pith. sign in

arxiv: 2312.13962 · v1 · submitted 2023-12-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.mtrl-sci

The rich phase diagram of the prototypical iridate Ba₂IrO₄: Effective low-energy models and metal-insulator transition

Francesco Cassol , L\'eo Gaspard , Michele Casula , Cyril Martins , Benjamin Lenz This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 05:15 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords iridatesBa2IrO4j_eff statesmetal-insulator transitiondynamical mean-field theoryspin-orbit couplingHund's coupling
0
0 comments X

The pith

A three-band model in Ir j_eff states retains the low-energy physics of Ba2IrO4

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

This paper shows that a three-band model using spin-orbit entangled j_eff states on iridium fully captures the low-energy physics of Ba2IrO4, matching results from a complete five-orbital d-electron model. Such a reduction matters for understanding iridates, which may host exotic phases and share features with cuprate superconductors where simple models enable progress. Using ab initio methods combined with dynamical mean-field theory, the authors explore the effects of spin-orbit coupling, Hund's coupling, and Coulomb interactions to produce a detailed phase diagram. They locate a regime where the system behaves as an effective one-band Mott insulator relevant to the real material. Spectral functions agree with key aspects of angle-resolved photoemission data, though some features point to missing non-local fluctuations.

Core claim

By means of a combination of different ab initio techniques with dynamical mean-field theory, a three-band model in terms of Ir-j_eff states fully retains the low-energy physics of the system as compared to a full Ir-5d model. Providing a detailed study of the three-band model in terms of spin-orbit coupling, Hund's coupling and Coulomb interactions, the authors map out a rich phase diagram and identify a region of effective one-band metal-insulator transition relevant to Ba2IrO4. Compared to available angle-resolved photoemission spectra, they find good agreement of salient aspects of the calculated spectral function.

What carries the argument

The three-band model in Ir-j_eff states, constructed via ab initio downfolding and solved with dynamical mean-field theory to map interaction-driven phases.

If this is right

  • The three- and five-band models apply directly to studies of doped Ba2IrO4.
  • The models help clarify similarities and differences with cuprate superconductors.
  • An effective one-band metal-insulator transition regime exists in the parameter space relevant to the material.
  • Certain spectral features require non-local fluctuations beyond the current approach.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The validated three-band model could simplify doping studies in other layered iridates with similar local physics.
  • Extending the approach to include non-local effects might shift the identified metal-insulator boundaries.
  • The one-band regime opens a route to test whether doped Ba2IrO4 exhibits cuprate-like pairing instabilities.

Load-bearing premise

Single-site dynamical mean-field theory is sufficient to capture the metal-insulator transition and spectral features without non-local fluctuations.

