Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Giant orbital magnetoresistance in the antiferromagnet CoO driven by dynamic orbital angular momentum interaction

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-15 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Pairing orbital currents from oxidized copper with CoO's orbital magnetism yields more than fifty-fold larger magnetoresistance than the usual spin route, and flips its sign.

desk verdict Clear experimental giant, sign-reversed OMR in CoO/Cu* with solid controls; the orbital-exchange story is plausible but still qualitative and the hematite control is imperfect. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.06425 v1 pith:IWJPX77W submitted 2026-03-06 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Christin Schmitt , Sachin Krishnia , Edgar Galindez-Ruales , Luca Micus , Takashi Kikkawa , Hiroki Arisawa , Marjana Lezaic , Duc Tran
show 7 more authors
Timo Kuschel Jairo Sinova Eiji Saitoh Gerhard Jakob Olena Gomonay Yuriy Mokrousov Mathias Kläui
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords orbitalHallmagnetoresistanceangularmomentumCoOantiferromagnetcurrentorbitronicsCuoxidationNéelvector
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

The paper argues that the long-promised efficiency of orbital currents has stayed locked because ordinary magnets carry magnetization mainly as spin, so orbital currents must be converted by weak spin-orbit coupling before they can do useful work. By switching to the antiferromagnetic insulator CoO, whose cobalt atoms carry large unquenched orbital moments, the authors claim a direct orbital-to-orbital interaction becomes possible. In CoO next to surface-oxidized copper they measure an orbital Hall magnetoresistance of 0.28 percent at 150 K, more than fifty times larger than the spin Hall magnetoresistance of the same CoO next to platinum, and of opposite sign. Thickness and temperature trends, plus the near absence of the effect on hematite (where orbital moments are quenched), are offered as evidence that the giant signal is carried by orbital exchange and orbital-quadrupole torques rather than residual spin physics. If correct, the result opens a path to reading and writing antiferromagnets with light-metal orbital currents, combining high stability, terahertz dynamics and far lower energy cost than spin-orbit devices.

What carries the argument

Orbital Hall magnetoresistance (OMR) arising from orbital-orbital exchange and orbital-dipole-to-quadrupole conversion at the CoO interface: orbital accumulation generated by oxidized copper is absorbed or reflected according to the orientation of CoO's Néel vector, producing a large, sign-reversed resistance change that does not require spin-orbit conversion.

What would settle it

Repeat the identical zero-field Néel-vector switching protocol on CoO next to a copper film that is deliberately kept free of surface oxidation and on a CoO sample whose orbital moment has been quenched by doping or strain; if the large reversed magnetoresistance disappears only when orbital moments or oxidation are removed, the orbital-exchange claim holds; if it survives, the claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Direct coupling of dynamic orbital angular momentum generated in surface-oxidized copper to the static unquenched orbital moments of insulating antiferromagnetic CoO produces an orbital Hall magnetoresistance more than fifty times larger than the conventional spin Hall magnetoresistance of CoO/Pt and of opposite sign, demonstrating that giant orbital currents can be harnessed without orbital-to-spin conversion when the magnet itself is orbitally dominated.

Load-bearing premise

The giant size and reversed sign of the resistance change come mainly from orbital-orbital coupling rather than leftover spin currents, interface oxidation artifacts, or ordinary magnetoresistance in the copper layer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Orbitally dominated antiferromagnets can be read and written by pure orbital currents from light, abundant metals without heavy-metal spin-orbit converters.
  • Device energy cost for antiferromagnetic memory or logic can drop by the same factor as the observed magnetoresistance enhancement.
  • Sign of the magnetoresistance becomes a diagnostic of whether the active channel is orbital or spin.
  • Thickness-independent OMR in the few-nanometre copper range implies surface orbital generation is robust enough for practical multilayers.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same orbital-quadrupole torque mechanism should appear in other t2g oxides with unquenched orbital moments (e.g., NiO under appropriate strain), offering a materials-selection rule beyond CoO.
  • If orbital currents couple so efficiently to local orbital moments, pure-orbital spin-wave or magnon transport may be observable over macroscopic distances in CoO without spin intermediaries.
  • A quantitative microscopic model that predicts the observed 50-fold ratio from first-principles orbital exchange constants would turn the present qualitative argument into a design tool for orbitronic stacks.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a giant orbital Hall magnetoresistance (OMR) of ~0.28% at 150 K in epitaxial CoO(5 nm)/Cu*(6 nm) bilayers, more than 36–59 times larger than the spin Hall magnetoresistance (SMR) of 0.0078% in CoO/Pt under the same zero-field transverse-resistance protocol after a spin-flop field sweep. The OMR sign is reversed relative to CoO/Pt. The authors attribute both the amplitude and the sign reversal to direct coupling of orbital current generated in surface-oxidized Cu* (via OHE/OREE) to the large unquenched orbital moments of Co (~1.5–2 μB) that form part of the Néel order, rather than to residual spin currents or conventional spin-exchange. Supporting data include temperature series, Cu* thickness dependence (pointing to surface OREE), angular-field hysteresis above the spin-flop, and a near-null result in α-Fe2O3/Cu*. First-principles GGA+U moments and a phenomenological spin–orbital Hamiltonian with an orbital-quadrupole term are used to rationalize efficient orbital absorption and the sign anomaly.

Significance. If the orbital–orbital interpretation holds, the work supplies a concrete materials route—pairing a light-metal orbital-current source with an orbital-moment-dominated antiferromagnetic insulator—to realize the theoretically predicted orders-of-magnitude advantage of orbital currents without relying on weak SOC conversion. The experimental amplitude ratio, opposite sign, and multi-control protocol (zero-field difference after spin-flop, thickness series, temperature series, Pt control) constitute a clear, falsifiable advance over prior OMR reports on spin-dominated magnets. The combination of epitaxial CoO growth, high-field transport, and DFT moments is a solid platform for orbitronics of antiferromagnets that already offer THz dynamics and field immunity.

major comments (3)
  1. The central attribution of the 36–59× amplitude and opposite sign to orbital–orbital exchange rests primarily on the near-null result in α-Fe2O3/Cu* (Supplementary Text S3 / Fig. S2). That control uses a 100 nm c-cut film of different crystal structure and anisotropy, reports longitudinal rather than zero-field transverse resistance, and may differ in Cu* interface oxidation. It therefore does not tightly exclude residual spin currents, oxidation-induced interface moments, or CoO-specific anisotropic scattering. A more closely matched control (e.g., NiO/Cu* or thickness-matched hematite with the same transverse zero-field protocol) or an independent estimate of orbital Hall conductivity of Cu* times orbital mixing conductance of CoO is needed to make the isolation load-bearing.
  2. No quantitative estimate is given that links the measured 0.28% OMR to the product of Cu* orbital-current generation efficiency and an orbital mixing conductance at the CoO interface. The SMR analysis for CoO/Pt quotes θ_SH ≈ 3.5% and G_r = 5×10^14 Ω^−1 m^−2; an analogous order-of-magnitude calculation for the orbital channel (even with literature orbital Hall angles for oxidized Cu) is absent. Without it, the claim that the giant amplitude is “expected” from orbital–orbital exchange remains qualitative.
  3. The sign-reversal argument (Results and Discussion) invokes opposite L and S on Co and/or anomalous orbital-quadrupole dynamics (Eq. S1 and the subsequent LLG for n). The Hamiltonian is phenomenological and does not predict the observed sign or its temperature independence. A minimal calculation showing that injection of L perpendicular to the equilibrium moments produces a quadrupole torque of the observed polarity would strengthen the claim; otherwise the sign remains post-hoc.
minor comments (5)
  1. Abstract and main text alternate between “more than fifty-fold,” “36 times,” and “two orders of magnitude.” State the temperature-dependent ratio range (35–59) once and use it consistently.
  2. Figure 2(C) top and bottom panels share the same vertical scale label but differ by two orders of magnitude; a broken axis or separate scales would improve readability.
  3. The Cu* thickness series (Fig. 2D) stops at the insulating limit (~3.2 nm). A brief remark on whether residual metallic Cu remains or whether the OREE is purely interfacial would clarify the surface-origin claim.
  4. DFT moments (1.52 μB orbital) are lower than the literature value quoted in the introduction (~2.05 μB). A short note on the U,J dependence or experimental lattice parameters would remove the apparent discrepancy.
  5. Supplementary Text S5 disentangles hysteretic and sinusoidal components; the main-text Fig. 3 caption should explicitly state that only the hysteretic amplitude is plotted as the MR signal.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the fifty-fold OMR enhancement and sign reversal are direct experimental resistance ratios, not forced by fit, definition, or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The paper’s central numerical claims (OMR amplitude 0.28 % at 150 K in CoO/Cu*, SMR 0.0078 % in CoO/Pt, ratio rising to ~59 at 100 K, opposite sign) are obtained from zero-field transverse resistance differences after field-induced Néel-vector reorientation; they do not reduce to any fitted parameter or definitional identity. Secondary estimates (θ_SH ≈ 3.5 % using literature G_r) and first-principles moments (spin 2.70 μ_B, orbital 1.52 μ_B) are used only for consistency checks and qualitative discussion of orbital exchange/quadrupole torques; neither enters the reported enhancement factor. Self-citations (prior CoO/Pt switching, NiFe/Cu* OMR, quadrupole anomaly) supply context and comparison values but are not required to establish the measured ratio or its attribution. The α-Fe2O3/Cu* control and thickness/field-dependence checks are independent experimental tests, not circular constructions. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of a known result is present. Minor self-citation for background therefore yields only a score of 1.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The experimental claim rests on standard thin-film growth and magnetotransport assumptions plus literature values for CoO orbital moments and Pt spin-mixing conductance. The interpretive claim of pure orbital–orbital exchange introduces an effective orbital-exchange term and orbital-quadrupole coupling whose microscopic strength is not independently measured here.

