Spin-orbit exciton in a honeycomb lattice magnet <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msub><mml:mi>CoTiO</mml:mi><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>: Revealing a link between magnetism in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mi>d</mml:mi></mml:math>- and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math>-electron systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We carried out inelastic neutron scattering to study the spin-orbit (SO) exciton in a single crystal sample of ${\mathrm{CoTiO}}_{3}$ as a function of temperature. ${\mathrm{CoTiO}}_{3}$ is a honeycomb magnet with dominant $XY$-type magnetic interaction and an $A$-type antiferromagnetic order below ${T}_{N}\ensuremath{\approx}38$ K. We found that the SO exciton becomes softer but acquires a larger bandwidth in the paramagnetic phase, compared to that in the magnetically ordered phase. Moreover, an additional mode is only observed in the intermediate temperature range, as the sample is warmed up above the lowest accessible temperature below ${T}_{N}$. Such an unusual temperature dependence observed in this material suggests that its ground states (an ${S}_{\mathrm{eff}}=\frac{1}{2}$ doublet) and excited states multiplets are strongly coupled and therefore cannot be treated independently, as often done in a pseudospin model. Our observations can be explained by a multilevel theory within random phase approximation that explicitly takes into account both the ground and excited multiplets. The success of our theory, originally developed for the rare-earth systems, highlights the similarity between magnetic excitations in $f$- and $d$-electron systems with strong spin-orbit coupling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".