pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.08937 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-10 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.supr-con

Superconductivity and competing orders in honeycomb t-J model: interplay of lattice geometry and next-nearest-neighbor hopping

Zhi Xu , Hong-Chen Jiang , Yi-Fan Jiang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:20 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.supr-con
keywords honeycomb latticet-J modeld-wave superconductivitystripe ordernext-nearest-neighbor hoppingDMRGslave-boson mean-field
0
0 comments X

The pith

Next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' induces robust d-wave superconductivity competing with stripes in the doped honeycomb t-J model.

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

The paper examines the extended t-J model on the honeycomb lattice, focusing on how next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' influences the competition between superconductivity and stripe orders at finite doping. Large-scale DMRG simulations on cylinders with different boundary conditions show that one geometry supports quasi-long-range d-wave superconductivity coexisting with armchair stripes over a wide range of t', with the superconducting correlation strength peaking at moderate t' around 0.4. The opposite cylinder orientation instead favors long-range zigzag stripes without superconductivity once t' exceeds 0.5. Slave-boson mean-field theory applied to the two-dimensional limit finds the armchair stripe phase stable across most of the diagram but predicts a transition to uniform nematic d-wave superconductivity at large t' for doping 1/8. Together the two methods indicate that t' can promote a stable superconducting phase in this model.

Core claim

The combined DMRG and SBMFT results suggest a robust t'-induced SC phase that might remain stable in doped extended t-J model on the honeycomb lattice. On YC4-0 cylinders the ground state exhibits pronounced quasi-long-range d-wave SC coexisting with armchair-oriented stripes across broad t', with the SC Luttinger exponent showing non-monotonic dependence and an optimum near t'~0.4. On XC cylinders a competing long-range zigzag stripe phase without SC appears for t'>0.5. SBMFT identifies the a-stripe as the stable configuration across most of the phase diagram, with a transition to uniform nematic d-wave SC at large t' for δ=1/8.

What carries the argument

Next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' (with J' scaled as (t'/t)^2 J) acting together with cylinder boundary geometry in DMRG, which selects between d-wave SC plus a-stripes versus zigzag stripes.

If this is right

  • The superconducting Luttinger exponent depends non-monotonically on t', reaching a maximum near t' approximately 0.4 on YC4-0 cylinders.
  • Armchair-oriented stripes coexist with quasi-long-range d-wave SC over a broad range of t' on YC4-0 cylinders.
  • Zigzag stripes without superconductivity dominate on XC cylinders once t' exceeds 0.5.
  • In the mean-field description the a-stripe phase occupies most of the phase diagram, giving way to uniform nematic d-wave SC only at large t' when doping equals 1/8.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The geometry dependence seen in DMRG implies that the stability of the SC phase must be rechecked on wider systems before claiming it survives in the thermodynamic limit.
  • Tuning next-nearest-neighbor hopping in real honeycomb materials could provide a route to enhance superconductivity if the mean-field transition persists beyond the approximations used here.
  • The non-monotonic SC strength versus t' suggests an optimal intermediate hopping window that might be accessible by pressure or strain in candidate compounds.
  • Similar competition between t'-driven SC and stripes may appear in related models on other lattices when next-nearest hopping is varied.

Load-bearing premise

The narrow cylinder geometries and slave-boson mean-field treatment together capture the true two-dimensional thermodynamic limit without significant finite-size or approximation artifacts.

What would settle it

DMRG simulations on wider cylinders or unbiased methods such as quantum Monte Carlo that show the d-wave SC phase disappearing in favor of stripes near t' = 0.4 and doping 1/8 would falsify the claim of robustness.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.08937 by Hong-Chen Jiang, Yi-Fan Jiang, Zhi Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Quantum phase diagram of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (b) reveals a characteristic stripe pattern break￾ing translation symmetry along ˆex direction. Since the charge density is invariant along armchair direction, we denote it as “a-stripe” and calculate its rung average n(x) = P y ⟨nˆ(x, y)⟩/Ly to analyze its spatial distribu￾tion. In all t ′ = 0.0 − 0.9 cases, the ground states form half-filled a-stripe with two doped holes per CDW su￾percell on 4-leg cylin… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. SBMFT phase diagrams for 2D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the extended $t$-$J$ model on honeycomb lattices with next-nearest-neighbor (NNN) electron hopping $t'$ and superexchange coupling $J'=(t'/t)^2 J$ using large-scale density-matrix renormalization group (DMRG) simulations and slave-boson mean-field theory (SBMFT). By systematically varying $t'$ and cylinder geometries, our DMRG results reveal several competing phases with distinct charge and superconducting (SC) properties. On YC4-0 cylinders possessing bonds lying along $\vec{e}_y$ direction, the ground state of doped models exhibits pronounced quasi-long-range $d$-wave SC with coexisting armchair-oriented stripes (a-stripe) across a broad range of $t'$. Notably, the SC Luttinger exponent has a non-monotonic dependence on $t'$, showing an optimal $t'_{op}\sim0.4$ for dominant SC. Conversely, XC cylinders host a competing long-range zigzag stripes phase without SC for $t'>0.5$, highlighting the role of boundary geometry in stabilizing distinct competing phases in DMRG. To elucidate the stability of all these competing phases in 2D limit, we employ SBMFT and identify the a-stripe as the stable configuration across most of phase diagram, with a transition to uniform nematic $d$-wave SC at large $t'$ for $\delta=1/8$. The combined results from two complementary approaches suggest a robust $t'$-induced SC phase that might remain stable in doped extended $t$-$J$ model on the honeycomb lattice.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper studies the extended t-J model on the honeycomb lattice with next-nearest-neighbor hopping t' and J'=(t'/t)^2 J. Large-scale DMRG on YC4-0 and XC cylinders reveals geometry-dependent competing phases: quasi-long-range d-wave SC coexisting with armchair stripes on YC4-0 (with non-monotonic Luttinger exponent optimized near t'~0.4), versus long-range zigzag stripes without SC on XC for t'>0.5. Slave-boson mean-field theory finds a-stripe order dominant across most of the phase diagram, with a transition to uniform nematic d-wave SC only at large t' for δ=1/8. The authors conclude that the combined approaches indicate a robust t'-induced SC phase that may persist in the 2D thermodynamic limit.

Significance. If the extrapolation to the 2D limit can be substantiated, the work would usefully demonstrate how NNN hopping t' can tip the balance toward d-wave superconductivity over stripe orders in doped honeycomb t-J models, with relevance to strongly correlated systems on non-square lattices. The deployment of complementary large-scale DMRG on multiple cylinder geometries and SBMFT is a methodological strength that allows direct comparison of charge and pairing correlations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and DMRG results: the reported geometry dependence (quasi-long-range d-wave SC on YC4-0 versus long-range zigzag stripes with no SC for t'>0.5 on XC) directly challenges the central claim of a robust t'-induced SC phase in the thermodynamic 2D limit; the manuscript must provide explicit finite-size scaling or boundary-condition analysis to justify the extrapolation rather than treating the YC4-0 results as representative.
  2. [SBMFT] SBMFT section: while SBMFT recovers uniform nematic d-wave SC at large t' for δ=1/8, this saddle-point approximation is known to underestimate fluctuation suppression of orders; it does not resolve the DMRG geometry discrepancy and therefore cannot alone establish stability of the SC phase in 2D.
  3. [DMRG] DMRG on YC4-0 cylinders: the non-monotonic Luttinger exponent with optimum near t'~0.4 is presented without reported error bars, convergence checks against wider cylinders, or direct benchmarks against exact diagonalization on small clusters, weakening the quantitative claim for dominant SC.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Notation] The distinction between 'a-stripe' (armchair-oriented) and 'zigzag stripes' should be defined with a figure or explicit bond orientation upon first use to aid readability.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract omits the specific doping values (beyond δ=1/8 in SBMFT) and cylinder circumferences used in the DMRG scans; these parameters should be stated for context.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We have revised the text to address the concerns about geometry dependence, the limitations of the mean-field approach, and the quantitative presentation of DMRG data. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and DMRG results: the reported geometry dependence (quasi-long-range d-wave SC on YC4-0 versus long-range zigzag stripes with no SC for t'>0.5 on XC) directly challenges the central claim of a robust t'-induced SC phase in the thermodynamic 2D limit; the manuscript must provide explicit finite-size scaling or boundary-condition analysis to justify the extrapolation rather than treating the YC4-0 results as representative.

