arxiv: 2604.26636 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Recognition: unknown

Revealing magnetism in the distorted kagome RTi₃Bi₄ (R = Nd, Sm, Gd) via ARPES and XMCD

C. Lim , F. Ballester , A. Kar , M. Alkorta , D. Subires , J. Dai , M. Tallarida , E. Vescovo

show 14 more authors

T. K. Kim C. Cacho C. Yi S. Roychowdhury A. Kumar Sharma Y. Choi G. Fabbris J. Strempfer P. Gargiani C. Shekhar C. Felser I. Errea M. G. Vergniory S. Blanco-Canosa

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 11:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords kagome magnetismXMCDARPESinduced magnetic momentTi kagome layersrare-earth compoundsanomalous Hall effectspin flip transitions

0 comments

The pith

XMCD detects a small magnetic moment on Ti kagome layers in GdTi3Bi4 induced by nearby Gd zigzag chains.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The study maps the electronic bands and magnetic moments in the series of distorted kagome compounds R Ti3 Bi4 for R equals Nd, Sm and Gd. ARPES combined with DFT calculations shows that the bulk bands arise mainly from Ti hybridization while a weak electron-like feature at the Gamma point is a surface state. XMCD at the Ti L2,3 edge reveals a small moment only in the Gd member, attributed to the geometric closeness of the Ti planes to Gd zigzag chains, and the total Gd moment is partitioned between f and d electrons according to sum-rule analysis and multiplet calculations. These magnetic details supply a concrete basis for interpreting the spin-flip transitions and anomalous Hall response already reported in the same family.

Core claim

The Ti L2,3-edge XMCD reveals the presence of a small magnetic moment in GdTi3Bi4, presumably driven by the proximity of the Ti kagome layers to the zigzag chains of Gd, while the total magnetic moment of Gd is shared by the f and d electrons. ARPES and DFT confirm that the bulk electronic structure is dominated by Ti bands with a surface-state pocket at Gamma, and the rare-earth M4,5 XAS is isotropic and consistent with the trivalent oxidation state.

What carries the argument

XMCD sum rules applied to the Ti L-edge and rare-earth M-edge, supplemented by atomic multiplet theory calculations, to separate spin and orbital contributions to the moments.

If this is right

The observed Ti moment supplies a microscopic route to the spin-flip transitions reported in the same materials.
The partitioning of the Gd moment between f and d shells offers a starting point for modeling the anomalous Hall conductivity.
The dominance of Ti-derived bands with only a surface-state pocket at Gamma constrains any future calculation of transport or optical response.
The absence of a detectable Ti moment in the Nd and Sm members isolates the role of the particular rare-earth moment size and chain geometry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Interlayer proximity coupling of this type could be tuned by lattice expansion or rare-earth substitution to control the size of the induced Ti moment.
Similar induced polarization on non-magnetic kagome sheets may occur in other layered compounds that combine magnetic zigzag chains with metallic planes.
Quantitative first-principles modeling of the Gd-Ti exchange path would convert the present qualitative attribution into a predictive design rule.

Load-bearing premise

The small Ti moment is induced specifically by proximity to the Gd zigzag chains rather than by other hybridization channels or measurement artifacts, an interpretation supported only by the spatial layout and the lack of signal in the Nd and Sm analogs.

