Interaction of separated ferromagnetic domains in a hole-doped manganite achieved by a magnetic field

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 93, Issue 4, 2004, Pages

  Yoo, J H ^a   Murakami, Y ^a   Shindo, D ^a   Atou, T ^a   Kikuchi, M ^a,b  

^a TOHOKU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b TOHOKU FUKUSHI UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CERAMIC MATERIALS; COLOSSAL MAGNETORESISTANCE; ELECTRON HOLOGRAPHY; FERROMAGNETISM; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETIC FLUX; MAGNETIZATION; MICROSTRUCTURE; PHASE SHIFT;

CURIE TEMPERATURE; DOUBLE EXCHANGE (DE) INTERACTIONS; ELECTRIC CORRELATIONS; MAGNETIC MICROSTRUCTURE;

MAGNETIC DOMAINS;

EID: 4344700219     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.047204     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. S. Jin et al., Science 264, 413 (1994).
2. P.W. Anderson and H. Hasegawa, Phys. Rev. 100, 675 (1955).
3. P.-G. de Gennes, Phys. Rev. 118, 141 (1960).
4. A. Moreo, S. Yunoki, and E. Dagotto, Science 283, 2034 (1999).
5. M. Fäth et al., Science 285, 1540 (1999).
6. M. Uehara, S. Mori, C.H. Chen, and S.-W. Cheong, Nature (London) 399, 560 (1999).
7. S. Mori, C. H. Chen, and S.-W. Cheong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3972 (1998).
8. Q. Lu, C. C. Chen, and A. de Lozanne, Science 276, 2006 (1997).
9. A. Moreo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5568 (2000).
10. M. Mayr et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 135 (2001).
11. L. Zhang et al., Science 298, 805 (2002).
12. A. Tonomura, Electron Holography (Springer-Verlag, Tokyo, 1999).
13. D. Shindo, and T. Oikawa, Analytical Electron Microscopy for Materials Science (Springer-Verlag, Tokyo, 2002).
14. G. H. Jonker and J. H. van Santen, Physica (Amsterdam) 16, 337 (1950).
15. A. Urushibara et al., Phys. Rev. B 51, 14103 (1995).
16. D. Shindo et al., Scr. Mater. 48, 851 (2003).
17. J. C. Loudon, N. D. Mathur, and P. A. Midgley, Nature (London) 420, 797 (2002).
18. Y. Murakami et al., Nature (London) 423, 965 (2003).
19. The direction of the magnetic flux can be determined by the sign (positive or negative) of the slope in the phase shift vs position curve as shown in the inset of Figs. 1(c) and 1(d). See Ref. [13] for details.
20. The homogeneous magnetic field produced by the magnetizing stage is not included in the reconstructed phase images, while the inhomogeneous stray magnetic field from the specimen and/or the local magnetization distribution inside the specimen are visualized. The homogeneous magnetic field has an equivalent influence on both the reference and object electron waves; therefore no phase shift is produced.
21. The magnetic flux density can be evaluated if the spacing of the black lines in reconstructed phase images and the depth (along the electron beam) of the space in which the magnetic flux is present are known. Refer to Refs. [12,13] for details of the method
22. In practice, most of the magnetic field outside the specimen in Fig. 2 is the stray magnetic field from a distinct portion, wherein large FM domains exist, e.g., the shadowed lower-left part. For example, in Fig. 2(b), the magnetizing stage supplies the magnetic field of only 6 mT, while the stray magnetic field from the shadowed lower-left part is 110 mT. Thus, we summed up both contributions to evaluate the effective local magnetic field at the position of the asterisk.