Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Mechanical enhancement of quantum oscillations

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The enhanced quantum oscillations in TaNiTe5 are a mechanical artifact of sample motion, not a topological electronic signature.

desk verdict A plausible, well-controlled artifact explanation for enhanced quantum oscillations in floating-sample setups, with a real gap between the qualitative claim and the quantitative model. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02612 v1 pith:WZGUVJTU submitted 2025-07-03 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Maximilian Daschner , Ivan Kokanović , F. Malte Grosche This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords quantumoscillationsShubnikov–deHaaseffectdeHaas–vanAlphentorquemotionalvoltagemechanicalartifactlock-inmagnetoresistanceTaNiTe5Diracnodal-linesemimetal
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 argues that the strongly amplified quantum oscillations seen in the magnetoresistance of TaNiTe5 are not an electronic or topological property of the material but a mechanical artifact of the measurement. In the four-point setup the sample floats, held only by gold wires, so the AC measurement current experiences a Lorentz force in the magnetic field and the whole sample shakes at the drive frequency. A moving conductor in a magnetic field develops a motional voltage, and de Haas–van Alphen oscillations in the magnetic torque tilt the sample, modulating both the force and the induced voltage. A damped harmonic-oscillator model reproduces the in-phase and out-of-phase lock-in signals, and the same model explains the observed field and frequency dependences. If correct, some purported topological signatures in Dirac semimetals should be re-examined with sample motion in mind.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two coupled damped harmonic oscillators: one for the vertical displacement $z(t)$ of the sample, driven by the Lorentz force, and one for its angular tilt $\theta(t)$, driven by the de Haas–van Alphen torque. The central object is the motional voltage $U_I = -\dot z B L \cos(\theta_0+\theta)$, which enters the measured resistance on top of the intrinsic magnetoresistance and carries the quantum oscillations into both lock-in components. The model also predicts a mechanical resonance at $\omega_R = \sqrt{\kappa_1/m}$, matching resonance-like features seen in the resistance.

What would settle it

Attach a TaNiTe5 sample rigidly and simultaneously measure its displacement (for example with a laser vibrometer) during a field sweep; if the enhanced in-phase and out-of-phase oscillations persist while the sample stays still, the mechanical explanation is wrong, and if the displacement tracks the Lorentz drive and dHvA torque, it is confirmed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the enhanced Shubnikov–de Haas oscillations in TaNiTe5 are mechanical in origin: the measured voltage contains a motional contribution $U_I = -\dot z B L \cos(\theta_0 + \theta)$, produced when the Lorentz force $F_L = I(t)\mathbf{L}\times\mathbf{B}$ sets the sample oscillating. A de Haas–van Alphen torque tilts the sample by $\theta \approx \tau_{QO}/k_1$, so quantum oscillations enter the resistance through the angle-dependent motion of the sample. Equations (15) and (16), giving the lock-in in-phase and out-of-phase components, closely resemble the experimental data of Figure 2 without any need to invoke topological properties. The underlying Fermi-surface frequencies and effective masses remain real, but the amplitude enhancement is a measurement artefact.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes the sample moves as a rigid object on springs made of the gold wires, with no other significant source of induced voltage; if the wires bend nonlinearly, the sample flexes, or the leads generate comparable induced voltages, the quantitative agreement collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • SdH amplitudes measured on floating samples can be strongly enhanced or even dominated by the motional voltage rather than by the sample's intrinsic resistance.
  • Samples rigidly attached to the measurement platform show no such oscillations, confirming that mechanical freedom is required for the effect.
  • The in-phase component should scale quadratically with lock-in frequency and the out-of-phase component linearly, as observed up to about 89 Hz.
  • A mechanical resonance in the measured resistance should appear at $\omega_R = \sqrt{\kappa_1/m}$, and similar peaks should be expected in other floating-sample measurements.
  • The extracted quantum oscillation frequencies and effective masses can still reflect the genuine Fermi surface, since the mechanical effect modulates the signal rather than creating the oscillations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same mechanism may contaminate other high-field transport measurements on needle-shaped or freely suspended crystals, and a large out-of-phase signal with a resonance peak is a cheap diagnostic for it.
  • A direct experimental test would be to measure sample displacement with a laser vibrometer or capacitive sensor during a field sweep; the model predicts that displacement tracks the Lorentz drive and is modulated by the dHvA torque.
  • The rigid-rod assumption could be probed by varying the mechanical compliance of the wires: if the model is right, the oscillation amplitude should scale with compliance rather than with sample purity or topology.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that the strongly enhanced quantum oscillations observed in the magnetoresistance of the nodal-line semimetal TaNiTe5 are a mechanical measurement artifact rather than an intrinsic topological transport signature. The proposed mechanism is that an AC Lorentz force drives a floating sample into damped harmonic motion, and de Haas-van Alphen oscillations in the magnetic torque periodically tilt the sample; the resulting motional voltage contaminates the four-point lock-in measurement. A two-degree-of-freedom model yields expressions for the in-phase and out-of-phase resistances (Eqs. 15 and 16) that reproduce the qualitative shape of the data in Fig. 2, the quadratic-in-field and linear/quadratic-in-frequency scalings, and a mechanical resonance. A control experiment with the sample fixed by vacuum grease abolishes the oscillations, supporting the mechanical origin.

