Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Wavenumber-dependent magnetic losses in YIG-GGG heterostructures at millikelvin temperatures

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that at millikelvin temperatures the dissipation rate of propagating spin waves in a YIG-on-GGG film grows with wavenumber, by up to 55% at 26 mK, because of dynamic dipolar coupling to the partially magnetized GGG…

desk verdict A transparent and honest measurement of k-dependent dissipation in YIG/GGG at millikelvin temperatures, but the causal mechanism at the headline temperature is an extrapolation the authors themselves flag. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13414 v1 pith:FKNT5FUU submitted 2024-11-20 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.other

David Schmoll , Andrey A. Voronov , Rostslav O. Serha , Denys Slobodianiuk , Khrystyna O. Levchenko , Claas Abert , Sebastian Knauer , Dieter Suess
show 2 more authors
Roman Verba Andrii V. Chumak
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.other
keywords yttriumirongarnetgadoliniumgalliummillikelvinspin-wavespectroscopymagnetostaticsurfacespinwaveswavenumber-dependentdampingdipolarcouplingquantummagnonicscryogenicmagnontransport
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 asks where magnetic losses come from for propagating magnons in the workhorse magnonic material, a yttrium iron garnet (YIG) film grown on gadolinium gallium garnet (GGG), at the millikelvin temperatures needed for quantum magnonics. Using propagating spin-wave spectroscopy from 293 K down to 26 mK, it extracts the wavenumber-dependent dissipation rate $\Gamma_k$ for magnetostatic surface spin waves in a 7.78 µm YIG film. The central claim is that $\Gamma_k$ increases with wavenumber at cryogenic temperatures, by up to 55% between the uniform mode ($k=0$) and the largest probed wavenumber ($k \approx 450$ rad/cm) at 26 mK, and that this increase is caused by dynamic dipolar coupling to the partially magnetized GGG substrate. A consequence is that the substrate, normally treated as inert, is an intrinsic loss channel that must be accounted for in designs for detecting individual propagating magnons.

What carries the argument

The carrier of the argument is the semi-analytical magnetostatic-wave model of a layered ferrite/paramagnet structure, with complex frequency $\tilde{\omega}_k = \omega_k + i \Gamma_k$ and permeability tensors for YIG and GGG. The dispersion and damping follow from the secular equation $D_{\mathrm{YIG}}D_{\mathrm{GGG}} + E_{\mathrm{YIG}}E_{\mathrm{GGG}} = 0$, where GGG is modeled as a paramagnet with a phenomenological inhomogeneous linewidth $\mu_0\Delta H \approx 400$ mT. The k-dependence of the extra loss comes from the magnetostatic Green function $G_{k,xx} = -G_{k,zz} = \frac{|k_x|}{2} e^{-|k_x||z-z'|}$, which makes the YIG-GGG dipolar coupling vanish at $k=0$, rise linearly at small $k$, and decay exponentially at large $k$. This same function explains both the measured increase of $\Gamma_k$ with wavenumber and the predicted decrease for $k > 400$ rad/cm.

What would settle it

Remeasure the same sample after removing or isolating the GGG substrate (for example by etching it away or inserting a nonmagnetic spacer): if $\Gamma_k$ still rises by roughly 55% between $k \approx 0$ and $k \approx 450$ rad/cm at 26 mK, the dipolar-coupling mechanism is not the cause.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper demonstrates a temperature- and wavenumber-dependent loss mechanism in YIG-GGG heterostructures: the propagating-wave dissipation rate $\Gamma_k$ grows with $k$ at low temperatures even as the total damping falls below 4 K, and the growth saturates below 500 mK. The quantitative extraction uses the measured transmission $S_{21}$, the calculated group velocity, and the assumption that antenna efficiency is temperature independent, giving $\Gamma_k$ directly from $S_{21} = J^2 \exp(-\Gamma_k L / v_g)$. The rise in $\Gamma_k$ is reproduced by a dipolar-coupled two-layer model in which GGG carries a much larger internal damping than YIG; like coupled oscillators, the higher-quality YIG mode loses energy into the lower-quality GGG mode, and because the magnetostatic coupling grows linearly at small $k$ before decaying exponentially, the added loss is k-dependent. The paper reports that rare-earth ion relaxation adds a k-independent offset (largest at 4 K), while the substrate coupling produces the k-dependent part, and it states that the model overestimates the k-dependence below 1 K because it does not include GGG's complex magnetic phase transitions.

