Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Polarization-resolved Raman spectroscopy of {\alpha}-RuCl3 and evidence of room temperature two-dimensional magnetic scattering

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Using polarization-resolved Raman scattering, this paper identifies the broad low-frequency continuum in α-RuCl3 as a two-dimensional magnetic signal that survives to room temperature and matches Kitaev quantum-spin-liquid scattering.

desk verdict Strong experimental phonon assignment and a striking polarization selection rule; the room-temperature Kitaev attribution is real but underdetermined. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01021 v1 pith:3HDRJIHI submitted 2019-08-02 cond-mat.str-el

Thuc T. Mai , A. McCreary , P. Lampen-Kelley , N. Butch , J. R. Simpson , J.-Q. Yan , S. E. Nagler , D. Mandrus
show 2 more authors
A. R. Hight Walker R. Valdes Aguilar
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el PACS 78.30.-j75.10.Jm
keywords α-RuCl3Kitaevquantumspinliquidpolarization-resolvedRamanspectroscopyFanolineshapehoneycomblatticeC2hpointgroupMajoranafermionstwo-dimensionalmagneticscattering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper uses polarization-resolved Raman scattering on a large, mono-domain crystal of α-RuCl3 to pin down the symmetry of its phonon spectrum and to test the origin of the broad low-frequency scattering continuum that has been attributed to Kitaev quantum-spin-liquid physics. The data reveal nearly degenerate pairs of $A_g$ and $B_g$ phonons whose angular intensity patterns establish the bulk point group as $C_{2h}$, not the $D_{3d}$ of a perfect honeycomb layer. The central observation is that the continuum, together with the Fano asymmetry of the 164 cm$^{-1}$ phonon, disappears when the incoming and scattered polarizations are perpendicular to the honeycomb plane, while the phonon itself remains visible. The authors take this as evidence that the continuum is a two-dimensional magnetic signal and that it originates from Kitaev exchange that survives at room temperature, a scale well above the bare exchange energy of roughly 58–90 K.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the polarization selection rule for Kitaev Raman scattering: in a honeycomb Kitaev magnet, the paired-Majorana scattering continuum is absent when both the incoming and outgoing photon polarizations are perpendicular to the honeycomb plane, but is active for in-plane geometries. The experiment implements this test using the Raman tensor of the monoclinic point group $C_{2h}$, fitting the 4-fold and 2-fold angular intensity patterns of nearly degenerate $A_g$/$B_g$ phonon pairs, and using the Fano lineshape parameter $1/|q|$ of the 164 cm$^{-1}$ $A_{2g}$ phonon as a sensitive measure of its coupling to the continuum. The simultaneous vanishing of the continuum and of $1/|q|$ in the out-of-plane geometry is the observation that carries the Kitaev attribution.

