Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Nonflat bands and chiral symmetry in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that a low-energy theory of magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene built from the renormalized normal state widens the flat bands to 48.4 meV and drives the system toward the chiral limit.

desk verdict A serious atomistic Hartree-Fock study showing flat bands widen severalfold and drive U(4)_flat breaking, but the subtraction-scheme dependence leaves the effective theory not yet fully quantitative. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09197 v3 pith:PUOQYABL submitted 2025-01-15 cond-mat.str-el

Miguel Sánchez Sánchez , José González , Tobias Stauber This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords magic-angletwistedbilayergrapheneflat-bandrenormalizationmany-bodyprojectionchirallimitU(4)symmetryHartree-FockvortexCherngaugecorrelatedinsulators
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 argues that a proper low-energy theory of magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene must be built from the interacting normal state, not from the bare non-interacting bands. Starting from an atomistic tight-binding model with 11,908 atoms per moiré cell and a self-consistent Hartree-Fock normal state at charge neutrality, the authors project onto the central four or twenty bands. The flat bandwidth grows from 8.7 meV in the bare model to 48.4 meV at $\epsilon_r=10$, $U=4$ eV, making it comparable to the interaction scale. In the projected four-band model the dominant dispersion components break the $U(4)_\mathrm{flat}$ symmetry while approximately preserving $U(4)_\mathrm{chiral}$, and the wavefunctions flow toward the chiral limit. If correct, this reshapes which correlated insulating and metallic states are expected at charge neutrality.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a many-body projection scheme. A self-consistent Hartree-Fock normal state is computed for the full 11,908-atom tight-binding model with Coulomb and Hubbard interactions, and a projector onto many-body excitations of the central $n_B=4$ or 20 bands is used to obtain an effective Hamiltonian $H=H_0+H_\mathrm{int}$. The single-particle part $H_0$ contains the mean-field dispersion plus a counter-term designed to avoid double-counting the exchange corrections from the integrated valence bands. A second ingredient is the vortex Chern gauge, a choice of smooth Bloch states (except for a Berry-curvature vortex at $\Gamma_M$) obtained by maximizing the localization of Wannier functions; in this basis the dispersion decomposes into valley-sublattice components, making the dominant $h_{x0}\sigma_x+h_{yz}\sigma_y\tau_z$ term explicit and allowing the symmetry generators $G_\mathrm{flat}$ and $G_\mathrm{chiral}$ to be evaluated.

What would settle it

Compute the projected $n_B=4$ dispersion on a fine momentum grid using a Wannier-regularized projector (the $n_B=20$ projector is ill-defined at fine grids due to band touchings) at $\epsilon_r=10$, $U=4$ eV; if the resulting bandwidth and the $h_{x0}+h_{yz}$ amplitude differ substantially from the reported 48.4 meV and the 20.99 meV value at $\Gamma_M$, the projection counter-term is not exact.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that integrating out high-energy ('remote') bands changes the low-energy theory in two linked ways. First, the flat bands widen strongly: the effective bandwidth in the renormalized normal state is 15.3 meV at $\epsilon_r=50$, $U=0.5$ eV and 48.4 meV at $\epsilon_r=10$, $U=4$ eV, compared with 8.7 meV for the bare bands; the authors interpret this as an interaction-induced shift of the magic angle toward lower values. Second, the flat-band wavefunctions flow toward perfect sublattice polarization and particle-hole symmetry, the chiral limit. In the $n_B=4$ vortex Chern basis, the projected dispersion is dominated by $h_{x0}(k)\sigma_x + h_{yz}(k)\sigma_y\tau_z$, a term that breaks $U(4)_\mathrm{flat}$ but commutes with $U(4)_\mathrm{chiral}$. Hartree-Fock solutions at charge neutrality then give insulating Kramers intervalley coherent (KIVC), orbital polarized (OP), and quantum anomalous Hall (QAH) states, while valley polarized (VP), time-reversal invariant intervalley coherent (TIVC), and spin polarized (SP) states remain metallic because the wide dispersion forces gapless band crossings.

Load-bearing premise

The counter-term in the projected Hamiltonian is assumed to remove exactly the double counting of exchange interactions from the integrated valence bands; if it is incomplete, the reported renormalized bandwidth is not the true one.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Low-energy models of MATBG should be derived from the renormalized symmetric state; using bare bands underestimates the flat-band width by a factor of about five at strong coupling.
  • The magic angle is predicted to shift to a smaller value with increasing interaction strength, with a band inversion expected between $0.9^\circ$ and $1.0^\circ$ for $\epsilon_r=10$, $U=4$ eV.
  • At charge neutrality, the Kramers intervalley coherent and orbital polarized states (and the quantum anomalous Hall state) are insulating, whereas valley polarized, time-reversal invariant intervalley coherent, and spin polarized states are metallic, so the competition among correlated states depends on the renormalized dispersion.
  • The $U(4)_\mathrm{flat}$ symmetry is broken by the dominant dispersion term, while $U(4)_\mathrm{chiral}$ remains an approximate symmetry independently of the bandwidth.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, if the flat bandwidth truly reaches the interaction scale, strong-coupling arguments that set $H_0 \approx 0$ may need revision, and ordered states and superconductivity should be re-evaluated with the renormalized dispersion.
  • Beyond the paper, the dependence of the results on the subtraction scheme suggests that the dielectric environment may select different effective low-energy physics; this connection to screening is not developed in the paper.
  • A testable extension is to measure the flat-band width in devices with different screening strengths; the predicted linear-in-$1/\epsilon_r$ growth of the bandwidth and the shift of the magic angle could be checked by tunnelling spectroscopy.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 authors study an atomistic tight-binding model of MATBG at θ=1.05° with Coulomb and Hubbard interactions, construct a symmetry-preserving Hartree-Fock normal state at charge neutrality, and project onto the central 4 or 20 bands. They derive a renormalized one-body Hamiltonian H0 with a counter-term to avoid double counting. They find that the flat bandwidth grows from 8.7 meV to 15.3 meV at ϵr=50, U=0.5 eV and to 48.4 meV at ϵr=10, U=4 eV, and that the flat-band wavefunctions flow toward sublattice polarization and particle-hole symmetry (the 'chiral' limit). The dominant dispersion components hx0σx+hyzσyτz break U(4)flat while preserving U(4)chiral. Hartree-Fock calculations in the four-band model yield insulating KIVC, OP and QAH states and metallic VP, TIVC, SP and NSM states at neutrality, with KIVC lowest in energy.

Significance. If the central result holds, it is significant because it challenges the common assumption that remote bands only weakly renormalize the flat bands: the bandwidth becomes comparable to the interaction scale, and the resulting symmetry structure ('chiral-nonflat' U(4)chiral) changes the expected ordering of correlated insulators. The paper's machinery—derived projection counter-terms, vortex-Chern gauge construction, and explicit symmetry decomposition—is a useful template for atomistic interacting studies of moiré systems. Strengths include that no parameter is fitted to reproduce a target result: ϵr and U are physical inputs, and the bandwidth and symmetry components are outputs of the self-consistent calculation. The main claims are falsifiable, for instance through the predicted renormalization of the magic angle and the metallic-versus-insulating distinction at neutrality.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. V and Appendix E] The central phase classification in Table I and Figs. 3–4 is obtained from the 'average' subtraction scheme only. Appendix E reports that under the 'graphene' subtraction the flat bands undergo a topological phase transition for ϵr between 50 and 10 and that the nB=4 projector becomes ill-defined at strong coupling. Since the paper does not establish that the average scheme is the physically correct double-counting convention, the claimed ordering (KIVC/OP insulating; VP/TIVC/SP metallic) is not shown to be independent of the subtraction protocol.
  2. [Eq. (B12), Appendix B] The counter-term in Eq. (B12), which combines the mean-field dispersion with exchange corrections from the integrated valence bands, is assumed to exactly remove the double counting between εMF and the projected interaction. No independent numerical check demonstrates that the resulting H0 reproduces the correct renormalized dispersion when fluctuations are included. If the counter-term is incomplete, the projected bandwidth (48.4 meV at ϵr=10, U=4 eV) and the dominance of hx0σx+hyzσyτz are not the true renormalized values.
  3. [Appendix F] The nB=20 projection relies on a band projector that is ill-defined on fine momentum grids because of band touchings near the ΓM MM line; the paper assumes a Wannier-regularized projector would give the same result but does not implement or test it. Since the nB=20 calculation is used to support the claim that the widening is not an artifact of the four-band truncation, this assumption should be verified or the nB=20 claim should be softened.
  4. [Appendix B and Sec. II] The self-consistent normal state is computed on a 6×6 Brillouin zone grid, with no convergence study in Nc; the final band structures are obtained on finer grids with the fixed 6×6 Fock matrix. Given that the central quantitative claim is the growth of the flat bandwidth from 8.7 meV to 48.4 meV, the absence of a convergence check leaves a systematic uncertainty that could be comparable to the reported effect.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title page] The affiliation contains the typo 'Insituto'; it should be 'Instituto'.
  2. [Sec. III] The text 'by diagonalizing the projeccted valley' contains a typo: 'projeccted' should be 'projected'.
  3. [Fig. 3(c)] The three data points in Fig. 3(c) correspond to different U values (0 eV, 0.5 eV, 4 eV) in addition to different 1/ϵr values, so the stated linear growth with 1/ϵr is not isolated from the simultaneous variation of U.
  4. [Appendix C, Eq. (C1)] The sign convention for ηrr' is not fully specified: the text says '±1 depending if the pair r,r′ is part of a clockwise or counterclockwise triangle' but does not state which orientation gives +1, which is needed to reproduce the valley operator.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central bandwidth and symmetry results are computed outputs; only minor self-citations and scheme caveats.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained and not circular. Inputs are the fixed tight-binding and Coulomb/Hubbard Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) with physical parameters εr and U; the outputs are the self-consistent HF normal-state band structure, the projected H0 via the derived counter-term Eq. (B12), the vortex-Chern components hij(k), and the phase energies of Table I. No parameter is fitted to reproduce a target bandwidth or phase ordering: the 8.7→48.4 meV bandwidth growth, the increase of the σz eigenvalues and C2zP singular values, and the dominance of hx0 and hyz are all computed outputs. The statement that hx0σx + hyzσyτz breaks U(4)_flat while preserving U(4)_chiral is algebraically true given the decomposition, but the dominance of those components is an output (Table D2), not an input. The counter-term in Eq. (B12) is derived from the projection algebra PV P, not tuned; the 'average' subtraction is a convention, and Appendix E's topological phase transition under 'graphene' subtraction is a robustness caveat, not a circular reduction. Appendix F's admission that the nB=20 projector is ill-defined on fine grids is an implementation limitation, and the Wannier-regularized continuation is an assumption rather than a fit. Self-citations appear — Ref. [106] supplies a proof of [Hint, C2zP]=0 and Ref. [95] (in preparation) supplies the renormalized magic angle — but they are peripheral and do not carry the central claim; Refs. [76] and [70] are external. Hence no significant circularity; the score of 2 reflects only the minor non-load-bearing self-citations.

