pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2601.04811 · v1 · submitted 2026-01-08 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Recognition: no theorem link

Switching magnetization of quantum antiferromagnets: Schwinger boson mean-field theory compared to exact diagonalization

Florian Johannesmann , Asliddin Khudoyberdiev , G\"otz S. Uhrig
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 16:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords quantum antiferromagnetsmagnetization switchingSchwinger boson mean-field theoryexact diagonalizationsublattice magnetizationspintronicsNéel vector
0
0 comments X

The pith

Exact diagonalization on small clusters confirms Schwinger boson mean-field theory for antiferromagnet magnetization switching at short times.

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

This paper applies exact diagonalization to small quantum antiferromagnet clusters to examine sublattice magnetization switching driven by an external magnetic field. It directly compares the outcomes to prior results from time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory and reports consistency at short time scales with deviations of roughly 12.5 percent. The agreement indicates that the mean-field description captures the main features of the switching dynamics. Such validation matters for modeling potential antiferromagnet-based devices that require fast and controlled reversal of the Néel vector.

Core claim

The results obtained by exact diagonalization for the switching of the sublattice magnetization in small-cluster quantum antiferromagnets under an external magnetic field are consistent with the predictions of time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory at short time scales, showing only about 12.5% deviations. This agreement demonstrates that the mean-field theory provides a versatile framework to capture the essentials of the switching process in quantum antiferromagnets.

What carries the argument

Time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory for the dynamics of sublattice magnetization under a time-varying external field, tested for agreement against exact diagonalization on finite clusters.

If this is right

  • The mean-field theory can be applied to larger systems where exact diagonalization becomes impossible.
  • Short-time switching behavior relevant to ultrafast devices is reliably described by the approach.
  • Further computational studies of Néel-vector control in anisotropic antiferromagnets are justified.
  • The validated framework supports design work for high-density spintronic memory elements.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The 12.5% deviation may point to residual quantum fluctuations that grow or shrink when cluster size increases.
  • Similar comparisons could be performed on other lattice geometries or with different anisotropy parameters.
  • If agreement persists for larger clusters, the method could be used to predict switching thresholds in real materials.

Load-bearing premise

The magnetization switching seen on small finite clusters with chosen boundary conditions accurately reflects the process in larger systems.

What would settle it

A deviation substantially larger than 12.5% or a clear qualitative mismatch in the time-dependent magnetization curves when the identical cluster size and field protocol are used in both methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.04811 by Asliddin Khudoyberdiev, Florian Johannesmann, G\"otz S. Uhrig.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Illustration of the manipulation of the sublattice mag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Illustration of quantum tunneling between two or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Sublattice magnetization values (blue dots) depen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Results of ED calculations: panel a) Energy difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Panel (a) shows the dynamics of the occupation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison of the magnetization dynamics of the re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Comparison of the magnetization dynamics of the re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Comparison of the threshold fields depending on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Comparison of the threshold fields depending on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Comparison of the ground state sublattice magne [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: For small values of χ, only a very tiny field is required in order to induce a finite sublattice magnetiza￾tion ground state. This is because the quantum tunneling from one ordered state to the other is strongly suppressed so that both are almost perfectly degenerate. If the sys￾tem becomes more isotropic, larger and larger magnetic fields are necessary to obtain the appropriate sublattice magnetization v… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. 6x4 spin lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. 4x4 spin lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. 24 spin lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Antiferromagnets have attracted significant attention because of their considerable potential in engineering high-density and ultrafast memory devices, a crucial and increasingly demanded component of contemporary high-performance information technology. Theoretical and experimental investigations are actively progressing to provide the capability of efficient switching and precise control of the N\'eel vector, which is crucial for the intended practical applications of antiferromagnets. Recently, a time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory has been successfully developed to study the sublattice magnetization switching in anisotropic quantum antiferromagnets [K. Bolsmann $et \, al.$, \textcolor{blue}{\hyperlink{10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030332}{PRX Quantum $\mathbf{4}$, 030332 (2023)}}]. Here we use a complementary exact diagonalization method to study such sublattice magnetization switching, but in small-cluster quantum antiferromagnets, by means of an external magnetic field. Furthermore, this article aims to support the findings of the Schwinger boson approach. We show that the results of both approaches are consistent at short time scales, with only about 12.5 $\%$ deviations. The consistency of the outcomes obtained through this alternative exact approach demonstrates that the time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory is a versatile framework to capture the essentials of the switching process in quantum antiferromagnets. Thereby, the findings of current article pave the way for further theoretical and computational progress in the study of antiferromagnets for engineering spintronic devices with ultrahigh density and ultrafast speed.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses exact diagonalization on small finite clusters to investigate sublattice magnetization switching in anisotropic quantum antiferromagnets driven by an external magnetic field. It compares these results to the time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory from a prior PRX Quantum paper, reporting consistency at short times with approximately 12.5% deviations, and concludes that this agreement demonstrates the mean-field framework's versatility for capturing the essentials of the switching process.

