Dávid Beke1,2, Jan Valenta3, Gyula Károlyházy1, Sándor Lenk2, Zsolt Czigány4, Bence Gábor Márkus5, Katalin Kamarás1, Ferenc Simon5, Adam Gali1,2. 1. Institute for Solid State Physics and Optics, Wigner Research Centre for Physics, PO. Box 49, Budapest H-1525, Hungary. 2. Department of Atomic Physics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budafoki út 8, Budapest H-1111, Hungary. 3. Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Department of Chemical Physics & Optics, Charles University, Ke Karlovu 3, Prague 12116, Czechia. 4. Institute for Technical Physics and Materials Science, Centre for Energy Research, Konkoly-Thege M. út 29-33, Budapest H-1121, Hungary. 5. Department of Physics, Budapest University of Technology and Economics and MTA-BME Lendület Spintronics Research Group (PROSPIN), Budafoki út 8, Budapest H-1111, Hungary.
Abstract
There is an urgent quest for room-temperature qubits in nanometer-sized, ultrasmall nanocrystals for quantum biosensing, hyperpolarization of biomolecules, and quantum information processing. Thus far, the preparation of such qubits at the nanoscale has remained futile. Here, we present a synthesis method that avoids any interaction of the solid with high-energy particles and uses self-propagated high-temperature synthesis with a subsequent electrochemical method, the no-photon exciton generation chemistry to produce room-temperature qubits in ultrasmall nanocrystals of sizes down to 3 nm with high yield. We first create the host silicon carbide (SiC) crystallites by high-temperature synthesis and then apply wet chemical etching, which results in ultrasmall SiC nanocrystals and facilitates the creation of thermally stable defect qubits in the material. We demonstrate room-temperature optically detected magnetic resonance signal of divacancy qubits with 3.5% contrast from these nanoparticles with emission wavelengths falling in the second biological window (1000-1380 nm). These results constitute the formation of nonperturbative bioagents for quantum sensing and efficient hyperpolarization.
There is an urgent quest for room-temperature qubits in nanometer-sized, ultrasmall nanocrystals for quantum biosensing, hyperpolarization of biomolecules, and quantum information processing. Thus far, the preparation of such qubits at the nanoscale has remained futile. Here, we present a synthesis method that avoids any interaction of the solid with high-energy particles and uses self-propagated high-temperature synthesis with a subsequent electrochemical method, the no-photon exciton generation chemistry to produce room-temperature qubits in ultrasmall nanocrystals of sizes down to 3 nm with high yield. We first create the host silicon carbide (SiC) crystallites by high-temperature synthesis and then apply wet chemical etching, which results in ultrasmall SiC nanocrystals and facilitates the creation of thermally stable defect qubits in the material. We demonstrate room-temperature optically detected magnetic resonance signal of divacancy qubits with 3.5% contrast from these nanoparticles with emission wavelengths falling in the second biological window (1000-1380 nm). These results constitute the formation of nonperturbative bioagents for quantum sensing and efficient hyperpolarization.
Solid state defect qubits are
building blocks for quantum technology.[1] Room-temperature defect qubits[2−4] stand out with their great potential
in biology and human diagnosis, by means of sensing at the nanoscale[5] and hyperpolarization of biomolecules.[6] The state of these defect qubits is read out
by optical means which harness the spin-selective fluorescence of
the defect qubits: the electron spin state can be manipulated by applying
a resonant microwave field while monitoring changes in the fluorescence.
This readout method is known as optically detected magnetic resonance
(ODMR) spectroscopy.[2] Optical pumping of
these ODMR defect qubits results in efficient electron spin polarization
which can be transferred toward nuclear spins of the solid. This leads
to a nuclear spin polarization around the defect qubits that can be
several orders of magnitude larger than that in thermal equilibrium.
This way the sensitivity of traditional magnetic resonance imaging
(MRI)[6] and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)[7,8] techniques with defects in solids can be enhanced down to the few-molecule
level.[9,10] In these applications, it is crucial to
use small nanocrystals as nonperturbative agents[11] with qubits close to the surface for enhanced sensing and
effective direct polarization of external nuclear spins. This requirement
defines the diameter of the nanocrystals around 5 nm or below; we
refer to these crystals as ultrasmall nanoparticles.[11,12]Despite the fact that preparation of ultrasmall nanoparticles
hosting
stable qubits is appealing, the creation of such systems still remains
a challenge. So far, ODMR signals from defect qubits have been either
reported from 7.5 nm diamond nanocrystals, which were created by milling
of larger crystals and subsequent electron irradiation,[13] or detected in some 5 nm particles separated from detonation
nanodiamonds by ultracentrifugation.[14] The
defect yield values in such systems are about 35% and 0.005–0.012
ppm, respectively. Later, the defect yield has been increased to a
few fold[15] by electron irradiation and
subsequent annealing at high temperature. Both methods create ultrasmall
nanoparticles with a low quality of defects which was previously attributed
to the presence of high strain and was manifested as a large splitting
in the corresponding ODMR spectrum.[14] Furthermore,
the 5 nm particle size could be a limit of formation of defect qubits
in diamond by any preparation technique operating at elevated temperatures,[16] because of the competing and highly stable sp2carbon allotropes at sizes of a few nanometers.[17] Only a single study reported the photoluminescence
(PL) signal of a qubit embedded in 1.5 nm diamonds that were found
in special meteorites,[18] but this qubit
only operates at cryogenic temperatures.[19] Silicon carbide (SiC), on the other hand, does not exhibit sp2 allotropes which gives hope for the preparation of ultrasmall
bioinert[20,21] SiC nanoparticles (NPs) with stable room-temperature
qubits. However, the size of the smallest reported SiC NPs with the
room-temperature ODMR signal of defect qubits, created by irradiation
and milling, is 600 nm, and only PL signals were found
in smaller particles with a size of 35 nm.[22]The lack of a suitable synthesis technique may be related,
besides
surface and crystal reconstruction, to the mechanism of qubit formation
in ultrasmall nanoparticles. Indeed, all the known room-temperature
defect qubits contain a vacancy,[2−4] a missing atom in the crystal
structure, that has been predominantly created by implantation or
irradiation techniques, by knocking out an atom from its lattice site,[4,9,22,23] to precisely control the defect location close to the surface, or
to create vacancies uniformly in the bulk system before extensive
milling, respectively. Both techniques lead to a cascade process forming
unwanted multiple vacancies and other defects, that compromise the
quality of the host crystal and affect the key operation parameters
of the qubits.[24,25] Apart from detonation nanodiamonds,[26] qubits in small nanoparticles are often created
by top-down methods: first, defect qubits are formed in larger crystallites
by irradiation techniques and subsequent annealing, and then, they
are milled or laser ablated into smaller crystals.[9,22,27] These procedures result in crystal quality
dramatically affecting the performance of the qubits.[9,22]Here, we report a novel technique for introducing room-temperature
defect qubits into small nanoparticles that is similar to the principles
of lithography and avoids any largely invasive material fabrication
processes such as irradiation, implantation, and milling. We developed
a chemical method that creates a high density of defects and a three-dimensional
resist structure in the bulk material. The method also protects the
defects and results in the formation of stable qubits during the electrochemical
etching of this material while preparing the nanoparticles. By this
method, we synthesized thermally stable qubits in 3–6 nm SiC
nanoparticles with high yield. The ensemble of qubits exhibits room-temperature
ODMR signals with 3.5% ODMR contrast, and near-infrared fluorescence,
centered at 1180 nm at room temperature, most favorable for biological,
medical, and telecommunication applications (Figure ).
