Refs. [22, 27, 49].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Coherent Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts of meta-grating with radiation asymmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P5RGS6C7

@misc{pith2026250607360,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Coherent Goos-H$\ddota$nchen shifts of meta-grating with radiation asymmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P5RGS6C7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07360}
}
abstract

The coherent Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts of meta-grating are proposed, which is the Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts of the two outgoing beams under the simultaneous incidence of two coherent optical beams from opposite sides of the grating with the same lateral wave number. As both of the frequency and lateral wave number are resonant with a topological state of the meta-grating, such as unidirectionally guided resonance or circular polarized states, the energy flux and Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts of the two outgoing beams are coherently controlled by the relative phase difference between the two incident beams. By applying stationary-phase method, it is found that the enhancement of coherent Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts by the unidirectionally guided resonance and circular polarized states is accompanied by constant and peak transmittance, respectively. Analysis with temporal coupled mode theory shows that the different features are due to difference mechanism of interference between direction scattering and resonant radiation. The coherent Goos-H$\ddot{a}$nchen shifts with incident Gaussian beams are sensitive to the relative phase between the two beams, which can be applied in refractive index sensor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07360 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: The scheme of coherent Goos-H¨a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: (a) The structure of the double layer dielectric meta [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (a) The band structure of the TE mode for a meta [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: For the branches of systems with both UGR and CPS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The angular spectrum of the ratio between the outgoin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: For the system in Fig. 5, as the incident angle is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: For a Gaussian beam with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a). Meanwhile, the left traveling CPS radiates energy to both up and down sides of the grating, which form the outgoing beams with GH shift to the left. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: The same as Fig. 7(a,b), with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: The same as Fig. 7(c,d), with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Numerical value of GH shifts extracted from Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Goos and H

    F. Goos and H. H¨ anchen, Ein neuer und fundamentaler Versuch zur Totalreflexion, Ann. Phys. 436, 333 (1947)

    1947

  2. [2]

    H. M. Lai and S. W. Chan, Large and negative Goos- H¨anchen shift near the Brewster dip on reflection from weakly absorbing media, Opt. Lett. 27, 680 (2002)

    2002

  3. [3]

    L. Wang, H. Chen, and S. Zhu, Large negative Goos- H¨anchen shift from a weakly absorbing dielectric slab, Opt. Lett. 30, 2936 (2005)

    2005

  4. [4]

    P. T. Leung, C. W. Chen, and H.-P. Chiang, Large neg- ative Goos-H¨anchen shift at metal surfaces, Opt. Com- mun. 276, 206(2007)

    2007

  5. [5]

    X. Yin, L. Hesselink, Z. Liu, N. Fang, and X. Zhang, Large positive and negative lateral optical beam displace- ments due to surface plasmon resonance, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85, 372(2004)

    2004

  6. [6]

    Yin and L

    X. Yin and L. Hesselink, Goos-H¨ anchen shift surface plasmon resonance sensor, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 261108 (2006)

    2006

  7. [7]

    V. J. Yallapragada, A. P. Ravishankar, G. L. Mulay, G. S. Agarwal, and V. G. Achanta, Observation of giant Goos-H¨anchen and angular shifts at designed metasur- faces, Sci. Rep. 6, 19319 (2016)

    2016

  8. [8]

    Y. Wang, Y. Hu, R. Xie, Q. Zeng, Y. Hong, X. Chen, P. Zhang, L. Zeng, Y. Zhang, S. Zeng, and H. Yang, Ultrasensitive label-free miRNA-21 detection based on MXene-enhanced plasmonic lateral displacement mea- surement, Nanophotonics 12, 4055 (2023)

    2023

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Li and Q

    C.-F. Li and Q. Wang, Prediction of simultaneously large and opposite generalized Goos-H¨anchen shifts for TE and TM light beams in an asymmetric double-prism configu- ration, Phys. Rev. E 69, 055601(R) (2004)

    2004

  2. [10]

    Wang and S

    L. Wang and S. Zhu, Giant lateral shift of a light beam at the defect mode in one-dimensional photonic crystals, Opt. Lett. 31, 101 (2006)

    2006

  3. [11]

    K. V. Sreekanth, Q. Ouyang, S. Han, K.-T. Yong, and R. Singh, Giant enhancement of Goos-H¨ anchen shift at the singular phase of a nanophotonic cavity, Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 161109 (2018)

    2018

  4. [12]

    F. Wu, T. Liu, M. Luo, H. Li, and S. Xiao, Giant Goos- H¨anchen shifts with high reflection driven by Fabry-Perot quasibound states in the continuum in double-layer grat- ings, Phys. Rev. B 109, 125411(2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    I. V. Soboleva, V. V. Moskalenko, and A. A. Fedyanin, Giant Goos-H¨anchen effect and Fano resonance at pho- tonic crystal surfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 123901 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Y. Wan, Z. Zheng, W. Kong, X. Zhao, Y. Liu, Y. Bian, and J. Liu, Nearly three orders of magnitude enhance- ment of Goos-H¨anchen shift by exciting Bloch surface wave, Opt. Express 20, 8998 (2012)

    2012

  7. [15]

    J. Tang, J. Xu, Z. Zheng, H. Dong, J. Dong, S. Qian, J. Guo, L. Jiang, and Y. Xiang, Graphene Tamm plasmon- induced giant Goos-H¨anchen shift at terahertz frequen- cies, Chin, Opt. Lett. 17, 020007 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    J. Wu, F. Wu, K. Lv, Z. Guo, H. Jiang, Y. Sun, Y. Li, and H. Chen, Giant Goos-H¨ anchen shift with a high reflectance assisted by interface states in photonic het- erostructures, Phys. Rev. A 101, 053838 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Y. Ye, W. Chen, S. Wang, Y. Liu, and L. Jiang, En- hanced and tunable Goos-H¨anchen effect of reflected light due to Tamm surface plasmons with Dirac semimetals, Results Phys. 43, 106105 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    F. Wu, J. Wu, Z. Guo, H. Jiang, Y. Sun, Y. Li, J. Ren and H. Chen, Giant Enhancement of the Goos-H¨ anchen Shift Assisted by Quasibound States in the Continuum, Phys. Rev. Appl. 12, 014028(2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    F. Wu, M. Luo, J. Wu, C. Fan, X. Qi, Y. Jian, D. Liu, S. Xiao, G. Chen, H. Jiang, Y. Sun and H. Chen, Dual quasibound states in the continuum in compound grat- ing waveguide structures for large positive and negative Goos-H¨anchen shifts with perfect reflection, Phys. Rev. A 10...

    2021

  12. [20]

    Luo and F

    M. Luo and F. Wu, Refractive-index sensing based on large negative Goos-H¨anchen shifts of a wavy dielectric grating, Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 014050(2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Artmann, Berechnung der Seitenversetzung des total - reflektierten Strahles, Ann

    K. Artmann, Berechnung der Seitenversetzung des total - reflektierten Strahles, Ann. Phys. 437, 87 (1948)

    1948

  14. [22]

    Zhuang, H.-L

    Z.-P. Zhuang, H.-L. Zeng, X.-D. Chen, X.-T. He, and J.-W. Dong, Topological Nature of Radiation Asym- metry in Bilayer Metagratings, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 113801(2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    C. W. Hsu, B. Zhen, A. D. Stone, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljaˇci´c, Bound state in the continuum, Nat. Rev. Mater. 1, 16048 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    Joseph, S

    S. Joseph, S. Pandey, S. Sarkar, and J. Joseph, Bound states in the continuum in resonant nanostructures: An overview of engineered materials for tailored application s, Nanophotonics 10, 4175 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    S. I. Azzam and A. V. Kildishev, Photonic bound states in the continuum: From basics to applications, Adv. Opt. Mater. 9, 2001469 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    A. F. Sadreev, Interference traps waves in an open sys- tem: Bound states in the continuum, Rep. Prog. Phys. 84, 055901(2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Zhen, C.W

    B. Zhen, C.W. Hsu, L. Lu, A. D. Stone, and M. Soljaˇ ci´c, Topological nature of optical bound states in the contin- uum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 257401(2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    C. W. Hsu, B. Zhen, J. Lee, S. Chua, S. G. Johnson, J. D. 11 -30 30 y/a -30 30 y/a -30 30 y/a -30 30 y/a -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 x/a -30 30 y/a -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 x/a FIG. 9: The same as Fig. 7(a,b), with θInc = 21.5o and ϕ varying from 0 .1π t...

    2013

  21. [29]

    Y. Yang, C. Peng, Y. Liang, Z. Li, and S. Noda, Ana- lytical Perspective for Bound States in the Continuum in Photonic Crystal Slabs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 037401 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    Koshelev, S

    K. Koshelev, S. Lepeshov, M. Liu, A. Bogdanov, and Y. Kivshar, Asymmetric Metasurfaces with High-Q Res- onances Governed by Bound States in the Continuum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 193903 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    Minkov, I

    M. Minkov, I. A. D. Williamson, M. Xiao, and S. Fan, Zero-Index Bound States in the Continuum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 263901 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    J. Jin, X. Yin, L. Ni, M. Soljaˇ ci´c, B. Zhen, and C. Peng, Topologically enabled ultrahigh-Q guided resonances ro- bust to out-of-plane scattering, Nature (London) 574, 501 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    S. Li, C. Zhou, T. Liu, and S. Xiao, Symmetry-protected bound states in the continuum supported by all-dielectric metasurfaces, Phys. Rev. A 100, 063803 (2019)

    2019

  26. [34]

    S. Dai, P. Hu, and D. Han, Near-field analysis of bound 12 0 1 2 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 (a) 0 1 2 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 (b) FIG. 11: Numerical value of GH shifts extracted from Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 are plotted in panel (a) and (b), respectively. The red and blue dots repre...

    2020

  27. [35]

    B. Wang, W. Liu, M. Zhao, J. Wang, Y. Zhang, A. Chen, F. Guan, X. Liu, L. Shi, and J. Zi, Generating optical vortex beams by momentum-space polarization vortices centred at bound states in the continuum, Nat. Photonics 14, 623 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    J. W. Yoon, S. H. Song, and R. Magnusson, Critical field enhancement of asymptotic optical bound states in the continuum, Sci. Rep. 5, 18301 (2015)

    2015

  29. [37]

    Monticone and A

    F. Monticone and A. Al` u, Bound states within the ra- diation continuum in diffraction gratings and the role of leaky modes, New J. Phys. 19, 093011 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    Z. F. Sadrieva, I. S. Sinev, K. L. Koshelev, A. Samu- sev, I. V. Iorsh, O. Takayama, R. Malureanu, A. A. Bog- danov, and A. V. Lavrinenko, Transition from optical bound states in the continuum to leaky resonances: Role of substrate and roughness, ACS Photonics 4, 723 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    H. M. Doeleman, F. Monticone, W. den Hollander, A. Al`u, and A. F. Koenderink, Experimental observation of a polarization vortex at an optical bound state in the continuum, Nat. Photonics 12, 397 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    E. N. Bulgakov, D. N. Maksimov, P. N. Semina, and S. A. Skorobogatov, Propagating bound states in the con- tinuum in dielectric gratings, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 35, 1218 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    S. I. Azzam, V. M. Shalaev, A. Boltasseva, and A. V. Kildishev, Formation of Bound States in the Continuum in Hybrid Plasmonic-Photonic Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 253901(2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    Joseph, S

    S. Joseph, S. Sarkar, S. Khan, and J. Joseph, Exploring the optical bound state in the continuum in a dielec- tric grating coupled plasmonic hybrid system, Adv. Opt. Mater. 9, 2001895(2021)

    2021

  35. [43]

    D. Liu, X. Yu, F. Wu, S. Xiao, F. Itoigawa, and S. Ono, Terahertz high-Q quasibound states in the continuum in laserfabricated metallic double-slit arrays, Opt. Expres s 29, 24779(2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Z. F. Sadrieva, M. A. Belyakov, M. A. Balezin, P. V. Kapitanova, E. A. Nenasheva, A. F. Sadreev, and A. A. Bogdanov, Experimental observation of a symmetric- protected bound state in the continuum in a chain of dielectric disks, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053804 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    M. V. Rybin, K. L. Koshelev, Z. F. Sadrieva, K. B. Samu- sev, A. A. Bogdanov, M. F. Limonov, and Y. S. Kivshar, High-Q Supercavity Modes in Subwavelength Dielectric Resonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 243901 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    Melik-Gaykazyan, K

    E. Melik-Gaykazyan, K. Koshelev, J. Choi, S. S. Kruk, A. Bogdanov, H. Park, and Y. Kivshar, From Fano to quasi-BIC resonances in individual dielectric nanoanten- nas, Nano Lett. 21, 1765(2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    Hemmati and R

    H. Hemmati and R. Magnusson, Resonant dual-grating metamembranes supporting spectrally narrow bound states in the continuum, Adv. Opt. Mater. 7, 1900754 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Cong and R

    L. Cong and R. Singh, Symmetry-protected dual bound states in the continuum in metamaterials, Adv. Opt. Mater. 7, 1900383(2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    X. Yin, J. Jin, M. Soljaˇ ci´c, C. Peng, and B. Zhen, Ob- servation of topologically enabled unidirectional guided resonances, Nature (London) 580, 467 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

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

    2021

  43. [51]

    X. Yin, T. Inoue, C. Peng, and S. Noda, Topological unidirectional guided resonances emerged from interband coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 056401 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    X. Tu, S. Feng, J. Li, Y. Xing, F. Wu, Tingtin. Liu, and S. Xiao, Enhanced second-harmonic generation in high-Q all-dielectric metasurfaces with backward frequency con- version, Phys. Rev. A 109, 063522 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Zhang, K

    G. Zhang, K. Zhang, X. Huang, X. Chen, X. Wang, W. Tao, and Y. Mao, Highly robust and efficient second har- monic generation device based on lithium niobate, Phys. Rev. B 111, 155302 (2025)

    2025

  46. [54]

    Luo and Q

    M. Luo and Q. H. Liu, Extraordinary transmission of a thick film with a periodic structure consisting of strongly dispersive materials, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 629 (2011)

    2011

  47. [55]

    Luo and Q

    M. Luo and Q. H. Liu, Three-dimensional dispersive metallic photonic crystals with a bandgap and a high cutoff frequency, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 27, 1878 (2010)

    2010

  48. [56]

    M. Luo, Q. H. Liu, and J. Guo, A spectral element method calculation of extraordinary light transmission through periodic subwavelength slits, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 27, 560(2010)

    2010

  49. [57]

    Luo and Q

    M. Luo and Q. H. Liu, Accurate determination of band structures of 2D dispersive anisotropic photonic crystals by the spectral element method, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 26, 1598(2009)

    2009

  50. [58]

    Luo and Q

    M. Luo and Q. H. Liu, Spectral element method for band structures of three-dimensional anisotropic pho- tonic crystals, Phys. Rev. E 80, 056702 (2009)

    2009

  51. [59]

    M. Luo, Q. H. Liu, and Z. Li, Spectral element method for band structures of two-dimensional anisotropic pho- tonic crystals, Phys. Rev. E 79, 026705 (2009)

    2009

  52. [60]

    S. Fan, W. Suh, and J. D. Joannopoulos, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 20, 569 (2003)

    2003

  53. [61]

    F. Wu, C. Fan, K. Zhu, J. Wu, X. Qi, Y. Sun, S. Xiao, H. Jiang, and H. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 105, 245417(2022)

    2022

  54. [62]

    Luo and F

    M. Luo and F. Wu, Phys. Rev. A 106, 063514(2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.