Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 58 references

Near-zero effective magnetization lowers spin Hall oscillator threshold currents by two orders of magnitude, enabling micrometer-sized devices.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 00:13 UTC pith:CUJF6VCA

load-bearing objection Worth a serious referee, but the title claim is ahead of the evidence: the low measured threshold is credible, while the near-zero-MeFF causal story is inferred, not demonstrated. the 5 major comments →

arxiv 2607.26299 v1 pith:CUJF6VCA submitted 2026-07-28 cond-mat.mes-hall

Near-zero effective magnetization enabling ultra-low threshold currents in spin Hall micro-oscillators

A. Koujok , H. Kurebayashi , K. Yamamoto , B. Heinz , V. K. Kushwaha , X. Hou , A. Hamadeh , T. Seki
show 1 more author
P. Pirro
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords effective magnetizationspin Hall oscillatorthreshold current densitymagnonicsBrillouin light scatteringmacrospin approximationperpendicular magnetic anisotropyspin-orbit torque
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to establish that engineering a magnetic stack so its effective magnetization M_eff is nearly zero is a practical route to much lower drive currents in spin Hall oscillators. In a W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta micro-oscillator, the authors measure a pulsed threshold current density of (0.292 ± 0.035) ×10^10 A/m², about two orders of magnitude below recent nanoscale spin Hall nano-oscillators. The reduction is attributed to strongly reduced precessional ellipticity at low M_eff, which lowers damping and suppresses magnon–magnon scattering. Micromagnetic simulations show that the macrospin approximation breaks down above threshold, which is why oscillations persist even at zero M_eff, and reveal that small changes in M_eff profoundly change the dynamic regime.

Core claim

The central claim, stated on the paper's own terms, is that near-zero effective magnetization—achieved by balancing the demagnetization field against the perpendicular anisotropy at the MgO/CoFeB interface—dramatically lowers the current density needed to excite sustained magnetization oscillations in a spin Hall oscillator. Using micro-focused Brillouin light scattering, the authors find J_th = (1.305 ± 0.153) ×10^10 A/m² under DC current and J_th = (0.292 ± 0.035) ×10^10 A/m² under 200 ns pulses at μ0H_ext = 25 mT, a reduction of more than two orders of magnitude relative to most recent nanoscale SHNOs. Micromagnetic simulations for M_eff values of 33, 10, 0, and -10 mT reveal that beyond

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective magnetization M_eff = M_s − 2K_u/(μ0 M_s), a combination of saturation magnetization and perpendicular uniaxial anisotropy. The paper uses an MgO/CoFeB interface to tune K_u so that M_eff is near zero, and exploits the threshold-current formula J_th = (2e μ0 α d_FM M_s)/(ℏ θ_SH)(H_ext + M_eff/2) as the design guide. In simulations, breaking of the macrospin approximation—the simplifying assumption that all spins precess in unison—through the appearance of domains and short-wavelength spin waves is the mechanism that allows steady oscillations at zero M_eff.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the fabricated device really has near-zero effective magnetization: the paper infers this from the layer stack and expected interface anisotropy rather than measuring it directly, and the simulations use hand-picked anisotropy values rather than values matched to the experimental sample.

What would settle it

Measure M_eff of the exact W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta stack by ferromagnetic resonance or another direct magnetization probe and check whether μ0M_eff is indeed close to zero; alternatively, fabricate a control micro-oscillator with a slightly larger M_eff and show that J_th rises in line with (H_ext + M_eff/2).

