pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21694 · v1 · pith:7X4FCS2Nnew · submitted 2026-06-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Quantum oscillations and Dirac dispersion in tunable kagome lattice Lu_(1-y)Y_y(Nb_(1-x)Ta_x)₆Sn₆

Keenan Avers , Phineas Sobel , Lochlan Joyce , Jared Dans , Prathum Saraf , Ram Kumar , Shanta Saha , Peter Zavalij
show 1 more author
Johnpierre Paglione
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 12:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords kagome latticequantum oscillationsDirac dispersioncharge density waveFermi surfacealloy substitutioneffective mass
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum oscillations reveal a scaling between effective mass and Fermi wavevector consistent with Dirac-like dispersion across the full alloy series in Lu1-yYy(Nb1-xTax)6Sn6.

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

The paper grows high-quality single crystals of the double-alloy kagome system and tracks the gradual suppression of charge density wave order as yttrium replaces lutetium. Quantum oscillations appear in both magnetoresistance and magnetization measurements throughout the substitution series, allowing extraction of Fermi surface sizes, effective masses, and quasiparticle parameters. These data show Fermi surfaces shrinking with both Y and Ta/Nb substitutions while a clear scaling relation holds between effective mass and Fermi wavevector. A sympathetic reader would care because the relation points to linear, Dirac-type dispersion persisting even as the system is tuned and the charge density wave is removed.

Core claim

The central claim is that the observed scaling between effective mass and Fermi wavevector throughout the Lu1-yYy(Nb1-xTax)6Sn6 alloy series indicates a regime of Dirac-like dispersion, with the Fermi surface parameters extracted from quantum oscillations remaining consistent with linear band crossing even as charge density wave order is suppressed.

What carries the argument

The scaling relation between effective mass m* and Fermi wavevector kF extracted from quantum oscillation frequencies and temperature damping, used to infer the form of the quasiparticle dispersion.

If this is right

  • Fermi surface area decreases systematically with both yttrium and tantalum/niobium substitutions.
  • Charge density wave transition temperature falls continuously with increasing yttrium content.
  • Effective masses and quasiparticle lifetimes remain extractable across the entire alloy range.
  • The system can be tuned while preserving the apparent Dirac dispersion relation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same mass-wavevector scaling could be checked in other kagome compounds to test whether linear dispersion is a generic feature of the lattice.
  • If the scaling survives further disorder reduction, it would constrain models of how kagome flat bands and Dirac points interact under doping.
  • Transport measurements at lower temperatures or higher fields might isolate whether multiple bands contribute to the observed scaling.

Load-bearing premise

The quantum oscillations come from bulk three-dimensional Fermi surfaces whose mass and wavevector values can be read out cleanly without major interference from alloy disorder, surface states, or overlapping bands.

