An overview of advanced instruments for magnetic characterization and measurements

Abstract

Magnetic materials play a pivotal role in emerging fields such as new energy, information technology, and biomedicine, where accurate magnetic characterization is essential for material innovation and device engineering. Notably, with the burgeoning development of nanomaterials and spintronics, the importance of magnetic characterization has grown significantly, accompanied by increasingly higher requirements for precision and multi-dimensional analysis. This paper elaborates on the working principles and structural components of static magnetic measurement techniques—including Vibrating Sample Magnetometer (VSM), Alternating Gradient Magnetometer (AGM), Magneto-Optical Kerr Effect (MOKE) Microscope, Magnetic Force Microscope (MFM) and Superconducting Quantum Interference Device (SQUID) Magnetometer, as well as dynamic magnetic measurement techniques such as Alternating Current (AC) susceptometry and Ferromagnetic Resonance (FMR). In addition, this review also introduces emerging techniques relevant to spintronics, including Magnetometer based on negatively charged nitrogen-vacancy (NV⁻) centers in diamond, Spin-polarized Scanning Tunneling Microscope (SP-STM), Lorentz Transmission Electron Microscope (LTEM), and Soft X-ray-based techniques, highlighting their principles and applications in quantum sensing, magnetic imaging, and element-specific spin analysis. This overview emphasizes the unique capabilities and measurement principles of each magnetic characterization instrument, providing users with practical guidance to identify the most appropriate tool based on specific research objectives, material properties, and experimental requirements, thereby improving characterization efficiency and accuracy.

1 Introduction

Magnetic measurement, serving as a fundamental approach for investigating and characterizing the behavior of magnetic materials under external magnetic fields, plays an integral role in scientific research across numerous cutting-edge fields, including but not limited to biomedicine (Doaga et al., 2013; Nosrati et al., 2018; Kermanian et al., 2020), physics (Béa et al., 2008; Pan et al., 2008; Lavrijsen et al., 2013; Anbuselvan et al., 2021), and materials science (El-Bassuony and Abdelsalam, 2017; Ramakrishna et al., 2018; Jabbar et al., 2020). It enables the quantification of the magnetic parameters such as coercivity, remanent magnetization, and saturation magnetization (Cullity and Graham, 2011), as well as the evaluation of magnetic susceptibility and permeability, which reflect a material’s responsiveness to magnetic fields. With continued research advancement, dynamic magnetic parameters—such as AC susceptibility, magnetic loss, magnetic relaxation (Topping and Blundell, 2018), and spin dynamic characteristics (Tang et al., 2023)—have become key indicators for understanding frequency-dependent behavior and microscopic magnetic processes. Moreover, the development of advanced characterization techniques, such as MFM, and NV center magnetometer, has enabled the exploration of nanoscale magnetic domain structures. In summary, magnetic measurements play an essential role not only in evaluating the performance of conventional ferromagnetic materials, but also in advancing research on novel magnetic materials, spintronic devices, and nanomagnetism.

Magnetic measurement instruments can be systematically classified into static magnetic measurement instruments and dynamic magnetic measurement instruments according to the state of the external magnetic field employed during measurement. Static measurement techniques operate under a constant or quasi-static magnetic field, and the representative instruments in this category include the VSM (Foner, 1959), AGM (Flanders, 1988), SQUID (Fagaly, 2006), MOKE-based magnetometer (Soldatov and Schäfer, 2017) and MFM (Krivcov et al., 2018), offering distinct advantages in sensitivity, spatial resolution, or suitability for specific sample forms and measurement conditions. In contrast, dynamic magnetic measurement techniques apply an AC magnetic field to probe frequency-dependent behaviors. Typical instruments include AC susceptometer (Topping and Blundell, 2018), which measure real and imaginary components of susceptibility over a range of frequencies, and FMR systems (Wang et al., 2018), which provide insights into damping mechanisms and spin dynamics at the microscopic level. In addition to conventional instruments, emerging techniques originally developed for spintronics—such as NV⁻ center magnetometer (Rondin et al., 2014), SP-STM (Bagchi et al., 2024), LTEM (Xue, 2025), and soft X-ray-based techniques (Van der Laan and Figueroa, 2014)—are increasingly used for high-resolution magnetic imaging and quantum sensing, offering access to spin structures at nanoscale levels. This classification reflects the progression of magnetic measurement from macroscopic, steady-state characterization toward microscopic, transient investigations, aligning with the evolving demands of modern magnetic materials research.

This review systematically introduces representative static and dynamic magnetic measurement techniques, while also covering spintronic-relevant emerging methods, aiming to serve as a practical reference for method selection and a source of inspiration for cutting-edge characterization development.

2 Static magnetic measurement techniques

Static magnetic measurement techniques serve as the cornerstone for elucidating the intrinsic magnetic behavior of materials, focusing on equilibrium magnetization responses under direct current (DC) or quasi-static magnetic fields. The magnetic hysteresis measurements (M-H curve) are conducted by sweeping an external magnetic field, enabling the characterization of key magnetic properties: defines a material’s maximum magnetization capacity, quantifies its resistance to demagnetization, and reflects retained magnetization. By measuring those key parameters, macroscopic magnetic characteristics—such as magnetization behavior and magnetism classification—can be effectively revealed and analyzed. Combined with temperature-dependent measurements, static techniques capture magnetic phase transitions, such as the Curie temperature ( in ferromagnets or the Néel temperature () in antiferromagnets, revealing the onset of magnetic ordering. As a relatively fundamental yet powerful characterization approach, static magnetic measurement techniques play a vital role in both academic research and technological innovation. Their ability to reveal intrinsic magnetic parameters with high precision makes them indispensable for understanding material behavior and guiding the design of functional magnetic devices. In the following sections, we provide a detailed overview of several representative static magnetic characterization techniques, spanning from macroscale magnetization to nanoscale domain structures, with a focus on their principles, structures, and applications.

2.1 Vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM)

As one of the most widely utilized instruments for magnetic characterization, the VSM is renowned for its versatility, robustness, and adaptability to diverse sample forms, including bulk solids, powders (Frandsen et al., 2021), thin films (Ke et al., 2021), and liquids, whether in the form of single crystals, polycrystals, hard magnetic materials, or soft magnetic ones. This technique was first realized by Simon Foner in 1955 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Lincoln Laboratory, where he constructed the first prototype using readily available materials, including a paper cup, paper straw, and a loudspeaker (Foner, 1996). The central idea was to mechanically vibrate a magnetized sample within a uniform magnetic field, thereby inducing an alternating magnetic flux through a set of stationary pickup coils. According to Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction, this time-varying magnetic flux generates an induced voltage () in the coils that is directly proportional to the sample’s magnetic moment. The corresponding experimental results were published in 1956 (Foner, 1956), and further mechanical refinements followed in 1959. Subsequently, he granted the patent for the VSM design to Princeton Applied Research Corp (PARC), which marked the beginning of the commercial development of the VSM.

Over the decades, continued engineering and electronic advancements have significantly enhanced the sensitivity and stability of VSM systems. Modern commercial VSMs typically consist of three primary subsystems—the magnetic field generation and control unit, the vibration and sample mounting unit, and the signal detection and processing unit (as schematically illustrated in Figure 1)—and are capable of achieving sensitivities in the range of 10⁻⁷ to 10⁻⁸ emu with typical acquisition times of 10 s per measurement point. The magnetic field generation and control unit comprises an electromagnet and a gaussmeter. The electromagnet provides a uniform magnetic field to magnetize the sample, while the gaussmeter monitors the field intensity in real time. This feedback enables precise closed-loop control, ensuring the field remains stable and accurate throughout the measurement process. The vibration and sample mounting unit typically includes a vibration head, a sample rod, and the sample holder. The vibration head, driven by a mechanical oscillator, induces sinusoidal motion in the sample at a fixed frequency (commonly around tens of hertz). The sample, mounted at the lower end of the rod, is positioned within the uniform magnetic field. Vibration can occur either parallel or perpendicular to the field direction, depending on the system configuration (Mészáros, 2007). The signal detection and processing unit is mainly composed of a detection coil and a lock-in amplifier (LIA). The pickup coil system typically adopts a four-coil configuration arranged symmetrically along the vibration axis (Mallinson, 1966). This differential arrangement enhances the detection sensitivity and effectively cancels out background noise and environmental interference, thereby significantly improving the signal-to-noise ratio. As the magnetized sample oscillates within the magnetic field, it causes a time-varying magnetic flux through the pickup coils, thereby inducing a voltage via electromagnetic induction. The LIA, phase-locked to the vibration frequency, selectively amplifies and extracts the signal corresponding to the sample’s magnetic response, effectively suppressing noise at other frequencies. By integrating these subsystems, the VSM enables accurate and efficient magnetic moment measurements across a broad range of material systems and sample geometries.

FIGURE 1

Further, digging into the working principle, the induced voltage obtained by the pick-up coils of the VSM can be given below (Dodrill and Lindemuth, 2021):where, m denotes the magnetic moment of the sample, and A and f represent the amplitude and frequency of vibration, respectively, and S is the sensitivity function of the detection coils. It is clear from formula that increasing the amplitude , the frequency , or the sensitivity will enhance measurement accuracy. However, in practical implementations, each of these parameters must be carefully optimized to avoid adverse effects. Excessive vibration frequency can induce substantial eddy currents in conductive samples, which in turn distort the magnetic response and generate undesirable heat. To mitigate these effects, the vibration frequency is typically maintained below 100 Hertz (Hz). Similarly, to minimize geometric distortions and prevent signal loss due to non-uniform field coupling, the vibration amplitude should be kept moderate, generally smaller than the diameter of the pickup coil. Furthermore, the sensitivity factor can be enhanced through optimization of the pickup coil design, for example, by increasing the number of coil turns or modifying the coil geometry to better match the sample’s magnetic field distribution. While increasing the number of turns improves inductive sensitivity, it also raises coil resistance, which elevates thermal noise and may reduce the effective signal-to-noise ratio. As an alternative, improving the magnetic coupling between the sample and the pickup coils, such as by reducing the coil-to-sample distance, offers a promising route to increasing . It is important to note, though, that the spacing cannot be arbitrarily minimized, as sufficient room must be preserved for the sample to oscillate freely. Therefore, striking the perfect balance is crucial.

The distinctive advantage of the VSM over other magnetometers resides in its multifaceted applicability, enabling it to characterize samples across diverse morphological forms. For instance, VSM has been employed to characterize powder-form nanomaterials, such as Ni_xCo_xMg_xCu_xZn_1−4xO, where doping-dependent transitions from diamagnetic to mixed diamagnetic-ferromagnetic behavior were observed (Thien et al., 2024). It also enables the evaluation of perpendicular magnetic anisotropy (PMA) in thin film structures by analyzing their hysteresis loops (Smith et al., 2023). Furthermore, through modular integration of cryogenic and high-temperature accessories, the VSM facilitates magnetic measurements under controlled thermal environments, a capability particularly critical for studying temperature-dependent magnetic transitions. For example, Feng et al. (2023) employed a VSM to measure the temperature-dependent magnetization and hysteresis loops of tetragonal and hexagonal Mn₃O₄ nanosheets. These measurement results were used to determine the magnetic phase transition, Curie temperature, and identify the ferromagnetic ordering and the origin of magnetism. These applications collectively highlight VSM’s versatility in probing static magnetic properties across a broad range of sample types and environmental conditions.

Despite its widespread use, the measurement precision of conventional VSM systems presents limitations when characterizing ultra-weak magnetic signals, particularly in the context of micro- and nano-electronic materials. In response, recent efforts have been devoted to improving system performance through the development of enhanced vibration drivers and more sensitive detection coil designs (Niazi et al., 2000; Nizhankovskii and Lugansky, 2007; El-Alaily et al., 2015; Jordán et al., 2018; Lopez-Dominguez et al., 2018; Dodrill and Lindemuth, 2021). While these customized, home-built VSM systems offer advantages in cost and user flexibility, they often fall short in achieving the high precision required for advanced magnetic analysis. Therefore, improving measurement precision and enabling versatile testing functions has emerged as a central challenge for the advancement of VSM technology.

2.2 Alternating gradient magnetometer (AGM)

As another key technique for magnetic moment measurement, the AGM offers significantly higher precision and sensitivity compared to the VSM, making it especially well-suited for characterizing materials with ultra-weak magnetic signals. Unlike VSM, which relies on detecting induced voltages via sample vibration, the AGM functions as a magnetic force balance, detecting vibration amplitude of a sample subjected to an alternating magnetic field gradient. The original concept of AGM emerged in the 1970s, where the sample was mounted on an elastic rod and subjected to an alternating magnetic field gradient. At resonance, the magnetic force induced a measurable deflection of the rod, visible under a microscope. The deflection amplitude was found to be proportional to the magnetic moment of the sample, establishing the foundation of the AGM technique (Zijlstra, 1970). Subsequent developments in AGM technology primarily focused on enhancing the vibration detection methods and refining the sample holder design. In 1980, the integration of piezoelectric bimorphs and lock-in amplifiers markedly improved detection precision, reaching a sensitivity of 10⁻¹⁰ emu (Roos et al., 1980). Building upon these advancements, Richter et al. (1988) refined the system through optimizing signal acquisition, introducing background noise compensation, and implementing strategies to suppress external interference, thereby achieving a remarkable sensitivity of 10⁻¹¹ emu. Most notably, Todorovic and Schultz (1998) employed a quartz tuning fork as the piezoelectric sensor in combination with a magnetic field gradient of 5 kOe/cm (50 T/m), attaining a noise floor as low as 10⁻¹² emu, one of the most sensitive performances reported to date in quantitative magnetic characterization.

Currently, commercial AGMs, based on Flanders’ research (Flanders, 1988; 1990), utilize piezoelectric bimorphs as sensors, offering advantages such as high sensitivity, improved signal stability, and reduced noise interference, with a typical sensitivity of 10^–8 emu at a sampling rate of one point per second. The Composition is schematically depicted in Figure 2A, and additional detail of probe is shown in Figure 2B. The core sensing element of a typical AGM probe is a piezoelectric bimorph, which serves as a high-sensitivity vibration detector. The bimorph is mechanically coupled to the sample via two fused silica extensions, and the sample itself is mounted on a glass sample holder. The magnetic field system comprises a field-controlled electromagnet that provides a constant direct current (DC) magnetic field, along with gradient coils that generate an AC magnetic field. Under the excitation of the AC gradient field, the sample experiences a force at the same frequency as the alternating field, which causes the bimorph to generate a voltage signal proportional to the applied force. This signal is detected and extracted by a LIA. When a DC magnetic field is applied, the vibration amplitude of the sample is proportional to its magnetic moment. By measuring the vibration amplitude as a function of the applied DC field, a hysteresis loop can be obtained. For an AGM, the force on the sample in the non-uniform magnetic field is given by the following formula (Dodrill and Reichard, 2021):In general, a force in the X direction results from the gradient of the X component of the gradient field interacting with the X component of the magnetic moment in the sample. The first term in equation is this force. The magnetic moment can be estimated by measuring the magnitude of the field gradient and the alternating force. The second and third terms in equation should be decreased because they are undesirable. In normal situations, this is accomplished by lowering the field gradient.

