Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Altermagnetic spin textures coupled to superconductors: Domain wall spin-triplet superconductivity and supercurrent-induced torques

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

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

Pith's one-line read A spatially varying altermagnet, proximitized by an s-wave superconductor, converts singlet Cooper pairs into localized equal-spin triplet pairs at domain walls, while a supercurrent exerts a quadrupolar torque that can deform the wall into

desk verdict Solid, clean theory showing altermagnetic domain walls locally induce equal-spin triplets and a current-controlled quadrupolar torque; the quantitative side rests on a semiclassical approximation that the paper's own parameters violate. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.15249 v1 pith:ZHCXD33U submitted 2026-07-16 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mes-hall

Yasir Dar , Mathias S. Scheurer , Constantin Schrade This is my paper
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mes-hall
keywords altermagnetismdomainwallsuperconductivityspin-tripletpairingproximityeffectemergentspin-orbitcouplingsupercurrent-inducedtorqued-wavealtermagnetnonunitarytriplet
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

Altermagnets are magnets with zero net magnetization but spin-split electronic bands; when their magnetic order parameter varies in space, itinerant electrons feel emergent Zeeman and spin-orbit fields that are absent in a uniform sample. This paper shows that in a hybrid with a conventional s-wave superconductor those emergent fields convert the injected singlet Cooper pairs into equal-spin triplet pairs, but only in the vicinity of a magnetic domain wall. The triplet amplitude is momentum-selective and inherits the d-wave anisotropy of the altermagnet, producing fourfold hotspot patterns around the wall and a local spectrum that is nodal at some wall positions and fully gapped at others. The effect is reciprocal: a supercurrent exerts a quadrupolar torque, localized at the wall, that deforms a circular wall into an ellipse whose orientation is controlled by the current direction. If correct, this provides a stray-field-free way to engineer Cooper pairs locally and to detect or manipulate altermagnetic order with supercurrents.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the low-energy BdG Hamiltonian of the d-wave altermagnetic texture in a rotating frame: h = ξ σ0 + b_z σz + (1/2){p, α} σx. Spatial variation of the Néel vector generates a scalar potential V0, a geometric Zeeman field Vz carrying the d-wave form factor, and an emergent spin-orbit coupling α localized at the wall. The results follow from a Wigner/semiclassical approximation to the Gor'kov equation, G ≈ (iω − H_BdG)^{-1}, and a gradient expansion of the superfluid stiffness in these fields for the torque. In the helicity basis the singlet-to-triplet conversion factor is α_p/λ_p, which makes the induced pairing odd-parity within each helicity band and nonunitary, wit

What would settle it

Scanning tunneling spectroscopy across a radial domain wall in a proximitized d-wave altermagnet: the paper predicts wall-localized spectral changes with fourfold angular modulation — nodal at some positions along the wall and fully gapped at others — and no such effect in the antiferromagnetic limit. Seeing a uniform spectrum around the wall, or no wall-localized gap, would refute the central claim. A complementary check is to image the wall while driving supercurrents along x and y: the predicted elliptical deformation should reverse its elongation axis when the current is rotated by 90 degr

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim: a spatially varying altermagnet proximitized by a conventional s-wave superconductor converts the induced singlet pairing into nonunitary equal-spin triplet pairing, localized at domain walls. For a radial wall, the equal-time triplet correlator F_σσ = Δ α_p (σ ξ − b_z)/D shows that the emergent spin-orbit coupling α_p is the conversion engine: no α, no triplet, so correlations vanish away from the wall and for tangential momenta. The altermagnet-specific Zeeman term b_z makes the node structure spin-dependent and elliptical, and the triplet intensity forms a fourfold hotspot pattern set by the d-wave order. The same BdG Hamiltonian gives a local spectrum that alte

