Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 41 references

Dynamical crossover between stretched- and compressed-exponential relaxation in a photoexcited crystal

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports that in the photoexcited crystal Ca3Ru2O7, the shape parameter β of the stretched/compressed-exponential recovery crosses from below to above unity near 1.1 mJ/cm², and shows that a minimal lattice model with spatial…

desk verdict A credible experimental observation of a fluence-tuned stretched-to-compressed crossover in Ca3Ru2O7, plus a toy model that illustrates the idea but does not establish the strain mechanism. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.04814 v1 pith:W3OG4HUE submitted 2025-09-05 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.soft

Tyler Carbin , Joel Herman , Xinshu Zhang , Adrian B. Culver , Yu Zhang , Hengdi Zhao , Rahul Roy , Gang Cao
show 1 more author
Anshul Kogar
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.soft
keywords stretchedexponentialrelaxationcompressedKohlrausch-Williams-WattsfunctionphotoinducedphasetransitionCa3Ru2O7time-resolvedsecondharmonicgenerationstrain-mediatedinteractionslatticemodel
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 reports a tunable crossover between two classic "glassy" relaxation forms in a photoexcited single crystal. In Ca3Ru2O7, the recovery of the low-temperature phase after a femtosecond laser pulse fits $u(t)=1+I_0\exp[-(t/\tau)^\beta]$ at every fluence, but the shape parameter $\beta$ rises with fluence and crosses $\beta=1$ near 1.1 mJ/cm², switching the relaxation from stretched to compressed exponential. The authors argue that two ingredients—spatial inhomogeneity from phase coexistence and cooperative, strain-mediated interactions—are enough to produce the crossover, and they reproduce it with a minimal lattice model. If correct, the work makes an ordered crystal a controllable laboratory for a phenomenon normally associated with glasses and jammed systems, and it suggests that stretched and compressed relaxation can be two faces of the same inhomogeneous, interacting dynamics.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the neighbor-dependent relaxation rule $P(t+1)=\exp(-sN(t)/4)$ on a 2D lattice, where $N(t)/4$ is the fraction of excited nearest neighbors and $s=6$ is the only free parameter. This rule encodes an energy barrier to relaxation that grows with local strain imposed by excited neighboring regions, so the act of one site relaxing raises the relaxation probability of its excited neighbors. That single mechanism does double duty: at low excitation fractions the sites relax mostly independently with a spread of effective rates, yielding the stretched exponential, while at high fractions connected clusters amplify each other's relaxation in an avalanche-like fashion, yielding the compressed exponential. The paper also uses a data-collapse rescaling of the stretched/compressed-exponential form to certify that each trace, experimental or simulated, obeys the same one-parameter family.

What would settle it

With a probe that resolves individual mesoscopic domains, test whether a domain's relaxation probability falls as $\exp(-sN/4)$ with the number of excited neighboring domains; observing neighbor-accelerated relaxation, no neighbor dependence, or a markedly different functional form would rule out the proposed strain-suppression mechanism, leaving the observed $\beta$ crossover unexplained.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a single control parameter—photoexcitation fluence—continuously tunes the relaxation of the photoinduced phase transition in Ca3Ru2O7 through the full stretched-to-compressed exponential crossover. The time-resolved second-harmonic traces collapse onto the form $u(t)=1+\theta(t)I_0\exp[-(t/\tau)^\beta]$, and the extracted $\beta$ increases with fluence, surpassing unity near 1.1 mJ/cm² while $\tau$ grows from about 100 ps to 1 ns and the initial signal $I_0$ saturates near 1.8 mJ/cm². The paper's minimal model—a 2D lattice of excited/relaxed mesoscopic regions in which every excited site relaxes with probability $P(t+1)=\exp(-sN(t)/4)$, with $s=6$—reproduces the fluence dependence of all three fit parameters, including the $\beta$ crossover, when the excited fraction $f$ is identified with fluence. The authors therefore conclude that inhomogeneous relaxation plus local strain-mediated suppression of relaxation is a sufficient mechanism for the crossover, and they associate the compressed regime with cooperative, avalanche-like recovery.

Load-bearing premise

The mechanism rests on the assumption that the real strain field acts as an exponential, nearest-neighbor suppression of relaxation with strength $s=6$; if the physical interaction instead accelerates relaxation, is long-ranged, or is not exponential, the simulations would not establish the proposed origin of the crossover.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Fluence acts as a continuous knob for the relaxation shape in a crystalline solid, spanning the stretched regime ($\beta<1$) and the compressed regime ($\beta>1$) in one material.
  • The compressed-exponential recovery observed here is evidence for cooperative, avalanche-like dynamics rather than independent relaxation of uncoupled regions.
  • The simultaneous onset of 2 and 8 GHz acoustic modes with the compressed regime ties the crossover to strain-mediated interactions, making the lattice itself part of the relaxation mechanism.
  • The minimal model implies that any photoexcited solid with a first-order phase transition and mesoscopic phase coexistence could show the same crossover when excited above a connectivity threshold.
  • Because $\tau$ grows with fluence, the model connects slower recovery to stronger interactions, so the crossover and the slowdown share a single origin.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If connectivity of excited domains is the real control parameter, the crossover fluence should shift when the initial excitation pattern is reshaped—for example, with a striped or speckled pump—at fixed total fluence; the paper does not test this, but the model suggests it directly.
  • The stretched and compressed regimes may be unified as limiting cases of one inhomogeneous, interacting dynamics, which would connect this fluence-tuned crossover to temperature-driven stretched/compressed crossovers reported in other systems.
  • A quantitative extension would derive the exponential neighbor-suppression rule from measured elastic constants and strain fields; if the barrier is actually nonlinear in the number of excited neighbors or weakens as strain relaxes, the single parameter $s$ would become time-dependent and the model would make distinct predictions.
  • Because the model's initial state is random, its predictions depend on the statistics of the excited-region distribution; experiments that vary domain size, for example by changing growth conditions or pump penetration depth, could test whether the crossover fluence tracks the percolation threshold of that distribution.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports time-resolved second-harmonic generation (SHG) measurements on single-crystal Ca3Ru2O7 following femtosecond photoexcitation across the metal-insulator transition at 48 K. The recovery of the SHG signal is fit to the stretched/compressed exponential function u(t) = 1 + I0 exp[-(t/tau)^beta], and the authors find that the shape parameter beta increases with pump fluence and crosses unity near 1.1 mJ/cm2, indicating a crossover from stretched- to compressed-exponential relaxation. They corroborate this functional form via data collapse and, in the Supplementary Material, check against alternative forms (logistic, logarithmic, Avrami), a finite-time-window bias analysis, repetition-rate dependence, and transient heating estimates. To explain the crossover, they introduce a two-dimensional lattice model with random initial excitation (spatial inhomogeneity) and a neighbor-dependent relaxation probability P(t+1) = exp(-sN(t)/4) with s = 6, which they interpret as strain-mediated suppression of relaxation. The model qualitatively reproduces the fluence dependence of beta, including the stretched-to-compressed crossover, and the authors connect the mechanism to strain-mediated interactions supported by the observation of coherent GHz acoustic oscillations during relaxation.

Significance. If the experimental observation holds, this is a notable result: a tunable stretched-to-compressed exponential crossover in an ordered crystal, established by ultrafast optical spectroscopy, linking photoexcited solids to the broader physics of anomalous relaxation in disordered systems. The experimental evidence is strong: the data collapse in Fig. 2(d) is compelling, and the SI's checks against alternative functional forms, repetition-rate effects, temperature effects, and finite-time-window bias all support the robustness of the measured beta crossover. The model is transparent and easily reproducible from the stated rule, grid size, and parameter values. However, the mechanistic explanation is currently underdetermined: the interaction rule is chosen by hand and is not tied to measured material properties, so the model presently demonstrates a possible mechanism rather than establishing that strain-mediated suppression is responsible in Ca3Ru2O7. A robustness analysis or a quantitative link to an independent observable would materially strengthen the paper.