FIGURE 2

The AGM has gained widespread recognition for its high sensitivity and precision in characterizing weak magnetic materials, making it a reliable tool for detecting subtle magnetic responses. For example, Şuan et al. (2020) utilized AGM to examine the impact of Al₂O₃ addition on Fe₃O₄ nanoparticles, demonstrating its capability to sensitively detect variations in saturation magnetization despite compositional changes. Similarly, Amir et al. (2023) used AGM to characterize superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) used in magnetic abrasives, extracting key parameters such as coercivity and saturation magnetization, and confirming their superparamagnetic behavior, which is critical for magnetically assisted polishing applications.

Through continuous optimization of mechanical sensing mechanisms, structural design, and gradient coil configurations, researchers have developed various AGM system variants tailored to different measurement demands. These advancements include integration with the MOKE (Hill et al., 1996), the development of vector magnetometers (Thomas et al., 2003), and specialized implementations for measuring reversible parallel and transverse susceptibilities (Barbic, 2004). Additional adaptations have enabled operation under cryogenic conditions (O’Grady et al., 1993) and the development of reed-type AGM systems for compact, high-sensitivity applications (Frey et al., 1988). Despite its high measurement precision and wide adaptability, AGM still faces several technical limitations in practice. Its sensitivity is highly susceptible to environmental disturbances, which may degrade performance by an order of magnitude or more. Common external interferences include acoustic noise, air flow fluctuations, ambient temperature variation, electronic noise, and mechanical vibrations from nearby equipment or human activity. In addition, the mechanical fragility of AGM probes, particularly the fused silica extensions, necessitates careful sample mounting to avoid damage. To address these challenges and enhance detection accuracy, Truth Instruments Co., Ltd., has recently introduced a novel variant known as the Laser Alternating Gradient Magnetometer (LAGM). This system employs laser Doppler vibrometry to capture the oscillatory motion of the sample induced by the alternating magnetic gradient. Leveraging the ultra-high displacement resolution of laser interferometric sensing, on the order of picometer, the LAGM achieves higher measurement precision than traditional AGMs, with magnetic moment noise levels as low as 10⁻⁹ emu. In addition, the LAGM features a decoupled design in which the vibration generation and detection subsystems are physically separated. This modularity facilitates integration with external systems, such as low-temperature cryostats or electrical transport measurement platforms, enabling the construction of a multifunctional physical field characterization system. Such versatility positions the LAGM as a promising tool for future high-precision magnetometer applications.

2.3 Magneto-optical Kerr microscope

The Magneto-Optical Kerr Microscope is a specialized instrument renowned for its ability to provide real-time, high-resolution imaging of magnetic domain structures in a non-invasive and surface-sensitive manner. Its working principle is based on the magneto-optical Kerr effect, wherein the polarization state of reflected light is modulated by the magnetization of the sample. This effect was first observed by John Kerr in the 1870s (Kerr et al., 1877), and has since laid the foundation for a range of magneto-optical measurement techniques. Based on the magneto-optical Kerr effect, two main types of instruments have been developed: Kerr magnetometers for hysteresis loops measuring, and Kerr microscopes for magnetic domain structures imaging. Especially, the Kerr microscope stands out for its capability to visualize spatially resolved magnetic phenomena, making it particularly valuable in both fundamental magnetism studies and spintronic research.

The schematic sketch and the mechanism of the MOKE are shown in Figure 3A. By measuring slight changes in the polarization of a polarized laser beam upon reflection from the sample surface, the magnetic information of the sample can be obtained (McCord, 2015). We can use this phenomenological model to describe the detailed origin of this effect. First, the linearly polarized light can be seen as a superposition of left and right circularly polarized components. Upon interacting with a magnetized sample, two distinct effects occur: (i) the two polarized components will travel with different velocities and they emerge at the end of the media with different phase shifts, which will lead to the Kerr rotation ; (ii) the absorption coefficients of the two components for the magnetic media is different and they emerge at the end of the media with different intensities, which will lead to the Kerr ellipticity of the outgoing light (Ciprian et al., 2018). A further underlying reason for this phenomenological model is the Zeeman exchange splitting together with spin-orbit interaction, which is explained in detail in papers (Argyres, 1955; Bruno et al., 1996). Depending on the relative directions of magnetization and plane of incidence of the light, MOKE can be categorized into three geometries: polar MOKE, longitudinal MOKE, and transverse MOKE. Among them, polar and longitudinal MOKE are the most commonly used configurations. Polar MOKE is sensitive to the out-of-plane magnetization, where the magnetization vector is oriented normal to the sample surface. Longitudinal MOKE, on the other hand, detects the in-plane magnetization component that lies within the plane of incidence. In longitudinal MOKE measurements with oblique incidence, unwanted polar MOKE contributions may also arise, potentially affecting the accuracy of in-plane magnetization detection. To minimize the influence of the polar component and isolate the longitudinal response, several suppression strategies have been developed. These include a dual-configuration approach that swaps the laser source and detector to extract angular-dependent components via addition and subtraction (Ding et al., 2000), a quadrant-detector-based method that separates signals through spatially resolved analysis (Celik et al., 2019), and a recently developed mirror and quarter-wave plate configuration that leverages rotational symmetry to cancel the polar response (Greening et al., 2025). In addition, by combining any two or all of them and using some specified techniques (Vavassori, 2000; Ding et al., 2001), i.e., generalized magneto-optical ellipsometry, MOKE can provide the vectorial magnetic information of the sample. In summary, it should also be noted that, unlike techniques directly measuring magnetic flux or moment, MOKE signals depend also on the material-specific magneto-optical coupling strength.

FIGURE 3

The basic setup for detecting magnetism using MOKE typically consists of a light source, a polarizer, an analyzer, and a detector (Qiu and Bader, 2000). Linearly polarized light is incident on the surface of a magnetic sample; the reflected light is then collected by the detector after passing through the analyzer. To enable spatially resolved magnetic domain imaging, the Kerr microscope integrates a microscope objective and a camera into the optical path, as shown in Figure 3B. Additionally, to observe different types of MOKEs (e.g., longitudinal, transverse, or polar Kerr effects), aperture or fiber optic entry method can be used to adjust the incident light direction. While the use of a camera enables real-time visualization of magnetic domains, the quantitative accuracy of Kerr rotation angle measurements is generally lower than that of conventional point-detection MOKE magnetometers. This is primarily due to illumination instability, camera noise, and limited detector sensitivity, which reduce the precision of angle-resolved Kerr signal extraction.

Owing to its high spatial resolution, surface sensitivity, and non-destructive nature, magneto-optical Kerr microscope has become a powerful characterization platform for the investigation of magnetic domain structures and their evolution (Domenichini et al., 2019). One of its fundamental applications lies in defect detection and quality assessment of magnetic thin films, where high-resolution Kerr imaging enables precise magnetization mapping to identify local inhomogeneities and pinning sites (Adam et al., 2009; Adam et al., 2010). Similarly, MOKE has been widely employed to visualize magnetic skyrmions, nanoscale magnetic quasiparticles with topological protection, critical for next-generation low-power spintronic devices such as racetrack memories (Kato et al., 2023). Beyond static imaging, magneto-optical Kerr microscope plays a crucial role in the real-time study of magnetic domain wall dynamics, offering insights into the underlying mechanisms governing domain nucleation and propagation. In advanced configurations, MOKE systems can be integrated with electrical probe stations to facilitate the observation of domain wall motion driven by spin-transfer torque (STT) and spin-orbit torque (SOT) effects (Ryu et al., 2013).

To extend conventional MOKE techniques toward ultrafast magnetization dynamics, time-resolved magneto-optical Kerr effect (TR-MOKE) systems employ a pump-probe configuration to achieve picosecond and even femtosecond temporal resolution (Neudert et al., 2005; Mozooni et al., 2014). In this technique, two temporally separated laser pulses are used: a high-energy pump pulse excites the sample or initiates a specific magnetic event, while a delayed probe pulse monitors the resulting changes. By using a high-precision displacement stage to systematically change the transmission distance of the probe pulse, the time delay between the pump and probe pulses can be gradually and precisely adjusted. This allows for the recording of time-resolved Kerr signals to reconstruct the dynamic evolution of the sample’s magnetization (Schäfer and McCord, 2021). This enables the time resolution step of TR-MOKE to be as short as sub-picoseconds. Gradually, TR-MOKE microscope has become the main ultrafast magnetic dynamic measurement method in the field of spintronics, especially it plays an extremely important role in the field of optical-magnetic coupling such as all-optical switching (AOS) (Lalieu et al., 2019; Peng et al., 2024; Peng et al., 2023a; b; c). Researchers have employed TR-MOKE measurements to verify the ultrafast AOS dynamics in materials such as GdFeCo alloys (Kirilyuk et al., 2010), TbFe (Hassdenteufel et al., 2013), and Co/Gd multilayers (Lalieu et al., 2017), as well as the unique phenomena observed in antiferromagnetic materials like Mn₂Au (Bhattacharjee et al., 2018) and IrMn (Guo et al., 2024) under femtosecond laser excitation. Subsequently, TR-MOKE has also been utilized to explore the integration of AOS with magnetic tunnel junctions (MTJs) (Wang et al., 2022), as well as laser-induced magnetization switching in ferromagnetic spin valves (Igarashi et al., 2023; Igarashi et al., 2024). These studies offer novel approaches for the optical-electrical-magnetic integration and pave the way for future information writing and storage technologies. TR-MOKE is one of the most representative applications of ultrafast time-resolved pump-probe techniques. Beyond that, the advantages brought by pump-probe methods—such as ultrafast temporal resolution, multidimensional information, and non-contact measurement—have also been applied in various fields, including transient absorption, lattice and structural dynamics such as time-resolved X-ray diffraction (TR-XRD) and time-resolved Raman spectroscopy (TR-Raman), time-resolved ferromagnetic resonance (TR-FMR), and time-domain thermoreflectance for studying thermal properties.

MOKE technology has seen continuous advancements in recent years, driven by its exceptional sensitivity and scalability. Although quantitative characterization remains technically challenging, some researchers have proposed leveraging magnetic domain displacement as a potential solution (Hrabec et al., 2014; Magni et al., 2022). Moreover, in magnetic chip fabrication, wafer-level MOKE inspection has become the most prevalent method for quality control. Given these developments, MOKE-based techniques are expected to play an increasingly important role in both future research and industrial production.

2.4 Magnetic force microscope (MFM)

As another pivotal magnetic imaging technique, MFM has been widely adopted in both materials science research and industrial applications, owing to its ability to achieve nanoscale spatial resolution in the characterization of magnetic structures (Hartmann, 1999). It operates by detecting the magnetic force gradient between a magnetized probe tip and the sample surface, allowing for indirect imaging of magnetic field distributions with high spatial precision. Since its introduction, MFM has undergone continuous technological advancements and methodological refinements, establishing itself as a powerful tool for the high-resolution investigation of localized magnetic phenomena, including domain structures, magnetic coupling, and stray field distributions.

As illustrated in Figure 4A, MFM mainly consists of four key components: a cantilever, a ferromagnetic tip, a detection system, and a scanning control unit. The cantilever is usually made of silicon or silicon nitride, with a ferromagnetic tip attached to its end. The magnetic tips are typically fabricated from polycrystalline metal wires, such as nickel, iron, or cobalt. The detection system is responsible for measuring the subtle deflections of the cantilever induced by magnetic interactions between the tip and the sample. Common detection approaches include optical beam deflection methods (Erlandsson et al., 1988; Rugar et al., 1988), capacitive sensors (Göddenhenrich et al., 1988), and in some high-sensitivity implementations, differential optical interferometry (Schönenberger and Alvarado, 1989). The scanning control unit precisely regulates the relative position between the sample and the tip, enabling high-resolution, point-by-point surface scanning and mapping of the magnetic force distribution at the nanoscale.

FIGURE 4

MFM operates based on the dipolar interaction between the ferromagnetic tip and the magnetic stray field of the sample surface. This interaction enables MFM to acquire both magnetic and topographical information of the sample simultaneously. As the ferromagnetic tip approaches the sample surface, the stray magnetic field of the sample exerts a localized force on the tip, leading to a measurable deflection of the cantilever. Highly sensitive detection systems are employed to accurately measure the slight displacements of the cantilever. These deflections provide quantitative information about the magnetic force distribution, thereby reflecting the underlying magnetization of the sample surface. The detected signal, typically proportional to the magnetic force or its spatial derivative, is integrated into a servo feedback loop that accurately regulates the tip-sample distance. During the scanning process, this distance is continuously monitored and recorded. As a result, an image representing contours of constant interaction force or force gradient is constructed, revealing critical magnetic features such as the size, shape, and orientation of magnetic domains. In addition to magnetic imaging, MFM can also operate in specific modes to acquire topographical information. For example, in the electrostatic control method, a controlled Coulomb force is applied between the tip and the sample in addition to the magnetic interaction force. By precisely adjusting the magnitude of this electrostatic force, the tip-sample distance is regulated. While keeping the total interaction force constant, the vertical displacement of the tip during scanning is recorded. This displacement data corresponds to the topographical variations of the sample surface, thus enabling topographical imaging. Figures 4B,C give typical domain images measured by MFM.

The diameter and geometry of the MFM probe tip have a critical impact on the instrument’s spatial resolution. A larger tip radius increases the magnetic interaction volume, leading to signal averaging and a diminished ability to resolve fine-scale magnetic features. To address this limitation, several tip miniaturization techniques have been developed. Among them, electron beam deposition (EBD) (Jumpertz et al., 1997), focused ion beam (FIB) milling (Vasile et al., 1991), and the attachment of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs) to microfabricated silicon cantilevers (Dai et al., 1996) have shown the most promising results. In addition, researchers have explored strategies to reduce magnetic coating coverage, such as selectively coating only the apex of the tip or thinning the magnetic layer, with the aim of enhancing magnetic sensitivity and spatial resolution. Beyond geometric and coating modifications, further advancements have led to the development of specialized probe types, including double-exchange tips (Han et al., 2007), antiferromagnetic tips (Liu et al., 2002), and synthetic antiferromagnetic tips (Wu et al., 2003). Measurement results indicate that these advanced probes can significantly improve the accuracy and fidelity of magnetic force measurements (Schwarz and Wiesendanger, 2008).

