Cited by 5,277Topological Materials and PhenomenaQuantum and electron transport phenomenaAdvanced Condensed Matter Physics

Berry phase effects on electronic properties

Open access
Xiao, Di, Chang, Ming-Che, Niu, Qian·2010·Reviews of Modern Physics

Abstract

Ever since its discovery the notion of Berry phase has permeated through all branches of physics. Over the past three decades it was gradually realized that the Berry phase of the electronic wave function can have a profound effect on material properties and is responsible for a spectrum of phenomena, such as polarization, orbital magnetism, various (quantum, anomalous, or spin) Hall effects, and quantum charge pumping. This progress is summarized in a pedagogical manner in this review. A brief summary of necessary background is given and a detailed discussion of the Berry phase effect in a variety of solid-state applications. A common thread of the review is the semiclassical formulation of electron dynamics, which is a versatile tool in the study of electron dynamics in the presence of electromagnetic fields and more general perturbations. Finally, a requantization method is demonstrated that converts a semiclassical theory to an effective quantum theory. It is clear that the Berry phase should be added as an essential ingredient to our understanding of basic material properties.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes how the Berry phase and Berry curvature of Bloch electrons modify electronic properties, from electric polarization and orbital magnetization to quantum, anomalous, and valley Hall effects. It develops a semiclassical wave-packet formalism and shows how it can be re-quantized into effective quantum theories.

Key findings

  • The Berry curvature adds an anomalous velocity transverse to an electric field, giving Hall currents; the quantum Hall conductivity is a Chern number quantized in units of \(e^2/h\).
  • Electric polarization in crystals is expressed as a Berry phase/Zak phase, with polarization defined only up to a quantum; in inversion-symmetric one-dimensional systems Zak’s phase is 0 or \(\pi\).
  • Orbital magnetization contains a Berry-curvature contribution beyond the sum of quasiparticle orbital moments; in the broken-inversion graphene model the orbital moment can be “30 times larger than the spin moment.”
  • Degenerate bands require a non-Abelian Berry curvature, which underlies spin Hall effects, the Dirac electron’s \(g=2\), and Rashba-like spin-orbit terms in semiconductor electrons.

Methods

  • Pedagogical review, not a primary experimental study; it builds the semiclassical theory of Bloch electron wave packets, including Berry connection, Berry curvature, orbital magnetic moment, and modified phase-space density of states.
  • Applies the formalism to examples including the Rice-Mele model, graphene with broken inversion symmetry, fcc Fe, Fe thin films, magnetic Bloch bands/Hofstadter spectrum, the Dirac electron, and the Kane model.
  • Uses re-quantization methods—Bohr-Sommerfeld/EBK and canonical quantization/generalized Peierls substitution—to connect semiclassical dynamics to effective quantum Hamiltonians.

Limitations

  • The paper states it does not attempt to cover all Berry phase effects and refers readers to other books/reviews for omitted topics.
  • The paper states that direct measurement of the Berry curvature is still lacking, with only indirect evidence through quantities such as quantum Hall conductance, anomalous Hall effect, or graphene Hall plateaus.
  • The paper notes method limitations: the one-band approximation, validity to first order in external fields, Bohr-Sommerfeld ambiguities such as the Maslov index, and failure for nonclosed or chaotic orbits; it also notes many-body extensions are still at an early stage.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/revmodphys.82.1959

Cites

236 of 236 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 176 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingreasoning
    § 3. Example: The two-level system · p. 6

    The Berry connection is not gauge-independent.

    “This is not surprising because the Berry curvature is a gauge-independent quantity and the Berry connection is not.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingcitation
    § III. ELECTRON DYNAMICS IN THE PRESENCE OF ELECTRIC FIELDS · p. 13

    In the presence of an electric field, an electron can acquire an anomalous velocity proportional to the Berry curvature of the band.

    “In the presence of an electric field, an electron can acquire an anomalous velocity proportional to the Berry curvature of the band (Chang and Niu, 1995, 1996; Sundaram and Niu, 1999).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Chang and Niu, 1995, 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sundaram and Niu, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingreasoning
    § A. Adiabatic current · p. 8

    The adiabatic current induced by a time-dependent perturbation in a band is equal to the q-integral of the Berry curvature Ω_nqt.

    “We have thus derived the remarkable result that the adiabatic current induced by a time-dependent perturbation in a band is equal to the q -integral of the Berry curvature Ω n qt (Thouless, 1983).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thouless, 1983

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingnone given
    § D. Berry phase in Bloch bands · p. 7

    The path C must be closed to make γ_n a gauge-invariant quantity with physical significance.

    “We emphasize that the path C must be closed to make γ n a gauge-invariant quantity with physical significance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning
    § B. Quantized adiabatic particle transport · p. 9

    The quantization of the Chern number is always true as long as the Hamiltonian is periodic in both parameters.

    “Note that in our proof, we made no reference to the original physical system; the quantization of the Chern number is always true as long as the Hamiltonian is periodic in both parameters.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 146
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 98
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 23
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 1. The Rice-Mele model · p. 12

    At half-filling, the Rice-Mele model is a metal for ∆=δ=0 and an insulator otherwise.

    “At half-filling, the system is a metal for ∆ = δ = 0, and an insulator otherwise.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given
    § 3. Adiabatic Pumping · p. 11

    The integrand in Eq. (2.22) can be thought as the Berry curvature Ω_X1X2 = -2 I〈∂_X1 u | ∂_X2 u〉 if the inner product of the state vector is identified with the matrix product.

    “The integrand in Eq. (2.22) can be thought as the Berry curvature Ω X 1 X 2 = -2 ℑ〈 ∂ X 1 u | ∂ X 2 u 〉 if we identify the inner product of the state vector with the matrix product.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § C. Electric Polarization of Crystalline Solids · p. 12

    The Wannier center position is defined only up to a lattice vector.

    “The quantum uncertainty found in Eq. (2.29) is reflected by the fact that the Wannier center position is defined only up to a lattice vector.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § 1. The Rice-Mele model · p. 13

    In the Rice-Mele model, if the system adiabatically evolves along a loop enclosing the degeneracy point (0,0) in (∆,δ) space, the polarization changes by ea, corresponding to a quantized charge e pumped out after one cycle; if the loop does not contain the degeneracy point, the pumped charge is zero.

    “On the other hand, if the loop does not contain the degeneracy point, then the pumped charge is zero.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 3. Example: The two-level system · p. 7

    The Berry curvature integrated over a closed manifold is quantized in units of 2π and equals the net number of monopoles inside.

    “In general, the Berry curvature integrated over a closed manifold is quantized in the units of 2 π and equals to the net number of monopoles inside.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § C. Semiclassical picture: hyperorbits · p. 37

    The magnetic quasi-momentum hbar k is a good quantum number with hbar kdot = 0.

    “On the other hand, the magnetic quasi-momentum ¯ h k is a good quantum number with ¯ h ˙ k = 0.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § B. Basics of magnetic Bloch band · p. 36

    Since the area of the MBZ is smaller by a factor of q, each magnetic Bloch band has N/q states, sharing the number of states of the original Bloch band equally.

    “Since the area of the MBZ (and the number of states within) is smaller by a factor of q , each MBB has N/q states, sharing the number of states of the original Bloch band equally.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § B. Basics of magnetic Bloch band · p. 36

    The same does not apply to a MBZ.

    “However, the same does not apply to a MBZ.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § B. Basics of magnetic Bloch band · p. 36

    Between the two limits, when the magnetic field is neither very strong nor very weak, the band splitting does not follow a simple pattern.

    “Between the two limits, when the magnetic field is neither very strong nor very weak, the band splitting does not follow a simple pattern.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § A. Magnetic translational symmetry · p. 35

    The translated states are not equivalent but have the same energy as ψ_nk because [H,T_a1]=0.

    “These states are not equivalent, but have the same energy as ψ n k since [ H,T a 1 ] = 0.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § B. Basics of magnetic Bloch band · p. 36

    When the field is tuned from weak to strong, the subbands split, merge, and interact in a complicated manner, such that in the end there are only p subbands in the strong-field limit.

    “When the field is tuned from weak to strong, the subbands will split, merge, and interact with each other in a complicated manner, such that in the end there are only p subbands in the strong-field limit.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    D_open_r can be calculated from Eq. (8.26) once σ_open_r is known.

    “Furthermore, D open r can be calculated from Eq. (8.26) once σ open r is known.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    Equation (9.8) governs the dynamics of the spinor, from which one can derive the equation for the spin vector Jdot.

    “Equation (9.8) governs the dynamics of the spinor, from which we can derive the equation for the spin vector ˙ J , where J = 〈 J 〉 , and J is the spin matrix,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    The spin dynamics in Eq. (9.10) is influenced by the Zeeman energy in H.

    “The spin dynamics in Eq. (9.10) is influenced by the Zeeman energy in H , as it should be.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The Hall current density for a filled magnetic band in a clean sample is given by Eq. (8.28).

    “Therefore the Hall current density for a filled magnetic band in a clean sample is,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    If the areal electron density of a sample is ρ0, then after applying a flux φ=p/q per plaquette, the MBZ shrinks by q times and ρ=ρ0/q.

    “If the areal electron density of a sample is ρ 0 , then after applying a flux φ = p/q per plaquette, the MBZ shrinks by q times and ρ = ρ 0 /q .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The number of subbands split from a parent band that originated from a closed hyperorbit is given by Eq. (8.33).

    “This is the number of subbands split from a parent band that is originated from a closed hyperorbit.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The Hall conductivity for a closed hyperorbit produced by δB_{r-1} ≡ δφ_{r-1}/a^2 is given by Eq. (8.32).

    “As a result, the Hall conductivity for a closed hyperorbit produced by δB r -1 ≡ δφ r -1 /a 2 is (recall that ρ r = ρ 0 /q r ),”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The Hall conductivity and the number of splitting subbands are indeed integers.

    “One can see that the Hall conductivity and the number of splitting subbands are indeed integers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 40

    The rdot equation is slightly more complicated: the derivative in the group velocity ∂E/∂k_c is replaced by the covariant derivative and the variables are now matrices in general.

    “The ˙ r c -equation is slightly more complicated: The derivative in the group velocity ∂E/∂ k c is replaced by the covariant derivative and the variables are now matrices in general.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 40

    The spinor-averaged Hamiltonian matrix is the wavepacket energy, E = <H>.

    “The spinor-averaged Hamiltonian matrix is nothing but the wavepacket energy, E = 〈H〉 .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    The Bohr-Sommerfeld procedure applies to the Abelian case and is limited to closed orbits in phase space.

    “Such a procedure applies to the Abelian case and is limited to closed orbits in phase space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    The last terms in both equations can be neglected in some occasions; for example, they will not change the force and the velocity in Eqs. (9.6) and (9.7).

    “The last terms in both equations can be neglected in some occasions. For example, they will not change the force and the velocity in Eqs. (9.6) and (9.7).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § F. Incompleteness of effective Hamiltonian · p. 43

    When an electric field is applied to a Dirac electron, the transverse velocity calculated from the Heisenberg equation of motion for the Pauli Hamiltonian is larger by a factor of two than that calculated from Eq. (9.7).

