Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 64 references

Local Spin Excitations Mediate Quasiparticle Breakdown in the Orbital-Selective Mott Phase

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that local spin excitations generated by Hund's coupling destroy coherent quasiparticles in the orbital-selective Mott phase.

desk verdict Plausible mechanism, but the central resonance rests on a three-bath-site ED calculation with no convergence check; worth refereeing if that is fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05556 v1 pith:VQOXRF3G submitted 2026-08-06 cond-mat.str-el

Yuekun Niu , Yu Ni , Jia-Ming Wang , Zhong-Yi Lu , Yun Song , Shiping Feng This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el PACS 71.30.+h71.27.+a71.10.-t
keywords orbital-selectiveMottphaseHund'scouplinglocalspinexcitationsquasiparticlebreakdowndynamicalmean-fieldtheorytwo-qubitfidelitytwo-bandHubbardmodelinterorbital
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

Orbital-selective Mott phases are usually read as a simple coexistence: one band of electrons localized, the other itinerant, with the two effectively decoupled. The paper argues this picture is incomplete, and that the spin-flip and Ising-type pieces of Hund's coupling create local spin excitations—on-site electron-hole pairs across the two spin channels—that sit exactly at the Fermi energy inside the OSMP. These excitations dynamically couple the two orbitals, transfer spectral weight, and destroy well-defined quasiparticles. The quantitative fingerprint is a local two-qubit fidelity that takes non-half-integer values instead of the ideal 0 and 0.5. If the mechanism is right, the OSMP is an emergent coupled state rather than a decoupled band mixture, with direct consequences for understanding Hund metals and photoemission anomalies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the local spin-excitation spectral function $A^{\mathrm{LSE}}_\alpha(\omega) = -\frac{1}{\pi}\, \mathrm{Im}\langle b_\alpha^\dagger (\omega - H + i\delta)^{-1} b_\alpha\rangle$, built from the composite spin-flip operator $b_\alpha^\dagger = d^\dagger_{\alpha\downarrow} d_{\alpha\uparrow}$, which creates a local electron-hole pair in orbital $\alpha$ across the spin channel. Equation-of-motion analysis of the impurity Green's functions shows that $G_1(\omega)$ and $G_2(\omega)$ depend on the other orbital's spin-flip correlation $\langle d^\dagger_{\alpha\downarrow}d_{\alpha\uparrow}\rangle$ through $J_{sf}$ and on its occupations through $J_z$; this is the formal route by which LSEs couple the charge dynamics of the two bands. The numerical vehicle is DMFT with a Lanczos exact-diagonalization impurity solver on a Bethe lattice, with the local two-qubit fidelity (LTQF) as the quantitative order parameter distinguishing decoupled ($0$ or $0.5$) from coupled (non-half-integer) regimes.

What would settle it

Repeat the DMFT calculation at $U=3.5$, $J=U/4$, $R=0.5$ (deep inside the OSMP) with bath sizes $n_b=4$ and $n_b=5$ at the same $\beta$, keeping the same broadening convention, and check whether the LSE spectral function still has a peak exactly at $\omega=0$; if the zero-energy resonance moves or disappears, the central claim is not supported. A complementary check is to compute the same spectra with a different impurity solver (for example, continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo) and see whether the Fermi-level LSE peak survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that local spin excitations generated by the spin-flip ($J_{sf}$) and Ising-type ($J_z$) terms of Hund's coupling are the microscopic cause of quasiparticle breakdown in the orbital-selective Mott phase. Within DMFT for the half-filled two-band Hubbard model on a Bethe lattice, the LSE spectral function $A^{\mathrm{LSE}}_\alpha(\omega)$ shows a sharp resonance precisely at $\omega=0$ only inside the OSMP: the wide band's resonance sits inside the narrow band's Mott gap, and the narrow band's resonance coexists with the wide band's coherent quasiparticle peak. The LSEs act as dynamical intermediaries that renormalize quasiparticle lifetimes and binding energies, giving the nominally insulating narrow band partial itinerant weight and depleting the wide band's coherence. Turning off $J_{sf}$ and $J_z$ (keeping only pair hopping) eliminates the LSE spectra entirely, restores exact $L_o=0$ and $L_o=0.5$ local two-qubit fidelity values, and fully decouples the two bands. The paper concludes that the OSMP is therefore not a coexistence of decoupled subbands but an emergent many-body state, with non-half-integer LTQF values as the quantitative signature of LSE-mediated breakdown.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that a Lanczos impurity solver with only three bath sites per orbital and an inverse temperature of 512 resolves a real, sharp local-spin-excitation resonance exactly at the Fermi level inside the OSMP, with no convergence check in bath size and no stated broadening; if that resonance is a finite-bath artifact, the claimed coincidence between LSE weight and the LTQF anomaly carries no causal weight.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The OSMP should be viewed as a dynamically coupled state, not two effectively independent subband systems.
  • Switching off the spin-flip and Ising-type components of Hund's coupling removes the LSEs and restores the decoupled OSMP, shifting the Mott critical points to larger $U$.
  • Non-half-integer LTQF values are a direct quantitative signature of quasiparticle breakdown, not a generic property of the OSMP.
  • The same LSE channel can account for suppressed quasiparticle coherence and Fermi-surface reconstruction reported in Hund metals and in ARPES on $V_2O_3$ and $FeTe_{1-x}Se_x$.
  • LSE spectral weight concentrates at the Fermi level only inside the OSMP, so the breakdown is phase-selective and tied to the Mott transition.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If correct, the same mechanism predicts that any probe sensitive to local spin-flip excitations (resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, neutron scattering) should see a low-energy spin-excitation mode inside the Mott gap of the narrow band in OSMP materials, not just in the model.
  • A testable extension: the LSE-induced quasiparticle scattering rate in the wide band should track the weight of the narrow band's LSE peak at $\omega=0$ across the whole OSMP window, giving a quantitative relation between the two bands' spectra.
  • The distinction the paper draws between Ising-only and full Hund's coupling suggests that materials with more isotropic Hund's exchange should show stronger interorbital coupling than those with Ising anisotropy, a comparison that could be checked by alloying or pressure studies.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies a half-filled two-band Hubbard model on the Bethe lattice using DMFT with a Lanczos exact-diagonalization impurity solver (n_b = 3 bath sites per orbital, beta = 512). It introduces a local spin excitation (LSE) spectral function A_LSE(ω) and reports a sharp LSE resonance at the Fermi level inside the orbital-selective Mott phase (OSMP), together with non-half-integer values of the authors' local two-qubit fidelity (LTQF). The authors argue that LSEs generated by the spin-flip (J_sf) and Ising (J_z) components of Hund's coupling dynamically couple the wide and narrow bands, causing quasiparticle breakdown; removing J_sf and J_z restores a decoupled OSMP with quantized LTQF. The central claim is that the OSMP is not a coexistence of decoupled bands but a state whose charge dynamics are mediated by local spin excitations.

