Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 93 references

Arbitrary Control of Non-Hermitian Skin Modes via Disorder and An Electric Field

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Disorder plus an electric field steers non-Hermitian skin modes to any boundary site

desk verdict The core idea is fresh and the clean-limit analytics are correct, but the 'deterministic arbitrary control' claim is unsupported without per-realization statistics; Eq. (6) as written is Hermitian and needs fixing. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.16393 v3 pith:6VQ4T6G7 submitted 2025-11-20 cond-mat.dis-nn cond-mat.mes-hall

Zhao-Fan Cai , Yang Li , Yu-Ran Zhang , Xiaomin Wei , Zhongmin Yang , Tao Liu , Franco Nori This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.mes-hall
keywords non-HermitianskineffectdisorderelectricfieldWannier-Starklocalizationboundarywave-packetdynamicsreciprocallatticedirectedtransport
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 claims that in a two-dimensional non-Hermitian lattice, the place where skin modes accumulate can be chosen continuously by rotating a static electric field relative to the nonreciprocal hopping direction, provided random disorder is present. In a clean system, the field alone suppresses the skin effect and traps wave packets in Bloch oscillations; disorder alone competes with the nonreciprocal hopping. Together, disorder opens transverse transport channels while the component of nonreciprocal hopping perpendicular to the field biases the packet toward a specific boundary point. Varying the field angle sweeps that point along the boundary, and an analogous geometry-dependent control works in reciprocal lattices. If the mechanism holds, it provides a programmable route to directed wave-packet transport in classical and quantum settings.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a biorthogonal Wannier-Stark basis expansion of the disordered Hamiltonian. In this basis, the clean part is diagonal with ladder energies E_{m,n} = F_x m + F_y n, and disorder induces couplings between Stark-localized states, given by a product of Bessel functions with arguments γ_α = -2J/F_α. These couplings open transport between Stark-localized states, while the nonreciprocal hopping gauge factor e^{g·r} makes the transport directional. The geometric object that selects the destination is the decomposition of g into components parallel and perpendicular to the field: only the perpendicular component contributes to long-time drift toward the boundary. The clean-

What would settle it

Compute the final center-of-mass position for many individual disorder realizations at fixed (g, F, ξ) and plot the per-sample distribution instead of the average; if individual realizations scatter broadly along the boundary or fail to track the field angle φ, the claimed arbitrary control is not a property of typical samples.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that full, arbitrary control over where skin modes localize in two-dimensional non-Hermitian lattices can be achieved by combining random on-site disorder with a static electric field. In the clean nonreciprocal model, an exact analytical solution shows that the field produces Stark localization and suppresses the skin effect, so the packet stays in the bulk. Adding disorder creates effective couplings between localized Wannier-Stark states, opening new transport channels; the component of the nonreciprocal hopping vector perpendicular to the field then biases the packet to propagate transversely until it accumulates at a boundary site. Rotating the field orienta

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ensemble average over disorder realizations represents the behavior of a typical single sample—that nearly every disorder configuration localizes at the prescribed boundary site rather than at randomly scattered sites.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the mechanism holds, rotating the field angle φ relative to the nonreciprocal hopping vector g moves the final boundary accumulation continuously along the chosen quadrant, so a single lattice can route wave packets to many destinations.
  • Because the drift is directed by the perpendicular component of g, control survives moderate variations in field strength, nonreciprocity, and disorder strength, as shown by the parameter sweeps.
  • In reciprocal lattices, the lattice geometry—square versus slanted-edge triangles—determines whether boundary localization occurs and where along the edge it accumulates, extending the recipe to systems without nonreciprocal hopping.
  • The open-quantum-system calculation indicates that the same effective dynamics arises from gain and loss channels, so the route is not limited to explicitly non-Hermitian Hamiltonians.
  • The IPR and ultra-long-time simulations indicate that once the packet reaches the boundary it remains sharply localized rather than spreading diffusively.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported control is demonstrated through ensemble averages over 1000 disorder realizations; the paper's claim of deterministic, arbitrary control would be strengthened by showing that individual realizations localize at the prescribed site with narrow spread, which is not presented.
  • The mechanism suggests a testable design rule for classical metamaterials: in a circuit or photonic lattice with engineered asymmetric hopping, rotating the bias direction should steer the output port continuously along the boundary, enabling a reconfigurable router in a single device.
  • Because only the perpendicular component of the nonreciprocal vector drives transport, the destination should shift approximately linearly with the tangent of the misalignment angle for small deviations; this quantitative angular-dependence prediction could be checked directly in numerical simulations.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and studies a mechanism for controlling boundary localization in two-dimensional non-Hermitian lattices by combining a static electric field with random on-site disorder. In the nonreciprocal Hatano–Nelson model, the clean system with an electric field exhibits Stark-localized Bloch oscillations rather than the NHSE; the authors show analytically, via an exact solution in the clean limit and a Wannier–Stark expansion, that adding disorder creates effective couplings between localized states. Their numerical simulations, averaged over 1000 disorder realizations, show that the wave-packet center of mass drifts perpendicular to the field and eventually localizes at a boundary position that depends on the field orientation relative to the nonreciprocal hopping direction. They also present analogous results for reciprocal lattices, where geometry controls the localization, and a Lindblad master-equation treatment that maps open-system dynamics onto the same non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. The central claim is that the boundary localization position can be continuously and arbitrarily controlled by tuning the angle between the electric field and the nonreciprocal hopping vector.

