pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24904 · v1 · pith:IFI4KM7Hnew · submitted 2026-06-16 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft · quant-ph

Spectral Leakage and Masking Effects in the Measurement of Hyperuniformity

Yang Jiao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 23:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft quant-ph
keywords hyperuniformitystructure factorspectral leakagefinite window effectsmaskingconvolution
0
0 comments X

The pith

Finite observation windows always add a universal k² term to measured structure factors at long wavelengths, hiding the true hyperuniform exponent.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that any finite window or mask used to observe a hyperuniform system convolves the intrinsic structure factor with the spectral density of that window, producing an observed S_obs(k). At wavenumbers below roughly one over the window size this convolution forces a quadratic leakage term that dominates regardless of the system's actual small-k exponent. The genuine exponent therefore appears only inside an intermediate window of wavenumbers bounded below by the inverse window size and above by any intrinsic cutoff. In stealthy hyperuniform systems that possess a spectral gap, every observed small-k signal is generated entirely by the convolution. The framework supplies explicit relations for both compact windows and spatially correlated masks, allowing the intrinsic scaling to be recovered once the measurement geometry is accounted for.

Core claim

Finite observation windows induce a universal quadratic leakage term at sufficiently small wavenumbers (k ≲ 1/L) that leads to an apparent k² scaling independent of the true exponent α; the true hyperuniform exponent can be measured only in the intermediate regime 1/L ≪ k ≪ q_c. In stealthy hyperuniform systems all observed small-k power arises entirely from this convolution mechanism.

What carries the argument

Convolution of the intrinsic structure factor with the spectral density of the observation function (compact window or extended random mask).

If this is right

  • True exponent α is accessible only inside the intermediate band 1/L ≪ k ≪ q_c.
  • In stealthy hyperuniform systems every small-k datum is produced by the measurement convolution.
  • Spatially correlated masks suppress, preserve, or distort hyperuniform signatures according to the mask's own spectral density.
  • Quantitative criteria exist for separating intrinsic scaling from measurement artifacts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Varying window size across repeated measurements on the same sample would map the predicted crossover location directly.
  • Mask spectral densities could be engineered to minimize distortion of the intrinsic small-k regime.
  • The same convolution relation applies to real-space imaging data where only a subset of particles is recorded.

Load-bearing premise

The measured structure factor equals the convolution of the intrinsic structure factor with the spectral density of whatever window or mask is used.

What would settle it

Measure the same hyperuniform configuration through two windows of different linear sizes L1 and L2; the wavenumber at which the quadratic regime begins should shift exactly as 1/L.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24904 by Yang Jiao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Examples of experimental systems in which hyper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Illustration of a finite observation window revealing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Representative disordered hyperuniform point con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Illustration of a masked system where only a subset of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Illustration of a Bernoulli mask (left) and a Debye [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The detection of hyperuniformity relies critically on accurate characterization of the small-wavenumber behavior of the static structure factor of the system. In practice, however, measurements are performed on finite subsystems or through incomplete observations that effectively mask portions of the underlying configuration. Inspired by a recent numerical study [Y. Liu, X. Li, J. Tian, X. Yan, G. Zhang, {\it J. Chem. Phys.} {\bf 164}, 094102 (2026)], we develop a unified theoretical framework that quantifies how finite windows and spatially correlated binary masks modify the observed structure factor. We show that the measured structure factor $S_{obs}(k)$ is the convolution of the intrinsic structure factor with the spectral density of the observation function, whether it is a compact window or an extended random mask. For generic hyperuniform systems with small-$k$ scaling $S(k)\sim k^{\alpha}$, finite observation window induces a universal quadratic leakage term at sufficiently small wavenumbers (i.e., $k \lesssim 1/L$), leading to an apparent $k^{2}$ scaling independent of the true exponent. The true hyperuniform exponent $\alpha$ can only be measured in the intermediate regime $1/L \ll k \ll q_c$. In stealthy hyperuniform systems, where the intrinsic structure factor possesses a spectral gap, all observed small-$k$ power arises entirely from this convolution mechanism. For spatially correlated masks, we derive the corresponding convolution relation in terms of the mask spectral density and identify conditions under which hyperuniform signatures are suppressed, preserved, or distorted. Our results establish quantitative criteria for reliably extracting intrinsic scaling exponents and distinguishing genuine hyperuniform order from measurement-induced artifacts.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a unified theoretical framework showing that the observed structure factor S_obs(k) in measurements of hyperuniform systems is the convolution of the intrinsic S(k) with the spectral density of the finite observation window or spatially correlated binary mask. For systems with intrinsic small-k scaling S(k) ~ k^α, this induces a universal quadratic leakage term at k ≲ 1/L that produces an apparent k² scaling independent of α; the true exponent is recoverable only in the intermediate regime 1/L ≪ k ≪ q_c. In stealthy hyperuniform systems the entire small-k signal is attributed to the convolution mechanism. Analogous relations and conditions for suppression, preservation, or distortion of hyperuniform signatures are derived for masked observations.

Significance. If the convolution relations and small-k expansions hold under the stated assumptions, the work is significant for the hyperuniformity literature. It supplies a standard Fourier-analytic explanation for measurement artifacts that have appeared in numerical studies, together with explicit criteria for extracting intrinsic exponents. The framework is grounded in the periodogram of windowed stationary processes and extends naturally to point-process structure factors after mean subtraction, providing a falsifiable diagnostic rather than ad-hoc fitting.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 (convolution framework)] The central claim that the quadratic term is independent of α and dominates for k ≲ 1/L rests on the small-k expansion of |Ŵ(k)|² for a compact window (or the mask spectral density) combined with S_obs(0)=0. This is load-bearing; the manuscript should explicitly show the leading-order term in §2 or §3 and confirm that higher-order corrections from the intrinsic S(k) remain sub-dominant throughout the claimed regime.
  2. [§4 (stealthy systems)] For stealthy hyperuniform systems the assertion that 'all observed small-k power arises entirely from this convolution mechanism' requires that the intrinsic spectral gap extends below the window scale 1/L. The manuscript should state the precise condition on the gap width relative to 1/L and q_c (perhaps in §4) to make the claim quantitative rather than qualitative.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / Introduction] The citation to Liu et al. (J. Chem. Phys. 164, 094102, 2026) appears in the abstract and introduction; confirm the reference is correctly formatted and that the numerical observations motivating the theory are summarized with sufficient detail for readers unfamiliar with that work.
  2. [§3 (masks)] Notation for the mask spectral density and the observation function should be introduced once and used consistently; a short table or appendix listing the symbols for window versus mask cases would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2 (convolution framework)] The central claim that the quadratic term is independent of α and dominates for k ≲ 1/L rests on the small-k expansion of |Ŵ(k)|² for a compact window (or the mask spectral density) combined with S_obs(0)=0. This is load-bearing; the manuscript should explicitly show the leading-order term in §2 or §3 and confirm that higher-order corrections from the intrinsic S(k) remain sub-dominant throughout the claimed regime.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation strengthens the argument. The leading small-k behavior |Ŵ(k)|² ∼ c k² (for compact windows) combined with S_obs(0)=0 yields S_obs(k) ∼ k² independent of α; intrinsic corrections enter at O(k^{α+2}) and remain sub-dominant for k ≲ 1/L when α > 0. We have added the explicit expansion and sub-dominance discussion to §2. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (stealthy systems)] For stealthy hyperuniform systems the assertion that 'all observed small-k power arises entirely from this convolution mechanism' requires that the intrinsic spectral gap extends below the window scale 1/L. The manuscript should state the precise condition on the gap width relative to 1/L and q_c (perhaps in §4) to make the claim quantitative rather than qualitative.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative condition improves precision. The claim holds when the intrinsic gap width satisfies Δ > 1/L, ensuring S(k) = 0 for all k < 1/L. We have added this condition (with reference to the intermediate regime up to q_c) explicitly in the revised §4. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation from standard convolution

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that S_obs(k) is the convolution of intrinsic S(k) with the spectral density of the observation function, producing a universal k² leakage at k ≲ 1/L—is a direct application of the convolution theorem to windowed/masked stationary processes after mean subtraction. This is a standard, externally verifiable result in Fourier analysis, independent of any fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatz. The abstract and framework present it as a first-principles quantification without reducing to inputs by construction. No load-bearing steps match the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only abstract available, so ledger is limited to the core modeling assumption stated in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The measured structure factor S_obs(k) is the convolution of the intrinsic structure factor with the spectral density of the observation function for both compact windows and extended random masks.
    This relation is the foundation of the entire framework and is invoked to derive the leakage term and mask effects.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5836 in / 1342 out tokens · 36034 ms · 2026-06-26T23:06:33.938757+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Deterministic large mask (fixed pattern) If the maskM(r) is a fixed deterministic pattern (not averaged over realizations), the mask spectral density χM(k) =| ˜M(k)|2/Vis a deterministic function. Eq. (46) reduces to the familiar convolution with| ˜M|2: Sobs(k) = 1 ϕ Z ddq (2π)d S(q)| ˜M(k−q)| 2.(47) This is the direct analogue of the finite-window result...

  2. [2]

    5 left panel

    Independent Bernoulli thinning (uncorrelated mask) We now consider spatially uncorrelated masks, i.e., each spatial location inVpossessing value 1 is indepen- dent of one another with probabilityϕ(classical random thinning), see Fig. 5 left panel. Its spectral density is χM(k) =ϕ(1−ϕ) + (2π) dϕ2δ(k),(48) where theδ-term encodes the meanϕ(the constant back...

  3. [3]

    χM(k) large neark=0), then Eq

    Mask with large-scale correlations If the mask has substantial power at smallk(i.e. χM(k) large neark=0), then Eq. (46) shows that small- |k|behavior ofS obs(k) will be dominated by a convolu- tion of the mask spectral weight near0with the parent S(k) at similar scales. In particular, a mask with strong low-|k|power willcreateorenhanceapparent low-|k| pow...

  4. [4]

    Torquato and F

    S. Torquato and F. H. Stillinger, Phys. Rev. E68, 041113 (2003)

    2003

  5. [5]

    Torquato, Phys

    S. Torquato, Phys. Rep.745, 1 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Torquato, J

    S. Torquato, J. Kim, M. A. Klatt, R. Car, and P. J. Steinhardt, Physical Review X16, 011042 (2026)

    2026

  7. [7]

    Florescu, S

    M. Florescu, S. Torquato, and P. J. Steinhardt, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.106, 20658 (2009)

    2009

  8. [8]

    M. A. Klatt, P. J. Steinhardt, and S. Torquato, Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences119, e2213633119 (2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    Zhang, F

    G. Zhang, F. H. Stillinger, and S. Torquato, J. Chem. Phys.145, 244109 (2016)

    2016

  10. [10]

    Chen and S

    D. Chen and S. Torquato, Acta Mater.142, 152 (2018)

    2018

  11. [11]

    Torquato, Physical Review E104, 054102 (2021)

    S. Torquato, Physical Review E104, 054102 (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    Y. Xu, S. Chen, P. Chen, W. Xu, and Y. Jiao, Phys. Rev. E96, 043301 (2017)

    2017

  13. [13]

    Leseur, R

    O. Leseur, R. Pierrat, and R. Carminati, Optica3, 763 (2016)

    2016

  14. [14]

    Yu, Nature Computational Science3, 128 (2023)

    S. Yu, Nature Computational Science3, 128 (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    G. Lee, S. Youn, I. Lee, K. Park, D. Hwang, X. Piao, N. Park, and S. Yu, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.09458 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  16. [16]

    S. Youn, K. Park, I. Lee, G. Lee, N. Park, and S. Yu, Advanced Optical Materials p. e03499 (2026)

    2026

  17. [17]

    C. E. Maher, J. L. Marzuola, and K. A. Newhall, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.22341 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    Y. Xu, M. Chen, L. Forestier, F. Carcenac, L. Mazenq, and P. Lalanne, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.02637 (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Liang, Y

    N. Liang, Y. Wang, and B. Song, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy68, 1 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    Jiao, Physical Review Letters136, 137402 (2026)

    Y. Jiao, Physical Review Letters136, 137402 (2026)

    2026

  21. [21]

    Torquato, G

    S. Torquato, G. Zhang, and F. H. Stillinger, Phys. Rev. X5, 021020 (2015)

    2015

  22. [22]

    R. D. Batten, F. H. Stillinger, and S. Torquato, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 050602 (2009)

    2009

  23. [23]

    Gabrielli, M

    A. Gabrielli, M. Joyce, and F. S. Labini, Phys. Rev. D 65, 083523 (2002)

    2002

  24. [24]

    Donev, F

    A. Donev, F. H. Stillinger, and S. Torquato, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 090604 (2005)

    2005

  25. [25]

    C. E. Zachary, Y. Jiao, and S. Torquato, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 178001 (2011)

    2011

  26. [26]

    Maire, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.20308 (2026)

    R. Maire, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.20308 (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Maire and L

    R. Maire and L. Chaix, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.04242 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    Y. Wang, Z. Qian, H. Tong, and H. Tanaka, Nature Com- munications16, 1398 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    Maire, L

