Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 60 references

Periodic Drive Induced Half-Metallic Phase in Insulators and Correlated Metals

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A periodically driven Hubbard model on a square lattice develops a ferrimagnetic half-metal phase over a wide range of hole doping and drive parameters, according to a Floquet plus Hartree-Fock analysis.

desk verdict A genuinely new Floquet mechanism for a half-metal, but the paper's central dynamic claim is inferred from a static ground-state calculation, so it needs a serious referee with teeth before it can be believed. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.05935 v2 pith:PKIST37A submitted 2025-07-08 cond-mat.str-el

Suryashekhar Kusari , Arnab Das , H. R. Krishnamurthy , Arti Garg This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords drivehalf-metallicphasehoppingstabledrivendynamicalferrimagnetic
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

Electrons moving on a lattice can be made to behave differently by shining a periodic, oscillating potential on the material. This paper studies a simple model, the Fermi-Hubbard model on a square lattice, where electrons hop between neighboring sites and repel each other when on the same site. Normally, with weak repulsion, the system is just a featureless metal. The authors add an alternating potential that is opposite in phase on the two sublattices, and they compute the effective static model that describes the system after one drive period.

The drive does two things. It makes nearest-neighbor hopping weaker, which effectively makes the repulsion between electrons stronger. It also creates a staggered energy difference between the two sublattices, along with new second- and third-neighbor hopping paths. The resulting effective model resembles the ionic Hubbard model, but with additional staggered hoppings and a correlated hopping term. Solving this effective model with a spin-resolved mean-field approximation, the authors find that for hole-doped systems the electrons of one spin become metallic while electrons of the opposite spin fill a fully occupied band and become insulating. This is the half-metal phase: it conducts only one spin direction.

The authors emphasize that the phase appears over a wide range of drive phase, interaction strength, and doping, and they argue that at high drive frequency or strong amplitude the phase should be stable for very long times due to prethermalization and dynamical freezing. The calculations stop at the ground state of the effective Floquet Hamiltonian; the paper does not simulate the actual time evolution or heating of the driven system.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that applying a periodic, sublattice-dependent potential to a weakly interacting Fermi-Hubbard model on a bipartite lattice stabilizes a ferrimagnetic half-metal: the abstract states 'a periodic drive can transform a weakly interacting metal into a ferrimagnetic half-metal.' Concretely, the first-order Floquet Hamiltonian develops a staggered potential Delta_ind, staggered second/third-neighbor hopping t'_ind, and correlated hopping tc_ind; its self-consistent Hartree-Fock ground state at hole doping n<1 has one spin band metallic and the other gapped for a broad range of Phi, V, Omega, U, and n.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the relevant physical state of the driven system is captured by the ground state of the first-order Magnus Floquet Hamiltonian HF. This is stated explicitly in 'The Ground State of HF': 'the concept of a ground state in its true sense of minimum energy does not apply to a Floquet system,' yet the phase diagram is computed from that ground state. If the driven system heats, or if higher-order Magnus terms or the initial state dynamics prevent the system from realizing this ground state, the half-metal phase would not appear in the actual time-dependent problem.

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 / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies the periodically driven Fermi-Hubbard model on a two-dimensional bipartite lattice, with a sublattice-dependent sinusoidal site potential. By moving to a rotating frame and keeping the first two terms of the Magnus expansion, the authors obtain an effective static Floquet Hamiltonian H_F = H_F^(0) + H_F^(1) in which the nearest-neighbor hopping is renormalized to t_eff = t0 J0((V/Omega) sin Phi), and the drive generates a staggered sublattice potential Delta_ind, staggered second- and third-neighbor hopping t'_ind, and a correlated hopping term t_c_ind. The paper computes the self-consistent Hartree-Fock ground state of this effective Hamiltonian and reports a first-order transition from a paramagnetic metal to a ferrimagnetic half-metal for hole-doped densities n < 1 as the drive phase Phi is increased, along with a reentrant behavior at half filling. The authors further claim that the half-metal is stable for exponentially long times due to prethermalization and possibly forever due to dynamical freezing, and propose cold-atom and quantum-simulator implementations.

Significance. Assuming the dynamical claim could be substantiated, the proposal would be significant: it offers a tunable Floquet-engineering route from a simple nearest-neighbor Hubbard model to a half-metal, with no parameters fitted to the target phase. The derivation of H_F^(1) is explicit, the noninteracting dispersion and the gap expression E_gap = 2 |Delta_eff + 4 t'_eff| are given in closed form, and the Hartree-Fock phase diagram is broad in Phi and n. The main limitation is equally clear: the paper establishes a ground-state property of a truncated static Floquet Hamiltonian, not a time-evolved non-equilibrium phase, and the paper itself concedes that a Floquet system has no true ground state. The significance therefore hinges on whether the authors can connect the effective-Hamiltonian ground state to the actual driven dynamics.

major comments (3)
  1. [The Ground State of HF (main text, after Eq. (2))] The abstract's central claim, that the periodic drive transforms a weakly interacting metal into a ferrimagnetic half-metal, is not supported by the calculation actually performed, which is the self-consistent Hartree-Fock ground state of the truncated static Floquet Hamiltonian H_F^(0) + H_F^(1). The paper explicitly concedes in the subsection 'The Ground State of HF' that 'the concept of a ground state in its true sense of minimum energy does not apply to a Floquet system,' and that the ground state of H_F is used only to identify Floquet states with lower quantum fluctuations. This is not an evolution statement: for a closed system, switching on the drive generates unitary stroboscopic evolution, and the undriven paramagnetic metal has finite energy density with respect to H_F, so it does not relax to the H_F ground state. Consequently, the phase diagram in Figs. 2-4 is a property of a static effective Hamiltonian, not a demonstrated non-equilibrium phase. I request either (i) a direct time-evolution calculation (e.g., exact diagonalization on small clusters or Floquet DMFT) starting from the undriven metal, showing that staggered magnetization and a spin-resolved gap develop on prethermal timescales, or (ii) a reframing of the claims as ground-state properties of the effective Floquet Hamiltonian, with the dynamic 'transform' and stability statements removed from the abstract and Conclusions.
  2. [Conclusions and Outlook; Introduction (dynamical freezing)] The stability arguments do not close the gap identified in the previous comment. The cited prethermalization and dynamical-freezing results establish slow heating of local observables or emergent conservation laws, but they do not imply that the initial state is attracted to the magnetic ground state of H_F; in fact, at a dynamical freezing point t_eff goes to zero and the stroboscopic dynamics is nearly frozen, so the system cannot dynamically build the staggered magnetization assumed in the phase diagram. Thus the Conclusions' statement that the half-metal should be observable for exponentially large times, and 'perpetually stable' beyond a strong enough drive amplitude, is an extrapolation from the static calculation. A concrete test would be a computation of the prethermal state's observables (e.g., the stroboscopic diagonal ensemble) rather than the ground state alone.
  3. [Results for the Hole-Doped System (paragraph beginning 'We note that all the calculations...'); SM Sec. I] The justification of Hartree-Fock by DMFT/DQMC studies of the static ionic Hubbard model is not directly transferable to the Hamiltonian in Eq. (2), because the latter contains staggered second- and third-neighbor hopping and a correlated hopping term t_c_ind that are absent in the static IHM. Since the phase boundary Phi_c and the width of the half-metal phase are outputs of the self-consistent HF solution, this is a load-bearing assumption. A check of the sensitivity of the phase diagram to the correlated hopping term (e.g., HF with and without t_c_ind), or a benchmark against a numerically exact method on small clusters, would substantially strengthen the central claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Reference [39] in main text] The citation to the Supplemental Material appears as an empty reference [39] in the reference list; please supply the SM citation or link.
  2. [Eq. (1) and following text] The drive phase is written as 'sgn(sigma)' with the explanation 'sgn(sigma) = pm for sigma = A, B', but sigma is already used for spin; the sign should refer to the sublattice index, e.g., 'sgn(alpha)'.
  3. [SM Sec. I, Eq. (6)] After defining tau = Omega t, Eq. (6) writes integrals over t1 and t2 with the same symbols as the original time; to avoid dimensional inconsistencies, use tau1 and tau2 and state that the integration variables are dimensionless.
  4. [Fig. 4(b)] The label 'CBI' in the phase diagram is not defined in the text or caption; the text elsewhere uses 'paramagnetic band insulator'.
  5. [Fig. 1(c) and paragraph 'We note that all the calculations...'] Fig. 1(c) shows U_eff reaching about 4.5 at Phi = pi/2, while the text says all calculations are for U_eff < 3.5; please clarify that the figure includes the full coupling range, not only the values used in the phase diagrams.
  6. [Conclusions and Outlook] The phrase 'exponentially large times in the drive amplitude and frequency' is imprecise; the usual prethermal bound is exponential in the frequency (or in a high-frequency expansion parameter), while the role of the amplitude enters through t_eff and the freezing points.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Floquet couplings are derived from the drive, the phase diagram is a self-consistent Hartree-Fock output, and the self-citations are methodological rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The effective couplings Delta_ind, t'_ind, and tc_ind are computed from the Magnus expansion of the rotated drive (SM Eq. 6) rather than fitted to the half-metal phase, and the phase diagram is a self-consistent Hartree-Fock output in which metallic, insulating, and half-metallic regions emerge from the spin-resolved band structure. No parameter is tuned to force the half-metal, and the spin-resolved DOS is a consequence of the self-consistent solution, not an input. The authors' explicit caveat that 'the concept of a ground state in its true sense of minimum energy does not apply to a Floquet system' is a real limitation on the dynamical statement that the drive 'transforms' the metal, but it is a physical-support gap rather than a circular reduction: solving for the ground state of H_F is not equivalent by construction to asserting that the time-evolved state reaches that ground state. The self-citations that appear are methodological: earlier IHM DMFT/DQMC comparisons are invoked to justify the reliability of Hartree-Fock theory, and dynamical-freezing/prethermal references support long-time stability. These are accompanied by independent external work and do not carry the central phase-diagram claim. Thus there is no load-bearing circularity; at most a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation, corresponding to a score of 2.

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

The central claim rests on physical control parameters rather than hidden fitted constants. The main assumptions are the validity of the truncated Magnus expansion, the use of the Floquet ground state as a proxy for the driven state, the transferability of ionic Hubbard model benchmarks to this driven model, and the extrapolation of prethermal and dynamical-freezing stability to this specific half-metal phase.

free parameters (5)
  • Drive amplitude V = 60 (in units of t0)
    Chosen by hand to be large compared to t0 and U, near but away from exact dynamical freezing zeros; sets the suppression of teff and enhancement of Ueff.
  • Drive frequency Omega = 30 (in units of t0)
    Chosen high so that the Magnus expansion to first order is controlled; combined with V gives V/Omega = 2.
  • Drive phase difference Phi = scanned from 0 to pi/2
    Control parameter for the transition; the phase diagram is presented as a function of Phi.
  • Onsite repulsion U = 1.0 (in units of t0)
    Initial weakly interacting strength; Ueff = U/teff is enhanced by the drive.
  • Average density n = 0.82 to 0.95 for hole doping
    Initial filling; determines the width of the half-metal phase.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math The Magnus expansion truncated to first order in 1/Omega gives an accurate Floquet Hamiltonian for the parameters used.
    The authors keep terms up to order 1/Omega and argue higher-order contributions are small at Omega=30; this is a standard but unverified truncation for this model.
  • domain assumption The ground state of the effective Floquet Hamiltonian HF describes the relevant long-time state of the driven system.
    The paper states that the true ground-state concept does not apply to Floquet systems, yet uses the ground state of HF to identify phases without showing the driven dynamics reaches it.
  • ad hoc to paper Hartree-Fock theory is quantitatively reliable for Ueff < 3.5 in this driven model.
    The justification is transferred from earlier DMFT/DQMC comparisons for the ionic Hubbard model, not from calculations on this driven model.
  • domain assumption Prethermal heating times are exponentially long in Omega, and dynamical freezing stabilizes the phase for large drive amplitude.
    Stability is borrowed from prior literature on Floquet heating and dynamical freezing; no heating simulation is performed here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Periodic Drive Induced Half-Metallic Phase in Insulators and Correlated Metals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PKIST37A

@misc{pith2026250705935,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Periodic Drive Induced Half-Metallic Phase in Insulators and Correlated Metals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PKIST37A}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.05935}
}
read the original abstract

Non-equilibrium control of electronic properties in condensed matter systems can result in novel phenomena. In this work, we provide a novel non-equilibrium route to realize half-metallic phases. We explore the periodically driven Hubbard model on a bipartite lattice and demonstrate that a periodic drive can transform a weakly interacting metal into a ferrimagnetic half-metal. We consider a Fermi-Hubbard model with only nearest-neighbour hopping and stabilize the elusive phase simply by driving the site potentials periodically. The drive induces staggered second and third-neighbor hopping and a staggered potential between two sublattices in the Floquet Hamiltonian, whose ground state is explored in this work. Close to the dynamical freezing point, due to the suppression of nearest neighbor hopping in the driven system, an effective enhancement of various terms in the Floquet Hamiltonian, including the e-e interactions, occurs. This helps in stabilizing a broad ferrimagnetic half-metallic phase for a wide range of system parameters. The half-metallic phase achieved in the presence of high drive frequency should be stable for exponentially large time scales in drive frequency and could be perpetually stable beyond a strong enough drive amplitude owing to dynamical freezing. It can hence have potential applications in stable spintronics and other upcoming quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.05935 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Effective couplings as functions of Φ in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4: Panel (a): The top of the down-spin valence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5: Results for the second driving protocol. Panel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Panel (a) and (b): Nearest-neighbour hopping [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The staggered magnetization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Panel (a): Staggered magnetization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Fausti, R

    D. Fausti, R. I. Tobey, N. Dean, S. Kaiser, A. Dienst, M. C. Hoffmann, S. Pyon, T. Takayama, H. Tak- agi, and A. Cavalleri, Science 331, 189 (2011) , https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1197294

    doi:10.1126/science.1197294 2011

  2. [2]

    Of course, the concept of a ground state in its true sense of mini- mum energy does not apply to a Floquet system, be- cause the quasi-energies, unlike true energies, are non- unique (by addition/subtraction of any integer multiple of the photon energy ℏΩ), being defined to correspond to a unique evolution operator rather than a unique Hamil- tonian [ 49, ...

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Nishida, D

    M. Nishida, D. Song, A. M. Hallas, H. Eisaki, and R. Shi- mano, Phys. Rev. B 110, 224515 (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    G. T. B. M. e. a. Budden, M., Nature Physics 17 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-01148-1

    doi:10.1038/s41567-020-01148-1 2021

  5. [5]

    S. B. S. F. e. a. McIver, J.W., Nature Physics 16 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0698-y

    doi:10.1038/s41567-019-0698-y 2020

  6. [6]

    J. L. H. Xu, J. Zhou, 8, 2101508

    work page

  7. [7]

    Lenarˇ ciˇ c, E

    Z. Lenarˇ ciˇ c, E. Altman, and A. Rosch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 267603 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Amato and M

    L. Amato and M. M¨ uller, Phys. Rev. B 109, 054424 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Z. A. D. P. e. a. Kogar, A., Nature Physics 16, 159 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    S. J. Zhang, X. Y. Zhou, S. X. Xu, Q. Wu, L. Yue, Q. M. Liu, T. C. Hu, R. S. Li, J. Y. Yuan, C. C. Homes, G. D. Gu, T. Dong, and N. L. Wang, Phys. Rev. X 14, 011036 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    M. M. D. R. e. a. Jotzu, G., Nature 515, 237 (2014)

    2014

  5. [13]

    Miyake, G

    H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Bur- ton, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185302 (2013)

    2013

  6. [14]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Phys. Rev. E 90, 012110 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    D’Alessio and M

    L. D’Alessio and M. Rigol, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041048 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    D. A. Abanin, W. De Roeck, and F. m. c. Huveneers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 256803 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    T. Mori, T. Kuwahara, and K. Saito, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 120401 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Kuwahara, T

    T. Kuwahara, T. Mori, and K. Saito, Annals of Physics 367, 96 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Abanin, W

    D. Abanin, W. De Roeck, W. W. Ho, and F. Huveneer, Commun. Math. Phys. 354, 809 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    D. J. Luitz, R. Moessner, S. L. Sondhi, and V. Khemani, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021046 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Mori, Phys

    T. Mori, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 050604 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    W. W. Ho, T. Mori, D. A. Abanin, and E. G. Dalla Torre, Annals of Physics 454, 169297 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Das, Phys

    A. Das, Phys. Rev. B 82, 172402 (2010)

    2010

  17. [25]

    Bhattacharyya, A

    S. Bhattacharyya, A. Das, and S. Dasgupta, Phys. Rev. B 86, 054410 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    S. S. Hegde, H. Katiyar, T. S. Mahesh, and A. Das, Phys. Rev. B 90, 174407 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Sasidharan and N

    S. Sasidharan and N. Surendran, Physica Scripta 99, 045930 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Haldar, R

    A. Haldar, R. Moessner, and A. Das, Phys. Rev. B 97, 245122 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Haldar, D

    A. Haldar, D. Sen, R. Moessner, and A. Das, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021008 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Haldar and A

    A. Haldar and A. Das, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 34, 234001 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    Floquet- thermalization via instantons near dynamical freezing,

    R. Mukherjee, H. Guo, and D. Chowdhury, “Floquet- thermalization via instantons near dynamical freezing,” (2024), arXiv:2412.10498 [quant-ph]

    2024

  24. [32]

    Frozonium: Freezing anhar- monicity in floquet superconducting circuits,

    K. Lewellen, R. Mukherjee, H. Guo, S. Roy, V. Fatemi, and D. Chowdhury, “Frozonium: Freezing anhar- monicity in floquet superconducting circuits,” (2025), arXiv:2501.10503 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  25. [33]

    Agarwala and D

    A. Agarwala and D. Sen, Phys. Rev. B 95, 014305 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    Aditya and D

    S. Aditya and D. Sen, SciPost Phys. Core 6, 083 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Mukherjee, R

    B. Mukherjee, R. Melendrez, M. Szyniszewski, H. J. Changlani, and A. Pal, Phys. Rev. B 109, 064303 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Ghosh, I

    S. Ghosh, I. Paul, and K. Sengupta, Physical Review Letters 130 (2023), 10.1103/physrevlett.130.120401

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    Haldar, A

    A. Haldar, A. Das, S. Chaudhuri, L. Staszewski, A. Wietek, F. Pollmann, R. Moessner, and A. Das, arXiv:2410.11050 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    C. C. J. G. e. a. Mazurenko, A., Nature 545, 462 (2017)

    2017

  31. [40]

    Hubbard and J

    J. Hubbard and J. B. Torrance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1750 (1981)

    1981

  32. [41]

    J. B. Torrance, A. Girlando, J. J. Mayerle, J. I. Crowley, V. Y. Lee, P. Batail, and S. J. LaPlaca, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1747 (1981)

    1981

  33. [42]

    Messer, R

    M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, T. Uehlinger, G. Jotzu, S. Hu- ber, D. Greif, and T. Esslinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 115303 (2015)

    2015

  34. [43]

    A. Garg, H. R. Krishnamurthy, and M. Randeria, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 046403 (2006)

    2006

  35. [44]

    Craco, P

    L. Craco, P. Lombardo, R. Hayn, G. I. Japaridze, and E. M¨ uller-Hartmann,Phys. Rev. B 78, 075121 (2008)

    2008

  36. [45]

    Byczuk, M

    K. Byczuk, M. Sekania, W. Hofstetter, and A. P. Kampf, Phys. Rev. B 79, 121103 (2009)

    2009

  37. [46]

    A. Garg, H. R. Krishnamurthy, and M. Randeria, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 106406 (2014)

    2014

  38. [47]

    A. T. Hoang, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 22, 095602 (2010)

    2010

  39. [48]

    S. Bag, A. Garg, and H. R. Krishnamurthy, Phys. Rev. B 91, 235108 (2015)

    2015

  40. [49]

    J. H. Shirley, Phys. Rev. 138, B979 (1965)

    1965

  41. [50]

    Sambe, Phys

    H. Sambe, Phys. Rev. A 7, 2203 (1973)

    1973

  42. [51]

    S. S. Kancharla and E. Dagotto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 016402 (2007)

    2007

  43. [52]

    Chattopadhyay, S

    A. Chattopadhyay, S. Bag, H. R. Krishnamurthy, and A. Garg, Phys. Rev. B 99, 155127 (2019)

    2019

  44. [54]

    Paris, K

    N. Paris, K. Bouadim, F. Hebert, G. G. Batrouni, and R. T. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 046403 (2007)

    2007

  45. [55]

    Bouadim, N

    K. Bouadim, N. Paris, F. H´ ebert, G. G. Batrouni, and R. T. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. B 76, 085112 (2007)

    2007

  46. [56]

    A. G. Anwesha Chattopadhyay, H. R. Krishnamurthy, SciPost Phys. Core 4, 009 (2021)

    2021

  47. [57]

    Darkwah Oppong, G

    N. Darkwah Oppong, G. Pasqualetti, O. Bettermann, P. Zechmann, M. Knap, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031026 (2022)

    2022

  48. [58]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008)

    2008

  49. [59]

    Observation of sep- arated dynamics of charge and spin in the fermi-hubbard model,

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, A. Bengtsson, S. Boixo, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, N. Bushnell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, Y.-A. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, S. J. Cot- ton, W. Courtney, S. Demura, A. Derk, A. Dunsworth, D. ...

    2020 arXiv

  50. [60]

    Periodic Drive Induced Half-Metallic Phase in Insulators and Correlated Metal

    T. Hensgens, T. Fujita, L. Janssen, X. Li, C. J. Van Diepen, C. Reichl, W. Wegscheider, S. Das Sarma, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Nature 548, 70 (2017) . Supplementary material for “Periodic Drive Induced Half-Metallic Phase in Insulators and Correlated Metal” Suryashekhar Kusar...

    2017

  51. [61]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Advances in Physics 64, 139 (2015) , https://doi.org/10.1080/00018732.2015.1055918

    2015

  52. [62]

    S. Bag, A. Garg, and H. R. Krishnamurthy, Phys. Rev. B 103, 155132 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.