Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Tunable topology, Hall response, and spin-textures in bicircularly polarized light illuminated altermagnets

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Bicircularly polarized light gives direct, multiparameter control over topology, anomalous Hall response, and spin textures of altermagnets.

desk verdict Solid symmetry-control insight on BCL-driven altermagnets, but the topological phase diagrams need a Floquet convergence check. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06349 v1 pith:O4NKUWUF submitted 2025-09-08 cond-mat.mes-hall

Maitri Ganguli , Aneek Jana , Awadhesh Narayan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords bicircularlypolarizedlightaltermagnetFloquetengineeringChernnumberanomalousHalleffectspintextureFermisurfaceRashbaspin-orbitcoupling
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

The paper argues that monochromatic circularly polarized light is not the only optical handle on altermagnets: two coplanar beams with frequencies $\omega$ and $2\omega$, combined into bicircularly polarized light, offer a richer set of controls. Using a Floquet effective Hamiltonian, the authors show that the overall amplitude $R$, the relative amplitude $r$, and the relative phase $\alpha$ of the two beams can switch the Chern number of a Rashba-coupled $d$-wave altermagnet through values such as $C=-1,0,+1$ (for $d_{x^2-y^2}$) and $C=\pm2$ (for $d_{xy}$), and that these switches are visible as sign changes in the anomalous Hall conductivity. The drive also reshapes Fermi surfaces and spin textures: for an even frequency ratio ($\eta=2$), the relative phase acts like an effective static $U(1)$ gauge field whose direction rotates with $\alpha$, breaking or restoring symmetries and even generating a weak ferromagnetic spin polarization. If the picture is right, structured light becomes a practical knob for controlling altermagnetic devices, with the anomalous Hall effect as a measurable readout.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Floquet effective Hamiltonian $H_F(k)=d^0_F(k)\,I+\mathbf{d}_F(k)\cdot\boldsymbol{\sigma}$, obtained by applying the Peierls substitution to the altermagnet plus Rashba Hamiltonian and expanding the time-periodic Hamiltonian to second order in $1/\omega$ (the Floquet–Magnus expansion, Eq. (5)). The vector $\mathbf{d}_F(k)$ completely determines the Berry curvature (Eq. (7)), the Chern number, and the spin texture, while $d^0_F(k)$ also shapes the Fermi surface. For the bicircular drive with frequency ratio $\eta=2$, the zero-photon part $H_0$ obeys substitution rules $\cos k_\alpha \to f^0_\alpha\cos(k_\alpha+k_{0\alpha})$ for $\alpha\in\{x,y,+,-\}$; the modulations $f^0_\alpha$ encode symmetry breaking of nearest- and next-nearest-neighbor hoppings, and the shifts $k_{0\alpha}$ act as an effective static $U(1)$ gauge field (a twisted boundary condition) whose orientation is rotated by the relative phase $\alpha$. This dual structure—the $\mathbf{d}_F$ vector for topology and the form-factor substitutions for symmetry—carries the paper's argument.

