Abstract
While metal is the most common conducting constituent element in the fabrication of metamaterials, graphene provides another useful building block, that is, a truly twodimensional conducting sheet whose conductivity can be controlled by doping. Here we report the experimental realization of a multilayer structure of alternating graphene and Al_{2}O_{3} layers, a structure similar to the metaldielectric multilayers commonly used in creating visible wavelength hyperbolic metamaterials. Chemical vapour deposited graphene rather than exfoliated or epitaxial graphene is used, because layer transfer methods are easily applied in fabrication. We employ a method of doping to increase the layer conductivity, and our analysis shows that the doped chemical vapour deposited graphene has good optical properties in the midinfrared range. We therefore design the metamaterial for midinfrared operation; our characterization with an infrared ellipsometer demonstrates that the metamaterial experiences an optical topological transition from elliptic to hyperbolic dispersion at a wavelength of 4.5 μm.
Introduction
Hyperbolic metamaterials (HMMs) are artificially structured materials designed to attain an extremely anisotropic optical response, in which the permittivities associated with different polarization directions exhibit opposite signs^{1,2,3}. Such anisotropic behaviour results in an isofrequency surface in the shape of a hyperboloid, which supports propagating high kmodes and exhibits an enhanced photonic density of states. Many interesting applications have been enabled by HMMs. For example, the spontaneous emission rate of quantum emitters can be modified if they are brought close to a HMM^{4}, and similarly, the scattering crosssection of small scatterers near a HMM is enhanced^{5}. The nearfield radiative heat transfer associated with HMMs becomes superPlanckian^{6}. Also, the propagating high kmodes supported by HMM are exploited to achieve subdiffractionlimited images using a hyperlens^{7}. Some natural materials such as bismuth, graphite and hexagonal boron nitride exhibit hyperbolic dispersion in specific spectral ranges^{8,9,10}, while artificial HMMs are most commonly realized with two categories of structures such as metaldielectric multilayers^{4,7} and metallic nanorod arrays^{11}. The former structure can be fabricated layer by layer using vapour deposition, and the latter is often obtained by electrochemical deposition of a metal on porous anodic aluminium oxide. In both cases, metal is the essential element to provide the conducting electrons that make the extreme anisotropicity possible. Metals can also be replaced by doped semiconductors for realizing HMMs in the infrared range^{12}.
In this paper, we explore the realization of a particular HMM, in which the role of the metal in providing a conducting layer is taken over by graphene^{13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21}. Graphene is a twodimensional (2D) semimetal with a thickness of only one atom^{22,23}. It has been shown that doped graphene is a good infrared plasmonic material in terms of material loss^{24}. As a truly 2D material that only conducts in the plane, graphene by nature has the anisotropicity required for HMMs. As the thinnest material imaginable, graphene also makes an ideal building block for multilayer structures, as it enables the minimum possible period and therefore the highest possible cutoff for the high kmodes^{14,25}, which has been limited in metal and semiconductorbased HMMs by the nonnegligible thickness of those materials. The conductivity of graphene, unlike that of metals, can be effectively modulated by electrical gating (see Supplementary Fig. 1 and Supplementary Note 1) or optical pumping^{26,27}. This unique advantage has been demonstrated in other graphenebased metamaterials^{28}, and can potentially be exploited to realize a tunable HMM, in which the photonic density of states can be controlled electronically on demand. In addition, graphene shows much richer optoelectronic behaviour than metals, and the massless Dirac quasiparticles in graphene also give rise to very different carrier dynamics compared with other semiconductors. Various photodetection mechanisms, such as thermoelectric, bolometric, photovoltaic, photogating and photoDember effects, have been demonstrated with graphene^{29,30,31,32}. Graphene multilayer structures can therefore serve as a unique platform in optoelectronics, incorporating the unusual photonic behaviour of HMMs into graphene detectors or other optoelectronic devices. For example, an ultrathin superabsorber enabled by HMM could be incorporated into graphene detectors to enhance the light absorption^{18}. A brief summary of this report is as follows. The design criterions and material choices for realizing the graphene HMM are discussed. Chemical vapour deposited (CVD) graphene is identified as a good practical choice in the midinfrared range when it is heavily doped. A chemical doping method is developed to obtain the desired high carrier density and ellipsometry is used to characterize the optical conductivity of monolayer graphene. The metamaterial with multilayer structure is fabricated by repetitive graphene transfer and dielectric deposition. We characterize the effective permittivities of the fabricated metamaterial with ellipsometry to demonstrate the hyperbolic dispersion in the midinfrared range.
