These graphene experts are trying to close the reproducibility gap in 2D materials research

-->

Advertisement

Close

Log in or create an account

Access thousands of C&EN articles

Get personalized recommendations

Follow your preferred chemistry topics

Save your favorite articles

Log In

Don't have an account?<br>Create one

Or

Access Through Institution

These graphene experts are trying to close the reproducibility gap in 2D materials research

Share

Save

Profiles

2-D Materials

These graphene experts are trying to close the reproducibility gap in 2D materials research

Too much work on graphene and related materials cannot be repeated—a problem that wastes time and holds back commercialization. New rules could help solve it

by

Mark Peplow, special to C&EN

June 17, 2026

min read

Share

Save

Save

A person in lab gear uses tongs to hold a silver-colored semiconductor wafer over a tray.

Companies incorporate graphene in electronic devices fabricated on wafers (shown above). Improving the reproducibility of graphene research could make this process easier.

Credit: Courtesy of AMO GmbH

Key insights

Graphene and other 2D materials show great promise in diverse applications but are finicky to work with.

Researchers often cannot reproduce research on 2D materials, which is slowing industrial translation.

A group of experts from academia, industry, and funding bodies recommend a system for reporting experimental conditions in much greater detail, along with other measures, to help close this reproducibility gap.

Ever since graphene’s debut in 2004, this atom-thin sheet of carbon has been touted as a revolutionary material because of its remarkable strength and electrical conductivity, as well as other outstanding properties. Its discovery triggered a wave of other 2D materials—including hexagonal boron nitride and molybdenum disulfide—many of which could serve as components in electronic devices.

But these materials can be difficult to work with; even minor variations in lab conditions can affect their properties. Researchers often find that results produced by another lab cannot be replicated in their own. Some believe that this “reproducibility gap” is slowing the translation of 2D materials into applications—a process known as technology transfer. “We can’t say we are working in a serious way on tech transfer if at the same time we’re not doing proper work on reporting and transparency,” says Peter Bøggild, who researches 2D materials at the Technical University of Denmark.

Bøggild brought together stakeholders from academia, industry, and funding bodies last year to develop practical guidelines aimed at closing this gap (Nat. Rev. Phys. 2025, DOI: 10.1038/s42254-025-00875-9). This expert group proposed a template for researchers to record experimental methods in far more depth than is usually required for academic papers in order to capture the trials and tribulations of working with 2D materials.

Ediz Herkert, a postdoc researcher at the Institute of Photonic Sciences (ICFO) in Barcelona who was not involved in the group, thinks the guidelines could ultimately be a huge time-saver for the field. “It should feel like you have an experienced postdoc next to you who’s really explaining everything to you step by step,” he says.

Paying more attention to reproducibility could also stimulate technology transfer by making it easier for companies to adopt and scale up methods developed in academia. “These materials are complicated,” says Amaia Zurutuza, a coauthor of the recommendations. She is the scientific director at Graphenea, a firm based in San Sebastián, Spain, that manufactures graphene-based materials and chips. “If you don’t have the reproducibility part, then it becomes even more complicated.”

Advertisement

Out in the open

All materials can suffer from contamination, but 2D materials are particularly susceptible because every single atom is exposed to the outside world. “The materials are literally from another dimension,” Bøggild says. “It’s inherently tricky to work with stuff that is open and cannot easily be protected from anything that lands on it.”

"The materials are literally from another dimension."

Subtle differences in preparation and handling methods can have a huge effect on 2D materials, and success may depend on tiny variations in temperature, humidity, or vibrations that are not always recorded in a paper’s methods.

When these materials are incorporated into devices such as transistors, researchers sometimes report only the very best “hero device,” ignoring dozens of failures that preceded it. Zurutuza says that’s a big problem when industry tries to replicate the work. “So many times we find that it’s not as good as it seems,” she says. “But we don’t know if we did exactly the same procedure, because not all the information is there.”

To further complicate matters, many companies have used the word graphene as a catchall for a range of related materials....