Significance. If the short-time agreement is shown to be robust beyond the small-cluster regime, the work supplies an independent exact benchmark that strengthens in the mean-field approach for regimes where exact methods are intractable. This cross-validation is useful for theoretical modeling of antiferromagnetic spintronics, where mean-field methods are often applied to larger systems.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Results] The central quantitative claim of 12.5% deviation (abstract) is presented without any specification of cluster sizes, lattice geometry, boundary conditions, Hamiltonian parameters (e.g., anisotropy strength), or error analysis. These omissions are load-bearing because the agreement could be an artifact of the particular small-system regime rather than evidence of broad applicability.
  2. [Discussion] The conclusion that the mean-field theory captures the essentials of the switching process (abstract) assumes small-cluster ED dynamics represent the thermodynamic-limit behavior where mean-field is typically used. No finite-size scaling, extrapolation, or discussion of long-wavelength mode corrections and boundary pinning is provided, leaving the validation claim unsupported.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The citation to the prior PRX Quantum work is given only as a hyperlink; replace with a standard bibliographic entry for consistency with journal style.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major point below and will incorporate revisions to improve clarity and precision.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Results] The central quantitative claim of 12.5% deviation (abstract) is presented without any specification of cluster sizes, lattice geometry, boundary conditions, Hamiltonian parameters (e.g., anisotropy strength), or error analysis. These omissions are load-bearing because the agreement could be an artifact of the particular small-system regime rather than evidence of broad applicability.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract lacks sufficient detail on the computational setup. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly state the cluster sizes, square-lattice geometry, periodic boundary conditions, the range of anisotropy parameters, and the short-time window over which the 12.5 % deviation is evaluated, together with a brief statement of the numerical precision of the ED data. These additions will make the quantitative claim transparent and tied to the small-system regime in which the comparison was performed. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion] The conclusion that the mean-field theory captures the essentials of the switching process (abstract) assumes small-cluster ED dynamics represent the thermodynamic-limit behavior where mean-field is typically used. No finite-size scaling, extrapolation, or discussion of long-wavelength mode corrections and boundary pinning is provided, leaving the validation claim unsupported.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the present work does not contain finite-size scaling or extrapolation to the thermodynamic limit. Our study is deliberately restricted to small clusters where exact diagonalization supplies benchmark data that can be compared directly with the mean-field theory. The short-time agreement demonstrates that the mean-field approach reproduces the essential local spin dynamics responsible for switching. We will add an explicit paragraph in the discussion section noting the absence of scaling analysis, the possible influence of boundary pinning and long-wavelength modes at longer times, and the fact that the validation applies to the accessible finite-size regime. We will also moderate the abstract wording to avoid implying a direct thermodynamic-limit validation. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Independent numerical comparison between SBMFT and ED exhibits no circularity

