Boundary conditions for the effective-medium description of subwavelength multilayered structures

Maxim A. Gorlach1, ∗ and Mikhail Lapine2 1ITMO University, Saint Petersburg 197101, Russia 2School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia Nanostructures with one-dimensional periodicity, such as multilayered structures, are currently in the focus of active research in the context of hyperbolic and photonic topological structures. An efficient way to describe the materials with subwavelength periodicity is based on the concept of effective material parameters, which can be rigorously derived incorporating both local and nonlocal responses. However, to provide any predictions relevant for applications, effective material parameters have to be supplemented by appropriate boundary conditions. In this work, we provide a comprehensive treatment of spatially dispersive bulk properties of multilayered metamaterials as well as derive boundary conditions for the averaged fields. We demonstrate that local bianisotropic model does not capture all the features related to second-order nonlocal effects in the bulk of . As we prove, while the bulk response of multilayers does not depend on the unit cell choice, effective boundary conditions are strongly sensitive to the sequence of layers and multilayer termination. The developed theory provides a clear interpretation of the recent experiments on the reflectance of all-dielectric deeply subwavelength multilayers suggesting further avenues to experimentally probe electromagnetic nonlocality in metamaterials.

I. INTRODUCTION However, it is not just bulk nonlocality that deter- mines the properties of multilayers, since boundary ef- fects should also be taken into account [13–15]. There- Electromagnetic properties of multilayered structures fore, to make the nonlocal description self-consistent, one and their effective material parameters have attracted re- has to supplement bulk effective by appro- search interest since early days [1]. Current fabrication priate boundary conditions. Since homogenized descrip- techniques based on sputtering or atomic layer deposi- tion includes averaged fields, boundary conditions should tion allow one to fabricate multilayers with deeply sub- also be formulated for the averaged fields, and therefore wavelength thickness and low roughness truly approach- it is not obvious a priori that the continuity of tangential ing the regime of metamaterial [2 and 3]. Nevertheless, components of electric and magnetic fields will still hold. a series of studies has warned against application of the Furthermore, previous studies contain a clear indica- standard frequency-dependent (i.e. local) effective mate- tion that the effective boundary conditions should be rial parameters to the multilayered metamaterials even in modified. For instance, it has recently been suggested the subwavelength regime [4–7]. In particular, multilay- theoretically [16] and verified experimentally [2] that the ers can give rise to tri-refringence phenomenon [6], while reflectance of all-dielectric multilayered structure with the standard techniques of effective parameters retrieval the layers of subwavelength thickness deviates from the can yield unphysical results for multilayers [8]. predictions of the local effective medium model also de- Such peculiar behavior has recently been attributed to pending on the structure termination. Shortly after- the nonlocal (or spatially dispersive) electromagnetic re- wards, quite a few proposals have been put forward on sponse of multilayers, which manifests itself through the how to interpret this peculiar feature [14, 15, 17, and dependence of polarization on electric field in the neigh- 18]. Most importantly, this feature can not be explained boring regions of space. Such electromagnetic nonlocality by bulk nonlocality alone, and therefore one has to work is described via the dependence of effective permittivity out the correct form of boundary conditions in order to tensorε ˆ(ω, k) on wave vector k which is considered as capture this phenomenon. a variable independent of ω in order to capture linear The rest of the article is organized as follows. In Sec- response of the structure to the arbitrary excitation [9]. tion II, we provide a general analysis of the bulk non- arXiv:1911.02884v1 [.optics] 7 Nov 2019 To evaluate effective nonlocal permittivity , it has local response of multilayered structure with arbitrary been proposed to use current-driven homogenization ap- number of layers in the unit cell and derive an explicit proach based on the analysis of the structure response to expression for the nonlocal permittivity tensorε ˆ(ω, k) in- the external distributed currents [10 and 11]. The effec- corporating spatial corrections up to the sec- tive susceptibility is then found as a matrix which relates ond order. Using this explicit expression and the link polarization averaged over the unit cell to the averaged between local and nonlocal descriptions [10 and 19], we electric field. Recently, this strategy has been applied analyze in Sec. III, whether it is possible to formally de- to the multilayered metamaterial composed of isotropic scribe all second-order spatial dispersion effects in the layers of two types, and an explicit though cumbersome bulk of multilayered structure in terms of local permit- expression for the effective permittivity tensor has been tivity and permeability . The answer appears to derived for this particular case [7 and 12]. be negative. In Section IV we derive the effective bound- 2 ary conditions for multilayered structure incorporating spatial dispersion corrections up to the second order. As   we show, the form of boundary conditions appears to be ∞ iky y ikx x X i(kx+nb) x sensitive to the termination of a multilayered structure, D(r) = e D0 e + Dn e  , which provides an elegant interpretation of the depen- n6=0,n=−∞ dence of reflectance on the sequence of layers. To illus- (3) trate our results, in Sec. V we perform calculations for where b = 2π/a is the period of reciprocal lattice, and the a specific metamaterial with two layers in the unit cell. dependence of the fields on x coordinate is determined Finally, in Sec. VI we discuss the obtained results con- by the Bloch theorem. The amplitudes of Fourier coef- cluding with the outlook for future applications. ficients En and Dn should be chosen in order to satisfy inhomogeneous wave equation with external current:

∇(divE) − ∆ E = q2 D + J , (4) II. DERIVATION OF THE BULK NONLOCAL RESPONSE where q = ω/c, J(r) ≡ 4π i q j(r)/c and CGS system of units is employed. In this section, we provide a general derivation of the Besides that, using the structure periodicity, we ex- bulk response of multilayered structure assuming peri- pand permittivity ε(x) and inverse permittivity ζ(x) ≡ odic permittivity modulation along x axis, ε(x), with 1/ε(x) into the Fourier series: the period equal to a as illustrated in Fig. 1. Analo- ∞ X gously to Refs. [7 and 12], we use nonlocal homogeniza- ε(x) = ε + ε einbx , (5) tion approach assuming excitation of the structure by the 0 n n6=0,n=−∞ external distributed currents ∞ X ζ(x) = ζ + ζ einbx , (6) ikx x+iky y 0 n j(r) = j0 e (1) n6=0,n=−∞ oscillating with the frequency ω. For simplicity, we as- where the coefficients εn and ζn are related to each other sume that ω a/c  1 and ka  1, keeping the terms up due to the fact that ε(x) ζ(x) ≡ 1. We aim to calculate to the second order in ω a/c or ka. To obtain the effec- the effective permittivity tensor of a multilayered struc- tive permittivity expanded in terms of small parameter, ture defined as we adopt the technique similar to Refs. [20 and 21] and expand the fields into Floquet harmonics as follows: D0 =ε ˆ(ω, k) E0 . (7)

 ∞  Note that the amplitudes E0 and D0 precisely corre- iky y ikx x X i(kx+nb) x spond to the averaged fields used in metamaterial ho- E(r) = e E0 e + En e  , n6=0,n=−∞ mogenization procedure [10], while the obtainedε ˆ(ω, k) (2) corresponds to effective permittivity definition in any pe- riodic medium [9]. It is also assumed that the external current J has only zeroth Floquet harmonic. TE TM Combining the expansions Eqs. (2), (3) with Eq. (4), we get a linear system of equations for En and Dn coeffi- E H cients. The entire system splits into two independent sets of equations which correspond to TE and TM-polarized H E waves propagating in the structure. We analyze TE case k k below, whereas more involved case of TM polarization is z y examined in Appendix A. In case of TE polarization, wave equation (4) and the a material equation D(r) = ε(x) E(r) yield: 2 2 2 kx + ky E0z = q D0z + Jz , (8) ε()x  2 2 2 (kx + nb) + ky Enz = q Dnz (n 6= 0) , (9) x X D0z = ε0 E0z + ε−n Enz , (10) FIG. 1. The scheme of multilayered structure with period a n6=0 X along x axis and arbitrary permittivity profile ε(x) with two Dnz = εn E0z + ε−m E(n+m)z , (n 6= 0) (11) possible polarizations of plane wave sketched. For simplicity, m6=−n we assume that the wave vector k defined by the external distributed currents exciting the structure lies in Oxy plane. where the summation is performed from −∞ to ∞. As a first step, we examine the quasistatic case when q = 3 k = 0. Inspecting Eq. (9), we recover that Enz = 0. nonzero off-diagonal components εxy and εyx. Their sym- Then Eq. (10) yields D0z = ε0 E0z and the zz component metric part (εxy + εyx)/2 appears to be proportional to of effective permittivity is simply equal to the average the product kx ky, and it is this term which has been in- permittivity ε0. terpreted in Ref. [7] as the rotation of the optical axis Hence, in the limit qa  1 and ka  1 we can consider of metamaterial induced by spatial dispersion. At the Enz as small parameter. To the leading order, Eq. (9) same time, an antisymmetric part (εxy − εyx)/2 is linear yields that for n 6= 0 in wave vector component ky, being nonzero only in the case when mirror symmetry of the unit cell is broken for q2 E ≈ D . any unit cell choice. This effect predicted in Ref. [20] is nz n2 b2 nz not possible for bi-layer structures since their unit cell can be chosen to be inversion symmetric, and therefore Dnz which enters the right-hand side can now be evalu- one needs at least three different layers in the unit cell ated as Dnz ≈ εn E0z [Eq. (11)], since Enz with nonzero to observe such one-dimensional chirality. At the same n are already small. Thus, the expression for Enz reads: time, the diagonal components εxx and εyy of permit- q2 ε tivity tensor acquire spatial dispersion corrections which E ≈ n E . (12) have the second order with respect to k. nz n2 b2 0z As a result of outlined derivation, the effective permit- More detailed analysis incorporating frequency and spa- tivity tensor in geometry Fig. 1 takes the following form: tial dispersion effects up to the third order carried on  −1 2  in Appendix A yields a bit more precise result for Enz ζ0 + χ ky −κ ky + ϑ kx ky 0 2 Floquet harmonic: εˆ(ω, k) = κ ky + ϑ kx ky ε|| − γ ky 0  (15) 0 0 ε|| 2 2 q εn 2kx q εn Enz ≈ 2 2 E0z − 3 3 E0z . (13) n b n b where ε|| is defined by Eq. (14) and the rest of param- eters is also defined in terms of Fourier components of Now we make use of Eqs. (10) writing D in terms of 0z permittivity ε(x) and its inverse ζ(x): E0z as follows:

2 2 1 X ε−n ζn q X ε−n εn 2 kx q X ε−n εn κ = , (16) D0z = ε0 E0z+ 2 2 E0z− 3 3 E0z. ζ0 b n b n b n n6=0 n6=0 n6=0 1 X ζ−n εn−m ζm P 3 χ = 2 2 , (17) Since the sum n6=0 ε−n εn/n vanishes due to cancel- ζ0 b mn lation of n and −n terms, the result for the effective m,n6=0 permittivity reads 1 X ε−nζn ϑ = − 2 2 , (18) ζ0 b n 2 n6=0 q X ε−n εn εzz(q, k) = ε|| ≡ ε0 + . (14) 1 X ε−n ζn−m εm b2 n2 γ = ζ 2 + . (19) n6=0 0 κ b2 mn m,n6=0 Equation (14) suggests that spatial dispersion effects do not affect εzz component of permittivity at least up the This particular result Eq. (15) has been obtained in third order, and only frequency dispersion is manifested. Ref. [21] for the case of eigenmode propagation in a meta- This is consistent with the conclusions of Refs. [5, 14, and material. 15]. This also agrees with the conclusions of Ref. [6], Equation (15) is derived for the special case kz = 0. where the authors do not observe any pronounced mani- We can easily generalize it to the case of arbitrary k festations of nonlocality for TE polarized waves. performing a rotation with respect to x axis and using the The analysis for TM-polarized waves appears to be transformation law of tensorε ˆ and vector k:ε ˆ(ω, k) = more involved and provided in Appendix A. One of the Rˆ εˆ(ω, Rˆ−1k) Rˆ−1, where Rˆ is the rotation operator. The key differences from TE case is the emergence of the result reads:

 −1 2 2  ζ0 + χ (ky + kz ) −κ ky + ϑ kx ky −κ kz + ϑ kx kz 2 εˆ(ω, k) =  κ ky + ϑ kx ky ε|| − γ ky −γ ky kz  . (20) 2 κ kz + ϑ kx kz −γ ky kz ε|| − γ kz

Tensor (20) captures the features of metamaterial bulk response including the terms up to the second order in 4 k and can be calculated numerically once the profile of where k× is an antisymmetric pseudotensor constructed permittivity ε(x) is specified. from vector k such that k× a = [k × a] for any a: But prior to the analysis of particular situations, we   would like to highlight several general properties of the 0 −kz ky × obtainedε ˆ(ω, k), Eq. (20). k =  kz 0 −kx . (26) First, effective permittivity tensor is independent of −ky kx 0 the unit cell choice. If we shift the coordinate origin within the unit cell by ∆, all Fourier coefficients do Having an explicit expression for the effective permit- change: tivity tensor expanded in powers of wave vector, Eq. (20), we can analyze whether it can be presented in the form ε˜ = ε einb ∆ , (21) n n Eq. (25) and, as a consequence, whether local effective ˜ inb ∆ ζn = ζn e . (22) material parameters can be introduced. It should be stressed that while spatial dispersion effects may resem- Hence, all combinations of the form εn ζ−n or ble artificial magnetic response for some fixed propaga- εm ζn−m ε−n or any others with sum of indices equal to tion directions, it does not mean necessarily that local zero are essentially independent of the unit cell choice. bianisotropic model is adequate for all other propagation As such, Eqs. (16)–(19) indicate that the effective per- directions [24]. mittivity remains unchanged after the shift of the unit Analyzing the applicability of local effective medium cell which is consistent with the general requirement to model, we first note that the structure of the tensorsε ˆ, nonlocal homogenization models [11]. µˆ,α ˆ and βˆ should be consistent with the symmetry of the Second, the effect of one-dimensional chirality de- metamaterial, i.e. full rotational symmetry with respect scribed by the term vanishes provided the unit cell κ to x axis. Therefore, the only possible form ofµ ˆ is contains mirror symmetry plane. Without loss of gen- erality we can assume that x = 0 is a mirror symmetry µ 0 0  plane. Then ε(x) = ε(−x) and therefore ε = ε and ⊥ n −n 0 µ 0 ζ = ζ . As a result, ε ζ = ε ζ which yields µˆ =  ||  , (27) n −n n −n −n n 0 0 µ κ = 0 according to Eq. (16). || Third, in the limit of shallow modulation, i.e. in the i.e.µ ˆ(ω) contains only two independent components. situation when |εn|  ε0 for any n, all spatial disper- sion effects in multilayer are described by the single pa- At the same time, second-order spatial dispersion ef- rameter. To show this, we notice that in this situation fects in multilayer are described by three independent 2 parameters [see Eq. (20)]. As we prove in Appendix B, ζ0 ≈ 1/ε0 and ζn ≈ −εn/ε . Using Eqs. (16)–(19), it is 0 it is not possible to choose such µ and µ that cap- straightforward to check that κ ≈ 0 and χ ≈ ϑ ≈ γ. || ⊥ ture all second-order spatial dispersion contributions en- tering Eq. (20). In other words, the bulk properties of III. ASSESSING LOCAL DESCRIPTION OF multilayered structures cannot be captured by the local MULTILAYERS bianisotropic model in the general case since there exist second-order spatial dispersion effects beyond such sim- In many situations it is beneficial to simplify the de- plified description. scription of a complex metamaterial to some local model Besides second-order nonlocal effects, multilayered including the set of material parameters which depend structure also exhibits one-dimensional chirality. We only on frequency. An example of such kind is bian- demonstrate below that this particular effect can be de- isotropic model which assumes the constitutive relations scribed within the frame of the local effective medium ˆ of the form [22 and 23]: model. Assumingµ ˆ = I in Eq. (25), we have the follow- ing form of the first-order spatial dispersion correction D =ε ˆ(ω) E +α ˆ(ω) H , (23) δε(1)(ω, k): ˆ B = β(ω) E +µ ˆ(ω) H , (24) 1 h i δε(1)(ω, k) = αˆ k× − k× βˆ . (28) whereε ˆ andµ ˆ are local permittivity and permeability q tensors, whileα ˆ and βˆ describe bianisotropic response of the structure. Any medium which fits into the frame of Pseudotensorsα ˆ and βˆ change their sign under mirror bianisotropic model can be alternatively described by the reflection. Therefore, the only possibility to construct single nonlocal permittivity tensor [10 and 19]: such pseudotensor is to use n×, where n is a unit vector normal to the layers. We assume thatα ˆ = βˆ = q nX , h i 1 h i κ εˆeff (ω, k) = εˆ− αˆµˆ−1βˆ + αˆµˆ−1k× − k×µˆ−1βˆ and then q   1 × h −1 ˆi × 0 −ky −kz + k µˆ − I k , (1) q2 δε = κ ky 0 0  , (29) (25) kz 0 0 5 which is consistent with the first-order corrections in the structure. Equation (33) therefore suggests that de- Eq. (20). Thus, bianisotropy of the structure is captured spite the continuity of microscopic fields, the macroscopic by the following tensors: fields do exhibit a discontinuity at the interface. Note that in contrast to the bulk properties the prefactor f   0 0 0 [Eq. (33)] does depend on the choice of the boundary and αˆ = βˆ = 0 0 −κ q , (30) respective unit cell choice. 0 κq 0 Next we examine the continuity of microscopic mag- netic field which is so-called omega-type bianisotropy [23]. out X Hy = Hy(x = 0) = H0y + Hny , n6=0 IV. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR MULTILAYERED STRUCTURE: LAYERS where Hny = −(kx +nb) Enz/q for all n. Note that in or- PARALLEL TO THE INTERFACE der to capture second-order spatial dispersion corrections to Hny, we need to use the expansion of Enz up to the Effective permittivity tensor of multilayered metama- third order as given by Eq. (13). With this expansion, terial, Eq. (20), provides full description of wave propa- we find out that gation in an infinite structure. For example, dispersion out kx 2  laws of TE and TM waves for the geometry shown in Hy = − 1 − q f E0z − q g E0z , (35) Fig. 1 read: q

2 2 2 where kx + ky = q ε|| , (31) 2  2 2 2  1 X εn kx 2 2 γ q κ q ζ0 g = . (36) + ky ζ0 − ζ0 q χ + − b n ε|| ε0 ε0 n6=0 4 2 2 ζ0 γ ζ0 ky 2 2 +kx ky (χ + 2 ϑ) − = q , (32) Now in addition to the prefactor (1 − q f) in front of ε0 ε0 electric field, we also get the term q g. Both of these respectively. However, to apply the developed theoret- terms cause the surface impedance defined for homog- ical models to any experimental situation, this descrip- enized fields to be different from −q/kx in the general tion has to be supplemented by appropriate boundary case. Obviously, this has to be taken into account while conditions. In this article, we analyze the situation most retrieving effective parameters of multilayered metama- relevant for the current experiments when the layers are terial from the transmission and reflection coefficients. parallel to the interface. Boundary conditions for TM-polarized waves are de- Inspecting dispersion equations Eqs. (31), (32), we find rived in a similar way in Appendix C, the result reads: out that each of equations contains the normal compo-    2 out H0z kx κ ζ0 2 q f nent of wave vector kx only in the second power. There- E = + − g˜ k + k y q ε ε y ε x fore, kx is defined uniquely for each of polarizations, and || 0 0 the usual birefringence takes place. As a result, boundary  2   ζ0 γ − ζ0 κ h ˜ 2 conditions for this situation are obtained from the con- + ϑ + 2 − + f kx ky , (37) ε0 ε0 ε0 tinuity of tangential components of microscopic electric     out g kx g κ ζ0 ˜ 2 f 2 and magnetic fields existing in the vicinity of metamate- Hz = H0z 1 + + − h ky − kx , rial boundary aligned with the plane x = 0. Focusing on ε0 ε0 ε0 TE case, we get: (38) X Eout = E (x = 0) = E + E , where f and g coefficients are defined by Eqs. (34), (36), z z 0z nz while n6=0

1 X ζn−m εm or, making use of calculated Fourier harmonics E h = , (39) nz b2 mn [Eq. (13)] m,n6=0

out 2  Ez = 1 + q f E0z , (33) and f˜,g ˜ and h˜ are obtained from the respective expres- sions for f, g and h by exchanging εn and ζn. Note that where in the limit of vanishing spatial dispersion Eqs. (37), (38) 1 X εn yield the standard boundary conditions f = , (34) b2 n2 n6=0 k Eout = H x , (40) y 0z q ε the superscript “out” refers to the fields outside of meta- 0 Hout = H , (41) material and E0z presents the macroscopic field inside z 0z 6

TE TM ε(x) and inverse permittivity ζ(x), respectively. The ef- E H fect of one-dimensional chirality vanishes in this case, κ = 0. H E The coefficients that enter the boundary conditions k k z read: Δ εA dA- y db εB f = −(εa − εb) ∆ (∆ − da) dB a 2 a dA εA d d −(ε − ε ) a b (d − d ) , (46) a b 12 a a b d  d  g = i (ε − ε ) b ∆ − a , (47) x a b a 2  2 FIG. 2. The scheme of multilayered structure containing two db da h = −(εa − εb) ∆ − layers in the unit cell: one with permittivity εa and thickness 2 εa a 2 db, and another one with permittivity εb and thickness db.  2 2  da db 3 da db da db The period of multilayer is equal to a = da + db. In our +(εa − εb) 2 + + . (48) analysis of boundary problem, we assume that the thickness 24 a εa εa εb of the upper layer with permittivity εa is reduced by ∆ < da. Two possible polarizations of impinging plane wave are Similar expressions for f˜,g ˜ and h˜ are obtained by replac- sketched, in both cases the wave vector k lies in Oxy plane. −1 ing εa,b by εa,b. Note that in the special case ∆ = da/2, i.e. when multilayered structure starts from the layer with half- which correspond to the case of a homogeneous medium. thickness, the boundary conditions are largely simpli- fied. However, even in such scenario they are non- Most remarkably, our results suggest that the first- ˜ order spatial dispersion corrections to the boundary con- trivial since f and f coefficients remain nonzero: f = (ε − ε ) d d (d + 2 d )/(24 a). ditions exist even in the absence of bulk chirality (κ = 0) a b a b a b provided the coefficients g andg ˜ are nonzero, which is Having the full set of parameters, we first examine the generally the case. Therefore, nonlocal contributions to bulk properties of multilayers. To this end, we compare the boundary conditions may have even more dramatic our model Eqs. (15) with parameters Eqs. (42)–(45) to impact on wave propagation than bulk nonlocality. Note the exact though cumbersome experession for the effec- that this first-order spatial dispersion effect was per- tive permittivity tensor obtained in Refs. [7 and 12]. As a ceived in Ref. [17] as bulk bianisotropy of multilayered specific example, we study all-dielectric multilayer com- structure. posed of Al2O3 and TiO2 layers which has been exten- sively investigated in recent experiments [2]. εzz component of permittivity tensor which governs V. RESULTS FOR BI-LAYER STRUCTURE the propagation of TE-polarized waves, exhibits mostly frequency dispersion [Fig. 3(a)], whereas spatial disper- sion of ε is quite weak. Predictions of our model nicely To test the developed theoretical models, we consider a zz match the exact solution up to q a ≈ 1, i.e. λ/a ≈ 6.3, simple example of multilayered structure containing two whereas for shorter wavelengths one has to take into ac- layers in the unit cell with ε and ε and a b count higher-order frequency- and spatial dispersion cor- thicknesses d and d , respectively, with the period of the a b rections. structure d + d = a as depicted in Fig. 2. In such case, a b ε and ε components depicted in Fig. 3(b,c) exhibit all parameters which describe spatial dispersion effects in xx xy mostly spatial dispersion and therefore we calculate them multilayers can be calculated analytically (see Appendix for the fixed frequency qa = 0.2. Again, up to reasonably D for details): large wave numbers ky a ≈ 1 our model provides good d2 d2 accuracy. Note also that the nonzero εxy component ε = ε + q2 (ε − ε )2 a b , (42) || 0 a b 12 a2 emerges purely due to spatial dispersion causing small ε (ε − ε )2 d2 d2 rotation of the multilayer anisotropy axis. χ = 0 a b a b , (43) Finally, ε permittivity component [Fig. 3(d)] exhibits ζ2 ε2 ε2 12 a2 yy 0 a b both frequency and spatial dispersion, where the former 2 2 2 (εa − εb) da db is manifested through the discrepancy between the exact ϑ = 2 , (44) εa εb ζ0 12 a solution and local effective medium model at ky a ≈ 0, 2 2 whereas spatial dispersion of εyy is well-described by our 2 da db γ = ζ0 (εa − εb) , (45) model up to k a ≈ 1. 12 a2 y To test the derived boundary conditions, Eqs. (33), −1 −1 where ε0 = (εa da +εb db)/a and ζ0 = (εa da +εb db)/a (35), (37), (38), we calculate the reflectance of the same are the zeroth order Fourier coefficients of permittivity semi-infinite all-dielectric multilayered structure for fixed 7

5.3 1 ()a local (a) local 5.25 second-order 0.8 exact 5.2 exact 5.15 0.6

5.1 r

zz

ε 0.4 5.05 5 0.2 4.95 TE 0 4.9 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 0.4 0.8 q a 1.2 1.6 2 θ 4.47 1 ( b ) (b) 4.46 0.8 4.45 0.6

xx

ε 4.44

r 4.43 0.4 4.42 0.2 4.41 TM 0 4.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 θ k a y 0.05 (c) 0.04 ()c 0 0.035 0.03 -0.05 0.025 0

r-r

xy -0.1 ε 0.02 Δ=0 0.015 -0.15 Δ=0.1a 0.01 a Δ=0.2 TE 0.005 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 θ 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 k a 0.05 y (d) 4.95 0 ( d ) 4.94 -0.05

4.93 0 r-r -0.1 4.92

yy

ε -0.15 4.91 TM -0.2 4.9 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 θ 4.89 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 kya FIG. 4. Reflectance of a semi-infinite all-dielectric multilay- ered structure composed of Al2O3 and TiO2 layers with per- FIG. 3. Calculated components of the effective nonlocal per- mittivities εa = 3.08, εb = 6.18 and thicknesses da = 38 nm mittivity tensor for all-dielectric multilayered structure com- (0.4 a), db = 57 nm (0.6 a), respectively, for the wave inci- dent from ZnSe prism (ε = 6.14). Wavelength of incident posed of Al2O3 layers with permittivity εa = 3.08 and TiO2 out light λ = 1 µm, period of the structure a = 95 nm (qa = 0.6). layers with εb = 6.18 at wavelengths around λ = 1 µm. Rel- (a,b) Reflection coefficient |E /E | (|H /H |) for TE (TM)- ative thicknesses of the layers are equal to da = 0.4 a and r in r in polarized light. Dot-dashed black and solid red curves show db = 0.6 a, respectively. Dot-dashed black curves, dashed blue and solid red lines correspond to the predictions of local ef- the predictions of local effective medium model and exact re- fective medium model, developed model and exact solution of sults obtained via transfer matrix method, respectively. (c,d) The difference between the reflection coefficients obtained via Ref. [7], respectively. (a) εzz versus dimensionless frequency transfer matrix method (solid lines) or our approach (dashed q a, where q = ω/c. (b-d) Dependence of εxx, εxy and εyy lines) and reflectance, predicted by the local effective medium on wave number ky calculated for fixed frequency qa = 0.2 (wavelength-to-period ratio λ/a ≈ 31) and fixed propagation model, for TE and TM polarizations. Different colors of the curves correspond to the different metamaterial terminations. direction with kx = ky. 8 wavelength and fixed structure parameters as a function dependence of reflectance on termination of multilayered of incidence angle θ. To probe the modes of the struc- metamaterial. As a consequence, the retrieval of effective ture with sufficiently large wave numbers, we consider material parameters from the measured reflectance and plane wave incident from ZnSe prism with permittivity transmittance becomes incorrect unless proper boundary εout = 6.14 which exceeds both components of multilayer conditions are used. permittivity tensor. So, total internal reflection occurs. To sum up, we believe that our results shed light Comparison of the local effective medium model with onto the intricate electromagnetic response of metamate- transfer matrix method [Fig. 4(a,b)] yields that the errors rials suggesting fruitful avenues to design electromagnetic of the local effective medium approach are maximal near properties desired for applications based on engineering the angle of total internal reflection, which agrees with of bulk and surface nonlocalities. experiments [2]. Nevertheless, as seen from the compar- ison in Fig. 4(c,d) our model describes the behavior of reflectance quite accurately for all incidence angles. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Apart from the improved accuracy, our model predicts also qualitatively new phenomena not captured by the We acknowledge valuable discussions with Pavel Belov. standard local effective medium model. In Fig. 4(c,d) This work was supported by the Russian Science Foun- we compare the reflection coefficients for the same polar- dation (Grant No. 18-72-00102). M.A.G. acknowledges ization of the incident wave but for the different termi- partial support by the Foundation for the Advancement nations of multilayered metamaterial. As illustrated in of Theoretical Physics and Mathematics “Basis”. Fig. 2, the difference between these geometries is in the thickness of the upper layer. Note that regardless of the value of ∆ multilayer is strictly periodic with the unit APPENDIX A. PERTURBATIVE ANALYSIS OF cell containing da − ∆ thickness of Al2O3, then db layer MULTILAYERS RESPONSE of TiO2 and finally ∆ layer of TiO2. Therefore, all three configurations with ∆ = 0, ∆ = 0.1 a and ∆ = 0.2 a es- In this Appendix, we calculate Floquet harmonics of sentially correspond to the same metamaterial and differ the fields in the multilayered metamaterial applying the only by the unit cell shift. As we have proved, bulk prop- perturbation theory with q a and k a playing the role of erties are unaffected by the unit cell choice and hence the small parameters. For clarity, we explicitly introduce difference in reflectance should be attributed exclusively small parameter which we denote as ξ ∝ q a ∝ k a. to the different boundary conditions for these different TE polarization. – First, we expand the fields as realizations of the same metamaterial. 2 (2) 3 (3) It should be stressed that this quite peculiar feature Enz = ξ Enz + ξ Enz + ..., can be potentially tested experimentally providing the di- (0) (1) Dnz = Dnz + ξ Dnz + ..., rect proof of complicated termination-dependent bound- ary conditions in multilayers. taking into account that the leading term in the ex- pansion of Enz has the second order. Next we rewrite Eqs. (9) and (11) in the form VI. DISCUSSION AND OUTLOOK h 2 2 2i h 2 (2) 3 (3) i (nb + ξ kx) + ξ ky ξ Enz + ξ Enz + ... In this Article, we have developed a complete frame-   = ξ2 q2 D(0) + ξ D(1) + ... , (49) work to describe multilayered structures with arbitrary nz nz number of layers in the unit cell, based on the effective (0) (1) Dnz + ξ Dnz + ··· = εn E0z medium perspective. Keeping the dominant contribu- X  2 (2) 3 (3)  tions due to frequency and spatial dispersion, we have + ε−m ξ E(m+n)z + ξ E(m+n)z + ... . (50) derived both bulk nonlocal effective permittivity tensor, m6=−n Eq. (20) and boundary conditions Eqs. (33), (35) and (37), (38) for TE- and TM-polarized waves, respectively. Separating the equations for different orders of ξ, we re- cover that As we have demonstrated, electromagnetic properties of multilayered metamaterials are determined by the n2 b2 E(2) = q2 D(0) , (51) complex interplay of the two factors: bulk nonlocality nz nz (2) 2 2 (3) 2 (1) on one side and nonlocal corrections to the boundary 2 nb kx Enz + n b Enz = q Dnz , (52) conditions (surface nonlocality) on the other. We have (0) Dnz = εn E0z , (53) proved that the bulk nonlocal response appears to be be- (1) yond simplified bianisotropic model based on local per- Dnz = 0 , (54) mittivity, permeability and bianisotropy tensors. More- which eventually yield Eq. (13) of the article main text: over, surface nonlocality can contain contributions linear with respect to wave vector k even in the absence of bulk q2 ε 2k q2 ε E = n E − x n E . bianisotropy. This gives rise to rich physics including the nz n2 b2 0z n3 b3 0z 9

Note that this third-order expansion is necessary for the Using Eqs. (62) and (63) we derive: correct derivation of the boundary condition for magnetic field, Eq. (35). (1) ky (0) ky ζn Eny = Enx = D0x , (70) TM polarization. – Using Eq. (4) together with the nb nb k k ε material equation D(r) = ε(x) E(r), we get: D(1) = − y D(0) = − y n E . (71) nx nb ny nb 0y 2 (n) 2 k Enx − k ky Eny = q Dnx (n 6= 0) , (55) y x Returning with these results to Eqs. (60), (61), we get: 2 (n) h (n)i 2 −kx ky Enx + kx Eny = q Dny (n 6= 0) , (56) X X ky εm E(1) = ζ D(1) = − ζ E , (72) X nx n−m mx n−m mb 0y Enx = ζn D0x + ζn−m Dmx , (57) m6=0 m6=0 m6=0 (1) X (1) X ky ζm X Dny = εn−m Emy = εn−m D0x . (73) Dny = εn E0y + εn−m Emy . (58) mb m6=0 m6=0 m6=0 Applying Eqs. (62), (63) once again, we recover that In this system, we omit two equations for E0x and E0y Floquet harmonics which are also the consequence of the k k q2 k wave equation and yield the relation between E and E(2) = − y x E(0) + D(0) + y E(1) 0x ny n2 b2 nx n2 b2 ny nb nx E0y from one side and current densities Jx and Jy from   2 2 the other. These equations are not especially useful in ky kx q εn ky X ζn−mεm = − ζ D + − E , εˆ(ω, k) calculation, though they are needed in the calcu- n2 b2 n 0x n2b2 nb mb  0y lation of the Green’s function of multilayered structure. m6=0 Note also that since div D = 0, (74)

(n) (2) ky (1) ky kx (0) k Dnx + ky Dny = 0 , (59) D = − D + D x nx nb ny n2 b2 ny which can be derived by combining Eqs. (55) and (56). 2 ky X εn−m ζm kx ky In a fully static case q = k = 0 we get E = 0 (n 6= 0) = − D0x + εn E0y . (75) ny b2 nm n2 b2 [Eq. (56)] and also Dnx = 0 (n 6= 0) [Eq. (59)]. As m6=0 a consequence of that, Eq. (57) yields E0x = ζ0 D0x, loc −1 loc Then we use Eqs. (60), (61), but with n = 0: D0y = ε0 E0x. Hence, εxx = ζ0 and εyy = ε0 in the quasistatic limit. X h (1) (2)i Now we seek second-order spatial dispersion correc- E0x = ζ0 D0x + ζ−n Dnx + Dnx , (76) tions to these formulas treating E and D as small n6=0 ny nx h i parameters. We rewrite the Eqs. (55)–(58) as follows: X (1) (2) D0y = ε0 E0y + ε−n Eny + Eny , (77) X n6=0 Enx = ζn D0x + ζn−m Dmx , (60) m6=0 In the right-hand side of these equations, we use the ex- X pressions (70), (71), (74), (75) and deduce: Dny = εn E0y + εn−m Emy , (61) m6=0 2 2 E0x = ζ0 − ζ0 χ ky D0x 2 2 ξ ky ξ q + (ζ0 κ ky − ζ0 ϑ kx ky) E0y , (78) Eny = Enx + 2 Dny (n 6= 0) , (62) nb + ξ kx [nb + ξ kx]  2 2 D0y = ε|| + (ζ0 κ − γ) ky E0y ξ ky Dnx = − Dny (n 6= 0) . (63) + [ζ0 κ ky + ζ0 ϑ kx ky] D0x , (79) nb + ξ kx Next we expand all Floquet harmonics with n 6= 0 in where we have used the designations Eqs. (16)-(19). Solv- terms of the small parameter ξ: ing Eqs. (78),(79) with respect to D0x and D0y, we arrive to the following set of constitutive relations: (0) (1) 2 (2) Enx = E + ξ E + ξ E + ..., (64) nx nx nx −1 2 D0x = ζ0 + χ ky E0x + (−κ ky + ϑ kx ky) E0y , (80) D = D(0) + ξ D(1) + ξ2 D(2) + ..., (65) ny ny ny ny 2 (1) 2 (2) D0y = (κ ky + ϑ kx ky) E0x + (ε|| − γ ky) E0y . (81) Eny = ξ Eny + ξ Eny + ..., (66) In this way, effective permittivity tensor in the chosen D = ξ D(1) + ξ2 D(2) + ... (67) nx nx nx geometry reads: and calculate the expansion coefficients iteratively.  −1 2  Based on Eqs. (60), (61), ζ0 + χ ky −κ ky + ϑ kx ky 0 2 εˆ(ω, k) = κ ky + ϑ kx ky ε|| − γ ky 0  , (0) Enx = ζn D0x , (68) 0 0 ε|| (0) Dny = εn E0y . (69) which is Eq. (15) provided in the article main text. 10

APPENDIX B. ON APPLICABILITY OF LOCAL Now, we use the continuity of miroscopic fields at meta- PERMEABILITY TENSOR TO DESCRIBE material boundary: MULTILAYERED STRUCTURES

out X Multilayered structure which we study has full rota- Ey = E0y + Eny , (87) tional symmetry with respect to x axis. Therefore, the n6=0 out X symmetry restricts possible form of permeability tensor Dx = D0x + Dnx , (88) and guarantees that it can only include identity matrix n6=0 Iˆ and the dyadics n ⊗ n, where n is a unit vector normal to the layers: where Eny and Dnx are defined by Eqs. (70), (74) and   (71), (75), respectively. As a result, boundary conditions 1 h i A1 0 0 µˆ−1 − Iˆ ≡ Aˆ = 0 A 0 . (82) take the form q2  2  0 0 A2 out 2 2   ˜ In such a case, local effective medium model would de- Ey = E0y 1 + q f − ky h + D0x ky g˜ − kx ky f , mand the following form of the second-order spatial dis- (89) persion correction δε(2): out  2 ˜ Dx = E0y (−ky g + kx ky f) + D0x 1 − ky h (90) δε(2)(ω, k) = k× Aˆ k×  2 2  −A2 (ky + kz ) A2 kx ky A2 kx kz 2 2 with f, g, h coefficients defined by Eqs. (34), (36) and =  A2 kx ky −A2 kx − A1 kz A1 ky kz  . ˜ ˜ 2 2 (39), respectively. The expressions for f,g ˜ and h are A2 kx kz A1 ky kz −A2 kx − A1 ky obtained by replacing εn by ζn and vice versa. Making (83) use of Eqs. (85), (86), we convert Eqs. (89)-(90) to their However, as we have shown, second-order spatial disper- final form Eqs. (37)-(38). sion effects in multilayers are described by

 2 2  χ (ky + kz ) ϑ kx ky ϑ kx kz (2) 2 δε (ω, k) =  ϑ kx ky −γ ky −γ ky kz . (84) ϑ k k −γ k k −γ k2 APPENDIX D. CALCULATIONS FOR BI-LAYER x z y z z STRUCTURE Equations (83) and (84) appear to be incompatible, though we may ensure the same off-diagonal entries by In this Appendix, we outline the technique to calculate choosing A1 = −γ and A2 = ϑ. However, the diagonal the parameters characterizing bulk and surface properties entries will be different, even in the shallow modulation of multilayered structure, doing this calculation explic- limit, since they include different components of wave itly for bi-layer structure. Our approach is based on the vector. conversion of sums Eqs. (16)–(19), (34), (36) and (39) Therefore, second-order spatial dispersion effects in involving Fourier coefficients of permittivity and its in- multilayers generally can not be described in terms of verse into the real-space integrals which are much easier local permeability tensor. This feature is manifested in to calculate. To this end, we introduce a set of functions a number of physical phenomena, e.g. tri-refringence [6]. with zero average:

(0) X inbx APPENDIX C. DERIVATION OF BOUNDARY ε (x) ≡ ε(x) − ε0 = εn e , (91) CONDITIONS FOR TM-POLARIZED WAVES n6=0 Z X εn ε(1)(x) = ε(0)(x) dx = einbx , (92) Here, we derive boundary conditions for TM-polarized inb waves incident on the surface of a multilayered metama- n6=0 Z terial with layers parallel to the interface. X εn ε(2)(x) = ε(1)(x) dx = − einbx . (93) First, Maxwell’s equations yield n2 n6=0 k k k D = − y H ,Dout = − y Hout ,D = x H . 0x q 0z x q z 0y q 0z In a similar way we define ζ(0)(x), ζ(1)(x) and ζ(2)(x). (85) Obviously, Second, combining Eqs. (79) and (85), we recover that H k ζ ϑ ζ ε + γ − ζ 2  ( E = 0z x + κ 0 k2 + 0 0 0 κ k k2 . (ε − ε ) d /a, 0 < x < d , 0y q ε ε y ε2 x y ε(0)(x) = a b b a (94) || 0 0 −(ε − ε ) d /a, d < x < d . (86) a b a a b 11

Integrating these expressions, we derive that APPENDIX E. CALCULATION OF ( REFLECTANCE (ε − ε ) db x − da  , 0 < x ≤ d , ε(1)(x) = a b a 2 a da db  (εa − εb) a a − x − 2 , da ≤ x < db , Calculating the reflectance of a semi-infinite multilay- (95) ered structure within our model, we perform the fol-  2 lowing conceptual steps. We define wave vector com- (2) (εa − εb) db da in √ ε (x) = x − ponents for the incident wave: kx = q εout cos θ, 2 a 2 √ ky = q εout sin θ. (εa − εb) da db TE-polarized waves. – k for the transmitted wave is − (a + d ) for 0 < x ≤ d , (96) x 24 a b a found from the dispersion equation Eq. (31):  2 (2) (εa − εb) da db q ε (x) = − a − x − 2 2 2 a 2 kx = q ε|| − ky . (107) (ε − ε ) d d + a b a b (a + d ) for d ≤ x < d . (97) 24 a a a b Also we take into account the link between electric and magnetic fields for the incident as well as for the reflected The functions ζ(0)(x), ζ(1)(x) and ζ(2)(x) are obtained waves: −1 from these expressions by replacing εa,b by εa,b. Parame- ters of multilayered structure are defined in terms of the kin Hin,r = ∓ x Ein,r . (108) introduced functions as follows: y q z a 2 Z 2 q h (1) i Then, applying the boundary conditions Eqs. (33), (35), ε = ε0 + ε (x) dx , (98) || a we finally derive: 0 a Z Er kin (1 + q2 f) − k (1 − q2 f) − q2 g i (0) (1) rTE ≡ z = x x . κ = ε (x) ζ (x) dx , (99) in in 2 2 2 ζ0 a Ez kx (1 + q f) + kx (1 − q f) + q g 0 (109) a Z 2 TM-polarized waves. – In a similar way we analyze the 1 h (1) i χ = 2 ε(x) ζ (x) dx , (100) boundary problem for TM-polarized waves. kx for the ζ0 a 0 transmitted wave is defined uniquely by Eq. (32). The a link between electric and magnetic fields for the incident 1 Z as well as for the reflected waves reads: ϑ = − ε(1)(x) ζ(1)(x) dx , (101) ζ0 a in 0 in,r kx in,r a Ey = ± Hz . (110) 1 Z h i2 q εout γ = ζ 2 + ε(1)(x) ζ(x) dx , (102) 0 κ a 0 Applying the boundary conditions Eqs. (37), (38), we find the reflection coefficient in the form f = −ε(2)(∆) , (103) (1) Hr kin B − ε A g = i ε (∆) , (104) rTM ≡ z = x out , (111) Hin kin B + ε A h = −H(1)(∆) , (105) z x out and f˜,g ˜ and h˜ coefficients are obtained by replacing the where A and B coefficients come from the boundary con- permittivity in Eqs. (103)-(105) by its inverse. Here, the ditions and read: (0) (1) functions H (x) and H (x) are defined as:   2 kx κ ζ0 2 q f A = + − g˜ ky + kx ε|| ε0 ε0 (0) (1) D (1) E H (x) ≡ ζ(x) ε (x) − ζ(x) ε (x)  ζ γ − ζ 2 h  + ϑ 0 + 0 κ − + f˜ k k2 , (112) ( 2 x y db da  ε0 ε0 ε0 (εa − εb) x − , 0 < x < da , = εa a 2 (106)   da db  g kx g ζ0 f (εa − εb) a − x − , da < x < db , κ ˜ 2 2 εb a 2 B = 1 + + − h ky − kx . (113) ε0 ε0 ε0 where h... i denotes the average over the unit cell. The dependence of reflectance on multilayer termination Z arises due to the dependence of f, g, h, f˜,g ˜ and h˜ coef- (1) (0) H (x) = H (x) dx + C, ficients on the thickness of the upper layer, da − ∆. Transfer matrix method. – Transfer matrix method for with the integration constant chosen in such way that the wave propagation in stratified media is analyzed in detail average of H(1)(x) is equal to zero. in the classical textbook [25], here we outline the main 12 calculation steps. Transfer matrices defined for TE and terial. The transmitted wave satisfies the equation TM waves as m − eikx x m  Et  11 12 = 0 , (118) m m − eikx x Ht     21 22 Ez(x) Ez(0) = MTE (114) Hy(x) Hy(0) where kx is a Bloch wave number of the transmitted     wave, Et and Ht are the tangential components of the Ey(x) Ey(0) = MTM , (115) transmitted Bloch wave directly near the boundary of Hz(x) Hz(0) a metamaterial, and mij are the elements of the con- structed transfer matrix M. From this equation, we im- mediately evaluate the impedance and admittance of the in the medium with the diagonal permittivity tensor have Bloch wave: the form Et m − eikx x Z ≡ = − 22 , (119) t Ht m iq ! 21 cos kx x − k sin kxx M (x) = x , (116) −1 TE i kx Y ≡ Z . The reflection coefficients from the semi- − q sin kxx cos kxx t t infinite medium are then found as ikx ! cos kx x sin kx x M (x) = q εyy , (117) r TE TE TM iq εyy Ez Yin − Yt sin kxx cos kx x r ≡ = , (120) kx TE in TE TE Ez Yin + Yt r TM TM Hz Zin − Zt rTM ≡ in = TM TM , (121) where x axis is chosen as the propagation direction. Con- Hz Zin + Zt structing M = M(εa, ∆) M(εb, db) M(εa, da −∆), we ob- TE in TM in tain the transfer matrix for a single period of a metama- where Yin = −kx /q and Zin = kx /(εout q).

∗ [email protected] 9 V. M. Agranovich and V. L. Ginzburg, Crystal Optics with 1 S. M. Rytov, “Electromagnetic Properties of a Finely Spatial Dispersion and Excitons (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Stratified Medium,” Soviet Physics JETP 2, 466–475 1984). (1956). 10 M. G. Silveirinha, “Metamaterial homogenization ap- 2 S. V. Zhukovsky, A. Andryieuski, O. Takayama, proach with application to the characterization of mi- E. Shkondin, R. Malureanu, F. Jensen, and A. V. crostrucutred composites with negative parameters,” Phys. Lavrinenko, “Experimental Demonstration of Effective Rev. B 75, 115104 (2007). Medium Approximation Breakdown in Deeply Subwave- 11 A. Al`u,“First-principles homogenization theory for peri- length All-Dielectric Multilayers,” Physical Review Letters odic metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. B 84, 075153 (2011). 115, 177402 (2015). 12 A. V. Chebykin, A. A. Orlov, C. R. Simovski, Yu. S. 3 J. Sukharn, O. Takayama, M. Mahmoodi, S. Sychev, Kivshar, and P. A. Belov, “Nonlocal effective parame- A. Bogdanov, S. H. Tavassoli, A. V. Lavrinenko, and ters of multilayered metal-dielectric metamaterials,” Phys. R. Malureanu, “Investigation of effective media applica- Rev. B 86, 115420 (2012). bility for ultrathin multilayer structures,” Nanoscale 11, 13 V. A. Markel and I. Tsukerman, “Current-driven homog- 12582–12588 (2019). enization and effective medium parameters for finite sam- 4 A. P. Vinogradov and A. V. Merzlikin, “On the Problem of ples,” Phys. Rev. B 88, 125131 (2013). Homogenizing One-Dimensional Systems,” J. Exp. Theor. 14 X. Lei, L. Mao, Y. Lu, and P. Wang, “Revisiting the effec- Phys. 94, 482–488 (2002). tive medium approximation in all-dielectric subwavelength 5 J. Elser and V. A. Podolskiy, “Nonlocal effects in effective- multilayers: Breakdown and rebuilding,” Physical Review medium response of nanolayered metamaterials,” Appl. B 96, 035439 (2017). Phys. Lett. 90, 191109 (2007). 15 A. Maurel and J.-J. Marigo, “Sensitivity of a dielectric 6 A. A. Orlov, P. M. Voroshilov, P. A. Belov, and Y. S. layered structure on a scale below the periodicity: A fully Kivshar, “Engineered optical nonlocality in nanostruc- local homogenized model,” Physical Review B 98, 024306 tured metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. B 84, 045424 (2011). (2018). 7 A. V. Chebykin, A. A. Orlov, A. V. Vozianova, S. I. 16 H. H. Sheinfux, I. Kaminer, Y. Plotnik, G. Bartal, and Maslovski, Yu. S. Kivshar, and P. A. Belov, “Nonlocal M. Segev, “Subwavelength Multilayer Dielectrics: Ul- effective medium model for multilayered metal-dielectric trasensitive Transmission and Breakdown of Effective- metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. B 84, 115438 (2011). Medium Theory,” Physical Review Letters 113, 243901 8 A. A. Orlov, E. A. Yankovskaya, S. V. Zhukovsky, V. E. (2014). Babicheva, I. V. Iorsh, and P. A. Belov, “Retrieval of 17 V. Popov, A. V. Lavrinenko, and A. Novitsky, “Oper- Effective Parameters of Subwavelength Periodic Photonic ator approach to effective medium theory to overcome a Structures,” Crystals 4, 417 (2014). breakdown of Maxwell Garnett approximation,” Physical 13

Review B 94, 085428 (2016). 21 C. Rizza, V. Galdi, and A. Ciattoni, “Enhancement 18 G. Castaldi, A. Al´u, and V. Galdi, “Boundary Effects of and interplay of first- and second-order spatial dispersion Weak Nonlocality in Multilayered Dielectric Metamateri- in metamaterials with moderate-permittivity inclusions,” als,” Physical Review Applied 10, 034060 (2018). Phys. Rev. B 96, 081113 (2017). 19 A. P. Vinogradov and I. I. Skidanov, “On the Problem of 22 I. V. Lindell, A. H. Sihvola, S. A. Tretyakov, and A. Vi- Constitutive Parameter of Composite Materials,” in Bian- itanen, Electromagnetic Waves in Chiral and Bi-Isotropic isotropics 2000: 8th International Conference on Electro- Media (Artech House, Boston, 1994). magnetics of Complex Media, September 2000, Lisbon (un- 23 A. N. Serdyukov, I. V. Semchenko, S. A. Tretyakov, and published) , 17–22 (2000). A. Sihvola, Electromagnetics of Bi-Anisotropic Materials: 20 C. Rizza, A. Di Falco, M. Scalora, and A. Ciattoni, “One- Theory and Applications (Gordon and Breach Science, Dimensional Chirality: Strong Optical Activity in Epsilon- Amsterdam, 2001). Near-Zero Metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 057401 24 M. A. Gorlach and P. A. Belov, “Nonlocality in uniaxially (2015). polarizable media,” Phys. Rev. B 92, 085107 (2015). 25 M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 4th ed. (Perg- amon Press, Oxford, 1965).