Hierarchies of Hofstadter butterflies in 2D covalent organic frameworks
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The Hofstadter butterfly is one of the first and most fascinating examples of the fractal and self-similar quantum nature of free electrons in a lattice pierced by a perpendicular magnetic field. However, the direct experimental verification of this effect on single-layer materials is still missing as very strong and inaccessible magnetic fields are necessary. For this reason, its indirect experimental verification has only been realized in artificial periodic 2D systems, like moiré lattices. The only recently synthesized 2D covalent organic frameworks might circumvent this limitation: Due to their large pore structures, magnetic fields needed to detect most features of the Hofstadter butterfly are indeed accessible with today technology. This work opens the door to make this exotic and theoretical issue from the 70s measurable and might solve the quest for the experimental verification of the Hofstadter butterfly in single-layer materials. Moreover, the intrinsic hierarchy of different pore sizes in 2D covalent organic framework adds additional complexity and beauty to the original butterflies and leads to a direct accessible playground for new physical observations.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Covalent Organic Framework Applications · Graphene research and applications · Topological Materials and Phenomena
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (57)
Show source-provided references
1. Hofstadter, D. R. Energy levels and wave functions of bloch electrons in rational and irrational magnetic fields. Phys. Rev. B 14, 2239–2249 (1976).10.1103/PhysRevB.14.2239 ↗
2. Rammal, R. Landau level spectrum of bloch electrons in a honeycomb lattice. J. Phys. 46, 1345–1354 (1985).10.1051/jphys:019850046080134500 ↗
3. Gumbs, G. & Fekete, P. Hofstadter butterfly for the hexagonal lattice. Phys. Rev. B 56, 3787–3791 (1997).10.1103/PhysRevB.56.3787 ↗
4. Koshino, M., Aoki, H., Kuroki, K., Kagoshima, S. & Osada, T. Hofstadter butterfly and integer quantum hall effect in three dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1062–1065 (2001).10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.1062 ↗
5. Osadchy, D. & Avron, J. E. Hofstadter butterfly as quantum phase diagram. J. Math. Phys. 42, 5665–5671 (2001).10.1063/1.1412464 ↗
6. Xiao, Y., Pelletier, V., Chaikin, P. M. & Huse, D. A. Landau levels in the case of two degenerate coupled bands:kagomé lattice tight-binding spectrum. Phys. Rev. B 67, 104505 (2003).10.1103/PhysRevB.67.104505 ↗
7. Nemec, N. & Cuniberti, G. Hofstadter butterflies of carbon nanotubes: pseudofractality of the magnetoelectronic spectrum. Phys. Rev. B 74, 165411 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevB.74.165411 ↗
8. Nemec, N. & Cuniberti, G. Hofstadter butterflies of bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 75, 201404 (2007).10.1103/PhysRevB.75.201404 ↗
9. Yılmaz, F. & Oktel, M. O. Hofstadter butterfly evolution in the space of two-dimensional bravais lattices. Phys. Rev. A 95, 063628 (2017).10.1103/PhysRevA.95.063628 ↗
10. Ferrari, A. C. et al. Science and technology roadmap for graphene, related two-dimensional crystals, and hybrid systems. Nanoscale 7, 4598–4810 (2015).10.1039/C4NR01600A ↗
11. von Klitzing, K. The quantized hall effect. Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 519–531 (1986).10.1103/RevModPhys.58.519 ↗
12. Kumar, A. et al. Integer quantum hall effect in trilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 126806 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.126806 ↗
13. Li, L. et al. Quantum hall effect in black phosphorus two-dimensional electron system. Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 593–597 (2016).10.1038/nnano.2016.42 ↗
14. Kjaergaard, M. et al. Quantized conductance doubling and hard gap in a two-dimensional semiconductor-superconductor heterostructure. Nat. Commun. 7, 12841 (2016).10.1038/ncomms12841 ↗
15. Kuhl, U. & Stöckmann, H.-J. Microwave realization of the hofstadter butterfly. Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3232–3235 (1998).10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.3232 ↗
16. Albrecht, C. et al. Evidence of hofstadter’s fractal energy spectrum in the quantized hall conductance. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 147–150 (2001).10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.147 ↗
17. Zaric, S. et al. Optical signatures of the aharonov-bohm phase in single-walled carbon nanotubes. Science 304, 1129–1131 (2004).10.1126/science.1096524 ↗
18. Geisler, M. C. et al. Detection of a landau band-coupling-induced rearrangement of the hofstadter butterfly. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 256801 (2004).10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.256801 ↗
19. Ponomarenko, L. A. et al. Cloning of dirac fermions in graphene superlattices. Nature 497, 594–597 (2013).10.1038/nature12187 ↗
20. Dean, C. R. et al. Hofstadter’s butterfly and the fractal quantum hall effect in moiré superlattices. Nature 497, 598–602 (2013).10.1038/nature12186 ↗
21. Hunt, B. et al. Massive dirac fermions and hofstadter butterfly in a van der waals heterostructure. Science 340, 1427–1430 (2013).10.1126/science.1237240 ↗
22. Yu, G. L. et al. Hierarchy of hofstadter states and replica quantum hall ferromagnetism in graphene superlattices. Nat. Phys. 10, 525–529 (2014).10.1038/nphys2979 ↗
23. Yang, W. et al. Hofstadter butterfly and many-body effects in epitaxial graphene superlattice. Nano Lett. 16, 2387–2392 (2016).10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b05161 ↗
24. Ni, X. et al. Observation of hofstadter butterfly and topological edge states in reconfigurable quasi-periodic acoustic crystals. Commun. Phys. 2, 55 (2019).10.1038/s42005-019-0151-7 ↗
25. Huber, R. et al. Gate-tunable two-dimensional superlattices in graphene. Nano Lett. 20, 8046–8052 (2020).10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c03021 ↗
26. Lu, X. et al. Multiple flat bands and topological hofstadter butterfly in twisted bilayer graphene close to the second magic angle. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2100006118 (2021).10.1073/pnas.2100006118 ↗
27. Côté, A. P. et al. Porous, crystalline, covalent organic frameworks. Science 310, 1166–1170 (2005).10.1126/science.1120411 ↗
28. Dienstmaier, J. F. et al. Synthesis of well-ordered COF monolayers: surface growth of nanocrystalline precursors versus direct on-surface polycondensation. ACS Nano 5, 9737–9745 (2011).10.1021/nn2032616 ↗
29. Dienstmaier, J. F. et al. Isoreticular two-dimensional covalent organic frameworks synthesized by on-surface condensation of diboronic acids. ACS Nano 6, 7234–7242 (2012).10.1021/nn302363d ↗
30. Colson, J. W. & Dichtel, W. R. Rationally synthesized two-dimensional polymers. Nat. Chem. 5, 453–465 (2013).10.1038/nchem.1628 ↗
31. Zhong, Y. et al. Wafer-scale synthesis of monolayer two-dimensional porphyrin polymers for hybrid superlattices. Science 366, 1379–1384 (2019).10.1126/science.aax9385 ↗
32. Liu, K. et al. On-water surface synthesis of crystalline, few-layer two-dimensional polymers assisted by surfactant monolayers. Nat. Chem. 11, 994–1000 (2019).10.1038/s41557-019-0327-5 ↗
33. Li, Y., Chen, W., Xing, G., Jiang, D. & Chen, L. New synthetic strategies toward covalent organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev. 49, 2852–2868 (2020).10.1039/D0CS00199F ↗
34. Li, X. et al. Partitioning the interlayer space of covalent organic frameworks by embedding pseudorotaxanes in their backbones. Nat. Chem. 12, 1115–1122 (2020).10.1038/s41557-020-00562-5 ↗
35. Ortega-Guerrero, A. et al. Multiscale modeling strategy of 2d covalent organic frameworks confined at an air–water interface. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13, 26411–26420 (2021).10.1021/acsami.1c05967 ↗
36. Springer, M. A., Liu, T.-J., Kuc, A. & Heine, T. Topological two-dimensional polymers. Chem. Soc. Rev. 49, 2007–2019 (2020).10.1039/C9CS00893D ↗
37. Raptakis, A., Dianat, A., Croy, A. & Cuniberti, G. Predicting the bulk modulus of single-layer covalent organic frameworks with square-lattice topology from molecular building-block properties. Nanoscale 13, 1077–1085 (2021).10.1039/D0NR07666J ↗
38. Dong, L., Kim, Y., Er, D., Rappe, A. M. & Shenoy, V. B. Two-dimensional π-conjugated covalent-organic frameworks as quantum anomalous hall topological insulators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 096601 (2016).10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.096601 ↗
39. Jiang, W., Ni, X. & Liu, F. Exotic topological bands and quantum states in metal–organic and covalent–organic frameworks. Acc. Chem. Res. 54, 416–426 (2021).10.1021/acs.accounts.0c00652 ↗
40. Pham, H. Q. & Pham-Tran, N.-N. Topological insulating phase in single-layer pentagonal covalent organic frameworks: a reticular design using metal phthalocyanine. Chem. Mater. 33, 4488–4499 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemmater.1c00671 ↗
41. Cui, B. et al. Realization of lieb lattice in covalent-organic frameworks with tunable topology and magnetism. Nat. Commun. 11, 66 (2020).10.1038/s41467-019-13794-y ↗
42. Li, J., Gu, L. & Wu, R. Transition-metal phthalocyanine monolayers as new chern insulators. Nanoscale 12, 3888–3893 (2020).10.1039/C9NR09817H ↗
43. Jiang, W., Zhang, S., Wang, Z., Liu, F. & Low, T. Topological band engineering of lieb lattice in phthalocyanine-based metal–organic frameworks. Nano Lett. 20, 1959–1966 (2020).10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b05242 ↗
44. Hahn, S. et al. 45.5-tesla direct-current magnetic field generated with a high-temperature superconducting magnet. Nature 570, 496–499 (2019).10.1038/s41586-019-1293-1 ↗
45. Kuc, A. et al. Proximity effect in crystalline framework materials: Stacking-induced functionality in MOFs and COFs. Adv. Funct. Mater. 30, 1908004 (2020).10.1002/adfm.201908004 ↗
46. Zhao, C., Lyu, H., Ji, Z., Zhu, C. & Yaghi, O. M. Ester-linked crystalline covalent organic frameworks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 14450–14454 (2020).10.1021/jacs.0c07015 ↗
47. Holec, J. et al. A large starphene comprising pentacene branches. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 60, 7752–7758 (2021).10.1002/anie.202016163 ↗
48. Pedersen, J. G. & Pedersen, T. G. Hofstadter butterflies and magnetically induced band-gap quenching in graphene antidot lattices. Phys. Rev. B 87, 235404 (2013).10.1103/PhysRevB.87.235404 ↗
49. Riaño, A. et al. An expanded 2d fused aromatic network with 90-ring hexagons. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202113657 (2021).10.1002/anie.202113657 ↗
50. Slater, J. C. & Koster, G. F. Simplified lcao method for the periodic potential problem. Phys. Rev. 94, 1498–1524 (1954).10.1103/PhysRev.94.1498 ↗
51. Manzano, H. et al. Do cement nanotubes exist? Adv. Mater. 24, 3239–3245 (2012).10.1002/adma.201103704 ↗
52. Larsen, A. H. et al. The atomic simulation environment—a python library for working with atoms. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 29, 273002 (2017).10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e ↗
53. Moldovan, D., Anđelković, M. & Peeters, F. pybinding v0.9.5: a Python package for tight- binding calculations. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4010216. (2020).10.5281/zenodo.4010216 ↗
54. Peierls, R. Zur theorie des diamagnetismus von leitungselektronen. Z. Phys. 80, 763–791 (1933).10.1007/BF01342591 ↗
55. Weiße, A., Wellein, G., Alvermann, A. & Fehske, H. The kernel polynomial method. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 275–306 (2006).10.1103/RevModPhys.78.275 ↗
56. Hourahine, B. et al. DFTB+, a software package for efficient approximate density functional theory based atomistic simulations. J. Chem. Phys. 152, 124101 (2020).10.1063/1.5143190 ↗
57. Ongari, D., Yakutovich, A. V., Talirz, L. & Smit, B. Building a consistent and reproducible database for adsorption evaluation in covalent–organic frameworks. ACS Cent. Sci. 5, 1663–1675 (2019).10.1021/acscentsci.9b00619 ↗