full rationale

The paper compares results from time-dependent Schwinger boson mean-field theory (developed in the cited prior work) against new exact diagonalization calculations on small clusters. The reported consistency (12.5% deviation at short times) is presented as mutual support, but the derivation chain relies on two distinct methods: one approximate (mean-field) and one exact for finite systems. No step reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, invokes a self-citation as a uniqueness theorem, or renames an input as an output. The central claim remains externally benchmarked rather than self-referential.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on standard quantum spin Hamiltonians and established numerical methods without introducing new free parameters, axioms beyond domain assumptions, or invented entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Small finite clusters with chosen boundary conditions capture the essential short-time switching dynamics of larger systems
    Invoked to extrapolate the observed consistency to the versatility of the mean-field theory for general quantum antiferromagnets.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5592 in / 1328 out tokens · 53632 ms · 2026-05-16T16:24:04.874024+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    threshold

    This effect is not very detrimental because the actual switching will be significantly faster. We will focus on in- termediate values of anisotropyχ∈(0.3,0.8) where the quantum tunneling, sketched in Fig. 2, is indeed weak for the accessible cluster sizes. To quantify the degree of quantum tunneling we show the energy gap between the two lowest eigenstate...

    work page

  2. [2]

    and/or the application of time-dependent control fields [13]. Although applying the theoretically found high switch- ing fields is far from trivial and difficult to conduct exper- imentally in the laboratory, our results provide evidence that switching can be achieved on picosecond time scales. To conclude, the analyses in present article shows that the t...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Jungwirth, X

    T. Jungwirth, X. Marti, P. Wadley, and J. Wunderlich, Antiferromagnetic spintronics, Nature Nanotechnology 11, 231 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Baltz, A

    V. Baltz, A. Manchon, M. Tsoi, T. Moriyama, T. Ono, and Y. Tserkovnyak, Antiferromagnetic spintronics, Re- view Modern Physics90, 015005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    H. Qiu, L. Zhou, C. Zhang, Y. Wu, J.and Tian, S. Cheng, S. Mi, H. Zhao, Q. Zhang, D. Wu, B. Jin, J. Chen, and P. Wu, Ultrafast spin current generated from an antifer- romagnet, Nature Physics17, 388 (2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Rongione, O

    E. Rongione, O. Gueckstock, M. Mattern, O. Gomonay, H. Meer, C. Schmitt, R. Ramos, T. Kikkawa, M. Miˇ cica, E. Saitoh, J. Sinova, H. Jaffr` es, J. Mangeney, S. T. B. Goennenwein, S. Gepr¨ ags, T. Kampfrath, M. Kl¨ aui, M. Bargheer, T. S. Seifert, S. Dhillon, and R. Lebrun, Emission of coherent THz magnons in an antiferromag- netic insulator triggered by u...

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    A. H. MacDonald and M. Tsoi, Antiferromagnetic metal spintronics, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Soci- ety A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 369, 3098 (2011)

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    Gomonay, T

    O. Gomonay, T. Jungwirth, and J. Sinova, Concepts of antiferromagnetic spintronics, Physica Status Solidi (RRL)11, 1700022 (2017)

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    M. B. Jungfleisch, W. Zhang, and A. Hoffmann, Perspec- tives of antiferromagnetic spintronics, Physics Letters A 382, 865 (2018)

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    Jungwirth, J

    T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, A. Manchon, X. Marti, J. Wun- derlich, and C. Felser, The multiple directions of antifer- romagnetic spintronics, Nature Physics14, 200 (2018)

    work page 2018

  11. [11]

    Kimel, T

    A. Kimel, T. Rasing, and B. Ivanov, Optical read-out and control of antiferromagnetic N´ eel vector in altermagnets and beyond, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Mate- rials598, 172039 (2024)

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    E. V. Gomonay and V. M. Loktev, Spintronics of anti- ferromagnetic systems (review article), Low Temperature Physics40, 17 (2014)

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    Gomonay, T

    O. Gomonay, T. Jungwirth, and J. Sinova, High antifer- romagnetic domain wall velocity induced by N´ eel spin- orbit torques, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 017202 (2016)

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Bolsmann, A

    K. Bolsmann, A. Khudoyberdiev, and G. S. Uhrig, Switching the magnetization in quantum antiferromag- nets, PRX Quantum4, 030332 (2023)

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Khudoyberdiev and G

    A. Khudoyberdiev and G. S. Uhrig, Switching of magneti- zation in quantum antiferromagnets with time-dependent control fields, Phys. Rev. B109, 174419 (2024)

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Khudoyberdiev and G

    A. Khudoyberdiev and G. S. Uhrig, Exchange-enhanced switching by alternating fields in quantum antiferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. B111, 064408 (2025)

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Yarmohammadi, P

    M. Yarmohammadi, P. M. Oppeneer, and J. K. Freericks, Cavity-assisted magnetization switching in a quantum spin-phonon chain, Phys. Rev. B112, 094445 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    ˇZelezn´ y, H

    J. ˇZelezn´ y, H. Gao, K. V´ yborn´ y, J. Zemen, J. Maˇ sek, A. Manchon, J. Wunderlich, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Relativistic N´ eel-order fields induced by electrical cur- rent in antiferromagnets, Physical Review Letters113, 13 157201 (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    ˇZelezn´ y, H

    J. ˇZelezn´ y, H. Gao, A. Manchon, F. Freimuth, Y. Mokrousov, J. Zemen, J. Maˇ sek, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Spin-orbit torques in locally and globally noncentrosymmetric crystals: Antiferromagnets and fer- romagnets, Physical Review B95, 014403 (2017)

    work page 2017

  20. [20]

    S. Y. Bodnar, L. ˇSmejkal, I. Turek, T. Jungwirth, O. Gomonay, J. Sinova, a. A. Sapozhnik, H.-J. Elmers, M. Kl¨ aui, and M. Jourdan, Writing and reading antifer- romagnetic Mn 2Au by N´ eel spin-orbit torques and large anisotropic magnetoresistance, Nature Communications 9, 348 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Behovits, A

    Y. Behovits, A. L. Chekhov, S. Y. Bodnar, O. Gueck- stock, S. Reimers, Y. Lytvynenko, Y. Skourski, M. Wolf, T. S. Seifert, O. Gomonay, M. Kl¨ aui, M. Jourdan, and T.Kampfrath, Terahertz N´ eel spin-orbit torques drive nonlinear magnon dynamics in antiferromagnetic Mn2Au, Nature Communications14, 6038 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Wadley, B

    P. Wadley, B. Howells, J. ˇZelezn´ y, C. Andrews, V. Hills, R. P. Campion, V. Nov´ ak, K. Olejn´ ık, F. Maccherozzi, S. S. Dhesi, S. Y. Martin, T. Wagner, J. Wunderlich, F. Freimuth, Y. Mokrousov, J. Kuneˇ s, J. S. Chauhan, M. J. Grzybowski, A. W. Rushforth, K. W. Edmonds, B. L. Gallagher, and T. Jungwirth, Electrical switching of an antiferromagnet, Scie...

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    L. Han, X. Fu, R. Peng, X. Cheng, J. Dai, L. Liu, Y. Li, Y. Zhang, W. Zhu, H. Bai, Y. Zhou, S. Liang, C. Chen, Q. Wang, X. Chen, L. Yang, Y. Zhang, C. Song, J. Liu, and F. Pan, Electrical 180°switching of N´ eel vec- tor in spin-splitting antiferromagnet, Science Advances 10, eadn0479 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    H. Guo, Z. Lin, J. Lu, C. Yun, G. Han, S. Sun, Y. Wu, W. Yang, D. Xiao, Z. Zhu, L. Peng, Y. Ye, Y. Hou, J. Yang, and Z. Luo, Layer-dependent spin-orbit torque switching of N´ eel vector in a van der Waals antiferromag- net, Nature Communications16, 8911 (2025)