What would settle it

A calculation of the out-of-plane polarization-resolved Raman intensity for a frustrated-magnon-decay mechanism, or for a two-phonon scattering process in the same $C_{2h}$ geometry, that predicts a nonzero continuum intensity would falsify the Kitaev attribution; equivalently, an experiment on a nonmagnetic honeycomb insulator with the same crystal structure that shows the same out-of-plane vanishing would call the magnetic origin into question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the low-frequency Raman continuum in bulk α-RuCl3 is a two-dimensional magnetic scattering signal of Kitaev origin that persists to room temperature. The decisive experiment is geometric: as the crystal is rotated so that the photon polarizations move out of the a-b honeycomb plane, the broad continuum and the Fano asymmetry parameter $1/|q|$ of the 164 cm$^{-1}$ $A_{2g}$ phonon both vanish, while the phonon itself stays visible. Because the phonon remains, the disappearance is not a trivial selection-rule artifact; because the continuum is present even when $B_g$ phonons are not active, a phononic origin is ruled out. The polarization behavior matches the prediction that Kitaev Raman scattering vanishes only when both polarizations are perpendicular to the honeycomb plane, and the persistence of the signal at 300 K fits the predicted $7J_K$ survival temperature for a Kitaev continuum with $J_K$ roughly 5–8 meV. The authors therefore conclude that the room-temperature continuum is Kitaev quantum-spin-liquid physics, not a relic of the low-temperature ordered state.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that the vanishing of the Raman continuum for out-of-plane polarizations is a fingerprint unique to Kitaev exchange; competing in-plane magnetic or lattice processes have not been modeled in the same polarization geometry.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Bulk α-RuCl3 phonons should be labeled under $C_{2h}$; the nearly degenerate $A_g$/$B_g$ doublets are the split $E_g$ modes of the ideal $D_{3d}$ honeycomb layer.
  • The low-frequency continuum can serve as a room-temperature, polarization-selective fingerprint of two-dimensional Kitaev magnetic scattering in α-RuCl3 and related honeycomb magnets.
  • The 164 cm$^{-1}$ $A_{2g}$ phonon's Fano asymmetry can be used as a local probe of the underlying spin continuum, with the asymmetry switching off in out-of-plane polarization.
  • The measured persistence of the continuum at 300 K is consistent with the theoretical $7J_K$ scale for Majorana-fermion scattering, strengthening the fermionic rather than bosonic interpretation of the signal.
  • The complete phonon assignment provides a clean basis for quantitative Raman-tensor analysis of this family of van der Waals magnets.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the Kitaev Raman selection rule used here is unique to Kitaev exchange, the same out-of-plane vanishing test could be applied to other candidate Kitaev materials, such as β- and γ-Li2IrO3, as a room-temperature screening diagnostic for quantum-spin-liquid correlations.
  • The roughly 2 cm$^{-1}$ $A_g$/$B_g$ splittings attributed to interlayer coupling imply a testable prediction not made in the paper: monolayer α-RuCl3 should show collapsed splittings and a sharper polarization selection rule than the bulk.
  • A decisive comparison would require computing the polarization-dependent Raman response of the competing magnon-decay mechanism in the same $C_{2h}$ geometry; if that mechanism also predicts vanishing out-of-plane intensity, the room-temperature Kitaev attribution is not uniquely identifiable from this experiment.
  • The result suggests polarization-resolved Raman could serve as a general probe of two-dimensional magnetic correlations in van der Waals magnets, isolating the in-plane magnetic channel by choosing the out-of-plane polarization geometry.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports polarization-resolved Raman spectroscopy on a large monolayer-quality single crystal of α-RuCl3, with laser polarizations both in and out of the honeycomb plane. The authors resolve pairs of nearly degenerate phonons whose angular intensity patterns are fitted to the C2h group-theory Raman tensors, leading them to assign the bulk point group as C2h rather than the single-layer D3d. They also observe a broad low-frequency scattering continuum and a Fano asymmetric A2g phonon near 164 cm−1. When the incident and scattered polarizations are both perpendicular to the honeycomb plane (φ = 90° in the a-c plane), the continuum and the Fano asymmetry appear to disappear while the phonon remains. The authors interpret this as evidence that the continuum is a 2D magnetic signal, and argue, citing Perreault et al. and the 7×JK persistence scale, that it originates from Kitaev exchange and survives at room temperature.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would provide a simple optical fingerprint for two-dimensional magnetic scattering in a Kitaev material and would significantly advance the case for room-temperature Kitaev physics in α-RuCl3. The experimental work is of high quality: Laue diffraction confirms a large single domain, the angular dependence of phonon intensities is fitted to the C2h tensor forms with good agreement, and the discovery of nearly degenerate Ag/Bg phonons is a valuable step toward a definitive phonon assignment. The paper's quantitative phonon symmetry analysis is a solid contribution independent of the magnetic interpretation. The magnetic claim, however, rests on a selection rule whose uniqueness is not established, so the significance of the central conclusion is currently limited by underdetermination.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV.B] The central inference that the continuum is of Kitaev origin is underdetermined because the paper never tests whether competing two-dimensional in-plane mechanisms obey the same polarization selection rule. For a Raman vertex built from in-plane bond vectors d_ij, the leading spin-exchange contribution is proportional to (e_i·d_ij)(e_s·d_ij); when both polarizations are perpendicular to the honeycomb plane, every such dot product vanishes. Thus any 2D in-plane spin-exchange process, including the frustrated magnon-decay mechanism of Winter et al. (ref 22) and generic two-magnon scattering, is expected to be suppressed in the (z,z) geometry. The observed vanishing of the continuum is therefore a symmetry consequence of planar scattering, not a unique fingerprint of Kitaev exchange. To support the Kitaev attribution, the authors should compute or cite the polarization dependence of the alternative continuum mechanisms (e.g., ref 22, or a two-phonon continuum from in-plane phonon pairs) and show that they do not also vanish at φ = 90°.
  2. [Section III and Fig. 5] The key observation—the disappearance of the continuum and of the Fano asymmetry at φ = 90°—is presented only visually and is not quantified. The text states that 1/|q|→0 and that the continuum 'vanishes,' but no error bars are given for the continuum intensity, no background-subtraction procedure is described, and no angle-by-angle plot of the continuum amplitude is provided. Since this observation carries the weight of the paper's central claim, the authors should quantify the continuum spectral weight as a function of φ (e.g., integrated intensity in a defined window below 164 cm−1), report uncertainties, and compare the angular dependence with the expected (e_i·d_ij)(e_s·d_ij) behavior for in-plane bond vectors. Similarly, the Fano parameter data in the inset to Fig. 5 should include error bars and a quantitative statement of the limiting value at φ = 90°.
  3. [Section IV.B] The room-temperature persistence argument relies on the pure Kitaev result that the Raman continuum survives up to at least 7×JK, where JK ≈ 58–93 K, implying persistence above 300 K. However, α-RuCl3 is a proximate Kitaev material with substantial Heisenberg and other non-Kitaev interactions, and it undergoes magnetic ordering at 7 K. A broad continuum that persists to room temperature could be a generic feature of 2D frustrated magnets or of phononic origin, and the pure Kitaev temperature scale does not directly transfer to the real material. The authors should either (i) provide evidence that the continuum at 300 K has the frequency and temperature dependence expected for the Kitaev Majorana response, or (ii) explicitly discuss why the persistence argument is robust to the presence of non-Kitaev terms that cause ordering at low temperature.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV.A] There is a typo: 'consistnet' should be 'consistent' in the sentence about the small frequency differences.
  2. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'reprensent' should be 'represent'.
  3. [Section III] The Fano parameters for the parallel and crossed configurations are reported as 0.064 and 0.091 without uncertainties; the authors should provide error bars or at least state the fitting uncertainties.
  4. [Table II] The note that B6_g is 'deliberately labeled out of order' is clear, but it would help to also state which phonon corresponds to the standard ordering in a footnote for readers.
  5. [Abstract / Introduction] The phrase 'mono-domain' appears with a hyphen in the abstract and without in the text; please unify the spelling.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Raman data test external predictions, and the Kitaev attribution is underdetermined rather than circular.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained with respect to external benchmarks. The point-group assignment (C2h) is tested by fitting phonon spectral weights to the group-theory angular forms in Table I; the functional forms (4-fold vs 2-fold, Ag vs Bg) are symmetry predictions, and the fitted coefficients are not relabeled as predictions. The central observation—continuum and Fano asymmetry vanish when incident and scattered polarizations are perpendicular to the honeycomb plane—is a new empirical result. The interpretation that this is a 2D magnetic continuum and ultimately Kitaev scattering relies on the external prediction of Perreault et al. (ref 23) that Kitaev-exchange Raman response vanishes in that geometry, and on the theoretical result that the Kitaev continuum persists to roughly 7*JK (refs 26,27). The JK values used (5–8 meV) come from multiple independent estimates (refs 7,10,19,28); although ref 7 shares authors with the present paper, the same estimate is provided by non-overlapping groups, so the self-citation is corroborating rather than load-bearing. The Fano parameter 1/|q| is a fitted quantity, but the paper does not use it to predict a separate observable; the correlated disappearance of the continuum and the Fano asymmetry is an empirical consistency check, not a construction. The only weakness is that the out-of-plane selection rule is not demonstrated to be unique to Kitaev exchange (other 2D in-plane spin or two-phonon processes can share the same symmetry), but that underdetermination is a correctness/interpretation risk, not a circularity. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claims rest on standard group theory and on literature-established crystal structure, insulating behavior, and Kitaev model parameters. The paper itself introduces no new entities. The Raman tensor coefficients and Fano parameters are fitted to the data, with the Fano parameters supporting the main interpretation. The interpretation additionally assumes the uniqueness of the Perreault selection rule as a Kitaev fingerprint, which is not tested against alternative continuum mechanisms.

