Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 8 minor 64 references

Different dielectric, magnetic, and magnetodielectric mechanisms in M-type BaFe12O19 hexaferrite regulated by doping Ga3+ and In3+ cations

T0 review · 4 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Ga and In dopants on different Fe sites in BaFe12O19 switch which low-temperature mechanism produces the magnetodielectric effect.

desk verdict Solid comparative Ga/In ceramic dataset with a useful mechanism table; site and conical-order assignments rest on Raman and bulk signatures, so the map is interpretive rather than proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04861 v1 pith:NRDYXLHX submitted 2026-07-06 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yang Yang , Run-Yu Lei , Jian-Ping Zhou , Xiao-Ming Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 72.55.+s75.85.+t75.50.Gg75.25.-j
keywords magnetodielectriceffectM-typehexaferritenon-collinearspinorderelectronhoppingquantumparaelectricitydipoleglassMaxwell-Wagnersite-selectivedoping
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

M-type barium hexaferrite hosts both magnetism and electric dipoles, so an external magnetic field can change its dielectric constant (the magnetodielectric, or MD, effect). This paper shows that the microscopic origin of that effect is not fixed: it is controlled by which crystal site the dopant occupies. Smaller Ga3+ ions prefer FeO6 octahedra in the R blocks and leave the FeO5 bipyramids intact; larger In3+ ions prefer the bipyramids themselves. Pure and Ga-doped ceramics remain collinear ferrimagnets and display either spin–phonon coupling or field-tuned bipyramid dipoles; In-doped ceramics develop a non-collinear conical spin order at low temperature and therefore a spin-ordering-mediated MD response that later yields to electron-hopping MD. At higher temperature every composition is dominated by the same extrinsic Maxwell–Wagner plus magnetoresistance channel. Mapping these site-specific routes supplies a practical design rule for choosing the MD mechanism in hexaferrites.

What carries the argument

Site-selective substitution of Fe3+ (Ga on octahedra, In on bipyramids of R blocks), diagnosed by differential Raman peak shifts and lattice-parameter trends; this site choice switches the magnetic ground state and the dominant low-temperature dielectric channel that couples to the magnetic field.

What would settle it

Neutron diffraction or Mössbauer site-occupancy data that place Ga or In on the opposite polyhedron from the Raman assignment, or single-crystal magnetoelectric measurements that show no field-induced polarization below the In-doped magnetic transition temperature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Preferential Ga substitution on FeO6 octahedra versus In substitution on FeO5 bipyramids of the R blocks produces three distinct low-temperature MD mechanisms—spin–phonon coupling then field-dependent electron hopping (pure), field-dependent electric dipoles inside FeO5 bipyramids (Ga-doped), and field-dependent non-collinear spin order then electron hopping (In-doped)—while high-temperature MD is extrinsic (magnetoresistance plus Maxwell–Wagner) for all compositions.

Load-bearing premise

The assignment of Ga to octahedra and In to bipyramids rests mainly on which Raman peaks shift, and the non-collinear spin order that is said to mediate the In-doped MD effect is inferred from bulk magnetometry rather than direct magnetic-structure determination.

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

4 major / 8 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a comparative experimental study of BaFe12−xMexO19 (Me = Ga, In; x = 0, 1.2, 1.8, 2.4) ceramics prepared by solid-state reaction, combining XRD, Raman, XPS, ZFC/FC and hysteresis magnetometry, broadband dielectric spectroscopy, impedance arcs, and isothermal magnetodielectric (MD) curves from 10–300 K. The central claim is that preferential Ga substitution on FeO6 octahedra of R blocks versus In substitution on FeO5 bipyramids produces distinct low-T magnetic, dielectric, and MD mechanisms: spin–phonon coupling then field-dependent electron hopping (pure); field-dependent FeO5 electric dipoles (Ga-doped); and field-dependent non-collinear spin order then electron hopping (In-doped), with high-T MD ascribed to magnetoresistance plus Maxwell–Wagner effects for all samples (Abstract; §III.D; Table I).

