Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 55 references

Intrinsic single crystals of MnTe altermagnet

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Intrinsic MnTe is an Anderson insulator below 150 K, yet its altermagnetic signatures survive.

desk verdict Flux-grown MnTe crystals with much lower carrier density show an insulating state and weakened but robust altermagnet signatures; the 'intrinsic' label overshoots the evidence, but the materials advance is real. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.21803 v1 pith:H4WL66KY submitted 2026-07-23 cond-mat.str-el

Kim-Khuong Huynh , Michael Anthony Quintero , Martin Klanjšek , Tilen Knaflič , Yuta Ishii , Norimasa Sasabe , Nhu-Quynh T. Phan , Frej S{o}ren Rattenborg
show 3 more authors
Yuichi Yamasaki Denis Arčon Bo Brummerstedt Iversen
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords altermagnetismMnTeAndersonlocalizationanomalousHalleffectX-raymagneticcirculardichroismsinglecrystalgrowthdomainsself-fluxsynthesis
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 reports ultra-pure single crystals of the altermagnet MnTe, nearly free of the tellurium vacancies that self-dope earlier samples. Below about 150 K these crystals become Anderson insulators with a tiny carrier density, yet they still display the anomalous Hall effect and X-ray magnetic circular dichroism—signatures of altermagnetism—though much weaker than in defective films. This shows that altermagnetic order survives in the intrinsic, stoichiometric limit and that earlier observations were tied to defect-induced carriers. The work also maps complex magnetic domain behavior near the Néel transition and demonstrates anisotropic domain control with magnetic fields, making clean MnTe a platform for electrostatic and mechanical tuning of altermagnetic properties.

What carries the argument

The self-flux growth method suppresses Te-vacancy formation using a Te-rich flux and careful decanting, yielding stoichiometric crystals nearly free of strain. The absence of self-doping pins the Fermi level away from the large Berry-curvature regions, leaving few carriers that undergo disorder-induced localization driven by magnetic disorder, while the preserved altermagnetic symmetry still permits weak AHE and XMCD. Domain kinetics, governed by sixfold Néel-vector degeneracy and piezomagnetic stress, complicate but also enrich the measurements.

What would settle it

A systematic study of MnTe crystals with deliberately controlled Te-vacancy concentrations (or with even lower carrier densities grown by alternative methods) measuring the temperature of Anderson localization and the magnitude of the anomalous Hall effect: if the localization and AHE magnitude do not track carrier density, or if a yet-cleaner crystal shows metallic behavior, the intrinsic-insulator interpretation would fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the intrinsic limit of stoichiometric, stress-free MnTe single crystals grown from self-flux, the material is an Anderson insulator below T_MI ≈ 150 K with carrier concentration of about 1.6×10^17 cm^-3, in sharp contrast to the metallic or weakly insulating behavior of Te-deficient samples. Despite the localization, the anomalous Hall effect and XMCD spectra—hallmarks of the altermagnetic state—remain detectable but with magnitudes roughly three orders smaller than in thin films. This establishes that these signatures are intrinsic to MnTe, not solely a self-doping effect, and that the clean crystals offer a route to study altermagnetism with tunable carrier density.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that these crystals represent the intrinsic, stoichiometric limit rests on characterization methods whose sensitivity cannot rule out dilute tellurium vacancies; the carrier density, though low, is still many orders of magnitude above the intrinsic carrier concentration expected for a 1.3 eV gap insulator, so residual extrinsic doping may still be present.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The intrinsic insulating state means MnTe can be electrostatically gated to tune the Fermi level across altermagnetic Berry-curvature features, a regime previously inaccessible in self-doped samples.
  • The reduced but nonzero AHE and XMCD magnitudes set a baseline for intrinsic altermagnetic transport in MnTe, allowing extrinsic contributions such as strain and doping to be separated in future studies.
  • The superheating–supercooling hysteresis and anisotropic field effects imply that domain engineering in stress-free crystals must account for short-range magnetic correlations above T_N.
  • The Korringa-like spin-lattice relaxation in the insulating regime indicates Anderson-localized states still mediate nuclear relaxation, providing a local probe of the localized electronic wavefunctions.
  • The fragility of MnTe under rigid mounting highlights that piezomagnetic stress can alter measurements, so free-standing configurations are essential for extracting intrinsic properties.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the measured carrier density of ~1e17 cm^-3 still represents residual defects, then the truly intrinsic limit may sit at even lower densities, where the localization temperature or the AHE magnitude could change further; the paper's claim rests on the detection limits of EDS and diffraction.
  • Since the Anderson localization is attributed to magnetic disorder, applying a magnetic field to reorient domains might modulate the localization length or T_MI, offering a direct, testable link between the altermagnetic domain state and electronic transport.
  • The persistence of ALTM-characteristic XMCD at room temperature in an insulating crystal suggests that altermagnetic spin splitting does not require metallicity, which could matter for spintronic concepts that rely on spin-polarized bands rather than conduction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the self-flux growth of MnTe single crystals and characterizes them by synchrotron SCXRD, SEM-EDS, XAS, transport, magnetization, EPR, NMR, and XMCD. The authors claim that the crystals are nearly stoichiometric and strain-free, and that this 'intrinsic limit' exhibits an Anderson insulating state below T_MI ≈ 150 K with a Hall carrier density of about 1.6×10^17 cm^-3, in contrast to the metallic behavior of Te-deficient samples. They further report complex anisotropic domain kinetics around the altermagnetic transition at T_N ≈ 310 K, in-plane field depopulation of altermagnetic domains seen by 55Mn NMR, and weak but detectable anomalous Hall effect and zero-field XMCD signals attributed to altermagnetism.

