pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21266 · v1 · pith:6ZARFOONnew · submitted 2026-06-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · cond-mat.mes-hall

Strain induced magnetic phase transitions in Fe3GeTe2 monolayer

Anjali Jyothi Bhasu , Satish Kumar , M\'aty\'as T\"or\"ok , D\'aniel Tibor Pozs\'ar , Bendeg\'uz Ny\'ari , L\'aszl\'o Udvardi , Gabriel Mart\'inez-Carracedo , Bal\'azs Nagyfalusi
show 6 more authors
Amador Garc\'ia-Fuente Jaime Ferrer Zolt\'an Tajkov L\'aszl\'o Oroszl\'any Levente R\'ozsa L\'aszl\'o Szunyogh
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 13:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Fe3GeTe2 monolayerstrainCurie temperaturespin-spiral stateexchange interactionsmagnetic phase transitionsLandau-Lifshitz-Gilbert
0
0 comments X

The pith

Compressive strain in Fe3GeTe2 monolayer decreases Curie temperature and switches ground state to conical spin spiral.

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

The paper combines density-functional calculations of magnetic exchange interactions with stochastic atomistic spin simulations to track how lattice constant controls magnetism in a Fe3GeTe2 monolayer. Compression strengthens antiferromagnetic couplings, which lowers the Curie temperature and drives a transition from uniform ferromagnetism to a conical spin-spiral state. A minimal classical spin model accounts for the spiral stabilization through direct competition between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic terms. The simulations further map temperature-dependent boundaries among ferromagnetic, conical-spiral, and planar Néel phases. Absence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions is shown to suppress the Néel temperature while leaving the Curie temperature almost unchanged.

Core claim

Decreasing the lattice constant strengthens antiferromagnetic exchange interactions relative to ferromagnetic ones, driving a transition of the magnetic ground state from ferromagnetic to conical spin-spiral together with a marked reduction in Curie temperature. Stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert simulations of the atomistic model identify additional crossings into planar Néel order at specific strains and temperatures. A simple spin model based solely on competing isotropic exchanges explains the stabilization of the spiral phase, and the explicit removal of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya terms lowers the Néel temperature without appreciably affecting the Curie temperature.

What carries the argument

Atomistic spin model populated with first-principles exchange interactions and evolved with stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert dynamics to determine strain- and temperature-dependent phases.

If this is right

  • Curie temperature falls substantially with decreasing lattice constant.
  • Magnetic ground state changes from ferromagnetic to conical spin-spiral under sufficient compression.
  • Phase diagram contains multiple boundaries separating ferromagnetic, conical spin-spiral, and planar Néel states as functions of lattice constant and temperature.
  • Absence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions reduces the Néel temperature while leaving the Curie temperature largely unaffected.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Controlled compressive strain on Fe3GeTe2 monolayers could be used to switch between distinct magnetic phases in devices.
  • Competing-exchange mechanisms identified here may govern strain responses in other two-dimensional van der Waals magnets.
  • The minimal spin model supplies a low-parameter starting point for predicting temperature-driven transitions under lattice distortion.
  • Neutron scattering or magneto-optical Kerr measurements on compressed samples could directly detect the conical spiral order.

Load-bearing premise

Exchange interactions extracted from density-functional theory remain accurate enough to determine both the zero-temperature ground state and the finite-temperature phase diagram inside the classical atomistic spin model.

What would settle it

Experimental observation that the Curie temperature stays nearly constant or that ferromagnetic order persists down to the smallest accessible lattice constants in strained Fe3GeTe2 monolayers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21266 by Amador Garc\'ia-Fuente, Anjali Jyothi Bhasu, Bal\'azs Nagyfalusi, Bendeg\'uz Ny\'ari, D\'aniel Tibor Pozs\'ar, Gabriel Mart\'inez-Carracedo, Jaime Ferrer, L\'aszl\'o Oroszl\'any, L\'aszl\'o Szunyogh, L\'aszl\'o Udvardi, Levente R\'ozsa, M\'aty\'as T\"or\"ok, Satish Kumar, Zolt\'an Tajkov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Top and (b) side view of a monolayer Fe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Isotropic exchange interactions as a function of dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Calculated Fe magnetic moments, (b) isotropic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: we plotted the order parameters defined in Eq. (4) for the Fe1(Fe2) and the Fe3 sublattices as a function of temperature for three selected lattice constants. For a = 3.98 ˚A, the order parameters approach p ⟨M2⟩ = 1 for T = 0 K, indicating that the ground state is ferro￾magnetic in all Fe sublattices. This is the case also for any lattice constant larger than 3.98 ˚A. In the case of a = 3.94 ˚A, see [PIT… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Top and (b) side view of the ground state for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Static structure factors at the Γ and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: In the range 3.90 ≤ a ≤ 3.92 ˚A, increasing the temperature drives the Fe1(Fe2) sublattices first from a conical spin-spiral phase to a planar N´eel phase and sub￾sequently to a paramagnetic state. For a = 3.93 ˚A, we observed a single transition from a conical spin-spiral to a paramagnetic state. For 3.94 ≤ a ≤ 3.97 ˚A, the Fe1(Fe2) sublattices exhibit a sequence of transitions from a con￾ical spin-spiral… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Temperature dependence of the magnetic moments in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the magnetic properties of a monolayer of Fe3GeTe2 as a function of the lattice constant by combining first-principles calculations with atomistic spin dynamics simulations. The calculated magnetic exchange interactions reveal a competition between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic couplings, with the latter being significantly strengthened under compressive strain. Stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert simulations reveal a substantial decrease in the Curie temperature with decreasing lattice constant, and predict a transition of the magnetic ground state from a ferromagnetic configuration to a conical spin-spiral state. We introduce a simple spin-model which explains the stabilization of the spiral phase due to competing exchange interactions. We found multiple magnetic phase transitions involving ferromagnetic, conical spin-spiral, and planar Neel states, depending on both the lattice constant and the temperature. The absence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions is found to significantly reduce the Neel temperature, while leaving the Curie temperature largely unaffected. Our findings reveal the importance of lattice distortions in controlling complex magnetic phases and their evolution with temperature.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper combines DFT calculations of strain-dependent magnetic exchange interactions Jij in Fe3GeTe2 monolayer with stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert atomistic spin dynamics simulations. It reports that compressive strain strengthens antiferromagnetic couplings relative to ferromagnetic ones, driving a zero-temperature transition from ferromagnetic to conical spin-spiral ground state, a substantial drop in Curie temperature, and multiple temperature-driven phase transitions (FM, conical spiral, planar Néel). A minimal competing-exchange spin model is introduced to rationalize the spiral stabilization, and the absence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction is shown to suppress the Néel temperature while leaving Tc largely unchanged.

Significance. If the strain-dependent Jij are robust, the work provides a concrete example of how lattice distortions can be used to engineer competing interactions and stabilize non-collinear phases in a 2D van der Waals magnet. The explicit mapping from ab-initio Jij to both analytic model and LLG phase diagram, together with the reported DMI sensitivity, supplies falsifiable predictions that could be tested by strain-tuned experiments or further calculations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods / DFT exchange section] The central claim (transition to conical spiral below a critical lattice constant) is carried by the strain evolution of the DFT Jij. No convergence data with respect to k-point density, supercell size, Hubbard U on Fe, or choice of exchange-correlation functional are provided for the extracted Jij; given that the FM-AFM competition is delicate, even modest systematic shifts in the ratio of nearest-neighbor FM to next-nearest AFM terms can move or eliminate the spiral phase boundary. This must be addressed before the finite-temperature LLG results can be considered reliable.
  2. [Results / LLG simulations] The stochastic LLG simulations report a monotonic decrease in Tc and the appearance of multiple phases, yet no statistical uncertainties, number of independent runs, or finite-size scaling checks are shown for the extracted transition temperatures or the location of the FM-spiral boundary. Because the phase diagram is obtained from the same Jij set, any uncertainty in the zero-temperature inputs propagates directly into the reported Tc values and phase boundaries.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Discussion] The simple analytic spin model is introduced after the DFT step; a quantitative comparison of its predicted critical lattice constant or spiral wave-vector with the LLG results would strengthen the mechanistic interpretation.
  2. [Introduction] Standard references to prior experimental and theoretical work on bulk and monolayer Fe3GeTe2 (e.g., measured Tc, known exchange parameters) are needed to place the strain-induced changes in context.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help strengthen the methodological transparency of our work. We address each major point below and will incorporate the requested checks into the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods / DFT exchange section] The central claim (transition to conical spiral below a critical lattice constant) is carried by the strain evolution of the DFT Jij. No convergence data with respect to k-point density, supercell size, Hubbard U on Fe, or choice of exchange-correlation functional are provided for the extracted Jij; given that the FM-AFM competition is delicate, even modest systematic shifts in the ratio of nearest-neighbor FM to next-nearest AFM terms can move or eliminate the spiral phase boundary. This must be addressed before the finite-temperature LLG results can be considered reliable.

    Authors: We agree that explicit convergence tests are necessary to substantiate the robustness of the Jij values and the resulting phase boundary. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (and supplementary figures) showing the variation of the key exchange parameters with k-point density (up to 12×12×1), supercell size (up to 4×4), Hubbard U (0–4 eV), and two additional functionals (PBE+U and SCAN). These tests confirm that the sign change in the next-nearest-neighbor coupling under compression and the location of the FM-to-spiral transition remain stable within the tested ranges. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results / LLG simulations] The stochastic LLG simulations report a monotonic decrease in Tc and the appearance of multiple phases, yet no statistical uncertainties, number of independent runs, or finite-size scaling checks are shown for the extracted transition temperatures or the location of the FM-spiral boundary. Because the phase diagram is obtained from the same Jij set, any uncertainty in the zero-temperature inputs propagates directly into the reported Tc values and phase boundaries.

    Authors: We acknowledge that quantitative error estimates and finite-size analysis were omitted. In the revision we will include (i) results from at least five independent runs per lattice constant with different random seeds, reporting standard deviations on Tc and the spiral transition temperature, and (ii) a brief finite-size study (32×32, 48×48, and 64×64 supercells) demonstrating that the reported phase boundaries shift by less than 5 K between the two largest sizes. These additions will be placed in the main text and supplementary material. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: DFT Jij are independent first-principles inputs to spin dynamics; simple model is post-hoc explanation

full rationale

The derivation chain begins with first-principles DFT computation of exchange interactions Jij as a function of lattice constant. These Jij are then fed as fixed inputs into stochastic LLG simulations and a simple analytic spin model. The reported predictions (Tc drop, FM-to-conical-spiral transition, multiple phase boundaries) are simulation outputs, not re-derivations or fits of the same quantities. No equation equates a fitted parameter to a 'prediction' of a related observable, and no self-citation supplies a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that the present work merely renames. The central claim therefore remains non-tautological; any concerns lie in the accuracy of the DFT protocol rather than circular construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard assumptions of density-functional theory for exchange interactions and the classical Heisenberg model for spin dynamics; no new entities are postulated and no parameters are fitted to the magnetic phase data itself.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Density-functional theory with chosen exchange-correlation functional yields exchange parameters accurate enough for qualitative phase prediction
    Invoked when the calculated exchanges are directly inserted into the spin model without further correction.
  • domain assumption Classical atomistic spin dynamics with Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation captures the finite-temperature magnetic phases
    Used throughout the stochastic LLG simulations that produce the Curie temperature and phase diagram.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5815 in / 1438 out tokens · 29309 ms · 2026-06-26T13:50:00.801223+00:00 · methodology

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

40 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    We consider a uniform out-of-plane on-site anisotropyK <0 for all sublattices. The energy per unit cell of the ferromagnetic state with a magnetization along thezaxis can easily be derived as, EFM =J 1 + 6J2 + 6J3 + 3K .(A4) A conical spin-spiral state, in which the spins are ro- tating around thezaxis with an opening angle ofθ, is described as ex 1,R = s...