Load-bearing premise

The entire explanation rests on treating the GGG substrate as a simple paramagnet with a single, temperature-independent internal loss parameter, and the paper itself reports that this model overestimates the wavenumber dependence below 1 K because it omits GGG's complex low-temperature phase behavior.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • GGG-induced dissipation is additive to YIG's intrinsic damping: $\Gamma_k = \Gamma_0 + \Gamma^{\mathrm{(dip)}}(k)$, so a measured $\Gamma_k(k)$ curve can be separated into a k-independent rare-earth relaxation part and a k-dependent substrate part.
  • At wavenumbers above roughly $k_x d_{\mathrm{YIG}} \gtrsim 3$ (above ~400 rad/cm here), the dipolar coupling falls exponentially, so the model predicts lower dissipation for short-wavelength exchange-dominated magnons.
  • Below 500 mK the dissipative state is frozen: neither transmission nor $\Gamma_k$ changes with temperature, matching the plateau in GGG's magnetic response.
  • Quantum-magnonic experiments using propagating, rather than standing, spin waves in YIG-on-GGG must treat the substrate as a loss channel that grows with wavenumber at low temperature.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the dipolar-coupling mechanism is the true cause, a clean test is to deposit a thin nonmagnetic spacer between YIG and GGG (or transfer the film): the k-dependent rise should vanish while the k-independent rare-earth loss survives.
  • The same coupled-oscillator reasoning should generalize: any low-damping magnetic film on a lossier magnetic or paramagnetic substrate should show a similar k-dependent loss, so this is a design constraint beyond YIG-GGG.
  • At the lowest temperatures the model's mismatch means the quantitative prediction should be checked by measuring GGG's own dynamic response at 26 mK rather than inferred from YIG spectra.
  • The model's predicted turnover near $k > 400$ rad/cm implies an optimum wavenumber for low-loss propagation; narrower antennas that excite shorter magnons would test this directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports propagating spin-wave spectroscopy (PSWS) measurements of a 7.78 µm YIG film on a GGG substrate at temperatures from 293 K down to 26 mK. The authors convert the frequency-domain transmission spectra into wavenumber space using a semi-analytical dispersion relation for a dipolar-coupled YIG/GGG bilayer (Eq. 4), and then extract the wavenumber-dependent dissipation rate Γk using Eq. 8. They observe a clear increase of Γk with wavenumber at all cryogenic temperatures, reaching about 55% between the FMR point and k ≈ 450 rad/cm at 26 mK. They attribute this k-dependence to dynamic dipolar coupling between YIG and the partially magnetized GGG substrate, supported by the semi-analytical model and micromagnetic simulations at 4 K–1 K. They also observe a temperature-dependent decrease in transmission at 4 K, attributed to rare-earth ion relaxation, and a plateau below 500 mK. The model reproduces the measured Γk(k) for 4 K–1 K after adding a k-independent offset Γ0, but the authors explicitly state that below 1 K the model overestimates the k-dependence and deviates significantly from experiment.

Significance. The experimental observation of a wavenumber-dependent dissipation rate in YIG/GGG at millikelvin temperatures is both novel and directly relevant to quantum magnonics, where propagating magnons at millikelvin temperatures are envisioned. The extraction method (Eq. 8) is transparent, the assumption that J² is k-independent and temperature-independent is clearly stated, and the model curves for 4 K–1 K are convincing. The paper also includes a substantial micromagnetic modelling effort, including a careful treatment of the static stray field of the thick GGG substrate. The main limitation is that the central causal claim—that the millikelvin k-dependence is caused by dipolar coupling to the partially magnetized GGG—is not quantitatively established at the headline temperature, as the model fails below 1 K. If the causal claim is appropriately qualified, the paper remains a valuable contribution; as written, the abstract and conclusions overstate the support for the mechanism.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section III.B, Fig. 4(c)] The central claim that the wavenumber-dependent dissipation rate at millikelvin temperatures is "caused by dipolar coupling to the partially magnetized GGG substrate" is not supported by the quantitative comparison at the temperatures where the claim is strongest. The authors state in Section III.B that below 1 K "the theoretical predictions deviate significantly from the experiment and overestimate the change of the dissipation rate Γk with wavenumber." Since the 26 mK data are the headline result, the causal attribution is an extrapolation from the 4 K–1 K agreement. The possibility remains that the low-temperature k-dependence arises from another mechanism (e.g., edge modes, stray-field inhomogeneity) or from a weaker temperature-dependent GGG coupling than the Brillouin-paramagnet model assumes. The abstract and conclusions should be reframed to present the GGG coupling as a plausible mechanism supported at intermediate temperatures, not as an established cause at millikelvin temperatures, or the model should be extended to account for GGG’s low-temperature magnetic phase transitions.
  2. [Section II.B, Eq. 2b and Section III.B] The failure of the model below 1 K is attributed to the complex magnetic phase transitions of GGG, but the model itself uses a single temperature-independent inhomogeneous linewidth μ₀ΔH ≈ 400 mT and a Brillouin-paramagnet magnetization for GGG. These assumptions are known to break down in the sub-Kelvin range. Because the causal attribution rests on this model, the quantitative prediction at 26 mK is unreliable. The paper should either (i) present a sensitivity analysis showing how the predicted Γk(k) changes when plausible temperature dependencies of μ₀ΔH and M_GGG are used, or (ii) explicitly state that the model is only valid for T ≥ 1 K and that the sub-Kelvin mechanism remains an open question. As written, the model agreement at 4 K–1 K is suggestive but does not establish the sub-Kelvin mechanism.
  3. [Section III.B, Eq. 8 and Fig. 3(b)–(d)] The extraction of the wavenumber-dependent Γk relies on the group velocity v_g(k) from the same semi-analytical model (Eq. 4) that is being used to explain the mechanism. If the model dispersion is inaccurate at low temperatures, part of the apparent k-dependence of Γk could be an artefact of the conversion. The micromagnetic simulations validate the dispersion up to about 2000 rad/cm, but the comparison is shown for a limited temperature set (the dotted data in Fig. 4(c) are for 2 K only). Please provide a quantitative sensitivity analysis: e.g., propagate the uncertainty in the fitted effective anisotropy field H_a and in M_YIG through Eq. 8 to show that the reported 55% k-dependence at 26 mK is robust, or provide an independent check of v_g(k) at millikelvin temperatures (e.g., phase-resolved measurements).
  4. [Section III.B, fitted Γ0 values] The paper reports fitted values of the k-independent offset Γ0 only for 4 K, 2 K, and 1 K (9, 5, and 1 MHz, respectively). For the sub-Kelvin temperatures where the model overestimates the data, no Γ0 is quoted. It should be stated explicitly whether any choice of Γ0 could bring the model into agreement below 1 K. If not, that is a strong indication that the model is inapplicable in that regime, and the corresponding curves in Fig. 4(c) should not be presented without a clear caveat.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The phrase "We demonstrate an increase in the dissipation rate with wavenumber at cryogenic temperatures, caused by dipolar coupling" conflates the direct observation (the increase) with the interpretation (the cause). Consider separating these in the abstract to avoid overclaiming.
  2. [Section II.A, experimental setup] The word "shored" in "a shored AMI superconducting vector magnet" should likely be "short" or "short-circuited"; please correct the typo.
  3. [Section IV, Conclusions] The sentence "it could proof beneficial" should be "it could prove beneficial." Also, the phrase "we attribute the recorded k-dependency" should be softened in view of the major comment above.
  4. [Section II.B, Eq. 4] The secular equation Eq. (4) is stated to be solved numerically, but the definitions of F_YIG and E_GGG in Eqs. (5c) and (5d) appear to be unused in the main text; please clarify the role of these terms (or whether the secular equation should contain both plus and minus combinations of D and E terms).
  5. [Reference [54]] Reference [54] is given as "R. Corporation, RT/duroid 6010.2lm laminates datasheet"; please format the publisher properly (Rogers Corporation) and include a URL or document number.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the wavenumber-dependent dissipation slope is a parameter-free model output, not a fitted quantity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The central experimental quantity, the increase of the dissipation rate Γk with wavenumber, is extracted from measured S21 transmission spectra via Eq. 8, using the group velocity obtained from the dispersion relation of the layered model (Eq. 4). The measured spectra are independent of the model's damping prediction; the model is used only to convert the frequency axis to a wavenumber axis, and that dispersion is separately validated against micromagnetic simulations (Fig. 3(b)). The k-dependent slope of Γk is a parameter-free output of the semi-analytical model, given the literature values for the GGG inhomogeneous linewidth (μ0ΔH ≈ 400 mT from Ref. [47]) and the Brillouin-paramagnet magnetization of GGG. The only fitted quantity in the comparison, Γ0, is a k-independent offset added to the calculated Γ(dip)(k); it shifts the curves vertically and does not determine the slope that constitutes the claimed effect. The room-temperature Gilbert damping α293K is measured independently by FMR, and the antenna efficiency J2 is calibrated from the room-temperature measurement. Self-citations [30] and [34] are used for context (prior millikelvin PSWS measurements and GGG stray-field/FMR studies) and are corroborative rather than load-bearing; the GGG linewidth parameter itself is taken from an external source [47]. The paper explicitly acknowledges that below 1 K the model overestimates the wavenumber dependence because it does not capture GGG's complex phase transitions. This is a quantitative limitation that weakens the causal attribution at 26 mK, but it is not a circular reduction: the experimental slope is not fed back into the model, and the disagreement is reported rather than hidden. No equation is defined in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction of the k-dependent dissipation.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result (k-dependent Γk) depends on two fitted parameters (Ha, Γ0) and on several domain assumptions inherited from prior literature, especially the simplified GGG permeability model. The k-dependence shape itself is not fitted, which limits circularity, but the absolute dissipation values are partly determined by the fitted Γ0. No new physical entities are postulated; the 30-µm GGG interface layer in simulations is a computational construct.

free parameters (2)
  • Effective anisotropy field Ha = 1 mT (293 K) to 2.4 mT (4 K)
    Introduced to make the quasi-analytical dispersion start at the experimental FMR frequency of 4.515 GHz; fitted per temperature (Section III A).
  • Additional damping offset Γ0 = 9 MHz (4 K), 5 MHz (2 K), 1 MHz (1 K)
    Added to the calculated dipolar damping as a k-independent fitting parameter to bring the semi-analytical model into agreement with the measured dissipation (Section III B).
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Magnetostatic wave theory for layered structures (secular equation Eq. 4) describes the dispersion and damping of MSSW in the YIG/GGG bilayer.
    Adopted from Emtage and Daniel [46]; assumed valid for k > 0.
  • domain assumption YIG dissipation follows the Gilbert model with scalar αG, while GGG damping is described by a phenomenological inhomogeneous linewidth µ0ΔH ≈ 400 mT (Eq. 2b).
    The different damping models are stated in Section II B; the GGG linewidth is taken from [47] and acknowledged as simplified.
  • domain assumption The GGG substrate magnetization follows a Brillouin paramagnet model with literature parameters.
    Used to compute M_GGG at each temperature and field; the model is stated to fail below 1 K due to unmodeled spin-glass and phase-transition behavior.
  • domain assumption Antenna excitation and detection efficiency J² is independent of temperature.
    Assumed in Section III B based on the weak temperature dependence of copper and gold resistivity and substrate permittivity; not directly measured.
  • domain assumption Damping contributions are additive: Γk = Γ0 + Γ(dip).
    Stated in Section III B and used to separate intrinsic (rare-earth relaxation) and substrate-induced damping.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Wavenumber-dependent magnetic losses in YIG-GGG heterostructures at millikelvin temperatures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FKNT5FUU

@misc{pith2026241113414,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Wavenumber-dependent magnetic losses in YIG-GGG heterostructures at millikelvin temperatures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FKNT5FUU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13414}
}
read the original abstract

Magnons have inspired potential applications in modern quantum technologies and hybrid quantum systems due to their intrinsic nonlinearity, nanoscale scalability, and a unique set of experimentally accessible parameters for manipulating their dispersion. Such magnon-based quantum technologies demand long decoherence times, millikelvin temperatures, and minimal dissipation. Due to its low magnetic damping, the ferrimagnet yttrium iron garnet (YIG), grown on gadolinium gallium garnet (GGG), is the most promising material for this objective. To comprehend the magnetic losses of propagating magnons in such YIG-GGG heterostructures at cryogenic temperatures, we investigate magnon transport in a micrometer-thick YIG sample via propagating spin-wave spectroscopy (PSWS) measurements for temperatures between 4K to 26mK. We demonstrate an increase in the dissipation rate with wavenumber at cryogenic temperatures, caused by dipolar coupling to the partially magnetized GGG substrate. Additionally, we observe a temperature-dependent decrease in spin-wave transmission, attributed to rare earth ion relaxations. The critical role of the additional dissipation channels at cryogenic temperatures is underpinned by the comparison of the experimental results with theoretical calculations and micromagnetic simulations. Our findings strengthen the understanding of magnon losses at millikelvin temperatures, which is essential for the future detection of individual propagating magnons.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13414 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a) Schematic diagram of the dilution refrigerator transmission line assembly. The input and the output line are connected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Schematic representation of the numerical simulation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: (a) Spin-wave transmission spectra detected in the MSSW configuration at different temperatures between 293 K and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) Difference in spin-wave amplitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Elimination of substrate-induced FMR linewidth broadening in the epitaxial system YIG-GGG by microstructuring

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Microstructuring YIG films so they sit only in the homogeneous region of the GGG substrate's stray field eliminates the asymmetric FMR linewidth broadening at cryogenic temperatures.

  2. Damping Enhancement in YIG at Millikelvin Temperatures due to GGG Substrate

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The 13-fold rise in effective magnetic damping in a YIG film on GGG at millikelvin temperatures is mostly caused by the inhomogeneous stray field of the partially magnetized GGG substrate, which can broaden the resona...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    A. A. Serga, A. V . Chumak, and B. Hillebrands, Yig magnonics, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 43, 264002 (2010)

    2010

  2. [2]

    Adam, Analog signal processing with microwave magnetics, Proc

    J. Adam, Analog signal processing with microwave magnetics, Proc. IEEE 76, 159 (1988)

    1988

  3. [3]

    Glass, Ferrite films for microwave and millimeter-wave devices, Proc

    H. Glass, Ferrite films for microwave and millimeter-wave devices, Proc. IEEE 76, 151 (1988)

    1988

  4. [4]

    Ishak, Magnetostatic wave technology: a review, Proc

    W. Ishak, Magnetostatic wave technology: a review, Proc. IEEE 76, 171 (1988). 10

    work page 1988

  5. [5]

    Morgenthaler, An overview of electromagnetic and spin angular momentum mechanical waves in ferrite media, Proc

    F. Morgenthaler, An overview of electromagnetic and spin angular momentum mechanical waves in ferrite media, Proc. IEEE 76, 138 (1988)

    1988

  6. [6]

    Rodrigue, A generation of microwave ferrite devices, Proc

    G. Rodrigue, A generation of microwave ferrite devices, Proc. IEEE 76, 121 (1988)

    1988

  7. [7]

    Zenbaa, C

    N. Zenbaa, C. Abert, F. Majcen, M. Kerber, R. O. Serha, S. Knauer, Q. Wang, T. Schrefl, D. Suess, and A. V . Chumak, Experimental realisation of a universal inverse-design magnonic device, arXiv arXiv:2403.17724

    arXiv

  8. [8]

    Finocchio et al

    G. Finocchio et al. , Roadmap for unconventional computing with nanotechnology, Nano Futures 8, 012001 (2024)

    2024

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Q. Wang, G. Csaba, R. Verba, A. V . Chumak, and P. Pirro, Nanoscale magnonic networks, Phys. Rev. Appl. 21, 040503 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    Q. Wang, R. Verba, B. Heinz, M. Schneider, O. Wojewoda, K. Davídková, K. Levchenko, C. Dubs, N. J. Mauser, M. Urbánek, P. Pirro, and A. V . Chumak, Deeply nonlinear excitation of self-normalized short spin waves, Sci. Adv 9, eadg4609 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    Pirro, V

    P. Pirro, V . I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Advances in coherent magnonics, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 1114 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Mahmoud, F

    A. Mahmoud, F. Ciubotaru, F. Vanderveken, A. V . Chumak, S. Hamdioui, C. Adelmann, and S. Cotofana, Introduction to spin wave computing, J. Appl. Phys. 128, 161101 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Heinz, T

    B. Heinz, T. Brächer, M. Schneider, Q. Wang, B. Lägel, A. M. Friedel, D. Breitbach, S. Steinert, T. Meyer, M. Kewenig, C. Dubs, P. Pirro, and A. V . Chumak, Propagation of spin-wave packets in individual nanosized yttrium iron garnet magnonic conduits, Nano Lett. 20, 4220 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Q. Wang, R. Verba, K. Davídková, B. Heinz, S. Tian, Y . Rao, M. Guo, X. Guo, C. Dubs, P. Pirro, and A. V . Chumak, All-magnonic repeater based on bistability, Nat. Commun. 15, 7577 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Heussner, G

    F. Heussner, G. Talmelli, M. Geilen, B. Heinz, T. Brächer, T. Meyer, F. Ciubotaru, C. Adelmann, K. Yamamoto, A. A. Serga, B. Hillebrands, and P. Pirro, Experimental realization of a passive gigahertz frequency-division demultiplexer for magnonic logic networks, Phys. Status So...

    2020

  8. [16]

    V ogt, F

    K. V ogt, F. Y . Fradin, J. E. Pearson, T. Sebastian, S. D. Bader, B. Hillebrands, A. Hoffmann, and H. Schultheiss, Realization of a spin-wave multiplexer, Nat. Commun. 5, 3727 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    Zavislyak and M

    I. Zavislyak and M. Popov, in Yttrium: Compounds, Production and Applications , edited by B. D. V olkerts (Nova Science Publishers, Inc, New York, USA, 2011) Chap. 3, pp. 87–125

    2011

  10. [18]

    A. V . Chumak et al. , Advances in magnetics roadmap on spin-wave computing, IEEE Trans. Magn. 58, 0800172 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Barman et al

    A. Barman et al. , The 2021 magnonics roadmap, J. Phys.: Condens.Matter 33, 413001 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    Zhang, A review of common materials for hybrid quantum magnonics, Materials Today Electronics 5, 100044 (2023)

    X. Zhang, A review of common materials for hybrid quantum magnonics, Materials Today Electronics 5, 100044 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Jiang, J

    Z. Jiang, J. Lim, Y . Li, W. Pfaff, T. H. Lo, J. Qian, A. Schleife, J. M. Zuo, V . Novosad, and A. Hoffmann, Integrating magnons for quantum information, Appl. Phys. Lett.123, 130501 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    P. G. Baity, D. A. Bozhko, R. Macêdo, W. Smith, R. C. Holland, S. Danilin, V . Seferai, J. Barbosa, R. R. Peroor, S. Goldman, U. Nasti, J. Paul, R. H. Hadfield, S. McVitie, and M. Weides, Strong magnon-photon coupling with chip-integrated yig in the zero-temperature limit, App...

    2021

  15. [23]

    Y . Li, W. Zhang, V . Tyberkevych, W. K. Kwok, A. Hoffmann, and V . Novosad, Hybrid magnonics: Physics, circuits, and applications for coherent information processing, J. Appl. Phys. 128, 130902 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Lachance-Quirion, Y

    D. Lachance-Quirion, Y . Tabuchi, A. Gloppe, K. Usami, and Y . Nakamura, Hybrid quantum systems based on magnonics, Appl. Phys. Express 12, 070101 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Forsch, R

    M. Forsch, R. Stockill, A. Wallucks, I. Marinkovi ´c, C. Gärtner, R. A. Norte, F. van Otten, A. Fiore, K. Srinivasan, and S. Gröblacher, Microwave-to-optics conversion using a mechanical oscillator in its quantum ground state, Nat. Phys. 16, 69 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Kurizki, P

    G. Kurizki, P. Bertet, Y . Kubo, K. Mølmer, D. Petrosyan, P. Rabl, and J. Schmiedmayer, Quantum technologies with hybrid systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112, 3866 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Y . Cao, P. Yan, H. Huebl, S. T. Goennenwein, and G. E. Bauer, Exchange magnon-polaritons in microwave cavities, Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 91, 094423 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Lachance-Quirion, S

    D. Lachance-Quirion, S. P. Wolski, Y . Tabuchi, S. Kono, K. Usami, and Y . Nakamura, Entanglement-based single-shot detection of a single magnon with a superconducting qubit, Science 367, 425 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y . Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y . Nakamura, Coherent coupling between a ferromagnetic magnon and a superconducting qubit, Science 349, 405 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Knauer, K

    S. Knauer, K. Davídková, D. Schmoll, R. O. Serha, A. V oronov, Q. Wang, R. Verba, O. V . Dobrovolskiy, M. Lindner, T. Reimann, C. Dubs, M. Urbánek, and A. V . Chumak, Propagating spin-wave spectroscopy in a liquid-phase epitaxial nanometer-thick yig film at millikelvin tempera...

    2023

  23. [31]

    Kosen, A

    S. Kosen, A. F. V . Loo, D. A. Bozhko, L. Mihalceanu, and A. D. Karenowska, Microwave magnon damping in yig films at millikelvin temperatures, APL Mater. 7, 101120 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    Danilov, D

    V . Danilov, D. Lyfar, Y . Lyubonko, A. Nechiporuk, and S. Ryabchenko, Low-temperature ferromagnetic resonance in epitaxial garnet films on paramagnetic substrates, Russ. Phys. J. 32, 276 (1989)

    1989

  25. [33]

    S. Guo, B. McCullian, P. C. Hammel, and F. Yang, Low damping at few-K temperatures in Y 3Fe5O12 epitaxial films isolated from Gd 3Ga5O12 substrate using a diamagnetic Y3Sc2.5Al2.5O12 spacer, J. Magn. Magn. Mater 562, 169795 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    R. O. Serha, A. A. V oronov, D. Schmoll, R. Verba, K. O. Levchenko, S. Koraltan, K. Davídková, B. Budinská, Q. Wang, O. V . Dobrovolskiy, M. Urbánek, M. Lindner, T. Reimann, C. Dubs, C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, C. Abert, D. Suess, D. A. Bozhko, S. Knauer, and A. V . Chumak, Magnet...

    2024

  27. [35]

    Boventer, M

    I. Boventer, M. Pfirrmann, J. Krause, Y . Schön, M. Kläui, and M. Weides, Complex temperature dependence of coupling and dissipation of cavity magnon polaritons from millikelvin to room temperature, Phys. Rev. B 97, 184420 (2018)

    2018

  28. [36]

    Mihalceanu, V

    L. Mihalceanu, V . I. Vasyuchka, D. A. Bozhko, T. Langner, A. Y . Nechiporuk, V . F. Romanyuk, B. Hillebrands, and A. A. Serga, Temperature-dependent relaxation of dipole-exchange magnons in yttrium iron garnet films, Phys. Rev. B 97, 214405 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    P. E. Seiden, Ferrimagnetic resonance relaxation in rare-earth iron garnets, Phys. Rev. 133, A728 (1964)

    1964

  30. [38]

    Sparks, R

    M. Sparks, R. Loudon, and C. Kittel, Ferromagnetic relaxation. i. theory of the relaxation of the uniform precession and the degenerate spectrum in insulators at low temperatures, Phys. Rev. 122, 791 (1961)