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

The central claim depends on interaction parameters chosen by hand (ϵr, U) and on standard tight-binding and relaxation models from prior literature. No new particles or forces are introduced. The main built-in assumption is the exactness of the counter-term in the many-body projection, which is specific to this paper and is the most fragile input.

free parameters (3)
  • relative permittivity ϵr = 10 and 50
    Chosen to represent strong and weak screening; the bandwidth grows approximately linearly with 1/ϵr. Not fitted to experimental data.
  • Hubbard on-site interaction U = 4 eV and 0.5 eV
    Chosen alongside ϵr as representative strongly and weakly interacting cases; not fitted to a target.
  • twist angle θ = 1.05°
    Fixed near the nominal magic angle; the paper argues interactions renormalize the effective magic angle, but this is a suggestion, not a fitted input.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Slater-Koster tight-binding hopping parameterization of Refs. [82,83] accurately describes the π bands of graphene and twisted bilayer graphene.
    Used throughout Appendix A to define HTB and the full band structure.
  • domain assumption The in-plane lattice relaxation model of Ref. [77] reliably describes the relaxed 1.05° structure.
    Relaxation changes hopping parameters; adopted in Appendix A without independent verification.
  • domain assumption A symmetry-preserving Hartree-Fock mean-field state is a valid starting point at charge neutrality; fluctuations beyond one loop are ignored.
    The whole normal-state construction and projection rest on this approximation (Section II and Appendix B).
  • ad hoc to paper The counter-term in Eq. (B12) exactly removes double counting of the valence-band Hartree-Fock potentials.
    This is a construction specific to this paper; if incomplete, H0's nonflat bands are miscalculated. The paper notes band touchings make the nB=20 projector ill-defined on fine grids (Appendix F).
  • domain assumption The projected particle-hole and sublattice operators C2zP and σz are obtained by unitary normalization of the projected microscopic operators, and the difference from the exact operators is negligible.
    Used to define symmetry generators in Appendix C; the paper explicitly states C2zP ≠ C2zP and σz ≠ σz, so the symmetry classification is approximate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonflat bands and chiral symmetry in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PUOQYABL

@misc{pith2026250109197,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonflat bands and chiral symmetry in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PUOQYABL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09197}
}
abstract

In this work, we study an interacting tight-binding model of magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene (MATBG), with a twist angle of $1.05^\circ$. We derive effective theories based on a mean-field normal state at charge neutrality, thereby including the renormalizations coming from integrating out high-energy modes. In these theories, the flat bands display a sizable increase of the bandwidth, suggesting the renormalization of the magic angle. Additionally, the corresponding wavefunctions flow towards the limit of perfect particle-hole symmetry and sublattice polarization (the 'chiral' limit). We further represent the flat bands in the 'vortex Chern' basis and discuss the implications on the dynamics, regarding the 'flat' and 'chiral' symmetries of MATBG, as manifested in the symmetry-broken states at neutrality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.09197 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Many-body projection scheme. First, we obtain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: (a) Band structure of the symmetric state for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (a) Comparison of the bare bands, the bands of [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: (a) Band structure of the Kramers intervalley [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Review of the tight-binding method applicable to the properties of moir\'e superlattices

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-11 conditional

    A review of atomistic tight-binding Hamiltonians and numerical methods for moiré superlattices, with worked examples but no new research results.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

107 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    K. F. Mak and J. Shan, Semiconductor moir´ e materials, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 686695 (2022)

    2022

  2. [2]

    K. P. Nuckolls and A. Yazdani, A microscopic perspec- tive on moir´ e materials, Nature Reviews Materials 9, 460480 (2024)

    2024

  3. [3]

    Tarnopolsky, A

    G. Tarnopolsky, A. J. Kruchkov, and A. Vishwanath, Origin of magic angles in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 106405 (2019)

    2019

  4. [4]

    J. Liu, J. Liu, and X. Dai, Pseudo landau level represen- tation of twisted bilayer graphene: Band topology and implications on the correlated insulating phase, Phys. Rev. B 99, 155415 (2019)

    2019

  5. [5]

    Z.-D. Song, B. Lian, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Twisted bilayer graphene. ii. stable symmetry anomaly, Phys. Rev. B 103, 205412 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    Bultinck, E

    N. Bultinck, E. Khalaf, S. Liu, S. Chatterjee, A. Vish- wanath, and M. P. Zaletel, Ground state and hidden symmetry of magic-angle graphene at even integer fill- ing, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031034 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    Lian, Z.-D

    B. Lian, Z.-D. Song, N. Regnault, D. K. Efetov, A. Yaz- dani, and B. A. Bernevig, Twisted bilayer graphene. iv. exact insulator ground states and phase diagram, Phys. Rev. B 103, 205414 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    B. A. Bernevig, B. Lian, A. Cowsik, F. Xie, N. Regnault, and Z.-D. Song, Twisted bilayer graphene. v. exact an- alytic many-body excitations in coulomb hamiltonians: Charge gap, goldstone modes, and absence of cooper pairing, Phys. Rev. B 103, 205415 (2021)

    2021

Show all 107 references
  1. [9]

    Xie and A

    M. Xie and A. H. MacDonald, Nature of the correlated insulator states in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 097601 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    S. Liu, E. Khalaf, J. Y. Lee, and A. Vishwanath, Ne- matic topological semimetal and insulator in magic- angle bilayer graphene at charge neutrality, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013033 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    D. E. Parker, T. Soejima, J. Hauschild, M. P. Zaletel, and N. Bultinck, Strain-induced quantum phase tran- sitions in magic-angle graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 027601 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Soejima, D

    T. Soejima, D. E. Parker, N. Bultinck, J. Hauschild, and M. P. Zaletel, Efficient simulation of moir´ e materials using the density matrix renormalization group, Phys. Rev. B 102, 205111 (2020). 6

    2020

  5. [13]

    J. S. Hofmann, E. Khalaf, A. Vishwanath, E. Berg, and J. Y. Lee, Fermionic monte carlo study of a realistic model of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011061 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Wagner, Y

    G. Wagner, Y. H. Kwan, N. Bultinck, S. H. Simon, and S. A. Parameswaran, Global phase diagram of the nor- mal state of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 156401 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    Wang, G.-D

    Y.-J. Wang, G.-D. Zhou, B. Lian, and Z.-D. Song, Electron-phonon coupling in the topological heavy fermion model of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 111, 035110 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Wang and O

    X. Wang and O. Vafek, Theory of correlated chern in- sulators in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 14, 021042 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    X. Lu, P. Stepanov, W. Yang, M. Xie, M. A. Aamir, I. Das, C. Urgell, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, G. Zhang, A. Bachtold, A. H. MacDonald, and D. K. Efetov, Su- perconductors, orbital magnets and correlated states in magic-angle bilayer graphene, Nature 574, 653657 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Saito, J

    Y. Saito, J. Ge, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and A. F. Young, Independent superconductors and correlated in- sulators in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 16, 926930 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Stepanov, I

    P. Stepanov, I. Das, X. Lu, A. Fahimniya, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, F. H. L. Koppens, J. Lischner, L. Levitov, and D. K. Efetov, Untying the insulating and supercon- ducting orders in magic-angle graphene, Nature 583, 375378 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    J. Yu, B. A. Foutty, Z. Han, M. E. Barber, Y. Schattner, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Phillips, Z.-X. Shen, S. A. Kivelson, and B. E. Feldman, Correlated hofs- tadter spectrum and flavour phase diagram in magic- angle twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 18, 825831 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    K. P. Nuckolls, M. Oh, D. Wong, B. Lian, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yazdani, Strongly correlated chern insulators in magic-angle twisted bi- layer graphene, Nature 588, 610615 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Stepanov, M

    P. Stepanov, M. Xie, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, X. Lu, A. H. MacDonald, B. A. Bernevig, and D. K. Efetov, Competing zero-field chern insulators in superconduct- ing twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 197701 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    A. L. Sharpe, E. J. Fox, A. W. Barnard, J. Finney, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. A. Kastner, and D. Goldhaber-Gordon, Emergent ferromagnetism near three-quarters filling in twisted bilayer graphene, Sci- ence 365, 605608 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    A. T. Pierce, Y. Xie, J. M. Park, E. Khalaf, S. H. Lee, Y. Cao, D. E. Parker, P. R. Forrester, S. Chen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Vishwanath, P. Jarillo- Herrero, and A. Yacoby, Unconventional sequence of correlated chern insulators in magic-angle twisted bi- layer graphen...

    2021

  17. [25]

    I. Das, X. Lu, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, Z.-D. Song, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. A. Bernevig, and D. K. Efetov, Symmetry-broken chern insulators and rashba-like landau-level crossings in magic-angle bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 17, 710714 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Zhang, Y

    L. Zhang, Y. Wang, R. Hu, P. Wan, O. Zheliuk, M. Liang, X. Peng, Y.-J. Zeng, and J. Ye, Correlated states in strained twisted bilayer graphenes away from the magic angle, Nano Letters 22, 32043211 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Kerelsky, L

    A. Kerelsky, L. J. McGilly, D. M. Kennes, L. Xian, M. Yankowitz, S. Chen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, C. Dean, A. Rubio, and A. N. Pasupathy, Maxi- mized electron interactions at the magic angle in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature 572, 95100 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    Adhikari, K

    K. Adhikari, K. Seo, K. S. D. Beach, and B. Uchoa, Strongly interacting phases in twisted bilayer graphene at the magic angle, Phys. Rev. B 110, L121123 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    D. Wong, K. P. Nuckolls, M. Oh, B. Lian, Y. Xie, S. Jeon, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yazdani, Cascade of electronic transitions in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Nature 582, 198202 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Zondiner, A

    U. Zondiner, A. Rozen, D. Rodan-Legrain, Y. Cao, R. Queiroz, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Oreg, F. von Oppen, A. Stern, E. Berg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and S. Ilani, Cascade of phase transitions and dirac revivals in magic-angle graphene, Nature 582, 203208 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    G. Rai, L. Crippa, D. C˘ alug˘ aru, H. Hu, F. Paoletti, L. de’ Medici, A. Georges, B. A. Bernevig, R. Valent ´ ı, G. Sangiovanni, and T. Wehling, Dynamical correla- tions and order in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 14, 031045 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Datta, M

    A. Datta, M. J. Caldern, A. Camjayi, and E. Bascones, Heavy quasiparticles and cascades without symmetry breaking in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Commu- nications 14, 10.1038/s41467-023-40754-4 (2023)

    2023 doi

  25. [33]

    H. Hu, G. Rai, L. Crippa, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, D. C˘ alug˘ aru, T. Wehling, G. Sangiovanni, R. Valent ´ ı, A. M. Tsvelik, and B. A. Bernevig, Symmetric kondo lattice states in doped strained twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 166501 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    H. Hu, B. A. Bernevig, and A. M. Tsvelik, Kondo lattice model of magic-angle twisted-bilayer graphene: Hund’s rule, local-moment fluctuations, and low-energy effec- tive theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 026502 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Zhou, Y.-J

    G.-D. Zhou, Y.-J. Wang, N. Tong, and Z.-D. Song, Kondo phase in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 109, 045419 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Unconventional su- perconductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Nature 556, 4350 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Y. Cao, D. Rodan-Legrain, J. M. Park, N. F. Q. Yuan, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, R. M. Fernandes, L. Fu, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nematicity and competing orders in superconducting magic-angle graphene, Science 372, 264271 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    M. Oh, K. P. Nuckolls, D. Wong, R. L. Lee, X. Liu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and A. Yazdani, Evidence for unconventional superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature 600, 240245 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    X. Liu, Z. Wang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, O. Vafek, and J. I. A. Li, Tuning electron correlation in magic- angle twisted bilayer graphene using coulomb screening, Science 371, 12611265 (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    H. S. Arora, R. Polski, Y. Zhang, A. Thomson, Y. Choi, H. Kim, Z. Lin, I. Z. Wilson, X. Xu, J.-H. Chu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Alicea, and S. Nadj- Perge, Superconductivity in metallic twisted bilayer graphene stabilized by wse2, Nature583, 379384 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Gonz´ alez and T

    J. Gonz´ alez and T. Stauber, Kohn-luttinger supercon- ductivity in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 122, 026801 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    Wang, G.-D

    Y.-J. Wang, G.-D. Zhou, S.-Y. Peng, B. Lian, and Z.- D. Song, Molecular pairing in twisted bilayer graphene superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 146001 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Christos, S

    M. Christos, S. Sachdev, and M. S. Scheurer, Nodal band-off-diagonal superconductivity in twisted graphene superlattices, Nature Communications 14, 10.1038/s41467-023-42471-4 (2023)

    2023 doi

  36. [44]

    Ingham, T

    J. Ingham, T. Li, M. S. Scheurer, and H. D. Scam- mell, Quadratic dirac fermions and the competition of ordered states in twisted bilayer graphene (2023), arXiv:2308.00748 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Cea and F