MFM leverages its sensitivity to local magnetic interactions to enable direct imaging of ferromagnetic domain structures, offering valuable insights into both hard and soft magnetic materials. It can resolve individual domain boundaries and reveal the fine internal features of magnetic domains, which are essential for understanding intrinsic magnetic properties (Göddenhenrich et al., 1988). In industrial applications, particularly within the magnetic recording industry, MFM serves as a key diagnostic tool (Martin et al., 1987). It is widely used to analyze the stray magnetic fields generated by recording heads, providing critical information for assessing their performance and structural integrity. Irregularities in stray-field distribution, for instance, may indicate mechanical defects or signal functional degradation (Van Schendel et al., 2001). Furthermore, MFM is applied to investigate written domains in both magneto-optical storage films and longitudinal magnetic recording media, thereby facilitating process optimization and contributing to higher data storage density and improved system reliability (Schoenenberger et al., 1991; Porthun et al., 1995). In recent years, MFM has served as a powerful tool for investigating a wide variety of magnetic structures. MFM has been widely applied to the study of patterned magnetic media (Rodríguez et al., 2016), artificial spin ice (Wang et al., 2016), domain walls (McCord, 2015), nanowires (Wohlhüter et al., 2015), multiferroic structures (Henrichs et al., 2016), and topological magnetic textures such as skyrmions (Pham et al., 2024). In particular, researchers have used MFM to demonstrate various spin current-driven operations (Pham et al., 2024; Mallick et al., 2024) of skyrmions, including their nucleation (Sun et al., 2023), motion (Pham et al., 2024), and annihilation (Mishra et al., 2025), which has significantly facilitated the development of skyrmion-based magnetic tunnel junctions (Chen et al., 2024) and racetrack memory devices (Wang et al., 2020). Meanwhile, quantitative MFM has also continuously evolved over the past 2 decades, employing a variety of approximation methods to quantitatively describe the two-dimensional stray field distribution of magnetic probes. These methods include parameter-free tip transfer function (TTF) approaches (Vock et al., 2011), the use of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in diamond to measure the stray field and derive the cantilever calibration function (Sakar et al., 2021), and the approximation of the tip using a tip-equivalent magnetic charge model to decouple the stray fields of the sample and the probe (Feng et al., 2022a), among others. The two-dimensional stray field distribution of the sample obtained via quantitative MFM can reveal high-resolution, quantitative magnetic information such as the domain structure and the distribution of exchange bias fields (Zingsem et al., 2017). In addition, Monte Carlo (MC) methods have been introduced to analyze uncertainty propagation in quantitative MFM, providing a statistical framework for evaluating the reliability of measured magnetic parameters (Marschall et al., 2022). Moreover, an implementation that integrates specially engineered low-stiffness cantilevers, high-aspect-ratio magnetic nanowire tips, and multi-mode vibration excitation and control has demonstrated significant advantages in studying complex magnetic samples (Freitag et al., 2023). In the future, it is expected to become an important tool for high-resolution magnetic measurements.

MFM offers a series of significant advantages that make it a powerful tool in the study of magnetic materials. It exhibits high environmental adaptability, capable of operating under diverse conditions with minimal sample-preparation needs, which simplifies experimental workflows across various fields. Moreover, its ability to concurrently acquire topographical and magnetic stray-field information provides a comprehensive view of the sample in a single scan, enhancing research efficiency. However, MFM also faces several drawbacks. Its resolution and performance are limited by the cantilever’s sensitivity, which may be insufficient to detect subtle forces. In addition, environmental noise, such as temperature fluctuations and mechanical vibrations, and tip-induced stray fields can further interfere with measurements, especially for soft magnetic samples. These limitations collectively hinder the high-precision measurement capabilities of MFM and must be carefully addressed. With ongoing technological advancements, MFM continues to evolve toward higher precision and broader applicability, including capabilities such as quantitative magnetic moment analysis, image reconstruction and denoising, instrumental integration with complementary techniques, and exploration of emerging application fields (Kazakova et al., 2019; Feng et al., 2022b).

2.5 Superconducting quantum interference device-based magnetometer

Among various magnetic measurement techniques, SQUID magnetometer stands out as the most sensitive and precise instrument currently available. Utilizing the principles of superconductivity and the Josephson effect, SQUID can measure the magnetic moment with an accuracy of 10⁻⁸ emu in a strong magnetic field (7 T and above) and ultra-low temperature (1.8 K) environment (Schmelz et al., 2016). Due to its reliance on a superconducting state, SQUID magnetometer operation necessitates cryogenic environments, typically maintained by liquid helium or closed-cycle refrigeration systems, which leads to relatively high operational and maintenance costs. Nevertheless, SQUID remains unparalleled in its ability to perform ultra-high-precision magnetic moment measurements across a wide variety of materials and under complex experimental conditions (Weinstock, 2002), making it a critical tool in the study of low-dimensional quantum systems, superconductors, and spintronic materials.

The measurement structure and operating principle of the SQUID magnetometer are illustrated in Figure 5A. Each component in the system is carefully designed to serve the goal of ultra-high-precision magnetic moment detection. For example, the magnetic signal from the sample is first sensed by a pickup coil, designed according to Faraday’s law of electromagnetic induction: as the sample moves relative to the coil, a time-varying magnetic flux induces a current that reflects the sample’s magnetic moment. To further enhance sensitivity and suppress environmental noise, the system employs a balanced second-order gradiometer configuration in the coil design. In this design, both the upper and lower coils are wound clockwise, while the central coil is wound counterclockwise with twice the number of turns. This symmetric winding geometry effectively cancels out uniform magnetic field fluctuations and external magnetic interference, thereby significantly improving the signal-to-noise ratio of the system. Similar to the inductive coil design in VSM, the physical dimensions of the pickup coil in SQUID systems must also be optimized to balance sensitivity and geometric accuracy. On one hand, the gradiometer should ideally be small relative to the sample, so that magnetic flux lines do not return the pickup loop, maximizing magnetic coupling efficiency. On the other hand, to minimize artifacts caused by sample geometry and size variation, the detection coils are often made larger than the sample itself. This trade-off requires precise engineering, as improper coil-sample matching may introduce systematic errors in the measured moment, particularly if the sample deviates from the geometry used during system calibration (Kirtley et al., 1995; Stamenov and Coey, 2006).

FIGURE 5

Franco and Dodrill (2021).

In a closed superconducting circuit, the total magnetic flux enclosed by the circuit remains constant, a fundamental property governed by flux quantization. This means that any magnetic flux variation caused by the motion of a magnetic sample within the pickup coil must be compensated by an equivalent response elsewhere in the circuit. Through the design of a flux transformer, this flux variation can be coupled into the detection circuit, enabling indirect but highly precise measurement of the sample’s magnetic moment. The SQUID is currently the most sensitive technology for magnetic flux detection. It can convert extremely small changes in magnetic flux into measurable voltage signals, and its core components are one or more Josephson junctions embedded in a superconducting loop. A Josephson junction is a classic “sandwich” structure consisting of two superconducting electrodes separated by an ultrathin insulating barrier, The behavior of the Josephson junction is governed by the Josephson effect, which manifests when the barrier thickness is less than the coherence length of the Cooper pairs in the superconductor. As illustrated in Figure 5B, when the current flowing through the junction is below the critical current , the junction remains in the superconducting state, and no voltage drop is observed across it. Above the threshold current, the junction transitions into a resistive state and exhibits Ohmic behavior. The transition region near I is particularly significant: small variations in current within this region result in large voltage responses. Based on the steepness of the slope in the transition region, the SQUID enables ultra-sensitive magnetic moment measurements (Fagaly, 2006).

Another key reason for the extremely high measurement accuracy of SQUID is the quantization characteristic when it measures magnetic flux. When the SQUID senses an external magnetic flux change , it induces a compensating magnetic flux such that the total enclosed flux in the loop satisfies the condition , where is the magnetic flux quantum and is an integer. As shown in Figure 5C, the induced current changes as a periodic function with the external magnetic flux (Fagaly, 2006). To obtain an absolute and linear measurement of the flux value, an additional structure, known as a flux-locked loop (FLL), is introduced, as shown in Figure 5A. This configuration includes an external feedback voltage source that couples into the pickup coil and generates a compensating flux to actively cancel the flux change produced by the sample (Dumas and Hogan, 2021). The final output of the measurement is obtained by summing the feedback signal applied by the external voltage source and the residual high-precision signal extracted from the Josephson junction response, thus achieving both linearity and ultra-high sensitivity.

Depending on how the sample interacts with the pickup coil, SQUID magnetometers support two primary modes for magnetic moment measurement: the traditional DC scan and the SQUID-VSM mode. The key distinction between DC-SQUID and SQUID-VSM lies in their measurement modes: DC-SQUID operates in a static (DC) scanning mode, while SQUID-VSM employs a dynamic (AC) vibrating mode. This fundamental difference leads to diverging characteristics in terms of measurement targets, spatial resolution, sensitivity, and application focus. The traditional DC scan drives the sample completely through the second-order gradiometer. By fitting the recorded magnetic signal with position, the magnetic moment of the sample can be obtained. For example, Wu et al. (2021) utilized the DC measurement mode of SQUID to characterize the magnetic response of a superconducting sample, confirming its superconducting properties and magnetic shielding effect. In contrast, the SQUID-VSM mode keeps the sample oscillating sinusoidally at a fixed frequency near the center of the gradiometer, rather than translating it through the entire detection region. The time-varying magnetic response induces an AC voltage, which is measured using LIA, and the magnetic moment is extracted from the amplitude of the AC signal at the drive frequency (Hurt et al., 2013). For example, Adanlété Adjanoh et al. (2024) employed the SQUID-VSM mode to measure quasistatic magnetic parameters of Ta/Pt/Co/Pt ultrathin films, revealing that annealing significantly reduces coercivity and enhances magnetic domain structure. Due to the differences in underlying principles and measurement procedures, the two SQUID modes are suited to different types of samples and experimental needs. The DC scan mode determines the magnetic moment by fitting the spatial variation of the output voltage to a theoretical response function (Bouchiat, 2009), making it well suited for large or geometrically irregular samples, where positional correction through fitting improves accuracy. In contrast, the SQUID-VSM mode measures the amplitude of the induced AC voltage and is therefore more appropriate for high-precision measurements of small, geometrically well-defined samples, where stable harmonic motion ensures consistent signal generation.

Although SQUID magnetometer is renowned for its exceptional sensitivity and precision, it presents several practical challenges that must be carefully addressed during operation. The need for cryogenic temperatures increases both system complexity and operational costs, while also limiting measurement throughput and accessibility. Additionally, measurement accuracy can be compromised by flux creep, magnet hysteresis, and instrumental drift, necessitating systematic calibration and stabilization (Sawicki et al., 2011; Buchner et al., 2018). Furthermore, SQUID magnetometer is generally not suitable for large-volume or strongly magnetic samples, as these may exceed the dynamic range of the pickup coils or introduce nonlinearities and flux instabilities in the detection process. Nevertheless, due to its unparalleled capability for detecting ultra-weak magnetic signals and enabling absolute magnetic moment quantification, SQUID magnetometry remains one of the most widely adopted techniques in magnetic characterization. Ongoing advances such as cryogen-free cooling technologies, miniaturized SQUID-on-chip systems, and enhanced real-time feedback electronics continue to improve its usability and reliability, thereby expanding its applications in both fundamental studies and applied magnetism research.

3 Dynamic magnetic measurement techniques

Static magnetic characterization techniques reveal the equilibrium magnetic properties of materials under direct current fields, yet their quasi-static limit inherently fails to capture the dynamic behavior of magnetic moments in alternating electromagnetic fields. For investigations of high-frequency devices or spin dynamics, a transition to the dynamic measurement paradigm is necessitated, employing time-varying electromagnetic fields to excite forced magnetization oscillations or resonant spin precession, with theoretical interpretation based on the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation to resolve frequency-dependent responses. This transition from equilibrium-state characterization to dynamic-state analysis not only addresses the limitations of static characterization but also establishes a spatiotemporal framework for material magnetism, providing critical insights for spintronics and high-frequency device applications.

3.1 Alternating current (AC) susceptometer

AC susceptometry is a fundamental technique in magnetism research and plays a central role in characterizing the dynamic magnetic responses of materials (Hartshorn, 1925). By quantifying the frequency-dependent magnetic susceptibility under alternating electromagnetic fields, this method provides crucial insights into phenomena such as superconducting phase transitions (Bałanda, 2013), magnetic relaxation processes (Mydosh, 1993), and energy dissipation mechanisms (Gatteschi et al., 2006). As a result, it offers a powerful tool for bridging the gap between a material’s microscopic magnetic dynamics and its macroscopic functional properties.

The theoretical foundation of AC susceptometry lies in the response of materials to alternating fields, described by the complex magnetic susceptibility Here, real part represents the in-phase magnetization component, while imaginary part quantifies out-of-phase energy dissipation arising from hysteresis, eddy currents, or spin-relaxation processes. This formulation assumes the weak-field approximation, under which the system exhibits harmonic responses confined to the fundamental frequency . A central framework for interpreting AC susceptibility is the Debye relaxation model (Topping and Blundell, 2018), which incorporates a damped dynamic equation to relate magnetization response to the characteristic relaxation time. This model reveals the frequency-dependent behavior of susceptibility (as shown in Figure 6A): at low frequencies, the magnetic response is fully developed; at high frequencies, the response is constrained by damping; and an energy dissipation peak emerges at intermediate frequencies, allowing precise interpretation of magnetic relaxation mechanisms in materials.

FIGURE 6

The mutual inductance method is a prevalent technique for AC susceptibility measurement, ideally suited for low-frequency regimes where magnetic relaxation and dynamic responses dominate, offering a simple yet robust solution for fundamental material characterization (as shown in Figure 6B). The system operates through a drive coil connected to an AC current source, generating a stable alternating magnetic field whose frequency and amplitude stability directly impact measurement precision. A sense coil array, typically configured with dual reverse-wound coils around the sample, detects magnetization-induced flux changes, converting magnetic responses into voltage signals and rejecting environmental noise. A lock-in amplifier then processes these signals using the drive coil current as a reference, applying phase-sensitive detection to extract in-phase and out-of-phase components from the fundamental frequency (Edgar and Quilty, 1993; Youssif et al., 2000). In practical measurements, the demagnetization effect must be considered. The internal magnetization of a material generates a demagnetizing field opposing the external field , resulting in the internal field: . This leads to a discrepancy between the measured extrinsic susceptibility () and the intrinsic susceptibility () of the material: . Here, denotes the demagnetization factor, determined by the sample geometry (Blundell, 2001).

AC susceptometry is widely employed to investigate the temperature- and field-dependent magnetic relaxation behavior of materials. In systems such as paramagnetic salts, it enables analysis of the spin relaxation process by applying the Debye relaxation model, which relates susceptibility responses to frequency under both isothermal and adiabatic conditions. By modifying this model to fit experimental data, researchers can elucidate the energy exchange mechanisms between spin systems and the lattice, thereby uncovering the underlying magnetic relaxation dynamics (Casimir and Du Pré, 1938). Furthermore, AC susceptibility has proven to be a powerful tool for probing superconducting phase transitions. For instance, by analyzing the temperature dependence of both complex and wide-band AC susceptibility under various flux pinning regimes, researchers have successfully extracted key physical parameters of high-T_C superconductors, including the critical temperature, magnetic penetration depth, and pinning potential, thereby providing deeper insights into the nature and dynamics of the superconducting transition (Gömöry, 1997). In recent years, AC susceptometry has been increasingly applied to study dynamic magnetic properties in advanced systems such as magnetic nanoparticles, molecular magnets, and low-dimensional heterostructures (Ghigo et al., 2022; Borgohain and Borah, 2021; Fernández-García et al., 2022). With sensitivity to both reversible and dissipative magnetic responses, it serves as a powerful tool for investigating spin dynamics and magnetic relaxation behavior. Notably, the development of high-frequency AC susceptometry has enabled time-resolved analysis of fast magnetic processes, including spin relaxation (Lah et al., 2020), quantum tunneling (Riordan et al., 2019), and high-speed switching relevant to spintronic devices (Cafolla-Ward, 2024). These advancements open new pathways for characterizing materials with short relaxation times and frequency-dependent losses.

