Flat-band formation and chiral superconductivity in driven topological insulators

Kartiek Agarwal; Leo Goutte; Suman Jyoti De; T. Pereg-Barnea

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 62 references

Flat-band formation and chiral superconductivity in driven topological insulators

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that circularly polarized light can flatten the surface band of a topological insulator and make the electrons pair into a chiral superconductor at about 7 K.

desk verdict Clever Floquet flat-band mechanism with a real quantitative concern: the first-order expansion used for Tc is not controlled at the claimed value. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27355 v1 pith:ZSZWALO7 submitted 2026-07-29 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hall

Suman Jyoti De , Leo Goutte , Kartiek Agarwal , T. Pereg-Barnea This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mes-hall

keywords FloquetengineeringflatbandstopologicalinsulatorsurfacestateschiralsuperconductivityrepulsiveCoulombinteractionsKohn-LuttingermechanismRytova-KeldyshscreeningWignercrystal

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 claims that circularly polarized light can reshape the surface-state dispersion of a three-dimensional topological insulator: by tuning the drive amplitude to a special value, the lower band becomes nearly flat, dispersing only as the fourth power of momentum, and can even bend into a Mexican-hat shape. At that point the density of states is so large that the screened Coulomb interaction, which is purely repulsive in the bare Hamiltonian, produces an effective attraction and drives a chiral superconducting state. Working with Bi2Se3 parameters, a 50 THz drive, and a metallic gate about 10 nm away, the self-consistent mean-field gap equation gives a critical temperature around 7 K for densities between $10^{11}$ and $10^{12}$ $cm^{-2}$, while keeping the system away from Wigner crystallization. If correct, this gives a light-controlled route to flat-band superconductivity that avoids moiré stacking or chemical substitution.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the first-order Floquet Hamiltonian $H_F=\hbar v_F \mathbf{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\sigma}+D(k^2+e^2A_0^2/\hbar^2)\sigma_0-\frac{v_F^2e^2A_0^2}{\hbar\omega}\sigma_z$, derived by a Peierls substitution followed by an inverse-frequency expansion. The drive induces a mass term that gaps the Dirac cone while also shifting the band bottom; when the curvature $Dk^2$ cancels the $k^2$ part of the square-root dispersion, the band flattens. The superconductivity mechanism is the RPA-screened Rytova-Keldysh Coulomb interaction, projected onto the lower band, decomposed into angular momentum channels $\tilde{V}_\ell(k,k')$, and solved self-consistently for the gap $\eta_\ell(k)$. Spin-orbit locking freezes the spin on the topological-insulator surface, leaving only odd-parity pairing channels and allowing the form factors of the projected interaction to select a definite chirality.

What would settle it

Recompute the gap equation with the second-order Floquet term quoted in the Supplement, which renormalizes $v_F$ to $v_F(1-e^2A_0^2v_F^2/\hbar^2\omega^2)$; if the $\mathcal{O}(k^4)$ flatness and a finite $T_c$ do not survive at the renormalized flat-band condition, the central quantitative claim fails. On the experimental side, time-resolved photoemission of Bi2Se3 at 50 THz with $E_0$ near $1.4\times10^8$ V/m should reveal the lower band flattening to $\mathcal{O}(k^4)$; observing an essentially unchanged quadratic dispersion would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At the level of the effective two-by-two Dirac Hamiltonian $H_0=\hbar v_F \mathbf{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\sigma}+Dk^2\sigma_0$, circularly polarized light with amplitude $E_0$ and frequency $\omega$ creates a Floquet band with dispersion $\varepsilon_k=D(k^2+e^2A_0^2/\hbar^2)-\sqrt{\hbar^2v_F^2k^2+(v_F^2e^2A_0^2/\hbar\omega)^2}$. When $E_0=E_0^{\mathrm{flat}}=\frac{\hbar\omega}{e}\sqrt{\frac{\hbar\omega}{2|D|}}$, the quadratic term in $k$ cancels and the lower band disperses only at $\mathcal{O}(k^4)$; for slightly smaller $E_0$ the Fermi surface becomes an annulus, giving a Mexican-hat-like band. In that regime the lower band is nearly pseudospin-polarized, so the surviving pairing channels are odd-parity. Using a Rytova-Keldysh-type screened Coulomb interaction, RPA charge susceptibility, and a metallic gate to control screening, the paper finds that the screened interaction becomes attractive at short range, and the angular-momentum-decomposed gap equation yields a chiral $p_x\pm ip_y$ order parameter with $T_c\sim 7$ K at low electron densities. The paper argues this realizes, in a driven system, the same physics proposed for rhombohedral graphene under a displacement field.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative superconductivity calculation rests on a first-order Floquet expansion whose expansion parameter $eA_0v_F/(\hbar\omega)$ is close to one at the flat-band limit, so the neglected higher-order terms could change the band structure and the predicted $T_c$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