Significance. If the site-preference and mechanism assignments hold, the paper supplies a useful comparative map of how ionic radius and preferred polyhedron control low-T MD pathways in M-type hexaferrite, which is of interest for multiferroic and magnetodielectric materials design. Strengths include a coherent multi-technique dataset on a single sample series, explicit supporting checks (Δε ∝ M² for pure BaFe12O19 at 10 K in Fig. 12; coincidence of MD inflection with magnetic hysteresis near ~20 kOe for Ga in Fig. 13; frequency-linked MD/dielectric crossover for In in Fig. 14), and a clear Ga-versus-In design that goes beyond single-dopant studies. The work is incremental relative to prior In-doped conical/ME hexaferrite literature, but the side-by-side mechanism table is a concrete contribution if the structural and spin-order premises are adequately supported or caveated.

major comments (4)
  1. §III.A and Fig. 3 (and Table I): Preferential Ga occupancy of FeO6 octahedra (R blocks) versus In occupancy of FeO5 bipyramids is assigned almost entirely from which Raman modes shift (peak V vs peak VI). This is the load-bearing premise for the entire mechanism map. Raman mode shifts are suggestive but not site-selective occupancy fractions; mixed or secondary-site occupancy is common in M-type hexaferrites. The manuscript should either (i) add direct site evidence (Mössbauer, neutron diffraction, or Rietveld site refinements with free occupancy parameters) or (ii) substantially soften the language from “preferentially substitute / tend to replace” to “consistent with preferential substitution,” cite quantitative prior site-occupancy studies for Ga and In in BaFe12O19, and discuss how mixed occupancy would affect the claimed mechanism separation.
  2. §III.B–D, Figs. 5–6 and 10, and Table I (In-doped rows): Non-collinear longitudinal conical order and inverse-DM-mediated MD are inferred from FC peaks at TM2, initial-magnetization curves lying outside hysteresis loops, and MD turnings near zero field, without neutron diffraction, single-crystal ME polarization, or P(H) data in this work. Bulk signatures can also arise from spin-glass freezing, canted ferrimagnetism, or domain effects (the text itself invokes nanomagnetic domains and spin-glass-like ZFC/FC bifurcation). The claim that the negative low-T MD “originates from the field-dependent non-collinear spin ordering” (§III.D; Abstract) is therefore stronger than the evidence. Please either provide polarization/ME or magnetic-structure data, or reframe the In-doped low-T MD as “consistent with field-dependent non-collinear order reported for related In-doped hexaferrites” and list al
  3. §III.C, insets of Figs. 7(a)–(d): Curie–Weiss fits to 1/εr′ yield TCW = −943.5 to −2163.9 K for pure and Ga-doped samples, used to argue reinforced dipole–dipole interaction and a dipole-glass state after Ga doping. Such large |TCW| values are unusual and highly sensitive to the fitted temperature window and background. The manuscript should report the exact fitting ranges, goodness-of-fit, and whether a quantum-paraelectric (Barrett-type) form was tested for the pure sample; without that, the quantitative claim of “reinforced interaction” and the glass-state assignment remain weakly constrained relative to their role in the Ga MD mechanism.
  4. §III.D and Eq. (8): The MD coefficient is defined relative to εr′(50 kOe), so the zero-field MD value and the “max coefficient” in Fig. 11/Table I are not independent of the high-field reference. For samples whose MD curves are non-monotonic or hysteretic (especially In-doped MD-LTN and all MD-CRT traces), this definition can exaggerate or invert apparent signs relative to the more common [ε(H)−ε(0)]/ε(0) form. Please report MD also with the zero-field reference (or both), state whether curves are field-increasing or field-decreasing averages, and confirm that the sign changes used to define MD-LTN/LTT/LTP survive the alternative normalization.
minor comments (8)
  1. Abstract and §I: “foundamental” → “fundamental”; several other typos (e.g., “su ch as”, “pr operties”, “effe ct”) appear to be line-break artifacts and should be cleaned throughout.
  2. Fig. 1 caption: “eij i s t h e u n i t vector…” is garbled; fix spacing and define L/L* blocks consistently with the main text.
  3. Table I: “Magnet odielectric” spacing; “ferrimagnetis m” line break; Max coefficient columns for pure sample are blank “−” while the text discusses nonzero MD—clarify or fill.
  4. §II.B: Specify electrode geometry, applied ac voltage, and whether MD data are at fixed frequency only (100 kHz in Fig. 10) or multi-frequency for all samples; Fig. 14 is multi-frequency for In only.
  5. §III.A XPS: Fe2+/Fe3+ ≈ 1/3.3 is stated after oxygen annealing; give fitting constraints (satellite intensity ratios, Shirley background) and whether the ratio is uniform across Ga vs In series, since electron-hopping MD depends on it.
  6. Eqs. (3)–(5): The approach of extracting Keff from high-field M vs 1/H2 is standard but approximate for polycrystalline hexaferrites with strong uniaxial anisotropy; note the limitation when comparing Hc trends for In-doped non-collinear samples.
  7. Fig. 10: Vertical scales differ panel-to-panel and many traces are stacked; a supplementary figure with absolute εr′(H) or a common scale would help readers judge effect sizes versus noise in the MD-CRT “oscillating” regime.
  8. References: Several hexaferrite MD/ME papers are cited appropriately; ensure consistent formatting (e.g., [29] vs others) and that key Raman mode assignments [35] and quantum-paraelectric claims [24–26] are matched to the exact compositions discussed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Experimental correlation paper: mechanism map is interpretive matching of measured bulk signatures to literature mechanisms, not a closed derivation that reduces to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper reports solid-state synthesis of BaFe12−xMexO19 (Me = Ga, In), then measures XRD, Raman, XPS, ZFC/FC magnetization, hysteresis, dielectric permittivity/loss/modulus, impedance, and field-dependent MD coefficients. Site preference (Ga → FeO6 of R blocks; In → FeO5 bipyramids) is assigned from which Raman modes shift (peaks V vs VI). Magnetic states (ferrimagnetism vs non-collinear → collinear) are assigned from thermomagnetic peaks, initial curves outside loops, and Hc/Ms trends. Dielectric and MD mechanisms (quantum paraelectricity, dipole glass, electron hopping, Maxwell–Wagner, spin–phonon, field-dependent dipoles, inverse-DM-type non-collinear order) are names taken from the external literature and matched to temperature/field shapes of the authors’ own data (e.g. Δε ∝ M² check for spin–phonon; Arrhenius Ea of M″ peaks for Maxwell–Wagner; MD turnings near zero field for In samples). None of the enumerated circularity patterns apply: no quantity is defined in terms of the quantity it is said to predict; no fitted parameter is re-labeled a prediction of a closely related observable; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors’ prior work as an external mathematical fact that forces the result; and known mechanism labels are not renamed as a new unification. Self-citations (e.g. related hexaferrite MD work) exist but are not load-bearing—the mechanism table stands or falls on the present bulk measurements and standard literature assignments. Weaknesses of evidence (Raman-only site occupancy; no neutron diffraction or measured ME polarization for the conical/ME claim) are correctness/assumption risks, not circularity. Score 0 with empty steps is therefore the honest finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Load-bearing content is experimental plus standard multiferroic/dielectric domain assumptions. Free parameters are synthesis choices and fitted relaxation/Curie–Weiss numbers used to label mechanisms. No new particles or forces are invented; entities such as quantum paraelectricity, dipole glass, inverse DM polarization, and Maxwell–Wagner MD are imported from literature and applied to the data.