However, this technology faces several challenges: during measurements, Joule heating and eddy current heating easily induce sample temperature drift, and existing temperature control measures show limited effectiveness under extreme conditions (e.g., high frequencies). Additionally, inductive and capacitive coupling noise in the environment interferes with detection signals, making interference suppression extremely difficult in complex electromagnetic environments. Moreover, the absence of unified calibration standards reduces the comparability of results from different devices, while the diversity of standard samples also requires enhancement. In the future, AC susceptibility technology may further benefit from integration with multimodal magnetic characterization methods (e.g., Magneto-Optic Kerr Effect, X-ray Magnetic Circular Dichroism), enabling more comprehensive and element-specific analysis.

3.2 Ferromagnetic resonance (FMR)-based system

FMR is a widely used technique for probing the high-frequency magnetization dynamics of magnetic materials. In contrast to AC susceptometer, which characterizes low-frequency magnetic relaxation, FMR-based system investigates the resonant precession of magnetic moments induced by a combination of a static magnetic field and a microwave-frequency oscillating field. When the excitation frequency matches the natural precession frequency of the magnetization vector, resonance occurs, enabling quantitative investigation of properties such as magnetic anisotropy, damping constants, and gyromagnetic ratios. This makes FMR a vital tool in the study of spintronic materials, multilayer heterostructures, and magnetization relaxation phenomena under GHz-range excitations. The early exploration of FMR began in 1911, when V. K. Arkad’yev first observed microwave absorption phenomena in nickel and iron wires exposed to centimeter-wave radiation (Vonsovskii, 2013). In 1923, J. Dorfmann contributed to the theoretical interpretation of these observations and proposed experimental tests to investigate the influence of strong external magnetic fields on ferromagnetic resonance behavior (Dorfmann, 1923). The experimental realization of FMR advanced significantly in 1946, with pioneering work by James Griffiths (Griffiths, 1946), who is widely credited with its discovery. Soon after, Charles Kittel (Kittel, 1948) provided a theoretical explanation for Griffiths’ results, laying the groundwork for the modern interpretation of FMR and its application across a wide range of magnetic systems.

To explain the fundamental principle of FMR, we need to start with a discussion on magnetic dynamics. Within the framework of the macrospin approximation, the time evolution of the magnetization vector () of a ferromagnet in the presence of an effective magnetic field () can be effectively described by the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation (Landau and Lifshitz, 1935),where , , and are the gyromagnetic ration, vacuum permeability and the Gilbert damping parameterm respectively. The LLG equation includes two torque terms on the right-hand side. The first term, describes precession and involves the rotation of both the magnetization vector () and the effective magnetic field (). The second term, , represents damping terms which aligns the magnetization along . The value of determines the damping rate, with larger values causing faster alignment and smaller values leading to slower alignment of m with . The amplitude of the precessions gradually decreases due to damping in the ferromagnet. FMR occurs when an external alternating magnetic field () is applied to the ferromagnet, compensating for the energy dissipation caused by damping. This results in a forced precession of . By tuning the frequency of to match the natural precession frequency of , the amplitude of the forced precession reaches its maximum due to resonance. This phenomenon is known as FMR, and the frequency of precession during resonance is referred to as the resonance frequency (). Kittel’s relation establishes a connection between the resonant field and the resonance frequency f,where is the effective demagnetization field of the ferromagnet. According to the equation, the resonance condition can be matched by fixing and tuning the frequency of or vice versa.

Early FMR measurements were primarily performed using resonant microwave cavities (Patton and Kohane, 1972), shown in Figure 7A, where the resonance condition was achieved by sweeping a static magnetic field while monitoring microwave absorption within a fixed-frequency cavity. These cavity-based FMR setups offer high sensitivity due to their large quality factors, but their applicability is limited to discrete frequencies, requiring cavity replacement for frequency variation. To overcome this limitation, broadband FMR techniques were developed based on planar transmission lines (as shown in Figure 7B), such as coplanar waveguides (CPW) (Lee et al., 2009; Schäfer et al., 2012) and microstrip lines (Kalarickal et al., 2006; Kennewell et al., 2010), enabling continuous frequency coverage across a wide range (up to 65 GHz) (Wu et al., 2019; Khodadadi et al., 2020; Srivastava et al., 2020). These methods offer enhanced versatility, though they introduce challenges such as impedance matching, field nonuniformity, and increased microwave loss.

FIGURE 7

The Vector Network Analyzer (VNA)-FMR measurement is the most commonly used method for conducting broadband FMR experiments (Neudecker et al., 2006; Godsell et al., 2010). This method offers a simple experimental setup because the signal is generated and measured by the VNA in the same device. Figure 7C shows the configuration of the VNA-FMR experiment. The VNA typically operates in frequency-swept mode, while field-swept VNA-FMR measurements have also been reported in (Sharma and Kuanr et al., 2018; Tamaru et al., 2018). A key advantage of VNA-FMR lies in its ability to extract both the real and imaginary components of the complex susceptibility, enabling comprehensive magnetic characterization. However, careful full two-port calibration of the VNA system is essential to ensure measurement accuracy. As an alternative, broadband FMR can also be performed without a VNA using a modular scheme known as Phase-FMR (Montoya et al., 2014), illustrated in Figure 7D. This technique relies on direct power reflection measurements that are sensitive to frequency-dependent impedance changes. Therefore, these experiments typically require field sweeping at a fixed frequency to resolve resonance features accurately. Additionally, electrical detection of FMR has emerged as a sensitive method for probing resonance in magnetic structures (Tsoi et al., 2000; Kiselev et al., 2003). It relies on the generation of DC voltage at resonance, driven by effects such as spin-transfer torque and spin pumping (Sankey et al., 2006). Signals are acquired using voltmeters, with lock-in detection improving the signal-to-noise ratio. Owing to its high sensitivity, this method is well suited for studying nanoscale systems, including individual nanomagnets, and shows promise for integration into spintronic applications (Tulapurkar et al., 2005).

Ferromagnetic resonance (FMR) plays a central role in magnetic materials research by enabling the precise determination of key magnetic parameters. It allows accurate extraction of saturation magnetization via resonance conditions (Beik Mohammadi et al., 2019), and in-plane angular-dependent FMR measurements are widely used to analyze magnetic anisotropy, particularly in exchange-biased systems (Beik Mohammadi et al., 2017). In addition, broadband FMR techniques are essential for quantifying Gilbert damping constants, providing a powerful means to validate theoretical models such as Kamberský’s torque correlation model, and to trace the microscopic origins of damping, including mechanisms governed by spin-orbit coupling. In recent years, FMR has also been extended to the in situ characterization of spin-orbit torque (SOT) devices, offering valuable insights into current-induced magnetization dynamics (Coester et al., 2023; Zhan et al., 2024). In such measurements, a radio-frequency current is applied to the device to excite magnetization precession via spin-orbit torques, and the resulting voltage signal—often referred to as the rectification voltage—is analyzed to extract key parameters (Kim et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2021). Specifically, by analyzing variations in resonance lineshape and linewidth induced by the applied current and magnetic field, researchers can determine the strength and angular dependence of spin-orbit torques, as well as quantify spin Hall efficiencies in multilayer structures (Hibino et al., 2024). This approach, known as spin-torque FMR (ST-FMR), has become a critical technique for optimizing spintronic device performance and for evaluating materials with strong spin–orbit interactions in magnetic random access memory (MRAM) and related applications (Chen et al., 2021). It has also been increasingly employed to investigate magnetization dynamics in two-dimensional magnetic materials, enabling the study of spin relaxation, damping, and anisotropy at the atomic thickness limit (Tang et al., 2023).

Furthermore, researchers have extended FMR by integrating it with complementary techniques to enhance spatial, spectral, and element-specific resolution. One such novel technique is X-ray detected FMR (XFMR) (Van der Laan and Hesjedal, 2023), which makes use of the XMCD effect to produce element-specific magnetic contrast in order to examine the dynamics of magnetization in individual layers. Variants such as diffraction-based FMR (DFMR) and reflectivity-based FMR (RFMR) extend XFMR by enabling the detection of magnetization dynamics through modulations in X-ray scattering and reflectivity signals, thereby enhancing structural and interfacial sensitivity (Burn et al., 2021). In addition, alternative non-microwave-based detection approaches have emerged, including the use of a MFM tip (Nazaretski et al., 2007a; Nazaretski et al., 2007b) and micro-focus Brillouin light scattering (BLS) techniques (Demidov et al., 2010; Demidov et al., 2011), both offering high spatial resolution and local FMR sensitivity. These hybrid and indirect detection methods broaden the experimental versatility of FMR, enabling investigation of complex magnetic phenomena in nanoscale systems.

4 Emerging spintronic characterization techniques

While static and dynamic magnetic characterization techniques remain foundational in understanding material magnetism, the rapid advancement of spintronic research has introduced new measurement demands. As spintronic systems often involve nanoscale spin textures, interfacial phenomena, ultrafast dynamics, and spin-polarized electronic states, traditional methods may face limitations in spatial resolution, temporal precision, or sensitivity to spin-specific quantities. To address these challenges, a range of emerging techniques has been developed—such as NV⁻ center magnetometry, Lorentz transmission electron microscopy (LTEM), Spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscope (SP-STM), and soft X-ray-based techniques. These tools provide localized, time-resolved, and often quantum-sensitive access to spin phenomena, and thus merit dedicated discussion distinct from conventional magnetic measurement systems.

Diamond-based magnetic sensing and measurement technologies are emerging quantum magnetometry techniques that have gained significant attention in recent years. These methods typically involve introducing various point defects into diamond crystals and utilizing the magnetic field sensitivity of their spin states for measurement. Diamond-based magnetometry includes techniques based on diamond color centers such as nitrogen-vacancy (NV), silicon-vacancy (SiV), and group-IV-related centers like GeV and SnV, among which the NV center technology is the most widely applied (Zhang et al., 2025; Guo, 2023; Hong et al., 2013). Magnetometer based on negatively charged nitrogen-vacancy (NV⁻) centers in diamond has recently attracted significant attention as emerging quantum sensors in condensed matter physics (Rondin et al., 2014; Maze et al., 2008). This method relies on the Zeeman response of NV⁻ spin states to external magnetic fields (Barry et al., 2020). By applying green laser excitation and microwave pulses, the NV⁻ electronic spins can be initialized, manipulated, and optically read out. Specifically, when a local magnetic field is present, the spin levels split, resulting in changes in fluorescence intensity. The magnetic field strength and direction can then be precisely extracted via optically detected magnetic resonance (Rondin et al., 2014; Schirhagl et al., 2014). NV⁻ magnetometry offers nanoscale spatial resolution (Grinolds et al., 2014), exceptional field sensitivity (Grinolds et al., 2013; Sushkov et al., 2014) and compatibility with a wide range of environments—from room temperature to cryogenic conditions (Pelliccione et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2019) and from ambient to high pressure (Lesik et al., 2019). Benefiting from these capabilities, NV⁻ center magnetometry is widely used for nanoscale magnetic characterization, such as probing magnetic domains and spin textures (Dovzhenko et al., 2018). Beyond static structures, it has been employed to detect magnon excitations in antiferromagnetic materials, extending its application to systems without net magnetization (Heitzer et al., 2024). In addition, NV⁻ centers have been used to study dynamic processes such as the non-resonant detection of GHz-frequency domain wall oscillations using nanodiamonds positioned near magnetic structures (Xu et al., 2019).

Spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscopy (Bode, 2003), as a magnetic imaging technique with atomic spatial resolution, has been widely employed for investigating local spin structures in spintronic materials (Palotás et al., 2017). Its working principle relies on the spin dependence of the tunneling current, when both the STM tip and the sample surface are spin-polarized, the tunneling current is influenced not only by the local density of states but also by the relative orientation of their spin directions, thereby enabling the detection of local spin configurations. Benefiting from this mechanism, SP-STM retains the ultrahigh spatial resolution of conventional STM while providing additional sensitivity to spin states. Furthermore, by adjusting the magnetization direction of the tip, SP-STM allows for selective imaging of different spin components, enhancing its applicability to complex magnetic structures. At present, SP-STM is primarily employed for imaging spin textures and local magnetic structures (Bagchi et al., 2024; Corbett et al., 2022). It is particularly effective in investigating spin configurations and their control in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic materials (Brüning et al., 2025; Spethmann et al., 2024), and has become a key technique for exploring the microscopic mechanisms of spintronic devices. Moreover, SP-STM has demonstrated unique capabilities in resolving chiral spin configurations, such as noncollinear spin spirals and skyrmion lattices, which are central to the study of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction-driven phenomena and topological spin textures (Brüning et al., 2025; Lee et al., 2022).

Lorentz Transmission Electron Microscopy (LTEM) is a powerful technique for high-resolution imaging of magnetic domain structures (Grundy and Tebble, 1968; Hale et al., 1959). It visualizes in-plane magnetization by detecting the deflection of electron beams caused by Lorentz forces as they pass through magnetic materials. LTEM typically operates in underfocused or overfocused imaging modes to enhance magnetic contrast and is particularly suitable for observing domain walls, magnetic vortices, and skyrmions (Xue, 2025; Chen et al., 2022). Compared with other magnetic imaging methods, LTEM offers real-space imaging with nanoscale spatial resolution and can be combined with in situ magnetic field and temperature control, enabling dynamic studies of magnetization processes and topological magnetic structures (Peng et al., 2018). For example, Matsumoto et al. employed LTEM to investigate the magnetic structure of a Co₈Zn₈Mn₄ alloy and identified a stable triple-q skyrmion phase, revealing the temperature- and field-dependent evolution of its topological magnetic textures (Kotani et al., 2016). However, LTEM also has certain limitations—it requires electron-transparent samples (typically thinner than 100 nm), is mainly sensitive to in-plane magnetization components, and must be conducted in high-vacuum TEM environments (Xue, 2025). These factors impose stringent demands on sample preparation and experimental setup.

With the development of X-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) and X-ray magnetic linear dichroism (XMLD), soft X-ray-based magnetic measurements using synchrotron radiation have become a key technique in magnetism research (Van der Laan and Thole, 1991; Schütz et al., 1987). These methods build on X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XAS), which provides element-specific and chemical-state-sensitive information by detecting the absorption of X-rays at specific energy edges (such as L₂ and L₃) (Van der Laan and Figueroa, 2014). XMCD exploits the difference in absorption of circularly polarized X-rays depending on the magnetization direction of the sample, enabling the detection of spin-resolved unoccupied electronic states through spin-orbit coupling. Conversely, XMLD uses linearly polarized X-rays to probe anisotropic charge distributions influenced by spin order, making it particularly useful for investigating antiferromagnetic and anisotropic ferromagnetic systems (Chen et al., 2019). These spectroscopic techniques can be extended into spatially resolved magnetic imaging using photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM) (Ohldag et al., 2009). In XMCD-PEEM and XMLD-PEEM, magnetic contrast arises from dichroic absorption differences, while the short wavelength of X-rays allows for nanoscale spatial resolution. This combination enables element-specific imaging of magnetic domains and domain walls. Overall, XMCD and XMLD, along with PEEM, provide powerful tools for understanding microscopic magnetic structures and spin configurations with high chemical and spatial resolution. This technique has been used to study a wide range of material systems, including thin films (Price et al., 2016), multilayers (Juge et al., 2022), and nanoparticles (Foerster et al., 2017). Additionally, XMLD and PEEM techniques offer unique advantages in observing antiferromagnetic moment reversal induced by spin-orbit torque (Ohldag et al., 2009; Wadley et al., 2016).

5 Conclusion and outlook

In this review, we systematically categorized magnetic measurement techniques into static, dynamic, and emerging classes. The static category, comprising VSM, AGM, SQUID magnetometer, MOKE microscope, and MFM, primarily addresses equilibrium magnetic properties. The dynamic category, including AC susceptometer and FMR-based systems, focuses on time- and frequency-dependent magnetization processes. In addition, we incorporated several emerging techniques originally developed for spintronic research, such as NV⁻ center magnetometry, SP-STM, LTEM, and soft X-ray-based techniques, which enable unprecedented exploration of spin structures and quantum-scale magnetic phenomena. For each technique, we primarily discussed its working principles and representative applications. These instruments demonstrate distinct strengths in specific measurement domains, from macroscopic hysteresis loop analysis and precise determination of magnetic parameters to nanoscale magnetic domain imaging. Collectively, they leverage a diverse array of physical mechanisms—including electromagnetic induction, quantum interference, magneto-optical effects, and scanning probe techniques, spin-dependent tunneling, spin-state readout—to form a multi-dimensional characterization matrix. In summary, Table 1 primarily highlights the spatial resolution, sample sensitivity, and main limitations of representative static and dynamic magnetic measurement techniques. Furthermore, Table 2 provides a comprehensive overview of all the techniques discussed, highlighting their applications and unique advantages in the field of spintronics.

In conclusion, magnetic measurement techniques have evolved into a diverse toolkit for probing magnetic materials across spatial, temporal, and energy scales. Building upon this foundation, future development is expected to follow several transformative directions that integrate advances in hardware, multi-physics coupling, intelligent data processing, and integrated on-chip sensing technologies. One prominent trajectory involves the development of high-field magnetic measurement platforms. Modern hybrid magnet systems are capable of generating ultrahigh magnetic fields that enable the exploration of novel magnetic phenomena beyond the reach of conventional instrumentation. For instance, the 45 T hybrid magnet developed at the High Magnetic Field Laboratory in Hefei, China, combines superconducting and resistive magnet technologies to provide a stable, user-accessible high-field environment (Bird, 2024). In parallel, pulsed-field systems reaching up to 100 T have been employed to probe exotic magnetic phases, such as field-induced quantum spin liquids in Kitaev materials (Zhou et al., 2023), highlighting the critical role of high magnetic fields in advancing quantum magnetism and emergent spin states.

A second important trend is the development of magneto-electric-optical multi-field coupling platforms that bridge the gap between macroscopic magnetic properties and microscopic magnetic structures. For example, molecule-based magnetic systems exemplify the progress in magnetic multi-field coupling, showcasing integrated optical, electronic, and magnetic responses such as magneto-chiral dichroism and opto-magneto-electric multifunctionality, with promising applications in quantum and sensing devices (Zakrzewski et al., 2024).

The third direction lies in the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into magnetic measurement workflows. AI-driven platforms are enabling closed-loop pipelines encompassing data acquisition, real-time analysis, and decision feedback. For instance, Talapatra et al. (2023) trained a convolutional neural network (CNN) on simulated magnetic domain images to predict key micromagnetic parameters with accuracies up to 93.9%, while McCray et al. (2024) developed a machine learning model that automatically identifies and quantifies magnetic skyrmions from LTEM images with 97.6% accuracy in position detection. These examples underscore how machine learning not only accelerates data analysis but also enables intelligent interpretation of complex magnetic textures.

Beyond these trends, the advancement of integrated on-chip magnetometers represents another key trajectory. Recent progress in NV center, atomic, and solid-state magnetometry has shown the feasibility of achieving high sensitivity and spatial resolution within compact, CMOS-compatible platforms. These miniaturized systems significantly reduce hardware complexity while enabling multi-channel detection of magnetic fields at the microscale. As photonic integration, quantum sensing, and advanced microfabrication technologies continue to mature, chip-scale magnetometers are expected to evolve into scalable, low-power, and application-specific solutions. This evolution will accelerate the deployment of magnetic sensing technologies into diverse applications such as biomedical diagnostics, microscale magnetic imaging, and quantum information processing. Enabled by atomic-scale detection mechanisms, emerging quantum magnetic sensors—such as SQUIDs, NV centers, and atomic magnetometers—offer unprecedented precision, paving the way for a new era of magnetic metrology.

This evolution, driven by synergistic advancements in high-field instrumentation, multi-field coupling, AI algorithm integration, and on-chip sensing technologies, is transforming magnetic measurement from a set of passive diagnostic tools into intelligent, scalable platforms for scientific discovery. Such progress is expected to continuously propel breakthroughs in spintronics, quantum magnetism, and energy-related materials, while expanding the role of magnetic characterization in both fundamental research and emerging real-world applications.

References

• 1

  AdamJ. P.RohartS.JametJ. P.MouginA.FerréJ.BernasH.et al (2009). Single Pt/Co (0.5 nm)/Pt nano-discs: beyond the coherent spin reversal model and thermal stability. J. Magnetics Soc. Jpn.33 (6_2), 498–502. 10.3379/msjmag.0907MI0009

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 2

  AdamJ.JametJ.FerréJ.MouginA.RohartS.WeilR.et al (2010). Magnetization reversal in Pt/Co (0.5 nm)/Pt nano-platelets patterned by focused ion beamlithography. Nanotechnology21 (44), 445302. 10.1088/0957-4484/21/44/445302

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 3

  Adanlété AdjanohA.PakamT.AfenyivehS. D. M. (2024). Magnetic domain and structural defects size in ultrathin films. Phys. Status Solidi – Rapid Res. Lett.19 (1), 2400215. 10.1002/pssr.202400215

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 4

  AmirM.MishraV.SharmaR.IqbalF.AliS. W.KumarS.et al (2023). Development of magnetic nanoparticle based nanoabrasives for magnetorheological finishing process and all their variants. Ceram. Int.49 (4), 6254–6261. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.11.033

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 5

  AnbuselvanD.NilavazhaganS.SanthanamA.ChidhambaramN.GunavathyK. V.AhamadT.et al (2021). Room temperature ferromagnetic behavior of nickel-doped zinc oxide dilute magnetic semiconductor for spintronics applications. Phys. E Low-Dimensional Syst. Nanostructures129, 114665. 10.1016/j.physe.2021.114665

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 6

  ArgyresP. N. (1955). Theory of the Faraday and Kerr effects in ferromagnetics. Phys. Rev.97 (2), 334–345. 10.1103/PhysRev.97.334

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 7

  BagchiM.TounsiT. Y.SafeerA.EfferenC. V.RoschA.MichelyT.et al (2024). Spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscopy measurements of an Anderson impurity. Phys. Rev. Lett.133 (24), 246701. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.246701

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 8

  BałandaM. (2013). AC susceptibility studies of phase transitions and magnetic relaxation: conventional, molecular and low-dimensional magnets. Acta Phys. Pol. A124 (6), 964–976. 10.12693/APhysPolA.124.964

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 9

  BarbicM. (2004). Sensitive measurement of reversible parallel and transverse susceptibility by alternating gradient magnetometry. Rev. Sci. Instrum.75 (11), 5016–5021. 10.1063/1.1808096

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 10

  BarryJ. F.SchlossJ. M.BauchE.TurnerM. J.HartC. A.PhamL. M.et al (2020). Sensitivity optimization for NV^- diamond magnetometry. Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 015004. 10.1103/RevModPhys.92.015004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 11

  BéaH.GajekM.BibesM.BarthélémyA. (2008). Spintronics with multiferroics. J. Phys. Condens. Matter20 (43), 11. 10.1088/0953-8984/20/43/434221

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 12

  Beik MohammadiJ.JonesJ. M.PaulS.KhodadadiB.MewesC. K.MewesT.et al (2017). Broadband ferromagnetic resonance characterization of anisotropies and relaxation in exchange-biased IrMn/CoFe bilayers. Phys. Rev. B95 (6), 064414. 10.1103/PhysRevB.95.064414

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 13

  Beik MohammadiJ.MankeyG.MewesC. K.MewesT. (2019). Strong interfacial perpendicular anisotropy and interfacial damping in Ni_{0. 8}Fe_{0. 2} films adjacent to Ru and SiO₂. J. Appl. Phys.125 (2), 023901. 10.1063/1.5052334

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 14

  BhattacharjeeN.SapozhnikA. A.BodnarS. Y.GrigorevV. Y.AgustssonS. Y.CaoJ.et al (2018). Néel spin-orbit torque driven antiferromagnetic resonance in Mn₂Au probed by time-domain THz spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett.120 (23), 237201. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.237201

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 15

  BirdM. D. (2024). Superconducting magnet technology for the outer coils of resistive -superconducting hybrid magnets. Supercond. Sci. Technol.37 (12), 123003. 10.1088/1361-6668/ad8af0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 16

  BlundellS. (2001). Magnetism in condensed matter. Oxford: OUP.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 17

  BodeM. (2003). Spin-polarized scanning tunnelling microscopy. Rep. Prog. Phys.66 (4), 523–582. 10.1088/0034-4885/66/4/203

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 18

  BorgohainC.BorahJ. P. (2021). A versatile and cost-effective automation of an AC susceptometer using Virtual Instruments and Arduino-Uno microcontroller. J. Instrum.16 (10), P10028. 10.1088/1748-0221/16/10/P10028

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 19

  BouchiatV. (2009). Detection of magnetic moments using a nano-SQUID: limits of resolution and sensitivity innear-field SQUID magnetometry. Supercond. Sci. Technol.22 (6), 064002. 10.1088/0953-2048/22/6/064002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 20

  BrüningR.RózsaL.Lo ConteR.KubetzkaA.WiesendangerR.von BergmannK. (2025). Topological meron-antimeron domain walls and skyrmions in a low-symmetry system. Phys. Rev. X15 (2), 021041. 10.1103/PhysRevX.15.021041

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 21

  BrunoP.SuzukiY.ChappertC. (1996). Magneto-optical Kerr effect in a paramagnetic overlayer on a ferromagnetic substrate: a spin-polarized quantum size effect. Phys. Rev. B53 (14), 9214–9220. 10.1103/PhysRevB.53.9214

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 22

  BuchnerM.HöflerK.HenneB.NeyV.NeyA. (2018). Tutorial: basic principles, limits of detection, and pitfalls of highly sensitive SQUID magnetometry for nanomagnetism and spintronics. J. Appl. Phys.124 (16), 161101. 10.1063/1.5045299

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 23

  BurnD.ZhangS.Van der LaanG.HesjedalT. (2021). Magnetization dynamics in ordered spin structures revealed by diffractive and reflectometry ferromagnetic resonance. AIP Adv.11 (1), 015327. 10.1063/9.0000058

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 24

  Cafolla-WardC. (2024). Using High Frequency A. C. Susceptibility to Probe Frustrated Magnetic Systems.PhD Thesis, Wales: Cardiff University. Available online at: https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/172700

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 25

  CaoZ.LiS.PanY.ZhaoJ.YeS.ZhangX.et al (2024). Characterization of magnetic thin films and spintronic devices using magneto-optic Kerr microscopy. Adv. Devices Instrum.5, 0060. 10.34133/adi.0060

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  CasimirH.Du PréF. (1938). Note on the thermodynamic interpretation of paramagnetic relaxation phenomena. Physica5 (6), 507–511. 10.1016/S0031-8914(38)80164-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  CelikH.KannanH.WangT.MellnikA.FanX.ZhouX.et al (2019). Vector-resolved magnetooptic Kerr effect measurements of spin-orbit torque. IEEE Trans. Magnetics55 (1), 1–5. 10.1109/TMAG.2018.2873129

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 28

  ChenX.ZhouX.ChengR.SongC.ZhangJ.WuY.et al (2019). Electric field control of Néel spin–orbit torque in an antiferromagnet. Nat. Mater.18, 931–935. 10.1038/s41563-019-0424-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 29

  ChenT.PengC.LiaoW.PaiC. (2021). Characterization of spin-orbit torque efficiency in the RF regime for MRAM applications. in 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Radio-FrequencyIntegration Technology (RFIT). New Jersey: IEEE. 10.1109/RFIT52905.2021.9565262

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 30

  ChenZ.TurgutE.JiangY.NguyenK. X.StoltM. J.JinS.et al (2022). Lorentz electron ptychography for imaging magnetic textures beyond the diffraction limit. Nat. Nanotechnol.17, 1165–1170. 10.1038/s41565-022-01224-y

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 31

  ChenS.LourembamJ.HoP.TohA. K. J.HuangJ.ChenX.et al (2024). All-electrical skyrmionic magnetic tunnel junction. Nature627 (8004), 522–527. 10.1038/s41586-024-07131-7

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 32

  CiprianR.LoiF.BusettoE.BonanniV.CasarinB.CarettaA.et al (2018). MOKE setup exploiting a nematic liquid crystal modulator. Rev. Sci. Instrum.89 (10), 105107. 10.1063/1.5033433

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 33

  CoesterB.LimG. J.TanF. N.PohH. Y.LewW. S. (2023). Investigation of spin-orbit torque performance with W/Cu-multilayers as spin current source. J. Appl. Phys.133 (22), 223904. 10.1063/5.0139212

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 34

  CorbettJ. P.MengK. Y.RepickyJ. J.Garcia-DiazR.RowlandJ. R.AhmedA. S.et al (2022). Spin polarized STM imaging of nanoscale Néel Skyrmions in an SrIrO₃/SrRuO₃ perovskite bilayer. Appl. Surf. Sci.599, 153766. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2022.153766

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 35

  CullityB. D.GrahamC. D. (2011). Introduction to magnetic materials. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 36

  DaiH.HafnerJ. H.RinzlerA. G.ColbertD. T.SmalleyR. E. (1996). Nanotubes as nanoprobes in scanning probe microscopy. Nature384 (6605), 147–150. 10.1038/384147a0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 37

  DemidovV. E.UrazhdinS.DemokritovS. O. (2010). Direct observation and mapping of spin waves emitted by spin-torque nano-oscillators. Nat. Mater.9 (12), 984–988. 10.1038/nmat2882

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 38

  DemidovV.UrazhdinS.EdwardsE.DemokritovS. (2011). Wide-range control of ferromagnetic resonance by spin Hall effect. Appl. Phys. Lett.99 (17), 172501. 10.1063/1.3655908

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 39

  DingH.PutterS.OepenH.KirschnerJ. (2000). Experimental method for separating longitudinal and polar Kerr signals. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.212, 5–11. 10.1016/S0304-8853(99)00790-8

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 40

  DingH. F.PütterS.OepenH. P.KirschnerJ. (2001). Spin-reorientation transition in thin films studied by the component-resolved Kerr effect. Phys. Rev. B63 (13), 134425. 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.134425

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 41

  DoagaA.CojocariuA.ConstantinC.HempelmannR.CaltunO. (2013). “Magnetic nanoparticles for medical applications: progress and challenges,” in AIP conference proceedings. New York: American Institute of Physics, 123–131.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 42

  DodrillB.LindemuthJ. R. (2021). “Vibrating sample magnetometry,” in Magnetic measurement techniques for materials characterization. Editors FrancoV.DodrillB. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 15–37.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 43

  DodrillB.ReichardH. S. (2021). “Alternating gradient magnetometry,” in Magnetic measurement techniques for materials characterization. Editors FrancoV.DodrillB. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 139–149.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 44

  DomenichiniP.QuinterosC. P.GranadaM.CollinS.GeorgeJ.-M.CurialeJ.et al (2019). Transient magnetic-domain-wall ac dynamics by means of magneto-optical Kerr effect microscopy. Phys. Rev. B99 (21), 214401. 10.1103/PhysRevB.99.214401

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 45

  DorfmannJ. (1923). Einige bemerkungen zur kenntnis des mechanismus magnetischer erscheinungen. Z. für Phys.17 (1), 98–111. 10.1007/BF01328670

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 46

  DovzhenkoY.CasolaF.SchlotterS.ZhouT. X.ButtnerF.WalsworthR. L.et al (2018). Magnetostatic twists in room-temperature skyrmions explored by nitrogen-vacancy center spin texture reconstruction. Nat. Commun.9, 2712. 10.1038/s41467-018-05158-9

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 47

  DumasR. K.HoganT. (2021). “Recent advances in SQUID magnetometry,” in Magnetic measurement techniques for MaterialsCharacterization. Editors FrancoV.DodrillB. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 39–62.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 48

  EdgarA.QuiltyJ. (1993). A mutual inductance apparatus for measuring magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity. Am. J. Phys.61 (10), 943–946. 10.1119/1.17373

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 49

  El-AlailyT. M.El-NimrM. K.SaafanS. A.KamelM. M.MeazT. M.AssarS. T. (2015). Construction and calibration of a low cost and fully automated vibrating sample magnetometer. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.386, 25–30. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2015.03.051

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 50

  El-BassuonyA. A. H.AbdelsalamH. K. (2017). Giant exchange bias of hysteresis loops on Cr³⁺-doped Ag nanoparticles. J. Supercond. Nov. Magnetism31 (5), 1539–1544. 10.1007/s10948-017-4340-x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 51

  ErlandssonR.McClellandG.MateC.ChiangS. (1988). Atomic force microscopy using optical interferometry. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A6 (2), 266–270. 10.1116/1.575440

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 52

  FagalyR. L. (2006). Superconducting quantum interference device instruments and applications. Rev. Sci. Instrum.77 (10), 101101. 10.1063/1.2354545

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 53

  FengY.MandruA. O.YıldırımO.HugH. J. (2022a). Quantitative magnetic force microscopy: transfer-function method revisited. Phys. Rev. Appl.18 (2), 024016. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.18.024016

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 54

  FengY.VaghefiP. M.VranjkovicS.PenedoM.KappenbergerP.SchwenkJ.et al (2022b). Magnetic force microscopy contrast formation and field sensitivity. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.551, 169073. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2022.169073

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 55

  FengX.ZhaiB.ChengR.YinL.WenY.JiangJ.et al (2023). Phase engineering of 2D spinel-type manganese oxides. Adv. Mater.35 (42), 2304118. 10.1002/adma.202304118

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 56

  Fernández-GarcíaM. P.TeixeiraJ. M.GonzálezdlV. M.MoreiraJ. C.AraújoJ. P. (2022). Delving into the aqueous coprecipitation synthesis of Fe-oxide nanoparticles with a real time AC susceptometer. Appl. Phys. A128 (3), 209. 10.1007/s00339-022-05342-1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 57

  FlandersP. J. (1988). An alternating-gradient magnetometer (invited). J. Appl. Phys.63 (8), 3940–3945. 10.1063/1.340582

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 58

  FlandersP. J. (1990). A vertical force alternating-gradient magnetometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.61 (2), 839–847. 10.1063/1.1141451

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 59

  FoersterM.MaciàF.StatutoN.FinizioS.Hernández-MínguezA.LendínezS.et al (2017). Direct imaging of delayed magneto-dynamic modes induced by surface acoustic waves. Nat. Commun.8 (1), 407. 10.1038/s41467-017-00456-0

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 60

  FonerS. (1956). Vibrating sample magnetometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.27 (7), 548. 10.1063/1.1715636

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 61

  FonerS. (1959). Versatile and sensitive vibrating-sample magnetometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.30 (7), 548–557. 10.1063/1.1716679

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 62

  FonerS. (1996). The vibrating sample magnetometer: experiences of a volunteer (invited). J. Appl. Phys.79 (8), 4740–4745. 10.1063/1.361657

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 63

  FrancoV.DodrillB. (2021). Magnetic measurement techniques for materials characterization. Cham: Springer.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 64

  FrandsenB. A.ReadC.StevensJ.WalkerC.ChristiansenM.HarrisonR. G.et al (2021). Superparamagnetic dynamics and blocking transition in Fe₃O₄ nanoparticles probed by vibrating sample magnetometry and muon spin relaxation. Phys. Rev. Mater.5 (5), 054411. 10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.5.054411

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 65

  FreitagN. H.ReicheC. F.NeuV.DeviP.BurkhardtU.FelserC.et al (2023). Simultaneous magnetic field and field gradient mapping of hexagonal MnNiGa by quantitative magnetic force microscopy. Commun. Phys.6 (1), 11. 10.1038/s42005-022-01119-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 66

  FreyT.JantzW.StibalR. (1988). Compensating vibrating reed magnetometer (invited). J. Appl. Phys.64 (10), 6002–6007. 10.1063/1.342132

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 67

  GatteschiD.SessoliR.VillainJ. (2006). Molecular nanomagnets. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 68

  GhidiniM.MaccherozziF.DhesiS.MathurN. (2022). XPEEM and MFM imaging of ferroic materials. Adv. Electron. Mater.8 (6), 2200162. 10.1002/aelm.202200162

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 69

  GhigoG.FracassoM.GerbaldoR.GozzelinoL.LavianoF.NapolitanoA.et al (2022). High-frequency ac susceptibility of iron-based superconductors. Materials15 (3), 1079. 10.3390/ma15031079

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 70

  GöddenhenrichT.HartmannU.AndersM.HeidenC. (1988). Investigation of Bloch wall fine structures by magnetic force microscopy. J. Microsc.152 (2), 527–536. 10.1111/j.1365-2818.1988.tb01417.x

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar
  • View reference in article

• 71

  GodsellJ. F.KulkarniS.O’DonnellT.RoyS. (2010). Precessional dynamics of Ni₄₅Fe₅₅ thin films for ultrahigh frequency integrated magnetics. J. Appl. Phys.107 (3), 033907. 10.1063/1.3276165

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  GömöryF. (1997). Characterization of high-temperature superconductors by AC susceptibility measurements. Supercond. Sci. Technol.10 (8), 523–542. 10.1088/0953-2048/10/8/001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  GreeningR. W.DeVisscherE. D.FanX. (2025). A method to suppress polar Kerr signal in a longitudinal magneto-optic-Kerr-effect measurement. IEEE Magn. Lett.16, 8100205. 10.1109/LMAG.2025.3577473

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  GriffithsJ. H. (1946). Anomalous high-frequency resistance of ferromagnetic metals. Nature158 (4019), 670–671. 10.1038/158670a0

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  GrinoldsM. S.HongS.MaletinskyP.LuanL.LukinM. D.WalsworthR. L.et al (2013). Nanoscale magnetic imaging of a single electron spin under ambient conditions. Nat. Phys.9, 215–219. 10.1038/nphys2543

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  GrinoldsM. S.WarnerM.De GreveK.DovzhenkoY.ThielL.WalsworthR. L.et al (2014). Subnanometre resolution in three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging of individual dark spins. Nat. Nanotechnol.9, 279–284. 10.1038/nnano.2014.30

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  GrundyP. J.TebbleR. S. (1968). Lorentz electron microscopy. Adv. Phys.17 (66), 153–242. 10.1080/00018736800101286

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  GuoS. (2023). An overview of NV centers. J. Appl. Math. Phys.11 (11), 3666–3675. 10.4236/jamp.2023.1111231

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  GuoZ.WangJ.MalinowskiG.ZhangB.ZhangW.WangH.et al (2024). Single-shot laser-induced switching of an exchange biased antiferromagnet. Adv. Mater.36 (21), 2311643. 10.1002/adma.202311643

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  HaleM. E.FullerH. W.RubensteinH. (1959). Magnetic domain observations by electron microscopy. J. Appl. Phys.30, 789–791. 10.1063/1.1735233

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  HanG.WuY.ZhengY. (2007). Double exchange biased magnetic force microscopy tip and comparison of its imaging performance with commercial tips. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.46 (7R), 4403. 10.1143/JJAP.46.4403

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  HartmannU. (1999). Magnetic force microscopy. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.29 (1), 53–87. 10.1146/annurev.matsci.29.1.53

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  HartshornL. (1925). A precision method for the comparison of unequal mutual inductances at telephonic frequencies. J. Sci. Instrum.2 (5), 145–151. 10.1088/0950-7671/2/5/301

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  HassdenteufelA.HeblerB.SchubertC.LiebigA.TeichM.HelmM.et al (2013). Thermally assisted all-optical helicity dependent magnetic switching in amorphous Fe_100-xTb_x alloy films. Adv. Mater.25 (22), 3122–3128. 10.1002/adma.201300176

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  HeitzerR. C.PintoF.RodríguezE.Rodríguez-SuárezR.MazeJ. R. (2024). Characterization of antiferromagnetic magnons using nitrogen vacancy center relaxometry. Phys. Rev. B110 (13), 134431. 10.1103/PhysRevB.110.134431

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  HenrichsL. F.CespedesO.BennettJ.LandersJ.SalamonS.HeuserC.et al (2016). Multiferroic clusters: a new perspective for relaxor-type room-temperature multiferroics. Adv. Funct. Mater.26, 2111–2121. 10.1002/adfm.201503335

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  HibinoY.TaniguchiT.YakushijiK.KubotaH.YuasaS. (2024). Observation of self-induced spin-orbit torques in Ni-Fe layers with a vertical gradient of magnetization. Phys. Rev. B109 (18), L180409. 10.1103/PhysRevB.109.L180409

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 88

  HillE. W.NazranP.TailorP. (1996). A versatile vibrating reed and magneto-optic magnetometer. IEEE Trans. Magnetics32 (5), 4899–4901. 10.1109/20.539281

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89

  HongS.GrinoldsM. S.PhamL. M.Le SageD.LuanL.WalsworthR. L.et al (2013). Nanoscale magnetometry with NV centers in diamond. MRS Bull.38 (2), 155–161. 10.1557/mrs.2013.23

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  HrabecA.PorterN.WellsA.BenitezM.BurnellG.McVitieS.et al (2014). Measuring and tailoring the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction in perpendicularly magnetized thin films. Phys. Rev. B90 (2), 020402. 10.1103/physrevb.90.020402

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  HurtD.LiS.AmannA. (2013). Versatile SQUID susceptometer with multiple measurement modes. IEEE Trans. Magnetics49 (7), 3541–3544. 10.1109/TMAG.2013.2241029

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  IgarashiJ.ZhangW.RemyQ.DíazE.LinJ. X.HohlfeldJ.et al (2023). Optically induced ultrafast magnetization switching in ferromagnetic spin valves. Nat. Mater.22 (6), 725–730. 10.1038/s41563-023-01499-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  IgarashiJ.Le GuenY.HohlfeldJ.ManginS.GorchonJ.HehnM.et al (2024). Influence of interlayer exchange coupling on ultrafast laser-induced magnetization reversal in ferromagnetic spin valves. Phys. Rev. B109 (9), 094422. 10.1103/PhysRevB.109.094422

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  JabbarR.SabeehS. H.HameedA. M. (2020). Structural, dielectric and magnetic properties of Mn⁺² doped cobalt ferrite nanoparticles. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.494, 165726. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2019.165726

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  JordánD.González-ChávezD.LauraD.León HilarioL. M.MonteblancoE.GutarraA.et al (2018). Detection of magnetic moment in thin films with a home-made vibrating sample magnetometer. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.456, 56–61. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2018.01.088

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  JugeR.SisodiaN.LarrañagaJ. U.ZhangQ.PhamV. T.RanaK. G.et al (2022). Skyrmions in synthetic antiferromagnets and their nucleation via electrical current and ultra-fast laser illumination. Nat. Commun.13 (1), 4807. 10.1038/s41467-022-32525-4

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  JumpertzR.LeinenbachP.Van der HartA.ScheltenJ. (1997). Magnetically refined tips for scanning force microscopy. Microelectron. Eng.35 (1-4), 325–328. 10.1016/S0167-9317(96)00133-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  KalarickalS. S.KrivosikP.WuM.PattonC. E.SchneiderM. L.KabosP.et al (2006). Ferromagnetic resonance linewidth in metallic thin films: comparison of measurement methods. J. Appl. Phys.99 (9), 093909. 10.1063/1.2197087

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  KatoY. D.OkamuraY.HirschbergerM.TokuraY.TakahashiY. (2023). Topological magneto-optical effect from skyrmion lattice. Nat. Commun.14 (1), 5416. 10.1038/s41467-023-41203-y

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 100

  KazakovaO.PuttockR.BartonC.Corte-LeónH.JaafarM.NeuV.et al (2019). Frontiers of magnetic force microscopy. J. Appl. Phys.125 (6), 060901. 10.1063/1.5050712

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  KeW.-E.ShaoP.-W.KuoC.-Y.SongH.HuangR.YagiN.et al (2021). Barium hexaferrite/muscovite heteroepitaxy with mechanically robust perpendicular magnetic anisotropy. npj Flex. Electron.5 (1), 33. 10.1038/s41528-021-00130-y

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  KennewellK.KostylevM.RossN.MagaraggiaR.StampsR.AliM.et al (2010). Magnetization pinning at a Py/Co interface measured using broadband inductive magnetometry. J. Appl. Phys.108 (7), 073917. 10.1063/1.3488618

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103

  KermanianM.NaghibiM.SadighianS. (2020). One-pot hydrothermal synthesis of a magnetic hydroxyapatite nanocomposite for MR imaging and pH-Sensitive drug delivery applications. Heliyon6 (9), e04928. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04928

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  KerrJ. J. T. L.MagazineD. P.ScienceJ. o. (1877). XLIII. On rotation of the plane of polarization by reflection from the pole of a magnet. Lond. Edinb. Dublin Philosophical Mag. J. Sci.3 (19), 321–343. 10.1080/14786447708639245

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  KhodadadiB.RaiA.SapkotaA.SrivastavaA.NepalB.LimY.et al (2020). Conductivitylike Gilbert damping due to intraband scattering in epitaxial iron. Phys. Rev. Lett.124 (15), 157201. 10.1103/physrevlett.124.157201

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  KimS. J.LeeD. K.OhS. H.KooH. C.LeeK. J. (2021). Theory of spin-torque ferrimagnetic resonance. Phys. Rev. B104 (2), 024405. 10.1103/PhysRevB.104.024405

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  KirilyukA.KimelA. V.RasingT. (2010). Ultrafast optical manipulation of magnetic order. Rev. Mod. Phys.82 (3), 2731–2784. 10.1103/RevModPhys.82.2731

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  KirtleyJ.KetchenM.StawiaszK.SunJ.GallagherW.BlantonS.et al (1995). High-resolution scanning SQUID microscope. Appl. Phys. Lett.66 (9), 1138–1140. 10.1063/1.113838

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  KiselevS. I.SankeyJ.KrivorotovI.EmleyN.SchoelkopfR.BuhrmanR.et al (2003). Microwave oscillations of a nanomagnet driven by a spin-polarized current. Nature425 (6956), 380–383. 10.1038/nature01967

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  KittelC. (1948). On the theory of ferromagnetic resonance absorption. Phys. Rev.73 (2), 155–161. 10.1103/PhysRev.73.155

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  KotaniA.NakajimaH.HaradaK.IshiiY.MoriS. (2016). Lorentz microscopy and small-angle electron diffraction study of magnetic textures in La_1−xSr_xMnO₃ (0.15 < x < 0.30): the role of magnetic anisotropy. Phys. Rev. B94 (2), 024407. 10.1103/physrevb.94.024407

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  KrivcovA.JunkersT.MöbiusH. (2018). Understanding electrostatic and magnetic forces in magnetic force microscopy: towards single superparamagnetic nanoparticle resolution. J. Phys. Commun.2 (7), 075019. 10.1088/2399-6528/aad3a4

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  LahN. A. C.MesranM. N.SaariM. M. (2020). Frequency-dependent of AC susceptibility in chitosan oligosaccharide-Ag nanostructures. J. Alloys Compd.835, 155366. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2020.155366

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  LalieuM. L. M.PeetersM. J. G.HaenenS. R. R.LavrijsenR.KoopmansB. (2017). Deterministic all-optical switching of synthetic ferrimagnets using single femtosecond laser pulses. Phys. Rev. B96 (22), 220411. 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.220411

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115

  LalieuM. L. M.LavrijsenR.KoopmansB. (2019). Integrating all-optical switching with spintronics. Nat. Commun.10 (1), 110. 10.1038/s41467-018-08062-4

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116

  LandauL.LifshitzE. (1935). On the theory of the dispersion of magnetic permeability in ferromagnetic bodies. Phys. Z. Sowjetunion8, 153–169. 10.1016/B978-0-08-036364-6.50008-9

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  LavrijsenR.LeeJ. H.Fernandez-PachecoA.PetitD. C.MansellR.CowburnR. P. (2013). Magnetic ratchet for three-dimensional spintronic memory and logic. Nature493 (7434), 647–650. 10.1038/nature11733

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 118

  LeeH.WangY. H.MewesC.ButlerW.MewesT.MaatS.et al (2009). Magnetization relaxation and structure of CoFeGe alloys. Appl. Phys. Lett.95 (8), 082502. 10.1063/1.3207749

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119

  LeeS. H.KimY.ChoB.ParkJ.KimM. S.ParkK.et al (2022). Spin-polarized and possible pseudospin-polarized scanning tunneling microscopy in kagome metal FeSn. Commun. Phys.5 (1), 235. 10.1038/s42005-022-01012-z

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120

  LesikM.PlissonT.TorailleL.RenaudJ.OccelliF.SchmidtM.et al (2019). Magnetic measurements on micrometer-sized samples under high pressure using designed NV centers. Science366, 1359–1362. 10.1126/science.aaw4329

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121

  LiuZ.DanY.JinjunQ.WuY. (2002). Magnetic force microscopy using focused ion beam sharpened tip with deposited antiferro-ferromagnetic multiple layers. J. Appl. Phys.91 (10), 8843–8845. 10.1063/1.1456056

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122

  LiuG.FengX.WangN.LiQ.LiuR. (2019). Coherent quantum control of nitrogen-vacancy center spins near 1000 kelvin. Nat. Commun.10, 1344. 10.1038/s41467-019-09327-2

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  Lopez-DominguezV.QuesadaA.Guzman-MinguezJ. C.MorenoL.LereM.SpottornoJ.et al (2018). A simple vibrating sample magnetometer for macroscopic samples. Rev. Sci. Instrum.89 (3), 034707. 10.1063/1.5017708

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 124

  MagniA.CarlottiG.CasiraghiA.DarwinE.DurinG.DiezL. H.et al (2022). Key points in the determination of the interfacial Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction from asymmetric bubble domain expansion. IEEE Trans. Magnetics58 (12), 1–16. 10.1109/TMAG.2022.3217891

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  MallickS.SassiY.PrestesN. F.KrishniaS.GallegoF.Vicente ArcheL. M.et al (2024). Driving skyrmions in flow regime in synthetic ferrimagnets. Nat. Commun.15 (1), 8472. 10.1038/s41467-024-52210-y

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  MallinsonJ. (1966). Magnetometer coils and reciprocity. J. Appl. Phys.37, 2514–2515. 10.1063/1.1708848

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127

  MarschallM.SieversS.SchumacherH. W.ElsterC. (2022). Uncertainty propagation in quantitative magnetic force microscopy using a Monte-Carlo method. IEEE Trans. Magnetics58 (5), 1–8. 10.1109/TMAG.2022.3153176

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  MartinY.WilliamsC. C.WickramasingheH. K. (1987). Atomic force microscope–force mapping and profiling on a sub 100-Å scale. J. Appl. Phys.61 (10), 4723–4729. 10.1063/1.338807

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  MazeJ. R.StanwixP. L.HodgesJ. S.HongS.TaylorJ. M.CappellaroP.et al (2008). Nanoscale magnetic sensing with an individual electronic spin in diamond. Nature455, 644–647. 10.1038/nature07279

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  McCordJ. (2015). Progress in magnetic domain observation by advanced magneto-optical microscopy. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys.48 (33), 333001. 10.1088/0022-3727/48/33/333001

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  McCrayA. R. C.SinhaS.LiQ.LiuJ.OhY.MüllerD. A.et al (2024). Simulation-trained machine learning models for quantitative analysis of magnetic skyrmions in Lorentz TEM. Apl. Mach. Learn.2 (2), 026120. 10.1063/5.0197138

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132

  MészárosI. (2007). Development of a novel vibrating sample magnetometer. Mater. Sci. Forum537-538, 413–418. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.537-538.413

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  MewesT.MewesC. K. A. (2021). “Ferromagnetic resonance,” in Magnetic Measurement Techniques for Materials Characterization. Editors FrancoV.DodrillB. (Cham: Springer), 431–452. 10.1007/978-3-030-70443-8_16

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  MishraK. K.LoneA. H.SrinivasanS.FariborziH.SettiG. (2025). Magnetic skyrmion: from fundamental physics to pioneering applications. Appl. Phys. Rev.12 (1), 011315. 10.1063/5.0223004

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  MontoyaE.McKinnonT.ZamaniA.GirtE.HeinrichB. (2014). Broadband ferromagnetic resonance system and methods for ultrathin magnetic films. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.356, 12–20. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2013.12.032

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 136

  MozooniB.von HofeT.McCordJ. (2014). Picosecond wide-field magneto-optical imaging of magnetization dynamics of amorphous film elements. Phys. Rev. B90 (5), 054410. 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.054410

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  MydoshJ. A. (1993). Spin glasses: An Experimental Introduction. London: CRC Press.

  • Google Scholar

• 138

  NazaretskiE.MartinI.MovshovichR.PelekhovD.HammelP.ZalalutdinovM.et al (2007a). Ferromagnetic resonance force microscopy on a thin permalloy film. Appl. Phys. Lett.90 (23), 10.1063/1.2747171

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  NazaretskiE.ThompsonJ. D.PelekhovD.MewesT.WigenP.KimJ.et al (2007b). Magnetic resonance force microscopy studies in a thin permalloy film. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.310 (2), e941–e943. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2006.10.994

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  NeudeckerI.WoltersdorfG.HeinrichB.OkunoT.GubbiottiG.BackC.et al (2006). Comparison of frequency, field, and time domain ferromagnetic resonance methods. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.307 (1), 148–156. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2006.03.060

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  NeudertA.McCordJ.ChumakovD.SchäferR.SchultzL. (2005). Small-amplitude magnetization dynamics in permalloy elements investigated by time-resolved wide-field Kerr microscopy. Phys. Rev. B71 (13), 134405. 10.1103/PhysRevB.71.134405

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  NiaziA.PoddarP.RastogiA. (2000). A precision, low-cost vibrating sample magnetometer. Curr. Sci.79 (1), 99–109. 10.1038/35018119

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 143

  NizhankovskiiV. I.LuganskyL. B. (2007). Vibrating sample magnetometer with a step motor. Meas. Sci. Technol.18 (5), 1533–1537. 10.1088/0957-0233/18/5/044

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 144

  NosratiH.SalehiabarM.ManjiliH. K.DanafarH.DavaranS. (2018). Preparation of magnetic albumin nanoparticles via a simple and one-pot desolvation and co-precipitation method for medical and pharmaceutical applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol.108, 909–915. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.10.180

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145

  OhldagH.Van der LaanG.ArenholzE. (2009). Correlation of crystallographic and magnetic domains at Co/NiO(001) interfaces. Phys. Rev. B79, 052403. 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.052403

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 146

  O’GradyK.LewisV. G.DicksonD. P. E. (1993). Alternating gradient force magnetometry: applications and extension to low temperatures (invited). J. Appl. Phys.73 (10), 5608–5613. 10.1063/1.353613

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 147

  PalotásK.RózsaL.SimonE.UdvardiL.SzunyoghL. (2017). Spin-polarized scanning tunneling microscopy characteristics of skyrmionic spin structures exhibiting various topologies. Phys. Rev. B96 (2), 024410. 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.024410

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148

  PanF.SongC.LiuX. J.YangY. C.ZengF. (2008). Ferromagnetism and possible application in spintronics of transition-metal-doped ZnO films. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep.62 (1), 1–35. 10.1016/j.mser.2008.04.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 149

  PattonC. E.KohaneT. (1972). Ultrasensitive technique for microwave susceptibility determination Down to 10^{− 5}. Rev. Sci. Instrum.43 (1), 76–79. 10.1063/1.1685449

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 150

  PelliccioneM.JenkinsA.OvartchaiyapongP.ReetzC.EmmanouilidouE.NiN.et al (2016). Scanned probe imaging of nanoscale magnetism at cryogenic temperatures with a single spin quantum sensor. Nat. Nanotechnol.11, 700–705. 10.1038/nnano.2016.68

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151

  PengL.ZhangY.ZuoS.HeM.CaiJ.WangS.et al (2018). Lorentz transmission electron microscopy studies on topological magnetic domains. Chin. Phys. B27 (6), 066802. 10.1088/1674-1056/27/6/066802

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 152

  PengY.MalinowskiG.GorchonJ.HohlfeldJ.SalomoniD.Buda-PrejbeanuL. D.et al (2023a). Single-Shot Helicity-Independent all-optical switching in Co/Ho multilayers. Phys. Rev. Appl.20 (1), 014068. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.20.014068

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153

  PengY.MalinowskiG.ZhangW.LacourD.MontaigneF.ManginS.et al (2023b). Laser single-shot magnetization reversal in Co_1-xLu_x nanostructures. Phys. Rev. B107 (21), 214415. 10.1103/PhysRevB.107.214415

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154

  PengY.SalomoniD.MalinowskiG.ZhangW.HohlfeldJ.Buda-PrejbeanuL. D.et al (2023c). In-plane reorientation induced single laser pulse magnetization reversal. Nat. Commun.14 (1), 5000. 10.1038/s41467-023-40721-z

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155

  PengY.MalinowskiG.KunyangyuenB.SalomoniD.IgarashiJ.LinJ. X.et al (2024). From toggle to precessional single laser pulse switching. Appl. Phys. Lett.124 (2), 022405. 10.1063/5.0180359

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 156

  PhamV. T.SisodiaN.Di ManiciI.Urrestarazu-LarrañagaJ.BairagiK.Pelloux-PrayerJ.et al (2024). Fast current-induced skyrmion motion in synthetic antiferromagnets. Science384 (6693), 307–312. 10.1126/science.add5751

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157

  PorthunS.RührigM.LodderJ. C. (1995). “Magnetic force microscopy on thin film magnetic recording media,” in Forces in scanning probe methods. Editors GüntherodtH. J.AnselmettiD.MeyerE. (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands), 471–476.

  • Google Scholar

• 158

  PriceN. W.JohnsonR. D.SaenrangW.MaccherozziF.DhesiS. S.BombardiA.et al (2016). Coherent magnetoelastic domains in multiferroic BiFeO₃films. Phys. Rev. Lett.117 (17), 177601. 10.1103/physrevlett.117.177601

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 159

  QiuZ. Q.BaderS. D. (2000). Surface magneto-optic Kerr effect. Rev. Sci. Instrum.71 (3), 1243–1255. 10.1063/1.1150496

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160

  RamakrishnaA.MuraliN.MammoT. W.SamathaK.VeeraiahV. (2018). Structural and DC electrical resistivity, magnetic properties of Co_0.5M_0.5Fe ₂O₄ (M= Ni, Zn, and Mg) ferrite nanoparticles. Phys. B Condens. Matter534, 134–140. 10.1016/j.physb.2018.01.033

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161

  RichterH. J.HempelK. A.PfeifferJ. (1988). Improvement of sensitivity of the vibrating reed magnetometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.59 (8), 1388–1393. 10.1063/1.1139674

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 162

  RiordanE.GozzelinoL.LavianoF.NapolitanoA.GhigoG.FracassoM.et al (2019). Design and implementation of a low temperature, inductance based high frequency alternating current susceptometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.90 (7), 073908. 10.1063/1.5074154

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 163

  RodríguezL. A.BranC.ReyesD.BerganzaE.VázquezM.GatelC.et al (2016). Quantitative nanoscale magnetic study of isolated diameter-modulated FeCoCu nanowires. Am. Chem. Soc. Nano10 (10), 9669–9678. 10.1021/acsnano.6b05496

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164

  RondinL.TetienneJ. P.HingantT.RochJ. F.MaletinskyP.JacquesV. (2014). Magnetometry with nitrogen-vacancy defects in diamond. Rep. Prog. Phys.77 (5), 056503. 10.1088/0034-4885/77/5/056503

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 165

  RoosW.HempelK. A.VoigtC.DederichsH.SchippanR. (1980). High sensitivity vibrating reed magnetometer. Rev. Sci. Instrum.51 (5), 612–613. 10.1063/1.1136264

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 166

  RugarD.MaminH.ErlandssonR.SternJ.TerrisB. (1988). Force microscope using a fiber-optic displacement sensor. Rev. Sci. Instrum.59 (11), 2337–2340. 10.1063/1.1139958

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 167

  RyuK. S.ThomasL.YangS. H.ParkinS. (2013). Chiral spin torque at magnetic domain walls. Nat. Nanotechnol.8 (7), 527–533. 10.1038/nnano.2013.102

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 168

  SakarB.LiuY.SieversS.NeuV.LangJ.OsterkampC.et al (2021). Quantum calibrated magnetic force microscopy. Phys. Rev. B104 (21), 214427. 10.1103/PhysRevB.104.214427

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 169

  SankeyJ.BragancaP.GarciaA.KrivorotovI.BuhrmanR.RalphD. (2006). Spin-transfer-driven ferromagnetic resonance of individual nanomagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett.96 (22), 227601. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.227601

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 170

  SawickiM.StefanowiczW.NeyA. (2011). Sensitive SQUID magnetometry for studying nanomagnetism. Semicond. Sci. Technol.26 (6), 064006. 10.1088/0268-1242/26/6/064006

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 171

  SchäferR.McCordJ. (2021). “Magneto-optical microscopy,” in Magnetic measurement techniques for materials characterization. Editors FrancoV.DodrillB. (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 171–229.

  • Google Scholar

• 172

  SchäferS.PachauriN.MewesC.MewesT.KaiserC.LengQ.et al (2012). Frequency-selective control of ferromagnetic resonance linewidth in magnetic multilayers. Appl. Phys. Lett.100 (3), 032402. 10.1063/1.3678025

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 173

  SchirhaglR.ChangK.LoretzM.DegenC. L. (2014). Nitrogen vacancy centers in diamond: nanoscale sensors for physics and biology. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.65, 83–105. 10.1146/annurev-physchem-040513-103659

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 174

  SchmelzM.ZakosarenkoV.ChwalaA.SchönauT.StolzR.AndersS.et al (2016). Thin-film-based ultralow noise SQUID magnetometer. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.26 (5), 1–5. 10.1109/TASC.2016.2530699

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 175

  SchoenenbergerC.AlvaradoS. F.LambertS. E.SandersI. L. (1991). Magnetic force microscopy and its application to longitudinal thin films. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.93, 123–127. 10.1016/0304-8853(91)90315-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 176

  SchönenbergerC.AlvaradoS. (1989). A differential interferometer for force microscopy. Rev. Sci. Instrum.60 (10), 3131–3134. 10.1063/1.1140543

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 177

  SchützG.WagnerW.WilhelmW.KienleP.ZellerR.FrahmR.et al (1987). Absorption of circularly polarized x rays in iron. Phys. Rev. Lett.58 (7), 737–740. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.737

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 178

  SchwarzA.WiesendangerR. (2008). Magnetic sensitive force microscopy. Nano Today3 (1-2), 28–39. 10.1016/S1748-0132(08)70013-6

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 179

  SharmaV.KuanrB. K. (2018). Magnetic and crystallographic properties of rare-earth substituted yttrium-iron garnet. J. Alloys Compd.748, 591–600. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.03.086

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 180

  SmithM.BullC.SpinkM. C.NutterP.AllenC. S.HopkinsonD.et al (2023). “Optimisation of perpendicular magnetic tunnel junction structures using scanning transmission electron microscopy,” in 2023 IEEE international magnetic conference-short papers (INTERMAG short papers). New Jersey: IEEE. 1–2.

  • Google Scholar

• 181

  SoldatovI. V.SchäferR. (2017). Advanced MOKE magnetometry in wide-field Kerr-microscopy. J. Appl. Phys.122 (15), 153906. 10.1063/1.5003719

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 182

  SpethmannJ.KhanhN. D.YoshimochiH.TakagiR.HayamiS.MotomeY.et al (2024). SP-STM study of the multi-Q phases in GdRu₂Si₂. Phys. Rev. Mater.8 (6), 064404. 10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.8.064404

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 183

  SrivastavaA.ColeK.WadsworthA.BurtonT.MewesC.MewesT.et al (2020). Broadband characterization of stress induced anisotropy in nanocomposite Co_{74. 6}Fe_{2. 7}Mn_{2. 7}Nb₄Si₂B₁₄. J. Magnetism Magnetic Mater.500, 166307. 10.1016/j.jmmm.2019.166307

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 184

  StamenovP.CoeyJ. M. D. (2006). Sample size, position, and structure effects on magnetization measurements using second-order gradiometer pickup coils. Rev. Sci. Instrum.77 (1), 015106. 10.1063/1.2149190

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 185

  ŞuanM. M.ChinC. K.Abd RazakJ.HasibH.AbidM. A. M.NurdinI. (2020). Synthesis and characterizations of Fe₃O₄ added with Al₂O₃ nanoparticles via sol-gel technique. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng.957, 012040. 10.1088/1757-899X/957/1/012040

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 186

  SunY.LinT.LeiN.ChenX.KangW.ZhaoZ.et al (2023). Experimental demonstration of a skyrmion-enhanced strain-mediated physical reservoir computing system. Nat. Commun.14 (1), 3434. 10.1038/s41467-023-39207-9

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 187

  SushkovA. O.LovchinskyI.ChisholmN.WalsworthR. L.ParkH.LukinM. D. (2014). Magnetic resonance detection of individual proton spins using quantum reporters. Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 197601. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.197601

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 188

  TalapatraA.GajeraU.Prasad PS.Arout ChelvaneJ.MohantyJ. R. (2023). Understanding the magnetic microstructure through experiments and machine learning algorithms. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces15 (1), 50318–50330. 10.1021/acsami.2c12848

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 189

  TamaruS.TsunegiS.KubotaH.YuasaS. (2018). Vector network analyzer ferromagnetic resonance spectrometer with field differential detection. Rev. Sci. Instrum.89 (5), 053901. 10.1063/1.5022762

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 190

  TangC.AlahmedL.MahdiM.XiongY.InmanJ.McLaughlinN. J.et al (2023). Spin dynamics in van der Waals magnetic systems. Phys. Rep.1032, 1–36. 10.1016/j.physrep.2023.09.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 191

  ThienT. D.Van ThangN.ChamL. T.ThangP. D.CoN. D.Van DuongP.et al (2024). Characteristics of Ni_xCo_xMg_xCu_xZn_1-4xO nanomaterials: their structural and magnetic properties and functional attributes. Ceram. Int.50 (23), 51087–51097. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2024.10.019

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 192

  ThomasL.RahmaniA.RenaudinP.WackA. (2003). High-sensitivity in-plane vector magnetometry using the alternating gradient force method. J. Appl. Phys.93 (10), 7062–7064. 10.1063/1.1555392

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 193

  TodorovicM.SchultzS. (1998). Miniature high-sensitivity quartz tuning fork alternating gradient magnetometry. Appl. Phys. Lett.73 (24), 3595–3597. 10.1063/1.122835

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 194

  ToppingC.BlundellS. (2018). AC susceptibility as a probe of low-frequency magnetic dynamics. J. Phys. Condens. Matter31 (1), 013001. 10.1088/1361-648X/aaed96

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 195

  TsoiM.JansenA.BassJ.ChiangW. C.TsoiV.WyderP. (2000). Generation and detection of phase-coherent current-driven magnons in magnetic multilayers. Nature406 (6791), 46–48. 10.1038/35017512

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 196

  TulapurkarA.SuzukiY.FukushimaA.KubotaH.MaeharaH.TsunekawaK.et al (2005). Spin-torque diode effect in magnetic tunnel junctions. Nature438 (7066), 339–342. 10.1038/nature04207

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 197

  Van der LaanG.FigueroaA. I. (2014). X-ray magnetic circular dichroism—a versatile tool to study magnetism. Coord. Chem. Rev.277-278, 95–129. 10.1016/j.ccr.2014.03.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 198

  Van der LaanG.HesjedalT. (2023). X-ray detected ferromagnetic resonance techniques for the study of magnetization dynamics. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sect. B Beam Interact. Mater. Atoms540, 85–93. 10.1016/j.nimb.2023.04.005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 199

  Van der LaanG.TholeB. T. (1991). Strong magnetic x-ray dichroism in 2p absorption spectra of 3d transition-metal ions. Phys. Rev. B43 (16), 13401–13411. 10.1103/PhysRevB.43.13401

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 200

  Van SchendelP. J. A.HugH. J.HoffmannR.MartinS.KappenbergerP.LantzM. A.et al (2001). “Applications of tip calibration in magnetic force microscopy (MFM),” in Magnetic storage systems beyond 2000. Editor HadjipanayisG. C. (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer), 313–316.

  • Google Scholar

• 201

  VasileM.GriggD.GriffithJ.FitzgeraldE.RussellP. E. (1991). Scanning probe tip geometry optimized for metrology by focused ion beam ion milling. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B Microelectron.9 (6), 3569–3572. 10.1116/1.585846

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 202

  VavassoriP. (2000). Polarization modulation technique for magneto-optical quantitative vector magnetometry. Appl. Phys. Lett.77 (11), 1605–1607. 10.1063/1.1310169

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 203

  VockS.SasvariZ.BranC.RheinF.WolffU.KiselevN. S.et al (2011). Quantitative magnetic force microscopy study of the diameter evolution of bubble domains in a (Co/Pd)₈₀ multilayer. IEEE Trans. Magnetics47 (10), 2352–2355. 10.1109/TMAG.2011.2155630

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 204

  VonsovskiiS. V. (2013). Ferromagnetic resonance: the phenomenon of resonant absorption of a high-frequency magnetic field in ferromagnetic substances. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  • Google Scholar

• 205

  WadleyP.HowellsB.ŽeleznýJ.AndrewsC.HillsV.CampionR. P.et al (2016). Electrical switching of an antiferromagnet. Science351 (6273), 587–590. 10.1126/science.aab1031

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 206

  WangY.XiaoZ.SnezhkoA.XuJ.OcolaL. E.DivanR.et al (2016). Rewritable artificial magnetic charge ice. Science352, 962–966. 10.1126/science.aad8037

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 207

  WangY.RamaswamyR.YangH. (2018). FMR-related phenomena in spintronic devices. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys.51 (27), 273002. 10.1088/1361-6463/aac7b5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 208

  WangZ.GuoM.ZhouH.ZhaoL.XuT.TomaselloR.et al (2020). Thermal generation, manipulation and thermoelectric detection of skyrmions. Nat. Electron.3 (11), 672–679. 10.1038/s41928-020-00489-2

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 209

  WangL.ChengH.LiP.Van HeesY. L. W.LiuY.CaoK.et al (2022). Picosecond optospintronic tunnel junctions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.119 (24), e2204732119. 10.1073/pnas.2204732119

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 210

  WeinstockH. (2002). A review of SQUID magnetometry applied to nondestructive evaluation. IEEE Trans. Magnetics27 (2), 3231–3236. 10.1109/20.133898

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 211

  WohlhüterP.BryanM.WarnickeP.GligaS.StevensonS. E.HeldtG.et al (2015). Nanoscale switch for vortex polarization mediated by Bloch core formation in magnetic hybrid systems. Nat. Commun.6, 7836. 10.1038/ncomms8836

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 212

  WuY.ShenY.LiuZ.LiK.QiuJ. (2003). Point-dipole response from a magnetic force microscopy tip with a synthetic antiferromagnetic coating. Appl. Phys. Lett.82 (11), 1748–1750. 10.1063/1.1560863

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 213

  WuS.AbeK.NakanoT.MewesT.MewesC.MankeyG.et al (2019). Thickness dependence of dynamic magnetic properties of soft (FeCo)-Si alloy thin films. Phys. Rev. B99 (14), 144416. 10.1103/PhysRevB.99.144416

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 214

  WuJ.ChenX.YangY.ZhiQ.WangX.ZhangJ.et al (2021). Application of TEM based on HTS SQUID magnetometer in deep geological structure exploration in the Baiyun Gold Deposit, NE China. J. Earth Sci.32 (1), 1–7. 10.1007/s12583-020-1086-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 215

  XuY.YuY.HuiY.SuY.ChengJ.ChangH.et al (2019). Mapping dynamical magnetic responses of ultrathin micron-size superconducting films using nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond. Nano Lett.19 (8), 5697–5702. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b02298

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 216

  XueQ. (2025). Recent developments in Lorentz microscopy. World Sci. Res. J.11 (7), 43–49. 10.6911/WSRJ.202507_11(7).0005

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 217

  YoussifM.BahgatA.AliI. A. (2000). AC magnetic susceptibility technique for the characterization of high temperature superconductors. Egypt. J. Solids23 (2), 231–250. 10.21608/ejs.2000.151732

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 218

  ZakrzewskiJ. J.LiberkaM.WangJ.ChorazyS.OhkoshiS. I. (2024). Optical phenomena in molecule-based magnetic materials. Chem. Rev.124 (9), 5930–6050. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.3c00840

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 219

  ZhanX.DuanH.WangW.YanC.ChenL.WangH.et al (2024). Quantifying spin-torque efficiency and magnetoresistance coefficient by microwave photoresistance in spin-torque ferromagnetic resonance. J. Appl. Phys.136 (12), 123903. 10.1063/5.0231025

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 220

  ZhangZ.GuK.TodaM.LiaoM. (2025). A perspective on diamond MEMS magnetic sensors. Appl. Phys. Lett.126 (10), 100501. 10.1063/5.0255014

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 221

  ZhouX. G.LiH.MatsudaY. H.MatsuoA.LiW.KuritaN.et al (2023). Possible intermediate quantum spin liquid phase in α-RuCl₃ under high magnetic fields up to 100 T. Nat. Commun.14 (1), 5613. 10.1038/s41467-023-41232-7

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 222

  ZijlstraH. (1970). A vibrating reed magnetometer for microscopic particles. Rev. Sci. Instrum.41 (8), 1241–1243. 10.1063/1.1684777

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 223

  ZingsemN.AhrendF.VockS.GottlobD.KrugI.DoganayH.et al (2017). Magnetic charge distribution and stray field landscape of asymmetric néel walls in a magnetically patterned exchange bias layer system. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys.50 (49), 495006. 10.1088/1361-6463/aa94e1

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar