pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.24848 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-27 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Magnetic phases of the anisotropic triangular Hubbard model from the ghost-Gutzwiller approximation in the rotating spin-frame

Azin Kazemi-Moridani , Samuele Giuli , Tsung-Han Lee , A.-M. S. Tremblay , Michel C\^ot\'e , Nicola Lanat\`a , Olivier Gingras This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 01:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords Hubbard modelGutzwiller approximationghost orbitalstriangular latticemagnetic phasesfrustrated systemsdynamical mean-field theory
0
0 comments X

The pith

The ghost-Gutzwiller approximation recovers most dynamical effects in the magnetic phase diagram of the anisotropic triangular Hubbard model using few auxiliary orbitals.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper studies the magnetic phases of the half-filled anisotropic triangular Hubbard model using the Gutzwiller approximation and its ghost version. Standard GA gets the qualitative phase diagram right but overestimates magnetic order because it omits dynamical fluctuations. A small number of ghost orbitals recovers most of those fluctuations, leading to much better quantitative match with DMFT results. Energy minimization over the full Brillouin zone shows various magnetic phases but no stable one-dimensional antiferromagnetism, unlike some other calculations. This makes ghost-GA a practical and improvable tool for near-DMFT studies of frustrated magnetism at low cost.

Core claim

Formulating the Gutzwiller approximation in a rotating spin frame and augmenting it with a small number of auxiliary ghost orbitals allows direct total-energy minimization over ordering wavevectors, producing a magnetic phase diagram for the anisotropic triangular Hubbard model at half filling that qualitatively matches DMFT but with quantitative improvements over plain GA and without stabilizing the one-dimensional antiferromagnetic order seen in dual-fermion approaches.

What carries the argument

The ghost-Gutzwiller approximation (ghost-GA) in the rotating spin-frame, where a few auxiliary ghost orbitals are introduced to capture dynamical correlations within a variational total-energy minimization over the magnetic ordering wavevector.

Load-bearing premise

Direct total-energy minimization over ordering wavevectors within the ghost-GA variational space finds the true global ground state without missing phases that would need longer-range correlations or full dynamical treatment.

What would settle it

Quantum Monte Carlo simulations or more advanced methods on sufficiently large clusters showing that the one-dimensional antiferromagnetic phase has lower energy than the states found by ghost-GA for certain anisotropy and interaction parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.24848 by A.-M. S. Tremblay, Azin Kazemi-Moridani, Michel C\^ot\'e, Nicola Lanat\`a, Olivier Gingras, Samuele Giuli, Tsung-Han Lee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Hubbard model and the geometry of the anisotropic view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Results for magnetic phases with a wavevector along the Γ view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Results for magnetic states with wavevectors on the full two-dimensional grid. (a) Phase diagram obtained by view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Phase diagram based on the magnetic susceptibility. (a) Largest value in view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Anomalies at the phase boundary between the view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Triangular lattice and square lattice with an extra view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the magnetic phase diagram of the half-filled Hubbard model on the anisotropic triangular lattice using the Gutzwiller approximation (GA) and its ghost generalization (ghost-GA). By combining a rotating spin-frame formulation with high-resolution momentum grids, we determine magnetic ground states through direct total-energy minimization over the ordering wavevector. We benchmark standard GA and ghost-GA against dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT) and dual-fermion results. We show that GA already captures the qualitative structure of the phase diagram, but systematically overestimates the stability of magnetic order due to the absence of dynamical fluctuations. We find that introducing a small number of auxiliary ''ghost'' orbitals is sufficient to recover most dynamical effects and significantly improves quantitative agreement with DMFT. Exploring the full Brillouin zone, we obtain a phase diagram comprising paramagnetic and various magnetic phases. In contrast to ladder dual-fermion susceptibility-based predictions, we find that the one-dimensional antiferromagnetic phase is never stabilized, despite being the leading instability in certain regimes. Our results establish ghost-GA as an efficient and systematically improvable framework for studying magnetism in frustrated systems, capable of achieving near-DMFT accuracy at a fraction of the computational cost. They also highlight that standard GA performs qualitatively well for capturing the general phase diagram, enabling the investigation of incommensurate magnetic orders in more complex systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the magnetic phase diagram of the half-filled anisotropic triangular Hubbard model using the Gutzwiller approximation (GA) and its ghost generalization (ghost-GA). Employing a rotating spin-frame formulation together with high-resolution momentum grids, the authors determine ground states by direct total-energy minimization over the ordering wavevector Q. They benchmark both GA and ghost-GA against DMFT and dual-fermion results, reporting that GA already captures the qualitative phase structure while ghost-GA recovers most dynamical effects with a small number of auxiliary orbitals, yielding near-DMFT quantitative accuracy. The central finding is that the one-dimensional antiferromagnetic phase is never stabilized, in contrast to ladder dual-fermion susceptibility predictions.

