Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 41 references

Tuning chiral anomaly signature in a Dirac semimetal via fast-ion implantation

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

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

Pith's one-line read Fast-ion implantation of niobium into Cd3As2 thin films shifts the chiral-anomaly magnetoresistance minimum from about 4 T in pristine films to beyond 9 T in bulk-doped films, a more than 100% enhancement, while preserving crystallinity.

desk verdict A genuinely interesting materials-tuning demo whose headline number (bulk-doped NLMR minimum >9 T) is not actually shown in the data. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.17972 v1 pith:HT6KE7TM submitted 2025-07-23 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Manasi Mandal , Eunbi Rha , Abhijatmedhi Chotrattanapituk , Denisse Córdova Carrizales , Alexander Lygo , Kevin B. Woller , Mouyang Cheng , Ryotaro Okabe
show 8 more authors
Guomin Zhu Kiran Mak Chu-Liang Fu Chuhang Liu Lijun Wu Yimei Zhu Susanne Stemmer Mingda Li
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords Diracsemimetalchiralanomalynegativelongitudinalmagnetoresistancefast-ionimplantationNb-dopedCd3As2topologicalmagnetotransportFermileveltuning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that accelerator-based fast-ion implantation can tune the chiral-anomaly transport signature in the Dirac semimetal Cd$_3$As$_2$. By implanting niobium ions at 25 keV (surface doping) and 200 keV (bulk doping), the authors measure a negative longitudinal magnetoresistance whose minimum moves from about $B = 4$ T in pristine films to $7$–$8$ T with surface doping and beyond $9$ T with bulk doping, a relative enhancement of more than 100%. The films remain crystalline after implantation, so the tuning is achieved without destroying the lattice. The broader point is that high-energy ion implantation becomes a practical, controllable route for engineering chiralitronic behavior in topological semimetals.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the Son–Spivak chiral conductivity $\sigma^A_{xx}(B) = \frac{e^2}{4\pi^2\hbar c}\frac{v}{c}\frac{(eB)^2 v^2}{\mu^2}\tau$, which grows as $B^2$; combined with a Drude term whose deviation from quadratic scaling is modeled as $-\xi B^4$, the longitudinal resistivity takes the form $\rho_{xx}(B) = 1/(\sigma_D(0) + \lambda B^2 - \xi B^4)$, with a minimum at $B_c = \sqrt{\lambda/(2\xi)}$. Doping lowers the Fermi level $\mu$, raising $\lambda$ and pushing $B_c$ to higher field. The experimental machinery is the tandem accelerator implantation of Nb ions, with SRIM/TRIM depth-profile simulations and SIMS concentration measurements confirming surface versus bulk doping, and STEM imaging verifying that the Cd$_3$As$_2$ lattice survives as a crystalline film.

What would settle it

Measure the same three samples in a Corbino geometry, where current flows radially between concentric contacts and no edge current paths exist: if the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance and the 7 T and 9 T minima vanish or reverse, the chiral-anomaly interpretation is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Nb-doped Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films exhibit a stronger and longer-lived chiral-anomaly magnetoresistance than pristine films: the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance minimum occurs near $B = 7$ T in surface-doped films and beyond $B = 9$ T in bulk-doped films, compared with $B = 4$ T in pristine films, while the crystal structure is preserved. The authors attribute the effect to doping shifting the Fermi level closer to the Dirac node, which increases the coefficient of the quadratic chiral conductivity and thereby delays the resistivity turn-around to higher field. This runs against the usual expectation that disorder suppresses quantum effects, and it is presented as evidence that fast-ion implantation can enhance rather than destroy the chiral response.

