Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 118 references

Dynamical spin correlations in kagome antiferromagnets: comparison of Abrikosov fermion and Schwinger boson approaches beyond mean field

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Bosonic spinons plus many-body effects capture the low-energy continuum of kagome antiferromagnets better than fermionic mean-field states.

desk verdict Solid side-by-side S(q,ω) comparison of AFMFT vs SBMFT on the same kagome+DM model; the RPA gap-closing is real but rests on a pre-selected bosonic ansatz. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.21513 v2 pith:LUCV3QNR submitted 2026-03-23 cond-mat.str-el

Daiki Sasamoto , Joji Nasu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords quantumspinliquidkagomeantiferromagnetdynamicalstructurefactorAbrikosovfermionSchwingerbosonDzyaloshinskii-Moriyainteractionrandomphaseapproximationherbertsmithite
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 asks which parton description better describes the spin dynamics of the kagome antiferromagnet that models materials such as herbertsmithite. It computes the dynamical spin structure factor both with Abrikosov fermions and with Schwinger bosons, including a random-phase correction that goes beyond pure mean-field theory for the bosons. Fermionic mean-field continua are dome-shaped and put weight high in energy; their detailed shape depends on the gauge structure of the ansatz. Bosonic mean-field continua are concave-down and already place strong weight near the Me point at low energy. Adding many-body interactions on top of that bosonic ansatz closes or strongly reduces the residual spin gap and further enhances the low-energy weight, matching the continuum seen by neutron scattering. The work therefore argues that bosonic fractional excitations, once their mutual interactions are kept, give a more faithful account of the measured low-energy spin response than the fermionic alternatives examined.

What carries the argument

Side-by-side calculation of the dynamical spin structure factor S(q,ω) from Abrikosov-fermion and Schwinger-boson mean-field theories, followed by an RPA dressing of the bosonic two-spinon bubbles that incorporates residual Heisenberg interactions among the spinons.

What would settle it

A future inelastic-neutron measurement that finds strong low-energy weight near Me together with a high-energy dome continuum (or the reverse), or an independent calculation that finds an Abrikosov-fermion saddle whose RPA-dressed spectrum reproduces the same low-energy Me intensity and gaplessness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within the set of nearest-neighbor ansatzes considered, Schwinger-boson mean-field theory produces a concave-down dynamical structure factor with strong low-energy intensity near Me, while Abrikosov-fermion mean-field theory produces dome-shaped continua whose high-energy features further depend on whether the invariant gauge group is U(1) or Z2. When residual spinon interactions are restored by RPA on the bosonic saddle point, the mean-field gap collapses and the low-energy spectral weight is enhanced, bringing the calculated continuum into closer agreement with inelastic neutron scattering on herbertsmithite.

Load-bearing premise

The many-body correction is applied only to the single Schwinger-boson ansatz that already matches the experimental low-energy Me intensity at the mean-field level; the fermionic ansatzes are set aside for RPA solely because none of them does so.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The overall shape of S(q,ω)—convex-up versus concave-down—can serve as a diagnostic of whether the fractional excitations are more naturally fermionic or bosonic.
  • Many-body corrections on top of a Schwinger-boson mean-field state are essential if one wants a gapless or nearly gapless continuum consistent with present experiments.
  • Gauge structure (U(1) versus Z2) leaves detectable imprints on the high-energy continuum of fermionic ansatzes even when only nearest-neighbor channels are kept.
  • The same bosonic framework that fits zero-field data may be used to track how magnetic order or applied field destabilizes the spin liquid.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the field-induced continuum of herbertsmithite or related compounds switches from concave-down to dome-shaped, that would signal a change in the statistics of the elementary excitations.
  • The same RPA dressing applied to other candidate bosonic or fermionic saddle points on the triangular lattice should produce a comparable diagnostic of statistics.
  • A controlled calculation that starts from a gapless U(1) Dirac fermion state and includes gauge fluctuations could still recover Me intensity, reopening the fermionic route.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes the dynamical spin structure factor S(q, ω) of the S = 1/2 kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet with out-of-plane DM interaction using both Abrikosov-fermion mean-field theory (six nearest-neighbor U(1) and Z2 ansatzes classified by Wilson-loop fluxes) and Schwinger-boson mean-field theory (a time-reversal-breaking Z2 ansatz). AFMFT continua are predominantly dome-shaped (convex-up) with high-energy weight whose detailed structure tracks the IGG and flux pattern, while SBMFT produces a concave-down low-energy continuum. RPA corrections applied on top of the SBMFT saddle close the mean-field spin gap at the Me point and enhance low-energy spectral weight, bringing the spectrum into closer agreement with inelastic neutron scattering on herbertsmithite. The authors conclude that residual many-body effects within the Schwinger-boson framework are essential for the observed low-energy spin dynamics and that the overall shape of S(q, ω) encodes the statistics of the underlying partons.

Significance. A systematic, side-by-side comparison of fermionic and bosonic parton constructions for the same microscopic model and the same dynamical observable has been missing from the kagome literature; the present work fills that gap with carefully documented mean-field diagonalizations, gauge-invariant flux diagnostics, and an explicit RPA implementation (Appendix D). If the reported spectral-shape dichotomy and the RPA gap-closing survive scrutiny, they supply a practical diagnostic for parton statistics that is complementary to thermodynamics, and they illustrate how residual interactions can reconcile a gapped mean-field spin liquid with the nearly gapless continuum seen experimentally. The technical transparency of the ansatz constructions and the RPA algebra is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Secs. IV C, V, abstract, Sec. VI] Secs. IV C and V (and the abstract/Sec. VI claim): RPA is performed exclusively on the single time-reversal-breaking Z2 SBMFT saddle of Messio et al. that was chosen precisely because its mean-field S(q, ω) already concentrates strong low-energy weight near Me (matching Han et al.). All six AFMFT ansatzes are discarded for RPA solely because none of them produces that feature at the mean-field level. The subsequent gap closing and weight enhancement (Fig. 10) are therefore refinements of a pre-selected, experimentally compatible bosonic ansatz rather than an independent demonstration that residual interactions plus bosonic statistics uniquely capture the continuum. A parallel RPA treatment of at least one further-neighbor fermionic ansatz (or an explicit argument why such an RPA cannot generate Me weight) is needed before the uniqueness claim can be regarded as established.
  2. [Sec. II E, Fig. 10] Sec. II E and Fig. 10: The RPA is uncontrolled near the magnetic instability (the calculation is performed at dz = 0.02, close to the spinon-gap closing). While the paper notes that the high-energy continuum is only weakly renormalized, no quantitative estimate of higher-order diagrams or of the proximity to the critical point is given. Because the central experimental-consistency argument rests on the RPA-induced gap closing, a brief assessment of the reliability of the geometric series in this regime (or a comparison with a different resummation) would strengthen the result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 3, Table I] Fig. 3 and Table I: The flux labels [ΦHex, ΦPara] are clear, but a short sentence reminding the reader that the Wilson-loop normalization (Eq. 33) is used would help non-specialists.
  2. [Sec. IV B 1] Sec. IV B 1: The relation of the present DM treatment (via Cz, Dz) to the link-dependent spin-rotation formulation of Messio et al. is stated but not quantified; a one-sentence comparison of the resulting mean-field parameters would improve transparency.
  3. [Appendix D] Appendix D: The six vertex matrices (D5)–(D7) are given, yet the numerical value of the infinitesimal δ used in the retarded functions is never stated; a brief note would aid reproducibility.
  4. Throughout: Occasional typographical inconsistencies appear (e.g., “az-directed” vs. “z-directed”, missing spaces around some equation references). A final proof-reading pass would remove them.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Pragmatic ansatz selection for RPA is guided by the experimental Me feature already present at mean-field level, but the gap-closing computation itself is an independent RPA output, not a tautology.

  1. other [Sec. IV C (and discussion in Sec. V)]
    "we adopt a pragmatic criterion based on experiment and choose an ansatz that reproduces the strong low-energy intensity at the Me point observed in inelastic neutron-scattering experiments [73]. None of the six AFMFT ansatzes captures this feature satisfactorily, whereas the SBMFT ansatz does. We therefore choose the Schwinger boson mean-field ansatz... as the starting point for the RPA analysis."

    The RPA calculation that is later advertised as demonstrating the importance of many-body effects for experimental consistency is performed exclusively on the single bosonic saddle already selected for matching the key experimental Me intensity at the mean-field level. While the gap reduction itself is computed rather than assumed, the decision of which continuum to correct is conditioned on the very spectral feature whose experimental agreement is then claimed, introducing a mild selection circularity that is not present in the equations.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain consists of explicit mean-field diagonalizations of Abrikosov-fermion and Schwinger-boson Hamiltonians for stated ansatzes, followed by a standard RPA resummation of bubble diagrams on one of those saddle points. No free parameters are fitted to the target dynamical structure factor and then re-labeled as predictions; the RPA equations (Appendix D) produce a genuine downward renormalization of the spin gap that is not present in the input mean-field spectrum. The only mild circularity is methodological: Sec. IV C explicitly discards all six AFMFT ansatzes for RPA solely because none already places strong low-energy weight at Me, and retains the single SBMFT ansatz of Messio et al. precisely because it does. That selection makes the subsequent experimental consistency less surprising, but does not render the RPA gap-closing result equivalent to its inputs by construction. There is no self-definitional loop, no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors, and no self-citation that carries the load of the calculation. Score 2 reflects this single, non-load-bearing selection step.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation rests on standard parton constructions and mean-field/RPA approximations whose validity is assumed rather than derived. Free parameters are the usual mean-field amplitudes (self-consistently determined once an ansatz is chosen) plus the quantum-fluctuation parameter κ and the DM strength dz that are scanned. No new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • κ (Schwinger-boson constraint parameter) = scanned 0.6–1.0 (physical subspace κ=1)
    Tuned from 0.6 to 1.0 (and up to ~1.37) to control quantum fluctuations; physical value is fixed to κ=1 but intermediate values are used to map the phase diagram.
  • dz (out-of-plane DM strength) = 0–0.1 (typical working value 0.02–0.1)
    Scanned near the magnetic instability (e.g., dz=0.02 for κ=1) to place the system close to the ordered phase; experimental values for herbertsmithite are only approximately known.
  • mean-field bond amplitudes (χ, η, A, B, C, D, phases ϕ, θ)
    Self-consistently determined once a particular ansatz pattern is chosen; the patterns themselves are discrete choices, not continuous fits.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Local parton constraints can be enforced only on average via uniform Lagrange multipliers.
    Standard in both AFMFT and SBMFT (Secs. II A, II B); exact local enforcement is intractable.
  • domain assumption The random-phase approximation captures the leading residual interactions among spinons.
    Invoked in Sec. II E and App. D; reliability is known to depend on the quality of the underlying mean-field state.
  • domain assumption Nearest-neighbor Heisenberg + out-of-plane DM is a sufficient microscopic model for the low-energy physics of herbertsmithite.
    Stated in Sec. III; real materials also contain further-neighbor exchanges and disorder.
  • standard math SU(2) or U(1) gauge redundancy of the parton representation can be classified by Wilson loops / IGG.
    Standard projective-symmetry-group technology (Wen, Lu et al.).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical spin correlations in kagome antiferromagnets: comparison of Abrikosov fermion and Schwinger boson approaches beyond mean field." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LUCV3QNR

@misc{pith2026260321513,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical spin correlations in kagome antiferromagnets: comparison of Abrikosov fermion and Schwinger boson approaches beyond mean field},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LUCV3QNR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.21513}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum spin liquids exhibit fractionalized spin excitations as a consequence of strong quantum many-body effects. The kagome antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model is a promising candidate for a quantum spin-liquid ground state; however, the nature of its excitation spectrum remains controversial, particularly regarding the presence of a spin gap and the gauge structure coupled to fractional quasiparticles. To address these issues, parton approaches have been extensively employed, where spin operators are represented in terms of fermionic or bosonic quasiparticles within the Abrikosov fermion and Schwinger boson frameworks. Thus far, these approaches have been pursued independently, and it has remained unclear how the results obtained from these frameworks compare, particularly with respect to the spin dynamics and gauge structure of the kagome antiferromagnet. Here, we investigate the dynamical spin structure factor of the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with a Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction on the kagome lattice, relevant to herbertsmithite, by employing both approaches. We find that the dynamical spin structure factor obtained from the Abrikosov fermion mean-field theory exhibits dome-shaped features, and that its continuum structure significantly depends on the gauge structure of the spin-liquid ansatz. On the other hand, the Schwinger boson mean-field theory yields a concave-down structure in the low-energy region, distinct from that obtained using the Abrikosov fermion approach. Moreover, incorporating many-body effects beyond the mean-field approximation substantially reduces the low-energy gap and enhances the low-energy spectral weight, consistent with experimental observations. Our results suggest the importance of many-body effects in the Schwinger boson theory for capturing the low-energy spin dynamics of kagome antiferromagnets.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

118 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    The AFMFT results presented below were computed for a DM interac- tion strengthd z =0.1

    Spinon dispersion We next discuss the spinon dispersion relations of the Abrikosov fermions obtained within AFMFT. The AFMFT results presented below were computed for a DM interac- tion strengthd z =0.1. Figure 4 shows the zero-temperature Abrikosov fermion dispersions obtained from the mean-field ansatzes I-VI. We find that, except for Ansatz IV [Fig. 4(...

  2. [2]

    The results are shown in Fig

    Spin structure factor We next describe the static and dynamical spin structure factors calculated within AFMFT for each mean-field ansatz. The results are shown in Fig. 5. Before discussing each ansatz in detail, we first focus on the characteristic features of the static spin structure factorS(q). Except for Ansatz II and Ansatz IV , the calculated stati...

  3. [3]

    In the study of kagome quantum spin liq- uids, the SBMFT has a long history, and a variety of mean- field ansatzes have been proposed to date [45–60]

    Mean-field ansatz We first describe the mean-field ansatz adopted in our SBMFT analysis. In the study of kagome quantum spin liq- uids, the SBMFT has a long history, and a variety of mean- field ansatzes have been proposed to date [45–60]. Among these prior works, two ansatzes stand out as being particu- larly successful in accounting for the neutron-scat...

  4. [4]

    As introduced in Sec

    Spinon dispersion We next examine the spinon dispersion obtained within SBMFT. As introduced in Sec. II B, in SBMFT the parame- terκ=2Scontrols the strength of quantum fluctuations, with smallerκcorresponding to stronger quantum effects. Fig- ure 7(a) shows the spinon dispersion for the ansatz adopted in this work, comparingκ=0.6 with the physical subspac...

  5. [5]

    The corresponding results are shown in Figs

    Spin structure factor We next examine the static spin structure factorS(q) and the dynamical structure factorS(q, ω) calculated within SBMFT. The corresponding results are shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. In both figures, the top row [(a)-(e)] corre- sponds to the pure Heisenberg model withd z =0, while the bottom row [(f)-(j)] shows the results with...

  6. [6]

    V oit, One-dimensional Fermi liquids, Rep

    J. V oit, One-dimensional Fermi liquids, Rep. Prog. Phys.58, 977 (1995)

    1995

  7. [7]

    Jompol, C

    Y . Jompol, C. J. B. Ford, J. P. Griffiths, I. Farrer, G. A. C. Jones, D. Anderson, D. A. Ritchie, T. W. Silk, and A. J. Schofield, Probing Spin-Charge Separation in a Tomonaga- Luttinger Liquid, Science325, 597 (2009)

    2009

  8. [8]

    R. B. Laughlin, Anomalous Quantum Hall Effect: An Incom- pressible Quantum Fluid with Fractionally Charged Excita- tions, Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 1395 (1983)

    1983

Show all 118 references
  1. [9]

    de Picciotto, M

    R. de Picciotto, M. Reznikov, M. Heiblum, V . Umansky, G. Bunin, and D. Mahalu, Direct observation of a fractional charge, Nature389, 162 (1997)

    1997

  2. [10]

    H. L. Stormer, D. C. Tsui, and A. C. Gossard, The fractional quantum Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.71, S298 (1999)

    1999

  3. [11]

    Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature464, 199 (2010)

    L. Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature464, 199 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Savary and L

    L. Savary and L. Balents, Quantum spin liquids: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys.80, 016502 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    Y . Zhou, K. Kanoda, and T.-K. Ng, Quantum spin liquid states, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 025003 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Knolle and R

    J. Knolle and R. Moessner, A Field Guide to Spin Liquids, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.10, 451 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Wen, S.-L

    J. Wen, S.-L. Yu, S. Li, W. Yu, and J.-X. Li, Experimental identification of quantum spin liquids, npj Quantum Mater.4, 12 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Broholm, R

    C. Broholm, R. J. Cava, S. A. Kivelson, D. G. Nocera, M. R. Norman, and T. Senthil, Quantum spin liquids, Science367, eaay0668 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Clark and A

    L. Clark and A. H. Abdeldaim, Quantum Spin Liquids from a Materials Perspective, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.51, 495 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Imada, A

    M. Imada, A. Fujimori, and Y . Tokura, Metal-insulator transi- tions, Rev. Mod. Phys.70, 1039 (1998)

    1998

  11. [19]

    A. P. Ramirez, Strongly Geometrically Frustrated Magnets, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.24, 453 (1994)

    1994

  12. [20]

    Anderson, Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of insu- lator?, Mater

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

    1973

  13. [21]

    A. W. Sandvik, Computational studies of quantum spin sys- tems, AIP Conf. Proc.1297, 135 (2010)

    2010

  14. [22]

    H. G. Katzgraber, Introduction to Monte Carlo Methods, (2011), arXiv:0905.1629

    2011 arXiv

  15. [23]

    A. W. Sandvik, Stochastic Series Expansion Methods, (2019), arXiv:1909.10591

    2019 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Troyer and U.-J

    M. Troyer and U.-J. Wiese, Computational Complexity and Fundamental Limitations to Fermionic Quantum Monte Carlo Simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 170201 (2005)

    2005

  17. [25]

    Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Magnetism, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer New York, 2012)

    A. Auerbach,Interacting Electrons and Quantum Magnetism, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics (Springer New York, 2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    J. B. Kogut, An introduction to lattice gauge theory and spin systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.51, 659 (1979)

    1979

  19. [27]

    P. W. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state in La2CuO4 and Superconductivity, Science235, 1196 (1987)

    1987

  20. [28]

    Baskaran, Z

    G. Baskaran, Z. Zou, and P. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state and high-Tc superconductivity — A mean field the- ory, Solid State Commun.63, 973 (1987)

    1987

  21. [29]

    Kotliar and J

    G. Kotliar and J. Liu, Superexchange mechanism and d-wave superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B38, 5142 (1988)

    1988

  22. [30]

    P. A. Lee, N. Nagaosa, and X.-G. Wen, Doping a Mott insula- tor: Physics of high-temperature superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 17 (2006)

    2006

  23. [31]

    S. E. Barnes, New method for the Anderson model, J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.6, 1375 (1976)

    1976

  24. [32]

    Coleman, New approach to the mixed-valence problem, Phys

    P. Coleman, New approach to the mixed-valence problem, Phys. Rev. B29, 3035 (1984)

    1984

  25. [33]

    Read and D

    N. Read and D. M. Newns, On the solution of the Coqblin- Schreiffer Hamiltonian by the large-N expansion technique, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys.16, 3273 (1983)

    1983

  26. [34]

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

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

    1991

  27. [35]

    D. P. Arovas and A. Auerbach, Functional integral theories of low-dimensional quantum Heisenberg models, Phys. Rev. B 38, 316 (1988)

    1988

  28. [36]

    Sachdev and N

    S. Sachdev and N. Read, LARGE N EXPANSION FOR FRUSTRATED AND DOPED QUANTUM ANTIFERRO- MAGNETS, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B5, 219 (1991)

    1991

  29. [37]

    Read and S

    N. Read and S. Sachdev, Large-Nexpansion for frustrated quantum antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 1773 (1991)

    1991

  30. [38]

    Affleck and J

    I. Affleck and J. B. Marston, Large-n limit of the Heisenberg- Hubbard model: Implications for high-T c superconductors, Phys. Rev. B37, 3774 (1988)

    1988

  31. [39]

    X. G. Wen, Mean-field theory of spin-liquid states with fi- nite energy gap and topological orders, Phys. Rev. B44, 2664 (1991)

    1991

  32. [40]

    Wen, Quantum orders and symmetric spin liquids, Phys

    X.-G. Wen, Quantum orders and symmetric spin liquids, Phys. Rev. B65, 165113 (2002). 27

    2002

  33. [41]

    Wen,Quantum Field Theory of Many-Body Systems, Ox- ford Graduate Texts (OUP Oxford, 2004)

