Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 31 references

Tuning Single-Atom Electron Spin Resonance in a Vector-Magnetic Field

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Single-atom electron spin resonance can be driven entirely by the magnetic stray field of the scanning tunneling microscope tip, with zero external magnetic field applied.

desk verdict Zero-field single-atom ESR is convincingly demonstrated; quantitative tip-field calibration and Rabi-rate extraction are softer than the main text suggests. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.11061 v1 pith:YVCIAWOO submitted 2019-08-29 cond-mat.mes-hall

Philip Willke , Aparajita Singha , Xue Zhang , Taner Esat , Christopher P. Lutz , Andreas J. Heinrich , Taeyoung Choi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords scanningtunnelingmicroscopyelectronspinresonancesingleatomvectormagneticfieldFeonMgOtip-fieldsweepRabiratezeroexternal
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

The paper establishes that electron spin resonance of a single atom on a surface can be driven by the magnetic stray field of the spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscope tip alone, with no external magnetic field. Using a two-dimensional vector magnet, the authors map how the resonance frequency and signal amplitude respond to out-of-plane and in-plane external fields, and they show that moving the tip closer to the atom strengthens the tip field, increases the Rabi rate by roughly an order of magnitude over earlier Fe ESR experiments, and shifts the resonance. They convert this shift into a measurement mode: sweeping the tip-to-sample conductance at a fixed radio frequency produces a tip-field sweep. A sympathetic reader would care because, if the claim holds, single-atom ESR becomes practical in commercial STM systems that lack external magnets and at a single fixed frequency.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the paper's Eq. (1), $f_0 = (2\mu_{\mathrm{Fe}}/h)(B_z^{\mathrm{ext}} + B_z^{\mathrm{tip}})$, which makes the resonance frequency a direct readout of the sum of the external out-of-plane field and the $z$-component of the spin-polarized tip's stray field. The experimental trick is that $B_z^{\mathrm{tip}}$ is proportional to the tunneling setpoint current, so a constant-frequency sweep of the conductance is a sweep of the magnetic field. On the driving side, the exchange-coupling model gives a Rabi rate proportional to the tip field gradient, hence $\Omega/V_{\mathrm{RF}} \propto B_z^{\mathrm{tip}}$, which explains both the enhanced driving at close approach and the use of the tip field as the only source of Zeeman splitting.

What would settle it

At zero external field, record the tunneling current at which the ESR resonance appears for several fixed radio frequencies, then repeat with a small known external field such as 50 mT and compare the implied $B_z^{\mathrm{tip}}(I)$ relation across the full 100-500 pA range; if the relation is not linear or disagrees with the paper's 0.85 mT/pA conversion factor, the constant-frequency tip-field sweep is not a true field sweep.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For individual Fe atoms on two atomic layers of MgO on Ag(001), the resonance condition is $f_0 = (2\mu_{\mathrm{Fe}}/h)(B_z^{\mathrm{ext}} + B_z^{\mathrm{tip}})$, with the iron magnetic moment extracted as $\mu_{\mathrm{Fe}} = (5.35 \pm 0.14)\,\mu_B$, independent of the in-plane field. The stray field from the spin-polarized tip, $B_z^{\mathrm{tip}}$, grows linearly with tunneling conductance, and the normalized Rabi rate $\Omega/V_{\mathrm{RF}}$ grows with it, reaching values about an order of magnitude larger than in previous Fe ESR-STM work. The paper demonstrates ESR at zero external magnetic field by using the tip field for the Zeeman splitting, and it shows a constant-frequency mode in which the setpoint current is swept to sweep the tip field across a range equivalent to roughly 40 GHz of frequency. It also finds that a large in-plane external field improves the ESR peak amplitude, with a maximum near $B_{\parallel}^{\mathrm{ext}} \approx \pm 1.5$ T.

Load-bearing premise

The tip's magnetic field is assumed to be a single-valued, monotonic, and nearly linear function of the setpoint tunneling current over the entire sweep, with that relation calibrated from one 50 mT offset measurement; if the tip's magnetization or its magnetic interaction with the atom changes nonlinearly as the tip gets close, the field axis and the zero-field resonance assignment become distorted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ESR-STM no longer requires an external magnet: the tip's own field can provide the Zeeman splitting, so the technique can run in STM systems that have no vector magnet.
  • Measurements can be performed at one fixed radio frequency, relaxing the need for broadband RF cabling and allowing the field to be swept faster by changing the tip current rather than the generator frequency.
  • The tip-field sweep covers roughly 300 mT of field, equivalent to a frequency window of about 40 GHz, so a single sweep captures a much wider resonance range than a frequency sweep at fixed field.
  • Bringing the tip closer increases the Rabi rate by about an order of magnitude for Fe atoms, because the tip field gradient and exchange coupling grow with conductance.
  • An in-plane external field around $\pm 1.5$ T maximizes the ESR amplitude, but zero in-plane field is workable when the tip field is strong enough.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the linear tip-field calibration survives closer approach, the constant-frequency tip-field sweep could be used as an atomic-scale field scanner to map the stray fields of other magnetic nanostructures without any external magnet.
  • The same tip-field driving mechanism should apply to other high-anisotropy atomic spins on polar insulating films, not just Fe, whenever a magnetic exchange interaction couples tip and atom strongly enough.
  • Because the sweep axis is the tip-sample distance, this mode couples ESR spectroscopy to topographic feedback, suggesting an automated route to spin-resonance mapping across a surface at fixed RF frequency.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a systematic electron spin resonance (ESR-STM) study of single Fe atoms on MgO/Ag(001) using a spin-polarized STM tip and a vector magnet that provides both out-of-plane and in-plane external fields. The authors measure the resonance frequency as a function of the out-of-plane external field at several in-plane fields, extract a constant Fe moment of (5.35 ± 0.14) Bohr magnetons consistent with prior work, and characterize how the ESR peak amplitude depends on both field components. They then show that increasing the tunneling conductance, which strengthens the tip's stray field, improves the ESR driving efficiency and permits ESR at zero in-plane field. The central demonstration is single-atom ESR at zero external magnetic field, in which the tip field alone provides the Zeeman splitting; this is shown both in frequency sweeps and in constant-frequency conductance sweeps that are converted to a tip-field axis claimed to span roughly 300 mT. The authors conclude that these operating modes eliminate the external-magnet requirement and enable fixed-frequency ESR, potentially broadening the accessibility of ESR-STM.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a significant experimental advance: zero-field single-atom ESR and fixed-frequency tip-field sweeps are new operating modes for ESR-STM, and the demonstration in a commercial microscope is an enabling step for the wider community. The paper's strengths are that the core observations are direct and internally consistent: the externally calibrated Fe moment agrees with previous determinations, the ESR shift is linear in both external and tip fields, and a 50 mT control measurement confirms the spin origin of the zero-field resonance. The core claim is also falsifiable: single-atom ESR should be observable at zero external field in any STM with a spin-polarized tip whose stray field exceeds the resonance linewidth. The authors are candid about the main ambiguities, explicitly stating that the peak-amplitude trend is not yet attributable to a single mechanism and that a crystal-field driving mechanism cannot be excluded. These strengths make the qualitative zero-field demonstration credible; the quantitative claims concerning the calibrated sweep axis and the order-of-magnitude Rabi-rate enhancement require the revision described below.