    “That is, the transverse velocity is larger by a factor of two.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The effective Pauli Hamiltonian is accurate for most low-energy applications in solid state.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    When expressed in the new variables, the semiclassical Hamiltonian in Eq. (9.9) can be written as Eq. (9.12).

    “When expressed in the new variables, the semiclassical Hamiltonian in Eq. (9.9) can be written as,”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    In the wavepacket theory, the variables r_c and k_c have very clear physical meaning, but they are not canonical variables.

    “In the wavepacket theory, the variables r c and k c have very clear physical meaning, but they are not canonical variables.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § D. Dirac electron · p. 41

    The size of the wavepacket can be as small as the Compton wavelength λ_c = hbar/mc (but not smaller), which is two orders of magnitude smaller than the Bohr radius.

    “The size of the wavepacket can be as small as the Compton wavelength λ c = ¯ h/mc (but not smaller), which is two orders of magnitude smaller than the Bohr radius.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The usual derivation of the anomalous velocity is based on linear response: the velocity operator has off-diagonal elements and the electric field mixes bands, so the expectation value of velocity acquires an additional term proportional to the field beyond the usual group velocity.

    “The usual derivation of the anomalous velocity is based on a linear response analysis: the velocity operator has off-diagonal elements and electric field mixes the bands, so that the expectation value of the velocity acquires an additional term proportional to the field other than the usual group velocity in the original band (Adams and Blount, 1959; Blount, 1962b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Adams and Blount, 1959

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Blount, 1962b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 5

    The Berry curvature can be viewed as the magnetic field in the parameter space.

    “The vector form gives us an intuitive picture of the Berry curvature: it can be viewed as the magnetic field in the parameter space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The anomalous velocity was first recognized in the mid and late 1990s as an effect of the Berry curvature intrinsic to each band, whose existence has nothing to do with the external field.

    “The anomalous velocity were first recognized in mid and late 90s as an effect of the Berry curvature intrinsic to each of the bands, whose existence has really nothing to do with the external field (Chang and Niu, 1995, 1996; Sundaram and Niu, 1999).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Chang and Niu, 1995, 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sundaram and Niu, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 3

    Electric polarization can be expressed in terms of the Berry phase across the entire Brillouin zone, linking it with adiabatic charge transport.

    “A breakthrough on electric polarization were made in early 90s by linking it with the phenomenon of adiabatic charge transport and expressing it in terms of the Berry phase 1 across the entire Brillouin zone (King-Smith and Vanderbilt, 1993; Resta, 1992; Vanderbilt and King-Smith, 1993).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites King-Smith and Vanderbilt, 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Resta, 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vanderbilt and King-Smith, 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 6

    The Berry curvature summation formula can be evaluated under any gauge choice and is particularly useful for numerical calculations where a smooth phase choice is not guaranteed.

    “The summation formula has the advantage that no differentiation on the wave function is involved, therefore it can be evaluated under any gauge choice. This property is particularly useful for numerical calculations, in which the condition of a smooth phase choice of the eigenstates is not guaranteed in standard diagonalization algorithms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 6

    The Berry curvature becomes singular if two energy levels are brought together at a certain value of R; this degeneracy point corresponds to a monopole in parameter space.

    “Equation (1.13) also shows that Ω n µν ( R ) becomes singular if two energy levels ε n ( R ) and ε n ′ ( R ) are brought together at certain value of R . This degeneracy point corresponds to a monopole in the parameter space; an explicit example is given below.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Topical overview · p. 3

    The Berry phase concept is essential for a coherent understanding of all the basic phenomena in solid state physics.

    “the concept is essential for a coherent understanding of all the basic phenomena”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 6

    The Berry curvature summation formula has been used to evaluate the Berry curvature in crystals with eigenfunctions supplied from first-principles calculations.

    “It has been used to evaluate the Berry curvature in crystals with the eigenfunctions supplied from first-principles calculations (Fang et al. , 2003; Yao et al. , 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fang et al., 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Yao et al., 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § A. Topical overview · p. 3

    For integrable dynamics such as Bloch oscillations and cyclotron orbits, the Bohr-Sommerfeld or EKB quantization rule can be used, with the Berry phase entering as a shift to the classical action and affecting quantized level energies, e.g., Wannier-Stark ladders and Landau levels.

    “For integrable dynamics, such as Bloch oscillations and cyclotron orbits, one can use the Bohr-Sommerfeld or EKB quantization rule. The Berry phase enters naturally as a shift to the classical action, affecting the energies of the quantized levels, e.g., the Wannier-Stark ladders and the Landau levels.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 1. Cyclic adiabatic evolution · p. 5

    The Berry phase depends only on the geometric aspect of the closed path and is independent of how R(t) varies in time.

    “From the above definition, we can see that the Berry phase only depends on the geometric aspect of the closed path, and is independent of how R ( t ) varies in time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 6

    The Berry curvature is a local quantity that provides a local description of the geometric properties of the parameter space.

    “Compared to the Berry phase which is always associated with a closed path, the Berry curvature is truly a local quantity. It provides a local description of the geometric properties of the parameter space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 6

    If the energy levels are degenerate, the dynamics must be projected to a subspace spanned by those degenerate eigenstates, and non-Abelian Berry curvature naturally arises.

    “However, if the energy levels are degenerate, then the dynamics must be projected to a subspace spanned by those degenerate eigenstates. Wilczek and Zee (1984) showed that in this situation non-Abelian Berry curvature naturally arises.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilczek and Zee (1984)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § 2. Berry curvature · p. 5

    The Berry curvature is gauge invariant and observable.

    “It can be verified from Eq. (1.11) that, unlike the Berry vector potential, the Berry curvature is gauge invariant and thus observable.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The vast majority of applications of the Berry phase concept are found in solid state physics.

    “Not surprisingly, the vast majority of applications of the Berry phase concept are found here.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The Berry phase is like the Aharonov-Bohm phase of a charged particle traversing a loop including a magnetic flux, while the Berry curvature is like the magnetic field.

    “In primitive terms, the Berry phase is like the Aharonov-Bohm phase of a charge particle traversing a loop including a magnetic flux, while the Berry curvature is like the magnetic field.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The Berry phase has close analogies to gauge field theories and differential geometry.

    “Third, the Berry phase has close analogies to gauge field theories and differential geometry (Simon, 1983).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Simon, 1983

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The Berry phase is geometrical: it can be written as a line integral over the loop in parameter space and does not depend on the exact rate of change along the loop.

    “Second, the Berry phase is geometrical. It can be written as a line-integral over the loop in the parameter space, and does not depend on the exact rate of change along the loop.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Berry, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § A. Topical overview · p. 3

    The traditional view cannot explain some basic effects to zeroth order of the fields: electric polarization and magnetization can exist in the absence of electric and magnetic fields in ferroelectric and ferromagnetic materials.

    “Interestingly enough, the traditional view cannot even explain some basic effects to zeroth order of the fields. The two basic electromagnetic properties of solids as a medium are the electric polarization and magnetization, which can exist in the absence of electric and magnetic fields in ferroelectric and ferromagnetic materials.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Topical overview · p. 2

    The anomalous velocity's existence was predicted in the early 1950s and its experimental relevance was established only recently.

    “The anomalous velocity is a prime example, whose existence were predicted in the early 50s (Karplus and Luttinger, 1954) and whose experimental relevance were established only recently (Lee et al. , 2004a,b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Karplus and Luttinger, 1954

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lee et al., 2004a,b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § A. Topical overview · p. 3

    The classic definitions of electric polarization and magnetization based on bound charges and currents are inadequate for the electronic contribution, and polarization and orbital magnetization cannot be determined from charge and current densities in the bulk of a crystal.

    “Their classic definition were based on the picture of bound charges and currents, but these are clearly inadequate for the electronic contribution and it was known that the polarization and orbital magnetization cannot be determined from the charge and current densities in the bulk of a crystal at all.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Electric Polarization of Crystalline Solids · p. 12

    The polarization defined above is a bulk quantity because it is given by the Berry phase of the ground state wave function.

    “Before concluding, we point out that the polarization defined above is clearly a bulk quantity as it is given by the Berry phase of the ground state wave function.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § B. Berry curvature: Symmetry considerations · p. 14

    In fcc Fe, the Berry curvature is negligible in most areas of momentum space and displays sharp peaks where Fermi lines have avoided crossings due to spin-orbit coupling.

    “As we can see, the Berry curvature is negligible in most areas in the momentum space and displays very sharp and pronounced peaks in regions where the Fermi lines (intersection of the Fermi surface with (010) plane) have avoided crossings due to spin-orbit coupling.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Yao et al. , 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § 1. The Rice-Mele model · p. 12

    If ∆=0, the Rice-Mele model reduces to the Su-Shrieffer-Heeger model.

    “If ∆ = 0 it reduces to the celebrated Su-Shrieffer-Heeger model (Su et al. , 1979).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Su et al. , 1979

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. The quantum Hall effect · p. 15

    A magnetic field is not necessary for the quantum Hall effect; the condition is a nonzero Chern number of the band.

    “However, from the above derivation it is clear that a magnetic field is not necessary for the quantum Hall effect to occur as the condition is a nonzero Chern number of the band.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 2. The ground state is non-degenerate. · p. 10

    The Chern number can only change discontinuously and does not change at all if the perturbation is small.

    “However, the fact that the Chern number must be an integer means that it can only be changed in a discontinous way and does not change at all if the perturbation is small. This is a general outcome of the topological invariance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § B. Quantized adiabatic particle transport · p. 9

    If the periodic potential slides its position without changing its shape, the electrons simply follow the potential.

    “If the periodic potential slides its position without changing its shape, we expect that the electrons simply follow the potential.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Berry phase in Bloch bands · p. 8

    Zak's phase is entirely due to the torus topology of the Brillouin zone and is the only way to realize a closed path in a one-dimensional parameter space.

    “We note that this phase is entirely due to the torus topology of the Brillouin zone, and it is the only way to realize a closed path in a one-dimensional parameter space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Electric Polarization of Crystalline Solids · p. 12

    The polarization per unit cell can be defined as the dipole moment of the Wannier charge density.

    “King-Smith and Vanderbilt (1993) further showed that, based on Eq. (2.28), the polarization per unit cell can be defined as the dipole moment of the Wannier charge density,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites King-Smith and Vanderbilt (1993)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Electric Polarization of Crystalline Solids · p. 11

    Only the change in polarization has physical meaning and it can be quantified by using the Berry phase of the electronic wave function.

    “These problems are eventually solved by the modern theory of polarization (King-Smith and Vanderbilt, 1993; Resta, 1994), where it is shown that only the change in polarization has physical meaning and it can be quantified by using the Berry phase of the electronic wave function.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites King-Smith and Vanderbilt, 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Resta, 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Electric Polarization of Crystalline Solids · p. 12

    Both adiabatic transport and electric polarization can be regarded as manifestations of Zak's phase.

    “In view of Eq. (2.28), both the adiabatic transport and the electric polarization can be regarded as the manifestation of Zak's phase, given in Eq. (1.29).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Anomalous velocity · p. 14

    The anomalous velocity is always transverse to the electric field and gives rise to a Hall current.

    “This velocity is always transverse to the electric field, which will give rise to a Hall current.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 1. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic contributions · p. 17

    The converged value is very close to the bulk σ_ah of Fe, confirming the dominance of the intrinsic contribution in Fe.

    “It turns out that this converged value is very close to the bulk σ ah of Fe, which confirms the dominance of the intrinsic contribution in Fe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    Intervalley scattering is strongly suppressed due to large separation in momentum space, making the valley index a good quantum number.

    “Because of their large separation in momentum space, the intervalley scattering is strongly suppressed (Gorbachev et al. , 2007; Morozov et al. , 2006; Morpurgo and Guinea, 2006), which makes the valley index a good quantum number.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Gorbachev et al. , 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Morozov et al. , 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Morpurgo and Guinea, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 1. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic contributions · p. 17

    The intrinsic contribution σ_in is independent of relaxation time τ, the skew scattering contribution σ_sk is proportional to τ, and the side jump contribution σ_sj is independent of τ.

    “where σ in H is the intrinsic contribution given by Eq. (3.14), σ sk H is the skew scattering contribution, which is proportional to the relaxation time τ , and σ sj H is the side jump contribution, which is independent of τ .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    The valley Hall effect relies on inversion symmetry breaking and survives in time-reversal invariant systems.

    “In this subsection we discuss another type of Hall effect which relies on inversion symmetry breaking, and survives in time-reversal invariant systems.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 20

    The orbital magnetization is not simply the thermodynamic average of the orbital moment; there is another contribution due to the center-of-mass motion of the wave packet.

    “As it turns out, this is only part of the contribution. There is another contribution due to the center-of-mass motion of the wave packet.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    Upon application of an electric field, electrons in different valleys flow to opposite transverse edges, giving rise to a net valley Hall current in the bulk.

    “Once the structure of the Berry curvature is revealed, the valley Hall effect becomes transparent: upon the application of an electric field, electrons in different valleys will flow to opposite transverse edges, giving rise to a net valley Hall current in the bulk.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. The anomalous Hall Effect · p. 16

    Unlike the quantum Hall effect, the anomalous Hall effect does not require a nonzero Chern number; a band with zero Chern number can have nonzero local Berry curvature and give a nonzero anomalous Hall conductivity.

    “However, unlike the quantum Hall effect, the anomalous Hall effect does not require a nonzero Chern number of the band; for a band with zero Chern number, the local Berry curvature can be nonzero and give rise to a nonzero anomalous Hall conductivity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 2. Anomalous Hall conductivity as a Fermi surface property · p. 17

    The Hall conductivity Eq. (3.14) is given as an integration over all occupied states below the Fermi energy.

    “An interesting aspect of the intrinsic contribution to the anomalous Hall effect is that the Hall conductivity, Eq. (3.14), is given as an integration over all occupied states below the Fermi energy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    A necessary condition for the charge Hall effect to manifest is broken time-reversal symmetry of the system.

    “Anecessary condition for the charge Hall effect to manifest is the broken time-reversal symmetry of the system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    Under time reversal, both the valley current and electric field are invariant.

    “Under time reversal, both the valley current and electric field are invariant ( τ z changes sign because the two valleys switch when the crystal momentum changes sign).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Construction of the wave packet and its orbital moment · p. 20

    In realistic situations, the orbital moment can be 30 times larger than the spin moment, and can be used as an effective way to detect and generate valley polarization.

    “In realistic situations, the moment can be 30 times larger than the spin moment, and can be used as an effective way to detect and generate the valley polarization (Xiao et al. , 2007b; Yao et al. , 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Xiao et al. , 2007b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Yao et al. , 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. The anomalous Hall Effect · p. 16

    For a generic Hamiltonian with spin-orbit split bands, the Berry curvatures of the two energy bands have opposite sign and are highly concentrated around the gap.

    “The Berry curvatures of the two energy bands have opposite sign, and is highly concentrated around the gap”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic contributions · p. 17

    In Fe thin films, measured σ_ah vs σ_xx^2 converge to a single point as σ_xx approaches zero, where impurity-scattering induced contribution is washed out by phonon scattering and only the intrinsic contribution survives.

    “We can see that although σ ah in different thin films and at different temperatures shows a large variation at finite σ xx , they converge to a single point as σ xx approaches zero, where the impurity-scattering induced contribution should be washed out by the phonon scattering and only the intrinsic contribution survives.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tian et al.

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § E. The valley Hall effect · p. 18

    Under spatial inversion, the valley current is invariant but the electric field changes sign.

    “Under spatial inversion, the valley current is still invariant but the electric field changes sign.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 20

    In the bulk where V(r) vanishes, the electron energy is just the bulk band-energy; near the boundary, it is tilted up due to the increase of V(r).

    “In the bulk where V ( r ) vanishes, the electron energy is just the bulk band-energy; near the boundary, it will be tilted up due to the increase of V ( r ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The confining potential V(r) varies slowly at atomic length scale such that the wave packet description of the electron is still valid on the boundary.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic contributions · p. 17

    Excellent agreement with experiments has been demonstrated in ferromagnetic transition metals and semiconductors, leaving little room for the side jump contribution.

    “Excellent agreement with experiments has been demonstrated in ferromagnetic transition metals and semiconductors (Fang et al. , 2003; Jungwirth et al. , 2002; Xiao et al. , 2006b; Yao et al. , 2004, 2007), which leaves little room for the side jump contribution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Fang et al. , 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jungwirth et al. , 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xiao et al. , 2006b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 2. Anomalous Hall conductivity as a Fermi surface property · p. 18

    The integral over the Fermi sea can be converted to a more efficient integral on the Fermi surface.

    “From a computational point of view, the advantage lies in that the integral over the Fermi sea is converted to a more efficient integral on the Fermi surface.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Intrinsic vs. extrinsic contributions · p. 17

    If the sample is clean and the temperature is low, the relaxation time τ can be extremely large, and skew scattering is expected to dominate.

    “If the sample is clean and the temperature is low, the relaxation time τ can be extremely large, and the skew scattering is expected to dominate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    If O = v, one finds the expression for the local current.

    “If ˆ O = ˆ v , one finds the expression for the local current:”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    The final expression for orbital magnetization, Eq. (4.14), is given in terms of bulk Bloch functions and does not depend on the boundary condition; the boundary is merely a tool to expose the free current contribution because in a uniform system the magnetization current always vanishes in the bulk.

    “This is a wrong assertion as the final expression, Eq. (4.14), is given in terms of the bulk Bloch functions and does not depend on the boundary condition. Here, the boundary is merely a tool to expose the 'free current' contribution because in a uniform system, the magnetization current always vanishes in the bulk.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    The local current is given by Eq. (4.19), where replacing the distribution function g(r,q) with the local Fermi-Dirac function f(r,q) is sufficient for a first-order calculation.

    “Firstly, as we showed in Eq. (4.19), the local current is given by”
    • Also stated in: § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22 · plain
      “where in the second term we have replaced the distribution function g ( r , q ) with the local Fermi-Dirac function f ( r , q ), which is sufficient for a first-order calculation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 24

    Although the phase-space volume is no longer conserved, it is a local function of the state variables and has nothing to do with the history of time evolution; a modified density of states can be introduced such that the number of states in the volume element remains constant in time.

    “Although the phase space volume is no longer conserved, it is a local function of the state variables and has nothing to do with the history of time evolution. We can thus introduce a modified density of states”
    • Also stated in: § B. Modified density of states · p. 24 · plain
      “such that the number of states in the volume element, D n ( r , k )∆ V , remains constant in time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. Dipole moment · p. 21

    The finite size of the wave packet not only allows an orbital magnetic moment but also leads to the concept of the dipole moment associated with an operator.

    “The finite size of the wave packet not only allows an orbital magnetic moment, but also leads to the concept of the dipole moment associated with an operator.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    Equation (4.23) is the most general expression for the transport current; the contribution from the orbital magnetic moment m(q) cancels out, agreeing with the picture that the orbital moment is due to self-rotation, is localized, and cannot contribute to transport.

    “Equation (4.23) is the most general expression for the transport current. We notice that the contribution from the orbital magnetic moment m ( q ) cancels out. This agrees with the intuitive picture we developed in Sec. IV.B, i.e., the orbital moment is due to the selfrotation of the wave packet, therefore it is localized and cannot contribute to transport”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 2. Streda Formula · p. 24

    Using Eq. (5.16) for an insulator, one obtains in 2D the same result as Thouless et al. (1982) obtained using the Kubo formula; the fact that the quantum Hall conductivity can be derived using the modified density of states further confirms the necessity to introduce this concept.

    “Using Eq. (5.16) for an insulator, we obtain, in 2D”
    • Also stated in: § 2. Streda Formula · p. 24 · plain
      “This is what Thouless et al. (1982) obtained using the Kubo formula. The fact that the quantum Hall conductivity can be derived using the modified density of states further confirms the necessity to introduce this concept.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Thouless et al. (1982)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 23

    If the length scale of perturbations is much larger than the spatial spread of the wave packet, the approximate Hamiltonian that the wave packet feels may be obtained by linearizing the perturbations about the wave packet center r_c.

    “If the length scale of the perturbations is much larger than the spatial spread of the wave packet, the approximate Hamiltonian that the wave packet 'feels' may be obtained by linearizing the perturbations about the wave packet center r c as”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    Similar formulas for insulators with zero Chern number have been obtained by Ceresoli et al. (2006) and Thonhauser et al. (2005) using the Wannier function approach, and have been numerically confirmed for a tight-binding model.

    “Similar formula for insulators with zero Chern number has been obtained by Ceresoli et al. (2006); Thonhauser et al. (2005) using the Wannier function approach, and has been numerically confirmed for a tightbinding model.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ceresoli et al. (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Thonhauser et al. (2005)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Dipole moment · p. 22

    If O is the spin operator s, Eq. (4.18) gives the spin dipole; in general the spin center and mass center do not coincide, usually due to spin-orbit interaction.

    “If ˆ O is the spin operator ˆ s , then Eq. (4.18) gives the spin dipole”
    • Also stated in: § C. Dipole moment · p. 22 · plain
      “It shows that in general the spin center and the mass center do not coincide, which is usually due to the spin-orbit interaction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Dipole moment · p. 21

    The dipole moment appears naturally when considering the thermodynamic average of a physical quantity, and in the wave packet approach it is given by Eq. (4.15).

    “The dipole moment appears naturally when we consider the thermodynamic average of a physical quantity, with its operator denoted by ˆ O . In the wave packet approach, it is given by”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 24

    Although the density of states is no longer constant, the dynamics itself is still Hamiltonian; the modification comes from the fact that r and k are no longer canonical variables, and the density of states can be regarded as the phase-space measure (Bliokh, 2006b; Duval et al., 2006b,a; Xiao et al., 2006a).

    “We emphasize that although the density of states is no longer a constant, the dynamics itself is still Hamiltonian. The modification comes from the fact that the dynamical variables, r and k , are no longer canonical variables, and the density of states can be regarded as the phase space measure (Bliokh, 2006b; Duval et al. , 2006b,a; Xiao et al. , 2006a).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bliokh, 2006b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Duval et al., 2006b,a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xiao et al., 2006a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    Anomalous thermoelectric transport in ferromagnets refers to the appearance of a Hall current driven by statistical forces, such as gradients of temperature and chemical potential (Chien and Westgate, 1980).

    “As an application of the above concepts, we consider the problem of anomalous thermoelectric transport in ferromagnets, which refers to the appearance of a Hall current driven by statistical forces, such as the gradient of temperature and chemical potential (Chien and Westgate, 1980).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chien and Westgate, 1980

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 23

    Compared to the conventional equations of motion for Bloch electrons (Ashcroft and Mermin, 1976), there are two differences: (1) the electron energy is modified by the orbital magnetic moment; (2) the electron velocity gains an extra velocity term proportional to the Berry curvature.

    “Compared to the conventional equations of motion for Bloch electrons (Ashcroft and Mermin, 1976), there are two differences: (1) The electron energy is modified by the orbital magnetic moment; (2) the electron velocity gains an extra velocity term proportional to the Berry curvature.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ashcroft and Mermin, 1976

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    For the intrinsic contribution to anomalous thermoelectric transport, both the Einstein relation and Mott relation still hold (Onoda et al., 2008; Xiao et al., 2006b).

    “It is straightforward to verify that for the intrinsic contribution to the anomalous thermoelectric transport, both the Einstein relation and Mott relation still hold (Onoda et al. , 2008; Xiao et al. , 2006b).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Onoda et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xiao et al., 2006b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    For band insulators, there will be a discontinuity of the orbital magnetization if the integral of the Berry curvature over the Brillouin zone, or the anomalous Hall conductivity, is non-zero and quantized; the size of the discontinuity is given by the quantized anomalous Hall conductivity times E_g/e, where E_g is the energy gap.

    “Following the discussions on band insulators in our first example in Sec. V.B.1, there will be a discontinuity of the orbital magnetization if the integral of the Berry curvature over the Brillouin zone, or the anomalous Hall conductivity, is non-zero and quantized.”
    • Also stated in: § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25 · plain
      “The size of the discontinuity is given by the quantized anomalous Hall conductivity times E g /e , where E g is the energy gap.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 20

    This transverse velocity leads to a boundary current given by Eq. (4.11).

    “This transverse velocity will lead to a boundary current (of the dimension 'current density × width' in 2D) given by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    Equation (4.23) is not limited to transport driven by statistical forces; at the microscopic level a mechanical force generally has two effects: it can drive electron motion directly and appear in the expression for rdot, and it can make the electron energy and Berry curvature spatially dependent, hence manifest in the second term of Eq. (4.23).

    “Equation (4.23) is not limited to transport driven by statistical forces. As we shall show later, at the microscopic level the mechanical force generally has two effects:”
    • Also stated in: § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 23 · plain
      “it can drive the electron motion directly, and appears in the expression for ˙ r ; it can also make the electron energy and the Berry curvature spatially dependent, hence also manifest in the second term in Eq. (4.23).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § D. Magnetotransport · p. 25

    The equations of motion (5.8) and the density of states (5.13) give a complete description of the electron dynamics in the presence of electromagnetic fields.

    “The equations of motion (5.8) and the density of states (5.13) gives us a complete description of the electron dynamics in the presence of electromagnetic fields.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 23

    The effect of a uniform A(r_c) is to add a phase to the eigenstates of the unperturbed Hamiltonian; therefore the wave packet can be written as Eq. (5.4).

    “The effect of a uniform A ( r c ) is to add a phase to the eigenstates of the unperturbed Hamiltonian. Therefore the wave packet can be written as”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 23

    The Berry curvature not only modifies the electron dynamics but also has a profound effect on the electron density of states in phase space (Xiao et al., 2005).

    “The Berry curvature not only modifies the electron dynamics, but also has a profound effect on the electron density of states in the phase space (Xiao et al. , 2005).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Xiao et al., 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 20

    Integrating Eq. (4.11) by parts yields an expression for magnetization in terms of the zero-temperature Hall conductivity σxy(ε).

    “Integrating Eq. (4.11) by part, we obtain”
    • Also stated in: § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21 · plain
      “where σ xy ( ε ) is the zero-temperature Hall conductivity for a system with Fermi energy ε :”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: For a current I flowing in a closed circuit enclosing a sufficiently small area A, the circuit carries a magnetic moment I·A, so the magnetization (magnetic moment per unit area) has magnitude I.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    Similar to the anomalous Hall effect, anomalous thermoelectric transport has intrinsic and extrinsic contributions; the paper focuses on the former.

    “Similar to the anomalous Hall effect, there are also intrinsic and extrinsic contributions, and we will focus on the former.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    In the presence of an electric field, the electron acquires an anomalous velocity proportional to the Berry curvature, which gives rise to a Hall current.

    “Recall that in the presence of an electric field, the electron acquires an anomalous velocity proportional to the Berry curvature, which gives rise to a Hall current.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    The boundary current corresponds to the global movement of the wave packet center and is called the 'free current' contribution, whereas the orbital moment is due to 'localized' current.

    “Since the boundary current corresponds to the global movement of the wave packet center, we call this contribution the 'free current' contribution, whereas the orbital moment are due to 'localized' current.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    The orbital magnetization has two contributions: one from the self-rotation of the wave packet and one from the center-of-mass motion.

    “The orbital magnetization has two different contributions: one is from the self-rotation of the wave packet, and the other is due to the center-of-mass motion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Dipole moment · p. 22

    The self-rotation of the wave packet can be thought of as a localized circuit; therefore, if the distribution is not uniform, those localized circuits contribute to the local current jL.

    “The self-rotation can be thought as localized circuit. Therefore if the distribution is not uniform, those localized circuit will contribute to the local current j L”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    If O = e, then Pe = 0, consistent with the charge center coinciding with the mass center of the electron; as a result, one cannot derive a current flowing in the x-direction.

    “If ˆ O = e , then P e = 0. This is consistent with the fact that the charge center coincides with the mass center of the electron. As a result, one cannot derive a current flowing in the x -direction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    The magnetization is the field derivative at fixed temperature and chemical potential, M = -(∂F/∂B)_{μ,T}, with the result Eq. (5.20); integration by parts of the second term gives the exact formula obtained in Eq. (4.14).

    “The magnetization is then the field derivative at fixed temperature and chemical potential, M = -( ∂F/∂ B ) µ,T , with the result”
    • Also stated in: § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25 · plain
      “Integration by parts of the second term will give us the exact formula obtained in Eq. (4.14).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 24

    The correct semiclassical limit of the sum in Eq. (5.9) is Eq. (5.12), where the expectation value in a wave packet could include the dipole contribution due to the finite size of the wave packet; in a uniform system it is simply given by Eq. (5.13).

    “Therefore, the correct semiclassical limit of the sum in Eq. (5.9) is”
    • Also stated in: § B. Modified density of states · p. 24 · hedged
      “where 〈· · ·〉 W is the expectation value in a wave packet, which could includes the dipole contribution due to the finite size of the wave packet (See Sec. 4.18). In a uniform system it is simply given by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    The dipole moment of an observable is a general consequence of the wave packet approach and must be included in the semiclassical theory; its contribution appears only when the system is inhomogeneous.

    “The dipole moment of an observable is a general consequence of the wave packet approach and must be included in the semiclassical theory. Its contribution appears only when the system is inhomogeneous.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    The first term in the orbital magnetization is what one would obtain if the wave packet is treated as a point particle; the second term is due to the finite size of the wave packet.

    “The first term is what one would obtain if the wave packet is treated as a point particle. The second term is due to the finite size of the wave packet.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 21

    In more rigorous approaches (Shi et al., 2007; Xiao et al., 2005) the boundary is not needed and the derivation is based on a pure bulk picture.

    “Finally, in more rigorous approaches (Shi et al. , 2007; Xiao et al. , 2005) the boundary is not needed and the derivation is based on a pure bulk picture.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Shi et al., 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Xiao et al., 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    Shi et al. (2007) provided a full quantum mechanical derivation of the formula and showed that it is valid in the presence of electron-electron interaction, provided the one-electron energies and wave functions are calculated self-consistently within the framework of the exact current and spin-density functional theory (Vignale and Rasolt, 1988).

    “Recently, Shi et al. (2007) provided a full quantum mechanical derivation of the formula, and showed that it is valid in the presence of electronelectron interaction, provided the one-electron energies and wave functions are calculated self-consistently within the framework of the exact current and spin-density functional theory (Vignale and Rasolt, 1988).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Shi et al. (2007)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Vignale and Rasolt, 1988

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § D. Anomalous thermoelectric transport · p. 22

    In ferromagnetic systems, it is important to discount the contribution from the magnetization current; the magnetization current cannot be measured by conventional transport experiments (Cooper et al., 1997).

    “Secondly, in ferromagnetic systems, it is important to discount the contribution from the magnetization current. It was argued that the magnetization current cannot be measured by conventional transport experiments (Cooper et al. , 1997).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cooper et al., 1997

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    The equilibrium magnetization density can be obtained from the grand canonical potential, which within first order in the magnetic field may be written as Eq. (5.19), where the electron energy ε_M = ε(k) - m(k)·B includes a correction due to the orbital magnetic moment m(k).

    “The equilibrium magnetization density can be obtained from the grand canonical potential, which, within first order in the magnetic field, may be written as”
    • Also stated in: § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25 · plain
      “where the electron energy ε M = ε ( k ) -m ( k ) · B includes a correction due to the orbital magnetic moment m ( k ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 23

    For the wave packet energy, <W|ΔH|W> = -m(k)·B, because the wave packet carries an orbital magnetic moment m(k) that couples to the magnetic field.

    “For the wave packet energy, we have 〈 W | ∆ H | W 〉 = -m ( k ) · B . This is expected as we already showed that the wave packet carries an orbital magnetic moment m ( k ) that will couple to the magnetic field.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Orbital magnetization: Revisit · p. 25

    The paper has derived a general expression for the equilibrium orbital magnetization density, valid at zero magnetic field but at arbitrary temperatures; from this derivation the orbital magnetization is indeed a bulk property, and the center-of-mass contribution comes from the Berry-phase correction to the electron density of states.

    “We have thus derived a general expression for the equilibrium orbital magnetization density, valid at zero magnetic field but at arbitrary temperatures. From this derivation we can clearly see that the orbital magnetization is indeed a bulk property. The center-of-mass contribution identified before comes from the Berry-phase correction to the electron density of states.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Orbital magnetization · p. 20

    A wave packet in the boundary region feels a force ∇V(r) due to the confining potential, and according to Eq. (4.10) the electron acquires a transverse velocity whose direction is parallel with the boundary.

    “Now consider a wave packet in the boundary region. It will feel a force ∇ V ( r ) due to the presence of the confining potential. Consequently, according to Eq. (4.10) the electron acquires a transverse velocity, whose direction is parallel with the boundary (Fig. 8).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The confining potential V(r) varies slowly at atomic length scale such that the wave packet description of the electron is still valid on the boundary.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Magnetic field induced polarization · p. 31

    For A = By zhat with B = h/(e a_z l_y) xhat, the magnetic flux over the supercell a_z × l_y in the x-direction is exactly h/e, so the system is periodic in the y-direction with period l_y.

    “Consider A = By ˆ z with B = h/ea z l y ˆ x . Note that magnetic flux over the supercell a z × l y in the x -direction is exactly h/e , therefore the system is periodic in the y -direction with period l y .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    Starting from Eq. (6.9) and the modified density of states (6.16), the adiabatic current induced by inhomogeneity is given by Eq. (6.29).

    “Starting from Eq. (6.9) and making use of the modified density of states (6.16), one finds the adiabatic current induced by inhomogeneity is give by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 28

    If the Berry curvature vanishes, Eq. (6.13) becomes the canonical equations of motion for Hamiltonian dynamics, and r and q are canonical variables.

    “Note that if the Berry curvature vanishes, Eq. (6.13) becomes the canonical equations of motion for Hamiltonian dynamics, and r and q are called canonical variables.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    In many physical situations the system is in an inhomogeneous state and the electric polarization strongly depends on the inhomogeneity.

    “However, in many physical situations the system is in an inhomogeneous state and the electric polarization strongly depends on the inhomogeneity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Cyclotron period · p. 25

    In a uniform magnetic field, the semiclassical equations of motion reduce to Eq. (5.25), and motion in k-space is confined in the xy-plane and completely determined once the energy ε and the z component of the wave vector k_z are given.

    “In this case, the equations of motion reduce to”
    • Also stated in: § 1. Cyclotron period · p. 25 · plain
      “From the second equation of (5.25) we can see that motion in k -space is confined in the xy -plane and is completely determined once the energy ε and the z component of the wave vector k z is given.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    Xiao et al. (2007a) showed how the two-point formula can be implemented in numerical calculations using a discretized version.

    “Xiao et al. (2007a) also showed how the two-point formula can be implemented in numerical calculations using a discretized version (Kotiuga, 1989).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Xiao et al. (2007a)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kotiuga, 1989

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 28

    The antisymmetric tensor Ω_rr is realized in terms of the magnetic field in the Lorentz force and is also seen in the singular form (δ-function like distribution) of dislocations in a deformed crystal (Bird and Preston, 1988).

    “The antisymmetric tensor Ω ↔ rr is realized in terms of the magnetic field in the Lorenz force and is also seen in the singular form ( δ -function like distribution) of dislocations in a deformed crystal (Bird and Preston, 1988).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Bird and Preston, 1988

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    For deformed crystals, the gradient correction to the electron energy is given by Eq. (6.8) and was found by Sundaram and Niu (1999).

    “One is the gradient correction to the electron energy, given in Eq. (6.8). It is found that (Sundaram and Niu, 1999)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sundaram and Niu, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    Direct calculation of the change of electron density using the modified density of states (6.16) gives Eq. (6.24).

    “On the other hand, we can also directly calculate the change of the electron density using the modified density of states (6.16), which gives”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    Qi et al. (2008) obtained a similar result.

    “Similar result has been obtained by Qi et al. (2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Qi et al. (2008)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § VI. ELECTRON DYNAMICS IN THE PRESENCE OF GENERAL PERTURBATIONS · p. 27

    In the general theory of electron dynamics in slowly perturbed crystals, the Berry curvature enters into the equations of motion and modifies the density of states; one needs to introduce the Berry curvature defined in the extended parameter space (r,q,t).

    “In this section we present the general theory of electron dynamics in slowly perturbed crystals (Panati et al. , 2003; Shindou and Imura, 2005; Sundaram and Niu, 1999). As expected, the Berry curvature enters into the equations of motion and modifies the density of states. The difference is that one needs to introduce the Berry curvature defined in the extended parameter space ( r , q , t ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Panati et al., 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Shindou and Imura, 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sundaram and Niu, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    Kunz (1986) showed that charge transport in incommensurate potentials is quantized and given in the form of Chern numbers, consistent with the derived result.

    “Kunz (1986) has discussed the charge pumping in incommensurate potentials and he showed that in general the charge transport is quantized and is given in the form of Chern numbers, which is consistent with what we have derived.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kunz (1986)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27

    More generally, the relaxation time can always be expanded to first order of (e/ħ)B·Ω, Eq. (5.41), where τ1 should be regarded as a fitting parameter within this theory.

    “More generally, we can always expand the relaxation time to first order of ( e/ ¯ h ) B · Ω ,”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27 · plain
      “where τ 1 should be regarded as a fitting parameter within this theory.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 26

    In the low field limit, the diagonal element of the conductivity is given by Eq. (5.37), which is the zeroth order expansion based on ω_c τ, and there are four places in this expression depending on B: explicit B-dependence in D(k), modification of v_x by the orbital magnetic moment, modification to the Fermi energy, and possible B-dependence of the relaxation time τ.

    “By solving the Boltzmann equation, one finds that the diagonal element of the conductivity is given by”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 26 · plain
      “This is just the zeroth order expansion based on ω c τ . There are four places in this expression depending on B . (1) There is an explicit B -dependence in ¯ D ( k ). (2) The electron velocity v x is modified by the orbital magnetic moment:”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27 · plain
      “(3) There is also a modification to the Fermi energy, given by Eq. (5.17). (4) The relaxation time τ can also depend on B .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 28

    The term Ω_qt was identified as the adiabatic velocity vector in Sec. II.

    “The term Ω q t was identified as the adiabatic velocity vector in Sec. II.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 2. The high field limit · p. 26

    For a hole-like band, the Hall current is obtained by subtracting the contribution of holes from that of the filled band, and there is an additional term in the current expression proportional to the Chern number of the band.

    “Let us now consider the hole-like band. The Hall current is obtained by substracting the contribution of holes from that of the filled band, which is given by -e E × ∫ [ d k ] Ω . Therefore”
    • Also stated in: § 2. The high field limit · p. 26 · plain
      “So for the hole-like band, there is an additional term in the current expression proportional to the Chern number (the second integral) of the band.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 28

    In the presence of electromagnetic perturbations, the local basis can be written as |u(r_c,q)> = |u(k)>, where k = q + eA(r); using the chain rule, Δε in Eq. (6.8) becomes -m(k)·B, and the equations of motion (6.9) reduce to Eq. (5.8).

    “Hence the local basis can be written as | u ( r c , q ) 〉 = | u ( k ) 〉 , where k = q + e A ( r ). One can verify that by using the chain rule ∂ q α = ∂ k α and ∂ r α = ( ∂ r α A β ) ∂ k β , ∆ ε given in Eq. (6.8) becomes -m ( k ) · B , and the equations of motion (6.9) reduces to Eq. (5.8).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Cyclotron period · p. 26

    There is a velocity term proportional to B in Eq. (5.25) that seems to suggest a current along the field direction; after averaging over the distribution function, this current is actually zero.

    “In addition, we note that there is a velocity term proportional to B in Eq. (5.25), which seems to suggest there will be a current along the field direction. We show that after averaging over the distribution function, this current is actually zero.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: There is no magnetic monopole in k-space.
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    A wave packet of incident wave vector q taken around the line of dislocation acquires a Berry phase given by Eq. (6.25), where b is the Burgers vector.

    “On account of this multiple-valuedness, a wave packet of incident wave vector q taken around the line of dislocation acquires a Berry phase”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27

    In the presence of the Berry curvature, the collision term in the Boltzmann equation is given by Eq. (5.38), where W_kk' is the transition probability from k' to k state.

    “In the presence of the Berry curvature, the collision term in the Boltzmann equation is given by”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27 · plain
      “where W kk ′ is the transition probability from k ′ to k state.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    The second Chern form demands that the system must be two-dimensional or higher; otherwise it vanishes.

    “The second Chern form demands that the system must be two-dimensional or higher, otherwise the second Chern form vanishes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 2. The high field limit · p. 26

    In the high field limit (ω_c τ ≫ 1), the total current in crossed electric and magnetic fields is the Hall current as if calculated from the free electron model, and it has no dependence on the relaxation time τ; this result ensures that even in the presence of anomalous Hall effect, the high field Hall current gives the real electron density.

    “Therefore in the high field limit we reach the remarkable conclusion: the total current in crossed electric and magnetic fields is the Hall current as if calculated from free electron model”
    • Also stated in: § 2. The high field limit · p. 26 · plain
      “and it has no dependence on the relaxation time τ . This result ensures that even in the presence of anomalous Hall effect, the high field Hall current gives the 'real' electron density.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: In the high field limit, all orbits are closed.
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    For a one-dimensional insulator under uniform strain with new lattice constant a+δa and one electron per unit cell, the electron density goes from 1/a to Eq. (6.23).

    “We first consider a one-dimensional insulator with lattice constant a and is under a uniform strain with a new lattice constant a + δa , i.e., ∂ x u = δa/a . Assuming one electron per unit cell, the electron density goes from 1 /a to”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Polarization induced by inhomogeneity · p. 30

    The coefficient χ is given by Eq. (6.33), where the Berry curvature is defined on the parameter space (q,h).

    “The coefficient χ is given by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    An insulator under a uniform strain remains an insulator.

    “From a physical point of view, it says an insulator under a uniform strain remains an insulator.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 28

    The form of the equations of motion is quite symmetrical with respect to r and q, and there are Berry curvatures between every pair of phase-space variables plus time.

    “The form of the equations of motion is quite symmetrical with respect to r and q , and there are Berry curvatures between every pair of phase space variables plus time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 28

    The presence of the Berry curvature renders the variables non-canonical and modifies the density of states.

    “The presence of the Berry curvature renders the variables non-canonical and, as a consequence, modifies the density of states.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Equations of motion · p. 28

    If the perturbation is uniform in space and only varies in time, all spatial derivatives vanish, and the equations reduce to Eq. (6.10); the first equation is the velocity formula (2.5) obtained in Sec. II, and the term Ω_qq was identified as the Hall conductivity tensor.

    “In fact, if the perturbation is uniform in space (has the same period as the unperturbed crystal) and only varies in time, all the spatial derivatives vanish; we obtain”
    • Also stated in: § A. Equations of motion · p. 28 · plain
      “The first equation is the velocity formula (2.5) obtained in Sec. II. The term Ω ↔ qq was identified as the Hall conductivity tensor.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27

    Expanding expression (5.37) to first order of B and taking the spherical band approximation yields Eq. (5.42), where M is the effective mass tensor; the zero-field conductivity takes the usual form Eq. (5.43), and the ratio -σ(1)xx/σ(0)xx gives the linear magnetoresistance.

    “Expand expression (5.37) to first order of B , and take the spherical band approximation, we obtain”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27 · plain
      “where M is the effect mass tensor. The zero-field conductivity takes the usual form”
    • Also stated in: § 3. The Low Field Limit · p. 27 · plain
      “The ratio -σ (1) xx /σ (0) xx will then give us the linear magnetoresistance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § 1. Magnetic field induced polarization · p. 31

    This coupling is labeled 'axion electrodynamics' and was discussed by Wilczek (1987).

    “This coupling, labeled 'axion electrodynamics', was discussed by Wilczek (1987).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilczek (1987)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    For deformed crystals, in addition to A_q, there are two other vector potentials, leading to Berry curvatures given by Eq. (6.22).

    “For deformed crystals, in addition to A q , there are two other vector potentials”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. Deformed Crystal · p. 29

    A wave packet should not feel the effect of a deformation of the lattice in the absence of electron-phonon coupling.

    “Which is expected since a wave packet should not feel the effect of a deformation of the lattice in the absence of electron-phonon coupling.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Modified density of states · p. 28

    In the Rice-Mele model with spatially varying dimerization at half filling, the system is an insulator and its electron density is given by Eq. (6.18).

    “At half filling, the system is an insulator and its electron density is given by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1. Magnetic field induced polarization · p. 31

    The induced polarization by the magnetic field is given by Eq. (6.34).

    “The induced polarization is given by”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § A. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization · p. 32

    The method of canonical quantization in Sec. VII.D does not have these problems.

    “On the other hand, the method of canonical quantization in Sec. VII.D does not have these problems.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    In reality, the orbit in one band would couple with orbits in other bands; as a result, the Landau levels are broadened into mini-bands.

    “In reality, the orbit in one band would couple with the orbits in other bands. As a result, the Landau levels are broadened into mini-bands (Wilkinson, 1984a).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wilkinson, 1984a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § A. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization · p. 32

    This inconsistency is known to happen in the case of an isotropic three-dimensional harmonic oscillator.

    “This is known to happen in the case of an isotropic three-dimensional harmonic oscillator (Tabor, 1989).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tabor, 1989

      Not checked in the free run.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. Spin Texture · p. 31

    The time-dependence of the spin texture gives rise to the Berry curvature Ω_rt given by Eq. (6.38).

    “In addition, the time-dependence of the spin texture also gives rises to”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    With a superlattice that has a much larger lattice constant, the period T_B can be reduced by two orders of magnitude, which could make Bloch oscillation and Wannier-Stark ladders detectable.

    “Nonetheless, with the help of a superlattice that has a much larger lattice constant, the period T B can be reduced by two orders of magnitude, which could make the Bloch oscillation and the accompanying Wannier-Stark ladders detectable (Mendes and Bastard, 1993).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mendes and Bastard, 1993

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    Because of the charge separation, the one-dimensional crystal has a polarization ΔP = eΓ_c/2π compared to the state without charge separation, which is the electric dipole per unit cell, consistent with Eq. (2.28).

    “Because of the charge separation mentioned above, the one-dimensional crystal has a polarization ∆ P = e Γ c / 2 π (compared to the state without charge separation), which is the electric dipole per unit cell. This is consistent with the result in Eq. (2.28).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § A. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization · p. 32

    The Bohr-Sommerfeld method fails if the trajectory in phase space is not closed, or if the dynamic system is chaotic so that no invariant torus exists.

    “Second, this method fails if the trajectory in phase space is not closed, or if the dynamic system is chaotic so that no invariant torus exists.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization · p. 32

    Since the Berry phase is path dependent, one may need to solve the equation self-consistently to obtain the quantized orbits.

    “Since the Berry phase is path dependent, one may need to solve the equation self-consistently to obtain the quantized orbits.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    It takes time T_B = h/(eEa) for the electron to traverse the first Brillouin zone, so the angular frequency of the periodic motion is ω_B = eEa/hbar; this is Bloch oscillation.

    “It takes the time T B = h/ ( eEa ) for the electron to traverse the first Brillouin zone. Therefore, the angular frequency of the periodic motion is ω B = eEa/ ¯ h . This is the so-called Bloch oscillation (Ashcroft and Mermin, 1976).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ashcroft and Mermin, 1976

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    Starting from Eq. (7.5), the average position of the electron is given by Eq. (7.6).

    “Starting from Eq. (7.5), it is not difficult to find the average position of the electron,”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. Spin Texture · p. 31

    The spatial variation of local spin textures gives rise to the Berry curvature field Eq. (6.37), where θ and φ are spherical angles specifying the direction of n.

    “Then the spatial variation of local spin textures gives rise to the Berry curvature field”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The electron spin will follow the local spin direction during its motion (adiabatic approximation).
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    Even though one can always have canonical pairs in a Hamiltonian system, as guaranteed by the Darboux theorem, in practice finding them may not be a trivial task.

    “Even though one can always have canonical pairs in a Hamiltonian system, as guaranteed by the Darboux theorem (Arnold, 1989), in practice, however, finding them may not be a trivial task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Arnold, 1989 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    Without quantization, the size of an orbit is determined by the initial energy of the electron and can be varied continuously.

    “Without quantization, the size of an orbit is determined by the initial energy of the electron and can be varied continuously.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    After time average, the quantized energies of the electron wavepacket are given by Eq. (7.7), which are the energy levels of the Wannier-Stark ladders.

    “After time average, the quantized energies of the electron wavepacket are,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    As a result, the 1/2 on the right hand side of Eq. (7.10) is cancelled by the Berry phase term; according to Eq. (7.10), the area of a cyclotron orbit is πk^2 = 2π|m|eB/hbar, and the Landau level energy is E_m = v_F sqrt(2eB hbar m).

    “As a result, the 1 / 2 on the right hand side of Eq. (7.10) is cancelled by the Berry phase term. According to Eq. (7.10), the area of a cyclotron orbit is thus πk 2 = 2 π | m | eB ¯ h , m ∈ Z . From which one can easily obtain the Landau level energy E m = v F √ 2 eB ¯ hm .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. Spin Texture · p. 31

    Unlike the anomalous Hall effect, this mechanism for a nonvanishing Hall effect does not require spin-orbit coupling, but does need a topologically nontrivial spin texture, for example, a skyrmion.

    “Unlike the anomalous Hall effect discussed in Sec. III.D, this mechanism for a nonvanishing Hall effect does not require the spin-orbit coupling, but does need a topologically nontrivial spin texture, for example, a skyrmion.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization · p. 32

    The quantization condition for an orbit with constant energy becomes Eq. (7.3).

    “The quantization condition for an orbit with constant energy thus becomes,”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given
    § VII. QUANTIZATION OF ELECTRON DYNAMICS · p. 31

    Berry curvature often appears as a result of restricting or projecting the extent of a theory to its subspace.

    “Berry curvature often appears as a result of restricting (or projecting) the extent of a theory to its subspace.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § VII. QUANTIZATION OF ELECTRON DYNAMICS · p. 31

    The re-quantized theory is valid in the same subspace of the semiclassical theory.

    “The re-quantized theory is valid in the same subspace of the semiclassical theory.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    Applying the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization rule as Onsager did, only certain orbits satisfying the quantization rule are allowed; each orbit corresponds to an energy level (Landau level), and this method remains valid in the presence of the Berry phase.

    “One then applies the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization rule, as Onsager did, to quantize the size of the orbit (Onsager, 1952). That is, only certain orbits satisfying the quantization rule are allowed. Each orbit corresponds to an energy level of the electron (i.e., the Landau level). Such a method remains valid in the presence of the Berry phase.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Onsager, 1952 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    For an electron with a quadratic energy dispersion before applying the magnetic field, the quantized levels are equally spaced; with the Berry phase correction, which is usually different for different orbits, the energy levels are no longer uniformly distributed.

    “For an electron with a quadratic energy dispersion (before applying the magnetic field), these levels are equally spaced. However, with the Berry phase correction, which are usually different for different orbits, the energy levels are no longer uniformly distributed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    Beyond the one-band approximation, there exist Zener tunnellings between Bloch bands; therefore the quantized levels are not stationary states and should be understood as resonances with finite life-times.

    “First, beyond the one-band approximation, there exist Zener tunnellings between Bloch bands. Therefore, the quantized levels are not stationary states of the system. They should be understood as resonances with finite life-times (Gl¨ uck et al. , 1999).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Glück et al., 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    Bloch oscillation and Wannier-Stark ladders can also be realized in an optical lattice, in which the atom can be coherent over a long period of time.

    “Alternatively, the Bloch oscillation and WannierStark ladders can also be realized in an optical lattice (Ben Dahan et al. , 1996; Wilkinson and Kay, 1996), in which the atom can be coherent over a long period of time.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ben Dahan et al., 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wilkinson and Kay, 1996

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    In addition to point degeneracy, other types of degeneracy in momentum space can also be a source of the Berry phase; the effect of Berry phase generated by a line of band contact on magneto-oscillations is studied in Mikitik and Sharlai.

    “In addition to point degeneracy, other types of degeneracy in momentum space can also be a source of the Berry phase. For example, the effect of the Berry phase generated by a line of band contact on magneto-oscillations is studied in Mikitik and Sharlai (1999, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mikitik and Sharlai (1999, 2004)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given
    § VII. QUANTIZATION OF ELECTRON DYNAMICS · p. 31

    The Berry curvature plays a crucial role in the semiclassical dynamics of electrons, which is valid under the one-band approximation.

    “In particular, the Berry curvature plays a crucial role in the semiclassical dynamics of electrons, which is valid under the oneband approximation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Wannier-Stark ladder · p. 32

    The energy of the oscillatory electron is quantized in multiples of hbarω_B, and unlike a harmonic oscillator, the Bloch oscillator has no zero-point energy (Maslov index zero); these equally spaced levels are Wannier-Stark ladders.

    “Similar to a simple harmonic oscillator, the energy of the oscillatory electron is quantized in multiples of ¯ hω B . However, unlike the former, the Bloch oscillator has no zero-point energy (that is, the Maslov index is zero). These equally spaced energy levels are called the Wannier-Stark ladders.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation · p. 33

    The integral on the left-hand side of Eq. (7.9) is the magnetic flux enclosed by the real-space orbit; therefore the enclosed flux has to jump in steps of the flux quantum plus a Berry phase correction.

    “The integral on the left-hand side is simply the magnetic flux enclosed by the real-space orbit (allowing a drift along the B -direction). Therefore, the enclosed flux has to jump in steps of the flux quantum (plus a Berry phase correction).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    In that case, one can apply a Peierls-like substitution to the coordinate variables and write r_c = x + A(q), satisfying commutation relations from Eq. (7.13).

    “One can apply a Peierls-like substitution to the coordinate variables and write r c = x + A ( q ). It is not difficult to see that the commutation relations arising from Eq. (7.13) can indeed be satisfied.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    The magnetic Bloch band usually carries non-zero quantum Hall conductance and has a nontrivial topology.

    “The MBB usually carries non-zero quantum Hall conductance and has a nontrivial topology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    In the case of a system with Berry curvature but not in a magnetic field, κ=1, the roles of r_c and k_c in the commutators are reversed, momentum variables commute but coordinates do not.

    “In the second case, consider a system with Berry curvature but not in a magnetic field ( Ω = 0 , B = 0). In this case, again we have κ = 1. Now the roles of r c and k c in the commutators are reversed. The momentum variables commute with each other, but not the coordinates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    If a physical observable is a product of several canonical variables, the order of the product may become a problem after quantization since the variables may not commute; to preserve hermitian property, the operator product needs to be symmetrized.

    “First, if a physical observable is a product of several canonical variables, the order of the product may become a problem after the quantization since the variables may not commute with each other. To preserve the hermitian property of the physical observable, the operator product needs to be symmetrized.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    The semiclassical dynamics is valid when the external field is weak enough to be treated as a perturbation to the Bloch states; this premise is no longer valid if the external field is strong enough to significantly alter the Bloch bands.

    “The semiclassical dynamics in previous sections is valid when the external field is weak, such that the latter can be treated as a perturbation to the Bloch states. Such a premise is no longer valid if the external field is so strong that the structure of the Bloch bands is significantly altered.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    The translational symmetry and topological property of the subband are very different from those of the usual Bloch band; the former is called the magnetic Bloch band.

    “The translational symmetry and the topological property of the subband are very different from those of the usual Bloch band. To distinguish between the two, the former is called the magnetic Bloch band (MBB).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § A. Magnetic translational symmetry · p. 35

    For a uniform magnetic field, the vector potential must be a linear function of r; therefore ΔA is independent of r and f = ΔA·r.

    “For an uniform magnetic field, the vector potential must be a linear function of r . Therefore, ∆ A is independent of r and f = ∆ A · r .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § B. Basics of magnetic Bloch band · p. 36

    In general, the phases of Bloch states at different k's are unrelated and can be defined independently.

    “In general, the phases of Bloch states at different k 's are unrelated and can be defined independently.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    The formulation provides a clear picture of the hierarchical subbands split by the strong magnetic field (the Hofstadter spectrum).

    “Such an elegant formulation provides a clear picture of the hierarchical subbands split by the strong magnetic field (the Hofstadter spectrum) (Hofstadter, 1976).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hofstadter, 1976

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § C. Semiclassical picture: hyperorbits · p. 37

    When a weak magnetic field is applied to a Bloch band, the electron experiences a Lorentz force and executes a cyclotron motion on the surface of the Fermi sea.

    “When a weak magnetic field is applied to a Bloch band, the electron experiences a Lorentz force and executes a cyclotron motion on the surface of the Fermi sea.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given
    § A. Magnetic translational symmetry · p. 35

    In the presence of a strong magnetic field, one needs to treat the magnetic field and the lattice potential on equal footing and solve the Schrödinger equation Eq. (8.1).

    “In the presence of a strong magnetic field, one needs to treat the magnetic field and the lattice potential on equal footing and solve the following Schrodinger equation,”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    In quantum Hall systems, the magnetic field is of the order of Tesla and a Bloch band breaks into many subbands.

    “This happens, for example, in quantum Hall systems where the magnetic field is of the order of Tesla and a Bloch band would break into many subbands.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    After canonical quantization, x becomes i∂/∂q in the quasi-momentum representation; in Blount (1962b), the position operator r in the one-band approximation acquires a correction, which is the Berry connection A; therefore r_c can be identified with the projected position operator P r P.

    “After the canonical quantization, x becomes i∂/∂ q in the quasi-momentum representation. In Blount (1962b), the position operator r in the one-band approximation acquires a correction, which is our Berry connection A . Therefore, r c can be identified with the projected position operator P r P , where P projects to the energy band of interest.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Blount (1962b)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    In general, exact canonical variables cannot be found easily; since the semiclassical theory is valid to linear order of field, only canonical variables correct to the same order are needed, and the result is Eq. (7.15).

    “In general, exact canonical variables cannot be found easily. However, since the semiclassical theory itself is valid to linear order of field, we only need to find the canonical variables correct to the same order in practice. The result is (Chang and Niu, 2008),”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chang and Niu, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § VIII. MAGNETIC BLOCH BAND · p. 34

    The Berry curvature of the Bloch electron is first revealed in the magnetic Bloch band.

    “In fact, the Berry curvature of the Bloch electron is first revealed in the MBB.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § D. Canonical quantization (Abelian case) · p. 34

    With these equations, one can verify Eqs. (7.13), (7.14), and (7.15) to linear orders of B and Ω.

    “With these equations, one can verify Eqs. (7.13),(7.14), and (7.15) to linear orders of B and Ω .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § IX. NON-ABELIAN FORMULATION · p. 39

    In order to have a complete effective theory, one also needs to identify the correct physical variables relevant to experiments.

    “In order to have a complete effective theory, one also needs to identify the correct physical variables relevant to experiments.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    Since then, such a recipe has been used widely in the analysis of the Hofstadter spectrum.

    “Since then, such a recipe has been used widely in the analysis of the Hofstadter spectrum (Hofstadter, 1976).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hofstadter, 1976

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    What is special about these truncations is that p_r/q_r is the closest approximation to p/q among all fractions with q ≤ q_r.

    “What is special about these truncations is that p r /q r is the closet approximation to p/q among all fractions with q ≤ q r (Khinchin, 1964).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Khinchin, 1964

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    The SHE was first observed in semiconductors and later in metals.

    “They are first observed in semiconductors (Kato et al. , 2004; Sih et al. , 2005; Wunderlich et al. , 2005), and later in metals (Kimura et al. , 2007; Seki et al. , 2008; Valenzuela and Tinkham, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Kato et al., 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sih et al., 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Wunderlich et al., 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The computation in principle can be carried out to all orders of r.

    “The computation in principle can be carried out to all orders of r .”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    In such a formulation, there are three essential quantities: the Bloch energy E0(q), the Berry curvature, and the magnetic moment of the wavepacket.

    “Similar to the non-degenerate case, there are three essential quantities in such a formulation. In addition to the Bloch energy E 0 ( q ), there are the Berry curvature and the magnetic moment of the wavepacket (see Sec. IV).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    The anomalous velocity in Eq. (9.7) proportional to the Berry curvature F is the transverse current in the quantum Hall effect and the anomalous Hall effect.

    “We have seen earlier that it is the transverse current in the quantum Hall effect and the anomalous Hall effect (Sec. III).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D. Hall conductivity of hyperorbit · p. 38

    The proper way to separate the uniform magnetic field B into a quantizing part B0 and a perturbation δB was first proposed by Azbel (1964).

    “The proper way to separate them was first proposed by Azbel (1964).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Azbel (1964)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    The anomalous Hall effect requires spinful electrons with spin-orbit coupling, and therefore the carrier dynamics is suitably described by Eqs. (9.6), (9.7) and (9.10).

    “The latter requires spinful electrons with spin-orbit coupling and therefore the carrier dynamics is suitably described by Eqs. (9.6), (9.7) and (9.10).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    In an energy band with D-fold degeneracy, the wavepacket is a superposition of the Bloch states ψ_nq.

    “The wavepacket in an energy band with D -fold degeneracy is a superposition of the Bloch states ψ n q (Cf. Sec. IV),”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    In the original proposal, a four-band Luttinger model is used to describe the heavy-hole (HH) bands and light-hole (LH) bands.

    “In the original proposal, a four-band Luttinger model is used to describe the heavyhole (HH) bands and light-hole (LH) bands.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Murakami et al. (2003)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    To date, most of the experimental evidences for the SHE belong to the extrinsic case.

    “To date, most of the experimental evidences for the SHE belong to the extrinsic case.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    Redefining the spinor basis amounts to a gauge transformation.

    “Redefining the spinor basis { ψ n q } amounts to a gauge transformation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    The extrinsic SHE was first predicted by Dyakonov and Perel and later revived by Hirsch.

    “This is first predicted by Dyakonov and Perel (1971a,b) (also see (Chazalviel, 1975)) and the same idea is later revived by Hirsch (1999).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dyakonov and Perel (1971a,b)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hirsch (1999)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § IX. NON-ABELIAN FORMULATION · p. 39

    The effective Hamiltonian is only part of an effective theory, and the variables in the effective Hamiltonian are often gauge-dependent and therefore cannot be physical variables.

    “Finally, we point out that the effective Hamiltonian is only part of an effective theory, and that the variables in the effective Hamiltonian are often gauge-dependent and therefore cannot be physical varaibles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § A. Non-Abelian electron wavepacket · p. 39

    The Berry connection and Berry curvature in the Abelian case have the same mathematical structures as the vector potential and the magnetic field in electromagnetism.

    “Recall that the Berry connection and Berry curvature in the Abelian case have the same mathematical structures as the vector potential and the magnetic field in electromagnetism.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § G. Hierarchy structure of effective theories · p. 44

    Whenever the scope of the parent theory needs to be extended, one only needs additional input from F_p and M_p and the accuracy can be improved easily.

    “On the other hand, however, whenever the scope of the parent theory needs to be extended, e.g, from II to I, instead of starting all of the calculations anew, one only needs additional input from F p and M p and the accuracy can be improved easily.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § F. Incompleteness of effective Hamiltonian · p. 43

    The canonical variables in the effective Hamiltonian may not be physical observables; for the position variable, they may differ by a Berry connection.

    “Nevertheless, we would like to emphasize that, the canonical variables in the effective Hamiltonian may not be physical observables. They may differ, for example, by a Berry connection in the case of the position variable.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § G. Hierarchy structure of effective theories · p. 44

    This Berry curvature corresponds to the F′ above.

    “This Berry curvature corresponds to the F ′ above.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § X. OUTLOOK · p. 44

    There exist sporadic and indirect evidences of the effect of the Berry phase or the Berry curvature through measurements such as quantum Hall conductance, anomalous Hall effect, or Hall plateau in graphene.

    “There does exist sporadic and indirect evidences of the effect of the Berry phase or the Berry curvature through the measurement of, for example, the quantum Hall conductance, the anomalous Hall effect, or the Hall plateau in graphene.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    With both the semiclassical theory and the method of re-quantization, one can start from a quantum theory of general validity and descend to an effective quantum theory with a smaller range of validity.

    “With both the semiclassical theory and the method of re-quantization at hand, one can start from a quantum theory of general validity (such as the Dirac theory of electrons) and descend to an effective quantum theory with a smaller range of validity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    The spin Hall conductivity in metals can be detected at room temperature and can be several orders of magnitude larger than that in semiconductors.

    “The spin Hall conductivity in metals can be detected at room temperature and can be several orders of magnitude larger than that in semiconductors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § X. OUTLOOK · p. 44

    Similar approach has been extended to quasiparticle dynamics in Bose-Einstein condensate.

    “Indeed, similar approach has also been extended to the quasiparticle dynamics in Bose-Einstein condensate (Zhang et al. , 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zhang et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § X. OUTLOOK · p. 44

    In many circumstances, the Berry curvature should be as important as the Bloch energy.

    “In this review, one can see clearly that in many circumstances, the Berry curvature should be as important as the Bloch energy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    Such a procedure can be applied iteratively to generate a hierarchy of effective quantum theories.

    “Such a procedure can be applied iteratively to generate a hierarchy of effective quantum theories.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 41

    It is doubtful that the electric dipole, or the spin-orbit energy can be measured independently.

    “For that matter, it is also doubtful that the electric dipole, or the spin-orbit energy can be measured independently.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 41

    The correction to the Zeeman energy is sometimes called the Yafet term, which vanishes near a band edge.

    “The correction to the Zeeman energy is sometimes called the Yafet term, which vanishes near a band edge (Yafet, 1963).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Yafet, 1963

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    This is a generalization of the Peierls substitution to the non-Abelian case.

    “This is a generalization of the Peierls substitution to the non-Abelian case.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § X. OUTLOOK · p. 44

    The Berry curvature plays a crucial role in the electronic structure and electron dynamics of crystals.

    “Even though the Berry curvature plays a crucial role in the electronic structure and electron dynamics of crystals, direct measurement of such a quantity is still lacking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. Semiconductor electron · p. 42

    Unlike the usual Rashba coupling, which requires structural inversion asymmetry to generate an internal field, this dipole term exists in a bulk semiconductor with inversion symmetry but requires an external field E.

    “However, unlike the usual Rashba coupling that requires structural inversion asymmetry to generate an internal field, this term exists in a bulk semiconductor with inversion symmetry but requires an external field E .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § E. Semiconductor electron · p. 42

    In the presence of an electric field, the Berry curvature generates a transverse velocity such that spin-up and spin-down electrons move in opposite directions, resulting in a spin-Hall effect.

