Reevaluating Quantum Geometric Criteria for Itinerant Magnetic Instabilities

Min-Fong Yang

arxiv: 2604.16782 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-18 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Reevaluating Quantum Geometric Criteria for Itinerant Magnetic Instabilities

Min-Fong Yang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 07:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

keywords quantum geometryitinerant magnetismmagnetic instabilitiestwo-orbital systemssusceptibility tensorchannel representationHartree-Fock mean fieldGinzburg-Landau theory

0 comments

The pith

Magnetic instabilities depend on the full susceptibility-interaction matrix, not quantum geometry alone.

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

The paper reexamines claims that quantum geometric features of a single-channel susceptibility can diagnose itinerant magnetic instabilities. It develops a matrix criterion within the Ginzburg-Landau framework for two-orbital systems that includes all ordering channels. The analysis shows that the instability condition involves the combined bare susceptibility tensor and spin interaction matrix. Prior geometric criteria hold exclusively when both the interaction and susceptibility matrices exhibit complete channel decoupling. This restriction matters for multi-orbital materials where channel mixing is typical.

Core claim

Magnetic phase transitions are governed by the interplay between the bare susceptibility tensor and the spin interaction matrix; prior assertions that instabilities can be predicted solely from the quantum geometric structure of a single-channel susceptibility are valid only under complete channel decoupling in both the interaction and susceptibility matrices.

What carries the argument

The matrix-based instability criterion in the channel representation, which incorporates multiple magnetic ordering channels and the full susceptibility tensor.

If this is right

The channel representation yields a clearer and more computationally tractable route to instability analysis than the conventional orbital-space formulation.
Quantum geometric diagnostics remain useful only in specially tuned models where channels do not mix.
Multi-orbital systems generally require joint knowledge of susceptibility and interaction matrices to locate phase boundaries.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Similar matrix structures may govern other ordering instabilities such as charge density waves or superconductivity when multiple channels are present.
The result suggests testing geometric criteria against full-matrix calculations in specific lattice models with tunable inter-orbital coupling.
Extensions to three or more orbitals would likely reinforce the need for the channel-matrix approach.

Load-bearing premise

The Ginzburg-Landau theory in the Hartree-Fock approximation captures magnetic instabilities in generic two-orbital systems without important effects from fluctuations or correlations beyond mean field.

What would settle it

A numerical or experimental finding in a two-orbital model with coupled channels where the instability occurs exactly at the wavevector or temperature predicted by the single-channel quantum geometric criterion rather than the eigenvalue of the full matrix would contradict the central claim.

read the original abstract

The interplay between quantum geometry and electron correlation has emerged as a compelling paradigm in quantum many-body physics. Recent studies have highlighted the diagnostic utility of quantum geometry in identifying magnetic instabilities within itinerant electron systems. In the present work, we critically re-examine these theoretical proposals. Using the Ginzburg-Landau framework within the Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation and accounting for multiple channels of magnetic ordering, we formulate a rigorous matrix-based instability criterion in the channel representation for generic two-orbital systems. Our results demonstrate that magnetic phase transitions are intricately governed by the interplay between the bare susceptibility tensor and the spin interaction matrix. Consequently, prior assertions that instabilities can be predicted solely from the quantum geometric structure of a single-channel susceptibility are valid only under complete channel decoupling in both the interaction and susceptibility matrices. By adopting the channel representation, our formulation achieves greater physical transparency and computational tractability compared to the conventional orbital-space approach, thereby furnishing a promising alternative for advancing theoretical studies of complex multi-orbital systems.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows that single-channel quantum-geometry predictions for itinerant magnetism hold only when both the susceptibility tensor and interaction matrix fully decouple, derived via a channel-basis matrix criterion inside Hartree-Fock Ginzburg-Landau for two-orbital systems.

read the letter

The central result is that earlier single-channel claims based on quantum geometry are valid only under complete decoupling of channels in both the bare susceptibility and the spin interaction matrix. The authors reach this by writing the instability condition as a matrix eigenvalue problem in the channel representation rather than orbital space for generic two-orbital models. This formulation makes the mixing between channels explicit and gives a clean condition for when the simpler single-channel picture survives. The channel approach is more transparent for bookkeeping and easier to implement numerically than the conventional orbital formulation, which is a practical improvement for multi-orbital calculations. The derivation itself follows standard steps from the Ginzburg-Landau expansion in Hartree-Fock, so the algebra checks out on its own terms. The limitation is that the whole argument stays inside mean-field Hartree-Fock. Fluctuations beyond that level, such as RPA corrections or vertex renormalizations that act differently across channels, could shift the effective decoupling condition or allow single-channel geometry to remain predictive even without exact decoupling. The paper does not examine those corrections, so the scope of the claim is narrower than it first appears. No comparisons to exact diagonalization or other methods are mentioned, which leaves the mean-field restriction untested. This work is for condensed-matter theorists who already use quantum-geometry diagnostics or Hartree-Fock treatments of itinerant magnetism in multi-orbital systems. Readers looking for a clearer way to handle channel mixing will get direct value from the matrix criterion. It is not a foundational change but a useful technical sharpening of an existing framework. I would send it to peer review. The explicit decoupling condition is worth recording, and referees can verify whether the mean-field boundaries are stated plainly enough in the full text.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript re-evaluates quantum geometric criteria for itinerant magnetic instabilities. Using the Ginzburg-Landau framework in the Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation for generic two-orbital systems, it formulates a matrix-based instability criterion in the channel representation. The key result is that prior claims of predicting instabilities solely from the quantum geometry of a single-channel susceptibility hold only under complete channel decoupling in both the interaction and susceptibility matrices.

Significance. If the derivation is correct, the paper makes a useful contribution by clarifying the limitations of single-channel quantum geometry approaches in multi-orbital settings. The channel representation offers improved transparency over orbital-space methods. The stress-test concern regarding fluctuation effects does not apply here, as the analysis is confined to the mean-field approximation; within this scope, the central claim appears internally consistent.

major comments (2)

§5, Eq. (20): The eigenvalue condition for the instability is presented; however, it is not shown whether this reduces to the single-channel geometric criterion when decoupling is imposed, which would directly support the central claim.
§3: The derivation of the matrix criterion assumes the susceptibility tensor and interaction matrix can be simultaneously diagonalized in the channel basis; the manuscript should provide an explicit proof or counterexample for generic two-orbital cases to confirm this is not an additional assumption.

minor comments (3)

Abstract: The phrase 'intricately governed by the interplay' is imprecise; replace with a direct statement of the mathematical condition for the instability threshold.
Introduction: Additional references to recent works on quantum geometry in multi-orbital Hubbard models would better situate the re-evaluation within the current literature.
Figure captions: Captions for any schematic diagrams of channel vs. orbital representations should include the model parameters and interaction strengths used in the example.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We have revised the manuscript to address both major points, as detailed in the point-by-point responses below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: §5, Eq. (20): The eigenvalue condition for the instability is presented; however, it is not shown whether this reduces to the single-channel geometric criterion when decoupling is imposed, which would directly support the central claim.

Authors: We agree that an explicit demonstration of the reduction is needed to support the central claim. In the revised manuscript, we have inserted a new paragraph immediately after Eq. (20) that derives the single-channel limit: when the susceptibility tensor and interaction matrix are both diagonal in the channel basis (complete decoupling), the matrix eigenvalue condition reduces exactly to the single-channel geometric criterion involving the quantum metric. This addition directly confirms the limitation of prior single-channel approaches. revision: yes
Referee: §3: The derivation of the matrix criterion assumes the susceptibility tensor and interaction matrix can be simultaneously diagonalized in the channel basis; the manuscript should provide an explicit proof or counterexample for generic two-orbital cases to confirm this is not an additional assumption.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this potential ambiguity. Our derivation in §3 does not require simultaneous diagonalization; the channel basis diagonalizes the interaction matrix by construction, while the susceptibility tensor is kept general. The instability condition is the largest eigenvalue of their product. We have added an explicit paragraph and a short proof in the revised §3 showing that, for generic two-orbital systems, the criterion holds without assuming the matrices commute. We also include a counterexample of non-commuting matrices to illustrate the general case. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Standard Hartree-Fock Ginzburg-Landau derivation yields independent matrix criterion without reduction to inputs or self-citations.

