alphaFeedback

WorksPhysics and Astronomy

Theory of High-Temperature Fractional Chern Phases in Monolayer van der Waals Kagome Materials A2_2T3_3X4_4

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

Fractional Chern insulators bring the fractional quantum Hall effect, with its anyonic excitations, to zero magnetic field. So far they have been realized in moiré materials, where the long superlattice period weakens electronic interactions and confines these phases to cryogenic temperatures. Early proposals instead envisioned topological flat bands on atomic-scale lattices, where fractionalization could persist to far higher temperatures, but a suitable material has been lacking. Here we theoretically identify monolayers of the recently synthesized van der Waals kagome family A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4 as such a platform, combining intrinsic topological flat bands and strong Coulomb interactions with gate-tunable carrier density and layer assembly. Exact diagonalization of models derived from density functional theory reveals ferromagnetism over broad filling ranges, supporting diverse fractional Chern insulators, anomalous composite Fermi liquids, and charge-ordered phases. In particular, in Cs2Pd3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4, the fractional Chern insulator exhibits a many-body gap of approximately 26 meV in the largest system accessible with band mixing allowing at most one interband electron-hole excitation. Layer assembly further provides a natural route to fractional quantum spin Hall insulators: bilayers with antiparallel magnetizations support this phase at realistic separations. These results identify an experimentally accessible material family in which chemical composition, carrier density, and stacking offer complementary routes to fractionalization at enhanced energy scales and control over topological order.

main.pdf

Introduction

Fractional quantum Hall phases are among the most remarkable forms of quantum matter, hosting quasiparticles that carry fractional charge and obey anyonic statistics [1, 2, 3, 4]. These exotic excitations lie at the heart of topological quantum computation [5, 6], connecting fundamental many-body physics with the prospect of protected quantum information. Recent experimental breakthroughs in twisted bilayer MoTe2\mathrm{MoTe}_{2} and rhombohedral multilayer graphene have realized fractional Chern insulators [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15], fulfilling a long-standing theoretical vision of fractional quantum Hall physics without an external magnetic field [16, 17, 18]. Yet the prospect of room-temperature fractionalization envisioned in early proposals [19] remains distant, as the long superlattice length scales constrain their characteristic interaction energies. Larger many-body gaps could bring fractionalization within reach of a broader range of experimental probes like photoemission spectroscopy [20] and potentially improve the robustness of prospective quantum technologies. Beyond these advantages, alternative materials can exhibit distinct phase diagrams, offering opportunities to investigate how fractionalized phases compete with other electronic order.

In this work, we identify monolayers of the recently synthesized van der Waals kagome family A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4} [21] as a platform for diverse fractionalized phases, higher Chern bands, and symmetry breaking Figure 1. Weak interlayer van der Waals bonding permits mechanical exfoliation into monolayers, enabling electrostatic control of the carrier density [21]. Band structure calculations reveal an isolated kagome band manifold near the Fermi level, with spin–orbit coupling endowing its nearly flat upper band with nontrivial topology Figure 2. The atomic lattice spacing also supports substantially larger Coulomb energy scales than those typical of moiré superlattices, opening a route to fractionalization at elevated temperatures. Together, these features and the tunability of spin-orbit coupling, Coulomb interactions, and band dispersion of the A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4} family provide a broad, experimentally accessible parameter space for exploring fractional Chern insulators. To explore these possibilities systematically, we study monolayers of six experimentally synthesized materials [21]: Cs2Pd3S4\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4}, Rb2Pd3S4\mathrm{Rb}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4}, Cs2Ni3S4\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Ni}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4}, Cs2Ni3Se4\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Ni}_{3}\mathrm{Se}_{4}, Rb2Pd3Se4\mathrm{Rb}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{Se}_{4}, and Cs2Pt3S4\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Pt}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4}. We perform exact diagonalization of tight-binding models fitted to density functional theory calculations, using the Ohno interaction to interpolate between onsite Hubbard repulsion and the long-range Coulomb interaction [22]. The Ohno interaction provides a minimal phenomenological description of interactions in the low-energy dxyd_{xy} bands, capturing the finite onsite repulsion associated with the orbital extent while retaining nonlocal Coulomb tail [23, 24, 25].

Fractional Chern States and Phase Diagrams of Kagome Monolayers

Figure 1. Fractional Chern States and Phase Diagrams of Kagome Monolayers. (a) Schematic compound structure for monolayer A2_2T3_3X4_4. (b) Different types of Chern insulators and symmetry-broken states exhibited by A2_2T3_3X4_4 monolayers. The higher Chern numbers 2 and 3 appear in Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4, and Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4. (c-i) (c) Phases that we have identified for (d) Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (e) Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (f) Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4, (g) Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_4, (h) Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4, and (i) Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4. FM and PM stand for ferromagnet and paramagnet.

Band structures for kagome monolayers

Figure 2. Band Structures for Kagome Monolayers. Black curves show tight-binding dispersions fitted to the DFT bands shown in red for (a) Cs₂Pd₃S₄, (b) Rb₂Pd₃S₄, (c) Cs₂Ni₃S₄, (d) Cs₂Ni₃Se₄, (e) Rb₂Pd₃Se₄, and (f) Cs₂Pt₃S₄.

Our key findings are as follows. We find robust ferromagnetism over broad filling ranges, supporting a reremarkably rich variety of correlated phases encompassing high Chern bands, Jain-sequence fractional Chern insulators, anomalous composite Fermi liquids, and charge-density waves [Fig. 1(d)-(i)]. Notably, the fractional Chern insulator in Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 retains a finite-size many-body gap of approximately 26 meV with band mixing between the two upper kagome bands in the largest accessible system size [Fig. 3(a)], exceeding typical theoretical gaps in moiré systems [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37]. We also consider bilayers made of kagome materials with negligible interlayer tunneling across a hexagonal boron nitride (hBN) spacer. Antiparallel layer magnetizations select opposite Chern-band chiralities [Fig. 4(a)], providing a natural route to fractional quantum spin Hall insulators, whose stabilization in real materials remains a major challenge [38, 39, 40]. These results establish van der Waals kagome materials as a versatile platform for fractional quantum matter, combining enhanced energy scales with tunable competition among correlated phases.

Results

Band Structures

We begin by examining the band structures obtained from density functional theory (DFT) and their tight-binding representations

H0=∑k,α,β,σhαβσ(k)ckασ†ckβσ.(1)H_0 = \sum_{\mathbf{k},\alpha,\beta,\sigma} h_{\alpha\beta\sigma}(\mathbf{k})c_{\mathbf{k}\alpha\sigma}^{\dagger}c_{\mathbf{k}\beta\sigma}. \tag*{(1)}

where ckασ†c_{\mathbf{k}\alpha\sigma}^{\dagger} (ckασc_{\mathbf{k}\alpha\sigma}) creates (annihilates) a dxyd_{xy}-orbital electron with momentum k\mathbf{k} and spin σ\sigma on sublattice α\alpha. hαβσ(k)h_{\alpha\beta\sigma}(\mathbf{k}) incorporates symmetry-allowed hopping up to ninth-nearest neighbors, including intrinsic spin–orbit coupling. Diagonalization yields three spin-degenerate kagome bands. The tight-binding and spin-orbit coupling parameters are fitted to the DFT calculations [Fig. 2] and listed in Tables S1 and S2, while the band characteristics are in Table S3 [41].

Let us comment on the distinct roles of A, T, and X sites in shaping the kagome bands. The alkali-metal A sites lie outside the kagome plane and contribute little orbital weight to the low-energy dxyd_{xy} bands, consistent with the nearly identical band structures of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 and Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4. The kagome-forming T atoms directly control hopping and spin-orbit coupling. For example, in the Cs-based sulfides, replacing Ni with Pd increases the full kagome bandwidth from 0.4 eV to 1.1 eV [Fig. 2(a), (c)], consistent with the greater spatial extent of Pd 4dd orbitals relative to Ni 3dd orbitals. Pt 5dd orbitals produce a larger spin-orbit coupling gap of 0.1 eV [Fig. 2(f)], approximately twice that of the Ni and Pd compounds, while the Pt compound’s full kagome bandwidth lies between those of its Ni and Pd counterparts. The chalcogen X sites mediate hopping between T sites, influencing the destructive interference underlying flat bands [42, 43]. Replacing S with Se broadens the topmost flat bands in both the Ni and Pd series, consistent with the more extended Se 4p orbitals.

Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 and Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4 offer particularly favorable conditions for fractionalizations. Both combine the narrowest upper flat bands with overall kagome bandwidths among the largest in the family, closely approaching the ideal kagome limit [42, 44, 45]. This proximity is accompanied by small values of the trace-condition violation [41, 46]

T=12π∫BZd2k[Tr⁡g(k)−∣Ω(k)∣]≈0.7,\mathcal{T} = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{\mathrm{BZ}} d^{2}k \left[\operatorname{Tr} g(\mathbf{k}) - \lvert\Omega(\mathbf{k}) \rvert\right] \approx0.7,

where g(k)g(\mathbf{k}) and Ω(k)\Omega(\mathbf{k}) are the quantum metric and Berry curvature of the flat bands. Smaller T\mathcal{T} indicates a closer approach to the ideal geometry, a feature favorable to fractional Chern insulators [47, 48, 49, 50]. Further, large dispersions of the lower bands can suppress the effect of virtual interband excitations, helping stabilize fractionalization against band mixing.

Ferromagnetism

Having characterized the single-particle bands, we now investigate electron–electron correlations. We adopt the Ohno interaction, motivated by first-principles studies of transition-metal compounds showing that this form captures the spatial dependence of dd-orbital Coulomb matrix elements under local background screening [51]

V(r)=U01+U02r2/UC2,(2)V(r) = \frac{U_{0}}{\sqrt{1+U_{0}^{2}r^{2}/U_{C}^{2}}}, \tag*{(2)}

where r=∣r∣r = \lvert\mathbf{r} \rvert, U0U_{0} is the onsite Hubbard repulsion, and UC=e2/4πϵU_{C} = e^{2}/4\pi\epsilon is the Coulomb prefactor, with ϵ\epsilon the effective background permittivity. This form recovers V(0)=U0V(0) = U_{0} and approaches the Coulomb tail V(r)→UC/rV(r) \to U_{C}/r for r≫UC/U0r \gg U_{C}/U_{0}. We take ϵ=5ϵ0\epsilon= 5\epsilon_{0} and a lattice constant a=6.3a = 6.3 Å [21], corresponding to a characteristic Coulomb energy e2/4πϵa≃0.457e^{2}/4\pi\epsilon a \simeq0.457 eV. We set U0=3U_{0} = 3 eV as a representative value referring to reported screened interactions in transition-metal dd orbitals [52, 53, 54, 55, 56].

We use exact diagonalization to investigate spontaneous symmetry breaking in the partially filled flat bands, focusing on ferromagnetism [Fig. 1(d)-(i)]. We project onto the two spin components of the uppermost kagome band, treating the four lower spin-resolved bands as fully occupied and inert. Conservation of the total SzS_{z} allows us to diagonalize the Hamiltonian independently in each SzS_{z} sector and compare the resulting many-body spectra at fixed total filling νtot=ν↑+ν↓\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \nu_{\uparrow} + \nu_{\downarrow}, with 0<νtot<20 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 2. In the undoped compounds, the Fermi level lies above the kagome bands and therefore we focus on 1<νtot<21 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 2, corresponding to less than one hole per unit cell relative to the fully occupied flat bands.

The stability of ferromagnetism correlates with the bandwidth of the flat bands [41]. In Cs₂Pd₃S₄, Rb₂Pd₃S₄, and Cs₂Ni₃S₄, which have the narrowest upper bands, the ground state exhibits maximal spin polarization and a substantial spin gap of approximately 30 meV or larger over broad filling ranges (red regions in Figure 1(d)-(Figure 1i)), except near full filling, νtot→2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} \to2 [41]. The energy splittings between different spin sectors decrease toward νtot=15/8\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 15/8 and collapse, indicating the emergence of paramagnetism near full filling [41]. By contrast, Cs₂Ni₃Se₄, Rb₂Pd₃Se₄, and Cs₂Pt₃S₄, with broader upper bands, exhibit substantially narrower ferromagnetic regimes. Extended filling intervals host partially spin-polarized states with ∣Sz∣<(N↑−N↓)/2\lvert S_{z} \rvert< (N_{\uparrow} - N_{\downarrow})/2 (where NσN_{\sigma} is the total spin-σ\sigma electron number) and small energy splittings between different spin sectors [41] (dashed regions in Figure 1(d)-(Figure 1i)). At higher fillings, this gives way to a paramagnetic regime (blue regions in Figure 1(d)-(Figure 1i)). In passing, we note that the qualitative trends in symmetry breaking remain largely unchanged when the Ohno interaction is replaced by Hubbard repulsion [41].

In these compounds, ferromagnetism is accompanied by Chern bands. Despite their weaker ferromagnetism, Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4 and Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 host bands with higher Chern numbers, ∣C∣=2|C| = 2 and ∣C∣=3|C| = 3, whereas the remaining four compounds have ∣C∣=1|C| = 1 [41].

Fractionalizations

We now investigate intrinsic topological order and competing phases in regimes of robust ferromagnetism, focusing on total fillings νtot=5/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/4, 4/34/3, 7/57/5, 10/710/7, 3/23/2, 11/711/7, 8/58/5, 5/35/3, and 7/47/4. We perform exact diagonalization with the minority-spin upper flat band partially filled and all other bands fully occupied. To capture the leading effects of band mixing, we retain configurations with at most one interband electron–hole excitation [57, 58]. We distinguish fractional Chern insulators, charge-density waves, and anomalous composite Fermi liquids using ground-state degeneracy patterns, spectral flow under flux insertion, many-body Chern numbers, structure factors, momentum-space occupations, and the finite-size scaling of low-energy splittings [18, 59, 60, 61, 62]. Further details are provided in Methods and [41].

Figure 3 summarizes the filling-dependent phases identified by our exact diagonalization calculations. Consistent with their favorable band geometry, Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 and Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4 host the richest sequences of fractional Chern phases (green solid bars in Figure 1(d)–(Figure 1i)). In particular, within the one-excitation truncation and at the largest accessible system size, N=24N = 24, Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 exhibits a threefold ground-state manifold separated from excited states by a many-body gap of approximately 26 meV [Fig. 3(a)]. Its spectral flow under flux insertion [Fig. 3(b)] and many-body Chern number CMB=1/3C_{\mathrm{MB}} = 1/3 support its identification as a Laughlin-type fractional Chern insulator [41]. At the Jain sequence fillings νtot=10/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 10/7, 11/711/7, 8/58/5, and 5/35/3, analogous degeneracy patterns, spectral flow, and many-body Chern numbers indicate additional fractional Chern phases [41]. Notably, the state at νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3 also exhibits a substantial finite-size gap of approximately 19 meV. Similar cascades of fractional Chern phases occur in Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4 [Fig. 1(e)]. Table S5 summarizes the finite-size many-body gaps of the identified fractional Chern states.

Exact diagonalization plots for Cs2Pd3S4

Figure 3. Exact Diagonalization of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4. (a) Many-body spectra at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 of system size N=24N = 24. The three degenerate ground states (blue diamond, orange square, and green triangle) are separated from the excited states (gray crosses) by a gap of 26 meV. (b) Spectral flow under flux insertion at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 of system size N=18N = 18. (c) Many-body spectra at νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2 of system size N=24N = 24. The low-lying states (marked in orange dots) exhibit twofold quasi-degeneracies. (d) Many-body spectra of the half-filled lowest Landau level at N=24N = 24. (e) Momentum-space occupation number n(k)n(k) and (f) structure factor S(q)S(q) averaged over the six low-lying states in (c). The two dashed circles in (f) are ∣q∣=kF|q| = k_{\mathrm{F}} and ∣q∣=2kF|q| = 2k_{\mathrm{F}}, respectively, where kF=ABZ/2πk_{\mathrm{F}} = \sqrt{A_{\mathrm{BZ}}/2\pi}.

νtot\nu_{\mathrm{tot}}4/37/510/711/78/55/312/7
system sizeN=24N = 24N=25N = 25N=21N = 21N=21N = 21N=25N = 25N=27N = 27N=28N = 28
Cs₂Pd₃S₄26-1215319-
Rb₂Pd₃S₄12-4189194
Cs₂Ni₃S₄-----2-

Table S5. Many-Body Gaps of Fractional Chern Insulators. The energy gap between the highest-energy state in the ground-state multiplet and the lowest excited state is presented for the largest accessible system size at each filling. The gaps are given in meV and rounded to the nearest meV. Note that the accessible size gets larger as the system gets closer to full filling νtot=2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 2, because higher electron filling leads to fewer holes and hence a smaller Hilbert-space dimension at fixed NN.

At half filling νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2 of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4, we find evidence for a gapless anomalous composite Fermi liquid (magenta solid bar in Figure 1(d)). The low-energy many-body spectra [Fig. 3(c)] closely resemble those of the half-filled lowest Landau level [Fig. 3(d)], including the momentum sectors of the lowest-lying states and twofold degeneracies. Furthermore, the occupation number averaged over the ground states [Fig. 3(e)]

n(k)=1NGS∑i∈GS⟨Ψi∣ck†ck∣Ψi⟩,n(k) = \frac{1}{N_{\mathrm{GS}}} \sum_{i \in\mathrm{GS}} \langle\Psi_i | c^\dagger_k c_k | \Psi_i \rangle,

remains nearly uniform, satisfying ∣n(k)−1/2∣<0.13|n(k) - 1/2| < 0.13 at the largest accessible system size, N=24N = 24, with no discernible electronic Fermi surface. This bound is comparable to the corresponding value of 0.17 reported for

the anomalous composite Fermi liquid in twisted bilayer MoTe2_2 [61]. Further evidence comes from the projected static structure factor [Fig. 3(f)]

S(q)=1N[⟨ρˉqρˉ−q⟩−δq,0∣⟨ρˉq⟩∣2],S(\mathbf{q}) = \frac{1}{N} \left[ \langle\bar{\rho}_{\mathbf{q}}\bar{\rho}_{-\mathbf{q}} \rangle- \delta_{\mathbf{q},0} |\langle\bar{\rho}_{\mathbf{q}} \rangle|^2 \right],

where ρˉq\bar{\rho}_{\mathbf{q}} is the density operator projected onto the upper flat band. We observe pronounced peaks near ∣q∣=2kF|\mathbf{q}| = 2k_{\mathrm{F}} and nearly vanishing weight for ∣q∣>2kF|\mathbf{q}| > 2k_{\mathrm{F}} [41]. These density correlations, together with the absence of a discernible electronic Fermi surface, support an emergent composite-fermion Fermi surface [20, 29, 61, 63, 64]. We also find signatures consistent with an anomalous composite Fermi liquid in Cs₂Pd₃S₄ at quarter filling of the flat band (νtot=5/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/4) [29, 41, 61, 63]. At several filling fractions, Cs₂Pd₃S₄, Rb₂Pd₃S₄, and Cs₂Ni₃S₄ exhibit translational symmetry breaking and form charge-density waves, characterized by multifold ground states and Bragg peaks in S(q)S(\boldsymbol{q}) (brown solid bars in Figure 1(d)-(Figure 1f)). Detailed characterizations are in [41].

Bilayers. The fractional Chern phases in these kagome monolayers naturally motivate bilayer heterostructures, which can be readily assembled using established van der Waals techniques [21]. Antiparallel layer magnetizations produce opposite Chern-band chiralities, providing a route to fractional quantum spin Hall insulators. We consider two Cs₂Pd₃S₄ monolayers at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 per layer, separated by an hBN spacer that suppresses interlayer tunneling [Fig. 4(a)]. We assume that ferromagnetism remains robust in each layer, and use the Ohno and Coulomb potentials for intralayer and interlayer interactions.

We use exact diagonalization to map the phase diagram as a function of d/ad/a [Fig. 4(c)], where dd is the interlayer separation and a=6.3a = 6.3 Å is the intralayer lattice constant. At small d/ad/a, the ground state is fully layer polarized and effectively realizes the monolayer fractional Chern insulator at νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3. As d/ad/a increases, an intermediate layer-balanced metallic phase emerges at d/a≃0.22d/a \simeq0.22 and gives way to a fractional quantum spin Hall insulator at d/a≃0.52d/a \simeq0.52. This insulator effectively realizes two decoupled fractional Chern insulators with opposite chiralities [Fig. 4(b)]. The measured interlayer spacing of approximately 7 Å [21] corresponds to d/a≃1.1d/a \simeq1.1, well within the fractional quantum spin Hall regime of our model [Fig. 4(b),(c)], suggesting an experimentally accessible route to realizing this phase.

Fractional Spin Hall Insulators in Bilayers

Figure 4. Fractional Spin Hall Insulators in Bilayers. (a) Schematic structure of bilayer kagome separated by hBN with antiparallel magnetizations. (b) Many-body spectra of two Cs₂Pd₃S₄ monolayers at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 per layer, d/a=1d/a = 1 for system size N=15N = 15. The ninefold quasi-degenerate ground states signal a fractional quantum spin Hall phase. (c) Phase diagram for bilayer Cs₂Pd₃S₄ as a function of d/ad/a. FQSH stands for fractional quantum spin Hall insulator.

Discussions

We identify the van der Waals kagome family A₂T₃X₄ as a platform for diverse correlated topological phases at enhanced energy scales. Within the ferromagnetic regimes, we find spin-polarized bands with Chern numbers up to ∣C∣=3\lvert C\rvert= 3, alongside Jain-sequence fractional Chern insulators, anomalous composite Fermi liquids, and competing charge order. The Pd-based sulfides are particularly favorable: Cs₂Pd₃S₄ exhibits a finite-size many-body gap of approximately 26 meV in the largest accessible system with band mixing that retains at most one interband electron–hole excitation. Bilayers with antiparallel layer magnetizations further support fractional quantum spin Hall insulators at realistic interlayer separations. Chemical diversity, gate-tunable carrier density, and van der Waals layer assembly together make these kagome materials versatile platforms for realizing and controlling fractionalized quantum matter.

These results motivate several directions for future investigation. The most immediate experimental priority is systematic transport characterization, building on preliminary observations of insulating behavior at partial filling of the flat band [21]. Gate-dependent measurements could test for fractional Hall responses and map the competition among the predicted phases. Secondly, calculations on larger systems using methods such as density matrix renormalization group could clarify the phases at additional fillings, where our finite-size spectra and ground-state diagnostics do not yet establish a definite symmetry-breaking pattern or topological order. Finally, flat bands may also promote other collective instabilities, including superconductivity driven by interaction channels beyond those retained in our minimal model. Together, these efforts could reveal how fractionalization, symmetry breaking, and superconductivity compete and intertwine within a single material family.

Acknowledgements

S. O., D. S., and G. Y. C. acknowledge the financial support from Samsung Science and Technology Foundation under Project Number SSTF-BA2401-03, the NRF of Korea (Grants No. RS-2026-25479545, RS-2024-00410027, RS-2026-25467036, RS-2024-00444725, RS-2023-00256050, RS-2025-25453111, RS-2025-08542968) funded by the Korean Government (MSIT), the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under Award No. FA23862514026, and Institute for Basic Science under project code IBS-R014-D1. S. O. acknowledges the support from the Agency for Defense Development through a grant funded by the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) (UI257011TE). J. H., J. C., and M. K. are supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea through grant nos. RS-2025-23525391 and RS-2026-25496507. M. K. was supported by the Creative-Pioneering Researchers Program through Seoul National University. M. K. acknowledges POSCO Science Fellowship from Cheongam Foundation. This work is in part supported by the Korea Max Planck Quantum Materials Centre (KOMQUEST), the Top-Tier Premier International Research Consortium through Grant No. RS-2026-25585727, and the core center program by the Ministry of Education through Grant No. 2021R1A6C101B418.

Methods

DFT Calculation.

The electronic structures of A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4 were calculated independently using Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP) [65, 66] and Quantum ESPRESSO package (QE) [67, 68], yielding consistent results. To ensure experimental relevance of our calculations, the DFT parameters were refined through comparison with the experimentally measured band structures of A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4 [21]. In particular, we found that the Heyd-Scuseria-Ernzerhof (HSE) [69] hybrid exchange-correlation functional, which incorporates a fraction (aHFa_{\mathrm{HF}}) of Hartree-Fock exchange, was necessary to accurately reproduce the experimental dispersion of A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4. We used aHF=5%a_{\mathrm{HF}} = 5\%, 5%5\%, 15%15\%, 15%15\%, and 15%15\% for Cs2Ni3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Ni}_3\mathrm{S}_4, Cs2Ni3Se4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Ni}_3\mathrm{Se}_4, (Rb,Cs)2Pd3S4(\mathrm{Rb},\mathrm{Cs})_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4, Rb2Pd3Se4\mathrm{Rb}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{Se}_4, and Cs2Pt3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pt}_3\mathrm{S}_4, respectively. Monolayer calculations were performed after relaxing the lattice structure with the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) [70] functional using a Γ\Gamma-centered 12×12×112 \times12 \times1 mesh, and a vacuum spacing of up to 2020 Å was introduced along the out-of-plane direction. For the electronic structure calculations, VASP used projector augmented-wave datasets [71] with a plane-wave energy cutoff of 450450 eV for Γ\Gamma-centered 5×5×15 \times5 \times1 kk-point mesh, whereas QE used optimized norm-conserving Vanderbilt (ONCV) pseudopotentials [72] with a wave cutoff of 100100 Ry for Γ\Gamma-centered 6×6×16 \times6 \times1 kk-point mesh. Spin-orbit coupling effects were included for all calculations. Following the self-consistent HSE calculations, maximally localized Wannier functions were constructed using the Wannier90 package [73]. The resulting Wannier Hamiltonians of monolayer A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4, constructed from transition metal (T) dd orbitals and chalcogen (X) pp orbitals, were used to interpolate the HSE band structures along high-symmetry paths.

Tight-Binding Parameter Optimization.

For Cs2Pd3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4 and Rb2Pd3S4\mathrm{Rb}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4, we have adopted the parameters used in [21]. For the remaining materials in the A2T3X4\mathrm{A}_2\mathrm{T}_3\mathrm{X}_4 family, we performed a neural-network-assisted optimization of the tight-binding Hamiltonian to obtain an unbiased fit to the DFT band structures. Three independently trainable neural-network modules were assigned to distinct subsets of the tight-binding parameters. The first module (N1) generated the on-site energy and nearest-neighbor hopping integrals; the second module (N2) generated the remaining hopping integrals; and the third module (N3) generated the spin-orbit-coupling parameters. The network parameters were optimized by minimizing the weighted mean squared error between the tight-binding and DFT band structures. Within each optimization cycle, N1 and N2 were optimized sequentially using the DFT bands without spin-orbit coupling, followed by optimization of N3 using the DFT bands with spin-orbit coupling. For each material, we compared two initialization protocols, random initialization and initialization from tight-binding parameters extracted from the Wannier Hamiltonians, yielding consistent results. The optimized tight-binding parameter sets closely reproduce the DFT bands within the target energy window, as shown in Figure 2.

Exact Diagonalization.

We diagonalize the many-body Hamiltonian H=H0+HintH = H_0 + H_{\mathrm{int}}, where

Hint=12A∑q,QV(q+Q):ρq+Qρ−q−Q:H_{\mathrm{int}} = \frac{1}{2A} \sum_{\boldsymbol{q},\boldsymbol{Q}} V(\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}) : \rho_{\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}}\rho_{-\boldsymbol{q}-\boldsymbol{Q}} :

Here, Q\boldsymbol{Q} are reciprocal lattice vectors, ρq\rho_{\boldsymbol{q}} denotes the electron density operator, and

V(p)=e22ϵpe−pUC/U0V(p) = \frac{e^2}{2\epsilon p} e^{-p U_C/U_0}

is the Fourier transform of the Ohno interaction, Eq. (2), with p=∣p∣p = \lvert\boldsymbol{p}\rvert. The diagonalization procedure is as follows: after fixing a momentum grid of finite system size NN, we choose the total electron number in the six kagome bands between 5N5N and 6N6N. Initially, we fully fill the lower four bands with 4N4N electrons and restrict excitation to upper bands, to keep the Hilbert space dimension manageable. We perform exact diagonalization within each SzS_z- and momentum-resolved subspace. Once the maximal SzS_z sector is chosen as a ground state, the three majority-spin bands become all fully filled and this only contributes as a constant Hartree shift. In this regime, the Hilbert space is effectively spinless and this allows us to consider further interband mixing, thereby investigating the spin-polarized sector thoroughly. To select sufficiently large momentum grids while incorporating this band-mixing effect, we truncate the Hilbert space by allowing at most one interband electron–hole excitation from the spin-minority middle band to the topmost flat band. For all the calculations, sparse diagonalization was performed using Krylov methods. Further details of the Hamiltonian and band mixing process are discussed in Supplementary Information.