Load-bearing premise

The whole interpretation rests on the assumption that the measured negative longitudinal magnetoresistance and its field shift are genuine chiral-anomaly signals, not artifacts of current paths, contact geometry, or ordinary disorder-modified magnetoresistance.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Surface-doped samples shift the NLMR minimum from roughly 4 T to 7–8 T; bulk-doped samples push it beyond 9 T, a relative enhancement of more than 100% over pristine films.
  • Implantation preserves crystallinity: high-resolution STEM matches a simulated perfect Cd$_3$As$_2$ lattice, with only isolated point defects from ion bombardment.
  • Doping deeper into the bulk delays the magnetoresistance minimum further, indicating that the depth profile of disorder is an independent tuning knob.
  • Because ion energy controls implantation depth, the same accelerator method could be applied to other topological and quantum materials, not just Cd$_3$As$_2$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive check of the chiral interpretation would be a Corbino-geometry measurement of the same implanted films; if the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance disappears or changes sign under those contacts, the claimed enhancement is likely a current-jetting artefact rather than chiral charge pumping.
  • The model predicts a quantitative relation $B_c = \sqrt{\lambda/(2\xi)}$ between the minimum-field and the doping-controlled Fermi level; implanting a concentration series and fitting $\rho_{xx}(B)$ without fixing the Son–Spivak form would test that prediction.
  • Because implantation can be localized in depth, the method could be used to separate surface and bulk contributions to chiral transport in other thin films, which the present transport measurements cannot distinguish.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports Nb ion implantation into MBE-grown Cd3As2 thin films as a route to tune the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance (NLMR) attributed to the chiral anomaly. Using 25 keV and 200 keV ion beams the authors achieve surface and bulk doping, respectively, as verified by SRIM/TRIM simulations and SIMS depth profiles. STEM shows that the Cd3As2 lattice remains largely crystalline after implantation. Longitudinal MR measurements show a progressive shift of the NLMR minimum from about 4 T in the pristine film to 7-8 T in the surface-doped film, and the authors claim a minimum above 9 T in the bulk-doped film, corresponding to more than a 100% relative enhancement of the maximum NLMR. A simple two-term resistivity model in the Supplementary Information is offered to explain the shift.

Significance. The paper addresses a timely and practically relevant question: whether ion implantation can be used to control chiral-anomaly-related transport in topological semimetals. The combination of accelerator-based implantation with SRIM/TRIM range prediction, SIMS profiling, and STEM structural characterization is a genuine strength, and the raw MR curves do show a credible progressive shift of the NLMR minimum from 4 T to about 7 T in the surface-doped sample. If the bulk-doped behavior were fully demonstrated, the reported >100% enhancement of the NLMR minimum field would be a notable result with potential device relevance. However, the central quantitative claim for the bulk-doped sample is not supported by the data as presented, and the chiral-anomaly interpretation rests on assumptions that are not tested by control measurements.

major comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 4 and Fig. S1] The central claim that the bulk-doped sample displays a maximum NLMR over B = 9 T is not demonstrated by the plotted data. The longitudinal MR curves in Fig. 4c and Fig. S1c are shown only up to 7.5 T, and within that range the curve has not reached a minimum. The abstract and main text nevertheless assert 'over B = 9 T' and a 'more than 100% relative enhancement' compared with the pristine sample. Since this field shift is the paper's headline quantitative result, the authors must either show raw MR data up to and beyond the actual minimum for the bulk-doped sample, or explicitly state that the >9 T value is an extrapolation and adjust the abstract and conclusions accordingly.
  2. [Supplementary Information IV, Eq. (6)] The theoretical model used to support the enhanced chiral anomaly contains two undetermined parameters, λ and ξ, and the expression B_c = sqrt(λ/2ξ) is not used to fit any of the measured MR curves. The claim that bulk doping reduces μ and thereby increases λ and B_c is qualitative and is not independently verified. As it stands, the model does not provide quantitative support for the >9 T minimum; it only shows that a shift is possible within an ad hoc parametrization. A fit of Eq. (6) to the measured curves, with reported parameter values and uncertainties, would be needed to make this argument load-bearing.
  3. [Fig. 4 and Experimental Methods] The attribution of the negative longitudinal MR to the chiral anomaly is not supported by control measurements. The symmetric contact procedure described in Supplementary Information III reduces contact misalignment for ρxx and ρxy, but it does not eliminate current jetting or other geometric artifacts, and no Corbino-geometry measurement or angle-dependent MR study is presented. Without such controls, and given the long-standing literature on NLMR artifacts in topological semimetals, the interpretation of the observed shift as enhanced chiral charge pumping remains an unverified assumption. At minimum, the authors should provide the field-angle dependence of the longitudinal MR or a Corbino measurement for at least one doped sample.
  4. [Fig. 4 caption and Results] The manuscript reports no error bars, no multiple-sample statistics, and no measurement reproducibility data for the key MR curves. The quantitative comparison among pristine, surface-doped, and bulk-doped samples therefore has no stated uncertainty, and the 'more than 100% relative enhancement' claim is a single-point comparison without an error estimate. The authors should state the number of samples measured and provide representative error estimates or replicate curves, particularly for the bulk-doped minimum field.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption states that measurements span 0-9 T, but the horizontal axes in all panels stop at 7.5 T. This inconsistency should be corrected, and the actual field range used for each panel should be stated.
  2. [Abstract and main text] The phrase 'maximum NLMR over B = 9 T' is ambiguous: it could mean 'at a field greater than 9 T' or 'at fields spanning more than 9 T.' Please rephrase to state unambiguously where the minimum occurs.
  3. [Introduction and throughout] There are several typographical and formatting issues, including 'irradation' (Fig. 2 caption), 'chiraltronic' (abstract), and inconsistent use of 'Nb-Cd3As2' versus 'Nb-doped Cd3As2'. These should be corrected in a final polish.
  4. [Fig. S1(g-i)] The statement that the opposite slope in the pristine sample's ρxy is due to a shift from electron to hole majority carriers with doping would benefit from a quantitative support, such as Hall carrier densities estimated from the low-field slopes.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Experimental NLMR study; central observation is a measurement, not a fitted prediction, so no constructional circularity; the claimed >9 T bulk-doped minimum is not visible in the plotted data, a support gap rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an experimental result: the magnetic-field position of the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance minimum shifts from ~4 T (pristine) to ~7–8 T (surface-doped) and reportedly above 9 T (bulk-doped). This is a measurement, not a quantity derived from fitted parameters, so there is no 'prediction that reduces to its input by construction.' The accompanying SI chiral-anomaly model (SI Eq. 6: rho_xx ~ 1/(sigma_D(0) + lambda B^2 - xi B^4), with B_c = sqrt(lambda/2 xi)) contains undetermined positive parameters lambda and xi; no fit to the data is shown, and the model is offered only as a qualitative explanation of the observed shift. Because lambda and xi are not adjusted to the measured MR and then renamed as predictions, the model does not create a fitting-as-prediction circularity. The self-citations present, notably Ref. [16] for the fast-ion-implantation method and Refs. [24,26] for crystal structure and film growth, are background/method citations and are not load-bearing for the transport claim; no uniqueness theorem or non-external ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. One non-circular support gap should be noted: the main text and Fig. 4 caption state the bulk-doped minimum occurs 'over 9 T,' while the plotted axes in Fig. 4c (and Fig. S1c) end at 7.5 T, and the SI model's lambda and xi are unspecified, so the theoretical explanation cannot independently fix B_c without additional fitting or data. That is a data-support/model-constraint concern, not a circularity of derivation. Overall, no significant circularity is found; score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on experimental transport observations plus a heuristic model whose coefficients lambda and xi are not determined; no new physical entity is introduced. The main unstated load is the chiral-anomaly interpretation of NLMR and the Fermi-level-lowering effect of Nb.

free parameters (3)
  • lambda (lambda) = not determined
    Coefficient of the B squared chiral conductivity term in SI Eq. (S5); the model asserts it increases when mu decreases, but no value is fit or measured.
  • xi (xi) = not determined
    Coefficient of the B-to-the-fourth Drude correction in SI Eq. (S6); introduced to create a minimum in rho_xx(B), giving Bc = sqrt(lambda/(2 xi)), but no independent estimate is provided.
  • target Nb dose = approximately 1e15 cm^-2
    Chosen for both surface and bulk samples so the doping levels match; the value is estimated from beam current, aperture, and time, not measured precisely.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The observed negative longitudinal magnetoresistance in Cd3As2 films with I parallel to B is a chiral anomaly transport signature.
    Adopted in the main text and used throughout; known alternative mechanisms such as current jetting, contact effects, and orbital MR are not excluded.
  • domain assumption Nb implantation lowers the Fermi level toward the Dirac node, increasing the chiral conductivity coefficient lambda.
    Main text and SI IV assume smaller mu causes larger lambda; evidence is indirect (pristine DFT and Hall carrier-sign change), with no direct measurement of mu or substitutional Nb.
  • domain assumption tau is much larger than tau_f, so the chiral B squared term dominates over the Drude term in the measured field range.
    SI IV states this ordering without measurement; the entire model relies on it.
  • domain assumption The Cd3As2 layer remains crystalline enough that the bulk electronic structure is preserved after implantation.
    STEM on the bulk-doped sample shows lattice periodicity but also vacancies and an amorphous boundary layer; the effect of these defects on transport is not quantified.
  • domain assumption SRIM/TRIM profiles and the SIMS measurement give the actual Nb distribution responsible for the doping effect.
    Agreement is shown, but SIMS uses an O beam and the dip at the amorphous layer is unexplained.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tuning chiral anomaly signature in a Dirac semimetal via fast-ion implantation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HT6KE7TM

@misc{pith2026250717972,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tuning chiral anomaly signature in a Dirac semimetal via fast-ion implantation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HT6KE7TM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.17972}
}
abstract

Cd$_3$As$_2$ is a prototypical Dirac semimetal that hosts a chiral anomaly and thereby functions as a platform to test high-energy physics hypotheses and to realize energy efficient applications. Here we use a combination of accelerator-based fast ion implantation and theory-driven planning to enhance the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance (NLMR)--a signature of a chiral anomaly--in Nb-doped Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films. High-energy ion implantation is commonly used to investigate semiconductors and nuclear materials but is rarely employed to study quantum materials. We use electrical transport and transmission electron microscopy to characterize the NLMR and the crystallinity of Nb-doped Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films. We find surface-doped Nb-Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films display a maximum NLMR around $B = 7$ T and bulk-doped Nb-Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films display a maximum NLMR over $B = 9$ T--all while maintaining crystallinity. This is more than a 100% relative enhancement of the maximum NLMR compared to pristine Cd$_3$As$_2$ thin films ($B = 4$ T). Our work demonstrates the potential of high-energy ion implantation as a practical route to realize chiralitronic functionalities in topological semimetals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.17972 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Fast-ion irradiation experimental setup, structural details, and Cd [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Simulated and experimental profiles of Nb ion implantation in Cd [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) characterization of the Nb implanted Cd [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Longitudinal magnetoresistance (MR) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    15 0.20 E − E f (eV) Cd As Nb k E B //k k E No magnetic field I a b c d FIG. 1. Fast-ion irradiation experimental setup, structural details, and Cd 3As2 chiral anomaly illustration. a. Tandem ion accelerator schematic with Cd3As2 sample. An ion source produces an Nb ion beam, which is injected into the terminal using a low-energy magnet and focused by a m...

    work page

  2. [2]

    H. Li, H. He, H.-Z. Lu, H. Zhang, H. Liu, R. Ma, Z. Fan, S.-Q. Shen, and J. Wang, Nature communications 7, 10301 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Hirschberger, S

    M. Hirschberger, S. Kushwaha, Z. Wang, Q. Gibson, S. Liang, C. A. Belvin, B. A. Bernevig, R. J. Cava, and N. P . Ong, Nature materials 15, 1161 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    In the longitudinal setup, all samples exhibit a pronounced NLMR, a known transport signature of the ABJ chiral anomaly [ 4, 5, 22, 33], exceeding −1% as shown in Fig

    The details of the data collection of these measurements are discussed in Sup- plementary Information III with an additional reference [ 33]. In the longitudinal setup, all samples exhibit a pronounced NLMR, a known transport signature of the ABJ chiral anomaly [ 4, 5, 22, 33], exceeding −1% as shown in Fig. 4a–c. For the pristine sample, we observe that ...

    work page 1947

  5. [5]

    Pikulin, A

    D. Pikulin, A. Chen, and M. Franz, Physical Review X6, 041021 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Zhang, S.- Y

    C.-L. Zhang, S.- Y . Xu, I. Belopolski, Z. Yuan, Z. Lin, B. Tong, G. Bian, N. Alidoust, C.-C. Lee, S.-M. Huang, et al. , Nature communications 7, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Huang, L

    X. Huang, L. Zhao, Y . Long, P . Wang, D. Chen, Z. Y ang, H. Liang, M. Xue, H. Weng, Z. Fang, et al., Physical Review X 5, 031023 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Parameswaran, T

    S. Parameswaran, T. Grover, D. Abanin, D. Pesin, and A. Vish- wanath, Physical Review X 4, 031035 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Takiguchi, Y

    K. Takiguchi, Y . K. Wakabayashi, H. Irie, Y . Krockenberger, T. Otsuka, H. Sawada, S. A. Nikolaev, H. Das, M. Tanaka, Y . Taniyasu,et al., Nature communications 11, 4969 (2020). 5 − 2 − 1 0 1 2 MR [%] − 2.0 − 1.5 − 1.0 −0.5 0.0 − 1.5 −1.0 −0.5 0.0 B [T] 0 5 10 15 20 25 0.0 2....

    2020

  2. [10]

    B. C. Park, T. Ha, K. I. Sim, T. S. Jung, J. H. Kim, Y . Kim, Y . H. Lee, T.-T. Kim, and S. W. Kim, Science Advances 8, eabq2479 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    D. E. Kharzeev, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 75, 133 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    Ong and S

    N. Ong and S. Liang, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 394 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Liang, Q

    T. Liang, Q. Gibson, M. N. Ali, M. Liu, R. Cava, and N. Ong, Nature materials 14, 280 (2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    Liang, J

    T. Liang, J. Lin, Q. Gibson, T. Gao, M. Hirschberger, M. Liu, R. J. Cava, and N. P . Ong, Physical review letters 118, 136601 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Li, L.-X

    C.-Z. Li, L.-X. Wang, H. Liu, J. Wang, Z.-M. Liao, and D.-P . Yu, Nature communications 6, 10137 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Z. Jia, C. Li, X. Li, J. Shi, Z. Liao, D. Yu, and X. Wu, Nature communications 7, 13013 (2016)

    2016

  9. [17]

    Schumann, L

    T. Schumann, L. Galletti, D. A. Kealhofer, H. Kim, M. Goyal, and S. Stemmer, Physical review letters 120, 016801 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Mandal, A

    M. Mandal, A. Chotrattanapituk, K. Woller, L. Wu, H. Xu, N. T. Hung, N. Mao, R. Okabe, A. Boonkird, T. Nguyen, et al., Applied Physics Reviews 11 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Ziegler, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 6, 270 (1985)

    J. Ziegler, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 6, 270 (1985)

    1985

  12. [20]

    Pearton, Materials science reports 4, 313 (1990)

    S. Pearton, Materials science reports 4, 313 (1990)

    1990

  13. [21]

    C. Y an, R. Wang, Y . Wang, X. Wang, and G. Bai, Nuclear Engineering and Technology 47, 323 (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    Das, SN Applied Sciences 1, 1614 (2019)

    S. Das, SN Applied Sciences 1, 1614 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Vojta, ANNUAL REVIEW OF CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS 10 (2019)

    T. Vojta, ANNUAL REVIEW OF CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS 10 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Xiong, S

    J. Xiong, S. K. Kushwaha, T. Liang, J. W. Krizan, M. Hirschberger, W. Wang, R. J. Cava, and N. P . Ong, Science 350, 413 (2015)

    2015

  17. [25]

    N. P . Lockyer, S. Aoyagi, J. S. Fletcher, I. S. Gilmore, P . A. W. van der Heide, K. L. Moore, B. J. T yler, and L.-T. Weng, Nature Reviews Methods Primers (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    G. Zhu, B. Guo, and S. Stemmer, Applied Physics Letters 123 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Middleton, University of Pennsylvania, unpublished (1989)

    R. Middleton, University of Pennsylvania, unpublished (1989)

    1989

  20. [28]

    Schumann, M

    T. Schumann, M. Goyal, H. Kim, and S. Stemmer, APL Materi- als 4 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Physical review B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  22. [30]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Physical review b 59, 1758 (1999)

    1999

  23. [31]

    J. P . Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical review letters 77, 3865 (1996). 6

    1996

  24. [32]

    V . Wang, N. Xu, J.-C. Liu, G. Tang, and W.-T. Geng, Computer Physics Communications 267, 108033 (2021)

    2021

  25. [34]

    https://beamline.com/lab.html,

  26. [35]

    Son and B

    D. Son and B. Spivak, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 88, 104412 (2013). Tuning chiral anomaly signature in a Dirac semimetal via fast-ion implantation: Supplementary Information Manasi Mandal, 1, 2, ∗ Eunbi Rha, 1, 2, † Abhijatmedhi Chotrattanapituk, ...

    2013

  27. [36]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Physical review B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  28. [37]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method, Physical review b 59, 1758 (1999)

    1999

  29. [38]

    J. P . Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Physical review letters 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  30. [39]

    V . Wang, N. Xu, J.-C. Liu, G. Tang, and W.-T. Geng, V aspkit: A user-friendly interface facilitating high- throughput computing and analysis using vasp code, Computer Physics Communications 267, 108033 (2021)

    2021

  31. [40]

    J. F. Ziegler, SRIM.EXE (1984)

    1984

  32. [41]

    Son and B

    D. Son and B. Spivak, Chiral anomaly and classical negative magnetoresistance of weyl metals, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 88, 104412 (2013). 5 76 78 80 ρ [µ Ω ·m] 60 65 70 75 37.4 37.6 37.8 38.0 50 100 150 200 250 ρ [µ Ω ·m] 40 60 80 32 34 36 38

    2013

  33. [42]

    0 2. 5 5. 0 7. 5 B [T] − 60 − 40 − 20 0 ρ [µ Ω ·m] 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 B [T] 0 10 20 30 40 50 0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 B [T] 0 5 10 15 Pristine Doped Surface Bulk Resistivity ρxx I ∥ B ρxx I ⊥ B ρxy I ⊥ B a b c d e f g h i 0 5 10 15 20 25 T [K] FIG. S1. V ariation of the longitudinal resis...

Pith tools

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