Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Fourfold Anisotropic Magnetoresistance and Unconventional Critical Exponents in Twinned FePd$_2$Te$_2$

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Twin boundaries in FePd2Te2 produce fourfold magnetoresistance and critical exponents outside every known universality class.

desk verdict Fourfold AMR data on twinned FePd2Te2 are new and worth a look, but the exotic critical exponents fail the paper's own algebra. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15842 v1 pith:TG7PLEMY submitted 2024-11-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.str-el

Zhaoxu Chen , Yuxin Yang , Jian-gang Guo This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el
keywords twinboundariesanisotropicmagnetoresistancecriticalexponentsvanderWaalsferromagnetFePd2Te2Hopkinsoneffectmagneticentropychangelong-rangeinteractions
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 sets out to show that crystal twins in the van der Waals ferromagnet FePd2Te2 are active agents in both electrical transport and magnetism, not passive structural defects. It reports a fourfold in-plane anisotropic magnetoresistance, explained by an antiferromagnetic coupling component at the twin boundaries combined with the pseudo-fourfold symmetry of perpendicular Fe chains, and a critical-exponent set $\beta = 0.866$, $\gamma = 1.043$, $\delta = 2.20$ that does not fit any universality class predicted by renormalization-group theory. If this stands, FePd2Te2 would be the first van der Waals magnet whose critical behavior lies outside all conventional models, which would make twin boundaries and their atomic-scale interfaces a practical tuning handle for magnetic phase transitions in layered magnets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the twin boundary: an atomically flat interface between orthorhombic crystal domains rotated by $\pi/2$, where Fe moments acquire a natural antiferromagnetic component. The quantitative engine is the scaling relation for magnetic entropy change, $n = 1 + (1/\delta)(1 - 1/\beta)$, combined with the Widom relation $\delta = 1 + \gamma/\beta$ and the critical-isotherm value $\delta = 2.49$; the paper uses these to arrive at $\beta = 0.866$ and $\gamma = 1.043$, then recomputes $\delta = 2.20$. The exponents are cross-checked with modified isotherm plots, the two-intercept method, and a scaling collapse of the rescaled magnetization $m = \varepsilon^{-\beta}M$ against the rescaled field $h = \varepsilon^{-(\beta+\gamma)}H$, and the whole interpretation rests on the spin-polarized-transport picture in which sharp antiferromagnetic boundaries produce non-saturating magnetization and linear magnetoresistance.

What would settle it

Apply the Widom relation $\delta = 1 + \gamma/\beta$ to the paper's own inputs: with the measured $\delta = 2.49$ and derived $\beta = 0.866$, the relation requires $\gamma \approx 1.29$, which conflicts with the reported $\gamma = 1.043$; recomputing the scaling collapse and the modified isotherm plots with $\gamma = 1.29$ (the value the paper itself uses) rather than $1.043$ would settle whether the claimed universality-class violation survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the twin boundaries in FePd2Te2 carry an antiferromagnetic coupling component that changes both the transport and the magnetic phase transition. In-plane magnetoresistance at 9 T has fourfold symmetry, which the paper explains by spin-polarized transport across atomically sharp antiferromagnetic twin boundaries in a lattice with pseudo-fourfold symmetry from perpendicular Fe chains. Magnetization measurements analyzed through the magnetic entropy change give $\beta = 0.866$, $\gamma = 1.043$, and $\delta = 2.20$, a combination that no short-range or standard long-range universality class reproduces. The paper attributes the large $\beta$ and small $\gamma$ to slow growth of the spontaneous magnetization and to non-saturating magnetization caused by the twin-boundary antiferromagnetic component, and concludes that FePd2Te2 is the first van der Waals magnet with critical exponents outside all conventional models.