    X. Wen,Quantum Field Theory of Many-Body Systems, Ox- ford Graduate Texts (OUP Oxford, 2004)

    2004

  34. [42]

    Motome and J

    Y . Motome and J. Nasu, Hunting Majorana Fermions in Kitaev Magnets, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.89, 012002 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    Trebst and C

    S. Trebst and C. Hickey, Kitaev materials, Phys. Rep.950, 1 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Matsuda, T

    Y . Matsuda, T. Shibauchi, and H.-Y . Kee, Kitaev quantum spin liquids, Rev. Mod. Phys.97, 045003 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    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

  38. [46]

    P. Rao, R. Moessner, and J. Knolle, Dynamical response the- ory of interacting Majorana fermions and its application to generic Kitaev quantum spin liquids in a field, Phys. Rev. B 112, 024440 (2025)

    2025

  39. [47]

    Hu, S.-S

    W.-J. Hu, S.-S. Gong, W. Zhu, and D. N. Sheng, Competing spin-liquid states in the spin- 1 2 Heisenberg model on the trian- gular lattice, Phys. Rev. B92, 140403 (2015)

    2015

  40. [48]

    Iqbal, W.-J

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

    2016

  41. [49]

    Willsher and J

    J. Willsher and J. Knolle, Dynamics and stability of U(1) spin liquids beyond mean-field theory: Triangular-latticeJ 1- J2 Heisenberg model, (2025), arXiv:2503.13831

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    S. Sachdev, Kagomé - and triangular-lattice Heisenberg an- tiferromagnets: Ordering from quantum fluctuations and quantum-disordered ground states with unconfined bosonic spinons, Phys. Rev. B45, 12377 (1992)

    1992

  43. [51]

    P. Li, H. Su, and S.-Q. Shen, Kagome antiferromagnet: A Schwinger-boson mean-field theory study, Phys. Rev. B76, 174406 (2007)

    2007

  44. [52]

    Messio, O

    L. Messio, O. Cépas, and C. Lhuillier, Schwinger-boson ap- proach to the kagome antiferromagnet with Dzyaloshinskii- Moriya interactions: Phase diagram and dynamical structure factors, Phys. Rev. B81, 064428 (2010)

    2010

  45. [53]

    Y . Huh, M. Punk, and S. Sachdev, Vison states and confine- ment transitions ofZ 2 spin liquids on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B84, 094419 (2011)

    2011

  46. [54]

    B. Fåk, E. Kermarrec, L. Messio, B. Bernu, C. Lhuillier, F. Bert, P. Mendels, B. Koteswararao, F. Bouquet, J. Ollivier, A. D. Hillier, A. Amato, R. H. Colman, and A. S. Wills, Kapel- lasite: A Kagome Quantum Spin Liquid with Competing In- teractions, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 037208 (2012)

    2012

  47. [55]

    Messio, B

    L. Messio, B. Bernu, and C. Lhuillier, Kagome Antiferromag- net: A Chiral Topological Spin Liquid?, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 207204 (2012)

    2012

  48. [56]

    Messio, C

    L. Messio, C. Lhuillier, and G. Misguich, Time reversal sym- metry breaking chiral spin liquids: Projective symmetry group approach of bosonic mean-field theories, Phys. Rev. B87, 125127 (2013)

    2013

  49. [57]

    M. Punk, D. Chowdhury, and S. Sachdev, Topological excita- tions and the dynamic structure factor of spin liquids on the kagome lattice, Nat. Phys.10, 289 (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    J. C. Halimeh and M. Punk, Spin structure factors of chiral quantum spin liquids on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B94, 104413 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    Mondal and C

    K. Mondal and C. Kadolkar, Schwinger boson mean-field theory of the kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet with Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions, Phys. Rev. B95, 134404 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    Messio, S

    L. Messio, S. Bieri, C. Lhuillier, and B. Bernu, Chi- ral Spin Liquid on a Kagome Antiferromagnet Induced by the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya Interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 267201 (2017)

    2017

  53. [61]

    J. C. Halimeh and R. R. P. Singh, Rapid filling of the spin gap with temperature in the Schwinger-boson mean-field theory of the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg kagome model, Phys. Rev. B99, 155151 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    Mondal and C

    K. Mondal and C. Kadolkar, Ground state phase diagram of kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet with Dzyaloshinskii- Moriya interaction, AIP Conf. Proc.2072, 020008 (2019)

  55. [63]

    Mondal and C

    K. Mondal and C. Kadolkar,Q=0 order in quantum kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter33, 145802 (2021)

    2021

  56. [64]

    Lugan, L

    T. Lugan, L. D. C. Jaubert, M. Udagawa, and A. Ralko, Schwinger boson theory of theJ 1,J 2 =J 3 kagome antifer- romagnet, Phys. Rev. B106, L140404 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    Rossi, J

    D. Rossi, J. Motruk, L. Rademaker, and D. A. Abanin, Schwinger boson study of theJ1-J2-J3 kagome Heisenberg an- tiferromagnet with Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions, Phys. Rev. B108, 144406 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    Y .-M. Lu, Y . Ran, and P. A. Lee,Z 2 spin liquids in the S= 1 2 Heisenberg model on the kagome lattice: A projec- tive symmetry-group study of Schwinger fermion mean-field states, Phys. Rev. B83, 224413 (2011)

    2011

  59. [67]

    Dodds, S

    T. Dodds, S. Bhattacharjee, and Y . B. Kim, Quantum spin liq- uids in the absence of spin-rotation symmetry: Application to herbertsmithite, Phys. Rev. B88, 224413 (2013)

    2013

  60. [68]

    Lecheminant, B

    P. Lecheminant, B. Bernu, C. Lhuillier, L. Pierre, and P. Sindz- ingre, Order versus disorder in the quantum Heisenberg anti- ferromagnet on the kagomé lattice using exact spectra analy- sis, Phys. Rev. B56, 2521 (1997)

    1997

  61. [69]

    Waldtmann, H.-U

    C. Waldtmann, H.-U. Everts, B. Bernu, C. Lhuillier, P. Sindz- ingre, P. Lecheminant, and L. Pierre, First excitations of the spin 1/2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the kagomé lattice, Eur. Phys. J. B2, 501 (1998)

    1998

  62. [70]

    H. C. Jiang, Z. Y . Weng, and D. N. Sheng, Density Matrix Renormalization Group Numerical Study of the Kagome An- tiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 117203 (2008)

    2008

  63. [71]

    S. Yan, D. A. Huse, and S. R. White, Spin-Liquid Ground State of theS=1/2 Kagome Heisenberg Antiferromagnet, Science332, 1173 (2011)

    2011

  64. [72]

    Depenbrock, I

    S. Depenbrock, I. P. McCulloch, and U. Schollwöck, Nature of the Spin-Liquid Ground State of theS=1/2 Heisenberg Model on the Kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 067201 (2012)

    2012

  65. [73]

    Nishimoto, N

    S. Nishimoto, N. Shibata, and C. Hotta, Controlling frustrated liquids and solids with an applied field in a kagome Heisen- berg antiferromagnet, Nat. Commun.4, 2287 (2013)

    2013

  66. [74]

    Y .-C. He, M. P. Zaletel, M. Oshikawa, and F. Pollmann, Signa- tures of Dirac Cones in a DMRG Study of the Kagome Heisen- berg Model, Phys. Rev. X7, 031020 (2017)

    2017

  67. [75]

    H. J. Liao, Z. Y . Xie, J. Chen, Z. Y . Liu, H. D. Xie, R. Z. Huang, B. Normand, and T. Xiang, Gapless Spin-Liquid Ground State in theS=1/2 Kagome Antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 137202 (2017)

    2017

  68. [76]

    Iqbal, F

    Y . Iqbal, F. Becca, S. Sorella, and D. Poilblanc, Gapless spin- liquid phase in the kagome spin- 1 2 Heisenberg antiferromag- net, Phys. Rev. B87, 060405 (2013)

    2013

  69. [77]

    Ðuri ´c, J

    T. Ðuri ´c, J. H. Chung, B. Yang, and P. Sengupta, Spin- 1/2 Kagome Heisenberg Antiferromagnet: Machine Learn- ing Discovery of the Spinon Pair-Density-Wave Ground State, Phys. Rev. X15, 011047 (2025)

    2025

  70. [78]

    T.-H. Han, J. S. Helton, S. Chu, D. G. Nocera, J. A. Rodriguez- Rivera, C. Broholm, and Y . S. Lee, Fractionalized excitations in the spin-liquid state of a kagome-lattice antiferromagnet, Nature492, 406 (2012)

    2012

  71. [79]

    Khuntia, M

    P. Khuntia, M. Velazquez, Q. Barthélemy, F. Bert, E. Kermar- rec, A. Legros, B. Bernu, L. Messio, A. Zorko, and P. Mendels, 28 Gapless ground state in the archetypal quantum kagome anti- ferromagnet ZnCu3(OH)6Cl2, Nat. Phys.16, 469 (2020)

    2020

  72. [80]

    M. Fu, T. Imai, T.-H. Han, and Y . S. Lee, Evidence for a gapped spin-liquid ground state in a kagome Heisenberg an- tiferromagnet, Science350, 655 (2015)

    2015

  73. [81]

    T.-H. Han, M. R. Norman, J.-J. Wen, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, J. S. Helton, C. Broholm, and Y . S. Lee, Correlated impuri- ties and intrinsic spin-liquid physics in the kagome material herbertsmithite, Phys. Rev. B94, 060409 (2016)

    2016

  74. [82]

    Z. Feng, Z. Li, X. Meng, W. Yi, Y . Wei, J. Zhang, Y .-C. Wang, W. Jiang, Z. Liu, S. Li, F. Liu, J. Luo, S. Li, G.-q. Zheng, Z. Y . Meng, J.-W. Mei, and Y . Shi, Gapped Spin-1/2 Spinon Exci- tations in a New Kagome Quantum Spin Liquid Compound Cu3Zn(OH)6FBr, Chin. Phys. Lett.3...

    2017

  75. [83]

    J. Wang, W. Yuan, P. M. Singer, R. W. Smaha, W. He, J. Wen, Y . S. Lee, and T. Imai, Emergence of spin singlets with in- homogeneous gaps in the kagome lattice Heisenberg antifer- romagnets Zn-barlowite and herbertsmithite, Nat. Phys.17, 1109 (2021)

    2021

  76. [84]

    A. T. Breidenbach, A. C. Campello, J. Wen, H.-C. Jiang, D. M. Pajerowski, R. W. Smaha, and Y . S. Lee, Identifying universal spin excitations in candidate spin-1/2 kagome quantum spin liquid materials, Nat. Phys.21, 1957 (2025)

    1957

  77. [85]

    Ihara, T

    Y . Ihara, T. Sasaki, N. Noguchi, Y . Ishii, M. Oda, and H. Yoshida, Gapless magnetic excitations in the kagome antiferromagnet Ca-kapellasite probed by 35Cl NMR spec- troscopy, Phys. Rev. B96, 180409 (2017)

    2017

  78. [86]

    W. Choi, P. W. Klein, A. Rosch, and Y . B. Kim, Topological superconductivity in the Kondo-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B 98, 155123 (2018)

    2018

  79. [87]

    J. Wang, B. Normand, and Z.-X. Liu, One Proximate Kitaev Spin Liquid in theK−J−ΓModel on the Honeycomb Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 197201 (2019)

    2019

  80. [88]

    C. J. Gazza and H. A. Ceccatto, A Schwinger boson ap- proach to Heisenberg antiferromagnets on a triangular lattice, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter5, L135 (1993)

    1993

  81. [89]

    Mattsson, Spin dynamics of the triangular Heisenberg anti- ferromagnet: A Schwinger-boson approach, Phys

    A. Mattsson, Spin dynamics of the triangular Heisenberg anti- ferromagnet: A Schwinger-boson approach, Phys. Rev. B51, 11574 (1995)

    1995

  82. [90]

    Flint and P

    R. Flint and P. Coleman, SymplecticNand time reversal in frustrated magnetism, Phys. Rev. B79, 014424 (2009)

    2009

  83. [91]

    Mezio, C

    A. Mezio, C. N. Sposetti, L. O. Manuel, and A. E. Trumper, A test of the bosonic spinon theory for the triangular antifer- romagnet spectrum, Europhys. Lett.94, 47001 (2011)

    2011

  84. [92]

    Merino, M

    J. Merino, M. Holt, and B. J. Powell, Spin-liquid phase in a spatially anisotropic frustrated antiferromagnet: A Schwinger boson mean-field approach, Phys. Rev. B89, 245112 (2014)

    2014

  85. [93]

    E. A. Ghioldi, M. G. Gonzalez, S.-S. Zhang, Y . Kamiya, L. O. Manuel, A. E. Trumper, and C. D. Batista, Dynamical struc- ture factor of the triangular antiferromagnet: Schwinger boson theory beyond mean field, Phys. Rev. B98, 184403 (2018)

    2018

  86. [94]

    Zhang, E

    S.-S. Zhang, E. A. Ghioldi, Y . Kamiya, L. O. Manuel, A. E. Trumper, and C. D. Batista, Large-Slimit of the large-N theory for the triangular antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B100, 104431 (2019)

    2019

  87. [95]

    Zhang and T

    Q. Zhang and T. Li, Why the Schwinger boson mean field the- ory fails to describe the spin dynamics of the triangular lat- tice antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model?, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter33, 375601 (2021)

    2021

  88. [96]

    Sasamoto and J

    D. Sasamoto and J. Nasu, Schwinger boson theory forS=1 Kitaev quantum spin liquids, (2025), arXiv:2509.25761

    2025 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Cépas, C

    O. Cépas, C. M. Fong, P. W. Leung, and C. Lhuillier, Quantum phase transition induced by Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interac- tions in the kagome antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B78, 140405 (2008)

    2008

  90. [98]

    J. S. Helton, K. Matan, M. P. Shores, E. A. Nytko, B. M. Bartlett, Y . Yoshida, Y . Takano, A. Suslov, Y . Qiu, J.-H. Chung, D. G. Nocera, and Y . S. Lee, Spin Dynamics of the Spin-1/2 kagome lattice antiferromagnet ZnCu3(OH)6Cl2, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 107204 (2007)

    2007

  91. [99]

    M. R. Norman, Colloquium: Herbertsmithite and the search for the quantum spin liquid, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 041002 (2016)

    2016

  92. [100]

    H. O. Jeschke, F. Salvat-Pujol, E. Gati, N. H. Hoang, B. Wolf, M. Lang, J. A. Schlueter, and R. Valentí, Barlowite as a canted antiferromagnet: Theory and experiment, Phys. Rev. B92, 094417 (2015)

    2015

  93. [101]

    Tustain, B

    K. Tustain, B. Ward-O’Brien, F. Bert, T. Han, H. Luetkens, T. Lancaster, B. M. Huddart, P. J. Baker, and L. Clark, From magnetic order to quantum disorder in the Zn-barlowite series ofS=1/2 kagomé antiferromagnets, npj Quantum Mater.5, 74 (2020)

    2020

  94. [102]

    Fu, M.-L

    Y . Fu, M.-L. Lin, L. Wang, Q. Liu, L. Huang, W. Jiang, Z. Hao, C. Liu, H. Zhang, X. Shi, J. Zhang, J. Dai, D. Yu, F. Ye, P. A. Lee, P.-H. Tan, and J.-W. Mei, Dynamic fingerprint of frac- tionalized excitations in single-crystalline Cu 3Zn(OH)6FBr, Nat. Commun.12, 3048 (2021)

    2021

  95. [103]

    R. W. Smaha, J. Pelliciari, I. Jarrige, V . Bisogni, A. T. Brei- denbach, J. M. Jiang, J. Wen, H.-C. Jiang, and Y . S. Lee, High-energy spin excitations in the quantum spin liquid can- didate Zn-substituted barlowite probed by resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, Phys. Rev. B1...

    2023

  96. [104]

    Okamoto, H

    Y . Okamoto, H. Yoshida, and Z. Hiroi, Vesignieite BaCu3V2O8(OH)2 as a Candidate Spin-1/2 Kagome Antifer- romagnet, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.78, 033701 (2009)

    2009

  97. [105]

    Boldrin, B

    D. Boldrin, B. Fåk, E. Canévet, J. Ollivier, H. C. Walker, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, and A. S. Wills, Vesignieite: AnS= 1 2 Kagome Antiferromagnet with Dominant Third- Neighbor Exchange, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 107203 (2018)

    2018

  98. [106]

    Y . Li, B. Pan, S. Li, W. Tong, L. Ling, Z. Yang, J. Wang, Z. Chen, Z. Wu, and Q. Zhang, Gapless quantum spin liq- uid in theS=1/2 anisotropic kagome antiferromagnet ZnCu3(OH)6SO4, New J. Phys.16, 093011 (2014)

    2014

  99. [107]

    Orain, B

    J.-C. Orain, B. Bernu, P. Mendels, L. Clark, F. H. Aidoudi, P. Lightfoot, R. E. Morris, and F. Bert, Nature of the Spin Liq- uid Ground State in a Breathing Kagome Compound Studied by NMR and Series Expansion, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 237203 (2017)

    2017

  100. [108]

    Ihara, H

    Y . Ihara, H. Yoshida, K. Arashima, M. Hirata, and T. Sasaki, Anisotropic magnetic excitations from single-chirality antifer- romagnetic state in Ca-kapellasite, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023269 (2020)

    2020

  101. [109]

    For clarity, we summarize here the correspondence between our mean-field ansatzes and the U(1) parent states introduced in Ref. [62]. In our notation, Ansatz I, Ansatz II, and Ansatz IV correspond to the U(1)[0,0], U(1)[π, π], and U(1)[0, π] states introduced there, respective...

  102. [110]

    Jeong, F

    M. Jeong, F. Bert, P. Mendels, F. Duc, J. C. Trombe, M. A. de Vries, and A. Harrison, Field-induced freezing of a quan- tum spin liquid on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 237201 (2011)

    2011

  103. [111]

    Gomilšek, M

    M. Gomilšek, M. Klanjšek, R. Žitko, M. Pregelj, F. Bert, P. Mendels, Y . Li, Q. M. Zhang, and A. Zorko, Field-Induced Instability of a Gapless Spin Liquid with a Spinon Fermi Sur- 29 face, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 137205 (2017)

    2017

  104. [112]

    Barthélemy, A

    Q. Barthélemy, A. Demuer, C. Marcenat, T. Klein, B. Bernu, L. Messio, M. Velázquez, E. Kermarrec, F. Bert, and P. Mendels, Specific heat of the kagome antiferromagnet her- bertsmithite in high magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. X12, 011014 (2022)

    2022

  105. [113]

    S. Jeon, D. Wulferding, Y . Choi, S. Lee, K. Nam, K. H. Kim, M. Lee, T. Jang, J.-H. Park, S. Lee, S. Choi, C. Lee, H. Nojiri, and K.-Y . Choi, One-ninth magnetization plateau stabilized by spin entanglement in a kagome antiferromagnet, Nat. Phys. 20, 435 (2023)

    2023

  106. [114]

    He, S.-L

    L.-W. He, S.-L. Yu, and J.-X. Li, Variational Monte Carlo Study of the 1/9-Magnetization Plateau in Kagome Antifer- romagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 096501 (2024)

    2024

  107. [115]

    M. Kato, Y . Narumi, K. Morita, Y . Matsushita, S. Fukuoka, S. Yamashita, Y . Nakazawa, M. Oda, H. Hayashi, K. Yamaura, M. Hagiwara, and H. K. Yoshida, One-third magnetization plateau in Quantum Kagome antiferromagnet, Commun. Phys. 7, 424 (2024)

    2024

  108. [116]

    Zheng, D

    G. Zheng, D. Zhang, Y . Zhu, K.-W. Chen, A. Chan, K. Jenk- ins, B. Kang, Z. Zeng, A. Xu, D. Ratkovski, J. Blawat, A. F. Bangura, J. Singleton, P. A. Lee, S. Li, and L. Li, Thermody- namic evidence of fermionic behavior in the vicinity of one- ninth plateau in a kagome antiferr...

    2025

  109. [117]

    L.-W. He, X. Wang, S.-L. Yu, and J.-X. Li, Nature of the 1/3 Magnetization Plateau in Spin-1/2 Kagome Antiferro- magnets, Chin. Phys. Lett.42, 090704 (2025)

    2025

  110. [118]

    M. Kato, H. K. Yoshida, R. Kumar, and Y . Ihara, Magnetic excitations in the 1/3 plateau state in InCu3(OH)6Cl3, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.94, 083704 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.