Spin moment over 10-300 K and delocalization of magnetic electrons above the Verwey transition in magnetite

Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids

Volumn 68, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1556-1560

  Li, Yinwan ^a,b   Montano, P A ^a,c   Barbiellini, B ^d   Mijnarends, P E ^d,e   Kaprzyk, S ^d,f   Bansil, A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^c U S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY   (United States)

^d NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^f AGH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

Author keywords

A. Magnetic materials; C. Ab initio calculations; D. Phase transitions

Indexed keywords

MAGNETIC GROUND STATE; MAGNETIC MOMENT; SPINEL STRUCTURE; VERWEY TRANSITION;

COMPTON SCATTERING; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETITE; MAGNETOELECTRONICS; PHASE TRANSITIONS; PROBES;

SPIN DYNAMICS;

EID: 34447576887     PISSN: 00223697     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpcs.2007.03.037     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Verwey E.J.W. Nature 144 (1939) 327
2. Verwey E.J.W., and Haayman P.W. Physica 8 (1941) 979
3. Novák P., Stepánková H., Englich J., Kohout J., and Brabers V.A.M. Phys. Rev. B 61 (2000) 1256
4. Waltz F. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 14 (2002) R285
5. Garcia J., and Subias G. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 16 (2004) R145
6. Coey M. Nature 430 (2004) 327
7. Radaelli P.G. New J. Phys. 7 (2005) 53
8. Yanase A., and Siratori K. J. Phys. Soc. Japan 53 (1984) 312
9. Zhang Z., and Satpathy S. Phys. Rev. B 44 (1991) 13319
10. Yanase A., and Hamada N. J. Phys. Soc. Japan 68 (1999) 1607
11. M.J. Cooper, P.E. Mijnarends, N. Shiotani, N. Sakai, A. Bansil, in: X-Ray Compton Scattering, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004, and references therein.
12. Huang D.J., Chang C.F., Jeng H.-T., Guo G.Y., Lin H.-J., Wu W.B., Ku H.C., Fujimori A., Takahashi Y., and Chen C.T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 077204
13. Goering E., Gold S., Lafkioti M., and Schütz G. Europhys. Lett. 73 (2006) 97
14. Goering E., Lafkioti M., and Gold S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 039701
15. Huang D.J., Lin H.-J., and Chen C.T. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 039702
16. Li Y., Montano P.A., Mitchell J.F., Barbiellini B., Mijnarends P.E., Kaprzyk S., and Bansil A. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 207206
17. Montano P.A., Li Y., Mitchell J.F., Barbiellini B., Mijnarends P.E., Kaprzyk S., and Bansil A. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 65 (2004) 1999
18. Montano P.A., Li Y., Ruett U., Beno M.A., Jennings G., and Kimball C.W. Proc. SPIE 3773 (1999) 262
19. Bansil A., Kaprzyk S., Mijnarends P.E., and Toboła J. Phys. Rev. B 60 (1999) 13 396
20. Mijnarends P.E., and Bansil A. In: Dupasquier A., and Mills A.P. (Eds). Positron Spectroscopy of Solids (1995), IOS Press, Amsterdam 25 and references therein
21. Aragón R. Phys. Rev. B 46 (1992) 5328
22. McQueeney R.J., Yethiraj M., Montfrooij W., Gardner J.S., Metcalf P., and Honig J.M. Phys. Rev. B 73 (2006) 174409
23. Abe K., Miyamoto Y., and Chikazumi S. J. Phys. Soc. Japan 41 (1976) 1894
24. Matsui M., Todo S., and Chikazumi S. J. Phys. Soc. Japan 43 (1977) 47
25. Uzu H., and Tanaka A. J. Phys. Soc. Japan 75 (2006) 043704
26. H. Uzu, private communication.
27. Néel L. Ann. Phys. (Paris) 3 (1948) 137
28. The Compton profile anisotropy is often invoked to highlight relatively small oscillating terms reflecting coherence properties of the ground state wave function. See e.g. E.D. Isaacs, A. Shukla, P.M. Platzman, D.R. Hamann, B. Barbiellini, C.A. Tulk, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 600. In magnetite, the [1 0 0] profile is dominated by atomic d-like behavior and it does not contain a significant interference term from the nearest neighbor Fe-Fe overlap. Therefore, in the [1 0 0]-[1 1 0] difference profile, the [1 0 0] profile essentially allows us to subtract an underlying atomic contribution to the [1 1 0] profile and to thus highlight interference effects in the [1 1 0] profile.
29. [1 0 0] 〉 as background does not introduce any spurious features in the anisotropy defined by Eq. (3).
30. Chiba T. J. Chem. Phys. 64 (1975) 1182
31. BB = 5.61 a . u . yields the good fit shown in Fig. 3.
32. The error in our values of f is estimated to be ± 0.02.
33. max.
34. mag (p) (in particular the peak at 1.12 a.u.) which involve the same area as the negative contributions.
35. Nazarenko E., Lorenzo J.E., Joly Y., Hodeau J.L., Mannix D., and Marin C. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 056403
36. Rozenberg G.Kh., Pasternak M.P., Xu W.M., Amiel Y., Hanfland M., Amboage M., Taylor R.D., and Jeanloz R. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 045705
37. Mijnarends P.E., and Singru R.M. Appl. Phys. 4 (1974) 303
38. Biasini M., Chiba T., Manuel A.A., Akahane T., and Yanase A. Mater. Sci. Forum 255-257 (1997) 515