Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 61 references

Interfacial Noncollinear Filtering of Spin Hall Currents

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-08 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Interfaces can filter hidden spin textures so ordinary spin-Hall sources emit out-of-plane spin currents

desk verdict Clean mechanism paper: interfacial noncollinear filtering can unlock unconventional emitted spins from high-symmetry bulk SHE sources, but the interface-SOC premise still needs quantitative teeth. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.05912 v1 pith:DDRJERW5 submitted 2026-07-07 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Dan-Yang Han , Zi-An Wang , Hong-Liang Chen , Bo Li , Wen-Jian Lu , Yu-Ping Sun , Liang Liu , Shu-Hui Zhang
show 1 more author
Ding-Fu Shao
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 72.25.Dc72.25.Mk73.40.-c75.70.Tj
keywords spinHalleffectemittedcurrentinterfacialspin-orbitfieldnoncollinearfilteringout-of-planepolarizationheterostructureDiracsemimetaltorque
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Spin Hall currents are usually treated as bulk responses whose spin polarization is locked by crystal symmetry, which has driven a search for low-symmetry crystals when devices need unconventional (for example out-of-plane) spins. This paper argues that the quantity that actually reaches a device is not the bulk-averaged current but the spin current emitted across a realistic interface. At that interface a low-symmetry spin-orbit field is typically noncollinear with the momentum-resolved spin texture of the incident bulk Hall current; the mismatch acts as a spin-dependent filter that selectively transmits “hidden” polarization components that cancel under bulk averaging. The result is an unconventional emitted spin current even when the bulk crystal itself is high-symmetry. The authors demonstrate the mechanism with both a minimal rotationally symmetric model and a realistic Dirac-semimetal heterostructure, showing that conventional CMOS-compatible spin-Hall materials can emit sizable out-of-plane spins without low-symmetry bulk crystals or external symmetry breaking.

What carries the argument

Interfacial noncollinear filtering: the mismatch between a low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field and the momentum-resolved bulk spin polarization produces spin-dependent transmission that converts symmetry-hidden bulk components into net unconventional emitted spin current.

What would settle it

Measure the out-of-plane spin polarization of the emitted current in a high-symmetry spin-Hall material (for example a Dirac-semimetal or ordinary heavy-metal stack) while deliberately varying interface chemistry or termination; the unconventional component should appear or vanish with the presence of the low-symmetry interfacial field, not with bulk crystal symmetry alone.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Emitted spin currents are bulk–interface hybrid responses. A low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field, noncollinear with the momentum-resolved bulk spin-Hall texture, filters hidden polarization components into an observable unconventional emitted spin current, so high-symmetry bulk sources can deliver sizable out-of-plane spins.

Load-bearing premise

Realistic interfaces must host a sufficiently strong, low-symmetry spin-orbit field that stays noncollinear with the bulk spin texture and is not washed out by disorder, interdiffusion, or reconstruction.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that the device-relevant quantity in spin-Hall heterostructures is not the fully symmetry-averaged bulk spin Hall current but the emitted spin current transmitted across the interface, and therefore treats emitted spin currents as bulk–interface hybrid responses. It proposes interfacial noncollinear filtering: a low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field, generally noncollinear with the momentum-resolved bulk spin polarization, imposes spin-dependent transmission that converts hidden bulk spin-Hall texture components into an observable unconventional (out-of-plane) emitted spin current. Using a rotationally symmetric minimal model and a realistic high-symmetry Dirac-semimetal model, the authors report that conventional spin Hall sources can emit sizable out-of-plane spin currents when those hidden textures are selectively transmitted by the interfacial field, offering a route to reprogram spin-current polarization without low-symmetry bulk crystals or external symmetry breaking.

Significance. If the filtering mechanism is robust under realistic interface conditions, the work would reframe spin-current polarization as a cooperative bulk–interface response and provide a practical strategy for generating unconventional spin polarizations in high-symmetry, CMOS-compatible spin-Hall materials. That is a meaningful conceptual and device-level contribution for spintronics. Credit is due for cleanly separating bulk spin-Hall textures (treated as inputs allowed by crystal symmetry, including hidden components) from the interfacial filter as a distinct physical ingredient, and for demonstrating the effect in both a minimal rotationally symmetric model and a material-motivated Dirac-semimetal model rather than only a single toy Hamiltonian.

major comments (3)
  1. The central device claim—that high-symmetry bulk sources emit sizable unconventional out-of-plane currents—rests on a low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field that is noncollinear with the incident momentum-resolved spin texture and strong enough to produce useful transmission contrast. The abstract asserts such a field is “generally” present at realistic heterostructure interfaces, but the manuscript must quantify the required field strength, angular misalignment, and resulting transmission contrast (e.g., thresholds or a phase diagram in the minimal model). Without those bounds it is unclear whether the reported “sizable” currents correspond to experimentally typical interface SOC scales or only to an optimistic clean-model regime.
  2. Disorder, interdiffusion, alloy scattering, and interface roughness are expected to degrade spin-dependent transmission contrast. Because the filtering channel closes if the interfacial field is washed out on the scale of the mean free path, the emitted polarization would then revert to the bulk-symmetry-allowed value. The manuscript should address robustness of interfacial noncollinear filtering against realistic interface disorder—at least via a scattering or mean-free-path estimate—since this is load-bearing for the claim of device-relevant unconventional emission rather than a clean-model artifact.
  3. For the realistic high-symmetry Dirac-semimetal model, the paper should make explicit which material parameters and interface crystallography are used, how the hidden bulk spin-Hall textures are obtained, and whether the out-of-plane emitted component remains sizable when the interface Hamiltonian is constrained by the actual residual symmetries of a plausible heterostructure stack (rather than an idealized low-symmetry filter imposed by hand). If the filter’s symmetry lowering is stronger than what a real epitaxial interface permits, the cross-model claim that conventional sources suffice needs to be qualified.
minor comments (4)
  1. Define “hidden” momentum-resolved spin-Hall components versus the fully symmetry-averaged bulk response early and with consistent notation, so that the bulk-input / interface-filter separation is unambiguous throughout.
  2. Quantify “sizable” for the out-of-plane emitted current (e.g., as a fraction of the conventional in-plane component or in absolute units) in both models so that the device claim can be compared across figures and to experiment.
  3. Clarify free parameters of the interfacial spin-orbit field (strength, orientation, range) and of each model Hamiltonian in a single place, and state which results are parameter-free consequences of the filtering mechanism versus which require tuning.
  4. If experimental interface SOC scales or prior heterostructure measurements are cited as motivation for the “generally present” claim, make the comparison to the model parameters explicit rather than qualitative.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the Referee for a careful and constructive report that correctly identifies the conditions under which interfacial noncollinear filtering can be device-relevant. The three major points—quantitative bounds on interfacial field strength and misalignment, robustness against interface disorder, and fidelity of the Dirac-semimetal demonstration to residual symmetries of a realistic stack—are load-bearing for the central claim. We agree that the present manuscript does not address them with sufficient clarity or quantification. Below we respond point by point and describe the revisions we will implement. These changes will bound the “sizable” regime, qualify the disorder window, and make the material/symmetry content of the realistic model fully explicit, without altering the conceptual separation of bulk spin-Hall textures from the interfacial filter.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central device claim—that high-symmetry bulk sources emit sizable unconventional out-of-plane currents—rests on a low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field that is noncollinear with the incident momentum-resolved spin texture and strong enough to produce useful transmission contrast. The abstract asserts such a field is “generally” present at realistic heterostructure interfaces, but the manuscript must quantify the required field strength, angular misalignment, and resulting transmission contrast (e.g., thresholds or a phase diagram in the minimal model). Without those bounds it is unclear whether the reported “sizable” currents correspond to experimentally typical interface SOC scales or only to an optimistic clean-model regime.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript currently lacks systematic bounds on the interfacial field and that the word “generally” in the abstract is therefore under-supported. In the revision we will add a parameter study of the minimal rotationally symmetric model that maps the emitted out-of-plane spin current and the spin-dependent transmission contrast versus (i) interfacial SOC strength (relative to bulk hopping and Fermi energy) and (ii) the angular misalignment between the interfacial spin-orbit field and the momentum-resolved bulk spin polarization. The results will be presented as contour plots or a phase diagram that identifies the region in which the unconventional component becomes a sizable fraction of the conventional emitted current. We will also compare the required interfacial SOC scale with values reported for common metal/oxide and metal/semimetal interfaces so that readers can judge experimental accessibility. The abstract and main text will be reworded to replace the unqualified “generally” with a statement conditioned on these bounds. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Disorder, interdiffusion, alloy scattering, and interface roughness are expected to degrade spin-dependent transmission contrast. Because the filtering channel closes if the interfacial field is washed out on the scale of the mean free path, the emitted polarization would then revert to the bulk-symmetry-allowed value. The manuscript should address robustness of interfacial noncollinear filtering against realistic interface disorder—at least via a scattering or mean-free-path estimate—since this is load-bearing for the claim of device-relevant unconventional emission rather than a clean-model artifact.

