Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Quantum effects in the magnon spectrum of 2D altermagnets via continuous similarity transformations

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quantum interactions between magnons reduce the altermagnetic spin splitting by 14–20% relative to linear spin-wave theory and produce a roton minimum in the lower branch that deepens when the next-nearest-neighbor coupling is frustrating.

desk verdict A careful and plausible CST study of a minimal 2D altermagnet, but the headline renormalization numbers rest on an approximate-stability assumption that needs a decay-width estimate before they can be taken at face value. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.03528 v1 pith:VXFPMSYK submitted 2025-11-05 cond-mat.str-el quant-ph

Raymond Wiedmann , Dag-Björn Hering , Vanessa Sulaiman , Matthias R. Walther , Kai P. Schmidt , Götz S. Uhrig This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elquant-ph
keywords altermagnetmagnonspectrumcontinuoussimilaritytransformationspinsplittingrotonminimummagnon-magnoninteractionsquare-latticeHeisenbergmodelspin-1/2
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 asks whether the spin splitting of magnon bands in a two-dimensional altermagnet survives quantum fluctuations in a spin-1/2 Heisenberg model, and how those fluctuations reshape the spectrum. Using a continuous similarity transformation that decouples sectors with different magnon numbers, it computes the one-magnon dispersion beyond linear spin-wave theory. The central quantitative claims are that magnon-magnon interactions reduce the altermagnetic spin splitting by 14% to 20% relative to linear spin-wave theory, and that a roton minimum appears in the lower magnon branch whose depth grows nonlinearly when the next-nearest-neighbor coupling is frustrating (J2 > 0). The paper also maps the stability region: the Néel order holds up to J2 ≈ 0.66 J1, while magnons are only approximately stable within a narrower window, bounded by the convergence of the transformation. A sympathetic reader would care because these are concrete, measurable predictions for inelastic neutron scattering on quasi-2D altermagnets.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a momentum-space continuous similarity transformation (CST) applied to a bosonized Heisenberg Hamiltonian after a self-consistent mean-field decoupling and a canonical rotation to gapless magnons. Two generators are used: a 0n generator that removes vacuum fluctuations and whose convergence marks the Néel-phase boundary, and a quasi-particle-conserving (qpc) generator that block-diagonalizes the Hamiltonian into fixed magnon-number sectors; the qpc flow converges only when one-magnon and three-magnon sectors do not overlap in energy, so its convergence (with residual off-diagonality below 10^-6 J1 and energy resolution 1/ℓmax ≈ 0.004 J1) is treated as a proxy for app

What would settle it

Computing the single-magnon spectral function with a higher flow cutoff or on larger lattices so that decay linewidths below 0.004 J1 are resolved; if the one-magnon peak acquires a Lorentzian width exceeding the current resolution, or if the qpc flow diverges for values of J2 where it is reported to converge, the roton minimum and the 14–20% splitting reduction are artifacts of the truncation. A complementary falsifier is an inelastic neutron scattering experiment on a quasi-2D altermagnet that resolves a magnon linewidth comparable to 1/ℓmax.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that magnon-magnon interactions, treated fully through the continuous similarity transformation, renormalize the altermagnetic magnon spectrum in a quantitative and partly counterintuitive way. At the momentum (π/2, π/2), the spin splitting ΔS = ω↓ − ω↑, which is 2J2 in linear spin-wave theory, is reduced by 14–20% for |J2| ≤ 0.16 J1, with the largest reduction for antiferromagnetic (frustrating) next-nearest-neighbor coupling. The same interactions create a roton minimum at (π,0) in the ω↓ branch: ΔR = ω↓(π/2,π/2) − ω↓(π,0) is exactly zero in LSWT and in self-consistent spin-wave theory, but finite in CST, and its depth increases strongly and nonlinearly with J2 > 0 while d

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a converging quasi-particle-conserving flow, stopped at a finite cutoff with energy resolution 1/ℓmax ≈ 0.004 J1, reliably indicates that magnons are approximately stable, so that the extracted dispersion, roton minimum, and splitting renormalization are physical rather than truncation artifacts — even though exact magnon stability is known to be absent for altermagnets.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The altermagnetic spin splitting of the magnon bands is a robust signature: even with full magnon-magnon interactions it survives with 80–86% of its linear-spin-wave value for |J2| ≤ 0.16 J1.
  • The roton minimum, a purely quantum effect absent in LSWT and scSWT, is present in the lower magnon branch for J2 = 0 and grows nonlinearly with frustrating NNN coupling, so its depth can serve as a measure of quantum fluctuations.
  • The stability map is asymmetric: the 0n flow converges for all J2 < 0 and up to J2,c ≈ 0.66 J1 for J2'=0, while the qpc flow converges only in a window roughly 0 ≲ J2/J1 ≲ 0.2, delimiting where single-magnon quasiparticles are approximately valid.
  • Spectral densities show that interactions shift weight from the one-magnon peak into the three-magnon continuum, and the two-magnon peak at (π/2,π/2) splits only when interactions are included, giving distinctive signatures for neutron scattering.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the resolution-limited criterion holds, the quantitative predictions — 14–20% splitting reduction and a J2-dependent roton depth — are sharp enough to be tested by inelastic neutron scattering on quasi-2D altermagnets with weak interlayer coupling; a measurement resolving the roton would discriminate between mean-field and full interaction theories.
  • The near-zero lower bound of qpc convergence for J2<0 suggests that even weak ferromagnetic NNN coupling may open decay channels or level crossings that LSWT misses; testing whether this is a physical instability or a truncation artifact via exact diagonalization on larger clusters would clarify the true stability window.
  • The non-monotonic dependence of the roton depth on J2 implies that strain or pressure tuning of the NNN coupling in candidate altermagnets could be a control knob for quantum fluctuations, potentially enhancing or suppressing magnon decay.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a minimal spin-1/2 square-lattice Heisenberg model with inequivalent next-nearest-neighbor couplings, intended as a 2D altermagnet. The authors combine the Dyson-Maleev transformation, self-consistent spin-wave theory, and continuous similarity transformations (CST) to obtain a one-magnon effective Hamiltonian. They use the 0n and qpc generators to map the stability of the Néel phase and the approximate stability of magnons, respectively. The central quantitative claims are that magnon-magnon interactions reduce the altermagnetic spin splitting by 14--20% relative to LSWT and produce a roton minimum in the lower magnon branch whose depth depends non-monotonically on the altermagnetic NNN coupling J2. The paper also presents dynamical structure factors separated into one-, two-, and three-magnon sectors and emphasizes the possibility of spontaneous magnon decay for J2 ≠ 0, interpreting the qpc flow convergence as a criterion for approximate magnon stability.

Significance. If the central quantitative claims are correct, the paper provides a useful beyond-LSWT benchmark for a minimal 2D altermagnet and gives experimentally relevant predictions for inelastic neutron scattering. The CST framework is systematic, has no free parameters beyond the model couplings, and the authors are explicit about the limitations imposed by finite system size and finite flow cutoff. The separation of spectral contributions by magnon number and the mapping of qpc/0n convergence regions are valuable methodological contributions. However, the quantitative claims rest on interpreting a truncated, finite-resolution flow as evidence of approximate magnon stability; this interpretational step is not yet backed by a direct estimate of the physical single-magnon linewidth, which is essential for the 14--20% splitting reduction and the roton-depth results.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Fig. 2 and Sec. 4.2] The extrapolated qpc convergence lower bound is J2,l^c ≈ (0.02±0.03)J1, i.e. essentially zero in the thermodynamic limit. This means the qpc flow is not expected to converge for any J2 < 0 as L→∞. Nevertheless, Figs. 3–5 present CST results for J2 = −0.16, −0.10, −0.05 and extrapolate them in 1/L. The finite-size convergence endpoints are not a surrogate for thermodynamic-limit convergence. The paper should either explain why the lower-bound divergence does not affect the single-magnon energies used for ΔS and ΔR, or restrict the quantitative claims to the J2 > 0 region. As written, the 14–20% reduction claim covers the negative-J2 part of the parameter range on a convergence basis that is absent in the L→∞ limit.
  2. [App. B, Eq. (B17); Sec. 4.2.1 and 4.2.2] The ROD < 10−6 stopping criterion gives 1/ℓmax ≈ 0.004J1, but this is a measure of the residual off-diagonality in the truncated operator space, not a measurement of the physical single-magnon linewidth Γ(k). Equation (B17) shows exponential suppression of off-diagonal elements only when one-magnon energies lie below all three-magnon energies. For J2 ≠ 0 the upper magnon branch is generically unstable (Refs. [28,30]), so the exact qpc flow diverges; the numerical flow is stopped before that divergence becomes visible. The 'converged' single-magnon peak position used to define ΔS and ΔR is therefore the result of a truncated generator flow and need not coincide with the peak of the true spectral function. To support the central quantitative claims, the authors should estimate Γ(k) at the relevant momenta, e.g. from the imaginary part of the one-magnon self-energy or from an independent nu
  3. [Sec. 3.1 and Sec. 4.2.1] The text describes the CST as 'fully including magnon-magnon interactions' and reports the 14–20% reduction as the interaction-induced effect. However, the flow equations are truncated at scaling dimension d_sc ≤ 2, a truncation inherited from previous Heisenberg and XXZ studies. Appendix A argues that the altermagnetic NNN couplings introduce no new operator types, but it does not establish that omitted d_sc > 2 operators have negligible influence on ΔS and ΔR for the altermagnetic parameter range. Since both the roton minimum and the additional reduction beyond scSWT are genuine interaction effects, a truncation-order convergence check or a comparison with an independent method for this model is needed before the specific numbers in Figs. 4 and 5 can be taken as quantitative.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.3] The single-magnon peaks in Figs. 6 and 8 are plotted with an artificial broadening of 0.1J1, which is much larger than 1/ℓmax and larger than typical decay widths the paper claims to ignore. The 'sharpness' of the peaks therefore does not provide independent evidence of approximate stability; this should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Sec. 4.1 and App. B] Sec. 4.1 states that the qpc flow converges only if the energy of an n-magnon mode is always smaller than the energy of an m>n mode, while App. B notes that the qpc generator can in principle re-order eigenstates if the flow is not truncated. These two statements should be reconciled, since the convergence criterion in the main text is stated more restrictively than the appendix allows.
  3. [App. A] There is a typo 'glsnnn contributions' in the text near Eq. (A10). Also, the paragraph after Eq. (A8) notes corrections to earlier papers; these corrections are useful but should be presented consistently (the missing factor in E_HB^0 and the l^2 vs m^2 issue are mentioned only in passing).
  4. [Sec. 4.2.1, Fig. 4] The 14–20% interval is quoted without specifying which J2 values are used and how the boundary-condition error bars are included. Please state the precise procedure and the error estimate for the interval, especially given the large relative error bars near J2 = 0.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central quantitative claims are independent outputs of the CST flow, not fitted inputs or self-citation consequences.

full rationale

The target quantities (altermagnetic spin splitting ΔS, roton depth ΔR, and their J2 dependence) are not inputs to the calculation. The mean-field parameters n_mf, Δ_mf, t_mf are determined self-consistently from the Hamiltonian (Eq. A8), the Bogoliubov transformation is derived from the quadratic part, and the CST flow is an exact similarity transformation truncated by scaling dimension; the qpc generator and ROD criterion are method choices, not fitted to the reported ΔS or ΔR. The 14–20% splitting reduction and the J2-dependent roton minimum are outputs of the converged effective Hamiltonian, so there is no equation in which a prediction equals an input by construction. The paper's self-citations (Refs. 19,20,33–35) supply the CST method and its previous benchmark results, but the altermagnetic model, its NNN coupling dependence, and the reported renormalizations are new content. The weakest point—interpreting qpc convergence at resolution 1/ℓmax ≈ 0.004 J1 as approximate magnon stability (Sec. 4.1, App. B)—is a physical/interpretive assumption about unresolved decay widths, not a circular reduction: the dispersion and roton depth are computed from the flow, not assumed in defining convergence. The LSWT normalization in Fig. 4 is explicitly acknowledged as 'constant ... by construction' and is only a plotting convention. Thus no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No external fitted parameters or invented entities. The self-consistent mean-field parameters (n_mf, Δ_mf, t_mf) are solved from the model, not fitted to data, so they are not counted as free parameters. The main additional assumptions are the modeling choice (J2'=0), the scSWT starting point, the CTS truncation, and the interpretation of generator convergence.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The spin model Eq. (2) with J1>0, J2'=0 is a representative minimal model for 2D altermagnets.
    Altermagnetic splitting is encoded in the asymmetry J2≠J2'; setting J2'=0 isolates the tuning parameter but is a modeling choice (Sec. 2).
  • domain assumption The self-consistent mean-field (scSWT) decoupling and Dyson-Maleev bosonization provide an appropriate starting point for the CST.
    Sec. 3.1 uses Takahashi/Hida mean-field and DM bosons; accuracy for altermagnets is assumed from prior square-lattice Heisenberg applications.
  • domain assumption The CST truncation at scaling dimension d_sc≤2 yields quantitatively accurate results for the altermagnetic model.
    Sec. 3.1 relies on prior verification for Heisenberg/XXZ models (Refs. [19,20,33,35]) but does not independently validate the truncation for J2≠0.
  • domain assumption Convergence of the 0n generator indicates Néel order stability; convergence of the qpc generator indicates approximate magnon stability within the energy resolution 1/ℓmax.
    Sec. 4.1 and App. B; this interpretive step converts flow convergence/divergence into physical statements about phase stability and magnon decay.
  • domain assumption Finite-size extrapolation in 1/L with pbc and apbc gives the thermodynamic limit with error estimates.
    Used throughout Sec. 4.2; equivalence of boundary conditions in the L→∞ limit is assumed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum effects in the magnon spectrum of 2D altermagnets via continuous similarity transformations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VXFPMSYK

@misc{pith2026251103528,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum effects in the magnon spectrum of 2D altermagnets via continuous similarity transformations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VXFPMSYK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.03528}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate quantum effects on magnon excitations in a minimal spin-1/2 Heisenberg model for 2D altermagnets on the square lattice. A continuous similarity transformation is applied in momentum space to derive an effective Hamiltonian that conserves the number of magnon excitations. This allows us to quantitatively calculate the one-magnon dispersion, the effects of magnon-magnon interactions, and the dynamic structure factor in a certain range of parameters. In particular, we focus on the altermagnetic spin splitting of the magnon bands and the size of the roton minimum. We further map out divergencies of the continuous similarity transformation for different types of generators, which signal either the breakdown of the N\'eel-ordered phase or the presence of significant magnon decay.

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. Weak-coupling altermagnetism and chiral magnetic excitations in a checkerboard lattice

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Checkerboard-lattice Hubbard electrons are unstable to weak-coupling altermagnetism whose magnons display alternating chirality splitting.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    B1 : Inverse of maximal flow parameter ℓmax where the ROD undercuts the threshold of 10−6𝐽1 depending on 𝐽2 with 𝐽 ′ 2 = 0

    Šmejkal, L., Sinova, J., Jungwirth, T.: Beyond conventional ferromagnetism and 25 −0.15 −0.10 −0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 J2/J1 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 1/ℓmax / J1 L = 13 L = 14 L = 15 L = 16 Nap Np Fig. B1 : Inverse of maximal flow parameter ℓmax where the ROD undercuts the threshold of 10−6𝐽1 depending on 𝐽2 with 𝐽 ′ 2 = 0. Different sys...

    2022

  2. [3]

    Mazin, I.: Editorial: Altermagnetism—a new punch line of fundamental mag- netism. Phys. Rev. X 12, 040002 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.12. 040002

    doi:10.1103/physrevx.12 2022

  3. [4]

    Jiang, Y., Song, Z., Zhu, T., Fang, Z., Weng, H., Liu, Z.-X., Yang, J., Fang, C.: Enumeration of spin-space groups: Toward a complete description of symmetries of magnetic orders. Phys. Rev. X 14, 031039 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevX.14.031039

    2024

  4. [5]

    npj Spintronics 2, 25 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/ s44306-024-00029-0

    Din, A.D., Amin, O.J., Wadley, P., Edmonds, K.W.: Antiferromagnetic spin- tronics and beyond. npj Spintronics 2, 25 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/ s44306-024-00029-0

    2024

  5. [6]

    McClarty, P.A., Rau, J.G.: Landau theory of altermagnetism. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 176702 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.176702

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.176702 2024

  6. [7]

    Heinsdorf, N.: Altermagnetic instabilities from quantum geometry. Phys. Rev. B 111, 174407 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.111.174407 26

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.111.174407 2025

  7. [8]

    Parshukov, K., Wiedmann, R., Schnyder, A.P.: Topological crossings in two- dimensional altermagnets: Symmetry classification and topological responses. Phys. Rev. B 111, 224406 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.111.224406

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.111.224406 2025

  8. [9]

    Bai, L., Feng, W., Liu, S., Šmejkal, L., Mokrousov, Y., Yao, Y.: Altermagnetism: Exploring new frontiers in magnetism and spintronics. Adv. Funct. Mater. 34, 2409327 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202409327

    doi:10.1002/adfm.202409327 2024

Show all 56 references
  1. [10]

