Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Fluctuation-Driven Enhancement of Spin-Orbit Torque near the Curie Temperature of Ultrathin Ferromagnets

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-10 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Magnetic fluctuations above the Curie point boost damping-like spin-orbit torque while suppressing the field-like part.

desk verdict Solid experimental observation of opposite DL/FL SOT trends above TC in ultrathin CoFeB, with a useful GMS method; the mixing interpretation is plausible but rests on an under-constrained length-scale assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.06703 v1 pith:RI2MRFQW submitted 2026-07-07 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hall

Mateusz Szurek , Sergei Ivanov , Sergei Urazhdin This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hall
keywords spin-orbittorqueCurietemperaturemagneticfluctuationsspin-mixingconductanceultrathinferromagnetsCoFeB/PtB/Taheat-assistedspintronics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper shows that when an ultrathin ferromagnet is driven above its Curie temperature by confinement, magnetic fluctuations do not simply dilute the magnetization. They reorganize how the ferromagnet absorbs spin current from a neighboring heavy-metal layer. The damping-like spin-orbit field that drives useful switching and magnon generation rises sharply, while the field-like field falls, and the two quantities move in opposite directions when an external field is applied. The authors attribute the divergence to geometric averaging of the interfacial spin-conductance tensor: fluctuations mix the large longitudinal conductance into the transverse channel, so more of the transversely polarized spin current is absorbed. Because the same mixing can be engineered statically or by short-wavelength magnons generated by the spin current itself, the result points to a practical route for raising spin-orbit-torque efficiency without new materials, analogous to heat-assisted magnetic recording.

What carries the argument

The angular average of the interfacial spin-conductance tensor over short-scale magnetization fluctuations (Eq. 5): the real (damping-like) mixing conductance is increased by a term proportional to the longitudinal conductance times the mean-square transverse angle, while the imaginary (field-like) part is reduced by the average cosine of the fluctuation angle.

What would settle it

Measure damping-like and field-like efficiencies in the same bilayers while independently tuning the magnetic correlation length (for example by controlled interfacial roughness or an antiferromagnetic spacer) so that it becomes longer than the spin-diffusion length; if the DL enhancement and FL suppression both disappear, the short-scale-mixing mechanism is ruled out.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Above the Curie temperature of an ultrathin ferromagnet, the damping-like spin-orbit field is strongly enhanced and the field-like field is suppressed, with opposite field dependences; both behaviors match the prediction of fluctuation-driven mixing between the longitudinal and transverse channels of the interfacial spin conductance.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that magnetic fluctuations occur on length scales shorter than the spin-diffusion length, so the interface can be replaced by a simple angular average of the spin-conductance tensor.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports that in ultrathin CoFeB/Pt and CoFeB/Ta bilayers with confinement-suppressed Curie temperatures, the damping-like spin-orbit field is strongly enhanced above TC while the field-like field is suppressed, with opposite in-plane field dependences. The authors introduce a generalized magnetoelectronic susceptibility (GMS) reformulation of second-harmonic Hall analysis that does not assume magnetic saturation or a unique anisotropy field, validate it against standard HHV on a thicker control film, and corroborate the temperature trends with ST-FMR. They interpret the divergent DL/FL behaviors as fluctuation-driven mixing of longitudinal and transverse interfacial spin conductances (Sec. II, Eq. 5), and discuss a possible spintronic analog of heat-assisted recording via engineered fluctuations or short-wavelength magnons.

Significance. If the experimental trends hold, the work is a useful contribution on two levels. Methodologically, the GMS approach is a practical tool for quantifying effective SOFs in unsaturated, fluctuating ultrathin magnets where standard HHV assumptions fail; the control-sample cross-check (Fig. 1) and dual-technique consistency (HHV and ST-FMR) strengthen that claim. Physically, opposite DL/FL temperature and field trends near TC in two HM systems with opposite spin-Hall signs are nontrivial and application-relevant, since high-current SOT devices inevitably heat the free layer. The paper is appropriately cautious in framing the microscopic picture as consistency rather than a unique proof, and it openly discusses REE and magnetization-scaling alternatives. The main value is therefore the robust phenomenology plus a clear, testable geometric mechanism, even if the length-scale assumption remains under-constrained.

