Science
ETH Zurich researcher listed among potential Nobel physics laureates
ETH Zurich professor Nicola Spaldin has been named among Clarivate’s potential Nobel laureates in physics. Her candidacy reflects the international impact of her research, although Nobel nominations remain confidential and predictions are inherently uncertain.

The physics prize will be announced on October 6, and ETH Zurich professor Nicola Spaldin is already on the shortlist of public predictions. Clarivate, the British-American data firm, included the Swiss-British researcher in its 2026 list of scientists it considers to have Nobel calibre. The announcement places an ETH scientist in the international spotlight just over two weeks before the Nobel season begins in Stockholm.\n\nSpaldin’s appearance on the list reflects the reach of her theoretical work on magnetoelectric multiferroics. These materials react to both magnetic and electric fields, a combination that could improve technologies ranging from data storage to magnetic sensing. Her research has helped establish the theoretical basis for understanding this class of materials.\n\nThe prediction comes with a clear qualification. Nobel nominations are kept secret for 50 years, and the prize committees publish no information about their deliberations. Laureates learn the result only shortly before the official announcement. Clarivate’s list therefore signals scientific influence, not confirmation of a nomination or an impending award. The distinction matters as attention turns to Switzerland’s research institutions and the 2026 prizes.
How Spaldin’s Materials Could Shape Future Technology
Spaldin’s work examines materials that couple two fundamental forces: magnetism and electricity. Magnetoelectric multiferroics can be influenced by magnetic fields and electric fields, giving researchers a route to control material properties in ways conventional materials cannot.\n\nThat combination has drawn interest for possible applications in energy-efficient data storage. It could also help create high-precision magnetic field sensors, technologies relevant to scientific instruments and advanced engineering. The source identifies Spaldin as the researcher who laid the theoretical foundations for this class of materials, linking her contribution to a field that spans condensed-matter physics, materials science and device development.\n\nThe significance of theoretical physics often emerges over time. Researchers develop models that explain how materials behave, and later teams test those ideas in laboratories or explore their technological uses. Clarivate’s methodology focuses on the influence of published work within the scientific community, measured primarily through citations by other scientists. Spaldin’s inclusion indicates that her research has become an important reference point for colleagues working on novel materials.
Clarivate’s List Offers Clues, Not Certainty
Clarivate has named 22 researchers in its 2026 Nobel-calibre list, but its record remains a guide rather than a forecast. The firm’s selection is based on the impact of scientists’ work in the research community, particularly how often their academic papers are cited. Citation counts can show that a body of work has influenced other researchers, but they cannot reveal the confidential deliberations of the Nobel committees.\n\nSince 2002, Clarivate has recognised 487 researchers as Citation Laureates. Of those, 89 later won a Nobel Prize, equivalent to about 18%. The timing also varies. Some researchers receive the prize years after Clarivate identifies them.\n\nThe list includes scientists from the United States, Canada, Denmark, Israel, Japan and China alongside Spaldin. That international spread underlines the global competition surrounding the physics prize. It also places ETH Zurich within a broad network of institutions whose researchers are being assessed through the visibility and influence of their work.\n\nThe prediction has precedent in Switzerland. Clarivate identified physicists Didier Queloz and Michel Mayor six years before they received the Nobel Prize. Their example shows why the list attracts attention, while the 18% historical success rate shows why no prediction should be treated as a result.