    Authors: We agree that the cylinder-geometry dependence must be discussed explicitly when claiming relevance to the 2D limit. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the abstract and the concluding section to state that the YC4-0 results are presented together with SBMFT calculations performed directly in the 2D thermodynamic limit; the latter recover a-stripe order over most of the phase diagram and a transition to uniform nematic d-wave SC at large t' for δ=1/8. We have added a paragraph analyzing the boundary conditions, noting that the YC4-0 geometry is compatible with the armchair stripe orientation that is energetically favored in SBMFT. While exhaustive finite-size scaling across multiple widths remains computationally prohibitive, we have included additional plots of the Luttinger exponent versus cylinder length that demonstrate convergence of the quasi-long-range SC signal. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [SBMFT] SBMFT section: while SBMFT recovers uniform nematic d-wave SC at large t' for δ=1/8, this saddle-point approximation is known to underestimate fluctuation suppression of orders; it does not resolve the DMRG geometry discrepancy and therefore cannot alone establish stability of the SC phase in 2D.

    Authors: We concur that the saddle-point SBMFT neglects fluctuation effects that can suppress ordered phases. The revised manuscript now contains an explicit caveat in the SBMFT section acknowledging this limitation and framing the mean-field results as a complementary 2D-limit probe rather than definitive proof. We emphasize that the SBMFT phase diagram is used only to corroborate the DMRG observation that a-stripe order is robust and that SC emerges at sufficiently large t'; the language claiming stability in 2D has been softened accordingly. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [DMRG] DMRG on YC4-0 cylinders: the non-monotonic Luttinger exponent with optimum near t'~0.4 is presented without reported error bars, convergence checks against wider cylinders, or direct benchmarks against exact diagonalization on small clusters, weakening the quantitative claim for dominant SC.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting these omissions. In the revised version we have added error bars to the Luttinger-exponent data, obtained from the covariance matrix of the linear fits to the pairing correlations. We have also included a new appendix comparing DMRG results on small clusters with exact diagonalization for selected t' values. Convergence with bond dimension and cylinder length is now documented in the main text. However, DMRG on cylinders wider than width 4 remains beyond our current computational resources for the required system lengths; we therefore cannot provide direct checks against wider geometries. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Explicit finite-size scaling of DMRG results to the true 2D thermodynamic limit (via systematically wider cylinders) is not feasible with present resources and therefore cannot be supplied.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; numerical DMRG and SBMFT results are independent of fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on direct DMRG simulations across YC4-0 and XC cylinder geometries plus SBMFT saddle-point calculations. The relation J'=(t'/t)^2 J is introduced as an explicit model input derived from superexchange, not fitted then renamed as a prediction. No quantity is defined in terms of another and then called a derived result; phase boundaries and Luttinger exponents emerge from the numerics without self-referential loops. Any self-citations are peripheral and not load-bearing for the t'-induced SC conclusion. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper assumes the standard t-J model Hamiltonian on the honeycomb lattice plus the superexchange-derived relation J'=(t'/t)^2 J. No new particles or forces are introduced. The cylinder boundary conditions and the mean-field decoupling are standard but approximate tools.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The extended t-J Hamiltonian with J' tied to t' via superexchange scaling is an appropriate microscopic model for the system.
    Invoked in the opening sentence of the abstract as the model under study.
  • domain assumption DMRG on finite-width cylinders with chosen boundary conditions can be extrapolated to the 2D thermodynamic limit.
    Central to the claim that the observed phases remain stable in 2D.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5618 in / 1582 out tokens · 62037 ms · 2026-05-10T17:20:58.131618+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

81 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Arrigoni, E

    E. Arrigoni, E. Fradkin, and S. A. Kivelson, Mechanism of high-temperature superconductivity in a striped Hub- bard model, Phys. Rev. B69, 214519 (2004)

    work page 2004

  2. [2]

    S. R. White and D. Scalapino, Stripes on a 6-leg Hubbard ladder, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 136403 (2003)

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    E. Berg, E. Fradkin, S. A. Kivelson, and J. M. Tran- quada, Striped superconductors: how spin, charge and superconducting orders intertwine in the cuprates, New Journal of Physics11, 115004 (2009)

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Zheng, C.-M

    B.-X. Zheng, C.-M. Chung, P. Corboz, G. Ehlers, M.-P. Qin, R. M. Noack, H. Shi, S. R. White, S. Zhang, and G. K.-L. Chan, Stripe order in the underdoped region of the two-dimensional Hubbard model, Science358, 1155 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    K. Ido, T. Ohgoe, and M. Imada, Competition among various charge-inhomogeneous states andd-wave super- conducting state in Hubbard models on square lattices, Phys. Rev. B97, 045138 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Ponsioen, S

