Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Laser-Controlled Nonlinear Hall Effect in Tellurium Solids via Nonlinear Phononics

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A strong THz laser pulse can reverse the direction of the nonlinear Hall current in electron-doped tellurium by transiently distorting its helical lattice.

desk verdict A plausible and genuinely new prediction of laser-driven NHE sign reversal in Te, but the static-displacement bridge from the oscillating lattice to the BCD flip is not justified and should be tested before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18843 v1 pith:RWO35RSU submitted 2024-11-28 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Hongyu Chen , Xi Wu , Jiali Yang , Peizhe Tang , Jia Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords nonlinearphononicstelluriumHalleffectBerrycurvaturedipoleWeylpointterahertzlaserphononcouplingfirst-principlescalculation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that a strong terahertz laser pulse can transiently alter the crystal lattice of elemental tellurium and thereby reverse the direction of a topological transport signal, the nonlinear Hall current, in electron-doped samples. The mechanism is a two-step phonon coupling: the laser resonantly drives the infrared-active A2 mode, whose motion nonlinearly excites the Raman-active A1 mode into an anharmonic regime with a shifted equilibrium position. That lattice distortion expands the radius of Te's helical chains, changing the band structure from direct to indirect and deforming the dispersion around a Weyl point. The deformed Weyl dispersion rearranges the Berry curvature dipole, which is the quantity that sets the sign of the nonlinear Hall current, producing the predicted sign reversal. The broader point is that light can act as a fast switch for topological transport without changing the material.

What carries the argument

The central object is the total potential energy of the two coupled phonon modes, $V(Q_{A2}, Q_{A1})$, containing harmonic terms for both modes, anharmonic cubic and quartic terms for A1, a quartic term for A2, and the symmetry-allowed couplings $g_1 Q_{A2}^2 Q_{A1}$ and $g_2 Q_{A2}^2 Q_{A1}^2$. Solving the coupled equations of motion with the laser force applied only to A2 yields a nonzero time-averaged shift of $Q_{A1}$, i.e. the lattice distortion. That distortion is then fed into density-functional band structure calculations, and the nonlinear Hall response is evaluated from the Berry curvature dipole $D_{zz}(\epsilon)$, the Fermi-surface integral of $v_z \Omega_z$, which is the standard quantity controlling the nonlinear Hall current.

What would settle it

A time-resolved nonlinear Hall transport experiment on electron-doped Te under a resonant THz pump, sweeping pump fluence and measuring the transverse second-harmonic voltage, would settle the claim: if the Hall signal does not reverse sign at the fluence corresponding to $Q_{A1} \approx 0.78$ $\mathrm{\AA}\sqrt{\mathrm{amu}}$, the central prediction fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that a resonant THz pump on tellurium does more than heat it: it creates a transient non-equilibrium lattice state in which the A1 breathing mode acquires an equilibrium displacement $\delta Q_{A1}$ while the driving A2 mode oscillates. Because the A1 potential is anharmonic (a sizeable cubic term), and because symmetry allows a $g_1 Q_{A2}^2 Q_{A1}$ coupling, the time average of the driven motion is a net expansion of the helical chain radius. First-principles band calculations for frozen displacements of $Q_{A1} = 0, 0.39, 0.78$ $\mathrm{\AA}\sqrt{\mathrm{amu}}$ show the conduction-band edge along $\Gamma$-$A$ dropping below the $H$-point minimum, turning Te into an indirect semiconductor, and the bands around the Weyl point at $H$ being deformed. Integrating the Berry curvature dipole $D_{zz}$ over the Fermi surface for electron-doped Te then gives a sign reversal of $D_{zz}$ as $Q_{A1}$ grows, which the paper reads as a reversal of the nonlinear Hall current under increasing laser strength.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation replaces the laser-driven oscillating lattice by a static displacement along the A1 mode; if the Berry curvature dipole is not nearly linear in that displacement over the oscillation amplitude, the predicted time-averaged sign reversal could differ from the static result.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Resonant THz excitation of Te should produce a measurable transient sign flip of the nonlinear Hall voltage in electron-doped crystals, with the flip occurring before any structural phase transition.
  • The same lattice-distortion channel should push Te's fundamental gap from direct to indirect transiently, observable as a change in recombination or optical absorption dynamics.
  • The predicted equilibrium shift along A1 scales monotonically with pump strength, giving a continuous knob for Berry curvature dipole magnitude rather than an on-off switch.
  • Since the A2–A1 coupling and anharmonic A1 potential are symmetry-allowed in other chiral elemental solids, similar THz control of the BCD should occur in related materials.
  • The mechanism does not require time-reversal symmetry breaking, so it applies to inversion-broken but non-magnetic crystals.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is to compute the time-averaged BCD over one full A1+A2 oscillation rather than at frozen displacements; if the sign reversal survives averaging, the static approximation is confirmed, but if it does not, the reversal would be weaker or delayed.
  • The paper's static-displacement calculation implicitly assumes the electronic response follows the lattice adiabatically; at THz timescales, a non-adiabatic treatment could modify both the magnitude and the switching speed of the Hall signal.
  • One could also probe the direct-to-indirect transition independently with time-resolved terahertz conductivity or photoemission, cross-checking the same lattice distortion that produces the Hall reversal.
  • The sign-reversal criterion could be applied to other Weyl systems: any material whose Weyl-point dispersion responds to a symmetry-preserving phonon displacement should show BCD control at similar fluences.
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 mechanism for ultrafast laser control of the nonlinear Hall effect in elemental tellurium. A THz laser resonantly drives the infrared-active A2 phonon; because of nonlinear phonon coupling, this indirectly excites the Raman-active A1 mode, whose anharmonic potential produces a rectified lattice displacement along the A1 coordinate. Using first-principles DFT calculations and coupled-phonon dynamics with parameters fitted to DFT (Table I), the authors find that the resulting lattice distortion changes Te from a direct to an indirect semiconductor and, at electron-doped Fermi energies near the Weyl point at H, reverses the Berry curvature dipole component Dzz. They interpret the reversal through the momentum-space redistribution of Berry curvature and Fermi velocity contributions around the Weyl point, and conclude that the nonlinear Hall current direction in electron-doped Te can be reversed by a strong THz laser field.

