CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 86

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Observation of second-order meron polarization textures in optical microcavities

Król, Mateusz, Sigurdsson, Helgi, Rechcińska, Katarzyna, Oliwa, Przemysław, Tyszka, Krzystof, Bardyszewski, Witold, Opala, Andrzej, Matuszewski, Michał, Morawiak, Przemysław, Mazur, Rafał, Piecek, Wiktor, Kula, Przemysław, Lagoudakis, Pavlos G., Piętka, Barbara, Szczytko, Jacek·2021·Optica
DOI 10.1364/optica.414891
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Multicomponent Bose–Einstein condensates, quantum Hall systems, and chiral magnetic materials display twists and knots in the continuous symmetries of their order parameters known as skyrmions. Originally discovered as solutions to the nonlinear sigma model in quantum field theory, these vectorial excitations are quantified by a topological winding number dictating their interactions and global properties of the host system. Here, we report the experimental observation of a stable individual second-order meron and antimeron appearing in an electromagnetic field. We realize these complex textures by confining light into a liquid-crystal-filled cavity that, through its anisotropic refractive index, provides an adjustable artificial photonic gauge field that couples the cavity photon motion to its polarization, resulting in the formation of these fundamental vectorial vortex states of light. Our observations could help bring topologically robust room-temperature optical vector textures into the field of photonic information processing and storage.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1364/optica.414891

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Optical field-skyrmions switchable between Néel- and Bloch-types were reported, but the existence of Bloch-type skyrmions was promptly disproved.

    “While optical field-skyrmions which can be switched between Néel-and Bloch-types were reported [43], the existence of Bloch-type skyrmions was promptly disproved [44,45].”

    From Optical skyrmions and other topological quasiparticles of light (2024) · cites this paper as [43]

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Skyrme, 1962, Nucl. Phys., 31, 556, 10.1016/0029-5582(62)90775-7 · DOI
  2. Nagaosa, 2013, Nat. Nanotechnol., 8, 899, 10.1038/nnano.2013.243 · DOI
  3. Wiesendanger, 2016, Nat. Rev. Mater., 1, 16044, 10.1038/natrevmats.2016.44 · DOI
  4. Krause, 2016, Nat. Mater., 15, 493, 10.1038/nmat4615 · DOI
  5. Fert, 2017, Nat. Rev. Mater., 2, 17031, 10.1038/natrevmats.2017.31 · DOI
  6. Lohani, 2019, Phys. Rev. X, 9, 041063, 10.1103/PhysRevX.9.041063 · DOI
  7. Mühlbauer, 2009, Science, 323, 915, 10.1126/science.1166767 · DOI
  8. Peng, 2020, Nat. Nanotechnol., 15, 181, 10.1038/s41565-019-0616-6 · DOI
  9. Du, 2019, Nat. Phys., 15, 650, 10.1038/s41567-019-0487-7 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Davis, 2020, Science, 368, eaba6415, 10.1126/science.aba6415 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Donati, 2016, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 113, 14926, 10.1073/pnas.1610123114 · DOI
  12. Yu, 2011, Nat. Mater., 10, 106, 10.1038/nmat2916 · DOI
  13. Woo, 2016, Nat. Mater., 15, 501, 10.1038/nmat4593 · DOI
  14. Smalyukh, 2020, Rep. Prog. Phys., 83, 106601, 10.1088/1361-6633/abaa39 · DOI
  15. Ackerman, 2017, Nat. Commun., 8, 673, 10.1038/s41467-017-00659-5 · DOI
  16. Foster, 2019, Nat. Phys., 15, 655, 10.1038/s41567-019-0476-x · DOI
  17. Shifman, 1994, Instantons in Gauge Theories, 10.1142/2281 · DOI
  18. Senthil, 2004, Science, 303, 1490, 10.1126/science.1091806 · DOI
  19. Bernevig, 2006, Science, 314, 1757, 10.1126/science.1133734 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Bleu, 2018, Phys. Rev. Lett., 121, 020401, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.020401 · DOI
  21. Gianfrate, 2020, Nature, 578, 381, 10.1038/s41586-020-1989-2 · DOI
  22. Guo, 2020, Phys. Rev. Lett., 124, 106103, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.106103 · DOI
  23. Shinjo, 2000, Science, 289, 930, 10.1126/science.289.5481.930 · DOI
  24. Phatak, 2012, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108, 067205, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.067205 · DOI
  25. Flayac, 2013, Phys. Rev. Lett., 110, 016404, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.016404 · DOI
  26. Vishnevsky, 2013, Phys. Rev. Lett., 110, 246404, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.246404 · DOI
  27. Yu, 2014, Nat. Commun, 5, 3198, 10.1038/ncomms4198 · DOI
  28. Yu, 2018, Nature, 564, 95, 10.1038/s41586-018-0745-3 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Cilibrizzi, 2016, Phys. Rev. B, 94, 045315, 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.045315 · DOI
  30. Peng, 2017, Nano Lett., 17, 7075, 10.1021/acs.nanolett.7b03792 · DOI
  31. Nych, 2017, Nat. Phys., 13, 1215, 10.1038/nphys4245 · DOI
  32. Gao, 2019, Nat. Commun., 10, 5603, 10.1038/s41467-019-13642-z · DOI
  33. Kavokin, 2005, Phys. Rev. Lett., 95, 136601, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.136601 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Leyder, 2007, Nat. Phys., 3, 628, 10.1038/nphys676 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Maragkou, 2011, Opt. Lett., 36, 1095, 10.1364/OL.36.001095 · DOI
  36. Lekenta, 2018, Light Sci. Appl., 7, 74, 10.1038/s41377-018-0076-z · DOI
  37. Berreman, 1972, J. Opt. Soc. Am., 62, 502, 10.1364/JOSA.62.000502 · DOI
  38. Manni, 2011, Phys. Rev. B, 83, 241307, 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.241307 · DOI
  39. Shibata, 2013, Nat. Nanotechnol., 8, 723, 10.1038/nnano.2013.174 · DOI
  40. Liew, 2008, Phys. Rev. Lett., 101, 187401, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.187401 · DOI
  41. Qiu, 2017, Science, 357, 645, 10.1126/science.aan6359 · DOI
  42. Schubert, 1996, Phys. Rev. B, 53, 4265, 10.1103/PhysRevB.53.4265 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Król, M., Sigurdsson, H., Rechcińska, K., Oliwa, P., Tyszka, K., Bardyszewski, W., Opala, A., Matuszewski, M., Morawiak, P., Mazur, R., Piecek, W., Kula, P., Lagoudakis, P. G., Piętka, B., & Szczytko, J.
Venue
Optica
Publisher
Optica Publishing Group
Published
2021-02-16
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
255
ISSN
2334-2536
DOI
10.1364/optica.414891
Cited by
86
References
1
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Narodowe Centrum Nauki (Quantera program 2017/25/Z/ST3/03032, 2017/27/B/ST3/00271, 2018/31/N/ST3/03046, 2019/35/B/ST3/04147)
  • Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego (“Diamentowy Grant” 0005/DIA/2016/45)
  • Ministry of National Defense Republic of Poland (13–995)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M025330/1)
  • Russian Foundation for Basic Research (20-02-00919, 20-52-12026)
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (899141)

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.

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