Topological correspondence between magnetic space group representations and subdimensions

Adrien Bouhon,1, 2, ∗ Gunnar F. Lange,3 and Robert-Jan Slager3, † 1Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics (NORDITA), Stockholm, Sweden 2Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-751 21 Uppsala, Sweden 3TCM Group, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, J.J. Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0HE, United Kingdom (Dated: June 18, 2021) The past years have seen rapid progress in the classification of topological materials. These diag- nostical methods are increasingly getting explored in the pertinent context of magnetic structures. We report on a general class of electronic configurations within a set of anti-ferromagnetic-compatible space groups that are necessarily topological. Interestingly, we find a systematic correspondence between these anti-ferromagnetic phases to necessarily nontrivial topological ferro/ferrimagnetic counterparts that are readily obtained through physically motivated perturbations. Addressing the exhaustive list of magnetic space groups in which this mechanism occurs, we also verify its presence on planes in 3D systems that were deemed trivial in existing classification schemes. This leads to the formulation of the concept of subdimensional topologies, featuring non-triviality within part of the system that coexists with stable Weyl points away from these planes, thereby uncovering novel topological materials in the full 3D sense that have readily observable features in their bulk and surface spectrum.

I. INTRODUCTION eigenvalues indicated schemes [34], that is symmetry indi- cators [35] and, very recently, topological quantum chem- With the advent of topological insulators (TIs) – istry [36]. gapped quantum matter having a topological entity by Already in the non-magnetic case the refined evalua- virtue of symmetry – the past years have seen a rein- tions resulted in new insights. In particular, the discrep- vigorated interest in band theory. Time reversal sym- ancies between different approaches culminated in the metry (TRS) has played a major role in these develop- formulation of the concept of fragile topology [37]. These ments, standing at the basis of the developments of the are topological invariants that, unlike stable counter- first models of the general notion of symmetry protected parts, characterize band-subspaces separated by energy states [1,2]. More recently, the interplay with crys- gaps from the other bands that can be trivialized upon talline symmetries has provided a plethora of topologi- the closing of the gaps [38–41]. Of particular interest are cal characterizations [3–22]. In particular, it was found systems with PT or C2T symmetry that were early char- that a substantial fraction of topological materials can acterized through a stable Z2 invariant [42–45], and more be diagnosed by refined symmetry eigenvalue methods. recently through a fragile Z invariant [38, 46] given by the Heuristically this pertains to considering combinatorial Euler class [47–49] for which new physical effects have constraints between high symmetry momenta in the Bril- been predicted [50]. In fact, taking into account multiple louin zone (BZ), which can be shown to reveal classes of gap conditions [49], these phases go beyond any sym- band structures that actually match the full machinery metry eigenvalue indicated notion and relate to the mo- of K-theory analysis in certain cases [23], and then com- mentum space braid trajectories of non-Abelian frame- paring them to real space atomic limits in order to define charge characterized spectral nodes [48, 51, 52]. The role non-triviality with respect to this reference [24, 25]. of C2T symmetry has also been pointed out in the non- Despite the crucial role of TRS, arguably the most trivial topology of the low energy bands of twisted bilayer paradigmatic TI model actually involves the formulation graphene [53, 54]. of TRS-breaking Chern bands [26], manifesting the orig- Here we revert to the question what physical impli- inal inspiration of these pursuits by Quantum Hall ef- cations the extension to magnetic space groups (MSG) fects. Hence, it is of natural interest to consider the role symmetries can bring within the above context. To

arXiv:2010.10536v3 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 17 Jun 2021 of magnetism in combination with the above recent de- this end we start by a case study in space group fam- velopments. While the interplay of topology and mag- ily (SG) 75 and find that within a magnetic background netism entails a vast and established literature, ranging some Wyckhoff positions necessarily imply non-triviality. from spin liquids to axion insulators [27–33], there have Turning to anti-ferromagnetic case we, for the first time, been rather fruitful results on both essential symmetry find a model exhibiting fragile and Euler class topol- ogy in a MSG and identify the protecting symmetries as well as defining quantities. The magnetic symmetry defining anti-ferromagnetic (AFM) order is however bro- ∗ [email protected] ken upon adding a generic Zeeman term, giving rise to † [email protected] a ferro/ferrimagnetic-compatible (FM) phase within the 2

a) b) II. MAGNETIC SPACE GROUP AND MAGNETIC STRUCTURE: A FIRST CASE STUDY IN SG P4 (NO. 75)

2b 2c To concretize matters we depart from a simple model for the tetragonal magnetic space group PC 4 (MSG No. 75.5 using the BNS convention)[57, 58]. The MSG can be decomposed into left cosets as G75.5/G75.1 = (E|0)G75.1 + MSG75.5 MSG75.1 0 (E|τ) G75.1, where the space group G75.1 = C4 × T (P 4, No. 75.1 in the BNS convention) has no anti-unitary FIG. 1. Background magnetic structures for MSG75.5 symmetry [57](E is the identity, the prime (·)0 stands and 75.1 with Wyckoff positions of interest indicated in for time reversal, and τ = a /2 + a /2). MSG75.1 (P4) standard notation. The latter MSG is effectively real- 1 2 ized by making the oppositely-oriented moments (red/blue has point group C4 with the normal subgroup of trans- spins aligned with thez ˆ-axis perpendicular to the plane) lations T corresponding to the primitive tetragonal Bra- in the former of unequal magnitude. This thus relates vais lattice {n1a1 + n2a2 + n3a3}n1,n2,n3∈Z where the an antiferromagnetic-compatible configuration of the SG75- primitive vectors are a1 = a(1, 0, 0), a2 = a(0, 1, 0), family with a ferro/ferrimagnetic one. and a3 = c(0, 0, 1). In the following we first focus on the two-dimensional projection z = 0, namely we study the corresponding magnetic layer group pc4 (denoted MLG49.4.357 in [58]). In addition, we use the fact that MSG75.5( PC 4) is generated by (C4z|0)T (C4z is the ro- tation by π/2 around the z-axis in the positive trigono- same family. The correspondence subsequently manifests metric orientation) and (E|τ)0T (we will call (E|τ)0 a itself by conveying that the fragile topological nature has non-symmorphic time reversal symmetry (TRS) as it to translate into bands of finite Chern number in the contains a fractional translation). FM counterpart. Going beyond fragile topology, we find that the other remaining possibility of this configuration entails a symmetry protected Weyl semi-metallic phase phase, characterized by a quantized π-Berry phase. The Generally, magnetic space groups with non- symmorphic TRS, called Shubnikov space groups stable nodal phase corresponds to finite Z2 symmetry in- dicator [35] that is protected by the combination of the of type IV [57], correspond to AFM structure. Writing (r, m) for a magnetic moment m located at r, the C4 and C2T symmetries. We moreover show that this 0 phase possesses a systematic correspondence to a non- action of (E|τ)0 gives (E|τ) (r, m) = (r + τ, −m), and [(E|τ)0]2 trivial Chern insulating FM counterpart at half-filling, the square (r, m) = (r +a1 +a2, m), i.e. the mo- characterized by an even Chern number C = 2 mod 4. ment is conserved under translation by a Bravais lattice We then generalize our findings by formulating an ex- vector while it is flipped under a fractional translation. haustive list of tetragonal MSGs featuring this necessar- Hence MSG75.5( PC 4) is compatible with the AFM ily present topological configurations and their system- structure drawn over one unit cell in Fig.1a), where atic correspondences relating AFM and FM counterparts. all the moments of equal sign (pointing in the direction We moreover address the effect of adding and remov- of the verticalz ˆ-axis) are obtained under the action of ing unitary symmetries leading to the identification of elements generated by (C4z|0)T. In the following, we magnetic Dirac points [55], and the generalization of the assume the existence of a magnetic background and C2T protected Weyl semi-metallic phases to numerous describe its effect on the band structure’s topology of MSGs. Most importantly, we find that this mechanism itinerant electrons. We note that such magnetism can can occur on planes in 3D systems that were previously be obtained directly as localized atomic magnetism diagnosed as trivial. At the crux of the argument lies within density functional theory frameworks [59], or as that the in-plane topology must coexist with symmetry the solution of an effective spin Hamiltonian mapped indicated nodes away from the subdimensional regions, from the Green’s functions of interacting electrons such that the 3D conditions appear trivial. Nonetheless, [60, 61]. Alternatively, effective electronic tight-binding these subdimensionally enriched topological nodal topolo- Hamiltonians were derived from the double exchange gies exhibit robust topological features, such as corner model, i.e. non self-interacting electrons coupled through modes plus Fermi arcs in the subdimensional gapped Hund’s coupling to local classical magnetic moments fragile AFM case [56], or Fermi arcs plus Fermi arcs in the that interact via super-exchange coupling [62], where the subdimensional Weyl nodal AFM case, and thus pinpoint electron spins anti-align with the local moments, and to a new class of gapped-nodal topological materials to for which line-nodal semimetallic phases were recently explore. discussed [63]. 3

A. Necessary crystalline fragile antiferromagnetic defined in terms of the bond vectors δ 1 = (2) topology −
(a1 + a2)/2. It is assumed that {t1, t2, t3} are real, while {λ1, λ2} can be complex. In the following, we first iπ/5 Adopting maximal Wyckoff position 2b [58], spanned set t1, t2, t3 = 1, and λ1, λ2 = (1/2)e . by the sub-lattice sites rA = a1/2 and rB = τ − rA = Of importance for the analysis of the band structure a2/2, and setting one s-electronic orbital and both spin- and its topology are the squares of the twofold anti- z-1/2 components per site, we define the corresponding unitary symmetries [67, 68]. The non-symmorphic time Bloch orbital basis functions reversal squares as

X ik·(R+rα) [(E|τ)0]2 −ik·2τ |ϕα,σ, ki = e |wα,σ, R + rαi, (1) hϕ, k| |ϕ, ki = −e 14×4, (6) R∈T from which we get with α = A, B and σ =↑, ↓ (takingz ˆ as the quantization [(E|τ)0]2 [(E|τ)0]2 axis of the spins). Ordering the degrees of freedom as hϕ, Γ| |ϕ, Γi = hϕ, M| |ϕ, Mi = −14×4. ϕ = (ϕA,↑, ϕA,↓, ϕB,↑, ϕB,↓), the generators of MSG75.5 (7) (PC 4), i.e. C4z rotation and non-symmorphic time rever- We thus conclude that there must be a twofold Kramers sal, are then represented through degeneracy at Γ and M, and we call them TRIM (time reversal invariant momentum) in the following. Combin- (C4z |0) hϕ,Dπ/2k| |ϕ, ki = (σx ⊗ M4), ing the non-symmorphic time reversal with C2z, we get (2) 0 (E|τ)0 ik·τ (C2z|τ) that is represented through hϕ, −k| |ϕ, ki = e (σx ⊗ −iσy)K, 0 (C2z |τ) iDπ k·τ hϕ, −C2zk| |ϕ, ki = e (σx ⊗ iσx) K, (8) −iπ/4 iπ/4 where M4 = diag[e , e ], and Dπ/2 is the 3D rotation matrix by an angle π/2 around the kz-axis, and squares as {σ } are the Pauli matrices, and K is complex con- i i=x,y,z 0 2 [(C2z |τ) ] jugation. Combining the two generators, we also obtain hϕ, k| |ϕ, ki = 14×4. (9)

0 (C4z |τ) iDπ/2k·τ ∗ The existence of such an antiunatry symmetry that leaves hϕ, −Dπ/2k| |ϕ, ki = e (1 ⊗ −iσyM4 )K. (3) the momentum invariant and squares to +1 implies that It follows that the orbit of the action of the there exists a change of orbital basis in which the Hamil- 0 0 tonian is real symmetric [52]. This is here achieved symmetries {(E|0), (C4z|0), (E|τ) , (C4z|τ) } on ϕA,↑ is √ through H(k) = V · H(k) · V † where V = σ ⊗ iσ . {ϕA,↑, ϕA,↓, ϕB,↑, ϕB,↓}, i.e. all four degrees of the free- e x x dom are intertwined by the symmetries of MSG75.5 We symbolically refer to this symmetry as the “C2T ” symmetry. (PC 4). It can be easily checked that this remains true for any change of basis (i.e. under any general rotation The bands are then effectively analyzed using the (co- among the sub-lattice and spinor components). Further- )irreducible representations at the Γ, M and X points. more, it can be verified that the atomic orbitals cannot be These are summarized in TableI (and discussed further moved to any other Wyckoff position without breaking in AppendixD1). Whenever a band structure of an EBR may be split by the symmetries. We therefore conclude that {|ϕ, ki}k∈BZ defines a four dimensional elementary band representa- an energy gap, at least one band subspace must be topo- tion (EBR) [25, 64–66] as it is formed by the minimal set logical, namely either both band subspaces are stable or of localized (atomic like) orbitals at the sites 2b that is fragile topological, or one is trivial and the other must be compatible with the magnetic space group symmetries, fragile topological[25, 37, 38]. Heuristically this is the 2b case because there must be an obstruction forbidding the and we denote it EBR75.5. This agrees with Ref. [36] which lists 2b as a maximal Wyckoff position and ex- mapping of Bloch eigenstates of EBR subspaces to local- cludes this EBR from the exceptional composite EBRs. ized Wannier functions (i.e. atomic limits) as a result of A minimal tight-binding model for EBR2b is given by the space group symmetries, since the dimensionality of 75.5 any band subspace’s Wannier basis (here two) is neces- sarily smaller than the dimensionality of the by definition H(k) = t1f1(k)σz ⊗ σz minimal EBR (here four). As a consequence, the Wan- + t f (k)σ ⊗ 1 + t f (k)σ ⊗ 1 2 2 y 3 3 x nier functions representing an EBR’s subspace are either ∗ ∗ (4) + λ1g1(k)1 ⊗ σ+ + λ1g1 (k)1 ⊗ σ− delocalized if we impose all symmetry constraints, or are ∗ ∗ + λ2g2(k)σx ⊗ σ+ + λ2g2 (k)σx ⊗ σ−, incompatible with the space group symmetries. From the induced irreducible co-representations (coIRREPs) and with σ± = (σx ± iσy)/2 and the lattice form factors the compatibility relations among these [23, 69, 70], we 2b conclude that EBR75.5 can be split over all high symme- f1 = cos a1k − cos a2k, g1 = sin a1k − i sin a2k, try regions of the Brillouin zone. We actually obtain a f2 = cos δ1k − cos δ2k, g2 = sin δ1k − i sin δ2k, (5) gapped band structure over the whole Brillouin zone in f3 = cos δ1k + cos δ2k, our minimal model, see Fig.2a) and b) that gives the 4

