4.6 Article

Effect of isothermal crystallization in antiferromagnetic IrMn on the formation of spontaneous exchange bias

期刊

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS
卷 118, 期 25, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/5.0053339

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key Technologies R&D Program of China [2016YFA0201102, 2017YFA0303600]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51871232, 51871233, 51931011]
  3. Ningbo Science and Technology Bureau [2018B10060]
  4. K. C. Wong Education Foundation [GJTD-2020-11]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that the isothermal crystallization of the IrMn layer plays a crucial role in the formation of SEB in IrMn/CoFeB bilayer, with even a slight degree of crystallization being sufficient to induce a significant SEB. The results confirm the newly reported SEB mechanism driven by isothermal crystallization in IrMn layer and clarify the key factor influencing the magnitude of SEB.
Recently, a spontaneous exchange bias (SEB) driven by the isothermal crystallization of the antiferromagnetic IrMn layer has been reported in IrMn/FeCo bilayer. However, the key factors to determine the magnitude of SEB have not been clearly understood yet. Here, we investigate the effect of isothermal crystallization in IrMn layer on the formation of SEB in IrMn/CoFeB bilayer through preparing the samples with different degrees of isothermal crystallization in IrMn layer. The SEB is negligible in the sample with more structure-stable IrMn layer, confirming that the isothermal crystallization of IrMn plays a crucial role in the formation of SEB. However, the SEB field does not change significantly with the free-relaxation time of IrMn/CoFeB bilayers or IrMn layer. These results indicate that a slight degree of isothermal crystallization in IrMn layer is sufficient to induce a large SEB in IrMn/CoFeB bilayer. Our results not only confirm the newly reported SEB driven by the isothermal crystallization in IrMn layer but also clarify the key factor to control the magnitude of SEB.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据