    R. Maire, L. Galliano, A. Plati, and L. Berthier, Physical Review Letters135, 227102 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    Kurita and E

    R. Kurita and E. R. Weeks, Phys. Rev. E84, 030401 (2011). 10

    2011

  31. [31]

    G. L. Hunter and E. R. Weeks, Rep. Prog. Phys.75, 066501 (2012)

    2012

  32. [32]

    Dreyfus, Y

    R. Dreyfus, Y. Xu, T. Still, L. A. Hough, A. G. Yodh, and S. Torquato, Phys. Rev. E91, 012302 (2015)

    2015

  33. [33]

    D. Chen, X. Jiang, D. Wang, H. Zhuang, and Y. Jiao, Acta Materialia246, 118678 (2023)

    2023

  34. [34]

    Zhang, X

    H. Zhang, X. Wang, J. Zhang, H.-B. Yu, and J. F. Dou- glas, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01429 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Chremos and J

    A. Chremos and J. F. Douglas, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 258002 (2018)

    2018

  36. [36]

    Shang, J

    J. Shang, J. Zhang, and I. Procaccia, arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.08363 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  37. [37]

    V. M. Bolton-Lum, R. C. Dennis, P. K. Morse, and E. I. Corwin, Physical Review Letters136, 058201 (2026)

    2026

  38. [38]

    R. P. Feynman and M. Cohen, Phys. Rev.102, 1189 (1956)

    1956

  39. [39]

    Y. A. Gerasimenko, I. Vaskivskyi, M. Litskevich, J. Ravnik, J. Vodeb, M. Diego, V. Kabanov, and D. Mi- hailovic, Nat. Mater.18, 1078 (2019)

    2019

  40. [40]

    Sakai, R

    S. Sakai, R. Arita, and T. Ohtsuki, arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.09698 (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    G. Rumi, J. A. S´ anchez, F. El´ ıas, R. C. Maldonado, J. Puig, N. R. C. Bolecek, G. Nieva, M. Konczykowski, Y. Fasano, and A. B. Kolton, Phys. Rev. Res.1, 033057 (2019)

    2019

  42. [42]

    J. A. S´ anchez, R. C. Maldonado, N. R. C. Bolecek, G. Rumi, P. Pedrazzini, M. I. Dolz, G. Nieva, C. J. van der Beek, M. Konczykowski, C. D. Dewhurst, et al., Commun. Phys.2, 1 (2019)

    2019

  43. [43]

    Zheng, L

    Y. Zheng, L. Liu, H. Nan, Z.-X. Shen, G. Zhang, D. Chen, L. He, W. Xu, M. Chen, Y. Jiao, et al., Sci. Adv.6, eaba0826 (2020)

    2020

  44. [44]

    D. Chen, Y. Zheng, L. Liu, G. Zhang, M. Chen, Y. Jiao, and H. Zhuang, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.118, e2016862118 (2021)

    2021

  45. [45]

    D. Chen, Y. Liu, H. Zhuang, M. Chen, and Y. Jiao, Phys- ical Review B106, 235427 (2022)

    2022

  46. [46]

    D. Chen, R. Samajdar, Y. Jiao, and S. Torquato, Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences122, e2416111122 (2025)

    2025

  47. [47]

    Vanoni, B

    C. Vanoni, B. L. Altshuler, P. J. Steinhardt, and S. Torquato, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.13502 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Asakura, K

    K. Asakura, K. Yamamoto, and A. Koga, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.22484 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  49. [49]

    Jeon and S

    J. Jeon and S. Sakai, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18331 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  50. [50]

    Y. Jiao, T. Lau, H. Hatzikirou, M. Meyer-Hermann, J. C. Corbo, and S. Torquato, Phys. Rev. E89, 022721 (2014)

    2014

  51. [51]

    Mayer, V

    A. Mayer, V. Balasubramanian, T. Mora, and A. M. Wal- czak, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA112, 5950 (2015)

    2015

  52. [52]

    Ge, Proc

    Z. Ge, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA120, e2306514120 (2023)

    2023

  53. [53]

    Y. Liu, D. Chen, J. Tian, W. Xu, and Y. Jiao, Physical Review Letters133, 028401 (2024)

    2024

  54. [54]

    Li, Q.-L

    Z.-Q. Li, Q.-L. Lei, and Y.-Q. Ma, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences122, e2421518122 (2025)

    2025

  55. [55]

    Y. Tang, X. Li, and D. Bi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.08976 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    W. Hu, L. Cui, M. Delgado-Baquerizo, R. Sol´ e, S. K´ efi, M. Berdugo, N. Xu, B. Wang, Q.-X. Liu, and C. Xu, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America122, e2504496122 (2025)

    2025

  57. [57]

    Hexner and D

    D. Hexner and D. Levine, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 110602 (2015)

    2015

  58. [58]

    R. L. Jack, I. R. Thompson, and P. Sollich, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 060601 (2015)

    2015

  59. [59]

    J. H. Weijs, R. Jeanneret, R. Dreyfus, and D. Bartolo, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 108301 (2015)

    2015

  60. [60]

    Salvalaglio, M

    M. Salvalaglio, M. Bouabdellaoui, M. Bollani, A. Benali, L. Favre, J.-B. Claude, J. Wenger, P. de Anna, F. Intonti, A. Voigt, et al., Physical Review Letters125, 126101 (2020)

    2020

  61. [61]

    ¨U. S. Nizam, G. Makey, M. Barbier, S. S. Kahra- man, E. Demir, E. E. Shafigh, S. Galioglu, D. Vahabli, S. H¨ usn¨ ugil, M. H. G¨ une¸ s, et al., Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter33, 304002 (2021)

    2021

  62. [62]

    Zheng, M

    Y. Zheng, M. A. Klatt, and H. L¨ owen, arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03107 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    J. Wang, Z. Sun, H. Chen, G. Wang, D. Chen, G. Chen, J. Shuai, M. Yang, Y. Jiao, and L. Liu, Physical Review Letters134, 248301 (2025)

    2025

  64. [64]

    Leoni, G

    F. Leoni, G. Franzese, E. C. O˘ guz, and F. Martelli, Phys- ical Review Research7, 043305 (2025)

    2025

  65. [65]

    Ballestero, A

    E. Ballestero, A. Duclos, A. Barbacci, and V. Romero- Garc´ ıa, Physical Review E112, L062401 (2025)

    2025

  66. [66]

    Q.-L. Lei, M. P. Ciamarra, and R. Ni, Sci. Adv.5, eaau7423 (2019)

    2019

  67. [67]

    Lei and R

    Q.-L. Lei and R. Ni, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences116, 22983 (2019)

    2019

  68. [68]

    Huang, W

    M. Huang, W. Hu, S. Yang, Q.-X. Liu, and H. Zhang, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118, e2100493118 (2021)

    2021

  69. [69]

    Zhang and A

    B. Zhang and A. Snezhko, Physical Review Letters128, 218002 (2022)

    2022

  70. [70]

    Oppenheimer, D

    N. Oppenheimer, D. B. Stein, M. Y. B. Zion, and M. J. Shelley, Nature communications13, 804 (2022)

    2022

  71. [71]

    Backofen, A

    R. Backofen, A. Y. Altawil, M. Salvalaglio, and A. Voigt, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences121, e2320719121 (2024)

    2024

  72. [72]

    Lei and R

    Y. Lei and R. Ni, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences120, e2312866120 (2023)

    2023

  73. [73]

    Hexner and D

    D. Hexner and D. Levine, Physical review letters118, 020601 (2017)

    2017

  74. [74]

    Hexner, P

    D. Hexner, P. M. Chaikin, and D. Levine, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences114, 4294 (2017)

    2017

  75. [75]

    J. H. Weijs and D. Bartolo, Physical review letters119, 048002 (2017)

    2017

  76. [76]

    Wilken, A

    S. Wilken, A. Z. Guo, D. Levine, and P. M. Chaikin, arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.09913 (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  77. [77]

    DeglInnocenti, Y

    R. DeglInnocenti, Y. D. Shah, L. Masini, A. Ronzani, A. Pitanti, Y. Ren, D. S. Jessop, A. Tredicucci, H. E. Beere, and D. A. Ritchie, Sci. Rep.6, 19325 (2016)

    2016

  78. [78]

    D. Chen, H. Zhuang, M. Chen, P. Y. Huang, V. Vlcek, and Y. Jiao, Applied Physics Reviews10(2023)

    2023

  79. [79]

    Zheng, D

    Y. Zheng, D. Chen, L. Liu, Y. Liu, M. Chen, H. Zhuang, and Y. Jiao, Phys. Rev. B103, 245413 (2021)

    2021

  80. [80]

    J. A. S´ anchez, R. C. Maldonado, M. L. Amig´ o, G. Nieva, A. Kolton, and Y. Fasano, Physical Review B107, 094508 (2023)

    2023

Showing first 80 references.