Stable and variable features of the magnetic structure of fcc Fe/Cu(001) films

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 81, Issue 6, 2010, Pages

  Sandratskii, L M ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF MICROSTRUCTURE PHYSICS   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954822292     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.81.064417     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. P. A. Montano, G. W. Fernando, B. R. Cooper, E. R. Moog, H. M. Naik, S. D. Bader, Y. C. Lee, Y. N. Darici, H. Min, and J. Marcano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 1041 (1987). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.1041
2. J. Thomassen, F. May, B. Feldmann, M. Wuttig, and H. Ibach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 3831 (1992). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.3831
3. D. Li, M. Freitag, J. Pearson, Z. Q. Qiu, and S. D. Bader, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3112 (1994). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.3112
4. S. Müller, P. Bayer, A. Kinne, P. Schmailzl, and K. Heinz, Surf. Sci. 322, 21 (1995). 10.1016/0039-6028(95)90013-6
5. H. Jenniches, J. Shen, C. V. Mohan, S. S. Manoharan, J. Barthel, P. Ohresser, M. Klaua, and J. Kirschner, Phys. Rev. B 59, 1196 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.1196
6. D. Qian, X. F. Jin, J. Barthel, M. Klaua, and J. Kirschner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 227204 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.227204
7. M. Weinelt, S. Schwarz, H. Baier, S. Müller, L. Hammer, K. Heinz, and Th. Fauster, Phys. Rev. B 63, 205413 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.205413
8. K. Amemiya, S. Kitagawa, D. Matsumura, T. Yokoyama, and T. Ohta, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 15, S561 (2003). 10.1088/0953-8984/15/5/310
9. K. Amemiya, S. Kitagawa, D. Matsumura, T. H. Abe, T. Ohta, and T. Tokoyama, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 936 (2004). 10.1063/1.1645330
10. H. L. Meyerheim, R. Popescu, D. Sander, J. Kirschner, O. Robach, and S. Ferrer, Phys. Rev. B 71, 035409 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevB.71.035409
11. T. Kraft, P. M. Marcus, and M. Scheffler, Phys. Rev. B 49, 11511 (1994). 10.1103/PhysRevB.49.11511
12. R. Lorenz and J. Hafner, Phys. Rev. B 54, 15937 (1996). 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.15937
13. T. Asada and S. Blügel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 507 (1997). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.507
14. L. Szunyogh, B. Ujfalussy, and P. Weinberger, Phys. Rev. B 55, 14392 (1997). 10.1103/PhysRevB.55.14392
15. D. Spišák and J. Hafner, Phys. Rev. B 56, 2646 (1997). 10.1103/PhysRevB.56.2646
16. R. E. Camley and D. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 4709 (2000). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.4709
17. S. S. A. Razee, J. B. Staunton, L. Szunyogh, and B. L. Gyorffy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 147201 (2002). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.147201
18. M. Pajda, J. Kudrnovsky, I. Turek, V. Drchal, and P. Bruno, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5424 (2000). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5424
19. D. Spišák and J. Hafner, Phys. Rev. B 66, 052417 (2002). 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.052417
20. B. Y. Yavorsky, P. Zahn, and I. Mertig, Phys. Rev. B 70, 014413 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevB.70.014413
21. C. A. F. Vaz, J. A. C. Bland, and G. Lauhoff, Rep. Prog. Phys. 71, 056501 (2008). 10.1088/0034-4885/71/5/056501
22. D. L. Mills, Phys. Rev. B 3, 3887 (1971). 10.1103/PhysRevB.3.3887
23. A. Sukiennicki and L. Wojtczak, Phys. Rev. B 7, 2205 (1973). 10.1103/PhysRevB.7.2205
24. R. A. Weiner, Phys. Rev. B 8, 4427 (1973). 10.1103/PhysRevB.8.4427
25. D. L. Mills, Phys. Rev. B 8, 4424 (1973). 10.1103/PhysRevB.8.4424
26. K. Binder and P. C. Hohenberg, Phys. Rev. B 9, 2194 (1974). 10.1103/PhysRevB.9.2194
27. L. M. Small and V. Heine, J. Phys. F 14, 3041 (1984). 10.1088/0305-4608/14/12/025
28. A. I. Liechtenstein, M. I. Katsnelson, V. P. Antropov, and V. A. Gubanov, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 67, 65 (1987). 10.1016/0304-8853(87)90721-9
29. H. L. Meyerheim, J.-M. Tonnerre, L. Sandratskii, H. C. N. Tolentino, M. Przybylski, Y. Gabi, F. Yildiz, X. L. Fu, E. Bontempi, S. Grenier, and J. Kirschner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 267202 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.267202
30. A. R. Williams, J. Kübler, and C. D. Gelatt, Phys. Rev. B 19, 6094 (1979). 10.1103/PhysRevB.19.6094
31. It is worth noting that the inequivalence of the atomic layers in the film leads to the difference of the distances between different pairs of the neighboring layers. This difference was experimentally detected [see, e.g., earlier experiment (Ref.) on the low energy electron diffraction (LEED) or recent experiment (Ref.) on x-ray diffraction]. A typical value of the variation in the interlayer distance in the internal part of the film is about 1%, whereas for the upper most layer it can be substantially larger. For example, for the 8 ML film the distance of the upper most layer to the next one was detected to increase to 1.88 ± 0.015 Å that is by more than 4% with respect to the Cu interlayer distance. Test calculations with varied interlayer distances have shown that all qualitative conclusions formulated in the paper remain valid. In particular the calculations show that the strong ferromagnetic exchange interactions between two upper Fe layers are determined not by the increased interlayer distance but by the reduced coordination of the Fe atoms of the surface layer.
32. L. M. Sandratskii, R. Singer, and E. Sasioglu, Phys. Rev. B 76, 184406 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.184406
33. N. D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1133 (1966). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.17.1133
34. L. M. Sandratskii, E. Sasioglu, and P. Bruno, Phys. Rev. B 73, 014430 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.014430
35. A possible reason for the noncollinearity was suggested to be layer dependence of the magnetic anisotropy. Another reason for the noncollinearity might be competing exchange interactions between different blocks. These interactions are rather weak and depend strongly on the concrete defect pattern in the film.
36. V. Antropov, Phys. Rev. B 72, 140406 (R) (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevB.72. 140406
37. A. V. Ruban, S. Khmelevskyi, P. Mohn, and B. Johansson, Phys. Rev. B 75, 054402 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.054402
38. The restriction of our statistical-mechanics calculations to the mean-field approximation leaves open the question if the first-order phase transition is an intrinsic property of the model. The application of a more elaborated statistical-mechanics technique should be carried out to verify if the phase transition predicted by the MFA calculations takes place in this form.
39. The small values of the moments of the interface layers of the fcc-Fe/Cu(001) films detected in the recent experiment (Ref.) can be explained by strong Fe-Cu intermixing.