Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Quantum spin excitations in a dual-core magnetic molecule

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that the low-energy tunneling spectrum of a single Cr2Br6 molecule on Au(111) comes from coexisting molecular vibrations and spin excitations of a spin-degenerate S=3 ground state formed by two ferromagnetically…

desk verdict Solid experimental STM/STS study of a new dual-core Cr2Br6 molecule with a credible vibrational assignment, but the spin-excitation interpretation leans on an unexplained order-of-magnitude gap between theory and experiment. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07204 v1 pith:UOFZB5UA submitted 2025-05-12 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.atm-clus

Wenbin Li (1) , Wenwen Shi (2) , Xiaoxiao Xiao (3) , Haiyan Zhu (4) , Cai Cheng (5 , 6) , Dongfei Wang (7) , Lan Chen (8
show 7 more authors
9) Masahiro Haze (1) Huixia Fu (4) Xiao Zheng (10) Yang Guo (11) Zhendong Li (3) Yukio Hasegawa (1)
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.atm-clus
keywords scanningtunnelingmicroscopyspinexcitationsinelasticelectronspectroscopyKondoeffectmagneticmoleculespin-orbitcouplingsuperexchangechromiumbromide
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

An individual Cr2Br6 molecule, two chromium ions bridged by one near-90° Cr–Br–Cr scissors bond, is shown to have a septet (S=3) ground state in which the two Cr spins couple ferromagnetically. Tunneling spectra on the molecule show an asymmetric Fano-shaped Kondo resonance at zero bias, flanked by mirror-symmetric steps, and magnetic-field measurements split only some of those steps while leaving others fixed. The paper assigns two steps to molecular vibrations (hindered rotation and translation, computed at 1.4 and 2.2 meV) and the remaining steps to spin excitations of a spin-orbit-split manifold whose lowest levels have degeneracies 2-2-2-1 with a doubly degenerate ground state. This provides a minimal, well-defined two-core superexchange-coupled molecule for studying quantum spin excitations at the atomic scale.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the spin-orbit-coupled septet manifold of Cr2Br6: a 26-electron, 20-orbital active space treated with density matrix renormalization group and iterative configuration interaction, then with spin-orbit coupling, yields a ground S=3 state that splits into four levels with degeneracies 2-2-2-1. The identity that carries the argument is the Zeeman branching of that manifold: under a magnetic field the doubly degenerate ground and excited states split into minority and majority states, so transitions to majority states stay field-independent while transitions to minority states rise linearly with field. That pattern, together with the two computed vibrational modes at 1.4 and 2.2 meV, is what lets the authors separate the observed steps into vibrations and spin excitations.

What would settle it

Run the same 26-electron, 20-orbital multireference spin-orbit calculation on a model that explicitly includes the Au(111) substrate (or a gold cluster) and check whether the S=3 spin gaps compress to the observed ~0.2–2.5 meV while maintaining the 2-2-2-1 degeneracy. Alternatively, measure the dI/dV spectrum of Cr2Br6 on an insulating decoupling film such as NaCl on Cu(111): if the spin steps do not shift to the predicted 8.5–13.5 meV range, the substrate-compression assumption is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the inelastic tunneling spectrum of a single Cr2Br6 molecule combines two coexisting excitation channels, and that the magnetic channel is a ferromagnetically coupled S=3 septet. At zero field the dI/dV spectrum shows a Fano peak with four inelastic tunneling spectroscopy (IETS) steps (E1–E4); under an out-of-plane magnetic field two additional steps (E0, E5) appear, and their energies grow linearly with field (slopes about 0.10 and 0.09 meV/T) while E1–E4 stay nearly constant. DFT identifies the 1.4 and 2.2 meV modes as hindered rotation and translation, matching E2 and E3. Multireference calculations with a 26-electron, 20-orbital active space place the S=3 state as ground state, and including spin-orbit coupling splits it into four levels with degeneracies 2-2-2-1, the lowest doubly degenerate. The paper attributes E1, E4, E0, and E5 to transitions within this spin manifold, noting that the calculated gaps (8.5–13.5 meV) are larger than the observed sub-meV-to-few-meV splittings and invoking a substrate-induced compression to reconcile the difference.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the Au(111) substrate compresses the calculated spin gaps (8.5–13.5 meV) down to the observed sub-meV-to-few-meV energies while preserving the 2-2-2-1 degeneracy pattern; the paper states this as a possibility but does not test it with a calculation that includes the substrate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 2-2-2-1 degeneracy pattern with a doubly degenerate ground state means the two Cr ions are ferromagnetically superexchange-coupled through a single near-90° Cr–Br–Cr bond, giving a minimal molecular realization of the coupling path in layered CrBr3.
  • In this class of molecules, the low-energy dI/dV spectrum cannot be read as purely magnetic; vibrational modes must be identified before assigning spin excitation energies.
  • Field-dependent IETS can distinguish spin excitations from non-magnetic ones by the slope of the step energy versus magnetic field, and the slope pattern maps the degeneracy structure of the ground manifold.
  • If the substrate-compression explanation is correct, quantitative predictions of spin excitations in adsorbed molecules require wavefunction calculations that include the metal surface, not just the free molecule.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive test would be to measure Cr2Br6 on a decoupling insulating film such as NaCl on Cu(111): if the spin steps move toward the calculated 8.5–13.5 meV energies, the Au(111) substrate compression is confirmed; if they remain sub-meV, the calculated gaps themselves are likely overestimated.
  • The observed field slopes near 0.10 meV/T are close to the value expected for simple g-factor Zeeman shifts, so a quantitative g-factor analysis of E0 and E5 could check the S=3 multiplet assignment against the field-dependent data.
  • The near-90° Cr–Br–Cr bridge is a two-center realization of the standard superexchange rules; varying the bridge angle or the halide could tune the sign and strength of the coupling, making Cr2Br6 a testbed for exchange control in molecule-based spin units.
  • If the doubly degenerate ground manifold is magnetically addressable, the molecule is a natural candidate for a surface-supported molecular spin qubit pair, although decoherence on a metal substrate remains an open question.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an STM/S study of individual Cr2Br6 molecules on Au(111), prepared by evaporating CrBr3. The authors observe a Fano resonance and several inelastic tunneling spectroscopy (IETS) steps, which they decompose into four zero-field modes and, under magnetic field, six modes. DFT calculations are used to assign two of the zero-field modes (E2 and E3) to hindered rotational and translational vibrations of the molecule, with calculated energies of 1.41 and 2.18 meV compared to fitted values of about 1.14 and 1.90 meV. DMRG and iCI calculations with a CAS(26,20) active space predict a septet (S = 3) ground state with ferromagnetic coupling between the two Cr ions, and the SOiCI and SOiCI(2) calculations split the septet into four levels with degeneracies described as 2-2-2-1. The remaining observed steps (E1, E4, E0, E5) are assigned to transitions within this SOC-split manifold, with E0 and E5 showing linear magnetic-field dependence with slopes near 2 μB. The central claim is that the molecule possesses a spin-degenerate ground state and that the complex spectrum arises from coexisting vibrational and magnetic excitations.

