Two‐Dimensional Magnets: Forgotten History and Recent Progress towards Spintronic Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The recent discovery of 2D magnetic order in van der Waals materials has stimulated a renaissance in the field of atomically thin magnets. This has led to promising demonstrations of spintronic functionality such as tunneling magnetoresistance. The frantic pace of this emerging research, however, has also led to some confusion surrounding the underlying phenomena of phase transitions in 2D magnets. In fact, there is a rich history of experimental precedents beginning in the 1960s with quasi‐2D bulk magnets and progressing to the 1980s using atomically thin sheets of elemental metals. This review provides a holistic discussion of the current state of knowledge on the three distinct families of low‐dimensional magnets: quasi‐2D, ultrathin films, and van der Waals crystals. It highlights the unique opportunities presented by the latest implementation in van der Waals materials. By revisiting the fundamental insights from the field of low‐dimensional magnetism, this review highlights factors that can be used to enhance material performance. For example, the limits imposed on the critical temperature by the Mermin–Wagner theorem can be escaped in three separate ways: magnetocrystalline anisotropy, long‐range interactions, and shape anisotropy. Several recent experimental reports of atomically thin magnets with Curie temperatures above room temperature are highlighted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".