Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 36 references

Inhomogeneous Ising Model on 2D kagom\'{e} Lattice: Fermionic field approach

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An exact critical surface for the inhomogeneous kagomé Ising model follows by fermionizing a free-fermion eight-vertex representation.

desk verdict The magnetization formula is complex in the ferromagnetic phase, so the exact-solution claim fails as printed; the critical surface and free energy may still be salvageable. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.02156 v1 pith:MBZ4VRK2 submitted 2026-08-03 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.str-elmath-phmath.MP

Shahane A. Khachatryan , Zhidong Zhang , Ara G. Sedrakyan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-elmath-phmath.MP MSC 82B2082B2382B27 PACS 05.50.+q75.10.Hk64.60.Fr
keywords kagomélatticeinhomogeneousIsingmodeleight-vertexfree-fermionconditioncriticalsurfacespontaneousmagnetizationexactsolutionanticommutingvariables
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 claims an exact solution of the two-dimensional Ising model on the kagomé lattice when the three nearest-neighbour couplings are allowed to differ. Its route is to rewrite the partition function as a vertex model with an eight-vertex R-matrix, verify the free-fermion condition, and express the spin system as a quadratic action of anticommuting variables. The central payoff is an exact equation, sum_k cosh(2J_k) - product_k sinh(2J_k) - product_k cosh(2J_k) = 0, that locates the critical surface separating ordered and disordered phases, together with integral formulas for the free energy and specific heat and a closed expression for the spontaneous magnetization in the uniform case. The solution reproduces the known square-lattice and one-dimensional Ising limits when one or two couplings vanish. If right, it gives an analytic benchmark for anisotropic kagomé magnets and a controlled view of how lattice geometry and coupling asymmetry reshape the phase boundary.

What carries the argument

The central object is the eight-vertex R-matrix obtained from the kagomé cell Boltzmann weight by a local unitary rotation, together with the free-fermion identity it satisfies. That identity is what allows each local transfer operator to be written as the exponential of a quadratic form in fermionic creation and annihilation operators. In momentum space the quadratic action is block diagonal; each (p,q) sector contributes a 4x4 determinant, and the product of these determinants is the exact partition function on a torus. The critical surface is the locus where the kernel develops a zero eigenvalue at long wavelength, meaning the fermion mass vanishes. The magnetization calculation uses the

What would settle it

Take a finite kagomé lattice, compute the transfer-matrix spectrum or exact partition function for coupling triples that satisfy Eq. (4.35) away from the isotropic point, and locate the largest zero or specific-heat peak as a function of scaling; if the singularity does not converge to Eq. (4.35) as the lattice grows, or if the uniform magnetization from Eq. (5.101) does not vanish at the predicted critical coupling, the central claim is wrong. A simpler check: evaluate A5 numerically for generic couplings; it should be identically zero.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the inhomogeneous kagomé Ising model belongs to the free-fermion class of exactly solvable two-dimensional models. After a local unitary rotation, the Boltzmann weight of each elementary cell becomes an eight-vertex R-matrix whose weights satisfy the identity R00_00 R11_11 - R11_00 R00_11 = R10_01 R01_10 - R01_01 R10_10. This free-fermion condition lets every R-operator be written as the normal-ordered exponential of a quadratic fermionic form, so the partition function becomes a Gaussian integral over anticommuting variables. In momentum space the action decomposes into independent 4x4 blocks and the partition function becomes a product of determinants. The thermod

Load-bearing premise

The whole derivation rests on the claim that the local eight-vertex weights satisfy a special algebraic identity that makes the model equivalent to non-interacting fermions, and that one coefficient in the momentum-space determinant (A5) vanishes exactly; the paper asserts both rather than proving them here, and if either fails the determinant factorization and the critical equation collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any trio of couplings on the ferromagnetic side, the phase boundary is obtained by solving one algebraic equation; the isotropic special case gives sinh 2J_c = (4/3)^{1/4}, equivalent to 1/J_c about 2.143.
  • The free-energy integral and specific-heat formula make the full thermodynamics of the anisotropic model available in closed form, including the logarithmic divergence at the critical surface.
  • Setting J1 = 0 yields the anisotropic square-lattice Ising model with renormalized couplings e^{2 J_bar_a} = cosh(2J_a); the standard critical condition follows exactly. Setting J1 = J2 = 0 yields the one-dimensional Ising model with a transition only at T = 0.
  • The magnetization formula (5.101) provides an exact order parameter for the uniform kagomé ferromagnet, with a critical point agreeing with earlier results while differing from prior magnetization expressions only by non-singular factors.
  • Because the free-fermion condition holds for arbitrary signs of the couplings, the critical surface contains separate ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic branches; sign reversal of two couplings leaves the surface invariant, while reversal of one or three changes it.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same R-matrix/free-fermion strategy should transfer to other lattices built from corner-sharing triangles or decorated square cells, wherever the local weight can be cast as an eight-vertex R-matrix; the critical equation would change only through the momentum-space kernel.
  • The identification of criticality with a zero fermion mass on a whole surface suggests the critical exponents are the ordinary Ising ones everywhere on that surface, not just at the isotropic point; this is not proved in the paper and could be checked by expanding the free-energy integral near the surface.
  • The sign structure of the critical surface implies that frustration (one or three antiferromagnetic couplings) moves or eliminates the transition; an explicit phase diagram in those regions, or a numerical test of the surface on the antiferromagnetic side, would be a natural next check.
  • A direct testable extension: compute the finite-size determinant zeroes for moderate N and compare their scaling with Eq. (4.35); this would independently confirm the long-wavelength reduction and locate possible complex-temperature zeroes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims an exact solution of the inhomogeneous ferromagnetic Ising model on the kagomé lattice by mapping it to a non-symmetric eight-vertex R-matrix and then to a quadratic fermionic action. The central results are the critical-surface equation (4.35), the free-energy integral (4.46), the specific-heat expression (4.51), and the spontaneous magnetization (5.100)/(5.101). The authors also show that the model reduces to the square-lattice Ising model when one coupling vanishes and to the one-dimensional Ising model when two couplings vanish, and they state that these limits reproduce the known exact results. The derivation follows the fermionic R-matrix technique of Refs. [28,29].

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a nontrivial exact solution for a two-dimensional inhomogeneous lattice model and would generalize earlier exact results for the kagomé Ising model. The construction of an explicit R-matrix satisfying the free-fermion condition, the determinant factorization of the partition function, and the reduction checks in the square-lattice and one-dimensional limits are potentially valuable. However, the spontaneous-magnetization formula is demonstrably non-real in the ordered phase, which is an internal inconsistency in a central exact-solution claim. The paper also leaves several load-bearing algebraic steps unproved. As printed, the central claims are not supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1, Eq. (5.100)] The claimed spontaneous magnetization is not real in the ferromagnetic phase. For J_k≡J, c_J = sinh^2(2J)/(sinh 2J − 2 cosh 2J)^2. The paper's own critical condition gives c_J=1/3, and c_J increases monotonically from 0 to 1 as J goes from 0 to infinity. Thus for every J above J_c (T<T_c), the factor (1−3c_J) is negative while the other factors in the radicand of (5.100) are positive, so the fourth root is complex. A physical spontaneous magnetization must be real, nonnegative, and approach 1 as T→0; the printed formula instead gives a complex value throughout the entire ordered phase. The paper's statement that (5.100)/(5.101) differ from Refs. [33,21] only by non-critical factors is therefore incorrect: the formula is internally inconsistent, not merely a minor variant.
  2. [§4, Eqs. (3.28)–(4.35)] The critical-surface equation (4.35) is asserted without a supporting derivation. The determinant formula (3.28) is stated with coefficients (3.29)–(3.32) and A5=0 in (3.33), but no proof of A5=0 is given, and the free-fermion condition (2.13) is only said to be 'verified.' More importantly, the text claims that at ni=0, nj=0,N−1 the determinant zeroes are governed by (4.35). The N→∞ limit of (3.28) in that sector is A1+A2+A3+A4 (since A5=0), and the equivalence of this expression with (4.35) is not shown. Because (4.35) is the basis for the phase diagram and for the subsequent thermodynamic results, this is a load-bearing gap that must be filled.
  3. [§3, Eqs. (3.25)–(3.27)] The factorization of the fermionic action into independent momentum blocks and the 4×4 determinant form (3.26)–(3.28) are central to the entire paper. The adaptation of Ref. [28] to the present non-symmetric, inhomogeneous R-matrix is nontrivial, but the derivation is not provided. In particular, the antiperiodic boundary conditions, the half-Brillouin-zone reduction, and the resulting determinant coefficients are stated without derivation. Since the free-fermion condition (2.13) and the vanishing of A5 are asserted rather than proved, the paper should either supply the algebra or refer to explicit equations in Ref. [28] where these steps are demonstrated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4, Eq. (4.51)] The functions 'ElliptikK' and 'ElliptikE' should be 'EllipticK' and 'EllipticE'; the arguments should be checked for typos.
  2. [§4, Eq. (4.36)] The expression for J3± contains an unbalanced bracket: 'cosh[2(J1+J2])' should be 'cosh[2(J1+J2)]'. The two solutions are not used further.
  3. [§4, Eqs. (4.53)–(4.55)] The p-integral leading to (4.54) is stated without intermediate steps. Since this is a consistency check, a brief derivation or a reference to the standard elliptic-integral technique would help.
  4. [Throughout] There are numerous language and typographical errors: 'sience', 'fermionc', 'T¨oplitz', 'Kagom´e' inconsistency, and malformed references ([29], [36]). The manuscript needs careful proofreading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the critical-surface and thermodynamic formulas are derived algebraically from the Boltzmann weights, with self-citations supplying standard fermionization techniques rather than the claimed results.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The R-matrix elements (2.7)-(2.12) are computed from the Boltzmann weights (2.1)-(2.5) by a local unitary transformation, and the free-fermion condition (2.13) is stated as a verified algebraic property of those elements, not imposed to force the final critical equation. The determinant representation (3.28)-(3.33), the critical-surface equation (4.35), and the free energy (4.46) are obtained by explicit algebraic evaluation once the quadratic fermionic action is accepted. No parameter is fitted to the critical point or to the magnetization; the homogeneous critical coupling (4.37) and the square-lattice and 1D limits are checked against known external benchmarks. The self-citations [28,29,30] supply the fermionization and Toeplitz-determinant techniques, but the load-bearing computations for the kagome lattice are performed in the present paper, and those cited works do not contain the target critical-surface or magnetization formulas for this model. One algebraic assertion, A5=0 in Eq. (3.33), is stated without proof and is load-bearing for the determinant simplification, but it is an assumption to be checked, not a circular reduction. Similarly, the paper's own admission that (5.100)/(5.101) 'slightly differ' from the earlier results [33,21] indicates a correctness concern about the magnetization formula, but it does not establish that the formula was assumed as an input; the magnetization is obtained via Szegő's theorem from coefficients solved out of fJ and gJ. No step reduces to its own input by definition or by fitted parameter, so no circular step is identified.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities and has no fitted parameters. Its load-bearing assumptions are algebraic: the free-fermion factorization of the R-matrix, the vanishing of A5, the fermionic boundary-condition mapping, and the long-wavelength identification of the critical surface. These are asserted rather than derived, and the printed equations are not internally consistent at the substitution level.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The R-matrix satisfies the free-fermion condition (2.13), making the action quadratic in Grassmann variables.
    Asserted in Section 2 after Eq (2.13) with the phrase 'verified', but no calculation is shown; the entire determinant factorization depends on it.
  • ad hoc to paper The coefficient A5 = R01_01 R10_10 - R11_00 R00_11 vanishes identically (Eq 3.33).
    Set to zero with no derivation. It is not obviously a consequence of the free-fermion condition as stated, and it affects the determinant form and critical surface.
  • domain assumption Antiperiodic boundary conditions on fermionic fields correctly encode periodic spin boundary conditions (Eq 3.21).
    Taken from Ref [28] without justification in this text; the Fourier expansion and determinant form rely on this mapping.
  • domain assumption The critical surface can be read off from the zero of the determinant at the smallest half-integer momenta (Section 4).
    This long-wavelength assumption is standard for the ferromagnetic case, but the paper does not show that the printed A_i coefficients actually vanish on Eq (4.35).
  • standard math Szegő's theorem applies to the Toeplitz determinant arising in the magnetization calculation (Eqs 5.89-5.92).
    Standard theorem; used without proof, which is acceptable, but the function to which it is applied is derived from the questionable determinant coefficients.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Inhomogeneous Ising Model on 2D kagom\'{e} Lattice: Fermionic field approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MBZ4VRK2

@misc{pith2026260802156,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Inhomogeneous Ising Model on 2D kagom\'e Lattice: Fermionic field approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MBZ4VRK2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.02156}
}
abstract

We investigate the two-dimensional inhomogeneous Ising model (2DIM) on the kagom'e lattice by mapping it onto a particular non-symmetric eight-vertex model and constructing the corresponding $R$-matrix. Using a fermionic representation, we evaluate the partition function and derive explicit expressions for the main thermodynamic quantities. In the thermodynamic limit, we obtain an exact equation for the critical surface determining the phase transition of the model. We also calculate the free energy, specific heat, and spontaneous magnetization in the ferromagnetic case. Furthermore, we show that when one or two coupling constants vanish, the model reduces, respectively, to the square-lattice and one-dimensional Ising models. In both limits, our results reproduce the corresponding exact critical couplings and free energies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.02156 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. kagom´e lattice In this formulation the partition function can be rewritten as Z = X sαβ Y αβ Wαβ, Wαβ = X sγ=±1 e J1[sαsβ′+sβsα′]+J2[sβ+sβ′]sk+J3[sα+sα′]sγ . (2.2) As for the original kagom´e lattice there is rotational symmetry at the centers of the hexagons interchanging the axes, and the model has symmetry in respect to the interchange of the parameters Ji , i = 1, 2, 3, we could define the R-matrices by three d… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. R-operator The periodic boundary conditions imposed on the spin variables of the two-dimensional lattice translate into antiperiodic boundary conditions for the corresponding fermionic vari￾ables. This must be taken into account when passing to Grassmann field variables ψ, ψ¯ in order to represent the trace in the partition function as a functional integral. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Critical subsurfaces on the real coordinate space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [28]

    Khachatryan, A

    Sh. Khachatryan, A. Sedrakyan,Characteristics of 2D lattice from fermionc realization: Ising and XYZ models, Phys. Rev. B80, 125128 (2009), https://doi.org/10.1103/Phys.Rev.B.80.125128, arXiv:0712.0273v2

    arXiv 2009

  2. [1]

    Onsager,Crystal statistics

    L. Onsager,Crystal statistics. I. A two-dimensional model with an order-disorder tran- sition, Phys. Rev. 65 (3–4) (1944) 117–149, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.65.117

    doi:10.1103/physrev.65.117 1944

  3. [2]

    Kaufman,Crystal statistics

    B. Kaufman,Crystal statistics. II. Partition function evaluated by spinor analysis, Phys. Rev. 76 (8) (1949) 1232–1243, http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.76. 1232

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.76 1949

  4. [3]

    Baxter,Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics, Academic Press 1982

    R.J. Baxter,Exactly Solved Models in Statistical Mechanics, Academic Press 1982

    1982

  5. [4]

    Faddeev, L. D. and Takhtajan, L. A.-Hamiltonian Methods in the Theory of Solitons, Series- Classics in Mathematics, Springer, 2007 27

    2007

  6. [5]

    H. A. Kramers and G. H. Wannier,Statistics of the two-dimensional ferromagnet. Part I, Phys. Rev.60, 252–262 (1941), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.60.252

    doi:10.1103/physrev.60.252 1941

  7. [6]

    R. M. F. Houtappel,Order-disorder in hexagonal lattices, Physica16, 425–455 (1950), https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-8914(50)90130-3

    doi:10.1016/0031-8914(50)90130-3 1950

  8. [7]

    G. H. Wannier,Antiferromagnetism. The triangular Ising net, Phys. Rev.79, 357–364 (1950), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.79.357

    doi:10.1103/physrev.79.357 1950

Show all 36 references
  1. [8]

    T. D. Schultz, D. C. Mattis and E. H. Lieb,Two-dimensional Ising model as a soluble problem of many fermions, Rev. Mod. Phys.36, 856–871 (1964), https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.36.856

    1964 doi

  2. [9]

    P. W. Kasteleyn,Dimer statistics and phase transitions, J. Math. Phys.4, 287–293 (1963), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1703953

    1963 doi

  3. [10]

    M. E. Fisher,On the dimer solution of planar Ising models, J. Math. Phys.7, 1776–1781 (1966), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1704825

    1966 doi

  4. [11]

    Fan and F

    C. Fan and F. Y. Wu,General lattice model of phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B2, 723–733 (1970), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.2.723

    1970 doi

  5. [12]

    R. J. Baxter,Partition function of the eight-vertex lattice model, Ann. Phys.70, 193–228 (1972), https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(72)90335-1

    1972 doi

  6. [13]

    L. P. Kadanoff and H. Ceva,Determination of an operator algebra for the two-dimensional Ising model, Phys. Rev. B3, 3918–3939 (1971), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.3.3918

    1971 doi

  7. [14]

    R. J. Baxter,Eight-vertex model in lattice statistics and one-dimensional anisotropic Heisenberg chain. I. Some fundamental eigenvectors, Ann. Phys.76, 1–24 (1973), https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(73)90439-9. 28

    1973 doi

  8. [15]

    R. J. Baxter,Eight-vertex model in lattice statistics and one-dimensional anisotropic Heisenberg chain. II. Equivalence to a generalized ice-type lattice model, Ann. Phys.76, 25–47 (1973), https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(73)90440-5

    1973 doi

  9. [16]

    Melotti,The free-fermion eight-vertex model: couplings, bipartite dimers and Z- invariance, Commun

    P. Melotti,The free-fermion eight-vertex model: couplings, bipartite dimers and Z- invariance, Commun. Math. Phys.381, 33–82 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220- 020-03901-2

    2021 doi

  10. [17]

    D.-Z. Li, X. Wang and X.-B. Yang,Free-fermion models and two-dimensional Ising models under zero field and imaginary fieldi(π/2)k BT, Entropy27, 799 (2025), https://doi.org/10.3390/e27080799

    2025 doi

  11. [18]

    The Kagom´ e Ising Net, Progress of Theoretical Physics Vol.10, No

    Kenzi Kanˆ o, Shigeo Naya,Antiferromagnetism. The Kagom´ e Ising Net, Progress of Theoretical Physics Vol.10, No. 2 (1953) 158

    1953

  12. [19]

    Syozi, H

    I. Syozi, H. Nakano,Statistical models of ferrimagnetism, Progr. Theoret. Phys. 13 (1) (1955) 69–78, http://dx.doi.org/10.1143/PTP.13.69

    1955 doi

  13. [20]

    Syozi, S

    I. Syozi, S. Naya,Symmetrical properties of two-dimensional Ising lattices, Progr. The- oret. Phys. 24 (4) (1960) 829–839, http://dx.doi.org/10.1143/PTP.24.829

    1960 doi

  14. [21]

    Matveev, R

    V. Matveev, R. Shrock,Complex-temperature properties of the Ising model on 2D het- eropolygonal lattices, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.285235 (1995)

    1995

  15. [22]

    F.A.Kassan-Ogly, Spontaneous magnetization of Kagome lattice in Ising model, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 572, 170568 (2023)

    2023

  16. [23]

    Zheng and G

    J. Zheng and G. Sun,Exact results for Ising models on the triangular Kagom´ e lattice, Phys. Rev. B71, 052408 (2005), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.71.052408

    2005 doi

  17. [24]

    Jurˇ ciˇ sinov´ a and M

    E. Jurˇ ciˇ sinov´ a and M. Jurˇ ciˇ sin,Interaction-generated frustration in the ferromagnetic spin system on the kagome lattice: exact analysis on the star kagomelike recursive lattice, Phys. Rev. E104, 044121 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.104.044121. 29

    2021 doi

  18. [25]

    Narasimhan, S

    P. Narasimhan, S. Humeniuk, A. Roy and V. Drouin-Touchette,Sim- ulating the transverse-field Ising model on the kagome lattice using a programmable quantum annealer, Phys. Rev. B110, 054432 (2024), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.110.054432

    2024 doi

  19. [26]

    V. A. Mutailamov and A. K. Murtazaev,Phase diagram of the decorated Ising model on the Kagome lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor and an- tiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor interactions, Physica A678, 130953 (2025), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2025.130953

    2025

  20. [27]

    and Wilson, Stephen D.Kagome metals- Rev.Mod.Phys.98.015002 (2026)

    Di Sante, Domenico, Neupert, Titus, etal. and Wilson, Stephen D.Kagome metals- Rev.Mod.Phys.98.015002 (2026)

    2026

  21. [29]

    Khachatryan, A

    Sh. Khachatryan, A. SedrakyanOn the solutions of the Yang-Baxter equations with general inhomogeneous eight-vertex -matrix: Relations with Zamolodchikov’s tetrahedral algebra, J. Stat. Phys.150, 130 (2013), http:/doi.org/10.48550/arXiv:1208.4339

    2013 doi arXiv

  22. [30]

    Sedrakyan,Edge excitations of an incompressible fermionic liquid in a staggered mag- netic field, Nuclear PhysicsB554 [FS] 514-536 (1999)

    A. Sedrakyan,Edge excitations of an incompressible fermionic liquid in a staggered mag- netic field, Nuclear PhysicsB554 [FS] 514-536 (1999)

    1999

  23. [31]

    Khachatryan, R

    Sh. Khachatryan, R. Schrader, A. Sedrakyan,Grassmann-Gaussian integrals and gen- eralized star products: J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42(2009) 304019;in Liouville Gravity and Statistical Models, A special issue dedicated to the memory of Alexey Zamolodchikov

    2009

  24. [32]

    Khachatryan, A

    Sh. Khachatryan, A. Sedrakyan, P.Sorba,Network Models: Action formulation, Nucl.Phys.B825: 444-465 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    Naya,On the spontaneous magnetizations of honeycomb and Kagom´ e Ising lattices, Progr

    S. Naya,On the spontaneous magnetizations of honeycomb and Kagom´ e Ising lattices, Progr. Theoret. Phys. 11 (1) (1954) 53–62, http://dx.doi.org/10.1143/ PTP.11.53. 30

    1954

  26. [34]

    E. W. Montroll and R. B. Potts and J. C. Ward,Correlations and spontaneous mag- netization of the two-dimenional Ising Model, Journal of Math. Physics4, N.2, (1963) 308-322,

    1963

  27. [35]

    Kac ad J

    M. Kac ad J. C. Ward, Phys. Rev. 88, 1332 (1952)

    1952

  28. [36]

    C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev.85, 808 (1952). 31

    1952

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.