Bilayer System.

For bilayer systems, we consider the following interaction,

Vℓℓ′(p)=e22ϵp{e−pUC/U0,ℓ=ℓ′e−pd,ℓ≠ℓ′(3)V^{\ell\ell'}(\mathbf{p}) = \frac{e^2}{2\epsilon p} \begin{cases} e^{-p U_C/U_0}, & \ell= \ell' \\ e^{-pd}, & \ell\ne\ell' \end{cases} \tag*{(3)}

to distinguish intralayer and interlayer interactions. The exact diagonalization follows the same strategy as in the spinful monolayer case, as we suppress the spin degrees of freedom and introduce layer pseudospin indices ℓ,ℓ′\ell,\ell', making the computation essentially equivalent. We neglect band mixing in this calculation owing to computational constraints on the accessible system size.

Supplementary Information for “Theory of High-Temperature Fractional Chern Phases in Monolayer van der Waals Kagome Materials A2_2T3_3X4_4”

Soomin Oh; Jiyong Han; Jinhyeok Choi; Donghae Seo; Mingu Kang; Gil Young Cho

supp.pdf

Supplementary Information for ``Theory of High-Temperature Fractional Chern Phases in Monolayer van der Waals Kagome Materials A2_2T3_3X4_4''

Tight-Binding Model

In this supplementary section, we explicitly write the tight-binding Hamiltonian on a kagome lattice, including hoppings up to ninth-nearest neighbors. The unit cell is spanned by two lattice vectors a1=a(1,0)\mathbf{a}_1 = a(1,0), a2=a(1/2,3/2)\mathbf{a}_2 = a(1/2,\sqrt{3}/2), where we set a=1a=1. We write the single-electron Hamiltonian in a 6-component spinor basis

Ck=(ckA↑ ckB↑ ckC↑ ckA↓ ckB↓ ckC↓)T,C_k = \left(c_{kA\uparrow}\ c_{kB\uparrow}\ c_{kC\uparrow}\ c_{kA\downarrow}\ c_{kB\downarrow}\ c_{kC\downarrow}\right)^{T},

where AA, BB, CC denote the three sublattices of a kagome lattice. The Hamiltonian in momentum space is

H0=∑kCk†(h+(k)00h−(k))Ck.H_0 = \sum_k C_k^\dagger \begin{pmatrix} h_+(\mathbf{k}) & 0 \\ 0 & h_-(\mathbf{k}) \end{pmatrix} C_k.

The diagonal components are

hAA±(k)=−t3(eik1+e−ik1+eik2+e−ik2)−t3′(ei(k1−k2)+ei(k2−k1))−t6(ei(k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−k1)+ei(2k1−k2)+ei(k2−2k1))−t6′(ei(k1+k2)+e−i(k1+k2))−t8(ei2k1+e−i2k1+ei2k2+e−i2k2)−t8′(ei(2k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−2k1)),(4)h_{AA\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -t_3 \left(e^{i k_1}+e^{-i k_1}+e^{i k_2}+e^{-i k_2}\right)-t'_3\left(e^{i(k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-k_1)}\right) \\ -t_6\left(e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}+e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-2k_1)}\right)-t'_6\left(e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}\right) \\ -t_8\left(e^{i2k_1}+e^{-i2k_1}+e^{i2k_2}+e^{-i2k_2}\right)-t'_8\left(e^{i(2k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-2k_1)}\right), \tag*{(4)}
hBB±(k)=−t3(eik1+e−ik1+ei(k1−k2)+ei(k2−k1))−t3′(eik2+e−ik2)−t6(ei(k1+k2)+e−i(k1+k2)+ei(k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−k1))−t6′(ei(2k1−k2)+ei(k2−2k1))−t8(ei2k1+e−i2k1+ei(2k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−2k1))−t8′(ei2k2+e−i2k2),(5)h_{BB\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -t_3\left(e^{i k_1}+e^{-i k_1}+e^{i(k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-k_1)}\right)-t'_3\left(e^{i k_2}+e^{-i k_2}\right) \\ -t_6\left(e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}\right)-t'_6\left(e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-2k_1)}\right) \\ -t_8\left(e^{i2k_1}+e^{-i2k_1}+e^{i(2k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-2k_1)}\right)-t'_8\left(e^{i2k_2}+e^{-i2k_2}\right), \tag*{(5)}
hCC±(k)=−t3(eik2+e−ik2+ei(k1−k2)+ei(k2−k1))−t3′(eik1+e−ik1)−t6(ei(k1+k2)+e−i(k1+k2)+ei(2k1−k2)+ei(2k2−k1))−t6′(ei(k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−k1))−t8(ei2k2+e−i2k2+ei(2k1−2k2)+ei(2k2−2k1))−t8′(ei2k1+e−i2k1),(6)h_{CC\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -t_3\left(e^{i k_2}+e^{-i k_2}+e^{i(k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-k_1)}\right)-t'_3\left(e^{i k_1}+e^{-i k_1}\right) \\ -t_6\left(e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}\right)-t'_6\left(e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}\right) \\ -t_8\left(e^{i2k_2}+e^{-i2k_2}+e^{i(2k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-2k_1)}\right)-t'_8\left(e^{i2k_1}+e^{-i2k_1}\right), \tag*{(6)}

and the off-diagonal components are

hAB±(k)=hBA±∗(k)=−(t1±iλ1)(1+e−ik1)−(t2±iλ2)(e−ik2+ei(k2−k1))−(t4±iλ4)(eik2+e−i(k1+k2)+ei(k2−2k1)+ei(k1−k2))−(t5±iλ5)(eik1+e−i2k1)−(t7±iλ7)(ei(2k2−k1)+e−i2k2+ei(2k2−2k1)+ei(k1−2k2))−(t9±iλ9)(e−i(2k1+k2)+ei(k2−3k1)+ei(k1+k2)+ei(2k2−k1)),(7)\begin{aligned} h_{AB\pm}(\mathbf{k}) &= h^*_{BA\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -(t_1 \pm i\lambda_1)\left(1+e^{-ik_1}\right) -(t_2 \pm i\lambda_2)\left(e^{-ik_2}+e^{i(k_2-k_1)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_4 \pm i\lambda_4)\left(e^{ik_2}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-2k_1)}+e^{i(k_1-k_2)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_5 \pm i\lambda_5)\left(e^{ik_1}+e^{-i2k_1}\right) -(t_7 \pm i\lambda_7)\left(e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}+e^{-i2k_2}+e^{i(2k_2-2k_1)}+e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_9 \pm i\lambda_9)\left(e^{-i(2k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-3k_1)}+e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}\right), \tag*{(7)} \end{aligned}
hAC±(k)=hCA±∗(k)=−(t1∓iλ1)(1+e−ik2)−(t2∓iλ2)(e−ik1+ei(k1−k2))−(t4∓iλ4)(eik1+e−i(k1+k2)+ei(k1−2k2)+ei(k2−k1))−(t5∓iλ5)(e−ik2+e−i2k2)−(t7∓iλ7)(ei(2k1−k2)+e−i2k1+ei(2k1−2k2)+ei(k2−2k1))−(t9∓iλ9)(ei(2k2−k1)+ei(k1+k2)+ei(k1−3k2)+e−i(k1+2k2)),(8)\begin{aligned} h_{AC\pm}(\mathbf{k}) &= h^*_{CA\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -(t_1 \mp i\lambda_1)\left(1+e^{-ik_2}\right) -(t_2 \mp i\lambda_2)\left(e^{-ik_1}+e^{i(k_1-k_2)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_4 \mp i\lambda_4)\left(e^{ik_1}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-k_1)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_5 \mp i\lambda_5)\left(e^{-ik_2}+e^{-i2k_2}\right) -(t_7 \mp i\lambda_7)\left(e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}+e^{-i2k_1}+e^{i(2k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-2k_1)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_9 \mp i\lambda_9)\left(e^{i(2k_2-k_1)}+e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{i(k_1-3k_2)}+e^{-i(k_1+2k_2)}\right), \tag*{(8)} \end{aligned}
hBC±(k)=hCB±∗(k)=−(t1±iλ1)(1+ei(k1−k2))−(t2±iλ2)(eik1+e−ik2)−(t4±iλ4)(e−ik1+eik2+ei(k1−2k2)+ei(2k1−k2))−(t5±iλ5)(ei(k2−k1)+ei(2k1−2k2))−(t7±iλ7)(ei2k1+e−i2k2+ei(k1+k2)+e−i(k1+k2))−(t9±iλ9)(ei(2k1−3k2)+ei(3k1−2k2)+ei(2k1−k2)+ei(k2−2k1)).(9)\begin{aligned} h_{BC\pm}(\mathbf{k}) &= h^*_{CB\pm}(\mathbf{k}) = -(t_1 \pm i\lambda_1)\left(1+e^{i(k_1-k_2)}\right) -(t_2 \pm i\lambda_2)\left(e^{ik_1}+e^{-ik_2}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_4 \pm i\lambda_4)\left(e^{-ik_1}+e^{ik_2}+e^{i(k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_5 \pm i\lambda_5)\left(e^{i(k_2-k_1)}+e^{i(2k_1-2k_2)}\right) -(t_7 \pm i\lambda_7)\left(e^{i2k_1}+e^{-i2k_2}+e^{i(k_1+k_2)}+e^{-i(k_1+k_2)}\right) \\ &\quad-(t_9 \pm i\lambda_9)\left(e^{i(2k_1-3k_2)}+e^{i(3k_1-2k_2)}+e^{i(2k_1-k_2)}+e^{i(k_2-2k_1)}\right). \tag*{(9)} \end{aligned}

Here, ki=k⋅aik_i=\mathbf{k}\cdot\mathbf{a}_i, and tnt_n, λn\lambda_n represent the nnth-nearest-neighbor hopping and spin-orbit coupling parameters, respectively. Note that there are two symmetry-inequivalent contributions of third-, sixth- and eighth-nearest-neighbor hoppings, which are labeled t3t_3, t6t_6, t8t_8 and t3′t'_3, t6′t'_6, t8′t'_8. This is because there are two distinct real-space paths through different intermediate atoms. The real space configurations of sublattices, hoppings, and spin-orbit couplings are illustrated in Figure S1. The parameters of the kagome materials A2_2T3_3X4_4 are listed in Table S1 and Table S2.

Kagome lattice configurations

Figure S1. Kagome Lattice Configurations. Schematic illustration of the three sublattices AA, BB, and CC, hopping amplitudes tnt_n and tn′t'_n, and spin-orbit couplings λn\lambda_n. All hopping paths are illustrated with reference to the AA sublattice.

A2_2T3_3X4_4t1t_1t2t_2t3t_3t3′t'_3t4t_4t5t_5t6t_6t6′t'_6t7t_7t8t_8t8′t'_8t9t_9
Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_40.11340.01640.02550.02550.0067-0.0064-0.00240.00090.008000
Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_40.11460.01540.01950.01760.0105-0.00950.0014-0.00370.0063000
Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_40.03230.00130.00780.00470.0088-0.0149-0.00390.00330.0034-0.00240.00180
Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_40.0351-0.01460.01930.00390.0129-0.0154-0.00600.00480.0034-0.00390.0046-0.0004
Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_40.1103-0.02550.04840.00190.0118-0.0090.0055-0.00960.0049000
Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_40.07570.0403-0.00250.0389-0.00670.0002-0.00610.00420.0052-0.0026-0.0020.0002

Table S1. Tight-Binding Parameters. The parameters are in eV units.

A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4}Cs2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}S4_{4}Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}Se4_{4}Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}Se4_{4}Cs2_{2}Pt3_{3}S4_{4}
Full Bandwidth1.0861.0590.3920.5191.1580.810
SOC gap at Dirac point0.0580.0570.0490.0540.1440.105
Flat Bandwidth0.1510.1490.1540.2640.4800.171

Table S2. Spin-Orbit Coupling Parameters. The parameters are in eV units.

We next diagonalize the Hamiltonian as

∑βhαβσ(k)unβσ(k)=ϵnσ(k)unασ(k),\sum_{\beta}h_{\alpha\beta\sigma}(\mathbf{k})u_{n\beta\sigma}(\mathbf{k})=\epsilon_{n\sigma}(\mathbf{k})u_{n\alpha\sigma}(\mathbf{k}),

where α,β=A,B,C\alpha,\beta=A,B,C denote the sublattices. We define the operators in the band basis cnkσ†=∑αunασ(k)ckασ†c^\dagger_{nk\sigma}=\sum_{\alpha}u_{n\alpha\sigma}(\mathbf{k})c^\dagger_{k\alpha\sigma}. With this, H0H_0 becomes

H0=∑knσϵn(k)cnkσ†cnkσ.(10)H_0=\sum_{kn\sigma}\epsilon_n(\mathbf{k})c^\dagger_{nk\sigma}c_{nk\sigma}. \tag*{(10)}

The three kagome bands are spin-degenerate, i.e. ϵnσ(k)≡ϵn(k)\epsilon_{n\sigma}(\mathbf{k})\equiv\epsilon_n(\mathbf{k}), before introducing ferromagnetism.

Quantum Band Geometry

In this supplementary section, we compare the quantum geometry of the flat kagome bands across the six compounds to characterize their relative suitability for fractional Chern insulators. We evaluate the quantum metric, Tr⁡g(k)\operatorname{Tr}g(\mathbf{k}),

A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4}λ1\lambda_{1}λ2\lambda_{2}λ4\lambda_{4}λ5\lambda_{5}λ7\lambda_{7}λ9\lambda_{9}
Cs2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}0.016700000
Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}0.016500000
Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}S4_{4}0.0110.00010.0014-0.0005-0.00020
Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}Se4_{4}0.0117-0.00040.0005-0.00100.00010
Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}Se4_{4}0.0115-0.00920.0028-0.00230.00070
Cs2_{2}Pt3_{3}S4_{4}0.00460.0335-0.0030.00360.00070

TABLE S2: Spin-Orbit Coupling Parameters. The parameters are in eV units.

TABLE S3: Characteristic Energy Scales. Bandwidths and spin-orbit coupling (SOC)-induced gaps of monolayer kagome A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4} compounds, obtained from the tight-binding band structures. All values are given in eV.

the Berry curvature, Ω(k)\Omega(\boldsymbol{k}), and their difference, Tr⁡g(k)−∣Ω(k)∣\operatorname{Tr} g(\boldsymbol{k}) - \lvert\Omega(\boldsymbol{k})\rvert, which are displayed as momentum-space maps in Figure S2. These quantities are evaluated using the gauge-invariant projector expressions [1]

Flat-band quantum geometry maps for six compounds

Figure S2. Flat-Band Quantum Geometry. Tr⁡g(k)\operatorname{Tr} g(k) (left), Ω(k)\Omega(k) (middle), and Tr⁡g(k)−∣Ω(k)∣\operatorname{Tr} g(k) - |\Omega(k)| (right) for (a) Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (b) Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (c) Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4, (d) Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_4, (e) Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4, and (f) Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 are presented. The trace-condition violations T=12π∫k[Tr⁡g(k)−∣Ω(k)∣]\mathcal{T} = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_k [\operatorname{Tr} g(k) - |\Omega(k)|] are (a) 0.76, (b) 0.62, (c) 2.85, (d) 3.79, (e) 9.39, and (f) 1.18.

Tr⁡g(k)=12tr⁡[(∂xP^(k))2+(∂yP^(k))2],(11)\operatorname{Tr} g(\boldsymbol{k}) = \frac{1}{2}\operatorname{tr}\left[(\partial_x\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k}))^2 + (\partial_y\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k}))^2\right], \tag*{(11)}
Ω(k)=itr⁡[P^(k)[∂xP^(k),∂yP^(k)]],(12)\Omega(\boldsymbol{k}) = i\operatorname{tr}\left[\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k})[\partial_x\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k}),\partial_y\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k})]\right], \tag*{(12)}

where P^(k)=∣unk⟩⟨unk∣\hat{P}(\boldsymbol{k}) = \lvert u_{n\boldsymbol{k}}\rangle\langle u_{n\boldsymbol{k}}\rvert projects onto the normalized cell-periodic Bloch eigenstate of the isolated band nn. Here, tr⁡\operatorname{tr} denotes the trace over the orbital and spin degrees of freedom of the Bloch Hamiltonian, whereas Tr⁡g=gxx+gyy\operatorname{Tr} g = g_{xx} + g_{yy} denotes the trace over Cartesian momentum indices. All three quantities plotted [Figure S2] are multiplied by ABZ/2πA_{\mathrm{BZ}}/2\pi, where ABZA_{\mathrm{BZ}} is the area of the first Brillouin zone.

To model ferromagnetic spin polarization, we introduce a sufficiently large Zeeman splitting to fully separate the spin-up and spin-down bands in energy. We then evaluate the quantum geometry of the flat band with a positive Chern number. The results are presented in Figure S2. Cs2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4} and Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4} offer small trace-condition violations of about 0.6–0.8, where the rest of the materials range from 1.1 to 9.3.

Many-Body Hamiltonian

In this supplementary section, we specify the interacting Hamiltonians used in the monolayer and bilayer calculations. Rewriting the full monolayer many-body Hamiltonian including the interacting term, we have

H=H0+Hint=∑knσεn(k)cnkσ†cnkσ+12A∑kk′q∑nn′mm′∑σσ′V^k,k′,qnn′mm′σσ′cn′k+qσ†cm′k′−qσ′†cmk′σ′cnkσ,(13)\begin{aligned} H = H_{0} + H_{\mathrm{int}} \\ &= \sum_{\boldsymbol{k}n\sigma}\varepsilon_{n}(\boldsymbol{k})c^{\dagger}_{n\boldsymbol{k}\sigma}c_{n\boldsymbol{k}\sigma} + \frac{1}{2A}\sum_{\boldsymbol{k}\boldsymbol{k}'\boldsymbol{q}}\sum_{nn'mm'}\sum_{\sigma\sigma'} \hat{V}^{nn'mm'\sigma\sigma'}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{k}',\boldsymbol{q}} c^{\dagger}_{n'\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{q}\sigma} c^{\dagger}_{m'\boldsymbol{k}'-\boldsymbol{q}\sigma'} c_{m\boldsymbol{k}'\sigma'}c_{n\boldsymbol{k}\sigma}, \tag*{(13)} \end{aligned}

where AA is the sample area. V^k,k′,qnn′mm′σσ′\hat{V}^{nn'mm'\sigma\sigma'}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{k}',\boldsymbol{q}} is the two-body interaction matrix

V^k,k′,qnn′mm′σσ′=∑QV(q+Q)Λk,q+Qn′nσ(Λk′−q,q+Qm′mσ′)∗,(14)\hat{V}^{nn'mm'\sigma\sigma'}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{k}',\boldsymbol{q}} = \sum_{\boldsymbol{Q}} V(\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q})\Lambda^{n'n\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}} \left(\Lambda^{m'm\sigma'}_{\boldsymbol{k}'-\boldsymbol{q},\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}}\right)^{*}, \tag*{(14)}

where Q\boldsymbol{Q} are the reciprocal lattice vectors, and the band form factor Λk,q+Qn′nσ\Lambda^{n'n\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}} is

Λk,q+Qn′nσ=∑αun′ασ∗(k+q)unασ(k)ei(q+Q)⋅τα.(15)\Lambda^{n'n\sigma}_{\boldsymbol{k},\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}} = \sum_{\alpha}u^{*}_{n'\alpha\sigma}(\boldsymbol{k}+\boldsymbol{q})u_{n\alpha\sigma}(\boldsymbol{k})e^{i(\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q})\cdot\boldsymbol{\tau}_{\alpha}.} \tag*{(15)}

Here, τα=A,B,C\tau_{\alpha}=A,B,C represents the sublattice coordinates, and the interaction V(q+Q)V(\boldsymbol{q}+\boldsymbol{Q}) is introduced in the main text,

V(p)=e22ϵpe−pUC/U0,(16)V(\boldsymbol{p}) = \frac{e^{2}}{2\epsilon p}e^{-pU_{C}/U_{0}}, \tag*{(16)}

where p=∣p∣p = |\mathbf{p}|, U0U_0 is the onsite Hubbard repulsion, and UC=e2/4πϵU_C = e^2/4\pi\epsilon is the Coulomb prefactor. We use U0=3U_0 = 3 eV and ϵ=5ϵ0\epsilon= 5\epsilon_0 as in the main text. A uniform neutralizing background removes the spatially uniform component of the interaction, and we set V(p=0)=0V(\mathbf{p}=0)=0. The sum over reciprocal vectors Q\mathbf{Q} is an infinite sum, but in practice, we truncate it at an appropriate cutoff as the interaction (S13) exponentially decays.

To extend the model to a bilayer, we include the interlayer Coulomb interaction in addition to the intralayer Ohno interaction. We neglect interlayer tunneling, so the particle number in each layer is separately conserved. Further assuming that the ferromagnetism is robust, we drop the spin index σ\sigma and the Hamiltonian is of the form

Hbilayer=H0+Hint=∑knℓϵn(ℓ)(k)cℓnk†cℓnk+12A∑kk′q∑ℓℓ′∑nn′mm′V^k,k′,qℓℓ′nn′mm′cℓ′n′k+q†cℓ′m′k′−q†cℓmk′cℓnk,(17)\begin{aligned} H_{\mathrm{bilayer}} &= H_0 + H_{\mathrm{int}} \\ &= \sum_{kn\ell} \epsilon_n^{(\ell)}(\mathbf{k})c_{\ell n\mathbf{k}}^\dagger c_{\ell n\mathbf{k}} + \frac{1}{2A}\sum_{\mathbf{k}\mathbf{k}'\mathbf{q}}\sum_{\ell\ell'}\sum_{nn'mm'} \hat{V}^{\ell\ell'nn'mm'}_{\mathbf{k},\mathbf{k}',\mathbf{q}}c_{\ell'n'\mathbf{k}+\mathbf{q}}^\dagger c_{\ell'm'\mathbf{k}'-\mathbf{q}}^\dagger c_{\ell m\mathbf{k}'}c_{\ell n\mathbf{k}}, \tag*{(17)} \end{aligned}

where ℓ,ℓ′=1,2\ell,\ell'=1,2 are layer pseudospin indices, and we restrict ourselves to homogeneous bilayers, ϵn(1)(k)=ϵn(2)(k)\epsilon_n^{(1)}(\mathbf{k})=\epsilon_n^{(2)}(\mathbf{k}). The interaction matrix is now

V^k,k′,qℓℓ′nn′mm′=∑QVℓℓ′(q+Q)Λk,q+Qℓn′n(Λk′−q,q+Qℓ′m′m)∗,(18)\hat{V}^{\ell\ell'nn'mm'}_{\mathbf{k},\mathbf{k}',\mathbf{q}}=\sum_{\mathbf{Q}}V^{\ell\ell'}(\mathbf{q}+\mathbf{Q})\Lambda^{\ell n'n}_{\mathbf{k},\mathbf{q}+\mathbf{Q}}\left(\Lambda^{\ell'm'm}_{\mathbf{k}'-\mathbf{q},\mathbf{q}+\mathbf{Q}}\right)^*, \tag*{(18)}

where we introduce different types of potentials for intralayer and interlayer interactions,

Vℓℓ′(p)=e22ϵp{e−pUC/U0,ℓ=ℓ′,e−pd,ℓ≠ℓ′,(19)V^{\ell\ell'}(\mathbf{p})=\frac{e^2}{2\epsilon p} \begin{cases} e^{-pU_C/U_0}, & \ell=\ell',\\ e^{-pd}, & \ell\ne\ell', \end{cases} \tag*{(19)}

with the interlayer distance dd. The form factor Λ\Lambda essentially has the same expression as (S12), replacing the spin index σ\sigma with the layer index ℓ\ell. The uniform neutralizing background leaves a finite layer-antisymmetric contribution by the capacitive correction,

Ecap=(N1−N2)24Alim⁡p→0[Vℓℓ(p)−Vℓℓˉ(p)]=e28ϵA(d−UCU0)(N1−N2)2.(20)\begin{aligned} E_{\mathrm{cap}} &= \frac{(N_1-N_2)^2}{4A}\lim_{p\to0}\left[V^{\ell\ell}(\mathbf{p})-V^{\ell\bar{\ell}}(\mathbf{p})\right] \\ &= \frac{e^2}{8\epsilon A}\left(d-\frac{U_C}{U_0}\right)(N_1-N_2)^2. \tag*{(20)} \end{aligned}

Numerical Details

In this supplementary section, we discuss the details of the Hamiltonian and band mixing process that we apply in our exact diagonalization calculations.

Spinful Exact Diagonalization

We describe the effective Hamiltonian used to investigate the possible ferromagnetism. We start from the many-body Hamiltonian (S10). This Hamiltonian contains a total of 6 bands, 3 for each spin species, which is impractical to handle in exact diagonalization. Therefore, as we perform SzS_z-resolved calculations, we retain only the topmost flat band of each spin species as an active degree of freedom. Labeling the three kagome bands by n=1,2,3n=1,2,3 in descending order of energy [Fig. S3(a)], we assume that bands n=2,3n=2,3 are fully occupied and inert for both spins. Then the spin number Sz=(N↑−N↓)/2S_z=(N_\uparrow-N_\downarrow)/2 is determined by the difference of electrons filling band 1 for each spin component.

The effective Hamiltonian is obtained by projecting onto this restricted Hilbert space,

Heff=PHP,P=∏k∏σ=↑,↓∏α=2,3n^αkσ.H_{\mathrm{eff}}=PHP,\qquad P=\prod_{\mathbf{k}}\prod_{\sigma=\uparrow,\downarrow}\prod_{\alpha=2,3}\hat{n}_{\alpha\mathbf{k}\sigma}.

where n^αkσ=cαkσ†cαkσ\hat{n}_{\alpha\mathbf{k}\sigma}=c_{\alpha\mathbf{k}\sigma}^\dagger c_{\alpha\mathbf{k}\sigma}. Here, HeffH_{\mathrm{eff}} is understood as an operator acting within the projected subspace. This projection retains the static Hartree and Fock contributions from the filled bands while excluding excitations that create holes in them. Up to a constant, the resulting Hamiltonian reads

Heff=∑kσ[ε1(k)+Σσ(k)]c1kσ†c1kσ+12A∑kk′q∑σσ′V^k,k′,q1111σσ′c1k+q,σ†c1k′−q,σ′†c1k′σ′c1kσ,(21)H_{\mathrm{eff}}=\sum_{\mathbf{k}\sigma}\left[\varepsilon_1(\mathbf{k})+\Sigma_\sigma(\mathbf{k})\right]c_{1\mathbf{k}\sigma}^\dagger c_{1\mathbf{k}\sigma}+\frac{1}{2A}\sum_{\mathbf{k}\mathbf{k}'\mathbf{q}}\sum_{\sigma\sigma'}\hat{V}^{1111\sigma\sigma'}_{\mathbf{k},\mathbf{k}',\mathbf{q}}c_{1\mathbf{k}+\mathbf{q},\sigma}^\dagger c_{1\mathbf{k}'-\mathbf{q},\sigma'}^\dagger c_{1\mathbf{k}'\sigma'}c_{1\mathbf{k}\sigma}, \tag*{(21)}
Band labels and band-mixing scheme

Figure S3. Band Labels and Band-Mixing Scheme. (a) The three kagome bands labeled n=1,2,3n=1,2,3 in descending order of energy. (b) Schematic illustration of the band-mixing scheme employed in our calculations. We keep band 3 fully occupied and allow at most one interband excitation from band 2 to band 1. The tight-binding band structure of Cs2Pd3S4\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4} is used for illustration.

where the filled-band self-energy is

Σσ(k)=1A∑k′∑a=2,3[∑τ=↑,↓V^k,k′,011aa−V^k,k′,k′−k1aa1].\Sigma_{\sigma}(k)=\frac{1}{A}\sum_{k'}\sum_{a=2,3}\left[\sum_{\tau=\uparrow,\downarrow}\hat{V}^{11aa}_{k,k',0}-\hat{V}^{1aa1}_{k,k',k'-k}\right].

The Hartree contribution includes both spin species in the filled bands, whereas the Fock contribution involves only filled-band electrons with the same spin as the electron in band n=1n=1.

For the bilayer systems, the strategy we use is essentially the same, as we drop the spin index σ\sigma and replace it with the layer pseudospin index ℓ\ell. The interaction matrix V^k,k′,q1111σσ′\hat{V}^{1111}_{k,k',q}{}^{\sigma\sigma'} in (S18) is replaced with V^k,k′,qℓℓ′1111\hat{V}^{\ell\ell'}_{k,k',q}{}^{1111}, introduced in (S15). Here, the potential Vℓℓ′(p)V^{\ell\ell'}(\mathbf{p}) differs from the monolayer spinful case.

Band Mixing in Ferromagnetic Regime

We next incorporate interband mixing within the maximally spin-polarized regime, provided that the spin gap is sufficiently large to restrict the low-energy analysis to the maximally spin-polarized sector. For this, we first show that the fully occupied majority-spin bands contribute only an additive constant within the spin-SzS_z sector. We then retain the two upper minority-spin bands and restrict their configurations to at most one interband electron–hole excitation.

Taking ↓\downarrow to be the majority spin, we introduce a projection operator for the ferromagnetic sector

PFM=∏k∏m=13n^mk↓,P_{\mathrm{FM}}=\prod_k\prod_{m=1}^{3}\hat{n}_{mk\downarrow},

where the three majority-spin bands are fully filled. Note that the many-body Hamiltonian (S10) can be decomposed into intraspin and interspin components,

H=H↑+H↓+Hmix.H=H_{\uparrow}+H_{\downarrow}+H_{\mathrm{mix}}.

Here, the intraspin component, Hσ=↑,↓H_{\sigma=\uparrow,\downarrow}, is defined as

Hσ=∑knεn(k)cnkσ†cnkσ+12A∑kk′q∑nn′mm′V^k,k′,qnn′mm′σσcn′k+qσ†cm′k′−qσ†cmk′σcnkσ.(22)H_{\sigma}=\sum_{kn}\varepsilon_n(k)c^\dagger_{nk\sigma}c_{nk\sigma}+\frac{1}{2A}\sum_{kk'q}\sum_{nn'mm'}\hat{V}^{nn'mm'}_{k,k',q}{}^{\sigma\sigma}c^\dagger_{n'k+q\sigma}c^\dagger_{m'k'-q\sigma}c_{mk'\sigma}c_{nk\sigma}. \tag*{(22)}

and HmixH_{\mathrm{mix}} denotes the interspin component which is a sum of (σ,σ′)=(↑,↓)(\sigma,\sigma')=(\uparrow,\downarrow) and (↓,↑)(\downarrow,\uparrow) terms in HintH_{\mathrm{int}}. As we project onto the subspace of the maximally spin-polarized sector, the effective Hamiltonian becomes

PFMHPFM=PFM(H↑+H↓+Hmix)PFM=(H↑+E↓)PFM+PFMHmixPFM.(23)P_{\mathrm{FM}}HP_{\mathrm{FM}}=P_{\mathrm{FM}}(H_{\uparrow}+H_{\downarrow}+H_{\mathrm{mix}})P_{\mathrm{FM}} =(H_{\uparrow}+E_{\downarrow})P_{\mathrm{FM}}+P_{\mathrm{FM}}H_{\mathrm{mix}}P_{\mathrm{FM}}. \tag*{(23)}

Here, E↓E_{\downarrow} is a constant energy since all spin-↓\downarrow electrons occupy their orbitals. We also show that the interspin interaction HmixH_{\mathrm{mix}} only gives a constant shift as well. The last term is expressed as

PFMHmixPFM=∑k,nn′Σn′nH,↓(k)cn′k↑†cnk↑PFM,P_{\mathrm{FM}}H_{\mathrm{mix}}P_{\mathrm{FM}}=\sum_{k,nn'}\Sigma^{H,\downarrow}_{n'n}(k)c^\dagger_{n'k\uparrow}c_{nk\uparrow}P_{\mathrm{FM}},

where

Σn′nH,↓(k)=1A∑p∑m=13V^k,p,0nn′mm↓(24)\Sigma^{H,\downarrow}_{n'n}(k)=\frac{1}{A}\sum_p\sum_{m=1}^{3}\widehat{V}^{nn'mm\downarrow}_{k,p,0} \tag*{(24)}

is the Hartree self-energy. Calculating this term explicitly,

Σn′nH,↓(k)=1A∑p∑m=13∑QV(Q)Λk,Qn′n↑(Λp,Qmm↓)∗=1A∑QαβV(Q)eiQ⋅(τα−τβ)un′α↑∗(k)unα↑(k)∑p,m∣umβ↓(p)∣2=NA∑αun′α↑∗(k)unα↑(k)∑QβV(Q)eiQ⋅(τα−τβ).(25)\begin{aligned} \Sigma^{H,\downarrow}_{n'n}(k)&=\frac{1}{A}\sum_p\sum_{m=1}^{3}\sum_Q V(Q)\Lambda^{n'n\uparrow}_{k,Q}\left(\Lambda^{mm\downarrow}_{p,Q}\right)^*\\ &=\frac{1}{A}\sum_{Q\alpha\beta}V(Q)e^{iQ\cdot(\tau_\alpha-\tau_\beta)}u^*_{n'\alpha\uparrow}(k)u_{n\alpha\uparrow}(k)\sum_{p,m}\left|u_{m\beta\downarrow}(p)\right|^2\\ &=\frac{N}{A}\sum_\alpha u^*_{n'\alpha\uparrow}(k)u_{n\alpha\uparrow}(k)\sum_{Q\beta}V(Q)e^{iQ\cdot(\tau_\alpha-\tau_\beta)}. \tag*{(25)} \end{aligned}

We have used the completeness of the Bloch eigenvectors, ∑m=13umα↓(p)umβ↓∗(p)=δαβ\sum_{m=1}^{3}u_{m\alpha\downarrow}(p)u^*_{m\beta\downarrow}(p)=\delta_{\alpha\beta}. Due to the threefold rotational symmetry of the three sublattices α,β=A,B,C\alpha,\beta=A,B,C, and provided that QQ is summed properly, the term ∑QβV(Q)eiQ⋅(τα−τβ)\sum_{Q\beta}V(Q)e^{iQ\cdot(\tau_\alpha-\tau_\beta)} is independent of α\alpha. As a result, together with N/AN/A, this term can be treated as a constant CHC_H while summing over α\alpha,

Σn′nH,↓(k)=CH∑αun′α↑∗(k)unα↑(k)=CHδn′n,(26)\begin{aligned} \Sigma^{H,\downarrow}_{n'n}(k)&=C_H\sum_\alpha u^*_{n'\alpha\uparrow}(k)u_{n\alpha\uparrow}(k)\\ &=C_H\delta_{n'n}, \tag*{(26)} \end{aligned}

using orthonormality again. Therefore,

∑knn′Σn′nH,↓(k)cn′k↑†cnk↑=CH∑kncnk↑†cnk↑=CHN^↑,(27)\sum_{knn'}\Sigma^{H,\downarrow}_{n'n}(k)c^\dagger_{n'k\uparrow}c_{nk\uparrow}=C_H\sum_{kn}c^\dagger_{nk\uparrow}c_{nk\uparrow}=C_H\hat{N}_{\uparrow}, \tag*{(27)}

which is a constant shift as long as the particle number N↑N_{\uparrow} is fixed. Consequently, the effective Hamiltonian (S20) becomes

PFMHPFM=(H↑+E↓+CHN^↑)PFM=H↑PFM+const.(28)\begin{aligned} P_{\mathrm{FM}}HP_{\mathrm{FM}}&=(H_{\uparrow}+E_{\downarrow}+C_H\hat{N}_{\uparrow})P_{\mathrm{FM}}\\ &=H_{\uparrow}P_{\mathrm{FM}}+\mathrm{const.} \tag*{(28)} \end{aligned}

The remaining problem is therefore equivalent to a spinless three-band system, and we suppress the minority-spin index ↑\uparrow below.

To incorporate band mixing within a tractable Hilbert space, we keep band 3 fully occupied and allow at most one electron to be promoted from band 2 to band 1 [Fig. S3(b)]. We define

P3=∏kn^3k,N^h,2=∑k(1−n^2k),Q≤1=ΠNh,2=0+ΠNh,2=1,P_3=\prod_k\hat{n}_{3k},\qquad\hat{N}_{h,2}=\sum_k(1-\hat{n}_{2k}),\qquad Q_{\leq1}=\Pi_{N_{h,2}=0}+\Pi_{N_{h,2}=1},

where n^nk=cnk†cnk\hat{n}_{nk}=c^\dagger_{nk}c_{nk} and ΠNh,2=r\Pi_{N_{h,2}=r} projects onto states with exactly rr holes in band 2. At fixed minority-spin particle number, the two retained sectors correspond to zero and one interband excitation, respectively. The full projector and the corresponding truncated Hamiltonian are

Pfull=PFMP3Q≤1,Htrunc=PfullHPfull.P_{\mathrm{full}}=P_{\mathrm{FM}}P_3Q_{\leq1},\qquad H_{\mathrm{trunc}}=P_{\mathrm{full}}HP_{\mathrm{full}}.

Here, HtruncH_{\mathrm{trunc}} acts within the projected Hilbert space. After suppressing the frozen degrees of freedom and omitting additive constants, it can be written as

Htrunc=Q≤1H12Q≤1,H_{\mathrm{trunc}}=Q_{\leq1}H_{12}Q_{\leq1},

where

H12=∑k∑n,n′=1,2[εn(k)δnn′+Σnn′(3)(k)]cn′k†cnk+12A∑kk′q∑n,n′,m,m′=1,2V^k,k′,qnn′mm′cn′k+q†cm′k′−q†cmk′cnk.(29)H_{12}=\sum_k\sum_{n,n'=1,2}\left[\varepsilon_n(k)\delta_{nn'}+\Sigma^{(3)}_{nn'}(k)\right]c^\dagger_{n'k}c_{nk}+\frac{1}{2A}\sum_{kk'q}\sum_{n,n',m,m'=1,2}\widehat{V}^{nn'mm'}_{k,k',q}c^\dagger_{n'k+q}c^\dagger_{m'k'-q}c_{mk'}c_{nk}. \tag*{(29)}

Here, the fully occupied band 3 contributes the static Hartree–Fock self-energy

Σnn′(3)(k)=1A∑p[V^k,p,0n′n33−V^k,p,p−kn′n3n].\Sigma_{nn'}^{(3)}(k) = \frac{1}{A} \sum_p \left[ \hat{V}_{k,p,0}^{n'n33} - \hat{V}_{k,p,p-k}^{n'n3n} \right].

Unlike the Hartree contribution from the complete majority-spin sector, this correction need not be proportional to the identity or independent of momentum. The final projection retains all matrix elements within and between the zero- and one-hole sectors of band 2, while excluding states with two or more holes in band 2 or any holes in band 3.

In the calculations described above, the valence bands are fully occupied and inert, and their static Hartree–Fock contribution is retained. A common alternative is to formulate exact diagonalization by projecting onto a target band without an explicit self-energy contribution from the inert bands [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. These two treatments are analogous, respectively, to the average (AVE) and charge-neutrality (CN) interaction schemes discussed in Refs. [7, 8], which differ in the reference used to define the interaction and the associated one-body terms. Unless otherwise specified, all results presented in this paper retain the inert-band self-energy, analogous to the AVE convention.

Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking

In this supplementary section, we present the spin-resolved many-body spectra used to determine the ferromagnetic regimes displayed in Figure 1 of the main text. Figure S4 shows the lowest energy in each SzS_z sector at fixed total filling, measured relative to the overall minimum at that filling. For the momentum clusters, N=14N = 14 was used for νtot=107,117\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{10}{7}, \frac{11}{7}, N=15N = 15 was used for νtot=43,75,85\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{4}{3}, \frac{7}{5}, \frac{8}{5}, N=16N = 16 was used for νtot=98,54,74\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{9}{8}, \frac{5}{4}, \frac{7}{4}, and N=32N = 32 and N=64N = 64 were used for νtot=158,3116\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{15}{8}, \frac{31}{16}, respectively. νtot=3116\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{31}{16} is the largest accessible filling which can be separated into at least three SzS_z sectors. We note that the spectra at νtot=158,3116\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{15}{8}, \frac{31}{16} either favor paramagnetic sector or have 0.1 meV or less order of separations (the spectra overlap and only the ferromagnetic sector is shown in the figure) for all cases except Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4 at νtot=158\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{15}{8}, and therefore identify them as paramagnetic. Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4 has a ferromagnetic ground state with a spin gap of about 1 meV at νtot=158\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = \frac{15}{8}.

Spin-resolved many-body spectra for six compounds

Figure S4. Spinful Many-Body Spectra. The spin-resolved many-body spectra at various fillings are presented for (a) Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (b) Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (c) Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4, (d) Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_4, (e) Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4, and (f) Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4.

Comparing the flat bandwidth presented in Table S3 with the stability of ferromagnetism over different electron fillings, we observe that the robustness of ferromagnetism over a broad range of fillings is correlated with the flatness of the topmost kagome band. The ordering of the flat bandwidths is:

A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4}Cs2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}S4_{4}Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}S4_{4}Cs2_{2}Ni3_{3}Se4_{4}Rb2_{2}Pd3_{3}Se4_{4}Cs2_{2}Pt3_{3}S4_{4}
Full Bandwidth1.0861.0590.3920.5191.1580.810
SOC gap at Dirac point0.0580.0570.0490.0540.1440.105
Flat Bandwidth0.1510.1490.1540.2640.4800.171

Table S3. Characteristic Energy Scales. Bandwidths and spin-orbit coupling (SOC)-induced gaps of monolayer kagome A2T3X4A_{2}T_{3}X_{4} compounds, obtained from the tight-binding band structures. All values are given in eV.