What would settle it

A numerically exact Floquet calculation that keeps the full time dependence (no $1/\omega$ truncation) at $\omega=3$, $t_j=0.3$, and $\lambda=0.1$, comparing the Chern numbers at, say, $R=1.5$ and $R=2.0$ for the $d_{x^2-y^2}$ model and at $R=0.5$ and $R=1.2$ for the $d_{xy}$ model, would settle the claim: if the exact Chern numbers do not show the predicted $C=-1\to 0$ and $C=-2\to +2$ transitions, the central prediction is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that bicircularly polarized illumination of an altermagnet with Rashba spin-orbit coupling produces a gapped Floquet band structure whose Chern number is set by the light's parameters. For a $d_{x^2-y^2}$ altermagnet the bands can carry $C=\pm1$, with $\pm1/2$ contributions from the $\Gamma$ and $M$ points; for a $d_{xy}$ altermagnet they can carry $C=\pm2$, with contributions from four high-symmetry points. The $(R,r)$ phase diagram contains a jump near $r\approx\sqrt{2}$ at small amplitude, amplitude-driven transitions that in the $d_{x^2-y^2}$ case pass through a trivial $C=0$ phase via a band inversion at $M$, and in the $d_{xy}$ case switch directly between $C=-2$ and $C=+2$. These transitions are reflected in the anomalous Hall conductivity $\sigma_{AH}$, which is not quantized in this metallic system but changes sign across the transitions at accessible filling fractions. Separately, the relative phase $\alpha$ controls the shape, position, and spin content of the Fermi surface through direction-dependent renormalizations of nearest- and next-nearest-neighbor hopping form factors and an effective static gauge field, giving a route to manipulate the spin texture and induce non-vanishing spin polarization when the $R_{\pi/2}T$ symmetry is broken.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the second-order Floquet–Magnus expansion is accurate at the drive frequency $\omega=3$ used throughout, with hopping $t=1$ and bandwidth 8; if that expansion is uncontrolled at this frequency, the predicted Chern-number phase diagrams, Berry curvatures, and anomalous Hall conductivities could be quantitatively or qualitatively wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At small overall amplitude, sweeping the relative amplitude $r$ through $\sqrt{2}$ produces a Chern-number jump of magnitude 2 in $d_{x^2-y^2}$ altermagnets and 4 in $d_{xy}$ altermagnets, so one beam-ratio knob flips the sign of the Hall response.
  • In the $d_{x^2-y^2}$ case, increasing the overall amplitude $R$ at fixed $r$ drives a topological transition from $C=-1$ to $C=0$ via a band inversion near $M$; in the $d_{xy}$ case the same knob switches between $C=-2$ and $C=+2$.
  • The anomalous Hall conductivity computed at finite filling changes sign at these transitions and can serve as an experimental diagnostic for the topological phase diagram.
  • For $\eta=2$, the relative phase $\alpha$ rotates the effective gauge field and thereby reshapes Fermi surfaces and spin textures, including breaking fourfold rotation while preserving $R_{\pi/2}T$; when $R_{\pi/2}T$ is broken, the filled Fermi sea acquires a net spin polarization.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same $\alpha$-rotatable gauge field could act as a continuously tunable pair-momentum source in altermagnet-superconductor hybrids, since it shifts Fermi surfaces without a real magnetic field; this is a consequence the paper does not pursue.
  • Because the symmetry breaking acts preferentially on nearest-neighbor versus next-nearest-neighbor channels, one testable prediction is that the charge-to-spin conversion anisotropy should oscillate with $\alpha$; measuring spin-charge conversion along different crystallographic directions as a function of the beam phase would probe this.
  • The transition near $r\approx\sqrt{2}$ at small amplitude looks like a ratio-symmetry balance between the two beams' effective masses at $\Gamma$; if that interpretation holds, the transition's location should be largely independent of $\lambda$ in the weak-coupling regime, which could be checked by repeating the phase diagram at several Rashba strengths.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies a square-lattice d-wave altermagnet with Rashba spin-orbit coupling under bicircularly polarized light (BCL). Using Floquet theory and a Floquet-Magnus expansion truncated at second order in 1/ω (Eq. 5), the authors derive an effective Hamiltonian and compute Chern numbers, Berry curvature, anomalous Hall conductivity, Fermi surfaces, and spin textures as functions of the BCL parameters (overall amplitude R, relative amplitude r, and relative phase α). For the d_x2−y2 altermagnet they report topological phase transitions between Chern numbers ±1 and 0, while for the d_xy altermagnet they find transitions between ±2. They show that the anomalous Hall conductivity changes sign at these transitions, and that the Fermi surface and spin textures can be controlled by the relative phase α. The results are presented as phase diagrams (Fig. 1), Berry-curvature maps (Fig. 2), Hall-conductivity plots (Fig. 3), and Fermi-surface plots (Fig. 4), and are interpreted through a symmetry analysis of the effective Hamiltonian.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper demonstrates a new control knob—bicircular polarization with a tunable relative phase—for Floquet-engineered altermagnets, yielding explicit, falsifiable predictions for the Hall response and spin textures. The analytic derivations are standard, the numerical phase diagrams are clearly presented, and the symmetry-based explanation of the α-dependence is elegant. However, the central predictions rely on the high-frequency Floquet-Magnus expansion being accurate at ω=3 with a bare bandwidth of 8, and this is not established. I therefore regard the paper as potentially significant but not yet convincing.

major comments (2)
  1. [Tunable Berry curvature and topology; Eq. (5)] The Floquet-Magnus expansion in Eq. (5) is truncated at second order in 1/ω, but the parameters used in Figs. 1 and 3 are ω=3, t=1 (bandwidth 8), and R up to 3. With R=3 and r=1, the Peierls phase arguments are of order R/√2 ≈ 2.1, so the higher-order corrections (e.g., terms of order 1/ω^2) are not parametrically small. The topological phase diagram in Fig. 1 and the Hall response in Fig. 3 are therefore not established. I request a quantitative validation, for example by computing the Chern numbers with a Floquet Hamiltonian truncated at higher harmonic order, or via exact time evolution over one drive period, for representative parameter points in Fig. 1.
  2. [Light modulated Fermi surface and spin-texture] The analysis of Fermi surfaces and spin textures in this section uses only the time-averaged Hamiltonian H0, with the justification that all other parts of HF(k) are suppressed as ω^{-m} in the high-frequency regime. However, the numerical examples in Fig. 4 use the same ω=3 and R values as in the topological analysis, where the omitted terms are of order (A0/ω)^2 ≈ (2/3)^2, which is not negligible. The α-dependence of the Fermi surface and spin texture shown in Fig. 4 could be significantly modified by the correction terms. The authors should either recompute Fig. 4 with the full effective Hamiltonian HF(k), or provide a quantitative estimate of the magnitude of the commutator terms at the parameters used.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Tunable Berry curvature and topology] The sentence 'We have confirmed these results both for the lattice model as well as by analyzing the low-energy effective Hamiltonian around each of those points' should be clarified, because the low-energy Hamiltonian is derived from the same Floquet-Magnus truncation and does not constitute an independent check of the expansion.
  2. [Light modulated Fermi surface and spin-texture] The claim that 'When Rπ/2T is broken in the altermagnetic part, it gives rise to a weak ferromagnetism leading to non-vanishing spin-polarization of the filled Fermi sea' is a sharp prediction, but no calculation or quantitative evidence is provided. A plot of the total spin polarization as a function of α would support this statement.
  3. [Table I] Table I would be more useful if the modulation factors f_α^0 and shift vectors k_0α were given explicitly as functions of α, or at least if the derivation were included in the Supplemental Material.
  4. [Eq. (6)] The notation in Eq. (6), particularly the term Im(d_m(k)×d_m(k)^* + d_0(k)×d_m(k)), is not fully explained; the cross product is in spin space and the identity component is omitted. A few clarifying sentences would help.
  5. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption contains the typo 'F ermi' in 'BCL-induced spin-resolved F ermi surface'; it should be 'Fermi'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: BCL-driven Chern number, Hall, and spin-texture results are computed from an explicit model Hamiltonian via standard Floquet–Magnus perturbation theory, with no fitted parameter renamed as prediction.

full rationale

The central claims follow from the explicit tight-binding Hamiltonian in Eqs. (1)–(3), the BCL vector potential in Eq. (4), and the standard Floquet–Magnus expansion in Eqs. (5)–(6). The effective Hamiltonian HF(k) is constructed from these inputs; the Berry curvature, Chern numbers, anomalous Hall conductivity, Fermi surfaces, and spin textures are then evaluated from HF(k) via Eqs. (7)–(8) and the spin-texture definition. No parameter is fitted to any target outcome, and no 'prediction' is equivalent by construction to an input. The only self-citation is Ref. [16], used to write the BCL vector potential and as an analogy for gap-closing transitions; neither use is load-bearing for the altermagnet-specific results, so it does not constitute circularity. The high-frequency truncation at ω=3 versus bandwidth 8 is a legitimate correctness risk, but it is not a circularity: if the expansion were uncontrolled the results would be wrong, not circularly true. Accordingly, no circular steps are identified, and the nonzero score reflects only the presence of a non-load-bearing methodological self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small set of hand-chosen model parameters and standard Floquet and tight-binding approximations. No new physical entities are introduced. The most significant assumption is the uncontrolled high-frequency expansion at ω=3, which directly affects the computed phase diagrams.

free parameters (7)
  • tj (altermagnetic hopping anisotropy) = 0.3
    Sets the scale of spin-splitting in the d-wave altermagnet; chosen by hand to realize spin-split bands and band-touching points at high-symmetry k-points. Central to the model but not fit to any material.
  • λ (Rashba spin-orbit coupling) = 0.1 and 0.3 (used in figures)
    Necessary for non-vanishing Berry curvature and topologically nontrivial bands; values chosen by hand to be comparable to or less than tj; controls the phase diagrams and Hall response.
  • ω (drive frequency) = 3 (in units of t=1)
    Used throughout the paper; the Floquet expansion to second order in 1/ω is assumed valid at this frequency, which is comparable to the bandwidth (~8). This is a fragile modeling choice.
  • R (overall light amplitude) = varied 0 to 3 in phase diagrams
    Control parameter scanned to produce the Chern number phase diagrams and Hall response; represents light intensity, not fit to data.
  • r (relative amplitude of the two BCL beams) = varied 0 to 5 in figures
    Control parameter; r→0 recovers circularly polarized light; central to the 'beyond monochromatic' claim.
  • α (relative phase between the two beams) = varied; 0 for topology, π/4 and π/2 for spin textures
    Key control knob for Fermi surface and spin-texture tunability; central to the symmetry-breaking claims.
  • f (filling fraction) = 0.30, 0.50, 0.70
    Used to set the chemical potential in the anomalous Hall conductivity calculations; chosen for illustration of metallic regime.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Floquet-Magnus expansion to second order in 1/ω describes the stroboscopic dynamics of the BCL-driven system for the parameters used (ω=3, bandwidth ~8t).
    Eq. (5) is used to define the effective Floquet Hamiltonian. Its validity at the chosen frequency is not checked against exact numerics; if uncontrolled, the phase diagrams (Fig. 1) and Hall response (Fig. 3) could be wrong.
  • domain assumption The occupation of Floquet bands is governed by the equilibrium Fermi function at temperature T (Floquet-Fermi distribution).
    Eq. (8) uses n_F with Floquet band energies. This standard approximation neglects photon-assisted processes, heating, and non-equilibrium effects; it is stated in Eq. (8) without caveats.
  • domain assumption The two-band tight-binding models (Eqs. 1-3) capture the essential physics of d-wave altermagnets with Rashba spin-orbit coupling.
    Standard minimal model for altermagnets; no material-specific parameters or band-structure validation are provided. The topological and symmetry conclusions rely on the model's band-touching structure.
  • standard math The Peierls substitution k → k + A(t) with the BCL vector potential (Eq. 4) correctly describes light-matter coupling (dipole approximation, e=1).
    Common treatment of light in tight-binding models; the BCL vector potential is a valid two-color field. This is standard background, though the dipole approximation is implicit.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tunable topology, Hall response, and spin-textures in bicircularly polarized light illuminated altermagnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O4NKUWUF

@misc{pith2026250906349,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tunable topology, Hall response, and spin-textures in bicircularly polarized light illuminated altermagnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O4NKUWUF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06349}
}
read the original abstract

