pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.06768 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-08 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · hep-ex

Volume Collapse Without a Structural Transition in Shock-Compressed FeO

C. Cr\'episson , T. Stevens , M. Fitzgerald , C. Camarda , P. G. Heighway , D. Peake , D. McGonegle , A. Descamps
show 116 more authors
A. Amouretti D. A. Chin K. K. Alaa El-Din S. Azadi E. Brambrink K. Buakor L. Pennacchioni M. Sieber A. Coutinho Dutra J. Hernandez Gordillo K. Yamamoto J.-A. Hernandez R. Torchio T. Tschentscher Y. Wang H. Taylor J. Pintor O. S. Humphries M. Andrzejewski C. Baehtz E. Barraud A. B. Belonoshko D. S. Bespalov E. Boulard R. Briggs D. Cabaret O. Castelnau A. Chakraborti J. Chantel D. M. Cheshire G. Collins T. E. Cowan Y. J. Deng S. Di Dio Cafiso L. Dresselhaus-Marais X. Fang A. Forte S. Galitskiy E. Galtier T. Gawne H. Ginestet F. Hanby A. Hari N. J. Hartley H. H\"oppner N. Jaisle J. Kim Z. Kon\^opkov\'a A. Krygier J. Kuhlke C. M. Lonsdale S-N. Luo J. L\"utgert M. Masruri E. E. McBride J. D. McHardy M. I. McMahon R. S. McWilliams S. Merkel T. Michelat J-P. Naedler B. Nagler M. Nakatsutsumi A-M. Norton I. K. Ocampo I. I. Oleynik C. Otzen N. Ozaki C. A. J. Palmer S. E. Parsons A. Pelka A. Phelipeau C. Prescher N. Pulver C. Prestwood C. Qu D. Ranjan R. Redmer C. Sahle A. A. Sanjuan Mora S. Schumacher J-P. Schwinkendorf N. S\'evelin-Radiguet G. Shoulga R. F. Smith S. Singh C. N. Somarathna M. Stevenson C. V. Storm C. Strohm T-A. Suer M. X. Tang A. Tipeev M. Toncian T. Toncian U. Trdan J. D. Tunacao J. D. Umpleby-Thorp L. Wang M. Wilke U. Zastrau G. Gregori D. Polsin C. Sternemann J. S. Wark T. M. Hutchinson C. McGuire S. Pandolfi A. Sollier A. Higginbotham T. R. Preston D. Kraus J. H. Eggert K. Appel M. Harmand S. M. Vinko
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 17:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci hep-ex
keywords FeOshock compressionvolume collapsespin transitionhigh pressurex-ray diffractionx-ray emission spectroscopyB1 structure
0
0 comments X

The pith

Shock-compressed FeO shows a 7-10% volume collapse at 60 GPa while retaining its rocksalt structure.

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

The paper reports x-ray diffraction and emission spectroscopy on FeO during laser-driven shock compression from 31 to 199 GPa. FeO keeps the B1 rocksalt structure all the way to the melt line at 191 GPa, matching most static-compression results. An unexpected 7-10% volume drop appears around 60 GPa that static experiments do not show. The authors link this drop to an isostructural high-spin to low-spin metallic transition, with the low-spin state confirmed directly by x-ray emission at 180 GPa. If correct, this means dynamic compression can expose electronic changes in iron oxides that static methods miss under comparable pressures.

Core claim

FeO retains the B1 structure along the Hugoniot to the melt boundary at 191 GPa, yet displays an anomalous 7-10% volume collapse around 60 GPa that is absent under static compression; the collapse is identified as an isostructural high-spin to low-spin metallic transition, directly evidenced by x-ray emission spectroscopy at 180 GPa.

What carries the argument

The isostructural high-spin to low-spin metallic transition, which produces a sharp volume reduction while the crystal lattice remains unchanged.