What would settle it

A calculation incorporating non-local fluctuations that produces a substantially different phase diagram or spectral function from the single-site DMFT results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2312.13962 by Benjamin Lenz, Cyril Martins, Francesco Cassol, L\'eo Gaspard, Michele Casula.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. K [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (b) reports the electronic structure including relativistic effects. The SOC splits the t2g states into two lower jeff = 3/2 bands and a jeff = 1/2 band. The effect of SOC on the eg manifold is rather small, but gives rise to the slightly more entangled states ˜eg. Still, four bands cross the Fermi level, including the ˜dx2−y2 , but, in con￾trast to DFT without SOC, the jeff = 1/2 band is nearly half-fille… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Energy level diagram for Ba [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Comparison of the results of the three- and five-band DMFT calculations. Contributions of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Imaginary part of the self-energy in Matsubara space. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Metal-insulator transition in the three-band model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Characteristics of the metallic and insulating phases. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Phase diagram for Hund’s coupling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Temperature-dependence of the metal-insulator transition. (a) U-T phase diagram for Ba [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (d) shows the total k-resolved spectral function, compared to bands extracted from ARPES measurements in Ref. 27. We focus first on our DMFT results. Consistently with panel (a), the flat bands around the Fermi level in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Details of the spectral function. Electron distribu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Iso-energy maps of the spectral function. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In the quest of new exotic phases of matter due to the interplay of various interactions, iridates hosting a spin-orbit entangled $j_{\mathrm{eff}}=1/2$ ground state have been in the spotlight in recent years. Also in view of parallels with the low-energy physics of high-temperature superconducting cuprates, the validity of a single- or few-band picture in terms of the $j_{\mathrm{eff}}$ states is key. However, in particular for its structurally simple member Ba$_2$IrO$_4$, such a systematic construction and subsequent analysis of minimal low-energy models are still missing. Here we show by means of a combination of different ab initio techniques with dynamical mean-field theory that a three-band model in terms of Ir-$j_{\mathrm{eff}}$ states fully retains the low-energy physics of the system as compared to a full Ir-$5d$ model. Providing a detailed study of the three-band model in terms of spin-orbit coupling, Hund's coupling and Coulomb interactions, we map out a rich phase diagram and identify a region of effective one-band metal-insulator transition relevant to Ba$_2$IrO$_4$. Compared to available angle-resolved photoemission spectra, we find good agreement of salient aspects of the calculated spectral function and identify features which require the inclusion of non-local fluctuations. In a broader context, we envisage the three- and five-band models developed in this study to be relevant for the study of doped Ba$_2$IrO$_4$ and to clarify further the similarities and differences with cuprates.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses ab initio downfolding combined with dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT) to construct effective models for Ba₂IrO₄. It demonstrates that a three-band model in the Ir j_eff basis fully retains the low-energy physics of the full five-band Ir-5d model under identical DMFT treatment. The work maps the phase diagram as a function of spin-orbit coupling, Hund's J, and Coulomb U, identifies a parameter region realizing an effective one-band metal-insulator transition relevant to the material, and reports good agreement between the calculated spectral function and available ARPES data on key features while noting that certain aspects require non-local fluctuations beyond single-site DMFT.

Significance. If the central equivalence holds, the validated three-band j_eff model provides a minimal, computationally tractable platform for studying doped iridates and their parallels to cuprates. The consistent ab initio + DMFT protocol applied to both the three- and five-band models, together with direct ARPES comparison, supplies independent experimental grounding and strengthens the claim that the low-energy physics is preserved. The mapped phase diagram in the space of SOC, J, and U constitutes a useful reference for interaction-driven phenomena in this class of materials.

minor comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (model construction): the precise definition of the Wannier functions and the energy window used for the j_eff projection should be stated explicitly to allow independent reproduction of the downfolding step.
  2. [Fig. 4] Fig. 4 (phase diagram): the boundaries of the one-band MIT region are shown for a fixed set of parameters; adding a brief statement on the sensitivity of these boundaries to small variations in the ab initio hoppings would strengthen the claim of relevance to Ba₂IrO₄.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our manuscript, including the summary of the ab initio + DMFT approach, the validation of the three-band j_eff model, the mapped phase diagram, and the comparison to ARPES data. The recommendation for minor revision is noted. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; model equivalence tested via independent ab initio + DMFT comparison

full rationale

The paper derives the three-band j_eff model from ab initio downfolding of the full 5d model and validates retention of low-energy physics by direct comparison of spectral features and MIT under identical single-site DMFT. This comparison is external to the fitting process itself and is further anchored by ARPES data. No self-definitional equations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the derivation chain. The central claim therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard DMFT approximations and interaction parameters whose concrete values are not given in the abstract; no invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Coulomb U and Hund J
    Interaction strengths that must be chosen or fitted to produce the phase diagram and spectral functions
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Single-site DMFT captures the essential low-energy physics
    Invoked when mapping the phase diagram and when claiming the three-band model suffices

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5845 in / 1245 out tokens · 25867 ms · 2026-05-24T05:15:59.025257+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

81 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    The rich phase diagram of the prototypical iridate Ba$_2$IrO$_4$: Effective low-energy models and metal-insulator transition

    and spectroscopic [15–17] properties, no supercon- ductivity has been reported to date for doped Sr 2IrO4. Possible explanations for this absence are twofold. First, rotations of the IrO 6 octahedra lead to a spin-canting of the Ir-momenta [18], which results in a Dzyaloshinsky- Moriya term in the effective pseudospin model [8, 19], absent in spin models ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    for Ba 2IrO4. We used Optimized Norm Conserving Vanderbilt (ONCVPSP) pseudopotentials [76] from the PseudoDojo database [77] with (fully relativistic) scalar relativistic corrections for the (non) spin-orbit calcula- tions. The cRPA calculations were performed using RESPACK v20200103 [78]. The Wannier functions were obtained for the t2g subspace with a 0 ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    J. Kim, H. Ohsumi, T. Komesu, S. Sakai, T. Morita, H. Takagi, and T. Arima, Science 323, 1239 (2009)

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Boseggia, R

    S. Boseggia, R. Springell, H. C. Walker, H. M. Rønnow, C. R¨ uegg, H. Okabe, M. Isobe, R. S. Perry, S. P. Collins, and D. F. McMorrow, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 117207 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    Pesin and L

    J. Pesin and L. Balents, Nature Phys. 6, 376–381 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    X. Wan, A. M. Turner, A. Vishwanath, and S. Y. Savrasov, Phys. Rev. B 83, 205101 (2011)

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    Y. Zhou, P. A. Lee, T.-K. Ng, and F.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 197201 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Okamoto, M

    Y. Okamoto, M. Nohara, H. Aruga-Katori, and H. Tak- agi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 137207 (2007)

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    Dhingra, T

    A. Dhingra, T. Komesu, S. Kumar, K. Shimada, L. Zhang, X. Hong, and P. A. Dowben, Mater. Horiz. 8, 2151 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Jackeli and G

    G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009)

    work page 2009

  11. [11]

    Reuther, R

    J. Reuther, R. Thomale, and S. Trebst, Phys. Rev. B 84, 100406 (2011)

    work page 2011

  12. [12]

    Wang and T

    F. Wang and T. Senthil, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 136402 (2011)

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    H. Jin, H. Jeong, T. Ozaki, and J. Yu, Phys. Rev. B 80, 075112 (2009)

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    Cao and P

    G. Cao and P. Schlottmann, Reports on Progress in Physics 81, 042502 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Bertinshaw, Y

    J. Bertinshaw, Y. Kim, G. Khaliullin, and B. Kim, An- nual Review of Condensed Matter Physics10, 315 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Okabe, M

    H. Okabe, M. Isobe, E. Takayama-Muromachi, A. Koda, S. Takeshita, M. Hiraishi, M. Miyazaki, R. Kadono, Y. Miyake, and J. Akimitsu, Phys. Rev. B 83, 155118 (2011)

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    de la Torre, S

    A. de la Torre, S. McKeown Walker, F. Y. Bruno, S. Ricc´ o, Z. Wang, I. Gutierrez Lezama, G. Scheerer, G. Giriat, D. Jaccard, C. Berthod, T. K. Kim, M. Hoesch, E. C. Hunter, R. S. Perry, A. Tamai, and F. Baumberger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 176402 (2015)

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    Louat, B

    A. Louat, B. Lenz, S. Biermann, C. Martins, F. m. c. Bertran, P. Le F` evre, J. E. Rault, F. Bert, and V. Brouet, Phys. Rev. B 100, 205135 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    S. Peng, C. Lane, Y. Hu, M. Guo, X. Chen, Z. Sun, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, Z.-X. Shen, T. Wu, X. Chen, R. S. Markiewicz, Y. Wang, A. Bansil, S. D. Wilson, and J. He, npj Quantum Materials 7, 58 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    M. K. Crawford, M. A. Subramanian, R. L. Harlow, J. A. Fernandez-Baca, Z. R. Wang, and D. C. Johnston, Phys. Rev. B 49, 9198 (1994)

    work page 1994

  21. [21]

    N. B. Perkins, Y. Sizyuk, and P. W¨ olfle, Phys. Rev. B 89, 035143 (2014)

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    Coldea, S

    R. Coldea, S. M. Hayden, G. Aeppli, T. G. Perring, C. D. Frost, T. E. Mason, S.-W. Cheong, and Z. Fisk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5377 (2001)

    work page 2001

  23. [23]

    Jeong, B

    J. Jeong, B. Lenz, A. Gukasov, X. Fabr` eges, A. Sazonov, V. Hutanu, A. Louat, D. Bounoua, C. Martins, S. Bier- mann, V. Brouet, Y. Sidis, and P. Bourges, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 097202 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Zhang and E

    G. Zhang and E. Pavarini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 036504 (2023)

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    V. M. Katukuri, V. Yushankhai, L. Siurakshina, J. van den Brink, L. Hozoi, and I. Rousochatzakis, Phys Rev X 4, 021051 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    Y. S. Hou, H. J. Xiang, and X. G. Gong, New Journal of Physics 18, 043007 (2016)

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    J. J. Nichols, O. B. Korneta, J. Terzic, G. Cao, J. W. Brill, and S. S. A. Seo, Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 121913 (2014)

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    Moser, L

    S. Moser, L. Moreschini, A. Ebrahimi, B. D. Piazza, M. Isobe, H. Okabe, J. Akimitsu, V. V. Mazurenko, K. S. Kim, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, J. Chang, H. M. Rønnow, and M. Grioni, New Journal of Physics 16, 013008 (2014)

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    Uchida, Y

    M. Uchida, Y. F. Nie, P. D. C. King, C. H. Kim, C. J. Fennie, D. G. Schlom, and K. M. Shen, Phys. Rev. B 90, 075142 (2014)

    work page 2014

  30. [30]

    Arita, J

    R. Arita, J. Kuneˇ s, A. V. Kozhevnikov, A. G. Eguiluz, and M. Imada, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 086403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  31. [31]

    Arita, J

    R. Arita, J. Kuneˇ s, P. Augustinsk´ y, A. V. Kozhevnikov, A. G. Eguiluz, and M. Imada, in Proceedings of the In- ternational Conference on Strongly Correlated Electron Systems (SCES2013) (JPS, 2014)

    work page 2014

  32. [32]

    Zaanen, G

    J. Zaanen, G. A. Sawatzky, and J. W. Allen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 418 (1985)

    work page 1985

  33. [33]

    F. C. Zhang and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 37, 3759 (1988)

    work page 1988

  34. [34]

    Andersen, A

    O. Andersen, A. Liechtenstein, O. Jepsen, and F. Paulsen, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 56, 1573 (1995), proceedings of the Conference on Spec- troscopies in Novel Superconductors

    work page 1995

  35. [35]

    Kanamori, Progress of Theoretical Physics 30, 275 (1963)

    J. Kanamori, Progress of Theoretical Physics 30, 275 (1963)

    work page 1963

  36. [36]

    Georges, L

    A. Georges, L. d. Medici, and J. Mravlje, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 4, 137 (2013)

    work page 2013

  37. [37]

    Marzari, A

    N. Marzari, A. A. Mostofi, J. R. Yates, I. Souza, and D. Vanderbilt, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 1419 (2012)

    work page 2012

  38. [38]

    Q. Gu, S. K. Pandey, and R. Tiwari, Computational Materials Science 221, 112090 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Aryasetiawan, M

    F. Aryasetiawan, M. Imada, A. Georges, G. Kotliar, S. Biermann, and A. I. Lichtenstein, Phys. Rev. B 70, 195104 (2004)

    work page 2004

  40. [40]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    work page 1996

  41. [41]

    Isobe, H

    M. Isobe, H. Okabe, E. Takayama-Muromachi, A. Koda, S. Takeshita, M. Hiraishi, M. Miyazaki, R. Kadono, Y. Miyake, and J. Akimitsu, Journal of Physics: Con- ference Series 400, 032028 (2012)

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    B. N. Figgis and M. A. Hitchman, Ligand Field Theory and Its Applications , Special Topics in Inorganic Chem- istry (John Wiley & Sons, Nashville, TN, 1999)

    work page 1999

  43. [43]

    Sugano, Y

    S. Sugano, Y. Tanabe, and H. Kanimura, Multiplets of Transition-Metal Ions in Crystals , 1st ed. (Elsevier, El- sevier, Januart, 28th 1970)

    work page 1970

  44. [44]

    B. J. Kim, H. Jin, S. J. Moon, J.-Y. Kim, B.-G. Park, C. S. Leem, J. Yu, T. W. Noh, C. Kim, S.-J. Oh, J.- H. Park, V. Durairaj, G. Cao, and E. Rotenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 076402 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    Martins, M

    C. Martins, M. Aichhorn, and S. Biermann, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 29, 263001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    Martins, M

    C. Martins, M. Aichhorn, L. Vaugier, and S. Biermann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 266404 (2011)

    work page 2011

  47. [47]

    Charlebois, J.-B

    M. Charlebois, J.-B. Mor´ ee, K. Nakamura, Y. Nomura, T. Tadano, Y. Yoshimoto, Y. Yamaji, T. Hasegawa, K. Matsuhira, and M. Imada, Phys. Rev. B 104, 075153 17 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    Parcollet, M

    O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, Computer Physics Communications 196, 398 (2015)

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    P. Seth, I. Krivenko, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Com- puter Physics Communications 200, 274 (2016)

    work page 2016

  50. [50]

    Aichhorn, L

    M. Aichhorn, L. Pourovskii, P. Seth, V. Vildosola, M. Zingl, O. E. Peil, X. Deng, J. Mravlje, G. J. Kraberger, C. Martins, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Computer Physics Communications 204, 200 (2016)

    work page 2016

  51. [51]

    M. M. Sala, M. Rossi, S. Boseggia, J. Akimitsu, N. B. Brookes, M. Isobe, M. Minola, H. Okabe, H. M. Rønnow, L. Simonelli, D. F. McMorrow, and G. Monaco, Physical Review B 89, 121101 (2014)

    work page 2014

  52. [52]

    V. M. Katukuri, H. Stoll, J. van den Brink, and L. Hozoi, Phys. Rev. B 85, 220402 (2012)

    work page 2012

  53. [53]

    N. A. Bogdanov, V. M. Katukuri, J. Romh´ anyi, V. Yushankhai, V. Kataev, B. B¨ uchner, J. van den Brink, and L. Hozoi, Nature Communications 6, 7306 (2015)

    work page 2015

  54. [54]

    Shinaoka, M

    H. Shinaoka, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Phys. Rev. B 91, 245156 (2015)

    work page 2015

  55. [55]

    Casula, A

    M. Casula, A. Rubtsov, and S. Biermann, Phys. Rev. B 85, 035115 (2012)

    work page 2012

  56. [56]

    Casula, P

    M. Casula, P. Werner, L. Vaugier, F. Aryasetiawan, T. Miyake, A. J. Millis, and S. Biermann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 126408 (2012)

    work page 2012

  57. [57]

    J. C. Slater, Quantum Theory of Atomic Structure, Vol. 1 (McGraw-Hill New York, 1960)

    work page 1960

  58. [58]

    Lifshitz, Soviet Physics JETP 11, 1130 (1960)

    I. Lifshitz, Soviet Physics JETP 11, 1130 (1960)

    work page 1960

  59. [59]

    Kubo, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 91, 124707 (2022)

    K. Kubo, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 91, 124707 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [60]

    Triebl, G

    R. Triebl, G. J. Kraberger, J. Mravlje, and M. Aichhorn, Phys. Rev. B 98, 205128 (2018)

    work page 2018

  61. [61]

    Chikano, S

    N. Chikano, S. Hoshino, and H. Shinaoka, Phys. Rev. B 104, 235125 (2021)

    work page 2021

  62. [62]

    Zhang, E

    G. Zhang, E. Gorelov, E. Sarvestani, and E. Pavarini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 106402 (2016)

    work page 2016

  63. [63]

    Terletska, J

    H. Terletska, J. Vuˇ ciˇ cevi´ c, D. Tanaskovi´ c, and V. Do- brosavljevi´ c, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 026401 (2011)

    work page 2011

  64. [64]

    Vuˇ ciˇ cevi´ c, H

    J. Vuˇ ciˇ cevi´ c, H. Terletska, D. Tanaskovi´ c, and V. Do- brosavljevi´ c, Phys. Rev. B88, 075143 (2013)

    work page 2013

  65. [65]

    Martins, B

    C. Martins, B. Lenz, L. Perfetti, V. Brouet, F. m. c. Bertran, and S. Biermann, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2, 032001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  66. [66]

    B. Lenz, C. Martins, and S. Biermann, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 31, 293001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  67. [67]

    Piovera, V

    C. Piovera, V. Brouet, E. Papalazarou, M. Caputo, M. Marsi, A. Taleb-Ibrahimi, B. J. Kim, and L. Per- fetti, Phys. Rev. B 93, 241114 (2016)

    work page 2016

  68. [68]

    Tamai, M

    A. Tamai, M. Zingl, E. Rozbicki, E. Cappelli, S. Ricc` o, A. de la Torre, S. McKeown Walker, F. Y. Bruno, P. D. C. King, W. Meevasana, M. Shi, M. Radovi´ c, N. C. Plumb, A. S. Gibbs, A. P. Mackenzie, C. Berthod, H. U. R. Strand, M. Kim, A. Georges, and F. Baumberger, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021048 (2019)

    work page 2019

  69. [69]

    Zwartsenberg, R

    B. Zwartsenberg, R. P. Day, E. Razzoli, M. Michiardi, N. Xu, M. Shi, J. D. Denlinger, G. Cao, S. Calder, K. Ueda, J. Bertinshaw, H. Takagi, B. J. Kim, I. S. Elfimov, and A. Damascelli, Nature Physics 16 (2020), 10.1038/s41567-019-0750-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-019-0750-y 2020

  70. [70]

    Brouet, P

    V. Brouet, P. Foulquier, A. Louat, F. m. c. Bertran, P. Le F` evre, J. E. Rault, and D. Colson, Phys. Rev. B 104, L121104 (2021)

    work page 2021

  71. [71]

    Zwartsenberg, R

    B. Zwartsenberg, R. P. Day, E. Razzoli, M. Michiardi, M. X. Na, G. Zhang, J. D. Denlinger, I. Vobornik, C. Bigi, B. J. Kim, I. S. Elfimov, E. Pavarini, and A. Damascelli, Phys. Rev. B 105, 245130 (2022)

    work page 2022

  72. [72]

    F. C. Zhang and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 41, 7243 (1990)

    work page 1990

  73. [73]

    Macridin, M

    A. Macridin, M. Jarrell, T. Maier, and G. A. Sawatzky, Phys. Rev. B 71, 134527 (2005)

    work page 2005

  74. [74]

    Hirayama, Y

    M. Hirayama, Y. Yamaji, T. Misawa, and M. Imada, Phys. Rev. B 98, 134501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  75. [75]

    Hirayama, T

    M. Hirayama, T. Misawa, T. Ohgoe, Y. Yamaji, and M. Imada, Phys. Rev. B 99, 245155 (2019)

    work page 2019

  76. [76]

    Giannozzi, S

    P. Giannozzi, S. Baroni, N. Bonini, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, G. L. Chiarotti, M. Cococ- cioni, I. Dabo, A. Dal Corso, S. de Gironcoli, S. Fabris, G. Fratesi, R. Gebauer, U. Gerstmann, C. Gougoussis, A. Kokalj, M. Lazzeri, L. Martin-Samos, N. Marzari, F. Mauri, R. Mazzarello, S. Paolini, A. Pasquarello, L. Paulatto, C. Sbraccia, S. S...

    work page 2009

  77. [77]

    Giannozzi, O

    P. Giannozzi, O. Andreussi, T. Brumme, O. Bunau, M. Buongiorno Nardelli, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavaz- zoni, D. Ceresoli, M. Cococcioni, N. Colonna, I. Carn- imeo, A. Dal Corso, S. de Gironcoli, P. Delugas, R. A. DiStasio, A. Ferretti, A. Floris, G. Fratesi, G. Fu- gallo, R. Gebauer, U. Gerstmann, F. Giustino, T. Gorni, J. Jia, M. Kawamura, H.-Y. Ko, A. ...

    work page 2017

  78. [78]

    D. R. Hamann, Physical Review B 88, 085117 (2013)

    work page 2013

  79. [79]

    M. J. van Setten, M. Giantomassi, E. Bousquet, M. J. Verstraete, D. R. Hamann, X. Gonze, and G. M. Rignanese, Computer Physics Communications 226, 39 (2018)

    work page 2018

  80. [80]

    Nakamura, Y

    K. Nakamura, Y. Yoshimoto, Y. Nomura, T. Tadano, M. Kawamura, T. Kosugi, K. Yoshimi, T. Misawa, and Y. Motoyama, Computer Physics Communications 261, 107781 (2021)

    work page 2021

Showing first 80 references.