Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Strong coupling of chiral magnons in altermagnets

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that the dipole-dipole interaction strongly couples exchange magnons of opposite chirality in altermagnets, producing an observable, anisotropic level repulsion.

desk verdict Novel DDI-induced chiral magnon coupling in altermagnets, but the main text never ties the coupling strength to a physical energy scale. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.18496 v1 pith:ATQSLDRW submitted 2025-05-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Zhejunyu Jin , Tianci Gong , Jie Liu , Huanhuan Yang , Zhaozhuo Zeng , Yunshan Cao , Peng Yan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords altermagnetschiralmagnonsmagnon-magnoncouplingdipole-dipoleinteractionlevelrepulsionBrillouinlightscatteringspinwavesquantummagnonics
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 argues that the dipole-dipole interaction (DDI), normally negligible in antiferromagnets, can strongly couple exchange magnons of opposite chirality in altermagnets, producing a clear level repulsion in the magnon spectrum. The predicted coupling is anisotropic, reaching roughly one-tenth of the magnon frequency, and should be visible in Brillouin light scattering experiments. If correct, this gives altermagnets a magnon-magnon coupling mechanism with direction selectivity that conventional antiferromagnets cannot offer. The authors back the analytical two-band model with full micromagnetic simulations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dipole-dipole interaction term $H_{\mathrm{DDI},k}$ in the Holstein-Primakoff-transformed magnon Hamiltonian. Projecting the $4\times4$ magnon Hamiltonian onto the eigenstates of opposite-chirality magnons produces a two-band effective Hamiltonian $H^{\mathrm{eff}}_{\mathrm{DDI},k} = \tfrac12(D_{11,k}+D_{22,k})I + \mathbf{f}(k)\cdot\boldsymbol{\sigma}$, where the off-diagonal element $D_{12,k}$ carries the chiral coupling. This projection shows that the DDI breaks spin conservation, couples magnons of opposite handedness, and makes the level repulsion wavevector- and direction-dependent.

What would settle it

A Brillouin light scattering experiment on a candidate altermagnet at the predicted in-plane field and wavevector would settle the claim: if the two chiral magnon branches do not show an anticrossing gap of the predicted size, the central claim is wrong. A numerical spin-wave calculation that includes realistic Gilbert damping and shows the level repulsion vanishes into the linewidth would also falsify it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In a $d$-wave altermagnet modeled by a two-sublattice Heisenberg Hamiltonian with anisotropic exchange, the paper shows that an in-plane magnetic field shifts the degeneracy point of right- and left-handed magnon branches to a finite wavevector without removing it, unlike in conventional antiferromagnets. When the dipole-dipole interaction is included, it mixes the two chiral branches and opens a gap at the crossing, a level repulsion. Projecting the dipolar Hamiltonian onto the chiral magnon basis yields the effective coupling $g_{\mathrm{eff}} = 2|D_{12,k}|$, which reaches about $0.1\,\omega_{k,\pm}$. The coupling depends on propagation direction and is asymmetric along $+y$ and $-y$, a signature of the Damon-Eshbach geometry. Micromagnetic simulations reproduce the analytical anticrossings, including the asymmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The prediction relies on the assumption that the exchange and anisotropy parameters taken from a representative altermagnet calculation are realistic for materials such as KV2Se2O, CrSb, and MnTe, so that the predicted coupling near one-tenth of the magnon frequency is not washed out by damping and linewidth in a real Brillouin light scattering measurement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In altermagnets, the dipole-dipole interaction opens a gap at crossings of right- and left-handed magnon branches, a phenomenon absent in conventional antiferromagnets.
  • The coupling is directional, differing for propagation along $+y$ and $-y$, which can be used for direction-selective magnon routing.
  • At moderate fields the effective coupling reaches $g_{\mathrm{eff}} \sim 0.1\,\omega_{k,\pm}$, putting it within reach of Brillouin light scattering.
  • A cavity-photon-mediated coupling between the same chiral magnons is estimated to be an order of magnitude weaker, so the dipolar mechanism is the experimentally accessible one.
  • Sufficiently large fields drive a spin-flop transition that removes the level crossing, bounding the field window in which the coupling can be observed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the predicted chiral coupling is realized, altermagnets could serve as a platform for chiral magnonic interferometry or routing, where the propagation direction selects the handedness of the coupled magnon pair.
  • Because the coupling is mediated by the long-range dipolar field rather than by exchange, sample shape and thickness should provide a tunable lever that the paper does not explicitly explore.
  • The effective spin-orbit-like structure of the two-band Hamiltonian suggests that Berry-curvature or topological effects in altermagnetic magnon bands may follow from the same dipolar mechanism, though the paper stops short of that claim.
  • The same mechanism may extend to g-wave altermagnets such as CrSb and MnTe; comparing Brillouin light scattering spectra along different crystal axes would test the predicted anisotropy in those materials.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the effect of the dipole-dipole interaction (DDI) on the magnon spectrum of a two-sublattice d-wave altermagnet within linear spin-wave theory. The authors find that an in-plane magnetic field shifts the opposite-chirality magnon branches in such a way that a level crossing at finite wavevector persists for propagation along the y-direction. Including the DDI lifts this degeneracy and induces an effective magnon-magnon coupling g_eff that is wavevector- and direction-dependent, reaching g_eff ~ 0.1 times the magnon energy at the anticrossing point for the parameters studied. They verify the analytical two-band projection against a four-band calculation and compare with MUMAX3 micromagnetic simulations, which show the predicted level repulsion and asymmetry. The paper argues that this DDI-induced strong coupling is a distinctive feature of altermagnets, absent in conventional antiferromagnets, and that it should be observable by Brillouin light scattering.

Significance. If the quantitative prediction is grounded in realistic material parameters, this work would identify a new and anisotropic magnon-magnon coupling mechanism in altermagnets, with potential implications for quantum magnonics and directional magnon transport. The analytical treatment is standard, but a strength is the internal consistency check between the two-band projection and the full four-band diagonalization, and the independent micromagnetic simulation confirming the level repulsion and its nonreciprocity. The paper does not rely on fitted couplings; the effective coupling is derived from the Hamiltonian. However, the headline result g_eff ~ 0.1 ω depends on an absolute energy scale that is not specified in the main text, which currently prevents the reader from assessing whether the prediction is realistic for the named materials.

major comments (3)
  1. [Level repulsion with DDI (Fig. 4)] The manuscript reports g_eff ~ 0.1 ω in Fig. 4(d) without providing the absolute exchange energy J2, the lattice constant a, or the dimensionless ratio κ/(J2 a^3) that controls the DDI matrix elements in Eq. (6). Since the DDI prefactor κ in Eq. (3) carries physical units and the magnon energies scale with J2 S, the ratio g_eff/ω is not a parameter-free prediction; it depends on the unstated value of κ/(J2 a^3). For the reader to verify the claim that the coupling is strong and observable in real altermagnets such as KV2Se2O, CrSb, and MnTe, the authors must specify these values and show that the resulting g_eff/ω remains near 0.1 for realistic material parameters. Without this conversion, the central quantitative claim is untethered from any concrete material.
  2. [Level repulsion with DDI (paragraph after Fig. 4)] The claim that the coupling is 'quite robust against the spectral broadening caused by the Gilbert damping' is not quantified in the main text. Strong coupling in magnonic systems is conventionally defined with respect to the linewidth, not just the ratio g_eff/ω. The authors should state the typical Gilbert damping and linewidth for the proposed materials (or for the parameters imported from Ref. [47]) and show that g_eff exceeds the linewidth, since this is the actual condition for observing the anticrossing in BLS. As it stands, the statement that the effect can be 'readily observed' is not quantitatively supported.
  3. [Discussion and Conclusion] The model is explicitly a d-wave altermagnet, yet the conclusions are extended to g-wave altermagnets such as CrSb and MnTe. The level-crossing condition, Eq. (10), and the resulting anisotropic coupling are derived for the specific anisotropic exchange structure of Eq. (1). The manuscript does not demonstrate that the same physics holds for g-wave altermagnets, which have different crystal symmetries and magnon dispersions. Either the claims should be restricted to the d-wave model, or a symmetry-based argument (or explicit calculation) should be provided to show that the DDI-induced chiral magnon coupling is generic to altermagnets.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction] There is a typo in the second paragraph: 'chiraliries' should be 'chiralities'.
  2. [Level-crossing without DDI] The symbol h is used both as a vector in Eq. (1) (h·(S_A + S_B)) and as a scalar field magnitude h/J2 in the text. Please clarify this notation.
  3. [Eq. (7)] The definition of Δ_k is confusing: 1/Δ_k is expressed as a square root of a quantity that appears to be sin^2 of some angle, making Δ_k ≥ 1. The relationship between Δ_k and the subsequent definitions of u_k and v_k should be clarified, since the current notation is ambiguous about whether Δ_k or 1/Δ_k is intended.
  4. [References] Reference [52] contains a typo: 'B. Brekkeet' should be 'B. Brekke'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the effective coupling is a derived matrix element of the explicit DDI Hamiltonian, independently checked by micromagnetic simulation; the only self-citation is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central quantity g_eff is not fitted to the level repulsion; it is defined from Eq. (8) as the off-diagonal matrix element of the explicit DDI Hamiltonian (3) evaluated in the chiral-eigenstate basis after the Holstein-Primakoff transformation. The level repulsion in Fig. 3 is then obtained by paraunitary diagonalization of the same Hamiltonian, so the prediction is a genuinely derived consequence of the stated input Hamiltonian, not an equivalent restatement of the input. The material parameters J1/J2=6.53, J3/J2=-3.22, K/J2=0.6, and S=1.5 are imported from external reference [47], not from the present authors. The anisotropic coupling follows from the anisotropic exchange in Eq. (1) and the Damon-Eshbach geometry of Eq. (3), again by calculation. The MUMAX3 micromagnetic simulations provide an independent numerical check of the same model, not a post hoc fit. The only self-citation, reference [53], appears in the Supplemental Material reference list and is not used to justify the coupling mechanism or the parameter set. The reviewer's concern that the main text does not state the absolute exchange energy J2 or the lattice constant a is a transparency and representativeness issue about whether the DDI-to-exchange ratio corresponds to real altermagnets; it is not circularity, because no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. No load-bearing circular step was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, mediators, or forces. Its central claim rests on imported material parameters and standard approximations (linear spin waves, point-dipole DDI, two-band projection).

free parameters (5)
  • Exchange ratio J1/J2 = 6.53
    Controls the anisotropy of the magnon dispersion, which sets the wavevector of the field-induced level crossing. Taken from ref [47], not fitted here.
  • Interlayer exchange J3/J2 = -3.22
    Sets the antiferromagnetic coupling and the size of the magnon gap. From ref [47].
  • Anisotropy K/J2 = 0.6
    Sets the zero-field magnon energy gap. From ref [47].
  • Spin length S = 1.5
    Scales all magnon energies. From ref [47].
  • External field h/J2 = 0 to 2.5 (0.3 used for strong-coupling estimate)
    Tunable control parameter; the strong coupling value g_eff ~ 0.1 omega is quoted at h/J2 = 0.3.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Holstein-Primakoff expansion truncated at harmonic order
    Neglects magnon-magnon interactions; the paper attributes discrepancies with micromagnetics to this approximation.
  • standard math Paraunitary diagonalization for the non-Hermitian magnon Hamiltonian
    Standard method for Bogoliubov-de Gennes type magnon Hamiltonians.
  • domain assumption The bilayer Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) realizes d-wave altermagnetism through the combined spin-space C_{s,2}, lattice C4, and glide symmetries
    The model is constructed to have d-wave altermagnetic symmetry, not derived from a specific material's electronic structure.
  • domain assumption Point-dipole form of the dipole-dipole interaction (Eq. 3) for intra- and inter-layer pairs
    Assumes the classical dipolar Hamiltonian with point dipoles; no retardation or finite-size corrections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strong coupling of chiral magnons in altermagnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ATQSLDRW

@misc{pith2026250518496,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strong coupling of chiral magnons in altermagnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ATQSLDRW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.18496}
}
read the original abstract

Altermagnets recently are identified as a new class of magnets that break the time-reversal symmetry without exhibiting net magnetization. The role of the dipole-dipole interaction (DDI) on their dynamical properties however is yet to be addressed. In this work, we show that the DDI can induce the strong coupling between exchange magnons with opposite chiralities in altermagnets, manifesting as a significant level repulsion in the magnon spectrum. Crucially, the predicted magnon-magnon coupling is highly anisotropic, and observable in practical experiments. These exotic features are absent in conventional antiferromagnets. Our findings open a new pathway for quantum magnonic information processing based on altermagnetism.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.18496 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Schematics of the dipolar-interaction induced strong cou [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: (a) Illustration of a two-sublattice altermagnet. The black [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Magnon dispersion for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) Field-dependence of the level-crossing point. (b) DDI [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: (a) The dispersion relation of altermagnetic magnons ob [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_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. Nanoscale Imaging of Strain-Controlled Altermagnetic Domains in {\alpha}-MnTe

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In alpha-MnTe, compression makes magnetic domains grow by merging, and unloading leaves them fragmented in a different, metastable pattern, so the material remembers the strain history.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [47]

    Q. Cui, B. Zeng, T. Yu, H. Yang, and P. Cui, Efficient Spin Seebeck and Spin Nernst Effects of Magnons in Altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B108, L180401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    V . V . Kruglyak, S. O. Demokritov, and D. Grundler, Magnonics, J. Phys. D43, 264001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  3. [2]

    A. V . Chumak, V . I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hille- brands, Magnon spintronics, Nat. Phys.11, 453 (2015)

    2015

  4. [3]

    Pirro, V

    P. Pirro, V . I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Ad- vances in coherent magnonics, Nat. Rev. Mater.6, 1114 (2021)

    2021

  5. [4]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y . Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y . Nakamura, Coherent coupling between a fer- romagnetic magnon and a superconducting qubit, Science349, 405 (2015)

    2015

  6. [5]

    Kounalakis, G

    M. Kounalakis, G. E. W. Bauer, and Y . M. Blanter, Analog Quantum Control of Magnonic Cat States on a Chip by a Su- perconducting Qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 037205 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [6]

    D. Xu, X. Gu, H. Li, Y . Weng, Y . Wang, J. Li, H. Wang, S. Zhu, and J. Q. You, Quantum Control of a Single Magnon in a Macroscopic Spin System, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 193603 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Agrawal, V

    M. Agrawal, V . I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, A. D. Karenowska, G. A. Melkov, and B. Hillebrands, Direct Measurement of Magnon Temperature: New Insight into Magnon-Phonon Cou- pling in Magnetic Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 107204 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 68 references
  1. [8]

    Streib, N

    S. Streib, N. Vidal-Silva, K. Shen, and G. E. W. Bauer, Magnon- phonon interactions in magnetic insulators, Phys. Rev. B99, 184442 (2019)

    2019

  2. [9]

    D. A. Bozhko, V . I. Vasyuchka, A. V . Chumak, and A. A. Serga, Magnon-phonon interactions in magnon spintronics (review ar- ticle), Low Temp. Phys.46, 383 (2020)

    2020

  3. [10]

    L. Bai, M. Harder, Y . P. Chen, X. Fan, J. Q. Xiao, and C.-M. Hu, Spin Pumping in Electrodynamically Coupled Magnon-Photon Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 227201 (2015)

    2015

  4. [11]

    Braggio, G

    C. Braggio, G. Carugno, M. Guarise, A. Ortolan, and G. Ru- oso, Optical Manipulation of a Magnon-Photon Hybrid System, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 107205 (2016)

    2016

  5. [12]

    Harder, Y

    M. Harder, Y . Yang, B. M. Yao, C. H. Yu, J. W. Rao, Y . S. Gui, R. L. Stamps, and C.-M. Hu, Level Attraction Due to Dissi- pative Magnon-Photon Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 137203 (2018)

    2018

  6. [13]

    H. Y . Yuan, Y . Cao, A. Kamra, R. A. Duine, and P. Yan, Quan- tum magnonics: When magnon spintronics meets quantum in- formation science, Phys. Rep.965, 1 (2022)

    2022

  7. [14]

    Shiota, T

    Y . Shiota, T. Taniguchi, M. Ishibashi, T. Moriyama, and T. Ono, Tunable Magnon-Magnon Coupling Mediated by Dy- namic Dipolar Interaction in Synthetic Antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 017203 (2020)

    2020

  8. [15]

    J. Chen, C. Liu, T. Liu, Y . Xiao, K. Xia, G. E. W. Bauer, M. Wu, and H. Yu, Strong Interlayer Magnon-Magnon Coupling in Magnetic Metal-Insulator Hybrid Nanostructures, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 217202 (2018)

    2018

  9. [16]

    A. Sud, C. W. Zollitsch, A. Kamimaki, T. Dion, S. Khan, S. Iihama, S. Mizukami, and H. Kurebayashi, Tunable magnon- magnon coupling in synthetic antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 102, 100403 (2020)

    2020

  10. [17]

    Sklenar and W

    J. Sklenar and W. Zhang, Self-Hybridization and Tunable Magnon-Magnon Coupling in van der Waals Synthetic Mag- nets, Phys. Rev. Applied15, 044008 (2021)

    2021

  11. [18]

    Liensberger, A

    L. Liensberger, A. Kamra, H. Maier-Flaig, S. Gepr ¨ags, A. Erb, S. T. B. Goennenwein, R. Gross, W. Belzig, H. Huebl, and M. Weiler, Exchange-Enhanced Ultrastrong Magnon-Magnon Coupling in a Compensated Ferrimagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 117204 (2019)

    2019

  12. [19]

    ¨O. O. Soykal and M. E. Flatt ´e, Strong Field Interactions be- tween a Nanomagnet and a Photonic Cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 077202 (2010)

    2010

  13. [20]

    H. Y . Yuan and X. R. Wang, Magnon-photon coupling in anti- ferromagnets, Appl. Phys. Lett.110, 082403 (2017)

    2017

  14. [21]

    N. J. Lambert, J. A. Haigh, S. Langenfeld, A. C. Doherty, and A. J. Ferguson, Cavity-mediated coherent coupling of magnetic moments, Phys. Rev. A93, 021803 (2016)

    2016

  15. [22]

    B. Z. Rameshti and G. E. W. Bauer, Indirect coupling of magnons by cavity photons, Phys. Rev. B97, 014419 (2018)

    2018

  16. [23]

    V . L. Grigoryan and K. Xia, Cavity-mediated dissipative spin- spin coupling, Phys. Rev. B100, 014415 (2019)

    2019

  17. [24]

    J. M. P. Nair, D. Mukhopadhyay, and G. S. Agarwal, Cavity- mediated level attraction and repulsion between magnons, Phys. Rev. B105, 214418 (2022)

    2022

  18. [25]

    Zhang, Y

    Q. Zhang, Y . Sun, J. Xue, and L. Bai, Distant Magnon-Magnon Coupling Mediated by Nonresonant Photon, Symmetry15, 518 (2023)

    2023

  19. [26]

    Johansen and A

    Ø. Johansen and A. Brataas, Nonlocal Coupling between An- tiferromagnets and Ferromagnets in Cavities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 087204 (2018)

    2018

  20. [27]

    W. He, Z. K. Xie, R. Sun, M. Yang, Y . Li, X. Zhao, W. Liu, Z. D. Zhang, J. Cai, and Z. Cheng, Anisotropic Magnon-Magnon Coupling in Synthetic Antiferromagnets, Chin. Phys. Lett.38, 057502 (2021)

    2021

  21. [28]

    A. A. Serga, A. V . Chumak, and B. Hillebrands, YIG magnon- ics, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.43, 264002 (2010)

    2010

  22. [29]

    S. A. Montoya, S. Couture, J. J. Chess, J. C. T. Lee, N. Kent, D. Henze, S. K. Sinha, M.-Y . Im, S. D. Kevan, P. Fischer, B. J. McMorran, V . Lomakin, S. Roy, and E. E. Fullerton, Tailor- ing magnetic energies to form dipole skyrmions and skyrmion lattices, Phys. Rev. B95, 024...

    2017

  23. [30]

    C. Song, H. Bai, Z. Zhou, L. Han, H. Reichlova, J. H. Dil, J. Liu, X. Chen, and F. Pan, Altermagnets as a new class of functional materials, Nat. Rev. Mater. (2025)

    2025

  24. [31]

    Hayami, Y

    S. Hayami, Y . Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Momentum- Dependent Spin Splitting by Collinear Antiferromagnetic Or- dering, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.88, 123702 (2019)

    2019

  25. [32]

    Hayami, Y

    S. Hayami, Y . Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Bottom-up design of spin-split and reshaped electronic band structures in antiferro- magnets without spin-orbit coupling: Procedure on the basis of augmented multipoles, Phys. Rev. B102, 144441 (2020)

    2020

  26. [33]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging Research Landscape of Altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022)

    2022

  27. [34]

    ˇSmejkal, A

    L. ˇSmejkal, A. Marmodoro, K. Ahn, R. Gonzalez-Hernandez, I. Turek, S. Mankovsky, H. Ebert, S. W. D’Souza, O. ˇSipr, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Chiral Magnons in Altermagnetic RuO2, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 256703 (2023)

    2023

  28. [35]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Beyond Conventional Ferromagnetism and Antiferromagnetism: A Phase with Non- relativistic Spin and Crystal Rotation Symmetry, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031042 (2022)

    2022

  29. [36]

    I. I. Mazin, Altermagnetism in MnTe: Origin, predicted 6 manifestations, and routes to detwinning, Phys. Rev. B107, L100418 (2023)

    2023

  30. [37]

    Turek, Altermagnetism and magnetic groups with pseu- doscalar electron spin, Phys

    I. Turek, Altermagnetism and magnetic groups with pseu- doscalar electron spin, Phys. Rev. B106, 094432 (2022)

    2022

  31. [38]

    Z. Feng, X. Zhou, L. ˇS mejkal, L. Wu, Z. Zhu, H. Guo, R. Gonz´alez-Hern´andez, X. Wang, H. Yan, P. Qin, X. Zhang, H. Wu, H. Chen, Z. Meng, L. Liu, Z. Xia, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, and Z. Liu, An anomalous Hall effect in altermagnetic ruthe- nium dioxide, Nat. Electron.5, 735 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    J. A. Ouassou, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, dc Josephson Effect in Altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 076003 (2023)

    2023

  33. [40]

    Zhang, L.-H

    S.-B. Zhang, L.-H. Hu, and T. Neupert, Finite-momentum Cooper pairing in proximitized altermagnets, Nat. Commun. 15, 1801 (2024)

    2024

  34. [41]

    X. Zhou, W. Feng, R. Zhang, L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, Y . Mokrousov, and Y . Yao, Crystal Thermal Transport in Alter- magnetic RuO2, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 056701 (2024)

    2024

  35. [42]

    Hariki, A

    A. Hariki, A. Dal Din, O. J. Amin, T. Yamaguchi, A. Badura, D. Kriegner, K. W. Edmonds, R. P. Campion, P. Wadley, D. Backes, L. S. I. Veiga, S. S. Dhesi, G. Springholz, L. ˇSmejkal, K. V´yborn´y, T. Jungwirth, and J. Kuneˇs, X-ray Magnetic Circu- lar Dichroism in Altermagnetic...

    2024

  36. [43]

    C. Sun, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, Andreev reflection in alter- magnets, Phys. Rev. B108, 054511 (2023)

    2023

  37. [44]

    H. Bai, Y . C. Zhang, Y . J. Zhou, P. Chen, C. H. Wan, L. Han, W. X. Zhu, S. X. Liang, Y . C. Su, X. F. Han, F. Pan, and C. Song, Efficient Spin-to-Charge Conversion via Altermagnetic Spin Splitting Effect in Antiferromagnet RuO2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 216701 (2023)

    2023

  38. [45]

    Białek, W

    M. Białek, W. Knap, and J.-P. Ansermet, Cavity-Mediated Cou- pling of Terahertz Antiferromagnetic Resonators, Phys. Rev. Applied19, 064007 (2023)

    2023

  39. [46]

    S. A. A. Ghorashi, T. L. Hughes, and J. Cano, Altermagnetic Routes to Majorana Modes in Zero Net Magnetization, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 106601 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Mazin, R

    I. Mazin, R. Gonz ´alez-Hern´andez, and L. ˇSmejkal, In- duced Monolayer Altermagnetism in MnP(S,Se) 3 and FeSe, arXiv:2309.02355 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Shen, Magnon Spin Relaxation and Spin Hall Effect Due to the Dipolar Interaction in Antiferromagnetic Insulators, Phys

    K. Shen, Magnon Spin Relaxation and Spin Hall Effect Due to the Dipolar Interaction in Antiferromagnetic Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 077201 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    J. Liu, L. Wang, and K. Shen, Tunable topological magnon phases in layered ferrimagnets, Phys. Rev. B107, 174404 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    I), various models of altermagnets (Sec

    See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/ for the derivation of the derivation of the eigen-equation for al- termagnetic magnons (Sec. I), various models of altermagnets (Sec. II), explicit expression of magnon Hamiltonian from DDI (Sec. III), full microma...

  44. [52]

    Brekkeet, A

    B. Brekkeet, A. Brataas, and A. Sudbø, Two-dimensional alter- magnets: Superconductivity in a minimal microscopic model, Phys. Rev. B108, 224421 (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Z.Jin, Z. Zeng, Y . Cao and P. Yan, Skyrmion Hall Effect in Al- termagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 196701 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    Sourounis and A

    K. Sourounis and A. Manchon, Impact of magnon interactions on transport in honeycomb antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B110, 054429 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    Vansteenkiste, J

    A. Vansteenkiste, J. Leliaert, M. Dvornik, M. Helsen, F. Garcia- Sanchez, and B. V . Waeyenberge, The design and verification of MUMAX3, AIP Adv.4, 107133 (2014)

    2014

  48. [56]

    H. Y . Yuan, S. Zheng, Z. Ficek, Q. Y . He, and M. Yung, En- hancement of magnon-magnon entanglement inside a cavity, Phys. Rev. B101, 014419 (2020)

    2020

  49. [57]

    Blais, R

    A. Blais, R. Huang, A. Wallraff, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Cavity quantum electrodynamics for supercon- ducting electrical circuits: An architecture for quantum com- putation, Phys. Rev. A69, 062320 (2004)

    2004

  50. [58]

    Blais, J

    A. Blais, J. Gambetta, A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, S. M. Girvin, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Quantum-information processing with circuit quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. A75, 032329 (2007)

    2007

  51. [59]

    Zueco, G

    D. Zueco, G. Reuther, S. Kohler, and P. H ¨anggi, Qubit- oscillator dynamics in the dispersive regime: Analytical the- ory beyond the rotating-wave approximation, Phys. Rev. A80, 033846 (2009)

    2009

  52. [60]

    P. Xu, J. W. Rao, Y . S. Gui, X. Jin, and C.-M. Hu, Cavity- mediated dissipative coupling of distant magnetic moments: Theory and experiment, Phys. Rev. B100, 094415 (2019)

    2019

  53. [61]

    Y . Li, V . G. Yefremenko, M. Lisovenko, C. Trevillian, T. Polakovic, T. W. Cecil, P. S. Barry, J. Pearson, R. Divan, V . Tyberkevych, C. L. Chang, U. Welp, W. Kwok, and V . Novosad, Coherent Coupling of Two Remote Magnonic Res- onators Mediated by Superconducting Circuits, Ph...

    2022

  54. [62]

    Falch, A

    V . Falch, A. Brataas, and A. Qaiumzadeh, Second-order cor- relation and squeezing of photons in cavities with ultrastrong magnon-photon interactions, Phys. Rev. B111, 104425 (2025)

    2025

  55. [63]

    S. M. Rezende, A. Azevedo, and R. L. R. Su ´arez, Introduc- tion to antiferromagnetic magnons, J. Appl. Phys.126,151101 (2019)

    2019

  56. [64]

    Holstein and H

    T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Phys. Rev.58, 1098 (1940)

    1940

  57. [65]

    R. A. Gallardo, T. Schneider, A. K. Chaurasiya, A. Oelschl¨agel, S. S. P. K. Arekapudi, A. Rold´an-Molina, R. H ¨ubner, K. Lenz, A. Barman, J. Fassbender, J. Lindner, O. Hellwig, and P. Lan- deros, Reconfigurable spin-wave nonreciprocity induced by dipolar interaction in a cou...

    2019

  58. [66]

    Jiang, M

    B. Jiang, M. Hu, J. Bai, Z. Song, C. Mu, G. Qu, W. Li, W. Zhu, H. Pi, Z. Wei, Y . Sun, Y . Huang, X. Zheng, Y . Peng, L. He, S. Li, J. Luo, Z. Li, G. Chen, H. Li, H. Weng, and T. Qian, A metallic room-temperatured−wave altermagnet, Nat. Phys.21, 754 (2025)

    2025

  59. [67]

    Reimers, L

    S. Reimers, L. Odenbreit, L ˘Smejkal, V . N. Strocov, P. Con- stantinou, A. B. Hellenes, R. J. Ubiergo, W. H. Campos, V . K. Bharadwaj, A. Chakraborty, T. Denneulin, W. Shi, R. E. Dunin- Borkowski, S. Das, M. Kl¨aui, J. Sinova, and M. Jourdan, Direct observation of altermagnet...

    2024

  60. [68]

    S. Lee, S. Lee, S. Jung, J. Jung, D. Kim, Y . Lee, B. Seok, J. Kim, B. G. Park, L. ˘Smejkal, C. Kang, and C. Kim, Broken Kramers Degeneracy in Altermagnetic MnTe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 036702 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.