Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 98 references

Shiba duality and $\eta$-altermagnetism: Pairing and charge orders in bipartite attractive Hubbard models

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Shiba duality maps altermagnetic band splitting from spin to η-pseudospin in attractive Hubbard models, defining η-altermagnetism as a Bogoliubov-de Gennes counterpart of altermagnetism in pairing and charge orders.

desk verdict A genuinely new symmetry-based concept—η-ALM—with clean algebraic derivations, but the ground-state evidence is thin and the odd-parity case is mostly a relabeling of known ALM. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.21430 v1 pith:QVEVPPAT submitted 2026-07-23 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.supr-con

Yu-Ping Lin This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.supr-con
keywords Shibadualityη-pseudospinaltermagnetismattractiveHubbardmodelBogoliubov-deGenneschargedensityordersingletpairingbipartitelattice
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 argues that the altermagnetic principle—momentum-dependent band splitting in a compensated collinear order—can be transplanted from spin to η-pseudospin via Shiba duality. In half-filled bipartite attractive Hubbard models, the η-pseudospin (whose components are on-site singlet pairing and staggered charge density) plays the role of spin, and anisotropic second-neighbor hopping generates splitting of the Bogoliubov-de Gennes bands. The paper defines this as η-altermagnetism (η-ALM) and shows that odd-parity η-ALM gives pure η-pseudospin splitting while even-parity η-ALM gives spin-η-locked splitting. Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov computations on checkerboard and honeycomb lattices produce p-, d-, and f-wave splitting structures. If correct, the result extends the altermagnetic band-splitting phenomenology into superconducting and charge-ordered ground states, without requiring higher-angular-momentum order parameters themselves.

What carries the argument

The central object is the η-pseudospin, an SU(2) pseudospin defined through Nambu spinors whose components are on-site uniform singlet pairing and staggered charge-density modulation. Shiba duality—a partial particle-hole transformation acting on one spin species—exactly maps repulsive Hubbard models to attractive ones at half filling. The load-bearing symmetry is the Shiba-dual P̃T̃, which protects Kramers degeneracy of η-pseudospins in the BdG bands of η-AFM. Anisotropic second-neighbor hopping (sublattice currents for odd parity, spin-dependent sublattice bonds for even parity) breaks this symmetry and generates the η-pseudospin or spin-η-locked splitting. Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov theory p

What would settle it

An unbiased exact-diagonalization or quantum Monte Carlo study of the checkerboard or honeycomb attractive Hubbard model with t1=1, t2=0.1, U=-4 at half filling could measure the momentum-resolved spectral function and the η-pseudospin splitting. If the splitting vanishes in the thermodynamic limit or the ground state shows no long-range pairing/charge order, the mean-field η-ALM band picture would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At half filling on bipartite lattices, Shiba duality exactly maps the repulsive Hubbard model to the attractive one, so the spin order of the repulsive side corresponds to η-pseudospin order on the attractive side. The paper shows that the η-pseudospin band structure mirrors the spin band structure: a Shiba-dual parity-time-reversal symmetry P̃T̃ enforces a Kramers degeneracy of η-pseudospins in the BdG bands of η-AFM. Introducing anisotropic second-neighbor hopping breaks this degeneracy and produces η-ALM. For sublattice currents (odd parity), the BdG bands develop η-pseudospin splitting with the same dispersion as spin altermagnetism; for sublattice spin bonds (even parity), the splitting

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mean-field ground state—obtained by fully occupying the negative-energy BdG band—faithfully represents the true ground state of the interacting attractive model; in two dimensions, quantum fluctuations could destroy the sharp η-pseudospin splitting.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Altermagnetic band-splitting phenomenology now has a pairing/charge-order counterpart: odd- and even-parity η-ALMs with p-, d-, and f-wave splitting structures on bipartite lattices.
  • The Shiba-dual correspondence implies that any ALM model on a bipartite lattice maps to an η-ALM model, so the known ALM taxonomy can be translated to the attractive side.
  • Doping the attractive model (equivalent to a Zeeman field on the repulsive side) produces canted η-ALM with additional alternate splitting associated with pairing orders beyond the s-wave η3 splitting of the pure model.
  • In ultracold-atom implementations, the predicted BdG band splitting could be observed with momentum-resolved Raman or radio-frequency spectroscopy, providing a direct experimental signature.
  • If η-ALM is realized in materials, junctions may show orientation-dependent Andreev reflection and Josephson effects, similar to altermagnet-superconductor junctions, with possible η-pseudospin torque.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The mean-field result suggests a broader principle: any order parameter with an SU(2) symmetry that can be rotated by Shiba duality may exhibit altermagnetic-type splitting; one could look for orbital or valley analogues.
  • If the η-pseudospin splitting survives beyond mean field, it would connect altermagnetism to pair-density waves and charge order, potentially unifying seemingly unrelated higher-angular-momentum states.
  • A testable extension: tune a cold-atom attractive Hubbard system with anisotropic next-nearest-neighbor hopping and measure the spectral function; the predicted spin-η-locked splitting in the even-parity case could be distinguished by spin-resolved probes.
  • The exact correspondence also implies that known even-parity ALM materials might have attractive-Hubbard analogues realizable in optical lattices, enabling quantum simulation of the pairing-sector splitting.
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 introduces the concept of η-altermagnetism (η-ALM) by applying the exact Shiba duality to altermagnetic repulsive Hubbard models. In the half-filled bipartite attractive Hubbard model, the Shiba-dual P̃T̃ symmetry is shown to protect a η-pseudospin Kramers degeneracy in the BdG bands; anisotropic second-neighbor hopping lifts this degeneracy and produces η-pseudospin band splitting, either of odd parity (η-pseudospin splitting) or even parity (spin-η-locked splitting). Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov calculations on checkerboard and honeycomb lattices are presented as concrete examples, showing p-, d-, and f-wave splitting structures accompanied by staggered charge-density and uniform singlet pairing orders.

Significance. If the mean-field solutions faithfully represent the true ground states, the paper offers a useful conceptual bridge between altermagnetism and superconducting/charge-ordered phases: the equal-spectrum relations (Eqs. 13–16) follow rigorously from Shiba duality, and the even-parity spin-η-locked splitting is a nontrivial prediction that goes beyond a direct index relabeling. The paper also provides an explicit HFB formalism in the Supplemental Material and makes falsifiable band-structure predictions for cold-atom and condensed-matter settings. However, the central ground-state claim currently rests on self-consistent HFB solutions without an unbiased assessment of competing orders or fluctuations, which limits the significance until that gap is addressed.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2D-lattice examples; Supplemental Eq. S12] The self-consistent equation (S12) characterizes stationary points of the HFB energy, not global minima. The manuscript does not report a comparison with competing self-consistent states—such as uniform s-wave BCS, pure staggered CDM, other orientations of the η vector, or the normal state—nor does it report multiple random initializations, finite-size scaling, or an exact-diagonalization/QMC benchmark on small clusters. Since Figs. 1 and 2 are the principal evidence that η-ALM is a ground-state phenomenon, and the exact Shiba duality only maps the repulsive-side state (whose ALM order is itself assumed from mean-field/symmetry analysis), the central claim that these are ground states is under-supported. I would ask for at least a minimal stability analysis: energies of competing HFB solutions and a finite-size study, or an explicit statement that the claims are at the self-consistent HF
  2. [Abstract and Eq. (14)] The abstract states that anisotropic second-neighbor hopping generates η-ALM, but Eq. (14) shows that for even parity the Shiba-dual Hamiltonian contains an explicit spin-dependent second-neighbor hopping, h_even τ3 σ3, rather than the spin-independent hopping introduced in Eq. (11). Thus the even-parity η-ALM examples in Figs. 1 and 2 are not the same family of attractive Hubbard models with spin-independent anisotropic hopping; they require an additional spin-dependent term whose physical origin should be stated in the abstract. Without this qualification, the generality of the proposal is overstated, and readers may incorrectly infer that spin-independent real second-neighbor hopping in the attractive model produces even-parity η splitting.
  3. [Eq. (15) and discussion of odd-parity η-ALM] Equation (15) shows that odd-parity η-ALM has a dispersion identical to that of the corresponding ALM under the index change σ_m→η_m. This is an exact consequence of Shiba duality and therefore does not by itself constitute an independent prediction; the genuinely new band-structure content of the paper is the even-parity spin-η-locked splitting of Eq. (16). The manuscript would be improved by stating this clearly and by framing the odd-parity examples as a dictionary translation rather than as novel numerical evidence. This does not invalidate the concept, but it affects how the claims in the introduction and abstract are weighted.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figs. 1 and 2 captions] The lattice sizes appear as '162 ×2' and '182 ×2'; these should read '16^2 ×2' and '18^2 ×2'. The superscripts have been lost in the text.
  2. [BZ splitting energy definitions, Figs. 1(d) and 2(d)] The formula 'E^η_k = Σ_{n=1}^4 E_{nkη_m} n_{nk} in the occupied bands' is not fully defined. Please specify the occupation factor n_{nk}, the normalization, and the relation to the band-splitting magnitude |E_{n,+}-E_{n,-}|. As written, the plotted 'splitting energy' mixes occupied-state weighting and may not be the standard diagnostic for the p-/d-/f-wave structure.
  3. [Eq. (14) and following text] The text says 'the mass term h_even ρ3 τ3 - m·τ3 η' gives the quoted correction, while Eq. (14) writes the even-parity term as h_even τ3 σ3. The notation is inconsistent; please clarify which operator is the spin-independent second-neighbor hopping in the BdG representation and which is the spin-dependent Shiba-dual counterpart.
  4. [Discussion of degeneracy] The sentence 'The components correspond to onsite uniform singlet pairing... which are degenerate in the ground state' could be clarified: the full SU_η(2) multiplet is degenerate in the exact ground state, but an HFB solution selects one member. This is related to the symmetry-breaking issue raised in the major comments.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: odd-parity η-ALM is an explicitly labeled exact duality image; the even-parity channel and HFB examples carry independent content.

