English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the original paper we argue that, because of our choice of ε11 = ε22 (considering only binary pseudomixtures), u 0 = u 0 in Eq. (3.9) of the original paper. This statement is incorrect because the energy parameters u l are proportional to the expansion coefficients f (ab) ll0 [see Eq. (3.9) of our original paper]. In particular, for l = 0 and a = b = 2, the latter are given by (see the Appendix of Ref. [1]) f (22) 000 /(4π ) 3/2 ∝ 1 + ε2 H where εH is a coupling constant that determines the interaction strength between a pair of spins of molecules of component 2. The correction proportional to εH is missing in the corresponding expression for f (11) 000 because particles of component 1 in our model do not carry a spin and therefore f (11) 000 = f (22) 000 . However, we stress that because the largest coupling constant used in the original paper is εH = 0.12 and because f (22) 000 /(4π ) 3/2 ∝ 1 + ε2 H the error introduced by erroneously assuming that f (11) 000 = f (22) 000 is vanishingly small and causes only a minute shift of the entire phase diagram to lower temperatures T . This shift is altogether inconsequential for the overall topology of the phase diagram at a given concentration of the magnetic colloids. To correct the error in the equations we presented in the original paper we need to replace u0 by u (ab) 0 where a = b = 1 in Eq. (3.19) [see also Eq. (A3)] and a = b = 2 in Eqs. (3.20) and (3.23) [see also Eq. (A2)] of our paper. Similarly, in Eqs. (3.24) and (A1) of the original paper, u0(ρ 1 + ρ2 2 ) → u 0 ρ2 1 + u 0 ρ2 2 . Moreover, from Eq. (3.18) of our paper it can be realized that the (normalized) orientation distribution function can be cast as

Erratum: Condensation, demixing, and orientational ordering of magnetic colloidal suspensions [Phys. Rev. E 91 , 052127 (2015)]