Load-bearing premise

The unconventional exponent set rests on accepting one scaling relation among the entropy-change exponent, $\delta$, and $\beta$ as the source of both $\beta$ and $\gamma$; if the companion Widom relation is applied consistently to the paper's own measured $\delta = 2.49$ and $\beta = 0.866$, it forces $\gamma \approx 1.29$, not $1.043$, so the reported exponent set stands or falls on that step.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the exponent set is correct, FePd2Te2 becomes the first van der Waals ferromagnet whose critical behavior falls outside every conventional universality class, putting twin boundaries on the map as a design axis for magnetic phase transitions.
  • Fourfold in-plane anisotropic magnetoresistance follows directly from the twin structure, so resistance anisotropy can serve as a contact-based probe of twinning in this and similar van der Waals ferromagnets.
  • Because the anisotropic-magnetoresistance strength tracks the fraction of twin boundaries, introducing strain through extra Pd atoms offers a practical way to tune the transport anisotropy.
  • The analysis implies that magnetization measurements along the hard c-axis will keep showing slow growth and non-saturation, so interpretations of the intrinsic critical behavior must separate the twin-boundary antiferromagnetic component from the Fe-chain magnetism.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: detwinned or single-domain crystals should lose the fourfold anisotropic magnetoresistance and recover twofold behavior, and their critical exponents should shift toward a conventional class; this is a direct, testable consequence the paper does not test.
  • Beyond the paper: the internal inconsistency between the reported $\gamma = 1.043$ and the Widom relation suggests that a clean independent determination of $\gamma$ near the Curie temperature is needed before the outside-all-universality-classes claim can be treated as settled.
  • Beyond the paper: measuring magnetization along the in-plane easy axis rather than the c-axis could separate intrinsic chain magnetism from twin-boundary effects and would likely yield exponents closer to standard models.
  • Beyond the paper: if twin-boundary antiferromagnetic regions are the cause, varying twin density through thermal cycling or strain should change the fourfold anisotropic-magnetoresistance amplitude and the critical exponents in a correlated way, giving one experiment that tests the whole picture.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports transport and magnetization measurements on the van der Waals ferromagnet FePd2Te2, emphasizing the role of crystal twins. It claims observation of orthorhombic twin domains, a fourfold in-plane anisotropic magnetoresistance, a Hopkinson peak in the ac susceptibility, and a set of critical exponents β=0.866, γ=1.043, δ=2.20. The authors argue that this exponent set is unconventional, cannot be assigned to any standard universality class, and reflects antiferromagnetic coupling near twin boundaries together with slow growth of spontaneous magnetization. The central load-bearing assertion is the reliability and unconventional nature of the exponent set.