What would settle it

A neutron-scattering or muon-spin-rotation measurement that either confirms or fails to confirm a Ti moment of comparable size in GdTi3Bi4, or the same measurement performed on an isostructural compound lacking the Gd zigzag chains, would directly test the proximity mechanism.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26636 by A. Kar, A. Kumar Sharma, C. Cacho, C. Felser, C. Lim, C. Shekhar, C. Yi, D. Subires, E. Vescovo, F. Ballester, G. Fabbris, I. Errea, J. Dai, J. Strempfer, M. Alkorta, M. G. Vergniory, M. Tallarida, P. Gargiani, S. Blanco-Canosa, S. Roychowdhury, T. K. Kim, Y. Choi.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: (a) The unit cell of RTi3Bi4. The green, light blue and red spheres represent R, Ti and Bi atoms, respectively. (b),(c) In-plane lattice structures of conventional hexagonal kagome lattice (b) and orthorhombic kagome lattice of RTi3Bi4. The solid lines in (b) and (c) show the in-plane unit cells of the hexagonal and orthorhombic lattices, respectively, while the dashed lines show the the other unit cell fo… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: (a)-(c) Valence band dispersions of (a) NdTi view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (a) Schematic illustration of the XMCD measurement in normal geometry, with the magnetic field parallel to the beam view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: XMCD at the rare earth edge for (a) NdTi view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Kagome materials are known for hosting emergent quantum phenomena driven by the interaction between different lattice, charge and spin orders. Here, we present a detailed angle resolved photoemission (ARPES), density functional theory (DFT) and x-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) study of the electronic and magnetic structure of $R$Ti$_3$Bi$_4$ ($R$ = Nd, Sm, Gd). ARPES and DFT demonstrate that the bulk electronic band structure is dominated by the hybridization of the Ti bands, and the weak electron-like pocket at $\Gamma$ is identified as a surface state. The isotropic XAS profile of the $M_{4,5}$-edge of the rare earth is consistent with the presence of $R^{3+}$ oxidation state. Using the XMCD sum rules, backed by the atomic multiplet theory calculations, we obtain the spin and orbital magnetic moments. The Ti $L_{2,3}$-edge XMCD reveals the presence of a small magnetic moment in GdTi$_3$Bi$_4$, presumably driven by the proximity of the {Ti} kagome layers to the $zigzag$ chains of Gd, while the total magnetic moment of Gd is shared by the $f$ and $d$ electrons. Our combined XMCD, ARPES and DFT study brings an important piece of information to understand the spin flip transitions and anomalous Hall effect observed in the $R$Ti$_3$Bi$_4$ kagome metals.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper delivers the first XMCD sum-rule moments on Ti in these kagome compounds, showing a small induced moment only in the Gd member that the authors tie to proximity with the rare-earth chains.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this work measures a small Ti magnetic moment via L2,3-edge XMCD exclusively in GdTi3Bi4 and attributes it to the nearby Gd zigzag chains, while the Nd and Sm analogs show nothing. ARPES plus DFT also pins the weak Gamma pocket as a surface state rather than bulk. That combination of element-specific magnetism data and surface-state assignment is new for this specific family. The measurements themselves look standard and internally consistent: XAS confirms R3+ valence, sum rules backed by multiplet calculations give the orbital and spin moments on the rare earths, and the Ti signal is reported only for Gd. DFT reproduces the overall band structure and supports the surface-state picture. These are useful numbers for anyone trying to model the spin-flip transitions or anomalous Hall effect in the series. The soft spot is the causal claim. The authors say the Ti moment is presumably proximity-driven because of the crystal structure and the absence of the signal in the other two compounds, but there is no DFT-derived exchange parameter, no calculated induced-moment size, and no explicit check against alternatives such as compound-to-compound differences in lattice spacing, 4f hybridization strength, or Fermi-level position. For small itinerant Ti moments the sum-rule extraction also needs careful background handling, and the paper does not spell out that validation in detail. The data stand on their own even if the interpretation stays qualitative. This is for people already working on kagome magnets or rare-earth–transition-metal coupling; the raw moments and surface-state assignment are worth having. It is not a breakthrough but it is honest experimental characterization of recently synthesized compounds, so it deserves a serious referee rather than a desk reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports ARPES, DFT, and XMCD studies on the distorted kagome metals RTi3Bi4 (R = Nd, Sm, Gd). ARPES and DFT establish that the bulk bands are dominated by Ti hybridization, with the weak electron-like pocket at Gamma identified as a surface state. XAS at the R M4,5 edges is consistent with R3+ valence. XMCD sum rules, supported by atomic multiplet calculations, are used to extract spin and orbital moments. A small Ti moment is detected at the L2,3 edge exclusively in the Gd compound and is attributed to proximity of the Ti kagome layers to Gd zigzag chains; the Gd moment is described as shared between f and d electrons. The combined results are positioned as relevant to understanding spin-flip transitions and the anomalous Hall effect in these materials.

Significance. If the small Ti moment and its proposed proximity origin are robustly confirmed, the work would contribute to clarifying how rare-earth magnetism couples to the kagome Ti sublattice and influences transport anomalies in this family. The multi-technique integration of ARPES/DFT for the electronic structure with element-specific XMCD for magnetism is a positive aspect, though the central magnetic claims rest on a small signal whose mechanistic interpretation currently lacks quantitative backing.

major comments (2)

In the XMCD results and discussion (abstract and corresponding experimental section), the claim that the small Ti moment in GdTi3Bi4 is 'presumably driven by the proximity' to Gd zigzag chains is not supported by any DFT-derived exchange parameters, induced-moment calculations, or explicit exclusion of alternatives such as differing Ti-R hybridization strengths or compound-specific Fermi-level positions. This interpretation is load-bearing for the central claim yet remains qualitative.
In the XMCD analysis section, application of the sum rules to the small itinerant Ti L2,3-edge signal lacks explicit documentation of background-subtraction procedures, error-bar estimation, or validation against the multiplet calculations; given the small magnitude of the reported moment, these details are required to establish its presence and rule out artifacts.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. We have addressed each major comment in detail below and made revisions to improve the clarity and rigor of the XMCD analysis and interpretation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: In the XMCD results and discussion (abstract and corresponding experimental section), the claim that the small Ti moment in GdTi3Bi4 is 'presumably driven by the proximity' to Gd zigzag chains is not supported by any DFT-derived exchange parameters, induced-moment calculations, or explicit exclusion of alternatives such as differing Ti-R hybridization strengths or compound-specific Fermi-level positions. This interpretation is load-bearing for the central claim yet remains qualitative.

Authors: We agree that the proposed mechanism remains qualitative. In the revised manuscript we have softened the language in the abstract and discussion sections to present the proximity to Gd zigzag chains as a plausible structural explanation rather than a confirmed driver. We explicitly state that quantitative support from DFT exchange parameters or induced-moment calculations is not provided here and that alternatives (e.g., hybridization differences or Fermi-level shifts) cannot be ruled out. A new paragraph has been added noting the need for future theoretical work to quantify the coupling. revision: partial
Referee: In the XMCD analysis section, application of the sum rules to the small itinerant Ti L2,3-edge signal lacks explicit documentation of background-subtraction procedures, error-bar estimation, or validation against the multiplet calculations; given the small magnitude of the reported moment, these details are required to establish its presence and rule out artifacts.

Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this omission. The revised manuscript now includes a dedicated subsection in the methods describing the background-subtraction procedure (linear fit to the pre-edge region), the estimation of error bars from the spectral noise level, and the resulting uncertainties on the extracted moments. We have also added a direct comparison of the experimental Ti XMCD spectrum with atomic multiplet calculations scaled to a small itinerant moment, confirming consistency and helping to exclude artifacts. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; experimental chain is self-contained

full rationale

The manuscript reports direct ARPES spectra, Ti L_{2,3} and R M_{4,5} XMCD/XAS data, and standard sum-rule extractions of spin/orbital moments backed by atomic multiplet calculations. The interpretive statement that the small Ti moment in the Gd compound is 'presumably driven by proximity' to Gd zigzag chains rests on comparative absence of signal in Nd/Sm analogs plus crystal geometry, not on any equation that defines the moment in terms of itself or reduces a fitted parameter to the same dataset. DFT band-structure results are independent of the XMCD moments. No self-definitional loops, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard experimental techniques and domain assumptions rather than new free parameters or postulated entities.

axioms (2)

domain assumption XMCD sum rules can be applied to extract spin and orbital moments from L2,3 and M4,5 edges
Invoked to obtain quantitative magnetic moments from the measured XAS/XMCD spectra.
domain assumption DFT accurately reproduces the bulk Ti-band hybridization and surface-state character
Used to assign the weak electron-like pocket at Gamma as a surface state.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5701 in / 1598 out tokens · 42441 ms · 2026-05-07T11:49:17.036151+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

and AM 6X6 [8–11] families have had a significant im- pact, constituting a major focus of research in this field. Recent studies of various kagome materials have identi- fied diverse collective phases such as charge density wave (CDW) [12–14], superconductivity [15, 16], exotic mag- netism [17–19] and topological phases [20–23]. Recently, a new 134-kagome...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[2]

Sachdev, Phys

S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B45, 12377 (1992)

1992
[3]

Balents, Nature464, 199 (2010)

L. Balents, Nature464, 199 (2010)

2010
[4]

M. Kang, S. Fang, L. Ye, H. C. Po, J. Denlinger, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, J. G. Checkelsky, and R. Comin, Nat. Commun.11, 4004 (2020)

2020
[5]

