Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Distinguishing features of longitudinal magnetoconductivity for a Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Interband scattering flips the s=3/2 band's longitudinal magnetoconductivity negative in an isolated Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node, giving a transport fingerprint that distinguishes it from ordinary Weyl nodes.

desk verdict A genuinely new RSWN transport calculation with a plausible qualitative prediction, but a beta-factor notation ambiguity in the printed equations must be fixed before the 'exact' claim is verifiable. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.12380 v2 pith:FS5E34OE submitted 2025-06-14 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.str-elhep-th

Ipsita Mandal This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.str-elhep-th
keywords Rarita-Schwinger-WeylnodelongitudinalmagnetoconductivitysemiclassicalBoltzmannequationBerrycurvatureorbitalmagneticmomentinterbandscatteringmultifoldfermionschiralsemimetal
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

The paper aims to establish that the longitudinal magnetoconductivity of an isolated Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node -- the current response when electric and magnetic fields are applied parallel to each other -- carries a band-resolved signature that separates the fourfold node from ordinary Weyl nodes. It solves the linearized semiclassical Boltzmann equation without the relaxation-time approximation, keeping the full angle-dependent spinor overlaps, Berry curvature, and orbital magnetic moment. The central result is that once interband scattering between the $s=1/2$ and $s=3/2$ bands exceeds a small threshold, the $s=3/2$ band's magnetoconductivity turns negative while the $s=1/2$ band remains positive. If correct, this sign flip gives a transport fingerprint of the Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node and shows that momentum-independent relaxation-time estimates can miss the qualitative physics.

What carries the argument

The central object is the cubic-polynomial ansatz for the mean-free path, Eq. (27): $\Lambda_z^s(\mu,\theta) = \tau_s(\mu,\theta)[\lambda_s - h_s + a_s\cos\theta + b_s\cos^2\theta + c_s\cos^3\theta]$. The argument relies on the claim that the collision operator closes on this four-dimensional space for each band, because the spinor-overlap functions $T_{s,\tilde{s}}(\theta,\theta')$ are polynomials of degree three in $\cos\theta$. This turns the linearized Boltzmann equation into an $8\times 8$ linear system for the coefficients $\{\lambda_s, a_s, b_s, c_s\}$; the matrix has rank 7, and the missing independent equation is provided by electron-number conservation. The $\theta$-dependent Fermi-surface radii, the phase-space factor $D_s$, and the field-induced Fermi-surface displacements enter through the integrals $c_{\alpha s}^n$ that build the matrix and source vector, which is how the magnetic field enters the solution.

What would settle it

Recompute $\sigma_{zz}(B)$ from the same linearized Boltzmann equation without imposing the cubic ansatz -- by expanding $\Lambda_z^s(\mu,\theta)$ in Legendre polynomials up to high order for the paper's parameter values -- and check whether coefficients beyond $\cos^3\theta$ vanish and whether the $s=3/2$ band still turns negative; any significant higher harmonic or a different sign would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the two occupied bands of an isolated Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node respond oppositely to a collinear magnetic field once interband scattering is allowed. Starting from $H = v_F\,\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{J}$ with bands $s = \pm 1/2, \pm 3/2$, the Berry curvature $\Omega_s$ enters through the phase-space factor $D_s = [1 + e\mathbf{B}\cdot\Omega_s]^{-1}$, and the orbital magnetic moment distorts the Fermi surfaces by $\varepsilon_s^{(m)} = -\mathbf{B}\cdot\mathbf{m}_s$. Solving the linearized Boltzmann equation with the cubic-in-$\cos\theta$ ansatz for the mean free path and imposing charge conservation yields the band-resolved longitudinal magnetoconductivity. The numerical solutions show that for $\beta_{\mathrm{inter}}/\beta_{\mathrm{intra}}$ above a small threshold the $s=3/2$ contribution to $\delta\sigma_{zz}$ flips negative while the $s=1/2$ contribution curves upward and stays positive; with the orbital magnetic moment switched off the two curves reverse their behavior, showing that the OMM is the ingredient that pushes $s=1/2$ positive and pulls $s=3/2$ down. The paper presents this exact computation as correcting the earlier relaxation-time-approximation results and as the distinguishing feature of a RSWN.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that the exact mean-free path has no angular dependence beyond $\cos^3\theta$, so the cubic ansatz closes under the collision operator; if higher angular harmonics are generated by the scattering, the predicted sign and curvature of the magnetoconductivity could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The exact solution shows that a momentum-independent relaxation time is not adequate for Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl nodes: keeping the angular dependence of the spinor overlaps and the mean free path changes the band-resolved magnetoconductivity, including its sign.
  • For an isolated Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node with interband scattering above a small threshold, the $s=3/2$ band contribution to $\delta\sigma_{zz}$ turns negative while the $s=1/2$ band contribution remains positive and curved upward, providing a transport signature absent in two-fold Weyl nodes.
  • The orbital magnetic moment contributes with opposite signs in the two bands: positive for $s=1/2$, enough to flip the Berry-curvature-only response positive, and negative for $s=3/2$, pulling the response downward.
  • $\sigma_{zz}(B)$ contains only even powers of $B$, consistent with Onsager-Casimir reciprocity; odd-in-$B$ terms are absent because the RSWN Hamiltonian has no tilt term.
  • The decoupled limit $\beta_{\mathrm{inter}}=0$ obeys charge conservation band by band, whereas $\beta_{\mathrm{inter}}\neq 0$ conserves only the total charge; this difference is why turning on interband scattering qualitatively reorganizes the response rather than merely renormalizing it.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the cubic closure is exact, the sign-flip criterion should be a generic property of isolated Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl nodes, and a measurement that isolates the two Fermi pockets at positive chemical potential would be a sharper test than measuring the total conductivity.
  • The 'exact' designation depends on the ansatz closing; a numerical solution of the full linearized Boltzmann equation expanded in higher angular harmonics at representative parameters would settle whether coefficients beyond $\cos^3\theta$ are genuinely absent or merely small.
  • The same machinery with angle-dependent spinor overlaps could be applied to other multifold fermions, such as pseudospin-1 and sixfold nodes, where interband scattering may also produce sign changes that a relaxation-time treatment would miss.
  • In real materials such as RhSi the isolated-node assumption is tied to the chemical potential sitting near the node; doping away from that region would bring other Fermi pockets and could wash out the predicted band-resolved sign flip.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the longitudinal magnetoconductivity of an isolated isotropic Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node, using the semiclassical Boltzmann equation with Berry curvature and orbital magnetic moment included, beyond the constant relaxation-time approximation. Impurity scattering is treated with intraband and interband channels characterized by parameters β_intra and β_inter. The authors reduce the linearized Boltzmann equation to an 8×8 linear system via a cubic-polynomial ansatz for the mean-free path, impose charge conservation, and compute band-resolved δσ_zz(B). Their central claim is that the s=3/2 and s=1/2 bands respond in opposite ways, with interband scattering flipping the s=3/2 curve into the negative domain, which would distinguish RSWNs from ordinary Weyl nodes.

Significance. If the calculation is correct, the predicted sign and curvature reversal of the band-resolved longitudinal magnetoconductivity is a concrete and falsifiable distinction between RSWNs and conventional Weyl nodes, going beyond the relaxation-time approximation. The paper's strengths are the explicit spinor overlap computation, the inclusion of Berry curvature and orbital magnetic moment, and the attempt to solve the full linearized Boltzmann equation. However, the printed equations contain a normalization inconsistency that directly controls the numerical solution of A N = Υ, and the appendix is not self-contained. These issues must be resolved before the central claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eqs. (19), (23), (26), and Appendix] The normalization of the collision kernel is internally inconsistent. Equation (19) defines |V_{s,tilde s}|^2 = (16×2π/ρ_imp) β_{...}, and Eq. (23) then prints T_{s,tilde s}(θ,θ') as a β-weighted combination of angular functions. In Eq. (26), the prefactor ρ_imp |V_{s,tilde s}|^2/(16×4π) supplies an additional factor β_{...}/2. If Eq. (23) is used literally, every scattering amplitude enters the Boltzmann equation twice, and the Appendix matrix A, which is linear in β (e.g., entries like 3 c_2^1 β_{1/2,1/2}^{intra}), is inconsistent with Eq. (26) combined with Eq. (23). Since the numerical solution of A N = Υ determines the sign and curvature claims in Sec. III C, this ambiguity is load-bearing: either Eq. (23) should be the pure spinor-overlap polynomial with the β factors removed, or Eq. (26) and the Appendix must carry β² terms.
  2. [Appendix, Eq. (32)] The definitions of c^n_{αs} and hc^n_{αs} in Eq. (32) are printed identically, yet the Υ vector of the Appendix contains terms such as 3 hc^2_2 β_inter + 3 hc^0_2 β_inter, which must involve an extra factor of the non-polynomial function h_s(θ) in the integrand. Without a correct definition of hc^n_{αs}, the reader cannot verify the right-hand side of A N = Υ, and the claimed 'exact' solution is not reproducible. The authors should provide the explicit integrands for both c^n and hc^n and show at least one row of A and Υ in full.
  3. [Sec. III B, Eq. (27)] The paper asserts that the eight-dimensional cubic ansatz spans the exact solution space because the collision kernel is polynomial in cosθ, but it does not demonstrate that the right-hand side of Eq. (26) contains no powers of cosθ higher than 3 after the non-polynomial factors τ_s, D_s, and k_F(θ) are integrated. The phrase 'observing the powers of cosθ in (23)' is insufficient for the 'exact computation' claim made in the Abstract and Sec. IV. Either the closure proof should be supplied, or the claim should be softened to state that the solution is obtained within a truncated polynomial basis.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III C] There is a typo: 'bbtained' should be 'obtained'.
  2. [Eq. (23)] The notation β_{1,1}^{intra}, β_{3,3}^{intra} is inconsistent with β_{1/2,1/2}^{intra}, β_{3/2,3/2}^{intra} used elsewhere; please unify the notation.
  3. [Sec. III C and figure captions] The horizontal axis is labeled 'B (in eV 2)' in the figures and text; the units of magnetic field in natural units should be specified clearly, and the axis label should be consistent with the definition σ_zz(B)/σ_zz(0)−1.
  4. [Sec. III B] The sentence stating that rank deficiency 'prevents the system from becoming overdetermined' is confusing: a rank-7 8×8 system is underdetermined unless an additional independent constraint is added. Please clarify that charge conservation supplies the missing equation and state how linear independence is verified.
  5. [General] Several typographical errors appear, including 'degenrate', 'form' for 'from', 'focussing', and 'quasipaticle'; a careful proofread is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Boltzmann-equation calculation is self-contained, and the reported magnetoconductivity is a numerical output rather than an input.

full rationale

The paper's derivation starts from a fixed model Hamiltonian and computes the longitudinal magnetoconductivity by solving a linearized Boltzmann equation with scattering strengths beta as free inputs. No parameter is fitted to the reported sign or curvature of delta sigma_zz(s); those features emerge from the solution of A N = Upsilon. The cubic ansatz of Eq. (27) is an approximation whose validity could affect the correctness or exactness of the calculation, but it is not circular: the claimed distinction between s=3/2 and s=1/2 is not inserted into the ansatz, and the coefficients are determined by the transport equations. Self-citations to earlier works provide notation, the Berry-curvature/orbital-momentum values, and comparisons, but those results are shown or are standard parameter-free consequences of the displayed wavefunctions, and they are not used as a uniqueness theorem to exclude alternatives. The main kinetic-equation framework is attributed to the external Ref. [12] (Knoll, Timm, and Meng), and material parameters are taken from Ref. [58]. Any ambiguity about the normalization of beta factors between Eqs. (23) and (26) is a consistency or correctness concern, not a case of a prediction reducing by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result depends on standard Boltzmann transport plus several modeling choices: isotropic RSWN Hamiltonian, elastic point-like impurities, T=0, isolated node, and the cubic-polynomial ansatz. The scattering strengths beta and chemical potential are free inputs; v_F is taken from literature. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • beta_{1/2,1/2}^{intra} = 1 in Fig. 2; varied in Fig. 3
    Dimensionless intraband scattering strength for the s=1/2 band; chosen by hand, not fixed by data.
  • beta_{3/2,3/2}^{intra} = 1 in Fig. 2; varied in Fig. 3
    Intraband scattering strength for the s=3/2 band; free input to the calculation.
  • beta_{inter} = 0 or varied in Fig. 3
    Interband scattering strength; the central threshold behavior is controlled by this parameter.
  • chemical potential mu = 0.001 to 0.005 eV in plots
    Chosen near the node; sets the Fermi surfaces and which bands contribute.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Semiclassical Boltzmann equations with Berry curvature and orbital magnetic moment corrections (Eqs. (13) and (15)) are valid for the RSWN at weak fields.
    The transport formalism from Refs. [6,12,56,57] is adopted without re-derivation; it assumes well-defined wavepackets and weak fields.
  • domain assumption The magnetic field is weak enough that Landau quantization can be ignored.
    Stated in Sec. I; the calculation treats B as a semiclassical parameter.
  • domain assumption Impurities are elastic, point-like, spinless, and described by Fermi's golden rule with momentum-independent potentials (Eqs. (16)-(18)).
    This restricts the collision integral to the form used in the paper.
  • domain assumption The temperature is zero and mu is positive, so only s=1/2 and s=3/2 conduction bands contribute.
    Sec. III sets T=0 and positive mu; the calculation does not address finite temperature.
  • domain assumption The low-energy model is the isotropic RSWN Hamiltonian H=v_F k·J at the Gamma-point; tilting is excluded by symmetry.
    Sec. II and Sec. IV; based on group-theoretic arguments from Ref. [58].
  • domain assumption The opposite-chirality conjugate node is sufficiently separated in energy and momentum that only the isolated RSWN matters.
    Invoked in Sec. I to justify dropping internode charge pumping and conjugate-node contributions.
  • ad hoc to paper The cubic-polynomial ansatz Eq. (27) spans the exact solution space of the linearized collision operator.
    Load-bearing for the "exact" claim; the paper asserts closure from the polynomial structure of T_{s,tilde_s} but does not prove it for h_s and phase-space factors.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distinguishing features of longitudinal magnetoconductivity for a Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FS5E34OE

@misc{pith2026250612380,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distinguishing features of longitudinal magnetoconductivity for a Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FS5E34OE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.12380}
}
abstract

The band-degeneracy points in the Brillouin zones of chiral crystals exist in multiple avatars, with the high-symmetry points being able to host multifold nodes of distinct characters. A class of such crystals, assisted by the spin-orbit coupling, harbours fourfold degeneracy in the form of Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl node (RSWN) at the $\Gamma$-point. Our aim is to explore the nature of longitudinal magnetoconductivity, arising from applying collinear electric and magnetic fields, for such systems. Adjusting the chemical potential to lie near the intrinsic energy-location of the RSWN, the multifold nature of the RSWN is revealed by an interplay of intraband and interband scatterings, which would not arise in twofold degeneracies like the conventional Weyl nodes. The current study fills up the much-needed gap in obtaining the linear response from an exact computation, rather than the insufficient relaxation-time approximation employed earlier.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.12380 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematics of the energy bands meeting at an isotropic RSWN: (a) Bare dispersion ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Models Know Their Shortcuts: Deployment-Time Shortcut Mitigation

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Shortcut Guardrail mitigates token-level shortcuts in pretrained language models at deployment time via gradient-based token identification and a LoRA-trained Masked Contrastive Learning module, improving accuracy und...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    A. A. Burkov and L. Balents, Weyl semimetal in a topological insulator multilayer, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 127205 (2011)

    2011

  2. [2]

    N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Weyl and Dirac semimetals in three-dimensional solids, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015001 (2018)

    2018

  3. [3]

    Yan and C

    B. Yan and C. Felser, Topological materials: Weyl semimetals, Annual Rev. of Condensed Matter Phys.8, 337 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    M. V. Berry, Quantal phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathe- matical and Physical Sciences392, 45 (1984)

    work page 1984

  5. [5]

    Xiao, M.-C

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

    2010

  6. [6]

    Sundaram and Q

    G. Sundaram and Q. Niu, Wave-packet dynamics in slowly perturbed crystals: Gradient corrections and Berry-phase effects, Phys. Rev. B59, 14915 (1999)

    1999

  7. [7]

    Graf and F

    A. Graf and F. Pi´ echon, Berry curvature and quantum metric inN-band systems: An eigenprojector approach, Phys. Rev. B 104, 085114 (2021). 10

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Ghosh and I

    R. Ghosh and I. Mandal, Electric and thermoelectric response for Weyl and multi-Weyl semimetals in planar Hall configurations including the effects of strain, Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures159, 115914 (2024)

    2024

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Ghosh and I

    R. Ghosh and I. Mandal, Direction-dependent conductivity in planar Hall set-ups with tilted Weyl/multi-Weyl semimetals, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 275501 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    Balduini, A

    F. Balduini, A. Molinari, L. Rocchino, V. Hasse, C. Felser, M. Sousa, C. Zota, H. Schmid, A. G. Grushin, and B. Gotsmann, Intrinsic negative magnetoresistance from the chiral anomaly of multifold fermions, Nature Communications15, 6526 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Medel, R

    L. Medel, R. Ghosh, A. Mart ´ ın-Ruiz, and I. Mandal, Electric, thermal, and thermoelectric magnetoconductivity for Weyl/multi- Weyl semimetals in planar Hall set-ups induced by the combined effects of topology and strain, Scientific Reports14, 21390 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Knoll, C

    A. Knoll, C. Timm, and T. Meng, Negative longitudinal magnetoconductance at weak fields in Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 101, 201402 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Mandal, Anisotropic conductivity for the type-I and type-II phases of Weyl/multi-Weyl semimetals in planar Hall set-ups, arXiv e-prints (2024), arXiv:2410.05028 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    I. Mandal, Anisotropic conductivity for the type-I and type-II phases of Weyl/multi-Weyl semimetals in planar Hall set-ups, arXiv e-prints (2024), arXiv:2410.05028 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Y. Li, Z. Wang, P. Li, X. Yang, Z. Shen, F. Sheng, X. Li, Y. Lu, Y. Zheng, and Z.-A. Xu, Negative magnetoresistance in Weyl semimetals NbAs and NbP: Intrinsic chiral anomaly and extrinsic effects, Frontiers of Phys.12, 127205 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Mandal, S

    I. Mandal, S. Saha, and R. Ghosh, Signatures of topology in generic transport measurements for Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Solid State Communications397, 115799 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Haidar and I

    F. Haidar and I. Mandal, Reflections of topological properties in the planar-Hall response for semimetals carrying pseudospin-1 quantum numbers, Annals of Physics478, 170010 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    +” and “−

    and isolated Kramers-Weyl nodes [35] (the latter arising exclusively in chiral crystals [50, 51]). In this paper, we take up a similar problem where an isotropic RSWN (sitting at the Γ-point) is the system under consideration. As pointed out earlier, only the isolated R WSN wi...

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Mandal, Longitudinal magnetoconductivity in chiral multifold semimetals exemplified by pseudospin-1 nodal points, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2505.19636 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    I. Mandal, Longitudinal magnetoconductivity in chiral multifold semimetals exemplified by pseudospin-1 nodal points, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2505.19636 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  11. [19]

    Hussain Rather, M

    F. Hussain Rather, M. Jaffar A., and I. Mandal, Direction-dependent linear response for gapped nodal-line semimetals in planar-Hall configurations, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2503.10712 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  12. [20]

    Bradlyn, J

    B. Bradlyn, J. Cano, Z. Wang, M. G. Vergniory, C. Felser, R. J. Cava, and B. A. Bernevig, Beyond Dirac and Weyl fermions: Unconventional quasiparticles in conventional crystals, Science353(2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Liang and Y

    L. Liang and Y. Yu, Semimetal with both Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl and Weyl excitations, Phys. Rev. B93, 045113 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    Boettcher, Interplay of topology and electron-electron interactions in Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys

    I. Boettcher, Interplay of topology and electron-electron interactions in Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 127602 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    J. M. Link, I. Boettcher, and I. F. Herbut,d-wave superconductivity and Bogoliubov-Fermi surfaces in Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B101, 184503 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Isobe and L

    H. Isobe and L. Fu, Quantum critical points ofj= 3 2 Dirac electrons in antiperovskite topological crystalline insulators, Phys. Rev. B93, 241113 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    P. Tang, Q. Zhou, and S.-C. Zhang, Multiple types of topological fermions in transition metal silicides, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 206402 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    Mandal, Transmission in pseudospin-1 and pseudospin-3/2 semimetals with linear dispersion through scalar and vector potential barriers, Phys

    I. Mandal, Transmission in pseudospin-1 and pseudospin-3/2 semimetals with linear dispersion through scalar and vector potential barriers, Phys. Lett. A384, 126666 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    Sekh and I

    S. Sekh and I. Mandal, Circular dichroism as a probe for topology in three-dimensional semimetals, Phys. Rev. B105, 235403 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Ma, Q.-S

    J.-Z. Ma, Q.-S. Wu, M. Song, S.-N. Zhang, E. Guedes, S. Ekahana, M. Krivenkov, M. Yao, S.-Y. Gao, W.-H. Fan,et al., Observation of a singular Weyl point surrounded by charged nodal walls in ptga, Nature Communications12, 3994 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Sekh and I

    S. Sekh and I. Mandal, Magnus Hall effect in three-dimensional topological semimetals, Eur. Phys. J. Plus137, 736 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Mandal, Transmission and conductance across junctions of isotropic and anisotropic three-dimensional semimetals, European Physical Journal Plus138, 1039 (2023)

    I. Mandal, Transmission and conductance across junctions of isotropic and anisotropic three-dimensional semimetals, European Physical Journal Plus138, 1039 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Mandal, Andreev bound states in superconductor-barrier-superconductor junctions of Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys

    I. Mandal, Andreev bound states in superconductor-barrier-superconductor junctions of Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys. Lett. A503, 129410 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Chang, B

    G. Chang, B. J. Wieder, F. Schindler, D. S. Sanchez, I. Belopolski, S.-M. Huang, B. Singh, D. Wu, T.-R. Chang, T. Neupert, S.-Y. Xu, H. Lin, and M. Z. Hasan, Topological quantum properties of chiral crystals, Nature Materials17, 978 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    Flicker, F

    F. Flicker, F. de Juan, B. Bradlyn, T. Morimoto, M. G. Vergniory, and A. G. Grushin, Chiral optical response of multifold fermions, Phys. Rev. B98, 155145 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Ghosh, F

    R. Ghosh, F. Haidar, and I. Mandal, Linear response in planar Hall and thermal Hall setups for Rarita-Schwinger-Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B110, 245113 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Mandal, Chiral anomaly and internode scatterings in multifold semimetals, Phys

    I. Mandal, Chiral anomaly and internode scatterings in multifold semimetals, Phys. Rev. B111, 165116 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    Mandal, Disentangling contributions to longitudinal magnetoconductivity for Kramers-Weyl nodes, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2506.07913 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    I. Mandal, Disentangling contributions to longitudinal magnetoconductivity for Kramers-Weyl nodes, arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2506.07913 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  29. [37]

    Cayssol and J

    J. Cayssol and J. N. Fuchs, Topological and geometrical aspects of band theory, Journal of Physics: Materials4, 034007 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    M. M. H. Polash, S. Yalameha, H. Zhou, K. Ahadi, Z. Nourbakhsh, and D. Vashaee, Topological quantum matter to topological phase conversion: Fundamentals, materials, physical systems for phase conversions, and device applications, Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports14...

