pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18009 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Magnetic-fluctuation-driven suppression of spin-orbit hybridization in the surface ferromagnet GdAg₂/Ag(111)

Ryo Noguchi , Jongkeun Jung , Younsik Kim , Sungsoo Hahn , Changyoung Kim This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords magnetic fluctuationsspin-orbit hybridizationsurface ferromagnetnodal-line crossingsARPESnon-Hermitian physicsBerry curvature
0
0 comments X

The pith

Spin fluctuations suppress spin-orbit hybridization above the Curie temperature in GdAg2/Ag(111) while preserving nodal-line band crossings.

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

The paper investigates the interplay of magnetism and spin-orbit coupling in a two-dimensional surface ferromagnet with Weyl-nodal-line-like band crossings. It finds that spin fluctuations keep the nodal-line-derived crossings intact even above the magnetic ordering temperature. In contrast, the hybridization gap induced by spin-orbit coupling appears only at low temperatures, visible through redistribution of electronic spectral weight in photoemission data. The high-temperature suppression arises from spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering, which the authors model with an effective non-Hermitian description. This shows magnetic fluctuations acting as a knob to control topological features and Berry curvature.

Core claim

Spin fluctuations preserve the nodal-line-derived band crossings even above the Curie temperature, while SOC-induced hybridization develops only at low temperatures, as evidenced by spectral-weight redistribution. The suppression of the hybridization at high temperature is attributed to spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering, captured by an effective non-Hermitian framework.

What carries the argument

Effective non-Hermitian framework that incorporates spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering to suppress SOC-induced hybridization at elevated temperatures.

If this is right

  • Magnetic fluctuations function as a control for SOC-induced hybridization and the associated Berry curvature.
  • Nodal-line-derived band crossings stay protected above the Curie temperature owing to spin fluctuations.
  • Magnetic systems provide a platform for studying non-Hermitian band physics.
  • Temperature can tune the appearance of hybridization gaps in topological magnetic materials.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The fluctuation-driven mechanism may appear in other two-dimensional magnetic systems with topological bands.
  • Temperature-dependent ARPES on related magnets could help isolate fluctuation effects from phonon or lattice contributions.

Load-bearing premise

The temperature-dependent spectral-weight redistribution seen in ARPES arises primarily from magnetic spin fluctuations and decoherence rather than phonons, lattice changes, or experimental artifacts.

What would settle it

If ARPES measurements showed the SOC-induced hybridization gap remaining open above the Curie temperature, the claim that spin fluctuations suppress it would be contradicted.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18009 by Changyoung Kim, Jongkeun Jung, Ryo Noguchi, Sungsoo Hahn, Younsik Kim.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Schematics of spin-mixing-type band splitting in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Temperature-dependent ARPES band maps taken [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Temperature-dependent ARPES band maps measured with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Magnetic materials hosting topological band structures have attracted intense interest due to the interplay between magnetism and spin-orbit coupling (SOC). Here, using temperature- and polarization-dependent angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy, we investigate the surface ferromagnet GdAg$_2$/Ag(111), a two-dimensional system with Weyl-nodal-line-like band crossings. We find that spin fluctuations preserve the nodal-line-derived band crossings even above the Curie temperature, while SOC-induced hybridization develops only at low temperatures, as evidenced by spectral-weight redistribution. The suppression of the hybridization at high temperature is attributed to spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering, captured by an effective non-Hermitian framework. Our results establish magnetic fluctuations as a control knob for SOC-induced hybridization and associated Berry curvature, and highlight magnetic systems as a platform for exploring non-Hermitian band physics.

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.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports temperature- and polarization-dependent ARPES measurements on the surface ferromagnet GdAg₂/Ag(111), which hosts Weyl-nodal-line-like band crossings. It claims that spin fluctuations preserve these crossings above the Curie temperature Tc while SOC-induced hybridization (and associated spectral-weight redistribution) appears only below Tc. The high-temperature suppression of hybridization is attributed to spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering, which is captured by an effective non-Hermitian framework. The work positions magnetic fluctuations as a control parameter for SOC hybridization and Berry curvature.

Significance. If the magnetic origin of the observed redistribution is established, the result would provide a concrete experimental demonstration that spin fluctuations can selectively suppress SOC hybridization while preserving nodal crossings, thereby linking magnetic order to non-Hermitian band physics. The temperature-dependent ARPES data and the non-Hermitian modeling constitute a useful platform for exploring fluctuation-controlled topological features in 2D magnets.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results section on T-dependent ARPES (near Figs. 2–4)] The central claim that spectral-weight redistribution is driven by magnetic spin fluctuations (rather than phonons, lattice expansion, or Fermi-Dirac broadening) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative subtraction of non-magnetic temperature effects nor a comparison to a non-magnetic reference system. This leaves the attribution untested (see stress-test note).
  2. [Theoretical modeling section (Eqs. defining the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian)] The effective non-Hermitian framework is introduced to explain the redistribution, but it is unclear whether its band-dependent scattering rates are derived from independent measurements (e.g., linewidth analysis or transport) or adjusted to fit the observed intensity transfer. If the latter, the model risks circularity and does not demonstrate necessity of the magnetic mechanism.
  3. [Abstract and Fig. 3 caption] No error bars, fitting uncertainties, or explicit exclusion criteria for alternative explanations (phonon Debye-Waller factors, surface relaxation) are reported in the temperature series, making it impossible to verify that the data quantitatively support fluctuation-driven suppression over other T-dependent mechanisms.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Experimental methods] Polarization dependence should be shown explicitly for all temperatures to confirm the orbital character assignment used to identify hybridization.
  2. [Introduction or sample characterization] Clarify the precise definition of Tc in the surface layer versus bulk and how it is determined from the ARPES data themselves.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We appreciate the referee's positive assessment of the significance of our work and their recommendation for major revision. We have addressed all the major comments by proposing specific revisions to strengthen the evidence for the magnetic origin of the observed effects, clarify the modeling, and improve the reporting of uncertainties and alternative explanations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results section on T-dependent ARPES (near Figs. 2–4)] The central claim that spectral-weight redistribution is driven by magnetic spin fluctuations (rather than phonons, lattice expansion, or Fermi-Dirac broadening) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative subtraction of non-magnetic temperature effects nor a comparison to a non-magnetic reference system. This leaves the attribution untested (see stress-test note).

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this important point. While the manuscript does not include an explicit quantitative subtraction, the temperature series shows changes that are correlated with the magnetic transition temperature Tc. In the revised manuscript, we will add a quantitative estimate of non-magnetic contributions, including phonon Debye-Waller factors calculated from the Debye temperature and lattice expansion effects, demonstrating that they cannot account for the observed spectral weight redistribution. Regarding a non-magnetic reference, such a system is not directly comparable, but the polarization dependence unique to the magnetic order supports our attribution. We will incorporate this analysis in the results section. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Theoretical modeling section (Eqs. defining the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian)] The effective non-Hermitian framework is introduced to explain the redistribution, but it is unclear whether its band-dependent scattering rates are derived from independent measurements (e.g., linewidth analysis or transport) or adjusted to fit the observed intensity transfer. If the latter, the model risks circularity and does not demonstrate necessity of the magnetic mechanism.

    Authors: The scattering rates in the non-Hermitian model are informed by the temperature-dependent linewidths extracted from the ARPES spectra, which show increased broadening above Tc consistent with spin fluctuation scattering. We will revise the theoretical section to include the linewidth data and explicitly derive the imaginary potentials from these measurements, thereby demonstrating that the model is not circular but grounded in independent spectral features. This will clarify the necessity of the magnetic mechanism. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract and Fig. 3 caption] No error bars, fitting uncertainties, or explicit exclusion criteria for alternative explanations (phonon Debye-Waller factors, surface relaxation) are reported in the temperature series, making it impossible to verify that the data quantitatively support fluctuation-driven suppression over other T-dependent mechanisms.

    Authors: We agree that error bars and uncertainties should be reported. In the revision, we will include error bars on the data points in Fig. 3 and discuss the fitting procedures with uncertainties. Additionally, we will add explicit criteria and arguments excluding phonon Debye-Waller factors and surface relaxation by comparing the temperature dependence to known phonon scales and noting the absence of structural transitions. These additions will be made to the figure caption, abstract if appropriate, and the main text. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: framework presented as interpretive model for independent ARPES observations

full rationale

The abstract attributes temperature-dependent spectral-weight redistribution to spin decoherence within a non-Hermitian framework, but provides no equations, parameter-fitting procedure, or self-citation chain that reduces the central claim to its own inputs by construction. The observed band crossings and hybridization changes are reported as experimental facts from temperature- and polarization-dependent ARPES; the framework is invoked to interpret them rather than to derive the data. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input prediction, or load-bearing self-citation is exhibited in the given text. The derivation therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks (ARPES spectra), consistent with a score of 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard ARPES interpretation assumptions and an effective non-Hermitian model whose scattering parameters are not shown to be independently constrained.