    T. Cea and F. Guinea, Coulomb interaction, phonons, and superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene, Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, 10.1073/pnas.2107874118 (2021)

    2021 doi

  38. [46]

    M. Long, A. Jimeno-Pozo, H. Sainz-Cruz, P. A. Pantalen, and F. Guinea, Evolution of supercon- ductivity in twisted graphene multilayers, Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, 10.1073/pnas.2405259121 (2024)

    2024 doi

  39. [47]

    S´ anchez S´ anchez, I

    M. S´ anchez S´ anchez, I. D ´ ıaz, J. Gonz´ alez, and T. Stauber, Nematic versus kekul´ e phases in twisted bi- layer graphene under hydrostatic pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 266603 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Y. Xie, A. T. Pierce, J. M. Park, D. E. Parker, E. Kha- laf, P. Ledwith, Y. Cao, S. H. Lee, S. Chen, P. R. Forrester, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Vishwanath, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and A. Yacoby, Fractional chern insu- lators in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Nature 600,...

    2021

  41. [49]

    Saito, F

    Y. Saito, F. Yang, J. Ge, X. Liu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. I. A. Li, E. Berg, and A. F. Young, Isospin pomeranchuk effect in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature 592, 220224 (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    Rozen, J

    A. Rozen, J. M. Park, U. Zondiner, Y. Cao, D. Rodan- Legrain, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Oreg, A. Stern, E. Berg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and S. Ilani, Entropic evi- dence for a pomeranchuk effect in magic-angle graphene, Nature 592, 214219 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Y. Cao, D. Chowdhury, D. Rodan-Legrain, O. Rubies- Bigorda, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, T. Senthil, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Strange metal in magic-angle graphene with near planckian dissipation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 076801 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Jaoui, I

    A. Jaoui, I. Das, G. Di Battista, J. Dez-Mrida, X. Lu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, H. Ishizuka, L. Levitov, and D. K. Efetov, Quantum critical behaviour in magic- angle twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Physics 18, 633638 (2022)

    2022

  45. [53]

    Andrews and A

    B. Andrews and A. Soluyanov, Fractional quantum hall states for moir´ e superstructures in the hofstadter regime, Phys. Rev. B 101, 235312 (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    S. Carr, S. Fang, Z. Zhu, and E. Kaxiras, Exact contin- uum model for low-energy electronic states of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 013001 (2019)

    2019

  47. [55]

    S. Fang, S. Carr, Z. Zhu, D. Massatt, and E. Kaxiras, Angle-dependent ab initiolow-energy hamiltonians for a relaxed twisted bilayer graphene heterostructure (2019), arXiv:1908.00058 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2019 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Kang and O

    J. Kang and O. Vafek, Pseudomagnetic fields, particle- hole asymmetry, and microscopic effective continuum hamiltonians of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 107, 075408 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Koshino and N

    M. Koshino and N. N. T. Nam, Effective continuum model for relaxed twisted bilayer graphene and moir´ e electron-phonon interaction, Phys. Rev. B 101, 195425 (2020)

    2020

  50. [58]

    Bistritzer and A

    R. Bistritzer and A. H. MacDonald, Moir´ e bands in twisted double-layer graphene, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, 12233 (2011), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.1108174108

    2011 doi

  51. [59]

    S. Carr, S. Fang, H. C. Po, A. Vishwanath, and E. Kaxi- ras, Derivation of wannier orbitals and minimal-basis tight-binding hamiltonians for twisted bilayer graphene: First-principles approach, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033072 (2019)

    2019

  52. [60]

    Koshino, N

    M. Koshino, N. F. Q. Yuan, T. Koretsune, M. Ochi, K. Kuroki, and L. Fu, Maximally localized wannier or- bitals and the extended hubbard model for twisted bi- layer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031087 (2018)

    2018

  53. [61]

    Kang and O

    J. Kang and O. Vafek, Symmetry, maximally localized wannier states, and a low-energy model for twisted bi- layer graphene narrow bands, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031088 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    H. C. Po, L. Zou, T. Senthil, and A. Vishwanath, Faith- ful tight-binding models and fragile topology of magic- angle bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 99, 195455 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    M. J. Calder´ on and E. Bascones, Interactions in the 8- orbital model for twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 102, 155149 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Vafek and J

    O. Vafek and J. Kang, Lattice model for the coulomb interacting chiral limit of magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene: Symmetries, obstructions, and excitations, Phys. Rev. B 104, 075143 (2021)

    2021

  57. [65]

    J. Cao, M. Wang, S.-F. Qian, C.-C. Liu, and Y. Yao, Ab initio four-band wannier tight-binding model for generic twisted graphene systems, Phys. Rev. B 104, L081403 (2021)

    2021

  58. [66]

    Bennett, D

    D. Bennett, D. T. Larson, L. Sharma, S. Carr, and E. Kaxiras, Twisted bilayer graphene revisited: Mini- mal two-band model for low-energy bands, Phys. Rev. B 109, 155422 (2024)

    2024

  59. [67]

    N. F. Q. Yuan and L. Fu, Model for the metal-insulator transition in graphene superlattices and beyond, Phys. Rev. B 98, 045103 (2018)

    2018

  60. [68]

    P. J. Ledwith, J. Dong, A. Vishwanath, and E. Khalaf, Nonlocal moments in the chern bands of twisted bilayer graphene (2024), arXiv:2408.16761 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    W. Miao, C. Li, X. Han, D. Pan, and X. Dai, Trun- cated atomic plane wave method for subband structure calculations of moir´ e systems, Phys. Rev. B107, 125112 (2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    Song and B

    Z.-D. Song and B. A. Bernevig, Magic-angle twisted bi- layer graphene as a topological heavy fermion problem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 047601 (2022)

    2022

  63. [72]

    H. Yoo, R. Engelke, S. Carr, S. Fang, K. Zhang, P. Cazeaux, S. H. Sung, R. Hovden, A. W. Tsen, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, G.-C. Yi, M. Kim, M. Luskin, E. B. Tadmor, E. Kaxiras, and P. Kim, Atomic and electronic reconstruction at the van der waals interface in twisted bilayer g...

    2019

  64. [73]

    Z. Bi, N. F. Q. Yuan, and L. Fu, Designing flat bands by strain, Phys. Rev. B 100, 035448 (2019)

    2019

  65. [74]

    N. P. Kazmierczak, M. Van Winkle, C. Ophus, K. C. Bustillo, S. Carr, H. G. Brown, J. Ciston, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, and D. K. Bediako, Strain fields in twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Materials 20, 956963 (2021)

    2021

  66. [75]

    Potasz, M

    P. Potasz, M. Xie, and A. H. MacDonald, Exact di- agonalization for magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 147203 (2021)

    2021

  67. [76]

    Vafek and J

    O. Vafek and J. Kang, Renormalization group study of hidden symmetry in twisted bilayer graphene with coulomb interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 257602 (2020)

    2020

  68. [77]

    N. N. T. Nam and M. Koshino, Lattice relaxation and energy band modulation in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 96, 075311 (2017)

    2017

  69. [78]

    P. J. Ledwith, G. Tarnopolsky, E. Khalaf, and A. Vish- wanath, Fractional chern insulator states in twisted bi- layer graphene: An analytical approach, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023237 (2020)

    2020

  70. [79]

    B. A. Bernevig, Z.-D. Song, N. Regnault, and B. Lian, Twisted bilayer graphene. iii. interacting hamiltonian and exact symmetries, Phys. Rev. B103, 205413 (2021)

    2021

  71. [80]

    J. M. Pizarro, M. R¨ osner, R. Thomale, R. Valent ´ ı, and T. O. Wehling, Internal screening and dielectric engi- neering in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 100, 161102 (2019)

    2019

  72. [81]

    T. I. Vanhala and L. Pollet, Constrained random phase approximation of the effective coulomb interaction in lattice models of twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 102, 035154 (2020)

    2020

  73. [82]

    Trambly de Laissardire, D

    G. Trambly de Laissardire, D. Mayou, and L. Magaud, Localization of dirac electrons in rotated graphene bi- layers, Nano Letters 10, 804 (2010), pMID: 20121163, https://doi.org/10.1021/nl902948m

    2010 doi

  74. [83]

    Moon and M

    P. Moon and M. Koshino, Energy spectrum and quan- tum hall effect in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195458 (2012)

    2012

  75. [84]

    Gonz´ alez and T

    J. Gonz´ alez and T. Stauber, Magnetic phases from com- peting hubbard and extended coulomb interactions in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 104, 115110 (2021)

    2021

  76. [85]

    Z. Song, Z. Wang, W. Shi, G. Li, C. Fang, and B. A. Bernevig, All magic angles in twisted bilayer graphene are topological, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 036401 (2019)

    2019

  77. [86]

    Lopez-Bezanilla and J

    A. Lopez-Bezanilla and J. L. Lado, Electrical band flat- tening, valley flux, and superconductivity in twisted tri- layer graphene, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033357 (2020)

    2020

  78. [87]

    Y. H. Kwan, G. Wagner, T. Soejima, M. P. Zaletel, S. H. Simon, S. A. Parameswaran, and N. Bultinck, Kekul´ e spiral order at all nonzero integer fillings in twisted bi- layer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041063 (2021)

    2021

  79. [88]

    F. Xie, Y. Fang, L. Chen, J. Cano, and Q. Si, Chern bands’ optimally localized wannier functions and frac- tional chern insulators (2024), arXiv:2407.08920 [cond- mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  80. [89]

    T. M. Gunawardana, A. M. Turner, and R. Barnett, Op- timally localized single-band wannier functions for two- dimensional chern insulators, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023046 (2024)

    2024

  81. [90]

    T. Wang, D. E. Parker, T. Soejima, J. Hauschild, S. Anand, N. Bultinck, and M. P. Zaletel, Ground-state order in magic-angle graphene at filling ν = −3: A full- scale density matrix renormalization group study, Phys. Rev. B 108, 235128 (2023)

    2023

  82. [91]

    Giuliani and G

    G. Giuliani and G. Vignale, Quantum Theory of the Electron Liquid (Cambridge University Press, 2005)

    2005

  83. [92]

    Cea and F

    T. Cea and F. Guinea, Band structure and insulating states driven by coulomb interaction in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 102, 045107 (2020)

    2020

  84. [93]

    Escudero, Diagrammatic perturbation approach to moir´ e bands in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys

    F. Escudero, Diagrammatic perturbation approach to moir´ e bands in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 110, 045442 (2024)

    2024

  85. [94]

    G. Yu, Y. Wang, M. I. Katsnelson, and S. Yuan, Origin of the magic angle in twisted bilayer graphene from hy- bridization of valence and conduction bands, Phys. Rev. B 108, 045138 (2023)

    2023

  86. [95]

    S´ anchez S´ anchez, T

    M. S´ anchez S´ anchez, T. Stauber and J. Gonz´ alez, in preparation. The magic angle is found to be between 0.9◦ and 1.0◦ for ϵr = 10, U = 4 eV

  87. [96]

    J. M. B. Lopes dos Santos, N. M. R. Peres, and A. H. Castro Neto, Continuum model of the twisted graphene bilayer, Phys. Rev. B 86, 155449 (2012)

    2012

  88. [97]

    J. C. Slater and G. F. Koster, Simplified lcao method for the periodic potential problem, Phys. Rev. 94, 1498 (1954)

    1954

  89. [98]

    K. N. Kudin, G. E. Scuseria, and E. Cancs, A black-box self-consistent field convergence algorithm: One step closer, The Journal of Chemical Physics 116, 82558261 (2002)

    2002

  90. [99]

    Herzog-Arbeitman, J

    J. Herzog-Arbeitman, J. Yu, D. Clugru, H. Hu, N. Reg- nault, O. Vafek, J. Kang, and B. A. Bernevig, Heavy fermions as an efficient representation of atomistic strain and relaxation in twisted bilayer graphene (2024), arXiv:2405.13880 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2024

  91. [100]

    Blason and M

    A. Blason and M. Fabrizio, Local kekul´ e distortion turns twisted bilayer graphene into topological mott insula- tors and superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 106, 235112 (2022)

    2022

  92. [101]

    H. Shi, W. Miao, and X. Dai, Moir´ e optical phonons dancing with heavy electrons in magic- angle twisted bilayer graphene (2024), arXiv:2402.11824 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  93. [102]

    Angeli, E

    M. Angeli, E. Tosatti, and M. Fabrizio, Valley jahn- teller effect in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041010 (2019)

    2019

  94. [103]

    Y. H. Kwan, G. Wagner, N. Bultinck, S. H. Simon, E. Berg, and S. A. Parameswaran, Electron-phonon cou- pling and competing kekul´ e orders in twisted bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B 110, 085160 (2024)

    2024

  95. [104]

    M. S. S´ anchez and T. Stauber, The correlated insulators of magic angle twisted bilayer graphene at zero and one quantum of magnetic flux: a tight-binding study (2023), arXiv:2308.01997 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2023 arXiv

  96. [105]

    Chatterjee, T

    S. Chatterjee, T. Wang, E. Berg, and M. P. Zale- tel, Inter-valley coherent order and isospin fluctuation mediated superconductivity in rhombohedral trilayer graphene, Nature Communications 13, 10.1038/s41467- 022-33561-w (2022)

    2022 doi

  97. [106]

    S´ anchez S´ anchez and T

    M. S´ anchez S´ anchez and T. Stauber, Correlated phases and topological phase transition in twisted bilayer graphene at one quantum of magnetic flux, Phys. Rev. B 109, 195167 (2024)

    2024

  98. [107]

    Alexandradinata, X

    A. Alexandradinata, X. Dai, and B. A. Bernevig, Wilson-loop characterization of inversion-symmetric topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 89, 155114 (2014). 9 Appendix A: Lattice geometry and tight-binding model In a graphene monolayer the lattice vectors are a1 = a0(1/2, √ 3/2...

    2014

  99. [108]

    [82, 83]

    hopping integral given in Refs. [82, 83]. The hopping function depends on the distance between atoms and the angle of the radius vector with the z axis, t(r) = −Vppπ(r) 1 − cos2(φr) + Vppσ(r) cos2(φr), Vppπ(r) = V 0 ppπ exp − (r − acc)/r0 , V ppσ(r) = V 0 ppσ exp − (r − d0)/r0...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.