Intermediate phases in <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>α</mml:mi> <mml:mtext>−</mml:mtext> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>RuCl</mml:mi> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> under in-plane magnetic field via interlayer spin interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
$α$-RuCl$_3$ has attracted significant attention as a prime candidate for the spin-1/2 Kitaev spin liquid in two-dimensional honeycomb lattices. Although its ground state is magnetically ordered, the order is suppressed under a moderate in-plane magnetic field. The intermediate regime of the field has exotic behaviors, some of which are claimed to originate from a Kitaev spin liquid. In resolving debates surrounding these behaviors, interlayer interactions in $α$-RuCl$_3$ have been largely overlooked due to their perceived weakness in van der Waals materials. However, near the transition, they may become significant as the field energy approaches the interlayer coupling scale. Here we investigate the effects of interlayer couplings in $α$-RuCl$_3$ with $R\bar{3}$ and $C2/m$ structures. We first examine their effects on the transition temperature ($T_N$) using classical Monte Carlo simulations. We found that the interlayer couplings have minimal effects on $T_N$, and the different $T_N$ between the two structures are mainly due to the anisotropy in intralayer interactions. Focusing on the $R{\bar 3}$ structure, we show that the nearest neighbor interlayer interaction is the XXZ type due to the symmetry, and the next nearest neighbor interaction of the Kitaev type is crucial for the transition between two zigzag orders under an in-plane field. Furthermore, an intermediate phase with a large unit cell emerges due to the interlayer interactions. Our findings provide insights into the exotic behaviors and sample dependence reported in $α$-RuCl$_3$.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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 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".