Chirality Versus Symmetry: Electron's Spin Selectivity in Nonpolar Chiral Lead–Bromide Perovskites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the last decade, chirality‐induced spin selectivity (CISS), the spin‐selective electron transport through chiral molecules, has been described in a large range of materials, from insulators to superconductors. Because more experimental studies are desired for the theoretical understanding of the CISS effect, chiral metal‐halide semiconductors may contribute to the field thanks to their chiroptical and spintronic properties. In this regard, this work uses new chiral organic cations S ‐HP1A and R ‐HP1A (HP1A = 2‐hydroxy‐propyl‐1‐ammonium) to prepare 2D chiral halide perovskites (HPs) which crystallize in the enantiomorphic space groups P 4 3 2 1 2 and P 4 1 2 1 2, respectively. The fourfold symmetry induces antiferroelectricity along the stacking axis which, combined to incomplete Rashba‐like splitting in each individual 2D polar layer, results in rare spin textures in the band structure. As revealed by magnetic conductive‐probe atomic force microscopy (AFM) measurements, these materials show CISS effect with partial spin polarization (SP; ±40–45%). This incomplete effect is efficient enough to drive a chiro‐spintronic device as demonstrated by the fabrication of spin valve devices with magnetoresistance (MR) responses up to 250 K. Therefore, these stable lead–bromide HP materials not only represent interesting candidates for spintronic applications but also reveal the importance of polar symmetry‐breaking topology for spin selectivity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".