MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408599291 · doi:10.1117/12.3045009

Light-wave-controlled Haldane model in monolayer hexagonal boron nitride

2025· article· en· W4408599291 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias F. Kling, Sambit Mitra, Alvaro Jimenez-Galan, Mario Aulich, Marcel Neuhaus, S. Biswas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicBoron and Carbon Nanomaterials Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHexagonal boron nitrideMonolayerMaterials scienceBoronHexagonal crystal systemOptoelectronicsCondensed matter physicsBoron nitrideNanotechnologyPhysicsCrystallographyChemistryGrapheneNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have implemented a tailored lightwave-driven analogue to twisted layer stacking in a hexagonal boron nitride monolayer. We tailored the symmetry of the light waveform to that of the crystal lattice (C3), which allowed for sub-femtosecond control over time-reversal symmetry breaking and thereby band structure engineering. In this way, we have realized the light-analogue of the topological Haldane model [1] in an insulating material, controlling its parameters with sub-femtosecond precision. Twisting the lightwave relative to the lattice orientation enables switching between band configurations, providing unprecedented control over the magnitude and location of the band gap, and curvature. This also allows us to establish a new regime of valleytronics that uses non-resonant light fields and allows valley polarization control on femtosecond timescales. Reference: 1. Mitra, S. et al.. 2024 Nature 628, 752-757

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBoron and Carbon Nanomaterials ResearchFrench-language works237,207