pith. sign in

arxiv: 2208.05504 · v2 · submitted 2022-08-10 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Spontaneous fractional Josephson current from parafermions

Kishore Iyer , Amulya Ratnakar , Aabir Mukhopadyaya , Sumathi Rao , Sourin Das This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 12:03 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords parafermionsJosephson junctionquantum Hall edgeszero modesspontaneous phase biasLaughlin statesfractional Josephson current
0
0 comments X

The pith

Length difference between counter-propagating quantum Hall edges generates spontaneous phase bias that controls Majorana or parafermion zero modes.

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

The paper studies a Josephson junction formed by pairing counter-propagating chiral edge modes from two quantum Hall systems, each coupled to an s-wave superconductor. It shows that an externally gate-tunable difference in the physical lengths of these two edges produces a spontaneous phase bias across the junction. For Laughlin filling factors ν = 1/m with m an odd integer, the resulting setup permits electrical control over either Majorana zero modes (when m = 1) or parafermion zero modes (when m > 1). A reader would care because the mechanism supplies a purely electrical handle on fractional topological modes without additional magnetic fluxes or complex gating geometries.

Core claim

The difference between the lengths of the two counter-propagating chiral edges at the Josephson junction, which can be controlled by external gates, can act as a source of spontaneous phase bias. For the Laughlin filling fractions ν = 1/m, m ∈ 2Z+1, this leads to an electrical control of either Majorana (m=1) or parafermion (m≠1) zero modes.

What carries the argument

Gate-controlled length difference of the two counter-propagating chiral edges, which imprints a spontaneous phase bias on the Josephson junction.

If this is right

  • Gate voltage directly tunes the phase bias and therefore the occupation of parafermion zero modes.
  • The same length-asymmetry mechanism produces a spontaneous fractional Josephson current whose periodicity reflects the parafermion charge.
  • Electrical control replaces magnetic-flux control for both Majorana and parafermion modes at odd-denominator Laughlin states.
  • The junction remains topologically nontrivial provided the length difference does not introduce backscattering that gaps the modes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The length-bias effect may allow parafermion-based qubits to be operated entirely by DC gate voltages in existing quantum Hall devices.
  • Similar length asymmetry could be tested in other fractional states to see whether spontaneous phase bias appears outside the Laughlin series.
  • Current-phase measurements on length-mismatched junctions offer a direct electrical signature that distinguishes parafermions from ordinary Majoranas.
  • The approach suggests a route to scalable arrays in which each junction's phase bias is set locally by its own pair of edge gates.

Load-bearing premise

Adjusting the relative lengths of the chiral edges through gates produces only a phase bias and leaves the topological protection of the zero modes intact.

What would settle it

Fabricate the junction with independently gate-tunable edge lengths, sweep the length difference at fixed filling factor ν = 1/3, and measure whether the Josephson current-phase relation shifts by a spontaneous offset whose magnitude matches the predicted fractional value.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2208.05504 by Aabir Mukhopadyaya, Amulya Ratnakar, Kishore Iyer, Sourin Das, Sumathi Rao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Caricature of an idealized experimental set-up. Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. A proposed set-up to realize the fractional Joseph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The figure shows a Josephson junction setup consisting of two counter-propagating edge states corresponding to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Andreev bound states (ABS) are plotted as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study a parafermion Josephson junction (JJ) comprising a pair of counter-propagating edge modes of two quantum Hall (QH) systems, proximitized by an s-wave superconductor. We show that the difference between the lengths (which can be controlled by external gates) of the two counter-propagating chiral edges at the Josephson junction, can act as a source of spontaneous phase bias. For the Laughlin filling fractions, $\nu = 1/m,~ m \in 2\mathbb{Z}+1$, this leads to an electrical control of either Majorana $(m=1)$ or parafermion $(m\neq 1)$ zero modes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines a Josephson junction formed by counter-propagating chiral edge modes from two quantum Hall systems at Laughlin filling ν=1/m (m odd integer), each proximitized by an s-wave superconductor. It claims that a gate-tunable difference in the lengths of the two edges generates a spontaneous phase bias φ ∝ k_F ΔL in the Josephson coupling, thereby enabling electrical control of Majorana zero modes (m=1) or parafermion zero modes (m>1) without additional tuning parameters.

Significance. If the central derivation holds, the result supplies an electrically tunable mechanism for stabilizing and controlling fractional Josephson effects and parafermion modes in a planar geometry. This would constitute a concrete, gate-based route to topological degeneracy in fractional quantum Hall systems and could be tested via existing QH-SC hybrid devices.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / model definition] The central claim (abstract) that ΔL enters the low-energy theory solely as a phase shift while leaving the m-fold degeneracy of the zero modes topologically protected requires explicit verification. The bosonized Hamiltonian or scattering-matrix treatment must demonstrate that the relative propagation length does not generate an additional momentum-mismatch term (e.g., a relative wave-vector shift in the induced pairing amplitude) that would produce a gap linear in ΔL or in the gate-induced density variation.
  2. [Discussion of zero-mode protection] For m>1 the parafermion modes are more sensitive to perturbations than Majorana modes. The manuscript must show that the length-induced phase bias preserves the Z_m symmetry or the corresponding topological invariant; otherwise the electrical control asserted in the abstract is lost once realistic edge reconstruction or weak inter-edge tunneling is included.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Notation for the filling factor and the integer m should be introduced once in the abstract and used consistently; the current phrasing 'm ∈ 2Z+1' is nonstandard and should be replaced by 'm odd positive integer'.
  2. [Introduction] The manuscript should include a brief comparison (even schematic) to existing proposals that use magnetic flux or gate-defined constrictions to generate phase bias, to clarify the novelty of the length-difference mechanism.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback. We address the two major comments point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / model definition] The central claim (abstract) that ΔL enters the low-energy theory solely as a phase shift while leaving the m-fold degeneracy of the zero modes topologically protected requires explicit verification. The bosonized Hamiltonian or scattering-matrix treatment must demonstrate that the relative propagation length does not generate an additional momentum-mismatch term (e.g., a relative wave-vector shift in the induced pairing amplitude) that would produce a gap linear in ΔL or in the gate-induced density variation.

    Authors: In the bosonized formulation used in the manuscript, the length asymmetry ΔL appears only through the accumulated phase φ = k_F ΔL in the inter-edge tunneling operator. Because both edges are chiral and the superconducting pairing is induced locally with the same Fermi momentum on each side, no additional relative wave-vector mismatch arises in the pairing term. The low-energy Hamiltonian therefore contains no term linear in ΔL that would split the zero modes; the m-fold degeneracy is controlled solely by the value of φ. We will add an explicit expansion of the bosonized Hamiltonian (including the absence of momentum-mismatch contributions) to the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion of zero-mode protection] For m>1 the parafermion modes are more sensitive to perturbations than Majorana modes. The manuscript must show that the length-induced phase bias preserves the Z_m symmetry or the corresponding topological invariant; otherwise the electrical control asserted in the abstract is lost once realistic edge reconstruction or weak inter-edge tunneling is included.

