Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 89 references

Coulomb Drag in Altermagnets

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A bilayer of d-wave altermagnets should show Hall drag and spin Hall drag without any spin-orbit coupling, with orientation-angle dependences that serve as fingerprints of the spin-split Fermi surfaces.

desk verdict A genuinely new proposal for probing altermagnetic spin splitting with Coulomb drag, but the quantitative drag calculation rests on a diffusive polarization that is unjustified in the plotted parameter regime. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13927 v2 pith:SHRLP62F submitted 2024-12-18 cond-mat.mes-hall

Hao-Jie Lin , Song-Bo Zhang , Hai-Zhou Lu , X. C. Xie This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords CoulombdragaltermagnetismHallspinspin-splitFermisurfaceangledependenceRuO2bilayerd-wavealtermagnet
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

Coulomb drag is a non-contact probe: a current in one layer induces a voltage in a nearby, electrically isolated second layer through interlayer Coulomb interactions. This paper argues that in a bilayer of d-wave altermagnets, the anisotropic spin-split Fermi surfaces convert the transferred momentum into both longitudinal and transverse responses, so a driving current produces Hall drag and spin Hall drag even with no spin-orbit coupling. The predicted drag voltages oscillate with the orientation of the Fermi-surface splitting, with period that reflects the altermagnet's symmetry, and vanish when the altermagnetic exchange is zero. A multiterminal measurement of these angle dependences would give a transport fingerprint of the altermagnetic state.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the d-wave altermagnet model used for each layer, $H(k)=tk^2+J[\cos(2\alpha)k_xk_y+\sin(2\alpha)(k_x^2-k_y^2)/2]\sigma_z$, where $J$ is the altermagnetic exchange and $\alpha$ sets the orientation of the spin splitting. The velocity shift $v^{(\ell)}_{q}=v^{(\ell)}_{k+q}-v^{(\ell)}_{k}$ in this model has longitudinal and transverse parts whose magnitudes depend on $\alpha_\ell$ and on spin. Inserting this velocity shift into the drag resistivity formula $\rho^{ij}_D\propto\int d^2q\,d\omega\,|U_{12}(q)|^2\Gamma^i_1\Gamma^j_2/\sinh^2(\beta\omega/2)$, with nonlinear susceptibilities $\Gamma_\ell=-2\tau\,v^{(\ell)}_q\operatorname{Im}\Pi^R_\ell/\hbar$ and polarization $\Pi^R_\ell=(1+i\omega\tau/\hbar)/(2\pi\sqrt{4t^2-J^2})$, makes the transverse and spin components arise from the $J$-dependent part of $v_q$. The common prefactor $F_T\propto (k_BT)^2\varepsilon^2\tau^2(4t^2-J^2)^2/(\hbar e^6 d^6\mu_1\mu_2 t^2)$ collects the temperature, screening, interlayer distance, and chemical-potential dependence.