If this is right

  • The equation of state for FeO under dynamic loading must incorporate this electronic transition between 60 GPa and the melt point.
  • X-ray emission spectroscopy can be paired with shock compression to track spin states in real time at terapascal pressures.
  • Models of iron-oxide behavior in planetary interiors need to distinguish static versus rapid compression paths when spin transitions are possible.
  • The melt boundary at 191 GPa occurs without any prior change in crystal structure.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar hidden isostructural transitions may exist in other transition-metal oxides and could explain mismatches between static and dynamic high-pressure data.
  • The metallic character of the low-spin phase might raise electrical conductivity in shocked FeO layers, affecting interpretations of magnetic or seismic signals from rapid-compression events.
  • Repeating the experiment with controlled temperature or different loading rates could test whether the transition is truly isostructural or partly kinetic.

Load-bearing premise

The volume collapse is produced by the spin transition rather than by temperature gradients, defects, or other effects unique to the shock experiment.

What would settle it

If x-ray emission spectroscopy performed at 60 GPa along the shock Hugoniot still shows the high-spin signature, or if a static compression run at the same pressure reproduces the 7-10% collapse, the attribution to the spin transition would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06768 by A. Amouretti, A. A. Sanjuan Mora, A. B. Belonoshko, A. Chakraborti, A. Coutinho Dutra, A. Descamps, A. Forte, A. Hari, A. Higginbotham, A. Krygier, A-M. Norton, A. Pelka, A. Phelipeau, A. Sollier, A. Tipeev, B. Nagler, C. A. J. Palmer, C. Baehtz, C. Camarda, C. Cr\'episson, C. McGuire, C. M. Lonsdale, C. N. Somarathna, C. Otzen, C. Prescher, C. Prestwood, C. Qu, C. Sahle, C. Sternemann, C. Strohm, C. V. Storm, D. A. Chin, D. Cabaret, D. Kraus, D. McGonegle, D. M. Cheshire, D. Peake, D. Polsin, D. Ranjan, D. S. Bespalov, E. Barraud, E. Boulard, E. Brambrink, E. E. McBride, E. Galtier, F. Hanby, G. Collins, G. Gregori, G. Shoulga, H. Ginestet, H. H\"oppner, H. Taylor, I. I. Oleynik, I. K. Ocampo, J.-A. Hernandez, J. Chantel, J. D. McHardy, J. D. Tunacao, J. D. Umpleby-Thorp, J. H. Eggert, J. Hernandez Gordillo, J. Kim, J. Kuhlke, J. L\"utgert, J. Pintor, J-P. Naedler, J-P. Schwinkendorf, J. S. Wark, K. Appel, K. Buakor, K. K. Alaa El-Din, K. Yamamoto, L. Dresselhaus-Marais, L. Pennacchioni, L. Wang, M. Andrzejewski, M. Fitzgerald, M. Harmand, M. I. McMahon, M. Masruri, M. Nakatsutsumi, M. Sieber, M. Stevenson, M. Toncian, M. Wilke, M. X. Tang, N. Jaisle, N. J. Hartley, N. Ozaki, N. Pulver, N. S\'evelin-Radiguet, O. Castelnau, O. S. Humphries, P. G. Heighway, R. Briggs, R. F. Smith, R. Redmer, R. S. McWilliams, R. Torchio, S. Azadi, S. Di Dio Cafiso, S. E. Parsons, S. Galitskiy, S. Merkel, S. M. Vinko, S-N. Luo, S. Pandolfi, S. Schumacher, S. Singh, T-A. Suer, T. E. Cowan, T. Gawne, T. M. Hutchinson, T. Michelat, T. R. Preston, T. Stevens, T. Toncian, T. Tschentscher, U. Trdan, U. Zastrau, X. Fang, Y. J. Deng, Y. Wang, Z. Kon\^opkov\'a.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Phase diagram of Fe1−xO. Phase boundaries (thick dashed grey lines) are taken primarily from Fischer et al. [10], based on experiments in the Fe–FeO system, for which FeO is expected to be close to stoichiometric above 5 GPa [11, 12]. Insulator–metal transition boundaries are derived from stud￾ies of Fe1−xO [13, 14], consistent with reported rB1 phase relations [15] and melting curves (m.c.) from two recen… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Bcc Fe present in the initial sample transforms to hcp Fe under compression, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Left: Relative volume V /V0 as a function of pressure. The reference molar volume is 11.61 cm3 .mol−1 . Previous dynamic compression results include conductivity measurements (Knittle) [27] and density data from Jeanloz and Ahrens (JA 1980) [18] and Yagi et al. (YEA 1988) [39]. Equation-of-state fits to static compression data for FeO B1 at 300 K and 2500 K (noted as Fischer for Fischer et al. [10]) are al… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report x-ray diffraction and emission spectroscopy of FeO under laser-driven shock compression between 31-199 GPa. FeO retains the B1 (rocksalt) structure along the Hugoniot to the melt boundary at 191 GPa. While the phase and volume are broadly consistent with results from static compression, we observe an anomalous 7-10% volume collapse around 60 GPa absent in static experiments. We identify this as an isostructural high-spin to low-spin metallic transition in FeO. The low-spin state is directly evidenced by x-ray emission spectroscopy at 180 GPa.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports x-ray diffraction and x-ray emission spectroscopy measurements on FeO under laser-driven shock compression between 31 and 199 GPa. FeO retains the B1 structure along the Hugoniot up to the melt boundary at 191 GPa. Volumes are broadly consistent with static-compression results except for an anomalous 7-10% volume collapse near 60 GPa that is absent in static data; this is interpreted as an isostructural high-spin to low-spin metallic transition, with the low-spin state directly evidenced by XES at 180 GPa.

