The magnetic structure of (La 1.8 Eu 0.2 )CuO 4 has been studied by magnetization measurements of single crystals, which show antiferromagnetic long-range order below T N = 265 K and a structural phase transition at T s = 130 K. At T s < T < T N , the Cu spin susceptibility exhibits almost the same behavior as that of La 2 CuO 4 in the low-temperature orthorhombic phase, which indicates the existence of finite spin canting out of the CuO 2 plane. At T < T s , the magnitude of the weak-ferromagnetic moment induced by the spin canting is suppressed approximately by 70%. This significant suppression of the weak-ferromagnetic moment is carefully compared with the theoretical analysis of weak ferromagnetism by Stein et al. (Phys. Rev. B 53, 775 (1996)), in which the magnitude of weak-ferromagnetic moments strongly depend on the crystallographic symmetry. Based on such comparison, below T s (La 1.8 Eu 0.2 )CuO 4 is in the low-temperature lessorthorhombic phase with a space group of P ccn. We also discuss the possible magnetic structure of the pure low-temperature tetragonal phase with space group P 4 2 /ncm, which is relevant for rare-earth and alkaline-earth ions co-doped La 2 CuO 4 . 15 He reinvestigated the role of spin-orbit interaction in super-exchange mechanism for one-dimensional S = 1/2 antiferromagnetic (AF) spin chains and spin rings, and found that the anisotropic symmetric interaction gives an easy-axis anisotropy to the spin system that completely compensates the easy-plane anisotropy given by the DM interaction. One possible test is to determine the magnetic structure of the so-called low-temperature tetragonal (LTT) phase (space group P 4 2 /ncm), which was first reported in (La,Ba) 2 CuO 4 .
20Bonesteel 12 discussed that the weak-ferromagnetic (WF) moment per CuO 2 plane should disappear in the LTT phase as is schematically drawn in Fig. 1 (b) when one takes the KSEA interaction into account. In this arrangement, spins are parallel to the rotation axes of CuO 6 octahedra, and therefore, they are also parallel/antiparallel to the DM vectors.This theoretical prediction became a trigger of a long debate, 21,22,23 because the magnetic structure shown in Fig. 1 (b) was different from that proposed based on neutron diffraction