Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Quantum fluid dimers of hyperbolic exciton-polariton condensates

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read By rotating the axis connecting two exciton-polariton condensates in a photonic crystal waveguide, this paper demonstrates continuous control over whether the condensates couple by tunneling (evanescent) or by propagating waves (ballistic).

desk verdict Nice angle-controlled evanescent-to-ballistic polariton dimer, but the central splitting curve likely mixes trapped modes with molecular levels. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14147 v1 pith:RNRZQYKD submitted 2024-12-18 physics.optics cond-mat.quant-gas

Ioannis Georgakilas , Antonio Gianfrate , Dimitrios Trypogeorgos , Helgi Sigur{ḥsson , Fabrizio Riminucci , Kirk W. Baldwin , Loren N. Pfeiffer , Milena De Giorgi
show 2 more authors
Dario Ballarini Daniele Sanvitto
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscond-mat.quant-gas
keywords hyperbolicdispersionexciton-polaritonphotoniccrystalwaveguidebound-in-the-continuumevanescentcouplingballisticpolaritondimersaddle
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

By rotating the axis connecting two exciton-polariton condensates in a photonic crystal waveguide, this paper demonstrates continuous control over whether the condensates couple by quantum tunneling (evanescent coupling) or by exchanging propagating waves (ballistic coupling). The underlying hyperbolic, saddle-shaped dispersion gives opposite effective masses along the two in-plane directions, so a dimer oriented near the evanescent axis behaves like a molecule with a large bonding/antibonding splitting, while a dimer oriented near the ballistic axis shows phase-locked standing-wave resonances. The authors measure the spectral splitting, interference fringe count, and flow patterns as functions of angle and distance, and match them to a mean-field model and a simple overlap-integral coupling parameter. If correct, the result turns a single photonic-crystal chip into a reconfigurable testbed for coupled quantum fluids, bridging tight-binding and delay-coupled oscillator physics.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the hyperbolic (saddle) dispersion of the lower polariton branch, ε(k) = (ħ²/2)(k_x²/m_x − k_y²/m_y), whose opposite-sign effective masses along the two in-plane directions determine the coupling anisotropy. This dispersion produces a real-space 'propagation cone' of half-angle θ_T ≈ arctan(√(m_y/m_x)) ≈ 5.7°–10°, outside which ballistic outflow is forbidden; along the evanescent direction polaritons are trapped by the pump-induced potential. The coupling between two condensates is captured by the overlap integral J(r,θ) = cos(k_c r cosθ) $e^{{−κ r cosθ}}$ $e^{{−r² sin²θ/(8σ_y²)}}$, which combines phase matching of propagating waves (cos term), damping from finite polariton lifetime (exponential decay), and confinement of the trapped condensate (Gaussian in the perpendicular direction). Mean-field simulations of the condensate and reservoir (Eq. S5) provide the quantitative spectral densities and real-space intensity and phase maps that match the measured dimer behaviour.

What would settle it

A decisive check would be to spatially resolve the near-field intensity pattern of each spectral peak in the inter-condensate region and confirm that the highest- and lowest-energy states have the symmetric/antisymmetric spatial structure expected for the bonding and antibonding modes; alternatively, one could show that the extracted splitting follows the predicted exponential form only when exactly two modes are present, and deviates when additional trapped modes appear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the inter-condensate coupling mechanism in a polariton dimer is set by the dimer's orientation relative to the grating, because the lowest-energy polariton branch has a hyperbolic dispersion ε(k) = (ħ²/2)(k_x²/m_x − k_y²/m_y) with positive effective mass along x and negative effective mass along y. Negative-mass polaritons are attracted to the pump-induced potential wells and couple evanescently, producing bonding and antibonding modes split by up to ~1.1 meV for small separations; positive-mass polaritons see the pumps as barriers and propagate ballistically between them, forming interference fringes whose number changes by one whenever the projected separation r_x = r cosθ grows by half the condensate wavelength. The authors map the evolution from evanescent to ballistic behaviour as θ decreases from 90° to below 45°, with both mechanisms coexisting near the critical angle set by the propagation cone of the hyperbolic dispersion. They quantify the coupling with the overlap integral J(r,θ) = cos(k_c r cosθ) $e^{{−κ r cosθ}}$ $e^{{−r² sin²θ/(8σ_y²)}}$, which reproduces the observed exponential distance decay of the evanescent splitting and the linear-in-r_x fringe count of the ballistic regime, and they support the interpretation with mean-field simulations of the condensate order parameter.

