This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Quadrupole topological insulators in TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5 (M=M= Ni, Pd) monolayers

Zhaopeng Guo Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China    Junze Deng Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China    Yue Xie Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China    Zhijun Wang [email protected] Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, and Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Abstract

Higher-order topological insulators have been introduced in the precursory Benalcazar-Bernevig-Hughes quadrupole model, but no electronic compound has been proposed to be a quadrupole topological insulator (QTI) yet. In this work, we predict that TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5 (M=M= Pd, Ni) monolayers can be 2D QTIs with second-order topology due to the double-band inversion. A time-reversal-invariant system with two mirror reflections (Mx and My) can be classified by Stiefel-Whitney numbers (w1,w2w_{1},w_{2}) due to the combined symmetry TC2zTC_{2z}. Using the Wilson loop method, we compute w1=0w_{1}=0 and w2=1w_{2}=1 for Ta2Ni3Te5, indicating a QTI with qxy=e/2q^{xy}=e/2. Thus, gapped edge states and localized corner states are obtained. By analyzing atomic band representations, we demonstrate that its unconventional nature with an essential band representation at an empty site, i.e., Ag@4eA_{g}@4e, is due to the remarkable double-band inversion on Y-Γ\Gamma. Then, we construct an eight-band quadrupole model with MxM_{x} and MyM_{y} successfully for electronic materials. These transition-metal compounds of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} (AA = Ta, Nb; MM = Pd, Ni; XX = Se, Te) family provide a good platform for realizing the QTI and exploring the interplay between topology and interactions.

Introduction.

In higher-order topological insulators, the ingap states can be found in (dnd-n)-dimensional edges (n>1n>1), such as the corner states of two-dimensional (2D) systems or the hinge states of three-dimensional systems Benalcazar et al. (2017); Schindler et al. (2018a); Song et al. (2017); Langbehn et al. (2017); Schindler et al. (2018b); Ezawa (2018); Khalaf (2018); Wang et al. (2019); Benalcazar et al. (2019a); Yue et al. (2019); Xu et al. (2019); Wieder et al. (2020). Different from topological insulators with (d1d-1)-dimensional edge states, the Chern numbers or 2\mathbb{Z}_{2} numbers in higher-order topological insulators are zero. The higher-order topology can be captured by topological quantum chemistry Bradlyn et al. (2017); Elcoro et al. (2021); Gao et al. (2022a); Nie et al. (2021a, b); Gao et al. (2022b), nested Wilson loop method Benalcazar et al. (2017); Wang et al. (2019) and second Stiefel-Whitney (SW) class Fang et al. (2015); Zhao et al. (2016); Zhao and Lu (2017); Ahn et al. (2019a, b); Wu et al. (2019); Pan et al. (2022). Using topological quantum chemistry Bradlyn et al. (2017), the higher-order topological insulator can be diagnosed by the decomposition of atomic band representations (aBRs) as an unconventional insulator (or obstructed atomic insulator) with mismatching of electronic charge centers and atomic positions Nie et al. (2021a, b); Xu et al. (2021); Gao et al. (2022b). In contrast to dipoles (Berry phase) for topological insulators, the higher-order topological insulators can be understood by multipole moments Benalcazar et al. (2017). In a 2D system, the second-order topology corresponds to the quadrupole moment, which can be diagnosed by the nested Wilson loop method Benalcazar et al. (2017); Wang et al. (2019); Ahn et al. (2019b). When the system contains space-time inversion symmetries, such as PTPT and C2zTC_{2z}T, where the PP and TT represent inversion and time-reversal symmetries, the second-order topology can be described by the second SW number (w2w_{2}) Wieder and Bernevig (2018); Ahn et al. (2019b). The second SW number w2w_{2} is a well-defined 2D topological invariant of an insulator only when the first SW number w1=0w_{1}=0. Usually, a 2D quadrupole topological insulator (QTI) with w1=0,w2=1w_{1}=0,w_{2}=1 has gapped edge states and degenerate localized corner states, which are pinned at zero energy (being topological) in the presence of chiral symmetry. When the degenerate corner states are in the energy gap of bulk and edge states, the fractional corner charge can be maintained due to filling anomaly Benalcazar et al. (2019b).

So far, various 2D systems are proposed to be SW insulators with second-order topology, such as monolayer graphdiyne Sheng et al. (2019); Lee et al. (2020), liganded Xenes Qian et al. (2021); Pan et al. (2022), β\beta-Sb monolayer Gao et al. (2022b) and Bi/EuO Chen et al. (2020). However, no compound has been proposed to be a QTI with Mx and My symmetries. After considering many-body interactions in transition-metal compounds, superconductivity, exciton condensation and Luttinger liquid could emerge in a transition-metal QTI. In recent years, van der Waals layered materials of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} (AA = Ta, Nb; MM = Pd, Ni; XX = Se, Te) family have attracted attentions because of their special properties, such as quantum spin Hall effect in Ta2Pd3Te5 monolayer Guo et al. (2021); Wang et al. (2021), excitons in Ta2NiSe5 Wakisaka et al. (2009); Lu et al. (2017); Mazza et al. (2020), and superconductivity in Nb2Pd3Te5 and doped Ta2Pd3Te5 Higashihara et al. (2021). In particular, the monolayers of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family can be exfoliated easily, serving as a good platform for studying topology and interactions in lower dimensions.