free parameters (2)
  • Ag/Bg Raman tensor coefficients a, b, c, d, e, f = not reported
    Used to fit the angular dependence of phonon intensities in Fig. 4; the functional forms come from C2h group theory and the coefficients are not independently measured or reported.
  • Fano parameters (q, Gamma, omega0) for the A2g phonon = 1/|q| from ~0.064/0.091 to ~0
    Fitted at each angle in the a-c plane; the vanishing of 1/|q| is central to the claim that the continuum disappears, but the fitted curves and uncertainties are not shown for that plane.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math C2h point group Raman tensor forms (Eq. 1) are correct.
    Standard group theory; the paper's fits to phonon angular dependence rely on these tensor forms.
  • domain assumption Crystal structure of α-RuCl3 is C2/m at room temperature.
    Taken from prior diffraction studies (refs 24,25); used to define crystallographic axes and interpret the phonon splitting as a symmetry-breaking effect.
  • domain assumption α-RuCl3 is a Mott insulator with optical gap ~1 eV and negligible free carriers.
    Used to rule out a free-electron origin for the continuum; based on prior optical and transport measurements cited in the paper.
  • domain assumption Kitaev exchange constant JK is approximately 5-8 meV and the Kitaev Raman continuum persists to about 7×JK.
    Taken from literature (refs 7,19,26-28); used to argue that persistence of the continuum to room temperature is plausible.
  • domain assumption Perreault et al. selection rule: Kitaev Raman response vanishes for incoming and outgoing polarizations perpendicular to the honeycomb plane.
    Central to interpreting the vanishing continuum as a Kitaev signature; the rule is taken from theory and is not independently verified in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Polarization-resolved Raman spectroscopy of {\alpha}-RuCl3 and evidence of room temperature two-dimensional magnetic scattering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3HDRJIHI

@misc{pith2026190801021,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Polarization-resolved Raman spectroscopy of \alpha-RuCl3 and evidence of room temperature two-dimensional magnetic scattering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3HDRJIHI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01021}
}
read the original abstract

Polarization-resolved Raman spectroscopy was performed and analyzed from large, high quality, mono-domain single crystal of {\alpha}-RuCl3, a proximate Kitaev quantum spin liquid. Spectra were collected with laser polarizations parallel and perpendicular to the honeycomb plane. Pairs of nearly degenerate phonons were discovered and show either a 4-fold or 2-fold polarization angle dependence in their Raman intensity, thereby providing evidence to definitively assign the bulk crystal point group as C2h. The low frequency continuum that is often attributed to scattering from pairs of Majorana fermions was also examined and found to disappear when the laser excitation and scattered photon polarizations were perpendicular to the honeycomb plane. This disappearance, along with the behavior of the phonon spectrum in the same polarization configuration, strongly suggests that the scattering continuum is 2-dimensional. We argue that this scattering continuum originates from the Kitaev magnetic interactions that survives up to room temperature, a scale larger than the bare Kitaev exchange energy of approximately 50 K.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01021 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Electronic properties of {\alpha}-RuCl3 in proximity to graphene

    cond-mat.str-el 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In α-RuCl3/graphene heterostructures, DFT calculations predict charge transfer and tensile strain that metallize α-RuCl3 and enhance its Kitaev coupling by more than 50% compared with bulk.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Balents ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08917 journal journal Nature \ volume 464 ,\ pages 199 EP ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    author author L. Balents ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08917 journal journal Nature \ volume 464 ,\ pages 199 EP ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/nature08917 2010

  2. [2]

    Kitaev ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005 journal journal Annals of Physics \ volume 321 ,\ pages 2 ( year 2006 ) ,\ note january Special Issue NoStop

    author author A. Kitaev ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005 journal journal Annals of Physics \ volume 321 ,\ pages 2 ( year 2006 ) ,\ note january Special Issue NoStop

    doi:10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005 2005

  3. [3]

    Savary \ and\ author L

    author author L. Savary \ and\ author L. Balents ,\ 10.1088/0034-4885/80/1/016502 journal journal Reports on Progress in Physics \ volume 80 ,\ pages 016502 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1088/0034-4885/80/1/016502 2016

  4. [4]

    Hermanns , author I

    author author M. Hermanns , author I. Kimchi , \ and\ author J. Knolle ,\ 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-033117-053934 journal journal Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics \ volume 9 ,\ pages 17 ( year 2018 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-033117-053934 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-033117-053934 NoStop

    doi:10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-033117-053934 2018

  5. [5]

    Knolle \ and\ author R

    author author J. Knolle \ and\ author R. Moessner ,\ 10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013401 journal journal Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics \ volume 10 ,\ pages 451 ( year 2019 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013401 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013401 NoStop

    doi:10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031218-013401 2019

  6. [6]

    Takagi , author T

    author author H. Takagi , author T. Takayama , author G. Jackeli , author G. Khaliullin , \ and\ author S. E. \ Nagler ,\ 10.1038/s42254-019-0038-2 journal journal Nature Reviews Physics \ volume 1 ,\ pages 264 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/s42254-019-0038-2 2019

  7. [7]

    Banerjee , author C

    author author A. Banerjee , author C. A. \ Bridges , author J.-Q. \ Yan , author A. A. \ Aczel , author L. Li , author M. B. \ Stone , author G. E. \ Granroth , author M. D. \ Lumsden , author Y. Yiu , author J. Knolle , author S. Bhattacharjee , author D. L. \ Kovrizhin , author R. Moessner , author D. A. \ Tennant , author D. G. \ Mandrus , \ and\ autho...

    doi:10.1038/nmat4604

  8. [8]

    Banerjee , author J

    author author A. Banerjee , author J. Yan , author J. Knolle , author C. A. \ Bridges , author M. B. \ Stone , author M. D. \ Lumsden , author D. G. \ Mandrus , author D. A. \ Tennant , author R. Moessner , \ and\ author S. E. \ Nagler ,\ 10.1126/science.aah6015 journal journal Science \ volume 356 ,\ pages 1055 ( year 2017 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/http:...

    doi:10.1126/science.aah6015

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Banerjee , author P

    author author A. Banerjee , author P. Lampen-Kelley , author J. Knolle , author C. Balz , author A. A. \ Aczel , author B. Winn , author Y. Liu , author D. Pajerowski , author J. Yan , author C. A. \ Bridges , author A. T. \ Savici , author B. C. \ Chakoumakos , author M. D. \...

    doi

  2. [10]

    author author L. J. \ Sandilands , author Y. Tian , author K. W. \ Plumb , author Y.-J. \ Kim , \ and\ author K. S. \ Burch ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.147201 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 114 ,\ pages 147201 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    doi

  3. [11]

    Glamazda , author P

    author author A. Glamazda , author P. Lemmens , author S.-H. \ Do , author Y. S. \ Kwon , \ and\ author K.-Y. \ Choi ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.174429 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 95 ,\ pages 174429 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  4. [12]

    Glamazda , author P

    author author A. Glamazda , author P. Lemmens , author S.-H. \ Do , author Y. S. \ Choi , \ and\ author K.-Y. \ Choi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12286 journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 7 ,\ pages 12286 EP ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi

  5. [13]

    Knolle , author G.-W

    author author J. Knolle , author G.-W. \ Chern , author D. L. \ Kovrizhin , author R. Moessner , \ and\ author N. B. \ Perkins ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.187201 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 113 ,\ pages 187201 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    doi

  6. [14]

    Perreault , author J

    author author B. Perreault , author J. Knolle , author N. B. \ Perkins , \ and\ author F. J. \ Burnell ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.094439 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 92 ,\ pages 094439 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015 doi

  7. [15]

    Ran , author J

    author author K. Ran , author J. Wang , author W. Wang , author Z.-Y. \ Dong , author X. Ren , author S. Bao , author S. Li , author Z. Ma , author Y. Gan , author Y. Zhang , author J. T. \ Park , author G. Deng , author S. Danilkin , author S.-L. \ Yu , author J.-X. \ Li , \ ...

    doi

  8. [16]

    Zhou , author Y

    author author B. Zhou , author Y. Wang , author G. B. \ Osterhoudt , author P. Lampen-Kelley , author D. Mandrus , author R. He , author K. S. \ Burch , \ and\ author E. A. \ Henriksen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2018.01.026 journal journal Journal of Physics and Chemist...

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    Rousochatzakis , author S

    author author I. Rousochatzakis , author S. Kourtis , author J. Knolle , author R. Moessner , \ and\ author N. B. \ Perkins ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.100.045117 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 100 ,\ pages 045117 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    Jackeli \ and\ author G

    author author G. Jackeli \ and\ author G. Khaliullin ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.017205 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 102 ,\ pages 017205 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009 doi

  11. [19]

    author author S. M. \ Winter , author Y. Li , author H. O. \ Jeschke , \ and\ author R. Valent\' ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.214431 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 93 ,\ pages 214431 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  12. [20]

    author author J. A. \ Sears , author Y. Zhao , author Z. Xu , author J. W. \ Lynn , \ and\ author Y.-J. \ Kim ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.180411 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 95 ,\ pages 180411 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    \ Do , author S.-Y

    author author S.-H. \ Do , author S.-Y. \ Park , author J. Yoshitake , author J. Nasu , author Y. Motome , author Y. Kwon , author D. T. \ Adroja , author D. J. \ Voneshen , author K. Kim , author T.-H. \ Jang , author J.-H. \ Park , author K.-Y. \ Choi , \ and\ author S. Ji ,...

    doi

  14. [22]

    author author S. M. \ Winter , author K. Riedl , author P. A. \ Maksimov , author A. L. \ Chernyshev , author A. Honecker , \ and\ author R. Valent \' ,\ @noop journal journal Nature communications \ volume 8 ,\ pages 1152 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017

  15. [23]

    Perreault , author J

    author author B. Perreault , author J. Knolle , author N. B. \ Perkins , \ and\ author F. J. \ Burnell ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.104427 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 94 ,\ pages 104427 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  16. [24]

    author author H. B. \ Cao , author A. Banerjee , author J.-Q. \ Yan , author C. A. \ Bridges , author M. D. \ Lumsden , author D. G. \ Mandrus , author D. A. \ Tennant , author B. C. \ Chakoumakos , \ and\ author S. E. \ Nagler ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.134423 journal journal Phy...

    doi

  17. [25]

    author author R. D. \ Johnson , author S. C. \ Williams , author A. A. \ Haghighirad , author J. Singleton , author V. Zapf , author P. Manuel , author I. I. \ Mazin , author Y. Li , author H. O. \ Jeschke , author R. Valent\' , \ and\ author R. Coldea ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.2...

    doi

  18. [26]

    Nasu , author J

    author author J. Nasu , author J. Knolle , author D. L. \ Kovrizhin , author Y. Motome , \ and\ author R. Moessner ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3809 journal journal Nature Physics \ volume 12 ,\ pages 912 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  19. [27]

    Wang , author G

    author author Y. Wang , author G. B. \ Osterhoudt , author Y. Tian , author P. Lampen-Kelley , author A. Banerjee , author T. Goldstein , author J. Yan , author J. Knolle , author J. Nasu , author Y. Motome , author S. Nagler , author D. Mandrus , \ and\ author K. S. \ Burch ,...

    2018 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Yadav , author N

    author author R. Yadav , author N. A. \ Bogdanov , author V. M. \ Katukuri , author S. Nishimoto , author J. Van Den Brink , \ and\ author L. Hozoi ,\ @noop journal journal Scientific reports \ volume 6 ,\ pages 37925 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016

  21. [29]

    Little , author L

    author author A. Little , author L. Wu , author P. Lampen-Kelley , author A. Banerjee , author S. Patankar , author D. Rees , author C. A. \ Bridges , author J.-Q. \ Yan , author D. Mandrus , author S. E. \ Nagler , \ and\ author J. Orenstein ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.227201 ...

    doi

  22. [30]

    Lu , author X

    author author X. Lu , author X. Luo , author J. Zhang , author S. Y. \ Quek , \ and\ author Q. Xiong ,\ 10.1007/s12274-016-1224-5 journal journal Nano Research \ volume 9 ,\ pages 3559 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    Birss ,\ https://books.google.com/books?id=Iz5RAAAAMAAJ title Symmetry and magnetism ,\ Selected topics in solid state physics\ ( publisher North-Holland Pub

    author author R. Birss ,\ https://books.google.com/books?id=Iz5RAAAAMAAJ title Symmetry and magnetism ,\ Selected topics in solid state physics\ ( publisher North-Holland Pub. Co. ,\ year 1964 ) NoStop

    1964

  24. [32]

    Fano ,\ 10.1103/PhysRev.124.1866 journal journal Phys

    author author U. Fano ,\ 10.1103/PhysRev.124.1866 journal journal Phys. Rev. \ volume 124 ,\ pages 1866 ( year 1961 ) NoStop

    1961 doi

  25. [33]

    Mashhadi , author D

    author author S. Mashhadi , author D. Weber , author L. M. \ Schoop , author A. Schulz , author B. V. \ Lotsch , author M. Burghard , \ and\ author K. Kern ,\ 10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b00926 journal journal Nano Letters \ volume 18 ,\ pages 3203 ( year 2018 ) ,\ note pMID: 296359...

    doi

  26. [34]

    Li , author X

    author author G. Li , author X. Chen , author Y. Gan , author F. Li , author M. Yan , author F. Ye , author S. Pei , author Y. Zhang , author L. Wang , author H. Su , author J. Dai , author Y. Chen , author Y. Shi , author X. Wang , author L. Zhang , author S. Wang , author D....

    doi

  27. [35]

    author author D. T. \ Larson \ and\ author E. Kaxiras ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.98.085406 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 98 ,\ pages 085406 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018 doi

  28. [36]

    Djurdji c \' c Mijin , author A

    author author S. Djurdji c \' c Mijin , author A. S S olaji c \' c , author J. Pe s s i c \' c , author M. S S c \' c epanovi c \' c , author Y. Liu , author A. Baum , author C. Petrovic , author N. Lazarevi c \' c , \ and\ author Z. V. \ Popovi c \' c ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.98.1...

    doi

  29. [37]

    author author K. W. \ Plumb , author J. P. \ Clancy , author L. J. \ Sandilands , author V. V. \ Shankar , author Y. F. \ Hu , author K. S. \ Burch , author H.-Y. \ Kee , \ and\ author Y.-J. \ Kim ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.041112 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 90 ,\ pages ...

    doi

  30. [38]

    Sinn , author C

    author author S. Sinn , author C. H. \ Kim , author B. H. \ Kim , author K. D. \ Lee , author C. J. \ Won , author J. S. \ Oh , author M. Han , author Y. J. \ Chang , author N. Hur , author H. Sato , author B.-G. \ Park , author C. Kim , author H.-D. \ Kim , \ and\ author T. W...

    doi

  31. [39]

    author author L. J. \ Sandilands , author C. H. \ Sohn , author H. J. \ Park , author S. Y. \ Kim , author K. W. \ Kim , author J. A. \ Sears , author Y.-J. \ Kim , \ and\ author T. W. \ Noh ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.195156 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 94 ,\ pages 195156...

    doi

  32. [40]

    Reschke , author F

    author author S. Reschke , author F. Mayr , author S. Widmann , author H.-A. \ Krug von Nidda , author V. Tsurkan , author S.-H. \ Eremin , M. V. Do , author K.-Y. \ Choi , author Z. Wang , \ and\ author A. Loidl ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/aae805 journal journal J. P...

    doi

  33. [41]

    Wang , author S

    author author Z. Wang , author S. Reschke , author D. H\"uvonen , author S.-H. \ Do , author K.-Y. \ Choi , author M. Gensch , author U. Nagel , author T. R\ o\ om , \ and\ author A. Loidl ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.227202 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 119 ,\ pages...

    doi

  34. [42]

    Reschke , author F

    author author S. Reschke , author F. Mayr , author Z. Wang , author S.-H. \ Do , author K.-Y. \ Choi , \ and\ author A. Loidl ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.165120 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 96 ,\ pages 165120 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.