Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 112 references

Symmetry Classification of Non-Relativistic Hidden Spin Polarization in Noncollinear Magnets

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Spin groups classify hidden spin polarization in noncollinear magnets.

desk verdict Useful spin-group taxonomy for HSP in noncollinear magnets, but the unproven sector-partition independence keeps the material-level claims conditional. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06787 v1 pith:JBHO4Z5C submitted 2026-08-07 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yuzhong Hu , Pan Zhou , Baoru Pan , PengBo Lyu , Lizhong Sun This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords hiddenspinpolarizationnoncollinearmagnetsspacegrouptextureclassificationnonrelativisticmagnetismHalleffectlayermagneticsymmetry
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

Hidden spin polarization (HSP) is the situation in which electrons in separate real-space sectors of a crystal carry opposite spin polarizations at every momentum, so the crystal as a whole shows no net spin even though each sector is locally spin-polarized. The paper establishes that in the nonrelativistic, spin-orbit-free limit the spin symmetries of a noncollinear magnet force the momentum-resolved spin polarization of any local sector into one of four split spin-texture (SST) types, and that an additional compensation operation $O$ determines whether those local textures hide globally or produce an observable spin splitting. Combining the SST form with the dimensionality of the local spin texture yields three HSP categories, HSP-1, HSP-2, and HSP-3, illustrated by tight-binding models and by specific compounds. A survey of a public magnetic-structure database finds 133, 7, and 139 candidate noncollinear magnets in the three categories, and the analysis predicts nonzero spin-related response tensors, including a spin Hall conductivity and a sector-resolved layer Hall effect, in many of these materials.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the spin space group, written $G_{SS}=G_{SO}\times G_{NS}$, with $G_{SO}$ the spin-only subgroup and $G_{NS}$ operations acting jointly on spin and space. Its operations are divided into three classes, $g_a$ (fixed $\mathbf{k}$), $g_b$ (maps $\mathbf{k}$ to $-\mathbf{k}$), and $g_c$ (maps $\mathbf{k}$ to other momenta), and the paper's classification is carried by the interplay of $g_a$ and $g_b$. The second ingredient is the compensation operation $O$, a spin-space-group element that exchanges the two local sectors and enforces $\mathbf{S}_\alpha(\mathbf{k})=-\mathbf{S}_\beta(\mathbf{k})$; the allowed form of $O$ depends on the spin dimensionality of the local texture and defines the HSP-1, HSP-2, and HSP-3 labels.

What would settle it

Take a predicted HSP material such as SrFe2Se2O, compute or measure the momentum-resolved spin polarization projected onto each of the two magnetic sublattices, and check at every $k$ where the sector-exchanging symmetry is preserved whether $\mathbf{S}_\alpha(\mathbf{k})+\mathbf{S}_\beta(\mathbf{k})=0$ exactly. Finding even one symmetry-preserving $k$ with a nonzero sum, or one predicted SST parity (such as odd in momentum) contradicted by the observed texture, would falsify the compensation or the texture classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a noncollinear magnet's hidden spin polarization is not an accident of electronic structure but is fixed by its spin space group, the symmetry group of a magnetic crystal in the limit where spin rotations act independently of spatial operations. The paper classifies the symmetry operations that constrain a momentum-space spin texture $\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{k})$ into three types: those that keep $\mathbf{k}$ fixed and fix the allowed spin dimensionality $d_s$; those that map $\mathbf{k}$ to $-\mathbf{k}$ and fix whether each spin component is even or odd in momentum; and those that relate distinct momenta. The first two types generate exactly four local split spin-texture classes, SST-1 through SST-4, distinguished by parity and dimensionality. HSP then arises when a spin operation $O$ exchanges the two real-space sectors and requires $\mathbf{S}_\alpha(\mathbf{k}) = -\mathbf{S}_\beta(\mathbf{k})$ at every momentum; depending on $d_s$ and on the allowed form of $O$, this yields HSP-1 (collinear local textures), HSP-2 (coplanar local textures), and HSP-3 (noncoplanar local textures). The framework reproduces the known collinear even-parity altermagnetic textures as a special case and predicts, in the nonrelativistic limit, that hundreds of noncollinear magnets host HSP with sizeable spin-dependent response tensors.

Load-bearing premise

The whole scheme depends on dividing the crystal into two well-defined local sectors, the natural magnetic sublattices connected by the sector-exchanging symmetry, whose spin polarizations are well defined and exactly opposite at every momentum; if that division is ambiguous for delocalized electrons in a first-principles calculation, the labels assigned to real materials become projection-dependent.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any noncollinear magnet in the nonrelativistic limit can be assigned a definite local SST class (SST-1 through SST-4) from its spin symmetries alone, without computing the full electronic structure.
  • If the compensation operation $O$ is present, the total spin polarization vanishes at every momentum while each sector stays spin-polarized; if it is absent, a global nonrelativistic spin splitting is symmetry-allowed instead.
  • The classification puts the previously separate collinear hidden-spin and even-parity altermagnetic textures into the same framework, with odd-parity SST-3 and mixed-parity SST-4 textures existing only in noncollinear magnets.
  • Candidate noncollinear magnets are abundant: the database survey yields 133 HSP-1, 7 HSP-2, and 139 HSP-3 materials, and many of them are predicted to show nonzero spin Hall conductivity, magnetoelectric effects, or a layer Hall effect even without spin-orbit coupling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An implication the authors leave implicit is that the same symmetry criteria could be used as a pre-screen on any magnetic-structure database, so the candidate counts are likely to grow as more noncollinear structures are added, and HSP-2 stays the rarest class because it requires the restrictive coplanar symmetry $[TC_{2z}\|P]$.
  • A testable expectation beyond the paper is that the odd-parity SST-3 and mixed-parity SST-4 textures will be the most strongly reshaped by spin-orbit coupling, since their momentum-parity pattern is not anchored to a global spin axis.
  • The predicted sector-resolved layer Hall effect suggests an experimental route the paper does not develop: a transport probe that couples to one magnetic sublattice should see a finite anomalous Hall response even though the crystal's total response vanishes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a spin-space-group classification of nonrelativistic hidden spin polarization (HSP) in noncollinear magnets. It defines four local split spin-texture (SST) types from the actions of g_a- and g_b-type spin symmetries, and three HSP categories from the local spin dimensionality d_s together with the sector-compensating operation O. The framework is illustrated with tight-binding models and five representative materials, and a MAGNDATA survey is reported to yield 133, 7, and 139 candidate materials for HSP-1, HSP-2, and HSP-3, respectively. The paper also derives symmetry-allowed spin Hall and layer Hall responses and presents a first-principles calculation for SrFe2Se2O. The abstract and body counts are internally consistent (133 = 122 + 11; 139 = 80 + 59).

Significance. If the central classification is valid, the paper would provide a genuinely general symmetry framework for hidden spin polarization in noncollinear magnets, extending earlier HSP theory beyond nonmagnetic and collinear systems. The main strengths are that the classification is derived from the external spin-space-group formalism rather than fitted to the target taxonomy, the tight-binding parameters are illustrative rather than adjustment knobs, and the predicted response tensors are concrete and symmetry-enforced. The MAGNDATA survey, if reproducible, would be a useful resource. However, the significance is conditional on two currently under-supported points: the asserted independence of the HSP/SST labels from the choice of sector partition, and the operational definition of sector-resolved spin polarization for delocalized Bloch states. Both points affect the material-level assignments and hence the headline counts.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix B / 'Hidden spin polarization in noncollinear magnets'] The assertion that 'the existence and category of HSP are fixed by the full SSG, independent of the sector partition' is load-bearing but is not proved. The SST label and the dimensionality d_s are defined through sector-resolved spin polarizations S_alpha(k), and Table 1 explicitly allows multiple admissible compensation operations O for a given HSP type. If two valid O operations exchange different pairs of 'natural magnetic sublattices' and yield sector stabilizers that are not conjugate under the SSG, the same material could receive different SST and HSP labels. Appendix B only states the independence claim and refers to the supplementary material; it does not supply a theorem, a canonical construction of the sector partition, or a worked example with two candidate O operations. Because the MAGNDATA counts (133/7/139) and the individual material assignments inherit this dependence, this is a central gap rather than a numerical detail. I ask the authors to provide a proof or a precise canonical definition of the natural sector partition, and to demonstrate on at least one concrete noncollinear magnet that all admissible choices of O yield the same SST/HSP classification.
  2. [Spin-texture prototypes in noncollinear magnets; Tabs. S1-S4] The classification into exactly four SST types is the foundation of the paper, but the completeness argument is not present in the main text. The text introduces the three operation classes g_a, g_b, and g_c for a generic k and then states that their interplay gives rise to four generic SST types, with the detailed symmetry conditions deferred to Tables S1-S4 of the supplementary material. I could not verify from the manuscript that these classes are exhaustive for all spin-space-group elements at a generic k, nor that the possible combinations of the g_a-determined spin subspace and the g_b momentum parity can produce only the four listed cases. Since every subsequent HSP label and all survey assignments depend on this taxonomy, the authors should state the classification as a theorem with a proof sketch in the main text, or ensure that the supplementary material is part of the review package and that the tables are self-contained and checkable.
  3. [Realization in realistic materials; Figs. 3 and S6] The first-principles sector-resolved quantities S_alpha(k) are not operationally defined in the main text. For delocalized Bloch states, the projection onto local sectors can be performed in several inequivalent ways (for example, atom-centered Wannier projection, real-space partitioning, or site-resolved spin-density projection), and these choices can change the sector-resolved spin texture. The material examples, including the SST-4/HSP-3 assignment for SrFe2Se2O, therefore need a specification of the exact projector used and a numerical test showing that the reported SST/HSP labels are stable under reasonable projection choices. This is particularly important because the MAGNDATA survey is carried out by symmetry criteria, while the individual material claims are based on first-principles sector-resolved calculations; the two procedures must refer to the same sector definition.
  4. [Realization in realistic materials; MAGNDATA survey paragraph] The survey paragraph does not state whether incommensurate MAGNDATA entries are included or excluded. The cited MAGNDATA papers cover both commensurate and incommensurate cases, and the spin-space-group criterion as formulated in the main text uses a finite fractional translation tau and an ordinary Brillouin zone, which suggests a commensurate assumption. Since the headline results include the total count of 790 noncollinear candidate materials and the 133/7/139 HSP counts, the authors should explicitly report the inclusion rule for incommensurate magnetic structures and, if incommensurate entries are retained, justify how the SSG classification applies to them.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The definition eta_g = det|U_s| is ambiguous for antiunitary operations: the determinant of the unitary rotation part is +1, yet time reversal reverses the spin vector and should give eta_g = -1. Please define eta_g directly as the sign acquired by the spin vector under the full spin part of the operation.
  2. [Reference list] Reference [80], described as a short review on metal phosphide based 2D nanomaterials, appears unrelated to the USb/U monopnictide context in which it is cited; please verify and replace it with an appropriate reference.
  3. [Table 1] In the HSP-2 row, the entry 'O = [T||P|tau] ([C_2z||E|tau])' is unclear: it should state explicitly whether both operations are always allowed or whether the parenthesized operation is allowed only under additional symmetry conditions.
  4. [Abstract and Introduction] The phrase 'the total spin polarization are hidden' should be corrected to 'the total spin polarization is hidden'.
  5. [MAGNDATA survey paragraph] The sentence 'after excluding collinear magnets and materials with fractional atomic occupancies' should also specify whether the search was restricted to the commensurate subset of MAGNDATA, and how the spin-space-group symmetry of each entry was determined algorithmically.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Group-theoretic classification is self-contained; no fitted prediction or self-citation chain forces the HSP taxonomy.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is a symmetry-enumeration result: Eq. (2), S(k) = U_s S(eta_g R_g^{-1} k), is the defining constraint of spin-group invariance, and the four SST types are obtained by classifying g_a (fixed-momentum) and g_b (opposite-momentum) operations. The HSP-1/HSP-2/HSP-3 categories are then defined by the sector spin dimensionality d_s and the allowed compensation operation O, not by fitting labels to any dataset. The tight-binding model and DFT examples are explicitly illustrative ('we construct a phenomenological tight-binding model ... to illustrate HSP'), not used to infer the taxonomy. The MAGNDATA survey applies the stated symmetry criteria to an external database; the counts 133, 7, and 139 are outputs of the criteria, not inputs that determine the classification. The Appendix B assertion that the existence and category of HSP are independent of the sector partition is a robustness assumption that is not proven in the main text, but it is not circular: the classification does not define the sectors in terms of the final HSP label, nor does it fit the label from material data. All citations to spin-group formalisms are to external, independently published classifications of spin space groups, and no load-bearing argument reduces to a self-citation by the present authors. Accordingly, no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The classification itself is parameter-free; only the illustrative TB model uses hand-set couplings. The response calculations depend on unpublished numerical settings. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • tight-binding hopping t = 0.5
    Chosen by hand for the illustrative model in Eq. (4); has no effect on the symmetry classification.
  • local moment magnitude |m| = 0.5
    Chosen by hand for the same illustrative model; not fitted to real materials.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Nonrelativistic limit: spin rotations are independent of spatial operations, so the symmetry group factorizes as G_SS = G_SO x G_NS (Eq. 1).
    Valid when SOC is negligible; the paper explicitly restricts to this limit, so real materials with sizable SOC are outside the scope.
  • standard math The set of g_a and g_b operations exhaustively determines the spin texture dimensionality and parity (Tables S1-S4).
    The group-theoretic enumeration is assumed correct; it is stated but not proved in the main text.
  • domain assumption Each material can be partitioned into natural magnetic sublattices whose sector-resolved spin polarization is well defined and whose compensation by O is exact at every k (Appendix B).
    The classification and material assignments rely on this partition; for delocalized Bloch states the sector projection may be non-unique.
  • domain assumption MAGNDATA entries represent reliable magnetic structures suitable for symmetry screening.
    The survey excludes collinear magnets and fractional occupancies but otherwise takes database structures at face value.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Symmetry Classification of Non-Relativistic Hidden Spin Polarization in Noncollinear Magnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JBHO4Z5C

@misc{pith2026260806787,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Symmetry Classification of Non-Relativistic Hidden Spin Polarization in Noncollinear Magnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JBHO4Z5C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06787}
}
abstract

Hidden spin polarization (HSP), in which spin-polarized states exist locally while the total spin polarization are hidden in momentum space, has been extensively studied in nonmagnetic and collinear magnetic systems, but remains largely unexplored in noncollinear magnets. Here we establish a unified symmetry framework for HSP in noncollinear magnetic materials based on spin-group theory. We show that spin symmetries systematically constrain nonrelativistic spin polarization, giving rise to four distinct split spin-texture (SST) types for each local sector, denoted as SST-1, SST-2, SST-3, and SST-4. Based on these splitting forms, together with the dimensionality of the associated local spin textures and the symmetry relations between different local sectors, we further classify HSP into three categories: HSP-1, HSP-2, and HSP-3. We illustrate these categories using tight-binding models and representative material examples, including SrFe$_2$Se$_2$O, USb, Sr$_2$Mn$_3$Sb$_2$O$_2$, PrFeAsO, and GdMn$_2$Si$_2$. A survey of the MAGNDATA database further identifies 133, 7, and 139 candidate noncollinear magnetic materials hosting HSP-1, HSP-2, and HSP-3, respectively. In addition, our symmetry analysis and first-principles calculation show that many of these materials can exhibit nonzero spin-related response tensors. These results establish a general framework for understanding HSP in noncollinear magnets and highlight their potential for spin-dependent functionalities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06787 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of HSP-1 in noncollinear magnets, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Phenomenological model illustrating HSP. (a) Top: magnetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a, b) Crystal structure and magnetic configuration of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. Naka, S. Hayami, H. Kusunose, Y . Yanagi, Y . Motome, and H. Seo, Spin current generation in organic antiferromagnets, Nat. Commun.10, 4305 (2019)

    2019

  2. [2]

    Shao, S.-H

    D.-F. Shao, S.-H. Zhang, M. Li, C.-B. Eom, and E. Y . Tsym- bal, Spin-neutral currents for spintronics, Nat. Commun.12, 7061 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    We demonstrate them in tight-binding models and repre- sentative materials, identify numerous candidates through a survey of the MAGNDATA database, and show that many HSP-hosting noncollinear magnets allow nonzero spin-related response tensors, linking hidden spin textures to observable spin-dependent phenomena. Spin-texture prototypes in noncollinear mag...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