Significance. If the spin assignment is correct, this work is a significant advance: a well-defined dual-core trihalide molecule containing a single near-90° superexchange bridge is characterized by a combination of atomically resolved STM/S and state-of-the-art multi-reference calculations. The DMRG/iCI prediction of an S = 3 ground state is a nontrivial ab initio result, and the field-dependent slopes of E0 and E5 close to 2 μB provide a striking experimental fingerprint. The DFT-based vibrational assignment is also plausible. However, the credibility of the spin-excitation assignment currently rests on bridging a large quantitative discrepancy between the calculated and observed excitation energies, a bridge supported only by an untested substrate-compression assumption. The work is therefore of high interest but requires additional quantitative support before the spin-assignment claim can be accepted as established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Table 2 and Fig. 3i] The central assignment of E1, E4, E0, and E5 to transitions within the SOC-split septet is difficult to reconcile with the calculated excitation energies in Table 2. The SOiCI(2) calculation places the first and second excited doublets at 8.5-8.6 and 13.0-13.5 meV, whereas the fits in Fig. 3i give c1 ≈ 0.23 meV and c4 = c5 ≈ 2.39 meV, a discrepancy of about a factor of 37 for E1 and a factor of 5 for E4/E5. The manuscript's only response, in the paragraph beginning 'It is worth noting...', invokes charge transfer from the Au(111) substrate and substrate-induced band compression, citing Refs. 38 and 39, but no calculation that includes the substrate or charge transfer is presented. Moreover, a simple uniform compression cannot reconcile the relative spacings: the calculated gap between the ground and first excited doublet (8.5 meV) is larger than the gap from the first to the second excited doublet (4.5 meV), while the fitted values imply the opposite ratio (0.23 meV versus about 2.16 meV). The authors need to provide a quantitative model or a substrate-included calculation (for example, an embedded multi-reference calculation or a DFT+U calculation with explicit charge transfer) demonstrating that the substrate can compress the gaps by these factors and alter their relative sizes while preserving the degeneracy pattern. Until such a calculation is provided, the spin assignment is underdetermined.
  2. [Fig. 3j] The text states that the transition from ground state 1 to state 4 is 'neglected in this analysis and included in E0, as the energy difference between state 2 and state 4 is too small', while elsewhere E0 is described as the Zeeman splitting of the doubly degenerate ground state (states 1 and 2). These two descriptions are mutually inconsistent. If E0 is the 1→2 transition, its zero-field energy should be zero; if it is the 1→4 transition, its zero-field energy should equal the calculated first-excited gap of about 8.5 meV, not the fitted c0 ≈ 0.05 meV. The schematic in Fig. 3j should be revised to show unambiguously which pairs of eigenstates contribute to each fitted step, including whether the 1→4 transition is actually resolved in the data.
  3. [Fig. 3a and Supplementary Fig. 4] The six-mode fit is justified in the text by the statement that 'the theoretical calculations suggest that analyzing with six excitation modes is more reasonable.' However, the authors also state that E4 and E5 are 'too close to be clearly distinguished', and the fitted E0 has zero or near-zero energy at zero field (c0 ≈ 0.05 meV). The number of IETS steps is therefore not independently determined by the data. A statistical comparison between fits with five and six steps, without imposing the theoretical level pattern, should be reported (for example, an F-test or AIC comparison) to demonstrate that the additional E0 and E5 steps are real spectral features rather than artifacts of overfitting. This is directly relevant to the Zeeman slopes that constitute the main experimental evidence for spin excitations.
  4. [Table 2] The claim of a 2-2-2-1 degeneracy pattern is only approximate. In the SOiCI(2) results, states 3 and 4 are split by 0.1 meV and states 5 and 6 by 0.5 meV. The latter splitting is larger than the entire fitted E1 energy (c1 ≈ 0.23 meV) and an order of magnitude larger than the fitted c0. The authors should state whether these intra-doublet splittings are physical or numerical, and how the field-dependent assignment can treat these states as degenerate doublets when the calculated splittings are comparable to or larger than the observed IETS energies.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] In the abstract, 'the Cr2Br6, exhibits' contains a stray comma before the verb; it should read 'Cr2Br6 exhibits'.
  2. [Results, paragraph beginning 'It is worth noting...'] The sentence 'the energy resolution of the calculation method does reach the meV scale' appears to be a typo; presumably it should read 'does not reach the sub-meV scale'. As written, it does not explain the discrepancy it is meant to address.
  3. [Fig. 2 caption and Fig. 3i] The zero-field energies reported in the Fig. 2 caption (Δ1 ≈ 0.14 meV, Δ4 ≈ 2.5 meV) differ from the c1 and c4 values in Fig. 3i (0.23 meV and 2.39 meV) by amounts (0.09 meV and 0.11 meV) larger than the stated fitting error for ci (±0.05 meV). Please report a single consistent set of final zero-field energies and explain how the two fitting procedures were reconciled.
  4. [Results, vibrational assignment] The DFT vibrational calculations are reported to give three lowest-energy modes at 1.413, 2.180, and 2.984 meV, but only the first two are discussed in relation to observed steps. The 2.984 meV mode is not assigned to any spectral feature; the authors should clarify whether this mode is expected to be IETS-inactive or falls outside the measured energy window.
  5. [Fig. 3h caption] The caption states 'The dashed curve in h corresponds to the 1 T curve from g', but the dashed curve is difficult to identify in the figure; consider plotting it in a different color or using a more visible line style.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the spin-state degeneracy pattern and field-dependent splitting are independent of the IETS fitting by construction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular. The S = 3 ground state and the 2-2-2-1 SOC-split degeneracy pattern are produced by DMRG/iCI and SOiCI/SOiCI(2) calculations on the isolated molecule, with no input from the measured dI/dV step energies (Table 1 and Table 2). The experimental field-dependent splittings of E0 and E5 are free data fitted with linear functions, and the qualitative fact that some IETS steps grow with field while others do not is presented as a consistency check, not as a quantity forced by the ab initio values. There is no place where a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the calculated gaps (8.5-13.5 meV) are openly acknowledged to be much larger than the fitted values (0.23-2.39 meV), so the paper does not claim the energies were predicted. The decision to use six IETS modes because 'the theoretical calculations suggest that analyzing with six excitation modes is more reasonable' is a model-selection choice informed by theory, but it does not equate a prediction with an input; the fitted energies and slopes remain undetermined by the degeneracy count alone. The substrate-compression argument cites Refs. 38-39, which are external works, and this is a quantitative limitation or untested assumption rather than a circular step. No self-citation chain is load-bearing, and no equation reduces to its own input by construction. Thus the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted spectral parameters and on theoretical calculations that assume the active space, geometry, and an ad hoc substrate effect. The most fragile addition is the unquantified substrate compression of spin gaps.

free parameters (2)
  • Substrate-induced compression factor for spin excitation energies
    The paper attributes the mismatch between SOiCI(2) spin gaps (8.5-13.5 meV) and observed E1/E4 (0.2-2.5 meV) to substrate effects or limited resolution, but never quantifies the compression. This ad hoc factor is needed for the spin assignment to work.
  • IETS step energies and slopes from spectral fitting = c1=0.23, c2=1.14, c3=1.90, c4=2.39, c5=2.39 meV; a0=0.104, a5=0.087 meV/T
    These are obtained by fitting the dI/dV spectra with a Fano background plus four or six IETS steps. The central comparison with DFT and spin calculations depends on these fitted numbers.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The CAS(26,20) active space and TZP-DKH basis set describe the low-energy spin states of Cr2Br6 sufficiently.
    Invoked in the DMRG and iCI calculations; no convergence test against active space size is presented.
  • domain assumption The DFT-optimized geometry of Cr2Br6 on Au(111) is close to the experimental adsorption structure.
    The optimized structure is used for all vibrational and spin calculations; it is only indirectly validated by STM simulation.
  • ad hoc to paper The Au(111) substrate does not change the spin-state ordering or degeneracies, only the energy separations.
    This is required to reconcile calculated gaps with observed steps; the text offers it as a possible explanation without evidence.
  • domain assumption The observed dI/dV spectra can be decomposed as a sum of a Fano resonance and independent IETS steps.
    All spectral fitting relies on this line-shape model, whose validity is assumed rather than derived.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum spin excitations in a dual-core magnetic molecule." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UOFZB5UA

@misc{pith2026250507204,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum spin excitations in a dual-core magnetic molecule},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UOFZB5UA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07204}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetic excitations are important quantum phenomena in magnetic systems and have been widely studied in individual magnetic atoms and molecules as well as their assembled structures over the past few decades. Using scanning tunneling microscopy/spectroscopy (STM/S) combined with density functional theory (DFT) and the state-of-the-art ab initio wavefunction calculations, we investigated the properties of a novel dual-core Cr2Br6 molecule, which consists of two Cr ions coupled via superexchange through a single near-90{\deg} Cr-Br-Cr scissors bond. Under zero magnetic field, we observed a Fano peak with multi-steps through STS. When an external magnetic field is applied, some steps exhibit additional splitting, while others change little. We find that the Cr2Br6, exhibits a spin-degenerate ground state, and the complex peak splitting arises from the coexistence of vibrational and magnetic excitations in the molecule. Our results reveal rich quantum spin behavior in a well-defined two-core magnetic trihalide complex at the atomic scale, offering not only a minimal model for superexchange-coupled multi-spin quantum excitations but also a possible foundational unit for future molecule-based quantum functionalities.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Spin excitations and correlations in scanning tunneling spectroscopy

    Ternes, M. Spin excitations and correlations in scanning tunneling spectroscopy. New J. Phys. 17, 063016 (2015)

    2015

  2. [2]

    Wolf, S. A. et al. Spintronics: A Spin-Based Electronics Vision for the Future. Science 294, 1488–1495 (2001)

    work page 2001

  3. [3]

    A., Wiebe, J., Chilian, B

    Khajetoorians, A. A., Wiebe, J., Chilian, B. & Wiesendanger, R. Realizing All-Spin–Based Logic Operations Atom by Atom. Science 332, 1062–1064 (2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    & Otte, A

    Spinelli, A., Bryant, B., Delgado, F., Fernández -Rossier, J. & Otte, A. F. Imaging of spin waves in atomically designed nanomagnets. Nat. Mater. 13, 782–785 (2014)

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    Toskovic, R. et al. Atomic spin-chain realization of a model for quantum criticality. Nat. Phys. 12, 656–660 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Figgins, J. et al. Quantum engineered Kondo lattices. Nat. Commun. 10, 5588 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Nadj-Perge, S. et al. Observation of Majorana fermions in ferromagnetic atomic chains on a superconductor. Science 346, 602–607 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Kim, H. et al. Toward tailoring Majorana bound states in artificially constructed magnetic atom chains on elemental superconductors. Sci. Adv. 4, eaar5251 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Schneider, L. et al. Precursors of Majorana modes and their length -dependent energy oscillations probed at both ends of atomic Shiba chains. Nat. Nanotechnol. 17, 384–389 (2022)

    2022

  2. [10]

    J., Gupta, J

    Heinrich, A. J., Gupta, J. A., Lutz, C. P. & Eigler, D. M. Single-atom spin-flip spectroscopy. Science 306, 466–9 (2004)

    2004

  3. [11]

    Ternes, M., Heinrich, A. J. & Schneider, W.-D. Spectroscopic manifestations of the Kondo effect on single adatoms. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 21, 053001 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    Probing magnetic excitations and correlations in single and coupled spin systems with scanning tunneling spectroscopy

    Ternes, M. Probing magnetic excitations and correlations in single and coupled spin systems with scanning tunneling spectroscopy. Prog. Surf. Sci. 92, 83–115 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    F., Lutz, C

    Hirjibehedin, C. F., Lutz, C. P. & Heinrich, A. J. Spin coupling in engineered atomic structures. Science 312, 1021–4 (2006)

    2006

  6. [14]

    Otte, A. F. et al. The role of magnetic anisotropy in the Kondo effect. Nat. Phys. 4, 847– 850 (2008)

    2008

  7. [15]

    Néel, N. et al. Two-Site Kondo Effect in Atomic Chains. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 106804 (2011)

    2011

  8. [16]

    Zhou, L. et al. Strength and directionality of surface Ruderman –Kittel–Kasuya–Yosida interaction mapped on the atomic scale. Nat. Phys. 6, 187–191 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Oberg, J. C. et al. Control of single-spin magnetic anisotropy by exchange coupling. Nat. Nanotechnol. 9, 64–68 (2014)

    2014

  10. [18]

    Spinelli, A., Rebergen, M. P. & Otte, A. A. F. Atomically crafted spin lattices as model systems for quantum magnetism. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 27, 243203 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Su, J., Lyu, P. & Lu, J. Atomically Precise Imprinting π-Magnetism in Nanographenes via Probe Chemistry. Precis. Chem. 1, 565–575 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    Zhao, Y . et al. Quantum nanomagnets in on-surface metal-free porphyrin chains. Nat. Chem. 15, 53–60 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Mishra, S. et al. Observation of fractional edge excitations in nanographene spin chains. Nature 598, 287–292 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Zhao, C. et al. Tunable topological phases in nanographene -based spin -1/2 alternating - exchange Heisenberg chains. Nat. Nanotechnol. (2024) doi:10.1038/s41565-024-01805-z

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    -D., Li, X

    Lv, W., Han, S. -D., Li, X. -Y . & Wang, G.-M. Coordination chemistry and magnetic properties of polynuclear metal clusters/cluster -based frameworks with tripodal alcohol ligands. Coord. Chem. Rev. 495, 215376 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Lischka, H. et al. Multireference Approaches for Excited States of Molecules. Chem. Rev. 118, 7293–7361 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    White, S. R. Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups. Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863–2866 (1992)

    1992

  18. [26]

    Chan, G. K.-L. & Head-Gordon, M. Highly correlated calculations with a polynomial cost algorithm: A study of the density matrix renormalization group. J. Chem. Phys. 116, 4462– 4476 (2002)

    2002

  19. [27]

    Smith, J. E. T., Mussard, B., Holmes, A. A. & Sharma, S. Cheap and Near Exact CASSCF with Large Active Spaces. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 5468–5478 (2017)

    2017

  20. [28]

    H., Thom, A

    Booth, G. H., Thom, A. J. W. & Alavi, A. Fermion Monte Carlo without fixed nodes: A game of life, death, and annihilation in Slater determinant space. J. Chem. Phys. 131, 054106 (2009)

    2009

  21. [29]

    These methods enable the investigation of the electronic structures of multi-nuclear systems, such as exploring the low -lying excited states of iron -sulfur clusters 30,31 and analyzing the superexchange mechanism in cuprates with corner -sharing CuO 4 plaquettes32. For such ...