At drive amplitude $E_0^{\mathrm{flat}}$, the lower Floquet band of a 3D topological-insulator surface disperses only at $\mathcal{O}(k^4)$, giving a nearly flat band whose curvature can be flipped into a Mexican-hat shape by varying $E_0$.
With a metallic gate at roughly 10 nm, the screened Coulomb interaction becomes attractive at short range and the self-consistent gap equation admits chiral $p_x\pm ip_y$ pairing with $T_c\sim 7$ K at densities $10^{11}$--$10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$, in a regime where the Wigner-crystal phase is suppressed.
The same effective Hamiltonian applies to other Dirac materials, including topological crystalline insulators, spin-orbit-coupled transition-metal dichalcogenides, and graphene with proximity-induced spin-orbit coupling, so the flat-band and pairing mechanism transfers to those settings.
Because the lower band is nearly pseudospin-polarized, only odd-parity pairing channels survive, and the projection form factors lift the degeneracy between the $\ell=+1$ and $\ell=-1$ channels, favoring one chirality of the order parameter.

Reading between the lines

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

A direct next step is to carry the second-order Floquet term through the RPA screening and the gap equation; the Supplement shows the expansion parameter is near one at the flat-band limit, so the precise location of the flat-band condition and the numerical value of $T_c$ could shift.
If the flat band is as narrow as claimed, an external magnetic field or increased interaction strength might drive fractional Chern insulator states, since the ingredients of band topology and a nearly dispersionless band would be present; the paper does not address this.
The gate-distance window suggests a device design in which a patterned or split gate tunes different regions of one sample between superconducting and Wigner-crystal behavior, something the uniform-gate calculation does not explore.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper has a genuinely novel angle: using circularly polarized light to flatten the surface band of a 3D TI, then using purely repulsive interactions to get chiral p-wave superconductivity. The single-particle Floquet derivation is clean, the flat-band condition E0_flat is explicit, and the connection to rhombohedral graphene is apt. The gate-distance phase diagram and the attention to Wigner crystallization are thoughtful; the SM also partially addresses form factors and chirality selection, which is honest work. The central qualitative mechanism is plausible and deserves attention.

The main weakness is quantitative. The inverse-frequency expansion is controlled by eA0 vF/(hbar omega), and the SM itself says this parameter is about 1 at the claimed flat-band limit for Bi2Se3. The second-order term renormalizes vF and shifts the flat-band condition; the SM retunes to a new amplitude but only compares band structures, never carrying the second-order Hamiltonian through the RPA screening and gap equation. Since the headline Tc ~7 K is computed with the first-order Hamiltonian, that number is not secured. This is not a fatal flaw, but it means the phase diagram in Fig. 1(b) is conditional. RPA and mean-field are also used without quantified error bars, though the form-factor effect in the SM is at least estimated at ~10%.

The paper is honest about its own limitation; the SM statement that higher-order terms are not negligible is there in black and white. So this is not a case of authors hiding a problem. But the quantitative claims are stretched. I would send this to peer review, mainly to force a serious treatment of the expansion issue. The referees should ask for either a controlled parameter regime (materials or frequencies where the expansion parameter is well below 1) or a calculation that carries the second-order terms through the Tc computation. As it stands, the qualitative proposal is interesting, but I would not put money on the specific Tc value.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes using circularly polarized light on the surface of three-dimensional topological insulators to Floquet-engineer nearly flat or Mexican-hat electronic bands. It derives an effective Floquet Hamiltonian to first order in the inverse frequency, gives an explicit flat-band condition E0_flat, and shows that near this condition the lower band disperses only at O(k^4). Using a Rytova-Keldysh screened Coulomb interaction with a nearby metallic gate, the authors solve a self-consistent mean-field gap equation for odd-parity pairing and report chiral p-wave superconductivity with Tc ~ 7 K for densities in the range 10^11-10^12 cm^-2. They also discuss competition with the Wigner crystal phase as a function of gate distance.