Altermagnets, featuring non-relativistic spin splitting, have drawn enormous attention due to their intriguing properties. Here, we investigate the effects of shining bicircularly polarized light (BCL) on altermagnets with Rashba spin-orbit coupling. We discover a remarkable tunability of topology, spin-textures, and Fermi surfaces of altermagnets by means of BCL illumination, going beyond monochromatic light. We illustrate a cascade of topological phase transitions controllable by BCL and demonstrate how these transitions are reflected in the anomalous Hall response of the altermagnet. Furthermore, we show that the spin-textures and Fermi surfaces can be directly tuned by the relative phase of the BCL, stemming from the underlying symmetry changes. Our findings can pave the way for effectively controlling altermagnetic materials with structured light.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.06349 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_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Linearly Polarized Light-Induced Anomalous Hall Effect and Topological Phase Transitions in an Altermagnetic Topological Insulator

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Floquet driving by linearly polarized light breaks C4zT in d-wave altermagnets, inducing anisotropic AHE and a spin-polarized Chern insulator, while PT-symmetric AFMs remain inert.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [16]

    Strobel and M

    P. Strobel and M. Daghofer, Physical Review B108, 035132 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    Oka and H

    T. Oka and H. Aoki, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics79, 081406 (2009)

    2009

  3. [2]

    This phase transition is also apparent from the Berry curvature plot around the Γ point for differentrat fixedR, for both kinds ofd-wave altermagnets

    This topological phase transition occurs via a closing of the band gap, which implies the emergence of BTP even in the presence of non-zero illuminationR̸= 0 [35], similar to what was previously reported for multifold semimetals and Dirac nodal line semimetals [16]. This phase transition is also apparent from the Berry curvature plot around the Γ point fo...

    work page 2023

  4. [3]

    N. H. Lindner, G. Refael, and V. Galitski, Nature Physics7, 490 (2011)

    2011

  5. [4]

    R. Wang, B. Wang, R. Shen, L. Sheng, and D. Y. Xing, Europhysics Letters105, 17004 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Narayan, Phys

    A. Narayan, Phys. Rev. B91, 205445 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [6]

    Yan and Z

    Z. Yan and Z. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 087402 (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [7]

    Narayan, Phys

    A. Narayan, Phys. Rev. B94, 041409 (2016)

    work page 2016

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Chan, Y.-T

    C.-K. Chan, Y.-T. Oh, J. H. Han, and P. A. Lee, Physical Review B94(2016), 10.1103/physrevb.94.121106

    2016 doi

  2. [9]

    H¨ ubener, M

    H. H¨ ubener, M. A. Sentef, U. De Giovannini, A. F. Kem- per, and A. Rubio, Nature Communications8(2017), 10.1038/ncomms13940

    2017 doi

  3. [10]

    T. V. Trevisan, P. V. Arribi, O. Heinonen, R.-J. Slager, and P. P. Orth, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 066602 (2022)

    2022

  4. [11]

    Y. Wang, A. Walter, G. Jotzu, and K. Viebahn, Physical Review A (2023)

    2023

  5. [12]

    Ikeda, S

    Y. Ikeda, S. Kitamura, and T. Morimoto, Physical re- view letters131 9, 096301 (2023)

    2023

  6. [13]

    Ikeda, S

    Y. Ikeda, S. Kitamura, and T. Morimoto (2024)

    2024

  7. [14]

    Sandholzer, A.-S

    K. Sandholzer, A.-S. Walter, J. Minguzzi, Z. Zhu, K. Viebahn, and T. Esslinger, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 013056 (2022)

    2022

  8. [15]

    Mrudul and G

    M. Mrudul and G. Dixit, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics54, 224001 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Ganguli, A

    M. Ganguli, A. Jana, and A. Narayan, New Journal of Physics27, 023033 (2025)

    2025

  10. [18]

    Kanega and M

    M. Kanega and M. Sato, Physical Review B112, 045306 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Z. Guo, Z. Lu, H. Wang, and K. Chang, Physical Review 6 B112, 035162 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    ˇSmejkal, J

    L. ˇSmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev. X 12, 040501 (2022)

    2022

  13. [22]

