Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 61 references

Dominant Kitaev interaction and field-induced quantum phase transitions in triangular-lattice KCeSe2

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read KCeSe2 is a triangular-lattice Kitaev magnet with dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev exchange K = -1.82 K, whose stripe-yz order and two field-induced transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T are reproduced by DMRG.

desk verdict A new triangular Kitaev candidate with careful bulk characterization, but the dominant-K claim rests on an underdetermined INS fit and should be treated as provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23502 v1 pith:LITS4V52 submitted 2025-05-29 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Mingtai Xie , Zheng Zhang , Weizhen Zhuo , Wei Xu , Jinfeng Zhu , Jan Embs , Lei Wang , Zikang Li
show 8 more authors
Huanpeng Bu Anmin Zhang Feng Jin Jianting Ji Zhongwen Ouyang Liusuo Wu Jie Ma Qingming Zhang
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords triangular-latticemagnetKitaevinteractionKitaev-Heisenbergmodelstripe-yzorderbydisorderfield-inducedphasetransitionceriumchalcogenideDMRG
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 triangular-lattice antiferromagnet KCeSe2 is a rare experimental platform for Kitaev physics beyond honeycomb magnets. From magnetization, neutron diffraction, inelastic neutron scattering, and specific heat, the authors fit a four-parameter anisotropic spin Hamiltonian and convert it to an extended Kitaev-Heisenberg form, obtaining a dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev interaction $K = -1.82$ K alongside antiferromagnetic Heisenberg $J = 1.34$ K. They show that this combination stabilizes stripe-yz magnetic order through order-by-disorder, even though both interactions individually promote frustration. Applying a magnetic field along a Kitaev bond, they find phase transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T that density-matrix renormalization-group calculations reproduce as stripe-yz to stripe-canted to polarized. If the model is right, KCeSe2 offers a way to study Kitaev interactions on a triangular lattice and field-driven quantum critical fluctuations near 1.67 T.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the four-parameter nearest-neighbor anisotropic spin Hamiltonian of Eq. 1, with couplings $J_{zz}$, $J_{\pm}$, $J_{\pm\pm}$, $J_{z\pm}$, plus the exact transformation of Eq. 2 to the extended Kitaev-Heisenberg parameters $J$, $K$, $\Gamma$, $\Gamma'$. Since $K = -2J_{\pm\pm} - \sqrt{2}J_{z\pm}$, the fitted positive values $J_{\pm\pm}=0.58$ K and $J_{z\pm}=0.47$ K are what turn the empirical fit into a dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev interaction. The same parameters feed exact-diagonalization and thermal-pure-quantum specific-heat checks, linear spin-wave comparisons, and a $6\times 30$ DMRG cylinder whose entanglement entropy and static spin structure factors mark the stripe-yz phase and the field-induced transitions. Order-by-disorder -- quantum fluctuations lifting the classical degeneracy among stripe states -- is invoked to explain why frustration plus Kitaev exchange still selects stripe-yz order.

