Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 58 references

Layer-selective chirality switch in bilayer graphene intercalated by Janus monolayers

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-08 · glm-5.2

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

Pith's one-line read Janus monolayers flip spin current direction in bilayer graphene

desk verdict Solid prediction of layer-selective Rashba chirality switch in bilayer graphene; WSSe case is clean, MnSSe case has a legitimate caveat about exchange vs. Rashba dominance. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.06159 v1 pith:NCVA5ZW5 submitted 2026-07-07 cond-mat.mes-hall

Marko Milivojević This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords graphenejanusmonolayersbilayerlayer-selectivelayersspinbottom
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 predicts that sandwiching a Janus monolayer (WSSe or MnSSe) between two graphene layers induces opposite Rashba spin-orbit coupling signs in each graphene sheet, so that gating the top versus bottom layer selects the direction of the resulting spin current. The Janus monolayer's intrinsic structural asymmetry — different atoms on its two faces — breaks the mirror symmetry of bilayer graphene and exposes each graphene layer to an effective electric field of opposite sign. First-principles calculations confirm that the two graphene layers become fully decoupled, each hosting its own Dirac cone with opposite Rashba parameters (e.g., λ_R = -0.309 meV for the top layer and +0.490 meV for the bottom in Gr/WSSe/Gr). A tight-binding model fitted to the DFT band structures, combined with Kubo-formalism charge-to-spin conversion calculations, shows that the Rashba-Edelstein coefficient α_REE has opposite signs in the two layers, directly verifying the chirality switch. The author argues that this provides a simpler and more direct route to electrical spin-current control than prior proposals based on ferroelectric switching, because the chirality switch is built into the heterostructure geometry and activated merely by choosing which graphene layer to gate.

What carries the argument

The Rashba SOC parameter λ_R, whose sign flips between the top and bottom graphene layers (Table I: -0.309 vs +0.490 meV for WSSe; -0.018 vs +0.105 meV for MnSSe). The Rashba-Edelstein coefficient α_REE, computed via the Kubo formula in the Smrčka-Středa formulation, whose sign reversal between layers (Fig. 5) is the direct observable signature of the chirality switch. The C3v crystallographic symmetry of the heterostructures, which determines the allowed spin-orbit coupling terms in the effective tight-binding Hamiltonian.

What would settle it

Measure the Rashba-Edelstein coefficient α_REE in a gated Gr/WSSe/Gr device. If the sign of α_REE does not reverse when switching the gate from the top to the bottom graphene layer, the central prediction is falsified. Alternatively, if angle-resolved photoemission shows the two graphene layers are not electronically decoupled (i.e., their Dirac cones hybridize), the tight-binding model underlying the chirality-switch argument breaks down.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central object is the Janus monolayer intercalated in bilayer graphene (Gr/Janus/Gr), which simultaneously decouples the two graphene layers and induces opposite-sign Rashba spin-orbit coupling in each. The mechanism is geometric: each graphene layer faces the Janus monolayer from the opposite side, so the proximity electric field reverses sign between top and bottom. This produces opposite chirality of the in-plane spin texture and, consequently, opposite signs of the Rashba-Edelstein coefficient α_REE, enabling a layer-selective spin current switch activated by electrostatic gating of one layer versus the other.