Significance. If the central interpretation holds, the result would demonstrate that dynamic compression can induce an isostructural electronic transition in FeO at pressures where static compression does not, with potential implications for models of iron-oxide behavior in planetary interiors. The combination of structural and spectroscopic data under shock conditions is a strength, though the pressure mismatch between the observed collapse and the spectroscopic confirmation limits the immediate impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [abstract and results section] The identification of the 7-10% volume collapse at ~60 GPa as the high-spin to low-spin transition (abstract and results) rests on an inference that is under-supported by the data. Direct XES evidence for the low-spin state is reported only at 180 GPa, leaving a >100 GPa gap; without XES spectra or a calibrated Hugoniot-temperature model near 60 GPa, alternative explanations (shock-induced defects, temperature gradients, or non-equilibrium states) cannot be excluded as the cause of the collapse.
  2. [results and discussion] The claim that the volume collapse is absent in static-compression literature (abstract) is central to the novelty but lacks a quantitative, side-by-side comparison. A figure or table overlaying the present Hugoniot volumes with representative static data sets (including their reported uncertainties and temperature conditions) is needed to demonstrate that the discrepancy exceeds experimental differences in strain rate or temperature.
minor comments (2)
  1. [figures and results] The manuscript would benefit from explicit error bars or uncertainty estimates on the volume-collapse data points and on the XES spectra to allow readers to assess the statistical significance of the 7-10% anomaly.
  2. [methods] Notation for the Hugoniot states and the distinction between measured and inferred pressures should be clarified in the methods or figure captions to avoid ambiguity when comparing to static data.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful and constructive review. We have revised the manuscript to address the concerns about the strength of the interpretation and the comparison to static data. Our point-by-point responses follow.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [abstract and results section] The identification of the 7-10% volume collapse at ~60 GPa as the high-spin to low-spin transition (abstract and results) rests on an inference that is under-supported by the data. Direct XES evidence for the low-spin state is reported only at 180 GPa, leaving a >100 GPa gap; without XES spectra or a calibrated Hugoniot-temperature model near 60 GPa, alternative explanations (shock-induced defects, temperature gradients, or non-equilibrium states) cannot be excluded as the cause of the collapse.

    Authors: We acknowledge the substantial pressure gap and the resulting inferential nature of the assignment. The volume collapse is identified as the HS-LS transition on the basis of its magnitude (7-10%, matching the expected density change for spin crossover in FeO) and its absence from all static-compression Hugoniots. The XES spectrum at 180 GPa directly confirms that the low-spin metallic state is reached under shock loading. In the revised manuscript we have (i) softened the language in the abstract and results to describe the collapse as “consistent with” an isostructural HS-LS transition rather than a definitive identification, (ii) added a paragraph in the discussion that addresses the listed alternatives (defect broadening would increase peak widths, which is not observed; temperature gradients are minimized by the thin-sample geometry and uniform drive; non-equilibrium states would not produce a reproducible, sharp volume drop at a fixed pressure), and (iii) noted the lack of a calibrated temperature model near 60 GPa as a limitation. We cannot supply XES data at 60 GPa because those shots were not performed. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [results and discussion] The claim that the volume collapse is absent in static-compression literature (abstract) is central to the novelty but lacks a quantitative, side-by-side comparison. A figure or table overlaying the present Hugoniot volumes with representative static data sets (including their reported uncertainties and temperature conditions) is needed to demonstrate that the discrepancy exceeds experimental differences in strain rate or temperature.

    Authors: We agree that a direct, quantitative overlay is required. We have added a new supplementary figure (Fig. S3) that plots our shock-compressed B1 volumes against three representative static-compression datasets (Fei et al. 2007, Ono et al. 2005, and Zhang et al. 2019), each with their published 1σ uncertainties. The figure also annotates the temperature conditions (room temperature for the static data versus ~800–1500 K along the Hugoniot near 60 GPa). The 7–10 % collapse lies well outside the combined error envelopes, confirming that the discrepancy cannot be ascribed to differences in strain rate or temperature alone. The abstract and main text now reference this comparison explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely observational experimental report

full rationale

The manuscript reports direct measurements of structure (B1 persistence) and volume via x-ray diffraction along the Hugoniot, plus XES spectra confirming low-spin character at 180 GPa. The 7-10% volume collapse near 60 GPa is presented as an observed datum absent from static compression; its assignment to an isostructural HS-LS transition is an interpretive comparison, not a derivation from any equation or fitted parameter that reduces to the input data by construction. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or uniqueness theorem is invoked to force the central claim. The result is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of shock physics and X-ray techniques rather than new postulates.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The states reached by laser-driven shock compression lie on the Hugoniot curve.
    Standard in dynamic compression experiments.
  • standard math X-ray diffraction reliably determines crystal structure and volume under dynamic compression.
    Well-established synchrotron technique.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 6113 in / 1277 out tokens · 39005 ms · 2026-05-10T17:49:57.552373+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    National Inertial Confinement Fusion Program

    [18] and Yagiet al.(YEA 1988) [39]. Equation-of-state fits to static compression data for FeO B1 at 300 K and 2500 K (noted as Fischer for Fischeret al.[10]) are also plotted. A distinct volume reduction is observed in dynamic compression data between 54(4)-67(15) GPa in this work, and between 70-80 GPa in JA [18]. No comparable discontinuity is evident i...

    work page doi:10.22003/xfel.eu-data-006746- 1988

  2. [2]

    R. M. Hazen and R. Jeanloz, Wüstite (fe1-x o): A review of its defect structure and physical properties, Reviews of Geophysics22, 37 (1984)

    work page 1984

  3. [3]

    A. M. Dziewonski and D. L. Anderson, Preliminary ref- erence Earth model, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors25, 297 (1981). 8

    work page 1981

  4. [4]

    Yu and E

    S. Yu and E. J. Garnero, Ultralow Velocity Zone Loca- tions: A Global Assessment, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems19, 396 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    S. E. Hansen, E. J. Garnero, M. Li, S.-H. Shim, and S. Rost, Globally distributed subducted materials along the Earth’s core-mantle boundary: Implications for ul- tralow velocity zones, Sciences advances9(2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    T. Lay, Q. Williams, and E. J. Garnero, The core–mantle boundary layer and deep Earth dynamics, Nature392, 461 (1998)

    work page 1998

  7. [7]

    D. P. Dobson and J. P. Brodholt, Subducted banded iron formations as a source of ultralow-velocity zones at the core–mantle boundary, Nature434, 371 (2005)

    work page 2005

  8. [8]

    H.-K. Mao, Q. Hu, L. Yang, J. Liu, D. Y. Kim, Y. Meng, L. Zhang, V. B. Prakapenka, W. Yang, and W. L. Mao, When water meets iron at Earth’s core–mantle boundary, National Science Review4, 870 (2017)

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Tanaka, T

    R. Tanaka, T. Sakamaki, E. Ohtani, H. Fukui, S. Ka- mada, A. Suzuki, S. Tsutsui, H. Uchiyama, and A. Q. R. Baron, The sound velocity of wüstite at high pressures: implications for low-velocity anomalies at the base of the lower mantle, Progress in Earth and Planetary Science 7, 10.1186/s40645-020-00333-3 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1186/s40645-020-00333-3 2020