major comments (3)
  1. [SI §8 and Fig. 4b] The quantitative x-axis of the constant-frequency tip-field sweeps rests on a single calibration point: at B_z^ext = 50 mT and f = 19 GHz the resonance shifts by (58.7 ± 2.1) pA, giving (0.85 ± 0.03) mT/pA, and the current-to-field conversion then assumes 'a full linear scaling across the whole current range' (SI §8). This assumption is in tension with SI §6, which states that 'not all measurements extrapolate to zero tip-field for zero conductance,' 'likely caused by a non-linear contribution of B_z^tip(σ).' The supporting linearity evidence, the 'almost perfect linear evolution' of the resonant current with frequency in Fig. S6c, is given without a goodness-of-fit statistic or residual analysis, and the moment extracted from that curve, (4.29 ± 0.79) μB, is consistent with the external-field value only within a large (≈18%) uncertainty. Because the claimed ~300 mT sweep range and its equivalent ~40 GHz frequency window are quantitative selling points of the new method, the authors should either calibrate the sweep at several external fields spanning the full current range, report separate slope and intercept for B_z^tip(σ) with uncertainties, or attach the calibration uncertainty to the stated range and reword the 'full linear scaling' assumption.
  2. [SI §5, Eq. (S5), and Fig. 3c] The Rabi rates in Fig. 3c and the claim that Ω is 'approximately one order of magnitude higher than previous experiments' rest on a chain of T1 and T2 estimates whose systematic uncertainties are not propagated into the displayed error bars. T1 is measured by pump-probe only at B_z^ext ≥ 0.4 T and is extrapolated to ESR conditions using a slope of ~46 μs/T derived, by the authors' own description, from measurements at only two field values (SI §3); it is then rescaled for the tunnel-current dependence using a factor of 3.5 per 50 pA measured at a single field and tip condition, and for the bias voltage by factors of 3, 10, and 35 whose derivation is not shown (SI §5, Table 1). T2 is computed with the decoherence probability set to P_T2 = 1 'for the sake of simplicity,' while Ref. [10] used 0.7. These choices can shift Ω/V_RF by factors well beyond the plotted error bars; a sensitivity analysis (e.g., Ω for the plausible range of the T1 scaling factors and for P_T2 = 0.7) is needed before the order-of-magnitude enhancement claim is accepted.
  3. [Main text, Fig. 3c] The statement that 'the two proportionalities Ω ∝ σ and B_z^tip ∝ σ found here imply Ω ∝ B_z^tip' is stronger than the data support. Several of the B_z^tip(σ) datasets in SI Fig. S5 have nonzero intercepts, as SI §6 acknowledges, so the data establish at most an affine relation B_z^tip ≈ aσ + b, and an offset in that relation changes the inferred dependence of Ω on B_z^tip. To justify the inference that underpins the exchange-mechanism discussion in SI §7, the intercepts of the fits should be reported with uncertainties and shown to be consistent with zero, or the argument should be restated in terms of the measured affine relation. The authors' own caveat that a crystal-field mechanism cannot be excluded is appropriate, but as written the Ω ∝ B_z^tip claim in the main text goes beyond the presented fits.
minor comments (6)
  1. [SI §3] The slope of the T1-versus-field relation is given as '~ 46 μμs/T,' which appears to be a typesetting error for ~46 μs/T; please correct the unit.
  2. [SI §5, Table 1] The bias-voltage T1 reduction factors (3, 10, and 35 for 8, 20, and 60 mV) are asserted without derivation or a specific pointer to the measurements in Refs. [7, 10, 28] from which they are estimated; an equation or a short description would make the Rabi-rate estimation reproducible.
  3. [Fig. 4b caption vs SI §8] The bias voltage for the tip-field sweeps is given as V_DC = 50 mV in the Fig. 4b caption but as V_DC = 30 mV in SI §8 (where it is also used to convert current to conductance); the values should be reconciled.
  4. [SI §8] The background subtraction of the current-sweep spectra uses a 'rescaled' 1 GHz spectrum, but the rescaling parameters (scale factor and any offset) are not specified; please provide them for reproducibility.
  5. [Fig. 2d] Tip #1 and tip #2 were measured at different RF voltages (15 mV vs 22 mV), so the absolute ESR amplitudes between the two tips are not directly comparable; the caption or text should note that the field dependence should be read within each tip series.
  6. [SI §7] Eq. (S8) is identical to Eq. (S7), so the displayed derivation of the Rabi force is incomplete; the intended intermediate step, in which the exponential form J(z) = J0 exp(-z/l) is inserted and differentiated to obtain F_J = -g μB B_z^tip(z)/l, is missing.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's central claims are experimental observations, and the cited prior results are used as inputs or comparisons, not as a self-referential derivation of the claimed outcomes.

full rationale

The paper's main claims are experimental: ESR amplitude dependence on vector fields is measured, tip-field sweeps are demonstrated, and zero-field ESR driven by the tip field is observed. The resonance relation f0 = (2 mu_Fe / h)(Bz_ext + Bz_tip) is a standard Zeeman form, and the extracted mu_Fe is checked against independent prior values. The tip-field sweep axis in Fig. 4b is calibrated from a single 50 mT shift and extended by a stated linear-scaling assumption; the SI itself acknowledges that 'not all measurements extrapolate to zero tip-field for zero conductance. This is likely caused by a non-linear contribution of Bz_tip(sigma).' That is an honest calibration limitation, not a circular derivation. The estimates of T1 and T2 used to convert saturation data into Rabi rates come from earlier papers (Refs. 7, 10, 28), but those are external inputs for the present quantitative analysis, not the paper's predicted results. Similarly, the proportionality Omega proportional to Bz_tip is derived from prior exchange-mechanism work, and the authors explicitly state that 'we cannot fully exclude the possibility of a crystal field driving mechanism as originally proposed in Ref. (7),' so the driving mechanism is not presented as forced by their own definition. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no central claim reduces by construction to an input or to a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on established single-atom ESR phenomenology, on calibration parameters measured in this work, and on one linearity assumption specific to the zero-field sweep mode. No new physical entities are introduced; the tip field and Fe spin pre-exist the work.

free parameters (3)
  • Bias-voltage T1 scaling factors = 3, 10, 35 (for 8, 20, 60 mV)
    Applied in SI section 5 to correct pump-probe T1 values to ESR conditions. They dominate the estimated T1 and hence the extracted Rabi rate but are not propagated into the final error bars.
  • Tip-field-to-current conversion factor = 0.85 +- 0.03 mT/pA
    Measured at a 50 mT field offset and assumed linear across the full zero-field sweep range (SI section 8). It sets the reported ~300 mT field scale and the Fe moment extracted from the zero-field sweep.
  • Slope of T1 versus B_z^ext = ~46 us/T
    Estimated from two pump-probe points in SI section 3 and used to map T1 from high B_z to the ESR regime, contributing to the Rabi-rate estimates.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Resonance frequency f0 = 2 mu_Fe/h (B_z^ext + B_z^tip) with the Fe moment fixed along z
    Used as Eq. (1). It is inherited from the strong out-of-plane anisotropy of Fe/MgO; the paper shows slope consistency but does not re-derive it.
  • standard math Steady-state Bloch/Lorentzian lineshape and saturation formula I_peak = I_sat * Phi(Omega)
    Used to extract V_1/2 and Rabi rates (main text Eq. (2), SI Eq. S3).
  • domain assumption T2 = e/(P_T2 * I) with P_T2 = 1 assumed
    Used in SI section 5 to estimate T2. The P_T2 = 1 simplification is a worst-case choice relative to P_T2 = 0.7 in Ref. 10.
  • domain assumption Exchange interaction J(z) = J0 exp(-z/l) and the Rabi-force derivation of Lado et al.
    Underlies the inference Omega proportional to B_z^tip in SI section 7. The authors note that the electric-field driving alternative is not excluded.
  • ad hoc to paper B_z^tip scales linearly with tunneling conductance across the whole current sweep
    Assumed for zero-field constant-frequency sweeps in SI section 8 so that the current axis can be translated into a tip-field axis. Calibrated at one offset field.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tuning Single-Atom Electron Spin Resonance in a Vector-Magnetic Field." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YVCIAWOO

@misc{pith2026190811061,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tuning Single-Atom Electron Spin Resonance in a Vector-Magnetic Field},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YVCIAWOO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.11061}
}
abstract

Spin resonance of single spin centers bears great potential for chemical structure analysis, quantum sensing and quantum coherent manipulation. Essential for these experiments is the presence of a two-level spin system whose energy splitting can be chosen by applying a magnetic field. In recent years, a combination of electron spin resonance (ESR) and scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) has been demonstrated as a technique to detect magnetic properties of single atoms on surfaces and to achieve sub-${\mu}$eV energy resolution. Nevertheless, up to now the role of the required magnetic fields has not been elucidated. Here, we perform single-atom ESR on individual Fe atoms adsorbed on magnesium oxide (MgO), using a 2D vector magnetic field as well as the local field of the magnetic STM tip in a commercially available STM. We show how the ESR amplitude can be greatly improved by optimizing the magnetic fields, revealing in particular an enhanced signal at large in-plane magnetic fields. Moreover, we demonstrate that the stray field from the magnetic STM tip is a versatile tool. We use it here to drive the electron spin more efficiently and to perform ESR measurements at constant frequency by employing tip-field sweeps. Lastly, we show that it is possible to perform ESR using only the tip field, under zero external magnetic field, which promises to make this technique available in many existing STM systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.11061 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Magnetic-field dependence of single-atom ESR peaks. (a) ESR spectra taken on the Fe atom in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [10]

    Probing quantum coherence in single-atom electron spin resonance

    Willke, P.; Paul, W.; Natterer, F.D.; Yang, K.; Bae, Y.; Choi, T.; Fernández -Rossier, J.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Probing quantum coherence in single-atom electron spin resonance. Science Adv. 2018, 4(2), eaaq1543

    work page 2018

  2. [1]

    Y.; Kolesov, R.; Al -Hmoud, M.; Tisler, J.; Shin, C.; Kim, C.; Wojcik, A.; Hemmer, P

    Balasubramanian, G.; Chan, I. Y.; Kolesov, R.; Al -Hmoud, M.; Tisler, J.; Shin, C.; Kim, C.; Wojcik, A.; Hemmer, P. R.; Krueger, A.; Hanke, T.; Leitenstorfer, A.; Bratschitsch, R.; Jelezko, F.; Wrachtrup, J. Nanoscale imaging magnetometry with diamond spins under ambient conditions. Nature 2008, 455, 648-651

    work page 2008

  3. [2]

    Single spin detection by magnetic resonance force microscopy

    Rugar, D.; Budakian, R.; Mamin, H.J.; Chui, B.W. Single spin detection by magnetic resonance force microscopy. Nature 2004, 430, 329-332

    work page 2004

  4. [3]

    PNAS 2009, 106, 1313-1317

    Degen, C.L.; Poggio, M.; Mamin, H.J.; Rettner, C.T.; Rugar, D.; Nanoscale magne tic resonance imaging. PNAS 2009, 106, 1313-1317

    work page 2009

  5. [4]

    Y.; Jaouen, N

    Gross, I.; Akhtar, W.; Garcia, V.; Martínez, L.J.; Chouaieb, S.; Garcia, K.; Carrétéro, C.; Barthélémy, A.; Appel, P.; Maletinsky, P.; Kim, J.V.; Chauleau, J. Y.; Jaouen, N. ; Viret, M.; Bibes, M.; Fusil, S.; Jacques, V. Real-space imaging of non-collinear antiferromagnetic order with a single-spin magnetometer. Nature 549, 252-256 (2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [5]

    Casola, F.; van der Sar, T.; Yacoby, A.; Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2018, 3, 17088

    work page 2018

  7. [6]

    Science 2019, 364, 973-976

    Thiel, L.; Wang, Z.; Tschudin, M.A.; Rohner, D.; Gutiérrez -Lezama, I.; Ubrig, N.; Gibertini, M.; Giannini, E.; Morpurgo, A.F.; Maletinsky, P.; Probing magnetism in 2D materials at the nanoscale with single spin microscopy. Science 2019, 364, 973-976

    work page 2019

  8. [7]

    Electron paramagnetic resonance of individual atoms on a surface

    Baumann, S.; Paul, W.; Choi, T.; Lutz, C.P.; Ardavan, A.; Heinrich, A.J. Electron paramagnetic resonance of individual atoms on a surface. Science 2015, 350, 417-420. 14

    work page 2015

Show all 31 references
  1. [8]

    Atomic -scale sensing of the magnetic dipolar field from single atoms

    Choi, T.; Paul, W.; Rolf-Pissarczyk, S.; Macdonald, A.J.; Natterer, F.D.; Yang, K.; Willke, P.; Lutz, C.P.; Heinrich, A.J. Atomic -scale sensing of the magnetic dipolar field from single atoms. Nature Nano. 2017, 12(5), 420-424

    2017

  2. [9]

    Engineering the eigenstates of coupled spin- 1/2 atoms on a surface

    Yang, K.; Bae, Y.; Paul, W.; Natterer, F.D.; Willke, P.; Lado, J.L.; Ferrón, A.; Choi, T.; Fernández-Rossier, J.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Engineering the eigenstates of coupled spin- 1/2 atoms on a surface. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 227206

    2017

  3. [11]

    Enhanced quantum coherence in exchange coupled spi ns via singlet-triplet transitions

    Bae, Y.; Yang, K.; Willke, P.; Choi, T.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Enhanced quantum coherence in exchange coupled spi ns via singlet-triplet transitions. Science Adv. 2018, 4(11), eaau4159

    2018

  4. [12]

    Hyperfine interaction of individual atoms on a surface

    Willke, P.; Bae, Y.; Yang, K.; Lado, J.L.; Ferrón, A.; Choi, T.; Ardavan, A.; Fernández - Rossier, J.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Hyperfine interaction of individual atoms on a surface. Science 2018, 362(6412), 336-339

    2018

  5. [13]

    Electrically controlled nuclear polarization of individual atoms

    Yang, K.; Willke, P.; Bae, Y.; Ferrón, A.; Lado, J.L.; Ardavan, A.; Fernández-Rossier, J.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Electrically controlled nuclear polarization of individual atoms. Nature Nano. 2018, 13(12), 1120-1125

    2018

  6. [14]

    Exchange mechanism for electron paramagnetic resonance of individual adatoms

    Lado, J.L.; Ferrón, A.; Fernández-Rossier, J. Exchange mechanism for electron paramagnetic resonance of individual adatoms. Phys. Rev. B 2017, 96(20), 205420

    2017

  7. [15]

    Spin transfer torque induced paramagnetic resonance

    Shakirov, A.M.; Rubtsov, A.N.; and Ribeiro, P. Spin transfer torque induced paramagnetic resonance. Phys. Rev. B 2019, 99(5), 054434. 15

    2019

  8. [16]

    Electron paramagnetic resonance of single magnetic moment on a surface

    Berggren, P.; Fransson, J. Electron paramagnetic resonance of single magnetic moment on a surface. Scientific reports 2016, 6, 25584

    2016

  9. [17]

    Generalized open quantum system approach for the electron paramagnetic resonance of magnetic atoms

    Shavit, G.; Horovitz, B.; Goldstein, M. Generalized open quantum system approach for the electron paramagnetic resonance of magnetic atoms. Phys. Rev. B 2019, 99(19), 195433

    2019

  10. [18]

    Spin decoherence of magnetic atoms on surfaces

    Delgado, F.; Fernández-Rossier, J. Spin decoherence of magnetic atoms on surfaces. Prog. Surf. Sci. 2017, 92(1), 40-82

    2017

  11. [19]

    Longitudinal and transverse spin relaxation times of magnetic single adatoms: An ab initio analysis

    Ibañez-Azpiroz, J.; dos Santos Dias, M.; Blügel, S.; Lounis, S. Longitudinal and transverse spin relaxation times of magnetic single adatoms: An ab initio analysis. Phys. Rev. B 2017, 96(14), 144410

    2017

  12. [20]

    Cotunneling mechanism for all -electrical electron spin resonance of single adsorbed atoms

    Gálvez, J.R.; Wolf, C.; Delgado, F.; Lorente, N. Cotunneling mechanism for all -electrical electron spin resonance of single adsorbed atoms. Phys. Rev. B 2019, 100(3), 035411

    2019

  13. [21]

    Upgrade of a low- temperature scanning tunne ling microscope for electron -spin resonance

    Natterer, F.D.; Patthey, F.; Bilgeri, T.; Forrester, P.R.; Weiss, N.; Brune, H. Upgrade of a low- temperature scanning tunne ling microscope for electron -spin resonance. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2019, 90(1), 013706

    2019

  14. [22]

    Single - atom electron paramagnetic resonance in a scanning tunneling microscope drive n by a radiofrequency antenna at 4 K

    Seifert, T.S.; Kovarik, S.; Nistor, C.; Persichetti, L.; Stepanow, S.; Gambardella, P. Single - atom electron paramagnetic resonance in a scanning tunneling microscope drive n by a radiofrequency antenna at 4 K. arXiv preprint 2019, arXiv:1908.03379

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    P.; Heinrich, A

    Paul, W.; Baumann, S.; Lutz, C. P.; Heinrich, A. J. Generation of constant -amplitude radio- frequency sweeps at a tunnel junction for spin resonance STM. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2016, 87, 074703

    2016

  16. [24]

    Control of quantum magnets by atomic exchange bias

    Yan, S.; Choi, D.J.; Burgess, J.A.; Rolf-Pissarczyk, S.; Loth, S. Control of quantum magnets by atomic exchange bias. Nature Nano. 2010, 10(1), 40-45. 16

    2010

  17. [25]

    J.; Lutz, C

    Willke, P.; Yang, K.; Bae, Y.; Heinrich, A. J.; Lutz, C. P. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Single Atoms, Nat. Phys. 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    Tuning the Exchange Bias on a Single Atom from 1 mT to 10 T

    Yang, K.; Paul, W.; Natterer, F.D.; Lado, J.L.; Bae, Y.; Willke, P.; Choi, T.; Ferrón, A.; Fernández-Rossier, J.; Heinrich, A.J.; Lutz, C.P. Tuning the Exchange Bias on a Single Atom from 1 mT to 10 T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019, 122(22), 227203

    2019

  19. [27]

    P.; Macfarlane, R

    Baumann, S.; Donati, F.; Stepanow, S.; Rusponi, S.; Paul, W.; Gangopadhyay, S.; Rau, I.G.; Pacchioni, G.E., Gragnaniello, L., Pivetta, M.; Dreiser, J .; Piamonteze, C.; Lutz, C. P.; Macfarlane, R. M.; Jones, B. A.; Gambardella, P.; Heinrich, A. J.; Brune, H. Origin of perpendi...

    2015

  20. [28]

    Control of the millisecond spin lifetime of an electrically probed atom

    Paul, W.; Yang, K.; Baumann, S.; Romming, N.; Choi, T.; Lutz, C.P.; Heinrich, A.J. Control of the millisecond spin lifetime of an electrically probed atom. Nat. Phys. 2017, 13, 403-407

    2017

  21. [29]

    Current-driven spin dynamics of artificially constructed quantum magnets

    Khajetoorians, A.A.; Baxevanis, B.; Hübner, C.; Schlenk, T.; Krause, S.; Wehling, T.O.; Lounis, S.; Lichtenstein, A.; Pfannkuche, D.; Wiebe, J.; Wiesendanger, R. Current-driven spin dynamics of artificially constructed quantum magnets. Science 2013, 339(6115), 55-59

    2013

  22. [30]

    Bistability in atomic -scale antiferromagnets

    Loth, S.; Baumann, S.; Lutz, C.P.; Eigler, D.M.; Heinrich, A.J. Bistability in atomic -scale antiferromagnets. Science 2012, 335(6065),196-199

    2012

  23. [31]

    A quantum pathway to overcome the trilemma of magnetic data storage

    Forrester, P.R.; Patthey, F.; Fernandes, E.; Sblendorio, D.P.; Brune, H.; Natterer, F.D. A quantum pathway to overcome the trilemma of magnetic data storage. arXiv prepr int 2019, arXiv:1903.00242

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.