pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.06262 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-06 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el

Competing magnetic phases in Cr_(3+δ)Te₄ are spatially segregated

V. K. Bhartiya , Anirban Goswami , Nicholas Ng , Wei Tian , Matthew G. Tucker , Niraj Aryal , Lijun Wu , Weiguo Yin
show 5 more authors
Yimei Zhu Milinda Abeykoon Emmanuel Yakubu Samaresh Guchhait J. M. Tranquada
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 01:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el
keywords Cr3Te4ferromagnetic orderantiferromagnetic ordermagnetostrictionneutron diffractiontransmission electron microscopyvan der Waals magnetsphase segregation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Two monoclinic phases intergrow at the nanoscale to separate FM and AFM orders in Cr3+δTe4

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that a single crystal of Cr_{3+δ}Te_4 with δ = -0.10 contains two distinct monoclinic phases mixed as fine-grained intergrowths no larger than about 100 nm. One phase develops ferromagnetic order below 321 K while the other develops antiferromagnetic order below 86 K. Neutron diffraction detects both ordering temperatures, spontaneous magnetostriction shows lattice expansions of opposite sign at each transition, and TEM images confirm both lattice types inside individual thin grains. A crystal with δ = -0.26 exhibits only the ferromagnetic phase. This spatial separation matters because it accounts for why magnetic ordering temperatures and anisotropies differ between bulk crystals and strained thin films in the same material family.

Core claim

The crystal with δ = -0.10 consists of two distinct monoclinic phases that form a fine-grained intergrowth of size ≲ 100 nm, one ordering ferromagnetically below T_C ≈ 321 K and the other antiferromagnetically below T_N ≈ 86 K; this follows from neutron diffraction on the single crystal, opposite-sign spontaneous magnetostriction at the two transitions, and TEM evidence for both monoclinic lattices inside one thin grain, with DFT calculations of relaxed structures rationalizing the observed lattice responses to each magnetic order.

What carries the argument

Spontaneous magnetostriction of opposite sign at T_C and T_N together with TEM imaging that detects both monoclinic phases inside a single ≈ 100 nm grain.

Load-bearing premise

That opposite-sign magnetostrictions at the two transitions and the presence of both monoclinic lattices inside one thin grain necessarily indicate two distinct phases spatially segregated rather than some other nanoscale coexistence or defect-driven behavior inside a single phase.

What would settle it

Observation of a uniform single monoclinic lattice type throughout an entire grain, with no regions showing the second lattice, would disprove the conclusion of fine-grained spatial segregation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.06262 by Anirban Goswami, Emmanuel Yakubu, J. M. Tranquada, Lijun Wu, Matthew G. Tucker, Milinda Abeykoon, Nicholas Ng, Niraj Aryal, Samaresh Guchhait, V. K. Bhartiya, Weiguo Yin, Wei Tian, Yimei Zhu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) The atomic arrangement in Cr [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a-e) Rocking curves at 350 K for a selection of structural Bragg peaks illustrating the varying separation of peaks A [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Rocking curves at 4 K (circles) and 350 K (squares) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Mesh scans for (a) (2 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Electron diffraction pattern (EDP) viewed along [1,−3, 1] zone axis. (b) Simulated EDP for two domains 6(a) Electron diffraction pattern (EDP) with a [131] zone axis for a grain of the δ 010 sample(b) Simu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Comparison of measured integrated intensities (cir [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison of measured integrated intensities (cir [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Temperature dependence of the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) Temperature dependence of the integrated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (a) Representation of the AFM order within the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Comparison of measured integrated intensities of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. NPD data for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Comparison of the thermal variations of the lattice parameters for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Temperature dependence of the average spin angle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: K. Analysis with DFT In an attempt to gain further insight, we performed calculations with DFT, in which all cell parameters were allowed to relax while maintaining the magnetic phase to be either FM or the AFM structure shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: 0 200 350 K cal data 0 200 Intensity (counts/s) 120 K 2 4 6 8 10 Q (Å 1 ) 0 200 400 5 K FIG. 16. Full range of the fitted NPD pattern at three differ￾ent temperatures, subsections of which are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Cr$_{1+x}$Te$_2$ is a self-intercalated vdW system that is of current interest for its room-temperature FM phases and tunable topological properties. Early NPD measurements on the monoclinic phase Cr$_3$Te$_4$ ($x=0.5$) presented evidence for competing FM and AFM phases. Here we apply neutron diffraction to a single crystal of Cr$_{3+\delta}$Te$_4$ with $\delta=-0.10$ and discover that it consists of two distinct monoclinic phases, one with FM order below $T_{\rm C} \approx 321$ K and another that develops AFM order below $T_{\rm N} \approx 86$ K. In contrast, we find that a crystal with $\delta=-0.26$ exhibits only FM order. The single-crystal analysis is complemented by results obtained with NPD, XPD, and TEM measurements on the $\delta=-0.10$ composition. From observations of spontaneous magnetostriction of opposite sign at $T_{\rm C}$ and $T_{\rm N}$, along with the TEM evidence for both monoclinic phases in a single thin ($\approx$ 100 nm) grain, we conclude that the two phases must have a fine-grained ($\lesssim$ 100 nm) intergrowth character, as might occur from high-temperature spinodal decomposition during the growth process. Calculations of the relaxed lattice structures for the FM and AFM phases with DFT provide a rationalization of the observed spontaneous magnetostrictions. Correlations between the magnitude and orientation of the magnetic moments with lattice parameter variation demonstrate that the magnetic orders are sensitive to strain, thus explaining why magnetic ordering temperatures and anisotropies can be different between bulk and thin-film samples, when the latter are subject to epitaxial strain. Our results point to the need to investigate the supposed coexistence FM and AFM phases reported elsewhere in the Cr$_{1+x}$Te$_2$ system, such as in the Cr$_5$Te$_8$ phase ($x=0.25$).

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports that a single crystal of Cr_{3+δ}Te₄ with δ = -0.10 consists of two distinct monoclinic phases, one exhibiting ferromagnetic order below T_C ≈ 321 K and the other antiferromagnetic order below T_N ≈ 86 K. This is established via single-crystal neutron diffraction supplemented by NPD, XPD, and TEM on the δ = -0.10 sample, while a δ = -0.26 crystal shows only FM order. The authors conclude that the phases form a fine-grained (≲ 100 nm) intergrowth, possibly from high-temperature spinodal decomposition, based on opposite-sign spontaneous magnetostriction at the two transitions and TEM detection of both monoclinic lattices inside a single ~100 nm grain. DFT lattice relaxations for the FM and AFM states rationalize the observed magnetostrictions and demonstrate strain sensitivity of the magnetic orders.

Significance. If the spatial-segregation interpretation holds, the work resolves apparent competing FM/AFM phases in the Cr_{1+x}Te₂ family by showing they are distinct, finely intergrown monoclinic structures rather than a single phase. The convergent use of single-crystal ND, powder diffraction, TEM, and DFT provides a clear experimental and computational framework. The strain-magnetism correlations offer a direct explanation for differences between bulk and thin-film samples, and the results motivate re-examination of reported FM/AFM coexistence in related compositions such as Cr₅Te₈.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and concluding discussion of TEM/magnetostriction evidence] The central inference of fine-grained spatial segregation (abstract and concluding discussion) rests on opposite-sign spontaneous magnetostriction at T_C and T_N together with TEM observation of both monoclinic lattices inside one ~100 nm grain. However, these observables do not spatially resolve which lattice hosts which magnetic order; the neutron data establish only macroscopic coexistence. Alternative pictures—a single monoclinic structure with nanoscale strain or Cr-vacancy gradients that locally stabilize FM versus AFM order, or a modulated single phase whose average diffraction mimics two discrete lattices—remain viable. The DFT relaxations test only the pure FM and AFM end-members and do not examine whether mixed or gradient configurations can reproduce the same magnetostriction signs and dual-lattice TEM contrast.
minor comments (2)
  1. [TEM experimental section] Clarify in the methods or results whether the TEM grain thickness (~100 nm) is representative of the bulk crystal or could itself induce additional strain that affects the observed phase coexistence.
  2. [Abstract and conclusion] The statement that the phases 'must have' a fine-grained intergrowth character should be softened to 'are consistent with' pending additional spatially resolved probes (e.g., micro-focused diffraction or magnetic imaging).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed and constructive report. The major comment correctly identifies that our data provide indirect rather than direct nanoscale mapping of magnetic order to each lattice. We address this point below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the logical chain and note remaining limitations.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and concluding discussion of TEM/magnetostriction evidence] The central inference of fine-grained spatial segregation (abstract and concluding discussion) rests on opposite-sign spontaneous magnetostriction at T_C and T_N together with TEM observation of both monoclinic lattices inside one ~100 nm grain. However, these observables do not spatially resolve which lattice hosts which magnetic order; the neutron data establish only macroscopic coexistence. Alternative pictures—a single monoclinic structure with nanoscale strain or Cr-vacancy gradients that locally stabilize FM versus AFM order, or a modulated single phase whose average diffraction mimics two discrete lattices—remain viable. The DFT relaxations test only the pure FM and AFM end-members and do not examine whether mixed or gradient configurations can reproduce the same magnetostriction signs and dual-lattice TEM.

    Authors: We agree that the present measurements do not furnish direct, spatially resolved correlation between a given magnetic order and a specific monoclinic lattice at the nanoscale. The single-crystal neutron data nevertheless permit assignment through temperature dependence: two distinct sets of nuclear reflections are observed, each corresponding to a monoclinic cell with slightly different parameters; ferromagnetic magnetic intensity appears exclusively below T_C and indexes to one nuclear set, while antiferromagnetic intensity appears below T_N and indexes to the other. The spontaneous magnetostriction changes sign at the two transitions and matches the lattice relaxations obtained from DFT for the pure FM and AFM states, respectively. The TEM images confirm that both lattices coexist inside individual grains of ~100 nm thickness, establishing that the phases are intergrown rather than macroscopically separated. A single-phase picture with continuous strain or vacancy gradients would be expected to produce broadened diffraction peaks and smeared magnetic transitions, neither of which is observed. Likewise, a modulated single phase would not naturally generate two sharp, temperature-offset magnetic onsets with opposite magnetostriction signs. While we have not performed additional DFT supercell calculations on mixed or gradient configurations, the quantitative agreement between the pure-phase calculations and the measured magnetostrictions supports the segregated-phase interpretation as the most economical account of all observations. We will revise the abstract and discussion to articulate this reasoning more explicitly and to state that local magnetic imaging would constitute a valuable future test. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central inference rests on independent observables

full rationale

The paper derives its claim of fine-grained spatial segregation of FM and AFM monoclinic phases from direct experimental inputs: neutron diffraction establishing coexisting orders, opposite-sign spontaneous magnetostriction at T_C and T_N, and TEM imaging of both lattices inside one ~100 nm grain, with DFT providing post-hoc rationalization of lattice relaxations. No fitted parameter is redefined as a prediction, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and the inference does not reduce to its own inputs by construction. The chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks such as diffraction peaks and real-space imaging.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard interpretation of diffraction data and standard DFT structural relaxation; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard assumptions of Rietveld refinement and magnetic structure determination from neutron diffraction intensities
    Invoked when assigning FM and AFM orders to the two monoclinic phases from NPD and single-crystal data.
  • domain assumption DFT exchange-correlation functional and pseudopotential choices yield reliable relaxed lattice parameters for this system
    Used to rationalize the observed spontaneous magnetostrictions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5737 in / 1439 out tokens · 77817 ms · 2026-05-17T01:40:47.477109+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    It is interesting to note that these results bracket the value ofβ= 0.3827 obtained in the magnetization study [13]

    andβ= 0.44 for (0 0−2). It is interesting to note that these results bracket the value ofβ= 0.3827 obtained in the magnetization study [13]. Thus, it appears that the character of the magnetic order is evolving near the tran- sition. In Sec. III J, we will consider an interpretation in terms of the temperature dependence of the average spin orientation. T...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The magnetic space groups constrain the FM spins to the ac−plane and the AFM spins to theb−axis; these choices are made to be consistent with the single-crystal results

    inC c2/mspace group) phases were intro- duced below their respective ordering temperatures. The magnetic space groups constrain the FM spins to the ac−plane and the AFM spins to theb−axis; these choices are made to be consistent with the single-crystal results. For the FM phase at 5 K, the magnetic moment of the Crh is described by the vector [1.7(1), 0,−...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Fujisawa, M

    Y. Fujisawa, M. Pardo-Almanza, J. Garland, K. Ya- magami, X. Zhu, X. Chen, K. Araki, T. Takeda, M. Kobayashi, Y. Takeda, C. H. Hsu, F. C. Chuang, R. Laskowski, K. H. Khoo, A. Soumyanarayanan, and Y. Okada, Tailoring magnetism in self-intercalated Cr1+δTe2 epitaxial films, Phys. Rev. Mater.4, 114001 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Y. Wang, S. Kajihara, H. Matsuoka, B. K. Saika, K. Yamagami, Y. Takeda, H. Wadati, K. Ishizaka, Y. Iwasa, and M. Nakano, Layer-Number-Independent Two-Dimensional Ferromagnetism in Cr3Te4, Nano Lett. 22, 9964 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Matsuoka, S

    H. Matsuoka, S. Kajihara, T. Nomoto, Y. Wang, M. Hi- rayama, R. Arita, Y. Iwasa, and M. Nakano, Band-driven switching of magnetism in a van der Waals magnetic semimetal, Sci. Adv.10, eadk1415 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    S. K. Chaluvadi, S. P. Chalil, A. Jana, D. Dagur, G. Vinai, F. Motti, J. Fujii, M. Mezhoud, U. L¨ uders, V. Polewczyk, I. Vobornik, G. Rossi, C. Bigi, Y. Hwang, T. Olsen, P. Orgiani, and F. Mazzola, Uncovering the Lowest Thickness Limit for Room-Temperature Ferro- magnetism of Cr 1.6Te2, Nano Lett.24, 7601 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Guillet, H

    Q. Guillet, H. Boukari, F. Choueikani, P. Ohresser, A. Ouerghi, F. Mesple, V. T. Renard, J.-F. Jacquot, D. Jalabert, C. Vergnaud, F. Bonell, A. Marty, and M. Jamet, Magnetic evolution of Cr 2Te3 epitaxially grown on graphene with post-growth annealing, Appl. Phys. Lett.124, 202402 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Kushwaha, O

    N. Kushwaha, O. Armitage, B. Edwards, L. Trzaska, J. Rigden, P. Bencok, D. Biswas, T.-L. Lee, C. Sanders, G. van der Laan, P. Wahl, P. D. C. King, and A. Ra- jan, From ferromagnetic semiconductor to antiferromag- netic metal in epitaxial Cr xTey monolayers, npj Quan- tum Mater.10, 50 (2025)

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Y. Ou, M. Mirzhalilov, N. M. Nemes, J. L. Martinez, M. Rocci, A. Duong, A. Akey, A. C. Foucher, W. Ge, D. Suri, Y. Wang, H. Ambaye, J. Keum, M. Randeria, N. Trivedi, K. S. Burch, D. C. Bell, F. M. Ross, W. Wu, D. Heiman, V. Lauter, J. S. Moodera, and H. Chi, En- hanced ferromagnetism in monolayer Cr 2Te3 via topo- logical insulator coupling, Rep. Prog. Ph...

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    K. He, M. Bian, S. D. Seddon, K. Jagadish, A. Muc- chietto, H. Ren, E. Kirstein, R. Asadi, J. Bai, C. Yao, S. Pan, J.-X. Yu, P. Milde, C. Huai, H. Hui, J. Zang, R. Sabirianov, X. M. Cheng, G. Miao, H. Xing, Y.-T. Shao, S. A. Crooker, L. Eng, Y. Hou, J. P. Bird, and H. Zeng, Unconventional Anomalous Hall Effect Driven by Self-Intercalation in Covalent 2D M...

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Ipser, K

    H. Ipser, K. L. Komarek, and K. O. Klepp, Transition metal-chalcogen systems viii: The Cr–Te phase diagram, J. Less Common Met.92, 265 (1983)

    work page 1983

  12. [12]

    Bertaut, E.F., Roult, G., Aleonard, R., Pauthenet, R., Chevreton, M., and Jansen, R., Structures magn´ etiques de Cr3X4 (X = S, Se, Te), J. Phys. France25, 582 (1964)

    work page 1964

  13. [13]

    A. F. Andresen, The Magnetic Structure of Cr 2Te3, Cr3Te4, and Cr5Te6, Acta Chem. Scand.24, 3495 (1970)

    work page 1970

  14. [14]

    Yamaguchi and T

    M. Yamaguchi and T. Hashimoto, Magnetic Properties of Cr 3Te4 in Ferromagnetic Region, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 32, 635 (1972)

    work page 1972

  15. [15]

    Goswami, N

    A. Goswami, N. Ng, E. Yakubu, A. M. Abeykoon, and S. Guchhait, Critical behavior in monoclinic Cr 3Te4, Phys. Rev. B109, 054413 (2024)

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Ohsawa, Y

    A. Ohsawa, Y. Yamaguchi, N. Kazama, H. Yamauchi, and H. Watanabe, Magnetic Anisotropy of Cr1−xTe with x= 0.077, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.33, 1303 (1972)

    work page 1972

  17. [17]

    K. D. R¨ oseler, C. Witteveen, C. Besnard, V. Pom- jakushin, H. O. Jeschke, and F. O. von Rohr, Efficient soft-chemical synthesis of large van-der-Waals crystals of the room-temperature ferromagnet 1T-CrTe 2, J. Mater. Chem. A13, 15798 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Huang, W

    Z.-L. Huang, W. Kockelmann, M. Telling, and W. Ben- sch, A neutron diffraction study of structural and mag- netic properties of monoclinic Cr 5Te8, Solid State Sci. 10, 1099 (2008)

    work page 2008

  19. [19]

    Hamasaki, T

    T. Hamasaki, T. Hashimoto, Y. Yamaguchi, and H. Watanabe, Neutron diffraction study of Cr 2Te3 sin- 15 gle crystal, Solid State Commun.16, 895 (1975)

    work page 1975

  20. [20]

    D. E. Cox, G. Shirane, and W. J. Takei, Magnetic struc- tures in the MnSb-CrSb and CrTe-CrSb systems, inPro- ceedings of the International Conference on Magnetism (Institute of Physics and the Physical Society, London,

    work page

  21. [21]

    W. J. Takei, D. E. Cox, and G. Shirane, Magnetic Struc- tures in CrTe–CrSb Solid Solutions, J. Appl. Phys.37, 973 (1966)

    work page 1966

  22. [22]

    Y. Liu, M. Abeykoon, E. Stavitski, K. Attenkofer, and C. Petrovic, Magnetic anisotropy and entropy change in trigonal Cr5Te8, Phys. Rev. B100, 245114 (2019)

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Lotgering and E

    F. Lotgering and E. Gorter, Solid solutions between fer- romagnetic and antiferromagnetic compounds with NiAs structure, J. Phys. Chem. Solids3, 238 (1957)

    work page 1957

  24. [24]

    R. C. Clark and J. S. Reid, The analytical calculation of absorption in multifaceted crystals, Acta Cryst. A51, 887 (1995)

    work page 1995

  25. [25]

    B. H. Toby and R. B. Von Dreele,GSAS-II: the gene- sis of a modern open-source all purpose crystallography software package, J. Appl. Cryst.46, 544 (2013)

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    B. J. Campbell, H. T. Stokes, D. E. Tanner, and D. M. Hatch,ISODISPLACE: a web-based tool for exploring structural distortions, J. Appl. Cryst.39, 607 (2006)

    work page 2006

  27. [27]

    H. T. Stokes, D. M. Hatch, and B. J. Campbell, Isodis- tort, isotropy software suite,iso.byu.edu

    work page

  28. [28]

    C. Li, K. Liu, D. Jiang, C. Jin, T. Pei, T. Wen, B. Yue, and Y. Wang, Diverse Thermal Expansion Behaviors in Ferromagnetic Cr 1−δTe with NiAs-Type, Defective Structures, Inorg. Chem.61, 14641 (2022)

    work page 2022

  29. [29]

    Purwar, A

    S. Purwar, A. Low, A. Bose, A. Narayan, and S. Thiru- pathaiah, Investigation of the anomalous and topological Hall effects in layered monoclinic ferromagnet Cr 2.76Te4, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 094204 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Kubota, Y

    Y. Kubota, Y. Okamoto, T. Kanematsu, T. Yajima, D. Hirai, and K. Takenaka, Large magnetic-field-induced strains in sintered chromium tellurides, Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 042404 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Hatakeyama, T

    K. Hatakeyama, T. Kaneko, H. Yoshida, S. Ohta, and S. Anzai, Pressure effect on the Curie temperatures of Cr1−δTe compounds, J. Magn. Magn. Mater.90–91, 175 (1990)

    work page 1990

  32. [32]

    Fujisawa, M

    Y. Fujisawa, M. Pardo-Almanza, C.-H. Hsu, A. Mo- hamed, K. Yamagami, A. Krishnadas, G. Chang, F.- C. Chuang, K. H. Khoo, J. Zang, A. Soumyanarayanan, and Y. Okada, Widely Tunable Berry Curvature in the Magnetic Semimetal Cr1+δTe2, Adv. Mater.35, 2207121 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Dijkstra, H

    J. Dijkstra, H. H. Weitering, C. F. van Bruggen, C. Haas, and R. A. de Groot, Band-structure calcula- tions, and magnetic and transport properties of ferro- magnetic chromium tellurides (CrTe, Cr 3Te4, Cr 2Te3), J. Phys. Condens. Matter1, 9141 (1989)

    work page 1989

  34. [34]

    A. Bose, S. Purwar, S. Thirupathaiah, and A. Narayan, Anomalous and parallel Hall effects in ferromagnetic Weyl metal Cr3Te4, Phys. Rev. Mater.9, 044413 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Huang, N

    Y. Huang, N. Zuo, Z. Zhang, X. Xing, X. Yao, A. Zhang, H. Ma, C. Xu, W. Jiao, W. Zhou, R. Sankar, D. Qian, and X. Xu, In-Plane Magnetic Anisotropy and Large Topological Hall Effect in Self-Intercalated Ferromagnet Cr1.61Te2, Adv. Funct. Mater.n/a, e10351 (2025)

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    R. Saha, H. L. Meyerheim, B. G¨ obel, B. K. Hazra, H. Deniz, K. Mohseni, V. Antonov, A. Ernst, D. Knyazev, A. Bedoya-Pinto, I. Mertig, and S. S. P. Parkin, Observation of N´ eel-type skyrmions in acen- tric self-intercalated Cr 1+δTe2, Nat. Commun.13, 3965 (2022)

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    S. K. Pradhan, Y. Liu, F. Zheng, D. Song, and R. Wu, Observation of N´ eel-type magnetic skyrmion in a layered non-centrosymmetric itinerant ferromagnet CrTe1.38, Appl. Phys. Lett.125, 152402 (2024)

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    B. Rai, S. K. Kuila, R. Saha, S. Hazra, C. De, J. Sau, V. Gopalan, P. P. Jana, S. S. P. Parkin, and N. Kumar, Peculiar Magnetic and Magneto-Transport Properties in a Noncentrosymmetric Self-Intercalated van der Waals Ferromagnet Cr5Te8, Chem. Mater.37, 746 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Zhang, W

    X. Zhang, W. Liu, W. Niu, Q. Lu, W. Wang, A. Sarikhani, X. Wu, C. Zhu, J. Sun, M. Vaninger, P. F. Miceli, J. Li, D. J. Singh, Y. S. Hor, Y. Zhao, C. Liu, L. He, R. Zhang, G. Bian, D. Yu, and Y. Xu, Self- Intercalation Tunable Interlayer Exchange Coupling in a Synthetic van der Waals Antiferromagnet, Adv. Funct. Mater.32, 2202977 (2022)

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Emergent Spin Fluctuation and Structural Metastability in Self-Intercalated Cr$_{1+x}$Te$_2$ Compounds

    C. Conner, A. Sarikhani, T. Volz, M. Vaninger, X. He, S. Kelley, J. Cook, A. Sah, J. Clark, H. Lucker, C. Zhang, P. Miceli, Y. S. Hor, X. Zhang, and G. Bian, Enhanced Antiferromagnetic Phase in Metastable Self-Intercalated Cr1+xTe2 Compounds (2024), arXiv:2411.13721

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024