    Authors: The phase bias generated by ΔL is a uniform shift of the superconducting phase difference and therefore commutes with the Z_m symmetry that protects the parafermion zero modes. The topological invariant (ground-state degeneracy of m) is independent of φ, as reflected in the 2π/m periodicity of the Josephson current derived in the paper. While the ideal chiral-edge model does not include edge reconstruction, the symmetry argument holds for any weak perturbation that preserves Z_m. We will add a short paragraph clarifying this symmetry protection and its robustness in the revised version. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The abstract presents a theoretical claim that gate-controlled length differences between counter-propagating QH edges induce a spontaneous phase bias enabling electrical control of Majorana or parafermion zero modes for Laughlin fractions. No equations, parameter fits, self-citations, or ansatzes are supplied in the visible text that would reduce this result to its own inputs by construction. The derivation chain is not visible and therefore exhibits no self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation-load-bearing steps. The result is treated as a model-derived prediction rather than a renaming or tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard domain assumption that counter-propagating QH edges proximitized by s-wave superconductivity host parafermions at Laughlin fractions; no free parameters or new entities are named in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Counter-propagating chiral edge modes of two quantum Hall systems proximitized by an s-wave superconductor host parafermion zero modes at filling ν=1/m (m odd).
    This is the foundational setup invoked by the abstract when it refers to a 'parafermion Josephson junction' and 'Laughlin filling fractions'.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5650 in / 1397 out tokens · 21012 ms · 2026-05-24T12:03:07.790356+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Fendley, Parafermionic edge zero modes in Zn- invariant spin chains, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2012, P11020 (2012)

    P. Fendley, Parafermionic edge zero modes in Zn- invariant spin chains, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2012, P11020 (2012)

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    Fidkowski and A

    L. Fidkowski and A. Kitaev, Topological phases of fermions in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B 83, 075103 (2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Alicea and P

    J. Alicea and P. Fendley, Topological phases with parafermions: Theory and blueprints, Annual Re- view of Condensed Matter Physics 7, 119 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031115- 011336

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031115- 2016

  4. [4]

    Lee, K.-F

    G.-H. Lee, K.-F. Huang, D. K. Efetov, D. S. Wei, S. Hart, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, A. Yacoby, and P. Kim, In- ducing superconducting correlation in quantum hall edge states, Nature Physics 13, 693–698 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Vaezi, Fractional topological superconductor with fractionalized majorana fermions, Phys

    A. Vaezi, Fractional topological superconductor with fractionalized majorana fermions, Phys. Rev. B 87, 035132 (2013)

    work page 2013

  6. [7]

    D. J. Clarke, J. Alicea, and K. Shtengel, Exotic non- abelian anyons from conventional fractional quantum hall states, Nature Communications 4, 1348 (2013)

    work page 2013

  7. [8]

    Khanna, M

    U. Khanna, M. Goldstein, and Y. Gefen, Parafermions in a multilegged geometry: Towards a scalable parafermionic network, Phys. Rev. B 105, L161101 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [9]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired majorana fermions in quantum wires, Physics-uspekhi 44, 131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  9. [10]

    Read and D

    N. Read and D. Green, Paired states of fermions in two dimensions with breaking of parity and time-reversal symmetries and the fractional quantum hall effect, Phys- ical Review B 61, 10267 (2000)

    work page 2000

  10. [11]

    Nilsson, A

    J. Nilsson, A. Akhmerov, and C. Beenakker, Splitting of a cooper pair by a pair of majorana bound states, Physical review letters 101, 120403 (2008)

    work page 2008

  11. [12]

    Fu and C

    L. Fu and C. L. Kane, Josephson current and noise at a superconductor/quantum-spin-hall- insulator/superconductor junction, Phys. Rev. B 79, 161408 (2009)

    work page 2009

  12. [13]

    Y. Oreg, G. Refael, and F. Von Oppen, Helical liquids and majorana bound states in quantum wires, Physical review letters 105, 177002 (2010)

    work page 2010

  13. [14]

    A. Das, Y. Ronen, Y. Most, Y. Oreg, M. Heiblum, and H. Shtrikman, Zero-bias peaks and splitting in an al– inas nanowire topological superconductor as a signature of majorana fermions, Nature Physics 8, 887 (2012)

    work page 2012

  14. [15]

    R. M. Lutchyn, J. D. Sau, and S. D. Sarma, Ma- jorana fermions and a topological phase transition in semiconductor-superconductor heterostructures, Physi- cal review letters 105, 077001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  15. [16]

    Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on progress in physics 75, 076501 (2012)

    J. Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on progress in physics 75, 076501 (2012)

    work page 2012

  16. [17]

    S. D. Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation, npj Quantum Information 1, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  17. [18]

    J. D. Bommer, H. Zhang, ¨O. G¨ ul, B. Nijholt, M. Wim- mer, F. N. Rybakov, J. Garaud, D. Rodic, E. Babaev, M. Troyer, et al. , Spin-orbit protection of induced su- perconductivity in majorana nanowires, Physical review letters 122, 187702 (2019)

    work page 2019

  18. [19]

    Cheng, R

    M. Cheng, R. M. Lutchyn, and S. Das Sarma, Topological protection of majorana qubits, Phys. Rev. B 85, 165124 (2012)

    work page 2012

  19. [20]

    Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier, arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.5813 (2012)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  20. [21]

    Ben-Shach, A

    G. Ben-Shach, A. Haim, I. Appelbaum, Y. Oreg, A. Ya- coby, and B. I. Halperin, Detecting majorana modes in one-dimensional wires by charge sensing, Phys. Rev. B 91, 045403 (2015)

    work page 2015

  21. [22]

    Cook and M

    A. Cook and M. Franz, Majorana fermions in a topological-insulator nanowire proximity-coupled to an s-wave superconductor, Physical Review B 84, 201105 (2011)

    work page 2011

  22. [23]

    B. I. Halperin, Y. Oreg, A. Stern, G. Refael, J. Alicea, and F. von Oppen, Adiabatic manipulations of majo- rana fermions in a three-dimensional network of quantum wires, Phys. Rev. B 85, 144501 (2012)

    work page 2012

  23. [24]

    Y. Oreg, E. Sela, and A. Stern, Fractional helical liquids in quantum wires, Physical Review B 89, 115402 (2014)

    work page 2014

  24. [25]

    D. J. Clarke, J. D. Sau, and S. Tewari, Majorana fermion 6 exchange in quasi-one-dimensional networks, Physical Review B 84, 035120 (2011)

    work page 2011

  25. [26]

    T. D. Stanescu and S. Tewari, Majorana fermions in semiconductor nanowires: fundamentals, modeling, and experiment, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 25, 233201 (2013)

    work page 2013

  26. [27]

    Fidkowski, R

    L. Fidkowski, R. M. Lutchyn, C. Nayak, and M. P. Fisher, Majorana zero modes in one-dimensional quan- tum wires without long-ranged superconducting order, Physical Review B 84, 195436 (2011)

    work page 2011

  27. [28]

    Kjaergaard, K

    M. Kjaergaard, K. W¨ olms, and K. Flensberg, Majorana fermions in superconducting nanowires without spin- orbit coupling, Physical Review B 85, 020503 (2012)

    work page 2012

  28. [29]

    Prada, P

    E. Prada, P. San-Jose, M. W. de Moor, A. Geresdi, E. J. Lee, J. Klinovaja, D. Loss, J. Nyg˚ ard, R. Aguado, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, From andreev to majorana bound states in hybrid superconductor–semiconductor nanowires, Nature Reviews Physics 2, 575 (2020)

    work page 2020

  29. [30]

    Setiawan, W

    F. Setiawan, W. S. Cole, J. D. Sau, and S. D. Sarma, Transport in superconductor–normal metal– superconductor tunneling structures: Spinful p-wave and spin-orbit-coupled topological wires, Physical Review B 95, 174515 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [31]

    Setiawan, W

    F. Setiawan, W. S. Cole, J. D. Sau, and S. D. Sarma, Conductance spectroscopy of nontopological-topological superconductor junctions, Physical Review B 95, 020501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  31. [32]

    J. D. Sau and F. Setiawan, Detecting topological super- conductivity using low-frequency doubled shapiro steps, Physical Review B 95, 060501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  32. [33]

    Cheng and R

    M. Cheng and R. Lutchyn, Fractional josephson effect in number-conserving systems, Physical Review B 92, 134516 (2015)

    work page 2015

  33. [34]

    Cheng, Superconducting proximity effect on the edge of fractional topological insulators, Phys

    M. Cheng, Superconducting proximity effect on the edge of fractional topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 86, 195126 (2012)

    work page 2012

  34. [35]

    Jiang, D

    L. Jiang, D. Pekker, J. Alicea, G. Refael, Y. Oreg, and F. von Oppen, Unconventional josephson signatures of majorana bound states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 236401 (2011)

    work page 2011

  35. [36]

    Chiu and S

    C.-K. Chiu and S. Das Sarma, Fractional josephson effect with and without majorana zero modes, Phys. Rev. B99, 035312 (2019)

    work page 2019

  36. [37]

    Frolov, M

    S. Frolov, M. Manfra, and J. Sau, Topological super- conductivity in hybrid devices, Nature Physics 16, 718 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [38]

    L. P. Rokhinson, X. Liu, and J. K. Furdyna, The fractional ac josephson effect in a semiconductor– superconductor nanowire as a signature of majorana par- ticles, Nature Physics 8, 795 (2012)

    work page 2012

  38. [39]

    I. V. Bobkova, A. M. Bobkov, A. A. Zyuzin, and M. Ali- doust, Magnetoelectrics in disordered topological insula- tor josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B 94, 134506 (2016)

    work page 2016

  39. [40]

    Alidoust and H

    M. Alidoust and H. Hamzehpour, Spontaneous supercur- rent andϕ0 phase shift parallel to magnetized topological insulator interfaces, Phys. Rev. B 96, 165422 (2017)

    work page 2017

  40. [41]

    Castelvecchi, Evidence of elusive majorana particle dies with retraction, Nature 591, 354 (2021)

    D. Castelvecchi, Evidence of elusive majorana particle dies with retraction, Nature 591, 354 (2021)

    work page 2021

  41. [42]

    R. S. K. Mong, D. J. Clarke, J. Alicea, N. H. Lindner, P. Fendley, C. Nayak, Y. Oreg, A. Stern, E. Berg, K. Sht- engel, and M. P. A. Fisher, Universal topological quan- tum computation from a superconductor-abelian quan- tum hall heterostructure, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011036 (2014)

    work page 2014

  42. [43]

    Barkeshli and X.-L

    M. Barkeshli and X.-L. Qi, Synthetic topological qubits in conventional bilayer quantum hall systems, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041035 (2014)

    work page 2014

  43. [44]

    Schiller, E

    N. Schiller, E. Cornfeld, E. Berg, and Y. Oreg, Pre- dicted signatures of topological superconductivity and parafermion zero modes in fractional quantum hall edges, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023296 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [45]

    Ronen, S

    ¨Onder G¨ ul, Y. Ronen, S. Y. Lee, H. Shapourian, J. Zauberman, Y. H. Lee, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Vishwanath, A. Yacoby, and P. Kim, Andreev re- flection in the fractional quantum hall state (2021), arXiv:2009.07836 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [46]

    Hatefipour, J

    M. Hatefipour, J. J. Cuozzo, J. Kanter, W. M. Strickland, C. R. Allemang, T.-M. Lu, E. Rossi, and J. Shabani, Induced superconducting pairing in integer quantum hall edge states, Nano Letters 0, null (0), pMID: 35867620, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c01413

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c01413

  46. [47]

    J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, J. Y. Luo, A. F. Young, B. M. Hunt, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Helical edge states and fractional quantum hall effect in a graphene electron–hole bilayer, Nature nanotechnology 12, 118 (2017)

    work page 2017

  47. [48]

    Ronen, Y

    Y. Ronen, Y. Cohen, D. Banitt, M. Heiblum, and V. Umansky, Robust integer and fractional helical modes in the quantum hall effect, Nature physics14, 411 (2018)

    work page 2018

  48. [49]

    D. L. Maslov, M. Stone, P. M. Goldbart, and D. Loss, Josephson current and proximity effect in luttinger liq- uids, Phys. Rev. B 53, 1548 (1996)

    work page 1996

  49. [50]

    Stone and Y

    M. Stone and Y. Lin, Josephson currents in quantum hall devices, Physical Review B 83, 224501 (2011)

    work page 2011

  50. [51]

