<?xml-model href='http://www.tei-c.org/release/xml/tei/custom/schema/relaxng/tei_all.rng' schematypens='http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0'?><TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0">
	<teiHeader>
		<fileDesc>
			<titleStmt><title level='a'>Magnonic superradiant phase transition</title></titleStmt>
			<publicationStmt>
				<publisher>Nature</publisher>
				<date>12/01/2022</date>
			</publicationStmt>
			<sourceDesc>
				<bibl> 
					<idno type="par_id">10474723</idno>
					<idno type="doi">10.1038/s42005-021-00785-z</idno>
					<title level='j'>Communications Physics</title>
<idno>2399-3650</idno>
<biblScope unit="volume">5</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope>					

					<author>Motoaki Bamba</author><author>Xinwei Li</author><author>Nicolas Marquez Peraca</author><author>Junichiro Kono</author>
				</bibl>
			</sourceDesc>
		</fileDesc>
		<profileDesc>
			<abstract><ab><![CDATA[<title>Abstract</title> <p>In the superradiant phase transition (SRPT), coherent light and matter fields are expected to appear spontaneously in a coupled light–matter system in thermal equilibrium. However, such an equilibrium SRPT is forbidden in the case of charge-based light–matter coupling, known as no-go theorems. Here, we show that the low-temperature phase transition of ErFeO<sub>3</sub>at a critical temperature of approximately 4K is an equilibrium SRPT achieved through coupling between Fe<sup>3+</sup>magnons and Er<sup>3+</sup>spins. By verifying the efficacy of our spin model using realistic parameters evaluated via terahertz magnetospectroscopy and magnetization experiments, we demonstrate that the cooperative, ultrastrong magnon–spin coupling causes the phase transition. In contrast to prior studies on laser-driven non-equilibrium SRPTs in atomic systems, the magnonic SRPT in ErFeO<sub>3</sub>occurs in thermal equilibrium in accordance with the originally envisioned SRPT, thereby yielding a unique ground state of a hybrid system in the ultrastrong coupling regime.</p>]]></ab></abstract>
		</profileDesc>
	</teiHeader>
	<text><body xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><p>I n 1973, it was proposed <ref type="bibr">1,</ref><ref type="bibr">2</ref> that photon and matter fields spontaneously appear in thermal equilibrium as a static transverse electromagnetic field and a static polarization, respectively, when the photon-matter coupling strength exceeds a certain threshold, entering the so-called ultrastrong coupling regime <ref type="bibr">[3]</ref><ref type="bibr">[4]</ref><ref type="bibr">[5]</ref> . This phenomenon is known as the superradiant phase transition (SRPT) or Dicke phase transition, as the Dicke model was used in the theoretical calculations <ref type="bibr">1,</ref><ref type="bibr">2</ref> , having been originally developed to describe the superradiance phenomena <ref type="bibr">6</ref> .</p><p>The realization of the SRPT in thermal equilibrium may be expected to provide a new avenue for decoherence-robust quantum technology because the ground state of the Dicke model provides a quantum-squeezed vacuum on a photon-atom two-mode basis <ref type="bibr">[7]</ref><ref type="bibr">[8]</ref><ref type="bibr">[9]</ref><ref type="bibr">[10]</ref><ref type="bibr">[11]</ref> , and perfect ideal squeezing is obtained at the SRPT critical point, as recently found both numerically and analytically <ref type="bibr">12,</ref><ref type="bibr">13</ref> . In contrast to the standard squeezed state generation in non-equilibrium situations, quantum squeezing at the SRPT critical point is intrinsically stable and resilient against any noise even at finite temperatures <ref type="bibr">13</ref> . As a result of this stable squeezing, such systems are intrinsically robust against decoherence, which is especially important for quantum sensing and continuous-variable quantum information technology.</p><p>A unique aspect of the SRPT is its manifestation as a physical phenomenon associated with the thermal-equilibrium state of a coupled light-matter system. This deviates from typical quantum-optics research that mainly deals with nonequilibrium excited-state dynamics. The occurrence of nonequilibrium SRPTs has been demonstrated in cold-atom systems driven by laser beams <ref type="bibr">[14]</ref><ref type="bibr">[15]</ref><ref type="bibr">[16]</ref><ref type="bibr">[17]</ref> . Although the temperature of cold atoms in a steady state is usually measured by the variance of their kinetic energy, the non-equilibrium SRPTs are inherently driven, dissipative, and transient phenomena. Effective temperatures defined with the driving power in the nonequilibrium SRPTs have been discussed theoretically <ref type="bibr">17</ref> . However, the realization of SRPTs under pure thermal equilibrium is yet to be achieved. The existence of a SRPT analogue has been theoretically proposed for a superconducting circuit maintained under thermal equilibrium <ref type="bibr">[18]</ref><ref type="bibr">[19]</ref><ref type="bibr">[20]</ref><ref type="bibr">[21]</ref><ref type="bibr">[22]</ref><ref type="bibr">[23]</ref><ref type="bibr">[24]</ref> , but no experimental observations of this effect have been reported.</p><p>The present work shows theoretically that the phase transition in erbium orthoferrite (ErFeO 3 ) with a critical temperature T c of ~4 K, known as the low-temperature phase transition (LTPT), is a magnonic SRPT, that is, an SRPT in which the Er 3&#254; spins cooperatively couple with the Fe 3&#254; magnonic field (spin-wave field) instead of with a photonic field as in the originally proposed SRPT. Specifically, we found that the LTPT occurs owing to Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling, even in the absence of direct Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions. In addition, we observed that the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling enhances the T c value for LTPT compared to that obtained via direct Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; interactions. These results demonstrate the uniqueness of ErFeO 3 as a physical system in which SRPT can be experimentally realized under thermal equilibrium.</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Results</head><p>Principle of magnonic SRPT. The SRPT was first suggested in 1973 by Hepp and Lieb <ref type="bibr">1</ref> , and has been extensively discussed based on the Dicke model <ref type="bibr">6</ref> , conventionally expressed as</p><p>Here, &#226; is the annihilation operator of a photon in a photonic mode with resonance frequency &#969; ph , &#348;x;y;z are spin N 2 operators representing an ensemble of two-level atoms with a transition frequency &#969; ex , and N is the number of atoms. The last term represents the coupling between the photonic mode and atomic ensemble with strength g. In the thermodynamic limit, i.e., in the limit of N !1, the SRPT arises when 4g <ref type="bibr">2</ref> &gt; &#969; ph &#969; ex , i.e., in the ultrastrong coupling regime g &#8819; &#969; ph ; &#969; ex <ref type="bibr">[3]</ref><ref type="bibr">[4]</ref><ref type="bibr">[5]</ref> . Below T c , the expectation values of the photon annihilation operator h&#226;i and spin operator h &#348;z i become non-zero, indicating the spontaneous appearance of a static electromagnetic field and static polarization (or a persistent electric current) in thermal equilibrium.</p><p>The magnonic SRPT is a phase transition caused by ultrastrong coupling between a magnonic mode and other collective excitations in matter. The spontaneous appearance of magnons, also known as spin waves, reflects the spontaneous ordering of a spin ensemble mediating them in a certain direction. We present an explanation of the magnonic SRPT in the case of ErFeO 3 below.</p><p>Each unit cell in ErFeO 3 contains four Er 3&#254; ions and four Fe 3&#254; ions. The four Fe 3&#254; spins, each of which has an angular momentum of _S &#188; &#240;5=2&#222;_, are oriented in different directions, even in the absence of an external direct current (DC) magnetic field <ref type="bibr">25</ref> . However, it is known that the Fe 3&#254; spin resonances (magnon modes) may be described well by considering only two spins &#348;A=B comprising two real Fe 3&#254; spins, which are usually treated as a single spin with S &#188; 5=2. In such a two-sublattice model of Fe 3&#254; , as depicted in Fig. <ref type="figure">1a</ref>, the two spins &#348;A=B are ordered antiferromagnetically along the c axis at T c &lt; T &#8818; 90 K, but are slightly canted toward the a axis and show weak magnetization (the Fe 3&#254; spins exhibit the so-called spinreorientation transition at 90 K &#8818; T &#8818; 100 K <ref type="bibr">[26]</ref><ref type="bibr">[27]</ref><ref type="bibr">[28]</ref> ). In contrast, the Er 3&#254; spins are paramagnetic at T &gt; T c , and they are directed along the a axis by the weak Fe 3&#254; magnetization. This phase is called the &#915; 2 phase <ref type="bibr">29</ref> .</p><p>At T &lt; T c , as shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">1b</ref>, when a two-sublattice model is used for the Er 3&#254; spins, they are ordered antiferromagnetically along the c axis, with a canting toward the a axis due to the Fe 3&#254; magnetization. Simultaneously, the Fe 3&#254; antiferromagnetism (AFM) vector S A &#192; S B rotates gradually in the bc plane. The rotation angle measured from the c axis, &#966;, was estimated to be 49 at T &#188; 0 K <ref type="bibr">29</ref> . This low-temperature phase is called the &#915; 12 phase <ref type="bibr">29</ref> .</p><p>The second-order phase transition between phases &#915; 2 and &#915; 12 at T c $ 4 K is called the LTPT <ref type="bibr">27,</ref><ref type="bibr">28</ref> . There are at least two contributions to the LTPT, namely the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; and Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions <ref type="bibr">29,</ref><ref type="bibr">30</ref> . Although the former is usually stronger than the latter and is largely responsible for LTPT, the latter is essential for explaining the rotation of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector.</p><p>In the absence of the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions, as shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">1a</ref>, the Fe 3&#254; spins are ordered antiferromagnetically along the c axis with a slight canting toward the a axis in the ground state of the Fe 3&#254; subsystem. Considering that the magnon excitation in this Fe 3&#254; subsystem corresponds to the photon excitation in the electromagnetic vacuum, the rotation of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector (at T &lt; T c as shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">1b</ref>) indicates the spontaneous appearance of magnons, corresponding to the appearance of photons (a static electromagnetic field) in the ordinary SRPT, in thermal equilibrium. The ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins corresponds to the spontaneous appearance of an atomic field (polarization) in the SRPT.</p><p>Owing to the phenomenological similarities between the LTPT and SRPT, the microscopic models governing these phase transitions may be considered transferable. This constitutes the basic concept of magnonic SRPT proposed in this study.</p><p>ErFeO 3 spin model. First, we describe a general spin model for Er x Y 1&#192;x FeO 3 (0 &#8804; x &#8804; 1), which is consistent with our previous experimental study <ref type="bibr">31</ref> . The replacement of Er 3&#254; ions with nonmagnetic Y 3&#254; ions simply reduces the density of the rare-earth (Er 3&#254; ) spins without changing the crystal structure or magnetic configuration of Fe 3&#254; spins in the &#915; 2 phase <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">32</ref> . Although the present work largely uses x &#188; 1 (ErFeO 3 ), the x-dependence is considered in "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods.</p><p>The Hamiltonian for the spins in Er x Y 1&#192;x FeO 3 consists of three parts, i.e.,</p><p>where H Fe , H Er , and H Er&#192;Fe are the Hamiltonians of the Fe 3&#254; spins, Er 3&#254; spins, and Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interactions, respectively. As explained above, we employ the two-sublattice model for the Fe 3&#254; spins following Herrmann's model <ref type="bibr">33</ref> and the methods of our prior works <ref type="bibr">[31]</ref><ref type="bibr">[32]</ref><ref type="bibr">[33]</ref><ref type="bibr">[34]</ref> . The Hamiltonian of the Fe 3&#254; spins is</p><p>Here, &#348;A=B i is the operator of the Fe 3&#254; spin S &#188; 5=2 at the i-th site in the A/B sublattice, while &#8721; n.n. represents a summation over all nearest-neighbor couplings. The number of nearest neighbors is</p><p>N 0 denotes the number of Fe 3&#254; spins in each sublattice and is equal to the unit cell count in ErFeO 3 . A total of 2N 0 spins represent the Fe 3&#254; subsystem. &#956; B is the Bohr magneton, and</p><p>is the g-factor tensor of the Fe 3&#254; spins. In the following, the g-factor of free electron spin is expressed as g. B DC is the external DC magnetic flux density. J Fe and D Fe y are the strengths of the isotropic and Dzyaloshinkii-Moriya-type exchange interaction strengths between the Fe 3&#254; spins, respectively. A x , A z , and A xz are the energies expressing the magnetic anisotropy of the Fe 3&#254; spins.</p><p>Although we expressed the Er 3&#254; subsystem using a single spin lattice for the paramagnetic Er 3&#254; spins (T &gt; T c ) in our previous works <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> , in this study we employ a two-sublattice model for the Er 3&#254; spins to describe the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interaction and LTPT. The Hamiltonian of the Er 3&#254; spins is</p><p>Here, RA=B i is the operator of rare-earth (Er 3&#254; or Y 3&#254; ) spin at the site i in the A/B sublattice. For Er x Y 1&#192;x FeO 3 , the rare-earth spins are represented randomly as s &#188; A; B; i.e.,</p><p>We describe each Er 3+</p><p>spin using a vector of Pauli operators &#963;s i &#240;&#963; s i;x ; &#963;s i;y ; &#963;s i;z &#222; t satisfying &#963;s i;&#958; &#963;s i;&#958; &#188; 1, &#189;&#963; s i;&#958; ; &#963;s 0 i 0 ;&#958; &#188; 0 (&#958; &#188; x; y; z), &#189;&#963; s i;x ; &#963;s 0 i 0 ;y &#188; i2&#963; s i;z &#948; s;s 0 &#948; i;i 0 , &#189;&#963; s i;y ; &#963;s 0 i 0 ;z &#188; i2&#963; s i;x &#948; s;s 0 &#948; i;i 0 , and &#189;&#963; s i;z ; &#963;s 0 i 0 ;x &#188; i2&#963; s i;y &#948; s;s 0 &#948; i;i 0 , where &#948; i;j is the Kronecker delta. The Y 3&#254; ion is non-magnetic, and Rs i is replaced with 0. The first term in Eq. (6) represents the Zeeman effect, and the magnetic moment is expressed in terms of the anisotropic g factors g Er x;y;z for the Er 3&#254; spins as &#956;s i &#192; 1 2 &#956; B &#240;g Er x Rs i;x ; g Er y Rs i;y ; g Er z Rs</p><p>The factor 1=2 is added because &#240;1=2&#222;&#963; s i theoretically corresponds to a spin <ref type="bibr">1</ref> 2 operator. We define the g-factor tensor for the Er 3+ spins as</p><p>The second term in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">6</ref>) represents the Er 3&#254; &#192; Er 3&#254; exchange interaction with strength J Er . Because the Er 3&#254; ions are diluted in Er x Y 1&#192;x FeO 3 , the number of nearest-neighbor Er 3&#254; spins is effectively given by</p><p>We describe the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions as</p><p>In our model, the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interaction is closed in each unit cell; that is, the Er 3&#254; and Fe 3&#254; spins in the same unit cell interact with each other but do not interact with the spins in other unit cells. J and D s;s 0 are the strengths of the isotropic and antisymmetric exchange interactions, respectively <ref type="bibr">[31]</ref><ref type="bibr">[32]</ref><ref type="bibr">[33]</ref><ref type="bibr">[34]</ref> . Considering the spin configuration at T &lt; T c with no external DC magnetic field (see more details in "Reduction of number of parameters" in Supplementary Methods), we assume that D s;s 0 are expressed in terms of two values D x and D y as</p><p>As explained in detail in the section "Mean-field Calculation</p><p>Method" we assume that the y components RA=B i;y of the Er 3&#254; spins are not influenced by the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interactions by implicitly considering a higher energy potential than that of the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interaction strengths J and D s;s 0 along the b axis. This assumption helps to obtain an appropriate description of LTPT in accordance with our numerical calculations.</p><p>The actual values of the parameters appearing in our proposed spin model are provided in "Parameters" together with a description of how they were determined based on recent experimental results of terahertz magnetospectroscopy <ref type="bibr">31</ref> and magnetization measurements <ref type="bibr">26</ref> .</p><p>LTPT phase diagrams. Next, we show that our spin model certainly describes the thermal equilibrium (average) values of the Er 3&#254; spins &#963; A=B and Fe 3&#254; spins S A=B in the zero-wavenumber (infinite-wavelength) limit using the mean-field method. Details pertaining to the mean-field method are provided in the section "Mean-field Calculation Method." Because we simply considered a homogeneous external DC magnetic flux density B DC , &#963; A=B and S A=B were independent of the site index i. Figure <ref type="figure">2a-c</ref> show the calculated phase diagrams as functions of T and B DC , applied along the a, b, and c axes, respectively. The difference j &#963; A z &#192; &#963; B z j in the z components of the thermal equilibrium values of Er 3&#254; spins (AFM vector) is plotted in red. j &#963; A z &#192; &#963; B z j is the order parameter for the LTPT in the presence of an external DC magnetic field in general, although the rotation angle of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector can be utilized as an alternative order parameter if the external DC field is zero or is along the a axis. The bold solid curves represent phase boundaries.</p><p>These phase diagrams are consistent with those reported by Zhang et al. <ref type="bibr">26</ref> . As shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">2a</ref>, because ErFeO 3 possesses a weak magnetization along the a axis, the critical field depends on whether the field is parallel (in the same direction) or antiparallel (in the opposite direction) to the magnetization. The parameters used in the calculations are provided in "Parameters."</p><p>Figure <ref type="figure">3</ref> plots the thermal equilibrium values of the Er 3&#254; and Fe 3&#254; spins in the absence of an external DC magnetic field as functions of temperature. The LTPT, that is, the antiferromagnetic ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins along the c axis and the rotation of the Fe 3&#254; spins in the bc plane <ref type="bibr">29</ref> , are reproduced well in our spin model. The rotation angle of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector is &#966; &#188; 46 at T &#188; 0 K with our parameters. This value is approximately equal to the experimentally estimated value &#966; &#188; 49 <ref type="bibr">29</ref> .</p><p>Extended Dicke Hamiltonian. The mean-field method employed in this study, as illustrated in Figs. <ref type="figure">2</ref> and <ref type="figure">3</ref>, is a standard means of analysing magnetic phase transitions. To investigate the analogy between LTPT and SRPT using the Dicke model, we derive an extended version of the Dicke model transformed from the spin model in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">2</ref>). This derivation is given in detail in the section "Derivation of Extended Dicke Hamiltonian".</p><p>The extended Dicke Hamiltonian minimally including the terms relevant to the LTPT in an external DC magnetic field applied along the a axis, where the &#915; 12 symmetry remains, is</p><p>-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 2 4 6 0 1 2 3 4 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 1 2 3 4 External DC field B x (T) (a) (b) (c) External DC field B y (T) External DC field B z (T) Temperature T (K) Temperature T (K) Temperature T (K)</p><p>Fig. <ref type="figure">2</ref> Phase diagrams of spins in ErFeO 3 calculated using the mean-field method. An external DC magnetic field was applied along the a a. b b. c c axes. The difference j &#963; A z &#192; &#963; B z j of the z components of the thermalequilibrium values of Er 3&#254; spins is mapped in red. The bold solid curves represent the phase boundaries. The external direct current (DC) magnetic field was varied from zero to positive or negative values at a fixed temperature. As ErFeO 3 shows weak magnetization along the a axis, the critical field depends on whether the field is parallel or antiparallel to the magnetization in Fig. <ref type="figure">2a</ref>.</p><p>0 1 2 3 4 5 0 0.5 1 x y z 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 S x S y S z (a) Temperature T (K) Temperature T (K) Er 3+ spin Fe 3+ spin (b)</p><p>x 10</p><p>Fig. <ref type="figure">3</ref> Thermal equilibrium spin values. a Er 3&#254; spin. b Fe 3&#254; spin calculated using the mean-field method as functions of T in the case of zero external direct current (DC) magnetic field. As shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">3a</ref>,</p><p>spontaneously appears below T c &#188; 4:0 K, i.e., the Er 3&#254; spins are antiferromagnetically ordered along the c axis. They show magnetization along the a axis as</p><p>due to the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction with the weak Fe 3&#254; magnetization along the a axis, whereas &#963; y &#188; &#963; </p><p>Here, &#226;&#960; (&#226; y &#960; ) is the annihilation (creation) operator of an Fe 3&#254; magnon in the quasi-antiferromagnetic (qAFM) mode <ref type="bibr">33</ref> . The eigenfrequency &#969; &#960; &#188; 2&#960; 0:896 THz can be evaluated using Eq. ( <ref type="formula">63</ref>). The actual value was evaluated using the parameters shown in "Parameters." The Er 3&#254; resonance frequency is defined as follows.</p><p>The total number of 1 2 spins (Er 3&#254; spins) in the two sublattices is</p><p>&#931;x;y;z are spin N 2 operators representing the rare-earth spins (a detailed definition is given in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">92</ref>)). The two Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling strengths in the last two terms of Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) are defined as follows.</p><p>Comparing Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) with Eq. ( <ref type="formula">1</ref>) (the Dicke model), because &#226;&#960; and &#931;x;y;z in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) correspond to &#226; and &#348;x;y;z in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">1</ref>), respectively, we may observe that the g z term in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) corresponds to the matter-photon coupling (transverse coupling), that is, the last term in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">1</ref>). In addition, the g x term represents longitudinal coupling, and the term J Er describes the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>). The coupling strength g z &#188; 2&#960; 0:116 THz shows the system fall into the ultrastrong regime because it is a considerable fraction of the Er 3&#254; resonance and qAFM magnon frequencies, E x &#188; h 0:023 THz and &#969; &#960; &#188; 2&#960; 0:896 THz. When the g z term causes an SRPT, h &#931;z i spontaneously acquires a non-zero value in thermal equilibrium, corresponding to the antiferromagnetic ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins along the c axis. As explained in "Derivation of Extended Dicke Hamiltonian," the spontaneous appearance of non-zero hi&#240;&#226; y &#960; &#192; &#226;&#960; &#222;i coupled with &#931;z in the g z term, corresponds to that of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector in the b axis and causes its rotation in the bc plane. The Fe 3&#254; quasi-ferromagnetic (qFM) magnon mode can be neglected in describing the LTPT, because the AFM ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins and the spontaneous appearance of qAFM magnons are rather favoured and they prevent the appearance of qFM magnons, which feel additional energy cost under the ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins and the qAFM magnons.</p><p>As seen in Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">20</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">21</ref>), the transverse coupling strength g z depends on D x , and the longitudinal coupling strength g x depends on J and D y . These expressions are reasonable from the perspective of the spin model in Eq. (11). The D x antisymmetric Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction is essential for the LTPT because it couples &#963;A=B z and &#348;A=B y , which appear spontaneously at T &lt; T c . In contrast, the J and D y exchange interactions are not directly related to the LTPT because these interaction terms do not couple &#963;A=B z and &#348;A=B y directly.