What would settle it

A measured effective-mass versus Fermi-wavevector relation that deviates from the linear-dispersion expectation in cleaner samples or at higher substitution levels would falsify the claim of persistent Dirac-like behavior.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21694 by Jared Dans, Johnpierre Paglione, Keenan Avers, Lochlan Joyce, Peter Zavalij, Phineas Sobel, Prathum Saraf, Ram Kumar, Shanta Saha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) The unit cell of Y(Nb [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Electrical resistivity ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Normalized resistivity of Lu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Magnetic susceptibility ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Shubnikov-de Haas (SdH) oscillations of three sam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Normalized Fast Fourier transforms of oscillatory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Collective Fourier transform spectra of oscillatory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Oscillatory component of magnetization ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) Phase diagram of oscillation frequencies in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a) Evolution of charge density wave (CDW) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Kagome lattice crystal systems present interesting symmetry-protected band structure features such as flat bands, van Hove singularities, and linearly dispersing Dirac/Weyl points that provide a rich playground for strongly correlated electron physics. Motivated by the rich properties and charge density wave evolution through the 1-6-6 series of compounds, we present our results in single crystal growth and characterization of the of Lu$_{1-y}$Y$_y$(Nb$_{1-x}$Ta$_x$)$_6$Sn$_6$ double-alloy system, including evolution of the charge density wave transition, electrical transport behavior and resultant phase diagrams. Using a novel growth technique, the synthesis of high quality crystals with extended length along the crystallographic $c$-axis allows us to follow the gradual suppression of charge density wave (CDW) order with Y substitution, and observe quantum oscillations in both magnetoresistance and magnetization throughout the series. We review the evolution of Fermi surfaces, effective masses and quasiparticle dispersion through the alloy series, revealing a decrease in size of Fermi surfaces that trends with both substitutions, and a scaling between effective mass and Fermi wavevector that suggests a regime with Dirac-like dispersion. The ability to fine-tune crystallographic, ground state and electronic dispersion properties of the \lit\ system with minimal impact of disorder opens a path torward further understanding the nature of the kagome lattice and its novel states and interactions.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports single-crystal growth of the double-substituted kagome series Lu_{1-y}Y_y(Nb_{1-x}Ta_x)_6Sn_6 using a novel technique yielding extended c-axis crystals. It characterizes the suppression of the CDW transition with Y substitution, presents electrical transport data and phase diagrams, and reports quantum oscillations in both magnetoresistance and magnetization across the alloy series. From Onsager frequencies the authors extract shrinking Fermi-surface pockets and, via Lifshitz-Kosevich temperature damping, effective masses that scale linearly with Fermi wave-vector, which they interpret as evidence for Dirac-like dispersion persisting through the substitutions.

Significance. A convincingly demonstrated, tunable linear m*–k_F relation in a kagome system with controlled disorder would strengthen the case that Dirac cones can be engineered in this family while preserving bulk three-dimensional Fermi surfaces, providing a platform for studying correlation effects near van Hove singularities and flat bands. The extended-crystal growth method is a concrete experimental advance that enables the reported measurements.

major comments (2)
  1. [Quantum-oscillation analysis (results section)] The central scaling result (m* ∝ k_F) rests on effective-mass values obtained from Lifshitz-Kosevich fits to the temperature damping of oscillation amplitudes. The manuscript does not report separate field-dependent amplitude analysis or independent mobility/Dingle-temperature constraints that would rule out systematic bias arising from alloy-induced inhomogeneous Landau-level broadening, which increases across the substitution series and can artificially steepen the apparent m*–k_F slope.
  2. [Discussion of Fermi-surface evolution] The claim that disorder has “minimal impact” is used to justify interpreting the scaling as intrinsic Dirac dispersion, yet no quantitative comparison of Dingle temperatures or residual resistivities versus substitution level is provided to support that assertion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 4 and associated text] Figure captions for the oscillation data should explicitly state the field range, temperature window, and fitting procedure used for each composition so that the LK analysis can be reproduced.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that oscillations are observed “throughout the series” but does not indicate the maximum substitution levels at which oscillations remain detectable; this information belongs in the main text or a table.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting these important points regarding the quantum-oscillation analysis and the role of disorder. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional supporting data and discussion.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central scaling result (m* ∝ k_F) rests on effective-mass values obtained from Lifshitz-Kosevich fits to the temperature damping of oscillation amplitudes. The manuscript does not report separate field-dependent amplitude analysis or independent mobility/Dingle-temperature constraints that would rule out systematic bias arising from alloy-induced inhomogeneous Landau-level broadening, which increases across the substitution series and can artificially steepen the apparent m*–k_F slope.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original manuscript did not include explicit field-dependent amplitude analysis or Dingle-temperature constraints. To address the possibility of systematic bias from alloy-induced inhomogeneous broadening, we have now extracted Dingle temperatures from the field dependence of the oscillation amplitudes for representative compositions across the series. These values are reported in a new supplementary figure and discussed in the revised results section. The analysis shows a modest increase in scattering rate with substitution, but the temperature-damping factor remains the dominant contribution to the amplitude decay; the extracted m* values are robust against this correction and the m*–k_F scaling is preserved. We have added a brief discussion of the limitations of the Lifshitz-Kosevich analysis in the presence of disorder. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The claim that disorder has “minimal impact” is used to justify interpreting the scaling as intrinsic Dirac dispersion, yet no quantitative comparison of Dingle temperatures or residual resistivities versus substitution level is provided to support that assertion.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative comparison is required to substantiate the statement that disorder has minimal impact. In the revised manuscript we have added a new panel (or supplementary table) that plots residual resistivity (extracted from zero-field transport) and Dingle temperatures against both Nb/Ta and Lu/Y substitution levels. The data show that the increase in scattering is modest relative to the observed shrinkage of the Fermi-surface pockets and does not track the linear m*–k_F relation. This comparison is now cited in the discussion section to support the interpretation that the scaling reflects the underlying Dirac-like dispersion rather than disorder-induced artifacts. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; experimental parameter extraction and empirical scaling observation are independent of self-referential inputs