major comments (3)
  1. Sec. II, Eq. (5): The central microscopic claim (enhancement of real Gmix and suppression of Im Gmix) requires that the characteristic fluctuation length be shorter than the spin-diffusion length so that the interface is described by the configuration average of G0. The paper itself notes (Sec. VI) that longer-ranged fluctuations would instead suppress the measured DL torque. The only support offered is the Curie–Weiss form of ΔH1(T) and the inference that μ ~ kBT/ΔH decreases above TC1 (Sec. IV). That constrains the effective moment size but does not fix the spatial correlation length relative to λs of Pt or Ta. This assumption is load-bearing for the interpretive claim and should be either better constrained (e.g., by correlation-length estimates, thickness/λs trends, or a clear falsification test) or the abstract/conclusions should more sharply separate the robust experimental observa
  2. Sec. IV–V and Eq. (12): SOT efficiencies ξDL,FL depend on a semi-quantitative M(H,T) reconstructed from AHE on the Hall bars plus SQUID on a different stack (different buffer, CoFeB thickness, and TC1). The paper acknowledges the uncertainty in ΔHin and that the estimate is only semi-quantitative below TC. Because the claimed non-trivial DL enhancement is largely carried by ξDL (Fig. 4c), the manuscript should quantify how plausible variations in ΔHin and stack mismatch propagate into ξDL,FL, and show that the rise of ξDL above TC1 survives those bounds rather than being an artifact of the M proxy.
  3. Sec. VI and Fig. 6: The Langevin–Brillouin calculation based on Eq. (5) places both the DL upturn and the FL drop at TC1, whereas the data show the FL collapse only above TC2 (and more abruptly). The paper notes this mismatch but still presents the model as reproducing the “overall anomalous behaviors.” Either the model should be extended to incorporate the TC2/Rashba-related feature that the authors themselves associate with the FL drop, or the claim that Eq. (5) accounts for the FL suppression should be narrowed, with TC2-related physics treated as a distinct, possibly coexisting channel rather than absorbed into the same free-parameter fit.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 1(d) and related text: The control comparison is valuable; please state explicitly the field range and percentage agreement used to claim “within 10%,” and note whether Oersted subtraction was applied consistently in both methods.
  2. Eq. (7) and the definition of dRH/dHIP, dRH/dHOP: Clarify whether these susceptibilities are evaluated at the same H used for each V2ω(ϕ) point, and how nonlinearity of RH(H) near TC is handled when the small-tilt linearization (Eq. 8) becomes marginal.
  3. ST-FMR section (Sec. V.B): The limitations of applying Eqs. (14)–(15) in the fluctuating regime are stated; a brief quantitative estimate of systematic error from field-dependent α and Ha near TC would help the reader weight Fig. 5(d) relative to the HHV results.
  4. Notation: TC, TC1, and TC2 are used somewhat interchangeably early on; a single consistent convention after their introduction in Sec. IV would reduce ambiguity in Figs. 4–5.
  5. References and context: A short comparison to prior reports of SOT or SHE enhancement near magnetic critical points (beyond the cited FexPt1−x and NiO-spacer works) would help place the magnitude of the observed ξDL change.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: experimental DL/FL divergence is independent of the model; Eq. 5 is an interpretive averaging ansatz with free parameters adjusted only for the illustrative Fig. 6 calculation.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. VI, Fig. 6 and surrounding text]
    "Figure 6 shows the results of calculations of SOTs based on ΔH(T) approximated by Eq. (11) with ΔHin=1.2 kOe, neglected anisotropy (Ha=0), a=40 Oe/K, the overall scale of efficiencies adjusted to match the observations, with neglected Gr, and Gi taken to be proportional to T to match the observed linear temperature dependence of FL-SOT. These calculations reproduce the overall anomalous behaviors of SOT efficiencies in CoFeB/Pt shown in Figs. 4(c),(d)"

    Parameters (D, a, overall scale, Gi∝T) are tuned to the same data the calculation is said to 'reproduce.' This is an illustrative consistency check, not a parameter-free prediction; the paper does not claim otherwise, so the circularity is minor and confined to the figure.

full rationale

The paper's central experimental claim (enhancement of DL-SOT and suppression of FL-SOT above TC, with opposite field dependencies) is extracted from second-harmonic Hall and ST-FMR data via the GMS method (Eqs. 7–8, 15), which is a reformulation of measured Hall susceptibilities and does not presuppose the fluctuation-mixing mechanism. The microscopic interpretation (Sec. II, Eq. 5) is an angular average of the spin-conductance tensor under the short-length-scale assumption; it is used to show consistency with the data, not to define or force the measured SOFs. The semi-phenomenological Langevin calculation of Fig. 6 explicitly adjusts D, a, and the overall scale of efficiencies to match the experimental scale, and the paper itself notes residual mismatches (FL drop at TC2 rather than TC1). Self-citations to the group's prior work (e.g., on Rashba magnetism, magnon chemical potential, or NiO spacers) supply context or alternative explanations that are considered and largely set aside; none is load-bearing for the uniqueness of the present result. The short-length-scale assumption is under-constrained by the data (as the skeptic notes), but that is a correctness/assumption risk, not circularity by construction. Score 1 reflects only the minor, non-load-bearing self-citation pattern.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard spin-transport phenomenology plus one key modeling assumption (short-length-scale angular averaging of the spin-conductance tensor) and several free parameters used only in the semi-phenomenological illustration of Fig. 6. No new particles or forces are postulated; GMS is a measurement reformulation, not an invented entity.

free parameters (3)
  • Gi proportional to T (scale factor a)
    In the model of Fig. 6, Gi is taken linear in T with constant a chosen to match the observed linear rise of FL-SOT below TC; overall efficiency scale is also adjusted by hand.
  • D = GP - Gr and ΔHin
    D is adjusted to match experimental efficiency scale; ΔHin = 1.2 kOe (or 0.4 kOe from SQUID) is chosen to parametrize anisotropy broadening in the sigmoid fits of M(H,T).
  • a = 40 Oe/K in Curie-Weiss width
    Fitting constant in Eq. (11) for the temperature-dependent broadening ΔH above TC.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Short-length-scale fluctuations: characteristic fluctuation length shorter than spin-diffusion length, so interface spin transport is given by angular average of G0 (Eq. 5).
    Stated in Sec. II; required for the mixing of longitudinal and transverse conductances that explains DL enhancement and FL suppression.
  • domain assumption Standard SHE-dominated SOF expression (Eq. 2) with complex interface transparency Tint involving Gmix.
    Taken from established spin-orbit torque literature (cited Manchon, Zhu et al.); used throughout.
  • domain assumption AHE amplitude tracks out-of-plane magnetization (dirty-limit intrinsic/side-jump dominance) so RH is a proxy for M⊥.
    Sec. IV; justified by residual resistivity ratio ~1.1 and comparison of RAHE(T) with SQUID Ms(T).
  • ad hoc to paper Langevin-Brillouin statistics for independent nanoscale moments with m = kBT / μ0 ΔH.
    Used only for the semi-phenomenological curves of Fig. 6; not required for the experimental claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fluctuation-Driven Enhancement of Spin-Orbit Torque near the Curie Temperature of Ultrathin Ferromagnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RI2MRFQW

@misc{pith2026260706703,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fluctuation-Driven Enhancement of Spin-Orbit Torque near the Curie Temperature of Ultrathin Ferromagnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RI2MRFQW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.06703}
}
abstract

We investigate how magnetic fluctuations influence spin-orbit torque in ultrathin-film magnetic heterostructures whose Curie temperature $T_C$ is suppressed by confinement. Above $T_C$, the damping-like contribution to spin-orbit field is significantly enhanced while the field-like contribution is suppressed, with the two contributions exhibiting opposite field dependencies. We show that these behaviors are consistent with fluctuation driven mixing between the longitudinal and transverse interfacial spin conductances, which enhances absorption of transversely polarized spin current by the ferromagnet. This mechanism can be activated below $T_C$ by engineering the microscopic magnetic state and by harnessing spin current-generated short-wavelength magnons, suggesting a spintronic analog of heat-assisted magnetic recording.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06703 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Cross-validation of the GMS and standard HHV methods [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Magnetic characterization of the CoFeB(0.65)/Pt(2.5) Hall [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Normalized second-harmonic voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Temperature dependence of the (a,b) damping-like and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. DL and FL SOT efficiencies vs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ramaswamy, J

    R. Ramaswamy, J. M. Lee, K. Cai, and H. Yang, Recent ad- vances in spin-orbit torques: Moving towards device applica- tions, Appl. Phys. Rev.5, 031107 (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Manchon, J

    A. Manchon, J. Železný, I. M. Miron, T. Jungwirth, J. Sinova, A. Thiaville, K. Garello, and P. Gambardella, Current-induced spin-orbit torques in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic sys- tems, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 035004 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Y . Wang, D. Zhu, Y . Wu, Y . Yang, J. Yu, R. Ramaswamy, R. Mishra, S. Shi, M. Elyasi, K.-L. Teo, Y . Wu, and H. Yang, Room temperature magnetization switching in topological insulator-ferromagnet heterostructures by spin-orbit torques, Nat. Commun.8, 1364 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    L. Zhu, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Maximizing spin- orbit torque generated by the spin Hall effect of Pt, Appl. Phys. Rev.8, 031308 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    D. Jo, D. Go, and H.-W. Lee, Gigantic intrinsic orbital Hall effects in weakly spin-orbit coupled metals, Phys. Rev. B98, 214405 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    A. Pezo, N. Sebe, A. Manchon, V . Cros, and H. Jaffrès, Anatomy of torques from orbital Rashba textures: The case of Co/Al interfaces, Phys. Rev. B112, 214426 (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Manchon and S

    A. Manchon and S. Zhang, Theory of nonequilibrium intrinsic spin torque in a single nanomagnet, Phys. Rev. B78, 212405 (2008)

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    V . P. Amin and M. D. Stiles, Spin transport at interfaces with spin-orbit coupling: Phenomenology, Phys. Rev. B94, 104420 (2016)

    work page 2016

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Finley and L

    J. Finley and L. Liu, Spin-orbit-torque efficiency in compen- sated ferrimagnetic cobalt-terbium alloys, Phys. Rev. Appl.6, 054001 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    Mishra, F

    R. Mishra, F. Yu, X. Qiu, M. Motapothula, T. Venkatesan, and H. Yang, Anomalous current-induced spin torques in ferrimag- nets near compensation, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 167201 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Urazhdin and N

    S. Urazhdin and N. Anthony, Effect of polarized current on the magnetic state of an antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 046602 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    J. Zhou, X. Wang, Y . Liu, J. Yu, H. Fu, L. Liu, S. Chen, J. Deng, W. Lin, X. Shu, H. Y . Yoong, T. Hong, M. Matsuda, P. Yang, S. Adams, B. Yan, and X. Han, Large spin-orbit torque effi- ciency enhanced by magnetic structure of collinear antiferro- magnet IrMn, Sci. Adv.5, eaa...

    2019

  5. [13]

    A. Bose, T. G. Saunderson, A. Shahee, L. Zhang, T. Hajiri, A. Rajan, D. Kumar, D. Go, H. Asano, U. Schwingenschlögl, A. Manchon, Y . Mokrousov, and M. Kläui, Fluctuation- mediated spin–orbit torque enhancement in the noncollinear an- tiferromagnet Mn3Ni0.35Cu0.65N, Nano Lett.2...

    2025

  6. [14]

    Mitrofanov and S

    A. Mitrofanov and S. Urazhdin, Energy and momentum conser- vation in spin transfer, Physical Review B102, 184402 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Mitrofanov and S

    A. Mitrofanov and S. Urazhdin, Nonclassical spin transfer effects in an antiferromagnet, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 037203 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Hayashi, J

    M. Hayashi, J. Kim, M. Yamanouchi, and H. Ohno, Quanti- tative characterization of the spin-orbit torque using harmonic Hall voltage measurements, Phys. Rev. B89, 144425 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    Lin and L

    X. Lin and L. Zhu, A two-field-scan harmonic Hall voltage analysis for fast, accurate quantification of spin-orbit torques in magnetic heterostructures, Sci. China: Phys. Mech. Astron. 67, 107511 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    V . E. Demidov, S. Urazhdin, E. R. J. Edwards, M. D. Stiles, R. D. McMichael, and S. O. Demokritov, Control of mag- netic fluctuations by spin current, Physical Review Letters107, 107204 (2011)

    2011

  11. [19]

    V . E. Demidov, S. Urazhdin, B. Divinskiy, V . D. Bessonov, A. B. Rinkevich, V . V . Ustinov, and S. O. Demokritov, Chem- ical potential of quasi-equilibrium magnon gas driven by pure spin current, Nat. Commun.8, 1579 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    V . E. Demidov, S. Urazhdin, A. Anane, V . Cros, and S. O. Demokritov, Spin–orbit-torque magnonics, J. Appl. Phys.127, 170901 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    G. Chen, D. Collette, and S. Urazhdin, Experimental demon- stration and analysis of random field effects in ferromag- net/antiferromagnet bilayers, Physical Review B101, 144427 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    L. Zhu, L. Zhu, and R. A. Buhrman, Fully spin-transparent magnetic interfaces enabled by the insertion of a thin param- agnetic NiO layer, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 107204 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Y . Ou, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Strong Enhancement of the Spin Hall Effect by Spin Fluctuations near the Curie Point of FexPt1−x alloys, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 097203 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Karimeddiny, J

    S. Karimeddiny, J. A. Mittelstaedt, R. A. Buhrman, and D. C. Ralph, Transverse and longitudinal spin-torque ferromagnetic resonance for improved measurement of spin-orbit torque, Phys. Rev. Appl.14, 024024 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    C.-F. Pai, L. Liu, Y . Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Spin transfer torque devices utilizing the giant spin Hall effect of tungsten, Appl. Phys. Lett.101, 122404 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    Zhang and R

    R. Zhang and R. F. Willis, Thickness-dependent Curie temper- atures of ultrathin magnetic films: Effect of the range of spin- spin interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 2665 (2001)

    2001

  19. [27]

    C. A. F. Vaz, J. A. C. Bland, and G. Lauhoff, Magnetism in ultrathin film structures, Rep. Prog. Phys.71, 056501 (2008)

    2008

  20. [28]

    W. L. Lim, N. Ebrahim-Zadeh, J. C. Owens, H. G. E. Hentschel, and S. Urazhdin, Temperature-dependent proximity magnetism in Pt, Appl. Phys. Lett.102, 162404 (2013)

    2013

  21. [29]

    Cecot, L

    M. Cecot, L. Karwacki, W. Skowronski, J. Kanak, J. Wrona, A. Zywczak, L. Yao, S. van Dijken, J. Barnas, and T. Sto- biecki, Influence of intermixing at the Ta/CoFeB interface on spin Hall angle in Ta/CoFeB/MgO heterostructures, Sci. Rep. 7, 968 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Additional information supporting our findings is available as Supplemental materials

  23. [31]

    Liu, C.-F

    L. Liu, C.-F. Pai, Y . Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Spin-Torque Switching with the Giant Spin Hall Ef- 11 fect of Tantalum, Science336, 555 (2012)

    2012

  24. [32]

    Golod, A

    T. Golod, A. Rydh, P. Svedlindh, and V . M. Krasnov, Anti- ordinary Hall effect near the ferromagnetic quantum phase tran- sition in NixPt1−x thin films, Phys. Rev. B87, 104407 (2013)

    2013

  25. [33]

    Ivanov, Y

    S. Ivanov, Y . Zhang, G. Chen, J. Peacock, V . E. Demidov, S. O. Demokritov, N. Brookes, B. Wehinger, J. W. Freeland, and S. Urazhdin, Evidence for Rashba magnetism in ultra- thin ferromagnet–heavy metal bilayers, Phys. Rev. Appl.22, L061002 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    S. E. Barnes, J. Ieda, and S. Maekawa, Rashba Spin-Orbit Anisotropy and the Electric Field Control of Magnetism, Sci. Rep.4, 4105 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    Kim, K.-J

    K.-W. Kim, K.-J. Lee, H.-W. Lee, and M. D. Stiles, Perpendic- ular magnetic anisotropy of two-dimensional Rashba ferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. B94, 184402 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    Nagaosa, J

    N. Nagaosa, J. Sinova, S. Onoda, A. H. MacDonald, and N. P. Ong, Anomalous Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1539 (2010)

    2010

  29. [37]

    Mihai Miron, G

    I. Mihai Miron, G. Gaudin, S. Auffret, B. Rodmacq, A. Schuhl, S. Pizzini, J. V ogel, and P. Gambardella, Current-driven spin torque induced by the rashba effect in a ferromagnetic metal layer, Nat. Mater.9, 230–234 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Nguyen and C.-F

    M.-H. Nguyen and C.-F. Pai, Spin–orbit torque characterization in a nutshell, APL Mater.9, 030902 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Lacroix, K

    C. Lacroix, K. Oguz, J. M. D. Coey, and D. Ménard, Ferromag- netic resonance damping mechanisms in cofeb thin films with cr substitution, Phys. Rev. B108, 094402 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Kittel, On the theory of ferromagnetic resonance absorption, Phys

    C. Kittel, On the theory of ferromagnetic resonance absorption, Phys. Rev.73, 155 (1948)

    1948

  33. [41]

    X. Tao, Q. Liu, B. Miao, R. Yu, Z. Feng, L. Sun, B. You, J. Du, K. Chen, S. Zhang, L. Zhang, Z. Yuan, D. Wu, and H. Ding, Self-consistent determination of spin Hall angle and spin diffu- sion length in Pt and Pd: The role of the interface spin loss, Sci. Adv.4, eaat1670 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    L. Zhu, D. C. Ralph, and R. A. Buhrman, Spin-orbit torques in heavy-metal–ferromagnet bilayers with varying strengths of interfacial spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 077201 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    R. H. Liu, W. L. Lim, and S. Urazhdin, Control of current- induced spin-orbit effects in a ferromagnetic heterostructure by electric field, Phys. Rev. B89, 220409 (2014)

    2014

  36. [44]

    Ivanov, J

    S. Ivanov, J. Peacock, and S. Urazhdin, Orbital correlations in ultrathin films of late transition metals, Phys. Rev. Mater.7, 014404 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed July 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.