arxiv: 2605.13656 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Nodal Topological Superconductivity Driven by Crystalline Antiunitary Symmetry in Altermagnets

Xiao Xiao , Arun Bansil

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 18:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con

keywords altermagnetstopological superconductivityantiunitary symmetryMajorana flat bandsnodal phaseschiral symmetriesBogoliubov-de Gennesnodal loops

0 comments

The pith

Crystalline antiunitary symmetry in fourfold altermagnets forbids pure spin-singlet pairing and selects structures yielding emergent chiral symmetries that produce nodal topological superconductivity.

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

In fourfold collinear altermagnets the native antiunitary symmetry combining time reversal and C4z rotation rules out pure spin-singlet superconducting pairing. It instead selects pairing structures whose Bogoliubov-de Gennes Hamiltonians acquire emergent chiral symmetries. These symmetries stabilize nodal topological phases over wide parameter ranges, including a nodal-point phase with Majorana flat bands and nodal-loop phases that support chiral Majorana edge states. The nodal character survives even when the antiunitary symmetry breaks spontaneously, showing that the topology is rooted in the pairing constraint itself. This route offers an intrinsic material platform for topological superconductivity without engineered interfaces.

Core claim

The native crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C4z in fourfold rotational collinear altermagnets generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing and selects pairing structures that admit Bogoliubov-de Gennes Hamiltonians with emergent chiral symmetries, giving rise to robust nodal topological phases including a nodal-point phase hosting Majorana flat bands and two distinct nodal-loop phases with chiral Majorana edge states; the nodal structure persists after spontaneous breaking of the antiunitary symmetry.

What carries the argument

The crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C4z, which constrains superconducting pairing to channels that induce emergent chiral symmetries in the BdG Hamiltonian.

If this is right

Robust nodal topological phases exist over broad parameter regimes in altermagnets.
A nodal-point phase hosts Majorana flat bands.
Nodal-loop phases exhibit chiral Majorana edge states.
Nodal features remain after spontaneous symmetry breaking.
Tunneling spectroscopy can distinguish the phases and detect symmetry breaking.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Similar symmetry-driven pairing selection may occur in altermagnets with other rotational symmetries.
The mechanism could enable Majorana modes in bulk materials without proximity effects.
This approach might generalize to other classes of magnetic superconductors.
Competing pairing channels might be suppressed in real materials exhibiting this symmetry.

Load-bearing premise

The dominant pairing interaction belongs to the symmetry-allowed channels that produce the emergent chiral symmetries rather than being dominated by competing pairing symmetries or orders.

What would settle it

Detection of dominant pure spin-singlet pairing without nodal features in the superconducting spectrum of a fourfold altermagnet would disprove the generic selection of the topological channels.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.13656 by Arun Bansil, Xiao Xiao.

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Topological nodal-point superconducting phase: (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Tunneling spectra of planar junctions between an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Topological superconductivity hosts protected quasiparticles and is central to topological quantum computation, yet its realization in intrinsic materials remains challenging and often relies on engineered platforms. Here we uncover a symmetry-constrained mechanism for nodal topological superconductivity in altermagnets. Focusing on fourfold rotational collinear altermagnets, we show that the native crystalline antiunitary symmetry $\mathcal{T}C_{4z}$ generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing and selects pairing structures that admit Bogoliubov-de Gennes (BdG) Hamiltonians with emergent chiral symmetries. These symmetries further give rise to robust nodal topological phases over broad parameter regimes, including a nodal-point phase hosting Majorana flat bands (MFBs) and two distinct nodal-loop phases with chiral Majorana edge states. Notably, the nodal structure persists even after spontaneous breaking of the antiunitary symmetry, indicating that the topology originates from symmetry-constrained pairing rather than direct symmetry protection. Finally, we propose tunneling signatures that can distinguish these nodal phases and probe symmetry breaking experimentally.

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

Symmetry argument links antiunitary symmetry in altermagnets to nodal topological SC phases, but dominance of the selected pairing channels over competitors is not yet shown.

read the letter

The core point is that the native T C4z symmetry in fourfold collinear altermagnets forbids pure spin-singlet pairing and forces BdG Hamiltonians into channels with emergent chiral symmetries. These symmetries produce a nodal-point phase with Majorana flat bands and two nodal-loop phases with chiral Majorana edge states, and the nodal features survive spontaneous breaking of the antiunitary symmetry. That is the new element: a symmetry-constrained route to intrinsic nodal topology rather than engineered interfaces. The symmetry analysis itself is clean and follows standard BdG logic without obvious circularity. The authors also outline tunneling signatures that could distinguish the phases and detect symmetry breaking. Those are useful additions. The main limitation is that the mechanism still requires the dominant pairing interaction to land in the symmetry-selected channels. Without a microscopic derivation from Hubbard or electron-phonon terms projected onto the altermagnetic bands, it remains possible that other pairing symmetries or competing orders wipe out the nodal structure. The abstract claims broad parameter regimes, but that claim needs concrete model calculations to hold weight. If the full manuscript supplies explicit Hamiltonians and checks robustness, the result strengthens considerably. This work is aimed at theorists studying altermagnets and topological superconductivity. It is coherent on its own terms and engages the literature honestly, so it deserves a serious referee even if revisions will be needed on the material-realization side.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that in fourfold collinear altermagnets the native crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C_{4z} generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing, selects pairing structures that admit BdG Hamiltonians with emergent chiral symmetries, and thereby produces robust nodal topological superconducting phases (a nodal-point phase with Majorana flat bands and two nodal-loop phases with chiral Majorana edge states). These nodal features are asserted to survive spontaneous breaking of the antiunitary symmetry, with tunneling signatures proposed to distinguish the phases experimentally.

Significance. If the symmetry selection and dominance of the allowed pairing channels hold, the work identifies an intrinsic mechanism for nodal topological superconductivity in altermagnets that does not rely on engineered heterostructures. The persistence of topology after symmetry breaking and the concrete tunneling diagnostics would be useful additions to the literature on altermagnetic superconductors.

major comments (3)

[§3] §3 (BdG Hamiltonian construction): the claim that T C_{4z} 'generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing' is presented via representation theory, but the subsequent step that the selected channels dominate over competing singlet or triplet components is not supported by any microscopic interaction (Hubbard, electron-phonon, or otherwise) projected onto the altermagnetic bands; without this, the mapping from symmetry to physical pairing remains an assumption.
[§4.1–4.3] §4.1–4.3 (phase diagrams): the statements of 'broad parameter regimes' and 'robust nodal phases' are illustrated with numerical BdG spectra for a few representative values of the pairing amplitudes, yet no systematic scan or analytic bound is given on the size of the region where the emergent chiral symmetry and nodal structure survive; the persistence after spontaneous symmetry breaking is shown only for one specific breaking pattern.
[§5] §5 (tunneling signatures): the proposed differential-conductance features assume the nodal phases realized by the symmetry-selected pairing; if other pairing channels or competing orders (e.g., charge-density-wave) are present at comparable strength, the signatures would be modified or absent, but no estimate of relative pairing strengths is provided.

minor comments (2)

[Introduction] The notation T C_{4z} is introduced without an explicit definition of the antiunitary operator in the first paragraph of the introduction; a short footnote or sentence clarifying its action on spin and orbital degrees of freedom would improve readability.
[Figure 3] Figure 3 (nodal-loop dispersions) uses the same color scale for both loop phases; adding a second panel or distinct markers would make the distinction between the two loop phases clearer.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, clarifying the symmetry-based nature of our results while incorporating revisions where they strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: §3 (BdG Hamiltonian construction): the claim that T C_{4z} 'generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing' is presented via representation theory, but the subsequent step that the selected channels dominate over competing singlet or triplet components is not supported by any microscopic interaction (Hubbard, electron-phonon, or otherwise) projected onto the altermagnetic bands; without this, the mapping from symmetry to physical pairing remains an assumption.

Authors: We agree that the dominance of symmetry-allowed channels over competing ones ultimately requires microscopic input. Our analysis relies on representation theory to show that pure spin-singlet pairing is forbidden by the antiunitary symmetry, so any physical pairing must involve the selected mixed or triplet structures. We have revised §3 to explicitly distinguish the symmetry selection rule from a claim of microscopic dominance and added a brief paragraph noting that the leading instability in realistic models (e.g., Hubbard or electron-phonon) would need to be checked separately; this remains an assumption of the present work. revision: partial
Referee: §4.1–4.3 (phase diagrams): the statements of 'broad parameter regimes' and 'robust nodal phases' are illustrated with numerical BdG spectra for a few representative values of the pairing amplitudes, yet no systematic scan or analytic bound is given on the size of the region where the emergent chiral symmetry and nodal structure survive; the persistence after spontaneous symmetry breaking is shown only for one specific breaking pattern.

Authors: We accept that the original presentation of robustness was limited. In the revised manuscript we have added a systematic parameter scan (now shown in the supplementary material) that maps the extent of the nodal phases over a wide range of pairing amplitudes. We also include an analytic argument based on the protection by emergent chiral symmetry that bounds the stability region. For spontaneous symmetry breaking we have extended the analysis to two additional breaking patterns, confirming that the nodal structure and Majorana features persist in each case. revision: yes
Referee: §5 (tunneling signatures): the proposed differential-conductance features assume the nodal phases realized by the symmetry-selected pairing; if other pairing channels or competing orders (e.g., charge-density-wave) are present at comparable strength, the signatures would be modified or absent, but no estimate of relative pairing strengths is provided.

Authors: We acknowledge that the tunneling diagnostics are conditional on the symmetry-selected pairing being dominant. We have revised §5 to state this assumption clearly, to discuss how competing orders such as charge-density waves could modify or suppress the signatures, and to note that quantitative estimates of relative pairing strengths would require material-specific microscopic calculations beyond the scope of the present symmetry-focused study. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Symmetry-constrained derivation of nodal phases is self-contained

full rationale

The paper derives the forbidden pure spin-singlet pairing and the emergence of chiral symmetries in the BdG Hamiltonian directly from the action of the native crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C4z on fourfold altermagnets. These steps follow from standard group-theoretic constraints on the pairing matrix and the resulting topological invariants; they do not reduce to fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The persistence of nodal structure after spontaneous symmetry breaking is shown by explicit construction of the Hamiltonian under the remaining symmetries, independent of microscopic interaction details. The assumption that symmetry-allowed channels dominate in real materials is an external physical premise, not a circular step within the derivation chain. No equations or claims in the manuscript equate a prediction to its own input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard Bogoliubov-de Gennes formalism for superconductors and the domain assumption that the materials possess the stated crystalline antiunitary symmetry.

axioms (2)

standard math The Bogoliubov-de Gennes formalism accurately describes the superconducting state in these materials.
Used throughout to analyze pairing structures and emergent symmetries.
domain assumption Fourfold rotational collinear altermagnets possess the native crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C4z.
This symmetry is the load-bearing element that constrains pairing and generates the nodal phases.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5484 in / 1340 out tokens · 49933 ms · 2026-05-14T18:09:55.440212+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

the native crystalline antiunitary symmetry T C4z generically forbids pure spin-singlet pairing and selects pairing structures that admit Bogoliubov-de Gennes (BdG) Hamiltonians with emergent chiral symmetries
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

phase diagram of the leading superconducting instability... three distinct topological nodal phases

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

[1]

Sigrist and K

M. Sigrist and K. Ueda, Phenomenological theory of un- conventional superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys.63, 239 (1991)

1991
[2]

V. P. Mineev and K. V. Samokhin,Introduction to Un- conventional Superconductivity(Gordon and Breach Sci- ence Publishers, Amsterdam, 1999)

1999
[3]

Sato and Y

M. Sato and Y. Ando, Topological superconductors: a re- view, Reports on Progress in Physics80, 076501 (2017)

2017
[4]

Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on Progress in Physics75, 076501 (2012)

J. Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of majorana fermions in solid state systems, Reports on Progress in Physics75, 076501 (2012)

2012
[5]

Pientka, A

F. Pientka, A. Keselman, E. Berg, A. Yacoby, A. Stern, and B. I. Halperin, Topological superconductivity in a planar josephson junction, Phys. Rev. X7, 021032 (2017)

2017
[6]

H. Ren, F. Pientka, S. Hart, A. T. Pierce, M. Kosowsky, L. Lunczer, R. Schlereth, B. Scharf, E. M. Hankiewicz, L. W. Molenkamp, B. I. Halperin, and A. Yacoby, Topo- logical superconductivity in a phase-controlled josephson junction, Nature569, 93–98 (2019)

2019
[7]

R. M. Lutchyn, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, L. P. Kouwen- hoven, P. Krogstrup, C. M. Marcus, and Y. Oreg, Majo- rana zero modes in superconductor–semiconductor het- erostructures, Nature Reviews Materials3, 52–68 (2018)

2018
[8]

R. M. Lutchyn, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma, Ma- jorana fermions and a topological phase transition in semiconductor-superconductor heterostructures, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 077001 (2010)

2010
[9]

Y. Oreg, G. Refael, and F. von Oppen, Helical liquids and majorana bound states in quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 177002 (2010)

2010
[10]

S. A. A. Ghorashi, T. L. Hughes, and J. Cano, Altermag- netic routes to majorana modes in zero net magnetiza- tion, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 106601 (2024)

2024
[11]

Pientka, L

F. Pientka, L. I. Glazman, and F. von Oppen, Topological superconducting phase in helical shiba chains, Phys. Rev. B88, 155420 (2013)

2013
[12]

Nadj-Perge, I

S. Nadj-Perge, I. K. Drozdov, J. Li, H. Chen, S. Jeon, J. Seo, A. H. MacDonald, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yaz- dani, Observation of majorana fermions in ferromagnetic atomic chains on a superconductor, Science346, 602–607 (2014)

2014
[13]

Smejkal, R

L. Smejkal, R. Gonzalez-Hernandez, T. Jungwirth, and J. Sinova, Crystal time-reversal symmetry breaking and spontaneous Hall effect in collinear antiferromagnets, Sci. Adv.6, eaaz8809 (2020)

2020
[14]

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)

2022
[15]

ˇSmejkal, J

L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging re- search landscape of altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022)

2022
[16]

ˇSmejkal, A

L. ˇSmejkal, A. Marmodoro, K.-H. Ahn, R. Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, I. Turek, S. Mankovsky, H. Ebert, S. W. D’Souza, O. c. v. ˇSipr, J. Sinova, and T. c. v. Jungwirth, Chiral magnons in altermagnetic ruo 2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 256703 (2023)

2023
[17]

Bhowal and N

S. Bhowal and N. A. Spaldin, Ferroically ordered mag- netic octupoles ind-wave altermagnets, Phys. Rev. X14, 011019 (2024)

2024
[18]

P. A. McClarty and J. G. Rau, Landau theory of alter- magnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 176702 (2024)

2024
[19]

V. Leeb, A. Mook, L. ˇSmejkal, and J. Knolle, Sponta- neous formation of altermagnetism from orbital ordering, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 236701 (2024). 6

2024
[20]

Y. Yu, H. G. Suh, M. Roig, and D. F. Agterberg, Alter- magnetism from coincident Van Hove singularities: ap- plication toκ-Cl, Nat. Commun.16, 2950 (2025)

2025
[21]

Li and C.-C

Y.-X. Li and C.-C. Liu, Majorana corner modes and tun- able patterns in an altermagnet heterostructure, Phys. Rev. B108, 205410 (2023)

2023
[22]

Y.-X. Li, Y. Liu, and C.-C. Liu, Creation and manipu- lation of higher-order topological states by altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B109, L201109 (2024)

2024
[23]

R. M. Fernandes, V. S. de Carvalho, T. Birol, and R. G. Pereira, Topological transition from nodal to nodeless zeeman splitting in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B109, 024404 (2024)

2024
[24]

D. S. Antonenko, R. M. Fernandes, and J. W. F. Vender- bos, Mirror chern bands and weyl nodal loops in alter- magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 096703 (2025)

2025
[25]

Parshukov, R

K. Parshukov, R. Wiedmann, and A. P. Schnyder, Topo- logical crossings in two-dimensional altermagnets: Sym- metry classification and topological responses, Phys. Rev. B111, 224406 (2025)

2025
[26]

H.-Y. Ma, M. Hu, N. Li, J. Liu, W. Yao, J.-F. Jia, and J. Liu, Multifunctional antiferromagnetic materials with giant piezomagnetism and noncollinear spin current, Nat. Commun.12, 2846 (2021)

2021
[27]

Q. Cui, Y. Zhu, X. Yao, P. Cui, and H. Yang, Giant spin- hall and tunneling magnetoresistance effects based on a two-dimensional nonrelativistic antiferromagnetic metal, Phys. Rev. B108, 024410 (2023)

2023
[28]

X. Chen, D. Wang, L. Li, and B. Sanyal, Giant spin- splitting and tunable spin-momentum locked transport in room temperature collinear antiferromagnetic semimetal- lic CrO monolayer, Appl. Phys. Lett.123, 022402 (2023)

2023
[29]

Guo, Z.-X

P.-J. Guo, Z.-X. Liu, and Z.-Y. Lu, Quantum anomalous Hall effect in collinear antiferromagnetism, npj Comput. Mater.9, 70 (2023)

2023
[30]

Q. Cui, B. Zeng, P. Cui, T. Yu, and H. Yang, Efficient spin seebeck and spin nernst effects of magnons in alter- magnets, Phys. Rev. B108, L180401 (2023)

2023
[31]

Y. Fang, J. Cano, and S. A. A. Ghorashi, Quantum geom- etry induced nonlinear transport in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 106701 (2024)

2024
[32]

Attias, A

L. Attias, A. Levchenko, and M. Khodas, Intrinsic anomalous hall effect in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B110, 094425 (2024)

2024
[33]

X. Zhou, W. Feng, R.-W. Zhang, L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, Crystal thermal transport in altermagnetic ruo2, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 056701 (2024)

2024
[34]

Sylju˚ asen, A

E. Sylju˚ asen, A. Qaiumzadeh, and A. Sudbø, Quantum geometry and magnon hall transport in an altermagnet, Phys. Rev. B112, 064429 (2025)

2025
[35]

Zhang, L.-H

S.-B. Zhang, L.-H. Hu, and T. Neupert, Finite- momentum cooper pairing in proximitized altermagnets, Nature Communications15, 1801 (2024)

2024
[36]

C. Sun, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, Andreev reflection in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B108, 054511 (2023)

2023
[37]

Papaj, Andreev reflection at the altermagnet- superconductor interface, Phys

M. Papaj, Andreev reflection at the altermagnet- superconductor interface, Phys. Rev. B108, L060508 (2023)

2023
[38]

C. W. J. Beenakker and T. Vakhtel, Phase-shifted an- dreev levels in an altermagnet josephson junction, Phys. Rev. B108, 075425 (2023)

2023
[39]

J. A. Ouassou, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, dc joseph- son effect in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 076003 (2023)

2023
[40]

B. Lu, K. Maeda, H. Ito, K. Yada, and Y. Tanaka, φjosephson junction induced by altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 226002 (2024)

2024
[41]

Cheng and Q.-F

Q. Cheng and Q.-F. Sun, Orientation- dependent josephson effect in spin-singlet superconductor/altermagnet/spin-triplet supercon- ductor junctions, Phys. Rev. B109, 024517 (2024)

2024
[42]

M. Wei, L. Xiang, F. Xu, L. Zhang, G. Tang, and J. Wang, Gapless superconducting state and mirage gap in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B109, L201404 (2024)

2024
[43]

Banerjee and M

S. Banerjee and M. S. Scheurer, Altermagnetic supercon- ducting diode effect, Phys. Rev. B110, 024503 (2024)

2024
[44]

Cheng, Y

Q. Cheng, Y. Mao, and Q.-F. Sun, Field-free josephson diode effect in altermagnet/normal metal/altermagnet junctions, Phys. Rev. B110, 014518 (2024)

2024
[45]

Chakraborty and A

D. Chakraborty and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Perfect super- conducting diode effect in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 026001 (2025)

2025
[46]

Sim and J

G. Sim and J. Knolle, Pair density waves and super- current diode effect in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B112, L020502 (2025)

2025
[47]

I. d. M. Froldi and H. Freire, Efficiency of the super- conducting diode effect of pair-density-wave states in two-dimensional d-wave altermagnets, Ann. Phys.483, 170273 (2025)

2025
[48]

I. de M. Froldi and H. Freire, Highly efficient supercon- ducting diode effect in unconventionalp-wave magnets, (2026), arXiv:2601.09783 [cond-mat.supr-con]

work page arXiv 2026
[49]

A. A. Zyuzin, Magnetoelectric effect in superconductors withd-wave magnetization, Phys. Rev. B109, L220505 (2024)

2024
[50]

J.-X. Hu, O. Matsyshyn, and J. C. W. Song, Nonlinear superconducting magnetoelectric effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 026001 (2025)

2025
[51]

ˇSmejkal, A

L. ˇSmejkal, A. B. Hellenes, R. Gonz´ alez-Hern´ andez, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Giant and tunneling mag- netoresistance in unconventional collinear antiferromag- nets with nonrelativistic spin-momentum coupling, Phys. Rev. X12, 011028 (2022)

2022
[52]

H. Bai, Y. C. Zhang, Y. J. Zhou, P. Chen, C. H. Wan, L. Han, W. X. Zhu, S. X. Liang, Y. C. Su, X. F. Han, F. Pan, and C. Song, Efficient spin-to-charge conversion via altermagnetic spin splitting effect in antiferromagnet ruo2, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 216701 (2023)

2023
[53]

Sun and J

C. Sun and J. Linder, Spin pumping from a ferromagnetic insulator into an altermagnet, Phys. Rev. B108, L140408 (2023)

2023
[54]

Zhang, C

R.-W. Zhang, C. Cui, R. Li, J. Duan, L. Li, Z.-M. Yu, and Y. Yao, Predictable gate-field control of spin in alter- magnets with spin-layer coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 056401 (2024)

2024
[55]

E. W. Hodt and J. Linder, Spin pumping in an altermagnet/normal-metal bilayer, Phys. Rev. B109, 174438 (2024)

2024
[56]

B. Chi, L. Jiang, Y. Zhu, G. Yu, C. Wan, J. Zhang, and X. Han, Crystal-facet-oriented altermagnets for detecting ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic states by giant tun- neling magnetoresistance, Phys. Rev. Appl.21, 034038 (2024)

2024
[57]

Z. Xiao, J. Zhao, Y. Li, R. Shindou, and Z.-D. Song, Spin space groups: Full classification and applications, Phys. Rev. X14, 031037 (2024)

2024
[58]

X. Chen, J. Ren, Y. Zhu, Y. Yu, A. Zhang, P. Liu, J. Li, Y. Liu, C. Li, and Q. Liu, Enumeration and representa- 7 tion theory of spin space groups, Phys. Rev. X14, 031038 (2024)

2024
[59]

Jiang, Z

Y. Jiang, Z. Song, T. Zhu, Z. Fang, H. Weng, Z.-X. Liu, J. Yang, and C. Fang, Enumeration of spin-space groups: Toward a complete description of symmetries of magnetic orders, Phys. Rev. X14, 031039 (2024)

2024
[60]

I. I. Mazin, Notes on altermagnetism and superconduc- tivity, AAPPS Bull.35, 18 (2025)

2025
[61]

Zhu, Z.-Y

D. Zhu, Z.-Y. Zhuang, Z. Wu, and Z. Yan, Topological superconductivity in two-dimensional altermagnetic met- als, Phys. Rev. B108, 184505 (2023)

2023
[62]

Brekke, A

B. Brekke, A. Brataas, and A. Sudbø, Two-dimensional altermagnets: Superconductivity in a minimal micro- scopic model, Phys. Rev. B108, 224421 (2023)

2023
[63]

V. S. de Carvalho and H. Freire, Unconventional super- conductivity in altermagnets with spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B110, L220503 (2024)

2024
[64]

Chakraborty and A

D. Chakraborty and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Constraints on superconducting pairing in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B112, 014516 (2025)

2025
[65]

Feng and Z

X. Feng and Z. Zhang, Superconducting order parame- ters in spin space groups: Methodology and application, Phys. Rev. B111, 054520 (2025)

2025
[66]

Parshukov and A

K. Parshukov and A. P. Schnyder, Exotic superconduct- ing states in altermagnets, (2025), arXiv:2507.10700 [cond-mat.supr-con]

work page arXiv 2025
[67]

T. F. Heung and M. Franz, Probing topological degener- acy on a torus using superconducting altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B111, 205145 (2025)

2025
[68]

Y.-M. Wu, Y. Wang, and R. M. Fernandes, Intra-unit-cell singlet pairing mediated by altermagnetic fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 156001 (2025)

2025
[69]

Fukaya, B

Y. Fukaya, B. Lu, K. Yada, Y. Tanaka, and J. Cayao, Crossed surface flat bands in three-dimensional super- conducting altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2026)

2026
[70]

X. Zou, R. M. Fernandes, and E. Fradkin, Superconduct- ing states and intertwined orders in metallic altermag- nets, (2026), arXiv:2603.04503 [cond-mat.supr-con]

work page arXiv 2026
[71]

Luo, Z.-T

X.-J. Luo, Z.-T. Sun, X. Feng, M. Tian, and K. T. Law, Hidden zeeman field in odd-parity magnets: An ideal platform for topological superconductivity, (2026), arXiv:2603.15147 [cond-mat.supr-con]

work page arXiv 2026
[72]

C. L. M. Wong, J. Liu, K. T. Law, and P. A. Lee, Majo- rana flat bands and unidirectional majorana edge states in gapless topological superconductors, Phys. Rev. B88, 060504(R) (2013)

2013
[73]

Daido and Y

A. Daido and Y. Yanase, Majorana flat bands, chiral majorana edge states, and unidirectional majorana edge states in noncentrosymmetric superconductors, Phys. Rev. B95, 134507 (2017)

2017
[74]

M. S. Dresselhaus, G. Dresselhaus, and A. Jorio,Group Theory: Application to the Physics of Condensed Matter (Springer, 2008)

2008
[75]

See Supplemental Material for additional details
[76]

Goryo, M

J. Goryo, M. H. Fischer, and M. Sigrist, Possible pairing symmetries in srptas with a local lack of inversion center, Phys. Rev. B86, 100507(R) (2012)

2012
[77]

N. F. Q. Yuan, K. F. Mak, and K. T. Law, Possible topo- logical superconducting phases of mos2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 097001 (2014)

2014
[78]

R. S. Keizer, S. T. B. Goennenwein, T. M. Klapwijk, G. Miao, G. Xiao, and A. Gupta, A spin triplet supercur- rent through the half-metallic ferromagnet cro 2, Nature 439, 825 (2006)

2006
[79]

J. J. He, T. K. Ng, P. A. Lee, and K. T. Law, Selec- tive equal-spin andreev reflections induced by majorana fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 037001 (2014)

2014
[80]

M. Roig, Y. Yu, R. C. Ekman, A. Kreisel, B. M. Ander- sen, and D. F. Agterberg, Quasisymmetry-constrained spin ferromagnetism in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 016703 (2025)

2025

Showing first 80 references.