Significance. If the quantitative result holds, the paper would demonstrate a new route to interaction-driven topological superconductivity in a driven system, with a falsifiable prediction of Tc~7 K at specific drive amplitudes and densities. The strengths of the work include an explicit, parameter-specific flat-band condition, a self-consistent mean-field calculation with no parameter fitted to Tc, and a careful treatment of screening and the competition with Wigner crystallization. The analogy to rhombohedral graphene under displacement field is well motivated. However, the central numerical prediction rests on an inverse-frequency expansion whose control parameter is O(1) near the flat-band limit, as the paper's own supplementary material states, so the quantitative claim is not yet secured.

major comments (2)

[Supplementary Material, Eqs. (17)-(21) and Fig. 3] The quantitative superconducting Tc in the main text (Eqs. (10)-(13) and Fig. 1(b)) is computed with the first-order Floquet Hamiltonian Eq. (17), but the SM explicitly states that the expansion parameter eA0 vF/(hbar omega) is approximately 1 near the flat-band limit for Bi2Se3, so higher-order terms are not negligible. The second-order term (Eq. (20)) renormalizes the Dirac velocity to vF_tilde = vF[1 - (eA0 vF/(hbar omega))^2] (Eq. (21)); at the claimed flat-band amplitude this factor is negative, so the curvature cancellation leading to the O(k^4) dispersion in Eq. (3) of the main text is destroyed. The SM retunes to a revised flat-band amplitude and compares only band structures (Fig. 3), but does not carry the second-order Hamiltonian through the RPA screening and the gap equation. Because the expansion is uncontrolled, the central numerical prediction Tc ~ 7 K is not secured.
[Main text, Eq. (3) and Fig. 1(b)] The phase diagram in Fig. 1(b) is plotted versus E0/E0_flat with E0_flat defined by the first-order condition. Since the second-order correction changes the flat-band amplitude by a large amount (by roughly 40% or more for the Bi2Se3 parameters), the horizontal axis of Fig. 1(b) does not correspond to the field at which the band is actually flat once second-order terms are retained. The authors should either recompute the Tc and the phase diagram using the second-order Floquet Hamiltonian, or restrict the quantitative claim to parameter regimes where (eA0 vF/(hbar omega))^2 is genuinely small and present the Bi2Se3 result as qualitative only.

minor comments (4)

[Supplementary Material, text before Fig. 3] The displayed expression for the revised flat-band amplitude E_tilde_flat^0 is missing parentheses and is very difficult to parse; please rewrite the formula in a clearly parenthesized form.
[Abstract and Fig. 1(b)] The abstract quotes Tc ~ 7 K, but the color bar in Fig. 1(b) has a maximum of 6 K and Fig. 5(b) shows values below 6 K; please clarify the maximum value and indicate at which parameters the 7 K value is obtained.
[Main text, paragraph after Eq. (13)] The sentence "We get Eq.(30) straightforwardly from equations (22, 23) by using definitions in Eq.(24)" refers to supplementary-material equation numbers from within the main text; this cross-referencing is confusing because the main text itself numbers only up to Eq. (13), and should be rephrased.
[Main text, Eq. (1) and following paragraph] The statement that "to a good approximation, the pseudospin sigma aligns with the physical spin orientation" is used later to justify spin-polarized pairing, but no quantitative estimate of the deviation is given; a brief justification or reference would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the flat-band amplitude is analytically derived from the input Hamiltonian, and Tc emerges from a self-consistent gap equation with no parameter fitted to produce it.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Starting from the low-energy surface Hamiltonian H0 (Eq. 1) with literature values for Bi2Se3, the paper computes the Floquet Hamiltonian (Eqs. 2, 17), obtains the lower-band dispersion (Eq. 3), and derives the flat-band condition E0_flat = (hbar omega/e) sqrt(hbar omega/(2|D|)) by requiring the k^2 curvature coefficient to vanish. That condition is an analytic output of the model, not a parameter fitted to the later superconductivity result. The superconducting Tc is then obtained by solving the RPA-screened Coulomb interaction (Eqs. 7-8) together with the self-consistent gap equation (Eqs. 10, 13, 25-29); Tc is an emergent output, not an input. No load-bearing step reduces to its own conclusion, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. The only identified self-citation is Ref. [27] (Farrell, Arsenault, and Pereg-Barnea), used as background for Floquet-gapped Dirac cones and not relied on for the flat-band condition or the Tc calculation. The Supplementary Material's comment that the expansion parameter eA0 vF/(hbar omega) is about 1 near the flat-band limit, and the resulting second-order renormalization of vF, is a genuine truncation-validity concern about the quantitative Tc value, but it is not a circularity: the first-order result is not equivalent to its inputs by construction. Thus the paper is largely self-contained and has no meaningful circular dependence.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The listed quantities are experimental or design inputs with literature values, not parameters fitted to the paper's target Tc. The central claim additionally rests on the listed approximations: Floquet truncation, thermal steady state, form-factor neglect, RPA and mean-field accuracy, spin freezing, and surface decoupling.

free parameters (7)

D (Dirac mass curvature) = 0.2 eV nm^2
Material parameter for Bi2Se3 taken from prior literature. It sets the flat-band condition through |D| = hbar^2 / (2 m_flat).
hbar v_F = 0.3 eV nm
Surface Dirac velocity for Bi2Se3 from literature; enters the Floquet Hamiltonian, dispersion, and screening.
drive frequency omega = 2 pi * 50 THz (hbar omega approx 0.2 eV)
Chosen as used in prior Floquet experiments on this material; determines the accessible E0_flat.
gate distance d_reg = 10 nm (scanned from 1 to 30 nm)
Design parameter chosen to suppress Wigner crystallization while preserving superconductivity. Tc is weakly dependent on it between 5 and 30 nm.
Rytova-Keldysh parameter r_K = 1 nm
Material screening length for Bi2Se3 from literature; enters the Rytova-Keldysh potential.
effective dielectric constant epsilon = (20 epsilon0 + epsilon0) / 2 = 10.5 epsilon0
Combines the Bi2Se3 dielectric constant and vacuum above the surface; sets the Coulomb interaction strength.
drive amplitude E0 / E0_flat = 0.8 to 1.2 (swept)
Tunable experimental control parameter; not fitted to the target, but the flat-band condition fixes E0_flat in terms of D and omega.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The high-frequency inverse-frequency Floquet expansion converges, and the first non-trivial order is sufficient for all quantitative results.
Invoked in the main model section. The SM states that the expansion parameter eA0 vF / (hbar omega) is about 1 near the flat-band limit, making this a load-bearing approximation.
domain assumption Under driving, the electronic system reaches a steady state described by a static thermal distribution, so a static Coulomb-interacting Hamiltonian applies.
Invoked after Eq. (2) with Refs. [35,36]. If Floquet heating dominates, the equilibrium superconductivity calculation is not valid.
domain assumption Projection form factors in the interaction can be set to 1 because hbar^2 k_F^2 / (4 m_flat^2 v_F^2) is much less than 1.
Main text after Eq. (5). The ratio is about 0.04 for kF = 0.3 nm^-1, and the SM later finds a 10% correction to Tc when form factors are included.
domain assumption RPA gives a quantitatively accurate screened interaction, and mean-field theory gives a quantitatively accurate Tc.
Used in Eqs. (8) through (13). No benchmark against quantum Monte Carlo or experiment is provided, so accuracy is unquantified.
domain assumption Electron spin is frozen in the lower Floquet band, so only odd-parity, effectively spinless pairing survives.
Main text near Eq. (8). Relies on pseudospin polarization and kBT much less than D k0^2, approximately 0.1 eV.
domain assumption Top and bottom surface states do not hybridize for slab thickness L satisfying 6 nm < L < d_reg.
Discussion section. Based on measured hybridization onset near L ~ 6 nm, and requires a slab thinner than the gate distance.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Flat-band formation and chiral superconductivity in driven topological insulators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZSZWALO7

@misc{pith2026260727355,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Flat-band formation and chiral superconductivity in driven topological insulators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZSZWALO7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27355}
}

abstract

We demonstrate that circularly polarized light can be used to Floquet-engineer nearly flat or Mexican-hat like electronic bands on the surface of three-dimensional topological insulators (3D TIs), which under suitable conditions, can support topological superconductivity via purely repulsive Coulomb interactions. The driving acts not merely by gapping out the Dirac cone on the surface of the 3D TI, but can be used to diminish, and even flip in sign, the intrinsic curvature of the surface state dispersion away from the Dirac point. Using parameters for canonical 3D TIs, we find that the flat band limit is attained for reasonable electric fields and the bands realized by changing the strength of the driving field have a similar energetic and spatial profile to those obtained in rhombohedral graphene under varying displacement field, where the case for superconductivity with purely repulsive interactions has recently been made. We find that, with the aid of appropriately placed screening metallic gate, one can obtain $T_c \sim 7 $K in this setup while avoiding Wigner crystallization for low electron densities in the range of $10^{11}-10^{12}/\text{cm}^2$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27355 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: (a) Dispersion of the Floquet bands with increasing electric field strength ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Comparison between bands close to flat-band limits [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) Superconducting critical temperature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: (a) Evolution of gas parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: Phase diagram with superconducting critical temperature [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

[1]

Leykam, A

D. Leykam, A. Andreanov, and S. Flach, Advances in Physics: X3, 1473052 (2018)

2018
[2]

Tasaki, Progress of Theoretical Physics99, 489 (1998)

H. Tasaki, Progress of Theoretical Physics99, 489 (1998)

work page 1998
[3]

K. Sun, Z. Gu, H. Katsura, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 236803 (2011)

2011
[4]

Wang and Y

F. Wang and Y. Ran, Phys. Rev. B84, 241103(R) (2011)

2011
[5]

S. A. Parameswaran, R. Roy, and S. L. Sondhi, Comptes Rendus. Physique14, 816 (2013)

2013
[6]

Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y. Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Nature556, 80 (2018)

2018
[7]

Jiang, X

Y. Jiang, X. Lai, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. Haule, J. Mao, and E. Y. Andrei, Nature573, 91 (2019)

work page 2019
[8]

Yankowitz, S

M. Yankowitz, S. Chen, H. Polshyn, Y. Zhang, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, D. Graf, A. F. Young, and C. R. Dean, Science363, 1059 (2019)

2019

Show all 62 references

[9]

Stepanov, I

P. Stepanov, I. Das, X. Lu, A. Fahimniya, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, F. H. L. Koppens, J. Lischner, L. Levitov, and D. K. Efetov, Nature583, 375 (2020)

2020
[10]

Bistritzer and A

R. Bistritzer and A. H. MacDonald, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences108, 12233 (2011)

2011
[11]

Geier, M

M. Geier, M. Davydova, and L. Fu, Nature Communica- tions17, 232 (2025)

2025
[12]

Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Kang, J. Zhu, P. Kn¨ uppel, C. Vaswani, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nature622, 69 (2023)

2023
[13]

J. Xie, Z. Huo, X. Lu, Z. Feng, Z. Zhang, W. Wang, Q. Yang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. Liu, Z. Song, X. C. Xie, J. Liu, and X. Lu, Nature Materials24, 1042 (2025)

2025
[14]

J. H. Shirley, Phys. Rev.138, B979 (1965)

1965
[15]

Rahav, I

S. Rahav, I. Gilary, and S. Fishman, Phys. Rev. A68, 013820 (2003)

2003
[16]

Goldman and J

N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Phys. Rev. X4, 031027 (2014)

2014
[17]

Goldman, J

N. Goldman, J. Dalibard, M. Aidelsburger, and N. R. Cooper, Phys. Rev. A91, 033632 (2015)

2015
[18]

Eckardt and E

A. Eckardt and E. Anisimovas, New Journal of Physics 17, 093039 (2015)

2015
[19]

