↓ Skip to main content

Zeeman splitting and dynamical mass generation in Dirac semimetal ZrTe5

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Zeeman splitting and dynamical mass generation in Dirac semimetal ZrTe5
Published in
Nature Communications, August 2016
DOI 10.1038/ncomms12516
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanwen Liu, Xiang Yuan, Cheng Zhang, Zhao Jin, Awadhesh Narayan, Chen Luo, Zhigang Chen, Lei Yang, Jin Zou, Xing Wu, Stefano Sanvito, Zhengcai Xia, Liang Li, Zhong Wang, Faxian Xiu

Abstract

Dirac semimetals have attracted extensive attentions in recent years. It has been theoretically suggested that many-body interactions may drive exotic phase transitions, spontaneously generating a Dirac mass for the nominally massless Dirac electrons. So far, signature of interaction-driven transition has been lacking. In this work, we report high-magnetic-field transport measurements of the Dirac semimetal candidate ZrTe5. Owing to the large g factor in ZrTe5, the Zeeman splitting can be observed at magnetic field as low as 3 T. Most prominently, high pulsed magnetic field up to 60 T drives the system into the ultra-quantum limit, where we observe abrupt changes in the magnetoresistance, indicating field-induced phase transitions. This is interpreted as an interaction-induced spontaneous mass generation of the Dirac fermions, which bears resemblance to the dynamical mass generation of nucleons in high-energy physics. Our work establishes Dirac semimetals as ideal platforms for investigating emerging correlation effects in topological matters.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 34%
Researcher 10 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Unspecified 4 7%
Other 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 33 57%
Unspecified 7 12%
Materials Science 6 10%
Engineering 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 5 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#160,454
of 12,220,965 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#2,957
of 19,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,415
of 261,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#50
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,220,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 47.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 261,544 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.