arxiv: 2604.21912 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall · cond-mat.mtrl-sci· cond-mat.str-el

Recognition: unknown

Cryogenic shock exfoliation for ultrahigh mobility rhombohedral graphite nanoelectronics

Ludwig Holleis , Youngjoon Choi , Canxun Zhang , Jack H. Farrell , Gabriel Bargas , Audrey Hsu , Zexing Chen , Ian Sackin

show 11 more authors

Wenjie Zhou Yi Guo Thibault Charpentier Yifan Jiang Benjamin A. Foutty Aidan Keough Martin E. Huber Takashi Taniguchi Kenji Watanabe Andrew Lucas Andrea F. Young

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el

keywords rhombohedral multilayer graphenecryogenic shock exfoliationvan der Waals assemblytransverse magnetic focusingelectron mean free pathelectron hydrodynamicsspin magnetismPoiseuille to porous flow

0 comments

The pith

Cryogenic shock exfoliation produces large rhombohedral graphene flakes enabling devices with over 200 micrometer electron mean free paths.

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

The authors develop cryogenic shock exfoliation to generate large flakes of rhombohedral multilayer graphene from graphite. They combine this with a low-pressure van der Waals assembly method that maintains the rhombohedral stacking. The resulting devices are larger than 1300 square micrometers, fabricated with 90 percent yield, and display uniform spin magnetism across 10 by 10 micrometer regions. Transverse magnetic focusing experiments show electrons travel more than 200 micrometers without scattering at low temperatures. In the hydrodynamic regime, electron flow shifts from Poiseuille to porous type as device size changes, which is possible only in very clean samples. A reader would care because this material can host controllable correlated phases such as magnetism and superconductivity, but prior work was limited by small and rare rhombohedral regions.

Core claim

Cryogenic shock exfoliation, when paired with low-pressure van der Waals assembly, produces rhombohedral multilayer graphene devices exceeding 1300 μm² in area with 90% fabrication yield. These devices show uniform spin magnetism over central 10×10 μm² areas. Transverse magnetic focusing measures a disorder mean free path exceeding 200 μm at low temperatures. Within the flat surface bands, a size-driven crossover from Poiseuille to porous electron flow appears in the strong electron-electron interaction regime.

What carries the argument

Cryogenic shock exfoliation is the mechanical separation process performed at low temperatures that increases the abundance of rhombohedral stacking in graphene flakes, which the low-pressure assembly then preserves to create high-quality devices.

If this is right

Large mesoscopic devices become available for exploring correlated electron phenomena in rhombohedral graphene.
High mobility allows clear observation of hydrodynamic electron flow and its size dependence.
Uniform magnetism over extended areas supports studies of spin textures in scalable geometries.
The 90% yield reduces the effort needed to produce samples suitable for nanoelectronics.
Electron mean free paths above 200 μm open access to longer coherence lengths for quantum effects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

This method could be adapted to other multilayer stackings to improve yields in related materials.
Systematic variation of device size may map the full phase diagram of hydrodynamic transport in flat-band graphene.
Preservation of stacking order might allow incorporation of RMG into heterostructures with other 2D materials without losing the desired phases.
Ultrahigh mobility samples could reveal new interaction-driven states not accessible in lower quality devices.

Load-bearing premise

The cryogenic shock and low-pressure assembly steps do not introduce defects or disrupt the rhombohedral stacking sequence that determines the electronic properties.

What would settle it

Detection of a mean free path shorter than 200 micrometers or spatially varying spin magnetism in multiple devices prepared by this exfoliation method would contradict the claim of ultrahigh quality and uniformity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21912 by Aidan Keough, Andrea F. Young, Andrew Lucas, Audrey Hsu, Benjamin A. Foutty, Canxun Zhang, Gabriel Bargas, Ian Sackin, Jack H. Farrell, Kenji Watanabe, Ludwig Holleis, Martin E. Huber, Takashi Taniguchi, Thibault Charpentier, Wenjie Zhou, Yifan Jiang, Yi Guo, Youngjoon Choi, Zexing Chen.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: a. Bulk graphite crystals are mechanically cleaved with tape and pressed onto a silicon substrate coated with 285 nm of thermally grown SiO2. Both tape and chip are then heated to 110 ◦C, and then together fully submerged in liquid nitrogen to achieve a large thermal differential via the cryogenic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: a shows optical and atomic force micrographs of a dual-graphite gated 13-layer RMG device fabricated from a cryogenic shock exfoliated flake using the methods of the pre- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Rhombohedral multilayer graphene (RMG) offers a highly tunable platform for correlated electron physics, featuring field-effect control of magnetic, superconducting, and topological phases[1-24]. The promise of these materials has been held back by the limited abundance of rhombohedral stacking in natural graphite, which constrains both sample yield and useful area. Here we introduce 'cryogenic shock exfoliation' to produce large area rhombohedral graphene flakes which, combined with a low-pressure van der Waals assembly technique that preserves stacking order, enable highly uniform devices exceeding 1300 $\mu m^2$ with fabrication yields of 90%. Using scanning nanoSQUID-on-tip imaging, we demonstrate uniform spin magnetism over the full central 10 times 10 $\mu m^2$ area of our devices. Transverse magnetic focusing reveals a disorder mean free path exceeding 200 $\mu m$ at low temperatures. Within the flat surface bands of RMG[20], we observe a size-driven crossover from Poiseuille to porous electron flow in the intermediate-temperature regime of strong electron-electron hydrodynamics[16, 25], providing a further signature of ultrahigh device quality. Our approach overcomes a key materials bottleneck in the fabrication of mesoscopic rhombohedral graphene devices, paving the way for incorporating strongly correlated phases into two-dimensional nanoelectronics.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper's real contribution is a practical fabrication route that delivers larger, cleaner rhombohedral multilayer graphene devices with measured mean free paths above 200 microns.

read the letter

The central point is that cryogenic shock exfoliation plus low-pressure assembly gives 90% yields and flakes big enough for 1300 square micron devices while keeping rhombohedral order. Standard exfoliation rarely produces enough of the right stacking, so this directly widens the usable area for correlated-state experiments in RMG. The nanoSQUID maps show uniform spin magnetism across the central 10 by 10 micron region, and transverse magnetic focusing gives a disorder mean free path exceeding 200 microns at low temperature. They also track a size-driven change from Poiseuille to porous flow in the hydrodynamic window, which lines up with the flat-band picture in the cited literature. All of this rests on direct imaging and transport rather than fits or simulations, so the internal consistency is straightforward. The citations to prior RMG work and hydrodynamic studies are appropriate and not circular. One minor soft spot is that stacking order is confirmed indirectly through the magnetism and focusing data; a side-by-side structural check on the same flakes would close the loop more tightly, but the transport signatures already constrain the disorder level. The hydrodynamic crossover sits in the expected intermediate-temperature range, so it does not overreach. This paper is aimed at experimental groups working on multilayer graphene devices and electron hydrodynamics. Anyone who has been limited by small or disordered RMG samples will find the methods and metrics useful. It deserves a serious referee because the fabrication step is concrete, the characterization is direct, and the claims are falsifiable with the reported measurements. I would send it out for review.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'cryogenic shock exfoliation' combined with low-pressure van der Waals assembly to produce large-area rhombohedral multilayer graphene (RMG) flakes at 90% yield, enabling devices >1300 μm². It reports uniform spin magnetism over 10×10 μm² via nanoSQUID-on-tip imaging, a disorder mean free path >200 μm from transverse magnetic focusing at low T, and a size-driven crossover from Poiseuille to porous electron flow in the hydrodynamic regime within the flat bands of RMG.

Significance. If the claims hold, the work removes a major materials bottleneck for RMG by increasing usable area and yield while preserving stacking order, directly enabling mesoscopic devices for correlated phases. Credit is due for the direct, spatially resolved evidence (nanoSQUID uniformity and magnetic focusing) that supports the ultrahigh-mobility and hydrodynamic signatures; these are stronger than typical indirect mobility estimates in the field.

major comments (2)

[Methods] Methods section: The cryogenic shock exfoliation protocol is presented at a high level without quantitative parameters (cooling rate, shock pressure, substrate temperature, or post-exfoliation stacking verification via Raman or STM maps). Because the central claim of defect-free rhombohedral order and l_mfp > 200 μm rests on this preservation, insufficient detail prevents assessment of reproducibility and rules out alternative explanations such as local Bernal regions or strain-induced defects.
[Results] Results (transverse magnetic focusing and hydrodynamic crossover): The mean-free-path extraction and the identification of the Poiseuille-to-porous crossover lack reported error bars, fitting procedures, or quantitative comparison to hydrodynamic theory (e.g., viscosity or Gurzhi length). These omissions are load-bearing for the claim of ultrahigh quality and the size-driven hydrodynamic signature.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: The term 'porous electron flow' appears without a one-sentence definition or reference; a brief clarification would aid readers outside the hydrodynamic-transport subfield.
[Figures] Figure captions and text: Ensure consistent use of '10×10 μm²' with explicit scale bars and labels on all nanoSQUID and focusing images.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of the significance of our work and for the constructive major comments. We address each point below and will incorporate the suggested improvements into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods] Methods section: The cryogenic shock exfoliation protocol is presented at a high level without quantitative parameters (cooling rate, shock pressure, substrate temperature, or post-exfoliation stacking verification via Raman or STM maps). Because the central claim of defect-free rhombohedral order and l_mfp > 200 μm rests on this preservation, insufficient detail prevents assessment of reproducibility and rules out alternative explanations such as local Bernal regions or strain-induced defects.

Authors: We agree that the Methods section requires additional quantitative detail to support reproducibility and to strengthen the central claims. In the revised manuscript we will expand the description of the cryogenic shock exfoliation protocol to include the specific cooling rate, shock pressure, and substrate temperature. We will also add post-exfoliation stacking verification using Raman spectroscopy maps and STM imaging to confirm the preservation of rhombohedral order across the device area and to address possible local Bernal regions or strain-induced defects. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] Results (transverse magnetic focusing and hydrodynamic crossover): The mean-free-path extraction and the identification of the Poiseuille-to-porous crossover lack reported error bars, fitting procedures, or quantitative comparison to hydrodynamic theory (e.g., viscosity or Gurzhi length). These omissions are load-bearing for the claim of ultrahigh quality and the size-driven hydrodynamic signature.

Authors: We acknowledge that the presentation of the transverse magnetic focusing data and the hydrodynamic crossover would be improved by the inclusion of error bars, explicit fitting procedures, and direct comparison to hydrodynamic theory. In the revised manuscript we will add error bars to the extracted mean-free-path values, describe the fitting procedures used for the focusing data, and provide quantitative comparisons to hydrodynamic predictions, including estimates of viscosity and the Gurzhi length, to better support the ultrahigh-mobility and size-driven crossover claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: experimental claims rest on direct measurements

full rationale

This is a materials fabrication and characterization paper with no derivation chain, model predictions, or fitted parameters. Claims of ultrahigh mobility (l_mfp > 200 μm), uniform magnetism, and hydrodynamic crossover are supported by direct experimental signatures: nanoSQUID-on-tip imaging and transverse magnetic focusing data. No equations, ansatzes, or self-citations are invoked to derive results from inputs; references to prior RMG literature provide background only. The fabrication method (cryogenic shock exfoliation + low-pressure vdW assembly) is presented as an empirical advance whose quality is validated by the measurements themselves, with no reduction of outputs to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Experimental paper with no free parameters or invented entities; relies on standard condensed matter assumptions for interpreting transport and imaging data.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Van der Waals forces allow stacking order preservation during low-pressure assembly without introducing significant defects.
Invoked to justify device uniformity and high mobility in the abstract.
standard math Standard solid-state physics models apply to interpret transverse magnetic focusing and electron hydrodynamics in graphene.
Used for mean free path extraction and flow regime identification.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5625 in / 1255 out tokens · 31810 ms · 2026-05-09T20:05:57.907764+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Characterizing electronic scattering rates with transport in multiterminal devices
cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

A five-terminal geometry diagnoses ballistic-hydrodynamic-Ohmic crossovers and extracts momentum-relaxing and conserving scattering rates from current partition in electron liquids.
Characterizing electronic scattering rates with transport in multiterminal devices
cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Current partition in a five-terminal geometry diagnoses ballistic-hydrodynamic-Ohmic crossovers and extracts momentum-relaxing and conserving scattering rates in 2D electron systems.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Y . Shi, S. Xu, Y . Yang, S. Slizovskiy, S. V . Morozov, S. K. Son, S. Ozdemir, C. Mullan, J. Barrier, J. Yin, A. I. Berdyu- gin, B. A. Piot, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, V . I. Fal’ko, K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, and A. Mishchenko, Nature584, 210 (2020), iSBN: 4158602025

2020
[2]

H. Zhou, T. Xie, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Nature598, 434 (2021)

2021
[3]

H. Zhou, T. Xie, A. Ghazaryan, T. Holder, J. R. Ehrets, E. M. Spanton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, E. Berg, M. Serbyn, and A. F. Young, Nature598, 429 (2021)

2021
[4]

H. Zhou, L. Holleis, Y . Saito, L. Cohen, W. Huynh, C. L. Pat- terson, F. Yang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and A. F. Young, Science375, 774 (2022)

2022
[5]

G. Chen, L. Jiang, S. Wu, B. Lyu, H. Li, B. L. Chittari, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Z. Shi, J. Jung, Y . Zhang, and F. Wang, Nature Physics15, 237 (2019)

2019
[6]

G. Chen, A. L. Sharpe, P. Gallagher, I. T. Rosen, E. J. Fox, L. Jiang, B. Lyu, H. Li, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Jung, Z. Shi, D. Goldhaber-Gordon, Y . Zhang, and F. Wang, Nature 572, 215 (2019)

2019
[7]

T. Arp, O. Sheekey, H. Zhou, C. L. Tschirhart, C. L. Patter- son, H. M. Yoo, L. Holleis, E. Redekop, G. Babikyan, T. Xie, J. Xiao, Y . Vituri, T. Holder, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. E. Huber, E. Berg, and A. F. Young, Nature Physics20, 1413 (2024)

2024
[8]

T. Han, Z. Lu, G. Scuri, J. Sung, J. Wang, T. Han, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, H. Park, and L. Ju, Nature623, 41 (2023)

2023
[9]

T. Han, Z. Lu, Y . Yao, J. Yang, J. Seo, C. Yoon, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, F. Zhang, and L. Ju, Science384, 647 (2024)

2024
[10]

K. Liu, J. Zheng, Y . Sha, B. Lyu, F. Li, Y . Park, Y . Ren, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Jia, W. Luo, Z. Shi, J. Jung, and G. Chen, Nature Nanotechnology19, 188 (2024)

2024
[11]

W. Zhou, J. Ding, J. Hua, L. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, W. Zhu, and S. Xu, Nature Communications15, 2597 (2024)

2024
[12]

Z. Lu, T. Han, Y . Yao, A. P. Reddy, J. Yang, J. Seo, K. Watan- abe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and L. Ju, Nature626, 759 (2024)

2024
[13]

C. L. Patterson, O. I. Sheekey, T. B. Arp, L. F. W. Holleis, J. M. Koh, Y . Choi, T. Xie, S. Xu, Y . Guo, H. Stoyanov, E. Re- dekop, C. Zhang, G. Babikyan, D. Gong, H. Zhou, X. Cheng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. E. Huber, C. Jin, E. Lantagne- Hurtubise, J. Alicea, and A. F. Young, Nature641, 632 (2025)

2025
[14]

Y . Choi, Y . Choi, M. Valentini, C. L. Patterson, L. F. W. Holleis, O. I. Sheekey, H. Stoyanov, X. Cheng, T. Taniguchi, K. Watan- abe, and A. F. Young, Nature639, 342 (2025)

2025
[15]

T. Han, Z. Lu, Z. Hadjri, L. Shi, Z. Wu, W. Xu, Y . Yao, A. A. Cotten, O. S. Sedeh, H. Weldeyesus, J. Yang, J. Seo, S. Ye, M. Zhou, H. Liu, G. Shi, Z. Hua, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Xiong, D. M. Zumbuehl, L. Fu, and L. Ju, Nature (2025), 10.1038/s41586-025-09169-7

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09169-7 2025
[16]

