On multipoles, their decomposition by time-reversal symmetry, and the electric toroidal monopole

Nicola A. Spaldin; Nora Taufertsh\"ofer; Vinzenz A. M\"uller

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

On multipoles, their decomposition by time-reversal symmetry, and the electric toroidal monopole

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper constructs a complete orthogonal basis of real Hermitian multipoles for the local single-particle density matrix, extends it to inter-shell operators, and uses the resulting electric toroidal monopole to distinguish the two enant

desk verdict Solid mathematical extension of the multipole formalism; the tellurium demo is thin and needs convergence work, but the core deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.13053 v1 pith:QGCTM5NL submitted 2026-07-03 quant-ph cond-mat.mtrl-scimath-phmath.MP

Vinzenz A. Müller , Nora Taufertshöfer , Nicola A. Spaldin This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-phcond-mat.mtrl-scimath-phmath.MP

keywords multipoledecompositionlocaldensitymatrixinter-shelloperatorstime-reversalsymmetryelectrictoroidalmonopolechiralitytelluriumsphericaltensor

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Fixed-shell multipole decompositions of the local density matrix only resolve operators within a single orbital l; the authors show that adding inter-shell operators — those mapping between different l — completes the basis of all Hermitian single-particle operators on the site. They build the complete orthogonal real Hermitian basis from coupled orbital and spin tensors, classify every operator by spatial parity and time-reversal, and prove the dimension count matches the full operator space. In the new classification the lowest odd-parity, time-reversal-even pseudoscalar is the electric toroidal monopole, a local chiral scalar. Applying the decomposition to trigonal tellurium, they compute this monopole moment at each Te site and find it is equal in magnitude and opposite in sign in the two enantiomers, making it a candidate atomic-scale measure of chirality. The reader should care because the completed basis gives a symmetry-resolved language in which any local observable can be matched to exactly the multipole moments that can contribute to it.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the coupled tensor operator W^{kpr}_t(l',l) = n^{-1}_{kpr} (-1)^{k+p} Σ_{q,y} (-1)^{-q-y} [k r p; -q t-y] C^k_q(l',l) ⊗ σ^p_y, built from the orbital tensor C^k_q(l',l) (normalized so the stretched matrix element is 1) and the spin tensor σ^p_y (identity and Pauli matrices in spherical form). Hermitian adjoints relate opposite (l',l) blocks, so the authors form real components and then '+/–' Hermitian combinations; time-reversal projection selects definite parity ν and the notation W^{νkpr,real}_{l1,l2,t} with l1≤l2. Completeness is checked by counting: the number of operators equals 4(l_max+1)^4, the dimension of End(H), and orthogonality follows from the orthogonality of W

What would settle it

Compute the electric toroidal monopole moment in trigonal tellurium with different projector radii (e.g., 1.0 to 1.5 bohr), denser k-meshes, higher energy cutoffs, and with d states included; if the sign difference between the two enantiomers disappears or flips under any of these changes, the claim that the ETM provides a robust local measure of chirality fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the time-reversal even/odd real Hermitian multipole operators W^{νkpr,real}_{l1,l2,t} form a complete orthogonal real basis of the Hermitian local single-particle operator space, extending the van der Laan–Thole/Bultmark fixed-shell basis to inter-shell blocks (l1 ≠ l2). The construction starts from the tensor product structure End(H) ≅ (⊕ V_l ⊗ V*_{l'}) ⊗ V_s ⊗ V*_s, decomposes orbital and spin operator spaces separately under SO(3), couples them with Clebsch–Gordan coefficients, and then forms real Hermitian combinations. The authors also prove that with one radial projector per angular-momentum shell and truncation at l_max, the counting of operators matches dim

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the projected local Hilbert space used in the application — one radial projector per angular-momentum shell and only s and p orbitals — captures a physically meaningful electric toroidal monopole moment; if the projected density matrix were strongly basis-dependent, the reported ±2.6×10^{-4} values would be artifacts of the projection rather than a robust chirality descriptor.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any symmetry-resolved observable O with definite parity and time-reversal character can only couple to multipole moments of the matching class, so the full basis lets one read off which local degrees of freedom a given measurement or response probes.
Fixed-shell multipole analyses (van der Laan–Thole, Bultmark et al.) are recovered exactly for l'=l; inter-shell operators such as the electric toroidal monopole are the new, previously missing channels.
The electric toroidal monopole moment computed from the s–p block of the density matrix distinguishes the two enantiomers of trigonal tellurium by sign while preserving equal magnitude at all three Te sites.
The same decomposition can be applied to any site-projected DFT density matrix, turning the local density matrix into a complete set of symmetry-labeled amplitudes comparable across materials.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the ETM sign is robust to the projection details, it could serve as a first-principles descriptor for structural chirality in other helical or screw-axis crystals, and possibly for chirality-dependent transport such as the current-induced magnetoelectric response in tellurium.
The basis completeness argument suggests a natural test: recomputing the same Te ETM with d and f shells included should preserve sign and change magnitude; if the s–p-only result vanished at higher l_max, the reported descriptor would be an artifact of truncation rather than a stable chiral invariant.
Because the ETM is the lowest-rank parity-odd time-reversal-even pseudoscalar, one might expect it to correlate with the sign of natural optical activity or circular dichroism in chiral crystals; computing the rotational-strength-weighted spectra for the two enantiomers would give a direct observable test.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Punchline: the mathematics is the real contribution; the tellurium calculation is a plausible demo but not yet a validated quantitative result.

What's new: a complete orthogonal real Hermitian multipole basis for the local single-particle operator space, extending the fixed-shell formalism to inter-shell (l≠l') operators. The construction is careful — they separate orbital and spin spaces, use Wigner–Eckart with the van der Laan normalization, couple spin and orbital parts, then build real Hermitian combinations. I checked the orthogonality and the dimension count N=4(l_max+1)^4, which matches dim End(H). The parity and time-reversal selection table is useful and follows cleanly. This fills a real gap, since standard tools like multipyles only do fixed-shell.

The paper does well: the derivation is explicit and self-contained, no fitting or external parameters, and the reduction to the old formalism for l'=l is checked. The appendices give enough detail to re-derive from scratch. The Te application demonstrates that the ETM picks out chirality: the sign flips between enantiomers, which is symmetry-enforced, so it's a valid consistency check.

Where it's soft: the application is under-supported. One DFT calculation with a single k-mesh, cutoff, functional, and one projector per l-shell (l_max=1) gives w=±2.6×10^-4, with no test of how this depends on PAW projector radius or inclusion of d states. The operator involves the s–p overlap , which is radial-dependent, so the magnitude is not obviously robust. The sign flip is guaranteed by symmetry; the quantitative claim as a 'local measure of chirality' needs convergence checks or a second chirality observable. This is the weakest load-bearing point. Also, the data availability statement (upon publication) means the numbers are not independently checkable now.

Minor but real: eqs. (20)–(22) identify n_lkl' with a stretched 3j symbol, but that symbol can be negative (e.g. (1 1 1; -1 0 1) = -1/√6) while the closed-form square root is positive. The normalization in (23) might still work if n is allowed to be signed, but the equations as printed are inconsistent. This should be fixed in revision; it's the kind of thing a careful reader will trip on.

Who this is for: people using multipole decompositions in DFT, especially toroidal/chiral observables and inter-shell physics. It deserves a serious referee. I'd send it to review with a request to strengthen the application (convergence tests or softened claims) and fix the sign.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a complete orthogonal real Hermitian multipole basis for the local single-site density matrix, extending the fixed-shell multipole formulations of van der Laan/Thole and Bultmark et al. to include inter-shell operators. The construction proceeds by decomposing the orbital and spin operator spaces under SO(3), coupling the resulting spherical tensors, and then forming real Hermitian combinations. The basis is classified by spatial parity and time-reversal symmetry. Orthogonality and completeness are addressed in Appendix A4, including a dimension count of 4(l_max+1)^4 for the real Hermitian operator space. As an application, the authors compute the electric toroidal monopole (ETM) moment w^{ν=0,110}_{s,p,0} for the two enantiomers of trigonal tellurium from DFT density matrices and report equal magnitudes and opposite signs on the two enantiomers.

Significance. The mathematical construction is a useful and mostly self-contained extension of the standard multipole basis: it supplies an explicit, symmetry-adapted, complete basis for the full local Hermitian operator space, including inter-shell blocks, and reduces to the known fixed-shell formalism when l'=l. The proofs in Appendix A are explicit, and the dimension-counting argument is convincing. The application to tellurium is conceptually attractive, but the reported ETM value is a single DFT number with no robustness checks. Because the sign change between enantiomers is enforced by spatial parity, the physically informative content of Table II is the magnitude and its stability; the manuscript currently does not establish that stability.

major comments (2)

[Sec. IV.B / Table II] The main application is not yet supported by sufficient evidence. The ETM moment is an expectation value of an inter-shell operator in a local subspace defined by one radial PAW projector per angular-momentum shell and l_max=1 (Sec. II). Its magnitude depends on the s–p block of the projected density matrix and on the radial matrix element between the s and p projector functions. No tests are reported against the PAW sphere/projector radius, augmentation settings, energy cutoff, k-mesh, exchange-correlation functional, or inclusion of higher-l states. Since the sign change between enantiomers is fixed by parity, a single value ±2.6×10^-4 does not by itself demonstrate that the ETM is a robust chirality descriptor. Please add convergence/robustness tests or explicitly reframe the Te calculation as an illustration of the formalism rather than a validation of the ETM as a measure.
[Sec. V / Abstract] The concluding claim that the ETM 'acts as an atomic-scale measure for structural chirality' overreaches the presented evidence. It is a symmetry statement that a parity-odd time-reversal-even scalar changes sign under exchange of enantiomorphic structures; the nontrivial content of the calculation is the nonzero amplitude and its stability under the local-truncation and PAW choices, neither of which is tested. The conclusion should be tempered pending the robustness analysis described above.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. IV.A] Please specify the PAW projector/augmentation-sphere parameters and the precise way the one-center density matrix is extracted from VASP. This is needed both for reproducibility and for assessing the sensitivity of the inter-shell moments.
[Sec. II / Eq. (60)] The notation l1,l2 in W^{νkpr,real}_{l1,l2,t} after defining l'=min and l=max is a little confusing; state explicitly that the operator is associated with the (l',l) block with l'≤l.
[Sec. III / Table I] The table entries '≠0' and '0' should be read as 'for the given ν' and 'for the complementary ν'; a sentence clarifying that the two rows are complementary rather than contradictory would help avoid misinterpretation.
[Fig. 1] The caption mentions blue inward-pointing and red outward-pointing hedgehogs, but the figure shows arrows around one Te atom; clarify the relation between arrow direction and the sign of w^{ν=0,110}_{s,p,0}.
[Data Availability] The statement that input files and data 'will be publicly available upon publication' means the current result cannot be independently reproduced. Consider providing the relevant computational parameters and data in the supplementary material or a repository at the time of submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the basis construction is self-contained and dimension-counted; the Te ETM sign flip is a parity-symmetry identity, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained: the multipole basis is constructed from standard angular-momentum coupling using the Wigner-Eckart theorem and Wigner-3j orthogonality, with completeness established by explicit dimension counting in Appendix A4c (N = 4(l_max+1)^4 = dim End(H)) and by direct orthogonality computations (Eqs. A30, A38). The reduction to the fixed-shell van der Laan/Bultmark basis for l'=l is a consistency check, not a circular input. No parameters are fitted from the tellurium data; the ETM moment is a basis component of the DFT density matrix. The opposite sign of the ETM between enantiomers follows from the operator being parity-odd and the two structures being mirror-related, so Table II is a symmetry-consistency demonstration rather than an independent numerical prediction; this limits the demonstrative weight of the application but is not a circular derivation. Self-citations (e.g., Refs. 9-17, 27) are contextual and not load-bearing for the basis construction or completeness proof. Caveats such as the single radial projector per l-shell, l_max=1 truncation, lack of projector-radius/convergence tests, and the data-availability statement are correctness/reproducibility concerns, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The electric toroidal monopole is an operator inherited from prior literature (refs. [24-27]); the paper's contribution is realizing it as an inter-shell s-p multipole within a complete SO(3) basis and computing it from DFT. The ledger is dominated by standard angular-momentum axioms and two application-level modeling choices (truncation, normalization) that set the numerical scale of the reported moments.

free parameters (2)

Local-subspace truncation (l_max) = l_max = 1 (s and p shells) for tellurium
Completeness is proven only within the projected subspace H with one radial projector per shell and finite l_max (Sec. II); the reported ETM moments include only the s-p inter-shell channel, omitting d/f inter-shell channels that could change the values.
Multipole normalization convention = n_{lkl'} per eq. (22); n_{kpr} per eq. (38) with i^g phase
The magnitude and absolute sign of the computed moments (|w| = 2.6×10^{-4}) depend on these hand-chosen normalizations; only the sign reversal between enantiomers is convention-independent.

assumptions (6)

standard math Wigner-Eckart theorem and Clebsch-Gordan decomposition Hom(V_l', V_l) ≅ ⊕_{k=|l-l'|}^{l+l'} V_k
Foundation for the orbital tensor operators C^k_q(l',l) in Sec. II.A, eqs. (8)-(13).
standard math Condon-Shortley phase convention for spherical harmonics, orbital and spin states, and the associated real Wigner-3j/CG relation (eq. 11)
Sets signs in all derived conjugation and time-reversal relations; a different phase convention would shift the inter-shell sign factors in eqs. (25), (39), (46).
domain assumption Time-reversal acts as Θ|lm⟩ = (-1)^m |l,-m⟩ and Θ|s,m_s⟩ = (-1)^{s-m_s}|s,-m_s⟩ with Θ antiunitary
Standard convention (Sakurai, ref. [36]); the TR classification in Table I and the ν labels in eq. (60) depend on it (Sec. III.B, App. A5).
domain assumption Single radial projector per (n,l) shell; radial parts transform trivially under rotations
Justifies omitting n and reducing the problem to angular parts (Sec. II, eqs. (2)-(4)); this truncation defines the operator space that the completeness proof counts.
domain assumption The VASP PAW-projected on-site density matrix faithfully represents local electronic degrees of freedom
All computed moments inherit the projector/gauge choice; robustness of the ETM values to this choice is untested (Sec. IV.A).
domain assumption The rank-0 SO(3) pseudoscalar (electric toroidal monopole) is the appropriate local chirality descriptor for tellurium
The selection of this particular inter-shell channel as the chirality measure is inherited from the prior chirality literature (refs. [24-27]) and is asserted rather than tested against other candidate descriptors or site-symmetry channels (Sec. IV).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On multipoles, their decomposition by time-reversal symmetry, and the electric toroidal monopole." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QGCTM5NL

@misc{pith2026260713053,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On multipoles, their decomposition by time-reversal symmetry, and the electric toroidal monopole},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QGCTM5NL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.13053}
}

abstract

The multipole decomposition of the single-site density matrix provides a symmetry-adapted representation of local electronic degrees of freedom. Conventional, so-called fixed-shell, formulations do not span the full local single-particle operator space, as only operators mapping within the same orbital $l$ are resolved. Here we construct a complete orthogonal basis of real Hermitian multipole operators for the local density matrix by extending the existing formulation to inter-shell operators. We revisit the multipole decomposition as a decomposition of the operator space by $\mathrm{SO}(3)$ by first decomposing the orbital and spin operator spaces. Then by coupling them we arrive at the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ local single-particle operator space, staying consistent with the existing fixed-shell formulations. We then classify the multipoles by parity and time-reversal symmetry, which allows for unique identification of multipole moments of the density matrix that contribute to expectation values of fully symmetry-resolved observables. As an application, we analyze the two enantiomers of chiral trigonal tellurium by computing the electric toroidal monopole moment selected by symmetry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.13053 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Hidden chiral signatures in ferroaxial K2Zr(PO4)2
cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Applying an electric field to the ferroaxial material K2Zr(PO4)2 induces a switchable net electronic chirality and a Berry curvature dipole, turning hidden chiral domains into a measurable nonlinear Hall response.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Fork+p+reven, we can achieve such a normalization by dividing by the projecting factor k p r 0 0 0

With this convention, the zero component is tied to thez-components of the or- bital and spin tensors. Fork+p+reven, we can achieve such a normalization by dividing by the projecting factor k p r 0 0 0 . Edmonds [3, Eq. 3.7.17] derived the following explicit expression: a b c 0 0 0 = (−1)g/2 s (g−2a)!(g−2b)!(g−2c)! (g+ 1)! × (g/2)! (g/2−a)!(g/2−b)!(g/2−c)...
[2]

(28) are reproduced by choosing the following nor- malization constant: np = 1p (p+ 2)! ,(A3) which forp= 0,1 isn −1 0 = √ 2 andn −1 1 = √ 6

Derivation of the spherical spin tensor components in angular momentum basis Fors= 1 2 , the spin-operator space decomposes as Vs ⊗V ∗ s ≃ 1 2 ⊗ 1 2 = 0⊕1.(A1) Hence the four spin operators may be organized into ir- reducible spherical tensorsσ p y, withp= 0,1: σp y = X m,m′ n−1 p (−1)s−m s p s −m y m′ |sm⟩⟨sm′|.(A2) We show that the spherical spin operat...
[3]

Hermitian adjoint of the spherical orbital tensor components We compute the Hermitian adjoint of the spherical or- bital tensor components as defined in eq. (24): C k q (l′, l) † = X m,m′ n−1 lkl′(−1)l−m l k l ′ −m q m′ |l′m′⟩⟨lm| = X m,m′ n−1 lkl′(−1)l−m l′ k l −m′ −q m |l′m′⟩⟨lm|, (A14) where in the second line we used the symmetry of the Wigner-3j symb...
[4]

(A18) Using the Hermitian conjugate of the orbital and spin tensors given in eq

Hermitian adjoint of the spherical multipole operators We first compute the Hermitian adjoint of the compo- nents of the spherical multipole tensor as defined in equa- tion (34) with a real normalization constant: (T r t (l′, l))† =n−1 3j (−1)k+p X q,y (−1)−q−y k r p −q t−y × C k q (l′, l) † ⊗ σp y † . (A18) Using the Hermitian conjugate of the orbital an...
[5]

Orthogonality of the spherical orbital operators We determine the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of the spherical tensor operator components as defined in eq

Orthogonality of operators a. Orthogonality of the spherical orbital operators We determine the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of the spherical tensor operator components as defined in eq. (24). Orthogonality of the spherical components of or- bital tensors that maps between different (l ′, l) blocks follows from the orthogonality of thelorbital states. Or...
[6]

As described in the appendix B, in particular with claim B.1, we determine the effect of the time-reversal operator by its action on the basis

Time-reversal of operators In the following we determine the time-reversed opera- tors of the spherical, spin, and multipole operators as well as the density matrix. As described in the appendix B, in particular with claim B.1, we determine the effect of the time-reversal operator by its action on the basis. The typical convention for the orbital states i...
[7]

its multipole moment, via upper- and lowercase letters

Multipole decomposition of the density matrix For an operatorO∈End(H) and a basisB i orthonor- mal with respect to the inner product on End(H), the operator can be expressed in that basis as O= X i ⟨Bi, O⟩Bi,(A87) where the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product is typically used: ⟨Bi, O⟩= Tr h B† i O i (A88) We can thus decompose a density matrixρ∈End(H) into its...
[8]

WithUbeing a complex matrix, time-reversalτ(·) andUdo not com- mute

Alternative time-symmetrization The transformation of the spherical tensor components as described in section II D is a complex transformation, for which we will use the following shorthand Tα = X t Uα,tTt (A91) As discussed in the appendix B, the time-reversal oper- ator is an antiunitary endomorphism Θ. WithUbeing a complex matrix, time-reversalτ(·) and...

Show all 59 references

[9]

This relation can be leveraged to give insight into how different components of a density matrix of definite time-reversal symmetry relate to each other

Relation between different spherical multipole moments across different orbital blocks As shown in the appendix A 4 b and A 5, the spherical multipole operators form an orthogonal basis of the oper- ator space and time-reversal relates different components of different (l ′, l...
[10]

Racah, Phys

G. Racah, Phys. Rev.62, 438 (1942)

1942
[11]

E. P. Wigner,Group Theory and Its Application to the Quantum Mechanics of Atomic Spectra(Academic Press, New York, 1959) pp. ix+372

1959
[12]

A. R. Edmonds,Angular Momentum in Quantum Me- chanics, Investigations in Physics No. 4 (Princeton Uni- versity Press, Princeton, NJ, 1957)

1957
[13]

D. M. Brink and G. R. Satchler,Angular Momentum (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1968) p. 160

1968
[14]

D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev, and V. K. Kher- sonskii,Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum(World Scientific, Singapore, 1988)

1988
[15]

van der Laan and B

G. van der Laan and B. T. Thole, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter7, 9947 (1995)

1995
[16]

Bultmark, F

F. Bultmark, F. Cricchio, O. Gr ˚ an¨ as, and L. Nordstr¨ om, Phys. Rev. B80, 035121 (2009)

2009
[17]

Cricchio, F

F. Cricchio, F. Bultmark, O. Gr ˚ an¨ as, and L. Nordstr¨ om, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 107202 (2009)

2009
[18]

Ederer and N

C. Ederer and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. B76, 214404 (2007)

2007
[19]

N. A. Spaldin, M. Fiebig, and M. Mostovoy, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter20, 434203 (2008)

2008
[20]

N. A. Spaldin, M. Fechner, E. Bousquet, A. Balatsky, and L. Nordstr¨ om, Phys. Rev. B88, 094429 (2013)

2013
[21]

Fechner and N

M. Fechner and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. B94, 134307 (2016)

2016
[22]

Th¨ ole and N

F. Th¨ ole and N. A. Spaldin, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 376, 20170450 (2018)

2018
[23]

Bhowal and N

S. Bhowal and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033185 (2021)

2021
[24]

Urru and N

A. Urru and N. A. Spaldin, Ann. Phys.447, 168964 (2022)

2022
[25]

Urru, J.-R

A. Urru, J.-R. Soh, N. Qureshi, A. Stunault, B. Roessli, H. M. Rønnow, and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033147 (2023)

2023
[26]

X. H. Verbeek, A. Urru, and N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. Res.5, l042018 (2023)

2023
[27]

Winkler and U

R. Winkler and U. Z¨ ulicke, Phys. Rev. B107, 155201 (2023)

2023
[28]

Hayami and H

S. Hayami and H. Kusunose, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.87, 033709 (2018)

2018
[29]

Hayami, M

S. Hayami, M. Yatsushiro, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Phys. Rev. B98, 165110 (2018)

2018
[30]

Kusunose, R

H. Kusunose, R. Oiwa, and S. Hayami, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 89, 104704 (2020)

2020
[31]

Yatsushiro, H

M. Yatsushiro, H. Kusunose, and S. Hayami, Phys. Rev. B104, 054412 (2021)

2021
[32]

Hayami and H

S. Hayami and H. Kusunose, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.93, 072001 (2024)

2024
[33]

A. Inda, R. Oiwa, S. Hayami, H. M. Yamamoto, and H. Kusunose, J. Chem. Phys.160, 184117 (2024)

2024
[34]

Kusunose, J.-i

H. Kusunose, J.-i. Kishine, and H. M. Yamamoto, Appl. Phys. Lett.124, 260501 (2024)

2024
[35]

Oiwa and H

R. Oiwa and H. Kusunose, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033250 (2025)

2025
[36]

N. A. Spaldin, Newton , 100581 (2026)

2026
[37]

Furukawa, Y

T. Furukawa, Y. Shimokawa, K. Kobayashi, and T. Itou, Nat. Commun.8, 954 (2017)

2017
[38]

Sakano, M

M. Sakano, M. Hirayama, T. Takahashi, S. Akebi, M. Nakayama, K. Kuroda, K. Taguchi, T. Yoshikawa, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, K. Ono, H. Kumigashira, T. Ideue, Y. Iwasa, N. Mitsuishi, K. Ishizaka, S. Shin, T. Miyake, S. Murakami, T. Sasagawa, and T. Kondo, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 1364...

2020
[39]

S. S. Tsirkin, P. A. Puente, and I. Souza, Phys. Rev. B 97, 035158 (2018)

2018
[40]

Gatti, D

G. Gatti, D. Gos´ albez-Mart ´ ınez, S. S. Tsirkin, M. Fan- ciulli, M. Puppin, S. Polishchuk, S. Moser, L. Testa, E. Martino, S. Roth, P. Bugnon, L. Moreschini, A. Bost- wick, C. Jozwiak, E. Rotenberg, G. Di Santo, L. Petaccia, I. Vobornik, J. Fujii, J. Wong, D. Jariwala, H. A...

2020
[41]

Calavalle, M

F. Calavalle, M. Su´ arez-Rodr ´ ıguez, B. Mart ´ ın-Garc ´ ıa, A. Johansson, D. C. Vaz, H. Yang, I. V. Maznichenko, S. Ostanin, A. Mateo-Alonso, A. Chuvilin, I. Mertig, M. Gobbi, F. Casanova, and L. E. Hueso, Nat. Mater. 21, 526 (2022)

2022
[42]

A. Roy, F. T. Cerasoli, A. Jayaraj, K. Tenzin, M. B. Nardelli, and J. S lawi´ nska, npj Comput. Mater.8, 243 (2022)

2022
[43]

P. E. Bl¨ ochl, Phys. Rev. B50, 17953 (1994). 18

1994
[44]

Kresse and D

G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Phys. Rev. B59, 1758 (1999)

1999
[45]

J. J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano,Modern Quantum Me- chanics, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2017)

2017
[46]

Duros, A

O. Duros, A. Juhin, H. Elnaggar, G. S. Chiuzb˘ aian, and C. Brouder, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.58, 025207 (2024)

2024
[47]

C. H. Choi, J. Ivanic, M. S. Gordon, and K. Ruedenberg, J. Chem. Phys.111, 8825 (1999)

1999
[48]

M. A. Blanco, M. Fl´ orez, and M. Bermejo, J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM419, 19 (1997)

1997
[49]

Oiwa and H

R. Oiwa and H. Kusunose, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 116401 (2022)

2022
[50]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Phys. Rev. B54, 11169 (1996)

1996
[51]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 3865 (1996)

1996
[52]

Buˇ cko, S

T. Buˇ cko, S. Leb` egue, J. Hafner, and J. G. ´Angy´ an, J. Chem. Theory Comput.9, 4293 (2013)

2013
[53]

Buˇ cko, S

T. Buˇ cko, S. Leb` egue, J. G.´Angy´ an, and J. Hafner, J. Chem. Phys.141, 034114 (2014)

2014
[54]

Keller, W

R. Keller, W. B. Holzapfel, and H. Schulz, Phys. Rev. B 16, 4404 (1977)

1977
[55]

Momma and F

K. Momma and F. Izumi, J. Appl. Crystallogr.41, 653 (2008)

2008
[56]

R. G. Littlejohn, Time reversal (1996–1997), physics 221 Lecture Notes, University of California, Berkeley

1996
[57]

M. S. Dresselhaus, G. Dresselhaus, and A. Jorio,Group Theory: Application to the Physics of Condensed Matter (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 2010)

2010
[58]

M. E. Merkel,multipylesv1.1.0 (Zenodo, 2023) doi:10.5281/zenodo.8199391

2023 doi
[59]

Shapiro, Notes on topological aspects of condensed matter physics (2016), based on notes by Prof

J. Shapiro, Notes on topological aspects of condensed matter physics (2016), based on notes by Prof. G. M. Graf

2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Fork+p+reven, we can achieve such a normalization by dividing by the projecting factor k p r 0 0 0

With this convention, the zero component is tied to thez-components of the or- bital and spin tensors. Fork+p+reven, we can achieve such a normalization by dividing by the projecting factor k p r 0 0 0 . Edmonds [3, Eq. 3.7.17] derived the following explicit expression: a b c 0 0 0 = (−1)g/2 s (g−2a)!(g−2b)!(g−2c)! (g+ 1)! × (g/2)! (g/2−a)!(g/2−b)!(g/2−c)...

[2] [2]

(28) are reproduced by choosing the following nor- malization constant: np = 1p (p+ 2)! ,(A3) which forp= 0,1 isn −1 0 = √ 2 andn −1 1 = √ 6

Derivation of the spherical spin tensor components in angular momentum basis Fors= 1 2 , the spin-operator space decomposes as Vs ⊗V ∗ s ≃ 1 2 ⊗ 1 2 = 0⊕1.(A1) Hence the four spin operators may be organized into ir- reducible spherical tensorsσ p y, withp= 0,1: σp y = X m,m′ n−1 p (−1)s−m s p s −m y m′ |sm⟩⟨sm′|.(A2) We show that the spherical spin operat...

[3] [3]

Hermitian adjoint of the spherical orbital tensor components We compute the Hermitian adjoint of the spherical or- bital tensor components as defined in eq. (24): C k q (l′, l) † = X m,m′ n−1 lkl′(−1)l−m l k l ′ −m q m′ |l′m′⟩⟨lm| = X m,m′ n−1 lkl′(−1)l−m l′ k l −m′ −q m |l′m′⟩⟨lm|, (A14) where in the second line we used the symmetry of the Wigner-3j symb...

[4] [4]

(A18) Using the Hermitian conjugate of the orbital and spin tensors given in eq

Hermitian adjoint of the spherical multipole operators We first compute the Hermitian adjoint of the compo- nents of the spherical multipole tensor as defined in equa- tion (34) with a real normalization constant: (T r t (l′, l))† =n−1 3j (−1)k+p X q,y (−1)−q−y k r p −q t−y × C k q (l′, l) † ⊗ σp y † . (A18) Using the Hermitian conjugate of the orbital an...

[5] [5]

Orthogonality of the spherical orbital operators We determine the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of the spherical tensor operator components as defined in eq

Orthogonality of operators a. Orthogonality of the spherical orbital operators We determine the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product of the spherical tensor operator components as defined in eq. (24). Orthogonality of the spherical components of or- bital tensors that maps between different (l ′, l) blocks follows from the orthogonality of thelorbital states. Or...

[6] [6]

As described in the appendix B, in particular with claim B.1, we determine the effect of the time-reversal operator by its action on the basis

Time-reversal of operators In the following we determine the time-reversed opera- tors of the spherical, spin, and multipole operators as well as the density matrix. As described in the appendix B, in particular with claim B.1, we determine the effect of the time-reversal operator by its action on the basis. The typical convention for the orbital states i...

[7] [7]

its multipole moment, via upper- and lowercase letters

Multipole decomposition of the density matrix For an operatorO∈End(H) and a basisB i orthonor- mal with respect to the inner product on End(H), the operator can be expressed in that basis as O= X i ⟨Bi, O⟩Bi,(A87) where the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product is typically used: ⟨Bi, O⟩= Tr h B† i O i (A88) We can thus decompose a density matrixρ∈End(H) into its...

[8] [8]

WithUbeing a complex matrix, time-reversalτ(·) andUdo not com- mute

Alternative time-symmetrization The transformation of the spherical tensor components as described in section II D is a complex transformation, for which we will use the following shorthand Tα = X t Uα,tTt (A91) As discussed in the appendix B, the time-reversal oper- ator is an antiunitary endomorphism Θ. WithUbeing a complex matrix, time-reversalτ(·) and...