Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 78 references

Quantum Criticality by Interaction Frustration in a Square-Planar Lattice

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read ThCr2Ge2C, a metal with a square-planar Cr lattice, exhibits quantum criticality at ambient pressure and zero magnetic field, driven by competing exchange interactions that leave the spins frustrated.

desk verdict Genuinely new compound with clean thermodynamic signatures, but the DFT frustration argument has a quantitative inconsistency the paper does not acknowledge; the central claim overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.22362 v1 pith:KPY6YJOL submitted 2025-07-30 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yi-Qiang Lin , Chang-Chao Liu , Jia-Xin Li , Bai-Jiang Lv , Kai-Xin Ye , Jia-Wen Zhang , Si-Qi Wu , Ya-Nan Zhang
show 11 more authors
Ye Chen Jia-Yi Lu Jing Li Hua-Xun Li Hao Li Yi Liu Cao Wang Yun-Lei Sun Hao Jiang Hui-Qiu Yuan Guang-Han Cao
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords quantumcriticalitymagneticfrustrationJ1-J2squarelatticenon-Fermi-liquidThCr2Ge2Csquare-planarspinnematicfrustratedmagnetism
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 claims that the metallic compound ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C sits at a quantum critical point already at ambient pressure and zero magnetic field, without any tuning of doping, field, or pressure. Its Cr$_2$C planes form a square-planar lattice in which nearest-neighbor exchange $J_1$ is ferromagnetic while next-nearest-neighbor exchange $J_2$ is antiferromagnetic, with $J_2/J_1 \sim -0.5$; the competing interactions frustrate the system so strongly that no magnetic order or spin freezing appears down to 70 mK. The evidence is a logarithmic divergence in the magnetic susceptibility and in $C/T$, together with resistivity $\rho = \rho_0 + A'T^n$ with $n = 1.11$, the non-Fermi-liquid signatures expected at a quantum critical point. Applying a magnetic field or pressure drives the system back to a Fermi liquid, and first-principles calculations show the frustration weakens under pressure while ordered phases become stable. If correct, this is a rare intrinsic quantum critical point in a metallic square lattice, and a platform for studying frustrated magnetism, spin-nematic order, and possible unconventional superconductivity.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $J_1$-$J_2$ Heisenberg model on a square lattice, whose exchange ratio $\alpha = J_2/J_1$ controls how much the competing couplings frustrate the spins. In ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C the Cr$_2$C planes form a Lieb-like square-planar net with two Cr sites per cell, so each site feels two distinct next-nearest-neighbor couplings, $J_2'$ and $J_2''$, and the effective $J_2$ is their average; the calculated $J_z$ is about an order of magnitude smaller, making the magnetism quasi-two-dimensional. Earlier studies of this model place quantum critical regions at the boundaries between ordered phases where quantum fluctuations destroy long-range order, and the paper's DFT-derived $\alpha \approx -0.5$ falls in that region. On the experimental side, the absence of magnetic Bragg peaks, the unusually large frustration index $f = |\theta_{CW}|/T_N > 6850$, and the logarithmic low-temperature divergences of $\chi$ and $C/T$ are what carry the quantum-critical interpretation.

What would settle it

A muon spin-rotation or high-resolution neutron scattering measurement below 70 mK that resolves static magnetic order or spin freezing would falsify the claim; equivalently, if the $-\ln T$ upturn in $C/T$ survives in the purest samples but is cut off below about 70 mK rather than continuing, or if the resistivity bends back toward $T^2$ at the lowest temperatures, the zero-field QCP would not be intrinsic.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C is a gapless quantum magnet near a quantum critical point in zero field and at ambient pressure. No long-range magnetic order or short-range spin freezing is detected by neutron powder diffraction, magnetization, and specific heat down to 70 mK, while $\chi(T)$ and $C/T$ both grow logarithmically at low temperature and the resistivity follows $\rho \propto T^{1.11}$ rather than the Fermi-liquid $T^2$. First-principles calculations give a strongly ferromagnetic $J_1$ and an antiferromagnetic effective $J_2$, with $\alpha = (J_2' + J_2'')/2J_1 \approx -0.5$, placing the compound near the frustration-driven quantum critical region of the two-dimensional $J_1$-$J_2$ phase diagram. The Fermi liquid is restored by magnetic field or pressure, and the same calculations show pressure moves $\alpha$ away from the critical value and stabilizes magnetically ordered states. The isoelectronic analogue ThCr$_2$Si$_2$C, under chemical pressure from Si, orders magnetically, which supports the pressure picture.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the low-temperature logarithmic divergences in $\chi$ and $C/T$ and the resistivity exponent $n = 1.11$ are genuine fingerprints of a nearby quantum critical point, rather than artifacts of disorder, two-dimensional fluctuations, Schottky tails, or a slow crossover.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C becomes a model system for zero-field quantum criticality in a metallic square lattice, complementing geometrically frustrated spin-liquid candidates.
  • Magnetic field and pressure act as control knobs that move the system from the quantum critical regime to a Fermi liquid; pressure should also stabilize magnetically ordered phases at low temperature.
  • The isoelectronic substitution of Si for Ge should act as positive chemical pressure and drive ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C into the A-type antiferromagnetic order observed in ThCr$_2$Si$_2$C.
  • Proximity to maximal frustration raises the possibility of a spin-nematic phase and gapless spinon-like excitations in the quantum critical regime.
  • The combination of log divergences in $\chi$ and $C/T$ with $n \approx 1.11$ in a metal argues for an itinerant quantum critical point that can be tested with muon spin relaxation, neutron scattering, and NMR.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the zero-field QCP is intrinsic, then substituting lighter or heavier elements on the Ge or C sites should tune $\alpha$ through the critical region, giving a doping-free phase diagram that could be compared quantitatively with the $J_1$-$J_2$ model.
  • A concrete testable extension is to measure the Grüneisen ratio, which should diverge at a pressure-tuned QCP, and to follow the field-dependence of the $C/T$ log term to see it replaced by a constant at the Fermi liquid crossover.
  • The Lieb-like geometry with two inequivalent next-nearest-neighbor couplings suggests that anisotropic strain along the $a$ or $b$ axis could separately tune $J_2'$ and $J_2''$, providing a route toward the spin-nematic phase the paper mentions.
  • Inelastic neutron scattering on single crystals could map the spin excitations and determine whether the quantum critical fluctuations are itinerant, as the resistivity exponent suggests, or local-moment in origin.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. ThCr2Ge2C is proposed as a zero-field, ambient-pressure quantum critical metal. The authors report synthesis and characterization: no magnetic order or spin freezing down to 70 mK (specific heat, magnetization, ac susceptibility) and no magnetic Bragg peaks in neutron diffraction down to 7 K. Susceptibility and C/T show logarithmic increases at low temperature, and resistivity follows ρ0 + A′T^1.11 below 10 K, with Fermi-liquid behavior recovered under applied magnetic field or pressure. DFT+U calculations yield competing J1 and J2 interactions with α = (J2′ + J2″)/(2J1) ≈ −0.4 to −0.6 and small energy differences among magnetic configurations, which the authors interpret as interaction frustration stabilizing a quantum critical point.

Significance. If correct, this would be one of the few intrinsic, zero-field QCPs in a metallic square-lattice system without doping, pressure, or field tuning, and the experimental dataset is unusually comprehensive (neutron powder diffraction, single-crystal and polycrystal magnetization, ac/dc susceptibility, specific heat to 70 mK, resistivity under multiple fields and pressures). The paper is not circular: the absence of order is an experimental result independent of the DFT. However, the central theoretical link—the quantitative frustration ratio—rests on an exchange-parameter extraction that is internally inconsistent, and the experimental log-T signatures have not been fully distinguished from disorder or 2D fluctuation alternatives. These issues must be addressed before the claim can be considered established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Tables I and S3] The six magnetic total energies in Table S3 cannot be reproduced by the exchange parameters in Table I. For U = 1.5 eV, the model gives E_C − E_G = 4J_z = −3.16 meV, while Table S3 gives −233.25 − (−136.10) = −97.15 meV; similarly E_FM − E_C = 8J_1 = −223.9 meV, while the table gives −129.9 meV. The discrepancy is even larger at U = 2 eV (4J_z = −16.9 meV vs E_C − E_G = −85.6 meV). Because the Cr moments vary between 1.56 and 2.02 μB across configurations, the fixed-spin Heisenberg model cannot absorb the moment-formation energy, and the paper does not state which subset of energies was used for the fit. The reported α ≈ −0.4 to −0.6 is therefore not a robust output, and the claim that ThCr2Ge2C sits near maximal frustration is not quantitatively supported.
  2. [Section II, Figs. 2(a,b,d) and Fig. S4] The logarithmic divergences in χ(T) and C/T are the main experimental evidence for quantum criticality, but the only alternative explicitly ruled out is a Schottky anomaly (Fig. S4). The paper does not quantitatively exclude disorder-broadened magnetism, short-range correlations, or two-dimensional fluctuation contributions, all of which can produce log(T)-like thermodynamic signatures. Additional diagnostics—such as field dependence of χ and C/T, scaling collapses, or a disorder-model comparison—are needed to support the intrinsic-QCP interpretation, or the attribution of these terms to a zero-field quantum critical point should be softened.
  3. [Section IV, Fig. 4(a,d), Table S3] At the U values closest to the cRPA result (U ≈ 1.25–1.5 eV), the DFT ground state is ferromagnetic, not a quantum critical state: at U = 1.5 eV, E_FM = −363.19 meV versus E_A = −360.05 meV, and the α value from Table I (−0.39) is not the maximal-frustration boundary α ≈ −0.5 claimed in the text. The pressure-evolution argument in Fig. 4(d) therefore depends entirely on the α values derived from the inconsistent fit. The authors should explain how a FM ground state in DFT is compatible with the absence of magnetic order in experiment, or identify what selects the U and the α value that place the system at the quantum critical boundary.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section II] The frustration index f = |θ_CW|/T_N > 6850 is not supported because θ_CW is never actually determined; the text states that the high-temperature data cannot be fitted by an extended Curie-Weiss law and that θ_CW is 'at least above 480 K,' which is not a quantitative extraction.
  2. [Fig. 2(d)] The C/T fit with C/T = γ + βT^2 − η ln(T) is performed over only 70 mK to 1 K; please provide residuals, parameter uncertainties, and a discussion of possible degeneracy with a nuclear or impurity contribution.
  3. [Table I] The U = 1 eV row is ambiguous because the header lists J2′ and J2″ separately, yet the text says only an average is given; a placeholder or a note should make this clear.
  4. [Abstract and Table I] The abstract quotes J2/J1 ~ −0.5, while Table I gives −0.39 at U = 1.5 eV and −0.58 at U = 2 eV; please quote the consistent range.
  5. [Section II] The resistivity exponent n = 1.11 is quoted without an uncertainty or a fit-range sensitivity check; given that the quantum-critical interpretation depends on n being distinct from 2, please report these.
  6. [General] There are several typographical and encoding issues: 'serval times' should be 'several times'; reference [78] contains an encoding artifact 'Szytu/suppress la'; 'anticonfiguration' is likely meant as 'anti-configuration' or 'antitype'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the experimental quantum-critical signatures and the DFT frustration ratio are independent inputs; the main residual concern is internal consistency of the DFT exchange fit, which is a correctness issue rather than a circularity.

full rationale

The derivation is not circular. The experimental claims (absence of long-range magnetic order down to 70 mK, logarithmic divergences in chi and C/T, and resistivity exponent n = 1.11) are direct measurements and do not depend on the DFT frustration parameter. The DFT value alpha = (J2' + J2'')/(2J1) ~ -0.4 to -0.6 is obtained by mapping six calculated magnetic total energies onto a J1-J2'-J2''-Jz Heisenberg model; it is not fitted to the experimental no-order observation or to the log-divergences, so the inference that interaction frustration drives quantum criticality is an independent conjunction of experiment and calculation. The choice of U ~ 1-1.5 eV is informed by the authors' own cRPA result and by comparison to CsCr3Sb5 (Ref. [63], overlapping authorship), but this is a minor parameter-provenance citation and is not load-bearing: alpha remains in the frustrated window for U = 1, 1.5, and 2 eV. A separate, non-circularity correctness risk is that the reported exchange parameters do not reproduce all six DFT energy differences; for example, at U = 1.5 eV, the FM-A difference implies 4Jz = -3.14 meV while C-G implies 4Jz = -97.15 meV. This indicates the Heisenberg reduction is not internally self-consistent, but it is an issue of robustness and correctness, not a circular derivation, and therefore does not raise the circularity score. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz-smuggling, or renaming of a known result was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on experimental signatures interpreted as quantum critical plus DFT-derived exchange parameters. The main free parameters are U and J/U (and the Th 5f UeFF), and the scientific conclusion depends non-trivially on the selected U. There are no invented entities. The axioms are standard domain assumptions for frustrated magnets and DFT-based parameter extraction.

free parameters (3)
  • Hubbard U for Cr 3d = 1.25 eV from cRPA (UeFF = 1.5 eV used in many calculations)
    The exchange constants and alpha depend strongly on U. At U = 1 eV, J1 = -74.94 meV; at U = 1.5 eV, J1 = -27.99 meV; at U = 2 eV, J1 = -17.67 meV. The paper selects U ~ 1.25 eV from cRPA and then uses U = 1.5 eV for the pressure calculations. The claim J2/J1 ~ -0.5 is tied to this choice.
  • UeFF for Th 5f orbitals = 11 eV
    Set to a large value to prevent Th 5f hybridization, following prior Th compounds (Refs. 56, 78). This is a modeling choice that affects the electronic structure and hence the exchange constants.
  • J/U ratio = 0.36 from cRPA
    Used to justify that U ~ 1 eV is the relevant interaction strength; if the true J/U differs, the preferred U and the resulting alpha change.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The magnetic properties of ThCr2Ge2C are dominated by the Cr 3d electrons, with Th 5f electrons inert.
    Invoked when setting UeFF(Th 5f) = 11 eV in the Methods section, citing prior Th-based compounds. If Th contributed magnetic moments or significant hybridization, the exchange constants would change.
  • domain assumption The low-temperature log-T divergences are quantum critical in origin.
    This is the interpretive step that connects the measurements to the claim. The paper excludes Schottky anomalies (Fig. S4) but does not quantitatively exclude disorder or 2D fluctuation alternatives.
  • domain assumption A J1-J2'-J2''-Jz Heisenberg model captures the magnetic interactions; longer-range J3 and RKKY are negligible.
    The DFT energies are mapped onto six magnetic states. The paper checks J3 in the SM and finds it small, but RKKY is acknowledged as possibly non-negligible without quantitative treatment.
  • domain assumption The classification of magnetic states (FM, A, C, G, S, 2k) is complete enough to extract J1, J2', J2'', Jz from total energies.
    The energy expressions in Section III (main text) assume these six states span the relevant configuration space. If another state were lower or if the mapping is not one-to-one, the extracted parameters would be affected.
invented entities (1)
  • No new fundamental entity proposed
    purpose: N/A
    The paper introduces no new particle, force, or conserved quantity. It applies existing DFT and Heisenberg model concepts to a new compound.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Criticality by Interaction Frustration in a Square-Planar Lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KPY6YJOL

@misc{pith2026250722362,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Criticality by Interaction Frustration in a Square-Planar Lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KPY6YJOL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.22362}
}
abstract

We report experimental and theoretical investigations on ThCr$_2$Ge$_2$C, a metallic compound in which Cr$_2$C planes form a square-planar lattice. Neutron powder diffraction, magnetization, and specific heat measurements reveal no evidence of long-range magnetic order or short-range spin freezing down to 70~mK. Quantum critical behavior was indicated through logarithmic divergences in both the magnetic susceptibility and the specific heat divided by temperature. Resistivity measurements exhibit non-Fermi-liquid behavior, with a Fermi liquid recovered under magnetic fields or high pressures. First-principles calculations identify competing nearest-neighbor ($J_1$) and next-nearest-neighbor ($J_2$) exchange interactions, with $J_2/J_1 \sim -0.5$, pointing to strong magnetic frustration. The interaction frustration is reduced, and magnetically ordered phases are stabilized upon the application of negative or positive pressures. This work offers a rare example of zero-field, ambient pressure quantum criticality mainly driven by interaction frustration in a square lattice.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.22362 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a-c) Reconstructed ThCr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Simulated neutron powder diffraction (NPD) pat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) Calculation of the energy of ThCr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Sachdev, Quantum phase transitions, Phys

    S. Sachdev, Quantum phase transitions, Phys. World 12, 33 (1999)

    work page 1999

  2. [2]

    Vojta, Quantum phase transitions, Rep

    M. Vojta, Quantum phase transitions, Rep. Prog. Phys. 66, 2069 (2003)

    2003

  3. [3]

    Sachdev, Quantum magnetism and criticality , Vol

    S. Sachdev, Quantum magnetism and criticality , Vol. 4 (Nature Publishing Group UK London, 2008) pp. 173– 185

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Sachdev and B

    S. Sachdev and B. Keimer, Quantum criticality, Phys. Today 64, 29 (2011)

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Stewart, Non-Fermi-liquid behavior in d- and f- electron metals, Rev

    G. Stewart, Non-Fermi-liquid behavior in d- and f- electron metals, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 797 (2001)

    work page 2001

  6. [6]

    Coleman, C

    P. Coleman, C. P´ epin, Q. Si, and R. Ramazashvili, How do Fermi liquids get heavy and die?, J. Phys.:Condens. Matter. 13, R723 (2001)

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    H. v. L¨ ohneysen, A. Rosch, M. Vojta, and P. W¨ olfle, Fermi-liquid instabilities at magnetic quantum phase transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1015 (2007)

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Mathur, F

    N. Mathur, F. Grosche, S. Julian, I. Walker, D. Freye, R. Haselwimmer, and G. Lonzarich, Magnetically me- diated superconductivity in heavy fermion compounds, Nature 394, 39 (1998)

    work page 1998

Show all 78 references
  1. [9]

    Schr¨ oder, G

    A. Schr¨ oder, G. Aeppli, R. Coldea, M. Adams, O. Stock- ert, H. L¨ ohneysen, E. Bucher, R. Ramazashvili, and P. Coleman, Onset of antiferromagnetism in heavy- fermion metals, Nature 407, 351 (2000)

    2000

  2. [10]

    Custers, P

    J. Custers, P. Gegenwart, H. Wilhelm, K. Neumaier, Y. Tokiwa, O. Trovarelli, C. Geibel, F. Steglich, C. P´ epin, and P. Coleman, The break-up of heavy electrons at a quantum critical point, Nature 424, 524 (2003)

    2003

  3. [11]

    Gegenwart, Q

    P. Gegenwart, Q. Si, and F. Steglich, Quantum criticality in heavy-fermion metals, Nat. Phys. 4, 186 (2008)

    2008

  4. [12]

    D. C. Johnston, The puzzle of high temperature super- conductivity in layered iron pnictides and chalcogenides, Adv. Phys. 59, 803 (2010)

    2010

  5. [13]

    Si and F

    Q. Si and F. Steglich, Heavy fermions and quantum phase transitions, Science 329, 1161 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    P. Dai, J. Hu, and E. Dagotto, Magnetism and its micro- scopic origin in iron-based high-temperature supercon- ductors, Nat. Phys. 8, 709 (2012)

    2012

  7. [15]

    Dai, Antiferromagnetic order and spin dynamics in iron-based superconductors, Rev

    P. Dai, Antiferromagnetic order and spin dynamics in iron-based superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 855 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Keimer, S

    B. Keimer, S. A. Kivelson, M. R. Norman, S. Uchida, and J. Zaanen, From quantum matter to high-temperature superconductivity in copper oxides, Nature 518, 179 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Liu, Z.-Y

    Y. Liu, Z.-Y. Liu, J.-K. Bao, P.-T. Yang, L.-W. Ji, S.- Q. Wu, Q.-X. Shen, J. Luo, J. Yang, J.-Y. Liu, C.-C. Xu, W.-Z. Yang, W.-L. Chai, J.-Y. Lu, C.-C. Liu, B.-S. Wang, H. Jiang, Q. Tao, Z. Ren, X.-F. Xu, C. Cao, Z.-A. Xu, R. Zhou, J.-G. Cheng, and G.-H. Cao, Superconduc- tiv...

    2024

  10. [18]

    Senthil, L

    T. Senthil, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, A. Vishwanath, and M. P. Fisher, Quantum criticality beyond the Landau- Ginzburg-Wilson paradigm, Phys. Rev. B 70, 144407 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    Xu, Unconventional quantum critical points, Int

    C. Xu, Unconventional quantum critical points, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 26, 1230007 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    L. Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    2010

  13. [21]

    Y. Zhou, K. Kanoda, and T.-K. Ng, Quantum spin liquid states, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 025003 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Schmidt and P

    B. Schmidt and P. Thalmeier, Frustrated two dimen- sional quantum magnets, Phys. Rep. 703, 1 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Vojta, Frustration and quantum criticality,Rep

    M. Vojta, Frustration and quantum criticality,Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 064501 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Nakatsuji, Y

    S. Nakatsuji, Y. Machida, Y. Maeno, T. Tayama, T. Sakakibara, J. v. Duijn, L. Balicas, J. Millican, R. Macaluso, and J. Y. Chan, Metallic spin-liquid be- havior of the geometrically frustrated Kondo lattice Pr2Ir2O7, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 087204 (2006)

    2006

  17. [25]

    Okamoto, M

    Y. Okamoto, M. Nohara, H. Aruga-Katori, and H. Tak- agi, Spin-Liquid State in the S = 1 /2 Hyperkagome Antiferromagnet Na4Ir3O8, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 137207 (2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    Yamashita, Y

    S. Yamashita, Y. Nakazawa, M. Oguni, Y. Oshima, H. Nojiri, Y. Shimizu, K. Miyagawa, and K. Kanoda, Thermodynamic properties of a spin-1/2 spin-liquid state in a κ-type organic salt, Nat. Phys. 4, 459 (2008)

    2008

  19. [27]

    T.-H. Han, J. S. Helton, S. Chu, D. G. Nocera, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, C. Broholm, and Y. S. Lee, Fraction- alized excitations in the spin-liquid state of a kagome- lattice antiferromagnet, Nature 492, 406 (2012)

    2012

  20. [28]

    Tokiwa, J

    Y. Tokiwa, J. Ishikawa, S. Nakatsuji, and P. Gegenwart, Quantum criticality in a metallic spin liquid, Nat. Mater. 13, 356 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Shen, Y.-D

    Y. Shen, Y.-D. Li, H. Wo, Y. Li, S. Shen, B. Pan, Q. Wang, H. C. Walker, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, Y. Hao, D. L. Quintero-Castro, L. W. Harriger, M. D. Frontzek, L. Hao, S. Meng, Q. Zhang, G. Chen, and J. Zhao, Ev- idence for a spinon fermi surface in a triangular-lattice quantum-...

    2016

  22. [30]

    B. Gao, T. Chen, D. W. Tam, C.-L. Huang, K. Sas- mal, D. T. Adroja, F. Ye, H. Cao, G. Sala, M. B. Stone, C. Baines, J. A. T. Verezhak, H. Hu, J.-H. Chung, X. Xu, S.-W. Cheong, M. Nallaiyan, S. Spagna, M. B. Maple, A. H. Nevidomskyy, E. Morosan, G. Chen, and P. Dai, Experimenta...

    2019

  23. [31]

    P.-L. Dai, G. Zhang, Y. Xie, C. Duan, Y. Gao, Z. Zhu, E. Feng, Z. Tao, C.-L. Huang, H. Cao, A. Podlesnyak, G. E. Granroth, M. S. Everett, J. C. Neuefeind, D. Voneshen, S. Wang, G. Tan, E. Morosan, X. Wang, H.-Q. Lin, L. Shu, G. Chen, Y. Guo, X. Lu, and P. Dai, Spinon Fermi sur...

    2021

  24. [32]

    Matan, T

    K. Matan, T. Ono, Y. Fukumoto, T. J. Sato, J. Yamaura, M. Yano, K. Morita, and H. Tanaka, Pinwheel valence- bond solid and triplet excitations in the two-dimensional deformed kagome lattice, Nat. Phys. 6, 865 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    J. P. Sheckelton, J. R. Neilson, D. G. Soltan, and T. M. McQueen, Possible valence-bond condensation in the frustrated cluster magnet LiZn 2Mo3O8, Nat. Mater. 11, 493 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    E. Kaul, H. Rosner, N. Shannon, R. Shpanchenko, and C. Geibel, Evidence for a frustrated square lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor interaction in the new compound Pb 2VO(PO4)2, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 272, 922 (2004)

    2004

  27. [35]

    R. Nath, A. Tsirlin, H. Rosner, and C. Geibel, Mag- 16 netic properties of BaCdVO(PO 4)2: A strongly frus- trated spin-1/2 square lattice close to the quantum crit- ical regime, Phys. Rev. B 78, 064422 (2008)

    2008

  28. [36]

    R. Nath, Y. Furukawa, F. Borsa, E. Kaul, M. Baenitz, C. Geibel, and D. Johnston, Single-crystal 31P NMR studies of the frustrated square-lattice compound Pb2(VO)(PO4)2, Phys. Rev. B 80, 214430 (2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    A. A. Tsirlin, R. Nath, A. M. Abakumov, R. V. Sh- panchenko, C. Geibel, and H. Rosner, Frustrated square lattice with spatial anisotropy: Crystal structure and magnetic properties of PbZnVO(PO4)2, Phys. Rev. B 81, 174424 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Bossoni, P

    L. Bossoni, P. Carretta, R. Nath, M. Moscardini, M. Baenitz, and C. Geibel, NMR and µSR study of spin correlations in SrZnVO(PO 4)2: An S= 1/2 frustrated magnet on a square lattice, Phys. Rev. B 83, 014412 (2011)

    2011

  31. [39]

    Kageyama, T

    H. Kageyama, T. Kitano, N. Oba, M. Nishi, S. Na- gai, K. Hirota, L. Viciu, W. JB, J. Yasuda, Y. Baba, Y. Ajiro, and Y. K, Spin-Singlet Ground State in Two-Dimensional S = 1 /2 Frustrated Square Lattice:(CuCl)LaNb2O7, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 74, 1702 (2005)

    2005

  32. [40]

    N. Oba, H. Kageyama, T. Kitano, J. Yasuda, Y. Baba, M. Nishi, K. Hirota, Y. Narumi, M. Hagiwara, K. Kindo, T. Saito, Y. Ajiro, and K. Yoshimura, Collinear order in frustrated quantum antiferromagnet on square lattice (CuBr)LaNb2O7, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 75, 113601 (2006)

    2006

  33. [41]

    A. A. Tsirlin, R. Nath, A. Abakumov, Y. Furukawa, D. Johnston, M. Hemmida, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A. Loidl, C. Geibel, and H. Rosner, Phase separation and frustrated square lattice magnetism of Na 1.5VOPO4F0.5, Phys. Rev. B 84, 014429 (2011)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Tsujimoto, J

    Y. Tsujimoto, J. Sugiyama, M. Ochi, K. Kuroki, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, I. Umegaki, M. M ˚ ansson, D. Andreica, S. Hara, T. Sakurai, S. Okubo, H. Ohta, A. T. Boothroyd, and K. Yamaura, Impact of mixed anion ordered state on the magnetic ground states of S = 1 /2 square-latt...

    2022

  35. [43]

    See Supplemental Materials for details

  36. [44]

    Vasiliev, O

    A. Vasiliev, O. Volkova, E. Zvereva, and M. Markina, Milestones of low-D quantum magnetism, npj Quantum Mater. 3, 18 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Zhang, Y.-H

    G.-M. Zhang, Y.-H. Su, Z.-Y. Lu, Z.-Y. Weng, D.-H. Lee, and T. Xiang, Universal linear-temperature dependence of static magnetic susceptibility in iron pnictides, Euro- phys. Lett. 86, 37006 (2009)

    2009

  38. [46]

    Ramirez, Strongly geometrically frustrated magnet s, Annu

    A. Ramirez, Strongly geometrically frustrated magnet s, Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 24, 453 (1994)

    1994

  39. [47]

    Burdin, D

    S. Burdin, D. Grempel, and A. Georges, Heavy-fermion and spin-liquid behavior in a kondo lattice with magnetic frustration, Phys. Rev. B 66, 045111 (2002)

    2002

  40. [48]

    L¨ ohneysen, M

    H. L¨ ohneysen, M. Sieck, O. Stockert, and M. Waffen- schmidt, Investigation of non-Fermi-liquid behavior in CeCu6−xAux, Physica B 223, 471 (1996)

    1996

  41. [49]

    Gegenwart, J

    P. Gegenwart, J. Custers, C. Geibel, K. Neu- maier, T. Tayama, K. Tenya, O. Trovarelli, and F. Steglich, Magnetic-field induced quantum critical point in YbRh 2Si2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 056402 (2002)

    2002

  42. [50]

    Paglione, M

    J. Paglione, M. Tanatar, D. Hawthorn, E. Boaknin, R. Hill, F. Ronning, M. Sutherland, L. Taillefer, C. Petro- vic, and P. Canfield, Field-induced quantum critical point in CeCoIn5, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 246405 (2003)

    2003

  43. [51]

    Shibauchi, L

    T. Shibauchi, L. Krusin-Elbaum, M. Hasegawa, Y. Kasa- hara, R. Okazaki, and Y. Matsuda, Field-induced quan- tum critical route to a Fermi liquid in high-temperature superconductors, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 105, 7120 (2008)

    2008

  44. [52]

    Pfeiffer, K

    M. Pfeiffer, K. Semeniuk, J. F. Landaeta, R. Borth, C. Geibel, M. Nicklas, M. Brando, S. Khim, and E. Has- singer, Pressure-tuned quantum criticality in the locally noncentrosymmetric superconductor CeRh 2As2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 126506 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Rosch, Interplay of disorder and spin fluctuations in the resistivity near a quantum critical point, Phys

    A. Rosch, Interplay of disorder and spin fluctuations in the resistivity near a quantum critical point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4280 (1999)

    1999

  46. [54]

    Moriya and T

    T. Moriya and T. Takimoto, Anomalous properties around magnetic instability in heavy electron systems, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 64, 960 (1995)

    1995

  47. [55]

    Lemoine, A

    P. Lemoine, A. Verniere, M. Pasturel, G. Venturini, and B. Malaman, Unexpected magnetic ordering on the Cr substructure in UCr2Si2C and structural relationships in quaternary U-Cr-Si-C compounds, Inorg. Chem. 57, 2546 (2018)

    2018

  48. [56]

    Y. Xiao, B. Li, Q. Duan, S. Liu, Q. Ren, Y. Lin, Y. Xia, Y. Cui, H. Jiang, S. Wei, Z. Ren, Y. Mei, Y. Sun, S. Fu, S. Tan, Q. Jing, D. Yu, Y. Chen, C. Wang, and G. Cao, ThCr2Si2C: An Antiferromagnetic Metal with a Cr 2C Square Lattice, Inorg. Chem. 63, 211 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Takeiri, Y

    F. Takeiri, Y. Matsumoto, T. Yamamoto, N. Hayashi, Z. Li, T. Tohyama, C. Tassel, C. Ritter, Y. Narumi, M. Hagiwara, and H. Kageyama, High-pressure synthe- sis of the layered iron oxyselenide BaFe2Se2O with strong magnetic anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B 94, 184426 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Song, Y.-Q

    S.-J. Song, Y.-Q. Lin, B.-Z. Li, S.-Q. Wu, Q.-Q. Zhu, Z. Ren, and G.-H. Cao, Tetragonal polymorph of BaFe2S2O as an antiferromagnetic Mott insulator, Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, 055002 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    Shannon, B

    N. Shannon, B. Schmidt, K. Penc, and P. Thalmeier, Finite temperature properties and frustrated ferromag- netism in a square lattice Heisenberg model, Eur. Phys. J. B. 38, 599 (2004)

    2004

  52. [60]

    Shannon, T

    N. Shannon, T. Momoi, and P. Sindzingre, Nematic or- der in square lattice frustrated ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 027213 (2006)

    2006

  53. [61]

    Richter, R

    J. Richter, R. Darradi, J. Schulenburg, D. J. J. Farnell , and H. Rosner, Frustrated spin-1/2 J1-J2 Heisenberg fer- romagnet on the square lattice studied via exact diago- nalization and coupled-cluster method, Phys. Rev. B 81, 174429 (2010)

    2010

  54. [62]

    Wen, S.-L

    J. Wen, S.-L. Yu, S. Li, W. Yu, and J.-X. Li, Experimen- tal identification of quantum spin liquids, npj Quantum Mater. 4, 12 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    S. Wu, C. Xu, X. Wang, H.-Q. Lin, C. Cao, and G.- H. Cao, Flat-band enhanced antiferromagnetic fluctu- ations and superconductivity in pressurized CsCr 3Sb5, Nat. Commun. 16, 1375 (2025)

    2025

  56. [64]

    J. B. Goodenough, Theory of the role of covalence in the perovskite-type manganites [La, M(II)]MnO 3, Phys. rev. 100, 564 (1955)

    1955

  57. [65]

    J. B. Goodenough, An interpretation of the mag- netic properties of the perovskite-type mixed crystals La1−xSrxCoO3−λ, J. Phys. Chem. Solids. 6, 287 (1958)

    1958

  58. [66]

    Kanamori, Theory of the magnetic properties of fer- rous and cobaltous oxides, I, Prog

    J. Kanamori, Theory of the magnetic properties of fer- rous and cobaltous oxides, I, Prog. Theor. Phys. 17, 177 (1957)

    1957

  59. [67]

    F. Wang, S. A. Kivelson, and D.-H. Lee, Nematicity and 17 quantum paramagnetism in FeSe, Nat. Phys. 11, 959 (2015)

    2015

  60. [68]

    Q. Wang, Y. Shen, B. Pan, X. Zhang, K. Ikeuchi, K. Iida, A. D. Christianson, H. C. Walker, D. T. Adroja, M. Abdel-Hafiez, X. Chen, D. A. Chareev, A. N. Vasiliev, and J. Zhao, Magnetic ground state of FeSe, Nat. Com- mun. 7, 12182 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Q. Wang, Y. Shen, B. Pan, Y. Hao, M. Ma, F. Zhou, P. Steffens, K. Schmalzl, T. R. Forrest, M. Abdel-Hafiez, X. Chen, D. A. Chareev, A. N. Vasiliev, P. Bourges, Y. Sidis, H. Cao, and J. Zhao, Strong interplay between stripe spin fluctuations, nematicity and superconductiv- ity in ...

    2016

  62. [70]

    Wang, Z.-C

    C. Wang, Z.-C. Wang, Y.-X. Mei, Y.-K. Li, L. Li, Z.-T. Tang, Y. Liu, P. Zhang, H.-F. Zhai, Z.-A. Xu, and G.-H. Cao, A new ZrCuSiAs-type superconductor: ThFeAsN, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138, 2170 (2016)

    2016

  63. [71]

    Rodr´ ıguez-Carvajal, Recent advances in magnetic structure determination by neutron powder diffraction, Physica B 192, 55 (1993)

    J. Rodr´ ıguez-Carvajal, Recent advances in magnetic structure determination by neutron powder diffraction, Physica B 192, 55 (1993)

    1993

  64. [72]

    Wills, A new protocol for the determination of mag- netic structures using simulated annealing and represen- tational analysis (SARAh), Physica B 276, 680 (2000)

    A. Wills, A new protocol for the determination of mag- netic structures using simulated annealing and represen- tational analysis (SARAh), Physica B 276, 680 (2000)

    2000

  65. [73]

    Zhang, D

    Y. Zhang, D. Su, Y. Huang, Z. Shan, H. Sun, M. Huo, K. Ye, J. Zhang, Z. Yang, Y. Xu, Y. Su, R. Li, M. Smid- man, M. Wang, L. Jiao, and H. Yuan, High-temperature superconductivity with zero resistance and strange-metal behaviour in La 3Ni2O7−δ, Nat. Phys. 20, 1269 (2024)

    2024

  66. [74]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  67. [75]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  68. [76]

    Rogl and P

    P. Rogl and P. Fischer, Single-crystal X-ray and pow- der neutron diffraction of ThB2C (ThB2C-type), J. Solid State Chem. 78, 294 (1989)

    1989

  69. [77]

    Szytu/suppress la, B

    A. Szytu/suppress la, B. Penc, M. Hofmann, and J. Przewo´ znik, Antiferromagnetism of ThCr 2Si2, Solid State Commun. 152, 1027 (2012)

    2012

  70. [78]

    Wang, Y.-T

    Z.-C. Wang, Y.-T. Shao, Y.-Q. Lin, S.-J. Song, B.-Z. Li, E.-J. Cheng, S.-Y. Li, Q.-Q. Zhu, Z. Ren, and G.- H. Cao, Absence of superconductivity in electron-doped chromium pnictides ThCrAsN1−xOx, Phys. Rev. B 108, 064503 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.