</p><p>Evidence of magnonic SRPT. Using the semiclassical method described in "Semiclassical Calculation Method" with the extended Dicke Hamiltonian in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), we calculated the thermal equilibrium values of the Er 3&#254; and Fe 3&#254; spins and magnon amplitudes as functions of temperature. Here and also in the calculation of the LTPT phase diagrams by the mean-field approach, we implicitly assumed that a thermal bath is connected to the extended Dicke Hamiltonian in Eq. (16) [and the spin model in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">2</ref>)]. The thermal bath simply ensures that the system is in thermal equilibrium at a certain temperature in the present calculations, whereas it causes the energy loss and decoherence in non-equilibrium dynamics of Er 3&#254; spins and Fe 3&#254; magnons. Figure <ref type="figure">4a-c</ref> show the thermal equilibrium values of the Er 3&#254; spins &#963; x;y;z &#188; h &#931;x;y;z i=&#240;N=2&#222;, Fe 3&#254; spins S x;y;z , and Fe 3&#254; qAFM magnons a r;i as functions of temperature in the absence of an external DC magnetic field, i.e., with B DC &#188; 0. S x;y;z were calculated using Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">113</ref>)-(115) with <ref type="figure">4a</ref>, b, respectively, reproduce Fig. <ref type="figure">3a</ref>, b calculated using the mean-field method with the original spin model, including T c , although S z differs. As depicted in Fig. <ref type="figure">3b</ref>, a decrease in temperature causes a reduction in S z along with the spontaneous appearance of S y , whereas Fig. <ref type="figure">4b</ref> reveals S z to remain nearly constant. This difference exists because</p><p>not hold in the extended Dicke Hamiltonian derived via magnon quantization (i.e., bosonisation of Fe 3&#254; spin modulations). The spins. c Fe 3&#254; magnon amplitudes as functions of T. These values were calculated using the semiclassical method with the extended Dicke Hamiltonian in the case of zero external direct current (DC) magnetic field. Figure <ref type="figure">4a</ref>, b are nearly the same as Fig. <ref type="figure">3a</ref>, b, respectively, except S z , which changes only slightly due to magnon bosonization. The Fe 3&#254; spins, S x;y;z , were calculated using Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">113</ref>)-(115) with the thermal equilibrium value of the quasi-antiferromagnetic (qAFM) magnon annihilation operator</p><p>ultrastrong term g z , the last term in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), causes the spontaneous appearance of &#963; z and a i , as shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">4a</ref>, <ref type="figure">c</ref>, respectively, and the latter causes a non-zero S y through Eq. (114). The Fe 3&#254; AFM vector is rotated due to the spontaneous appearance of a non-zero S y when S</p><p>Thus, the LTPT, that is, the spontaneous ordering of Er 3&#254; spins (spontaneous appearance of &#963; z ) and the spontaneous rotation of Fe 3&#254; AFM vector (spontaneous appearance of a i and S y ), is caused by the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling.</p><p>To compare the contributions of the Er 3&#254; -magnon couplings and Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions for the LTPT, Fig. <ref type="figure">5</ref> depicts the phase boundaries calculated using the full Hamiltonian (solid curves) as well as in the absence of Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions (dashed-dotted curve;</p><p>and Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions (dashed curve; J Er &#188; 0). Figure <ref type="figure">5a</ref>, b illustrate the results obtained using the mean-field and semiclassical methods with extended Dicke Hamiltonian, respectively. The solid curve in Fig. <ref type="figure">5a</ref> is equal to that in Fig. <ref type="figure">2a</ref>. The slight differences between Fig. <ref type="figure">5a</ref>, b are discussed in "Aspects of phase boundaries" in Supplementary Methods.</p><p>The dashed curves (J Er &#188; 0) in Fig. <ref type="figure">5</ref> reveal that the phase transition occurs even in the absence of Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions and that T c equals approximately 1.2 K at B DC &#188; 0. Thus, Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling alone can cause the LTPT. In this sense, the LTPT can be interpreted as a magnonic SRPT because the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling is sufficiently strong for the phase transition to occur.</p><p>On the other hand, in the absence of Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling, as denoted by the dashed-dotted curves, T c is approximately 2.6 K at B DC &#188; 0. This result appears to indicate that the contribution of the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions is larger than that of the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling. However, the actual T c is 4 K; that is, the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling enhances the T c of the phase transition. In the same manner, the critical magnetic fields are also enhanced. These facts are similar to the suggestion of T c enhancement through photon-matter coupling by Mazza and Georges <ref type="bibr">35</ref> ; however, in their case, phase transition does not occur solely by photon-matter coupling, and their model does not guarantee gauge invariance <ref type="bibr">36,</ref><ref type="bibr">37</ref> .</p><p>Although the g z term causes the spontaneous appearance of both &#963; z and S y following the above-mentioned description of the SRPT, a non-zero &#963; z can also spontaneously appear due to the J Er term (Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions). Although Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling is inevitable for the spontaneous rotation of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector (spontaneous appearance of S y ), we quantitatively evaluate the contributions of the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling and Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions for the LTPT as follows.</p><p>The two contributions to the LTPT can be determined by analysing the condition for the SRPT in our extended Dicke Hamiltonian in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) under the Holstein-Primakoff transformation <ref type="bibr">[38]</ref><ref type="bibr">[39]</ref><ref type="bibr">[40]</ref> . The detailed calculations are discussed in the "Condition for SRPT in Extended Dicke Hamiltonian" section. The condition can finally be expressed as</p><p>For J Er &#188; g x &#188; 0, this expression is reduced to 4g z 2 &gt; &#969; &#960; &#969; Er for the SRPT in the Dicke model, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">1</ref>).</p><p>The three terms on the left-hand side of Eq. ( <ref type="formula">22</ref>) are evaluated as follows.</p><p>In the following, we refer to these quantities as coupling depths.</p><p>They are dimensionless measures of coupling strength and are determined based on the appearance of the SRPT. As seen in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">22</ref>), the SRPT occurs when the sum of these coupling depths exceeds unity, i.e.,</p><p>The coupling depth D J Er of the J Er term is the largest, which is consistent with Fig. <ref type="figure">5</ref>. The g x term (longitudinal coupling) has a negative contribution to the SRPT (D g x &lt; 0). Among the three couplings, the contribution of the g z term is</p><p>23, and that of the total Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling is</p><p>These values are roughly equal to 1:3 K=&#240;1:3 K &#254; 3:4 K&#222; &#188; 0:28, as estimated by Kadomtseva et al. <ref type="bibr">29</ref> However, the longitudinal coupling (g x term) was not included in their model <ref type="bibr">41,</ref><ref type="bibr">42</ref> , and the parameters were determined only by the phase boundary for B DC ==a.</p><p>Considering the analogy between an LTPT and SRPT, the coupling depth of the g z term satisfies D g z &gt; 1 and</p><p>This result suggests that the transverse Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling is much stronger than the longitudinal coupling (giving a negative contribution) and is sufficiently strong to cause the SRPT alone. In this sense, we can conclude that the LTPT in ErFeO 3 is a magnonic SRPT obtained in the extended Dicke Hamiltonian with direct atom-atom interaction and longitudinal coupling (g x term).</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Discussion</head><p>As shown above, we quantitatively confirmed that the LTPT in ErFeO 3 is a magnonic version of the SRPT in thermal</p><p>-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 External DC field B x (T) External DC field B x (T) Temperature T (K) Temperature T (K) Er 3+ -Fe 3+ &amp; Er 3+ -Er 3+ Er 3+ -magnon &amp; Er 3+ -Er 3+ Er 3+ -Er 3+ only Er 3+ -magnon only Er 3+ -Fe 3+ only Er 3+ -Er 3+ only 3 3 (a) (b)</p><p>Fig. <ref type="figure">5</ref> Phase boundaries of the low-temperature phase transition (LTPT) in ErFeO 3 . Boundaries calculated using the (a) mean-field method and (b) semiclassical method with the extended Dicke Hamiltonian. An external direct current (DC) magnetic field is applied along the a axis. The solid curves are the phase boundaries determined using the full Hamiltonian, and those in Figs. <ref type="figure">5a</ref> and <ref type="figure">2a</ref> are equivalent. The dashed-dotted curves are the phase boundaries in the absence of Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling (Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions). The dashed curves are those obtained in the absence of Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions, i.e., the LTPT can be caused solely by the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling and thus can be interpreted as a magnonic superradiant phase transition (SRPT).</p><p>equilibrium. This is the first confirmation of the SRPT since its proposal in 1973 <ref type="bibr">1</ref> .</p><p>Early reports on the SRPT suggested its no-go theorems <ref type="bibr">[43]</ref><ref type="bibr">[44]</ref><ref type="bibr">[45]</ref><ref type="bibr">[46]</ref> , implying that thermal-equilibrium SRPTs cannot be realized in systems described by the minimal-coupling Hamiltonian, that is, charged particles (without spins) interacting with electromagnetic fields. Because the classical treatment of the electromagnetic fields used in proofs of such no-go theorems can be justified only in limited situations <ref type="bibr">2,</ref><ref type="bibr">[45]</ref><ref type="bibr">[46]</ref><ref type="bibr">[47]</ref><ref type="bibr">[48]</ref><ref type="bibr">[49]</ref> , proposals of counter-examples against the no-go theorems and criticisms against the counter-examples have been repeated in SRPT research <ref type="bibr">[35]</ref><ref type="bibr">[36]</ref><ref type="bibr">[37]</ref><ref type="bibr">[50]</ref><ref type="bibr">[51]</ref><ref type="bibr">[52]</ref><ref type="bibr">[53]</ref><ref type="bibr">[54]</ref><ref type="bibr">[55]</ref><ref type="bibr">[56]</ref><ref type="bibr">[57]</ref> .</p><p>One means of evading the no-go theorems involves introducing another degree of freedom, such as spin <ref type="bibr">44</ref> . For example, it has been shown that the Rashba spin-orbit coupling can cause paramagnetic instability in an ultrastrongly coupled system between a cyclotron resonance and cavity photon field, implying an SRPT <ref type="bibr">37</ref> . Further, it has been pointed out recently <ref type="bibr">37,</ref><ref type="bibr">58,</ref><ref type="bibr">59</ref> that the coupling between matter and a spatially-varying multi-mode cavity fields plays a key role for circumventing the no-go theorem. Another method is to utilize various types of interactions and spin waves in magnetic materials, which cannot be described by the minimal-coupling Hamiltonian.</p><p>Ultrastrong photon-magnon coupling has been reported for an yttrium-iron-garnet sphere embedded in a cavity with a resonance frequency in the gigahertz region <ref type="bibr">[60]</ref><ref type="bibr">[61]</ref><ref type="bibr">[62]</ref><ref type="bibr">[63]</ref><ref type="bibr">[64]</ref> , where the electromagnetic wave was confined by metallic or superconducting mirrors. Recently, g=&#969; $ 0:46 has been achieved to detect dark matter (galactic axions) <ref type="bibr">65</ref> . Ultrastrong spin-magnon <ref type="bibr">31</ref> and magnon-magnon <ref type="bibr">66,</ref><ref type="bibr">67</ref> couplings have also been observed. However, evidence of an SRPT has not been reported even with those magnonic ultrastrong couplings, although various phase transitions exist in magnetic systems, and it is conceivable that some of the known phase transitions can be understood as the SRPT or an analogue.</p><p>The LTPT in ErFeO 3 has been discussed in relation to the cooperative Jahn-Teller transition <ref type="bibr">29,</ref><ref type="bibr">41,</ref><ref type="bibr">42</ref> , which is analogous to the SRPT <ref type="bibr">68,</ref><ref type="bibr">69</ref> . Vitebskii and Yablonskii proposed a theoretical model for describing the LTPT in 1978 <ref type="bibr">30</ref> . Further, Kadomtseva et al. theoretically investigated the ratio between the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; and Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interaction strengths in 1980 <ref type="bibr">29</ref> . They also mentioned the analogy between the LTPT and cooperative Jahn-Teller transition <ref type="bibr">41,</ref><ref type="bibr">42</ref> . Loos and Larson discussed the analogy between the cooperative Jahn-Teller transition and SRPT in 1984 and 2008, respectively <ref type="bibr">68,</ref><ref type="bibr">69</ref> . However, the analogy between the LTPT and SRPT has not been directly drawn either theoretically or experimentally because the analogies between the LTPT and cooperative Jahn-Teller transition and between the latter and the SRPT have been independently discussed <ref type="bibr">29,</ref><ref type="bibr">68,</ref><ref type="bibr">69</ref> , and no experimental evidence has been shown. The spin-Peierls transitions <ref type="bibr">70,</ref><ref type="bibr">71</ref> and the spin-reorientation transition in rare-earth iron garnets <ref type="bibr">72</ref> have also been discussed as analogous phenomena to the SRPT. However, no experimental evidence has been demonstrated. Structural transitions in ferroelectric materials may also be seen as a SRPT analogue at a first glance <ref type="bibr">73</ref> . However, when we map such ferroelectric systems to the Dicke model, we find that the resonance frequency of the electric polarization becomes an imaginary value, which indicates that such ferroelectric phase transitions are caused by the instability of the electric polarization subsystem rather than by the coupling between the polarization and phonon subsystems. Hence, no other SRPT analogue by matter-matter coupling has been confirmed quantitatively.</p><p>In 2018, the ffiffiffiffi N p -dependence (N is the Er 3&#254; density) of the anticrossing frequency, or vacuum Rabi splitting (2g), between paramagnetic Er 3&#254; spins and a Fe 3&#254; magnon mode was experimentally confirmed at T &gt; T c <ref type="bibr">31</ref> . This ffiffiffiffi N p -dependence, the Dicke cooperativity, can be taken as evidence that the coupling between the Er 3&#254; spin ensemble and Fe 3&#254; magnon mode is cooperative, being well described by the Dicke model or its extension.</p><p>This study provides the quantitative evidence of magnonic SRPT manifestation. Meanwhile, the existence of photonic SRPT, which was originally proposed in 1973, has yet to be confirmed. Moreover, the possibility of its theoretical existence in materials with spin degree of freedom is still under debate <ref type="bibr">36,</ref><ref type="bibr">37,</ref><ref type="bibr">58,</ref><ref type="bibr">59</ref> . Since the development of the Dicke model, this study is the first to elucidate the occurrence of magnonic thermal-equilibrium SRPT in an actual material, namely ErFeO 3 .</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Conclusions</head><p>In this study, using an ErFeO 3 spin model reproducing both the phase diagrams obtained via magnetization measurements <ref type="bibr">26</ref> and terahertz magnetospectroscopy results <ref type="bibr">31</ref> , we derived an extended Dicke Hamiltonian that accounts for Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions as well as the cooperative coupling between the Er 3&#254; spins and Fe 3&#254; magnon modes. We found that the LTPT in ErFeO 3 can be caused solely by Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling (in the absence of Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions). From the analytical correspondence between the spin and Dicke models and the quantitative verification that the Er 3&#254; -magnon coupling solely causes the LTPT, we concluded that the LTPT in ErFeO 3 is a magnonic SRPT in the extended Dicke model. This is the first confirmation of the SRPT in thermal equilibrium since its proposal in 1973 <ref type="bibr">1</ref> . These results are expected to be the first step in finding the (originally proposed) photonic SRPT in magnetic or other materials explicitly including the spin degree of freedom.</p><p>The thermal SRPT in ErFeO 3 would exhibit rich physics beyond the quantum or zero-temperature SRPT that has been demonstrated in laser-driven cold atoms <ref type="bibr">[14]</ref><ref type="bibr">[15]</ref><ref type="bibr">[16]</ref><ref type="bibr">[17]</ref> . It is known that the thermal and quantum fluctuations of photons and atoms exhibit characteristic behaviours around the SRPT <ref type="bibr">74,</ref><ref type="bibr">75</ref> . Recent studies have reported the occurrence of strong, two-mode quantum squeezing at the SRPT critical point <ref type="bibr">12,</ref><ref type="bibr">13</ref> . In future endeavours, including ongoing terahertz magnetospectroscopy experiments on Er x Y 1&#192;x FeO 3 concerning LTPT <ref type="bibr">76</ref> and subsequent quantumfluctuation measurements <ref type="bibr">77,</ref><ref type="bibr">78</ref> of magnons and Er 3+ spins, we intend to investigate the occurrence of such quantum-squeezing phenomena during thermal SRPT.</p><p>The generation of squeezed states of light has attracted considerable research interest over several decades because they facilitate precision measurements to be performed beyond the limitations encountered owing to the manifestation of quantum vacuum fluctuations and evolution of continuous-variable quantum computing. However, most existing squeezing-generation protocols require a system to be driven to realize transient squeezed states. This limits the realizable degree of squeezing during experiments owing to unpredictable noise. In contrast, quantum squeezing at the SRPT critical point can be stably realized under thermal equilibrium, because an ultrastrong coupled system remains at its most stable in the squeezed state. As a result, such systems are resilient to unpredictable noise. This fundamental stability and resilience are expected to facilitate the realization of novel applications exploring quantum sensing and decoherence-robust continuous-variable quantum computing via the occurrence of quantum squeezing at the SRPT critical point.</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Methods</head><p>Parameters. Following our previous study <ref type="bibr">31</ref> , we used the following values for the Fe 3&#254; subsystem in our numerical calculations, except A x , which was determined to fit the spin resonance frequencies to the corresponding terahertz absorption spectrum in our experiments <ref type="bibr">31</ref> (see "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods for details).</p><p>The anisotropic g-factors for Er 3&#254; spins were assumed to be</p><p>These values were utilized to fit the Er 3&#254; spin resonance frequencies depicted in Supplementary Figs. <ref type="figure">1</ref><ref type="figure">2</ref><ref type="figure">3</ref>to their corresponding absorption peak positions observed during experiments <ref type="bibr">31</ref> (refer to "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods). They were multiplied by 2 compared to those estimated in our previous study <ref type="bibr">31</ref> to compensate for the use of the additional factor of 1=2 in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">8</ref>). The anisotropic g-factors for Fe 3&#254; spins were assumed to be</p><p>Here, g Fe z was determined to reproduce the critical magnetic flux density B DC z $ 20 T 26 of the transition between the &#915; 2 phase and the &#915; 4 phase, in which the Fe 3&#254; spins are ordered antiferromagnetically along the a axis with slight canting toward the c axis, in the case of B DC ==c. On the other hand, g Fe x and g Fe y were simply set to the values in the case of free electron spin because the results in the present study are insensitive to these values.</p><p>Concerning the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; and Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions, we used the following values.</p><p>These values were utilized to fit Fig. <ref type="figure">2</ref> roughly to the phase diagrams reported by Zhang et al. <ref type="bibr">26</ref> . The precise values of J Er , J, and D y were mainly determined to fit our calculated spin resonance frequencies B DC ==c to the corresponding terahertz absorption spectrum in our experiments <ref type="bibr">31</ref> , which are both shown in Supplementary Fig. <ref type="figure">3a</ref> (see "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods). On the other hand, D x was determined to reproduce T c &#188; 4:0 K. Although the ratio between the Er 3&#254; &#192;Er 3&#254; and Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interaction strengths was theoretically investigated by the phase boundary for B DC ==a 29 , the phase diagrams (T c and critical DC fields) themselves were not sufficient to determine all of our parameters, although we do not intend to claim the impossibility of such determination in the present study. The phase diagrams gave only some ranges of the parameters. Because the LTPT is caused by not only the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interaction, but also the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interactions (Er 3&#254; -magnon couplings), there are at least four parameters (J Er , J, D x , and D y ) even if the number of parameters is reduced according to the analysis in "Reduction of number of parameters" in Supplementary Methods. The anisotropic g-factors g Er x , g Er y , and g Er z of the Er 3&#254; spins are free parameters, and could easily change the critical DC fields. T c and three critical DC fields obtained from the magnetization measurements <ref type="bibr">26</ref> were not sufficient to determine the above parameters.</p><p>In determining all of these quantities, the spin resonance frequencies were informative. In particular, as discussed in "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods using the extended Dicke Hamiltonian, the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interaction strength J Er clearly appears as the frequency splitting between the Er 3&#254; in-phase and out-of-phase resonances. The out-of-phase mode cannot be excited by the terahertz wave unless it couples with the Fe 3&#254; magnon modes. In that sense, the anti-crossing between the Er 3&#254; in-phase resonances, out-of-phase resonances, and Fe 3&#254; qFM magnon mode B DC z $ 4 T in Supplementary Fig. <ref type="figure">3</ref> provides the most important information for determining J Er and the other parameters (see "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods).</p><p>Mean-field calculation method. Because we simply considered a homogeneous B DC in this study, the expectation values of the Er 3&#254; spins &#963; A=B h&#963; A=B i i and Fe 3&#254; spins S A=B h &#348;A=B i i were independent of the site index i. The brackets represent the theoretical expectation values of the operators at a finite temperature in the Heisenberg representation. The brackets also correspond to the ensemble average of the spins in each sublattice. Their equations of motion can be obtained from the Heisenberg equations derived from the Hamiltonian in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">2</ref>), as follows (s &#188; A; B).</p><p>Here, B A=B Er and B A=B Fe are the mean fields for the Er 3&#254; and Fe 3&#254; spins, respectively, and they can be expressed as</p><p>In Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">43</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">44</ref>), the first, second, and third terms represent the Zeeman effect, Er 3&#254; &#192;Er 3&#254; exchange interaction, and Er 3&#254; &#192;Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction, respectively. In Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">45</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">46</ref>), the first, second, and third terms represent the Zeeman effect, Er 3&#254; &#192;Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction, and Fe 3&#254; &#192;Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction, respectively. The dilution of the Er 3&#254; spins is reflected by the factors z Er &#188; 6x and x. z Er denotes the number of neighbours of Er 3&#254; , and its value effectively decreases by a factor of x. Because &#240;1=2&#222;&#963; A=B corresponds to the spin 1 2 operator, a factor of 2 appears overall in Eqs. (43) and (44). As explained at the end of the section "ErFeO 3 ," the y component of the third term in Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">43</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">44</ref>) is set to zero by means of implicitly considering a high-energy potential.