Significance. If the central claims are substantiated, this would be an important step for altermagnet research: a clean, low-carrier-density MnTe platform potentially suitable for electrostatic tuning, with reduced but robust altermagnetic responses. The experimental strengths are considerable: high-quality SCXRD data (R1 ≈ 0.98%, no diffuse scattering), detailed growth and mounting protocols, multi-technique characterization, and an interesting NMR-based domain-depopulation study. However, the 'intrinsic limit' framing is not fully supported by the presented data, and several load-bearing interpretations rely on assumptions or fitted models. The work merits publication after major revision.

major comments (4)
  1. [Crystal quality; Abstract] The measured carrier density p ≈ 1.6×10^17 cm^-3 is used as evidence for stoichiometry ('the small carrier number is consistent with the stoichiometric composition'). For a charge-transfer insulator with Eg ≈ 1.3 eV, the room-temperature intrinsic carrier density is of order 10^8 cm^-3, so the measured value is roughly nine orders of magnitude higher and indicates extrinsic doping (dilute Te vacancies or background impurities, on the order of 10^-5 per formula unit). EDS and SCXRD cannot detect point defects at this level. The central label 'intrinsic limit' in the Abstract and the claim 'nearly free from crystal imperfections' are therefore not established. Please provide defect-sensitive evidence (e.g., annealed/composition-controlled series, precision lattice parameters, positron annihilation, or quantitative chemical analysis) or substantially soften the claim to 'low-carrier-density
  2. [Low-T localization] The statement that 'No crystallographic disorder is detectable by SCXRD, suggesting that the localization is magnetically driven' is not warranted. SCXRD is insensitive to the dilute point defects that the carrier density itself implies. The activation energy E_a ≈ 17 meV and VRH parameter T_0 ≈ 5376 K (Supplement III) are equally consistent with impurity-band or vacancy-driven localization. To attribute the Anderson localization to magnetic disorder, additional evidence is needed, such as the magnetic-field dependence of ρ(T) in the VRH regime, a controlled doping series, or a quantitative disorder model. As written, the observation of an Anderson insulating state is solid, but its 'intrinsic' and 'magnetically driven' origin is an unsupported inference.
  3. [End Matter, XAS and XMCD] The atomic-model calculation introduces two effective internal fields — 0.30 eV for the ALTM interaction and 1 meV for the weak ferromagnetic interaction — 'in this study'. These are adjusted to reproduce the measured spectra. Consequently, the agreement between the zero-field XMCD and the 'ALTM characteristic spectral shapes predicted by theory' is partly a fitting result, not an independent verification. Please show the sensitivity of the XMCD line shape to these parameters, derive them from independent estimates, or compare with ab initio calculations. Without this, the claim that the zero-field XMCD uniquely fingerprints altermagnetism in this sample is overstated.
  4. [Supplementary V.C; Low-T localization] The assignment of the residual in-plane X-band EPR below T_N to conducting electron spin resonance (CESR) is an assumption. In the Anderson insulating regime the notion of a 'conducting electron' at E_F is problematic. The supporting evidence — linewidth tracking ρ(T) and Dysonian asymmetry — is suggestive but not diagnostic, and the spectra acquire multiple components and an 'anomalous' lineshape exactly in the temperature range of interest. Please provide a quantitative analysis (g-factor, linewidth anisotropy, spin susceptibility, comparison with a CESR standard) or present the EPR signal as a defect/localized-spin resonance with unresolved origin.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Page 6] 'ACKNOWDEGEMENT' should be 'ACKNOWLEDGMENTS'.
  2. [Low-T localization and Supplement III] 'variable-range-hoping' should be 'variable-range hopping' in both places.
  3. [XMCD paragraph] 'This spectroscopic observation is consistent with being consistent with the AHE' contains a duplicated phrase; please correct.
  4. [Fig. 4(b) caption] The symbol 'ρya(H)' should be 'ρyx(H)'.
  5. [Supplement II caption] 'Sebeeck' should be 'Seebeck'.
  6. [Supplement V.C] There is a broken/duplicated sentence: 'from the high temperature value of 0.14 to −0.84 at 150 K corroborating ... rom the high temperature value of 0.14 to -0.84 at 150 K.' Please clean up.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