    1961

  31. [39]

    J. F. Dillon Jr. and J. W. Nielsen, Effects of rare earth impurities 11 on ferrimagnetic resonance in yttrium iron garnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 3, 30 (1959)

    1959

  32. [40]

    E. G. Spencer, R. C. LeCraw, and A. M. Clogston, Low-temperature line-width maximum in yttrium iron garnet, Physical Review Letters 3, 32 (1959)

    1959

  33. [41]

    O. A. Petrenko, C. Ritter, M. Yethiraj, and D. McK Paul, Investigation of the low-temperature spin-liquid behavior of the frustrated magnet gadolinium gallium garnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4570 (1998)

    1998

  34. [42]

    Y . K. Tsui, N. Kalechofsky, C. A. Burns, and P. Schiffer, Study of the low temperature thermal properties of the geometrically frustrated magnet: Gadolinium gallium garnet, J. Appl. Phys. 85, 4512 (1999)

    1999

  35. [43]

    Schiffer, A

    P. Schiffer, A. P. Ramirez, D. A. Huse, and A. J. Valentino, Investigation of the field induced antiferromagnetic phase transition in the frustrated magnet: Gadolinium gallium garnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 2500 (1994)

    1994

  36. [44]

    P. P. Deen, O. Florea, E. Lhotel, and H. Jacobsen, Updating the phase diagram of the archetypal frustrated magnet gd 3ga5o12, Phys. Rev. B 91, 014419 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    Cherepanov, I

    V . Cherepanov, I. Kolokolov, V . L’vov, and V . Cherepanop, The saga of yig: Spectra, thermodynamics, interaction and relaxation of magnons in a complex magnet, Phys. Rep. 229, 81 (1993)

    1993

  38. [46]

    P. R. Emtage and M. R. Daniel, Magnetostatic waves and spin waves in layered ferrite structures, Phys. Rev. B 8, 212 (1984)

    1984

  39. [47]

    Barak, M

    J. Barak, M. X. Huang, and S. M. Bhagat, Electron paramagnetic resonance study of gadolinium-gallium-garnet, J. Appl. Phys. 71, 849 (1992)

    1992

  40. [48]

    Bruckner, C

    F. Bruckner, C. V ogler, M. Feischl, D. Praetorius, B. Bergmair, T. Huber, M. Fuger, and D. Suess, 3d fem–bem-coupling method to solve magnetostatic maxwell equations, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 324, 1862 (2012)

    2012

  41. [49]

    Bruckner, S

    F. Bruckner, S. Koraltan, C. Abert, and D. Suess, Magnum.np: a pytorch based gpu enhanced finite difference micromagnetic simulation framework for high level development and inverse design, Scientific Reports 13, 12054 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    S. S. Kalarickal, P. Krivosik, M. Wu, C. E. Patton, M. L. Schneider, P. Kabos, T. J. Silva, and J. P. Nibarger, Ferromagnetic resonance linewidth in metallic thin films: Comparison of measurement methods, J. Appl. Phys. 99, 093909 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    Kasuya and R

    T. Kasuya and R. C. LeCraw, Relaxation mechanisms in ferromagnetic resonance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 6, 223 (1961)

    1961

  44. [52]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y . Tabuchi, S. Ishino, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y . Nakamura, Hybridizing ferromagnetic magnons and microwave photons in the quantum limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 083603 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    R. A. Matula, Electrical resistivity of copper, gold, palladium, and silver, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 8, 1147 (1979)

    1979

  46. [54]

    R. Corporation, Rt/duroid 6010.2lm laminates datasheet (2019), available: https://rogerscorp.com/documents/ advanced-electronics-solutions/english/ data-sheets/rt-duroid-6006-6010lm-laminate-data-sheet. pdf

    2019

  47. [55]

    Kalinikos and A

    B. Kalinikos and A. Slavin, Theory of dipole-exchange spin wave spectrum for ferromagnetic films with mixed exchange boundary conditions, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 19, 7013 (1986)

    1986

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.