# Superconductivity in metallic twisted bilayer graphene stabilized by WSe2

## Abstract

Magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene (TBG), with rotational misalignment close to 1.1 degrees, features isolated flat electronic bands that host a rich phase diagram of correlated insulating, superconducting, ferromagnetic and topological phases1,2,3,4,5,6. Correlated insulators and superconductivity have been previously observed only for angles within 0.1 degree of the magic angle and occur in adjacent or overlapping electron-density ranges; nevertheless, the origins of these states and the relation between them remain unclear, owing to their sensitivity to microscopic details. Beyond twist angle and strain, the dependence of the TBG phase diagram on the alignment4,6 and thickness of the insulating hexagonal boron nitride (hBN)7,8 used to encapsulate the graphene sheets indicates the importance of the microscopic dielectric environment. Here we show that adding an insulating tungsten diselenide (WSe2) monolayer between the hBN and the TBG stabilizes superconductivity at twist angles much smaller than the magic angle. For the smallest twist angle of 0.79 degrees, superconductivity is still observed despite the TBG exhibiting metallic behaviour across the whole range of electron densities. Finite-magnetic-field measurements further reveal weak antilocalization signatures as well as breaking of fourfold spin–valley symmetry, consistent with spin–orbit coupling induced in the TBG via its proximity to WSe2. Our results constrain theoretical explanations for the emergence of superconductivity in TBG and open up avenues towards engineering quantum phases in moiré systems.

## Access options

from\$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

## Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors on reasonable request.

## References

1. 1.

Cao, Y. et al. Correlated insulator behaviour at half-filling in magic-angle graphene superlattices. Nature 556, 80–84 (2018).

2. 2.

Cao, Y. et al. Unconventional superconductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices. Nature 556, 43–50 (2018).

3. 3.

Yankowitz, M. et al. Tuning superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene. Science 363, 1059–1064 (2019).

4. 4.

Sharpe, A. L. et al. Emergent ferromagnetism near three-quarters filling in twisted bilayer graphene. Science 365, 605–608 (2019).

5. 5.

Lu, X. et al. Superconductors, orbital magnets and correlated states in magic-angle bilayer graphene. Nature 574, 653–657 (2019).

6. 6.

Serlin, M. et al. Intrinsic quantized anomalous Hall effect in a moiré heterostructure. Science 367, 900–903 (2020).

7. 7.

Stepanov, P. et al. The interplay of insulating and superconducting orders in magic-angle graphene bilayers. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.09198 (2019).

8. 8.

Saito, Y., Ge, J., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T. & Young, A. F. Independent superconductors and correlated insulators in twisted bilayer graphene. Nat. Phys. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0928-3 (2020).

9. 9.

Bistritzer, R. & MacDonald, A. H. Moiré bands in twisted double-layer graphene. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 12233–12237 (2011).

10. 10.

Choi, Y. et al. Electronic correlations in twisted bilayer graphene near the magic angle. Nat. Phys. 15, 1174–1180 (2019).

11. 11.

Polshyn, H. et al. Large linear-in-temperature resistivity in twisted bilayer graphene. Nat. Phys. 15, 1011–1016 (2019).

12. 12.

Cao, Y. et al. Strange metal in magic-angle graphene with near Planckian dissipation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 076801 (2020).

13. 13.

Codecido, E. et al. Correlated insulating and superconducting states in twisted bilayer graphene below the magic angle. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw9770 (2019).

14. 14.

Kretinin, A. V. et al. Electronic properties of graphene encapsulated with different two-dimensional atomic crystals. Nano Lett. 14, 3270–3276 (2014).

15. 15.

Zihlmann, S. et al. Large spin relaxation anisotropy and valley-Zeeman spin–orbit coupling in WSe2/graphene/h-BN heterostructures. Phys. Rev. B 97, 075434 (2018).

16. 16.

Island, J. O. et al. Spin–orbit-driven band inversion in bilayer graphene by the van der Waals proximity effect. Nature 571, 85–89 (2019).

17. 17.

Wang, D. et al. Quantum Hall effect measurement of spin–orbit coupling strengths in ultraclean bilayer graphene/WSe2 heterostructures. Nano Lett. 19, 7028–7034 (2019).

18. 18.

Wakamura, T. et al. Spin–orbit interaction induced in graphene by transition metal dichalcogenides. Phys. Rev. B 99, 245402 (2019).

19. 19.

Wilson, N. R. et al. Determination of band offsets, hybridization, and exciton binding in 2D semiconductor heterostructures. Sci. Adv. 3, e1601832 (2017).