XMCD 'theory match' partially reduces to an in-house ALTM field introduced as an input; transport and AHE remain independent.

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [End Matter, 'XAS and XMCD' paragraph; used in main-text Fig. 4(d)/'ALTM hallmarks' section]
    "In this study, we introduce effective internal fields of 0.30 eV arising from the ALTM interaction and 1 meV from the weak ferromagnetic interaction."

    Figure 4(d) is presented as showing 'the ALTM characteristic spectral shapes predicted by theory.' The theory is the authors' atomic-multiplet calculation, and its only new ALTM-specific ingredient is the quoted 0.30 eV effective internal field 'arising from the ALTM interaction,' inserted as an input in this study. A model containing an ALTM exchange field will, by construction, produce ALTM-type XMCD line shapes, so the match is a self-consistency check of that input rather than an independent, parameter-free prediction. The central claim survives because the AHE hysteresis is a direct transport observation and other published XMCD/band-structure support exist, but the zero-field XMCD half of the 'robust ALTM hallmark' evidence is partially circular.

full rationale

The main experimental chain is self-contained: SCXRD, EDS, transport, NMR/EPR, and AHE are direct observations, with external benchmarks such as T_N ≈ 310 K, the NAR comparison, and a prior neutron study. I do not count the 'intrinsic limit' inference as circular: the paper uses EDS/SCXRD as direct compositional/structural evidence, and the Hall density is a corroborating observation, not a definition of intrinsic. The low-T Anderson-localization label is an interpretation of fitted activation/VRH behavior, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The one partial circularity is the zero-field XMCD/ALTM identification: the 'Cal.' spectrum is generated by the authors' own atomic model into which an effective 0.30 eV ALTM field is inserted, so the agreement contains the ALTM assumption as an input. Because the AHE hysteresis and external prior work independently support altermagnetism, the central claim retains independent content. The concern that 1.6×10^17 cm^-3 is many orders above the intrinsic carrier density of a 1.3 eV-gap insulator is a real stoichiometry-sensitivity/correctness issue, but it is not a deductive circularity and is not scored here.

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

The central experimental claims rest mainly on standard measurement techniques. The main free parameters are the conductivity fits and the XMCD internal fields; the latter are particularly important because the ALTM XMCD interpretation depends on them.

free parameters (4)
  • Activation energy E_a = ≈17 meV
    Fitted to low-T conductivity (SM Eq. 1) to support the insulating/Anderson interpretation.
  • VRH characteristic temperature T_0 = ≈5376 K
    Fitted to low-T conductivity (SM Eq. 2) in the variable-range-hopping regime.
  • Effective ALTM internal field = 0.30 eV
    Introduced in the atomic XMCD model (End Matter, XAS and XMCD) to reproduce the zero-field ALTM spectral shape.
  • Weak ferromagnetic internal field = 1 meV
    Introduced in the atomic XMCD model to reproduce the in-field ferromagnetic contribution.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The crystal structure is P6_3/mmc with no structural transition up to 400 K
    Used to attribute all temperature-dependent phenomena to magnetic domain evolution; based on SCXRD and ref 29 neutron study, but a hidden structural transition below detection limit cannot be excluded.
  • domain assumption The observed phenomena are governed by thermal evolution of magnetic domain state
    Stated in End Matter: 'We thus assume that the observed phenomena are governed by the thermal evolutions of the magnetic domain state.'
  • standard math The atomic model for XMCD uses Hartree-Fock-Slater with 70% Slater integrals and D_3d crystal-field parameters from prior literature
    Standard atomic multiplet calculation; parameters from ref 49.
  • ad hoc to paper The residual X-band EPR signal below TN originates from conducting electron spin resonance (CESR)
    The assignment is inferred from linewidth tracking rho(T) and Dysonian lineshape; no direct confirmation that the signal is from conduction electrons.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Intrinsic single crystals of MnTe altermagnet." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H4WL66KY

@misc{pith2026260721803,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Intrinsic single crystals of MnTe altermagnet},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H4WL66KY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21803}
}
abstract

We report the synthesis methodology, structure, and intrinsic properties of ultra-high quality single crystals of MnTe, an archetypal altermagnet. The crystals, obtained from self-flux method, are nearly free from crystal imperfections and disproportionate chemical compositions as seen by various investigation methods. In measurements under quasi free-standing configuration minimizing stress induced effects, the crystals exhibit complex and anisotropic domain kinetics in both superheating and supercooling regimes around the altermagnetic transition at $T_{\mathrm{N}} = 310\,\mathrm{K}$. An Anderson insulating state is observed below $T_{\mathrm{MI}}\approx 150\,\mathrm{K}$ with a carrier density of about $1.6\times 10^{17}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-3}$, being sharply contrast to metallic states usually seen in Te-deficit samples. Nevertheless, hallmarks of altermagnetism, anomalous Hall effect and X-ray magnetic circular dichroism signal, are robust in this intrinsic limit, however with significantly reduced magnitudes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21803 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Crystal quality. (a) Crystal structure of MnTe as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Complex ALTM/AFM transition, domain degeneracy, and low- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Local probe of magnetic domain. (a) The colored [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. ALTM hallmarks. (a) Hall ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Šmejkal, J

    L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, and T. Jungwirth, Physical Re- view X12, 031042 (2022)

    2022

  2. [2]

    Šmejkal, A

    L. Šmejkal, A. H. MacDonald, J. Sinova, S. Nakat- suji, and T. Jungwirth, Nature Reviews Materials7, 482 (2022)

    2022

  3. [3]

    Cheong and F.-T

    S.-W. Cheong and F.-T. Huang, npj Quantum Materials 10, 38 (2025)

    2025

  4. [4]

    P. A. McClarty and J. G. Rau, Physical Review Letters 132, 176702 (2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    Sasabe, Y

    N. Sasabe, Y. Ishii, and Y. Yamasaki, Physical Review B112, 224401 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    I. I. Mazin and K. D. Belashchenko, Physical Review B 110, 214436 (2024)

    2024

  7. [7]

    Takahashi, C

    K. Takahashi, C. R. W. Steward, M. Ogata, R. M. Fer- nandes, and J. Schmalian, Physical Review B111, 184408 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    S. S. Fender, O. Gonzalez, and D. K. Bediako, Journal of the American Chemical Society147, 2257 (2025)