    Sødequist, J., Olsen, T.: Two-dimensional altermagnets from high throughput computational screening: Symmetry requirements, chiral magnons, and spin-orbit effects. Appl. Phys. Lett. 124, 182409 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0198285

    2024 doi

  2. [11]

    Xiao, Z., Zhao, J., Li, Y., Shindou, R., Song, Z.-D.: Spin space groups: Full classification and applications. Phys. Rev. X 14, 031037 (2024) https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevX.14.031037

    2024 doi

  3. [12]

    Nature 626, 517–522 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06907-7

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

    2024 doi

  4. [13]

    Fedchenko, O., Minár, J., Akashdeep, A., D’Souza, S.W., Vasilyev, D., Tkach, O., Odenbreit, L., Nguyen, Q., Kutnyakhov, D., Wind, N., Wenthaus, L., Scholz, M., Rossnagel, K., Hoesch, M., Aeschlimann, M., Stadtmüller, B., Kläui, M., Schönhense, G., Jungwirth, T., Hellenes, A.B....

    2024

  5. [14]

    Nag, J., Das, B., Bhowal, S., Nishioka, Y., Bandyopadhyay, B., Sarker, S., Kumar, S., Kuroda, K., Gopalan, V., Kimura, A., Suresh, K.G., Alam, A.: GdAlSi: An antiferromagnetic topological Weyl semimetal with nonrelativistic spin splitting. Phys. Rev. B 110, 224436 (2024) https...

    2024 doi

  6. [15]

    Šmejkal, L., Marmodoro, A., Ahn, K.-H., Gonzalez-Hernandez, R., Turek, I., Mankovsky, S., Ebert, H., D’Souza, S.W., Šipr, O., Sinova, J., Jungwirth, T.: Chiral magnons in altermagnetic RuO 2. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 256703 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.256703

    2023 doi

  7. [16]

    McClarty, P.A., Gukasov, A., Rau, J.G.: Observing altermagnetism using polarized neutrons. Phys. Rev. B 111, 060405 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevB.111.L060405

    2025

  8. [17]

    Hoyer, R., Stavropoulos, P.P., Razpopov, A., Valentí, R., Šmejkal, L., Mook, A.: Altermagnetic splitting of magnons in hematite 𝛼−Fe2O3. Phys. Rev. B 112, 27 064425 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/fgc1-5blp

    2025 doi

  9. [18]

    Liu, Z., Ozeki, M., Asai, S., Itoh, S., Masuda, T.: Chiral split magnon in alter- magnetic MnTe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 156702 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.133.156702

    2024

  10. [19]

    Powalski, M., Uhrig, G.S., Schmidt, K.P.: Roton minimum as a fingerprint of magnon-Higgs scattering in ordered quantum antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 207202 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.207202

    2015 doi

  11. [20]

    SciPost Phys

    Powalski, M., Schmidt, K.P., Uhrig, G.S.: Mutually attracting spin waves in the square-lattice quantum antiferromagnet. SciPost Phys. 4, 001 (2018) https: //doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.4.1.001

    2018 doi

  12. [21]

    Manousakis, E.: The spin-½ Heisenberg antiferromagnet on a square lattice and its application to the cuprous oxides. Rev. Mod. Phys. 63, 1–62 (1991) https: //doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.63.1

    1991 doi

  13. [22]

    Hamer, C.J., Zheng Weihong, Arndt, P.: Third-order spin-wave theory for the Heisenberg antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. B 46, 6276–6292 (1992) https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevB.46.6276

    1992 doi

  14. [23]

    Singh, R.R.P., Gelfand, M.P.: Spin-wave excitation spectra and spectral weights in square lattice antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. B 52, 15695–15698 (1995) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.52.R15695

    1995 doi

  15. [24]

    Sandvik, A.W., Singh, R.R.P.: High-energy magnon dispersion and multimagnon continuum in the two-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 528–531 (2001) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.528

    2001 doi

  16. [25]

    Zheng, W., Oitmaa, J., Hamer, C.J.: Series studies of the spin- 1 2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet at 𝑇 = 0 : Magnon dispersion and structure factors. Phys. Rev. B 71, 184440 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.71.184440

    2005 doi

  17. [26]

    Verresen, R., Pollmann, F., Moessner, R.: Quantum dynamics of the square- lattice Heisenberg model. Phys. Rev. B 98, 155102 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevB.98.155102

    2018

  18. [27]

    Garcia-Gaitan, F., Kefayati, A., Xiao, J.Q., ć, B.K.: Magnon spectrum of altermagnets beyond linear spin wave theory: Magnon-magnon interactions via time-dependent matrix product states versus atomistic spin dynamics. Phys. Rev. B 111, 020407 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/Phy...

    2025 doi

  19. [28]

    Eto, R., Gohlke, M., Sinova, J., Mochizuki, M., Chernyshev, A.L., Mook, A.: Spontaneous magnon decays from nonrelativistic time-reversal symmetry break- ing in altermagnets. Phys. Rev. B 112, 094442 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/ p4f5-w5m2 28

    2025

  20. [29]

    SciPost Phys

    Costa, A.T., Henriques, J.C.G., Fernández-Rossier, J.: Giant spatial anisotropy of magnon Landau damping in altermagnets. SciPost Phys. 18, 125 (2025) https: //doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.18.4.125

    2025 doi

  21. [30]

    Cichutek, N., Kopietz, P., Rückriegel, A.: Spontaneous magnon decay in two- dimensional altermagnets. Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 033208 (2025) https://doi.org/10. 1103/b5vs-ldpm

    2025

  22. [31]

    (arXiv preprint)

    Cichutek, N., Kopietz, P., Rückriegel, A.: Quantum fluctuations in two- dimensional altermagnets. (arXiv preprint). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. 2507.11218

    doi

  23. [32]

    Liu, Y., Shao, S., He, S., Xie, Z.Y., Mei, J.-W., Luo, H.-G., Zhao, J.: Quantum dynamics in a spin- 1 2 square lattice 𝐽1−𝐽2−𝛿 altermagnet. Phys. Rev. B 111, 245117 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.111.245117

    2025 doi

  24. [33]

    Walther, M.R., Hering, D.-B., Uhrig, G.S., Schmidt, K.P.: Continuous similarity transformation for critical phenomena: Easy-axis antiferromagnetic XXZ model. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013132 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5. 013132

    2023 doi

  25. [34]

    Caci, N., Hering, D.-B., Walther, M.R., Schmidt, K.P., Wessel, S., Uhrig, G.S.: Quantitative description of long-range order in the spin − 1 2 XXZ antiferromagnet on the square lattice. Phys. Rev. B 110, 054411 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevB.110.054411

    2024

  26. [35]

    Hering, D.-B., Walther, M.R., Schmidt, K.P., Uhrig, G.S.: Quantum melting of long-range ordered quantum antiferromagnets investigated by momentum-space continuous similarity transformations. Phys. Rev. B 110, 085115 (2024) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.110.085115

    2024 doi

  27. [36]

    Cui, Q., Zeng, B., Cui, P., Yu, T., Yang, H.: Efficient spin seebeck and spin nernst effects of magnons in altermagnets. Phys. Rev. B 108, 180401 (2023) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.L180401

    2023 doi

  28. [37]

    Brekke, B., Brataas, A., Sudbø, A.: Two-dimensional altermagnets: Supercon- ductivity in a minimal microscopic model. Phys. Rev. B 108, 224421 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.108.224421

    2023 doi

  29. [38]

    Sushkov, O.P., Oitmaa, J., Weihong, Z.: Quantum phase transitions in the two- dimensional 𝐽1-𝐽2 model. Phys. Rev. B 63, 104420 (2001) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevB.63.104420

    2001

  30. [39]

    Jiang, H.-C., Yao, H., Balents, L.: Spin liquid ground state of the spin- 1 2 square 𝐽1-𝐽2 Heisenberg model. Phys. Rev. B 86, 024424 (2012) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevB.86.024424 29

    2012

  31. [40]

    Doretto, R.L.: Plaquette valence-bond solid in the square-lattice 𝐽1-𝐽2 antiferro- magnet Heisenberg model: A bond operator approach. Phys. Rev. B 89, 104415 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.104415

    2014 doi

  32. [42]

    Dyson, F.J.: General Theory of Spin-Wave Interactions. Phys. Rev. 102, 1217– 1230 (1956) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.102.1217

    1956 doi

  33. [43]

    Soviet Physics JETP 6, 766 (1958)

    Maleev, S.V.: Scattering of slow neutrons in ferromagnets. Soviet Physics JETP 6, 766 (1958)

    1958

  34. [44]

    Takahashi, M.: Modified spin-wave theory of a square-lattice antiferromagnet. Phys. Rev. B 40, 2494–2501 (1989) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.40.2494

    1989 doi

  35. [45]

    Hida, K.: Low Temperature Properties of the Double Layer Quantum Heisenberg Antiferromagnet – Modified Spin Wave Method –. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 59, 2230– 2236 (1990) https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.59.2230

    1990 doi

  36. [46]

    Wegner, F.: Flow-equations for Hamiltonians. Ann. Phys. 506, 77–91 (1994) https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19945060203

    1994 doi

  37. [47]

    Mielke, A.: Flow equations for band-matrices. Eur. Phys. J. B 5, 605–611 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1007/s100510050485

    1998 doi

  38. [48]

    Knetter, C., Uhrig, S.: Perturbation theory by flow equations: dimerized and frustrated 𝑆 = 1/2 chain. Eur. Phys. J. B 13(2), 209–225 (2000) https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s100510050026

    2000 doi

  39. [49]

    Knetter, C., Schmidt, K.P., Uhrig, G.S.: The structure of operators in effective particle-conserving models. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 36, 7889 (2003) https://doi. org/10.1088/0305-4470/36/29/302

    2003 doi

  40. [50]

    Fischer, T., Duffe, S., Uhrig, G.S.: Adapted continuous unitary transformation to treat systems with quasi-particles of finite lifetime. New J. Phys. 12(3), 033048 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/3/033048

    2010 doi

  41. [51]

    Science Advances 7, 7532 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv

    Zhu, F., Zhang, L., Wang, X., Santos, F.J., Song, J., Mueller, T., Schmalzl, K., Schmidt, W.F., Ivanov, A., Park, J.T., Xu, J., Ma, J., Lounis, S., Blügel, S., Mokrousov, Y., Su, Y., Brückel, T.: Topological magnon insulators in two- dimensional van der Waals ferromagnets CrSi...

    2021 doi

  42. [52]

    Chen, T., Demmel, J., Gu, M., Saad, Y., Lehoucq, R., Sorensen, D., Maschhoff, K., Bai, Z., Day, D., Freund, R., Sleijpen, G., Vorst, H., Li, R.: 7. 7. Non- Hermitian Eigenvalue Problems, pp. 149–231. SIAM, Philadelphia (2000). https: //doi.org/10.1137/1.9780898719581.ch7

    2000 doi

  43. [53]

    Richter, J., Schulenburg, J.: The spin-1/2 𝐽1–𝐽2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice: Exact diagonalization for N=40 spins. Eur. Phys. J. B 73, 117–124 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2009-00400-4

    2010 doi

  44. [54]

    Morita, S., Kaneko, R., Imada, M.: Quantum spin liquid in spin 1/2 𝐽1–𝐽2 Heisenberg model on square lattice: Many-variable variational Monte Carlo study combined with quantum-number projections. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 84, 024720 (2015) https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSJ.84.024720

    2015 doi

  45. [55]

    Gong, S.-S., Zhu, W., Sheng, D.N., Motrunich, O.I., Fisher, M.P.A.: Plaque- tte ordered phase and quantum phase diagram in the spin- 1 2 𝐽1−𝐽2 square Heisenberg model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 027201 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.113.027201

    2014

  46. [56]

    Liu, W.-Y., Gong, S.-S., Li, Y.-B., Poilblanc, D., Chen, W.-Q., Gu, Z.-C.: Gapless quantum spin liquid and global phase diagram of the spin-1/2 𝐽1–𝐽2 square antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model. Sci. Bull. 67, 1034–1041 (2022) https://doi. org/10.1016/j.scib.2022.03.010

    2022 doi

  47. [57]

    Bishop, R.F., Li, P.H.Y., Götze, O., Richter, J.: Frustrated spin- 1 2 heisenberg magnet on a square-lattice bilayer: High-order study of the quantum critical behavior of the 𝐽1−𝐽2−𝐽 ⟂ 1 model. Phys. Rev. B 100, 024401 (2019) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.024401

    2019 doi

  48. [58]

    Dusuel, S., Uhrig, G.S.: The quartic oscillator: A non-perturbative study by con- tinuous unitary transformations. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37, 9275–9294 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/37/39/014 31

    2004 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.