What would settle it

A single-crystal inelastic neutron scattering measurement that resolves the full spin-wave dispersion would falsify the central claim if its mode energies and intensities cannot be reproduced by Eq. 1 with the fitted parameters, or if an equally good fit requires adding a second-neighbor exchange that changes $K$ by more than its statistical uncertainty.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is that KCeSe2 is a triangular-lattice material where a ferromagnetic Kitaev term is the largest exchange scale. Using the anisotropic spin model of Eq. 1, the authors determine four exchange couplings ($J_{\pm}=0.40$ K, $J_{zz}=0.61$ K, $J_{\pm\pm}=0.58$ K, $J_{z\pm}=0.47$ K) by matching ESR g-factors, magnetization, inelastic neutron scattering, and specific heat, then map them via Eq. 2 onto an extended Kitaev-Heisenberg model to get $J=1.34$ K, $K=-1.82$ K, $\Gamma=-0.62$ K, and $\Gamma'=0.21$ K. This parameter set places KCeSe2 in the stripe-yz ordered phase in both their DMRG phase diagram and the theoretical $J$-$K$-$\Gamma$ phase diagram, consistent with the neutron-diffraction ground state and the observed $T^3$ specific heat. A field along the $a$-axis produces transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T; DMRG magnetization curves and static spin structure factors identify the lower one as a quantum critical point with enhanced fluctuations and the upper one as entry into the spin-polarized state.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the four nearest-neighbor exchange couplings in Eq. 1, with the fitted values, capture all relevant low-energy magnetism of KCeSe2, so no significant further-neighbor couplings, multi-ion terms, or neglected processes shift the derived Kitaev and Heisenberg values, and that the finite clusters used in exact diagonalization and DMRG represent the thermodynamic limit.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • KCeSe2 joins KCeS2 and CsCeSe2 as Ce-based triangular-lattice magnets where stripe-yz order coexists with strong Kitaev exchange, so the extracted ratio $K/J \approx -1.36$ makes this a test case for bond-dependent anisotropy on a frustrated lattice.
  • The order-by-disorder mechanism implies that in zero field the stripe-yz pattern is selected from a degenerate manifold by quantum fluctuations, so tuning the Kitaev coupling, for instance by chemical substitution, could in principle restore a spin-disordered or spin-liquid state.
  • A magnetic field along the Kitaev bond direction drives two transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T: the lower one is identified as a quantum critical point with multi-fluctuation behavior, and the upper one as the crossover into a spin-polarized phase.
  • Near 1.67 T the DMRG calculations show disordered moment arrangements and strong quantum fluctuations, conditions the paper suggests could host deconfined spinon excitations, though it notes that dynamical measurements are still needed to confirm this.
  • The extracted $J$, $K$, and $\Gamma$ place KCeSe2 inside the stripe-yz region of the triangular-lattice $J$-$K$-$\Gamma$ phase diagram, directly linking the empirical parameters to the theoretical global phase diagram.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the order-by-disorder picture is right, then isostructural Ce chalcogenides with slightly different Ce-Se bond angles should sit at different points on the $K/J$ axis, and a compound with a weaker Kitaev term could fall into a spin-liquid region; a systematic search across that family would be a direct test.
  • The 1.67 T critical field should leave a signature in field-dependent inelastic neutron scattering: a continuum of excitations appearing near the critical field would support the spinon scenario the paper floats, whereas sharp magnon modes persisting across the transition would argue against it.
  • The four-parameter model was fitted to powder data, so a single-crystal inelastic neutron scattering experiment resolving the full dispersion would either confirm the fitted couplings or reveal additional exchange paths; such a measurement would also give an independent check on the quoted $K$ value.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper reports a multi-probe experimental and numerical study of the triangular-lattice antiferromagnet KCeSe2. Magnetization, ESR, powder neutron diffraction, powder INS, specific heat, and AC susceptibility data are combined with full-diagonalization, thermal-pure-quantum, and DMRG calculations. The authors fit the four nearest-neighbor anisotropic exchanges of Eq. (1) to magnetization and INS data, obtaining J± = 0.40 K, Jzz = 0.61 K, J±± = 0.58 K, and Jz± = 0.47 K. Using the linear transformation in Eq. (2), they convert these into J = 1.34 K, K = −1.82 K, Γ = −0.62 K, and Γ′ = 0.21 K, which they interpret as dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev and antiferromagnetic Heisenberg interactions stabilizing stripe-yz order. They further report field-induced transitions at 1.67 T and ~3.8 T along the a-axis, reproduced by DMRG, and interpret the lower-field transition as a quantum critical point with enhanced quantum fluctuations.

Significance. If the fitted Hamiltonian is correct, KCeSe2 would be a rare experimental realization of a triangular-lattice Kitaev system, and the observation of a field-tuned stripe-yz to canted transition at 1.67 T would be an interesting addition to the Kitaev-materials family. The paper's strengths are the combination of several bulk probes on a newly synthesized material and the explicit cross-checks between ED/TPQ/DMRG calculations and thermodynamic data. The DMRG reproduction of the 1.67 T transition is supportive because this field value was not used in the parameter fit. However, as detailed below, the central quantitative claim depends on a fit with limited overconstraint and no uncertainty analysis; the significance of the result therefore hinges on whether the parameter set is unique.

major comments (3)
  1. [Low-energy Spin Excitations, Fig. 3(b), Eq. (2)] The off-diagonal couplings J±± and Jz± are determined by matching two features (a weak peak near 0.28 meV and a stronger peak near 0.35 meV) of a powder-averaged INS difference spectrum using a 4×6 ED cluster. This is effectively a two-parameter fit to two spectral features; no chi-square landscape, confidence intervals, or alternative-parameter scans are shown. Because Eq. (2) gives K = −2J±± − √2 Jz± and Γ = (−2J± + Jzz − 4J±± + √2 Jz±)/3, the dominant-K and Γ conclusions are algebraically controlled by exactly these two parameters. Correlated shifts of J±± and Jz± can change K substantially and even its sign if the INS peaks can be compensated by other changes in the Hamiltonian. The authors should provide a uniqueness scan over (J±±, Jz±), report the goodness of fit, and give propagated uncertainties for K, J, Γ, and Γ′. Without this, the abstract-level claim of dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev interaction is not quantitatively established.
  2. [Magnetic field induced phase transition, Fig. 4(a)] The DMRG magnetization curves that reproduce the 1.67 T and 3.76 T features are computed from the same four-parameter Hamiltonian that was fitted to the magnetization and INS data. Agreement is therefore a self-consistency check rather than an independent prediction, although the 1.67 T value itself was not used in the fit. The authors should either describe the DMRG comparison as a consistency check or demonstrate robustness of the transition fields across the fitted-parameter uncertainty region; this distinction matters for the claim that DMRG predicted the transition.
  3. [Model Hamiltonian and Low-energy Spin Excitations] The fit assumes that the four nearest-neighbor exchanges in Eq. (1) form a complete low-energy model. Further-neighbor exchanges, multi-ion anisotropies, or small Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya terms are not considered, and the powder-averaged INS data provide only limited Q-space constraints. This is a correctness risk for the derived K and J values, which are linear combinations of the fitted parameters. The authors should explicitly state this limitation and, if possible, bound further-neighbor couplings, for example from the magnetic ordering wavevector or from a single-crystal dispersion once available.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase “consistent with density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) calculations predictions” is ungrammatical and should read “DMRG calculation predictions” or “predictions of DMRG calculations.”
  2. [Eq. (1)] The symbol i is used for both the site index and the imaginary unit in the phase factors γij and ladder operators S±; this is confusing and should be disambiguated.
  3. [Conclusions] The statement that this is “the first observation of field-induced phase transitions in a stripe-yz ordered triangular magnet” should be qualified in light of the field-induced quantum criticality reported in CsCeSe2 (Refs. 41 and 42).
  4. [Magnetic anisotropy and stripe-yz order] The order-by-disorder interpretation in the text and abstract is plausible but is supported only by a citation and the model phase diagram; either provide a direct calculation showing the selection of stripe-yz order for these parameters or soften the wording.
  5. [Fig. 3(b)] The INS difference spectrum is shown without error bars; please add them or state the statistical uncertainty so the significance of the 0.28 meV and 0.35 meV peaks can be assessed.
  6. [Fig. 4(a)] The legend for the dM/dH curves is not fully specified; please label the light-blue and dark-blue lines explicitly as experiment and DMRG calculation, respectively.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Kitaev and Heisenberg values are linear transforms of parameters fitted to magnetization and INS data, and the field-induced transitions are emergent DMRG predictions compared with data not used in the fit.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev K = -1.82 K and antiferromagnetic Heisenberg J = 1.34 K—is obtained by fitting the four exchange parameters of Eq. (1) to magnetization (J±, Jzz) and powder INS (J±±, Jz±), then applying the model-to-K-J mapping of Eq. (2). This is standard parameter inference followed by a linear transformation, not a prediction that is equivalent to its inputs by construction. The field-induced transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T are computed with DMRG on the fitted Hamiltonian and compared with AC-susceptibility and M-H data that are not part of the reported fitting procedure, so they are genuine emergent predictions; the same holds for the specific-heat comparisons in Fig. 3(c,d). The paper does contain self-citations (e.g., Refs. 15-17, 20, 25-28), but none of these is load-bearing for the K/J determination; the relevant phase diagrams (Refs. 48, 52, 58) are external. The two-feature/two-parameter INS fit is underconstrained, which is an identifiability and error-bar concern, not circularity. No quoted step reduces to its own input by definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a four-parameter nearest-neighbor spin Hamiltonian; those parameters are fitted to magnetization and INS data. The derived Kitaev and Heisenberg couplings are linear combinations of the fitted parameters. No novel physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • J± = 0.40 K
    Fitted to M/H-T and M-H data along a-axis and c-axis using mean-field and full-diagonalization simulations.
  • Jzz = 0.61 K
    Fitted simultaneously with J± to the same magnetization data.
  • J±± = 0.58 K
    Fitted to the powder INS spectral shape using exact diagonalization.
  • Jz± = 0.47 K
    Fitted simultaneously with J±± to the powder INS spectral shape.
  • g_ab = 1.636(6)
    Extracted from ESR resonance frequencies in the ab-plane at 2 K.
  • g_c = 0.624(3)
    Extracted from ESR resonance frequencies along the c-axis at 2 K.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Low-energy magnetism of KCeSe2 is described by the nearest-neighbor anisotropic spin-1/2 Hamiltonian Eq. (1) with four couplings J±, Jzz, J±±, Jz±.
    Derived from the CEF ground Kramers doublet under D3d symmetry; assumes no further-neighbor exchange, no multi-ion anisotropy, and that the 39 meV CEF excitation can be integrated out.
  • domain assumption The bond angle of 93.47 degrees being close to 90 degrees suppresses Heisenberg exchange and makes Kitaev interactions dominant.
    Jackeli-Khaliullin mechanism; used as motivation, not as a quantitative constraint.
  • standard math The mapping in Eq. (2) from the anisotropic exchange parameters to J-K-Gamma is the correct conversion.
    Taken from Refs [48,49], established in the literature.
  • ad hoc to paper The stripe-yz order is stabilized by an order-by-disorder mechanism.
    Invoked to explain why frustration does not disorder the system; the paper provides no direct experimental evidence for this mechanism.
  • domain assumption Finite-size clusters (4x6 ED/TPQ, 6x30 DMRG) are representative of the thermodynamic limit.
    Standard numerical assumption; finite-size effects are not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dominant Kitaev interaction and field-induced quantum phase transitions in triangular-lattice KCeSe2." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LITS4V52

@misc{pith2026250523502,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dominant Kitaev interaction and field-induced quantum phase transitions in triangular-lattice KCeSe2},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LITS4V52}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23502}
}
abstract

Realizing Kitaev interactions on triangular lattices offers a compelling platform for exploring quantum-spin-liquid physics beyond the conventional honeycomb lattice framework. Here, we investigate the triangular-lattice antiferromagnet KCeSe2, where multiple probes reveal strong magnetic anisotropy suggesting significant Kitaev physics. Through detailed and combined analysis of magnetization, neutron scattering, and thermodynamic experiments, we identify dominant ferromagnetic Kitaev ($K = -1.82$ K) and antiferromagnetic Heisenberg ($J = 1.34$ K) interactions that stabilize a stripe-$yz$ ordered ground state via an order-by-disorder mechanism. Magnetic fields applied along the Kitaev bond direction induce two phase transitions at 1.67 T and 3.8 T, consistent with density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) calculations predictions of a progression from stripe-$yz$ to stripe-canted and spin-polarized phases. Near the 1.67 T quantum critical point, enhanced quantum fluctuations suggest conditions favorable for exotic excitations. These results establish KCeSe2 as a platform for exploring Kitaev physics on triangular lattices.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond,

    Alexei Kitaev, “Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond,” Annals of Physics 321, 2–111 (2006)

    work page 2006

  2. [2]

    Concept and realization of Kitaev quantum spin liquids,

    Hidenori Takagi, Tomohiro Takayama, George Jackeli, Giniyat Khaliullin, and Stephen E. Nagler, “Concept and realization of Kitaev quantum spin liquids,” Nat Rev Phys1, 264–280 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Physics of the Kitaev Model: Fractionalization, Dynamic Correlations, and Material Connections,

    M. Hermanns, I. Kimchi, and J. Knolle, “Physics of the Kitaev Model: Fractionalization, Dynamic Correlations, and Material Connections,” Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 9, 17–33 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Exact Results for Spin Dynamics and Fractionalization in the Kitaev Model,

    G. Baskaran, Saptarshi Mandal, and R. Shankar, “Exact Results for Spin Dynamics and Fractionalization in the Kitaev Model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 247201 (2007)

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Observation of two types of fractional excitation in the Kitaev honeycomb magnet,

    Nejc Jan ˇsa, Andrej Zorko, Matja ˇz Gomil ˇsek, Matej Pregelj, Karl W. Kr ¨amer, Daniel Biner, Alun Biffin, Christian R ¨uegg, and Martin Klanj ˇsek, “Observation of two types of fractional excitation in the Kitaev honeycomb magnet,” Nature Physics 14, 786–790 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Mott Insulators in the Strong Spin-Orbit Coupling Limit: From Heisenberg to a Quantum Compass and Kitaev Models,

    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

  7. [7]

    Hyperhoney- comb Iridate β−Li2IrO3 as a Platform for Kitaev Magnetism,

    T. Takayama, A. Kato, R. Dinnebier, J. Nuss, H. Kono, L. S. I. Veiga, G. Fabbris, D. Haskel, and H. Takagi, “Hyperhoney- comb Iridate β−Li2IrO3 as a Platform for Kitaev Magnetism,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 077202 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Zigzag Magnetic Order in the Iridium Oxide Na 2IrO3,

    Ji ˇr´ı Chaloupka, George Jackeli, and Giniyat Khaliullin, “Zigzag Magnetic Order in the Iridium Oxide Na 2IrO3,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 097204 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Exotic Low-Energy Excitations Emer- gent in the Random Kitaev Magnet Cu 2IrO3,

    Y . S. Choi, C. H. Lee, S. Lee, Sungwon Yoon, W.-J. Lee, J. Park, Anzar Ali, Yogesh Singh, Jean-Christophe Orain, Gare- oung Kim, Jong-Soo Rhyee, Wei-Tin Chen, Fangcheng Chou, and Kwang-Yong Choi, “Exotic Low-Energy Excitations Emer- gent in the Random Kitaev Magnet Cu 2IrO3,”...

    2019

  2. [10]

    Neutron scattering in the proximate quantum spin liq- uid α-RuCl3,

    Arnab Banerjee, Jiaqiang Yan, Johannes Knolle, Craig A. Bridges, Matthew B. Stone, Mark D. Lumsden, David G. Man- drus, David A. Tennant, Roderich Moessner, and Stephen E. Nagler, “Neutron scattering in the proximate quantum spin liq- uid α-RuCl3,” Science 356, 1055–1059 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Half-integer quantized anomalous thermal Hall effect in the Kitaev material candidate α-RuCl3,

    T. Yokoi, S. Ma, Y . Kasahara, S. Kasahara, T. Shibauchi, N. Ku- rita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y . Motome, C. Hickey, S. Trebst, and Y . Matsuda, “Half-integer quantized anomalous thermal Hall effect in the Kitaev material candidate α-RuCl3,” Science 373, 568–572 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Majorana fermions in the Kitaev quan- tum spin system α-RuCl3,

    Seung-Hwan Do, Sang-Youn Park, Junki Yoshitake, Joji Nasu, Yukitoshi Motome, Yong Seung Kwon, D. T. Adroja, D. J. V oneshen, Kyoo Kim, T.-H. Jang, J.-H. Park, Kwang-Yong Choi, and Sungdae Ji, “Majorana fermions in the Kitaev quan- tum spin system α-RuCl3,” Nature Physics 13, 1...

    2017

  5. [13]

    Field-induced quantum spin dis- ordered state in spin-1/2 honeycomb magnet Na2Co2TeO6,

    Gaoting Lin, Jaehong Jeong, Chaebin Kim, Yao Wang, Qing Huang, Takatsugu Masuda, Shinichiro Asai, Shinichi Itoh, Ger- rit G ¨unther, Margarita Russina, Zhilun Lu, Jieming Sheng, Le Wang, Jiucai Wang, Guohua Wang, Qingyong Ren, Chuany- ing Xi, Wei Tong, Langsheng Ling, Zhengxin...

    2021

  6. [14]

    Evidence for field induced quantum spin liquid be- havior in a spin-1/2 honeycomb magnet,

    Gaoting Lin, Mingfang Shu, Qirong Zhao, Gang Li, Yinina Ma, Jinlong Jiao, Yuting Li, Guijing Duan, Qing Huang, Jieming Sheng, Alexander I. Kolesnikov, Lu Li, Liusuo Wu, Hongwei Chen, Rong Yu, Xiaoqun Wang, Zhengxin Liu, Haidong Zhou, and Jie Ma, “Evidence for field induced qua...

    2024

  7. [15]

    Anisotropic exchange coupling and ground state phase diagram of Kitaev compound YbOCl,

    Zheng Zhang, Yanzhen Cai, Jing Kang, Zhongwen Ouyang, Zhitao Zhang, Anmin Zhang, Jianting Ji, Feng Jin, and Qing- ming Zhang, “Anisotropic exchange coupling and ground state phase diagram of Kitaev compound YbOCl,” Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033006 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Crystalline electric field excitations and their nonlinear splitting under magnetic fields in YbOCl,

    Yanzhen Cai, Wei Ren, Xijing Dai, Jing Kang, Weizhen Zhuo, Mingtai Xie, Anmin Zhang, Jianting Ji, Feng Jin, Zheng Zhang, and Qingming Zhang, “Crystalline electric field excitations and their nonlinear splitting under magnetic fields in YbOCl,” Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043061 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Ground state magnetic structure and magnetic field effects in the layered honeycomb antiferro- magnet YbOCl,

    Zheng Zhang, Yanzhen Cai, Jinlong Jiao, Jing Kang, Dehong Yu, Bertrand Roessli, Anmin Zhang, Jianting Ji, Feng Jin, Jie Ma, and Qingming Zhang, “Ground state magnetic structure and magnetic field effects in the layered honeycomb antiferro- magnet YbOCl,” Phys. Rev. Res.6, 0332...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of in- sulator?

    P.W. Anderson, “Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of in- sulator?” Materials Research Bulletin 8, 153–160 (1973)

    1973

  11. [19]

    On the ground state proper- ties of the anisotropic triangular antiferromagnet,

    P. Fazekas and P. W. Anderson, “On the ground state proper- ties of the anisotropic triangular antiferromagnet,” The Philo- sophical Magazine: A Journal of Theoretical Experimental and Applied Physics 30, 423–440 (1974)

    1974

  12. [20]

    Rare- Earth Triangular Lattice Spin Liquid: A Single-Crystal Study of YbMgGaO4,

    Yuesheng Li, Gang Chen, Wei Tong, Li Pi, Juanjuan Liu, Zhaorong Yang, Xiaoqun Wang, and Qingming Zhang, “Rare- Earth Triangular Lattice Spin Liquid: A Single-Crystal Study of YbMgGaO4,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 167203 (2015)

    2015

  13. [21]

    Gapless quantum spin liquid ground state in the two- dimensional spin-1/2 triangular antiferromagnet YbMgGaO 4,

    Yuesheng Li, Haijun Liao, Zhen Zhang, Shiyan Li, Feng 7 Jin, Langsheng Ling, Lei Zhang, Youming Zou, Li Pi, Zhaorong Yang, Junfeng Wang, Zhonghua Wu, and Qingming Zhang, “Gapless quantum spin liquid ground state in the two- dimensional spin-1/2 triangular antiferromagnet YbMgG...

    2015

  14. [22]

    Crystalline Electric-Field Randomness in the Tri- angular Lattice Spin-Liquid YbMgGaO4,

    Yuesheng Li, Devashibhai Adroja, Robert I. Bewley, David V oneshen, Alexander A. Tsirlin, Philipp Gegenwart, and Qing- ming Zhang, “Crystalline Electric-Field Randomness in the Tri- angular Lattice Spin-Liquid YbMgGaO4,” Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 107202 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    NaYbS 2: A planar spin- 1 2 triangular-lattice magnet and putative spin liquid,

    M. Baenitz, Ph. Schlender, J. Sichelschmidt, Y . A. Onyki- ienko, Z. Zangeneh, K. M. Ranjith, R. Sarkar, L. Hozoi, H. C. Walker, J.-C. Orain, H. Yasuoka, J. van den Brink, H. H. Klauss, D. S. Inosov, and Th. Doert, “NaYbS 2: A planar spin- 1 2 triangular-lattice magnet and put...

    2018

  16. [24]

    Quantum spin liquid ground state in the disorder free triangular lattice NaYbS 2,

    R. Sarkar, Ph. Schlender, V . Grinenko, E. Haeussler, Peter J. Baker, Th. Doert, and H.-H. Klauss, “Quantum spin liquid ground state in the disorder free triangular lattice NaYbS 2,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 241116 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Magnetic Field Effects on the Quantum Spin Liquid Behaviors of NaYbS 2,

    Jiangtao Wu, Jianshu Li, Zheng Zhang, Changle Liu, Yong Hao Gao, Erxi Feng, Guochu Deng, Qingyong Ren, Zhe Wang, Rui Chen, Jan Embs, Fengfeng Zhu, Qing Huang, Ziji Xiang, Lu Chen, Yan Wu, E. S. Choi, Zhe Qu, Lu Li, Junfeng Wang, Haidong Zhou, Yixi Su, Xiaoqun Wang, Gang Chen, ...

    2022

  18. [26]

    Magnetism of NaYbS2: From Finite Temperatures to Ground State,

    Weizhen Zhuo, Zheng Zhang, Mingtai Xie, Anmin Zhang, Jianting Ji, Feng Jin, and Qingming Zhang, “Magnetism of NaYbS2: From Finite Temperatures to Ground State,” SCI- ENCE CHINA Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 67, 107411 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Spinon Fermi surface spin liquid in a triangular lattice antiferromagnet NaYbSe2,

    Peng-Ling Dai, Gaoning Zhang, Yaofeng Xie, Chunruo Duan, Yonghao Gao, Zihao Zhu, Erxi Feng, Zhen Tao, Chien-Lung Huang, Huibo Cao, Andrey Podlesnyak, Garrett E. Granroth, Michelle S. Everett, Joerg C. Neuefeind, David V oneshen, Shun Wang, Guotai Tan, Emilia Morosan, Xia Wang,...

    2021

  20. [28]

    Low-Energy Spin Dynamics of the Quantum Spin Liquid Can- didate NaYbSe2,

    Zheng Zhang, Jianshu Li, Mingtai Xie, Weizhen Zhuo, D. T. Adroja, Peter J. Baker, T. G. Perring, Anmin Zhang, Feng Jin, Jianting Ji, Xiaoqun Wang, Jie Ma, and Qingming Zhang, “Low-Energy Spin Dynamics of the Quantum Spin Liquid Can- didate NaYbSe2,” Phys. Rev. B106, 085115 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Kitaev-Heisenberg models for iridates on the triangular, hyperkagome, kagome, fcc, and pyrochlore lattices,

    Itamar Kimchi and Ashvin Vishwanath, “Kitaev-Heisenberg models for iridates on the triangular, hyperkagome, kagome, fcc, and pyrochlore lattices,” Phys. Rev. B89, 014414 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    Quantum spin liquid ground states of the Heisenberg-Kitaev model on the triangular lattice,

    Pavel Kos and Matthias Punk, “Quantum spin liquid ground states of the Heisenberg-Kitaev model on the triangular lattice,” Phys. Rev. B 95, 024421 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    Quantum order by disorder in the Kitaev model on a triangular lattice,

    George Jackeli and Adolfo Avella, “Quantum order by disorder in the Kitaev model on a triangular lattice,” Phys. Rev. B 92, 184416 (2015)

    2015

  24. [32]

    Global phase diagram, possible chiral spin liquid, and topological superconductivity in the triangular Kitaev–Heisenberg model,

    Kai Li, Shun-Li Yu, and Jian-Xin Li, “Global phase diagram, possible chiral spin liquid, and topological superconductivity in the triangular Kitaev–Heisenberg model,” New Journal of Physics 17, 043032 (2015)

    2015

  25. [33]

    Magnetic orders proximal to the kitaev limit in frustrated triangular systems: Application to Ba 3IrTi2O9,

    Andrei Catuneanu, Jeffrey G. Rau, Heung-Sik Kim, and Hae- Young Kee, “Magnetic orders proximal to the kitaev limit in frustrated triangular systems: Application to Ba 3IrTi2O9,” Phys. Rev. B 92, 165108 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Bond-dependent anisotropy and magnon de- cay in cobalt-based kitaev triangular antiferromagnet,

    Chaebin Kim, Sujin Kim, Pyeongjae Park, Taehun Kim, Jae- hong Jeong, Seiko Ohira-Kawamura, Naoki Murai, Kenji Naka- jima, A. L. Chernyshev, Martin Mourigal, Sung-Jin Kim, and Je-Geun Park, “Bond-dependent anisotropy and magnon de- cay in cobalt-based kitaev triangular antiferr...

    2023

  27. [35]

    A jeff = 1/2 Kitaev material on the triangular lat- tice: the case of NaRuO2,

    Aleksandar Razpopov, David A. S. Kaib, Steffen Backes, Leon Balents, Stephen D. Wilson, Francesco Ferrari, Kira Riedl, and Roser Valent´ı, “A jeff = 1/2 Kitaev material on the triangular lat- tice: the case of NaRuO2,” npj Quantum Materials8, 36 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    NaRuO 2: Kitaev- Heisenberg exchange in triangular-lattice setting,

    Pritam Bhattacharyya, Nikolay A. Bogdanov, Satoshi Nishi- moto, Stephen D. Wilson, and Liviu Hozoi, “NaRuO 2: Kitaev- Heisenberg exchange in triangular-lattice setting,” npj Quantum Materials 8, 52 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Quantum disordered ground state in the triangular-lattice magnet NaRuO 2,

    Brenden R. Ortiz, Paul M. Sarte, Alon Hendler Avidor, Aur- land Hay, Eric Kenney, Alexander I. Kolesnikov, Daniel M. Pa- jerowski, Adam A. Aczel, Keith M. Taddei, Craig M. Brown, Chennan Wang, Michael J. Graf, Ram Seshadri, Leon Ba- lents, and Stephen D. Wilson, “Quantum disor...

    2023

  30. [38]

    Long-range magnetic order in the ˜S = 1 /2 triangular lattice antiferromagnet KCeS2,

    G. Bastien, B. Rubrecht, E. Haeussler, P. Schlender, Z. Zan- geneh, S. Avdoshenko, R. Sarkar, A. Alfonsov, S. Luther, Y . A. Onykiienko, H. C. Walker, H. K ¨uhne, V . Grinenko, Z. Guguchia, V . Kataev, H. H. Klauss, L. Hozoi, J. van den Brink, D. S. Inosov, B. B¨uchner, A. U. ...

    2020

  31. [39]

    Stripe-yz Magnetic Or- der in the Triangular-Lattice Antiferromagnet KCeS2,

    Anton A Kulbakov, Stanislav M Avdoshenko, In ´es Puente- Orench, Mahmoud Deeb, Mathias Doerr, Philipp Schlender, Thomas Doert, and Dmytro S Inosov, “Stripe-yz Magnetic Or- der in the Triangular-Lattice Antiferromagnet KCeS2,” Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 33, 425802 (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    Spin-wave dynamics in the KCeS 2 de- lafossite: A theoretical description of powder inelastic neutron- scattering data,

    Stanislav M. Avdoshenko, Anton A. Kulbakov, Ellen H ¨außler, Philipp Schlender, Thomas Doert, Jacques Ollivier, and Dmytro S. Inosov, “Spin-wave dynamics in the KCeS 2 de- lafossite: A theoretical description of powder inelastic neutron- scattering data,” Phys. Rev. B106, 2144...

    2022

  33. [41]

    Stripe mag- netic order and field-induced quantum criticality in the perfect triangular-lattice antiferromagnet CsCeSe2,

    Tao Xie, N. Zhao, S. Gozel, Jie Xing, S. M. Avdoshenko, K. M. Taddei, A. I. Kolesnikov, L. D. Sanjeewa, Peiyue Ma, N. Har- rison, C. dela Cruz, L. Wu, Athena S. Sefat, A. L. Chernyshev, A. M. L¨auchli, A. Podlesnyak, and S. E. Nikitin, “Stripe mag- netic order and field-induce...

    2024

  34. [42]

    Quantum Spin Dynamics Due to Strong Kitaev Interactions in the Triangular-Lattice An- tiferromagnet CsCeSe2,

    Tao Xie, S. Gozel, Jie Xing, N. Zhao, S. M. Avdoshenko, L. Wu, Athena S. Sefat, A. L. Chernyshev, A. M. L ¨auchli, A. Podlesnyak, and S. E. Nikitin, “Quantum Spin Dynamics Due to Strong Kitaev Interactions in the Triangular-Lattice An- tiferromagnet CsCeSe2,” Phys. Rev. Lett.1...

    2024

  35. [43]

    Supplementary Materials: Dominant Kitaev interaction and field-induced quantum phase transitions in triangular-lattice KCeSe2 ,

    “ Supplementary Materials: Dominant Kitaev interaction and field-induced quantum phase transitions in triangular-lattice KCeSe2 ,”

  36. [44]

    An- tiferromagnetism and crystalline electric field excitations in tetragonal NaCeO2,

    Mitchell M. Bordelon, Joshua D. Bocarsly, Lorenzo Posthuma, Arnab Banerjee, Qiang Zhang, and Stephen D. Wilson, “An- tiferromagnetism and crystalline electric field excitations in tetragonal NaCeO2,” Phys. Rev. B103, 024430 (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    Magnetic properties and signatures of moment ordering in the triangular lattice antiferromagnet KCeO2,

    Mitchell M. Bordelon, Xiaoling Wang, Daniel M. Pajerowski, Arnab Banerjee, Mark Sherwin, Craig M. Brown, M. S. El- deeb, T. Petersen, L. Hozoi, U. K. R ¨oßler, Martin Mourigal, and Stephen D. Wilson, “Magnetic properties and signatures of moment ordering in the triangular latt...

    2021

  38. [46]

    Electronic and Structural Properties of RbCeX 2 (X2: O2, S2, SeS, Se2, TeSe, Te2),

    Brenden R. Ortiz, Mitchell M. Bordelon, Pritam Bhattacharyya, Ganesh Pokharel, Paul M. Sarte, Lorenzo Posthuma, Thorben 8 Petersen, Mohamed S. Eldeeb, Garrett E. Granroth, Clarina R. Dela Cruz, Stuart Calder, Douglas L. Abernathy, Liviu Hozoi, and Stephen D. Wilson, “Electroni...

    2022

  39. [47]

    Anisotropic spin model of strong spin-orbit-coupled triangular antiferro- magnets,

    Yao-Dong Li, Xiaoqun Wang, and Gang Chen, “Anisotropic spin model of strong spin-orbit-coupled triangular antiferro- magnets,” Phys. Rev. B94, 035107 (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Anisotropic-Exchange Magnets on a Triangular Lattice: Spin Waves, Accidental Degeneracies, and Dual Spin Liquids,

    P. A. Maksimov, Zhenyue Zhu, Steven R. White, and A. L. Chernyshev, “Anisotropic-Exchange Magnets on a Triangular Lattice: Spin Waves, Accidental Degeneracies, and Dual Spin Liquids,” Phys. Rev. X9, 021017 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    Frustration and anisotropic exchange in ytterbium magnets with edge-shared octahedra,

    Jeffrey G. Rau and Michel J. P. Gingras, “Frustration and anisotropic exchange in ytterbium magnets with edge-shared octahedra,” Phys. Rev. B98, 054408 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    Kitaev materials,

    Simon Trebst and Ciar ´an Hickey, “Kitaev materials,” Physics Reports 950, 1–37 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    We all acknowledge the beam time granted by PSI facility,” (2024)

    “The neutron scattering data were collected on the FOCUS spectrometer , a direct geometry cold neutron time-of-flight in- strument located at SINQ, the Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI) in Switzerland. We all acknowledge the beam time granted by PSI facility,” (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Topography of Spin Liquids on a Triangular Lat- tice,

    Zhenyue Zhu, P. A. Maksimov, Steven R. White, and A. L. Chernyshev, “Topography of Spin Liquids on a Triangular Lat- tice,” Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 207203 (2018)

    2018

  45. [53]

    Quan- tum lattice model solver HΦ,

    Mitsuaki Kawamura, Kazuyoshi Yoshimi, Takahiro Misawa, Youhei Yamaji, Synge Todo, and Naoki Kawashima, “Quan- tum lattice model solver HΦ,” Computer Physics Communica- tions 217, 180–192 (2017)

    2017

  46. [54]

    Update of HΦ: Newly added functions and methods in versions 2 and 3,

    Kota Ido, Mitsuaki Kawamura, Yuichi Motoyama, Kazuyoshi Yoshimi, Youhei Yamaji, Synge Todo, Naoki Kawashima, and Takahiro Misawa, “Update of HΦ: Newly added functions and methods in versions 2 and 3,” Computer Physics Communica- tions 298, 109093 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    Linear spin wave theory for single-q in- commensurate magnetic structures,

    S Toth and B Lake, “Linear spin wave theory for single-q in- commensurate magnetic structures,” Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter 27, 166002 (2015)

    2015

  48. [56]

    The ITensor Software Library for Tensor Network Cal- culations,

    Matthew Fishman, Steven R. White, and E. Miles Stouden- mire, “The ITensor Software Library for Tensor Network Cal- culations,” SciPost Phys. Codebases , 4 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Codebase release 0.3 for ITensor,

    Matthew Fishman, Steven R. White, and E. Miles Stoudenmire, “Codebase release 0.3 for ITensor,” SciPost Phys. Codebases , 4–r0.3 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Comprehensive study of the global phase diagram of the J − K − Γ model on a triangular lattice,

    Shi Wang, Zhongyuan Qi, Bin Xi, Wei Wang, Shun-Li Yu, and Jian-Xin Li, “Comprehensive study of the global phase diagram of the J − K − Γ model on a triangular lattice,” Phys. Rev. B 103, 054410 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Ground state phase diagram of the Kitaev-Heisenberg model on a honeycomb-triangular lattice,

    Masanori Kishimoto, Katsuhiro Morita, Yukihiro Matsub- ayashi, Shigetoshi Sota, Seiji Yunoki, and Takami Tohyama, “Ground state phase diagram of the Kitaev-Heisenberg model on a honeycomb-triangular lattice,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 054411 (2018)

    2018

  52. [60]

    Ev- idence for a field-induced quantum spin liquid in α-RuCl3,

    S.-H. Baek, S.-H. Do, K.-Y . Choi, Y . S. Kwon, A. U. B. Wolter, S. Nishimoto, Jeroen van den Brink, and B. B ¨uchner, “Ev- idence for a field-induced quantum spin liquid in α-RuCl3,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 037201 (2017)

    2017

  53. [61]

    Phase diagrams of kitaev models for arbitrary magnetic field orientations,

    F. Yılmaz, A. P. Kampf, and S. K. Yip, “Phase diagrams of kitaev models for arbitrary magnetic field orientations,” Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043024 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

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