Significance. If correct, the proposed mechanism would provide a versatile and experimentally relevant control knob for the non-Hermitian skin effect in two dimensions, going beyond earlier work that only tuned the existence or degree of the skin effect. The manuscript has clear strengths: the clean-limit dynamics are solved exactly (SM Sec. I), the Wannier–Stark expansion leading to the disorder-induced coupling is explicit and not circular, and the numerical checks include IPR and ultra-long-time dynamics. The extension to reciprocal lattices and to a Liouvillian description broadens the applicability. However, the central claim of 'deterministic' and 'arbitrary' control is supported only by disorder-averaged observables; no per-realization distribution is provided. Since the key new assertion is about controlling where a given wave packet localizes, rather than about the ensemble-averaged density, this is a load-bearing gap that must be addressed before the claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Figs. 2–4 and SM Secs. III–IV; abstract] The abstract and introduction claim 'deterministic control' and 'full control' over the skin-mode localization site, but every quantitative result for the disordered case—center-of-mass trajectories, final positions, second moments, and IPRs—is averaged over 1000 disorder realizations (100 in the ultra-long-time SM results). An ensemble-averaged trajectory can lie on a smooth curve such as Fig. 3(a) even if individual realizations localize at a broad distribution of boundary sites. The Wannier–Stark coupling in Eq. (5) and SM Eq. (S43) is linear in the disorder and symmetric in the state indices; it does not by itself imply that the drift direction or the final site is unique per sample. The authors should provide per-realization statistics: for representative parameters, a scatter of the final center-of-mass position over realizations, the standard deviation of that position, and the fr
  2. [Nonreciprocal model and SM Sec. III] The paper's title and central claim concern 'skin modes', which are eigenstates of an open-boundary non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. For the disordered nonreciprocal case, however, all evidence is dynamical: an initial Gaussian wave packet evolves and becomes boundary-localized. No eigenstate spectrum, eigenstate spatial density, or overlap of the final state with the OBC eigenstates is shown for the disordered Hamiltonian in Eq. (1). The IPR in SM Sec. III demonstrates localization of the time-evolved state, but not that it is a stationary skin mode rather than a transient scattering state pinned at the boundary. The authors should either provide OBC eigenstate calculations for the same parameters or explicitly state and justify a dynamical definition of 'skin-mode localization' that makes the wave-packet dynamics the relevant observable.
  3. [Fig. 3(a) and 'arbitrary control'] The claim of 'arbitrary' boundary control is demonstrated by sweeping the field orientation φ while keeping the nonreciprocity direction θ fixed at π/4, and the final positions lie along the upper-right quadrant boundary. The full parameter space (θ,φ) is not explored, and no statement is made about whether every point on the complete boundary can be reached by some combination of θ and φ. If the reachable set is limited to a quadrant or an arc, the word 'arbitrary' in the abstract and introduction is an overstatement. Please specify the reachable region of the boundary as a function of the control parameters, or soften the wording accordingly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and conclusion] Typographical issues: 'remains a significant challenging' should be 'remains a significant challenge'; in the conclusion, 'in clear lattices' should be 'in clean lattices'.
  2. [SM Sec. III] The text says the insets show 'the states with the smallest IPR' when verifying boundary localization; since boundary-localized states have large IPR, this likely should be 'largest IPR'. Please check and correct.
  3. [General notation] The notation g_perp is used informally in the discussion of Figs. 2(d–f) but is not defined. Define it explicitly as the component of g perpendicular to the electric field, e.g., g_perp = g · r_perp, to avoid ambiguity.
  4. [References] The reference to the Supplemental Material appears as 'SM in Ref. [83]' with no arXiv identifier or journal link; the manuscript should give full information so the SM is independently retrievable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the derivation chain is self-contained; the disorder-averaged-data caveat is an evidentiary limitation, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The clean-limit dynamics (Eq. 3 / SM Eq. S25) are obtained exactly from the Hamiltonian via a gauge transformation and Jacobi–Anger expansion, with no target result used as input. The disordered mechanism is derived by expanding the same Hamiltonian in biorthogonal Wannier–Stark states (SM Eqs. S35–S43), yielding the disorder-induced coupling V_(m,n),(m',n') from first principles; this coupling is not fitted to any output. The claimed transport direction and boundary localization are read off from independent numerical simulations of the center of mass, second moment, and IPR (Figs. 2, 3, S2, S3), none of which are constructed to equal the paper's claims. The self-citation to Ref. [83] points to the included Supplemental Material, not to an external unverified result, and the cited geometry-dependent skin effect (Ref. [91]) is external prior work. The fact that all reported quantities are averaged over 1000 disorder realizations is a limitation for the word "deterministic," but it is not circularity: no parameter is fitted to make the averaged output match the claim, and the claim is not defined in terms of that average. No step reduces by construction to its own input, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's original contribution is a numerical control mechanism; it relies on standard mathematical identities and on the (unverified) assumption that ensemble-averaged localization implies sample-specific controllability. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced; the effective nonreciprocal hopping in the Lindblad section is derived from explicit jump operators, not an invented entity.

free parameters (3)
  • Initial wave-packet width σ = 2 (lattice units)
    Chosen by hand for all simulations; robustness of the control mechanism to σ is not tested, though it is unlikely to be load-bearing.
  • Lattice size L_x × L_y = 61 × 61
    Chosen for numerics; finite-size scaling of the localization position is not systematically studied (only selected ultra-long-time runs).
  • Number of disorder realizations = 1000 (100 for ultra-long-time runs)
    Statistical averaging choice; no convergence of the mean position or variance is shown.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Bessel orthogonality/completeness identity Σ_x J_{x-m}(z) J_{x-m'}(z)=δ_{m,m'}
    Used in SM Eq. (S37) to establish biorthonormality of the Wannier–Stark basis.
  • standard math Wannier–Stark states form a complete biorthonormal basis in the thermodynamic limit
    Invoked in SM Sec. II to expand the disordered Hamiltonian in the basis of Eq. (S33)-(S36).
  • domain assumption Disorder-averaged dynamics represent the behavior of a typical single disorder sample
    All reported observables (center-of-mass, second moment, IPR, density) are averaged over 1000 realizations; the paper does not provide per-sample fluctuation data, yet claims deterministic control.
  • domain assumption Nonreciprocal hopping direction g determines the NHSE localization direction
    Standard property of the Hatano–Nelson model, cited as Ref. [81]; used throughout to relate g to the skin-mode propagation direction.
  • domain assumption Geometry-dependent skin effect in reciprocal lattices occurs as described in Ref. [91]
    The reciprocal-lattice results in Fig. 4 and SM Fig. S3 rely on the prior observation that certain lattice geometries (triangles) produce boundary-localized eigenstates even with reciprocal hoppings.
  • domain assumption Born–Markov approximation and Lindblad form for open quantum systems
    SM Sec. V uses a Lindblad master equation with specific nonlocal jump operators to derive the effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian; this is a standard but nontrivial modeling assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Arbitrary Control of Non-Hermitian Skin Modes via Disorder and An Electric Field." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6VQ4T6G7

@misc{pith2026251116393,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Arbitrary Control of Non-Hermitian Skin Modes via Disorder and An Electric Field},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6VQ4T6G7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.16393}
}
read the original abstract

The non-Hermitian skin effect (NHSE), characterized by the accumulation of a macroscopic number of bulk states at system boundaries, is a hallmark of non-Hermitian physics. However, in higher dimensions, achieving deterministic control over where skin modes accumulate remains a major challenge. Here, we propose a versatile route to program the skin-mode localization site in two-dimensional non-Hermitian lattices by combining disorder with a static electric field. While the electric field alone suppresses the NHSE in a clean system, the introduction of disorder induces transverse wave-packet transport perpendicular to the field. In nonreciprocal lattices, when the nonreciprocal hopping is misaligned with the electric field, the hopping component perpendicular to the field guides wave-packet propagation and produces boundary localization. By tuning the relative orientation between the electric field and the nonreciprocal hopping direction, the boundary localization position can be continuously and arbitrarily controlled. We further demonstrate distinct geometry-dependent manipulation of skin modes in reciprocal lattices, where controllable boundary localization emerges solely from the lattice geometry. Our results establish a robust and broadly applicable route to engineer boundary accumulation and directed transport along prescribed directions in two-dimensional non-Hermitian systems, enabling reconfigurable wave routing in classical platforms and programmable transport functionalities in quantum settings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.16393 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic of the 2D Hatano–Nelson model with nonreciprocal hopping, subject to a static electric field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Time-evolution trajectory of the center of mass, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Trajectories of the center of mass, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a,b) Spatial distributions of eigenstates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [52]

    Observation of disorder-induced boundary localization,

    B.-B. Wang, Z. Cheng, H.-Y. Zou, Y. Ge, K.-Q. Zhao, Q.-R. Si, S.-Q. Yuan, H.-X. Sun, H. Xue, and B. Zhang, “Observation of disorder-induced boundary localization,” PNAS122, e2422154122 (2025)

    2025

  2. [1]

    Exceptional topology of non-Hermitian systems,

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, “Exceptional topology of non-Hermitian systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 015005 (2021)

    2021

  3. [2]

    Non-Hermitian physics,

    Y. Ashida, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, “Non-Hermitian physics,” Adv. Phys.69, 249 (2020)

    2020

  4. [3]

    Parity- time symmetry and exceptional points in photonics,

    S. K. ¨Ozdemir, S. Rotter, F. Nori, and L. Yang, “Parity- time symmetry and exceptional points in photonics,” Nat. Mater.18, 783 (2019)

    2019

  5. [4]

    Quantum state tomography across the exceptional point in a single dissipative qubit,

    M. Naghiloo, M. Abbasi, Yogesh N. Joglekar, and K. W. Murch, “Quantum state tomography across the exceptional point in a single dissipative qubit,” Nat. Phys. 6 15, 1232 (2019)

    2019

  6. [5]

    Topolectrical- circuit realization of topological corner modes,

    S. Imhof, C. Berger, F. Bayer, J. Brehm, L. W. Molenkamp, T. Kiessling, F. Schindler, C. H. Lee, M. Greiter, T. Neupert, and R. Thomale, “Topolectrical- circuit realization of topological corner modes,” Nat. Phys. 14, 925 (2018)

    2018

  7. [6]

    Hybrid-order skin effect from loss- induced nonreciprocity,

    J. Wu, Y. Hu, Z. He, K. Deng, X. Huang, M. Ke, W. Deng, J. Lu, and Z. Liu, “Hybrid-order skin effect from loss- induced nonreciprocity,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 176601 (2025)

    2025

  8. [7]

    Chiral control of quantum states in non-Hermitian spin–orbit-coupled fermions,

    Z. Ren, D. Liu, E. Zhao, C. He, K. K. Pak, J. Li, and G.- B. Jo, “Chiral control of quantum states in non-Hermitian spin–orbit-coupled fermions,” Nat. Phys.18, 385 (2022)

    2022

Show all 93 references
  1. [8]

    Edge states and topological invariants of non-Hermitian systems,

    S. Yao and Z. Wang, “Edge states and topological invariants of non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 086803 (2018)

    2018

  2. [9]

    Non-Bloch band theory of non-Hermitian systems,

    K. Yokomizo and S. Murakami, “Non-Bloch band theory of non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 066404 (2019)

    2019

  3. [10]

    Correspondence between winding numbers and skin modes in non- Hermitian systems,

    K. Zhang, Z. Yang, and C. Fang, “Correspondence between winding numbers and skin modes in non- Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 126402 (2020)

    2020

  4. [11]

    Second-order topological phases in non-Hermitian systems,

    T. Liu, Y.-R. Zhang, Q. Ai, Z. Gong, K. Kawabata, M. Ueda, and F. Nori, “Second-order topological phases in non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 076801 (2019)

    2019

  5. [12]

    Biorthogonal bulk-boundary correspondence in non-Hermitian systems,

    F. K. Kunst, E. Edvardsson, J. C. Budich, and E. J. Bergholtz, “Biorthogonal bulk-boundary correspondence in non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 026808 (2018)

    2018

  6. [13]

    Topological dissipation in a time-multiplexed photonic resonator network,

    C. Leefmans, A. Dutt, J. Williams, L. Yuan, M. Parto, F. Nori, S. Fan, and A. Marandi, “Topological dissipation in a time-multiplexed photonic resonator network,” Nat. Phys.18, 442 (2022)

    2022

  7. [14]

    Interaction-induced second-order skin effect,

    W.-Z. Ling, Z.-F. Cai, and T. Liu, “Interaction-induced second-order skin effect,” Phys. Rev. B111, 205418 (2025)

    2025

  8. [15]

    Dissipation and interaction-controlled non-Hermitian skin effects,

    Y. Li, Z.-F. Cai, T. Liu, and F. Nori, “Dissipation and interaction-controlled non-Hermitian skin effects,” arXiv:2408.12451 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Non-Hermitian Chern bands,

    S. Yao, F. Song, and Z. Wang, “Non-Hermitian Chern bands,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 136802 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Non-Hermitian skin effect and chiral damping in open quantum systems,

    F. Song, S. Yao, and Z. Wang, “Non-Hermitian skin effect and chiral damping in open quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 170401 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    Topological correspondence between Hermitian and non- Hermitian systems: Anomalous dynamics,

    J. Y. Lee, J. Ahn, H. Zhou, and A. Vishwanath, “Topological correspondence between Hermitian and non- Hermitian systems: Anomalous dynamics,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 206404 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Classification of exceptional points and non-Hermitian topological semimetals,

    K. Kawabata, T. Bessho, and M. Sato, “Classification of exceptional points and non-Hermitian topological semimetals,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 066405 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Topological band theory for non-Hermitian systems from the Dirac equation,

    Z. Y. Ge, Y. R. Zhang, T. Liu, S. W. Li, H. Fan, and F. Nori, “Topological band theory for non-Hermitian systems from the Dirac equation,” Phys. Rev. B100, 054105 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Quantum exceptional points of non-Hermitian Hamiltonians and Liouvillians: The effects of quantum jumps,

    F. Minganti, A. Miranowicz, R. W. Chhajlany, and F. Nori, “Quantum exceptional points of non-Hermitian Hamiltonians and Liouvillians: The effects of quantum jumps,” Phys. Rev. A100, 062131 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Non-Hermitian topological light steering,

    H. Zhao, X. Qiao, T. Wu, B. Midya, S. Longhi, and L. Feng, “Non-Hermitian topological light steering,” Science365, 1163 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Symmetry and topology in non-Hermitian physics,

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, “Symmetry and topology in non-Hermitian physics,” Phys. Rev. X9, 041015 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Non- Hermitian boundary modes and topology,

    D. S. Borgnia, A. J. Kruchkov, and R.-J. Slager, “Non- Hermitian boundary modes and topology,” Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 056802 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Non-Hermitian robust edge states in one dimension: Anomalous localization and eigenspace condensation at exceptional points,

    V. M. Martinez Alvarez, J. E. Barrios Vargas, and L. E. F. Foa Torres, “Non-Hermitian robust edge states in one dimension: Anomalous localization and eigenspace condensation at exceptional points,” Phys. Rev. B97, 121401 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    Liouvillian exceptional points of any order in dissipative linear bosonic systems: Coherence functions and switching betweenPTand anti-PTsymmetries,

    I. I. Arkhipov, A. Miranowicz, F. Minganti, and F. Nori, “Liouvillian exceptional points of any order in dissipative linear bosonic systems: Coherence functions and switching betweenPTand anti-PTsymmetries,” Phys. Rev. A102, 033715 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Topological origin of non-Hermitian skin effects,

    N. Okuma, K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, and M. Sato, “Topological origin of non-Hermitian skin effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 086801 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    Higher-order Weyl-exceptional-ring semimetals,

    T. Liu, J. J. He, Z. Yang, and F. Nori, “Higher-order Weyl-exceptional-ring semimetals,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 196801 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Non-Hermitian boundary spectral winding,

    Z. Ou, Y. Wang, and L. Li, “Non-Hermitian boundary spectral winding,” Phys. Rev. B107, L161404 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Anisotropic scaling localization in higher-dimensional non-Hermitian systems,

    Z. Ou, H.-Q. Liang, G.-F. Xu, and L. Li, “Anisotropic scaling localization in higher-dimensional non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. B112, L161109 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    Gain- loss-induced hybrid skin-topological effect,

    Y. Li, C. Liang, C. Wang, C. Lu, and Y.-C. Liu, “Gain- loss-induced hybrid skin-topological effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 223903 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Observation of impurity-induced scale-free localization in a disordered non-Hermitian electrical circuit,

    H. Wang, J. Liu, T. Liu, and W.-B. Ju, “Observation of impurity-induced scale-free localization in a disordered non-Hermitian electrical circuit,” Front. Phys.20, 014203 (2025)

    2025

  26. [34]

    Non-Hermitian absorption spec- troscopy,

    K. Li and Y. Xu, “Non-Hermitian absorption spec- troscopy,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 093001 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Non- Hermitian sensing from the perspective of post-selected measurements,

    N. Zeng, T. Liu, K. Xia, Y.-R. Zhang, and F. Nori, “Non- Hermitian sensing from the perspective of post-selected measurements,” arXiv:2505.05058 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Chiral-extended photon-emitter dressed states in non- Hermitian topological baths,

    Z.-F. Cai, X. Wang, Z.-X. Liang, T. Liu, and F. Nori, “Chiral-extended photon-emitter dressed states in non- Hermitian topological baths,” Phys. Rev. A111, L061701 (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    Dynamical degeneracy splitting and directional invisibility in non-Hermitian systems,

    K. Zhang, C. Fang, and Z. Yang, “Dynamical degeneracy splitting and directional invisibility in non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 036402 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    Localization-delocalization transitions in non-Hermitian Aharonov-Bohm cages,

    X. Li, J. Liu, and T. Liu, “Localization-delocalization transitions in non-Hermitian Aharonov-Bohm cages,” Front. Phys.19, 33211 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Anderson delocalization in strongly coupled disordered non-Hermitian chains,

    W.-W. Jin, J. Liu, X. Wang, Y.-R. Zhang, X. Huang, X. Wei, W. Ju, Z. Yang, T. Liu, and F. Nori, “Anderson delocalization in strongly coupled disordered non-Hermitian chains,” Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 076602 (2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    Non-Abelian effects in dissipative photonic topological lattices,

    M. Parto, C. Leefmans, J. Williams, F. Nori, and A. Marandi, “Non-Abelian effects in dissipative photonic topological lattices,” Nat. Commun.14, 1440 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Amoeba formulation of non-Bloch band theory in arbitrary dimensions,

    H.-Y. Wang, F. Song, and Z. Wang, “Amoeba formulation of non-Bloch band theory in arbitrary dimensions,” Phys. Rev. X14, 021011 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    Non- Hermitian edge burst,

    W.-T. Xue, Y.-M. Hu, F. Song, and Z. Wang, “Non- Hermitian edge burst,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 120401 7 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Entangle- ment phase transition induced by the non-Hermitian skin effect,

    K. Kawabata, T. Numasawa, and S. Ryu, “Entangle- ment phase transition induced by the non-Hermitian skin effect,” Phys. Rev. X13, 021007 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Hopf bifurcation of nonlinear non-Hermitian skin effect,

    K. Kawabata and D. Nakamura, “Hopf bifurcation of nonlinear non-Hermitian skin effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 126610 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    Non-Hermitian Mott skin effect,

    T. Yoshida, S.-B. Zhang, T. Neupert, and N. Kawakami, “Non-Hermitian Mott skin effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 076502 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Percolation-inducedPT symmetry breaking,

    M. Yang and C. H. Lee, “Percolation-inducedPT symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 136602 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Complex frequency fingerprint: Basic concept and theory,

    J. Huang, K. Ding, J. Hu, and Z. Yang, “Complex frequency fingerprint: Basic concept and theory,” arXiv.2411.12577 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Intrinsic perturbation induced anomalous higher-order boundary states in non-Hermitian systems,

    H.-Q. Liang, Z. Ou, L. Li, and G.-F. Xu, “Intrinsic perturbation induced anomalous higher-order boundary states in non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. B111, L241112 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    Versatile control of nonlinear topological states in non- Hermitian systems,

    Z.-F. Cai, Y.-C. Wang, Y.-R. Zhang, T. Liu, and F. Nori, “Versatile control of nonlinear topological states in non- Hermitian systems,” Commun. Phys.8, 360 (2025)

    2025

  42. [50]

    Observation of the non-Hermitian skin effect and Fermi skin on a digital quantum computer,

    R. Shen, T. Chen, B. Yang, and C. H. Lee, “Observation of the non-Hermitian skin effect and Fermi skin on a digital quantum computer,” Nat. Commun.16, 1340 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Algebraic non- Hermitian skin effect and generalized Fermi surface formula in arbitrary dimensions,

    K. Zhang, C. Shu, and K. Sun, “Algebraic non- Hermitian skin effect and generalized Fermi surface formula in arbitrary dimensions,” Phys. Rev. X15, 031039 (2025)

    2025

  44. [53]

    Non-Hermitian origin of detachable boundary states in topological insulators,

    D. Nakamura, K. Shiozaki, K. Shimomura, M. Sato, and K. Kawabata, “Non-Hermitian origin of detachable boundary states in topological insulators,” Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 096601 (2025)

    2025

  45. [54]

    Quantum-classical correspondence of non-Hermitian symmetry breaking,

    Z.-T. Cai, H.-D. Li, and W. Chen, “Quantum-classical correspondence of non-Hermitian symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 240201 (2025)

    2025

  46. [55]

    Complex frequency fingerprint: Interacting driven non- Hermitian skin effect,

    Z. Yang, Z. Wang, J. Huang, Z. Zheng, and J. Hu, “Complex frequency fingerprint: Interacting driven non- Hermitian skin effect,” arXiv.2509.18828 (2025)

    2025

  47. [56]

    Observation of non-Hermitian degeneracies in a chaotic exciton-polariton billiard,

    T. Gao, E. Estrecho, K. Y. Bliokh, T. C. H. Liew, M. D. Fraser, S. Brodbeck, M. Kamp, C. Schneider, S. H¨ ofling, Y. Yamamoto, F. Nori, Y. S. Kivshar, A. G. Truscott, R. G. Dall, and E. A. Ostrovskaya, “Observation of non-Hermitian degeneracies in a chaotic exciton-polariton b...

    2015

  48. [57]

    Experimental realization of on-chip few-photon control around exceptional points,

    P. Song, X. Ruan, H. Ding, S. Li, M. Chen, R. Huang, L.-M. Kuang, Q. Zhao, J.-S. Tsai, H. Jing, L. Yang, F. Nori, D. Zheng, Y.-x. Liu, J. Zhang, and Z. Peng, “Experimental realization of on-chip few-photon control around exceptional points,” Nat. Commun.15, 9848 (2024)

    2024

  49. [58]

    Dynamically encircling an exceptional point through phase-tracked closed-loop control,

    S. Zhang, Y. Huang, L. Yu, K. He, N. Zhou, D. Xiao, X. Wu, F. Nori, H. Jing, and X. Zhou, “Dynamically encircling an exceptional point through phase-tracked closed-loop control,” Commun. Phys.8, 344 (2025)

    2025

  50. [59]

    Imaginary-Stark skin effect,

    H. Lin, J. Pi, Y. Qi, W. Qin, F. Nori, and G.-L. Long, “Imaginary-Stark skin effect,” Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033150 (2025)