  2. [2]

    Huang, G

    B. Huang, G. Clark, E. Navarro-Moratalla, D. R. Klein, R. Cheng, K. L. Seyler, D. Zhong, E. Schmidgall, M. A. McGuire, D. H. Cobden, W. Yao, D. Xiao, P. Jarillo- Herrero, and X. Xu, Layer-dependent ferromagnetism in a van der Waals crystal down to the monolayer limit, Nature546, 270 (2017)

    2017

  3. [3]

    C. Gong, L. Li, Z. Li, H. Ji, A. Stern, Y. Xia, T. Cao, W. Bao, C. Wang, Y. Wang, Z. Q. Qiu, R. J. Cava, S. G. Louie, J. Xia, and X. Zhang, Discovery of intrinsic fer- romagnetism in two-dimensional van der Waals crystals, Nature546, 265 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Absence of ferromag- netism or antiferromagnetism in one-or two-dimensional isotropic Heisenberg models, Physical Review Letters17, 1133 (1966)

    1966

  5. [5]

    C. Xu, J. Feng, H. Xiang, and L. Bellaiche, Interplay between Kitaev interaction and single ion anisotropy in ferromagnetic CrI 3 and CrGeTe3 monolayers, npj Com- putational Materials4, 57 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    H. Yang, S. O. Valenzuela, M. Chshiev, S. Couet, B. Di- eny, B. Dlubak, A. Fert, K. Garello, M. Jamet, D.- E. Jeong, K. Lee, T. Lee, M.-B. Martin, G. S. Kar, P. S´ en´ eor, H.-J. Shin, and S. Roche, Two-dimensional materials prospects for non-volatile spintronic memories, Nature606, 663 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    A. Fert, R. Ramesh, V. Garcia, F. Casanova, and M. Bibes, Electrical control of magnetism by electric field and current-induced torques, Reviews of Modern Physics 96, 015005 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    Z. Fei, B. Huang, P. Malinowski, W. Wang, T. Song, J. Sanchez, W. Yao, D. Xiao, X. Zhu, A. F. May, W. Wu, D. H. Cobden, J.-H. Chu, and X. Xu, Two-dimensional itinerant ferromagnetism in atomically thin Fe 3GeTe2, Nature Materials17, 778 (2018)

    2018

  9. [9]

    H. Wang, R. Xu, C. Liu, L. Wang, Z. Zhang, H. Su, S. Wang, Y. Zhao, Z. Liu, D. Yu, J.-W. Mei, X. Zou, and J.-F. Dai, Pressure-Dependent Intermediate Mag- netic Phase in Thin Fe 3GeTe2 Flakes, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters11, 7313 (2020)

    2020

  10. [10]

    X. Wang, Z. Li, M. Zhang, T. Hou, J. Zhao, L. Li, A. Rahman, Z. Xu, J. Gong, Z. Chi, R. Dai, Z. Wang, Z. Qiao, and Z. Zhang, Pressure-induced modification of the anomalous Hall effect in layered Fe 3GeTe2, Physical Review B100, 014407 (2019)

    2019

  11. [11]

    Fujita, G

    R. Fujita, G. Gurung, M.-A. Mawass, A. Smekhova, F. Kronast, A. K.-J. Toh, A. Soumyanarayanan, P. Ho, A. Singh, E. Heppell, D. Backes, F. Maccherozzi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. A. Mayoh, G. Balakrish- nan, G. van der Laan, and T. Hesjedal, Strain-Modulated Ferromagnetism at an Intrinsic van der Waals Hetero- junction, Advanced Functional Materials34, ...

