Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 32 references

Improved imaging of magnetic domains with a photoelectron emission microscope by utilizing symmetry and momentum selection

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Threshold photoemission microscopy can image magnetic domains selectively by moving the contrast aperture to symmetry-chosen points in electron momentum space, and Fe(001) measurements confirm the predicted pattern.

desk verdict Symmetry-based aperture-position selection for domain imaging is a genuinely new idea, convincingly demonstrated at the on/off level; the magnitude of the contrast boost is real but quantitatively unvalidated. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17658 v2 pith:WYUEMTLH submitted 2025-05-23 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

F. O. Schumann , M. Paleschke , J. Henk , W. Widdra , C.-T. Chiang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 73.20.At79.60.-i
keywords photoelectronemissionmicroscopythresholdphotoemissionmagneticdichroismdomainimagingmomentum-selectivecontrastapertureFe(001)C2vsymmetryrelativisticone-stepmodel
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

This paper claims that the low contrast that plagues threshold-regime photoelectron emission microscopy (PEEM) of magnetic domains can be turned into a strong, domain-selective signal by a purely geometric choice: where the microscope's contrast aperture sits in the momentum distribution of the emitted electrons. Guided by C2v symmetry, the authors show which aperture positions switch on the asymmetry of a given in-plane magnetization component and which switch it off. Relativistic one-step photoemission calculations for Fe(001) at $h\nu = 5.20$ eV map the asymmetry patterns, and PEEM images of a 90-degree closure-domain pattern reproduce the aperture-dependent contrast changes, proving the concept. If correct, this gives laboratory ultraviolet PEEM a cheap and simple route to magnetic domain imaging without synchrotron radiation.

What carries the argument

The central object is the contrast aperture of the PEEM, which in the back focal plane selects a small circular region of the photoelectron parallel momentum. The argument couples this aperture to the C2v symmetry of a (001) surface: the mirror operation at the scattering plane reverses the light helicity and the sign of the in-plane magnetization component perpendicular to that plane, but leaves the parallel component unchanged. This forces the domain-asymmetry difference $A_{\rm diff} \approx 2 A_{\rm ex}$ to have opposite symmetry for x- and y-magnetization, so aperture positions on the symmetry axes act as switches for domain selectivity. The numerical workhorse is the relativistic one-step photoemission model, which treats exchange and spin-orbit coupling on equal footing and supplies the k-resolved asymmetry maps that locate the high-contrast aperture positions.

What would settle it

On an Fe(001) sample at $h\nu = 5.20$ eV with circularly polarized light incident at 65 degrees, take PEEM images with the contrast aperture centered at $\mathbf{k} = (0,0)$, $(\delta,0)$, $(-\delta,0)$, $(0,\delta)$, and $(0,-\delta)$ with $\delta \approx 0.1$ $\AA^{-1}$; if the central image shows visible domain contrast, or if switching the aperture from $(+\delta,0)$ to $(-\delta,0)$ does not reverse the left/right contrast while leaving up/down unchanged, then the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the domain contrast in threshold photoemission is carried by the exchange asymmetry $A_{\rm ex}$, and in the domain-imaging geometry the relevant observable is $A_{\rm diff} = A_+ - A_- \approx 2 A_{\rm ex}$. Under C2v symmetry, reflection of the emission momentum at the scattering plane reverses the helicity and flips the in-plane magnetization component perpendicular to that plane, while leaving the parallel component unchanged. Consequently, for x-magnetization the left/right asymmetry is antisymmetric in $k_y$, but for y-magnetization it is the up/down asymmetry that is antisymmetric; placing a contrast aperture on a symmetry axis therefore nulls one magnetization component while the other remains visible. Numerical one-step calculations for Fe(001) at $h\nu = 5.20$ eV show quadrant patterns with asymmetries up to 45% and $A_{\rm diff}$ up to 40%, and experiments with a 90-degree closure domain confirm that images change with aperture position exactly as predicted: (0,0) shows no contrast, ($\pm1$,0) reveal left/right, (0,$\pm1$) reveal up/down, and diagonal positions group orthogonal pairs with the same contrast. The same symmetry argument shows that perpendicular magnetization becomes visible at $k=0$ under normal incidence, where in-plane components vanish.

Load-bearing premise

The calculated momentum-resolved asymmetry maps for Fe(001) at $h\nu = 5.20$ eV from the relativistic one-step model are accurate enough that the selected aperture positions give the predicted domain contrasts in the real crystal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A standard PEEM with a movable contrast aperture and a circularly polarized ultraviolet source can image in-plane magnetic domains with selectable sensitivity to the two orthogonal in-plane magnetization components.
  • For a 90-degree closure domain pattern, aperture positions on the $k_x$ and $k_y$ axes separate left/right from up/down domains, while diagonal positions merge orthogonal pairs with equal contrast.
  • Under normal incidence, the same symmetry argument predicts sensitivity to perpendicular magnetization at $k=0$, where in-plane contributions vanish, extending the method to ultrathin films with out-of-plane easy axes.
  • The identity $A_{\rm diff} \approx 2 A_{\rm ex}$ means the imaging contrast is set by the exchange part of the dichroism, so the technique measures a quantity distinct from the polarization- or magnetization-averaged dichroisms used in spectroscopy.
  • Because only light-helicity switching is required, not magnetization reversal, the method applies to multidomain samples in their as-grown state.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the symmetry relations carry the domain selectivity, the same aperture-selection recipe should transfer to other C4v ferromagnetic surfaces such as Fe(110), though the optimum aperture coordinates will shift with the electronic structure.
  • A natural extension is vectorial domain mapping: recording images at three or more well-chosen aperture positions should allow reconstruction of the local in-plane magnetization direction, since the contrast pattern encodes orientation rather than only sign.
  • The symmetry argument suggests that the same momentum-selection trick could enhance dichroic contrast in time-resolved or pump-probe PEEM experiments, where intensity is limited and contrast is often the bottleneck.
  • If the one-step calculations are quantitatively reliable, the k-resolved asymmetry maps themselves can be used to pre-select aperture positions for a given material and photon energy, turning the method into a predictive imaging tool.
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 proposes and tests a symmetry-based method for improving magnetic domain contrast in threshold photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM). Starting from C2v symmetry of Fe(001), the authors define domain-relevant asymmetries A+ and A-, show that their difference Adiff approximates 2Aex, and compute k-resolved asymmetry maps for Fe(001) at hν = 5.20 eV with a relativistic one-step photoemission model. They argue that positioning the PEEM contrast aperture in selected regions of momentum space can switch on or off sensitivity to particular in-plane magnetization components, and they illustrate this with simulated 90° closure-domain patterns and an experimental Fe(001) domain image series that reproduces the predicted on/off pattern. The paper also briefly extends the idea to perpendicular magnetization.

Significance. The symmetry analysis is exact and internally consistent, and the computed maps satisfy the expected mirror relations (e.g., Adiff ≈ 2Aex, sign reversals under kx-axis mirroring). If the quantitative claim of 'sizable intensity asymmetries' holds after aperture and energy integration, the method would be practically valuable because it would allow laboratory UV-based PEEM to image magnetic domains with selectable sensitivity to different magnetization directions without synchrotron radiation. The experimental images qualitatively reproduce the central on/off domain-selectivity pattern, which is a genuine test of the symmetry argument. However, the paper's main quantitative claim is not yet validated: the calculations are single-energy EF point values, and the experimental comparison is visual only, with no measured asymmetry values or error bars. The strength of the paper is the symmetry-guided concept and the qualitative feasibility demonstration, rather than a demonstrated quantitative contrast improvement.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. VI, Fig. 5(b)] The experimental demonstration is only qualitative. The text states that 'regions with different asymmetry values can be recognized,' but no measured asymmetry values, contrast metrics, or error bars are reported for any aperture position. Since the abstract and Sec. I claim 'sizable intensity asymmetries' and 'prove the feasibility,' the manuscript should provide a quantitative comparison between measured and calculated Adiff (or A+/A-) for the aperture positions shown in Fig. 4(c). Without such numbers, the central claim that the selected momenta yield sizable domain contrast is unquantified.
  2. [Sec. V and Sec. VI] All computed asymmetry maps are for electron emission from EF only at hν = 5.20 eV, whereas the experiment has 100 meV energy resolution at room temperature and finite apertures of 0.2 Å^-1 diameter (Sec. III). The reported up-to-40% asymmetries are point values; integration over the finite aperture area can cancel positive and negative regions of the maps, as the nodal lines in Figs. 2-4 show, and integration over the energy window can further reduce contrast. The manuscript should provide aperture- and energy-integrated theoretical predictions for the exact aperture centers used in Fig. 4(c) and Fig. 5, so the reader can see whether the 'sizable' asymmetric values survive those integrations.
  3. [Fig. 5(a)] The construction of the simulated domain patterns is not specified. It is unclear whether the gray levels represent the EF-only point values of Adiff, an aperture-integrated Adiff, or an intensity-based image, and how the 90° closure-domain geometry was chosen. A precise description of the simulation is needed to substantiate the visual agreement claimed for Fig. 5(b) and to allow the reader to judge whether the simulation includes the same aperture and energy integrations that the experiment necessarily contains.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. III] The sentence 'the contrast aperture confines emission angles δ via the relation k · sin(δ)' is incomplete; the aperture radius in k-space should be related to the emission angle by r_k = k sin δ, but the sentence as written is garbled and should be rewritten.
  2. [Figs. 2-4] The color bars are said to give asymmetries in percent, but the tick labels are not visible in the reproduced figures; adding numerical tick labels would allow quantitative reading of the maps.
  3. [Reference [25]] Reference [25] lists the DOI as '10.1103/klc4-lk7g', which appears to be a placeholder or malformed identifier; it should be updated to the correct DOI.
  4. [Sec. IV] The notation Aup/down in Eq. (3b) is introduced for y-aligned magnetization, but Fig. 1 labels the y-direction as 'up'/'down' only implicitly; please make the notation consistent with Table I and the figure.
  5. [Sec. VI] The phrase 'a zero-crossing upon reflection at the ky axis' is ambiguous; it likely means a sign change when crossing the ky axis, and should be rephrased for clarity.
  6. [Sec. VIII] The opening sentence states 'a ferromagnetic sample with C4v symmetry,' but the in-plane magnetized Fe(001) surface has C2v symmetry; although the next sentence qualifies this, the wording may mislead readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the domain-selectivity claim follows from symmetry and an independent one-step photoemission calculation, then is tested against experiment.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained against its own inputs. The asymmetries in Section II and Appendix A are algebraic regroupings of the four fundamental intensities; Eq. (2) (Adiff ≈ 2 Aex) is an approximation derived under the stated small-Amag assumption, and the authors explicitly compute Adiff directly from Aright and Aleft rather than relying on the approximation. The symmetry relations in Section IV follow from the C2v transformation table, which is standard group-theoretic content and is not used to smuggle in the quantitative result. The predicted domain selectivity from aperture position is derived from symmetry and then evaluated with a relativistic one-step photoemission calculation, which is an independent theoretical model with stated parameters (hν = 5.20 eV, θ = 65° and 0°, emission from EF). The experimental Fe(001) images in Fig. 5(b) provide an external test of the qualitative on/off selectivity pattern. The paper's self-citations, e.g., [16] for asymmetry definitions and symmetry tables and [25] for the PEEM instrument, are background references and are not load-bearing reductions of the central claim: the central prediction—that positioning the contrast aperture selects particular magnetization directions—is not defined in terms of the experimental outcome, nor is any fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The skeptic's concern about finite aperture and energy integration affecting the quantitative asymmetry magnitude is a correctness/validation risk, not a circularity, because the paper does not claim to have quantitatively fitted those integrated values. Therefore, no circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate score is 0.

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

The central claim rests on standard group-theoretic symmetry analysis and an established one-step photoemission model; no free parameters were fitted to the imaging data, and no new entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Fe(001) surface obeys C2v symmetry with in-plane easy axes along x and y.
    Used throughout Section IV and the aperture-position predictions in Section VI; based on standard surface symmetry of Fe(001).
  • domain assumption The relativistic one-step model correctly describes threshold photoemission from Fe(001).
    Section III describes the calculation framework; the predicted asymmetry maps in Figures 2-4 depend on this model.
  • standard math Group-theoretic transformation table (Table I) correctly maps momentum, helicity, and magnetization under C2v operations.
    Section IV derives asymmetry relations from this table; follows from C2v symmetry and is cited to ref [16].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Improved imaging of magnetic domains with a photoelectron emission microscope by utilizing symmetry and momentum selection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WYUEMTLH

@misc{pith2026250517658,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Improved imaging of magnetic domains with a photoelectron emission microscope by utilizing symmetry and momentum selection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WYUEMTLH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17658}
}
read the original abstract

Imaging of magnetic domains with a photoelectron emission microscope operated with photon energies in the threshold regime often suffers from low contrast. In this work we show by symmetry considerations, photoemission calculations, and imaging experiments, how the contrast can be improved significantly. The key to both domain selectivity and sizable intensity asymmetries is, guided by symmetry considerations, selecting the momenta of the photoelectrons by a properly positioned contrast aperture. By comparing computational with experimental results for an Fe(001) surface we prove the feasibility of the approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17658 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Sketch of the experimental geometry. The incoming [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Calculated asymmetries for an Fe(001) surface with magnetization along [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Calculated asymmetries for an Fe(001) surface. The photon energy is set to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Asymmetry distributions of the two orientations of the x-magnetization (“left”/“right”) in (a) and (b). In (c) we show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Panel (a) shows the simulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Difference asymmetry for perpendicular magnetiza [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    Henk and B

    J. Henk and B. Johansson, Magnetic dichroism in off- normal valence-band photoemission, J. Electron. Spec- trosc. Relat. Phenom. 94, 259 (1998)

    work page 1998

  2. [25]

    Paleschke, D

    M. Paleschke, D. Huber, F. W¨ uhrl, C.-T. Chiang, F. O. Schumann, J. Henk, and W. Widdra, Enhanced mag- netic dichroism in darkfield UV photoemission electron microscopy, Phys. Rev. B 10.1103/klc4-lk7g (2025)

    work page doi:10.1103/klc4-lk7g 2025

  3. [1]

    Sch¨ utz, W

    G. Sch¨ utz, W. Wagner, W. Wilhelm, P. Keinle, R. Zeller, R. Frahm, and G. Materlike, Absorption of Circularly Polarized X Rays in Iron, Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 737 (1987)

    work page 1987

  4. [2]

    C. Chen, Y. Idzerda, H.-J. Lin, N. Smith, G. Meigs, E. Chaban, G. Ho, E. Pellegrin, and F. Sette, Experi- mental Confirmation of the X-Ray Magnetic Dichroism Sum Rules for Iron and Cobalt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 152 (1995)

    work page 1995

  5. [3]

    Baumgarten, C

    L. Baumgarten, C. Schneider, H. Petersen, F. Sch¨ afers, and J. Kirschner, Magnetic X-Ray Dichroism in Core- Level Photoemission from Ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 492 (1990)

    work page 1990

  6. [4]

    Getzlaff, C

    M. Getzlaff, C. Ostertag, G. Fecher, N. Cherepkov, and G. Sch¨ onhense, Magnetic Dichroism in Photoemission with Unpolarized Light, Phys. Rev. Lett.73, 3030 (1994)

    work page 1994

  7. [5]

    W. Kuch, A. Dittschar, K. Meinel, M. Zharnikov, C. M. Schneider, J. Kirschner, J. Henk, and R. Feder, Magnetic- circular-dichroism study of the valence states of perpen- dicularly magnetized Ni(001) films, Phys. Rev. B 53, 11621 (1996)

    work page 1996

  8. [6]

    W. Kuch, A. Dittschar, M. Salvietti, M. T. Lin, M. Zharnikov, C. M. Schneider, J. Camarero, J. J. de Miguel, R. Miranda, and J. Kirschner, Magnetic dichroism study of the valence-band structure of perpen- dicularly magnetized Co/Cu(111), Phys. Rev. B 57, 5340 (1998)

    work page 1998

Show all 32 references
  1. [7]

    Bansmann, M

    J. Bansmann, M. Getzlaff, C. Ostertag, and G. Sch¨ onhense, Magnetic circular and linear dichroism in VUV-photoemission from thin iron films on W(110), Surf. Sci. 352-354, 898 (1996)

    1996

  2. [8]

    Venus, Magnetic dichroism in uv photoemission from valence bands: Geometries where the three-step model of photoemission predicts null results, Phys

    D. Venus, Magnetic dichroism in uv photoemission from valence bands: Geometries where the three-step model of photoemission predicts null results, Phys. Rev. B 56, 2661 (1997)

    1997

  3. [9]

    Kuch and C

    W. Kuch and C. M. Schneider, Magnetic dichroism in valence band photoemission, Rep. Prog. Phys. 64, 147 (2001)

    2001

  4. [10]

    Feder, J

    R. Feder, J. Henk, and B. Johansson, Magnetic dichroism in threshold photoemission, Solid State Commun. 108, 713 (1998)

    1998

  5. [11]

    G. K. L. Marx, H. J. Elmers, and G. Sch¨ onhense, Magneto-optical Linear Dichroism in Threshold Photo- emission Electron Microscopy of Polycrystalline Fe Films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5888 (2000)

    2000

  6. [12]

    Nakagawa and T

    T. Nakagawa and T. Yokoyama, Magnetic Circular Dichroism near the Fermi Level, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 237402 (2006)

    2006

  7. [13]

    Kronseder, J

    M. Kronseder, J. Min´ ar, J. Braun, S. G¨ unther, G. Woltersdorf, H. Ebert, and C. H. Back, Threshold photoemission magnetic circular dichroism of perpendic- ularly magnetized Ni films on Cu(001): Theory and ex- periment, Phys. Rev. B 83, 132404 (2011)

    2011

  8. [14]

    K. Hild, J. Emmel, G. Sch¨ onhense, and H. J. Elmers, Threshold photoemission magnetic circular dichroism at the spin-reorientation transition of ultrathin epitaxial Pt/Co/Pt(111)/W(110) films, Phys. Rev. B 80, 224426 (2009)

    2009

  9. [15]

    Melchior, M

    P. Melchior, M. Rollinger, P. Thielen, S. Alebrand, U. Bierbrauer, C. M. Schneider, M. Gottwald, M. Hehn, S. Mangin, M. Cinchetti, and M. Aeschlimann, Energy- resolved magnetic domain imaging in TbCo alloys by va- lence band photoemission magnetic circular dichroism, Phys. Rev...

    2013

  10. [17]

    S. V. Halilov, E. Tamura, D. Meinert, H. Gollisch, and R. Feder, Relativistic Green function theory of layer den- sities of states and photoemission from magnetic com- pounds, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 5, 3859 (1993)

    1993

  11. [18]

    Feder and J

    R. Feder and J. Henk, Magnetic dichroism and spin po- larization in valence band photoemission, in Spin-Orbit- Influenced Spectroscopies of Magnetic Solids , edited by H. Ebert and G. Sch¨ utz (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1996) p. 85

    1996

  12. [19]

    J. Henk, T. Scheunemann, S. V. Halilov, and R. Feder, Magnetic dichroism and electron spin polarization in photoemission: analytical results, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, 47 (1996)

    1996

  13. [20]

    Scheunemann, S

    T. Scheunemann, S. V. Halilov, J. Henk, and R. Feder, Spin reversal and circular dichroism in valence-band photoemission from 3d-ferromagnets, Solid State Com- mun. 91, 487 (1994)

    1994

  14. [21]

    Bauer, The resolution of the low energy electron re- 9 flection microscope, Ultramicroscopy 17, 51 (1985)

    E. Bauer, The resolution of the low energy electron re- 9 flection microscope, Ultramicroscopy 17, 51 (1985)

    1985

  15. [22]

    Kotsugi, W

    M. Kotsugi, W. Kuch, F. Offi, L. I. Chelaru, and J. Kirschner, Microspectroscopic two-dimensional Fermi surface mapping using a photoelectron emission micro- scope, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 74, 2754 (2003)

    2003

  16. [23]

    Kr¨ omker, M

    B. Kr¨ omker, M. Escher, D. Funnemann, D. Hartung, H. Engelhard, and J. Kirschner, Development of a mo- mentum microscope for time resolved band structure imaging, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 053702 (2008)

    2008

  17. [24]

    Merkel, M

    M. Merkel, M. Escher, J. Settemeyer, D. Funne- mann, A. Oelsner, C. Ziethen, O. Schmidt, M. Klais, and G. Sch¨ onhense, Microspectroscopy and spectromi- croscopy with photoemission electron microscopy using a new kind of imaging energy filter, Surf. Sci. 480, 196 (2001)

    2001

  18. [26]

    Bertacco and F

    R. Bertacco and F. Ciccacci, Oxygen-induced enhance- ment of the spin-dependent effects in electron spectro- scopies of Fe(001), Phys. Rev. B 59, 4207 (1999)

    1999

  19. [27]

    S. D. Cameron and D. J. Dwyer, Charge transfer effects on CO bond cleavage: CO and potassium on Fe(100), Surf. Sci. 198, 315 (1988)

    1988

  20. [28]

    G. N. Derry, M. E. Kern, and E. H. Worth, Recom- mended values of clean metal surface work functions, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 33, 060801 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    H. Kawano, Effective Work Functions of the Elements: Database, Most probable value, Previously recommended value, Polycrystalline thermionic contrast, Change at critical temperature, Anisotropic dependence sequence, Particle size dependence, Prog. Surf. Sci. 97, 100583 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    C. A. Ballentine, R. L. Fink, J. Araya-Pochet, and J. L. Erskine, Exploring magnetic properties of ultrathin epi- taxial magnetic structures using magneto-optical tech- niques, Applied Physics A 49, 459 (1989)

    1989

  23. [31]

    Z. Qiu, J. Pearson, and S. Bader, Asymmetry of the spin reorientation transition in ultrathin Fe films and wedges grown on Ag(100), Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1006 (1993)

    1993

  24. [32]

    Berger and H

    A. Berger and H. Hopster, Nonequilibrium Magnetiza- tion near the Reorientation Transition of Fe/Ag(100) Films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 519 (1996)

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.