Origin of ferroelectric polarization in tetragonal tungsten-bronze-type oxides
Gerhard Henning Olsen, Ulrich Aschauer, Nicola A. Spaldin, Sverre Magnus Selbach, and Tor Grande
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180101(R) (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
Matthieu Dupré, Fabrice Lemoult, Mathias Fink, and Geoffroy Lerosey
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180201(R) (2016) - Published 5 May, 2016
Subwavelength focusing (and hence imaging) of waves is a topic of major interest for many applications. Several approaches have been proposed so far, mostly relying on metamaterials, but they suffer from drawbacks of being inherently narrowband and from dissipation into the material. The authors here suggest an innovative approach to overcome these issues by using an extended fractal resonator alongside time reversal. By coupling the fractal resonator with a reverberating cavity that transforms a single source of waves into multiple ones, they demonstrate experimentally that very wide bandwidth subwavelength focusing of microwaves is possible from the far field anywhere on the fractal.
S. Chikara, J. Singleton, J. Bowlan, D. A. Yarotski, N. Lee, H. Y. Choi, Y. J. Choi, and V. S. Zapf
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180405(R) (2016) - Published 17 May, 2016
LuMnCoO is a rare example of a double-perovskite material exhibiting multiferroic behavior – coupling of magnetic and electric order – and a rare example of hysteretic coupling in a bulk material. Here, the authors lay to rest questions about whether it occurs in single crystals and verify that it is an intrinsic effect. The Mn and Co spins are arranged in a frustrated up-up-down-down ordering along the axis. Data from single crystals show that exchange striction produces electric polarization, albeit with a twist. Unlike other ‘up up down down’ multiferroics, the ferroelectricity emerges orthogonal to the magnetic ordering easy axis. This may be explained by a model taking into account the oxygen bond distortion in LuMnCoO. Consequently, the system has a rich phase diagram: a dielectric response emerges below the magnetic ordering temperature, whereas a hysteretic polarization emerges in the region of magnetic hysteresis, as shown in this paper.
Benjamin T. Zhou, Noah F. Q. Yuan, Hong-Liang Jiang, and K. T. Law
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180501(R) (2016) - Published 4 May, 2016
Due to its noncentrosymmetric lattice structure, a monolayer of transition metal dichalcogenides (TMD) possesses a very special type of spin-orbit coupling (SOC) called Ising SOC. Unlike Rashba SOC, Ising SOC pins electron spins to the out-of-plane rather than the in-plane direction. In TMD materials, the Ising SOC is quite strong and substantially enhances the in-plane upper critical field of their superconducting state. Despite this, the authors show here that the Ising SOC can in fact lead to spin-triplet Cooper pairing with electrons spins pointing in the in-plane direction. Such pairing induces a topological superconducting state in spin-polarized proximity coupled wires and generates Majorana end states. So-formed Majorana states can be more accessible experimentally due to the strong Ising SOC and a wider topologically nontrivial regime.
T. Cea, C. Castellani, and L. Benfatto
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180507(R) (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
In conventional superconductors, the energy gap lies in the frequency range of few tenths of terahertz (THz), making THz spectroscopy the best tool to access its fundamental excitations. Recently it has been shown by R. Matsunaga . that the use of intense, coherent multicycle THz pulses allows one to measure, in a NbN film, a component of the transmitted pulse oscillating three times faster than the incident light. It is found that this effect, named third-harmonic generation, has its maximum intensity at the temperature below , where the light frequency matches the superconducting gap value (T), pointing to a resonant process involving excitations specific of the superconducting state. What is the nature of this resonance? While previous work attributed this resonance to the Higgs mode, i.e., to amplitude fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter, the present paper comes to a different conclusion. By providing a detailed microscopic derivation of the nonlinear optical response, the authors show that the 3 current response is controlled by the lattice-modulated density fluctuations. As a consequence, the third-harmonic generation turns out to be largely dominated by Cooper-pair excitations, which pile up at 2. At the same time, in analogy with the standard Raman response, the Higgs signal is suppressed by the extremely small coupling to the probing field. The authors discuss also the polarization dependence of the nonlinear 3 response, which opens the route to a Raman-like symmetry-selective probe of the superconducting excitations. This result offers challenging perspectives for THz spectroscopy of several systems, including cuprate superconductors.