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

    2021

  5. [5]

    M. Naka, Y . Motome, and H. Seo, Perovskite as a spin current generator, Phys. Rev. B103, 125114 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    ˇSmejkal, A

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

    2022

  7. [7]

    A. Bose, N. J. Schreiber, R. Jain, D.-F. Shao, H. P. Nair, J. Sun, X. S. Zhang, D. A. Muller, E. Y . Tsymbal, D. G. Schlom,et al., Tilted spin current generated by the collinear antiferromagnet ruthenium dioxide, Nat. Electron.5, 267 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    H. Bai, L. Han, X. Feng, Y . Zhou, R. Su, Q. Wang, L. Liao, W. Zhu, X. Chen, F. Pan,et al., Observation of spin splitting torque in a collinear antiferromagnet RuO 2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 197202 (2022)

    2022

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

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

    2024

  2. [10]

    Y . A. Bychkov and E. I. Rashba, Oscillatory effects and the magnetic susceptibility of carriers in inversion layers, J. Phys. C17, 6039 (1984)

    1984

  3. [11]

    Dresselhaus, Spin-orbit coupling effects in zinc blende structures, Phys

    G. Dresselhaus, Spin-orbit coupling effects in zinc blende structures, Phys. Rev.100, 580 (1955)

    1955

  4. [12]

    J. M. Riley, F. Mazzola, M. Dendzik, M. Michiardi, T. Takayama, L. Bawden, C. Granerød, M. Leandersson, T. Balasubramanian, M. Hoesch,et al., Direct observation of spin-polarized bulk bands in an inversion-symmetric semicon- ductor, Nat. Phys.10, 835 (2014)

    2014

  5. [13]

    Zhang, Q

    X. Zhang, Q. Liu, J.-W. Luo, A. J. Freeman, and A. Zunger, Hidden spin polarization in inversion-symmetric bulk crystals, Nat. Phys.10, 387 (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    Razzoli, T

    E. Razzoli, T. Jaouen, M.-L. Mottas, B. Hildebrand, G. Mon- ney, A. Pisoni, S. Muff, M. Fanciulli, N. C. Plumb, V . A. Ro- galev, V . N. Strocov, J. Mesot, M. Shi, J. H. Dil, H. Beck, and P. Aebi, Selective probing of hidden spin-polarized states in inversion-symmetric bulk Mo...

    2017

  7. [15]

    S.-L. Wu, K. Sumida, K. Miyamoto, K. Taguchi, T. Yoshikawa, A. Kimura, Y . Ueda, M. Arita, M. Na- gao, S. Watauchi,et al., Direct evidence of hidden local spin polarization in a centrosymmetric superconductor LaO0.55F0.45BiS2, Nat. Commun.8, 1919 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Gotlieb, C.-Y

    K. Gotlieb, C.-Y . Lin, M. Serbyn, W. Zhang, C. L. Small- wood, C. Jozwiak, H. Eisaki, Z. Hussain, A. Vishwanath, and A. Lanzara, Revealing hidden spin-momentum locking in a high-temperature cuprate superconductor, Science362, 1271 (2018). 6

    2018

  9. [17]

    L. Yuan, Q. Liu, X. Zhang, J.-W. Luo, S.-S. Li, and A. Zunger, Uncovering and tailoring hidden rashba spin-orbit splitting in centrosymmetric crystals, Nat. Commun.10, 906 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    J. Tu, X. B. Chen, X. Z. Ruan, Y . F. Zhao, H. F. Xu, Z. D. Chen, X. Q. Zhang, X. W. Zhang, J. Wu, L. He, Y . Zhang, R. Zhang, and Y . B. Xu, Direct observation of hidden spin polarization in 2H-MoTe2, Phys. Rev. B101, 035102 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    Huang, A

    Y . Huang, A. Yartsev, S. Guan, L. Zhu, Q. Zhao, Z. Yao, C. He, L. Zhang, J. Bai, J.-w. Luo, and X. Xu, Hidden spin polariza- tion in the centrosymmetric MoS 2 crystal revealed via ellipti- cally polarized terahertz emission, Phys. Rev. B102, 085205 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    H. J. Qian, X. Zhang, C. M. Liu, Q. Jiang, W. J. Liu, H. M. Zha, D. Y . Wang, X. P. Shen, M. Ye, Y . F. Guo, and S. Qiao, Layer-locked spin states revealed in the centrosym- metric nodal-line semimetal HfSiS, Phys. Rev. B104, 035145 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    Zhang, S

    K. Zhang, S. Zhao, Z. Hao, S. Kumar, E. F. Schwier, Y . Zhang, H. Sun, Y . Wang, Y . Hao, X. Ma, C. Liu, L. Wang, X. Wang, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, C. Liu, J. Mei, K. Shimada, C. Chen, and Q. Liu, Observation of spin-momentum-layer locking in a centrosymmetric crystal, Phys. Rev...

    2021

  14. [22]

    Gatti, D

    G. Gatti, D. Gos ´albez-Mart´ınez, S. Roth, M. Fanciulli, M. Za- cchigna, M. Kall¨ane, K. Rossnagel, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg,et al., Hidden bulk and surface effects in the spin polarization of the nodal-line semimetal ZrSiTe, Com- mun. Phys.4, 54 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Guan, J.-X

    S. Guan, J.-X. Xiong, Z. Wang, and J.-W. Luo, Progress of hidden spin polarization in inversion-symmetric crystals, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.65, 237301 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    Fanciulli, D

    M. Fanciulli, D. Bresteau, J. Gaudin, S. Dong, R. G ´eneaux, T. Ruchon, O. Tcherbakoff, J. Min ´ar, O. Heckmann, M. C. Richter, K. Hricovini, and S. Beaulieu, Ultrafast hidden spin polarization dynamics of bright and dark excitons in 2H- WSe2, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 066402 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Sheoran, S

    S. Sheoran, S. Monga, A. Phutela, and S. Bhattacharya, Cou- pled spin-valley, Rashba effect, and hidden spin polarization in WSi2N4 family, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.14, 1494 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Bhowal and N

    S. Bhowal and N. A. Spaldin, Electric toroidal dipole order and hidden spin polarization in ferroaxial materials, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 043141 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Arnoldi, S

    B. Arnoldi, S. L. Zachritz, S. Hedwig, M. Aeschlimann, O. L. Monti, and B. Stadtm ¨uller, Revealing hidden spin polariza- tion in centrosymmetric van der Waals materials on ultrafast timescales, Nat. Commun.15, 3573 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Lai, M.-R

    Y .-J. Lai, M.-R. Huang, H.-J. Duan, M. Yang, R.-Q. Wang, and M.-X. Deng, Current-induced nonequilibrium hidden spin polarization in topological Dirac semimetals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 106505 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    W. Chen, M. Gu, J. Li, P. Wang, and Q. Liu, Role of hidden spin polarization in nonreciprocal transport of antiferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 276601 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    L.-D. Yuan, X. Zhang, C. M. Acosta, and A. Zunger, Uncover- ing spin-orbit coupling-independent hidden spin polarization of energy bands in antiferromagnets, Nat. Commun.14, 5301 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Sheoran and S

    S. Sheoran and S. Bhattacharya, Multiple Zeeman-type hid- den spin splittings inPT-symmetric layered antiferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. B109, L020404 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Matsuda, H

    J. Matsuda, H. Watanabe, and R. Arita, Multiferroic collinear antiferromagnets with hidden altermagnetic spin splitting, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 226703 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Q. Liu, X. Zhang, H. Jin, K. Lam, J. Im, A. J. Freeman, and A. Zunger, Search and design of nonmagnetic centrosymmet- ric layered crystals with large local spin polarization, Phys. Rev. B91, 235204 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Zhang, P

    Y . Zhang, P. Liu, H. Sun, S. Zhao, H. Xu, and Q. Liu, Symmetry-assisted protection and compensation of hidden spin polarization in centrosymmetric systems, Chin. Phys. Lett.37, 087105 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Suzuki, M

    R. Suzuki, M. Sakano, Y . Zhang, R. Akashi, D. Morikawa, A. Harasawa, K. Yaji, K. Kuroda, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, et al., Valley-dependent spin polarization in bulk MoS 2 with broken inversion symmetry, Nat. Nanotechnol.9, 611 (2014)

    2014

  28. [36]

    Q. Liu, X. Zhang, and A. Zunger, Intrinsic circular polariza- tion in centrosymmetric stacks of transition-metal dichalco- genide compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 087402 (2015)

    2015

  29. [37]

    Gautier, J

    R. Gautier, J. M. Klingsporn, R. P. Van Duyne, and K. R. Poep- pelmeier, Optical activity from racemates, Nat. Mater.15, 591 (2016)

    2016

  30. [38]

    Manchon, J

    A. Manchon, J. ˇZelezn´y, I. M. Miron, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, A. Thiaville, K. Garello, and P. Gambardella, Current-induced spin-orbit torques in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic sys- tems, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 035004 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    D.-F. Shao, G. Gurung, S.-H. Zhang, and E. Y . Tsymbal, Dirac nodal line metal for topological antiferromagnetic spintronics, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 077203 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    C. Wang, Y . Gao, and D. Xiao, Intrinsic nonlinear Hall effect in antiferromagnetic tetragonal CuMnAs, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 277201 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    H. Liu, J. Zhao, Y .-X. Huang, W. Wu, X.-L. Sheng, C. Xiao, and S. A. Yang, Intrinsic second-order anomalous Hall effect and its application in compensated antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 277202 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    J. Wang, H. Zeng, W. Duan, and H. Huang, Intrinsic nonlinear Hall detection of the N´eel vector for two-dimensional antifer- romagnetic spintronics, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 056401 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    T. Nan, C. X. Quintela, J. Irwin, G. Gurung, D.-F. Shao, J. Gib- bons, N. Campbell, K. Song, S.-Y . Choi, L. Guo,et al., Con- trolling spin current polarization through non-collinear anti- ferromagnetism, Nat. Commun.11, 4671 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    Shao, S.-H

    D.-F. Shao, S.-H. Zhang, G. Gurung, W. Yang, and E. Y . Tsymbal, Nonlinear anomalous Hall effect for N´eel vector de- tection, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 067203 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Hu, D.-F

    S. Hu, D.-F. Shao, H. Yang, C. Pan, Z. Fu, M. Tang, Y . Yang, W. Fan, S. Zhou, E. Y . Tsymbal,et al., Efficient perpendicular magnetization switching by a magnetic spin Hall effect in a noncollinear antiferromagnet, Nat. Commun.13, 4447 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Gurung, M