Load-bearing premise

The evanescent mode splitting is extracted as the energy difference between the lowest and highest spectral features even when the spectrum contains multiple trapped modes; if those features are not the bonding/antibonding pair of the dimer, the quoted exponential distance and angle decay of the evanescent coupling is contaminated by ballistic resonances.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single photonic-crystal waveguide can act as a reconfigurable polariton lattice where the coupling type and sign are set by the angle between lattice sites, without altering the sample.
  • The measured exponential distance and angle dependence of the evanescent splitting gives design rules for placing condensates so that they either hybridize strongly or remain essentially independent.
  • The linear dependence of the ballistic fringe count on projected separation r_x provides a way to encode in-phase/anti-phase synchronization states in the geometry of the pump spots.
  • Near the critical angle where both coupling mechanisms coexist, the dimer offers a controllable setting to study the competition between mode hybridization and phase locking in driven-dissipative quantum fluids.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the geometric control demonstrated here transfers to two-dimensional gratings, the same angle knob could be used to build tighter polariton networks with half the angular range, a possibility the authors sketch in their discussion.
  • The coupling integral J(r,θ) assumes a factorized, isotropic condensate profile; a more complete treatment that accounts for the observed anisotropic density might predict small angle-dependent corrections to the extracted coupling that could be tested by precision spectroscopy.
  • Because the bound-in-the-continuum states carry a topological π phase between lobes, placing pumps at specific positions could create phase dislocations in the dimer region; this is an untested consequence that would show up as a discontinuity in the interference pattern.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports experiments and mean-field simulations on pairs of exciton-polariton condensates in a photonic-crystal waveguide with a saddle-like dispersion. Two non-resonant Gaussian pump spots form a condensate dimer, and the angle θ of the inter-spot axis relative to the positive-mass (ballistic) direction is varied. At large θ the condensates are trapped along the negative-mass direction and form an evanescently coupled molecule with a large spectral splitting; at small θ they are ballistically coupled by propagating waves, with interference fringes and phase locking that switches between in-phase and anti-phase as the projected distance changes. The authors support this picture with energy-resolved spectra, real-space images, phase and velocity maps, and mean-field spectral-density calculations, and they propose a compact overlap model for the coupling strength.

Significance. If the central claim is accepted, this is a significant result for polaritonics and analogue simulation: it introduces a single geometric parameter that continuously interpolates between tight-binding-like evanescent coupling and ballistic, phase-locked coupling in a platform with very large effective-mass anisotropy (m_y/m_x ≈ 100) and bound-in-the-continuum polaritons. The paper contains a large body of direct experimental evidence—dispersion measurements, real-space spectra, fringe counting, phase/velocity imaging—and the qualitative angle dependence is shown both experimentally and in simulations. The supplemental material is also transparent enough to state the mode-extraction rule that creates the main weakness, which allows the issue to be identified and fixed. However, the quantitative decay laws for the evanescent splitting are not yet reliably established because of the mode-identification problem and the absence of uncertainties, and the overlap model contains fitted parameters, so it is illustrative rather than a parameter-free validation.

