Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 55 references

Proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism in Ising superconductors

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-27 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Proximity to an antiferromagnet induces orbital antiferromagnetism in Ising superconductors when the magnetic unit cell contains at least three sublattices.

desk verdict The paper predicts a new atomic-scale phase-modulated superconducting state locked to the AF lattice in Ising SC/AF heterostructures, shown via DFT plus BdG on NbSe2/MnPS3. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.09797 v1 pith:QCU6QM3X submitted 2026-06-08 cond-mat.supr-con

G. A. Bobkov , V. A. Bobkov , T. Karabassov , I. V. Bobkova , A. A. Golubov This is my paper
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords orbitalantiferromagnetismIsingsuperconductorsproximityeffectheterostructuresphasemodulationloopcurrentsBogoliubov-deGenneslocaldensityofstates
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 sets out to establish that a new superconducting state forms in heterostructures of Ising superconductors and antiferromagnets. In this state the order parameter develops a periodic phase modulation locked to the antiferromagnetic lattice, which in turn creates atomic-scale loop currents carrying opposite orbital moments on neighboring cells. A sympathetic reader would care because the resulting state is predicted to carry net current, to remain stable across the entire parameter range, and to differ from both FFLO and helical phases while producing clear signatures in the local density of states.

What carries the argument

Periodic phase modulation of the superconducting order parameter locked to the antiferromagnetic lattice, which generates atomic-scale loop currents with alternating orbital moments.

What would settle it

STM spectra on an NbSe2/MnPS3 heterostructure that show no finite-energy dips in the local density of states would indicate that the predicted phase modulation and orbital antiferromagnetism do not form.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We predict a fundamentally new superconducting state in superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostructures with Ising spin-orbit coupling: proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism. In this state, the order parameter acquires a periodic phase modulation locked to the magnetic lattice, generating atomic-scale loop currents with opposite orbital moments on neighboring unit cells. Its emergence requires at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices per unit cell and finite spin-orbit coupling. Using NbSe2/MnPS3 as a concrete example, first-principles and Bogoliubov-de Gennes calculations demonstrate that the proximity-induced exchange field leads to robust phase modulation. Unlike FFLO and

Load-bearing premise

The proximity-induced exchange field produces robust phase modulation only when the antiferromagnet has at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices per unit cell together with finite spin-orbit coupling.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Atomic-scale loop currents appear with opposite orbital moments on neighboring unit cells.
  • The modulated state carries net current because of its atomic-scale phase gradient.
  • The state remains stable over the full parameter range where FFLO and helical states do not.
  • Finite-energy dips appear in the local density of states and can be detected by STM.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Heterostructures built from other antiferromagnets that also possess three or more magnetic sublattices may host analogous modulated states.
  • The atomic-scale orbital moments could respond to external magnetic fields or currents, offering a route to control the superconducting phase.
  • STM experiments on additional Ising-superconductor interfaces with complex antiferromagnetic order would provide a direct test of the sublattice requirement.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper predicts a new superconducting state, proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism, in superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostructures with Ising spin-orbit coupling. In this state the superconducting order parameter develops a periodic phase modulation locked to the magnetic lattice, producing atomic-scale loop currents with opposite orbital moments on neighboring unit cells. Emergence requires at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices per unit cell and finite SOC. For the concrete NbSe2/MnPS3 example, first-principles calculations combined with Bogoliubov-de Gennes solutions are stated to demonstrate that the proximity-induced exchange field produces robust phase modulation, distinct from FFLO and helical states by being atomic-scale, current-carrying, and uniquely stable across the explored parameter range, with a characteristic finite-energy LDOS signature accessible to STM.

Significance. If the numerical demonstration holds, the work identifies a qualitatively new superconducting phase whose atomic-scale current-carrying character and orbital-moment alternation are not shared by conventional FFLO or helical states. The explicit conditions (three sublattices plus finite Ising SOC) and the concrete material example together with an STM falsifiable signature constitute a clear, testable prediction. The use of standard first-principles plus BdG methods to uncover the state, rather than fitting to an ad-hoc order parameter, is a methodological strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [BdG results section] The abstract asserts that the phase modulation remains uniquely stable over the full parameter range explored, yet the quantitative dependence on exchange-field magnitude and SOC strength is not shown; without an explicit scan or stability diagram (e.g., in the results section on BdG solutions) it is unclear whether the uniqueness claim is load-bearing or holds only for the specific NbSe2/MnPS3 parameters chosen.
  2. [Methods and model section] The requirement of at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices is stated as necessary, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that two-sublattice AF order (common in many materials) fails to produce the orbital AF state; a comparative BdG calculation for a two-sublattice case would be needed to establish this as a load-bearing condition rather than an assumption.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the superconducting order parameter phase modulation should be defined explicitly (e.g., Δ(r) = |Δ| exp(i heta(r))) before the first use in the results.
  2. A figure showing the real-space current pattern and orbital-moment alternation on the lattice would make the central physical picture clearer.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the positive assessment of its significance. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested additions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [BdG results section] The abstract asserts that the phase modulation remains uniquely stable over the full parameter range explored, yet the quantitative dependence on exchange-field magnitude and SOC strength is not shown; without an explicit scan or stability diagram (e.g., in the results section on BdG solutions) it is unclear whether the uniqueness claim is load-bearing or holds only for the specific NbSe2/MnPS3 parameters chosen.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit parameter scan would make the stability claim more robust and load-bearing. In the revised manuscript we will add a stability diagram in the BdG results section that maps the emergence and persistence of the phase-modulated state as a function of exchange-field strength and SOC magnitude, confirming that the orbital antiferromagnetic state remains stable across the explored range while conventional FFLO and helical solutions do not. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods and model section] The requirement of at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices is stated as necessary, but the manuscript does not demonstrate that two-sublattice AF order (common in many materials) fails to produce the orbital AF state; a comparative BdG calculation for a two-sublattice case would be needed to establish this as a load-bearing condition rather than an assumption.

    Authors: We acknowledge that a direct numerical comparison is required to establish the three-sublattice condition as necessary rather than assumed. In the revised manuscript we will include a comparative BdG calculation for a model two-sublattice antiferromagnet (with otherwise identical parameters) demonstrating that the atomic-scale phase modulation and orbital antiferromagnetism do not appear in that geometry. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper derives its central prediction of proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism via first-principles calculations combined with numerical solution of the Bogoliubov-de Gennes equations on the NbSe2/MnPS3 interface. The emergence conditions (three nonequivalent sublattices plus finite Ising SOC) are stated as prerequisites rather than fitted outputs, and the phase modulation is reported as a direct numerical outcome of the proximity exchange field. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided abstract or description; the uniqueness claim versus FFLO/helical states is tied to the explored parameter range of the calculations rather than reducing by construction to the input definitions. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard theoretical tools in superconductivity and the assumption that the chosen heterostructure realizes the required sublattice and spin-orbit conditions; no free parameters or new entities beyond the predicted state itself are introduced in the abstract.

assumptions (2)
  • standard math Bogoliubov-de Gennes equations govern the superconducting quasiparticle spectrum
    Invoked to model the proximity-induced modulated state.
  • domain assumption First-principles electronic structure calculations accurately capture the proximity-induced exchange field
    Used to obtain the magnetic input for the BdG calculation.
invented entities (1)
  • proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism
    purpose: Describes the predicted modulated superconducting state with atomic-scale loop currents
    This is the central new state whose existence is asserted by the calculations; no independent falsifiable evidence outside the model is provided in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism in Ising superconductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QCU6QM3X

@misc{pith2026260609797,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism in Ising superconductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QCU6QM3X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.09797}
}
abstract

We predict a fundamentally new superconducting state in superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostructures with Ising spin--orbit coupling: proximity-induced orbital antiferromagnetism. In this state, the order parameter acquires a periodic phase modulation locked to the magnetic lattice, generating atomic-scale loop currents with opposite orbital moments on neighboring unit cells. Its emergence requires at least three nonequivalent magnetic sublattices per unit cell and finite spin--orbit coupling. Using NbSe$_2$/MnPS$_3$ as a concrete example, we combine first-principles and Bogoliubov--de Gennes calculations to demonstrate that the proximity-induced exchange field leads to robust phase modulation. Unlike FFLO and helical states, the phase gradient is atomic-scale, the state is current-carrying, and it remains uniquely stable over the full parameter range. The state manifests as characteristic finite-energy dips in the local density of states, accessible by STM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.09797 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Top view of the NbSe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Electronic band structure of the NbSe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (b) demonstrates a phase modulation φA,B,C with magnetic periodicity for any nonzero exchange field. The phase is linear, to good accuracy, in hA,B,C (even beyond the h ≪ ∆ analytical limit) and temperature￾independent, contrasting sharply with the FFLO state. The obtained phase inhomogeneity is strong: the phase gradient qφ ∼ 0.1/a ∼ 109 m−1 (phase difference ∼ 0.1 between neighbors) far exceeds qc ∼ ξ −1 ∼ ∆/(ℏvF … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Electronic spectra of the two-band model described [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Sublattice-resolved amplitudes of triplet correlations in NbSe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Sublattice-resolved amplitudes of triplet correlations in NbSe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Schematic (not to scale) of the spatial distribution of the triplet correlation ampli- tude for (a) ferrimagnetic exchange [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    PROXIMITY-INDUCED ORBITAL ANTIFERROMAGNETISM IN ISING SUPERCONDUCTORS

    that ifiandjbelong to the same sublattice, then at the momentump=K r corresponding toK r-point Eσ,νν(Kr) =e 2iπk1/3P r tij,σ (k1 is an integer). Ifiand jn (n∈ {1,2,3}) belong to different sublatticesν̸=ν ′, thenE σ,νν ′(Kr) = 0 [47]. Thus, for this particular mo- mentum pointK r all off-diagonal components of the sub- lattice matrixE σ,νν ′(p) vanish. Con...

  2. [2]

    A. I. Buzdin, Proximity effects in superconductor- ferromagnet heterostructures, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 935 (2005)

    2005

  3. [3]

    F. S. Bergeret, A. F. Volkov, and K. B. Efetov, Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductor-ferromagnet structures, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 1321 (2005)

    2005

  4. [4]

    F. S. Bergeret, M. Silaev, P. Virtanen, and T. T. Heikkil¨ a, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium effects in superconductors with a spin-splitting field, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 041001 (2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    Eschrig, Spin-polarized supercurrents for spintron- ics: a review of current progress, Reports on Progress 12 in Physics78, 104501 (2015)

    M. Eschrig, Spin-polarized supercurrents for spintron- ics: a review of current progress, Reports on Progress 12 in Physics78, 104501 (2015)

    2015

  6. [6]

    Linder and J

    J. Linder and J. W. A. Robinson, Superconducting spin- tronics, Nature Physics11, 307 (2015)

    2015

  7. [7]

    G. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, A. M. Bobkov, and A. Kamra, N´ eel proximity effect at antiferromag- net/superconductor interfaces, Phys. Rev. B106, 144512 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    Bobkova, G

    I. Bobkova, G. Bobkov, V. Gordeeva, and A. Bobkov, N´ eel proximity effect in superconductorantiferromagnet heterostructures, Mesoscience & Nanotechnology1, 01 (2024)

    2024

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    G. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, and A. A. Golubov, Mag- netic anisotropy of the superconducting transition in superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostructures with spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B108, L060507 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    G. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, and A. M. Bobkov, Prox- imity effect in superconductor/antiferromagnet hybrids: N´ eel triplets and impurity suppression of superconduc- tivity, Phys. Rev. B108, 054510 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    G. A. Bobkov, V. M. Gordeeva, A. M. Bobkov, and I. V. Bobkova, Oscillatory superconducting transition tem- perature in superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostruc- tures, Phys. Rev. B108, 184509 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Chourasia, L

    S. Chourasia, L. J. Kamra, I. V. Bobkova, and A. Kamra, Generation of spin-triplet cooper pairs via a canted anti- ferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B108, 064515 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    G. A. Bobkov, V. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, A. M. Bobkov, and A. A. Golubov, Triplet correlations in su- perconductor/antiferromagnet heterostructures: Depen- dence on type of antiferromagnetic ordering, Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism38, 239 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    G. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, and A. M. Bobkov, Andreev bound states at nonmagnetic impurities in superconduc- tor/antiferromagnet heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B109, 214508 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    L. J. Kamra, S. Chourasia, G. A. Bobkov, V. M. Gordeeva, I. V. Bobkova, and A. Kamra, Complete Tc suppression and n´ eel triplets mediated exchange in antiferromagnet-superconductor-antiferromagnet trilay- ers, Phys. Rev. B108, 144506 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    G. A. Bobkov, V. M. Gordeeva, L. Johnsen Kamra, S. Chourasia, A. M. Bobkov, A. Kamra, and I. V. Bobkova, Superconducting spin valves based on antifer- romagnet/superconductor/antiferromagnet heterostruc- tures, Phys. Rev. B109, 184504 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Fulde and R

    P. Fulde and R. A. Ferrell, Superconductivity in a strong spin-exchange field, Phys. Rev.135, A550 (1964)

    1964

  10. [18]

    Larkin and Y

    A. Larkin and Y. Ovchinnikov, Nonuniform state of su- perconductors, Sov. Phys. JETP20, 762 (1965)

    1965

  11. [19]

    Mironov, A

    S. Mironov, A. Mel’nikov, and A. Buzdin, Vanish- ing meissner effect as a hallmark of in-plane fulde- ferrell-larkin-ovchinnikov instability in superconductor– ferromagnet layered systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 237002 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    S. V. Mironov, D. Y. Vodolazov, Y. Yerin, A. V. Samokhvalov, A. S. Mel’nikov, and A. Buzdin, Tempera- ture controlled fulde-ferrell-larkin-ovchinnikov instability in superconductor-ferromagnet hybrid”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 077002 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Edelstein, Characteristics of the cooper pairing in two- dimensional noncentrosymmetric electron systems, Sov

    V. Edelstein, Characteristics of the cooper pairing in two- dimensional noncentrosymmetric electron systems, Sov. Phys. JETP68, 1244 (1989)

    1989

  14. [22]

    Barzykin and L

    V. Barzykin and L. P. Gor’kov, Inhomogeneous stripe phase revisited for surface superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 227002 (2002)

    2002

  15. [23]

    K. V. Samokhin, Magnetic properties of superconductors with strong spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B70, 104521 (2004)

    2004

  16. [24]

    R. P. Kaur, D. F. Agterberg, and M. Sigrist, Helical vortex phase in the noncentrosymmetric CePt 3Si, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 137002 (2005)

    2005

  17. [25]

    Dimitrova and M

    O. Dimitrova and M. V. Feigel’man, Theory of a two- dimensional superconductor with broken inversion sym- metry, Phys. Rev. B76, 014522 (2007)

    2007

  18. [26]

    Houzet and J

    M. Houzet and J. S. Meyer, Quasiclassical theory of disor- dered rashba superconductors, Phys. Rev. B92, 014509 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    D. S. Rabinovich, I. V. Bobkova, A. M. Bobkov, and M. A. Silaev, Magnetoelectric effects in superconduc- tor/ferromagnet bilayers, Phys. Rev. B99, 214501 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    H. Meng, A. V. Samokhvalov, and A. I. Buzdin, Nonuni- form superconductivity and josephson effect in a conical ferromagnet, Phys. Rev. B99, 024503 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    M. Pan, F. Liu, and H. Huang, Orbital altermagnetism (2025), arXiv:2510.00509 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    M. E. Simon and C. M. Varma, Detection and impli- cations of a time-reversal breaking state in underdoped cuprates, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 247003 (2002)

    2002

  23. [31]

    Chakravarty, R

    S. Chakravarty, R. B. Laughlin, D. K. Morr, and C. Nayak, Hidden order in the cuprates, Phys. Rev. B 63, 094503 (2001)

    2001

  24. [32]

    Chakravarty, H.-Y

    S. Chakravarty, H.-Y. Kee, and C. Navak, Neutron scat- tering signature of d-density wave order in the cuprates, International Journal of Modern Physics B15, 2901 (2001), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979201007002

    2001 doi

  25. [33]

    Kee and Y

    H.-Y. Kee and Y. B. Kim, Specific-heat anomaly in the d density wave state and emergence of inhomogeneous orbital antiferromagnetic order, Phys. Rev. B66, 012505 (2002)

    2002

  26. [34]

    H. A. Mook, P. Dai, and F. Do˘ gan, Observation of magnetic moments in the superconducting state of yba2cu3o6.6, Phys. Rev. B64, 012502 (2001)

    2001

  27. [35]

    V. I. Belyavsky, Y. V. Kopaev, and M. Y. Smirnov, In- terplay of the superconducting state and orbital antifer- romagnetic state of the high-temperature cuprate super- conductors, Phys. Rev. B72, 132501 (2005)

    2005

  28. [36]

    D. F. Schroeter and S. Doniach, Orbital antiferromag- netism in coupled planar systems, Phys. Rev. B69, 094407 (2004)

    2004

  29. [37]

    F. J. Ohkawa, Orbital antiferromagnetism in ceb6, Jour- nal of the Physical Society of Japan54, 3909 (1985), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.54.3909