    H. Bai, Z. Zhou, L. Han, H. Reichlova, H. Dil, J. Liu, X. Chen, and F. Pan, Nature Reviews Materials10 (2025), 10.1038/s41578-025-00779-1

    2025 doi

  14. [23]

    G. Yang, Z. Li, S. Yang, J. Li, H. Zheng, W. Zhu, Z. Pan, Y. Xu, S. Cao, W. Zhao, A. Jana, J. Zhang, M. Ye, Y. Song, L.-H. Hu, L. Yang, J. Fujii, I. Vobornik, M. Shi, H. Yuan, Y. Zhang, Y. Xu, and Y. Liu, Nature Commu- nications16(2025), 10.1038/s41467-025-56647-7

    2025 doi

  15. [24]

    Z.-X. Li, H. Zhou, X. Wan, and W. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 111, 125119 (2025)

    2025

  16. [25]

    L. Bai, W. Feng, S. Liu, L. ˇSmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, and Y. Yao, Advanced Functional Materials34(2024), 10.1002/adfm.202409327

    2024 doi

  17. [26]

    Z. Wu, M. Long, H. Chen, S. Paul, H. Matsuki, O. Zhe- liuk, U. Zeitler, G. Li, R. Zhou, Z. Zhu, D. Graf, T. I. Weinberger, F. M. Grosche, Y. Maeno, and A. G. Eaton, Phys. Rev. X15, 031044 (2025)

    2025

  18. [27]

    d-wave flat fermi surface in altermagnets enables maximum charge-to-spin conversion,

    J. Lai, T. Yu, P. Liu, L. Liu, G. Xing, X.-Q. Chen, and Y. Sun, “d-wave flat fermi surface in altermagnets enables maximum charge-to-spin conversion,” (2025), arXiv:2506.07703 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]

    2025 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  20. [29]

    Chang, C.-X

    C.-Z. Chang, C.-X. Liu, and A. H. MacDonald, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 011002 (2023)

    2023

  21. [30]

    Y. A. Bychkov and E. I. Rashba, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics17, 6039 (1984)

    1984

  22. [31]

    P. Rao, A. Mook, and J. Knolle, Phys. Rev. B110, 024425 (2024)

    2024

  23. [32]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Advances in Physics64, 139–226 (2015)

    2015

  24. [33]

    Oka and S

    T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics10, 387–408 (2019)

    2019

  25. [34]

    Mikami, S

    T. Mikami, S. Kitamura, K. Yasuda, N. Tsuji, T. Oka, and H. Aoki, Phys. Rev. B93, 144307 (2016)

    2016

  26. [35]

    Sato and T

    M. Sato and T. N. Ikeda, (2025), arXiv:2508.01783 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2025

  27. [36]

    See Supplemental Material for details of derivation of the Floquet effective Hamiltonian, plots of band structures, discussion on controlling symmetry of the model using BCL, and tunable spin texture plots

  28. [37]

    Dynamical generation of higher-order spin-orbit couplings, topology and per- sistent spin texture in light-irradiated altermagnets,

    S. A. A. Ghorashi and Q. Li, “Dynamical generation of higher-order spin-orbit couplings, topology and per- sistent spin texture in light-irradiated altermagnets,” (2025), arXiv:2504.00122 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  29. [38]

    Light- induced floquet spin-triplet cooper pairs in uncon- ventional magnets,

    P.-H. Fu, S. Mondal, J.-F. Liu, and J. Cayao, “Light- induced floquet spin-triplet cooper pairs in uncon- ventional magnets,” (2025), arXiv:2506.10590 [cond- mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  30. [39]

    Yarmohammadi, U

    M. Yarmohammadi, U. Z¨ ulicke, J. Berakdar, J. Linder, and J. K. Freericks, Physical Review B111, 224412 (2025)

    2025

  31. [40]

    Ikeda, S

    Y. Ikeda, S. Kitamura, and T. Morimoto, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics2022, 04A101 (2021), https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article- pdf/2022/4/04A101/43369895/ptab127.pdf

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.