L. Chen, X. Teng, H. Tan, B. L. Winn, G. E. Granroth, F. Ye, D. H. Yu, R. A. Mole, B. Gao, B. Yan, M. Yi, and P. Dai, Nat. Commun.15, 1918 (2024)

1918
[6]

Guo and M

H.-M. Guo and M. Franz, Phys. Rev. B80, 113102 (2009)

2009
[7]

M. Kang, L. Ye, S. Fang, J.-S. You, A. Levitan, M. Han, J. I. Facio, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, M. K. Chan, R. D. McDonald, D. Graf, K. Kaznatcheev, E. Vescovo, D. C. Bell, E. Kaxiras, J. van den Brink, M. Richter, M. Prasad Ghimire, J. G. Checkelsky, and R. Comin, Nat. Mater.19, 163 (2020)

2020
[8]

B. R. Ortiz, L. C. Gomes, J. R. Morey, M. Winiarski, M. Bordelon, J. S. Mangum, I. W. H. Oswald, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, J. R. Neilson, S. D. Wilson, E. Ertekin, T. M. McQueen, and E. S. Toberer, Phys. Rev. Mater.3, 094407 (2019)

2019
[9]

D. Chen, C. Le, C. Fu, H. Lin, W. Schnelle, Y. Sun, and C. Felser, Phys. Rev. B103, 144410 (2021)

2021
[10]

S. Peng, Y. Han, G. Pokharel, J. Shen, Z. Li, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, B. R. Ortiz, Y. Luo, H. Li, M. Guo, B. Wang, S. Cui, Z. Sun, Z. Qiao, S. D. Wilson, and J. He, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 266401 (2021)

2021
[11]

Y. Wang, G. T. McCandless, X. Wang, K. Thanabal- asingam, H. Wu, D. Bouwmeester, H. S. J. van der Zant, M. N. Ali, and J. Y. Chan, Chem. Mater.34, 7337–7343 (2022)

2022
[12]

Y. Hu, X. Wu, Y. Yang, S. Gao, N. C. Plumb, A. P. Schnyder, W. Xie, J. Ma, and M. Shi, Sci. Adv.8, eadd2024 (2022)

2022
[13]

Jiang, J.-X

Y.-X. Jiang, J.-X. Yin, M. M. Denner, N. Shumiya, B. R. Ortiz, G. Xu, Z. Guguchia, J. He, M. S. Hossain, X. Liu, J. Ruff, L. Kautzsch, S. S. Zhang, G. Chang, I. Belopolski, Q. Zhang, T. A. Cochran, D. Multer, M. Litskevich, Z.-J. Cheng, X. P. Yang, Z. Wang, R. Thomale, T. Neupert, S. D. Wilson, and M. Z. Hasan, Nat. Mater.20, 1353 (2021)

2021
[14]

H. W. S. Arachchige, W. R. Meier, M. Marshall, T. Mat- suoka, R. Xue, M. A. McGuire, R. P. Hermann, H. Cao, and D. Mandrus, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 216402 (2022)

2022
[15]

X. Teng, L. Chen, F. Ye, E. Rosenberg, Z. Liu, J.-X. Yin, Y.-X. Jiang, J. S. Oh, M. Z. Hasan, K. J. Neubauer, B. Gao, Y. Xie, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, R. J. Birgeneau, J.-H. Chu, M. Yi, and P. Dai, Nature609, 490 (2022)

2022
[16]

B. R. Ortiz, S. M. L. Teicher, Y. Hu, J. L. Zuo, P. M. Sarte, E. C. Schueller, A. M. M. Abeykoon, M. J. Krogstad, S. Rosenkranz, R. Osborn, R. Seshadri, L. Ba- lents, J. He, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 247002 (2020)

2020
[17]

Gui and R

X. Gui and R. J. Cava, Chem. Mater.34, 2824 (2022)

2022
[18]

Z. Hou, W. Ren, B. Ding, G. Xu, Y. Wang, B. Yang, Q. Zhang, Y. Zhang, E. Liu, F. Xu, W. Wang, G. Wu, X. Zhang, B. Shen, and Z. Zhang, Adv. Mater.29, 1701144 (2017)

2017
[19]

N. J. Ghimire, R. L. Dally, L. Poudel, D. C. Jones, D. Michel, N. T. Magar, M. Bleuel, M. A. McGuire, J. S. Jiang, J. F. Mitchell, J. W. Lynn, and I. I. Mazin, Sci. Adv.6, eabe2680 (2020)

