Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 45 references

Efficient spin excitation via ultrafast damping-like torques in antiferromagnets

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that ultrafast damping during optical excitation, not just the pump field, produces a measurable spin canting in antiferromagnets, and that exchange enhancement can make this damping-like torque the dominant excitation…

desk verdict A genuinely new and honest paper: damping during the femtosecond pulse acts as an exchange-enhanced excitation channel in antiferromagnets, with the HoMnO3 phase data carrying the argument; the main unresolved assumption is that pulse-time and relaxation damping are the same. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01359 v3 pith:PD4HVQSK submitted 2019-08-04 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.optics

Christian Tzschaschel , Takuya Satoh , Manfred Fiebig This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.optics
keywords antiferromagneticspintronicsultrafastspindynamicsdamping-liketorqueinverseFaradayeffectexchangeenhancementGilbertdampinghexagonalmanganitestime-resolvedrotation
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 claims that a usually neglected piece of magnetic damping—the damping-like torque acting during an ultrafast optical pulse—can be the main way light excites spin motion in antiferromagnets. In ferromagnets this torque is negligible, but antiferromagnets precess in strongly elliptical orbits, so a tiny damping-induced canting along the short axis is amplified by exchange into large modulations of the antiferromagnetic order. The authors support this with time-resolved Faraday rotation measurements on hexagonal YMnO3 and HoMnO3, where the extrapolated signal at t=0 and the initial phase of the Z-mode precession are accounted for by a Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert model that includes damping during the pulse, with an additional non-damping contribution needed in YMnO3. If correct, the result turns damping from a passive relaxation effect into an active handle for ultrafast antiferromagnetic spintronics.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the damping term of the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation integrated over the ultrafast optical pulse, combined with exchange enhancement. The central identity is Eq. (3): after a delta-function effective field $\mathbf{H}_{\mathrm{IFE}}(t)=H\theta\,\delta(t)\,\hat{z}$, each sublattice magnetization acquires a z-canting $\alpha\gamma\mu_0H\theta M_0$ that is smaller than the in-plane kick by the small factor $\alpha$ but points along the minor axis of the elliptical precession. The exchange-enhancement factor $A=\sqrt{J/D}-1$, which is the aspect ratio of the precession ellipse, amplifies this canting; Eq. (7) quantifies the leverage as $\Delta F\approx 3(A^2\alpha^2+1)DM_y^2$, so the damping-like channel dominates once $A\alpha>1$.