Significance. If the central numerical observation is robust, the paper offers a concrete microscopic mechanism for quasiparticle breakdown in the OSMP and a quantitative diagnostic (the LTQF anomaly) tied to that mechanism. The phase-selective evolution of the LSE weight across the metal-OSMP-insulator transitions is a clean falsifiable prediction, and the component-wise comparison of Hund's coupling terms is a useful organizing principle. However, the current evidence is not fully convincing: the sharp Fermi-level LSE resonance rests on a very small impurity bath with no convergence check, and the analytical support in the supplement relies on a Hartree-Fock truncation that, as written, yields a vanishing interorbital coupling in the paramagnetic state. The paper is therefore potentially significant but needs substantial technical strengthening before the causal claim can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Models and methods; Fig. 1b,c; Eq. (5)] The central LSE resonance at ω = 0 is computed with the Lanczos ED impurity solver using only n_b = 3 bath sites per orbital and beta = 512, with no convergence check in n_b and no reported broadening parameter for the plotted spectra. ED produces a discrete pole spectrum, and with three bath sites per orbital the low-energy region is severely under-resolved; a peak at the Fermi level can be a single finite-bath pole rather than a true continuum resonance. Because the entire causal claim is pinned to this resonance, the authors must show that its position and weight are stable as n_b is increased (e.g., n_b = 4, 5, 6) and must specify the broadening η used in ρ_α(ω) and δ in Eq. (5).
  2. [Supplemental Material, Eqs. (8)-(9)] The analytical support for interorbital coupling states that G_1(ω) depends on J_sf ⟨d†_{2↓}d_{2↑}⟩, but in the paramagnetic, spin-rotationally invariant state treated throughout the paper this expectation value vanishes by symmetry. At the Hartree-Fock level, the advertised dynamical link is therefore exactly zero, so the equation-of-motion derivation does not establish a nonzero LSE-mediated coupling. The supplement acknowledges the Hartree-Fock truncation but does not resolve this contradiction; the authors should either provide a symmetry-preserving higher-order closure or explicitly state that the HF expression is only a schematic and cannot be used as quantitative support.
  3. [Fig. 3 and Models and methods] The causal test in Fig. 3 compares J_sf = J_z = U/4, J_ph = 0 with J_sf = J_z = 0, J_ph = U/4, but these two cases have very different critical couplings (U_c1 = 3.74 vs. 7.21) and the second case violates spin-rotational invariance because U = U′ + 2J with only J_ph retained does not satisfy the Kanamori symmetry conditions. The disappearance of LSEs and restoration of half-integer LTQF values may therefore reflect a different interaction point or a broken-symmetry artifact rather than the causal role of the LSEs. A controlled test should vary J_sf and J_z at fixed U and fixed total J, or at least compare both cases at the same ratio U/U_c.
  4. [Eq. (5); Figs. 1-3; Refs. [41,42]] The LSE operator b†_α = d†_{α↓}d_{α↑} is precisely the spin-flip operator that appears in the J_sf term, and the LTQF is the authors' own diagnostic introduced in their previous work. Consequently, showing that J_sf generates spectral weight in the J_sf spectral function is partly definitional, and the correlation between LSE weight at ω = 0 and the LTQF anomaly does not by itself establish a causal mechanism. The claim that LSEs mediate quasiparticle breakdown needs an independent test, for example by showing that the LSE propagator enters the charge self-energy through a two-particle vertex in a controlled approximation, or by tuning the LSE energy away from the Fermi level at fixed J_sf and observing the predicted restoration of coherence.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Models and methods] The text states 'We perform calculations at zero temperature, where β is treated as a large but finite parameter'; this is contradictory, and the authors should state that they work at low but finite temperature and comment on the convergence of β = 512.
  2. [Eq. (5) and DOS definition] The broadening δ in Eq. (5) and η in the DOS definition are never assigned numerical values, so the plotted spectra cannot be reproduced or compared quantitatively; please specify both and describe any smoothing procedure.
  3. [Reference [57]] The citation to the supplemental material is vague; please cite the specific equations (e.g., Eqs. (S8)-(S9)) where the Green's function equations of motion are derived.
  4. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption states 'The LSE peaks at the Fermi level in the NB Mott gap' but this applies to panel (c) only; the WB LSE resonance in panel (b) lies at the Fermi level but not inside a Mott gap, so the wording should be clarified.
  5. [Eq. (2)] The pair-hopping term J_ph is written with spin indices that may not match the standard Kanamori form; please verify the operator ordering and the summation convention.
  6. [Throughout] There are several grammatical slips, e.g., 'the spin-flip and Ising-type components constitute' (subject-verb agreement) and 'signaling the emergence of the interorbital coupling'; a careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity: the LSE observable is the spin-flip operator of the Hamiltonian, and the LTQF diagnostic is imported from the authors' prior work, but the zero-energy resonance and quasiparticle breakdown are independent numerical results.

  1. self definitional [Eq. (5) and Fig. 3, 'Key Role of J_sf and J_z']
    "we introduce the LSE spectral function defined as A_LSE_α(ω) = −(1/π) Im ⟨b†_α 1/(ω−H+iδ) b_α⟩ ... the composite operator b†_α = d†_{α↓}d_{α↑}. It should be emphasized that this operator b†_α explicitly describes a local spin-flip excitation. ... (ii) With J_ph = U/4 and J_sf = J_z = 0, the LSE spectra vanish entirely."

    The observable chosen to 'explain' the interorbital coupling is literally the spin-flip operator d†_{α↓}d_{α↑} that the J_sf term of the Hamiltonian contains. Setting J_sf=0 therefore removes the very source term whose spectral function is being measured, so the conclusion that J_sf and J_z are 'essential for generating LSEs' is partially a restatement of the definition of the observable rather than an independent dynamical test. The genuinely nontrivial content — the resonance precisely at ω=0 and the associated quasiparticle weight redistribution — is not forced by construction, which is why this is only a partial circularity.

  2. self citation load bearing [Introduction, paragraph 1]
    "In recent work, we introduced the local two-qubit fidelity (LTQF), a quantitative metric ... For a conventional decoupled OSMP, the LTQF is restricted to these integer and half-integer values [41, 42]. By contrast, when the full Hund's coupling is retained, we identified non-half-integer LTQF values within the OSMP and demonstrated that the NB exhibits a quantum-entangled state, providing direct quantitative evidence for interorbital coupling in the charge degrees of freedom [42]."

    The paper's central quantitative signature of interorbital coupling — non-half-integer LTQF values — is interpreted through a criterion established in the authors' own prior papers [41,42]. The present manuscript does not independently calibrate this diagnostic against an external benchmark; it inherits the meaning of the anomaly from a self-citation. This is load-bearing because the causal claim connecting LSEs to quasiparticle breakdown is anchored to that inherited criterion. It is not fully circular, however, because the LTQF values themselves are freshly computed from the DMFT Green's functions rather than being fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central numerical discovery — sharp LSE resonances at the Fermi level inside the OSMP, vanishing when J_sf/J_z are removed — is a genuine calculation, not a fit or a renamed input. The finite-bath (n_b=3) and unspecified-broadening concerns raised by the skeptic are correctness and robustness issues, not circularity, and therefore do not by themselves inflate the circularity score. The main circularity flavor comes from two places. First, the LSE spectral function is defined through the same spin-flip operator that appears in the J_sf interaction, so showing that removing J_sf removes LSE weight is partially a tautology; the physical interpretation that these LSEs 'mediate' the breakdown is not fully separated from the Hamiltonian's built-in spin-flip coupling. Second, the LTQF metric and its meaning as a measure of interorbital coupling are imported from the authors' previous work, making the central diagnostic self-referential rather than externally anchored. Neither step reduces the whole derivation to its inputs: the zero-energy resonance, the phase-selective evolution of LSE weight, and the quasiparticle broadening are independent numerical outputs. The score of 4 reflects 'some self-citation and a partly definitional observable, while the central claim retains independent content.'

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

The central claim rests on the DMFT mapping, on the numerical fidelity of the small-bath Lanczos solver, on the HF-truncated equation-of-motion picture, on the authors' LTQF diagnostic, and on the comparability of the component-knockout calculations. No free parameters are fitted to experimental data, but the model parameters J/U = 1/4 and R = 0.5 are choices, and the numerical bath size and temperature are fixed without convergence checks.

free parameters (4)
  • J/U ratio = 1/4
    Set by hand across all DMFT runs; no scan over J/U is presented, so the generality of the LSE mechanism across Hund coupling strengths is untested.
  • Bandwidth ratio R = t2/t1 = 0.5
    Chosen bandwidth ratio; the OSMP boundaries depend strongly on R, and no R-dependence is shown.
  • Bath size n_b = 3
    Numerical ED parameter; the central LSE-at-Fermi-level observation may depend on bath discretization.
  • Inverse temperature beta = 512
    ED parameter used to approximate zero temperature; results may depend on this discretization in imaginary time.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math DMFT becomes exact in infinite dimensions; the Bethe lattice maps to the self-consistent single-impurity model.
    Refs. [54-56] invoked in Models and methods.
  • domain assumption Lanczos ED with n_b = 3 accurately approximates the exact impurity spectral functions including sharp LSE resonances.
    No convergence check in bath size or broadening is provided; the central finding depends on this.
  • ad hoc to paper Hartree-Fock decoupling of the equations of motion is a valid guide to the interorbital coupling mechanism.
    Supplement II; the derivation that G1(omega) depends on <d†2↓ d2↑> is made at HF level, which is uncontrolled and does not yield the sharp LSE peak at omega = 0.
  • ad hoc to paper Non-half-integer LTQF values imply interorbital coupling and quasiparticle breakdown.
    LTQF defined and interpreted in the authors' prior papers [41,42]; this is assumed as the diagnostic linking LSEs to breakdown.
  • domain assumption Removing J_sf and J_z while keeping U = U' + 2J produces a comparable OSMP that isolates the role of these terms.
    The comparison in Fig. 3 changes the SU(2) symmetry of the model and shifts Uc1/Uc2 from 3.74/2.58 to 7.21/4.00, so the two OSMP windows are not on the same footing.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Local Spin Excitations Mediate Quasiparticle Breakdown in the Orbital-Selective Mott Phase." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VQOXRF3G