Significance. The result, if correct, is an important cautionary contribution to the quantum-oscillation community, since it identifies a way in which apparent Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations with plausible frequencies and masses can arise from sample motion rather than from the electronic band structure. The paper's strengths are the clean control experiment (Fig. 5), the explicit analytical model, and the testable scaling predictions (Eqs. 17 and 18, and the resonance condition Eq. 19). The model is not circular in the illegitimate sense: the dHvA torque and its frequencies are inputs from the prior literature, not outputs of the fit. However, because the model is not quantitatively constrained by the data, the paper currently establishes the existence of a mechanical contribution but does not yet prove that the proposed rigid-body motional-EMF mechanism is the dominant contamination pathway.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. (16) and Fig. 7] The out-of-phase channel contains no semiclassical resistance term RS, so any oscillations at the fundamental frequencies, the observed 53, 163 and 233 T peaks, must come from the factor cos(θ0 + τ_QO/k1)|cos(θ0 + τ_QO/k1)|. If θ0 = 0, this factor is an even function of τ_QO and therefore oscillates at twice the dHvA frequency, not at the fundamental. Reproducing the out-of-phase oscillations at 53, 163 and 233 T requires a nonzero initial tilt θ0, and yet θ0 is never measured or quoted. Since θ0 is an unconstrained free parameter on which a central qualitative feature depends, the comparison in Fig. 7 is not evidence for the model unless the authors provide an independent determination of θ0, for example from the contact geometry, from a zero-torque limit, or from the sign of the out-of-phase signal.
  2. [Section IV, Eqs. (15)-(16) and Fig. 7] The comparison between the model and Fig. 2 is qualitative only; no values are given for m, κ1, κ2, k1, k2, the dHvA torque prefactor in Eq. (7), the initial tilt θ0, or the damping parameters. With this many free parameters, a visually similar curve does not meaningfully constrain the model. The authors should either report the parameter values used for Fig. 7 and show a fit with residuals to a selected dataset, or provide an independent measurement of the sample's mechanical response, such as a displacement or velocity measurement, or a frequency sweep through the resonance at fixed field. Without this, Eqs. (15)-(16) remain a plausible but untested shape model.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 5 and Section IV, Eq. (6)] The vacuum-grease control demonstrates that mechanical freedom is necessary for the enhanced oscillations, but it does not distinguish the rigid-body translational motional voltage of Eq. (6) from other mechanical effects, such as bending of the gold leads, loop-area changes in the voltage circuit, or strain-induced resistance changes at the contacts. The experiment should include a control in which the sample is rigidly fixed but the leads are free to move, or a measurement with shortened or stiffened leads, so that the specific motional-EMF pathway is isolated. This is load-bearing because the model's quantitative predictions rely on the z(t) degree of freedom being the dominant contributor.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV, Eqs. (15)-(16)] The derivation of the in-phase and out-of-phase components from the driven-harmonic-oscillator solution is highly condensed. Showing the intermediate algebra, such as the steady-state solution for z(t) and the grouping of sin(ωt) and cos(ωt) terms, would make the paper more accessible and verifiable.
  2. [Section IV, Eq. (15)-(16)] The denominator in Eqs. (15)-(16) appears to be missing a κ1^2 term or is mis-typeset: the standard damped-oscillator denominator is (κ1 - mω^2)^2 + (κ2ω)^2, which contains a κ1^2 term that is absent from the printed expression. Since the denominator as printed would vanish at ω = 0 and produce a divergent mechanical contribution, this is likely a typographical error that should be corrected.
  3. [Section IV, Eq. (7)-(9)] The model assumes the dHvA frequency F is angle-independent for numerical stability. This is stated, but the torque in Eq. (7) generally depends on θ through F(θ), and the authors themselves note that this coupling complicates the solution. The authors should estimate the size of this effect for TaNiTe5 or justify that it is negligible within the field range considered, especially given the anisotropic Fermi surface inferred from the reported frequencies.
  4. [Section III, paragraph after Fig. 3] The paper states that the extracted frequencies and effective masses are 'consistent with DFT calculations and results from previous measurements' and uses these as evidence of SdH oscillations, before later attributing them to a mechanical artifact. Please clarify whether these frequencies are identical in the floating and fixed samples, and whether the fixed sample shows any residual oscillations that could be intrinsic SdH, so that the reader can understand the relationship between the mechanically contaminated signal and the underlying Fermi-surface information.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the mechanical model uses the externally established dHvA torque formula and independent inputs, while the self-citation to the authors' earlier report is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained rather than circular. Equations 5–18 construct the motional voltage from the Lorentz force and a damped harmonic oscillator, with the dHvA torque input taken from Shoenberg (ref. [30]) and the semiclassical background from refs. [31–36]. The quantum-oscillation frequencies and effective masses are stated as inputs from prior measurements and literature, not as outputs of the model, so the model does not pretend to derive the Fermi-surface frequencies from itself. The out-of-phase and in-phase signals in Equations 15 and 16 are produced by inserting those external inputs into a mechanical transfer function; this is a physical transduction mechanism, not a renaming or a fit disguised as prediction. The only self-citation, ref. [29], points to the authors' earlier report of the data that the paper reinterprets, and the agreement with that data is corroborated by independent literature (refs. [13, 18, 21]); it therefore does not carry the argument. The vacuum-grease control and the measured frequency scalings provide independent empirical constraints. The absence of reported values for m, κ1, κ2, k1, k2, and θ0 is a verification weakness, but it is not circularity because those parameters are not set by the target data and then reused to predict it.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model's quantitative output depends on several mechanical constants that are not measured or reported, and on standard formulas taken from the literature. No new physical entities are introduced. The central claim therefore rests on unverified numerical inputs rather than on an independent measurement of the sample motion.

free parameters (5)
  • Initial tilt angle θ0
    Assumed small in Section IV; enters all outputs through cos(θ0+θ) in Equations 15 and 16, but is not measured.
  • Torsional spring and damping constants k1, k2
    Used in the θ equation of motion (Equation 8) and in Equations 15/16; no values are reported.
  • Center-of-mass mass m and wire constants κ1, κ2
    Used in Equation 11 and in the denominators of Equations 15/16; no values are reported.
  • dHvA torque prefactor in Eq. 7
    Proportionality constant for τ_QO; it can be absorbed into k1, but it is not specified, so the absolute tilt angle cannot be checked.
  • Semiclassical magnetoresistance parameters α, β
    Appear in Equation 14 for R_S(B); the text says they can be determined from a stationary sample, but no fitted values are given.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The dHvA torque has the Lifshitz-Kosevich form τ_QO ∝ B^{3/2} R_T R_D R_S sin(2π(F/B - γ) ± δ) (Eq 7).
    Taken from Shoenberg [30]; assumes a single orbit and one harmonic, and neglects γ and δ.
  • domain assumption The sample tilt is quasi-static: θ ≈ τ_QO/k1 (Eq 9).
    The field ramp is slow, but θ¨ and θ˙ are dropped without checking the values of J and k2.
  • ad hoc to paper The dHvA frequency F is assumed angle-independent (after Eq 9).
    The authors state this is 'for reasons of numerical stability'; real dHvA frequencies generally depend on angle.
  • domain assumption The sample is a rigid rod and its motional emf is U_I = -z_dot B L cos(θ0+θ) (Eq 6).
    Assumes the entire sample translates rigidly and the voltage contacts span the full length; no direct displacement measurement is provided.
  • domain assumption The AC current is set by the lock-in source alone, with V(t) >> U_I (Eq 12).
    Justified by the 1 kΩ series resistor, but the induced voltage is never calculated to verify the inequality.
  • domain assumption The semiclassical background resistance follows R_S(B) = R_S(0)(1 + αB^2/(β+B^2)) (Eq 14).
    A Kohler-type empirical form with material parameters α and β that are not reported.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mechanical enhancement of quantum oscillations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WZGUVJTU

