Extended Data Fig. 9: Superconductivities in device P1.

a, Optical micrograph of the device. Scale bar, 3 μm. b, The n_e–D map of R_xx at B_⊥ = 1.5 T and base temperature, featuring the quantum oscillations corresponding to the QM state neighbouring SC1. c,d, The n_e–D map of R_xx and R_xy at B_⊥ = 0.1 T and base temperature, respectively. e,f, Magnetic hysteresis of R_xy at the green triangle and square positions in d. g,h, Temperature dependence of antisymmetrized R_xy 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, R_xx and R_xy as a function of n_e 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 n_e–B map of R_xx at D/ε₀ = 1.05 V nm⁻¹, cutting through SC2. k, Magnetic field dependence of R_xx in two representative states inside SC1. We use 10% (indicated by the blue dots) of the normal state resistance to extract the T_c and 5% (red dots) and 15% (green dots) of the normal state resistance to extract the uncertainty of T_c in Fig. 5. l, dV_xx/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 n_e–D map of R_xx, highlighting (by the orange dashed curve) the phase boundary between the spin-polarized and valley-polarized QM and an UM. n, Temperature-dependent R_xx 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 R_xx, which shifts to lower n_e as T is lowered.