Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Signatures of chiral superconductivity in rhombohedral graphene

Nature (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Chiral superconductors are unconventional superconducting states that break time-reversal symmetry spontaneously and typically feature Cooper pairing at non-zero angular momentum. Such states may host Majorana fermions and provide an important platform for topological physics research and fault-tolerant quantum computing1,2,3,4,5,6,7. Despite intensive search and prolonged studies of several candidate systems8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26, chiral superconductivity has remained elusive so far. Here we report the discovery of robust unconventional superconductivity in rhombohedral tetralayer and pentalayer graphene without moiré superlattice effects. We observed two superconducting states in the gate-induced flat conduction bands with Tc up to 300 mK and charge density ne down to 2.4 × 1011 cm−2 in five devices. Spontaneous time-reversal-symmetry breaking (TRSB) owing to orbital motion of the electron is found and several observations indicate the chiral nature of these superconducting states, including: (1) in the superconducting state, Rxx shows magnetic hysteresis in varying out-of-plane magnetic field B⊥—absent from all other superconductors; (2) the superconducting states are robust against in-plane magnetic field and are developed within a spin-polarized and valley-polarized quarter-metal (QM) phase; (3) the normal states show anomalous Hall signals at zero magnetic field and magnetic hysteresis. We also observed a critical B⊥ of 1.4 T, higher than any graphene superconductivity, which indicates a strong-coupling superconductivity close to the Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer (BCS)–Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC) crossover27. Our observations establish a pure carbon material for the study of topological superconductivity, with the promise to explore Majorana modes and topological quantum computing.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Superconductivity in the flat bands of rhombohedral tetralayer graphene device T3 and pentalayer graphene device P1.
Fig. 2: TRSB and valley polarization in the neighbouring states in the tetralayer device T3.
Fig. 3: Spin and valley polarization in the superconducting states in the pentalayer device P1.
Fig. 4: Temperature-dependent anomalous Hall effects and phase boundary in the tetralayer device T3.
Fig. 5: Superconductivity close to the BCS–BEC crossover.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data shown in the figures are available from https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IADV2O. Other data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on request.

References      

  1. Sato, M. & Ando, Y. Topological superconductors: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 076501 (2017).

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Read, N. & Green, D. Paired states of fermions in two dimensions with breaking of parity and time-reversal symmetries and the fractional quantum Hall effect. Phys. Rev. B 61, 10267–10297 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kallin, C. & Berlinsky, J. Chiral superconductors. Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 054502 (2016).

    Article  ADS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Qi, X.-L. & Zhang, S. C. Topological insulators and superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057–1110 (2011).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kitaev, A. Periodic table for topological insulators and superconductors. AIP Conf. Proc. 1134, 22–30 (2009).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nayak, C., Simon, S. H., Stern, A., Freedman, M. & Das Sarma, S. Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1083–1159 (2008).

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schnyder, A. P., Ryu, S., Furusaki, A. & Ludwig, A. W. W. Classification of topological insulators and superconductors in three spatial dimensions. Phys. Rev. B 78, 195125 (2008).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Maeno, Y. et al. Superconductivity in a layered perovskite without copper. Nature 372, 532–534 (1994).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ghosh, S. et al. Thermodynamic evidence for a two-component superconducting order parameter in Sr2RuO4. Nat. Phys. 17, 199–204 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Saxena, S. Superconductivity on the border of itinerant-electron ferromagnetism in UGe2. Nature 406, 587–592 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stewart, G. R., Fisk, Z., Willis, J. O. & Smith, J. L. Possibility of coexistence of bulk superconductivity and spin fluctuations in UPt3. Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 679–682 (1984).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Aoki, D. Coexistence of superconductivity and ferromagnetism in URhGe. Nature 413, 613–616 (2001).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ran, S. et al. Nearly ferromagnetic spin-triplet superconductivity. Science 365, 684–687 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hayes, I. M. et al. Multicomponent superconducting order parameter in UTe2. Science 373, 797–801 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jiao, L. et al. Chiral superconductivity in heavy-fermion metal UTe2. Nature 579, 523–527 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Theuss, F. et al. Single-component superconductivity in UTe2 at ambient pressure. Nat. Phys. 20, 1124–1130 (2024).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nandkishore, R., Levitov, L. S. & Chubukov, A. V. Chiral superconductivity from repulsive interactions in doped graphene. Nat. Phys. 8, 158–163 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ming, F. et al. Evidence for chiral superconductivity on a silicon surface. Nat. Phys. 19, 500–506 (2023).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wan, Z. et al. Unconventional superconductivity in chiral molecule–TaS2 hybrid superlattices. Nature 632, 69–74 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Li, Z. et al. Observation of odd-parity superconductivity in UTe2. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 122, e2419734122 (2025).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Mielke, C. et al. Time-reversal symmetry-breaking charge order in a kagome superconductor. Nature 602, 245–250 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yin, J. X., Lian, B. & Hasan, M. Z. Topological kagome magnets and superconductors. Nature 612, 647–657 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Le, T. et al. Superconducting diode effect and interference patterns in kagome CsV3Sb5. Nature 630, 64–69 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hsu, Y. T., Vaezi, A., Fischer, M. H. & Kim, E. A. Topological superconductivity in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides. Nat. Commun. 8, 14985 (2017).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Murshed, S. A., Szabó, A. L. & Roy, B. Nodal pair-density-waves from quarter-metal in crystalline graphene multilayers. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.15660 (2022).

