Magnetic and Magnetotransport Properties of Exchange-Biased NiFe/NiO Bilayers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The magnetism of a series of NiFe (20 nm)/NiO (10 nm) bilayers with different Ni oxides has been studied. Ni oxides were made using ratios of O 2 to Ar ions ranging from 7 to 33% during ion-beam deposition. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) has shown that with 7% O 2 /Ar used during bottom layer deposition, the film produced consisted of fcc Ni ( a =3.52 Å) and rock-salt NiO ( a =4.21 Å) phases. A bottom film layer prepared with 33% O 2 /Ar consisted of a pure NiO phase with an expanded lattice constant ( a =4.32 Å). A strong temperature dependence of the coercivity ( H c ) and a 20 kOe field-cooled loop shift exchange bias field ( H ex ) were observed below 100 K. In addition, H ex increased with increasing O 2 /Ar ratio for the bottom layer antiferromagnetic (AF) component. At 10 K, a NiFe/NiO (33% O 2 /Ar) bilayer exhibited the higest H c (110 Oe) and H ex (-60 Oe). This indicated that the more expanded the NiO lattice, the stronger the exchange coupling with the NiFe. The magnetotransport studies have shown that these NiFe/NiO bilayers exhibit anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) behavior. In addition, the total MR ratio of these NiFe/NiO bilayers increases with increasing O 2 /Ar ratio owing to strong anisotropic scattering at the NiFe/NiO interface.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".