Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Accelerated ultrafast demagnetization of an interlayer-exchange-coupled Co/Mn/Co trilayer

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Manganese spacer spin texture decides how fast cobalt demagnetizes.

desk verdict Solid ultrafast demagnetization study with a genuinely new SCP observation, but the same-thickness WCA evidence is vulnerable to a two-layer difference artifact and the interpretation relies on inferred Mn spin structure. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.24547 v1 pith:CHI3GTQL submitted 2025-05-30 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Jendrik Gördes , Ivar Kumberg , Chowdhury S. Awsaf , Marcel Walter , Tauqir Shinwari , Sangeeta Thakur , Sangeeta Sharma , Christian Schü{ss}ler-Langeheine
show 2 more authors
Niko Pontius Wolfgang Kuch
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords ultrafastdemagnetizationopticallyinducedintersitespintransferinterlayerexchangecouplingantiferromagneticspacerCo/Mn/Cotrilayertime-resolvedX-raymagneticcirculardichroismtime-dependentdensityfunctionaltheory
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 tries to establish that the internal spin arrangement of an antiferromagnetic spacer layer, not just its presence, controls how fast adjacent ferromagnetic layers lose their magnetization under an ultrafast laser pulse. In a Co/Mn/Co trilayer, demagnetization is roughly three times faster when the manganese spin structure is collinear than when it is twisted, and ab initio time-dependent density functional theory traces the acceleration to optically induced intersite spin transfer of spin-polarized electrons from cobalt into manganese. If correct, this gives a design handle: choose spacer thickness and layer alignment so the antiferromagnetic spacer is collinear, and demagnetization is accelerated by an optically driven spin-transfer channel. It also distinguishes optically induced intersite spin transfer from superdiffusive spin currents as the operative mechanism in this regime.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is optically induced intersite spin transfer: a laser pulse photo-excites spin-polarized electrons from occupied cobalt states into unoccupied minority-spin states of neighboring manganese atoms, transferring spin angular momentum out of the Co layers on a sub-100-femtosecond timescale. The efficiency of this transfer is controlled by the spin structure of the Mn spacer. In a collinear antiferromagnetic Mn configuration, the number of available unoccupied Mn states projected along the Co spin direction is maximal, so the transfer acts as a strong additional demagnetization channel; in a twisted non-collinear configuration, fewer states are available and the channel is suppressed. The paper maps the experimental configurations, weak coupling at 9.5 ML and strong coupling at 11 ML, onto collinear versus twisted Mn structures using the sign of the direct exchange coupling and the Mn layer parity from earlier interlayer-coupling measurements.

What would settle it

Measure the static Mn spin texture directly on the same Co/Mn/Co wedges, for example by X-ray magnetic linear dichroism or magnetic reflectometry: if at 9.5 ML Mn the spacer is collinear while the Co layers are parallel, or at 11 ML Mn twisted while parallel, the collinearity assignment and with it the central OISTR explanation would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper reports pump–probe resonant X-ray magnetic circular dichroism measurements at the cobalt L3 edge on a Cu(001)/8 ML Co/Mn wedge/20 ML Co/6 ML Ni trilayer and finds that the ultrafast demagnetization time constant of Co depends on both the relative alignment of the two Co layers and the Mn spacer thickness. At 9.5 ML Mn and a pump fluence of 10 mJ/cm², antiparallel alignment demagnetizes with a time constant of 90 ± 20 fs, whereas parallel alignment takes 240 ± 40 fs; at 11 ML Mn, where only parallel alignment is possible, the time constant is 78 ± 14 fs. The authors argue that a collinear Mn spin structure exists in the antiparallel 9.5 ML and parallel 11 ML configurations but a twisted one in the parallel 9.5 ML configuration, and that only collinear Mn allows optically induced intersite spin transfer: spin-polarized electrons photo-excited from occupied Co states are transferred into unoccupied Mn minority states, providing an extra spin decay channel. Because superdiffusive spin currents cannot explain the fast parallel-aligned demagnetization at 11 ML, the paper concludes that the spin structure of the antiferromagnetic spacer layer significantly controls the magnetization dynamics of adjacent ferromagnetic layers.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the assumed manganese spin structure at the two spacer thicknesses, collinear for antiparallel Co at 9.5 ML and parallel Co at 11 ML, twisted for parallel Co at 9.5 ML, which is inferred from the sign of the direct exchange coupling and layer parity rather than measured directly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, the demagnetization speed in ferromagnet/antiferromagnet/ferromagnet trilayers becomes tunable by spacer thickness and ferromagnetic alignment alone, with collinear spacer configurations shortening the time constant to roughly 80–90 fs at 10 mJ/cm² compared with about 240 fs for the twisted configuration.
  • Optically induced intersite spin transfer must be included alongside superdiffusive spin currents when modelling ultrafast demagnetization in metallic multilayers, because the fast parallel-aligned demagnetization at 11 ML Mn cannot be explained by spin-current transfer between antiparallel layers.
  • Antiferromagnetic spacers with controlled collinearity could act as built-in spin sinks that accelerate demagnetization, offering a route to faster all-optical switching of magnetic order in coupled multilayers.
  • The monolayer parity of the antiferromagnetic spacer becomes a relevant design parameter: with direct exchange coupling, the collinear configuration alternates with spacer thickness, so demagnetization speed should oscillate with the same period as the interlayer coupling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A test the paper does not report: time-resolve the Mn response itself; if optically induced intersite spin transfer is the decay channel, a transient increase in Mn minority-state occupation or a transient Mn moment should appear within the first few hundred femtoseconds of the Co demagnetization in the collinear cases.
  • The collinearity-controlled mechanism predicts a periodic alternation of fast and slow demagnetization times as the Mn thickness is swept across the wedge, following the 2-monolayer direct-exchange oscillation; a thickness series would map the effect directly.
  • Because the weak-coupling antiparallel R-XMCD signal is the difference of two antiparallel Co layer contributions, isolating the bottom Co layer with the incidence-angle-dependent sign change of its contribution could check whether unequal layer demagnetization rates distort the extracted 90 fs time constant.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper investigates ultrafast demagnetization in a Co/Mn/Co trilayer, comparing parallel and antiparallel alignment of the Co layers at 9.5 ML Mn thickness and parallel alignment at 11 ML Mn. Using element-resolved R-XMCD in reflectivity, the authors find that demagnetization is faster (90±20 fs and 78±14 fs at 10 mJ/cm²) when they infer a collinear Mn spin structure, and slower (240±40 fs) when they infer a twisted Mn spin structure. Ab initio TD-DFT calculations on a 2Co/4Mn/2Co slab show a corresponding difference between parallel and antiparallel Co alignments, which the authors attribute to optically induced intersite spin transfer (OISTR) from Co into Mn. The manuscript argues that the AFM spacer's spin structure controls this additional decay channel.

Significance. If the interpretation is correct, the work would demonstrate a controllable mechanism—OISTR into an antiferromagnetic spacer—for accelerating ultrafast demagnetization, with potential relevance for optically assisted magnetic switching. The paper's strengths include element-specific time-resolved data at multiple fluences, a quantitative comparison of fit time constants with error bars, and TD-DFT calculations that are not fitted to the experimental time constants, providing an independent theoretical basis for the qualitative trend. The central claim is plausible and the data show a reproducible difference, but the load-bearing inference of the Mn spin structure is indirect, and the WCA signal is a difference of two layer contributions, leaving room for a non-OISTR explanation.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section IV and inset of Fig. 4] The comparison between SCP (11 ML Mn) and WCP (9.5 ML Mn) involves different Mn thicknesses and therefore different absorption (7.5% vs 4.9% in the Mn layer) and possibly different interface qualities. The authors briefly dismiss interface differences, but the claim that the 11 ML collinear configuration is the sole cause of the fast 78 fs demagnetization requires excluding thickness-dependent effects. A control measurement at a third Mn thickness with the same inferred spin structure, or a systematic fluence-dependent comparison across thicknesses, would strengthen the case.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'may lead to improve dynamics' should be 'may lead to improved dynamics'.
  2. [Section II] The sentence 'The error scales with √N' is ambiguous; the error typically scales as 1/√N. Please clarify.
  3. [Section IV] There is a typo: 'negligble' should be 'negligible'.
  4. [Supplemental Material] The name 'Paratt' should be 'Parratt' in the ReMagX simulation section.
  5. [Table I] Table I lists time constants in ps, while the text quotes values in fs. Please ensure units are consistent or clearly labeled in both places.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the TD-DFT calculation is parameter-free and is not fitted to the measured demagnetization time constants, and the Mn spin-structure assignment rests on independent prior coupling measurements rather than on the dynamics data itself.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is: (1) measure R-XMCD demagnetization time constants for WCP, WCA, and SCP configurations; (2) assign a collinear or twisted Mn spin structure on the basis of the known sign of direct exchange coupling and Mn layer parity from earlier magnetometry (Ref. [25]); (3) run ab initio TD-DFT on an idealized Co/Mn/Co stack with those two spin configurations; (4) qualitatively match the fast/slow demagnetization pattern. No experimental demagnetization time constant is used as an input to the TD-DFT calculation, and the calculation does not define which experimental configuration is collinear or twisted. The spin-structure mapping is an inference from independent previous coupling measurements, not from the pump-probe data; the paper explicitly says 'We argue that this is the case' and also offers an alternative explanation ('spin-dependent interface transmittance of hot electrons'), so the OISTR interpretation is not forced by construction. The skeptic's concern that the WCA antiparallel signal is a difference of two unequal Co-layer contributions is a potential systematic artifact, not a circular reduction: the normalized difference signal is not by definition equal to the fitted time constant. Self-citations (Refs. [12,18-21,25,30]) are prior experimental or theoretical results that are externally falsifiable and are not used to define the present fitted quantities. Therefore the paper's central prediction is self-contained against its inputs; no equation or fitted parameter is equivalent to the claimed conclusion by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entities are introduced. The free parameters are modeling choices and fit parameters, not physical constants. The main burden is the inferred Mn spin structure (second axiom).

free parameters (4)
  • Assumed instrument response FWHM = 120 fs
    Gaussian convolution width in Eq. (1) is set from the stated pump and probe pulse durations, not measured in situ. It directly affects the extracted tm values, which are close to this width.
  • TD-DFT pump fluence = 29 mJ/cm2
    Chosen for the calculation, higher than the experimental 5-10 mJ/cm2. The authors claim the same effects appear with a shorter pulse, but this is a parameter choice, not fitted to the target result.
  • TD-DFT pulse FWHM = 12.4 fs
    Shorter than the experimental 60 fs pump. Chosen based on Ref. [19]; no sensitivity analysis is provided.
  • TD-DFT slab geometry = 2 ML Co / 4 ML Mn / 2 ML Co
    A simplified supercell chosen because OISTR is short-ranged. The even number of Mn layers determines which Co alignment gives a collinear Mn structure, shaping the interpretation.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption TD-DFT with the Elk code accurately describes OISTR-driven demagnetization in this Co/Mn interface.
    The central mechanism is identified from the TD-DFT result; no benchmarking against the specific Co/Mn interface is provided.
  • domain assumption The Mn spin structure is collinear for WCA at 9.5 ML and SCP at 11 ML, and twisted for WCP, based on direct exchange coupling sign and layer parity.
    This assignment is inferred from the coupling thickness dependence in Ref. [25] and is not directly measured. It is the load-bearing premise for the OISTR attribution.
  • domain assumption Superdiffusive spin currents are negligible at the high pump fluences used here.
    Invoked from literature (Refs. [7,8,10,37]) to rule out the standard alternative explanation for the WCA/WCP difference.
  • domain assumption The normalized R-XMCD difference at 7 degrees represents the sum of both Co layer magnetizations with no time-dependent distortion.
    ReMagX simulations support the sign choice, but the antiparallel signal is a difference of two layers; unequal layer dynamics would change the apparent time constant.
  • domain assumption The Ni capping layer affects all three configurations equally.
    Stated in the Discussion; no separate check on Ni influence on the compared cases is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Accelerated ultrafast demagnetization of an interlayer-exchange-coupled Co/Mn/Co trilayer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CHI3GTQL

@misc{pith2026250524547,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Accelerated ultrafast demagnetization of an interlayer-exchange-coupled Co/Mn/Co trilayer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CHI3GTQL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.24547}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the ultrafast magnetization dynamics of an interlayer-exchange-coupled Co/Mn/Co trilayer system after excitation with an ultrafast optical pump. We probe element- and time-resolved ferromagnetic order by X-ray magnetic circular dichroism in resonant reflectivity. We observe an accelerated Co demagnetization time in the case of weak total parallel interlayer coupling at 9.5 ML Mn thickness for antiparallel alignment of both Co layers compared to parallel alignment as well as for parallel alignment in the case of strong parallel interlayer coupling at 11 ML of Mn. From ab initio time-dependent density functional theory calculations, we conclude that optically induced intersite spin transfer of spin-polarized electrons from Co into Mn acts as a decay channel to enhance and accelerate ultrafast demagnetization. This spin transfer can only take place in case of a collinear Mn spin structure. We argue that this is the case for antiparallel alignment of both Co layers at 9.5 ML Mn thickness and parallel alignment in case of 11 ML of Mn. Our results point out that an antiferromagnetic spacer layer and its spin structure have a significant effect on the magnetization dynamics of adjacent ferromagnetic layers. Our findings provide further insight into fundamental mechanisms of ultrafast demagnetization and may lead to improve dynamics in multilayered systems for faster optical switching of magnetic order.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.24547 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: (a): Sketch of the experiment. Sample geometry of the Cu(001)/Co/Mn/Co/Ni [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Pump–probe delay time traces of the normalized difference for parallel orientation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Pump–probe delay time traces for a fluence of 10 mJ/cm [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Result of a TD-DFT calculation of the time-dependent magnetic moment of Co for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [7]

    Malinowski, F

    G. Malinowski, F. Dalla Longa, J. H. H. Rietjens, P. V. Paluskar, R. Huijink, H. J. M. Swagten, and B. Koopmans, Control of speed and efficiency of ultrafast demagnetization by direct trans- fer of spin angular momentum, Nature Physics 4, 855 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [10]

    Rudolf, C

    D. Rudolf, C. La-O-Vorakiat, M. Battiato, R. Adam, J. M. Shaw, E. Turgut, P. Maldonado, S. Mathias, P. Grychtol, H. T. Nembach, T. J. Silva, M. Aeschlimann, H. C. Kapteyn, M. M. Murnane, C. M. Schneider, and P. M. Oppeneer, Ultrafast magnetization enhancement in metallic multilayers driven by superdiffusive spin current, Nature Communications 3, 1037 (2012)

    work page 2012

  3. [1]

    Beaurepaire, J

    E. Beaurepaire, J. Merle, A. Daunois, and J. Bigot, Ultrafast spin dynamics in ferromagnetic nickel, Physical Review Letters 76, 4250 (1996)

    work page 1996

  4. [2]

    Hohlfeld, E

    J. Hohlfeld, E. Matthias, R. Knorren, and K. H. Bennemann, Nonequilibrium magnetization dynamics of nickel, Physical Review Letters 78, 4861 (1997)

    work page 1997

  5. [3]

    Scholl, L

    A. Scholl, L. Baumgarten, R. Jacquemin, and W. Eberhardt, Ultrafast spin dynamics of ferro- magnetic thin films observed by fs spin-resolved two-photon photoemission, Physical Review Letters 79, 5146 (1997)

    work page 1997

  6. [4]

    Koopmans, J

    B. Koopmans, J. J. M. Ruigrok, F. D. Longa, and W. J. M. de Jonge, Unifying ultrafast magnetization dynamics, Physical Review Letters 95, 267207 (2005)

    work page 2005

  7. [5]