What would settle it

Vary the pump-pulse duration at fixed integrated effective field $H\theta$: the delta-pulse model says the initial z-canting and hence $\tan\varphi_0$ should stay unchanged, while a frequency-dependent damping acting during the pulse would make them move. Observing a clear shift of the initial phase with pulse duration would falsify the claim that the relaxation damping governs the excitation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that integrating the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation across the delta-function effective field of the inverse Faraday effect leaves a small net magnetization along the z axis, $M_{i,z}(+0)=\alpha\gamma\mu_0 H\theta M_0$, in addition to the usual in-plane kick. This z-canting lies along the minor axis of the strongly elliptical antiferromagnetic precession, whose major-to-minor axis ratio is the exchange-enhancement factor $A=\sqrt{J/D}-1\gg1$. The exchange and anisotropy then convert the tiny damping-induced canting into large-amplitude oscillations of the antiferromagnetic order parameter, so the energy transferred by the damping-like torque scales as $A^2\alpha^2$ relative to the field-like contribution. Measurements of the Z-mode frequency, relaxation time, and initial phase in HoMnO3 and YMnO3, including across a spin-reorientation transition and toward the Néel temperature, are consistent with this picture; in HoMnO3 the extracted $A\alpha$ reaches values where the damping route dominates.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that the Gilbert damping $\alpha$ extracted from the slow relaxation decay also acts during the ~130 fs excitation pulse, so that integrating the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation across the pulse is valid, and that the extrapolated zero-delay Faraday rotation is magnetic in origin rather than a pump-probe coherent artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The initial phase $\varphi_0$ of a coherent antiferromagnetic precession is not a nuisance fit parameter but a direct readout of the damping acting during the excitation pulse.
  • Materials with small Gilbert damping can still be excited efficiently if the exchange-enhancement factor $A$ is large, for instance near a spin-reorientation transition.
  • The damping route gives a materials knob: choosing the rare-earth ion tunes the damping strength over orders of magnitude through crystal-field scattering.
  • With both field-like and damping-like torques available optically, all-optical coherent precessional switching of antiferromagnets becomes a credible target rather than a conceptual limit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial extension: any mechanism—optical, electrical, or thermal—that deposits a net magnetization in an antiferromagnet should receive the same exchange amplification, so the damping-like route may be just one member of a family of low-threshold excitation schemes.
  • Editorial extension: the delta-pulse model implies the integrated field $H\theta$ alone sets the initial state, so measuring the same material with different pump-pulse durations at fixed $H\theta$ would test whether the damping during the pulse truly equals the relaxation damping.
  • Editorial extension: tuning a hexagonal manganite closer to its spin-reorientation transition by doping or strain should raise $A$ and therefore boost the damping-like excitation, a prediction that could be checked without new theory.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that the damping-like torque during ultrafast optical excitation of antiferromagnets produces an immediate spin canting along the short precession axis, which is then exchange-enhanced into large modulations of the antiferromagnetic order parameter. The authors model this by integrating the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation across a delta-function optical field pulse, obtaining an analytic expression for the initial phase of the ensuing precession in terms of the exchange-enhanced damping Aα. They measure the Z-mode precession in hexagonal YMnO3 and HoMnO3 as a function of temperature, extract α and A from the frequency and relaxation time, and compare the predicted initial phase with the measured one. For HoMnO3 they report good agreement around the spin-reorientation transition; for YMnO3 they introduce an additional heuristic non-damping contribution δ to restore agreement. They conclude that ultrafast damping can be the dominant spin excitation mechanism in antiferromagnets, in contrast to ferromagnets.

Significance. If the interpretation is correct, the result is significant for antiferromagnetic spintronics because it challenges the standard neglect of damping during impulsive excitation and identifies a new, potentially dominant excitation channel. The paper's strengths are the closed-form analytic solution of the LLG equation across the pulse, the use of a parameter-free prediction for φ0 in HoMnO3 (where α and A are extracted from relaxation data rather than fitted to φ0), and the temperature-dependent data covering both an order-order and an order-disorder transition. The HoMnO3 comparison is a genuine consistency check, though it shares model parameters with the same dataset. The YMnO3 case is weaker because the agreement is restored only by an ad hoc δ fitted to the measured phase, and the central claim rests on the unexamined assumption that the damping during the ~130 fs pulse equals the relaxation damping.