Significance. If the reported exponents were reliable, the claim of the first van der Waals magnet with critical exponents outside all conventional universality classes would be significant for the field of low-dimensional magnetism, and the connection between twin boundaries and transport anisotropy would be of interest. The manuscript contains a substantial amount of experimental data, including polarization microscopy, anisotropic magnetoresistance, Hall effect, and isothermal magnetization, and it attempts a multipronged critical-exponent analysis. These experimental efforts are valuable. However, the exponent set is not internally consistent, and because the paper's main conclusion rests on those exponents, the significance as stated is not established by the present analysis.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III, equations (6) and (7), pages 5–6] The derivation of the central exponent set is algebraically inconsistent. With n=0.938(4) from Fig. 4(b) and δ=2.49(1) from Fig. 3(d), Eq. (6) indeed gives β=0.866. But substituting β=0.866 and δ=2.49 into the Widom relation, Eq. (7), gives γ=β(δ−1)=1.29, not the reported γ=1.043. Conversely, the reported β=0.866 and γ=1.043 in Eq. (7) give δ=2.20, which is 12% below the measured δ=2.49 and outside its stated uncertainty. The sentence 'New δ was calculated as 2.20 through Eq. (6)' is also incorrect: Eq. (6) with n=0.938 and β=0.866 recovers δ≈2.49, while δ=2.20 follows only from Eq. (7). Since the abstract and conclusion quote β=0.866, γ=1.043, δ=2.20 as the definitive result, this is a load-bearing error, not a typographical detail.
  2. [Table I and Sec. III, Kouvel–Fisher analysis, pages 5–7] The final exponents are selected from a set of mutually incompatible determinations, and no uncertainties are provided for the values quoted as the main result. Table I lists δ=2.49(1) from the critical isotherm, δ=2.20 from the entropy analysis, and δ=2.41(2) from the Kouvel–Fisher method; these do not agree within stated errors. The Kouvel–Fisher analysis gives β=0.95(5) and γ=1.34(3), which are not simply consistent with β=0.866 and γ=1.043. Moreover, the modified Arrott plot used to extract the Kouvel–Fisher values was constructed with β=0.87 and γ=1.29, i.e., with a gamma that is the Widom value derived from the measured δ, not the reported γ=1.043. The scaling collapse in Fig. 4(d) is presented without any quantitative collapse criterion, so it cannot resolve these conflicts. Thus the paper does not provide a single, error-propagated, internally consistent exponent set.
  3. [Sec. III, equations (13)–(19), pages 6–7] The comparison with renormalization-group predictions is presented as a classification failure, but the procedure described is a parameter search, not a falsifiable test. The authors state that they 'adjusted σ and different sets of {d:n} to yield a value for γ close to that experimentally observed, i.e., γ=1.043,' and then report that β and δ do not match. Adjusting free parameters to reproduce one exponent and then noting that other exponents do not match is circular and non-exhaustive; it does not establish that FePd2Te2 lies outside all universality classes. A meaningful claim would require a systematic search over admissible {d, n, σ} with propagated uncertainties and a quantitative goodness-of-fit measure.
  4. [Sec. III, 'large β and small γ' discussion, page 7] The interpretation of β as 'slow growth of spontaneous magnetization' is complicated by the fact that all critical-exponent measurements were performed along the c-axis, which the authors themselves describe as the hard axis. The authors invoke an analogy with Fe2.72GeTe2, where exponents differ substantially between the hard and easy directions. Without a corresponding easy-axis or detwinned measurement, the claim that the large β is intrinsic to the twinned FePd2Te2 system is not established. This is a further reason why the quoted exponents cannot be taken as a robust characterization of the magnetic universality class.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Summary] The abstract contains the phrase 'renormalized group' rather than 'renormalization group', and the Summary says the influence is studied 'systemically' instead of 'systematically'.
  2. [Sec. III, page 5] The text reporting the critical-isotherm fit contains a typographical error: 'lnM=1/δlnM+lnD' should read 'ln M = (1/δ) ln H + ln D'.
  3. [Sec. III, page 6] The Kouvel–Fisher errors are reported inconsistently: the text gives γ=1.34 ± 0.27, while Table I lists γ=1.34(3). These differ by an order of magnitude and should be reconciled.
  4. [Fig. 1 and Sec. III] The paper refers to a 'serious of DC bias magnetic field'; this should be 'series'. Also, the caption of Fig. 1 uses 'a serious of DC bias' in the text, which should be corrected.
  5. [Sec. III, page 4] The claim of a structural phase transition origin of the twins would be strengthened by direct structural evidence at elevated temperature; the current support is indirect, based on the fixed π/2 angle between domains.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The reported unconventional exponents are partly constructed: β is forced by Eq. (6) from fitted n and δ, γ=1.043 is not derivable from the paper's equations, and δ=2.20 is computed from the same β and γ via Eq. (7) rather than measured.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III, Eqs. (6)-(7) and Table I]
    "Combining δ = 2.49 ± 0.01, β and γ was calculated as 0.866 and 1.043, respectively. New δ was calculated as 2.20 through Eq. (6)."

    Using the fitted n=0.938(4) and measured δ=2.49±0.01 in Eq. (6) forces β=0.866, so β is a derived quantity. Eq. (7) with those inputs gives γ=1.29, not the reported 1.043, so γ has no stated derivation. The 'new δ=2.20' is not produced by Eq. (6) — Eq. (6) with n=0.938 and β=0.866 returns δ=2.49 — but is the value of Eq. (7) evaluated at the already-chosen β=0.866 and γ=1.043. The final δ is therefore constructed from the very exponents it is supposed to corroborate, and the directly measured critical-isotherm δ=2.49 is discarded in favor of this computed value. The unconventional exponent set is partly parameter reconciliation rather than independent determination.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that FePd2Te2 has critical exponents β=0.866, γ=1.043, δ=2.20 outside all renormalization-group universality classes. The derivation chain starts from fitted inputs: n=0.938(4) from the magnetic entropy change and δ=2.49±0.01 from the critical isotherm. Eq. (6) legitimately converts these into β=0.866, but this makes β dependent on the measured δ. The reported γ=1.043 is not obtained from any stated equation: Eq. (7) with δ=2.49 and β=0.866 yields γ=1.29, a value the paper itself uses later for the modified Arrott plot. The final δ=2.20 is not obtained from Eq. (6) as claimed; it is the output of Eq. (7) when β=0.866 and γ=1.043 are inserted, so it is generated by the same scaling relation from the very exponents it is used to validate. Table I lists three mutually incompatible deltas (2.49, 2.20, 2.41), reinforcing that the reported set is not an independent determination. Because the 'unconventional' conclusion rests on this constructed set, the central claim partially reduces to its own inputs. The fourfold AMR and twinning observations are independent experimental findings, and no load-bearing self-citation is involved; the circularity is internal to the exponent algebra.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The claimed unconventional critical exponents rest on scaling relations, a fitted entropy exponent n, and a critical-isotherm delta; the final gamma and delta values are not consistent with the stated equations. The twin-boundary antiferromagnetic component is inferred, not directly measured.

free parameters (5)
  • n = 0.938(4)
    Field-dependence exponent of max magnetic entropy change, Eq. (5), used to derive beta via Eq. (6).
  • delta_critical_isotherm = 2.49(1)
    Log-log slope of M vs H at Tc (Fig. 3d). Combined with n to get beta=0.866, but later replaced by delta=2.20.
  • beta = 0.866
    Reported final exponent, derived from Eq. (6) with n=0.938 and delta=2.49; no error bar given.
  • gamma = 1.043
    Reported final exponent from entropy analysis; Eq. (7) with beta=0.866 and delta=2.49 gives 1.29, not 1.043, so origin is unclear.
  • delta_final = 2.20
    Reported final delta, obtained from Eq. (6) or (7) after replacing the measured 2.49; basis not clearly stated.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Scaling hypothesis M = epsilon^beta f(H/epsilon^(beta+gamma)) holds
    Used for Arrott plots, Kouvel-Fisher, and scaling collapse; assumes a single second-order transition.
  • standard math n = 1 + (1/delta)(1 - 1/beta) for magnetic entropy change
    Eq. (6), used without derivation; standard scaling result.
  • standard math Widom relation delta = 1 + gamma/beta
    Eq. (7), used to connect exponents.
  • domain assumption c-axis magnetization represents intrinsic critical behavior
    All isotherms are along H//c; authors later discuss hard-axis effects on beta, so this may not hold.
  • standard math Fisher-Ma-Nickel long-range interaction RG formulas apply
    Used in Eqs (13)-(19) to test universality classes.
invented entities (2)
  • Antiferromagnetic coupling component at twin boundaries
    purpose: Explains non-saturating magnetization, small delta, and fourfold AMR
    No direct magnetic imaging or spin-resolved probe; inferred from transport and magnetization behavior.
  • Fragmented Fe chains and magnetic clusters
    purpose: Explains large beta and possible Griffiths-like behavior
    Suggested in text but not directly observed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fourfold Anisotropic Magnetoresistance and Unconventional Critical Exponents in Twinned FePd$_2$Te$_2$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TG7PLEMY

@misc{pith2026241115842,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fourfold Anisotropic Magnetoresistance and Unconventional Critical Exponents in Twinned FePd$_2$Te$_2$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TG7PLEMY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15842}
}
abstract

As a special material symmetry operation, crystal twins usually influence physical properties. Here, detailed electrical transport and magnetic measurements were performed to reveal twinning effect on properties of van der Waals ferromagnet FePd$_2$Te$_2$. Orthorhombic crystal domains were observed in polarized optical microscopy and fixed $\pi$/2 angle between adjacent domains suggests a phase transition origin of the twins. FePd$_2$Te$_2$ exhibits fourfold in-plane anisotropic magnetoresistance. It is attributed to antiferromagnetic coupling component near atomically flat twin boundary and pseudo four-fold symmetry from perpendicular Fe chains. Intense magnetic domain motion is suggested by Hopkinson effect observed in magnetic susceptibility. A set of unusual critical exponents $\beta$ = 0.866, $\gamma$ = 1.043, $\delta$ = 2.20 cannot be classified in any universal class predicted by renormalized group. Deviation from standard model reflects the non-saturating magnetization and slow growth of spontaneous magnetization resulting from crystal domain walls. These results show that additional symmetry from twins and twin boundary have a significant effect on electrical transport and magnetic properties of FePd$_2$Te$_2$. There is much room to modulate physical properties of twinned van der Waals ferromagnets through twins.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15842 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Structure characterization and basic physical properties. (a) X-ray diffraction of a FePd [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Anisotropic in-plane electrical transport. (a) Magnetoresistance of FePd [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Magnetic Properties and entropy change. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Atomic to mesoscale hierarchical structures and magnetic states in an anisotropic layered ferromagnet FePd2Te2

