Geometrical frustration versus Kitaev interactions in BaCo <sub>2</sub> (AsO <sub>4</sub> ) <sub>2</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, Co-based honeycomb magnets have been proposed as promising candidate materials to host the Kitaev spin liquid (KSL) state. One of the front-runners is BaCo 2 (AsO 4 ) 2 (BCAO), where it was suggested that the exchange processes between Co 2+ ions via the surrounding edge-sharing oxygen octahedra could give rise to bond-dependent Kitaev interactions. In this work, we present and analyze a comprehensive inelastic neutron scattering (INS) study of BCAO with fields in the honeycomb plane. Combining the constraints from the magnon excitations in the high-field polarized state and the inelastic spin structure factor measured in zero magnetic field, we examine two leading theoretical models: the Kitaev-type <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>JK</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Γ</mml:mi> <mml:msup> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Γ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>′</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> model and the XXZ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>J</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>J</mml:mi> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> model. We show that the existing experimental data can be consistently accounted for by the XXZ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>J</mml:mi> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mtext>-</mml:mtext> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>J</mml:mi> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> model but not by the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>JK</mml:mi> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Γ</mml:mi> <mml:msup> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Γ</mml:mi> <mml:mo>′</mml:mo> </mml:msup> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> model, and we discuss the implications of these results for the realization of a spin liquid phase in BCAO and more generally for the realization of the Kitaev model in cobaltates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".