Results
Design of graphene HMM
Figure 1 shows the structure of the graphenebased HMM, which consists of alternating dielectric and graphene layers. Similar graphenedielectric multilayer structures have been proposed and analysed theoretically by different groups and shown to function as a HMM operating at terahertz (THz) and midinfrared frequencies^{13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21}. Various applications have also been discussed. For example, in our previous work we have calculated theoretically the Purcell factor of a graphenebased HMM with a finite number of layers^{17}, and we have simulated numerically the light coupling from free space into a graphenebased HMM slab with a metallic grating^{18}. In spite of the large body of theoretical work on graphenebased HMM, no experimental demonstrations have yet been reported, the primary reason being the challenge in obtaining a sufficiently high level of doping in the graphene layers in the required multilayer structure.
The graphenedielectric multilayer structure can be homogenized and viewed as a metamaterial using the effective medium approximation (EMA). The effective outofplane and inplane permittivities of this metamaterial can be derived by taking the longwavelength limit of the Bloch theory^{13,14,15,16}:
Here ɛ_{d} is the permittivity of the dielectric layer, d is the dielectric thickness and σ is the optical conductivity of graphene. Z_{0} is the vacuum impedance. Here graphene, as a 2D material, is treated as an infinitely thin layer described by its inplane sheet conductivity. As indicated by equation 1, the graphenedielectric multilayer system forms a uniaxial anisotropic metamaterial. ɛ_{eff,⊥} is the same as the constituent dielectric and is always positive. On the other hand, the real part of ɛ_{eff,} becomes negative if
When this criterion is satisfied, the isofrequency surface becomes a hyperboloid and we obtain HMM. Such an isofrequency surface allows the existence of propagating high kmodes, which can be traced back to the coupled plasmon modes in the graphenedielectric multilayer structure^{17}. The criterion described by equation 2 determines the wavelength at which the optical topological transition between elliptical and hyperbolic dispersions occurs^{4}.
While most previous theoretical work has concentrated on using highmobility graphene that may be obtained from mechanically exfoliated or epitaxially grown samples, we use CVD graphene because it is the most realistic choice for practical fabrication of a multilayer structure^{33}. Growth of largearea CVD graphene is well established, and it can be transferred onto arbitrary surfaces using poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) as the carrier material. In spite of its advantage in fabrication, CVD graphene often has a higher degree of disorder, which is typically manifested by a reduced mobility (usually on the order of thousands cm^{2} V^{−1} s^{−1}). As a result of the lower crystal quality, the stronger carrier scattering in typical polycrystalline CVD graphene enhances the freecarrier absorption at THz frequencies, which can be understood from the theoretical optical conductivity of graphene^{34,35,36}
where σ_{0} equals to e^{2}/(4ℏ), E_{F} is the Fermi energy relative to the Dirac point and γ is the intraband scattering rate. In this expression, the first two terms correspond to interband transitions, while the third term is the Drudelike intraband conductivity. Figure 2 shows a plot of the theoretical optical conductivity given by equation 3 with parameters typical for doped polycrystalline CVD graphene. To realize a good HMM, we need graphene with a large positive imaginary conductivity to interact with light, but with a small real conductivity to minimize the material loss. As indicated by Fig. 2, graphene is lossy at high frequencies when ℏω>2E_{F} because of interband transitions. On the other hand, at low frequencies when ℏω≲ℏγ, graphene also exhibits a large loss because of the intraband freecarrier absorption enabled by scattering. Because CVD graphene typically has a ℏγ of tens of meV, it is a lossy material at THz frequencies^{37}. As shown by Fig. 2, however, there is a spectral range between the two lossy regions, such that the imaginary part of the conductivity exceeds the real part. As this spectral range lies in the midinfrared part of the spectrum, CVD graphenebased HMM operates better in the midinfrared than the THz region. Also, Fig. 2 indicates that doping can improve the properties of graphene for realizing a HMM. A large E_{F} can turn off the interband absorption by the Pauli blocking and increase the Imσ required for achieving negative ɛ_{eff,}. Furthermore, doping can also suppress the intraband scattering by screening charged impurities^{37,38}.
Characterization of the optical conductivity of grapheme
Because graphene is the key building block of the metamaterial, it is important to have an accurate measurement on the optical conductivity of the actual CVD graphene layers used to fabricate the sample. Although the theoretical optical conductivity given by equation 3 provides a good guideline for designing the graphene HMM, real CVD graphene layers can have imperfections or extrinsic properties that are not taken into account by equation 3. We therefore need to characterize actual graphene samples and examine the scope of validity of equation 3.
In our previous work, we have developed a technique based on ellipsometry to measure the optical conductivity of truly 2D materials^{39}. In this technique, the analysis used in conventional ellipsometry is modified to handle the infinitely thin 2D material whose properties are fully described by the 2D optical conductivity. To characterize actual CVD graphene samples with this technique, we have prepared two kinds of samples, unintentionally doped and the chemically doped CVD graphene, on CaF_{2} substrates by the standard PMMA transfer method. Even without chemical treatment, unintentionally doped CVD graphene is ptype because of adsorbed gas molecules and residual ammonium persulfate from the transfer process^{40,41}. The chemically doped CVD graphene is prepared by a solution process that leaves a submonolayer of Tris (4bromophenyl)ammoniumyl hexachloroantimonate (also known as ‘magic blue’), a somewhat airstable ptype dopant, on the surface (see Methods section, Supplementary Fig. 2 and Supplementary Note 2)^{42,43}. Figure 3a shows the optical conductivities of both samples measured with ellipsometry. The optical conductivities shown here are mathematically described by cubic splines without assuming an a priori theoretical expression like equation 3. Consistent with Fig. 2, in the midinfrared range the chemically doped graphene has a larger imaginary conductivity, which is necessary for creating the extreme anisotropicity in the metamaterial.
Although the splinefitted conductivity of actual CVD graphene sample shown in Fig. 3a is useful in many applications, a conductivity model based on a theoretical expression such as equation 3 provides more physical insight and requires fewer unknown parameters to perform the fit. The latter is important when we want to parameterize the homogenized metamaterial, which will be discussed in next section. In Fig. 3b, we examine how well equation 3 works for our chemically doped CVD graphene samples. In fitting the ellipsometer data, we express the optical conductivity σ(ω) by the model given by equation 3 with E_{F} and γ being the only two unknown fitting parameters. We also show in the same figure the splinefitted conductivity obtained from the same set of data. It is apparent that the resulting conductivity based on equation 3 overlaps very well with the splinefitted conductivity throughout the midinfrared range, assuring the validity of using equation 3 for the midinfrared metamaterial. We extract from the fit that E_{F}=460 meV and ℏγ=23 meV. A mobility of ∼2,000 cm^{2} V^{−1} s^{−1} can be calculated from these numbers using the relationship , where μ is the mobility and V_{F} is the Fermi velocity.
In the midinfrared range, the optical conductivity is mostly determined by intraband transitions, which are described by the Drudelike term in equation 3. Our result is consistent with ref. 37, which shows that the Drude model can successfully fit the measured absorption spectrum of CVD graphene over a broad range of infrared wavelengths. We do not apply equation 3 in the ultraviolet to visible wavelength range because the manybody correction has been shown to be important^{44,45}. There is some discrepancy between the model and spline fits in the nearinfrared (∼1.5 μm, that is, near the wavelength corresponding to interband transitions close to the Fermi level). The origin of this discrepancy is not quantitatively understood, but may be related to spatial inhomogeneity in the Fermi energy or other disorder effects. Since the optical topological transition wavelength of our HMM is very far from this spectral region, and the fit is excellent over the entire midinfrared range, the failure of the simple model in the nearinfrared region does not affect the behaviour of the material in the midinfrared, which is the region of concern in this work. Equation 3 thus provides an excellent description for the midinfrared conductivity. Other imperfections that are typically present in transferred CVD graphene samples, such as the existence of small multilayer graphene patches and holes (see Supplementary Fig. 3 and Supplementary Note 3), can also contribute to the deviations observed in Fig. 3b (ref. 46).
Measurement of the effective permittivity of graphene HMM
We have fabricated the multilayer structure shown in Fig. 1, which consists five periods of alternating CVD graphene and Al_{2}O_{3}. The CVD graphene is transferred by the PMMA method and doped with Tris (4romophenyl) ammoniumyl hexachloroantimonate (‘magic blue’). The Al_{2}O_{3} dielectric layer is grown by atomic layer deposition (ALD). We choose Al_{2}O_{3} as the dielectric material, because it has negligible loss at the midinfrared wavelengths up to 8 μm. The dielectric thickness is chosen to be ∼10 nm to create an optical topological transition in the midinfrared range.
To characterize the metamaterial, we use infrared ellipsometry, which is appropriate to probe the effective permittivity of a metamaterial, since it measures the sample with freespace plane waves and the transverse wave vector (k_{0}sinθ) associated with the freespace plane waves is very small (k_{0}sinθd<<1 , where θ is the angle of incidence). We are therefore probing the low kmodes of the metamaterial, ensuring the validity of the longwavelength approximation. Although the longwavelength approximation is evidently satisfied for our metamaterial (d/λ<1/300 in our case), we still need to confirm the validity of the EMA with a rigorous transfermatrix calculation, since the EMA is derived for an infinite periodic system, while our metamaterial has only five periods. In Fig. 4 we show the transfermatrix calculation of five periods of graphenedielectric multilayer structure and the EMA calculation with the structure homogenized into an anisotropic layer, with the permittivities of the homogenized anisotropic layer given by equation 1. Here we calculate the ellipsometric angles Ψ and Δ, the quantities an ellipsometer acquires directly, at different incident angles. Ψ and Δ are defined by r_{p}/r_{s}=(tanΨ)e^{iΔ}, where r_{p} and r_{s} are the reflection coefficients for p and s light, respectively. Numbers used in the simulation are chosen according to measured material properties of the individual layers. As demonstrated by Fig. 4, the two methods give very close results, confirming that the fiveperiod graphenedielectric structure, in the low kregime probed by ellipsometry, can be accurately treated as a metamaterial with the effective permittivities given by equation 1. In fact, in the low kregime, even one period of the graphenedielectric unit cell can be homogenized by the same EMA formula given by equation 1 and still reproduce the optical properties accurately (see Supplementary Figs 4 and 5 and Supplementary Note 4). However, the high kregime is where the real interest of HMM lies, and as discussed in Supplementary Note 4, the high k optical properties depend on the number of unit cells in the metamaterial. The fiveperiod structure in our experimental realization of graphene HMM is chosen to create desirable high k optical properties.
The results of infrared ellipsometry, ellipsometric angles Ψ and Δ for our HMM sample, are shown in Fig. 5a,b, from which we extract the effective permittivities by fitting the acquired data. A robust and physical fitting in ellipsometry requires correct prior knowledge about the sample parameters, which allows us to use a minimal number of unknowns. Since our simulation in Fig. 4 demonstrates that the EMA is an accurate description for the multilayer structure, we can apply equation 1 in fitting the data. More precisely, we fit the experimental data to a layer of an anisotropic material on a CaF_{2} substrate with the permittivities of the anisotropic material given by equation 1. In equation 1, we know everything except the optical conductivity of graphene σ, as we have measured the thickness d independently after depositing each Al_{2}O_{3} layer, and we have measured the refractive index of the ALDgrown Al_{2}O_{3} in the relevant spectral range independently on a reference sample (see Methods section). Furthermore, as shown by Fig. 3b, considering the midinfrared range with only the intraband response, the expression of equation 3 is a good description for the optical conductivity of the actual CVD graphene layers. Therefore, we can apply equation 3 and parameterize the optical conductivity with only E_{F} and γ. As a result of this independent knowledge of the sample, only two unknowns, E_{F} and γ, are sufficient to fit the experimental data of the multilayer metamaterial.
The fitted results of the ellipsometric angles Ψ and Δ are plotted as the blue dash lines in Fig. 5a,b. We restrict the wavelengths range of the fitting to 3.5–8 μm, where the lower bound is limited by the requirement of intrabandonly response in the application of equation 3, and the upper bound is because of the limited transparent spectral range of Al_{2}O_{3}. As shown by Fig. 5, we are able to reproduce all six Ψ and Δ curves acquired at different incident angles with only two free parameters in the fitting. The extracted E_{F} is 365 meV, and the extracted ℏγ is 41 meV. The extracted E_{F} is lower than the value we typically obtain from chemically doped monolayer CVD graphene, because some dopants are lost in the ALD process because of the vacuum environment and the elevated temperature. The obtained scattering rate ℏγ is higher than the value of graphene on CaF_{2} substrate shown in Fig. 3. This can be explained by the fact that the carrier scattering in graphene depends on the surrounding environment, from which we conclude that sandwiching graphene between Al_{2}O_{3} increases the carrier scattering.
Figure 5c shows the effective permittivity of the graphene metamaterial given by the extracted values of E_{F} and γ. ɛ_{eff,⊥} is always positive because it equals the permittivity of Al_{2}O_{3}. On the other hand, the real part of ɛ_{eff,} changes from positive to negative at 4.5 μm indicating an optical topological transition from an elliptical metamaterial to a HMM. This graphene metamaterial is therefore a transverse epsilonnearzero metamaterial at the wavelength of 4.5 μm (ref. 14). The imaginary part of ɛ_{eff,} is several times smaller than the real part in most of the spectral range with hyperbolic dispersion, indicating that the loss of this HMM is reasonably low. In Fig. 5d, we plot the optical conductivity of the constituent graphene sheet of the metamaterial using the extracted E_{F} and γ.
Discussion
Our characterization by the infrared ellipsometry demonstrates that the graphenedielectric multilayer structure indeed experiences an optical topological transition from an elliptical to a hyperbolic dispersion in the midinfrared range, confirming the theoretical predictions in previous works^{13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21}. Our metamaterial sample has an optical topological transition at a wavelength of 4.5 μm, and maintains good hyperbolic properties up to 8 μm. The upper bound of the wavelength range is limited by the absorption in Al_{2}O_{3} and CVD graphene. While the absorption in the dielectric layer can be overcome by replacing Al_{2}O_{3} with other infrared transparent materials such as ZnSe, the absorption in CVD graphene is limited by the quality of graphene. Recently, there have been reports of the growth of largearea CVD graphene with the quality of a single crystal^{47}, and new transfer process for CVD graphene without degrading the mobility^{48}. With higher quality CVD graphene, the intraband absorption resulted from scattering could potentially be suppressed. The transition wavelength, as determined by equation 2, can be shifted by choosing the dielectric thickness or controlling the doping of graphene. The latter is especially useful if it can be done by the electrical gating. Shifting the transition wavelength farther into the infrared can be done by using lightly doped graphene or thicker dielectric. We have also realized a graphene HMM with the same structure except that the CVD graphene layers were not chemically doped (see Supplementary Fig. 6 and Supplementary Note 5), resulting in a transition wavelength redshifted to 7.2 μm. On the other hand, blue shifting the transition wavelength is limited by the highest doping and the thinnest dielectric layers achievable in practice. While the structure reported in this work has only five periods, the procedure developed here can be repeated to scale up the graphene HMM. Some applications of HMMs do not require a large number of periods; for example, only a few periods is sufficient to produce a Purcell factor close to a semiinfinite structure, according to the theoretical calculations in ref. 17.
Methods
Sample fabrication
The graphenedielectric multilayer structure with five periods is fabricated on a CaF_{2} wedge. The CVD graphene is grown on copper foil (Graphenea Inc) and transferred to the substrate using the standard PMMA transfer technique^{33,46}. The copper foil is etched using an ammonium persulfate solution. The size of the CVD graphene we transfer is ∼10 mm by 10 mm. After transferring each graphene layer, we dope the graphene by soaking the sample in a 0.25 mM solution of Tris (4bromophenyl)ammoniumyl hexachloroantimonate ‘magic blue’ in dichloromethane for 10 min, and then rinse the sample with dichloromethane (see Supplementary Fig. 2 and Supplementary Note 2). The Al_{2}O_{3} dielectric layer is deposited by the ALD at 150 °C using trimethylaluminium as the Al precursor and H_{2}O as the oxygen precursor. The number of cycles used in the ALD process is calibrated to grow ∼10 nm of Al_{2}O_{3} on graphene, with the thickness characterized by an ellipsometer (Woollam M2000). The procedure is repeated to fabricate five periods of the grapheneAl_{2}O_{3} unit cell. We have also confirmed that the chemical doping with Tris (4bromophenyl) ammoniumyl hexachloroantimonate does not affect the Al_{2}O_{3} layer and the substrate. We have found that although nitric acid can also pdope graphene effectively^{37,39}, it is not a good dopant for making the multilayer structure because of damage to the thin Al_{2}O_{3} layer. The substrate is wedged to avoid back side reflection in the ellipsometry measurement. We also characterize the graphenedielectric multilayer structure with the Woollam M2000 ellipsometer after depositing each Al_{2}O_{3} layer and after transferring each graphene layer. With the acquired ellipsometry data, we extract an average Al_{2}O_{3} thickness of 10.4 nm.
Ellipsometry characterization
The optical conductivity of monolayer graphene is measured by the ellipsometric analysis method described in ref. 39. Two ellipsometers designed for different spectral ranges, Woollam M2000 and Woollam IRVASE, are used for the wavelengths from 230 nm to 1.64 μm and the wavelengths above 2 μm, respectively. The data are acquired at three angles of incidence: 47°, 57° and 67°. The spot sizes of M2000 and IRVASE are 3 mm by 5.5 mm and 8 mm by 20 mm, respectively when the incident angle is 57°. We mask the samples for the IRVASE measurement because the spot size is larger than the graphene area. To obtain the refractive index of Al_{2}O_{3}, we have prepared a sample with ALDgrown Al_{2}O_{3} film on a CaF_{2} wedge. We measure the sample with both ellipsometers, and fit the refractive index of Al_{2}O_{3} with the Sellmeier equation. The measurement of the effective permittivities of the graphenedielectric multilayer structure is performed by the IRVASE ellipsometer with the same settings described above.
Additional information
How to cite this article: Chang, Y.C. et al. Realization of midinfrared graphene hyperbolic metamaterials. Nat. Commun. 7:10568 doi: 10.1038/ncomms10568 (2016).
References
 1
Smith, D. R. & Schurig, D. Electromagnetic wave propagation in media with indefinite permittivity and permeability tensors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 077405 (2003).
 2
Poddubny, A., Iorsh, I., Belov, P. & Kivshar, Y. Hyperbolic metamaterials. Nat. Photon. 7, 948–957 (2013).
 3
Jacob, Z. et al. Engineering photonic density of states using metamaterials. Appl. Phys. B 100, 215–218 (2010).
 4
Krishnamoorthy, H. N., Jacob, Z., Narimanov, E., Kretzschmar, I. & Menon, V. M. Topological transitions in metamaterials. Science 336, 205–209 (2012).
 5
Guclu, C., Campione, S. & Capolino, F. Hyperbolic metamaterial as super absorber for scattered fields generated at its surface. Phys. Rev. B 86, 205130 (2012).
 6
Biehs, S. A., Tschikin, M., Messina, R. & BenAbdallah, P. SuperPlanckian nearfield thermal emission with phononpolaritonic hyperbolic metamaterials. Appl. Phys. Lett. 102, 131106 (2013).
 7
Liu, Z., Lee, H., Xiong, Y., Sun, C. & Zhang, X. Farfield optical hyperlens magnifying subdiffractionlimited objects. Science 315, 1686–1686 (2007).
 8
Narimanov, E. E. & Kildishev, A. V. Naturally hyperbolic. Nat. Photon. 9, 214–216 (2015).
 9
Dai, S. et al. Tunable phonon polaritons in atomically thin van der Waals crystals of boron nitride. Science 343, 1125–1129 (2014).
 10
Caldwell, J. D. et al. Subdiffractional volumeconfined polaritons in the natural hyperbolic material hexagonal boron nitride. Nat. Commun. 5, 5221 (2014).
 11
Noginov, M. A. et al. Bulk photonic metamaterial with hyperbolic dispersion. Appl. Phys. Lett. 94, 151105 (2009).
 12
Hoffman, A. J. et al. Negative refraction in semiconductor metamaterials. Nat. Mater. 6, 946–950 (2007).
 13
Iorsh, I. V., Mukhin, I. S., Shadrivov, I. V., Belov, P. A. & Kivshar, Y. S. Hyperbolic metamaterials based on multilayer graphene structures. Phys. Rev. B 87, 075416 (2013).
 14
Othman, M. A. K., Guclu, C. & Capolino, F. Graphene–dielectric composite metamaterials: evolution from elliptic to hyperbolic wavevector dispersion and the transverse epsilonnearzero condition. J. Nanophoton. 7, 073089–073089 (2013).
 15
Othman, M. A. K., Guclu, C. & Capolino, F. Graphenebased tunable hyperbolic metamaterials and enhanced nearfield absorption. Opt. Express 21, 7614–7632 (2013).
 16
Wang, B., Zhang, X., GarcíaVidal, F. J., Yuan, X. & Teng, J. Strong coupling of surface plasmon polaritons in monolayer graphene sheet arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 073901 (2012).
 17
DaSilva, A. M., Chang, Y. C., Norris, T. B. & MacDonald, A. H. Enhancement of photonic density of states in finite graphene multilayers. Phys. Rev. B 88, 195411 (2013).
 18
Chang, Y. C. et al. Midinfrared hyperbolic metamaterial based on graphenedielectric multilayers. Proc. SPIE 9544, 954417 (2015).
 19
Nefedov, I. S., Valaginnopoulos, C. A. & Melnikov, L. A. Perfect absorption in graphene multilayers. J. Opt. 15, 114003 (2013).
 20
Sreekanth, K. V., De Luca, A. & Strangi, G. Negative refraction in graphenebased hyperbolic metamaterials. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 023107 (2013).
 21
Andryieuski, A., Lavrinenko, A. V. & Chigrin, D. N. Graphene hyperlens for terahertz radiation. Phys. Rev. B 86, 121108 (2012).
 22
Novoselov, K. S. et al. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films. Science 306, 666–669 (2004).
 23
Novoselov, K. S. A. et al. Twodimensional gas of massless Dirac fermions in graphene. Nature 438, 197–200 (2005).
 24
Jablan, M., Buljan, H. & Soljacic, M. Plasmonics in graphene at infrared frequencies. Phys. Rev. B 80, 245435 (2009).
 25
Kidwai, O., Zhukovsky, S. V. & Sipe, J. E. Effectivemedium approach to planar multilayer hyperbolic metamaterials: strengths and limitations. Phys. Rev. A 85, 053842 (2012).
 26
Liu, M. et al. A graphenebased broadband optical modulator. Nature 474, 64–67 (2011).
 27
Bao, Q. et al. Atomic‐layer graphene as a saturable absorber for ultrafast pulsed lasers. Adv. Funct. Mater. 19, 3077–3083 (2009).
 28
Lee, S. H., Choi, J., Kim, H. D., Choi, H. & Min, B. Ultrafast refractive index control of a terahertz graphene metamaterial. Sci. Rep. 3, 2135 (2013).
 29
Gabor, N. M. et al. Hot carrier–assisted intrinsic photoresponse in graphene. Science 334, 648–652 (2011).
 30
Yan, J. et al. Dualgated bilayer graphene hotelectron bolometer. Nat. Nanotechnol. 7, 472–478 (2012).
 31
Liu, C. H., Chang, Y. C., Norris, T. B. & Zhong, Z. Graphene photodetectors with ultrabroadband and high responsivity at room temperature. Nat. Nanotechnol. 9, 273–278 (2014).
 32
Liu, C. H. et al. Ultrafast lateral photoDember effect in graphene induced by nonequilibrium hot carrier dynamics. Nano Lett. 15, 4234–4239 (2015).
 33
Li, X. et al. Largearea synthesis of highquality and uniform graphene films on copper foils. Science 324, 1312–1314 (2009).
 34
Falkovsky, L. A. & Pershoguba, S. S. Optical farinfrared properties of a graphene monolayer and multilayer. Phys. Rev. B 76, 153410 (2007).
 35
Falkovsky, L. A. & Varlamov, A. A. Spacetime dispersion of graphene conductivity. Eur. Phys. J. B 56, 281–284 (2007).
 36
Stauber, T., Peres, N. M. R. & Geim, A. K. Optical conductivity of graphene in the visible region of the spectrum. Phys. Rev. B 78, 085432 (2008).
 37
Yan, H. et al. Tunable infrared plasmonic devices using graphene/insulator stacks. Nat. Nanotechnol. 7, 330–334 (2012).
 38
Hwang, E. H., Adam, S. & Sarma, S. D. Carrier transport in twodimensional graphene layers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 186806 (2007).
 39
Chang, Y. C., Liu, C. H., Liu, C. H., Zhong, Z. & Norris, T. B. Extracting the complex optical conductivity of mono and bilayer graphene by Ellipsometry. Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 261909 (2014).
 40
Schedin, F. et al. Detection of individual gas molecules adsorbed on graphene. Nat. Mater. 6, 652–655 (2007).
 41
Bae, S. et al. Rolltoroll production of 30inch graphene films for transparent electrodes. Nat. Nanotechnol. 5, 574–578 (2010).
 42
Tarasov, A. et al. Controlled doping of large‐area trilayer MoS2 with molecular reductants and oxidants. Adv. Mater. 27, 1175–1181 (2015).
 43
Paniagua, S. A. et al. Production of heavily nand pdoped CVD graphene with solutionprocessed redoxactive metal–organic species. Mater. Horiz. 1, 111–115 (2014).
 44
Mak, K. F., Shan, J. & Heinz, T. F. Seeing manybody effects in singleand fewlayer graphene: observation of twodimensional saddlepoint excitons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 046401 (2011).
 45
Yang, L., Deslippe, J., Park, C. H., Cohen, M. L. & Louie, S. G. Excitonic effects on the optical response of graphene and bilayer graphene. Phys. Rev. Lett 103, 186802 (2009).
 46
Liang, X. et al. Toward clean and crackless transfer of graphene. ACS Nano 5, 9144–9153 (2011).
 47
Hao, Y. et al. The role of surface oxygen in the growth of large singlecrystal graphene on copper. Science 342, 720–723 (2013).
 48
Banszerus, L. et al. Ultrahighmobility graphene devices from chemical vapor deposition on reusable copper. Sci. Adv. 1, e1500222 (2015).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Center for Photonic and Multiscale Nanomaterials (DMR 1120923). This work was performed in part at the Lurie Nanofabrication Facility, a member of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network, which is supported in part by the National Science Foundation. This research was also funded by the National Science MRSEC Program, DMR0820382. Z.Z. thanks the support from NSF CAREER Award (ECCS1254468).
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
Y.C.C. and T.B.N. conceived the experiments. Y.C.C., Che.H.L. and Cha.H.L. fabricated the samples. S.Z and S.R.M identified suitable dopants and suggested procedures for doping studies. Y.C.C. performed the measurements. All authors discussed the results. Y.C.C. and T.B.N. cowrote the manuscript and all authors provided comments.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
Supplementary Figures 16, Supplementary Notes 15 and Supplementary References. (PDF 970 kb)
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Cite this article
Chang, YC., Liu, CH., Liu, CH. et al. Realization of midinfrared graphene hyperbolic metamaterials. Nat Commun 7, 10568 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10568
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Further reading

Graphenebased tunable hyperbolic microcavity
Scientific Reports (2021)

Structural and functional applications of 3Dprinted graphenebased architectures
Journal of Materials Science (2021)

Midinfrared photodetector based on 2D material metamaterial with negative index properties for a wide range of angles near vertical illumination
Applied Physics A (2021)

Using graphene to tune verticalcavity surfaceemitting lasers
Optical and Quantum Electronics (2020)

ThreeDimensional UltraBroadband Metamaterial Absorber with Full Graphite Structure
Journal of Electronic Materials (2020)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.