Holleis, T

L. Holleis, T. Xie, S. Xu, H. Zhou, C. L. Patterson, A. Panigrahi, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, L. S. Levitov, C. Jin, E. Berg, and A. F. Young, Nature640, 355 (2025)

2025
[17]

Auerbach, S

N. Auerbach, S. Dutta, M. Uzan, Y . Vituri, Y . Zhou, A. Y . Meltzer, S. Grover, T. Holder, P. Emanuel, M. E. Huber, Y . Myasoedov, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Y . Oreg, E. Berg, and E. Zeldov, Nature Physics21, 1765 (2025)

2025
[18]

Zhang, Y .-Y

Y . Zhang, Y .-Y . Zhou, S. Zhang, H. Cai, L.-H. Tong, W.-Y . Liao, R.-J. Zou, S.-M. Xue, Y . Tian, T. Chen, Q. Tian, C. Zhang, Y . Wang, X. Zou, X. Liu, Y . Hu, Y .-N. Ren, L. Zhang, L. Zhang, 8 W.-X. Wang, L. He, L. Liao, Z. Qin, and L.-J. Yin, Nature Nanotechnology20, 222 (2025)

2025
[19]

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
[20]

Flat band surface state superconductivity in thick rhombohe- dral graphene,

Y . Guo, O. I. Sheekey, T. Arp, K. Kol ´aˇr, T. Charpentier, L. Holleis, B. Foutty, A. Keough, M. Kang-Chou, M. E. Huber, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, C. Lewandowski, and A. F. Young, “Flat band surface state superconductivity in thick rhombohe- dral graphene,” (2025), arXiv:2511.17423 [cond-mat]

work page arXiv 2025
[21]

Kumar, D

M. Kumar, D. Waleffe, A. Okounkova, R. Tejani, V . T. Phong, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Lewandowski, J. Folk, and M. Yankowitz, “Superconductivity from dual-surface carriers in rhombohedral graphene,” (2025), arXiv:2507.18598 [cond- mat]

work page arXiv 2025
[22]

Extreme Anisotropy in the Metallic and Superconducting Phases of Rhombohedral Hexalayer Graphene,

P. Qin, H.-T. Wu, R. Q. Nguyen, E. Morissette, N. J. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and J. I. A. Li, “Extreme Anisotropy in the Metallic and Superconducting Phases of Rhombohedral Hexalayer Graphene,” (2025), version Number: 4

2025
[23]

J. Xie, Z. Huo, Z. Chen, Z. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and X. Lu, arXiv (2025), arXiv:2512.24306

work page arXiv 2025
[24]

Zhang, B

R. Zhang, B. A. Foutty, O. Sheekey, T. Arp, S. Xu, T. Xie, Y . Guo, H. Stoyanov, S. Gu, A. Keough, E. Redekop, C. Zhang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. E. Huber, C. Jin, E. Berg, and A. F. Young, “Imaging the Meissner effect and local superfluid stiffness in a graphene superconductor,” (2026), arXiv:2603.25807 [cond-mat]

work page arXiv 2026
[25]

Imaging flat band electron hydrodynamics in biased bilayer graphene,

C. Zhang, E. Redekop, H. Stoyanov, J. H. Farrell, S. Kim, L. Holleis, D. Gong, A. Keough, Y . Choi, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. E. Huber, A. C. B. Jayich, A. Lucas, and A. F. Young, “Imaging flat band electron hydrodynamics in bi- ased bilayer graphene,” (2026), arXiv:2603.11175 [cond-mat]

work page arXiv 2026
[26]

K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V . Morozov, D. Jiang, Y . Zhang, S. V . Dubonos, I. V . Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov, Science306, 666 (2004)

2004
[27]

A. K. Geim and I. V . Grigorieva, Nature499, 419 (2013)

2013
[28]

H. S. Lipson and A. R. Stokes, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences181, 101 (1942)

1942
[29]

C. H. Lui, Z. Li, Z. Chen, P. V . Klimov, L. E. Brus, and T. F. Heinz, Nano Letters11, 164 (2011)

2011
[30]

Yankowitz, J

M. Yankowitz, J. I.-J. Wang, A. G. Birdwell, Y .-A. Chen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Jacquod, P. San-Jose, P. Jarillo- Herrero, and B. J. LeRoy, Nature Materials13, 786 (2014)

2014
[31]

Jiang, S

L. Jiang, S. Wang, Z. Shi, C. Jin, M. I. B. Utama, S. Zhao, Y . R. Shen, H. J. Gao, G. Zhang, and F. Wang, Nature Nanotechnol- ogy13, 204 (2018)

2018
[32]

Y . Yang, Y . C. Zou, C. R. Woods, Y . Shi, J. Yin, S. Xu, S. Ozdemir, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, A. K. Geim, K. S. Novoselov, S. J. Haigh, and A. Mishchenko, Nano Letters19, 8526 (2019)

2019
[33]

H. Li, M. I. B. Utama, S. Wang, W. Zhao, S. Zhao, X. Xiao, Y . Jiang, L. Jiang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, A. Weber- Bargioni, A. Zettl, and F. Wang, Nano Letters20, 3106 (2020)

2020
[34]

A. Dey, A. Azizimanesh, S. M. Wu, and H. Askari, ACS Ap- plied Materials and Interfaces16, 8169 (2024)

2024
[35]

J. P. Nery, M. Calandra, and F. Mauri, Nano Letters20, 5017 (2020)

2020
[36]

R. N. GURZHI, J .Exptl. Theoret. Phys121, 771 (1963)

1963
[37]

Z. Lu, T. Han, Y . Yao, Z. Hadjri, J. Yang, J. Seo, L. Shi, S. Ye, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and L. Ju, Nature637, 1090 (2025), iSBN: 4158602408

2025
[38]

Z. Feng, W. Wang, Y . You, Y . Chen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Liu, K. Liu, and X. Lu, Physical Review Applied23, 034012 (2025)

2025
[39]

Holleis, L

L. Holleis, L. Cohen, N. Samuelson, C. L. Patterson, Y . Choi, M. Valentini, O. Sheekey, Y . Choi, J. Zhou, H. Stoyanov, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Q. Hu, J. H. Kim, C. Phillips, P. D. Wolf, and A. F. Young, Nano Letters25, 12487 (2025)

2025
[40]

Laves and Y

P. Laves and Y . Baskdj, Zeitschrift fuer Kristallographie107, 337 (1956)

1956
[41]

Van Houten, C

H. Van Houten, C. W. J. Beenakker, J. G. Williamson, M. E. I. Broekaart, P. H. M. Van Loosdrecht, B. J. Van Wees, J. E. Mooij, C. T. Foxon, and J. J. Harris, Physical Review B39, 8556 (1989)

1989
[42]

Taychatanapat, K

T. Taychatanapat, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Nature Physics9, 225 (2013)

2013
[43]

Ingla-Ayn ´es, A

J. Ingla-Ayn ´es, A. L. R. Manesco, T. S. Ghiasi, S. V olosheniuk, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and H. S. J. v. d. Zant, Nano Letters 23, 5453 (2023)

2023
[44]

A. S. Mayorov, R. V . Gorbachev, S. V . Morozov, L. Brit- nell, R. Jalil, L. A. Ponomarenko, P. Blake, K. S. Novoselov, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and A. K. Geim, Nano Letters11, 2396 (2011)

2011
[45]

L. Wang, I. Meric, P. Y . Huang, Q. Gao, Y . Gao, H. Tran, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, L. M. Campos, D. A. Muller, J. Guo, P. Kim, J. Hone, K. L. Shepard, and C. R. Dean, Sci- ence342, 614 (2013)

2013
[46]

W. Wang, N. Clark, M. Hamer, A. Carl, E. Tovari, S. Sullivan- Allsop, E. Tillotson, Y . Gao, H. De Latour, F. Selles, J. Howarth, E. G. Castanon, M. Zhou, H. Bai, X. Li, A. We- ston, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Mattevi, T. H. Bointon, P. V . Wiper, A. J. Strudwick, L. A. Ponomarenko, A. V . Kre- tinin, S. J. Haigh, A. Summerfield, and R. Gorbachev, Natu...

2023
[47]

Lucas and K

A. Lucas and K. C. Fong, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 30, 053001 (2018)

2018
[48]

J. A. Sulpizio, L. Ella, A. Rozen, J. Birkbeck, D. J. Perello, D. Dutta, M. Ben-Shalom, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, T. Holder, R. Queiroz, A. Principi, A. Stern, T. Scaffidi, A. K. Geim, and S. Ilani, Nature576, 75 (2019)

2019
[49]

M. J. H. Ku, T. X. Zhou, Q. Li, Y . J. Shin, J. K. Shi, C. Burch, L. E. Anderson, A. T. Pierce, Y . Xie, A. Hamo, U. V ool, H. Zhang, F. Casola, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M. M. Fogler, P. Kim, A. Yacoby, and R. L. Walsworth, Nature583, 537 (2020)

2020
[50]

Jenkins, S

A. Jenkins, S. Baumann, H. Zhou, S. A. Meynell, Y . Daipeng, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Lucas, A. F. Young, and A. C. Bleszynski Jayich, Physical Review Letters129, 087701 (2022)

2022
[51]

Kumar, J

C. Kumar, J. Birkbeck, J. A. Sulpizio, D. Perello, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, O. Reuven, T. Scaffidi, A. Stern, A. K. Geim, and S. Ilani, Nature609, 276 (2022)

2022
[52]

Dong, Anomalous Hall Crystals in Rhombohedral Multilayer Graphene

A. Stern, T. Scaffidi, O. Reuven, C. Kumar, J. Birkbeck, and S. Ilani, Physical Review Letters129(2022), 10.1103/Phys- RevLett.129.157701

work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2022
[53]

S. Feng, K. Cao, Y . Gao, Y . Han, Z. Liu, Y . Lu, and Z. Xu, Communications Materials3, 28 (2022)

2022
[54]

Kolumbus, A

Y . Kolumbus, A. Zalic, N. Fardian-Melamed, Z. Barkay, D. Rotem, D. Porath, and H. Steinberg, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter30, 475704 (2018)

2018
[55]

Finkler, Y

A. Finkler, Y . Segev, Y . Myasoedov, M. L. Rappaport, L. Ne’eman, D. Vasyukov, E. Zeldov, M. E. Huber, J. Martin, and A. Yacoby, Nano Letters10, 1046 (2010)

2010
[56]

Vasyukov, Y

D. Vasyukov, Y . Anahory, L. Embon, D. Halbertal, J. Cuppens, L. Ne’eman, A. Finkler, Y . Segev, Y . Myasoedov, M. L. Rappa- 9 port, M. E. Huber, and E. Zeldov, Nature nanotechnology8, 10 (2013)

2013
[57]

Redekop, C

E. Redekop, C. Zhang, H. Park, J. Cai, E. Anderson, O. Sheekey, T. Arp, G. Babikyan, S. Salters, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. E. Huber, X. Xu, and A. F. Young, Nature 635, 584 (2024)

2024
[58]

Huber, P

M. Huber, P. Neil, R. Benson, D. Burns, A. Corey, C. Flynn, Y . Kitaygorodskaya, O. Massihzadeh, J. Martinis, and G. Hilton, IEEE Transactions on Appiled Superconductivity11, 4048 (2001)

2001
[59]

D. M. Feldmann, Physical Review B69, 144515 (2004)

2004
[60]

A. Y . Meltzer, E. Levin, and E. Zeldov, Physical Review Ap- plied8, 064030 (2017)

2017
[61]

jackhfarrell/FermiHarmonics: v0.1.0 - Square Bells UCSB,

J. Farrell, “jackhfarrell/FermiHarmonics: v0.1.0 - Square Bells UCSB,” (2026)

2026
[62]

C. Q. Cook and A. Lucas, Physical Review B99, 235148 (2019)

2019
[63]

P. J. Ledwith, H. Guo, and L. Levitov, Annals of Physics411, 167913 (2019). 10 MATERIALS AND METHODS Cryogenic shock exfoliation statistics.To quantify the improvement over standard mechanical exfoliation, both methods are compared on the same total Si substrate area. For the standard process, steps I and II of Fig. 1a are followed; the chip is then coole...

2019