    B. Ponsioen, S. S. Chung, and P. Corboz, Period 4 stripe in the extended two-dimensional Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B100, 195141 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    M. Qin, T. Sch¨ afer, S. Andergassen, P. Corboz, and E. Gull, The Hubbard model: A computational perspec- tive, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics13, 275 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Jiang, D

    S. Jiang, D. J. Scalapino, S. R. White,et al., Den- sity matrix renormalization group based downfolding of the three-band Hubbard model: Importance of density- assisted hopping, Phys. Rev. B108, L161111 (2023)

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    L. Yang, T. P. Devereaux, and H.-C. Jiang, Recovery of a Luther-Emery phase in the three-band Hubbard ladder with longer-range hopping, Phys. Rev. B110, 014511 (2024)

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Jiang, Pair density wave in the doped three-band Hubbard model on two-leg square cylinders, Phys

    H.-C. Jiang, Pair density wave in the doped three-band Hubbard model on two-leg square cylinders, Phys. Rev. B107, 214504 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    H. C. Jiang and T. P. Devereaux, Superconductivity in the doped Hubbard model and its interplay with next- nearest hoppingt ′, Science365, 1424 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    H. Xu, C. M. Chung, M. Qin, U. Schollwock, S. R. White, and S. Zhang, Coexistence of superconductivity with par- tially filled stripes in the Hubbard model, Science384, eadh7691 (2024)

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Y. Gu, W. Li, H. Lin, B. Zhan, R. Li, Y. Huang, D. He, Y. Wu, T. Xiang, M. Qin, L. Wang, and D. Lv, Solving the Hubbard model with neural quantum states, arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.02644 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    C. Roth, A. Chen, A. Sengupta, and A. Georges, Su- perconductivity in the two-dimensional Hubbard model revealed by neural quantum states, arXiv preprint 6 arXiv:2511.07566 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Jiang, T

    Y.-F. Jiang, T. P. Devereaux, and H.-C. Jiang, Ground- state phase diagram and superconductivity of the doped Hubbard model on six-leg square cylinders, Phys. Rev. B 109, 085121 (2024)

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Xu, G.-X

    Z. Xu, G.-X. Liu, and Y.-F. Jiang, Pair density wave, infinite-length stripes, and holon wigner crystal in single- band Hubbard model on diagonal square lattice, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18833 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  17. [17]

    D.-W. Qu, Q. Li, S.-S. Gong, Y. Qi, W. Li, and G. Su, Phase diagram, d-wave superconductivity, and pseudo- gap of thet−t ′−Jmodel at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 256003 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Jiang, T

    H.-C. Jiang, T. P. Devereaux, and S. A. Kivelson, Com- petition between charge-density-wave and superconduct- ing orders on eight-leg square Hubbard cylinders, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.18644 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    G. Li, A. Luican, J. M. B. Lopes dos Santos, A. H. Cas- tro Neto, A. Reina, J. Kong, and E. Y. Andrei, Observa- tion of van hove singularities in twisted graphene layers, Nature Physics6, 109 (2009)

    work page 2009

  20. [20]

    E. Y. Andrei, D. K. Efetov, P. Jarillo-Herrero, A. H. MacDonald, K. F. Mak, T. Senthil, E. Tutuc, A. Yazdani, and A. F. Young, The marvels of moir´ e materials, Nature Reviews Materials6, 201 (2021)

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y. Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, R. C. Ashoori, and P. Jarillo- Herrero, Correlated insulator behaviour at half-filling in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Nature556, 80 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Unconventional super- conductivity in magic-angle graphene superlattices, Na- ture556, 43 (2018)

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    N. F. Q. Yuan and L. Fu, Model for the metal-insulator transition in graphene superlattices and beyond, Phys. Rev. B98, 045103 (2018)

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    H. Pan, F. Wu, and S. Das Sarma, Quantum phase di- agram of a moir´ e-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B102, 201104 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Angeli and A

    M. Angeli and A. H. MacDonald, Γ valley transition metal dichalcogenide moir´ e bands, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences118, e2021826118 (2021)

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    Pan, E.-A

    H. Pan, E.-A. Kim, and C.-M. Jian, Realizing a tunable honeycomb lattice in ABBA-stacked twisted double bi- layer WSe2, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 043173 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    L. Ma, R. Chaturvedi, P. X. Nguyen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Relativistic Mott transition in twisted WSe 2 tetralayers, Nature Materials 24, 1935 (2025)

    work page 1935

  28. [28]

    L. Wei, Q. Li, M. U. Rehman, Y. He, D. An, S. Li, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. Claassen, K. S. Novoselov, D. M. Kennes, A. Rubio, D. A. Rhodes, L. Xian, G. Yu, and L. Wang, Valley charge-transfer in- sulator in twisted double bilayer WSe 2, Nature Commu- nications16, 1185 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    F. F. Assaad and I. F. Herbut, Pinning the order: The nature of quantum criticality in the Hubbard model on honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. X3, 031010 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    Otsuka, S

    Y. Otsuka, S. Yunoki, and S. Sorella, Universal quan- tum criticality in the metal-insulator transition of two- dimensional interacting dirac electrons, Phys. Rev. X6, 011029 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    D. K. Yadav, Q. Zhang, K. Gofryk, H. S. Nair, and S. Uma, Evidence of long-range and short-range mag- netic ordering in the honeycomb Na3Mn2SbO6 oxide, In- org Chem62, 7403 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Xiao, S.-L

    L.-Y. Xiao, S.-L. Yu, W. Wang, Z.-J. Yao, and J.-X. Li, Possible singlet and triplet superconductivity on honey- comb lattice, Europhysics Letters115, 27008 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    Y. Qi, L. Fu, K. Sun, and Z. Gu, Coexistence of antifer- romagnetism and topological superconductivity on the honeycomb lattice Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B102, 245140 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Pathak, V

    S. Pathak, V. B. Shenoy, and G. Baskaran, Possible high- temperature superconducting state with ad+idpairing symmetry in doped graphene, Phys. Rev. B81, 085431 (2010)

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    T. Ma, Z. Huang, F. Hu, and H.-Q. Lin, Pairing in graphene: A quantum monte carlo study, Phys. Rev. B 84, 121410 (2011)

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    K. Guo, Y. Zhang, Y. Liang, and T. Ma, Disorder- dependent superconducting pairing symmetry in doped graphene, Phys. Rev. B110, 085103 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Li, H.-R

    X.-D. Li, H.-R. Liu, Z.-D. Yu, C.-D. Gong, S.-L. Yu, and Y. Zhou, Mixture of the nearest- and next-nearest- neighbord+id-wave pairings on the honeycomb lattice, New Journal of Physics24, ac974a (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Honerkamp, Density waves and cooper pairing on the honeycomb lattice, Phys Rev Lett100, 146404 (2008)

    C. Honerkamp, Density waves and cooper pairing on the honeycomb lattice, Phys Rev Lett100, 146404 (2008)

    work page 2008

  39. [39]

    Raghu, S

    S. Raghu, S. A. Kivelson, and D. J. Scalapino, Supercon- ductivity in the repulsive Hubbard model: An asymp- totically exact weak-coupling solution, Phys. Rev. B81, 224505 (2010)

    work page 2010

  40. [40]

    Nandkishore, L

    R. Nandkishore, L. S. Levitov, and A. V. Chubukov, Chiral superconductivity from repulsive interactions in doped graphene, Nature Physics8, 158 (2012)

    work page 2012

  41. [41]

    M. L. Kiesel, C. Platt, W. Hanke, D. A. Abanin, and R. Thomale, Competing many-body instabilities and un- conventional superconductivity in graphene, Phys. Rev. B86, 020507 (2012)

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    Wang, Y.-Y

    W.-S. Wang, Y.-Y. Xiang, Q.-H. Wang, F. Wang, F. Yang, and D.-H. Lee, Functional renormalization group and variational monte carlo studies of the elec- tronic instabilities in graphene near 1 4 doping, Phys. Rev. B85, 035414 (2012)

    work page 2012

  43. [43]

    Ho and K.-K

    C.-P. Ho and K.-K. Voo, Antiferromagnetism and chiral- d wave superconductivity in a honeycomb lattice close to Mott state, Physica B: Condensed Matter648, 414408 (2023)

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    Jia, Q.-w

    S.-q. Jia, Q.-w. Wang, J. Liu, and L.-J. Zou, Possible three-dimensional superconducting properties of strongly correlated honeycomb compound In3Cu2VO9, Journal of Physics: Conference Series827, 012010 (2017)

    work page 2017

  45. [45]

    Zhong, L

    Y. Zhong, L. Zhang, H.-T. Lu, and H.-G. Luo, Coex- istence of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity of t−t′−Jmodel on honeycomb lattice, Physica B: Con- densed Matter462, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  46. [46]

    Miao, Z.-Y

    J.-J. Miao, Z.-Y. Yue, H. Zhang, W.-Q. Chen, and Z.- C. Gu, Spin-charge separation and unconventional super- conductivity in thet−Jmodel on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B111, 174518 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Gu, H.-C

    Z.-C. Gu, H.-C. Jiang, D. N. Sheng, H. Yao, L. Balents, and X.-G. Wen, Time-reversal symmetry breaking super- conducting ground state in the doped Mott insulator on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B88, 155112 (2013)

    work page 2013

  48. [48]

    Xu, Z.-C

    Z.-T. Xu, Z.-C. Gu, and S. Yang, Competing orders in 7 the honeycomb latticet−Jmodel, Phys. Rev. B108, 035144 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Cui, J.-Y

    C. Cui, J.-Y. Zhao, and Z.-Y. Weng, Variational monte carlo study of the dopedt−Jmodel on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B110, 155111 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Uchoa and A

    B. Uchoa and A. H. Castro Neto, Superconducting states of pure and doped graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 146801 (2007)

    work page 2007

  51. [51]

    J. P. L. Faye, P. Sahebsara, and D. S´ en´ echal, Chiral triplet superconductivity on the graphene lattice, Phys. Rev. B92, 085121 (2015)

    work page 2015

  52. [52]

    Gu, H.-C

    Z.-C. Gu, H.-C. Jiang, and G. Baskaran, Emergence of p+ipsuperconductivity in two-dimensional doped dirac systems, Phys. Rev. B101, 205147 (2020)

    work page 2020

  53. [53]

    X. Y. Xu, S. Wessel, and Z. Y. Meng, Competing pairing channels in the doped honeycomb lattice Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B94, 115105 (2016)

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    X. Yang, H. Zheng, and M. Qin, Stripe order in the doped Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B 103, 155110 (2021)

    work page 2021

  55. [55]

    Qin, Stripes versus superconductivity in the doped Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice, Phys

    M. Qin, Stripes versus superconductivity in the doped Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B 105, 035111 (2022)

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    C. Peng, D. N. Sheng, and H.-C. Jiang, Superconductiv- ity in the lightly doped Hubbard model on the cylindrical honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B111, 085108 (2025)

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    Jiang and H

    Y.-F. Jiang and H. Yao, Pair-density-wave superconduc- tivity: A microscopic model on the 2D honeycomb lat- tice, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 176501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Chapman, Y

    J. Chapman, Y. Su, C. A. Howard, D. Kundys, A. N. Grigorenko, F. Guinea, A. K. Geim, I. V. Grigorieva, and R. R. Nair, Superconductivity in Ca-doped graphene laminates, Sci Rep6, 23254 (2016)

    work page 2016

  59. [59]

    Q. Yang, H. Zhang, J. Zhao, and X. Jiang, Probing the superconductivity limit of Li-doped graphene, Advanced Functional Materials34, 2406023 (2024)

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Nishikubo, K

    Y. Nishikubo, K. Kudo, and M. Nohara, Superconduc- tivity in the honeycomb-lattice pnictide SrPtAs, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan80, 055002 (2011)

    work page 2011

  61. [61]

    Y. Wang, J. Ying, Z. Zhou, J. Sun, T. Wen, Y. Zhou, N. Li, Q. Zhang, f. Han, Y. Xiao, P. Chow, W. Yang, V. V. Struzhkin, Y. Zhao, and H. K. Mao, Emergent su- perconductivity in an iron-based honeycomb lattice initi- ated by pressure-driven spin-crossover, Nat Commun9, 1914 (2018)

    work page 1914

  62. [62]

    Baskaran, Resonating-valence-bond contribution to superconductivity in MgB 2, Phys

    G. Baskaran, Resonating-valence-bond contribution to superconductivity in MgB 2, Phys. Rev. B65, 212505 (2002)

    work page 2002

  63. [63]

    Z. Zhu, D. A. Huse, and S. R. White, Weak plaquette valence bond order in theS= 1/2 honeycombJ 1 −J 2 heisenberg model, Phys Rev Lett110, 127205 (2013)

    work page 2013

  64. [64]

    A. F. Albuquerque, D. Schwandt, B. Het´ enyi, S. Cap- poni, M. Mambrini, and A. M. L¨ auchli, Phase diagram of a frustrated quantum antiferromagnet on the honey- comb lattice: Magnetic order versus valence-bond crystal formation, Phys. Rev. B84, 024406 (2011)

    work page 2011

  65. [65]

    Mezzacapo and M

    F. Mezzacapo and M. Boninsegni, Ground-state phase diagram of the quantumJ 1 −J 2 model on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B85, 060402 (2012)

    work page 2012

  66. [66]

    Reuther, D

    J. Reuther, D. A. Abanin, and R. Thomale, Magnetic order and paramagnetic phases in the quantumJ 1 −J 2 − J3 honeycomb model, Phys. Rev. B84, 014417 (2011)

    work page 2011

  67. [67]

    Mosadeq, F

    H. Mosadeq, F. Shahbazi, and S. A. Jafari, Plaquette valence bond ordering in aJ 1 −J 2 heisenberg antiferro- magnet on a honeycomb lattice, J Phys Condens Matter 23, 226006 (2011)

    work page 2011

  68. [68]

    Ganesh, J

    R. Ganesh, J. van den Brink, and S. Nishimoto, Decon- fined criticality in the frustrated heisenberg honeycomb antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 127203 (2013)

    work page 2013

  69. [69]

    Ferrari, S

    F. Ferrari, S. Bieri, and F. Becca, Competition between spin liquids and valence-bond order in the frustrated spin-1/2 heisenberg model on the honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B96, 104401 (2017)

    work page 2017

  70. [70]

    S.-S. Gong, D. N. Sheng, O. I. Motrunich, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phase diagram of the spin-1/2J 1 −J 2 heisenberg model on a honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B88, 165138 (2013)

    work page 2013

  71. [71]

    D. C. Cabra, C. A. Lamas, and H. D. Rosales, Evidence of a spin-liquid phase in the frustrated honeycomb lattice, Modern Physics Letters B25, 891 (2011)

    work page 2011

  72. [72]

    B. K. Clark, D. A. Abanin, and S. L. Sondhi, Nature of the spin liquid state of the Hubbard model on a honey- comb lattice, Phys Rev Lett107, 087204 (2011)

    work page 2011

  73. [73]

    Mukherjee, R

    R. Mukherjee, R. Kundu, A. Singh, and A. Kundu, Schwinger-boson mean-field study of the spin-1/2J 1 − J2 −J χ model in the honeycomb lattice: Thermal hall signature, Phys. Rev. B107, 155122 (2023)

    work page 2023

  74. [74]

    Z. Xu, H. C. Jiang, and Y. F. Jiang, Superconductiv- ity enhancement and particle-hole asymmetry: Interplay with electron attraction in doped Hubbard model, Sci- post Physics19, 137 (2025)

    work page 2025

  75. [75]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863 (1992)

    work page 1992

  76. [76]

    Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group, Reviews of Modern Physics77, 259 (2005)

    U. Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group, Reviews of Modern Physics77, 259 (2005)

    work page 2005

  77. [77]

    Talkachov, A

    A. Talkachov, A. Samoilenka, and E. Babaev, Micro- scopic study of boundary superconducting states on a honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. B108, 134507 (2023)

    work page 2023

  78. [78]

    S. R. White, I. Affleck, and D. J. Scalapino, Friedel oscil- lations and charge density waves in chains and ladders, Phys. Rev. B65, 165122 (2002). 8 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Lattice geometry and numerical details The three cylinder geometries used in DMRG simulations, YC4-0, YC4-4 and XC8-0, are illustrated in Fig. S1. X and Y indicate the orientation of th...

    work page 2002

  79. [79]

    The fitting curves of rung average charge densityn(x) at sitex= 18 √ 3 are illustrated in Fig

    inδ= 1/12 and 1/8 models. The fitting curves of rung average charge densityn(x) at sitex= 18 √ 3 are illustrated in Fig. S2(c) and (d). FIG. S2. The finite-truncation-error extrapolations for rung-average charge densities and the pair-pair correlation functions: (a) the extrapolation of rung average charge densityn(x= 18 √

    work page

  80. [80]

    (c) the extrapolation of long-distance pair-pair correlation Φ(r= 14 √

    forδ= 1/12 case and (b) forδ= 1/8 case. (c) the extrapolation of long-distance pair-pair correlation Φ(r= 14 √

    work page

Showing first 80 references.