full rationale

The manuscript is an experimental study reporting crystal growth, transport measurements, CDW suppression, and quantum oscillation data across an alloy series. Fermi surface parameters are obtained via the standard Onsager relation (frequency to extremal area/k_F) and Lifshitz-Kosevich temperature damping for m*; the reported m* ∝ k_F scaling is presented as an empirical observation suggesting Dirac-like dispersion rather than a derived prediction. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text. The central claim rests on direct data reduction using textbook formulas whose validity is external to the paper. This matches the default expectation for non-circular experimental characterization papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the interpretation of quantum-oscillation frequencies and temperature damping as bulk Fermi-surface parameters whose scaling indicates Dirac dispersion; this interpretation implicitly assumes standard Lifshitz-Kosevich analysis applies without additional corrections for disorder or multi-band effects, none of which are quantified in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5838 in / 1163 out tokens · 24661 ms · 2026-06-26T12:32:36.913373+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

79 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and UNb 6Sn6 [24] which is no surprise given the awe-inspiring range of ground states of uranium systems [25–27], as well as transition metal magnetism, such as spiral spin structures in YMn 6Sn6 [28, 29]. Interplay be- tween Mn magnetism and lanthanide magnetism enables investigation of large anomalous Hall effects with topol- ogy in RMn6Sn6 (R = Gd - Tm...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    As the Ta only minutely suppresses the CDW order, we only show the samples with the lowest Ta amounts. This is in direct contrast to Sc(V 1−xCrx)6Sn6 in which a few percent Cr eliminates the CDW order [60], which indicates that the underlying mechanism of the CDW could be different between LuNb 6Sn6 and ScV 6Sn6, the only two materials of this 166 kagome ...

  3. [3]

    Singh, H

    B. Singh, H. Lin, and A. Bansil, Advanced Materials 35, 2201058 (2023)

    2023

  4. [4]

    M. Yin, J. Zhang, and D. D. Vvedensky, Symmetry 17 (2025), 10.3390/sym17060807

    work page doi:10.3390/sym17060807 2025

  5. [5]

    P. W. Brouwer and V. Dwivedi, Phys. Rev. B 108, 155137 (2023)

    2023

  6. [6]

    Heavy fermions: electrons at the edge of magnetism,

    P. Coleman, “Heavy fermions: electrons at the edge of magnetism,” (2007), arXiv:cond-mat/0612006 [cond- mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    Yoshida, R

    T. Yoshida, R. Peters, and N. Kawakami, Phys. Rev. B 98, 035141 (2018)

    2018

  8. [8]

    S. E. Sebastian and C. Proust, Annual Review of Con- densed Matter Physics 6, 411 (2015)

    2015

  9. [9]

    A. H. Castro Neto, F. Guinea, N. M. R. Peres, K. S. Novoselov, and A. K. Geim, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 109 (2009)

    2009

  10. [10]

    Q. Wang, H. Lei, Y. Qi, and C. Felser, Accounts of Materials Research 5, 786 (2024)

    2024

  11. [11]

    H.-R. Xia, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, Z. Gao, and M. Xiao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 176902 (2025)

    2025

  12. [12]

    Y. Wang, H. Wu, G. T. McCandless, J. Y. Chan, and M. N. Ali, Nature Reviews Physics 5, 635 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    Zhang,et al., Large Fermi surface in pristine kagome metal CsV 3Sb5 and enhanced quasi- particle effective masses.Proc

