Spin dynamics and 1/3 magnetization plateau in the coupled distorted diamond chain compound <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>Cu</mml:mi> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>MoO</mml:mi> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:math>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate magnetic properties of the $s=1/2$ compound ${\mathrm{K}}_{2}{\mathrm{Cu}}_{3}{({\mathrm{MoO}}_{4})}_{4}$ by combining magnetic susceptibility, magnetization, specific heat, and electron spin resonance (ESR) with density functional calculations. Its monoclinic structure features alternating ${\mathrm{Cu}}^{2+}$ ($s=1/2$) monomers and edge-shared dimers linked by ${\mathrm{MoO}}_{4}$ units, forming a distorted diamond chain along the $a$ axis. Antiferromagnetic order occurs at ${T}_{\mathrm{N}}=2.3$ K, as evident from a $\ensuremath{\lambda}$-type anomaly in specific heat and magnetic susceptibility derivatives. Inverse magnetic susceptibility reveals coexisting ferro- and antiferromagnetic interactions. Specific heat and ESR data show two characteristic temperatures: one at 20 K, associated with spin-singlet formation in ${\mathrm{Cu}}_{2}{\mathrm{O}}_{9}$ dimers, and another at 3.68 K, indicating short-range correlations between dimers and monomers. Magnetization measurements reveal a metamagnetic transition at 2.6 T and a critical magnetic field ${\ensuremath{\mu}}_{0}{H}_{c}=3.4$ T, where a 1/3 magnetization plateau emerges with saturation near 0.35 ${\ensuremath{\mu}}_{\mathrm{B}}$. Low-temperature specific heat and magnetization data reveal the suppression of long-range order at ${\ensuremath{\mu}}_{0}{H}_{c}$, enabling the construction of a temperature-magnetic field phase diagram showing multiple magnetic phases near the ${\ensuremath{\mu}}_{0}{H}_{c}$. Density functional theory confirms a distorted diamond chain with ${J}_{1}$ dimers and competing ${J}_{2}, {J}_{4}, {J}_{3}$, and ${J}_{5}$ interactions with monomer spins as an effective low-temperature spin model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".