free parameters (2)
  • real part of spin-mixing conductance G_r
    Taken from literature (5×10^14 Ω^{-1} m^{-2}) to convert measured SMR amplitude into an estimated spin Hall angle of Pt; used only for secondary comparison, not for the OMR ratio itself.
  • DFT Hubbard U and J for Co 3d
    U = 6.0 eV, J = 0.92 eV chosen within the Liechtenstein GGA+U scheme to open a 2.7 eV gap and produce orbital moment 1.52 μ_B; values affect the theoretical orbital-exchange narrative but not the measured resistance ratio.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Surface-oxidized Cu* generates a pure orbital current (via OHE/OREE) with negligible spin current.
    Invoked throughout Results and Discussion; supported by prior torque and OMR literature but not re-measured independently in this work.
  • domain assumption CoO carries a large unquenched orbital moment (~1.5–2 μ_B) that participates in the staggered magnetization.
    Taken from literature and confirmed by the paper’s own DFT; central to the claim that orbital–orbital exchange is possible.
  • domain assumption The observed transverse resistance difference at zero field after spin-flop directly quantifies SMR/OMR amplitude without Hanle or Lorentz contributions.
    Stated in Results; justified by the zero-field protocol and field-saturation of the hysteretic component.
  • ad hoc to paper An effective non-relativistic orbital-exchange term exists in CoO that can absorb orbital current with efficiency comparable to spin exchange.
    Introduced in Discussion to explain the giant amplitude; motivated by DFT orbital splitting but not derived from a microscopic Hamiltonian fitted to the present data.
invented entities (1)
  • orbital quadrupole torque on the Néel vector arising from injected orbital dipole
    purpose: to account for both the large OMR amplitude and the reversed sign via coupled spin–orbital dynamics
    Constructed from the phenomenological Hamiltonian (S1) and recent altermagnet literature; independent experimental handle (e.g., direct quadrupole detection) is not provided in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Giant orbital magnetoresistance in the antiferromagnet CoO driven by dynamic orbital angular momentum interaction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IWJPX77W

@misc{pith2026260306425,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Giant orbital magnetoresistance in the antiferromagnet CoO driven by dynamic orbital angular momentum interaction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IWJPX77W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.06425}
}
read the original abstract

Recent predictions of orders of magnitude larger orbital current effects compared to spin currents have attracted significant interest. However, the full potential of giant orbital currents remains to be fully harnessed, since so far, the orbital currents need to be converted into spin currents before they can interact with the static magnetization that is dominated by spin angular momentum in conventional magnets. By using a magnet dominated by orbital angular momentum, we demonstrate a more than fifty-fold enhancement in orbital Hall magnetoresistance in CoO/Cu*, compared to conventional CoO/Pt. This is found to be driven by a unique interaction between dynamic orbital angular momentum from surface oxidized Cu* (i.e., the orbital current) and the static orbital angular momentum which constitutes the magnetic moments in the antiferromagnetic insulator CoO. A distinctive scattering mechanism for orbital currents at the CoO interface leads to a sign reversal in orbital magnetoresistance in CoO/Cu* compared to CoO/Pt. Our results show how by using orbital angular momentum-dominated materials such as CoO, we can harness the benefits of giant orbital currents that have not been possible using conventional spin-dominated magnets, for orbitronics-based devices, offering unprecedented energy efficiency for operations of antiferromagnets that combine ultimate stability with THz dynamics.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Orbital Hall effect-driven spin-orbit torque enhancement in Ti-based systems via rare-earth interface engineering

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A 4 nm Gd interlayer in Ti/Co structures raises orbital torque efficiency above 1 with fivefold gain over Gd/Co reference, confirming bulk orbital Hall effect in Ti with diffusion length over 20 nm.

  2. Orbital Hall effect-driven spin-orbit torque enhancement in Ti-based systems via rare-earth interface engineering

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A 4 nm Gd interlayer in Ti/Co systems produces fivefold higher spin-orbit torque efficiency than reference bilayers, with trilayer torque efficiency exceeding 1 due to enhanced orbital-to-spin conversion at the rare-e...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    M. N. Baibich, et al., Giant Magnetoresistance of (001)Fe/(001)Cr Magnetic Superlattices. Phys. Rev.Lett.61, 2472–2475 (1988)

    1988

  2. [2]

    Binasch, P

    G. Binasch, P. Gr¨ unberg, F. Saurenbach, W. Zinn, Enhanced magnetoresistance in layered magnetic structures with antiferromagnetic interlayer exchange. Phys. Rev. B39, 4828–4830 (1989)

    1989

  3. [3]

    I. M. Miron, et al., Perpendicular switching of a single ferromagnetic layer induced by in-plane current injection. Nature476(7359), 189–193 (2011)

    2011

  4. [4]

    Bhatti, et al., Spintronics based random access memory: a review

    S. Bhatti, et al., Spintronics based random access memory: a review. Mater. Today20(9), 530–548 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    A. Fert, V. Cros, J. Sampaio, Skyrmions on the track.Nat. Nanotechnol.8(3), 152–156 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Everschor-Sitte, J

    K. Everschor-Sitte, J. Masell, R. M. Reeve, M. Kl ¨aui, Perspective: Magnetic skyrmions—Overview of recent progress in an active research field. J. Appl. Phys.124(24), 240901 (2018)

    2018

  7. [7]

    Zhang, M

    X. Zhang, M. Ezawa, Y. Zhou, Magnetic skyrmion logic gates: conversion, duplication and merging of skyrmions. Sci. Rep.5(1), 9400 (2015)

    2015

  8. [8]

    Grollier, et al., Neuromorphic spintronics

    J. Grollier, et al., Neuromorphic spintronics. Nat. Electron.3(7), 360–370 (2020)

    2020

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    da Cˆamara Santa Clara Gomes,et al., Neuromorphic weighted sum with magnetic skyrmions

    T. da Cˆamara Santa Clara Gomes,et al., Neuromorphic weighted sum with magnetic skyrmions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16909 (2023), Nat. Electron. in press 2025

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Beneke, et al., Gesture recognition with Brownian reservoir computing using geometrically confined skyrmion dynamics

    G. Beneke, et al., Gesture recognition with Brownian reservoir computing using geometrically confined skyrmion dynamics. Nat. Commun.15(1), 8103 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Manchon, et al., Current-induced spin-orbit torques in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic systems

    A. Manchon, et al., Current-induced spin-orbit torques in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic systems. Rev.Mod. Phys.91, 035004 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    D. Go, D. Jo, H.-W. Lee, M. Kl¨aui, Y. Mokrousov, Orbitronics: Orbital currents in solids.EPL 135(3), 37001 (2021). 14

    2021

  5. [13]

    D. Go, D. Jo, C. Kim, H.-W. Lee, Intrinsic Spin and Orbital Hall Effects from Orbital Texture. Phys. Rev.Lett.121, 086602 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Ding, et al., Harnessing Orbital-to-Spin Conversion of Interfacial Orbital Currents for Efficient Spin-Orbit Torques.Phys

    S. Ding, et al., Harnessing Orbital-to-Spin Conversion of Interfacial Orbital Currents for Efficient Spin-Orbit Torques.Phys. Rev.Lett.125, 177201 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    K.-J. Lee, V. Cros, H.-W. Lee, Electric-field-induced orbital angular momentum in metals.Nat. Mater.23(10), 1302–1304 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Tanaka, et al., Intrinsic spin Hall effect and orbital Hall effect in 4𝑑and 5𝑑transition metals

    T. Tanaka, et al., Intrinsic spin Hall effect and orbital Hall effect in 4𝑑and 5𝑑transition metals. Phys. Rev.B77, 165117 (2008)

    2008

  9. [17]

    Kontani, T

    H. Kontani, T. Tanaka, D. S. Hirashima, K. Yamada, J. Inoue, Giant Orbital Hall Effect in Transition Metals: Origin of Large Spin and Anomalous Hall Effects. Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 016601 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Johansson, B

    A. Johansson, B. G ¨obel, J. Henk, M. Bibes, I. Mertig, Spin and orbital Edelstein effects in a two-dimensional electron gas: Theory and application to SrTiO3 interfaces. Phys. Rev.Res.3, 013275 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    S. A. Nikolaev, et al., Large Chiral Orbital Texture and Orbital Edelstein Effect in Co/Al Heterostructure. Nano. Lett.24(43), 13465–13472 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

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

    2024

  13. [21]

    Salemi, P

    L. Salemi, P. M. Oppeneer, First-principles theory of intrinsic spin and orbital Hall and Nernst effects in metallic monoatomic crystals. Phys. Rev.Mater.6(9), 095001 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Krishnia, et al., Large Interfacial Rashba Interaction Generating Strong Spin–Orbit Torques in Atomically Thin Metallic Heterostructures

    S. Krishnia, et al., Large Interfacial Rashba Interaction Generating Strong Spin–Orbit Torques in Atomically Thin Metallic Heterostructures. Nano Lett.23(15), 6785–6791 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Choi, et al., Observation of the orbital Hall effect in a light metal Ti.Nature619(7968), 52–56 (2023)

    Y.-G. Choi, et al., Observation of the orbital Hall effect in a light metal Ti.Nature619(7968), 52–56 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Lyalin, S

    I. Lyalin, S. Alikhah, M. Berritta, P. M. Oppeneer, R. K. Kawakami, Magneto-Optical Detection of the Orbital Hall Effect in Chromium. Phys. Rev.Lett.131, 156702 (2023). 15

    2023

  17. [25]

    J. C. Idrobo, et al., Direct observation of nanometer-scale orbital angular momentum accumu- lation. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2403.09269 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Bose, et al., Detection of long-range orbital-Hall torques.Phys

    A. Bose, et al., Detection of long-range orbital-Hall torques.Phys. Rev.B107, 134423 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Krishnia, et al., Quantifying the large contribution from orbital Rashba–Edelstein effect to the effective damping-like torque on magnetization.APL Mater.12(5), 051105 (2024)

    S. Krishnia, et al., Quantifying the large contribution from orbital Rashba–Edelstein effect to the effective damping-like torque on magnetization.APL Mater.12(5), 051105 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    G. Sala, P. Gambardella, Giant orbital Hall effect and orbital-to-spin conversion in 3𝑑, 5𝑑, and 4𝑓metallic heterostructures. Phys. Rev.Res.4, 033037 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Gupta, et al., Harnessing orbital Hall effect in spin-orbit torque MRAM

    R. Gupta, et al., Harnessing orbital Hall effect in spin-orbit torque MRAM. Nature Communications16(1), 130 (2025)

    2025

  22. [30]

    M. I. Katsnelson, Y. O. Kvashnin, V. V. Mazurenko, A. I. Lichtenstein, Correlated band theory of spin and orbital contributions to Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactions. Phys. Rev. B 82, 100403 (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    Rongione, et al., Emission of coherent THz magnons in an antiferromagnetic insulator triggered by ultrafast spin-phonon interactions

    E. Rongione, et al., Emission of coherent THz magnons in an antiferromagnetic insulator triggered by ultrafast spin-phonon interactions. Nat. Commun.14(1), 1818 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Kampfrath, et al., Coherent terahertz control of antiferromagnetic spin waves.Nat

    T. Kampfrath, et al., Coherent terahertz control of antiferromagnetic spin waves.Nat. Photonics 5(1), 31–34 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    Lebrun, et al., Tunable long-distance spin transport in a crystalline antiferromagnetic iron oxide

    R. Lebrun, et al., Tunable long-distance spin transport in a crystalline antiferromagnetic iron oxide. Nature561(7722), 222–225 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Das, et al., Anisotropic long-range spin transport in canted antiferromagnetic orthoferrite YFeO3

    S. Das, et al., Anisotropic long-range spin transport in canted antiferromagnetic orthoferrite YFeO3. Nat. Commun.13(1), 6140 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Rollmann, A

    G. Rollmann, A. Rohrbach, P. Entel, J. Hafner, First-principles calculation of the structure and magnetic phases of hematite. Phys. Rev.B69(16), 165107 (2004)

    2004

  28. [36]

    Norman, Orbital polarization and the insulating gap in the transition-metal oxides

    M. Norman, Orbital polarization and the insulating gap in the transition-metal oxides. Phys. Rev.Lett.64(10), 1162 (1990). 16

    1990

  29. [37]

    C. T. Chen, et al., Experimental Confirmation of the X-Ray Magnetic Circular Dichroism Sum Rules for Iron and Cobalt. Phys. Rev.Lett.75, 152–155 (1995)

    1995

  30. [38]

    Krishnia, et al., Interfacial spin-orbitronic effects controlled with different oxidation levels at the Co— Al interface

    S. Krishnia, et al., Interfacial spin-orbitronic effects controlled with different oxidation levels at the Co— Al interface. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.10685 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Grzybowski, et al., Antiferromagnetic hysteresis above the spin-flop field

    M. Grzybowski, et al., Antiferromagnetic hysteresis above the spin-flop field. Phys. Rev. B 107(6), L060403 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Wang, et al., Anomalous spin-orbit torques in magnetic single-layer films

    W. Wang, et al., Anomalous spin-orbit torques in magnetic single-layer films. Nat. Nanotech. 14(9), 819–824 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Krishnia, et al., Spin-Orbit Coupling in Single-Layer Ferrimagnets: Direct Observation of Spin-Orbit Torques and Chiral Spin Textures.Phys

    S. Krishnia, et al., Spin-Orbit Coupling in Single-Layer Ferrimagnets: Direct Observation of Spin-Orbit Torques and Chiral Spin Textures.Phys. Rev.Appl.16, 024040 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Baldrati, et al., Efficient spin torques in antiferromagnetic CoO/Pt quantified by comparing field-and current-induced switching

    L. Baldrati, et al., Efficient spin torques in antiferromagnetic CoO/Pt quantified by comparing field-and current-induced switching. Phys. Rev.Lett.125(7), 077201 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    Schmitt, et al., Mechanisms of Electrical Switching of Ultrathin CoO/Pt Bilayers

    C. Schmitt, et al., Mechanisms of Electrical Switching of Ultrathin CoO/Pt Bilayers. Nano Lett.24(5), 1471–1476 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Roth, Magnetic structures of MnO, FeO, CoO, and NiO

    W. Roth, Magnetic structures of MnO, FeO, CoO, and NiO. Phys. Rev.110(6), 1333 (1958)

    1958

  37. [45]

    Saito, K

    S. Saito, K. Nakahigashi, Y. Shimomura, X-ray diffraction study on CoO. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 21(5), 850–860 (1966)

    1966

  38. [46]

    Satoh, et al., Excitation of coupled spin–orbit dynamics in cobalt oxide by femtosecond laser pulses

    T. Satoh, et al., Excitation of coupled spin–orbit dynamics in cobalt oxide by femtosecond laser pulses. Nat. Commun.8(1), 638 (2017)

    2017

  39. [47]

    Nakayama, et al., Spin Hall Magnetoresistance Induced by a Nonequilibrium Proximity Effect

    H. Nakayama, et al., Spin Hall Magnetoresistance Induced by a Nonequilibrium Proximity Effect. Phys. Rev.Lett.110, 206601 (2013)

    2013

  40. [48]

    J. Kim, P. Sheng, S. Takahashi, S. Mitani, M. Hayashi, Spin Hall Magnetoresistance in Metallic Bilayers. Phys. Rev.Lett.116, 097201 (2016)

    2016

  41. [49]

    Ding, et al., Observation of the Orbital Rashba-Edelstein Magnetoresistance

    S. Ding, et al., Observation of the Orbital Rashba-Edelstein Magnetoresistance. Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 067201 (2022). 17

    2022

  42. [50]

    V ´elez, et al., Hanle magnetoresistance in thin metal films with strong spin-orbit coupling

    S. V ´elez, et al., Hanle magnetoresistance in thin metal films with strong spin-orbit coupling. Phys. Rev.Lett.116(1), 016603 (2016)

    2016

  43. [51]

    G. R. Hoogeboom, A. Aqeel, T. Kuschel, T. Palstra, B. J. van Wees, Negative spin Hall magnetoresistance of Pt on the bulk easy-plane antiferromagnet NiO.Appl. Phys. Lett.111(5) (2017)

    2017

  44. [52]

    S. R. Marmion, M. Ali, M. McLaren, D. A. Williams, B. J. Hickey, Temperature dependence of spin Hall magnetoresistance in thin YIG/Pt films. Phys. Rev.B89, 220404 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    Yoon, et al., Handedness anomaly in a non-collinear antiferromagnet under spin–orbit torque

    J.-Y. Yoon, et al., Handedness anomaly in a non-collinear antiferromagnet under spin–orbit torque. Nat. Mater.22(9), 1106–1113 (2023)

    2023

  46. [54]

    I. V. Solovyev, A. I. Liechtenstein, K. Terakura, Is Hund’s Second Rule Responsible for the Orbital Magnetism in Solids? Phys. Rev.Lett.80, 5758–5761 (1998)

    1998

  47. [55]

    Boussendel, N

    A. Boussendel, N. Baadji, A. Haroun, H. Dreyss ´e, M. Alouani, Effect of substrate strain on calculated magnetic properties and magnetic anisotropy energy of CoO. Phys. Rev. B81, 184432 (2010)

    2010

  48. [56]

    S. Han, D. Jo, I. Baek, P. M. Oppeneer, H.-W. Lee, Harnessing magnetic octupole Hall effect to induce torque in altermagnets (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    Wortmann, et al., FLEUR, Zenodo (2023), doi:10.5281/zenodo.7576163

    D. Wortmann, et al., FLEUR, Zenodo (2023), doi:10.5281/zenodo.7576163

    2023 doi

  50. [58]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, M. Ernzerhof, Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Phys. Rev.Lett.77, 3865–3868 (1996)

    1996

  51. [59]

    Ross, et al., Structural sensitivity of the spin Hall magnetoresistance in antiferromagnetic thin films

    A. Ross, et al., Structural sensitivity of the spin Hall magnetoresistance in antiferromagnetic thin films. Phys. Rev.B102(9), 094415 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    Pauw, A method of measuring specific resistivity and Hall effect of discs of arbitrary shape

    L. Pauw, A method of measuring specific resistivity and Hall effect of discs of arbitrary shape. Philips Res. Rep.13(1), 1–9 (1958). 18 Acknowledgments We acknowledge fruitful discussions with Dongwook Go, Daegeun Jo and Kyun-Jin Lee. We thank D. A. Grave, A. Kay and A. Rothsc...

    1958

Pith tools

Reviewed July 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.