N. H. Lindner, G. Refael, and V. Galitski, Nature Physics 7, 490 (2011)

2011
[20]

Oka and S

T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics10, 387 (2019)

2019
[21]

M. S. Rudner and N. H. Lindner, Nature Reviews Physics 2, 229 (2020)

2020
[22]

C. Bao, P. Tang, D. Sun, and S. Zhou, Nature Reviews Physics4, 33 (2022)

2022
[23]

J. W. McIver, B. Schulte, F. U. Stein, T. Matsuyama, G. Jotzu, G. Meier, and A. Cavalleri, Nature Physics16, 38 (2020)

2020
[24]

Oka and H

T. Oka and H. Aoki, Phys. Rev. B79, 081406(R) (2009)

2009
[25]

Kitagawa, T

T. Kitagawa, T. Oka, A. Brataas, L. Fu, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. B84, 235108 (2011)

2011
[26]

G. Usaj, P. M. Perez-Piskunow, L. E. F. Foa Torres, and C. A. Balseiro, Phys. Rev. B90, 115423 (2014)

2014
[27]

Farrell, A

A. Farrell, A. Arsenault, and T. Pereg-Barnea, Phys. Rev. B94, 155304 (2016)

2016
[28]

L. Fu, C. L. Kane, and E. J. Mele, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 106803 (2007)

2007
[29]

Fu and C

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

2007
[30]

Zhang, C.-X

H. Zhang, C.-X. Liu, X.-L. Qi, X. Dai, Z. Fang, and S.-C. Zhang, Nature Physics5, 438 (2009)

2009
[31]

Liu, X.-L

C.-X. Liu, X.-L. Qi, H. Zhang, X. Dai, Z. Fang, and S.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. B82, 045122 (2010)

2010
[32]

Y. Xia, D. Qian, D. Hsieh, L. Wray, A. Pal, H. Lin, A. Bansil, D. Grauer, Y. S. Hor, R. J. Cava, and M. Z. Hasan, Nature Physics5, 398 (2009)

2009
[33]

Y. L. Chen, J. G. Analytis, J.-H. Chu, Z. K. Liu, S.-K. Mo, X. L. Qi, H. J. Zhang, D. H. Lu, X. Dai, Z. Fang, S. C. Zhang, I. R. Fisher, Z. Hussain, and Z.-X. Shen, Science325, 178 (2009)

2009
[34]

M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 3045 (2010)

2010
[35]

K. I. Seetharam, C.-E. Bardyn, N. H. Lindner, M. S. Rudner, and G. Refael, Phys. Rev. X5, 041050 (2015)

2015
[36]

K. I. Seetharam, C.-E. Bardyn, N. H. Lindner, M. S. Rudner, and G. Refael, Phys. Rev. B99, 014307 (2019)

2019
[37]

F. C. Peiris, E. T. Holmgren, J. W. Lyons, X. Li, X. Liu, M. Dobrowolska, and J. K. Furdyna, Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology B37, 031205 (2019)

2019
[38]

Y. H. Wang, H. Steinberg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and N. Gedik, Science342, 453 (2013)

2013
[39]

N. S. Rytova, Screened potential of a point charge in a thin film (2020), arXiv:1806.00976 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

2020 arXiv
[40]

L. V. Keldysh, Soviet Journal of Experimental and The- oretical Physics Letters29, 658 (1979)

1979
[41]

M. Fang, Z. Wang, H. Gu, M. Tong, B. Song, X. Xie, T. Zhou, X. Chen, H. Jiang, T. Jiang, and S. Liu, Applied Surface Science509, 144822 (2020)

2020
[42]

Kohn and J

W. Kohn and J. M. Luttinger, Phys. Rev. Lett.15, 524 (1965)

1965
[43]

A. V. Chubukov, Phys. Rev. B48, 1097 (1993)

1993
[44]

Maiti and A

S. Maiti and A. V. Chubukov, AIP Conference Proceed- ings1550, 3 (2013)

2013
[45]

Alexandrov,Theory of Superconductivity: From Weak to Strong Coupling, Condensed Matter Physics (CRC Press, 2003)

A. Alexandrov,Theory of Superconductivity: From Weak to Strong Coupling, Condensed Matter Physics (CRC Press, 2003)

2003
[46]

Mahan,Many-Particle Physics, Physics of Solids and Liquids (Springer US, 1990)

G. Mahan,Many-Particle Physics, Physics of Solids and Liquids (Springer US, 1990)

1990
[47]

Giuliani and G

G. Giuliani and G. Vignale,Quantum Theory of the Elec- tron Liquid, Masters Series in Physics and Astronomy (Cambridge University Press, 2005)

2005
[48]

Wigner, Phys

E. Wigner, Phys. Rev.46, 1002 (1934)

1934
[49]

Ceperley, Phys

D. Ceperley, Phys. Rev. B18, 3126 (1978). 6

1978
[50]

Tanatar and D

B. Tanatar and D. M. Ceperley, Phys. Rev. B39, 5005 (1989)

1989
[51]

N. D. Drummond and R. J. Needs, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 126402 (2009)

2009
[52]

Zhang, K

Y. Zhang, K. He, C.-Z. Chang, C.-L. Song, L.-L. Wang, X. Chen, J.-F. Jia, Z. Fang, X. Dai, W.-Y. Shan, S.-Q. Shen, Q. Niu, X.-L. Qi, S.-C. Zhang, X.-C. Ma, and Q.-K. Xue, Nature Physics6, 584 (2010)

2010
[53]

Sakamoto, T

Y. Sakamoto, T. Hirahara, H. Miyazaki, S.-i. Kimura, and S. Hasegawa, Phys. Rev. B81, 165432 (2010)

2010
[54]

Lu, W.-Y

H.-Z. Lu, W.-Y. Shan, W. Yao, Q. Niu, and S.-Q. Shen, Phys. Rev. B81, 115407 (2010)

2010
[55]

Fu, Physical Review Letters106, 106802 (2011)

L. Fu, Physical Review Letters106, 106802 (2011)

2011
[56]

Ando and L

Y. Ando and L. Fu, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics6, 361 (2015)

2015
[57]

Xiao, G.-B

D. Xiao, G.-B. Liu, W. Feng, X. Xu, and W. Yao, Phys- ical Review Letters108, 196802 (2012)

2012
[58]

X. Xu, W. Yao, D. Xiao, and T. F. Heinz, Nature Physics 10, 343 (2014)

2014
[59]

Gmitra and J

M. Gmitra and J. Fabian, Physical Review B92, 155403 (2015)

2015
[60]

Zhang, C

J. Zhang, C. Triola, and E. Rossi, Physical Review Let- ters112, 096802 (2014)

2014
[61]

Bukov, L

M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Advances in Physics64, 139 (2015)

2015
[62]

Mikami, S

T. Mikami, S. Kitamura, K. Yasuda, N. Tsuji, T. Oka, and H. Aoki, Phys. Rev. B93, 144307 (2016). 7 Supplementary Material for: Flat-band formation and chiral superconductivity in driven topological insulators FLOQUET HAMIL TONIAN AND FLA T-BAND CONDITION In the presence of cir...

2016

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Leykam, A

D. Leykam, A. Andreanov, and S. Flach, Advances in Physics: X3, 1473052 (2018)

2018

[2] [2]

Tasaki, Progress of Theoretical Physics99, 489 (1998)

H. Tasaki, Progress of Theoretical Physics99, 489 (1998)

work page 1998

[3] [3]

K. Sun, Z. Gu, H. Katsura, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 236803 (2011)

2011

[4] [4]

Wang and Y

F. Wang and Y. Ran, Phys. Rev. B84, 241103(R) (2011)

2011

[5] [5]

S. A. Parameswaran, R. Roy, and S. L. Sondhi, Comptes Rendus. Physique14, 816 (2013)

2013

[6] [6]

Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y. Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Nature556, 80 (2018)

2018

[7] [7]

Jiang, X

Y. Jiang, X. Lai, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. Haule, J. Mao, and E. Y. Andrei, Nature573, 91 (2019)

work page 2019

[8] [8]

Yankowitz, S

M. Yankowitz, S. Chen, H. Polshyn, Y. Zhang, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, D. Graf, A. F. Young, and C. R. Dean, Science363, 1059 (2019)

2019