- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review B

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Tangle of spin double helices in the honeycomb Kitaev-Γ model

Jheng-Wei Li1,2,3, Nihal Rao2,3, Jan von Delft2,3, Lode Pollet2,3, and Ke Liu2,3,*

  • *Contact author: ke.liu@lmu.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. B 113, 104423 – Published 12 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/cglm-2ctt

Abstract

We investigate the ground-state nature of the honeycomb Kitaev-Γ model in the material-relevant parameter regime through a combination of analytics and classical and quantum simulations. We find the classical model is imprinted with a tangle of highly structured spin double helices. This helix tangle consists of 18 inequivalent helices and features modulation of multiple rotation axes, an anisotropy in spacial periodicities indicative of spontaneous symmetry breaking, and a sgn(Γ)-determined chirality pattern. Infinite projected entangled pair state simulations with clusters of up to 36 sites identify hallmarks of this unprecedented many-body order in the quantum spin-1/2 model. Our findings provide a fresh perspective of the Kitaev-Γ model and enrich the physics of the Kitaev magnetism.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (73)

  1. G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009).
  2. J. Chaloupka, G. Jackeli, and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 027204 (2010).
  3. J. G. Rau, E. K.-H. Lee, and H.-Y. Kee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 077204 (2014).
  4. J. G. Rau, E. K.-H. Lee, and H.-Y. Kee, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 7, 195 (2016).
  5. W. Wang, Z.-Y. Dong, S.-L. Yu, and J.-X. Li, Phys. Rev. B 96, 115103 (2017).
  6. H. Takagi, T. Takayama, G. Jackeli, G. Khaliullin, and S. E. Nagler, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 264 (2019).
  7. S. M. Winter, A. A. Tsirlin, M. Daghofer, J. van den Brink, Y. Singh, P. Gegenwart, and R. Valentí, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29, 493002 (2017).
  8. A. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. (NY) 321, 2 (2006), January Special Issue.
  9. A. Banerjee, C. A. Bridges, J. Q. Yan, A. A. Aczel, L. Li, M. B. Stone, G. E. Granroth, M. D. Lumsden, Y. Yiu, J. Knolle, S. Bhattacharjee, D. L. Kovrizhin, R. Moessner, D. A. Tennant, D. G. Mandrus, and S. E. Nagler, Nat. Mater. 15, 733 (2016).
  10. A. Banerjee, J. Yan, J. Knolle, C. A. Bridges, M. B. Stone, M. D. Lumsden, D. G. Mandrus, D. A. Tennant, R. Moessner, and S. E. Nagler, Science 356, 1055 (2017).
  11. J. Zheng, K. Ran, T. Li, J. Wang, P. Wang, B. Liu, Z.-X. Liu, B. Normand, J. Wen, and W. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 227208 (2017).
  12. Y. Kasahara, T. Ohnishi, Y. Mizukami, O. Tanaka, S. Ma, K. Sugii, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, T. Shibauchi, and Y. Matsuda, Nature (London) 559, 227 (2018).
  13. T. Yokoi, S. Ma, Y. Kasahara, S. Kasahara, T. Shibauchi, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, J. Nasu, Y. Motome, C. Hickey, S. Trebst, and Y. Matsuda, Science 373, 568 (2021).
  14. S. Bachus, D. A. S. Kaib, Y. Tokiwa, A. Jesche, V. Tsurkan, A. Loidl, S. M. Winter, A. A. Tsirlin, R. Valentí, and P. Gegenwart, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 097203 (2020).
  15. P. Czajka, T. Gao, M. Hirschberger, P. Lampen-Kelley, A. Banerjee, J. Yan, D. G. Mandrus, S. E. Nagler, and N. P. Ong, Nat. Phys. 17, 915 (2021).
  16. P. Czajka, T. Gao, M. Hirschberger, P. Lampen-Kelley, A. Banerjee, N. Quirk, D. G. Mandrus, S. E. Nagler, and N. Ong, Nat. Mater. 22, 36 (2023).
  17. J. A. N. Bruin, R. R. Claus, Y. Matsumoto, N. Kurita, H. Tanaka, and H. Takagi, Nat. Phys. 18, 401 (2022).
  18. E. Lefrançois, G. Grissonnanche, J. Baglo, P. Lampen-Kelley, J.-Q. Yan, C. Balz, D. Mandrus, S. E. Nagler, S. Kim, Y.-J. Kim, N. Doiron-Leyraud, and L. Taillefer, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021025 (2022).
  19. K. Ran, J. Wang, W. Wang, Z.-Y. Dong, X. Ren, S. Bao, S. Li, Z. Ma, Y. Gan, Y. Zhang, J. T. Park, G. Deng, S. Danilkin, S.-L. Yu, J.-X. Li, and J. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 107203 (2017).
  20. R. Yadav, N. A. Bogdanov, V. M. Katukuri, S. Nishimoto, J. van den Brink, and L. Hozoi, Sci. Rep. 6, 37925 (2016).
  21. H.-S. Kim and H.-Y. Kee, Phys. Rev. B 93, 155143 (2016).
  22. S. M. Winter, Y. Li, H. O. Jeschke, and R. Valentí, Phys. Rev. B 93, 214431 (2016).
  23. S. M. Winter, K. Riedl, P. A. Maksimov, A. L. Chernyshev, A. Honecker, and R. Valentí, Nat. Commun. 8, 1152 (2017).
  24. P. A. Maksimov and A. L. Chernyshev, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033011 (2020).
  25. P. Laurell and S. Okamoto, npj Quantum Mater. 5, 2 (2020).
  26. J. Rusnačko, D. Gotfryd, and J. Chaloupka, Phys. Rev. B 99, 064425 (2019).
  27. Y.-F. Jiang, T. P. Devereaux, and H.-C. Jiang, Phys. Rev. B 100, 165123 (2019).
  28. J. S. Gordon, A. Catuneanu, E. S. Sørensen, and H.-Y. Kee, Nat. Commun. 10, 2470 (2019).
  29. H.-Y. Lee, R. Kaneko, L. E. Chern, T. Okubo, Y. Yamaji, N. Kawashima, and Y. B. Kim, Nat. Commun. 11, 1639 (2020).
  30. M. Gohlke, L. E. Chern, H.-Y. Kee, and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043023 (2020).
  31. J. Wang, B. Normand, and Z.-X. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 197201 (2019).
  32. F. L. Buessen and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. B 103, 184407 (2021).
  33. J. Wang and Z.-X. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 102, 094416 (2020).
  34. E. S. Sørensen, A. Catuneanu, J. S. Gordon, and H.-Y. Kee, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011013 (2021).
  35. L. E. Chern, R. Kaneko, H.-Y. Lee, and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013014 (2020).
  36. L. E. Chern, F. L. Buessen, and Y. B. Kim, npj Quantum Mater. 6, 33 (2021).
  37. K. Liu, N. Sadoune, N. Rao, J. Greitemann, and L. Pollet, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023016 (2021).
  38. N. Rao, K. Liu, M. Machaczek, and L. Pollet, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033223 (2021).
  39. P. Lampen-Kelley, L. Janssen, E. Andrade, S. Rachel, J.-Q. Yan, C. Balz, D. Mandrus, S. Nagler, and M. Vojta, arXiv:1807.06192.
  40. A. Rayyan, Q. Luo, and H.-Y. Kee, Phys. Rev. B 104, 094431 (2021).
  41. K. Chen, Q. Luo, Z. Zhou, S. He, B. Xi, C. Jia, H.-G. Luo, and J. Zhao, New J. Phys. 25, 023006 (2023).
  42. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/cglm-2ctt for details of the classical and iPEPS simulations, which also contains additional Refs. [71, 72, 73].
  43. I. Rousochatzakis and N. B. Perkins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 147204 (2017).
  44. P. Saha, Z. Fan, D. Zhang, and G.-W. Chern, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 257204 (2019).
  45. Q. Luo, J. Zhao, H.-Y. Kee, and X. Wang, npj Quantum Mater. 6, 57 (2021).
  46. Simulations at the Γ point are prone to boundary conditions and algorithms. Private communications with Hong-Hao Tu and Ji-Ze Zhao.
  47. R. Yadav, S. Nishimoto, M. Richter, J. van den Brink, and R. Ray, Phys. Rev. B 100, 144422 (2019).
  48. This is similar to the mapping between the ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model on a bipartite lattice.
  49. J. Osorio Iregui, P. Corboz, and M. Troyer, Phys. Rev. B 90, 195102 (2014).
  50. S. R. White and A. L. Chernyshev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 127004 (2007).
  51. Y.-D. Li, Y. Shen, Y. Li, J. Zhao, and G. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 97, 125105 (2018).
  52. J. Chaloupka and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. B 92, 024413 (2015).
  53. H. C. Jiang, Z. Y. Weng, and T. Xiang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 090603 (2008).
  54. P. Corboz, R. Orús, B. Bauer, and G. Vidal, Phys. Rev. B 81, 165104 (2010).
  55. T. Nishino and K. Okunishi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65, 891 (1996).
  56. R. Orús and G. Vidal, Phys. Rev. B 80, 094403 (2009).
  57. J. Jordan, R. Orús, G. Vidal, F. Verstraete, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 250602 (2008).
  58. M. Mostovoy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 067601 (2006).
  59. T. Kimura, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 37, 387 (2007).
  60. D. Khomskii, Physics 2, 20 (2009).
  61. Y. Tokura and S. Seki, Adv. Mater. 22, 1554 (2010).
  62. V. Popkov and G. M. Schütz, Phys. Rev. E 95, 042128 (2017).
  63. P. N. Jepsen, J. Amato-Grill, I. Dimitrova, W. W. Ho, E. Demler, and W. Ketterle, Nature (London) 588, 403 (2020).
  64. M. P. Walser, C. Reichl, W. Wegscheider, and G. Salis, Nat. Phys. 8, 757 (2012).
  65. A. Weichselbaum, Ann. Phys. 327, 2972 (2012).
  66. A. Weichselbaum, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023385 (2020).
  67. J. Greitemann, K. Liu, and L. Pollet, Phys. Rev. B 99, 060404(R) (2019).
  68. K. Liu, J. Greitemann, and L. Pollet, Phys. Rev. B 99, 104410 (2019).
  69. A. Gaenko, A. Antipov, G. Carcassi, T. Chen, X. Chen, Q. Dong, L. Gamper, J. Gukelberger, R. Igarashi, S. Iskakov, M. Könz, J. LeBlanc, R. Levy, P. Ma, J. Paki, H. Shinaoka, S. Todo, M. Troyer, and E. Gull, Comput. Phys. Commun. 213, 235 (2017).
  70. J.-W. Li, N. Rao, J. von Delft, L. Pollet, and K. Liu, Tangle of Spin Double Helices in the Honeycomb Kitaev-Γ Model, https://zenodo.org/record/7682289.
  71. H. G. Katzgraber, S. Trebst, D. A. Huse, and M. Troyer, J. Stat. Mech. (2006) P03018.
  72. L. Janssen, E. C. Andrade, and M. Vojta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 277202 (2016).
  73. P. Corboz, M. Lajkó, A. M. Läuchli, K. Penc, and F. Mila, Phys. Rev. X 2, 041013 (2012).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 113, 104423– Published 12 March, 2026
  • Received 20 July 2022
  • Revised 6 October 2025
  • Accepted 21 January 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation