Two-dimensional<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>X</mml:mi><mml:mi>Y</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math>behavior observed in quasi-two-dimensional quantum Heisenberg antiferromagnets

Fan, Xing; Woodward, F. M.; Landee, Christopher P.; Turnbull, Mark M.; Mielke, C. H.; Harrison, N.; Lancaster, Tom; Blundell, Stephen J.; Baker, Peter J.; Babkevich, P.; Pratt, F. L.

doi:10.1103/physrevb.79.134412

Cited by 50 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(45 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These experiments were performed at 500 mK so that the sample is in the magnetically ordered state. Figure 5(d) shows similar data for 4 at 1.8 K taken from 70 . In this case, a single crystal was used and the magnetic field aligned both parallel and perpendicular to the Cu-pyz planes.…”

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropysupporting

confidence: 65%

“…The kink in M (H) arising from the spin-exchange anisotropy is clearly observed with the parallel-field orientation. This kink occurs when the applied in-plane field is increased above the anisotropy field, H A [70]. At this point the moments can begin to rotate out of the easy plane, leading to an enhancement in the dynamic susceptibility and hence a kink in the magnetization 70 .…”

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This kink occurs when the applied in-plane field is increased above the anisotropy field, H A [70]. At this point the moments can begin to rotate out of the easy plane, leading to an enhancement in the dynamic susceptibility and hence a kink in the magnetization 70 . The equivalent feature in the data for the polycrystalline samples is reduced in clarity by comparison; nevertheless, a change in slope is apparent for all compounds.…”

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fields at which this kink appears, the anisotropy field µ 0 H A , are determined from the position of the large peak in d 2 M/dH 2 and are found to be 0.08 T (1), 0.11 T (2) and 0.11 T (3). ∆ can be found by taking the ratio of H A and H c [70] and is found to be similar in magnitude (∼ 10 −3 ) for all members of the family. The size of the energy scale associated with this anisotropy is estimated from the product of J and ∆ and these values are tabulated in Table III.…”

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it has been suggested that the magnetic order in these types of material could be driven by a combination of interlayer coupling and spinexchange anisotropy within the layers (a departure from a Heisenberg-type interactions) 70 . The g-factor anisotropy determined above shows that the spin-orbit coupling that gives rise to spin-exchange anisotropy is present in the materials considered here.…”

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Control of the third dimension in copper-based square-lattice antiferromagnets

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a mixed-ligand synthetic scheme, we create a family of quasi-two-dimensional antiferromagnets, namely, [Cu(HF2)(pyz)2]ClO4 [pyz = pyrazine], [CuL2(pyz)2](ClO4)2 [L = pyO = pyridine-N-oxide and 4-phpyO = 4-phenylpyridine-N-oxide. These materials are shown to possess equivalent two-dimensional [Cu(pyz)2] 2+ nearly square layers, but exhibit interlayer spacings that vary from 6.5713Å to 16.777Å, as dictated by the axial ligands. We present the structural and magnetic properties of this family as determined via x-ray diffraction, electron-spin resonance, pulsed-and quasistatic-field magnetometry and muon-spin rotation, and compare them to those of the prototypical two-dimensional magnetic polymer Cu(pyz)2(ClO4)2. We find that, within the limits of the experimental error, the two-dimensional, intralayer exchange coupling in our family of materials remains largely unaffected by the axial ligand substitution, while the observed magnetic ordering temperature (1.91 K for the material with the HF2 axial ligand, 1.70 K for the pyO and 1.63 K for the 4-phpyO) decreases slowly with increasing layer separation. Despite the structural motifs common to this family and Cu(pyz)2(ClO4)2, the latter has significantly stronger two-dimensional exchange interactions and hence a higher ordering temperature. We discuss these results, as well as the mechanisms that might drive the long-range order in these materials, in terms of departures from the ideal S = 1/2 two-dimensional square-lattice Heisenberg antiferromagnet. In particular, we find that both spin exchange anisotropy in the intralayer interaction and interlayer couplings (exchange, dipolar, or both) are needed to account for the observed ordering temperatures, with the intralayer anisotropy becoming more important as the layers are pulled further apart.

show abstract

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropysupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Spin Exchange Anisotropymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Control of the third dimension in copper-based square-lattice antiferromagnets

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Quantum Spin‐1/2 Dimers in a Low‐Dimensional Tetrabromocuprate Magnet

Sampson

Bristowe

Carr

et al. 2022

Chemistry A European J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work describes a homometallic spin-1 = 2 tetrabromocuprate adopting a bilayer structure. Magnetic-susceptibility measurements show a broad maximum centred near 70 K, with fits to this data using a Heisenberg model consistent with strong antiferromagnetic coupling between neighbouring copper atoms in different layers of the bilayer. There are further weak intralayer ferromagnetic interactions between copper cations in neighbouring dimers. Firstprinciples calculations are consistent with this, but suggest there is only significant magnetic coupling within one direction of a layer; this would suggest the presence of a spin ladder within the bilayer with antiferromagnetic rung and weaker ferromagnetic rail couplings.

show abstract