Load-bearing premise

The results assume the domain wall is smooth enough that all texture-induced fields vary slowly compared with the Fermi wavelength and the superconducting coherence length, so the local (semiclassical) Green's function is quantitatively accurate; a sharp wall could alter the triplet hotspots and torque.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Near a domain wall, the proximity-induced pairing is predominantly equal-spin triplet and localized on the wall; scanning tunneling spectroscopy should see a transition from gapless spectra away from the wall to V-shaped or U-shaped spectra on it, with the shape depending on position around the wall.
  • The local spectrum alternates between nodal and fully gapped as one moves around the wall; the nodal points occur only where the emergent spin-orbit coupling vanishes and b_z² = ξ² + Δ², so the pattern directly encodes the d-wave symmetry of the altermagnet.
  • A uniform supercurrent exerts a quadrupolar torque on the wall: currents along x and y give opposite torques, a diagonal current switches the torque off, and the mechanical work selects a cos2χ deformation, so the circular wall becomes an ellipse.
  • Because the torque is carried by quasiparticles, it vanishes at T=0 in a fully gapped superconductor but is present when the spectrum has Bogoliubov Fermi surfaces or at finite temperature; measuring its temperature dependence tests the mechanism.
  • For a candidate material like Mn5Si3 with wall width ~50 nm the paper estimates the triplet component at about 0.1 meV for a 0.5 meV proximity gap, within range of tunneling probes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A short-wavelength extension, not made in the paper: if the wall width approaches the coherence length, corrections beyond the semiclassical Green's function could shift the hotspot positions or spread triplets away from the wall; a lattice Bogoliubov-de Gennes calculation on a sharp wall would test how robust the cos2χ torque and hotspot pattern are.
  • Because the torque acts only on the cos2χ harmonic of the wall displacement, the same mechanism should generate current-controlled anisotropic pinning or deformation for other altermagnetic textures, such as skyrmions; the paper only analyzes the radial wall.
  • The momentum-space structure of the triplet component (nodes along p_R=0, ellipse controlled by b_z) suggests that a domain wall could act as a spin-selective filter for triplet Cooper pairs in a Josephson junction; this junction consequence is left implicit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the proximity effect between a conventional s-wave superconductor and an altermagnet with a spatially varying Néel vector, focusing on a planar radial domain wall. It derives an effective low-energy BdG Hamiltonian with emergent scalar potential V0, geometric Zeeman field Vz, and spin-orbit coupling alpha(r). Using a local Wigner/semiclassical approximation to the Gor'kov equation, it obtains analytic results for the local quasiparticle spectrum (Eq. 11), the equal-spin triplet pairing correlations (Eq. 15), and the spin-resolved triplet intensity. It predicts wall-localized triplet superconductivity with a fourfold hotspot pattern controlled by the d-wave altermagnetic order, and a supercurrent-induced quadrupolar torque (Eq. 23) that deforms the circular wall into an ellipse (Eq. 27). A material estimate is given for Mn5Si3.