    Kirilyuk, A

    A. Kirilyuk, A. V. Kimel, and T. Rasing, Ultrafast optical manipulation of magnetic order, Reviews of Modern Physics 82, 2731 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [6]

    Walowski and M

    J. Walowski and M. Münzenberg, Perspective: Ultrafast magnetism and THz spintronics, Journal of Applied Physics 120, 140901 (2016)

    work page 2016

Show all 48 references
  1. [8]

    Battiato, K

    M. Battiato, K. Carva, and P. M. Oppeneer, Superdiffusive spin transport as a mechanism of ultrafast demagnetization, Physical Review Letters 105, 027203 (2010)

    2010

  2. [9]

    Melnikov, I

    A. Melnikov, I. Razdolski, T. O. Wehling, E. T. Papaioannou, V. Roddatis, P. Fumagalli, O. Aktsipetrov, A. I. Lichtenstein, and U. Bovensiepen, Ultrafast transport of laser-excited 14 spin-polarized carriers in Au/Fe/MgO(001), Physical Review Letters 107, 076601 (2011)

    2011

  3. [11]

    Eschenlohr, M

    A. Eschenlohr, M. Battiato, P. Maldonado, N. Pontius, T. Kachel, K. Holldack, R. Mitzner, A. Föhlisch, P. M. Oppeneer, and C. Stamm, Ultrafast spin transport as key to femtosecond demagnetization, Nature Materials 12, 332 (2013)

    2013

  4. [12]

    Kumberg, E

    I. Kumberg, E. Golias, N. Pontius, R. Hosseinifar, K. Frischmuth, I. Gelen, T. Shinwari, S. Thakur, C. Schüßler-Langeheine, P. M. Oppeneer, and W. Kuch, Accelerating the laser- induced demagnetization of a ferromagnetic film by antiferromagnetic order in an adjacent layer, Phys...

    2020

  5. [13]

    Carpene, E

    E. Carpene, E. Mancini, C. Dallera, M. Brenna, E. Puppin, and S. de Silvestri, Dynamics of electron-magnon interaction and ultrafast demagnetization in thin iron films, Physical Review B 78, 174422 (2008)

    2008

  6. [14]

    Iacocca, T.-M

    E. Iacocca, T.-M. Liu, A. H. Reid, Z. Fu, S. Ruta, P. W. Granitzka, E. Jal, S. Bonetti, A. X. Gray, C. E. Graves, R. Kukreja, Z. Chen, D. J. Higley, T. Chase, L. Le Guyader, K. Hirsch, H. Ohldag, W. F. Schlotter, G. L. Dakovski, G. Coslovich, M. C. Hoffmann, S. Car- ron, A. Tsu...

    2019

  7. [15]

    Stamm, T

    C. Stamm, T. Kachel, N. Pontius, R. Mitzner, T. Quast, K. Holldack, S. Khan, C. Lupulescu, E. F. Aziz, M. Wietstruk, H. A. Dürr, and W. Eberhardt, Femtosecond modification of electron localization and transfer of angular momentum in nickel, Nature Materials 6, 740 (2007)

    2007

  8. [16]

    Koopmans, G

    B. Koopmans, G. Malinowski, F. Dalla Longa, D. Steiauf, M. Fähnle, T. Roth, M. Cinchetti, and M. Aeschlimann, Explaining the paradoxical diversity of ultrafast laser-induced demagne- tization, Nature Materials 9, 259 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Sultan, U

    M. Sultan, U. Atxitia, A. Melnikov, O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, and U. Bovensiepen, Electron- and phonon-mediated ultrafast magnetization dynamics of Gd(0001), Physical Review B 85, 15 184407 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    J. K. Dewhurst, P. Elliott, S. Shallcross, E. K. U. Gross, and S. Sharma, Laser-induced intersite spin transfer, Nano Letters 18, 1842 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    Siegrist, J

    F. Siegrist, J. A. Gessner, M. Ossiander, C. Denker, Y.-P. Chang, M. C. Schröder, A. Guggen- mos, Y. Cui, J. Walowski, U. Martens, J. K. Dewhurst, U. Kleineberg, M. Münzenberg, S. Sharma, and M. Schultze, Light-wave dynamic control of magnetism, Nature 571, 240 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Willems, C

    F. Willems, C. von Korff Schmising, C. Strüber, D. Schick, D. W. Engel, J. K. Dewhurst, P. Elliott, S. Sharma, and S. Eisebitt, Optical inter-site spin transfer probed by energy and spin-resolved transient absorption spectroscopy, Nature Communications 11, 871 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Golias, I

    E. Golias, I. Kumberg, I. Gelen, S. Thakur, J. Gördes, R. Hosseinifar, Q. Guillet, J. K. Dewhurst, S. Sharma, C. Schüßler-Langeheine, N. Pontius, and W. Kuch, Ultrafast optically induced ferromagnetic state in an elemental antiferromagnet, Physical Review Letters 126, 107202 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    S. A. Ryan, P. C. Johnsen, M. F. Elhanoty, A. Grafov, N. Li, A. Delin, A. Markou, E. Lesne, C. Felser, O. Eriksson, H. C. Kapteyn, O. Grånäs, and M. M. Murnane, Optically controlling the competition between spin flips and intersite spin transfer in a Heusler half-metal on sub- ...

    2023

  15. [23]

    Möller, H

    C. Möller, H. Probst, G. S. M. Jansen, M. Schumacher, M. Brede, J. K. Dewhurst, M. Reutzel, D. Steil, S. Sharma, and S. Mathias, Verification of ultrafast spin transfer effects in iron-nickel alloys, Communications Physics 7, 74 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Bobowski, X

    K. Bobowski, X. Zheng, B. Frietsch, D. Lawrenz, W. Bronsch, C. Gahl, B. Andres, C. Strüber, R. Carley, M. Teichmann, A. Scherz, S. Molodtsov, C. Cacho, R. T. Chapman, E. Springate, and M. Weinelt, Ultrafast spin transfer and its impact on the electronic structure, Science Adva...

    2024

  17. [25]

    Zhang, C.-B

    B. Zhang, C.-B. Wu, and W. Kuch, Tailoring interlayer coupling and coercivity in Co/Mn/Co trilayers by controlling the interface roughness, Journal of Applied Physics 115, 233915 (2014)

    2014

  18. [26]

    Y. A. Shokr, M. Erkovan, C.-B. Wu, B. Zhang, O. Sandig, and W. Kuch, Temperature-induced sign change of the magnetic interlayer coupling in Ni/Ni 25Mn75/Ni trilayers on Cu 3Au(001), Journal of Applied Physics 117, 175302 (2015) . 16

    2015

  19. [27]

    Néel, Sur un nouveau mode de couplage entre les aimantations de deux couches minces ferromagnétiques, C

    L. Néel, Sur un nouveau mode de couplage entre les aimantations de deux couches minces ferromagnétiques, C. r. hebd. séances Acad. sci. 255, 1676 (1962)

    1962

  20. [28]

    Dieny, V

    B. Dieny, V. S. Speriosu, S. S. P. Parkin, B. A. Gurney, D. R. Wilhoit, and D. Mauri, Giant magnetoresistance in soft ferromagnetic multilayers, Physical Review B 43, 1297 (1991)

    1991

  21. [29]

    Holldack, J

    K. Holldack, J. Bahrdt, A. Balzer, U. Bovensiepen, M. Brzhezinskaya, A. Erko, A. Eschenlohr, R. Follath, A. Firsov, W. Frentrup, L. Le Guyader, T. Kachel, P. Kuske, R. Mitzner, R. Müller, N. Pontius, T. Quast, I. Radu, J. S. Schmidt, C. Schüssler-Langeheine, M. Sperling, C. St...

    2014

  22. [31]

    [ 38– 44]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for additional details, refer- encing refs. [ 38– 44]

  23. [34]

    T. Roth, A. J. Schellekens, S. Alebrand, O. Schmitt, D. Steil, B. Koopmans, M. Cinchetti, and M. Aeschlimann, Temperature dependence of laser-induced demagnetization in Ni: A key for identifying the underlying mechanism, Phys. Rev. X 2, 021006 (2012)

    2012

  24. [35]

    J. K. Dewhurst, K. Krieger, S. Sharma, and E. Gross, An efficient algorithm for time propa- gation as applied to linearized augmented plane wave method, Computer Physics Communi- cations 209, 92 (2016)

    2016

  25. [36]

    http://elk.sourceforge.net ()

  26. [37]

    Battiato, K

    M. Battiato, K. Carva, and P. M. Oppeneer, Theory of laser-induced ultrafast superdiffusive spin transport in layered heterostructures, Phys. Rev. B 86, 024404 (2012)

    2012

  27. [38]

    Macke and E

    S. Macke and E. Goering, Magnetic reflectometry of heterostructures, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 26, 363201 (2014) . 17

    2014

  28. [39]

    https://www.remagx.org/ ()

  29. [42]

    J. R. Cerda, P. L. de Andres, A. Cebollada, R. Miranda, E. Navas, P. Schuster, C. M. Schnei- der, and J. Kirschner, Epitaxial growth of cobalt films on Cu(100): a crystallographic LEED determination, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 5, 2055 (1993)

    1993

  30. [44]

    Johnson and R

    P. Johnson and R. Christy, Optical constants of transition metals: Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, and Pd, Physical Review B 9, 5056 (1974) . 18 Accelerated ultrafast demagnetization of an interlayer-exchange-coupled Co/Mn/Co trilayer — Supplemental Material — Jendrik Gördes, 1 Iva...

    1974

  31. [45]

    Kumberg, E

    I. Kumberg, E. Golias, S. E. Hadjadj, R. Hosseinifar, S. Thakur, T. Shinwari, I. Gelen, N. Pon- tius, C. Schüßler-Langeheine, C. von Korff Schmising, S. Sharma, and W. Kuch, Ultrafast laser- induced magneto-optical changes in resonant magnetic x-ray reflectivity, Physical Review...

    2023

  32. [46]

    Macke and E

    S. Macke and E. Goering, Magnetic reflectometry of heterostructures, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 26, 363201 (2014)

    2014

  33. [47]

    https://www.remagx.org/

  34. [48]

    Henke, E

    B. Henke, E. Gullikson, and J. Davis, X-ray interactions: Photoabsorption, scattering, trans- mission, and reflection at E = 50-30,000 eV, Z = 1-92, Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 54, 181 (1993)

    1993

  35. [49]

    Abu-Joudeh, B

    M. Abu-Joudeh, B. Davies, and P. Montano, LEED, Auger, and electron energy loss studies of Ni epitaxially grown on Cu(100), Surface Science 171, 331 (1986)

    1986

  36. [50]

    J. R. Cerda, P. L. de Andres, A. Cebollada, R. Miranda, E. Navas, P. Schuster, C. M. Schnei- der, and J. Kirschner, Epitaxial growth of cobalt films on Cu(100): a crystallographic LEED determination, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 5, 2055 (1993) . 6

    1993

  37. [51]

    Q. Wang, N. Metoki, C. Morawe, T. Zeidler, and H. Zabel, Structural and magnetic properties of Co/face-centered-cubic Mn(001) multilayers, Journal of Applied Physics 78, 1689 (1995)

    1995

  38. [52]

    Ohta and H

    K. Ohta and H. Ishida, Matrix formalism for calculation of electric field intensity of light in stratified multilayered films, Applied Optics 29, 1952 (1990)

    1990

  39. [53]

    Ohta and H

    K. Ohta and H. Ishida, Matrix formalism for calculation of the light beam intensity in stratified multilayered films, and its use in the analysis of emission spectra, Applied Optics 29, 2466 (1990)

    1990

  40. [54]

    Johnson and R

    P. Johnson and R. Christy, Optical constants of transition metals: Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, and Pd, Physical Review B 9, 5056 (1974) . 7

    1974

Pith tools

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