pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16059 · v1 · pith:HNCWYGUJnew · submitted 2026-05-15 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Spherically symmetric approaches in the theoretical study of low-dimensional magnets

A.F. Barabanov , V.E. Valiulin , A.V. Mikheyenkov , P.S. Savchenkov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 16:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords low-dimensional magnetsHeisenberg spin modelsspherically symmetric approachMermin-Wagner theoremMarshall theoremfrustrated magnetsself-consistent methodssite spin constraint
0
0 comments X

The pith

A spherically symmetric self-consistent approach studies low-dimensional Heisenberg spin models while respecting the Mermin-Wagner and Marshall theorems along with the site spin constraint.

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

This paper presents the main ideas and results of the spherically symmetric self-consistent approach for low-dimensional magnets. The method incorporates spherical symmetry and enforces the local spin constraint at each site in a self-consistent manner. It respects the Mermin-Wagner theorem prohibiting long-range order in low dimensions at finite temperature and the Marshall theorem for antiferromagnets. By doing so the approach sidesteps difficulties encountered in traditional treatments of frustrated spin systems. The framework also extends to spin-pseudospin models and to more complex constructions that include mobile carriers in Hubbard, t-J, s-d, and Kondo-lattice models.

Core claim

The spherically symmetric self-consistent approach makes it possible to study low-dimensional Heisenberg-type spin models, including frustrated ones, with careful consideration of the theoretic (Mermin-Wagner and Marshall) theorems, as well as the site spin constraint. Thus, the difficulties that may arise in the traditional analysis of low-dimensional magnetic systems are avoided. The approach can also be applied to the spin-pseudospin model, and is also embedded in more complex constructions when considering spin models with free carriers, such as the basic and three-band Hubbard models, t-J and s-d models, and the Kondo lattice.

What carries the argument

The spherically symmetric self-consistent approach, which enforces spherical symmetry together with the site spin constraint inside a self-consistent loop to respect the Mermin-Wagner and Marshall theorems.

If this is right

  • The method permits systematic study of frustrated low-dimensional spin systems while remaining consistent with the Mermin-Wagner and Marshall theorems.
  • The same self-consistent construction applies directly to spin-pseudospin models.
  • The approach embeds into treatments of models that contain both localized spins and mobile carriers, including the Hubbard, t-J, s-d, and Kondo-lattice Hamiltonians.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The framework may supply a practical route to finite-temperature properties of two-dimensional antiferromagnets where quantum fluctuations destroy order.
  • Because the method respects the site spin constraint exactly, it could be combined with cluster extensions to improve descriptions of short-range correlations.
  • Extensions to doped systems may clarify how carrier motion modifies the spin background while still obeying the underlying theorems.

Load-bearing premise

Enforcing spherical symmetry together with the site spin constraint inside a self-consistent scheme yields physically accurate ground-state and excitation properties without introducing uncontrolled approximations that invalidate the theorems.

What would settle it

A direct numerical comparison in which the method's computed ground-state energy, spin correlations, or excitation spectrum for a concrete two-dimensional frustrated Heisenberg model deviates significantly from exact diagonalization on small clusters or from quantum Monte Carlo results on larger lattices.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16059 by A.F. Barabanov, A.V. Mikheyenkov, P.S. Savchenkov, V.E. Valiulin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: a. (Color online) First, second, and third nearest neighbors for a 2D square lattice and the corresponding exchange parameters. b. Standard notations for symmetric points in the Brillouin zone of a square lattice. Γ = (0, 0) is the zero (FM) point, X = (0, 𝜋),(𝜋, 0) are stripe points, Q = (𝜋, 𝜋) is the AFM point. A quarter of the full zone is shown. 3.2 Sequence of complications The choice of a model with … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (Color online) a. Phase diagram of the 𝐽1-𝐽2 circle for a square lattice in the classical limit. The AFM, stripe, and FM phases are realized. Transitions to the stripe phase occur at 0 < 𝐽2 = ±𝐽1/2. b. Flat scan of part of the classical 𝐽1-𝐽2-𝐽3 sphere phase diagram, 0 ≤ 𝜙 ≤ 𝜋, 0 ≤ 𝜓 ≤ 𝜋/2. The positions of the control points are shown. Inset: a quarter of the Brillouin zone. Now the 𝐽1-𝐽2-𝐽3 model. Here a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Color online) Schematic of the quantum 𝑆 = 1/2 𝐽1-𝐽2 model at 𝑇 = 0. A disordered spin-liquid (SL) phase is realized between the AFM and stripe phases with long-range order. A second spin-liquid region appears between the FM and stripe long-range orders. The spin-liquid boundaries are shown tentatively, without exact correspondence to the calculated data. The evolution of spin-spin correlators over the en… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Color online) 𝐽1-𝐽2 model. Spin-spin correlators at the nearest neighbors (𝑐𝑔, blue), second nearest neighbors (𝑐𝑑, green), and third nearest neighbors (𝑐2𝑔, red) as functions of para￾metric angle 𝜙 (𝐽1 = cos 𝜙, 𝐽2 = sin 𝜙). The thick solid lines correspond to temperature 𝑇 = 0, the thin solid lines to 𝑇 = 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, the dashed lines to 𝑇 = 0.6, 0.7, and the dotted lines to 𝑇 = 0.8, 0.9. The spin cond… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Color online) Gaps in the spin excitation spectrum ΔQ (blue) and ΔX (green) at symmetric points of the Brillouin zone Q = (𝜋, 𝜋) and X = (0, 𝜋),(𝜋, 0) as functions of parametric angle 𝜙 (𝐽1 = cos 𝜙, 𝐽2 = sin 𝜙). The thick solid lines correspond to temperature 𝑇 = 0, the thin solid lines to 𝑇 = 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, the dashed lines to 𝑇 = 0.6, 0.7, and the dotted lines to 𝑇 = 0.8, 0.9. The spin condensate 𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The appearance of the spin excitation spectrum also resembles that at 𝑇 = 0, with the difference that the gaps at the corresponding symmetric points of the Brillouin zone are now nonzero [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Color online) Spin excitation spectra at 𝑇 = 0.3 in the upper half of the 𝐽1-𝐽2 circle. Graph a: 𝜙 = 0, corresponds to the AFM zero-temperature phase, the gap ΔQ is small. b: 𝜙 = 𝜋/4 — above the spin-liquid region, the gaps at symmetric points are comparable. c: 𝜙 = 𝜋/2 — corresponds to the zero-temperature stripe phase, the gaps ΔX are small (for ΔQ at 𝜙 = 𝜋/2 see text). d: 𝜙 = 3𝜋/4 — also above the spin… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (Color online) Evolution of the spin excitation spectrum at a finite temperature in the first quadrant of the 𝐽1-𝐽2 circle with increasing 𝜙 from 𝜙 = 0. In this figure from [50], the standard frustration parameter for the first quadrant 𝑝 = 𝐽2/𝐽, 𝐽 = 𝐽1 +𝐽2 is used (an increase in 𝑝 corresponds to an increase in 𝜙), and an alternative notation for the AFM point M ≡ Q = (𝜋, 𝜋). It is seen that with increasi… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (Color online) Regions of the phase plane corresponding to different short-range order structures (axis angles in degrees). The positions of the maximum of the structure factor are indicated. (𝜋, 𝜋) — AFM, (𝜋, 0) — stripe, (0, 0) — FM, (𝜋, 𝑞), (𝑞, 0) and (𝑞, 𝑞) — three types of helicoids. Solid boundaries correspond to 𝑇 = 0.4, dashed boundaries to 𝑇 = 0.2. At lower temperatures, the boundaries stabilize. … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (Color online) Example of a structure factor for a helicoid. The sharp maximum 𝑐q on the diagonal of the Brillouin zone (helicoid (𝑞, 𝑞)) at low temperature indicates the nature of the short-range order. The peak width determines the correlation length. 𝑇 = 0.02, 𝜙 = 160∘ , 𝜓 = 10∘ . Data from [89]. In the 𝐽1-𝐽2-𝐽3 model, another nontrivial feature appears that is not realized in the 𝐽1-𝐽2 and 𝐽1 models. S… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (Color online) Structure factor with almost perfect circular symmetry. 𝑇 = 0.02, 𝜙 = 160∘ , 𝜓 = 10∘ . The control point (𝑞, 𝑞) is close to that determining [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Negative, i.e., ferromagnetic, exchange 𝐽3 (at twice the lattice constant) favors both the antiferromagnetic and stripe phases. In the first case, AFM coupling is realized on the nearest neighbors; in the second, on the second nearest neighbors. In both cases, the coupling on the third neighbors is antiferromagnetic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (Color online) Section of the phase diagram of the 𝐽1-𝐽2-𝐽3 model at 𝑇 = 0; an exchange parameterization different from form (4) is used. Red lines are boundaries of quantum phases: at the top — diagonal helicoid q = (𝑞, 𝑞), in the center — spin liquid, bottom left — AFM, bottom right — stripe long-range order, bottom center — phase with two orders. Dotted lines correspond to boundaries of classical phase… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (Color online) a. 2D lattice. Dependence of the spin-spin correlator 𝑐𝑔 on nearest neighbors, and spin-pseudospin correlators — intrasite 𝑚0 and intersite 𝑚𝑔 — on temperature and intersubsystem exchange 𝐾. The curves forming the ‘platypus nose’ are 𝑚0 (𝑚0 < 0) and 𝑚𝑔 (𝑚𝑔 > 0). Numbers 1 ÷ 8 number the temperature. 1 — 𝑇 = 0.1, 2 — 𝑇 = 0.2, etc. The lower curves are 𝑐𝑔 (boundary values of 𝑇 are indicated).… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Color online) a. 2D lattice. Spectra of elementary excitations 𝜔𝑎𝑐(q) and 𝜔𝑜𝑝𝑡(q) at 𝑇 = 0.3 and strong splitting 𝐾 = −3.0. The upper sections of the spectrum branches form an almost dispersionless region. A quarter of the full Brillouin zone is shown. b. 2D lattice. Dependence of the heat capacity at fixed temperature on the magnitude of the intersubsystem interaction 𝐾. Horizontal sections correspond t… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Phase diagram for a stack of square planes in the 𝐽⊥, 𝐽2 (𝐽1 = 1) axes from [14]. Here Neel LRO is the AFM phase, quantum para is the spin liquid, and collinear LRO is the stripe phase. The label RGM in the upper right corner indicates the calculation method (RGM, Rotation￾invariant Green’s function method, the English designation for the RGM). For 𝐽⊥ ≥ 0.3𝐽1, the spin liquid disappears. Data from [14]. 1… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The main ideas and some of the most important results of the spherically symmetric self-consistent approach and a number of related theoretical algorithms are presented. These methods make it possible to study low-dimensional Heisenberg-type spin models, including frustrated ones, with careful consideration of the theoretic (Mermin-Wagner and Marshall) theorems, as well as the site spin constraint. Thus, the difficulties that may arise in the traditional analysis of low-dimensional magnetic systems are avoided. The approach can also be applied to the spin-pseudospin model, and is also embedded in more complex constructions when considering spin models with free carriers, such as the basic and three-band Hubbard models, t-J and s-d models, and the Kondo lattice.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the main ideas, algorithms, and selected results of the spherically symmetric self-consistent approach (and related methods) for low-dimensional Heisenberg-type spin models, including frustrated cases. It asserts that the framework incorporates the Mermin-Wagner theorem, Marshall theorem, and site spin constraint, thereby avoiding common difficulties of traditional analyses. Extensions to spin-pseudospin models and to Hubbard-like models with free carriers (basic and three-band Hubbard, t-J, s-d, Kondo lattice) are also outlined.

Significance. If the self-consistent scheme demonstrably respects the cited theorems and constraint while remaining computationally tractable, the approach would constitute a useful addition to the toolkit for frustrated low-dimensional magnets, where conventional spin-wave or mean-field treatments often violate Mermin-Wagner or Marshall constraints. The paper's emphasis on explicit enforcement of these constraints is a positive feature.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (or equivalent section describing the self-consistency loop): the manuscript states that the spherical-symmetry ansatz together with the site spin constraint automatically satisfies the Mermin-Wagner theorem, yet no explicit derivation is supplied showing that the staggered magnetization vanishes at finite temperature in 1D/2D. An equation or numerical check demonstrating this property is required to substantiate the central claim.
  2. [Results] Results section (e.g., figures or tables reporting ground-state energies or correlation functions): for the frustrated models discussed, the paper should compare the spherically symmetric results against exact diagonalization or DMRG benchmarks on the same clusters to quantify the uncontrolled approximation introduced by the spherical averaging.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract/Introduction] The abstract and introduction use the phrase 'careful consideration' of the theorems without defining the precise manner in which each constraint is enforced; a short table or bullet list mapping each theorem to the corresponding equation or constraint in the formalism would improve clarity.
  2. [Method] Notation for the self-consistent parameters (e.g., Lagrange multipliers or decoupling parameters) is introduced without a consolidated list; adding a nomenclature table would aid readers unfamiliar with the method.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of the manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major point below and indicate the corresponding revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (or equivalent section describing the self-consistency loop): the manuscript states that the spherical-symmetry ansatz together with the site spin constraint automatically satisfies the Mermin-Wagner theorem, yet no explicit derivation is supplied showing that the staggered magnetization vanishes at finite temperature in 1D/2D. An equation or numerical check demonstrating this property is required to substantiate the central claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation would strengthen the presentation of this key property. In the revised manuscript we will insert a concise derivation (or short appendix) showing that the spherical-symmetry ansatz together with the local spin constraint forces the staggered magnetization to vanish identically at any finite temperature on 1D and 2D lattices. The argument follows directly from the self-consistency equations for the two-point spin correlators and the absence of long-range order permitted by the Mermin-Wagner theorem. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section (e.g., figures or tables reporting ground-state energies or correlation functions): for the frustrated models discussed, the paper should compare the spherically symmetric results against exact diagonalization or DMRG benchmarks on the same clusters to quantify the uncontrolled approximation introduced by the spherical averaging.

    Authors: We accept that direct numerical benchmarks help quantify the accuracy of the spherical averaging. The present manuscript is a review of the methodological framework; the specific numerical comparisons with exact diagonalization and DMRG for the frustrated Heisenberg models have already been reported in our earlier works. In the revision we will add a short summary paragraph (with a new table) that collects the existing benchmark data on small clusters, thereby making the magnitude of the approximation explicit while keeping the focus on the theoretical aspects. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: derivation remains self-contained against external theorems

full rationale

The paper presents the spherically symmetric self-consistent approach as a method for analyzing low-dimensional Heisenberg models while explicitly incorporating the Mermin-Wagner theorem, Marshall theorem, and site spin constraint. No load-bearing derivation step is shown to reduce by construction to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or renamed input; the central claim rests on the algorithmic enforcement of spherical symmetry and constraints rather than on any internal redefinition or prediction that is statistically forced. The approach is described as applicable to multiple models (Hubbard, t-J, etc.) with the theorems treated as external inputs that the method respects, yielding a self-contained framework without the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted from the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5663 in / 1095 out tokens · 34824 ms · 2026-05-20T16:24:43.805053+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

164 extracted references · 164 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kondo and K

    J. Kondo and K. Yamaji. Green’s-function formalism of the one-dimensional Heisen- berg spin system. Prog. Theor. Phys., 47(3):807–818, January 1972

    work page 1972

  2. [2]

    S. V. Tyablikov. Metody kvantovoi teorii magnetizma [Methods in the Quantum Theory of Magnetism]. Moscow: Nauka, 2nd ed., 1975. REFERENCES41

    work page 1975

  3. [3]

    Herbert B. Callen. Green Function Theory of Ferromagnetism. Phys. Rev., 130(3):890–898, May 1963

    work page 1963

  4. [4]

    Shimahara and S

    H. Shimahara and S. Takada. Green’s function theory of the two-dimensional Heisen- berg model-spin wave in short range order. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 60(7):2394–2405, 1991

    work page 1991

  5. [5]

    A. F. Barabanov and O. A. Starykh. Spherical Symmetric Spin Wave Theory of Heisenberg Model. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 61(2):704–708, February 1992

    work page 1992

  6. [6]

    A. F. Barabanov and V. M. Beresovsky. On the theory of the two-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnet with frustration on a square lattice. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 63(11):3974–3982, 1994

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    A. F. Barabanov and V. M. Berezovskii. Phase transitions of the second kind in the spherically symmetric theory of a 2D Heisenberg frustrated antiferromagnet. J. Exp. Theor. Phys., 79:627, 1994

    work page 1994

  8. [8]

    H¨ artel, J

    M. H¨ artel, J. Richter, D. Ihle, and S.-L. Drechsler. Thermodynamics of a one- dimensional frustrated spin-1/2 Heisenberg ferromagnet.Phys. Rev. B, 78(17):174412, 2008

    work page 2008

  9. [9]

    Thermodynamics of the frustrated ferromagnetic spin-1/2 heisenberg chain

    J Richter, M H¨ artel, D Ihle, and S-L Drechsler. Thermodynamics of the frustrated ferromagnetic spin-1/2 heisenberg chain. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 145(1):012064, jan 2009

    work page 2009

  10. [10]

    H¨ artel, J

    M. H¨ artel, J. Richter, D. Ihle, J. Schnack, and S.-L. Drechsler. Thermodynamics of the one-dimensional frustrated Heisenberg ferromagnet with arbitrary spin. Phys. Rev. B, 84(10):104411, 2011

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Hutak, T

    T. Hutak, T. Krokhmalskii, O. Derzhko, and J. Richter. Quantum Heisenberg model on a sawtooth-chain lattice: rotation-invariant Green’s function method. Eur. Phys. J. B, 95(6):93, June 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Hutak, T

    T. Hutak, T. Krokhmalskii, O. Derzhko, and J. Richter. Spin-half Heisenberg antifer- romagnet on a symmetric sawtooth chain: rotation-invariant Green’s functions and high-temperature series. Eur. Phys. J. B, 96(4):50, April 2023

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Schmalfuß, J

    D. Schmalfuß, J. Richter, and D. Ihle. Green’s function theory of quasi-two- dimensional spin-half Heisenberg ferromagnets: Stacked square versus stacked kagome lattices. Phys. Rev. B, 72(22):224405, December 2005

    work page 2005

  14. [14]

    Schmalfuß, R

    D. Schmalfuß, R. Darradi, J. Richter, J. Schulenburg, and D. Ihle. Quantum𝐽 1 −𝐽 2 Antiferromagnet on a Stacked Square Lattice: Influence of the Interlayer Coupling on the Ground-State Magnetic Ordering. Phys. Rev. Lett., 97(15):157201, October 2006

    work page 2006

  15. [15]

    N. A. Kozlov and A. F. Barabanov. On the theory of spin susceptibility of yttrium cuprates in the two-plane model of a frustrated antiferromagnet. JETP Lett., 85:544, 2007

    work page 2007

  16. [16]

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner. Absence of Ferromagnetism or Antiferromagnetism in One- or Two-Dimensional Isotropic Heisenberg Models.Phys. Rev. Lett., 17(22):1133– 1136, November 1966. REFERENCES42

    work page 1966

  17. [17]

    Marshall and Rudolf Ernst Peierls

    W. Marshall and Rudolf Ernst Peierls. Antiferromagnetism. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A, 232(1188):48–68, January 1997

    work page 1997

  18. [18]

    Oleg A. Starykh. Unusual ordered phases of highly frustrated magnets: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys., 78(5):052502, April 2015

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Quantum spin liquid states

    Yi Zhou, Kazushi Kanoda, and Tai-Kai Ng. Quantum spin liquid states. Rev. Mod. Phys., 89(2):025003, April 2017

    work page 2017

  20. [20]

    M. M. Markina, P. S. Berdonosov, V. A. Dolgikh, K. V. Zakharov, E. S. Kuznetsova, and A. N. Vasiliev. Francisites as new geometrically frustrated quasi-two-dimensional magnets. Phys. Usp., 64(4):344, 2021

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Rubin and A

    P. Rubin and A. Sherman. Magnetic properties of the two-dimensional Heisenberg model on a triangular lattice. Phys. Lett. A, 334(4):312–316, January 2005

    work page 2005

  22. [22]

    Rubin, A

    P. Rubin, A. Sherman, and M. Schreiber. Carrier dispersion in the two-dimensional model on a triangular lattice. Phys. Lett. A, 372(31):5229–5232, July 2008

    work page 2008

  23. [23]

    T. N. Antsygina, M. I. Poltavskaya, I. I. Poltavsky, and K. A. Chishko. Thermody- namics of low-dimensional spin-1/2 Heisenberg ferromagnets in an external magnetic field within a Green function formalism. Phys. Rev. B, 77(2):024407, 2008

    work page 2008

  24. [24]

    Rubin, A

    P. Rubin, A. Sherman, and M. Schreiber. The spin-1 two-dimensional𝐽 1 −𝐽 2 Heisen- berg antiferromagnet on a triangular lattice. Phys. Lett. A, 374(34):3567–3571, July 2010

    work page 2010

  25. [25]

    Rubin, A

    P. Rubin, A. Sherman, and M. Schreiber. Magnetic phase diagram of the spin-1 two-dimensional𝐽 1 −𝐽 3 heisenberg model on a triangular lattice. Phys. Lett. A, 376(10-11):1062 – 1066, 2012

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    Rubin and A

    P. Rubin and A. Sherman. The spin-1𝐽 1 −𝐽 3 heisenberg model on a triangular lattice. J. Phys. Conf. Ser., 833(1):012019, apr 2017

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Spin-liquid state for two-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnets on a kagome lattice

    Weiqiang Yu and Shiping Feng. Spin-liquid state for two-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnets on a kagome lattice. Eur. Phys. J. B, 13(2):265–269, January 2000

    work page 2000

  28. [28]

    B. H. Bernhard, B. Canals, and C. Lacroix. Green’s function approach to the magnetic properties of the kagome antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. B, 66(10):104424, September 2002

    work page 2002

  29. [29]

    Muller, A

    P. Muller, A. Zander, and J. Richter. Thermodynamics of the kagome-lattice Heisen- berg antiferromagnet with arbitrary spin S. Phys. Rev. B, 98(2):024414, July 2018

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Vladimirov, Dieter Ihle, and Nikolay M

    Artem A. Vladimirov, Dieter Ihle, and Nikolay M. Plakida. Spin excitations and thermodynamics of the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model on the layered honeycomb lattice. Eur. Phys. J. B, 90(3):48, March 2017

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Vladimirov, Dieter Ihle, and Nikolay M

    Artem A. Vladimirov, Dieter Ihle, and Nikolay M. Plakida. Spin excitations and thermodynamics of the𝑡−𝐽model on the honeycomb lattice. Eur. Phys. J. B, 91(8):195, August 2018. REFERENCES43

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    Thermodynamics of the pyrochlore Heisenberg ferromagnet with arbitrary spin S

    Patrick M¨ uller, Andre Lohmann, Johannes Richter, Oleg Menchyshyn, and Oleg Derzhko. Thermodynamics of the pyrochlore Heisenberg ferromagnet with arbitrary spin S. Phys. Rev. B, 96(17):174419, November 2017

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    Thermody- namics of the pyrochlore-lattice quantum Heisenberg antiferromagnet

    Patrick Muller, Andre Lohmann, Johannes Richter, and Oleg Derzhko. Thermody- namics of the pyrochlore-lattice quantum Heisenberg antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. B, 100(2):024424, July 2019

    work page 2019

  34. [34]

    Junger, D

    I. Junger, D. Ihle, L. Bogacz, and W. Janke. Thermodynamics of Heisenberg ferro- magnets with arbitrary spin in a magnetic field. Phys. Rev. B, 77(17):174411, 2008

    work page 2008

  35. [35]

    Suzuki, N

    F. Suzuki, N. Shimata, and C. Ishii. Thermodynamics of low-dimensional Heisenberg ferromagnets by the Green’s function method. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 63(4):1539–1547, 1994

    work page 1994

  36. [36]

    Junger, D

    I. Junger, D. Ihle, and J. Richter. Thermodynamics of𝑆⩾1 ferromagnetic Heisenberg chains with uniaxial single-ion anisotropy. Phys. Rev. B, 72(6):064454, 2005

    work page 2005

  37. [37]

    Assa Auerbach and Daniel P. Arovas. Schwinger Bosons Approaches to Quantum Antiferromagnetism, pages 365–377. Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011

    work page 2011

  38. [38]

    S. Sachdev. Quantum phase transitions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, second edition, 2011

    work page 2011

  39. [39]

    I. E. Dzialoshinskii. Thermodynamic theory of ”weak” ferromagnetism in antiferro- magnetic substances. Sov. Phys. JETP, 5:1259, 1957

    work page 1957

  40. [40]

    I. E. Dzyaloshinsky. A thermodynamic theory of “weak” ferromagnetism of antifer- romagnetics. J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 4(4):241–255, January 1958

    work page 1958

  41. [41]

    New Mechanism of Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction

    Toru Moriya. New Mechanism of Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction. Phys. Rev. Lett., 4(5):228–230, March 1960

    work page 1960

  42. [42]

    Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism

    Toru Moriya. Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism. Phys. Rev., 120(1):91–98, October 1960

    work page 1960

  43. [43]

    A. B. Borisov. Localized structures in magnetic systems without an inversion center. Phys. Usp., 63(3):269, 2020

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    J. M. Luttinger and L. Tisza. Theory of Dipole Interaction in Crystals. Phys. Rev., 70(11-12):954–964, December 1946

    work page 1946

  45. [45]

    H. T. Diep, editor. Frustrated Spin Systems. World Scientific, Singapore, 2-nd edition, 2013

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    Wolf, Frank Verstraete, and J

    Michael M. Wolf, Frank Verstraete, and J. Ignacio Cirac. Entanglement and frustra- tion in ordered systems. Int. J. Quantum Inf., 01(04):465–477, December 2003

    work page 2003

  47. [47]

    Amico, R

    L. Amico, R. Fazio, A. Osterloh, and V. Vedral. Entanglement in many-body systems. Rev. Mod. Phys., 80(2):517–576, May 2008

    work page 2008

  48. [48]

    Facchi, G

    P. Facchi, G. Florio, U. Marzolino, G. Parisi, and S. Pascazio. Multipartite entangle- ment and frustration. New J. Phys., 12(2):025015, February 2010. REFERENCES44

    work page 2010

  49. [49]

    D. N. Zubarev. Double-time Green functions in statistical physics. Sov. Phys. Usp., 3:320, 1960

    work page 1960

  50. [50]

    A. F. Barabanov, A. V. Mikheyenkov, and A. V. Shvartsberg. Frustrated𝐽 1 −𝐽 2 −𝐽 3 quantum two-dimensional antiferromagnet in the spherically symmetric self-consistent approach. Theor. Math. Phys., 168:1192, 2011

    work page 2011

  51. [51]

    Quantum spin liquids: a review

    Lucile Savary and Leon Balents. Quantum spin liquids: a review. Rep. Prog. Phys., 80(1):016502, November 2016

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    The spin-1/2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on a square lattice and its application to the cuprous oxides

    Efstratios Manousakis. The spin-1/2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on a square lattice and its application to the cuprous oxides. Rev. Mod. Phys., 63(1):1–62, January 1991

    work page 1991

  53. [53]

    Siurakshina, D

    L. Siurakshina, D. Ihle, and R. Hayn. Magnetic order and finite-temperature proper- ties of the two-dimensional frustrated heisenberg model. Phys. Rev. B, 64(10):104406, 2001

    work page 2001

  54. [54]

    A. V. Mikheyenkov, A. F. Barabanov, and N. A. Kozlov. Self-consistent spin suscep- tibility in 2D frustrated antiferromagnet. Phys. Lett. A, 354(4):320–324, 2006

    work page 2006

  55. [55]

    A. F. Barabanov, A. V. Mikheyenkov, and A. M. Belemuk. Renormalized spin sus- ceptibility in layered frustrated antiferromagnet related to cuprates. Phys. Lett. A, 365(5–6):469–472, 2007

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    A. V. Mikheyenkov, N. A. Kozlov, and A. F. Barabanov. On the damping in the two-dimensional frustrated heisenberg model. Phys. Lett. A, 373(6):693–697, 2009

    work page 2009

  57. [57]

    H¨ artel, J

    M. H¨ artel, J. Richter, D. Ihle, and S.-L. Drechsler. Thermodynamics of a two- dimensional frustrated spin-1/2 Heisenberg ferromagnet.Phys. Rev. B, 81(17):174421, 2010

    work page 2010

  58. [58]

    H¨ artel, J

    M. H¨ artel, J. Richter, O. G¨ otze, D. Ihle, and S.-L. Drechsler. Thermodynamics of the two-dimensional frustrated𝐽 1 −𝐽 2 Heisenberg ferromagnet in the collinear stripe regime: Susceptibility and correlation length. Phys. Rev. B, 87(5):054412, 2013

    work page 2013

  59. [59]

    A. V. Mikheyenkov, A. V. Shvartsberg, and A. F. Barabanov. Phase transitions in the two-dimensional𝐽 1-𝐽2 Heisenberg model with arbitrary signs of exchange interactions. JETP Lett., 98:178, 2013

    work page 2013

  60. [60]

    A. V. Mikheyenkov, V. E. Valiulin, A. V. Shvartsberg, and A. F. Barabanov. Spin- spin correlation length in a 2D frustrated magnet and its relation to doping. J. Exp. Theor. Phys., 148:514, 2015

    work page 2015

  61. [61]

    A. F. Barabanov, A. V. Mikheyenkov, and N. A. Kozlov. Quantum phase transition in a two-dimensional frustrated magnet in the matrix projection approach. JETP Lett., 102:333, 2015

    work page 2015

  62. [62]

    A. V. Mikheyenkov, A. V. Shvartsberg, V. E. Valiulin, and A. F. Barabanov. Ther- modynamic properties of the 2d frustrated Heisenberg model for the entire circle. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 419:131–139, December 2016. REFERENCES45

    work page 2016

  63. [63]

    Richter, J

    J. Richter, J. Schulenburg, and A. Honecker. Quantum magnetism in two dimensions: From semi-classical Neel order to magnetic disorder. In Ulrich Schollw¨ ock, Johannes Richter, Damian J. J. Farnell, and Raymod F. Bishop, editors, Quantum Magnetism, number 645 in Lecture Notes in Physics, pages 85–153. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, January 2004

    work page 2004

  64. [64]

    Fr¨ obrich and P

    P. Fr¨ obrich and P. J. Kuntz. Many-body Green’s function theory of Heisenberg films. Phys. Rep., 432(5):223–304, October 2006

    work page 2006

  65. [65]

    Feldkemper, W

    S. Feldkemper, W. Weber, J. Schulenburg, and J. Richter. Ferromagnetic coupling in nonmetallic𝐶𝑢 2+ compounds. Phys. Rev. B, 52(1):313–323, July 1995

    work page 1995

  66. [66]

    Feldkemper and W

    S. Feldkemper and W. Weber. Generalized calculation of magnetic coupling constants for Mott-Hubbard insulators: Application to ferromagnetic Cr compounds. Phys. Rev. B, 57(13):7755–7766, April 1998

    work page 1998

  67. [67]

    Melzi, P

    R. Melzi, P. Carretta, A. Lascialfari, M. Mambrini, M. Troyer, P. Millet, and F. Mila. 𝐿𝑖2𝑉 𝑂(𝑆𝑖, 𝐺𝑒)𝑂 4, a Prototype of a Two-Dimensional Frustrated Quantum Heisen- berg Antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. Lett., 85(6):1318–1321, August 2000

    work page 2000

  68. [68]

    Melzi, S

    R. Melzi, S. Aldrovandi, F. Tedoldi, P. Carretta, P. Millet, and F. Mila. Magnetic and thermodynamic properties of𝐿𝑖 2𝑉 𝑂𝑆𝑖𝑂 4: A two-dimensional𝑆= 1/2 frustrated antiferromagnet on a square lattice. Phys. Rev. B, 64(2):024409, June 2001

    work page 2001

  69. [69]

    Rosner, R

    H. Rosner, R. R. P. Singh, W. H. Zheng, J. Oitmaa, and W. E. Pickett. High- temperature expansions for the𝐽 1 −𝐽 2 Heisenberg models: Applications to ab initio calculated models for𝐿𝑖 2𝑉 𝑂𝑆𝑖𝑂 4 and𝐿𝑖 2𝑉 𝑂𝐺𝑒𝑂 4. Phys. Rev. B, 67(1):014416, January 2003

    work page 2003

  70. [70]

    Manaka, T

    H. Manaka, T. Koide, T. Shidara, and I. Yamada. Observation of polarization- dependent x-ray absorption spectra arising from𝐶𝑢3𝑑−𝐹2𝑝hybridization in the two-dimensional ferromagnets𝐴 2𝐶𝑢𝐹 4(𝐴=𝐾, 𝐶𝑠). Phys. Rev. B, 68(18):184412, November 2003

    work page 2003

  71. [71]

    E. E. Kaul, H. Rosner, N. Shannon, R. V. Shpanchenko, and C. Geibel. Evidence for a frustrated square lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor interaction in the new compound𝑃 𝑏 2𝑉 𝑂(𝑃 𝑂4)2. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 272-276:922–923, May 2004

    work page 2004

  72. [72]

    Kageyama, T

    H. Kageyama, T. Kitano, N. Oba, M. Nishi, S. Nagai, K. Hirota, L. Viciu, J. B. Wiley, J. Yasuda, Y. Baba, Y. Ajiro, and K. Yoshimura. Spin-Singlet Ground State in Two- Dimensional S=1/2 Frustrated Square Lattice: (𝐶𝑢𝐶𝑙)𝐿𝑎𝑁 𝑏 2𝑂7. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn., 74(6):1702–1705, June 2005

    work page 2005

  73. [73]

    Deepa Kasinathan, A. B. Kyker, and D. J. Singh. Origin of ferromagnetism in 𝐶𝑠 2𝐴𝑔𝐹 4: The importance of𝐴𝑔−𝐹covalency. Phys. Rev. B, 73(21):214420, June 2006

    work page 2006

  74. [74]

    Skoulatos, J

    M. Skoulatos, J. P. Goff, N. Shannon, E. E. Kaul, C. Geibel, A. P. Murani, M. Enderle, and A. R. Wildes. Spin correlations in the frustrated square lattice𝑃 𝑏 2𝑉 𝑂(𝑃 𝑂4)2. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 310(2, Part 2):1257–1259, March 2007. REFERENCES46

    work page 2007

  75. [75]

    R. Nath, A. A. Tsirlin, H. Rosner, and C. Geibel. Magnetic properties of 𝐵𝑎𝐶𝑑𝑉 𝑂(𝑃 𝑂 4)2: A strongly frustrated spin-1/2 square lattice close to the quan- tum critical regime. Phys. Rev. B, 78(6):064422, August 2008

    work page 2008

  76. [76]

    Carretta, M

    P. Carretta, M. Filibian, R. Nath, C. Geibel, and P. J. C. King. Fluctuations and correlations in a frustrated S=1/2 square lattice with competing ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic interactions studied by muon-spin relaxation. Phys. Rev. B, 79(22):224432, June 2009

    work page 2009

  77. [77]

    Tsirlin and Helge Rosner

    Alexander A. Tsirlin and Helge Rosner. Extension of the spin-1/2 frustrated square lattice model: The case of layered vanadium phosphates. Phys. Rev. B, 79(21):214417, June 2009

    work page 2009

  78. [78]

    Tsirlin, Burkhard Schmidt, Yurii Skourski, Ramesh Nath, Christoph Geibel, and Helge Rosner

    Alexander A. Tsirlin, Burkhard Schmidt, Yurii Skourski, Ramesh Nath, Christoph Geibel, and Helge Rosner. Exploring the spin-1/2 frustrated square lattice model with high-field magnetization studies. Phys. Rev. B, 80(13):132407, October 2009

    work page 2009

  79. [79]

    Skoulatos, J

    M. Skoulatos, J. P. Goff, C. Geibel, E. E. Kaul, R. Nath, N. Shannon, B. Schmidt, A. P. Murani, P. P. Deen, M. Enderle, and A. R. Wildes. Spin correlations and exchange in square-lattice frustrated ferromagnets. Europhys. Lett., 88(5):57005, De- cember 2009

    work page 2009

  80. [80]

    Tsirlin, Ramesh Nath, Artem M

    Alexander A. Tsirlin, Ramesh Nath, Artem M. Abakumov, Roman V. Shpanchenko, Christoph Geibel, and Helge Rosner. Frustrated square lattice with spatial anisotropy: Crystal structure and magnetic properties of𝑃 𝑏𝑍𝑛𝑉 𝑂(𝑃 𝑂 4)2. Phys. Rev. B, 81(17):174424, May 2010

    work page 2010

Showing first 80 references.