Significance. If the central results hold, the paper significantly extends the known ferromagnetic domain-wall triplet phenomenon to altermagnets, identifying effects that are unique to altermagnetic textures: the geometric Zeeman field Vz, triplet hotspots with fourfold symmetry, and a supercurrent-induced quadrupolar torque. The derivation chain is transparent, analytic, and benchmarked against the established ferromagnetic case; the SM provides detailed derivations. The predictions are falsifiable with STM and transport/torque measurements. However, the quantitative validity is currently conditional on an uncontrolled semiclassical approximation, so the significance is real but requires strengthening of the approximation justification.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. (10); Table S1] The local Wigner approximation in Eq. (10) is said to require slow variation of texture-induced fields on the scale of the Fermi wavelength and the superconducting coherence length, but the parameters used in the paper violate this condition. For Table S1, with hbar=1, mu=1.70, p_F=1.30, lambda_F=4.8, while w=1.65, so w<lambda_F. The BCS coherence length for Delta=0.25 and v_F~2.6 is xi0~3.3, again not large compared with w. For the Mn5Si3 estimate, w=50 nm and xi0~2.6 um, so xi0/w~50. The Moyal corrections discarded in Eq. (10) and the O((partial phi)^4) terms discarded in Eq. (21) are not bounded by any small parameter. Since the nodal positions (Fig. 2), triplet hotspot locations (Fig. 4), and torque profile (Eq. 23) are all computed within this approximation, the central quantitative claims need either a real-space BdG calculation for the same parameters or a rigorous estimate of the
  2. [Section III, Eq. (3)] The projection onto the S=-1 subspace drops inter-band pairing and all couplings to the high-energy subspace. The justification is that J is the largest energy scale, but no estimate of J is given for the model parameters or for Mn5Si3. The transverse gauge field A_perp in Eq. (S5) couples the low- and high-energy sectors and produces 1/J corrections; for a narrow wall with w<lambda_F, these corrections may be comparable to the retained terms. Please provide a quantitative bound on the neglected terms, or show that the leading triplet amplitude in Eq. (15) is unaffected by the inter-band processes.
  3. [Section VIII, Eq. (26); SM S79] The generalized force for the delta u_2 deformation mode is given as F_Q = pi^3 hbar^2 rho_z Q^2 Cbar_z cos(2 chi_Q)/(8 w^2) in the main text, but the Supplemental Material derivation, SM Eq. (S79), gives F_Q = pi^3 hbar^2 rho_z Q^2 Cbar_z cos(2 chi_Q)/(8 w). This inconsistency changes delta u_2 by a factor of w and affects the quantitative deformation prediction. Please correct the prefactor and verify the radial integral with the stated normalization.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section V, Eq. (12)] Eq. (12) appears to have a typesetting problem: the matrix should be (Delta/lambda_p) times a 2x2 matrix, but the displayed expression is missing the division by lambda_p. Please check and correct.
  2. [Section VI, Eq. (15)] The denominator D(R,p) in Eq. (15) is not defined in the main text. It is used implicitly and only becomes clear from the SM expression in Eq. (S30). Please define it explicitly after Eq. (15).
  3. [Section VI, text after Eq. (13)] There is a typo: 'pariring' should be 'pairing'. Minor, but it appears in the main derivation text.
  4. [Section IV, general] The term 'local, semiclassical approximation' is introduced for Eq. (10). To avoid confusion, it may be useful to explicitly name it a zeroth-order Wigner (Moyal) approximation and state the first-order correction in a footnote or appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main results are computed from the stated BdG Hamiltonian and free-energy expansion, not from fitted outputs; self-citations are contextual and not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Section II starts from the microscopic altermagnetic texture Hamiltonian Eq. (1) and explicitly performs the rotating-frame transformation and large-J projection to obtain the effective normal-state Hamiltonian Eq. (3); the reference to Ref. 38 is for nomenclature and prior derivation, but the needed steps (rotating frame, projection, emergent V0, Vz, SOC) are re-derived in the paper and in SM S1. The central pairing result Eq. (15) is obtained by writing the BdG Hamiltonian Eq. (7), using the local semiclassical approximation Eq. (10), inverting the 4x4 Nambu matrix and performing the Matsubara sum (SM S2, Eqs. S27-S32); it is an algebraic consequence of the stated Hamiltonian, not an input. The triplet hotspots and nodal/gapped spectra follow by evaluating this closed-form expression and the quasiparticle energies Eq. (11); no parameter is fitted to the predicted spectra or correlators. The supercurrent torque Eq. (23) is obtained from the free-energy functional Eq. (18) by a gradient expansion Eq. (21) whose coefficient Cbar_z is computed from the uniform BdG spectrum in Eq. (24), again a parameter-free evaluation rather than a fit. The deformation calculation introduces a phenomenological stiffness k, but this is an additional modeling assumption, not a circular reuse of the target result. Self-citations (Refs. 38, 42) are not load-bearing: even if removed, every equation used here is derived within the paper. The semiclassical/Wigner approximation Eq. (10) is asserted rather than quantitatively controlled for the wall widths used, and this is a genuine correctness/quantitative-control concern (the local expansion parameter may be large), but that is not a circularity. The results are also benchmarked against the independent ferromagnetic domain-wall triplet phenomenon (Refs. 43-45), supporting that the mechanism is not an artifact of the paper's own definitions. Therefore no step reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or order parameters. Its free parameters are model/material parameters and a phenomenological wall stiffness. Its axioms are the standard large-J projection, semiclassical Moyal truncation, s-wave/τ_x pairing, and gradient-truncated free energy. The central qualitative claims are robust to the numerical values of the plotted parameters but not to the semiclassical and large-J assumptions.

free parameters (3)
  • Model parameters ϱ₀, ϱ_z, ϱ₃, µ, ∆, R₀, w for figures = ϱ₀=1, ϱ_z=0.40/0.70, ϱ₃=0.70/0.90, µ=1.70, ∆=0.25, R₀=6.0, w=1.10/1.65 (Fig. tables)
    Dimensionless model parameters chosen by hand for the plots. They are not fitted to experimental data and only set the illustrative regime, so they do not directly threaten the central qualitative claims.
  • Material parameters for Mn₅Si₃ estimate: v_F, v₃, w, Δ_AM, ∆ = v_F ≈ 2×10⁶ m/s, v₃ ≈ 0.5 v_F, w ≈ 50 nm, Δ_AM ≈ 100 meV, ∆ ≈ 0.5 meV
    In §IX these values are taken from literature or assumed; they enter the size estimate Δ_t/Δ ∼ 0.2 but not the central analytic results.
  • Phenomenological wall stiffness k = unspecified
    In Eq. (27), the wall deformation δu₂ = (π³/8w²k) ℏ²ϱ_z Q² C̄_z cos2χ_Q is inversely proportional to a phenomenological stiffness k. The sign and pattern of the deformation do not depend on k, but its magnitude does; k is not derived from the microscopic model.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption J is the largest energy scale and the low-energy projection onto S = τ_z s_z = −1 discards all inter-subspace pairing; helicity-band interband pairing neglected below Eq. (12).
    Required for the effective BdG Hamiltonian Eq. (7). Loss of quantitative accuracy when J is not much larger than the other scales is not quantified.
  • domain assumption Texture-induced fields vary slowly on the scale of Fermi wavelength and coherence length, justifying G(R,p) ≈ [iω_n − H_BdG(R,p)]⁻¹ (Eq. 10) and the truncation of the Moyal product at lowest order.
    This is the central semiclassical approximation; asserted in §IV without a validity bound for the parameters in the figures or the Mn₅Si₃ estimate.
  • domain assumption The equilibrium pairing in the superconductor is conventional s-wave and the proximity-induced pairing is inter-sublattice τ_x i s_y (Eq. 6).
    Other pairing channels are argued to vanish under the low-energy projection; this confines the scope to the s-wave proximity regime.
  • domain assumption The free-energy expansion of the superfluid stiffness is truncated at second order in gradients of φ, and the deformation is linearized in a phenomenological restoring force.
    Eq. (21) drops O((∂φ)⁴), and Eq. (27) introduces −k δu₂. The regime of validity (small Q, small deformation) is stated but not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Altermagnetic spin textures coupled to superconductors: Domain wall spin-triplet superconductivity and supercurrent-induced torques." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZHCXD33U

@misc{pith2026260715249,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Altermagnetic spin textures coupled to superconductors: Domain wall spin-triplet superconductivity and supercurrent-induced torques},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZHCXD33U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.15249}
}
abstract