ing from a bulk-boundary perspective [74]. Indeed, they TABLE I. Character table for the magnetic space group IR- culminate in-gap edge states, reflecting a physical signa- REPs of MSG75.1( P 4), and coIRREPs of the unitary sym- ture, see [56] for a detailed analysis. metries of MSG75.5( P 4), at Γ, M, and X, with ω = eiπ/4. C We further derive in AppendixA the necessary non- The coIRREPs of MSG75.5( PC 4) are given by the pairing of 2b the two IRREPs of MSG75.1( P 4) within the same column triviality of the split EBR75.5. Following Ref. [38] (e.g. Γ5Γ7 = Γ5 ⊕ Γ7). Retrieved from the Bilbao Crys- we show that the crystal symmetries impose a fi- tallographic Server [69]. The second column gives the spin nite fractional winding of Wilson loop over one quar- components located at the Wyckoff position 2c of MSG75.1 ter of the Brillouin zone, i.e. the patch bounded by (P 4) from which the IRREPs are induced.a the paths ΓXΓ0 and ΓMΓ0 (blue dashed lines) in Fig.2c). This results from the difference in the sym- WP Γ Γ M M X X 5 6 8 7 3 4 metry protected quantizations of the Wilson loops over 2c Γ7 Γ8 M5 M6 the two base paths, i.e. Arg [eig{W[lΓXΓ0 ]}] = [0, π] ∗ ∗ ↑z −ω ω ω −ω and Arg [eig{W[lΓMΓ0 ]}] = [π/2, π/2], which depends on C4z ∗ ∗ ↓z −ω ω −ω ω both the IRREPs and the spinor structure of the bands (i.e. spin-parallel vs. spin-flip parallel transports, see Ap- ↑z −i −i i i C2z -i i pendixA), as is also verified through direct numerical ↓ i i −i −i z evaluation of the Wilson loop over the patch in Fig.2e). a We note that for any maximal Wyckoff position (WP) of Then, by C4 symmetry, the Wilson loop must have a MSG75.1 (P 4) {1a, 1b, 2c} [36, 69] the spin-z components are finite integer winding over the whole Brillouin zone, as good quantum numbers at Γ and M, which originates from the confirmed by Fig.2d). We later refer to it as the crys- fact that the vertical C -axes (for WPs 1a and 1b) and 4z talline Euler fragile topology (written CEF in TableIII) C2z-axes (for WPs 2c) give natural quantization axes for the spins. At the Wyckoff position 2c (compatible with the Wyckoff when we address the generalization to other MSGs. position 2b of MSG75.5), the spin-z +1/2 (+3/2) induces We furthermore compute the C4-symmetric Wilson {Γ , Γ , M , M }, and the spin-z −1/2 (−3/2) induces 5 6 7 8 loop flow [38, 75, 76] from the point l0 = Γ to the con- {Γ7, Γ8, M 5, M 6}. tour of the Brillouin zone l1 = ∂BS, shown in green in Fig.2c), and between which we extrapolate by taking the ordering in energy of the induced coIRREPs[71] (defined scaled contour ν∂BZ for ν ∈ [0, 1]. This also exhibits a in TableI). The rational behind the splitting of the EBR full winding shown in Fig.2f). The C4-symmetric Wilson loop winding alludes to the persistence of nontrivial frag- will be explained when we address the symmetry indica- 0 tor, which turns out to be trivial for the IRREPs ordering ile topology after breaking (C2z|0) symmetry, i.e. with- of Fig.2b). In the following we refer to the lower (higher) out Euler class. We refer to it as the crystalline fragile two-band subspace as the valence (conduction) subspace topology (written CF in TableIII). at half-filling. The question is then to determine the These results thus constitute three complementary ways to reveal the necessary non-triviality of the crys- topology of each gapped subspace as in that case there 2b is no stable symmetry indicated topology. talline fragile topology of the split EBR75.5. As pointed out above, the C2T symmetry implies that the Bloch eigenvectors can be made real through the ap- propriate change of basis. It follows that (oriented) two- B. Stable nodal topological phases band subspaces of such Hamiltonians are topologically classified by Euler class χ ∈ Z that can be computed We can characterize the symmetry indicators of a given as a winding of Wilson loop [38, 47–49, 52]. We find band structure by using the matrix containing all al- that the Wilson loop (W[l], see AppendixA) of each lowed magnetic EBRs. This results in a Z2 indicator for two-band subspace winds along both directions (i.e. inte- MSG75.5( PC 4). As detailed in AppendixD, the explicit grating along the base path lky = {(kx, ky)|kx ∈ [0, 2π]} expression for this indicator is and scanning through ky ∈ [0, 2π], and similarly if we ex- z = n mod 2, (10) change kx ↔ ky), see Fig.2d). We moreover find that the 2 X3 Berry phase (eiγB [l] = DetW[l]) of both two-band sub- where n is the number of occupied bands at the X-point spaces is π along both directions, see Fig.2d) (red dashed X3 line), pointing to the non-orientability of the subspaces’ with the IRREP X3. In agreement with the discussion frames of Bloch eigenvectors [49]. While the Euler class in the previous section, the indicator is trivial for the 2b is not defined strictly speaking for an unorientable band fragile phase of EBR75.5 at half-filling, as can be verified subspace [72], we still obtain the winding of Wilson loop from the coIRREPs of Fig.2b). We emphasize that this as an element of π1(O(2)) = Z since W[l] ∈ O(2) when symmetry indicator readily generalizes for an arbitrary computed in the real gauge (i.e. using the Bloch eigenvec- even number of occupied bands, i.e. at a filling ν ∈ 2Z+2. tors of the real symmetric form) [73]. We thus conclude We thus conclude that a stable topological phase that each two-band subspace has a non-orientable non- can be reached through a band inversion at X. This√ is trivial fragile topology [49]. Moreover, we also point out achieved for the model√ Eq. (4) by taking |λ2| > 2|t1|. that the non-trivial π Berry-phases are actually appeal- Setting λ2 = (6/5) 2, we obtain the band structure of 5

Fig.2(c)], i.e. (see derivation in AppendixB) h  i γ(1::2)[l ] = −i log Det W(1::2)[l ] 2 B q q

E 0  Γ Γ M M  ξ4 (1)ξ4 (2)ξ2 (1)ξ2 (2) -2 = −i log M M X X ξ4 (1)ξ4 (2)ξ2 (1)ξ2 (2) Γ M Γ  (+1)(+1)  = −i log X X (−1)ξ2 (1)ξ2 (2)  X X  = −i log (−1)ξ2 (1)ξ2 (2)  0 mod 2π, if z = 0, = 2 (11) π mod 2π, if z2 = 1. Let us first note that, similarly to Eq. (10), Eq. (11) can also be generalized for an arbitrary even number of oc- cupied bands (i.e. a filling ν ∈ 2Z + 2). Importantly, 2 C2T symmetry (with [C2T ] = +1) imposes the van- ishing of the U(1) Berry curvature over the two-band occupied eigen-subspaces, since within the real basis we have F = Pf[F]iσy [52] and thus trF ≡ 0. As a conse- quence, the Chern number of the gapped AFM phase at half-filling is identically zero. From there results that the FIG. 2. Non-triviality in MSG75.5. a) Full band structure nontriviality of the Berry phase indicates a nodal phase of model defined in Eq. (4) and b) along the high symme- (i.e. it indicates the obstruction to define a smooth pro- try directions with coIRREPs indicated. c) Symmetry-based jector on the occupied bands over the whole Brillouin paths within the Brillouin zone used as base loops for the zone due to the presence of topologically stable band patch Wilson loop (dashed blue), the C4-symmetric Wilson loop (green), and the symmetry indicated Berry phase (red). crossings with the unoccupied bands), i.e. the necessary The small arrows show the direction of flow (deformation of existence of an odd number of nodal points inside the base loops). d) Two-band Wilson loop (blue lines), integrated domain bounded by lq. Upon the breaking of the non- along kx ∈ [0, 2π], and total Berry phase (red dashed line) for symmorphic TRS, C2zT is also broken, and the π Berry 2b the valence (equivalently, conduction) bands of EBR75.5. In- phase indicates a C4-symmetry protected Chern number tegrating along ky ∈ [0, 2π] gives equivalent results. e) Wilson at half-filling, or more generally at a filling ν ∈ 2Z + 2, loop flow over a patch from the base loop ΓXΓ0 to ΓMΓ0. f) C4-symmetric Wilson loop flow from the point l0 = Γ to the C = 2z2 mod 4. (12) boundary of the Brillouin zone, l1 = ∂BZ. Notation follows The nontrivial Chern phases are discussed in detail in the conventions of the main text. next section. We emphasize that the nodal points at general mo- menta are not indicated by the compatibility relations. 0 Indeed, these are stabilized by the (C2z|τ) -symmetry 4 (C2T ) for which there is not an eigenvalue structure. 2 Instead, the C2T symmetry quantizes the Berry phase to the values {0, π}, with π indicating an odd num-

E 0 ber of nodes encircled by lq. Embedded in 3D the -2 nodal points correspond to single Weyl points that are -4 pinned on the C2T invariant plane (i.e. at kz = 0 where Γ X M Γ −C2zk = IC2zk = mzk = k) by virtue of the chirality- preserving property of C2T . Indeed, any Weyl point leav- ing the kz = 0 plane must have a mirror symmetric im- FIG. 3. Stable topological semimetallic phase of MSG75.5 age with equal chirality by C2T symmetry. It is therefore 2b (PC 4) indicated by z2 = 1mod2, here represented by EBR75.5 forbidden for a single node to leave the plane by conser- at half-filling. Full band structure over a) BZ and b) along vation of Chern number. We refer to these phases in the high symmetry lines where two coIRREPs at X have been 3D context as the crystalline Weyl topology (written CW inverted when compared to figure2b). in TableIII).

Fig.3 that exhibits a semimetallic phase with four nodal III. AFM-FM CORRESPONDENCE points around Γ at half-filling. We find that the stable symmetry indicator z2 corresponds to a π-Berry phase We now turn to ferro/ferrimagnetic (FM) phases as- for the valence (conduction) bands along the path lq [see sociated with SG75 obtained from the fragile and stable 6 nodal AFM phases discussed above through the breaking a) of the antiunitary symmetry (E|τ)0, thereby effectively realizing MSG75.1 (P4, Shubnikov type I). This is done in Eq.(4) by adding a Zeeman coupling term Z(1 ⊗ σz). We find that the topology of the FM-compatible phases are necessarily nontrivial, exhibiting Chern numbers con- strained by crystalline symmetries that intricately relate to the topology of the AFM counterparts. We note that the correspondence discussed here must be contrasted from the Chern phases obtained under an b) external magnetic field [77] which are in general not sym- metry indicated.

A. General mechanism

Let us first generally address the AFM-FM corre- FIG. 4. a) Splitting and ordering of the EBR’s energy lev- spondence and its physical mechanisms. For this pur- els induced by the successive breaking of inversion (I|0) and 0 pose it is worth starting from MSG83.49( PC 4/m) which non-symmorphic time reversal (E|τ) symmetries. The split is obtained from MSG75.5 by simply adding inversion (t1, t2, t3 = ∆) four-dimensional EBR of MSG83.49( PC 4/m), and MSG75.5( PC 4) for z2 = 0, separates into two split EBRs symmetry, i.e. SG83 has point group C4h. The pres- ence of (I|τ)0 symmetry which squares to −1 leads to of MSG75.1( P 4) under the combined effect of Dresselhaus- Rashba spin-orbit (λ1, λ2 = λsoc) and Zeeman (Z) couplings, the twofold Kramers degeneracy of the bands over the giving rise to energy ordered pseudo-spin-polarized Chern whole Brillouin zone. The parent EBR, which we write bands (C = sign[t ], brown). Pure spin components are drawn 2c 2 EBR83.49, also splits with a topology characterized by in red and blue (for MSG83.49), pseudo-spin components are symmetry indicated mirror Chern numbers [36]. We drawn in magenta and green for MSG75.1. Under a strong readily obtain the corresponding Hamiltonian by taking Zeeman splitting, the valence (conduction) subspaces become 2c λ1, λ2 = 0 in Eq. (4). The full splitting of EBR83.49 re- fully pseudo-spin-polarized (see text) while conserving (at quires |t1|, |t2|, |t3| > 0 (which we symbolize by a single fixed λsoc) the Chern characters of the bands. b) Zeeman splitting when z = 1 for the EBR of MSG75.5( P 4) lead- variable ∆ in Fig.4), where t1 is a spin-z-preserving spin- 2 C orbit coupling that acts as a delocalized Zeeman coupling ing to a symmetry indicated nontrivial even Chern insulator on each sub-lattice orbital but changes sign between sub- (C = 2 mod 4) at half-filling. lattice sites, and t2 and t3 are spin-preserving inter-sub- lattice site couplings. Due to the basal mirror symme- mz distinct sets of IRREPs at Γ and at M (see the foot- try hϕ, mzk| |ϕ, ki = 1 ⊗ −iσz, each band-doublet can be separated into the −i and i mirror-eigenvalue sectors, note of TableI). In the following we thus refer to the matching with the spin-↑ and spin-↓ components (i.e. the pseudo-spin-polarizations e↑ and e↓ of the bands in the spin-z-components are good quantum numbers over the sense that the band e↑ (e↓) at k has the pure spin com- whole Brillouin zone). ponent ↑ (↓) at Γ and M. This does not exclude the The terms in {λ1, λ2} in Eq. (4) break inversion sym- case, for dominant spin-flip terms as compared to Zee- metry and correspond to combined Dresselhaus and man splitting, of a band subspace with an opposite pure Rashba spin-orbit couplings. The effect of the latter spin configuration at Γ (say spin-↑) and M (spin-↓), see (symbolized by λsoc) is to split the Kramers degener- the discussion around Eq. (A6) in Appendix A. Such a acy away from Γ and M, as represented schematically configuration typically requires long-range spin-flip terms in Fig.4a) for z2 = 0 in Eq. (10). The conservation [36]. This results in energy ordered pseudo-spin-polarized of Kramers doublets at Γ and M is due to the non- Chern bands (column Z > 0 in Fig.4, Fig.5, and Fig. 12 symmorphic time reversal which still squares to −1 at in AppendixC) with the relative chirality of the minimal these points, as derived above. While the bands now model set by sign[t2]. Further increasing Zeeman cou- have pseudo-spin components at generic momenta, the pling (while keeping λsoc fixed, see below) leads to fully pure spin-↑ and spin-↓ components are still good quan- pseudo-spin-polarized valence and conduction subspaces tum number at Γ and M since the terms in λ1,2 vanish illustrated in the right column in Fig.4a). there. As a next step, by switching off the spin-flip λ1,2-terms, The AFM-FM transition can then be modeled through while maintaining a dominant Zeeman splitting, we adia- a Zeeman term (Z) that breaks the non-symmorphic batically map the fully pseudo-spin-polarized bands into TRS leading to the splitting of the (Γ and M) Kramers pure spin-polarized split EBRs of MSG75.1( P 4). In- doublets. This leads to the pure spin polarization of the deed, the sub-lattice sites A and B still span a single bands at Γ and M since, for any maximal Wyckoff posi- maximal Wyckoff position, now labeled 2c for MSG75.1 tion of MSSG75.1 (P 4) [36,69], spin- ↑ and spin-↓ induce (P 4)[69, 78], and from the absence of spin-mixing sym- 7

2c,↑ 2c,↓ metry we may form spin polarized EBR75.1, and EBR75.1, from the orbital basis (ϕA,↑, ϕB,↑), and (ϕA,↓, ϕB,↓), re- spectively. We write the adiabatic mapping of the fully pseudo-spin-polarized valence and conduction bands into 2c,e↑ 2c,↑ spin-polarized split EBRs as EBR75.1 ∼ EBR75.1 and 2c,e↓ 2c,↓ EBR75.1 ∼ EBR75.1. The symmetry breaking term (Zee- man) thus induces the following phase transition from one four-dimensional split EBR (of MSG75.5) to two FIG. 5. Non-triviality in MSG75.1. a) Band structure for two-dimensional split EBRs (of MSG75.1), MSG75.1 obtained from the model in Eq. (4) together with Zeeman coupling, and b) along high-symmetry lines with the 2b 2c,e↑ 2c,e↓ 2c,↑ 2c,↓ EBR75.5 −→ EBR75.1 + EBR75.1 ∼ EBR75.1 + EBR75.1. IRREPs indicated. We have taken Z = 1/2. Applying (13) Eq. (14) we find that each band hosts a nonzero Chern num- We emphasize that this mapping is model independent, ber. in the sense that it continues to exist when we add any extra term in Eq. (4) that satisfies the symmetries of where EBR→ is an EBR formed with non-colinear in- MSG75.5 (PC 4) and MSG75.1 (P 4). The symmetry bro- −1 ken band structure is now split into four separated bands plane spinors {(→),C4z(→),C2z(→),C4z (→)}, i.e. with and the question is to characterize the topology of each a quantization axis that is perpendicular to the vertical single band. C4-axis [80] (we chosey ˆ in TableIII with →y). The symmetry indicated Berry phase for Band n (us- ing the bottom-up labeling of the energy eigenvalues, 0 0 B. Small Zeeman splitting i.e. En ≤ En+1) along the path lq = ΓM XMΓ (M =M- b2), see (in red) Fig.2a), is [6, 13, 79] (one-band reduction of Eq. (11), see derivation in AppendixB) Here we derive the topology of the FM phases obtained 2b from each of the nontrivial AFM phases of EBR75.5 when (n) Γ M −1 M X −1 γB [lq] = −i log[ξ4 (n)ξ4 (n) ξ2 (n)ξ2 (n) ], (14) the Zeeman splitting is small compared to the other en- k¯ k¯ ergy scales (i.e. Z < ∆, λSOC in Fig.4), underpinning where ξ4 (n) and ξ2 (n) are the C4- and C2-eigenvalues, the general mechanism outlined previously. respectively, at the high-symmetry point k¯ listed in Ta- bleI. The Chern number of Band n, given through −i2πC(n) iγ(n)[l ] 4 e = (e B q ) , is thus 1. Crystalline Chern ferro/ferrimagnetic topology from fragile AFM phase (n) C(n) = −(2/π)γB [lq] mod 4, (15) 2b see also [36]. We show below that whenever the FM Starting from the gapped fragile phase of EBR75.5 phase is obtained from one of the (necessarily) nontrivial (z2 = 0) and given the sign of the Zeeman coupling 2b ( > 0, i.e. E > E ) we predict the ordering in AFM phases of EBR75.5, it must be made of nontrivial Z ↑z ↓z Chern bands. Remarkably, the Zeeman splitting of the energy of the IRREPs of each split Kramers degener- stable nodal phase of MSG75.5 (PC 4), i.e. with z2 = 1 in acy to be E(Γ7) < E(Γ5) < E(Γ8) < E(Γ6), and Eq. (10), necessarily generates a nontrivial Chern FM E(M5) < E(M8) < E(M6) < E(M7). We show the band phases at half-filling, with C = 2 mod 4 according to structure for MSG75.1 in Fig.5a) and b) together with Eq. (12), see Fig.4b). This is discussed in detail below the IRREPs along high-symmetry lines thus confirming where we show that Eq. (12) matches with Eq. (14,15) the IRREPs ordering. for Band 1 and 2. Below we also use the pseudo-spin po- Substituting the symmetry eigenvalues in Eq. (14) we larization to predict single bands of higher Chern number then readily find C(1) = C(4) = +1 mod 4, and C(2) = 2c (i.e. C = ±3 mod 4) in some regime. In the following we C(3) = −1 mod 4. We conclude that each split EBR75.1 refer to these symmetry indicated Chern phases as the has a stable Chern class topology. This is confirmed by crystalline Chern topology (we call it CC topology in the direct evaluation of the flow of Berry phase for each band, following). see Fig. 12 in AppendixC. Before we study the AFM to FM phases correspon- dence for the model Eq. (4) in more detail, we impor- tantly note that the same nontrivial AFM phases, as well 2. Crystalline Chern FM from stable nodal AFM phase as the AFM to FM correspondence, can be obtained from 2b the following EBRs (for MSG75.5 (PC 4) → MSG75.1 We now start from the stable nodal phase of EBR75.5 (P 4)): (z2 = 1). The breaking of non-symmorphic TRS un- ↑ ↓ ↑ ↓ ↓ ↑ locks the nodal (Weyl) points which then become free EBR2a ⊕ EBR2a → EBR1a ⊕ EBR1b ⊕ EBR1a ⊕ EBR1b, to leave the basal momentum plane (when embedded in → → EBR4c → EBR4d, 3D). As for the fragile topological phase this results in a (16) fully gapped band structure at kz = 0 where each band 8 acquires a symmetry indicated Chern number given by the energy eigenvalues at X for Eq. (4) including the Zee- Eq. (14). Given the band inversion at X between Band 2 p 2 2 man term is s1,s2 = s12t1 + s2 2|λ2| + Z with s1,2 = and 3 required in the fragile to stable topological transi- ±1, and we find E±(X4) = −,± and E±(X3) = +,±. tion (see the IRREPs ordering in Fig.3b)), we now find Fixing t1 > 0, we note that E−(X4) ≤ E+(X4) ≤ E+(X3) band Chern numbers and E−(X4) ≤ E−(X3) ≤ E+(X3). Hence, the low- C(1) = C(2) = C(3) = C(4) = +1 mod 4. (17) est and highest energy levels are E1 = E−(X4) and E4 = E+(X3), respectively, from which we get C(1) = Then, together with the cancellation sum rule C(4) = 1 mod 4. P4 i=1 C(i) = 0, we predict C(2) = −3 and C(3) = +1 The topology of the two remaining bands is then de- (or, equivalently, C(2) = +1 and C(3) = −3). This termined by the sign of is confirmed numerically in Fig. 13 of AppendixC. We q thus reach the conclusion that for small Zeeman cou- 2 2 E−(X3) − E+(X4) = 2t1 − 2|λ2| +  . (18) pling the bands in the vicinity of the half-filling energy Z must exhibit a higher Chern number. Also, contrary to √ Let us first we assume |λ | > 2t , for which we find the gapped FM phase obtained from the fragile topolog- 2 1 E = E (X ) < E (X ) = E for all  > 2t , 2t , and ical phase where the valence (conduction) subspace has 2 − 3 + 4 3 Z 2 3 C(2) = C(3) = −1 mod 4. This case thus has zero Chern a trivial summed topology (i.e. C(1) + C(2) = 0), we here number at half-filling. necessarily obtain a nontrivial Chern phase at half-filling √ If we take instead t > |λ |/ 2, then either  > with C(1) + C(2) = ±2, thus recovering the general pre- 1 2 Z p 2 2 diction of Eq. (12). 4t1 − 2|λ2| , 2t2, 2t3, and we reach the same conclu- p 2 2 sion as before, or 4t1 − 2|λ2| > Z > 2t2, 2t3, in which case E2 = E+(X4) < E−(X3) = E3, and we find C. Fully pseudo-spin-polarized FM phases C(2) = C(3) = +1 mod 4 which, we have shown, leads to a higher Chern number for Band 2 or 3, thus leading to Given the spin-z components associated with the in- a finite Chern number at half-filling (C = 2 mod 4). duced IRREPs of the EBR at Γ and M (TableI), we We conclude this section by noting that the bands of a 2c,↑(↓) anticipate that by increasing Z there must be a second single split EBR75.1 must always carry non-zero Chern transition into a phase with fully pseudo-spin-polarized numbers irrespectively of the ordering of IRREPs. valence (conduction) bands (right column of Fig.4), i.e. the e↑-(e↓-)band has a ↑-(↓-)spin component at Γ and M. This phase transition must happen through two band IV. 3D TOPOLOGY AND GENERAL MSG inversions, i.e. at Γ and at M. Assuming Z > 0, we in- fer that beyond the transition the IRREPs ordering at Having determined the topology of the 2D projection Γ and M are E(Γ7) < E(Γ8) < E(Γ5) < E(Γ6), and of MSG75.5( PC 4) (i.e. for the corresponding magnetic E(M5) < E(M6) < E(M8) < E(M7), respectively (im- layer group), we now address the 3D topology introduc- portantly, note the difference with the ordering of the ing the third momentum component kz. First of all, we previous section and Fig.5b)). The question of the Chern note that each Kramers doublet at Γ, M, Z, and A, are numbers, as determined by Eq. (14), is then reduced to Weyl points carrying a chirality (Chern number). This the IRREPs ordering at X. results from the chirality of any crystal structure with First, without loss of generality we can assume that MSG75.5 (PC 4), see SectionVI. This nodal topology will the lowest (highest) energy level has IRREP X4 (X3), be manifested in terms of Fermi arcs on surface spec- as in Fig.2b) and Fig.3b), from which we get C(1) = tra only at quarter-filling, and more generally at a filling C(4) = +1 mod 4. Then, for dominant values of Z and ν ∈ 2Z + 1. In the following we instead focus on the λSOC , we get C(2) = C(3) = −1 mod 4. If we assume topology at half-filling, and more generally at a filling intermediary values of Z and λSOC (see below), we in- ν ∈ 2Z + 2. stead obtain C(2) = C(3) = +1 mod 4. In the later case, The above results are directly transferable to the kz = (similarly to the discussion below Eq. (17)) one of the 0 and kz = π planes of the 3D Brillouin zone, which leads 0 π 2 two middle bands must exhibit a high Chern number of to a (z2 , z2 ) ∈ Z2 classification. If the two symmetry 0 π −3, giving a total Chern number of ±2 at half-filling for indicators are distinct, e.g. (z2 , z2 ) = (1, 0), they indicate the valence/conduction space. the presence of C2z protected Weyl points (at half-filling) We now detail the phase transition to the fully polar- on the XR high-symmetry axis, on top of the four Weyl ized phase in the context of the model Eq. (4) to underpin points on the kz = 0-plane, while the plane at kz = π has the general scheme outlined above. The fully pseudo- CEF topology. These thus form a Z2 indicated octuplet spin-polarized phase must happen through two band in- of Weyl points (i.e. the CW topology). It is interesting versions, at Γ and M, which are analytically defined for to note that by C4 symmetry the Weyl points in plane Eq. (4) by the conditions Z > 2t3 and Z > 2t2, respec- must all have the same chirality, while the Weyl points on tively (assuming t2,3 > 0), and with the IRREPs ordering the XR axis must all be of the opposite chirality by C2T at Γ and M given above for Z > 0. The general form of symmetry, which leads to the configuration of Fig.6a) 9

to a non-symmetry indicated Z2 index of a strong two- dimensional TI [32]. We note that the non-symmorphic Fragile TRS squares to −1 over the whole plane that contains Z Z the four TRIMPs. Therefore, restricting any 3D model R R on that plane, it can be seen effectively as a 2D system A A with TRS and the index can be computed in the same Γ Γ way as the Kane-Mele Z2 invariant [81]. For completeness, let us also mention the axion insulat- X X ing phases protected by C2T , i.e. the three-dimensional M M gapped topological phases indicated by the difference in the second Stiefel Whitney class between the two C2T symmetric planes kz = 0, π [29, 30, 42, 82]. This phase requires that C2T squares to +1 on both planes and, con- trary to its parent phases with inversion symmetry [36], Z Z it is not symmetry indicated. R R The mechanism discussed so far is directly transferable ¯ A A to the other tetragonal AFM candidate MSG81.37( PC 4) and its FM counterpart MSG81.33( P 4)¯ , where the four- Γ Γ fold rotoinversion point symmetry S4 takes the place of X X C4. The only differences with MSG75.5( PC 4) are the M M reversal of chirality of the Weyl points under the action of S4 = IC4z symmetry and, for the 3D gapped phase, 0 the existence of an additional z2 ∈ Z2 symmetry indi- cator [35] of a strong 3D TI protected by S4-symmetry and (non-symmorphic) TRS [83] (see also AppendixD3 2b FIG. 6. Topology at half-filling of the 3D EBR75.5 for a) where this symmetry indicator is derived for MSG81.36 0 π 0 π (z2 , z2 ) = (1, 0), and b) (z2 , z2 ) = (1, 1). The colored dots (Pc4)¯ for which it is the unique symmetry indicator of represent the Weyl points (and their chirality) of the crys- the 3D gapped phase, similarly to MSG81.38( PI 4)¯ ). The talline Weyl (CW) phases. The plane with crystalline Euler 0 nontrivial value of the symmetry indicator z2 in Eq. (D4), fragile (CEF) topology is colored in green. TRIM (time rever- corresponding to the indicator z2 identified for MSG81.33 sal invariant) momenta are indicated as open circles. c) Same (P 4)¯ in Ref. [36], indicates a 3D axion topological insu- as b) before the annihilation of the Weyl points on the verti- lating phase with a non-trivial axion angle π [36] and a cal axes. d) Alternative to b) when the horizontal (vertical) Weyl points all have equal chirality. quantized magnetoelectric response [28, 84]. We conclude this section by noting the candidate MSSG77.17 (PC 42) that has a Z2 symmetry indicator where the plane with CEF topology is colored in green. [35] which indicates C2T protected Weyl semi-metallic If we reverse the indicators, i.e. (z0, zπ) = (0, 1), the phases, as in MSG75.5 (PC 4), but now with a mini- 2 2 mal connectivity of bands of 4, i.e. the filling must be plane with CEF topology moves to kz = 0 and the plane ν ∈ 4Z + 4. The 2D gapped phases at kz = 0, π are with the Weyl nodes moves to kz = π. When both symmetry indicators are nonzero (obtained thus either trivial, or host the second Stiefel Whitney from above through a band inversion at R) both planes topology that is not symmetry indicated, since the non- are stable nodal and we either obtain two quadruplets of trivial Euler class topology only exists within two-band Weyl points of opposite chirality in each horizontal plane subspaces. as illustrated in Fig.6b) (after the annihilation on the vertical axes of the nodes with opposite chirality visible in Fig.6c)), or we have two octuplets of Weyl points with V. COEXISTENCE OF NODAL AND all Weyl points on the horizontal planes with the same SUBDIMENSIONAL TOPOLOGIES chirality and all Weyl points on the vertical axes with the opposite chirality as shown in Fig.6d). In the previous MSG candidates we were guided by Only when both symmetry indicators are zero do we the possibility of having a non-trivial symmetry indi- retrieve a gapped 3D phase where both planes kz = 0 cator of the 3D gapped phase, signaling the possibility and kz = π are fragile topological. Our classification of splitting groups of bands (possibly EBRs) into (frag- thus characterizes and refines the earlier prediction of ile) topological bands, see also AppendixD. We now ad- a Z2 symmetry indicator for the 3D MSG75.5( PC 4) dress a class of MSGs that host a similar mechanism that phases [35]. As a side remark, we note that planes host- nonetheless appear trivial from a standard symmetry in- ing the four TRIM {Γ, M, Z, A} characterized by (non- dicator or topological quantum chemistry perspective. symmorphic) TRS, i.e. is an anti-unitary symmetry At the crux of the argument lies the observation that squaring to −1 and inverting the momentum, give rise these MSGs host groups of bands (possibly EBRs) that 10

2a 2a can be split at planes in the Brillouin zone, hosting the representation which we write EBR77.18. EBR77.18 re- 2b same (stable) topological features, while their total three- sembles EBR75.5 except that it is indecomposable over dimensional band structure must be connected. Conse- the 3D Brillouin zone. quently, within these “trivial” groups of bands, i.e. in the An other important difference with MSG75.5 (PC 4) is sense that they lack 3D symmetry indicators, the in-plane the algebra of symmetries at kz = π. Taking a point on ¯ non-trivial signatures must coexist with symmetry indi- the kz = π plane k = (kx, ky, π), the C2T symmetry in 2a cated nodal structures located away from the (possibly) MSG77.18( PI 42) is represented for EBR77.18 by gapped planes. We discuss below one example where the 0 ¯ (C2z |τd) ¯ ikC2z τd ¯ ¯ connectivity of the three-dimensional EBR by itself indi- hϕ, k| |ϕ, ki = e hϕ, k|ϕ,IC2zki(σx ⊗ iσx)K cates the presence of protected Weyl points in the direc- ikC2z τd ¯ ¯ = e hϕ, k|ϕ, k − b3i(σx ⊗ iσx)K tion perpendicular to the 2D topological planes. It thus ikC2z τd ˆ has stable 3D signatures, such as Fermi arcs [85], which = e T (−b3)(σx ⊗ iσx)K, topological origin is independent of the 2D topologies and (19) ˆ irA·K irA·K irB ·K irB ·K their signatures. Since the 3D symmetry indicators are with T (−b3) = diag(e , e , e , e )K=−b3 blind to this kind of coexistence, these topological phases = diag(1, 1, −1, −1). We thus find the square to be 0 2 ¯ [(C2z |τd) ] ¯ can thus only be perceived in this refined context of sub- hϕ, k| |ϕ, ki = −14×4, i.e. the C2T symmetry dimensional topology. squares to −1. The bands hence exhibit a twofold We emphasize that our use of subdimensional topology Kramers degeneracy over the whole kz = π-plane is distinct from the usual correspondence between the topological charges of a d-dimensional node, with codi- mension δ within a d+δ=D-dimensional Brillouin zone, TABLE II. Character table for the magnetic space group IRREPs of MSG77.13( P 4 ), and coIRREPs of the unitary and the p-dimensional gapped topologies for δ − 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 symmetries of MSG77.18( P 4 ), at Z, A, and R, with ω = D − 1 [46, 86]. The archetypal example of this usual I 2 eiπ/4. The (co-)IRREPs at Γ, M, and X are the same as in decent approach is the stability of a Weyl point being TableI. The coIRREPs of MSG77.18 are given by the pairing captured by the Chern number of a gapped sphere sur- of the two IRREPs of MSG77.13 within the same column. rounding it [87]. We discuss below such as a situation Retrieved from the Bilbao Crystallographic Server [69]. for the case of Weyl nodes protected by the screw axis 42 with a chirality χ = ±2 captured by gapped Chern planes WP Z5 Z6 A8 A7 R3 R4 with C = 2 mod 4. Many correspondences of this kind 2c Z8 Z7 A5 A6 have been formulated recently for new types of crystal- ↑ −ω ω ω∗ −ω∗ (C |τ ) z symmetry protected gapped topologies, e.g. [86, 88–90]. 4z 3 ∗ ∗ ↓z −ω ω −ω ω In contrast, the new sub-dimensional topology we are ↑z −i −i i i referring to is independent of the charges of the Weyl (C2z|0) -i i nodes protected by the screw symmetry, since we show ↓z i i −i −i that the Chern number must be zero on the 2D planes that host the sub-dimensional topology. This leads to the prediction of new phases with coexisting topological features, i.e. the manifestations of the nodal topology 1. Model and band structure in 3D together with the manifestations of the nontrivial sub-dimensional topology. We illustrate this with the following minimal 3D exten- sion of Eq. (4) which we rewrite as H[f1, f2, f3, g1, g2](k),

0 0 0 0 A. Case study of MSG77.18( PI 42) H (k) = H[f1, f2, f3, g1, g2](k)+ ρ1h1(k)σx ⊗ σz + ρ2h2(k)σy ⊗ σz, (20) As an example, we take MSG77.18( PI 42) that hosts where the new lattice form factors are now extended to the mechanism discussed for MSG75.5( PC 4) as a 2D sub- dimensional topology. The coset decomposition of the 3D momentum space, AFM compatible MSG77.18( PI 42) in terms of its FM 0 0 0 0 0
f2(k) = cos δ1k − cos δ2k + cos δ3k − cos δ4k /2, partner MSG77.13( P 42) is G77.18/G77.13 = (E|0)G77.13 + 0 0 0 0 0 0
(E|τd) G77.13 with τd = a1/2 + a2/2 + a3/2, where T is f3(k) = cos δ1k + cos δ2k + cos δ3k + cos δ4k /2, the primitive Bravais lattice and G is generated by 0 0 0 0 0
77.13 g2(k) = sin δ1k − i sin δ2k − sin δ3k + i sin δ4k /2, (C4z|τ3)T with τ3 = a3/2. We consider the Wyckoff po- 0 0 0 0
sition (WP) 2a [69] that is spanned by the sub-lattice h1(k) = sin δ1k + sin δ2k + sin δ3k + sin δ4k /2, 0 0 0 0
sites rA = a1/2 and rB = a2/2 + a3/2. The same h2(k) = sin δ1k − sin δ2k + sin δ3k − sin δ4k /2, sites correspond to WP 2c of MSG77.13. Populating (21) 0 0 the sites with s-electronic orbitals and both spin-z-1/2 with δ1,2 = δ1,2 + a3/2, and δ3,4 = −δ1,2 + a3/2, and components we get the Bloch orbital basis |ϕ, ki with with the new real parameters ρ1, ρ2 ∈ R (we take ρ1 = −1 ϕ = (ϕA↑, ϕA↓, ϕB↑, ϕB↓) forming an elementary band and ρ2 = −2/5). 11

E

E

FIG. 7. Sub-dimensional gapped phases within a 3D indecom- 2a 2c posable EBR, illustrated by a) EBR77.18, and b) EBR77.13 obtained by breaking TRS through a Zeeman coupling. The Weyl nodes imposed at half-filling by the screw axis 42 are marked with colored circles indicating the sign of the symmetry-imposed chiralities.

We show the band structure of model Eq. (20) in Fig.7a) where the kz-axis covers [0, 2π], and the other axis corresponds to the successive paths ΓX and XM within the plane kz = 0. The band structure along the high-symmetry lines is shown in Fig.8a), and c) after a band inversion at X. We note the twofold degeneracy at kz = π which explains the degeneracies along ZR and RA in Fig.7a), and in Fig.8a) and c). Importantly, the compatibility relations along the C4- symmetric axes ΓZ and MA imply that the EBR cannot be split [69], see AppendixD2. Indeed, the fourfold screw symmetry 42 ≡ (C4z|τ3) imposes an exchange of branches between the Kramers doublets of Γ and Z (M and A), see the coIRREPs given in TableII retrieved from [69]. FIG. 8. Band structure along high-symmetry lines for EBR2a a) with z0 = 0 and c) with z0 = 1, and for EBR2c This leads to two 42-protected nodal points on the ΓZ- 77.18 2 2 77.13 line (resp. the MA-line) at half-filling (marked by circles obtained through Zeeman splitting b) from a), and d) from c). in Fig.7a)), and more generally at a filling ν ∈ 4Z + 2. We note that this exchange of IRREPs along the 42- axes originates from the monodromy of the irreducible representations of the screw symmetry 42 [6, 69, 86, 91, −1 −1 92]. la = C4zlb (where lb is the reversed oriented path), see Fig.9a). Since we can recompose the total sphere 2 3 through C4z actions, i.e. S = S ∪ C4zS ∪ C4zS ∪ C4zS, the Chern number of the two occupied bands over the 2. Chirality of Weyl nodes protected by a screw axis 4 2 gapped sphere thus reads

Following the algebraic argument of Ref. [6], see also Ref. [86], we now derive the symmetry enforced chirality  4 e−i2πC[S] = e−iγB [l] = e−i4γB [l], (22) of χ = 2mod4 for each Weyl point protected by 42. Let us start with a sphere S surrounding one of the Weyl points, say the one on the upper half of the ΓZ line. We fix the south pole at Γ and the north pole at Z, see Fig.9a). by the invariance of the Berry curvature under rotation Then, we divide the sphere in four quarters, one of which, symmetry [6], and where γB[l] is the Berry phase of the let us call it S, is bounded by an oriented loop ∂S ≡ l = two occupied bands over the loop l = lb ◦ la, i.e. (see lb ◦ la (which we read as first la followed by lb) with the definition of symmetry transformation of the Wilson 12

Eq. (10). We therefore can define a sub-dimensional 0 Z R Z R z2 ∈ Z2 symmetry indicator. We have seen that on the A A kz = π plane the C2T symmetry squares to −1, such that there is no (real) Euler class topology. Neverthe- M' less, we show in Fig. 10 the C4-symmetric Wilson loop X' Γ on the plane kz = π for the model for MSG77.18( PI 42) Γ X X Eq. (20), over a) the conduction and b) valence bands. M M The winding of Wilson loop for the conduction bands indicates a crystalline (non-Euler) fragile (CF) topology.

FIG. 9. Chirality of χ = 2mod4 for each Weyl point protected by the 42 screw axis on the ΓZ and MA lines, at half-filling (ν ∈ 4Z + 2), derived from the symmetry reduction of the Wilson loop (see text).

loop in AppendixA) FIG. 10. C4-symmetry Wilson loop for the conduction a) and 2a valence b) bands of EBR77.18 at kz = π. −iγB [l] e = detW[l] = det (W[lb] ·W[la])  −1  We now determine how the subdimensional topolo- = det RΓ ·W[l ]−1 · RZ
·W[l ] 42 a 42 a gies (at kz = 0, π) interact with the topology of the 42- (23) symmetry protected Weyl points. We first note that the  Γ Z
−1 χ42 (Γ5)χ42 (Γ7) = det R · R = Chern number at half-filling vanishes on the kz = 0, π- 42 4 iχ (Z )iχ (Z ) 42 5 42 8 planes as a consequence of C2T symmetry (see the dis- 2 = (−i) = −1, cussion below Eq. (11) for kz = 0, and at kz = π, 2 we have F ≡ 0 by [C2T ] = −1). As a consequence, where RΓ = eiC4z kΓ·τ3 SΓ (Γ Γ ) = SΓ (Γ Γ ) and RZ = we can deform the sphere S of Fig. 11a) into the pyra- 42 42 i j 42 i j 42 eiC4z kZ·τ3 SZ (Z Z ) = iSZ (C k · τ = b /2 · a /2 = mid P of Fig. 11b) while conserving the Chern number, 42 i j 42 4z Z 3 3 3 π/2) are defined in terms of the representation of sym- i.e. C[S] = C[P] = 2 mod 4. This equality can be readily metry (g|τ ) in the valence band basis Sk (k k ) for verified through the symmetry reduction of the Wilson g (g|τg ) i j loop W[ld ◦lc ◦lb ◦la] similarly to the above derivation for a coIRREP kikj at a momentum k, and χ4(ki) is the S but now using both C4z and C2z transformations [6]. character of the IRREP k given in TableI (we have i We note that even if there are nodal points on the kz = 0 χ (Z ) = χ (Γ )[69]). Therefore, γ [l] = π mod 2π 4 i 4 i B plane (for z2 = 1), by C4 symmetry they must contribute and we conclude that the Chern number over the whole to an increase of the Chern number by ±4, which leaves sphere, and thus the chirality of the Weyl point inside, is the quantity mod 4 unchanged. An other consequence of C[S] = 2 mod 4. Very interestingly, we find a quadratic C2T symmetry is that any Weyl point above the kz = 0 dispersion in the (kx, ky)-plane at a fixed kz from each plane must have its mirror symmetric image underneath Weyl point at half-filling in Fig.7, see also [92]. (kz → IC2zkz = −kz) with the same chiral charge. Com- While the above derivation based on the symmetry re- bining the top of the pyramid in Fig.9b) with its mir- duction of Wilson loop, first developed in Ref. [6, 86] ror image in the kz-direction, we obtain an octahedron adapting the Wilson loop techniques developed eariler O = P ∪ mzP that wraps the pair of Weyl points on the to assess gapped topological phases in [13, 79, 93–95], is ΓZ line, and over which there is a total Chern number completely general and can be readily transferred to any (chirality) of C[O] = (2 + 2) mod 8 = 4 mod 8. other context (i.e. any other space group, with or with- We note that O divides the 3D Brillouin zone in two out spin-orbit coupling), we note some later alternative symmetric halves. Invoking the Nielsen-Ninomiya can- approaches in Ref. [92, 96]. cellation theorem [97], it follows that the total chirality inside O (say +4), must be compensated by the total chi- rality inside the complement of O (−4), see Fig.9. We 3. AFM topological phases then arrive for z2 = 0 to the configuration of Fig. 11a), where the green (purple) plane hosts a CEF (CF) topol- We now discuss the global topology of the AFM topo- ogy, and where each red (blue) point mark a Weyl point logical phases for MSG77.18 (PI 42). We first note that with χ = +2 (rep. χ = −2). We finally conclude that 2a EBR77.18 can be gapped over the planes kz = 0, π. The this phase must exhibit large double Fermi arcs in the 2a 2D topology at kz = 0 for EBR77.18 is the same as the surface spectra connecting pairs of projected Weyl nodes 2b topology discussed for EBR75.5, that is CEF topology of opposite chirality across the surface Brillouin zone. 0 versus stable nodal (CW topology) indicated by z2 in Also, by inverting IRREPs at X, i.e. setting z2 = 1, we 13