@misc{pith2026260805556,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Local Spin Excitations Mediate Quasiparticle Breakdown in the Orbital-Selective Mott Phase},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VQOXRF3G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05556}
}
read the original abstract

The orbital-selective Mott phase (OSMP) is commonly described as a coexistence of localized and itinerant electrons within effectively decoupled orbitals, but emerging evidence for quasiparticle breakdown points to physics beyond this picture, whose microscopic origin remains unknown. Using dynamical mean-field theory for the two-band Hubbard model, we show that the spin-flip and Ising-type components of Hund's coupling generate local spin excitations (LSEs). These LSEs couple electrons between different orbitals, renormalize quasiparticle lifetimes and binding energies, and thereby destroy well-defined quasiparticles in the OSMP. Removing these two components of Hund's coupling restores coherent quasiparticle behavior and fully decouples the charge dynamics of the two bands. Our results therefore identify electronic coupling to LSEs as the fundamental mechanism driving quasiparticle breakdown within the OSMP.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05556 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Evolution of the LSE spectra across the Mott tran [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Role of Hund’s coupling components in generating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic diagram of LSE bound states. WB is represented by a thicker red line and NB by a thinner blue line. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Effect of the Coulomb interaction U for the excitation spectrum of LSE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    de’ Medici, S

    L. de’ Medici, S. R. Hassan, M. Capone, and X. Dai, Orbital-selective mott transition out of band degeneracy lifting, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 126401 (2009)

    work page 2009

  2. [2]

    Georges, L

    A. Georges, L. d. Medici, and J. Mravlje, Strong correla- tions from hund’s coupling, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics4, 137 (2013)

    2013

  3. [3]

    Anisimov, I

    V. Anisimov, I. Nekrasov, D. Kondakov, T. Rice, and M. Sigrist, Orbital-selective mott-insulator transition in Ca2−xSrxRuO4, The European Physical Journal B25, 191 (2002)

    work page 2002

  4. [4]

    N´ u˜ nez Fern´ andez, G

    Y. N´ u˜ nez Fern´ andez, G. Kotliar, and K. Hallberg, Emer- gent low-energy bound states in the two-orbital hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B97, 121113 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Hallberg and Y

    K. Hallberg and Y. N´ u˜ nez Fern´ andez, Subbands in the doped two-orbital kanamori-hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B102, 245138 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Song, X.-C

    Z.-Y. Song, X.-C. Jiang, and Y.-Z. Zhang, Orbitally se- lective breakdown of the fermi liquid and simultaneous enhancement of metallic and insulating states in corre- lated multiband systems with spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B102, 245124 (2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Y. Wu, Y. Fang, P. Li, Z. Xiao, H. Zheng, H. Yuan, C. Cao, Y.-f. Yang, and Y. Liu, Bandwidth-control orbital-selective delocalization of 4f electrons in epitaxial ce films, Nature Communications12, 2520 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Herbrych, M

    J. Herbrych, M. ´Sroda, G. Alvarez, M. Mierzejewski, and E. Dagotto, Interaction-induced topological phase transi- tion and majorana edge states in low-dimensional orbital- selective mott insulators, Nature Communications12, 2955 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    E. A. Stepanov and S. Biermann, Can orbital-selective n´ eel transitions survive strong nonlocal electronic corre- lations?, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 226501 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    M. Kim, S. Choi, W. H. Brito, and G. Kotliar, Orbital- selective mott transition effects and nontrivial topol- ogy of iron chalcogenide, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 136504 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    F. B. Kugler and G. Kotliar, Is the orbital-selective mott phase stable against interorbital hopping?, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 096403 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Bouadim, G

    K. Bouadim, G. G. Batrouni, and R. T. Scalettar, De- terminant quantum monte carlo study of the orbitally selective mott transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 226402 (2009)

    2009

  5. [13]

    A. Koga, N. Kawakami, T. M. Rice, and M. Sigrist, Orbital-selective mott transitions in the degenerate hub- bard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 216402 (2004)