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    S. P. Bommanaboyena, D. Backes, L. S. I. Veiga, S. S. Dhesi, Y. R. Niu, B. Sarpi, T. Denneulin, A. Kov´ acs, T. Mashoff, O. Gomonay, J. Sinova, K. Everschor-Sitte, D. Sch¨ onke, R. M. Reeve, M. Kl¨ aui, H.-J. Elmers, and M. Jourdan, Readout of an antiferromagnetic spintron- ics system by strong exchange coupling of Mn 2Au and Permalloy, Nature Communicati...

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    Grigorev, M

    V. Grigorev, M. Filianina, S. Y. Bodnar, S. Sobolev, N. Bhattacharjee, S. Bommanaboyena, Y. Lytvynenko, Y. Skourski, D. Fuchs, M. Kl¨ aui, M. Jourdan, and J. Demsar, Optical readout of the N´ eel vector in the metallic antiferromagnet Mn 2Au, Physical Review Ap- plied16, 014037 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Ghara, M

    S. Ghara, M. Winkler, S. W. Schmid, L. Prodan, K. Geirhos, V. Tsurkan, W. Ge, W. Wu, A. Halbritter, S. Krohns, and I. K´ ezsm´ arki, Nonvolatile electric control of antiferromagnetic states on nanosecond timescales, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 126704 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Polewczyk, A

    V. Polewczyk, A. Y. Petrov, B. Sarpi, D. Backes, H. El- naggar, P. Wadhwa, A. Filippetti, G. Rossi, P. Torelli, G. Vinai, F. Maccherozzi, and B. A. Davidson, Control of the antiferromagnetic domain configuration and n´ eel axis orientation with epitaxial strain, Communications Materials6, 153 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Toyoda, V

    S. Toyoda, V. Kocsis, Y. Tokunaga, I. K´ ezsm´ arki, Y. Taguchi, T.-h. Arima, Y. Tokura, and N. Ogawa, All- optical control of antiferromagnetic domains via an in- verse optical magnetoelectric effect, arXiv (2025), sub- mitted on 8 Jun 2025, arXiv:2506.07051 [cond-mat.mtrl- sci]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Jourdan, G

    M. Jourdan, G. O. Bl¨ aßer, J.and G´ amez, S. Reimers, L. Odenbreit, M. Fischer, Y. R. Niu, E. Golias, F. Mac- cherozzi, A. Kleibert, H. Stoll, and M. Kl¨ aui, Identify- ing switching of antiferromagnets by spin-orbit torques, Phys. Rev. B112, 104408 (2025)

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    X. Chen, X. Zhou, R. Cheng, C. Song, J. Zhang, Y. Wu, Y. Ba, H. Li, Y. Sun, Y. You, Y. Zhao, and F. Pan, Electric field control of N´ eel spin-orbit torque in an an- tiferromagnet, Nature Materials18, 931 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    H. V. Gomonay and V. M. Loktev, Spin transfer and current-induced switching in antiferromagnets, Physical Review B81, 144427 (2010)

    work page 2010

  33. [33]

    G. S. Uhrig, Landau–Lifshitz damping from Lindbladian dissipation in quantum magnets, New Journal of Physics 27, 103502 (2025)

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    J. L. Ross, P.-I. Gavriloaea, F. Freimuth, T. Adaman- topoulos, Y. Mokrousov, R. F. L. Evans, R. Chantrell, R. M. Otxoa, and O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, Ultrafast an- tiferromagnetic switching of Mn 2Au with laser-induced optical torques, npj Computational Materials10, 234 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Holstein and H

    T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the in- trinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Physical Review58, 1098 (1940)

    work page 1940

  36. [36]

    F. J. Dyson, General theory of spin-wave interactions, Physical Review102, 1217 (1956)

    work page 1956

  37. [37]

    S. V. Maleev, Scattering of slow neutrons in ferromag- nets, Soviet Physics JETP6, 766 (1958)

    work page 1958

  38. [38]

    R¨ uckriegel, A

    A. R¨ uckriegel, A. Kreisel, and P. Kopietz, Time- dependent spin-wave theory, Physical Review B85, 054422 (2012)

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    Schwinger, US Atomic Energy Commission 10.2172/4389568

    J. Schwinger, US Atomic Energy Commission 10.2172/4389568

    work page doi:10.2172/4389568

  40. [40]

    Khudoyberdiev and G

    A. Khudoyberdiev and G. S. Uhrig, The effect of dephas- ing and spin-lattice relaxation during the switching pro- cesses in quantum antiferromagnets, SciPost Phys.19, 117 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2006)

    work page 2006

  42. [42]

    Beckmann and J

    C. Beckmann and J. Schnack, Investigation of ther- malization in giant-spin models by different Lindblad schemes, J. Mag. Mag. Mat.437, 7 (2017)

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    L¨ uscher and A

    A. L¨ uscher and A. M. L¨ auchli, Exact diagonalization study of the antiferromagnetic spin- 1 2 Heisenberg model on the square lattice in a magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 79, 195102 (2009)

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    Lieb and D

    E. Lieb and D. Mattis, Theory of ferromagnetism and the ordering of electronic energy levels, Phys. Rev.125, 164 (1962)

    work page 1962

  45. [45]

    Caci, D.-B

    N. Caci, D.-B. Hering, M. R. Walther, K. P. Schmidt, S. Wessel, and G. S. Uhrig, Quantitative description of long-range order in the spin− 1 2 XXZ antiferromagnet on the square lattice, Phys. Rev. B110, 054411 (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Mag- netism, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer, New York, 1994)

    A. Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Mag- netism, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer, New York, 1994)

    work page 1994

  47. [47]

    Raykin and A

    M. Raykin and A. Auerbach, 1/Nexpansion and spin correlations in constrained wave functions, Physical Re- view B47, 5118 (1993)

    work page 1993

  48. [48]

    A. S. T. Pires,Theoretical Tools for Spin Models in Mag- netic Systems, 2053-2563 (IOP Publishing, 2021). 14

    work page 2053

  49. [49]

    Fauseweh and J.-X

    B. Fauseweh and J.-X. Zhu, Ultrafast optical induction of magnetic order at a quantum critical point, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter37, 075603 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Weinberg and M

    P. Weinberg and M. Bukov, QuSpin: a Python package for dynamics and exact diagonalisation of quantum many body systems part I: spin chains, SciPost Phys.2, 003 (2017)

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    Weinberg and M

    P. Weinberg and M. Bukov, QuSpin: a Python package for dynamics and exact diagonalisation of quantum many body systems. Part II: bosons, fermions and higher spins, SciPost Phys.7, 020 (2019)

    work page 2019

  52. [52]

    Cheng, M

    R. Cheng, M. W. Daniels, J.-G. Zhu, and D. Xiao, Ul- trafast switching of antiferromagnets via spin-transfer torque, Phys. Rev. B91, 064423 (2015)

    work page 2015

  53. [53]

    Weißenhofer, F

    M. Weißenhofer, F. Foggetti, U. Nowak, and P. M. Op- peneer, N´ eel vector switching and terahertz spin-wave excitation in Mn 2Au due to femtosecond spin-transfer torques, Phys. Rev. B107, 174424 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    A. W. Sandvik and J. Kurkij¨ arvi, Quantum Monte Carlo simulation method for spin systems, Phys. Rev. B43, 5950 (1991)

    work page 1991

  55. [55]

    A. W. Sandvik, Stochastic series expansion method with operator-loop update, Phys. Rev. B59, R14157 (1999)

    work page 1999

  56. [56]

    O. F. Sylju˚ asen and A. W. Sandvik, Quantum Monte Carlo with directed loops, Phys. Rev. E66, 046701 (2002)

    work page 2002