2020
[20]

Pokharel, S

G. Pokharel, S. M. L. Teicher, B. R. Ortiz, P. M. Sarte, G. Wu, S. Peng, J. He, R. Seshadri, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. B104, 235139 (2021)

2021
[21]

L. Ye, M. Kang, J. Liu, F. von Cube, C. R. Wicker, T. Suzuki, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, D. C. Bell, L. Fu, R. Comin, and J. G. Checkelsky, Nature555, 638 (2018)

2018
[22]

D. F. Liu, A. J. Liang, E. K. Liu, Q. N. Xu, Y. W. Li, C. Chen, D. Pei, W. J. Shi, S. K. Mo, P. Dudin, T. Kim, C. Cacho, G. Li, Y. Sun, L. X. Yang, Z. K. Liu, S. S. P. Parkin, C. Felser, and Y. L. Chen, Science365, 9 1282 (2019)

2019
[23]

J.-X. Yin, W. Ma, T. A. Cochran, X. Xu, S. S. Zhang, H.-J. Tien, N. Shumiya, G. Cheng, K. Jiang, B. Lian, Z. Song, G. Chang, I. Belopolski, D. Multer, M. Litske- vich, Z.-J. Cheng, X. P. Yang, B. Swidler, H. Zhou, H. Lin, T. Neupert, Z. Wang, N. Yao, T.-R. Chang, S. Jia, and M. Z Hasan, Nature583, 533 (2020)

2020
[24]

M. Li, Q. Wang, G. Wang, Z. Yuan, W. Song, R. Lou, Z. Liu, Y. Huang, Z. Liu, H. Lei, Z. Yin, and S. Wang, Nat. Commun.12, 3129 (2021)

2021
[25]

B. R. Ortiz, H. Miao, D. S. Parker, F. Yang, G. D. Samolyuk, E. M. Clements, A. Rajapitamahuni, T. Yil- maz, E. Vescovo, J. Yan, A. F. May, and M. A. McGuire, Chem. Mater.35, 9756 (2023)

2023
[26]

H. Bie, S. Devon Moore, D. G. Piercey, A. V. Tkachuk, O. Y. Zelinska, and A. Mar, J. Solid State Chem.180, 2216 (2007)

2007
[27]

Ovchinnikov and S

A. Ovchinnikov and S. Bobev, Inorg. Chem.59, 3459 (2020)

2020
[28]

B. R. Ortiz, G. Pokharel, M. Gundayao, H. Li, F. Kaboudvand, L. Kautzsch, S. Sarker, J. P. C. Ruff, T. Hogan, S. J. G. Alvarado, P. M. Sarte, G. Wu, T. Braden, R. Seshadri, E. S. Toberer, I. Zeljkovic, and S. D. Wilson, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 064201 (2023)

2023
[29]

L. Chen, Y. Zhou, H. Zhang, X. Ji, K. Liao, Y. Ji, Y. Li, Z. Guo, X. Shen, R. Yu, X. Yu, H. Weng, and G. Wang, Commun. Mater.5, 73 (2024)

2024
[30]

Jiang, T

Z. Jiang, T. Li, J. Yuan, Z. Liu, Z. Cao, S. Cho, M. Shu, Y. Yang, Z. Li, J. Liu, J. Ding, Z. Liu, J. Liu, J. Ma, Z. Sun, X. Wan, Y. Guo, D. Shen, and D. Feng, Sci. Bull. 69, 3192 (2024)

2024
[31]

A. P. Sakhya, B. R. Ortiz, B. Ghosh, M. Sprague, M. I. Mondal, M. Matzelle, I. Bin Elius, N. Valadez, D. G. Man- drus, A. Bansil, and M. Neupane, Commun. Mater.5, 241 (2024)

2024
[36]

A. K. Sharma, B. Tai, S. Roychowdhury, P. Yanda, U. Burkhardt, X. Feng, C. Felser, and C. Shekhar, Phys. Rev. B113, L060402 (2026)

2026
[37]

Venturini, D

G. Venturini, D. Fruchart, and B. Malaman, J. Alloys Compd.236, 102 (1996)

1996
[38]

Malaman, G

B. Malaman, G. Venturini, R. Welter, J. Sanchez, P. Vul- liet, and E. Ressouche, J. Magn. Magn. Mater.202, 519 (1999)

1999
[39]

D. M. Clatterbuck and K. A. Gschneidner, J. Magn. Magn. Mater.207, 78 (1999)

1999
[40]

B. R. Ortiz, H. Zhang, K. G´ ornicka, D. S. Parker, G. D. Samolyuk, F. Yang, H. Miao, Q. Lu, R. G. Moore, A. F. May, and M. A. McGuire, Chem. Mater.36, 8002 (2024)

2024
[41]

J. Guo, L. Zhou, J. Ding, G. Qu, Z. Liu, Y. Du, H. Zhang, J. Li, Y. Zhang, F. Zhou, W. Qi, M. Cui, Y. Zhang, F. Guo, T. Wang, F. Fei, Y. Huang, T. Qian, D. Shen, Y. Song, H. Weng, and F. Song, Sci. Bull.69, 2660 (2024)

2024
[42]

X. Li, Y. Yang, F. Guan, X. Zhu, W. Ning, and M. Tian, Appl. Phys. Lett.126, 092405 (2025)

2025
[43]

X. Yang, J. Pan, M. Yang, D. Chu, and S. Liu, J. Magn. Magn. Mater.621, 172916 (2025)

2025
[44]

J. Guo, S. Zhu, R. Zhou, R. Wang, Y. Wang, J. Sun, Z. Zhao, X. Dong, J. Cheng, H. Yang, J. Xiao, and H.-J. Gao, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 226704 (2025)

2025
[45]

P. Park, B. R. Ortiz, M. Sprague, A. P. Sakhya, S. A. Chen, M. D. Frontzek, W. Tian, R. Sibille, D. G. Maz- zone, C. Tabata, K. Kaneko, L. M. DeBeer-Schmitt, M. B. Stone, D. S. Parker, G. D. Samolyuk, H. Miao, M. Neu- pane, and A. D. Christianson, Nat. Commun.16, 4384 (2025)

2025
[46]

Singh, S

S. Singh, S. Rathod, R. chen, Lipika, Sneh, R. Y. Umetsu, Y. Sun, and K. Manna, Phys. Rev. B113, 134437 (2026)

2026
[47]

X. Han, H. Chen, Z. Cao, J. Guo, C. Tuo, M.-R. Li, F. Fei, H. Tan, J. Guo, Y. Shi, R. Zhou, R. Wang, Z. Zhao, H. Yang, F. Song, H. Yao, B. Yan, S. Zhu, Z. Wang, and H.-J. Gao, Nat. Commun.17, 2667 (2026)

2026
[48]

M. I. Mondal, A. P. Sakhya, M. Sprague, B. R. Ortiz, M. Matzelle, A. K. Kumay, A. Seal, B. Ghosh, A. Bansil, and M. Neupane, Phys. Rev. B112, L121104 (2025)

2025
[49]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Hafner, Phys. Rev. B47, 558 (1993)

1993
[50]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Comput. Mater. Sci.6, 15 (1996)

1996
[51]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Phys. Rev. B54, 11169 (1996)

1996
[52]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 3865 (1996)

1996
[53]

M. W. Haverkort, M. Zwierzycki, and O. K. Andersen, Phys. Rev. B85, 165113 (2012)

2012
[54]

Y. Lu, M. H¨ oppner, O. Gunnarsson, and M. W. Haverkort, Phys. Rev. B90, 085102 (2014)

2014
[55]

J. K. Lang, Y. Baer, and P. A. Cox, J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.11, 121 (1981)

1981
[56]

M. Kang, S. Fang, J.-K. Kim, B. R. Ortiz, S. H. Ryu, J. Kim, J. Yoo, G. Sangiovanni, D. Di Sante, B.-G. Park, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, S. D. Wilson, J.-H. Park, and R. Comin, Nat. Phys.18, 301 (2022)

2022
[57]

Y. Hu, J. Ma, Y. Li, Y. Jiang, D. J. Gawryluk, T. Hu, J. Teyssier, V. Multian, Z. Yin, S. Xu, S. Shin, I. Plokhikh, X. Han, N. C. Plumb, Y. Liu, J.-X. Yin, Z. Guguchia, Y. Zhao, A. P. Schnyder, X. Wu, E. Pomjakushina, M. Z. Hasan, N. Wang, and M. Shi, Nat. Commun.15, 1658 (2024)

2024
[58]

C. Yi, X. Feng, N. Mao, P. Yanda, S. Roychowdhury, Y. Zhang, C. Felser, and C. Shekhar, Phys. Rev. B109, 035124 (2024)

2024
[59]

S. Lee, C. Won, J. Kim, J. Yoo, S. Park, J. Den- linger, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, R. Comin, M. Kang, and J.-H. Park, npj Quantum Mater.9, 15 (2024)

2024
[60]

Subires, A

D. Subires, A. Kar, A. Korshunov, C. A. Fuller, Y. Jiang, H. Hu, D. C˘ alug˘ aru, C. McMonagle, C. Yi, S. Roychowdhury, W. Schnelle, C. Shekhar, J. Strempfer, A. Jana, I. Vobornik, J. Dai, M. Tallarida, D. Chernyshov, A. Bosak, C. Felser, B. A. Bernevig, and S. Blanco- Canosa, Nat. Commun.16, 4091 (2025). 10

2025
[61]

L. Wu, Y. Hu, D. Fan, D. Wang, and X. Wan, Chin. Phys. Lett.40, 117103 (2023)

2023
[62]

Zhang, B

R. Zhang, B. Yu, H. Tan, Y. Cheng, F. Shen, J. Yang, D. Mu, X. Han, A. Zong, Q. Hu, X. Chen, Y. Hu, C. Meng, J. Ren, J. Li, Z. Chen, Z. Liu, M. Ye, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, S. Jin, B. Yan, L. He, Z. Wang, T. Shang, Y. Huang, B. Lv, and H. Ding, Phys. Rev. X15, 031012 (2025)

2025
[63]

Kushnirenko, L.-L

Y. Kushnirenko, L.-L. Wang, X. Su, A. Eaton, P. C. Canfield, A. Kaminski, B. Schrunk, and E. O’Leary, Phys. Rev. B112, 155119 (2025)

2025
[64]

B. T. Thole, P. Carra, F. Sette, and G. van der Laan, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 1943 (1992)

1943
[65]

Carra, B

P. Carra, B. T. Thole, M. Altarelli, and X. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 694 (1993)

1993
[66]

J.-S. Lee, Y. W. Xie, H. K. Sato, C. Bell, Y. Hikita, H. Y. Hwang, and C.-C. Kao, Nat. Mater.12, 703 (2013)

2013
[67]

Salluzzo, S

M. Salluzzo, S. Gariglio, D. Stornaiuolo, V. Sessi, S. Rusponi, C. Piamonteze, G. M. De Luca, M. Mi- nola, D. Marr´ e, A. Gadaleta, H. Brune, F. Nolting, N. B. Brookes, and G. Ghiringhelli, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 087204 (2013)

2013
[68]

Khmelevskyi, P

S. Khmelevskyi, P. Mohn, J. Redinger, and M. Weinert, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 146403 (2005)

2005
[69]

V. Rose, K. Br¨ uggemann, R. David, and R. Franchy, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 037202 (2007)

2007
[70]

Chikina, M

A. Chikina, M. H¨ oppner, S. Seiro, K. Kummer, S. Danzenb¨ acher, S. Patil, A. Generalov, M. G¨ uttler, Y. Kucherenko, E. V. Chulkov, Y. M. Koroteev, K. Koepernik, C. Geibel, M. Shi, M. Radovic, C. Laub- schat, and D. V. Vyalikh, Nat. Commun.5, 3171 (2014)

2014
[71]

G¨ uttler, A

M. G¨ uttler, A. Generalov, M. M. Otrokov, K. Kum- mer, K. Kliemt, A. Fedorov, A. Chikina, S. Danzenb¨ acher, S. Schulz, E. V. Chulkov, Y. M. Koroteev, N. Caroca- Canales, M. Shi, M. Radovic, C. Geibel, C. Laubschat, P. Dudin, T. K. Kim, M. Hoesch, C. Krellner, and D. V. Vyalikh, Sci. Rep.6, 24254 (2016)

2016
[72]

S. Kim, J. Bang, C.-y. Lim, S. Y. Lee, J. Hyun, G. Lee, Y. Lee, J. D. Denlinger, S. Huh, C. Kim, S. Y. Song, J. Seo, D. Thapa, S.-G. Kim, Y. H. Lee, Y. Kim, and S. W. Kim, Nat. Mater.21, 1269 (2022)

2022
[73]

Sarafidis, F

C. Sarafidis, F. Wilhelm, A. Rogalev, M. Gjoka, and O. Kalogirou, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter.21, 236001 (2009)

2009
[74]

Y. Shu, X. Mi, Y. Wei, S. Tao, A. Wang, Y. Chai, D. Ma, X. Yang, and M. He, Phys. Rev. B111, 155103 (2025)

2025
[75]

P. Wei, S. Lee, F. Lemaitre, L. Pinel, D. Cutaia, W. Cha, F. Katmis, Y. Zhu, D. Heiman, J. Hone, J. S. Moodera, and C.-T. Chen, Nat. Mater.15, 711 (2016)

2016
[76]

Katmis, V

F. Katmis, V. Lauter, F. S. Nogueira, B. A. Assaf, M. E. Jamer, P. Wei, B. Satpati, J. W. Freeland, I. Eremin, D. Heiman, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and J. S. Moodera, Nature 533, 513 (2016)

2016
[77]

Jiang, C.-Z

Z. Jiang, C.-Z. Chang, C. Tang, P. Wei, J. S. Moodera, and J. Shi, Nano Lett.15, 5835 (2015)

2015
[78]

M. A. Ruderman and C. Kittel, Phys. Rev.96, 99 (1954)

1954
[79]

H. X. Yang, A. Hallal, D. Terrade, X. Waintal, S. Roche, and M. Chshiev, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 046603 (2013). Supplementary Material of ‘Revealing magnetism in the distorted kagomeRTi 3Bi4 (R = Nd, Sm, Gd) via ARPES and XMCD’ C. Lim,1,∗ F. Ballester,1, 2 A. Kar,1 M. Alkorta,2, 3 D. Subires,1, 4 J. Dai,5 M. Tallarida,5 E. Vescovo,6 T. K. Kim, 7 C. Cacho,7 C...

2013
[80]

MAGNETIC CHARACTERIZA TION Magnetization measurements ofRTi 3Bi4 (R=Nd, Sm and Gd), see Fig. S1. The temperature dependence of the magnetization reveals magnetic transitions of∼10 K (Nd),∼25 K (Sm) and∼15 K (Gd), in agreement with the reports in the literature [1–6]. 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 M (µB/Nd) 30252015105 T (K) 0.010 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.000 M (µB...
[81]

CORE LEVEL XPS Before the ARPES measurements, the core-level spectra ofRTi 3Bi4 compounds (R= Nd, Sm, and Gd) were examined using 110 eV photons. Fig. S6 shows the resulting core-level spectra, which reveal Bi 5dand Ti 3ppeaks common to all three compounds. In contrast, each compound exhibits distinct lanthanide 4fspectral features. In ∗ chanyoung.lim@dip...
[82]

S7 displaysk x-hνplane Fermi surfaces ofRTi 3Bi4 compounds, which correspond to thek x-kz plane Fermi surfaces

ANGLE RESOL VED PHOTOELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY Fig. S7 displaysk x-hνplane Fermi surfaces ofRTi 3Bi4 compounds, which correspond to thek x-kz plane Fermi surfaces. The two-dimensional nature of these Fermi surfaces confirms minimal interlayer electronic interactions in these compounds. 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 k x (Å -1 ) high low 110 1...
[83]

The valence states are dominantly Ti 3d, with a noticeable contribution from Bi states starting from approximately 1 eV belowE F

DFT CALCULA TIONS For the pDOS calculation we used a 21×21×21 Γ-centered k-mesh grid for the BZ sampling, using the same parameters as with the calculations mentioned in the main text. The valence states are dominantly Ti 3d, with a noticeable contribution from Bi states starting from approximately 1 eV belowE F . Between the three compounds, we found no ...
[84]

S13 shows the estimation of the magnetic moment from Gd 5delectrons using GdL-edge XMCD results (2p-5d transition)

XMCD A T THE GD L-EDGE Fig. S13 shows the estimation of the magnetic moment from Gd 5delectrons using GdL-edge XMCD results (2p-5d transition). First, we measured XAS and XMCD spectra at the GdL 3 edge for both Gd foil and then calculate the 16 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 XMCD signal (arb. unit) 7280727072607250724072307220 Energy (eV) 3 2 1 0 XAS intensity (arb....

Showing first 80 references.