Load-bearing premise

The MnSSe half of the results assumes an out-of-plane antiferromagnetic spin configuration that costs 0.19 meV per Mn atom relative to the in-plane ground state. The WSSe results do not depend on this assumption. A more structural concern is that the two graphene layers are treated as fully decoupled, which is supported by projected density of states near the Fermi level but may not hold perfectly at all doping levels used in the charge-to-spin conversion calculations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the predicted sign reversal of α_REE is confirmed experimentally in Gr/WSSe/Gr — and WSSe has already been synthesized — it would provide a purely electrical, gate-tunable spin current switch requiring no active manipulation of a ferroelectric or magnetic layer.
  • The layer-selective mechanism is geometric and does not depend on magnetic ordering in the nonmagnetic WSSe case, making it robust against thermal fluctuations of magnetic degrees of freedom.
  • The concept could extend to other Janus monolayers with different chalcogen or transition-metal compositions, allowing tuning of the Rashba parameter magnitude while preserving the sign-reversal mechanism.
  • The MnSSe case, if its out-of-plane antiferromagnetic configuration can be stabilized by substrate proximity, would add exchange-field control on top of the Rashba chirality switch, potentially enabling spin-current devices with both SOC and magnetic functionalities.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The sign-reversal mechanism should generalize to any Janus monolayer with C3v symmetry and sufficient band offset to decouple the graphene layers, suggesting a design rule: pick a Janus spacer with large atomic-number contrast between its two faces to maximize the Rashba magnitude while preserving the sign flip.
  • If the two graphene layers are not perfectly decoupled at all doping levels — interlayer tunneling could mix states and partially wash out the sign reversal of α_REE — the effect would be strongest near each layer's Dirac point and could degrade at high doping, which is testable by gating both layers simultaneously and measuring the net spin current.
  • The built-in electric field from the Janus dipole that shifts the Dirac cones to different energies could itself be exploited for charge-based valley or layer filtering, independent of the spin-current switch functionality.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript predicts a layer-selective chirality switch in bilayer graphene intercalated by Janus monolayers (WSSe and MnSSe). The central claim is that the broken mirror symmetry of the Janus spacer induces opposite signs of proximity-induced Rashba SOC in the top and bottom graphene layers, leading to opposite Rashba-Edelstein coefficients and thus opposite spin current directions that can be selected by gating. The methodology combines DFT calculations (PBE, vdW-D2, dipole correction, fully-relativistic pseudopotentials) with an established tight-binding model and Kubo-formalism charge-to-spin conversion calculations. The Rashba parameters are independently extracted from DFT spin expectation values, and the sign reversal of α_REE is computed from these parameters, making the central logic non-circular.

Significance. The paper presents a clear and physically motivated mechanism for gate-tunable spin current direction control. The WSSe case is particularly valuable because WSSe has been experimentally synthesized, making Gr/WSSe/Gr an experimentally accessible platform. The DFT methodology is standard and well-specified (Appendix A), the tight-binding model is an established formalism (Ref. 37), and the Rashba parameters are independently extracted from DFT rather than assumed. The prediction of opposite Rashba signs arising from inverted proximity geometry is a clean and falsifiable result. The Kubo-formalism calculations provide a quantitative verification of the chirality switch through α_REE sign reversal.

major comments (1)
  1. §V, Fig. 5(b), Table I: In the MnSSe case, the exchange parameters (Δ_A ≈ 1.28 meV, Δ_B ≈ -1.51 meV) are an order of magnitude larger than the Rashba parameters (λ_R = 0.018/0.105 meV). The α_REE magnitudes in MnSSe (±0.2, Fig. 5b) are approximately 5× larger than in WSSe (±0.04, Fig. 5a) despite λ_R being ~5× smaller, suggesting exchange-enhanced REE. The manuscript claims MnSSe demonstrates 'the generality of the layer-selective chirality switch mechanism in the presence of both proximity-induced SOC and out-of-plane exchange interactions,' but does not verify that the α_REE sign reversal is genuinely Rashba-driven rather than exchange-driven. A control calculation with exchange parameters set to zero (keeping only λ_R) for the MnSSe case would directly test whether the sign reversal persists without exchange. Without this, the claim of generality for the MnSSe case is not fully substt
minor comments (5)
  1. Table I: The sign convention for λ_R should be stated explicitly. The manuscript states that opposite signs correspond to opposite chirality, but the relationship between the sign of λ_R and the clockwise/counterclockwise chirality direction described in Fig. 1 is not specified.
  2. Fig. 4 caption: The text states 'Nonzero Sy (not shown here) spin expectation values suggest the presence of Rashba SOC.' Since Sy is the primary evidence for Rashba SOC in MnSSe, showing this data (or at least a representative panel) would strengthen the MnSSe analysis.
  3. §V: The statement that |α_REE| of the bottom layer exceeds that of the top layer 'reflecting the stronger proximity-induced Rashba coupling' is well-justified for WSSe but less clearly justified for MnSSe, where exchange effects dominate.
  4. Appendix A: The use of PZ exchange-correlation functional for the MnSSe self-consistent calculation, while PBE is used for WSSe, is noted but not motivated. A brief justification for the different functionals used would be helpful.
  5. §II: The strain applied to graphene (-0.9% for WSSe, +2.1% for MnSSe, Table II) and its potential effect on the proximity parameters is not discussed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and the positive assessment. The referee raises one substantive concern: whether the α_REE sign reversal in the MnSSe case is genuinely Rashba-driven rather than exchange-driven, and requests a control calculation with exchange parameters set to zero. We agree this is a valid and important test, and will perform the requested calculation and revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §V, Fig. 5(b), Table I: In the MnSSe case, the exchange parameters (Δ_A ≈ 1.28 meV, Δ_B ≈ -1.51 meV) are an order of magnitude larger than the Rashba parameters (λ_R = 0.018/0.105 meV). The α_REE magnitudes in MnSSe (±0.2, Fig. 5b) are approximately 5× larger than in WSSe (±0.04, Fig. 5a) despite λ_R being ~5× smaller, suggesting exchange-enhanced REE. The manuscript claims MnSSe demonstrates 'the generality of the layer-selective chirality switch mechanism in the presence of both proximity-induced SOC and out-of-plane exchange interactions,' but does not verify that the α_REE sign reversal is genuinely Rashba-driven rather than exchange-driven. A control calculation with exchange parameters set to zero (keeping only λ_R) for the MnSSe case would directly test whether the sign reversal persists without exchange. Without this, the claim of generality for the MnSSe case is not fully substt

    Authors: The referee raises a valid and important point. We agree that the current manuscript does not explicitly demonstrate that the α_REE sign reversal in the MnSSe case is driven by the opposite Rashba signs rather than by the exchange parameters, which are indeed an order of magnitude larger than λ_R. The requested control calculation—setting Δ_A = Δ_B = 0 while retaining the Rashba parameters from Table I—is a clean and direct test of this claim, and we will perform it. Specifically, we will compute α_REE for the top and bottom graphene layers of Gr/MnSSe/Gr using the tight-binding Hamiltonian H_{orb} + H_I + H_R (i.e., without H_{ex}), with all other parameters unchanged. If the sign reversal persists, this directly confirms that the chirality switch is Rashba-driven even in the magnetic case. We expect this to be the outcome, since the sign of α_REE is tied to the chirality of the Rashba spin texture, which is determined by the sign of λ_R, but we agree that this must be explicitly verified rather than assumed. We will add the results of this control calculation to the revised manuscript, either as an additional panel in Fig. 5 or as a supplementary figure, and will revise the discussion in §V to explicitly address the distinction between Rashba-driven sign reversal and exchange-enhanced magnitude. We will also temper the claim of 'generality' to accurately reflect what the control calculation shows. We note that the referee's observation about the exchange-enhanced magnitude of α_REE in MnSSe is consistent with the expected physics: the exchange interaction modifies the band structure and spin splitting in ways that can amplify the charge-to-spin conversion efficiency, but this amplification is orthogonal to the question of whether the sign reversal itself originates in revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: DFT-extracted Rashba parameters independently determine α_REE sign reversal via Kubo formalism

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that opposite signs of proximity-induced Rashba SOC in the top and bottom graphene layers lead to opposite signs of the Rashba-Edelstein coefficient α_REE—is not circular. The tight-binding parameters (λ_R, λ_I, exchange parameters, etc.) are independently extracted from DFT band structures and spin expectation values (Figs. 3-4, Table I). The α_REE is then computed from these parameters via the Kubo formula (Eqs. 8-10), which is a standard, well-established linear-response formalism citing Kubo [40,41], Smrčka-Středa [42-44], and others. The sign reversal of α_REE (Fig. 5) follows from the sign reversal of λ_R, which is a DFT output, not an input or a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. The tight-binding model itself (Eqs. 1-7) is a standard C3v-symmetry graphene Hamiltonian from Kochan, Irmer, and Fabian [37], not an ansatz introduced by the present author. There are some self-citations (Refs. 23, 25, 29) but these are to related heterostructure studies, not load-bearing for the present derivation chain. The MnSSe case has a legitimate correctness concern (whether the α_REE sign reversal is Rashba-driven or exchange-driven, given that exchange parameters exceed Rashba by ~10×), but this is a question about the physical interpretation of a non-circular calculation, not about circularity in the derivation. The Kubo formula calculation takes the full Hamiltonian (including both Rashba and exchange terms) as input and produces α_REE as output; no parameter was fitted to α_REE and then presented as a prediction of α_REE. The derivation is self-contained against external DFT benchmarks. Score 2 reflects minor self-citations that are not load-bearing for the central claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities, particles, or forces. All parameters are fitted to DFT data or taken from prior literature. The Janus monolayers (WSSe, MnSSe) are known materials from prior work (Refs. 26-28, 49-50). The tight-binding model and Kubo formalism are standard. The only ad hoc element is the out-of-plane magnetic configuration for MnSSe, which is a modeling choice, not an invented entity.

free parameters (8)
  • t (hopping) = 2616.089 / 2611.505 meV (WSSe top/bot); 2398.291 / 2400.830 meV (MnSSe top/bot)
    Nearest-neighbor hopping, fitted to DFT band structure
  • μ (chemical potential) = 72.897 / -78.763 meV (WSSe); -9.017 / 7.225 meV (MnSSe)
    On-site energy, fitted to DFT Dirac point positions
  • Δ (staggered potential) = 1.029 / 1.143 meV (WSSe); 0.082 / 0.016 meV (MnSSe)
    Sublattice asymmetry, fitted to DFT band structure
  • λ_I^A, λ_I^B (intrinsic SOC) = 0.924/-1.028, 1.302/-1.370 meV (WSSe); -0.026/-0.004, 0.002/-0.004 meV (MnSSe)
    Intrinsic SOC on sublattices A/B, fitted to DFT spin expectation values
  • λ_R (Rashba SOC) = -0.309 / 0.490 meV (WSSe top/bot); -0.018 / 0.105 meV (MnSSe top/bot)
    Rashba SOC strength, fitted to DFT spin expectation values. Sign reversal between top and bottom is the central result.
  • Δ_A, Δ_B (exchange, MnSSe only) = 1.281/1.289, -1.511/-1.531 meV (top/bot)
    Proximity exchange parameters, fitted to DFT spin-splitting at K and K'
  • τ (relaxation time) = 10⁻¹⁰ s
    Disorder scattering time, taken from Ref. 48, not fitted to this system's data
  • γ (broadening) = ℏ/2τ
    Derived from τ, enters Kubo formula
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption C3v point group symmetry of both heterostructures
    Sec. II: The commensurate alignment preserves C3v symmetry, which determines the symmetry-allowed spin physics. This is a structural assumption based on the lattice matching.
  • domain assumption Low-energy physics described by two independent graphene layers
    Sec. II, V: pDOS shows negligible Janus contribution near E_F, justifying decoupled-layer treatment. This is supported by DFT data but is an approximation.
  • ad hoc to paper Type-A antiferromagnetic ordering of MnSSe with out-of-plane spins
    Sec. II: The ground state favors in-plane easy axis (Ref. 28). Out-of-plane configuration costs 0.19 meV/Mn. Used as a model case; justified by experimental observation in related MnSe (Ref. 30) and potential substrate stabilization.
  • standard math Standard tight-binding Hamiltonian for C3v-symmetric graphene (Eqs. 1-4)
    Sec. III: Hamiltonian from Ref. 37 (Kochan, Irmer, Fabian 2017). Well-established in the literature.
  • standard math Kubo/Smrčka-Středa formalism for linear response (Eqs. 8-10)
    Sec. IV: Standard linear response theory from Refs. 40-44.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Layer-selective chirality switch in bilayer graphene intercalated by Janus monolayers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NCVA5ZW5

