“…Unlikely, here we take into account the contributions from the second-order perturbation terms, which result from the admixture of the lowest (Γ 5 + Γ 6 ) doublet with the other ten irreducible representations Γ x [i.e., five (Γ 5 + 6 ) and five (Γ 7 + 8 )] due to the orthorhombic splitting of the ground 4 I 9/2 and the first excited 4 I 11/2 states via crystal-field H CF and orbital angular momentumĴ interactions, as pointed out for a 4f 11 ion in axial (tetragonal or trigonal) symmetry in our recent works [16,17]. In the above expressions, the second-order perturbation contribution g (2) x or g (2) y vanishes because none of the ten Γ x has non-zero matrix element with the lowest (Γ 5 + Γ 6 ) doublet, for bothĤ CF and the x or y component ofĴ operators.…”