Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 83 references

Raman signature of multiple phase transitions and quasi-particle excitations in putative Kitaev spin liquid candidate Na2Co2TeO6

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Temperature-dependent Raman scattering on the cobalt honeycomb magnet Na2Co2TeO6 reports four transitions in phonon self-energies: a quantum paramagnetic crossover near 150 K, a ferroelectric transition near 70 K, zigzag antiferromagnetic…

desk verdict A careful Raman characterization of NCTO with plausible multi-transition signatures; the 70 K ferroelectric claim is the softest piece, but the paper hedges appropriately and the core phonon-anomaly narrative holds up. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03970 v1 pith:IC3CK67K submitted 2025-02-06 cond-mat.str-el

Atul G. Chakkar , Chaitanya B. Auti , Deepu Kumar , Nirmalya Jana , Koushik Pal , Pradeep Kumar This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords Na2Co2TeO6KitaevspinliquidRamanspectroscopyphononself-energyzigzagantiferromagnetismreorientationferroelectrictransitionmagneticcontinuum
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

This paper argues that temperature-dependent Raman scattering on the honeycomb cobalt magnet Na2Co2TeO6 records four distinct temperature scales in one set of measurements: a crossover into a quantum paramagnetic phase near 150 K, a proposed ferroelectric transition near 70 K, zigzag antiferromagnetic order near 30 K, and a spin reorientation near 17 K. The evidence lies in the phonon mode frequencies, linewidths, and intensities, which change slope at each of these temperatures. The paper also reports an asymmetric low-frequency excitation near 63 cm-1 that appears below about 50 K and is assigned to magnetic excitations other than magnons, along with a broad high-frequency magnetic continuum whose temperature dependence suggests frustrated spin dynamics. The reason to care is that a single optical probe would then track all of the relevant ordering and crossover scales of a putative Kitaev spin-liquid candidate, and the phonon anomalies well above the magnetic ordering temperature point to nontrivial spin excitations developing before long-range order sets in.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the temperature-dependent phonon self-energy, extracted by fitting Raman peaks to Lorentzian profiles and following the peak frequency $\omega(T)$ and full width at half maximum $\Gamma(T)$. Above 150 K these are described by a three- and four-phonon anharmonic model; deviations and slope changes below that temperature are the signatures of each transition. The Fano profile $I(\delta)\propto(1+q^{-1}\delta)^2/(1+\delta^2)$ quantifies the coupling of the discrete $S^*$ mode to an underlying continuum, with $1/q$ as the coupling strength. Quasi-elastic scattering is converted through the Raman response and a Kramers-Kronig relation into a dynamic susceptibility and an estimate of the magnetic specific heat, both of which also show changes at the four temperatures.

What would settle it

A temperature-dependent x-ray or neutron diffraction study across 70 K, or a second-harmonic-generation or dielectric measurement, would settle whether the $P6_{3}22$-to-$P6_{3}$ polar transition actually occurs at $T_\mathrm{FE}$. If no polar structural change or dielectric anomaly appears near 70 K while the Raman plateau remains, the ferroelectric assignment would be ruled out; conversely, an applied magnetic field that removes the 17 K spin-reorientation signature while leaving the 70 K phonon plateau unchanged would confirm the two are distinct transitions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the renormalized self-energy parameters—mode frequency $\omega(T)$ and full width at half maximum $\Gamma(T)$—of Raman-active phonons in Na2Co2TeO6 show reproducible slope changes at $T^*\sim150$ K, $T_\mathrm{FE}\sim70$ K, $T_\mathrm{N}\sim30$ K, and $T_\mathrm{SR}\sim17$ K, and that these mark, respectively, a crossover from a pure paramagnet to a quantum paramagnetic phase, a ferroelectric transition in which the structure is suggested to change from $P6_{3}22$ to polar $P6_{3}$, the onset of long-range zigzag antiferromagnetic order, and a spin reorientation inside the ordered phase. In the low-frequency spectrum an asymmetric Fano-shaped mode $S^*$ near 63 cm$^{-1}$ appears below about 50 K and is assigned to magnetic excitations distinct from magnons; its Fano asymmetry parameter changes slope at $T_\mathrm{SR}$ and $T_\mathrm{N}$, tying it to the magnetic order. A broad continuum between roughly 330 and 1400 cm$^{-1}$ loses intensity sharply above $T_\mathrm{N}$ and shows a further slope change near $T^*$, which the paper reads as evidence of frustrated magnetic interactions in the quantum paramagnetic regime. Polarization-dependent data show one phonon mode, P16, whose intensity pattern rotates by nearly 90 degrees between 5 K and 300 K, indicating that the underlying phase changes alter the Raman selection rules.

Load-bearing premise

The 70 K ferroelectric transition is inferred from a plateau in phonon frequency and linewidth between roughly 70 K and 30 K plus the appearance of a weak mode $P^*$, assuming these reflect the reported $P6_{3}22$-to-$P6_{3}$ polar structural change; the paper presents no structural, dielectric, or polarization data of its own, so if that structural change does not occur at 70 K, the ferroelectric-transition claim loses its Raman support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single optical probe can separate the four temperature scales in Na2Co2TeO6, making Raman spectroscopy a practical diagnostic for phase boundaries in honeycomb cobaltates.
  • Phonon renormalization beginning near 150 K implies spin-phonon coupling and nontrivial spin excitations exist well above the magnetic ordering temperature, consistent with short-range correlated or frustrated spin physics.
  • The broad magnetic continuum and its temperature dependence support the presence of frustrated magnetic interactions in the quantum paramagnetic phase and invite comparison with fractionalized-excitation scenarios in Kitaev candidates.
  • The Fano mode $S^*$ at 63 cm$^{-1}$ provides a distinct low-energy excitation tied to the magnetic order, useful for probing how disorder or magnetic fields renormalize non-magnon excitations.
  • The near-90-degree rotation of the P16 polarization pattern between 5 K and 300 K shows that the Raman selection rules in this material are tunable across the underlying phase transitions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the four-temperature picture holds, Raman spectroscopy could serve as a quick screening tool for other $d^7$ honeycomb Kitaev candidates, with phonon self-energy anomalies flagging candidate spin-liquid regimes before neutron or thermodynamic studies are undertaken.
  • The 70 K assignment is the most exposed part of the paper; a dedicated structural or dielectric probe would either verify the polar $P6_{3}$ phase or require reinterpreting the phonon plateau as short-range magnetic correlations rather than ferroelectric order.
  • The temperature-dependent rotation of the P16 polarization pattern, if confirmed as an order-parameter-like effect, could become a sensitive optical probe of symmetry changes; a microscopic model connecting the rotation angle to the proposed polar or magnetic order would be a testable extension.
  • Measuring the magnetic-field dependence of the $S^*$ mode would test whether it is the same non-magnon excitation as the roughly 55 cm$^{-1}$ excitation reported for this compound, and whether its Fano coupling tracks the spin-reorientation transition.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports temperature-dependent (5–300 K) and polarization-dependent Raman scattering measurements on single-crystal Na2Co2TeO6, together with DFT-based harmonic phonon calculations. The central claim is that the temperature evolution of phonon self-energies (frequency, linewidth, intensity), the Fano line shape of a low-energy mode S*, the quasi-elastic dynamic Raman susceptibility, and a broad high-frequency continuum reveal four distinct temperature scales: a crossover to a quantum paramagnetic phase near T* ~ 150 K, a ferroelectric transition near TFE ~ 70 K, zigzag antiferromagnetic order near TN ~ 30 K, and a spin-reorientation transition near TSR ~ 17 K. The paper also reports weak modes below ~50–70 K (S* and P*), crystal-field excitations with Kramers-degeneracy lifting, and a temperature-dependent rotation of the polarization pattern of mode P16, which the authors interpret as evidence for tunable optical selection rules across the phase transitions.