Significance. If the predicted sign reversal survives a more complete treatment of the driven lattice, this would be a notable demonstration of nonlinear-phononics control over a Berry-curvature-derived transport response in a simple elemental solid, connecting ultrafast lattice dynamics with topological transport. The paper's strengths include the explicit first-principles construction of the coupled phonon potential, the dynamical simulation of the A1-A2 coupling with a clear zero-frequency displacement component, and the direct frozen-phonon DFT evaluation of the BCD from first-principles band structures rather than from the fitted model. The mechanism proposed — competition between inner and outer Fermi-velocity regions around the Weyl point — is concrete and falsifiable. However, the central transport prediction is currently computed from static displacements only, and the connection between the oscillating laser-driven lattice and the time-averaged nonlinear Hall signal is not established; this is the main load-bearing gap.

major comments (3)
  1. [Fig. 2(c)-(d) and Fig. 4(b)] The central claim of sign reversal is supported by computing Dzz only for static A1 displacements QA1 = 0, 0.39, 0.78 Å√amu, while the actual laser-driven state shown in Fig. 2(c) oscillates with frequency components at zero, 2ω_A2, and ω_A1,eff. The paper does not justify that the time-averaged BCD is equal to the BCD evaluated at the rectified displacement. Because Fig. 4(b) shows Dzz crossing zero between QA1 = 0.39 and 0.78, the oscillatory part of the trajectory could sample regions of opposite Dzz sign, and the time-averaged signed current could differ from or even cancel the static prediction. Please provide a time-resolved estimate of Dzz along the actual trajectory, or an explicit argument that Dzz is approximately linear in QA1 over the oscillation amplitude so that only the mean displacement matters.
  2. [Fig. 2(e) and the surrounding text] The mapping from laser pump strength to the rectified displacement δQA1 ≈ 0.78 Å√amu is asserted through a brief statement involving Te atomic mass, Born effective charge, and 'experimentally achievable pump strength,' but no formula, no pump field amplitude, and no pulse duration are given. Since the BCD reversal in Fig. 4 is computed precisely at QA1 = 0.78, the experimental feasibility of reaching that displacement within the phonon lifetime is load-bearing. Please state the conversion, the corresponding electric-field amplitude and pulse length, the phonon lifetime, and the resulting duration during which the distorted structure is present relative to the transport measurement time.
  3. [Eq. (4) and the paragraph after it] The manuscript defines the Berry curvature dipole Dzz but never writes the nonlinear Hall current expression that connects Dzz to the measurable current. The abstract claims a sign reversal of the 'nonlinear Hall-like current,' yet the text only states that the in-plane NHE current flows along the trigonal axis, citing Ref. [36]. Please give the full nonlinear current formula (including the relaxation-time prefactor and the direction of flow) and show explicitly that the sign change of Dzz in Fig. 4(b) corresponds to a sign change of the measurable current for the relevant electron-doped Fermi energy and scattering time. Without this, the central transport claim is not completely specified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction, first paragraph] There are typographical and grammatical errors, e.g., 'In stead of phase transitions' should be 'Instead of phase transitions,' and 'could enables dynamic structure design' should be 'could enable dynamic structure design.'
  2. [Eq. (1) and the discussion of Table I] The statement that the absolute value of a3 (7.62 meV/amu^{3/2} Å^3) is 'significant compared to' ω²_A1 (38.74 meV/amu Å^2) is dimensionally inconsistent because a3 multiplies Q^3 while ω²_A1 multiplies Q^2; the relative importance depends on the amplitude of QA1. The conclusion that the A1 mode is anharmonic can be justified, but the comparison should be made through a dimensionless ratio such as a3 A / ω²_A1 for a relevant amplitude A.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption and Fig. 3(c)] The conversions between normal-coordinate values QA1 = 0.39 and 0.78 Å√amu and atomic displacements of 0.1 and 0.2 Å are stated without derivation; please clarify the normal-mode normalization and show how the atomic displacement is obtained from QA1.