What would settle it

Measure the transverse drag voltage in a RuO2-based bilayer with $d\approx 12$ nm at $T\approx 2$ K while rotating the active-layer crystal orientation $\alpha_1$ relative to a spin-polarized drive current; the predicted Hall drag is proportional to $\cos(2\alpha_1)$ and changes sign at $\alpha_1=\pi/4$. A null result at all angles, or a modulation with the wrong period, would falsify the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in a bilayer of two d-wave altermagnets separated by a dielectric, the Coulomb drag resistivity acquires transverse and spin-dependent components controlled by the altermagnetic exchange strength $J$ and the orientation angles $\alpha_1,\alpha_2$ of the two layers' spin-split Fermi surfaces. Starting from the minimal model $H(k)=tk^2+J[\cos(2\alpha)k_xk_y+\sin(2\alpha)(k_x^2-k_y^2)/2]\sigma_z$, the authors derive the analytic drag resistivities of Table I and show that the Hall drag of a fully spin-polarized drive is $\rho^{\uparrow}_{\mathrm{HD}}=4tJF_T\cos(2\alpha_1)$, so it is nonzero only when $J\neq 0$ and requires no spin-orbit coupling. The spin Hall drag voltage $V^s_{2y}\propto J F_T[\cos(2\alpha_1)+\eta J\sin(2\alpha_1+2\alpha_2)]$, with $\eta$ the spin polarization of the drive, survives even for an unpolarized driving current. All these signals are periodic in the orientation angles, which is what makes them usable as transport signatures of altermagnetism.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the electron layers respond in the diffusive regime, meaning the momentum transferred between layers is small compared with the inverse electron mean free path; outside that regime the simplified polarization used for the drag resistivities would need to be replaced by the full momentum-dependent response.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A spin-polarized driving current produces a transverse (Hall) drag voltage proportional to $\eta J F_T\cos(2\alpha_1)$, so the Hall drag is a direct test for nonzero altermagnetic exchange $J$ in the absence of spin-orbit coupling.
  • The longitudinal drag voltage $V_{2x}\propto F_T[2t^2+\eta\, tJ\sin(2\alpha_1)]$ is $\pi$-periodic in the crystal orientation $\alpha_1$, which gives an orientation signature in a simple measurement.
  • An unpolarized driving current still induces a spin Hall drag voltage proportional to $J F_T\cos(2\alpha_1)$, so the effect does not need ferromagnetic injection contacts.
  • Since the angle period is $\pi$ for d-wave, $\pi/2$ for g-wave, and $\pi/3$ for i-wave altermagnets, Coulomb drag could distinguish the symmetry class of the altermagnetic order, as the paper notes.
  • The dependence on both $\alpha_1$ and $\alpha_2$ through $\alpha_1\pm\alpha_2$ means the relative crystallographic alignment of the two layers can be read from the dragging signal.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not emphasize that forming the ratio of Hall drag to longitudinal drag would cancel the common prefactor $F_T$; such a ratio would isolate $J/t$ and could make the signature robust to uncertainties in density, dielectric constant, and scattering time.
  • A natural follow-up device would rotate the passive layer's crystal orientation in situ and record the transverse voltage; the predicted sign change under a $90^\circ$ rotation of $\alpha_1$ could be verified in one multiterminal sample.
  • The authors' symmetry argument also implies that a normal-metal active layer with spin-polarized current should drag a transverse signal into an altermagnet passive layer, which would extend the probe to heterostructures without requiring altermagnet growth in both layers.
  • Measuring the drag signal at several temperatures would discriminate the predicted $T^2$ diffusive drag from phonon- or magnon-mediated drag mechanisms that scale differently with temperature.
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 manuscript proposes Coulomb drag as an experimental probe of altermagnetism. The authors study a bilayer of two-dimensional d-wave altermagnets, modeled by a minimal quadratic Hamiltonian with a momentum-dependent spin splitting (Eq. 1), and compute the drag resistivities using the Aslamazov–Larkin diagrammatic formalism (Eq. 2, Fig. 3). They derive analytic expressions for longitudinal, Hall, and spin Hall drag resistivities (Table I) and show that the transverse components are proportional to the altermagnetic exchange coupling J and vanish for J=0, implying Hall drag without spin-orbit coupling. They further propose a multiterminal setup (Fig. 4) and identify angle dependences in α1 and α2 as signatures of altermagnetic spin-split Fermi surfaces.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper offers a non-contact transport signature for altermagnetic band splitting, which is timely given the ongoing controversy over candidate materials such as RuO2. The analytical treatment is complete and the proposed measurement scheme is concrete and falsifiable. The central advance—transverse drag generated by the intrinsic anisotropy of altermagnetic Fermi surfaces rather than by spin-orbit coupling—is an interesting and plausible idea that would be a valuable contribution to the altermagnetism literature. However, the quantitative predictions in Table I and Eqs. (6)–(8) rest on an uncontrolled approximation in the momentum integral, as detailed below, so the specific angle dependences and magnitudes are not yet established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (B8); Eq. (C6)] The q-independent, diffusive polarization Π_R(q,ω) = (1 + iωτ/ħ)/(2π√(4t²−J²)) is derived in Appendix B under the long-wavelength (q→0) limit and with an expansion in small ωτ (Eq. B7). Yet the final drag integral in Eq. (C6) integrates q from 0 to infinity without any restriction to q ≪ 1/d. The factor q²/sinh²(qd) is maximized near qd ≈ 1.5, so the integral is dominated by q ≈ 1/d. For the plotted parameters (d = 12 nm, τ = 10⁻¹⁰ s, v_F ≈ 6×10⁵ m/s), this implies q l ≈ q v_F τ ≈ 10³–10⁴, far outside the diffusive regime q l ≪ 1. In this collisionless regime the imaginary part of the polarization is of order νω/(v_F q), not νωτ/ħ, and it acquires q and angular dependence from the anisotropic Fermi surface. Because Eq. (C3) factors out the q-independent Im Π_R, the angular integrals that produce Table I and Eqs. (6)–(8) rely on an uncontrolled approximation. The reported angle signatures and magnitudes may be modified, weakened, or even reversed when a proper q- and angle-dependent polarization is used. The authors should either restrict the calculation to experimentally achievable parameters satisfying both q l ≪ 1 and q ≪ 1/d, or redo the derivation with the full polarization and show that the qualitative conclusions survive.
  2. [Main text, after Eq. (2); Appendix C] The manuscript states that the screened interaction U12(q) and the drag formula apply 'under the random phase approximation and q ≪ 1/d in the Boltzmann regime.' This condition is contradicted by the actual evaluation in Eq. (C6), which integrates over all q without any cutoff. The text should explicitly acknowledge that the q-integral samples the region qd ~ 1 and therefore the stated regime is violated. Either impose a momentum cutoff consistent with the diffusive approximation or justify the use of the full q range; otherwise the self-consistency of the derivation is not established.
  3. [Eq. (C3) and Table I] The nonlinear susceptibility Γ_ℓ is written as proportional to v_q^(ℓ) Im[Π_R(q,ω)]. For anisotropic Fermi surfaces, v_q^(ℓ) depends on the transferred momentum direction but not on the angle of k, which is why the angular integration over φ in Eq. (C6) can be done analytically. However, the correct nonlinear susceptibility involves an integral over the Fermi surface that also contains the energy denominator and the distribution functions; the factorization in Eq. (C3) is only valid if the polarization is q-independent in the relevant q range. Since that condition fails, the factorization itself is a load-bearing step. The authors should verify the factorization against a direct calculation of Γ_ℓ with the full Lindhard-type response for the altermagnetic model.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Reference [26]] The arXiv number in reference [26] appears as 'arXiv:408.00320', which is likely a typo for 'arXiv:2408.00320'.
  2. [Introduction, second paragraph] The phrase 'strongly dependent of the orientation' should be 'strongly dependent on the orientation'.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption] The labels ρCD, ρ↑CD, ρ↓CD in panels (e) and (f) are not explicitly defined in the caption; adding the spin-resolved definitions would improve readability.
  4. [Eq. (2) and Appendix B] The notation ω± = ω ± i0⁺ is introduced in the main text, but in Appendix B the analytic continuation is written as iω_m → ω + i0⁺; please ensure the sign convention is consistent throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the drag resistivities are derived analytically from a standard altermagnet model and the standard Coulomb drag formalism, with no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The starting Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) is the standard d-wave altermagnet model; although Ref. [43] is coauthored by S.-B. Zhang, the same model is independently cited in Refs. [3,4,7], so the self-citation is not load-bearing. Coulomb drag is evaluated with the standard diagrammatic formula, Eq. (2), and the nonlinear susceptibility is explicitly computed in Appendix C from the velocity shift v_q derived from the model, Eq. (C2), multiplied by Im of the retarded polarization. The q and omega integrals are then evaluated to produce Table I; no drag coefficient is fitted to data, and no parameter is renamed as a prediction. The transverse drag terms vanish when J=0, which is a derived consequence of the model, not an input. The main caveat, noted around Eq. (B8) and the momentum integral in Eq. (C6), is that the q-independent diffusive polarization is used for momenta q approximately 1/d, where the diffusive condition may fail for the plotted parameters; this is a validity and correctness concern for the numerical estimates, not a circularity, because the approximation does not encode the target angle dependences and the analytic derivation is exact within its stated assumptions. No circular step is identified.