Significance. If the four transition temperatures are all correctly identified by Raman spectroscopy, the paper would be a valuable demonstration that a single optical probe tracks the magnetic, polar, and quantum-paramagnetic scales in a Kitaev candidate. The dataset is substantial: spectra over a broad range, multiple phonon modes followed with fine temperature steps near TSR, polarization measurements at four temperatures, and DFT support for mode assignment. The Fano analysis of S*, the Kramers–Kronig treatment of the quasi-elastic response, and the temperature dependence of the magnetic continuum give the manuscript several independent-looking strands of evidence. However, the identification of the 70 K ferroelectric transition is the least secured element of the central claim and is supported only by indirect Raman signatures, while the 17 K spin-reorientation signature is small and presented without statistical quantification. The present evidence is therefore suggestive rather than conclusive for the full four-transition scenario.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figs. 2 and 3] The ferroelectric transition at TFE ~ 70 K is the load-bearing claim of the abstract, but the evidence presented is indirect. The text states that the transition 'is suggested' from a P6322 (#182) to polar P63 (#173) structural change and cites reference [34], with no structural, dielectric, or polarization data from this work. The supporting Raman evidence is (i) a near-constant phonon frequency and FWHM between ~70 K and ~30 K and (ii) the appearance of a weak mode P* below ~70 K. A plateau in self-energy parameters is not specific to polar order: it could equally arise from the onset of short-range magnetic correlations, which are known in this material below ~50 K (reference [31]), or from a change in phonon decay channels. Similarly, P* is a single weak unassigned line; without a symmetry analysis, a magnetic-field response, or a structural measurement, it could be a zone-folded mode, a defect/impurity mode, or a magnetic excitation rather than a polar soft mode. If the 70 K anomaly is not the P6322-to-P63 transition, the abstract's four-transition claim reduces to three transitions plus an uninterpreted anomaly, and the multiferroic suggestion loses its Raman support. The authors should either provide additional measurements/analysis that establish the polar nature of the transition or explicitly reframe TFE as an anomaly of unidentified origin.
  2. [Section 3.1, Abstract, and Introduction] There is an internal inconsistency in the onset temperature of the asymmetric low-frequency mode S*. The Abstract and Section 3.1 state that S* appears only below ~50 K, whereas the Introduction states that an asymmetric phonon mode appears below the transition temperature ~70 K and 'potentially corresponds to a structural transition and/or underlying magnetic excitations.' The text also refers separately to P* appearing below ~70 K, but the Introduction's wording conflates the two modes. Since the 70 K structural/polar interpretation depends on which mode appears at which temperature, this ambiguity must be resolved: specify the onset temperatures of S* and P* separately and state explicitly what each mode is claimed to represent.
  3. [Section 3.2, Fig. 3(a) and insets of Fig. 2] The spin-reorientation transition at TSR ~ 17 K is supported by visually identified changes in the slopes of phonon frequency and FWHM versus temperature, but no error bars, derivatives, or statistical tests are presented. For example, Fig. 3(a) shows only small changes in P23–P25 frequencies between 5 and 40 K, and the inset slopes near 17 K are comparable to the scatter of the data. Because TSR is a central element of the four-transition claim, the authors should show uncertainties on the fitted parameters and provide a quantitative criterion (e.g., a slope-break or F-test) that establishes that the changes near 17 K are significant rather than the result of measurement noise or fitting drift.
  4. [Section 3.4, Eqs. (3) and (4), Fig. 5] The extracted magnetic specific heat Cm is used in Fig. 5(d) as independent confirmation of all four transitions, but the extraction relies on a hydrodynamic relation and a Kramers–Kronig integral with an upper cutoff Omega = 75 cm^-1. No analysis is given of how the result depends on the choice of Omega, on the extrapolation to zero frequency, or on whether the hydrodynamic regime is valid across the full temperature range, including the quantum paramagnetic and ordered phases. The power-law fit chi_dyn(T) ~ T^beta with beta = -0.38 is reported without an uncertainty. The authors should either validate this extraction against a known model or present it as a qualitative indicator rather than as quantitative support for the transition temperatures.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Equations (1) and (2)] The anharmonic fitting formulae are garbled in the manuscript: the exponentials and parentheses do not render correctly, making it impossible to reproduce the fits from the text alone. Please rewrite them cleanly with all factors defined.
  2. [Section 3.1 and Table I] The Raman spectrum at 5 K is reported to contain 'more than twenty-seven' modes, but Table I lists 25 named modes including S* and P*. Please reconcile the count and ensure that every observed mode is either assigned or explicitly stated to be unassigned.
  3. [Section 3.5, Fig. 7] The rotation of the P16 polar plot is interesting, but the text states that 'solid red lines are the fitted curves' only for Fig. 6(a); Fig. 7 does not show any fitted curves or uncertainties. Please provide fits for the rotated maxima and define the parameter Psi (rotation angle) quantitatively.
  4. [Figure 5(d)] The y-axis label 'log10 Cm' in the main text conflicts with the caption's description of Cm, and the scale is otherwise not defined. Please clarify whether the plotted quantity is log(Cm) and give units or normalization.
  5. [References] Reference [27] is incomplete ('Supplemental Material of___'), and several cited articles (e.g., references [45]–[47]) are listed in the Introduction but appear not to be discussed in the body text. Please match the citation list to the in-text callouts.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: phase-transition temperatures are extracted from measured phonon self-energy slopes; literature values are used as external benchmarks, not as fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are experimental: temperature-dependent Raman spectra are measured, phonon modes are fitted to Lorentzian/Fano profiles, and the reported transition temperatures (TN ~ 30 K, TFE ~ 70 K, T* ~ 150 K, TSR ~ 17 K) are read off as changes in the slopes of the fitted frequency, linewidth, and intensity as functions of temperature. These temperatures are not obtained by fitting a model that already contains them, nor by fitting to a subset of the same data that then 'predicts' a closely related quantity. The anharmonic fits in Eqs. (1)-(2) are standard descriptions of the high-temperature behavior and are not used to generate the transition temperatures. The Fano analysis, the power-law fit for the dynamic susceptibility, and the extraction of magnetic specific heat via Eq. (4) are model-dependent analyses of independent Raman channels, but none of them reduces by construction to the phase-transition claims. The assignment of the ~70 K anomaly to a ferroelectric transition rests on an external structural report (ref. [34]) and is presented with hedging ('is suggested'); this is an interpretive assumption and a potential correctness risk, not a circular step. The self-citations in the reference list are methodological or contextual (e.g., refs. [37], [39], [41], [43], [46], [65], [68], [69]) and do not carry the load of the central claims. No uniqueness theorem is invoked, and no result is forced by a self-citation chain. The weakest assumption, the ferroelectric assignment at 70 K, is an external-benchmark interpretation rather than a self-derived prediction. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained against the measured Raman data, and no significant circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on standard group theory, DFT phonon calculations with Ueff from the literature, anharmonic and Fano fitting models, and a hydrodynamic relation for Cm. The main free parameters are the coefficients in these fits and the chosen Kramers-Kronig cutoff. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Anharmonic expansion coefficients A, B, C, D = Listed in Table II for P4-P25, e.g., A=-1.35±0.12 for P4
    Fitted to phonon frequency and linewidth vs temperature using equations (1) and (2) in the range 150-300 K. Used to define the anharmonic baseline above T*.
  • Fano asymmetry parameter q for S* mode = Temperature dependent, 1/|q| ranges roughly 0.9-1.5 arb. units between 5 and 50 K
    Fitted to the S* line shape at each temperature to quantify the phonon-continuum coupling and its slope changes at TSR and TN.
  • Power-law exponent beta for chi_dyn(T) = -0.38
    Fitted to the temperature dependence of the dynamic Raman susceptibility in Figure 5(c); used to characterize the growth of low-energy magnetic fluctuations.
  • Kramers-Kronig upper cutoff Omega = 75 cm^-1
    Chosen cutoff for integrating the Raman response to obtain chi_dyn. Affects absolute values of chi_dyn and Cm, but not the reported transition temperatures.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Group-theoretical mode decomposition for space group P6322 (#182) is correct and observed modes correspond to the predicted Raman-active irreps.
    Used in Section 3.1 and Table III to assign symmetries and interpret polarization dependences; if wrong, symmetry assignments and the P16 rotation analysis fail.
  • domain assumption The anharmonic model (equations 1-2) adequately describes the T>150 K phonon baseline.
    Used to identify deviations below 150 K as anomalies; if the model is incomplete, the extracted anomaly temperatures shift.
  • ad hoc to paper The broad continuum in 330-1400 cm^-1 is magnetic in origin.
    Central to the claim of frustrated magnetic interactions; the paper does not rule out second-order phonon or impurity scattering contributions.
  • domain assumption The hydrodynamic relation (equation 4) connects Raman conductivity to magnetic specific heat.
    Used to extract Cm(T) from quasi-elastic scattering; depends on validity of the hydrodynamic limit for this quasi-2D magnet.
  • domain assumption The DFT ground-state Na ordering and AFM configuration chosen from total energy are the physical ones.
    The DFT phonon frequencies in Table I depend on this structural and magnetic choice; Ueff=5 eV is taken from ref [24].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Raman signature of multiple phase transitions and quasi-particle excitations in putative Kitaev spin liquid candidate Na2Co2TeO6." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IC3CK67K

@misc{pith2026250203970,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Raman signature of multiple phase transitions and quasi-particle excitations in putative Kitaev spin liquid candidate Na2Co2TeO6},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IC3CK67K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03970}
}
read the original abstract

Two-dimensional cobalt-based honeycomb oxide Na2Co2TeO6 is an important candidate for the realization of Kitaev physics and may provide future platform for the quantum computation and quantum technology. Here, we report an in-depth temperature as well as polarization dependent inelastic light scattering (Raman) measurements on the single crystals of quasi-two-dimensional Na2Co2TeO6. Our study reveal signature of multiple phase transitions i.e. long-range zigzag antiferromagnetic transition (TN) at ~ 30 K, ferroelectric transition (TFE) at ~ 70 K, and a crossover from pure paramagnetic phase to a quantum paramagnetic phase around ~ 150 K reflected in the renormalized self-energy parameters of the Raman active phonon modes. A distinct signature of spin reorientation deep into the AFM phase around TSR ~ 17 K is observed, marked by the clear change in the frequency and linewidth slopes. We also observed an asymmetric phonon mode in the low frequency region, and it appears below the transition temperature ~ 50 K, attributed to the magnetic excitations other than the magnon. The Raman signature of multiple crystal-field excitations at low temperature along with lifting of the Kramers degeneracy is also observed. Signature of the underlying broad magnetic continuum in the quantum paramagnetic phase and its temperature dependence suggest presence of frustrated magnetic interaction in the quantum paramagnetic phase below ~ 150 K.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03970 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Raman spectrum of Na2Co2TeO6 in the spectral range of ~200 to 720 cm-1 recorded at 5 K using 633 nm laser excitation. Insets in the green shaded area are the amplified spectra in the spectral range of 200 to 350 cm-1 (left side) and 380 to 615 cm-1 (right side). (b) Shows the temperature evolution of the Raman spectrum in the spectral range of 30 to 615 cm￾1 . Shaded region around ~ 120 cm-1 and low frequency at… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) and (b) Shows the temperature dependence of the frequency and FWHM of the phonon modes P4, P7, P8, P12, and P14; respectively. (c) and (d) Shows the temperature dependence of the frequency and FWHM of the phonon modes P15, P20, P23, P24, and P25; respectively (the solid red line shows a three and four phonon fitting in the temperature range of ~ 150 to 330 K). TN ~ 30 K, TFE ~70 K, and T* ~150 K represents the Z… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Temperature dependence of the frequency of modes P23-P25 in the range of ~ 5-40 K, measured at an interval of ~ 2 K. (b) Shows the temperature evolution of the Fano peak S* at three different temperatures, plotted on the same intensity scale. (c) Temperature dependence of the asymmetry, 1/ q , in the temperature range of ~ 5-50 K. (d) and (e) Temperature dependence of the intensity of the phonon modes P4, P5, P1… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    Yang et al., Significant thermal Hall effect in the 3d cobalt Kitaev system 22 Na2Co2TeO6, Phys

    H. Yang et al., Significant thermal Hall effect in the 3d cobalt Kitaev system 22 Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 106, L081116 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [31]

    Lefrançois et al., Magnetic properties of the Honeycomb oxide Na2Co2TeO6, Phys

    E. Lefrançois et al., Magnetic properties of the Honeycomb oxide Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 94, 214416 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [1]

    Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    L. Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    2010

  4. [2]

    Experimental and computational details 2.1. Experimental details Temperature dependent Raman scattering measurements were performed using the Lab RAM HR-Evolution Raman spectrometer with 1800 lines /mm grating in the backscattering configuration and closed -cycle He -flow cryostat (Montana) from 5 to 300 K with ± 0.1K accuracy. The spectra were excited us...

  5. [3]

    Results and Discussions 3.1. Lattice Vibrations in Na2Co2TeO6 Bulk single crystal of two-dimensional Na2Co2TeO6 belongs to the non-centrosymmetric space group P6322 (#182) and point group D6 (222) in the hexagonal structure and it contained edge sharing CoO 6 (and TeO 6) octahedra that form a perfect honeycomb lattice of the Co 2+ ions [34,36]. According ...

    2023

  6. [4]

    Y. Zhou, K. Kanoda, and T. K. Ng, Quantum spin liquid states, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [5]

    Knolle and R

    J. Knolle and R. Moessner, A field Guide to spin liquids, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 10, 451 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [6]

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Absence of ferromagnetism or antiferromagnetism in one- or two-dimensional isotropic Heisenberg models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1133 (1966)

    work page 1966

Show all 83 references
  1. [7]

    Gong et al., Discovery of intrinsic ferromagnetism in two-dimensional van der waals crystals, Nature 546, 265 (2017)

    C. Gong et al., Discovery of intrinsic ferromagnetism in two-dimensional van der waals crystals, Nature 546, 265 (2017)

    2017

  2. [8]

    Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Ann. Phys. (N. Y). 321, 2 (2006)

    2006

  3. [9]

    Takagi, T

    H. Takagi, T. Takayama, G. Jackeli, G. Khaliullin, and S. E. Nagler, Concept and realization of Kitaev quantum spin liquids, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 264 (2019)

    2019

  4. [10]

    Jackeli and G

    G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Mott insulators in the strong spin-orbit coupling limit: from Heisenberg to a quantum compass and Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009)

    2009

  5. [11]

    Hermanns, I

    M. Hermanns, I. Kimchi, and J. Knolle, Physics of the Kitaev model:fractionalization, dynamic correlations, and material connections, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 9, 20 17-33 (2018)

    2018

  6. [12]

    Liu and G

    H. Liu and G. Khaliullin, Pseudospin exchange interactions in d7 Cobalt compounds: possible realization of the Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B 97, 014407 (2018)

    2018

  7. [13]

    H. B. Cao, A. Banerjee, J. Q. Yan, C. A. Bridges, M. D. Lumsden, D. G. Mandrus, D. A. Tennant, B. C. Chakoumakos, and S. E. Nagler, Low-temperature crystal and magnetic structure of α-RuCl3, Phys. Rev. B 93, 134423(2016)

    2016

  8. [14]

    J. A. Sears, M. Songvilay, K. W. Plumb, J. P. Clancy, Y. Qiu, Y. Zhao, D. Parshall, and Y. J. Kim, Magnetic order in α-RuCl3: A honeycomb-lattice quantum magnet with strong spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B 91, 144420 (2015)

    2015

  9. [15]

    Lampen-Kelley, S

    P. Lampen-Kelley, S. Rachel, J. Reuther, J.-Q. Yan, A. Banerjee, C. A. Bridges, H. B. Cao, S. E. Nagler, and D. Mandrus, Anisotropic susceptibilities in the honeycomb Kitaev system α-RuCl3, Phys. Rev. B 98, 100403(R) (2018)

    2018

  10. [16]

    Kitagawa, T

    K. Kitagawa, T. Takayama, Y. Matsumoto, A. Kato, R. Takano, Y. Kishimoto, S. Bette, R. Dinnebier, G. Jackeli, and H. Takagi, A spin-orbital-entangled quantum liquid on a honeycomb lattice, Nature 554, 341 (2018)

    2018

  11. [17]

    J. H. Roudebush, K. A. Ross, and R. J. Cava, Iridium containing honeycomb delafossites by topotactic cation exchange, Dalt. Trans. 45, 8783 (2016)

    2016

  12. [18]

    Todorova, A

    V. Todorova, A. Leineweber, L. Kienle, V. Duppel, and M. Jansen, On AgRhO2, and the new quaternary delafossites AgLi1/3M2/3O2, syntheses and analyses of real structures, J. Solid State Chem. 184, 1112 (2011)

    2011

  13. [19]

    Singh and P

    Y. Singh and P. Gegenwart, Antiferromagnetic mott insulating state in single crystals of the honeycomb lattice material Na2IrO3, Phys. Rev. B 82, 064412 (2010)

    2010

  14. [20]

    S. C. Williams et al., Incommensurate counterrotating magnetic order stabilized by Kitaev interactions in the layered honeycomb α-Li2IrO3, Phys. Rev. B 93, 195158 (2016)

    2016

  15. [21]

    Chen et al., Spin-orbit phase behavior of Na2Co2TeO6 at low temperatures, Phys

    W. Chen et al., Spin-orbit phase behavior of Na2Co2TeO6 at low temperatures, Phys. Rev. B 103, L180404 (2021)

    2021

  16. [22]

    R. Sano, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Kitaev-Heisenberg Hamiltonian for high-spin d7 Mott insulators, Phys. Rev. B 97, 014408 (2018). 21

    2018

  17. [23]

    H. Liu, J. Chaloupka, and G. Khaliullin, Kitaev spin liquid in 3d transition metal compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 047201 (2020)

    2020

  18. [24]

    Motome, R

    Y. Motome, R. Sano, S. Jang, Y. Sugita, and Y. Kato, Materials design of Kitaev spin liquids beyond the Jackeli-Khaliullin mechanism, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 32, 404001 (2020)

    2020

  19. [25]

    H. K. Vivanco, B. A. Trump, C. M. Brown, and T. M. McQueen, Competing antiferromagnetic-ferromagnetic states in a d7 Kitaev honeycomb magnet, Phys. Rev. B 102, 224411 (2020)

    2020

  20. [26]

    S. K. Pandey and J. Feng, Spin interaction and magnetism in cobaltate Kitaev candidate materials: An ab Initio and model Hamiltonian approach, Phys. Rev. B 106, 174411 (2022)

    2022

  21. [27]

    R. D. Johnson et al., Monoclinic crystal structure of α-RuCl3 and the zigzag antiferromagnetic ground state, Phys. Rev. B 92, 235119 (2015)

    2015

  22. [28]

    F. Ye, S. Chi, H. Cao, B. C. Chakoumakos, J. A. Fernandez-baca, R. Custelcean, T. F. Qi, O. B. Korneta, and G. Cao, Direct evidence of a zigzag spin-chain structure in the honeycomb lattice: A neutron and x-ray diffraction investigation of single-crystal Na2IrO3, Phys. Rev. B ...

    2012

  23. [29]

    See Supplemental Material of___ for details on schematics, polarization study of the phonon using 633 nm laser excitation

  24. [30]

    al., Field-induced quantum spin disordered state in spin 1/2 honeycomb magnet Na2Co2TeO6, Nat

    Gaoting Lin, et. al., Field-induced quantum spin disordered state in spin 1/2 honeycomb magnet Na2Co2TeO6, Nat. Commun. 12, 5559 (2021)

    2021

  25. [32]

    Yao and Y

    W. Yao and Y. Li, Ferrimagnetism and anisotropic phase tunability by magnetic fields in Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 101, 85120 (2020)

    2020

  26. [33]

    A. K. Bera, S. M. Yusuf, A. Kumar, and C. Ritter, Zigzag antiferromagnetic ground state with anisotropic correlation lengths in the quasi-two-dimensional honeycomb lattice compound Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 95, 094424(2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    Li et al., Magnon-polaron driven thermal Hall effect in a Heisenberg-Kitaev antiferromagnet, Phys

    N. Li et al., Magnon-polaron driven thermal Hall effect in a Heisenberg-Kitaev antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B 108, L140402 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Mukherjee, G

    S. Mukherjee, G. Manna, P. Saha, S. Majumdar, and S. Giri, Ferroelectric order with a linear high-field magnetoelectric coupling in Na2Co2TeO6: A proposed Kitaev compound, Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, 054407 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    C. H. Lee, S. Lee, Y. S. Choi, Z. H. Jang, R. Kalaivanan, R. Sankar, and K. Y. Choi, Multistage development of anisotropic magnetic correlations in the Co-based honeycomb lattice Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 103, 214447 (2021)

    2021

  30. [38]

    Xiao et al., Crystal growth and the magnetic properties of Na2Co2TeO6 with quasi- two-dimensional Honeycomb lattice, Cryst

    G. Xiao et al., Crystal growth and the magnetic properties of Na2Co2TeO6 with quasi- two-dimensional Honeycomb lattice, Cryst. Growth Des. 19, 2568 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    Singh, M

    B. Singh, M. Vogl, S. Wurmehl, S. Aswartham, B. Büchner, and P. Kumar, Kitaev magnetism and fractionalized excitations in double perovskite Sm2ZnIrO6, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013040 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    L. J. Sandilands, Y. Tian, K. W. Plumb, Y. J. Kim, and K. S. Burch, Scattering continuum and possible fractionalized excitations in α-RuCl3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 147201 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Kumar, A

    P. Kumar, A. Bera, D. V. S. Muthu, S. N. Shirodkar, R. Saha, A. Shireen, A. Sundaresan, U. V. Waghmare, A. K. Sood, and C. N. R. Rao, Coupled phonons, magnetic excitations, and ferroelectricity in AlFeO3: Raman and first-principles studies, Phys. Rev. B 85, 134449 (2012)

    2012

  34. [42]

    Wulferding, Y

    D. Wulferding, Y. Choi, W. Lee, and K. Y. Choi, Raman spectroscopic diagnostic of quantum spin liquids, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 32, (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    Kumar, D

    V. Kumar, D. Kumar, B. Singh, Y. Shemerliuk, M. Behnami, B. Büchner, S. Aswartham, and P. Kumar, Fluctuating fractionalized spins in quasi-two-dimensional magnetic V0.85PS3, Phys. Rev. B 107, 094417(2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Glamazda, P

    A. Glamazda, P. Lemmens, S.-H. Do, Y. S. Kwon, and K.Y. Choi, Relation between Kitaev magnetism and structure in α-RuCl3, Phys. Rev. B 95, 174429 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    Singh, D

    B. Singh, D. Kumar, K. Manna, A. K. Bera, G. A. Cansever, A. Maljuk, S. Wurmehl, 23 B. Büchner, and P. Kumar, Correlated paramagnetism and interplay of magnetic and phononic degrees of freedom in 3d-5d coupled La2CuIrO6, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 31, 485803(2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    Khan, et.al., The interplay of topology and antiferromagnetic order in two- dimensional van der Waals crystals of (NixFe1−x)2P2S6, 2D Mater

    N. Khan, et.al., The interplay of topology and antiferromagnetic order in two- dimensional van der Waals crystals of (NixFe1−x)2P2S6, 2D Mater. 11, 035018(2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    L. Luo, W. Ge, J. Li, D. Viehland, C. Farley, R. Bodnar, Q. Zhang, and H. Luo, Raman spectroscopic study of Na1/2Bi1/2TiO3-X%BaTiO3 single crystals as a function of temperature and composition, J. Appl. Phys. 109, 113507 (2011)

    2011

  40. [48]

    Kumar, D

    P. Kumar, D. V. S. Muthu, L. Harnagea, S. Wurmehl, B. Buchner, and A. K. Sood, Phonon anomalies, orbital-ordering and electronic Raman scattering in iron-pnictide Ca(Fe0.97Co0.03)2As2: temperature-dependent Raman study, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 26, 305403 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    S. N. Gupta, P. V. Sriluckshmy, A. Balodhi, D. V. S. Muthu, S. R. Hassan, Y. Singh, T. V. Ramakrishnan, and A. K. Sood, Spin liquid like Raman signatures in the hyperkagome iridate Na4Ir3O8, Phys. Rev. B 94, 155153 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    Xiang et al., Disorder-enriched magnetic excitations in a Heisenberg-Kitaev quantum magnet Na2Co2TeO6, Phys

    L. Xiang et al., Disorder-enriched magnetic excitations in a Heisenberg-Kitaev quantum magnet Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 76701 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  44. [52]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented- wave method, Phys. Rev. B. 59, 1758 (1999)

    1999

  45. [53]

    Perdew, Kieron Burke, and Matthias Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys

    John P. Perdew, Kieron Burke, and Matthias Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  46. [54]

    J. P. Perdew, A. Ruzsinszky, G. I. Csonka, O. A. Vydrov, G. E. Scuseria, L. A. Constantin, X. Zhou, and K. Burke, Restoring the density-gradient expansion for exchange in solids and surfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 136406 (2008)

    2008

  47. [55]

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

    1994

  48. [56]

    Kumar et al., Structural, thermodynamic, and local probe investigations of the honeycomb material Ag3LiMn2O6, Phys

    R. Kumar et al., Structural, thermodynamic, and local probe investigations of the honeycomb material Ag3LiMn2O6, Phys. Rev. B 99, 144429 (2019). 24

    2019

  49. [57]

    S. L. Dudarev, G. A. Botton, S. Y. Savrasov, C. J.Humphreys, and A. P. Sutton, Electron-energy-loss spectra and the structural stability of nickel oxide: An LSDA+U study, Phys. Rev.B 57,1505 (1998)

    1998

  50. [58]

    D. L. Rousseau, R. P. Bauman, and S.P.S. Portp, Normal mode determination in crystals, Journal of Raman spectrscopy 10, 253 (1981)

    1981

  51. [59]

    M. A. Prosnikov, M. Bal, R. V Pisarev, P. C. M. Christianen, and A. M. Kalashnikova, Giant intrinsic nonlinear phonon-magnon coupling in the antiferromagnet CoF2, arXiv: 2405. 07304 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    Li et al., Giant phonon anomalies in the proximate Kitaev quantum spin liquid α- RuCl3, Nat

    H. Li et al., Giant phonon anomalies in the proximate Kitaev quantum spin liquid α- RuCl3, Nat. Commun. 12, 3513 (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    M. Ye, G. B. Halász, L. Savary, and L. Balents, Quantization of the thermal Hall conductivity at small Hall angles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 47201 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    Balkanski, R

    M. Balkanski, R. F. Wallis, and E. Haro, Anharmonic effects in light scattering due to optical phonons in silicon, Phys. Rev. B 28, 1928 (1983)

    1983

  55. [63]

    Weiliang Yao, Kazuki Iida, Kazuya Kamazawa, and Yuan Li, Excitations in the ordered and paramagnetic states of honeycomb magnet Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 147202 (2022)

    2022

  56. [64]

    Fano, Effects of configuration interaction on intensities and phase shifts, Phys

    U. Fano, Effects of configuration interaction on intensities and phase shifts, Phys. Rev. 124, 1866 (1961)

    1961

  57. [65]

    I. W. Shepherd, Tempraure dependance of phonon Raman scattering in FeBO3, InBO3 , and VBO3 : Evidence for a magnetic contribution to the intensities, Phys. Rev. B 5, 4524(1972)

    1972

  58. [66]

    Scagliotti, M

    M. Scagliotti, M. Jouanne, M. Balkanski, G. Ouvrard, and G. Benedek, Raman scattering in antiferromagnetic FePS3 and FePSe3 crystals, Phys. Rev. B 35, 7097 (1987)

    1987

  59. [67]

    A. G. Chakkar, D. Kumar, and P. Kumar, Broken weak and strong spin rotational symmetries and tunable interactions between phonons and the continuum in Cr2Ge2 Te6, Phys. Rev. B 109, 134406 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    Schaack, Raman scattering by crystal-field excitations, Light Scatt

    G. Schaack, Raman scattering by crystal-field excitations, Light Scatt. Solids VII 75, 25 24 (2007)

    2007

  61. [69]

    B. S. Mou et al., Comparative Raman scattering study of crystal field excitations in Co-based quantum magnets, Phys. Rev. Mater. 8, 84408 (2024)

    2024

  62. [70]

    Singh, M

    B. Singh, M. Vogl, S. Wurmehl, S. Aswartham, B. Büchner, and P. Kumar, Kramers doublets, phonons, crystal-field excitations, and their coupling in Nd2ZnIrO6, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023162 (2020)

    2020

  63. [71]

    Kumar, A

    P. Kumar, A. Kumar, S. Saha, D. V. S. Muthu, J. Prakash, U. V. Waghmare, A. K. Ganguli, and A. K. Sood, Temperature-dependent Raman study of a CeFeAsO0.9F0.1 superconductor: crystal field excitations, phonons and their coupling, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 22, 255402 (2010)

    2010

  64. [72]

    Y. Choi, S. Lee, J. H. Lee, S. Lee, M. J. Seong, and K. Y. Choi, Bosonic spinons in anisotropic triangular antiferromagnets, Nat. Commun. 12, 6453 (2021)

    2021

  65. [73]

    Glamazda, P

    A. Glamazda, P. Lemmens, S. H. Do, Y. S. Choi, and K. Y. Choi, Raman spectroscopic signature of fractionalized excitations in the harmonic-honeycomb iridates β- and γ - Li2IrO3, Nat. Commun. 7, 12286 (2016)

    2016

  66. [74]

    S. Yoon, K. Y. Choi, and H. Nam, Raman spectroscopic probe of the magnetic specific heat in quantum magnets, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 77, 138 (2020)

    2020

  67. [75]

    B. I. Halperin and P. C. Hohenberg, Hydrodynamic theory of spinwaves, J. Appl. Phys. 40, 1554 (1969)

    1969

  68. [76]

    A. L. Sanders, R. A. Mole, J. Liu, A. J. Brown, D. Yu, C. D. Ling, and S. Rachel, Dominant Kitaev interactions in the honeycomb materials Na3Co2SbO6 and Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 106, 014413 (2022)

    2022

  69. [77]

    Papawassiliou et al., The role of quantum metastability and the perspective of quantum glassiness in Kitaev fractional spin dyamics: an NMR study, arXiv: 2407.14663 (2024)

    W. Papawassiliou et al., The role of quantum metastability and the perspective of quantum glassiness in Kitaev fractional spin dyamics: an NMR study, arXiv: 2407.14663 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Francini and L

    N. Francini and L. Janssen, Spin vestigial orders in extended Heisenberg-Kitaev models near hidden SU(2) points: application to Na2Co2TeO6, Phys. Rev. B 109, 075104 (2024)

    2024

  71. [79]

    Loudon, The Raman effect in crystals, Adv

    R. Loudon, The Raman effect in crystals, Adv. Phys. 50, 813 (2001). 26

    2001

  72. [80]

    Nanotechnology 15, 212(2020)

    Bevin Huang, et.al.,Tuning inelastic light scattering via symmetry control in the two dimensional magnet CrI3, Nat. Nanotechnology 15, 212(2020)

    2020

  73. [81]

    M. Wu, Z. Li, T. Cao, and S. G. Louie, Physical origin of giant excitonic and magneto-optical responses in two-dimensional ferromagnetic insulators, Nat. Commun. 10, 2371 (2019). Figures: Figure 1. (a) Raman spectrum of Na 2Co2TeO6 in the spectral range of ~200 to 720 cm -1 re...

    2019

  74. [82]

    () and (b) Raman conductivity,  

    Shaded region around ~ 120 cm-1 and low frequency at higher temperature shows air peaks. CFE1 is the crystal filed exist, S* and P* are the weak modes which appears below ~ 50 K and 70 K, respectively. (c) Shows the temperature evolution of the most prominent peaks P23, P24, a...

  75. [83]

    (arb. units) Raman shift (cm-1) Raman shift (cm-1) Icont. (normalized) Temperature (K) Intensity (arb. units) 150 K 70 K Raman shift (cm-1) 5 K 

    (f) Shows the temperature dependence of intensity of the underlying broad continuum. The solid blue line is guide to the eye. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 400 600 800 1000 12000 50 100 150 200 250 300 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 5 ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.