Yanjun Xu1,2, Yumeng Yang1,3, Kui Yao3, Baoxi Xu2, Yihong Wu1. 1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National University of Singapore, 4 Engineering Drive 3, Singapore, 117583, Singapore. 2. Data Storage Institute, A*STAR (Agency for Science, Technology and Research), 2 Fusionopolis Way, 08-01 Innovis, Singapore, 138634, Singapore. 3. Institute of Materials Research and Engineering, A*STAR (Agency for Science, Technology and Research), 2 Fusionopolis Way, 08-03 Innovis, Singapore, 138634, Singapore.
Abstract
Extensive efforts have been devoted to the study of spin-orbit torque in ferromagnetic metal/heavy metal bilayers and exploitation of it for magnetization switching using an in-plane current. As the spin-orbit torque is inversely proportional to the thickness of the ferromagnetic layer, sizable effect has only been realized in bilayers with an ultrathin ferromagnetic layer. Here we demonstrate that, by stacking ultrathin Pt and FeMn alternately, both ferromagnetic properties and current induced spin-orbit torque can be achieved in FeMn/Pt multilayers without any constraint on its total thickness. The critical behavior of these multilayers follows closely three-dimensional Heisenberg model with a finite Curie temperature distribution. The spin torque effective field is about 4 times larger than that of NiFe/Pt bilayer with a same equivalent NiFe thickness. The self-current generated spin torque is able to switch the magnetization reversibly without the need for an external field or a thick heavy metal layer. The removal of both thickness constraint and necessity of using an adjacent heavy metal layer opens new possibilities for exploiting spin-orbit torque for practical applications.
Extensive efforts have been devoted to the study of spin-orbit torque in ferromagnetic metal/heavy metal bilayers and exploitation of it for magnetization switching using an in-plane current. As the spin-orbit torque is inversely proportional to the thickness of the ferromagnetic layer, sizable effect has only been realized in bilayers with an ultrathin ferromagnetic layer. Here we demonstrate that, by stacking ultrathin Pt and FeMn alternately, both ferromagnetic properties and current induced spin-orbit torque can be achieved in FeMn/Pt multilayers without any constraint on its total thickness. The critical behavior of these multilayers follows closely three-dimensional Heisenberg model with a finite Curie temperature distribution. The spin torque effective field is about 4 times larger than that of NiFe/Pt bilayer with a same equivalent NiFe thickness. The self-current generated spin torque is able to switch the magnetization reversibly without the need for an external field or a thick heavy metal layer. The removal of both thickness constraint and necessity of using an adjacent heavy metal layer opens new possibilities for exploiting spin-orbit torque for practical applications.
Inverse spin galvanic effect (ISGE) can be exploited to manipulate magnetization of
ferromagnetic materials with either bulk or structure inversion asymmetry (SIA)1234567. In these material structures, a charge current passing
through a ferromagnet (FM)238 or FM/heavy metal (HM)
heterostructures49101112131415 generates a
non-equilibrium spin density through the ISGE, which in turn exerts a torque on the
local magnetization of the FM through either s-d (in the case of a transition metal) or
p-d (in the case of dilute magnetic semiconductor) exchange coupling. As the ISGE is
originated from spin-orbit coupling (SOC), the resultant torque is referred to as
spin-orbit toque (SOT). Unlike spin transfer torque (STT), which requires non-collinear
magnetization configurations, the SOT can be realized in structures with a uniform
magnetization; this greatly simplifies the structure and device design when
investigating and exploiting the SOT effect for spintronics applications.Although SOC induced spin polarization of electrons has been studied extensively in
semiconductors161718, the investigations of SOC induced
non-equilibrium spin density in ferromagnets and the resultant SOT on local
magnetization have only been reported recently. Manchon and Zhang2
predicted theoretically that, in the presence of a Rashba spin-orbit coupling, the SOT
is able to switch the magnetization of magnetic two-dimensional electron gas at a
current density of about
104–106 A/cm2,
which is lower than or comparable to the critical current density of typical STT
devices. The first experimental observation of SOT was reported by Chernyshov et
al.3 for Ga0.94Mn0.06As dilute magnetic
semiconductor (DMS) grown epitaxially on GaAs (001) substrate. The compressive strain
due to lattice mismatch results in a Dresselhaus-type spin-orbit interaction that is
linear in momentum. When a charge current passes through the DMS layer below its Curie
temperature, 80 K in this case, the resultant SOT was able to switch the
magnetization with the assistance of an external field and crystalline anisotropy. The
lack of bulk inversion asymmetry (BIA) in transition metal FM has prompted researchers
to explore the SOT effect in FM heterostructures with SIA. Miron et al.4 reported the first observation of a current-induced SOT in a thin Co
layer sandwiched by a Pt and an AlO layer. Due to the asymmetric
interfaces with Pt and AlO, electrons in the Co layer experience a
large Rashba effect, leading to sizable current-induced SOT. In addition to the Rashba
SOT, spin current from the Pt layer due to spin Hall effect (SHE) also exerts a torque
on the FM layer through transferring the spin angular momentum to the local
magnetization19. To differentiate it from the Rashba SOT, it is also
called SHE-SOT. Although the exact mechanism still remains debatable, both types of
torques are generally present in the FM/HM bilayers. The former is field-like, while the
latter is of anti-damping nature similar to STT. Mathematically, the two types of
torques can be modeled by (field-like) and (anti-damping like), respectively, where is the magnetization direction,
is the in-plane current density, is the interface normal,
and and are the magnitudes
of the field-like and anti-damping like torques, respectively131520.
To date, the SOT effect has been reported in several FM/HM bilayers with different FMs
such as CoFeB11131415202122, Co410232425, NiFe1226 and HMs such as Pt4101219, Ta911131520, and W21. An average effective field
strength of 4 × 10−6
Oe/(A/cm2) has been obtained, except for the
[Pd/Co]/Ta multilayer27 which was reported to
exhibit a very large effective field strength to current density ratio in the range of
10−5 Oe/(A/cm2). In the latter case, the
spin Hall current from Ta layer alone is unable to account for the large effective
field, indicating possible contributions arising from the Pd/Co interfaces internally,
though the exact mechanism is not clear. Despite these efforts, however, so far
SOT-induced magnetization switching has only be realized in FM/HM structures with
ultrathin FM layers.Here we report on the observation of both ferromagnetism and SOT effect in
[FeMn/Pt] multilayers with or without an additional thick Pt
layer. This work is inspired by our recent observation of SOT effect in FeMn/Pt
bilayers28 and the earlier report of proximity effect at FeMn/Pt
interfaces29. By controlling the Pt and FeMn layer thickness, we
demonstrate that it is possible to achieve both ferromagnetic properties and SOT effect
in
[FeMn(t)/Pt(t)]
multilayers above room temperature (RT), with t and
t in the range of 0.2–1 nm and
0.4–0.8 nm, respectively. The field-like effective field
(H) to current density (j)
ratio in standalone [FeMn/Pt] multiple layers is about
1 × 10−6
Oe/(A/cm2), which is comparable to those observed in
Pt/Co/AlO trilayers1319. The addition of a
thick Pt layer either at the top or bottom helps increase
H/j to a certain extent but
within the same order. We further demonstrate that the magnetization of
[FeMn/Pt] multilayers can be reversibly switched by the
current-induced SOT with or without an additional thick Pt layer. The current density
for inducing magnetization switching in a standalone multilayer with a total thickness
of 8.2 nm is around
7 × 105 A/cm2,
which is much lower than that of HM/FM bilayers with similar FM thicknesses1019. The realization of self-current induced magnetization switching in
these standalone and thick magnetic layers will open new possibilities for practical
applications of SOT-based devices.
Results
Magnetic properties
The magnetic properties of
Pt(3)/[FeMn(t)/Pt(t)]/SiO2/Si
(hereafter referred to as Batch A) samples with different layer thicknesses and
period were characterized using a Quantum Design VSM by cutting the thin film
samples into a size of
2.5 mm × 2 mm. Here
the number and symbols inside the parentheses denote the thickness of individual
Pt and FeMn layers in nm, and n is the number of period.
Throughout this manuscript the sample sequence starts from the top most layer to
the substrate unless otherwise specified. The samples were prepared on
SiO2/Si substrates (see details in Methods) and their structural
properties were characterized using X-ray diffraction and X-ray photoelectron
spectroscopy (see Supplementary Note
S1 for details). To facilitate the comparison with electrical
measurement results, we fixed n = 5 (unless
specified otherwise) and varied t and
t systematically to investigate how the
magnetic properties depend on the individual layer thickness.All the multilayers were found to exhibit ferromagnetic properties with in-plane
anisotropy (see Supplementary Note
S2 for detail discussion). Figure 1a shows a
typical example of in-plane and out-of-plane hysteresis loops for the sample
with
t = t = 0.6 nm,
measured at 50 K and 300 K, respectively. For this
specific sample, the coercivity (H) decreases from 108
Oe at 50 K to ~1 Oe at 300 K, with a
saturation magnetization (M) of
286.8 emu/cm3 at 300 K. Both the
small M and H facilitate
SOT-induced magnetization switching with a small current. Figure
1b–d shows the saturation magnetization of
Pt(3)/[FeMn(t)/Pt(t)]
multilayers as a function of temperature (the M-T curve), with the legend
denoting (t,
t) × n
(see Supplementary Fig.
S2a–c for t-,
t- and n- dependence of
T and M,
respectively). The M-T curves were obtained by first cooling the sample
from 300 K to 50 K and then recording the magnetic
moment while warming up the sample from 50 K to 380 K
with an applied in-plane field of 1000 Oe. The field applied was
sufficient to saturate the magnetization in the field direction. Although our
VSM only allows us to perform the measurements above 50 K, we have
confirmed using a separate system for the (0.6,
0.6) × 5 sample that the magnetization below
50 K is almost constant between 10 K and
50 K, as shown in Supplementary Fig. S2d. Figure 1b shows the
M-T curves of samples with
t = 0.6 nm,
n = 5, and
t = 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, and
1 nm, respectively. In the range of
t = 0.1 nm–0.6 nm,
T increases slightly from
t = 0.1 nm to
0.2 nm, and then drops to about 350 K when
t increases to 0.6 nm. On the
other hand, the Mat 50 K increases
gradually with t until saturation at
t = 0.6 nm
from about 587.9 to 795.4 emu/cm
Figure 1
Magnetic properties.
(a) Hysteresis loops of Pt(3)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]5,
measured at 50 K (dashed line in green) and 300 K
(dotted line in red) with an in-plane field and at 300 K (black
solid curve) with an out-of-plane field. (b–d)
Saturation magnetization of Batch A samples as a function of temperature
(M-T curve). The legend (t,
t) × n
denotes a multilayer with a FeMn thickness of t,
Pt thickness of t, and a period of n.
However, T drops sharply to about 260 K for
both the t = 0 and
t = 1 nm
samples. The presence of sizable M for the
t = 0 sample, which is
essentially a FeMn(3)/Pt(3) bilayer, below 260 K may be ascribed to
two origins: canting of spin sub-lattices of FeMn under an applied field and
proximity induced moment in the Pt layer near the FeMn/Pt interface. The former
leads to a measurable moment in the applied field direction because of the
softening of FeMn spin sublattices at small thickness. The latter is caused by
the fact that Pt is at the Stoner threshold to become a ferromagnet which can be
polarized through magnetic proximity effect when contacting with a ferromagnet
such as Fe, Ni and Co3031323334. It is reasonable to
assume that the same will also happen at the FeMn/Pt interface due to
uncompensated spins from FeMn. Our control experiments using FeMn(3)/Au(3) (see
Supplementary Fig. S3 for
comparison of the M-H curves between FeMn(3)/Au(3) and FeMn(3)/Pt(3)
bilayer samples) revealed that, although proximity effect is indeed present in
FeMn(3)/Pt(3) bilayer, its contribution to magnetic moment is small and the
measured moment is dominantly from canting of the FeMn spin sub-lattices.
Despite its small contribution to the magnetic moment, the Pt layer inside the
multilayer structure plays an important role in enhancing ferromagnetic ordering
throughout the multilayers when the Pt thickness is in the range of 0.1 to
0.6 nm. In this thickness range, the proximity effect from both
sides of Pt is able to couple with each other and also with the neighboring FeMn
layers, leading to global FM ordering in the multilayer. However, when
t is increased further to 1.0 nm
and beyond, the central regions of the individual Pt layers remain un-polarized,
hindering ferromagnetic ordering throughout the multilayer. This is the reason
why T of the
t = 1 nm sample
drops back to the same level of FeMn(3)/Pt(3), but its magnetization is much
larger than that of the latter. This is understandable because the multilayer
has a larger number of FeMn/Pt interfaces and each of these interfaces will
contribute to the net magnetization. We now turn to the
t-dependence of magnetic properties. Figure 1c
shows the M-T curves of samples with
t = 0.4 nm,
n = 5, and
t = 0.6, 0.8, and
1 nm, respectively. As can be seen, the M
at low temperature decreases with increasing t, but
T remains almost the same. This suggests that FM
ordering weakens when the thickness of FeMn increases. However, unlike the case
of increasing t, the increase of
t up to 1.0 nm does not lead to a
sharp decrease of T, or in other words, the
T is mainly determined by the degree of
polarization of the Pt layer. The last factor investigated is the total
thickness, as shown in Fig. 1d. The decrease of n leads to gradual
decrease of both M and T.
Both the surface and size effect may play a role here since the multilayer is
sandwiched between thin Pt layers at both the top and bottom. The former is
relevant because when n is small, the less polarized top and bottom Pt
layer may affect the magnetic properties of the multilayer, leading to
reductions of both M and T.
On the other hand, the size effect which is common for all magnetic materials,
may eventually lead to development of partial paramagnetic phase in these
materials, and hence a decrease of both M and
T. The T of a
ferromagnetic thin film can be estimated by scaling analysis, i.e.,
, where
T(∞) and
T(d) are the Curie temperature of bulk and
thin film with a thickness d, respectively, and v is the critical
exponent of the bulk correlation length in the range of 0.5 to 0.705 (refs
35 and 36). The
fitting of our data to this equation gives a v value of 1.6, which is
much larger than values obtained for Ni (v = 1)
and Gd (v = 0.625) thin films36.
As we will discuss shortly about the M-T data, this is presumably caused
by the finite distribution of T itself in the
multilayers.As the FeMn/Pt multilayers are new, it is of importance to study their critical
behavior so as to have a better understanding of their magnetic properties. The
M-T curve of a ferromagnet generally follows the semi-empirical
formula37 (see Supplementary Note S3 on why this model is preferred over other
models):where M(0) is the magnetization at zero temperature,
T is the Curie temperature,
β is the critical exponent representing the universality
class that the material belongs to, and s is a fitting constant. As shown
in Supplementary Fig. S4, the
M-T curves can be fitted reasonably well using this formula except
that the β values of 0.68–0.9, which are
2–3 times larger than that of bulk ferromagnet (see Supplementary Table S1). The fitting result is
very sensitive to β; in other words, the large
β value must be a characteristic of the multilayer
sample. Although we notice that a large value in the range of
0.7–0.89 is typically obtained for surface magnetism38394041, the multilayers discussed here are different from
surface magnetism due to their relatively large thickness. As shown in Fig. 1, T of the multilayers
depends strongly on the individual thickness; therefore, it is plausible to
assume that there is a finite distribution of T inside
the multilayer due to thickness fluctuation induced by the interface roughness.
As shown in Supplementary Fig. S5,
the M-T curves can be fitted very well, especially in the
high-temperature region, by assuming a normal distribution of
T and using
β = 0.365 for all the samples (note
that β = 0.365 is the critical
exponent for M-T based on three-dimensional (3D) Heisenberg model). As
listed in Supplementary Table S2,
the width of T distribution agrees very well with the
range of T observed in Fig. 1
for different samples. These detailed analyses revealed that FeMn/Pt multilayers
are 3D ferromagnets with a finite T distribution.
Magnetoresistance and Hall resistance
Figure 2a,b shows the room temperature magnetoresistance
(MR) of four Hall bar devices with the structure
Pt(3)/[Pt(0.6)/FeMn(0.6)]/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si
(hereafter referred to as Batch B) with n = 4, 5,
and 6, measured by sweeping the field in longitudinal (Fig.
2a) and vertical direction (Fig. 2b),
respectively, at a bias current of 1 mA. All these devices have a Pt
(3) capping layer and a Ta (3) seed layer. The longitudinal MR of all these
devices shows a negative peak at low field with negligible coercivity. The
amplitude of the peak remains almost constant while the coercivity increases as
temperature decreases (see Supplementary
Fig. S6 for temperature dependence of the
n = 5 sample). Although it is not shown here, the
transverse MR shows a positive peak at low field. In contrast to the single peak
of longitudinal and transverse MR, the out-of-plane MR shows a characteristic
“W” shape below the saturation field (Fig. 2b), which cannot be explained by the conventional anisotropic
magnetoresistance (AMR) behavior alone. In order to reveal its origin, we have
carried out angular dependence measurement by rotating a constant field of
3000 Oe relative to sample on different planes. The results are
shown in Fig. 2c,d for the
n = 6 sample and the sample with structure of
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6, respectively. In the figures,
θ,
θ and
θ are the angles of field with
respect to the x, z, and z axis, when the field is rotated in the
xy-, zy-, and zx-plane, respectively. The results in Fig. 2c,d suggest that both AMR, , and unconventional MR (UCMR), , are
present in the multilayer samples. Here, and
are unit vectors in the directions of the
magnetization and the current, respectively,
represents the normal vector perpendicular to the plane of the layers,
is the isotropic longitudinal
resistivity, and
represents the size of the AMR (UCMR) effect. Based on these relations, the
θ – dependence of MR, if
any, is dominated by UCMR as the current (along x-axis) is always
perpendicular to the magnetization direction during
θ sweeping. On the other hand,
the θ – dependence of MR is
mainly attributed to conventional AMR as y-component of magnetization is
zero when the field is sufficiently strong to saturate the magnetization in the
field-direction. Both AMR and UCMR contribute to the
θ – dependence of MR.
The small amplitude of MR (θ) shown in
Fig. 2c,d indicates that the MR shown in Fig. 2a is dominantly originated from UCMR. As shown in
Fig. 2c,d, the size of UCMR of the sample with a
1 nm Pt capping layer and without any Ta seed layer
(0.061%) is comparable to that of the sample with both a 3 nm
Pt capping and a 3 nm Ta seed layer (0.079%). This
demonstrates that the observed UCMR is not just from the interfaces with Pt(3)
and Ta(3); instead it should mainly come from the multilayer itself. Although
both models based on spin-Hall magnetoresistance (SMR)42 and
spin-dependent scattering due to spin-orbit coupling43 at the
FM/HM interface can explain the observed UCMR, we believe that the SMR scenario
is more relevant in the multilayer structures. In these samples, the individual
Pt layers serves as a source for both SHE and ISHE. The FeMn layer in-between
serves as a “spin-current valve”, which controls the
relative amount of spin currents that can reach a specific Pt layer from the
neighboring Pt layers. The reflected and transmitted spin-currents combined
entering the specific Pt layer will determine the size of the UCMR. With the
presence of both AMR and UCMR, the “W”-shaped MR curves
in Fig. 2b can be understood as the competition between
the two when there is a slight misalignment of the external field from the
vertical direction (See Supplementary Note
S4 for more details).
Figure 2
Magnetoresistance and Hall resistance of Batch B samples.
(a,b) Magnetoresistance of samples with
n = 4, 5, and 6, measured by sweeping the
field in longitudinal (a) and vertical direction (b) at a bias
current of 1 mA. (c,d) Angular dependence of
magnetoresistance for the samples with n = 6
(c) and the sample
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/SiO2/Si (d),
measured by rotating the sample in xy, zy and zx planes with a
constant longitudinal field of 3000 Oe. (e,f)
planar Hall resistance and anomalous Hall resistance measured by sweeping
the field in longitudinal (e) and vertical (f) direction at a
bias current of 1 mA for the same set of samples whose MR curves
are shown in Fig. 2a,b. Note that all but the
n = 6 curve in Fig. 2a,b,e,f are vertically
shifted for clarity. The zero-field resistance for samples with
n = 4, 5, and 6 are 912.6, 871.3 and
769.5 Ω, respectively.
Figure 2e,f shows the dependence of planar Hall resistance
(PHR) and anomalous Hall resistance (AHR) on magnetic field in the longitudinal
and vertical direction, respectively, for the same set of devices whose MR
curves are shown in Fig. 2a,b. PHR and AHR are obtained by
dividing the measured planar and anomalous Hall voltage by the current flowing
only inside the multilayer instead of the total current. In what follows, a
positive current refers to the current following in positive x-direction
and vice versa. Phenomenologically, the PHR and AHR have a characteristic polar
and azimuth angle dependence, i.e.,
PHR ∝ sin2φ and
AHR ∝ cosθ,
respectively, where φ is the angle between the magnetization
and positive current direction and θ is the angle between the
magnetization and the sample normal12. The PHE signal shown in
Fig. 2e resembles well the PHE curve of a typical FM
with a small coercivity. These curves are essentially proportional to the first
order derivatives of the MR curves shown in Fig. 2a. On
the other hand, the AHE signal increases linearly at low field and saturate at
about ±2000 Oe which correlates well with the
out-of-plane M-H curve in Fig. 1a. The nearly
linear increase of the AHE signal from −2000 Oe to
2000 Oe and clear saturation beyond this field range shows that
ferromagnetic order is developed throughout the multilayer structure, consistent
with the magnetic measurement results.
Spin-orbit torque
We now turn to the investigation of current-induced SOT in multilayer devices
both with and without an additional 3 nm Pt capping layer. To reduce
Joule heating, the current sweeping experiments have been performed using pulsed
DC current with a constant duration (5 ms) and duty ratio (2.5%). To
ensure good reproducibility, we always started the sweeping from zero current
and then gradually increased it to a preset value in both positive and negative
directions with a fixed step size. The Hall voltage was recorded using a
nano-voltmeter from which PHR was obtained by dividing it with the peak value of
pulsed current.Figure 3a–c shows the PHR as a function of
current density for devices with structures of (a)
Pt(3)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si, (b)
Pt(3)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si, and (c)
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/SiO2/Si, respectively.
Devices (a) and (b) both have a 3 nm Pt capping layer and a
3 nm Ta seed layer, whereas Device (c) only has a 1 nm
Pt capping which is necessary to prevent the sample from oxidation. Due to the
large resistivity of Ta as compared to Pt, current passes through the Ta layer
can be ignored. To facilitate comparison with Device (c), in Fig.
3a,b, we show the current density in the multilayer in the lower
horizontal axis and the current density in the Pt layer in the upper horizontal
axis. The results shown in Fig. 3a–c can be
reproduced consistently. For the sake of clarity, we only show the result of one
round of measurement in which a pulsed current is firstly swept from 0 to a
positive preset current (50 mA for (a), 40 mA for (b),
and 20 mA for (c)), then to the negative preset current with the
same peak value by passing zero, and finally back to zero. The overall shape of
the PHR curve can be qualitatively understood if we consider a field-like
effective field (H) induced in the direction121944, as shown
schematically in Fig. 3d (top-view of the Hall bar). The
current shown in Fig. 3d is the actual current applied to
obtain the switching curve in Fig. 3a. Due to the small
uniaxial anisotropy, the effective easy axis at the junction of Hall bar is
assumed to be at an angle α (e.g.,
−10°) away from the x-axis. When a current is
applied in x-direction, an effective field H
will be generated in y-direction with its strength proportional to the
current. The competition between H and the effective
anisotropy field (H) leads to an in-plane rotation of
the magnetization to towards y-direction with an angle , where φ is the angle between the
magnetization and x-axis. The PHR reaches the first positive maximum when
φ = 45°. Further increase of the
current will rotate the magnetization to a direction that is slightly passing
over the y-axis towards the negative x-direction due to the added
effect from H. When the current is gradually reduced
after it reaches the positive preset value (50 mA in this case), the
magnetization will continue to be rotated in anticlockwise direction and settle
down in the opposite direction, i.e., ,
when the current returns to zero. During this quadrant of sweeping, a negative
peak in PHR appears when . By the same reasoning,
the magnetization will continue to be rotated in anticlockwise direction when
the current is swept from zero to −50 mA and then back
to zero. This is because the effective field direction will be reversed when
current changes sign. During this process, the PHR will first reach a positive
maximum at and then a negative maximum at
. The magnetization will go back to the
initial equilibrium direction after a full cycle of current sweeping. Therefore,
the results in Fig. 3a–c demonstrate clearly
that the magnetization of the multilayer device can be switched from one
direction to its opposite, and then back to its initial direction (see Supplementary Note S5 for
measurements with an additional bias field in y-direction and Supplementary Note S6 for simulation of the
PHR curve). It is worth noting that such kind of reversible switching can be
realized in a bare multilayer without an additional thick Pt layer, as shown in
Fig. 3c. Furthermore, the threshold current density is
even smaller than that of the samples with an additional thick Pt layer (Fig. 3a). These results show clearly that an effective field
is induced inside the multilayer itself, regardless of whether there is an
additional thick HM layer.
Figure 3
Current sweeping PHR curves (a–c) and illustration
of magnetization reversal process (d).
(a–c) PHR dependence on the pulsed current density
for Pt(3)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si
(a), Pt(3)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si
(b) and Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/SiO2/Si
(c) samples. Note that j represents
the current density in the multilayer only, while
j represents the current density in the
3 nm Pt layer. (d) Schematic illustration of the
magnetization switching process assisted by anisotropy misalignment, where
I represents the total current used in (a).
Second order PHE measurements1245 were then performed to
quantify the strength of current-induced effective field
H in different samples (see details in Supplementary Note S7). Figure 4a shows the H for Batch B
samples with n = 4, 5 and 6, together with that
of the Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6 and
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4 samples, which are plotted against the
current density in the multilayer portion of the samples
(j). It is worth noting that the effective
fields of both Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6 and
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4 are comparable with the samples with a
thick Pt capping layer, especially at low current density. This shows that the
effective field is mostly generated inside the multilayer itself; the effect of
spin-current generated by the thick Pt layer is largely confined near its
interface with the multilayer. Figure 4b compares the
effective field of Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4/SiO2/Si with
that of Pt(3)/NiFe(4.8)/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si trilayer by plotting it against
the current density in the multilayer itself for the former and that in Pt layer
for the latter. The thickness of the multilayer (excluding the 1 nm
Pt capping layer) is intentionally made the same as that of NiFe in the trilayer
structure. For the same current density, the effective field of the multilayer
is about 4 times larger than that of the trilayer and the difference is even
larger if we take into account only the current flowing through the Pt layers.
In addition, we have also investigated the H for
Pt(1)/[FeMn(t)/Pt(t)]5
samples with different FeMn (t) and Pt
(t) layer thickness combinations. As shown in
Supplementary Fig. S11, the
H increases sharply with the Pt thickness from
0.2 to 0.6 nm with fixed FeMn thickness
(t = 0.6 nm),
which indicates clearly that the spin current is mainly from the Pt layer which
itself has already been polarized by the proximity effect. The effect of FeMn
thickness is relatively small and is only caused by the difference in
uncompensated spins.
Figure 4
H extracted by second order PHE method.
(a) H for Batch B samples with
n = 4, 5 and 6, together with the
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6/SiO2/Si and
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4/SiO2/Si samples. Here,
j is the current density in the multilayer
portion of the samples. (b) H for
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]4/SiO2/Si and
Pt(3)/NiFe(4.8)/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si trilayer. Note that
j is the current density inside the
3 nm Pt layer for Pt(3)/NiFe(4.8)/Ta(3)/SiO2/Si.
Write and read by current
To further demonstrate reversible magnetization switching of the multilayer, PHE
measurements were performed on Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6 with
alternate write and read pulse as shown schematically in the upper panel of
Fig. 5a. The measurement began with the supply of a
+20 mA (corresponding to a current density of
1.25 × 106 A/cm2)
write current pulse (I) with a duration of
5 ms to saturate the magnetization into a specific easy axis
direction, followed by reading the Hall voltage with a 5 ms read
current pulse (I) of +2 mA. The reading
was repeated 13 times during which the PHR was recorded by dividing each
measured Hall voltage with the 2 mA reading current, and the results
are shown in the lower panel of Fig. 5a. Subsequent to
this, a negative current pulse of −20 mA was applied to
reverse the magnetization and then read with the same 2 mA current
pulse. The write and read cycles were repeated 8 times, as shown in Fig. 5a. The readout process can be readily understood with
the assistance of the schematic diagram in Fig. 5b. During
readout, the read current pulse (+2 mA) induces a small rotation of
the magnetization (δφ) towards +y
direction from its equilibrium positions, one at angle α
(State #1) and the other at
α + 180° away from
+x direction (State #2). When the read current is chosen properly for
a specific a value, the magnetization will be rotated to the first octant
for State #1 but remains in the second octant for State #2. This leads to Hall
resistance of different polarity for the two states, positive for State #1 and
negative for State #2. The absolute value of PHR depends on the readout current
and misalignment angle α, as shown clearly in Fig. 3. The results shown in both Figs 3 and
5 demonstrated unambiguously reversible switching of
magnetization solely by a current.
Figure 5
Write and read experiment.
(a) Illustration of write current pulses (20 mA with a
duration of 5 ms) applied to the
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6 sample (upper panel) and readout
signals in terms of PHR (lower panel). Reading is performed with a
2 mA pulse which is repeated 13 times after each writing
process. (b) Schematic illustration of magnetization rotation during
reading at two states with opposite equilibrium magnetization
directions.
Discussion
Although the physical origin of the field-like effective field in FM/HM
hetero-structures is still debatable, recent studies suggest that its ratio to
charge current density in the HM layer (j) can be written
in the following form by taking into account only the spin current generated by SHE
in the HM layer4647:where θ is the spin Hall angle of HM,
M the saturation magnetization of FM,
t the thickness of FM, ħ the
reduced Planck constant, e the electron charge,
μ the vacuum permeability,
d the thickness of HM,
λ the spin diffusion length in HM,
and with
G the spin mixing conductance of FM/HM interface
and the resistivity of HM. If we use the parameters:
= 0.52 T for NiFe
(much smaller than the bulk value), = 0.2 (0.004–0.34 in literature),
λ = 1.5 nm
(0.5 nm–10 nm for Pt in literature),
d = 3 nm,
t = 4.8 nm,
ρ = 31.66
μΩ·cm (measured value), and
G = (8.1 × 1014 + i
2.2 × 1014)
Ω−1 m−2
for NiFe/Pt26484950, we obtain the field-to-current ratio
H/j = 1.34 × 10−7 Oe/(A/cm2);
this is comparable to the experimental value of
2.93 × 10−7 Oe/(A/m2)
for the Pt(3)/NiFe(4.8)/Ta(3) sample shown in Fig. 4b.
However, if we use
d = 1 nm and keep
other parameters the same, the effective field to current ratio decreases to
4.0 × 10−8 Oe/(A/m2).
In other words, if we replace NiFe by the multilayer, the spin current from the
1 nm Pt capping layer alone would be too small to account for the
effective field obtained experimentally.Now the question is: what could be the SOT generation mechanism in the multilayer
without an additional thick Pt layer, e.g., in the case of
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6? The observation of clear SMR suggests
that spin current is present inside the multilayer. Considering the fact that FeMn
has a very small spin Hall angle51 and both the Pt and FeMn layers
are very thin (t is smaller than spin diffusion length of
Pt), we may assume that the spin current is dominantly generated in the Pt layers
and absorbed almost locally by the uncompensated moment of neighboring FeMn layers
(see illustration of spin Hall angle and Ms distribution in Supplementary Fig. S12). Compared with the case of
FM/HM bilayers, in which the spin current is generated non-locally due to the large
thickness of HM, and the case of bulk material with broken spatial inversion
symmetry like strained GaMnAs, in which the spin current is generated locally, the
present case falls somewhere between the two; therefore, the SOT observed in FeMn/Pt
multilayers can be considered as a pseudo-bulk effect (see Supplementary Note S8 for detailed explanations).
In the case of a pure HM layer, when a charge current is applied in
x-direction, the SHE generates a spin current flowing in z-direction
with the spin polarization in y-direction, thereby building up spin
accumulations at both the top and bottom surfaces. At steady state and under the
boundary conditions,, the spin current is given bywhere is the SHE spin current, λ is
the spin diffusion length and d thickness of the HM layer. In the case of
FeMn/Pt multilayers, in addition to Pt, we also have FeMn layers and the entire
multilayer is a ferromagnet. Therefore, the SHE spin current will be partially
absorbed and converted to SOT. The absorption is strongest when the polarization of
spin current is perpendicular to the magnetization direction and smallest when they
are parallel, thereby inducing the SMR-like magnetoresistance. It should be pointed
out that in the latter case, spin current can presumably travel through the
multilayer because it behaves like a single phase FM, which is different from a
FM/HM bilayer. In the extreme case, we may assume that the spin current generated by
the Pt layers is completely absorbed by the FeMn layers locally when the
polarization of spin current is perpendicular to the local magnetization direction.
Under this assumption, there will be no spin accumulation at the two surfaces. The
difference in spin current between these two cases gives the SMR-like MR as follows
(see Supplementary Note S9 for
details):Here, η < 1 describes the
efficiency of spin current absorption in realistic situations. If we use the
following parameters: η = 0.5,
λ = 1.5 nm,
d = 8.2 nm (total thickness of
Pt(1)/[FeMn(0.6)/Pt(0.6)]6), and = 0.0610% (experimental value extracted from Fig. 2d), we obtain a spin Hall angle
θ = 0.058 for
this sample. With this spin Hall angle, the damping-like effective field to current
ratio is calculated asIf we use the following parameters:
μ0M = 0.32 T
(experimental value),
t = 3.6 nm (total
thickness of FeMn) and
θ = 0.058, we have
H/j = 3.78 × 10−7 Oe/(A/cm2).
Although it is 2–3 times smaller than the experimentally observed value
of H/j, it is a reasonable
estimation considering the fact that the field-like and damping-like effective
fields are typically on the same order in FM/HM bilayers13144552. It should be pointed out that, although the FeMn layer is sandwiched between two
neighboring Pt layers, the top and bottom interfaces are generally different as
reported in literature27535455, whereby leading to a net SOT.
The degree of asymmetry is represented by the η parameter in Eq. (4).In summary, we have observed both ferromagnetic properties and SOT in FeMn/Pt
multilayers consisting of ultrathin Pt and FeMn layers. The former is characterized
by a 3D Heisenberg critical behavior with a finite distribution in
T. The self-current induced SOT is able to induce
reversible switching of magnetization without the need of an external field and/or
additional Pt layer. Such kind of “built-in” SOT in thick
films and its ability to switch magnetization without the assistance of an
additional HM layer significantly improves the prospects of practical applications
of SOT devices.
Methods
Sample and experimental geometry
The FeMn/Pt multilayers consisting of alternate and ultrathin FeMn and Pt layers
were deposited on SiO2/Si substrates using DC magnetron sputtering
with a base and working pressure of
2 × 10−8 Torr
and 3 × 10−3
Torr, respectively. An in-plane field of ~500 Oe was
applied during the sputtering deposition to induce a uniaxial anisotropy. The
basic structural and magnetic properties of the multilayers were characterized
using X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and
vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM), on coupon films. The XRD measurements were
performed on D8-Advance Bruker system with Cu Kα
radiation. Magnetic measurements were carried out using a Quantum Design
vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM) with the samples cut into a size of
2.5 mm × 2 mm. The
resolution of the system is better than
6 × 10−7 emu.The Hall bars, with a central area of
2.3 mm × 0.2 mm and
transverse electrodes of
0.1 mm × 0.02 mm,
were fabricated using combined techniques of photolithography and sputtering
deposition. All electrical measurements (unless specified otherwise) were
carried out at room temperature using the Keithley 6221 current source and 2182A
nanovoltmeter. The PHE measurements were performed by supplying a DC bias
current (I) to the Hall bar and measuring the Hall voltage
(V) while sweeping an external field
(H) in x-axis direction. Current sweeping measurements were
carried out using pulsed current without any external field.
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Xu, Y. et al. Self-current induced spin-orbit
torque in FeMn/Pt multilayers. Sci. Rep.
6, 26180; doi: 10.1038/srep26180 (2016).
Authors: H Kurebayashi; Jairo Sinova; D Fang; A C Irvine; T D Skinner; J Wunderlich; V Novák; R P Campion; B L Gallagher; E K Vehstedt; L P Zârbo; K Výborný; A J Ferguson; T Jungwirth Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: S D Ganichev; E L Ivchenko; V V Bel'kov; S A Tarasenko; M Sollinger; D Weiss; W Wegscheider; W Prettl Journal: Nature Date: 2002-05-09 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: H Nakayama; M Althammer; Y-T Chen; K Uchida; Y Kajiwara; D Kikuchi; T Ohtani; S Geprägs; M Opel; S Takahashi; R Gross; G E W Bauer; S T B Goennenwein; E Saitoh Journal: Phys Rev Lett Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 9.161