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Microscope images show that twinning domains in FePd2Te2 create compressed and stretched regions with different magnetic responses, including a polarized paramagnetic state above the ordering temperature.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Parsons, Introduction to Twinning, Acta Crystallo- graphica Section D: Biological Crystallography59, 1995 (2003)

    S. Parsons, Introduction to Twinning, Acta Crystallo- graphica Section D: Biological Crystallography59, 1995 (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    Nespolo, Tips and Traps on Crystal Twinning: How toFullyDescribeYourTwin,CrystalResearchandTech- nology 50, 362 (2015)

    M. Nespolo, Tips and Traps on Crystal Twinning: How toFullyDescribeYourTwin,CrystalResearchandTech- nology 50, 362 (2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    I. R. Fisher, L. Degiorgi, and Z. Shen, In-plane Electronic Anisotropy of Underdoped ‘122’ Fe-Arsenide Supercon- ductors Revealed by Measurements of Detwinned Sin- gle Crystals, Reports on progress in Physics74, 124506 (2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Specht, C

    E. Specht, C. Sparks, A. Dhere, J. Brynestad, O. Cavin, D. Kroeger, and H. Oye, Effect of Oxygen Pressure on the Orthorhombic-Tetragonal Transition in the High- Temperature Superconductor YBa2Cu3Ox, Physical Re- view B 37, 7426 (1988)

    work page 1988

  5. [5]

    Radaelli, D

    P. Radaelli, D. Hinks, A. Mitchell, B. Hunter, J. Wag- ner, B. Dabrowski, K. Vandervoort, H. Viswanathan, and J. Jorgensen, Structural and Superconducting Properties of La2−xSrxCuO4 as a Function of Sr content, Physical Review B 49, 4163 (1994)

    work page 1994

  6. [6]

    Tanatar, A

    M. Tanatar, A. Kreyssig, S. Nandi, N. Ni, S. L. Bud’ko, P. Canfield, A. Goldman, and R. Prozorov, Direct Imaging of the Structural Domains in the Iron Pnictides AFe2As2 (A= Ca, Sr, Ba), Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics79, 180508 (2009)

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    Prozorov, M

    R. Prozorov, M. Tanatar, N. Ni, A. Kreyssig, S. Nandi, S. Bud’Ko, A. Goldman, and P. Canfield, Intrinsic Pinning on Structural Domains in Underdoped Sin- gle Crystals of Ba(Fe 1−xCox)2As2, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics80, 174517 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    S. Li, C. de La Cruz, Q. Huang, G. Chen, T.-L. Xia, J. Luo, N. Wang, and P. Dai, Structural and Mag- netic Phase Transitions in Na1−δFeAs, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics80, 020504 (2009)

    work page 2009

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    McQueen, A

    T. McQueen, A. Williams, P. Stephens, J. Tao, Y. Zhu, V. Ksenofontov, F. Casper, C. Felser, and R. Cava, Tetragonal-to-Orthorhombic Structural Phase Transition at 90 K in the Superconductor Fe1.01Se, Physical Review Letters 103, 057002 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    Dolan, G

    G. Dolan, G. Chandrashekhar, T. Dinger, C. Feild, and F. Holtzberg, Vortex Structure in YBa2Cu3O7 and Ev- idence for Intrinsic Pinning, Physical review letters62, 827 (1989)

    1989

  3. [11]

    Maggio-Aprile, C

    I. Maggio-Aprile, C. Renner, A. Erb, E. Walker, and Ø. Fischer, Critical Currents Approaching the Depair- ing Limit at a Twin Boundary in YBa2Cu3O7−δ, Nature 390, 487 (1997)

    1997

  4. [12]

    Song, Y.-L

    C.-L. Song, Y.-L. Wang, Y.-P. Jiang, L. Wang, K. He, X. Chen, J. E. Hoffman, X.-C. Ma, and Q.-K. Xue, Sup- pression of Superconductivity by Twin Boundaries in FeSe, Physical Review Letters109, 137004 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Tsuei and J

    C. Tsuei and J. Kirtley, Pairing Symmetry in Cuprate Superconductors, Reviews of Modern Physics 72, 969 (2000)

    2000

  6. [14]

    Watashige, Y

    T. Watashige, Y. Tsutsumi, T. Hanaguri, Y. Kohsaka, S. Kasahara, A. Furusaki, M. Sigrist, C. Meingast, T. Wolf, H. v. Löhneysen, et al. , Evidence for Time- Reversal Symmetry Breaking of the Superconducting State near Twin-Boundary Interfaces in FeSe Revealed by Scanning Tunne...

    2015

  7. [15]

    B. Shi, Y. Geng, H. Wang, J. Yang, C. Shang, M. Wang, S. Mi, J. Huang, F. Pan, X. Gui,et al., FePd2Te2: An Anisotropic Two-Dimensional Ferromagnet with One- Dimensional Fe Chains, Journal of the American Chem- ical Society 146, 21546 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    G. Yang, J. Abell, P. Shang, I. Jones, and C. Gough, Growth and Microstructure in Bi 2Sr2CaCu2Oy Single Crystals, Journal of crystal growth166, 820 (1996)

    1996

  9. [17]

    J. K. Murthy and A. Venimadhav, 4f-3d Exchange Cou- pling Induced Exchange Bias and Field Induced Hopkin- son Peak Effects in Gd2CoMnO6, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 719, 341 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    W. Tang, J. Liang, G. Rao, and X. Yan, Study of AC Susceptibility on the LaFe13−xSix System, physica status solidi (a) 141, 217 (1994)

    1994

  11. [19]

    Benka, A

    G. Benka, A. Bauer, P. Schmakat, S. Säubert, M. Seifert, P. Jorba, and C. Pfleiderer, Interplay of Itinerant Mag- netism and Spin-Glass Behavior in FexCr1−x, Physical Review Materials 6, 044407 (2022)

    2022

  12. [20]

    Karma, D

    N. Karma, D. Harinkhere, P. Karil, and H. Dager, Study of AC Susceptibility of La0.8Sr0.2MnO3 at Different Fre- quencies, in Journal of Physics: Conference Series , Vol. 2603 (IOP Publishing, 2023) p. 012030

    2023

  13. [21]

    Drobac, Critical Exponents from High-Precision AC Susceptibility Data, Journal of magnetism and magnetic materials 159, 159 (1996)

    Ð. Drobac, Critical Exponents from High-Precision AC Susceptibility Data, Journal of magnetism and magnetic materials 159, 159 (1996)

    1996

  14. [22]

    Pramanik and A

    A. Pramanik and A. Banerjee, Phase Separation and the Effect of Quenched Disorder in Pr0.5Sr0.5MnO3, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter20, 275207 (2008)

    2008

  15. [23]

    Li and J

    F. Li and J. Fang, Glassy-Ferromagnetic Behavior in Eu0.5Sr0.5CoO3, Journal of magnetism and magnetic ma- terials 324, 2664 (2012)

    2012

  16. [24]

    J. K. Murthy, K. Chandrasekhar, H. Wu, H. Yang, J.- Y. Lin, and A. Venimadhav, Antisite Disorder Driven Spontaneous Exchange Bias Effect in La2−xSrxCoMnO6 (0≤ x≤ 1), Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 28, 086003 (2016). 9

    2016

  17. [25]

    Sláma, M

    J. Sláma, M. Ušáková, M. Šoka, R. Dosoudil, and V. Jančárik, Hopkinson Effect in Soft and Hard Magnetic Ferrites, Acta Physica Polonica A131, 762 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    S. U. Bhasker, G. Choudary, and M. R. Reddy, Modula- tion in Magnetic Exchange Interaction, Core Shell Struc- ture and Hopkinson’s Peak with Chromium Substitution into Ni0.75Co0.25Fe2o4 Nano Particles, Journal of Mag- netism and Magnetic Materials454, 349 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    Gaunt, S

    P. Gaunt, S. Ho, G. Williams, and R. Cochrane, Crit- ical Behavior of an Amorphous Ferromagnet, Physical Review B 23, 251 (1981)

    1981

  20. [28]

    A.B.Pippard, Magnetoresistance in Metals,Vol.2(Cam- bridge university press, 1989)

    1989

  21. [29]

    Ramos, S

    R. Ramos, S. Arora, and I. Shvets, Anomalous Anisotropic Magnetoresistance in Epitaxial Fe3O4 Thin Films on MgO (001), Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics78, 214402 (2008)

    2008

  22. [30]

    Y. Ando, A. Lavrov, and S. Komiya, Anisotropic Mag- netoresistance in Lightly Doped La2−xSrxCuO4: Impact of Antiphase Domain Boundaries on the Electron Trans- port, Physical review letters90, 247003 (2003)

    2003

  23. [31]

    X. Ma, M. Huang, S. Wang, P. Liu, Y. Zhang, Y. Lu, and B. Xiang, Anisotropic Magnetoresistance and Pla- nar Hall Effect in Layered Room-Temperature Ferromag- net Cr1.2Te2, ACS Applied Electronic Materials5, 2838 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Bibes, B

    M. Bibes, B. Martınez, J. Fontcuberta, V. Trtik, C. Fer- rater, F. Sánchez, M. Varela, R. Hiergeist, and K. Steen- beck, Anisotropic Magnetoresistance of (00h),(0hh) and (hhh) La 2/3Sr1/3MnO3 Thin Films on (001) Si Sub- strates, Journal of magnetism and magnetic materials 211,...

    2000

  25. [33]

    Bibes, V

    M. Bibes, V. Laukhin, S. Valencia, B. Martinez, J. Fontcuberta, O. Y. Gorbenko, A. Kaul, and J. Mar- tinez, Anisotropic Magnetoresistance and Anomalous Hall Effect in Manganite Thin Films, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 17, 2733 (2005)

    2005

  26. [34]

    Y. Dai, Y. Zhao, L. Ma, M. Tang, X. Qiu, Y. Liu, Z. Yuan, and S. Zhou, Fourfold Anisotropic Magnetore- sistance of L10FePt Due to Relaxation Time Anisotropy, Physical Review Letters128, 247202 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Eerenstein, T

    W. Eerenstein, T. Palstra, S. Saxena, and T. Hibma, Spin-Polarized Transport across Sharp Antiferromag- netic Boundaries, Physical review letters 88, 247204 (2002)

    2002

  28. [36]

    P. Li, C. Jin, E. Jiang, and H. Bai, Origin of the Twofold and Fourfold Symmetric Anisotropic Magnetoresistance inEpitaxialFe 3O4 Films,JournalofAppliedPhysics 108 (2010)

    2010

  29. [37]

    Margulies, F

    D. Margulies, F. Parker, M. Rudee, F. Spada, J. Chap- man, P. Aitchison, and A. Berkowitz, Origin of the Anomalous Magnetic Behavior in Single Crystal Fe3O4 Films, Physical Review Letters79, 5162 (1997)

    1997

  30. [38]

    Arrott and J

    A. Arrott and J. E. Noakes, Approximate Equation of State for Nickel near Its Critical Temperature, Physical Review Letters 19, 786 (1967)

    1967

  31. [39]

    M. E. Fisher, The Theory of Equilibrium Critical Phe- nomena, Reports on progress in physics30, 615 (1967)

    1967

  32. [40]

    Q. H. Wang, A. Bedoya-Pinto, M. Blei, A. H. Dismukes, A. Hamo, S. Jenkins, M. Koperski, Y. Liu, Q.-C. Sun, E. J. Telford, et al. , The Magnetic Genome of Two- Dimensional van der Waals Materials, ACS nano 16, 6960 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    Pramanik and A

    A. Pramanik and A. Banerjee, Critical Behavior at Para- magnetic to Ferromagnetic Phase Transition in Pr 0.5 Sr0.5MnO3: A Bulk Magnetization Study, Physical Re- view B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 79, 214426 (2009)

    2009

  34. [42]

    J. S. Kouvel and M. E. Fisher, Detailed Magnetic Behav- ior of Nickel near Its Curie Point, Physical Review136, A1626 (1964)

    1964

  35. [43]

    M. E. Fisher, S.-k. Ma, and B. Nickel, Critical Exponents for Long-RangeInteractions,PhysicalReview Letters 29, 917 (1972)

    1972

  36. [44]