    G. Gurung, M. Elekhtiar, Q.-Q. Luo, D.-F. Shao, and E. Y . Tsymbal, Nearly perfect spin polarization of noncollinear an- tiferromagnets, Nat. Commun.15, 10242 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Y .-P. Zhu, X. Chen, X.-R. Liu, Y . Liu, P. Liu, H. Zha, G. Qu, C. Hong, J. Li, Z. Jiang,et al., Observation of plaid-like spin splitting in a noncoplanar antiferromagnet, Nature626, 523 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    H. Zhu, J. Li, X. Chen, Y . Yu, and Q. Liu, Magnetic geome- try induced quantum geometry and nonlinear transports, Nat. Commun.16, 4882 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    Y . Liu, J. Li, P. Liu, and Q. Liu, Unconventional spin tex- tures emerging from a universal symmetry theory of spin- momentum locking, npj Quantum Mater.9, 69 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    A. B. Hellenes, T. Jungwirth, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, A. Chakraborty, J. Sinova, and L. ˇSmejkal,p-wave magnets, arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.01607 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Luo, J.-X

    X.-J. Luo, J.-X. Hu, and K. Law, Spin symmetry criteria for odd-parity magnets, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.05512 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    Hayami, Y

    S. Hayami, Y . Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Spontaneous an- tisymmetric spin splitting in noncollinear antiferromagnets 7 without spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B101, 220403 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Hayami, Mechanism of antisymmetric spin polarization in centrosymmetric multiple-qmagnets based on effective chiral bilinear and biquadratic spin cross products, Phys

    S. Hayami, Mechanism of antisymmetric spin polarization in centrosymmetric multiple-qmagnets based on effective chiral bilinear and biquadratic spin cross products, Phys. Rev. B105, 024413 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    Y . Yu, M. B. Lyngby, T. Shishidou, M. Roig, A. Kreisel, M. Weinert, B. M. Andersen, and D. F. Agterberg, Odd-parity magnetism driven by antiferromagnetic exchange, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 046701 (2025)

    2025

  47. [55]

    Q. Song, S. Stavri ´c, P. Barone, A. Droghetti, D. S. Anto- nenko, J. W. Venderbos, C. A. Occhialini, B. Ilyas, E. Ergec ¸en, N. Gedik,et al., Electrical switching of ap-wave magnet, Na- ture642, 64 (2025)

    2025

  48. [56]

    Yamada, M

    R. Yamada, M. T. Birch, P. R. Baral, S. Okumura, R. Nakano, S. Gao, M. Ezawa, T. Nomoto, J. Masell, Y . Ishihara,et al., A metallicp-wave magnet with commensurate spin helix, Nature 646, 837 (2025)

    2025

  49. [57]

    Ezawa, Almost half-quantized planar Hall effects inX- wave magnets withX=p,d,f,g,i, Phys

    M. Ezawa, Almost half-quantized planar Hall effects inX- wave magnets withX=p,d,f,g,i, Phys. Rev. B112, 235307 (2025)

    2025

  50. [58]

    Ezawa, Quantum geometry and elliptic optical dichroism inp-wave magnets, Phys

    M. Ezawa, Quantum geometry and elliptic optical dichroism inp-wave magnets, Phys. Rev. B112, 045302 (2025)

    2025

  51. [59]

    Ezawa, Third-order and fifth-order nonlinear spin-current generation ing-wave andi-wave altermagnets and perfectly nonreciprocal spin current inf-wave magnets, Phys

    M. Ezawa, Third-order and fifth-order nonlinear spin-current generation ing-wave andi-wave altermagnets and perfectly nonreciprocal spin current inf-wave magnets, Phys. Rev. B 111, 125420 (2025)

    2025

  52. [60]

    N. A. A. Pari, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, A. Chakraborty, L. ˇSmejkal, and J. Sinova, Nonrelativistic linear Edelstein ef- fect in helical EuIn2As2, Phys. Rev. B112, 024404 (2025)

    2025

  53. [61]

    Chakraborty, A

    A. Chakraborty, A. Birk Hellenes, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, T. Jungwirth, L. ˇSmejkal, and J. Sinova, Highly efficient non- relativistic Edelstein effect in nodalp-wave magnets, Nat. Commun.16, 7270 (2025)

    2025

  54. [62]

    A. H. Mayo, D.-A. Deaconu, H. Masuda, Y . Nii, H. Takahashi, R. V . Belosludov, S. Ishiwata, M. S. Bahramy, and Y . Onose, Band asymmetry-driven nonreciprocal electronic transport in a helimagnetic semimetalα-EuP 3, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci.122, e2405839122 (2025)

    2025

  55. [63]

    Gonz ´alez-Hern´andez, P

    R. Gonz ´alez-Hern´andez, P. Ritzinger, K. V`yborn`y, J. ˇZelezn`y, and A. Manchon, Non-relativistic torque and Edelstein effect in non-collinear magnets, Nat. Commun.15, 7663 (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    ˇZelezn´y, Y

    J. ˇZelezn´y, Y . Zhang, C. Felser, and B. Yan, Spin-polarized current in noncollinear antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 187204 (2017)

    2017

  57. [65]

    Brekke, P

    B. Brekke, P. Sukhachov, H. G. Giil, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, Minimal models and transport properties of unconventionalp- wave magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 236703 (2024)

    2024

  58. [66]

    Fukaya, K

    Y . Fukaya, K. Yada, and Y . Tanaka, Tunneling conductance in superconducting junctions withp-wave unconventional mag- nets breaking time-reversal symmetry, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn.38, 228 (2025)

    2025

  59. [67]

    P. Liu, J. Li, J. Han, X. Wan, and Q. Liu, Spin-group symme- try in magnetic materials with negligible spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. X12, 021016 (2022)

    2022

  60. [68]

    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

  61. [69]

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

    2024

  62. [70]

    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: To- ward a complete description of symmetries of magnetic or- ders, Phys. Rev. X14, 031039 (2024)

    2024

  63. [71]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Beyond conventional ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism: A phase with non- relativistic spin and crystal rotation symmetry, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031042 (2022)

    2022

  64. [72]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging research landscape of altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022). [72]See Supplementary Materials for comprehensive details on nonrelativistic spin polarization prototypes, classification and symmetry criteria of hidden spi...

    2022

  65. [73]

    S. V . Gallego, J. M. Perez-Mato, L. Elcoro, E. S. Tasci, R. M. Hanson, K. Momma, M. I. Aroyo, and G. Madariaga, MAGN- DATA: towards a database of magnetic structures. I. the com- mensurate case, J. Appl. Crystallogr.49, 1750 (2016)

    2016

  66. [74]

    S. V . Gallego, J. M. Perez-Mato, L. Elcoro, E. S. Tasci, R. M. Hanson, M. I. Aroyo, and G. Madariaga, MAGNDATA: to- wards a database of magnetic structures. II. the incommensu- rate case, J. Appl. Crystallogr.49, 1941 (2016)

    2016

  67. [75]

    Guo, M.-T

    H. Guo, M.-T. Fern ´andez-D´ıaz, A. C. Komarek, S. Huh, P. Adler, and M. Valldor, Long-range antiferromagnetic order on spin ladders SrFe2S2O and SrFe2Se2O as probed by neutron diffraction and m ¨ossbauer spectroscopy, Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 2017, 3829 (2017)

    2017

  68. [76]

    H. J. Zhao, X. Liu, Y . Wang, Y . Yang, L. Bellaiche, and Y . Ma, Zeeman effect in centrosymmetric antiferromagnetic semicon- ductors controlled by an electric field, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 187602 (2022)

    2022

  69. [77]

    Burlet, S

    P. Burlet, S. Quezel, J. Rossat-Mignod, and R. Horyn, Mag- netic ordering in uranium monophosphide, Solid State Com- mun.55, 1057 (1985)

    1985

  70. [78]

    Lander and P

    G. Lander and P. Burlet, On the magnetic structure of actinide monopnictides, Phys. B: Condens. Matter215, 7 (1995)

    1995

  71. [79]

    Samsel-Czekała, E

    M. Samsel-Czekała, E. Talik, P. de V . Du Plessis, R. Tro ´c, H. Misiorek, and C. Sułkowski, Electronic structure and mag- netic and transport properties of single-crystalline UN, Phys. Rev. B76, 144426 (2007)

    2007

  72. [80]

    Ranganatha, A short review on metal phosphide based 2D nanomaterials for high performance electrochemical superca- pacitors, Mater

    S. Ranganatha, A short review on metal phosphide based 2D nanomaterials for high performance electrochemical superca- pacitors, Mater. Res. Innovations.27, 93 (2023)

    2023

  73. [81]

    S. L. Brock, N. Raju, J. Greedan, and S. M. Kauzlarich, The magnetic structures of the mixed layer pnictide oxide com- pounds Sr2Mn3Pn2O2 (Pn=As, Sb), J. Alloys Compd.237, 9 (1996)

    1996

  74. [82]

    C.-W. Chen, W. Wang, V . Loganathan, S. V . Carr, L. W. Harriger, C. Georgen, A. H. Nevidomskyy, P. Dai, C.-L. Huang, and E. Morosan, Possible Mott transition in layered Sr2Mn3As2O2 single crystals, Phys. Rev. B99, 144423 (2019)

    2019

  75. [83]

    Zhang, Z

    Q. Zhang, Z. Diao, H. Cao, A. Saleheen, R. Chapai, D. Gong, S. Stadler, and R. Jin, Structure-property relationship in lay- ered BaMn2Sb2 and Ba2Mn3Sb2O2, Phys. Rev. B99, 184416 (2019)

    2019

  76. [84]

    J. Zhao, Q. Huang, C. de la Cruz, J. W. Lynn, M. D. Lumsden, Z. A. Ren, J. Yang, X. Shen, X. Dong, Z. Zhao, and P. Dai, Lattice and magnetic structures of PrFeAsO, PrFeAsO0.85F0.15, and PrFeAsO0.85, Phys. Rev. B78, 132504 (2008)

    2008

  77. [85]

    H. M. Alyahyaei and R. A. Jishi, Theoretical investigation of magnetic order in RFeAsO (R=Ce,Pr), Phys. Rev. B79, 064516 (2009)

    2009

  78. [86]

    J. Liu, B. Luo, R. Laskowski, and K. L. Yao, Noncollinear magnetic ground state of PrFeAsO, Europhys. Lett. EPL93, 17003 (2011). 8

    2011

  79. [87]

    Ert ¨urk, T

    E. Ert ¨urk, T. G ¨urel, A. V . Lukoyanov, G. Akc ¸ay, R. Eryi˘git, and V . Anisimov, Ab initio study on the rare-earth iron- pnictides RFeAsO (R=Pr, Nd, Sm, Gd) in the low- temperatureCmmaphase, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter26, 045501 (2014)

    2014

  80. [88]

    Coehoorn, K

    R. Coehoorn, K. H. J. Buschow, M. W. Dirken, and R. C. Thiel, Valence-electron contributions to the electric-field gra- dient in hcp metals and at Gd nuclei in intermetallic com- pounds with the ThCr 2Si2 structure, Phys. Rev. B42, 4645 (1990)

    1990

  81. [89]

    Gerasimov, P

    E. Gerasimov, P. Terentev, A. Gubkin, H. Fischer, D. Gor- bunov, and N. Mushnikov, Easy-plane magnetic anisotropy in layered GdMn2Si2 compound with easy-axis magnetocrys- talline anisotropy, J. Alloys Compd.818, 152902 (2020)

    2020

  82. [90]

    Nomoto, S

    T. Nomoto, S. Minami, Y . Yanagi, M.-T. Suzuki, T. Koret- sune, and R. Arita, High-throughput calculations of antiferro- magnets hosting anomalous transport phenomena, Phys. Rev. B109, 094435 (2024)

    2024

  83. [91]

    Elahi, G

    E. Elahi, G. Dastgeer, P. R. Sharma, S. Nisar, M. Suleman, M. W. Iqbal, M. Imran, M. Aslam, and A. Imran, A brief re- view on the spin valve magnetic tunnel junction composed of 2D materials, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.55, 423001 (2022)

    2022

  84. [92]

    Rado and V

    G. Rado and V . Folen, Magnetoelectric effects in antiferro- magnetics, J. Appl. Phys.33, 1126 (1962)

    1962

  85. [93]

    Sinova, S

    J. Sinova, S. O. Valenzuela, J. Wunderlich, C. H. Back, and T. Jungwirth, Spin Hall effects, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1213 (2015)

    2015

  86. [94]

    J. Qiao, J. Zhou, Z. Yuan, and W. Zhao, Calculation of intrinsic spin Hall conductivity by Wannier interpolation, Phys. Rev. B 98, 214402 (2018)

    2018

  87. [95]

    Zhang, Y

    Y . Zhang, Y . Sun, H. Yang, J. ˇZelezn´y, S. P. P. Parkin, C. Felser, and B. Yan, Strong anisotropic anomalous Hall ef- fect and spin Hall effect in the chiral antiferromagnetic com- pounds Mn3X (X=Ge, Sn, Ga, Ir, Rh, and Pt), Phys. Rev. B 95, 075128 (2017)

    2017

  88. [96]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Hafner, Ab initio molecular-dynamics sim- ulation of the liquid-metal–amorphous-semiconductor transi- tion in germanium, Phys. Rev. B49, 14251 (1994)

    1994

  89. [97]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨uller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  90. [98]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gra- dient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  91. [99]

    P. E. Bl ¨ochl, Projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  92. [100]

    S. L. Dudarev, G. A. Botton, S. Y . Savrasov, C. J. Humphreys, and A. P. Sutton, Electron-energy-loss spectra and the struc- tural stability of nickel oxide: An LSDA+U study, Phys. Rev. B57, 1505 (1998)

    1998

  93. [101]

    Herath, P

    U. Herath, P. Tavadze, X. He, E. Bousquet, S. Singh, F. Mu˜noz, and A. H. Romero, PyProcar: A Python library for electronic structure pre/post-processing, Comput. Phys. Com- mun.251, 107080 (2020)

    2020

  94. [102]

    L. Lang, P. Tavadze, A. Tellez, E. Bousquet, H. Xu, F. Mu˜noz, N. Vasquez, U. Herath, and A. H. Romero, Expanding PyPro- car for new features, maintainability, and reliability, Comput. Phys. Commun.297, 109063 (2024)

    2024

  95. [103]

    F. T. Cerasoli, A. R. Supka, A. Jayaraj, M. Costa, I. Siloi, J. Sławi´nska, S. Curtarolo, M. Fornari, D. Ceresoli, and M. B. Nardelli, Advanced modeling of materials with PAOFLOW 2.0: New features and software design, Comput. Mater. Sci. 200, 110828 (2021)

    2021

  96. [104]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Anomalous Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  97. [105]

    Xiao, M.-C

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

    2010

  98. [106]

    Etxebarria, J

    J. Etxebarria, J. M. Perez-Mato, E. S. Tasci, and L. Elcoro, Crystal tensor properties of magnetic materials with and with- out spin-orbit coupling. Application of spin point groups as approximate symmetries, Acta Cryst. A81, 317 (2025)

    2025

  99. [107]

    Z. Song, Z. Qi, C. Fang, Z. Fang, and H. Weng, A uni- fied symmetry classification of magnetic orders via spin space groups: Prediction of coplanar even-wave phases, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.08901 (2025)

    2025

  100. [108]

    Huang, Z

    S. Huang, Z. Qin, F. Zhan, D.-H. Xu, D.-S. Ma, and R. Wang, Light-induced odd-parity magnetism in conventional antifer- romagnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 126703 (2026)

    2026

  101. [109]

    T. Zhu, D. Zhou, H. Wang, S.-H. Wei, and J. Ruan, Floquet odd-parity collinear magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 126704 (2026)

    2026

  102. [110]

    Luo, J.-X

    X.-J. Luo, J.-X. Hu, M. Hu, and K. Law, Spin group sym- metry criteria for unconventional magnetism, arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.07643 (2026)

    2026

  103. [111]

    Zhang, J

    Y . Zhang, J. ˇZelezn`y, Y . Sun, J. Van Den Brink, and B. Yan, Spin Hall effect emerging from a noncollinear magnetic lattice without spin-orbit coupling, New J. Phys.20, 073028 (2018)

    2018

  104. [112]

    R.-C. Xiao, Y . Jin, Z.-F. Zhang, Z.-H. Feng, D.-F. Shao, and M. Tian, Tensorsymmetry: a package to get symmetry- adapted tensors disentangling spin-orbit coupling effect and establishing analytical relationship with magnetic order, Com- put. Phys. Commun.318, 109872 (2026). E...

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.