    1985 doi

  30. [38]

    hidden order

    H.-H. Kung, S. Ran, N. Kanchanavatee, V. Krapivin, A. Lee, J. A. Mydosh, K. Haule, M. B. Maple, and G. Blumberg, Analogy between the “hidden order” and the orbital antiferromagnetism in uru 2−xfexsi2, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 227601 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    X. Xi, Z. Wang, W. Zhao, J.-H. Park, K. T. Law, H. Berger, L. Forr´ o, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Ising pairing in superconducting nbse2 atomic layers, Nature Physics 12, 139 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    S. C. de la Barrera, M. R. Sinko, D. P. Gopalan, N. Sivadas, K. L. Seyler, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. W. Tsen, X. Xu, D. Xiao, and B. M. Hunt, Tun- ing ising superconductivity with layer and spin–orbit coupling in two-dimensional transition-metal dichalco- genides, Nature C...

    2018

  33. [41]

    Khestanova, J

    E. Khestanova, J. Birkbeck, M. Zhu, Y. Cao, G. L. Yu, D. Ghazaryan, J. Yin, H. Berger, L. Forr´ o, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, R. V. Gorbachev, A. Mishchenko, A. K. Geim, and I. V. Grigorieva, Unusual suppression of the superconducting energy gap and critical temperature in ato...

    2018

  34. [42]

    Wickramaratne and I

    D. Wickramaratne and I. I. Mazin, Ising superconductiv- ity: A first-principles perspective, Applied Physics Let- ters122, 240503 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Olsen, Antiferromagnetism in two-dimensional mate- rials: progress and computational challenges, 2D Mate- rials11, 033005 (2024)

    T. Olsen, Antiferromagnetism in two-dimensional mate- rials: progress and computational challenges, 2D Mate- rials11, 033005 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    G. Long, H. Henck, M. Gibertini, D. Dumcenco, Z. Wang, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, E. Giannini, and A. F. Morpurgo, Persistence of magnetism in atomically thin mnps3 crystals, Nano Letters20, 2452 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Sun, Q.-H

    Y.-J. Sun, Q.-H. Tan, X.-L. Liu, Y.-F. Gao, and J. Zhang, Probing the magnetic ordering of antiferro- magnetic mnps3 by raman spectroscopy, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters10, 3087 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    K. Kim, S. Y. Lim, J. Kim, J.-U. Lee, S. Lee, P. Kim, K. Park, S. Son, C.-H. Park, J.-G. Park, and H. Cheong, Antiferromagnetic ordering in van der waals 2d magnetic material mnps3 probed by raman spectroscopy, 2D Ma- terials6, 041001 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    Strasdas, B

    J. Strasdas, B. Pestka, M. Rybak, A. K. Budniak, N. Leuth, H. Boban, V. Feyer, I. Cojocariu, D. Bara- nowski, J. Avila, P. Dudin, A. Bostwick, C. Jozwiak, E. Rotenberg, C. Autieri, Y. Amouyal, L. Plucinski, E. Lifshitz, M. Birowska, and M. Morgenstern, Elec- tronic band struct...

    2023

  40. [48]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for technical details of the Green’s functions calculation, BdG formalism and analysis of triplet corre- lations

  41. [49]

    Ozaki, Variationally optimized atomic orbitals for large-scale electronic structures, Phys

    T. Ozaki, Variationally optimized atomic orbitals for large-scale electronic structures, Phys. Rev. B67, 155108 (2003)

    2003

  42. [50]

    Ozaki and H

    T. Ozaki and H. Kino, Numerical atomic basis orbitals from h to kr, Phys. Rev. B69, 195113 (2004)

    2004

  43. [51]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  44. [52]

    Grimme, J

    S. Grimme, J. Antony, S. Ehrlich, and H. Krieg, A con- sistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H-Pu, The Journal of Chemical Physics132, 154104 (2010), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article- pdf/doi/...

    2010 doi

  45. [53]

    Aikebaier, T

    F. Aikebaier, T. T. Heikkil¨ a, and J. L. Lado, Controlling magnetism through ising superconductivity in magnetic van der waals heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B105, 054506 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    G. A. Bobkov, K. A. Bokai, M. M. Otrokov, A. M. Bobkov, and I. V. Bobkova, Gate-controlled proximity effect in superconductor/ferromagnet van der waals het- erostructures, Phys. Rev. Mater.8, 104801 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    G. Sarma, On the influence of a uniform exchange field acting on the spins of the conduction electrons in a su- perconductor, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 24, 1029 (1963)

    1963

Pith tools

Reviewed June 27, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.