    2025

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    I. I. Mazin, Physical Review B107, L100418 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    R. D. Gonzalez Betancourt, J. Zubáč, R. Gonzalez- Hernandez, K. Geishendorf, Z. Šobáň, G. Springholz, K. Olejník, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, S. T. B. Goennenwein, A. Thomas, H. Reichlová, J. Železný, and D.Kriegner,PhysicalReviewLetters130,036702(2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    Krempaský, L

    J. Krempaský, L. Šmejkal, S. W. D’Souza, M. Ha- jlaoui, G. Springholz, K. Uhlířová, F. Alarab, P. C. Constantinou, V. Strocov, D. Usanov, W. R. Pudelko, R. González-Hernández, A. Birk Hellenes, Z. Jansa, H. Reichlová, Z. Šobáň, R. D. Gonzalez Betancourt, P. Wadley, J. Sinova, ...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Osumi, S

    T. Osumi, S. Souma, T. Aoyama, K. Yamauchi, A. Honma, K. Nakayama, T. Takahashi, K. Ohgushi, and T. Sato, Physical Review B109, 115102 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Hariki, A

    A. Hariki, A. Dal Din, O. J. Amin, T. Yamaguchi, A. Badura, D. Kriegner, K. W. Edmonds, R. P. Cam- pion, P. Wadley, D. Backes, L. S. I. Veiga, S. S. Dhesi, G. Springholz, L. Šmejkal, K. Výborný, T. Jungwirth, and J. Kuneš, Physical Review Letters132, 176701 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    O. J. Amin, A. Dal Din, E. Golias, Y. Niu, A. Za- kharov, S. C. Fromage, C. J. B. Fields, S. L. Heywood, R. B. Cousins, F. Maccherozzi, J. Krempaský, J. H. Dil, D. Kriegner, B. Kiraly, R. P. Campion, A. W. Rushforth, K. W. Edmonds, S. S. Dhesi, L. Šmejkal, T. Jungwirth, and P....

    2024

  7. [15]

    Takegami, T

    D. Takegami, T. Aoyama, T. Okauchi, T. Yamaguchi, S. Tippireddy, S. Agrestini, M. García-Fernández, T. Mi- zokawa, K. Ohgushi, K.-J. Zhou, J. Chaloupka, J. Kuneš, A. Hariki, and H. Suzuki, Physical Review Letters135, 196502 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Zaanen, G

    J. Zaanen, G. A. Sawatzky, and J. W. Allen, Physical Review Letters55, 418 (1985)

    1985

  9. [17]

    D. I. Khomskii,Transition Metal Compounds(Cam- bridge University Press, 2014)

    2014

  10. [18]

    J. Wasscher,Electrical Transport Phenomena in MnTe, an Antiferromagnetic Semiconductor, Phd Thesis 1 (Research TU/e / Graduation TU/e), Technische Hogeschool Eindhoven, Eindhoven (1969)

    1969

  11. [19]

    Svane, K

    J. Svane, K. K. Huynh, Y. Chen, and B. B. Iversen, Journal of Materials Chemistry C (2025), 10.1039/D5TC03020J

    2025 doi

  12. [20]

    Kriegner, H

    D. Kriegner, H. Reichlova, J. Grenzer, W. Schmidt, E.Ressouche, J.Godinho, T.Wagner, S.Y.Martin, A.B. Shick, V. V. Volobuev, G. Springholz, V. Holý, J. Wun- derlich, T. Jungwirth, and K. Výborný, Physical Review B96, 214418 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    Un- expected Tuning of the Anomalous Hall Effect in Alter- magnetic MnTe Thin Films,

    S. Bey, S. S. Fields, N. G. Combs, B. G. Márkus, D. Beke, J. Wang, A. V. Ievlev, M. Zhukovskyi, T. Orlova, L. Forró, S. P. Bennett, X. Liu, and B. A. Assaf, “Un- expected Tuning of the Anomalous Hall Effect in Alter- magnetic MnTe Thin Films,” (2024), arXiv:2409.04567 [cond-mat]

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    K. P. Kluczyk, K. Gas, M. J. Grzybowski, P. Skupiński, M. A. Borysiewicz, T. Fąs, J. Suffczyński, J. Z. Do- magala, K. Grasza, A. Mycielski, M. Baj, K. H. Ahn, K. Výborný, M. Sawicki, and M. Gryglas-Borysiewicz, Physical Review B110, 155201 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    N. P. Armitage, P. Fournier, and R. L. Greene, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 2421 (2010)

    2010

  16. [24]

    S. M. Kevy, H. E. Lund, L. Wollesen, K. J. Dalgaard, Y.- T. Hsu, S. Wiedmann, M. Bianchi, A. J. U. Holt, D. Cur- 7 cio, D. Biswas, A. J. H. Jones, K. Volckaert, C. Cacho, P. Dudin, P. Hofmann, and M. Bremholm, Physical Re- view B103, 085107 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Lessons from $α$-RuCl3 for pursuing quan- tum spin liquid physics in atomically thin materials,

    C. Ojeda-Aristizabal, X. Zheng, C. Xu, Z. Nussinov, Y. Motome, A. Banerjee, A. W. Tsen, M. Knap, R.- R. Du, G. Joshi, A. Mounce, Y. Kim, B. M. Hunt, D. Shcherbakov, B. Zhou, R. Jing, M. Liu, H. Zhao, B. Liao, M. Claassen, O. Erten, Y. P. Chen, and E. A. Henriksen, “Lessons fro...

    2025

  18. [26]

    Aoyama and K

    T. Aoyama and K. Ohgushi, Physical Review Materials 8, L041402 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    andH c are predominantly linear, as displayed in Fig. 4(a). On the other hand, Fig. 4(b) reveals weak AHE-related hysteresis loops emerging after the crystals had been either cooled down or warmed up to the mea- suring temperature underH c. Incidental domain selec- tion due to...

  20. [28]

    See Supplementary Materials

  21. [29]

    Baral, J

    R. Baral, J. A. Christensen, P. K. Hamilton, F. Ye, K. Chesnel, T. D. Sparks, R. Ward, J. Yan, M. A. McGuire, M. E. Manley, J. B. Staunton, R. P. Hermann, and B. A. Frandsen, Matter5, 1853 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Komatsubara, M

    T. Komatsubara, M. Murakami, and E. Hirahara, Jour- nal of the Physical Society of Japan18, 356 (1963)

    1963

  23. [31]

    Yosida,Theory of Magnetism, Vol

    K. Yosida,Theory of Magnetism, Vol. 122 (Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 1996)

    1996

  24. [32]

    Janša, K.-K

    N. Janša, K.-K. Huynh, T. Ogasawara, M. Klanjšek, P. Jeglič, P. Carretta, K. Tanigaki, and D. Arčon, Phys- ical Review B103, 064422 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Walther, Physical Review B4, 3873 (1971)

    K. Walther, Physical Review B4, 3873 (1971)

    1971

  26. [34]

    Kriegner, K

    D. Kriegner, K. Výborný, K. Olejník, H. Reichlová, V. Novák, X. Marti, J. Gazquez, V. Saidl, P. Němec, V. V. Volobuev, G. Springholz, V. Holý, and T. Jung- wirth, Nature Communications7, 11623 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Dzian, P

    J. Dzian, P. Kubaščík, S. Tázlarů, M. Białek, M. Šindler, F. Le Mardelé, C. Kadlec, F. Kadlec, M. Gryglas- Borysiewicz, K. P. Kluczyk, A. Mycielski, P. Skupiński, J. Hejtmánek, R. Tesař, J. Železný, A.-L. Barra, C. Faugeras, J. Volný, K. Uhlířová, L. Nádvorník, M. Veis, K. Výb...

    2025

  28. [36]

    N. F. Mott and E. A. Davis,Electronic processes in non- crystalline materials, 2nd ed., The international series of monographs on physics (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2012)

    2012

  29. [38]

    Sasabe, M

    N. Sasabe, M. Mizumaki, T. Uozumi, and Y. Yamasaki, Physical Review Letters131, 216501 (2023)

    2023

  30. [39]

    Altermagnetic XMCD in Hematite Distinct from Weak Ferromagnetic Contributions,

    Y. Ishii, N. Sasabe, and Y. Yamasaki, “Altermagnetic XMCD in Hematite Distinct from Weak Ferromagnetic Contributions,” (2026), arXiv:2603.00442 [cond-mat]

    2026

  31. [40]

    Mn-te binary phase diagram 0-100 at.% te: Datasheet from “PAULING FILE multi- naries edition – 2022

    “Mn-te binary phase diagram 0-100 at.% te: Datasheet from “PAULING FILE multi- naries edition – 2022” in SpringerMateri- als (https://materials.springer.com/isp/phase- diagram/docs/c_0100223),” (2023)

    2022

  32. [41]

    LennardKrause,

    Lennard Krause, “LennardKrause,” (2026)

    2026

  33. [42]

    SAINT-Plus,

    “SAINT-Plus,” Bruker AXS Inc (2012)

    2012

  34. [43]

    Krause, R

    L. Krause, R. Herbst-Irmer, G. M. Sheldrick, and D. Stalke, Journal of Applied Crystallography48, 3 (2015)

    2015

  35. [44]

    CrysAlisPro,

    R. O. Diffraction, “CrysAlisPro,” Rigaku Oxford Diffrac- tion/Agilent Technologies Ltd. (2025)

    2025

  36. [45]

    G.M.Sheldrick,ActaCrystallographicaSectionA:Foun- dations and Advances71, 3 (2015)

    2015

  37. [46]

    G. M. Sheldrick, Acta Crystallographica Section C: Structural Chemistry71, 3 (2015)

    2015

  38. [47]

    O. V. Dolomanov, L. J. Bourhis, R. J. Gildea, J. a. K. Howard, and H. Puschmann, Journal of Applied Crys- tallography42, 339 (2009)

    2009

  39. [48]

    S. Mori, S. Hatayama, Y. Shuang, D. Ando, and Y. Sutou, Nature Communications11, 85 (2020)

    2020

  40. [49]

    Sasabe, M

    N. Sasabe, M. Kimata, and T. Nakamura, Physical Re- view Letters126, 157402 (2021)

    2021

  41. [50]

    R. D. Cowan,The Theory of Atomic Structure and Spec- tra, Vol. 3 (Univ of California Press, 1981). 8 END MA TTER Crystal growth –The synthesis were carried out at Department of Chemistry, Aarhus University (AU). All elements were used as obtained from Chempur: Mn325 mesh powde...

    1981

  42. [51]

    C. P. Slichter,Principles of Magnetic Resonance, Vol. 1 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2013)

    2013

  43. [52]

    Low- energy magnons in the altermagnet $α$-MnTe,

    K. Y. Povarov, J. Wosnitza, S. Rößler, M. Schmidt, A. A. Tsirlin, and S. A. Zvyagin, “Low- energy magnons in the altermagnet $α$-MnTe,” (2025), arXiv:2510.24376 [cond-mat]

    2025 arXiv

  44. [53]

    F. J. Dyson, Physical Review98, 349 (1955)

    1955

  45. [54]

    Mn-te binary phase diagram 0-100 at.% te: Datasheet from “PAULING FILE multi- naries edition – 2022

    “Mn-te binary phase diagram 0-100 at.% te: Datasheet from “PAULING FILE multi- naries edition – 2022” in SpringerMaterials (https://materials.springer.com/isp/phase- diagram/docs/c_0100223),” (2023)

    2022

  46. [55]

    M. A. Quintero, K.-K. Huynh, Y. Ishii, N. Sasabe, N.-Q. Phan, Y. Yamasaki, and B. B. Iversen, Submitted (2026)

    2026

  47. [56]

    Y.-P. Zhu, X. Chen, X.-R. Liu, Y. Liu, P. Liu, H. Zha, G. Qu, C. Hong, J. Li, Z. Jiang, X.-M. Ma, Y.-J. Hao, M.-Y. Zhu, W. Liu, M. Zeng, S. Jayaram, M. Lenger, J. Ding, S. Mo, K. Tanaka, M. Arita, Z. Liu, M. Ye, D. Shen, J. Wrachtrup, Y. Huang, R.-H. He, S. Qiao, Q. Liu, and C...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.