    2021

  31. [39]

    Nielsen and M

    H. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, A no-go theorem for regularizing chiral fermions, Phys. Lett. B105, 219 (1981)

    1981

  32. [40]

    B. Q. Lv, H. M. Weng, B. B. Fu, X. P. Wang, H. Miao, J. Ma, P. Richard, X. C. Huang, L. X. Zhao, G. F. Chen, Z. Fang, X. Dai, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Experimental discovery of Weyl semimetal TaAs, Phys. Rev. X5, 031013 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Nielsen and M

    H. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, The Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomaly and Weyl fermions in a crystal, Physics Letters B130, 389 (1983)

    1983

  34. [42]

    D. T. Son and B. Z. Spivak, Chiral anomaly and classical negative magnetoresistance of Weyl metals, Phys. Rev. B88, 104412 (2013)

    2013

  35. [43]

    W.-Y. He, X. Y. Xu, and K. T. Law, Kramers Weyl semimetals as quantum solenoids and their applications in spin-orbit torque devices, Communications Physics4, 66 (2021). 11

    2021

  36. [44]

    Chang, S.-Y

    G. Chang, S.-Y. Xu, B. J. Wieder, D. S. Sanchez, S.-M. Huang, I. Belopolski, T.-R. Chang, S. Zhang, A. Bansil, H. Lin, and M. Z. Hasan, Unconventional chiral fermions and large topological Fermi arcs in RhSi, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 206401 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    Z. Ni, K. Wang, Y. Zhang, O. Pozo, B. Xu, X. Han, K. Manna, J. Paglione, C. Felser, A. G. Grushin, F. de Juan, E. J. Mele, and L. Wu, Giant topological longitudinal circular photo-galvanic effect in the chiral multifold semimetal CoSi, Nature Communications12, 154 (2021)

    2021

  38. [46]

    J. E. Moore, Optical properties of Weyl semimetals, National Science Rev.6, 206 (2018)

    2018

  39. [47]

    C. Guo, V. S. Asadchy, B. Zhao, and S. Fan, Light control with Weyl semimetals, eLight3, 2 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    Avdoshkin, V

    A. Avdoshkin, V. Kozii, and J. E. Moore, Interactions remove the quantization of the chiral photocurrent at Weyl points, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 196603 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Mandal, Effect of interactions on the quantization of the chiral photocurrent for double-Weyl semimetals, Symmetry12 (2020)

    I. Mandal, Effect of interactions on the quantization of the chiral photocurrent for double-Weyl semimetals, Symmetry12 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Mandal, Signatures of two- and three-dimensional semimetals from circular dichroism, International Journal of Modern Physics B38, 2450216 (2024)

    I. Mandal, Signatures of two- and three-dimensional semimetals from circular dichroism, International Journal of Modern Physics B38, 2450216 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    Zahid Hasan, G

    M. Zahid Hasan, G. Chang, I. Belopolski, G. Bian, S.-Y. Xu, and J.-X. Yin, Weyl, Dirac and high-fold chiral fermions in topological quantum materials, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2103.01714 (2021), arXiv:2103.01714 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Zhang, F

    C.-L. Zhang, F. Schindler, H. Liu, T.-R. Chang, S.-Y. Xu, G. Chang, W. Hua, H. Jiang, Z. Yuan, J. Sun, H.-T. Jeng, H.-Z. Lu, H. Lin, M. Z. Hasan, X. C. Xie, T. Neupert, and S. Jia, Ultraquantum magnetoresistance in the Kramers-Weyl semimetal candidateβ-Ag 2Se, Phys. Rev. B96, ...

    2017

  45. [53]

    D. S. Sanchez, I. Belopolski, T. A. Cochran, X. Xu, J.-X. Yin, G. Chang, W. Xie, K. Manna, V. S¨ uß, C.-Y. Huang, N. Alidoust, D. Multer, S. S. Zhang, N. Shumiya, X. Wang, G.-Q. Wang, T.-R. Chang, C. Felser, S.-Y. Xu, S. Jia, H. Lin, and M. Zahid Hasan, Topological chiral crys...

    2019

  46. [54]

    N. B. M. Schr¨ oter, D. Pei, M. G. Vergniory, Y. Sun, K. Manna, F. de Juan, J. A. Krieger, V. S¨ uss, M. Schmidt, P. Dudin, B. Bradlyn, T. K. Kim, T. Schmitt, C. Cacho, C. Felser, V. N. Strocov, and Y. Chen, Chiral topological semimetal with multifold band crossings and long F...

    2019

  47. [55]

    Mardanya, M

    S. Mardanya, M. Kargarian, R. Verma, T.-R. Chang, S. Chowdhury, H. Lin, A. Bansil, A. Agarwal, and B. Singh, Unconventional superconducting pairing in a B20 multifold Weyl fermion semimetal, Phys. Rev. Mater.8, L091801 (2024)

    2024

  48. [56]

    Z. S. Gao, X.-J. Gao, W.-Y. He, X. Y. Xu, T. K. Ng, and K. T. Law, Topological superconductivity in multifold fermion metals, Quantum Frontiers1, 3 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Ashcroft and N

    N. Ashcroft and N. Mermin,Solid State Physics(Cengage Learning, 2011)

    2011

  50. [58]

    Mandal and K

    I. Mandal and K. Saha, Thermoelectric response in nodal-point semimetals, Ann. Phys. (Berlin)536, 2400016 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    B. Xu, Z. Fang, M.- ´A. S´ anchez-Mart ´ ınez, J. W. F. Venderbos, Z. Ni, T. Qiu, K. Manna, K. Wang, J. Paglione, C. Bernhard, C. Felser, E. J. Mele, A. G. Grushin, A. M. Rappe, and L. Wu, Optical signatures of multifold fermions in the chiral topological semimetal CoSi, Proce...

    2020

  52. [60]

    D. Xiao, W. Yao, and Q. Niu, Valley-contrasting physics in graphene: Magnetic moment and topological transport, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 236809 (2007)

    2007

  53. [61]

    Graf,Aspects of multiband systems: Quantum geometry, flat bands, and multifold fermions, Theses, Universit´ e Paris-Saclay (2022)

    A. Graf,Aspects of multiband systems: Quantum geometry, flat bands, and multifold fermions, Theses, Universit´ e Paris-Saclay (2022)

    2022

  54. [62]

    L. Li, J. Cao, C. Cui, Z.-M. Yu, and Y. Yao, Planar hall effect in topological Weyl and nodal-line semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 108, 085120 (2023)

    2023

  55. [63]

    Mandal and K

    I. Mandal and K. Saha, Thermopower in an anisotropic two-dimensional Weyl semimetal, Phys. Rev. B101, 045101 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Mandal, Linear response of tilted anisotropic two-dimensional Dirac cones, The European Physical Journal B98, 123 (2025)

    I. Mandal, Linear response of tilted anisotropic two-dimensional Dirac cones, The European Physical Journal B98, 123 (2025)

    2025

  57. [65]

    Onsager, Reciprocal Relations in Irreversible Processes

    L. Onsager, Reciprocal Relations in Irreversible Processes. I., Phys. Rev.37, 405 (1931)

    1931

  58. [66]

    H. B. G. Casimir, On Onsager’s principle of microscopic reversibility, Rev. Mod. Phys.17, 343 (1945)

    1945

  59. [67]

    Jacquod, R

    P. Jacquod, R. S. Whitney, J. Meair, and M. B¨ uttiker, Onsager relations in coupled electric, thermoelectric, and spin transport: The tenfold way, Phys. Rev. B86, 155118 (2012)

    2012

  60. [68]

    St ˚ alhammar, J

    M. St ˚ alhammar, J. Larana-Aragon, J. Knolle, and E. J. Bergholtz, Magneto-optical conductivity in generic Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. B102, 235134 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    Yadav, S

    S. Yadav, S. Sekh, and I. Mandal, Magneto-optical conductivity in the type-I and type-II phases of Weyl/multi-Weyl semimetals, Physica B: Condensed Matter656, 414765 (2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    Mandal and H

    I. Mandal and H. Freire, Transport properties in non-Fermi liquid phases of nodal-point semimetals, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 443002 (2024)

    2024

  63. [71]

    Bose and A

    A. Bose and A. Narayan, Strain-induced topological charge control in multifold fermion systems, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter33, 375002 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.