major comments (3)
  1. [Model (Fig. 3)] The central mechanistic claim rests entirely on the ad hoc update rule P(t+1)=exp(-sN(t)/4) with s=6. This rule is not derived from any measured property of Ca3Ru2O7 (e.g., strain fields, elastic constants, or the observed GHz acoustic modes), and the paper provides no sensitivity study showing that the beta crossover persists for a range of s or for alternative interaction kernels (e.g., linear suppression, saturating suppression, next-nearest-neighbor interactions). As written, the simulation demonstrates only that a particular hand-chosen cooperative rule can produce a stretched-to-compressed crossover; it does not establish that inhomogeneity plus strain-mediated suppression is the mechanism operating in CRO. Please add a robustness scan over the interaction strength and functional form, and/or make a quantitative connection between the suppression kernel and an independent experimental observable (for example, the amplitude or frequency of the 2-8 GHz oscillations).
  2. [Fig. 4 and SI Fig. 14] The claim that strain underlies both the crossover and the coherent oscillations is supported only by the temporal coincidence of their onset and by linear correlations between oscillation amplitudes and the fitted beta values. These correlations are suggestive but do not identify the microscopic suppression kernel P(N) with the measured acoustic response; they are equally consistent with two independent fluence-dependent effects. To make this evidence load-bearing for the mechanism, the authors should either derive a quantitative prediction linking the phonon signatures to s (e.g., a strain-energy estimate from the lattice distortion amplitudes reported in Ref. [24]) or soften the wording to clearly present the phonon data as circumstantial support.
  3. [Model-experiment comparison (Fig. 3 and SI)] The simulation is only qualitatively compared with the experiment: the fluence fraction f is not calibrated to the incident fluence scale (mJ/cm2), the simulation time step is not mapped to picoseconds, and the experimentally reported crossover fluence of about 1.1 mJ/cm2 is never compared with the model's crossover in f. This is acceptable for a minimal model, but the text should state explicitly that the model does not reproduce the quantitative crossover location or the absolute time scales, and avoid phrasing that implies a one-to-one account of the experimental crossover.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2(c) and SI] The best-fit values of beta, tau, and I0 are presented only as plots. For reproducibility and for future quantitative comparison, please include a table of these values with their 95% confidence intervals in the Supplementary Material.
  2. [Model section] The phrase 'see below' following the strain-mediated interpretation of P(t+1) is vague; please point explicitly to the paragraph discussing the GHz oscillations.
  3. [Fig. 3(e) caption] The caption says the collapse was 'performed in the same manner as in Fig. 2(c)', but the experimental collapse is shown in Fig. 2(d); please correct the reference.
  4. [Supplementary Material, Avrami kinetics] The statement that the Avrami exponent N is 'given by the slope of each trace' is imprecise; the slope of a log-log plot of ln(-ln(1-f)) versus ln t gives N, which the figure appears to show. Please clarify the description.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the experimental crossover and the lattice-model demonstration rest on independent evidence, and no claimed result reduces by construction to its inputs.

full rationale

The central experimental claim—a fluence-tuned crossover of the KWW shape parameter beta—is an independent data-analysis result: Eq. (1) is fitted directly to the time-resolved SHG traces, corroborated by the data collapse in Fig. 2(d), and alternative functional forms (logistic growth, logarithmic relaxation, and Avrami kinetics) are considered in the Supplementary Material. The lattice model is not fitted to the experimental beta values; s=6 is a stated choice and the fluence fraction f is the only input that is varied. The simulated beta crossover emerges from fitting the simulated traces to Eq. (1), so it is not an input, a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, or a self-definitional restatement of the model rule. The model is presented as a sufficiency demonstration ('can account for the observed anomalous relaxation'), not as a parameter-free first-principles derivation, and the interaction rule P(t+1)=exp(-sN(t)/4) is an explicit ansatz with an acknowledged motivational interpretation rather than a result derived from the data. The self-citations, [21] for prior observation of mesoscopic phase coexistence and [35] for the plausibility of strain-mediated coupling in this material, are experimental or externally grounded evidence rather than unverified uniqueness theorems invoked to force a conclusion. The ad hoc character of the update rule is a legitimate robustness and completeness concern, but it does not constitute circularity under the rule that a claim must be shown to reduce to its own inputs by the paper's own equations or citations. No exhibited reduction of any claimed result to its inputs was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental observable beta is extracted by fitting each trace to Eq. 1; I do not list it as a free parameter because it is an output of the characterization, not a hidden input. The model does have one hand-set coupling s, and the two-state description, SHG proportionality, exponential update rule, and phonon assignment are unverified idealizations that the mechanistic claims rest on.

