| Literature DB >> 33008906 |
Paul G Evans1, Samuel D Marks2, Stephan Geprägs3, Maxim Dietlein3,4, Yves Joly5, Minyi Dai2, Jiamian Hu2, Laurence Bouchenoire6,7, Paul B J Thompson6,7, Tobias U Schülli8, Marie-Ingrid Richard8,9, Rudolf Gross3,4,10, Dina Carbone11, Danny Mannix5,12,13.
Abstract
Spin electronic devices based on crystalline oxide layers with nanoscale thicknesses involve complex structural and magnetic phenomena, including magnetic domains and the coupling of the magnetism to elastic and plastic crystallographic distortion. The magnetism of buried nanoscale layers has a substantial impact on spincaloritronic devices incorporating garnets and other oxides exhibiting the spin Seebeck effect (SSE). Synchrotron hard x-ray nanobeam diffraction techniques combine structural, elemental, and magnetic sensitivity and allow the magnetic domain configuration and structural distortion to be probed in buried layers simultaneously. Resonant scattering at the Gd L2 edge of Gd3Fe5O12 layers yields magnetic contrast with both linear and circular incident x-ray polarization. Domain patterns facet to form low-energy domain wall orientations but also are coupled to elastic features linked to epitaxial growth. Nanobeam magnetic diffraction images reveal diverse magnetic microstructure within emerging SSE materials and a strong coupling of the magnetism to crystallographic distortion.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33008906 PMCID: PMC7852389 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aba9351
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Magnetic structure of GdIG.
(A) Atomic structure and magnetic moments in one atomic layer of the GdIG cubic unit cell, highlighting oxygen octahedra and tetrahedra. Arrows indicate the directions of the magnetic moments of Gd3+ ions (red) and Fe ions on tetragonal (light green) and octahedral (dark green) sites. (B) Directions of the total magnetization M under the assumption of bulk-like ⟨111⟩ magnetization directions in a (001)-oriented GdIG thin film. (C) Hall bar SSE device consisting of a patterned GdIG MI and a thin Pt conductor. (D) Magnetic field hysteresis of VSSE at 20, 150, and 300 K. (E) Electric field polarization vectors for right (R)–, left (L)–, and π-polarized incident x-ray nanobeams.
Fig. 2Domain imaging in GdIG SSE devices.
(A) Optical micrograph of a patterned GdIG layer from which GdIG has been removed in the area outside the light square. X-ray nanobeam diffraction maps of (B) circular-polarization flipping ratio Fcir and (C) linear π-polarization flipping ratio Fπ in the same region. The areas of nearly uniform contrast at the edges of the images in (B) and (C) are in regions from which the GdIG layer had been removed and in which there is vanishingly low diffracted intensity.
Fig. 3X-ray photon energy dependence of resonant scattering contrast.
(A) Maps of Fcir of the same region of the GdIG layer for several photon energies near the Gd L2 resonance. (B) Predicted Fcir for four ⟨111⟩ magnetization directions. (C) Observed and predicted contrast of Fcir measured for regions of (A) with opposite values of Fcir (bottom). X-ray fluorescence intensity as a function of photon energy (top).
Fig. 4Magnetic domain wall orientation and magnetic structure.
(A) Nanobeam diffraction map of Fcir within a region of the GdIG pattern with large magnetic domains. The footprint of the incident and diffracted x-ray beams is horizontal. The nearly uniform contrast at the edges of the image in (A) is in regions from which the GdIG layer had been removed. (B) Schematic of the in-plane projection of the magnetization of the domains. The edges of the patterned GdIG layer are indicated by dashed lines.
Fig. 5Interaction between crystallographic and magnetic microstructure.
(A) Nanobeam diffraction maps of Fcir at micrometer length scales. The in-plane crystallographic directions are shown in the diagram below the images. (B) Crystallographic tilt toward the [010] (vertical) direction. (C) Integrated diffracted x-ray intensity at the 008 Bragg reflection. The magnetic response to the structural variation in (B) and (C) competes with the development of facets along directions of the lowest domain boundary energy.