Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Proper Theory of Magnon Orbital Angular Momentum at Equilibrium

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

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes a gauge-invariant, finite-temperature definition of magnon orbital angular momentum, coupling it to an electric-field divergence through the Aharonov-Casher effect, and derives a formula that splits the OAM into self-r

desk verdict A serious candidate resolution of the magnon OAM definition problem, with a novel finite-temperature topological term; the heuristic Thomas-precession normalization and an unshown integration step are the main soft spots, both addressable. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.03322 v3 pith:TNRQJPPR submitted 2025-10-01 cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph

Junyu Tang , Ran Cheng This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph
keywords magnonorbitalangularmomentumAharonov-CashereffectBerrycurvaturespinNernstDzyaloshinskii-Moriyainteractionbosonicstatisticshoneycomblatticegaugeinvariance
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 give the first proper, gauge-invariant definition of the orbital angular momentum (OAM) of magnons at finite temperature. Defining OAM is hard because magnons are charge-neutral bosons: their orbital motion produces no magnetic moment, and the naive position operator is ill-defined. The authors identify the divergence of an electric field, coupled through the Aharonov-Casher effect, as the correct thermodynamic conjugate, and derive a quantum linear-response formula in which the OAM splits into a self-rotation part and a topological Berry-curvature part with bosonic statistics. They show that only this formula reproduces the correct magnon spin Nernst effect, and that in a honeycomb lattice the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction produces a sizable OAM in both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic phases. The result matters because it gives neutral-boson orbitronics a concrete observable signature—edge polarization and an effective magnetoelectric response—despite the absence of an orbital magnetic moment.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the perturbation Hamiltonian δH = -P·E with P = γħ v × ẑ / c², and the choice of ∇⊥·E (the in-plane divergence of the electric field) as the thermodynamic conjugate variable. The quantum machinery is first-order perturbation theory on Bloch states in a slowly varying AC field, kept finite but with q→0, followed by a Maxwell-relation integration of the auxiliary response L̃ = ∂(βL)/∂β over inverse temperature. The calculation respects bosonic commutation rules through para-unitary diagonalization, and the final single-band formula is checked against a semiclassical wave-packet derivation.

What would settle it

Measure the edge polarization of a two-dimensional honeycomb ferromagnet with known DMI: for D = 0.05 meV at room temperature the paper predicts p ≈ 10⁻⁴ C/m², odd in D, rising from zero near 10 K. A null result, a wrong sign under D reversal, or a sharply different temperature profile would indicate the normalization—or the entire linear-response construction—is incorrect. Alternatively, measuring the magnon spin Nernst conductivity and comparing with the formula's curl prediction would distinguish this theory from earlier candidates.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the equilibrium magnon OAM per unit cell is L = -∑_{k,n}[L_n(k)b_nk - (4/(βħ))Ω_n(k) ln(1-e^{-βε_nk})], where L_n(k) is the self-rotation of the magnon wave packet, Ω_n(k) is the Berry curvature, and b_nk is the Bose-Einstein occupation. Both terms are gauge invariant at every k point, with no symmetry of the Brillouin zone assumed. The first term parallels the electronic self-rotation; the topological term, however, follows bosonic statistics and vanishes at zero temperature, contrary to earlier conjectures. The paper further claims that replacing the topological term's temperature factor with the Bose-Einstein occupation (or with the electron's Fermi factor) yield

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the classical Aharonov-Casher energy correction ΔU = −(γħL/4c²)∇⊥·E, including the Thomas-precession factor of 1/2, defines the magnon OAM's thermodynamic conjugate; the quantum formula inherits that normalization.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Magnon OAM is a finite-temperature effect: it grows with temperature and vanishes as T→0, matching bosonic statistics rather than electron-like behavior.
  • The topological term is not the simple Ω_n b_n guessed earlier; with the factor ln(1−e^{-βε}), it vanishes at zero temperature and differs at all finite T, so prior estimates need revisiting.
  • Taking the spatial curl of the topological term reproduces the magnon spin Nernst effect; only this OAM formula yields the correct transport expression.
  • In a honeycomb ferromagnet with DMI, the two bands carry opposite OAM near K and K'; the net OAM is set by the competition and peaks at intermediate exchange strength J≈−0.2 meV.
  • At the edges of the sample the orbital motion generates a detectable polarization density, roughly 10^{-4} C/m² for the FM case studied, and an effective magnetoelectric polarizability comparable to an axion insulator in the AFM case.