20. 20.

Kerelsky, A. et al. Maximized electron interactions at the magic angle in twisted bilayer graphene. Nature 572, 95–100 (2019).

21. 21.

Xie, Y. et al. Spectroscopic signatures of many-body correlations in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene. Nature 572, 101–105 (2019).

22. 22.

Jiang, Y. et al. Charge order and broken rotational symmetry in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene. Nature 573, 91–95 (2019).

23. 23.

Koshino, M. et al. Maximally localized Wannier orbitals and the extended Hubbard model for twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031087 (2018).

24. 24.

Lilly, M. P. et al. Resistivity of dilute 2D electrons in an undoped GaAs heterostructure. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 056806 (2003).

25. 25.

Lee, P. A., Nagaosa, N. & Wen, X.-G. Doping a Mott insulator: physics of high-temperature superconductivity. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 17–85 (2006).

26. 26.

Wu, F., MacDonald, A. H. & Martin, I. Theory of phonon-mediated superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 257001 (2018).

27. 27.

Lian, B., Wang, Z. & Bernevig, B. A. Twisted bilayer graphene: a phonon-driven superconductor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 257002 (2019).

28. 28.

Wu, F., Hwang, E. & Das Sarma, S. Phonon-induced giant linear-in-T resistivity in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene: ordinary strangeness and exotic superconductivity. Phys. Rev. B 99, 165112 (2019).

29. 29.

Stewart, G. R. Heavy-fermion systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 56, 755–787 (1984).

30. 30.

Ardavan, A. et al. Recent topics of organic superconductors. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn 81, 011004 (2012).

31. 31.

Stewart, G. R. Superconductivity in iron compounds. Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1589–1652 (2011).

32. 32.

Uri, A. et al. Mapping the twist angle and unconventional Landau levels in magic angle graphene. Nature 581, 47–52 (2020).

33. 33.

Bi, Z., Yuan, N. F. Q. & Fu, L. Designing flat bands by strain. Phys. Rev. B 100, 035448 (2019).

34. 34.

Zhang, Y.-H., Po, H. C. & Senthil, T. Landau-level degeneracy in twisted bilayer graphene: role of symmetry breaking. Phys. Rev. B 100, 125104 (2019).

35. 35.

Zondiner, U. et al. Cascade of phase transitions and Dirac revivals in magic-angle graphene. Nature 582, 203–208 (2020).

36. 36.

Wong, D. et al. Cascade of electronic transitions in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene. Nature 582, 198–202 (2020).

37. 37.

Guinea, F. & Walet, N. R. Electrostatic effects, band distortions, and superconductivity in twisted graphene bilayers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 13174–13179 (2018).

38. 38.

You, Y.-Z. & Vishwanath, A. Superconductivity from valley fluctuations and approximate SO(4) symmetry in a weak coupling theory of twisted bilayer graphene. npj Quantum Mater. 4, 16 (2019).

39. 39.

Kozii, V., Isobe, H., Venderbos, J. W. F. & Fu, L. Nematic superconductivity stabilized by density wave fluctuations: possible application to twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 99, 144507 (2019).

40. 40.

Gu, X. et al. Antiferromagnetism and chiral d-wave superconductivity from an effective tJD model for twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 101, 180506 (2020).

41. 41.

Cao, Y. et al. Superlattice-induced insulating states and valley-protected orbits in twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 116804 (2016).

42. 42.

Kim, K. et al. Van der Waals heterostructures with high accuracy rotational alignment. Nano Lett. 16, 1989–1995 (2016).

43. 43.

Nam, N. N. T. & Koshino, M. Lattice relaxation and energy band modulation in twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 96, 075311 (2017).

44. 44.

Po, H. C., Zou, L., Vishwanath, A. & Senthil, T. Origin of Mott insulating behavior and superconductivity in twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031089 (2018).

45. 45.

Carr, S., Fang, S., Zhu, Z. & Kaxiras, E. Exact continuum model for low-energy electronic states of twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 013001 (2019).

46. 46.

Gmitra, M., Kochan, D., Högl, P. & Fabian, J. Trivial and inverted Dirac bands and the emergence of quantum spin Hall states in graphene on transition-metal dichalcogenides. Phys. Rev. B 93, 155104 (2016).

47. 47.

Goodwin, Z. A. H., Corsetti, F., Mostofi, A. A. & Lischner, J. Twist-angle sensitivity of electron correlations in moiré graphene bilayers. Phys. Rev. B 100, 121106 (2019).

48. 48.

Pizarro, J. M., Rösner, M., Thomale, R., Valentí, R. & Wehling, T. O. Internal screening and dielectric engineering in magic-angle twisted bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 100, 161102 (2019).

49. 49.

Wang, Z. et al. Origin and magnitude of ‘designer’ spin–orbit interaction in graphene on semiconducting transition metal dichalcogenides. Phys. Rev. X 6, 041020 (2016).

50. 50.

Cummings, A. W., Garcia, J. H., Fabian, J. & Roche, S. Giant spin lifetime anisotropy in graphene induced by proximity effects. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 206601 (2017).

51. 51.

Gmitra, M. & Fabian, J. Graphene on transition-metal dichalcogenides: a platform for proximity spin–orbit physics and optospintronics. Phys. Rev. B 92, 155403 (2015).

52. 52.

Li, Y. & Koshino, M. Twist-angle dependence of the proximity spin–orbit coupling in graphene on transition-metal dichalcogenides. Phys. Rev. B 99, 075438 (2019).

53. 53.

Wang, Z. et al. Strong interface-induced spin–orbit interaction in graphene on WS2. Nat. Commun. 6, 8339 (2015).

54. 54.

McCann, E. & Fal’ko, V. I. z → −z symmetry of spin–orbit coupling and weak localization in graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 166606 (2012).

## Acknowledgements

We acknowledge discussions with H. Ren, D. Zhong, Y. Peng, G. Refael, F. von Oppen, Y. Saito, A. Young, D. Efetov, J. Eisenstein and P. Lee. The device nanofabrication was performed at the Kavli Nanoscience Institute (KNI) at Caltech. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation through programme CAREER DMR-1753306 and grant DMR-1723367, the Gist–Caltech memorandum of understanding and the Army Research Office under grant award W911NF-17-1-0323. Nanofabrication performed by Y.Z. was supported by the US Department of Energy DOE-QIS programme (DE-SC0019166). J.A. and S.N.-P. also acknowledge the support of IQIM (an NSF-funded Physics Frontiers Center). A.T. and J.A. are grateful for support from the Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics at Caltech and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation’s EPiQS Initiative, grant GBMF8682. The material synthesis at the University of Washington was supported as part of Programmable Quantum Materials, an Energy Frontier Research Center funded by the DOE, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences (BES), under award DE-SC0019443 and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation’s EPiQS Initiative, grant GBMF6759 to J.-H.C.

## Author information

Authors

### Contributions

H.S.A., R.P., Y.Z. and S.N.-P. designed the experiment. H.S.A. made the TBG–WSe2 devices assisted by Y.Z., H.K. and Y.C. H.S.A. and R.P. performed the measurements. Y.Z. made and measured initial TBG devices and D4. H.S.A., R.P. and S.N.-P. analysed the data. A.T. and J.A. developed the continuum model that includes spin–orbit interactions and performed model calculations. Z.L., I.Z.W., X.X. and J.-H.C. provided WSe2 crystals. K.W. and T.T. provided hBN crystals. H.S.A., R.P., Y.Z., A.T., J.A. and S.N.-P. wrote the manuscript with input from other authors. S.N.-P. supervised the project.

## Ethics declarations

### Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review information Nature thanks Ronny Thomale and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

## Extended data figures and tables

### Extended Data Fig. 1 Fabrication details.

ae, Critical steps in the stacking process. f, Optical images of a typical flake and stacks at different stages of the fabrication.

### Extended Data Fig. 2 Optical images of devices D1–D4.

ad, The electrodes that are used in the measurements and the corresponding twisted angles are labelled for each device. The electrodes marked with blue lines were used for measuring the Hall conductance in Fig. 3. The scale bar in each panel corresponds to 15 μm. The bottom hBN thicknesses for D1, D2, D3 and D4 are 62 nm, 40 nm, 48 nm and 56 nm, respectively. D4 differs from the other devices as it features monolayer WSe2 on both the top and bottom of the device. The contact angles for each pair of contacts listed were determined from the Landau-fan diagrams, as described in Methods.

### Extended Data Fig. 3 Additional temperature data for device D1 (0.97°).

a, Rxx as a function of ν and temperature, up to 10 K. b, Temperature dependence of Rxx for ν = 2 (red) and ν = 3 (black), showing insulating behaviour. c, At other partial integer filling factors, Rxx increases with temperature, consistent with metallic behaviour.