free parameters (1)
  • band-dependent scattering rates
    Introduced in the non-Hermitian framework to account for differential scattering that suppresses hybridization at high temperature
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption ARPES spectral weight directly reflects the underlying band hybridization and its temperature evolution
    Used to interpret redistribution as evidence of suppressed SOC hybridization
invented entities (1)
  • effective non-Hermitian framework no independent evidence
    purpose: To model spin decoherence and band-dependent scattering effects on hybridization
    Postulated to explain why hybridization vanishes above the Curie temperature

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5458 in / 1348 out tokens · 54467 ms · 2026-05-10T03:58:08.604503+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tokura, K

    Y. Tokura, K. Yasuda, and A. Tsukazaki, Nature Re- views Physics1, 126 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Chang, C.-X

    C.-Z. Chang, C.-X. Liu, and A. H. MacDonald, Reviews of Modern Physics95, 011002 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Chang, J

    C. Chang, J. Zhang, X. Feng, J. Shen, and Z. Zhang, Science15, 167 (2013)

    work page 2013

  4. [4]

    J. G. Checkelsky, R. Yoshimi, A. Tsukazaki, K. S. Takahashi, Y. Kozuka, J. Falson, M. Kawasaki, and Y. Tokura, Nature Physics10, 731 (2014)

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    M. M. Otrokov, I. I. Klimovskikh, H. Bentmann, D. Es- tyunin, A. Zeugner, Z. S. Aliev, S. Gaß, A. U. B. Wolter, A. V. Koroleva, A. M. Shikin, M. Blanco-Rey, M. Hoff- 6 mann, I. P. Rusinov, A. Y. Vyazovskaya, S. V. Ere- meev, Y. M. Koroteev, V. M. Kuznetsov, F. Freyse, J. S´ anchez-Barriga, I. R. Amiraslanov, M. B. Babanly, N. T. Mamedov, N. A. Abdullayev,...

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Y. Gong, J. Guo, J. Li, K. Zhu, M. Liao, X. Liu, Q. Zhang, L. Gu, L. Tang, X. Feng, D. Zhang, W. Li, C. Song, L. Wang, P. Yu, X. Chen, Y. Wang, H. Yao, W. Duan, Y. Xu, S.-C. Zhang, X. Ma, Q.-K. Xue, and K. He, Chinese Physics Letters36, 076801 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Y. Deng, Y. Yu, M. Z. Shi, Z. Guo, Z. Xu, J. Wang, X. H. Chen, and Y. Zhang, Science367, 895 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Kuroda, T

    K. Kuroda, T. Tomita, M.-T. Suzuki, C. Bareille, A. A. Nugroho, P. Goswami, M. Ochi, M. Ikhlas, M. Nakayama, S. Akebi, R. Noguchi, R. Ishii, N. In- ami, K. Ono, H. Kumigashira, A. Varykhalov, T. Muro, T. Koretsune, R. Arita, S. Shin, T. Kondo, and S. Nakat- suji, Nature Materials16, 1090 (2017)

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    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, 1282 (2019)

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Morali, R

    N. Morali, R. Batabyal, P. K. Nag, E. Liu, Q. Xu, Y. Sun, B. Yan, C. Felser, N. Avraham, and H. Beidenkopf, Sci- ence365, 1286 (2019)

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Belopolski, K

    I. Belopolski, K. Manna, D. S. Sanchez, G. Chang, B. Ernst, J. Yin, S. S. Zhang, T. Cochran, N. Shumiya, H. Zheng, B. Singh, G. Bian, D. Multer, M. Litskevich, X. Zhou, S.-M. Huang, B. Wang, T.-R. Chang, S.-Y. Xu, A. Bansil, C. Felser, H. Lin, and M. Z. Hasan, Science 365, 1278 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    Q. Xu, E. Liu, W. Shi, L. Muechler, J. Gayles, C. Felser, and Y. Sun, Physical Review B97, 235416 (2018)

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    E. Liu, Y. Sun, N. Kumar, L. Muechler, A. Sun, L. Jiao, S.-Y. Yang, D. Liu, A. Liang, Q. Xu, J. Kroder, V. S¨ uß, H. Borrmann, C. Shekhar, Z. Wang, C. Xi, W. Wang, W. Schnelle, S. Wirth, Y. Chen, S. T. B. Goennenwein, and C. Felser, Nature Physics14, 1125 (2018)

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    D. F. Liu, E. K. Liu, Q. N. Xu, J. L. Shen, Y. W. Li, D. Pei, A. J. Liang, P. Dudin, T. K. Kim, C. Cacho, Y. F. Xu, Y. Sun, L. X. Yang, Z. K. Liu, C. Felser, S. S. P. Parkin, and Y. L. Chen, npj Quantum Materials7, 11 (2022)

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    Belopolski, T

    I. Belopolski, T. A. Cochran, X. Liu, Z.-J. Cheng, X. P. Yang, Z. Guguchia, S. S. Tsirkin, J.-X. Yin, P. Vir, G. S. Thakur, S. S. Zhang, J. Zhang, K. Kaznatcheev, G. Cheng, G. Chang, D. Multer, N. Shumiya, M. Litske- vich, E. Vescovo, T. K. Kim, C. Cacho, N. Yao, C. Felser, T. Neupert, and M. Z. Hasan, Physical Review Letters 127, 256403 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    D. F. Liu, Q. N. Xu, E. K. Liu, J. L. Shen, C. C. Le, Y. W. Li, D. Pei, A. J. Liang, P. Dudin, T. K. Kim, C. Cacho, Y. F. Xu, Y. Sun, L. X. Yang, Z. K. Liu, C. Felser, S. S. P. Parkin, and Y. L. Chen, Physical Review B104, 205140 (2021)

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Rossi, V

    A. Rossi, V. Ivanov, S. Sreedhar, A. L. Gross, Z. Shen, E. Rotenberg, A. Bostwick, C. Jozwiak, V. Taufour, S. Y. Savrasov, and I. M. Vishik, Physical Review B104, 155115 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    J.-Z. Ma, S. M. Nie, C. J. Yi, J. Jandke, T. Shang, M. Y. Yao, M. Naamneh, L. Q. Yan, Y. Sun, A. Chik- ina, V. N. Strocov, M. Medarde, M. Song, Y.-M. Xiong, G. Xu, W. Wulfhekel, J. Mesot, M. Reticcioli, C. Fran- chini, C. Mudry, M. M¨ uller, Y. G. Shi, T. Qian, H. Ding, and M. Shi, Science Advances5, eaaw4718 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    M. X. Sprague, S. Regmi, B. Ghosh, A. P. Sakhya, M. I. Mondal, I. B. Elius, N. Valadez, B. Singh, T. Romanova, D. Kaczorowski, A. Bansil, and M. Neupane, Physical Review B110, 045130 (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    D. Li, J. Pearson, S. D. Bader, D. N. McIlroy, C. Wald- fried, and P. A. Dowben, Physical Review B51, 13895 (1995)

    work page 1995

  21. [21]

    Weschke, C

    E. Weschke, C. Sch¨ ussler-Langeheine, R. Meier, A. V. Fedorov, K. Starke, F. H¨ ubinger, and G. Kaindl, Physical Review Letters77, 3415 (1996)

    work page 1996

  22. [22]

    Donath, B

    M. Donath, B. Gubanka, and F. Passek, Physical Review Letters77, 5138 (1996)

    work page 1996

  23. [23]

    Getzlaff, M

    M. Getzlaff, M. Bode, S. Heinze, R. Pascal, and R. Wiesendanger, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials184, 155 (1998)

    work page 1998

  24. [24]

    Maiti, M

    K. Maiti, M. C. Malagoli, A. Dallmeyer, and C. Carbone, Physical Review Letters88, 167205 (2002)

    work page 2002

  25. [25]

    A. V. Fedorov, T. Valla, F. Liu, P. D. Johnson, M. Wein- ert, and P. B. Allen, Physical Review B65, 212409 (2002)

    work page 2002

  26. [26]

    N. Qin, C. Chen, S. Du, X. Du, X. Zhang, Z. Yin, J. Zhou, R. Xu, X. Gu, Q. Zhang, W. Zhao, Y. Li, S.-K. Mo, Z. Liu, S. Zhang, Y. Guo, P. Tang, Y. Chen, and L. Yang, Physical Review B106, 035129 (2022)

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    H. Wu, C. Hu, Y. Xie, B. G. Jang, J. Huang, Y. Guo, S. Wu, C. Hu, Z. Yue, Y. Shi, R. Basak, Z. Ren, T. Yil- maz, E. Vescovo, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Roten- berg, A. Fedorov, J. D. Denlinger, C. Klewe, P. Shafer, D. Lu, M. Hashimoto, J. Kono, A. Frano, R. J. Birge- neau, X. Xu, J.-X. Zhu, P. Dai, J.-H. Chu, and M. Yi, Physical Review B109, 104410 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Zhong, C

    Y. Zhong, C. Peng, H. Huang, D. Guan, J. Hwang, K. H. Hsu, Y. Hu, C. Jia, B. Moritz, D. Lu, J.-S. Lee, J.-F. Jia, T. P. Devereaux, S.-K. Mo, and Z.-X. Shen, Nature Communications14, 5340 (2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Cheng, I

    Z. Cheng, I. Belopolski, H. Tien, T. A. Cochran, X. P. Yang, W. Ma, J. Yin, D. Chen, J. Zhang, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, G. Cheng, M. S. Hossain, Q. Zhang, M. Litskevich, Y. Jiang, N. Yao, N. B. M. Schroeter, V. N. Strocov, B. Lian, C. Felser, G. Chang, S. Jia, T. Chang, and M. Z. Hasan, Advanced Materials 35, 2205927 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    R. Lou, L. Zhou, W. Song, A. Fedorov, Z. Tu, B. Jiang, Q. Wang, M. Li, Z. Liu, X. Chen, O. Rader, B. B¨ uchner, Y. Sun, H. Weng, H. Lei, and S. Wang, Nature Commu- nications15, 9823 (2024)

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    Damascelli, Physica ScriptaT109, 61 (2004)

    A. Damascelli, Physica ScriptaT109, 61 (2004)

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    S´ anchez-Barriga, A

    J. S´ anchez-Barriga, A. Varykhalov, G. Springholz, H. Steiner, R. Kirchschlager, G. Bauer, O. Caha, E. Schierle, E. Weschke, A. A. ¨Unal, S. Valencia, M. Dunst, J. Braun, H. Ebert, J. Min´ ar, E. Golias, L. V. Yashina, A. Ney, V. Hol´ y, and O. Rader, Nature Com- munications7, 10559 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    A. M. Shikin, D. A. Estyunin, I. I. Klimovskikh, S. O. Fil- nov, E. F. Schwier, S. Kumar, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, A. Kimura, K. Kuroda, K. Yaji, S. Shin, Y. Takeda, Y. Saitoh, Z. S. Aliev, N. T. Mamedov, I. R. Ami- 7 raslanov, M. B. Babanly, M. M. Otrokov, S. V. Eremeev, and E. V. Chulkov, Scientific Reports10, 13226 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [34]

    Garnica, M

    M. Garnica, M. M. Otrokov, P. C. Aguilar, I. I. Klimovskikh, D. Estyunin, Z. S. Aliev, I. R. Amiraslanov, N. A. Abdullayev, V. N. Zverev, M. B. Babanly, N. T. Mamedov, A. M. Shikin, A. Arnau, A. L. V. de Parga, E. V. Chulkov, and R. Miranda, npj Quantum Materials 7, 7 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Chuang, C.-H

    F.-C. Chuang, C.-H. Hsu, H.-L. Chou, C. P. Crisostomo, Z.-Q. Huang, S.-Y. Wu, C.-C. Kuo, W.-C. V. Yeh, H. Lin, and A. Bansil, Physical Review B93, 035429 (2016)

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    B. Feng, B. Fu, S. Kasamatsu, S. Ito, P. Cheng, C.-C. Liu, Y. Feng, S. Wu, S. K. Mahatha, P. Sheverdyaeva, P. Moras, M. Arita, O. Sugino, T.-C. Chiang, K. Shi- mada, K. Miyamoto, T. Okuda, K. Wu, L. Chen, Y. Yao, and I. Matsuda, Nature Communications8, 1007 (2017)

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    Feng, R.-W

    B. Feng, R.-W. Zhang, Y. Feng, B. Fu, S. Wu, K. Miyamoto, S. He, L. Chen, K. Wu, K. Shimada, T. Okuda, and Y. Yao, Physical Review Letters123, 116401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    ¨Unzelmann, H

    M. ¨Unzelmann, H. Bentmann, P. Eck, T. Kißlinger, B. Geldiyev, J. Rieger, S. Moser, R. C. Vidal, K. Kißner, L. Hammer, M. A. Schneider, T. Fauster, G. Sangiovanni, D. D. Sante, and F. Reinert, Physical Review Letters 124, 176401 (2020)

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    L. Liu, C. Wang, J. Li, X. Q. Chen, Y. Jia, and J. H. Cho, Physical Review B101, 1 (2020)