free parameters (5)
  • doping levels x = 0, 1.2, 1.8, 2.4
    Discrete compositions chosen by the authors; all comparative claims are conditioned on this grid.
  • Arrhenius activation energies Ea from M″ peaks
    Fitted Ea (e.g. 0.513 eV pure; ~0.36–0.43 eV Ga; ~0.24–0.43 eV In) used to assign Maxwell–Wagner relaxation (§III.C, Figs. 8h–j).
  • Curie–Weiss temperatures TCW for pure and Ga samples
    Fitted TCW (−943.5 to −2163.9 K) used to argue reinforced dipole interactions after Ga doping (insets Figs. 7a–d).
  • MD coefficient reference field 50 kOe
    Eq. (8) normalizes εr'(H) to εr'(50 kOe); reported MD magnitudes and signs depend on this choice.
  • Fe2+/Fe3+ XPS ratio ~1/3.3
    Fitted chemical-state ratio after annealing, used to support residual electron hopping (§III.A).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Inverse Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction P ∝ eij · (Si × Sj) converts non-collinear conical spin order into electric polarization under field.
    Used to assign negative low-T MD of In-doped samples to spin-order-mediated ME/MD (§I; §III.D Eq. 9).
  • domain assumption Pure BaFe12O19 hosts quantum paraelectricity / frustrated FeO5 dipoles that can become a dipole glass when quantum fluctuations are suppressed.
    Taken from Shen/Sun and related citations; underpins pure and Ga dielectric assignments (§I; §III.C).
  • domain assumption Magnetoresistance combined with Maxwell–Wagner interfacial polarization produces extrinsic MD without intrinsic ME coupling.
    Catalan-type argument used for all samples in MD-CRT (§I; §III.D Eqs. 10–12).
  • domain assumption Raman mode V tracks Fe–O in FeO6 of R blocks and mode VI tracks Fe–O in FeO5 bipyramids, so peak shifts report preferential substitution sites.
    Central structural premise for Ga vs In site preference (§III.A, Fig. 3; Table I).
  • domain assumption Spin–phonon coupling shifts phonon frequencies proportionally to spin correlation, and Lyddane–Sachs–Teller links that to dielectric permittivity (Δε ~ M²).
    Used for negative MD of pure BaFe12O19 at extremely low T (§III.D, Fig. 12).
  • domain assumption Standard solid-state ceramic synthesis and bulk magnetometry/dielectric impedance methods faithfully represent intrinsic phase behavior of the doped hexaferrites.
    Background experimental premise of §II; grain-boundary effects are later invoked for high-T dielectric/MD.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Different dielectric, magnetic, and magnetodielectric mechanisms in M-type BaFe12O19 hexaferrite regulated by doping Ga3+ and In3+ cations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NRDYXLHX

@misc{pith2026260704861,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Different dielectric, magnetic, and magnetodielectric mechanisms in M-type BaFe12O19 hexaferrite regulated by doping Ga3+ and In3+ cations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NRDYXLHX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04861}
}
read the original abstract

We systematically investigated the magnetic, dielectric, and MD properties of BaFe12-xMexO19 ceramics prepared by a solid-state reaction method. The Ga3+ cations with a smaller radius preferentially substitute the Fe3+ ions in FeO6 octahedra while the In3+ cations with a larger radius tend to replace the Fe3+ ions in FeO5 bipyramids of R blocks, inducing different physical characteristics. The pure BaFe12O19 and Ga-doped samples show ferrimagnetism in the temperature range from 10 K to 300 K. The In-doped samples exhibit a transition from non-collinear magnetism to collinear ferrimagnetism. The dielectric decrease of pure BaFe12O19 at around 10-175 K is attributed to the quantum paraelectric state, and the shoulder peaks of loss at about 140-200 K are from electron hopping. The dipole glass state is responsible for the dielectric peak of Ga-doped samples at around 20-40 K. The dielectric increase and plateau of In-doped samples are mainly ascribed to the electron hopping at low temperatures. Their dielectric properties at high temperatures are all attributed to the interfacial polarization caused by the Maxwell-Wagner effect. The MD effect also has different origins for the various samples at low temperatures. For the pure BaFe12O19, the negative MD effect at extremely low temperatures and the positive MD effect after warming are ascribed to spin-phonon coupling and field-dependent electron hopping, respectively. The positive MD effect in Ga-doped hexaferrites results from the field-dependent electric dipoles inside FeO5 bipyramids. For the In-doped samples, the negative MD effect and subsequent transformation to the positive MD effect originate from the field-dependent non-collinear spin ordering and electron hopping, respectively. The MD effect at high temperatures is attributed to the combination of magnetoresistance and Maxwell-Wagner effects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04861 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic of BaFe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) XRD patterns of BaFe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. shows the Raman spectra of BaFe12−xMexO19 ceramics at room temperature. There are 7 notable peaks for the pure BaFe12O19 sample. The peaks at around 337.9, 412.2, 468.7, and 524.8 cm−1 are marked as I, II, III, and IV, respectively. The second strongest peak, strongest peak, and shoulder peak at around 617.6, 687.9, and 726.9 cm−1 are marked as V, VI, and VII, respectively. The Fe-O bonds in different oxygen polyhed… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. XPS spectra of (a) Ba 3d, (b) In 3d, (c) Ga 2p, (d) Fe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Thermomagnetic curves of BaFe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a)–(g) Hysteresis loops of BaFe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Temperature dependence of dielectric permittivity of Ba [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a)–(g) Temperature dependence of dielectric permittivi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Impedance complex plots of BaFe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a)–(g) Magnetic field dependence of MD coefficient un [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Temperature dependence of the MD coefficient gathered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Dielectric difference as a function of the square of m [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Magnetic field dependence of (a) MD coefficient and (b [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Temperature dependence of MD coefficient and dielectri [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_14.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Lawes, T

    G. Lawes, T. Kimura, C. M. Varma, M. A. Subramanian, N. Rog ado, R. J. Cava, and A. P. Ramirez, Magnetodielectric effects at magnetic ordering transitions, Prog. Solid State Ch. 37, 40 (2009)

    2009

  2. [2]

    C. Lu, M. Wu, L. Lin, and J.-M. Liu, Single-phase multiferr oics: new materials, phenomena, and physics, Natl. Sci. Rev. 6, 653 (2019)

    2019

  3. [3]

    Cheong and M

    S.-W. Cheong and M. Mostovoy, Multiferroic: a magnetic twis t for ferroelectricity, Nat. Mater. 6, 13 (2007)

    2007

  4. [4]

    Khomskii, Classifying multiferroics: Mechanisms and effe cts, Physics 2, 20 (2009)

    D. Khomskii, Classifying multiferroics: Mechanisms and effe cts, Physics 2, 20 (2009). 30

    2009

  5. [5]

    Tokura, S

    Y . Tokura, S. Seki, and N. Nagaosa, Multiferroics of spin origin, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 076501 (2014)

    2014

  6. [6]

    Y . S. Chai, S. H. Chun, S. Y . Haam, Y . S. Oh, I. Kim, and K. Hoon Kim, Low-magnetic-field control of dielectric constant at room temperature realized in Ba0.5Sr1.5Zn2Fe12O22, New J. Phys. 11, 073030 (2009)

    2009

  7. [7]

    J. Wang, D. Gao, J. Xie, and W. Hu, Polaron hopping induced giant room-temperature magnetodielectric effect in disordered rutile NiNb2O6, Adv. Funct. Mater. 31, 2108950 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    Lawes, A

    G. Lawes, A. P. Ramirez, C. M. Varma, and M. A. Subramanian , Magnetodielectric effects from spin fluctuations in isostructural ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 257208 (2003)

    2003

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Catalan, Magnetocapacitance without magnetoelectric coup ling, Appl

    G. Catalan, Magnetocapacitance without magnetoelectric coup ling, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 102902 (2006)

    2006

  2. [10]

    Tokunaga, Y

    Y . Tokunaga, Y . Kaneko, D. Okuyama, S. Ishiwata, T. Arima, S. Wakimoto, K. Kakurai, Y . Taguchi, and Y . Tokura, Multiferroic M-type hexaferrites with a room-tem perature conical state and magnetically controllable spin helicity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 257201 (2010)

    2010

  3. [11]

    Y . Q. Song, Y . Fang, L. Y . Wang, W. P. Zhou, Q. Q. Cao, D. H. Wang, and Y . W. Du, Spin reorientation transition and near room-temperature multiferroic properties in a W-type hexaferrite SrZn1.15Co0.85Fe16O27, J. Appl. Phys. 115, 093905 (2014)

    2014

  4. [13]

    Kitagawa, Y

    Y . Kitagawa, Y . Hiraoka, T. Honda, T. Ishikura, H. Nakamur a, and T. Kimura, Low-field magnetoelectric effect at room temperature, Nat. Mater. 9, 797 (2010)

    2010

  5. [14]

    Kimura, G

    T. Kimura, G. Law es, and A. P. Ramirez, Electric polarization rotation in a hexaferrite with long- wavelength magnetic structures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 137201 (2005)

    2005

  6. [15]

    R. C. Pullar, Hexagonal ferrites: A review of the synthesis, properties and applications of hexaferrite ceramics, Prog. Mater. Sci. 57, 1191 (2012)

    2012

  7. [16]

    Qureshi, M

    N. Qureshi, M. D. Ruiz-Martín, I. Puente-Orench, M. T. Fer nández-Díaz, A. M. Balbashov, V . Y . Ivanov, V . Skumryev, and A. A. Mukhin, Conical magnetic structures in multiferroic SrScxFe12−xO19 hexaferrites derived from powder neutron diffraction, Phys. Rev. B 98, 094411 (2018)

    2018

  8. [17]

    J. Li, H. Zhang, Y . Liu, Q. Li, T. Zhou, and H. Yang, Phas e formation, magnetic properties and Raman spectra of Co–Ti co-substitution M-type barium ferrites, Appl. Phys. A 119, 525 (2015)

    2015

  9. [18]

    Awawdeh, I

    M. Awawdeh, I. Bsoul, and S. H. Mahmood, Magnetic properti es and Mössbauer spectroscopy on Ga, Al, and Cr substituted hexaferrites, J. Alloy. Compd. 585, 465 (2014)

    2014

  10. [19]

    L. Wang, D. Wang, Q. Cao, Y . Zheng, H. Xuan, J. Gao, and Y. Du, Electric control of magnetism at room temperature, Sci. Rep.-UK 2, 223 (2012)

    2012

  11. [20]

    Y . Shao, F. Huang, J. Zhang, S. Yan, S. Xiao, X. Lu, and J. Zhu, Magnetoelectric coupling triggered by noncollinear magnetic structure in M-type hexaferrite, Adv. Quantum Technol. 4, 2000096 (2021)

    2021

  12. [21]

    Gupta, V

    S. Gupta, V . G. Sathe, and V . Siruguri, Magnetodielectricity induced by coexisting incommensurate conical magnetic structure and cluster glass-like states in pol ycrystalline BaFe10In2O19, J. Alloy. Compd. 825, 154141 (2020)

    2020

  13. [22]

    Y . Guan, Y . Lin, L. Zou, Q. Miao, M. Zeng, Z. Liu, X. Gao, and J. Liu, The effects of Co-Ti co- doping on the magnetic, electrical, and magnetodielectric behaviors of M-type barium hexaferrites, AIP Adv. 3, 122115 (2013). 31

    2013

  14. [23]

    R. Tang, H. Zhou, J. Huang, M. Fan, H. Wang, J. Jian, H. W ang, and H. Yang, Room temperature magnetodielectric effects in epitaxial hexaferrite BaFe 10.2Sc1.8O19 thin film, Appl. Phys. Lett. 110, 242901 (2017)

    2017

  15. [24]

    Shen, Y .-S

    S.-P. Shen, Y .-S. Chai, J.-Z. Cong, P.-J. Sun, J. Lu, L.-Q. Yan, S.-G. Wang, and Y . Sun, Magnetic- ion-induced displacive electric polarization in FeO5 bipyramidal units of (Ba,Sr)Fe12O19 hexaferrites, Phys. Rev. B 90, 180404(R) (2014)

    2014

  16. [25]

    S. P. Shen, J. C. Wu, J. D. Song, X. F. Sun, Y . F. Yang, Y. S. Chai, D. S. Shang, S. G. W ang, J. F . Scott, and Y . Sun, Quantum electric-dipole liquid on a triangular lattice, Nature commun. 7, 10569 (2016)

    2016

  17. [26]

    Zhang, Q.-J

    X. Zhang, Q.-J. Ye, H. Xiang, and X.-Z. Li, Quantum parael ectricity of BaFe 12O19, Phys. Rev. B 101, 104102 (2020)

    2020

  18. [27]

    Li and G.-L

    X. Li and G.-L. Tan, Multiferroic and magnetoelectronic polarizations in BaFe12O19 system, J. Alloy. Compd. 858, 157722 (2021)

    2021

  19. [28]

    Turchenko, V

    V . Turchenko, V . G. Kostishin, S. Trukhanov, F. Damay, M. Balasoiu, B. Bozzo, I. Fina, V . V . Burkhovetsky, S. Polosan, M. V . Zdorovets, A. L. Kozlovskiy, K. A. Astapovich, and A. Trukhanov, Structural features, magnetic and ferroelectric properties of SrFe10.8In1.2O19 com...

    2021

  20. [29]

    X.-B. Chen, N. T. Minh Hien, K. Han, J. Chul Sur, N. H. Su ng, B. K. Cho, and I.-S. Y ang, Raman studies of spin-phonon coupling in hexagonal BaFe12O19, J. Appl. Phys. 114, 013912 (2013)

    2013

  21. [30]

    M. A. P. Buzinaro, M. A. Macêdo, B. F. O. Costa, and N. S. Ferreira, Disorder of Fe(2)O5 bipyramids and spin-phonon coupling in SrFe12O19 nanoparticles, Ceram. Int. 45, 1357 (2019)

    2019

  22. [31]

    P. S. Wang and H. J. Xiang, Room-temperature ferrimagnet w ith frustrated antiferroelectricity: promising candidate toward multiple-state memory, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011035 (2014)

    2014

  23. [32]

    Y . Shao, F. Huang, X. Xu, S. Y an, C. Y ang, M. Zhou, X. Lu, and J. Zhu, Multi-susceptible single- phase BaAl xFe12−xO19 ceramics with both improved magnetic and ferroelectric propert ies, Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 242902 (2019)

    2019

  24. [33]

    S. E. Rowley, T. V ojta, A. T. Jones, W. Guo, J. Oliveira, F. D. Morrison, N. Lindfield, E. B. Saitovitch, B. E.Watts, and J. F. Scott, Quantum percolation phase transition and magnetoelectric dipole glass in hexagonal ferrites, Phys. Rev. B 96, 020407(R) (2017)

    2017

  25. [34]

    W. Y . Zhao, P. Wei, X. Y . Wu, W. Wang, and Q. J. Zhang, Lattice vibration characterization and magnetic properties of M-type barium hexaferrite with excessive iron, J. Appl. Phys. 103, 063902 (2008)

    2008

  26. [35]

    L. H. Yin, L. Hu, J. Yang, P. Teng, W. H. Song, J. M. Dai, X. B. Zhu, and Y . P . Sun, Negative and positive photodielectric effects in quantum paraelectric BaFe12O19 single crystals, J. Mater. Chem. C 6, 12707 (2018)

    2018

  27. [36]

    Yamashita and P

    T. Yamashita and P. Hayes, Analysis of XPS spectra of Fe2+ and Fe3+ ions in oxide materials, Appl. Surf. Sci. 254, 2441 (2008)

    2008

  28. [37]

    R. Tang, C. Jiang, J. Jian, Y . Liang, X. Zhang, H. Wang, and H. Yang, Impedance spectroscopy and scaling behaviors of Sr3Co2Fe24O41 hexaferrite, Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, 022902 (2015)

    2015

  29. [38]

    Hiraoka, H

    Y . Hiraoka, H. Nakamura, M. Soda, Y . Wakabayashi, and T. Kimura, Magnetic and magnetoelectric properties of Ba2-xSrxNi2Fe12O22 single crystals with Y-type hexaferrite structure, J. Appl. Phys. 110, 32 033920 (2011)

    2011

  30. [39]

    R. K. Sahu, O. Mohanta, and A. K. Pramanik, XPS study on the correlation of magnetic properties and site occupancy of Al doped SrFe12O19, J. Alloy. Compd. 532, 114 (2012)

    2012

  31. [40]

    A. M. Alsmadi, I. Bsoul, S. H. Mahmood, G. Alnawashi, K. Prokeš, K. Siemensmeyer, B. Klemke, and H. Nakotte, Magnetic study of M-type doped barium hexaferri te nanocrystalline particles, J. Appl. Phys. 114, 243910 (2013)

    2013

  32. [41]

    Albanse and A

    G. Albanse and A. Deriu, Magnetic properties of Al, Ga, Sc , In substituted barium ferrites: a comparative analysis, Ceranurgia International 5, 3 (1979)

    1979

  33. [42]

    T. M. Perekalina, M. A. Vinnik, R. I. Zvereva, and A. D. S hchurova, Magnetic properties of hexagonal ferrites with weak exchange coupling between sublattices, Soviet Physics JETP 32, 813 (1971)

    1971

  34. [43]

    Nakajima, Y

    T. Nakajima, Y . Tokunaga, M. Matsuda, S. Dissanayake, J. Fernandez-Baca, K. Kakurai, Y . Taguchi, Y . Tokura, and T.-h. Arima, Magnetic structures and excitations in a multiferroic Y-type hexaferrite BaSrCo2Fe11AlO22, Phys. Rev. B 94, 195154 (2016)

    2016

  35. [44]

    H. B. Lee, S. H. Chun, K. W. Shin, B.-G. Jeon, Y . S. Chai, K. H. Kim, J. Schefer, H. Chang, S.-N. Yun, T.-Y . Joung, and J.-H. Chung, Heliconical magnetic order and field-induced multiferroicity of the Co2Y-type hexaferrite Ba0.3Sr1.7Co2Fe12O22, Phys. Rev. B 86, 094435 (2012)

    2012

  36. [45]

    N. A. Hill, Why are there so few magnetic ferroelectrics?, J. Phys. Chem. B 104, 6694 (2000)

    2000

  37. [46]

    Shen and Y

    S.-P. Shen and Y . Sun, Magnetoelectric multiferroicity and quantum paraelectricity in hexaferrites, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 62, 047501 (2019)

    2019

  38. [47]

    L. H. Yin, J. Yang, P. Tong, X. Luo, W. H. Song, J. M. Dai, X. B. Zhu, and Y . P. Sun, Magnetocaloric effect and influence of Fe/Cr di sorder on the magnetization rev ersal and dielectric relaxation in RFe0.5Cr0.5O3 systems, Appl. Phys. Lett. 110, 192904 (2017)

    2017

  39. [48]

    J. M. Rondinelli, A. S. Eidelson, and N. A. Spaldin, Non- d0 Mn-driven ferroelectricity in antiferromagnetic BaMnO3, Phys. Rev. B 79, 205119 (2009)

    2009

  40. [49]

    Xie, H.-g

    Y . Xie, H.-g. Fu, H.-t. Y u, G.-x. Zhang, and J.-z. Sun, A first-principles investigation into the ferroelectric and antiferrodistortive instabilities of cubic SrTiO3, J. Phys. condens. Mat. 19, 506213 (2007)

    2007

  41. [50]

    Kumar, S

    S. Kumar, S. Supriya, and M. Kar, Correlation between temp erature dependent dielectric and DC resistivity of Cr substituted barium hexaferrite, Mater. Res. Express 4, 126302 (2017)

    2017

  42. [51]

    L. Peng, X. Tu, L. Li, R. Wang, and X. Zhong, Electrical conduction and polarization behaviors of low temperature sintered Sr1−xLaxFe12−xCoxO19 (x = 0–0.3) hexaferrites, J. Alloy. Compd. 686, 292 (2016)

    2016

  43. [52]

    S upriya , S

    S. S upriya , S . Kumar , a nd M . Kar , Correlat ion betwee n A C and DC transport properties of Mn substituted cobalt ferrite, J. Appl. Phys. 120, 215106 (2016)

    2016

  44. [53]

    R. J. Tang, C. Jiang, W. H. Qian, J. Jian, X. Zhang, H. Y . Wang, and H. Yang, Dielectric relaxation, resonance and scaling behaviors in Sr3Co2Fe24O41 hexaferrite, Sci. Rep. 5, 13645 (2015)

    2015

  45. [54]

    Lunkenheimer, R

    P. Lunkenheimer, R. Fichtl, S. G. Ebbinghaus, and A. Loidl , Nonintrinsic origin of the colossal dielectric constants in CaCu3Ti4O12, Phys. Rev. B 70, 172102 (2004)

    2004

  46. [55]

    Q. Zhu, R. Tang, H. Zhou, Y . Wang, S. Xu, J. Zhang, C. Jia ng, X. Su, and H. Yang, Impedance spectroscopy and conduction mech anism of magnetoelectric hexafe rrite BaFe10.2Sc1.8O19, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 102, 4038 (2019). [ 5 7 ] M . W u , L . L i u , a n d Z . L i u , I n v e s...

    2019

  47. [56]

    S. Shen, L. Yan, Y . Chai, J. Cong, and Y . Sun, Magnetic field reversal of electric polarization and magnetoelectric phase diagram of the hexaferrite Ba1.3Sr0.7Co0.9Zn1.1Fe10.8Al1.2O22, Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 032905 (2014)

    2014

  48. [57]

    S. Zhou, Y . Yang, R.-Y . Lei, J.-P. Zhou, and X.-M. Chen, T he effects of indium doping on the electrical, magnetic, and magnet odielectric properties of M-typ e strontium hexaferrites, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 539, 168333 (2021)

    2021

  49. [58]

    Okumura, T

    K. Okumura, T. Ishikura, M. Soda, T. Asaka, H. Nakamura, Y . Wakabayashi, and T. Kimura, Magnetism and magnetoelectricity of a U-type hexaferrite Sr 4Co2Fe36O60, Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 212504 (2011)

    2011

  50. [59]

    N. D. Khanh, N. Abe, K. Matsuura, H. Sagayama, Y . Tokunaga , and T. Arima, Anisotropic magnetodielectric coupling in antiferromagnet Co4Nb2O9, Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 102905 (2019)

    2019

  51. [60]

    T. D. Sparks, M. C. Kemei, P. T. Barton, R. Seshadri, E.-D . Mun, and V . S. Zapf, Magnetocapacitance as a sensitive probe of magnetostructural changes in NiCr2O4, Phys. Rev. B 89, 024405 (2014)

    2014

  52. [61]

    Rathi, A

    A. Rathi, A. Anshul, A. Gupta, P. K. Rout, K. K. Maurya, R . K. Kotnala, R. P. Pant, and G. A. Basheed, Large low-field magnetodielectric response in multiferroic Bi2NiMnO6 thin film, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 50, 135006 (2017)

    2017

  53. [62]

    Zhou, Y .-X

    J.-P. Zhou, Y .-X. Zhang, Q. Liu, and P. Liu, Magnetoelectr ic effects on ferromagnetic and ferroelectric phase transitions in multiferroic materials, Acta Mater. 76, 355 (2014)

    2014

  54. [63]

    L. H. Yin, R. R. Zhang, J. Yang, P. Tong, W. H. Song, J. M. Dai, X. B. Zhu, and Y. P. Sun, Quantum paraelectricity to dipolar glass transition in Sc doped BaFe 12O19 crystals single, Appl. Phys. Lett. 115, 262902 (2019)

    2019

  55. [64]

    Y . Wang, S. Zhang, W. K. Zhu, L. Ling, L. Zhang, Z. Qu, L. Pi, W. Tong, and M. Tian, Reversal and non-reversal ferroelectric polarizations in a Y-type hexaferrite, J. Mater. Chem. C 7, 340 (2019)

    2019

  56. [65]

    B. Yuan, J. Yang, X. Z. Zuo, X. C. Kan, L. Zu, X. B. Zhu, J. M. Dai, W. H. Song, and Y . P. Sun, Dielectric relaxation and magnetodielectric response in DyMn0.5Cr0.5O3, J. Appl. Phys. 118, 124103 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed July 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.