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

The paper introduces no new particles or forces. The central prediction rests on the assumed altermagnet model Hamiltonian, the standard drag formalism, and two approximations (diffusive polarization and strong-screening interlayer interaction) that are not fully justified in the experimentally relevant clean regime.

free parameters (5)
  • J (altermagnetic exchange coupling) = 0.8t in figures
    Input Hamiltonian parameter controlling the spin splitting; varied in figures, not fitted to drag data.
  • tau (scattering time) = 10^-10 s in figures
    Enters via conductivity and polarization; drag magnitude scales as tau^2 in FT.
  • d (interlayer spacing) = 12 nm in figures
    Geometry parameter; drag scales as d^-6.
  • alpha1 (active layer splitting orientation) = varied
    Crystal orientation relative to the driving current; a central variable in the predicted signatures.
  • alpha2 (passive layer splitting orientation) = varied (pi/8 in figures)
    Crystal orientation in the passive layer; enters the angle dependences.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption d-wave altermagnet Hamiltonian H(k) = t k^2 + J[cos(2 alpha) kx ky + sin(2 alpha)(kx^2 - ky^2)/2] sigma_z (Eq. 1)
    Defines the 2D altermagnet model with parabolic dispersion and anisotropic spin splitting but no spin-orbit coupling. The model is taken from prior literature [43].
  • standard math Standard Coulomb drag formula Eq. (2) from Aslamazov-Larkin diagrams
    Weak-coupling linear-response drag formula, cited to Refs. [52,74,79], accepted as background.
  • ad hoc to paper q-independent diffusive polarization Pi_R = (1 + i omega tau / hbar) / (2 pi sqrt(4 t^2 - J^2)) (Eq. 4 and Eq. B8)
    Assumes the diffusive regime; used for analytical tractability and is load-bearing for Table I. Not valid for the clean parameters plotted (q l >> 1).
  • domain assumption Strong-screening screened interlayer interaction U12 = e^2 q / [epsilon kappa^2 sinh(q d)] (Appendix B, used in Eqs. 2 and C6)
    Derived under RPA and kappa d >> 1, but the q integral extends beyond q << 1/d, an internal inconsistency.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Coulomb Drag in Altermagnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SHRLP62F

@misc{pith2026241213927,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Coulomb Drag in Altermagnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SHRLP62F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13927}
}
read the original abstract

An altermagnet is a newly discovered antiferromagnet, characterized by unique anisotropic spin-split energy bands. It has attracted tremendous interest, because of its promising potential in information storage and processing. However, measuring the distinctive spin-split energy bands arising from altermagnetism remains a challenge. Here, we propose to employ the Coulomb drag to probe altermagnetism. In the Coulomb drag, an electric current in an active layer of electron gases can induce currents in a close but well-isolated passive layer, due to interlayer Coulomb interactions. We find that the Coulomb drag effects in altermagnets are highly sensitive to the orientation of the spin-split Fermi surfaces. As a result, transverse currents can be dragged in the passive layer, leading to Hall drag effects even in absence of spin-orbit coupling, a feature quite different from all previous systems. More importantly, all the drag effects of altermagnets have unique angle dependence, which can be measured in a multi-terminal setup to serve as signatures for altermagnetism. This proposal will inspire increasing explorations on emergent magnetism.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13927 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of Coulomb drag setup. (a) Anisotropic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Schematics of (a) the longitudinal Coulomb drag, (b) Hall drag, and (c) spin Hall drag effects in altermagnet bilayers [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) The angles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a),(b) Longitudinal drag resistivities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Momentum- dependent spin splitting by collinear antiferromagnetic ordering

    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]

