Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 64 references

Evolution of flat bands in two-dimensional fused pentagon network

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A fused pentagon network hosts exact flat bands in two fine-tuned limits, and a nearly flat band persists between them.

desk verdict Exact accidental flat bands in a fused-pentagon lattice that hold up under direct substitution; a clean, checkable result with only a qualitative robustness claim as the main soft spot. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17092 v1 pith:IYTHOBWI submitted 2024-11-26 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hall

Tomonari Mizoguchi , Mina Maruyama , Yasuhiro Hatsugai , Susumu Okada This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hall
keywords flatbandstight-bindingmodelfusedpentagonnetworkcompactlocalizedstatesaccidentalWannierfunctionstopologicalcarbonallotrope
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 studies a tight-binding model on a two-dimensional network of fused pentagons, a lattice inspired by a predicted carbon allotrope but not belonging to the standard flat-band classes such as sublattice-number-imbalanced bipartite lattices or line graphs. The authors establish that exact flat bands occur at two fine-tuned parameter limits: at $t_3=0$ a threefold-degenerate zero-energy flat band appears, with one nontrivial compact localized state (a state supported on finitely many sites), and at $t_1=t_2=t_3=-1$ two exact flat bands appear at $E=1\pm\sqrt{2}$. They derive the Bloch wave functions analytically in both limits, construct the real-space Wannier functions, and show the two flat-band mechanisms are different: destructive interference for $t_3=0$, and an accidental state with amplitude on every sublattice for $t_1=t_2=t_3$. They also show that for intermediate $t_3/t_1$, a nearly flat band survives near the Fermi level at half-filling, which matters because flat or nearly flat bands amplify electron correlations. If correct, the fused pentagon network offers a platform for flat-band-correlated physics even without fine-tuning all hopping parameters.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 14-site Bloch Hamiltonian $H_{\mathbf{k}}$ of the fused pentagon network in the block form of Eq. (1). Two algebraic features carry the argument. At $t_3=0$, the blocks $T_1$ and $T_2$ share a common kernel vector $u=(1,-1,1,-1,1,-1)^T$, so the $k$-independent state of Eq. (6), supported only on the six hexagon-edge sites, is an exact zero-energy eigenstate for any $t_1,t_2$; this is a compact localized state, a wave function living on finitely many sites. At $t_1=t_2=t_3=-1$, the uniform-edge ansatz $\psi_7=\cdots=\psi_{12}=1$ reduces the 14-site Schr\"odinger equation to a small algebraic system, and the self-consistency condition at site 7 factorizes as $(E^2-2E-1)(E^2+2E-1-\alpha)=0$, whose $k$-dependent factor selects the two flat-band energies $E_\pm=1\pm\sqrt{2}$ with the wave functions of Eq. (8). The same uniform-edge property makes the imaginary next-nearest-neighbor hoppings of Appendix C act as zero on the flat-band states, so the flat bands survive when those hoppings are added. Finally, the analytic Bloch functions feed directly into the real-space Wannier construction of Eq. (10) through a Brillouin-zone sum.

What would settle it

A direct check would be to diagonalize the full $14\times 14$ Bloch Hamiltonian for $t_1=t_2=t_3=-1$ at a generic momentum such as $\Gamma$ or $K$ and confirm that two eigenvalues are exactly $1+\sqrt{2}$ and $1-\sqrt{2}$; if the spectrum misses either value, the claimed exact flat bands fail. A second check is to substitute the wave functions of Eq. (8) into the Schr\"odinger equations for sites 8 through 12, whose agreement with the site-7 result the paper asserts without showing the algebra.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the fused pentagon network hosts exact flat bands in two limits, and both are analytically solvable. For $t_3=0$ with $t_1=t_2=-1$, the Bloch Hamiltonian has a threefold-degenerate zero-energy flat band; two copies are trivial isolated-site states on sublattices 13 and 14, and the third is the $k$-independent compact localized state of Eq. (6) with support only on the six hexagon-edge sites, arising because $T_1$ and $T_2$ share the common kernel vector $u=(1,-1,1,-1,1,-1)^T$. For $t_1=t_2=t_3=-1$, the paper finds two exact flat bands at $E_\pm=1\pm\sqrt{2}$ whose Bloch wave functions, Eq. (8), have amplitude on every sublattice, so they are not interference-induced compact localized states. The derivation uses the ansatz $\psi_7=\cdots=\psi_{12}=1$, solves the Schr\"odinger equations for sites 13, 14, and 1 through 6, and fixes $E$ from the self-consistency condition at site 7; the resulting $k$-independent energies make these bands exactly flat. The paper also constructs the corresponding Wannier functions, shows they are real and localized with a characteristic double-hexagon profile, and shows that adding pure-imaginary next-nearest-neighbor hoppings that vanish on the uniform-edge states preserves the flat bands while producing nontrivial topological invariants. Finally, away from both exact limits, a nearly flat band persists near the Fermi energy at half-filling.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation of the $E=1\pm\sqrt{2}$ flat bands rests on the assumption that the six hexagon-edge amplitudes are all equal at every momentum, a condition the authors found numerically rather than derived, together with an assertion that the equations for sites 8 through 12 force the same two energies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At $t_3=0$, the zero-energy flat band survives for any $t_1$ and $t_2$, because the molecular-orbital representation holds without fine-tuning those hoppings.
  • At $t_1=t_2=t_3=-1$, the exact flat bands at $E=1\pm\sqrt{2}$ provide analytic Bloch wave functions, so the real-space Wannier localization of the accidental flat band can be computed directly.
  • For intermediate $t_3/t_1$, the near-flat band near half-filling implies that correlation-driven orders such as spin-polarized states can be expected throughout the interpolated parameter region.
  • The hydrogen-adsorption route that removes sublattices 13 and 14 effectively realizes the $t_3=0$ limit, so the predicted change in flat-band character is experimentally accessible in the proposed carbon material.
  • With imaginary hoppings chosen to vanish on the uniform-edge states, the exact flat bands persist and the band set containing $E_-$ can carry a nonzero (even high) topological invariant, providing a topological flat-band model.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the uniform-edge condition $\psi_7=\cdots=\psi_{12}$ can be traced to a lattice symmetry, the 'accidental' flat bands would actually be symmetry-protected and the ansatz would follow rather than being guessed from numerics.
  • The persistence of a nearly flat band at intermediate $t_3$ suggests that a finite-$U$ on-site interaction calculation at half-filling should find a correlated insulating or magnetically ordered phase in a broad parameter window; this is a testable numerical extension of the paper's noninteracting result.
  • The imaginary-hopping construction could be pushed to fractional filling of the $E_-$ flat band; because that band set carries a nonzero topological invariant, a fractional Chern insulator may appear with appropriate interactions, a consequence the paper does not pursue.
  • The same analytic strategy may transfer to other pentagon-based or accidental flat-band lattices: whenever a subset of sites can be assumed equal at every $k$, the self-consistency equation factorizes and gives exact flat-band energies without a symmetry classification.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a 14-site tight-binding model on a fused-pentagon network inspired by a carbon allotrope. The authors identify two parameter regimes with exact flat bands: at t3=0 a threefold degenerate zero-energy flat band (one compact localized state plus two isolated-site states), and at t1=t2=t3=-1 two exact flat bands at E=1±√2 with explicitly constructed Bloch wavefunctions. They derive these solutions analytically, construct Wannier functions, and argue that a nearly flat band persists for intermediate t3. An appendix extends the model with imaginary hoppings to obtain topological flat bands with nonzero Chern numbers.

Significance. This is a valuable contribution to the flat-band literature because it provides an analytically solvable example of an accidental flat band, going beyond the well-understood Lieb-type and line-graph classes. The explicit wavefunctions (Eq. 6 and Eq. 8) enable direct construction of Wannier functions and a topological extension, and the algebraic derivations are self-contained and checkable by direct substitution; I verified the key factorization in Appendix B. The t3=0 compact localized state exists for any t1 and t2, and the t1=t2=t3 flat-band wavefunctions are exact for all momenta. These strengths make the paper a solid theoretical addition to the field.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix B] The derivation states that the equations for ψ8 through ψ12 lead to the same eigenenergies, but the algebra is not shown; direct substitution confirms that each of these six equations reduces to the same factorized condition (E^2−2E−1)(E^2+2E−1−γ)=0 with a k-dependent γ, so the claim is correct, but presenting the general reduction would improve reproducibility.
  2. [Sec. III C] The 'reasonably flat' and 'nearly flat' characterizations are qualitative; please provide a quantitative measure such as the bandwidth of the relevant band as a function of t3/t1 to substantiate the robustness claim.
  3. [General] There are several typographical and grammatical errors: 'Appnedix' (end of Sec. I), 'fablicated' (Introduction), 'Turing to Fig. 2' (Sec. III C), and 'There is not sublattice' (Sec. III A) should be corrected.
  4. [Eq. (8)] The normalization constant N_{k,±} is left unspecified; although its explicit form is not needed for the flat-band proof, stating it or its behavior would make the wave-function formula complete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the flat-band solutions are derived by direct substitution into the Bloch Hamiltonian, not fitted or imported from self-citations.

full rationale

The central flat-band derivations are self-contained. For t3/t1 = 0, the wave function in Eq. (6) is explicitly verified against the Bloch Hamiltonian, and the construction relies on the common kernel of T1 and T2, which is shown in the text. For t1 = t2 = t3 = -1, Appendix B starts from an ansatz (ψ7 = ... = ψ12 = 1) found by numerical diagonalization, but the ansatz is substituted into the Schrödinger equation and the algebraic condition (B8) factorizes so that E = 1 ± √2 satisfies the equation for every k. The assertion that the ψ8 through ψ12 equations give the same energies is a straightforward consequence of the same factorization; it is a verification, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The self-citations [43,44] introduce the material model but are not used to prove the flat bands, and [49-51] provide a representation method that is explicitly reconstructed in Appendix A rather than assumed. Appendix C is transparently a construction: imaginary hoppings are chosen so that they vanish on the flat-band wave function, and the paper states this mechanism explicitly. The qualitative 'nearly flat' claim is a matter of evidence strength, not circularity. No load-bearing argument reduces to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central flat-band derivation uses standard tight-binding and Bloch machinery plus one ad hoc ansatz (ψ7=...=ψ12). The hopping parameters are model inputs rather than data-fitted quantities. No new physical entities are introduced. The material interpretation assumes nearest-neighbor-only hopping is adequate.

free parameters (2)
  • hopping parameters t1, t2, t3 = t1=t2=-1; t3/t1 scanned 0..1 with special limits 0 and 1
    Model inputs chosen by hand to explore the fused-pentagon network; not fitted to data. The exact flat bands are derived only at the special ratios, so the claim is conditional on these choices.
  • imaginary next-nearest-neighbor hopping λ = 0.3 (Appendix C)
    Introduced ad hoc in Appendix C to construct a topological flat-band example; not needed for the central flat-band derivation.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Bloch theorem and Fourier transform diagonalize the translation-invariant tight-binding Hamiltonian
    Used throughout to write Hk as a 14x14 Bloch matrix in Sec. II.
  • standard math Molecular-orbital representation H=Φ h Φ† yields flat bands from zero modes of Φ†
    Invoked in Appendix A to explain the t3=0 flat band; follows from cited work [49-51].
  • domain assumption The real carbon allotrope is described by nearest-neighbor π-electron hoppings t1, t2, t3 only
    The material-motivated claim in Sec. IV depends on neglecting longer-range hoppings and lattice relaxation; the paper notes first-principles band structure is similar but shows no quantitative comparison.
  • ad hoc to paper Ansatz ψ7=ψ8=...=ψ12 for flat-band eigenstates at t1=t2=t3
    Eq. (B1) is found by numerical diagonalization and imposed rather than derived from lattice symmetry; the exact flat-band solution in Appendix B rests on it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Evolution of flat bands in two-dimensional fused pentagon network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IYTHOBWI

@misc{pith2026241117092,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Evolution of flat bands in two-dimensional fused pentagon network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IYTHOBWI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17092}
}
read the original abstract

Theoretical quest of flat-band tight-binding models usually relies on lattice structures on which electrons reside. Typical examples of candidate lattice structures include the Lieb-type lattices and the line graphs. Meanwhile, there can be accidental flat-band systems that belong to neither of such typical classes and deriving flat-band energies and wave functions for such systems is not straightforward. In this work, we investigate the characteristic band structure for the tight-binding model on a network composed of pentagonal rings, which is inspired by the theoretically-predicted carbon-based material. Although the lattice does not belong to conventional classes of flat band models, the exact flat bands appear only for fine-tuned parameters. We analytically derive the exact eigenenergies and eigenstates of the flat bands. By using the analytic form of the Bloch wave function, we construct the corresponding Wannier function and reveal its characteristic real-space profile. We also find that, even away from the exact flat-band limits, the nearly flat band exists near the Fermi level for the half-filled systems, which indicates that the present system will be a suitable platform for questing flat-band-induced correlated electron physics if it is realized in the real material.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17092 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Lattice structure considered in this paper. Black, red, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Band structures of the model of Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Real-space distribution of (a) the CLS for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Schematic figure of additional imaginary hoppings pre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mielke, J

    A. Mielke, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 24, 3311 (1991)

    work page 1991

  2. [2]

    Tasaki, Phys

    H. Tasaki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1608 (1992)

    1992

  3. [3]

    Imada and M

    M. Imada and M. Kohno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 143 (2000)

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    Peotta and P

    S. Peotta and P. T ¨orm¨a, Nature Communications 6, 8944 (2015)

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    H. Aoki, J. Supercond. Novel Magn. 33, 2341 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Huhtinen, J

    K.-E. Huhtinen, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, A. Chew, B. A. Bernevig, and P. T¨orm¨a, Phys. Rev. B 106, 014518 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    S. D. Huber and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. B 82, 184502 (2010)

    2010

  8. [8]

    Katsura, N

    H. Katsura, N. Kawashima, S. Morita, A. Tanaka, and H. Tasaki, Phys. Rev. Research3, 033190 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Tang, J.-W

    E. Tang, J.-W. Mei, and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236802 (2011)

    2011

  2. [10]

    K. Sun, Z. Gu, H. Katsura, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236803 (2011)

    2011

  3. [11]

    Neupert, L

    T. Neupert, L. Santos, C. Chamon, and C. Mudry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236804 (2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    Y . Cao, V . Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxi- ras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature 556, 43 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Y . Cao, V . Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y . Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Nature 556, 80 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Yankowitz, S

    M. Yankowitz, S. Chen, H. Polshyn, Y . Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. Graf, A. F. Young, and C. R. Dean, Science 363, 1059 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aav1910

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    J. M. Park, Y . Cao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Nature 590, 249 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    B. R. Ortiz, L. C. Gomes, J. R. Morey, M. Winiarski, M. Bor- delon, J. S. Mangum, I. W. H. Oswald, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, J. R. Neilson, S. D. Wilson, E. Ertekin, T. M. McQueen, and E. S. Toberer, Phys. Rev. Mater.3, 094407 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    J.-X. Yin, S. S. Zhang, G. Chang, Q. Wang, S. S. Tsirkin, Z. Guguchia, B. Lian, H. Zhou, K. Jiang, I. Belopolski, N. Shumiya, D. Multer, M. Litskevich, T. A. Cochran, H. Lin, Z. Wang, T. Neupert, S. Jia, H. Lei, and M. Z. Hasan, Nature Physics 15, 443 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    M. Kang, S. Fang, L. Ye, H. C. Po, J. Denlinger, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, J. G. Checkelsky, and R. Comin, Nature Communications 11, 4004 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Z. Sun, H. Zhou, C. Wang, S. Kumar, D. Geng, S. Yue, X. Han, Y . Haraguchi, K. Shimada, P. Cheng, L. Chen, Y . Shi, K. Wu, S. Meng, and B. Feng, Nano Letters 22, 4596 (2022), pMID: 35536689

    2022

  12. [20]

    L. Ye, S. Fang, M. Kang, J. Kaufmann, Y . Lee, C. John, P. M. Neves, S. Y . F. Zhao, J. Denlinger, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, D. C. Bell, O. Janson, R. Comin, and J. G. Checkelsky, Nature Physics 20, 610 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Kumar, K

    A. Kumar, K. Banerjee, A. S. Foster, and P. Liljeroth, Nano Letters 18, 5596 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    Shuku, R

    Y . Shuku, R. Suizu, S. Nakano, M. Tsuchiizu, and K. Awaga, Phys. Rev. B 107, 155123 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Nemoto, R

    R. Nemoto, R. Arafune, S. Nakano, M. Tsuchiizu, N. Takagi, R. Suizu, T. Uchihashi, and K. Awaga, ACS Nano 18, 19663 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    S. Taie, H. Ozawa, T. Ichinose, T. Nishio, S. Nakajima, and Y . Takahashi, Science Advances1, e1500854 (2015)

    2015

  17. [25]

    Ozawa, S

    H. Ozawa, S. Taie, T. Ichinose, and Y . Takahashi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 175301 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    S. Xia, A. Ramachandran, S. Xia, D. Li, X. Liu, L. Tang, Y . Hu, D. Song, J. Xu, D. Leykam, S. Flach, and Z. Chen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 263902 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    Leykam and S

    D. Leykam and S. Flach, APL Photonics 3, 070901 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    L. Tang, D. Song, S. Xia, S. Xia, J. Ma, W. Yan, Y . Hu, J. Xu, D. Leykam, and Z. Chen, Nanophotonics 9, 1161 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    J. Yang, Y . Li, Y . Yang, X. Xie, Z. Zhang, J. Yuan, H. Cai, D.-W. Wang, and F. Gao, Nature Communications15, 1484 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    Sutherland, Phys

    B. Sutherland, Phys. Rev. B 34, 5208 (1986)

    1986

  23. [31]

    E. H. Lieb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1201 (1989)

    1989

  24. [32]

    Miyahara, K

    S. Miyahara, K. Kubo, H. Ono, Y . Shimomura, and N. Fu- rukawa, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 74, 1918 (2005)

    2005

  25. [33]

    J. M. Lee, C. Geng, J. W. Park, M. Oshikawa, S.-S. Lee, H. W. Yeom, and G. Y . Cho, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 137002 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Ogata, M

    T. Ogata, M. Kawamura, and T. Ozaki, Phys. Rev. B 103, 205119 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    H. Liu, G. Sethi, S. Meng, and F. Liu, Phys. Rev. B105, 085128 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Mizoguchi, Y

    T. Mizoguchi, Y . Gao, M. Maruyama, Y . Hatsugai, and S. Okada, Phys. Rev. B 107, L121301 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    M. E. Zhitomirsky and H. Tsunetsugu, Phys. Rev. B70, 100403 (2004)

    2004

  30. [38]

    D. L. Bergman, C. Wu, and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. B78, 125104 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    Mizoguchi, M

    T. Mizoguchi, M. Maruyama, S. Okada, and Y . Hatsugai, Phys. Rev. Materials 3, 114201 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Mizoguchi, H

    T. Mizoguchi, H. Katsura, I. Maruyama, and Y . Hatsugai, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035155 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    D. Heo, J. Lee, A. Zhang, and J.-W. Rhim, Photonics 10, 10.3390/photonics10010029 (2023)

    2023 doi

  34. [42]

    A. M. Marques, J. M ¨ogerle, G. Pelegr ´ı, S. Flannigan, R. G. Dias, and A. J. Daley, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023110 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Maruyama and S

    M. Maruyama and S. Okada, Applied Physics Express 6, 095101 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Maruyama and S

    M. Maruyama and S. Okada, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 53, 06JD02 (2014)

    2014

  37. [45]

    1, but the connectivity of the bonds are equivalent

    Note that the calculated lattice structure (i.e., the optimal posi- tion of the carbon atom) is slightly different from Fig. 1, but the connectivity of the bonds are equivalent

  38. [46]

    L. Zhu, Q. Xue, X. Li, Y . Jin, H. Zheng, T. Wu, and Q. Guo, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 7, 28502 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    T. Zeng, Q. Chen, J. Guo, and H. Wang, Chemical Physics Let- ters 745, 137225 (2020)

    2020

  40. [48]

    Y . Niu, K. Meng, T. Xu, J. Wang, X. Xiao, J. Rong, X. Yu, Y . Zhang, and Y . Wei, Diamond and Related Materials 140, 110448 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Hatsugai and I

    Y . Hatsugai and I. Maruyama, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 95, 20003 (2011)

    2011

  42. [50]

    Mizoguchi and Y

    T. Mizoguchi and Y . Hatsugai, EPL (Europhysics Letters)127, 47001 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Mizoguchi, Y

    T. Mizoguchi, Y . Kuno, and Y . Hatsugai, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035161 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    J. M. Luttinger and L. Tisza, Phys. Rev. 70, 954 (1946)

    1946

  45. [53]

    J. N. Reimers, A. J. Berlinsky, and A.-C. Shi, Phys. Rev. B 43, 865 (1991)

    1991

  46. [54]

    D. A. Garanin and B. Canals, Phys. Rev. B 59, 443 (1999)

    1999

  47. [55]

    S. V . Isakov, K. Gregor, R. Moessner, and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 167204 (2004)

    2004

  48. [56]

    Essafi, L

    K. Essafi, L. D. C. Jaubert, and M. Udagawa, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 29, 315802 (2017)

    2017

  49. [57]

    Mizoguchi, L

    T. Mizoguchi, L. D. C. Jaubert, R. Moessner, and M. Udagawa, 8 Phys. Rev. B 98, 144446 (2018)

    2018

  50. [58]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015 (1988)

    1988

  51. [59]

    Fukui, Y

    T. Fukui, Y . Hatsugai, and H. Suzuki, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 74, 1674 (2005)

    2005

  52. [60]

    Wang and Y

    F. Wang and Y . Ran, Phys. Rev. B84, 241103 (2011)

    2011

  53. [61]

    Sticlet, F

    D. Sticlet, F. Pi ´echon, J.-N. Fuchs, P. Kalugin, and P. Simon, Phys. Rev. B 85, 165456 (2012)

    2012

  54. [62]

    Yang, Z.-C

    S. Yang, Z.-C. Gu, K. Sun, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 86, 241112 (2012)

    2012

  55. [63]

    Y .-F. Wang, H. Yao, C.-D. Gong, and D. N. Sheng, Phys. Rev. B 86, 201101 (2012)

    2012

  56. [64]

    Trescher and E

    M. Trescher and E. J. Bergholtz, Phys. Rev. B 86, 241111 (2012)

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.