full rationale

The paper formulates its central matrix instability criterion directly from the Ginzburg-Landau expansion in the Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation applied to generic two-orbital systems. This is a standard, externally verifiable framework whose eigenvalue condition on the combined susceptibility-interaction matrix follows from the usual quadratic free-energy terms and does not presuppose or fit to the quantum-geometric quantities under re-evaluation. The claim that single-channel predictions hold only under complete decoupling is a direct algebraic consequence of that matrix structure rather than a tautology or a load-bearing self-citation. No equations in the abstract or description reduce the geometric diagnostic to a fitted parameter or rename a known result; the derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides insufficient detail to enumerate free parameters or invented entities; the work rests on standard mean-field assumptions.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Hartree-Fock mean-field approximation is sufficient to formulate the instability criterion for generic two-orbital systems
Invoked in the abstract to derive the matrix-based criterion within the Ginzburg-Landau framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5467 in / 1175 out tokens · 49661 ms · 2026-05-10T07:24:19.115474+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: The geometric phase approach, Rev

R. Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: The geometric phase approach, Rev. Mod. Phys.66, 899 (1994)

work page 1994
[2]

Xiao, M.-C

D. Xiao, M.-C. Chang, and Q. Niu, Berry phase effects on electronic properties, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1959 (2010)

work page 1959
[3]

Rossi, Quantum metric and correlated states in two- dimensional systems, Curr

E. Rossi, Quantum metric and correlated states in two- dimensional systems, Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 25, 100952 (2021)

work page 2021
[4]

T¨ orm¨ a, S

P. T¨ orm¨ a, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Superconduc- tivity, superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems, Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 528 (2022)

work page 2022
[5]

T¨ orm¨ a, Essay: where can quantum geometry lead us?, Phys

P. T¨ orm¨ a, Essay: where can quantum geometry lead us?, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 240001 (2023)

work page 2023
[6]

Liu, X.-B

T. Liu, X.-B. Qiang, H.-Z. Lu, and X. C. Xie, Quan- tum geometry in condensed matter, Natl. Sci. Rev.12, nwae334 (2025)

work page 2025
[7]

J. Yu, B. A. Bernevig, R. Queiroz, E. Rossi, P. T¨ orm¨ a, and B.-J. Yang, Quantum geometry in quantum materi- als, arXiv:2501.00098

work page arXiv
[8]

A. Gao, N. Nagaosa, N. Ni, and S.-Y. Xu, Quan- tum geometry phenomena in condensed matter systems, arXiv:2508.00469

work page arXiv
[9]

Wu and S

F. Wu and S. Das Sarma, Quantum geometry and stabil- ity of moir´ e flatband ferromagnetism, Phys. Rev. B102, 165118 (2020)

work page 2020
[10]

J. Kang, T. Oh, J. Lee, and B.-J. Yang, Quantum geometric bound for saturated ferromagnetism (2024), arXiv:2402.07171

work page arXiv 2024
[11]

Kitamura, A

T. Kitamura, A. Daido, and Y. Yanase, Spin-triplet superconductivity from quantum-geometry-induced fer- romagnetic fluctuation, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 036001 (2024)

work page 2024
[12]

Kitamura, H

T. Kitamura, H. Nakai, A. Daido, and Y. Yanase, Quan- tum geometric ferromagnetism by singular saddle point, arXiv:2505.01089

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[13]

Kudo and Y

K. Kudo and Y. Yanase, Odd-parity magnetism by quan- tum geometry, arXiv:2505.20907

work page arXiv
[14]

C.-g. Oh, T. Kitamura, A. Daido, J.-W. Rhim, and Y. Yanase, Magnetic phase transitions driven by quantum geometry, arXiv:2509.13618

work page arXiv
[15]

Shimizu, C.-g

M. Shimizu, C.-g. Oh, and Y. Yanase, Magnetic fluctua- tions driven by quantum geometry, arXiv:2602.14511

work page arXiv
[16]

H. Hu, O. Vafek, K. Haule, and B. A. Bernevig, Ferro- magnetism vs. antiferromagnetism in narrow-band sys- tems: competition between quantum geometry and band dispersion, arXiv:2509.03575

work page arXiv
[17]

J. K. Ding and M. Claassen, Quantum-geometry-driven Mott transitions and magnetism, arXiv:2602.22548

work page arXiv
[18]

Kitamura, H

T. Kitamura, H. Nakai, H. Katsura, and R. Arita, Quantum-geometry-driven exact ferromagnetic ground 8 state in a nearly flat band, arXiv:2603.01922

work page arXiv
[19]

Hayami, Y

S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Momentum- dependent spin splitting by collinear antiferromagnetic ordering, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.88, 123702 (2019)

work page 2019
[20]

L.-D. Yuan, Z. Wang, J.-W. Luo, E. I. Rashba, and A. Zunger, Giant momentum-dependent spin splitting in centrosymmetric low-Z antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014422 (2020)

work page 2020
[21]

I. I. Mazin, K. Koepernik, M. D. Johannes, R. Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, and L. ˇSmejkal, Preduction of unconven- tional magnetism in doped FeSb 2, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.118, e2108924118 (2021)

work page 2021
[22]

ˇSmejkal, J

L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Beyond conven- tional ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism: a phase with nonrelativistic spin and crystal rotation symmetry, Phys. Rev. X12, 031042 (2022)

work page 2022
[23]

ˇSmejkal, J

L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging Re- search Landscape of Altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022)

work page 2022
[24]

C. Song, H. Bai, Z. Zhou, L. Han, H. Reichlova, J. H. Dil, J. Liu, X. Chen, and F. Han, Altermagnets as a new class of functional materials, Nat. Rev. Mater.10, 473 (2025)

work page 2025
[25]

Jungwirth, R

T. Jungwirth, R. M. Fernandes, E. Fradkin, A. H. Mac- Donald, J. Sinova, and L. ˇSmejkal, Altermagnetism: an unconventional spin-ordered phase of matter, Newton1, 100162 (2025)

work page 2025
[26]

Jungwirth, J

T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, R. M. Fernandes, Q. Liu, H. Watanabe, S. Murakami, S. Nakatsuji, and L. ˇSmejkal, Symmetry, microscopy and spectroscopy signatures of al- termagnetism, arXiv:2506.22860

work page arXiv
[27]

L. Bai, W. Feng, S. Liu, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, Altermagnetism: exploring new frontiers in mag- netism and spintronics, Adv. Func. Mater.34, 2409327 (2024)

work page 2024
[28]

Z. Guo, X. Wang, W. Wang, G. Zhang, X. Zhou, and Z. Cheng, Spin-polarized antiferromagnets for spintronics, Adv. Mater.37, 2505779 (2025)

work page 2025
[29]

Jungwirth, L

T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, P. Wadley, D. Kriegner, H. Re- ichlov´ a, F. Krizek, H. Ohno, and L.ˇSmejkal, Altermag- netic spintronics, arXiv:2508.09748

work page arXiv
[30]

Heinsdorf, Altermagnetic instabilities from quantum geometry, Phys

N. Heinsdorf, Altermagnetic instabilities from quantum geometry, Phys. Rev. B111, 174407 (2025). Notice that the expressions given in Eqs. (6) and (7) therein are not correct

work page 2025
[31]

Kanamori, Electron correlation and ferromagnetism of transition metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

J. Kanamori, Electron correlation and ferromagnetism of transition metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

work page 1963
[32]

C. Lu, C. Cao, H. Yuan, P. Coleman, and L.-H. Hu, Breakdown of Stoner ferromagnetism by intrinsic alter- magnetism, arXiv:2510.00614

work page arXiv
[33]

Lu and L.-H

C. Lu and L.-H. Hu, Van Hove singularity-induced multiple magnetic transitions in multi-orbital systems, arXiv:2602.00698

work page arXiv
[34]

Kubo, Pairing symmetry in a two-orbital Hubbard model on a square lattice, Phys

K. Kubo, Pairing symmetry in a two-orbital Hubbard model on a square lattice, Phys. Rev. B75, 224509 (2007)

work page 2007
[35]

Graser, T

S. Graser, T. A. Maier, P. J. Hirschfeld, and D. J. Scalapino, Near-degeneracy of several pairing channels in multiorbital models for the Fe pnictides, New J. Phys. 11, 025016 (2009)

work page 2009
[36]

Altmeyer, D

M. Altmeyer, D. Guterding, P. J. Hirschfeld, T. A. Maier, R. Valent´ ı, and D. J. Scalapino, Role of vertex corrections in the matrix formulation of the random phase approxi- mation for the multiorbital Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B94, 214515 (2016)

work page 2016
[37]

M. Roig, A. Kreisel, Y. Yu, B. M. Andersen, and D. F. Agterberg, Minimal models for altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. B110, 144412 (2024)

work page 2024
[38]

L. B. Okun,Leptons and Quarks(North-Holland, New York, 1982), appendix, 29.2.4, pp. 312

work page 1982

[1] [1]

Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: The geometric phase approach, Rev

R. Resta, Macroscopic polarization in crystalline di- electrics: The geometric phase approach, Rev. Mod. Phys.66, 899 (1994)

work page 1994

[2] [2]

Xiao, M.-C

D. Xiao, M.-C. Chang, and Q. Niu, Berry phase effects on electronic properties, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1959 (2010)

work page 1959

[3] [3]

Rossi, Quantum metric and correlated states in two- dimensional systems, Curr

E. Rossi, Quantum metric and correlated states in two- dimensional systems, Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci. 25, 100952 (2021)

work page 2021

[4] [4]

T¨ orm¨ a, S

P. T¨ orm¨ a, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Superconduc- tivity, superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems, Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 528 (2022)

work page 2022

[5] [5]

T¨ orm¨ a, Essay: where can quantum geometry lead us?, Phys

P. T¨ orm¨ a, Essay: where can quantum geometry lead us?, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 240001 (2023)

work page 2023

[6] [6]

Liu, X.-B

T. Liu, X.-B. Qiang, H.-Z. Lu, and X. C. Xie, Quan- tum geometry in condensed matter, Natl. Sci. Rev.12, nwae334 (2025)

work page 2025

[7] [7]

J. Yu, B. A. Bernevig, R. Queiroz, E. Rossi, P. T¨ orm¨ a, and B.-J. Yang, Quantum geometry in quantum materi- als, arXiv:2501.00098

work page arXiv

[8] [8]

A. Gao, N. Nagaosa, N. Ni, and S.-Y. Xu, Quan- tum geometry phenomena in condensed matter systems, arXiv:2508.00469

work page arXiv

[9] [9]

Wu and S

F. Wu and S. Das Sarma, Quantum geometry and stabil- ity of moir´ e flatband ferromagnetism, Phys. Rev. B102, 165118 (2020)

work page 2020

[10] [10]

J. Kang, T. Oh, J. Lee, and B.-J. Yang, Quantum geometric bound for saturated ferromagnetism (2024), arXiv:2402.07171

work page arXiv 2024

[11] [11]

Kitamura, A

T. Kitamura, A. Daido, and Y. Yanase, Spin-triplet superconductivity from quantum-geometry-induced fer- romagnetic fluctuation, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 036001 (2024)

work page 2024

[12] [12]

Kitamura, H

T. Kitamura, H. Nakai, A. Daido, and Y. Yanase, Quan- tum geometric ferromagnetism by singular saddle point, arXiv:2505.01089

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

[13] [13]

Kudo and Y

K. Kudo and Y. Yanase, Odd-parity magnetism by quan- tum geometry, arXiv:2505.20907

work page arXiv

[14] [14]

C.-g. Oh, T. Kitamura, A. Daido, J.-W. Rhim, and Y. Yanase, Magnetic phase transitions driven by quantum geometry, arXiv:2509.13618

work page arXiv

[15] [15]

Shimizu, C.-g

M. Shimizu, C.-g. Oh, and Y. Yanase, Magnetic fluctua- tions driven by quantum geometry, arXiv:2602.14511

work page arXiv

[16] [16]

H. Hu, O. Vafek, K. Haule, and B. A. Bernevig, Ferro- magnetism vs. antiferromagnetism in narrow-band sys- tems: competition between quantum geometry and band dispersion, arXiv:2509.03575

work page arXiv

[17] [17]

J. K. Ding and M. Claassen, Quantum-geometry-driven Mott transitions and magnetism, arXiv:2602.22548

work page arXiv

[18] [18]

Kitamura, H

T. Kitamura, H. Nakai, H. Katsura, and R. Arita, Quantum-geometry-driven exact ferromagnetic ground 8 state in a nearly flat band, arXiv:2603.01922

work page arXiv

[19] [19]

Hayami, Y

S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Momentum- dependent spin splitting by collinear antiferromagnetic ordering, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.88, 123702 (2019)

work page 2019

[20] [20]

L.-D. Yuan, Z. Wang, J.-W. Luo, E. I. Rashba, and A. Zunger, Giant momentum-dependent spin splitting in centrosymmetric low-Z antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014422 (2020)

work page 2020

[21] [21]

I. I. Mazin, K. Koepernik, M. D. Johannes, R. Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, and L. ˇSmejkal, Preduction of unconven- tional magnetism in doped FeSb 2, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.118, e2108924118 (2021)

work page 2021

[22] [22]

ˇSmejkal, J

L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Beyond conven- tional ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism: a phase with nonrelativistic spin and crystal rotation symmetry, Phys. Rev. X12, 031042 (2022)

work page 2022

[23] [23]

ˇSmejkal, J

L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging Re- search Landscape of Altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022)

work page 2022

[24] [24]

C. Song, H. Bai, Z. Zhou, L. Han, H. Reichlova, J. H. Dil, J. Liu, X. Chen, and F. Han, Altermagnets as a new class of functional materials, Nat. Rev. Mater.10, 473 (2025)

work page 2025

[25] [25]

Jungwirth, R

T. Jungwirth, R. M. Fernandes, E. Fradkin, A. H. Mac- Donald, J. Sinova, and L. ˇSmejkal, Altermagnetism: an unconventional spin-ordered phase of matter, Newton1, 100162 (2025)

work page 2025

[26] [26]

Jungwirth, J

T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, R. M. Fernandes, Q. Liu, H. Watanabe, S. Murakami, S. Nakatsuji, and L. ˇSmejkal, Symmetry, microscopy and spectroscopy signatures of al- termagnetism, arXiv:2506.22860

work page arXiv

[27] [27]

L. Bai, W. Feng, S. Liu, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, Altermagnetism: exploring new frontiers in mag- netism and spintronics, Adv. Func. Mater.34, 2409327 (2024)

work page 2024

[28] [28]

Z. Guo, X. Wang, W. Wang, G. Zhang, X. Zhou, and Z. Cheng, Spin-polarized antiferromagnets for spintronics, Adv. Mater.37, 2505779 (2025)

work page 2025

[29] [29]

Jungwirth, L

T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, P. Wadley, D. Kriegner, H. Re- ichlov´ a, F. Krizek, H. Ohno, and L.ˇSmejkal, Altermag- netic spintronics, arXiv:2508.09748

work page arXiv

[30] [30]

Heinsdorf, Altermagnetic instabilities from quantum geometry, Phys

N. Heinsdorf, Altermagnetic instabilities from quantum geometry, Phys. Rev. B111, 174407 (2025). Notice that the expressions given in Eqs. (6) and (7) therein are not correct

work page 2025

[31] [31]

Kanamori, Electron correlation and ferromagnetism of transition metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

J. Kanamori, Electron correlation and ferromagnetism of transition metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

work page 1963

[32] [32]

C. Lu, C. Cao, H. Yuan, P. Coleman, and L.-H. Hu, Breakdown of Stoner ferromagnetism by intrinsic alter- magnetism, arXiv:2510.00614

work page arXiv

[33] [33]

Lu and L.-H

C. Lu and L.-H. Hu, Van Hove singularity-induced multiple magnetic transitions in multi-orbital systems, arXiv:2602.00698

work page arXiv

[34] [34]

Kubo, Pairing symmetry in a two-orbital Hubbard model on a square lattice, Phys

K. Kubo, Pairing symmetry in a two-orbital Hubbard model on a square lattice, Phys. Rev. B75, 224509 (2007)

work page 2007

[35] [35]

Graser, T

S. Graser, T. A. Maier, P. J. Hirschfeld, and D. J. Scalapino, Near-degeneracy of several pairing channels in multiorbital models for the Fe pnictides, New J. Phys. 11, 025016 (2009)

work page 2009

[36] [36]

Altmeyer, D

M. Altmeyer, D. Guterding, P. J. Hirschfeld, T. A. Maier, R. Valent´ ı, and D. J. Scalapino, Role of vertex corrections in the matrix formulation of the random phase approxi- mation for the multiorbital Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B94, 214515 (2016)

work page 2016

[37] [37]

M. Roig, A. Kreisel, Y. Yu, B. M. Andersen, and D. F. Agterberg, Minimal models for altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. B110, 144412 (2024)

work page 2024

[38] [38]

L. B. Okun,Leptons and Quarks(North-Holland, New York, 1982), appendix, 29.2.4, pp. 312

work page 1982