  26. Deng, H. et al. Evidence for time-reversal symmetry-breaking kagome superconductivity. Nat. Mater. 23, 1639–1644 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Randeria, M. & Taylor, E. Crossover from Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer to Bose-Einstein condensation and the unitary Fermi gas. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 5, 209–232 (2014).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cheng, M., Sun, K., Galitski, V. & Das Sarma, S. Stable topological superconductivity in a family of two-dimensional fermion models. Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 81, 024504 (2010).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. Li, Y. S. et al. High-sensitivity heat-capacity measurements on Sr2RuO4 under uniaxial pressure. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2020492118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Pustogow, A. et al. Constraints on the superconducting order parameter in Sr2RuO4 from oxygen-17 nuclear magnetic resonance. Nature 574, 72–75 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Willa, R., Hecker, M., Fernandes, R. M. & Schmalian, J. Inhomogeneous time-reversal symmetry breaking in Sr2RuO4. Phys. Rev. B 104, 024511 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Min, H. & MacDonald, A. H. Electronic structure of multilayer graphene. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 176, 227–252 (2008).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Koshino, M. & McCann, E. Trigonal warping and Berry’s phase Nπ in ABC-stacked multilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. B 80, 165409 (2009).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  34. Ghazaryan, A., Holder, T., Berg, E. & Serbyn, M. Multilayer graphenes as a platform for interaction-driven physics and topological superconductivity. Phys. Rev. B 107, 104502 (2023).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Viñas Boström, E. et al. Phonon-mediated unconventional superconductivity in rhombohedral stacked multilayer graphene. NPJ Comput. Mater. 10, 163 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Castro Neto, A. H., Guinea, F., Peres, N. M. R., Novoselov, K. S. & Geim, A. K. The electronic properties of graphene. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 109–162 (2009).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Cao, T., Wu, M. & Louie, S. G. Unifying optical selection rules for excitons in two dimensions: band topology and winding numbers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 087402 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Park, J. M., Cao, Y., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T. & Jarillo-Herrero, P. Tunable strongly coupled superconductivity in magic-angle twisted trilayer graphene. Nature 590, 249–255 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yi, H. et al. Interface-induced superconductivity in magnetic topological insulators. Science 383, 634–639 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Safar, H. et al. Experimental evidence for a first-order vortex-lattice-melting transition in untwinned, single crystal YBa2Cu3O7. Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 824 (1992).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hu, Y., Meng, F., Lei, H., Xue, Q.-K. & Zhang, D. Possible spin-polarized Cooper pairing in high temperature FeSe superconductor. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10482 (2024).

  42. Ma, L. et al. Electric-field-controlled superconductor–ferromagnetic insulator transition. Sci. Bull. 64, 653–658 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Bert, J. A. et al. Direct imaging of the coexistence of ferromagnetism and superconductivity at the LaAlO3/SrTiO3 interface. Nat. Phys. 7, 767–771 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Fulde, P. & Ferrell, R. A. Superconductivity in a strong spin-exchange field. Phys. Rev. 135, A550 (1964).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  45. Larkin, A. I. & Ovchinnikov, Y. N. Inhomogeneous state of superconductors. Sov. Phys. JETP 20, 762–769 (1965).