### Extended Data Fig. 4 Additional data for device D3 (1.04°).

a, Rxx as a function of ν and temperature, up to 120 K. In this device, a higher temperature was required for fitting the Arrhenius gaps, owing to the larger gap size. The data in a were therefore measured in a variable-temperature (Quantum Design PPMS) setup, whereas data from other panels were taken in the dilution fridge. b, Line cuts from a, with corresponding fits showing gaps at full filling Δ±4 and partial filling Δ±2. c, Landau-fan diagram showing similar behaviour as for D1 (0.97°). d, Temperature dependence up to 2 K, clearly showing superconductivity on the hole side (for −3 < ν < −2) and with a smaller pocket on the electron side showing signatures of developing superconductivity. e, Fraunhofer-like pattern at ν = −2.78.

### Extended Data Fig. 5 Additional data for device D2 (0.83° contacts).

See Extended Data Fig. 2b for the layout of D2. a, Rxx plotted for filling factor ν and temperature up to 2 K, showing the superconducting pocket on the electron side. b, As in a, up to 40 K, showing the reduction of the |ν| = 4 insulating states. c, Arrhenius fits to the gap values of 0.97 meV for ν = −4, and 3.7 meV for ν = +4. d, Rxx versus filling factor and magnetic field (B), forming a Landau-fan diagram, with white dashed lines tracing the dominant ±2, +3, ±4, ±6, ±8, ±10, ±14, ±18, +20, ±22, −26 sequence around charge neutrality. The odd level (+3) is marked with green. e, The Fraunhofer-like pattern for the superconductivity pocket, taken at ν = 2.08. The inset is a magnification of the low-field data, showing that the critical current reaches a local minimum about zero field, indicating “π-junction-like” behaviour3.

### Extended Data Fig. 6 Additional data from device D1 (0.97°).

a, Fraunhofer-like pattern for electron doping, at ν = 1.58. b, c, Additional Fraunhofer-like pattern for hole doping, at ν = −2.1 (b), and ν = −2.5 (c).

### Extended Data Fig. 7 Additional data for device D4 (0.80°).

D4 was fabricated with monolayer WSe2 on both the top and bottom of the TBG. a, Rxx as a function of ν and temperature, to 2 K, revealing a superconducting pocket over the range 2 < ν < 3.2 and resistance at full filling (|ν| = 4) of less than at the CNP. b, The Landau fan, with dotted lines drawn from the CNP according to the sequence ±2, +3, ±4, ±6, ±8, ±10, −12, ±14, ±18, +22, with the odd level (+3) marked in green. c, Current versus voltage at ν = 2.79, at temperatures from 50 mK to 900 mK in 50 mK steps. The main plot is on a log scale in both axes, revealing a Berezinskii–Kosterlitz–Thouless (BKT) transition temperature near 250 mK. Inset, IV dependence for the same temperatures. d, Fraunhofer-like pattern for D4 at ν = 2.40.

### Extended Data Fig. 8 Weak antilocalization data measured in D4 (θ = 0.80°).

a, Rxx as a function of back-gate voltage, Vbg, for the 0.80° contacts of D4 (see Extended Data Fig. 2). The black (red) line shows the voltage range used in the flat (dispersive) bands, which corresponds to the plots in bd (e, f). The peak at B = 0 mT is prominent in both ranges, showing the presence of weak antilocalization and, consequently, spin–orbit coupling. b, The change in conductivity Δσ, relative to the 0 mT point, as a function of magnetic field, taken at several gate voltages close to Vbg ≈ −2 V measured at 25 mK; the narrow peak about B = 0 mT, indicative of weak antilocalization, is clearly visible. Universal conductance fluctuations can be averaged out by taking field sweeps at different gate points53. c, d, Averaged data from b for different field ranges. The data taken at 900 mK—where the weak antilocalization peak has disappeared—has been subtracted, and the data points have been symmetrized about 0 mT. The dashed lines are the comparison with the model54 used previously for monolayer graphene/transition metal dichalcogenide heterostructures18,53 with a renormalized Fermi velocity to account for the flatness of the bands. For generating plots at different temperatures, only the dephasing scattering time τϕ is varied. Although the total spin–orbit scattering time τso ≈ 10 ps better reproduces the low-field data in c, τso ≈ 1–3 ps captures the saturation at larger fields (d) with asymmetric and symmetric relaxation-time ratios54 (τasym/τsym) varying in the range 0.3–3. The values of τso obtained here correspond to SOI energies50 in the range 0.5–1 meV. We note that, in the case of TBG, a more detailed analysis with a correct model for describing weak antilocalization in TBG is probably required for quantitative comparison. Regardless, the weak antilocalization peaks are an indication of strong SOI in WSe2–TBG heterostructures. e, f, The data show a weak antilocalization peak in the dispersive bands near Vbg = −6 V (red line in a). Data in e was taken at 25 mK. In f, the data points at each temperature are offset by 0.1 e2/h for clarity.

### Extended Data Fig. 9 Theoretical Landau-level spectrum.

a, c, Colour plot of the phenomenologically broadened density of states (see Supplementary Information section 2 for details) as a function of energy squared, in millelectronvolts squared (roughly equivalent to the electron density that is gate-tuned in the experiment), and the magnetic field in tesla. b, d, The spectrum, without taking broadening effects into account. Blue and red lines correspond to levels originating proximate to the +K and −K valleys, respectively. The effective spin–orbit coupling parameters (as distinct from those used in the continuum model) are $$({\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{I}}},{\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{R}}},{\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{KM}}})$$ = (3 meV, 4 meV, 0 meV) with a broadening Γ = 0.22 meV (a, b) and $$({\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{I}}},{\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{R}}},{\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{KM}}})$$ = (1.5 meV, 2.5 meV, 2 meV) with a broadening Γ = 0.15 meV (c, d). The Fermi velocity in both is vF ≈ 105 m s−1, as is appropriate for θ ≈ 0.8°−0.9°. We note that the Landau-level sequence and energy levels on the hole-doped side are identical to those shown here for a and b. When both $${\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{I}}}$$ and $${\tilde{\lambda }}_{{\rm{KM}}}$$ are non-zero, as in c and d, a slightly different Landau-level sequence is generically obtained at negative energies relative to the CNP.

### Extended Data Fig. 10 SOI dependence of the band structure.

a, c, f, h, Flat-band energies along momentum line cuts defined in the inset of a; dashed lines indicate the chemical potential corresponding to ν = +2. bdegij, Band structure of the electron-like bands with their ν = +2 Fermi surfaces indicated, for different values of the SOI parameters. We consider the cases in which no SOI is present (a, b), and where only Ising SOI (ce), only Kane–Mele SOI (f, g), and only Rashba SOI (hj) are present. In cj, the non-zero SOI parameter is set to 3 meV; other parameters are provided in Methods. In c, the bands possess an out-of-plane spin polarization, Sz, which is displayed in colour as per the inset. As indicated in Fig. 4, when both λI and λR are non-zero, the Dirac cones at ±κ generate masses. By contrast, when λI, λR and λKM are individually the only non-zero SOI, only the Kane–Mele term results in a gapped spectrum at charge neutrality. In f, the inset magnifies the −κ point to demonstrate this point. Aside from this feature, the band structure when λKM = 3 meV (f, g) is qualitatively identical to the band structure without SOI (a, b). In i and j, the colour of the Fermi surfaces indicates the expectation value of the in-plane spin according to the wheel above i. All other parameter sets have a zero in-plane spin projection.

## Supplementary information

### Supplementary Information

Supplementary Methods: The file includes the continuum model details used in Fig. 4 and Extended Data Fig. 10, and Landau level diagram derivations used in Extended Data Fig. 9.

## Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Arora, H.S., Polski, R., Zhang, Y. et al. Superconductivity in metallic twisted bilayer graphene stabilized by WSe2. Nature 583, 379–384 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2473-8

• Accepted:

• Published:

• Issue Date:

• ### Experimental evidence for orbital magnetic moments generated by moiré-scale current loops in twisted bilayer graphene

• Si-Yu Li
• , Yu Zhang
• , Ya-Ning Ren
• , Jianpeng Liu
• , Xi Dai
•  & Lin He

Physical Review B (2020)

• ### Transport across twist angle domains in moiré graphene

• , Apoorv Tiwari
• , Titus Neupert
•  & Shinsei Ryu

Physical Review Research (2020)

• ### Electrically tunable correlated and topological states in twisted monolayer–bilayer graphene

• Shaowen Chen
• , Minhao He
• , Ya-Hui Zhang
• , Valerie Hsieh
• , Zaiyao Fei
• , K. Watanabe
• , T. Taniguchi
• , David H. Cobden
• , Xiaodong Xu
• , Cory R. Dean
•  & Matthew Yankowitz

Nature Physics (2020)

• ### Superconducting pairing symmetry and spin-orbit coupling in proximitized graphene

• Abdulrhman M. Alsharari
•  & Sergio E. Ulloa

Physical Review B (2020)