Emergent magnetic order in the antiferromagnetic Kitaev model in a [111] field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Kitaev spin liquid, stabilized as the ground state of the Kitaev honeycomb model, is a paradigmatic example of a topological ${\mathbb{Z}}_{2}$ quantum spin liquid. The fate of the Kitaev spin liquid in presence of an external magnetic field is at present, a subject of intense scrutiny due to recent experimental signatures pointing to a ${\mathbb{Z}}_{2}$ topological phase in certain materials, as well as theoretical studies predicting the emergence of a quantum spin liquid phase of debated nature. In this work, we employ hierarchical mean-field theory, a method based on the use of clusters preserving relevant symmetries and short-range quantum correlations, to investigate the quantum phase diagram of the antiferromagnetic Kitaev's model in a [111] magnetic field. By using clusters of 24 sites, we predict that the Kitaev spin liquid transits through two intermediate phases, characterized by emerging stripe and chiral orders, respectively, before entering the trivial partially polarized phase, differing from previous studies. We assess our results by performing exact diagonalization and computing the scaling of different observables, including the many-body Chern number and other topological quantities, thus establishing hierarchical mean-field theory as a method to study models of frustrated quantum magnetism potentially hosting topological quantum spin liquids.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".