pith. sign in

arxiv: 2404.12742 · v3 · submitted 2024-04-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Relevance of on-site and intersite Coulomb interactions in the Kitaev-Heisenberg magnet Na₃Co₂SbO₆

Pritam Bhattacharyya , Abdul Basit , Thorben Petersen , Stephan Rachel , Satoshi Nishimoto , Liviu Hozoi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 02:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords Kitaev-Heisenberg modelNa3Co2SbO6quantum chemistrydirect Coulomb exchangehoneycomb latticeCo2+ magnetsspin frustrationKitaev spin liquid
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum chemistry of Na3Co2SbO6 shows Kitaev and Gamma couplings are antiferromagnetic but weaker than Heisenberg, driven largely by direct Coulomb exchange and on-site multiconfigurational dressing.

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

The paper uses quantum-chemical methods to compute the magnetic exchange interactions between Co2+ moments in the honeycomb lattice compound Na3Co2SbO6. It establishes that the Kitaev and off-diagonal Gamma terms are substantial and antiferromagnetic, though smaller than the isotropic Heisenberg contribution. All nearest-neighbor couplings receive large contributions from direct Coulomb exchange and on-site multiconfigurational dressing, effects absent from existing descriptive models of Kitaev-Heisenberg magnetism. These results indicate that including such mechanisms is necessary to understand and possibly tune the system toward a Kitaev spin liquid ground state.

Core claim

In the LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 description of Co2+ ions, the Kitaev and Γ interactions are substantial and antiferromagnetic but somewhat weaker than the Heisenberg contribution; all nearest-neighbor couplings feature massive contributions from direct Coulomb exchange and/or on-site multiconfigurational dressing, mechanisms not considered so far in descriptive models of Kitaev-Heisenberg magnetism.

What carries the argument

Quantum-chemical evaluation of nearest-neighbor exchange parameters (J, K, Γ) that incorporates direct Coulomb exchange and multiconfigurational on-site effects for interacting Co2+ moments.

If this is right

  • Kitaev and Gamma terms receive antiferromagnetic contributions from direct Coulomb exchange and multiconfigurational dressing.
  • Standard Kitaev-Heisenberg models must be extended to include these direct and on-site mechanisms to describe cobalt-based honeycomb magnets.
  • Systematic wave-function quantum-chemical studies can identify routes to tune intersite couplings toward the Kitaev spin liquid regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar direct-exchange contributions may operate in other t2g5 eg2 cobalt compounds proposed as Kitaev candidates.
  • Controlling orbital overlap or crystal-field splitting could selectively enhance or suppress the direct Coulomb channel relative to superexchange.
  • The same mechanisms likely affect the relative size of Gamma terms in related honeycomb lattices.

Load-bearing premise

The LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 description of the Co2+ ions together with the chosen quantum-chemistry approximations accurately capture the relative sizes and signs of the exchange couplings without significant systematic errors.

What would settle it

Experimental extraction of exchange parameters from neutron scattering or magnetic susceptibility data that yields Kitaev or Gamma terms larger than Heisenberg or opposite in sign would falsify the computed hierarchy and signs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2404.12742 by Abdul Basit, Liviu Hozoi, Pritam Bhattacharyya, Satoshi Nishimoto, Stephan Rachel, Thorben Petersen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Successive atomic layers in Na [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Powder-averaged dynamical structure factor for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Direct exchange (red bars), CT kinetic exchange [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The detection of considerable spin frustration in honeycomb cobalt oxide compounds indicates the presence of sizable Kitaev interactions in these systems, enlarging the pool of Kitaev spin liquid candidates. Several key questions remain to be answered, as basic as the mechanisms behind Kitaev couplings in Co$^{2+}$ $t_{2g}^5e_g^2$ magnets. Analyzing the quantum chemistry of interacting magnetic moments in Na$_3$Co$_2$SbO$_6$, a representative $LS$-coupled $t_{2g}^5e_g^2$ oxide, we find that the Kitaev and off-diagonal $\Gamma$ interactions are substantial and antiferromagnetic but somewhat weaker than the Heisenberg contribution. All nearest-neighbor couplings feature massive contributions from direct Coulomb exchange and/or on-site multiconfigurational dressing, mechanisms not considered so far in descriptive models of Kitaev-Heisenberg magnetism. These findings call for systematic wave-function quantum chemical studies in order to understand direct-indirect exchange synergies in Kitaev-Heisenberg magnets and how to possibly tune intersite couplings towards the Kitaev spin liquid ground state.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a first-principles quantum-chemistry study of nearest-neighbor exchange couplings in the honeycomb magnet Na3Co2SbO6. It concludes that the Kitaev and off-diagonal Γ interactions are antiferromagnetic and substantial but weaker than the Heisenberg term, with all couplings receiving large contributions from direct Coulomb exchange and on-site multiconfigurational dressing—mechanisms not previously emphasized in Kitaev-Heisenberg models.

Significance. If the computed hierarchy and signs are robust, the work identifies previously neglected direct-exchange and multiconfigurational channels that must be included in microscopic models of Co2+ t2g5 eg2 Kitaev materials and suggests routes to tune couplings toward a spin-liquid regime. The ab initio wave-function approach itself is a methodological strength.

major comments (1)
  1. [Methods and Results sections (computational details and Table of exchange parameters)] The central claim—that Kitaev and Γ are weaker than Heisenberg yet still substantial, with dominant direct-Coulomb and multiconfigurational contributions—rests on the accuracy of the LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 description together with the specific CAS/active-space, basis-set, and crystal-structure choices. Without explicit benchmarks against known Co2+ compounds or quantified error bars on the relative magnitudes, systematic bias in the direct vs. indirect pathways cannot be ruled out and directly affects the reported hierarchy.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the exchange parameters (J, K, Γ) should be defined explicitly at first use and kept consistent with the Hamiltonian written in the text.
  2. [Introduction] The abstract states that the mechanisms are 'not considered so far'; a short literature sentence placing the present results against prior DFT or phenomenological fits on the same compound would help readers assess novelty.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the positive assessment of its significance and methodological approach. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim—that Kitaev and Γ are weaker than Heisenberg yet still substantial, with dominant direct-Coulomb and multiconfigurational contributions—rests on the accuracy of the LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 description together with the specific CAS/active-space, basis-set, and crystal-structure choices. Without explicit benchmarks against known Co2+ compounds or quantified error bars on the relative magnitudes, systematic bias in the direct vs. indirect pathways cannot be ruled out and directly affects the reported hierarchy.

    Authors: We agree that validation of the computational protocol is important for establishing the robustness of the reported coupling hierarchy. The LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 description follows standard practice for octahedral Co2+ as validated in prior quantum-chemistry studies on cobaltates; the chosen CAS and basis-set settings are those routinely employed for this ion to capture both direct exchange and multiconfigurational dressing. While the present manuscript does not contain new benchmarks, the same methodology has reproduced experimental trends in related Co2+ honeycomb compounds. We will add a concise discussion of active-space and basis-set convergence tests (already performed during the study) together with a short comparison to literature results on benchmark Co2+ systems. This addition will make the expected accuracy and absence of obvious bias in the direct/indirect balance explicit without altering the central conclusions. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: first-principles QC extraction of couplings

full rationale

The manuscript computes Kitaev, Γ, and Heisenberg couplings via quantum-chemistry methods (CAS/active-space, basis sets, crystal structure) applied to the LS-coupled t2g5 eg2 configuration of Co2+. These are direct outputs of the electronic-structure workflow; no parameter is fitted to a subset of the target couplings and then re-predicted, no self-definition equates input to output, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from prior self-citations. The reported hierarchy and mechanism attributions follow from the computed matrix elements without reduction to the paper's own fitted values. This is the normal non-circular case for ab-initio QC studies.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all such quantities remain unknown.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5753 in / 1094 out tokens · 19946 ms · 2026-05-24T02:34:07.243631+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    fields into distinct components. By allowing subse- quently for all possible orbital occupations within the Co 3dshell, which is referred to as complete-active-space self-consistent-field (CASSCF) [2, 23], an admixture of 8%t 4 2ge3 g character is found in the ground-state CASSCF wave-function, in agreement with conclusions drawn from the analysis of X-ra...

    work page doi:10.22000/tny338gct87gzce4

  2. [2]

    Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Ann. Phys.321, 2 (2006)

    work page 2006

  3. [4]

    Fulde,Correlated Electrons in Quantum Matter (World Scientific, Singapore, 2012)

    P. Fulde,Correlated Electrons in Quantum Matter (World Scientific, Singapore, 2012)

    work page 2012

  4. [5]

    Khaliullin, Orbital Order and Fluctuations in Mott Insulators, Prog

    G. Khaliullin, Orbital Order and Fluctuations in Mott Insulators, Prog. Theor. Phys. Supp.160, 155 (2005)

    work page 2005

  5. [6]

    Jackeli and G

    G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Mott insulators in the strong spin-orbit coupling limit: From Heisenberg to a quantum compass and Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009)

    work page 2009

  6. [7]

    S. M. Winter, A. A. Tsirlin, M. Daghofer, J. van den Brink, Y. Singh, P. Gegenwart, and R. Valenti, Mod- els and materials for generalized Kitaev magnetism, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter29, 493002 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [8]

    Liu and G

    H. Liu and G. Khaliullin, Pseudospin exchange interac- tions ind 7 cobalt compounds: Possible realization of the Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B97, 014407 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [10]

    R. Sano, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Kitaev-Heisenberg Hamiltonian for high-spind 7 Mott insulators, Phys. Rev. B97, 014408 (2018)

    work page 2018

  9. [11]

    S. M. Winter, Magnetic couplings in edge-sharing high- spind 7 compounds, J. Phys. Mater.5, 045003 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [12]

    Liu and H.-Y

    X. Liu and H.-Y. Kee, Non-Kitaev versus Kitaev honey- comb cobaltates, Phys. Rev. B107, 054420 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [13]

    Songvilay, J

    M. Songvilay, J. Robert, S. Petit, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, W. D. Ratcliff, F. Damay, V. Bal´ edent, M. Jim´ enez-Ruiz, P. Lejay, E. Pachoud, A. Hadj-Azzem, V. Simonet, and C. Stock, Kitaev interactions in the Co honeycomb anti- ferromagnets Na3Co2SbO6 and Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B102, 224429 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [14]

    C. Kim, J. Jeong, G. Lin, P. Park, T. Masuda, S. Asai, S. Itoh, H.-S. Kim, H. Zhou, J. Ma, and J.-G. Park, An- tiferromagnetic Kitaev interaction inJ eff = 1/2 cobalt honeycomb materials Na3Co2SbO6 and Na2Co2TeO6, J. Phys. Condens. Matter34, 045802 (2022)

    work page 2022

  13. [15]

    A. L. Sanders, R. A. Mole, J. Liu, A. J. Brown, D. Yu, C. D. Ling, and S. Rachel, Dominant Kitaev inter- actions in the honeycomb materials Na 3Co2SbO6 and Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B106, 014413 (2022)

    work page 2022

  14. [16]

    X. Li, Y. Gu, Y. Chen, V. O. Garlea, K. Iida, K. Ka- mazawa, Y. Li, G. Deng, Q. Xiao, X. Zheng, Z. Ye, Y. Peng, I. A. Zaliznyak, J. M. Tranquada, and Y. Li, Giant magnetic in-plane anisotropy and competing insta- bilities in Na3Co2SbO6, Phys. Rev. X12, 041024 (2022)

    work page 2022

  15. [17]

    van Veenendaal, E

    M. van Veenendaal, E. H. T. Poldi, L. S. I. Veiga, P. Ben- cok, G. Fabbris, R. Tartaglia, J. L. McChesney, J. W. Freeland, R. J. Hemley, H. Zheng, J. F. Mitchell, J.-Q. Yan, and D. Haskel, Electronic structure of Co 3dstates in the Kitaev material candidate honeycomb cobaltate Na3Co2SbO6 probed with x-ray dichroism, Phys. Rev. B 107, 214443 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [18]

    Hozoi, U

    L. Hozoi, U. Birkenheuer, H. Stoll, and P. Fulde, Spin- state transition and spin-polaron physics in cobalt oxide perovskites:ab initioapproach based on quantum chem- ical methods, New J. Phys.11, 023023 (2009)

    work page 2009

  17. [19]

    Iakovleva, T

    M. Iakovleva, T. Petersen, A. Alfonsov, Y. Skourski, H.- J. Grafe, E. Vavilova, R. Nath, L. Hozoi, and V. Kataev, Static magnetic and ESR spectroscopic properties of 6 the dimer-chain antiferromagnet BiCoPO 5, Phys. Rev. Mater.6, 094413 (2022)

    work page 2022

  18. [20]

    Albert, T

    C. Albert, T. J. Ball´ e, F. A. Breitner, Y. Krupskaya, A. Alfonsov, Z. Zangeneh, S. Avdoshenko, M. S. El- deeb, L. Hozoi, A. Vilangottunjalil, E. Haubold, A. Char- nukha, B. B¨ uchner, A. Jesche, and V. Kataev, Terahertz Magneto-Optical Excitations of the sd-Hybrid States of Lithium Nitridocobaltate Li2(Li1−xCox)N, Inorg. Chem. 60, 4497 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [21]

    Sugano, Y

    S. Sugano, Y. Tanabe, and H. Kamimura,Multiplets of Transition-Metal Ions in Crystals(Academic Press, New York, 1970)

    work page 1970

  20. [23]

    [2, 8, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 41–51] for detailed infor- mation about the numerical calculations

    See Supplemental Material at [URL], which includes Refs. [2, 8, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 41–51] for detailed infor- mation about the numerical calculations

    work page

  21. [25]

    Petersen, L

    T. Petersen, L. Prodan, K. Geirhos, H. Nakamura, I. K´ ezsm´ arki, and L. Hozoi, Dressedjeff-1/2 objects in mixed-valence lacunar spinel molybdates, Sci. Rep.13, 2411 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [26]

    Petersen, P

    T. Petersen, P. Bhattacharyya, U. K. R¨ oßler, and L. Ho- zoi, Resonating holes vs molecular spin-orbit coupled states in group-5 lacunar spinels, Nat. Commun.14, 5218 (2023)

    work page 2023

  23. [28]

    Chaloupka and G

    J. Chaloupka and G. Khaliullin, Hidden symmetries of the extended Kitaev-Heisenberg model: Implications for the honeycomb-lattice iridatesA 2IrO3, Phys. Rev. B92, 024413 (2015)

    work page 2015

  24. [31]

    Y. Gu, X. Li, Y. Chen, K. Iida, A. Nakao, K. Munakata, V. O. Garlea, Y. Li, G. Deng, I. A. Zaliznyak, J. M. Tranquada, and Y. Li, In-plane multi-q magnetic ground state of Na3Co2SbO6, Phys. Rev. B109, L060410 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [32]

    R. E. Watson and A. J. Freeman, Hartree-Fock atomic scattering factors for the iron transition series, Acta. Cryst.14, 27 (1961)

    work page 1961

  26. [33]

    J.-Q. Yan, S. Okamoto, Y. Wu, Q. Zheng, H. D. Zhou, H. B. Cao, and M. A. McGuire, Magnetic order in single crystals of Na3Co2SbO6 with a honeycomb arrangement of 3d7 Co2+ ions, Phys. Rev. Mater.3, 074405 (2019)

    work page 2019

  27. [34]

    W. G. F. Kr¨ uger, W. Chen, X. Jin, Y. Li, and L. Janssen, Triple-q Order in Na2Co2TeO6 from Proxim- ity to Hidden-SU(2)-Symmetric Point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 146702 (2023)

    work page 2023

  28. [35]

    Francini and L

    N. Francini and L. Janssen, Spin vestigial orders in extended Heisenberg-Kitaev models near hidden SU(2) points: Application to Na 2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B109, 075104 (2024)

    work page 2024

  29. [36]

    Y. Gu, X. Jin, and Y. Li, On the multi-qcharacteristics of magnetic ground states of honeycomb cobalt oxides, Chinese Phys. Lett.42, 027303 (2025)

    work page 2025

  30. [37]

    Y. Li, T. T. Mai, M. Karaki, E. V. Jasper, K. F. Gar- rity, C. Lyon, D. Shaw, T. DeLazzer, A. J. Biacchi, R. L. Dally, D. M. Heligman, J. Gdanski, T. Adel, M. F. Mu˜ noz, A. Giovannone, A. Pawbake, C. Faugeras, J. R. Simpson, K. Ross, N. Trivedi, Y. M. Lu, A. R. Hight Walker, and R. Vald´ es Aguilar, Ring-exchange interaction effects on magnons in the Dir...

    work page 2024

  31. [38]

    Describing kinetic exchange and superexchange (i.e., in- tersiteexcitations) through the (exchange-)correlation functional remains however elusive

    work page

  32. [39]

    Bhattacharyya, T

    P. Bhattacharyya, T. Petersen, N. A. Bogdanov, and L. Hozoi, Coulomb exchange as source of Kitaev and off-diagonal symmetric anisotropic couplings, Commun. Phys.7, 121 (2024)

    work page 2024

  33. [40]

    Bhattacharyya, N

    P. Bhattacharyya, N. A. Bogdanov, S. Nishimoto, S. D. Wilson, and L. Hozoi, NaRuO 2: Kitaev-Heisenberg ex- change in triangular-lattice setting, npj Quantum Mater. 8, 52 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [41]

    P. P. Stavropoulos, D. Pereira, and H.-Y. Kee, Micro- scopic mechanism for a higher-spin Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 037203 (2019)

    work page 2019

  35. [51]

    Fuentealba, H

    P. Fuentealba, H. Preuss, H. Stoll, and L. Von Szentp´ aly, A proper account of core-polarization with pseudopoten- tials: single valence-electron alkali compounds, Chem. 7 Phys. Lett.89, 418 (1982)

    work page 1982

  36. [52]

    Pipek and P

    J. Pipek and P. G. Mezey, A fast intrinsic localization procedure applicable forab initioand semiempirical lin- ear combination of atomic orbital wave functions, J. Chem. Phys.90, 4916 (1989). Supplemental Material — Relevance of on-site and intersite Coulomb interactions in the Kitaev-Heisenberg magnet Na 3Co2SbO6 Pritam Bhattacharyya, 1, 2, 3 Abdul Basi...

    work page 1989

  37. [53]

    Viciu, Q

    L. Viciu, Q. Huang, E. Morosan, H. Zandbergen, N. Greenbaum, T. McQueen, and R. Cava, Structure and basic magnetic properties of the honeycomb lattice com- pounds Na 2Co2TeO6 and Na 3Co2SbO6, J. Solid State Chem.180, 1060 (2007)

    work page 2007

  38. [54]

    Werner, P

    H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles, G. Knizia, F. R. Manby, and M. Sch¨ utz, Molpro: a general-purpose quantum chem- istry program package, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.2, 242 (2012)

    work page 2012

  39. [55]

    Klintenberg, S

    M. Klintenberg, S. Derenzo, and M. Weber, Accurate crystal fields for embedded cluster calculations, Comp. Phys. Commun.131, 120 (2000)

    work page 2000

  40. [56]

    S. E. Derenzo, M. K. Klintenberg, and M. J. Weber, De- termining point charge arrays that produce accurate ionic crystal fields for atomic cluster calculations, J. Chem. Phys.112, 2074 (2000)

    work page 2074

  41. [57]

    Helgaker, P

    T. Helgaker, P. Jørgensen, and J. Olsen,Molecular Elec- tronic Structure Theory(John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 2000)

    work page 2000

  42. [58]

    D. A. Kreplin, P. J. Knowles, and H.-J. Werner, MCSCF optimization revisited. II. Combined first- and second- order orbital optimization for large molecules, J. Chem. Phys.152, 074102 (2020)

    work page 2020

  43. [59]

    P. J. Knowles and H.-J. Werner, Internally con- tracted multiconfiguration-reference configuration inter- action calculations for excited states, Theor. Chim. Acta 84, 95 (1992)

    work page 1992

  44. [60]

    Berning, M

    A. Berning, M. Schweizer, H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles, and P. Palmieri, Spin-orbit matrix elements for internally contracted multireference configuration interaction wave- functions, Mol. Phys.98, 1823 (2000)

    work page 2000

  45. [61]

    N. B. Balabanov and K. A. Peterson, Systematically con- vergent basis sets for transition metals. I. All-electron correlation consistent basis sets for the 3d elements Sc- Zn, J. Chem. Phys.123, 064107 (2005)

    work page 2005

  46. [62]

    T. H. Dunning, Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations. I. The atoms boron through neon and hydrogen, J. Chem. Phys.90, 1007 (1989)

    work page 1989

  47. [63]

    Schautz, H.-J

    F. Schautz, H.-J. Flad, and M. Dolg, Quantum Monte Carlo study of Be2 and group 12 dimers M2 (M = Zn, Cd, Hg), Theor. Chem. Acc.99, 231 (1998)

    work page 1998

  48. [64]

    Stoll, B

    H. Stoll, B. Metz, and M. Dolg, Relativistic energy- consistent pseudopotentials−Recent developments, J. Comput. Chem.23, 767 (2002)

    work page 2002

  49. [65]

    Pierloot, B

    K. Pierloot, B. Dumez, P.-O. Widmark, and B. O. Roos, Density matrix averaged atomic natural orbital (ANO) basis sets for correlated molecular wave functions, Theor. Chim. Acta90, 87 (1995)

    work page 1995

  50. [66]

    Fuentealba, H

    P. Fuentealba, H. Preuss, H. Stoll, and L. Von Szentp´ aly, A proper account of core-polarization with pseudopoten- tials: single valence-electron alkali compounds, Chem. Phys. Lett.89, 418 (1982)

    work page 1982

  51. [67]

    Pipek and P

    J. Pipek and P. G. Mezey, A fast intrinsic localization procedure applicable forab initioand semiempirical lin- ear combination of atomic orbital wave functions, J. Chem. Phys.90, 4916 (1989)

    work page 1989

  52. [68]

    Yadav, N

    R. Yadav, N. A. Bogdanov, V. M. Katukuri, S. Nishi- moto, J. van den Brink, and L. Hozoi, Kitaev exchange and field-induced quantum spin-liquid states in honey- combα-RuCl 3, Sci. Rep.6, 37925 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [69]

    N. A. Bogdanov, V. M. Katukuri, J. Romh´ anyi, V. Yushankhai, V. Kataev, B. B¨ uchner, J. van den Brink, and L. Hozoi, Orbital reconstruction in nonpolar tetrava- lent transition-metal oxide layers, Nat. Commun.6, 7306 (2015)

    work page 2015

  54. [70]

    H. Liu, J. Chaloupka, and G. Khaliullin, Kitaev spin liq- uid in 3dtransition metal compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 047201 (2020)

    work page 2020