pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10576 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-12 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Microscopic model for the ground state, 1/3 plateau and excitations of γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂

P. A. Maksimov , L. V. Shvanskaya , O. S. Volkova , A. N. Vasiliev This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords γ-Mn3(PO4)21/3 magnetization plateaubiquadratic couplingsingle-ion anisotropyantiferromagnetspecific heatexchange Hamiltoniantrimer lattice
0
0 comments X

The pith

A magnetic model for γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂ needs both biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy to explain its 1/3 plateau and multiple susceptibility transitions.

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

The paper builds a microscopic exchange model for the antiferromagnet γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂, in which Mn²⁺ ions with spin 5/2 occupy a trimer lattice that supports a 1/3 magnetization plateau. Fitting the Hamiltonian to magnetization measurements shows that biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy are both required to produce the sequence of phase transitions seen in susceptibility data. The same model then generates a spin-wave spectrum whose low-energy density of states matches the measured low-temperature specific heat. A reader would care because the resulting Hamiltonian supplies concrete predictions for excitations and field-driven states in a material whose fractional plateau arises from its trimer geometry.

Core claim

An exchange Hamiltonian fitted to magnetization data for γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂ incorporates biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy; both terms are necessary to reproduce the multiple phase transitions observed in magnetic susceptibility, while the calculated magnetic spectrum accounts for the low-temperature specific-heat data.

What carries the argument

The trimer lattice of Mn²⁺ (S = 5/2) ions together with the fitted exchange Hamiltonian that includes bilinear, biquadratic, and single-ion anisotropy terms.

If this is right

  • The 1/3 plateau is stabilized by the combined action of biquadratic coupling and anisotropy on the trimer lattice.
  • The sequence of susceptibility transitions arises directly from the inclusion of these two terms.
  • The low-energy magnetic excitations computed from the Hamiltonian reproduce the measured specific heat.
  • The ground state remains antiferromagnetic under the fitted interactions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same Hamiltonian could be applied to predict the material's response to hydrostatic pressure or chemical substitution.
  • Other Mn²⁺ compounds with trimer or triangular motifs may require analogous biquadratic and anisotropy terms to describe their plateaus.
  • Direct verification of the excitation spectrum by neutron scattering would test the uniqueness of the parameter set.

Load-bearing premise

The minimal set of fitted exchange parameters that includes biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy is assumed to be unique and sufficient to match both the magnetization curve and the specific-heat data.

What would settle it

An inelastic neutron scattering measurement that finds an excitation spectrum differing substantially from the one calculated with the fitted Hamiltonian would falsify the necessity of the biquadratic and anisotropy terms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10576 by A. N. Vasiliev, L. V. Shvanskaya, O. S. Volkova, P. A. Maksimov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Crystal structure of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Calculated magnetization and susceptibility in comparison to powder data from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Intensity plots of magnetic susceptibility, as a function of Hamiltonian parameters and magnetic field, for two principal directions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Dynamical structure factor calculated using spin-wave theory for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Calculated magnetization and susceptibility in comparison to data from Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a magnetic model for an antiferromagnetic compound $\gamma$-Mn$_3$(PO$_4$)$_2$, which was previously shown to exhibit a 1/3 magnetization plateau due to the trimer-based structure of the lattice of magnetic Mn$^{2+}$ ions with $S=5/2$. An exchange Hamiltonian that yields observed field transitions is obtained from fitting magnetization data. It is shown that both biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy are necessary to be present in the magnetic model to explain multiple phase transitions in the magnetic susceptibility data. The calculated magnetic spectrum is in agreement with the low-temperature specific heat data.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The paper presents a microscopic magnetic model for the antiferromagnetic compound γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂ featuring a trimer-based lattice of Mn²⁺ (S=5/2) ions. An exchange Hamiltonian including nearest-neighbor J, biquadratic K, single-ion anisotropy D, and further-neighbor terms is obtained by fitting to magnetization data. The authors demonstrate that both K and D are necessary to reproduce multiple phase transitions in the susceptibility, and show that the resulting magnetic spectrum is consistent with low-temperature specific-heat data, thereby accounting for the observed 1/3 magnetization plateau.

Significance. If the fitted model is robust, this provides a concrete microscopic understanding of the ground state, plateau, and excitations in this frustrated trimer antiferromagnet. The explicit test that removing K or D destroys the transitions is a positive feature, and the specific-heat consistency offers a useful cross-check. Such detailed models are valuable for interpreting data in related materials and for guiding future experiments or theory on biquadratic and anisotropic effects in S=5/2 systems.

major comments (3)
  1. [Hamiltonian fitting and results] The necessity of biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy is shown by demonstrating that their removal eliminates the observed transitions in the magnetization data. However, the fitting procedure lacks reported quantitative metrics (chi-squared, residuals, parameter error bars, or covariance), which are required to assess fit quality and parameter uniqueness.
  2. [Model construction and necessity tests] The central claim that the minimal model (J, K, D plus further neighbors) is required assumes uniqueness. No exhaustive search over alternative interaction sets, different lattice distortions, or other exchange topologies is presented that might reproduce the same magnetization curve and specific-heat agreement, leaving the necessity open to alternative explanations.
  3. [Excitations and specific-heat comparison] The magnetic spectrum is computed from the fitted parameters and compared to specific-heat data. Because the parameters are determined from magnetization fitting, this is a post-fit consistency check rather than an independent prediction; the manuscript should address the resulting circularity burden explicitly.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract could include the numerical values of the fitted parameters (J, K, D) to allow readers to quickly assess the scale of the interactions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to improve clarity and rigor.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The necessity of biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy is shown by demonstrating that their removal eliminates the observed transitions in the magnetization data. However, the fitting procedure lacks reported quantitative metrics (chi-squared, residuals, parameter error bars, or covariance), which are required to assess fit quality and parameter uniqueness.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative fit metrics are essential for assessing robustness. In the revised manuscript we will report the chi-squared value of the fit to the magnetization data, the residuals, and estimated parameter uncertainties (including covariance where available) obtained from the fitting procedure. These additions will allow readers to evaluate parameter uniqueness and fit quality directly. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The central claim that the minimal model (J, K, D plus further neighbors) is required assumes uniqueness. No exhaustive search over alternative interaction sets, different lattice distortions, or other exchange topologies is presented that might reproduce the same magnetization curve and specific-heat agreement, leaving the necessity open to alternative explanations.

    Authors: We acknowledge that a fully exhaustive enumeration of all conceivable interaction sets or lattice distortions is computationally infeasible and outside the scope of the present study. Our model is instead constructed from the known crystal structure and symmetry of γ-Mn₃(PO₄)₂, beginning with nearest-neighbor exchanges and introducing additional terms (K, D, further neighbors) only when required by the data. We have already demonstrated that removing K or D destroys the observed transitions. In the revision we will add an explicit discussion of why physically motivated alternatives (e.g., strong next-nearest-neighbor exchanges without biquadratic terms) are unlikely to reproduce the full set of features, while noting that complete uniqueness cannot be proven. revision: partial

  3. Referee: The magnetic spectrum is computed from the fitted parameters and compared to specific-heat data. Because the parameters are determined from magnetization fitting, this is a post-fit consistency check rather than an independent prediction; the manuscript should address the resulting circularity burden explicitly.

    Authors: We agree that the specific-heat comparison constitutes a post-fit consistency check rather than an a priori prediction. In the revised manuscript we will explicitly discuss this point, clarifying that the magnetization curve (including the 1/3 plateau and multiple transitions) supplies the primary constraints on the parameters, while the low-temperature specific heat provides an independent cross-validation of the resulting excitation spectrum. We will also note the limitations this imposes and the value of future inelastic neutron scattering measurements for further tests. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Fitted Hamiltonian parameters yield post-fit consistency with specific heat

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "An exchange Hamiltonian that yields observed field transitions is obtained from fitting magnetization data. It is shown that both biquadratic coupling and single-ion anisotropy are necessary to be present in the magnetic model to explain multiple phase transitions in the magnetic susceptibility data. The calculated magnetic spectrum is in agreement with the low-temperature specific heat data."

    Parameters are determined exclusively by fitting to magnetization/susceptibility data; the spectrum (excitations) is then derived from the identical fitted Hamiltonian and compared to specific heat. The agreement is therefore a post-fit consistency test on the same model rather than an independent result.

full rationale

The derivation obtains the exchange Hamiltonian (including biquadratic and anisotropy terms) by fitting to magnetization data that reproduces the 1/3 plateau and field transitions. The magnetic spectrum is then computed from these fitted parameters and shown to agree with specific-heat data. This constitutes a consistency check on the fit rather than an independent derivation or first-principles prediction. No self-definitional loops, self-citation load-bearing steps, or uniqueness theorems are present in the provided text. The necessity claim for the extra terms rests on the fit without an exhaustive alternative-model search, but the central chain remains anchored in external data rather than reducing exactly to its inputs by construction. Score kept moderate because the specific-heat comparison is a distinct observable and the paper does not rename the fit as a prediction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on a classical or semi-classical spin Hamiltonian whose parameters are determined by fitting; no new particles or forces are postulated, but several interaction strengths are introduced as adjustable quantities.

free parameters (4)
  • nearest-neighbor exchange J
    Fitted to reproduce field-induced transitions in magnetization data.
  • biquadratic coupling K
    Introduced and fitted; shown to be required for multiple transitions.
  • single-ion anisotropy D
    Introduced and fitted; shown to be required for multiple transitions.
  • further-neighbor exchanges
    Possibly included in the full model to match the trimer lattice geometry.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The magnetic lattice consists of isolated trimers of Mn²⁺ S=5/2 ions with the geometry previously determined by crystallography.
    Invoked to justify the form of the exchange Hamiltonian.
  • domain assumption The system can be described by a spin Hamiltonian containing bilinear, biquadratic, and single-ion terms without higher-order interactions.
    Standard assumption in modeling classical antiferromagnets.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5436 in / 1737 out tokens · 30524 ms · 2026-05-10T15:42:54.768546+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

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Shvanskaya, O

    L. Shvanskaya, O. Volkova, and A. Vasiliev, A review on crystal structure and properties of 3d transition metal (II) or- thophosphates𝑀 3(PO4)2, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 835, 155028 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    J. S. Stephens and C. Calvo, Crystal structure of𝛽 ′Mn3(PO4)2, Canadian Journal of Chemistry47, 2215 (1969)

    work page 1969

  3. [3]

    A. G. Nord and H. Annersten, A high-pressure phase of man- ganese (II) orthophosphate, Mn 3(PO4)2, Acta chemica Scan- dinavica. Series A. Physical and inorganic chemistry41, 56 (1987)

    work page 1987

  4. [4]

    El-Bali, A

    B. El-Bali, A. Boukhari, R. Glaum, M. Gerk, and K. Maaß, Preparation and Structure Determination of SrMn 2(PO4)2 and Redetermination of b’-Mn3(PO4)2, Zeitschrift f¨ ur anorganische und allgemeine Chemie626, 2557 (2000)

    work page 2000

  5. [5]

    D. Yan, Y. Zhao, Y. Dong, Z. Liang, and X. Lin, Phase relations of Li2O-MnO-P2O5 system and the electrochemical properties of Li 1+𝑥 Mn1−𝑥 PO4 compounds, Journal of Alloys and Com- pounds636, 73 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Massa, O

    W. Massa, O. V. Yakubovich, and O. V. Dimitrova, A novel modification of manganese orthophosphate Mn 3(PO4)2, Solid State Sciences7, 950 (2005)

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    O. S. Volkova, L. V. Shvanskaya, E. A. Ovchenkov, E. A. Zvereva, A. S. Volkov, D. A. Chareev, K. Molla, B. Rahaman, T. Saha-Dasgupta, and A. N. Vasiliev, Structure–Property Rela- tionships in𝛼-,𝛽 ′-, and𝛾-Modifications of Mn 3(PO4)2, Inor- ganic Chemistry55, 10692 (2016), pMID: 27661209

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    A. V. Chubukov and D. I. Golosov, Quantum theory of an anti- ferromagnet on a triangular lattice in a magnetic field, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter3, 69 (1991)

    work page 1991

  9. [9]

    L. E. Svistov, A. I. Smirnov, L. A. Prozorova, O. A. Petrenko, L. N. Demianets, and A. Y. Shapiro, Quasi-two-dimensional an- tiferromagnet on a triangular lattice RbFe(MoO 4)2, Phys. Rev. B67, 094434 (2003)

    work page 2003

  10. [10]

    Koutroulakis, T

    G. Koutroulakis, T. Zhou, Y. Kamiya, J. D. Thompson, H. D. Zhou, C. D. Batista, and S. E. Brown, Quantum phase diagram of the𝑆= 1 2 triangular-lattice antiferromagnet Ba 3CoSb2O9, Phys. Rev. B91, 024410 (2015)

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    Whangbo, H.-J

    M.-H. Whangbo, H.-J. Koo, R. K. Kremer, and A. N. Vasiliev, Magnetization Plateaus by the Field-Induced Partitioning of Spin Lattices, Condensed Matter9, 10.3390/condmat9040045 (2024)

    work page doi:10.3390/condmat9040045 2024

  12. [12]

    L. P. Regnault, P. Burlet, and J. Rossat-Mignod, Magnetic order- ing in a planar X-Y model: BaCo2(AsO4)2, Physica B+C86-88, 660 (1977)

    work page 1977

  13. [13]

    Zhong, T

    R. Zhong, T. Gao, N. P. Ong, and R. J. Cava, Weak-field in- duced nonmagnetic state in a Co-based honeycomb, Sci. Adv. 6, eaay6953 (2020)

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    P. A. Maksimov, Proximity-induced sequence of field transi- tions in the Kitaev candidate BaCo2 (AsO4)2, Phys. Rev. B108, L180405 (2023)

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    S. Lee, S. Zhang, S. M. Thomas, L. Pressley, C. A. Bridges, E. S. Choi, V. S. Zapf, S. M. Winter, and M. Lee, Quantum order by disorder is a key to understanding the magnetic phases of BaCo2(AsO4)2, npj Quantum Mater.10, 11 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    T. Yang, Y. Zhang, S. Yang, G. Li, M. Xiong, F. Liao, and J. Lin, Four Isomorphous Phosphates AM 3P4O14 (A = Sr, Ba; M = Co, Mn) with Antiferromagnetic-Antiferromagnetic- Ferromagnetic Trimerized Chains, Showing 1/3 Quantum Mag- netization Plateaus Only in the Manganese(II) System, Inorganic Chemistry47, 2562 (2008), pMID: 18333609

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    M. Hase, T. Yang, R. Cong, J. Lin, A. Matsuo, K. Kindo, K. Ozawa, and H. Kitazawa, High-field magnetization of SrMn3P4O14 exhibiting a quantum-mechanical magnetization plateau and classical magnetic long-range order, Phys. Rev. B 80, 054402 (2009)

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    M. Hase, V. Y. Pomjakushin, A. D ¨onni, T. Yang, R. Cong, and J. Lin, Direct Observation of the Ground State of a 1/3 Quantum Magnetization Plateau in SrMn3P4O14 Using Neutron Diffraction Measurements, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan83, 104701 (2014)

    work page 2014

  19. [19]

    A. N. Vasiliev, O. S. Volkova, E. A. Zvereva, E. A. Ovchenkov, I. Muna`o, L. Clark, P. Lightfoot, E. L. Vavilova, S. Kamusella, H.-H. Klauss, J. Werner, C. Koo, R. Klingeler, and A. A. Tsirlin, 1/3 magnetization plateau and frustrated ferrimagnetism in a sodium iron phosphite, Phys. Rev. B93, 134401 (2016)

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    L. E. Svistov, A. I. Smirnov, L. A. Prozorova, O. A. Petrenko, A. Micheler, N. B¨ uttgen, A. Y. Shapiro, and L. N. Demianets, Magnetic phase diagram, critical behavior, and two-dimensional to three-dimensional crossover in the triangular lattice antifer- romagnet RbFeMoO4, Phys. Rev. B74, 024412 (2006)

    work page 2006

  21. [21]

    Ishii, S

    R. Ishii, S. Tanaka, K. Onuma, Y. Nambu, M. Toku- naga, T. Sakakibara, N. Kawashima, Y. Maeno, C. Broholm, D. P. Gautreaux, J. Y. Chan, and S. Nakatsuji, Successive phase transitions and phase diagrams for the quasi-two-dimensional 7 M (μB/f.u.)dM/dB Powder averaged B∥zB⊥z 0 2 4 6 8 10 Data b-only Dz-only 0 10 20 30 B (T) 0 10 20 30 B (T) 0 10 20 30 B (T)...

    work page 2011

  22. [22]

    M. Lee, E. S. Choi, X. Huang, J. Ma, C. R. Dela Cruz, M. Mat- suda, W. Tian, Z. L. Dun, S. Dong, and H. D. Zhou, Mag- netic phase diagram and multiferroicity of Ba 3MnNb2O9: A spin- 5 2 triangular lattice antiferromagnet with weak easy-axis anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B90, 224402 (2014)

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Xiang, C. Su, D. Sheptyakov, X. Liu, Y. Gao, P. Sun, W. Li, G. Su, and W. Jin, Successive magnetic transi- tions in the spin- 5 2 easy-axis triangular-lattice antiferromagnet Na2BaMn(PO4)2: A neutron diffraction study, Phys. Rev. B 110, 214405 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Whangbo, H.-J

    M.-H. Whangbo, H.-J. Koo, and O. S. Volkova, Le Chatelier’s Principle and Field-Induced Change in Magnetic Entropy Lead- ing to Spin–Lattice Partitioning and Magnetization Plateau, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C129, 17797 (2025)

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Edgar, E

    A. Edgar, E. Siegel, and W. Urban, Magnetic single-ion anisotropy and zero-field splittings of Mn 2+ ions in some low- dimensional chlorides, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 13, 6649 (1980)

    work page 1980

  26. [26]

    Szuszkiewicz, E

    W. Szuszkiewicz, E. Dynowska, B. Witkowska, and B. Hen- nion, Spin-wave measurements on hexagonal MnTe of NiAs- type structure by inelastic neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B73, 104403 (2006)

    work page 2006

  27. [27]

    S. V. Grigoriev, S. V. Maleyev, A. I. Okorokov, Y. O. Chetverikov, P. B ¨oni, R. Georgii, D. Lamago, H. Eckerlebe, and K. Pranzas, Magnetic structure of MnSi under an applied field probed by polarized small-angle neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B74, 214414 (2006)

    work page 2006

  28. [28]

    Pato-Dold ´an, L

    B. Pato-Dold ´an, L. C. G ´omez-Aguirre, A. P. Hansen, J. Mira, S. Castro-Garc ´ıa, M. S ´anchez-And´ ujar, M. A. Se ˜nar´ıs- Rodr´ıguez, V. S. Zapf, and J. Singleton, Magnetic transi- tions and isotropic versus anisotropic magnetic behaviour of [CH 3NH3][M(HCOO)3] M = Mn 2+, Co 2+, Ni 2+, Cu 2+ metal–organic perovskites, J. Mater. Chem. C4, 11164 (2016)

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    J. K. Clark, V. Yannello, A. M. Samarakoon, C. Ross, M. C. Uible, V. O. Garlea, and M. Shatruk, Inelastic Neutron Scatter- ing Study of Magnetic Exchange Pathways in MnS, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C125, 16183 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    E. A. Harris and J. Owen, Biquadratic Exchange Between Mn2+ Ions in MgO, Phys. Rev. Lett.11, 9 (1963)

    work page 1963

  31. [31]

    Sy ˆozi, Statistics of Kagom ´e Lattice, Progress of Theoretical Physics6, 306 (1951)

    I. Sy ˆozi, Statistics of Kagom ´e Lattice, Progress of Theoretical Physics6, 306 (1951)

    work page 1951

  32. [32]

    Pomata and T.-C

    N. Pomata and T.-C. Wei, AKLT models on decorated square lattices are gapped, Phys. Rev. B100, 094429 (2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    F. A. Kassan-Ogly, A. I. Proshkin, A. K. Murtazaev, and V. A. 8 Mutailamov, Decorated Ising Square Lattice in a Magnetic Field, Physics of the Solid State62, 770 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Mila and F.-C

    F. Mila and F.-C. Zhang, On the origin of biquadratic exchange in spin 1 chains, The European Physical Journal B - Condensed Matter and Complex Systems16, 7 (2000)

    work page 2000

  35. [35]

    Tanaka, Y

    K. Tanaka, Y. Yokoyama, and C. Hotta, Origin of Biquadratic Exchange Interactions in a Mott Insulator as a Driving Force of Spin Nematic Order, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 87, 023702 (2018)

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    A. R. Wildes, M. E. Zhitomirsky, T. Ziman, D. Lanc ¸on, and H. C. Walker, Evidence for biquadratic exchange in the quasi-two- dimensional antiferromagnet FePS3, Journal of Applied Physics 127, 223903 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    Kartsev, M

    A. Kartsev, M. Augustin, R. F. L. Evans, K. S. Novoselov, and E. J. G. Santos, Biquadratic exchange interactions in two-dimensional magnets, npj Computational Materials6, 150 (2020)

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    A. L. Chernyshev and O. A. Starykh, Roller Coaster in a Flat- land: Magnetoresistivity in Eu-Intercalated Graphite, Phys. Rev. X12, 021010 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Sindzingre, N

    P. Sindzingre, N. Shannon, and T. Momoi, Phase diagram of the spin-1/2 J1-J2-J3 Heisenberg model on the square lattice, Journal of Physics: Conference Series200, 022058 (2010)

    work page 2010

  40. [40]

    M. G. Gonzalez, E. A. Ghioldi, C. J. Gazza, L. O. Manuel, and A. E. Trumper, Interplay between spatial anisotropy and next- nearest-neighbor exchange interactions in the triangular Heisen- berg model, Phys. Rev. B102, 224410 (2020)

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    Mohylna, F

    M. Mohylna, F. A. G ´omez Albarrac ´ın, M. ˇZukoviˇc, and H. D. Rosales, Spontaneous antiferromagnetic skyrmion/antiskyrmion lattice and spiral spin-liquid states in the frustrated triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B106, 224406 (2022)

    work page 2022

  42. [42]

    Toth and B

    S. Toth and B. Lake, Linear spin wave theory for single-Q incom- mensurate magnetic structures, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter27, 166002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    K. E. Avers, P. A. Maksimov, P. F. S. Rosa, S. M. Thomas, J. D. Thompson, W. P. Halperin, R. Movshovich, and A. L. Cherny- shev, Fingerprinting triangular-lattice antiferromagnet by exci- tation gaps, Phys. Rev. B103, L180406 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    Kamiya, L

    Y. Kamiya, L. Ge, T. Hong, Y. Qiu, D. L. Quintero-Castro, Z. Lu, H. B. Cao, M. Matsuda, E. S. Choi, C. D. Batista, M. Mourigal, H. D. Zhou, and J. Ma, The nature of spin excitations in the one-third magnetization plateau phase of Ba 3CoSb2O9, Nature Communications9, 2666 (2018)

    work page 2018