  4. [Note added and Ref. [48]] The 'Note added' disclosing the related e-print is appreciated, but the manuscript would benefit from a brief comparison of the results and methods with Ref. [48] so that the novelty and differences are clear to the reader.
  5. [Throughout] Several references to the Supplemental Material (Sec. II, Sec. III, Figs. S1-S6, Table S1) carry essential technical details, including the analytical derivation of the zero-frequency shift and the coupling equations of motion. These details should be summarized at least briefly in the main text so that the core derivation is self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the BCD reversal is computed directly from first-principles electronic structure at displaced geometries, and the fitted phonon model supplies only the displacement scale.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The phonon potential parameters in Table I are fitted to DFT total energies and are used to simulate the laser-driven A2/A1 dynamics and to estimate the rectified A1 displacement of about 0.8 Å·amu^(1/2). The central transport prediction, however, is the reversal of Dzz, which is obtained by evaluating the Berry curvature dipole from first-principles band structures at frozen A1 displacements QA1 = 0, 0.39, and 0.78 Å·amu^(1/2). The sign reversal is therefore a direct electronic-structure result for the displaced lattice, not a restatement of the fitted phonon parameters. No predicted quantity is equivalent by construction to a parameter fitted to the target data. The only coauthor self-citation, Ref. [20] by Shin, Rubio, and Tang, appears in a contextual list of non-equilibrium steady states and is not load-bearing for the BCD calculation or the sign-reversal claim. The static-displacement approximation for the time-averaged BCD under an oscillating lattice is a physical approximation that could affect accuracy, but an approximation or possible failure is a correctness risk, not circularity. Accordingly, no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, fields, or conserved quantities are introduced. The paper's central prediction rests on a classical phonon model with fitted parameters, the static-displacement approximation, and standard DFT and Berry-curvature formalism.

free parameters (4)
  • Potential coefficients ω²_A2, b4, ω²_A1, a3, a4, g1, g2 = 26.72, 0.28, 38.74, -7.62, 0.24, -0.85, -2.02 (in meV and mixed units)
    Fitted to first-principles potential energy curves; these determine the equilibrium lattice shift and hence the displacements used for the BCD calculation.
  • Pump driving force F = not specified in main text
    The THz field amplitude enters the A2 equation of motion; the conversion to an experimentally achievable pump strength uses Born effective charge and refs [46,47].
  • QA1 displacement values = 0.39 and 0.78 Å√amu
    Chosen as representative values corresponding to atomic shifts of 0.1 and 0.2 Å; 0.78 is called the feasible shift under strong pumping.
  • Electron doping level / Fermi energy = energy near the Weyl point at H
    Chosen to place the Fermi level at the Weyl point where BCD is large, following the scenario of ref [36].
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DFT with an approximate exchange-correlation functional gives accurate band structure and Berry curvature for Te.
    All electronic structure and BCD results rely on this; no functional or convergence details are given in the main text.
  • domain assumption The coupled phonon dynamics can be described by classical equations of motion with the fitted potential Eq. 3.
    Quantum effects, phonon-phonon scattering beyond the model, and carrier dynamics are neglected.
  • ad hoc to paper The time-averaged effect of the laser-driven lattice motion is captured by a static displacement along A1 only.
    The paper computes band structure and BCD for frozen QA1 values (Fig. 3-4) while the actual state oscillates (Fig. 2c); the equivalence is assumed, not derived.
  • standard math Symmetry selection rule A2⊗A2⊗A1⊗...⊗A1 ⊃ A1 governs the allowed couplings.
    Group theory for D3 point group, stated before Eq. 3.
  • domain assumption The Berry curvature dipole formula Eq. 4 describes the nonlinear Hall current.
    Standard nonlinear response theory from refs [25,26,36].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Laser-Controlled Nonlinear Hall Effect in Tellurium Solids via Nonlinear Phononics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RWO35RSU

@misc{pith2026241118843,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Laser-Controlled Nonlinear Hall Effect in Tellurium Solids via Nonlinear Phononics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RWO35RSU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18843}
}
read the original abstract

A Terahertz (THz) laser with strong strength could excite more than one phonons and induce a transient lattice distortion termed as nonlinear phononics. This process allows dynamic control of various physical properties, including topological properties. Here, using first-principles calculations and dynamical simulations, we demonstrate that THz laser excitation can modulate the electronic structure and the signal of nonlinear Hall effect in elemental solid tellurium (Te). By strongly exciting the chiral phonon mode, we observe a non-equilibrium steady state characterized by lattice distortion along the breathing vibrational mode. This leads to a transition of Te from a direct to an indirect semiconductor. In addition, the energy dispersion around the Weyl point is deformed, leading to variations in the local Berry curvature dipole. As a result, the nonlinear Hall-like current in Te can be modulated with electron doping where the sign of current could be reversed under a strong THz laser field. Our results may stimulate further research on coupled quasiparticles in solids and the manipulation of their topological transport properties using THz lasers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18843 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Crystal structures and phonon modes of Te. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. THz laser-induced changes in the chemical bonding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. THz laser-controlled nonlinear Hall effect around the Weyl point in electron-doped elemental Te. (a) Band structures [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [48]

    Light-induced renormalization of the band structure of chiral tellurium

    G. Gatti, N. Tancogne-Dejean, H. H¨ ubener, U. D. Gio- vannini, J. Dai, S. Polishchuk, P. Bugnon, F. Frassetto, L. Poletto, M. Chergui, M. Grioni, A. Rubio, M. Pup- pin, and A. Crepaldi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.13954 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [36]

    S. S. Tsirkin, P. A. Puente, and I. Souza, Phys. Rev. B 97, 035158 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [1]

    Forn-D ´ ıaz, L

    P. Forn-D ´ ıaz, L. Lamata, E. Rico, J. Kono, and E. Solano, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025005 (2019)

    2019

  4. [2]

    Rivera and I

    N. Rivera and I. Kaminer, Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 538 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [3]

    R. B. Liu, W. Yao, and L. J. Sham, Adv. Phys. 59, 703 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [4]

    F¨ orst, C

    M. F¨ orst, C. Manzoni, S. Kaiser, Y. Tomioka, Y. Tokura, R. Merlin, and A. Cavalleri, Nat. Phys. 7, 854 (2011)

    work page 2011

  7. [5]

    Neufeld, J

    O. Neufeld, J. Zhang, U. De Giovannini, H. H¨ ubener, and A. Rubio, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 119, e2204219119 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [6]

    Caruso and M

    F. Caruso and M. Zacharias, Phys. Rev. B 107, 054102 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 48 references
  1. [7]

    Fechner, M

    M. Fechner, M. F¨ orst, G. Orenstein, V. Krapivin, A. S. Disa, M. Buzzi, A. von Hoegen, G. de la Pena, Q. L. Nguyen, R. Mankowsky, M. Sander, H. Lemke, Y. Deng, M. Trigo, and A. Cavalleri, Nat. Mater. 23, 363 (2024)

    2024

  2. [8]

    Subedi, A

    A. Subedi, A. Cavalleri, and A. Georges, Phys. Rev. B 89, 220301 (2014)

    2014

  3. [9]

    Mankowsky, M

    R. Mankowsky, M. F¨ orst, T. Loew, J. Porras, B. Keimer, and A. Cavalleri, Phys. Rev. B 91, 094308 (2015)

    2015

  4. [10]

    Fechner and N

    M. Fechner and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. B 94, 134307 (2016)

    2016

  5. [11]

    D. M. Juraschek, M. Fechner, and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 054101 (2017)

    2017

  6. [12]

    Frenzel, M

    M. Frenzel, M. Cherasse, J. M. Urban, F. Wang, B. Xiang, L. Nest, L. Huber, L. Perfetti, M. Wolf, T. Kampfrath, X. Y. Zhu, and S. F. Maehrlein, Sci. Adv. 9, eadg3856 (2023)

    2023

  7. [13]

    E. J. Sie, C. M. Nyby, C. D. Pemmaraju, S. J. Park, X. Shen, J. Yang, M. C. Hoffmann, B. K. Ofori-Okai, R. Li, A. H. Reid, S. Weathersby, E. Mannebach, N. Finney, D. Rhodes, D. Chenet, A. Antony, L. Bali- cas, J. Hone, T. P. Devereaux, T. F. Heinz, X. Wang, and A. M. Lindenber...

    2019

  8. [14]

    T. F. Nova, A. Cartella, A. Cantaluppi, M. F¨ orst, D. Bossini, R. V. Mikhaylovskiy, A. V. Kimel, R. Merlin, and A. Cavalleri, Nat. Phys. 13, 132 (2017)

    2017

  9. [15]

    A. S. Disa, M. Fechner, T. F. Nova, B. L. Liu, M. F¨ orst, D. Prabhakaran, P. G. Radaelli, and A. Cavalleri, Nat. Phys. 16, 937 (2020)

    2020

  10. [16]

    Afanasiev, J

    D. Afanasiev, J. R. Hortensius, B. A. Ivanov, A. Sasani, E. Bousquet, Y. M. Blanter, R. V. Mikhaylovskiy, A. V. Kimel, and A. D. Caviglia, Nat. Mater. 20, 607 (2021)

    2021

  11. [17]

    R. Tang, F. Boi, and Y. H. Cheng, npj Quantum Mater. 8, 78 (2023). 5

    2023

  12. [18]

    Mankowsky, A

    R. Mankowsky, A. Subedi, M. F¨ orst, S. O. Mariager, M. Chollet, H. T. Lemke, J. S. Robinson, J. M. Glow- nia, M. P. Minitti, A. Frano, M. Fechner, N. A. Spaldin, T. Loew, B. Keimer, A. Georges, and A. Cavalleri, Na- ture 516, 71 (2014)

    2014

  13. [19]

    Radhakrishnan, K

    P. Radhakrishnan, K. S. Rabinovich, A. V. Boris, K. F¨ ursich, M. Minola, G. Christiani, G. Logvenov, B. Keimer, and E. Benckiser, Nat. Phys. 10.1038/s41567- 024-02686-8 (2024)

    2024 doi

  14. [20]

    D. Shin, A. Rubio, and P. Tang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 016603 (2024)

    2024

  15. [21]

    Q. Ma, S. Y. Xu, C. K. Chan, C. L. Zhang, G. Chang, Y. Lin, W. Xie, T. Palacios, H. Lin, S. Jia, P. A. Lee, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and N. Gedik, Nat. Phys. 13, 842 (2017)

    2017

  16. [22]

    E. A. Mashkovich, K. A. Grishunin, R. M. Dubrovin, A. K. Zvezdin, R. V. Pisarev, and A. V. Kimel, Science 374, 1608 (2021)

    2021

  17. [23]

    Subedi, Phys

    A. Subedi, Phys. Rev. B 92, 214303 (2015)

    2015

  18. [24]

    Mankowsky, A

    R. Mankowsky, A. von Hoegen, M. F¨ orst, and A. Caval- leri, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 197601 (2017)

    2017

  19. [25]

    Sodemann and L

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

    2015

  20. [26]

    J. Wang, H. Zeng, W. Duan, and H. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 056401 (2023)

    2023

  21. [27]

    Y. K. Kato, R. C. Myers, A. C. Gossard, and D. D. Awschalom, Science 306, 1910 (2004)

    2004

  22. [28]

    C. Z. Chang, J. Zhang, X. Feng, J. Shen, Z. Zhang, M. Guo, K. Li, Y. Ou, P. Wei, L. L. Wang, Z. Q. Ji, Y. Feng, S. Ji, X. Chen, J. Jia, X. Dai, Z. Fang, S. C. Zhang, K. He, Y. Wang, L. Lu, X. C. Ma, and Q. K. Xue, Science 340, 167 (2013)

