Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Two nearly degenerate states in the triangular-lattice J1-J2 Heisenberg model are distinct competing phases, not a topological signature of a single Z2 spin liquid.

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 ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 23:00 UTC pith:FRSMGGDO

load-bearing objection Solid static evidence that the two states are competing phases rather than topological sectors; the Dirac-vs-Z2 spectral assignment rests on a non-variational DDMRG that needs an HE-state convergence check. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.14892 v2 pith:FRSMGGDO submitted 2026-02-16 cond-mat.str-el

Competing states in the S=1/2 triangular-lattice J₁-J₂ Heisenberg model: a dynamical density-matrix renormalization group study

Shengtao Jiang , Steven R. White , Steven A. Kivelson , Hong-Chen Jiang This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-el MSC 82B2082B2682B27 PACS 75.10.Jm75.10.Kt75.40.Gb
keywords triangular latticeJ1-J2 Heisenberg modelquantum spin liquidDirac spin liquidZ2 spin liquiddynamical density-matrix renormalization groupspin structure factorcompeting phases
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.

This paper tackles a long-standing dispute about the intermediate J2 regime of the spin-1/2 triangular-lattice Heisenberg antiferromagnet, where earlier work disagreed on whether the ground state is a gapped Z2 spin liquid, a gapless Dirac spin liquid, or a weakly magnetic ordered phase. Using an improved dynamical density-matrix renormalization group (DDMRG) method, the authors compute the dynamical spin structure factor on cylinders of circumference 6 through 9 and uncover two distinct variational states at J2=0.12. The higher-energy state shows comparable low-energy spectral weight at both the K and M points, consistent with a Dirac quantum spin liquid. The lower-energy state has a single dominant peak at K, resembling the magnetically ordered 120-degree phase at J2=0, and is likely a gapped Z2 spin liquid or a weakly ordered state near a quantum critical point. The authors conclude that the previously inferred two-fold degeneracy does not reflect the topological degeneracy of a single gapped Z2 spin liquid; instead, two thermodynamically distinct states compete, and determining the true ground state will require still wider cylinders.

Core claim

At J2=0.12, the two nearly degenerate variational states on triangular-lattice cylinders are not two topological sectors of one Z2 spin liquid but are distinct, locally distinguishable phases. The higher-energy (HE) state exhibits a diffuse spin structure factor with comparable intensities at K and M, matching the prediction for a gapless Dirac spin liquid; the lower-energy (LE) state has a dominant K-peak and a sign pattern similar to the 120-degree ordered state, making it either a gapped Z2 spin liquid or a weakly magnetically ordered version of the J2=0 phase. The existence of a metastable HE state on odd-width cylinders, along with qualitative differences in bond correlations and long-r

What carries the argument

The central instrument is an improved dynamical density-matrix renormalization group (DDMRG) algorithm that solves the correction-vector equation by state-averaging a small number of targets with carefully chosen weights: sqrt(eta) on the source state S|0> and eta on the real part |X(omega)>, while keeping |Y(omega)> fully weighted. This balancing stabilizes convergence and reduces the distortion from the non-variational approximation that replaces H^2 by (H_proj)^2. The dynamical spin structure factor S(q,omega) computed with this method is the diagnostic: a peak at the K point alone indicates a magnetic or gapped Z2 phase, while comparable low-energy intensity at both K and M is the signat

Load-bearing premise

The central interpretation relies on the improved DDMRG weighting scheme (weights sqrt(eta) on S|0> and eta on |X(omega)>) giving unbiased low-energy K-versus-M spectral intensities for both states; if the projection approximation distorts one state's spectrum more than the other, the Dirac-versus-Z2/ordered assignment fails.

What would settle it

Compute the same dynamical spin structure factor on an XC6-24 cylinder at J2=0.12 using an independent algorithm that does not rely on the H-proj approximation (for example, time-dependent DMRG or a Krylov-based correction-vector approach) and check whether the HE state still shows comparable low-energy peaks at K and M; if the M-peak disappears or the K-peak strongly dominates, the Dirac-spin-liquid assignment would be refuted.

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

If this is right

  • The intermediate J2 region at J2=0.12 hosts at least two competing variational states whose relative stability is size-dependent, so the thermodynamic ground state remains undetermined.
  • The observation of a metastable HE state on odd-width XC7 and XC9 cylinders argues against interpreting the two states as topological sectors of a Z2 spin liquid.
  • If the HE state is a Dirac spin liquid, its low-energy spin-triplet excitations should appear at both K and M with comparable intensity, a testable signature.
  • The LE state, being either a gapped Z2 spin liquid or a weakly ordered 120-degree state, is proximate to a magnetic ordering transition, making wider-system studies necessary to distinguish the two scenarios.
  • The improved DDMRG method, benchmarked on a square-lattice Heisenberg model against quantum Monte Carlo, provides a reliable route for computing dynamical spectra in other frustrated magnets.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the energy ordering reverses at larger circumference, the Dirac spin liquid could become the thermodynamic ground state, implying a first-order-like transition or an avoided level crossing between the two states.
  • The ratio of low-energy spectral weight at M versus K could serve as a compact, machine-readable order parameter for classifying phases in future tensor-network studies of frustrated magnets.
  • The improved state-averaging scheme may be applied to other non-variational DDMRG calculations, such as electron removal or photoemission spectra, where the balance between the source state and correction-vector components is similarly delicate.
  • The proximity of the LE state to the J2=0 ordered phase suggests that a quantum critical point could exist at finite J2; pinning-field scaling on even wider cylinders would test whether the magnetic moment truly vanishes in the 2D limit.

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. This paper studies the S=1/2 triangular-lattice J1-J2 Heisenberg model at intermediate J2=0.12 using DMRG and an improved dynamical DMRG (DDMRG) method on XC6/8/9 and YC6 cylinders. It reports two distinct variational states — a lower-energy (LE) state and a higher-energy (HE) state — stabilized by different initial states and boundary conditions. Static correlations show that the two states are locally different (bond anisotropies, equal-time S(q), sign patterns), including on odd-width XC7/XC9 cylinders, and the authors argue this rules out a topological-degeneracy interpretation of the near degeneracy. The improved DDMRG spectra show that the LE state has a dominant low-energy response at K and resembles the J2=0 120-degree ordered state, while the HE state has comparable low-energy intensity at K and M with decreasing gaps, which the authors identify as the expected signature of a Dirac QSL. The paper concludes that the HE state is most likely a Dirac QSL and the LE state is probably a gapped Z2 QSL or a weak magnetic order; it explicitly leaves the 2D limit unsettled.

Significance. If the spectral assignment is correct, the paper makes a substantive contribution: it reframes the two nearly degenerate states found in earlier DMRG as competing phases rather than topological sectors, and it provides a concrete dynamical signature (K vs M spectral weight) for distinguishing a metastable Dirac QSL from a gapped/weakly ordered state. The improved DDMRG scheme is a useful technical advance, and the benchmark against QMC on the square-lattice Heisenberg model is a genuine strength; the static correlation differences are well documented. However, the phase labels depend on a non-variational DDMRG approximation whose reliability for this triangular-lattice model and for the HE state specifically is not yet demonstrated. The significance is therefore conditional on additional convergence and validation evidence.

major comments (3)
  1. [SM Sec. II, Eq. (6); SM Sec. III; Figs. 2-3] The central K-vs-M spectral contrast is computed with a non-variational DDMRG scheme that replaces (H-E0-omega)^2 by (H_proj-E0-omega)^2 and uses empirically chosen state-averaging weights sqrt(eta) and eta. The method is benchmarked against QMC only for the square-lattice Heisenberg model at omega=2.4, which does not test the differential low-energy response of two nearly degenerate, locally distinct variational states on the triangular lattice. Because a state-dependent projection/truncation error could bias one state's K/M intensity ratio more than the other, the Dirac-vs-Z2/weak-order assignment is not yet established. Please provide either a triangular-lattice validation for at least one state/cylinder using an independent method, or a systematic bond-dimension convergence study of the K/M ratio for both states (especially the HE state), or an explicit estimate showing the projectio
  2. [End Matter, 'Differences between the LE and HE state on the XC9 cylinder'] On XC9-24 the HE state is reported to remain metastable only up to m=2400 and to evolve toward the LE state at larger m, while the DDMRG results for both states are quoted at m=4000. It is not explained whether the HE DDMRG calculation uses the m=2400 HE ground state as |0>, nor is a convergence test shown for the HE correction-vector calculation. As a result, the XC9 HE spectrum in Figs. 2-4 cannot be regarded as a demonstrated property of the same metastable HE state characterized by the static correlations. The authors should either recompute the HE DDMRG at m<=2400 and show convergence before the instability, or otherwise demonstrate that the m=4000 HE calculation remains in the HE sector and is uncontaminated by the nearby LE state.
  3. [Figs. 2-3 and SM Sec. IX] The K/M comparison at XC8 and XC9 relies on nearby approximate momenta because the exact high-symmetry points are not accessible, and the M-point data are averaged over symmetry-related points. The subsequent D6 symmetrization and interpolation additionally modify the intensity maps. Since the entire phase assignment is a differential statement about low-energy K vs M intensity, the robustness of the intensity ratio to these momentum-choice and symmetrization steps should be quantified, for example by showing the unsymmetrized K/M ratios for each symmetry-related momentum and by varying the interpolation procedure. This is needed before the 'comparable intensity at K and M' claim can be used as a sharp diagnostic.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] The paper is generally well written, but there are several typographical issues: 'T op panel' in the Fig. 1 caption, 'inlculde' in the SM reference list, and the Fig. 6 caption 'momentum cut 3J2=0.12' is confusingly formatted.
  2. [Supplemental Materials] The placeholder '[URL]' for the supplemental materials should be replaced by the actual DOI or link before publication.
  3. [Fig. 3] The caption says S(q≃K,omega) and S(q≃M,omega), but the precise momenta used for each panel are only given in Ref. [74]. Please include this information directly in the caption or in a short table.
  4. [SM Sec. IV] The convergence example in the SM is for the LE state only. If the requested HE convergence study is added, it should also report the truncation error of the HE DDMRG calculation, since the paper notes that truncation error is typically O(10^-4).
  5. [SM Fig. S8] The insensitivity to eta is demonstrated for XC6-24 only. The main text states that qualitative features are insensitive to eta; please state that this was checked on XC6 and mention whether XC8/XC9 were also checked.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No derivation-level circularity; phase labels are empirical comparisons, not fitted predictions.

full rationale

The central claims are numerical outputs from DMRG/DDMRG applied to the fixed Hamiltonian (Eq. 1). The two variational states are obtained from different initial states with computed energy densities; the LE/HE ordering is not fitted. The phase assignments are made by comparing computed static and dynamical structure factors to external theoretical expectations (gapped Z2 QSL: gap at K; Dirac QSL: comparable low-energy weight at K and M). These comparisons are interpretive but not circular: the spectra are outputs of the simulation, and no parameter was fitted to produce the K/M contrast. The improved DDMRG weighting scheme (SM Sec. II) is calibrated on a square-lattice Heisenberg benchmark against QMC, not on the triangular model; this is a validity risk (especially for the HE state on XC9, where the static HE state is not metastable beyond m=2400, as noted in the End Matter), but it is not a circular reduction. Self-citations (Refs. [38,48,69]) are present but not load-bearing: [38] is the prior interpretation being tested, [48] is a supporting numerical result, and [69] is an exact quantum-dimer-model result used as a comparison standard for columnar order; the paper's rejection of topological degeneracy rests primarily on new odd-width and spectral data. Thus no prediction reduces by construction to an input.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard MPS/DMRG numerics, domain assumptions about cylinder-to-2D extrapolation and topological degeneracy, and an empirical DDMRG weighting scheme. No new physical entities are postulated; J2, broadening, and state-averaging weights are chosen parameters rather than fits to data.

free parameters (4)
  • J2 ratio = 0.12
    Representative coupling in the disputed intermediate regime, chosen from prior phase diagrams rather than fitted; all central results are shown at this single value.
  • DDMRG broadening eta = 0.1 (0.05 in a check)
    Chosen broadening factor; authors check qualitative insensitivity in SM Sec. VIII, but exact values of gaps and peak intensities depend on it.
  • DDMRG state-averaging weights = sqrt(eta) on S|0>, eta on |X(omega)>
    Empirical reweighting introduced to stabilize convergence (SM Sec. II); no first-principles justification, benchmarked on square-lattice Heisenberg model.
  • Maximum bond dimensions = 1800, 3000, 5000 for XC6/XC8/XC9
    Truncation parameters; convergence is checked for selected cases (SM Sec. IV) but not exhaustively for every state and frequency.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption DMRG on finite cylinders with circumference up to 9 approximates the 2D thermodynamic limit sufficiently for qualitative phase distinction.
    Used throughout; the authors themselves note that the character of the ground state may change for larger Ly (Discussion).
  • domain assumption A gapped Z2 QSL on a cylinder has topological degeneracy that appears only on even-width cylinders and with identical local properties.
    Invoked to argue that two states on odd-width XC7/XC9 with different local observables rule out a topological interpretation; based on dimer-model analyses Refs. [38,69].
  • domain assumption Theoretical spectral predictions for a gapped Z2 QSL (spinon minimum at K) and a U(1) Dirac QSL/QED3 (gapless triplets at K and M) apply to this model's candidate phases.
    Used to interpret the DSSF of the LE and HE states; Refs. [57-59,66,67].
  • ad hoc to paper The improved DDMRG weighting scheme is a valid approximation to the exact correction-vector equation despite the non-variational (H_proj)^2 projection.
    SM Sec. II justifies the scheme empirically; benchmarked against QMC on a square lattice but not on the triangular J1-J2 model.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 22469 in / 13626 out tokens · 124380 ms · 2026-08-02T23:00:55.173117+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Previous studies of the $S=1/2$ triangular-lattice $J_1$--$J_2$ Heisenberg antiferromagnet have inferred the existence of a non-magnetic ground-state phase for an intermediate range of $J_2$, but disagree concerning whether it is a gapped $\mathbb{Z}_2$ quantum spin liquid (QSL), a gapless (Dirac) QSL, or a weakly symmetry-broken phase. Using an improved dynamical density-matrix renormalization group method, we investigate the relevant intermediate $J_2$ regime for cylinders with circumferences from 6 to 9. Depending on the initial state and boundary conditions, we find two {\it distinct} variational states. The higher energy state is consistent with a Dirac QSL. In the lower-energy state, both the static and dynamical properties are qualitatively similar to the magnetically ordered state at $J_2=0$, suggestive of either a weakly magnetically ordered non-QSL or a gapped QSL proximate to a continuous transition to such an ordered state.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.14892 by Hong-Chen Jiang, Shengtao Jiang, Steven A. Kivelson, Steven R. White.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a)(b)(c) for XC6-24, XC8-24, and XC9-24 cylin￾ders, respectively. The LE state at J2 = 0.12 also has dominant peaks at ⃗q = K with a similar amplitude to the J2 = 0 case, but with a somewhat more diffuse struc￾ture around it. The intensity at the M point increases only slightly and does not exhibit a clear peak. In contrast, the low-energy DSSF for the HE state at J2 = 0.12 exhibits conspicuous difference… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The DSSF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Sign of the spin-spin correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. On an XC6-24 cylinder, the DSSF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Emergence of a monopole phase in the $J_1{-}J_2$ Heisenberg model on the triangular lattice for small magnetic fields

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    For J2/J1 approximately 1/8 and small fields, the triangular-lattice J1-J2 Heisenberg ground state is a gapless monopole condensate with scalar chirality and no transverse magnetic order, not semiclassical Y or canted...

  2. Dynamical dimer structure factor of the triangular $S=1/2$ Heisenberg antiferromagnet

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Numerical simulations of the dynamical dimer structure factor on the triangular Heisenberg model provide support for a gapless U(1) Dirac quantum spin liquid with gapless singlet monopole excitations at X = K/2 momenta.

  3. Investigation of the $J_1$-$J_2$ Heisenberg model on the triangular lattice: A study with projected entangled-pair states

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Infinite PEPS simulations find a direct Néel-to-QSL transition at J2/J1 ≈ 0.08 in the triangular J1-J2 model and indicate the QSL is gapless, consistent with a U(1) Dirac spin liquid.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Anderson, Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of insulator?, Mater

    P. Anderson, Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of insulator?, Mater. Res. Bull.8, 153 (1973)

    1973

  2. [2]

    S. A. Kivelson and S. L. Sondhi, 50 years of quantum spin liquids, Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 368 (2023)

    2023

  3. [3]

    Sim- ulations were carried out on XC6-24 (left column, (a)(d)(g)), XC8-24 (middle column, (b)(e)(h)), and XC9-24 (right col- umn, (c)(f)(i)), respectively

    after sym- metrization (see text), for the 120 ◦ state atJ 2 = 0 (top row, (a)(b)(c)), the LE state atJ 2 = 0.12 (middle row, (d)(e)(f)), and the HE state atJ 2 = 0.12 (bottom row, (g)(h)(i)). Sim- ulations were carried out on XC6-24 (left column, (a)(d)(g)), XC8-24 (middle column, (b)(e)(h)), and XC9-24 (right col- umn, (c)(f)(i)), respectively. QSL [66,...

  4. [4]

    Broholm, R

    C. Broholm, R. J. Cava, S. A. Kivelson, D. G. Nocera, M. R. Norman, and T. Senthil, Quantum spin liquids, Science367, 10.1126/science.aay0668 (2020)

    doi:10.1126/science.aay0668 2020

  5. [5]

    Zheng, J

    W. Zheng, J. O. Fjærestad, R. R. P. Singh, R. H. McKen- zie, and R. Coldea, Excitation spectra of the spin- 1 2 triangular-lattice heisenberg antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B74, 224420 (2006)

    2006

  6. [6]

    S. J. Miyake, Spin-wave results for the staggered magneti- zation of triangular heisenberg antiferromagnet, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan61, 983 (1992)

    1992

  7. [7]

    A. V. Chubukov, S. Sachdev, and T. Senthil, Large-s ex- pansion for quantum antiferromagnets on a triangular lattice, J. Phys. Condens. Matter.6, 8891 (1994)

    1994

  8. [8]

    Bernu, P

    B. Bernu, P. Lecheminant, C. Lhuillier, and L. Pierre, Exact spectra, spin susceptibilities, and order parameter of the quantum heisenberg antiferromagnet on the trian- gular lattice, Phys. Rev. B50, 10048 (1994)

    1994

  9. [9]

    Capriotti, A

    L. Capriotti, A. E. Trumper, and S. Sorella, Long-range 8 n´ eel order in the triangular heisenberg model, Physical review letters82, 3899 (1999)

    1999

  10. [11]

    Kalmeyer and R

    V. Kalmeyer and R. B. Laughlin, Equivalence of the resonating-valence-bond and fractional quantum hall states, Phys. Rev. Lett.59, 2095 (1987)

    2095

  11. [12]

    Moessner, S

    R. Moessner, S. L. Sondhi, and P. Chandra, Two- dimensional periodic frustrated ising models in a trans- verse field, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 4457 (2000)

    2000

  12. [13]

    Peng, Y.-F

    C. Peng, Y.-F. Jiang, Y. Wang, and H.-C. Jiang, Gapless spin liquid and pair density wave of the hubbard model on three-leg triangular cylinders, New J. Phys.23, 123004 (2021)

    2021

  13. [14]

    S.-S. Gong, W. Zheng, M. Lee, Y.-M. Lu, and D. N. Sheng, Chiral spin liquid with spinon fermi surfaces in the spin- 1 2 triangular heisenberg model, Phys. Rev. B100, 241111 (2019)

    2019

  14. [15]

    Szasz, J

    A. Szasz, J. Motruk, M. P. Zaletel, and J. E. Moore, Chiral spin liquid phase of the triangular lattice hubbard model: A density matrix renormalization group study, Phys. Rev. X10, 021042 (2020)

    2020

  15. [16]

    Z. Zhu, P. A. Maksimov, S. R. White, and A. L. Chernyshev, Disorder-induced mimicry of a spin liquid in ybmggao4, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 157201 (2017)

    2017

  16. [17]

    Z. Zhu, P. A. Maksimov, S. R. White, and A. L. Cherny- shev, Topography of spin liquids on a triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 207203 (2018)

    2018

  17. [18]

    P. A. Maksimov, Z. Zhu, S. R. White, and A. L. Cherny- shev, Anisotropic-exchange magnets on a triangular lat- tice: Spin waves, accidental degeneracies, and dual spin liquids, Phys. Rev. X9, 021017 (2019)

    2019

  18. [19]

    R. Chi, J. Hu, H.-J. Liao, and T. Xiang, Dynamical spec- tra of spin supersolid states in triangular antiferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. B110, L180404 (2024)

    2024

  19. [20]

    C. A. Gallegos, S. Jiang, S. R. White, and A. L. Cherny- shev, Phase diagram of the easy-axis triangular-lattice J1−J2 model, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 196702 (2025)

    2025

  20. [21]

    Huang, X

    J. Huang, X. Qian, and M. Qin, On the magnetization of the 120 ◦ order of the spin-1/2 triangular lattice heisen- berg model: a dmrg revisited, J. Phys. Condens. Matter. 36, 185602 (2024)

    2024

  21. [22]

    Ulaga, J

    M. Ulaga, J. Kokalj, T. Tohyama, and P. Prelovˇ sek, Easy- axis heisenberg model on the triangular lattice: From a supersolid to a gapped solid, Phys. Rev. B111, 174442 (2025)

    2025

  22. [23]

    Y. Gao, C. Zhang, J. Xiang, D. Yu, X. Lu, P. Sun, W. Jin, G. Su, and W. Li, Double magnon-roton excitations in the triangular-lattice spin supersolid, Phys. Rev. B110, 214408 (2024)

    2024

  23. [24]

    Scheie, E

    A. Scheie, E. Ghioldi, J. Xing, J. Paddison, N. Sherman, M. Dupont, L. Sanjeewa, S. Lee, A. Woods, D. Aber- nathy,et al., Proximate spin liquid and fractionalization in the triangular antiferromagnet kybse 2, Nat. Phys.20, 74 (2024)

    2024

  24. [25]

    Facheris, S

    L. Facheris, S. D. Nabi, A. Glezer Moshe, U. Nagel, T. R˜ o om, K. Y. Povarov, J. R. Stewart, Z. Yan, and A. Zhe- ludev, Confinement of fractional excitations in a triangu- lar lattice antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 256702 (2023)

    2023

  25. [26]

    T. Chen, A. Ghasemi, J. Zhang, L. Shi, Z. Tagay, Y. Chen, L. Chen, E.-S. Choi, M. Jaime, M. Lee, Y. Hao, H. Cao, B. Winn, A. A. Podlesnyak, D. M. Pajerowski, R. Zhong, X. Xu, N. P. Armitage, R. Cava, and C. Bro- holm, Phase diagram and spectroscopic signatures of a supersolid in quantum ising magnet k 2co(seo3)2 (2025), arXiv:2402.15869 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2025

  26. [27]

    N. Li, Q. Huang, X. Y. Yue, W. J. Chu, Q. Chen, E. S. Choi, X. Zhao, H. D. Zhou, and X. F. Sun, Possible itin- erant excitations and quantum spin state transitions in the effective spin-1/2 triangular-lattice antiferromagnet na2baco(po4)2, Nat. Commun.11, 4216 (2020)

    2020

  27. [28]

    Gao, Y.-C

    Y. Gao, Y.-C. Fan, H. Li, F. Yang, X.-T. Zeng, X.-L. Sheng, R. Zhong, Y. Qi, Y. Wan, and W. Li, Spin su- persolidity in nearly ideal easy-axis triangular quantum antiferromagnet na2baco(po4)2, npj Quantum Mater.7, 89 (2022)

    2022

  28. [29]

    Sheng, L

    J. Sheng, L. Wang, A. Candini, W. Jiang, L. Huang, B. Xi, J. Zhao, H. Ge, N. Zhao, Y. Fu, J. Ren, J. Yang, P. Miao, X. Tong, D. Yu, S. Wang, Q. Liu, M. Kofu, R. Mole, G. Biasiol, D. Yu, I. A. Zaliznyak, J.-W. Mei, and L. Wu, Two-dimensional quantum universal- ity in the spin-1/2 triangular-lattice quantum antiferro- magnet na2baco(po4)2, Proc. Natl. Acad....

    2022

  29. [30]

    Xiang, C

    J. Xiang, C. Zhang, Y. Gao, W. Schmidt, K. Schmalzl, C.-W. Wang, B. Li, N. Xi, X.-Y. Liu, H. Jin, G. Li, J. Shen, Z. Chen, Y. Qi, Y. Wan, W. Jin, W. Li, P. Sun, and G. Su, Giant magnetocaloric effect in spin supersolid candidate na2baco(po4)2, Nature625, 270 (2024)

    2024

  30. [31]

    R. Bag, S. Xu, N. E. Sherman, L. Yadav, A. I. Kolesnikov, A. A. Podlesnyak, E. S. Choi, I. da Silva, J. E. Moore, and S. Haravifard, Evidence of dirac quan- tum spin liquid in ybzn 2gao5, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 266703 (2024)

    2024

  31. [32]

    Y. Li, H. Liao, Z. Zhang, S. Li, F. Jin, L. Ling, L. Zhang, Y. Zou, L. Pi, Z. Yang, J. Wang, Z. Wu, and Q. Zhang, Gapless quantum spin liquid ground state in the two-dimensional spin-1/2 triangular antiferromagnet YbMgGaO4, Sci. Rep.5, 16419 (2015)

    2015

  32. [33]

    A. O. Scheie, M. Lee, K. Wang, P. Laurell, E. S. Choi, D. Pajerowski, Q. Zhang, J. Ma, H. D. Zhou, S. Lee, S. M. Thomas, M. O. Ajeesh, P. F. S. Rosa, A. Chen, V. S. Zapf, M. Heyl, C. D. Batista, E. Dagotto, J. E. Moore, and D. A. Tennant, Spectrum and low-energy gap in triangular quantum spin liquid naybse 2 (2024), arXiv:2406.17773 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2024

  33. [34]

    A. O. Scheie, Y. Kamiya, H. Zhang, S. Lee, A. J. Woods, M. O. Ajeesh, M. G. Gonzalez, B. Bernu, J. W. Villanova, J. Xing, Q. Huang, Q. Zhang, J. Ma, E. S. Choi, D. M. Pajerowski, H. Zhou, A. S. Sefat, S. Okamoto, T. Berlijn, L. Messio, R. Movshovich, C. D. Batista, and D. A. Ten- nant, Nonlinear magnons and exchange hamiltonians of the delafossite proxima...

    2024

  34. [35]

    Shen, Y.-D

    Y. Shen, Y.-D. Li, H. Wo, Y. Li, S. Shen, B. Pan, Q. Wang, H. C. Walker, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, Y. Hao, D. L. Quintero-Castro, L. W. Harriger, M. D. Frontzek, L. Hao, S. Meng, Q. Zhang, G. Chen, and J. Zhao, Ev- idence for a spinon fermi surface in a triangular-lattice quantum-spin-liquid candidate, Nature540, 559 (2016)

    2016

  35. [36]

    J. Ma, Y. Kamiya, T. Hong, H. B. Cao, G. Ehlers, W. Tian, C. D. Batista, Z. L. Dun, H. D. Zhou, and M. Matsuda, Static and dynamical properties of the spin-1/2 equilateral triangular-lattice antiferromag- net ba3cosb2o9, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 087201 (2016)

    2016

  36. [37]

    Zhong, S

    R. Zhong, S. Guo, G. Xu, Z. Xu, and R. J. Cava, Strong 9 quantum fluctuations in a quantum spin liquid candidate with a co-based triangular lattice, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.116, 14505 (2019)

    2019

  37. [38]

    P. Park, E. A. Ghioldi, A. F. May, J. A. Kolopus, A. A. Podlesnyak, S. Calder, J. A. Paddison, A. E. Trumper, L. O. Manuel, C. D. Batista,et al., Anomalous contin- uum scattering and higher-order van hove singularity in the strongly anisotropic s= 1/2 triangular lattice antifer- romagnet, Nat. Commun.15, 7264 (2024)

    2024

  38. [39]

    Zhu and S

    Z. Zhu and S. R. White, Spin liquid phase of thes= 1 2 J1 −J 2 heisenberg model on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B92, 041105 (2015)

    2015

  39. [40]

    Iqbal, W.-J

    Y. Iqbal, W.-J. Hu, R. Thomale, D. Poilblanc, and F. Becca, Spin liquid nature in the heisenbergJ 1 −J 2 triangular antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B93, 144411 (2016)

    2016

  40. [41]

    R. V. Mishmash, J. R. Garrison, S. Bieri, and C. Xu, Theory of a competitive spin liquid state for weak mott insulators on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 157203 (2013)

    2013

  41. [42]

    S. N. Saadatmand and I. P. McCulloch, Symmetry frac- tionalization in the topological phase of the spin-1 2 J1−J2 triangular heisenberg model, Phys. Rev. B94, 121111 (2016)

    2016

  42. [43]

    Hu, S.-S

    W.-J. Hu, S.-S. Gong, W. Zhu, and D. N. Sheng, Com- peting spin-liquid states in the spin- 1 2 heisenberg model on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B92, 140403 (2015)

    2015

  43. [44]

    P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, and C. E. Campbell, Quasiclas- sical magnetic order and its loss in a spin- 1 2 heisenberg antiferromagnet on a triangular lattice with competing bonds, Phys. Rev. B91, 014426 (2015)

    2015

  44. [45]

    Hu, S.-S

    W.-J. Hu, S.-S. Gong, and D. N. Sheng, Variational monte carlo study of chiral spin liquid in quantum an- tiferromagnet on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B94, 075131 (2016)

    2016

  45. [46]

    T. Tang, B. Moritz, and T. P. Devereaux, Spectra of a gapped quantum spin liquid with a strong chiral excita- tion on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B106, 064428 (2022)

    2022

  46. [47]

    Wietek and A

    A. Wietek and A. M. L¨ auchli, Chiral spin liquid and quantum criticality in extendeds= 1 2 heisenberg models on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B95, 035141 (2017)

    2017

  47. [48]

    Kaneko, S

    R. Kaneko, S. Morita, and M. Imada, Gapless spin- liquid phase in an extended spin 1/2 triangular heisen- berg model, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan83, 093707 (2014)

    2014

  48. [49]

    Jiang and H.-C

    Y.-F. Jiang and H.-C. Jiang, Nature of quantum spin liquids of thes= 1 2 heisenberg antiferromagnet on the triangular lattice: A parallel dmrg study, Phys. Rev. B 107, L140411 (2023)

    2023

  49. [50]

    Keselman, X

    A. Keselman, X. Xu, H. Zhang, C. D. Batista, and O. A. Starykh,j 1 −j 2 triangular lattice antiferromagnet in a magnetic field (2025), arXiv:2512.02150 [cond-mat.str- el]

    arXiv 2025

  50. [51]

    Bader, S

    T. Bader, S. Feng, S. Budaraju, F. Becca, J. Knolle, and F. Pollmann, Triangularj 1-j2 heisenberg antiferromag- net in a magnetic field (2025), arXiv:2512.08768 [cond- mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2025

  51. [52]

    D. J. Thouless, Fluxoid quantization in the resonating- valence-bond model, Phys. Rev. B36, 7187 (1987)

    1987

  52. [53]

    S. Hu, W. Zhu, S. Eggert, and Y.-C. He, Dirac spin liquid on the spin-1/2 triangular heisenberg antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 207203 (2019)

    2019

  53. [54]

    Ferrari and F

    F. Ferrari and F. Becca, Dynamical structure factor of theJ 1 −J 2 heisenberg model on the triangular lattice: Magnons, spinons, and gauge fields, Phys. Rev. X9, 031026 (2019)

    2019

  54. [55]

    N. E. Sherman, M. Dupont, and J. E. Moore, Spectral function of theJ 1 −J2 heisenberg model on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B107, 165146 (2023)

    2023

  55. [56]

    Drescher, L

    M. Drescher, L. Vanderstraeten, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, Dynamical signatures of symmetry-broken and liquid phases in ans= 1 2 heisenberg antiferromag- net on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B108, L220401 (2023)

    2023

  56. [57]

    Drescher, L

    M. Drescher, L. Vanderstraeten, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, Spectral functions of an extended antifer- romagnetics= 1/2 heisenberg model on the triangular lattice (2025), arXiv:2508.17292 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [58]

    Wietek, S

    A. Wietek, S. Capponi, and A. M. L¨ auchli, Quantum electrodynamics in 2 + 1 dimensions as the organizing principle of a triangular lattice antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. X14, 021010 (2024)

    2024

  58. [59]

    X.-Y. Song, C. Wang, A. Vishwanath, and Y.-C. He, Uni- fying description of competing orders in two-dimensional quantum magnets, Nat. Commun.10, 4254 (2019)

    2019

  59. [60]

    Song, Y.-C

    X.-Y. Song, Y.-C. He, A. Vishwanath, and C. Wang, From spinon band topology to the symmetry quantum numbers of monopoles in dirac spin liquids, Phys. Rev. X10, 011033 (2020)

    2020

  60. [64]

    Ferrari, A

    F. Ferrari, A. Parola, and F. Becca, Gapless spin liquids in disguise, Phys. Rev. B103, 195140 (2021)

    2021

  61. [65]

    [9, 16, 19, 60–62, 70, 77, 78]

    See supplemental materials at [URL] for further details of the improved DDMRG algorithm, its benchmark and convergence, and various supporting results, which inl- cude Refs. [9, 16, 19, 60–62, 70, 77, 78]

  62. [66]

    Moessner and S

    R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Resonating valence bond phase in the triangular lattice quantum dimer model, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1881 (2001)

    2001

  63. [67]

    Sachdev, Kagome´- and triangular-lattice heisenberg antiferromagnets: Ordering from quantum fluctuations and quantum-disordered ground states with unconfined bosonic spinons, Phys

    S. Sachdev, Kagome´- and triangular-lattice heisenberg antiferromagnets: Ordering from quantum fluctuations and quantum-disordered ground states with unconfined bosonic spinons, Phys. Rev. B45, 12377 (1992)

    1992

  64. [68]

    Wang and A

    F. Wang and A. Vishwanath, Spin-liquid states on the triangular and kagom´ e lattices: A projective-symmetry- group analysis of schwinger boson states, Phys. Rev. B 74, 174423 (2006)

    2006

  65. [69]

    We have also tested that the HE state on XC6 cylin- der remains metastable upon adding a noise of 1E-5 in DMRG

  66. [70]

    Yao and S

    H. Yao and S. A. Kivelson, Exact spin liquid ground states of the quantum dimer model on the square and honeycomb lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 247206 (2012)

    2012

  67. [71]

    Ronca, Z

    E. Ronca, Z. Li, C. A. Jimenez-Hoyos, and G. K.-L. Chan, Time-step targeting time-dependent and dynami- cal density matrix renormalization group algorithms with ab initio hamiltonians, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation13, 5560 (2017)

    2017

  68. [72]

    For ground state DMRG, we typically keep a maxi- mum bond dimension such that the truncation error is ∼O(10 −5). 10

  69. [73]

    Fishman, S

    M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, The ITensor Software Library for Tensor Network Calcula- tions, SciPost Phys. Codebases , 4 (2022)

    2022

  70. [74]

    Haegeman, KrylovKit (2024)

    J. Haegeman, KrylovKit (2024)

    2024

  71. [75]

    The∼Mpoint is taken to be (1.111π,0.385π) on XC9 cylinder, which is closest to the originalMpoint along the zone boundary

    On XC8 cylinder, the∼Kpoint is chosen at a nearby momentum (1.25π,0.1443π) where the intensity reaches its maximum. The∼Mpoint is taken to be (1.111π,0.385π) on XC9 cylinder, which is closest to the originalMpoint along the zone boundary. For the HE state on XC9 cylinder, the intensity at (1.25π,0.257π) is chosen, since the peak has slightly shifted away ...

  72. [76]

    H. J. Changlani, D. Kochkov, K. Kumar, B. K. Clark, and E. Fradkin, Macroscopically degenerate exactly solv- able point in the spin-1/2 kagome quantum antiferromag- net, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 117202 (2018)

    2018

  73. [77]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18535976

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18535976

  74. [78]

    H. Shao, Y. Q. Qin, S. Capponi, S. Chesi, Z. Y. Meng, and A. W. Sandvik, Nearly deconfined spinon excitations in the square-lattice spin-1/2 heisenberg antiferromag- net, Phys. Rev. X7, 041072 (2017)

    2017

  75. [79]

    S. R. White, R. M. Noack, and D. J. Scalapino, Resonat- ing valence bond theory of coupled heisenberg chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.73, 886 (1994). Supplemental materials: Competing states in theS= 1/2J1-J2 Heisenberg model on the triangular lattice: a dynamical density-matrix renormalization group study Shengtao Jiang (蒋晟韬), 1 Steven R. White, 2 Steven A. Kive...

    1994

  76. [80]

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

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

    2002

  77. [81]

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

    1992

  78. [82]

    S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. B48, 10345 (1993)

    1993

  79. [83]

    Ronca, Z

    E. Ronca, Z. Li, C. A. Jimenez-Hoyos, and G. K.-L. Chan, Time-step targeting time-dependent and dynamical density matrix renormalization group algorithms with ab initio hamiltonians, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation13, 5560 (2017)

    2017

  80. [84]

    H. Shao, Y. Q. Qin, S. Capponi, S. Chesi, Z. Y. Meng, and A. W. Sandvik, Nearly deconfined spinon excitations in the square-lattice spin-1/2 heisenberg antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. X7, 041072 (2017)

    2017

Showing first 80 references.