@misc{pith2026260706159,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Layer-selective chirality switch in bilayer graphene intercalated by Janus monolayers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NCVA5ZW5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.06159}
}
read the original abstract

We predict that intercalating bilayer graphene with nonmagnetic WSSe or magnetic MnSSe Janus monolayers induces a layer-selective switch of the in-plane Rashba spin texture, resulting in opposite spin current directions in the top and bottom graphene layers. First-principles calculations reveal that both Janus monolayers decouple the two graphene layers while simultaneously inducing opposite signs of the proximity-induced Rashba spin-orbit coupling in each. Tight-binding modeling of the proximitized layers, combined with Rashba-Edelstein charge-to-spin conversion calculations, confirms that the spin current direction can be independently controlled by gating the top or bottom graphene layer. Bilayer graphene intercalated by Janus monolayers thus represents a promising platform for gate-tunable, layer-selective spintronic devices.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06159 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic view of AA-stacked bilayer graphene [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Atom-projected density of states of (a) Gr/WSSe/Gr and (b) Gr/MnSSe/Gr heterostructures. In both cases, the carbon states reside inside the semiconduct￾ing gap of the Janus monolayer, confirming the absence of hybridization between graphene and substrate states near the Fermi level. Layer-resolved fatband structure of (c) Gr/WSSe/Gr and (d) Gr/MnSSe/Gr in the vicinity of the K point, with the top (red) and bottom (b… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Comparison of the DFT electronic band structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of the DFT electronic band structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Calculated dependence of the conventional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Žutić, J

    I. Žutić, J. Fabian, and S. Das Sarma, Spintronics: Fun- damentals and applications, Rev. Mod. Phys.76, 323 8 (2004)

    work page 2004

  2. [2]

    Fabian, A

    J. Fabian, A. Matos-Abiague, C. Ertler, P. Stano, and I.Žutić,Semiconductorspintronics,ActaPhysicaSlovaca 57, 565 (2007)

    work page 2007

  3. [3]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov, Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films, Science306, 666 (2004)

    work page 2004

  4. [4]

    A. K. Geim and I. V. Grigorieva, Van der Waals het- erostructures, Nature499, 419 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Y. Liu, N. O. Weiss, X. Duan, H.-C. Cheng, Y. Huang, and X. Duan, Van der Waals heterostructures and de- vices, Nature Reviews Materials1, 16042 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. Mishchenko, A. Carvalho, and A. H. Castro Neto, 2D materials and van der Waals het- erostructures, Science353, aac9439 (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Liang, B

    S.-J. Liang, B. Cheng, X. Cui, and F. Miao, Van der Waals heterostructures for high-performance device ap- plications: Challenges and opportunities, Advanced Ma- terials32, 1903800 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    J. F. Sierra, J. Fabian, R. K. Kawakami, S. Roche, and S. O. Valenzuela, Van der waals heterostructures for spin- tronics and opto-spintronics, Nature Nanotechnology16, 856 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    Z. Zhao, Y. Lin, and A. Avsar, Novel spintronic effects in two-dimensional van der Waals heterostructures, npj 2D Materials and Applications9, 30 (2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    Gmitra and J

    M. Gmitra and J. Fabian, Graphene on transition- metal dichalcogenides: A platform for proximity spin- orbit physics and optospintronics, Physical Review B92, 155403 (2015)

    2015

  3. [11]

    Gmitra, D

    M. Gmitra, D. Kochan, P. Högl, and J. Fabian, Trivial and inverted Dirac bands and the emergence of quantum spin Hall states in graphene on transition-metal dichalco- genides, Physical Review B93, 155104 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    J. H. Garcia, A. W. Cummings, and S. Roche, Spin Hall effect and weak antilocalization in graphene/transition metal dichalcogenide heterostructures, Nano Letters17, 5078 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    T. S. Ghiasi, A. A. Kaverzin, P. J. Blah, and B. J. van Wees, Charge-to-spin conversion by the rashba-edelstein effect in two-dimensional van der waals heterostructures up to room temperature, Nano Letters19, 5959 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    Herling, C

    F. Herling, C. K. Safeer, J. Ingla-Aynés, N. Ontoso, L. E. Hueso, and F. Casanova, Gate tunability of highly ef- ficient spin-to-charge conversion by spin Hall effect in graphene proximitized with WSe 2, APL Materials8, 071103 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Khokhriakov, A

    D. Khokhriakov, A. M. Hoque, B. Karpiak, and S. P. Dash, Gate-tunable spin-galvanic effect in graphene- topological insulator van der waals heterostructures at room temperature, Nature Communications11, 3657 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    A. M. Hoque, D. Khokhriakov, K. Zollner, B. Zhao, B. Karpiak, J. Fabian, and S. P. Dash, All-electrical cre- ation and control of spin-galvanic signal in graphene and molybdenum ditelluride heterostructures at room tem- perature, Communication Physics4, 124 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Camosi, J

    L. Camosi, J. Světlík, M. V. Costache, W. S. Torres, I. F. Aguirre, V. Marinova, D. Dimitrov, M. Gospodinov, J. F. Sierra, and S. O. Valenzuela, Resolving spin currents and spin densities generated by charge-spin interconversion in systems with reduced crystal symmetry, 2D Mat...

    2022

  10. [18]

    Milivojević, M

    M. Milivojević, M. Gmitra, M. Kurpas, I. Štich, and J. Fabian, Giant asymmetric proximity-induced spin- orbit coupling in twisted graphene/SnTe heterostructure, 2D Materials11, 035036 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    H. Yang, B. Martín-García, J. Kimák, E. Schmoranze- rová, E. Dolan, Z. Chi, M. Gobbi, P. Němec, L. E. Hueso, and F. Casanova, Twist-angle tunable spin texture in wse2/graphene van der waals heterostructures, Nature Materials23, 1502 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    J. F. Sierra, J. Světlík, W. Savero Torres, L. Camosi, F.Herling, T.Guillet, K.Xu, J.S.Reparaz, V.Marinova, D. Dimitrov, and S. O. Valenzuela, Room-temperature anisotropic in-plane spin dynamics in graphene induced by PdSe2 proximity, Nature Materials24, 876 (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Veneri, D

    A. Veneri, D. T. S. Perkins, C. G. Péterfalvi, and A. Fer- reira, Twist angle controlled collinear Edelstein effect in van der Waals heterostructures, Physical Review B106, L081406 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Ingla-Aynés, I

    J. Ingla-Aynés, I. Groen, F. Herling, N. Ontoso, C. K. Safeer, F. de Juan, L. E. Hueso, M. Gobbi, and F. Casanova, Omnidirectional spin-to-charge conversion in graphene/NbSe2 van der Waals heterostructures, 2D Materials9, 045001 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Mnich, M

    J. Mnich, M. Milivojević, and M. Gmitra, Stacking switching between correlation-protected radial Rashba field and persistent spin textures in graphene en- capsulated by 1T-TaS 2 monolayers, arXiv (2026), arXiv:2606.12239 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026 arXiv

  16. [24]

    L. Bai, C. Ke, Z. Luo, T. Zhu, L. You, and S. Liu, Intrin- sic ferroelectric switching in two-dimensionalα-In 2Se3, ACS Nano18, 26103 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Milivojević, J

    M. Milivojević, J. Mnich, P. Jureczko, M. Kurpas, and M. Gmitra, Ferroelectric switching control of spin current in graphene proximitized by in2se3, Materials Futures5, 015201 (2026)

    2026

  18. [26]

    Y.-C. Lin, C. Liu, Y. Yu, R. Torsi, A. A. Puretzky, I. N. Ivanov, C. M. Rouleau, G. Duscher, K. Xiao, and D. B. Geohegan, Low energy implantation into transition- metal dichalcogenide monolayers to form Janus struc- tures, ACS Nano14, 3896 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    S. B. Harris, Y.-C. Lin, A. A. Puretzky, L. Liang, O. Dyck, T. Berlijn, G. Eres, C. M. Rouleau, K. Xiao, and D. B. Geohegan, Real-time diagnostics of 2D crystal transformations by pulsed laser deposition: Controlled synthesis of Janus WSSe monolayers and alloys, ACS Nano17, 24...