major comments (3)
  1. [SI §VI; main Fig. 4a; Fig. 3b–g] SI §VI states that when the spectrum contains more than two peaks, the authors 'always considered the energy difference between the lowest and highest energy state observed in the spectrum' as the evanescent mode splitting. This rule is only correct if those extremal states are in fact the two partners of the molecular bonding/antibonding doublet. The same section, however, acknowledges additional 'trapped' modes originating from the inter-condensate potential and notes that such modes appear in the ballistic configuration; Fig. 3e–g and Fig. 4a include parameter ranges with more than two peaks. The min-max span will then mix a molecular state with a ballistic or trapped resonance, so the reported decay from about 1.4 meV to 0.1 meV and the claimed e^{-r^2}/e^{-sin^2 θ} dependence in Fig. 4a are not necessarily the evanescent dimer splitting. Because Fig. 4a is the quantitative core of the evanescent-to-ballistic transition, this extraction rule is load-bearing. The authors should re-extract the gaps by tracking the two molecular branches across r and θ, or by fitting the full multi-peak spectrum with an explicit mode model, and should verify in each reported point that the extremal peaks indeed correspond to the bonded/antibonded pair. Error bars and the number of independent acquisitions should accompany the re-analysis.
  2. [Eq. (4); SI §VII] Eq. (4) is presented in the main text as an overlap-integral result with a closed form, but it is not a parameter-free derivation of the measured splitting. The transverse size σ_y is fitted from solutions of Eq. (S5), the outflow wavenumber k_c is taken from the simulated momentum-space photoluminescence, and κ is set by the lifetime. Therefore the statements that the evanescent splitting 'decreases as e^{-r^2}' and 'decreases as e^{-sin^2 θ}' are at least partly a consistency check with a model containing adjustable inputs, not an independent prediction. In addition, SI §VII assumes a factorized Gaussian/plane-wave ansatz and explicitly defers the BiC π-phase-jump topology that the Discussion itself says can affect dimer coupling. The manuscript should state which parameters are measured, which are fitted, and should justify the neglect of the BiC lobe structure quantitatively, or soften the claims based on Eq. (4) to 'consistent with a model' rather than presenting them as measured laws.
  3. [Fig. 4; data-analysis] No error bars, confidence intervals, or numbers of independent measurements are given for the energy gaps in Fig. 4a, nor are peak-position uncertainties reported for the fringe counts in Fig. 4b–c. Without this information, deviations from the monotonic trends and from Eq. (4) cannot be assessed, for example the scatter in Fig. 4c or the spread of splitting values at fixed separation. At minimum, representative error bars from repeated acquisitions or from peak-fitting uncertainties should be added, together with a clear description of the extraction method for each data point.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (4)] The parameter σ_y appears in Eq. (4) but is defined only in SI §VII; it should be defined in the main text at the point of first use.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption of Fig. 3 begins 'aCalculated spectrum...' with a missing space, and there are several similar typographical slips elsewhere; a careful proofreading pass is needed.
  3. [SI §VI] SI §VI states that the data in Fig. 3g of the main text have been renormalized to the power recorded during acquisition, but the main text does not mention this correction; please specify the panel(s) to which the renormalization applies and how it was performed.
  4. [Introduction / Discussion] The new element with respect to Ref. [14], which already reports evanescent coupling of BiC condensates along the grating direction, should be stated more explicitly as the angular control of the evanescent/ballistic crossover; this would help the reader identify the standalone contribution of the present work.
  5. [Section II] The text says the spectral gap at θ = 90° is 'one order of magnitude larger than the polariton linewidth of 100 μeV'; given that the peaks in Fig. 3b–g appear broader than this, the manuscript should specify whether 100 μeV is the single-condensate linewidth or the instrumental resolution, and how the peak positions were determined.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The evanescent splitting is defined as the full spectral span, so the quantitative decay laws in Fig. 4a partly reduce to the extraction rule rather than a molecular-gap measurement.

  1. self definitional [Supplemental Information Section VI ('Confined modes in the gap'); applied in main text Section II and Fig. 4a]
    "In our analysis, for extracting the mode splitting due to the evanescent coupling, we always considered the energy difference between the lowest and highest energy state observed in the spectrum."