    2013

  23. [29]

    P. J. M. W¨ oltgens, C. Dekker, and H. W. de Wijn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3858 (1993)

    1993

  24. [30]

    H. Yang, Y. Liu, C. Zhuang, J. Shi, Y. Yao, S. Massidda, M. Monni, Y. Jia, X. Xi, Q. Li, Z. K. Liu, Q. Feng, and H. H. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 067001 (2008)

    2008

  25. [31]

    Zhang, L

    X. Zhang, L. Yu, S. von Moln´ ar, Z. Fisk, and P. Xiong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 106602 (2009)

    2009

  26. [32]

    V. K. Dugaev, M. Inglot, E. Y. Sherman, J. Berakdar, and J. Barna´ s, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 206601 (2012)

    2012

  27. [33]

    M. S. Hossain, F. Schindler, R. Islam, Z. Muhammad, Y. X. Jiang, Z. J. Cheng, Q. Zhang, T. Hou, H. Chen, M. Litskevich, B. Casas, J. X. Yin, T. A. Cochran, M. Yahyavi, X. P. Yang, L. Balicas, G. Chang, W. Zhao, T. Neupert, and M. Z. Hasan, Nature 628, 527 (2024)

    2024

  28. [34]

    I. K. Drozdov, A. Alexandradinata, S. Jeon, S. Nadj- Perge, H. Ji, R. J. Cava, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yazdani, Nat. Phys. 10, 664 (2014)

    2014

  29. [35]

    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. Yaz- dani, B. A. Bernevig, and T. Neupert, Nat. Phys. 14, 918 (2018)

    2018

  30. [37]

    Gatti, D

    G. Gatti, D. Gos´ albez-Mart ´ ınez, S. S. Tsirkin, M. Fan- ciulli, M. Puppin, S. Polishchuk, S. Moser, L. Testa, E. Martino, S. Roth, P. Bugnon, L. Moreschini, A. Bost- wick, C. Jozwiak, E. Rotenberg, G. Di Santo, L. Petaccia, I. Vobornik, J. Fujii, J. Wong, D. Jariwala, H. A...

    2020

  31. [38]

    Sakano, M

    M. Sakano, M. Hirayama, T. Takahashi, S. Akebi, M. Nakayama, K. Kuroda, K. Taguchi, T. Yoshikawa, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, K. Ono, H. Kumigashira, T. Ideue, Y. Iwasa, N. Mitsuishi, K. Ishizaka, S. Shin, T. Miyake, S. Murakami, T. Sasagawa, and T. Kondo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 136...

    2020

  32. [39]

    Furukawa, Y

    T. Furukawa, Y. Watanabe, N. Ogasawara, K. Kobayashi, and T. Itou, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023111 (2021)

    2021

  33. [40]

    V. A. Shalygin, A. N. Sofronov, L. E. Vorob’ev, and I. I. Farbshtein, Phys. Solid State 54, 2362 (2012)

    2012

  34. [41]

    L. A. Agapito, N. Kioussis, W. A. Goddard, and N. P. Ong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 176401 (2013)

    2013

  35. [42]

    Hirayama, R

    M. Hirayama, R. Okugawa, S. Ishibashi, S. Murakami, and T. Miyake, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 5 (2015)

    2015

  36. [43]

    H. Ning, O. Mehio, C. Lian, X. Li, E. Zoghlin, P. Zhou, B. Cheng, S. D. Wilson, B. M. Wong, and D. Hsieh, Phys. Rev. B 106, 205118 (2022)

    2022

  37. [44]

    Jnawali, Y

    G. Jnawali, Y. Xiang, S. M. Linser, I. A. Shojaei, R. Wang, G. Qiu, C. Lian, B. M. Wong, W. Wu, P. D. Ye, Y. Leng, H. E. Jackson, and L. M. Smith, Nat. Commun. 11, 3991 (2020)

    2020

  38. [45]

    for supplementary notes, Figs

    See Supplemental Material at ... for supplementary notes, Figs. S1-S6, and Table S1

  39. [46]

    H. Peng, N. Kioussis, and D. A. Stewart, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 251904 (2015)

    2015

  40. [47]

    Shalaby and C

    M. Shalaby and C. P. Hauri, Nat. Commun. 6, 5976 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

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