    2004

  6. [14]

    Liebsch, Mott transitions in multiorbital systems, Phys

    A. Liebsch, Mott transitions in multiorbital systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 226401 (2003)

    2003

  7. [15]

    Shimoyamada, K

    A. Shimoyamada, K. Ishizaka, S. Tsuda, S. Nakatsuji, Y. Maeno, and S. Shin, Strong mass renormalization at a local momentum space in multiorbital Ca1.8Sr0.2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 086401 (2009)

    2009

  8. [16]

    Neupane, P

    M. Neupane, P. Richard, Z.-H. Pan, Y.-M. Xu, R. Jin, D. Mandrus, X. Dai, Z. Fang, Z. Wang, and H. Ding, Observation of a novel orbital selective mott transition in Ca1.8Sr0.2RuO4, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 097001 (2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    Lo Vecchio, J

    I. Lo Vecchio, J. D. Denlinger, O. Krupin, B. J. Kim, P. A. Metcalf, S. Lupi, J. W. Allen, and A. Lanzara, Fermi surface of metallic V 2O3 from angle-resolved pho- toemission: Mid-level filling ofe π g bands, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 166401 (2016)

    2016

  10. [18]

    S. Y. Kim, M.-C. Lee, G. Han, M. Kratochvilova, S. Yun, S. J. Moon, C. Sohn, J.-G. Park, C. Kim, and T. W. Noh, Spectroscopic studies on the metal–insulator transition mechanism in correlated materials, Advanced Materials 30, 1704777 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    Huang, R

    J. Huang, R. Yu, Z. Xu, J.-X. Zhu, J. S. Oh, Q. Jiang, M. Wang, H. Wu, T. Chen, J. D. Denlinger, S.-K. Mo, M. Hashimoto, M. Michiardi, T. M. Pedersen, S. Gorovikov, S. Zhdanovich, A. Damascelli, G. Gu, P. Dai, J.-H. Chu, D. Lu, Q. Si, R. J. Birgeneau, and M. Yi, Correlation-dr...

    2022

  12. [20]

    Haule and G

    K. Haule and G. Kotliar, Coherence–incoherence crossover in the normal state of iron oxypnictides and im- portance of hund’s rule coupling, New Journal of Physics 11, 025021 (2009)

    2009

  13. [21]

    Werner, M

    P. Werner, M. Casula, T. Miyake, F. Aryasetiawan, A. J. Millis, and S. Biermann, Satellites and large doping and temperature dependence of electronic properties in hole- doped BaFe2As2, Nature Physics8, 331 (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Kuneˇ s, V

    J. Kuneˇ s, V. Kˇ r´ apek, N. Parragh, G. Sangiovanni, A. Toschi, and A. V. Kozhevnikov, Spin state of nega- tive charge-transfer material SrCoO 3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 117206 (2012)

    2012

  15. [23]

    Z. P. Yin, K. Haule, and G. Kotliar, Kinetic frustration and the nature of the magnetic and paramagnetic states in iron pnictides and iron chalcogenides, Nature Materi- als10, 932 (2011)

    2011

  16. [24]

    de’ Medici, J

    L. de’ Medici, J. Mravlje, and A. Georges, Janus-faced influence of hund’s rule coupling in strongly correlated materials, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 256401 (2011)

    2011

  17. [25]

    Huang, Y

    L. Huang, Y. Wang, and X. Dai, Pressure-driven or- bital selective insulator-to-metal transition and spin- state crossover in cubic CoO, Phys. Rev. B85, 245110 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    K. M. Stadler, Z. P. Yin, J. von Delft, G. Kotliar, and A. Weichselbaum, Dynamical mean-field theory plus nu- merical renormalization-group study of spin-orbital sepa- ration in a three-band hund metal, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 136401 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Biermann, L

    S. Biermann, L. de’ Medici, and A. Georges, Non-fermi- liquid behavior and double-exchange physics in orbital- selective mott systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 206401 (2005)

    2005

  20. [28]

    de’ Medici, Hund’s coupling and its key role in tun- ing multiorbital correlations, Phys

    L. de’ Medici, Hund’s coupling and its key role in tun- ing multiorbital correlations, Phys. Rev. B83, 205112 (2011)

    2011

  21. [29]

    Liebsch, Single mott transition in the multiorbital hubbard model, Phys

    A. Liebsch, Single mott transition in the multiorbital hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B70, 165103 (2004)

    2004

  22. [30]

    Ferrero, F

    M. Ferrero, F. Becca, M. Fabrizio, and M. Capone, Dy- 6 namical behavior across the mott transition of two bands with different bandwidths, Phys. Rev. B72, 205126 (2005)

    2005

  23. [31]

    Georges, G

    A. Georges, G. Kotliar, W. Krauth, and M. J. Rozen- berg, Dynamical mean-field theory of strongly correlated fermion systems and the limit of infinite dimensions, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 13 (1996)

    1996

  24. [32]

    Kotliar, S

    G. Kotliar, S. Y. Savrasov, K. Haule, V. S. Oudovenko, O. Parcollet, and C. A. Marianetti, Electronic struc- ture calculations with dynamical mean-field theory, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 865 (2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    Vollhardt, Dynamical mean-field theory for correlated electrons, Annalen der Physik524, 1 (2012)

    D. Vollhardt, Dynamical mean-field theory for correlated electrons, Annalen der Physik524, 1 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    Z. P. Yin, K. Haule, and G. Kotliar, Fractional power-law behavior and its origin in iron-chalcogenide and ruthen- ate superconductors: Insights from first-principles calcu- lations, Phys. Rev. B86, 195141 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Zhang, H

    Y.-Z. Zhang, H. Lee, H.-Q. Lin, C.-Q. Wu, H. O. Jeschke, and R. Valent ´ ı, General mechanism for orbital selective phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B85, 035123 (2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    Dagotto, A

    E. Dagotto, A. Moreo, A. Nicholson, Q. Luo, S. Liang, and X. Zhang, Properties of the multiorbital hubbard models for the iron-based superconductors, Frontiers of Physics6, 379 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    de’Medici, A

    L. de’Medici, A. Georges, and S. Biermann, Orbital- selective mott transition in multiband systems: Slave- spin representation and dynamical mean-field theory, Phys. Rev. B72, 205124 (2005)

    2005

  30. [38]

    Strigari, T

    F. Strigari, T. Willers, Y. Muro, K. Yutani, T. Taka- batake, Z. Hu, S. Agrestini, C.-Y. Kuo, Y.-Y. Chin, H.- J. Lin, T. W. Pi, C. T. Chen, E. Weschke, E. Schierle, A. Tanaka, M. W. Haverkort, L. H. Tjeng, and A. Sever- ing, Crystal field ground state of the orthorhombic kondo...

    2013

  31. [39]

    Yu and Q

    R. Yu and Q. Si, Orbital-selective mott phase in multi- orbital models for alkaline iron selenides K 1−xFe2−ySe2, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 146402 (2013)

    2013

  32. [40]

    Lee, Y.-Z

    H. Lee, Y.-Z. Zhang, H. O. Jeschke, R. Valent ´ ı, and H. Monien, Dynamical cluster approximation study of the anisotropic two-orbital hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 026402 (2010)

    2010

  33. [41]

    Y. Niu, Y. Ni, J. Wang, L. Chen, Y. Xing, Y. Song, and S. Feng, Quantitative determination of the critical points of mott metal–insulator transition in strongly correlated systems, Chinese Physics B33, 017102 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Y. Niu, Y. Ni, H. Zhang, L. Qiu, J. Wang, L. Chen, Y. Song, and S. Feng, Quantitative determination of the orbital-selective mott transition and quantum entangle- ment in the orbital-selective mott phase, Phys. Rev. B 110, 045131 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    R¨ odl, K

    C. R¨ odl, K. O. Ruotsalainen, F. Sottile, A.-P. Honkanen, J. M. Ablett, J.-P. Rueff, F. Sirotti, R. Verbeni, A. Al- Zein, L. Reining, and S. Huotari, Low-energy electronic excitations and band-gap renormalization in cuo, Phys. Rev. B95, 195142 (2017)

    2017

  36. [44]

    D. Liu, C. Li, J. Huang, B. Lei, L. Wang, X. Wu, B. Shen, Q. Gao, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, Y. Hu, Y. Xu, A. Liang, J. Liu, P. Ai, L. Zhao, S. He, L. Yu, G. Liu, Y. Mao, X. Dong, X. Jia, F. Zhang, S. Zhang, F. Yang, Z. Wang, Q. Peng, Y. Shi, J. Hu, T. Xiang, X. Chen, Z. Xu, C. Chen, a...