In this work, we predict that based on first-principles calculations, Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer is a 2D QTI. Using the Wilson-loop method, we show that its SW numbers are w1=0w_{1}=0 and w2=1w_{2}=1, corresponding to the second-order topology. We also solve the aBR decomposition for Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer, and find that it is unconventional with an essential band representation (BR) at an empty Wykoff position (WKP), Ag@4cA_{g}@4c, which origins from the remarkable double-band inversion on Y–Γ\Gamma line. To verify the QTI phase, we compute the energy spectrum of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer with open boundary conditions in both xx and yy directions and obtain four degenerate corner states. Then, we construct an eight-band quadrupole model with MxM_{x} and MyM_{y} successfully. The double-band-inversion picture widely happens in the band structures of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family. The TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5 monolayers are 2D QTI candidates for experimental realization in electronic systems.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a) The crystal structure, Wyckoff positions and Brillouin zone (BZ) of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer. (b) Band structure and irreps at Y and Γ\Gamma of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer. (c) The 1D kyk_{y}-direct Wilson bands as a function of kxk_{x} calculated in the DFT code. (d) Close-up of the green region in (c), with one crossing of Wilson bands at θ=π\theta=\pi indicating the second SW class w2=1w_{2}=1.

Band structures.

The band structure of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer suggests that it is an insulator with a band gap of 65 meV. We have checked that spin-orbit coupling (SOC) has little effect on the band structure (Fig. S2(b)). We also checked the band structures using GW method and SCAN method, and we find that the band gap remains using these methods (the corresponding band structures are shown in Appendix A). As shown in the orbital-resolved band structures of Fig. 3(a-c), although low-energy bands near the Fermi level (EFE_{F}) are mainly contributed by Ta-dz2d_{z^{2}} orbitals (two conduction bands) and NiA-dxzd_{xz} orbitals (two valence bands), the inverted bands of {Y2;GM1,GM3}\{\rm{Y}2;\rm{GM}1-,\rm{GM}3-\} come from Te-pxp_{x} orbitals. The irreducible representations (irreps) Gao et al. (2021) at Y and Γ\Gamma are denoted for the inverted bands in Fig. 1(b). We notice that the double-band inversion between {Y2;GM1,GM3}\{\rm{Y}2;\rm{GM}1-,\rm{GM}3-\} bands and {Y1;GM1+,GM3+}\{\rm{Y}1;\rm{GM}1+,\rm{GM}3+\} bands is remarkable, about 1 eV.

Atomic band representations.

To analyze the band topology, the decomposition of aBR is performed. In a unit cell of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer in Fig. 1(a), four Ta atoms, four NiB atoms and eight Te atoms are located at different 4e4e WKPs. The rest two Te atoms and two NiA atoms are located at 2a2a and 2b2b WKPs respectively. The aBRs are obtained from the crystal structure by pos2aBR Nie et al. (2021a, b); Gao et al. (2022b), and irreps of occupied states are calculated by IRVSP Gao et al. (2021) at high-symmetry kk-points. Then, the aBR decomposition is solved online -- http://tm.iphy.ac.cn/UnconvMat.html. The results are listed in Table S2 of Appendix B. Instead of being a sum of aBRs, we find that the aBR decomposition of the occupied bands has to include an essential BR at an empty WKP, i.e., Ag@4cA_{g}@4c. As illustrated in Fig. 1(a), the charge centers of the essential BR are located at the middle of NiB-NiB bonds (i.e., the 4c4c WKP), indicating that the Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer is a 2D unconventional insulator with second-order topology.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: (a) The diagram of double-band inversion along Y--Γ\Gamma line. The schematic band structures of (b) 215-type semimetal and (c) 235-type insulator. The double-band inversion happens in both cases. The crossing points on the Γ\Gamma--X line are part of the nodal line.
Refer to caption
Figure 3: The orbital-resolved band structures of (a) dz2d_{z^{2}} orbitals of Ta atoms, (b) dxzd_{xz} orbitals of NiA atoms, and (c) pxp_{x} orbitals of Te atoms. (d) The comparison between band structures of maximally localized Wannier functions and DFT results. (e) (01)-edge states around Γ\Gamma. (f) The charge distribution of four corner states. The insert shows the energy spectrum of the tight-binding model with open boundaries in xx and yy directions.

Double-band inversion.

In an ideal atomic limit, Te-pp orbitals and Ni-dd orbitals are occupied, while Ta-dd orbitals are fully unoccupied. Thus, all the occupied bands are supposed to be the aBRs of Te-pp and Ni-dd orbitals, as shown in the left panel of Fig. 2(a). However, in the monolayers of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family (see their band structures in Appendix A), a double-band inversion happens between the occupied aBR A′′@4eA^{\prime\prime}@4e (Te-pxp_{x} and Ni-dd) and unoccupied aBR A@4eA^{\prime}@4e (Ta-dz2d_{z^{2}}), as shown in the right two panels of Fig. 2(a). When the double-band inversion happens between {Y2;GM1,GM3}\{\rm{Y}2;\rm{GM}1-,\rm{GM}3-\} and {Y1;GM2,GM4}\{\rm{Y}1;\rm{GM}2-,\rm{GM}4-\} on Y--Γ\Gamma line, it results in a semimetal for Ta2NiSe5 monolayer (215-type; Fig. 2(b)). When it happens between {Y2;GM1,GM3}\{\rm{Y}2;\rm{GM}1-,\rm{GM}3-\} and {Y1;GM1+,GM3+}\{\rm{Y}1;\rm{GM}1+,\rm{GM}3+\} in Fig. 2(c), the system becomes a 2D QTI for Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer (235-type), resulting in the essential BR of Ag@4cA_{g}@4c.

Second Stiefel-Whitney class w2=1w_{2}=1.

To identify the second-order topology of the monolayers, we compute the second SW number by the Wilson-loop method. The first SW class (w1w_{1}) is,

w1|C=1πCd𝒌Tr𝓐(𝒌)\evaluated{w_{1}}_{C}=\frac{1}{\pi}\oint_{C}\differential{{\bf\it k}}\cdot\Tr{\bf\it\mathcal{A}}({\bf\it k}) (1)

where 𝓐mn(𝒌)=um(𝒌)|i𝒌|un(𝒌){\bf\it\mathcal{A}}_{mn}({\bf\it k})=\matrixelement{u_{m}({\bf\it k})}{{\text{i}}\gradient_{{\bf\it k}}}{u_{n}({\bf\it k})} Ahn et al. (2019a). The second SW class (w2w_{2}) can be computed by the nested Wilson-loop method, or simply by mm module 2, where mm is the number of crossings of Wilson bands at θ=π\theta=\pi. It should be noted that w2w_{2} is well-defined only when w1=0w_{1}=0. With w1=0w_{1}=0, w2w_{2} can be unchanged when choosing the unit cell shifting a half lattice constant. The 1D Wilson-loops are computed along kyk_{y}. The computed phases of the eigenvalues of Wilson-loop matrices Wy(kx)W_{y}(k_{x}) (Wilson bands) are shown in Fig. 1(c) as a function of kxk_{x}. The results show that the first SW class is w1=0w_{1}=0. In addition, there is one crossing of Wilson bands at θ=π\theta=\pi [Fig. 1(d)], indicating the second SW class w2=1w_{2}=1. The quadruple moment qxy=e/2q^{xy}=e/2 calculated by the nested Wilson-loop method in Appendix C. Therefore, the Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer is a QTI with a nontrivial second SW number.

Edge spectrum and corner states.

From the orbital-resolved band structures (Fig. 3), the maximally localized Wannier functions of Ta-dz2d_{z^{2}}, NiA-dxzd_{xz} and Te-pxp_{x} orbitals are extracted, to construct a 2D tight-binding (TB) model of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer. As shown in Fig. 3(d), the obtained TB model fits the density functional theory (DFT) band structure well. First, we compute the (01)-edge spectrum with open boundary condition along yy. Instead of gapless edge states for a 2D 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-nontrivial insulator, gapped edge states are obtained for the 2D QTI [Fig. 3(e)]. Then, we explore corner states as the hallmark of the 2D QTI. We compute the energy spectrum for a nanodisk. For concreteness, we take a rectangular-shaped nanodisk with 50×1050\times 10 unit cells, preserving both MxM_{x} and MyM_{y} symmetries in the 0D geometry. The obtained discrete spectrum for this nanodisk is plotted in the inset of Fig. 3(f). Remarkably, one observes four degenerate states near EFE_{F}. The spatial distribution of these four-fold modes can be visualized from their charge distribution, as shown in Fig. 3(f). Clearly, they are well localized at the four corners, corresponding to isolated corner states.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Energy spectrum for (a) the (01)-edge, (b) the (10)-edge, and (c) a MxM_{x}- and MyM_{y}-symmetric disk of 80×2080\times 20 unit cells of the minimum model with chiral symmetry slightly broken (δ=0.1\delta=-0.1). (d) The spatial distribution of four degenerate in-gap states in (c). (e) The diverse properties of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} (AA = Ta, Nb; MM = Pd, Ni; XX = Se, Te) family.

Minimum model for the 2D QTI.

As shown in Fig. 2, the minimum model for the 2D QTI should be consisted of two BRs of A@4eA^{\prime}@4e and A′′@4eA^{\prime\prime}@4e. Based on the situation of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer in Fig. 2(c), the minimum effective model is derived as below,

HTB(𝒌)=(HTa(𝒌)Hhyb(𝒌)Hhyb(𝒌)HNi(𝒌))H_{\rm TB}({\bf\it k})=\begin{pmatrix}H_{\rm Ta}({\bf\it k})&H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})\\ {H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})}^{\scriptstyle{\dagger}}&H_{\rm Ni}({\bf\it k})\end{pmatrix} (2)

The terms of HTa(𝒌),HNi(𝒌)H_{\rm Ta}({\bf\it k}),H_{\rm Ni}({\bf\it k}) and Hint(𝒌)H_{\rm int}({\bf\it k}) are 4×44\times 4 matrices, which read

HTa(𝒌)=\displaystyle H_{\rm Ta}({\bf\it k})= [εs+2ts1cos(kx)]σ0τ0+ts2γ1(𝒌)+ts3σ0τx,\displaystyle\;\bqty{\varepsilon_{s}+2t_{s1}\cos(k_{x})}\sigma_{0}\tau_{0}+t_{s2}\gamma_{1}({\bf\it k})+t_{s3}\sigma_{0}\tau_{x}, (3)
HNi(𝒌)=\displaystyle H_{\rm Ni}({\bf\it k})= [εp+2tp1cos(kx)]σ0τ0+tp2γ2(𝒌)+tp3σ0τx,\displaystyle\;\bqty{\varepsilon_{p}+2t_{p1}\cos(k_{x})}\sigma_{0}\tau_{0}+t_{p2}\gamma_{2}({\bf\it k})+t_{p3}\sigma_{0}\tau_{x},
Hhyb(𝒌)=\displaystyle H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})=  2itspsin(kx)γ3(𝒌).\displaystyle\;2{\text{i}}t_{sp}\sin(k_{x})\gamma_{3}({\bf\it k}).

The γ1,2,3(𝒌)\gamma_{1,2,3}({\bf\it k}) matrices are given explicitly in Appendix D.

Table 1: Parameters of the TB model for the QTI with chiral symmetry when δ=0\delta=0.
εs\varepsilon_{s} ts1t_{s1} ts2t_{s2} ts3t_{s3} tspt_{sp} εp\varepsilon_{p} tp1t_{p1} tp2t_{p2} tp3t_{p3}
2.05 -1 -0.8 -0.2 0.3 -2.05 1 0.8 0.2(1+δ\delta)

We find that ts1<0t_{s1}<0 and tp1,tp2>0t_{p1},t_{p2}>0 for the A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family (ts3t_{s3} and tp3t_{p3} are small). When εs+2ts12|ts2|<εp+2tp1+2tp2\varepsilon_{s}+2t_{s1}-2\absolutevalue{t_{s2}}<\varepsilon_{p}+2t_{p1}+2t_{p2}, the double-band inversion happens in the monolayers of this family. By fitting the DFT bands, we obtain ts2>0t_{s2}>0 for the 215-type, while ts2<0t_{s2}<0 for the 235-type. When εp=εs\varepsilon_{p}=-\varepsilon_{s} and tpi=tsi(i=1,2,3)t_{pi}=-t_{si}(i=1,2,3), the model is chiral symmetric (i.e., δ=0\delta=0 in Table 1). Since the second SW insulator or QTI is topological in the presence of chiral symmetry, we would focus on the model (almost respecting chiral symmetry) in the following discussion.

Analytic solution of (01)-edge states

As the remnants of the QTI phase, the localized edge states can be solved analytically for the minimum model. For the (01)-edge, one can treat the model HTB(𝒌)H_{\rm TB}({\bf\it k}) as two parts, H0(𝒌)H_{0}({\bf\it k}) and H(𝒌)H^{\prime}({\bf\it k}),

H0(𝒌)=\displaystyle H_{0}({\bf\it k})= (ts2γ1(𝒌)+ts3σ0τx00tp2γ2(𝒌)+tp3σ0τx)\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}t_{s2}\gamma_{1}({\bf\it k})+t_{s3}\sigma_{0}\tau_{x}&0\\ 0&t_{p2}\gamma_{2}({\bf\it k})+t_{p3}\sigma_{0}\tau_{x}\end{pmatrix} (4)
H(𝒌)=\displaystyle H^{\prime}({\bf\it k})= ([εs+2ts1cos(kx)]σ0τ0Hhyb(𝒌)Hhyb(𝒌)[εp+2tp1cos(kx)]σ0τ0)\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}\bqty{\varepsilon_{s}+2t_{s1}\cos(k_{x})}\sigma_{0}\tau_{0}&H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})\\ {H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})}^{\scriptstyle{\dagger}}&\bqty{\varepsilon_{p}+2t_{p1}\cos(k_{x})}\sigma_{0}\tau_{0}\end{pmatrix}

Note that there is a pair of Dirac points (±kxD,0)(\pm k_{x}^{D},0), with kxD=arccos[12(ts3ts2)21]k_{x}^{D}=\arccos\left[\frac{1}{2}\pqty{\frac{t_{s3}}{t_{s2}}}^{2}-1\right]. Since kxk_{x} is still a good quantum number on the (01)-edge, expanding kyk_{y} to the second order, the zero-mode equation H0(kx,iy)Ψ(kx,y)=0H_{0}(k_{x},-{\text{i}}\partial_{y})\Psi(k_{x},y)=0 can be solved for y[0,+)y\in[0,+\infty). Taking the trial solution of Ψ(kx,y)=ψ(kx)eλy\Psi(k_{x},y)=\psi(k_{x})e^{\lambda y}, we obtain the secular equation and the solution of λ=±λ±\lambda=\pm\lambda_{\pm}, where

λ±=1±ts32(1+cos(kx))ts221\lambda_{\pm}=1\pm\sqrt{\frac{t_{s3}^{2}}{(1+\cos(k_{x}))t_{s2}^{2}}-1} (5)

With the boundary conditions Ψ(kx,0)=Ψ(kx,+)=0\Psi(k_{x},0)=\Psi(k_{x},+\infty)=0, only λ±-\lambda_{\pm} are permitted.

In the kxk_{x} regime of [𝒌xD,𝒌xD]\left[-{\bf\it k}_{x}^{D},{\bf\it k}_{x}^{D}\right], the edge zero-mode states are Ψ(kx,y)=[C1(kx)ϕ1(kx)+C2(kx)ϕ2(kx)]\Psi(k_{x},y)=\bqty{C_{1}(k_{x})\phi_{1}(k_{x})+C_{2}(k_{x})\phi_{2}(k_{x})} (eλ+yeλy)\pqty{e^{-\lambda_{+}y}-e^{-\lambda_{-}y}} with

ϕ1(kx)=\displaystyle\phi_{1}(k_{x})= ((1+eikx)ts2ts30100000)T\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}-\frac{(1+e^{-{\text{i}}k_{x}})t_{s2}}{t_{s3}}&0&1&0&0&0&0&0\end{pmatrix}^{\rm T} (6)
ϕ2(kx)=\displaystyle\phi_{2}(k_{x})= (0000tp3(1+eikx)tp2010)T\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}0&0&0&0&-\frac{t_{p3}}{(1+e^{{\text{i}}k_{x}})t_{p2}}&0&1&0\end{pmatrix}^{\rm T}

The edge zero states are Fermi arcs that linking the pair of projected Dirac points (±kxD,0)(\pm k_{x}^{D},0). Once H(𝒌)H^{\prime}({\bf\it k}) included, the effective (01)-edge Hamiltonian is,

H01eff\displaystyle H^{eff}_{\rm 01} =Φ|H(𝒌)|Φ\displaystyle=\bra{\Phi}H({\bf\it k})\ket{\Phi} (7)
=(εs+2ts1cos(kx)00εp+2tp1cos(kx))\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}\varepsilon_{s}+2t_{s1}\cos(k_{x})&0\\ 0&\varepsilon_{p}+2t_{p1}\cos(k_{x})\end{pmatrix}

where |Φ|ϕ1(kx),ϕ2(kx)\ket{\Phi}\equiv\ket{\phi_{1}(k_{x}),\phi_{2}(k_{x})}. Two edge spectra are obtained in Fig. 4 (a).

Effective SSH model on (10)-edge and corner states

Similarly, we derive the (10)-edge modes as [F1(ky)φ1(ky)+F2(ky)φ2(ky)](eΛ+xeΛx)[F_{1}(k_{y})\varphi_{1}(k_{y})+F_{2}(k_{y})\varphi_{2}(k_{y})]\left(e^{-\Lambda_{+}x}-e^{-\Lambda_{-}x}\right) with

φ1=(01Δs1Δseiky01+Δp001+Δpeiky),φ2=(eiky(1Δs)001Δseiky01+Δpeiky+Δp0).\displaystyle\varphi_{1}=\begin{pmatrix}0\\ 1-\Delta_{s}\\ 1-\Delta_{s}e^{ik_{y}}\\ 0\\ -1+\Delta_{p}\\ 0\\ 0\\ -1+\Delta_{p}e^{-ik_{y}}\end{pmatrix},\varphi_{2}=\begin{pmatrix}e^{-ik_{y}}\left(1-\Delta_{s}\right)\\ 0\\ 0\\ 1-\Delta_{s}e^{-ik_{y}}\\ 0\\ -1+\Delta_{p}\\ -e^{-ik_{y}}+\Delta_{p}\\ 0\end{pmatrix}. (8)

Here, Λ±=2tsp±4tsp22(2ts1+ts2)(2ts1+2ts2+εs)2ts1+ts2\Lambda_{\pm}=\frac{2t_{sp}\pm\sqrt{4t_{sp}^{2}-2(2t_{s1}+t_{s2})(2t_{s1}+2t_{s2}+\varepsilon_{s})}}{2t_{s1}+t_{s2}}, Δs=(ts32ts2)2\Delta_{s}=\left(\frac{t_{s3}}{2t_{s2}}\right)^{2}, and Δp=(tp32tp2)2\Delta_{p}=\left(\frac{t_{p3}}{2t_{p2}}\right)^{2}. Then we obtain the effective Hamiltonian on (10) edge below,

H10eff\displaystyle H^{eff}_{\rm 10} =(0v+weikyv+weiky0),\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}0&v+we^{-ik_{y}}\\ v+we^{ik_{y}}&0\end{pmatrix}, (9)
w\displaystyle w =ts3+tp34ts3Δs,\displaystyle=t_{s3}+t_{p3}-4t_{s3}\Delta_{s},
v\displaystyle v =ts3+tp34tp3Δp\displaystyle=t_{s3}+t_{p3}-4t_{p3}\Delta_{p}

When δ=0\delta=0, the minimum QTI model is chiral symmetric and it is gapless on the (10) edge (preserving MyM_{y} symmetry). When the chiral symmetry is slightly broken (δ0\delta\neq 0), the H10effH^{eff}_{10} becomes an Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model (δ<0\delta<0 nontrivial; δ>0\delta>0 trivial), as presented in Fig. 4(b-d). As a result, we obtain a solution state on the end of the edge mode, i.e., the corner. As long as the energy of the corner state is located in the gap of bulk and edge states, the corner state is well localized at the corners, as shown in Fig. 4(c,d).

Discussion.

In Ta2NiSe5 monolayer, the double-band inversion has also happened between Ta-dz2d_{z2} and Te-pxp_{x} states, about 0.4 eV, resulting in a semimetal with a pair of nodal lines in the 215-type. The highest valence bands on Y--Γ\Gamma are from the inverted Ta-dz2d_{z^{2}} states. However, in Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer, the double-band inversion strength becomes remarkable, \sim 1 eV, which is ascribed to the filled BB-type voids and more extended Te-pp states. On the other hand, the highest valence bands become NiA-dxzd_{xz} states (slightly hybridized with Te-pxp_{x} states). It is insulating with a small gap of 65 meV. When it comes to A2A_{2}Pd3Te5 monolayer, the remarkable inversion strength is similar to that of Ta2Ni3Te5. But the PdA-dxzd_{xz} states go upwards further due to more expansion of the dd-orbitals and the energy gap becomes almost zero in Ta2Pd3Te5. In short, the double-band inversion happens in all these monolayers, while the band gap of the 235-type changes from positive (Ta2Ni3Te5), to nearly zero (Ta2Pd3Te5 with a tiny band overlap), to negative (Nb2Pd3Te5), as shown in Fig. S1. Although the band structure of Ta2Pd3Te5 bulk is metallic without SOC Guo et al. (2021); Wang et al. (2021); Higashihara et al. (2021), the monolayer could become a QSH insulator upon including SOC in Ref.Guo et al. (2021). Since their bulk materials are van der Waals layered compounds, the bulk topology and properties strongly rely on the band structures of the monolayers in the A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family.

As we find in Ref. Guo et al. (2021), the band topology of Ta2Pd3Te5 monolayer is lattice sensitive. By applying >1>1% uniaxial compressive strain along bb, it becomes a 2\mathbb{Z}_{2}-trivial insulator, being a QTI. On the other hand, due to the quasi-1D crystal structure, the screening effect of carriers is relatively weak and the electron-hole Coulomb interaction may be substantial for exciton condensation. The 1D in-gap edge states as remnants of the QTI are responsible for the observed Luttinger-liquid behavior.

In conclusion, we predict that TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5 monolayers can be QTIs by solving aBR decomposition and computing SW numbers. Through aBR analysis, we conclude that the second-order topology comes from an essential BR at the empty site (Ag@4cA_{g}@4c), and it origins from the remarkable double-band inversion. The double-band inversion also happens in the band structure of Ta2NiSe5 monolayer. The second SW number of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer is w2=1w_{2}=1, corresponding to a QTI. Therefore, we obtain edge states and corner states of the monolayer. The eight-band quadrupole model with Mx and My has been constructed successfully for electronic materials. With the large double-band inversion and small band energy gap/overlap, these transition-metal materials of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family provide a good platform to study the interplay between the topology and interactions (Fig. 4(e)).

Method.

Our first-principles calculations were performed within the framework of the DFT using the projector augmented wave method Blochl (1994); Kresse and Joubert (1999), as implemented in Vienna ab-initio simulation package (VASP) Kresse and Furthmuller (1996a, b). The Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof (PBE) generalized gradient approximation exchange-correlations functional Perdew et al. (1996) was used. SOC is neglected in the calculations except Supplementary Figure 2(b). We also used SCAN Sun et al. (2015) and GW Shishkin and Kresse (2006) method when checking the band gap. In the self-consistent process, 16 ×\times 4 ×\times 1 kk-point sampling grids were used, and the cut-off energy for plane wave expansion was 500 eV. The irreps were obtained by the program IRVSP Gao et al. (2021). The maximally localized Wannier functions were constructed by using the Wannier90 package Pizzi et al. (2020). The edge spectra are calculated using surface Green’s function of semi-infinite system Sancho et al. (1984, 1985).

Acknowledgements.
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11974395 and No. 12188101), the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Grant No. XDB33000000), the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation funded project (Grant No. 2021M703461), and the Center for Materials Genome.

References

Appendix

A The band structures of the monolayers of A2M1,3X5A_{2}M_{1,3}X_{5} family

The space group of relaxed Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer is PmmnPmmn (No. 59). The symmetry operators are inversion, C~2x={C2x|1/2,0,0}\widetilde{C}_{2x}=\{C_{2x}|1/2,0,0\}, C~2y={C2y|0,1/2,0}\widetilde{C}_{2y}=\{C_{2y}|0,1/2,0\} and C~2z={C2z|1/2,1/2,0}\widetilde{C}_{2z}=\{C_{2z}|1/2,1/2,0\}. Although PP is weakly broken in the exfoliated monolayer from the bulk, it will be regained after relaxation. The change of the band structure is minute, as presented in Fig. S1(c-d). In a unit cell of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer in Fig. 1(a), four Ta atoms, four NiB atoms and eight Te atoms are located at 4e4e WKPs. The rest two Te atoms and two NiA atoms are differently located at 2a2a and 2b2b WKPs respectively. They form 1D Ta2Te5 double chains. Unlike only AA-type voids filled in Ta2NiSe5, both AA- and BB-types of tetrahedral voids are filled by NiA and NiB respectively in Ta2Ni3Te5 Guo et al. (2021) (Fig. 1(a)).

There are two phases of bulk Ta2NiSe5, which are C2/cC2/c (No. 15, low-temperature phase) and CmcmCmcm (No. 63, high-temperature phase). The exfoliated Ta2NiSe5 monolayer of C2/cC2/c is insulator after relaxation (Fig. S1(a)). As shown in Fig. S1(b), the exfoliated Ta2NiSe5 monolayer of CmcmCmcm is semimetal, and the compatibility relationship is consistent with band inversion process in Fig. 2(a). In addition, the Ta2NiSe5 is proposed to be an exciton insulator Mazza et al. (2020). In literature, there is another argument about the band gap opening, which is the single-particle band hybridization after the structural phase transition (form high-temperature SG63 to low-temperature SG 15). The space group of bulk TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5(MM = Ni, Pd) is PnmaPnma (No. 62), and space group of the corresponding exfoliated monolayer is Pmn21Pmn2_{1} (No. 31). However, the relaxed Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer structure has inversion symmetry, and the corresponding space group becomes PmmnPmmn (No. 59). Thus, the inversion was imposed into TaM32{}_{2}M_{3}Te5 monolayers with tiny atom positions movements, and the corresponding band structures are also calculated, as shown in Fig. S1(c-h). In addition, with inversion symmetry, the irreps can be distinguished by parity and the aBR decomposition can be done easily.

Refer to caption
Figure S1: The comparisons of band structures of (a-b) Ta2NiSe5, (c-d) Ta2Ni3Te5, (e-f) Ta2Pd3Te5, (g-h) Nb2Pd3Te5 monolayers. The lower panels share the same space group #59. The 235-type band gap (Eg=EGM4EGM4+E_{g}=E_{GM4-}-E_{GM4+}) changes for 0.068 eV for Ta2Ni3Te5, to -0.023 eV for Ta2Pd3Te5, to -0.124 eV for Nb2Pd3Te5 monolayers.
Refer to caption
Figure S2: The comparisons of band structures of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayers (a) without SOC, (b) with SOC, (c) using GW method, (d) using SCAN method. The band gaps and double band inversions are remained in these band structures using different methods.

B The aBR decomposition of Ta2Ni3Te5

As shown in Table. S1, we find that A@4e+A′′@4e=Ag@4c+Au@4cA^{\prime}@4e+A^{\prime\prime}@4e=Ag@4c+Au@4c in aBRs for PmmnPmmn space group. The WKPs, aBRs and the aBR decomposition of Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer are given in Table. S2.

Table S1: The aBRs for PmmnPmmn space group at 4e4e and 4c4c WKPs, we can find A@4e+A′′@4e=Ag@4c+Au@4cA^{\prime}@4e+A^{\prime\prime}@4e=Ag@4c+Au@4c.
A@4eA^{\prime}@4e A′′@4eA^{\prime\prime}@4e Ag@4cAg@4c Au@4cAu@4c
Γ\Gamma Γ1+Γ2Γ3+Γ4\Gamma_{1+}\oplus\Gamma_{2-}\oplus\Gamma_{3+}\oplus\Gamma_{4-} Γ1Γ2+Γ3Γ4+\Gamma_{1-}\oplus\Gamma_{2+}\oplus\Gamma_{3-}\oplus\Gamma_{4+} Γ1+Γ2+Γ3+Γ4+\Gamma_{1+}\oplus\Gamma_{2+}\oplus\Gamma_{3+}\oplus\Gamma_{4+} Γ1Γ2Γ3Γ4\Gamma_{1-}\oplus\Gamma_{2-}\oplus\Gamma_{3-}\oplus\Gamma_{4-}
S S1S_{1}\oplusS2S_{2} S1S_{1}\oplusS2S_{2} S1S_{1}\oplusS2S_{2} S1S_{1}\oplusS2S_{2}
X X1X_{1}\oplusX2X_{2} X1X_{1}\oplusX2X_{2} X1X_{1}\oplusX2X_{2} X1X_{1}\oplusX2X_{2}
Y 2Y12Y_{1} 2Y22Y_{2} Y1Y_{1}\oplusY2Y_{2} Y1Y_{1}\oplusY2Y_{2}
Table S2: The aBRs, BR decomposition for PmmnPmmn Ta2Ni3Te5 monolayer.
Atom WKP(q)(q) Symm. Orbital Irrep(ρ)(\rho) aBR(ρ@q\rho@q) Occ.
Ta 4ee mm dx2y2d_{x^{2}-y^{2}} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee
dz2d_{z^{2}} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee
dyzd_{yz} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee
dxzd_{xz} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee
dxyd_{xy} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee
NiA 2bb mm2mm2 dz2d_{z^{2}} A1A_{1} A1@A_{1}@2bb yes
dx2y2d_{x^{2}-y^{2}} A1A_{1} A1@A_{1}@2bb yes
dxyd_{xy} A2A_{2} A2@A_{2}@2bb yes
dxzd_{xz} B1B_{1} B1@B_{1}@2bb yes
dyzd_{yz} B2B_{2} B2@B_{2}@2bb yes
NiB 4ee mm dz2d_{z^{2}} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
dx2y2d_{x^{2}-y^{2}} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
dyzd_{yz} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
dxzd_{xz} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee yes
dxyd_{xy} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee yes
Te1 2aa mm2mm2 pzp_{z} A1A_{1} A1@A_{1}@2aa yes
pxp_{x} B1B_{1} B1@B_{1}@2aa yes
pyp_{y} B2B_{2} B2@B_{2}@2aa yes
Te2 4ee mm pzp_{z} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
pyp_{y} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
pxp_{x} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee yes
Te3 4ee mm pzp_{z} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
pyp_{y} AA^{\prime} A@A^{\prime}@4ee yes
pxp_{x} A′′A^{\prime\prime} A′′@A^{\prime\prime}@4ee
Ag@A_{g}@4cc yes

C Wilson-loop method

The Wilson-loop method is widely applied in identifying topology in bands. A Hamiltonian satisfies,

H(kx,ky)|un(kx,ky)=En(kx,ky)|un(kx,ky)H(k_{x},k_{y})\ket{u_{n}(k_{x},k_{y})}=E_{n}(k_{x},k_{y})\ket{u_{n}(k_{x},k_{y})} (10)

with noccn_{\rm occ} occupied energy bands. We can define the overlap matrix,

Mymn(kx;kyj,kyj+1)=um(kx,kyj)|un(kx,kyj+1)M_{y}^{mn}(k_{x};k_{y}^{j},k_{y}^{j+1})=\innerproduct{u_{m}(k_{x},k_{y}^{j})}{u_{n}(k_{x},k_{y}^{j+1})} (11)

where kyj=2πj/Nk_{y}^{j}=2{\pi}j/N, m,n=1,2,,noccm,n=1,2,...,n_{\rm occ}, and,

𝒲y(kx)=j=0N1My(kx;kyj,kyj+1).{\mathcal{W}}_{y}(k_{x})=\prod_{j=0}^{N-1}M_{y}(k_{x};k_{y}^{j},k_{y}^{j+1}). (12)

Diagonalizing 𝒲y(kx){\mathcal{W}}_{y}(k_{x}), we can get the eigenvalues Wly(kx)=eiθl(kx)(l=1,2,,nocc)W_{ly}(k_{x})=e^{{\text{i}}\theta_{l}(k_{x})}\;(l=1,2,...,n_{\rm occ}) and the corresponding eigenvectors |wly(kx)\ket{w_{ly}(k_{x})}. The phase is also called the Wannier charge center (WCC). In systems with PTPT symmetry or 2D systems with C2zTC_{2z}T symmetry, the Hamiltonian can be transformed to be real. In this condition, the system can be classified using the SW class instead of the Chern class. And the second SW class can be determined by a 2\mathbb{Z}_{2} number w2w_{2}, which is corresponding to the number of cross points at θ=π\theta=\pi modulo 2. When calculating nested Wilson loop, we define Mxymn(kxj,kxj+1)=wmy(kxj)|wny(kxj+1)M_{xy}^{mn}(k_{x}^{j},k_{x}^{j+1})=\innerproduct{w_{my}(k_{x}^{j})}{w_{ny}(k_{x}^{j+1})} (kxj=2πj/Nk_{x}^{j}=2{\pi}j/N; m,n=1,2,,nm,n=1,2,...,n^{\prime}). Similar to the Wilson-loop method,

𝒲xy=j=0N1Mxy(kxj,kxj+1).{\mathcal{W}}_{xy}=\prod_{j=0}^{N-1}M_{xy}(k_{x}^{j},k_{x}^{j+1}). (13)

Thus the final Berry phase of nested Wilson loop is,

Φ=Imln[det(𝒲xy)].\Phi=-\imaginary\ln\bqty{\det({\mathcal{W}}_{xy})}. (14)

D The Effective model for a 2D QTI

With unit cell defined in Fig. S3(a), basis chosen as

(|𝒌,Ta1,dz2,|𝒌,Ta2,dz2,|𝒌,Ta3,dz2,|𝒌,Ta4,dz2,\displaystyle\left(\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ta}_{1},d_{z^{2}}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ta}_{2},d_{z^{2}}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ta}_{3},d_{z^{2}}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ta}_{4},d_{z^{2}}},\right. (15)
|𝒌,Ni1,dxz,|𝒌,Ni2,dxz,|𝒌,Ni3,dxz,|𝒌,Ni4,dxz),\displaystyle\left.\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ni}_{1},d_{xz}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ni}_{2},d_{xz}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ni}_{3},d_{xz}},\ket{{\bf\it k},{\rm Ni}_{4},d_{xz}}\right),

hoppings considered listed in Fig. S3(b-h), and being Fourier transformed with atomic position 𝝉{\bf\it\tau} excluded (i.e., lattice gauge; denoted as H(𝒌)H({\bf\it k})), the minimum effective eight-band tight-binding Hamiltonian of Ta2Ni3Te5 are given as Eq. (3) in the main text, with γ\gamma-matrices defined as

γ1(𝒌)=\displaystyle\gamma_{1}({\bf\it k})= (000eiky(1+eikx)001+eikx001+eikx00eiky(1+eikx)000)\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}0&0&0&e^{-{\text{i}}k_{y}}\pqty{1+e^{-{\text{i}}k_{x}}}\\ 0&0&1+e^{-{\text{i}}k_{x}}&0\\ 0&1+e^{{\text{i}}k_{x}}&0&0\\ e^{{\text{i}}k_{y}}\pqty{1+e^{{\text{i}}k_{x}}}&0&0&0\end{pmatrix} (16a)
γ2(𝒌)=\displaystyle\gamma_{2}({\bf\it k})= (0001+eikx00eiky(1+eikx)00eiky(1+eikx)001+eikx000)\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}0&0&0&1+e^{-{\text{i}}k_{x}}\\ 0&0&e^{{\text{i}}k_{y}}\pqty{1+e^{-{\text{i}}k_{x}}}&0\\ 0&e^{-{\text{i}}k_{y}}\pqty{1+e^{{\text{i}}k_{x}}}&0&0\\ 1+e^{{\text{i}}k_{x}}&0&0&0\end{pmatrix} (16b)
γ3(𝒌)=\displaystyle\gamma_{3}({\bf\it k})= (0eiky001000000100eiky0)\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}0&e^{-{\text{i}}k_{y}}&0&0\\ 1&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&1\\ 0&0&e^{{\text{i}}k_{y}}&0\end{pmatrix} (16c)

Therefore, the full tight-binding (TB) Hamiltonian is

HTB(𝒌)=\displaystyle H_{\rm TB}({\bf\it k})= (HTa(𝒌)Hhyb(𝒌)Hhyb(𝒌)HNi(𝒌))\displaystyle\;\begin{pmatrix}H_{\rm Ta}({\bf\it k})&H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})\\ {H_{\rm hyb}({\bf\it k})}^{\scriptstyle{\dagger}}&H_{\rm Ni}({\bf\it k})\end{pmatrix} (17)
Refer to caption
Figure S3: (a) Unit cell of minimum effective model of Ta2Ni3Te5. (b)-(h) Hoppings considered in effective model. The hoppings are represented by bonds between Ta and Ni atoms. And the plus and minus represent the positive and negative values of hoppings.