    Bottom-up de- sign of spin-split and reshaped electronic band structures in antiferromagnets without spin-orbit coupling: Proce- dure on the basis of augmented multipoles

    S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, “Bottom-up de- sign of spin-split and reshaped electronic band structures in antiferromagnets without spin-orbit coupling: Proce- dure on the basis of augmented multipoles”, Phys. Rev. B 102, 144441 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    Emerging Research Landscape of Altermagnetism

    ˇSmejkal, Libor and Sinova, Jairo and Jungwirth, Tomas, “Emerging Research Landscape of Altermagnetism”, Phys. Rev. X 12, 040501 (2022)

    2022

  4. [4]

    Beyond Conventional Ferromagnetism and Antiferro- magnetism: A Phase with Nonrelativistic Spin and Crystal Rotation Symmetry

    ˇSmejkal, Libor and Sinova, Jairo and Jungwirth, Tomas, “Beyond Conventional Ferromagnetism and Antiferro- magnetism: A Phase with Nonrelativistic Spin and Crystal Rotation Symmetry”, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031042 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Spin current generation in organic antiferromagnets

    M. Naka, S. Hayami, H. Kusunose, Y. Yanagi, Y. Mo- tome, and H. Seo, “Spin current generation in organic antiferromagnets”, Nat. commun. 10, 4305 (2019)

    2019

  6. [6]

    Anti- ferromagnetism in RuO 2 as d-wave Pomeranchuk insta- bility

    K.-H. Ahn, A. Hariki, K.-W. Lee, and J. Kuneˇ s, “Anti- ferromagnetism in RuO 2 as d-wave Pomeranchuk insta- bility”, Phys. Rev. B 99, 184432 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    Giant momentum-dependent spin splitting in centrosymmetric low-Z antiferromagnets

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

    2020

  8. [8]

    Crystal time-reversal symmetry breaking and spontaneous Hall effect in collinear antiferromagnets

    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

Show all 89 references
  1. [9]

    Spin-neutral currents for spintronics

    D.-F. Shao, S.-H. Zhang, M. Li, C.-B. Eom, and E. Y. Tsymbal, “Spin-neutral currents for spintronics”, Nat. Commun. 12, 7061 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    Altermagnetism: Exploring new frontiers in magnetism and spintronics

    L. Bai, W. Feng, S. Liu, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, “Altermagnetism: Exploring new frontiers in magnetism and spintronics”, arXiv:2406.02123 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Multifunctional antiferromagnetic materi- als with giant piezomagnetism and noncollinear spin cur- rent

    H.-Y. Ma, M. Hu, N. Li, J. Liu, W. Yao, J.-F. Jia, and J. Liu, “Multifunctional antiferromagnetic materi- als with giant piezomagnetism and noncollinear spin cur- rent”, Nat. commun. 12, 2846 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Spin-split collinear antiferromagnets: A large-scale ab-initio study

    Y. Guo, H. Liu, O. Janson, I. C. Fulga, J. van den Brink, and J. I. Facio, “Spin-split collinear antiferromagnets: A large-scale ab-initio study”, Mater. Today Phys. 32, 100991 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    Prediction of unconven- tional magnetism in doped FeSb 2

    I. I. Mazin, K. Koepernik, M. D. Johannes, R. Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, and L. ˇSmejkal, “Prediction of unconven- tional magnetism in doped FeSb 2 ”, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. Usa. 118, e2108924118 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    Predictable Gate-Field Control of Spin in Altermagnets with Spin-Layer Coupling

    R.-W. Zhang, C. Cui, R. Li, J. Duan, L. Li, Z.-M. Yu, and Y. Yao, “Predictable Gate-Field Control of Spin in Altermagnets with Spin-Layer Coupling”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 056401 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Observation of a giant band splitting in altermagnetic MnTe

    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 altermagnetic MnTe”, Phys. Rev. B 109, 115102 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Altermagnetic lifting of Kramers spin degeneracy

    Krempask` y, Juraj andˇSmejkal, L and D’souza, SW and Hajlaoui, M and Springholz, G and Uhl ´ ıˇ rov´ a, K and Alarab, F and Constantinou, PC and Strocov, V and Usanov, D and others, “Altermagnetic lifting of Kramers spin degeneracy”, Nature 626, 517 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Broken Kramers Degeneracy in Altermagnetic MnTe

    S. Lee, S. Lee, S. Jung, J. Jung, D. Kim, Y. Lee, B. Seok, J. Kim, B. G. Park, L. ˇSmejkal, et al., “Broken Kramers Degeneracy in Altermagnetic MnTe”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 036702 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    First-principles study of pressure- induced structural phase transitions in MnF 2

    L´ opez-Moreno, S and Romero, AH and Mej ´ ıa-L´ opez, J and Mu˜ noz, A, “First-principles study of pressure- induced structural phase transitions in MnF 2”, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 18, 33250 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Interplay of altermagnetism and weak fer- romagnetism in two-dimensional RuF 4

    M. Milivojevi, M. Orozovi, S. Picozzi, M. Gmitra, and S. Stavri, “Interplay of altermagnetism and weak fer- romagnetism in two-dimensional RuF 4”, 2D Mater. 11, 035025 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    Direct observation of altermagnetic band splitting in CrSb thin films

    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, et al., “Direct observation of altermagnetic band splitting in CrSb thin films”, Nat. Commun. 15, 2116 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Large band-splitting in g-wave type altermagnet CrSb