    2018

  37. [45]

    Aucar Boidi, A

    N. Aucar Boidi, A. P. Kampf, and K. Hallberg, Uncon- ventional correlated metallic behavior due to interorbital coulomb interaction, Phys. Rev. B109, 085122 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    J.-M. Wang, Y. Chen, Y.-H. Tian, R.-Q. He, and Z.-Y. Lu, Low-energy interband kondo bound states in orbital- selective mott phases, Phys. Rev. B111, 155107 (2025)

    2025

  39. [47]

    Aucar Boidi, H

    N. Aucar Boidi, H. Fern´ andez Garc ´ ıa, Y. N´ u˜ nez Fern´ andez, and K. Hallberg, In-gap band in the one- dimensional two-orbital kanamori-hubbard model with interorbital coulomb interaction, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 043213 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    ´Sroda, J

    M. ´Sroda, J. Mravlje, G. Alvarez, E. Dagotto, and J. Her- brych, Hund bands in spectra of multiorbital systems, Phys. Rev. B108, L081102 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    F. B. Kugler, S.-S. B. Lee, A. Weichselbaum, G. Kotliar, and J. von Delft, Orbital differentiation in hund metals, Phys. Rev. B100, 115159 (2019)

    2019

  42. [50]

    L. M. Roth, Simple narrow-band model of ferromag- netism due to intra-atomic exchange, Phys. Rev.149, 306 (1966)

    1966

  43. [51]

    A. M. Ole´ s, Antiferromagnetism and correlation of elec- trons in transition metals, Phys. Rev. B28, 327 (1983)

    1983

  44. [52]

    Castellani, C

    C. Castellani, C. R. Natoli, and J. Ranninger, Magnetic structure of V 2O3 in the insulating phase, Phys. Rev. B 18, 4945 (1978)

    1978

  45. [53]

    Fr´ esard and G

    R. Fr´ esard and G. Kotliar, Interplay of mott transition and ferromagnetism in the orbitally degenerate hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B56, 12909 (1997)

    1997

  46. [54]

    Georges and G

    A. Georges and G. Kotliar, Hubbard model in infinite dimensions, Phys. Rev. B45, 6479 (1992)

    1992

  47. [55]

    Caffarel and W

    M. Caffarel and W. Krauth, Exact diagonalization ap- proach to correlated fermions in infinite dimensions: Mott transition and superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1545 (1994)

    1994

  48. [56]

    Laloux, A

    L. Laloux, A. Georges, and W. Krauth, Effect of a mag- netic field on mott-hubbard systems, Phys. Rev. B50, 3092 (1994)

    1994

  49. [57]

    See supplemental material, the supplementary materials contain detailed analytical derivations and extra numeri- cal results that corroborate the conclusions drawn in the main manuscript

  50. [58]

    Bulla, T

    R. Bulla, T. A. Costi, and T. Pruschke, Numerical renor- malization group method for quantum impurity systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 395 (2008)

    2008

  51. [59]

    E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Continuous-time monte carlo methods for quantum impurity models, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011)

    2011

  52. [60]

    Song, X.-C

    Z.-Y. Song, X.-C. Jiang, H.-Q. Lin, and Y.-Z. Zhang, Dis- tinct nature of orbital-selective mott phases dominated by low-energy local spin fluctuations, Phys. Rev. B96, 235119 (2017). Supplemental Material:Local Spin Excitations Mediate Quasiparticle Breakdown in the Orbital-S...

    2017

  53. [61]

    Caffarel and W

    M. Caffarel and W. Krauth, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 1545 (1994)

    1994

  54. [62]

    Laloux, A

    L. Laloux, A. Georges, and W. Krauth, Phys. Rev. B50, 3092 (1994)

    1994

  55. [63]

    Y. Niu, Y. Ni, J. Wang, L. Chen, Y. Xing, Y. Song, and S. Feng, Chinese Physics B33, 017102 (2023)

    2023

  56. [64]

    Y. Niu, Y. Ni, H. Zhang, L. Qiu, J. Wang, L. Chen, Y. Song, and S. Feng, Phys. Rev. B110, 045131 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.