Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Remote spin control in Haldane spin chains

T0 review · 1 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 The paper claims that a weak local magnetic field applied to one edge of an open Haldane spin chain can fully polarize and remotely switch the magnetization of the opposite edge, through the entangled singlet ground state.

desk verdict A clean, narrow theory result on remote edge-spin control in Haldane chains; the central formula is solid, but one unproved matrix-element identity shoulders the long-chain quantitative claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21544 v1 pith:OFGLWSLU submitted 2025-08-29 cond-mat.mes-hall

Y. del Castillo , A. Ferrón , J. Fernández-Rossier This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Haldanespinchainedgefractionalspinsremotecontroleffectivefour-levelmodelLandau-Zenersinglet-tripletsplittinglocalmagnetizationnanographene
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 the two effective edge spins of an open Haldane spin chain, entangled through a singlet ground state, can be remotely controlled: a weak magnetic field applied to one edge modifies and can saturate the magnetization of the opposite edge. The authors derive a four-state effective model whose two-level part predicts the local magnetization response exactly, and they verify it against full numerical diagonalization for both S=1 Haldane chains and the alternating-exchange Heisenberg model. They further show that a Landau-Zener sweep of the local field adiabatically reverses the far-edge magnetization, making the chain a candidate for non-local spin control in nanographene platforms.

What carries the argument

The machinery is an effective four-level Hamiltonian built in the singlet-triplet ground-state manifold of the open chain. The only non-vanishing matrix elements of the local spin operator are $S^z_i = \langle S|\hat{S}^z_i|T_0\rangle$ and $T^{(\pm)}_i = \langle T_\pm|\hat{S}^z_i|T_\pm\rangle$; the paper uses the identity $|T^{(\pm)}_1| = |S^z_1|$ to write a two-level model in the $(S,T_0)$ sector, $h(b) = -\tfrac{j}{2}\tau_z + \epsilon_0(b)\tau_x$. This two-level system, with splitting $E(b)=\tfrac{1}{2}\sqrt{j^2+4\epsilon_0(b)^2}$, controls the magnetization response and the Landau-Zener dynamics.

What would settle it

Measure the magnetization profile of a Haldane chain of N=12 spins as a function of a local field applied to one edge and compare the saturation value and the scaling with $4\epsilon_0^2+j^2$ against Eq. (11); a deviation in the edge magnetization beyond numerical error would falsify the effective model. Alternatively, an exact diagonalization that breaks the $|T^{(\pm)}_1|=|S^z_1|$ relation would show whether the predicted saturation persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is Eq. (11): for a field b applied only at site 1, the local magnetization at any site i is given by $\langle\psi_\pm|\hat{S}^z_i|\psi_\pm\rangle = \pm\,2\epsilon_0(b)\,S^z_i\,/\sqrt{4\epsilon_0(b)^2+j^2}$, where $\epsilon_0(b)=g\mu_B b\,S^z_1$ and $j$ is the exponentially small singlet-triplet splitting. In the limit $|\epsilon_0| \gg j$ this saturates to $\pm S^z_i$, so a local perturbation on one edge fully polarizes the opposite edge with opposite sign. The same formula holds for both the S=1 Haldane model and the S=1/2 alternating-exchange Heisenberg model, and exact numerics confirm the effective-model prediction to high accuracy.

Load-bearing premise

The entire quantitative prediction rests on the unproved identity that the diagonal matrix elements of the edge spin in the triplet states equal its singlet-triplet off-diagonal matrix element; if that relation is only approximate, the level structure and the Landau-Zener exponent change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A local AC field can drive electron spin resonance transitions between the singlet and triplet at frequency $\hbar\omega = j$, providing a way to address individual Haldane chains with a scanning tip.
  • A probe placed at one edge can sense a field applied at the opposite edge, enabling non-local magnetometry across the chain.
  • Adiabatic sweeps of the local field reverse the far-edge magnetization on sub-nanosecond timescales for realistic nanographene parameters, enabling fast remote spin switching.
  • The effective model remains valid for both S=1 Haldane chains and the alternating-exchange Heisenberg model, so the remote-control mechanism transfers across different physical platforms.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The identity $|T^{(\pm)}_1| = |S^z_1|$ is asserted without proof; if it holds only approximately, the quantitative Landau-Zener exponent and the exact saturation value would shift, although the qualitative remote-control picture likely survives.
  • The mechanism is essentially a two-level avoided crossing, so similar remote-control behavior should appear in other gapped spin chains with entangled edge states beyond the Haldane phase.
  • The condition $k_B T \ll j$ restricts the protocol to very low temperatures; an interesting extension would be to use the $T_\pm$ states or multi-sweep Landau-Zener-Stückelberg-Majorana protocols to relax the temperature constraint.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies open Haldane spin chains, both the S=1 chain with biquadratic exchange (Eq. 1) and the S=1/2 alternating-exchange Heisenberg model (Eq. 2), in the regime where only the low-energy singlet-triplet quartet is populated. A local magnetic field is applied to the first spin, and degenerate perturbation theory is used to derive a four-state effective Hamiltonian, Eq. (7), whose Sz=0 block is a two-level system with splitting j and coupling ε0(b)=gμB b S^z_1. The central result, Eq. (11), gives the local magnetization at site i in the two Sz=0 eigenstates as ±2ε0(b) S^z_i / sqrt(4ε0(b)^2+j^2), so that for |ε0| >> j the edge magnetization saturates and the opposite edge responds with opposite sign. The authors validate the effective model against exact diagonalization for N=10 and N=12, compare a Landau-Zener sweep with the full time evolution for N=8, and use DMRG to estimate parameters for a nanographene realization with N=22.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper provides a simple, parameter-free prediction: a local field on one edge controls the magnetization of the opposite edge, with a closed-form expression involving only singlet-triplet matrix elements of S^z_i. The connection between the fractional edge spins of Haldane chains and a singlet-triplet qubit model is elegant and likely to be useful. The exact-diagonalization validation (energy deviations ~10^-4, magnetization deviations below 10^-7), the Landau-Zener comparison with full time evolution, and the explicit falsifiable formula in Eq. (11) are clear strengths. The main open question is the status of the identity |T±_1|=|S^z_1|, which is used for the quantitative long-chain claims but is not derived.

major comments (1)
  1. [After Eq. (6); Supplemental Material Sec. IV] The identity |T±_1| = |S^z_1|, stated after Eq. (6) as 'We find that' without proof, is load-bearing in two places. First, it fixes the diagonal energies of the T± states in Eq. (7), and it is what guarantees that ψ− remains the ground state for all b, so that the Landau-Zener protocol stays in the Sz=0 sector. Second, Supplemental Material Sec. IV uses this relation to extract the singlet-triplet matrix elements S_i from DMRG for long chains (N=20-70), including the N=22 case used for the feasibility estimates. The exact-diagonalization checks in the Supplemental Material are only for N=10 and N=12, so they do not establish the identity for the parameters of the proposed experiment. The authors should either derive the identity from the effective edge-spin structure or provide a direct DMRG computation of S_i for the relevant chain lengths, together with an estimate of the error incurred by replacing S_i with T±_i.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (4)] Eq. (4) writes Heff(b) = ⟨G|V|G′⟩, but the effective Hamiltonian in Eq. (7) also contains the unperturbed singlet-triplet energies; the notation should be corrected to include the unperturbed part, e.g., Heff = E_G δ_{GG′} + ⟨G|V|G′⟩.
  2. [Feasibility estimate after Eq. (14)] The quoted sweep time Δt_LZ = ℏ/(η j) ≃ 0.28 ns is inconsistent with the stated definitions: with gμB Δb = 4j and v_s = η v_{s,0}, one obtains Δt_LZ = 4ℏ/(η j) ≈ 0.22 ns for j = 94 μeV and η = 0.127, while the written expression gives about 0.055 ns. The factor of 4 should be corrected.
  3. [Eq. (14)] The hierarchy kBT << j < gμB b << ΔH is presented as a set of conditions for the model, but the Landau-Zener sweep necessarily passes through b = 0, where the middle inequality fails; this inequality should be described as a condition for full polarization rather than as a general validity condition.
  4. [Fig. 2(d) caption] The Fig. 2(d) caption states β = 0.3, while the main text near Fig. 2 and Fig. 4 uses β = 0.32; please harmonize the parameter values.
  5. [Supplemental Material Sec. II] The sentence 'the external field should be of the same order of magnitude as the thermal energy' is unclear; presumably the intended statement is that the external field should be small compared with the thermal energy, and the sentence should be rephrased.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Eq. (11) is an algebraic consequence of a degenerate-perturbation-theory Hamiltonian whose matrix elements are computed from the unperturbed chain, and the numerical comparisons are consistency checks, not fits.

full rationale

The central result, Eq. (11), is derived from the effective two-level Hamiltonian in Eq. (8), which is built from first-order degenerate perturbation theory in the local field. The matrix elements S^z_i and T^(±)_i are evaluated on the unperturbed singlet–triplet ground-state manifold and are explicitly stated to be independent of b, so no parameter is fitted to the magnetization response that the paper claims to predict. Eq. (11) then follows algebraically from diagonalizing Eq. (8). The Supplemental Material comparisons of the effective model with exact diagonalization of the full Hamiltonians (Eqs. (1)–(2)) and the Landau–Zener comparison in Fig. 4 validate the effective model against the same microscopic Hamiltonian; they do not inject the target result as an input. The relation |T^(±)_1| = |S^z_1| used to extract S^z_i by DMRG for longer chains is an unproved approximate identity and is legitimately flagged as a validation risk for the N=22 feasibility estimate, but it is not circular with respect to Eq. (11), whose derivation does not presuppose that identity, and the identity is checked by exact diagonalization for the sizes where that is feasible. Self-citations provide external nanographene parameters and experimental context but are not load-bearing for the formal derivation. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and no step reduces by construction to its own inputs.

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

The derivation rests on the standard Haldane edge-state picture, first-order degenerate perturbation theory, and the exponential decay of the singlet-triplet gap. All quantitative inputs (J, β, J1, J2) come from prior experimental characterization of nanographene chains, not from fitting the target result. No free parameters are introduced; the simulation sizes (N=8, 12) are illustrative. No new entities are postulated. The main auxiliary claim without proof is the matrix-element identity |T^(±)_1| = |S^z_1|, which is load-bearing for the effective Hamiltonian but is likely exact by the Wigner-Eckart theorem within the singlet-triplet manifold.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Open-boundary Haldane chains have a low-energy manifold of one singlet and one triplet, with splitting j that decays exponentially with chain length.
    Used to justify the four-level model; standard Haldane edge-state result (Kennedy 1990; AKLT construction), cited in the Introduction.
  • domain assumption The local field is weak enough that first-order degenerate perturbation theory in the ground-state manifold is valid, i.e., gμB b << ΔH.
    Explicitly assumed after Eq. (3) in the main text; required for projecting onto the four-state manifold.
  • domain assumption The matrix-element identity |T^(±)_1| = |S^z_1| holds.
    Stated without proof after Eq. (6); used to fix the diagonal elements of the T± states in Eq. (7) and to determine the Landau-Zener exponent.
  • standard math The Landau-Zener formula describes the non-adiabatic transition probability for the two-level Hamiltonian h(b).
    Used in Eq. (13); standard quantum mechanics result, cited to Refs. [51-53].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Remote spin control in Haldane spin chains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OFGLWSLU

@misc{pith2026250821544,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Remote spin control in Haldane spin chains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OFGLWSLU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21544}
}
read the original abstract

We consider the remote manipulation of the quantum state of the edge fractional spins of Haldane spin chains using a weak local perturbation on the other edge. We derive an effective four-level model that correctly captures the response of the local magnetization to local perturbations and we use it to show that applying a small local field on one edge of the chain induces a strong variation of the magnetization on the opposite edge. Using a Landau-Zener protocol, we show how local control of the field on one edge of the chain, implemented for instance with a spin-polarized scanning tunnel microscope tip, can adiabatically switch the magnetization direction on the other side of the chain.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21544 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a) Alternating exchange Heisenberg model (AEHM) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Haldane S=1 non-vanishing matrix elements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (a) Ground-state expectation values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) Ground–state magnetization of the left (solid) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Comparison between the full Hamiltonian (FH) from Eq. (1) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Ground state thermal occupation probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Singlet-triplet gap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.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. Identification and optimization of accurate spin models for Fermi-Hubbard ladders using matrix product states

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Low-energy states of oligo(indenoindene) carbon ladders are accurately captured by an optimized delocalized-spin J1–J2 Heisenberg chain.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Haldane, Physics Letters A 93, 464 (1983)

    F. Haldane, Physics Letters A 93, 464 (1983)

    work page 1983

  2. [2]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1153 (1983)

    1983

  3. [3]

    des Cloizeaux and J

    J. des Cloizeaux and J. J. Pearson, Phys. Rev. 128, 2131 (1962)

    work page 1962

  4. [4]

    Much faster sweeping times can be achieved with mul- tiple sweeps in the so-called Landau-Zener-Stuckelberg- Majorana[53, 54]

    Hence, triangulene’s Haldane chain with N = 22 units would allow for remote control between edge spins at a distance of 13 nanometers in a fraction of nanosecond. Much faster sweeping times can be achieved with mul- tiple sweeps in the so-called Landau-Zener-Stuckelberg- Majorana[53, 54]. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that Haldane spin chains provid...

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Kennedy, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 2, 5737 (1990)

    T. Kennedy, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 2, 5737 (1990)

    work page 1990

  6. [6]

    Bose, Phys

    S. Bose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 207901 (2003)

    2003

  7. [7]

    Christandl, N

    M. Christandl, N. Datta, A. Ekert, and A. J. Landahl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 187902 (2004)

    2004

  8. [8]

    Burgarth, V

    D. Burgarth, V. Giovannetti, and S. Bose, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 38, 6793 (2005)

    work page 2005

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Bose, Contemporary Physics 48, 13 (2007)

    S. Bose, Contemporary Physics 48, 13 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    Campos Venuti, C

    L. Campos Venuti, C. Degli Esposti Boschi, and M. Roncaglia, Physical Review Letters 99, 060401 (2007)

    2007

  3. [11]

    Romero-Isart, K

    O. Romero-Isart, K. Eckert, and A. Sanpera, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 75, 050303 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    Zwick, G

    A. Zwick, G. A. Alvarez, J. Stolze, and O. Osenda, Phys- ical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 84, 022311 (2011)

    2011

  5. [13]

    G. M. Nikolopoulos, I. Jex, et al., Quantum state transfer and network engineering (Springer, 2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    Banchi, J

    L. Banchi, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, C. F. Hirjibehedin, and S. Bose, Physical review letters 118, 147203 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    D. I. Bazhanov, I. N. Sivkov, and V. S. Stepanyuk, Sci- entific Reports 8, 14118 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    J. S. Van Dyke, Y. P. Kandel, H. Qiao, J. M. Nichol, S. E. Economou, and E. Barnes, Physical Review B 103, 245303 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    D. S. Acosta Coden, O. Osenda, and A. Ferr´ on, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 58, 015504 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    C. F. Hirjibehedin, C. P. Lutz, and A. J. Heinrich, Science 312, 1021 (2006)

    2006

  11. [19]

    A. A. Khajetoorians, J. Wiebe, B. Chilian, and R. Wiesendanger, Science 332, 1062 (2011)

    2011

  12. [20]

    D.-J. Choi, N. Lorente, J. Wiebe, K. Von Bergmann, A. F. Otte, and A. J. Heinrich, Reviews of Modern Physics 91, 041001 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Mishra, G

    S. Mishra, G. Catarina, F. Wu, R. Ortiz, D. Jacob, K. Eimre, J. Ma, C. A. Pignedoli, X. Feng, P. Ruffieux, J. Fernandez-Rossier, and R. Fasel, Nature 598, 287 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    C. Zhao, G. Catarina, J.-J. Zhang, J. C. Henriques, L. Yang, J. Ma, X. Feng, O. Gr¨ oning, P. Ruffieux, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier,et al. , Nature Nanotechnology , 1 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    C. Zhao, L. Yang, J. C. Henriques, M. Ferri-Cort´ es, G. Catarina, C. A. Pignedoli, J. Ma, X. Feng, P. Ruffieux, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier,et al. , Nature Materials , 1 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    C. J. van Diepen, T.-K. Hsiao, U. Mukhopadhyay, C. Re- ichl, W. Wegscheider, and L. M. Vandersypen, Physical Review X 11, 041025 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Donnelly, J

    M. Donnelly, J. Rowlands, L. Kranz, Y. Hsueh, Y. Chung, A. Timofeev, H. Geng, P. Singh- Gregory, S. Gorman, J. Keizer, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03763 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Murmann, F

    S. Murmann, F. Deuretzbacher, G. Z¨ urn, J. Bjerlin, S. M. Reimann, L. Santos, T. Lompe, and S. Jochim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 215301 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Senko, P

    C. Senko, P. Richerme, J. Smith, A. Lee, I. Cohen, A. Retzker, and C. Monroe, Physical Review X 5, 021026 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Barredo, H

    D. Barredo, H. Labuhn, S. Ravets, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and C. S. Adams, Physical review letters 114, 113002 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    P. K. Kandel, H. Qiao, S. Fallahi, G. C. Gardner, M. J. Manfra, and J. M. Nichol, Nature Communications 12, 2156 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Y. Wang, Y. Chen, H. T. Bui, C. Wolf, M. Haze, C. Mier, J. Kim, D.-J. Choi, C. P. Lutz, Y. Bae, et al. , Science 382, 87 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Hida, Physical Review B 45, 2207 (1992)

    K. Hida, Physical Review B 45, 2207 (1992)

    1992

  24. [32]

    H. Wang, P. Fan, J. Chen, L. Jiang, H.-J. Gao, J. L. Lado, and K. Yang, Nature Nanotechnology , 1 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    Sompet, S

    P. Sompet, S. Hirthe, D. Bourgund, T. Chalopin, J. Bibo, J. Koepsell, P. Bojovi´ c, R. Verresen, F. Pollmann, G. Sa- 6 lomon, et al. , Nature 606, 484 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    M. M. Munia, S. Monir, E. N. Osika, M. Y. Simmons, and R. Rahman, Physical Review Applied 21, 014038 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    De L´ es´ eleuc, V

    S. De L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, D. Barredo, S. We- ber, N. Lang, H. P. B¨ uchler, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Science 365, 775 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    M¨ ogerle, K

    J. M¨ ogerle, K. Brechtelsbauer, A. Gea-Caballero, J. Prior, G. Emperauger, G. Bornet, C. Chen, T. La- haye, A. Browaeys, and H. B¨ uchler, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21424 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Jaworowski, N

    B. Jaworowski, N. Rogers, M. Grabowski, and P. Hawry- lak, Scientific Reports 7, 5529 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    V. V. Baran and J. Paaske, Physical Review B 110, 064503 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Affleck, T

    I. Affleck, T. Kennedy, E. H. Lieb, and H. Tasaki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 799 (1987)

    1987

  32. [40]

    Diederix, H

    K. Diederix, H. Bl¨ ote, J. Groen, T. Klaassen, and N. Poulis, Physical Review B 19, 420 (1979)

    1979

  33. [41]

    J. C. Bonner, S. A. Friedberg, H. Kobayashi, D. L. Meier, and H. W. Bl¨ ote, Physical Review B 27, 248 (1983)

    1983

  34. [42]

    K. Yang, W. Paul, F. D. Natterer, J. L. Lado, Y. Bae, P. Willke, T. Choi, A. Ferr´ on, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, A. J. Heinrich, et al. , Physical review letters 122, 227203 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Phark, H

    S.-h. Phark, H. T. Bui, A. Ferr´ on, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, J. Reina-G´ alvez, C. Wolf, Y. Wang, K. Yang, A. J. Heinrich, and C. P. Lutz, Advanced Science 10, 2302033 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    J. R. Petta, A. C. Johnson, J. M. Taylor, E. A. Laird, A. Yacoby, M. D. Lukin, C. M. Marcus, M. P. Hanson, and A. C. Gossard, Science 309, 2180 (2005)

    2005

  37. [45]

    Ortiz, N

    R. Ortiz, N. A. Garc ´ ıa-Mart ´ ınez, J. Lado, and J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, Physical Review B 97, 195425 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Fishman, S

    M. Fishman, S. R. White, and E. M. Stoudenmire, Sci- Post Phys. Codebases , 4 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Lado, DMRGpy library (2023)

    J. Lado, DMRGpy library (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    del Castillo and J

    Y. del Castillo and J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, Physical Review B 110, 045145 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    The Supplemental Material also contains Ref

    See Supplemental Material for a comparison between the complete Hamiltonian and the effective model, an esti- mation of the ground-state thermal occupation, and a discussion of possible experimental realizations of remote spin control. The Supplemental Material also contains Re...

  42. [50]

    Baumann, W

    S. Baumann, W. Paul, T. Choi, C. P. Lutz, A. Ardavan, and A. J. Heinrich, Science 350, 417 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    Maiellaro, H

    A. Maiellaro, H. Aubin, A. Mesaros, and P. Simon, Phys- ical Review B 110, L220410 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Landau, Phys

    L. Landau, Phys. Z. Sowjetunion 2, 118 (1932)

    1932

  45. [53]

    Zener, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London

    C. Zener, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Phys- ical Character 137, 696 (1932)

    1932

  46. [54]

    Ivakhnenko, S

    V. Ivakhnenko, S. N. Shevchenko, and F. Nori, Physics Reports 995, 1 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    S. A. Rodr ´ ıguez, S. S. G´ omez, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier, and A. Ferr´ on, Physical Review Letters134, 056703 (2025). Supplemental material of ”Remote spin control in Haldane spin chains” Y. del Castillo 1,2, A. Ferr´ on 3, J. Fern´ andez-Rossier1˚,: 1International Iberian Na...

    2025

Pith tools

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