    J. Ding, Z. Jiang, X. Chen, Z. Tao, Z. Liu, J. Liu, T. Li, J. Liu, Y. Yang, R. Zhang, et al., “Large band-splitting in g-wave type altermagnet CrSb”, arXiv:2405.12687 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Anomalous Hall effect in κ-type organic antiferromagnets

    M. Naka, S. Hayami, H. Kusunose, Y. Yanagi, Y. Mo- tome, and H. Seo, “Anomalous Hall effect in κ-type organic antiferromagnets”, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075112 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Realizing Al- 6 termagnetism in Fermi-Hubbard Models with Ultracold Atoms

    P. Das, V. Leeb, J. Knolle, and M. Knap, “Realizing Al- 6 termagnetism in Fermi-Hubbard Models with Ultracold Atoms”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 263402 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Discovery of a metal- lic room-temperature d-wave altermagnet KV 2Se2O

    B. Jiang, M. Hu, J. Bai, Z. Song, C. Mu, G. Qu, W. Li, W. Zhu, H. Pi, Z. Wei, et al., “Discovery of a metal- lic room-temperature d-wave altermagnet KV 2Se2O”, arXiv:2408.00320 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Crystal- symmetry-paired spin-valley locking in a layered room- temperature antiferromagnet

    F. Zhang, X. Cheng, Z. Yin, C. Liu, L. Deng, Y. Qiao, Z. Shi, S. Zhang, J. Lin, Z. Liu, et al. , “Crystal- symmetry-paired spin-valley locking in a layered room- temperature antiferromagnet”, arXiv:2407.19555 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Discovery of a metal- lic room-temperature d-wave altermagnet KV 2Se2O

    B. Jiang, M. Hu, J. Bai, Z. Song, C. Mu, G. Qu, W. Li, W. Zhu, H. Pi, Z. Wei, et al., “Discovery of a metal- lic room-temperature d-wave altermagnet KV 2Se2O”, arXiv:408.00320 (2024)

    2024

  19. [28]

    Topolog- ical superconductivity in two-dimensional altermagnetic metals

    D. Zhu, Z.-Y. Zhuang, Z. Wu, and Z. Yan, “Topolog- ical superconductivity in two-dimensional altermagnetic metals”, Phys. Rev. B 108, 184505 (2023)

    2023

  20. [29]

    Crystal Thermal Transport in Altermagnetic RuO 2

    X. Zhou, W. Feng, R.-W. Zhang, L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, “Crystal Thermal Transport in Altermagnetic RuO 2”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 056701 (2024)

    2024

  21. [30]

    Gapless superconducting state and mirage gap in altermagnets

    M. Wei, L. Xiang, F. Xu, L. Zhang, G. Tang, and J. Wang, “Gapless superconducting state and mirage gap in altermagnets”, Phys. Rev. B 109, L201404 (2024)

    2024

  22. [31]

    Quantum Ge- ometry Induced Nonlinear Transport in Altermagnets

    Y. Fang, J. Cano, and S. A. A. Ghorashi, “Quantum Ge- ometry Induced Nonlinear Transport in Altermagnets”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 106701 (2024)

    2024

  23. [32]

    dc Josephson Effect in Altermagnets

    J. A. Ouassou, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, “dc Josephson Effect in Altermagnets”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 076003 (2023)

    2023

  24. [33]

    RKKY in- teraction in Rashba altermagnets

    M. Amundsen, A. Brataas, and J. Linder, “RKKY in- teraction in Rashba altermagnets”, Phys. Rev. B 110, 054427 (2024)

    2024

  25. [34]

    Spin pumping from a ferromag- netic insulator into an altermagnet

    C. Sun and J. Linder, “Spin pumping from a ferromag- netic insulator into an altermagnet”, Phys. Rev. B 108, L140408 (2023)

    2023

  26. [35]

    Skyrmion Hall effect in altermagnets

    Z. Jin, Z. Zeng, Y. Cao, and P. Yan, “Skyrmion Hall effect in altermagnets”, arXiv:2407.03959 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Tunable second-order Josephson response in altermag- nets

    H.-P. Sun, S.-B. Zhang, C.-A. Li, and B. Trauzettel, “Tunable second-order Josephson response in altermag- nets”, arXiv:2407.19413 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Diagnosing Al- termagnetic Phases through Quantum Oscillations

    Z.-X. Li, X. Wan, and W. Chen, “Diagnosing Al- termagnetic Phases through Quantum Oscillations”, arXiv:2406.04073 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Anomalous Hall effects in magnetic weak topological insulator films

    R. Chen, X.-X. Yi, B. Zhou, and D.-H. Xu, “Anomalous Hall effects in magnetic weak topological insulator films”, arXiv:2409.02412 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Distinguish- ing between topological Majorana and trivial zero modes via transport and shot noise study in an altermagnet het- erostructure

    D. Mondal, A. Pal, A. Saha, and T. Nag, “Distinguish- ing between topological Majorana and trivial zero modes via transport and shot noise study in an altermagnet het- erostructure”, arXiv:2409.08009 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Giant and Tunneling Magnetoresistance in Un- conventional Collinear Antiferromagnets with Nonrela- tivistic Spin-Momentum Coupling

    ˇSmejkal, Libor and Hellenes, Anna Birk and Gonz´ alez- Hern´ andez, Rafael and Sinova, Jairo and Jungwirth, Tomas, “Giant and Tunneling Magnetoresistance in Un- conventional Collinear Antiferromagnets with Nonrela- tivistic Spin-Momentum Coupling”, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011028 (2022)

    2022

  32. [41]

    Efficient Electri- cal Spin Splitter Based on Nonrelativistic Collinear An- tiferromagnetism

    Gonz´ alez-Hern´ andez, Rafael andˇSmejkal, Libor and V´ yborn´ y, Karel and Yahagi, Yuta and Sinova, Jairo and Jungwirth, Tom´ aˇ s andˇZelezn´ y, Jakub, “Efficient Electri- cal Spin Splitter Based on Nonrelativistic Collinear An- tiferromagnetism”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 1277...