    2023

  20. [28]

    Sattar, M

    S. Sattar, M. F. Islam, and C. M. Canali, Monolayer mnx and janus xmny (x=y=s,te,se): A family of two- dimensional antiferromagnetic semiconductors, Physical Review B106, 085410 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Milivojević and M

    M. Milivojević and M. Gmitra, Gate-tunable syn- thetic antiferromagnetism with nonrelativistic spin split- ting in a graphene/MnS/graphene heterostructure, arXiv:2603.20458 (2026), 2603.20458 [cond-mat.mes- hall]

    2026

  22. [30]

    Aapro, M

    M. Aapro, M. N. Huda, J. Karthikeyan, S. Kezilebieke, S. C. Ganguli, H. G. Herrero, X. Huang, P. Liljeroth, and H.-P. Komsa, Synthesis and properties of monolayer MnSe with unusual atomic structure and antiferromag- netic ordering, ACS Nano15, 13794 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    D. T. Pozsár, M. B. Sípos, A. García-Fuente, P. Nemes- Incze, V. Ivády, E. Navarro-Moratalla, J. Ferrer, L. Szun- yogh, L. Oroszlány, and Z. Tajkov, Proximity-induced spin reorientation in monolayer CrI3 on hexagonal WTe2, 9 arXiv:2606.24305 (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Giannozzi, S

    P. Giannozzi, S. Baroni, N. Bonini, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, G. L. Chiarotti, M. Cococ- cioni, I. Dabo, A. D. Corso, S. de Gironcoli, S. Fabris, G. Fratesi, R. Gebauer, U. Gerstmann, C. Gougoussis, A. Kokalj, M. Lazzeri, L. Martin-Samos, N. Marzari, F. M...

    2009

  25. [33]

    Giannozzi, O

    P. Giannozzi, O. Andreussi, T. Brumme, O. Bunau, M. B. Nardelli, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, M. Cococcioni, N. Colonna, I. Carnimeo, A. D. Corso, S. de Gironcoli, P. Delugas, R. A. DiStasio, A. Ferretti, A. Floris, G. Fratesi, G. Fugallo, R. Gebauer, U. Ger...

    2017

  26. [34]

    Grimme, Semiempirical gga-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction, Journal of Computational Chemistry27, 1787 (2006)

    S. Grimme, Semiempirical gga-type density functional constructed with a long-range dispersion correction, Journal of Computational Chemistry27, 1787 (2006)

    2006

  27. [35]

    Barone, M

    V. Barone, M. Casarin, D. Forrer, M. Pavone, M. Sambi, and A. Vittadini, Role and effective treatment of disper- sive forces in materials: Polyethylene and graphite crys- tals as test cases, Journal of Computational Chemistry 30, 934 (2009)

    2009

  28. [36]

    Bengtsson, Dipole correction for surface supercell cal- culations, Physical Review B59, 12301 (1999)

    L. Bengtsson, Dipole correction for surface supercell cal- culations, Physical Review B59, 12301 (1999)

    1999

  29. [37]

    D.Kochan, S.Irmer,andJ.Fabian,Modelspin-orbitcou- pling Hamiltonians for graphene systems, Physical Re- view B95, 165415 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    V. M. Edelstein, Spin polarization of conduction elec- trons induced by electric current in two-dimensional asymmetric electron systems, Solid State Communica- tions73, 233–235 (1990)

    1990

  31. [39]

    Offidani, M

    M. Offidani, M. Milletarì, R. Raimondi, and A. Fer- reira, Optimal charge-to-spin conversion in graphene on transition-metal dichalcogenides, Physical Review Let- ters119, 196801 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    Kubo, A general expression for the conductivity ten- sor, Canadian Journal of Physics34, 1274–1277 (1956)

    R. Kubo, A general expression for the conductivity ten- sor, Canadian Journal of Physics34, 1274–1277 (1956)

    1956

  33. [41]

    Kubo, Statistical-mechanical theory of irreversible processes

    R. Kubo, Statistical-mechanical theory of irreversible processes. I. general theory and simple applications to magnetic and conduction problems, Journal of the Phys- ical Society of Japan12, 570–586 (1957)

    1957

  34. [42]

    Smrčka and P

    L. Smrčka and P. Středa, Transport coefficients in strong magnetic fields, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 10, 2153 (1977)

    1977

  35. [43]

    Crépieux and P

    A. Crépieux and P. Bruno, Theory of the anomalous Hall effect from the Kubo formula and the Dirac equation, Physical Review B64, 014416 (2001)

    2001

  36. [44]

    Bonbien and A

    V. Bonbien and A. Manchon, Symmetrized decomposi- tion of the Kubo-Bastin formula, Physical Review B102, 085113 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    S. Lee, D. J. P. de Sousa, Y.-K. Kwon, F. de Juan, Z. Chi, F. Casanova, and T. Low, Charge-to-spin conversion in twisted graphene/WSe2 heterostructures, Physical Re- view B106, 165420 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Freimuth, S

    F. Freimuth, S. Blügel, and Y. Mokrousov, Spin-orbit torques in Co/Pt(111) and Mn/W(001) magnetic bilay- ers from first principles, Physical Review B90, 174423 (2014)

    2014

  39. [47]

    Železný, Y

    J. Železný, Y. Zhang, C. Felser, and B. Yan, Spin- polarized current in noncollinear antiferromagnets, Phys- ical Review Letters119, 187204 (2017)

    2017

  40. [48]

    S. K. Jaćimovski, J. S. Lamovec, J. P. Šetrajčić, and D. I. Ilić, Temperature dependence of the relaxation time in scattering of elementary excitations in graphene, Mate- rials Science and Engineering: B264, 114933 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    S. Feng, F. Guo, C. Yuan, Z. Wang, F. Miao, and H. Zhang, Study on the electronic and optical proper- ties of van der waals heterostructures of blue phospho- rene and janus-wses monolayers for photocatalytic water splitting, Materials Advances3, 9063 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    Yu, S.-H

    S.-B. Yu, S.-H. Sun, M. Zhou, D. Zhang, and K. Chang, Current-induced spin polarization in janus wsse mono- layer, Physical Review B107, 125426 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  44. [52]

    D. R. Hamann, Optimized norm-conserving vanderbilt pseudopotentials, Physical Review B88, 085117 (2013)

    2013

  45. [53]

    Schlipf and F

    M. Schlipf and F. Gygi, Optimization algorithm for the generation of oncv pseudopotentials, Computer Physics Communications196, 36 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    Scherpelz, M

    P. Scherpelz, M. Govoni, I. Hamada, and G. Galli, Im- plementation and validation of fully relativistic gw calcu- lations: Spin–orbit coupling in molecules, nanocrystals, andsolids,JournalofChemicalTheoryandComputation 12, 3523 (2016)

    2016

  47. [55]

    M.MethfesselandA.T.Paxton,High-precisionsampling for brillouin-zone integration in metals, Physical Review B40, 3616 (1989)

    1989

  48. [56]

    Dal Corso, Pseudopotentials periodic table: From h to pu, Computational Materials Science95, 337 (2014)

    A. Dal Corso, Pseudopotentials periodic table: From h to pu, Computational Materials Science95, 337 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    P. E. Blöchl, Projector augmented-wave method, Physi- cal Review B50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  50. [58]

    J. P. Perdew and A. Zunger, Self-interaction correction to density-functional approximations for many-electron systems, Physical Review B23, 5048 (1981)

    1981

Pith tools

Reviewed July 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.