@misc{pith2026250702612,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mechanical enhancement of quantum oscillations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WZGUVJTU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02612}
}
abstract

We investigate quantum oscillation measurements in the Dirac nodal-line semimetal TaNiTe$_5$ which exhibit a strongly enhanced amplitude in the magnetoresistance. We show that mechanical properties of the measurement setup in combination with de Haas - van Alphen oscillations in the magnetic torque can cause this enhancement in the measured resistance, without involvement of any topological properties in this material. To support the empirical data, a numerical model is provided, showing good agreement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.02612 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Typical setup of a four-point resistivity measure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Magnetoresistance measurement of a TaNiTe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Data from Figure 3 measured at 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Relation between enhancement of quantum oscil [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Simple circuit diagram for a four-point measure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Mechanical resonance measured in the resistance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: a) Field sweep of a Fe3GeTe2 sample at 53 Hz and 300.0 K. The inset shows the out-of-phase component for different frequencies divided by the respective frequency. b) Frequency sweep of a TaNiTe5 at 13 T and 1.5 K. Both components resemble the behaviour of a damped ha…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Two TaNiTe5 samples on a standard Quantum Design measurement puck. Note how both of them are held by the gold wires alone, thus floating above the platform. Appendix B: Mechanical resonance in magnetic field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. De Haas - van Alphen study of the Dirac nodal-line semimetal candidate TaPtTe$_5$

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A rotation-resolved de Haas-van Alphen study maps the Fermi surface of TaPtTe5 and finds agreement with DFT calculations that predict a nodal line encircled by a small cylindrical pocket.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Experimental perspective on three-dimensional topological semimetals

    BQ Lv, T Qian, and H Ding. Experimental perspective on three-dimensional topological semimetals. Reviews of Modern Physics, 93(2):025002, 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Weyl and Dirac semimetals in three-dimensional solids

    NP Armitage, EJ Mele, and Ashvin Vishwanath. Weyl and Dirac semimetals in three-dimensional solids. Re- views of Modern Physics, 90(1):015001, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Topological materials: Weyl semimetals

    Binghai Yan and Claudia Felser. Topological materials: Weyl semimetals. Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics, 8:337–354, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Berry phase ef- fects on electronic properties

    Di Xiao, Ming-Che Chang, and Qian Niu. Berry phase ef- fects on electronic properties. Reviews of modern physics, 82(3):1959, 2010

    work page 1959

  5. [5]