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Micrometer-scale spin Hall oscillators can run at current densities around 0.3×10^10 A/m², making them plausible candidates for energy-efficient magnonic devices and oscillator-based computing.
  • Pulsed operation avoids the Joule-heating penalty that raises the DC threshold by roughly a factor of 4.5, so thermal management becomes the main practical constraint on continuous operation.
  • Tuning M_eff can replace aggressive lateral miniaturization as a route to low threshold current, potentially simplifying fabrication and device integration.
  • The macrospin breakdown above threshold means device modeling must treat full micromagnetic dynamics; predictions based on macrospin alone will fail at high drive currents.
  • The strong sensitivity of the dynamic regime to small M_eff changes (from 0 to 10 mT) suggests M_eff can be used as a control parameter for the type of magnetization dynamics a device exhibits.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: If the stack truly has near-zero M_eff, the same material design should also lower thresholds for other spin-orbit-torque phenomena, such as magnetization switching or domain-wall motion, offering a general energy-efficiency route in spintronics.
  • Inference: The paper's causal story could be tested directly by fabricating sister samples with slightly different CoFeB thicknesses (hence different M_eff) and checking that J_th rises approximately linearly with (H_ext + M_eff/2), as Eq. (1) predicts.
  • Inference: The large DC-versus-pulsed threshold difference implies a frequency dependence of J_th; measuring J_th versus pulse length and duty cycle would quantify the thermal contribution and guide practical device design.
  • Inference: Because macrospin breakdown creates localized dynamic domains, these devices may exhibit mode-hopping and stochastic switching, a feature relevant for unconventional computing but also a potential source of timing jitter in coherent signal generation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports experimental and micromagnetic-simulation results for micrometer-sized spin Hall oscillators (SHMOs) based on a W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta stack with nominally near-zero effective magnetization Meff. Using micro-focused Brillouin light scattering, the authors extract threshold current densities Jth from the inverse BLS intensity: Jth = (1.305 ± 0.153) × 10^10 A/m^2 under continuous DC current and Jth = (0.292 ± 0.035) × 10^10 A/m^2 under 200 ns current pulses at μ0Hext = 25 mT. They attribute the low pulsed threshold to the near-zero Meff of the CoFeB layer, arguing from the standard macrospin threshold formula and from Mumax3 simulations that show strongly Meff-dependent magnetization dynamics, including breakdown of the macrospin approximation above threshold. The paper claims a reduction of the threshold current density by nearly two orders of magnitude compared with recent nanoscale spin Hall nano-oscillators.

Significance. If the causal claim is established, the result would be significant for energy-efficient magnonic and oscillator devices, because it would demonstrate that engineering Meff can lower threshold current densities by orders of magnitude and enable micrometer-sized devices that are easier to fabricate and measure. The paper also provides a useful experimental data point on pulsed versus DC threshold behavior in a micro-scale spin Hall system. However, the central causal claim rests on the assumption that the fabricated sample indeed has near-zero Meff, which is not directly measured, and on simulations whose quantitative agreement with the pulsed experiment is poor. The paper includes standard threshold-extraction methodology, but lacks the control and parameter characterization needed to isolate Meff as the cause of the low Jth.

major comments (5)
  1. [Results, Continuous DC and Pulsed measurements (Figs. 2, 3)] The central claim that near-zero Meff causes the low Jth is not supported because Meff is never directly measured. The near-zero value is inferred only from the W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta stack design and the expected MgO/CoFeB perpendicular anisotropy. No VSM, SQUID, FMR, or anomalous Hall measurement of Meff is presented, and no control sample with a substantially different Meff is measured under the identical pulsed protocol. Without such a control, the observed low Jth could equally be attributed to heating, geometry, or a particularly high spin-Hall efficiency of the sample. This is a load-bearing gap for the paper's main claim.
  2. [Micromagnetic simulations, Fig. 4 and Methods] The simulated pulsed threshold current densities are 1.3, 0.9, 1.2, and 1.2 × 10^10 A/m^2 for Meff = 33, 10, 0, and -10 mT, respectively, while the measured pulsed Jth is 0.292 × 10^10 A/m^2. Thus the simulations overestimate the pulsed threshold by a factor of 3–4, even though they are intended to model the same pulsed excitation and geometry. The spin Hall angle used in the simulations is not stated, so the threshold cannot be reproduced or checked. This quantitative discrepancy means the simulations do not currently validate the experimental threshold value or the causal role of Meff.
  3. [Fig. 4, subplot (a) and caption] The simulations do not support the simple 'near-zero Meff is optimal' narrative. Among the four tested values, Meff = 10 mT gives the lowest simulated Jth (0.9 × 10^10 A/m^2), whereas Meff = 0 mT gives Jth = 1.2 × 10^10 A/m^2. The text later emphasizes that the Meff = 10 mT case is closest to macrospin behavior, which further complicates the interpretation. The paper should explicitly address why the optimal simulated Meff is not zero and how this affects the claimed advantage of near-zero Meff.
  4. [Equation (1) and quantitative link] Equation (1) is used to argue that lowering Meff lowers Jth, but no quantitative test is performed linking the measured Jth to the actual Meff and spin Hall angle. For example, using the measured pulsed Jth and literature parameters for W/CoFeB, the authors could estimate the effective Meff implied by Eq. (1) and compare it with their nominal value. Without such a consistency check, the agreement between the measured threshold and Eq. (1) is only qualitative. This is particularly important given that the pulsed Jth is four times lower than the continuous Jth, and the manuscript does not explain why the DC threshold (1.305 × 10^10 A/m^2) happens to be close to the simulated pulsed thresholds.
  5. [Methods, Micromagnetic simulations] The simulations are performed at T = 0 K, with no thermal effects or Joule heating included, while the experiments are at room temperature under 200 ns pulses. The authors argue that heating increases threshold, but the simulated pulsed thresholds are higher, not lower, than the measured pulsed threshold. This inconsistency is not discussed. The manuscript should either include thermal effects in the simulations or explain why the T = 0 K simulated thresholds are expected to be higher than the room-temperature measured values.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Results, Fig. 3 caption] The abstract quotes Jth = (0.292 ± 0.025) × 10^10 A/m^2, while the Results section and Fig. 3(c) quote (0.292 ± 0.035) × 10^10 A/m^2. Please harmonize the uncertainty.
  2. [Introduction, first paragraph] There is a duplicated phrase: 'magnetization magnetization oscillation threshold reduction' in the paragraph following Eq. (1).
  3. [Results, Pulsed measurements] The sentence 'the pulse 200 ns long pulse is highlighted' contains a grammatical error; should be 'The 200 ns long pulse is highlighted'.
  4. [Methods, Micromagnetic simulations] The citation for the Aithericon platform is present only as a URL in a footnote. Please provide a full reference or software citation.
  5. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption states 'All snapshots were taken at a fixed current density of Jc = 2Jth' but the text later says the snapshots at 182.5 ns are also at Jc = 2Jth; please ensure the wording is unambiguous regarding the two time points.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the threshold formula is independently cited theory, the measured Jth is an experimental extrapolation, and the simulations are parameter sweeps rather than fits to the target value.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that near-zero Meff lowers the spin-Hall-oscillator threshold current density. The derivation chain is not circular. Equation (1), Jth = (2e mu0 alpha d_FM Ms / (hbar theta_SH)) (Hext + Meff/2), is taken from established spin-torque theory (Slavin & Tiberkevich; Taniguchi & Kubota), not derived from the present measurement. The experimental threshold is extracted from BLS intensity ratios using the separately-motivated relation I_BLS proportional to k_B T Gamma_i / (Gamma_i - Gamma(Jc)), with Jth defined as the point of zero net relaxation rate. That is a measurement, not a fit of a model built to produce the claimed value. The near-zero Meff is a stated design property of the W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta stack, inferred from the expected MgO/CoFeB perpendicular anisotropy; it is not fitted from the measured Jth. In the simulations, Ku1 values are chosen to realize four specific Meff values (33, 10, 0, -10 mT), but this is a deliberate parameter sweep, not an optimization to match the experimental pulsed Jth. In fact, the simulated thresholds (0.9-1.3 x 10^10 A/m^2) do not reproduce the pulsed experimental value (0.292 x 10^10 A/m^2), so the simulations are not forced to agree with the headline result by construction. No load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem is used; self-references are confined to background/broader-context statements. The scientific concern that Meff is never directly measured and no high-Meff control is tested under the pulsed protocol is a serious evidence gap, but it is a matter of empirical support and causal identification, not circularity. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The causal claim rests on standard spin-Hall torque theory (Eq. 1) and on simulation/material inputs that are not fully validated against the measured device. The key unmeasured quantity is the sample's Meff: the simulations use hand-selected K_u values to realize the Meff values, and material parameters are taken from literature rather than the specific film. No new physical entities are postulated; 'SHMO' is a device label, not a new force or particle.

free parameters (4)
  • Gilbert damping alpha in simulations = 0.045
    Chosen for CoFeB in Mumax3; stated to match experiment/material characterization, but no direct measurement or source is shown for this film. It directly affects the simulated threshold and dynamics.
  • Exchange stiffness A_ex in simulations = 15 x 10^-12 J/m
    Taken as a typical CoFeB value from refs 46 and 47, not measured on the actual film. It controls spin-wave stiffness and domain formation in the macrospin-breakdown simulations.
  • Saturation magnetization Ms in simulations = 521 x 10^3 A/m
    Input for Mumax3, said to come from experiments/material characterization, but the measurement is not shown. Ms enters both the threshold expression and the demagnetizing fields.
  • Uniaxial anisotropy constants K_u1 per simulated Meff case = 161950, 167944, 170551.3, 173156.7 J/m^3
    Hand-selected to make the simulated µ0Meff equal 33, 10, 0, and -10 mT. These values are not tied to a measured anisotropy of the experimental sample, but they define the claimed near-zero Meff conditions.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Macrospin threshold formula Jth = (2e mu0 alpha d_FM M_s / (hbar theta_SH))(Hext + Meff/2) from refs 34 and 35
    The paper uses this external formula to motivate that lowering Meff lowers Jth and to interpret threshold behavior. It is not re-derived.
  • domain assumption Inverse BLS intensity relation I_BLS proportional to k_B T / (Gamma_i - Gamma(Jc)) from ref 42
    The threshold current extraction assumes thermodynamic equilibrium of the spin-wave mode and a linear dependence of inverse intensity on current density near threshold.
  • standard math Mumax3 correctly solves the micromagnetic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation with spin-orbit torques
    The simulations rely on a well-established solver without formal verification of the specific setup.
  • ad hoc to paper Thermal effects can be neglected in simulations (T = 0 K)
    Simulations run at T = 0 K to reduce time, while the experiments show a large DC-vs-pulsed threshold difference attributed to Joule heating. The simulated dynamics may not quantitatively reproduce the heated experimental device.
  • domain assumption Material parameters (alpha, A_ex, Ms, K_u) chosen in simulations apply to the experimental sample
    Parameters are taken from literature or stated as 'material characterization' without showing the measurement. If the actual film's parameters differ, the simulated Jth values and domain dynamics would change.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12111 in / 14386 out tokens · 139154 ms · 2026-08-01T00:13:36.534537+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Reducing the electrical current required to excite magnetization dynamics is a central challenge, e.g. for energy-efficient magnonic devices or oscillator-based computing. Spin Hall oscillators typically rely on large current densities to compensate intrinsic magnetic damping, so these systems are usually studied on the nanoscale (Spin Hall Nano Oscillators, SHNOs) to work with moderate currents and a favorable heat dissipation geometry. Here, we demonstrate that engineering a near-zero effective magnetization ($M_\mathrm{eff}$) enables a drastic reduction of the magnetization oscillation threshold current density for Spin Hall oscillators. This makes it possible to excite even comparably large systems with micrometer lateral sizes, so-called "Spin Hall Micro-Oscillators" (SHMOs). Using micro-focused Brillouin light scattering spectroscopy, we quantify the threshold current density in SHMOs based on W/CoFeB/MgO/Ta with near-zero $M_\mathrm{eff}$. We observe threshold current densities as low as $J_{\mathrm{th}}$ = (0.292 $\pm$ 0.025) $\times 10^{10}$ A/m$^{2}$, representing a reduction of more than two orders of magnitude compared with most recent reported SHNOs. Using systematic micromagnetic simulations, we investigate the breaking down of the macrospin approximation and underline the high influence of $M_\mathrm{eff}$ on magnetization dynamics under applied spin currents. Our results establish $M_\mathrm{eff}$ engineering as a powerful strategy for realizing ultra-low-power spin Hall oscillators and energy-efficient magnetization control.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.26299 by A. Hamadeh, A. Koujok, B. Heinz, H. Kurebayashi, K. Yamamoto, P. Pirro, T. Seki, V. K. Kushwaha, X. Hou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Schematic representation of the sample stack. A W layer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Continuous DC measurements: (a) color-coded [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Pulsed current measurements: (a) Color-coded [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Micromagnetic simulations with pulsed current: (a) Space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Micromagnetic simulations with pulsed current: Spatial snapshots at t = 175 ns and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Micromagnetic simulations with pulsed current: Space av [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗

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

58 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Experimental prototype of a spin-wave majority gate , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  2. [2]

    Physics Letters A , volume=

    Perspectives of using spin waves for computing and signal processing , author=. Physics Letters A , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  3. [3]

    IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs , volume=

    Two cascaded spin wave majority gates operation under continuous and pulse modes , author=. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems II: Express Briefs , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  4. [4]

    IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , volume=

    Advances in magnetics roadmap on spin-wave computing , author=. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  5. [5]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19212 , year=

    Review on spin-wave RF applications , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19212 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  6. [6]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.08656 , year=

    Identification and minimization of losses in microscaled spin-wave transducers , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.08656 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    Nature materials , volume=

    Magnetic nano-oscillator driven by pure spin current , author=. Nature materials , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  8. [8]

    Nature Physics , volume=

    Long-range mutual synchronization of spin Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Nature Physics , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  9. [9]

    Proceedings of the IEEE , volume=

    Spin-torque and spin-Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  10. [10]

    Nature nanotechnology , volume=

    Two-dimensional mutually synchronized spin Hall nano-oscillator arrays for neuromorphic computing , author=. Nature nanotechnology , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  11. [11]

    Nature materials , volume=

    Memristive control of mutual spin Hall nano-oscillator synchronization for neuromorphic computing , author=. Nature materials , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  12. [12]

    Nature communications , volume=

    A single layer spin-orbit torque nano-oscillator , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  13. [13]

    ACS nano , volume=

    Energy-Efficient Single Layer Spin Hall Nano-Oscillators Driven by Berry Curvature , author=. ACS nano , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  14. [14]

    Advanced Materials , volume=

    Ultra-Low Current 10 nm Spin Hall Nano-Oscillators , author=. Advanced Materials , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  15. [15]

    Nature materials , volume=

    Spin Hall effect devices , author=. Nature materials , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  16. [16]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Beta ( ) tungsten thin films: Structure, electron transport, and giant spin Hall effect , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2015 , publisher=

    2015

  17. [17]

    Physical Review Applied , volume=

    Energy-Efficient W 100- x Ta x/Co-Fe-B/MgO Spin Hall Nano-Oscillators , author=. Physical Review Applied , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  18. [18]

    IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , volume=

    Nonlinear auto-oscillator theory of microwave generation by spin-polarized current , author=. IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , volume=. 2009 , publisher=

    2009

  19. [19]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Generation Linewidth of an Auto-Oscillator with a Nonlinear Frequency Shift:<? format?> Spin-Torque Nano-Oscillator , author=. Physical review letters , volume=. 2008 , publisher=

    2008

  20. [20]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Synchronization of spin Hall nano-oscillators to external microwave signals , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  21. [21]

    Chinese Physics B , volume=

    Recent progress on excitation and manipulation of spin-waves in spin Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Chinese Physics B , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  22. [22]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Voltage-driven gigahertz frequency tuning of spin Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  23. [23]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Current-nonlinear Hall effect and spin-orbit torque magnetization switching in a magnetic topological insulator , author=. Physical review letters , volume=. 2017 , publisher=

    2017

  24. [24]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Spectral characteristics of the microwave emission by the spin Hall nano-oscillator , author=. Physical review letters , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  25. [25]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Compositional effect on auto-oscillation behavior of Ni100- xFex/Pt spin Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  26. [26]

    Nature Nanotechnology , volume=

    Energy-efficient picosecond spin--orbit torque magnetization switching in ferro-and ferrimagnetic films , author=. Nature Nanotechnology , volume=. 2025 , publisher=

    2025

  27. [27]

    Physical review letters , volume=

    Control of magnetic fluctuations by spin current , author=. Physical review letters , volume=. 2011 , publisher=

    2011

  28. [28]

    Physical Review B , volume=

    Instability analysis of spin-torque oscillator with an in-plane magnetized free layer and a perpendicularly magnetized pinned layer , author=. Physical Review B , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  29. [29]

    Physical Review Applied , volume=

    Threshold current density for perpendicular magnetization switching through spin-orbit torque , author=. Physical Review Applied , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  30. [30]

    Science , volume=

    Spin-torque switching with the giant spin Hall effect of tantalum , author=. Science , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  31. [31]

    Physical Review B , volume=

    Controlling Gilbert damping in a YIG film using nonlocal spin currents , author=. Physical Review B , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  32. [32]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Generation of coherent spin-wave modes in yttrium iron garnet microdiscs by spin--orbit torque , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  33. [33]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Giant voltage-controlled modulation of spin Hall nano-oscillator damping , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  34. [34]

    Physical Review Applied , volume=

    Fast low-current spin-orbit-torque switching of magnetic tunnel junctions through atomic modifications of the free-layer interfaces , author=. Physical Review Applied , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  35. [35]

    AIP advances , volume=

    The design and verification of MuMax3 , author=. AIP advances , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  36. [36]

    Physical Review B , volume=

    Gilbert damping constants of Ta/CoFeB/MgO (Ta) thin films measured by optical detection of precessional magnetization dynamics , author=. Physical Review B , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  37. [37]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Damping of CoxFe80- xB20 ultrathin films with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  38. [38]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Optothermal control of spin Hall nano-oscillators , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  39. [39]

    Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials , volume=

    Temperature dependence of spin pumping and inverse spin Hall effect in permalloy/Pt bilayers , author=. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  40. [40]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00709 , year=

    Spin current control of magnetism , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00709 , year=

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Physical Review Applied , volume=

    Thermal contribution to the spin-orbit torque in metallic-ferrimagnetic systems , author=. Physical Review Applied , volume=. 2018 , publisher=

    2018

  42. [42]

    Physical Review B , volume=

    Magnon transport in Y 3 Fe 5 O 12/Pt nanostructures with reduced effective magnetization , author=. Physical Review B , volume=. 2021 , publisher=

    2021

  43. [43]

    Nature communications , volume=

    Controlled nonlinear magnetic damping in spin-Hall nano-devices , author=. Nature communications , volume=. 2019 , publisher=

    2019

  44. [44]

    Journal of Applied Physics , volume=

    Tutorial: Simulating modern magnetic material systems in mumax3 , author=. Journal of Applied Physics , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  45. [45]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Spin transfer torque devices utilizing the giant spin Hall effect of tungsten , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  46. [46]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume=

    Brillouin light scattering spectra as local temperature sensors for thermal magnons and acoustic phonons , author=. Applied Physics Letters , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  47. [47]

    Nature Nanotechnology , volume=

    Bose--Einstein condensation of quasiparticles by rapid cooling , author=. Nature Nanotechnology , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  48. [48]

    Physical Review Letters , volume=

    Stimulated amplification of propagating spin waves , author=. Physical Review Letters , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  49. [49]

    Physical Review Applied , volume=

    Enhanced magnon spin current using the bosonic Klein paradox , author=. Physical Review Applied , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  50. [50]

    AIP Advances , volume=

    Antimagnonics , author=. AIP Advances , volume=. 2024 , publisher=

    2024

  51. [51]

    Communications Physics , volume=

    Magnonic Klein and acausal tunneling enabled by breaking the anti parity-time symmetry in antiferromagnets , author=. Communications Physics , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  52. [52]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.09569 , year=

    Dynamical Stabilization of Inverted Magnetization and Antimagnons by Spin Injection in an Extended Magnetic System , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.09569 , year=

    arXiv

  53. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.15231 , year=

    Direct Observation of Antimagnons with Inverted Dispersion , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.15231 , year=

    arXiv

  54. [54]

    Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics , volume=

    Parametric excitation of magnetization oscillations controlled by pure spin current , author=. Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics , volume=. 2012 , publisher=

    2012

  55. [55]

    , volume=

    , author=. , volume=. See www.aithericon.com for further information and details , publisher=

  56. [56]

    Nature Materials , pages=

    Dynamical stability by spin transfer in nearly isotropic magnets , author=. Nature Materials , pages=. 2026 , publisher=

    2026

  57. [57]

    Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials , volume=

    Exchange stiffness and damping constants of spin waves in CoFeB films , author=. Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  58. [58]

    Journal of Applied Physics , volume=

    Exchange stiffness in ultrathin perpendicularly magnetized CoFeB layers determined using the spectroscopy of electrically excited spin waves , author=. Journal of Applied Physics , volume=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016