4.2 Article

Zigzag magnetic order and possible Kitaev interactions in the spin-1 honeycomb lattice KNiAsO4

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW RESEARCH
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.013022

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Researchers have identified a potential candidate material, KNiAsO4, that may exhibit a spin-liquid ground state based on the Kitaev spin Hamiltonian. Experimental measurements show evidence of magnetic order and a gapped spin-wave spectrum, suggesting the presence of a well-defined spin-liquid state.
Despite the exciting implications of the Kitaev spin Hamiltonian, finding and confirming the quantum spin-liquid state have proven incredibly difficult. Recently, the applicability of the model has been expanded through the development of a microscopic description of a spin-1 Kitaev interaction. Here we explore a candidate spin-1 honeycomb system, KNiAsO4, which meets many of the proposed criteria to generate such an interaction. Bulk measurements reveal an antiferromagnetic transition at similar to 19 K which is generally robust to applied magnetic fields. Neutron diffraction measurements show magnetic order with a k = (z, 0, 0) ordering vector which results in the well-known zigzag magnetic structure thought to be adjacent to the spin-liquid ground state. Field-dependent diffraction shows that while the structure is robust, the field can tune the direction of the ordered moment. Inelastic neutron scattering experiments show a well-defined gapped spin-wave spectrum with no evidence of the continuum expected for fractionalized excitations. Modeling of the spin waves shows that the extended Kitaev spin Hamiltonian is are generally necessary to model the spectra and reproduce the observed magnetic order. First-principles calculations suggest that the substitution of Pd on the Ni sublattice may strengthen the Kitaev interactions while simultaneously weakening the exchange interactions thus pushing KNiAsO4 closer to the spin-liquid ground state.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据