Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 59 references

Spin lifetime anisotropy in graphene induced by the SiO2 interface

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The SiO2 substrate, through spin-orbit coupling alone, can produce the nearly isotropic spin lifetimes measured in graphene spin valves, removing the need to invoke magnetic impurities or contact effects.

desk verdict A serious computational study that shows substrate SOC alone can push spin lifetime anisotropy above the Rashba 1/2, but the quantitative link to real SiO2 rests on a single crystalline slab and needs an amorphous-interface test. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.11615 v1 pith:NBF2YTHY submitted 2026-08-12 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-phquant-ph

Aron W. Cummings , Chunhao Guo , Andrew Grieder , Shihao Tu , Mayank Gupta , Junqing Xu , Juan Marmolejo-Tejada , Yuan Ping This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-phquant-ph
keywords spinlifetimeanisotropygrapheneSiO2substratespin-orbitcouplingtextureRashbaElliott-Yafetelectron-holepuddles
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 common SiO2 substrate, normally regarded as an inert support, can by itself control how long electron spins survive in graphene. The authors find two distinct regimes: a 2D SiO2 layer gives the standard Rashba helical spin texture and a spin-lifetime anisotropy of $\zeta = 1/2$, while a bulk SiO2 surface breaks both out-of-plane and in-plane mirror symmetry, creating a spin texture with a preferred in-plane axis and a nonuniform out-of-plane component. With realistic disorder, this substrate-only mechanism yields anisotropy between 0.5 and 1, and oxygen vacancies in the SiO2 drive it to about 1. If the claim holds, the substrate alone explains the near-isotropic spin relaxation measured in graphene spin valves, and it will matter more as devices become cleaner.

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the anisotropic tight-binding Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{\mathrm{aniso}}$ of Eq. (2), whose sums run only over the graphene bonds that lie nearest to the SiO2 surface (the green bonds in Fig. 1(b)). Its three terms do three distinct jobs: $\delta t$ shifts the band extrema away from the $K$ point in $k$-space, $\delta\lambda_R$ makes the helical in-plane spin texture anisotropic, and $\lambda^{\mathrm{in}}_R$, modeling a local in-plane electric field from broken mirror symmetry, produces the nonuniform out-of-plane spin component. Fitted to DFT band structures and spin textures, this Hamiltonian is used in two transport setups: first-principles Lindbladian density-matrix dynamics with electron-phonon and impurity scattering, and a linear-scaling real-space method that handles millions of atoms and models electron-hole puddles as Gaussian potentials.