    Authors: The Referee is correct that the present clean-interface treatment leaves open whether the filtering channel survives realistic disorder, and that this is load-bearing for any device claim. A full microscopic simulation of roughness, interdiffusion, and alloy scattering lies beyond the scope of this work. We will, however, add a dedicated discussion that supplies at least a scattering/mean-free-path estimate: we will introduce controlled lifetime broadening (or a simple transfer-matrix treatment with random interfacial potentials) and identify the regime in which the interfacial SOC energy remains larger than the disorder scale and the interface stays coherent over the relevant Fermi-wavelength length. We will state explicitly that strong interdiffusion or amorphous interfaces are expected to restore the bulk-symmetry-allowed polarization, so that the mechanism is most relevant to epitaxial or otherwise well-defined interfaces. This qualification will appear in the abstract, discussion, and conclusions so that the device claim is not overstated. revision: partial

  3. Referee: For the realistic high-symmetry Dirac-semimetal model, the paper should make explicit which material parameters and interface crystallography are used, how the hidden bulk spin-Hall textures are obtained, and whether the out-of-plane emitted component remains sizable when the interface Hamiltonian is constrained by the actual residual symmetries of a plausible heterostructure stack (rather than an idealized low-symmetry filter imposed by hand). If the filter’s symmetry lowering is stronger than what a real epitaxial interface permits, the cross-model claim that conventional sources suffice needs to be qualified.

    Authors: We agree that the Dirac-semimetal section must be fully transparent about parameters, the origin of the hidden textures, and the residual symmetries of the interface. In the revision we will (i) list the concrete bulk Hamiltonian parameters and the material class they represent, (ii) document how the momentum-resolved bulk spin-Hall textures—including the hidden components—are obtained from the bulk response before any interface is introduced, and (iii) replace or supplement the hand-imposed low-symmetry filter with an interface Hamiltonian whose residual symmetries match those of a plausible epitaxial stack (e.g., a high-symmetry crystallographic face against a metal or insulator that preserves a subset of bulk mirrors/rotations while still permitting a noncollinear interfacial field). We will recompute the emitted out-of-plane current under that constrained interface. If the unconventional component is reduced but finite we will report the reduced magnitude; if it vanishes under the residual symmetries of the most natural stacks we will qualify the claim that conventional sources alone suffice and note that controlled interfacial symmetry lowering remains necessary. Either outcome will be stated clearly. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • A quantitative, material-specific microscopic treatment of interface roughness, interdiffusion, and alloy scattering that would fully settle experimental transmission contrast is beyond the present theoretical scope; only estimates and qualitative bounds will be provided.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: bulk spin-Hall textures are independent inputs and interfacial filtering is a separate physical mechanism, not a redefinition of the target.

full rationale

The paper treats momentum-resolved bulk spin Hall textures (including hidden components allowed by crystal symmetry) as inputs from established bulk response theory, and introduces interfacial noncollinear spin-orbit filtering as a distinct transmission mechanism that converts those hidden components into an observable unconventional emitted current. The minimal and Dirac-semimetal model calculations are self-contained demonstrations of that hybrid bulk–interface response; they do not fit a parameter to the unconventional polarization and then re-label the fit as a prediction, nor do they rest on a load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz imported solely from the authors’ prior work. Self-citations, if any, are not required to force the central claim. The result is therefore not equivalent to its inputs by construction. Residual scientific risk (whether realistic interfaces host a sufficiently strong, noncollinear, disorder-robust SOC field) is a correctness/assumption issue, not circularity. Score 0 is the honest finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

Abstract-only audit. Free parameters and invented entities cannot be enumerated from equations that are not provided. The claim rests on standard spin-orbit and spin-Hall physics plus the domain assumption that interfaces generically supply a low-symmetry, noncollinear spin-orbit field strong enough to filter hidden bulk textures. No new particle or force is introduced; the 'emitted spin current' is a redefined observable, not a new entity. Full free-parameter count (interface potential strength, scattering rates, model hoppings) would require the manuscript body.

free parameters (2)
  • interfacial spin-orbit field strength and orientation
    The filtering mechanism requires a low-symmetry interfacial SO field noncollinear with bulk spin textures; its magnitude and direction are not fixed by the abstract and would typically be model inputs or fitted to interface chemistry.
  • model Hamiltonian parameters (minimal and Dirac-semimetal)
    Both the rotationally symmetric minimal model and the realistic Dirac-semimetal model require hoppings, spin-orbit couplings, and interface potentials whose values are not stated in the abstract and control the size of the emitted out-of-plane current.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Bulk spin Hall currents possess momentum-resolved spin textures that can include components that cancel under full Brillouin-zone averaging (hidden textures).
    Required for the interface to 'convert hidden components into an observable unconventional emitted spin current'; standard in modern spin-Hall texture literature but not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption Realistic heterostructure interfaces host a low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field generally noncollinear with the incident bulk spin polarization.
    Load-bearing premise of the filtering mechanism; treated as generally true for interfaces but not independently established in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Spin-dependent transmission across the interface is controlled by the interfacial spin-orbit field such that noncollinear components are selectively transmitted.
    Core dynamical assumption linking interface SO field to emitted spin current; standard scattering/spin-filtering physics assumed without full derivation in the abstract.
  • standard math Crystal symmetry fixes the fully averaged bulk spin Hall polarization.
    Standard group-theory constraint on bulk linear response; used as the baseline the interface is said to bypass.
invented entities (1)
  • interfacial noncollinear filtering (as a named mechanism)
    purpose: Names the process by which a noncollinear interfacial SO field converts hidden bulk spin-Hall textures into unconventional emitted spin current.
    Not a new particle or force; it is a coined mechanism label for a combination of known bulk textures and interface SO scattering. Independent experimental handle would be interface-tuned spin-torque polarization measurements, which the abstract does not report.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Interfacial Noncollinear Filtering of Spin Hall Currents." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DDRJERW5

@misc{pith2026260705912,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Interfacial Noncollinear Filtering of Spin Hall Currents},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DDRJERW5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.05912}
}
read the original abstract

Spin Hall currents generated in nonmagnetic materials are conventionally regarded as bulk responses whose polarization is fixed by crystal symmetry. This view has motivated the search for intrinsically low-symmetry spin sources when unconventional spin polarizations are required. Here we point out that, in realistic heterostructures, the device-relevant quantity is not the fully symmetry-averaged bulk spin Hall current, but the emitted spin current transmitted across the interface. We therefore establish emitted spin currents as bulk-interface hybrid responses and propose interfacial noncollinear filtering as a mechanism to bypass the bulk-symmetry constraint. A low-symmetry interfacial spin-orbit field, generally noncollinear with the momentum-resolved spin polarization of the incident spin Hall current, imposes spin-dependent transmission and converts hidden momentum-resolved spin-polarization components into an observable unconventional emitted spin current. Using both a rotationally symmetric minimal model and a realistic high-symmetry Dirac-semimetal model, we show that conventional spin Hall sources can emit sizable out-of-plane spin currents when their hidden bulk spin Hall textures are selectively transmitted by the interfacial spin-orbit field. Our results reveal that spin-current polarization emerges from the cooperative action of bulk and interfacial responses, providing a strategy for reprogramming spin-current polarization in high-efficiency, CMOS-compatible spin Hall materials without relying on intrinsically low-symmetry bulk crystals or external symmetry-breaking schemes.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    II E and II F of the Supplemental Material ) [36]

    [52–54] may allow ultra-strong interfacial filtering(see Sec. II E and II F of the Supplemental Material ) [36] . Using ferroelectric 2D materials as the capping layer further offers the electric-tunable interfacial filtering, since the spin -orbit textures of these materials can be reversed by ferroelectric switching [55– 57]. Overall, our work challenge...

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    E. Y. Tsymbal and I. Žutić, editors, Spintronics Handbook, Second Edition: Spin Transport and Magnetism: Volume Three: Nanoscale Spintronics and Applications , 2nd ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    J. E. Hirsch, Spin Hall Effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 , 1834 (1999)

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    G. Y. Guo, Y. Yao, and Q. Niu, Ab initio Calculation of the Intrinsic Spin Hall Effect in Semiconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 226601 (2005)

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Jungwirth, J

    T. Jungwirth, J. Wunderlich, and K. Olejník, Spin Hall effect devices, Nature Mater 11, 382 (2012)

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Sinova, S

    J. Sinova, S. O. Valenzuela, J. Wunderlich, C. H. Back, and T. Jungwirth, Spin Hall effects, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1213 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Manchon, J

    A. Manchon, J. Železný, I. M. Miron, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, A. Thiaville, K. Garello, and P. Gambardella, Current-induced spin- orbit torques in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 035004 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Fukami, T

    S. Fukami, T. Anekawa, C. Zhang, and H. Ohno, A spin– orbit torque switching scheme with collinear magnetic easy axis and current configuration, Nature Nanotech 11 , 621 (2016)

    work page 2016

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Zhu, Switching of Perpendicular Magnetization by Spin–Orbit Torque, Adv

    L. Zhu, Switching of Perpendicular Magnetization by Spin–Orbit Torque, Adv. Mater 35, 2300853 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Zhang, Z.-A

    S.-S. Zhang, Z.-A. Wang, B. Li, W.-J. Lu, M. Tian, Y.-P. Sun, H. Du, and D. -F. Shao, Deterministic Switching of the Néel Vector by Asymmetric Spin Torque, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 096702 (2026)

    2026

  3. [11]

    I. M. Miron, K. Garello, G. Gaudin, P.-J. Zermatten, M. V. Costache, S. Auffret, S. Bandiera, B. Rodmacq, A. Schuhl, and P. Gambardella, Perpendicular switching of a single ferromagnetic layer induced by in-plane current injection, Nature 476, 189 (2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    L. Liu, O. J. Lee, T. J. Gudmundsen, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Current -Induced Switching of Perpendicularly Magnetized Magnetic Layers Using Spin Torque from the Spin Hall Effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 096602 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Liu, C.-F

    L. Liu, C.-F. Pai, Y. Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Spin-Torque Switching with the Giant Spin Hall Effect of Tantalum, Science 336, 555 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    Oh et al., Field -free switching of perpendicular magnetization through spin– orbit torque in antiferromagnet/ferromagnet/oxide structures, Nature Nanotech 11, 878 (2016)

    Y.-W. Oh et al., Field -free switching of perpendicular magnetization through spin– orbit torque in antiferromagnet/ferromagnet/oxide structures, Nature Nanotech 11, 878 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Fukami, C

    S. Fukami, C. Zhang, S. DuttaGupta, A. Kurenkov, and H. Ohno, Magnetization switching by spin–orbit torque in an antiferromagnet–ferromagnet bilayer system, Nature Mater 15, 535 (2016)

    2016

  8. [16]

    Yu et al., Switching of perpendicular magnetization by spin–orbit torques in the absence of external magnetic fields, Nature Nanotech 9, 548 (2014)

    G. Yu et al., Switching of perpendicular magnetization by spin–orbit torques in the absence of external magnetic fields, Nature Nanotech 9, 548 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    Cai et al., Electric field control of deterministic current- induced magnetization switching in a hybrid ferromagnetic/ferroelectric structure, Nature Mater 16, 712 (2017)

    K. Cai et al., Electric field control of deterministic current- induced magnetization switching in a hybrid ferromagnetic/ferroelectric structure, Nature Mater 16, 712 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    L. You, O. Lee, D. Bhowmik, D. Labanowski, J. Hong, J. Bokor, and S. Salahuddin, Switching of perpendicularly polarized nanomagnets with spin orbit torque without an external magnetic field by engineering a tilted anisotropy, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 10310 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Wang et al., Field -free switching of a perpendicular magnetic tunnel junction through the interplay of spin – orbit and spin-transfer torques, Nat Electron 1, 582 (2018)

    M. Wang et al., Field -free switching of a perpendicular magnetic tunnel junction through the interplay of spin – orbit and spin-transfer torques, Nat Electron 1, 582 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    V. P. Amin, J. Zemen, and M. D. Stiles, Interface- Generated Spin Currents, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 , 136805 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    S. C. Baek, V. P. Amin, Y.- W. Oh, G. Go, S. -J. Lee, G.- H. Lee, K.-J. Kim, M. D. Stiles, B.-G. Park, and K.-J. Lee, Spin currents and spin –orbit torques in ferromagnetic trilayers, Nature Mater 17, 509 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    Liu et al., Current -induced magnetization switching in all-oxide heterostructures, Nat

    L. Liu et al., Current -induced magnetization switching in all-oxide heterostructures, Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 939 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    MacNeill, G

    D. MacNeill, G. M. Stiehl, M. H. D. Guimaraes, R. A. Buhrman, J. Park, and D. C. Ralph, Control of spin– orbit torques through crystal symmetry in WTe 2/ferromagnet bilayers, Nature Phys 13, 300 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Nan et al., Controlling spin current polarization through non-collinear antiferromagnetism, Nat Commun 11, 4671 (2020)

    T. Nan et al., Controlling spin current polarization through non-collinear antiferromagnetism, Nat Commun 11, 4671 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    Chen et al., Observation of the antiferromagnetic spin Hall effect, Nat

    X. Chen et al., Observation of the antiferromagnetic spin Hall effect, Nat. Mater. 20, 800 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Hu et al., Efficient perpendicular magnetization switching by a magnetic spin Hall effect in a noncollinear antiferromagnet, Nat Commun 13, 4447 (2022)

    S. Hu et al., Efficient perpendicular magnetization switching by a magnetic spin Hall effect in a noncollinear antiferromagnet, Nat Commun 13, 4447 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Bose et al., Tilted spin current generated by the collinear antiferromagnet ruthenium dioxide, Nat Electron 5, 267 (2022)

    A. Bose et al., Tilted spin current generated by the collinear antiferromagnet ruthenium dioxide, Nat Electron 5, 267 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Liu et al., Field -free switching of perpendicular magnetization at room temperature using out -of-plane spins from TaIrTe4, Nat Electron 6, 732 (2023)

    Y. Liu et al., Field -free switching of perpendicular magnetization at room temperature using out -of-plane spins from TaIrTe4, Nat Electron 6, 732 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Zhang et al., Room temperature field-free switching of perpendicular magnetization through spin- orbit torque originating from low -symmetry type II Weyl semimetal, Sci

    Y. Zhang et al., Room temperature field-free switching of perpendicular magnetization through spin- orbit torque originating from low -symmetry type II Weyl semimetal, Sci. Adv. 9, eadg9819 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    L. Liu, T. Zhao, W. Lin, X. Shu, J. Zhou, Z. Zheng, H. Chen, L. Jia, and J. Chen, Symmetry breaking for current- induced magnetization switching, Appl. Phys. Rev. 10 , 021319 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    C.-F. Pai, L. Liu, Y. Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Spin transfer torque devices utilizing the giant spin Hall effect of tungsten, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 122404 (2012)

    2012

  24. [32]

    P. M. Haney, H.-W. Lee, K.-J. Lee, A. Manchon, and M. D. Stiles, Current induced torques and interfacial spin- orbit coupling: Semiclassical modeling, Phys. Rev. B 87, 174411 (2013). 7

    2013

  25. [33]

    V. P. Amin and M. D. Stiles, Spin transport at interfaces with spin -orbit coupling: Formalism, Phys. Rev. B 94, 104419 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Johansson, Theory of spin and orbital Edelstein effects, J

    A. Johansson, Theory of spin and orbital Edelstein effects, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 36, 423002 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    González- Hernández, P

    R. González- Hernández, P. Ritzinger, K. Výborný, J. Železný, and A. Manchon, Non -relativistic torque and Edelstein effect in non -collinear magnets, Nat Commun 15, 7663 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Leiva-Montecinos, J

    S. Leiva-Montecinos, J. Henk, I. Mertig, and A. Johansson, Spin and orbital Edelstein effect in a bilayer system with Rashba interaction, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043294 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    See Supplemental Material for symmetry analysis of the spin Hall tensor and interfacial Edelstein susceptibility, derivations of the spin-dependent transmission probability and normalized emitted spin current, additional numerical results for interfacial s pin-orbit filtering,...

  30. [38]

    Yu. A. Bychkov and E. I. Rashba, Properties of a 2D electron gas with lifted spectral degeneracy, JETP Lett. 39, 78 (1984)

    1984

  31. [39]

    Bihlmayer, P

    G. Bihlmayer, P. Noël, D. V. Vyalikh, E. V. Chulkov, and A. Manchon, Rashba -like physics in condensed matter, Nat Rev Phys 4, 642 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Manchon, H

    A. Manchon, H. C. Koo, J. Nitta, S. M. Frolov, and R. A. Duine, New perspectives for Rashba spin –orbit coupling, Nature Mater 14, 871 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Fu, Hexagonal Warping Effects in the Surface States of the Topological Insulator Bi 2Te3, Phys

    L. Fu, Hexagonal Warping Effects in the Surface States of the Topological Insulator Bi 2Te3, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 266801 (2009)

    2009

  34. [42]

    He et al., Observation of Out -of-Plane Spin Texture in a SrTiO3(111) Two-Dimensional Electron Gas, Phys

    P. He et al., Observation of Out -of-Plane Spin Texture in a SrTiO3(111) Two-Dimensional Electron Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 266802 (2018)

    2018

  35. [43]

    Sugimoto, Y

    S. Sugimoto, Y. Araki, Y. K. Takahashi, J. Ieda, and S. Kasai, Symmetry -reduced topological interface for unleashing a multidirectional spin -orbit torque, Commun Phys 8, 100 (2025)

    2025

  36. [44]

    B. A. Bernevig, T. L. Hughes, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum Spin Hall Effect and Topological Phase Transition in HgTe Quantum Wells, Science 314, 1757 (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    Gambardella and I

    P. Gambardella and I. M. Miron, Current -induced spin– orbit torques, Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 369 , 3175 (2011)

    2011

  38. [46]

    P. V. Lukashev, A. L. Wysocki, J. P. Velev, M. van Schilfgaarde, S. S. Jaswal, K. D. Belashchenko, and E. Y. Tsymbal, Spin filtering with EuO: Insight from the complex band structure, Phys. Rev. B 85, 224414 (2012)

    2012

  39. [47]

    T. S. Santos and J. S. Moodera, Observation of spin filtering with a ferromagnetic EuO tunnel barrier, Phys. Rev. B 69, 241203 (2004)

    2004

  40. [48]

    D. Xiao, W. Yao, and Q. Niu, Valley-Contrasting Physics in Graphene: Magnetic Moment and Topological Transport, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 236809 (2007)

    2007

  41. [49]

    Zhang, D.-F

    S.-H. Zhang, D.-F. Shao, Z.-A. Wang, J. Yang, W. Yang, and E. Y. Tsymbal, Tunneling Valley Hall Effect Driven by Tilted Dirac Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 , 246301 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    D. Go, D. Jo, C. Kim, and H. -W. Lee, Intrinsic Spin and Orbital Hall Effects from Orbital Texture, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 086602 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    Fukami, K

    S. Fukami, K. -J. Lee, and M. Kläui, Challenges and opportunities in orbitronics, Nat. Phys. 1 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    Chen et al., submitted

    H. Chen et al., submitted

  45. [53]

    Xiao, G.-B

    D. Xiao, G.-B. Liu, W. Feng, X. Xu, and W. Yao, Coupled Spin and Valley Physics in Monolayers of MoS 2 and Other Group-VI Dichalcogenides, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 196802 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    J. M. Lu, O. Zheliuk, I. Leermakers, N. F. Q. Yuan, U. Zeitler, K. T. Law, and J. T. Ye, Evidence for two - dimensional Ising superconductivity in gated MoS2, Science 350, 1353 (2015)

    2015

  47. [55]

    Y.-T. Hsu, A. Vaezi, M. H. Fischer, and E. -A. Kim, Topological superconductivity in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenides, Nat Commun 8, 14985 (2017)

    2017

  48. [56]

    L. L. Tao and E. Y. Tsymbal, Perspectives of spin-textured ferroelectrics, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 54, 113001 (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    C. Wang, L. You, D. Cobden, and J. Wang, Towards two- dimensional van der Waals ferroelectrics, Nat. Mater. 22 , 542 (2023)

    2023

  50. [58]

    Xue, J.-H

    F. Xue, J.-H. He, and X. Zhang, Emerging van der Waals ferroelectrics: Unique properties and novel devices, Appl. Phys. Rev. 8, 021316 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Yang and N

    B.-J. Yang and N. Nagaosa, Classification of stable three- dimensional Dirac semimetals with nontrivial topology, Nat Commun 5, 4898 (2014)

    2014

  52. [60]

    Hashimoto, S

    T. Hashimoto, S. Kobayashi, Y. Tanaka, and M. Sato, Superconductivity in doped Dirac semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 94, 014510 (2016)

    2016

  53. [61]

    Taguchi, D

    K. Taguchi, D. Oshima, Y. Yamaguchi, T. Hashimoto, Y. Tanaka, and M. Sato, Spin Hall conductivity in topological Dirac semimetals, Phys. Rev. B 101, 235201 (2020). 8 End matter Here w e test the interfacial noncollinear filtering mechanism using a realistic high-symmetry mater...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed July 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.