Motivated by the absence of sizable stray fields and the recently discovered highly non-trivial impact of altermagnetic textures on itinerant electrons, we here study the form of Cooper pairs in spatially varying altermagnets coupled to conventional $s$-wave superconductors. As a consequence of the detrimental impact of altermagnetism on spin-singlet pairing and the local symmetry reduction caused by textures in the magnetic order parameter, we show that superconductivity predominantly impacts the regions between altermagnetic domains. Focusing on a planar radial domain wall for concreteness, we show that emergent Zeeman and spin-orbit fields create spatially separated triplet hotspots and transitions between nodal and fully gapped superconducting regions, whose structure is set by both the domain wall and the altermagnetic order parameter. We also identify a reciprocal effect, where a supercurrent generates a quasiparticle-mediated quadrupolar torque that inherits the symmetry of the altermagnetic order. Our results show that accounting for spatial inhomogeneities in the altermagnetic order parameter is essential for an understanding of the superconducting proximity effect and suggest that hybrid systems of altermagnetic textures and superconductors offer unique opportunities for local engineering of Cooper pairs and for detecting altermagnetic order.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15249 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Hubert and R

    A. Hubert and R. Schäfer,Magnetic domains: the analy- sis of magnetic microstructures(SpringerScience&Busi- ness Media, 1998)

    1998

  2. [2]

    Domain wall memory: Physics, mate- rials, and devices,

    D. Kumar, T. Jin, R. Sbiaa, M. Kläui, S. Bedanta, S. Fukami, D. Ravelosona, S.-H. Yang, X. Liu, and S. N. Piramanayagam, “Domain wall memory: Physics, mate- rials, and devices,” Phys. Rep.958, 1 (2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    Mag- netic domain walls: types, processes and applications,

    G. Venkat, D. A. Allwood, and T. J. Hayward, “Mag- netic domain walls: types, processes and applications,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys.57, 063001 (2023)

    2023

  4. [4]

    Magnetic skyrmions: advances in physics and potential applications,

    A. Fert, N. Reyren, and V. Cros, “Magnetic skyrmions: advances in physics and potential applications,” Nat. Rev. Mater.2, 17031 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    Topological Spin Textures: Basic Physics and Devices,

    Y. Zhou, S. Li, X. Liang, and Y. Zhou, “Topological Spin Textures: Basic Physics and Devices,” Adv. Mater.37, e2312935. (2025), 38861696

    2025

  6. [6]

    Magnetic domain-wall racetrack memory,

    S. S. Parkin, M. Hayashi, and L. Thomas, “Magnetic domain-wall racetrack memory,” science320, 190 (2008)

    2008

  7. [7]

    Skyrmions on the track,

    A. Fert, V. Cros, and J. Sampaio, “Skyrmions on the track,” Nature nanotechnology8, 152 (2013)

    2013

  8. [8]

    Linear momentum in ferromagnets,

    G. E. Volovik, “Linear momentum in ferromagnets,” Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics20, L83 (1987)

    1987

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Topolog- ical hall effect and berry phase in magnetic nanostruc- tures,

    P. Bruno, V. K. Dugaev, and M. Taillefumier, “Topolog- ical hall effect and berry phase in magnetic nanostruc- tures,” Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 096806 (2004)

    2004

  2. [10]

    Universalelectromotiveforce induced by domain wall motion,

    S. A. Yang, G. S. D. Beach, C. Knutson, D. Xiao, Q. Niu, M.Tsoi, andJ.L.Erskine,“Universalelectromotiveforce induced by domain wall motion,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 067201 (2009)

    2009

  3. [11]

    Electromotive force and huge magnetore- sistance in magnetic tunnel junctions,

    P. N. Hai, S. Ohya, M. Tanaka, S. E. Barnes, and S. Maekawa, “Electromotive force and huge magnetore- sistance in magnetic tunnel junctions,” Nature458, 489 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    Generalization of fara- day’s law to include nonconservative spin forces,

    S. E. Barnes and S. Maekawa, “Generalization of fara- day’s law to include nonconservative spin forces,” Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 246601 (2007)

    2007

  5. [13]

    Emergent electrodynamics of skyrmions in a chiral magnet,

    T. Schulz, R. Ritz, A. Bauer, M. Halder, M. Wagner, C. Franz, C. Pfleiderer, K. Everschor, M. Garst, and A. Rosch, “Emergent electrodynamics of skyrmions in a chiral magnet,” Nature Physics8, 301 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Emergent curved space and gravitational lensing in quantum materials,

    Y. Onishi, N. Paul, and L. Fu, “Emergent curved space and gravitational lensing in quantum materials,” Phys. Rev. B113, 024401 (2026)

    2026

  7. [15]

    Electron dynamics in slowly vary- ing antiferromagnetic texture,

    R. Cheng and Q. Niu, “Electron dynamics in slowly vary- ing antiferromagnetic texture,” Phys. Rev. B86, 245118 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    Berry-phase effects and electronic dynam- ics in a noncollinear antiferromagnetic texture,

    O. Gomonay, “Berry-phase effects and electronic dynam- ics in a noncollinear antiferromagnetic texture,” Phys. Rev. B91, 144421 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Theory of spin mo- tive force in one-dimensional antiferromagnetic domain wall,

    A. Okabayashi and T. Morinari, “Theory of spin mo- tive force in one-dimensional antiferromagnetic domain wall,” JournalofthePhysicalSocietyofJapan84,033706 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    Electric voltage generation by antiferromagnetic dynamics,

    Y. Yamane, J. Ieda, and J. Sinova, “Electric voltage generation by antiferromagnetic dynamics,” Phys. Rev. B93, 180408 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Editorial: Altermagnetism—a new punch line of fundamental magnetism,

    I. Mazin (The PRX Editors), “Editorial: Altermagnetism—a new punch line of fundamental magnetism,” Phys. Rev. X12, 040002 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    Emerging re- search landscape of altermagnetism,

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

    2022

  13. [21]

    Al- termagnetism: A chemical perspective,

    S. S. Fender, O. Gonzalez, and D. K. Bediako, “Al- termagnetism: A chemical perspective,” Journal of the American Chemical Society147, 2257 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Altermagnetismandaltermagnets: Abriefre- view,

    R. Tamang, S. Gurung, D. P. Rai, S. Brahimi, and S.Lounis,“Altermagnetismandaltermagnets: Abriefre- view,” Magnetism5(2025), 10.3390/magnetism5030017

    2025 doi

  15. [23]

    Altermagnetism: An unconventional spin-ordered phase of matter,

    T. Jungwirth, R. M. Fernandes, E. Fradkin, A. H. Mac- Donald, J. Sinova, and L. Šmejkal, “Altermagnetism: An unconventional spin-ordered phase of matter,” Newton1 (2025), 10.1016/j.newton.2025.100162

    2025

  16. [24]

    Structure, control, and dynamics of altermag- netic textures,

    O.Gomonay, V.P.Kravchuk, R.Jaeschke-Ubiergo, K.V. Yershov, T. Jungwirth, L. Šmejkal, J. v. d. Brink, and J. Sinova, “Structure, control, and dynamics of altermag- netic textures,” npj Spintronics2, 35 (2024). 11

    2024

  17. [25]

    Skyrmionhalleffect in altermagnets,

    Z.Jin, Z.Zeng, Y.Cao, andP.Yan,“Skyrmionhalleffect in altermagnets,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 196701 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Spin-transfer torque in altermagnets with magnetic textures,

    H. Vakili, E. Schwartz, andA. A.Kovalev,“Spin-transfer torque in altermagnets with magnetic textures,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 176401 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    Transport theory and spin-transfer physics ind-wave altermagnets,

    R. Zarzuela, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, O. Gomonay, L. Šme- jkal, and J. Sinova, “Transport theory and spin-transfer physics ind-wave altermagnets,” Phys. Rev. B111, 064422 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Anisotropic vacancy-induced magnetization textures in altermagnets,

    R. Burkard, M. S. Scheurer, and U. F. P. Seifert, “Anisotropic vacancy-induced magnetization textures in altermagnets,” arXiv e-prints (2026), arXiv:2607.07789 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2026 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Local signatures of alter- magnetism,

    J. Gondolf, A. Kreisel, M. Roig, Y. Yu, D. F. Agter- berg, and B. M. Andersen, “Local signatures of alter- magnetism,” Phys. Rev. B111, 174436 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    Impurity states in alter- magnetic superconductors,

    A. Maiani and R. S. Souto, “Impurity states in alter- magnetic superconductors,” Phys. Rev. B111, 224506 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Impurity-induced friedel oscillations in altermagnets andp-wave magnets,

    P. Sukhachov and J. Linder, “Impurity-induced friedel oscillations in altermagnets andp-wave magnets,” Phys. Rev. B110, 205114 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Quasiparticle in- terference in altermagnets,

    H.-R. Hu, X. Wan, and W. Chen, “Quasiparticle in- terference in altermagnets,” Phys. Rev. B111, 035132 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Impurity scattering and friedel oscillations in altermag- nets,

    W. Chen, X. Zhou, D. Zhang, Y.-Q. Xu, and W.-K. Lou, “Impurity scattering and friedel oscillations in altermag- nets,” Phys. Rev. B110, 165413 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Disorder-enhanced superconductivity in altermagnet-superconductor hy- brids,

    M. M. Vasiakin and A. S. Mel’nikov, “Disorder-enhanced superconductivity in altermagnet-superconductor hy- brids,” Phys. Rev. B111, L100502 (2025)

    2025

  27. [35]

    Prox- imity effect in superconductor/antiferromagnet hybrids: Néel triplets and impurity suppression of superconduc- tivity,

    G. A. Bobkov, I. V. Bobkova, and A. M. Bobkov, “Prox- imity effect in superconductor/antiferromagnet hybrids: Néel triplets and impurity suppression of superconduc- tivity,” Phys. Rev. B108, 054510 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Quantum geometry and impurity sensitivity of superconductors without time-reversal symmetry: application to rhombohedral graphene and altermagnets,

    D. Sedov and M. S. Scheurer, “Quantum geometry and impurity sensitivity of superconductors without time-reversal symmetry: application to rhombohedral graphene and altermagnets,” arXiv e-prints (2025), arXiv:2510.19943 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    2025

  29. [37]

    Optical and transport anisotropies in spin-textured altermagnets,

    A. Maiani, “Optical and transport anisotropies in spin-textured altermagnets,” arXiv e-prints (2026), arXiv:2602.14950 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026

  30. [38]

    Altermagnetic spin tex- tures: Emergent electrodynamics, quantum geometry, and probes,

    C. Schrade and M. S. Scheurer, “Altermagnetic spin tex- tures: Emergent electrodynamics, quantum geometry, and probes,” arXiv e-prints (2026), arXiv:2602.20236 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026

  31. [39]

    Proximitizing altermagnets with conventional superconductors,

    N. Heinsdorf and M. Franz, “Proximitizing altermagnets with conventional superconductors,” Phys. Rev. B113, L020501 (2026)

    2026

  32. [40]

    Ma- joranas with a twist: Tunable majorana zero modes in al- termagnetic heterostructures,

    A. Hadjipaschalis, S. A. A. Ghorashi, and J. Cano, “Ma- joranas with a twist: Tunable majorana zero modes in al- termagnetic heterostructures,” Phys. Rev. B112, 214430 (2025)

    2025

  33. [41]

    Proximity- induced superconductivity and emerging topological phases in altermagnet-based heterostructures,

    O. Alam, A. Pal, P. Dutta, and A. Saha, “Proximity- induced superconductivity and emerging topological phases in altermagnet-based heterostructures,” Phys. Rev. B113, 155429 (2026)

    2026

  34. [42]

    Al- termagnetic superconducting diode effect from non- collinear compensated magnetism in Mn3Pt,

    C. Schrade, S. Manna, and M. S. Scheurer, “Al- termagnetic superconducting diode effect from non- collinear compensated magnetism in Mn3Pt,” arXiv e- prints (2026), arXiv:2601.03348 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026

  35. [43]

    Domainwallsupercon- ductivity in ferromagnetic superconductors,

    A.I.BuzdinandA.S.Mel’nikov,“Domainwallsupercon- ductivity in ferromagnetic superconductors,” Phys. Rev. B67, 020503(R) (2003)

    2003

  36. [44]

    Domain-wall superconductivity in superconductor–ferromagnet hybrids,

    Z. Yang, M. Lange, A. Volodin, R. Szymczak, and V. V. Moshchalkov, “Domain-wall superconductivity in superconductor–ferromagnet hybrids,” Nat. Mater.3, 793 (2004)

    2004

  37. [45]

    Percolative supercurrent in superconductor–ferromagnetic insulator bilayers,

    A. Maiani, A. C. C. Drachmann, L. Galletti, C. Schrade, Y. Liu, R. S. Souto, and S. Vaitiek˙ enas, “Percolative supercurrent in superconductor–ferromagnetic insulator bilayers,” Phys. Rev. B111, 174509 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    Supercurrent-Driven Néel Torque in Supercon- ductor/Altermagnet Hybrids,

    H. Vakili, M. Ali, I. Žutić, and A. A. Ko- valev, “Supercurrent-Driven Néel Torque in Supercon- ductor/Altermagnet Hybrids,” arXiv e-prints (2026), arXiv:2603.22243 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2026 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Superconducting phenomena in systems with unconven- tional magnets,

    Y. Fukaya, B. Lu, K. Yada, Y. Tanaka, and J. Cayao, “Superconducting phenomena in systems with unconven- tional magnets,” Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 37, 313003 (2025)

    2025

  40. [48]

    Superconducting spin- tronics,

    J. Linder and J. W. A. Robinson, “Superconducting spin- tronics,” Nat. Phys.11, 307 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductor-ferromagnet structures,

    F. S. Bergeret, A. F. Volkov, and K. B. Efetov, “Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductor-ferromagnet structures,” Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 1321 (2005)

    2005

  42. [50]

    Minimal models for altermagnetism,

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

    2024

  43. [51]

    Quasisymmetry-constrained spin ferromagnetism in altermagnets,

    M. Roig, Y. Yu, R. C. Ekman, A. Kreisel, B. M. Ander- sen, and D. F. Agterberg, “Quasisymmetry-constrained spin ferromagnetism in altermagnets,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 016703 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    Multi-band eilenberger the- ory of superconductivity: Systematic low-energy projec- tion,

    Y. Nagai and H. Nakamura, “Multi-band eilenberger the- ory of superconductivity: Systematic low-energy projec- tion,” JournalofthePhysicalSocietyofJapan85,074707 (2016), https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSJ.85.074707

    2016 doi

  45. [53]

    Observation of a spontaneous anomalous hall response in the mn5si3 d-wave altermagnet candi- date,

    H. Reichlova, R. Lopes Seeger, R. González-Hernández, I. Kounta, R. Schlitz, D. Kriegner, P. Ritzinger, M. Lammel, M. Leiviskä, A. Birk Hellenes, K. Olejník, V. Petřiček, P. Doležal, L. Horak, E. Schmoranzerova, A. Badura, S. Bertaina, A. Thomas, V. Baltz, L. Michez, J. Sinova...

    2024

  46. [54]

    Anomalous nernst effect in the noncollinear anti- ferromagnet mn5si3,

    C. Sürgers, G. Fischer, W. H. Campos, A. B. Hellenes, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, M. Merz, T. Wolf, and W. Werns- dorfer, “Anomalous nernst effect in the noncollinear anti- ferromagnet mn5si3,” Communications Materials5, 176 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    Macroscopic time reversal symmetry break- ing by staggered spin-momentum interaction,

    H. Reichlová, R. L. Seeger, R. González-Hernández, I. Kounta, R. Schlitz, D. Kriegner, P. Ritzinger, M. Lam- mel, M. Leiviskä, V. Petříček, P. Doležal, E. Schmoranze- rová, A. Bad’ura, A. Thomas, V. Baltz, L. Michez, J. Sinova, S. T. B. Goennenwein, T. Jungwirth, and L. Šmejka...

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

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