free parameters (1)
  • s (strain-mediated interaction strength in model) = 6
    The only free parameter in the lattice model; it controls how strongly excited nearest neighbors suppress relaxation. It is set by hand to 6 with no stated selection procedure, robustness scan, or uncertainty, and it is the key knob that produces the simulated beta crossover.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The sample can be represented as mesoscopic regions that are either excited or relaxed, with no intermediate states.
    Invoked in the Model paragraph; motivated by the discontinuous metal-insulator transition, but it restricts the dynamics and ignores partial orders or gradual structural changes.
  • domain assumption The measured SHG intensity is proportional to the fraction of excited sites in the probed volume.
    The simulations 'equate the simulated SHG intensity to the fraction of sites that are in the excited state.' Depth effects are discussed in the Supplementary Material, but linearity of the SHG signal in phase fraction is assumed.
  • ad hoc to paper The site relaxation probability has the form P(t+1) = exp(-sN(t)/4), representing a strain-mediated energy barrier linear in the number of excited neighbors.
    This functional form is not derived from measured strain fields or material parameters; it is chosen because it produces the desired stretched-to-compressed crossover in the simulations.
  • domain assumption The 2 GHz and 8 GHz oscillations are acoustic phonons linked to the structural phase transition and to strain-mediated interactions.
    The attribution is based on frequency range and disappearance above T_MI, but no direct measurement of the strain field or phonon character is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical crossover between stretched- and compressed-exponential relaxation in a photoexcited crystal." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W3OG4HUE

@misc{pith2026250904814,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical crossover between stretched- and compressed-exponential relaxation in a photoexcited crystal},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W3OG4HUE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04814}
}
read the original abstract

Anomalous relaxation is one of the hallmarks of disordered systems. Following perturbation by an external source, many glassy, jammed and amorphous systems relax as a stretched or compressed exponential as a function of time. However, despite their ubiquity, the origins of and the connection between these phenomenological relaxation functions remains to be understood. Here, we observe a tunable crossover from stretched- to compressed-exponential relaxation by photoexciting single crystal Ca3Ru2O7 across a structural phase transition. We present a simple lattice model that shows how spatial inhomogeneity and local, strain-mediated interactions cooperate to produce the dynamical crossover. Our work reveals anomalous relaxation dynamics in an idealized single crystal material and establishes photoexcited solids as promising platforms for probing the mechanisms underlying anomalous relaxation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.04814 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Equilibrium SHG characterization of Ca [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Crossover from stretched- to compressed-exponenti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Numerical simulation of the PIPT. Results are shown fo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Low-frequency oscillations during relaxation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: SHG relaxation data equivalent to Fig 2 of the main tex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Fits to logistic growth model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Fits of the data shown in the main text to a logarithmic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Avrami analysis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Relaxation of the PIPT as a function of the repetition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Fits to a stretched/compressed exponential relaxa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Results of simulations that are identical to those i [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14: Correlations between amplitudes of 2 GHz and 8 GHz os [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_14.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [24]

    Yoshida, S.-I

    Y. Yoshida, S.-I. Ikeda, H. Matsuhata, N. Shirakawa, C. H. Lee, and S. Katano, Phys. Rev. B 72, 054412 (2005), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.72.054412

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.72.054412 2005

  2. [1]

    M. D. Ediger, C. A. Angell, and S. R. Nagel, J. Phys. Chem. 100, 13200 (1996)

    work page 1996

  3. [2]

    C. A. Angell, K. L. Ngai, G. B. McKenna, P. F. McMillan, and S. W. Martin, Journal of Applied Physics 88, 3113 (2000), ISSN 0021-8979, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/ jap/article-pdf/88/6/3113/19175813/3113 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1286035. 15

    doi:10.1063/1.1286035 2000

  4. [3]

    M. R. Evans and M. E. Cates, Soft and fragile matter: Nonequilibrium Dynamics, metasta bility and flow (Institute of Physics, 2000)

    work page 2000

  5. [4]

    A. R. Dobrovolskis, J. L. Alvarellos, and J. J. Lissauer, Icarus 188, 481 (2007), ISSN 0019-1035, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103506004453

    work page 2007

  6. [5]

    Metzler, J

    R. Metzler, J. Klafter, J. Jortner, and M. Volk, Chemical Physics Letters 293, 477 (1998), ISSN 0009-2614, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009261498007581

    work page 1998

  7. [6]

    L. Guo, E. Tan, S. Chen, Z. Xiao, and X. Zhang, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh ACM Symposium on Princip les of Distributed Computing (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 20 08), PODC ’08, p. 283–294, ISBN 9781595939890, URL https://doi.org/10.1145/1400751.1400789

    work page arXiv

  8. [7]

    J. C. Phillips, Reports on Progress in Physics 59, 1133–1207 (1996)

    work page 1996

Show all 41 references
  1. [8]

    R. G. Palmer, D. L. Stein, E. Abrahams, and P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 958 (1984), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.53.958

    1984 doi

  2. [9]

    H. Guo, G. Bourret, M. K. Corbierre, S. Rucareanu, R. B. Le nnox, K. Laaziri, L. Piche, M. Sutton, J. L. Harden, and R. L. Leheny, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 075702 (2009), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.075702

    2009 doi

  3. [10]

    D. C. Johnston, Phys. Rev. B 74, 184430 (2006), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.74.184430

    2006 doi

  4. [11]

    Cipelletti, L

    L. Cipelletti, L. Ramos, S. Manley, E. Pitard, D. A. Weit z, E. E. Pashkovski, and M. Johansson, Faraday Discuss. 123, 237 (2003), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/B204495A

    2003 doi

  5. [12]

    E. E. Ferrero, K. Martens, and J.-L. Barrat, Phys. Rev. L ett. 113, 248301 (2014), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.248301

    2014 doi

  6. [13]

    Evenson, B

    Z. Evenson, B. Ruta, S. Hechler, M. Stolpe, E. Pineda, I. Gallino, and R. Busch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 175701 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.175701

    2015 doi

  7. [14]

    Trachenko and A

    K. Trachenko and A. Zaccone, Journal of Physics: Conden sed Matter 33, 315101 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    J. Song, Q. Zhang, F. de Quesada, M. H. Rizvi, J. B. Tracy, J. Ilavsky, S. Narayanan, E. D. Gado, R. L. Leheny, N. Holten-Andersen, et al., Proceed ings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, e2201566119 (2022), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10. 1073/pnas.2201566119, URL http...

    2022 doi

  9. [16]

    B. Ruta, Y. Chushkin, G. Monaco, L. Cipelletti, E. Pined a, P. Bruna, V. M. Giordano, and M. Gonzalez-Silveira, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 165701 (2012), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.165701

    2012 doi

  10. [17]

    P. Luo, P. Wen, H. Y. Bai, B. Ruta, and W. H. Wang, Phys. Rev . Lett. 118, 225901 (2017), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.225901

    2017 doi

  11. [18]

    Caronna, Y

    C. Caronna, Y. Chushkin, A. Madsen, and A. Cupane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 055702 (2008), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.055702

    2008 doi

  12. [19]

    G. Cao, S. McCall, J. E. Crow, and R. P. Guertin, Phys. Rev . Lett. 78, 1751 (1997), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.1751

    1997 doi

  13. [20]

    [21, 36–41]

    See Supplemental Material at [url] for the sample grrow th procedure, additional data, data analysis, and discussi on of the correspondence between simulation and experiment, which i ncludes Refs. [21, 36–41]

  14. [21]

    Carbin, X

    T. Carbin, X. Zhang, A. B. Culver, H. Zhao, A. Zong, R. Ach arya, C. J. Abbamonte, R. Roy, G. Cao, and A. Kogar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 186902 (2023), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.186902

    2023 doi

  15. [22]

    W. Bao, Z. Q. Mao, Z. Qu, and J. W. Lynn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 247203 (2008), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.247203

