Phase behavior of antiferromagnetic ultrathin magnetic films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phase diagram of a system of classical spins on a square lattice, interacting through a nearest-neighbor antiferromagnetic exchange and a dipolar interaction, is presented. The phase diagram is based on results from a series of Monte Carlo simulations. The phase diagram shows a parallel antiferromagnetic phase, in which the spins are aligned in the $x\ensuremath{-}y$ plane, and an antiferromagnetic perpendicular phase, in which the spins are aligned perpendicular to the $x\ensuremath{-}y$ plane. The critical value of the exchange interaction, ${J}_{c}(T),$ on the phase boundary separating the two phases shows only a weak dependence on temperature ${(J}_{c}\ensuremath{\approx}{J}_{0}),$ while the transition appears to be first order with an extremely small latent heat. The Monte Carlo data also indicate that the parallel phase separates into two distinct phases, although further work is required to determine the precise nature of the phase boundary separating the two regions. Finally, the low-temperature magnetization data suggest a softening of the spin-wave stiffness close to the phase boundary. The N\'eel temperature of the perpendicular antiferromagnetic phase is found to be consistent with earlier predictions of spin-wave calculations.
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".