Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Experimental electronic phase diagram in a diamond-lattice antiferromagnetic system

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Substituting nickel for cobalt in the diamond-lattice magnet Co1.3Ir1.7S4 produces a full phase diagram whose central feature is the replacement of the expected antiferromagnetic quantum critical point by a glassy non-Fermi-liquid metal…

desk verdict A solid first doping study of a new diamond-lattice antiferromagnet, with a phase diagram that likely holds even if the quantum Griffiths interpretation is provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02213 v1 pith:SBJR3NDN submitted 2024-12-03 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Liang-Wen Ji , Wu-Zhang Yang , Yi-Ming Lu , Jia-Yi Lu , Jing Li , Yi Liu , Zhi Ren , Guang-Han Cao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 72.80.Ga74.62.Dh75.30.-m74.70.Xa
keywords phasediagramdiamond-latticeantiferromagnetthiospinelinsulator-metalcrossovernon-FermiliquidquantumGriffithsspinglassNidoping
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

Electron-doping the diamond-lattice antiferromagnet Co1.3Ir1.7S4 with nickel does more than suppress magnetic order: it yields a complete phase diagram in which the insulating magnet becomes metallic, the antiferromagnetic transition is pushed toward zero temperature, and the metal at the edge of magnetic order refuses to behave as a Fermi liquid. The paper constructs this diagram from resistivity, magnetization, and specific-heat measurements on a series of polycrystalline samples. The key claim is that the antiferromagnetic quantum critical point is avoided: instead of a clean continuous transition at the critical doping $x_c\approx0.95$, the metallic state is disorder-dominated, with a spin-glass-like tail and non-Fermi-liquid behavior (resistivity exponent $\alpha\approx1.2$–$1.3$ and divergent $C/T$) persisting above $x_c$. If correct, the system becomes a concrete experimental platform for studying quantum Griffiths physics in a doped diamond-lattice magnet, with the disorder that suppresses Fermi-liquid behavior also likely inhibiting the superconductivity that electron doping of this family was expected to produce.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the phase diagram itself, built on the A-site diamond sublattice and the narrow charge-transfer gap of the parent Co[Co0.3Ir1.7]S4. Ni2+ substituted for Co2+ at the tetrahedral A site acts as a nominally nonmagnetic electron donor: the added electrons fill the antibonding Co-$t_2$/S-$p$ states, closing the gap and driving metallization, while diluting the magnetic Co sublattice and weakening the nearest-neighbor antiferromagnetic exchange. In the metallic state, the randomness of Co/Ni occupancy, including partial site inversion at high doping, frustrates the RKKY-coupled spins into a spin-glass-like phase. In the paper's interpretation this same disorder converts the would-be quantum critical endpoint into a finite region of quantum Griffiths behavior, replacing the conventional Fermi-liquid description.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of Ni and Co site occupancies—for example by neutron powder diffraction or extended X-ray absorption fine structure on samples near x=0.95–1—showing that the B-site Ni fraction is far above the estimated 6.7% would undermine the doping-axis interpretation; conversely, a clean single crystal of the same composition showing a conventional antiferromagnetic quantum critical point instead of the glassy non-Fermi-liquid tail would disprove the disorder-driven phase diagram.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors establish that substituting Ni for Co on the A-site diamond sublattice of Co1.3Ir1.7S4 drives an insulator-to-metal crossover at $x\approx0.35$, gradually suppresses the Néel order from 292 K at $x=0$ to 23 K at $x=0.7$, and completely extinguishes it near $x_c\approx0.95$. In the metallic state at $x\geq0.4$ a spin-glass-like transition emerges at low temperatures, and just above the magnetic phase boundary the resistivity follows a power law $T^\alpha$ with $\alpha\approx1.2$–$1.3$ instead of the Fermi-liquid $T^2$, while $C/T$ grows logarithmically at low temperatures and the electronic specific-heat coefficient $\gamma$ increases substantially. The paper concludes that an antiferromagnetic quantum critical point is avoided at $x_c$ and that the glassy tail above the critical concentration aligns with an extended quantum Griffiths phase produced by quenched disorder, supported by power-law fits and a scaling collapse of magnetization data.