Xiaopeng Li, J. H. Pixley, Dong-Ling Deng, Sriram Ganeshan, and S. Das Sarma
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184204 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
Quantum thermalization of isolated systems undergoing unitary time evolution is a fundamental problem in quantum statistical mechanics. Its study has been revived recently in the context of many-body Anderson localization. Previous works have focused on localization of many-body systems with all the single-particle states being localized. As a significant step forward, this work studies localization aspects of noninteracting many-particle systems in the presence of a single-particle mobility edge. By systemically investigating entanglement entropy scaling and nonthermal fluctuations in various lattice models, the authors establish a nonergodic extended phase as a generic intermediate phase (between purely ergodic extended and nonergodic localized phases) for the many-body localization transition of noninteracting fermions. This work also sheds light on the interacting transition scenario as well.
Gerhard Henning Olsen, Ulrich Aschauer, Nicola A. Spaldin, Sverre Magnus Selbach, and Tor Grande
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180101(R) (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
Matthieu Dupré, Fabrice Lemoult, Mathias Fink, and Geoffroy Lerosey
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180201(R) (2016) - Published 5 May, 2016
Subwavelength focusing (and hence imaging) of waves is a topic of major interest for many applications. Several approaches have been proposed so far, mostly relying on metamaterials, but they suffer from drawbacks of being inherently narrowband and from dissipation into the material. The authors here suggest an innovative approach to overcome these issues by using an extended fractal resonator alongside time reversal. By coupling the fractal resonator with a reverberating cavity that transforms a single source of waves into multiple ones, they demonstrate experimentally that very wide bandwidth subwavelength focusing of microwaves is possible from the far field anywhere on the fractal.
Daniel Thuberg, Sebastián A. Reyes, and Sebastian Eggert
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180301(R) (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
Liang Liu (刘亮), Jiasen Niu (牛佳森), Huiqiang Guo (郭会强), Jian Wei (危健), D. L. Li, J. F. Feng, X. F. Han, J. M. D. Coey, and X.-G. Zhang
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180401(R) (2016) - Published 3 May, 2016
Satoru Emori, Tianxiang Nan, Amine M. Belkessam, Xinjun Wang, Alexei D. Matyushov, Christopher J. Babroski, Yuan Gao, Hwaider Lin, and Nian X. Sun
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180402(R) (2016) - Published 4 May, 2016
R. D. Johnson, D. D. Khalyavin, P. Manuel, A. Bombardi, C. Martin, L. C. Chapon, and P. G. Radaelli
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180403(R) (2016) - Published 11 May, 2016
Y. Takahashi, S. Kibayashi, Y. Kaneko, and Y. Tokura
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180404(R) (2016) - Published 13 May, 2016
S. Chikara, J. Singleton, J. Bowlan, D. A. Yarotski, N. Lee, H. Y. Choi, Y. J. Choi, and V. S. Zapf
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180405(R) (2016) - Published 17 May, 2016
LuMnCoO is a rare example of a double-perovskite material exhibiting multiferroic behavior – coupling of magnetic and electric order – and a rare example of hysteretic coupling in a bulk material. Here, the authors lay to rest questions about whether it occurs in single crystals and verify that it is an intrinsic effect. The Mn and Co spins are arranged in a frustrated up-up-down-down ordering along the axis. Data from single crystals show that exchange striction produces electric polarization, albeit with a twist. Unlike other ‘up up down down’ multiferroics, the ferroelectricity emerges orthogonal to the magnetic ordering easy axis. This may be explained by a model taking into account the oxygen bond distortion in LuMnCoO. Consequently, the system has a rich phase diagram: a dielectric response emerges below the magnetic ordering temperature, whereas a hysteretic polarization emerges in the region of magnetic hysteresis, as shown in this paper.
