Spin dynamics in the low-dimensional magnet TiOCl

A. Loidl; D. V. Zakharov; H.-A. Krug von Nidda; J. Deisenhofer; J. Hemberger; M. Hoinkis; M. Klemm; M. Sing; M. V. Eremin; P. Lunkenheimer

REVIEW

Spin dynamics in the low-dimensional magnet TiOCl

D. V. Zakharov, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, P. Lunkenheimer, J. Hemberger, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, M. Sing

show 4 more authors

R. Claessen, M. V. Eremin, S. Horn, A. Loidl

Strongly Correlated Electrons · Submitted 28 Feb 2006 · 48 references

Pith's verdict: New ESR g-values correct earlier TiOCl data, but the orbital splitting estimate rests on an unmeasured λ⊥ and the linewidth decomposition is fit-bound.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDcond-mat/0602678 (version 1)

Pith IDTI5GLOLB, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationA. Loidl, D. V. Zakharov, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, J. Deisenhofer, J. Hemberger, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, M. Sing, M. V. Eremin, P. Lunkenheimer, R. Claessen, S. Horn. "Spin dynamics in the low-dimensional magnet TiOCl." arXiv:cond-mat/0602678 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/TI5GLOLB

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

First, the useful part: this is a careful ESR study of high-quality TiOCl single crystals, and the new g-tensor values are a real correction to the earlier report by Kataev et al. The room-temperature ga = 1.943 is far from their 2.010, and the paper's argument that no AOM calculation in the earlier work can reproduce ga = 2.010 is convincing. The g-values are temperature-independent up to ~250 K, consistent with optics and ARPES, and they fit a tetragonal crystal-field model with a covalence reduction in the a-direction that is calibrated by the optical gap.

The estimate of the first excited state, Δ1 = 0.2–0.4 eV, is new and interesting because optics could not see this level. But the lower bound depends on λ⊥ being at least 140 K, and λ⊥ is not measured. The authors state this plainly. If the bc-plane covalence is stronger than they assume — λ⊥ = 100 K, say — the lower bound drops to ~0.13 eV and the agreement with the cluster estimate 0.25–0.3 eV is lost. The qualitative exclusion of a degenerate excited state survives that drop, but the quantitative '0.3(1) eV' is not on as firm ground as the abstract implies. That is the paper's weakest link, and the stress-test note identifies it correctly.

The linewidth analysis is the other soft spot. It is a fit to the same data it explains, with many free parameters (KAE, KDM, C1, C2, Kexp, Δ_ESR). The angular dependence in the (ab)-plane gives some cross-check, and the ratios of DM parameters come out close to the structural expectation, which is good. But I would not treat the AE/DM decomposition as unique. The high-temperature exponential term is also unexplained; the authors openly say so and only note that Δ_ESR ≈ 0.28 eV is close to the orbital splitting.

Overall, the paper deserves a serious referee. The new g-value data alone is worth publishing, and the Δ1 estimate, properly qualified, is a useful data point. I'd cite the g-values, and possibly the splitting estimate with a caveat. If you run a reading group on low-dimensional magnets or orbital physics, this would generate a decent discussion about how much weight a single unmeasured parameter can carry. My recommendation: engage with it, and ask the authors to tighten the λ⊥ argument or at least flag the sensitivity more explicitly.

Referee report

Significance

If the central quantitative estimate Δ1 = 0.2–0.4 eV were robust, the paper would provide an important experimental constraint on the orbital ground state of TiOCl: it would rule out an orbital degeneracy below room temperature and reconcile ESR with optical and ARPES studies. The experimental work is carefully done: the crystals are characterized by the first-order transition hysteresis at Tc1, multiple samples are measured, and the g-factor errors are estimated from the resonance-field uncertainty. The linewidth analysis is ambitious, combining angular and temperature dependence and comparing the fitted DM anisotropy ratio (1.72:1.04:1) with the structural expectation (2:1:1), which is a nontrivial consistency check. The authors also transparently state where their parameters are not independently known, notably the covalence reduction in the (bc)-plane. However, as detailed below, that missing parameter is load-bearing for the paper's headline claim, and the current presentation overstates the certainty of Δ1.

Major objections (2)

[Section IV, Eq. (1) and following paragraph] The lower bound Δ1 ≈ 0.2 eV is not an experimentally determined limit because λ⊥ is not measured. The paper states "We cannot unambiguously determine the covalence reduction within the (bc)-plane" and then sets λ⊥ = λ∥ = 140 K as a lower limit, with the free-ion value 224 K as the upper limit. But λ∥ itself is a calibration parameter: it is fixed by forcing ga to reproduce the optical gap Δ0 = 1.5 eV, not independently measured. The justification that the short Ti-O bond along the a-axis presumably gives stronger covalence is plausible but not quantitative. If, for example, λ⊥/kB = 100 K, the same formula gives Δ′ ≈ 0.215 eV and, with Δ2 = 0.65 eV, Δ1 ≈ 0.13 eV, which lies outside the quoted 0.2–0.4 eV range and outside the cluster estimate 0.25–0.3 eV. Thus the abstract's "0.3(1) eV" and the summary's "in good agreement with theoretical estimations" are not established by the presented data. The claim should be rephrased as conditional on λ⊥ ≥ 140 K, or supported by an independent determination of λ⊥, for example from a systematic ligand-field/covalence analysis or from a probe that measures the splitting directly. The qualitative exclusion of an exactly degenerate ground state may survive, but the quantitative central claim needs revision.
[Section VI, Eq. (12) and Table II] The decomposition of the linewidth into AE, DM, and exponential contributions rests on several assumptions that are acknowledged but not tested. The DM term [Eq. (11)] applies the Oshikawa-Affleck T ≪ J power law, derived for a staggered field, to a uniform chain and extrapolates it up to T = J; the AE term uses an empirical exponential [Eq. (6)] whose parameters C1 and C2 are fitted to the same data. With K_AE, K_DM, C1, C2, K_exp, and Δ_ESR all free (Table II), the good quality of the fit does not by itself establish that the AE contribution dominates for 90 K < T < 250 K and the DM contribution below 90 K. I would like to see a robustness test, for example, a fit of the temperature dependence below 250 K without the exponential term, or a check that the fitted C1 and C2 are stable when the dataset is truncated. The angular fit in the (ab)-plane provides some support, but it uses the same fitted parameters and introduces SAE. This does not invalidate the linewidth analysis, but the mechanistic conclusions should be presented with the model dependence made more explicit.

Minor objections (5)

[Throughout, especially Section IV] The word "exited" is used instead of "excited" in multiple places (e.g., "first exited state" in Section IV and "exited states" in Section V.B); this should be corrected throughout.
[Section V.C and Eq. (13)] The definition of SAE appears inverted. The text gives SAE ≈ K_AE(H||a)(∞) / [2 K_AE(H||b)(∞)] = 1.05, but Table II gives K_AE(H||a) = 1429 Oe and K_AE(H||b) = 765 Oe, which yields 0.93; the value 1.05 corresponds to 2 K_AE(H||b)(∞) / K_AE(H||a)(∞) ≈ 1.07. Please check and correct the definition.
[Section VII] The phrase "for T > 250 K higher temperature" is redundant and should read "for T > 250 K."
[Section III] The error bars for the g-values are estimated as 5% of the linewidth; a sentence stating whether this estimate was propagated from the Lorentzian fit or is purely empirical would improve reproducibility.
[References] Reference 8 is given only as "cond-mat/0301425" with no journal citation; if a published version exists, it should be cited.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Electron spin resonance on TiOCl single crystals shows a stable orbital configuration below room temperature and places the first excited d-orbital state at 0.2–0.4 eV, ruling out a degenerate orbital ground state.

The reading

This paper uses electron spin resonance (ESR) on single crystals of the low-dimensional quantum magnet TiOCl to pin down the orbital energy-level scheme of the Ti3+ ions. From the anisotropy of the g-factor the authors derive the first excited d-orbital state at Δ1 = 0.2–0.4 eV, which excludes a degeneracy of the lowest d-orbitals that had been left open by optical and photoemission measurements. They also account for the ESR linewidth up to 250 K as a competition between symmetric anisotropic exchange and Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya interactions, with an additional exponential relaxation channel above 250 K. If correct, the result settles a debated point in TiOCl: any orbital-liquid or degenerate-orbital scenario below room temperature is ruled out, and the spin dynamics can be understood from a stable orbital ground state.

What carries the argument

The paper's central objects are the g-factor equations g∥ = 2 − 8λ∥/Δ0 and g⊥ = 2 − 2λ⊥/Δ′ for a tetragonally distorted TiO4Cl2 octahedron, together with the combination rule 2/Δ′ = 1/Δ1 + 1/Δ2 for the split |dxz⟩,|dyz⟩ doublet, which convert measured g-shifts into crystal-field splittings. For the linewidth, the machinery is the moment method: the ESR linewidth is obtained from the second moment M2 of the anisotropic exchange Hamiltonian divided by the exchange J, with the symmetric anisotropic-exchange tensor and the Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya vectors built from the Ti–O–Ti and Ti–Cl–Ti pathways; the competing temperature dependences, the Oshikawa–Affleck (J/T)^2 law for DM and an exponential crossover for AE, reproduce the observed angular and temperature dependence below 250 K, and an Arrhenius term describes the extra broadening above.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the d-orbital ground state of Ti3+ in TiOCl is non-degenerate, with the first excited state lying 0.2–0.4 eV above it. The argument is made through the ESR g-factor: ga = 1.935(8), gb = 1.921(5), gc = 1.908(5) at 150 K, nearly temperature-independent up to room temperature. Identifying ga with g∥ and using a covalence-reduced spin-orbit coupling λ∥ = 140 K yields Δ0 ≈ 2.4 eV for the dx2−y2 level; combining the in-plane g⊥ = 1.92(1) with λ⊥ between 140 K and the free-ion value 224 K and with the optical splitting Δ2 = 0.65(15) eV gives Δ1 = 0.2–0.4 eV. A second result is that the ESR linewidth anisotropy is controlled by two competing relaxation mechanisms: symmetric anisotropic exchange dominates between 90 and 250 K with maximum linewidth along a, while the antisymmetric Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya interaction takes over below 90 K with maximum linewidth along b; an exponential term with ΔESR = 0.28 eV describes the high-temperature rise.

Load-bearing premise

The estimate of the first excited-state energy rests on assuming the in-plane spin-orbit coupling λ⊥ lies between the covalence-reduced value 140 K and the free-ion value 224 K, a parameter the paper does not measure.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Below room temperature, the d-orbital ground state of Ti3+ in TiOCl is non-degenerate, so orbital-liquid or degenerate-orbital scenarios are excluded.
The g-tensor is essentially constant up to 250 K, so the crystal-field splitting does not change significantly with temperature in that range.
For 90 K < T < 250 K, the ESR linewidth is dominated by symmetric anisotropic exchange, producing the largest width for H ∥ a; below 90 K the Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya interaction dominates, largest for H ∥ b.
Above 250 K, an exponential relaxation channel with ΔESR = 0.28 eV dominates the linewidth, and its activation is close to the first excited-state energy, suggesting orbital excitations or lattice fluctuations may be involved.
The linewidth fits give high-temperature DM ratios close to 2 : 1 : 1, supporting the assignment of the low-temperature crossover to the Dzyaloshinsky-Moriya interaction.

Reading between the lines

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

If the derived Δ1 range is correct, the same g-factor analysis applied to the isostructural compound TiOBr would predict a comparable first-excited-state energy, which could be checked against its optical spectrum.
Because the exponential linewidth activation ΔESR = 0.28 eV lies inside the Δ1 range, a natural test is to measure the linewidth under pressure or in doped samples: shifting the orbital splitting should shift the high-temperature relaxation if the two share a common origin.
A systematic estimate of the covalence reduction in the (bc)-plane from ligand-field theory or cluster calculations would replace the bracketing assumption by a measured λ⊥ and tighten the Δ1 range.

Original abstract

We present detailed ESR investigations on single crystals of the low-dimensional quantum magnet TiOCl. The anisotropy of the g-factor indicates a stable orbital configuration below room temperature, and allows to estimate the energy of the first excited state as 0.3(1) eV ruling out a possible degeneracy of the orbital ground state. Moreover, we discuss the possible spin relaxation mechanisms in TiOCl and analyze the angular and temperature dependence of the linewidth up to 250 K in terms of anisotropic exchange interactions. Towards higher temperatures an exponential increase of the linewidth is observed, indicating an additional relaxation mechanism.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,607 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.11 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.11 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We present detailed ESR investigations on single crystals of the low-dimensional quantum magnet TiOCl. The anisotropy of the g-factor indicates a stable orbital configuration below room temperature, and allows to estimate the energy of the first excited state as 0.3(1) eV ruling out a possible degeneracy of the orbital ground state. Moreover, we discuss the possible spin relaxation mechanisms in TiOCl and analyze the angular and temperature dependence of the linewidth up to 250 K in terms of anisotropic exchange interactions. Towards higher temperatures an exponential increase of the linewidth is observed, indicating an additional relaxation mechanism.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We present detailed ESR investigations on single crystals of the low-dimensional quantum magnet TiOCl.	contribution 0.99	0.96	0.04	asserted 0.98
s1	The anisotropy of the g-factor indicates a stable orbital configuration below room temperature, and allows to estimate the energy of the first excited state as 0.3(1) eV ruling out a possible degeneracy of the orbital ground state.	result 0.93	0.90	0.30	asserted 0.55
s2	Moreover, we discuss the possible spin relaxation mechanisms in TiOCl and analyze the angular and temperature dependence of the linewidth up to 250 K in terms of anisotropic exchange interactions.	contribution 0.92	0.93	0.12	asserted 0.52
s3	Towards higher temperatures an exponential increase of the linewidth is observed, indicating an additional relaxation mechanism.	result 0.83	0.92	0.10	hedged possibility 0.54

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: (color online) Crystal structure of TiOCl at room

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: (color online) Temperature evolution of the ESR spec

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: (color online) ESR linewidth (a) and

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4: (color online) Schematic pathway of the symmetric

**Figure 5.** FIG. 5: (color online) Next-neighbor bonds of the Ti ion to

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6: (color online) Temperature dependence of the ESR

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7: (color online) Temperature dependence of the ESR

Figures reproduced from arXiv:cond-mat/0602678 by the authors.

References

Works cited (48)

[1]

B. Keimer, D. Casa, A. Ivanov, J. W. Lynn, M. v. Zimmermann, J. P. Hill, D. Gibbs, Y. Taguchi, and Y. Tokura, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 , 3946 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[2]

M. Cwik, T. Lorenz, J. Baier, R. Muller, G. Andre, F. Bouree, F. Lichtenberg, A. Freimuth, R. Schmitz, E. Muller-Hartmann, and M. Braden, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 060401 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[3]

J. Hemberger, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, V. Fritsch, J. Deisenhofer, S. Lobina, T. Rudolf, P. Lunkenheimer, F. Lichtenberg, A. Loidl, D. Bruns, and B. Buchner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 , 066403 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[4]

R. M. Eremina, M. V. Eremin, V. V. Iglamov, J. Hemberger, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, F. Lichtenberg, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 70 , 224428 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[5]

C. Ulrich, G. Khaliullin, S. Okamoto, M. Reehuis, A. Ivanov, H. He, Y. Taguchi, Y. Tokura, and B. Keimer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 , 167202 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[6]

A. Seidel, C. A. Marianetti, F. C. Chou, G. Ceder, and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 67 , 020405(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[7]

M. Shaz, S. van Smaalen, L. Palatinus, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, S. Horn, and R. Claessen, Phys. Rev. B 71 , 100405(R) (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[8]

T. Imai, F.C. Chou, cond-mat/0301425

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[9]

R. Beynon and J. Wilson, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 5 , 1983 (1993)

View on Pith 1993
[10]

T. Saha-Dasgupta, R. Valenti, H. Rosner and C. Gros, Europhys. Lett. 67 , 63 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[11]

L. Craco, M. S. Laad, E. M\" u ller-Hartmann, cond-mat/0410472

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[12]

M. Hoinkis, M. Sing, J. Schafer, M. Klemm, S. Horn, H. Benthien, E. Jeckelmann, T. Saha-Dasgupta, L. Pisani, R. Valenti, and R. Claessen, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 125127 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[13]

J. Hemberger, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, M. Sing, R. Claessen, S. Horn, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 012420 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[14]

R. Ruckamp, J. Baier, M. Kriener, M. W. Haverkort, T. Lorenz, G. S. Uhrig, L. Jongen, A. Moller, G. Meyer, and M. Gruninger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 , 097203 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[15]

S. van Smaalen, L. Palatinus, and A. Schonleber, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 020105(R) (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[16]

G. Caimi, L. Degiorgi, N. N. Kovaleva and P. Lemmens, F. C. Chou, Phys. Rev. B 69 , 125108 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[17]

P. Lemmens, K. Y. Choi, G. Caimi, L. Degiorgi, N. N. Kovaleva, A. Seidel, and F. C. Chou, Phys. Rev. B 70 , 134429 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[18]

V. Kataev, J. Baier, A. Moller, L. Jongen, G. Meyer, and A. Freimuth, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 140405(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[19]

R. Ruckamp, E. Benckiser, M. W. Haverkort, H. Roth, T. Lorenz, A. Freimuth, L. Jongen, A. Moller, G. Meyer, P. Reutler, B. Buchner, A. Revcolevschi, S.-W. Cheong, C. Sekar, G. Krabbes and M. Gruninger, New J. Phys. 7, 144 (2005); cond-mat/0503405

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[20]

H. Schaefer, F. Wartenpfuhl, E. Weise, Z. anorg. und allg. Chemie 295, 268 (1958)

View on Pith 1958
[21]

A. Abragam and B. Bleaney, Electron Paramagnetic Resonance of Transition Ions, Clarendon, Oxford, (1970)

View on Pith 1970
[22]

J. Deisenhofer, M.V. Eremin, D. Zakharov, V.A. Ivanshin, R. Eremina, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A.A. Mukhin, A.M. Balbashov, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 104440 (2002); cond-mat/0108515

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[23]

J. Deisenhofer, B.I. Kochelaev, E. Shilova, A.M. Balbashov, A. Loidl, and H.-A. Krug von Nidda, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 214427 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[24]

The local coordinate frame \ xyz \ is chosen so that z\|-a , and the x and y axes are rotated by 45^ o with respect to the c and b axis, respectively (Fig. AE )

View on Pith
[25]

S. A. Altshuler and B. M. Kozyrev, Electron Paramagnetic resonance, Acad. Press, New York (1964)

View on Pith 1964
[26]

B. Pilawa, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9 , 3779 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[27]

I. Yamada, H. Manaka, H. Sawa, M. Nishi, M. Isobe and Y. Ueda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67 , 4269 (1998)

View on Pith 1998
[28]

T. Moriya, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 , 228 (1960); Phys. Rev. 120 , 91 (1960)

View on Pith 1960
[29]

H.-A. Krug von Nidda, L. E. Svistov, M. V. Eremin, R. M. Eremina, A. Loidl, V. Kataev, A. Validov, A. Prokofiev, and W. Assmus, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 134445 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[30]

M. Oshikawa and I. Affleck, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 134410 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[31]

J. Choukroun, J.-L. Richard, and A. Stepanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 , 127207 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[32]

A. Bencini and D. Gatteschi, EPR of Exchange Coupled Systems, Springer, Berlin, (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[33]

M. V. Eremin, Theory of exchange interaction of magnetic ions in dielectrics, Spectroskopy of Crystals, pp. 150-172 (edited by A. A. Kaplyanskii, Nauka, 1985)

View on Pith 1985
[34]

R. Kubo and K. Tomita, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 9 , 888 (1954), P. W. Anderson and P. R. Weiss, Rev. Mod. Phys. 25 , 269 (1953)

View on Pith 1954
[35]

B.I. Kochelaev, E. Shilova, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A. Loidl, A.A. Mukhin and A.M Balbashov, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 17, 459 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[36]

M. V. Eremin, D. V. Zakharov, R. M. Eremina, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, G. Obermeier, S. Horn, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 , 027209 (2006)

View on Pith 2006
[37]

K. Yosida, Theory of Magnetism, Springer, Berlin, (1996)

View on Pith 1996
[38]

R. M. Eremina, M. V. Eremin, V. N. Glazkov, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 014417 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[39]

M. Heinrich, H.A. Krug von Nidda, R. M. Eremina, A. Loidl, Ch. Helbig, G. Obermeier, and S. Horn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 , 116402 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[40]

V. A. Ivanshin, V. Yushankhai, J. Sichelschmidt, D. V. Zakharov, E. E. Kaul, and C. Geibel, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 064404 (2003); J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 272, 960 (2004)

View on Pith 2003
[41]

S. A. Zvyagin, A. K. Kolezhuk, J. Krzystek, and R. Feyerherm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 , 017207 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[42]

C. Kato, Y. Kobayashi, M. Sato, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 74 , (1), 473 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[43]

I. Dzialoshinski, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 4, 241 (1958)

View on Pith 1958
[44]

F. Keffer, Phys. Rev. 126 , 896 (1962)

View on Pith 1962
[45]

A. Shengelaya, Guo-meng Zhao, H. Keller, and K. A. Muller, B. I. Kochelaev, Phys. Rev. B 61 , 5888 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[46]

P. Lunkenheimer, V. Bobnar, A. V. Pronin, A. I. Ritus, A. A. Volkov, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 66 , 052105 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[47]

P. Lunkenheimer, unpublished

View on Pith
[48]

M. Heinrich, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A. Krimmel, A. Loidl, R. M. Eremina, A. D. Ineev, B. I. Kochelaev, A. V. Prokofiev, and W. Assmus, Phys. Rev. B 67 , 224418 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

B. Keimer, D. Casa, A. Ivanov, J. W. Lynn, M. v. Zimmermann, J. P. Hill, D. Gibbs, Y. Taguchi, and Y. Tokura, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 , 3946 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[2] [2]

M. Cwik, T. Lorenz, J. Baier, R. Muller, G. Andre, F. Bouree, F. Lichtenberg, A. Freimuth, R. Schmitz, E. Muller-Hartmann, and M. Braden, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 060401 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[3] [3]

J. Hemberger, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, V. Fritsch, J. Deisenhofer, S. Lobina, T. Rudolf, P. Lunkenheimer, F. Lichtenberg, A. Loidl, D. Bruns, and B. Buchner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 , 066403 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[4] [4]

R. M. Eremina, M. V. Eremin, V. V. Iglamov, J. Hemberger, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, F. Lichtenberg, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 70 , 224428 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[5] [5]

C. Ulrich, G. Khaliullin, S. Okamoto, M. Reehuis, A. Ivanov, H. He, Y. Taguchi, Y. Tokura, and B. Keimer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 , 167202 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[6] [6]

A. Seidel, C. A. Marianetti, F. C. Chou, G. Ceder, and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 67 , 020405(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[7] [7]

M. Shaz, S. van Smaalen, L. Palatinus, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, S. Horn, and R. Claessen, Phys. Rev. B 71 , 100405(R) (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[8] [8]

T. Imai, F.C. Chou, cond-mat/0301425

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[9] [9]

R. Beynon and J. Wilson, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 5 , 1983 (1993)

View on Pith 1993

[10] [10]

T. Saha-Dasgupta, R. Valenti, H. Rosner and C. Gros, Europhys. Lett. 67 , 63 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[11] [11]

L. Craco, M. S. Laad, E. M\" u ller-Hartmann, cond-mat/0410472

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[12] [12]

M. Hoinkis, M. Sing, J. Schafer, M. Klemm, S. Horn, H. Benthien, E. Jeckelmann, T. Saha-Dasgupta, L. Pisani, R. Valenti, and R. Claessen, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 125127 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[13] [13]

J. Hemberger, M. Hoinkis, M. Klemm, M. Sing, R. Claessen, S. Horn, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 012420 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[14] [14]

R. Ruckamp, J. Baier, M. Kriener, M. W. Haverkort, T. Lorenz, G. S. Uhrig, L. Jongen, A. Moller, G. Meyer, and M. Gruninger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 , 097203 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[15] [15]

S. van Smaalen, L. Palatinus, and A. Schonleber, Phys. Rev. B 72 , 020105(R) (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[16] [16]

G. Caimi, L. Degiorgi, N. N. Kovaleva and P. Lemmens, F. C. Chou, Phys. Rev. B 69 , 125108 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[17] [17]

P. Lemmens, K. Y. Choi, G. Caimi, L. Degiorgi, N. N. Kovaleva, A. Seidel, and F. C. Chou, Phys. Rev. B 70 , 134429 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[18] [18]

V. Kataev, J. Baier, A. Moller, L. Jongen, G. Meyer, and A. Freimuth, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 140405(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[19] [19]

R. Ruckamp, E. Benckiser, M. W. Haverkort, H. Roth, T. Lorenz, A. Freimuth, L. Jongen, A. Moller, G. Meyer, P. Reutler, B. Buchner, A. Revcolevschi, S.-W. Cheong, C. Sekar, G. Krabbes and M. Gruninger, New J. Phys. 7, 144 (2005); cond-mat/0503405

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[20] [20]

H. Schaefer, F. Wartenpfuhl, E. Weise, Z. anorg. und allg. Chemie 295, 268 (1958)

View on Pith 1958

[21] [21]

A. Abragam and B. Bleaney, Electron Paramagnetic Resonance of Transition Ions, Clarendon, Oxford, (1970)

View on Pith 1970

[22] [22]

J. Deisenhofer, M.V. Eremin, D. Zakharov, V.A. Ivanshin, R. Eremina, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A.A. Mukhin, A.M. Balbashov, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 104440 (2002); cond-mat/0108515

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[23] [23]

J. Deisenhofer, B.I. Kochelaev, E. Shilova, A.M. Balbashov, A. Loidl, and H.-A. Krug von Nidda, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 214427 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[24] [24]

The local coordinate frame \ xyz \ is chosen so that z\|-a , and the x and y axes are rotated by 45^ o with respect to the c and b axis, respectively (Fig. AE )

View on Pith

[25] [25]

S. A. Altshuler and B. M. Kozyrev, Electron Paramagnetic resonance, Acad. Press, New York (1964)

View on Pith 1964

[26] [26]

B. Pilawa, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9 , 3779 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[27] [27]

I. Yamada, H. Manaka, H. Sawa, M. Nishi, M. Isobe and Y. Ueda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67 , 4269 (1998)

View on Pith 1998

[28] [28]

T. Moriya, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 , 228 (1960); Phys. Rev. 120 , 91 (1960)

View on Pith 1960

[29] [29]

H.-A. Krug von Nidda, L. E. Svistov, M. V. Eremin, R. M. Eremina, A. Loidl, V. Kataev, A. Validov, A. Prokofiev, and W. Assmus, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 134445 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[30] [30]

M. Oshikawa and I. Affleck, Phys. Rev. B 65 , 134410 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[31] [31]

J. Choukroun, J.-L. Richard, and A. Stepanov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 , 127207 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[32] [32]

A. Bencini and D. Gatteschi, EPR of Exchange Coupled Systems, Springer, Berlin, (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[33] [33]

M. V. Eremin, Theory of exchange interaction of magnetic ions in dielectrics, Spectroskopy of Crystals, pp. 150-172 (edited by A. A. Kaplyanskii, Nauka, 1985)

View on Pith 1985

[34] [34]

R. Kubo and K. Tomita, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 9 , 888 (1954), P. W. Anderson and P. R. Weiss, Rev. Mod. Phys. 25 , 269 (1953)

View on Pith 1954

[35] [35]

B.I. Kochelaev, E. Shilova, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A. Loidl, A.A. Mukhin and A.M Balbashov, Mod. Phys. Lett. B 17, 459 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[36] [36]

M. V. Eremin, D. V. Zakharov, R. M. Eremina, J. Deisenhofer, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, G. Obermeier, S. Horn, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 , 027209 (2006)

View on Pith 2006

[37] [37]

K. Yosida, Theory of Magnetism, Springer, Berlin, (1996)

View on Pith 1996

[38] [38]

R. M. Eremina, M. V. Eremin, V. N. Glazkov, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 014417 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[39] [39]

M. Heinrich, H.A. Krug von Nidda, R. M. Eremina, A. Loidl, Ch. Helbig, G. Obermeier, and S. Horn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 , 116402 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[40] [40]

V. A. Ivanshin, V. Yushankhai, J. Sichelschmidt, D. V. Zakharov, E. E. Kaul, and C. Geibel, Phys. Rev. B 68 , 064404 (2003); J. Magn. Magn. Mat. 272, 960 (2004)

View on Pith 2003

[41] [41]

S. A. Zvyagin, A. K. Kolezhuk, J. Krzystek, and R. Feyerherm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 , 017207 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[42] [42]

C. Kato, Y. Kobayashi, M. Sato, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 74 , (1), 473 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[43] [43]

I. Dzialoshinski, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 4, 241 (1958)

View on Pith 1958

[44] [44]

F. Keffer, Phys. Rev. 126 , 896 (1962)

View on Pith 1962

[45] [45]

A. Shengelaya, Guo-meng Zhao, H. Keller, and K. A. Muller, B. I. Kochelaev, Phys. Rev. B 61 , 5888 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[46] [46]

P. Lunkenheimer, V. Bobnar, A. V. Pronin, A. I. Ritus, A. A. Volkov, and A. Loidl, Phys. Rev. B 66 , 052105 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[47] [47]

P. Lunkenheimer, unpublished

View on Pith

[48] [48]

M. Heinrich, H.-A. Krug von Nidda, A. Krimmel, A. Loidl, R. M. Eremina, A. D. Ineev, B. I. Kochelaev, A. V. Prokofiev, and W. Assmus, Phys. Rev. B 67 , 224418 (2003)

View on Pith 2003