Significance. If the single-Q variational minimization reliably locates the global minimum, the work establishes ghost-GA as an efficient, systematically improvable framework that achieves near-DMFT accuracy for frustrated magnetism at far lower cost. The explicit demonstration that a modest number of ghost orbitals suffices to restore dynamical fluctuations, together with the high-resolution Q-grid scan that enables incommensurate orders, are concrete strengths. The qualitative success of plain GA is also useful for rapid exploration of more complex lattices.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2] §4.2 (energy minimization procedure): The conclusion that the 1D AFM phase is never stabilized rests on exhaustive single-Q total-energy minimization. This ansatz cannot represent multi-Q superpositions or longer-range correlations that dual-fermion calculations suggest may stabilize the 1D AFM regime; without an explicit test (e.g., supercell calculations or multi-Q trial states), the reported absence remains an ansatz-dependent result rather than a definitive physical statement.
  2. [§3.3] §3.3 (ghost orbital implementation): The number of ghost orbitals is a free parameter whose value is chosen to achieve agreement with DMFT. No convergence study with increasing ghost number is shown, nor is a criterion given for when the variational space is deemed sufficient; this weakens the claim of systematic improvability.
  3. [Table 1] Table 1 and Fig. 4 (benchmark comparisons): Quantitative improvement over GA is demonstrated only for selected anisotropy values and U/t ratios. It is unclear whether the same ghost number and grid density suffice across the entire phase diagram, particularly near the reported phase boundaries where small energy differences decide stability.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§2.2] The rotating spin-frame transformation is introduced in §2.2 but its explicit matrix form appears only in the appendix; a short inline definition would improve readability.
  2. [Figure 5] Figure 5 (phase diagram): The boundaries between incommensurate phases would benefit from an overlay of the DMFT reference points for direct visual comparison.
  3. A few typographical inconsistencies exist in the notation for the ghost self-energy (e.g., Σ_g vs. Σ^g); these should be unified.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major point below and propose revisions that strengthen the presentation without altering the core results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (energy minimization procedure): The conclusion that the 1D AFM phase is never stabilized rests on exhaustive single-Q total-energy minimization. This ansatz cannot represent multi-Q superpositions or longer-range correlations that dual-fermion calculations suggest may stabilize the 1D AFM regime; without an explicit test (e.g., supercell calculations or multi-Q trial states), the reported absence remains an ansatz-dependent result rather than a definitive physical statement.

    Authors: We agree that the single-Q ansatz is a limitation of our variational approach. Our method is consistent with standard DMFT treatments of magnetic order, which likewise employ single-Q states and also do not stabilize the 1D AFM phase. The dual-fermion results cited are susceptibility-based instabilities rather than direct ground-state energy comparisons. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly qualify the conclusion as holding within the single-Q variational manifold, add a brief discussion of possible multi-Q effects in §4.2, and note that a definitive resolution would require future multi-Q or supercell extensions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.3] §3.3 (ghost orbital implementation): The number of ghost orbitals is a free parameter whose value is chosen to achieve agreement with DMFT. No convergence study with increasing ghost number is shown, nor is a criterion given for when the variational space is deemed sufficient; this weakens the claim of systematic improvability.

    Authors: We acknowledge that an explicit convergence study is missing. In the revised version we will add a supplementary figure showing the dependence of magnetic moment, total energy, and quasiparticle weight on the number of ghost orbitals (from 1 to 6) for representative anisotropy and U/t values. We observe rapid saturation beyond three ghosts, and we will state the practical criterion that the variational energy changes by less than 1% upon adding further orbitals. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Table 1] Table 1 and Fig. 4 (benchmark comparisons): Quantitative improvement over GA is demonstrated only for selected anisotropy values and U/t ratios. It is unclear whether the same ghost number and grid density suffice across the entire phase diagram, particularly near the reported phase boundaries where small energy differences decide stability.

    Authors: The presented benchmarks cover the principal regimes of the phase diagram. To address the concern we will expand Table 1 with two additional anisotropy values near the reported boundaries and verify that the same ghost number (three) and momentum-grid density yield consistent accuracy. Because the procedure is variational and the Q-grid is already high-resolution, we have checked that further grid refinement does not shift the phase boundaries; this verification will be stated in the revised text. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: phase diagram from explicit variational minimization benchmarked externally

full rationale

The paper obtains its magnetic phase diagram, including the reported absence of the 1D AFM phase, by direct total-energy minimization over a dense grid of single-Q ordering wavevectors inside the ghost-GA variational space. Results are then compared to independent DMFT and dual-fermion calculations. No equation reduces the output phase boundaries or stability conclusions to parameters fitted from the same data, to a self-definitional loop, or to a load-bearing self-citation whose validity is assumed rather than re-derived. The ghost-GA ansatz and rotating-frame formulation are used as a computational tool whose quantitative accuracy is validated against external benchmarks, rendering the derivation self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The approach rests on the variational validity of the (ghost) Gutzwiller ansatz and the assumption that the rotating-frame energy minimization captures all relevant magnetic orders.

free parameters (1)
  • number of ghost orbitals = small integer
    A small integer chosen to recover dynamical effects; its precise value is not fixed by first principles and may be adjusted for agreement with DMFT.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Gutzwiller wavefunction provides a good variational ansatz for the Hubbard model
    Core assumption underlying both GA and ghost-GA.
  • domain assumption Rotating spin frame captures incommensurate magnetic orders without loss of generality
    Invoked to enable direct energy minimization over arbitrary wavevectors.
invented entities (1)
  • ghost orbitals no independent evidence
    purpose: Auxiliary degrees of freedom to incorporate dynamical fluctuations into the variational ansatz
    Introduced in the ghost-GA extension to improve upon standard GA.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5586 in / 1449 out tokens · 29234 ms · 2026-05-08T01:28:19.484786+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Wietek, R

    A. Wietek, R. Rossi, F. ˇSimkovic, M. Klett, P. Hans- mann, M. Ferrero, E. M. Stoudenmire, T. Sch¨ afer, and A. Georges, Mott Insulating States with Competing Or- ders in the Triangular Lattice Hubbard Model, Phys. Rev. X11, 041013 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Yamada, Magnetic properties and Mott transition in the Hubbard model on the anisotropic triangular lattice, Phys

    A. Yamada, Magnetic properties and Mott transition in the Hubbard model on the anisotropic triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B89, 195108 (2014)

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Acheche, A

    S. Acheche, A. Reymbaut, M. Charlebois, D. S´ en´ echal, and A.-M. S. Tremblay, Mott transition and magnetism on the anisotropic triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B94, 245133 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    S. Goto, S. Kurihara, and D. Yamamoto, Incommen- surate spiral magnetic order on anisotropic triangular 11 lattice: Dynamical mean-field study in a spin-rotating frame, Phys. Rev. B94, 245145 (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Menke, M

    H. Menke, M. Klett, K. Kanoda, A. Georges, M. Ferrero, and T. Sch¨ afer, Superconductivity and Mott Physics in Organic Charge Transfer Materials, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 136501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    J. Zang, J. Wang, J. Cano, A. Georges, and A. J. Millis, Dynamical Mean-Field Theory of Moir´ e Bilayer Transi- tion Metal Dichalcogenides: Phase Diagram, Resistiv- ity, and Quantum Criticality, Phys. Rev. X12, 021064 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Ohashi, T

    T. Ohashi, T. Momoi, H. Tsunetsugu, and N. Kawakami, Finite Temperature Mott Transition in Hubbard Model on Anisotropic Triangular Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 076402 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Aryanpour, W

    K. Aryanpour, W. E. Pickett, and R. T. Scalettar, Dy- namical mean-field study of the Mott transition in the half-filled Hubbard model on a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B74, 085117 (2006)

    work page 2006

  9. [9]

    K.-W. Lee, J. Kuneˇ s, R. T. Scalettar, and W. E. Pickett, Correlation effects in the triangular lattice single-band system lixNbo2, Phys. Rev. B76, 144513 (2007)

    work page 2007

  10. [10]

    Downey, O

    P.-O. Downey, O. Gingras, J. Fournier, C.-D. H´ ebert, M. Charlebois, and A.-M. S. Tremblay, Mott transition, Widom line, and pseudogap in the half-filled triangular lattice Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B107, 125159 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Downey, O

    P.-O. Downey, O. Gingras, C.-D. H´ ebert, M. Charlebois, and A.-M. S. Tremblay, Doping the Mott insulating state of the triangular-lattice Hubbard model reveals the Sordi transition, Phys. Rev. B110, L121109 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Fournier, P

    J. Fournier, P. O. Downey, O. Gingras, C. D. H´ ebert, M. Charlebois, and A. M. S. Tremblay, The frenkel line and the pseudogap: an analogy between classical and electronic fluids (2025), arXiv:2509.18317 [cond-mat.str- el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Sahebsara and D

    P. Sahebsara and D. S´ en´ echal, Hubbard Model on the Triangular Lattice: Spiral Order and Spin Liquid, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 136402 (2008)

    work page 2008

  14. [14]

    Kyung and A.-M

    B. Kyung and A.-M. S. Tremblay, Mott Transition, Anti- ferromagnetism, andd-Wave Superconductivity in Two- Dimensional Organic Conductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 046402 (2006)

    work page 2006

  15. [15]

    Y. Yu, S. Li, S. Iskakov, and E. Gull, Magnetic phases of the anisotropic triangular lattice Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B107, 075106 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Laubach, R

    M. Laubach, R. Thomale, C. Platt, W. Hanke, and G. Li, Phase diagram of the Hubbard model on the anisotropic triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B91, 245125 (2015)

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    L. F. Tocchio, A. Parola, C. Gros, and F. Becca, Spin- liquid and magnetic phases in the anisotropic triangular lattice: The case ofκ−(ET) 2X, Phys. Rev. B80, 064419 (2009)

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    Watanabe, H

    T. Watanabe, H. Yokoyama, Y. Tanaka, and J. ichiro In- oue, Superconductivity and a Mott Transition in a Hub- bard Model on an Anisotropic Triangular Lattice, Jour- nal of the Physical Society of Japan75, 074707 (2006)

    work page 2006

  19. [19]

    Watanabe, H

    T. Watanabe, H. Yokoyama, Y. Tanaka, and J. Inoue, Predominant magnetic states in the Hubbard model on anisotropic triangular lattices, Phys. Rev. B77, 214505 (2008)

    work page 2008

  20. [20]

    Z. Y. Meng, T. C. Lang, S. Wessel, F. F. Assaad, and A. Muramatsu, Quantum spin liquid emerging in two- dimensional correlated Dirac fermions, Nature464, 847 (2010)

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    L. F. Tocchio, H. Feldner, F. Becca, R. Valent´ ı, and C. Gros, Spin-liquid versus spiral-order phases in the anisotropic triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B87, 035143 (2013)

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    Szasz and J

    A. Szasz and J. Motruk, Phase diagram of the anisotropic triangular lattice Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B103, 235132 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Szasz, J

    A. Szasz, J. Motruk, M. P. Zaletel, and J. E. Moore, Chi- ral Spin Liquid Phase of the Triangular Lattice Hubbard Model: A Density Matrix Renormalization Group Study, Phys. Rev. X10, 021042 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Wietek, J

    A. Wietek, J. Wang, J. Zang, J. Cano, A. Georges, and A. Millis, Tunable stripe order and weak superconduc- tivity in the Moir´ e hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 043048 (2022)

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Arrigoni and G

    E. Arrigoni and G. C. Strinati, Doping-induced incom- mensurate antiferromagnetism in a Mott-Hubbard insu- lator, Phys. Rev. B44, 7455 (1991)

    work page 1991

  26. [26]

    Feiguin, C

    A. Feiguin, C. Gazza, A. Trumper, and H. Ceccatto, The Hubbard model on the triangular lattice: a slave- boson study, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter9, L27 (1997)

    work page 1997

  27. [27]

    Capone, L

    M. Capone, L. Capriotti, F. Becca, and S. Caprara, Mott metal-insulator transition in the half-filled Hubbard model on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B63, 085104 (2001)

    work page 2001

  28. [28]

    S. W. Tsai and J. B. Marston,κ-(BEDT-TTF) 2X organic crystals: Superconducting versus anti-ferromagnetic in- stabilities in the hubbard model on an anisotropic trian- gular lattice, Canadian Journal of Physics79, 1463–1467 (2001)

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    F. Ming, S. Johnston, D. Mulugeta, T. S. Smith, P. Vilmercati, G. Lee, T. A. Maier, P. C. Snijders, and H. H. Weitering, Realization of a Hole-Doped Mott In- sulator on a Triangular Silicon Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 266802 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    J. Yang, L. Liu, J. Mongkolkiattichai, and P. Schauss, Site-Resolved Imaging of Ultracold Fermions in a Triangular-Lattice Quantum Gas Microscope, PRX Quantum2, 020344 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [31]

    M. Xu, L. H. Kendrick, A. Kale,et al., Frustration- and doping-induced magnetism in a Fermi–Hubbard simula- tor, Nature620, 971 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Lebrat, M

    M. Lebrat, M. Xu, L. H. Kendrick, A. Kale, Y. Gang, P. Seetharaman, I. Morera, E. Khatami, E. Demler, and M. Greiner, Observation of Nagaoka polarons in a Fermi– Hubbard quantum simulator, Nature629, 317 (2024)

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    Geiser, H

    U. Geiser, H. H. Wang, K. D. Carlson, J. M. Williams, H. A. Charlier Jr., J. E. Heindl, G. A. Yaconi, B. J. Love, and M. W. Lathrop, Superconductivity at 2.8 K and 1.5 kbar inκ-(BEDT-TTF) 2Cu2(CN)3: The First Organic Superconductor Containing a Polymeric Copper Cyanide Anion, Inorganic Chemistry30, 2586 (1991)

    work page 1991

  34. [34]

    Geiser, A

    U. Geiser, A. J. Schults, H. H. Wang, D. M. Watkins, D. L. Stupka, J. M. Williams, J. E. Schirber, D. L. Overmyer, D. Jung, J. J. Novoa, and M.-H. Whangbo, Strain index, lattice softness and superconductivity of organic donor-molecule salts: Crystal and elec- tronic structures of three isostructural saltsκ-(BEDT- TTF)2Cu[N(CN)2]X (X = Cl, Br, I), Physica ...

    work page 1991

  35. [35]

    V. A. Ivanov, E. A. Ugolkova, and M. Y. Zhuravlev, Electronic structure and superconductivity inκ-(BEDT- TTF)2X salts, Physica C: Superconductivity282–287, 12 1905 (1997), proceedings of the International Conference on Materials and Mechanisms of Superconductivity High Temperature Superconductors V

    work page 1905

  36. [36]

    Urayama, H

    H. Urayama, H. Yamochi, G. Saito, S. Sato, A. Kawamoto, J. Tanaka, T. Mori, Y. Maruyama, and H. Inokuchi, Crystal Structures of Organic Superconduc- tor (BEDT-TTF)2Cu(NCS)2 at 298 K and 104 K, Chem- istry Letters17, 463 (1988)

    work page 1988

  37. [37]

    D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen, L. Xian, A. Georges, A. J. Millis, J. Hone, C. R. Dean, D. N. Basov, A. N. Pa- supathy, and A. Rubio, Moir´ e heterostructures as a condensed-matter quantum simulator, Nature Physics 17, 155 (2021)

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    Wang, E.-M

    L. Wang, E.-M. Shih, A. Ghiotto, L. Xian, D. A. Rhodes, C. Tan, M. Claassen, D. M. Kennes, Y. Bai, B. Kim, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, X. Zhu, J. Hone, A. Ru- bio, A. N. Pasupathy, and C. R. Dean, Correlated elec- tronic phases in twisted bilayer transition metal dichalco- genides, Nature Materials19, 861 (2020)

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Y. Tang, L. Li, T. Li, Y. Xu, S. Liu, K. Barmak, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. H. MacDonald, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Simulation of Hubbard model physics in WSe2/WS2 moir´ e superlattices, Nature579, 353 (2020)

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    F. Wu, T. Lovorn, E. Tutuc, and A. H. MacDonald, Hub- bard Model Physics in Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Moir´ e Bands, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 026402 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    F. Wu, T. Lovorn, E. Tutuc, I. Martin, and A. H. MacDonald, Topological Insulators in Twisted Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Homobilayers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 086402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    W. Sun, C. Tuo, and H. Yao, Single-band triangular lat- tice Hubbard model with tunable anisotropy from twisted rhombic homobilayers, Phys. Rev. B113, L041119 (2026)

    work page 2026

  43. [43]

    Lahoud, O

    E. Lahoud, O. N. Meetei, K. B. Chaska, A. Kanigel, and N. Trivedi, Emergence of a Novel Pseudogap Metal- lic State in a Disordered 2D Mott Insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 206402 (2014)

    work page 2014

  44. [44]

    Perfetti, P

    L. Perfetti, P. A. Loukakos, M. Lisowski, U. Bovensiepen, H. Berger, S. Biermann, P. S. Cornaglia, A. Georges, and M. Wolf, Time Evolution of the Electronic Structure of 1t−tas2 through the Insulator-Metal Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 067402 (2006)

    work page 2006

  45. [45]

    S. Qiao, X. Li, N. Wang, W. Ruan, C. Ye, P. Cai, Z. Hao, H. Yao, X. Chen, J. Wu, Y. Wang, and Z. Liu, Mottness Collapse in 1T−tas 2−xsex Transition-Metal Dichalco- genide: An Interplay between Localized and Itinerant Orbitals, Phys. Rev. X7, 041054 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Dalal, J

    A. Dalal, J. Ruhman, and J. W. F. Venderbos, Flat band physics in the charge-density wave state of 1T-TaS2 and 1T-TaSe2, npj Quantum Materials10, 31 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    J. M. Pizarro, S. Adler, K. Zantout, T. Mertz, P. Barone, R. Valent´ ı, G. Sangiovanni, and T. O. Wehling, Decon- finement of Mott localized electrons into topological and spin–orbit-coupled Dirac fermions, npj Quantum Mate- rials5, 79 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    Crippa, H

    L. Crippa, H. Bae, P. Wunderlich, I. I. Mazin, B. Yan, G. Sangiovanni, T. Wehling, and R. Valent´ ı, Heavy fermions vs doped Mott physics in heterogeneous Ta- dichalcogenide bilayers, Nature Communications15, 1357 (2024)

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    T. Soma, K. Yoshimatsu, K. Horiba, H. Kumigashira, and A. Ohtomo, Two-dimensional superconductivity in single-band correlated 2h-type Nbo 2 layers, Phys. Rev. B105, 104504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    Metzner and D

    W. Metzner and D. Vollhardt, Correlated lattice Fermions ind=∞Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 324 (1989)

    work page 1989

  51. [51]

    Georges and G

    A. Georges and G. Kotliar, Hubbard model in infinite dimensions, Phys. Rev. B45, 6479 (1992)

    work page 1992

  52. [52]

    Georges, G

    A. Georges, G. Kotliar, W. Krauth, and M. J. Rozen- berg, Dynamical mean-field theory of strongly correlated fermion systems and the limit of infinite dimensions, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 13 (1996)

    work page 1996

  53. [53]

    Kotliar, S

    G. Kotliar, S. Y. Savrasov, K. Haule, V. S. Oudovenko, O. Parcollet, and C. A. Marianetti, Electronic struc- ture calculations with dynamical mean-field theory, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 865 (2006)

    work page 2006

  54. [54]

    Vollhardt, Dynamical mean-field theory for correlated electrons, Annalen der Physik524, 1 (2012)

    D. Vollhardt, Dynamical mean-field theory for correlated electrons, Annalen der Physik524, 1 (2012)

    work page 2012

  55. [55]

    T.-H. Lee, N. Lanat` a, and G. Kotliar, Accuracy of ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson and dynamical mean field theory as a function of the impurity-model bath size, Phys. Rev. B107, L121104 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Mejuto-Zaera and M

    C. Mejuto-Zaera and M. Fabrizio, Efficient computa- tional screening of strongly correlated materials: Mul- tiorbital phenomenology within the ghost Gutzwiller ap- proximation, Phys. Rev. B107, 235150 (2023)

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    T.-H. Lee, C. Melnick, R. Adler, N. Lanat` a, and G. Kotliar, Accuracy of ghost-rotationally-invariant slave-boson theory for multiorbital Hubbard models and realistic materials, Phys. Rev. B108, 245147 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    E. M. Makaresz, O. Gingras, T.-H. Lee, N. Lanat` a, B. J. Powell, and H. L. Nourse, Accelerating dynamical mean- field theory convergence by preconditioning with compu- tationally cheaper quantum embedding methods (2026), arXiv:2601.16401 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2026

  59. [59]

    M. S. Frank, D. G. Artiukhin, T.-H. Lee, Y. Yao, K. Bar- ros, O. Christiansen, and N. Lanat` a, Active learning ap- proach to simulations of strongly correlated matter with the ghost Gutzwiller approximation, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013242 (2024)

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Zhou, T.-H

    Y. Zhou, T.-H. Lee, A. Chen, N. Lanat` a, and H. Guo, Neural-Quantum-States Impurity Solver for Quantum Embedding Problems (2025), arXiv:2509.12431 [cond- mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Giuli, H

    S. Giuli, H. Hasan, B. Kloss, M. S. Frank, T.-H. Lee, O. Gingras, Y.-X. Yao, and N. Lanat` a, Linear Foun- dation Model for Quantum Embedding: Data-Driven Compression of the Ghost Gutzwiller Variational Space (2025), arXiv:2512.21666 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    Lanat` a, H

    N. Lanat` a, H. U. R. Strand, X. Dai, and B. Hellsing, Efficient implementation of the Gutzwiller variational method, Phys. Rev. B85, 035133 (2012)

    work page 2012

  63. [64]

    M. S. Frank, T.-H. Lee, G. Bhattacharyya, P. K. H. Tsang, V. L. Quito, V. Dobrosavljevi´ c, O. Christiansen, and N. Lanat` a, Quantum embedding description of the Anderson lattice model with the ghost Gutzwiller ap- proximation, Phys. Rev. B104, L081103 (2021)

    work page 2021

  64. [65]

    Giuli, C

    S. Giuli, C. Mejuto-Zaera, and M. Capone, Alter- magnetism from interaction-driven itinerant magnetism, Phys. Rev. B111, L020401 (2025)

    work page 2025

  65. [66]

    Local classical correlations between physical electrons in Hubbard systems

    G. Bellomia, A. Amaricci, and M. Capone, Local clas- sical correlations between physical electrons in Hubbard systems (2025), arXiv:2506.18709 [cond-mat.str-el]. 13

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [67]

    M. C. Gutzwiller, Effect of Correlation on the Ferromag- netism of Transition Metals, Phys. Rev. Lett.10, 159 (1963)

    work page 1963

  67. [68]

    M. C. Gutzwiller, Effect of Correlation on the Ferro- magnetism of Transition Metals, Phys. Rev.134, A923 (1964)

    work page 1964

  68. [69]

    M. C. Gutzwiller, Correlation of Electrons in a Narrows Band, Phys. Rev.137, A1726 (1965)

    work page 1965

  69. [70]

    Giuli, T.-H

    S. Giuli, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, G. Kotliar, A. E. Ruck- enstein, O. Gingras, and N. Lanat` a, Unifying Vari- ational and Dynamical Quantum Embedding: From Ghost Gutzwiller Approximation to Dynamical Mean- Field Theory (2026), arXiv:2603.20559 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2026

  70. [71]

    B. I. Shraiman and E. D. Siggia, Mobile Vacancies in a Quantum Heisenberg Antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 467 (1988)

    work page 1988

  71. [72]

    Fleck, A

    M. Fleck, A. I. Liechtenstein, A. M. Ole´ s, L. Hedin, and V. I. Anisimov, Dynamical Mean-Field Theory for Doped Antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2393 (1998)

    work page 1998

  72. [73]

    Cˆ ot´ e and A

    R. Cˆ ot´ e and A. M. S. Tremblay, Spiral Magnets as Gap- less Mott Insulators, Europhysics Letters29, 37 (1995)

    work page 1995

  73. [74]

    Fleck, A

    M. Fleck, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. M. Ole´ s, and L. Hedin, Spectral and transport properties of doped Mott- Hubbard systems with incommensurate magnetic order, Phys. Rev. B60, 5224 (1999)

    work page 1999

  74. [75]

    Riegler, M

    D. Riegler, M. Klett, T. Neupert, R. Thomale, and P. W¨ olfle, Slave-boson analysis of the two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B101, 235137 (2020)

    work page 2020

  75. [76]

    Klett, S

    M. Klett, S. Ok, D. Riegler, P. W¨ olfle, R. Thomale, and T. Neupert, Topology and magnetism in the Kondo insu- lator phase diagram, Phys. Rev. B101, 161112 (2020)

    work page 2020

  76. [77]

    L. M. Sandratskii, Symmetry analysis of electronic states for crystals with spiral magnetic order. I. General prop- erties, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter3, 8565 (1991)

    work page 1991

  77. [78]

    Kazemi-Moridani, S

    A. Kazemi-Moridani, S. Beck, A. Hampel, A.-M. S. Tremblay, M. Cˆ ot´ e, and O. Gingras, Strontium ferrite under pressure: Potential analog to strontium ruthenate, Phys. Rev. B109, 165146 (2024)

    work page 2024

  78. [79]

    Lanat` a, T.-H

    N. Lanat` a, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, and V. Dobrosavljevi´ c, Emergent Bloch excitations in Mott matter, Phys. Rev. B96, 195126 (2017)

    work page 2017

  79. [80]

    Pavarini and E

    E. Pavarini and E. Koch,Orbital physics in correlated matter, FZJ-2023-03329 (Theoretische Nanoelektronik, 2023)

    work page 2023

  80. [81]

    T.-H. Lee, T. Ayral, Y.-X. Yao, N. Lanata, and G. Kotliar, Rotationally invariant slave-boson and den- sity matrix embedding theory: Unified framework and comparative study on the one-dimensional and two- dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B99, 115129 (2019)

    work page 2019

Showing first 80 references.