What would settle it

A decisive check would be a Hanle or oblique-precession measurement on a graphene spin valve on an ultraclean SiO2 surface, with magnetic impurities and contact effects independently ruled out, that returns $\zeta = 1/2$ at all carrier densities; that would show the substrate alone cannot produce near-isotropic relaxation. The converse observation, $\zeta$ clearly above 1/2 in a device with no magnetic impurities, would support the paper's mechanism. Computationally, an ab initio or tight-binding simulation of an amorphous SiO2 interface whose spin texture is purely helical would falsify the generality of the bulk-silica symmetry breaking.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the SiO2 interface does more than induce the textbook Rashba spin-orbit coupling. On a bulk SiO2 surface, proximity to the substrate modifies graphene's nearest-neighbor bonds, so the authors extend the standard substrate Hamiltonian with three bond-selective terms: a hopping distortion $\delta t$, a bond-dependent Rashba term $\delta\lambda_R$, and a local out-of-plane spin coupling $\lambda^{\mathrm{in}}_R$ that arises from broken in-plane mirror symmetry. These terms produce a spin texture whose in-plane part is no longer purely helical (it favors the $k_y$ axis) and whose out-of-plane component is finite and nonuniform around the $K$ point. Spin-transport simulations then show the anisotropy $\zeta = \tau_{s_z}/\tau_{s_x}$ can leave the Rashba value of 1/2: electron-hole puddles that scatter between valleys give $0.7 < \zeta < 0.95$, and oxygen vacancies give $\zeta \approx 1$ through a local SOC that randomizes spin during scattering in a way decoupled from momentum relaxation. The conclusion the paper draws is that spin-orbit-driven relaxation caused by the SiO2 substrate alone is capable of yielding spin lifetime anisotropies close to 1, matching experiments.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the two crystalline interface models used in the simulations, graphene on a 2D silica kagome layer and on an OH-passivated Si-terminated silica slab, capture the essential physics of a real amorphous SiO2 surface; if local bonding, termination, or trapped charges at an amorphous interface destroy the anisotropic spin texture or the vacancy-induced local SOC, the predicted $\zeta$ near 1 would not transfer to experiments.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the substrate alone can drive $\zeta$ near 1, the interpretation of existing spin-valve experiments must be revisited: near-isotropic spin relaxation no longer implies magnetic impurities or contact effects.
  • The in-plane spin-lifetime anisotropy ($\tau_{s_x} \neq \tau_{s_y}$) predicted for graphene on bulk SiO2 gives an experimental handle: measuring $\zeta$ separately along $x$ and $y$ could confirm the broken in-plane symmetry.
  • Substrate engineering becomes a lever for spintronics: choosing or terminating the dielectric could tune $\zeta$ between 1/2 and 1.
  • Oxygen vacancies are a concrete, controllable defect channel: varying vacancy density in the oxide should change the Elliott-Yafet-like contribution while leaving momentum relaxation largely unchanged.
  • As graphene devices get cleaner and contacts improve, substrate-induced SOC, not impurities, will set the upper bound on spin diffusion length.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test would be to simulate an amorphous SiO2/graphene interface: if the anisotropic spin texture and vacancy-induced local SOC survive disorder in the oxide, the mechanism is robust; if not, the quantitative agreement with experiments is specific to the crystalline model.
  • The same bond-selective anisotropic Hamiltonian could be applied to other dielectrics and van der Waals substrates (hBN, Al2O3, Si3N4), predicting which interfaces will show $\zeta > 1/2$ without needing magnetic impurities.
  • The nonuniform out-of-plane spin texture is a small effect here but could be amplified in other interfaces; the added term $\Omega_{z,\mathrm{osc}}$ in the modified DP model is a general correction that should appear in any system with modulated out-of-plane spin polarization.
  • If vacancy-induced Elliott-Yafet-like relaxation is real, then controlling the stoichiometry of the oxide (e.g., via annealing) would provide a practical way to switch the dominant spin relaxation mechanism between DP and EY.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper investigates spin relaxation and its anisotropy in graphene supported by SiO2 substrates. The authors perform DFT for graphene on a 2D silica kagome layer and on a crystalline bulk SiO2 slab, extract a tight-binding model that includes bond-resolved anisotropic hopping and Rashba-like spin-orbit terms, and then compute spin lifetimes with first-principles density-matrix dynamics and with linear-scaling kernel-polynomial transport simulations in large systems containing electron-hole puddles. For the 2D SiO2 substrate they find a Rashba-type helical spin texture and D'yakonov-Perel' spin relaxation with anisotropy zeta = 1/2. For the bulk SiO2 substrate they find an anisotropic in-plane spin texture and a nonuniform out-of-plane spin component; the transport simulations yield 0.5 < zeta <= 1, with oxygen vacancies giving zeta ~ 1 through an Elliott-Yafet-like mechanism attributed to defect-induced local spin-orbit coupling, and short-range puddles with intervalley scattering giving 0.7 < zeta < 0.95. The central claim is that substrate spin-orbit coupling alone can produce near-isotropic spin relaxation in graphene on SiO2, offering a possible explanation for measured spin lifetime anisotropies close to 1.

Significance. If the claims hold, the manuscript provides a concrete alternative to magnetic-impurity or contact explanations for the near-isotropic spin lifetimes measured in SiO2-supported graphene spin valves, and it extends the standard Rashba picture of graphene/substrate interfaces by demonstrating how broken in-plane mirror symmetry can modify the spin texture. The strengths are the combination of two independent numerical approaches (first-principles density-matrix dynamics and linear-scaling tight-binding/KPM), the forward nature of the calculations (TB parameters are fitted to DFT band structures and spin textures, not to spin lifetimes or anisotropies), the consistency check against the analytic D'yakonov-Perel' model, and the falsifiable predictions for distinct disorder regimes. The bond-resolved TB Hamiltonian of Eq. (2) that reproduces the DFT spin texture is a useful methodological contribution. However, the quantitative comparison to experiments rests on a small number of crystalline interface configurations and on an inferred defect-induced local spin-orbit mechanism, so the generality of the central claim is not yet fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II A, Fig. 1(b); Sec. IV] The quantitative claim that a bulk SiO2 substrate generically yields 0.5 < zeta <= 1 is based on a single crystalline interface model: a 2x2 graphene cell on a Si-terminated, OH-passivated bulk SiO2 slab in AA stacking. Real SiO2 substrates are amorphous, and the anisotropic in-plane spin texture and the nonuniform out-of-plane component in Fig. 2(f,h), together with the fitted bond-resolved terms of Eq. (2), could average away under random bond angles, terminations, steps, and trapped charges. No ensemble of interface configurations or an amorphous model is studied. The authors should either restrict their conclusions to the specific crystalline interface or demonstrate that the qualitative features and the resulting anisotropy range are robust across representative interface configurations.
  2. [Sec. III C and III D] The zeta ~ 1 result for oxygen vacancies rests on a single defect site and on an inferred mechanism. The paper proposes that oxygen vacancies induce a local spin-orbit coupling that randomizes electron spins during scattering, but no ab initio calculation of the local spin-orbit field, spin texture, or spin mixing around the vacancy is presented; the Elliott-Yafet-like scaling in Fig. 5(b) is obtained by scaling the full scattering matrix with A_scale, which cannot by itself identify the microscopic origin. A DFT-level characterization of the vacancy-induced local spin-orbit coupling, or tests with different vacancy sites and local environments, are needed to support the claim that SiO2 oxygen vacancies generically produce near-isotropic spin relaxation.
  3. [Sec. III C, Fig. 4(a,b)] The oxygen-vacancy impurity density n_imp is not stated in the main text. Since the plotted spin lifetimes (tens of ns) and any comparison with experimental lifetimes depend on n_imp, this missing parameter prevents reproduction of the central zeta ~ 1 result. Please provide the value and its justification, or point to the specific section, equation, or table in the Supplemental Material where it is defined.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. III A] There is a typo: 'poseudopotentials' should be 'pseudopotentials', and the phrase 'fully-relativisitic' should be 'fully relativistic'.
  2. [Sec. III C] The phrase 'strongly constrasts' should read 'strongly contrasts'.
  3. [Fig. 3(a) caption] The sentence 'The lifetime as a function of temperature-dependent (at mu = 25 meV above the CB minimum) is shown in the inset' is missing a noun; it should read 'The lifetime as a function of temperature (at mu = 25 meV above the CB minimum) is shown in the inset'.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. III C] The abstract states that the work quantifies electron-phonon scattering at the graphene/SiO2 interface, but for the bulk-SiO2 case electron-phonon scattering is not computed because of unstable slab phonons; this caveat should be acknowledged in the abstract or the wording should be adjusted.
  5. [Sec. II B, Eq. (2)] The sign and normalization convention for the in-plane-field Rashba term lambda_in should be stated explicitly, since the text only notes that it couples to the z-component of the spin.
  6. [Table I] Given the large number of fitted TB parameters, reporting fit uncertainties or at least specifying the fitted k-path and the weighting of band structure versus spin texture in the fits would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; spin lifetimes are forward calculations from DFT-fitted TB Hamiltonians and are not fitted to experimental anisotropies.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The TB parameters in Eqs. (1)-(2) are fitted to DFT band structures and spin textures (Sec. II B, Table I), not to spin lifetimes or to the experimental anisotropy value. The spin relaxation results in Figs. 3-6 are forward time-dependent density-matrix and real-space transport calculations, or D'yakonov-Perel' model evaluations using the same first-principles spin-orbit fields; no lifetime or anisotropy datum enters the fit. The self-citation to Ref. 13 provides the modified DP intervalley-scattering mechanism used to interpret the bulk-SiO2 results, but the paper numerically verifies this mechanism for its own Hamiltonian (Figs. 4 and 5) rather than taking zeta>1/2 as an input. The only modeling choice that could affect the quantitative claim is the use of crystalline SiO2 interfaces instead of amorphous substrates, which is a validity concern, not a circularity. The unstable-phonon limitation noted in Sec. III C similarly affects completeness but does not reveal a step that reduces by construction to its own input. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 29 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central spin-relaxation results rest on a large set of fitted TB parameters (22 from Table I), two Gaussian puddle models with chosen parameters, and a specific crystalline interface structure. These parameters are fit to DFT and literature values, not to spin lifetime data, so the transport outputs are forward predictions; nevertheless, the high number of adjustable inputs and the crystalline interface assumption mean the quantitative span of the anisotropy is partly model-dependent.