    This defines the observable 'mode splitting due to evanescent coupling' as the total spectral span of whatever modes appear. SI VI itself states that in some cases the spectrum consists of multiple 'trapped' modes of the inter-condensate potential, not just the bonding/antibonding pair. The main text's Fig. 4a and the surrounding discussion report this min-max span as the evanescent splitting and compare its r and theta variation with the molecular overlap model of Eq. (4)/Eq. (S12). If trapped or ballistic resonances lie inside the span, the measured quantity is no longer the two-level molecular gap; the quoted decay laws e^{-r^2} and e^{-sin^2 theta} are then statements about the width of a multi-mode manifold rather than an independent test of evanescent coupling.

full rationale

The central qualitative claim that changing the dimer angle relative to the grating tunes the coupling between evanescent and ballistic mechanisms is not circular: it rests on directly measured real-space PL, momentum-space dispersion, and angle-resolved spectral images, and the mean-field simulations (Eq. S5) are calibrated to an independently fitted dispersion (Table I) rather than to the extracted splitting values. The cross-check between the real-space fringe count and the calculated k_c (Fig. 4c) is a genuine theory-experiment comparison because k_c is taken from the calculated momentum-space PL, not fit to the fringe data. The self-citations to the platform and phase-locking literature are background support rather than the load-bearing derivation. The one load-bearing circular element is the SI VI extraction rule: 'mode splitting due to evanescent coupling' is defined as the energy difference between the lowest and highest spectral peaks even when multiple trapped modes are present. Applying that rule to validate Eq. (4) conflates the molecular bonding/antibonding gap with the total multiplet width. This does not undermine the qualitative transition observation, but it compromises the specific exponential decay laws and the location of the crossover in Fig. 4a, warranting a moderate circularity score.

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

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced; the hyperbolic dispersion and BiC states are properties of the existing waveguide platform. The central claim rests on a set of fitted system parameters and a simplifying ansatz for the coupling overlap, which are listed above.

free parameters (5)
  • Effective mass ratio m_y/m_x = approximately 101.8
    Obtained by polynomial fitting of the saddle surface of the lowest polariton branch; sets the hyperbolic contour aspect ratio, the propagation cone angle, and the evanescent/ballistic dichotomy.
  • Transverse trap size sigma_y = not given in main text
    Found from fitting to solutions of Eq. (S5); controls the e^{-r^2/8sigma_y^2} decay of the evanescent coupling in Eq. (4).
  • Condensate outflow wavenumber k_c = approximately 1 inverse micron (lambda_c about 6.6 microns)
    Average wavenumber of ballistic outflow used in Eq. (4); extracted from reciprocal-space maxima and cross-checked with real-space fringe spacing.
  • Photonic Hamiltonian parameters (Omega, U, v, omega_X, m) = 5.3 meV, 3.2 meV, 36.2 meV micron, 2.74 meV, 0.28 meV ps^2 micron^-2
    Fitted to experimental PL spectra in Table I; define the dispersion underlying the saddle approximation.
  • Mean-field reservoir parameters = g_R=4g, R=10g, eta Gamma_R=6, Gamma_R=0.2 ps^-1
    Chosen in simulations; not fitted to the dimer data but affect the simulated spectra and extracted quantities.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The lowest polariton branch is well described by a scalar order parameter with saddle dispersion epsilon(k) = (hbar^2/2)(k_x^2/m_x - k_y^2/m_y).
    Invoked in SI Eq. (S3) after disregarding higher branches; central to the whole evanescent/ballistic picture.
  • domain assumption The nonresonant pump profile maps to an effective potential landscape P(r) proportional to V(r) > 0 felt by polaritons.
    Stated in main text; from prior work [14]. Underpins trapping of negative-mass polaritons and barriers for positive-mass polaritons.
  • ad hoc to paper The dimer coupling is proportional to the overlap integral of factorized Gaussian and plane-wave ansatz wavefunctions, J proportional to integral psi_1* psi_2 dr with psi_n = sqrt(N_n) X(x-x_n) Y(y-y_n).
    SI Eq. (S8)-(S12); explicitly an ansatz, with anisotropy and the full potential landscape dismissed as later work.
  • domain assumption The sign of J controls in-phase vs anti-phase locking, and the number of observed fringes follows the nth root of cos(k_c r_x).
    Borrowed from prior ballistic polariton dimer studies [18,19]; used to interpret fringe counts.
  • ad hoc to paper BiC topology (pi phase jump between lobes) can be ignored for the central dimer results.
    Acknowledged in Discussion: 'we have ignored the non-trivial BiC topology'; may affect phase structures at finite angles.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum fluid dimers of hyperbolic exciton-polariton condensates." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RNRZQYKD

@misc{pith2026241214147,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum fluid dimers of hyperbolic exciton-polariton condensates},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RNRZQYKD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14147}
}
read the original abstract

Coupled many-body quantum systems give rise to rich emergent physics and abundance of both stationary and dynamical behaviours. Designing platforms with tunable and distinct forms of coupling gives new insight into the collective behaviour of the dimerised quantum systems. Fundamentally, two systems can exchange particles through either forbidden or allowed channels, underpinning evanescent and ballistic coupling mechanisms, respectively. Based on proximity, the former leads to large spectral splitting that defines, for instance, chemical binding energies, whereas the latter pushes for stringent phase-matching and synchronicity between oscillating degrees-of-freedom, analogous to phase-coupled harmonic oscillators, with a significantly smaller impact on the energy landscape. Here, we demonstrate an all-optically tunable evanescent-ballistic quantum fluid dimer based on hyperbolic exciton-polariton condensates in a photonic crystal waveguide. By changing the angle of the polariton dimer relative to the grating, the system transitions from an evanescently-coupled molecule with large mode-splitting to a ballistic condensate dimer with strict phase-matching conditions and rich interference patterns. We directly measure the condensate spectral features and mass flow subject to a saddle dispersion relation, and connect our results to mean field theory. These results showcase the potential of photonic crystals to study condensed matter phenomena lying at the interface between delay-coupled nonlinear oscillators and tight binding physics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.14147 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [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 ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: b shows the number of fringes ranging from 2 to 10. The increasing number of fringes with the spatial separation at small angles is similar to ballistic coupled condensates in mi￾crocavities [19]. A new fringe enters the inter-condensate re￾gion every time the distance…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. A. Acebrón, L. L. Bonilla, C. J. Pérez Vicente, F. Ritort, and R. Spigler, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 137 (2005)

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    V. E. Calado, S. Goswami, G. Nanda, M. Diez, A. R. Akhmerov, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, T. M. Klapwijk, and L. M. K. Van- dersypen, Nature Nanotechnology10, 761 (2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    N.W.AshcroftandN.D.Mermin, SolidStatePhysics (Harcourt College Publishers, New York; London, 1976)

    work page 1976

  4. [4]

    S.J.MassonandA.Asenjo-Garcia,NatureCommunications 13, 2285 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Yu, G.-B

    H. Yu, G.-B. Liu, J.Tang, X. Xu,and W.Yao, ScienceAdvances 3, e1701696 (2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    H. Deng, H. Haug, and Y. Yamamoto, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1489 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    S.Ghosh, R.Su, J.Zhao, A.Fieramosca, J.Wu, T.Li, Q.Zhang, 7 F. Li, Z. Chen, T. Liew, D. Sanvitto, and Q. Xiong, Photonics Insights1, R04 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    A.AmoandJ.Bloch,ComptesRendusPhysique 17,934(2016), polariton physics / Physique des polaritons

    work page 2016

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    C.Schneider,K.Winkler,M.D.Fraser,M.Kamp,Y.Yamamoto, E.A.Ostrovskaya,andS.Höfling,ReportsonProgressinPhysics 80, 016503 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    Alyatkin, J

    S. Alyatkin, J. D. Töpfer, A. Askitopoulos, H. Sigurdsson, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 207402 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    R. Tao, K. Peng, L. Haeberlé, Q. Li, D. Jin, G. R. Fleming, S.Kéna-Cohen,X.Zhang,andW.Bao,NatureMaterials 21,761 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Ohadi, A

    H. Ohadi, A. J. Ramsay, H. Sigurdsson, Y. del Valle-Inclan Re- dondo,S.I.Tsintzos,Z.Hatzopoulos,T.C.H.Liew,I.A.Shelykh, Y. G. Rubo, P. G. Savvidis, and J. J. Baumberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 067401 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    Dovzhenko, D

    D. Dovzhenko, D. Aristov, L. Pickup, H. Sigurðsson, and P. Lagoudakis, Phys. Rev. B108, L161301 (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Gianfrate, H

    A. Gianfrate, H. Sigurðsson, V. Ardizzone, H. C. Nguyen, F.Riminucci,M.Efthymiou-Tsironi,K.W.Baldwin,L.N.Pfeif- fer, D. Trypogeorgos, M. De Giorgi, D. Ballarini, H. S. Nguyen, and D. Sanvitto, Nature Physics20, 61 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    K. G. Lagoudakis, B. Pietka, M. Wouters, R. André, and B. Deveaud-Plédran, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 120403 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    Galbiati, L

    M. Galbiati, L. Ferrier, D. D. Solnyshkov, D. Tanese, E. Wertz, A.Amo,M.Abbarchi,P.Senellart,I.Sagnes,A.Lemaître,E.Ga- lopin, G. Malpuech, and J. Bloch, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 126403 (2012)

    2012

  9. [17]

    Ferrier, I

    M.Abbarchi,A.Amo,V.G.Sala,D.D.Solnyshkov,H.Flayac, L. Ferrier, I. Sagnes, E. Galopin, A. Lemaître, G. Malpuech, and J. Bloch, Nature Physics9, 275 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    Ohadi, R

    H. Ohadi, R. L. Gregory, T. Freegarde, Y. G. Rubo, A. V. Ka- vokin, N. G. Berloff, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Phys. Rev. X6, 031032 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    J. D. Töpfer, H. Sigurdsson, L. Pickup, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Communications Physics3, 2 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Furman, R

    M. Furman, R. Mirek, M. Król, W. Pacuski, H. Sigurðsson, J. Szczytko, and B. Piętka, Communications Physics 6, 196 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Ardizzone, F

    V. Ardizzone, F. Riminucci, S. Zanotti, A. Gianfrate, M. Efthymiou-Tsironi, D. G. Suàrez-Forero, F. Todisco, M.DeGiorgi,D.Trypogeorgos,G.Gigli,K.Baldwin,L.Pfeiffer, D. Ballarini, H. S. Nguyen, D. Gerace, and D. Sanvitto, Nature 605, 447 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Riminucci, A

    F. Riminucci, A. Gianfrate, D. Nigro, V. Ardizzone, S. Dhuey, L. Francaviglia, K. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, D. Ballarini, D. Try- pogeorgos,A.Schwartzberg,D.Gerace,andD.Sanvitto,Physical Review Letters131, 246901 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    X. Wu, S. Zhang, J. Song, X. Deng, W. Du, X. Zeng, Y. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Y. Chen, Y. Wang, C. Jiang, Y. Zhong, B. Wu, Z. Zhu, Y. Liang, Q. Zhang, Q. Xiong, and X. Liu, Nature Communica- tions15, 3345 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    L. A. Smirnov, D. A. Smirnova, E. A. Ostrovskaya, and Y. S. Kivshar, Phys. Rev. B89, 235310 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Grosso, G

    G. Grosso, G. Nardin, F. Morier-Genoud, Y. Léger, and B. Deveaud-Plédran, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 245301 (2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    Trypogeorgos, A

    D. Trypogeorgos, A. Gianfrate, M. Landini, D. Nigro, D. Ger- ace,I.Carusotto,F.Riminucci,K.W.Baldwin,L.N.Pfeiffer,G.I. Martone, M. D. Giorgi, D. Ballarini, and D. Sanvitto, Emerging supersolidity from a polariton condensate in a photonic crystal waveguide (2024), arXiv:2407.02...

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Fontaine, D

    Q. Fontaine, D. Squizzato, F. Baboux, I. Amelio, A. Lemaître, M. Morassi, I. Sagnes, L. Le Gratiet, A. Harouri, M. Wouters, I. Carusotto, A. Amo, M. Richard, A. Minguzzi, L. Canet, S. Ravets, and J. Bloch, Nature608, 687 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    H.Sigurðsson,H.C.Nguyen,andH.S.Nguyen,Nanophotonics 13, 3503 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    G.Tosi,G.Christmann,N.G.Berloff,P.Tsotsis,T.Gao,Z.Hat- zopoulos, P. G. Savvidis, and J. J. Baumberg, Nature Physics8, 190 (2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    Alyatkin, H

    S. Alyatkin, H. Sigurdsson, A. Askitopoulos, J. D. Töpfer, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Nature Communications12, 5571 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    N. G. Berloff, M. Silva, K. Kalinin, A. Askitopoulos, J. D. Töpfer, P. Cilibrizzi, W. Langbein, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Nature Materials 16, 1120 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    D. D. Solnyshkov, G. Malpuech, P. St-Jean, S. Ravets, J. Bloch, and A. Amo, Opt. Mater. Express11, 1119 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    hopping energy integral

    A. Opala and M. Matuszewski, Opt. Mater. Express13, 2674 (2023). 1 Supplementary Information I. SAMPLE AND EXPERIMENTAL METHODS Our system is a500 nmthick AlGaAs slab waveguide with 12 embedded20 nmGaAs quantum wells. The surface of the slab hetero-structure is etched with a17...

    2023

  26. [34]

    Gigli, K

    V.Ardizzone,F.Riminucci,S.Zanotti,A.Gianfrate,M.Efthymiou-Tsironi,D.G.Suàrez-Forero,F.Todisco,M.DeGiorgi,D.Trypogeorgos, G. Gigli, K. Baldwin, L. Pfeiffer, D. Ballarini, H. S. Nguyen, D. Gerace, and D. Sanvitto, Nature605, 447 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Gianfrate, H

    A. Gianfrate, H. Sigurðsson, V. Ardizzone, H. C. Nguyen, F. Riminucci, M. Efthymiou-Tsironi, K. W. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, D. Trypo- georgos, M. De Giorgi, D. Ballarini, H. S. Nguyen, and D. Sanvitto, Nature Physics20, 61 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Riminucci, A

    F. Riminucci, A. Gianfrate, D. Nigro, V. Ardizzone, S. Dhuey, L. Francaviglia, K. Baldwin, L. N. Pfeiffer, D. Ballarini, D. Trypogeorgos, A. Schwartzberg, D. Gerace, and D. Sanvitto, Physical Review Letters131, 246901 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Sigurðsson, H

    H. Sigurðsson, H. C. Nguyen, and H. S. Nguyen, Nanophotonics13, 3503 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Ohadi, R

    H. Ohadi, R. L. Gregory, T. Freegarde, Y. G. Rubo, A. V. Kavokin, N. G. Berloff, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Phys. Rev. X6, 031032 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    J. D. Töpfer, H. Sigurdsson, L. Pickup, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Communications Physics3, 2 (2020). ∗ These two authors contributed equally. † dimitrios.trypogeorgos@nanotec.cnr.it

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.