Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Influence of X-ray Irradiation on the Magnetic and Structural Properties of Gadolinium Silicide Nanoparticles for Self-Regulating Hyperthermia

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Gd5Si4 nanoparticles keep their hyperthermia heating after high-dose X-ray irradiation.

desk verdict Useful irradiation-stability data for Gd5Si4 nanoparticles, but the self-regulating hyperthermia claim outruns what was actually measured. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.00293 v1 pith:5YG7YB37 submitted 2025-05-30 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.med-ph

Samantha E. Smith , Santiago Bermudez , Pavan Chaitanya , Zoe Boekelheide , Jessika Rojas Marin , Ravi L. Hadimani This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.med-ph
keywords MagnetichyperthermiaSelf-regulatingGadoliniumsilicidenanoparticlesX-rayirradiationdefectsMagnetocaloriceffectSpecificlosspowerRare-earth
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 asks whether Gd5Si4 nanoparticles, a candidate for self-regulating magnetic hyperthermia, can survive the high X-ray doses they would encounter if hyperthermia were combined with radiation therapy or used in high-radiation settings. The authors report that after 36 and 72 kGy of X-ray irradiation at 120 Gy/min, the particles keep their crystal structure, morphology, composition, magnetocaloric response, and specific loss power, even though transmission electron microscopy shows localized lattice defects and magnetic measurements show small changes such as a 3 K shift in transition temperature. If the claim holds, the particles' heating performance is robust to radiotherapy-relevant irradiation, supporting combined magnetic hyperthermia and radiotherapy as well as magnetocaloric cooling in radiation-rich environments. The stability conclusion is strongest for the functional heating metrics; the DC magnetization changes are small but not zero.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Gd5Si4 nanoparticle's ferromagnetic-to-paramagnetic transition near body-compatible temperatures (about 334 K, lower than the 336 K bulk Curie temperature $T_C$), which is what gives self-regulating hyperthermia: heating slows as the particle approaches its transition temperature. The functional readouts are the specific loss power (SLP), computed from the initial slope of the temperature rise under an alternating field, and the magnetocaloric entropy change, computed from magnetization isotherms via Maxwell's relation. Irradiation damage enters as localized lattice defects and dislocations seen in TEM, which are the mechanism that could in principle degrade magnetic order; the paper's argument is that these defects remain too sparse and local to change the functional heating metrics, even though they visibly soften DC hysteresis parameters.