    2025

  51. [60]

    Dynamical control of quantum heat engines using exceptional points,

    J.-W. Zhang, J.-Q. Zhang, G.-Y. Ding, J.-C. Li, J.-T. Bu, B. Wang, L.-L. Yan, S.-L. Su, L. Chen, F. Nori, S ¸. K. ¨Ozdemir, F. Zhou, H. Jing, and M. Feng, “Dynamical control of quantum heat engines using exceptional points,” Nat. Commun.13, 6225 (2022)

    2022

  52. [61]

    Dynamically crossing dia- bolic points while encircling exceptional curves: A programmable symmetric-asymmetric multimode switch,

    I. I. Arkhipov, A. Miranowicz, F. Minganti, S ¸. K. ¨Ozdemir, and F. Nori, “Dynamically crossing dia- bolic points while encircling exceptional curves: A programmable symmetric-asymmetric multimode switch,” Nat. Commun.14, 2076 (2023)

  53. [62]

    Non-Markovian quantum exceptional points,

    J.-D. Lin, P.-C. Kuo, N. Lambert, A. Miranowicz, F. Nori, and Y.-N. Chen, “Non-Markovian quantum exceptional points,” Nat. Commun.16, 1289 (2025)

    2025

  54. [63]

    Non-Markovian skin effect,

    P.-C. Kuo, S.-L. Yang, N. Lambert, J.-D. Lin, Y.-T. Huang, F. Nori, and Y.-N. Chen, “Non-Markovian skin effect,” Phys. Rev. Res.7, L012068 (2025)

    2025

  55. [64]

    How to realize compact and noncompact localized states in disorder-free hypercube networks,

    I. I. Arkhipov, F. Minganti, and F. Nori, “How to realize compact and noncompact localized states in disorder-free hypercube networks,” Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033002 (2025)

    2025

  56. [65]

    Simple formulas of directional amplification from non- Bloch band theory,

    W.-T. Xue, M.-R. Li, Y.-M. Hu, F. Song, and Z. Wang, “Simple formulas of directional amplification from non- Bloch band theory,” Phys. Rev. B103, L241408 (2021)

    2021

  57. [66]

    Topological framework for directional amplification in driven-dissipative cavity arrays,

    C. C. Wanjura, M. Brunelli, and A. Nunnenkamp, “Topological framework for directional amplification in driven-dissipative cavity arrays,” Nat. Commun.11, 3149 (2020)

    2020

  58. [67]

    Amplification of quantum signals by the non-Hermitian skin effect,

    Q. Wang, C. Zhu, Y. Wang, B. Zhang, and Y. D. Chong, “Amplification of quantum signals by the non-Hermitian skin effect,” Phys. Rev. B106, 024301 (2022)

    2022

  59. [68]

    Critical non- Hermitian skin effect,

    L. Li, C. H. Lee, S. Mu, and J. Gong, “Critical non- Hermitian skin effect,” Nat. Commun.11, 5491 (2020)

    2020

  60. [69]

    Scale-free localization andPTsymmetry breaking from local non- Hermiticity,

    B. Li, H.-R. Wang, F. Song, and Z. Wang, “Scale-free localization andPTsymmetry breaking from local non- Hermiticity,” Phys. Rev. B108, L161409 (2023)

    2023

  61. [70]

    Non-Hermitian skin effect in periodically driven dissipative ultracold atoms,

    Z.-F. Cai, T. Liu, and Z. Yang, “Non-Hermitian skin effect in periodically driven dissipative ultracold atoms,” Phys. Rev. A109, 063329 (2024)

    2024

  62. [71]

    Anomalous behaviors of quantum emitters in non- Hermitian baths,

    Z. Gong, M. Bello, D. Malz, and F. K. Kunst, “Anomalous behaviors of quantum emitters in non- Hermitian baths,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 223601 (2022)

    2022

  63. [72]

    Manipulating the non-Hermitian skin effect via electric fields,

    Y. Peng, J. Jie, D. Yu, and Y. Wang, “Manipulating the non-Hermitian skin effect via electric fields,” Phys. Rev. B106, L161402 (2022)

    2022

  64. [73]

    Impurity induced scale- free localization,

    L. Li, C. H. Lee, and J. Gong, “Impurity induced scale- free localization,” Commun. Phys.4, 42 (2021)

    2021

  65. [74]

    Anomalous skin effects in disordered systems with a single non-Hermitian impurity,

    P. Molignini, O. Arandes, and E. J. Bergholtz, “Anomalous skin effects in disordered systems with a single non-Hermitian impurity,” Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033058 (2023)

    2023

  66. [75]

    Nonlinear non-Hermitian skin effect and skin solitons in temporal photonic feedforward lattices,

    S. Wang, B. Wang, C. Liu, C. Qin, L. Zhao, W. Liu, S. Longhi, and P. Lu, “Nonlinear non-Hermitian skin effect and skin solitons in temporal photonic feedforward lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 243805 (2025)

    2025

  67. [76]

    Nonunitary scaling theory of non-Hermitian localization,

    K. Kawabata and S. Ryu, “Nonunitary scaling theory of non-Hermitian localization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 166801 (2021)

    2021

  68. [77]

    Erratic non-Hermitian skin localization,

    S. Longhi, “Erratic non-Hermitian skin localization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 196302 (2025)

    2025

  69. [78]

    Magnetic suppression of non-Hermitian skin effects,

    M. Lu, X.-X. Zhang, and M. Franz, “Magnetic suppression of non-Hermitian skin effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 256402 (2021)

    2021

  70. [79]

    Enhancement of second-order non-Hermitian skin effect by magnetic fields,

    C.-A. Li, B. Trauzettel, T. Neupert, and S.-B. Zhang, “Enhancement of second-order non-Hermitian skin effect by magnetic fields,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 116601 (2023). 8

    2023

  71. [80]

    Cyclotron quantization and mirror-time transition on nonreciprocal lattices,

    K. Shao, Z.-T. Cai, H. Geng, W. Chen, and D. Y. Xing, “Cyclotron quantization and mirror-time transition on nonreciprocal lattices,” Phys. Rev. B106, L081402 (2022)

    2022

  72. [81]

    Localization transitions in non-Hermitian quantum mechanics,

    N. Hatano and D. R. Nelson, “Localization transitions in non-Hermitian quantum mechanics,” Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 570 (1996)

    1996

  73. [82]

    Dynamics of band electrons in electric and magnetic fields,

    G. H. Wannier, “Dynamics of band electrons in electric and magnetic fields,” Rev. Mod. Phys.34, 645 (1962)

    1962

  74. [83]

    demonstrates that similar dynamics can arise in open quantum systems, where coherent–dissipative interplay generates effective nonreciprocal hopping. Geometry-dependent manipulation of skin modes in reciprocal lattice.—We have revealed the versatile control of skin-mode locali...

  75. [84]

    See Supplemental Material for detailed derivations

  76. [85]

    Topological phases of non- Hermitian systems,

    Z. Gong, Y. Ashida, K. Kawabata, K. Takasan, S. Higashikawa, and M. Ueda, “Topological phases of non- Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. X8, 031079 (2018)

    2018

  77. [86]

    Unified one-parameter scaling function for Anderson localization transitions in nonreciprocal non-Hermitian systems,

    C. Wang, W. He, X. R. Wang, and H. Ren, “Unified one-parameter scaling function for Anderson localization transitions in nonreciprocal non-Hermitian systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 176301 (2025)

    2025

  78. [87]

    Anisotropic Anderson localization in higher-dimensional nonreciprocal lattices,

    H. Hu J. Shang, “Anisotropic Anderson localization in higher-dimensional nonreciprocal lattices,” arXiv:2507.14523 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  79. [88]

    Spreading dynamics in the Hatano- Nelson model,

    J. Shang and H. Hu, “Spreading dynamics in the Hatano- Nelson model,” Phys. Rev. B112, 014205 (2025)

    2025

  80. [89]

    Localization in one-dimensional disordered systems in the presence of an electric field,

    C. M. Soukoulis, J. V. Jos´ e, E. N. Economou, and P. Sheng, “Localization in one-dimensional disordered systems in the presence of an electric field,” Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 764 (1983)

    1983

  81. [90]

    Anderson localization and delocal- ization in an electric field,

    T. R. Kirkpatrick, “Anderson localization and delocal- ization in an electric field,” Phys. Rev. B33, 780 (1986)

    1986

  82. [91]

    Interplay between Anderson and Stark localization in 2D lattices,

    A. R. Kolovsky, “Interplay between Anderson and Stark localization in 2D lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 190602 (2008)

    2008

  83. [92]

    Universal non- Hermitian skin effect in two and higher dimensions,

    K. Zhang, Z. Yang, and C. Fang, “Universal non- Hermitian skin effect in two and higher dimensions,” Nat. Commun.13, 2496 (2022)

    2022

  84. [93]

    Experimental realization of geometry-dependent skin effect in a reciprocal two-dimensional lattice,

    W. Wang, M. Hu, X. Wang, G. Ma, and K. Ding, “Experimental realization of geometry-dependent skin effect in a reciprocal two-dimensional lattice,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 207201 (2023)

    2023

  85. [94]

    Observation of geometry-dependent skin effect in non-Hermitian phononic crystals with exceptional points,

    Q. Zhou, J. Wu, Z. Pu, J. Lu, X. Huang, W. Deng, M. Ke, and Z. Liu, “Observation of geometry-dependent skin effect in non-Hermitian phononic crystals with exceptional points,” Nat. Commun.14, 4569 (2023). 1 SUPPLEMENT AL MA TERIAL FOR “ARBITRAR Y CONTROL OF NON-HERMITIAN SKIN ...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.