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    J. Lu, L. Gao, S. Song, H. Li, G. Niu, H. Chen, T. Qian, H. Ding, X. Lin, S. Du, and H. J. Gao, ACS Applied Nano Materials4, 8845 (2021)

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Bauernfeind, J

    M. Bauernfeind, J. Erhardt, P. Eck, P. K. Thakur, J. Gabel, T.-L. Lee, J. Sch¨ afer, S. Moser, D. D. Sante, R. Claessen, and G. Sangiovanni, Nature Communica- tions12, 5396 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Cameau, N

    M. Cameau, N. Olszowska, M. Rosmus, M. G. Silly, T. Cren, A. Malecot, P. David, and M. D’angelo, 2D Materials11, 035023 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    A. V. Matetskiy, A. Barla, P. Moras, C. Carbone, V. Milotti, C. A. Brondin, Z. R. Benher, M. Holub, P. Ohresser, E. Otero, F. Choueikani, I. A. Shvets, A. N. Mihalyuk, S. V. Eremeev, and P. M. Sheverdyaeva, ACS Nano19, 20863 (2025)

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Ormaza, L

    M. Ormaza, L. Fern´ andez, M. Ilyn, A. Maga˜ na, B. Xu, M. J. Verstraete, M. Gastaldo, M. A. Valbuena, P. Gar- giani, A. Mugarza, A. Ayuela, L. Vitali, M. Blanco-Rey, F. Schiller, and J. E. Ortega, Nano Letters16, 4230 (2016)

    work page 2016

  45. [45]

    See supplementary information at [url] for the details of the methods and analysis

    work page

  46. [46]

    Correa, B

    A. Correa, B. Xu, M. J. Verstraete, and L. Vitali, Nanoscale8, 19148 (2016)

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    Fernandez, M

    L. Fernandez, M. Blanco-Rey, R. Castrillo-Bodero, M. Ilyn, K. Ali, E. Turco, M. Corso, M. Ormaza, P. Gar- giani, M. A. Valbuena, A. Mugarza, P. Moras, P. M. Sheverdyaeva, A. K. Kundu, M. Jugovac, C. Laubschat, J. E. Ortega, and F. Schiller, Nanoscale12, 22258 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    Bentmann, S

    H. Bentmann, S. Abdelouahed, M. Mulazzi, J. J. Henk, and F. Reinert, Physical Review Letters108, 196801 (2012)

    work page 2012

  49. [49]

    B. Zhen, C. W. Hsu, Y. Igarashi, L. Lu, I. Kaminer, A. Pick, S.-L. Chua, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljaˇ ci´ c, Nature525, 354 (2015)

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    Eleuch and I

    H. Eleuch and I. Rotter, Physical Review A95, 022117 (2017)

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    Kozii and L

    V. Kozii and L. Fu, Physical Review B109, 235139 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    N. H. Jo, Y. Wu, T. V. Trevisan, L.-L. Wang, K. Lee, B. Kuthanazhi, B. Schrunk, S. L. Bud’ko, P. C. Canfield, P. P. Orth, and A. Kaminski, Nature Communications 12, 7169 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    S. Hahn, B. Sohn, M. Kim, J. R. Kim, S. Huh, Y. Kim, W. Kyung, M. Kim, D. Kim, Y. Kim, T. W. Noh, J. H. Shim, and C. Kim, Physical Review Letters127, 256401 (2021)

    work page 2021

  54. [54]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, Reviews of Modern Physics93, 015005 (2021)

    work page 2021

  55. [55]

    Cayao, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter35, 254002 (2023)

    J. Cayao, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter35, 254002 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Yoshida, R

    T. Yoshida, R. Peters, and N. Kawakami, Physical Re- view B98, 035141 (2018)

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, Phys- ical Review X9, 041015 (2019)

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    E. J. Bergholtz and J. C. Budich, Physical Review Re- search1, 012003 (2019)

    work page 2019

  59. [59]

    Nagai, Y

    Y. Nagai, Y. Qi, H. Isobe, V. Kozii, and L. Fu, Physical Review Letters125, 227204 (2020)

    work page 2020

  60. [60]

    C. Li, Y. Wang, J. Zhang, G. Liu, H. Liu, W. Chen, H. Deng, W. Ma, C. Polley, B. Thiagarajan, T. K. Kim, J. Yin, Y. Shi, T. Xiang, and O. Tjernberg, Advanced Materials37, 2419559 (2025)

    work page 2025