Altermagnetism: Exploring New Frontiers in Magnetism and Spintronics

Ling Bai, Wanxiang Feng*, Siyuan Liu, Libor Šmejkal, Yuriy Mokrousov, Yugui Yao*

Ling Bai1,2, Wanxiang Feng1,2, Siyuan Liu1,2

1
Centre for Quantum Physics, Key Laboratory of Advanced Optoelectronic Quantum
Architecture and Measurement (MOE), School of Physics, Beijing Institute of Technology,
Beijing 100081, China
2
Beijing Key Lab of Nanophotonics and Ultrafine Optoelectronic Systems, School of Physics,
Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
E-mail: [email protected]

Libor Šmejkal3,4
3
Institute of Physics, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany
4
Institute of Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Cukrovarnická 10, 162 00 Praha 6, Czech
Republic

Yuriy Mokrousov3,5
3
Institute of Physics, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany
5
Peter Grünberg Institut and Institute for Advanced Simulation, Forschungszentrum Jülich
and JARA, 52425 Jülich, Germany

Yugui Yao1,2
1
Centre for Quantum Physics, Key Laboratory of Advanced Optoelectronic Quantum
Architecture and Measurement (MOE), School of Physics, Beijing Institute of Technology,
Beijing 100081, China
2
Beijing Key Lab of Nanophotonics and Ultrafine Optoelectronic Systems, School of Physics,
Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
E-mail: [email protected]

Keywords: altermagnetism, spin space group, nonrelativistic spin splitting, time-reversal

symmetry breaking, anomalous transport properties

1
 Recent developments have introduced a groundbreaking form of collinear magnetism known
as “altermagnetism”. This emerging magnetic phase is characterized by robust time-reversal
symmetry breaking, antiparallel magnetic order, and alternating spin-splitting band structures,
yet it exhibits vanishing net magnetization constrained by symmetry. Altermagnetism uniquely
integrates traits previously considered mutually exclusive to conventional collinear
ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism, thereby facilitating phenomena and functionalities
previously not achievable within these traditional categories of magnetism. Initially proposed
theoretically, the existence of the altermagnetic phase has since been corroborated by a range
of experimental studies, which have confirmed its unique properties and potential for
applications. This review explores the rapidly expanding research on altermagnets,
emphasizing the novel physical phenomena they manifest, methodologies for inducing
altermagnetism, and promising altermagnetic materials. The goal of this review is to furnish
readers with a comprehensive overview of altermagnetism and to inspire further innovative
studies on altermagnetic materials which could potentially revolutionize applications in
technology and materials science.

2
1. Introduction
Magnetism, a fundamental and expansive area within condensed-matter physics, plays a
crucial role in advancing technology. Historically, this field has primarily focused on two
magnetic phases: ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism. Ferromagnets (FMs), known for
their spin polarization that mirrors the macroscopic magnetization, facilitate a myriad of time-
reversal (𝒯) symmetry-breaking responses and have therefore been the subject of extensive
research and widespread applications.[1-4] Nevertheless, the inherent properties of FMs present
significant challenges for the performance of ferromagnetic spintronic devices, particularly
affecting their stability, scalability, and dynamic responses. These limitations render them
suboptimal for incorporation into advanced electronic systems. Specifically, the field-
sensitivity of ferromagnetic order exposes these materials to external magnetic disturbances,
substantial stray magnetic fields compromise the potential for high-density integration, and the
conventional ferromagnetic precession frequencies, typically on the order of GHz, constrain the
operational speed of these devices. In conventional antiferromagnets (AFMs), the perfectly
compensated antiparallel magnetization results in zero net magnetic moment, which confers
significant robustness against magnetic disturbances and eliminates stray magnetic fields.
Furthermore, due to antiferromagnetic exchange interactions, the precession frequencies of
AFMs can extend up to the THz range, thus opening up a new frontier in antiferromagnetic
spintronics.[5-8] However, the compensated magnetization of AFMs is often perceived as
leading to uncontrollable antiferromagnetic order, weak magnetic signal, and very intricate
magnetoelectronic responses. To overcome the limitations of collinear ferromagnetic and
antiferromagnetic materials in spintronics, scientists have been exploring new materials that
can combine the advantages of both ferromagnetism and antiferromagnetism. A new magnetic
phase—altermagnetism—has consequently emerged.
With compensated antiparallel magnetic order, altermagnetic band structure breaks 𝒯
symmetry and possesses characteristic nonrelativistic spin-splitting. Indication of
unconventional magnetism can be tracked back to reports of anomalous effects by various
research groups.[9-21] The anomalous effects have been referred to by several names, such as
crystal Hall effect,[9] AFM-induced spin splitting,[12] staggered spin-momentum interaction,[14]
unconventional magnetism and anti-Kramers nodal surfaces[15] and unconventional
antiferromagnetism and spin-splitter currents.[19, 21] Shortly after, it was recognized that these
anomalous properties[9-21] and other results[22-23] are characteristics of an unconventional
magnetic class. This unconventional magnetic class, identified by symmetries by Šmejkal and
colleagues, exhibits alternating spin polarization with d-, g-, or i-wave symmetry (as shown in
3
Figure 1) in both direct and reciprocal space; therefore, it has been aptly named as
“altermagnetism”, a term that has gained wide acceptance.[24] Although it has, by symmetry, no
net magnetization, unlike conventional antiferromagnetism, the sublattices with opposite spins
are connected by a real-space rotational transformation—either proper or improper, and either
symmorphic or non-symmorphic—rather than by translation or inversion.[24] As a result, while
altermagnets (AMs) share certain key properties with AFMs, they demonstrate even more
similarities with FMs due to the alternating spin-splitting of the bands in the absence of spin-
orbit coupling (SOC).[25] Numerous studies have investigated the nature of AMs both
theoretically and experimentally, developing a Landau theory for AMs,[26] constructing
models,[21, 24, 27-29]
and connecting altermagnetism with superconductivity, topological
phenomena and magnetic multipoles.[14, 21, 27, 30-45].
We note that there have been several comprehensive reviews covering topics such as
antiferromagnetic spintronics, anomalous Hall antiferromagnets, and the emerging field of
altermagnetism.[8, 31, 46-47] Some of these reviews were published at a time when research into
AMs was still in its early stages and predominantly theoretical,[31] while others concentrated on
specific physical properties or considered complex magnetic configurations, such as
noncollinear or noncoplanar antiferromagnetism, in which the coverage of AMs was notably
limited.[8, 46-47] Here, we focus on the recent theoretical and experimental progress in AMs,
highlighting canonical examples such as MnTe,[24, 38, 48-50] CrSb[24, 43, 51-54] and RuO2[24, 40, 55] to
offer a detailed exploration of novel physical phenomena associated with altermagnetism.
In this review, we first introduce several exotic physical phenomena manifested in AMs,
including lifted Kramers degeneracy, anomalous and spin transport properties, magneto-optical
effects and chiral magnons. Then we discuss various strategies for inducing altermagnetism
from conventional FMs and AFMs, which broaden the application scope of traditional magnetic
materials. In addition to artificial AMs, naturally occurring AMs also play a significant role;
therefore, we compile a list of potential two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D)
altermagnetic candidates found in nature. Although our understanding of altermagnetism
remains in its nascent stages, the field has already become a rich area for theoretical exploration
and a promising avenue for the development of spintronic devices.

2. Exotic physical phenomena

AMs have demonstrated a series of phenomena that were previously considered exclusive to
FMs, including nonrelativistic lifted Kramers degeneracy, anomalous Hall/Nernst effect,
nonrelativistic spin (polarized) currents, and the magneto-optical Kerr effect. Moreover, AMs
4
also display unique physical phenomena, e.g. the emergence of chiral magnons. In this section,
we will primarily focus on lifted Kramers degeneracy, anomalous and spin transport properties,
magneto-optical effects and chiral magnons in AMs.

2.1. Lifted Kramers degeneracy

We start by briefly recalling three kinds of space groups. Symmetry, one of the central
concepts in modern physics, plays a significant role in physical properties, enabling physicists
to make a priori judgments without knowledge of certain microscopic details. More than one
hundred years ago, based on group theory, the symmetries of 3D crystals were classified into
230 space groups. However, these 230 space groups are only applicable to nonmagnetic cases.
For magnetic systems, an additional degree of freedom, associated with spin, arises. The spin
magnetic moments are also periodically arranged in spin space, forming a 3D pseudovector
field. This pseudovector field exhibits even parity under space inversion (𝒫) symmetry and odd
parity under 𝒯 symmetry. Initially, the combination of 𝒯 symmetry with the aforementioned
230 space groups resulted in 1651 magnetic space groups. In these magnetic space groups, the
rotation of spin is coupled with spatial operations, meaning the orientation of spin may change
under spatial operations. Therefore, when considering SOC, it is essential to take magnetic
space groups into account in symmetry analysis of magnetic materials. Later in the 1960’s,
Brinkman and Elliott proposed that in many cases, it was sufficient to include only Heisenberg
exchange and anisotropy field in a spin Hamiltonian, while neglecting SOC.[56] Such groups,
which usually have more symmetries, were introduced as “spin-space groups”. In a spin-space
group, the spins are rotated independently of the lattice. Therefore, the spin-symmetry operation
can be represented as [ℛ! ||ℛ" ], where the transformation on the left (right) of the double
vertical bar acts solely in spin space (spatial space). Although in magnetism, the key features
of the electronic structure and basic characteristics can be explained without referring to
nonrelativistic physics, people are used to describing the symmetry properties of magnetic
systems in terms of the magnetic space groups due to the complexity of spin-space group. Only
in recent years has research involving spin-space groups matured significantly,[15, 24, 31, 56-59]
with the most noteworthy development being the AMs with lifted Kramers degeneracy.
Kramers degeneracy theorem[60-62] states that any system possessing combined 𝒫𝒯
symmetry ensures at least double spin degeneracy at arbitrary wave vectors. Typically, the
breaking of Kramers degeneracy is considered to originate from two fundamental mechanisms:
relativistic and nonrelativistic. Here we focus on the latter. For all collinear magnets, the spin-
only symmetry [𝒞# ||𝐸] guarantees that spin is a good quantum number and is momentum (𝑘)-
5
independent, where 𝒞# denotes arbitrary rotations of spin around the common axis of spins,
and 𝐸 is the identity transformation in real space. Therefore, the energy band can be represented
by 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠), where 𝑠 denotes spin. Another common spin-only symmetry in collinear magnets
is 𝒞$̅ , representing a twofold rotation perpendicular to the collinear spin axis, followed by spin-
space inversion, which we denote also as [𝒞$ ||𝒯]. This symmetry (𝒞$̅ ) together with collinear
symmetry 𝒞# implies nonrelativistic inversion symmetry (𝒫) of the band structure,[63] as it
transforms 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) to 𝐸(−𝑘, 𝑠) , and thus enforces 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) = 𝐸(−𝑘, 𝑠) . Consequently, the
bands exhibit even parity in momentum around the Γ point. From the analysis above, we
observe that for any type of collinear magnets, the nonrelativistic bands remain invariant under
𝒫 symmetry, regardless of whether the system possesses real-space inversion symmetry. This
observation means that if a collinear magnet has [𝒞$ ||𝒫] symmetry, the spin band is Kramers
degenerate across the entire Brillouin zone. This degeneracy emerges because the combination
[𝒞$ ||𝒫][𝒞$ ||𝒯] enforces 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) = 𝐸(𝑘, −𝑠), which is equivalent to combined 𝒫𝒯. In addition,
the symmetry denoted by [𝒞$ ||𝐸]/[𝒞$ ||𝜏] (𝜏 means translational symmetries) also enforces
𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) = 𝐸(𝑘, −𝑠). Given that all nonmagnets have [𝒞$ ||𝐸] symmetry, Kramers degeneracy
is present in all nonmagnetic systems in the nonrelativistic limit. In FMs, if the spin moments
of all magnetic atoms are flipped (under spin-only symmetry), there is no symmetry that acts
solely on the lattice to recover the initial magnetic configuration. Consequently, Kramers
degeneracy is broken in FMs, resulting in uniform Zeeman splitting between the opposite-spin
bands. For systems formally spin-compensated by symmetry, there are two types of magnetic
order: conventional AFMs, which include the symmetries of [𝒞$ ||𝒫][𝒞$ ||𝒯] and/or [𝒞$ ||𝜏],
and AMs, which lack these two symmetries. It is obviously that the former is spin degenerate,
and the latter is spin nondegenerate. The nonrelativistic band structures of these three types of
collinear magnets are depicted in Figure 1A.[24] The spin rotational 𝒞$ symmetry, along with
rotational symmetry connecting opposite-spin sublattice, causes the electronic band structures
of AMs to show d-, g- or i-wave anisotropy (alternating spin polarizations) and characteristics
of spin-momentum locking. These phenomena have been comprehensively analyzed in ref. [24],
and we selectively show the planar even-parity wave form of altermagnetism in Figure 1B.
Noncollinear systems can also show spin splitting with complex patterns,[64] but it is out of the
scope of this review.

6
Figure 1. A) Schematic diagrams of band structures and corresponding energy iso-surfaces of
the three nonrelativistic collinear magnetic phases. B) The planar even-parity wave form of
altermagnetism. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[24] Copyright 2022,
The Authors, published by American Physical Society. C) Magnetic unit cell of RuO2 without
and with O atoms. Two Ru atoms with antiparallel spin magnetic moments are represented by
red and blue balls, and the nonmagnetic O atoms are depicted by gray balls. D) Magnetization
density related by fourfold crystal rotational symmetry. E) Reciprocal space Fermi surface cut
at wave vector kz = 0 calculated without spin-orbit coupling. Reproduced with permission.[37]
Copyright 2024, American Physical Society. F) Band structure of RuO2 with (black) and
without (red and blue) spin-orbit coupling. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY-NC 4.0
license.[9] Copyright 2020, The Authors, Published by American Association for the
Advancement of Science.

Next, we use the most investigated altermagnetic candidate RuO2 as a case study to
specifically illustrate the d-wave anisotropic spin-momentum locking observed in its band
structure. Although the magnetic ground state of single crystalline RuO2 remains
controversial,[65-68] assuming hypothetical altermagnetic order for RuO2 is justifiable, given our
primary interest in exploring the interplay between altermagnetism and band structure. As
shown in Figure 1C,[37] crystals composed solely of the magnetic atom Ru possess [𝒞$ ||𝜏]
symmetry, and thus belong to the category of conventional collinear AFMs (left panel). The
7
arrangement of the nonmagnetic oxygen atoms leads to the breaking of this symmetry, resulting
in altermagnetic order (right panel). Therefore, the positioning of nonmagnetic atoms
significantly influences the magnetic phase of a material. The spin-space group of RuO2
incorporates the following symmetry operations
[𝐸||𝐻] + [𝒞$ ||𝐴𝐻] (1)
where 𝐻 and 𝐴𝐻 respectively contains 𝐸, 𝒫, 𝒞$% , 𝒞$[''(] , 𝒞$['*'(] , ℳ% , ℳ[''(] , ℳ['*'(] and
±
𝜏𝒞$+ , 𝒞$, , ±𝒞-% , ℳ+ , ℳ, , and 𝜏 is half a unit cell translation. We note that [𝐸||𝐻] are
transformations that interchange atoms within only one of the two spin sublattices. These
symmetries are crucial in determining the characteristic anisotropy of the spin density on the
opposite-spin sublattices (Figure 1D).[37] [𝒞$ ||𝐴𝐻] comprises symmetries that interchange
atoms between opposite-spin sublattices and guarantees zero net magnetization. It is noted that
𝐴𝐻 does not contain 𝒫, indicating the broken 𝒯 symmetry in the band structure, i.e., 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) ≠
𝐸(−𝑘, −𝑠). Moreover, for momentum whose little group does not contain 𝐴𝐻 elements, such
as Γ − 𝑆 path (Figure 1F), the spin-up and spin-down bands are nondegenerate, i.e., 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) ≠
𝐸(𝑘, −𝑠).[9] The magnitude of the spin splitting can reach up to eV scale, comparable to that
observed in FMs and even larger than that induced by relativistic SOC.[31, 49, 55] [𝒞$ ||ℳ+ ] and
[𝒞$ ||ℳ, ] (disregarding translational symmetry for simplicity) respectively transform 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠)
as [𝒞$ ||ℳ+ ]𝐸(𝑘+ , 𝑘, , 𝑘% , 𝑠) = 𝐸(−𝑘+ , 𝑘, , 𝑘% , −𝑠) and [𝒞$ ||ℳ, ]𝐸(𝑘+ , 𝑘, , 𝑘% , 𝑠) =
𝐸;𝑘+ , −𝑘, , 𝑘% , −𝑠<. These two transformations enforce the spin degeneracy on the 𝑘+ = 0, 𝜋
/ /
and 𝑘, = 0, 𝜋 planes. In addition, [𝒞$ ||𝒞-% ] transforms 𝐸(𝑘, 𝑠) as [𝒞$ ||𝒞-% ] 𝐸(𝑘+ , 𝑘, , 𝑘% , 𝑠) =
𝐸;𝑘, , −𝑘+ , 𝑘% , −𝑠<. This transformation makes the spin splitting of bands alternate across two
perpendicular wave vectors in the 𝑘% plane. These symmetries collectively lead to a planar d-
wave spin-momentum locking band structure of RuO2, as shown in Figure 1E.[37]
In Figure 2A-C, we present the ab initio nonrelativistic band structures of other AMs，such
as metallic FeSb2[15], organic κ-(BEDT-TTF)2Cu[N(CN)]Cl (abbreviated as κ-Cl), and
insulating RuF4[69], which also illustrate that altermagnetic spin splitting is strongly momentum
dependent and the sign of splitting is alternating across the Brillouin zone. Figure 2D illustrate
the average energy splitting between opposite-spin bands across a broad pool of altermagnetic
candidates, with different color sectors corresponding to different magnetic atoms.[70] We
observe that no specific magnetic atoms can be identified consistently as producing particularly
sizable spin splitting, and in AMs composed solely of light elements, significant band splitting
also occurs.

8
Figure 2. A) Top view of the spin-polarized Fermi surface of FeSb2. Reproduced under the
terms of the PNAS License.[15]Copyright 2019, The Authors, Published by PNAS. B)
Nonrelativistic κ-Cl band structure. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[71]
Copyright 2019, The Authors, Published by Springer Nature. C) Nonrelativistic RuF4 band
structure. The inset indicates the spin splitting energies of the two highest occupied energy
bands (V1/2) and lowest unoccupied energy bands (C1/2). Reproduced under the terms of the
CC-BY 4.0 license.[69] Copyright 2024, The Authors, Published by arXiv. D) The average
energy splitting between opposite-spin bands across a broad pool of altermagnetic candidates.
Reproduced with permission.[70] Copyright 2023, Elsevier.

In addition to band structures derived from first-principles calculations, several experimental

observations have also revealed band splitting phenomena in AMs.[38, 40, 43, 48-49, 55] Although a
recent experiment showed that the magnetic ground state of bulk RuO2 is non-magnetic,[68] a
9
time-reversal symmetry broken band structure of epitaxial RuO2 film was observed by detecting
magnetic circular dichroism in angle-resolved photoemission spectra (Figure 3A).[55]
Conducted at the [001] orientation of the Ru moments, the measurements reveal no detectable
remnant net magnetization, indicating unconventional origin of the signal. Most detailed
experimental evidence of theoretically predicted[24] g-wave altermagnetic spin splitting was
reported in studies on MnTe, [38, 48-50] see Figure 3B. The studies reported momentum-dependent
lifting of Kramers degeneracy[38, 48-50], quadratic spin splitting form around Γ point, [38]
and
temperature dependence of the splitting.[48, 50] Furthermore, Reimers et al. employed spin-
integrated soft X-ray angular-resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (SX-ARPES) to investigate
the band structure of epitaxial CrSb thin films.[43] As shown in Figure 3C, their observations of
band dispersions, consistent with theoretical calculations that predict spin splitting, strongly
support the existence of altermagnetic band structure in CrSb. The measured spin splitting, with
a significant magnitude of approximately 0.6 eV below the Fermi energy, highlights the
potential applications in spintronics.

Figure 3. A) Left panel: Calculated 3D Fermi surface and Fermi surface cut for RuO2. Right
panel: Experimental Fermi energy intensity distribution and the same Fermi surface cut for
RuO2. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[55] Copyright 2024, The Authors,
Published by American Association for the Advancement of Science. B) Measured angular-
resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (ARPES) band dispersion at 𝑘% = 0.35 Å0' along the ΓC −
E path and corresponding spin-resolved APRES simulation for α-MnTe. Blue and red colors
𝑀
10
indicate spin polarization. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[38] Copyright
2024, The Authors, Published by Springer Nature. C) The spin integrated soft X-ray angular-
resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (SX-ARPES) intensity, along with the superimposed spin-
resolved band structure, is shown for CrSb along the high-symmetry P-Q path using both p-
polarized and s-polarized photons. Reproduced under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[43]
Copyright 2024, The Authors, Published by Springer Nature.

The spin splitting of altermagnetic bands makes it possible to realize numerous spin-
dependent phenomena, such as anomalous Hall effect, magneto-optical Kerr effect,
unconventional longitudinal and transverse spin currents, giant magnetoresistance (GMR), and
tunneling magnetoresistance (TMR) effects and their thermal and magnonic counterparts. We
will now discuss these effects highlighting their potential for faster and scalable spintronics
devices.

2.2. Anomalous and spin transport properties

2.2.1. Anomalous Hall, Anomalous Nernst, and Anomalous thermal Hall effects
The anomalous Hall effect (AHE)[72] is characterized by a transverse voltage drop that occurs
in response to a longitudinal charge current, even in the absence of an applied magnetic field.
The presence of AHE requires broken 𝒫𝒯 and 𝒯𝜏 symmetry and therefore, the AHE research
was previously limited to FMs and complex noncollinear AFMs,[73] as the AHE was not
expected to occur in conventional AFMs. AMs naturally meet this requirement, thus becoming
candidate materials for generating low-dissipation Hall currents, and indeed the emergence of
AHE in AMs has been demonstrated both theoretically and experimentally.[9, 14, 37, 74-83] In 2020,
the AHE was theoretically predicted in RuO2 and CoNb3S6, and the corresponding term “crystal
Hall effect” (CHE) was introduced to mark its unconventional properties when compared with
conventional anomalous Hall effect arising from magnetization.[9] The CHE arises from
unusual symmetry breaking and corresponding order parameters which originate from
combination of magnetic and crystallographic order. In the case of altermagnetic RuO2 the
magnetic sites have anisotropic crystallographic environment. The symmetry breaking results
in a strong angular dependence of the Hall conductivity on the order parameter (akin to
crystalline anisotropic magnetoresistance) – e.g. the effect can be completely switched-off by
rotating spin quantization axis. The calculated anomalous Hall conductivity of RuO2 with the
Néel vector 𝑛 along [100] as a function of canting angle is shown in Figure 4A.[9] The Néel
vector 𝑛 is defined as 𝑛 = (𝑚1 − 𝑚2 )/2, where 𝑚1/2 are the magnetizations of the opposite-
11
spin A and B sublattices. When considering SOC, a small net moment 𝑚 = 𝑚1 + 𝑚2 is
generated by the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction (DMI), thus inducing a canting angle
between magnetizations of A and B sublattices, resulting in weak ferromagnetism. It is essential
to note that the emergence of this weak ferromagnetism is crucial for the electrical manipulation
of the altermagnetic order.[84] Therefore, the anomalous Hall conductivity component 𝜎+% can
456 156
be separated into 𝜎+% (even in 𝑚) and 𝜎+% (odd in 𝑚), which represents the contributions
induced by altermagnetic order and the small ferromagnetic moment, respectively. We note that
the 𝜎+% is entirely induced by the altermagnetic order when the canting angle is 0°. Furthermore,
456
𝜎+% dominates the contribution to 𝜎+% when the canting angle is less than 10°, suggesting that
the effect of the small net magnetic moment on 𝜎+% is negligible. Therefore, in the examples to
follow, we drop the name “crystal Hall effect”, and use commonly accepted “anomalous Hall
effect”.
For CoNb3S6, the sign of the anomalous Hall conductivity reverses when the crystal chirality
is reversed (Figure 4A, right panel).[9] This phenomenon occurs because the anomalous Hall
conductivity is odd under 𝒯 symmetry, and the two states of crystal chirality are related by 𝒯
symmetry. Thus, reversing the Néel vector can also induce a change in sign. Consequently, in
AMs, the sign of the anomalous Hall conductivity is determined by the combined effect of the
Néel vector and crystal chirality. The experimental observations of AHE in CoNb3S6 and RuO2
are presented in Figure 4C and 4D, respectively.[74, 76] Note that the measured anomalous Hall
conductivities are 27 Ω−1 cm−1 for CoNb3S6 at 23 K and 1,000 Ω−1 cm−1 for RuO2 at 50 T. These
values do not align well with the theoretical predictions, likely due to doping effects and the
influence of strong magnetic fields. As illustrated in Figure 4B, the calculated anomalous Hall
conductivity for perovskite CaCrO3 is substantial and can be further enhanced by electron or
hole doping, which once again underscores the significant impact of doping effects.[79]
Additionally, the AHE in epitaxial thin films of Mn5Si3 and MnTe has also been investigated
where spontaneous remanence of the signal was observed.[14, 78, 85] As shown in Figure 4E, it
can be observed that the orientation of the Néel vector changes when the external magnetic field
is rotated, and the AHE in this material is anisotropic, dependent on the relative orientation of
the Néel vector.[83] Therefore, AHE can serve as an effective method for detecting altermagnetic
order. It must be mentioned again that not all the states of AMs can generate AHE. Since the
anomalous Hall conductivity behaves as an axial vector and is odd under 𝒯 symmetry, a
nonvanishing AHE is only observed in systems whose symmetries permit such a vector. This
implies that the magnetic space group of the system must allow for the existence of a nonzero
net magnetic moment. For instance, in RuO2, when the Néel vector is oriented along [001], the
12
magnetic space group is P42’/mnm’, and all components of anomalous Hall conductivity are
prohibited. On the other hand, with the Néel vector aligned along [100], the magnetic space
group is Pnn’m’ and 𝜎+% is permitted.

Figure 4. A) Left panel: first-principle calculated AHE conductivity in RuO2 as a function of

canting angle along with its ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic components. Right panel:
Calculated AHE conductivity in CoNb3S6 as a function of Fermi level. Reproduced under the
terms of the CC-BY-NC 4.0 license.[9] Copyright 2020, The Authors, Published by American
Association for the Advancement of Science. B) Calculated AHE conductivity in CaCrO3 as
functions of Fermi energy. Reproduced with permission.[79] Copyright 2023, American Physical
Society. C) Anomalous Hall resistivity in CoNb3S6 as a function of magnetic field. Reproduced
under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[74] Copyright 2018, The Authors, Published by
Springer Nature. D) Anomalous Hall resistivity in the (110)-oriented RuO2 film. Reproduced
with permission.[76] Copyright 2022, Springer Nature. E) Experimental AHE in Mn5Si3. Left
panel: Experimental AHE conductivity as a function of external field with the orientation 𝜃 =
0°. Right panel: Schematic of Hall bar with external field orientation 𝜃 relative to the [0001]
direction and measured AHE conductivity as a function of 𝜃. Reproduced under the terms of
the CC-BY 4.0 license.[83] Copyright 2024, The Authors, Published by arXiv.

The anomalous Nernst effect (ANE) and anomalous thermal Hall effect (ATHE) are the
thermoelectric and thermal counterparts, respectively, of the AHE. The ANE describes the
appearance of a transverse voltage induced by a longitudinal heat current in the absence of an
external magnetic field, while the ATHE describes the appearance of a transverse thermal

13
current density under similar conditions. Both phenomena require the same symmetry
conditions as AHE. Consequently, all systems that permit the existence of the AHE also allow
for the occurrence of the ANE and the ATHE. However, the ANE and the ATHE have been
investigated only sporadically in AMs, where the ANE and the ATHE can be termed as crystal
Nernst effect and crystal thermal Hall effect, respectively.[37, 41-42] The measured and calculated
ANE of Mn5Si3 is shown in Figure 5A.[41] Clear hysteretic behavior and saturation in the
transverse thermopower, indicative of a finite ANE, closely correspond to the field dependence
of the anomalous Hall conductivity. The measured magnitude of anomalous Nernst
conductivity ranges from (0.11 ± 0.08) A/(K·m) at 58 K to (0.015 ± 0.005) A/(K·m) at 216 K,
which are in qualitative agreement with the calculated magnitude of 0.25 A/(K·m) for 58 K and
0.12 A/(K·m) for 216 K, respectively. Besides, it has been demonstrated that the anomalous
Nernst conductivity undergoes a drastic sixfold enhancement in Mn5Si3 films with a small
amount of Mn doping, especially in Mn5.10Si2.90.[42] In addition, Zhou et al.[37] analyzed the
sources of the large anomalous Nernst conductivity in RuO2 through first-principles
calculations, identifying Weyl fermions arising from band crossings, strong spin-flip
pseudonodal surfaces, and weak spin-flip ladder transitions as key contributors. Based on this,
the total anomalous Hall/Nernst conductivity was decomposed into spin-conserving and spin-
flip parts (Figure 5B). The results show that, within the hole doping range of -0.2 to 0.0 eV, the
ANE is predominantly driven by the spin-flip processes. Moreover, due to the topological Weyl
points, the Wiedemann-Franz law, which reflects the relationship between the anomalous Hall
conductivity and anomalous thermal Hall conductivity at low temperatures, is applicable up to
150 K in RuO2, a range significantly broader than what is typically expected of conventional
magnets (Figure 5C).[37] Furthermore, Hoyer et al. used a toy model of an insulating d-wave
AM to investigate the ATHE of magnons, showing that it was strongly dependent on the Néel
vector orientation and strain.[86] These works enhance our understanding of anomalous transport
behavior associated with alternating spin-splitting band structure in AMs. Given these insights,
AMs may play a leading role in the future development of spintronics and spin caloritronics.

14
Figure 5. A) Transverse Nernst signal (brown) and anomalous Hall conductivity (black) of as
a function of applied magnetic field for a sample average temperature of 216 K (left) and ab
initio calculated band structure and ANE at 58 K and 216 K (right) for Mn5Si3. Reproduced
with permission.[41] Copyright 2024, The Authors, Published by arXiv. B) The calculated total
anomalous Hall (left) /Nernst (right) conductivity and their spin-conserved and spin-flip parts
of RuO2. C) Anomalous Hall conductivity, anomalous thermal Hall conductivity and
anomalous Lorenz ratio as a function of temperature at different Fermi levels. Reproduced with
permission.[37] Copyright 2024, American Physical Society.

2.2.2. Nonrelativistic spin current

In commercial spin-transfer-torque magnetic random-access memories (STT-MRAMs), the
foundational mechanism involves applying a longitudinal spin-polarized current in an out-of-
plane direction, moving from a reference to a recording ferromagnetic layer.[87-89] In this context,
the longitudinal spin current, originated from ferromagnetic exchange splitting, has high spin
torque efficiency and is odd under 𝒯 symmetry. However, due to the two-point out-of-plane
geometry required for both electrical STT writing and TMR-based electrical readout, STT
encounters several limitations. A key challenge in STT-MRAMs is to maintain a sufficient
separation between writing and readout currents to ensure robust signals while keeping writing
currents below the tunnel barrier's breakdown threshold. In contrast, the transversal spin current
induced by relativistic SOC effects such as spin Hall effect (SHE),[90] which is even under 𝒯
symmetry, can decouple the reading and writing paths in MRAMs and thus enhance the device
endurance.[91-94] Yet, it relies on relativistic SOC, which is typically much weaker than
exchange coupling. Furthermore, the non-conserving nature of spin significantly restricts the
15
spin diffusion length to merely nanoscale dimensions, severely limiting the practical utility of
spin-orbit-torque magnetic random-access memories (SOT-MRAMs). AMs, with the
anisotropic band splitting, offer a new perspective for the generation of spin currents.[19, 71, 95-
100]

As depicted in Figure 6A,[19] taking d-wave RuO2 as an example, due to Fermi-surface

/
anisotropies and the [𝒞$ ||𝒞-% C 0] axis results
] symmetry, applying an electric field along the [11
in parallel spin-up and spin-down charge currents that are different in magnitude. As a result,
only longitudinal spin polarized current along the [11C0] axis is generated. In contrast, when the
electric field is applied along the [100] axis, a transversal pure spin current is produced along
the [010] axis. The spin polarization of this nonrelativistic spin current is aligned along the spin
quantization axis of the electronic structure. Therefore, there are no symmetry requirements
dictating that the applied field, current flow direction, and transported spin component be
orthogonal to each other. The transversal spin current, generated by magnetic exchange splitting
(𝒯-odd) and independent of SOC, can similarly engender spin splitter torque in spintronics,
akin to the 𝒯 -even type. This phenomenon is termed “spin-splitter torque” (SST).[19]
Characterized by high spin torque efficiency and a nonrelativistic origin, SST merges the
advantages of STT and SOT while overcoming their respective key limitations. The calculated
charge-spin conversion ratio for RuO2 can reach up to 28% (Figure 6B), which is significantly
larger than the most extensively exploited spin Hall angle of Pt.[90] Additionally, this ratio is
only weakly impacted by SOC. Some literature refers to the phenomenon of generating such
𝒯-odd spin currents, when considering SOC, as the magnetic spin Hall effect (MSHE).[101] To
verify the aforementioned claims, experimentally, the ferromagnetic permalloy (Py) layer was
deposited on the (100)- and (110)-oriented RuO2 films (Figure 6C). When brought in contact
with a ferromagnetic layer, the RuO2(100) film generates a transversal spin current that induces
both the SST and SOT, while for the (110)-oriented RuO2 film, only SOT is exerted on the Py
layer. The spin torque-ferromagnetic resonance (ST-FMR) measurements were performed to
detect the spin current and spin torque generated by the RuO2 films.[96] The ST-FMR spectra of
RuO2/Py samples reveal that RuO2(100) film exerts much stronger spin torque on Py film
(Figure 6D).[96] The calculated spin torque efficiency and spin torque conductivity in RuO2
films further corroborate this finding , as illustrated in Figure 6E.[96] Furthermore, the measured
spin Hall angle and spin diffusion length of RuO2(100) film is 0.183 and greater than 12 nm,
respectively, surpassing those of conventional spin source materials such as heavy metals.[102]
RuO2 is not the only example of generating 𝒯-odd spin currents. We point out that, unlike
the anomalous Hall effect mentioned above, the existence of 𝒯-odd spin currents is subject to
16
fewer restrictions. All AMs, including both inorganic and organic types, are allowed to produce
𝒯-odd transversal or longitudinal spin currents due to their broken 𝒫𝒯 and 𝒯𝜏 symmetries, but
some require SOC as nonrelativistic SST effect is absent.[19] The GdFeO3-type perovskite with
C-type antiferromagnetic order were found to generate pure spin current under an applied
electric field;[95] the spin-charge conversion ratio was expected to be over 30% in V2Te2O;[100]
as the twist angle varies, the spin Hall angle of the twisted bilayer VOBr AM can reach a peak
value of 1.4;[103] organic κ-Cl can act as a spin current generator by applying a thermal gradient,
functioning as a time-reversal odd counterpart to the spin Nernst effect.[71] These theoretical
and experimental findings, which demonstrate the observation of transversal spin current and
spin splitting torque, suggest that AMs are not only ideal as information carriers free from Joule
heating in electronic devices but also as promising spin source in spintronics.

Figure 6. A) Schematic of the longitudinal spin current (left) and transversal spin current (right)
in RuO2. B) 𝒯-odd charge-spin conversion ratio calculated with (solid line) and without (dashed
line) SOC. The Néel vector is oriented along [001]. Reproduced with permission.[19] Copyright
2021, American Physical Society. C) Schematic of ST-FMR measurements for the
RuO2(100)/Py (left) and the RuO2(110)/Py (right) samples. D) ST-FMR spectra of the
RuO2(100)/Py (left) and the RuO2(110)/Py (right) samples. E) The calculated spin torque
efficiency (left) and the spin torque conductivity (right) in RuO2(100) and RuO2(110) films.
Reproduced with permission.[96] Copyright 2022, American Physical Society.

17
 The spin splitting of altermagnetic bands and the associated spin currents proposed in RuO2[19]
make it possible to be used in GMR[21] and TMR[20-21] effects. GMR (TMR) effect refers to the
phenomenon where the resistance of a magnetic tunnel junction—comprising a nonmagnetic
metallic (insulating) layer sandwiched between two ferromagnetic electrodes—varies with the
relative orientation of the magnetic order of the two ferromagnetic layers, and a higher spin
polarization of the electrodes results in a large MR ratio.[104-106] A large magnitude of GMR
ratio (𝜌7 − 𝜌17 )/(𝜌7 + 𝜌17 ), where P(AP) corresponds to (anti)parallel alignment of Néel
vector in altermagnetic layers separated by nonmagnetic metallic spacer, up to 100% was
predicted in magnetic tunnel junction comprised of RuO2.[21] TMR in AMs has been studied
both from first-principle and model calculations. [20-21] Shao et al. designed a RuO2/TiO2/RuO2
tunnel junction (Figure 7A).[20] The 𝑘∥ -resolved transmission for spin-up and spin-down
channel in P states clearly showed a large distribution of the spin-polarized conduction channels
in RuO2 (Figure 7B, left panel). In contrast, for the AP state, only the states near the zone center
contributed to the transmission (Figure 7B, right panel), resulting in a significantly lower total
transmission compared to the P state (Figure 7C). The calculated TMR ratio can reach up to
500% at the Fermi level (Figure 7D), a value comparable to that obtained in commercially used
Fe/MgO/Fe (001) magnetic tunnel junction.[107-108] The superior performance suggests that
altermagnetic TMR/GMR holds promise for commercial applications.

18
Figure 7. A) Structures of a TMR stack of RuO2/TiO2/RuO2 tunnel junction with parallel (P)
and antiparallel (AP) alignment of the Néel vectors. B) Ab initio calculated 𝑘∥ -resolved
transmission of spin-up and spin down channel for P and AP states. C) Total transmissions with
respect to energy for P and AP states. D) Energy dependence of calculated TMR. Reproduced
under the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license.[20] Copyright 2021, The Authors, Published by
Springer Nature.

2.3. Magneto-optical effects

Magneto-optical (MO) effects, which represent the fundamental interplay between
magnetism and light, play a pivotal role in condensed matter physics. Within the extensive array
of MO effects, the Kerr and Faraday effects stand out, both of which are 𝒯-odd MO effects.
These phenomena are characterized by the rotation of the polarization plane of linearly
polarized light as it reflects from or transmits through magnetic materials, respectively. The
optical Hall conductivity, which is intimately related to the magneto-optical Kerr and Faraday
effects (MOKE and MOFE), can be seen as the ac counterpart of anomalous Hall conductivity.
Therefore, both MOKE and MOFE adhere to the same symmetry rules as the AHE, and
consequently, these effects are also observed in AMs. In fact, as early as 1997, research
predicted the presence of 𝒯-odd MO effect in LaMO3 (M=Cr, Mn, Fe), but it was not yet
19
associated with the unconventional magnetic order.[109] Samanta et al. also identified crystal
MO effect in the monolayer limit of an SrRuO3 film, associating it with the lowering structural
symmetry and antiferromagnetic order.[110] Zhou et al.,[111] employing first-principles
calculations, identified MOKE and MOFE in AMs, which they designated as crystal chirality
magneto-optical (CCMO) effects. These effects demonstrate that the signs of Kerr and Faraday
spectra in RuO2 and CoNb3S6 reverse with changes in material chirality, as illustrated in
Figures 8A-C.[111] Moreover, the peak values of the Kerr and Faraday rotation angles induced
by this novel CCMO effect—0.62 deg and 2.42 × 105 deg/cm for RuO2, respectively—are
significantly larger than those observed in traditional ferromagnetic and noncollinear
antiferromagnetic materials,[112-114] suggesting their potential for applications in MO recording.
In addition, a prominent MOKE has also been observed in altermagnetic RuF4,[115] and the
time-resolved MOKE has been employed to explore ultrafast spin dynamics in epitaxial
MnTe(001)/InP(111) thin films.[116]
In addition to the MOKE and MOFE, x-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) also
represents a highly significant 𝒯-odd MO effect and also shares the same symmetry principles
as AHE. Hariki et al. employed both ab initio theoretical models and experimental approaches
to investigate XMCD in α-MnTe.[117] As shown in Figure 8D, the trends in XMCD, obtained
both theoretically and experimentally, remained consistent regardless of the application of an
external magnetic field, although the magnitudes differed significantly.[117] They attributed this
phenomenon to the role of magnetic domains. In zero field, the cooling process causes the
magnetic moments to cant, forming magnetic domains. Within each domain, there exists a
ferrimagnetic-like alignment, with the direction of the magnetic moments varying between
domains. Since XMCD is dependent on the direction of the magnetic moments, the effects from
different domains cancel each other out under zero external magnetic field, resulting in a
measured value that is ten times smaller than theoretical predictions. However, under a 6T
external magnetic field, the magnetic moments within each domain align due to canting, thus
closely aligning experimental and theoretical values (the experimentally induced magnetic
moments were only 0.1μB compared to 5μB used in theoretical calculations, a difference of 50
times, yet the calculated results differed by only 80 times, nearly a 1:1 ratio). The conclusions
are corroborated in Figure 8E, where an opposing external magnetic field leads to the reversal
of ferrimagnetic-like moments within the domains, ultimately reversing the XMCD signal.[117]
Hariki et al. computed XMCD at L2,3 and M2,3 edges of Ru in RuO2 for different orientations
of the Néel vector and the results for M2,3 edges of Ru are shown in Figure 8F, indicating that
[118]
the orientation of the altermagnetic order also has a significant effect on the MO effect.
20
Moreover, a review systematically analyzed the nonlinear MO effects in antiferromagnetic and
altermagnetic materials, revealing that altermagnetic domains with antiparallel Néel vector can
be distinguished by the MO effects that are linearly proportional to the Néel vector.[119]
These findings indicate that MO tools are effective in probing altermagnetism, and MO
effects can be utilized to investigate physical properties in AMs. Such insights are crucial for
advancing research in magnetic materials and their technological applications.

Figure 8. A) Kerr rotation and Faraday rotation angle and B) Kerr ellipticity and Faraday
ellipticity for the left- and righthanded chirality states (𝜒 = ±1) of RuO2. C) Kerr and Faraday
rotation angles for the left- and right-handed chirality states of CoNb3S6. Reproduced with
permission.[111] Copyright 2021, American Physical Society. D) Mn L2,3-edge spectra,
comparing theoretical results (solid black line) and experimental data (red dotted line), with
light propagation along the c-axis. Top: X-ray absorption spectroscopy. Middle: XMCD in zero
magnetic field following cooling in a 6 T field. Bottom: measured XMCD in an applied
21
magnetic field of 6 T, calculated XMCD with k aligned parallel to the magnetic moment,
normalized by the ratio 𝑚9: = 𝑚!;< ≈ 1/50 . E) XMCD following cooling in opposing
magnetic fields. Reproduced with permission. [117] Copyright 2024, American Physical Society.
F) Real (red) and imaginary (blue) components of the optical conductivity tensor at the Ru M2,3
edge for various orientations of the Néel vector. Reproduced with permission.[118] Copyright
2024, American Physical Society.

2.4 Chiral magnons

Magnons, the spin wave quanta, are collective excitations of the spins observed in a magnetic
system, that are central to the important research field called magnonics.[120-125] As depicted in
Figure 9A , in the nonrelativistic limit and for collinear FMs, the magnons typically are
polarized with one chirality (counterclockwise, cyan), have quadratic dispersion near the Γ
point in the magnonic Brillouin zone, and are in GHz range. In contrast, for conventional
collinear AFMs, the dispersions of magnons possess two chiral modes (cyan for
counterclockwise and pink for clockwise) which are degenerate throughout the entire Brillouin
zone and show a linear dispersion close to the Γ point.[57, 126-127] In addition, the resonance
frequencies of antiferromagnetic magnons can reach up to THz range, making AFMs attractive
[128-130]
for magnon spintronics when compared with FMs. However, the net spin angular
momentum is zero if these two opposite-chirality modes are equally populated. In order to
observe and take advantages of the magnon-generated spin currents, the degeneracy between
these two modes must be lifted by external stimuli (e.g., magnetic field).[127] Given that both
FMs and AFMs have limitations in applying them in the realm of magnonics, it is natural to
wonder whether there exists another type of magnetic matter that operated in the THz range
and hosts nondegenerate magnonic chirality.
Recently, properties of magnons in AMs were theoretically investigated[131]. In these
unconventional collinear compensated magnets, the degeneracy of magnon modes with
opposite-chirality can be lifted without external stimuli and the sign of the splitting between
opposite chirality magnons alternates throughout the Brillouin zone (Figure 9A).[131] Again,
taking RuO2 as an example, the nonrelativistic electronic and magnonic band structures along
the high-symmetry paths at kz=0 plane under zero magnetic field are shown in Figure 9B.[131]
It is noted that both of these two kinds of splittings are strongly momentum dependent and the
alternating sign of the chirality splitting is similar to that of the spin splitting along the same
paths. The origin of the chirality splitting can be traced back to the anisotropic intra-sublattice
exchange interactions, which must be accompanied by the spin group symmetry of
22
altermagnetic phase. The anisotropic exchange alone is not sufficient condition for chiral
magnons. This can be seen by analyzing an artificial antiferromagnetic phase of RuO2,
constructed by a 1 × 1 × 2 supercell. Such a supercell exhibits the anisotropic intra-sublattice
exchange interactions but due to the antiferromagnetic spin group, the magnon bands are
degenerate. Other AMs such as CoF2, MnTe and Fe2O3 also showed alternating splitting (Figure
9C)[131] which means the alternating sign of the chirality splitting constitutes a distinctive
hallmark of altermagnetic magnons with no counterpart in collinear FMs or AFMs. We notice
that the magnitude of chiral splitting for RuO2 was calculated to reach 10 meV, which is large
enough to be detected experimentally via e.g. inelastic polarized neutron scattering.[132] The
chiral splitting can also contribute to efficient spin Seebeck and spin Nernst effects of
magnons.[133]

Figure 9. A) Schematic representation of the nonrelativistic magnon spectra in collinear FM,

collinear AFM and AM. B) Up panel: the electronic band structure of the altermagnetic phase
of RuO2 with spin splitting. Down panel: corresponding magnonic band structure with
alternating chirality splitting. C) The magnitude of chirality splitting in altermagnetic CoF2,
MnTe and Fe2O3. Reproduced with permission[131] Copyright 2023, American Physical Society.

3. Strategies to induce altermagnetism

Although there are many spontaneous altermagnetic candidates in nature, which we will
mention in Section 4, there are always some situations in practice where it is necessary to
23
manually construct AMs by functionalizing FMs or conventional AFMs. To achieve artificial
AMs, the guiding principle is to break the combined 𝒫𝒯 and/or 𝒯𝜏 symmetry while preserving
altermagnetic spin point group symmetries. Here, we briefly review four proposed routes
towards altermagnetism.

3.1. Applied electric fields

In 3D magnetic materials, two spin-symmetry operations, [𝒞$ ||𝒫][𝒞$ ||𝒯](≡ 𝒫𝒯) and
[𝒞$ ||𝜏], enforce Kramers spin degeneracy throughout the Brillouin zone, while 2D systems
have no out-of-plane components of momentum 𝑘= , only in-plane components 𝑘∥ , therefore,
violations of the aforementioned two symmetries are insufficient to realize spin splitting. For
instance, [𝒞$ || 𝒞$% ][𝒞$ ||𝒯] symmetry transforms energy eigenstate 𝐸(𝑘∥ , 𝑠) as
[𝒞$ || 𝒞$% ][𝒞$ ||𝒯]𝐸(𝑘∥ , 𝑠) = [𝒞$ || 𝒞$% ]𝐸(−𝑘∥ , 𝑠) = 𝐸(𝑘∥ , −𝑠) , resulting in spin degeneracy
across the 2D Brillouin zone. [𝒞$ || ℳ% ] symmetry transforms energy eigenstate 𝐸(𝑘∥ , 𝑠) as
[𝒞$ || ℳ% ]𝐸(𝑘∥ , 𝑠) = 𝐸(𝑘∥ , −𝑠) , acting as [𝒞$ ||𝜏] . The additional constraints imposed by
symmetry considerations increase the difficulty of achieving 2D artificial AMs. Note that
monolayer MnPSe3 forms an antiferromagnetic arrangement, corresponding to the conventional
collinear Néel order on the honeycomb lattice. The only symmetry that preserves spin
degeneracy is 𝒫𝒯 symmetry. Consequently, monolayer MnPSe3 is a good source for inducing
altermagnetism.
Applied electric fields are one of the most common ways to tune and control physical
properties.[134-142] As illustrated in Figure 10A ,[143] when an electric gate or a substrate is used
to introduce an electric field perpendicular to the Mn plane in monolayer MnPSe3, the two Se
layers become crystallographically inequivalent due to the unequally additional electrostatic
potential and thus the 𝒫𝒯 symmetry is broken, while the two opposite-spin Mn atoms are still
locally equivalent and connected by glide-reflection symmetry. The resulting spin splitting is
about 25 meV. This mechanism can generate AHE in collinear AFMs but is different from
layer-polarized anomalous Hall effects, in which the two magnetic layers become
crystallographically inequivalent under the vertical electric field and are formally like
ferrimagnets[140, 142]. Besides, we notice that a large spin splitting of 100 meV in the Fe bands
can be seen in FeSe/SrTiO3 heterostructure combined with quantum spin Hall effect,
demonstrating the feasibility of combining nontrivial band-topology with unconventional
altermagnetism in an experimentally known superconducting monolayer.[143]

3.2 Janusization
24
 In addition to applied electric field, built-in electric field arising from a Janus structure can
also break the inversion symmetry, thus enabling the transformation of a conventional AFM
into an AM. For instance, in monolayer MnPSe3, if one of the two Se layers is completely
substituted with a different atomic species, such as S atoms (Figure 10B),[143] to form a Janus
structure, the 𝒫𝒯 symmetry is broken while the two spin sublattices are mapped on top of each
other by mirror rather than inversion or translational symmetries. The resulting band structure,
in the absence of SOC, shows altermagnetic spin splitting of i-wave symmetry. Besides, the
process of Janusization could facilitate the integration of piezoelectricity, piezovalley, and
piezomagnetism with altermagnetism, significantly expanding the versatility of AMs.[144-145]

3.3. Twisted bilayer altermagnets

“Twisting” has already been demonstrated, both theoretically and experimentally, to
significantly change the physical properties of nonmagnetic and magnetic systems without
[146-152]
alteration of chemical compositions. Recently, twisted bilayer AMs have been
proposed.[153-154] In normally stacked antiferromagnetic bilayers, spin-up and spin-down states
are degenerate in the band structure due to the high symmetry. Interestingly, introducing a twist
between the two layers results in reduced symmetry, which in turn causes significant k-
dependent spin splitting. Figure 10C illustrates the structure of twisted bilayer MnPSe3 in which
the magnetic order is intralayer and interlayer antiferromagnetic.[154] The special twist angle
(𝜽 = 𝟐𝟏. 𝟕𝟗°) not only breaks 𝓟𝓣 symmetry but also ensures the emergence of rotation
symmetry ([𝓒𝟐 || 𝓒𝟐[𝟎𝟏𝟎] ]), which connects opposite spin sublattices. The bands exhibit spin
degeneracy along high-symmetry paths, potentially leading to the misconception that it
represents conventional antiferromagnetism. However, this is not applicable at any generic k-
point, where no symmetry operations enforce the spin degeneracy. Therefore, a comprehensive
analysis of the Brillouin Zone for AMs is essential. The maximum nonrelativistic spin splitting
observed in twisted bilayer MnPSe3 is 5.1 meV, which is relatively small compared to that of
well-known bulk antiferromagnets but can be tuned by biaxial strain. Besides, other twist angles,
such as 9.43° and 42.10°, can also induce altermagnetism. Therefore, twist angles represent a
new degree of freedom for tuning the properties of AMs. It is worth mentioning that in twisted
bilayer CrSBr, the transverse charge-to-spin conversion rate can reach up to 90%,
demonstrating that AMs induced through this method hold significant potential for applications
in spintronics.[153] We notice that the induction of spin splitting upon twisting a bilayer system
with interlayer antiferromagnetic coupling is a universal phenomenon. Liu et al. have proposed

25
a more comprehensive analysis of twisted bilayer AMs and demonstrated that the spin-splitting
character can range from d-wave to i-wave symmetry.[103]

3.4. Supercell altermagnets

The above three strategies are applicable in the case of 2D AMs. Here, a method that can
induce 3D altermagnetism is proposed. Until now, the exploration of new altermagnetic
candidates in nature has predominantly concentrated on materials where the magnetic unit cell
coincides with the nonmagnetic one. A very recent work has expanded the family of
altermagnetic candidates by enlarging the magnetic unit cell.[155] Figure 10D shows two
magnetic structures of MnSe2 (termed MnSe2-Ⅰ and MnSe2-Ⅱ) and their band structure.[155] Both
structures are constructed by stacking three nonmagnetic unit cells along the c-axis. The
distribution of the magnetic moments varies between them, which is revealed by the different
colored spin density around Mn atoms. The anisotropic spin density also indicates that in both
cases, two sites with opposite spin cannot be linked by a straightforward antiunitary translation.
The glide planes connecting Mn with opposite spin for MnSe2-Ⅰ and MnSe2-Ⅱ are [𝒞$ || ℳ, ]
and [𝒞$ || ℳ% ] (disregarding translational symmetry for simplicity), respectively. Due to the
differing glide planes, spin splitting occurs along distinct k-path, with the maximum values of
spin splitting being 167 meV and 71 meV, respectively. Symmetry analysis has revealed that
both MnSe2-Ⅰ and MnSe2-Ⅱ are d-wave AMs. Notably, the energy difference of MnSe2-Ⅰ and
MnSe2-Ⅱ is merely 5 meV. This minimal discrepancy suggests that changing the ground state
through an external perturbation could be feasible. Despite the current lack of experimental
techniques for manipulating the magnetic order of individual atoms, the proposal of supercell
AMs encourages further exploration in the design of AMs.

26
Figure 10. Four mechanisms of inducing altermagnetic phase. A) Top: applying external
electric field. Bottom: placing the monolayer on a substrate. B) Forming a Janus structure by
replacing the bottom Se atoms with S atoms. Reproduced with permission.[143] Copyright 2024,
The Authors, Published by arXiv. C) Twisting bilayer of MnPSe3. Reproduced with
permission.[154] Copyright 2024, American Physical Society. D) Supercell magnetic
configurations of MnSe2-Ⅰ (up) and MnSe2-Ⅱ (down) and their corresponding nonrelativistic
band structures. Cyan and magenta denote positive and negative values of the spin density,
respectively. Reproduced with permission.[155] Copyright 2024, American Physical Society.

4. Altermagnetic candidates
In this Section, we review the altermagnetic candidates, neglecting the artificial AMs
mentioned in Section 3. Before moving on to this Section, we recall the criteria necessary to
identify altermagnetic phase[31]: an even number of magnetic atoms in the magnetic unit cell;
no 𝒫𝒯 and 𝒯𝜏 symmetries; the sign of the spin splitting alternates across the Brillouin zone;
the two opposite-spin sublattices are linked by a real space rotation transformation (proper or
improper, and symmorphic or non-symmorphic). It is worth noting that symmetry constraints
prevent the emergence of one-dimensional (1D) AMs, owing to the absence of rotational
transformations in reciprocal space for 1D systems. Therefore, we focus exclusively on 2D and
3D altermagnetic candidates, encompassing a diverse spectrum of conduction types ranging
from insulators and metals to superconductors. In addition, a program was recently developed

27
to determine the magnetic phase of symmetry-compensated collinear magnetic material. We
refer interested readers to a detailed information in ref. [156].

4.1 2D altermagnetic candidates

As discussed in Section 3.1, the symmetry requirements for 2D AMs are relatively more
stringent compared to their bulk counterparts. Consequently, there are fewer viable candidates
for 2D AMs than for 3D ones. Nevertheless, considerable efforts have been made to search for
and study the properties of 2D AMs. For instance, Sødequist and Olsen [157] identified seven 2D
AMs using high-throughput calculations based on the Computational 2D Materials Database
(C2DB), while Liu et al.[158] computationally derived two 2D AMs from the 2D NiAs-type non-
van der Waals family, providing new perspectives for the synthesis of 2D AMs. In addition,
Zeng and Zhao explored the 2D spin layer group, which is conducive to the further
understanding of 2D AMs.[159] These materials are listed in Table 1, which includes those
currently considered to be 2D AMs. It is anticipated that ongoing research will further expand
the family of 2D altermagnetic candidates.

Table 1. 2D altermagnetic candidates with their corresponding nonmagnetic space group

(NSG), magnetic space group (MSG), and even-parity spin symmetry type. The number of
NSG represents in parentheses.
No. Compound NSG MSG Spin symmetry Ref.

1 OsNNaSCl5 P21 (4) P21 d-wave [157]

2 V2ClBrI2O2 Cm (8) P1 d-wave [157]

3 RuF4 P21/c (14) P21/c d-wave [69]

4 VF4 P21/c (14) P21/c d-wave [157]

5 AgF2 P21/c (14) P21’/c’ d-wave [157]

6 OsF4 P21/c (14) P21/c d-wave [157]

7 SrRuO3(010) P21/c (14) P21/c d-wave [110]

8 MnTeMoO6 P21212 (18) d-wave [159]

9 FeS(110) Pmma (51) d-wave [158]

10 FeSe(110) Pmma (51) d-wave [158]

11 VP2H8(NO4)2 P4bm (100) g-wave [159]

12 Ca(CoN)2 P4"m2 (115) P4"’m’2 d-wave [160]

13 Ca(FeN)2 P4"m2 (115) P4"’m’2 d-wave [161]

14 CrO P4/mmm (123) P4’/mmm’ d-wave [162-163]

15 V2Se2O P4/mmm (123) Pm'm'm d-wave [164]

16 V2Te2O P4/mmm (123) P4’/mm’m d-wave [100, 165]

17 Cr2Te2O P4/mmm (123) d-wave [133]

28
 18 Cr2Se2O P4/mmm (123) d-wave [133]

19 FeSe(001) P4/nmm (129) d-wave [143, 166]

20 2H-FeBr3 P6"2m (189) P6"2m i-wave [157]

4.2. 3D altermagnetic candidates

After reviewing the literature on 3D altermagnetic candidates, we propose that perovskite
materials are particularly favorable for altermagnetism. This includes those with GdFeO3-type
and LiNbO3-type structures, as well as perovskites that are structurally doubled or tripled, in
which the distortion of the O octahedra reduces the symmetry of the system, making the
emergence of altermagnetism possible. Additionally, 3D rutile fluorides or oxides along with
other fluorides and sulfate fluorides, have also emerged as promising candidates. Moreover,
altermagnetism is not limited to inorganic materials; it can also occur in organic materials.
We tabulate 219 3D altermagnetic candidates in Table 2, mainly referring to the work of
Šmejkal et al.,[9, 24, 31] Guo et al.,[70] Chen et al.[167] and Gao et al.[168] Šmejkal and colleagues
were pioneers in applying spin group theory to identify several important AMs, including MnTe,
[9, 14, 24, 31]
CrSb, Mn5Si3, RuO2, Co/VNb3S6, and Fe2O3. Among these, MnTe, CrSb, Mn5Si3,
and RuO2 have been experimentally confirmed as AMs.[14, 38, 41-43, 48, 51-54, 74, 76, 78, 82, 85, 97-99] Guo
et al. [70] and Gao et al. [168] further selected altermagnetic candidates through a large-scale ab
initio study and AI search engine, respectively. Chen et al. systematically developed the Spin
Space Group theory to describe collinear magnetic configurations, identified 422 altermagnetic
spin space groups, and identified potential altermagnetic candidates using the MAGNDATA
database.[167]

Table 2. 3D altermagnetic candidates with their corresponding NSG, MSG, and Néel
temperature. The number of NSG represents in parentheses. The experimentally indicated AMs
via measurements of spin-splitting spectrum and anomalous transport are highlighted in bold.
Néel temperature
No. Compound NSG MSG Ref.
[K]
[9-10, 55, 65, 76,
1 RuO2 P42/mnm (136) P42’/mnm’ > 300
82, 96-99, 102]
2 CoNb3S6 P6322 (182) C2’2’21 25 [9, 74, 111, 169]
[14, 41-42, 83,
3 Mn5Si3 P63/mcm (193) P1" 240
85]
[24, 43, 51-54,
4 CrSb P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’m’c > 600
170]
[24, 38, 48-49,
5 MnTe P63/mmc (194) Cm’c’m 310 78, 116-117,
171-172]

29
6 LiFeP2O7 P21 (4) P21 22 [9, 173]

7 CaLaFeAgO6 Pc (7) [168]

8 Mn4Nb2O9 Cc (9) Cc 52.1(1) [167, 174]

9 CaFe5O7 P21/m (11) P21’/m’ 125 [167, 175]

10 Fe3F8(H2O)2 C2/m (12) C2’/m’ 157 [167, 176]

11 RbMnF4 P21/a (14) P1" 3.7(1) [70, 177]

12 Li2Co(SO4)2 P21/c (14) P21’/c’ 7~8 [70, 178]

13 LiFe(SO4)2 P21/c (14) P21/c 35~39 [178]

14 Li2Mn(SO4)2 P21/c (14) P21/c 6 [178]

15 Fe3(PO4)2(OH)2 P21/c (14) P21/c 160 [70, 179]

16 CuF2 P21/c (14) 69 [24, 180]

17 Li2Ni(SO4)2 P21/c (14) P21/c 15 [167, 181]

18 K2ReI6 P21/n (14) P21/c 24 [70, 182]

19 Sr2CoTeO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 15~19 [167, 183]

20 Sr2ScOsO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 92 [167, 184]

21 Sr2YRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 26 [167, 185]

22 Sr2TbIrO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 51 [167, 186]

23 Sr2LuRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 30(1) [167, 187]

24 Sr2YbRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 36 [167, 188]

25 Sr2TmRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 36 [167, 189]

26 Sr2TbRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 41 [167, 190]

27 Sr2HoRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 36 [167, 191]

28 Sr2DyRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 39.5 [167, 192]

29 Mn2ScSbO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 22.3 [167, 193]

30 CuAg(SO4)2 P21/n (14) [194-195]

31 La2LiRuO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 30 [167, 196]

32 Sr2CoTeO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 15 [70, 197]

33 Sr2Co0.9Mg0.1TeO6 P21/n (14) P21/c 13 [167, 197]

34 Sr2CoOsO6 B2/c (15) C2/c 108 [70, 198]

35 Ba3CoIr2O9 C2/c (15) C2/c 107 [70, 199]

36 FeSO4F C2/c (15) C2’/c’ 100 [70, 200]

37 FeOHSO4 C2/c (15) C2’/c’ 125 [70, 201]

38 BiCrO3 C2/c (15) C2/c [9]

39 BaCrF5 P212121 (19) P21’21’21 3.4 [70, 202]

40 FeHO2 Pmn21 (31) > RT [168, 203-204]

41 CaLaCr2O6 Pmn21 (31) [168]

42 Y2Cu2O5 Pna21 (33) Pna21 13 [70, 205-206]

43 NaFeO2 Pna21 (33) [168, 207]

44 [C(ND2)3]Cu(DCOO)3 Pna21 (33) Pn’a’21 [167, 208]

45 [C(ND2)3]Cu(DCOO)3 Pna21 (33) Pna21 [167, 208]

46 Ca3Mn2O7 Cmc21 (36) Cm’c21’ 115 [70, 209]

30
47 Ca3Cr2O7 Cmc21 (36) [168]

48 ErGe1.83 Cmc21 (36) Cmc21 6 [167, 210]

49 Cu2V2O7 Fdd2 (43) Fd’d’2 33.4(1) [70, 211]

50 ZnFeF5(H2O)2 Imm2 (44) Imm2 9(2) [70, 212]

51 Sr2MnGaO5 Ima2 (46) Im’a2’ 180 [167, 213]

52 BiFe0.5Sc0.5O3 Ima2 (46) Im’a2’ ~ 220 [167, 214]

53 [C(ND2)3]Co(DCOO)3 Pnna (52) Pn’na’ 14.04(1) [167, 208]

54 [C(ND2)3]Mn(DCOO)3 Pnna (52) Pn’n’a 8.73(2) [167, 208]

55 Fe1.5Mn1.5BO5 Pbam (55) Pbam 100 [167, 215]

56 Mn(N(CN)2)2 Pnnm (58) Pnn’m’ 16 [70, 216]

57 FeSb2 Pnnm (58) Pnn’m’ [15]

58 CrSb2 Pnnm (58) 273 [15, 217-218]

59 Eu3In2As4 Pnnm (58) [219-220]

60 Fe2WO6 Pbcn (60) Pbc’n’ [167, 221]

61 Ca2RuO4 Pbca (61) [222]

62 CaCrO3 Pbnm (62) Pb’n’m 90 [24, 223-224]

63 YCrO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ 141 [70, 225]

64 TbCrO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’m’a 158 [70, 225-226]

65 DyCrO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’m’a [167, 227]

66 ErCrO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ 133 [167, 225]

67 CeFeO3 Pbnm (62) Pnma 220 [167, 228]

68 CeFeO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ 720 [167, 228]

69 SmFeO3 Pbmn (62) Pn’m’a 480 [70, 229]

70 SmFeO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 675 [70, 229]

71 TbFeO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ 681 [70, 230]

72 DyFeO3 Pbnm (62) Pnma 73 [167, 231]

73 DyFeO3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ [167, 231]

74 ErVO3 Pbnm (62) P21/c 56 [167, 232]

75 NdCoO3 Pbnm (62) Pnma 1.20(1) [167, 233]

76 TbCr0.5Mn0.5O3 Pbnm (62) Pn’ma’ ~ 84 [167, 234]

77 κ-Cl Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 23 [31, 71, 235]

78 YVO3 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a 77 [167, 236]

79 NdVO3 Pnma (62) P21’/m’ 135 [167, 236]

80 LaCrO3 Pnma (62) Pnma 289 [70, 237]

81 LaCrO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ [70, 238]

82 ScCrO3 Pnma (62) Pnma 73 [70, 239]

83 InCrO3 Pnma (62) Pnma 93 [70, 239]

84 TlCrO3 Pnma (62) Pnma 89 [70, 239]

85 ZrCrO3 Pnma (62) [168]

86 YRuO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 97 [167, 240]

87 LaMnO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 139.5 [9, 241]

31
88 CaMnO3 Pnma (62) 120 [9, 242]

89 Ca1–xCexMnO3 Pnma (62) [9]

90 NdMnO3 Pnma (62) P21/m 85 [167, 243]

91 PrMnO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 91 [167, 243]

92 LaFeO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 750 [244]

93 NdFeO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 760 [70, 245]

94 NaOsO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 411.(2) [70, 246]

95 Fe2PO5 Pnma (62) Pnma 250 [70, 247-248]

96 NiFePO5 Pnma (62) Pnma 178(5) [70, 249]

97 CuFePO5 Pnma (62) Pnma 195(5) [70, 249]

98 Mn2SeO3F2 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 26 [70, 250]

99 MnO2 Pnma (62) [168, 251]

100 KMnF3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ 75 [24, 252]

101 Ca2MnGaO5 Pnma (62) Pnm’a’ 160 [167, 213]

102 Ca2PrCr2TaO9 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a 130 [167, 253]

103 Ca2PrCr2NbO9 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a 110 [167, 253]

104 Ho0.2Bi0.8FeO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ [167, 254]

105 Ho0.15Bi0.85FeO3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ [167, 254]

106 La0.95Ba0.05Mn0.95Ti0.05O3 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ [167, 255]

107 La0.75Bi0.25Fe0.5Cr0.5O3 Pnma (62) Pnma 350 [167, 256]

108 La0.5Sr0.5FeO2.5F0.5 Pnma (62) Pn’ma’ [167, 257]

109 BiFe0.5Sc0.5O3 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a ~ 220 [167, 214]

110 Bi0.85Ca0.15Fe0.55Mn0.45O3 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a [167, 258]

111 Ca2Fe0.875Cr0.125GaO5 Pnma (62) Pn’m’a [167, 259]

112 Pb2Mn0.6Co0.4WO6 Pmcn (62) Pm’c21’ 9 [167, 260]

113 NiCrO4 Cmcm (63) Cmcm [167, 261]

114 Tb2Ir3Ga9 Cmcm (63) Cm’cm’ 12.5 [167, 262]

115 CaIrO3 Cmcm (63) Cm’cm’ 115 [70, 263-264]

116 CoFe3O5 Cmcm (63) Cm’cm’ ~ 300 [167, 265]

117 Nd2PdGe6 Cmce (64) Cm’c’a 4 [167, 266]

118 LaCaFeO4 Cmce (64) Cm’c’a [167, 267]

119 Sr4Fe4O11 Cmmm (65) Cmm’m’ 232(4) [70, 268]

120 La2NiO3F2 Cccm (66) 49 [269-270]

121 YBaMn2O5.5 Ibam (72) C2/m ~ 140 [167, 271]

122 YBaMn2O5.5 Ibam (72) Ib’a’m ~ 120 [167, 271]

123 Y2SrCu0.6Co1.4O6.5 Ibam (72) Ib’a’m 385 [167, 272]

124 Bi0.8La0.2Fe0.5Mn0.5O3 Imma (74) Imm’a’ ~ 240 [167, 273]

125 α-MnO2 I4/m (87) [23, 274]

126 KRu4O8 I4/m (87) [24]

127 KyFe2-xSe2 I4/m (87) C2’/m’ [167, 275]

128 RbyFe2-xSe2 I4/m (87) C2’/m’ [167, 275]

32
129 NaFeO2 P41212 (92) [168, 276]

130 GdAlSi I41md (109) I41’ m’d 32 [277]

131 SrMn2V2O8 I41cd (110) Ib’a2’ 42.2 [70, 278]

132 Ba2MnSi2O7 " 21m (113)

P4 P4" 21m 2.95 [70, 279]

133 Ba2CoGe2O7 " 21m (113)

P4 Cm’m2’ 6.7 [70, 280]

134 Ca2CoSi2O7 " 21m (113)

P4 P2121’2’ 5.7 [167, 281]

135 CsCoF4 " C2 (120)

I4 I4" ’ 54 [167, 282]

136 CuFeS2 I4"2d (122) I4"2d > RT [167, 283]

137 UCr2Si2C P4/mmm (123) Pm’m’m [167, 284]

138 ZrMn2Ge4O12 P4/nbm (125) P4’/nbm’ 8 [70, 285]

139 CeMn2Ge4O12 P4/nbm (125) P4’/nbm’ 7.6 [167, 286]

140 CeMnCoGe4O12 P4/nbm (125) Pb’an’ 5.8 [167, 286]

141 Nb2FeB2 P4/mbm (127) P4/mb’m’ [80]

142 Ta2FeB2 P4/mbm (127) P4/mb’m’ [80]

143 NdB2C2 P4/mbm (127) 8.8 [168, 287]

144 Mg2FeIr5B2 P4/mbm (127) [168, 288]

145 Mg2MnIr5B2 P4/mbm (127) [168, 288]

146 Mg2NiIr5B2 P4/mbm (127) [168, 288]

147 Sc2MnIr5B2 P4/mbm (127) [168, 289]

148 MnF2 P42/mnm (136) P42’/mnm’ 67.4 [24, 290]

149 CoF2 P42/mnm (136) P42’/mnm’ 37.7 [24, 291]

150 NiF2 P42/mnm (136) Pnn’m’ 73.2 [167, 292]

151 ReO2 P42/mnm (136) P42’/mnm’ [293]

152 β-MnO2 P42/mnm (136) [23-24]

153 LiFe2F6 P42/mnm (136) P42’/mnm’ 105 [70, 294]

154 La2NiO4 P42/ncm (138) Pc’c’n 80 [70, 295]

155 La2O3FeMnSe2 I4/mmm (139) Im’m’m 76 [167, 296]

156 Sr0.7Tb0.3CoO2.9 I4/mmm (139) I4’/mmm’ ~ 300 [167, 297]

157 Sr0.7Er0.3CoO2.8 I4/mmm (139) I4’/mmm’ ~ 300 [167, 297]

158 Sr0.7Ho0.3CoO2.7 I4/mmm (139) I4’/mmm’ ~ 300 [167, 297]

159 KMnF3 I4/mcm (140) I4/mcm 86.8 [24, 252]

160 β-Fe2(PO4)O I41/amd (141) I41’/am‘d 408 [298-299]

161 Co2(PO4)O I41/amd (141) I41’/am‘d [300-301]

162 Cr2S3 R3" (148) P1" [9]

163 MnTiO3 R3c (161) Cc’ 28 [9, 302]

164 PbNiO3 R3c (161) R3c 205 [70, 303-304]

165 ZrMnO3 R3c (161) [168]

166 GaFeO3 R3c (161) Cc’ 408 [167, 305]

167 ScFeO3 R3c (161) Cc’ 360(5) [167, 306]

168 Ho0.1Bi0.9FeO3 R3c (161) R3c [167, 254]

169 Ho0.05Bi0.95FeO3 R3c (161) R3c [167, 254]

33
170 K1.62Fe4O6.62(OH)0.38 P3"1c (163) " 1c
P3 [167, 307]

171 MnCO3 R3"c (167) C2/c 31.5 [70, 308]

172 FeBO3 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 348 [70, 309]

173 FeCO3 R3"c (167) R3"c 38 [70, 310]

174 NiCO3 R3"c (167) C2/c 24.25 [70, 311]

175 CoCO3 R3"c (167) C2/c 18.1 [167, 312]

176 CoF3 R3"c (167) R3"c 460 [24, 313-314]

177 FeF3 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 394 [24, 313-314]

178 CrF3 R3"c (167) [168]

179 NiF3 R3"c (167) [168]

180 VF3 R3"c (167) [168]

181 α-Fe2O3 R3"c (167) P1" 259.1(2) [9, 131, 315]

182 α-Fe2O3 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 955 [9, 131, 315]

183 Ca3LiRuO6 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 117.0(8) [70, 316]

184 Sr3LiRuO6 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 90 [70, 317]

185 Sr3NaRuO6 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 70 [317]

186 Ca3LiOsO6 R3"c (167) C2’/c’ 117.1(9) [70, 318]

187 LaCrO3 R3"c (167) R3"c [167, 238]

Ca3Co2-xMnxO6
188 R3"c (167) R3c 16.5 [167, 319]
(x≈0.96)
189 La0.33Sr0.67FeO3 R3"c (167) C2/c 200 [9, 320]

190 VNb3Sb6 P6322 (182) C2’2’21 50 [24, 321]

191 Fe2Mo3O8 P63mc (186) P63’m’c 59(3) [167, 322]

192 Co2Mo3O8 P63mc (186) P63’m’c 42(3) [167, 322]

193 MnO P63mc (186) [168, 323]

194 MnSe P63mc (186) [324]

195 UNiGa P6"2m (189) P6"′2m’ 38 [167, 325]

196 FeS P6"2c (190) P6"’2c’ [167, 326]

197 CsCr3Sb5 P6/mmm (191) [327]

198 BaMnO3 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’cm’ 2.3 [167, 328]

199 CrNb4S8 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’m’c [70, 329]

200 Ba3NiRu2O9 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’m’c [70, 330]

201 Ba5Co5ClO13 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’m’c 110 [167, 331]

202 MnSe P63/mmc (194) 120(10) [324]

203 CaMnN2 P63/mmc (194) [168]

204 EuIn2As2 P63/mmc (194) [332]

205 CsNiCl3 P63/mmc (194) C22’21’ 4.85 [167, 333]

206 CsCoCl3 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’cm’ 20.82 [167, 334]

207 RbCoBr3 P63/mmc (194) P63’/m’cm’ 36 [167, 335]

208 MnTeLi0.003 P63/mmc (194) C2’/m’ 307 [167, 336]

209 MnSe2 " (205)

Pa3 Pca’21’ 49 [167, 337]

34
 210 MnSe2 " (205)
Pa3 Pbca [167, 338]

211 Co2Mo3N P4132 (213) C22’21’ [167]

212 Ce4Sb3 I4"3d (220) I4"′2d’ [167, 339]

213 Ce4Ge3 I4"3d (220) I4"2d ~5 [167, 340]

214 Tb2C3 I4"3d (220) Fd’d2’ 33(4) [167, 341]

215 LiTi2O4 Fd3"m (227) I41’/am’d [342]

216 Bi2RuMnO7 Fd3"m (227) Fd’d’d 20 [167, 343]

217 Er2Ru2O7 Fd3"m (227) I41’/am’d 90 [167, 344]

218 La2NiO4 Bmab 770 [295, 345]

219 La2CuO4 Bmab PAccn 316(2) [24, 346]

5. Conclusion
In this review, we explore the intriguing world of AMs, focusing on their physical properties,
the various methodologies used to induce altermagnetism, and the promising candidates for
altermagnetic materials. As a magnetic phase that has only recently been identified, the study
of AMs remains in its foundational stages, and the existence of a real material that exhibits all
the predicted features of altermagnetism has yet to be conclusively demonstrated. This nascent
field promises a wealth of uncharted physical properties, which may pave the way for
groundbreaking applications in technology. Given their unique magnetic behaviors, AMs could
revolutionize fields such as data storage, spintronics, and magnetic sensing, offering more
efficient and durable alternatives to traditional ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic materials.
The coming decades may witness significant advancements as researchers continue to uncover
the full potential of these materials, potentially leading to the development of faster, smaller,
and more energy-efficient electronic devices that leverage the unique properties of AMs.

Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (Grant No.
2022YFA1403800, No. 2022YFA1402600, and No. 2020YFA0308800), the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12274027, No. 12234003, No. 12321004 and No.
12347214). Y. M. and L. S. acknowledge support by the DFG-TRR 288-422213477/2 and
DFG-TRR 173-268565370/3. We also acknowledge the Joint Sino-German Research Projects
(Chinese Grant No. 12061131002 and German Research Foundation, DFG, Grant No.
44880005) for funding.

35
References
[1] S. A. Wolf, D. D. Awschalom, R. A. Buhrman, J. M. Daughton, S. von Molnár, M. L.
Roukes, A. Y. Chtchelkanova, D. M. Treger, Science 2001, 294, 1488.
[2] I. Žutić, J. Fabian, S. Das Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys. 2004, 76, 323.
[3] C. Chappert, A. Fert, F. N. Van Dau, Nat. Mater. 2007, 6, 813.
[4] S. D. Bader, S. S. P. Parkin, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2010, 1, 71.
[5] T. Jungwirth, X. Marti, P. Wadley, J. Wunderlich, Nat. Nanotechnol. 2016, 11, 231.
[6] V. Baltz, A. Manchon, M. Tsoi, T. Moriyama, T. Ono, Y. Tserkovnyak, Rev. Mod.
Phys. 2018, 90, 015005.
[7] L. Šmejkal, Y. Mokrousov, B. Yan, A. H. MacDonald, Nat. Phys. 2018, 14, 242.
[8] H. Chen, L. Liu, X. Zhou, Z. Meng, X. Wang, Z. Duan, G. Zhao, H. Yan, P. Qin, Z.
Liu, Adv. Mater. 2024, 36, 2310379.
[9] L. Šmejkal, R. González-Hernández, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, Sci. Adv. 2020, 6,
eaaz8809.
[10] K.-H. Ahn, A. Hariki, K.-W. Lee, J. Kuneš, Phys. Rev. B 2019, 99, 184432.
[11] S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, H. Kusunose, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 2019, 88, 123702.
[12] L. D. Yuan, Z. Wang, J. W. Luo, E. I. Rashba, A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. B 2020, 102,
014422.
[13] S. Hayami, Y. Yanagi, H. Kusunose, Phys. Rev. B 2020, 102, 144441.
[14] H. Reichlová, R. Lopes Seeger, R. González-Hernández, I. Kounta, R. Schlitz, D.
Kriegner, P. Ritzinger, M. Lammel, M. Leiviskä, V. Petříček, P. Doležal, E.
Schmoranzerová, A. Bad'ura, A. Thomas, V. Baltz, L. Michez, J. Sinova, S. T. B.
Goennenwein, T. Jungwirth, L. Šmejkal, ArXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.15651.
[15] I. I. Mazin, K. Koepernik, M. D. Johannes, R. González-Hernández, L. Šmejkal, Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2021, 118, e2108924118.
[16] S. A. Egorov, D. B. Litvin, R. A. Evarestov, J. Phys. Chem. C 2021, 125, 16147.
[17] H.-Y. Ma, M. Hu, N. Li, J. Liu, W. Yao, J.-F. Jia, J. Liu, Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 2846.
[18] L.-D. Yuan, Z. Wang, J.-W. Luo, A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. B 2021, 103, 224410.
[19] R. González-Hernández, L. Šmejkal, K. Vyborny, Y. Yahagi, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, J.
Zelezny, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021, 126, 127701.
[20] D.-F. Shao, S.-H. Zhang, M. Li, C.-B. Eom, E. Y. Tsymbal, Nat. Commun. 2021, 12,
7061.
[21] L. Šmejkal, A. B. Hellenes, R. González-Hernández, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev.
X 2022, 12, 011028.
[22] S. López-Moreno, A. H. Romero, J. Mejía-López, A. Muñoz, I. V. Roshchin, Phys. Rev.
B 2012, 85, 134110.
[23] Y. Noda, K. Ohno, S. Nakamura, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2016, 18, 13294.
[24] L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 031042.
[25] I. Mazin, P. R. X. E. The, Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 040002.
[26] P. A. McClarty, J. G. Rau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024, 132, 176702.
[27] R. M. Fernandes, V. S. de Carvalho, T. Birol, R. G. Pereira, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109,
024404.
[28] L. Attias, A. Levchenko, M. Khodas, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2402.12115.
[29] Y. Yu, H.-G. Suh, M. Roig, D. F. Agterberg, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2402.05180.
[30] I. I. Mazin, ArXiv 2022, arXiv:2203.05000.
[31] L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 040501.
[32] L.-D. Yuan, A. Zunger, Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2211966.
[33] D. F. Shao, S. H. Zhang, R. C. Xiao, Z. A. Wang, W. J. Lu, Y. P. Sun, E. Y. Tsymbal,
Phys. Rev. B 2022, 106, L180404.
[34] L.-D. Yuan, X. Zhang, C. M. Acosta, A. Zunger, Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 5301.
36
[35] D. Zhu, Z.-Y. Zhuang, Z. Wu, Z. Yan, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, 184505.
[36] Y.-X. Li, C.-C. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, 205410.
[37] X. Zhou, W. Feng, R.-W. Zhang, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, Y. Mokrousov, Y. Yao, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 2024, 132, 056701.
[38] J. Krempasky, L. Šmejkal, S. W. D'Souza, M. Hajlaoui, G. Springholz, K. Uhlirová, F.
Alarab, P. C. Constantinou, V. Strocov, D. Usanov, W. R. Pudelko, R. González-
Hernández, A. B. Hellenes, Z. Jansa, H. Reichlová, Z. Sobán, R. D. G. Betancourt, P.
Wadley, J. Sinova, D. Kriegner, J. Minár, J. H. Dil, T. Jungwirth, Nature 2024, 626,
517.
[39] S. Bhowal, N. A. Spaldin, Phys. Rev. X 2024, 14, 011019.
[40] Z. Lin, D. Chen, W. Lu, X. Liang, S. Feng, K. Yamagami, J. Osiecki, M. Leandersson,
B. Thiagarajan, J. Liu, C. Felser, J. Ma, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2402.04995.
[41] A. Badura, W. H. Campos, V. K. Bharadwaj, I. Kounta, L. Michez, M. Petit, J. Rial, M.
Leiviskä, V. Baltz, F. Krizek, D. Kriegner, J. Zemen, S. Telkamp, S. Sailler, M.
Lammel, R. Jaeschke Ubiergo, A. Birk Hellenes, R. González-Hernández, J. Sinova, T.
Jungwirth, S. T. B. Goennenwein, L. Šmejkal, H. Reichlova, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2403.12929.
[42] L. Han, X. Fu, W. He, Y. Zhu, J. Dai, W. Yang, W. Zhu, H. Bai, C. Chen, C. Wan, X.
Han, C. Song, J. Liu, F. Pan, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2403.13427.
[43] S. Reimers, L. Odenbreit, L. Šmejkal, V. N. Strocov, P. Constantinou, A. B. Hellenes,
R. J. Ubiergo, W. H. Campos, V. K. Bharadwaj, A. Chakraborty, T. Denneulin, W. Shi,
R. E. Dunin-Borkowski, S. Das, M. Kläui, J. Sinova, M. Jourdan, Nat. Commun. 2024,
15, 2116.
[44] H. G. Giil, J. Linder, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 134511.
[45] Y.-X. Li, Y. Liu, C.-C. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, L201109.
[46] L. Šmejkal, A. H. MacDonald, J. Sinova, S. Nakatsuji, T. Jungwirth, Nat. Rev. Mater.
2022, 7, 482.
[47] H. Yan, X. Zhou, P. Qin, Z. Liu, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2024, 124, 030503.
[48] S. Lee, S. Lee, S. Jung, J. Jung, D. Kim, Y. Lee, B. Seok, J. Kim, B. G. Park, L.
Šmejkal, C. J. Kang, C. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024, 132, 036702.
[49] T. Osumi, S. Souma, T. Aoyama, K. Yamauchi, A. Honma, K. Nakayama, T.
Takahashi, K. Ohgushi, T. Sato, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 115102.
[50] M. Hajlaoui, S. Wilfred D'Souza, L. Šmejkal, D. Kriegner, G. Krizman, T. Zakusylo, N.
Olszowska, O. Caha, J. Michalička, J. Sánchez-Barriga, A. Marmodoro, K. Výborný, A.
Ernst, M. Cinchetti, J. Minar, T. Jungwirth, G. Springholz, Adv. Mater. 2024, 2314076.
[51] G. Yang, Z. Li, S. Yang, J. Li, H. Zheng, W. Zhu, S. Cao, W. Zhao, J. Zhang, M. Ye, Y.
Song, L.-H. Hu, L. Yang, M. Shi, H. Yuan, Y. Zhang, Y. Xu, Y. Liu, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2405.12575.
[52] M. Zeng, M.-Y. Zhu, Y.-P. Zhu, X.-R. Liu, X.-M. Ma, Y.-J. Hao, P. Liu, G. Qu, Y.
Yang, Z. Jiang, K. Yamagami, M. Arita, X. Zhang, T.-H. Shao, Y. Dai, K. Shimada, Z.
Liu, M. Ye, Y. Huang, Q. Liu, C. Liu, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.12679.
[53] J. Ding, Z. Jiang, X. Chen, Z. Tao, Z. Liu, J. Liu, T. Li, J. Liu, Y. Yang, R. Zhang, L.
Deng, W. Jing, Y. Huang, Y. Shi, S. Qiao, Y. Wang, Y. Guo, D. Feng, D. Shen, ArXiv
2024, arXiv:2405.12687.
[54] C. Li, M. Hu, Z. Li, Y. Wang, W. Chen, B. Thiagarajan, M. Leandersson, C. Polley, T.
Kim, H. Liu, C. Fulga, M. G. Vergniory, O. Janson, O. Tjernberg, J. van den Brink,
ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.14777.
[55] O. Fedchenko, J. Minár, A. Akashdeep, S. W. D'Souza, D. Vasilyev, O. Tkach, L.
Odenbreit, Q. Nguyen, D. Kutnyakhov, N. Wind, L. Wenthaus, M. Scholz, K.
Rossnagel, M. Hoesch, M. Aeschlimann, B. Stadtmüller, M. Kläui, G. Schönhense, T.

37
 Jungwirth, A. B. Hellenes, G. Jakob, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, H. J. Elmers, Sci. Adv.
2024, 10, eadj4883.
[56] W. F. Brinkman, R. J. Elliott, Proc. R. Soc. A 1966, 294, 343.
[57] A. Corticelli, R. Moessner, P. A. McClarty, Phys. Rev. B 2022, 105, 064430.
[58] Z. Xiao, J. Zhao, Y. Li, R. Shindou, Z.-D. Song, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2307.10364.
[59] Y. Jiang, Z. Song, T. Zhu, Z. Fang, H. Weng, Z.-X. Liu, J. Yang, C. Fang, ArXiv 2023,
arXiv:2307.10371.
[60] H. Kramers, presented at Proc. Acad. Sci. Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1930.
[61] L. Šmejkal, J. Zelezny, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 118, 106402.
[62] H. J. Elmers, S. V. Chernov, S. W. D’Souza, S. P. Bommanaboyena, S. Y. Bodnar, K.
Medjanik, S. Babenkov, O. Fedchenko, D. Vasilyev, S. Y. Agustsson, C. Schlueter, A.
Gloskovskii, Y. Matveyev, V. N. Strocov, Y. Skourski, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, J. Minár,
M. Kläui, G. Schönhense, M. Jourdan, ACS Nano 2020, 14, 17554.
[63] A. Birk Hellenes, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, L. Šmejkal, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2309.01607.
[64] Y.-P. Zhu, X. Chen, X.-R. Liu, Y. Liu, P. Liu, H. Zha, G. Qu, C. Hong, J. Li, Z. Jiang,
X.-M. Ma, Y.-J. Hao, M.-Y. Zhu, W. Liu, M. Zeng, S. Jayaram, M. Lenger, J. Ding, S.
Mo, K. Tanaka, M. Arita, Z. Liu, M. Ye, D. Shen, J. Wrachtrup, Y. Huang, R.-H. He, S.
Qiao, Q. Liu, C. Liu, Nature 2024, 626, 523.
[65] T. Berlijn, P. C. Snijders, O. Delaire, H. D. Zhou, T. A. Maier, H. B. Cao, S. X. Chi, M.
Matsuda, Y. Wang, M. R. Koehler, P. R. C. Kent, H. H. Weitering, Phys. Rev. Lett.
2017, 118, 077201.
[66] S. W. Lovesey, D. D. Khalyavin, G. van der Laan, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, L121103.
[67] A. Smolyanyuk, I. I. Mazin, L. Garcia-Gassull, R. Valentí, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109,
134424.
[68] M. Hiraishi, H. Okabe, A. Koda, R. Kadono, T. Muroi, D. Hirai, Z. Hiroi, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 2024, 132, 166702.
[69] M. Milivojević, M. Orozović, S. Picozzi, M. Gmitra, S. Stavrić, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2401.15424.
[70] Y. Q. Guo, H. Liu, O. Janson, I. C. Fulga, J. van den Brink, J. I. Facio, Mater. Today
Phys. 2023, 32, 100991.
[71] M. Naka, S. Hayami, H. Kusunose, Y. Yanagi, Y. Motome, H. Seo, Nat. Commun.
2019, 10, 4305.
[72] N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, N. P. Ong, Rev. Mod. Phys. 2010,
82, 1539.
[73] X. Zhou, J.-P. Hanke, W. Feng, F. Li, G.-Y. Guo, Y. Yao, S. Blügel, Y. Mokrousov,
Phys. Rev. B 2019, 99, 104428.
[74] N. J. Ghimire, A. S. Botana, J. S. Jiang, J. J. Zhang, Y. S. Chen, J. F. Mitchell, Nat.
Commun. 2018, 9, 3280.
[75] M. Naka, S. Hayami, H. Kusunose, Y. Yanagi, Y. Motome, H. Seo, Phys. Rev. B 2020,
102, 075112.
[76] Z. X. Feng, X. R. Zhou, L. Šmejkal, L. Wu, Z. W. Zhu, H. X. Guo, R. González-
Hernández, X. N. Wang, H. Yan, P. X. Qin, X. Zhang, H. J. Wu, H. Y. Chen, Z. Meng,
L. Liu, Z. C. Xia, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Z. Q. Liu, Nat. Electron. 2022, 5, 735.
[77] M. Naka, Y. Motome, H. Seo, Phys. Rev. B 2022, 106, 195149.
[78] R. D. Gonzalez Betancourt, J. Zubáč, R. Gonzalez-Hernandez, K. Geishendorf, Z.
Šobáň, G. Springholz, K. Olejník, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, S. T. B.
Goennenwein, A. Thomas, H. Reichlová, J. Železný, D. Kriegner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023,
130, 036702.
[79] T. P. T. Nguyen, K. Yamauchi, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 107, 155126.
[80] X. Y. Hou, H. C. Yang, Z. X. Liu, P. J. Guo, Z. Y. Lu, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 107,
L161109.
38
[81] A. Fakhredine, R. M. Sattigeri, G. Cuono, C. Autieri, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, 115138.
[82] M. Wang, K. Tanaka, S. Sakai, Z. Wang, K. Deng, Y. Lyu, C. Li, D. Tian, S. Shen, N.
Ogawa, N. Kanazawa, P. Yu, R. Arita, F. Kagawa, Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 8240.
[83] M. Leiviskä, J. Rial, A. Badura, R. Lopes Seeger, I. Kounta, S. Beckert, D. Kriegner, I.
Joumard, E. Schmoranzerová, J. Sinova, O. Gomonay, A. Thomas, S. T. B.
Goennenwein, H. Reichlová, L. Šmejkal, L. Michez, T. Jungwirth, V. Baltz, ArXiv
2024, arXiv:2401.02275.
[84] Z. Zhou, X. Cheng, M. Hu, J. Liu, F. Pan, C. Song, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2403.07396.
[85] L. Han, X. Fu, R. Peng, X. Cheng, J. Dai, L. Liu, Y. Li, Y. Zhang, W. Zhu, H. Bai, Y.
Zhou, S. Liang, C. Chen, Q. Wang, X. Chen, L. Yang, Y. Zhang, C. Song, J. Liu, F.
Pan, Sci. Adv. 2024, 10, eadn0479.
[86] R. Hoyer, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, K.-H. Ahn, L. Šmejkal, A. Mook, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2405.05090.
[87] D. C. Ralph, M. D. Stiles, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2008, 320, 1190.
[88] A. Brataas, A. D. Kent, H. Ohno, Nat. Mater. 2012, 11, 372.
[89] D. Apalkov, A. Khvalkovskiy, S. Watts, V. Nikitin, X. Tang, D. Lottis, K. Moon, X.
Luo, E. Chen, A. Ong, A. Driskill-Smith, M. Krounbi, J. Emerg. Technol. Comput. Syst.
2013, 9, 13.
[90] J. Sinova, S. O. Valenzuela, J. Wunderlich, C. H. Back, T. Jungwirth, Rev. Mod. Phys.
2015, 87, 1213.
[91] I. M. Miron, K. Garello, G. Gaudin, P.-J. Zermatten, M. V. Costache, S. Auffret, S.
Bandiera, B. Rodmacq, A. Schuhl, P. Gambardella, Nature 2011, 476, 189.
[92] L. Liu, C.-F. Pai, Y. Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, R. A. Buhrman, Science 2012, 336,
555.
[93] A. Manchon, J. Železný, I. M. Miron, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, A. Thiaville, K. Garello,
P. Gambardella, Rev. Mod. Phys. 2019, 91, 035004.
[94] C. Song, R. Zhang, L. Liao, Y. Zhou, X. Zhou, R. Chen, Y. You, X. Chen, F. Pan, Prog.
Mater. Sci. 2021, 118, 100761.
[95] M. Naka, Y. Motome, H. Seo, Phys. Rev. B 2021, 103, 125114.
[96] H. Bai, L. Han, X. Y. Feng, Y. J. Zhou, R. X. Su, Q. Wang, L. Y. Liao, W. X. Zhu, X.
Z. Chen, F. Pan, X. L. Fan, C. Song, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022, 128, 197202.
[97] A. Bose, N. J. Schreiber, R. Jain, D.-F. Shao, H. P. Nair, J. Sun, X. S. Zhang, D. A.
Muller, E. Y. Tsymbal, D. G. Schlom, D. C. Ralph, Nat. Electron. 2022, 5, 267.
[98] S. Karube, T. Tanaka, D. Sugawara, N. Kadoguchi, M. Kohda, J. Nitta, Phys. Rev. Lett.
2022, 129, 137201.
[99] H. Bai, Y. C. Zhang, Y. J. Zhou, P. Chen, C. H. Wan, L. Han, W. X. Zhu, S. X. Liang,
Y. C. Su, X. F. Han, F. Pan, C. Song, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023, 130, 216701.
[100] Q. R. Cui, Y. M. Zhu, X. Yao, P. Cui, H. X. Yang, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, 024410.
[101] A. Mook, R. R. Neumann, A. Johansson, J. Henk, I. Mertig, Phys. Rev. Res. 2020, 2,
023065.
[102] Y. Zhang, H. Bai, L. Han, C. Chen, Y. Zhou, C. H. Back, F. Pan, Y. Wang, C. Song,
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024, 2313332.
[103] Y. Liu, J. Yu, C.-C. Liu, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2404.17146.
[104] M. Julliere, Phys. Lett. A 1975, 54, 225.
[105] M. N. Baibich, J. M. Broto, A. Fert, F. N. Van Dau, F. Petroff, P. Etienne, G. Creuzet,
A. Friederich, J. Chazelas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1988, 61, 2472.
[106] G. Binasch, P. Grünberg, F. Saurenbach, W. Zinn, Phys. Rev. B 1989, 39, 4828.
[107] S. S. P. Parkin, C. Kaiser, A. Panchula, P. M. Rice, B. Hughes, M. Samant, S.-H. Yang,
Nat. Mater. 2004, 3, 862.
[108] S. Yuasa, T. Nagahama, A. Fukushima, Y. Suzuki, K. Ando, Nat. Mater. 2004, 3, 868.
[109] I. V. Solovyev, Phys. Rev. B 1997, 55, 8060.
39
[110] K. Samanta, M. Ležaić, M. Merte, F. Freimuth, S. Blügel, Y. Mokrousov, J. Appl. Phys.
2020, 127, 213904.
[111] X. D. Zhou, W. X. Feng, X. X. Yang, G. Y. Guo, Y. G. Yao, Phys. Rev. B 2021, 104,
024401.
[112] G. Y. Guo, H. Ebert, Phys. Rev. B 1994, 50, 10377.
[113] G. Y. Guo, H. Ebert, Phys. Rev. B 1995, 51, 12633.
[114] W. Feng, G.-Y. Guo, J. Zhou, Y. Yao, Q. Niu, Phys. Rev. B 2015, 92, 144426.
[115] N. Wang, J. Chen, N. Ding, H. M. Zhang, S. Dong, S. S. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 2022, 106,
064435.
[116] I. Gray, Q. Deng, Q. Tian, M. Chilcote, M. Brahlek, L. Wu, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2404.05020.
[117] A. Hariki, A. Dal Din, O. J. Amin, T. Yamaguchi, A. Badura, D. Kriegner, K. W.
Edmonds, R. P. Campion, P. Wadley, D. Backes, L. S. I. Veiga, S. S. Dhesi, G.
Springholz, L. Šmejkal, K. Výborný, T. Jungwirth, J. Kuneš, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024, 132,
176701.
[118] A. Hariki, Y. Takahashi, J. Kuneš, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 094413.
[119] A. V. Kimel, T. Rasing, B. A. Ivanov, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2024, 598, 172039.
[120] S. Neusser, D. Grundler, Adv. Mater. 2009, 21, 2927.
[121] V. V. Kruglyak, S. O. Demokritov, D. Grundler, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2010, 43,
264001.
[122] A. A. Serga, A. V. Chumak, B. Hillebrands, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2010, 43, 264002.
[123] B. Lenk, H. Ulrichs, F. Garbs, M. Münzenberg, Phys. Rep. 2011, 507, 107.
[124] A. V. Chumak, V. I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, B. Hillebrands, Nat. Phys. 2015, 11, 453.
[125] D. Sander, S. O. Valenzuela, D. Makarov, C. H. Marrows, E. E. Fullerton, P. Fischer, J.
McCord, P. Vavassori, S. Mangin, P. Pirro, B. Hillebrands, A. D. Kent, T. Jungwirth, O.
Gutfleisch, C. G. Kim, A. Berger, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2017, 50, 363001.
[126] R. Cheng, Q. Niu, Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 081105.
[127] J. X. Li, C. B. Wilson, R. Cheng, M. Lohmann, M. Kavand, W. Yuan, M. Aldosary, N.
Agladze, P. Wei, M. S. Sherwin, J. Shi, Nature 2020, 578, 70.
[128] F. Keffer, C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 1952, 85, 329.
[129] O. Gomonay, V. Baltz, A. Brataas, Y. Tserkovnyak, Nat. Phys. 2018, 14, 213.
[130] S. M. Rezende, A. Azevedo, R. L. Rodríguez-Suárez, J. Appl. Phys. 2019, 126, 151101.
[131] L. Šmejkal, A. Marmodoro, K. H. Ahn, R. González-Hernández, I. Turek, S.
Mankovsky, H. Ebert, S. W. D'Souza, O. Sipr, J. Sinova, T. Jungwirth, Phys. Rev. Lett.
2023, 131, 256703.
[132] Y. Nambu, J. Barker, Y. Okino, T. Kikkawa, Y. Shiomi, M. Enderle, T. Weber, B.
Winn, M. Graves-Brook, J. M. Tranquada, T. Ziman, M. Fujita, G. E. W. Bauer, E.
Saitoh, K. Kakurai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020, 125, 027201.
[133] Q. Cui, B. Zeng, P. Cui, T. Yu, H. Yang, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, L180401.
[134] H. B. Zhang, C. Lazo, S. Blügel, S. Heinze, Y. Mokrousov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108,
056802.
[135] S. Shimizu, K. S. Takahashi, T. Hatano, M. Kawasaki, Y. Tokura, Y. Iwasa, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 2013, 111, 216803.
[136] W. J. Yu, Y. Liu, H. L. Zhou, A. X. Yin, Z. Li, Y. Huang, X. F. Duan, Nat.
Nanotechnol. 2013, 8, 952.
[137] N. Sivadas, S. Okamoto, D. Xiao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 117, 267203.
[138] Y. J. Deng, Y. J. Yu, Y. C. Song, J. Z. Zhang, N. Z. Wang, Z. Y. Sun, Y. F. Yi, Y. Z.
Wu, S. W. Wu, J. Y. Zhu, J. Wang, X. H. Chen, Y. B. Zhang, Nature 2018, 563, 94.
[139] H. W. Wang, M. L. Chen, M. J. Zhu, Y. N. Wang, B. J. Dong, X. D. Sun, X. R. Zhang,
S. M. Cao, X. X. Li, J. Q. Huang, L. Zhang, W. L. Liu, D. M. Sun, Y. Ye, K. P. Song, J.

40
 J. Wang, Y. Han, T. Yang, H. H. Guo, C. B. Qin, L. T. Xiao, J. Zhang, J. H. Chen, Z.
Han, Z. D. Zhang, Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 2302.
[140] A. Y. Gao, Y. F. Liu, C. W. Hu, J. X. Qiu, C. Tzschaschel, B. Ghosh, S. C. Ho, D.
Bérubé, R. Chen, H. P. Sun, Z. W. Zhang, X. Y. Zhang, Y. X. Wang, N. Z. Wang, Z. M.
Huang, C. Felser, A. Agarwal, T. Ding, H. J. Tien, A. Akey, J. Gardener, B. Singh, K.
Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. S. Burch, D. C. Bell, B. B. Zhou, W. B. Gao, H. Z. Lu, A.
Bansil, H. Lin, T. R. Chang, L. Fu, Q. Ma, N. Ni, S. Y. Xu, Nature 2021, 595, 521.
[141] S. S. Liu, J. X. Yu, E. Z. Zhang, Z. H. Li, Q. Sun, Y. Zhang, L. W. Cao, L. Li, M. H.
Zhao, P. L. Leng, X. Y. Cao, A. Li, J. Zou, X. F. Kou, J. D. Zang, F. X. Xiu, Nano Lett.
2023, 24, 16.
[142] T. Zhang, X. L. Xu, J. H. Guo, Y. Dai, Y. D. Ma, Nano Lett. 2024, 24, 1009.
[143] L. Mazin, R. González-Hernández, L. Šmejkal, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2309.02355.
[144] S. D. Guo, X. S. Guo, K. Cheng, K. Wang, Y. S. Ang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023, 123,
082401.
[145] Y. Zhu, T. K. Chen, Y. C. Li, L. Qiao, X. A. Ma, C. Liu, T. Hu, H. Gao, W. Ren, Nano
Lett. 2023, 24, 472.
[146] J. M. B. L. dos Santos, N. M. R. Peres, A. H. Castro, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 99, 256802.
[147] Y. Cao, V. Fatemi, S. Fang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, P. Jarillo-Herrero,
Nature 2018, 556, 43.
[148] M. Yankowitz, S. W. Chen, H. Polshyn, Y. X. Zhang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D.
Graf, A. F. Young, C. R. Dean, Science 2019, 363, 1059.
[149] A. L. Sharpe, E. J. Fox, A. W. Barnard, J. Finney, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, M. A.
Kastner, D. Goldhaber-Gordon, Science 2019, 365, 605.
[150] L. Wang, E. M. Shih, A. Ghiotto, L. Xian, D. A. Rhodes, C. Tan, M. Claassen, D. M.
Kennes, Y. S. Bai, B. Kim, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, X. Y. Zhu, J. Hone, A. Rubio,
A. N. Pasupathy, C. R. Dean, Nat. Mater. 2020, 19, 861.
[151] E. Y. Andrei, A. H. MacDonald, Nat. Mater. 2020, 19, 1265.
[152] J. Sun, M. Hu, C. Z. Zhang, L. Bai, C. X. Zhang, Q. Wang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2022,
32, 2209000.
[153] R. He, D. Wang, N. N. Luo, J. Zeng, K. Q. Chen, L. M. Tang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023,
130, 046401.
[154] S. Sheoran, S. Bhattacharya, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2024, 8, L051401.
[155] R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, V. K. Bharadwaj, T. Jungwirth, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, Phys. Rev.
B 2024, 109, 094425.
[156] A. Smolyanyuk, L. Šmejkal, I. I. Mazin, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2401.08784.
[157] J. Sødequist, T. Olsen, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2401.05992.
[158] Q. Liu, J. Kang, P. Wang, W. Gao, Y. Qi, J. Zhao, X. Jiang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2024,
2402080.
[159] S. Zeng, Y.-J. Zhao, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.03557.
[160] R.-W. Zhang, C. Cui, R. Li, J. Duan, L. Li, Z.-M. Yu, Y. Yao, ArXiv 2023,
arXiv:2306.08902.
[161] R.-W. Z. Chaoxi Cui, Yilin Han, Zhi-Ming Yu, Yugui Yao, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2405.15410.
[162] X. Chen, D. Wang, L. Y. Li, B. Sanyal, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2023, 123, 022402.
[163] P. J. Guo, Z. X. Liu, Z. Y. Lu, npj Comput. Mater. 2023, 9, 70.
[164] H. Y. Ma, M. L. Hu, N. N. Li, J. P. Liu, W. Yao, J. F. Jia, J. W. Liu, Nat. Commun.
2021, 12, 2846.
[165] A. Ablimit, Y.-L. Sun, E.-J. Cheng, Y.-B. Liu, S.-Q. Wu, H. Jiang, Z. Ren, S. Li, G.-H.
Cao, Inorg. Chem. 2018, 57, 14617.
[166] V. Leeb, A. Mook, L. Šmejkal, J. Knolle, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2312.10839.
[167] X. Chen, J. Ren, J. Li, Y. Liu, Q. Liu, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2307.12366.
41
[168] Z.-F. Gao, S. Qu, B. Zeng, Y. Liu, J.-R. Wen, H. Sun, P.-J. Guo, Z.-Y. Lu, ArXiv 2023,
arXiv:2311.04418.
[169] S. S. P. Parkin, E. A. Marseglia, P. J. Brown, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 1983, 16,
2765.
[170] W. J. Takei, D. E. Cox, G. Shirane, Phys. Rev. 1963, 129, 2008.
[171] C. Ferrer-Roca, A. Segura, C. Reig, V. Muñoz, Phys. Rev. B 2000, 61, 13679.
[172] D. Kriegner, H. Reichlova, J. Grenzer, W. Schmidt, E. Ressouche, J. Godinho, T.
Wagner, S. Y. Martin, A. B. Shick, V. V. Volobuev, G. Springholz, V. Holý, J.
Wunderlich, T. Jungwirth, K. Výborný, Phys. Rev. B 2017, 96, 214418.
[173] G. Rousse, J. Rodríguez-Carvajal, C. Wurm, C. Masquelier, Solid State Sci. 2002, 4,
973.
[174] E. Solana-Madruga, C. Ritter, C. Aguilar-Maldonado, O. Mentré, J. P. Attfield, Á. M.
Arévalo-López, Chem. Commun. 2021, 57, 8441.
[175] C. Delacotte, Y. Bréard, V. Caignaert, V. Hardy, J. M. Greneche, S. Hébert, E. Suard,
D. Pelloquin, J. Solid State Chem. 2017, 247, 13.
[176] M. Leblanc, G. Ferey, P. Lacorre, J. Pannetier, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 1991, 92, 359.
[177] M. C. Moron, F. Palacio, J. Rodriguezcarvajal, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 1993, 5, 4909.
[178] M. Reynaud, G. Rousse, J.-N. Chotard, J. Rodríguez-Carvajal, J.-M. Tarascon, Inorg.
Chem. 2013, 52, 10456.
[179] M. Poienar, F. Damay, J. Rouquette, V. Ranieri, S. Malo, A. Maignan, E. Elkaïm, J.
Haines, C. Martin, J. Solid State Chem. 2020, 287, 121357.
[180] R. J. Joenk, R. M. Bozorth, J. Appl. Phys. 1965, 36, 1167.
[181] S. Singh, P. K. Jha, M. Avdeev, W. Zhang, K. Jayanthi, A. Navrotsky, H. N. Alshareef,
P. Barpanda, Chem. Mater. 2021, 33, 6108.
[182] X. Gui, S. Calder, H. B. Cao, T. Y. Yu, W. W. Xie, J. Phys. Chem. C 2019, 123, 1645.
[183] B. Orayech, L. Ortega-San-Martín, I. Urcelay-Olabarria, L. Lezama, T. Rojo, M. I.
Arriortua, J. M. Igartua, Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 13716.
[184] A. E. Taylor, R. Morrow, D. J. Singh, S. Calder, M. D. Lumsden, P. M. Woodward, A.
D. Christianson, Phys. Rev. B 2015, 91, 100406.
[185] P. Kayser, B. Ranjbar, B. J. Kennedy, M. Avdeev, J. Solid State Chem. 2017, 249, 154.
[186] H. Daijitsu, W. Makoto, H. Yukio, O. Kenji, Y. Yasuo, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2000,
12, 3229.
[187] P. D. Battle, C. W. Jones, J. Solid State Chem. 1989, 78, 108.
[188] S. Sharma, D. T. Adroja, C. Ritter, D. Khalyavin, P. Manuel, G. B. G. Stenning, A.
Sundaresan, A. D. Hillier, P. P. Deen, D. I. Khomskii, S. Langridge, Phys. Rev. B 2020,
102, 134412.
[189] Y. Doi, Y. Hinatsu, A. Nakamura, Y. Ishii, Y. Morii, J. Mater. Chem. 2003, 13, 1758.
[190] Y. Doi, Y. Hinatsu, K.-i. Oikawa, Y. Shimojo, Y. Morii, J. Mater. Chem. 2000, 10,
1731.
[191] Y. Doi, Y. Hinatsu, K.-i. Oikawa, Y. Shimojo, Y. Morii, J. Mater. Chem. 2000, 10, 797.
[192] D. T. Adroja, S. Sharma, C. Ritter, A. D. Hillier, D. Le, C. V. Tomy, R. Singh, R. I.
Smith, M. Koza, A. Sundaresan, S. Langridge, Phys. Rev. B 2020, 101, 094413.
[193] E. Solana-Madruga, A. J. Dos santos-García, A. M. Arévalo-López, D. Ávila-Brande,
C. Ritter, J. P. Attfield, R. Sáez-Puche, Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 20441.
[194] M. Domański, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala, Chem. - Eur. J. 2023, 29, e202302042.
[195] H. O. Jeschke, M. Shimizu, I. I. Mazin, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2403.02201.
[196] P. D. Battle, C. P. Grey, M. Hervieu, C. Martin, C. A. Moore, Y. Paik, J. Solid State
Chem. 2003, 175, 20.
[197] B. Orayech, L. Ortega-San-Martín, I. Urcelay-Olabarria, L. Lezama, T. Rojo, M. I.
Arriortua, J. M. Igartua, Dalton Trans. 2015, 44, 13716.

42
[198] B. Yan, A. K. Paul, S. Kanungo, M. Reehuis, A. Hoser, D. M. Többens, W. Schnelle, R.
C. Williams, T. Lancaster, F. Xiao, J. S. Möller, S. J. Blundell, W. Hayes, C. Felser, M.
Jansen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 112, 147202.
[199] C. Garg, D. Roy, M. Lonsky, P. Manuel, A. Cervellino, J. Müller, M. Kabir, S. Nair,
Phys. Rev. B 2021, 103, 014437.
[200] B. C. Melot, G. Rousse, J. N. Chotard, M. Ati, J. Rodríguez-Carvajal, M. C. Kemei, J.
M. Tarascon, Chem. Mater. 2011, 23, 2922.
[201] M. Avdeev, S. Singh, P. Barpanda, C. D. Ling, Inorg. Chem. 2021, 60, 15128.
[202] H. Holler, W. Kurtz, D. Babel, W. Knop, Z. Naturforsch., B: J. Chem. Sci. 1982, 37, 54.
[203] N. B. Bolotina, V. N. Molchanov, T. I. Dyuzheva, L. M. Lityagina, N. A. Bendeliani,
Crystallogr. Rep. 2008, 53, 960.
[204] O. Ikeda, T. Sakamaki, T. Mitsui, K. Fujiwara, C. A. McCammon, A. Suzuki, J. Phys.
Soc. Jpn. 2023, 92, 043702.
[205] R. Troc, Z. Bukowski, R. Horyn, J. Klamut, Phys. Lett. A 1987, 125, 222.
[206] J. L. Garciamunoz, J. Rodriguezcarvajal, X. Obradors, M. Valletregi, J. Gonzalezcalbet,
M. Parras, Phys. Rev. B 1991, 44, 4716.
[207] I. E. Grey, B. F. Hoskins, I. C. Madsen, J. Solid State Chem. 1990, 85, 202.
[208] M. Viswanathan, S. G. Bhat, A. K. Bera, J. Rodríguez-Carvajal, J. Phys. Chem. C 2019,
123, 18551.
[209] M. V. Lobanov, M. Greenblatt, E. N. Caspi, J. D. Jorgensen, D. V. Sheptyakov, B. H.
Toby, C. E. Botez, P. W. Stephens, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2004, 16, 5339.
[210] O. Oleksyn, P. Schobinger-Papamantellos, C. Ritter, C. H. de Groot, K. H. J. Buschow,
J. Alloys Compd. 1997, 252, 53.
[211] G. Gitgeatpong, Y. Zhao, M. Avdeev, R. O. Piltz, T. J. Sato, K. Matan, Phys. Rev. B
2015, 92, 024423.
[212] Y. Laligant, J. Pannetier, G. Ferey, J. Solid State Chem. 1987, 66, 242.
[213] V. Y. Pomjakushin, A. M. Balagurov, T. V. Elzhov, D. V. Sheptyakov, P. Fischer, D. I.
Khomskii, V. Y. Yushankhai, A. M. Abakumov, M. G. Rozova, E. V. Antipov, M. V.
Lobanov, S. J. L. Billinge, Phys. Rev. B 2002, 66, 184412.
[214] D. D. Khalyavin, A. N. Salak, N. M. Olekhnovich, A. V. Pushkarev, Y. V. Radyush, P.
Manuel, I. P. Raevski, M. L. Zheludkevich, M. G. S. Ferreira, Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89,
174414.
[215] F. Damay, J. Sottmann, F. Lainé, L. Chaix, M. Poienar, P. Beran, E. Elkaim, F. Fauth,
L. Nataf, A. Guesdon, A. Maignan, C. Martin, Phys. Rev. B 2020, 101, 094418.
[216] A. Lappas, A. S. Wills, M. A. Green, K. Prassides, M. Kurmoo, Phys. Rev. B 2003, 67,
144406.
[217] Y. Takahashi, T. Harada, T. Kanomata, K. Koyama, H. Yoshida, T. Kaneko, M.
Motokawa, M. Kataoka, J. Alloys Compd. 2008, 459, 78.
[218] G. Kuhn, S. Mankovsky, H. Ebert, M. Regus, W. Bensch, Phys. Rev. B 2013, 87,
085113.
[219] A. B. Childs, S. Baranets, S. Bobev, J. Solid State Chem. 2019, 278, 120889.
[220] Y. Zhao, H. Bae, Y. Jiang, Y. Li, C.-X. Liu, B. Yan, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2403.06304.
[221] H. Pinto, M. Melamud, H. Shaked, Acta Crystallogr., Sect. A 1977, 33, 663.
[222] G. Cuono, R. M. Sattigeri, J. Skolimowski, C. Autieri, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2023,
586, 171163.
[223] J. F. Weiher, B. L. Chamberland, J. L. Gillson, J. Solid State Chem. 1971, 3, 529.
[224] A. C. Komarek, S. V. Streltsov, M. Isobe, T. Möller, M. Hoelzel, A. Senyshyn, D.
Trots, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, T. Hansen, H. Gotou, T. Yagi, Y. Ueda, V. I. Anisimov,
M. Grüeninger, D. I. Khomskii, M. Braden, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 101, 167204.
[225] E. F. Bertaut, G. Bassi, G. Buisson, P. Burlet, J. Chappert, A. Delapalme, J. Mareschal,
G. Roult, R. Aleonard, R. Pauthenet, J. P. Rebouillat, J. Appl. Phys. 1966, 37, 1038.
43
[226] E. F. Bertaut, J. Mareschal, G. F. De Vries, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 1967, 28, 2143.
[227] B. Van Laar, J. B. Elemans, J. Phys. France 1971, 32, 301.
[228] C. Ritter, M. Ceretti, W. Paulus, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2021, 33, 215802.
[229] C. Y. Kuo, Y. Drees, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, L. Zhao, L. Vasylechko, D. Sheptyakov, A.
M. T. Bell, T. W. Pi, H. J. Lin, M. K. Wu, E. Pellegrin, S. M. Valvidares, Z. W. Li, P.
Adler, A. Todorova, R. Küchler, A. Steppke, L. H. Tjeng, Z. Hu, A. C. Komarek, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 2014, 113, 217203.
[230] E. F. Bertaut, J. Chappert, J. Mareschal, J. P. Rebouillat, J. Sivardière, Solid State
Commun. 1967, 5, 293.
[231] C. Ritter, R. Vilarinho, J. A. Moreira, M. Mihalik, M. Mihalik, S. Savvin, J. Phys.:
Condens.Matter 2022, 34, 265801.
[232] M. Reehuis, C. Ulrich, K. Prokeš, S. Mat'aš, J. Fujioka, S. Miyasaka, Y. Tokura, B.
Keimer, Phys. Rev. B 2011, 83, 064404.
[233] I. Plaza, E. Palacios, J. Bartolomé, S. Rosenkranz, C. Ritter, A. Furrer, Phys. B 1997,
234-236, 632.
[234] M. Staruch, V. Sharma, C. dela Cruz, R. Ramprasad, M. Jain, J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116,
033919.
[235] J. M. Williams, A. M. Kini, H. H. Wang, K. D. Carlson, U. Geiser, L. K. Montgomery,
G. J. Pyrka, D. M. Watkins, J. M. Kommers, Inorg. Chem. 1990, 29, 3272.
[236] M. Reehuis, C. Ulrich, P. Pattison, B. Ouladdiaf, M. C. Rheinstädter, M. Ohl, L. P.
Regnault, M. Miyasaka, Y. Tokura, B. Keimer, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73, 094440.
[237] A. Martinelli, M. Ferretti, M. R. Cimberle, C. Ritter, Mater. Res. Bull. 2011, 46, 190.
[238] J. S. Zhou, J. A. Alonso, A. Muoñz, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, J. B. Goodenough, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 2011, 106, 057201.
[239] L. Ding, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, F. Orlandi, Y. Kumagai, F. Oba, W. Yi, A. A.
Belik, Phys. Rev. B 2017, 95, 054432.
[240] K. Ji, A. Paul, E. Solana-Madruga, A. M. Arevalo-Lopez, U. V. Waghmare, J. P.
Attfield, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2020, 4, 091402.
[241] F. Moussa, M. Hennion, J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, H. Moudden, L. Pinsard, A.
Revcolevschi, Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 15149.
[242] J. B. MacChesney, H. J. Williams, J. F. Potter, R. C. Sherwood, Phys. Rev. 1967, 164,
779.
[243] S. Quezel-Ambrunaz, Bull. Mineral. 1968, 91, 339.
[244] W. C. Koehler, E. O. Wollan, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 1957, 2, 100.
[245] W. Sławiński, R. Przeniosło, I. Sosnowska, E. Suard, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2005,
17, 4605.
[246] S. Calder, V. O. Garlea, D. F. McMorrow, M. D. Lumsden, M. B. Stone, J. C. Lang, J.
W. Kim, J. A. Schlueter, Y. G. Shi, K. Yamaura, Y. S. Sun, Y. Tsujimoto, A. D.
Christianson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 257209.
[247] A. Modaressi, A. Courtois, R. Gerardin, B. Malaman, C. Gleitzer, J. Solid State Chem.
1981, 40, 301.
[248] J. K. Warner, A. K. Cheetham, D. E. Cox, R. B. Von Dreele, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992,
114, 6074.
[249] N. El Khayati, R. Cherkaoui El Moursli, J. Rodríguez-Carvajal, G. André, N.
Blanchard, F. Bourée, G. Collin, T. Roisnel, Eur. Phys. J. B 2001, 22, 429.
[250] T. Zhu, O. Mentré, H. Yang, Y. Jin, X. Zhang, Á. M. Arévalo-López, C. Ritter, K.-Y.
Choi, M. Lü, Inorg. Chem. 2021, 60, 12001.
[251] N. Curetti, D. Bernasconi, P. Benna, G. Fiore, A. Pavese, Phys. Chem. Miner. 2021, 48,
43.
[252] K. S. Knight, D. D. Khalyavin, P. Manuel, C. L. Bull, P. McIntyre, J. Alloys Compd.
2020, 842, 155935.
44
[253] E. C. Hunter, S. Mousdale, P. D. Battle, M. Avdeev, J. Solid State Chem. 2019, 269, 80.
[254] J. Singh, A. Agarwal, S. Sanghi, P. Prakash, A. Das, C. L. Prajapat, M. Rangi, AIP Adv.
2019, 9, 025110.
[255] J. B. A. A. Elemans, B. Van Laar, K. R. Van Der Veen, B. O. Loopstra, J. Solid State
Chem. 1971, 3, 238.
[256] S. A. Ivanov, P. Beran, G. Bazuev, R. Tellgren, T. Sarkar, P. Nordblad, R. Mathieu, J.
Solid State Chem. 2017, 254, 166.
[257] O. Clemens, F. J. Berry, A. J. Wright, K. S. Knight, J. M. Perez-Mato, J. M. Igartua, P.
R. Slater, J. Solid State Chem. 2013, 206, 158.
[258] V. A. Khomchenko, M. Das, J. A. Paixão, M. V. Silibin, D. V. Karpinsky, J. Alloys
Compd. 2022, 901, 163682.
[259] R. Dhal, P. N. Lekshmi, R. Singh, A. Das, A. K. Sinha, P. N. Santhosh, J. Solid State
Chem. 2018, 265, 417.
[260] F. Orlandi, L. Righi, F. Mezzadri, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, D. Delmonte, C.
Pernechele, R. Cabassi, F. Bolzoni, M. Solzi, G. Calestani, Inorg. Chem. 2016, 55,
4381.
[261] M. Pernet, G. Quezel, J. Coing-Boyat, E.-F. Bertaut, Bull. Mineral. 1969, 92, 264.
[262] M. A. Khan, Q. Zhang, J.-K. Bao, R. S. Fishman, A. S. Botana, Y. Choi, G. Fabbris, D.
Haskel, J. Singleton, J. F. Mitchell, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2019, 3, 114411.
[263] K. Ohgushi, H. Gotou, T. Yagi, Y. Kiuchi, F. Sakai, Y. Ueda, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 74,
241104.
[264] K. Ohgushi, J.-i. Yamaura, H. Ohsumi, K. Sugimoto, S. Takeshita, A. Tokuda, H.
Takagi, M. Takata, T.-h. Arima, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 110, 217212.
[265] K. H. Hong, E. Solana-Madruga, M. Coduri, J. P. Attfield, Inorg. Chem. 2018, 57,
14347.
[266] B. Penc, S. Baran, A. Hoser, J. Przewoźnik, A. Szytuła, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2020,
514, 167152.
[267] M. M. Nguyen-Trut-Dinh, M. Vlasse, M. Perrin, G. Le Flem, J. Solid State Chem. 1980,
32, 1.
[268] M. Schmidt, M. Hofmann, S. J. Campbell, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2003, 15, 8691.
[269] K. Wissel, J. Heldt, P. B. Groszewicz, S. Dasgupta, H. Breitzke, M. Donzelli, A. I.
Waidha, A. D. Fortes, J. Rohrer, P. R. Slater, G. Buntkowsky, O. Clemens, Inorg.
Chem. 2018, 57, 6549.
[270] K. Wissel, A. M. Malik, S. Vasala, S. Plana-Ruiz, U. Kolb, P. R. Slater, I. da Silva, L.
Alff, J. Rohrer, O. Clemens, Chem. Mater. 2020, 32, 3160.
[271] C. Perca, L. Pinsard-Gaudart, A. Daoud-Aladine, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, J. Rodríguez-
Carvajal, Chem. Mater. 2005, 17, 1835.
[272] R. K. Li, C. Greaves, Phys. Rev. B 2000, 62, 14149.
[273] J. Bertinshaw, D. L. Cortie, Z. X. Cheng, M. Avdeev, A. J. Studer, F. Klose, C. Ulrich,
X. L. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 144422.
[274] Y. D. Kondrashev, A. Zaslavskii, Izv. Acad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Fiz 1951, 15, 179.
[275] V. Y. Pomjakushin, E. V. Pomjakushina, A. Krzton-Maziopa, K. Conder, Z.
Shermadini, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2011, 23, 156003.
[276] I. E. Grey, R. J. Hill, A. W. Hewat, Z. Kristallogr. - Cryst. Mater. 1990, 193, 51.
[277] J. Nag, B. Das, S. Bhowal, Y. Nishioka, B. Bandyopadhyay, S. Kumar, K. Kuroda, A.
Kimura, K. G. Suresh, A. Alam, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2312.11980.
[278] A. K. Bera, B. Lake, W. D. Stein, S. Zander, Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 094402.
[279] M. Sale, Q. Xia, M. Avdeev, C. D. Ling, Inorg. Chem. 2019, 58, 4164.
[280] V. Hutanu, A. Sazonov, M. Meven, H. Murakawa, Y. Tokura, S. Bordács, I. Kézsmárki,
B. Náfrádi, Phys. Rev. B 2012, 86, 104401.

45
[281] A. Sazonov, V. Hutanu, M. Meven, G. Roth, H. Murakawa, Y. Tokura, V. K. Guduru,
L. C. J. M. Peters, U. Zeitler, L. F. Kiss, D. Szaller, B. Náfrádi, I. Kézsmárki, Phys. Rev.
B 2017, 95, 174431.
[282] P. Lacorre, J. Pannetier, T. Fleischer, R. Hoppe, G. Ferey, J. Solid State Chem. 1991,
93, 37.
[283] G. Donnay, L. M. Corliss, J. D. H. Donnay, N. Elliott, J. M. Hastings, Phys. Rev. 1958,
112, 1917.
[284] P. Lemoine, A. Vernière, M. Pasturel, G. Venturini, B. Malaman, Inorg. Chem. 2018,
57, 2546.
[285] D. Xu, M. Sale, M. Avdeev, C. D. Ling, P. D. Battle, Dalton Trans. 2017, 46, 6921.
[286] D. Xu, M. Avdeev, P. D. Battle, X.-Q. Liu, Inorg. Chem. 2017, 56, 2750.
[287] K. Ohoyama, T. Onimaru, H. Onodera, H. Yamauchi, Y. Yamaguchi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.
2000, 69, 2623.
[288] W. Jung, J. Schiffer, Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 1990, 581, 135.
[289] E. A. Nagelschmitz, W. Jung, Chem. Mater. 1998, 10, 3189.
[290] P. Heller, G. B. Benedek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1962, 8, 428.
[291] W. Jauch, M. Reehuis, A. J. Schultz, Acta Crystallogr., Sect. A: Found. Adv. 2004, 60,
51.
[292] P. J. Brown, J. B. Forsyth, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 1981, 14, 5171.
[293] A. Chakraborty, R. González Hernández, L. Šmejkal, J. Sinova, Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109,
144421.
[294] G. Shachar, J. Makovsky, H. Shaked, Phys. Rev. B 1972, 6, 1968.
[295] J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, M. T. Fernandez-Diaz, J. L. Martinez, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter
1991, 3, 3215.
[296] S. Landsgesell, E. Blumenröther, K. Prokeš, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 2013, 25,
086004.
[297] V. Cascos, J. L. Martínez, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, J. A. Alonso, J. Alloys Compd. 2020,
844, 156121.
[298] S.-S. Zhang, Z.-A. Wang, B. Li, S.-H. Zhang, R.-C. Xiao, L.-X. Liu, X. Luo, W. J. Lu,
M. Tian, Y. P. Sun, E. Y. Tsymbal, H. Du, D.-F. Shao, ArXiv 2023, arXiv:2310.13271.
[299] M. Ijjaali, B. Malaman, C. Gleitzer, J. K. Warner, J. A. Hriljac, A. K. Cheetham, J.
Solid State Chem. 1990, 86, 195.
[300] G. Wang, M. Valldor, E. T. Spielberg, A.-V. Mudring, Inorg. Chem. 2014, 53, 3072.
[301] T. He, L. Li, C. Cui, R.-W. Zhang, Z.-M. Yu, G. Liu, X. Zhang, ArXiv 2024,
arXiv:2403.00371.
[302] A. M. Arévalo-López, J. P. Attfield, Phys. Rev. B 2013, 88, 104416.
[303] Y. Inaguma, K. Tanaka, T. Tsuchiya, D. Mori, T. Katsumata, T. Ohba, K.-i. Hiraki, T.
Takahashi, H. Saitoh, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133, 16920.
[304] X. F. Hao, A. Stroppa, S. Picozzi, A. Filippetti, C. Franchini, Phys. Rev. B 2012, 86,
014116.
[305] H. Niu, M. J. Pitcher, A. J. Corkett, S. Ling, P. Mandal, M. Zanella, K. Dawson, P.
Stamenov, D. Batuk, A. M. Abakumov, C. L. Bull, R. I. Smith, C. A. Murray, S. J. Day,
B. Slater, F. Cora, J. B. Claridge, M. J. Rosseinsky, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017, 139, 1520.
[306] M.-R. Li, U. Adem, S. R. C. McMitchell, Z. Xu, C. I. Thomas, J. E. Warren, D. V.
Giap, H. Niu, X. Wan, R. G. Palgrave, F. Schiffmann, F. Cora, B. Slater, T. L. Burnett,
M. G. Cain, A. M. Abakumov, G. van Tendeloo, M. F. Thomas, M. J. Rosseinsky, J. B.
Claridge, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 3737.
[307] R. Albrecht, J. Hunger, T. Block, R. Pöttgen, A. Senyshyn, T. Doert, M. Ruck,
ChemistryOpen 2019, 8, 74.
[308] A. S. Borovik-Romanov, M. P. Orlova, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 1957, 4, 531.
[309] M. Pernet, D. Elmale, J.-C. Joubert, Solid State Commun. 1970, 8, 1583.
46
[310] D. B. Langille, D. C. O'Shea, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 1977, 38, 1161.
[311] R. Plumier, M. Sougi, M. Lecomte, R. Saint‐James, J. Appl. Phys. 1985, 57, 3261.
[312] P. J. Brown, P. J. Welford, J. B. Forsyth, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 1973, 6, 1405.
[313] E. O. Wollan, H. R. Child, W. C. Koehler, M. K. Wilkinson, Phys. Rev. 1958, 112,
1132.
[314] S. Lee, S. Torii, Y. Ishikawa, M. Yonemura, T. Moyoshi, T. Kamiyama, Phys. B 2018,
551, 94.
[315] A. H. Hill, F. Jiao, P. G. Bruce, A. Harrison, W. Kockelmann, C. Ritter, Chem. Mater.
2008, 20, 4891.
[316] S. Calder, D. J. Singh, V. O. Garlea, M. D. Lumsden, Y. G. Shi, K. Yamaura, A. D.
Christianson, Phys. Rev. B 2017, 96, 184426.
[317] D. G. Porter, M. S. Senn, D. D. Khalyavin, A. Cortese, N. Waterfield-Price, P. G.
Radaelli, P. Manuel, H. C. zur-Loye, C. Mazzoli, A. Bombardi, Phys. Rev. B 2016, 94,
134404.
[318] S. Calder, M. D. Lumsden, V. O. Garlea, J. W. Kim, Y. G. Shi, H. L. Feng, K.
Yamaura, A. D. Christianson, Phys. Rev. B 2012, 86, 054403.
[319] Y. J. Choi, H. T. Yi, S. Lee, Q. Huang, V. Kiryukhin, S. W. Cheong, Phys. Rev. Lett.
2008, 100, 047601.
[320] F. Li, V. Pomjakushin, T. Mazet, R. Sibille, B. Malaman, R. Yadav, L. Keller, M.
Medarde, K. Conder, E. Pomjakushina, Phys. Rev. B 2018, 97, 174417.
[321] K. Lu, D. Sapkota, L. DeBeer-Schmitt, Y. Wu, H. B. Cao, N. Mannella, D. Mandrus, A.
A. Aczel, G. J. MacDougall, Phys. Rev. Mater. 2020, 4, 054416.
[322] D. Bertrand, H. Kerner-Czeskleba, J. Phys. France 1975, 36, 379.
[323] K. M. Nam, Y.-I. Kim, Y. Jo, S. M. Lee, B. G. Kim, R. Choi, S.-I. Choi, H. Song, J. T.
Park, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 8392.
[324] M. J. Grzybowski, C. Autieri, J. Domagala, C. Krasucki, A. Kaleta, S. Kret, K. Gas, M.
Sawicki, R. Bożek, J. Suffczyński, W. Pacuski, Nanoscale 2024, 16, 6259.
[325] H. Maletta, R. A. Robinson, A. C. Lawson, V. Sechovský, L. Havela, L. Jirman, M.
Divis, E. Brück, F. R. De Boer, A. V. Andreev, K. H. J. Buschow, P. Burlet, J. Magn.
Magn. Mater. 1992, 104-107, 21.
[326] A. F. Andresen, N. Hofman-Bang, T. A. Bak, E. Varde, G. Westin, Acta Chem. Scand.
1960, 14, 919.
[327] C. Xu, S. Wu, G.-X. Zhi, G. Cao, J. Dai, C. Cao, X. Wang, H.-Q. Lin, ArXiv 2023,
arXiv:2309.14812.
[328] A. N. Christensen, G. Ollivier, J. Solid State Chem. 1972, 4, 131.
[329] B. Van Laar, H. M. Rietveld, D. J. W. Ijdo, J. Solid State Chem. 1971, 3, 154.
[330] P. Lightfoot, P. D. Battle, J. Solid State Chem. 1990, 89, 174.
[331] O. Mentré, M. Kauffmann, G. Ehora, S. Daviero-Minaud, F. Abraham, P. Roussel, Solid
State Sci. 2008, 10, 471.
[332] G. Cuono, R. M. Sattigeri, C. Autieri, T. Dietl, Phys. Rev. B 2023, 108, 075150.
[333] W. B. Yelon, D. E. Cox, Phys. Rev. B 1973, 7, 2024.
[334] M. Mekata, K. Adachi, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 1978, 44, 806.
[335] V. Minkiewicz, D. Cox, G. Shirane, J. Phys. Colloques 1971, 32, 892.
[336] D. H. Moseley, K. M. Taddei, J. Yan, M. A. McGuire, S. Calder, M. M. H. Polash, D.
Vashaee, X. Zhang, H. Zhao, D. S. Parker, R. S. Fishman, R. P. Hermann, Phys. Rev.
Mater. 2022, 6, 014404.
[337] T. Chattopadhyay, J. Rossat-Mignod, H. Fjellvåg, Solid State Commun. 1987, 63, 65.
[338] L. M. Corliss, N. Elliott, J. M. Hastings, J. Appl. Phys. 1958, 29, 391.
[339] R. Nirmala, A. V. Morozkin, O. Isnard, A. K. Nigam, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2009,
321, 188.
[340] A. V. Morozkin, O. Isnard, R. Nirmala, S. K. Malik, J. Alloys Compd. 2009, 486, 497.
47
[341] M. Atoji, J. Chem. Phys. 1971, 54, 3504.
[342] T. He, X. Zhang, Y. Liu, X. Dai, L. Wang, G. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 2021, 104, 045143.
[343] R. Martínez-Coronado, J. A. Alonso, V. Cascos, M. T. Fernández-Díaz, J. Power
Sources 2014, 247, 876.
[344] N. Taira, M. Wakeshima, Y. Hinatsu, A. Tobo, K. Ohoyama, J. Solid State Chem. 2003,
176, 165.
[345] F. Bernardini, M. Fiebig, A. Cano, ArXiv 2024, arXiv:2401.12910.
[346] M. Reehuis, C. Ulrich, K. Prokeš, A. Gozar, G. Blumberg, S. Komiya, Y. Ando, P.
Pattison, B. Keimer, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73, 144513.

48
 This review provides an overview of the recent progress in the study of emergent magnetic
phase known as altermagnetism. The unconventional properties of altermagnets, including
lifted Kramer degeneracy, anomalous and spin transport properties, magneto-optical effects and
chiral magnons, along with several avenues to inducing altermagnetism are introduced.
Additionally, the two-dimensional and three-dimensional altermagnets discovered so far are
summarized.

Ling Bai, Wanxiang Feng*, Siyuan Liu, Libor Šmejkal, Yuriy Mokrousov, Yugui Yao*

Altermagnetism: Exploring New Frontiers in Magnetism and Spintronics

49