Antiferromagnetic domain size and exchange bias

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 77, Issue 22, 2008, Pages

  Fitzsimmons, M R ^a   Lederman, D ^b   Cheon, M ^b   Shi, H ^b,e   Olamit, J ^a   Roshchin, Igor V ^c,d   Schuller, Ivan K ^c  

^a LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 44649137585     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.224406     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. W. H. Meiklejohn and C. P. Bean, Phys. Rev. PHRVAO 0031-899X 10.1103/PhysRev.102.1413 102, 1413 (1956).
2. W. H. Meiklejohn and C. P. Bean, Phys. Rev. PHRVAO 0031-899X 10.1103/PhysRev.105.904 105, 904 (1957).
3. J. Nogués and I. K. Schuller, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/S0304-8853(98)00266-2 192, 203 (1999).
4. A. E. Berkowitz and K. Takano, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/S0304-8853(99)00453-9 200, 552 (1999).
5. B. Dieny, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/0304-8853(94) 00356-4 136, 335 (1994).
6. R. L. Stamps, J. Phys. D JPAPBE 0022-3727 10.1088/0022-3727/33/23/201 33, R247 (2000).
7. M. Kiwi, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/S0304-8853(01) 00421-8 234, 584 (2001).
8. A. P. Malozemoff, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.35.3679 35, 3679 (1987).
9. D. Mauri, H. C. Siegmann, and P. S. Bagus, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.339367 62, 3047 (1987).
10. T. C. Schulthess and W. H. Butler, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.4516 81, 4516 (1998).
11. P. Miltényi, M. Gierlings, J. Keller, B. Beschoten, G. Güntherodt, U. Nowak, and K. D. Usadel, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.4224 84, 4224 (2000).
12. U. Nowak, K. D. Usadel, J. Keller, P. Miltényi, B. Beschoten, and G. Güntherodt, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.014430 66, 014430 (2002).
13. J. Keller, P. Miltényi, B. Beschoten, G. Güntherodt, U. Nowak, and K. D. Usadel, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66. 014431 66, 014431 (2002).
14. J.-I. Hong, T. Leo, D. J. Smith, and A. E. Berkowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.117204 96, 117204 (2006).
15. H. Shi, D. Lederman, and E. E. Fullerton, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.1452266 91, 7763 (2002).
16. H. Shi, Z. Liu, and D. Lederman, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.72.224417 72, 224417 (2005).
17. M. Grimsditch, A. Hoffmann, P. Vavassori, H. Shi, and D. Lederman, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.257201 90, 257201 (2003).
18. C. Leighton, H. Suhl, M. J. Pechan, R. Compton, J. Nogués, and I. K. Schuller, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.1491277 92, 1483 (2002).
19. G. J. Mata, E. Pestana, M. Kiwi, and H. Dreysse, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.74.144407 74, 144407 (2006).
20. J. Nogués, D. Lederman, T. J. Moran, and I. K. Schuller, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.76.4624 76, 4624 (1996).
21. M. R. Fitzsimmons, B. J. Kirby, S. Roy, Zhi-Pan Li, Igor V. Roshchin, S. K. Sinha, and Ivan K. Schuller, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.214412 75, 214412 (2007).
22. M. Cheon, Z. Liu, and D. Lederman, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.2429997 90, 012511 (2007).
23. F. Radu, A. Westphalen, K. Theis-Bröhl, and H. Zabel, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter JCOMEL 0953-8984 10.1088/0953-8984/18/3/L01 18, L29 (2006).
24. V. K. Valev, M. Gruyters, A. Kirilyuk, and Th. Rasing, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.067206 96, 067206 (2006).
25. I. V. Roshchin, O. Petracic, R. Morales, Z.-P. Li, X. Batlle, and I. K. Schuller, Europhys. Lett. EULEEJ 0295-5075 10.1209/epl/i2005-10078-2 71, 297 (2005).
26. O. Petracic, Z.-P. Li, I. V. Roshchin, M. Viret, R. Morales, X. Batlle, and I. K. Schuller, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.2138357 87, 222509 (2005).
27. Y. Henry, S. Mangin, T. Hauet, and F. Montaigne, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.134420 73, 134420 (2006).
28. F. Nolting, A. Scholl, J. Stöhr, J. W. Seo, J. Fompeyrine, H. Siegwart, J.-P. Locquet, S. Anders, J. Lüning, E. E. Fullerton, M. F. Toney, M. R. Scheinfein, and H. A. Padmore, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/35015515 405, 767 (2000).
29. A. Scholl, J. Stöhr, J. Lüning, J. W. Seo, J. Fompeyrine, H. Siegwart, J.-P. Locquet, F. Nolting, S. Anders, E. E. Fullerton, M. R. Scheinfein, and H. A. Padmore, Science SCIEAS 0036-8075 10.1126/science.287. 5455.1014 287, 1014 (2000).
30. A. Scholl, F. Nolting, J. W. Seo, H. Ohldag, J. Stöhr, S. Raoux, J.-P. Locquet, and J. Fompeyrine, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.1813633 85, 4085 (2004).
31. H. Ohldag, H. Shi, E. Arenholz, J. Stöhr, and D. Lederman, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.027203 96, 027203 (2006).
32. S. Roy, M. R. Fitzsimmons, S. Park, M. Dorn, O. Petracic, I. V. Roshchin, Z.-P. Li, X. Batlle, R. Morales, A. Misra, X. Zhang, K. Chesnel, J. B. Kortright, S. K. Sinha, and I. K. Schuller, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.047201 95, 047201 (2005).
33. M. Gruyters and D. Schmitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.077205 100, 077205 (2008).
34. A. Hoffmann, J. W. Seo, M. R. Fitzsimmons, H. Siegwart, J. Fompeyrine, J. P. Locquet, J. A. Dura, and C. F. Majkrzak, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.220406 66, 220406 (R) (2002).
35. S. Mangin, F. Montaigne, and A. Schuhl, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.140404 68, 140404 (R) (2003).
36. H. Shi and D. Lederman, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.094426 66, 094426 (2002).
37. S. K. Sinha, E. B. Sirota, S. Garoff, and H. B. Stanley, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.2297 38, 2297 (1988).
38. R. Pynn, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.45.602 45, 602 (1992).
39. M. R. Fitzsimmons and E. Burkel, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.47.8436 47, 8436 (1993).
40. L. G. Parratt, Phys. Rev. PHRVAO 0031-899X 10.1103/PhysRev.95.359 95, 359 (1954).
41. B. Vidal and P. Vincent, Appl. Opt. 23, 1794 (1984). 0003-6935
42. M. R. Fitzsimmons and C. F. Majkrzak, in Modern Techniques for Characterizing Magnetic Materials, edited by, Y. Zhu, (Kluwer, Boston, 2005), pp. 107-152.
43. W. H. Press, B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Vetterling, Numerical Recipes, The Art of Scientific Computing (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986), p. 294.
44. The normalized ξ2 metrics were 21, 7, and 4 for the Co/ Ni0.55 Fe0.45 F2, Co/ Zn0.30 Fe0.70 F2, and Co/ FeF2 samples, respectively.
45. H. Dosch, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.35.2137 35, 2137 (1987).
46. The Al and Co layers for the alloy samples were too thick for GIXD.
47. M. A. Krivoglaz, Theory of X-ray and Thermal-Neutron Scattering by Real Crystals (Plenum, New York, 1969).
48. Let σ FeF2 be the measured width (rms) of a Bragg reflection from the FeF2 film. Γ appearing in Fig. 4 is equal to 8ln2 (σ FeF2 2 - σ ins 2).
49. H. Lipson and H. Steeple, Interpretation of X-ray Powder Diffraction Patterns (St. Martin's, New York, 1970).
50. The error on Γ for the FeF2 reflections of 0.00135 Å-1 is the standard deviation of the values of Γ for the GaAs reflections.
51. J. Narayan and B. C. Larson, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.1528301 93, 278 (2003).
52. D. B. Williams and C. B. Carter, Transmission Electron Microscopy (Plenum, New York, 1996), p. 447.
53. L. B. Freund, MRS Bull. 17, 52 (1992). 0883-7694
54. J. Mattsson, C. Djurberg, and P. Nordblad, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/0304-8853(94)90440-5 136, L23 (1994).
55. M. Lederman, J. Hammann, and R. Orbach, Physica B (Amsterdam) 165-166, 179 (1990). 0921-4526
56. Ch. Binek, Xi Chen, A. Hochstrat, and W. Kleemann, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/S0304-8853(01)00817-4 240, 257 (2002).
57. M. Ooi, T. Ino, G. Muhrer, E. J. Pitcher, G. J. Russell, P. D. Ferguson, E. B. Iverson, D. Freeman, and Y. Kiyanagi, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A NIMAER 0168-9002 10.1016/j.nima.2006.06.073 566, 699 (2006).
58. The divergence in degrees of the neutron beam from the guide is 0.23λ for λ in angstroms.
59. The mosaic spreads of the samples were much less than the divergence of the neutron beam incident on the sample.
60. The largest neutron beam on Asterix is 5×5 cm2.
61. See http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/instruments/bt9/
62. H. Shi, D. Lederman, K. V. O'Donovan, and J. A. Borchers, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.69.214416 69, 214416 (2004).
63. The relation is valid for small or Gaussian-distributed values of dλ λ and dθcotθ. Given the Gaussian profile of the (100) Bragg reflection, the relation is reasonable to use.
64. B. Fultz and J. Howe, Transmission Electron Microscopy and Diffractometry of Materials, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2002), p. 433.
65. M. R. Fitzsimmons, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A NIMAER 0168-9002 10.1016/S0168-9002(96)00854-6 383, 549 (1996).
66. The σm typically increases with λ below 6 Å and then saturates.
67. Note that the Bragg reflection from the graphite sample is highly asymmetric in Fig. 8 -typical of an instrumental-resolution-limited intensity profile. In contrast, the Bragg reflection from the Zn0.30 Fe0.70 F2 sample in Fig. 7 is broadened yielding a more symmetric intensity profile.
68. This experiment allowed us to demonstrate the combination of inelastic scattering and reflectometry with an energy resolution of 30 μeV.
69. C. G. Shull, W. A. Strauser, and E. O. Wollan, Phys. Rev. PHRVAO 0031-899X 10.1103/PhysRev.83.333 83, 333 (1951).
70. B. E. Warren, X-ray Diffraction (Dover, New York, 1990), p. 253.
71. Since the (100) wave vector lies 45° from the sample's surface normal, the dimension of the domains corresponds to this direction (i.e., a dimension that is neither purely perpendicular nor parallel to the sample's surface).
72. M. R. Fitzsimmons, J. A. Eastman, M. Müller-Stach, and G. Wallner, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.44.2452 44, 2452 (1991).
73. The in-plane microstrain can not be measured with GIXD for either of the Zn0.30 Fe0.70 F2 or the Ni0.55 Fe0.45 F2 films because the Co and Al overlayers are so thick that the x-ray beam is absorbed by the overlayers.
74. The strain term is 25% of the domain-size term.
75. N. W. Ashcroft and N. D. Mermin, Solid State Physics (Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 1976), p. 699.
76. N. Rosov, A. Kleinhammes, P. Lidbjörk, C. Hohenemser, and M. Eibschütz, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.37.3265 37, 3265 (1988).
77. G. E. Bacon, Neutron Diffraction (Clarendon, Oxford, 1975).
78. G. L. Squires, Introduction to the Theory of Thermal Neutron Scattering (Dover, New York, 1978), pp. 146-152.
79. A. Tucciarone, H. Y. Lau, L. M. Corliss, A. Delapalme, and J. M. Hastings, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.4.3206 4, 3206 (1971).
80. D. Lederman, J. Nogués, and I. K. Schuller, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.56.2332 56, 2332 (1997).
81. K. Nishioka, S. Shigematsu, T. Imagawa, and S. Narishige, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.367090 83, 3233 (1998).
82. Y. Ozaki, K. Shimoyama, S. Iwata, and S. Tsunashima, IEEE Trans. Magn. IEMGAQ 0018-9464 10.1109/20.908618 36, 2888 (2000).
83. R. Morales, Z.-P. Li, J. Olamit, Kai Liu, J. M. Alameda, and Ivan K. Schuller (unpublished).
84. The observation of a (100) AF Bragg reflection for the Co/ Ni0.45 Fe0.55 F2 sample means that the (100) planes have a net ferromagnetic moment that is not consistent with the AF structure of bulk NiF2.
85. The difference between TB and TN is significant provided the thermometry used in the SQUID and neutron experiment performed similarly (both used calibrated Cernox sensors). A better approach would be to measure the temperature dependencies of the exchange bias with polarized neutron reflectometry and TN with neutron diffraction using the same thermometer-measurements planned for the future with Asterix.
86. We note that in Refs., it was concluded the size of the domain of uncompensated magnetization in the AF affected the sign and magnitude of exchange bias. This dimension is not the AF domain size we discuss in the present paper. The AF domain size refers to the size of the domain over which long range order of the AF spin lattice exists.
87. M. R. Fitzsimmons, C. Leighton, J. Nogués, A. Hoffmann, K. Liu, C. F. Majkrzak, J. A. Dura, J. R. Groves, R. W. Springer, and P. N. Arendt, V. Leiner, H. Lauter, and I. K. Schuller, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.65.134436 65, 134436 (2002).