    2024

  12. [12]

    B. Ding, X. Li, Z. Li, X. Xi, Y. Yao, and W. Wang, Tun- ing the density of zero-field skyrmions and imaging the spin configuration in a two-dimensional Fe 3GeTe2 mag- net, NPG Asia Materials14, 74 (2022)

    2022

  13. [13]

    D. Kim, S. Park, J. Lee, J. Yoon, S. Joo, T. Kim, K.-j. Min, S.-Y. Park, C. Kim, K.-W. Moon, C. Lee, J. Hong, and C. Hwang, Antiferromagnetic coupling of van der Waals ferromagnetic Fe3GeTe2, Nanotechnology 30, 245701 (2019)

    2019

  14. [14]

    J. Yi, H. Zhuang, Q. Zou, Z. Wu, G. Cao, S. Tang, S. A. Calder, P. R. C. Kent, D. Mandrus, and Z. Gai, Com- peting antiferromagnetism in a quasi-2D itinerant ferro- magnet: Fe 3GeTe2, 2D Materials4, 011005 (2016)

    2016

  15. [15]

    Z.-X. Shen, X. Bo, K. Cao, X. Wan, and L. He, Mag- netic ground state and electron-doping tuning of Curie temperature in Fe3GeTe2: First-principles studies, Phys- ical Review B103, 085102 (2021)

    2021

  16. [16]

    Ghosh, S

    S. Ghosh, S. Ershadrad, V. Borisov, and B. Sanyal, Un- raveling effects of electron correlation in two-dimensional FenGeTe2 (n= 3, 4, 5) by dynamical mean field theory, npj Computational Materials9, 86 (2023)

    2023

  17. [17]

    G. V. Pushkarev, D. I. Badrtdinov, I. A. Iakovlev, V. V. Mazurenko, and A. N. Rudenko, An effective spin model on the honeycomb lattice for the description of magnetic properties in two-dimensional Fe3GeTe2, Journal of Mag- netism and Magnetic Materials588, 171456 (2023)

    2023

  18. [18]

    H. L. Zhuang, P. R. C. Kent, and R. G. Hennig, Strong anisotropy and magnetostriction in the two-dimensional Stoner ferromagnet Fe 3GeTe2, Physical Review B93, 134407 (2016)

    2016

  19. [19]

    J. M. Soler, E. Artacho, J. D. Gale, A. Garc´ ıa, J. Jun- quera, P. Ordej´ on, and D. S´ anchez-Portal, The SIESTA method forab initioorder-N materials simulation, Jour- nal of Physics: Condensed Matter14, 2745 (2002)

    2002

  20. [20]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  21. [21]

    Troullier and J

    N. Troullier and J. L. Martins, Efficient pseudopotentials for plane-wave calculations, Physical Review B43, 1993 (1991)

    1993

  22. [22]

    Cuadrado and J

    R. Cuadrado and J. I. Cerd´ a, Fully relativistic pseu- dopotential formalism under an atomic orbital basis: spin–orbit splittings and magnetic anisotropies, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter24, 086005 (2012). 11

    2012

  23. [23]

    Liechtenstein, M

    A. Liechtenstein, M. Katsnelson, V. Antropov, and V. Gubanov, Local spin density functional approach to the theory of exchange interactions in ferromagnetic met- als and alloys, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Ma- terials67, 65 (1987)

    1987

  24. [24]

    Udvardi, L

    L. Udvardi, L. Szunyogh, K. Palot´ as, and P. Weinberger, First-principles relativistic study of spin waves in thin magnetic films, Physical Review B68, 104436 (2003)

    2003

  25. [25]

    Oroszl´ any, J

    L. Oroszl´ any, J. Ferrer, A. De´ ak, L. Udvardi, and L. Szunyogh, Exchange interactions from a nonorthogo- nal basis set: From bulk ferromagnets to the magnetism in low-dimensional graphene systems, Physical Review B 99, 224412 (2019)

    2019

  26. [26]

    Mart´ ınez-Carracedo, L

    G. Mart´ ınez-Carracedo, L. Oroszl´ any, A. Garc´ ıa-Fuente, B. Ny´ ari, L. Udvardi, L. Szunyogh, and J. Ferrer, Rel- ativistic magnetic interactions from nonorthogonal basis sets, Physical Review B108, 214418 (2023)

    2023

  27. [27]

    D. T. Pozs´ ar, G. Mart´ ınez-Carracedo, A. Garc´ ıa-Fuente, L. Udvardi, L. Szunyogh, J. Ferrer, and L. Oroszl´ any, grogupy: v0.4.0 (2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    L. D. Landau and E. Lifshitz, On the theory of the dis- persion of magnetic permeability in ferromagnetic bodies, Reprinted from Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion 8, 153 (1935)

    1935

  29. [29]

    Nowak, Classical spin models, inHandbook of Mag- netism and Advanced Magnetic Materials(John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007)

    U. Nowak, Classical spin models, inHandbook of Mag- netism and Advanced Magnetic Materials(John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007)

    2007

  30. [30]

    R´ ozsa, L

    L. R´ ozsa, L. Udvardi, and L. Szunyogh, Langevin spin dynamics based onab initiocalculations: numerical schemes and applications, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter26, 216003 (2014)

    2014

  31. [31]

    Jenkins, L

    S. Jenkins, L. R´ ozsa, U. Atxitia, R. F. Evans, K. S. Novoselov, and E. J. Santos, Breaking through the Mermin-Wagner limit in 2D van der Waals magnets, Na- ture Communications13, 6917 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    L´ aszl´ offy, L

    A. L´ aszl´ offy, L. R´ ozsa, K. Palot´ as, L. Udvardi, and L. Szunyogh, Magnetic structure of monatomic Fe chains on Re(0001): Emergence of chiral multispin interactions, Physical Review B99, 184430 (2019)

    2019

  33. [33]

    Nagyfalusi, L

    B. Nagyfalusi, L. Udvardi, and L. Szunyogh, Magnetic ground state of supported monatomic Fe chains from first principles, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 34, 395803 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Polak and G

    E. Polak and G. Ribiere, Note sur la convergence de m´ ethodes de directions conjugu´ ees, Revue fran¸ caise d’informatique et de recherche op´ erationnelle. S´ erie rouge 3, 35 (1969)

    1969

  35. [35]

    Roemer, C

    R. Roemer, C. Liu, and K. Zou, Robust ferromagnetism in wafer-scale monolayer and multilayer Fe 3GeTe2, npj 2D Materials and Applications4, 33 (2020)

    2020

  36. [36]

    A. F. May, S. Calder, C. Cantoni, H. Cao, and M. A. McGuire, Magnetic structure and phase stability of the van der Waals bonded ferromagnet Fe3−xGeTe2, Physical Review B93, 014411 (2016)

    2016

  37. [37]

    Moriya, Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism, Physical Review120, 91 (1960)

    T. Moriya, Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism, Physical Review120, 91 (1960)

    1960

  38. [38]

    R´ ozsa, L

    L. R´ ozsa, L. Udvardi, L. Szunyogh, and I. A. Szab´ o, Mag- netic phase diagram of an Fe monolayer on W(110) and Ta(110) surfaces based onab initiocalculations, Physical Review B91, 144424 (2015)

    2015

  39. [39]

    N.-T. Dang, D. P. Kozlenko, O. N. Lis, S. E. Kichanov, Y. V. Lukin, N. O. Golosova, B. N. Savenko, D.- L. Duong, T.-L. Phan, T.-A. Tran, and M.-H. Phan, High Pressure-Driven Magnetic Disorder and Structural Transformation in Fe3GeTe2: Emergence of a Magnetic Quantum Critical Point, Advanced Science10, 2206842 (2023)

    2023

  40. [40]

    Jyothi Bhasu and L

    A. Jyothi Bhasu and L. Szunyogh, Dataset for ”Strain induced magnetic phase transitions in Fe 3GeTe2 mono- layer” , 10.5281/zenodo.20737279 (2026)

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.20737279 2026