Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 40 references

Robust and Symmetric Magnetic Field Dependency of Superconducting Diode Effect in Asymmetric Dirac Semimetal SQUIDs

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Asymmetric Dirac-semimetal SQUIDs show a superconducting diode whose switching-current difference stays nearly constant from -10 to +10 mT.

desk verdict Incremental but useful: MBE-grown Cd3As2 SQUIDs show a field-symmetric switching-current difference that is plausible but rests on one device and a fixed voltage threshold; worth refereeing with requested robustness checks. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21861 v1 pith:X4BTDZDQ submitted 2025-05-28 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci

H.C. Travaglini , J.J. Cuozzo , K.R. Sapkota , I.A. Leahy , A.D. Rice , K. Alberi , W. Pan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 74.50.+r
keywords superconductingdiodeeffectzero-fieldasymmetricSQUIDDiracsemimetalCd3As2molecularbeamepitaxyhelicalspintexturemagnetic-field-independent
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

The paper reports a superconducting diode effect in asymmetric SQUIDs patterned on MBE-grown Cd3As2 thin films, and claims that the diode's size is independent of the strength and polarity of an out-of-plane magnetic field from -10 to +10 mT. At zero field the positive and negative switching currents differ by about 1.5 µA, and this difference stays nearly constant across the field range rather than changing sign as in conventional field-tuned diodes. If correct, this means a single compact diode could rectify signals even when stray magnetic fields in a circuit reverse direction, removing a practical obstacle to superconducting electronics. The authors tie the zero-field effect to surface-bulk coupling in the Dirac semimetal acting through the SQUID's arm asymmetry, and speculate that a helical magnetic texture may explain the field robustness.

What carries the argument

Two ingredients carry the argument. The first is the asymmetric SQUID geometry: two aluminum/Cd3As2/aluminum Josephson junctions of different widths (about 230 nm and 500 nm) on the same epitaxial film, connected in a loop. The second is a two-band Ginzburg-Landau free energy in which each junction has two superconducting order parameters; a change of variables produces a current-phase relationship $I_s(\theta,\psi)$ whose equilibrium phase $\psi$ breaks time-reversal symmetry. In the SQUID, fluxoid quantization relates the two arm phases, and the antiferromagnetic-like ground state $\psi_a = -\psi_b$ suppresses the zero-field diode when the arms are symmetric. The paper uses this model to explain the zero-field SDE in the asymmetric device, while explicitly leaving the magnetic-field resilience unexplained beyond a speculation about helimagnetic order and helical spin texture.

What would settle it

Repeat the field sweep while extracting switching currents from several voltage thresholds (for example 5, 20 and 50 µV) or from the peak of $\mathrm{d}V/\mathrm{d}I$; if the $I_c^- - I_c^+$ plateau changes with threshold or acquires a slope versus field, the field-independence claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an asymmetric SQUID made from an MBE-grown Cd3As2 thin film acts as a superconducting diode at zero magnetic field, with positive and negative switching currents differing by roughly 1.5 µA, and that this difference $I_c^- - I_c^+$ remains nearly constant for out-of-plane magnetic fields between -10 and +10 mT. At -15 mT the difference is still 0.9 µA, and it falls to zero only where the field destroys the supercurrent. The authors describe this as a robust, symmetric-in-field diode effect, distinct from field-induced diode effects whose efficiency changes sign when the field reverses.

Load-bearing premise

The claim presupposes that the 20-microvolt voltage threshold used to mark each switching current captures the true transition equally for both current directions at every field; if the transitions are rounded, the flat 1.5-microamp difference could be a measurement artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Stray-field-tolerant rectification becomes feasible: a diode with this property would keep its rectification direction and strength while random circuit fields around ±10 mT fluctuate in sign.
  • MBE growth plus direct aluminum deposition means the device is compatible with semiconductor-style fabrication, unlike the exfoliated multiferroic junctions that previously showed symmetric-in-field diode effects.
  • Because zero-field SDE appears in both MBE-grown and exfoliated Cd3As2 devices, the effect is intrinsic to this material rather than a growth artifact.
  • The diode vanishes well below the superconducting transition temperature, so its operation window is restricted to low temperatures, at least in this device.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct check of the threshold concern would be to repeat the field dependence with several voltage thresholds; if the plateau is threshold-dependent, the claimed field-independence is a measurement artifact.
  • Comparing symmetric and asymmetric SQUID arms on the same MBE film at finite field would isolate whether the flat $I_c^- - I_c^+$ response comes from the arm asymmetry or from the Cd3As2 itself.
  • The proposed helical-spin explanation could be tested by local magnetometry or by replacing Cd3As2 with a non-magnetic Dirac semimetal; if the symmetric-in-field diode persists without any magnetic order, the helimagnetic speculation would be unnecessary.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports measurements of the superconducting diode effect (SDE) in an asymmetric SQUID fabricated from an MBE-grown Cd3As2 thin film with Al contacts. At zero magnetic field, the switching currents for positive and negative current sweeps differ (I_c+ ≈ 43.3 μA, I_c- ≈ 44.7 μA at T = 0.3 K), reproducing earlier work on exfoliated Cd3As2. The central new claim is that the difference ΔI_c = I_c- − I_c+ remains approximately constant (~1.5 μA) for out-of-plane magnetic fields between −10 mT and +10 mT, i.e., the SDE is symmetric in field and resilient to field strength, before decreasing as the critical field is approached. The authors present a Ginzburg-Landau two-band model for the zero-field SDE and speculate that helimagnetic order in Cd3As2 could explain the field-resilient behavior, while explicitly stating that the exact origin is not known.

Significance. If the field-independence claim holds, the result is of practical interest because superconducting diodes that are insensitive to the polarity and magnitude of stray magnetic fields would be more robust for circuit applications. The paper has clear strengths: the current-voltage measurements are standard, the zero-field SDE is consistent with prior work, the MBE film quality is benchmarked against an exfoliated device, and the authors are transparent that the field-resilience mechanism is a speculation. The zero-field SDE in MBE-grown Cd3As2 SQUIDs is a useful data point. However, the central field-independence claim currently rests on a single device, a fixed voltage threshold, and no quantified uncertainty, so the significance is contingent on additional evidence.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Fig. 4d] The central claim that ΔI_c is independent of B between −10 and 10 mT is based on switching currents defined by a fixed 20 μV voltage threshold. If the width or shape of the resistive transition changes with magnetic field, or differs between the two sweep directions, the current read at a fixed voltage can shift even when the true switching current is constant, or vice versa. The manuscript provides no test of this possibility, such as extracting switching currents with multiple threshold voltages, fitting the switching branch, or showing full IV traces at intermediate fields. This must be addressed before the field-independence claim can be accepted.
  2. [Section II, Fig. 4c,d] The robust field-dependence claim is made with data from a single SQUID. The text states that two SQUIDs showed zero-field SDE but that results are presented from one device. In addition, no error bars or scatter estimates are shown for I_c±(B) or ΔI_c(B), and the repeated B = 0 measurements mentioned in the text are not displayed. Without a second device or quantified reproducibility, the word "robust" is not established.
  3. [Introduction and Section III, Fig. 4c,d] The paper motivates the SDE through the diode efficiency η = (I_c+ − I_c−)/(I_c+ + I_c−), but the central figure plots only ΔI_c. Since both I_c+ and I_c− decrease with increasing |B| (Fig. 4c), a constant ΔI_c implies a B-dependent η. The authors should either plot η(B) to demonstrate symmetric-in-field diode efficiency, or explicitly and consistently limit the claim to the current difference.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure captions, Figs. 3 and 4] The figure captions contain the typo "depedence" instead of "dependence."
  2. [Section II, Fig. 1b] The SQUID "dimension" of ~1.3 × 1.0 μm² is ambiguous; specify whether this is the loop area or the overall footprint.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 4a] The sentence "the difference in critical currents is about as same as that at B = 0 mT" should be rephrased, for example as "approximately equal to that at B = 0 mT."
  4. [Section III, Fig. 1d] The resistance overshoot discussion is qualitative and not used in the central SDE claim; it could be shortened or moved to supplementary material.
  5. [Section IV, Eq. (1)-(3)] The notation in the Ginzburg-Landau free energy is partially garbled; for instance, $F_i = \Gamma \Delta_i^2$ appears twice with the same symbol, and the definitions leading to Eq. (3) should be made unambiguous.
  6. [Section III, Fig. 4c,d] The repeated B = 0 measurements are mentioned in the text but not shown; including them in Fig. 4c or as error bars in Fig. 4d would strengthen the reproducibility claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central field-independence claim is an experimental observation, not a model-derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper's main claim—that I_c- - I_c+ is nearly constant for |B| <= 10 mT—is presented as a direct measurement (Figs. 4a-4d), not as a consequence of a derived model. The Ginzburg-Landau CPR in Eq. (3) is imported from prior work (Ref. [33]) and is used only to rationalize the zero-field SDE in asymmetric SQUIDs; it is not fitted to the data and is not used to predict the field-resilience plateau. The helimagnetic explanation is explicitly labeled speculation ('the exact origin ... is not known', 'we speculate'), so it cannot be a circular derivation. The paper does cite prior work by overlapping authors (Refs. [10], [18], [33]), but these citations provide external experimental and theoretical context for the zero-field mechanism and are not the evidentiary basis for the new magnetic-field measurements. The fixed 20 uV threshold used to define I_c+ and I_c- is a potential systematic concern for the plateau claim (a threshold artifact would be a correctness risk, not a circularity), but no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction and no definition reduces the output to the input. The central result is self-contained experimental evidence, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central experimental claim does not require fitting model parameters. The only hand-chosen number used in the main analysis is the 20 µV threshold. The model and mechanism sections rest on prior theory and speculation, none of which is fitted to the data.

free parameters (1)
  • Switching current voltage threshold V_th = 20 µV
    Chosen by the authors to define I_c+ and I_c- (when |Vdc| = 20 µV). The central claim of a constant I_c- - I_c+ could depend on this threshold if the resistive transitions have finite slope.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Two-band Ginzburg-Landau free energy of the junction (Eq. 1), including intra-band, co-tunneling, and inter-band pair tunneling terms.
    Used to derive the current-phase relation Eq. (3); the model is imported from prior work (Ref. [33]) and not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Surface-bulk superconducting channel coupling provides intrinsic time-reversal symmetry breaking and a zero-field SDE in Cd3As2.
    This is the mechanism proposed in the same group's Ref. [18] and is assumed to transfer to MBE-grown films.
  • domain assumption The equilibrium SQUID ground state has ψ_a = -ψ_b with 0 < |ψ_a| < π/2.
    Following Ref. [18], this antiferromagnetic-like configuration is needed for the zero-field SDE to appear in an asymmetric SQUID model.
  • domain assumption Helimagnetic order can form in Dirac semimetals via helical spin texture or nuclear spin spirals.
    Speculative explanation for the field-resilient SDE, borrowed from Refs. [24-28]; no magnetic characterization is provided in this paper.
invented entities (1)
  • Helimagnetic (helical spin) order in the Cd3As2 film
    purpose: Proposed origin of the field-resilient, symmetric-in-field SDE
    The paper speculates that a helimagnetic phase predicted for Dirac semimetals explains why the diode effect survives both polarities of magnetic field, but it provides no direct measurement of magnetic order and no independent falsifiable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Robust and Symmetric Magnetic Field Dependency of Superconducting Diode Effect in Asymmetric Dirac Semimetal SQUIDs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X4BTDZDQ

@misc{pith2026250521861,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Robust and Symmetric Magnetic Field Dependency of Superconducting Diode Effect in Asymmetric Dirac Semimetal SQUIDs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X4BTDZDQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21861}
}
read the original abstract