Figure 1
Schematic representation of the implantation
or irradiation-based
vacancy formation for preparation of nanoparticles with defect qubits
versus chemical lithography techniques. Chemical lithography offers
noninvasive nanoparticle synthesis of vacancy-related qubits with
high yield. The benefit of chemical lithography is the formation of
a three-dimensional resist network that protects the vacancies during
nanoparticle synthesis. In the case of cubic SiC, Al additive during
the synthesis leads both to stacking fault (SF) generation, i.e.,
a hexagonal SiC inclusion along a specific direction in the cubic
lattice that is resistive against the no-photon exciton generation
chemical etching (NPEGEC), and vacancy generation. Here, SFs act as
resist, and NPEGEC synthesizes the nanoparticles. These nanoparticles
contain an orange emitter (called the E center), originating from
the carbon vacancy–antisite pair, VC–CSi. Annealing can transform E centers into divacancies, VC–VSi defects, that are near-infrared emitters
with a room-temperature ODMR signal.
Schematic representation of the implantation
or irradiation-based
vacancy formation for preparation of nanoparticles with defect qubits
versus chemical lithography techniques. Chemical lithography offers
noninvasive nanoparticle synthesis of vacancy-related qubits with
high yield. The benefit of chemical lithography is the formation of
a three-dimensional resist network that protects the vacancies during
nanoparticle synthesis. In the case of cubic SiC, Al additive during
the synthesis leads both to stacking fault (SF) generation, i.e.,
a hexagonal SiC inclusion along a specific direction in the cubic
lattice that is resistive against the no-photon exciton generation
chemical etching (NPEGEC), and vacancy generation. Here, SFs act as
resist, and NPEGEC synthesizes the nanoparticles. These nanoparticles
contain an orange emitter (called the E center), originating from
the carbon vacancy–antisite pair, VC–CSi. Annealing can transform E centers into divacancies, VC–VSi defects, that are near-infrared emitters
with a room-temperature ODMR signal.Defect Synthesis with Chemical Lithography. We
used self-propagated high-temperature synthesis (SHS) starting from
Si, C, and Al. A mixture of the precursor powders was placed into
an induction furnace and heated up to about 1250 °C where Si
and C react to create SiC. The heat generated by the reaction promotes
fast conversion with high product yield. Aluminum (Al), on the other
hand, reacts with SiC and removes silicon atoms from the crystal.[28,29] At the same time, Al promotes hexagonal crystal formation to the
continuously growing SiC crystal.[30] This
method creates cubic SiC powder with in situ generated
point defects and a 3-dimensional network of stacking faults (SFs)
that are two-dimensional hexagonal inclusions in the cubic matrix.[30]Defect-Rich Nanoparticle Synthesis. SFs act as
resists during the etching process known as no-photon exciton generation
chemistry (NPEGEC),[30] that dissolves only
cubic SiC producing ultrasmall SiC NPs and leaves intact the two-dimensional
hexagonal inclusions[30] and the vacancies
in the vicinity. We followed the transformations of defects by EPR
and PL spectroscopy (see Figure ). The as-synthesized SiC ceramic powder exhibits a
strong EPR signal that corresponds to a silicon vacancy,[31] VSi with S = 3/2
electron spin and characteristic double peaks due to the hyperfine
interaction with 29Si nuclear spins. The nonzero zero-field
splitting value (27 MHz) indicates that these vacancies are close
to the hexagonal SF layers that break the tetrahedral symmetry (Figure A). VSi also has photoemission under excitation, and the PL emission is
centered around 900–1000 nm that was reported in hexagonal
SiC crystals[22] (Figure B). This fact also implies that the preparation
procedure creates these vacancies close to the hexagonal SF layers.
NPEGEC etching creates a porous layer on the SiC surface that can
be broken down to nanoparticles. The EPR and the PL spectra of the
porous SiC and the nanoparticles indicate that VSi in SiC
is transformed into another type of vacancy after the NPEGEC process.
