Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Stimulated Magnonic Frequency Combs

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two-tone microwave drive produces a magnon frequency comb whose spacing is set by the modulation tone.

desk verdict The experiment may be real, but the missing RF spectrum leaves the 'magnonic comb' claim unproven, and the theory is too inconsistent to support the interpretation as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.21370 v1 pith:TJITTXM6 submitted 2026-01-29 cond-mat.mes-hall

Xueyu Guo , Tianci Gong , Guibin Lan , Mengying Guo , Xiufeng Han , Guoqiang Yu , Peng Yan , Qi Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall PACS 75.30.Ds75.78.-n76.50.+g
keywords magnonicfrequencycombthree-magnonscatteringspinwavesstimulatedBrillouinlightPermalloymicrowavemodulationnonlinearmagnonics
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 reports the experimental observation of magnonic frequency combs generated by stimulated three-magnon scattering. By adding a low-frequency modulation signal (fm) to a microwave excitation (fe) in a micrometer-scale Permalloy square, the authors produce a series of equispaced spectral lines whose spacing is exactly the modulation frequency (Δf = fm) and whose number grows with modulation power. The mechanism relies on a 'modulation magnon' that mixes with the main mode through confluence and splitting, then cascades to fill the comb—even at frequencies below the ferromagnetic resonance. If correct, this offers a low-power, real-time knob for shaping magnonic spectra, with potential applications in magnon-based sensing and signal processing. The claim is backed by an analytical Hamiltonian, micromagnetic simulations, and microfocused Brillouin light scattering.

What carries the argument

The central object is the stimulated three-magnon Hamiltonian of Eq. (6): a main drive at ωe and a modulation drive at ωm, coupled to a FMR magnon mode, with three-magnon confluence (gp ae am ap†) and splitting (gq ae am† aq†) terms. The modulation amplitude is set by Eq. (5), a Lorentzian response peaked at the FMR frequency, and the scattering efficiency η = (|ap|+|aq|)/|ae| quantifies how strongly sidebands are generated. This machinery explains both the exact locking of comb spacing to fm and the power-dependent growth in the number of comb lines.

What would settle it

Sweep the modulation frequency continuously from well below to near the FMR frequency while keeping fe and powers fixed, and measure the intensity of the first sideband (fe + fm). The model's Eq. (5) predicts a Lorentzian peak as fm approaches FMR; if the sideband amplitude does not follow that resonance enhancement—or if the comb spacing deviates from fm when fm is tuned off any magnon mode—the stimulated three-magnon scattering mechanism is not the operative one.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under dual-frequency excitation (fe + fm), the nonlinear magnon system generates a frequency comb with teeth at fe ± nfm. The comb spacing is locked to fm, and the number of teeth increases monotonically with modulation power. The authors attribute this to stimulated three-magnon scattering: the modulation drive excites a coherent 'modulation magnon' at frequency ωm, which participates in confluence (ωe + ωm) and splitting (ωe - ωm) with the main mode; the resulting sidebands then repeatedly mix with the modulation magnon to populate higher-order comb lines. The model reproduces the measured dependence of scattering efficiency on external field and the power-dependent evolution of first- and

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes that the low-frequency modulation creates a coherent 'modulation magnon' that participates in three-magnon scattering, even though the modulation frequency (0.5 GHz) lies far below the ferromagnetic resonance (~3.8 GHz), where no real magnon eigenmode exists.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The comb spacing is directly tunable by changing the modulation frequency, independent of the main excitation.
  • The number of comb teeth—and therefore the spectral bandwidth—can be controlled in real time by adjusting modulation power.
  • Comb lines appear below the ferromagnetic resonance frequency, which is normally inaccessible to direct excitation, enabling sub-FMR magnon probing.
  • The stimulated mechanism lowers the drive power required for three-magnon combs, potentially making them practical for on-chip magnonic devices.
  • The same two-tone principle could be extended to other magnetic textures or materials to engineer combs with tailored line spacing.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the modulation acts purely as a classical time-dependent field rather than as a genuine magnon mode, the same sideband structure could arise from parametric modulation; the 'stimulated three-magnon scattering' label is then an interpretation, not a proven microscopic process.
  • Eq. (5) predicts a Lorentzian enhancement of sideband intensity as fm approaches the FMR frequency; sweeping fm continuously would test whether the modulation-magnon picture is required or whether the response is flat, which would indicate a different mechanism.
  • The paper does not directly measure the phase coherence of the comb teeth; confirming mutual phase-locking would connect this magnonic comb to optical frequency-comb metrology and quantum sensing applications.
  • The observed spatial localization of sub-FMR comb lines at the element boundaries hints that boundary-localized modes could serve as tunable, on-chip magnon sources, an implication the paper does not develop.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports the experimental observation of a magnonic frequency comb (MFC) generated by applying a low-frequency modulation signal fm together with an excitation signal fe to a permalloy microelement, and it proposes a theoretical model based on stimulated three-magnon scattering. The main experimental claims are: (i) a comb of equally spaced BLS spectral lines appears under dual-frequency excitation, with spacing Δf = fm; (ii) the comb can extend below the FMR frequency; and (iii) the number of teeth and their intensities increase with modulation power. A Hamiltonian model with coupled magnon modes, micromagnetic simulations, and BLS measurements are presented as joint support.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper reports a simple and efficient way to generate tunable magnonic frequency combs using two microwave tones, with the comb spacing set by an external low-frequency source and the bandwidth controlled by power. This could be useful for magnonic sensing and signal processing and would extend the frequency-comb concept well below the ferromagnetic resonance. The paper combines experiment, simulation, and analytical modeling, and the experimental BLS spectra are internally plausible. However, the current manuscript does not yet establish the central mechanism: the missing control of the applied rf spectrum leaves open a trivial intermodulation explanation, and the theoretical model has internal inconsistencies that undermine its role as evidence for stimulated three-magnon scattering.

major comments (4)
  1. [Experimental setup; Fig. 1(b), Fig. 2(b)] The central claim requires that the comb teeth at fe ± n·fm are generated by magnon nonlinearity. The paper never reports the microwave spectrum at the antenna. With two synchronized sources at Pe = 20 dBm and Pm = 30 dBm combined by a broadband power combiner, intermodulation products at fe ± fm, fe ± 2fm, etc. can be generated in the amplifiers/combiner before the antenna. If such sidebands are present, the BLS spectra in Fig. 1(b) and Fig. 2(b) would be the forced linear response of the corresponding spin-wave modes; the edge localization of the 3.5 GHz component would follow from the eigenmode structure, not from three-magnon scattering. The power dependence and spatial maps do not discriminate these possibilities. Please provide a measured spectrum of the rf field/current at the antenna, and ideally a control experiment that rules out drive-chain nonlinearity (e.g., a linear sample
  2. [Eqs. (3)–(7)] The theoretical model is internally inconsistent. In Eq. (3) the modulation mode am is assigned the FMR eigenfrequency ωf, while in Eq. (6) the kinetic term reads ωe(ae†ae + am†am + aq†aq), giving am and aq the excitation frequency ωe. Equation (7) then uses (ωf − iαfωf)am and (ωf − iαfωf)aq. Since fm = 0.5 GHz lies far below the FMR frequency (~3.8 GHz at 18 mT), am is not a magnon eigenmode; the paper itself notes that the sub-FMR response 'localizes at the boundaries.' Treating am as a bosonic mode that participates in the three-magnon vertices gp ae am ap† and gq ae am† aq† is therefore not microscopically justified. The proper description should be in terms of a classical time-dependent modulation field or a parametric drive, and the resulting amplitude and threshold equations must be re-derived. In addition, the rotating exponentials in Eqs. (1), (3), and (4) have sign inconsistenc
  3. [After Eq. (9); Fig. 2(d) and Fig. 3(b)] The quantitative predictions rely on fitted coupling strengths: 'Through fitting of simulation data, we determine the coupling strengths gp = gq = 0.02GHz.' Thus the theoretical curves in Fig. 2(d) and Fig. 3(b) are not parameter-free predictions. The agreement with experiment is therefore a fit, not a validation of the model. Please document the fitting procedure, state which simulation data were used, test the sensitivity to these parameters, and, if possible, derive gp and gq from the dipole-exchange Hamiltonian or from independent micromagnetic spectra.
  4. [Eqs. (1)–(7); claim 'Δf = fm'] The statement that the comb spacing is 'precisely locked to the modulation frequency (Δf = fm)' is a statement about the input drive, not a prediction of the magnonic nonlinearity. Any nonlinear mixer driven by two tones separated by fm produces sidebands at fe ± n·fm. The spacing is fixed externally. What must be shown is that the observed teeth are generated by magnon nonlinearity rather than by intermodulation in the drive chain (see first major comment) and that the cascade beyond the first-order sidebands is intrinsic to the magnon dynamics. The current framing overstates the control the magnonic system exerts over the comb spacing.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 1(b) paragraph] The text says 'the difference frequency (fm−fe) = 3.5 GHz'; this should be (fe − fm) = 3.5 GHz.
  2. [Eq. (1) and Eq. (3)] The notation for the drive term is ambiguous: the placement of the exponential on the annihilation vs. creation operator and the subscript k at the end of Eq. (1) should be defined consistently with the rotating frame used in Eq. (5).
  3. [Fig. 2 caption] Typo: 'bule curve' should be 'blue curve'.
  4. [After Eq. (5)] Typo: 'we apply a second driving single (central single)' should be 'second driving signal (central signal)'.
  5. [Supplementary material [42]] Several key validations (micromagnetic simulation details, dispersion curves, variable-fm spectra) are relegated to the Supplementary Material. For a self-contained report, please summarize the simulation parameters, boundary conditions, and the finite-size mode structure in the main text or ensure the supplement fully supports the claims.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Comb-spacing claim reduces to a restatement of the applied modulation frequency; sideband positions fe±n fm are algebraic consequences of the two-tone drive.

  1. self definitional [Fig. 1(b) text / 'precise control' paragraph; Eq. (6) and following text: 'Under dual frequency driving...']
    "Notably, this method provides two independent control dimensions: the comb spacing (Δf), which is precisely locked to the modulation frequency (Δf = fₘ) ... Under dual frequency driving, the linear response of system excites two distinct modes (ωe and ωm), while nonlinear effects would mix two modes with each other and generate the confluence mode (sum-frequency: ωp= ωe+ ωm ) and splitting mode (difference-frequency: ωq= ωe- ωm )."

    The sideband frequencies are formed by adding/subtracting the two input drive frequencies. ωm = 2πfm is an input parameter of the Hamiltonian (Eq. (6), drive h1 e^{-iωm t}), so Δf = fm is true by construction, not a consequence of three-magnon scattering. Any nonlinearity that mixes two tones at fe and fm produces intermodulation lines at fe ± n fm; the claimed 'control over comb spacing' is just the choice of fm. The model does not derive the spacing from magnon eigenstates, and the paper does not show the drive contains only fe and fm.

full rationale

The headline theoretical 'prediction' of comb spacing is tautological: the modulation tone at fm is an input, and the confluence/splitting modes in Eq. (6) are exactly the sum and difference of the input frequencies. The experimental BLS spectra are independent data, so the observation is not itself manufactured by the model, and the field/power comparisons use coupling constants fitted to micromagnetic simulations rather than to the same measured points, which weakens but does not circularly falsify those trends. The absence of an antenna rf-spectrum measurement is an experimental control gap (intermodulation confound), not a definitional reduction; the internal inconsistency of am appearing with both ωf and ωe/ωm in Eqs. (3), (6), and (7) is a modeling flaw rather than circularity. No load-bearing uniqueness argument or exclusive self-citation chain is invoked. Because one central control claim reduces by construction, partial circularity is present; score 6.

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

The derivation leans on the Kalinikos-Slavin dispersion and standard magnon nonlinearity, but introduces an ad hoc sub-FMR modulation mode and fixes the three-magnon coupling strengths by fitting to simulation data. The central experimental observation does not depend on the model, but the mechanism claim does.

free parameters (2)
  • gp = gq = 0.02 GHz
    Three-magnon confluence/splitting coupling strengths obtained by 'fitting of simulation data' and used in Eqs. (8)-(9) to generate theoretical curves in Figs. 2(d) and 3(b).
  • Gilbert damping α = 0.007
    Assumed identical for all magnon modes ('we assume that all magnon modes have identical damping rates α=0.007'); no independent justification or error estimate.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Spin-wave dispersion Eq. (2) from Kalinikos-Slavin/Brächer is taken as valid.
    Used to assign magnon eigenfrequencies, but the derivation is not repeated; from refs 44-45.
  • ad hoc to paper The modulation term in Hamiltonian Eq. (3) is a linear drive coupling h1 to the FMR magnon.
    Physically a 0.5 GHz field does not resonantly drive a 4 GHz uniform mode; this term assumes it does.
  • domain assumption Three-magnon confluence and splitting interaction of the form gp(ae am ap†+H.c.)+gq(ae am† aq†+H.c.) is assumed.
    Standard three-magnon nonlinearity in magnonics, but the assignment of am as a mode at ωm is the model's key assumption.
  • standard math Steady-state ansatz d aν/dt=i ων ⟨aν⟩e^{-iωνt}.
    Used to reduce Eq. (7) to Eqs. (8)-(9); assumes harmonic time dependence.
invented entities (1)
  • Sub-FMR 'modulation magnon' mode am (a uniform FMR magnon driven off-resonantly at ωm)
    purpose: Acts as the third wave in stimulated three-magnon confluence/splitting in Eqs. (6)-(9), enabling the cascade that produces the comb.
    No magnon eigenmode exists at fm=0.5 GHz below the FMR gap; the paper's Eq. (5) gives an off-resonant driven amplitude, not a quasiparticle. The three-magnon interaction requires am to be a real mode, so this is a postulated construct without independent evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stimulated Magnonic Frequency Combs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TJITTXM6

@misc{pith2026260121370,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stimulated Magnonic Frequency Combs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TJITTXM6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.21370}
}
read the original abstract

Magnonic frequency combs, characterized by a series of discrete frequency lines, have emerged as a promising frontier in magnon spintronics, with potential applications in advanced information processing and sensing technologies. Although the three-magnon scattering process is widely recognized as a fundamental mechanism for generating these combs, its experimental realization has remained challenging due to the high threshold power and strict conservation of momentum and energy. In this work, we propose a novel mechanism for the stimulated generation of magnonic frequency combs that overcomes these limitations. Our approach offers precise and efficient control over key comb properties, including spacing between spectral lines and the number of lines, marking a significant advancement in the field. We substantiate this mechanism through a robust combination of theoretical modeling, micromagnetic simulations, and experimental validation. This study not only demonstrates the feasibility of our method but also opens new pathways for integrating magnonic frequency combs into practical spintronic devices.

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. Harnessing magnetic anisotropy for nonlinear magnetization precession and spin waves

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Placing a magnetic field near a film's hard axis, close to the anisotropy field, makes the energy potential asymmetric so magnetization precession and spin waves produce thresholdless higher harmonics and rectification.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    S. A. Diddams, K. Vahala, and T. Udem, Optical frequency combs: Coherently uniting the electromagnetic spectrum, Science. 369, 267 (2020)

    2020

  2. [2]

    S. A. Diddams, L. Hollberg, and V. Mbele, Molecular fingerprinting with the resolved modes of a femtosecond laser frequency comb., Nature 445, 627 (2007)

    2007

  3. [3]

    Chang, S

    L. Chang, S. Liu, and J. E. Bowers, Integrated optical frequency comb technologies, Nat. Photon. 16, 95 (2022)

    2022

  4. [4]

    A. V. Chumak, P. Kabos, M. Wu, C. Abert, C. Adelmann, et al., Advances in Magnetics Roadmap on Spin-Wave Computing, IEEE Trans. Magn. 58, 1 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    X. Han, H. Wu, T. Zhang, Magnonics: Materials, physics, and devices, Appl. Phys. Lett. 125, 020501 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    Q. Wang, G. Csaba, R. Verba, A. V. Chumak, and P. Pirro, Nanoscale magnonic networks, Phys. Rev. Applied 21, 040503 (2024)

    2024

  7. [7]

    Pirro, V

    P. Pirro, V. I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Advances in coherent magnonics, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 1114 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    Csaba, Á

    G. Csaba, Á. Papp, and W. Porod, Perspectives of Using Spin Waves for Computing and Signal Processing, Phys. Lett. A 381, 1471 (2017)

    2017

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    R. E. Camley, Three-magnon processes in magnetic nanoelements: Quantization and localized mode effects, Phys. Rev. B 89, 214402 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    Mohseni, Q

    M. Mohseni, Q. Wang, B. Heinz, M. Kewenig, M. Schneider, et al., Controlling the nonlinear relaxation of quantized propagating magnons in nanodevices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 097202 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Körber, C

    L. Körber, C. Heins, I. Soldatov, R. Schäfer, A. Kákay, et al., Modification of three-magnon splitting in a flexed magnetic vortex, Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 092401 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    T. Hula, K. Schultheiss, F. J. T. Gonçalves, L. Körber, M. Bejarano, et al., Spin-wave frequency combs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 121, 112404 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    Q. Wang, M. Kewenig, M. Schneider, R. Verba, F. Kohl, et al., A magnonic directional coupler for integrated magnonic half-adders, Nat. Electron. 3, 765 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Zheng, Z

    S. Zheng, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, F. Sun, Q. He, et al., Tutorial: Nonlinear magnonics, J. Appl. Phys. 134, 151101 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    Qi Wang, Roman Verba, Björn Heinz, Michael Schneider, Ondřej Wojewoda, Deeply nonlinear excitation of self-normalized short spin waves, Sci. Adv. 9, eadg4609 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Merbouche, H

    H. Merbouche, H. Merbouche, B. Divinskiy, K. O. Nikolaev, C. Kaspar, W. H. P. Pernice, et al., Giant Nonlinear Self-Phase Modulation of Large-Amplitude Spin Waves in Microscopic YIG Waveguides, Sci. Rep. 12, 7246 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    A. M. Kosevich, B. A. Ivanov, A. S. Kovalev, Magnetic solitons, Phys. Rep. 194, 117 (1990)

    1990

  10. [18]

    Bauer, O

    M. Bauer, O. Büttner, S. Demokritov, B. Hillebrands, V. Grimalsky, et al., Observation of spatiotemporal self-focusing of spin waves in magnetic films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3769 (1998)

    1998

  11. [19]

    Elyasi, K

    M. Elyasi, K. Sato, and G. E. W. Bauer, Topologically nontrivial magnonic solitons, Phys. Rev. B 99, 13442 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Koerner, R

    C. Koerner, R. Dreyer, M. Wagener, N. Liebing, H. G. Bauer et al., Frequency multiplication by collective nanoscale spin-wave dynamics, Science 375, 1165 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    C. Wang, J. Rao, Z. Chen, K. Zhao, L. Sun, et al., Enhancement of magnonic frequency combs by exceptional points, Nat. Phys. 20, 1139 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    Liang, Y

    X. Liang, Y. Cao, P. Yan, and Y. Zhou, Asymmetric magnon frequency comb, Nano Lett. 24, 6730 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    Z. Liu, J. Peng, and H. Xiong, Generation of magnonic frequency combs via a two-tone microwave drive, Phys. Rev. A 107, 053708 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    V. E. Demidov, J. Jersch, K. Rott, P. Krzysteczko, G. Reiss, et al., Nonlinear Propagation of Spin Waves in Microscopic Magnetic Stripes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 177207 (2009)

    2009

  17. [25]

    V. S. L’vov, Wave Turbulence under Parametric Excitation (Springer Nature, 1994)

    1994

  18. [26]

    K. O. Nikolaev, S. R. Lake, G. Schmidt, S. O. Demokritov, and V. E. Demidov, Resonant generation of propagating second-harmonic spin waves in nano-waveguides, Nat. Commun. 15, 1827 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    A. V. Chumak, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Magnon Transistor for All-Magnon Data Processing, Nat. Commun. 5, 4700 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Verba, M

    R. Verba, M. Carpentieri, G. Finocchio, V. Tiberkevich, and A. Slavin, Amplification and Stabilization of Large-Amplitude Propagating Spin Waves by Parametric Pumping, Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 042402 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    H. Qin, R. B. Holländer, Lukáš Flajšman, F. Hermann, R. Dreyer, et al., Nanoscale Magnonic Fabry-Pérot Resonator for Low-Loss Spin-Wave Manipulation, Nat Commun. 12, 2293 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    C. Dubs, O. Surzhenko, R. Linke, A. Danilewsky, U. Brückner, et al., Sub-micrometer yttrium iron garnet LPE films with low ferromagnetic resonance losses, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 50, 204005 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    C. Liu, J. Chen, T. Liu, F. Heimbach, H. Yu, et al., Long-distance propagation of short-wavelength spin waves, Nat. Commun. 9, 738 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    X. Yao, Z. Jin, Z. Wang, Z. Zeng, and P. Yan, Terahertz magnon frequency comb, Phys. Rev. B 108, 134427 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Z. Wang, H. Y. Yuan, Y. Cao, Z.-X. Li, R. A. Duine, et al., Magnonic Frequency Comb through Nonlinear Magnon-Skyrmion Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 037202 (2021)

    2021

  26. [34]

    Y. Liu, T. Liu, Q. Yang, G. Tian, Z. Hou, et al., Design of controllable magnon frequency comb in synthetic ferrimagnets, Phys. Rev. B. 109, 174412 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Z. Wang, H. Y. Yuan, Y. Cao, and P. Yan, Twisted Magnon Frequency Comb and Penrose Superradiance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 107203 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Z. Zhou, X. Wang, Y. Nie, Q. Xia, and G. Guo, Spin wave frequency comb generated through interaction between propagating spin wave and oscillating domain wall, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 534, 168046 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Lan, K.-Y

    G. Lan, K.-Y. Liu, Z. Wang, F. Xia, H. Xu, et al., Coherent harmonic generation of magnons in spin textures, Nat Commun. 16, 1178 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Heins, A

    C. Heins, A. Kákay, J.-V . Kim, G. Hlawacek, J. Fassbender, et al, Control of Magnon Frequency Combs in Magnetic Rings, arXiv:2501.05080

    arXiv

  31. [39]

    A. V . Gaponov, Instability of a system of excited oscillators with respect to electromagnetic perturbations, Sov. Phys. JETP 12, 232 (1961)

    1961

  32. [40]

    V . M. Fain, A quantum generalization of the expression for energy dissipation, Sov. Phys. JETP 23, 882 (1966)

    1966

  33. [41]

    Fain and P

    B. Fain and P. W. Milonni, Classical stimulated emission, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4, 78 (1987)

    1987

  34. [42]

    Supplemental Material

  35. [43]

    V. E. Demidov, J. Jersch, and S. O. Demokritov, Transformation of propagating spin-wave modes in microscopic waveguides with variable width, Phys. Rev. B 79, 054417 (2009)

    2009

  36. [44]

    B. A. Kalinikos and A. N. Slavin, Theory of dipole-exchange spin wave spectrum for ferromagnetic films with mixed exchange boundary conditions, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 19, 7013 (1986)

    1986

  37. [45]

    Brächer, P

    T. Brächer, P. Pirro, and B. Hillebrands, Parallel pumping for magnon spintronics: Amplification and manipulation of magnon spin currents on the micron-scale, Phys. Rep. 699, 1 (2017)

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.