The recent demonstration of the superconducting diode effect (SDE) has generated renewed interests in superconducting electronics in which devices such as compact superconducting diodes that can perform signal rectification where low-energy operations are needed. In this article, we present our results of robust and symmetric-in-magnetic-field SDE in asymmetric superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) realized in high-quality Dirac semimetal Cd3As2 thin film grown by the molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) technique. Consistent with previous work, a zero magnetic field SDE is observed. Furthermore, the difference in switching current is independent of the strength and polarity of an out-plane magnetic field in the range of -10 mT and 10 mT. We speculate that this robust symmetric-in-field SDE in our Dirac semimetal SQUIDs is due to the formation of helical spin texture, theoretically predicted in Dirac semimetals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21861 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Superconducting transition in an asymmetric SQUID in an MBE grown Cd3As2 thin film. (a) shows a schematic of the growth stack of the MBE grown Cd3As2 film. (b) shows an SEM image of the asymmetric SQUIDs studied. The gray background represents the Cd3As2 thin film. (c) shows the quasi-four-terminal sample resistance Rxx as a function of temperature (T). A superconducting transition is observed at Tc ~ 1.2K. The inse… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Zero magnetic field superconducting diode effect. (a) Current-voltage (I-V) characteristics measured at 𝐵 = 0 mT. 0→P and 0→N refer to the curves in which the current sweeps from 0 to ~ + 70 µA and 0 to ~ − 70 µA, respectively. In (b), the absolute value of the 0→N curve is plotted along with the 0→P curve. The two curves overlap perfectly in both the superconducting and normal state regimes, but differ clearly in t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Temperature depedence of the zero-field superconducting diode effect. I-V characteristics at zero magnetic field measured at three temperatures, 0.3K (a), 0.7 K (b), and 0.9 K (c). It is clearly seen that the diode effect decreases with increasing temperatures [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Magnetic field depedence of the superconducting diode effect. (a) and (b) show the I-V characteristics at two magnetic fields of different polarity: 10 mT (a) and -15 mT (b). (c) shows the magnetic (B) field dependence for both I+c and I-c. In (d), the difference of cr…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    W. Yu, J. J. Cuozzo, K. Sapkota, E. Rossi, D. X. Rademacher, T. M. Nenoff, and W. Pan, Time reversal symmetry breaking and zero magnetic field Josephson diode effect in Dirac semimetal Cd3As2 mediated asymmetric SQUIDs, Phys. Rev. B 110, 104510 (2024)

    work page 2024

  2. [10]

    Cuozzo, Anand Johnson Bokka, Gang Qiu, Christopher Eckberg, Yanfeng Lyu, Shuyuan Huyan, Ching-Wu Chu, Kenji Watanabe, Takashi Taniguchi, Kang L

    Hung-Yu Yang, Joseph J. Cuozzo, Anand Johnson Bokka, Gang Qiu, Christopher Eckberg, Yanfeng Lyu, Shuyuan Huyan, Ching-Wu Chu, Kenji Watanabe, Takashi Taniguchi, Kang L. Wang, Field-Resilient Supercurrent Diode in a Multiferroic Josephson Junction, arXiv: 2412.12344

    work page arXiv

  3. [1]

    Digitalization and Energy (IEA, 2017)

    International Energy Agency. Digitalization and Energy (IEA, 2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [2]

    Holmes, A.L

    D.S. Holmes, A.L. Ripple, M.A. and Manheimer, Energy-efficient superconducting computing – power budgets and requirements, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 23, 1701610 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [3]

    Pan, A.J

    W. Pan, A.J. Muhowski, W.M. Martinez, C.L.H. Sovinec, J.P. Mendez, D. Mamaluy, W. Yu, X. Shi, K. Sapkota, S.D. Hawkins, and J.F. Klem, Quantum enhanced Josephson junction field- effect transistors for logic applications, Materials Science and Engineering: B 310, 117729 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [4]

    Fuhrer, and Xiaolin Wang, The superconducting diode effect, Nature Reviews Physics 5.10 (2023): 558-577

    Nadeem, Muhammad, Michael S. Fuhrer, and Xiaolin Wang, The superconducting diode effect, Nature Reviews Physics 5.10 (2023): 558-577

    work page 2023

  7. [5]

    Zhang, Y

    Y . Zhang, Y . Gu, P. Li, J. Hu, and K. Jiang, General theory of Josephson diodes, Phys. Rev. X 12, 041013 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [6]

    Davydova, S

    M. Davydova, S. Prembabu, and L. Fu, Universal Josephson diode effect, Sci. Adv. 8, eabo0309 (2022)

    2022

Show all 40 references
  1. [7]

    Daniel Margineda, Alessandro Crippa, Elia Strambini, Laura Borgongino, Alessandro Paghi, Giorgio de Simoni, Lucia Sorba, Yuri Fukaya, Maria Teresa Mercaldo, Carmine Ortix, Mario Cuoco, and Francesco Giazotto, Back-action supercurrent rectifiers, Commun Phys 8, 16 (2025)

    2025

  2. [8]

    Pei-Hao Fu, Yong Xu, Jun-Feng Liu, Ching Hua Lee, and Yee Sin Ang, Implementation of a transverse Cooper-pair rectifier using an N-S junction, Phys. Rev. B 111, L020507 (2025)

    2025

  3. [9]

    Foster, Marco Colangelo, and Karl K

    Matteo Castellani, Owen Medeiros, Alessandro Buzzi, Reed A. Foster, Marco Colangelo, and Karl K. Berggren, A superconducting full-wave bridge rectifier, arXiv:2406.12175

    arXiv

  4. [11]

    Khan, A.S

    M.N.I. Khan, A.S. Iyengar, S. Ghosh, Novel Magnetic Burn-In for Retention and Magnetic Tolerance Testing of STTRAM, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems 26, 1508–1517 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    F. Ando, Y . Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y . Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y . Yanase, and T. Ono, Observation of superconducting diode effect. Nature 584, 373–376 (2020)

    2020

  6. [13]

    Bauer, Kai-Qiang Lin, John M

    Lorenz Bauriedl, Christian Bäuml, Lorenz Fuchs, Christian Baumgartner, Nicolas Paulik, Jonas M. Bauer, Kai-Qiang Lin, John M. Lupton, Takashi Taniguchi, Kenji Watanabe, Christoph Strunk, and Nicola Paradiso, Supercurrent diode effect and magnetochiral anisotropy in few- layer ...

    2022

  7. [14]

    B. Pal, A. Chakraborty, P. K. Sivakumar, M. Davydova, A. K. Gopi, A. K. Pandeya, J. A. Krieger, Y . Zhang, M. Date, S. Ju, N. Yuan, N. B. M. Schröter, L. Fu, and S. S. P. Parkin, Josephson diode effect from Cooper pair momentum in a topological semimetal, Nat. Phys. 18, 1228 (2022)

    2022

  8. [15]

    Y . Hou, F. Nichele, H. Chi, A. Lodesani, Y . Wu, M. F. Ritter, D. Z. Haxell, M. Davydova, S. Ilić, O. Glezakou-Elbert, A. Varambally, F. S. Bergeret, A. Kamra, L. Fu, P. A. Lee, and J. S. Moodera, Ubiquitous superconducting diode effect in superconductor thin films, Phys. Rev...

    2023

  9. [16]

    Rice, C.H

    A.D. Rice, C.H. Lee, B. Fluegel, A.G. Norman, J.N. Nelson, C.S. Jiang, M. Steger, D.L. McGott, P. Walker, K. Alberi, Epitaxial Dirac Semimetal Vertical Heterostructures for Advanced Device Architectures. Adv. Funct. Mater. 32, 2111470 (2022)

    2022

  10. [17]

    Schumann, M

    T. Schumann, M. Goyal, H. Kim, and S. Stemmer, Molecular beam epitaxy of Cd3As2 on a III-V substrate. APL Mater. 4, 126110 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    H. Wu, Y . Wang, Y . Xu, P. K. Sivakumar, C. Pasco, U. Filippozzi, S. S. P. Parkin, Y .-J. Zeng, T. McQueen, and M. N. Ali, The field-free Josephson diode in a van der Waals heterostructure, Nature (London) 604, 653 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    J.-X. Lin, P. Siriviboon, H. D. Scammell, S. Liu, D. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, M. S. Scheurer, and J. I. A. Li, Zero-field superconducting diode effect in small-twist- angle trilayer graphene, Nat. Phys. 18, 1221 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    S. Y . Frank Zhao, X. Cui, P. A. V olkov, H. Yoo, S. Lee, J. A. Gardener, A. J. Akey, R. Engelke, Y . Ronen, R. Zhong, G. Gu, S. Plugge, T. Tummuru, M. Kim, M. Franz, J. H. Pixley, N. Poccia, and P. Kim, Time-reversal symmetry breaking superconductivity between twisted cuprate...

    2023

  14. [22]

    Qiu, H.-Y

    G. Qiu, H.-Y . Yang, L. Hu, H. Zhang, C.-Y . Chen, Y . Lyu, C. Eckberg, P. Deng, S. Krylyuk, A.V . Davydov, R. Zhang, and K.L. Wang, Emergent ferromagnetism with superconductivity in Fe(Te,Se) van der Waals Josephson junctions. Nature Communications 14(1), 6691 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Díez-Mérida, A

    J. Díez-Mérida, A. Díez-Carlón, S. Y . Yang, Y .-M. Xie, X.-J. Gao, J. Senior, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, X. Lu, A. P. Higginbotham, K. T. Law & Dmitri K. Efetov, Symmetry-broken Josephson junctions and superconducting diodes in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene, Nature Com...

    2023

  16. [24]

    Xiao-Qi Sun, Shou-Cheng Zhang, and Zhong Wang, Helical spin order from topological Dirac and Weyl semimetals, Physical review letters 115, 076802 (2015)

    2015

  17. [25]

    Yevtushenko and A

    Oleg M. Yevtushenko and A. M. Tsvelik, Chiral lattice supersolid on edges of quantum spin Hall Samples, Phys. Rev. B 98, 081118 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Chen-Hsuan Hsu, Peter Stano, Jelena Klinovaja, and Daniel Loss, Effects of nuclear spins on the transport properties of the edge of two-dimensional topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 97, 125432 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    Grigory Bednik, Antiferromagnetism and spin density waves in three-dimensional Dirac metals, Phys. Rev. B 102, 125119 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Yang-Zhi Chou, Jennifer Cano, and J. H. Pixley, Band manipulation and spin texture in interacting moiré helical edges, Phys. Rev. B 104, L201113 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    J. N. Nelson, I. A. Leahy, A. D. Rice, C. Brooks, G. Teeter, M. Van Schilfgaarde, S. Lany, B. Fluegel, M. Lee, and K. Alberi, Direct link between disorder and magnetoresistance in topological semimetals, Physical Review B 107, L220206 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Leahy, Anthony D

    Ian A. Leahy, Anthony D. Rice, Jocienne N. Nelson, Herve Ness, Mark van Schilfgaarde, Wei Pan, and Kirstin Alberi, Interplay of Quasi-Quantum Hall Effect and Coulomb Disorder in Semimetals, arXiv:2412.05273. 19

  23. [31]

    Wang, C.-Z

    A.-Q. Wang, C.-Z. Li, C. Li, Z.-M. Liao, A. Brinkman, and D.-P. Yu, 4𝜋-Periodic Supercurrent from Surface States in Cd3As2 Nanowire-Based Josephson Junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 237701 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    W. Yu, W. Pan, D. L. Medlin, M. A. Rodriguez, S. R. Lee, Z.-Q. Bao, and F. Zhang, 𝜋 and 4𝜋 Josephson effects mediated by a Dirac semimetal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 177704 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    Cuozzo, W

    Joseph J. Cuozzo, W. Yu, P. Davids, T. M. Nenoff, D. B. Soh, Wei Pan, and Enrico Rossi, Leggett modes in a Dirac semimetal, Nature Physics volume 20, pages1118–1123 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Lygo, Victor Huang, and Susanne Stemmer, Induced superconductivity in the two-dimensional topological insulator phase of cadmium arsenide, APL Mater

    Arman Rashidi, Robert Kealhofer, Alexander C. Lygo, Victor Huang, and Susanne Stemmer, Induced superconductivity in the two-dimensional topological insulator phase of cadmium arsenide, APL Mater. 11, 041117 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Park, M.S

    M. Park, M.S. Isaacson, and J.M. Parpia, Resistance anomaly and excess voltage in inhomogeneous superconducting aluminum thin films, Physical Review B 55, 9067 (1997)

    1997

  28. [36]

    Le Duc Anh, Keita Ishihara, Tomoki Hotta, Kohdai Inagaki, Hideki Maki, Takahiro Saeki, Masaki Kobayashi & Masaaki Tanaka, Large superconducting diode effect in ion-beam patterned Sn-based superconductor nanowire/topological Dirac semimetal planar heterostructures, Nature Commu...

    2024

  29. [37]

    Norbert Gál, Vladimír Štrbík, Štefan Gaži, Štefan Chromik, andMarcel Talacko, Resistance Anomalies at Superconducting Transition in Multilayer N/S/F/S/N Heterostructures, Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism 32, 213-217 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Shichao Qi, Jun Ge, Chengcheng Ji, Yiwen Ai, Gaoxing Ma, Ziqiao Wang, Zihan Cui, Yi Liu, Ziqiang Wang, and Jian Wang, High-temperature field-free superconducting diode effect in high-Tc cuprates, Nature Communications 16, 531 (2025)

    2025

  31. [39]

    Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996)

    M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1996)

    1996

  32. [40]

    Phys.: Condens

    Debika Debnath and Paramita Dutta, Field-free Josephson diode effect in interacting chiral quantum dot junctions, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37, 175301 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.