full rationale

The derivation chain is an exact algebraic consequence of the Shiba transformation: Eq. (2) maps the repulsive model to the attractive model, Eq. (14) is obtained by transforming δH2, and the band splittings Eqs. (15)-(16) are computed from the resulting BdG Hamiltonian. No parameter is fitted to the target splitting; the inputs are t1, t2, U0, and symmetry assignments. The closest step to a by-construction reduction is Eq. (15), where odd-parity η-ALM splitting 'has the same form as in ALM (13) ... under a direct index change.' But the paper explicitly labels this as a direct consequence of the exact Shiba map; because the paper's claimed content is the mapping itself, this is a derivation, not a disguised reuse of the conclusion. The even-parity case is genuinely new: real second-neighbor hopping becomes spin-dependent under Shiba (ν_ij -> ν_ij σ3), producing spin-η-locked splitting in Eq. (16), which is not a relabeling of the ALM input. The HFB computations are self-consistent solutions of Eq. (S12) with stated parameters and are not fits to the p/d/f splitting energies. The remaining caveat—that HFB may select a metastable local minimum and that 2D quantum fluctuations are uncontrolled—is a correctness/robustness concern, not circularity. The only self-citation touching the input is Ref. [9] for the odd-parity ALM form factor; it is background and not a uniqueness theorem or an assumed version of the η-ALM result, so it is not load-bearing. Overall, no significant circularity; score 2 reflects the minor non-load-bearing self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the exact Shiba duality of the pure Hubbard model, the SUη(2) identification of pairing/charge orders, and the mean-field HFB approximation used for all concrete examples. Model parameters t2=0.1 and U0=-4 are hand-chosen, and the anisotropy pattern {ν_ij} is chosen to satisfy the halvable-subgroup condition. No new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions) are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • t2 (second-neighbor hopping) = 0.1
    Hand-picked small value that realizes anisotropic sublattice-dependent hopping without dominating t1; the splitting magnitude in Eqs. (13)-(16) scales with it.
  • U0 (interaction strength) = -4
    Hand-picked strongly attractive interaction used in the HFB computations to stabilize η-AFM/η-ALM; not derived from experiment or ab initio input.
  • μ (chemical potential) = -2
    Set by the half-filling condition μ=U0/2; not an independent fit but listed for completeness.
  • anisotropy pattern {ν_ij} = 0, ±1, ±i (or ±σ3 after duality)
    Chosen by hand to satisfy the halvable-subgroup condition and to realize even- or odd-parity ALM/η-ALM. The specific pattern determines which wave (p, d, or f) splitting appears.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Exact Shiba duality between repulsive and attractive Hubbard models on bipartite lattices at half filling
    Established canonical transformation cited as Refs. [66,67]; the entire mapping from AFM to η-AFM and ALM to η-ALM relies on it.
  • standard math SUη(2) symmetry of the half-filled bipartite Hubbard model and identification of η-pseudospin components with pairing and charge orders
    From Yang [63] and Zhang [64,65]; gives the order-parameter content of Eq. (5), with components corresponding to onsite singlet pairing and staggered CDM.
  • domain assumption Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov mean-field theory approximates the true ground state of the interacting model
    All concrete η-ALM results (Figs. 1-2) are obtained from HFB self-consistent solutions; no exact, QMC, or DMRG verification is provided.
  • domain assumption Spin-group symmetry criteria for altermagnetism transfer to η-pseudospin-group symmetry under Shiba duality
    The paper assumes the compensated collinear order protected by the spin-group symmetry in Ref. [8] survives the duality and the additional second-neighbor terms.
  • domain assumption Particle-hole symmetry C and half filling μ=U0/2 on bipartite lattices
    These conditions ensure a clean Shiba duality and the SUη(2) algebra; away from half filling the correspondence changes as noted in the Discussion.
  • domain assumption BdG quasiparticle bands are well-defined and physically observable in the pairing/charge-ordered state
    The central claim is a statement about BdG band splitting; this presumes a coherent mean-field superconducting/charge-order state with well-defined quasiparticle excitations.
  • ad hoc to paper The specific second-neighbor hopping configurations {ν_ij} keep the halvable-subgroup condition G'
    The configurations are chosen by hand to produce ALM/η-ALM; the paper does not derive them from a broader principle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Shiba duality and $\eta$-altermagnetism: Pairing and charge orders in bipartite attractive Hubbard models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QVEVPPAT

@misc{pith2026260721430,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Shiba duality and $\eta$-altermagnetism: Pairing and charge orders in bipartite attractive Hubbard models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QVEVPPAT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21430}
}
abstract

We show that Shiba duality maps the altermagnetic principle of momentum-dependent band splitting from spin to $\eta$-pseudospin, defining $\eta$-altermagnetism ($\eta$-ALM) as a Bogoliubov-de Gennes (BdG) counterpart of ALM in pairing and charge orders. In half-filled pure Hubbard models on bipartite lattices, the duality relates repulsion-driven antiferromagnetism (AFM) to attraction-driven $\eta$-AFM with uniform singlet pairing and staggered charge-density modulation. In the BdG bands, the Shiba-dual parity-time-reversal $\mathcal{\tilde{P}}\mathcal{\tilde{T}}$ symmetry protects a Kramers degeneracy of $\eta$-pseudospin. Anisotropic second-neighbor hopping breaks this degeneracy and generates $\eta$-ALM. Odd-parity $\eta$-ALM shows $\eta$-pseudospin splitting, whereas even-parity $\eta$-ALM has spin-$\eta$-locked splitting. Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov computations on checkerboard and honeycomb lattices find $\eta$-ALMs with $p$-, $d$-, and $f$-wave splitting structures. Possible generalizations and experimental probes are discussed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21430 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 9 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Hayami, Y

    S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Momentum- dependent spin splitting by collinear antiferromagnetic ordering, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.88, 123702 (2019)

    2019

  2. [2]

    ˇSmejkal, R

    L. ˇSmejkal, R. Gonz´ alez-Hern´ andez, T. Jungwirth, and J. Sinova, Crystal time-reversal symmetry breaking and spontaneous hall effect in collinear antiferromagnets, Sci. Adv.6, eaaz8809 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    L.-D. Yuan, Z. Wang, J.-W. Luo, E. I. Rashba, and A. Zunger, Giant momentum-dependent spin splitting in centrosymmetric low-zantiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014422 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    H.-Y. Ma, M. Hu, N. Li, J. Liu, W. Yao, J.-F. Jia, and J. Liu, Multifunctional antiferromagnetic materials with giant piezomagnetism and noncollinear spin current, Nat. Commun.12, 2846 (2021). 6

    2021

  5. [5]

    I. I. Mazin, K. Koepernik, M. D. Johannes, R. Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, and L.ˇSmejkal, Prediction of unconventional magnetism in doped fesb 2, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2108924118 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Beyond conven- tional ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism: A phase with nonrelativistic spin and crystal rotation symmetry, Phys. Rev. X12, 031042 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Emerging re- search landscape of altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. X12, 040501 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    Jungwirth, R

    T. Jungwirth, R. M. Fernandes, E. Fradkin, A. H. Mac- Donald, J. Sinova, and L. ˇSmejkal, Altermagnetism: An unconventional spin-ordered phase of matter, Newton1, 100162 (2025)

    2025

Show all 98 references
  1. [9]

    Lin and M

    Y.-P. Lin and M. Vila, Odd-parity altermagnetism through sublattice currents: From Haldane-Hubbard model to general bipartite lattices, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2503.09602 (2025), arXiv:2503.09602 [cond- mat.str-el]

    2025

  2. [10]

    S. Lee, S. Lee, S. Jung, J. Jung, D. Kim, Y. Lee, B. Seok, J. Kim, B. G. Park, L. ˇSmejkal, C.-J. Kang, and C. Kim, Broken kramers degeneracy in altermagnetic mnte, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 036702 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Reimers, L

    S. Reimers, L. Odenbreit, L. ˇSmejkal, V. N. Strocov, P. Constantinou, A. B. Hellenes, R. Jaeschke Ubiergo, W. H. Campos, V. K. Bharadwaj, A. Chakraborty, T. Denneulin, W. Shi, R. E. Dunin-Borkowski, S. Das, M. Kl¨ aui, J. Sinova, and M. Jourdan, Direct observation of altermag...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Osumi, S

    T. Osumi, S. Souma, T. Aoyama, K. Yamauchi, A. Honma, K. Nakayama, T. Takahashi, K. Ohgushi, and T. Sato, Observation of a giant band splitting in alter- magnetic mnte, Phys. Rev. B109, 115102 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    J. Ding, Z. Jiang, X. Chen, Z. Tao, Z. Liu, T. Li, J. Liu, J. Sun, J. Cheng, J. Liu, Y. Yang, R. Zhang, L. Deng, W. Jing, Y. Huang, Y. Shi, M. Ye, S. Qiao, Y. Wang, Y. Guo, D. Feng, and D. Shen, Large band splitting in g-wave altermagnet crsb, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 206401 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Z. Zhou, X. Cheng, M. Hu, R. Chu, H. Bai, L. Han, J. Liu, F. Pan, and C. Song, Manipulation of the al- termagnetic order in CrSb via crystal symmetry, Nature 638, 645 (2025)

    2025

  7. [15]

    M. Roig, A. Kreisel, Y. Yu, B. M. Andersen, and D. F. Agterberg, Minimal models for altermagnetism, Phys. Rev. B110, 144412 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    D¨ urrnagel, H

    M. D¨ urrnagel, H. Hohmann, A. Maity, J. Seufert, M. Klett, L. Klebl, and R. Thomale, Altermagnetic phase transition in a lieb metal, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 036502 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    Huang, Z

    S. Huang, Z. Qin, F. Zhan, D.-H. Xu, D.-S. Ma, and R. Wang, Light-induced odd-parity magnetism in con- ventional antiferromagnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 126703 (2026)

    2026

  10. [18]

    T. Zhu, D. Zhou, H. Wang, S.-H. Wei, and J. Ruan, Floquet odd-parity collinear magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 126704 (2026)

    2026

  11. [19]

    Li, D.-F

    B. Li, D.-F. Shao, and A. A. Kovalev, Floquet spin split- ting and spin generation in antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 166701 (2026)

    2026

  12. [20]

    Liu, Z.-Y

    D. Liu, Z.-Y. Zhuang, D. Zhu, Z. Wu, and Z. Yan, Light- induced odd-parity altermagnets on dimerized lattices, Phys. Rev. B113, L060409 (2026)

    2026

  13. [21]

    Leeb and J

    V. Leeb and J. Knolle, Collinearp-wave magnetism and hidden orbital ferrimagnetism, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2601.07418 (2026), arXiv:2601.07418 [cond- mat.str-el]

    2026

  14. [22]

    L. Bai, W. Feng, S. Liu, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, Altermagnetism: Exploring New Frontiers in Magnetism and Spintronics, Adv. Funct. Mater.34, 2409327 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    X. Duan, J. Zhang, Z. Zhu, Y. Liu, Z. Zhang, I. ˇZuti´ c, and T. Zhou, Antiferroelectric altermagnets: Antiferro- electricity alters magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 106801 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    M. Gu, Y. Liu, H. Zhu, K. Yananose, X. Chen, Y. Hu, A. Stroppa, and Q. Liu, Ferroelectric switchable alter- magnetism, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 106802 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    I. I. Mazin, Notes on altermagnetism and superconduc- tivity, AAPPS Bull.35, 18 (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    Zhu, Z.-Y

    D. Zhu, Z.-Y. Zhuang, Z. Wu, and Z. Yan, Topological superconductivity in two-dimensional altermagnetic met- als, Phys. Rev. B108, 184505 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Brekke, A

    B. Brekke, A. Brataas, and A. Sudbø, Two-dimensional altermagnets: Superconductivity in a minimal micro- scopic model, Phys. Rev. B108, 224421 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    H. G. Giil and J. Linder, Superconductor-altermagnet memory functionality without stray fields, Phys. Rev. B 109, 134511 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Chakraborty and A

    D. Chakraborty and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Zero-field finite-momentum and field-induced superconductivity in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B110, L060508 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    A. Bose, S. Vadnais, and A. Paramekanti, Altermag- netism and superconductivity in a multiorbitalt−j model, Phys. Rev. B110, 205120 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    S. Hong, M. J. Park, and K.-M. Kim, Unconventional p-wave and finite-momentum superconductivity induced by altermagnetism through the formation of bogoliubov fermi surface, Phys. Rev. B111, 054501 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    Y.-M. Wu, Y. Wang, and R. M. Fernandes, Intra-unit-cell singlet pairing mediated by altermagnetic fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 156001 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Papaj, Andreev reflection at the altermagnet- superconductor interface, Phys

    M. Papaj, Andreev reflection at the altermagnet- superconductor interface, Phys. Rev. B108, L060508 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    C. Sun, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, Andreev reflection in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. B108, 054511 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    J. A. Ouassou, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, dc joseph- son effect in altermagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 076003 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    C. W. J. Beenakker and T. Vakhtel, Phase-shifted an- dreev levels in an altermagnet josephson junction, Phys. Rev. B108, 075425 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Sigrist and K

    M. Sigrist and K. Ueda, Phenomenological theory of un- conventional superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys.63, 239 (1991)

    1991

  30. [38]

    C. C. Tsuei and J. R. Kirtley, Pairing symmetry in cuprate superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys.72, 969 (2000)

    2000

  31. [39]

    Nandkishore, L

    R. Nandkishore, L. S. Levitov, and A. V. Chubukov, Chiral superconductivity from repulsive interactions in doped graphene, Nat. Phys.8, 158 (2012), arXiv:1107.1903 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2012 arXiv

  32. [40]

    I. I. Pomeranchuk, On the stability of a fermi liquid, Sov. Phys. JETP8, 361 (1959)

    1959

  33. [41]

    S. A. Kivelson, E. Fradkin, and V. J. Emery, Electronic 7 liquid-crystal phases of a doped mott insulator, Nature 393, 550 (1998)

    1998

  34. [42]

    Nayak, Density-wave states of nonzero angular mo- mentum, Phys

    C. Nayak, Density-wave states of nonzero angular mo- mentum, Phys. Rev. B62, 4880 (2000)

    2000

  35. [43]

    C. J. Halboth and W. Metzner,d-wave superconductiv- ity and pomeranchuk instability in the two-dimensional hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 5162 (2000)

    2000

  36. [44]

    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

  37. [45]

    Oganesyan, S

    V. Oganesyan, S. A. Kivelson, and E. Fradkin, Quantum theory of a nematic fermi fluid, Phys. Rev. B64, 195109 (2001)

    2001

  38. [46]

    J. W. F. Venderbos, Symmetry analysis of translational symmetry broken density waves: Application to hexago- nal lattices in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. B93, 115107 (2016)

    2016

  39. [47]

    Lin and R

    Y.-P. Lin and R. M. Nandkishore, Chiral twist on the high-Tc phase diagram in moir´ e heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B100, 085136 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Lin and R

    Y.-P. Lin and R. M. Nandkishore, Complex charge den- sity waves at van hove singularity on hexagonal lattices: Haldane-model phase diagram and potential realization in the kagome metalsaV 3sb5 (a=k, rb, cs), Phys. Rev. B 104, 045122 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    J. E. Hirsch, Spin-split states in metals, Phys. Rev. B41, 6820 (1990)

    1990

  42. [50]

    L. P. Gor’kov and A. Sokol, Nontrivial magnetic order: Localized versus itinerant systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2586 (1992)

    1992

  43. [51]

    Wu and S.-C

    C. Wu and S.-C. Zhang, Dynamic generation of spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 036403 (2004)

    2004

  44. [52]

    C. Wu, K. Sun, E. Fradkin, and S.-C. Zhang, Fermi liquid instabilities in the spin channel, Phys. Rev. B75, 115103 (2007)

    2007

  45. [53]

    J. W. F. Venderbos, Multi-qhexagonal spin density waves and dynamically generated spin-orbit coupling: Time-reversal invariant analog of the chiral spin density wave, Phys. Rev. B93, 115108 (2016)

    2016

  46. [54]

    E. I. Kiselev, M. S. Scheurer, P. W¨ olfle, and J. Schmalian, Limits on dynamically generated spin-orbit coupling: Absence ofl= 1 pomeranchuk instabilities in metals, Phys. Rev. B95, 125122 (2017)

    2017

  47. [55]

    Y.-M. Wu, A. Klein, and A. V. Chubukov, Conditions forl= 1 pomeranchuk instability in a fermi liquid, Phys. Rev. B97, 165101 (2018)

    2018

  48. [56]

    Classen, A

    L. Classen, A. V. Chubukov, C. Honerkamp, and M. M. Scherer, Competing orders at higher-order van hove points, Phys. Rev. B102, 125141 (2020)

    2020

  49. [57]

    Birk Hellenes, T

    A. Birk Hellenes, T. Jungwirth, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, A. Chakraborty, J. Sinova, and L. ˇSmejkal, P-wave magnets, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2309.01607 (2023), arXiv:2309.01607 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Luo, J.-X

    X.-J. Luo, J.-X. Hu, M. Hu, and K. T. Law, Spin Group Symmetry Criteria For Unconventional Magnetism, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2603.07643 (2026), arXiv:2603.07643 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2026

  51. [59]

    Mitscherling, J

    J. Mitscherling, J. Priessnitz, C. K. Geschner, and L. ˇSmejkal, Microscopic origin ofp-wave mag- netism, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2603.09736 (2026), arXiv:2603.09736 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026

  52. [60]

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

    2025 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Li and P

    Y. Li and P. Sukhachov,P-wave Orbital Mag- netism, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2604.18695 (2026), arXiv:2604.18695 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026 arXiv

  54. [62]

    S. Fang, J. Wang, Z. Guo, J. Gong, H. Meng, W. Wang, Z. Cheng, X. Wang, and Y. Sin Ang, Alterelectric- ity: Electrical Analogue of Altermagnetism, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2604.07112 (2026), arXiv:2604.07112 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]

    2026 arXiv

  55. [63]

    C. N. Yang,ηpairing and off-diagonal long-range order in a hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 2144 (1989)

    1989

  56. [64]

    C. N. Yang and S. Zhang, SO(4) Symmetry in a Hubbard Model, Mod. Phys. Lett. B04, 759 (1990)

    1990

  57. [65]

    Zhang, So(4) symmetry of the hubbard model and its experimental consequences, Int

    S. Zhang, So(4) symmetry of the hubbard model and its experimental consequences, Int. Jour. Mod. Phys. B05, 153 (1991)

    1991

  58. [66]

    Shiba, Thermodynamic properties of the one- dimensional half-filled-band hubbard model

    H. Shiba, Thermodynamic properties of the one- dimensional half-filled-band hubbard model. ii: Applica- tion of the grand canonical method, Prog. Theor. Phys. 48, 2171 (1972)

    1972

  59. [67]

    V. J. Emery, Theory of the quasi-one-dimensional elec- tron gas with strong ”on-site” interactions, Phys. Rev. B 14, 2989 (1976)

    1976

  60. [68]

    Robaszkiewicz, R

    S. Robaszkiewicz, R. Micnas, and K. A. Chao, Thermo- dynamic properties of the extended hubbard model with strong intra-atomic attraction and an arbitrary electron density, Phys. Rev. B23, 1447 (1981)

    1981

  61. [69]

    Robaszkiewicz, R

    S. Robaszkiewicz, R. Micnas, and K. A. Chao, Chemi- cal potential and order parameter of extended hubbard model with strong intra-atomic attraction, Phys. Rev. B 24, 1579 (1981)

    1981

  62. [70]

    R. T. Scalettar, E. Y. Loh, J. E. Gubernatis, A. Moreo, S. R. White, D. J. Scalapino, R. L. Sugar, and E. Dagotto, Phase diagram of the two-dimensional negative-u hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 1407 (1989)

    1989

  63. [71]

    Duchon, Y

    E. Duchon, Y. L. Loh, and N. Trivedi, Optical Lattice Emulators: Bose and Fermi Hubbard Models, arXiv e- prints , arXiv:1311.0543 (2013), arXiv:1311.0543 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    2013 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Fu and C

    L. Fu and C. L. Kane, Superconducting proximity effect and majorana fermions at the surface of a topological insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 096407 (2008)

    2008

  65. [73]

    C.-K. Chiu, J. C. Y. Teo, A. P. Schnyder, and S. Ryu, Classification of topological quantum matter with sym- metries, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 035005 (2016)

    2016

  66. [74]

    J. E. Hirsch, Two-dimensional hubbard model: Numeri- cal simulation study, Phys. Rev. B31, 4403 (1985)

    1985

  67. [75]

    J. E. Hirsch and S. Tang, Antiferromagnetism in the two- dimensional hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 591 (1989)

    1989

  68. [76]

    C. N. Varney, C.-R. Lee, Z. J. Bai, S. Chiesa, M. Jarrell, and R. T. Scalettar, Quantum monte carlo study of the two-dimensional fermion hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 80, 075116 (2009)

    2009

  69. [77]

    Sorella and E

    S. Sorella and E. Tosatti, Semi-metal-insulator transition of the hubbard model in the honeycomb lattice, EPL19, 699 (1992)

    1992

  70. [78]

    F. F. Assaad and I. F. Herbut, Pinning the order: The nature of quantum criticality in the hubbard model on honeycomb lattice, Phys. Rev. X3, 031010 (2013)

    2013

  71. [79]

    Otsuka, S

    Y. Otsuka, S. Yunoki, and S. Sorella, Universal quan- tum criticality in the metal-insulator transition of two- dimensional interacting dirac electrons, Phys. Rev. X6, 011029 (2016). 8

    2016

  72. [80]

    Zhang, Y

    Y. Zhang, Y. Ran, and A. Vishwanath, Topological in- sulators in three dimensions from spontaneous symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. B79, 245331 (2009)

    2009

  73. [81]

    Nagaoka, Ferromagnetism in a narrow, almost half- filledsband, Phys

    Y. Nagaoka, Ferromagnetism in a narrow, almost half- filledsband, Phys. Rev.147, 392 (1966)

    1966

  74. [82]

    R. R. P. Singh and R. T. Scalettar, Exact demonstra- tion ofηpairing in the ground state of an attractive-u hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 3203 (1991)

    1991

  75. [83]

    Lin, Sublattice polarization from destructive interference on common lattices, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2406.02671 (2024), arXiv:2406.02671 [cond- mat.mes-hall]

    Y.-P. Lin, Sublattice polarization from destructive interference on common lattices, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2406.02671 (2024), arXiv:2406.02671 [cond- mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  76. [84]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL] for the de- tails of Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov theory, which includes Refs. [98]

  77. [85]

    P. Das, V. Leeb, J. Knolle, and M. Knap, Realizing al- termagnetism in fermi-hubbard models with ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 263402 (2024)

    2024

  78. [86]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Model for a quantum hall effect with- out landau levels: Condensed-matter realization of the ”parity anomaly”, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 2015 (1988)

    2015

  79. [87]

    Zhang, Z

    Y.-C. Zhang, Z. Xu, and S. Zhang, Topological superflu- ids and the bec-bcs crossover in the attractive haldane- hubbard model, Phys. Rev. A95, 043640 (2017)

    2017

  80. [88]

    dos Anjos Sousa-J´ unior, J

    S. dos Anjos Sousa-J´ unior, J. Fa´ undez, T. P. Cysne, R. T. Scalettar, and R. Mondaini, Real-space topology and charge order in the Haldane-Holstein Model, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2602.09335 (2026), arXiv:2602.09335 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2026 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Mazurenko, C

    A. Mazurenko, C. S. Chiu, G. Ji, M. F. Parsons, M. Kan´ asz-Nagy, R. Schmidt, F. Grusdt, E. Demler, D. Greif, and M. Greiner, A cold-atom Fermi-Hubbard antiferromagnet, Nature545, 462 (2017)

    2017

  82. [90]

    M. Gall, N. Wurz, J. Samland, C. F. Chan, and M. K¨ ohl, Competing magnetic orders in a bilayer Hubbard model with ultracold atoms, Nature589, 40 (2021)

    2021

  83. [91]

    S. Taie, E. Ibarra-Garc ´ ıa-Padilla, N. Nishizawa, Y. Takasu, Y. Kuno, H.-T. Wei, R. T. Scalettar, K. R. A. Hazzard, and Y. Takahashi, Observation of antiferromag- netic correlations in an ultracold SU(N) Hubbard model, Nat. Phys.18, 1356 (2022)

    2022

  84. [92]

    M. Xu, L. H. Kendrick, A. Kale, Y. Gang, C. Feng, S. Zhang, A. W. Young, M. Lebrat, and M. Greiner, A neutral-atom Hubbard quantum simulator in the cryo- genic regime, Nature642, 909 (2025)

    2025

  85. [93]

    Jotzu, M

    G. Jotzu, M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, M. Lebrat, T. Uehlinger, D. Greif, and T. Esslinger, Experimental realization of the topological Haldane model with ultra- cold fermions, Nature515, 237 (2014)

    2014

  86. [94]

    T.-L. Dao, A. Georges, J. Dalibard, C. Salomon, and I. Carusotto, Measuring the one-particle excitations of ultracold fermionic atoms by stimulated raman spec- troscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 240402 (2007)

    2007

  87. [95]

    J. T. Stewart, J. P. Gaebler, and D. S. Jin, Using pho- toemission spectroscopy to probe a strongly interacting Fermi gas, Nature454, 744 (2008)

    2008

  88. [96]

    P. T. Brown, E. Guardado-Sanchez, B. M. Spar, E. W. Huang, T. P. Devereaux, and W. S. Bakr, Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy of a Fermi-Hubbard system, Nat. Phys.16, 26 (2020)

    2020

  89. [97]

    Zhang, Y

    Y. Zhang, Y. Ni, H. Zhao, S. Hakani, F. Ye, L. DeLong, I. Kimchi, and G. Cao, Control of chiral orbital currents in a colossal magnetoresistance material, Nature611, 467 (2022)

    2022

  90. [98]

    Shiba duality andη-altermagnetism: Pairing and charge orders in bipartite attractive Hubbard models

    Y.-P. Lin, V. Madhavan, and J. E. Moore, Ultrafast op- tical control of charge orders in kagome metals, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2411.10447 (2024), arXiv:2411.10447 [cond-mat.str-el]. 9 Supplemental Material for “Shiba duality andη-altermagnetism: Pairing and charge orders in bi...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.