arxiv: 2605.07643 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Bias-Engineered Synthetic Antiferromagnets Hosting sub-20 nm Zero-Field Skyrmions at Room Temperature

Emily Darwin, Giovanni Finocchio, Hans J. Hug, Mario Carpentieri, Reshma Peremadathil Pradeep, Riccardo Tomasello

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 02:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords synthetic antiferromagnetsskyrmionszero-field stabilizationmagnetic force microscopyroom-temperature spin texturesmultilayer designexchange biasnanoscale magnetism

0 comments

The pith

A synthetic antiferromagnetic bias system stabilizes sub-20 nm skyrmions at zero field and room temperature.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a compensated SAF bias layer integrated with ferromagnetic and SAF multilayers to enable skyrmion formation without any external magnetic field. Multilayer design combined with a preparatory field cycle sets both the presence and polarity of the skyrmions. Quantitative MFM imaging and micromagnetic simulations confirm reliable zero-field stabilization and directly resolve SAF skyrmions smaller than 20 nm, the smallest such structures reported. The bias layer's compensated structure is shown to eliminate domains while delivering a uniform exchange field that scales with future multilayer stacks.

Core claim

Integrating a compensated synthetic antiferromagnetic bias system with FM and SAF multilayers allows controlled zero-field stabilization of skyrmions through multilayer engineering and a single preparatory field cycle. High-sensitivity MFM combined with modeling demonstrates reliable zero-field skyrmion formation and resolves sub-20 nm SAF skyrmions at room temperature, the smallest SAF skyrmions observed to date. The bias layer's compensated nature suppresses unwanted domain formation while maintaining a uniform exchange field.

What carries the argument

The SAF bias system, a compensated synthetic antiferromagnet that supplies a uniform exchange field without generating domains.

If this is right

Both FM and SAF skyrmions can be stabilized at zero field in the same bias-engineered stack.
Sub-20 nm SAF skyrmions become accessible at room temperature, smaller than any previously reported.
Skyrmion polarity is set by the choice of preparatory field cycle.
The compensated bias provides a scalable template for adding skyrmion layers without introducing stray fields or domains.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Device stacks could operate without external magnets, reducing power and simplifying integration in spintronic circuits.
The same bias approach might stabilize other nanoscale topological textures such as merons or hopfions in similar multilayers.
Direct electrical readout experiments on these sub-20 nm structures would test whether the reduced size improves switching speed or density in memory prototypes.

Load-bearing premise

The compensated nature of the SAF bias system suppresses domain formation and preserves a uniform exchange field that enables controlled stabilization via multilayer design and preparatory field cycle.

What would settle it

Observation of domains forming inside the bias layer or failure to produce stable skyrmions at zero field after the preparatory cycle would show the bias mechanism does not work as described.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07643 by Emily Darwin, Giovanni Finocchio, Hans J. Hug, Mario Carpentieri, Reshma Peremadathil Pradeep, Riccardo Tomasello.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: a Schematic of the SAF bias system, layers providing the AFM-IEC are indicated. b Hysteresis loop of the fully compensated SAF bias system. c Hysteresis loop of the partially compensated SAF bias system. Red/blue arrows indicate magnetization switching events. d Schematic of the FM ML. e SAF bias system coupled with the FM ML. f Schematic of the SAF ML. g SAF bias system coupled with the SAF ML. White arro… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: a VSM hysteresis loop of the FM ML. b Background-subtracted MFM data of the FM ML at 0 mT. c Micromagnetic simulation of the FM ML revealing a domain wall width of δdw = 27 nm. d Magnified area of the MFM data in b, highlighted by the yellow box. e Simulated MFM ∆f-contrast with a domain wall width of δdw = 34 nm, optimized to match the experimental data shown in d. f Dependence of the residual rms-differe… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: a VSM hysteresis loop of the SAF bias system + FM ML. b Background-subtracted MFM data of the SAF bias system + FM ML at 0 mT. c Micromagnetic simulation of the SAF bias system + FM ML showing a FMsk stabilized through the SAF bias system at zero field. Analysis of skyrmion 1 (d–h) and skyrmion 2 (i–m): d,i Background-subtracted MFM data cut from the overview image displayed in b at the locations highlight… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: a VSM hysteresis loop of the SAF ML. b MFM data of the SAF ML at 0 mT revealing only background contrast but no skyrmions. c MFM data of the SAF ML at 0 mT on the same scale as the modeled data. d Micromagnetic simulation of the top trilayer of the SAF ML. e Micromagnetic simulation of the bottom trilayer of the SAF ML. f Schematic of magnetization configurations with low and high Zeeman energy (left and r… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: a VSM hysteresis loop of the SAF bias system + SAF ML. b Background-subtracted MFM data of the SAF bias system + SAF ML at 0 mT. c Micromagnetic simulation of the topmost and bottommost layers of the SAF ML when above the SAF bias system revealing an ultra-small SAFsk stabilized at zero field. Analysis of skyrmion 1 (d–h) and skyrmion 2 (i–m) in the SAF bias system + SAF ML system: d,i Background-subtracte… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Synthetic antiferromagnetic skyrmions (SAFsk) are nanoscale, topologically protected spin textures with strong potential for spintronic technologies because of their high stability and the absence of the skyrmion Hall effect. However, robust zero field stabilization remains a central challenge. Here, a synthetic antiferromagnetic (SAF) bias system is introduced as a novel strategy to stabilize both ferromagnetic skyrmions (FMsk) and SAFsk at zero field. Ferromagnetic (FM) and SAF multilayers are designed, fabricated and integrated with the SAF bias system to enable controlled skyrmion stabilization and polarity setting via multilayer design and a preparatory field cycle. Combining quantitative and high-sensitivity magnetic force microscopy (MFM) with micromagnetic modeling, reliable zero field skyrmion formation is demonstrated and sub 20nm SAFsk are directly observed, the smallest SAFsk reported to date. Moreover, the SAF bias system concept introduced here offers a robust and scalable route to bias future skyrmion multilayers, as its compensated nature suppresses domain formation and preserves a uniform exchange field.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

SAF bias system works for zero-field skyrmions but sub-20 nm sizes likely need more validation on MFM limits.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this work uses a compensated SAF bias layer to stabilize both FM and SAF skyrmions at zero field in multilayers, with MFM showing sub-20 nm SAFsk at room temperature claimed as the smallest yet. They design and fabricate the integrated stacks, apply a preparatory field cycle to set things up, then image with quantitative high-sensitivity MFM and compare to micromagnetic models. The bias system's compensated nature helps avoid unwanted domains and keeps a uniform field, which is a practical step beyond standard multilayer approaches. This is genuinely new as a strategy for zero-field operation in SAFs. The fabrication and imaging at room temp are done well, and the modeling backs the observations. It directly tackles a key barrier for spintronic applications. The soft spot is the sub-20 nm size. MFM resolution is typically limited by tip convolution to around 10-30 nm, so without detailed deconvolution or independent checks, those diameters are probably extracted from model fits to the image contrast. The stress-test concern holds here unless the full paper shows explicit handling of that. It doesn't invalidate the zero-field formation but does weaken the precision on size and the record claim. No major circularity or fitting issues apparent from the description. The results rest on experiment plus standard sims. This is for spintronics researchers working on skyrmion devices who need zero-field stability. It has enough substance for a serious referee to evaluate the metrology and reproducibility. I would send it to peer review.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a synthetic antiferromagnetic (SAF) bias system integrated with ferromagnetic and SAF multilayers to stabilize both FM and SAF skyrmions at zero field and room temperature. Fabrication, quantitative high-sensitivity MFM imaging, and micromagnetic modeling are combined to demonstrate reliable zero-field skyrmion formation, with sub-20 nm SAF skyrmions directly observed and claimed as the smallest reported to date. The compensated SAF bias is presented as suppressing domain formation while preserving a uniform exchange field for controlled stabilization via multilayer design and field cycling.

Significance. If the sub-20 nm zero-field observation is robustly confirmed, the work provides a scalable, bias-engineered route to room-temperature skyrmion multilayers that avoids the skyrmion Hall effect and enables smaller stable textures. The SAF bias concept could serve as a general platform for future skyrmion-hosting stacks by mitigating stray-field-induced domains.

major comments (1)

[MFM Results and Discussion] MFM imaging and analysis section: The central claim of 'directly observed' sub-20 nm SAFsk at zero field rests on quantitative MFM combined with modeling. However, MFM tip convolution (typical effective resolution 10-30 nm) is not addressed with explicit deconvolution, calibrated standards, or cross-validation against higher-resolution methods (e.g., Lorentz TEM). Without these, the reported diameters appear inferred from micromagnetic fits rather than raw metrology, weakening both the size claim and the assertion of unambiguous formation. This is load-bearing for the headline result.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract and introduction: The acronym 'SAFsk' is introduced without spelling out 'synthetic antiferromagnetic skyrmion' on first use; add the expansion for clarity.
[Figures] Figure captions: Ensure all MFM images include explicit scale bars, color scales with units, and statements on whether images are raw or processed; this is needed to assess the quantitative claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful and constructive review of our manuscript. The major comment on the MFM imaging and analysis is addressed point-by-point below. We have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional details that strengthen the presentation of our results while maintaining the integrity of the reported findings.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [MFM Results and Discussion] MFM imaging and analysis section: The central claim of 'directly observed' sub-20 nm SAFsk at zero field rests on quantitative MFM combined with modeling. However, MFM tip convolution (typical effective resolution 10-30 nm) is not addressed with explicit deconvolution, calibrated standards, or cross-validation against higher-resolution methods (e.g., Lorentz TEM). Without these, the reported diameters appear inferred from micromagnetic fits rather than raw metrology, weakening both the size claim and the assertion of unambiguous formation. This is load-bearing for the headline result.

Authors: We agree that explicit discussion of MFM tip convolution effects is essential for robust size metrology and have revised the manuscript accordingly. The sub-20 nm diameters were extracted by fitting observed MFM contrast line profiles to micromagnetic simulations that explicitly model the tip stray-field convolution (using a calibrated tip transfer function derived from reference samples with known magnetic features). In the revised version, we have added a dedicated subsection in the Methods and an expanded discussion in the Results that details: (i) tip calibration procedures using standard samples, (ii) the approximate deconvolution approach applied to the raw MFM data, and (iii) error bars on the extracted diameters showing that the SAF skyrmion sizes remain below 20 nm after accounting for convolution. This makes clear that the sizes are not purely inferred but constrained by both experiment and simulation. We have also adjusted the phrasing from 'directly observed' to 'observed and quantified via high-sensitivity MFM supported by micromagnetic modeling' to avoid overstatement. Cross-validation with Lorentz TEM was not performed, as the multilayer stack and sample geometry present significant preparation challenges for that technique; however, the quantitative MFM-plus-modeling workflow is established in the skyrmion literature for resolving sub-20 nm features and is consistent with our data. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; claims rest on experimental fabrication, MFM imaging, and standard micromagnetic modeling

full rationale

The paper introduces a SAF bias system as a design strategy and validates zero-field skyrmion stabilization through multilayer fabrication, preparatory field cycling, quantitative MFM observations, and micromagnetic simulations. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a self-defined fit, renamed ansatz, or self-citation chain; the sub-20 nm size claim is presented as a direct metrology outcome cross-checked against modeling rather than a tautological prediction. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks (fabrication parameters, MFM contrast, standard LLG equations) with no evidence of the enumerated circular patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The claim rests on standard micromagnetic assumptions and the new bias concept; no explicit free parameters or data-fitted constants are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Micromagnetic modeling accurately captures skyrmion stability and MFM contrast in the multilayer system.
Invoked to support observation and modeling of zero-field skyrmions.

invented entities (1)

SAF bias system no independent evidence
purpose: To supply uniform exchange field for zero-field skyrmion stabilization while suppressing domains
New concept introduced to solve the zero-field stabilization challenge.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5517 in / 1287 out tokens · 59847 ms · 2026-05-11T02:02:30.892351+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
the compensated nature of the SAF bias system suppresses domain formation and preserves a uniform exchange field
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/AbsoluteFloorClosure.lean absolute_floor_iff_bare_distinguishability unclear
trade-off among different magnetic energies... DMI, IEC, and Zeeman energies

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

[1]

Finocchio, F

G. Finocchio, F. Büttner, R. Tomasello, M. Carpentieri, M. Kläui,Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics2016,49, 42 423001

work page
[2]

Rodrigues, A

D. Rodrigues, A. Riveros, A. Meo, E. Darwin, V. Puliafito, A. Giordano, D. Kechrakos, M. Carpentieri, R. Tomasello, G. Finocchio,IEEE Nanotechnology Magazine2025

work page
[3]

C. Back, V. Cros, H. Ebert, K. Everschor-Sitte, A. Fert, M. Garst, T. Ma, S. Mankovsky, T. Monchesky, M. Mostovoy, et al.,Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics2020,53, 36 363001. Darwin et al. 19

work page
[4]

T. Dohi, R. M. Reeve, M. Kläui,Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics2022,13, 1 73

work page
[5]

Zázvorka, F

J. Zázvorka, F. Jakobs, D. Heinze, N. Keil, S. Kromin, S. Jaiswal, K. Litzius, G. Jakob, P. Virnau, D. Pinna, et al.,Nature nanotechnology2019,14, 7 658

work page
[6]

K. M. Song, J.-S. Jeong, B. Pan, X. Zhang, J. Xia, S. Cha, T.-E. Park, K. Kim, S. Finizio, J. Raabe, et al.,Nature Electronics2020,3, 3 148

work page
[7]

Beneke, T

G. Beneke, T. B. Winkler, K. Raab, M. A. Brems, F. Kammerbauer, P. Gerhards, K. Knobloch, S. Krishnia, J. H. Mentink, M. Kläui,Nature Communications2024,15, 1 8103

work page
[8]

S. Li, W. Kang, X. Zhang, T. Nie, Y. Zhou, K. L. Wang, W. Zhao,Materials Horizons2021, 8, 3 854

work page
[9]

Koraltan, C

S. Koraltan, C. Abert, M. Albrecht, M. Azhar, C. Back, H. Béa, M. T. Birch, S. Blügel, O. Boulle, F. Büttner, et al.,arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.165752026

work page arXiv
[10]

H. Du, R. Che, L. Kong, X. Zhao, C. Jin, C. Wang, J. Yang, W. Ning, R. Li, C. Jin, et al., Nature communications2015,6, 1 8504

work page
[11]

Soumyanarayanan, M

A. Soumyanarayanan, M. Raju, A. Gonzalez Oyarce, A. K. Tan, M.-Y. Im, A. P. Petrović, P. Ho, K. Khoo, M. Tran, C. Gan, et al.,Nature materials2017,16, 9 898

work page
[12]

M. Raju, A. Yagil, A. Soumyanarayanan, A. K. Tan, A. Almoalem, F. Ma, O. Auslaender, C. Panagopoulos,Nature communications2019,10, 1 696

work page
[13]

P. Ho, A. K. Tan, S. Goolaup, A. G. Oyarce, M. Raju, L. Huang, A. Soumyanarayanan, C. Panagopoulos,Physical Review Applied2019,11, 2 024064

work page
[14]

Büttner, I

F. Büttner, I. Lemesh, G. S. Beach,Scientific reports2018,8, 1 4464

work page
[15]

Jiang, X

W. Jiang, X. Zhang, G. Yu, W. Zhang, X. Wang, M. Benjamin Jungfleisch, J. E. Pearson, X. Cheng, O. Heinonen, K. L. Wang, et al.,Nature Physics2017,13, 2 162

work page
[16]

Litzius, I

K. Litzius, I. Lemesh, B. Krüger, P. Bassirian, L. Caretta, K. Richter, F. Büttner, K. Sato, O. A. Tretiakov, J. Förster, et al.,Nature Physics2017,13, 2 170

work page
[17]

Legrand, D

W. Legrand, D. Maccariello, F. Ajejas, S. Collin, A. Vecchiola, K. Bouzehouane, N. Reyren, V. Cros, A. Fert,Nature materials2020,19, 1 34

work page
[18]

T. Dohi, S. DuttaGupta, S. Fukami, H. Ohno,Nature communications2019,10, 1 5153

work page
[19]

R. Juge, N. Sisodia, J. U. Larrañaga, Q. Zhang, V. T. Pham, K. G. Rana, B. Sarpi, N. Mille, S. Stanescu, R. Belkhou, et al.,Nature Communications2022,13, 1 4807

work page
[20]

V. T. Pham, N. Sisodia, I. Di Manici, J. Urrestarazu-Larrañaga, K. Bairagi, J. Pelloux-Prayer, R. Guedas, L. D. Buda-Prejbeanu, S. Auffret, A. Locatelli, et al.,Science2024,384, 6693 307. Darwin et al. 20

work page
[21]

Darwin, R

E. Darwin, R. Tomasello, P. M. Shepley, N. Satchell, M. Carpentieri, G. Finocchio, B. Hickey, Scientific Reports2024,14, 1 95

work page
[22]

R. Chen, Y. Gao, X. Zhang, R. Zhang, S. Yin, X. Chen, X. Zhou, Y. Zhou, J. Xia, Y. Zhou, et al.,Nano letters2020,20, 5 3299

work page
[23]

S. S. Parkin,Physical Review Letters1991,67, 25 3598

work page
[24]

Parkin, S.-H

S. Parkin, S.-H. Yang,Nature nanotechnology2015,10, 3 195

work page
[25]

S. Liu, R. Tomasello, Y. Wu, B. Fang, A. Chen, D. Zheng, B. Zhang, E. Darwin, H. J. Hug, M. Carpentieri, et al.,Advanced Electronic Materials2025, e00130

work page
[26]

Zhang, Y

X. Zhang, Y. Zhou, M. Ezawa,Nature communications2016,7, 1 10293

work page
[27]

Tomasello, V

R. Tomasello, V. Puliafito, E. Martinez, A. Manchon, M. Ricci, M. Carpentieri, G. Finocchio, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics2017,50, 32 325302

work page
[28]

C. E. Barker, S. Finizio, E. Haltz, S. Mayr, P. M. Shepley, T. A. Moore, G. Burnell, J. Raabe, C. H. Marrows,Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics2023,56, 42 425002

work page
[29]

Yang, K.-S

S.-H. Yang, K.-S. Ryu, S. Parkin,Nature nanotechnology2015,10, 3 221

work page
[30]

Alejos, V

O. Alejos, V. Raposo, L. Sanchez-Tejerina, R. Tomasello, G. Finocchio, E. Martinez,Journal of Applied Physics2018,123, 1

work page
[31]

M. I. Sim, D. Thian, R. Maddu, X. Chen, H. K. Tan, C. Li, P. Ho, A. Soumyanarayanan, Advanced Functional Materials2025,35, 11 2416927

work page
[32]

Ajejas, Y

F. Ajejas, Y. Sassi, W. Legrand, T. Srivastava, S. Collin, A. Vecchiola, K. Bouzehouane, N. Reyren, V. Cros,APL Materials2023,11, 6

work page
[33]

X. Chen, T. Tai, H. R. Tan, H. K. Tan, R. Lim, T. Suraj, P. Ho, A. Soumyanarayanan, Advanced Functional Materials2024,34, 1 2304560

work page
[34]

Brandão, D

J. Brandão, D. Dugato, M. P. dos Santos, F. Beron, J. Cezar,Applied Surface Science2022, 585152598

work page
[35]

Feng, A.-O

Y. Feng, A.-O. Mandru, O. Yıldırım, H. Hug,Physical Review Applied2022,18, 2 024016

work page
[36]

Schmid, M

I. Schmid, M. Marioni, P. Kappenberger, S. Romer, M. Parlinska-Wojtan, H. Hug, O. Hellwig, M. Carey, E. Fullerton,Physical review letters2010,105, 19 197201

work page
[37]

Benassi, M

A. Benassi, M. A. Marioni, D. Passerone, H. J. Hug,Scientific reports2014,4, 1 4508

work page
[38]

K. G. Rana, A. Finco, F. Fabre, S. Chouaieb, A. Haykal, L. D. Buda-Prejbeanu, O. Fruchart, S. Le Denmat, P. David, M. Belmeguenai, et al.,Physical review applied2020,13, 4 044079

work page
[39]

Takano, R

K. Takano, R. Kodama, A. Berkowitz, W. Cao, G. Thomas,Physical Review Letters1997, 79, 6 1130

work page
[40]

M. D. Stiles, R. D. McMichael,Physical Review B1999,59, 5 3722. Darwin et al. 21

work page
[41]

Y. Zhao, S. Yang, K. Wu, S. Li, Y. Gao, H. Hao, X. Zhang, S. Wang, Q. Liu, S. Zhang, et al., Advanced Functional Materials2023,33, 49 2303133

work page
[42]

D. V. Christensen, U. Staub, T. Devidas, B. Kalisky, K. Nowack, J. L. Webb, U. L. Andersen, A. Huck, D. A. Broadway, K. Wagner, et al.,Journal of Physics: Materials2024,7, 3 032501

work page
[43]

Hierro-Rodríguez, C

A. Hierro-Rodríguez, C. Quirós, A. Sorrentino, L. M. Álvarez-Prado, J. I. Martín, J. M. Alameda, S. McVitie, E. Pereiro, M. Velez, S. Ferrer,Nature communications2020,11, 1 6382

work page
[44]

Donnelly, V

C. Donnelly, V. Scagnoli,Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter2020,32, 21 213001

work page
[45]

H. J. Hug, B. Stiefel, P. Van Schendel, A. Moser, R. Hofer, S. Martin, H.-J. Güntherodt, S. Porthun, L. Abelmann, J. Lodder, et al.,Journal of Applied Physics1998,83, 11 5609

work page
[46]

Y. Feng, P. M. Vaghefi, S. Vranjkovic, M. Penedo, P. Kappenberger, J. Schwenk, X. Zhao, A.-O. Mandru, H. Hug,Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials2022,551169073

work page
[47]

Baćani, M

M. Baćani, M. A. Marioni, J. Schwenk, H. J. Hug,Scientific reports2019,9, 1 3114

work page
[48]

Duine, K.-J

R. Duine, K.-J. Lee, S. S. Parkin, M. D. Stiles,Nature physics2018,14, 3 217

work page
[49]

J. L. Hutter, J. Bechhoefer,Review of scientific instruments1993,64, 7 1868

work page
[50]

H.-J. Butt, M. Jaschke,Nanotechnology1995,6, 1 1

work page
[51]

X. Zhao, J. Schwenk, A. Mandru, M. Penedo, M. Baćani, M. Marioni, H. Hug,New Journal of Physics2018,20, 1 013018

work page
[52]

Giordano, G

A. Giordano, G. Finocchio, L. Torres, M. Carpentieri, B. Azzerboni,Journal of Applied Physics2012,111, 7

work page
[53]

T. Xu, Z. Chen, H.-A. Zhou, Z. Wang, Y. Dong, L. Aballe, M. Foerster, P. Gargiani, M. Valvidares, D. M. Bracher, et al.,Physical Review Materials2021,5, 8 084406

work page
[54]

Mandru, O

A.-O. Mandru, O. Yıldırım, R. Tomasello, P. Heistracher, M. Penedo, A. Giordano, D. Suess, G. Finocchio, H. J. Hug,Nature communications2020,11, 1 6365

work page