Non-collinear vs collinear description of the Ir-based one-$t_{2g}$ -hole perovskite-related compounds: SrIrO$_3$ and Sr$_2$IrO$_4$
J. L. Lado, V. Pardo

TL;DR
This study compares collinear and non-collinear electronic structure calculations for iridates, revealing that non-collinear methods better capture the $j_{eff}$=1/2 state, with similar band structures but different orbital character descriptions.
Contribution
It demonstrates the necessity of non-collinear calculations to accurately describe the $j_{eff}$=1/2 state in iridates, highlighting differences from collinear approaches and their implications.
Findings
Non-collinear calculations better reproduce the $j_{eff}$=1/2 state.
Both solutions have similar band structures despite different orbital descriptions.
Electronic structure and magnetism are sensitive to strain, spin-orbit coupling, and Coulomb interactions.
Abstract
We present an analysis of the electronic structure of perovskite-related iridates, 5d electron compounds where a subtle interplay between spin-orbit coupling, tetragonal distortions and electron correlations determines the electronic structure properties. We suggest via electronic structure calculations that a non-collinear calculation is required to obtain solutions close to the usually quoted = 1/2 state to describe the hole in the cation, while a collinear calculation yields a different solution, the hole is in a simpler xz/yz complex combination with a smaller ratio. We describe what the implications of this are in terms of the electronic structure; surprisingly, both solutions barely differ in terms of their band structure, and are similar to the one obtained by a tight binding model involving orbitals with mean field…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
