pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.18009 · v1 · pith:KH2KJIRRnew · submitted 2026-05-18 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Multi-rotational switching in a noncollinear antiferromagnet by spin-orbit torque

Yuma Sato , Yutaro Takeuchi , Yuta Yamane , Shun Kanai , Shunsuke Fukami This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 00:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords noncollinear antiferromagnetspin-orbit torquemulti-rotational switchingswitching dynamicsantiferromagnetic nanodotcurrent-induced reversalthreshold current density
0
0 comments X

The pith

Noncollinear antiferromagnets reverse order through multiple rotations under spin-orbit torque, rendering switching thresholds independent of pulse length.

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

The paper examines switching in a noncollinear antiferromagnetic nanodot driven by spin-orbit torque from electric pulses. Experiments across a wide range of pulse durations and amplitudes reveal that the threshold current density for reversing the order stays roughly constant instead of following the usual dependence on how long the pulse lasts. This insensitivity is traced to a new process called multi-rotational switching, in which the antiferromagnetic order rotates several times before it settles into the reversed state. The mechanism is explained as the result of torque pushing the order coherently, an external field reorienting any small net magnetization, and thermal fluctuations helping the system cross energy barriers. If accurate, the finding supplies a concrete way to understand and harness current-driven control of antiferromagnetic order in small devices.

Core claim

With electric pulses spanning a wide range of durations and amplitudes, the threshold current density for switch-back events in a noncollinear antiferromagnetic nanodot exhibits an unconventional insensitivity to pulse duration. This behavior is attributed to multi-rotational switching, a process in which the noncollinear antiferromagnetic order undergoes multiple rotations before completing reversal. Theoretical analysis shows that multi-rotational switching arises from the interplay of current-driven coherent rotation of the noncollinear antiferromagnetic order, field-induced reorientation of the uncompensated net magnetization, and thermal fluctuations.

What carries the argument

Multi-rotational switching, the process in which noncollinear antiferromagnetic order rotates multiple times before reversal through the combined action of spin-orbit torque, field reorientation, and thermal fluctuations.

If this is right

  • Switching events can complete reliably even when pulse lengths vary substantially.
  • The same current density works for both short and long pulses in switch-back operations.
  • A microscopic picture now exists for how spin-orbit torque reverses noncollinear antiferromagnetic order.
  • This route supports the design of antiferromagnetic nanodevices for spintronics applications.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Pulse timing requirements could be relaxed in device operation because the threshold stays stable over a broad duration window.
  • Similar repeated-rotation behavior might appear in other noncollinear magnetic textures when driven by spin-orbit torque.
  • Incorporating explicit thermal activation into device models could help predict the range of pulse conditions that produce this insensitivity.
  • Arrays of such nanodots might exhibit collective switching advantages if the multi-rotation process reduces sensitivity to local variations.

Load-bearing premise

The observed insensitivity of threshold current density to pulse duration is caused by multi-rotational switching from the interplay of current-driven coherent rotation, field-induced reorientation of uncompensated net magnetization, and thermal fluctuations rather than other experimental factors or dynamics.

What would settle it

Time-resolved imaging or simulation that captures the antiferromagnetic order rotating only once during a switching pulse, without intermediate rotations, would show that multi-rotational switching is not occurring and thus cannot explain the pulse-duration insensitivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.18009 by Shun Kanai, Shunsuke Fukami, Yuma Sato, Yutaro Takeuchi, Yuta Yamane.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic and characterizations of the Mn3Sn nanodot sample. a, SOT switching of the noncollinear AFM order in the Mn3Sn nanodot, with the orange arrow indicating the Néel vector. b, Scanning electron microscope image of the fabricated Hall device. c, 𝑅?-𝐻" curve for the Mn3Sn nanodot. d, 𝑅?-𝐽!# curves in DC experiments (the current pulse duration being 100 ms) with various in-plane magnetic field 𝐻$, wher… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Switching probability measurements. a-d, 𝑃 versus 𝐽!# with four different 𝜏O. e-f, Two-dimensional mappings of 𝑃(𝐽!#, 𝜏O) with 𝜇&𝐻$ = 100 mT, obtained by experiment (e) and simulation (f). g, Phase diagram identifying the three distinct switching regimes for the numerical result in f [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Theoretical and numerical analyses on the SOT switching of the Néel vector. Schematic illustrations of Néel vector dynamics based on the analytical model with Eqs. (1) and (2) in the 𝜋-switching regime (a), the multi-rotational switching regime (c), and the coherent rotation regime (e). The unit of 𝑢(𝜃) is arbitrary. Numerical simulations for the time evolution of the Néel vector in the corresponding regim… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Numerical results for the probabilities of multiple rotations of the Néel vector. a-c, Probabilities of the Néel vector completing 𝜋 (a), 3𝜋 (b) and 5𝜋 (c) rotations, as functions of 𝐽!# and 𝜏O . d, Summation of the probabilities of 3𝜋, 5𝜋, 7𝜋, … rotations, corresponding to the probability of multi-rotational switching [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Magnetic-field dependence of the switching properties. a-f, 𝑃(𝐽!#, 𝜏O) for three different 𝐻$, obtained by experiment (a-c) and simulation (d-f). g, 𝐻$ dependence of the experimental and numerical 𝐽') #### and the theoretical 𝐽') ∗ . The error bars indicate the standard deviation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Spintronics has advanced through discoveries of various electrically-driven spin dynamics in nanomagnets. Here, we report a novel switching dynamics of spin systems driven by spin-orbit torque, using a noncollinear antiferromagnetic nanodot. With electric pulses spanning a wide range of durations and amplitudes, we find an unconventional insensitivity of a threshold current density to pulse duration in switch-back events. This observation is attributed to a previously unrecognized process, in which the noncollinear antiferromagnetic order undergoes multiple rotations before completing reversal, a phenomenon we term multi-rotational switching. Our theoretical analysis reveals that multi-rotational switching arises from the interplay of three key factors: current-driven coherent rotation of the noncollinear antiferromagnetic order, field-induced reorientation of the uncompensated net magnetization, and thermal fluctuations. These findings establish a microscopic mechanism governing current-induced switching in noncollinear antiferromagnets, a topic of growing interest for next-generation spintronics technologies, opening a new route to controlling antiferromagnetic order in nanodevices.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the experimental observation of an insensitivity of threshold current density to electric pulse duration (over a wide range of durations and amplitudes) during switch-back events in a noncollinear antiferromagnetic nanodot under spin-orbit torque. This is attributed to a new mechanism termed multi-rotational switching, in which the antiferromagnetic order undergoes multiple rotations prior to reversal. The mechanism is explained via theoretical analysis as arising from the interplay of current-driven coherent rotation of the noncollinear order, field-induced reorientation of uncompensated net magnetization, and thermal fluctuations.

Significance. If the attribution to multi-rotational switching holds after distinguishing it from alternative explanations, the result would be significant for antiferromagnetic spintronics. It identifies a previously unrecognized dynamics that could inform control of antiferromagnetic order in nanodevices. The experimental strategy of varying pulse duration and amplitude to probe threshold behavior is a methodological strength.

major comments (1)
  1. [Experimental results and theoretical analysis sections] The central attribution of the observed pulse-duration insensitivity to multi-rotational switching (rather than thermally assisted reversal or heating artifacts) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative controls such as temperature-dependent measurements, heat-sinking variations, or direct comparison of the data to a purely thermal activation model. Without these, it remains unclear whether the proposed interplay of coherent rotation, magnetization reorientation, and fluctuations is required to explain the results.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Clarify the specific noncollinear antiferromagnet material and nanodot dimensions in the abstract and introduction for better context.
  2. [Figures] Ensure all figures include error bars and explicit definitions of threshold current density extraction method.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and for recognizing the potential significance of our results for antiferromagnetic spintronics. We address the major comment regarding the need for quantitative controls to support the attribution to multi-rotational switching below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Experimental results and theoretical analysis sections] The central attribution of the observed pulse-duration insensitivity to multi-rotational switching (rather than thermally assisted reversal or heating artifacts) is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative controls such as temperature-dependent measurements, heat-sinking variations, or direct comparison of the data to a purely thermal activation model. Without these, it remains unclear whether the proposed interplay of coherent rotation, magnetization reorientation, and fluctuations is required to explain the results.

    Authors: We agree that distinguishing the proposed mechanism from purely thermal effects is critical. The observed insensitivity of threshold current density to pulse duration (spanning orders of magnitude) is inconsistent with standard thermally activated reversal, which predicts a strong (typically logarithmic) dependence of switching probability and effective threshold on pulse length due to the Arrhenius process. In the revised manuscript, we will add a direct quantitative comparison of the experimental data to a purely thermal activation model, including calculations of the expected threshold vs. duration curve under thermal activation alone. Our existing theoretical framework (micromagnetic simulations incorporating the stochastic LLG equation) already shows that the interplay of SOT-driven coherent rotation of the noncollinear order, field-induced reorientation of the uncompensated magnetization, and thermal fluctuations produces the flat threshold behavior; we will expand this section with additional simulations (with and without thermal noise) to quantify each contribution. While new temperature-dependent measurements and heat-sinking variations would provide valuable further validation and are planned for future work, the combination of the wide-range experimental insensitivity and the model comparison demonstrates that the multi-rotational mechanism is required to explain the results. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental observation and theoretical attribution remain independent of fitted inputs or self-citation chains

full rationale

The paper reports an experimental finding of threshold current density insensitivity to pulse duration in switch-back events for a noncollinear antiferromagnetic nanodot, then attributes this to multi-rotational switching arising from interplay of current-driven coherent rotation, field-induced reorientation of uncompensated magnetization, and thermal fluctuations. No equations, self-citations, or derivations are presented in the abstract or described text that reduce the claimed mechanism to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, a self-definitional loop, or a load-bearing uniqueness theorem imported from the authors' prior work. The central claim is framed as grounded in new experimental data rather than by construction equivalent to its inputs, making the derivation self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the interpretation that the experimental insensitivity arises specifically from the three-factor interplay; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are named in the abstract, but the mechanism attribution functions as an interpretive axiom.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The observed threshold current insensitivity to pulse duration is due to multi-rotational dynamics rather than other effects.
    This interpretive step links the experimental finding to the proposed mechanism in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5724 in / 1324 out tokens · 26628 ms · 2026-05-20T00:52:33.962941+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Antiferromagnetic spintronics,

    T. Jungwirth, X. Marti, P. Wadley, and J. Wunderlich, “Antiferromagnetic spintronics,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 231–241 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Antiferromagnetic spintronics,

    V . Baltz et al., “Antiferromagnetic spintronics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Spin transport and spin torque in antiferromagnetic devices,

    J. Železný, P. Wadley, K. Olejník, A. Hoffmann, and H. Ohno, “Spin transport and spin torque in antiferromagnetic devices,” Nat. Phys. 14, 220–228 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Coherent antiferromagnetic spintronics,

    J. Han, R. Cheng, L. Liu, H. Ohno, and S. Fukami, “Coherent antiferromagnetic spintronics,” Nat. Mater. 22, 684–695 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Inertia-driven spin switching in antiferromagnets,

    A. V . Kimel et al., “Inertia-driven spin switching in antiferromagnets,” Nat. Phys. 5, 727–731 (2009)

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    Terahertz electrical writing speed in an antiferromagnetic memory,

    K. Olejník et al., “Terahertz electrical writing speed in an antiferromagnetic memory,” Sci. Adv. 4, eaar3566 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Electrical coherent driving of chiral antiferromagnet,

    Y . Takeuchi et al., “Electrical coherent driving of chiral antiferromagnet,” Science 389, 830–834 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Picosecond ultralow-power switching device based on an antiferromagnet,

    H. Tsai et al., “Picosecond ultralow-power switching device based on an antiferromagnet,” Science 392, 761–765 (2026)

    work page 2026

  9. [9]

    Anomalous Hall effect arising from noncollinear antiferromagnetism,

    H. Chen, Q. Niu, and A. H. MacDonald, “Anomalous Hall effect arising from noncollinear antiferromagnetism,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 017205 (2014)

    work page 2014

  10. [10]

    Non-collinear antiferromagnets and the anomalous Hall effect,

    J. Kübler and C. Felser, “Non-collinear antiferromagnets and the anomalous Hall effect,” EPL 108, 67001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Large anomalous Hall effect in a non-collinear antiferromagnet at room temperature,

    S. Nakatsuji, N. Kiyohara, and T. Higo, “Large anomalous Hall effect in a non-collinear antiferromagnet at room temperature,” Nature 527, 212–215 (2015)

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    Large anomalous Hall effect driven by a nonvanishing Berry curvature in the noncollinear antiferromagnet Mn3Ge,

    A. K. Nayak et al., “Large anomalous Hall effect driven by a nonvanishing Berry curvature in the noncollinear antiferromagnet Mn3Ge,” Sci. Adv. 2, e1501870 (2016)

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    Anomalous Nernst and Righi-Leduc effects in Mn3Sn: Berry curvature and entropy flow,

    X. Li et al., “Anomalous Nernst and Righi-Leduc effects in Mn3Sn: Berry curvature and entropy flow,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 056601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    Anomalous Hall effect and topological defects in antiferromagnetic Weyl semimetals: Mn3Sn/Ge,

    J. Liu and L. Balents, “Anomalous Hall effect and topological defects in antiferromagnetic Weyl semimetals: Mn3Sn/Ge,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 087202 (2017)

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Large magneto-optical Kerr effect in noncollinear antiferromagnets Mn3X (X = Rh, Ir, Pt),

    W. Feng, G.-Y . Guo, J. Zhou, Y . Yao, and Q. Niu, “Large magneto-optical Kerr effect in noncollinear antiferromagnets Mn3X (X = Rh, Ir, Pt),” Phys. Rev. B 92, 144426 (2015)

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Large magneto-optical Kerr effect and imaging of magnetic octupole domains in an antiferromagnetic metal,

    T. Higo et al., “Large magneto-optical Kerr effect and imaging of magnetic octupole domains in an antiferromagnetic metal,” Nat. Photonics 12, 73–78 (2018)

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    Large anomalous Nernst effect at room temperature in a chiral antiferromagnet,

    M. Ikhlas et al., “Large anomalous Nernst effect at room temperature in a chiral antiferromagnet,” Nat. Phys. 13, 1085–1090 (2017)

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    Spin-polarized current in noncollinear antiferromagnets,

    J. Železný et al., “Spin-polarized current in noncollinear antiferromagnets,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 187204 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Magnetic and magnetic inverse spin Hall effects in a non-collinear antiferromagnet,

    M. Kimata et al., “Magnetic and magnetic inverse spin Hall effects in a non-collinear antiferromagnet,” Nature 565, 627–630 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Octupole-driven magnetoresistance in an antiferromagnetic tunnel junction,

    X. Chen et al., “Octupole-driven magnetoresistance in an antiferromagnetic tunnel junction,” Nature 613, 490–495 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Room-temperature flexible manipulation of the quantum-metric structure in a topological chiral antiferromagnet,

    J. Han et al., “Room-temperature flexible manipulation of the quantum-metric structure in a topological chiral antiferromagnet,” Nat. Phys. 20, 1110–1117 (2024)

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Chiral-spin rotation of non-collinear antiferromagnet by spin–orbit torque,

    Y . Takeuchi et al., “Chiral-spin rotation of non-collinear antiferromagnet by spin–orbit torque,” Nat. Mater. 20, 1364–1370 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Quantum sensing and imaging of spin–orbit-torque-driven spin dynamics in the non-collinear antiferromagnet Mn3Sn,

    G. Q. Yan et al., “Quantum sensing and imaging of spin–orbit-torque-driven spin dynamics in the non-collinear antiferromagnet Mn3Sn,” Adv. Mater. 34, 2200327 (2022)

    work page 2022

  24. [24]

    Theory of nonequilibrium intrinsic spin torque in a single nanomagnet,

    A. Manchon and S. Zhang, “Theory of nonequilibrium intrinsic spin torque in a single nanomagnet,” Phys. Rev. B 78, 212405 (2008)

    work page 2008

  25. [25]

    Perpendicular switching of a single ferromagnetic layer induced by in-plane current injection,

    I. M. Miron et al., “Perpendicular switching of a single ferromagnetic layer induced by in-plane current injection,” Nature 476, 189–193 (2011)

    work page 2011

  26. [26]

    Spin-torque switching with the giant spin Hall effect of tantalum,

    L. Liu et al., “Spin-torque switching with the giant spin Hall effect of tantalum,” Science 336, 555–558 (2012)

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    A spin–orbit torque switching scheme with collinear magnetic easy axis and current configuration,

    S. Fukami, T. Anekawa, C. Zhang, and H. Ohno, “A spin–orbit torque switching scheme with collinear magnetic easy axis and current configuration,” Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 621–625 (2016)

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Using generalized Landau-Lifshitz equations to describe the dynamics of multi-sublattice antiferromagnets induced by spin-polarized current,

    E. V . Gomonay and V . M. Loktev, “Using generalized Landau-Lifshitz equations to describe the dynamics of multi-sublattice antiferromagnets induced by spin-polarized current,” Low Temp. Phys. 41, 698 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Field-free, spin-current control of magnetization in non-collinear chiral antiferromagnets,

    H. Fujita, “Field-free, spin-current control of magnetization in non-collinear chiral antiferromagnets,” Phys. Status Solidi RRL 11, 1600360 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Dynamics of noncollinear antiferromagnetic textures driven by spin current injection,

    Y . Yamane, O. Gomonay, and J. Sinova, “Dynamics of noncollinear antiferromagnetic textures driven by spin current injection,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 054415 (2019)

    work page 2019

  31. [31]

    Electrical manipulation of a topological antiferromagnetic state,

    H. Tsai et al., “Electrical manipulation of a topological antiferromagnetic state,” Nature 580, 608–613 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Perpendicular full switching of chiral antiferromagnetic order by current,

    T. Higo et al., “Perpendicular full switching of chiral antiferromagnetic order by current,” Nature 607, 474–479 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Setting of the magnetic structure of chiral kagome antiferromagnets by a seeded spin-orbit torque,

    B. Pal et al., “Setting of the magnetic structure of chiral kagome antiferromagnets by a seeded spin-orbit torque,” Sci. Adv. 8, eabo5930 (2022)

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    Time-dependent multistate switching of topological antiferromagnetic order in Mn3Sn,

    G. K. Krishnaswamy et al., “Time-dependent multistate switching of topological antiferromagnetic order in Mn3Sn,” Phys. Rev. Appl. 18, 024064 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Handedness anomaly in a non-collinear antiferromagnet under spin–orbit torque,

    J.-Y . Yoon et al., “Handedness anomaly in a non-collinear antiferromagnet under spin–orbit torque,” Nat. Mater. 22, 1106–1113 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Pulse-width dependence of spin–orbit torque switching in Mn3Sn/Pt thin films,

    Y . Kobayashi, Y . Shiota, H. Narita, T. Ono, and T. Moriyama, “Pulse-width dependence of spin–orbit torque switching in Mn3Sn/Pt thin films,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 122405 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Symmetry and the macroscopic dynamics of magnetic materials,

    A. F. Andreev and V . I. Marchenko, “Symmetry and the macroscopic dynamics of magnetic materials,” Sov. Phys. Usp. 23, 21 (1980)

    work page 1980

  38. [38]

    Field-free full switching of chiral antiferromagnetic order,

    Z. Zhou et al., “Field-free full switching of chiral antiferromagnetic order,” Nature 651, 341–347 (2026)

    work page 2026

  39. [39]

    Crystal orientation and anomalous Hall effect of sputter-deposited non-collinear antiferromagnetic Mn3Sn thin films,

    J. Yoon et al., “Crystal orientation and anomalous Hall effect of sputter-deposited non-collinear antiferromagnetic Mn3Sn thin films,” Appl. Phys. Express 13, 013001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    Thermal stability of non-collinear antiferromagnetic Mn3Sn nanodot,

    Y . Sato et al., “Thermal stability of non-collinear antiferromagnetic Mn3Sn nanodot,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 122404 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Impact of strain on the SOT-driven dynamics of thin film Mn3Sn,

    A. Shukla, S. Qian, and S. Rakheja, “Impact of strain on the SOT-driven dynamics of thin film Mn3Sn,” J. Appl. Phys. 135, 123903 (2024)

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Time-resolved reversal of spin-transfer switching in a nanomagnet,

    R. H. Koch, J. A. Katine, and J. Z. Sun, “Time-resolved reversal of spin-transfer switching in a nanomagnet,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 088302 (2004)

    work page 2004

  43. [43]

    E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevskii, Statistical Physics, Course of Theoretical Physics V ol. 9, Pt. 2 (Pergamon, Oxford, 1980)

    work page 1980

  44. [44]

    Thermal fluctuations of a single-domain particle,

    W. F. Brown, “Thermal fluctuations of a single-domain particle,” Phys. Rev. 130, 1677–1686 (1963)

    work page 1963

  45. [45]

    Cluster multipole theory for anomalous Hall effect in antiferromagnets,

    M.-T. Suzuki, T. Koretsune, M. Ochi, and R. Arita, “Cluster multipole theory for anomalous Hall effect in antiferromagnets,” Phys. Rev. B 95, 094406 (2017). Materials and methods Sample preparation The MgO layer was deposited by RF sputtering at room temperature, while W, Ta, Mn3Sn, and Ru layers were deposited by DC sputtering at 400 °C on a heated stage...

    work page 2017