Magnetic Transport in Spin Antiferromagnets for Spintronics Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Had magnetic monopoles been ubiquitous as electrons are, we would probably have had a different form of matter, and power plants based on currents of these magnetic charges would have been a familiar scene of modern technology. Magnetic dipoles do exist, however, and in principle one could wonder if we can use them to generate magnetic currents. In the present work, we address the issue of generating magnetic currents and magnetic thermal currents in electrically-insulating low-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnets by invoking the (broken) electricity-magnetism duality symmetry. The ground state of these materials is a spin-liquid state that can be described well via the Jordan–Wigner fermions, which permit an easy definition of the magnetic particle and thermal currents. The magnetic and magnetic thermal conductivities are calculated in the present work using the bond–mean field theory. The spin-liquid states in these antiferromagnets are either gapless or gapped liquids of spinless fermions whose flow defines a current just as the one defined for electrons in a Fermi liquid. The driving force for the magnetic current is a magnetic field with a gradient along the magnetic conductor. We predict the generation of a magneto-motive force and realization of magnetic circuits using low-dimensional Heisenberg antiferromagnets. The present work is also about claiming that what the experiments in spintronics attempt to do is trying to treat the magnetic degrees of freedoms on the same footing as the electronic ones.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".