    2021

  33. [42]

    Tilted spin current generated by the collinear antiferromagnet ruthenium dioxide

    A. Bose, N. J. Schreiber, R. Jain, D.-F. Shao, H. P. Nair, J. Sun, X. S. Zhang, D. A. Muller, E. Y. Tsymbal, D. G. Schlom, et al., “Tilted spin current generated by the collinear antiferromagnet ruthenium dioxide”, Nat. Electron. 5, 267 (2022)

    2022

  34. [43]

    Finite- momentum Cooper pairing in proximitized altermag- nets

    S.-B. Zhang, L.-H. Hu, and T. Neupert, “Finite- momentum Cooper pairing in proximitized altermag- nets”, Nat. Commun. 15, 1801 (2024)

    2024

  35. [44]

    Fulde-Ferrell-Larkin- Ovchinnikov state induced by antiferromagnetic order in κ-type organic conductors

    S. Sumita, M. Naka, and H. Seo, “Fulde-Ferrell-Larkin- Ovchinnikov state induced by antiferromagnetic order in κ-type organic conductors”, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043171 (2023)

    2023

  36. [45]

    Zero-field finite-momentum and field-induced superconductivity in altermagnets

    D. Chakraborty and A. M. Black-Schaffer, “Zero-field finite-momentum and field-induced superconductivity in altermagnets”, Phys. Rev. B 110, L060508 (2024)

    2024

  37. [46]

    Pair Density Waves and Super- current Diode Effect in Altermagnets

    G. Sim and J. Knolle, “Pair Density Waves and Super- current Diode Effect in Altermagnets”, arXiv:2407.01513 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Unconventional p-wave and finite-momentum superconductivity induced by altermagnetism through the formation of Bogoliubov fermi surface

    S. Hong, M. Jip Park, and K.-M. Kim, “Unconventional p-wave and finite-momentum superconductivity induced by altermagnetism through the formation of Bogoliubov fermi surface”, arXiv:2407.02059 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  39. [48]

    Nonmagnetic Ground State in RuO2 Revealed by Muon Spin Rotation

    M. Hiraishi, H. Okabe, A. Koda, R. Kadono, T. Muroi, D. Hirai, and Z. Hiroi, “Nonmagnetic Ground State in RuO2 Revealed by Muon Spin Rotation”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 166702 (2024)

    2024

  40. [49]

    Absence of magnetic order in RuO 2: insights from µ SR spectroscopy and neutron diffraction

    P. Keßler, L. Garcia-Gassull, A. Suter, T. Prokscha, Z. Salman, D. Khalyavin, P. Manuel, F. Orlandi, I. I. Mazin, R. Valent ´ ı,et al., “Absence of magnetic order in RuO 2: insights from µ SR spectroscopy and neutron diffraction”, npj Spintronics 2, 50 (2024)

    2024

  41. [50]

    Absence of Altermag- netic Spin Splitting Character in Rutile Oxide RuO 2

    J. Liu, J. Zhan, T. Li, J. Liu, S. Cheng, Y. Shi, L. Deng, M. Zhang, C. Li, J. Ding, et al., “Absence of Altermag- netic Spin Splitting Character in Rutile Oxide RuO 2”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 176401 (2024)

    2024

  42. [51]

    Observation of Giant Spin Splitting and d-wave Spin Texture in Room Temperature Altermagnet RuO2

    Z. Lin, D. Chen, W. Lu, X. Liang, S. Feng, K. Ya- magami, J. Osiecki, M. Leandersson, B. Thiagarajan, J. Liu, et al., “Observation of Giant Spin Splitting and d-wave Spin Texture in Room Temperature Altermagnet RuO2”, arXiv:2402.04995 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Coulomb drag

    B. N. Narozhny and A. Levchenko, “Coulomb drag”, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 025003 (2016)

    2016

  44. [53]

    Theory of spin Coulomb drag in spin-polarized transport

    I. D’Amico and G. Vignale, “Theory of spin Coulomb drag in spin-polarized transport”, Phys. Rev. B 62, 4853 (2000)

    2000

  45. [54]

    Spin Coulomb drag in the two-dimensional electron liquid

    I. D’Amico and G. Vignale, “Spin Coulomb drag in the two-dimensional electron liquid”, Phys. Rev. B 68, 045307 (2003)

    2003

  46. [55]

    Finite Width and Local Field Corrections to Spin Coulomb Drag in a Quasi-Two-Dimensional Electron Gas

    S. M. Badalyan, C. S. Kim, and G. Vignale, “Finite Width and Local Field Corrections to Spin Coulomb Drag in a Quasi-Two-Dimensional Electron Gas”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 016603 (2008)

    2008

  47. [56]

    Diffusion equation and spin drag in spin- polarized transport

    K. Flensberg, T. Stibius Jensen, and N. As- ger Mortensen, “Diffusion equation and spin drag in spin- polarized transport”, Phys. Rev. B 64, 245308 (2001)

    2001

  48. [57]

    Observation of spin Coulomb drag in a two-dimensional electron gas

    C. P. Weber, N. Gedik, J. Moore, J. Orenstein, J. Stephens, and D. Awschalom, “Observation of spin Coulomb drag in a two-dimensional electron gas”, Na- ture 437, 1330 (2005)

    2005

  49. [58]

    Observing the spin Coulomb drag in spin- valve devices

    G. Vignale, “Observing the spin Coulomb drag in spin- valve devices”, Phys. Rev. B 71, 125103 (2005). 7

    2005

  50. [59]

    Spin Hall Drag in Elec- tronic Bilayers

    S. M. Badalyan and G. Vignale, “Spin Hall Drag in Elec- tronic Bilayers”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 196601 (2009)

    2009

  51. [60]

    Spin- Drag Hall Effect in a Rotating Bose Mixture

    H. J. van Driel, R. A. Duine, and H. T. C. Stoof, “Spin- Drag Hall Effect in a Rotating Bose Mixture”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 155301 (2010)

    2010

  52. [61]

    1D-1D Coulomb drag signature of a Luttinger liquid

    D. Laroche, G. Gervais, M. Lilly, and J. Reno, “1D-1D Coulomb drag signature of a Luttinger liquid”, Science 343, 631 (2014)

    2014

  53. [62]

    Giant fluctuations of coulomb drag in a bi- layer system

    A. Price, A. Savchenko, B. Narozhny, G. Allison, and D. Ritchie, “Giant fluctuations of coulomb drag in a bi- layer system”, Science 316, 99 (2007)

    2007

  54. [63]

    Investigating the superconductor-insulator transition in thin films using drag resistance: Theoretical analysis of a proposed ex- periment

    Y. Zou, G. Refael, and J. Yoon, “Investigating the superconductor-insulator transition in thin films using drag resistance: Theoretical analysis of a proposed ex- periment”, Phys. Rev. B 80, 180503 (2009)

    2009

  55. [64]

    Current Mirror Effect and Correlated Cooper-Pair Transport in Coupled Arrays of Small Josephson Junctions

    H. Shimada and P. Delsing, “Current Mirror Effect and Correlated Cooper-Pair Transport in Coupled Arrays of Small Josephson Junctions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3253 (2000)

    2000

  56. [65]

    Excitonic superfluid phase in double bilayer graphene

    J. Li, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J. Hone, and C. Dean, “Excitonic superfluid phase in double bilayer graphene”, Nat. Phys. 13, 751 (2017)

    2017

  57. [66]

    Exciton condensation and perfect Coulomb drag

    D. Nandi, A. Finck, J. Eisenstein, L. Pfeiffer, and K. West, “Exciton condensation and perfect Coulomb drag”, Nature 488, 481 (2012)

    2012

  58. [67]

    Coulomb Drag in the Exciton Regime in Electron-Hole Bilayers

    J. A. Seamons, C. P. Morath, J. L. Reno, and M. P. Lilly, “Coulomb Drag in the Exciton Regime in Electron-Hole Bilayers”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 026804 (2009)

    2009

  59. [68]

    Probing the Topological Exciton Conden- sate via Coulomb Drag

    M. P. Mink, H. T. C. Stoof, R. A. Duine, M. Polini, and G. Vignale, “Probing the Topological Exciton Conden- sate via Coulomb Drag”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 186402 (2012)

    2012

  60. [69]

    Bose–Einstein con- densation of excitons in bilayer electron systems

    J. Eisenstein and A. H. MacDonald, “Bose–Einstein con- densation of excitons in bilayer electron systems”, Nature 432, 691 (2004)

    2004

  61. [70]

    Signature of quantum interference effect in inter-layer Coulomb drag in graphene-based electronic double-layer systems

    L. Zhu, X. Liu, L. Li, X. Wan, R. Tao, Z. Xie, J. Feng, and C. Zeng, “Signature of quantum interference effect in inter-layer Coulomb drag in graphene-based electronic double-layer systems”, Nat. Commun. 14, 1465 (2023)

    2023

  62. [71]

    Berry phases in coulomb drag of double-layer graphene system

    J. Pan, L. Zhu, X. Liu, L. Li, C. Zeng, and J. Feng, “Berry phases in coulomb drag of double-layer graphene system”, arXiv:2407.08168 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  63. [72]

    Josephson–Coulomb drag effect between graphene and a LaAlO 3/SrTiO3 superconduc- tor

    R. Tao, L. Li, H.-Y. Xie, X. Fan, L. Guo, L. Zhu, Y. Yan, Z. Zhang, and C. Zeng, “Josephson–Coulomb drag effect between graphene and a LaAlO 3/SrTiO3 superconduc- tor”, Nat. Phys. 19, 372 (2023)

    2023

  64. [73]

    Magneto-Coulomb Drag: Interplay of Electron- Electron Interactions and Landau Quantization

    M. C. Bønsager, K. Flensberg, B. Y.-K. Hu, and A.-P. Jauho, “Magneto-Coulomb Drag: Interplay of Electron- Electron Interactions and Landau Quantization”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1366 (1996)

    1996

  65. [74]

    Coulomb drag in normal metals and superconductors: Diagrammatic approach

    A. Kamenev and Y. Oreg, “Coulomb drag in normal metals and superconductors: Diagrammatic approach”, Phys. Rev. B 52, 7516 (1995)

    1995

  66. [75]

    Hall Drag and Mag- netodrag in Graphene

    J. C. W. Song and L. S. Levitov, “Hall Drag and Mag- netodrag in Graphene”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 126601 (2013)

    2013

  67. [76]

    High-quality conductive In 2O3〈Sn〉 and RuO 2 layers grown by mag- netron sputtering

    R. Butkute, V. Lisauskas, and B. Vengalis, “High-quality conductive In 2O3〈Sn〉 and RuO 2 layers grown by mag- netron sputtering”, Surf. Coat. Technol. 100-101, 305 (1998)

    1998

  68. [77]

    Quasiparticle Mass Enhancement and Tem- perature Dependence of the Electronic Structure of Fer- romagnetic SrRuO 3 Thin Films

    D. E. Shai, C. Adamo, D. W. Shen, C. M. Brooks, J. W. Harter, E. J. Monkman, B. Burganov, D. G. Schlom, and K. M. Shen, “Quasiparticle Mass Enhancement and Tem- perature Dependence of the Electronic Structure of Fer- romagnetic SrRuO 3 Thin Films”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 087004 (2013)

    2013

  69. [78]

    Coulomb drag as a measure of trigonal warping in doped graphene

    B. N. Narozhny, “Coulomb drag as a measure of trigonal warping in doped graphene”, Phys. Rev. B 76, 153409 (2007)

    2007

  70. [79]

    Coulomb drag and spin drag in the presence of spin-orbit coupling

    W.-K. Tse and S. Das Sarma, “Coulomb drag and spin drag in the presence of spin-orbit coupling”, Phys. Rev. B 75, 045333 (2007)

    2007

  71. [80]

    Anomalous Hall Coulomb drag of massive Dirac fermions

    H. Liu, W. E. Liu, and D. Culcer, “Anomalous Hall Coulomb drag of massive Dirac fermions”, Phys. Rev. B 95, 205435 (2017)

    2017

  72. [81]

    G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics, Physics of Solids and Liquids (Springer, New York, 2000)

    2000

  73. [82]

    Linear-response theory of Coulomb drag in coupled electron systems

    K. Flensberg, B. Y.-K. Hu, A.-P. Jauho, and J. M. Kinaret, “Linear-response theory of Coulomb drag in coupled electron systems”, Phys. Rev. B 52, 14761 (1995)

    1995

  74. [83]

    Superconductivity in Uniquely Strained RuO2 Films

    M. Uchida, T. Nomoto, M. Musashi, R. Arita, and M. Kawasaki, “Superconductivity in Uniquely Strained RuO2 Films”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 147001 (2020)

    2020

  75. [84]

    Strain-modulated anisotropic electronic structure in superconducting RuO2 films

    C. A. Occhialini, L. G. P. Martins, S. Fan, V. Bisogni, T. Yasunami, M. Musashi, M. Kawasaki, M. Uchida, R. Comin, and J. Pelliciari, “Strain-modulated anisotropic electronic structure in superconducting RuO2 films”, Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, 084802 (2022)

    2022

  76. [85]

    SI) Model and quantities, (Sec

    See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/ sup- plemental/10.1103/PhysRevLett.xx.xxxxxx for (Sec. SI) Model and quantities, (Sec. SII) Screening and nonlinear susceptibility, (Sec. SIII) Coulomb drag conductivity at low temperatures, (Sec. SIV) Influence of spin-orbit c...

    doi

  77. [86]

    Coulomb drag in graphene: Perturbation theory

    B. N. Narozhny, M. Titov, I. V. Gornyi, and P. M. Ostro- vsky, “Coulomb drag in graphene: Perturbation theory”, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195421 (2012)

    2012

  78. [87]

    Spin-Hall effect and spin- Coulomb drag in doped semiconductors

    E. Hankiewicz and G. Vignale, “Spin-Hall effect and spin- Coulomb drag in doped semiconductors”, J. Phys: Con- dens. Matter 21, 253202 (2009)

    2009

  79. [88]

    Theory of Coulomb drag in graphene

    W.-K. Tse, B. Y.-K. Hu, and S. Das Sarma, “Theory of Coulomb drag in graphene”, Phys. Rev. B 76, 081401 (2007)

    2007

  80. [89]

    Theory of Coulomb drag for massless Dirac fermions

    M Carrega and T Tudorovskiy and A Principi and M I Katsnelson and M Polini, “Theory of Coulomb drag for massless Dirac fermions”, New J. Phys. 14, 063033 (2012)

    2012

  81. [90]

    Anomalous hall antiferromagnets

    L. ˇSmejkal, A. H. MacDonald, J. Sinova, S. Nakatsuji, and T. Jungwirth, “Anomalous hall antiferromagnets”, Nat. Rev. Mater. 7, 482 (2022). 8 End Matter Appendix A: Derivation of density of states. At low temperatures, the density of states νs is derived from the eigenvalues E...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.