MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The measurement of off‐plane magnetic field through electron vortex beams

2016· other· en· W4232662378 on OpenAlexaff
Vincenzo Grillo, Tyler R. Harvey, Jordan Pierce, Federico Venturi, R. Balboni, Gian Carlo Gazzadi, Stefano Frabboni, Benjamin McMorran, Robert W. Boyd, Ebrahim Karimi

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Microscopy Congress 2016: Proceedings · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic properties of thin films
Canadian institutionsMax Planck - University of Ottawa Centre for Extreme and Quantum PhotonicsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic fieldMagnetizationCondensed matter physicsVortexPhysicsField (mathematics)Plane (geometry)Demagnetizing fieldPhase (matter)GeometryMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well known that a magnetic field produces a phase change proportional to the in plane magnetic field B [1]. Alas the out of plane magnetic field is more elusive. The only measurement that so far seems to produce any out of plane information is the magnetic dichroism [2] as it actually measures the out of plane magnetization. Unfortunately magnetic dichroism experiment is still a complicated experiment that requires a considerable control of the condition and of the material; moreover the measures of the magnetization , often with the objective on, is not directly a measure of the magnetic field itself. However while a plane wave along the optical axis has no significant interaction with a magnetic field along z , vortex beams with winding number l do feel such field through a Larmor phase effect. We will demonstrate here that through the use of large vortex beams [3][4][5] we are able, for the first time, to measure the out of plane magnetic field generated by a magnetic pillar of Co [6]. We placed the vortex around the pillar ensuring as much as possible an axial symmetry and observed the phase effect. The result is in good agreement with the typical magnetization expected for the pillar with an average field at surface of about 2T. Fig 1 illustrates the A and B field produced by a magnetic pillar. The actual magnetic pillar fabricated by EBID deposition is illustrated in fig 1b. Fig 2 depicts the vortex beam density with L=200 as imaged in its focal plane. Thanks to an interferometric approach we were able to measure the magnetic phase contribution and bind it to the magnetic field in proximity of the sample. The magnetic phase is visible in the inset of fig 2 showing approximate axial symmetry. The technique has been carried on in Low Mag mode with the main objective lens off but there are no principle limitation to the application in conventional (S) TEM mode. Moreover this promises to be one of the best recognition of the importance of vortex beams in microscopy for material science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Microscopy Congress 2016: ProceedingsSame topicMagnetic properties of thin filmsFrench-language works237,207