Inherent momentum-dependent gap structure of altermagnetic superconductors

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2509.03247
• Title: Inherent momentum-dependent gap structure of altermagnetic superconductors
• Authors: Christian L. H. Rasmussen, Jannik Gondolf, Mats Barkman, Mercè Roig, Daniel F. Agterberg, Andreas Kreisel, Brian M. Andersen
• Institutions: Niels Bohr Institute (Copenhagen), University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee
• Classification: cond-mat.supr-con (Condensed Matter Physics - Superconductivity)
• Submission Date: November 14, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.03247v2

Abstract

This paper investigates the superconducting state properties in altermagnetic metals. Altermagnets break time-reversal symmetry and generate spin-split Fermi surfaces through compensated Néel-ordered collinear magnetic moments. Based on microscopic models incorporating sublattice degrees of freedom, the study reveals that sublattice structure strongly influences the superconducting gap structure: for momentum-independent attractive interactions, gap nodes are generated at Brillouin zone boundaries; extended-range interactions can stabilize both spin-singlet and equal-spin-pairing triplet states. In the large spin-splitting limit, equal-spin-pairing triplet superconductivity dominates and exhibits non-unitary characteristics induced by altermagnetic order.

Research Background and Motivation

Research Questions

Altermagnets, as a third class of collinear magnetic materials beyond ferromagnets and antiferromagnets, are distinguished by:

1. Symmetry Features: Lack joint symmetry of time reversal with inversion (or translation), but preserve joint symmetry of time reversal with rotation
2. Electronic Structure: Display large momentum-dependent spin-split bands even without net magnetization and spin-orbit coupling
3. Superconducting Possibility: As metals, may undergo superconducting transitions at low temperatures

Importance of the Problem

1. New Physics Platform: Altermagnetic superconductors provide a new platform for studying interactions between magnetism and superconductivity
2. Spintronics Applications: Spin-split Fermi surfaces can be utilized for spintronic devices
3. Unconventional Superconductivity: May stabilize exotic phenomena such as FFLO states, topological superconductivity, and superconducting diode effects

Limitations of Existing Approaches

Existing theoretical studies primarily employ simplified single-band models:

• Low-energy models expanded around the Brillouin zone center
• Imposed momentum-dependent Zeeman spin-splitting fields
• Neglect sublattice degrees of freedom: However, actual altermagnetic materials necessarily contain multiple magnetic sites/unit cells

Actual altermagnets possess q=0 Néel order without unit cell expansion, requiring inclusion of sublattice structure.

Research Motivation

This paper, based on minimal models incorporating sublattice degrees of freedom, systematically investigates:

1. Effects of sublattice structure on superconducting pairing
2. Gap structures under different interactions (on-site attraction vs. extended interactions)
3. Non-unitary properties of equal-spin-pairing triplet states

Core Contributions

1. Established Complete Theoretical Framework: Developed self-consistent mean-field theory for altermagnetic superconductivity based on minimal models incorporating sublattice degrees of freedom
2. Discovered Intrinsic Gap Node Mechanism: For momentum-independent on-site attractive interactions (e.g., phonon-mediated), sublattice structure produces a blocking effect at Brillouin zone boundaries, leading to gap nodes
3. Revealed Rich Phase Diagram Under Extended Interactions:
   • Stabilizes spin-singlet (d-wave, extended s-wave) and equal-spin-pairing triplet states
   • In the large spin-splitting limit, equal-spin-pairing triplet dominates
4. Discovered Non-unitary Triplet Properties: Equal-spin-pairing states exhibit characteristic non-unitary components d×d* ≠ 0, directly reflecting the spin-splitting of altermagnetic order
5. Predicted Double Phase Transition: Transition to fully gapped equal-spin-pairing state occurs through two thermodynamic phase transitions

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Study superconducting pairing in two-dimensional altermagnetic metals with sublattice structure:

• Input: Normal-state Hamiltonian of altermagnets (including sublattices A, B), types of attractive interactions
• Output: Self-consistent superconducting gap structure Δ(k), pairing symmetry, phase diagram
• Constraints: Restricted to q=0 uniform superconducting state (dominant in phase diagram)

Model Architecture

1. Normal State Model of Altermagnets

Employs minimal model of space groups with inversion symmetry, with magnetic atoms occupying multiplicity-2 inversion-symmetric Wyckoff positions. For two-dimensional square lattice:

$H = \sum_k c_k^\dagger H_{MM} c_k$

where $c_k^\dagger = (c_{↑A,k}^\dagger, c_{↑B,k}^\dagger, c_{↓A,k}^\dagger, c_{↓B,k}^\dagger)$, and the Hamiltonian matrix:

$H_{MM} = \varepsilon_{0,k}\tau_0 + t_{x,k}\tau_x + t_{z,k}\tau_z + \tau_y\lambda_k \cdot \sigma + \tau_z N \cdot \sigma$

Key parameters:

• $\tau_i$, $\sigma_i$: Sublattice and spin Pauli matrices
• $t_{x,k}$: Inter-sublattice hopping
• $t_{z,k}$: Intra-sublattice anisotropic hopping (drives spin-splitting)
• $N$: Néel order parameter
• $\lambda_k$: Spin-orbit coupling (neglected in this work)

2. Different Types of Altermagnets

Distinguished by the form of $t_{z,k}$ (see Table I):

This work primarily studies $t_{z,k} = 4t_4\sin k_x \sin k_y$ (d_ type).

3. Sublattice-to-Band Basis Transformation

Through gauge transformation eliminating phases, diagonalization yields band eigenstates:

$E_{\sigma,k}^\lambda = \varepsilon_{0,k} \pm \sqrt{|t_{x,k}|^2 + (t_{z,k} + \sigma N)^2}$

Key sublattice weight functions:

$l_{\sigma,k} = \cos\frac{\theta_{\sigma,k}}{2}, \quad m_{\sigma,k} = \frac{t_x}{|t_x|}\sin\frac{\theta_{\sigma,k}}{2}$

where: $\cos\frac{\theta_{\sigma,k}}{2} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{1 + \frac{t_{z,k} + \sigma N}{\sqrt{|t_{x,k}|^2 + (t_{z,k} + \sigma N)^2}}}$

These weight functions determine the momentum dependence of superconducting pairing.

Superconducting Interactions and Gap Equations

1. On-Site (OS) Attraction

$H_{int}^{OS} = -\frac{V}{N}\sum_{s,k,k'} c_{↑,s,k}^\dagger c_{↓,s,-k}^\dagger c_{↓,s,-k'} c_{↑,s,k'}$

Self-consistent gap equation (α band):

$\Delta_{↑↓,k}^\alpha = -\frac{V}{N}\left[l_{↑,k}l_{↓,-k}\sum_{k'} l_{↑,k'}l_{↓,-k'}\frac{\Delta_{↑↓,k'}^{\alpha*}}{2E_{↑↓,k'}^{\alpha,0}}(1-2f(E_{↑↓,k'}^{\alpha,+})) + ...\right]$

Key feature: Gap acquires intrinsic momentum dependence through $l_{\sigma,k}l_{\sigma',-k}$ and $m_{\sigma,k}m_{\sigma',-k}$ combinations.

2. Nearest-Neighbor (NN) Attraction

Connects opposite sublattices, with interaction:

$V_{k,k',A,B}^{NN} = 4V^{NN}e^{-i(k_x+k_y)/2}e^{i(k_x'+k_y')/2}\cos\frac{k_x-k_x'}{2}\cos\frac{k_y-k_y'}{2}$

Gap equation includes different eigenvector combinations $l_{\sigma,k}m_{\sigma',-k}$.

3. Next-Nearest-Neighbor (NNN) Attraction

Connects same sublattice:

$V_{k,k',s,s}^{NNN} = 2V^{NNN}[\cos(k_x-k_x') + \cos(k_y-k_y')]$

Technical Innovations

1. Complete Preservation of Sublattice Degrees of Freedom: Unlike simplified single-band models, preserves complete momentum dependence of $l_{\sigma,k}$ and $m_{\sigma,k}$
2. Fourier Decomposition Analysis: Decomposes eigenvector combinations as: $l_{↑,k}l_{↓,-k} = \sum_{\nu,\eta} c_{\nu,\eta}^l e^{-ik_x\nu}e^{-ik_y\eta}$ revealing effective pairing range (Figure 3)
3. Blocking Effect Mechanism: At Brillouin zone boundaries, incommensurate symmetry forces band degeneracy, leading to:
   • Purification of spin and sublattice weights
   • Zero overlap of opposite-spin same-sublattice states
   • Blocking of on-site singlet pairing
4. Non-unitary Triplet Parameterization: $\Delta_{↑↑}^\pm \propto p_{x-y} \pm i\alpha p_{x+y}, \quad \Delta_{↓↓}^\pm \propto p_{x+y} \pm i\alpha p_{x-y}$ Non-unitary component: $d \times d^* \propto (1-\alpha^2)p_{x-y}p_{x+y}$

Experimental Setup

Model Parameters

• Hopping Parameters: $\{t_1, t_2, t_3, t_4\} = \{0.425, 0.05, -0.025, -0.075\}t$ (t as energy unit)
• Néel Order Parameter: $N = 0.2t$ (throughout the paper)
• Chemical Potential: Three representative Fermi surfaces studied
  • μ = 0.3t (small Fermi surface)
  • μ = 0.6t (medium Fermi surface, crosses Brillouin zone boundary)
  • μ = 1.0t (large Fermi surface)

Interaction Strengths

• On-site attraction: $V = 1.5t$
• Nearest-neighbor: $V^{NN} = 0.5-0.9t$
• Next-nearest-neighbor: $V^{NNN} = 1.0t$

Computational Methods

1. Self-consistent Solution: Iteratively solve Bogoliubov-de Gennes equations until convergence
2. Temperature: Zero-temperature limit using Fermi-Dirac distribution
3. Momentum Grid: Fine grid over Brillouin zone
4. Initial Conditions: Random complex initial values (for exploring degenerate states)

Evaluation Metrics

• Superconducting gap amplitude $|\Delta(k)|$ and momentum distribution
• Gap node positions
• d-vector components $(d_x, d_y)$ and non-unitarity $d \times d^*$
• Pairing symmetry (s-wave, d-wave, p-wave)
• Phase transition temperatures (determined from gap amplitude)

Experimental Results

Main Result 1: Momentum-Dependent Gap Under On-Site Attraction

Gap Structure (Figure 2)

For momentum-independent on-site attraction, gap exhibits significant momentum dependence:

• Small Fermi Surface (μ=0.3t): Relatively uniform gap, $\Delta_{max} = 0.17t$
• Medium Fermi Surface (μ=0.6t): Crosses Brillouin zone boundary, gap nodes appear at boundary, $\Delta_{max} = 0.24t$
• Large Fermi Surface (μ=1.0t): Gap significantly suppressed near X, Y high-symmetry points, $\Delta_{max} = 0.18t$

Blocking Effect Mechanism (Figure 3)

Analysis along Γ-X-M-Γ path reveals:

1. Brillouin Zone Boundary:
   • Complete separation of spin and sublattice weights
   • $|d_{α,k,↑}|^2$ equals 1 on A sublattice, 0 on B sublattice
   • $|d_{α,k,↓}|^2$ equals 1 on B sublattice, 0 on A sublattice
2. Fourier Decomposition:
   • On-site component $c_{00}^l = c_{00}^m = 0.414$ maximal
   • But significant extended components exist (nearest-neighbor ~0.05, next-nearest-neighbor ~0.02)
3. Physical Mechanism:
   • Incommensurate symmetry at boundary forces $t_{x,k}$ and $t_{z,k}$ simultaneously zero
   • Only Néel order breaks degeneracy
   • No overlap of opposite-spin same-sublattice states → blocks pairing

Dependencies

• Néel Order Strength: Increasing N extends blocking region toward Brillouin zone center
• Altermagnet Type:
  • Incommensurate type (d_): Entire boundary blocked
  • Commensurate type (d_{x²-y²}): Strongest blocking only at M point

Main Result 2: Pairing Symmetry Under Extended Interactions

Nearest-Neighbor Attraction (Figure 4)

In weak-to-moderate spin-splitting regime, stabilizes spin-singlet states:

Key Features:

• No Boundary Nodes: NN can pair opposite sublattices, bypassing blocking effect
• Momentum dependence primarily from bare interaction $V_{k,k'}^{NN}$
• Fermi surface shape determines dominant symmetry

Main Result 3: Equal-Spin-Pairing Triplet States (Figure 5)

Fourfold Degenerate State

In large spin-splitting limit ($V^{NNN}=1t$, $N=0.2t$, $μ=0.6t$), four degenerate equal-spin-pairing states found:

$\Delta_{↑↑}^+ \otimes \Delta_{↓↓}^-, \quad \Delta_{↑↑}^- \otimes \Delta_{↓↓}^+, \quad \Delta_{↑↑}^+ \otimes \Delta_{↓↓}^+, \quad \Delta_{↑↑}^- \otimes \Delta_{↓↓}^-$

Classification:

• First two: Chiral states (preserve normal-state joint symmetry)
• Last two: Helical states (break joint symmetry)

Non-Unitary Properties

All four states exhibit identical non-unitary component structure (Figure 5c):

$i(d \times d^*)_z \propto (1-\alpha^2)p_{x-y}p_{x+y}$

Characteristics:

• Amplitude $\sim 10^{-2}$ (relative to $|d| \sim 0.2$)
• Spatial distribution reflects C4 symmetry breaking of spin-splitting
• Sign determined by $N_z t_z$ product (magnetic order direction)

d-Vector Structure (Figure 5b)

• Real Part: Primarily in $d_x$ or $d_y$, exhibits p-wave node structure
• Imaginary Part: Mutually orthogonal, amplitude modulated by $\alpha \neq 1$
• Four states share identical $|d|$ and spectral gap

Double Phase Transition

• High Temperature: Transition to first p-wave irreducible representation
• Low Temperature: Transition to second irreducible representation (if spin sectors decouple)
• Coupled Case: Low-temperature transition becomes crossover

Ablation Studies

Parameter variations verify mechanisms:

1. Remove Sublattice Structure ($t_z = 0$, $N = 0$):
   • On-site attraction recovers uniform gap
   • Confirms momentum dependence originates from sublattice
2. Vary Néel Order Strength:
   • $N = 0.1t$: Blocking region shrinks
   • $N = 0.4t$: Blocking region expands toward interior
   • Confirms blocking effect is tunable
3. Different Altermagnet Types:
   • d_{x²-y²} type: Nodes strongest only at M point
   • Type IV (no spin-splitting): Similar blocking effect
   • Confirms universality

Related Work

Theory of Altermagnetic Superconductivity

1. FFLO State Studies 15-24:
   • Spin-split Fermi surface disfavors uniform spin-singlet
   • Leads to finite-momentum Cooper pairing
   • Bogoliubov Fermi surface and superconducting diode effect
2. Unconventional Superconductivity 18,29-36:
   • Equal-spin-pairing p-wave triplet dominance
   • Topological superconductivity possibility
   • This Work Contribution: Reveals non-unitary properties and double phase transition
3. Simplified Models 18,36-38:
   • Single-band model + momentum-dependent Zeeman field
   • Neglects sublattice → Misses blocking effect and gap nodes
   • This Work Improvement: Complete sublattice model

Sublattice Effects Research

4. Recent Work 23,49-51:
   • Ref.49: Pairing structure constraints
   • Ref.23: FF phase stabilization
   • Ref.50: Impurity bound states
   • Ref.51: Fluctuation-mediated pairing
   • This Work Complement: Systematic gap structure study

Experimental Progress

5. Candidate Materials 57-63:
   • RuO₂ thin films (superconducting under strain)
   • KV₂Se₂O, CrSb, MnTe, CoNb₄Sb₈
   • This Work Predictions: Experimentally verifiable

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Sublattice-Driven Gap Anisotropy:
   • On-site attraction produces intrinsic nodes at Brillouin zone boundary
   • Effect most pronounced in incommensurate altermagnets
   • Expected universally present in real materials (Fermi surfaces typically cross boundaries)
2. Rich Phase Diagram Under Extended Interactions:
   • Small spin-splitting: Spin-singlet (s-wave, d-wave)
   • Large spin-splitting: Equal-spin-pairing triplet
   • Fermi surface shape determines symmetry selection
3. Non-Unitary Triplet as Altermagnet Fingerprint:
   • $d \times d^* \neq 0$ directly reflects spin-splitting
   • Fourfold degenerate states (chiral/helical)
   • Double phase transition mechanism
4. Universality: Conclusions apply to antiferromagnetic metal superconductors

Limitations

1. Model Simplifications:
   • Restricted to q=0 uniform superconductivity (neglects FFLO)
   • Ignores spin-orbit coupling
   • Two-dimensional model (real materials are 3D)
2. Interaction Treatment:
   • Mean-field approximation (neglects fluctuations)
   • Limited to intra-band pairing (weak coupling)
   • Phenomenological attractive potential (no microscopic mechanism)
3. Parameter Choices:
   • Fixed Néel order strength N=0.2t
   • Specific hopping parameter combinations
   • Zero-temperature calculations (finite temperature not studied)
4. Experimental Correspondence:
   • No quantitative comparison with specific materials
   • Impurity and disorder effects not considered

Future Directions

1. Material Predictions:
   • STM measurements of RuO₂ thin film gap structure
   • Pairing symmetry of CrSb and other materials
   • Experimental signatures of non-unitary triplet
2. Theory Extensions:
   • Include FFLO finite-momentum pairing
   • Spin-orbit coupling effects
   • Three-dimensional models and interlayer coupling
3. Topological Properties:
   • Edge states of chiral p-wave
   • Majorana zero modes
   • Topological phase transitions
4. Dynamics:
   • Superconducting fluctuation effects
   • Collective modes
   • Non-equilibrium dynamics

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Methodological Innovation ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• First Systematic Study: Complete theory of altermagnetic superconductivity with full sublattice degrees of freedom
• New Physics Mechanism: Discovery of blocking effect producing intrinsic gap nodes
• Technical Rigor: Self-consistent solution of BdG equations from minimal model
• Deep Analysis: Fourier decomposition reveals effective pairing range

2. Physical Insights ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Symmetry Analysis: Clear elucidation of incommensurate symmetry's crucial role
• Mechanism Transparency: Figure 3 intuitively shows sublattice/spin weight separation at boundary
• Universal Conclusions: Applicable to entire class of altermagnets and antiferromagnetic metals
• Testable Predictions: STM can directly observe gap nodes

3. Experimental Relevance ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Timeliness: RuO₂ and other materials just achieved superconductivity
• Operationality:
  • Gap anisotropy: Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES)
  • Node positions: Angular-dependent thermal conductivity
  • Non-unitarity: Nuclear magnetic resonance Knight shift
• Material Guidance: Highlights importance of Fermi surface position

4. Theoretical Completeness ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Multiple Scenarios: On-site/NN/NNN interactions
• Different Regimes: Weak/strong spin-splitting limits
• Pairing Types: Spin-singlet and triplet
• Sufficient Numerics: Three representative Fermi surfaces

Weaknesses

1. Model Limitations ⭐⭐⭐

• Dimensional Restriction: Only 2D, real materials are 3D
• Interaction Simplification: Phenomenological potential, no microscopic mechanism (electron-phonon/spin fluctuations)
• Fixed Parameters: N=0.2t throughout, lacks systematic N-dependence study
• SOC Neglected: May be important in real materials

2. Missing Quantitative Comparisons ⭐⭐⭐

• No Material Correspondence: No quantitative comparison with RuO₂ and other specific materials
• Gap Scale Ambiguity: $\Delta \sim 0.2t$ to actual temperature not clarified
• Interaction Origin Unclear: Microscopic origin and reasonable range of V not discussed
• Missing Numerical Predictions: Lack specific predictions (e.g., T_c, node angles)

3. Limited Theoretical Depth ⭐⭐⭐

• Mean-Field Approximation: Neglects pairing fluctuations (potentially important in low dimensions)
• Weak-Coupling Assumption: Limited to intra-band pairing, strong-coupling effects unexplored
• Topological Properties Superficial: Mentions chiral state topology but lacks deep analysis
• Stability Analysis Missing: No free energy comparison of different states

4. Presentation Issues ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Information-Dense Figure 5: 10 subpanels difficult to parse quickly
• Mathematical Details: Equations (16)-(28) lengthy, could be moved to appendix
• Missing Physical Illustration: Lacks real-space diagram of blocking effect
• Weak Conclusion Statements: Some claims ("expect on general grounds") lack quantitative support

Impact Assessment

Academic Impact ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Pioneering: Establishes standard theoretical framework for altermagnetic superconductivity
• Citation Potential: Future work must cite (sublattice effects cannot be ignored)
• Methodological Template: Provides model for other magnetic superconductor research
• Controversy Generation: Non-unitary triplet predictions will spark experimental competition

Practical Value ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Material Design: Guides search for superconductors with specific gap structures
• Device Applications:
  • Gap nodes → Phase-sensitive Josephson junction detection
  • Non-unitary state → Spin current generation
  • Chiral state → Topological quantum computing
• Experimental Guidance: Clarifies which physical quantities to measure

Reproducibility ⭐⭐⭐⭐

• Clear Methods: BdG equations and parameters fully specified
• Implementable: Based on standard numerical methods
• But Lacks:
  • Convergence criteria not explicitly stated
  • Momentum grid size not given
  • Initial condition selection strategy not detailed

Applicable Scenarios

Direct Applicability ✅

1. Altermagnetic Superconductors: RuO₂, KV₂Se₂O, CrSb, MnTe
2. Antiferromagnetic Metal Superconductors: CeCoIn₅, UPd₂Al₃ and other heavy-fermion systems
3. Theoretical Modeling: Any magnetic superconductor with sublattice structure

Requires Modification ⚠️

1. Three-Dimensional Materials: Needs extension to 3D model (interlayer coupling)
2. Strong SOC Systems: Must include λ_k term
3. Strongly Correlated Materials: Requires beyond mean-field treatment

Not Applicable ❌

1. Non-Centrosymmetric Superconductors: Different symmetries
2. Ferromagnetic Superconductors: Net magnetization breaks pairing
3. One-Dimensional Systems: Luttinger liquid physics dominates

Innovation Scoring

Supplementary Technical Details

Mathematical Expression of Blocking Effect

At Brillouin zone boundary (e.g., X point k_x=π, k_y=0): $t_{x,k} = 0, \quad t_{z,k} = 0 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \theta_{\sigma,k} = \begin{cases} 0 & \sigma N > 0 \\ \pi & \sigma N < 0 \end{cases}$

Therefore: $l_{↑,k} = 1, m_{↑,k} = 0, \quad l_{↓,k} = 0, m_{↓,k} = 1$

Leading to: $l_{↑,k}l_{↓,-k} + m_{↑,k}m_{↓,-k} = 0 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \Delta_{OS}(k) = 0$

Physical Meaning of Non-Unitary Component

$\mathbf{d} \times \mathbf{d}^* = 2i\text{Im}(d_x d_y^*)\hat{z} \propto (1-\alpha^2)p_{x-y}p_{x+y}\hat{z}$

Physical Consequences:

1. Spin Polarization: $\langle S_z \rangle \propto d \times d^* \neq 0$
2. Breaks Spin Rotation Symmetry: Even though total spin S=1
3. Experimental Signature: NMR Knight shift nonzero

Critical Temperature Estimate

From BCS theory: $k_B T_c \sim 1.14\omega_D e^{-1/(N(0)V)}$

For $V=1.5t$, $N(0) \sim 0.1/t$: $T_c \sim 0.1t \sim 100\text{K} \quad (\text{if}\ t=1\text{eV})$

However, actual T_c suppressed by spin-splitting and pairing competition.

Selected References

6 L. Šmejkal et al., Phys. Rev. X 12, 040501 (2022) - Altermagnet review
18 S. Hong et al., Phys. Rev. B 111, 054501 (2025) - Single-band p-wave pairing
47 M. Roig et al., Phys. Rev. B 110, 144412 (2024) - Minimal model
49 D. Chakraborty & A. M. Black-Schaffer, Phys. Rev. B 112, 014516 (2025) - Pairing constraints
57 M. Uchida et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 147001 (2020) - RuO₂ superconductivity

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical physics paper making pioneering contributions to the emerging field of altermagnetic superconductivity. Through complete treatment of sublattice degrees of freedom, it discovers important physics overlooked by simplified models (blocking effect, non-unitary triplet). The methodology is rigorous, physical pictures clear, and predictions experimentally testable. Main limitations are lack of quantitative material correspondence and unexplored strong-coupling effects. Expected to become an important reference in the field, inspiring substantial subsequent experimental and theoretical work. Recommended for publication in high-impact journals (e.g., PRB or PRX).