    Omrani, M

    H. Omrani, M. Mansouri, W. C. Koubaa, M. Koubaa, and A. Cheikhrouhou, Critical Behavior Study near the Paramagnetic to Ferromagnetic Phase Transition Tem- perature in Pr0.6−xErxCa0.1Sr0.3MnO3 (x= 0, 0.02 and 0.06) Manganites, RSC Advances6, 78017 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    H. C. Chauhan, B. Kumar, A. Tiwari, J. K. Tiwari, and S. Ghosh, Different Critical Exponenxts on Two Sides of a Transition: Observation of Crossover from Ising to Heisenberg Exchange in Skyrmion Host Cu2OSeO3, Physical Review Letters128, 015703 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Zhang, H

    L. Zhang, H. Han, M. Ge, H. Du, C. Jin, W. Wei, J. Fan, C. Zhang, L. Pi, and Y. Zhang, Critical Phenomenon of the Near Room Temperature Skyrmion Material FeGe, Scientific reports 6, 22397 (2016)

    2016

  39. [47]

    R. Nag, B. Sarkar, S. Pal, and E. Bose, Magnetic Prop- erties and Critical Behavior of Electron Doped Polycrys- talline Ca0.85Sm0.15MnO3 Manganite, Physica Scripta 94, 095801 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Sarkar, R

    B. Sarkar, R. Nag, and S. Pal, Manifestation of Non- conventional Magnetic Interaction in Electron-Doped Ca0.85Dy0.15MnO3 from Magnetic Properties and Criti- cal Behavior Analysis, Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism 34, 2059 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Kundu and T

    S. Kundu and T. Nath, Critical Behavior and Magnetic Relaxation Dynamics of Nd0.4Sr0.6MnO3 Nanoparticles, Philosophical Magazine 93, 2527 (2013)

    2013

  42. [50]

    W. Liu, Y. Wang, J. Fan, L. Pi, M. Ge, L. Zhang, and Y. Zhang, Field-Dependent Anisotropic Magnetic Cou- pling in Layered Ferromagnetic Fe3−x GeTe2, Physical Review B 100, 104403 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Rumpf, P

    K. Rumpf, P. Granitzer, and P. Pölt, Non-Saturating Magnetic Behaviour of a Ferromagnetic Semiconduc- tor/Metal Nanocomposite, Journal of magnetism and magnetic materials 322, 1283 (2010)

    2010

  44. [52]

    Kumar and A

    D. Kumar and A. Banerjee, A Critical Examination of Magnetic States of La0.5Ba0.5CoO3: Non-Griffiths Phase and Interacting Ferromagnetic-Clusters, arXiv preprint arXiv:1211.4936 (2012)

    2012 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Zhang, F

    G. Zhang, F. Guo, H. Wu, X. Wen, L. Yang, W. Jin, W. Zhang, and H. Chang, Above-Room- Temperature Strong Intrinsic Ferromagnetism in 2d van der Waals Fe3GaTe2 with Large Perpendicular Magnetic Anisotropy, Nature Communications13, 5067 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Absence of Fer- romagnetism or Antiferromagnetism in One-or Two- Dimensional Isotropic Heisenberg Models, Physical Re- view Letters 17, 1133 (1966)

    1966

  47. [55]

    L. Duan, X. Wang, J. Zhang, Z. Hu, J. Zhao, Y. Feng, H. Zhang, H.-J. Lin, C. Chen, W. Wu, et al. , Syn- thesis, Structure, and Magnetism in the Ferromagnet La3MnAs5: Well-Separated Spin Chains Coupled via Itinerant Electrons, Physical Review B 106, 184405 (2022)

    2022

  48. [56]

    Zhang and R

    R. Zhang and R. F. Willis, Thickness-Dependent Curie Temperatures of Ultrathin Magnetic Films: Effect of the Range of Spin-spin Interactions, Physical review letters 10 86, 2665 (2001)

    2001

  49. [57]

    Y. Deng, Y. Yu, Y. Song, J. Zhang, N. Z. Wang, Z. Sun, Y. Yi, Y. Z. Wu, S. Wu, J. Zhu,et al. , Gate- Tunable Room-Temperature Ferromagnetism in Two- Dimensional Fe3GeTe2, Nature 563, 94 (2018)

    2018

  50. [58]

    Z.Chen, Y.Yang, T.Ying,andJ.-G.Guo,High- Tc Ferro- magnetic Semiconductor in Thinned 3d Ising Ferromag- netic Metal Fe3GaTe2, Nano Letters24, 993 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.