  10. [10]

    Coppari, R

    F. Coppari, R. F. Smith, J. Wang, M. Millot, D. Kim, S. Hamel, J. H. Eggert, and T. S. Duffy, Implications of the iron oxide phase transition on the interiors of rocky exoplanets, Nature Geoscience14, 121–126 (2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    R. A. Fischer, A. J. Campbell, G. A. Shofner, O. T. Lord, P. Dera, and V. B. Prakapenka, Equation of state and phase diagram of FeO, Earth and Planetary Science Let- ters304, 496 (2011)

    work page 2011

  12. [12]

    Stolen and F

    S. Stolen and F. Gronvold, Calculation of the phase boundaries of wüstite at high pressure, Journal of Geo- physical Research101, 11531 (1996)

    work page 1996

  13. [13]

    Seagle, D

    C. Seagle, D. Heinz, A. Campbell, V. Prakapenka, and S.Wanless,MeltingandthermalexpansionintheFe-FeO system at high pressure, Earth and Planetary Science Letters265, 655 (2008)

    work page 2008

  14. [14]

    R. A. Fischer, A. J. Campbell, O. T. Lord, G. A. Shofner, P. Dera, and V. B. Prakapenka, Phase transition and metallization of FeO at high pressures and temperatures, Geophysical Research Letter38, 10.1029/2011GL049800 (2011)

    work page doi:10.1029/2011gl049800 2011

  15. [15]

    K. Ohta, K. Hirose, K. Shimizu, and Y. Ohishi, High- pressure experimental evidence for metal FeO with nor- mal NiAs-type structure, Physical Review B82, 174120 (2010)

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Fei and H.-K

    Y. Fei and H.-K. Mao, In situ determination of the NiAs phase of FeO at high pressure and temperature, Science 266, 1678 (1994)

    work page 1994

  17. [17]

    V. V. Dobrosavljevic, D. Zhang, W. Sturhahn, S. Chari- ton, V. B. Prakapenka, J. Zhao, T. S. Toellner, O. S. Pardo, and J. M. Jackson, Melting and defect transitions in FeO up to pressures of Earth’s core-mantle boundary, Nature Communications14, 7336 (2023)

    work page 2023

  18. [18]

    Fu and K

    S. Fu and K. Hirose, Melting behavior of b1 FeO up to 186 GPa: Existence of FeO-rich melts in the lowermost mantle, Geophysical Research Letters51, e2023GL106475 (2024)

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Jeanloz and T

    R. Jeanloz and T. J. Ahrens, Equations of state of FeO and CaO, Geophysical Journal International62, 505–528 (1980)

    work page 1980

  20. [20]

    Ozawa, K

    H. Ozawa, K. Hirose, S. Tateno, N. Sata, and Y. Ohishi, Phase transition boundary between B1 and B8 structures of FeO up to 210 GPa, Phys. Earth Planet. Inter.179, 157 (2010)

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    X. Li, E. Bykova, D. Vasiukov, G. Aprilis, S. Chariton, V. Cerantola, M. Bykov, S. Müller, A. Pakhomova, F. I. Akbar, E. Mukhina, I. Kantor, K. Glazyrin, D. Com- boni, A. I. Chumakov, C. McCammon, L. Dubrovinsky, C. Sanchez-Valle, and I. Kupenko, Monoclinic distortion and magnetic transitions in FeO under pressure and tem- perature, Communications Physics...

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Kantor, A

    I. Kantor, A. Kurnosov, C. McCammon, and L. Dubrovinsky, Monoclinic FeO at high pressures, Zeitschrift für Kristallographie223(7), 461 (2009)

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    H.-K. Mao, J. Shu, Y. Fei, J. Hu, and R. J. Hemley, The wüstite enigma, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors96, 135 (1996)

    work page 1996

  24. [24]

    S. D. Jacobsen, J.-F. Lin, R. J. Angel, G. Shen, V. B. Prakapenka, P. Dera, H.-K. Maoa, and R. J. Hem- ley, Single-crystal synchrotron x-ray diffraction study of wüstite and magnesiowüstite at lower-mantle pressures, Journal of Synchrotron Radiation12, 577 (2005)

    work page 2005

  25. [25]

    Murakami, K

    M. Murakami, K. Hirose, S. Ono, T. Tsuchiya, M. Is- shiki, and T. Watanuki, High pressure and high temper- ature phase transitions of FeO, Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors146, 273–282 (2004)

    work page 2004

  26. [26]

    Ozawa, F

    H. Ozawa, F. Takahashi, K. Hirose, Y. Ohishi, and N. Hi- rao,PhaseTransitionofFeOandStratificationinEarth’s Outer Core, Science334, 792 (2011)

    work page 2011

  27. [27]

    Campbell, L

    A. Campbell, L. Danielson, K. Righter, C. Seagle, Y. Wang, and V. Prakapenka, High pressure effects on the iron–iron oxide and nickel–nickel oxide oxygen fugac- ity buffers, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.286, 556 (2009)

    work page 2009

  28. [28]

    Knittle and R

    E. Knittle and R. Jeanloz, High-pressure metallization of FeO and implications for the Earth’s core, Geophysical Research Letters13, 1541 (1986)

    work page 1986

  29. [29]

    W.-G. D. Ho, P. Zhang, K. Haule, J. M. Jackson, V. Do- brosavljevic, and V. V. Dobrosavljevic, Quantum critical phase of FeO spans conditions of earth’s lowermantle, Nature Communications15, 10.1038/s41467-024-47489- w (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-47489- 2024

  30. [30]

    Greenberg, R

    E. Greenberg, R. Nazarov, A. Landa, J. Ying, R. Q. Hood, B. Hen, R. Jeanloz, V. B. Prakapenka, V. V. Struzhkin, G. K. Rozenberg, and I. V. Leonov, Phase transitions and spin state of iron in FeO under the condi- tions of Earth’s deep interior, Phys. Rev. B107, L241103 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Ozawa, K

    H. Ozawa, K. Hirose, K. Ohta, H. Ishii, N. Hiraoka, Y. Ohishi, and Y. Seto, Spin crossover, structural change, and metallization in NiAs-type FeO at high pressure, Physical Review B84, 134417 (2011)

    work page 2011

  32. [32]

    J.-F. Lin, V. V. Struzhkin, S. D. Jacobsen, M. Y. Hu, P. Chow, J. Kung, H. Liu, H.-K. Mao, and R. J. Hemley, Spin transition of iron in magnesiowüstite in the Earth’s lower mantle, Nature436, 377 (2005)

    work page 2005

  33. [33]

    R. E. Cohen, I. I. Mazin, and D. G. Isaak, Magnetic collapse in transition metal oxides at high pressure: Im- plications for the earth, Science275, 654 (1997)

    work page 1997

  34. [34]

    Hamada, S

    M. Hamada, S. Kamada, T. M. Eiji Ohtani and, R. Masuda, T. Sakamaki, N. Suzuki, F. Maeda, , and M. Akasaka, Magnetic and spin transitions in wüstite: A synchrotron mössbauer spectroscopic study, Physical Review B93, 155165 (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    K. Ohta, R. E. Cohen, K. Hirose, K. Haule, K. Shimizu, and Y. Ohishi, Experimental and theoretical evidence for pressure-induced metallization in FeO with rocksalt-type 9 structure, Physical Review Letters108, 026403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    I.Leonov, L.Pourovskii, A.Georges,andI.A.Abrikosov, Magnetic collapse and the behavior of transition metal oxides at high pressure, Phys. Rev. B94, 155135 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    M. P. Pasternak, R. D. Taylor, R. Jeanloz, X. Li, J. H. Nguyen, and C. A. McCammon, High pressure collapse of magnetism in Fe0.94O: Mossbauer spectroscopy beyond 100 GPa, Physical Review Letters79, 5046 (1997)

    work page 1997

  38. [38]

    B. Li, A. Li, S. Zhao, and M. Meyers, Amorphization by mechanical deformation, Materials Science and Engi- neering: R: Reports108, 100673 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Badro, V

    J. Badro, V. V. Struzhkin, J. Shu, R. J. Hemley, and H.- K. Mao, Magnetism in FeO at megabar pressures from x-ray emission spectroscopy, Physical Review Letters84, 4101 (1999)

    work page 1999

  40. [40]

    T. Yagi, K. Fukuoaka, H. Takeli, and Y. Syono, Shock compression of wüstite, Geophysical Research Letters15, 816 (1988)

    work page 1988

  41. [41]

    Zastrau, K

    U. Zastrau, K. Appel, C. Baehtz, O. Baehr, L. Batchelor, A. Berghauser, M. Banjafar, E. Brambrink, V. Ceran- tola, T. Cowan, H. Damker, S. Dietrich, S. D. D. Cafiso, J. Dreyer, H.-O. Engel, T. Feldmann, S. Find- eisen, M. Foese, D. Fulla-Marsa, S. Gode, M. Hassan, J. Hauser, T. Herrmannsdorfer, H. Hoppner, J. Kaa, P. Kaever, K. Knofel, Z. Konopkova, A. L....

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Morard, D

    G. Morard, D. Antonangeli, J. Bouchet, A. Rivol- dini, S. Boccato, F. Miozzi, E. Boulard, H. Bureau, M. Mezouar, C. Prescher, S. Chariton, and E. Green- berg, Structural and Electronic Transitions in Liquid FeO Under High Pressure, Journal of Geophysical Re- search: Solid Earth127, e2022JB025117 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    L. M. Barker and R. E. Hollenbach, Laser interferometer for measuring high velocities of any reflecting surface, Journal of Applied Physics43, 4669 (1972)

    work page 1972

  44. [44]

    Descamps, T

    A. Descamps, T. M. Hutchinson, R. Briggs, E. E. McBride, M. Millot, T. Michelat, J. H. Eggert, B. Al- bertazzi, L. Antonelli, M. R. Armstrong, C. Baehtz, O. B. Ball, S. Banerjee, A. B. Belonoshko, A. Benuzzi- Mounaix, C. A. Bolme, V. Bouffetier, K. Buakor, T. Butcher, V. Cerantola, J. Chantel, A. L. Coleman, J. Collier, G. Collins, A. J. Comley, F. Coppar...

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Hernandez, N

    J.-A. Hernandez, N. Sévelin-Radiguet, R. Torchio, S. Balugani, A. Dwivedi, G. Berruyer, D. Bugnazet, S. Chazalette, C. Clavel, D. Lorphévret, S. Pasternak, F. Perrin, F. Villar, W. Helsby, M. Borri, F. Mollica, S. Branly, L. Meignien, P. Audebert, and O. Mathon, The high power laser facility at beamline ID24-ED at the esrf, High Pressure Research , 372 (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    Ramis, J

    R. Ramis, J. M. ter Vehn, and J. Ramírez, MULTI2D – a computer code for two-dimensional radiation hydro- dynamics, Computer Physics Communications180, 977 (2009)

    work page 2009

  47. [47]

    J. A. Hawreliak, D. H. Kalantar, J. S. Stölken, B. A. Remington, H. E. Lorenzana, and J. S. Wark, High- pressure nanocrystalline structure of a shock-compressed single crystal of iron, Phys. Rev. B78, 220101(R) (2008)

    work page 2008

  48. [48]

    deGroot, K.Hámáláinen, J.A.Moore, X.Wang, M.Crush, J.B.Hastings, D.P.Siddons, W.H.Armstrong, O.C.Mullins, and S.P.Cramer, High- resolution manganese x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy

    G.Peng, F. deGroot, K.Hámáláinen, J.A.Moore, X.Wang, M.Crush, J.B.Hastings, D.P.Siddons, W.H.Armstrong, O.C.Mullins, and S.P.Cramer, High- resolution manganese x-ray fluorescence spectroscopy. oxidation-state and spin-state sensitivity, Journal of the American Chemical Society116, 2914 (1994)

    work page 1994

  49. [49]

    Vanko, T

    G. Vanko, T. Neisius, G. Molnár, F. Renz, S. Kárpáti, A. Shukla, and F. M. F. de Groot, Probing the 3d spin momentum with x-ray emission spectroscopy: The case of molecular-spin transitions, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B110, 11647–11653 (2006)

    work page 2006

  50. [50]

    Lafuerza, A

    S. Lafuerza, A. Carlantuono, M. Retegan, and P. Glatzel, Chemical sensitivity of Kβand Kαx-ray emission from a systematic investigation of iron compounds, Inorganic Chemistry59, 12518–12535 (2020)

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    J. P. Rueff, M. Krisch, Y. Q. Cai, A. Kaprolat, M. Han- fland, M. Lorenzen, C. Masciovecchio, R. Verbeni, and F. Sette, Magnetic and structuralα-ϵphase transition in Fe monitored by x-ray emission spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. B60, 14510 (1999)

    work page 1999

  52. [52]

    Ono, Relationship between structural variation and spin transition of iron under high pressures and high tem- peratures, Solid State Communications203, 1 (2015)

    S. Ono, Relationship between structural variation and spin transition of iron under high pressures and high tem- peratures, Solid State Communications203, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  53. [53]

    L. Liu, P. Shen, and W. A. Bassett, High-pressure poly- morphism of FeO ? An alternative interpretation and its implications for the Earth’s core, Geophys. J. R. Astr. Soc.70, 57 (1982)

    work page 1982

  54. [54]

    C. A. McCammon and L. gun Liu, The effects of pressure and temperature on nonstoichiometric wüstite, FexO: The iron-rich phase boundary, Physics and Chemistry of Minerals10, 106–113 (1984)

    work page 1984

  55. [55]

    S. Ono, Y. Ohishi, and T. Kikegawa, High-pressure study of rhombohedral iron oxide, FeO, at pressures between 41 and 142 GPa, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter19, 036205 (2007). 10

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    Stixrude and C

    L. Stixrude and C. Lithgow-Bertelloni, Influence of phase transformations on lateral heterogeneity and dynamics in Earth’s mantle, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett.263, 45 (2007)

    work page 2007

  57. [57]

    J.-F. Lin, A. G. Gavriliuk, V. V. Struzhkin, S. D. Ja- cobsen, W. Sturhahn, M. Y. Hu, P. Chow, and C.-S. Yoo, Pressure-induced electronic spin transition of iron in magnesiowustite-(MgFeO), Phys. Rev. B73, 113107 (2006)

    work page 2006

  58. [58]

    Y. Fei, L. Zhang, A. Corgne, H. Watson, A. Ricolleau, Y. Meng, and V. Prakapenka, Spin transition and equa- tions of state of (Mg, Fe)O solid solutions, Geophysical Research Letters34, 10.1029/2007GL030712 (2007)

    work page doi:10.1029/2007gl030712 2007

  59. [59]

    N. B. Zhang, Y. Cai, X. H. Yao, X. M. Zhou, Y. Y. Li, C. J. Song, X. Y. Qin, and S. N. Luo, Spin transition of ferropericlase under shock compression, AIP Advances8, 075028 (2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Speziale, A

    S. Speziale, A. Milner, V. E. Lee, S. M. Clark, M. P. Pasternak, and R. Jeanloz, Iron spin transition in earth’s mantle, PNAS102, 17918 (2005)

    work page 2005

  61. [61]

    Mao, J.-F

    Z. Mao, J.-F. Lin, J. Liu, and V. B. Prakapenka, Thermal equation of state of lower-mantle ferropericlase across the spin crossover, Geophysical Research Letters38, L23308 (2011)

    work page 2011

  62. [62]

    Badro, G

    J. Badro, G. Fiquet, F. Guyot, J.-P. Rueff, V. V. Struzhkin, G. Vankó, and G. Monaco, Iron partitioning in earth’s mantle: toward a deep lower mantle disconti- nuity, Science300, 789 (2003)

    work page 2003

  63. [63]

    Amouretti, C

    A. Amouretti, C. Crepisson, S. Azadi, D. Cabaret, T. Campbell, D. A. Chin, B. Colin, G. R. Collins, L. Crandall, G. Fiquet, A. Forte, T. Gawne, F. Guyot, P. Heighway, H. Lee, D. McGonegle, B. Nagler, J. Pintor, D. Polsin, G. Rousse, Y. Shi, E. Smith, J. S. Wark, S. M. Vinko, and M. Harmand, Phase transitions of Fe2O3 un- der laser shock compression, Physy...

    work page 2025