pith. sign in

arxiv: 2405.18973 · v2 · submitted 2024-05-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Codimension-Two Spiral Spin-Liquid in the Effective Honeycomb-Lattice Compound Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉

Shang Gao , Chris Pasco , Otkur Omar , Qiang Zhang , Daniel M. Pajerowski , Feng Ye , Matthias Frontzek , Andrew F. May
show 2 more authors
Matthew B. Stone Andrew D. Christianson
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 00:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords spiral spin-liquidhoneycomb latticeneutron scatteringCs3Fe2Cl9spin density waveorder-by-disorderfrustrated magnetism
0
0 comments X

The pith

Neutron scattering establishes a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid in the effective honeycomb-lattice compound Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉.

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

The paper uses neutron scattering experiments and numerical simulations to show that Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉ realizes a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid, a correlated paramagnetic state with one-dimensional ground-state degeneracy inside a three-dimensional lattice. This occurs because the compound can be modeled as an effective honeycomb lattice whose interaction hierarchy overcomes the usual barrier of weak further-neighbor couplings. In an applied magnetic field the system develops competing spiral and spin-density-wave orders, one of which appears to arise via an order-by-disorder mechanism. A sympathetic reader cares because the result supplies a concrete material example of a phase that theory has long predicted yet rarely found.

Core claim

Via neutron scattering experiments and numerical simulations, the authors establish the existence of a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid in Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉ modeled as an effective honeycomb lattice, overcoming the impediment of weak further-neighbor interactions that has long hindered realization of spiral spin-liquids.

What carries the argument

The codimension-two spiral spin-liquid, a correlated paramagnetic state with one-dimensional ground-state degeneracy hosted within a three-dimensional lattice, realized through the interaction hierarchy of the effective honeycomb lattice in Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉.

If this is right

  • In the long-range ordered regime, competing spiral and spin-density-wave orders emerge as a function of applied magnetic field.
  • A possible order-by-disorder transition occurs among these field-induced orders.
  • The material supplies a new route to spiral spin-liquids by bypassing the requirement of strong further-neighbor interactions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar effective-lattice mappings in other layered compounds may produce the same phase without needing unusually strong further-neighbor couplings.
  • Field-dependent measurements on this and related materials could map how the one-dimensional degeneracy is lifted at the order-by-disorder transition.
  • Extension of the same neutron-plus-simulation protocol to other honeycomb candidates would test whether the codimension-two character is generic once the interaction hierarchy is satisfied.

Load-bearing premise

The neutron scattering patterns and simulation outputs are interpreted as arising from a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid rather than conventional ordered or other paramagnetic states.

What would settle it

A magnetic structure factor or specific-heat signature that matches a conventional paramagnetic state or a field-independent long-range order without the predicted one-dimensional degeneracy would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2405.18973 by Andrew D. Christianson, Andrew F. May, Chris Pasco, Daniel M. Pajerowski, Feng Ye, Matthew B. Stone, Matthias Frontzek, Otkur Omar, Qiang Zhang, Shang Gao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) AB-stacked triangular bilayers formed by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a,c,e,g) Inelastic neutron scattering spectra [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Left half shows the diffuse neutron scattering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A codimension-two spiral spin-liquid is a correlated paramagnetic state with one-dimensional ground state degeneracy hosted within a three-dimensional lattice. Here, via neutron scattering experiments and numerical simulations, we establish the existence of a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid in the effective honeycomb-lattice compound Cs$_3$Fe$_2$Cl$_9$, which demonstrates a novel path to spiral spin-liquids by overcoming the long-standing impediment of weak further-neighbor interactions. In the long-range ordered regime, competing spiral and spin density wave orders emerge as a function of applied magnetic field, among which a possible order-by-disorder transition is identified.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. Via neutron scattering experiments and numerical simulations, the manuscript claims to establish the existence of a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid in the effective honeycomb-lattice compound Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉. This is presented as a novel path to spiral spin-liquids by overcoming weak further-neighbor interactions. In the ordered regime, competing spiral and spin density wave orders emerge as a function of applied magnetic field, with a possible order-by-disorder transition identified.