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. Casalbuoni, R. & Nardulli, G. Inhomogeneous superconductivity in condensed matter and QCD. Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 263 (2004).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Charbonneau, P. et al. Polar Kerr effect as probe for time-reversal symmetry breaking in unconventional superconductors. New J. Phys. 11, 055060 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Uri, A. et al. Nanoscale imaging of equilibrium quantum Hall edge currents and of the magnetic monopole response in graphene. Nat. Phys. 16, 164–170 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Tschirhart, C. L. et al. Imaging orbital ferromagnetism in a moiré Chern insulator. Science 372, 1323–1327 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Wollman, D. A., Van Harlingen, D. J., Lee, W. C., Ginsberg, D. M. & Leggett, A. J. Experimental determination of the superconducting pairing state in YBCO from the phase coherence of YBCO-Pb dc SQUIDs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 2134 (1993).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Tsuei, C. C. & Kirtley, J. R. Pairing symmetry in cuprate superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 969–1016 (2000).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Li, Y., Xu, X., Lee, M. H., Chu, M. W. & Chien, C. L. Observation of half-quantum flux in the unconventional superconductor β-Bi2Pd. Science 366, 238–241 (2019).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Hart, S. et al. Induced superconductivity in the quantum spin Hall edge. Nat. Phys. 10, 638–643 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Wang, W. et al. Evidence for an edge supercurrent in the Weyl superconductor MoTe2. Science 368, 534–537 (2020).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kasahara, Y. et al. Majorana quantization and half-integer thermal quantum Hall effect in a Kitaev spin liquid. Nature 559, 227–231 (2018).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Lu, Z. et al. Extended quantum anomalous Hall states in graphene/hBN moiré superlattices. Nature 637, 1090–1095 (2025).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Zhang, F., Sahu, B., Min, H. & MacDonald, A. H. Band structure of ABC-stacked graphene trilayers. Phys. Rev. B 82, 035409 (2010).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  58. Yang, J. et al. Spectroscopy signatures of electron correlations in a trilayer graphene/hBN moiré superlattice. Science 375, 1295–1299 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Seiler, A. M. et al. Quantum cascade of correlated phases in trigonally warped bilayer graphene. Nature 608, 298–302 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Chen, G. et al. Signatures of tunable superconductivity in a trilayer graphene moiré superlattice. Nature 572, 215–219 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Zhou, H., Xie, T., Taniguchi, T., Watanabe, K. & Young, A. F. Superconductivity in rhombohedral trilayer graphene. Nature 598, 434–438 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Pantaleón, P. A. et al. Superconductivity and correlated phases in non-twisted bilayer and trilayer graphene. Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 304–315 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Zhang, Y. et al. Enhanced superconductivity in spin–orbit proximitized bilayer graphene. Nature 613, 268–273 (2023).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Holleis, L. et al. Nematicity and orbital depairing in superconducting Bernal bilayer graphene with strong spin orbit coupling. Nat. Phys. 21, 444–450 (2025).

  68. Li, C. et al. Tunable superconductivity in electron- and hole-doped Bernal bilayer graphene. Nature 631, 300–306 (2024).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Zhang, Y. et al. Twist-programmable superconductivity in spin–orbit-coupled bilayer graphene. Nature 641, 625–631 (2025).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Patterson, C. L. et al. Superconductivity and spin canting in spin-orbit-coupled trilayer graphene. Nature 641, 632–638 (2025).

  71. Yang, J. et al. Impact of spin-orbit coupling on superconductivity in rhombohedral graphene. Nat. Mater. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-025-02156-3 (2025).

  72. Zhou, H. et al. Isospin magnetism and spin-polarized superconductivity in Bernal bilayer graphene. Science 375, 774–778 (2022).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Zhou, H. et al. Half- and quarter-metals in rhombohedral trilayer graphene. Nature 598, 429–433 (2021).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Han, T. et al. Orbital multiferroicity in pentalayer rhombohedral graphene. Nature 623, 41–47 (2023).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Han, T. et al. Correlated insulator and Chern insulators in pentalayer rhombohedral-stacked graphene. Nat. Nanotechnol. 19, 181–187 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Liu, K. et al. Spontaneous broken-symmetry insulator and metals in tetralayer rhombohedral graphene. Nat. Nanotechnol. 19, 188–195 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Sha, Y. et al. Observation of a Chern insulator in crystalline ABCA-tetralayer graphene with spin-orbit coupling. Science 384, 414–419 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Han, T. et al. Large quantum anomalous Hall effect in spin-orbit proximitized rhombohedral graphene. Science 384, 647–651 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Lu, Z. et al. Fractional quantum anomalous Hall effect in multilayer graphene. Nature 626, 759–764 (2024).

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Xie, J. et al. Tunable fractional Chern insulators in rhombohedral graphene superlattices. Nat. Mater. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-025-02225-7 (2025).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the helpful discussions with S. D. Sarma, J. Sau, X. G. Wen, S. Todadri, F. Zhang, A. Vishwanath, P. Lee, B. Ramshaw, E. A. Kim, A. MacDonald, T. Devakul and A. Young. This study was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Sciences and Engineering Division under grant no. DE-SC0025325. Device fabrication was performed at the Harvard Center for Nanoscale Systems and MIT.nano. T.H. acknowledges support from a Mathworks Fellowship. L.F. was supported by a Simons Investigator Award from the Simons Foundation. Work in Basel was supported by the EU’s H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) cofund Quantum Science and Technologies at the European Campus (QUSTEC) grant no. 847471, the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant no. 215757), the Georg H. Endress Foundation and WSS Research Center for Molecular Quantum Systems (molQ) of the Werner Siemens Foundation. K.W. and T.T. acknowledge support from the JSPS KAKENHI (grant nos. 20H00354, 21H05233 and 23H02052) and the World Premier International Research Center Initiative, MEXT, Japan.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Tonghang Han, Zhengguang Lu, Zach Hadjri

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

    Tonghang Han, Zhengguang Lu, Zach Hadjri, Lihan Shi, Zhenghan Wu, Wei Xu, Yuxuan Yao, Jixiang Yang, Junseok Seo, Shenyong Ye, Muyang Zhou, Liang Fu & Long Ju

  2. Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Zhengguang Lu, Haoyang Liu, Gang Shi, Zhenqi Hua & Peng Xiong

  3. Department of Physics, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

    Armel A. Cotten, Omid Sharifi Sedeh, Henok Weldeyesus & Dominik M. Zumbühl

  4. Research Center for Electronic and Optical Materials, National Institute for Materials Science, Tsukuba, Japan

    Kenji Watanabe

  5. Research Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics, National Institute for Materials Science, Tsukuba, Japan

    Takashi Taniguchi

Authors
  1. Tonghang Han
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhengguang Lu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zach Hadjri
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lihan Shi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhenghan Wu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wei Xu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yuxuan Yao
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Armel A. Cotten
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Omid Sharifi Sedeh
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Henok Weldeyesus
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Jixiang Yang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Junseok Seo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Shenyong Ye
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Muyang Zhou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Haoyang Liu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Gang Shi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Zhenqi Hua
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Kenji Watanabe
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Takashi Taniguchi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Peng Xiong
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Dominik M. Zumbühl
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Liang Fu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Long Ju
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

L.J. supervised the project. T.H. and Z.L. performed the DC magneto-transport measurement. Z. Hadjri, A.A.C., O.S.S., H.W. and D.M.Z. performed some of the in-plane field measurements (Basel). T.H., L.S., Z.W., W.X., Y.Y. and S.Y. fabricated the devices. J.Y., J.S., Z.L. and T.H. helped with installing and testing the dilution refrigerator. T.H. and M.Z. performed the band-structure calculation. H.L., G.S., Z. Hua and P.X. helped with part of the measurements on device T1. K.W. and T.T. grew hBN crystals. L.F. contributed to data analysis. All authors discussed the results and wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Long Ju.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

D.M.Z. is a co-founder of Basel Precision Instruments. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature thanks Ying-Ming Xie, Petr Stepanov and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.

Additional information

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 Superconductivity in rhombohedral tetralayer graphene device T2.

a, Optical micrograph and illustration of the structure of rhombohedral tetralayer graphene, in which the electrons are polarized to the layer far away from WSe2. Scale bar, 3 μm. b, Four-terminal resistance Rxx as a function of ne and gate displacement field D/ε0. Four regions show zero Rxx (labelled as SC1–SC4, respectively) and superconductivity. SC1 and SC2 show fluctuations, whereas SC3 and SC4 are smooth. c, Temperature dependence of the four superconducting states, with critical temperatures extracted from the comparison of I–V with the BKT model. See Extended Data Fig. 2. d, Differential resistance dVxx/dI as a function of current I and out-of-plane magnetic field B⊥ in the SC3 and SC4 states. Both states show peaks of dV/dI as a signature of superconductivity at small magnetic fields. The superconductivity is killed below 30 mT, similar to that of most graphene-based superconductors. e,f, Rxx and Rxy maps at 0.1 T, extracted by symmetrizing and antisymmetrizing the data taken at B⊥ = ±0.1 T. The fluctuations in SC1, SC2 and neighbouring states all disappear. In f, SC1 (SC2) is surrounded (neighboured) by states that show anomalous Hall signals. The value of normal Hall signals at the same ne can be seen in the high-D part of the map. g,h, Magnetic hysteresis scans of Rxy taken at the red and orange circle positions in d, showing loops that are consistent with the anomalous Hall signals in f. i, Rxx map taken at B⊥ = 1.5 T. The period of quantum oscillations indicates a QM (as labelled by the arrow) that neighbours SC1. Combined with the anomalous Hall signals as shown in f, this QM is a spin-polarized and valley-polarized phase. j, Rxx in SC1 (at ne = 0.55 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.02 V nm−1) as a function of time, featuring fluctuations when gate voltages are fixed. k,l, Representative magnetic hysteresis of Rxx taken in SC1 (at ne = 0.57 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.05 V nm−1) and SC2 (at ne = 0.7 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.16 V nm−1). We note that one of the four terminals was damaged during measurement, resulting in only three-terminal resistance measurement being possible.

Extended Data Fig. 2 Detailed characterizations of SC1–SC4 in device T2.

a,b, Differential resistance dVxx/dI versus I and B⊥ for SC1 and SC2 in device T2, respectively. The vanishing differential resistance persists to about 1 T and about 0.6 T in SC1 and SC2, respectively. c, B–ne map at D/ε0 = 1.14 V nm−1. d–g, Temperature dependence of longitudinal and differential resistances and BKT fitting for SC1–SC4. These are taken at representative (ne, D) combinations corresponding to Extended Data Fig. 1c. Panels in the same column correspond to a specific superconducting state. Zero resistance, differential resistance peak at critical current and the BKT scaling (Vxx ∝ I3, as indicated by the dashed lines in the lower panels) can be seen for all four of the superconducting states.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Anomalous Hall effects and TRSB in the normal state of SC1 and SC2 in device T2.

a,b, Symmetrized Rxx and antisymmetrized Rxy map at 0.1 T and 450 mK, above the critical temperatures of SC1 and SC2. The dashed curves in b outline the boundary of SC1 and SC2, inside which clear anomalous Hall signals can be seen in the normal states. c,d, Magnetic hysteresis scans at the dot and triangle positions in b. Clear hysteresis loops can be seen in both the states surrounding SC1, as well as in SC1 and SC2. e,f, Temperature-dependent antisymmetrized Rxy hysteresis at a state in SC1 and SC2, respectively. Curves are shifted vertically for clarity.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Superconductivities in device T3.

a, Optical micrograph of the device. Scale bar, 3 μm. b, Temperature-dependent differential resistance dVxx/dI versus I at a typical (ne, D) inside the SC1 region, featuring zero resistance at low current and a pair of peaks at critical current. c, Temperature-dependent Rxx at a constant D, featuring a density range of zero resistance that corresponds to SC1. d–f, Differential resistance at typical ne–D positions inside SC1 and SC3. The vanishing differential resistance persists to about 1 T for SC1, whereas that of SC3 persists to only about 50 mT. g, Rxx as a function of ne and B⊥ at D/ε0 = 1.113 V nm−1 in SC3. The density range corresponding to SC3 continues shrinking on B⊥. h, Differential resistance measurement in SC1, showing the superconducting diode effect. i, Representative magnetic hysteresis of Rxx taken in SC1 (at ne = 0.5 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 0.985 V nm−1).

Extended Data Fig. 5 Magnetic hysteresis, coercive field and superconducting critical temperature in SC1 in device T3.

a, Rxx as a function of the out-of-plane magnetic field at different ne and D/ε0 = 0.985 V nm−1. The curves are shifted vertically for clarity. The dashed horizontal lines indicate the shift of each curve (which corresponds to zero resistance). Orange and blue arrows indicate the coercive fields, which is defined as the closest-to-zero magnetic field, in which Rxx increases rapidly. b, Colour map of Rxx versus T and ne. c, Summary of the coercive fields and the superconducting Tc at different ne and D/ε0 = 0.985 V nm−1. d–f, Same as a–c but for D/ε0 = 1.015 V nm−1.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Magnetic hysteresis, quantum oscillations and temperature dependence of SC1 in device T3.

a, The ne–D map of Rxx taken at zero magnetic field in device T3. b, Landau fan diagram taken at D/ε0 = 1.123 V nm−1, revealing quantum oscillations starting at B⊥ ≈ 1.5 T. c, Fast Fourier transform spectra of data in b. A diagonal feature above fv = 1 suggests a QM state with annular Fermi surface. However, the low-frequency component of this annular Fermi-surfaced metal is not clear from the data. d, Out-of-plane magnetic field scans of Rxx at different (ne, D) indicated by the coloured dots in a. Magnetic hysteresis was observed across a large range of (ne, D) parameter space across SC1. e–g, Upper panels, Rxx as a function of T and ne at three displacement fields cutting through SC1. In all cases, there is a clear boundary as indicated by the black arrow at above Tc. This boundary shifts to lower ne values as the temperature is lowered. Superconductivity domes emerge within the phase to the right of this boundary, suggesting that this phase to the right (the spin-polarized and valley-polarized QM) is the parent state of SC1. Lower panels, linecuts at T = 400 mK from the upper panels, featuring kinks that correspond to the phase boundary between the spin-polarized and valley-polarized QM and the metal state at lower densities.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Superconductivities in device T1.

a, Optical micrograph and device configuration, in which electrons are polarized to the bottom layer of tetralayer graphene with WSe2 at proximity. Scale bar, 3 μm. b,c, The ne–D maps of Rxx at B⊥ = 0 T and base temperature, corresponding to opposite sweeping directions of ne, respectively. Three superconducting regions labelled as SC1–SC3 similar to in devices T2 and T3 can be seen. Some fluctuations can be seen in SC1, SC2 and the neighbouring metallic region. d, The ne–D map of Rxx at B⊥ = 1.5 T and base temperature, featuring the quantum oscillations of a QM to the right of the SC1 region. e,f, The ne–D map of Rxx and Rxy at B⊥ = 0.1 T and base temperature. The fluctuations and SC3 are both suppressed, similar to those observed in device T2. g–j, Magnetic hysteresis scans of Rxy taken at the dot, triangle, diamond and star positions in f, showing jumps/loops that are consistent with the anomalous Hall signals in f. k,l, Representative magnetic hysteresis of Rxx taken in SC1 (at ne = 0.54 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.03 V nm−1) and SC2 (at ne = 0.72 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.17 V nm−1).

Extended Data Fig. 8 Temperature and magnetic field dependence of superconductivity in device T1.

a–c, Temperature dependence of Rxx, the difference resistance dVxx/dI versus I and the BKT fitting of SC1, respectively. d, Temperature-dependent antisymmetrized Rxy hysteresis at a state in SC1. e–g, Temperature dependence of Rxx, the difference resistance dV/dI versus I and the BKT fitting of SC2, respectively. h, Temperature-dependent antisymmetrized Rxy hysteresis at a state in SC2. i,j, Rxx and Rxy as a function of ne and B⊥ at D/ε0 = 1.075 V nm−1 (corresponding to SC1), respectively. The phase boundary between the QM and SC1 remains at the same ne, indicating that the orbital magnetism is continuous across the boundary and SC1 is orbital magnetic. k,l, Rxx and Rxy as a function of ne and B⊥ at D/ε0 = 1.03 V nm−1 (corresponding to SC1), respectively. The phase boundary between the QM and SC1 remains at the same ne, whereas the left boundary of SC1 even moves against the neighbouring state in magnetic field, confirming the orbital magnetic nature of SC1. m,n, Rxx and Rxy as a function of ne and B⊥ at D/ε0 = 1.17 V nm−1 (corresponding to SC2), respectively. The phase boundaries between SC2 and neighbouring states move towards SC2 under magnetic field.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Superconductivities in device P1.