    “As a result, spin-up and spin-down electrons move toward opposite directions, which results in a spin-Hall effect (see Sec. IX.B for related discussion).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § X. OUTLOOK · p. 44

    Direct measurement of the Berry curvature is still lacking.

    “Even though the Berry curvature plays a crucial role in the electronic structure and electron dynamics of crystals, direct measurement of such a quantity is still lacking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 41

    In a neighborhood of a k-point, one can always choose to work within a particular gauge.

    “Second, in a neighborhood of a k -point, one can always choose to work within a particular gauge.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation
    § B. Spin Hall effect · p. 40

    Such a large effect could be due to the resonant Kondo scattering from the Fe impurities.

    “Such a large effect could be due to the resonant Kondo scattering from the Fe impurities (Guo et al. , 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Guo et al., 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    The Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization helps predicting quantized energy levels.

    “In Sec. VII, we have introduced the Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization, which helps predicting quantized energy levels.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given
    § C. Quantization of electron dynamics · p. 40

    Even though a Hamiltonian system always admits canonical variables, it is not always easy to find them.

    “As we have mentioned in Sec. VII.D, even though a Hamiltonian system always admits canonical variables, it is not always easy to find them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
228 of 228
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Electrons are in Bloch waves traveling more or less independently in periodic potentials of the lattice, except that the Pauli exclusion principle has to be satisfied and electron-electron interactions are taken care of in some self-consistent manner.

    “A basic paradigm of theoretical framework is based on the assumption that electrons are in Bloch waves traveling more or less independently in periodic potentials of the lattice, except that the Pauli exclusion principle has to be satisfied and electron-electron interactions are taken care of in some self-consistent manner.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The perturbation is periodic in time.

    “We assume the perturbation is periodic in time, i.e., the Hamiltonian satisfies”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The basis function along the contour of the rectangle is single-valued.

    “The basis function along the contour of the rectangle is assumed to be single-valued.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The adiabatic transformation is parameterized by a scalar λ(t) with λ(0)=0 and λ(T)=1.

    “For general purpose, we shall assume the adiabatic transformation is parameterized by a scalar λ ( t ) with λ (0) = 0 and λ ( T ) = 1.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Periodic boundary condition is assumed for the Rice-Mele model.

    “Assuming periodic boundary condition, the Bloch representation of the above Hamiltonian is given by H ( q ) = h ( q ) · σ , where”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The perturbations are sufficiently weak that transitions between different bands can be neglected, so electron dynamics is confined within a single band.

    “We assume the perturbations are sufficiently weak such that transitions between different bands can be neglected. i.e., the electron dynamics is confined within a single band.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    For simplicity, there is only one partially filled band.

    “For simplicity, let us consider a two-dimensional system. We assume there is only one partially filled band.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The Fermi surface is a closed loop in the Brillouin zone.

    “If we assume the Fermi surface is a closed loop in the Brillouin zone, then”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The confining potential V(r) varies slowly at atomic length scale such that the wave packet description of the electron is still valid on the boundary.

    “We further assume that the potential V ( r ) varies slowly at atomic length scale such that the wave packet description of the electron is still valid on the boundary.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    For a current I flowing in a closed circuit enclosing a sufficiently small area A, the circuit carries a magnetic moment I·A, so the magnetization (magnetic moment per unit area) has magnitude I.

    “Recall that for a current I fl owing in a closed circuit enclosing a sufficiently small area A , the circuit carries a magnetic moment given by I · A . Therefore the magnetization (magnetic moment per unit area) has the magnitude of the current I .”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The wave packet is well localized around r_c so that the δ-function can be expanded to first order of r - r_c.

    “Since the w packet is well localized around r c we can expand the δ -function to first order of ˆ r -r c”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The width L of the sampling function is sufficiently small to be treated as a δ-function at the macroscopic level and sufficiently big to contain a large number of wave packets of width l inside its range.

    “The width L of the sampling function is sufficiently s so that it can be treated as a δ -function at the macroscopic level and is sufficiently big so that it contain large number of wave packets of width l inside its range.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    We assume ∇µ = 0 and ∇T = 0.

    “We assume ∇ µ = 0 and ∇ T = 0.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the high field limit, all orbits are closed.

    “We can then assume all orbits are closed.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the relaxation-time approximation, a characteristic relaxation time exists so that Eq. (5.39) holds.

    “In the relaxation-time approximation we make the assumption that a characteristic relaxation time exists so that”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Ω(k) is smooth and W_kk' is localized.

    “If we assume Ω ( k ) is smooth and W kk ′ is localized, the relaxation time can be approximated by”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is no magnetic monopole in k-space.

    “if there is no magnetic monopole in k -space, the second term also vanishes.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The system can be described, at least at the mean-field level, by a perfect crystal under the influence of an external field h(r).

    “We assume that, at least at the mean-field level, the system can be described by a perfect crystal under the influence of an external field h ( r ).”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The order parameter is periodic in space (but generally incommensurate with the crystal lattice).

    “As usually in the case of multiferroics, we can assume the order parameter is periodic in space (but in general incommensurate with the crystal lattice).”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The order parameter has period l_y in the y-direction.

    “If we assume the order parameter has period l y in the y -direction,”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The electron spin will follow the local spin direction during its motion (adiabatic approximation).

    “Because of the strong s -d coupling, we adopt the adiabatic approximation which states that the electron spin will follow the local spin direction during its motion.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The magnetic field is uniform along the z-axis and the electron is confined to the x-y plane.

    “For convenience of discussion, we assume the magnetic field is uniform along the z -axis and the electron is confined to the x -y plane.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the zero Berry curvature under magnetic field case, hbar k_c = p + e A(x) and x and p are canonical conjugate variables.

    “Obviously, if one assumes ¯ h k c = p + e A ( x ) and requires x and p to be canonical conjugate variables,”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The effective Pauli Hamiltonian is accurate for most low-energy applications in solid state.

    “It is considered accurate for most of the low-energy applications in solid state.”
24 of 24

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Earlier studies on graphene established quantized energies of LLs for spinless 2D Dirac fermions are ε_n = v_F sgn(n) sqrt(2e|B n|) (n=0, ±1, ±2...).

    “Earlier studies on graphene (205,206) established that the quantized energies of LLs for spinless 2D Dirac fermions are ε n = v F sgn(n) 2e |B n| (n = 0, ±1, ±2. . .), 5.”

    From Transport of Topological Semimetals (2019) · cites this paper as [206]

    In “C. de Haas-van Alphen oscillation” (p. 33), the review derives graphene Landau-level energies near the Dirac point with square-root dependence on the level index and magnetic field. Its printed expression includes ℏ, which the cited formula omits, and the passage does not explicitly give the claimed sgn(n) form for negative-energy levels. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The zero energy of the zeroth Landau level can be understood through the Berry phase arising from cyclotron motion of carriers in momentum space.

    “Such a zero energy can be understood in terms of the Berry phase arising from the cyclotron motion of carriers in momentum space (206).”

    From Transport of Topological Semimetals (2019) · cites this paper as [206]

  • The magnetic moment occurs from the self-rotating electric wavepacket, which is virtually impossible to be directly observed with electrons.

    “The magnetic moment occurs from the self-rotating electric wavepacket [7678], which is virtually impossible to be directly observed with electrons.”
  • The geometry of the eigenmodes gives rise to Berry curvature in opposite directions at the K- and K'-points.

    “Thus, the geometry of the eigenmodes gives rise to the Berry curvature which is in opposite directions at the K - and K ′ -points [21,86, 78] (see fig. 3.1 b)).”
  • The spiralling intensity is a valley contrasting quantity, analogous to the orbital momentum of electrons in condensed matter systems, manifested when inversion symmetry is broken.

    “the spiralling intensity is a valley contrasting quantity, analogous to the orbital momentum of electrons in condensed matter systems [76-78], manifested when the inversion symmetry is broken.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Polar and azimuthal angles are interchanged

    Minor

    The parameterization labels θ as the azimuthal angle and φ as the polar angle, but the later identification of the south pole at θ = π treats θ as the polar angle.

  • Flux quantum is defined two different ways

    Minor

    The text defines the magnetic flux quantum as e/h in one section and h/e in another. These are reciprocal quantities, not the same flux quantum.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Ashcroft, N. W., 1976, Solid State Physics
  2. Azbel, M. Y., 1964, Sov. Phys. JETP, 19, 634
  3. Blount, E. I., 1962, Solid State Physics
  4. Bohm, A., 2003, The Geometric Phase in Quantum Systems: Foundations, Mathematical Concepts, and Applications in Molecular and Condensed Matter Physics, 10.1007/978-3-662-10333-3 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Bychkov, Y., 1984, JETP Lett., 39, 78
  6. 1980, The Hall Effect and Its Application
  7. Dyakonov, M. I., 1971, JETP Lett., 13, 467
  8. Federov, F. I., 1955, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 105, 465
  9. Jackson, J. D., 1998, Classical Electrodynamics
  10. Khinchin, A. Y., 1964, Continued Fractions
  11. Lifshitz, E. M., 1980, Statistical Physics: Part 2 (Course of Theoretical Physics)
  12. Marder, M. P., 2000, Condensed-Matter Physics
  13. Messiah, A., 1962, Quantum Mechanics
  14. Morandi, G., 1988, Quantum Hall Effect: Topological Problems in Condensed-Matter Physics
  15. Rashba, E. I., 1960, Sov. Phys. Solid State, 2, 1224
  16. Resta, R., 2007, Physics of Ferroelectrics: A Modern Perspective
  17. Sakurai, 1993, Modern Quantum Mechanics
  18. Shapere, A., 1989, Geometric Phases in Physics
  19. Strange, P., 1998, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics: With Applications in Condensed Matter and Atomic Physics, 10.1017/CBO9780511622755 · DOI
  20. Tabor, M., 1989, Chaos and Integrability in Nonlinear Dynamics: An Introduction
  21. Yafet, Y., 1963, Solid State Physics: Advances in Research and Applications

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xiao, D., Chang, M.-C., & Niu, Q.
Affiliations
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (US)
Venue
Reviews of Modern Physics
Published
2010-07-06
Volume
82
Issue
3
Pages
1959-2007
ISSN
  • 0034-6861 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-0756
OpenAlex
W2132568564
Cited by
5,277
References
236
Citations by year
2026: 496 · 2025: 584 · 2024: 552 · 2023: 484 · 2022: 464 · 2021: 518 · 2020: 420 · 2019: 348 · 2018: 328 · 2017: 270 · 2016: 216 · 2015: 192 · 2014: 140 · 2013: 111 · 2012: 87
FWCI
45.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Reviews of Modern Physics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Texas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Texas Digital Library (University of Texas)
  • Bulletin of the American Physical Society
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • Welch Foundation
  • National Science Council
  • Basic Energy Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Topological Materials and Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum and electron transport phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Condensed Matter Physics › Advanced Condensed Matter Physics
Keywords
Berry phase, Berry curvature, electron wave functions, anomalous Hall effect, quantum Hall effect, spin Hall effect, orbital magnetism, polarization, requantization, solid state physics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review