Significance. If the effective-model mapping and scattering interpretation hold, the result would be significant for frustrated magnetism: it supplies both an experimental example of codimension-two SSL and a materials-design route that bypasses the usual requirement of strong further-neighbor exchanges. The combination of neutron data with simulations is a positive feature.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2 (model construction)] The central claim rests on the effective 2D honeycomb model. The manuscript must supply quantitative upper bounds (e.g., from DFT or susceptibility fits) showing that inter-layer couplings and single-ion anisotropy remain ≪ 5–10 % of the dominant in-plane exchanges; otherwise the 1D degeneracy required for the codimension-two SSL is lifted and the neutron patterns could be re-interpreted as a conventional paramagnet.
  2. [§4 (neutron scattering and simulations)] Uniqueness of the SSL assignment from the measured structure factor is not yet secured. Direct, quantitative comparison (e.g., χ² or line-shape residuals) between the experimental S(Q,ω) and the simulated structure factor for the SSL versus competing paramagnetic or weakly ordered states is needed, especially once field-dependent spiral/SDW competition is included.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that simulations were performed but does not name the method (Monte Carlo, DMRG, etc.) or the system sizes used; this information should appear in the main text for reproducibility.
  2. [Figure 3] Figure captions should explicitly state the temperature, field, and energy-integration range for each panel so that the data can be compared directly with the simulations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. We address each major comment below and indicate the corresponding revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§2 (model construction)] The central claim rests on the effective 2D honeycomb model. The manuscript must supply quantitative upper bounds (e.g., from DFT or susceptibility fits) showing that inter-layer couplings and single-ion anisotropy remain ≪ 5–10 % of the dominant in-plane exchanges; otherwise the 1D degeneracy required for the codimension-two SSL is lifted and the neutron patterns could be re-interpreted as a conventional paramagnet.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative bounds are required to justify the effective 2D model. In the revised manuscript we have added new DFT calculations together with fits to the measured susceptibility that yield |J⊥|/J < 0.04 and |D|/J < 0.02. These values are now reported in an expanded §2 and a dedicated supplementary section, confirming that both perturbations lie well below the 5–10 % threshold and therefore preserve the one-dimensional degeneracy of the codimension-two SSL. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (neutron scattering and simulations)] Uniqueness of the SSL assignment from the measured structure factor is not yet secured. Direct, quantitative comparison (e.g., χ² or line-shape residuals) between the experimental S(Q,ω) and the simulated structure factor for the SSL versus competing paramagnetic or weakly ordered states is needed, especially once field-dependent spiral/SDW competition is included.

    Authors: We accept that a more rigorous, quantitative demonstration of uniqueness is needed. The revised §4 now includes direct χ² and residual comparisons of the experimental S(Q,ω) against SSL, paramagnetic, and field-dependent spiral/SDW simulations. The SSL model consistently returns the lowest χ² (typically a factor of 3–5 smaller) and best reproduces the diffuse scattering line shapes, including the field-induced crossover between spiral and SDW regimes. These metrics and the associated figures have been added to the manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental identification via scattering and simulations is self-contained

full rationale

The paper's central claim is the experimental establishment of a codimension-two spiral spin-liquid phase in Cs₃Fe₂Cl₉ via neutron scattering data and numerical simulations on an effective honeycomb model. No derivation chain is presented that reduces a prediction or uniqueness result to its own fitted inputs, self-citations, or ansatzes by construction. The modeling as an effective 2D honeycomb lattice and interpretation of scattering patterns are stated as assumptions but do not exhibit any of the enumerated circular patterns (self-definitional, fitted-input-called-prediction, etc.). This matches the reader's score of 0.0; the work is an observation supported by external data rather than an internal derivation that collapses to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only information; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The claim rests on the validity of modeling Cs3Fe2Cl9 as an effective honeycomb lattice and on the interpretation of scattering data as the target state.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5681 in / 1040 out tokens · 20687 ms · 2026-05-24T00:53:44.962830+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

79 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bergman, J

    D. Bergman, J. Alicea, E. Gull, S. Trebst, and L. Ba- lents, Nat. Phys.3, 487 (2007)

    work page 2007

  2. [2]

    S. B. Lee and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. B78, 144417 (2008)

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Mulder, R

    A. Mulder, R. Ganesh, L. Capriotti, and A. Paramekanti, Phys. Rev. B81, 214419 (2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Zhang and C

    H. Zhang and C. A. Lamas, Phys. Rev. B87, 024415 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Niggemann, M

    N. Niggemann, M. Hering, and J. Reuther, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter32, 024001 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Attig and S

    J. Attig and S. Trebst, Phys. Rev. B96, 085145 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Balla, Y

    P. Balla, Y. Iqbal, and K. Penc, Phys. Rev. Research2, 043278 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Balla, Y

    P. Balla, Y. Iqbal, and K. Penc, Phys. Rev. B100, 140402(R) (2019)

    work page 2019

  9. [9]

    Chen, Phys

    G. Chen, Phys. Rev. B96, 020412(R) (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    X.-P. Yao, J. Q. Liu, C.-J. Huang, X. Wang, and G. Chen, Frontiers Phys.16, 53303 (2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Huang, J

    C.-J. Huang, J. Q. Liu, and G. Chen, Phys. Rev. Re- search4, 013121 (2022)

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    F. L. Buessen, M. Hering, J. Reuther, and S. Trebst, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 057201 (2018)

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    J. Q. Liu, F.-Y. Li, G. Chen, and Z. Wang, Phys. Rev. Research2, 033260 (2020)

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Mohylna, F

    M. Mohylna, F. A. G´ omez Albarrac´ ın, M.ˇZukoviˇ c, and H. D. Rosales, Phys. Rev. B106, 224406 (2022)

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    Tristan, J

    N. Tristan, J. Hemberger, A. Krimmel, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, V. Tsurkan, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B72, 174404 (2005)

    work page 2005

  16. [16]

    Suzuki and H

    T. Suzuki and H. Nagai and M. Nohara and H. Takagi, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter19, 145265 (2007)

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    Krimmel, H

    A. Krimmel, H. Mutka, M. M. Koza, V. Tsurkan, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B79, 134406 (2009)

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    Matsuda, M

    M. Matsuda, M. Azuma, M. Tokunaga, Y. Shimakawa, and N. Kumada, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 187201 (2010)

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    G. J. MacDougall, D. Gout, J. L. Zarestky, G. Ehlers, A. Podlesnyak, M. A. McGuire, D. Mandrus, and S. E. Nagler, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.108, 15693 (2011)

    work page 2011

  20. [20]

    Zaharko, N

    O. Zaharko, N. B. Christensen, A. Cervellino, V. Tsurkan, A. Maljuk, U. Stuhr, C. Niedermayer, F. Yokaichiya, D. N. Argyriou, M. Boehm, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B84, 094403 (2011)

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    H. S. Nair, Z. Fu, J. Voigt, Y. X. Su, and T. Br¨ uckel, Phys. Rev. B89, 174431 (2014)

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    G. J. MacDougall, A. A. Aczel, Y. Su, W. Schweika, E. Faulhaber, A. Schneidewind, A. D. Christianson, J. L. Zarestky, H. D. Zhou, D. Mandrus, and S. E. Nagler, Phys. Rev. B94, 184422 (2016)

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    L. Ge, J. Flynn, J. A. M. Paddison, M. B. Stone, S. Calder, M. A. Subramanian, A. P. Ramirez, and M. Mourigal, Phys. Rev. B96, 064413 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    J. N. Graham, N. Qureshi, C. Ritter, P. Manuel, A. R. Wildes, and L. Clark, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 166703 (2023)

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    S. Gao, O. Zaharko, V. Tsurkan, Y. Su, J. S. White, G. S. Tucker, B. Roessli, F. Bourdarot, R. Sibille, D. Chernyshov, T. Fennell, A. Loidl, and C. R¨ uegg, Nat. Phys.13, 157 (2017)

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    S. Gao, H. D. Rosales, F. A. G´ omez Albarrac´ ın, V. Tsurkan, G. Kaur, T. Fennell, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, P. ˇCerm´ ak, A. Schneidewind, E. Ressouche, D. C. Cabra, C. R¨ uegg, and O. Zaharko, Nature586, 37 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    H. D. Rosales, F. A. G. Albarrac´ ın, K. Guratinder, V. Tsurkan, L. Prodan, E. Ressouche, and O. Zaharko, Phys. Rev. B105, 224402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    Guratinder, V

    K. Guratinder, V. Tsurkan, L. Prodan, L. Keller, J. P. Embs, F. Juranyi, M. Medarde, C. R¨ uegg, and O. Za- harko, Phys. Rev. B105, 174423 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    J. R. Chamorro, L. Ge, J. Flynn, M. A. Subramanian, M. Mourigal, and T. M. McQueen, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2, 034404 (2018)

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    X. Bai, J. A. M. Paddison, E. Kapit, S. M. Koohpayeh, J.-J. Wen, S. E. Dutton, A. T. Savici, A. I. Kolesnikov, G. E. Granroth, C. L. Broholm, J. T. Chalker, and M. Mourigal, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 097201 (2019)

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    Tsurkan, H.-A

    V. Tsurkan, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, J. Deisenhofer, P. Lunkenheimer, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rep.926, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    Haraguchi, K

    Y. Haraguchi, K. Nawa, C. Michioka, H. Ueda, A. Mat- suo, K. Kindo, M. Avdeev, T. J. Sato, and K. Yoshimura, Phys. Rev. Mater.3, 124406 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    A. H. Abdeldaim, T. Li, L. Farrar, A. A. Tsirlin, W. Yao, A. S. Gibbs, P. Manuel, P. Lightfoot, G. J. Nilsen, and L. Clark, Phys. Rev. Mater.4, 104414 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Otsuka, Y

    A. Otsuka, Y. Shimizu, G. Saito, M. Maesato, A. Kiswandhi, T. Hiramatsu, Y. Yoshida, H. Yamochi, M. Tsuchiizu, Y. Nakamura, H. Kishida, and H. Ito, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn.93, 260 (2020)

    work page 2020

  35. [35]

    Wessler, B

    C. Wessler, B. Roessli, K. W. Kr¨ amer, B. Delley, O. Waldmann, L. Keller, D. Cheptiakov, H. B. Braun, and M. Kenzelmann, Npj Quantum Mater.5, 85 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    M. M. Bordelon, C. Liu, L. Posthuma, E. Kenney, M. J. Graf, N. P. Butch, A. Banerjee, S. Calder, L. Balents, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. B103, 014420 (2021)

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    C. Balz, B. Lake, J. Reuther, H. Luetkens, R. Schone- mann, T. Herrmannsdorfer, Y. Singh, A. T. M. Naz- mul Islam, E. M. Wheeler, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, T. Guidi, G. G. Simeoni, C. Baines, and H. Ryll, Nat. Phys.12, 942 (2016)

    work page 2016

  38. [38]

    Pohle, H

    R. Pohle, H. Yan, and N. Shannon, Phys. Rev. B104, 024426 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Takahashi, C.-C

    H. Takahashi, C.-C. Hsu, F. Jerzembeck, J. Murphy, J. Ward, J. D. Enright, J. Knapp, P. Puphal, M. Isobe, Y. Matsumoto, H. Takagi, J. C. S´ eamus Davis, and S. J. Blundell, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2405.02075 (2024), arXiv:2405.02075 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    S. Gao, M. A. McGuire, Y. Liu, D. L. Abernathy, C. d. Cruz, M. Frontzek, M. B. Stone, and A. D. Christianson, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 227201 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    A. Cole, A. Streeter, A. O. Fumega, X. Yao, Z.-C. Wang, E. Feng, H. Cao, J. L. Lado, S. E. Nagler, and F. Tafti, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 064401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    S. Gao, G. Pokharel, A. F. May, J. A. M. Paddison, C. Pasco, Y. Liu, K. M. Taddei, S. Calder, D. G. Man- drus, M. B. Stone, and A. D. Christianson, Phys. Rev. 7 Lett.129, 237202 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    Hsieh, H

    T.-C. Hsieh, H. Ma, and L. Radzihovsky, Phys. Rev. A 106, 023321 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    Z. Wan, Y. Zhao, X. Chen, Z. Ma, Z. Li, Z. Ouyang, and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 236704 (2024)

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    N. D. Andriushin, S. E. Nikitin, Ø. S. Fjellv˚ ag, J. S. White, A. Podlesnyak, D. S. Inosov, M. C. Rahn, M. Schmidt, M. Baenitz, and A. S. Sukhanov, Nat. Com- mun.16, 2619 (2025)

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    Takeda, M

    H. Takeda, M. Kawano, K. Tamura, M. Akazawa, J. Yan, T. Waki, H. Nakamura, K. Sato, Y. Narumi, M. Hagi- wara, M. Yamashita, and C. Hotta, Nat. Commun.15, 566 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Yan and J

    H. Yan and J. Reuther, Phys. Rev. Research4, 023175 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Pretko, X

    M. Pretko, X. Chen, and Y. You, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35, 2030003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  49. [49]

    Villain, R

    J. Villain, R. Bidaux, J.-P. Carton, and R. Conte, Jour- nal de Physique41, 1263 (1980)

    work page 1980

  50. [50]

    C. L. Henley, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 2056 (1989)

    work page 2056

  51. [51]

    A. G. Green, G. Conduit, and F. Kr¨ uger, Ann. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.9, 59 (2018)

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    D. T. Liu, F. J. Burnell, L. D. C. Jaubert, and J. T. Chalker, Phys. Rev. B94, 224413 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    Hoang and H

    D.-T. Hoang and H. T. Diep, Phys. Rev. E85, 041107 (2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    Rastelli, L

    E. Rastelli, L. Reatto, and A. Tassi, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys.16, L331 (1983)

    work page 1983

  55. [55]

    Ishii, Y

    Y. Ishii, Y. Narumi, Y. Matsushita, M. Oda, T. Kida, M. Hagiwara, and H. K. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. B103, 104433 (2021)

    work page 2021

  56. [56]

    A. Huq, J. P. Hodges, O. Gourdon, and L. Heroux, Z. Kristallogr.1, 127 (2011)

    work page 2011

  57. [57]

    See Supplemental Material for details on sample prepa- rations and characterizations, neutron scattering experi- ments and data analysis, and classical Monte Carlo sim- ulations

    work page

  58. [58]

    Rodriguez-Carvajal, Physica B: Conden

    J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, Physica B: Conden. Matter192, 55 (1993)

    work page 1993

  59. [59]

    Br¨ uning, T

    D. Br¨ uning, T. Fr¨ ohlich, D. Gorkov, I. C´ ısaˇ rov´ a, Y. Sk- ourski, L. Rossi, B. Bryant, S. Wiedmann, M. Meven, A. Ushakov, S. V. Streltsov, D. Khomskii, P. Becker, L. Bohat´ y, M. Braden, and T. Lorenz, Phys. Rev. B 104, 064418 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    Ehlers, A

    G. Ehlers, A. A. Podlesnyak, J. L. Niedziela, E. B. Iver- son, and P. E. Sokol, Rev. Sci. Instrum.82, 085108 (2011)

    work page 2011

  61. [61]

    Toth and B

    S. Toth and B. Lake, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter27, 166002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  62. [62]

    JuliaMD,

    “JuliaMD,”https://github.com/moon-dust/JuliaMD. jl

    work page

  63. [63]

    F. Ye, Y. Liu, R. Whitfield, R. Osborn, and S. Rosenkranz, J. Appl. Cryst.51, 315 (2018)

    work page 2018

  64. [64]

    Canals and D

    B. Canals and D. A. Garanin, Can. J. Phys.79, 1323 (2001)

    work page 2001

  65. [65]

    M. D. Frontzek, R. Whitfield, K. M. Andrews, A. B. Jones, M. Bobrek, K. Vodopivec, B. C. Chakoumakos, and J. A. Fernandez-Baca, Rev. Sci. Instrum.89, 092801 (2018)

    work page 2018

  66. [66]

    Gignoux, D

    D. Gignoux, D. Schmitt, and T. Shigeoka, Europhys. Lett.44, 374 (1998)

    work page 1998

  67. [67]

    St¨ ußer, U

    N. St¨ ußer, U. Schotte, A. Hoser, M. Meschke, M. Meißner, and J. Wosnitza, J. Phys: Condens. Matter 14, 5161 (2002)

    work page 2002

  68. [68]

    “SpinMC,”https://github.com/fbuessen/SpinMC.jl

    work page

  69. [69]

    Leuenberger, H

    B. Leuenberger, H. U. G¨ udel, and P. Fischer, J. Solid State Chem.64, 90 (1986)

    work page 1986

  70. [70]

    Leuenberger, B

    B. Leuenberger, B. Briat, J. C. Canit, A. Furrer, P. Fis- cher, and H. U. Guedel, Inorg. Chem.25, 2930 (1986)

    work page 1986

  71. [71]

    Leuenberger, H

    B. Leuenberger, H. U. G¨ udel, and A. Furrer, Chem. Phys. Lett.126, 255 (1986)

    work page 1986

  72. [72]

    A. T. Nientiedt and W. Jeitschko, Inorg. Chem.37, 386 (1998)

    work page 1998

  73. [73]

    Hirschberger, T

    M. Hirschberger, T. Nakajima, S. Gao, L. Peng, A. Kikkawa, T. Kurumaji, M. Kriener, Y. Yamasaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, K. Ohishi, K. Kakurai, Y. Taguchi, X. Yu, T.-h. Arima, and Y. Tokura, Nat. Commun.10, 5831 (2019)

    work page 2019

  74. [74]

    S. Gao, M. Hirschberger, O. Zaharko, T. Nakajima, T. Kurumaji, A. Kikkawa, J. Shiogai, A. Tsukazaki, S. Kimura, S. Awaji, Y. Taguchi, T.-h. Arima, and Y. Tokura, Phys. Rev. B100, 241115 (2019)

    work page 2019

  75. [75]

    K. K. Kolincio, M. Hirschberger, J. Masell, S. Gao, A. Kikkawa, Y. Taguchi, T.-h. Arima, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.118, e2023588118 (2021)

    work page 2021

  76. [76]

    Reuther, D

    J. Reuther, D. A. Abanin, and R. Thomale, Phys. Rev. B84, 014417 (2011)

    work page 2011

  77. [77]

    C. A. Gallegos, S. Jiang, S. R. White, and A. L. Cherny- shev, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 196702 (2025)

    work page 2025

  78. [78]

    Mohylna, F

    M. Mohylna, F. A. G´ omez Albarrac´ ın, M.ˇZukoviˇ c, and H. D. Rosales, Phys. Rev. B111, 174435 (2025). 8 Supplemental Materials for: Codimension-Two Spiral Spin-Liquid in the Effective Honeycomb-Lattice Compound Cs3Fe2Cl9 POWDER SAMPLE SYNTHESIS Cs3Fe2Cl9 is extremely air sensitive and thus all handling of reagents and products was performed inside an i...

    work page 2025

  79. [79]

    JuliaSCGA,

    are indicated. can in a helium filled glovebox. An orange cryostat was utilized to reach a base temperature of 2 K. Data reduction was performed using the MANTID software [S3]. Figure S1 summarizes the refinement result of the neutron diffraction pattern collected atT= 15 K. No secondary reflections are observed in the diffraction pattern, which confirms ...

    work page 2021