  22. [30]

    & Liu, W

    Guo, Y ., Zhang, N., Lei, Y . & Liu, W. iCISCF: An Iterative Configuration Interaction-Based Multiconfigurational Self -Consistent Field Theory for Large Active Spaces. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17, 7545–7561 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    & Chan, G

    Sharma, S., Sivalingam, K., Neese, F. & Chan, G. K. -L. Low-energy spectrum of iron – sulfur clusters directly from many -particle quantum mechanics. Nat. Chem. 6, 927–933 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    & Chan, G

    Li, Z., Guo, S., Sun, Q. & Chan, G. K. -L. Electronic landscape of the P -cluster of nitrogenase as revealed through many -electron quantum wavefunction simulations. Nat. Chem. 11, 1026–1033 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    A., Li Manni, G., Sharma, S., Gunnarsson, O

    Bogdanov, N. A., Li Manni, G., Sharma, S., Gunnarsson, O. & Alavi, A. Enhancement of superexchange due to synergetic breathing and hopping in corner -sharing cuprates. Nat. Phys. 18, 190–195 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Cherkez, V . V . et al. Self-ordered nanoporous lattice formed by chlorine atoms on Au(111). Phys. Rev. B 93, 045432 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Di Giovannantonio, M. et al. On-Surface Growth Dynamics of Graphene Nanoribbons: The Role of Halogen Functionalization. Acs Nano 12, 74–81 (2018)

    2018

  28. [36]

    Wang, H., Fan, F., Zhu, S. & Wu, H. Doping enhanced ferromagnetism and induced half - metallicity in CrI 3 monolayer. EPL Europhys. Lett. 114, 47001 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    Sheng, S. et al. Launching Coherent Acoustic Phonon Wave Packets with Local Femtosecond Coulomb Forces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 043001 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    & Morgenstern, K

    Gawronski, H., Mehlhorn, M. & Morgenstern, K. Imaging Phonon Excitation with Atomic Resolution. Science 319, 930–933 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    He, X. et al. Selective self-assembly of 2,3-diaminophenazine molecules on MoSe2 mirror twin boundaries. Nat. Commun. 10, 2847 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Kezilebieke, S. et al. Topological superconductivity in a van der Waals heterostructure. Nature 588, 424–428 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Horcas, I. et al. WSXM : A software for scanning probe microscopy and a tool for nanotechnology. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 78, 013705 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    & Furthmüller, J

    Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Comput. Mater. Sci. 6, 15–50 (1996)

    1996

  35. [43]

    & Furthmüller, J

    Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169–11186 (1996)

    1996

  36. [44]

    P., Burke, K

    Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996)

    1996

  37. [45]

    & Krieg, H

    Grimme, S., Antony, J., Ehrlich, S. & Krieg, H. A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT -D) for the 94 elements H-Pu. J. Chem. Phys. 132, 154104 (2010)

    2010

  38. [46]

    E., Canal Neto, A., Camiletti, G

    Jorge, F. E., Canal Neto, A., Camiletti, G. G. & Machado, S. F. Contracted Gaussian basis sets for Douglas –Kroll–Hess calculations: Estimating scalar relativistic effects of some atomic and molecular properties. J. Chem. Phys. 130, 064108 (2009)

    2009

  39. [47]

    Ideas of relativistic quantum chemistry

    Liu, W. Ideas of relativistic quantum chemistry. Mol. Phys. 108, 1679–1706 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    Relativistic Hamiltonians for Chemistry: A Primer

    Saue, T. Relativistic Hamiltonians for Chemistry: A Primer. ChemPhysChem 12, 3077– 3094 (2011)

    2011

  41. [49]

    & Reiher, M

    Peng, D. & Reiher, M. Exact decoupling of the relativistic Fock operator. Theor. Chem. Acc. 131, 1081 (2012)

    2012

  42. [50]

    & Liu, W

    Li, Z., Xiao, Y . & Liu, W. On the spin separation of algebraic two-component relativistic Hamiltonians: Molecular properties. J. Chem. Phys. 141, 054111 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    Chan, G. K. -L. & Sharma, S. The Density Matrix Renormalization Group in Quantum Chemistry. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 62, 465–481 (2011)

    2011

  44. [52]

    & Hoffmann, M

    Zhang, N., Liu, W. & Hoffmann, M. R. Further Development of iCIPT2 for Strongly Correlated Electrons. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17, 949–964 (2021). Acknowledgement: This work was partially supported by the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI) from the Japan Society fo...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.