In this paper, the author discusses the following nonlinear response relation: $$\delta s_a=\alpha_{abc}E_bE_c \tag{1},$$ where $\delta s_a$ represents the spin polarization generated by the current driven by the electric field $E_b/E_c$. In Eq.(1), $E_b/E_c$ are time-reversal-invariant quantities: if $\delta s_a$ is reversed by time-reversal symmetry ($\mathcal{T}$), we conclude that $\alpha_{abc}$ is a T-odd tensor; if $\delta s_a$ is not reversed by time-reversal symmetry, we conclude that $\alpha_{abc}$ is a T-even quantity.
However, in the paper cited before, the author claims $$\alpha_{abc}=\alpha_{abc}^{even}+\alpha_{abc}^{odd} \tag{2}$$ I don't understand why this partition is legitimate. Is it due to the sign change of $\delta s_{a}$ under time-reversal symmetry being indefinite?
Furthermore, consider the nonlinear current response: $$j_a=\sigma_{abc}E_bE_c \tag{3}$$ where the current density $j_a$ will change its sign under time-reversal symmetry and the electric field $E_b/E_c$ will remain unchanged under time-reversal symmetry. As a result, we find: $$\mathcal{T}\sigma_{abc}=-\sigma_{abc}$$ namely, the nonlinear conductivity should be a T-odd tensor. However, in another paper, the author seems to also admit a similar partition: $$\sigma_{abc}=\sigma_{abc}^{even}+\sigma_{abc}^{odd}$$
How could this be true? The current density is not reversed by time-reversal symmetry? This can not be the case.