    Experimental signatures of the chiral anomaly in Dirac-Weyl semimetals

    NP Ong and Sihang Liang. Experimental signatures of the chiral anomaly in Dirac-Weyl semimetals. Nature Reviews Physics, 3(6):394–404, 2021

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Quantum transport in Dirac and Weyl semimetals: a review

    Shuo Wang, Ben-Chuan Lin, An-Qi Wang, Da-Peng Yu, and Zhi-Min Liao. Quantum transport in Dirac and Weyl semimetals: a review. Advances in Physics: X, 2(3):518– 544, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Colloquium: topo- logical insulators

    M Zahid Hasan and Charles L Kane. Colloquium: topo- logical insulators. Reviews of modern physics, 82(4):3045, 2010

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Discovery of a Weyl fermion semimetal and topo- logical Fermi arcs

    Su-Yang Xu, Ilya Belopolski, Nasser Alidoust, Mad- hab Neupane, Guang Bian, Chenglong Zhang, Raman Sankar, Guoqing Chang, Zhujun Yuan, Chi-Cheng Lee, et al. Discovery of a Weyl fermion semimetal and topo- logical Fermi arcs. Science, 349(6248):613–617, 2015

    work page 2015

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    Observa- tion of the chiral-anomaly-induced negative magnetore- sistance in 3D Weyl semimetal TaAs

    Xiaochun Huang, Lingxiao Zhao, Yujia Long, Peipei Wang, Dong Chen, Zhanhai Yang, Hui Liang, Mianqi Xue, Hongming Weng, Zhong Fang, et al. Observa- tion of the chiral-anomaly-induced negative magnetore- sistance in 3D Weyl semimetal TaAs. Physical Review X, 5(3):031023, 2015

    2015

  2. [10]

    Evidence for the chi- ral anomaly in the Dirac semimetal Na 3Bi

    Jun Xiong, Satya K Kushwaha, Tian Liang, Jason W Krizan, Max Hirschberger, Wudi Wang, Robert Joseph Cava, and Nai Phuan Ong. Evidence for the chi- ral anomaly in the Dirac semimetal Na 3Bi. Science, 350(6259):413–416, 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Magnetic oscillations in metals

    David Shoenberg. Magnetic oscillations in metals. Cam- bridge university press, 2009

    2009

  4. [12]

    Manifestation of Berry’s phase in metal physics

    GP Mikitik and Yu V Sharlai. Manifestation of Berry’s phase in metal physics. Physical review letters, 82(10):2147, 1999

    1999

  5. [13]

    Anisotropic transport and quantum oscil- lations in the quasi-one-dimensional TaNiTe 5: evidence for the nontrivial band topology

    Chunqiang Xu, Yi Liu, Pinggen Cai, Bin Li, Wenhe Jiao, Yunlong Li, Junyi Zhang, Wei Zhou, Bin Qian, Xuefan Jiang, et al. Anisotropic transport and quantum oscil- lations in the quasi-one-dimensional TaNiTe 5: evidence for the nontrivial band topology. The Journal of Physical C...

    2020

  6. [14]

    Coexistence of strong and weak topological orders in a quasi-one-dimensional material

    De-Yang Wang, Qi Jiang, Kenta Kuroda, Kaishu Kawaguchi, Ayumi Harasawa, Koichiro Yaji, Arthur Ernst, Hao-Ji Qian, Wen-Jing Liu, He-Ming Zha, et al. Coexistence of strong and weak topological orders in a quasi-one-dimensional material. Physical Review Letters, 129(14):146401, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    Synthesis, struc- tures, and conductivities of the new layered compounds Ta3Pd3Te14 and TaNiTe5

    Eric W Liimatta and James A Ibers. Synthesis, struc- tures, and conductivities of the new layered compounds Ta3Pd3Te14 and TaNiTe5. Journal of Solid State Chem- istry, 78(1):7–16, 1989

    1989

  8. [16]

    Transport and thermal properties of single crystal TaNiTe 5

    Jiyu Hu, Zhenxiang Dai, Xucai Kan, Ganhong Zheng, Zheng Chen, and Yongqing Ma. Transport and thermal properties of single crystal TaNiTe 5. Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 895:162563, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    Quasi-one-dimensional characters in topological semimetal TaNiTe5

    Ni Ma, De-Yang Wang, Ben-Rui Huang, Kai-Yi Li, Jing- Peng Song, Jian-Zhong Liu, Hong-Ping Mei, Mao Ye, and Ang Li. Quasi-one-dimensional characters in topological semimetal TaNiTe5. Chinese Physics B, 32(5):056801, 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    Anisotropic giant magnetoresistance and de Hass- van Alphen oscillations in layered topological semimetal crystals

    Rongli Ye, Tian Gao, Haoyu Li, Xiao Liang, and Guixin Cao. Anisotropic giant magnetoresistance and de Hass- van Alphen oscillations in layered topological semimetal crystals. AIP Advances, 12(4), 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Magnetic field-induced resistivity upturn and non-topological origin in the quasi-one-dimensional semimetals

    Yalei Huang, Rongli Ye, Weihao Shen, Xinyu Yao, and Guixin Cao. Magnetic field-induced resistivity upturn and non-topological origin in the quasi-one-dimensional semimetals. Symmetry, 15(10):1882, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Coexistence of ferroelectric like polarization and Dirac-like surface state in TaNiTe5

    Yunlong Li, Zhao Ran, Chaozhi Huang, Guanyong Wang, Peiyue Shen, Haili Huang, Chunqiang Xu, Yi Liu, Wenhe Jiao, Wenxiang Jiang, et al. Coexistence of ferroelectric like polarization and Dirac-like surface state in TaNiTe5. Physical Review Letters, 128(10):106802, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Three-dimensional topological semimetal phase in layered TaNiTe5 probed by quantum oscillations

    Zheng Chen, Min Wu, Yong Zhang, Jinglei Zhang, Yong Nie, Yongliang Qin, Yuyan Han, Chuanying Xi, Shuaiqi Ma, Xucai Kan, et al. Three-dimensional topological semimetal phase in layered TaNiTe5 probed by quantum oscillations. Physical Review B, 103(3):035105, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Multiple Dirac nodal lines in an in-plane anisotropic semimetal TaNiTe5

    Zhanyang Hao, Weizhao Chen, Yuan Wang, Jiayu Li, Xiao-Ming Ma, Yu-Jie Hao, Ruie Lu, Zecheng Shen, Zhicheng Jiang, Wanling Liu, et al. Multiple Dirac nodal lines in an in-plane anisotropic semimetal TaNiTe5. Phys- ical Review B, 104(11):115158, 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Origin of giant mag- netoresistance in layered nodal-line semimetal TaNiTe 5 nanoflakes

    Ding-Bang Zhou, Kuang-Hong Gao, Meng-Fan Zhao, Zhi-Yan Jia, Xiao-Xia Hu, Qian-Jin Guo, Hai-Yan Du, Xiao-Ping Chen, and Zhi-Qing Li. Origin of giant mag- netoresistance in layered nodal-line semimetal TaNiTe 5 nanoflakes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16088, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Topologically protected surface states in TaPdTe5

    Qi Lu, Zhao Ran, Yunlong Li, Chenhang Xu, Jiayuan Hu, Xunqing Yin, Guohua Wang, Wentao Zhang, Weidong Luo, Xiaofeng Xu, et al. Topologically protected surface states in TaPdTe5. Quantum Frontiers, 1(1):9, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    Topological Dirac states in a layered telluride TaPdTe 5 with quasi-one-dimensional PdTe2 chains

    Wen-He Jiao, Xiao-Meng Xie, Yi Liu, Xiaofeng Xu, Bin Li, Chun-Qiang Xu, Ji-Yong Liu, Wei Zhou, Yu-Ke Li, Hai-Yang Yang, et al. Topological Dirac states in a layered telluride TaPdTe 5 with quasi-one-dimensional PdTe2 chains. Physical Review B, 102(7):075141, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Synthesis, structure, and physical properties of the new layered ternary telluride TaPtTe5

    Arthur Mar and James A Ibers. Synthesis, structure, and physical properties of the new layered ternary telluride TaPtTe5. Journal of Solid State Chemistry, 92(2):352– 361, 1991

    1991

  19. [27]

    Dirac nodal lines in the quasi-one- dimensional ternary telluride TaPtTe 5

    Shaozhu Xiao, Wen-He Jiao, Yu Lin, Qi Jiang, Xiufu Yang, Yunpeng He, Zhicheng Jiang, Yichen Yang, Zheng- tai Liu, Mao Ye, et al. Dirac nodal lines in the quasi-one- dimensional ternary telluride TaPtTe 5. Physical Review B, 105(19):195145, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    Anisotropic transport and de Haas-van Alphen oscillations in quasi-one-dimensional TaPtTe5

    Wen-He Jiao, Shaozhu Xiao, Bin Li, Chunqiang Xu, Xiao-Meng Xie, Hang-Qiang Qiu, Xiaofeng Xu, Yi Liu, Shi-Jie Song, Wei Zhou, et al. Anisotropic transport and de Haas-van Alphen oscillations in quasi-one-dimensional TaPtTe5. Physical Review B, 103(12):125150, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Probing the Fermi surface with quantum oscillation 8 measurements in the Dirac semimetal TaNiTe 5

    Maximilian Daschner, Friedrich Malte Grosche, Cheng Liu, Bruno Gudac, Mario Novak, and Ivan Kokanovi´ c. Probing the Fermi surface with quantum oscillation 8 measurements in the Dirac semimetal TaNiTe 5. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12921, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    The Fermi surfaces of copper, silver and gold

    David Shoenberg. The Fermi surfaces of copper, silver and gold. i. the de Haas-van Alphen effect. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 255(1052):85–133, 1962

    1962

  23. [31]

    Magnetoresistance in metals, vol- ume 2

    Alfred Brian Pippard. Magnetoresistance in metals, vol- ume 2. Cambridge university press, 1989

    1989

  24. [32]

    Large, non-saturating magnetoresistance in WTe 2

    Mazhar N Ali, Jun Xiong, Steven Flynn, Jing Tao, Quinn D Gibson, Leslie M Schoop, Tian Liang, Neel Hal- dolaarachchige, Max Hirschberger, Nai Phuan Ong, et al. Large, non-saturating magnetoresistance in WTe 2. Na- ture, 514(7521):205–208, 2014

    2014

  25. [33]

    Temperature- field phase diagram of extreme magnetoresistance

    Fazel Fallah Tafti, Quinn Gibson, Satya Kush- waha, Jason W Krizan, Neel Haldolaarachchige, and Robert Joseph Cava. Temperature- field phase diagram of extreme magnetoresistance. Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences, 113(25):E3475–E3481, 2016

    2016

  26. [34]

    Origin of the turn-on temperature behavior in WTe 2

    YL Wang, LR Thoutam, ZL Xiao, J Hu, S Das, ZQ Mao, J Wei, R Divan, A Luican-Mayer, GW Crabtree, et al. Origin of the turn-on temperature behavior in WTe 2. Physical Review B, 92(18):180402, 2015

    2015

  27. [35]

    Magnetotransport in La(Fe, Ru)AsO as a probe of band structure and mobility

    I Pallecchi, Fabio Bernardini, M Tropeano, A Palen- zona, A Martinelli, C Ferdeghini, M Vignolo, S Mas- sidda, and M Putti. Magnetotransport in La(Fe, Ru)AsO as a probe of band structure and mobility. Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics , 84(13):134524, 2011

    2011

  28. [36]

    Multiband effects and possible Dirac states in LaAgSb 2

    Kefeng Wang and C Petrovic. Multiband effects and possible Dirac states in LaAgSb 2. Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics , 86(15):155213, 2012

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.