Spinful Hubbard many-body spectra and phase diagrams

Figure S5. Spinful Hubbard Many-Body Spectra and Phase Diagrams. The spin-resolved many-body spectra at various fillings with onsite Hubbard repulsion are presented. The corresponding phase diagrams are shown below each energy spectrum, for (a) Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (b) Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4, (c) Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4, (d) Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_4, (e) Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4, and (f) Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4.

Cs2Pd3S4∼Rb2Pd3S4∼Cs2Ni3S4<Cs2Pt3S4<Cs2Ni3Se4<Rb2Pd3Se4.\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4} \sim\mathrm{Rb}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4} \sim\mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Ni}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4} < \mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Pt}_{3}\mathrm{S}_{4} < \mathrm{Cs}_{2}\mathrm{Ni}_{3}\mathrm{Se}_{4} < \mathrm{Rb}_{2}\mathrm{Pd}_{3}\mathrm{Se}_{4}.

Notably, the ferromagnetic filling range tends to decrease as the flat bandwidth increases. We organize the relation in Table S4:

A2_2T3_3X4_4Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4Rb2_2Pd3_3S4_4Cs2_2Ni3_3S4_4Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4Cs2_2Ni3_3Se4_4Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4
Flat Bandwidth0.1510.1490.1540.1710.2640.480
Ferromagnetism1<νtot<15/81 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 15/81<νtot<15/81 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 15/81<νtot<15/81 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 15/81<νtot<11/71 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 11/71<νtot<3/21 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 3/21<νtot<7/51 < \nu_{\mathrm{tot}} < 7/5

Table S4. Correlation of Flat Bandwidth and Ferromagnetism. A comparison of flat bandwidth and the range of ferromagnetic regions for the kagome materials A2_2T3_3X4_4 is summarized. The flat bandwidth is written in eV units.

We further find that our phase diagram remains robust under varying the interaction type. For onsite Hubbard interaction, the many-body spectra [Fig. S5] reveal a similar trend, and consequently the symmetry breaking remains largely unchanged.

Momentum Grids

For our exact diagonalization calculations, we used finite-size periodic lattices of various system sizes NN. To diagonalize on an NN-unit cell lattice with periodic boundary conditions, we define two boundary vectors L1,L2\mathbf{L}_1,\mathbf{L}_2 such that there exists uij∈Zu_{ij} \in\mathbb{Z} with Li=∑j=1,2uijaj\mathbf{L}_i = \sum_{j=1,2} u_{ij}\mathbf{a}_j. Then the number of unit cells corresponds to

N=∥L1×L2∥∥a1×a2∥=det⁡u,N = \frac{\lVert\mathbf{L}_1 \times\mathbf{L}_2 \rVert}{\lVert\mathbf{a}_1 \times\mathbf{a}_2 \rVert} = \det u,

and the two vectors g1,g2\mathbf{g}_1,\mathbf{g}_2 that satisfy Li⋅gj=2πδij\mathbf{L}_i \cdot\mathbf{g}_j = 2\pi\delta_{ij} span the discrete Brillouin zone. We further introduce N1,N2N_1,N_2 so that our uu satisfies uij=Niuˉiju_{ij} = N_i\bar{u}_{ij} where Ni,uˉij∈ZN_i,\bar{u}_{ij} \in\mathbb{Z} and det⁡uˉ=1\det\bar{u} = 1. Then N=N1N2N = N_1N_2, and we have a parametrization K=k1+N1k2K = k_1 + N_1k_2 in our calculation. The grids that we used are plotted in Figure S6.

Finite-Size Brillouin Zones

Figure S6. Finite-Size Brillouin Zones. Discrete momentum grids used in our exact diagonalization calculations. The parameters (N,u11,u12,u21,u22)(N,u_{11},u_{12},u_{21},u_{22}) are given by (a) (14,7,0,2,2)(14,7,0,2,2), (b) (15,5,0,6,3)(15,5,0,6,3), (c) (16,4,0,0,4)(16,4,0,0,4), (d) (18,9,0,4,2)(18,9,0,4,2), (e) (20,5,0,0,4)(20,5,0,0,4), (f) (21,7,−6,−3)(21,7,-6,-3), (g) (24,8,−12,−9)(24,8,-12,-9), (h) (24,6,0,0,4)(24,6,0,0,4), (i) (25,5,0,0,5)(25,5,0,0,5), (j) (27,9,0,3,3)(27,9,0,3,3), (k) (28,14,0,4,2)(28,14,0,4,2), (l) (32,16,0,4,2)(32,16,0,4,2), (m) (64,8,0,0,8)(64,8,0,0,8).

Additional Results at Fractional Fillings

In this supplementary section, we present additional numerical studies at fractional fillings for different kagome monolayers. All energy spectra presented and discussed in this section adopt band mixing with at most one interband electron–hole excitation, as mentioned in the main text.

Many-Body Chern Number

We calculate the many-body Berry curvature on the torus of boundary twists Φ=(Φ1,Φ2)\boldsymbol{\Phi} = (\Phi_1,\Phi_2), with Φμ∈[0,2π)\Phi_\mu\in[0,2\pi) using the gauge-invariant discretization [9]. For an NGSN_{\mathrm{GS}}-state ground-state multiplet, we define the link variables Uμ(Φ)=det⁡Wμ(Φ)/∣det⁡Wμ(Φ)∣U_\mu(\boldsymbol{\Phi}) = \det W_\mu(\boldsymbol{\Phi})/|\det W_\mu(\boldsymbol{\Phi})|, where WμW_\mu is the overlap matrix between neighboring multiplets, including the evolution of the single-particle basis. The discretized multiplet Berry curvature is

Many-Body Spectra of Cs₂Pd₃S₄

Figure S7. Many-Body Spectra of Cs₂Pd₃S₄. Exact diagonalization energy spectra at (a) νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3, N=24N = 24, (b) νtot=7/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 7/5, N=25N = 25, (c) νtot=10/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 10/7, N=21N = 21, (d) νtot=11/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 11/7, N=21N = 21, (e) νtot=8/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 8/5, N=25N = 25, and (f) νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=27N = 27.

F(Φ1,Φ2)=Arg⁡[U1(Φ)U2(Φ+δ1)U1∗(Φ+δ2)U2∗(Φ)]ΔΦ1ΔΦ2,(30)F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2) = \frac{\operatorname{Arg}[U_1(\Phi)U_2(\Phi+\delta_1)U_1^*(\Phi+\delta_2)U_2^*(\Phi)]}{\Delta\Phi_1\Delta\Phi_2}, \tag*{(30)}

where δμ=ΔΦμe^μ\delta_\mu= \Delta\Phi_\mu\hat{e}_\mu. Its integral divided by the ground-state degeneracy NGSN_{\mathrm{GS}} yields the many-body Chern number,

CMB=12πNGS∑ΦF(Φ1,Φ2)ΔΦ1ΔΦ2=2πNΦNGS∑ΦF(Φ1,Φ2),C_{\mathrm{MB}} = \frac{1}{2\pi N_{\mathrm{GS}}}\sum_{\Phi} F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2)\Delta\Phi_1\Delta\Phi_2 = \frac{2\pi}{N_{\Phi}N_{\mathrm{GS}}}\sum_{\Phi} F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2),

where NΦN_{\Phi} is the number of grid meshes. Our many-body Chern number calculation was conducted on NΦ=12×12N_{\Phi}=12 \times12 or 20×2020 \times20 grid depending on the system size. In the following subsection, we plot the normalized average Berry curvature 2πF(Φ1,Φ2)/NGS2\pi F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2)/N_{\mathrm{GS}}, where its average over the boundary-twist torus equals CMBC_{\mathrm{MB}}.

Fractional Chern Insulators

We report additional details of fractional Chern insulators that we discovered in our exact diagonalization study. We first summarize the many-body spectra of Cs₂Pd₃S₄ at Jain sequence fillings νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3, 7/57/5, 10/710/7, 11/711/7, 8/58/5, 5/35/3 at the largest accessible system size [Fig. S7]. The fractional Chern insulator at νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 [Fig. S7(a)] is also provided in the main text [Fig. 3(a)]. The result for νtot=7/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 7/5 [Fig. S7(b)] is shown as an example for an undetermined phase. The fivefold states are not ground states, and hence the corresponding fractional Chern insulator phase is absent from the phase diagram [Fig. 1(d)]. The calculations of spectral flow under flux insertion and many-body Chern number were done for the five identified Jain sequence fractional Chern insulators [Fig. S8], where we used a smaller system size if possible to reduce computational cost. In the spectral flow plot, at most three eigenstates per momentum sector are presented. The spectral flow for νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3 [Fig. S8(a)] is also provided in the main text [Fig. 3(b)].

We next turn to Rb₂Pd₃S₄, where a similar set of fractional Chern insulators occurs [Fig. S9]. In addition to the five fillings that were also identified in Cs₂Pd₃S₄, we also report a fractional Chern insulator at νtot=12/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 12/7 [Fig. S9(e)]. The spectral flow under flux insertion and many-body Chern numbers are further confirmed [Fig. S10]. Finally, we identify an additional fractional Chern insulator phase in Cs₂Ni₃S₄. The quantum geometry of this material is less favorable than that of the preceding two materials (see Figure S2), and we identify a fractional Chern insulator only at νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3. The spectral flow exhibits sharp variations near Φ1=0\Phi_1 = 0 and π\pi, and a twist grid of 20×2020 \times20 points also yielded insufficient overlaps near those regions for a reliable many-body Chern number calculation. We therefore adaptively refine the grid in these regions and confirm convergence to CMB=2/3C_{\mathrm{MB}} = 2/3. The many-body gaps of fractional Chern insulators are reported in Table S5.

Anomalous Composite Fermi Liquids

We next provide results for anomalous composite Fermi liquids in Cs₂Pd₃S₄. In addition to the many-body spectra, ground state occupation number, and structure factor displayed in the main text [Fig. 3(c-f)], we present the same set of results at N=20N = 20 [Fig. S12(a-d)], and also N=24N = 24 [Fig. S12(e-h)] with a more symmetric grid [Fig. S6(g)]. The calculations in the main text use an N=6×4N = 6 \times4 grid [Fig. S6(h)] to explore the twofold degeneracies of low-lying states. Whereas the structure factor in main text [Fig. 3(f)] largely exhibits a Fermi-liquid-like behavior, there are also peaks at large ∣q∣|q| points. In our additional calculations, we observe that the peaks in the structure factor diminish with

Spectral flow and many-body Berry curvature of Cs₂Pd₃S₄

Figure S8. Spectral Flow and Many-Body Berry Curvature of Cs₂Pd₃S₄. (a-e) Spectral flow under one flux insertion and (f-j) normalized average Berry curvature 2πF(Φ1,Φ2)/NGS2\pi F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2)/N_{\mathrm{GS}} of Cs₂Pd₃S₄ at (a,f) νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3, N=18N = 18, (b,g) νtot=10/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 10/7, N=21N = 21, (c,h) νtot=11/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 11/7, N=21N = 21, (d,i) νtot=8/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 8/5, N=15N = 15, and (e,j) νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=18N = 18.

Many-body spectra of Rb₂Pd₃S₄

Figure S9. Many-Body Spectra of Rb₂Pd₃S₄. Exact diagonalization energy spectra at (a) νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3, N=24N = 24, (b) νtot=10/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 10/7, N=21N = 21, (c) νtot=11/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 11/7, N=21N = 21, (d) νtot=8/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 8/5, N=25N = 25, (e) νtot=12/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 12/7, N=28N = 28, and (f) νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=27N = 27.

Spectral flow and many-body Berry curvature of Rb₂Pd₃S₄

Figure S10. Spectral Flow and Many-Body Berry Curvature of Rb₂Pd₃S₄. (a-f) Spectral flow under one flux insertion and (g-l) normalized average Berry curvature 2πF(Φ1,Φ2)/NGS2\pi F(\Phi_1,\Phi_2)/N_{\mathrm{GS}} of Rb₂Pd₃S₄ at (a,g) νtot=4/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 4/3, N=18N = 18, (b,h) νtot=10/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 10/7, N=21N = 21, (c,i) νtot=11/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 11/7, N=21N = 21, (d,j) νtot=8/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 8/5, N=15N = 15, (e,k) νtot=12/7\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 12/7, N=21N = 21, and (f,l) νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=18N = 18.

Fractional Chern Insulator in Cs₂Ni₃S₄

Figure S11. Fractional Chern Insulator in Cs₂Ni₃S₄. (a) Many-body spectra of Cs₂Ni₃S₄ at νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=27N = 27. (b-c) Spectral flow under one flux insertion at νtot=5/3\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/3, N=18N = 18, where (b) all momentum sectors are plotted, and (c) only the three momentum sectors that contain the ground states are plotted to resolve the gaps within these momentum sectors. Enlarged views of sharp variations near Φ1/2π=0.5\Phi_1/2\pi= 0.5 and 1 (boxed in rectangles) are shown as two small plots on the right side.

increasing system size [Figure S12,Figure S12)]. We further note that the fluctuations in the occupation number decrease with increasing system size, from ∣n(k)−1/2∣<0.22\lvert n(k)-1/2\rvert< 0.22 at N=20N = 20 [Figure S12] to ∣n(k)−1/2∣<0.14\lvert n(k)-1/2\rvert< 0.14 at N=24N = 24 [Figure S12 and Figure 3(e)].

Signatures of Anomalous Composite Fermi Liquids in Cs$_2$Pd$_3$S$_4$

Figure S12. Signatures of Anomalous Composite Fermi Liquids in Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4. (a) Many-body spectra of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 at νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2, N=20N = 20. (b) Many-body spectra of half-filled lowest Landau level at N=20N = 20. (c) Momentum-space occupation number n(k)n(k) and (d) structure factor S(q)S(q) averaged over the two low-lying states in (a). (e) Many-body spectra of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 at νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2, N=24N = 24. (f) Many-body spectra of half-filled lowest Landau level at N=24N = 24. (g) Momentum-space occupation number n(k)n(k) and (h) structure factor S(q)S(q) averaged over the two low-lying states in (e). (i) Many-body spectra of Cs2_2Pd3_3S4_4 at νtot=5/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/4, N=28N = 28. (j) Many-body spectra of quarter-filled lowest Landau level at N=28N = 28. (k) Momentum-space occupation number n(k)n(k) and (l) structure factor S(q)S(q) averaged over the four low-lying states in (i). The two dashed circles in (d,h,l) are ∣q∣=kF|q| = k_F and ∣q∣=2kF|q| = 2k_F, respectively, where kF=ABZ/2πk_F = \sqrt{A_{\mathrm{BZ}}/2\pi} in (d,h) and kF=ABZ/4πk_F = \sqrt{A_{\mathrm{BZ}}/4\pi} in (l).

We also report a signature consistent with a quarter-filled anomalous composite Fermi liquid at νtot=5/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 5/4, N=28N = 28 [Figure S12-Figure S12)]. The low-lying momentum sectors [Figure S12] match those of quarter-filled lowest Landau level [Figure S12], and the momentum occupation number [Figure S12] has no sharp discontinuity, although there exists some modulation (∣n(k)−1/4∣<0.21\lvert n(k) - 1/4\rvert< 0.21). The structure factor [Figure S12] shows peaks near ∣q∣=2kF\lvert q\rvert= 2k_F and nearly vanishes for ∣q∣>2kF\lvert q\rvert> 2k_F.

Charge Density Waves

We summarize the evidence for charge density waves found at several fillings for different materials. The many-body spectra and ground state structure factor are presented [Figure S13]. We first observe charge density waves at νtot=7/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 7/4 for three different compounds, Cs₂Pd₃S₄, Rb₂Pd₃S₄, and Cs₂Ni₃S₄ [Figure S13-Figure S13)]. The fourfold ground-state momentum sectors [Figure S13] are related to each other with MM-point vectors, consistent with the Bragg peaks in S(q)S(q) at MM-points [Figure S13-Figure S13)]. For Cs₂Ni₃S₄, we find two additional charge density waves at νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2 and 7/57/5 [Figure S13,Figure S13)], where the ground-state momenta are again consistent with Bragg peaks [Figure S13,Figure S13,Figure S13,Figure S13)].

Signatures of Charge Density Waves

Figure S13. Signatures of Charge Density Waves. (a-e) Many-body spectra of (a) Cs2Pd3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4, (b) Rb2Pd3S4\mathrm{Rb}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{S}_4, and (c) Cs2Ni3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Ni}_3\mathrm{S}_4 at νtot=7/4\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 7/4, N=24N = 24, Cs2Ni3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Ni}_3\mathrm{S}_4 at (d) νtot=3/2\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 3/2, N=24N = 24 and (e) νtot=7/5\nu_{\mathrm{tot}} = 7/5, N=20N = 20. (f-h) Momentum grids used where ground-state momentum sectors are marked in orange for (f) (a-c), (g) (d), (h) (e). (i-m) Structure factor S(q)S(q) averaged over the multifold low-lying states in (i) (a), (j) (b), (k) (c), (l) (d), and (m) (e). Unlike the other panels, (m) includes an extended momentum range to reveal the peaks outside the first Brillouin zone.

Higher Chern Bands

In this supplementary section, we discuss the higher Chern numbers of the flat bands in Cs₂Pt₃S₄ and Rb₂Pd₃Se₄. We adopt the hopping and spin-orbit coupling conventions introduced in Sec. I and assume a sufficiently large Stoner splitting, H=H0+ΔσzH = H_0 + \Delta\sigma_z with Δ>0\Delta> 0, to separate the two spin sectors. Throughout this section, we focus on the upper spin sector and list the three Chern numbers in descending energy order, C=(Ctop,Cmid,Cbot)C = (C_{\mathrm{top}}, C_{\mathrm{mid}}, C_{\mathrm{bot}}).

First, we consider the ideal nearest-neighbor kagome model as a reference, choosing t1=1t_1 = 1 and setting all further-neighbor hopping and spin-orbit coupling amplitudes to zero [Figure S14]. As we turn on a positive nearest-neighbor spin-orbit coupling, λ1→0+\lambda_1 \to0^+, the quadratic band touching at Γ\Gamma and the Dirac crossings at KK and K′K' are gapped, producing C=(+1,0,−1)C = (+1, 0, -1) [Figure S14].

Higher Chern Band Analysis

Figure S14. Higher Chern Band Analysis. (a) The ideal kagome model with t1=1t_1 = 1 and all other parameters zero. (b) Turning on λ1=0.1\lambda_1 = 0.1 from (a). (c) A toy kagome model by retaining the hopping parameters of Cs2Pt3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pt}_3\mathrm{S}_4 with spin-orbit coupling turned off. The orange dots mark the Dirac touchings at the topmost flat band. (d) Band structure of (c) plotted in 3D. We observe a Γ\Gamma touching, six KK, K′K' touchings, and six additional Dirac touchings sitting on the Γ−M\Gamma- M paths. (e) Turning on λ1=0.0046\lambda_1 = 0.0046 eV from (c). Within consistent sign conventions, the flat band acquires C=−1C = -1, in contrast to the ideal model. (f) Turning on λ2=λ2,c1=0.0023\lambda_2 = \lambda_{2,\mathrm{c1}} = 0.0023 eV from (e). The upper two bands touch at KK and K′K'. (g) Turning on λ2=λ2,c2=0.0091\lambda_2 = \lambda_{2,\mathrm{c2}} = 0.0091 eV from (e). The lower two bands touch at KK and K′K'. (h) The resulting band structure of Cs2Pt3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pt}_3\mathrm{S}_4 with λ2=0.0335\lambda_2 = 0.0335 eV and all remaining parameters set to their fitted values.

Compared to this ideal model, the Chern numbers for the three bands of Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 and Rb2_2Pd3_3Se4_4 with the same sign conventions are C=(−3,5,−2)C = (-3, 5, -2), and C=(−2,3,−1)C = (-2, 3, -1), respectively, which are quite different. Using our tight-binding model, we examine the origin of this peculiarity, with emphasis on the Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 case.

We introduce a kagome model by retaining the fitted hopping parameters of Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 (see Table S1) while initially setting all spin-orbit coupling amplitudes to zero (Figure S14(c),(d)). We first notice that the lowest band is directly separated from the other two. This is because the symmetry-enforced doublet at KK and K′K' now belongs to the upper two bands. This reordering can be seen from the spin-orbit-coupling-free eigenvalues at KK,

Es=dK+2fK,Ed=dK−fK,E_s = d_K + 2f_K,\qquad E_d = d_K - f_K,
fK=t1−2t2+2t4−2t5+2t7+2t9,f_K = t_1 - 2t_2 + 2t_4 - 2t_5 + 2t_7 + 2t_9,

where EsE_s and EdE_d denote the singlet and doublet energies, respectively, and dKd_K is their common diagonal contribution. Whereas fK=t1>0f_K = t_1 > 0 in the nearest-neighbor model places the doublet below the singlet, the fitted Cs2_2Pt3_3S4_4 parameters give fK=−0.0079f_K = -0.0079 eV, reversing their order, mainly due to large t2t_2. Since each spin sector retains an effective spinless time-reversal symmetry in the absence of spin-orbit coupling, the isolated lowest band has Cbot=0C_{\mathrm{bot}} = 0. The upper two bands, meanwhile, exhibit additional crossings beyond those of the ideal kagome model. Besides the quadratic touching at Γ\Gamma and the Dirac touchings at KK and K′K', there are six symmetry-related Dirac points along the Γ\Gamma–MM directions (marked with orange dots in Figure S14,(Figure S14)). As a weak positive nearest-neighbor spin-orbit coupling λ1→0+\lambda_1 \to0^{+} gaps all these crossings, the local Berry fluxes of the top band, in units of 2π2\pi, approach +1+1 near Γ\Gamma, +1/2+1/2 near each of KK and K′K', and −1/2-1/2 near each of the six additional Dirac points. Consequently,

Ctop=1+2×12−6×12=−1.(31)C_{\mathrm{top}} = 1 + 2 \times\frac{1}{2} - 6 \times\frac{1}{2} = -1. \tag*{(31)}

The contribution from Γ\Gamma thus retains the sign found in the ideal model, while the additional Dirac points reverse the sign of the total upper-band Chern number. The middle band receives the opposite contribution, giving C=(−1,1,0)C = (-1, 1, 0). No further gap closing occurs as λ1\lambda_1 increases to the fitted value 0.0046 eV with all other spin-orbit coupling terms held at zero (Figure S14).

We now fix λ1=0.0046\lambda_1 = 0.0046 eV and increase the next-nearest-neighbor spin-orbit coupling, λ2\lambda_2, from zero to its fitted value 0.0335 eV, keeping the remaining spin-orbit coupling amplitudes zero. The first transition occurs at λ2,c1=λ1/2=0.0023\lambda_{2,\mathrm{c1}} = \lambda_1/2 = 0.0023 eV, where the upper two bands touch simultaneously at KK and K′K' (Figure S14). The reversal of the Dirac mass transfers one unit of Chern number from the top band to the middle band at each valley, changing the sequence from (−1,1,0)(-1, 1, 0) to (−3,3,0)(-3, 3, 0). Upon further increasing λ2\lambda_2, the descending branch of the split doublet reaches the singlet when

λ2,c2=λ1−3fK2≃0.0091 eV.\lambda_{2,\mathrm{c2}} = \frac{\lambda_1 - \sqrt{3}f_K}{2} \simeq0.0091\ \mathrm{eV}.

This second transition involves the middle and lowest bands at both valleys and changes their Chern numbers by +2+2 and −2-2, respectively (Figure S14). The resulting evolution is

(−1,1,0)→λ2,c1(−3,3,0)→λ2,c2(−3,5,−2).(-1, 1, 0) \xrightarrow{\lambda_{2,\mathrm{c1}}} (-3, 3, 0) \xrightarrow{\lambda_{2,\mathrm{c2}}} (-3, 5, -2).

The Γ\Gamma-point gap remains open along this path, and the final sequence persists up to λ2=0.0335\lambda_2 = 0.0335 eV. Restoring the remaining fitted spin-orbit coupling terms continuously from zero also leaves the direct gaps open, connecting this simplified interpolation to the full Cs2Pt3S4\mathrm{Cs}_2\mathrm{Pt}_3\mathrm{S}_4 model (Figure S14).

A related mechanism yields the ∣C∣=2\lvert C\rvert= 2 upper band in Rb2Pd3Se4\mathrm{Rb}_2\mathrm{Pd}_3\mathrm{Se}_4. Its spin-orbit-coupling-free hopping Hamiltonian also contains six additional Dirac crossings between the upper two bands along the symmetry-related Γ\Gamma–MM directions. Positive nearest-neighbor spin-orbit coupling gaps these crossings, each contributing −1/2-1/2 to the upper-band Chern number in the weak-spin-orbit-coupling limit. Together with the +1+1 contribution from the quadratic touching at Γ\Gamma, this gives Ctop=1−6/2=−2C_{\mathrm{top}} = 1 - 6/2 = -2. In this material, the KK and K′K' doublets remain in the lower two bands, and the complete Chern sequence is (−2,3,−1)(-2, 3, -1) in the same upper-spin convention. This sequence is obtained with nearest-neighbor spin-orbit coupling alone and remains unchanged upon continuously restoring the other fitted spin-orbit coupling amplitudes.

References

References

  1. [1]D. C. Tsui, H. L. Stormer, and A. C. Gossard, Two-Dimensional Magnetotransport in the Extreme Quantum Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1559 (1982).
  2. [2]R. B. Laughlin, Anomalous Quantum Hall Effect: An Incompressible Quantum Fluid with Fractionally Charged Excitations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1395 (1983).
  3. [3]B. I. Halperin, Statistics of Quasiparticles and the Hierarchy of Fractional Quantized Hall States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 1583 (1984).
  4. [4]D. Arovas, J. R. Schrieffer, and F. Wilczek, Fractional Statistics and the Quantum Hall Effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 722 (1984).
  5. [5]A. Yu. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Annals of Physics 303, 2 (2003).
  6. [6]C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1083 (2008).
  7. [7]J. Cai, E. Anderson, C. Wang, X. Zhang, X. Liu, W. Holtzmann, Y. Zhang, F. Fan, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, Y. Ran, T. Cao, L. Fu, D. Xiao, W. Yao, and X. Xu, Signatures of fractional quantum anomalous Hall states in twisted MoTe2, Nature 622, 63 (2023).
  8. [8]Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Kang, J. Zhu, P. Knüppel, C. Vaswani, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Thermodynamic evidence of fractional Chern insulator in moiré MoTe2, Nature 622, 69 (2023).DOI
  9. [9]H. Park, J. Cai, E. Anderson, Y. Zhang, J. Zhu, X. Liu, C. Wang, W. Holtzmann, C. Hu, Z. Liu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, J.-H. Chu, T. Cao, L. Fu, W. Yao, C.-Z. Chang, D. Cobden, D. Xiao, and X. Xu, Observation of fractionally quantized anomalous Hall effect, Nature 622, 74 (2023).
  10. [10]F. Xu, Z. Sun, T. Jia, C. Liu, C. Xu, C. Li, Y. Gu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, B. Tong, J. Jia, Z. Shi, S. Jiang, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, and T. Li, Observation of Integer and Fractional Quantum Anomalous Hall Effects in Twisted Bilayer MoTe2, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031037 (2023).
  11. [11]Z. Lu, T. Han, Y. Yao, A. P. Reddy, J. Yang, J. Seo, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Fu, and L. Ju, Fractional quantum anomalous Hall effect in multilayer graphene, Nature 626, 759 (2024).DOI
  12. [12]Z. Ji, H. Park, M. E. Barber, C. Hu, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J.-H. Chu, X. Xu, and Z.-X. Shen, Local probe of bulk and edge states in a fractional Chern insulator, Nature 635, 578 (2024).
  13. [13]J. Xie, Z. Huo, X. Lu, Z. Feng, Z. Zhang, W. Wang, Q. Yang, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. Liu, Z. Song, X. C. Xie, J. Liu, and X. Lu, Tunable fractional Chern insulators in rhombohedral graphene superlattices, Nat. Mater. 24, 1042 (2025).DOI
  14. [14]H. Park, W. Li, C. Hu, C. Beach, M. Gonçalves, J. F. Mendes-Valderama, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, D. Cobden, L. Fu, B. A. Bernevig, R. Regnault, J.-H. Chu, D. Xiao, and X. Xu, Observation of dissipationless fractional Chern insulator, Nat. Phys. 22, 389 (2026).DOI
  15. [15]H. Pan, S. Yang, Y. Wang, X. Cai, W. Wang, Y. Zhao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, L. Zhang, Y. Liu, B. Yang, and W. Gao, Optical Signatures of − 1/3 Fractional Quantum Anomalous Hall State in Twisted MoTe2, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 056601 (2026).
  16. [16]T. Neupert, L. Santos, C. Chamon, and C. Mudry, Fractional Quantum Hall States at Zero Magnetic Field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236804 (2011).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21770534
  17. [17]K. Sun, Z. Gu, H. Katsura, and S. Das Sarma, Nearly Flatbands with Nontrivial Topology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236805 (2011).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21770533
  18. [18]N. Regnault and B. A. Bernevig, Fractional Chern Insulator, Phys. Rev. X 1, 021014 (2011).
  19. [19]E. Tang, J.-W. Mei, and X.-G. Wen, High-Temperature Fractional Quantum Hall States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 236802 (2011).
  20. [20]F. Pichler, W. Kadow, C. Kuhlenkamp, and M. Knap, Single-particle spectral function of fractional quantum anomalous Hall states, Phys. Rev. B 111, 075108 (2025).
  21. [21]H. Bong, C. Won, S. Lee, S. Oh, P. X. Nguyen, R. Chaturvedi, S. Oh, J. Han, P. Malinowski, C. M. Mowers, J. Kim, S. H. Ryu, H. Lee, J. Choi, S. Yer, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, C. M. Polley, M. D. Watson, T. K. Kim, H. Yang, J. Lee, K. F. Mak, J. Shan, J.-H. Park, G. Y. Cho, K. M. Shen, and M. Kang, Monolayer van der Waals kagome lattice for high-temperature flat-band physics, Nat. Phys. (2026).DOI
  22. [22]K. Ohno, Some remarks on the Pariser-Parr-Pople method, Theoret. Chim. Acta 2, 219 (1964).
  23. [23]K. Gundra and A. Shukla, Theory of the electro-optical properties of graphene nanoribbons, Phys. Rev. B 83, 075413 (2011).DOI
  24. [24]M. Schüler, M. Rösner, T. O. Wehling, A. I. Lichtenstein, and M. I. Katsnelson, Optimal Hubbard Models for Materials with Nonlocal Coulomb Interactions: Graphene, Silicene, and Benzene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 036601 (2013).DOI
  25. [25]V. M. L. D. P. Goli, S. Prodhan, S. Mazumdar, and S. Ramasesha, Correlated electronic properties of some graphene nanoribbons: A DMRG study, Phys. Rev. B 94, 035139 (2016).DOI
  26. [26]C. Repellin and T. Senthil, Chern bands of twisted bilayer graphene: Fractional Chern insulators and spin phase transition, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023238 (2020).arxiv.org/abs/1912.11469
  27. [27]Z. Liu, A. Abouelkomsan, and E. J. Bergholtz, Gate-Tunable Fractional Chern Insulators in Twisted Double Bilayer Graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 026801 (2021).DOI
  28. [28]A. P. Reddy, F. Alsallom, Y. Zhang, T. Devakul, and L. Fu, Fractional quantum anomalous Hall states in twisted bilayer MoTe2 and WSe2, Phys. Rev. B 108, 085117 (2023).DOI
  29. [29]A. P. Reddy and L. Fu, Toward a global phase diagram of the fractional quantum anomalous Hall effect, Phys. Rev. B 108, 245159 (2023).arxiv.org/abs/2308.10406
  30. [30]N. Morales-Durán, J. Wang, G. R. Schleder, M. Angeli, Z. Zhu, E. Kaxiras, C. Repellin, and J. Cano, Pressure-enhanced fractional Chern insulators along a magic line in moiré transition metal dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L032022 (2023).
  31. [31]A. Abouelkomsan, A. P. Reddy, L. Fu, and E. J. Bergholtz, Band mixing in the quantum anomalous Hall regime of twisted semiconductor bilayers, Phys. Rev. B 109, L121107 (2024).
  32. [32]C.-E. Ahn, W. Lee, K. Yananose, Y. Kim, and G. Y. Cho, Non-Abelian fractional quantum anomalous Hall states and first Landau level physics of the second moiré band of twisted bilayer MoTe₂, Phys. Rev. B 110, L161109 (2024).
  33. [33]J. Dong, T. Wang, T. Wang, T. Soejima, M. P. Zaletel, A. Vishwanath, and D. E. Parker, Anomalous Hall Crystals in Rhombohedral Multilayer Graphene. I. Interaction-Driven Chern Bands and Fractional Quantum Hall States at Zero Magnetic Field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 206503 (2024).
  34. [34]C. Xu, J. Li, Y. Xu, Z. Bi, and Y. Zhang, Maximally localized Wannier functions, interaction models, and fractional quantum anomalous Hall effect in twisted bilayer MoTe₂, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2316749121 (2024).DOI
  35. [35]C. Wang, X.-W. Zhang, X. Liu, Y. He, X. Xu, Y. Ran, T. Cao, and D. Xiao, Fractional Chern Insulator in Twisted Bilayer MoTe₂, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 036501 (2024).
  36. [36]Z. Dong, A. S. Patri, and T. Senthil, Theory of Quantum Anomalous Hall Phases in Pentalayer Rhombohedral Graphene Moiré Structures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 206502 (2024).
  37. [37]C.-E. Ahn, D. Seo, G. Lee, Y. Kim, and G. Y. Cho, Superconductivity proximate to non-Abelian fractional spin Hall insulator in twisted bilayer MoTe₂, Nat Commun 17, 7005 (2026).DOI
  38. [38]K. Kang, B. Shen, Y. Qiu, Y. Zeng, Z. Xia, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Evidence of the fractional quantum spin Hall effect in moiré MoTe₂, Nature 628, 522 (2024).DOI
  39. [39]A. Abouelkomsan and L. Fu, Non-Abelian spin Hall insulator, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 023083 (2025).
  40. [40]Y. H. Kwan, G. Wagner, J. Yu, A. K. Dagnino, Y. Jiang, X. Xu, B. A. Bernevig, T. Neupert, and N. Regnault, Regarding the existence of abelian fractional topological insulators in twisted MoTe₂ and related systems, Commun Phys 9, 52 (2026).
  41. [41]See Supplementary Information for additional details.
  42. [42]D. L. Bergman, C. Wu, and L. Balents, Band touching from real-space topology in frustrated hopping models, Phys. Rev. B 78, 125104 (2008).DOI
  43. [43]D. Kim and F. Liu, Realization of flat bands by lattice intercalation in kagome metals, Phys. Rev. B 107, 205130 (2023).DOI
  44. [44]H.-M. Guo and M. Franz, Topological insulator on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B 80, 113102 (2009).DOI
  45. [45]M. Kang, S. Fang, L. Ye, H. C. Po, J. Denlinger, C. Jozwiak, A. Bostwick, E. Rotenberg, E. Kaxiras, J. G. Checkelsky, and R. Comin, Topological flat bands in frustrated kagome lattice CoSn, Nat Commun 11, 4004 (2020).
  46. [46]R. Roy, Band geometry of fractional topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 90, 165139 (2014).
  47. [47]T. S. Jackson, G. Möller, and R. Roy, Geometric stability of topological lattice phases, Nat Commun 6, 8629 (2015).DOI
  48. [48]D. Bauer, T. S. Jackson, and R. Roy, Quantum geometry and stability of the fractional quantum Hall effect in the Hofstadter model, Phys. Rev. B 93, 235133 (2016).DOI
  49. [49]P. J. Ledwith, G. Tarnopolsky, E. Khalaf, and A. Vishwanath, Fractional Chern insulator states in twisted bilayer graphene: An analytical approach, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023237 (2020).
  50. [50]G. Shavit and Y. Oreg, Quantum Geometry and Stabilization of Fractional Chern Insulators Far from the Ideal Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 156504 (2024).
  51. [51]D. Di Sante, B. K. Kim, W. Hanke, T. Wehling, C. Franchini, R. Tho-male, and G. Sangiovanni, Electronic correlations and universal long-range scaling in kagome metals, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L012008 (2023).
  52. [52]A. I. Lichtenstein, M. I. Katsnelson, and G. Kotliar, Finite-Temperature Magnetism of Transition Metals: An ab initio Dynamical Mean-Field Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 067205 (2001).
  53. [53]E. Şaşıoğlu, C. Friedrich, and S. Blügel, Effective Coulomb interaction in transition metals from constrained random-phase approximation, Phys. Rev. B 83, 121101 (2011).
  54. [54]S. K. Panda, P. Thunström, I. Di Marco, J. Schött, A. Delin, I. Dasgupta, O. Eriksson, and D. D. Sarma, A charge self-consistent LDA+DMFT study of the spectral properties of hexagonal NiS₂, New J. Phys. 16, 093049 (2014).
  55. [55]M. Taş, E. Şaşıoğlu, S. Blügel, I. Mertig, and I. Galanakis, Ab initio calculation of the Hubbard U and Hund exchange J in local moment magnets: The case of Mn-based full Heusler compounds, Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, 114401 (2022).
  56. [56]R. Tesch and P. M. Kowalski, Hubbard U parameters for transition metals from first principles, Phys. Rev. B 105, 195153 (2022).DOI
  57. [57]J. Yu, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, Y. H. Kwan, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Moiré fractional Chern insulators. IV. Fluctuation-driven collapse in multiband exact diagonalization calculations on rhombohedral graphene, Phys. Rev. B 112, 075110 (2025).DOI
  58. [58]M. Gonçalves, J. F. Mendez-Valderrama, J. Herzog-Arbeitman, J. Yu, X. Xu, D. Xiao, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Moiré fractional Chern insulators and Spinful Charge Excitations in Moiré Fractional Chern Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 196503 (2026).
  59. [59]T. Fukui, Y. Hatsugai, and H. Suzuki, Chern Numbers in Discretized Brillouin Zone: Efficient Method of Computing (Spin) Hall Conductances, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 74, 1674 (2005).DOI
  60. [60]D. N. Sheng, Z.-C. Gu, K. Sun, and L. Sheng, Fractional quantum Hall effect in the absence of Landau levels, Nat Commun 2, 389 (2011).DOI
  61. [61]J. Dong, J. Wang, P. J. Ledwith, A. Vishwanath, and D. E. Parker, Composite Fermi Liquid at Zero Magnetic Field in Twisted MoTe₂, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 136502 (2023).
  62. [62]R. Perea-Causin, H. Liu, and E. J. Bergholtz, Quantum anomalous Hall crystals in moiré bands with higher Chern number, Nat Commun 16, 6875 (2025).
  63. [63]H. Goldman, A. P. Reddy, N. Paul, and L. Fu, Zero-Field Composite Fermi Liquid in Twisted Semiconductor Bilayers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 136501 (2023).
  64. [64]Y. Shi, B. Xie, F. Ren, X. Cai, Z. Guo, Q. Li, X. Lu, N. Regnault, Z. Liu, and J. Liu, Fractional Topological States in Rhombohedral Multilayer Graphene Modulated by Kagome Superlattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 256603 (2025).arxiv.org/abs/2502.17320
  65. [65]G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set, Computational Materials Science 6, 15 (1996).DOI
  66. [66]G. Kresse and J. Furthmüller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9984901
  67. [67]P. Giannozzi, S. Baroni, N. Bonini, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, G. L. Chiarotti, M. Cococcioni, I. Dabo, A. Dal Corso, S. de Gironcoli, S. Fabris, G. Fratesi, R. Gebauer, U. Gerstmann, C. Gougoussis, A. Kokalj, M. Lazzeri, L. Martin-Samos, N. Marzari, F. Mauri, R. Mazzarello, S. Paolini, A. Pasquarello, L. Paulatto, C. Sbraccia, S. Scandolo, G. Schlauf, A. P. Seitsonen, A. Smogunov, P. Umari, and R. M. Wentzcovitch, QUANTUM ESPRESSO: A modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 21, 395502 (2009).
  68. [68]P. Giannozzi, O. Andreussi, T. Brumme, O. Bunau, M. Buongiorno Nardelli, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, M. Cococcioni, N. Colonna, I. Carnimeo, A. Dal Corso, S. de Gironcoli, P. Delugas, R. A. DiStasio, A. Ferretti, A. Floris, G. Fratesi, G. Fugallo, R. Gebauer, U. Gerstmann, F. Giustino, T. Gorni, J. Jia, M. Kawamura, H.-Y. Ko, A. Kokalj, E. Küçükbenli, M. Lazzeri, M. Marsili, N. Marzari, F. Mauri, N. L. Nguyen, H.-V. Nguyen, A. Otero-de-la-Roza, L. Paulatto, S. Poncé, D. Rocca, R. Sabatini, B. Santra, M. Schl iph, A. P. Seitsonen, A. Smogunov, I. Timrov, T. Thonhauser, P. Umari, N. Vast, X. Wu, and S. Baroni, Advanced capabilities for materials modelling with Quantum ESPRESSO, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29, 465901 (2017).
  69. [69]J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, and M. Ernzerhof, Hybrid functionals based on a screened Coulomb potential, J. Chem. Phys. 118, 8207 (2003).DOI
  70. [70]J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10062328
  71. [71]P. E. Blöchl, Projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 50, 17953 (1994).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9976227
  72. [72]M. J. van Setten, M. Giantomassi, E. Bousquet, M. J. Verstraete, D. R. Hamann, X. Gonze, and G. M. Rignanese, The PseudoDojo: Training and grading a 85 element optimized norm-conserving pseudopotential table, Computer Physics Communications 226, 39 (2018).DOI
  73. [73]A. A. Mostofi, J. R. Yates, G. Pizzi, Y.-S. Lee, I. Souza, D. Vanderbilt, and N. Marzari, An updated version of wannier90: A tool for obtaining maximally-localised Wannier functions, Computer Physics Communications 185, 2309 (2014).DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_dvfa9dau
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 2

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Physics and Astronomy

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents