Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 77 references

In a model of Sr2RuO4, Hubbard U enhances the effective spin-orbit coupling while Hund's coupling J suppresses it, and a cheap embedding method (GRISB) reproduces the expensive DMFT results for most static and dynamic observables.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

GRISB with up to 21 bath orbitals reproduces DMFT results for spin-orbit-related observables in Sr2RuO4 and shows that U enhances while J suppresses the effective spin-orbit coupling.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection Solid GRISB-vs-DMFT benchmark for SOC observables in Sr2RuO4; the U/J trends are reproductions of known DMFT physics, and the finite-bath slope lacks a direct DMFT cross-check. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2608.00254 v1 pith:FGVLMK74 submitted 2026-07-31 cond-mat.str-el

Interplay of spin-orbit coupling, crystal field splitting and correlations: a ghost rotationally invariant slave boson treatment

Xue Sun , Walber Hugo Brito , Andreas Gleis , Ran Adler , Tsung-Han Lee , Gabriel Kotliar , Corey Peters This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-el PACS 71.27.+a71.70.Ej
keywords ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson methodGRISBspin-orbit coupling renormalizationHubbard UHund's coupling JSr2RuO4DMFT convergenceLifshitz transition
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that the ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson method (GRISB) — an embedding scheme that adds 'ghost' bath orbitals to the impurity problem — converges quickly to DMFT-level accuracy for static and many dynamical spin-orbit-related observables in a t2g Hubbard-Kanamori model of Sr2RuO4. Using GRISB to scan a wide parameter range, the authors find a clean dichotomy: the Hubbard interaction U enhances the effective spin-orbit coupling, while Hund's coupling J suppresses it. If correct, this makes GRISB a computationally cheap route to quantitative spin-orbit physics in correlated materials and gives a concrete rule for how interactions renormalize spin-orbit effects.

Core claim

The central claim is that in the three-orbital t2g model, correlations renormalize the local spin-orbit coupling anisotropically and oppositely with U and J: increasing U enhances the effective SOC (larger |⟨L·S⟩| and larger renormalized ξ extracted from the local Hamiltonian), whereas increasing J suppresses it for every filling studied. GRISB, with 15–21 bath orbitals, reproduces DMFT's static densities, off-diagonal occupancies, ⟨L·S⟩, and the Matsubara-axis self-energy; only real-axis spectral functions at finite frequency remain outside the method's reach. The paper also finds that the Γ-point spin-orbit splitting does not converge monotonically with bath size — RISB happens to match ex

What carries the argument

Ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson (GRISB) embedding: the lattice problem is represented through a rectangular renormalization matrix R and an impurity model with N_b bath ('ghost') orbitals, solved by exact diagonalization or DMRG at zero temperature. The effective spin-orbit coupling is read off either from the frequency-dependent self-energy (ξ_eff(iω_n)) or from a renormalized local Hamiltonian ĥ_loc built from R and Λ; both serve as diagnostics of how U and J renormalize SOC.

Load-bearing premise

The benchmarking treats finite-bath GRISB as an approximation to DMFT based on a conjecture that GRISB results converge to DMFT as the number of ghosts grows; if that convergence fails for SOC/CFS observables, the U/J renormalization trends lose their reference point.

What would settle it

Compute the effective spin-orbit coupling (e.g., ⟨L·S⟩ or ξ_eff at the lowest Matsubara frequency) with GRISB at N_b=30 or 45 for the same Sr2RuO4 parameters and compare with a converged DMFT-CTQMC solution at the same low temperature; if the difference does not decrease monotonically with N_b, or if the U-enhancement/J-suppression trend reverses at larger bath, the paper's central claim collapses.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • GRISB with a modest number of ghosts can replace DMFT-CTQMC for static SOC observables and for the low-frequency self-energy, cutting computational cost by orders of magnitude in this class of models.
  • The U-enhances/J-suppresses rule for effective SOC gives a qualitative prediction: materials with larger Hund's coupling will show weaker spin-orbit-induced band splitting and smaller L3/L2 branching ratios at fixed U.
  • The Lifshitz-transition strain in Sr2RuO4 moves from about -0.9% (noninteracting) to roughly -0.3% in GRISB, approaching the experimental -0.44%, indicating that correlations substantially soften the strain needed to drive the van Hove singularity to the Fermi level.
  • Static quantities such as orbital occupancies and ⟨L·S⟩ converge with only two ghosts (N_b=9), meaning cheap GRISB runs already capture the correlation-driven redistribution of electrons across orbitals.
  • The Γ-point splitting in GRISB does not converge to experiment as ghosts are added, so real-frequency quantities should be interpreted with care; RISB's apparent agreement there is coincidental error cancellation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the U/J dichotomy holds generally, it suggests a materials-design knob: in 4d and 5d oxides where SOC is already strong, increasing U will further enhance spin-orbit-driven gaps and anisotropies, while doping or chemistry that raises Hund's coupling will suppress them — a testable trend across the ruthenate and iridate families.
  • The paper's GRISB-vs-DMFT comparison was done at different temperatures (11.6 K vs 400 K); a direct same-temperature benchmark for the effective SOC would sharpen the method's claimed accuracy for dynamic quantities.
  • Because the effective SOC is extracted from the static local Hamiltonian ĥ_loc, one could extend the analysis to finite doping or strained heterostructures, mapping how strain and filling modulate the U/J competition in the same framework.
  • The convergence slowdown for the Γ-point splitting hints that real-axis poles in GRISB are not converged; a practical extension would be to use GRISB to bootstrap a DMFT calculation, initializing the impurity solver with the GRISB self-energy to reduce CTQMC cost.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper applies the ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson method (GRISB) to the three-orbital t2g Hubbard-Kanamori model with Sr2RuO4 tight-binding parameters derived from DFT-LDA and LQSGW. It benchmarks convergence in the number of bath ('ghost') orbitals (Nb = 3, 9, 15, 21) against DMFT with CTQMC for spectral functions, off-diagonal self-energies, and static spin-orbit observables, and against ARPES/XAS/quantum-oscillation data. The authors report that most static observables converge quickly, that GRISB reproduces DMFT-like low-energy spectra, and that the effective spin-orbit coupling is enhanced by U and suppressed by J. They also compute Fermi surfaces and the strain-driven Lifshitz transition. Two limitations are acknowledged in the text: the GRISB-to-DMFT convergence is stated to be conjectural (Sec. III.B.3), and the real-frequency Γ-point SOC splitting does not converge with Nb (Table III).

Significance. If the central trends are correct, GRISB would be a valuable low-cost embedding method for spin-orbit-coupling and crystal-field physics, especially for low-temperature parameter scans where DMFT-CTQMC is expensive. The paper's strengths are its independent benchmarks: parameters come from DFT/LQSGW or experiment, results are compared against DMFT/CTQMC and measured Fermi surfaces, and no fitting to the target observables is performed. The DMRG impurity-solver ordering study and the open discussion of QEPack/Portobello reproducibility are useful. However, the abstract's headline 'U enhances, J suppresses SOC' is validated against DMFT at only one or two parameter sets; the U/J curves otherwise rely on a finite bath whose convergence is shown to be incomplete for quasiparticle weights. The physical trend is plausible and testable, but its present support is contingent on additional convergence or DMFT checks.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, Sec. IV.C (Figs. 9 and 11)] The claim that 'U enhances the spin-orbit coupling while J suppresses it' is overstated relative to the data. Fig. 9 shows that for N=3 and N=4 the renormalized SOC ξ̃ is nearly unchanged by U, and Fig. 11 states that at the realistic N=4 point U leaves ξ̃ 'insensitive or slightly suppressed'. What survives as a general statement is an increase in |⟨L·S⟩| and in localization, not an increase in ξ̃ itself. Please qualify the abstract and conclusions accordingly, or give direct evidence that at the Sr2RuO4 point the relevant ξ̃ is enhanced by U.
  2. [Sec. IV.B/IV.C, Table II, Eq. (26)] The U/J slopes in Figs. 9–11 are computed at Nb=15 wherever they matter, but no DMFT benchmark exists at those parameters: Table I and Fig. 6 are single parameter sets, and Fig. 8 uses U=2.6 eV, Δ=0 rather than U=2.3 eV, Δ=0.11 eV. Meanwhile Table II shows Z_xy = 0.25→0.21 and Z_yz/xz = 0.33→0.29 between Nb=15 and Nb=21 at U=2.3, J=0.4. Since Eq. (26) involves √Z, ξ̃_loc has not been demonstrated to be converged in the same regime, and Sec. III.B.3 explicitly says GRISB→DMFT convergence is only conjectured. Please provide Nb=21 (or larger) results at two U and two J values along the Fig. 11 curves, or direct DMFT estimates of ξ̃_loc at the endpoints, to rule out a finite-bath artifact in the central trend.
  3. [Sec. IV.B and Table III] The general statement that 'the addition of ghosts systematically improves the RISB predictions' is not supported for the Γ-point splitting: Table III moves from 0.11 eV (RISB) to 0.04–0.07 eV (GRISB) and does not converge with Nb, whereas DMFT and experiment are near 0.11–0.13 eV. The authors acknowledge this, and I do not treat it as a fatal flaw. However, the abstract's 'GRISB converges quickly for most observables' should be explicitly qualified to exclude real-frequency quantities such as this splitting, which is a central observable of the paper.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. II, after Eq. (5)] 'the self energy Σ (Eqs. 22 and 22)' should be 'Eqs. (22) and (23)'.
  2. [Sec. IV.B] Typo: 'frequnecy' should be 'frequency'. Also, the caption of Fig. 6 could clarify which GRISB spectra are LDA vs LQSGW-based.
  3. [Figs. 9–11] Please state explicitly in the text that the qualitative U/J trends for realistic N=4 are from Nb=15 GRISB and that Fig. 11 compares RISB (Nb=3) with GRISB (Nb=15); the current captions are ambiguous about the bath sizes used for the trend lines.
  4. [Sec. IV.C] The sentence 'However, at half-filling, the atomic gap is Δat=U+2J, which contradicts our findings' is confusing. Clarify that the contradiction is with the naive atomic-gap expectation, not with the numerical result.
  5. [Table III] The row 'ξ̄Γ LDA/GW' is ambiguous: the Nb=3 value is 0.11 and DMFT is listed as ∼0.11. State explicitly whether LDA and LQSGW give identical values or whether only one is shown.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: GRISB results are benchmarked against independent DMFT/CTQMC and experimental data, and the U/J trends are computed outputs rather than fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—that GRISB reproduces DMFT-quality SOC observables and that U enhances while J suppresses the effective spin-orbit coupling—are not obtained by fitting to the target observables. The interaction parameters U, J, ξ, and Δ are taken from DFT-LDA/LQSGW, the literature, or experimental estimates, and the effective SOC quantities (Eqs. 22–26) are defined directly from the self-energy or renormalized local Hamiltonian, not constructed to reproduce the benchmark values. The benchmark itself uses independent anchors: DMFT with CTQMC (Figs. 6–8, Table I), prior DMFT results [36], and experimental Fermi surface and quasiparticle-weight data (Fig. 13, Tables II–III). The self-citations to the GRISB framework (Refs. 12–17) are foundational in the sense that the method is the tool, but the paper does not rely on a self-cited uniqueness theorem or on an unverified claim to force its conclusions; rather, it explicitly tests the method against external DMFT and experiment. The paper's own admission that GRISB→DMFT convergence is 'conjectured' and the incomplete bath convergence of Z in Table II are genuine robustness/correctness caveats, but they are not circularity: the derivation chain does not reduce a prediction to its own input. No step in the paper equates a claimed prediction with a fitted parameter or with a definition of the same quantity. Hence no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters were fitted to the target observables: U, J, xi, Delta, and strain ratios are taken from DFT/LQSGW, prior literature, or experiment. The main load-bearing assumptions are the GRISB->DMFT convergence conjecture, the model-to-material mapping, and solver convergence. No new entities are introduced; ghost orbitals are part of the pre-existing GRISB method.

axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The GRISB saddle-point free energy (Eq. 6) and self-consistency equations (Eqs. 9-14) produce the correct embedding solution, and as the number of bath orbitals tends to infinity GRISB converges to DMFT.
    Sec. III.B.3 calls the DMFT limit 'conjectured on the basis of an extensive numerical investigation'; this paper's entire benchmarking program interprets finite-Nb GRISB as an approximation to DMFT.
  • domain assumption The three-orbital t2g Hubbard-Kanamori model with LDA/LQSGW tight-binding parameters faithfully represents Sr2RuO4's low-energy physics.
    Secs. II and III.B.1; all material-specific conclusions depend on this model reduction.
  • domain assumption Tetragonal symmetry fixes xi_x=xi_y and Delta_xz=Delta_yz, so the local one-body matrix has the structure of Eq. (5).
    Used to define effective SOC observables (Eqs. 22-25) and the Gamma-point splitting.
  • domain assumption DMRG/Lanczos computations of the GRISB embedding ground state are converged for all parameter sets, not only the Nb=15 test case validated in Sec. III.B.2.
    Convergence was demonstrated for one representative model via energy errors and bond dimensions; the paper assumes similar quality elsewhere.
  • domain assumption Maximum-entropy analytic continuation of the DMFT off-diagonal Green's function (Eqs. 30-31) yields reliable real-frequency spectra.
    DMFT spectra in Fig. 6(e) rely on this continuation; no continuation error estimate is given.
  • domain assumption The experimental Poisson ratios used to convert uniaxial strain (Sec. V.C) remain valid at the computed strain range.
    Values from Ref. [73] at 4 K are used for all strains including near the Lifshitz transition.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Interplay of spin-orbit coupling, crystal field splitting and correlations: a ghost rotationally invariant slave boson treatment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FGVLMK74

@misc{pith2026260800254,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Interplay of spin-orbit coupling, crystal field splitting and correlations: a ghost rotationally invariant slave boson treatment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FGVLMK74}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00254}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We investigate the interplay of spin-orbit coupling, crystal field splittings, and electronic correlations in the $t_{2g}$ Hubbard-Kanamori model within the recently formulated ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson method (GRISB). In particular, we study a tight binding model of Sr$_2$RuO$_4$ with parameters extracted from density functional theory and linearized quasiparticle self-consistent GW (LQSGW) calculations; we study the behavior of different physical quantities as the number of ghosts increases to examine the convergence of GRISB to dynamical mean field theory (DMFT) and experimental results; and we leverage the ability of GRISB to investigate the model over a wide range of parameters at low temperature. In particular, we examine both static and dynamical observables driven by the spin orbit coupling (SOC) and study how they vary as a function of the Hubbard $U$ and Hund's coupling $J$. GRISB converges quickly for most of these observables, and the calculations reveal the following: $U$ enhances the spin-orbit coupling while $J$ suppresses it. We also study the shape of the Fermi surface within different methodologies, and examine the Lifshitz transition which takes place as a function of strain in this material.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00254 by Andreas Gleis, Corey Peters, Gabriel Kotliar, Ran Adler, Tsung-Han Lee, Walber Hugo Brito, Xue Sun.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Sketch of the different chain orderings of the bath in the star geometry. The large circle denotes the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: (a) Relative error in energy versus discarded weight [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Spectral functions of the three-orbital model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Quasiparticle weight [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Comparison of off-diagonal components of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Renormalized spin-orbit coupling of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Renormalized spin-orbit coupling of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Renormalized crystal field splitting (top panel) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: Fermi surface of Sr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: Fermi surfaces of Sr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    We compute the multiorbital model from DFT-LDA or LQSGW calcula- tions of Sr 2RuO4

    Realistic treatment of the band structure In order to solve the mean field equations, we require a model of the non-interacting latticeϵ k. We compute the multiorbital model from DFT-LDA or LQSGW calcula- tions of Sr 2RuO4. The main results are based on DFT- LDA, except for those labeled by GW explicitly. We uti- lize Wien2k [41] (1000kpoints) for the DFT...

  2. [2]

    These can be effi- ciently computed using the density matrix renormaliza- tion group (DMRG); its application to GRISB problems is discussed in this section

    Solving the impurity model with DMRG Solving the GRISB equations requires the computa- tion of static zero-temperature expectation values of an impurity model with a finite bath. These can be effi- ciently computed using the density matrix renormaliza- tion group (DMRG); its application to GRISB problems is discussed in this section. The use of the densit...

  3. [3]

    1: Sketch of the different chain orderings of the bath in the star geometry

    Solving the equations with DMFT GRISB is a quantum embedding method which de- scribes the environment of a site in terms of a bath with a 6 FIG. 1: Sketch of the different chain orderings of the bath in the star geometry. The large circle denotes the impurity, containing 6 fermionic spin-orbitals. Each small circle denotes a spin-orbital of the bath, and ...

    2024

  4. [4]

    Liebsch and H

    A. Liebsch and H. Ishida, Subband Filling and Mott Transition in Ca 2−xSrxRuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 216403 (2007)

    2007

  5. [5]

    Martins, M

    C. Martins, M. Aichhorn, and S. Biermann, Coulomb correlations in 4d and 5d oxides from first principles—or how spin–orbit materials choose their effective orbital de- generacies, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter29, 263001 (2017)

    2017

  6. [7]

    Liebsch and A

    A. Liebsch and A. Lichtenstein, Photoemission Quasi- particle Spectra of Sr 2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 1591 (2000)

    2000

  7. [8]

    X. Cao, Y. Lu, P. Hansmann, and M. W. Haverkort, Tree tensor-network real-time multiorbital impurity solver: Spin-orbit coupling and correlation functions in Sr2RuO4, Phys. Rev. B104, 115119 (2021)

    2021

  8. [9]

    X. Deng, K. Haule, and G. Kotliar, Transport properties of metallic ruthenates: A DFT + DMFT investigation, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 256401 (2016)

    2016

  9. [10]

    Zhang, E

    G. Zhang, E. Gorelov, E. Sarvestani, and E. Pavarini, Fermi Surface of Sr 2RuO4: Spin-Orbit and Anisotropic Coulomb Interaction Effects, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 106402 (2016)

    2016

  10. [11]

    M. Kim, J. Mravlje, M. Ferrero, O. Parcollet, and A. Georges, Spin-Orbit Coupling and Electronic Correla- tions in Sr 2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 126401 (2018)

    2018

  11. [12]

    Lanat` a, T.-H

    N. Lanat` a, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, and V. Dobrosavljevi´ c, Emergent bloch excitations in mott matter, Phys. Rev. B96, 195126 (2017)

    2017

  12. [13]

    Tamai, M

    A. Tamai, M. Zingl, E. Rozbicki, E. Cappelli, S. Ricc` o, A. de la Torre, S. McKeown Walker, F. Y. Bruno, P. D. C. King, W. Meevasana, M. Shi, M. Radovi´ c, N. C. Plumb, A. S. Gibbs, A. P. Mackenzie, C. Berthod, H. U. R. Strand, M. Kim, A. Georges, and F. Baum- berger, High-Resolution Photoemission on Sr 2RuO4 Re- veals Correlation-Enhanced Effective Spin...

    2019

  13. [14]

    A. K. Maurya and A. Medhi, Hund’s coupling and spin-orbit interaction in the three-band hubbard model: Anomalous mass renormalization in sr 2ruo4, Phys. Rev. B107, 125131 (2023). 14

    2023

  14. [15]

    J. I. Facio, J. Mravlje, L. Pourovskii, P. S. Cornaglia, and V. Vildosola, Spin-orbit and anisotropic strain effects on the electronic correlations in Sr 2RuO4, Phys. Rev. B98, 085121 (2018)

    2018

  15. [16]

    T.-H. Lee, C. Melnick, R. Adler, N. Lanat` a, and G. Kotliar, Accuracy of ghost-rotationally-invariant slave-boson theory for multiorbital hubbard models and realistic materials, Phys. Rev. B108, 245147 (2023)

    2023

  16. [17]

    M. S. Frank, T.-H. Lee, G. Bhattacharyya, P. K. H. Tsang, V. L. Quito, V. Dobrosavljevi´ c, O. Christiansen, and N. Lanat` a, Quantum embedding description of the anderson lattice model with the ghost gutzwiller approx- imation, Phys. Rev. B104, L081103 (2021)

    2021

  17. [18]

    Lanat` a, Operatorial formulation of the ghost rota- tionally invariant slave-boson theory, Phys

    N. Lanat` a, Operatorial formulation of the ghost rota- tionally invariant slave-boson theory, Phys. Rev. B105, 045111 (2022)

    2022

  18. [19]

    T.-H. Lee, N. Lanat` a, and G. Kotliar, Accuracy of ghost rotationally invariant slave-boson and dynamical mean field theory as a function of the impurity-model bath size, Phys. Rev. B107, L121104 (2023)

    2023

  19. [20]

    Georges, L

    A. Georges, L. d. Medici, and J. Mravlje, Strong Cor- relations from Hund’s Coupling, Annual Review of Con- densed Matter Physics4, 137 (2013)

    2013

  20. [21]

    Giuli, T.-H

    S. Giuli, T.-H. Lee, Y.-X. Yao, G. Kotliar, A. E. Ruckenstein, O. Gingras, and N. Lanat` a, Unify- ing variational and dynamical quantum embedding: From ghost gutzwiller approximation to dynamical mean-field theory, arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.20559 10.48550/arXiv.2603.20559 (2026), arXiv:2603.20559 [cond-mat.str-el]

    doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.20559 2026

  21. [22]

    A. P. Mackenzie, S. R. Julian, A. J. Diver, G. J. McMul- lan, M. P. Ray, G. G. Lonzarich, Y. Maeno, S. Nishizaki, and T. Fujita, Quantum Oscillations in the Layered Per- ovskite Superconductor Sr 2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 3786 (1996)

    1996

  22. [23]

    Bergemann, S

    C. Bergemann, S. R. Julian, A. P. Mackenzie, S. NishiZaki, and Y. Maeno, Detailed Topography of the Fermi Surface of Sr 2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2662 (2000)

    2000

  23. [24]

    Bergemann, A

    C. Bergemann, A. P. Mackenzie, S. R. Julian, D. M. Forsythe, and E. Ohmichi, Quasi-two-dimensional Fermi liquid properties of the unconventional superconductor Sr2RuO4, Advances in Physics52, 639 (2003)

    2003

  24. [25]

    Mravlje, M

    J. Mravlje, M. Aichhorn, T. Miyake, K. Haule, G. Kotliar, and A. Georges, Coherence-Incoherence Crossover and the Mass-Renormalization Puzzles in Sr2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 096401 (2011)

    2011

  25. [26]

    de’ Medici, J

    L. de’ Medici, J. Mravlje, and A. Georges, Janus-Faced Influence of Hund’s Rule Coupling in Strongly Correlated Materials, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 256401 (2011)

    2011

  26. [27]

    Maeno, K

    Y. Maeno, K. Yoshida, H. Hashimoto, S. Nishizaki, S. Ikeda, M. Nohara, T. Fujita, A. Mackenzie, N. Hussey, J. Bednorz, and F. Lichtenberg, Two-Dimensional Fermi Liquid Behavior of the Superconductor Sr2RuO4, journal of the physical society of japan66, 1405 (1997)

    1997

  27. [28]

    T. M. Rice and M. Sigrist, Sr 2RuO4: an electronic ana- logue of 3He?, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter7, L643 (1995)

    1995

  28. [29]

    Stricker, J

    D. Stricker, J. Mravlje, C. Berthod, R. Fittipaldi, A. Vec- chione, A. Georges, and D. van der Marel, Optical Re- sponse of Sr 2RuO4 Reveals Universal Fermi-Liquid Scal- ing and Quasiparticles Beyond Landau Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 087404 (2014)

    2014

  29. [30]

    standard

    defined by Hi,int =U X α niα↑niα↓ + (U−2J) X α<β,σ niασniβ¯σ+ (U−3J) X α<β,σ niασniβσ −J X α<β (d† iα↑diα↓d† iβ↓diβ↑ +H.c.) +J X α<β (d† iα↑d† iα↓diβ↓diβ↑ +H.c.), (2) wheren i is the particle number operator,UandJare coupling constants. Both spin-orbit coupling and crys- tal field splitting are local one-body terms which can be written as Hi,soc = i 2 X α...

  30. [31]

    A. P. Mackenzie and Y. Maeno, The superconductivity of Sr 2RuO4 and the physics of spin-triplet pairing, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 657 (2003)

    2003

  31. [32]

    Maeno, H

    Y. Maeno, H. Hashimoto, K. Yoshida, S. Nishizaki, T. Fujita, J. G. Bednorz, and F. Lichtenberg, Supercon- ductivity in a layered perovskite without copper, Nature 372, 532 (1994)

    1994

  32. [33]

    A. P. Mackenzie, T. Scaffidi, C. W. Hicks, and Y. Maeno, Even odder after twenty-three years: the superconduct- ing order parameter puzzle of sr2ruo4, npj Quantum Ma- terials2, 40 (2017)

    2017

  33. [34]

    Kanamori, Electron Correlation and Ferromagnetism of Transition Metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

    J. Kanamori, Electron Correlation and Ferromagnetism of Transition Metals, Progress of Theoretical Physics30, 275 (1963)

    1963

  34. [35]

    Horvat, R

    A. Horvat, R. ˇZitko, and J. Mravlje, Spin-orbital cou- pling in three-orbital kanamori impurity model and its relevance for transition-metal oxides, Phys. Rev. B96, 085122 (2017)

    2017

  35. [36]

    Triebl, G

    R. Triebl, G. J. Kraberger, J. Mravlje, and M. Aichhorn, Spin-orbit coupling and correlations in three-orbital sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B98, 205128 (2018)

    2018

  36. [37]

    Carra, B

    P. Carra, B. T. Thole, M. Altarelli, and X. Wang, X- ray circular dichroism and local magnetic fields, Physical Review Letters70, 694 (1993)

    1993

  37. [38]

    van der Laan and B

    G. van der Laan and B. T. Thole, Strong magnetic x-ray dichroism in 2p absorption spectra, Physical Review B 43, 13401 (1991)

    1991

  38. [39]

    Lechermann, A

    F. Lechermann, A. Georges, G. Kotliar, and O. Parcol- let, Rotationally invariant slave-boson formalism and mo- mentum dependence of the quasiparticle weight, Phys. Rev. B76, 155102 (2007)

    2007

  39. [40]

    M. Kim, J. Mravlje, M. Ferrero, O. Parcollet, and A. Georges, Spin-orbit coupling and electronic correla- tions in sr 2ruo4, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 126401 (2018)

    2018

  40. [41]

    Lee, QEPACK: Quantum embedding package (un- published), https://gitlab.com/henhans/qepack

    T.-H. Lee, QEPACK: Quantum embedding package (un- published), https://gitlab.com/henhans/qepack

  41. [42]

    Lanczos, An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral op- erators, J

    C. Lanczos, An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral op- erators, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. B45, 255 (1950)

    1950

  42. [43]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863 (1992)

    1992

  43. [44]

    Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011), january 2011 Special Issue

    U. Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011), january 2011 Special Issue

    2011

  44. [45]

    Blaha, K

    P. Blaha, K. Schwarz, G. Madsen, D. Kvasnicka, and J. Luitz, WIEN2k: An Augmented Plane Wave plus Lo- cal Orbitals Program for Calculating Crystal Properties, Technische Universit¨ at Wien, Wien28(2001)

    2001

  45. [46]

    Kuneˇ s, R

    J. Kuneˇ s, R. Arita, P. Wissgott, A. Toschi, H. Ikeda, and K. Held, Wien2wannier: From linearized augmented plane waves to maximally localized wannier functions, Computer Physics Communications181, 1888 (2010)

    2010

  46. [47]

    A. A. Mostofi, J. R. Yates, G. Pizzi, Y.-S. Lee, I. Souza, D. Vanderbilt, and N. Marzari, An updated version of wannier90: A tool for obtaining maximally-localised wannier functions, Computer Physics Communications 185, 2309 (2014)

    2014

  47. [48]

    Kutepov, S

    A. Kutepov, S. Y. Savrasov, and G. Kotliar, Ground- state properties of simple elements from gw calculations, Phys. Rev. B80, 041103 (2009). 15

    2009

  48. [49]

    Kutepov, K

    A. Kutepov, K. Haule, S. Y. Savrasov, and G. Kotliar, Electronic structure of pu and am metals by self- consistent relativisticgwmethod, Phys. Rev. B85, 155129 (2012)

    2012

  49. [50]

    Kutepov, V

    A. Kutepov, V. Oudovenko, and G. Kotliar, Linearized self-consistent quasiparticle gw method: Application to semiconductors and simple metals, Computer Physics Communications219, 407 (2017)

    2017

  50. [51]

    Garc ´ ıa, K

    D. Garc ´ ıa, K. Hallberg, and M. J. Rozenberg, Den- sity matrix renormalization group as a dynamical mean field theory impurity solver, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 246403 (2004)

    2004

  51. [52]

    Nishimoto, E

    T. Nishimoto, E. Jeckelmann, F. Gebhard, and R. M. Noack, Density-matrix renormalization group for the mott-hubbard transition in infinite dimensions, Phys. Rev. B72, 085117 (2005)

    2005

  52. [53]

    Jeckelmann, Dynamical density-matrix renormalization-group method, Phys

    E. Jeckelmann, Dynamical density-matrix renormalization-group method, Phys. Rev. B66, 045114 (2002)

    2002

  53. [54]

    Y. N. nez Fern´ andez and K. Hallberg, Solving the multi- site and multi-orbital dynamical mean field theory using density matrix renormalization, Frontiers in Physics6, 13 (2018)

    2018

  54. [55]

    Bauernfeind, M

    D. Bauernfeind, M. Zingl, R. Triebl, M. Aichhorn, and H. G. Evertz, Fork tensor product states – efficient three orbital real time dmft solver, arXiv:1612.05587 (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  55. [56]

    H. Zhai, H. R. Larsson, S. Lee, Z.-H. Cui, T. Zhu, C. Sun, L. Peng, R. Peng, K. Liao, J. T¨ olle, J. Yang, S. Li, and G. K.-L. Chan, Block2: A comprehensive open source framework to develop and apply state-of-the-art DMRG algorithms in electronic structure and beyond., The Jour- nal of chemical physics159 23(2023)

    2023

  56. [57]

    Legeza and J

    O. Legeza and J. S´ olyom, Optimizing the density-matrix renormalization group method using quantum informa- tion entropy, Phys. Rev. B68, 195116 (2003)

    2003

  57. [58]

    Rissler, R

    J. Rissler, R. M. Noack, and S. R. White, Measuring orbital interaction using quantum information theory, Chemical Physics323, 519 (2006)

    2006

  58. [59]

    Barcza, O

    G. Barcza, O. Legeza, K. H. Marti, and M. Reiher, Quantum-information analysis of electronic states of dif- ferent molecular structures, Phys. Rev. A83, 012508 (2011)

    2011

  59. [60]

    Ganahl, M

    M. Ganahl, M. Aichhorn, H. G. Evertz, P. Thunstr¨ om, K. Held, and F. Verstraete, Efficient dmft impurity solver using real-time dynamics with matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B92, 155132 (2015)

    2015

  60. [61]

    Linden, M

    N.-O. Linden, M. Zingl, C. Hubig, O. Parcollet, and U. Schollw¨ ock, Imaginary-time matrix product state im- purity solver in a real material calculation: Spin-orbit coupling in sr2ruo4, Phys. Rev. B101, 041101(R) (2020)

    2020

  61. [62]

    Weichselbaum, Non-abelian symmetries in tensor net- works: A quantum symmetry space approach, Annals of Physics327, 2972 (2012)

    A. Weichselbaum, Non-abelian symmetries in tensor net- works: A quantum symmetry space approach, Annals of Physics327, 2972 (2012)

    2012

  62. [63]

    Weichselbaum, X-symbols for non-abelian symmetries in tensor networks, Phys

    A. Weichselbaum, X-symbols for non-abelian symmetries in tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023385 (2020)

    2020

  63. [64]

    Weichselbaum, QSpace - An open-source tensor li- brary for Abelian and non-Abelian symmetries, SciPost Phys

    A. Weichselbaum, QSpace - An open-source tensor li- brary for Abelian and non-Abelian symmetries, SciPost Phys. Codebases , 40 (2024)

    2024

  64. [65]

    Gleis, J.-W

    A. Gleis, J.-W. Li, and J. von Delft, Projector formalism for kept and discarded spaces of matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B106, 195138 (2022)

    2022

  65. [66]

    Gleis, J.-W

    A. Gleis, J.-W. Li, and J. von Delft, Controlled bond ex- pansion for density matrix renormalization group ground state search at single-site costs, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 246402 (2023)

    2023

  66. [67]

    J.-W. Li, A. Gleis, and J. von Delft, Time-dependent variational principle with controlled bond expansion for matrix product states, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 026401 (2024)

    2024

  67. [68]

    Hubig, I

    C. Hubig, I. P. McCulloch, U. Schollw¨ ock, and F. A. Wolf, Strictly single-site dmrg algorithm with subspace expansion, Phys. Rev. B91, 155115 (2015)

    2015

  68. [69]

    Stoudenmire and S

    E. Stoudenmire and S. R. White, Studying two- dimensional systems with the density matrix renormal- ization group, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics3, 111 (2012)

    2012

  69. [70]

    Gleis, J.-W

    A. Gleis, J.-W. Li, and J. von Delft, Reply to comment on ”controlled bond expansion for density matrix renor- malization group ground state search at single-site costs” (2025), arXiv:2501.12291 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  70. [71]

    Y. Lu, M. H¨ oppner, O. Gunnarsson, and M. W. Haverkort, Efficient real-frequency solver for dynamical mean-field theory, Phys. Rev. B90, 085102 (2014)

    2014

  71. [72]

    Y. Lu, X. Cao, P. Hansmann, and M. W. Haverkort, Natural-orbital impurity solver and projection approach for green’s functions, Phys. Rev. B100, 115134 (2019)

    2019

  72. [73]

    Kohn and G

    L. Kohn and G. E. Santoro, Efficient mapping for ander- son impurity problems with matrix product states, Phys. Rev. B104, 014303 (2021)

    2021

  73. [74]

    Adler, C

    R. Adler, C. Melnick, and G. Kotliar, Portobello - quan- tum embedding in correlated materials made accessible, Computer Physics Communications294, 108907 (2024)

    2024

  74. [75]

    Accelerated impurity solver for dmft and its diagram- matic extensions, Computer Physics Communications 267, 108075 (2021)

    2021

  75. [76]

    C. N. Veenstra, Z.-H. Zhu, M. Raichle, B. M. Lud- brook, A. Nicolaou, B. Slomski, G. Landolt, S. Kittaka, Y. Maeno, J. H. Dil, I. S. Elfimov, M. W. Haverkort, and A. Damascelli, Spin-orbital entanglement and the breakdown of singlets and triplets in sr 2ruo4 revealed by spin- and angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 127002 (2014)

    2014

  76. [77]

    M. E. Barber, F. Lechermann, S. V. Streltsov, S. L. Sko- rnyakov, S. Ghosh, B. J. Ramshaw, N. Kikugawa, D. A. Sokolov, A. P. Mackenzie, C. W. Hicks, and I. I. Mazin, Role of correlations in determining the Van Hove strain in Sr2RuO4, Phys. Rev. B100, 245139 (2019)

    2019

  77. [78]

    Kotliar and A

    G. Kotliar and A. E. Ruckenstein, New Functional In- tegral Approach to Strongly Correlated Fermi Systems: The Gutzwiller Approximation as a Saddle Point, Phys. Rev. Lett.57, 1362 (1986)

    1986

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.