free parameters (29)
  • TB hopping t (bulk SiO2) = 2.57 eV
    Fitted to DFT graphene bands in Table I, Sec. II B.
  • Sublattice gap Delta (bulk SiO2) = 1 meV
    Fitted to DFT Dirac gap, Table I.
  • Rashba SOC lambda_R (bulk SiO2) = 7.3 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Kane-Mele SOC lambda_I (bulk SiO2) = 0.4 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Valley-Zeeman SOC lambda_VZ (bulk SiO2) = -0.69 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT out-of-plane spin, central for intervalley anisotropy, Table I.
  • Anisotropic hopping delta_t24 (bulk SiO2) = -5.83 meV
    Fitted to DFT; modifies specific bonds near substrate atoms, Table I.
  • Anisotropic hopping delta_t37 (bulk SiO2) = 1.43 meV
    Fitted to DFT; second modified bond set, Table I.
  • Anisotropic Rashba delta_lambda_R,24 (bulk SiO2) = -12.55 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture; induces in-plane anisotropy, Table I.
  • Anisotropic Rashba delta_lambda_R,37 (bulk SiO2) = 26.4 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture; second bond set, Table I.
  • In-plane-field Rashba lambda_in_R,24 (bulk SiO2) = -0.75 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT; generates nonuniform out-of-plane spin, Table I.
  • In-plane-field Rashba lambda_in_R,37 (bulk SiO2) = -1.85 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT; second bond set for out-of-plane spin, Table I.
  • TB hopping t (2D SiO2) = 2.47 eV
    Fitted to DFT graphene bands, Table I.
  • Sublattice gap Delta (2D SiO2) = 4.69 meV
    Fitted to DFT Dirac gap, Table I.
  • Rashba SOC lambda_R (2D SiO2) = -9.41 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Kane-Mele SOC lambda_I (2D SiO2) = 0.57 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Valley-Zeeman SOC lambda_VZ (2D SiO2) = -0.03 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT out-of-plane spin, Table I.
  • Anisotropic hopping delta_t24 (2D SiO2) = 0.51 meV
    Fitted to DFT; smaller than the bulk counterpart, Table I.
  • Anisotropic hopping delta_t37 (2D SiO2) = 0.2 meV
    Fitted to DFT, Table I.
  • Anisotropic Rashba delta_lambda_R,24 (2D SiO2) = 1.31 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Anisotropic Rashba delta_lambda_R,37 (2D SiO2) = -1.07 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • In-plane-field Rashba lambda_in_R,24 (2D SiO2) = -0.063 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • In-plane-field Rashba lambda_in_R,37 (2D SiO2) = -0.045 micro-eV
    Fitted to DFT spin texture, Table I.
  • Long-range puddle amplitude V_eh = 50 meV
    Chosen from STM measurements of electron-hole puddles on graphene/SiO2 (Refs. 51,52); random amplitudes in [-50,50] meV.
  • Long-range puddle width l_eh = 10 nm
    Chosen from measured puddle length scale, Sec. III A.
  • Long-range puddle density N_eh/N = 0.0004
    Chosen to mimic measurements (Refs. 51,52), Sec. III A.
  • Short-range puddle amplitude V_eh = 2.7 eV
    Chosen to represent charged impurities directly physisorbed on graphene, known to induce intervalley scattering (Ref. 13); value is a modeling choice, Sec. III C.
  • Short-range puddle width l_eh = 0.435 nm
    Narrow width chosen to induce intervalley scattering; not directly measured, Sec. III C.
  • Short-range puddle density N_eh/N = 0.0001
    Chosen for the short-range scenario (Ref. 13), Sec. III C.
  • Oxygen vacancy impurity density n_imp = Not specified in main text (SM)
    Used in FPDMD impurity scattering, Eq. (7); value not reported in main text, limiting reproducibility.
assumptions (6)
  • ad hoc to paper The interface-induced terms in the graphene Hamiltonian are fully captured by Eq. (1) plus the anisotropic bond-dependent terms of Eq. (2), with only the bonds nearest to the substrate atoms modified.
    The anisotropic Hamiltonian is newly introduced; the choice of which bonds to modify is qualitative and not derived. If additional bonds or terms contribute, the spin texture and lifetimes change. Invoked in Sec. II B, Eq. (2).
  • domain assumption The lowest-energy crystalline interface structures (AB stacking for 2D SiO2, AA stacking with Si termination and OH passivation for bulk SiO2) represent the experimental graphene/SiO2 interface.
    Real SiO2 is amorphous; other terminations or alignments may give different spin textures. This is load-bearing for the comparison to experiments. Sec. II A, Fig. 1.
  • domain assumption Electron-hole puddles can be represented by a sum of Gaussian potentials with random centers, amplitudes in [-V_eh,V_eh], and a uniform width l_eh (Eq. 15).
    The transport results depend quantitatively on V_eh, l_eh, and N_eh/N. Sec. III A, Eq. (15).
  • domain assumption The D'yakonov-Perel' model of Eq. (17) and its extension in Eq. (18) capture spin-orbit mediated spin relaxation, with Markovian momentum and intervalley scattering times.
    The good agreement with numerics supports this, but it is an approximation; for very strong scattering, beyond-DP corrections could appear. Sec. III B and III C.
  • domain assumption Oxygen vacancies are the dominant charged impurities in bulk SiO2 and their scattering is computed via the supercell method with one removed O atom.
    Other impurity species and multi-vacancy configurations are neglected. Sec. III A and III C.
  • domain assumption For bulk SiO2, electron-phonon scattering can be neglected because the slab phonons are unstable.
    The paper states this explicitly; it means the bulk-SiO2 spin relaxation results only cover impurity/puddle-dominated regimes. Sec. III A and III C.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spin lifetime anisotropy in graphene induced by the SiO2 interface." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NBF2YTHY

@misc{pith2026260811615,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spin lifetime anisotropy in graphene induced by the SiO2 interface},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NBF2YTHY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.11615}
}
abstract

Understanding how common dielectric substrates influence the spin transport properties of graphene is essential for advancing graphene-based spintronic technologies. Here we use a comprehensive set of numerical simulations to reveal how a SiO$_2$ substrate modifies the spin texture and governs spin relaxation in graphene. Using first-principles density matrix dynamics simulations, as well as tight-binding (TB) transport simulations, we quantify the effects of electron-phonon scattering, impurity scattering, and electrostatic disorder on the spin relaxation process. We find that a 2D SiO$_2$ substrate induces a predominantly Rashba-type helical spin texture in graphene, leading to a spin lifetime anisotropy of 1/2. Meanwhile, bulk SiO$_2$ breaks in-plane symmetry in graphene, leading to anisotropic in-plane and out-of-plane components in the spin texture, which we capture with a newly-developed TB model of graphene. Transport simulations under realistic disorder conditions reveal a spin lifetime anisotropy between 0.5 and 1, similar to what is seen in measurements of graphene spin valves on a SiO$_2$ substrate. Our results reveal a more complex picture of spin relaxation at the ubiquitous graphene/SiO$_2$ interface, beyond the standard Rashba model, providing critical insight for interpreting experiments and guiding substrate engineering for graphene spintronics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.11615 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Crystal structure of the graphene and 2D SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Band structure and spin texture of graphene on SiO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) In-plane and out-of-plane spin lifetime as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) In-plane and out-of-plane spin lifetime as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Spin relaxation mechanism and (b) anisotropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a,c) Spin relaxation mechanism and anisotropy for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    W. Han, R. K. Kawakami, M. Gmitra, and J. Fabian, Graphene spintronics, Nat. Nanotechnol.9, 794 (2014)

    2014

  2. [2]

    Avsar, H

    A. Avsar, H. Ochoa, F. Guinea, B. ¨Ozyilmaz, B. J. van Wees, and I. J. Vera-Marun, Colloquium: Spintronics in graphene and other two-dimensional materials, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 021003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Roche, B

    S. Roche, B. van Wees, K. Garello, and S. O. Valenzuela, Spintronics with two-dimensional materials and van der Waals heterostructures, 2D Mater.11, 043001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Ingla-Ayn´ es, M

    J. Ingla-Ayn´ es, M. H. D. Guimar˜ aes, R. J. Meijerink, P. J. Zomer, and B. J. van Wees, 24−µm spin relaxation length in boron nitride encapsulated bilayer graphene, Phys. Rev. B92, 201410 (2015)

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Dr¨ ogeler, C

    M. Dr¨ ogeler, C. Franzen, F. Volmer, T. Pohlmann, L. Banszerus, M. Wolter, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Stampfer, and B. Beschoten, Spin Lifetimes Exceed- ing 12 ns in Graphene Nonlocal Spin Valve Devices, Nano Lett.16, 3533 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Z. M. Gebeyehu, S. Parui, J. F. Sierra, M. Timmermans, M. J. Esplandiu, S. Brems, C. Huyghebaert, K. Garello, M. V. Costache, and S. O. Valenzuela, Spin communica- tion over 30µm long channels of chemical vapor deposited graphene on SiO2, 2D Mater.6, 034003 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Panda, M

    J. Panda, M. Ramu, O. Karis, T. Sarkar, and M. V. Ka- malakar, Ultimate Spin Currents in Commercial Chem- ical Vapor Deposited Graphene, ACS Nano14, 12771 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Bisswanger, Z

    T. Bisswanger, Z. Winter, A. Schmidt, F. Volmer, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, C. Stampfer, and B. Beschoten, CVD Bilayer Graphene Spin Valves with 26µm Spin Diffusion Length at Room Temperature, Nano Lett.22, 4949 (2022)

    work page 2022

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Gmitra and J

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

    2015

  2. [10]

    Gmitra, D

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

    2016

  3. [11]

    K. Song, D. Soriano, A. W. Cummings, R. Robles, P. Ordej´ on, and S. Roche, Spin Proximity Effects in Graphene/Topological Insulator Heterostructures, Nano Lett.18, 2033 (2018)

    2018

  4. [12]

    Zollner, M

    K. Zollner, M. Gmitra, and J. Fabian, Electrically tun- able exchange splitting in bilayer graphene on monolayer Cr2X2Te6 with X = Ge, Si, and Sn, New J. Phys.20, 073007 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    A. W. Cummings, J. H. Garcia, J. Fabian, and S. Roche, Giant Spin Lifetime Anisotropy in Graphene Induced by Proximity Effects, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 206601 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    T. S. Ghiasi, J. Ingla-Ayn´ es, A. A. Kaverzin, and B. J. van Wees, Large Proximity-Induced Spin Lifetime Anisotropy in Transition-Metal Dichalco- genide/Graphene Heterostructures, Nano Lett.17, 7528 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    L. A. Ben´ ıtez, J. F. Sierra, W. Savero Torres, A. Arrighi, F. Bonell, M. V. Costache, and S. O. Valenzuela, Strongly anisotropic spin relaxation in graphene–transition metal dichalcogenide heterostructures at room temperature, Nat. Phys.14, 303 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    L. A. Ben´ ıtez, W. Savero Torres, J. F. Sierra, M. Timmer- mans, J. H. Garcia, S. Roche, M. V. Costache, and S. O. Valenzuela, Tunable room-temperature spin galvanic and spin Hall effects in van der Waals heterostructures, Nat. Mater.19, 170 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    T. S. Ghiasi, A. A. Kaverzin, A. H. Dismukes, D. K. de Wal, X. Roy, and B. J. van Wees, Electrical and thermal generation of spin currents by magnetic bilayer graphene, Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 788 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Ertler, S

    C. Ertler, S. Konschuh, M. Gmitra, and J. Fabian, Elec- tron spin relaxation in graphene: The role of the sub- strate, Phys. Rev. B80, 041405 (2009)

    2009

  11. [19]

    Huertas-Hernando, F

    D. Huertas-Hernando, F. Guinea, and A. Brataas, Spin- Orbit-Mediated Spin Relaxation in Graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 146801 (2009)

    2009

  12. [20]

    D’yakonov and V

    M. D’yakonov and V. Perel’, Spin relaxation of conduc- tion electrons in noncentrosymmetric semiconductors, Sov. Phys. Solid State13, 3023 (1972)

    1972

  13. [21]

    Fabian, A

    J. Fabian, A. Matos-Abiague, C. Ertler, P. Stano, and I. ˇZuti´ c, Semiconductor Spintronics, Acta Phys. Slovaca 57, 565 (2007). 10

    2007

  14. [22]

    B. Raes, J. E. Scheerder, M. V. Costache, F. Bonell, J. F. Sierra, J. Cuppens, J. Van de Vondel, and S. O. Valen- zuela, Determination of the spin-lifetime anisotropy in graphene using oblique spin precession, Nat. Commun. 7, 11444 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    B. Raes, A. W. Cummings, F. Bonell, M. V. Costache, J. F. Sierra, S. Roche, and S. O. Valenzuela, Spin pre- cession in anisotropic media, Phys. Rev. B95, 085403 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Kochan, M

    D. Kochan, M. Gmitra, and J. Fabian, Spin Relaxation Mechanism in Graphene: Resonant Scattering by Mag- netic Impurities, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 116602 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Ringer, S

    S. Ringer, S. Hartl, M. Rosenauer, T. V¨ olkl, M. Kadur, F. Hopperdietzel, D. Weiss, and J. Eroms, Measuring anisotropic spin relaxation in graphene, Phys. Rev. B97, 205439 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Zhu and R

    T. Zhu and R. K. Kawakami, Modeling the oblique spin precession in lateral spin valves for accurate determi- nation of the spin lifetime anisotropy: Effect of finite contact resistance and channel length, Phys. Rev. B97, 144413 (2018)

    2018

  19. [28]

    J. Xu, A. Habib, R. Sundararaman, and Y. Ping,Ab initioultrafast spin dynamics in solids, Phys. Rev. B104, 184418 (2021)

    2021

  20. [30]

    Xu and Y

    J. Xu and Y. Ping, Ab Initio Predictions of Spin Re- laxation, Dephasing, and Diffusion in Solids, J. Chem. Theory Comput.20, 492 (2024)

    2024

  21. [31]

    Simoni, G

    J. Simoni, G. Riva, and Y. Ping, First-principles open quantum dynamics for solids based on density-matrix for- malism, J. Chem. Phys.163, 170901 (2025)

    2025

  22. [32]

    Bj¨ orkman, V

    T. Bj¨ orkman, V. Skakalova, S. Kurasch, U. Kaiser, J. C. Meyer, J. H. Smet, and A. V. Krasheninnikov, Vibra- tional Properties of a Two-Dimensional Silica Kagome Lattice, ACS Nano10, 10929 (2016)

    2016

  23. [33]

    Doudin, K

    N. Doudin, K. Saritas, M. Li, I. Ennen, J. A. Boscoboinik, P. Dementyev, A. H¨ utten, S. Ismail-Beigi, and E. I. Altman, Twisting and Rippling of a Two- Dimensional Kagome Lattice: Silica on Au(111), ACS Mater. Lett.4, 1660 (2022)

    2022

  24. [34]

    Sundararaman, K

    R. Sundararaman, K. Letchworth-Weaver, K. A. Schwarz, D. Gunceler, Y. Ozhabes, and T. A. Arias, JDFTx: Software for joint density-functional theory, SoftwareX6, 278 (2017)

    2017

  25. [35]

    D. R. Hamann, Optimized norm-conserving Vanderbilt pseudopotentials, Phys. Rev. B88, 085117 (2013)

    2013

  26. [36]

    Grimme, J

    S. Grimme, J. Antony, S. Ehrlich, and H. Krieg, A con- sistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 ele- ments H-Pu, J. Chem. Phys.132, 154104 (2010)

    2010

  27. [37]

    C. L. Kane and E. J. Mele, Quantum Spin Hall Effect in Graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 226801 (2005)

    2005

  28. [38]

    Gmitra, S

    M. Gmitra, S. Konschuh, C. Ertler, C. Ambrosch-Draxl, and J. Fabian, Band-structure topologies of graphene: Spin-orbit coupling effects from first principles, Phys. Rev. B80, 235431 (2009)

    2009

  29. [39]

    Zollner, A

    K. Zollner, A. W. Cummings, S. Roche, and J. Fabian, Graphene on two-dimensional hexagonal BN, AlN, and GaN: Electronic, spin-orbit, and spin relaxation proper- ties, Phys. Rev. B103, 075129 (2021)

    2021

  30. [40]

    Winkler, Spin orientation and spin precession in inversion-asymmetric quasi-two-dimensional electron systems, Phys

    R. Winkler, Spin orientation and spin precession in inversion-asymmetric quasi-two-dimensional electron systems, Phys. Rev. B69, 045317 (2004)

    2004

  31. [41]

    N. S. Averkiev and L. E. Golub, Giant spin relaxation anisotropy in zinc-blende heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B 60, 15582 (1999)

    1999

  32. [42]

    Kainz, U

    J. Kainz, U. R¨ ossler, and R. Winkler, Anisotropic spin- splitting and spin-relaxation in asymmetric zinc blende semiconductor quantum structures, Phys. Rev. B68, 075322 (2003)

    2003

  33. [43]

    N. S. Averkiev, L. E. Golub, A. S. Gurevich, V. P. Evtikhiev, V. P. Kochereshko, A. V. Platonov, A. S. Shkolnik, and Y. P. Efimov, Spin-relaxation anisotropy in asymmetrical (001) Al xGa1−xAs quantum wells from Hanle-effect measurements: Relative strengths of Rashba and Dresse...