a, Optical micrograph of the device. Scale bar, 3 μm. b, The ne–D map of Rxx at B⊥ = 1.5 T and base temperature, featuring the quantum oscillations corresponding to the QM state neighbouring SC1. c,d, The ne–D map of Rxx and Rxy at B⊥ = 0.1 T and base temperature, respectively. e,f, Magnetic hysteresis of Rxy at the green triangle and square positions in d. g,h, Temperature dependence of antisymmetrized Rxy in SC1 (corresponding to the red dot position in d) and SC2 (corresponding to the blue dot position in d), respectively. Curves are shifted vertically for clarity. h,i, Rxx and Rxy as a function of ne and B⊥ at D/ε0 = 0.955 V nm−1, respectively. The phase boundary between the QM and SC1 shifts to slightly higher density, suggesting the orbital magnetic nature of SC1. j, The ne–B map of Rxx at D/ε0 = 1.05 V nm−1, cutting through SC2. k, Magnetic field dependence of Rxx in two representative states inside SC1. We use 10% (indicated by the blue dots) of the normal state resistance to extract the Tc and 5% (red dots) and 15% (green dots) of the normal state resistance to extract the uncertainty of Tc in Fig. 5. l, dVxx/dI versus I in SC1 and SC2 at (0.61 × 1012 cm−2, 0.94 V nm−1) and (0.85 × 1012 cm−2, 1.05 V nm−1), respectively, featuring zero resistance at small current and the resistance spikes at critical current. m, The ne–D map of Rxx, highlighting (by the orange dashed curve) the phase boundary between the spin-polarized and valley-polarized QM and an UM. n, Temperature-dependent Rxx linecut at D/ε0 = 0.92 V nm−1, in which the QM–UM phase boundary (indicated by the orange dashed arrow) gradually shifts as T is lowered. The SC1 state develops to the right of the boundary, indicating the QM as the parent state of SC1. o, Linecuts from n, showing the QM–UM phase boundary as a kink (orange arrow) in Rxx, which shifts to lower ne as T is lowered.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Superconductivities in device P2.

a, Optical micrograph and illustration of the device configuration. Scale bar, 3 μm. b, Magnetic hysteresis in SC1 (at ne = 0.61 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 0.95 V nm−1) and SC2 (at ne = 0.87 × 1012 cm−2 and D/ε0 = 1.07 V nm−1) at base temperature, respectively. c, The ne–D map of Rxx at zero magnetic field, featuring SC1–SC3. d, The ne–D map of Rxx at B⊥ = 1.5 T, featuring the QM state to the higher density side of SC1. e,f, The ne–D map of Rxx and Rxy at B⊥ = 0.1 T and base temperature. g, Temperature-dependent magnetic hysteresis of Rxy at the star position in e. Curves are shifted vertically for clarity. h,i, Rxx and Rxy as a function of ne and B⊥ along the dashed line in e, respectively. The phase boundary between the QM and SC1 shifts to slightly higher density, suggesting the orbital magnetic nature of SC1.

Extended Data Fig. 11 Comparison between the highest superconducting transition temperatures of SC1 in devices T1–T3 and P1.

a–d, Upper panels, Rxx as a function of temperature and charge density at a constant D that corresponds to the highest Tc, in the four devices, respectively. Lower panels, the same plots as in the upper panels with a small unified colour scale for a fair comparison. The BKT fitting reveals an increase of TBKT from device T1 to T3, corresponding to a weakening of spin–orbit-coupling effect.

Extended Data Fig. 12 Calculation of the effective mass and Fermi energy in tetralayer and pentalayer rhombohedral graphene.

a, Calculation at a fixed potential difference between the top-most and bottom-most layers Δ = 90 meV in tetralayer graphene. b, Calculation at a fixed charge density ne = 0.5 × 1012 cm−2 in tetralayer graphene. c, Calculation at a fixed potential difference Δ = 110 meV in pentalayer graphene. d, Calculation at a fixed charge density ne = 0.6 × 1012 cm−2 in pentalayer graphene.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Han, T., Lu, Z., Hadjri, Z. et al. Signatures of chiral superconductivity in rhombohedral graphene. Nature (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09169-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09169-7

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing