1976
DOI: 10.1143/jpsj.41.1894
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Magnetocrystalline Anisotropy of Low Temperature Phase of Magnetite

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
95
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 164 publications
(109 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
14
95
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At this intrinsic transition, magnetite undergoes a structural change from cubic to monoclinic with a shift of the easy axes from [111] to [100], which causes a prominent change in the magnetization properties [41 -45]. The switching of the magnetic axes is associated with an increase of jK 1 j as calculated from monoclinic anisotropy constants and a decrease of magnetization [43,46,47]. Considering the chain configuration in MTB, the switching of easy axes from [111] to [100] weakens the net magnetic moment of the chains and randomizes their contribution to B int .…”
Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…At this intrinsic transition, magnetite undergoes a structural change from cubic to monoclinic with a shift of the easy axes from [111] to [100], which causes a prominent change in the magnetization properties [41 -45]. The switching of the magnetic axes is associated with an increase of jK 1 j as calculated from monoclinic anisotropy constants and a decrease of magnetization [43,46,47]. Considering the chain configuration in MTB, the switching of easy axes from [111] to [100] weakens the net magnetic moment of the chains and randomizes their contribution to B int .…”
Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The decrease of the signals below 80 K can be explained by the large monoclinic anisotropy constants [46] that hamper the alignment of the magnetization vector along the external magnetic field ( figure 1a). This, in turn, causes reduction of the FMR intensity, as discussed in §2.1.…”
Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared to single domain assemblages of the same mineralogy, superparamagnetic crystals of will have narrower linewidths (small ∆B), nearly symmetric absorption (A ~ 1), and g eff closer to the mineral's g-factor [17,18]. Superparamagnetic assemblages of magnetites will show broader, more asymmetric linewidths (e.g, larger ∆B and A farther from 1) and higher g eff at 77 K compared to room temperature (e.g., [19,20]). However, because FMR absorption and linewidth are smooth functions of particle size with no discontinuities across the single domain superparamagnetic boundary, there is no concept of "blocking temperature" in FMR [9].…”
Section: Dependence Of Fmr On Crystal Sizementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Above T V , in contrast, crystal structure analysises show no evidence of the lowered symmetry from the cubic one, apparently contradicting with our prediction of the ferro-OO even in the metallic phase. However, the symmetry in the electronic structure has been pointed out to be lowered than the cubic one [30] based on magneto-crystalline anisotropy measurements [31] and in the recent resonant X-ray scattering at room temperature [13], consistent with the OO state.…”
Section: Comparison With Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%