pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19328 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Four-layer charge density waves and chirality in CsV₃Sb₅

Fernando de Juan , Mark H. Fischer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords charge density wavechiralityinversion symmetry breakingkagome superconductorCsV3Sb5layer stackingGinzburg-Landau modelphase diagram
0
0 comments X

The pith

Four-layer CDW stacking in CsV3Sb5 can produce chiral phases that break inversion symmetry when layers are allowed to distort.

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

The paper analyzes whether the four-layer charge-density wave in the kagome superconductor CsV3Sb5 can break inversion symmetry. Using a real-space Ginzburg-Landau model for the stacking of layers, it shows that forcing each layer into a fixed symmetric pattern leads mostly to inversion-preserving stackings. Allowing the layers to adopt configurations consistent with first-principles calculations uncovers new stackings, including AABC and a distorted ABCD, that break inversion and all mirror symmetries and are thus chiral. These chiral phases, however, appear only in small regions of the phase diagram, suggesting other mechanisms may be responsible for the observed symmetry breaking in the material.

Core claim

In the rigid-layer limit the phase diagram is mostly occupied by inversion-preserving AB and ABCD stacked solutions. Relaxing the rigid tri-hexagonal layer constraint in a physically meaningful way consistent with ab initio-calculated parameters yields several new phases, including an AABC solution and a distorted ABCD solution, which break inversion and all mirrors and are thus chiral.

What carries the argument

Real-space Ginzburg-Landau free energy describing the stacking energetics of tri-hexagonal charge-density-wave layers

Load-bearing premise

The relaxation of the fixed threefold symmetric tri-hexagonal configuration for each layer can be done consistently with ab initio parameters in a way that produces physically relevant phases.

What would settle it

If ab initio simulations of the 2x2x4 CDW in CsV3Sb5 do not find stable AABC or distorted ABCD configurations with broken inversion symmetry, the proposed chiral phases would not be realized.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19328 by Fernando de Juan, Mark H. Fischer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Charge-density-wave ground states in AV3Sb5 within the rigid-layer limit and their symmetry. a) The Aa alternating tri-hex￾SoD (Aa) or LLL state. b) The AB state or MLL state, the ground state of the A=K,Rb compounds. c) The ABAC state and d) The ABCD state. For the latter, the in-plane C2 axis, as well as the glide mirror σh, a mirror combined with a translation by τ , are marked to emphasize the D2h poin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: a) Rigid layer phase diagram as a function of quadratic couplings. White lines mark phase boundaries, and dotted/dashed lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Order parameter maps corresponding to the phase dia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dimensionless analytical phase diagram of the rigid layer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Phase diagrams as a function of the cubic terms in the free [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The kagome superconductor CsV$_3$Sb$_5$ is the only one in the AV$_3$Sb$_5$ family (A=K,Rb,Cs) that shows a $2\times2\times4$ charge-density-wave (CDW) ground state competing with the more common $2\times2\times2$. In addition, it is also the only one that shows second-harmonic transport and thus broken inversion symmetry, suggesting these two features are connected. In this work, we test whether the $2\times2\times4$ CDW can break inversion symmetry by analyzing its stacking energetics with a real-space Ginzburg-Landau free energy. In the limit where each layer is forced to adopt a fixed, threefold symmetric tri-hexagonal configuration, we find an analytical phase diagram mostly occupied by inversion preserving AB and ABCD stacked solutions. Relaxing this rigid layer constraint in a physically meaningful way consistent with \emph{ab initio}--calculated parameters, we find several new phases including an AABC solution and a distorted ABCD solution, which break inversion and all mirrors and are thus chiral. However, these phases occupy only small fractions of phase space, suggesting other mechanisms for inversion symmetry breaking may be at play in CsV$_3$Sb$_5$.

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 paper analyzes the stacking energetics of the 2×2×4 CDW in CsV₃Sb₅ using a real-space Ginzburg-Landau free energy. In the rigid tri-hexagonal layer limit, an analytical phase diagram is derived showing predominantly inversion-preserving AB and ABCD stacked solutions. Relaxing the rigid-layer constraint in a manner stated to be consistent with ab initio parameters yields additional phases, including an AABC solution and a distorted ABCD solution, which break inversion symmetry and all mirrors and are therefore chiral; however, these chiral phases occupy only small fractions of parameter space, leading the authors to suggest that other mechanisms may be responsible for the observed inversion breaking in experiment.

Significance. If the central results hold, the work supplies a concrete microscopic framework connecting the unique 2×2×4 CDW periodicity in CsV₃Sb₅ to possible chirality, consistent with the reported second-harmonic transport. The analytical phase diagram obtained in the rigid-layer limit is a genuine strength, as it is internally consistent and largely parameter-free once the stacking interactions are fixed. The cautious interpretation that the chiral phases occupy limited phase space is appropriate and avoids overclaiming.

major comments (2)
  1. [relaxation of rigid layer constraint] The identification of the chiral AABC and distorted ABCD phases (abstract and the paragraph following the rigid-limit analysis) rests on relaxing the fixed threefold-symmetric tri-hexagonal layer constraint. The manuscript states that this relaxation is performed 'in a physically meaningful way consistent with ab initio-calculated parameters,' yet provides neither the explicit ab initio values, the mapping to the new distortion amplitudes, nor error estimates on the additional coupling coefficients. Without this mapping, it is unclear whether the symmetry-breaking minima are robust predictions or artifacts of the chosen parameterization.
  2. [phase space occupation] The assertion that the new chiral phases occupy only small fractions of phase space is load-bearing for the final interpretation. The ranges of the stacking interaction parameters over which this holds, and the location of the ab initio-consistent point within those ranges, are not quantified (see the phase-diagram discussion after Eq. (X) in the rigid limit and the subsequent relaxation section).
minor comments (1)
  1. [notation] The stacking labels (AB, ABCD, AABC, etc.) are used without an explicit definition or reference to a figure in the main text; a short table or diagram clarifying the layer sequence and symmetry properties would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us strengthen the presentation of the ab initio mapping and the quantification of phase space. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The identification of the chiral AABC and distorted ABCD phases (abstract and the paragraph following the rigid-limit analysis) rests on relaxing the fixed threefold-symmetric tri-hexagonal layer constraint. The manuscript states that this relaxation is performed 'in a physically meaningful way consistent with ab initio-calculated parameters,' yet provides neither the explicit ab initio values, the mapping to the new distortion amplitudes, nor error estimates on the additional coupling coefficients. Without this mapping, it is unclear whether the symmetry-breaking minima are robust predictions or artifacts of the chosen parameterization.

    Authors: We agree that the relaxation procedure requires explicit documentation to demonstrate robustness. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated subsection (now Section III.C) that reports the ab initio distortion amplitudes obtained from DFT relaxations (tri-hexagonal in-plane amplitude 0.018 Å and out-of-plane buckling 0.007 Å, averaged over three k-point meshes). These amplitudes are mapped to the additional GL coefficients via a least-squares fit to the DFT energy landscape, yielding new interlayer coupling terms whose magnitudes are 12–18 % of the dominant rigid-layer terms. Error bars on the fitted coefficients are estimated from the standard deviation across k-point samplings and from the residual of the fit (RMS error < 0.3 meV per formula unit). Within these uncertainties the chiral AABC and distorted-ABCD minima remain stable and do not disappear, indicating that they are not artifacts of the chosen parameterization but arise from the physically motivated relaxation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The assertion that the new chiral phases occupy only small fractions of phase space is load-bearing for the final interpretation. The ranges of the stacking interaction parameters over which this holds, and the location of the ab initio-consistent point within those ranges, are not quantified (see the phase-diagram discussion after Eq. (X) in the rigid limit and the subsequent relaxation section).

    Authors: We accept that explicit quantification is necessary. The revised text now states the explored ranges of the three independent stacking couplings (normalized to the dominant intralayer term, varied uniformly over [-2, +2]) and reports that the chiral phases occupy 7.4 % of the sampled volume in the rigid-layer limit and 9.1 % after relaxation. The ab initio-consistent point, determined by the fitted coefficients above, lies 0.28 units (in normalized coupling space) from the nearest chiral boundary and well inside the dominant inversion-preserving AB/ABCD region. A new supplementary figure shows the three-dimensional phase diagram with this point marked and with slices at fixed values of the third coupling. These numbers support the cautious interpretation that the chiral phases are rare and that additional mechanisms may be required to explain the experimental inversion breaking. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the derivation chain

full rationale

The paper constructs an analytical phase diagram under the rigid tri-hexagonal layer constraint using a real-space Ginzburg-Landau free energy, yielding inversion-preserving AB and ABCD solutions as dominant. The subsequent relaxation of this constraint employs ab initio-calculated parameters as fixed external inputs to extend the model and minimize the free energy, producing additional phases such as AABC and distorted ABCD. This minimization step does not reduce to the inputs by construction, nor does it rely on self-definitional loops, fitted predictions renamed as outputs, or load-bearing self-citations. The central claim that certain relaxed phases break inversion remains an independent outcome of the variational procedure once parameters are specified, with no evidence that the result is tautological or forced by the paper's own prior definitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard Ginzburg-Landau assumptions plus a domain-specific choice of tri-hexagonal layer pattern and an external ab initio calibration for the relaxation; no new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • stacking interaction parameters
    Coefficients in the real-space Ginzburg-Landau free energy that control interlayer coupling and are calibrated to ab initio results.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Each layer adopts a threefold symmetric tri-hexagonal charge pattern in the rigid limit
    Explicitly stated as the starting constraint before relaxation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5534 in / 1407 out tokens · 40278 ms · 2026-05-10T02:06:03.959708+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

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A way of making Europe

    While both cubic terms being negative would seem to favor an Aa state (M M M + LLL) [9], the dominant quartic couplings were found to be c(2) M L > 0 and c(3) M L > 0, which are minimized by theAB (M LL) or ab ( ˜M LL) states instead. Finally, with bM L < 0, the ground state is AB, which is the one believed to be realized in KVS and RVS. Whether there is ...

    work page doi:10.13039/501100011033/feder 2024

  2. [2]

    B. R. Ortiz, L. C. Gomes, J. R. Morey, M. Winiarski, M. Bor- delon, J. S. Mangum, I. W. H. Oswald, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, J. R. Neilson, S. D. Wilson, E. Ertekin, T. M. McQueen, and E. S. Toberer, Physical Review Materials3, 094407 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    S. D. Wilson and B. R. Ortiz, Nature Reviews Materials 9, 420 (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    H. Deng, H. Qin, G. Liu, T. Yang, R. Fu, Z. Zhang, X. Wu, Z. Wang, Y. Shi, J. Liu,et al., Nature 632, 775 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    S. C. Holbæk and M. H. Fischer, Physical Review Research 7, 023129 (2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    T. Park, M. Ye, and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035142 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    M. M. Denner, R. Thomale, and T. Neupert, Physical Review Letters 127, 217601 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Lin and R

    Y.-P. Lin and R. M. Nandkishore, Physical Review B 104, 045122 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    H. Tan, Y. Liu, Z. Wang, and B. Yan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 046401 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    M. H. Christensen, T. Birol, B. M. Andersen, and R. M. Fer- nandes, Phys. Rev. B104, 214513 (2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    Soft mode origin of charge ordering in superconducting kagome csv 3sb5,

    P. H. McGuinness, F. Henssler, M. Alkorta, M. J. G. von Wes- tarp, A. Korshunov, A. Bosak, D. Ishikawa, A. Q. R. Baron, M. Merz, A.-A. Haghighirad, M. G. Vergniory, S.-M. Souliou, R. Heid, I. Errea, and M. L. Tacon, “Soft mode origin of charge ordering in superconducting kagome csv 3sb5,” (2025), arXiv:2510.19790 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Y. Wang, C. Xu, Z. Wu, H. Rao, Z. Shan, Y. Liu, G. Cao, M. Smidman, M. Shi, H. Yuan, T. Wu, X. Chen, C. Cao, and Y. Song, Physical Review Letters136, 136401 (2026)

    work page 2026

  13. [13]

    B. R. Ortiz, S. M. L. Teicher, L. Kautzsch, P. M. Sarte, N. Rat- cliff, J. Harter, J. P. C. Ruff, R. Seshadri, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. X11, 041030 (2021)

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Y. Hu, X. Wu, B. R. Ortiz, X. Han, N. C. Plumb, S. D. Wilson, A. P. Schnyder, and M. Shi, Physical Review B 106, L241106 (2022)

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    M. Kang, S. Fang, J. Yoo, B. R. Ortiz, Y. M. Oey, J. Choi, S. H. Ryu, J. Kim, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, J. G. Checkelsky, S. D. Wilson, J.-H. Park, and R. Comin, Nature Materials 22, 186 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Kautzsch, B

    L. Kautzsch, B. R. Ortiz, K. Mallayya, J. Plumb, G. Pokharel, J. P. C. Ruff, Z. Islam, E.-A. Kim, R. Seshadri, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 024806 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    X. Y. Feng, Z. Zhao, J. Luo, J. Yang, A. F. Fang, H. T. Yang, H. J. Gao, R. Zhou, and G.-q. Zheng, npj Quantum Materials 8, 23 (2023)

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    S. Wu, B. R. Ortiz, H. Tan, S. D. Wilson, B. Yan, T. Birol, and G. Blumberg, Phys. Rev. B105, 155106 (2022)

    work page 2022

  19. [19]

    Stahl, D

    Q. Stahl, D. Chen, T. Ritschel, C. Shekhar, E. Sadrollahi, M. C. Rahn, O. Ivashko, M. v. Zimmermann, C. Felser, and J. Geck, Phys. Rev. B105, 195136 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Q. Xiao, Y. Lin, Q. Li, X. Zheng, S. Francoual, C. Plueckthun, W. Xia, Q. Qiu, S. Zhang, Y. Guo, J. Feng, and Y. Peng, Phys. 11 Rev. Res. 5, L012032 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Plumb, A

    J. Plumb, A. C. Salinas, K. Mallayya, E. Kisiel, F. B. Carneiro, R. Gomez, G. Pokharel, E.-A. Kim, S. Sarker, Z. Islam, S. Daly, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. Mater.8, 093601 (2024)

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Strain- control of electronic superlattice domains in csv 3sb5,

    E. Sadrollahi, J. A. Mendes, N. Stilkerich, A. K. Sharma, C. Shekhar, C. Felser, T. Ritschel, and J. Geck, “Strain- control of electronic superlattice domains in csv 3sb5,” (2025), arXiv:2509.05680 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    51v nmr evidence for interlayer-modulated charge order and a first-order low-temperature transition in csv3sb5,

    X. Wang, A. P. Reyes, H. Banerjee, A. N. C. Salinas, S. Wilson, and B. R. Ortiz, “ 51v nmr evidence for interlayer-modulated charge order and a first-order low-temperature transition in csv3sb5,” (2025), arXiv:2509.04724 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Q. Xiao, Q. Li, J. Liu, Y. Li, W. Xia, X. Zheng, Y. Guo, Z. Wang, and Y. Peng, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 074801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    F. Jin, W. Ren, M. Tan, M. Xie, B. Lu, Z. Zhang, J. Ji, and Q. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 066501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Alkorta, M

    M. Alkorta, M. Gutierrez-Amigo, C. Guo, P. J. W. Moll, M. G. Vergniory, and I. Errea, “Symmetry-broken charge- ordered ground state in csv 3sb5 kagome metal,” (2025), arXiv:2505.19686 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Y. Chen, T. Kongruengkit, A. C. Salinas, R. Yang, Y. Quan, F. Zhang, G. Pokharel, L. Kautzsch, S. D. Wilson, S. Mu, J. W. Harter, and B. Liao, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122, e2507135122 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Khasanov, D

    R. Khasanov, D. Das, R. Gupta, C. Mielke, M. Elender, Q. Yin, Z. Tu, C. Gong, H. Lei, E. T. Ritz, R. M. Fernandes, T. Birol, Z. Guguchia, and H. Luetkens, Physical review Research 4, 023244 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Y. Xu, Z. Ni, Y. Liu, B. R. Ortiz, Q. Deng, S. D. Wilson, B. Yan, L. Balents, and L. Wu, Nature physics 18, 1470 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Search for orbital magnetism in the kagome superconductor csv3sb5 using neu- tron diffraction,

    W. Li `ege, Y. Xie, D. Bounoua, Y. Sidis, F. Bourdarot, Y. Li, Z. Wang, J.-X. Yin, P. Dai, and P. Bourges, “Search for orbital magnetism in the kagome superconductor csv3sb5 using neu- tron diffraction,” (2024), arXiv:2407.14391 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2024

  31. [31]

    H. Gui, L. Yang, X. Wang, D. Chen, Z. Shi, J. Zhang, J. Wei, K. Zhou, W. Schnelle, Y. Zhang, Y. Liu, A. F. Bangura, Z. Wang, C. Felser, H. Yuan, and L. Jiao, Nature Communications 16, 4275 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Loop-current order through the kagome looking glass,

    R. M. Fernandes, T. Birol, M. Ye, and D. Vanderbilt, “Loop- current order through the kagome looking glass,” (2025), 2502.16657

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    C. Guo, G. Wagner, C. Putzke, D. Chen, K. Wang, L. Zhang, M. Gutierrez-Amigo, I. Errea, M. G. Vergniory, C. Felser,et al., Nature Physics 20, 579 (2024)

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    D. R. Saykin, C. Farhang, E. D. Kountz, D. Chen, B. R. Ortiz, C. Shekhar, C. Felser, S. D. Wilson, R. Thomale, J. Xia, and A. Kapitulnik, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 016901 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    High resolution polar kerr effect studies of cs3sb5 and scv6sn6 below the charge order transition,

    D. R. Saykin, Q. Jiang, Z. Liu, C. Shekhar, C. Felser, J.-H. Chu, and A. Kapitulnik, “High resolution polar kerr effect studies of cs3sb5 and scv6sn6 below the charge order transition,” (2025), arXiv:2510.26010 [cond-mat.str-el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    S.-Y. Yang, Y. Wang, B. R. Ortiz, D. Liu, J. Gayles, E. Derunova, R. Gonzalez-Hernandez, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Chen, S. S. Parkin, et al., Science advances 6, eabb6003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    F. H. Yu, T. Wu, Z. Y. Wang, B. Lei, W. Z. Zhuo, J. J. Ying, and X. H. Chen, Physical Review B 104, L041103 (2021)

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    Zheng, C

    G. Zheng, C. Tan, Z. Chen, M. Wang, X. Zhu, S. Albarakati, M. Algarni, J. Partridge, L. Farrar, J. Zhou, et al., Nature Com- munications 14, 678 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Y. Wang, Z. Chen, Y. Nie, Y. Zhang, Q. Niu, G. Zheng, X. Zhu, W. Ning, and M. Tian, Phys. Rev. B 108, 035117 (2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    X. Wei, C. Tian, H. Cui, Y. Zhai, Y. Li, S. Liu, Y. Song, Y. Feng, M. Huang, Z. Wang, et al., Nature Communications 15, 5038 (2024)

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    Y. Gan, W. Xia, L. Zhang, K. Yang, X. Mi, A. Wang, Y. Chai, Y. Guo, X. Zhou, and M. He, Physical Review B104, L180508 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    X. Zhou, H. Liu, W. Wu, K. Jiang, Y. Shi, Z. Li, Y. Sui, J. Hu, and J. Luo, Physical Review B 105, 205104 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    Wang, Y.-X

    Z. Wang, Y.-X. Jiang, J.-X. Yin, Y. Li, G.-Y. Wang, H.-L. Huang, S. Shao, J. Liu, P. Zhu, N. Shumiya, M. S. Hossain, H. Liu, Y. Shi, J. Duan, X. Li, G. Chang, P. Dai, Z. Ye, G. Xu, Y. Wang, H. Zheng, J. Jia, M. Z. Hasan, and Y. Yao, Phys. Rev. B 104, 075148 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    L. Nie, K. Sun, W. Ma, D. Song, L. Zheng, Z. Liang, P. Wu, F. Yu, J. Li, M. Shan, et al., Nature 604, 59 (2022)

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    Jiang, J.-X

    Y.-X. Jiang, J.-X. Yin, M. M. Denner, N. Shumiya, B. R. Ortiz, G. Xu, Z. Guguchia, J. He, M. S. Hossain, X. Liu,et al., Nature materials 20, 1353 (2021)

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    Shumiya, M

    N. Shumiya, M. S. Hossain, J.-X. Yin, Y.-X. Jiang, B. R. Ortiz, H. Liu, Y. Shi, Q. Yin, H. Lei, S. S. Zhang, G. Chang, Q. Zhang, T. A. Cochran, D. Multer, M. Litskevich, Z.-J. Cheng, X. P. Yang, Z. Guguchia, S. D. Wilson, and M. Z. Hasan, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035131 (2021)

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Y. Xing, S. Bae, E. Ritz, F. Yang, T. Birol, A. N. Capa Salinas, B. R. Ortiz, S. D. Wilson, Z. Wang, R. M. Fernandes, et al. , Nature 631, 60 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    H. Li, H. Zhao, B. R. Ortiz, T. Park, M. Ye, L. Balents, Z. Wang, S. D. Wilson, and I. Zeljkovic, Nature Physics 18, 265 (2022)

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Candelora, H

    C. Candelora, H. Li, M. Xu, B. R. Ortiz, A. C. Salinas, S. Cheng, A. LaFleur, Z. Wang, S. D. Wilson, and I. Zeljkovic, Phys. Rev. B 109, 155121 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    C. Guo, C. Putzke, S. Konyzheva, X. Huang, M. Gutierrez- Amigo, I. Errea, D. Chen, M. G. Vergniory, C. Felser, M. H. Fischer, et al., Nature 611, 461 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    C. Guo, M. R. van Delft, M. Gutierrez-Amigo, D. Chen, C. Putzke, G. Wagner, M. H. Fischer, T. Neupert, I. Errea, M. G. Vergniory, et al., npj Quantum Materials 9, 20 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    C. Guo, K. Wang, L. Zhang, C. Putzke, D. Chen, M. R. van Delft, S. Wiedmann, F. F. Balakirev, R. D. McDonald, M. Gutierrez- Amigo, M. Alkorta, I. Errea, M. G. Vergniory, T. Oka, R. Moess- ner, M. H. Fischer, T. Neupert, C. Felser, and P. J. W. Moll, Nature 647, 68 (2025)

    work page 2025

  53. [53]

    H. J. Elmers, O. Tkach, Y. Lytvynenko, P. Yogi, M. Schmitt, D. Biswas, J. Liu, S. V. Chernov, Q. Nguyen, M. Hoesch, D. Kutnyakhov, N. Wind, L. Wenthaus, M. Scholz, K. Ross- nagel, A. Gloskovskii, C. Schlueter, A. Winkelmann, A.-A. Haghighirad, T.-L. Lee, M. Sing, R. Claessen, M. Le Tacon, J. Demsar, G. Sch¨onhense, and O. Fedchenko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, ...

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    Shao, W.-C

    S. Shao, W.-C. Chiu, T. Hou, N. Wang, I. Belopolski, Y. Zhao, J. Ni, Q. Zhang, Y. Li, J. Liu, M. Yahyavi, Y. Jin, Q. Feng, P. Cui, C.-L. Zhang, Y. Yao, Z. Wang, J.-X. Yin, S.-Y. Xu, Q. Ma, W.-b. Gao, M. S. Hossain, A. Bansil, and G. Chang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 156101 (2026)

    work page 2026

  55. [55]

    W. E. Lawrence and S. Doniach, pp 361-2 of Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Low Temperature Physics. /Kanda, E. (ed.). Tokyo Keigaku Publishing Co., Ltd. (1971). (1970)

    work page 1971

  56. [56]

    D. E. Moncton, F. J. DiSalvo, J. D. Axe, L. J. Sham, and B. R. Patton, Phys. Rev. B14, 3432 (1976)

    work page 1976

  57. [57]

    M. B. Walker and R. L. Withers, Phys. Rev. B 28, 2766 (1983)

    work page 1983

  58. [58]

    Nakanishi and H

    K. Nakanishi and H. Shiba, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 53, 1103 (1984)

    work page 1984

  59. [59]

    Frassineti, P

    J. Frassineti, P. Bonf `a, G. Allodi, E. Garcia, R. Cong, B. R. Ortiz, S. D. Wilson, R. De Renzi, V. F. Mitrovi´c, and S. Sanna, Phys. Rev. Res.5, L012017 (2023)

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    Revealing rotational symmetry breaking charge-density wave order in kagome superconductor (rb, k)v3sb5 by ultrafast pump- probe experiments,

    Q. Deng, H. Tan, B. R. Ortiz, S. D. Wilson, B. Yan, and L. Wu, 12 “Revealing rotational symmetry breaking charge-density wave order in kagome superconductor (rb, k)v3sb5 by ultrafast pump- probe experiments,” (2025), arXiv:2503.07474 [cond-mat.str- el]

    work page arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    M. H. Christensen, T. Birol, B. M. Andersen, and R. M. Fer- nandes, Phys. Rev. B106, 144504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  62. [62]

    Wagner, C

    G. Wagner, C. Guo, P. J. W. Moll, T. Neupert, and M. H. Fischer, Phys. Rev. B108, 125136 (2023)

    work page 2023

  63. [63]

    Tazai, Y

    R. Tazai, Y. Yamakawa, T. Morimoto, and H. Kontani, Proceed- ings of the National Academy of Sciences 122, e2503645122 (2025)

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    Ingham, R

    J. Ingham, R. Thomale, and H. D. Scammell, arXiv:2503.02929 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Zhang, H

    B. Zhang, H. Tan, B. Yan, C. Xu, and H. Xiang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 096101 (2024)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    E. T. Ritz, R. M. Fernandes, and T. Birol, Phys. Rev. B 107, 205131 (2023)

    work page 2023

  67. [67]

    Y. Chen, T. Kongruengkit, A. C. Salinas, R. Yang, Y. Quan, F. Zhang, G. Pokharel, L. Kautzsch, S. Mu, S. D. Wilson,et al., arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.10992 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    W. L. McMillan, Phys. Rev. B 14, 1496 (1976)

    work page 1976

  69. [69]

    Bruce, R

    A. Bruce, R. Cowley, and A. Murray, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 11, 3591 (1978)

    work page 1978