Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Chiral Pumping of Spin Waves

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A precessing nanowire couples only to spin waves traveling one way, so it injects magnons into just one half of a thin magnetic film.

desk verdict Clear, well-built theory of chiral thermal pumping, but the perfect chirality is an idealization that the numerical estimates lean on harder than the text acknowledges. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09141 v2 pith:JFYATSSJ submitted 2019-08-24 cond-mat.mes-hall

Tao Yu , Yaroslav M. Blanter , Gerrit E. W. Bauer This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords chiralspinpumpingwavesmagnonicsSeebeckeffectdipolarcouplingyttriumirongarnetmagnontransport
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that the dipolar interaction between a precessing magnetic nanowire and a thin magnetic film is intrinsically chiral: a nanowire's Kittel mode couples only to spin waves propagating in one direction, so it injects magnons into only one half of the film. This directionality follows from the circular polarization of exchange spin waves, $m_y^{(k)} = i m_x^{(k)}$, which makes the coupling to left-moving waves vanish exactly, $g_{-|k_y|} = 0$. The same chirality converts a temperature difference between wire and film into a unidirectional flow of incoherent magnons, a chiral spin Seebeck effect the paper defines and quantifies. If correct, a single nanoscale magnet becomes a directional magnon source and thermal rectifier, with the emission direction controlled by the relative alignment of the two magnetizations.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dipolar coupling constant $g_k$ between a nanowire magnon and a film spin wave, Eq. (7), built from the magnetostatic field of the film's spin waves and the Zeeman interaction with the wire. The identity that carries the argument is polarization-momentum locking: the dipolar field of a right-moving exchange spin wave lies only above the film, the left-moving only below, and a right-circularly polarized wire ($\tilde{m}_y = i \tilde{m}_x$) matches one of them. With film exchange waves satisfying $m_y^{(k)} = i m_x^{(k)}$, the matrix product in $g_k$ vanishes for $k_y < 0$, giving $g_{-|k_y|}=0$; contour integration over the pole at $q_*$ then restricts the real-space response to $y > y_0$.

What would settle it

Place two nanowires on a 20 nm YIG film with antiparallel magnetizations and measure microwave transmission with the detector on each side in turn; perfect chirality predicts zero signal on the upstream side ($y<y_0$) and a finite signal on the downstream side, so a comparable left-moving spin-wave signal in a Brillouin light scattering or NV-center scan, or symmetric $S_{21}$ under swapping source and detector, would falsify $g_{-|k_y|}=0$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that magnetodipolar coupling between a circularly polarized exchange spin wave in an ultrathin film and a circularly polarized nanowire Kittel mode is perfectly chiral. Writing the coupling as $g_k = F(k)(m_x^{(k)*}, m_y^{(k)*}) \begin{pmatrix} |k| & i k_y \\ i k_y & -k_y^2/|k| \end{pmatrix} (\tilde{m}_x, \tilde{m}_y)^T$, the right-circular polarization condition $m_y^{(k)} = i m_x^{(k)}$ makes the product vanish for negative momenta, $g_{-|k_y|}=0$. Consequently a resonantly driven nanowire excites spin-wave magnetization only in the half-space $y>y_0$ (Eq. 13), and a temperature bias $T_1 \neq T_2$ leaves asymmetric magnon densities $\delta\rho_> = 4\times 10^{13}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ versus $\delta\rho_< = 2\times 10^{13}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ for a cobalt nanowire on a 20 nm YIG film at $T_2=30$ K, $T_1=10$ K. The nanowire's ferromagnetic resonance also broadens by an additional damping $\delta\chi_{\mathrm{Co}} = 3.1\times 10^{-2}$, an order of magnitude larger than its intrinsic Gilbert damping.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the film's spin waves are perfectly circularly polarized exchange waves with $m_y^{(k)} = i m_x^{(k)}$ and uniform magnetization across the thickness; only under this premise does the coupling to left-moving waves vanish exactly, and any ellipticity from dipolar-exchange hybridization, finite thickness, or anisotropy makes the chirality approximate and the quoted densities upper bounds.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A microwave-driven nanowire on an ultrathin film emits a coherent spin-wave beam in one direction only, and reversing the magnetization of film or wire reverses that direction.
  • The nanowire's ferromagnetic resonance linewidth gains a radiative contribution $\delta\chi_{\mathrm{Co}} = 3.1\times 10^{-2}$, which should be observable in microwave reflection and transmission spectra.
  • A temperature bias pumps incoherent magnons unequally: $\delta\rho_> \approx 4\times 10^{13}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ on the downstream side versus $\delta\rho_< \approx 2\times 10^{13}\,\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$ upstream at $T_2=30$ K, $T_1=10$ K, detectable inductively by a second nanowire.
  • Microwave transmission between two nanowires is nonreciprocal under perfect chirality: signal appears only when the detector lies on the pumped side, since $g_{-|q|}=0$ removes back-action.
  • For an elliptically polarized Kittel mode the directionality disappears at a critical angle $\theta_c \simeq \arccos\sqrt{d/w}$, so weak in-plane fields can tune the chirality.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • In a real film, dipolar-exchange hybridization, finite thickness, and anisotropy make the film's spin waves elliptical rather than exactly $m_y = i m_x$, so the perfect zero $g_{-|k_y|}=0$ becomes a finite suppression; the reported densities are therefore best read as upper bounds, and the device remains a strong directional coupler rather than an ideal diode.
  • Because the coupling is long-range and needs no electrical current, the same geometry should work for insulating magnets and could be stacked: several nanowires within one propagation length should add their injected magnon densities, as the paper notes.
  • The chiral spin Seebeck effect is the magnetostatic, low-frequency analogue of chiral nano-optics: the magnetic dipolar field of a spin wave couples selectively to one circular polarization, so designs from chiral plasmonics, such as routing by polarization, may transfer to magnon circuits.
  • A direct test of the magnon diode idea would place a detector nanowire on the upstream side and heat the emitter; the paper's Eq. (18) predicts near-zero signal for $T_1>T_2$, whereas a conventional diffusive spin Seebeck effect would give a symmetric signal.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript develops a quantum theory of the dynamic dipolar coupling between a ferromagnetic nanowire transducer and an extended thin magnetic film. Starting from the Zeeman interaction with dipolar fields and a Holstein-Primakoff magnon representation, the authors derive a momentum-dependent coupling g_k, show that for circularly polarized exchange spin waves the coupling is chiral (g_{-|ky|}=0), and use input-output theory to predict coherent unidirectional spin-wave pumping, a chiral spin Seebeck effect under a temperature gradient, and non-local microwave transmission between two nanowires. Numerical estimates for a Co nanowire on YIG give an additional damping δχ_Co = 3.1×10^-2 and asymmetric thermally injected magnon densities δρ> = 4×10^13 cm^-2 and δρ< = 2×10^13 cm^-2.

Significance. The paper's framework is appealing and the qualitative mechanism is physically well motivated: dipolar fields of spin waves are polarization-momentum locked, so a local precessing magnet can preferentially inject magnons into one half-space. The derivation is first-principles and the final formulas are explicit and usable, with no fitted parameters; the predictions for microwave transmission, damping broadening, Brillouin light scattering, and NV-center detection are experimentally testable. If the quantitative regime of validity is clarified, the work would be a valuable contribution to magnonics. However, the quantitative predictions currently rely on an exchange-only circular-polarization assumption whose breakdown at the dominant coupling wavevector has not been quantified.

major comments (2)
  1. [Origin of the chiral coupling; Eq. (7); SM Eq. (33)] The statement that exchange waves are right-circularly polarized with m_y = i m_x and the resulting perfect chirality g_{-|ky|} = 0 is only valid in the pure-exchange regime. For the film parameters used in the numerical estimates, the dominant coupling occurs at k ≈ π/w ≈ 0.045 nm^-1, where k s ≈ 0.9 and λ_ex k^2 ≈ 0.6, i.e., in the dipolar-exchange crossover. In this regime the eigenmodes of the tangentially magnetized film are elliptical (m_L ≠ 0), so |g_{-|ky|}| does not vanish; the ratio |g_{-|ky|}/g_{|ky|}| is set by |m_L/m_R|. Since SM Eq. (20) contains the m_L terms, the authors should compute this ratio from the full dipolar-exchange mode structure and use it to revise the numerical estimates in the paragraph preceding the Discussion (δρ>, δρ<, δχ_Co). Without this, the quantitative claims are not secured.
  2. [Abstract; Coherent chiral pumping, Eq. (13)] The abstract and Eq. (13) state that the nanowire excites spin waves 'in only half of the film' and that for perfect chiral coupling g_{-q*}=0 the magnetization in the other half is zero. The paper's own thermal-pumping estimate gives a finite δρ< = 2×10^13 cm^-2, so the statement should be framed as a limiting case of circular polarization, not as the generic prediction. The authors should either identify a realistic parameter window where the exchange approximation is quantitatively accurate or present the general asymmetric (rather than half-space) result as the central claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'non-equilibrium magnetization in only half of the film' should be softened to 'predominantly in one half' in view of the finite δρ< reported in the numerical estimates.
  2. [Supplemental Material, reference list] The SM reference list is duplicated and renumbered inconsistently across sections, which will confuse readers trying to trace the cited results.
  3. [Final numerical paragraph before Discussion] The phrase 'The references signal is given by...' appears to be a typo for 'The reference signal is given by...'.
  4. [Fig. 5 caption] The color scale for |g_k| is given in MHz, but the color bar itself is not labeled; please label the color bar and axes explicitly for clarity.
  5. [Eq. (18) and SM Eq. (59)] The damping notation is inconsistent between the main text (κ0) and the SM (κ), and the relation between δρR in Eq. (18) and ρR in SM Eq. (59) should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the chiral coupling is derived from magnetostatics and standard exchange-mode polarization, and the pumping predictions follow algebraically.

full rationale

The chiral coupling g_k is derived, not assumed, from the magnetostatic dipolar field (Eq. 2) and the standard exchange-spin-wave polarization m_y = i m_x (SM Eq. 33). The key vanishing g_{-|ky|}=0 follows from the explicit matrix structure of Eq. (7) and the side-dependent dipolar field of a circularly polarized spin wave (SM Eqs. 21-22), which is a mathematical consequence of Maxwell's equations and the chosen mode polarization. The coherent and incoherent pumping asymmetries (Eqs. 13, 15, 17) are linear-response results expressed directly in terms of |g_k|^2; no parameter is fitted to the predicted observables. The paper's self-citations (e.g., PRB 99, 134424) are used for standard dipolar field integrals and for experimental support of the exchange-wave regime; these are externally published results, not an unverified premise that the present argument depends on in a way that reduces to the target conclusion. The circular-polarization assumption is explicitly stated in the text and the SM also treats the general elliptical case, so it is a controlled idealization rather than a hidden restatement of the chirality. The quantitative estimates may be quantitatively too optimistic because k ~ pi/w lies in the dipolar-exchange crossover, but that is a correctness or validity concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard magnetostatics and spin wave theory. The main idealizations are circular polarization of exchange waves, homogeneous magnetization across thickness, negligible interface exchange, and disregard of higher subbands and magnon interactions; these are stated in the paper but not quantitatively validated.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Kinetic exchange waves in the film are right-circularly polarized with m_y = i m_x
    Used to derive perfect chirality g_{-|ky|}=0 (SM Eq. 33, main text before Eq. 7).
  • domain assumption Magnetization is homogeneous across the film and nanowire thickness (step-function profiles)
    Assumed for thin films s, d ~ 10 nm; used to evaluate overlap integrals (main text after Eq. 5).
  • domain assumption Interface exchange between nanowire and film is negligible compared with dipolar coupling
    Stated in main text: 'disregard interface exchange, which appears to play only a minor role.'
  • domain assumption Higher magnon subbands are disregarded
    Main text: 'Disregarding higher magnon subbands turns out to be a good approximation even at higher temperatures because of the strong mode selectivity of the dipolar coupling.'
  • standard math Standard input-output theory and Kubo formula for linear response
    Used to derive coherent and incoherent pumping rates.
  • domain assumption Magnon-magnon and magnon-phonon interactions are neglected in the film
    SM Sec. V: 'we may disregard the effects of magnon-magnon and magnon-phonon interactions that otherwise render magnon transport phenomena diffuse.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chiral Pumping of Spin Waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JFYATSSJ

@misc{pith2026190809141,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chiral Pumping of Spin Waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JFYATSSJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09141}
}
read the original abstract

We report a theory for the coherent and incoherent chiral pumping of spin waves into thin magnetic films through the dipolar coupling with a local magnetic transducer, such as a nanowire. The ferromagnetic resonance of the nanowire is broadened by the injection of unidirectional spin waves that generate a non-equilibrium magnetization in only half of the film. A temperature gradient between the local magnet and film leads to a unidirectional flow of incoherent magnons, i.e., a chiral spin Seebeck effect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09141 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. The magnetization in the wire precesses in a di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Parameters and coordinate system when the magnetizations of film and nanowire are non-collinear. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (Color online) Reflection Re( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Momentum dependence of the dipolar coupling strength [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Chiral coupling of magnons in waveguides

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2019-09 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Chiral magnon-photon coupling in a rectangular waveguide enables nonreciprocal magnon-magnon interactions and edge-localized superradiant modes in chains of ferromagnetic spheres.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    (11) Since the magnons are coherently excited their number is⟨ˆα† q(t)ˆαq(t)⟩ =⟨ˆα† q(t)⟩⟨ˆαq(t)⟩

    + ˜κ′ 0 2 + ζ0 2 . (11) Since the magnons are coherently excited their number is⟨ˆα† q(t)ˆαq(t)⟩ =⟨ˆα† q(t)⟩⟨ˆαq(t)⟩. In the absence of damp- ing, κq is a positive infinitesimal that safeguards causal- ity. A resonant input⟨ˆp0⟩ = 2πDδ(ω− ˜ω0) excites a film magnetization in position space δMβ(r,t ) = √ 2MsγℏD e−i˜ω0t√ζ0 −i(˜ω0− ˜ω′

    work page

  2. [2]

    (12) The denominator ˜ω0− ωq + iκq/2 vanishes for q± = ±(q∗ +iδΓ) in the complex plane with q∗ > 0 and inverse propagation length δΓ

    + (˜κ′ 0 +ζ0)/2 × ∑ q m(q) β (x) gqeiq(y−y0) (˜ω0−ωq) +iκq/2 + h.c.. (12) The denominator ˜ω0− ωq + iκq/2 vanishes for q± = ±(q∗ +iδΓ) in the complex plane with q∗ > 0 and inverse propagation length δΓ. Closing the contour, we obtain δMβ(r) = √ 2MsγℏD 1 vq∗ e−i˜ω0t√ζ0 (˜ω0− ˜ω′

    work page

  3. [3]

    m(−q∗) β (x)g−q∗eiq−(y−y0) + h.c

    +i(˜κ′ 0 +ζ0)/2 × { m(q∗) β (x)gq∗eiq+(y−y0) + h.c. m(−q∗) β (x)g−q∗eiq−(y−y0) + h.c. for y >y0 y <y0 , (13) where vq∗ = ∂ωq/∂q|q∗ is the magnon group velocity. For perfect chiral coupling g−q∗ = 0 only the magnetiza- tion in half space y > y0 can be excited, which implies handedness also in position space. The coherent chiral pumping can be directly obse...

    work page

  4. [8]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. Stobbe, A. Rauschenbeu- tel, P. Schneeweiss, J. Volz, H. Pichler, and P. Zoller, Nature (London) 541, 473 (2017)

    2017

  5. [11]

    Akhiezer, V

    A. Akhiezer, V. Bar´ ıakhtar, and S. Peletminski, Spin Waves (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968)

    work page 1968

  6. [18]

    Shinjo (El- sevier, Oxford, 2009)

    Nanomagnetism and Spintronics, edited by T. Shinjo (El- sevier, Oxford, 2009)

    work page 2009

  7. [20]

    H. Qin, S. J. H¨ am¨ al¨ ainen, and S. van Dijken, Sci. Rep. 8, 5755 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [24]

    Y. Au, E. Ahmad, O. Dmytriiev, M. Dvornik, T. Davi- son, and V. V. Kruglyak, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 182404 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 62 references
  1. [31]

    J. Xiao, G. E. W. Bauer, K. Uchida, E. Saitoh, and S. Maekawa, Phys. Rev. B 81, 214418 (2010)

    2010

  2. [42]

    van der Sar, F

    T. van der Sar, F. Casola, R. L. Walsworth, and A. Ya- coby, Nat. Commun. 6, 7886 (2015)

    2015

  3. [43]

    Moreno, R

    R. Moreno, R. F. L. Evans, S. Khmelevskyi, M. C. Mu˜ noz, R. W. Chantrell, and O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, Phys. Rev. B 94, 104433 (2016)

    2016

  4. [47]

    F. J. Rodr´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, G. Marino, P. Ginzburg, D. O’Connor, A. Mart´ ınez, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zay- ats, Science 340, 328 (2013)

    2013

  5. [48]

    spatial chirality

    J. Petersen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Science346, 67 (2014). MAGNETO-DIPOLAR FIELDS In-plane magnetized films Here we derive the dipolar field generated by spin waves in a magnetic film with arbitrary propagation direction and ellipticity of the polarization. The equilibri...

    2014

  6. [50]

    Novotny and B

    L. Novotny and B. Hecht, Principles of Nano-Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2006)

    2006

  7. [53]

    G. D. Mahan, Many Particle Physics (Plenum, New York, 1990)

    1990

  8. [54]

    ˇSim´ anek and B

    E. ˇSim´ anek and B. Heinrich, Phys. Rev. B67, 144418 (2003)

    2003

  9. [57]

    L. J. Cornelissen, J. Liu, R. A. Duine, J. Ben Youssef, and B. J. van Wees, Nat. Phys. 11, 1022 (2015)

    2015

  10. [58]

    B. Lenk, H. Ulrichs, F. Garbs, and M. Muenzenberg, Phys. Rep. 507, 107 (2011)

    2011

  11. [59]

    A. V. Chumak, V. I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Nat. Phys. 11, 453 (2015)

    2015

  12. [60]

    Grundler, Nat

    D. Grundler, Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 407 (2016)

    2016

  13. [61]

    V. E. Demidov, S. Urazhdin, G. de Loubens, O. Klein, V. Cros, A. Anane, and S. O. Demokritov, Phys. Rep. 673, 1 (2017)

    2017

  14. [62]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. Stobbe, A. Rauschenbeutel, P. Schneeweiss, J. Volz, H. Pichler, and P. Zoller, Nature (London) 541, 473 (2017)

    2017

  15. [63]

    L. R. Walker, Phys. Rev. 105, 390 (1957)

    1957

  16. [64]

    R. W. Damon and J. R. Eshbach, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 19, 308 (1961)

    1961

  17. [65]

    Akhiezer, V

    A. Akhiezer, V. Bar´ ıakhtar, and S. Peletminski,Spin Waves (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968)

    1968

  18. [66]

    D. D. Stancil and A. Prabhakar, Spin Waves–Theory and Applications (Springer, New York, 2009)

    2009

  19. [67]

    T. Yu, S. Sharma, Y. M. Blanter, and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. B 99, 174402 (2019)

    2019

  20. [68]

    Jamali, J

    M. Jamali, J. H. Kwon, S.-M. Seo, K.-J. Lee, and H. Yang, Sci. Rep. 3, 3160 (2013)

    2013

  21. [69]

    Chang, P

    H. Chang, P. Li, W. Zhang, T. Liu, A. Hoffmann, L. Deng, and M. Wu, IEEE Magn. Lett. 5, 6700104 (2014)

    2014

  22. [70]

    A. A. Serga, A. V. Chumak, and B. Hillebrands, J. Phys. D 43, 264002 (2010)

    2010

  23. [71]

    L. J. Cornelissen, K. J. H. Peters, G. E. W. Bauer, R. A. Duine, and B. J. van Wees, Phys. Rev. B 94, 014412 (2016)

    2016

  24. [72]

    Shinjo (Elsevier, Oxford, 2009)

    Nanomagnetism and Spintronics , edited by T. Shinjo (Elsevier, Oxford, 2009)

    2009

  25. [73]

    H. Yu, G. Duerr, R. Huber, M. Bahr, T. Schwarze, F. Brandl, and D. Grundler, Nat. Commun. 4, 2702 (2013)

    2013

  26. [74]

    H. Qin, S. J. H¨ am¨ al¨ ainen, and S. van Dijken, Sci. Rep.8, 5755 (2018)

    2018

  27. [75]

    Klingler, V

    S. Klingler, V. Amin, S. Gepr¨ ags, K. Ganzhorn, H. Maier-Flaig, M. Althammer, H. Huebl, R. Gross, R. D. McMichael, M. D. Stiles, S. T. B. Goennenwein, and M. Weiler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 127201 (2018)

    2018

  28. [76]

    C. P. Liu, J. L. Chen, T. Liu, F. Heimbach, H. M. Yu, Y. Xiao, J. F. Hu, M. C. Liu, H. C. Chang, T. Stueckler, S. Tu, Y. G. Zhang, Y. Zhang, P. Gao, Z. M. Liao, D. P. Yu, K. Xia, N. Lei, W. S. Zhao, and M. Z. Wu, Nat. Commun. 9, 738 (2018)

    2018

  29. [77]

    J. L. Chen, C. P. Liu, T. Liu, Y. Xiao, K. Xia, G. E. W. Bauer, M. Z. Wu, and H. M. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 217202 (2018)

    2018

  30. [78]

    Y. Au, E. Ahmad, O. Dmytriiev, M. Dvornik, T. Davison, and V. V. Kruglyak, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 182404 (2012)

    2012

  31. [79]

    T. Yu, C. P. Liu, H. M. Yu, Y. M. Blanter, and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. B 99, 134424 (2019)

    2019

  32. [80]

    J. L. Chen, T. Yu, C. P. Liu, T. Liu, M. Madami, K. Shen, J. Y. Zhang, S. Tu, M. S. Alam, K. Xia, M. Z. Wu, G. Gubbiotti, Y. M. Blanter, G. E. W. Bauer, and H. M. Yu, arXiv:1903.00638

    1903 arXiv

  33. [81]

    B¨ uttiker, H

    M. B¨ uttiker, H. Thomas, and A. Prˆ etre, Z. Phys. B94, 133 (1994)

    1994

  34. [82]

    Tserkovnyak, A

    Y. Tserkovnyak, A. Brataas, and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 117601 (2002)

    2002

  35. [83]

    Tserkovnyak, A

    Y. Tserkovnyak, A. Brataas, G. E. W. Bauer, and B. I. Halperin, Rev. Mod. Phys., 77, 1375 (2005)

    2005

  36. [84]

    Uchida, J

    K. Uchida, J. Xiao, H. Adachi, J. Ohe, S. Takahashi, J. Ieda, T. Ota, Y. Kajiwara, H. Umezawa, H. Kawai, G. E. W. Bauer, S. Maekawa, and E. Saitoh, Nat. Mater. 9, 894 (2010)

    2010

  37. [85]

    J. Xiao, G. E. W. Bauer, K. Uchida, E. Saitoh, and S. Maekawa, Phys. Rev. B 81, 214418 (2010). 15

    2010

  38. [86]

    Adachi, J

    H. Adachi, J. Ohe, S. Takahashi, and S. Maekawa, Phys. Rev. B 83, 094410 (2011)

    2011

  39. [87]

    G. E. W. Bauer, E. Saitoh, and B. J. van Wees, Nat. Mat. 11, 391 (2012)

    2012

  40. [88]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Electrodynamics of Continuous Media , 2nd ed. (Butterworth-Heinenann, Oxford, 1984)

    1984

  41. [89]

    Kittel, Phys

    C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 73, 155 (1948)

    1948

  42. [90]

    See Supplemental Material

  43. [91]

    Kittel, Quantum Theory of Solids (Wiley, New York, 1963)

    C. Kittel, Quantum Theory of Solids (Wiley, New York, 1963)

    1963

  44. [92]

    Holstein and H

    T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Phys. Rev. 58, 1098 (1940)

    1940

  45. [93]

    C. W. Gardiner and M. J. Collett, Phys. Rev. A 31, 3761 (1985)

    1985

  46. [94]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1155 (2010)

    2010

  47. [95]

    S. O. Demokritov, B. Hillebrands, and A. N. Slavin, Phys. Rep. 348, 441 (2001)

    2001

  48. [96]

    van der Sar, F

    T. van der Sar, F. Casola, R. L. Walsworth, and A. Yacoby, Nat. Commun. 6, 7886 (2015)

    2015

  49. [97]

    Moreno, R

    R. Moreno, R. F. L. Evans, S. Khmelevskyi, M. C. Mu˜ noz, R. W. Chantrell, and O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, Phys. Rev. B94, 104433 (2016)

    2016

  50. [98]

    M. A. W. Schoen, D. Thonig, M. L. Schneider, T. J. Silva, H. T. Nembach, O. Eriksson, O. Karis, and J. M. Shaw, Nat. Phys. 12, 839 (2016)

    2016

  51. [99]

    Ercole, W

    A. Ercole, W. S. Lew, G. Lauhoff, E. T. M. Kernohan, J. Lee, and J. A. C. Bland, Phys. Rev. B 62, 6429 (2000)

    2000

  52. [100]

    Sebastian, K

    T. Sebastian, K. Schultheiss, B. Obry, B. Hillebrands, and H. Schultheiss, Front. Phys. 3, 35 (2015)

    2015

  53. [101]

    F. J. Rodr´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, G. Marino, P. Ginzburg, D. O’Connor, A. Mart´ ınez, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, Science 340, 328 (2013)

    2013

  54. [102]

    Petersen, J

    J. Petersen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Science 346, 67 (2014)

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.