Long-ranged magnetic proximity effects in noble metal-doped cobalt probed with spin- dependent tunnelling
Mihai S. Gabureac, Donald A. Mac Laren, Hervé Courtois, Christopher M. Marrows
arXiv:1404.6565 · DOI 10.1088/1367-2630/16/4/043008 · 2014-04-25 · New Journal of Physics
Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval
Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.
Abstract
We inserted non-magnetic layers of Au and Cu into sputtered AlOx-based magnetic tunnel junctions and Meservey-Tedrow junctions in order to study their effect on tunnelling magnetoresistance (TMR) and spin polarization (TSP). When either Au or Cu are inserted into a Co/AlOx interface, we find that TMR and TSP remain finite and measurable for thicknesses up to several nanometres. High-resolution transmission electron microscopy shows that the Cu and Au interface layers are fully continuous when their thickness exceeds ~3 nm, implying that spin-polarized carriers penetrate the interface noble metal to dis- tances exceeding this value. A power law model based on exchange scattering is found to fit the data better than a phenomenological exponential decay. The discrepancy between these length scales and the much shorter ones reported from x-ray magnetic circular dichroism studies of magnetic proximitization is ascribed to the fact that our tunnelling transport measurements selectively probe s-like electrons close to the Fermi level. When a 0.1 nm thick Cu or Au layer is inserted within the Co, we find that the suppression of TMR and TSP is restored on a length scale of <=1 nm, indicating that this is a sufficient quantity of Co to form a fully spin-polarized band structure at the interface with the tunnel barrier.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Al96Si4 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 3 | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Proximity effect between two superconductors spatially resolved by scanning tunneling spectroscopy
similarity 0.87V. Cherkez et al. · 2014 · arXiv:1401.8118
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Electromagnetic proximity effect controlled by spin-triplet correlations in superconducting spin-valve structures
similarity 0.87Zh. Devizorova et al. · 2019 · arXiv:1908.05916
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Perspectives on Magnetic/Superconductor Hybrid Systems: Long-range Electromagnetic Phenomena Induced by Proximity Effect and Interfacial Spin-orbit Coupling
similarity 0.86S. V. Mironov et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2608.20535
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Magnetism via superconductivity in SF proximity structures
similarity 0.85V. N. Krivoruchko & V. N. Varyukhin · 2005 · arXiv:cond-mat/0506277
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Magnetoresistive Effects in Ferromagnet-Superconductor Multilayers
similarity 0.85E. M. Stoudenmire & C. A. R. Sá de Melo · 2004 · arXiv:cond-mat/0412005
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Experimental Observation of the Inverse Proximity Effect in Superconductor/Ferromagnet Layered Structures
similarity 0.85R. I. Salikhov et al. · 2008 · arXiv:0806.4104
Source status unknown — claims are unverified