What would settle it

Directly measure the steady-state temperature of a Gd5Si4 dispersion under an alternating field before and after 72 kGy irradiation; a shift of more than about 2 °C in the plateau temperature, or a change in SLP beyond the 15% uncertainty in paired runs, would refute the stability claim. Alternatively, AC magnetometry across therapeutic field amplitudes would reveal whether radiation-induced hysteresis changes that are invisible in DC VSM data alter heating.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that the magnetic-hyperthermia performance of Gd5Si4 nanoparticles is unaffected by high-dose, high-dose-rate X-ray exposure up to 72 kGy. The evidence is a before/after comparison: XRD, SEM, and EDS show no structural or compositional change; TEM shows irradiation-induced localized lattice distortions and dislocations that increase with dose; VSM magnetometry shows essentially unchanged saturation magnetization ($M_s$ = 35.72, 35.81, and 35.07 emu/g) with the coercivity falling from 40.5 to 6.2 Oe and remanence from 0.43 to 0.05 emu/g after 10 hours; the magnetic transition temperature drops from 334 K to about 330 K; and the magnetocaloric entropy-change peak remains at about 1.30 J/kg·K near 304 K for a 3 T field change. Specific loss power measured from the initial heating slope at 227 kHz and 0.035 T is 16.2, 17.3, and 15.9 W/g with roughly 15% uncertainty across the three samples. Because the functional metrics overlap within uncertainty, the paper concludes that the self-regulating heating capability and magnetocaloric effect are stable under irradiation.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that self-regulating hyperthermia is unaffected rests on an indirect SLP measurement at a single low field and frequency, plus treating a coercivity drop from 40.5 to 6.2 Oe and a remanence drop from 0.43 to 0.05 emu/g as functionally unimportant even though no error bars are reported for those VSM values.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Doses up to 72 kGy at 120 Gy/min do not change SLP within the 15% measurement uncertainty, so heating performance should survive the radiation exposure used in fractionated radiotherapy.
  • The magnetocaloric entropy-change peak is unchanged, so magnetocaloric cooling in high-radiation or deep-space environments remains viable.
  • Localized lattice damage accumulates with dose without breaking the crystal structure, implying a radiation-tolerance window exists below some higher threshold dose.
  • Combined hyperthermia/radiotherapy regimens can treat Gd5Si4 as functionally radiation-stable for heating, even though DC coercivity and remanence soften.
  • Gadolinium neutron capture therapy remains a plausible extension because the material's composition and structure survive intense ionizing irradiation, though neutron irradiation itself was not tested.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper did not measure the steady-state self-regulating temperature; if the 3 K transition-temperature drop seen after 10 hours persists under AMF heating, the therapeutic plateau could shift by a similar amount, so the self-regulation claim would be stronger with direct temperature-plateau measurements.
  • The SLP was measured at one low field (0.035 T) and frequency (227 kHz); radiation-induced changes in hysteresis loss at higher therapeutic field amplitudes cannot be ruled out and would be testable by AC magnetometry or calorimetry over a field sweep.
  • The 15% SLP uncertainty is comparable to the observed sample-to-sample spread, so a paired before/after measurement on the same batch would be needed to resolve radiation effects smaller than that.
  • The TEM defect accumulation suggests a dose-response trend; extrapolating beyond 72 kGy, one would expect a threshold where the transition-temperature shift, coercivity drop, and defect density eventually degrade SLP.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experimental study of Gd5Si4 nanoparticles exposed to high-dose X-ray irradiation (36 and 72 kGy at 120 Gy/min), using XRD, SEM/EDS, TEM, XPS, VSM, and SLP measurements. The authors find no structural or compositional changes by XRD/SEM/EDS, localized lattice distortions by TEM, and modest changes in DC magnetic properties, while the magnetocaloric ΔSM and the specific loss power (SLP) remain unchanged within the stated uncertainty. On this basis, they conclude that Gd5Si4 nanoparticles are stable under high-dose irradiation and that their self-regulating magnetic hyperthermia capability is unaffected, supporting combined hyperthermia-radiotherapy and deep-space applications.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the result is practically useful: it would show that Gd5Si4 nanoparticles preserve their magnetic hyperthermia heating performance after clinically relevant radiation doses, supporting combined MHT-RT. The paper's SLP measurements (16.2±2.4, 17.3±2.6, 15.9±2.4 W/g) overlap within the stated 15% uncertainty, and the ΔSM curves for irradiated and non-irradiated samples are nearly identical; these are concrete, quantitative comparisons. The use of previous SLP measurements on non-irradiated particles as an external cross-check is a strength. The paper is, however, less careful about the magnetic parameters in Table 3 and about the distinction between what was directly measured and what is inferred about self-regulation.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.6, §4, Abstract] The conclusion that 'self-regulating magnetic hyperthermia heating capability remains unaffected' is not supported by the measurements presented. Section 3.6 explicitly states 'this study did not investigate the self-regulating nature of the particles,' and the only heating metric reported is the initial-slope SLP measured at room temperature (0.035 T, 227 kHz). The self-regulating behavior relies on the temperature-dependent reduction of heating near the Curie transition, which is not captured by a room-temperature initial-slope measurement. The steady-state temperature was not measured. The authors should either remove the self-regulation claim from the abstract and conclusions, or clearly qualify it as an inference based on prior work on non-irradiated particles.
  2. [§3.5, Table 3] Table 3 lists Ms, Mr, and Hc for non-irradiated, 5 h, and 10 h irradiated samples without error bars, replicate measurements, or statistical tests. The relative changes for the 10 h sample are large: Hc decreases from 40.53 to 6.16 Oe (about 85%) and Mr from 0.43 to 0.05 emu/g (about 88%). The text describes these as 'slight' or 'not functionally important,' but without uncertainties or replicates, the claim that these changes are insignificant is unsupported. The authors should provide error bars, report the number of replicate samples, and perform a significance test (or at least discuss the measurement precision of the VSM) before concluding that the magnetic properties are unchanged.
  3. [§3.5 (transition temperature)] The paper reports a 3 K decrease in the transition temperature after 10 h irradiation (from about 60 °C to about 57 °C), but gives no uncertainty for this value. Because the transition temperature is the setpoint for self-regulating hyperthermia, a 3 K shift may be clinically relevant if real. The authors should provide an uncertainty estimate for the dM/dT-determined transition temperature and discuss whether the shift is statistically meaningful, especially since the same section states 'no significant change in dM/dT between Figure 9a and Figure 9b.'
  4. [Abstract vs. §4] There is an internal inconsistency: the abstract states 'observable changes in magnetic properties' are evidenced in magnetization vs. temperature and hysteresis measurements, while the conclusion states 'no significant changes in magnetization behavior.' This tension should be resolved. If the observed changes (coercivity drop, remanence drop, 3 K transition shift) are considered real but not functionally important, that should be stated explicitly; if they are considered insignificant, the abstract should not call them 'observable changes.'
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.8, Eq. (1)] The definition of the RMS field strength is self-referential and dimensionally inconsistent: 'μ0Hmax = √2 μ0Hmax.' This should be corrected (e.g., μ0H_rms = μ0H_max/√2 or a clearer statement of the relationship between the quoted amplitude and the RMS value).
  2. [§3.5] The method for determining the transition temperature from dM/dT is not defined; please specify whether it is the peak of dM/dT or the inflection point, and indicate the temperature step used in the M(T) measurements.
  3. [§3.5, Figure 9 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'after X-ray irradiation for(b) 5h and (c) 10h of.' Also, the text uses both 'K' and '°C' inconsistently; please use one convention or clearly convert.
  4. [§3.5 (Figure 10)] The FFT filter with cutoff frequency 0.024 used to smooth the ΔSM curves is not justified; please show or state that this smoothing does not affect the peak position or magnitude, or provide the raw ΔSM curves.
  5. [References] Reference [38] appears to be about radiation-induced radioactivity in materials and does not seem connected to the sentence in which it is cited (about magnetic properties of irradiated SiC). Please check the citation placement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the irradiation study is a direct experimental comparison; prior same-group SLP and steady-state measurements are used only as external cross-checks, not as inputs that make the conclusion true by construction.

full rationale

No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation in the paper reduces an output to an input. SLP is measured from the initial slope of T(t) via Eq. (1) on irradiated and non-irradiated samples, with the 15% uncertainty stated as an empirical value. Magnetocaloric ΔSM is computed from measured magnetization isotherms via Maxwell's relation, Eq. (2). The paper's main limitation—that steady-state self-regulating temperature was not directly measured (Section 3.6: 'this study did not investigate the self-regulating nature of the particles')—is an evidentiary gap, not a circular reduction: the conclusion that self-regulation is unaffected combines the measured SLP with prior same-group steady-state experiments [44], which are independent external measurements rather than parameters fitted to the present data. Similarly, the statement that SLP 'was consistent with past measurements [44], [45]' is a cross-check, not a load-bearing input. The reported 3 K transition-temperature shift, coercivity drop, and remanence change are disclosed rather than hidden; calling them 'slight' is a scientific judgment under measurement uncertainty, not a tautology. Because the paper contains no derivation chain in which a claimed prediction is equivalent to its inputs by construction, no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental characterization study with no fitting or derived quantities beyond standard formulas. The central claims rest on measurement assumptions rather than free parameters; the only hand-chosen numeric input is the FFT smoothing cutoff. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • FFT filter cutoff = 0.024
    Chosen manually to smooth ΔSM(T) curves; different cutoff could alter peak shape, though peak value and position are reported unchanged.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption GdSi and Gd5Si3 impurity phases have negligible magnetic contribution
    Section 3.1 states impurities are antiferromagnetic or paramagnetic with near-zero spontaneous magnetization, citing refs [25-27].
  • domain assumption 36-gauge E-type thermocouple minimizes eddy-current heating in the AMF
    Section 2.8 relies on ref [23] for this; no in-situ verification reported.
  • domain assumption SLP initial-slope method with background and loss subtraction yields the true SLP
    Section 2.8 applies Eq. (1) and subtracts background dT/dt; uncertainty of 15% is stated but raw curves for all samples are not shown.
  • domain assumption Delivered X-ray dose equals the nominal 36 and 72 kGy at 120 Gy/min
    Section 2.2 gives irradiator settings but no independent dosimetry or uncertainty for the dose.
  • ad hoc to paper FFT smoothing at cutoff 0.024 does not change the ΔSM peak
    Section 3.5 applies an FFT filter; the effect of the cutoff choice on the peak is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Influence of X-ray Irradiation on the Magnetic and Structural Properties of Gadolinium Silicide Nanoparticles for Self-Regulating Hyperthermia." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5YG7YB37

@misc{pith2026250600293,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Influence of X-ray Irradiation on the Magnetic and Structural Properties of Gadolinium Silicide Nanoparticles for Self-Regulating Hyperthermia},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5YG7YB37}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.00293}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetic hyperthermia treatment (MHT) utilizes heat generated from magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) under an alternating magnetic field (AMF) for therapeutic applications. Gadolinium silicide (Gd5Si4) has emerged as a promising MHT candidate due to its self-regulating heating properties and potential biocompatibility. However, the impact of high-dose X-ray irradiation on its magnetic behavior remains uncertain. This study examines Gd5Si4 nanoparticles exposed to 36 and 72 kGy X-ray irradiation at a high-dose rate (120 Gy/min). While X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy, and energy dispersive spectroscopy confirm no structural or compositional changes, transmission electron microscopy reveals localized lattice distortions, along with observable changes in magnetic properties, as evidenced in magnetization vs. temperature and hysteresis measurements. Despite this, magnetocaloric properties and specific loss power (SLP) remain unaffected. Our findings confirm the stability of Gd5Si4 under high-dose X-ray irradiation, supporting its potential for radiotherapy (RT) and magnetocaloric cooling in deep-space applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.00293 by the authors.

Figure 7
Figure 7. TEM images of (a-c) Gd5Si4 nanoparticles, HR-TEM images, and corresponding FFT patterns marked in yellow and blue of Gd5Si4 nanoparticles: (d-f) non-irradiated, (g-i) after 5 h of irradiation and (j-l) after 10 h of irradiation at 225 kV and 13.33 mA. Upon irradiation, the nanoparticles exhibited progressive structural changes. After 5 hours of irradiation, HR-TEM images ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. VSM magnetic hysteresis loops at 300 K from -3 T to 3 T of non-irradiated and irradiated samples after (a) 5h and (b) 10h at 300 K. When the data for the 5-hour irradiated sample are overlapped (Figure 8a), the magnetization shows no significant observable change. Additionally, no significant variation in coercivity is observed, as shown in the inset of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Magnetization (M) as a function of temperature (T) at 100 Oe applied magnetic field when measured as (a) non-irradiated, and after X-ray irradiation for(b) 5h and (c) 10h of. The transition temperature was determined from dM/dT. dislocations and vacancies similar to the variation of magnetization and coercivity in hysteresis graphs in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: , was generated using a signal processing technique involving an FFT filter with a cutoff frequency of 0.024 to effectively smooth the curve. The evaluation was conducted at a magnetic field of 3T using Maxwell’s thermodynamic equations, expressed as follows: ΔS𝑀 = ∫ …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Applications of magnetic nanoparticles in biomedicine,

    Q. A. Pankhurst, J. Connolly, S. K. Jones, and J. Dobson, “Applications of magnetic nanoparticles in biomedicine,” J Phys D Appl Phys, vol. 36, no. 13, pp. R167 –R181, Jul. 2003, doi: 10.1088/0022-3727/36/13/201

    doi:10.1088/0022-3727/36/13/201 2003

  2. [2]

    Selective Inductive Heating of Lymph Nodes,

    R. K. Gilchrist, R. M edal, W. D. S horey, R. C. Hanselman, J. C. P arrott, and C. B. T aylor, “Selective Inductive Heating of Lymph Nodes,” Ann Surg , vol. 146, no. 4, pp. 596 –606, Oct. 1957, doi: 10.1097/00000658 -195710000- 00007

    work page doi:10.1097/00000658 1957

  3. [3]

    Magnetic hyperthermia therapy for the treatment of glioblastoma: a review of the therapy’s history, efficacy and application in humans,

    K. Mahmoudi, A. Bouras, D. Bozec, R. Ivkov, and C. Hadjipanayis, “Magnetic hyperthermia therapy for the treatment of glioblastoma: a review of the therapy’s history, efficacy and application in humans,” International Journal of Hyperthermia , vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1316 –1328, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.1080/02656736.2018.1430867

    arXiv 2018

  4. [4]

    Magnetic nanoparticle-based therapeutic agents for thermo-chemotherapy treatment of cancer,

    A. Hervault and N. T. K. Thanh, “Magnetic nanoparticle-based therapeutic agents for thermo-chemotherapy treatment of cancer,” Nanoscale, vol. 6, no. 20, pp. 11553 –11573, 2014, doi: 10.1039/C4NR03482A

    work page doi:10.1039/c4nr03482a 2014

  5. [5]

    Lysosomal exocytosis induced by hyperthermia: a new model of cancer cell death. II. Effect on peritoneal macrophages,

    P. Pontiggia, S. Barai, G. Mathé, V. Bertone, and E. Pontiggia, “Lysosomal exocytosis induced by hyperthermia: a new model of cancer cell death. II. Effect on peritoneal macrophages,” Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy , vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 429 –430, Jan. 1995, doi: 10.1016/0753 - 3322(96)82680-1

    work page doi:10.1016/0753 1995

  6. [6]

    Cellular responses to hyperthermia (40 –46 °C): Cell killing and molecular events,

    J. L. Roti Roti, “Cellular responses to hyperthermia (40 –46 °C): Cell killing and molecular events,” International Journal of 10 Hyperthermia, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 3–15, Jan. 2008, doi: 10.1080/02656730701769841

    doi:10.1080/02656730701769841 2008

  7. [7]

    Advances in magnetic induction hyperthermia,

    Y.-F. Zhang and M. Lu, “Advances in magnetic induction hyperthermia,” Front Bioeng Biotechnol, vol. 12, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1432189

    work page arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy,

    X. Liu et al. , “Comprehensive understanding of magnetic hyperthermia for improving antitumor therapeutic efficacy,” Theranostics, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 3793–3815, 2020, doi: 10.7150/thno.40805

    work page doi:10.7150/thno.40805 2020

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Next Generation Magnetic Nanoparticles for Biomedical Applications,

    T. Thuy, S. Maenosono, and N. Thanh, “Next Generation Magnetic Nanoparticles for Biomedical Applications,” in Magnetic Nanoparticles, CRC Press, 2012, pp. 99 –126. doi: 10.1201/b11760-7

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    Synthesis and characterization of superparamagnetic iron -oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) and utilization of SPIONs in X -ray imaging,

    C. Justin, S. A. Philip, and A. V. Samrot, “Synthesis and characterization of superparamagnetic iron -oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) and utilization of SPIONs in X -ray imaging,” Appl Nanosci , vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 463 – 475, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s13204 -017-0583- x

    2017 doi

  3. [11]

    Fundamentals and advances in magnetic hyperthermia,

    E. A. Périgo et al., “Fundamentals and advances in magnetic hyperthermia,” Appl Phys Rev , vol. 2, no. 4, p. 041302, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1063/1.4935688

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    Investigating phase transition temperatures of size separated gadolinium silicide magnetic nanoparticles,

    S. G. Hunagund, S. M. Harstad, A. A. El -Gendy, S. Gupta, V. K. Pecharsky, and R. L. Hadimani, “Investigating phase transition temperatures of size separated gadolinium silicide magnetic nanoparticles,” AIP Adv, vol. 8, no. 5, May 2018, doi: 10.1063/1.5007686

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    Thermosensitive Magnetic Nanoparticles for Self -Controlled Hyperthermia Cancer Treatment,

    K. S. Martirosyan, “Thermosensitive Magnetic Nanoparticles for Self -Controlled Hyperthermia Cancer Treatment,” J Nanomed Nanotechnol , vol. 03, no. 06, 2012, doi: 10.4172/2157 - 7439.1000e112

    2012

  6. [14]

    Primer on gadolinium chemistry,

    A. D. Sherry, P. Caravan, and R. E. Lenkinski, “Primer on gadolinium chemistry,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1240–1248, Dec. 2009, doi: 10.1002/jmri.21966

    2009 doi

  7. [15]

    Effect of γ-rays irradiation on the structural, magnetic, and electrochemical properties of ZnMn2O4 nanoparticles,

    M. Sameeh, M. Khairy, and K. F. Qasim, “Effect of γ-rays irradiation on the structural, magnetic, and electrochemical properties of ZnMn2O4 nanoparticles,” Radiation Physics and Chemistry, vol. 226, p. 112343, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.radphyschem.2024.112343

    2025

  8. [16]

    Influence of Magnetic Nanoparticle Degradation in the Frame of Magnetic Hyperthermia and Photothermal Treatments,

    Y. Fernández -Afonso, L. Asín, L. Beola, R. M. Fratila, and L. Gutiérrez, “Influence of Magnetic Nanoparticle Degradation in the Frame of Magnetic Hyperthermia and Photothermal Treatments,” ACS Appl Nano Mater , vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 16220 –16230, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1021/acsanm.2c03220

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    Magnetic Hyperthermia and Radiation Therapy: Radiobiological Principles and Current Practice †,

    S. V. Spirou, M. Basini, A. Lascialfari, C. Sangregorio, and C. Innocenti, “Magnetic Hyperthermia and Radiation Therapy: Radiobiological Principles and Current Practice †,” Nanomaterials, vol. 8, no. 6, p. 401, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.3390/nano8060401

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    Anomalous Behavior in Electrical Transport Properties in Single -Crystal Gd5Si1.8Ge2.2 and Polycrystalline Gd5Si2.09Ge1.91,

    R. L. Hadimani, Y. Melikhov, J. E. Snyder, and D. C. Jiles, “Anomalous Behavior in Electrical Transport Properties in Single -Crystal Gd5Si1.8Ge2.2 and Polycrystalline Gd5Si2.09Ge1.91,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 4368 –4371, Oct. 2009, doi: 10.1109/TM...

    2009

  11. [19]

    Estimation of second order phase transition temperature of the orthorhombic phase of Gd5(SixGe 1−x) using Arrott plots,

    R. L. Hadimani, Y. Melikhov, J. E. Snyder, and D. C. Jiles, “Estimation of second order phase transition temperature of the orthorhombic phase of Gd5(SixGe 1−x) using Arrott plots,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 103, no. 3, p. 033906, 2008, doi: 10.1063/1.2841728

    2008 doi

  12. [20]

    Magnetocaloric Effect of Micro - and Nanoparticles of Gd5Si4,

    S. M. Harstad, A. A. El -Gendy, S. Gupta, V. K. Pecharsky, and R. L. Hadimani, “Magnetocaloric Effect of Micro - and Nanoparticles of Gd5Si4,” JOM, vol. 71, no. 9, pp. 3159 –3163, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11837-019-03626-1

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    Investigation of Room Temperature Ferromagnetic Nanoparticles of Gd5Si4,

    R. L. Hadimani, S. Gupta, S. M. Harstad, V. K. Pecharsky, and D. C. Jiles, “Investigation of Room Temperature Ferromagnetic Nanoparticles of Gd5Si4,” IEEE Trans Magn, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 1 –4, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2015.2446774

    2015

  14. [22]

    Ferromagnetic Gd5Si4 Nanoparticles as T2 Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging,

    A. A. El -Gendy et al. , “Ferromagnetic Gd5Si4 Nanoparticles as T2 Contrast Agents for Magnetic Resonance Imaging,” IEEE Magn Lett, vol. 8, pp. 1 –4, 2017, doi: 10.1109/LMAG.2017.2728503

    2017

  15. [23]

    Electronic Measurements in an Alternating Magnetic Field for Studying Magnetic Nanoparticle Hyperthermia: Minimizing Eddy Current Heating,

    Z. Boekelheide, Z. A. Hussein, and S. Hartzell, “Electronic Measurements in an Alternating Magnetic Field for Studying Magnetic Nanoparticle Hyperthermia: Minimizing Eddy Current Heating,” IEEE Trans Magn, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 1 –4, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2016.2515051. 11

    2016

  16. [24]

    On the reliable measurement of specific absorption rates and intrinsic loss parameters in magnetic hyperthermia materials,

    R. R. Wildeboer, P. Southern, and Q. A. Pankhurst, “On the reliable measurement of specific absorption rates and intrinsic loss parameters in magnetic hyperthermia materials,” J Phys D Appl Phys , vol. 47, no. 49, p. 495003, Dec. 2014, doi: 10.1088/0022 - 3727/47/49/495003

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    The effect of varying the crystal structure on the magnetism, electronic structure and thermodynamics in the Gd 5 (Si x Ge 1−x ) 4 system near x =0.5,

    V. K. Pecharsky, G. D. Samolyuk, V. P. Antropov, A. O. Pecharsky, and K. A. Gschneidner, “The effect of varying the crystal structure on the magnetism, electronic structure and thermodynamics in the Gd 5 (Si x Ge 1−x ) 4 system near x =0.5,” J Solid State Chem , vol. 171, no. ...

    2003 doi

  18. [26]

    Hyperthermia in combined treatment of cancer,

    P. Wust et al. , “Hyperthermia in combined treatment of cancer,” Lancet Oncol, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 487 –497, Aug. 2002, doi: 10.1016/S1470 - 2045(02)00818-5

    2002 doi

  19. [27]

    Size - dependent magnetic and magnetothermal properties of gadolinium silicide nanoparticles,

    M. Nauman, M. H. Alnasir, M. A. Hamayun, Y. Wang, M. Shatruk, and S. Manzoor, “Size - dependent magnetic and magnetothermal properties of gadolinium silicide nanoparticles,” RSC Adv , vol. 10, no. 47, pp. 28383 –28389, 2020, doi: 10.1039/D0RA05394E

    2020 doi

  20. [28]

    Biocompatibility, physico -chemical and mechanical properties of hydroxyapatite -based silicon dioxide nanocomposites for biomedical applications,

    M. A. Taha, R. A. Youness, and M. Ibrahim, “Biocompatibility, physico -chemical and mechanical properties of hydroxyapatite -based silicon dioxide nanocomposites for biomedical applications,” Ceram Int , vol. 46, no. 15, pp. 23599–23610, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.06.132

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    The X -ray photoemission spectra of Nd(OH)3, Sm(OH)3, Eu(OH)3 and Gd(OH)3,

    D. F. Mullica, C. K. C. Lok, H. O. Perkins, G. A. Benesh, and V. Young, “The X -ray photoemission spectra of Nd(OH)3, Sm(OH)3, Eu(OH)3 and Gd(OH)3,” J Electron Spectros Relat Phenomena, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 1 –20, Feb. 1995, doi: 10.1016/0368-2048(94)02250-X

    1995 doi

  22. [30]

    Lanthanide Oxide Thin Films by Metalorganic Chemical Vapor Deposition Employing Volatile Guanidinate Precursors,

    A. P. Milanov et al., “Lanthanide Oxide Thin Films by Metalorganic Chemical Vapor Deposition Employing Volatile Guanidinate Precursors,” Chemistry of Materials, vol. 21, no. 22, pp. 5443– 5455, Nov. 2009, doi: 10.1021/cm902123m

    2009 doi

  23. [31]

    XPS characterization and luminescent properties of GdNbO4 and GdTaO4 thin films,

    H. Brunckova, H. Kolev, L. A. Rocha, E. J. Nassar, S. B. Moscardini, and L. Medvecky, “XPS characterization and luminescent properties of GdNbO4 and GdTaO4 thin films,” Appl Surf Sci, vol. 504, p. 144358, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144358

    2020

  24. [32]

    Effect of annealing on chemical, structural and electrical properties of Au/Gd2O3/n-GaN heterostructure with a high -k rare-earth oxide interlayer,

    C. V. Prasad, M. S. P. Reddy, V. Rajagopal Reddy, and C. Park, “Effect of annealing on chemical, structural and electrical properties of Au/Gd2O3/n-GaN heterostructure with a high -k rare-earth oxide interlayer,” Appl Surf Sci , vol. 427, pp. 670 –677, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1016/...

    2018 doi

  25. [33]

    Selective Fabrication of SiC/Si Diodes by Excimer Laser Under Ambient Conditions,

    A. Kaur, P. Chahal, and T. Hogan, “Selective Fabrication of SiC/Si Diodes by Excimer Laser Under Ambient Conditions,” IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 142–145, Feb. 2016, doi: 10.1109/LED.2015.2508479

    2016

  26. [34]

    Embracing Defects and Disorder in Magnetic Nanoparticles,

    A. Lak, S. Disch, and P. Bender, “Embracing Defects and Disorder in Magnetic Nanoparticles,” Advanced Science, vol. 8, no. 7, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1002/advs.202002682

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

    Vacancy -Driven Noncubic Local Structure and Magnetic Anisotropy Tailoring in Fex ⁢O−Fe3−𝛿⁢O4 Nanocrystals,

    A. Lappas et al. , “Vacancy -Driven Noncubic Local Structure and Magnetic Anisotropy Tailoring in Fex ⁢O−Fe3−𝛿⁢O4 Nanocrystals,” Phys Rev X, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 041044, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.9.041044

    2019 doi

  28. [36]

    Effect of x-ray irradiation on magnetocaloric materials, (MnNiSi)1 -x(Fe2Ge)x and LaFe13-x-yMnxSiyHz,

    J. P. J. Nunez, V. Sharma, J. V Rojas, R. Barua, and R. L. Hadimani, “Effect of x-ray irradiation on magnetocaloric materials, (MnNiSi)1 -x(Fe2Ge)x and LaFe13-x-yMnxSiyHz,” Mater Res Express , vol. 11, no. 9, p. 096102, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1088/2053-1591/ad791f

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    Structural and magnetic properties of irradiated SiC,

    Y. Wang et al. , “Structural and magnetic properties of irradiated SiC,” J Appl Phys , vol. 115, no. 17, May 2014, doi: 10.1063/1.4860659

    2014 doi

  30. [38]

    Potential Induced Radioactivity in Materials Processed with X -ray Energy Above 5 MeV,

    H. Michel, T. Kroc, B. J. McEvoy, D. Patil, P. Reppert, and M. A. Smith, “Potential Induced Radioactivity in Materials Processed with X -ray Energy Above 5 MeV,” Biomed Instrum Technol, vol. 55, no. s3, pp. 17 –26, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.2345/0899-8205-55.s3.17

    2021 doi

  31. [39]

    New ferromagnetic 5 : 4 compounds in the rare earth silicon and germanium systems,

    F. Holtzberg, R. J. Gambino, and T. R. McGuire, “New ferromagnetic 5 : 4 compounds in the rare earth silicon and germanium systems,” Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 2283 –2289, Nov. 1967, doi: 10.1016/0022 - 3697(67)90253-3

    1967 doi

  32. [40]

    Optimal Parameters for Hyperthermia Treatment Using Biomineralized Magnetite Nanoparticles: Theoretical and Experimental Approach,

    A. Muela et al. , “Optimal Parameters for Hyperthermia Treatment Using Biomineralized Magnetite Nanoparticles: Theoretical and Experimental Approach,” The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, vol. 120, no. 42, pp. 24437–24448, Oct. 2016, doi: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b07321. 12

    2016 doi

  33. [41]

    Training effects in Gd5Ge4: role of microstructure,

    M. Manekar, M. K. Chattopadhyay, R. Kaul, V. K. Pecharsky, and K. A. Gschneidner, “Training effects in Gd5Ge4: role of microstructure,” Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol. 18, no. 26, pp. 6017 –6032, Jul. 2006, doi: 10.1088/0953-8984/18/26/020

    2006 doi

  34. [42]

    Field and temperature induced colossal strain in Gd5(SixGe1−x)4,

    R. L. Hadimani, P. A. Bartlett, Y. Melikhov, J. E. Snyder, and D. C. Jiles, “Field and temperature induced colossal strain in Gd5(SixGe1−x)4,” J Magn Magn Mater, vol. 323, no. 5, pp. 532–534, Mar. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2010.10.004

    2011 doi

  35. [43]

    Irrecoverable and Recoverable Resistivity Resulting From the First Order Magnetic -Structural Phase Transition in Gd5(SixGe1-x)4,

    R. L. Hadimani and D. C. Jiles, “Irrecoverable and Recoverable Resistivity Resulting From the First Order Magnetic -Structural Phase Transition in Gd5(SixGe1-x)4,” IEEE Magnetics Letters, vol. 1, pp. 6000104 –6000104, 2010, doi: 10.1109/LMAG.2010.2041902

    2010

  36. [44]

    Gd5Si4 Micro- and Nano-Particles for Self -Regulated Magnetic Hyperthermia,

    Z. Boekelheide, Z. A. Hussein, S. M. Harstad, A. A. El-Gendy, and R. L. Hadimani, “Gd5Si4 Micro- and Nano-Particles for Self -Regulated Magnetic Hyperthermia,” IEEE Trans Magn, vol. 53, no. 11, pp. 1 –4, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2017.2708688

    2017

  37. [45]

    Particle size-dependent magnetic hyperthermia in gadolinium silicide micro - and nano -particles from calorimetry and AC magnetometry,

    Z. Boekelheide, S. Hunagund, Z. A. Hussein, J. T. Miller, A. A. El -Gendy, and R. L. Hadimani, “Particle size-dependent magnetic hyperthermia in gadolinium silicide micro - and nano -particles from calorimetry and AC magnetometry,” J Magn Magn Mater, vol. 519, p. 167441, Feb. ...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.