Load-bearing premise

The whole x-axis story assumes that the nominal nickel content x is actually built into the A-site diamond lattice as nonmagnetic Ni2+ electron donors, but if Co–Ni site inversion at high doping is larger than the estimated 4.6–6.7% or varies differently with x, both the assignment of the glassy tail to A-site Co dilution and the precise value of xc would need revision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At $x\approx0.35$ the system crosses from an insulator to a metal, so electron doping of this diamond-lattice antiferromagnet provides a controlled route from a charge-transfer-gap insulator to a correlated metal.
  • The antiferromagnetic transition is suppressed smoothly, with $T_N$ decreasing from 292 K to 23 K by $x=0.7$ and vanishing near $x_c=0.95$, so the phase diagram gives a clear target concentration for magnetic quantum criticality.
  • In the metallic regime above $x_c$, the absence of Fermi-liquid behavior—$\alpha\approx1.2$–$1.3$ and divergent $C/T$ with enhanced effective mass—means the material joins the small family of spinel compounds showing non-Fermi-liquid physics.
  • The spin-glass-like tail persisting beyond $x_c$ implies that quenched disorder, not a clean quantum critical point, controls the low-temperature physics near the magnetic boundary.
  • The paper reports no superconductivity in the doped region, attributing its absence to the disorder that also produces the glassy non-Fermi-liquid state.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct experimental determination of Ni versus Co site occupancy—for example by neutron or resonant X-ray diffraction—could test whether the glassy tail is intrinsic to A-site dilution or an artifact of larger-than-estimated Co–Ni site inversion; this is a measurement the paper does not perform.
  • Extending the doping beyond $x=1$ or applying pressure could tune the system closer to the suppressed quantum critical point, offering a test of whether the glassy NFL region expands or sharpens into a conventional QCP.
  • The scaling exponents reported for the Griffiths analysis (e.g., $\eta$ values near 0.4–0.8 and the $H/T$ collapse) provide quantitative fingerprints that could be compared with infinite-randomness fixed-point predictions, a comparison the paper leaves to future work.
  • If the disorder-driven interpretation holds, similar non-Fermi-liquid and glassy behavior may appear in other doped diamond-lattice or charge-transfer-gap spinels, making this family a useful testing ground for theory.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a systematic Ni-doping study of the thiospinel Co1.3-xNixIr1.7S4 (0 ≤ x ≤ 1), combining powder XRD, dc magnetization, electrical resistivity, and specific heat. The authors track the evolution from an antiferromagnetic insulator (TN ≈ 292 K at x = 0) through an insulator-to-metal crossover near x ≈ 0.35, a spin-glass-like transition in the metallic state, and a non-Fermi-liquid regime for x ≥ 0.95 with resistivity exponent α ≈ 1.2–1.3 and divergent C/T. They construct a phase diagram (Fig. 5) in which the AFM quantum critical point is avoided and argue that the glassy tail above xc is consistent with a quantum Griffiths phase driven by quenched disorder. DFT calculations are used to support the A-site Ni occupancy and to estimate the bare electronic specific-heat coefficient.

Significance. If the phase diagram is correct, this paper provides a new doped diamond-lattice antiferromagnet in which disorder converts an avoided QCP into a glassy non-Fermi-liquid region. The key strengths are the use of three independent bulk probes (magnetization, resistivity, specific heat) that yield mutually consistent transition temperatures for the AFM order, and the transparent reporting of the site-inversion caveat. The DFT calculations are a useful complement, although they are not the main evidence. The claim of a quantum Griffiths phase is appropriately phrased as a possibility rather than a definitive identification, and the authors explicitly call for further investigation. The main limitation is the indirect determination of the A-site occupancy, which anchors the entire x-axis, and the lack of quantitative uncertainty estimates on the fitted exponents and phase boundaries.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III.A, Table S2] The entire x-axis and the location of xc ≈ 0.95 in Fig. 5 are interpreted under the assumption that nominal Ni concentration equals the active A-site Ni content, with Ni acting as a nonmagnetic electron donor. The manuscript itself reports 4.6–6.7% site inversion for x ≥ 0.9, estimated only from the deviation of the lattice parameter from a linear fit (Table S2). No direct measurement of site occupancy (resonant XRD, XAS, neutron diffraction) is provided. If the inversion is larger or composition-dependent in the metallic/NFL region, the effective A-site Co concentration becomes 1 − x + y, which shifts the insulator-metal crossover, TN(x), and xc, and the assignment of the glassy tail to A-site Co dilution would need revision. Please add a direct occupancy determination or, failing that, a quantitative sensitivity analysis of the phase diagram to plausible inversion profiles.
  2. [§III.E, Fig. 5] The phase diagram in Fig. 5 is presented without uncertainty estimates on any of the boundaries, although TN is extracted from three different probes and the paper states only that the values are 'generally consistent.' Please define clearly how each transition temperature is determined (peak position, inflection point, onset, or fit criterion), provide error bars or at least representative uncertainties on the points in Fig. 5, and quantify the consistency among TχN, TρN, and TCN. This is load-bearing because the claimed suppression of TN to zero at xc ≈ 0.95 and the existence of the SG-like tail above xc rest on the precise evolution of these boundaries.
  3. [§III.D, Eq. (C/T fits)] The specific-heat analysis uses C/T = γ + βT² for x ≤ 0.6 and C/T = γ + βT² − η ln T for 0.8 ≤ x ≤ 1, with no documented justification for this crossover or comparison of fit residuals. A logarithmic term can often mimic other low-temperature contributions, and the reported γ values at x ≥ 0.8 may be sensitive to the choice of fitting form and to the fitted temperature window. Please report the temperature ranges used, the resulting fit parameters with uncertainties, and a comparison against alternative fits (e.g., including a T³ term only, or a fixed ln T term at all x). This is important because the large enhancement of γ is used to support the effective-mass increase and the NFL interpretation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§III.C, Fig. 3(d)] The description of α ≈ 1.7 at x ≤ 0.9 as being 'close to the Fermi-liquid scenario (α = 2)' is somewhat generous; a 15% deviation is significant and deserves a comment on whether this represents a distinct crossover or simply a fit artifact. Please state the fitted temperature ranges and the statistical errors on α.
  2. [§III.B, Fig. 2(b)] The spin-glass-like transition is identified solely from ZFC/FC bifurcation and a broad anomaly in resistivity and specific heat. Additional evidence such as ac-susceptibility frequency dependence or aging/memory measurements would strengthen the assignment. If such measurements are unavailable, the text should more explicitly acknowledge that the 'SG-like' label is provisional.
  3. [§III.A, Fig. 1(d)] The linear fit in Fig. 1(d) is used both to demonstrate lattice contraction and to estimate the site-inversion degree, but the fit range and the uncertainty of the fitted slope are not stated. Please clarify whether the fit includes only x ≤ 0.8 and what the statistical error of the slope is, since the inversion estimate depends directly on this baseline.
  4. [§II, Methods (DFT)] The DFT calculations are performed with nonmagnetic configurations, and it would be helpful to state explicitly how this choice affects the computed density of states and the comparison with the experimental γ, especially in the magnetically ordered region.
  5. [References] References [4] and [39] cite the same paper (J. Huang et al., Nat. Phys. 2024); please consolidate or distinguish the two citations. Also, the typo 'diamond-lattic e' appears in the abstract of the manuscript version provided; please correct it.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: all phase-diagram quantities are measured and the QGP comparison is an independent theoretical consistency check.

full rationale

This paper reports measured quantities (lattice parameter, magnetic susceptibility, resistivity, specific heat) and constructs the phase diagram directly from those measurements; there is no claimed first-principles derivation whose output is equivalent to its input. The AFM ordering temperatures are determined independently from susceptibility, resistivity, and specific heat, and the agreement among them is a consistency check rather than an assumed conclusion. The NFL exponent alpha and QGP exponents eta are fit to the data and then compared with theoretical expectations from independent references [41,46-48]; this is a phenomenological consistency assessment, not a prediction generated from the same fitted parameters. The only self-citations ([3,13,40]) are to prior published work on related spinels and superconductors, and the parent compound characterization cited in [13] is also independently re-measured in this paper (Figs. 2(a) and 3(a)), so the citation is not load-bearing. The site-inversion estimate from the lattice-parameter deviation (Table S2) is an indirect structural calibration and represents a possible systematic uncertainty in the nominal x-axis, but it does not make any step circular. Overall, the paper is self-contained as an experimental study with no circular derivation chain.

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

The phase diagram interpretation rests on fitting parameters extracted from bulk measurements and on the assumption that Ni occupies the A site and acts as a nonmagnetic electron donor. No new physical entities are introduced; the QGP is a previously proposed phase. Fit uncertainties are not reported, and the QGP exponents are fit to the same data they are used to interpret.

free parameters (5)
  • Curie-Weiss parameters chi0, theta_W, C = x-dependent; shown in Fig. 2(e), not tabulated in main text
    Modified Curie-Weiss fit chi = chi0 + C/(T - theta_W) for 0.6 <= x <= 1; used to derive effective moments and Weiss temperature.
  • Resistivity power-law exponent alpha and coefficient A' = alpha ~ 1.7 at x <= 0.9; alpha ~ 1.2-1.3 at x >= 0.95
    Fit rho = rho0 + A' T^alpha to low-temperature resistivity; used to classify Fermi-liquid versus non-Fermi-liquid behavior.
  • Specific-heat coefficients gamma, beta, eta = gamma increases with x; C/T = gamma + beta T^2 for x <= 0.6 and C/T = gamma + beta T^2 - eta ln T for 0.8 <= x <= 1
    Fits to low-temperature heat capacity; gamma is used as evidence of quasiparticle mass enhancement.
  • Quantum Griffiths exponents eta and delta = eta = 0.51 (chi), 0.8 (M-H), 0.42 (Delta C/T); scaling eta = 0.46, delta = 1.32
    Power-law fits to chi(T), M(H), and Delta C/T for Co0.3NiIr1.7S4 and a scaling collapse; used to support the QGP interpretation.
  • Site inversion degree = 4.6% to 6.7% for x >= 0.9
    Estimated from the deviation of lattice parameter a from linear behavior (Table S2) to account for high-doping anomalies.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Nominal Ni content equals actual A-site Ni fraction and the samples are single-phase.
    XRD shows no secondary phases and DFT free-energy prefers A-site Ni, but no direct site-resolved composition measurement is provided; high-x site inversion of 4.6-6.7% is acknowledged (Section III.A, Fig. 1(e), Table S2).
  • domain assumption Ni at the A site is nonmagnetic and donates one electron per substituted Co, so doping controls band filling and dilutes magnetic Co.
    Used throughout Sections III.B-E to interpret the decrease in Curie constant and suppression of AFM; based on NiIr2S4 being nonmagnetic (ref 31) and crystal-field arguments.
  • domain assumption The anomalies in susceptibility, resistivity, and heat capacity mark cooperative phase transitions (AFM and spin-glass-like) rather than extrinsic artifacts.
    T_N and T_SG are read from bulk-probe extrema and upturns; no neutron diffraction or muSR confirms the ordered state (Sections III.B-D).
  • standard math Curie-Weiss and power-law fitting forms capture the physics without omitted contributions.
    Fits to chi = chi0 + C/(T - theta_W), rho = rho0 + A' T^alpha, and C/T = gamma + beta T^2 - eta ln T are standard; this assumes lattice and magnon contributions are correctly separated.
  • ad hoc to paper Low-temperature power laws and log-T divergence are intrinsic signatures of a quantum Griffiths phase.
    This is the interpretive leap in Section III.E; the authors note further investigation is needed and that exponents are comparable to QGP predictions. If these behaviors are extrinsic, the QGP claim would fail.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Experimental electronic phase diagram in a diamond-lattice antiferromagnetic system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SBJR3NDN

@misc{pith2026241202213,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Experimental electronic phase diagram in a diamond-lattice antiferromagnetic system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SBJR3NDN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02213}
}
abstract

We report Ni-doping effect on the magnetic and electronic properties of thiospinel Co$_{1-x}$Ni$_x$[Co$_{0.3}$Ir$_{1.7}$]S$_4$ (0 $\leq x \leq$ 1). The parent compound Co[Co$_{0.3}$Ir$_{1.7}$]S$_4$ exhibits antiferromagnetic order below $T_\mathrm{N} \sim$ 292 K within the $A$-site diamond sublattice, along with a narrow charge-transfer gap. Upon Ni doping, an insulator-to-metal crossover occurs at $x \sim$ 0.35, and the antiferromagnetism is gradually suppressed, with $T_\mathrm{N}$ decreasing to 23 K at $x =$ 0.7. In the metallic state, a spin-glass-like transition emerges at low temperatures. The antiferromagnetic transition is completely suppressed at $x_\mathrm{c} \sim$ 0.95, around which a non-Fermi-liquid behavior emerges, evident from the $T^\alpha$ temperature dependence with $\alpha \approx$ 1.2-1.3 in resistivity and divergent behavior of $C/T$ in specific heat at low temperatures. Meanwhile, the electronic specific heat coefficient $\gamma$ increases substantially, signifying an enhancement of the quasiparticle effective mass. The magnetic phase diagram has been established, in which an antiferromagnetic quantum critical point is avoided at $x_\mathrm{c}$. Conversely, the observed glass-like tail above the critical concentration aligns more closely with theoretical predictions for an extended region of quantum Griffiths phase in the presence of strong disorder.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.02213 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) Powder x-ray diffraction of Co [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) (a) Temperature dependence of magnet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) (a) Temperature dependence of electr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) Temperature dependence of specifi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Phase diagram of Co [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tsurkan, H.-A

    V. Tsurkan, H.-A. K. Von Nidda, J. Deisenhofer, P. Lunkenheimer, and A. Loidl, On the complexity of spinels: Magnetic, electronic, and polar ground states, Phys. Rep. 926, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Hagino, Y

    T. Hagino, Y. Seki, N. Wada, S. Tsuji, T. Shirane, K. I. Kumagai, and S. Nagata, Superconductivity in spinel- type compounds CuRh 2S4 and CuRh 2Se4, Phys. Rev. B 51, 12673 (1995)

    work page 1995

  3. [3]

    Jin, S.-H

    Y.-Y. Jin, S.-H. Sun, Y.-W. Cui, Q.-Q. Zhu, L.-W. Ji, Z. Ren, and G.-H. Cao, Bulk superconductivity and Pauli paramagnetism in nearly stoichiometric CuCo 2S4, Phys. Rev. Mater. 5, 074804 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Huang, L

    J. Huang, L. Chen, Y. Huang, C. Setty, B. Gao, Y. Shi, Z. Liu, Y. Zhang, T. Yilmaz, E. Vescovo, et al. , Non-Fermi liquid behaviour in a correlated flat-band pyrochlore lattice, Nat. Phys. , 1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    P. G. Radaelli, Y. Horibe, M. J. Gutmann, H. Ishibashi, C. Chen, R. M. Ibberson, Y. Koyama, Y.-S. Hor, V. Kiryukhin, and S.-W. Cheong, Formation of isomor- phic Ir 3+ and Ir 4+ octamers and spin dimerization in the spinel CuIr 2S4, Nature 416, 155 (2002)

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    Fichtl, V

    R. Fichtl, V. Tsurkan, P. Lunkenheimer, J. Hemberger, V. Fritsch, H.-A. KrugvonNidda, E.-W. Scheidt, and A. Loidl, Orbital Freezing and Orbital Glass State in FeCr2S4, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 027601 (2005)

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    Harris and M

    M. Harris and M. Zinkin, Frustration in the pyrochlore antiferromagnets, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 10, 417 (1996)

    work page 1996

  8. [8]

    Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    L. Balents, Spin liquids in frustrated magnets, Nature 464, 199 (2010)

    2010

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Bergman, J

    D. Bergman, J. Alicea, E. Gull, S. Trebst, and L. Balents, Order-by-disorder and spiral spin-liquid in frustrated diamond-lattice antiferromagnets, Nat. Phys. 3, 487 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    K. W. Plumb, J. R. Morey, J. A. Rodriguez-Rivera, H. Wu, A. A. Podlesnyak, T. M. McQueen, and C. L. Broholm, Antiferromagnetic and orbital ordering on a diamond lattice near quantum criticality, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041055 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    S. Gao, O. Zaharko, V. Tsurkan, Y. Su, J. S. White, G. S. Tucker, B. Roessli, F. Bourdarot, R. Sibille, D. Chernyshov, et al. , Spiral spin-liquid and the emer- gence of a vortex-like state in MnSc 2S4, Nat. Phys. 13, 157 (2017). 8

    2017

  4. [12]

    S. Gao, H. D. Rosales, F. A. Gomez Albarracin, V. Tsurkan, G. Kaur, T. Fennell, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, P. ˇCerm´ ak, A. Schneidewind, et al. , Fractional anti- ferromagnetic skyrmion lattice induced by anisotropic couplings, Nature 586, 37 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Ji, S.-Q

    L.-W. Ji, S.-Q. Wu, B.-Z. Li, W.-Z. Yang, S.-J. Song, Y. Liu, J. Li, Z. Ren, and G.-H. Cao, Inter-cation charge transfer mediated antiferromagnetism in Co 1+xIr2−xS4, Phys. Rev. B 110, 155139 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Imada, A

    M. Imada, A. Fujimori, and Y. Tokura, Metal-insulator transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1039 (1998)

    1998

  7. [15]

    D. I. Khomskii, Transition metal compounds (Cambridge University Press, 2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    G. Cao, S. Jiang, X. Lin, C. Wang, Y. Li, Z. Ren, Q. Tao, C. Feng, J. Dai, Z. Xu, et al. , Narrow superconducting window in LaFe 1−xNixAsO, Phys. Rev. B 79, 174505 (2009)

    2009

  9. [17]

    L. Li, Y. Luo, Q. Wang, H. Chen, Z. Ren, Q. Tao, Y. Li, X. Lin, M. He, Z. Zhu, et al. , Superconductivity induced by Ni doping in BaFe 2As2 single crystals, New J. Phys. 11, 025008 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Hu and C

    J. Hu and C. Le, A possible new family of unconventional high temperature superconductors, Sci. Bull. 62, 212 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    J. Hu, Y. Gu, and C. Le, Predicting diamond-like Co- based chalcogenides as unconventional high temperature superconductors, Sci. Bull. 63, 1338 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Efficient iterative schem es for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  13. [21]

    P. E. Bl¨ ochl, Projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  14. [22]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  15. [23]

    Bellaiche and D

    L. Bellaiche and D. Vanderbilt, Virtual crystal ap- proximation revisited: Application to dielectric and piezoelectric properties of perovskites, Phys. Rev. B 61, 7877 (2000)

    2000

  16. [24]

    O. Knop, K. I. Reid, Sutarno, and Y. Nakagawa, Chalkogenides of the transition elements. VI. X-Ray, neutron, and magnetic investigation of the spinels Co3O4, NiCo 2O4, Co 3S4, and NiCo 2S4, Can. J. Chem. 46, 3463 (1968)

    1968

  17. [25]

    Huang and O

    C.-H. Huang and O. Knop, Chalkogenides of the transi- tion elements. VIII. An X-ray and neutron diffraction study of the spinel CoNi 2S4, Can. J. Chem. 49, 598 (1971)

    1971

  18. [26]

    Muller, Inorganic structural chemistry (John Wiley & Sons, 2007)

    U. Muller, Inorganic structural chemistry (John Wiley & Sons, 2007)

    2007

  19. [27]

    3−xNixIr2S4 (0.95 ≤ x ≤ 1.15), the specific heat of NiIr 2S4, the density of states and band structure for Co 1−xNix[Co0

    See Supplemental Material at [URL] for the free energy difference between Co 8−xNix[Co2Ir14]S32 and Co8−x+yNix−y[NiyCo2−yIr14]S32 (1 ≤ x ≤ 8, 1 ≤ y ≤ 2), the estimation of site inversion degree, the resistivit y of NiIr 2S4 and Co 1. 3−xNixIr2S4 (0.95 ≤ x ≤ 1.15), the specific h...

  20. [28]

    R. D. Shannon, Revised effective ionic radii and sys- tematic studies of interatomic distances in halides and chalcogenides, Acta Crystallogr. A 32, 751 (1976)

    1976

  21. [29]

    C. P. Poole Jr and H. A. Farach, Magnetic phase diagram of spinel spin-glasses, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 47, 55 (1982)

    1982

  22. [30]

    T. Naka, J. Valenta, T. Nakane, S. Ishii, M. Nakayama, H. Mamiya, K. Takehana, N. Tsujii, Y. Imanaka, Y. Mat- sushita, et al. , Phase transitions and slow spin dynamics of slightly inverted A-site spinel CoAl 2−xGaxO4, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 36, 125801 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Endoh, N

    R. Endoh, N. Matsumoto, S. Chikazawa, S. Nagata, T. Furubayashi, and T. Matsumoto, Metal-insulator transition in the spinel-type Cu 1−xNixIr2S4 system, Phys. Rev. B 64, 075106 (2001)

    2001

  24. [32]

    Rullier-Albenque, H

    F. Rullier-Albenque, H. Alloul, and R. Tourbot, Disord er and transport in cuprates: weak localization and mag- netic contributions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 157001 (2001)

    2001

  25. [33]

    Zhang, Y.-F

    G.-M. Zhang, Y.-F. Yang, and F.-C. Zhang, Self- doped Mott insulator for parent compounds of nickelate superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 101, 020501(R) (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Miranda and V

    E. Miranda and V. Dobrosavljevi´ c, Disorder-driven no n- Fermi liquid behaviour of correlated electrons, Rep. Prog. Phys. 68, 2337 (2005)

    2005

  27. [35]

    Stewart, Non-Fermi-liquid behavior in d-and f- electron metals, Rev

    G. Stewart, Non-Fermi-liquid behavior in d-and f- electron metals, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 797 (2001)

    2001

  28. [36]

    H. v. L¨ ohneysen, A. Rosch, M. Vojta, and P. W¨ olfle, Fermi-liquid instabilities at magnetic quantum phase transitions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 1015 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    Michon, C

    B. Michon, C. Girod, S. Badoux, J. Kaˇ cmarˇ c ´ ık, Q. Ma, M. Dragomir, H. Dabkowska, B. Gaulin, J.-S. Zhou, S. Pyon, et al. , Thermodynamic signatures of quantum criticality in cuprate superconductors, Nature 567, 218 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Grossman, J

    O. Grossman, J. S. Hofmann, T. Holder, and E. Berg, Specific heat of a quantum critical metal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 017601 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Huang, L

    J. Huang, L. Chen, Y. Huang, C. Setty, B. Gao, Y. Shi, Z. Liu, Y. Zhang, T. Yilmaz, E. Vescovo, et al. , Non-Fermi liquid behaviour in a correlated flat-band pyrochlore lattice, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    Liu, Z.-Y

    Y. Liu, Z.-Y. Liu, J.-K. Bao, P.-T. Yang, L.-W. Ji, S.- Q. Wu, Q.-X. Shen, J. Luo, J. Yang, J.-Y. Liu, et al. , Superconductivity under pressure in a chromium-based kagome metal, Nature 632, 1032 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Vojta, Quantum griffiths effects and smeared phase transitions in metals: Theory and experiment, J

    T. Vojta, Quantum griffiths effects and smeared phase transitions in metals: Theory and experiment, J. Low Temp. Phys. 161, 299 (2010)

    2010

  34. [42]

    Pfleiderer, P

    C. Pfleiderer, P. Boni, T. Keller, U. Rossler, and A. Rosch, Non-Fermi liquid metal without quantum criticality, Science 316, 1871 (2007)

    2007

  35. [43]

    Ubaid-Kassis, T

    S. Ubaid-Kassis, T. Vojta, and A. Schroeder, Quantum Griffiths Phase in the Weak Itinerant Ferromagnetic Alloy Ni 1−xVx, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 066402 (2010)

    2010

  36. [44]

    A. K. Mishra, S. S. Samatham, M. T. F. Telling, A. D. Hillier, M. R. Lees, K. G. Suresh, and V. Ganesan, Quantum Griffiths phase in disordered Mn 1−xFexSi, Phys. Rev. B 107, L100405 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Stewart, Unconventional superconductivity, Adv

    G. Stewart, Unconventional superconductivity, Adv. Phys. 66, 75 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    A. H. Castro Neto, G. Castilla, and B. A. Jones, Non- Fermi Liquid Behavior and Griffiths Phase in f -Electron Compounds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3531 (1998)

    1998

  39. [47]

    Andraka and A

    B. Andraka and A. M. Tsvelik, Observation of non-Fermi- liquid behavior in U 0. 2Y0. 8Pd3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2886 (1991)

    1991

  40. [48]

    A. M. Tsvelik and M. Reizer, Phenomenological theory of non-Fermi-liquid heavy-fermion alloys, Phys. Rev. B 48, 9887 (1993)

    1993

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.