    2006

  34. [44]

    J. F. Sierra, J. Svˇ etl´ ık, 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, Nat. Mater.24, 876 (2025)

    2025

  35. [45]

    See the Supplemental Material for: computational details, structural and electronic properties of graphene/SiO2 interfaces, details on the impact of the anisotropic Hamiltonian on the band structure and spin texture of graphene, details on fitting the TB model, and carrier and...

  36. [46]

    J. Xu, A. Habib, S. Kumar, F. Wu, R. Sundararaman, and Y. Ping, Spin-phonon relaxation from a universal ab initio density-matrix approach, Nat. Commun.11, 2780 (2020)

    2020

  37. [47]

    J. Xu, A. Habib, R. Sundararaman, and Y. Ping, Ab initio ultrafast spin dynamics in solids, Phys. Rev. B104, 184418 (2021)

    2021

  38. [48]

    Giustino, M

    F. Giustino, M. L. Cohen, and S. G. Louie, Electron- phonon interaction using Wannier functions, Phys. Rev. B76, 165108 (2007)

    2007

  39. [49]

    Xu and Y

    J. Xu and Y. Ping, Substrate effects on spin relaxation in two-dimensional Dirac materials with strong spin-orbit coupling, npj Comp. Mater.9, 47 (2023)

    2023

  40. [50]

    J. Xu, K. Li, U. N. Huynh, M. Fadel, J. Huang, R. Sun- dararaman, V. Vardeny, and Y. Ping, How spin relaxes and dephases in bulk halide perovskites, Nat. Commun. 15, 188 (2024)

    2024

  41. [51]

    Deshpande, W

    A. Deshpande, W. Bao, F. Miao, C. N. Lau, and B. J. LeRoy, Spatially resolved spectroscopy of mono- layer graphene on SiO2, Phys. Rev. B79, 205411 (2009)

    2009

  42. [52]

    J. Xue, J. Sanchez-Yamagishi, D. Bulmash, P. Jacquod, A. Deshpande, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Jarillo- Herrero, and B. J. LeRoy, Scanning tunnelling mi- croscopy and spectroscopy of ultra-flat graphene on hexagonal boron nitride, Nat. Mater.10, 282 (2011)

    2011

  43. [53]

    S. Adam, E. H. Hwang, V. M. Galitski, and S. D. Sarma, A self-consistent theory for graphene transport, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.104, 18392 (2007)

    2007

  44. [54]

    J. W. K los and I. V. Zozoulenko, Effect of short- and long-range scattering on the conductivity of graphene: Boltzmann approach vs tight-binding calculations, Phys. Rev. B82, 081414 (2010). 11

    2010

  45. [55]

    Z. Fan, J. H. Garcia, A. W. Cummings, J. E. Barrios- Vargas, M. Panhans, A. Harju, F. Ortmann, and S. Roche, Linear scaling quantum transport methodolo- gies, Phys. Rep.903, 1 (2021)

    2021

  46. [56]

    Van Tuan, F

    D. Van Tuan, F. Ortmann, A. W. Cummings, D. So- riano, and S. Roche, Spin dynamics and relaxation in graphene dictated by electron-hole puddles, Sci. Rep.6, 21046 (2016)

    2016

  47. [57]

    Weiße, G

    A. Weiße, G. Wellein, A. Alvermann, and H. Fehske, The kernel polynomial method, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 275 (2006)

    2006

  48. [58]

    Elliott, Theory of the Effect of Spin-Orbit Coupling on Magnetic Resonance in Some Semiconductors, Phys

    R. Elliott, Theory of the Effect of Spin-Orbit Coupling on Magnetic Resonance in Some Semiconductors, Phys. Rev.96, 266 (1954)

    1954

  49. [59]

    Yafet, g Factors and Spin-Lattice Relaxation of Con- duction Electrons, Solid State Phys.14, 1 (1963)

    Y. Yafet, g Factors and Spin-Lattice Relaxation of Con- duction Electrons, Solid State Phys.14, 1 (1963)

    1963

  50. [60]

    Ochoa, A

    H. Ochoa, A. H. Castro Neto, and F. Guinea, Elliot-Yafet Mechanism in Graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 206808 (2012)

    2012

  51. [61]

    T. J. Boerner, S. Deems, T. R. Furlani, S. L. Knuth, and J. Towns, ACCESS: Advancing Innovation: NSF’s Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Coordination Ecosystem: Services & Support (New York, NY, USA, 2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.