NPEGEC was performed at around 180 °C (see the Supporting Information). Such temperature propagates diffusion
of the vacancy at a few Ångströms scale, while the redox
reactions change the surface creating oxygen-rich groups that shift
the Fermi level. The process transforms the negatively charged VSi into its more stable tautomer, the carbon antisite-vacancy
defect,[32,33] namely, the E center,[34] which, in its double positively charged state,[34] shows a room-temperature maximum emission around
650 nm (Figure B),
right in the first biological imaging window. The E center fluorescence
is detected in both porous SiC and 3–6 nm (Figure C) SiC NPs. The PL maximum
is narrowed in the nanoparticles compared to that in porous SiC, indicating
increasingly uniform surroundings.[22,34] It should
be noted that E centers were characterized as single photon sources
in porous SiC.[34] Only the doubly positively
charged form of the vacancy is optically active, and because of that,
E centers are sensitive to the environment when they are close to
the surface, i.e., when the host material is an ultrasmall nanoparticle.
The E center emission can be easily detected from dry nanoparticles
or nanoparticles dispersed in tetrahydrofuran. In aqueous solution,
E centers are active only in an alkaline environment, or when a proper
surfactant is used (ultrasmall SiC nanoparticles can be dispersed
in polar solvents without surfactants).
Figure 2
Monitoring the vacancy
evaluation during the NPEGEC nanoparticle
synthesis by the (A) X-band electron paramagnetic
resonance spectrum and (B) photoluminescence spectrum. Bulk SiC contains
silicon vacancies (VSi) before chemical etching (yellow
lines). NPEGEC creates porous SiC and transforms most of the VSi into E centers. E centers show fluorescence predominantly
in the first biological imaging window (centered at 650 nm with excitation
wavelength: 550 nm) (light orange lines). These emission centers exist
in 3–6 nm SiC NPs (dark orange lines, NPs in tetrahydrofuran).
(C) Size distribution of the nanoparticles embedding E centers. A
fraction of E centers was transformed into a near-infrared emitter,
the divacancy, by annealing the NPs at 140 °C for 2 h: divacancies
with S = 1 electron spin and broad emission in the
1050–1300 nm region were observed by (A) X-band EPR spectroscopy and (B) PL with excitation by a 785 nm laser,
respectively (purple lines). The arrows in part A show the EPR transitions
separated by zero-field splitting at 1327 MHz (474 gauss). The upper
purple curve is a 10-fold magnification in intensity of the EPR spectrum
where such EPR signals are more visible. Before annealing EPR shows
only the signal of the single positively charged VC–CSi that we label by E center after its PL signal in its double
positive charge state (dark orange line). After the annealing, a strong
EPR signal with g = 2.0043 can also be observed (purple
line in part A) that is associated with the Si dangling bond at the
interface of SiC and amorphous SiO2, i.e., a near-interface
carbon vacancy (see the main text for additional details). (D) Room-temperature
divacancy ODMR spectrum at zero magnetic field at 1327 MHz with PL
excitation at 785 nm: ODMR contrast is 3.5%; the FWHM is 12 MHz.
Monitoring the vacancy
evaluation during the NPEGEC nanoparticle
synthesis by the (A) X-band electron paramagnetic
resonance spectrum and (B) photoluminescence spectrum. Bulk SiC contains
silicon vacancies (VSi) before chemical etching (yellow
lines). NPEGEC creates porous SiC and transforms most of the VSi into E centers. E centers show fluorescence predominantly
in the first biological imaging window (centered at 650 nm with excitation
wavelength: 550 nm) (light orange lines). These emission centers exist
in 3–6 nm SiC NPs (dark orange lines, NPs in tetrahydrofuran).
(C) Size distribution of the nanoparticles embedding E centers. A
fraction of E centers was transformed into a near-infrared emitter,
the divacancy, by annealing the NPs at 140 °C for 2 h: divacancies
with S = 1 electron spin and broad emission in the
1050–1300 nm region were observed by (A) X-band EPR spectroscopy and (B) PL with excitation by a 785 nm laser,
respectively (purple lines). The arrows in part A show the EPR transitions
separated by zero-field splitting at 1327 MHz (474 gauss). The upper
purple curve is a 10-fold magnification in intensity of the EPR spectrum
where such EPR signals are more visible. Before annealing EPR shows
only the signal of the single positively charged VC–CSi that we label by E center after its PL signal in its double
positive charge state (dark orange line). After the annealing, a strong
EPR signal with g = 2.0043 can also be observed (purple
line in part A) that is associated with the Si dangling bond at the
interface of SiC and amorphous SiO2, i.e., a near-interface
carbon vacancy (see the main text for additional details). (D) Room-temperature
divacancy ODMR spectrum at zero magnetic field at 1327 MHz with PL
excitation at 785 nm: ODMR contrast is 3.5%; the FWHM is 12 MHz.Transformation of the E Centers into the
Paramagnetic Divacancy. We applied low-temperature annealing
to transform the E centers
in SiC NPs into an infrared emitter with S = 1 electron
spin state, the divacancy (VC–VSi).[35] The drying process of SiC NPs causes the redistribution
of the surface groups,[36−38] and decarboxylation[39,40] which generates
near-surface vacancies.[39,40] A carbon vacancy, formed
during annealing within a 3 neighbor distance to an E center, transforms
to a divacancy.[35] The EPR signal of SiC
NPs annealed at 140 °C can be seen in Figure A. A strong EPR signal with g = 2.0043 can be observed that is associated with the Si dangling
bond at the interface of SiC and amorphous SiO2[41,42] (Pb center), that can be viewed as a near-surface carbon
vacancy. Indeed, carbon vacancies in SiC exhibit no PL but a strong
EPR signal, while the divacancy shows the opposite behavior. VC–VSi defects in the nanoparticles have a
random orientation, which leads to arbitrary orientations of the corresponding
spin quantization axis. As the resonance frequency of this defect
is highly dependent on the angle between the magnetic field and the
spin quantization axis,[43] the EPR spectrum
of VC–VSi in SiC powder becomes very
broad. However, sharp features arise at certain orientations,[44] corresponding to the divacancy EPR signal[45] in the SiC NPs (Figure A). The VC–VSi defect emits light at around 1180 nm, at the center of the second
biological imaging window, where deep tissue imaging is possible because
of the reduced light absorption and scattering (Figure B). Besides the PL spectrum, direct identification
of these centers is provided by the detected ODMR signal which shows
a clear electron spin resonance at 1327 MHz, in excellent agreement
with the reported value in the Ky5 electron paramagnetic resonance
(EPR) center[43] and ODMR center[4,45] associated with a divacancy in cubic SiC (Figure D). The measured full width at half maximum
(FWHM) of 12 MHz at room temperature agrees well with the fwhm of
ensembles of divacancies with favorable qubit properties,[3,4] and the observed 3.5% ODMR contrast is also consistent with the
latest studies on divacancies in cubic SiC.[46] We emphasize that the detected ODMR signals do not show any evidence
of splitting due to external perturbation in the few nanometers SiC
nanoparticles. We note that a neutral divacancy does not require additional
dopants like the negatively charged NV center in diamond. Dopants
may create strain or stray electric fields upon illumination causing
large splitting in the corresponding ODMR spectra that occurs for
NV centers in nanodiamonds.Determination of the Defect
Yield in Nanoparticles. We determined the defect yield of
the vacancy with the photoluminescence
of the E center by using single dot PL spectroscopy[47] on drop-cast samples and PL spectroscopy in aqueous solutions.
The first method was applied to 217 individual nanoparticles, whereas
the second method samples millions of nanoparticles. Single dot spectroscopy
measures the emission spectra of individual NPs (Figure A), and the yield can be determined
by the frequency ratio between particles that have different colors
(Figure B) (i.e.,
the nanoparticles which contain the E centers have emission centered
around 600–700 nm, and defect-free particles emit in the range
450–550 nm). In aqueous solution, the E center is dark at neutral
pH because the surface charge alters the distribution of photoexcited
carriers, but it becomes visible in alkaline solution. As a result,
all particles emit around 530 nm at neutral pH, but nanoparticles
containing the E center have a maximum emission around 620 nm in alkaline
solution, while the emission of the defect-free particles is unaffected.
Consequently, the band-edge PL intensity at 530 nm decreases proportionally
to the particles hosting the E centers (Figure C). Single dot spectroscopy of dried samples
and PL spectroscopy in aqueous solution give 57% and 60% yield, respectively.
Figure 3
Determination
of the defect yield. (A) Single dot spectroscopy
measures the spectrum of individual NPs (excitation wavelength: 405
nm). NPs with E centers emit above 600 nm, while defect-free nanoparticles
emit below 550 nm. (B) From the ratio between the two emitters, the
defect yield can be estimated. (C) The E center is dark in aqueous
solution at pH 7, and all the nanoparticles show band-edge luminescence
(excitation wavelength: 450 nm). In alkaline solution by converting
pH 7 to pH 11, the E center becomes active, which results in a new
emission at around 620 nm and a decrease of the band-edge luminescence.
The intensity ratio of the band-edge luminescence between the two
states gives an estimate of the defect yield. Single dot spectroscopy
on a drop-cast sample and luminescence spectroscopy in solution give
almost the same result. (D) Annealing of NPs transforms a fraction
of E centers into divacancies which results in a decrease of the E
center emission (excitation wavelength: 550 nm). The intensity ratio
of the E center emission before and after the annealing was used to
estimate the conversion yield. (E) Infrared emission of the divacancies
in the middle of the second biological window in aqueous solution
(excitation wavelength: 785 nm). The octothorp here indicates the
water Raman peak under 785 nm excitation. Green lines represent band-edge
emission from drop-cast samples in part A or from aqueous solutions
at pH 7 in parts C and D, where only the band-edge emission can be
seen. Orange lines in part B are the emission of the E center from
drop-cast samples, or the emission of the alkaline solution before
annealing in part C, in which defect emissions are activated. The
spectra of the annealed samples are colored purple in parts D and
E.
Determination
of the defect yield. (A) Single dot spectroscopy
measures the spectrum of individual NPs (excitation wavelength: 405
nm). NPs with E centers emit above 600 nm, while defect-free nanoparticles
emit below 550 nm. (B) From the ratio between the two emitters, the
defect yield can be estimated. (C) The E center is dark in aqueous
solution at pH 7, and all the nanoparticles show band-edge luminescence
(excitation wavelength: 450 nm). In alkaline solution by converting
pH 7 to pH 11, the E center becomes active, which results in a new
emission at around 620 nm and a decrease of the band-edge luminescence.
The intensity ratio of the band-edge luminescence between the two
states gives an estimate of the defect yield. Single dot spectroscopy
on a drop-cast sample and luminescence spectroscopy in solution give
almost the same result. (D) Annealing of NPs transforms a fraction
of E centers into divacancies which results in a decrease of the E
center emission (excitation wavelength: 550 nm). The intensity ratio
of the E center emission before and after the annealing was used to
estimate the conversion yield. (E) Infrared emission of the divacancies
in the middle of the second biological window in aqueous solution
(excitation wavelength: 785 nm). The octothorp here indicates the
water Raman peak under 785 nm excitation. Green lines represent band-edge
emission from drop-cast samples in part A or from aqueous solutions
at pH 7 in parts C and D, where only the band-edge emission can be
seen. Orange lines in part B are the emission of the E center from
drop-cast samples, or the emission of the alkaline solution before
annealing in part C, in which defect emissions are activated. The
spectra of the annealed samples are colored purple in parts D and
E.From PL measurements, it is possible
to determine the conversion
of the E centers into divacancies, too, by measuring the intensity
ratio of the E center emission between the nonannealed and annealed
samples. The band-to-band recombination shows the same intensity before
and after annealing and the same decrease in alkaline solution (Figure D) as divacancies
are active only in alkaline solution, too (Figure E). The PL intensity of the E center in aqueous
solution after the annealing was reduced to 26% of that before annealing
(Figure D). One can
estimate from this observation that the conversion efficiency is around
74%. From the change in the intensity of EPR signals we estimate a
similar conversion efficiency (see the Supporting Information).In conclusion, the advance in the field
of detectors for the wavelength
region of the second biological window and lock-in techniques makes
our silicon carbide divacancy nanoparticles with strain-free ODMR
signals very attractive for various quantum-technology-related applications.
Our findings pave the way toward quantum biosensing, and efficient
hyperpolarization of MRI contrast agents and biomolecules. As the
yield of suitable nanoparticles is close to 40% with our present method,
this can be directly applied in biochemistry and biolabeling without
introducing postselection methods. The divacancy is embedded in ultrasmall
cubic silicon carbide nanoparticles; the host nanoparticles were successfully
tested in toxicity assays.[20,21] The efficient polarization
of the divacancies’ electron spin by optical pumping and spin
polarization transfer toward proximate and distant nuclear spins at
low constant magnetic fields has been already demonstrated.[48,49] All of these facts make these nanoparticles appealing as MRI contrast
agents by utilizing the recent new methods of spin polarization transfer
that may overcome the bottleneck of the ∼1.3 GHz zero-field-splitting
pointing at arbitrary angles with respect to the direction of the
external magnetic field in the powder samples.[50,51] The estimated distance between the divacancy and the surface is
about 1 nm which makes the direct polarization of external nuclear
spins very likely; thus, the idea of a polarizer device[52] can be directly applied for our nanoparticles.
We further note that the emission wavelength with the center at the
second biological window implies the deepest penetration depth by
light among the known fluorophores in biological studies. In particular,
the ODMR transition of divacancies is sensitive to the presence of
external currents or electric fields,[53] e.g., induced by neuron cell activities, and thus can be an ultimate
fluorescent biomarker for brain science.
Authors: Igor I Vlasov; Andrey A Shiryaev; Torsten Rendler; Steffen Steinert; Sang-Yun Lee; Denis Antonov; Márton Vörös; Fedor Jelezko; Anatolii V Fisenko; Lubov F Semjonova; Johannes Biskupek; Ute Kaiser; Oleg I Lebedev; Ilmo Sildos; Philip R Hemmer; Vitaly I Konov; Adam Gali; Jörg Wrachtrup Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2013-12-08 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Julia Tisler; Gopalakrishnan Balasubramanian; Boris Naydenov; Roman Kolesov; Bernhard Grotz; Rolf Reuter; Jean-Paul Boudou; Patrick A Curmi; Mohamed Sennour; Alain Thorel; Michael Börsch; Kurt Aulenbacher; Rainer Erdmann; Philip R Hemmer; Fedor Jelezko; Jörg Wrachtrup Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2009-07-10 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Simon Schmitt; Tuvia Gefen; Felix M Stürner; Thomas Unden; Gerhard Wolff; Christoph Müller; Jochen Scheuer; Boris Naydenov; Matthew Markham; Sebastien Pezzagna; Jan Meijer; Ilai Schwarz; Martin Plenio; Alex Retzker; Liam P McGuinness; Fedor Jelezko Journal: Science Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Abram L Falk; Paul V Klimov; Bob B Buckley; Viktor Ivády; Igor A Abrikosov; Greg Calusine; William F Koehl; Adám Gali; David D Awschalom Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2014-05-05 Impact factor: 9.161
Authors: Gary Wolfowicz; Christopher P Anderson; Andrew L Yeats; Samuel J Whiteley; Jens Niklas; Oleg G Poluektov; F Joseph Heremans; David D Awschalom Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Felipe Fávaro de Oliveira; Denis Antonov; Ya Wang; Philipp Neumann; Seyed Ali Momenzadeh; Timo Häußermann; Alberto Pasquarelli; Andrej Denisenko; Jörg Wrachtrup Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Jan Havlik; Vladimira Petrakova; Jan Kucka; Helena Raabova; Dalibor Panek; Vaclav Stepan; Zuzana Zlamalova Cilova; Philipp Reineck; Jan Stursa; Jan Kucera; Martin Hruby; Petr Cigler Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 14.919