Reading between the lines

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

  • By the paper's own generalization claim, the same AC-response machinery should assign a well-defined OAM to other chargeless spin-carrying bosons—e.g., photons or exciton-polaritons—where the conjugate field would again be ∇⊥·E; this is not computed in the paper.
  • Altermagnets, which split spin bands intrinsically, should show a finite magnon OAM without an external magnetic field; the paper lists altermagnets as future work but does not calculate them.
  • A direct test would be to scan the edge polarization as a function of DMI strength; the paper's scaling is odd in D, so reversing the DMI chirality should flip the edge charge.
  • One could derive a magnon orbital Nernst effect by replacing the electric-field perturbation with a thermal gradient in the same linear-response framework; the paper mentions the temperature-gradient response as an open direction.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a 'proper theory' of equilibrium magnon orbital angular momentum (OAM) based on the Aharonov–Casher (AC) effect. The authors identify the in-plane divergence of an electric field as the thermodynamic conjugate to magnon OAM, compute the finite-temperature OAM as a linear response to that divergence, and obtain a two-part formula: a self-rotation term and a topological Berry-curvature term, Eq. (12). They further claim that only this theory reproduces the known magnon spin Nernst effect, and they illustrate the formalism on a honeycomb ferromagnet and antiferromagnet with Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction, predicting OAM of order 10^-7–10^-8 m²/s per unit cell.

Significance. If sound, the result would be a significant advance: it provides a gauge-invariant, finite-temperature definition of magnon OAM that is well defined at each k point, without relying on special Brillouin-zone symmetries, and it extends naturally to other chargeless bosons with intrinsic spin. The paper's strengths include a detailed supplementary-material derivation of the multi-band and single-band perturbation formulas, an independent semiclassical consistency check, a proper para-unitary treatment of the bosonic Hamiltonian via Colpa's method, and no fitted parameters in the central derivation. The numerical examples illustrate how DMI induces OAM in both FM and AFM honeycomb lattices. However, the normalization of the theory rests on a heuristic classical step, and the comparison with the spin Nernst effect is only sketched.

major comments (4)
  1. [Intuitive picture, Eq. (4)] The prefactor in Eq. (4) is load-bearing but is not derived. A direct time average of Eq. (1) over the circular orbit r(t)=r_m(cos ωt,sin ωt,0) gives ΔŪ = -γħL/(2c²)∇⊥·E, so the factor 1/4 in Eq. (4) contains an extra 1/2 that is attributed to Thomas precession. No independent derivation of this Thomas factor is given for a magnon wave packet in a lattice; the SM only proves equivalence of two polarization operators in the zero-DMI limit. Moreover, the limit r_m→0 with L=ωr_m² fixed implies the orbital speed v=ωr_m=L/r_m→∞, contradicting the v<<c assumption used to justify the AC energy correction. Since the prefactor 4c²/γ enters every subsequent formula, including Eq. (12), this normalization must be put on a firmer footing.
  2. [Quantum perturbation, Eqs. (11)–(12)] The passage from the auxiliary field L̃ in Eq. (11) to the central OAM formula in Eq. (12) is asserted with the sentence 'Finally, by integrating L̃ over β...' but the integration is not shown. The SM derives L̃_1 and L̃_2 explicitly, but not the nontrivial integration with respect to β, nor the vanishing of the integration constant as T→0. This step is essential: the bosonic distribution and its derivative must combine to produce the ln(1-e^{-βε}) topological term with the coefficient 4/(βħ). The authors should provide the intermediate algebra, or at least a compact derivation with the key identity.
  3. [Eq. (14) and the spin Nernst check] The claimed consistency check with the magnon spin Nernst effect is incomplete. Eq. (14) states J_MSN ∝ ∇×L ∝ Σ Ω_n [ẑ×∇T] c1(b_n), but it drops the self-rotation contribution -L_n b_n from Eq. (12) without explanation. In general, ∇×(-L_n b_n) is not zero, so the full curl of L contains more than the topological term. Additionally, only a proportionality is stated; the known spin Nernst expression has a specific coefficient that must be matched to substantiate the claim that only this theory reproduces the correct magnon spin Nernst effect. The authors should either prove that the self-rotation part does not contribute to the transverse current, or explicitly include it and show cancellation.
  4. [SM, 'Equivalence between two polarization operators'] The extension from Heisenberg exchange to finite intrinsic DMI is an assumption, not a derivation. The SM proves P_eff = P_AC only when the intrinsic DMI vanishes; for finite DMI the text asserts that Eq. (3) is 'more general' than P_eff. This is plausible because the velocity operator in P=γħv×ẑ/c² contains the DMI, but it is not demonstrated. For AFM magnons the classical picture of a spin fixed along -ẑ is also not representative of the two sublattices. A derivation of the AC polarization operator from the full bosonic Hamiltonian, including DMI and the AFM sublattice structure, is needed before Eq. (12) can be considered established for the examples presented.
minor comments (4)
  1. [After Eq. (11)] The matrix elements are written v_nm = ⟨u_{n,k}|v̂(k)|u_{n,k}⟩ and similarly for P_nm; the ket should be |u_{m,k}⟩. This is presumably a typographical error.
  2. [Introduction and SM] Typos and grammatical issues: 'from the a linear-response perspective', 'supplementray materials', 'fowllowing', 'eigenennergy', 'exhcange' in Ref. [37]. These should be corrected.
  3. [Footnote [22]] The statement that one can recover the unit of angular momentum by multiplying by an effective mass is problematic because magnons do not have a unique effective mass. The physical meaning of L in units of m²/s should be clarified earlier, especially since the paper's title speaks of orbital angular momentum.
  4. [Figs. 2 and 3] The color scales and units are clear, but the relation between the weighted band plots and the OAM distributions could be stated more explicitly. In Fig. 2(a), the integers marking Chern numbers are useful but the caption should note which band they refer to.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No material circularity; minor self-citations appear only in benchmark comparisons, not in the derivation of the central OAM formula.

full rationale

The central OAM formula, Eqs. (12)-(13), is obtained by a self-contained linear-response calculation. Starting from the AC-effect perturbation Hamiltonian δH = -P·E with P(k) = γħ v×ẑ/c², the paper computes δU to first order in a q→0 field profile, Eqs. (7)-(8), and derives L_n(k) and Ω_n(k) from matrix elements of v and P. No parameter is fitted to the OAM output; the honeycomb-lattice model parameters in Eq. (15) are free inputs, not adjusted to reproduce the calculated OAM. The Thomas-precession factor 1/2 in Eq. (4) is an openly stated heuristic input that sets the normalization of the conjugate variable; it is assumed, not derived, but that is a modeling assumption and correctness risk, not circularity, because the subsequent calculation genuinely evaluates the response rather than re-labeling the input as the output. The claimed agreement with the magnon spin Nernst effect is a post-derivation comparison using published results, including one co-authored paper [30]; the OAM formula is not derived by demanding agreement with that effect. The SM also supplies an independent semiclassical wave-packet derivation reproducing the same formulae, further supporting that the central result is not circularly constructed. Minor self-citations exist but are not load-bearing for the derivation, so the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The general scheme introduces no new physical entities or fitted constants; the only adjustable inputs are the illustrative model parameters and the heuristic AC/Thomas-precession coupling. The axioms are standard for noninteracting magnon theory, with the AC coupling being the most load-bearing domain assumption.

free parameters (2)
  • Model parameters in numerical examples (J, D, A_z, B_z, S) = FM: J=-1 meV, D=0.05 meV, A_z=0.1 meV, B_z=0, S=5/2; AFM: J=+1 meV, D=0.05 meV, B_z=-1 T
    Chosen by hand for illustrative tight-binding parameters; not fitted to experiment. They do not enter the general derivation.
  • Numerical-estimation scales (d_m, spin-orbit coupling scale) = d_m ~ 0.5 nm; SOC of eV scale
    Used to convert OAM values to polarization densities p; these are order-of-magnitude assumptions, not measured or optimized values.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Aharonov-Casher coupling: a moving magnetic dipole in an electric field has energy -P·E with P = gamma hbar v x zhat / c^2, including a Thomas-precession factor 1/2 in the orbital average.
    Equations (1)-(4); no independent derivation for magnon wavepackets in a lattice, and the factor 1/2 is inherited by the final OAM formula.
  • domain assumption Magnon chemical potential is zero because magnon number is not conserved.
    Used before Eq. (6); standard for noninteracting magnons, but assumes no number-conserving constraint.
  • domain assumption Noninteracting harmonic spin-wave approximation (Holstein-Primakoff to quadratic order) and well-defined magnetic order at the temperatures considered.
    Used throughout the examples; magnon interactions, damping, and thermal renormalization of the order are neglected.
  • domain assumption The electric-field profile E = rho/(2q)(sin qx, sin qy) with q,rho -> 0 and curl-free condition isolates the response to the in-plane divergence of E.
    This construction is essential to the perturbation calculation; it assumes no time-dependent magnetic field is generated and that the q -> 0 limit is well behaved.
  • standard math Colpa's para-unitary diagonalization gives the correct bosonic Bloch states, Berry curvature, and velocity matrix elements.
    Used in the SM to evaluate Eq. (13) for the bosonic Nambu Hamiltonian; this is a standard tool for quadratic bosonic Hamiltonians.
  • standard math Standard first-order perturbation theory for Bloch states, including the Feynman-Hellmann theorem, is valid for the magnon response.
    Used throughout the derivation of Eqs. (10)-(11) and the SM multi-band formula.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Proper Theory of Magnon Orbital Angular Momentum at Equilibrium." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TNRQJPPR

@misc{pith2026251003322,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Proper Theory of Magnon Orbital Angular Momentum at Equilibrium},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TNRQJPPR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.03322}
}
read the original abstract

The orbital motion of chargeless bosons, unlike that of electrons, does not generate a magnetic moment and thus cannot directly interact with magnetic fields. To formulate the orbital angular momentum (OAM) of magnons, we first identify its proper conjugate variable by considering the Aharonov-Casher effect, which gives rise to a virtual perturbation to the equilibrium state, allowing us to calculate the magnon OAM as a virtual response to an infinitesimal electric field divergence. At finite temperatures, both self-rotation and topological contributions to the magnon OAM are explicitly derived, analogous to their electronic counterpart but with the correct bosonic statistics. In a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice, we show that the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction induces a large magnon OAM in both the ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic phases. Our formalism can be generalized to other chargeless bosons with intrinsic spin.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.03322 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematics of the magnon OAM (green arrow) with a radius [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) AFM magnon band structure (weighted by magnon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Signatures of Topological Magnon Edge States in THz Spectroscopy and Cavity Response

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A symmetry-allowed electric-dipole term creates magnon pairs, so THz pumping can selectively amplify and detect topological magnon edge states.

  2. Ferroelectricity in a magnon Bose-Einstein condensate: Nonreciprocal superfluidity, exceptional points, and Majorana bosons

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Strong Aharonov-Casher coupling drives a magnon Bose-Einstein condensate into a spontaneous ferroelectric superfluid, with nonreciprocal excitations and an exceptional flat band at the critical point.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    D. Xiao, J. Shi, and Q. Niu, Berry phase correction to electron density of states in solids, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 137204 (2005)

    2005

  2. [2]

    Thonhauser, D

    T. Thonhauser, D. Ceresoli, D. Vanderbilt, and R. Resta, Or- bital magnetization in periodic insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 137205 (2005)

    2005

  3. [3]

    J. Shi, G. Vignale, D. Xiao, and Q. Niu, Quantum theory of orbital magnetization and its generalization to interacting sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 197202 (2007)

    2007

  4. [4]

    Y .-G. Choi, D. Jo, K.-H. Ko, D. Go, K.-H. Kim, H. G. Park, C. Kim, B.-C. Min, G.-M. Choi, and H.-W. Lee, Observation of the orbital hall effect in a light metal ti, Nature619, 52 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    Tanaka, H

    T. Tanaka, H. Kontani, M. Naito, T. Naito, D. S. Hirashima, K. Yamada, and J. Inoue, Intrinsic spin hall effect and orbital hall effect in 4dand 5dtransition metals, Phys. Rev. B77, 165117 (2008)

    2008

  6. [6]

    Salemi and P

    L. Salemi and P. M. Oppeneer, Theory of magnetic spin and orbital hall and nernst effects in bulk ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B106, 024410 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Salemi and P

    L. Salemi and P. M. Oppeneer, First-principles theory of in- trinsic spin and orbital hall and nernst effects in metallic monoatomic crystals, Phys. Rev. Mater.6, 095001 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    El Hamdi, J.-Y

    A. El Hamdi, J.-Y . Chauleau, M. Boselli, C. Thibault, C. Gorini, A. Smogunov, C. Barreteau, S. Gariglio, J.-M. Triscone, and M. Viret, Observation of the orbital inverse rashba–edelstein ef- fect, Nature Physics19, 1855 (2023)

    2023

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    T. Yoda, T. Yokoyama, and S. Murakami, Orbital edelstein ef- fect as a condensed-matter analog of solenoids, Nano letters18, 916 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    B. A. Bernevig, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Orbitronics: The intrinsic orbital current inp-doped silicon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 066601 (2005)

    2005

  3. [11]

    D. Go, D. Jo, H.-W. Lee, M. Kläui, and Y . Mokrousov, Or- bitronics: Orbital currents in solids, Europhysics Letters135, 37001 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    R. R. Neumann, A. Mook, J. Henk, and I. Mertig, Orbital mag- netic moment of magnons, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 117209 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    R. S. Fishman, J. S. Gardner, and S. Okamoto, Orbital angular momentum of magnons in collinear magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 167202 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    R. S. Fishman, Gauge-invariant measure of the magnon orbital angular momentum, Phys. Rev. B107, 214434 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    G. Go, D. An, H.-W. Lee, and S. K. Kim, Magnon orbital nernst effect in honeycomb antiferromagnets without spin–orbit cou- pling, Nano Letters24, 5968 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    J. Ni, Z. Zhang, J. Lu, Q. Du, Z. Jiang, and L. Bellaiche, Non- volatile magnonics in bilayer magnetic insulators, Nano Letters 25, 1207 (2025), pMID: 39801279

    2025

  9. [17]

    Matsumoto and S

    R. Matsumoto and S. Murakami, Theoretical prediction of a rotating magnon wave packet in ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 197202 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    Aharonov and A

    Y . Aharonov and A. Casher, Topological quantum effects for neutral particles, Phys. Rev. Lett.53, 319 (1984)

    1984

  11. [19]

    Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak” fer- romagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids4, 241 (1958)

    I. Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak” fer- romagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids4, 241 (1958)

    1958

  12. [20]

    Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak fer- romagnetism, Phys

    T. Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak fer- romagnetism, Phys. Rev.120, 91 (1960)

    1960

  13. [21]

    Ceresoli, T

    D. Ceresoli, T. Thonhauser, D. Vanderbilt, and R. Resta, Or- bital magnetization in crystalline solids: Multi-band insulators, chern insulators, and metals, Phys. Rev. B74, 024408 (2006)

    2006

  14. [22]

    As a bosonic quasiparticle, magnon does not have a defined 6 mass as the electrons. To recover the appropriate unit of angular momentum, one could mutiply the effective massm eff derived from the energy dispersion toL; however, this is not the focus of our discussion

  15. [23]

    L. H. Thomas, The motion of the spinning electron, Nature117, 514 (1926)

    1926

  16. [24]

    Jackson,Classical Electrodynamics(Wiley, 2021)

    J. Jackson,Classical Electrodynamics(Wiley, 2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Ouvry, L

    S. Ouvry, L. Pastur, and A. Yanovsky, Thomas precession, per- sistent spin currents and quantum forces, Europhysics Letters 106, 18001 (2014)

    2014

  18. [26]

    [3], here we identify the Maxwell relation as∂L/∂T=−λ ∂ 2Ω/(∂T∂(∇ ⊥ · E)) =λ ∂S/∂(∇ ⊥ ·E)withλ=4c 2/γ ¯h

    Following the same mathematical trick of Ref. [3], here we identify the Maxwell relation as∂L/∂T=−λ ∂ 2Ω/(∂T∂(∇ ⊥ · E)) =λ ∂S/∂(∇ ⊥ ·E)withλ=4c 2/γ ¯h. From the definition ofLand ˜L, we haveL= ˜L+Tλ ∂S/∂(∇ ⊥ ·E). Combing the two equations, we haveL= ˜L+T∂L/∂T, which leads to t...

  19. [27]

    See supplementray materials at [URL] for the derivation details of magnon OAM

  20. [28]

    Notably, the coefficients for both two contributions are four times larger than their electronic counterparts. The first 2 factor comes from the orbtial average but it can be absorbed by re- defining the OAM with additonal 1/2 factorL=r×v/2, such that R Ldtis exactly the area ...

  21. [29]

    D. Xiao, Y . Yao, Z. Fang, and Q. Niu, Berry-phase effect in anomalous thermoelectric transport, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 026603 (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    Cheng, S

    R. Cheng, S. Okamoto, and D. Xiao, Spin nernst effect of magnons in collinear antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 217202 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    V . A. Zyuzin and A. A. Kovalev, Magnon spin nernst effect in antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 217203 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    To simplify the notation, we absorb the ¯h2 factor from the magnon spin into parametersJ,D,A z, such thatS i is a unitary and dimensionless vector representing the spinSati-th site

  25. [33]

    Colpa, Diagonalization of the quadratic boson hamiltonian, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications93, 327 (1978)

    J. Colpa, Diagonalization of the quadratic boson hamiltonian, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications93, 327 (1978)

    1978

  26. [34]

    Liu and G

    T. Liu and G. Vignale, Electric control of spin currents and spin- wave logic, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 247203 (2011)

    2011

  27. [35]

    Katsura, N

    H. Katsura, N. Nagaosa, and A. V . Balatsky, Spin current and magnetoelectric effect in noncollinear magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 057205 (2005)

    2005

  28. [36]

    (3) is more general than ˆPeff

    For a nonvanishing intrinsic DMI, ˆPeff fails to capture the anomalous velocity induced by the DMI, so Eq. (3) is more general than ˆPeff

  29. [37]

    To stabilize the FM ground state when varying the exhcangeJ, a finite magnetic fieldB z =−1 T is applied for obtaining results in Fig. 2(d)

  30. [38]

    Zhang and R

    H. Zhang and R. Cheng, A perspective on magnon spin nernst effect in antiferromagnets, Applied Physics Letters120(2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    J. Xia, X. Zhang, X. Liu, Y . Zhou, and M. Ezawa, Univer- sal quantum computation based on nanoscale skyrmion helic- ity qubits in frustrated magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 106701 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Sundaram and Q

    G. Sundaram and Q. Niu, Wave-packet dynamics in slowly per- turbed crystals: Gradient corrections and berry-phase effects, Phys. Rev. B59, 14915 (1999). 7 Supplementary Material for Proper Theory of Magnon Orbital Angular Momentum Junyu Tang1, Ran Cheng2,1,3 1Department of Phy...

    1999

Pith tools

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