particular, the bands can be ordered at {Γ, Z, M, A} as Fragile to avoid Weyl points at half-filling (more generally at a Fragile filling ν ∈ 4Z + 2). Z Z R R A A Fragile 5. Stable 3D signatures Γ Γ X X We emphasize that the rational of sub-dimensional M M topologies thus works in two manners. Firstly, because the total 3D EBR is connected, and thus trivial, these phases are missed by previous schemes. Reciprocally, the presence of in plane topology together with the nodes to make the EBR globally connected implies the coexistence 2a FIG. 11. Topology at half-filling of the 3D EBR77.18 for a) of topological signatures of qualitatively distinct origins. 0 0 z2 = 0, and b) z2 = 1. The colored dots represent the Weyl On one hand, the connectivity condition directly induces points and their chirality, with χ = ±1 for the small dots, and symmetry indicated Weyl points, and in turn, Fermi arcs χ = ±2 for the big dots, of the crystalline Weyl (CW) phases. in the surface spectra. On the other hand, the subdimen- The double Weyl points on the vertical axes are protected by sional topology is either gapless, in which case it induces the screw 42 symmetry, see Section VA2. The plane with additional Weyl points and thus additional Fermi arcs, or crystalline Euler fragile (CEF) topology is colored in green, it is gapped fragile topological, in which case it induces and the plane with (C4-symmetry protected) crystalline frag- ile (CF) topology is colored in purple. TRIM (time reversal corner modes [56]. In this sense this mechanism can thus invariant) momenta are indicated as open circles. be used to find new topological signatures that are di- rectly detectable via the usual routes of e.g. angle re- solved photoemission spectroscopy, quantum oscillation get the octuplet of Weyl points discussed above in the 3D techniques or scanning tunneling microscopy. phase of MSG75.5( PC 4), leading to the configuration of Fig. 11b). This last case must exhibit an exotic coexis- tence of Fermi arcs generated by different sets of Weyl B. Generalization points with qualitatively distinct topological origins. Our sub-dimensional analysis has thus allowed us to We end by generalizing our sub-dimensional topology identify new phases with the coexistence of 2D and 3D scheme and search systematically for candidate MSGs nodal topological features. hosting the planar topologies discussed so far− that is, CEF, CF, and CW phases for the AFM cases and CC phases for their FM counterpart−and the outlined mech- 4. AFM-FM correspondence anisms relating them. Remarkably, our results are di- rectly transferable to all tetragonal MSGs with the point We now consider the effect of breaking the non- groups C4 and S4, i.e. comprising space group families symmorphic TRS, i.e. inducing a transition from the SG75-SG82. For each family we then consider all the AFM phase of MSG77.18( PI 42) to the FM phase of Shubnikov type IV AFM MSGs and the one type I FM MSG77.13( P 42). This can be done by including a Zee- MSG. This amounts to a total of 26 MSGs which we list man splitting as we did for MSG75. We show the band in TableIII, where we give the type of planar topologies structure in Fig.7b), and along the high-symmetry lines for kz = 0 and kz = π, and the list of EBRs hosting in Fig.8b), and d) after a band inversion at X. We these. On top of the single EBRs that split on both find that all the Kramers degeneracies are split leav- planes, kz = 0 and kz = π, and which must necessar- ing gapped bands on the kz = 0 and π planes. Simi- ily host a nontrivial planar topology of type indicated, larly to the case of MSG75.1( P 4), the topology of the we have also listed the sums of EBRs that can lead to a gapped bands at fixed kz are characterized through sym- listed topology upon the permutation of their IRREPs. metry indicated Chern numbers (i.e. with CC topology). Whenever there is the choice CEF/CW, the topology is Interestingly, for moderate Zeeman coupling, the four determined by the ordering of IRREPs. We note that 2 bands remain fully connected along the C4-symmetric [C2T ] = ±1 indicates CEF or CEF/CW (+1) versus axes through the persistence of the C4-symmetry pro- CF (−1) topology [98][99] as the only alternative since tected Weyl nodes, as indicated by the IRREP order at the Chern number must vanish. Finally, all FM can- Γ, Z, M, and A, as it is clearly shown in Fig.8b) and d). didates acquire CC topology when obtained from their We note however that, by relaxing the pairing condi- AFM parents through Zeeman splitting. In particular, tions (i.e. from 2D coIRREPs to 1D IRREPs), there are every nodal AFM phase at half-filling must give rise to more combinatorial ways of connecting the bands allowed a nontrivial Chern FM phase at half-filling, thus consti- by the compatibility relations for MSG77.13 (P 42). In tuting a systematic correspondence between necessarily 14

TABLE III. Candidate MSGs for the (Euler) fragile/stable-nodal AFM to Chern FM mechanism, including those profiting from the subdimensional topological analysis. The table lists the AFM and corresponding FM counterparts as well as their time reversal invariant momenta (TRIM) which host Kramers doublets (i.e. Weyl nodes). Moreover, it details the topology by enumerating the value of C2T = ±1 and the two-band subspace (2-BS) characterization on the kz = 0, π momentum planes. 2 2 [C2T ] = +1 indicates Euler class (real) topology, while [C2T ] = −1 implies the twofold Kramers degeneracy of the bands. The labels CEF, CF, CW, and CC indicate crystalline Euler fragile (with symmetry-indicated Wilson loop quantization), crystalline fragile (with the winding of C4-symmetric Wilson loop), and crystalline Weyl semimetallic (with a symmetry-indicated π-Berry phase), respectively. When the 2-BS Topology is CW, we mean that there must be Weyl nodes connecting adjacent two-band subspaces. When we write CEF/CW, we mean that either of the topologies is realized depending on the ordering of IRREPs. Finally, the EBR column specifies the elementary band representationsa hosting the topologyb . All FM candidates acquire crystalline Chern (CC) topology when obtained from their AFM parents through Zeeman splitting. The EBR data were retrieved from the Bilbao Crystallographic Server [69]. 2 AFMSG TRIM kz [C2T ] 2-BS Topology EBRs FMSG 0 +1 CEF (2a, ↑z) ⊕ (2a, ↓z), (2b, ↑z) ⊕ (2b, ↓z), 75.4 (Pc4) Γ,M,X,X’ 75.1 (P 4) π −1 CF (4c, ↑z), (4c, ↓z) 0 +1 CEF/CW (2a, ↑z) ⊕ (2a, ↓z), (2b, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), 75.5 (PC 4) Γ,M,Z,A 75.1 (P 4) π +1 CEF/CW (4c, →y) 1/2 1/2 3/2 3/2 0 +1 CEF/CW (2a, ↑z ) ⊕ (2a, ↓z ) ⊕ (2a, ↑z ) ⊕ (2a, ↑z ), 75.6 (PI 4) Γ,M,R,R’ 75.1 (P 4) π −1 CF (4b, ↑z), (4b, ↓z) 0 +1 CEF 76.10 (P 4 ) Γ,M,X,X’ (4a, → ), (4b, → ), (4c, → ) 76.7 (P 4 ) c 1 π +1 CEF/CW y y y 1 0 +1 CEF/CW 76.11 (P 4 ) Γ,M,Z,A (8a, → ) 76.7 (P 4 ) C 1 π −1 CF y 1 0 +1 CEF/CW 76.12 (P 4 ) Γ,M,R,R’ (4a, → ) 76.7 (P 4 ) I 1 π +1 CEF/CW y 1 0 +1 CEF (2a, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), (2b, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), 77.16 (Pc42) Γ,M,X,X’ 77.13 (P 42) π −1 CF (4c, ↑z), (4c, ↓z) 0 +1 CEF/CW (4a, ↑z) ⊕ (4a, ↓z), (4b, ↑z) ⊕ (4b, ↓z), 77.17 (PC 42) Γ,M,Z,A 77.13 (P 42) π +1 CEF/CW (4c, →y) 0 +1 CEF/CW 77.18 (P 4 ) Γ,M,R,R’ (2a, ↑ ⊕ ↓ ), (4b, ↑ ) ⊕ (4b, ↓ ) 77.13 (P 4 ) I 2 π −1 CF z z z z 2 0 +1 CEF 78.22 (P 4 ) Γ,M,X,X’ (4a, → ), (4b, → ), (4c, → ) 78.19 (P 4 ) c 3 π +1 CEF/CW y y y 3 0 +1 CEF/CW 78.23 (P 4 ) Γ,M,Z,A (8a, → ) 78.19 (P 4 ) C 3 π −1 CF y 3 0 +1 CEF/CW 78.24 (P 4 ) Γ,M,R,R’ (4a, → ) 78.19 (P 4 ) I 3 π +1 CEF/CW y 3 (4a, ↑z) ⊕ (4a, ↓z), (4b, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), 79.28 (Ic4) Γ,M,X,X’ 0 +1 CEF 79.25 (I4) (8c, →y) (8a, →y), (8b, →y), 80.32 (Ic41) Γ,M,X,X’ 0 +1 CEF 80.29 (I41) (8c, ↑z), (8c, ↓z) 0 +1 CEF (2a, ↑z) ⊕ (2a, ↓z), (2c, ↑z) ⊕ (2c, ↓z), 81.36 (Pc4)¯ Γ,M,X,X’ 81.33 (P 4)¯ π −1 CF (4g, ↑z), (4g, ↓z) (2a, ↑1/2) ⊕ (2a, ↓1/2) ⊕ (2a, ↑3/2) ⊕ (2a, ↑3/2), 0 +1 CEF/CW z z z z 81.37 (P 4)¯ Γ,M,Z,A 1/2 1/2 3/2 3/2 81.33 (P 4)¯ C π +1 CEF/CW (2b, ↑z ) ⊕ (2b, ↓z ) ⊕ (2b, ↑z ) ⊕ (2b, ↑z ), (2c, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), (2d, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), (4g, →y) (2a, ↑1/2) ⊕ (2a, ↓1/2) ⊕ (2a, ↑3/2) ⊕ (2a, ↓3/2), 0 +1 CEF/CW z z z z 81.38 (P 4)¯ Γ,M,R,R’ 1/2 1/2 3/2 3/2 81.33 (P 4)¯ I π −1 CF (2b, ↑z ) ⊕ (2b, ↓z ) ⊕ (2b, ↑z ) ⊕ (2b, ↓z ), (2c, ↑z ⊕ ↓z), (2d, ↑z ⊕ ↓z) (4a, ↑z) ⊕ (4a, ↓z), (4d, ↑z) ⊕ (4d, ↓z), 82.42 (Ic4)¯ Γ,M,X,X’ 0 +1 CEF 82.39 (I4)¯ (8g, →y)

a. The EBRs are defined for a given Wyckoff position and a fixed spin basis. We either take the verticalz ˆ-axis (C4-axis) as the quantization axis for the spin-1/2 (3/2) with the spin basis√ (↑z, ↓z), or we take a quantization axis that is perpendicular toz ˆ, e.g.y ˆ for which the spin basis is (→y, ←y) = (↑z +i ↓z, i ↑z + ↓z)/ 2. b. In the case of a single EBR, splitable at kz = 0 and kz = π, we mean that it must host one of the listed nontrivial topologies. In the case of a (direct) sum of EBRs, we mean that the topology can be achieved through the permutation of IRREPs between the EBRs. nontrivial topological phases associated to MSG repre- VI. CHIRAL FERMIONS AT sentations. HIGH-SYMMETRY MOMENTA AND LARGE FERMI ARCS

All the MSGs of the table with point group C4 (i.e. the type IV AFM MSG75.4-MSG81.36, and the type I FM 15

MSG75.1-MSG80.29) have only proper symmetries, a Remarkably the four bands become all connected through consequence of which is that any crystal structure that a fourfold magnetic Dirac node at M, similarly to the explicitly breaks all symmetries not included in their examples discussed in Ref. [55]. MSG must be chiral, i.e. enantiomorphic (the SGs 75-76- The same happens for MSG89.93 (PC 422), obtained 77-78-79-80 are all among the 65 Sohncke space groups by including one horizontal π-rotation symmetry (say with no inversion, no mirror, nor roto-inversion symme- C2y) leading to the point group D4 (422), as well as tries [100]). Then, the absence of improper symmetry for MSG83.49 (PC 4/m), obtained by including the basal allows the existence of Weyl nodes at high-symmetry mirror symmetry mz leading to the point group C4h momenta, i.e. with non-vanishing Chern numbers. This (4/m). is the rationale for the chiral Fermions found in many The structural chirality is lost for MSG99.169 (non-magnetic) material candidates with a Sohncke space (PC 4mm) and MSG83.49 (PC 4/m), thus preventing group [6, 101–105]. the existence of Weyl nodes at the TRIMPs, i.e. the We have noted that MSG75.5 (PC 4) and MSG77.18 Weyl points are absorbed within vertical nodal lines on (PI 42) exhibit Weyl nodes at every TRIMP at a filling the C4z-axes, and, respectively, within a global twofold 2Z + 1. MSG77.18 must also exhibit Weyl nodes on the Kramer’s degeneracy. For MSG89.93 (PC 422) instead, ΓZ- and MA-lines at a filling 4Z + 2 due to the mon- the structural chirality, and thus the Weyl nodes, are odromy of the irreducible representation of the screw axis preserved. 42. The same results apply to the FM parents MSG75.1 We note that the introduction mz allows the defini- (P 4) and MSG77.13 (P 42). The Weyl points at high- tion of C4-symmetry indicated mirror Chern numbers symmetry momenta for all the other MSGs of the table [13, 83, 106]. The systematic study of the magnetic topo- can be found similarly. logical phases for the next magnetic super-space groups, In Ref. [6] we have given a detailed analysis of the however, lies beyond the scope of the present work. symmetry indicated higher Chern number generated by the Weyl points locked on a screw axis at half-filling, and derived the necessary existence of large Fermi arcs due to B. Weyl phases protected by [C T ]2 = +1 the compensation of chirality across the Brillouin zone. 2 This analysis can be readily transferred to the present situation (e.g. here C = ±2 on the 42-axes). Large Fermi The symmetry indicator Eq. (10) and its interpreta- arcs has also been reported in other non-magnetic chiral tion in terms of a Z2 quantized Berry phase Eq. (11), materials [102, 103]. derived here for MSG75.5 (PC 4), can be readily applied In the next section, we discuss the fate of the Weyl to many other MSGs with gapped 2D planes in the Bril- 2 points when extra improper point symmetries are in- louin zone where [C2T ] = +1. The simplest example cluded. MSG3.4 (Pa2), obtained by forgetting the C4 symmetry, We now turn to the MSGs with roto-inversion symme- has a Z2 symmetry indicator that readily corresponds to z Eq. (10)[35]. For many MSGs though, there are sym- try IC4z. Since the chirality of Weyl points is reversed 2 metry indicated nodal points between the gapped planes, under IC4z, the Kramer’s degeneracies at the TRIMPs i.e. similarly to MSG77.18 (P 4 ), such that they cannot (which are also IC4z invariant momenta) cannot form I 2 Weyl nodes at the filling 2Z + 1. Instead, each double be identified by a (3D) symmetry indicator and they have been listed as trivial [35]. degeneracy at a TRIMP on the kz = 0 plane is continued as a nodal line for all values of kz [69].

C. Chern and Weyl phases of type I MSGs VII. RAISING AND LOWERING OF SYMMETRIES We have discussed in detail the transition from the AFM Weyl phase of MSG75.5 (PC 4), and MSG77.18 So far, we have focused on the topological correspon- (PI 42), to the sub-dimensional Chern insulating FM dence between representations of magnetic space groups phases of MSG75.1 (P 4), and MSG77.13 (P 42), re- with the tetragonal point groups C4 and S4. We now spectively, obtained upon the breaking of the non- briefly address the effect of adding and removing unitary symmorphic TRS. The effect of breaking TRS is to un- symmetries. lock the Weyl nodes that were pinned on the C2T planes, so that they move within the Brillouin zone. We conclude that the symmetry indicator Z4 of the type I MSG75.1 A. Magnetic Dirac Fermions (P 4) [35] indicates a We yl semi-metallic phase, while there is no symmetry indicator for MSG77.13 (P 42)[35] Let us start by including extra unitary symmetries to with a Weyl semi-metallic phase that must be assessed MSSG75.5 (PC 4). If we include one extra vertical mirror in terms of sub-dimensional topology. symmetry, say my, the MSG is promoted to MSG99.169 In the same way as we predict many AFM phases with (PC 4mm) with the (unitary) point group C4v (4mm). C2T protected Weyl nodal phases, we predict many FM 16

Weyl nodal phases indicated by sub-dimensional Chern College at the University of Cambridge. G.F.L acknowl- phases upon the breaking of the non-symmorphic TRS. edges funding from the Aker Scholarship. Note added.– We finally note that our results agree with expressions for magnetic EBRs, compatibility rela- tions and symmetry indicators tabulated in [36], which VIII. CONCLUSIONS was posted during the finalizing stages of this manuscript. Note added.– We comment here on Ref. [106] that ap- In conclusion, starting from the specific case study, peared several months after the first version of this paper MSG 75.5( PC 4), we find that specific Wyckoff positions and has some overlap with our work. Among many re- (2b) in this magnetic ground group necessarily results in sults not covered by our work, they give a complete list (fragile) topological bands. In this regard we formulated of MSGs that have z2 (called z4 in their work) as one a first generic model exhibiting fragile topology in the of the 3D symmetry indicators, including some of the context of magnetic space group symmetries. Breaking MSGs discussed here. While the scope of our work was the essential symmetry by a Zeeman term then relates more restricted, our approach based on sub-dimensional the underlying AFM-compatible MSG with a FM coun- topologies, i.e. allowing symmetry indicated nodes be- terpart in the same space group family and ensures that tween gapped planes, leads us to predict many more the fragile topology gaps into bands with finite Chern MSGs with C2T protected Weyl semi-metallic phases. number. After translating the Z2 symmetry indicator of Ref. [106] also considers other Weyl semi-metallic phases the AFM MSG into a quantized Berry phase of a stable in type I MSGs protected by IC4z symmetry, among topological semimetallic phase, which originates from the which are MSG81.33 (P 4)¯ and MSG82.39 (P 4).¯ Alter- combination of C4 symmetry and C2T -protected Euler natively, these FM phases can be readily obtained, upon class topology, we also discuss a similar correspondence the breaking of the non-symmorphic TRS, from the (sub- to FM Chern phases. We thus unveil a systematic cor- dimensional) AFM Weyl phases of the following type respondence between necessarily nontrivial topological IV MSG81.36 (Pc4),¯ MSG81.37 (PC 4),¯ MSG81.38 (PI 4),¯ phases associated with MSG representations. Moreover, and MSG82.42 (Ic4),¯ all listed in our table. we then promote this mechanism to three spatial dimen- sions, where we also find novel phases characterized by the concept of subdimensional topologies. The latter fea- ture the same in-plane mechanism but have 3D elemen- tary band representations that are fully connected. As a result, the non-trivial 2D topology must coexists with nodes away from the high symmetry planes, e.g. Weyl points, giving rise to additional topological nodal fea- tures, such as Fermi arcs, that can be diagnosed with established experimental methods. As a result, our work culminates in an exhaustive list of tetragonal MSGs (with the point groups C4 and S4) and their EBR content host- ing the above correspondence. We have then addressed the effect of adding and removing unitary symmetries that lead to the identification of magnetic Dirac (four- fold) points, and have outlined how the symmetry indi- cated Weyl semi-metallic phases protected by C2T can be found in numerous MSGs as a result of our refined subdimensional topological analysis. Given the general- ity of these insights and relevance of parameters to access this physics, we hope our results pave the way for new pursuits in topological band structures. In fact, we an- ticipate that this coexistence effect, i.e. of gapped subdi- mensional topology together with independent topolog- ical nodes, can also occur in the non-magnetic context culminating in novel gapped-nodal topological phases.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

R.-J. S. acknowledges funding from the Marie Sklodowska-Curie programme under EC Grant No. 842901 and the Winton programme as well as Trinity 17

Appendix A: Wilson loop winding for the fragile Considering now the base path lΓMΓ0 , we have topological phase W[lΓMΓ0 ] = WΓ0←M ·WM←Γ (A4) We algebraically derive the symmetry obstruction on Γ −1 M −1 = R4 ·WM←Γ · (R4 ) ·WM←Γ, the winding of Wilson loop over one quarter of the Brillouin zone, and following over the whole Brillouin k¯ ¯ ˆ ¯ ¯ ˆ ¯ where R4 = hu,Dπ/2k|U(C4z)|u, ki = hu, k|T (C4zk − zone, for the valence (conduction) subspace of the split ¯ ¯ 2b k)Uˆ(C4z)|u, ki is the representation in the basis of Bloch EBR75.5. For this we choose the patch of the Brillouin ¯ eigenvectors of C4z at k, with, in the orbital basis |ϕ, ki, zone bounded by l 0 and l 0 , see Fig.2c) (blue ΓXΓ ΓMΓ ˆ −iπ/4 iπ/4 dashed). We design a flow starting with the base path U(C4z) = σx ⊗ M4 where M4 = diag(e , e ), and ¯ ˆ ¯ k¯ † lΓXΓ0 and ending with lΓMΓ0 . Defining the Wilson loop we have used |u, Dπ/2ki = U(C4z)|u, ki R4 . phases Using parallel transported Bloch eigenvectors the Wil- son loop becomes diagonal, and we write WfM←Γ = {ϕ , ϕ } = Arg [eig{W[l 0 ]}] , 1 2 ΓXΓ diag(eiϕa , eiϕb ). The above expression thus reduces to 0 0 (A1) {ϕ1, ϕ2} = Arg [eig{W[lΓMΓ0 ]}] , Γ e−iϕa 0  M −1 eiϕa 0  W[lΓMΓ0 ] = R · −iϕ · (R ) · iϕ . they must extrapolate smoothly between {ϕ1, ϕ2} and f e4 0 e b e4 0 e b 0 0 {ϕ1, ϕ2} as we smoothly deform the base path from (A5) lΓXΓ0 to lΓMΓ0 . The Wilson loop over an oriented Since at C4z-symmetric momenta the parallel trans- base path l : k1 → k2 is defined through Wk2←k1 = ported Bloch eigenvectors are also eigenvectors of the C4z ˆ Γ hu, k2|W |u, k1i where |u, k1i is the matrix of Bloch operator, we retrieve irreducible representations Re4 = ∗ M ∗ eigenvectors of the band subspace under consideration, (±)diag(ω, ω ) and Re4 = (±)diag(ω, −ω ), where the ˆ Qk2←k1 and W = k P(k) with the projector P(k) = signs depend on the coIRREPs realized at Γ and M (see |u, kihu, k|. TableI). We now show that the crystal symmetries act as an The quantization of the Wilson loop Wf[lΓMΓ0 ] depends obstruction imposing the quantization of Wilson loop on the relative spin-z components of the parallel trans- phases. First, we find ported Bloch eigenstates at Γ and M, see the discussion k¯ k¯ k¯ in Ref. [38]. Writing Re4 = diag(ξ4 (Γa), ξ4 (Γb)), we find W[lΓXΓ0 ] = WΓ0←X ·WX←Γ (A2) = RΓ ·W−1 · (RX)−1 ·W ,  Γ M  2 X←Γ 2 X←Γ ξ4 (Γa)/ξ4 (Ma) 0 Wf[lΓMΓ0 ] = Γ M . 0 ξ (Γb)/ξ (Mb) k¯ ¯ ˆ ¯ 4 4 where R2 = hu,Dπk|U(C2z)|u, ki is the sewing ma- (A6) ¯ trix of symmetry C2z at the high symmetry point k Assuming the same spin-z component at Γ and M, in the valence Bloch eigenvectors basis (with Uˆ(C ) = 2z e.g. with (Γa, Ma, Γb, Mb) = (Γ5, M8, Γ7, M5) (see Table 1 ⊗ −iσz the representation of C2z in the orbital ba- I), we find sis |ϕ, ki, and Dπ is the rotation matrix by π around ¯ ˆ† ¯ 0 0 the z-axis). Writing |u, k + Ki = T (K)|u, ki where {ϕ1, ϕ2} = {π/4, π/4} mod 2π. (A7) Tˆ(K) = diag(eirAK , eirAK , eirB K , eirB K ) accounts for the phase factors due to the displacements of the sub- This matches exactly with the direct numerical evalua- lattice sites with respect to the origin of the unit cell, tion of the Wilson loop shown in Fig.2e) in the main k¯ ¯ ˆ ¯ ¯ ˆ ¯ we can rewrite R2 = hu, k|T (Dπk − k)U(C2z)|u, ki text. If instead we assume opposite spin-z components which guarantees that the arbitrary gauge phase factors at Γ and M, e.g. with (Γa, Ma, Γb, Mb) = (Γ5, M5, Γ7, M8) ¯ ˆ ¯ k¯ † (see TableI), we find are removed, and use |u, Dπki = U(C2z)|u, ki R2 in the following. We note that at C2z-invariant momenta, 0 0 ¯ ¯ {ϕ1, ϕ2} = {0, π} mod 2π. (A8) i.e. Dπk = k + K with K a reciprocal lattice vector, we have [Tˆ(K)Uˆ(C ),H(k¯)] = 0 and Rk¯ is diagonal. Since 2z 2 This later quantization thus corresponds to a system for the fragile phase (z = 0 mod 2, see Eq. 10) we have 2 where there is a twisting spin texture from Γ to M, which RX = (±)diag(i, i) and RΓ = diag(i, −i) (see TableI), we 2 2 would require strong Rashba-type spin-orbit coupling. readily find It thus follows that, in the absence of a twisted

{ϕ1, ϕ2} = {0, π} mod 2π. (A3) spin texture, the Wilson loop phases must wind from 0 0 {ϕ1, ϕ2} = {0, π} to {ϕ1, ϕ2} = {π/4, π/4} mod 2π, as We emphasize that the quantization of the Wilson loop we scan over one quarter of the Brillouin zone through the 0 over ΓXΓ comes from the repetition of the IRREPs at X deformation of the base path from lΓXΓ0 to lΓMΓ0 . There 0 0 (equivalently at Γ). An alternative source of Wilson loop is thus a minimal winding of (∆ϕ1, ∆ϕ2) = (ϕ1, ϕ2) − quantization is when both Γ and X are TRIMs in which (ϕ1, ϕ2) = (+π/2, −π/2). By the action of C4 symme- case the Wilson loop phases are Kramers degenerated at try we can recover the whole Brillouin zone for which we {0, 0} or {π, π}. predict a minimal winding of the Wilson loop phases of 18

4(∆ϕ1, ∆ϕ2) = (+2π, −2π). This precisely predicts al- gebraically the numerical evaluation of the Wilson loop over the whole Brillouin zone shown in Fig.2d). We finally conclude that the valence (conduction) sub- 2b space of the split EBR75.5 is topologically non-trivial as indicated by the finite winding of Wilson loop phases.

Appendix B: Derivation of formula Eq. (14) and Eq. (11)

We give here the algebraic derivation of the Wilson loop over lq = ΓM’XMΓ (red loop in Fig.2c)) as given in Eq. (11), from which Eq. (14) readily follows by reducing to a single band-subspace. We use the algebraic Wilson loop techniques developed in [13, 79] and [6, 38, 86]. It is convenient to decompose the Wilson loop into the contributions of each segment that connects two succes- sive high-symmetry points, i.e. W[l ] = W W W W , q d c b a FIG. 12. Berry phase flows for the four split bands of with MSG75.1( P 4) as obtained from gapping the fragile topologi- ˆ ˆ 0 cal MSG75.5( PC 4) phase. Band 1 and 4 have Chern number Wa = hu, Γ|W |u, Mi, Wc = hu, X|W |u, M i, C = +1. Band 2 and 3 exhibit Chern number C = −1. 0 Wb = hu, M |Wˆ |u, Γi, Wd = hu, M|Wˆ |u, Xi, (B1) ¯ where M’ = M − b2. band at the high-symmetry momentum k. For magnetic We now use symmetries to rewrite Wa and Wd, as space groups with symmorphic C4z and C2z symmetries

(i.e. τC4z = τC2z = 0) as MSG75.5 (and MSG75.1), it Wa = hu, Γ|Wˆ |u, Mi = hu,C4zΓ|Wˆ |u,C4zM’i simplifies to Γ ˆ † ˆ ˆ M’ † = R4 · hu, Γ|U (C4z)W U(C4z)|u, M’i · (R4 ) Nocc Γ M Y ξ4 (i)ξ2 (i) Γ −1 M’ † Det W[lq] = . (B6) = R4 ·Wb · (R4 ) , ξM(i)ξX(i) i=1 4 2 Wd = hu, M|Wˆ |u, Xi = hu,C2zM”|Wˆ |u,C2zX’i = RM” · hu, M”|Uˆ †(C )Wˆ Uˆ(C )|u, X’i · (RX’)† 2 2z 2z 2 Appendix C: Numerical computation of Berry phase M” ˆ ˆ † ˆ = R2 · hu, M’|T (−b1)U (C2z)W flows for MSG75.1( P 4) † X’ † Uˆ(C2z)|Tˆ (−b1)u, X’i · (R ) 2 We present here the numerical evaluation of the non- M” −1 X’ † = R2 ·Wc · (R2 ) , triviality of the case MSG75.1( P 4), i.e. for the model (B2) Eq. (4) with an additional Zeeman coupling. In Fig. 12. where M” = M’ − b1 and X’ = X − b1. We thus have, we show the numerically obtained Berry phase for the  M” X’ † Γ M’ † individual bands of the band structure in Fig.5 obtained Det W[lq] = Det R2 · (R2 ) · R4 · (R4 ) . (B3) for the model of MSG75.1( P 4). These evaluations cor- roborate the analytical results. That is, each band shows Defining the irreducible representation of the symme- a finite Chern number C. While bands 2 and 3 exhibit a try (g|τ ) in the basis of Bloch eigenstates as g value of C = 1, the other two bands have opposite Chern number. Finally, we also show in Fig. 13 the Berry k¯ −i gk¯·τg k¯ Sg = e Rg , (B4) phase of the bands as obtained from gapping the sta- ble nodal topological MSG75.5( P 4) band structure of and substituting in the above expression, we get C Fig.3. As described in the main text, the resulting spec- i N [(M−X)·τ +(Γ−M)·τ ] trum features a single band (band number two in this Det W[l ] = e occ C2z C4z q case) with Chern number C = −3, whereas the others  M X † Γ M † Det S2 · (S2 ) · S4 · (S4 ) exhibit a Chern number C = 1. Nocc Γ M i N [(M−X)·τ +(Γ−M)·τ ] Y ξ4 (i)ξ2 (i) = e occ C2z C4z , ξM(i)ξX(i) i=1 4 2 Appendix D: Details on symmetry indicator analysis (B5) k¯ where Nocc is the number of occupied bands, and ξg (i) We here give further detail on the symmetry indicator is the eigenvalue of the symmetry (g|τg) of the i-th analysis for some of the MSGs considered. 19

compatibility relations for the Γ point are given by:

Γ5 → Z5

Γ6 → Z6 (D1) Γ7 → Z7

Γ7 → Z8

The compatibility relations between M and A display a similar structure. Finally, the compatibility relations between X and R are:

X3 → R3 (D2) X4 → R4

From the above relations it is evident that it suffices to consider the points Γ, X and M as the compatibility rela- tions uniquely link IRREPs at these points to all IRREPs FIG. 13. Berry phase flows for the four split bands of at all other high-symmetry points in the 3D BZ [23]. MSG75.1( P 4) obtained from the gapping of the stable nodal To form the coIRREPs, we consider the additional con- phase of MSG75.5( PC 4). Band 1, 3 and 4 have Chern number straints imposed by the antiunitary symmetries. These C = +1. Band 2 has has higher Chern number C = −3. can be determined from the Herring rule [57] applied at each high-symmetry point. We only consider spinful IR- REPs. At Γ and M (and A and Z), this gives pairing of inequivalent IRREPs. At X (and R), no additional pair- ing is required. To determine which IRREPs are paired to form the coIRREPs at Γ and M, we pair represen- tations of g with representations of AgA−1, where g is an element of the unitary little group at Γ or M and 1. Symmetry indicators for MSG75.5( PC 4) 0 A = (E|τ) . The allowed pairings at Γ are Γ5Γ7, Γ6Γ8 and the pairings at M are M 6M 7, M 5M 8. The magnetic EBRs for the MSG75.5( PC 4) can be found from the EBRs for SG75 [69]. We note that the MSG75.5( PC 4) is derived from SG75 by including the vector τ relates WP 1a (0, 0) and 1b (1/2, 1/2) in SG75, 0 1 operator (E|τ) with τ = 2 (a1 +a2). We can thus classify so the EBRs from these WPs are paired. Similarly, τ the possible band structures for our model by consider- maps WP 2c (0, 1/2), (1/2, 0) in SG75 to itself, so we ing the IRREPs of SG75, and pair them appropriately pair EBRs at WP 2c directly. We can uniquely determine to form coIRREPs of MSG75.5( PC 4), as described in which EBRs are paired, by realizing that the magnetic [35]. The full compatibility relations[23] and EBRs for EBRs must satisfy the magnetic compatibility relations SG75 can be found on the Bilbao Crystallographic detailed above. This gives the following magnetic EBRs Server[69]. Using their notation (see also TableI), the for MSG75.5( PC 4) (using the WP labels from SG75):

1 2 (1a : E1 + 1b : E2) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, M 6M 7, 2X3) 1 2 (1a : E2 + 1b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ7, M 5M 8, 2X3) 2 1 (1a : E1 + 1b : E2) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, M 5M 8, 2X4) 2 1 (1a : E2 + 1b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6, M 6M 7, 2X4) 1 2 (2c : E + 2c : E) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, 2X42X3)

To compute the symmetry indicators, as described in (PC 4) as Z2, in agreement with [35]. [35], we compute the Smith normal form of the matrix From our magnetic EBRs, we see that it is not possible of EBRs. This gives the indicator group for MSG75.5 to construct a band structure with an odd number of 20 bands in the X3 (or equivalently the X4) IRREP from degeneracies are imposed by the non-symmorphic sym- an integer combination of magnetic EBRs. Every other metry elements of SG77. For the C4 symmetric points, combination consistent with the compatibility relations the non-symmorphic symmetries constrain that the can be constructed from the magnetic EBRs. Thus, the IRREPs must switch partners when moving through the Z2 indicator can be conveniently computed as: BZ. This enforces gap closings along the kz direction, which acts as an obstruction to defining two-band n mod 2, (D3) X3 subspaces across the entire BZ, see figure7a) and c). Thus the minimal connectivity of bands in the BZ is 4. in agreement with the expression in the main text. The symmetry indicator group can be computed as before. WP 2c (0, 1/2, z), (0, 1/2, z + 1/2) of 2. Symmetry indicators for MSG77.18( P 4 ) I 2 SG77 goes into WP 2a of MSG77.18( PI 42), and the two spinful site-symmetry IRREPs glue to- MSG77.18( PI 42) is formed from SG77, by including gether. Similarly, WP 2a (0, 0, z),(0, 0, z + 1/2) and 2b 0 1 the operator (E|τ) with τ = 2 (a1 + a2 + a3). For the (1/2, 1/2, z),(1/2, 1/2, z + 1/2) of SG77 go into WP 4b C4 symmetric points (Γ,Z,M,A), the Herring test gives of MSG77.18( PI 42), and by checking the compatibility the same result as for 75.5. At X, the Herring test relations, we realize that IRREPs 1E pairs with 2E at gives that the antiunitary symmetries impose no further the different sites. Thus, we get three spinful magnetic degeneracies, whereas at R, the Herring test gives that EBRs, which are given by (using the WP labels from each IRREP must be doubly degenerate. Additional SG77):

(2c : E1 + 2c : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, Z5Z6Z7Z8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, A5A6A7A8, 2X32X4, 2R32R4)

(2a : E1 + 2b : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, Z5Z6Z7Z8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, A5A6A7A8, 4X3, 4R3)

(2a : E2 + 2b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, Z5Z6Z7Z8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, A5A6A7A8, 4X4, 4R4)

Using the Smith normal form decomposition as before, spectively, and similarly at A. This assignment satisfies we see that there’s no nontrivial indicator in this MSG, the compatibility relations, so the minimal connectivity in agreement with [35]. of bands in the BZ is 2, and two-band subspaces can be defined throughout the BZ. To compute the symmetry indicator group, we note that 3. Symmetry indicator for MSG81.36( Pc4¯) τ connects WP 1a (0, 0, 0) and 1b (0, 0, 1/2) of SG81 to form magnetic WP 2a. Similarly, WP 1c (1/2, 1/2, 0) As a final example, we here compute the symmetry in- and 1d (1/2, 1/2, 1/2) of SG81 connect to form mag- dicators for MSG81.36( Pc4)¯ , as an example of an MSG netic WP 2c. Some of the non-maximal WPs of SG81 ¯ with S4 rotoinversion symmetry. This MSG is gener- become maximal WPs for MSG81.36( Pc4), e.g. WP ated from SG81 by including the operator (E|τ)0 with 2e (0, 0, z), (0, 0, −z) of SG81 goes into maximal mag- 1 netic WP 2b (0, 0, 1/4), (0, 0, 3/4), and similarly for non- τ = 2 a3. SG81 is similar to SG75, but the C4 rotations are combined with inversion. The Herring test gives that magnetic WP 2f going into magnetic WP 2d. As the the C2 IRREPs must glue together at the C2 symmetric EBRs at these WPs have to satisfy compatibility rela- points X and R. At the C4 symmetric points, the Her- tions, however, it is straightforward to investigate which ring test glues together Γ5Γ7 and Γ6Γ8 respectively, and site-symmetry IRREPs to pair. This gives the following similarly at M. At Z, Z5Z8 and Z6Z7 glue together re- magnetic EBRs (labelled using the WPs of SG81): 21

1 2 (1a : E1 + 1b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, Z6Z7, M 6M 8, A6A7, X3X4, R3R4) 1 2 (1a : E2 + 1b : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ7, Z5Z8, M 5M 7, A5A8, X3X4, R3R4) 2 1 (1a : E1 + 1b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, Z5Z8, M 6M 8, A5A8, X3X4, R3R4) 2 1 (1a : E2 + 1b : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ7, Z6Z7, M 5M 7, A6A7, X3X4, R3R4) 1 2 (1c : E1 + 1d : E1) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, Z6Z7, M 5M 7, A5A8, X3X4, R3R4) 1 2 (1c : E2 + 1d : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ7, Z5Z8, M 6M 8, A6A7, X3X4, R3R4) 2 1 (1c : E1 + 1b : E1) ↑ G = (Γ6Γ8, Z5Z8, M 5M 7, A6A7, X3X4, R3R4) 2 1 (1c : E2 + 1d : E2) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ7, Z6Z7, M 6M 8, A5A8, X3X4, R3R4) 1 2 (2e : E + 2e : E) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, Z5Z6Z7Z8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, A5A6A7A8, 2X32X4, 2R32R4) 1 2 (2f : E + 2f : E) ↑ G = (Γ5Γ6Γ7Γ8, Z5Z6Z7Z8, M 5M 6M 7M 8, A5A6A7A8, 2X32X4, 2R32R4)

Computing the Smith normal form gives a single Z2 fac- symmetry indicator relates to a 3D axion topological in- tor. Inspecting the solution space, we see that the corre- sulating phase. sponding indicator is given by whether the IRREPs at the C4 invariant points contain an odd or an even number of representations with subscript 5 (or any other subscript). Thus, an explicit expression for the symmetry indicator We finally note that our results in this Appendix is: agree with general expressions for magnetic EBRs, compatibility relations and symmetry indicators in [36], z0 = n + n + n + n mod 2 (D4) which we became aware of during the finalizing stages of 2 Γ5 Z5 M 5 A5 this manuscript. It has been shown in [36] for MSG81.33 (P 4)¯ that this

[1] Xiao-Liang Qi and Shou-Cheng Zhang, “Topological in- gashikawa, and Takashi Oka, “Wannier representation sulators and superconductors,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, of floquet topological states,” Phys. Rev. B 101, 075108 1057–1110 (2011). (2020). [2] M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, “Colloquium,” Rev. Mod. [11] F. Nur Unal,¨ Andr´eEckardt, and Robert-Jan Slager, Phys. 82, 3045–3067 (2010). “Hopf characterization of two-dimensional floquet topo- [3] Robert-Jan Slager, Andrej Mesaros, Vladimir Juriˇci´c, logical insulators,” Phys. Rev. Research 1, 022003 and Jan Zaanen, “The space group classification of topo- (2019). logical band-insulators,” Nat. Phys. 9, 98 (2012). [12] Ken Shiozaki, Masatoshi Sato, and Kiyonori Gomi, [4] Liang Fu, “Topological crystalline insulators,” Phys. “Topological crystalline materials: General formulation, Rev. Lett. 106, 106802 (2011). module structure, and wallpaper groups,” Phys. Rev. B [5] Robert-Jan Slager, “The translational side of topologi- 95, 235425 (2017). cal band insulators,” Journal of Physics and Chemistry [13] Chen Fang, Matthew J. Gilbert, and B. Andrei of Solids 128, 24 – 38 (2019), spin-Orbit Coupled Ma- Bernevig, “Bulk topological invariants in noninteract- terials. ing point group symmetric insulators,” Phys. Rev. B [6] Adrien Bouhon and Annica M. Black-Schaffer, “Global 86, 115112 (2012). band topology of simple and double dirac-point [14] Dan S. Borgnia, Alex Jura Kruchkov, and Robert-Jan semimetals,” Phys. Rev. B 95, 241101 (2017). Slager, “Non-hermitian boundary modes and topology,” [7] Tom´aˇsBzduˇsek,QuanSheng Wu, Andreas R¨uegg,Man- Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 056802 (2020). fred Sigrist, and Alexey A. Soluyanov, “Nodal-chain [15] Maryam Taherinejad, Kevin F. Garrity, and David metals,” Nature 538, 75 EP – (2016). Vanderbilt, “Wannier center sheets in topological insu- [8] J. H¨ollerand A. Alexandradinata, “Topological bloch lators,” Phys. Rev. B 89, 115102 (2014). oscillations,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 024310 (2018). [16] Nicola Marzari and David Vanderbilt, “Maximally local- [9] Bohm-Jung Yang and Naoto Nagaosa, “Classification of ized generalized wannier functions for composite energy stable three-dimensional dirac semimetals with nontriv- bands,” Phys. Rev. B 56, 12847–12865 (1997). ial topology,” Nature Communications 5, 4898 (2014). [17] Vladimir Juriˇci´c,Andrej Mesaros, Robert-Jan Slager, [10] Masaya Nakagawa, Robert-Jan Slager, Sho Hi- and Jan Zaanen, “Universal probes of two-dimensional 22

topological insulators: Dislocation and π flux,” Phys. mar, A. Kimura, L. Petaccia, G. Di Santo, R. C. Vidal, Rev. Lett. 108, 106403 (2012). S. Schatz, K. Kißner, M. Unzelmann,¨ C. H. Min, Simon [18] Mathias S. Scheurer and Robert-Jan Slager, “Unsuper- Moser, T. R. F. Peixoto, F. Reinert, A. Ernst, P. M. vised machine learning and band topology,” Phys. Rev. Echenique, A. Isaeva, and E. V. Chulkov, “Prediction Lett. 124, 226401 (2020). and observation of an antiferromagnetic topological in- [19] Alexey A. Soluyanov and David Vanderbilt, “Wannier sulator,” Nature 576, 416–422 (2019). representation of z2 topological insulators,” Phys. Rev. [34] Rui-Xing Zhang and Chao-Xing Liu, “Topological mag- B 83, 035108 (2011). netic crystalline insulators and corepresentation the- [20] Robert-Jan Slager, Louk Rademaker, Jan Zaanen, and ory,” Phys. Rev. B 91, 115317 (2015). Leon Balents, “Impurity-bound states and green’s func- [35] Haruki Watanabe, Hoi Chun Po, and Ashvin Vish- tion zeros as local signatures of topology,” Phys. Rev. wanath, “Structure and topology of band structures in B 92, 085126 (2015). the 1651 magnetic space groups,” Science Advances 4 [21] Andrej Mesaros, Robert-Jan Slager, Jan Zaanen, and (2018). Vladimir Juricic, “Zero-energy states bound to a mag- [36] Luis Elcoro, Benjamin J. Wieder, Zhida Song, Yuan- netic π-flux vortex in a two-dimensional topological in- feng Xu, Barry Bradlyn, and B. Andrei Bernevig, sulator,” Nucl. Phys. B 867, 977 – 991 (2013). “Magnetic topological quantum chemistry,” (2020), [22] Jun-Won Rhim, Jens H. Bardarson, and Robert- arXiv:2010.00598 [cond-mat.mes-hall]. Jan Slager, “Unified bulk-boundary correspondence for [37] Hoi Chun Po, Haruki Watanabe, and Ashvin Vish- band insulators,” Phys. Rev. B 97, 115143 (2018). wanath, “Fragile topology and wannier obstructions,” [23] Jorrit Kruthoff, Jan de Boer, Jasper van Wezel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 126402 (2018). Charles L. Kane, and Robert-Jan Slager, “Topo- [38] Adrien Bouhon, Annica M. Black-Schaffer, and Robert- logical classification of crystalline insulators through Jan Slager, “Wilson loop approach to fragile topology band structure combinatorics,” Phys. Rev. X 7, 041069 of split elementary band representations and topologi- (2017). cal crystalline insulators with time-reversal symmetry,” [24] Hoi Chun Po, Ashvin Vishwanath, and Haruki Watan- Phys. Rev. B 100, 195135 (2019). abe, “Symmetry-based indicators of band topology in [39] Valerio Peri, Zhi-Da Song, Marc Serra-Garcia, Pascal the 230 space groups,” Nat. Commun. 8, 50 (2017). Engeler, Raquel Queiroz, Xueqin Huang, Weiyin Deng, [25] Barry Bradlyn, L. Elcoro, Jennifer Cano, M. G. Zhengyou Liu, B. Andrei Bernevig, and Sebastian D. Vergniory, Zhijun Wang, C. Felser, M. I. Aroyo, and Huber, “Experimental characterization of fragile topol- B. Andrei Bernevig, “Topological quantum chemistry,” ogy in an acoustic metamaterial,” Science 367, 797–800 Nature 547, 298 (2017). (2020). [26] F. D. M. Haldane, “Model for a quantum hall effect [40] Zhida Song, L. Elcoro, Nicolas Regnault, and B. An- without landau levels: Condensed-matter realization of drei Bernevig, “Fragile phases as affine monoids: the ”parity anomaly”,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2015–2018 Full classification and material examples,” (2019), (1988). arXiv:1905.03262 [cond-mat.mes-hall]. [27] Na Hyun Jo, Lin-Lin Wang, Robert-Jan Slager, Ji- [41] Yoonseok Hwang, Junyeong Ahn, and Bohm-Jung aqiang Yan, Yun Wu, Kyungchan Lee, Benjamin Yang, “Fragile topology protected by inversion symme- Schrunk, Ashvin Vishwanath, and Adam Kaminski, try: Diagnosis, bulk-boundary correspondence, and wil- “Intrinsic axion insulating behavior in antiferromag- son loop,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 205126 (2019). netic MnBi6Te10,” Phys. Rev. B 102, 045130 (2020). [42] Chen Fang and Liang Fu, “New classes of three- [28] Xiao-Liang Qi, Taylor L. Hughes, and Shou-Cheng dimensional topological crystalline insulators: Non- Zhang, “Topological field theory of time-reversal invari- symmorphic and magnetic,” Phys. Rev. B 91, 161105 ant insulators,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 195424 (2008). (2015). [29] Nicodemos Varnava and David Vanderbilt, “Surfaces of [43] Chen Fang, Yige Chen, Hae-Young Kee, and Liang Fu, axion insulators,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 245117 (2018). “Topological nodal line semimetals with and without [30] Benjamin J Wieder and B Andrei Bernevig, “The axion spin-orbital coupling,” Phys. Rev. B 92, 081201 (2015). insulator as a pump of fragile topology,” arXiv preprint [44] Junyeong Ahn and Bohm-Jung Yang, “Unconventional arXiv:1810.02373 (2018). topological phase transition in two-dimensional systems [31] Chang Liu, Yongchao Wang, Hao Li, Yang Wu, Yaoxin with space-time inversion symmetry,” Phys. Rev. Lett. Li, Jiaheng Li, Ke He, Yong Xu, Jinsong Zhang, and 118, 156401 (2017). Yayu Wang, “Robust axion insulator and chern insula- [45] Y. X. Zhao and Y. Lu, “PT-symmetric real dirac tor phases in a two-dimensional antiferromagnetic topo- fermions and semimetals,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 056401 logical insulator,” Nature Materials 19, 522–527 (2020). (2017). [32] Roger S. K. Mong, Andrew M. Essin, and Joel E. [46] Tom´aˇsBzduˇsekand Manfred Sigrist, “Robust doubly Moore, “Antiferromagnetic topological insulators,” charged nodal lines and nodal surfaces in centrosym- Phys. Rev. B 81, 245209 (2010). metric systems,” Phys. Rev. B 96, 155105 (2017). [33] M. M. Otrokov, I. I. Klimovskikh, H. Bentmann, D. Es- [47] Junyeong Ahn, Dongwook Kim, Youngkuk Kim, and tyunin, A. Zeugner, Z. S. Aliev, S. Gaß, A. U. B. Wolter, Bohm-Jung Yang, “Band topology and linking structure A. V. Koroleva, A. M. Shikin, M. Blanco-Rey, M. Hoff- of nodal line semimetals with Z2 monopole charges,” mann, I. P. Rusinov, A. Yu. Vyazovskaya, S. V. Ere- Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 106403 (2018). meev, Yu. M. Koroteev, V. M. Kuznetsov, F. Freyse, [48] Junyeong Ahn, Sungjoon Park, and Bohm-Jung Yang, J. S´anchez-Barriga, I. R. Amiraslanov, M. B. Babanly, “Failure of nielsen-ninomiya theorem and fragile topol- N. T. Mamedov, N. A. Abdullayev, V. N. Zverev, A. Al- ogy in two-dimensional systems with space-time inver- fonsov, V. Kataev, B. B¨uchner, E. F. Schwier, S. Ku- sion symmetry: Application to twisted bilayer graphene 23

at magic angle,” Phys. Rev. X 9, 021013 (2019). [68] Ken Shiozaki, Masatoshi Sato, and Kiyonori Gomi, [49] Adrien Bouhon, Tom´aˇs Bzduˇsek, and Robert-Jan “Topology of nonsymmorphic crystalline insulators and Slager, “Geometric approach to fragile topology be- superconductors,” Phys. Rev. B 93, 195413 (2016). yond symmetry indicators,” Phys. Rev. B 102, 115135 [69] M. I. Aroyo, A. Kirov, C. Capillas, J. M. Perez-Mato, (2020). and H. Wondratschek, Acta Cryst. A 62, 115–128 [50] F. Nur Unal,¨ Adrien Bouhon, and Robert-Jan Slager, (2006). “Topological euler class as a dynamical observable in [70] Robert Evarestov and Vyacheslav P. Smirnov, Site Sym- optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 053601 (2020). metry in Crystals, 0171-1873 (Springer-Verlag Berlin [51] QuanSheng Wu, Alexey A. Soluyanov, and Tom´aˇs Heidelberg, 1997). Bzduˇsek,“Non-abelian band topology in noninteracting [71] The coIRREPs of MSG75.5 are obtained from the IR- metals,” Science 365, 1273–1277 (2019). REPs of MSG75.1 with the degeneracies imposed by the [52] Adrien Bouhon, QuanSheng Wu, Robert-Jan Slager, extra anti-unitary symmetries (this is practically deter- Hongming Weng, Oleg V. Yazyev, and Tom´aˇsBzduˇsek, mined by the Herring rule [57]). “Non-abelian reciprocal braiding of weyl points and its [72] A. Hatcher, Vector Bundles and K-Theory (Unpub- manifestation in zrte,” Nature Physics 16, 1137–1143 lished, 2003). (2020). [73] Strictly speaking there is reduction Z → N of the clas- [53] Zhida Song, Zhijun Wang, Wujun Shi, Gang Li, Chen sification as a consequence of the facts that band sub- Fang, and B. Andrei Bernevig, “All magic angles in spaces are orientable and not oriented, and that the twisted bilayer graphene are topological,” Phys. Rev. homotopy classes of gapped Hamiltonians have no fixed Lett. 123, 036401 (2019). base points [49]. [54] Hoi Chun Po, Liujun Zou, T. Senthil, and Ashvin [74] J. Zak, “Berry’s phase for energy bands in solids,” Phys. Vishwanath, “Faithful tight-binding models and fragile Rev. Lett. 62, 2747–2750 (1989). topology of magic-angle bilayer graphene,” Phys. Rev. [75] Barry Bradlyn, Zhijun Wang, Jennifer Cano, and B 99, 195455 (2019). B. Andrei Bernevig, “Disconnected elementary band [55] Steve M. Young and Benjamin J. Wieder, “Filling- representations, fragile topology, and wilson loops as enforced magnetic dirac semimetals in two dimensions,” topological indices: An example on the triangular lat- Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 186401 (2017). tice,” Phys. Rev. B 99, 045140 (2019). [56] Gunnar F. Lange, Adrien Bouhon, and Robert-Jan [76] Sander H. Kooi, Guido van Miert, and Carmine Ortix, Slager, “Subdimensional topologies, indicators, and “Classification of crystalline insulators without symme- higher order boundary effects,” Phys. Rev. B 103, try indicators: Atomic and fragile topological phases 195145 (2021). in twofold rotation symmetric systems,” Phys. Rev. B [57] C.J. Bradley and A.P. Cracknell, The Mathematical 100, 115160 (2019). Theory of Symmetry in Solids (Oxford University Press, [77] Biao Lian, Fang Xie, and B. Andrei Bernevig, “Lan- 1972). dau level of fragile topology,” Phys. Rev. B 102, 041402 [58] Daniel B. Litvin, 1-, 2- and 3-Dimensional Magnetic (2020). Subperiodic Groups and Magnetic Space Groups (Inter- [78] International Tables for Crystallography. Volume A, national Union of Crystallography, 1972). Space-group symmetry, online ed. (2006) edited by T. [59] J¨urgenK¨ubler, Theory of Itinerant Electron Magnetism Hahn. (Oxford Science Publications, 2009). [79] Zhijun Wang, A. Alexandradinata, R. J. Cava, and [60] B. Skubic, J. Hellsvik, L. Nordstr¨om, and O. Eriksson, B. Andrei Bernevig, “Hourglass fermions,” Nature 532, “A method for atomistic spin dynamics simulations: Im- 189 EP – (2016). plementation and examples.” J. Phys.: Condens. Matter [80] In that case however, there is no spin polarization at 20, 315203 (2008). Γ and M, which we relate to the fact that 4d is not a [61] Anders Bergman, Lars Bergqvist, Olle Eriksson, and maximal Wyckoff position for MSG75.1, i.e. the non- Johan Hellsvik, Atomistic spin dynamics : foundations colinear in-plane spins at 4d can be can superposed on and applications (Oxford University Press, 2017). top of each other by moving them to another Wyckoff [62] J.L. Alonso, L.A. Fern´andez, F. Guinea, V. Laliena, position with higher symmetry. and V. Mart´ın-Mayor, “Hybrid monte carlo algorithm [81] Chen Fang, Matthew J. Gilbert, and B. Andrei for the double exchange model,” Nuclear Physics B 596, Bernevig, “Topological insulators with commensurate 587–610 (2001). antiferromagnetism,” Phys. Rev. B 88, 085406 (2013). [63] R. Matthias Geilhufe, Francisco Guinea, and Vladimir [82] Junyeong Ahn and Bohm-Jung Yang, “Symmetry rep- Juriˇci´c,“Hund nodal line semimetals: The case of a resentation approach to topological invariants in C2zt- twisted magnetic phase in the double-exchange model,” symmetric systems,” Phys. Rev. B 99, 235125 (2019). Phys. Rev. B 99, 020404 (2019). [83] Eslam Khalaf, Hoi Chun Po, Ashvin Vishwanath, and [64] J. Zak, “Symmetry specification of bands in solids,” Haruki Watanabe, “Symmetry indicators and anoma- Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 1025–1028 (1980). lous surface states of topological crystalline insulators,” [65] J. Zak, “Band representations and symmetry types of Phys. Rev. X 8, 031070 (2018). bands in solids,” Phys. Rev. B 23, 2824–2835 (1981). [84] Andrew M. Essin, Joel E. Moore, and David Vander- [66] L. Michel and J. Zak, “Connectivity of energy bands in bilt, “Magnetoelectric polarizability and axion electro- crystals,” Phys. Rev. B 59, 5998–6001 (1999). dynamics in crystalline insulators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [67] Ken Shiozaki and Masatoshi Sato, “Topology of crys- 102, 146805 (2009). talline insulators and superconductors,” Phys. Rev. B [85] Varghese Mathai and Guo Chuan Thiang, “Global 90, 165114 (2014). topology of weyl semimetals and fermi arcs,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 11LT01 (2017). 24

[86] A. Bouhon and A. M. Black-Schaffer, “Bulk topol- 219 – 223 (1981). ogy of line-nodal structures protected by space group [98] In case of CEF, the quantization of the Wilson loop over symmetries in class AI,” ArXiv e-prints (2017), the base path ΓXΓ0 follows either from the condition Γ Γ M M arXiv:1710.04871 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]. that ξ2 (1) = ξ2 (2) (equivalently, ξ2 (1) = ξ2 (2)), or if [87] E. Kiritsis, Commun. Math. Phys. 111, 417 (1987). both Γ and X are TRIMs in which case the Wilson loop [88] Mao Lin and Taylor L. Hughes, “Topological quadrupo- phases are also Kramers degenerate at {0, 0} or {π, π}. lar semimetals,” Phys. Rev. B 98, 241103 (2018). [99] A. Alexandradinata, Zhijun Wang, and B. Andrei [89] Zhijun Wang, Benjamin J. Wieder, Jian Li, Binghai Bernevig, “Topological insulators from group cohomol- Yan, and B. Andrei Bernevig, “Higher-order topology, ogy,” Phys. Rev. X 6, 021008 (2016). monopole nodal lines, and the origin of large fermi arcs [100] Chaim Dryzun and David Avnir, “On the abundance of in transition metal dichalcogenides xte2 (x = Mo, W),” chiral crystals,” Chem. Commun. 48, 5874–5876 (2012). Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 186401 (2019). [101] Barry Bradlyn, Jennifer Cano, Zhijun Wang, M. G. [90] Benjamin J. Wieder, Zhijun Wang, Jennifer Cano, Vergniory, C. Felser, R. J. Cava, and B. Andrei Xi Dai, Leslie M. Schoop, Barry Bradlyn, and B. Andrei Bernevig, “Beyond dirac and weyl fermions: Unconven- Bernevig, “Strong and fragile topological dirac semimet- tional quasiparticles in conventional crystals,” Science als with higher-order fermi arcs,” Nature Communica- 353 (2016), 10.1126/science.aaf5037. tions 11, 627 (2020). [102] Guoqing Chang, Su-Yang Xu, Benjamin J. Wieder, [91] L. Michel and J. Zak, “Connectivity of energy bands in Daniel S. Sanchez, Shin-Ming Huang, Ilya Belopol- crystals,” Phys. Rev. B 59, 5998–6001 (1999). ski, Tay-Rong Chang, Songtian Zhang, Arun Bansil, [92] Stepan S. Tsirkin, Ivo Souza, and David Vanderbilt, Hsin Lin, and M. Zahid Hasan, “Unconventional chiral “Composite weyl nodes stabilized by screw symmetry fermions and large topological fermi arcs in rhsi,” Phys. with and without time-reversal invariance,” Phys. Rev. Rev. Lett. 119, 206401 (2017). B 96, 045102 (2017). [103] Peizhe Tang, Quan Zhou, and Shou-Cheng Zhang, [93] Taylor L. Hughes, Emil Prodan, and B. Andrei “Multiple types of topological fermions in transition Bernevig, “Inversion-symmetric topological insulators,” metal silicides,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 206402 (2017). Phys. Rev. B 83, 245132 (2011). [104] Guoqing Chang, Benjamin J. Wieder, Frank Schindler, [94] A. Alexandradinata, Xi Dai, and B. Andrei Bernevig, Daniel S. Sanchez, Ilya Belopolski, Shin-Ming Huang, “Wilson-loop characterization of inversion-symmetric Bahadur Singh, Di Wu, Tay-Rong Chang, Titus Ne- topological insulators,” Phys. Rev. B 89, 155114 (2014). upert, Su-Yang Xu, Hsin Lin, and M. Zahid Hasan, [95] A. Alexandradinata and B. Andrei Bernevig, “Berry- “Topological quantum properties of chiral crystals,” Na- phase description of topological crystalline insulators,” ture Materials 17, 978–985 (2018). Phys. Rev. B 93, 205104 (2016). [105] Tiantian Zhang, Ryo Takahashi, Chen Fang, and [96] Rafael Gonz´alez-Hern´andez, Erick Tuiran, and Shuichi Murakami, “Twofold quadruple weyl nodes in Bernardo Uribe, “Chiralities of nodal points along high chiral cubic crystals,” Phys. Rev. B 102, 125148 (2020). symmetry lines with screw rotation symmetry,” (2021), [106] Bingrui Peng, Yi Jiang, Zhong Fang, Hongming Weng, arXiv:2102.09970 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]. and Chen Fang, “Topological classification and di- [97] H.B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya, “A no-go theorem for agnosis in magnetically ordered electronic materials,” regularizing chiral fermions,” Physics Letters B 105, (2021), arXiv:2102.12645 [cond-mat.mes-hall].