</p><p>The free energy of the system is minimized when the thermal equilibrium values (time averages) of spins &#963; A=B and S A=B are parallel to their mean fields B s Er B s Er &#240;f &#963; A=B g; f S A=B g&#222; and B s Fe B s Fe &#240;f &#963; A=B g; f S A=B g&#222; as follows.</p><p>Here, the unit vectors of the mean fields are defined as</p><p>The thermal equilibrium values &#963; A=B and S A=B can be determined as follows.</p><p>For given mean fields B s</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Fe and B</head><p>s Er , the effective Hamiltonians of each Er 3&#254; and Fe 3&#254; can be defined as</p><p>Subsequently, the partition functions can be expressed as</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>Z s</head><p>Er Tr e &#192; &#292;s Er =&#240;k B T&#222;</p><p>where the following are defined.</p><p>Because &#963;A=B is not a standard spin operator with an angular momentum of _ or _=2 but is a vector of the Pauli operators, the summation is performed for m &#188; &#177;1.</p><p>The free energies are given as &#192;k B TlnZ A=B Er and &#192;k B TlnZ A=B Fe , and the thermal equilibrium values of the spins are</p><p>where B S &#240;z&#222; is the Brillouin function, defined as</p><p>By consistently solving Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">43</ref>)-( <ref type="formula">48</ref>), ( <ref type="formula">57</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">58</ref>), &#963; A=B and S A=B can be determined at finite temperatures.</p><p>Derivation of extended Dicke Hamiltonian. Here, we describe the transformation of our spin model, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">2</ref>), into an extended version of the Dicke Hamiltonian, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">1</ref>). We first rewrite the Fe 3+ subsystem H Fe in terms of the annihilation and creation operators of a magnon in "Fe 3&#254; subsystem." The Er 3&#254; subsystem H Er is rewritten using large spin operators in "Er 3&#254; subsystems." The Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions, H Er&#192;Fe , are transformed into five Er 3&#254; -magnon couplings as per "Er 3&#254; &#192;Fe 3&#254; interactions." Finally, the extended Dicke Hamiltonian is discussed in the section "Total Hamiltonian." Fe 3&#254; subsystem. We assume that the most stable values of the Fe 3&#254; spins at zero temperature, S A=B , are unchanged even when B DC (&#8818;10 T) is applied, as we also assumed in our previous studies <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> . Under this assumption, as depicted in Fig. <ref type="figure">1a</ref>, the most stable state (i.e., the ground state) of the Fe 3&#254; subsystem &#292;Fe , Eq. (3), can be expressed as</p><p>Here, the canting angle &#946; 0 can be expressed as (see "Magnon quantization" in Supplementary Methods and Supplementary Fig. <ref type="figure">4</ref> or refs. <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">33,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> )</p><p>The magnon is the quantum of spin fluctuations (spin waves) from this stable state. As shown in "Magnon quantization" in Supplementary Methods as well as in refs. <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> in the long-wavelength limit, the Fe 3&#254; Hamiltonian &#292;Fe , Eq. ( <ref type="formula">3</ref>), can be rewritten in terms of the annihilation (creation) operators &#226;K (&#226; y K ) of Fe 3&#254; magnons as</p><p>Here, K &#188; 0 and &#960; correspond to the qFM and qAFM magnon modes, respectively <ref type="bibr">33</ref> . The eigenfrequencies can be expressed as follows.</p><p>Here, we define</p><p>The operators of the spin fluctuations &#948; &#348;A=B</p><note type="other">i &#348;A=B i &#192; S A=B 0</note><p>can be expressed as</p><p>where the following are defined.</p><p>For the subsequent discussion, we define the sum and difference of the spins as</p><p>Their equilibrium (most stable) values are</p><p>and their fluctuations are given by the sum and difference of Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">68</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">69</ref>) as follows.</p><p>Er 3&#254; subsystems. We define the following new operators.</p><p>For an Er 3&#254; ion, &#240;1=2&#222; RA=B i is a spin 1 2 operator and &#931;A=B is a spin N 4 operator representing the rare earth spins in the A/B sublattice. We also define the sum and difference of the two sublattice spins as</p><p>In the long-wavelength limit, all spins in each sublattice have the same values in both static and dynamic situations. Subsequently, the Er 3&#254; Hamiltonian in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">6</ref>) can be rewritten as</p><p>Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; interactions. In the same manner as in our prior works <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> , the Hamiltonian of the Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interactions can be rewritten using Eq. ( <ref type="formula">11</ref>), as</p><p>In each set of parentheses, the first term represents the influence of the static components (equilibrium values) S A=B 0 of Fe 3&#254; spins to Er 3&#254; spins &#931; &#177; , and the second term represents the coupling between the Fe 3&#254; fluctuation &#948; &#348; &#177; and Er 3&#254; spins &#931; &#177; . We divide these terms into two Hamiltonians as The first term gives part of the Er 3&#254; spin resonance frequency and can be expressed as follows.</p><p>Here, we used Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">73</ref>), ( <ref type="formula">74</ref>) and (18). We neglected &#240;&#192;4SD x cos &#946; 0 &#222; &#931;&#192; y under the assumption explained at the end of the section "ErFeO 3 ." The second term in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">82</ref>) can be rewritten in terms of the Fe 3&#254; fluctuations as</p><p>Total Hamiltonian. In terms of the annihilation and creation operators of magnons, the total Hamiltonian can be expressed as</p><p>The five coupling strengths are defined as</p><p>The actual values were evaluated using the parameters shown in "Parameters."</p><p>Compared with the expressions in our previous studies <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> , the coupling strengths in Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">86</ref>)-(87) include additional factors ffiffi ffi 2 p and ffiffi ffi S p . First, ffiffi ffi 2 p</p><p>originates from the number of Er 3&#254; sublattices in the present study, whereas a single Er 3&#254; lattice was considered in our previous studies <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> . The second factor, ffiffi ffi S p , is a result of the difference in the method of normalizing the Fe 3&#254; spins between the present and previous studies <ref type="bibr">31,</ref><ref type="bibr">34</ref> .</p><p>Whereas the Er 3&#254; spin ensemble is described by six operators &#931;&#254; x;y;z and &#931;&#192; x;y;z in the extended Dicke Hamiltonian in Eq. (85), only &#931;&#254; x and &#931;&#192; z are relevant to the LTPT shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">1</ref>.</p></div>
<div xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><head>&#931;&#254;</head><p>x corresponds to the paramagnetic alignment by the Fe 3&#254; magnetization along the a axis, and &#931;&#192; z corresponds to the antiferromagnetic ordering along the c axis. Subsequently, to analyse the thermal equilibrium values of the spins, it is sufficient to consider only the following two terms in the Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions.</p><p>In contrast, while the Fe 3&#254; spins are described by the qFM and qAFM magnon modes in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">85</ref>), only the qAFM mode is relevant to the LTPT. As shown in Fig. <ref type="figure">1</ref>, <ref type="figure">&#948;</ref> &#348;&#192; y and &#948; &#348;&#192; z are required to describe the rotation of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector in the bc plane, and &#948; &#348;&#254; x is required for possible modulation of canting along the a axis. As seen in Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">75</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">76</ref>), &#948; &#348;&#254; x , &#948; &#348;&#192; y , and &#948; &#348;&#192; z are related to the qAFM magnon mode (K &#188; &#960;), and the qFM mode (K &#188; 0) plays no role in the LTPT.</p><p>Consequently, among the terms in the total Hamiltonian given by Eq. (85), it is only necessary to consider the terms shown in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) to describe the LTPT (the other terms are required to fully reproduce the terahertz spectra discussed in "Spin resonance frequencies" in Supplementary Methods). Note that, in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), we rewrote the large spin operators representing the Er 3&#254; spin ensemble as</p><p>where we re-indexed the Pauli operators representing the Er 3&#254; spins in the two sublattices as &#963;A i;x ! &#963;2i&#192;1;x &#963;A i;y ! &#963;2i&#192;1;y &#963;A i;z ! &#963;2i&#192;1;z 8 &gt; &gt; &lt; &gt; &gt; : ; &#963;B i;x ! &#963;2i;x &#963;B i;y ! &#192;&#963; 2i;y &#963;B i;z ! &#192;&#963; 2i;z 8 &gt; &gt; &lt; &gt; &gt; : :</p><p>Further, in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), it was assumed that the external DC magnetic field is applied along the a axis to maintain &#915; 12 symmetry, where either j &#963; A z &#192; &#963; B z j or the rotation angle &#966; of the Fe 3&#254; AFM vector from the c axis can be the order parameter for the LTPT. Among the five Er 3&#254; -magnon couplings in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">85</ref>), only the g x and g z terms are required to consider the coupling between &#931;x;z and the qAFM magnons. Although the g y 0 term also couples &#931;y and qAFM magnons, its coupling strength is negligible compared with g x;z , as shown in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">88</ref>), which is consistent with the experimentally observed antiferromagnetic ordering of the Er 3&#254; spins along the c axis (h &#931;&#192; y i &#188; 0). As demonstrated in Figs. <ref type="figure">4</ref> and <ref type="figure">5</ref>, the LTPT can be quantitatively reproduced as the SRPT in the extended Dicke Hamiltonian, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">85</ref>), which was derived from the spin model of ErFeO 3 . The essential terms were extracted as shown in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>). The g z term (antisymmetric Er 3&#254; -Fe 3&#254; exchange interaction with D x ) corresponds to the matter-photon coupling and causes the antiferromagnetic ordering of Er 3&#254; spins along the c axis and the b component of the Fe 3&#254; spins through the spontaneous appearance of qAFM magnons.</p><p>Semiclassical calculation method. Wang and Hioe demonstrated a simple calculation method for the SRPT in 1973 2 , and Hepp and Lieb confirmed its validity for the Dicke model <ref type="bibr">47</ref> . In the Dicke model, the partition function at temperature T Z Dicke &#240;T&#222; Tr&#189;e &#192; &#292;Dicke =&#240;k B T&#222; ; &#240;94&#222; in the thermodynamic limit N ! 1 can be approximately evaluated by replacing the trace over the photonic variables with an integral over coherent states j ffiffiffiffi N p a ( a 2 C; giving &#226;j ffiffiffiffi N p a &#188; ffiffiffiffi N p aj ffiffiffiffi N p a ) as Z Dicke &#240;T&#222; Z d 2 a &#960;=N Tr&#189;e &#192; &#292;eff Dicke &#240; a&#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; &#240;95&#222; &#188; Z d 2 a &#960;=N e &#192; S Dicke &#240; a;T&#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; ;</p><p>where an effective Hamiltonian is defined as given below,</p><p>as well as an action</p><p>and an effective Hamiltonian per atom</p><p>The normalized expectation value a &#188; h&#226;i= ffiffiffiffi N p of the annihilation operator of a photon at temperature T can be determined to minimize the action, that is, &#8706; S=&#8706;Re&#189; a &#188; 0 and &#8706; S=&#8706;Im&#189; a &#188; 0. a acquires a non-zero value below T c when 4g 2 &gt; &#969; ph &#969; ex is satisfied ( ffiffiffiffi N p a gives a finite electric (displacement) field or vector potential even in the thermodynamic limit N ! 1 if the atomic density is fixed). The above approximation is justified if the free energy F Dicke &#240;T&#222; &#192;&#240;k B T=N&#222;ln Z Dicke &#240;T&#222; per atom satisfies _&#969; ph =N ( j F Dicke &#240;T&#222;j in the thermodynamic limit <ref type="bibr">45,</ref><ref type="bibr">46,</ref><ref type="bibr">48,</ref><ref type="bibr">49</ref> . Following the above treatment, we calculated the expectation values of the Er 3&#254; spin and Fe 3&#254; qAFM magnon operators in the extended Dicke Hamiltonian, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), at a finite temperature. In the thermodynamic limit N ! 1 the partition function Z&#240;T&#222; Tr&#189;e &#192; &#292;=&#240;k B T&#222; can be approximately evaluated by replacing the trace over the magnonic variables with an integral over c-numbers a r ; a i 2 R,</p><p>, as Z&#240;T&#222; Z d a r d a i &#960;=N Tr e &#192; &#292;eff &#240; a r ; a i &#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; h i &#240;101&#222; &#188; Z d a r d a i &#960;=N e &#192; S&#240; a;T&#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; ;</p><p>where we define an effective Hamiltonian &#292;eff &#240; a r ;</p><p>by introducing the Er 3&#254; components h &#931;x;z i of the mean fields of the Er 3&#254; ensemble. The action in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">102</ref>) is defined as follows.</p><p>S&#240; a r ; a i ; T&#222; &#192;k B TlnTr e &#192; &#292;eff &#240; a r ; a i &#222;=&#240;k B T&#222;</p><p>Here, we define an effective Hamiltonian per Er 3&#254; spin as</p><p>The site index i is omitted here because all the spins are identical. The action S is minimized at &#8706; S=&#8706; a r &#188; 0 and &#8706; S=&#8706; a i &#188; 0, yielding</p><p>where the expectation values of the Pauli operators are defined for a given a r and a i , as &#963; &#958; h&#963; &#958; i Tr&#189;&#963; &#958; e &#192; &#292;a &#240; a r ; a i &#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; Tr&#189;e &#192; &#292;a &#240; a r ; a i &#222;=&#240;k B T&#222; : &#240;109&#222;</p><p>From Eqs. (107) and (108), the expectation values of the large spin operators can be expressed as</p><p>Substituting these into Eq. ( <ref type="formula">106</ref>) gives</p><p>By simultaneously solving Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">107</ref>)-( <ref type="formula">109</ref>) and (112) for a given temperature, T, we obtain the thermal equilibrium values of the Er 3&#254; spins &#963; x;z and Fe 3&#254; qAFM magnons a r;i . From Eqs. ( <ref type="formula">60</ref>) and ( <ref type="formula">68</ref>)-( <ref type="formula">71</ref>), the thermal equilibrium values of the Fe 3&#254; spins can be obtained from those of the qAFM magnons a r;i as</p><p>Condition for SRPT in extended Dicke Hamiltonian. To quantitatively evaluate the contributions of the Er 3&#254; -magnon couplings and Er 3&#254; -Er 3&#254; exchange interactions to the LTPT, the condition for the SRPT in our extended Dicke Hamiltonian, Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>), can be derived using the Holstein-Primakoff transformation <ref type="bibr">[38]</ref><ref type="bibr">[39]</ref><ref type="bibr">[40]</ref> . &#931;x;y;z can be rewritten using the bosonic annihilation (creation) operator b ( by ) as &#931;x ! by b &#192; N 2 ; &#240;116&#222; &#931;y ! by &#240;N &#192; by b&#222; 1=2 &#254; &#240;N &#192; by b&#222; 1=2 b 2 ; &#240;117&#222; &#931;z ! by &#240;N &#192; by b&#222; 1=2 &#192; &#240;N &#192; by b&#222; 1=2 b i2 :</p><p>Further, all the operators are replaced by c-numbers a r ; a i ; b 2 R as</p><p>Subsequently, the Hamiltonian in Eq. ( <ref type="formula">16</ref>) becomes</p><p>The ground state of the system should satisfy</p><p>Solving the first two equations, the Fe 3&#254; qAFM magnon amplitudes can be expressed as</p><p>By substituting these expressions into Eq. ( <ref type="formula">124</ref>), the following equation for the Er 3&#254; amplitude can be obtained.</p><p>For a real non-zero value of b to exist, the parameters must satisfy Eq. ( <ref type="formula">22</ref>).</p></div><note xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" place="foot" xml:id="foot_0"><p>COMMUNICATIONS PHYSICS | (2022) 5:3 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-021-00785-z | www.nature.com/commsphys</p></note>
		</body>
		</text>
</TEI>