Nguyen H. Long, Phivos Mavropoulos, Bernd Zimmermann, Stefan Blügel, and Yuriy Mokrousov
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180406(R) (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
A. Scheie, M. Sanders, J. Krizan, Y. Qiu, R. J. Cava, and C. Broholm
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180407(R) (2016) - Published 20 May, 2016
Yuta Yamane, Jun'ichi Ieda, and Jairo Sinova
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180408(R) (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Wen-Han Kao (高文瀚), Peter C. W. Holdsworth, and Ying-Jer Kao (高英哲)
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180410(R) (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
Benjamin T. Zhou, Noah F. Q. Yuan, Hong-Liang Jiang, and K. T. Law
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180501(R) (2016) - Published 4 May, 2016
Due to its noncentrosymmetric lattice structure, a monolayer of transition metal dichalcogenides (TMD) possesses a very special type of spin-orbit coupling (SOC) called Ising SOC. Unlike Rashba SOC, Ising SOC pins electron spins to the out-of-plane rather than the in-plane direction. In TMD materials, the Ising SOC is quite strong and substantially enhances the in-plane upper critical field of their superconducting state. Despite this, the authors show here that the Ising SOC can in fact lead to spin-triplet Cooper pairing with electrons spins pointing in the in-plane direction. Such pairing induces a topological superconducting state in spin-polarized proximity coupled wires and generates Majorana end states. So-formed Majorana states can be more accessible experimentally due to the strong Ising SOC and a wider topologically nontrivial regime.
S.-H. Baek, D. V. Efremov, J. M. Ok, J. S. Kim, Jeroen van den Brink, and B. Büchner
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180502(R) (2016) - Published 10 May, 2016
Taichi Terashima, Naoki Kikugawa, Shigeru Kasahara, Tatsuya Watashige, Yuji Matsuda, Takasada Shibauchi, and Shinya Uji
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180503(R) (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
Brandon M. Anderson, Rufus Boyack, Chien-Te Wu, and K. Levin
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180504(R) (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
A. De Cecco, K. Le Calvez, B. Sacépé, C. B. Winkelmann, and H. Courtois
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180505(R) (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
Ke Zou, Subhasish Mandal, Stephen D. Albright, Rui Peng, Yujia Pu, Divine Kumah, Claudia Lau, Georg H. Simon, Omur E. Dagdeviren, Xi He, Ivan Božović, Udo D. Schwarz, Eric I. Altman, Donglai Feng, Fred J. Walker, Sohrab Ismail-Beigi, and Charles H. Ahn
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180506(R) (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
T. Cea, C. Castellani, and L. Benfatto
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180507(R) (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
In conventional superconductors, the energy gap lies in the frequency range of few tenths of terahertz (THz), making THz spectroscopy the best tool to access its fundamental excitations. Recently it has been shown by R. Matsunaga . that the use of intense, coherent multicycle THz pulses allows one to measure, in a NbN film, a component of the transmitted pulse oscillating three times faster than the incident light. It is found that this effect, named third-harmonic generation, has its maximum intensity at the temperature below , where the light frequency matches the superconducting gap value (T), pointing to a resonant process involving excitations specific of the superconducting state. What is the nature of this resonance? While previous work attributed this resonance to the Higgs mode, i.e., to amplitude fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter, the present paper comes to a different conclusion. By providing a detailed microscopic derivation of the nonlinear optical response, the authors show that the 3 current response is controlled by the lattice-modulated density fluctuations. As a consequence, the third-harmonic generation turns out to be largely dominated by Cooper-pair excitations, which pile up at 2. At the same time, in analogy with the standard Raman response, the Higgs signal is suppressed by the extremely small coupling to the probing field. The authors discuss also the polarization dependence of the nonlinear 3 response, which opens the route to a Raman-like symmetry-selective probe of the superconducting excitations. This result offers challenging perspectives for THz spectroscopy of several systems, including cuprate superconductors.
Matteo d'Astuto, Rolf Heid, Burkhard Renker, Frank Weber, Helmut Schober, Omar De la Peña-Seaman, Janusz Karpinski, Nikolai D. Zhigadlo, Alexei Bossak, and Michael Krisch
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180508(R) (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
R. Khasanov, A. Amato, P. Bonfà, Z. Guguchia, H. Luetkens, E. Morenzoni, R. De Renzi, and N. D. Zhigadlo
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180509(R) (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
Curtis F. Jones et al.
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180510(R) (2016) - Published 26 May, 2016
Bing Cheng, Liang Wu, N. J. Laurita, Harkirat Singh, Madhavi Chand, Pratap Raychaudhuri, and N. P. Armitage
Phys. Rev. B 93, 180511(R) (2016) - Published 26 May, 2016
A. Nichol and G. J. Ackland
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184101 (2016) - Published 2 May, 2016
Tufan Roy, Dhanshree Pandey, and Aparna Chakrabarti
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184102 (2016) - Published 13 May, 2016
Mauricio A. Flores, Walter Orellana, and Eduardo Menéndez-Proupin
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184103 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Z. J. He, Z. H. Fu, D. Legut, X. H. Yu, Q. F. Zhang, V. I. Ivashchenko, S. Veprek, and R. F. Zhang
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184104 (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
A. Ulvestad, A. Tripathi, S. O. Hruszkewycz, W. Cha, S. M. Wild, G. B. Stephenson, and P. H. Fuoss
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184105 (2016) - Published 19 May, 2016
V. Théry, A. Boulle, A. Crunteanu, J. C. Orlianges, A. Beaumont, R. Mayet, A. Mennai, F. Cosset, A. Bessaudou, and M. Fabert
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184106 (2016) - Published 20 May, 2016
O. Yu. Gorobtsov and I. A. Vartanyants
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184107 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Davide Di Stefano, Roman Nazarov, Tilmann Hickel, Jörg Neugebauer, Matous Mrovec, and Christian Elsässer
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184108 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Benyuan Cheng, Quanjun Li, Huafang Zhang, Ran Liu, Bo Liu, Zhen Yao, Tian Cui, Jing Liu, Zhenxian Liu, Bertil Sundqvist, and Bingbing Liu
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184109 (2016) - Published 24 May, 2016
J. Blasco, S. Lafuerza, J. García, G. Subías, V. Cuartero, J. L. García-Muñoz, C. Popescu, and I. Peral
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184110 (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
Elke Sondermann, Florian Kargl, and Andreas Meyer
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184201 (2016) - Published 6 May, 2016
Parthapratim Biswas, Raymond Atta-Fynn, and Stephen R. Elliott
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184202 (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
István A. Kovács, Róbert Juhász, and Ferenc Iglói
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184203 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
Xiaopeng Li, J. H. Pixley, Dong-Ling Deng, Sriram Ganeshan, and S. Das Sarma
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184204 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
Quantum thermalization of isolated systems undergoing unitary time evolution is a fundamental problem in quantum statistical mechanics. Its study has been revived recently in the context of many-body Anderson localization. Previous works have focused on localization of many-body systems with all the single-particle states being localized. As a significant step forward, this work studies localization aspects of noninteracting many-particle systems in the presence of a single-particle mobility edge. By systemically investigating entanglement entropy scaling and nonthermal fluctuations in various lattice models, the authors establish a nonergodic extended phase as a generic intermediate phase (between purely ergodic extended and nonergodic localized phases) for the many-body localization transition of noninteracting fermions. This work also sheds light on the interacting transition scenario as well.
Shuai Yin, Chung-Yu Lo, and Pochung Chen
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184301 (2016) - Published 2 May, 2016
Luca Messina, Maylise Nastar, Nils Sandberg, and Pär Olsson
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184302 (2016) - Published 3 May, 2016
L. S. Kadyrov, T. Zhang, E. S. Zhukova, V. B. Anzin, V. G. Trotsenko, V. I. Torgashev, M. Dressel, and B. P. Gorshunov
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184303 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
R. Legrand, A. Huynh, B. Jusserand, B. Perrin, and A. Lemaître
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184304 (2016) - Published 19 May, 2016
M. Rüsing, S. Sanna, S. Neufeld, G. Berth, W. G. Schmidt, A. Zrenner, H. Yu, Y. Wang, and H. Zhang
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184305 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Tian-Shi Xiong, Jiangbin Gong, and Jun-Hong An
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184306 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
B. L. Zink, M. Manno, L. O'Brien, J. Lotze, M. Weiler, D. Bassett, S. J. Mason, S. T. B. Goennenwein, M. Johnson, and C. Leighton
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184401 (2016) - Published 2 May, 2016
J. K. Glasbrenner
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184402 (2016) - Published 2 May, 2016
Shatabda Bhattacharya, Diptiman Dinda, Bikash Kumar Shaw, Saurav Dutta, and Shyamal K. Saha
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184403 (2016) - Published 4 May, 2016
Sergii Khmelevskyi, Andrei V. Ruban, and Peter Mohn
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184404 (2016) - Published 4 May, 2016
Zhujun Yuan, Hong Lu, Yongjie Liu, Junfeng Wang, and Shuang Jia
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184405 (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
Jason R. Jeffries, Ryan L. Stillwell, Samuel T. Weir, Yogesh K. Vohra, and Nicholas P. Butch
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184406 (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
A. A. Zvyagin
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184407 (2016) - Published 9 May, 2016
Jeffrey G. Rau, Sylvain Petit, and Michel J. P. Gingras
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184408 (2016) - Published 10 May, 2016
A. K. Bera, S. M. Yusuf, Amit Kumar, M. Majumder, K. Ghoshray, and L. Keller
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184409 (2016) - Published 10 May, 2016
Piotr Czarnik, Jacek Dziarmaga, and Andrzej M. Oleś
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184410 (2016) - Published 11 May, 2016
G. Gubbiotti, S. Tacchi, M. Madami, G. Carlotti, Z. Yang, J. Ding, A. O. Adeyeye, and M. Kostylev
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184411 (2016) - Published 11 May, 2016
D. Pinna, C. A. Ryan, T. Ohki, and A. D. Kent
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184412 (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
Satoru Hayami, Shi-Zeng Lin, and Cristian D. Batista
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184413 (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
Shi-Zhuo Wang and Ke Xia
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184414 (2016) - Published 12 May, 2016
M. Karbowiak and C. Rudowicz
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184415 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Jan-Niklas Toedt, Sebastian Mansfeld, Daniel Mellem, Wolfgang Hansen, Detlef Heitmann, and Stefan Mendach
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184416 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
M. Wang, R. A. Marshall, K. W. Edmonds, A. W. Rushforth, R. P. Campion, and B. L. Gallagher
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184417 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
T. Byrum, S. L. Gleason, A. Thaler, G. J. MacDougall, and S. L. Cooper
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184418 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Andrew Smerald and Nic Shannon
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184419 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Eric Kin-Ho Lee, Jeffrey G. Rau, and Yong Baek Kim
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184420 (2016) - Published 17 May, 2016
Vittorio Basso, Elena Ferraro, Alessandro Magni, Alessandro Sola, Michaela Kuepferling, and Massimo Pasquale
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184421 (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
Ioanna Bakaimi, Rosaria Brescia, Craig M. Brown, Alexander A. Tsirlin, Mark A. Green, and Alexandros Lappas
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184422 (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
B. Hebler, S. Böttger, D. Nissen, R. Abrudan, F. Radu, and M. Albrecht
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184423 (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
W. Bi, J. Lim, G. Fabbris, J. Zhao, D. Haskel, E. E. Alp, M. Y. Hu, P. Chow, Y. Xiao, W. Xu, and J. S. Schilling
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184424 (2016) - Published 19 May, 2016
Natalia Drichko, Collin Broholm, K. Kimura, R. Ishii, and Satoru Nakasutji
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184425 (2016) - Published 20 May, 2016
Hylke C. Donker, Hans De Raedt, and Mikhail I. Katsnelson
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184426 (2016) - Published 20 May, 2016
B. Taurel, T. Valet, V. V. Naletov, N. Vukadinovic, G. de Loubens, and O. Klein
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184427 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
A. L. Malvezzi, G. Karpat, B. Çakmak, F. F. Fanchini, T. Debarba, and R. O. Vianna
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184428 (2016) - Published 24 May, 2016
Masaya Fukami, Yuma Tateno, Koji Sekiguchi, and Kazuya Ando
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184429 (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
A. McDannald, C. R. dela Cruz, M. S. Seehra, and M. Jain
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184430 (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
Tino Gottschall, Konstantin P. Skokov, Dimitri Benke, Markus E. Gruner, and Oliver Gutfleisch
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184431 (2016) - Published 25 May, 2016
I. Fita, A. Wisniewski, R. Puzniak, V. Markovich, and G. Gorodetsky
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184432 (2016) - Published 27 May, 2016
S. Gueddida and M. Alouani
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184433 (2016) - Published 27 May, 2016
G. Bimonte, D. López, and R. S. Decca
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184434 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
D. Lenk, M. Hemmida, R. Morari, V. I. Zdravkov, A. Ullrich, C. Müller, A. S. Sidorenko, S. Horn, L. R. Tagirov, A. Loidl, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, and R. Tidecks
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184501 (2016) - Published 2 May, 2016
Yu-Li Lee and Yu-Wen Lee
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184502 (2016) - Published 5 May, 2016
Y. Fang, D. H. Xie, W. Zhang, F. Chen, W. Feng, B. P. Xie, D. L. Feng, X. C. Lai, and S. Y. Tan
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184503 (2016) - Published 10 May, 2016
G. E. D. K. Prawiroatmodjo, F. Trier, D. V. Christensen, Y. Chen, N. Pryds, and T. S. Jespersen
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184504 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Zhiqiang Wang and Sudip Chakravarty
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184505 (2016) - Published 16 May, 2016
Hendrik Meier, Vladimir I. Fal'ko, and Leonid I. Glazman
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184506 (2016) - Published 18 May, 2016
Yaron Kedem, Jian-Xin Zhu, and Alexander V. Balatsky
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184507 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Shinichi Ikawa and Makoto Tsubota
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184508 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Terence M. Bretz-Sullivan and A. M. Goldman
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184509 (2016) - Published 23 May, 2016
Igor I. Smolyaninov and Vera N. Smolyaninova
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184510 (2016) - Published 24 May, 2016
Rui Wang, Lei Hao, Baigeng Wang, and C. S. Ting
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184511 (2016) - Published 24 May, 2016
D. C. Freitas, P. Rodière, M. R. Osorio, E. Navarro-Moratalla, N. M. Nemes, V. G. Tissen, L. Cario, E. Coronado, M. García-Hernández, S. Vieira, M. Núñez-Regueiro, and H. Suderow
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184512 (2016) - Published 24 May, 2016
Naoki Kikugawa, Taichi Terashima, Shinya Uji, Kaori Sugii, Yoshiteru Maeno, David Graf, Ryan Baumbach, and James Brooks
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184513 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016
Cheung Chan
Phys. Rev. B 93, 184514 (2016) - Published 31 May, 2016