major comments (3)
  1. [§Results, Eqs. (3)–(6)] The derivation of the impulsive z-canting in Eq. (3) integrates Eq. (1) across a delta pulse assuming that the same Gilbert damping parameter α governs the damping-like torque during the pulse and during the subsequent slow relaxation. The α used in Eq. (6) is extracted from the relaxation time τ via Eq. (5). The manuscript does not justify that the damping during the ~130 fs excitation equals the low-frequency relaxation damping; if α is frequency-dependent or delayed (e.g., due to finite bath correlation times or magnon-phonon equilibration), the predicted initial phase and the inferred zero-delay canting do not follow. This is load-bearing because the claim that Aα>1 makes damping the dominant mechanism depends directly on this equality. Please provide a concrete test, such as measuring φ0 as a function of pulse duration or fluence, or a microscopic argument that the pulse-time and relaxation damping are the same.
  2. [§Ultrafast spin damping in YMnO3, Eq. (8)] The quantitative agreement between measured and modeled tan φ0 in YMnO3 is obtained only after introducing a heuristic δ in Eq. (8) that is fitted to the measured phase. Consequently, YMnO3 does not provide an independent confirmation of the damping mechanism; the predictive power rests on the HoMnO3 comparison, where α and the anisotropy parameters are extracted from the same dataset (frequency, relaxation time, and the fitted anisotropy model). Please state explicitly which comparisons are predictive and which involve fitted parameters, and quantify the number of free parameters used in each comparison.
  3. [§Results, Fig. 2b and Methods, Eq. (9)] The claim of a finite magnetisation at t=0 is inferred by extrapolating the damped-sine fit from Eq. (9) through the strong pump-probe overlap region. The manuscript does not provide a control demonstrating that this extrapolated offset is magnetic in origin rather than a coherent pump-probe artifact. A control experiment (e.g., opposite pump helicity or a nonmagnetic reference) would strengthen the identification of the initial phase as a measure of the damping-like torque.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Introduction, paragraph 3] The phrase 'the neglecting is not generally justified' should read 'the neglect is not generally justified.'
  2. [Discussion, paragraph 2] 'an useful degree of freedom' should be 'a useful degree of freedom.'
  3. [Abstract and Discussion] The claim that the canting is amplified by 'several orders of magnitude' is not supported by the quoted exchange enhancement A≈69 for YMnO3 (Table I), which is less than two orders of magnitude for the canting amplitude. If the statement refers to the energy density in Eq. (7), where A² enters, this should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] The red line in Fig. 3c is described as 'model calculations' but is not explicitly identified in the caption; please specify which panel and what the red line represents.
  5. [Methods, Eq. (9)] The fit function in Eq. (9) uses a decay time t1 in the exponential term A1 e^{-t/t1} that is not defined; please define t1 or remove it if it is a generic parasitic-decay term.
  6. [References] Reference [30] lists the journal as 'Phys. Rev. B.101' with an extra period; it should be 'Phys. Rev. B 101, 134413 (2020).'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the initial-phase prediction is an independent overdetermined cross-check, not a fit renamed as prediction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. Equation (3) follows by directly integrating the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation across the delta-function inverse-Faraday-effect field, with no fitted quantity entering the formal result. The central test is the initial-phase relation, Eq. (6). The authors extract Aα from the independently measured frequency ω and relaxation time τ via Eqs. (4) and (5), then use Eq. (6) to compute tan φ0 and compare it with the directly fitted initial phase in Fig. 3c. Because φ0 is not used to determine Aα or the anisotropy parameters, the HoMnO3 agreement is an overdetermined consistency check rather than a constructed identity. The YMnO3 section does introduce a heuristic correction δ in Eq. (8) that is fitted to the measured φ0, but the text explicitly labels this as a secondary non-damping mechanism and does not use it to define the central damping-like-torque claim, which is supported by the HoMnO3 data. Citations to the authors' prior work supply context for exchange enhancement and Z-mode identification, but they are not invoked as a uniqueness or existence theorem that forces the conclusion. The assumption that the Gilbert damping α extracted from relaxation also acts during the 130 fs pulse is a physical assumption that could be wrong, but it is not circular: the predicted φ0 is not an input to the extraction. No step reduces an equation to itself by definition or renames a fit as a prediction.

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

The central claim rests on the LLG ansatz, the delta-pulse IFE model, and a free-energy model whose parameters are fitted to ω0(T). No new particles, fields, or conserved quantities are introduced. The key unvalidated premise is that the same α governs both relaxation and the sub-picosecond excitation.

free parameters (5)
  • λ (intra-plane exchange) = 70.845 T^2 cm^3/J (HoMnO3), 71.125 (YMnO3)
    Fitted to the temperature dependence of Z-mode frequency ω0(T) via the free energy Eq. (2) and a Brillouin-function M0(T); sets the exchange energy J and contributes to A.
  • Dz (easy-plane anisotropy) = 11.045 (HoMnO3), 13.925 (YMnO3) T^2 cm^3/J
    Fitted to ω0(T); enters the effective out-of-plane anisotropy J = 3λ/2 + Dz + |Dy| and therefore the exchange enhancement A.
  • Dy(T) (in-plane anisotropy) = HoMnO3: κ(T-TSR), κ=0.0093(6), TSR=33.5(2) K; YMnO3: 0.0251(1)
    Linear temperature model for the spin-reorientation transition; fitted to the frequency dip near TSR; controls the effective in-plane anisotropy D and hence A.
  • Δ (fourth-order in-plane anisotropy) = HoMnO3: 0.0354(9) T^2 cm^3/J; YMnO3: 0
    Required so that the Z-mode frequency stays finite at the spin-reorientation transition; fitted to ω0(T).
  • δ (YMnO3 non-damping excitation correction) = Not stated explicitly
    Ad hoc addition to the z-component in Eq. (3), used to restore quantitative agreement with the measured initial phase in YMnO3; represents optical spin-transfer or optical-orientation mechanisms and is fitted to the data rather than predicted.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation with a single Gilbert damping α describes both the excitation and the relaxation of the antiferromagnetic sublattices.
    Eq. (1) is the starting point; α from the relaxation time Eq. (5) is inserted into the delta-pulse integration Eq. (3), assuming the same damping acts during the pulse.
  • domain assumption The inverse Faraday effect acts as an instantaneous magnetic field pulse HIFE(t)=Hθδ(t) along the z axis.
    Used to derive Eq. (3) and the subsequent phase expressions; ignores finite pulse-width effects until a heuristic δ is introduced for YMnO3.
  • domain assumption The three-sublattice Z-mode dynamics reduces to a single spin moving in effective out-of-plane and in-plane anisotropies J and D.
    Stated as Supplementary Note 1; relies on preserved threefold symmetry and on neglect of the much weaker inter-plane exchange.
  • domain assumption The sublattice magnetization follows a Brillouin function for S=2 Mn spins in the exchange field.
    Used in Methods to model M0(T) and fit the anisotropy parameters, which are needed to obtain A and the predicted initial phase.
  • domain assumption The measured Faraday rotation is proportional to the net z magnetization with no birefringence or anisotropic optical artifacts.
    The quasi-collinear geometry along the optic axis is used to justify this; the t=0 signal is interpreted as a spin canting.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Efficient spin excitation via ultrafast damping-like torques in antiferromagnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PD4HVQSK

@misc{pith2026190801359,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Efficient spin excitation via ultrafast damping-like torques in antiferromagnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PD4HVQSK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01359}
}
read the original abstract

Damping effects form the core of many emerging concepts for high-speed spintronic applications. Important characteristics such as device switching times and magnetic domain-wall velocities depend critically on the damping rate. While the implications of spin damping for relaxation processes are intensively studied, damping effects during impulsive spin excitations are assumed to be negligible because of the shortness of the excitation process. Herein, we show that, unlike in ferromagnets, ultrafast damping plays a crucial role in antiferromagnets because of their strongly elliptical spin precession. In time-resolved measurements, we find that ultrafast damping results in an immediate spin canting along the short precession axis. The interplay between antiferromagnetic exchange and magnetic anisotropy amplifies this canting by several orders of magnitude towards large-amplitude modulations of the antiferromagnetic order parameter. This leverage effect discloses a highly efficient route towards the ultrafast manipulation of magnetism in antiferromagnetic spintronics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01359 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gomonay, V

    O. Gomonay, V. Baltz, A. Brataas, and Y . Tserkovnyak, Antiferromagnetic spin textures and dynamics, Nat. Phys.14, 213–216 (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Baltz et al., Antiferromagnetic spintronics, Rev

    V. Baltz et al., Antiferromagnetic spintronics, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 015005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Wienholdt, D

    S. Wienholdt, D. Hinzke, and U. Nowak, THz switching of antiferromagnets and ferrimagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 247207 (2012)

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    Nˇemec, M

    P . Nˇemec, M. Fiebig, T. Kampfrath, and A. V. Kimel, Antiferromagnetic opto-spintronics, Nat. Phys.14, 229–241 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Wadley et al., Electrical switching of an antiferromagnet, Science351, 587–590 (2016)

    P . Wadley et al., Electrical switching of an antiferromagnet, Science351, 587–590 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Y ang, K.-S

    S.-H. Y ang, K.-S. Ryu, and S. Parkin, Domain-wall velocities of up to 750 m s −1 driven by exchange-coupling torque in synthetic antiferromagnets, Nat. Nanotech. 10, 221–226 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Hellman et al., Interface-induced phenomena in magnetism, Rev

    F . Hellman et al., Interface-induced phenomena in magnetism, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 025006 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    A. V. Kimel et al., Ultrafast non-thermal control of magnetization by instantaneous photomagnetic pulses, Nature 435, 655– 657 (2005)

    work page 2005

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    A. M. Kalashnikova et al., Impulsive generation of coherent magnons by linearly polarized light in the easy-plane antiferro- magnet FeBO3, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 167205 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    Satoh et al., Spin oscillations in antiferromagnetic NiO triggered by circularly polarized light, Phys

    T. Satoh et al., Spin oscillations in antiferromagnetic NiO triggered by circularly polarized light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 077402 (2010)

    2010

  3. [11]

    Kirilyuk, A

    A. Kirilyuk, A. V. Kimel, and Th. Rasing, Ultrafast optical manipulation of magnetic order, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 2731 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    A. M. Kalashnikova, A. V. Kimel, and R. V. Pisarev, Ultrafast opto-magnetism, Phys. Usp.58, 969–980 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Bossini and Th

    D. Bossini and Th. Rasing, Femtosecond optomagnetism in dielectric antiferromagnets, Phys. Scr. 92, 024002 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Tzschaschel et al., Ultrafast optical excitation of coherent magnons in antiferromagnetic NiO, Phys

    Ch. Tzschaschel et al., Ultrafast optical excitation of coherent magnons in antiferromagnetic NiO, Phys. Rev. B 95, 174407 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Tzschaschel, T

    Ch. Tzschaschel, T. Satoh, and M. Fiebig, Tracking the ultrafast motion of an antiferromagnetic order parameter, Nat. Com- mun. 10, 3995 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics , 8th ed

    C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics , 8th ed. (Wiley, New Y ork, 2004)

    2004

  9. [17]

    A. M. Kalashnikova et al., Impulsive excitation of coherent magnons and phonons by subpicosecond laser pulses in the weak ferromagnet FeBO3, Phys. Rev. B78, 104301 (2008)

    2008

  10. [18]

    Satoh, R

    T. Satoh, R. Iida, T. Higuchi, M. Fiebig, and T. Shimura, Writing and reading of an arbitrary optical polarization state in an antiferromagnet, Nat. Photon. 9, 25–29 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    L. D. Landau, L. P . Pitaevskii, and E. M. Lifshitz, Electrodynamics of Continuous Media, Second Edition: Volume 8 (Course of Theoretical Physics) (Butterworth-Heinemann, London, 1984)

    1984

  12. [20]

    Devolder, J

    T. Devolder, J. Hayakawa, K. Ito, H. Takahashi, S. Ikeda, P . Crozat, N. Zerounian, J.-V. Kim, C. Chappert, and H. Ohno, Single- shot time-resolved measurements of nanosecond-scale spin-transfer induced switching: Stochastic versus deterministic aspects, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 0...

    2008

  13. [21]

    Fiebig, V

    M. Fiebig, V. V. Pavlov, and R. V. Pisarev, Second-harmonic generation as a tool for studying electronic and magnetic structures of crystals: review, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 22, 96–118 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    Fiebig, Th

    M. Fiebig, Th. Lottermoser, and R. V. Pisarev, Spin-rotation phenomena and magnetic phase diagrams of hexagonal RMnO3, J. Appl. Phys. 93, 8194–8196 (2003)

    2003

  15. [23]

    Lottermoser and M

    Th. Lottermoser and M. Fiebig, Magnetoelectric behavior of domain walls in multiferroic HoMnO 3, Phys. Rev. B 70, 220407 (2004)

    2004

  16. [24]

    Fabr `eges et al., Interplay between spin dynamics and crystal field in multiferroic compound HoMnO 3, Phys

    X. Fabr `eges et al., Interplay between spin dynamics and crystal field in multiferroic compound HoMnO 3, Phys. Rev. B 100, 094437 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Toulouse et al., Lattice and spin excitations in multiferroich-YMnO3, Phys

    C. Toulouse et al., Lattice and spin excitations in multiferroich-YMnO3, Phys. Rev. B89, 094415 (2014). 12

    2014

  18. [26]

    Hansteen, A

    F . Hansteen, A. Kimel, A. Kirilyuk, and Th. Rasing, Femtosecond photomagnetic switching of spins in ferrimagnetic garnet films, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 047402 (2005)

    2005

  19. [27]

    Hansteen, A

    F . Hansteen, A. Kimel, A. Kirilyuk, and Th. Rasing, Nonthermal ultrafast optical control of the magnetization in garnet films, Phys. Rev. B73, 014421 (2006)

    2006

  20. [28]

    A. V. Kimel et al., Inertia-driven spin switching in antiferromagnets, Nat. Phys. 5, 727–731 (2009)

    2009

  21. [29]

    B. A. Ivanov, Spin dynamics of antiferromagnets under action of femtosecond laser pulses (review article), Low Temp. Phys. 40, 91–105 (2014)

    2014

  22. [30]

    P . Khan, M. Kanamaru, K. Matsumoto, T. Ito, and T. Satoh, Ultrafast light-driven simultaneous excitation of coherent terahertz magnons and phonons in multiferroic BiFeO3, Phys. Rev. B.101, 134413 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Talbayev et al., Magnetic exchange interaction between rare-earth and mn ions in multiferroic hexagonal manganites, Phys

    D. Talbayev et al., Magnetic exchange interaction between rare-earth and mn ions in multiferroic hexagonal manganites, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 247601 (2008)

    2008

  24. [32]

    N. J. Laurita et al., Asymmetric splitting of an antiferromagnetic resonance via quartic exchange interactions in multiferroic hexagonal HoMnO3, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 227601 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    V. N. Krivoruchko, Spin waves damping in nanometre-scale magnetic materials (review article), Low Temp. Phys.41, 670–681 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Pailh `es et al., Hybrid Goldstone modes in multiferroic YMnO3 studied by polarized inelastic neutron scattering, Phys

    S. Pailh `es et al., Hybrid Goldstone modes in multiferroic YMnO3 studied by polarized inelastic neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B 79, 134409 (2009)

    2009

  27. [35]

    Nˇemec et al., Experimental observation of the optical spin transfer torque, Nat

    P . Nˇemec et al., Experimental observation of the optical spin transfer torque, Nat. Phys. 8, 411–415 (2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    V. V. Pavlov et al., Magnetic-field-induced crossover from the inverse Faraday effect to the optical orientation in EuTe, J. Appl. Phys. 123, 193102 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Baierl et al., Terahertz-driven nonlinear spin response of antiferromagnetic nickel oxide, Phys

    S. Baierl et al., Terahertz-driven nonlinear spin response of antiferromagnetic nickel oxide, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 197201 (2016)

    2016

  30. [38]

    Malinowski, F

    G. Malinowski, F . D. Longa, J. H. H. Rietjens, P . V. Paluskar, R. Huijink, H. J. M. Swagten, and B. Koopmans, Control of speed and efficiency of ultrafast demagnetization by direct transfer of spin angular momentum, Nat. Phys.4, 855–858 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    A. J. Schellekens, K. C. Kuiper, R. de Wit, and B. Koopmans, Ultrafast spin-transfer torque driven by femtosecond pulsed- laser excitation, Nat. Commun. 5, 4333 (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

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

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

    2019

  33. [41]

    A. M. Kalashnikova and R. V. Pisarev, Electronic structure of hexagonal rare-earth manganites RMnO 3, JETP Lett. 78, 143 (2003)

    2003

  34. [42]

    Bossini, A

    D. Bossini, A. M. Kalashnikova, R. V. Pisarev, Th. Rasing and A. V. Kimel, Controlling coherent and incoherent spin dynamics by steering the photoinduced energy flow, Phys. Rev. B89, 060405 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    E. C. Standard, T. Stanislavchuk, A. A. Sirenko, N. Lee, and S.-W. Cheong, Magnons and crystal-field transitions in hexagonal RMnO3 (R = Er, Tm, Yb, Lu) single crystals, Phys. Rev. B85, 144422 (2012)

    2012

  36. [44]

    Moriyama et al., Intrinsic and extrinsic antiferromagnetic damping in NiO, Phys

    T. Moriyama et al., Intrinsic and extrinsic antiferromagnetic damping in NiO, Phys. Rev. Mater.3, 051402 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Ratcliff, J

    W. Ratcliff, J. W. Lynn, V. Kiryukhin, P . Jain, and M. R. Fitzsimmons, Magnetic structures and dynamics of multiferroic systems obtained with neutron scattering, npj quantum mater. 1, 16003 (2016). ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors thank B. A. Ivanov and A. V. Kimel for valuable dis...

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.