    2008 doi

  16. [23]

    Bohnenbuck, I

    B. Bohnenbuck, I. Zegkinoglou, J. Strempfer, C. Sch¨ uß ler-Langeheine, C. S. Nelson, P. Leininger, H.-H. Wu, E. Schierle, J. C. Lang, G. Srajer, et al., Phys. Rev . B 77, 224412 (2008), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.224412

    2008 doi

  17. [25]

    D. A. Sokolov, N. Kikugawa, T. Helm, H. Borrmann, U. Burk hardt, R. Cubitt, J. S. White, E. Ressouche, M. Bleuel, K. Kummer, et al., Nature Physics 15, 671 (2019), ISSN 1745-2481, URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0501-0

    2019 doi

  18. [26]

    Perez-Salinas, A

    D. Perez-Salinas, A. S. Johnson, D. Prabhakaran, and S. Wall, Nature Communications 13 (2022), URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27819-y

    2022 doi

  19. [27]

    A. S. McLeod, A. Wieteska, G. Chiriaco, B. Foutty, Y. Wan g, Y. Yuan, F. Xue, V. Gopalan, L. Q. Chen, Z. Q. Mao, et al., npj Quantum Materials 6 (2021), URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41535-021-00339-0

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    J. C. Mauro and Y. Z. Mauro, Physica A: Statistical Mecha nics and its Applications 506, 75 (2018), ISSN 0378-4371, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437118304795

    2018

  21. [29]

    Richert, J

    R. Richert, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 14, R703–R738 (2002)

    2002

  22. [30]

    Cipelletti, S

    L. Cipelletti, S. Manley, R. C. Ball, and D. A. Weitz, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 84, 2275 (2000), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.2275

    2000 doi

  23. [31]

    Z. W. Wu, W. Kob, W.-H. Wang, and L. Xu, Nature Communicat ions 9, 5334 (2018), ISSN 2041-1723, URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07759-w

    2018 doi

  24. [32]

    Bouchaud and E

    J.-P. Bouchaud and E. Pitard, The European Physical Jou rnal E 6, 231 (2001), ISSN 1292-8941, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s101890170005

    2001 doi

  25. [33]

    Ballesta, A

    P. Ballesta, A. Duri, and L. Cipelletti, Nature Physics 4, 550 (2008), ISSN 1745-2481, URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1000

    2008 doi

  26. [34]

    Bandyopadhyay, D

    R. Bandyopadhyay, D. Liang, J. L. Harden, and R. L. Lehen y, Solid State Communications 139, 589 (2006), ISSN 0038- 1098, soft Condensed Matter, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038109806005229. 16

    2006

  27. [35]

    H. Zhao, H. Zheng, J. Terzic, W. Song, Y. Ni, Y. Zhang, P. S chlottmann, and G. Cao, Phys. Rev. B 104, L121119 (2021), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L121119

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    M. Avrami, The Journal of Chemical Physics 7, 1103 (1939), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/ jcp/article- pdf/7/12/1103/18791257/1103 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1750380

    1939 doi

  29. [37]

    M. Avrami, The Journal of Chemical Physics 8, 212 (1940), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/j cp/article- pdf/8/2/212/18791481/212 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1750631

    1940 doi

  30. [38]

    M. Avrami, The Journal of Chemical Physics 9, 177 (1941), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/j cp/article- pdf/9/2/177/18792034/177 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1750872

    1941 doi

  31. [39]

    Varadarajan, S

    V. Varadarajan, S. Chikara, V. Durairaj, X. Lin, G. Cao, and J. Brill, Solid State Communications 141, 402 (2007), ISSN 0038-1098, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038109806010222

    2007

  32. [40]

    McCall, G

    S. McCall, G. Cao, and J. E. Crow, Phys. Rev. B 67, 094427 (2003), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.67.094427

    2003 doi

  33. [41]

    J. S. Lee, S. J. Moon, B. J. Yang, J. Yu, U. Schade, Y. Yoshi da, S.-I. Ikeda, and T. W. Noh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 097403 (2007), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.097403

    2007 doi

Pith tools

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