    W. Zhang, T. F. Poon, C. W. Tsang, W. Wang, X. Liu, J. Xie, S. T. Lam, S. Wang, K. T. Lai, A. Pourret, G. Seyfarth, G. Knebel, W. C. Yu, and S. K. Goh, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2322270121 (2024), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.2322270121

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2322270121 2024

  14. [14]

    S. D. Wilson and B. R. Ortiz, Nature Reviews Materials 9, 420 (2024)

    2024

  15. [15]

    Z. Xu, T. Le, and X. Lin, Chinese Physics Letters 42, 037304 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    Zhang, X

    W. Zhang, X. Liu, L. Wang, C. W. Tsang, Z. Wang, S. T. Lam, W. Wang, J. Xie, X. Zhou, Y. Zhao, S. Wang, J. Tallon, K. T. Lai, and S. K. Goh, Nano Letters 23, 872 (2023), pMID: 36662599

    2023

  17. [17]

    H. Tan, Y. Li, Y. Liu, D. Kaplan, Z. Wang, and B. Yan, npj Quantum Materials 8, 39 (2023)

    2023

  18. [18]

    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, Nature 555, 638 (2018)

    2018

  19. [19]

    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, Nature Materials 19, 163 (2020)

    2020

  20. [20]

    X. Teng, J. S. Oh, H. Tan, L. Chen, J. Huang, B. Gao, J.-X. Yin, J.-H. Chu, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, G. E. Granroth, B. Yan, R. J. Birgeneau, P. Dai, and M. Yi, Nature Physics 19, 814 (2023)

    2023

  21. [21]

    P. M. Bonetti, Y. Jiang, H. Hu, D. C˘ alug˘ aru, M. M. Scherer, B. A. Bernevig, and L. Classen, Phys. Rev. B 112, L220405 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Di Sante, T

    D. Di Sante, T. Neupert, G. Sangiovanni, R. Thomale, R. Comin, J. G. Checkelsky, I. Zeljkovic, and S. D. Wil- son, Rev. Mod. Phys. 98, 015002 (2026)

    2026

  23. [23]

    Jovanovic and L

    M. Jovanovic and L. M. Schoop, Journal of the American Chemical Society 144, 10978 (2022), pMID: 35675484

    2022

  24. [24]

    A. K. Sharma, S. Chatterjee, P. Yanda, C. Felser, and C. Shekhar, npj Quantum Materials -1, (2026)

    2026

  25. [25]

    S. M. Thomas, C. S. Kengle, W. Simeth, C.-y. Lim, Z. W. Riedel, K. Allen, A. Schmidt, M. Ruf, S. Gim, J. D. Thompson, F. Ronning, A. O. Scheie, C. Lane, J. D. Denlinger, S. Blanco-Canosa, J.-X. Zhu, E. D. Bauer, and P. F. S. Rosa, npj Quantum Materials 10, 66 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    Z. W. Riedel, W. Simeth, C. S. Kengle, S. M. Thomas, J. D. Thompson, A. O. Scheie, F. Ronning, C. Lane, J.- X. Zhu, P. F. S. Rosa, and E. D. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Mater. 9, 084401 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    Q. Gu, S. Wang, J. P. Carroll, K. Zhussupbekov, C. Broyles, S. Ran, N. P. Butch, J. A. Horn, S. Saha, J. Paglione, X. Liu, J. C. S. Davis, and D.-H. Lee, Sci- ence 388, 938 (2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    K. E. Avers, M. D. Nguyen, J. W. Scott, A. M. Zimmer- man, S. M. Thomas, P. F. S. Rosa, E. D. Bauer, J. D. Thompson, and W. P. Halperin, Phys. Rev. Mater. 5, 054803 (2021)

    2021

  29. [29]

    Q. Xu, H. Siddiquee, S. Gould, J. A. Zhu, D. A. Martinez, C. Broyles, G. Ni, T. Kong, and S. Ran, Phys. Rev. B 110, 165162 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    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- 12 ence Advances 6, eabe2680 (2020)

    2020

  31. [31]

    L. Jia, Y. Chen, G. Yang, W. Lv, C. Zhang, L. Zhou, X. Han, Q. Zhang, H. Yang, H. Lei, Y. Zhang, H.-J. Gao, and Y. Wang, Nano Letters 24, 8843 (2024), pMID: 39007508

    2024

  32. [32]

    W. Ma, X. Xu, J.-X. Yin, H. Yang, H. Zhou, Z.-J. Cheng, Y. Huang, Z. Qu, F. Wang, M. Z. Hasan, and S. Jia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 246602 (2021)

    2021

  33. [33]

    L. Min, M. Sretenovic, T. W. Heitmann, T. W. Valentine, R. Zu, V. Gopalan, C. M. Rost, X. Ke, and Z. Mao, Communications Physics 5, 63 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    R. Lou, M. Mende, R. Vocaturo, H. Zhang, Q. Dong, M. Li, P. Ding, E. Cheng, Z. Liao, Y. Zhang, J. Lin, R. Firouzmandi, V. Kocsis, L. T. Corredor, Y. Prots, O. Suvorov, A. Jana, J. Fujii, I. Vobornik, O. Janson, W. Zhu, J. van den Brink, C. Krellner, M. Pan, B. Wang, T. Xia, J. Cheng, S. Wang, C. Felser, B. B¨ uchner, S. Borisenko, R. Yu, D. V. Vyalikh, an...

    2025

  35. [35]

    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. B 104, 235139 (2021)

    2021

  36. [36]

    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

  37. [37]

    Y. Li, S. Cao, J. Liao, J. Ma, Y. Zhang, T. Li, J. Wang, C. Xu, J. Dai, C. Cao, Y. Song, P. Sun, and Y. Li, Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy 69, 217411 (2025)

    2025

  38. [38]

    D. R. Saykin, Q. Jiang, Z. Liu, C. Shekhar, C. Felser, J.- H. Chu, and A. Kapitulnik, Phys. Rev. B 113, L241104 (2026)

    2026

  39. [39]

    B. R. Ortiz, W. R. Meier, G. Pokharel, J. Chamorro, F. Yang, S. Mozaffari, A. Thaler, S. J. Gomez Alvarado, H. Zhang, D. S. Parker, G. D. Samolyuk, J. A. M. Pad- dison, J. Yan, F. Ye, S. Sarker, S. D. Wilson, H. Miao, D. Mandrus, and M. A. McGuire, Journal of the Ameri- can Chemical Society 147, 5279 (2025), pMID: 39900526, https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.4c16347

    work page doi:10.1021/jacs.4c16347 2025

  40. [40]

    Y. Xiao, Q. Duan, X. Xu, Z. Li, S. Guo, H. Tan, and R. Zhong, Phys. Rev. B 111, 205103 (2025)

    2025

  41. [41]

    Yue and X.-W

    C.-Y. Yue and X.-W. Lei, Inorganic Chemistry 51, 2461 (2012), pMID: 22300353

    2012

  42. [42]

    Krause, R

    L. Krause, R. Herbst-Irmer, G. M. Sheldrick, and D. Stalke, Journal of Applied Crystallography 48, 3 (2015)

    2015

  43. [43]

    G. M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallographica Section A 71, 3 (2015)

    2015

  44. [44]

    G. M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallographica Section C 71, 3 (2015)

    2015

  45. [45]

    A. T. Hand, A. C. Lamb, M. G. Richmond, X. Wang, C. A. Steren, and Z.-L. Xue, Inor- ganic Chemistry 61, 19075 (2022), pMID: 36409334, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.2c02365

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.inorgchem.2c02365 2022

  46. [46]

    Vashist, R

    A. Vashist, R. K. Gopal, D. Srivastava, M. Karppinen, and Y. Singh, Phys. Rev. B 99, 245131 (2019)

    2019

  47. [47]

    Singh, V

    S. Singh, V. Sub, M. Schmidt, C. Felser, and C. Shekhar, Journal of Physics: Materials 3, 024003 (2020)

    2020

  48. [48]

    Qiang, H.-Y

    X.-B. Qiang, H.-Y. Xu, R.-J. Tong, S. Li, Z.-X. Gao, P.-L. Zhao, and H.-Z. Lu, Phys. Rev. B 112, 224208 (2025)

    2025

  49. [49]

    Zhang, H

    H. Zhang, H. Li, H. Wang, G. Cheng, H. He, and J. Wang, Applied Physics Letters 113, 113503 (2018)

    2018

  50. [50]

    W. R. Meier, D. E. Graf, B. R. Ortiz, S. Mozaffari, and D. Mandrus, Phys. Rev. Mater. 9, L082001 (2025)

    2025

  51. [51]

    J. Xu, F. Han, T.-T. Wang, L. R. Thoutam, S. E. Pate, M. Li, X. Zhang, Y.-L. Wang, R. Fotovat, U. Welp, X. Zhou, W.-K. Kwok, D. Y. Chung, M. G. Kanatzidis, and Z.-L. Xiao, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041029 (2021)

    2021

  52. [52]

    Miccoli, F

    I. Miccoli, F. Edler, H. Pfn¨ ur, and C. Tegenkamp, Jour- nal of Physics: Condensed Matter 27, 223201 (2015)

    2015

  53. [53]

    F. Z. Yang, X. Huang, H. Tan, A. Kundu, S. Kim, M. Thinel, J. Ingham, A. Rajapitamahuni, Y. Q. Cai, C. Nelson, E. Vescovo, W. R. Meier, D. Mandrus, B. R. Ortiz, A. N. Pasupathy, B. Yan, and H. Miao, Phys. Rev. B 112, 245113 (2025)

    2025

  54. [54]

    Zheng, Y

    G. Zheng, Y. Zhu, S. Mozaffari, N. Mao, K.-W. Chen, K. Jenkins, D. Zhang, A. Chan, H. W. S. Arachchige, R. P. Madhogaria, M. Cothrine, W. R. Meier, Y. Zhang, D. Mandrus, and L. Li, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 36, 215501 (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    Murakawa, M

    H. Murakawa, M. S. Bahramy, M. Tokunaga, Y. Ko- hama, C. Bell, Y. Kaneko, N. Nagaosa, H. Y. Hwang, and Y. Tokura, Science 342, 1490 (2013), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1242247

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1242247 2013

  56. [56]

    Alexandradinata and L

    A. Alexandradinata and L. Glazman, Phys. Rev. B 97, 144422 (2018)

    2018

  57. [57]

    A. A. Taskin and Y. Ando, Phys. Rev. B 84, 035301 (2011)

    2011

  58. [58]

    K. Wang, L. Wang, I.-L. Liu, F. Boschini, M. Zonno, M. Michiardi, E. Rotenberg, A. Bostwick, D. Graf, B. J. Ramshaw, A. Damascelli, and J. Paglione, Phys. Rev. Mater. 7, 074205 (2023)

    2023

  59. [59]

    Kossut, Solid State Communications 27, 1237 (1978)

    J. Kossut, Solid State Communications 27, 1237 (1978)

    1978

  60. [60]

    Martin, E

    C. Martin, E. D. Mun, H. Berger, V. S. Zapf, and D. B. Tanner, Phys. Rev. B 87, 041104 (2013)

    2013

  61. [61]

    J. M. DeStefano, E. Rosenberg, O. Peek, Y. Lee, Z. Liu, Q. Jiang, L. Ke, and J.-H. Chu, npj Quantum Materials 8, 65 (2023)

    2023

  62. [62]

    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 Materials 9, 15 (2024)

    2024

  63. [63]

    S. Lei, S. M. L. Teicher, A. Topp, K. Cai, J. Lin, G. Cheng, T. H. Salters, F. Rodolakis, J. L. McChes- ney, S. Lapidus, N. Yao, M. Krivenkov, D. Marchenko, A. Varykhalov, C. R. Ast, R. Car, J. Cano, M. G. Vergniory, N. P. Ong, and L. M. Schoop, Advanced Ma- terials 33, 2101591 (2021)

    2021

  64. [64]

    C. Chen, X. Y. Xu, Z. Y. Meng, and M. Hohenadler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 077601 (2019)

    2019

  65. [65]

    Orbital-selective band modifications in a charge-ordered kagome metal lunb 6sn6,

    R. Lou, Y. Zhang, E. Cheng, X. Feng, A. Fedorov, Z. Li, Y. Luo, A. Generalov, H. Ma, Q. Wei, Y. Zhou, S. Chang- dar, W. Schnelle, D. Chen, Y. Chen, J. Liu, Y. Guo, S. Borisenko, D. V. Vyalikh, C. Felser, B. B¨ uchner, and Z. Liu, “Orbital-selective band modifications in a charge-ordered kagome metal lunb 6sn6,” (2025), arXiv:2504.04019 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    W. R. Meier, R. P. Madhogaria, S. Mozaffari, M. Mar- shall, D. E. Graf, M. A. McGuire, H. W. S. Arachchige, C. L. Allen, J. Driver, H. Cao, and D. Mandrus, Jour- nal of the American Chemical Society 145, 20943 (2023), pMID: 37708375

    2023

  67. [67]

    Phillips, K

    C. Phillips, K. Shtefiienko, S. Mozaffari, R. P. Madhoga- ria, W. R. Meier, A. F. Savvidou, B. W. Casas, L. Bali- cas, D. G. Mandrus, D. E. Graf, and K. Shrestha, Phys. Rev. B 111, 155136 (2025). 13

    2025

  68. [68]

    Shtefiienko, C

    K. Shtefiienko, C. Phillips, S. Mozaffari, R. P. Madhog- aria, W. R. Meier, D. G. Mandrus, D. E. Graf, and K. Shrestha, APL Quantum 2, 016118 (2025)

    2025

  69. [69]

    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. Zahid Hasan, Nature 583, 533 (2020)

    2020

  70. [70]

    Xu, J.-X

    X. Xu, J.-X. Yin, W. Ma, H.-J. Tien, X.-B. Qiang, P. V. S. Reddy, H. Zhou, J. Shen, H.-Z. Lu, T.-R. Chang, Z. Qu, and S. Jia, Nature Communications 13, 1197 (2022)

    2022

  71. [71]

    Rehfuss, C

    Z. Rehfuss, C. Broyles, D. Graf, Y. Li, H. Tan, Z. Zhao, J. Liu, Y. Zhang, X. Dong, H. Yang, H. Gao, B. Yan, and S. Ran, Phys. Rev. Mater. 8, 024003 (2024)

    2024

  72. [72]

    De Giovannini, H

    U. De Giovannini, H. H¨ ubener, S. A. Sato, and A. Rubio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 136401 (2020)

    2020

  73. [73]

    A. E. Myasnikova, E. A. Zhileeva, and D. V. Moseykin, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 30, 125601 (2018)

    2018

  74. [74]

    Dragoman and M

    D. Dragoman and M. Dragoman, Solid-State Electronics 211, 108818 (2024)

    2024

  75. [75]

    Freitas, F

    R. Freitas, F. de Brito Mota, R. Rivelino, A. Kakanakova- Georgieva, and G. Gueorguiev, Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing 208, 110515 (2026)

    2026

  76. [76]

    Vezzosi, A

    A. Vezzosi, A. Bertoni, M. Gibertini, and G. Goldoni, Phys. Rev. B 112, 085425 (2025)

    2025

  77. [77]

    Yakovkin, Surface Science 662, 1 (2017)

    I. Yakovkin, Surface Science 662, 1 (2017)

    2017

  78. [78]

    Shi, J.-G

    L.-T. Shi, J.-G. Si, A. Liang, R. Turnbull, P.-F. Liu, and B.-T. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 107, 184503 (2023)

    2023

  79. [79]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M. I. Katsnelson, I. V. Grigorieva, S. V. Dubonos, and A. A. Firsov, Nature 438, 66 (2005)

    2005