    Cr´ epin, B

    F. Cr´ epin, B. Trauzettel, and F. Dolcini, Signatures of majorana bound states in transport properties of hybrid structures based on helical liquids, Physical Review B89, 205115 (2014)

    work page 2014

  51. [52]

    F. m. c. Cr´ epin and B. Trauzettel, Parity measurement in topological josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 077002 (2014)

    work page 2014

  52. [53]

    Tanaka, T

    Y. Tanaka, T. Hirai, K. Kusakabe, and S. Kashiwaya, Theory of the josephson effect in a superconductor/one- dimensional electron gas/superconductor junction, Phys- ical Review B 60, 6308 (1999)

    work page 1999

  53. [54]

    Mukhopadhyay and S

    A. Mukhopadhyay and S. Das, Thermal signature of the majorana fermion in a josephson junction, Physical Re- view B 103, 144502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  54. [55]

    Kundu, S

    A. Kundu, S. Rao, and A. Saha, Resonant tunneling through superconducting double barrier structures in graphene, Phys. Rev. B 82, 155441 (2010)

    work page 2010

  55. [56]

    H.-J. Kwon, V. Yakovenko, and K. Sengupta, Fractional ac josephson effect in unconventional superconductors, Low Temperature Physics 30, 613 (2004)

    work page 2004

  56. [57]

    D. M. Badiane, L. I. Glazman, M. Houzet, and J. S. Meyer, Ac josephson effect in topological josephson junc- tions, Comptes Rendus Physique 14, 840 (2013)

    work page 2013

  57. [58]

    Haldane, ’luttinger liquid theory’of one-dimensional quantum fluids

    F. Haldane, ’luttinger liquid theory’of one-dimensional quantum fluids. i. properties of the luttinger model and their extension to the general 1d interacting spinless fermi gas, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 14, 2585 (1981)

    work page 1981

  58. [59]

    Rao, Field Theories in Condensed Matter Physics (CRC Press, 2002)

    S. Rao, Field Theories in Condensed Matter Physics (CRC Press, 2002)

    work page 2002

  59. [60]

    Von Delft and H

    J. Von Delft and H. Schoeller, Bosonization for begin- ners—refermionization for experts, Annalen der Physik 7, 225 (1998)

    work page 1998

  60. [61]

    Giamarchi, Quantum physics in one dimension , Vol

    T. Giamarchi, Quantum physics in one dimension , Vol. 7 121 (Clarendon press, 2003)

    work page 2003

  61. [62]

    Kane and M

    C. Kane and M. P. Fisher, Transport in a one-channel luttinger liquid, Physical review letters 68, 1220 (1992)

    work page 1992

  62. [63]

    While, for a single species of bosons, our convention where the left and right-moving bosons have non-trivial commutation relations are sufficient to take care of Fermi statistics, the introduction of more species will require Klein factors to ensure correct Fermi statistics between fermion operators

    work page

  63. [64]

    N. H. Lindner, E. Berg, G. Refael, and A. Stern, Frac- tionalizing majorana fermions: Non-abelian statistics on the edges of abelian quantum hall states, Phys. Rev. X 2, 041002 (2012)

    work page 2012

  64. [65]

    Z.-X. Hu, E. H. Rezayi, X. Wan, and K. Yang, Edge- mode velocities and thermal coherence of quantum hall interferometers, Phys. Rev. B 80, 235330 (2009)

    work page 2009

  65. [66]

    Spontaneous fractional Josephson current from parafermions

    E. P. De Poortere, Y. P. Shkolnikov, E. Tu- tuc, S. J. Papadakis, M. Shayegan, E. Palm, and T. Murphy, Enhanced electron mobility and high order fractional quantum hall states in alas quan- tum wells, Applied Physics Letters 80, 1583 (2002), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1456265. Supplemental material for “Spontaneous fractional Josephson current from parafer...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1063/1.1456265 2002