See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323576236

Quantum Oscillations of the Microwave Sensitivity of a Spin-Torque Diode in a

Magnetic Nanobridge

Article  in  JETP Letters · December 2017

DOI: 10.1134/S0021364017240055

CITATIONS READS

0 21

2 authors, including:

Gleb Demin
National Research University of Electronic Technology
16 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The development of spintronic system of machine vision for the robotized platform of autonomous driving View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gleb Demin on 09 March 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSN 0021-3640, JETP Letters, 2017, Vol. 106, No. 12, pp. 821–827. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2017.
Original Russian Text © G.D. Demin, A.F. Popkov, 2017, published in Pis’ma v Zhurnal Eksperimental’noi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki, 2017, Vol. 106, No. 12, pp. 782–788.

MISCELLANEOUS

Quantum Oscillations of the Microwave Sensitivity

of a Spin-Torque Diode in a Magnetic Nanobridge
G. D. Demina, b, * and A. F. Popkova, b
a NationalResearch University of Electronic Technology (MIET), Zelenograd, Moscow, 124498 Russia
b Laboratory of Physics and Magnetic Heterostructures for Spintronics and Energy Efficient Information Technologies,
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT), Dolgoprudnyi, Moscow region, 141701 Russia
*e-mail: gddemin@gmail.com
Received August 11, 2017; in final form, November 2, 2017

The reduction of the area of the cross section of a spin-valve-like structure to a nanoscale is an important
problem of modern spin electronics. However, the transverse quantization of electronic states in the spin
valve, which forms a magnetic nanobridge at this scale, additionally affects not only the magnetoresistance
but also the spin-transfer torques. In this work, features of the quantization of the magnetoresistance and
spin-angular momentum associated with the spin transfer in a Co/Au/Co metallic nanobridge with metallic
contacts have been theoretically analyzed. It has been shown that these features are manifested in oscillations
of the microwave sensitivity of a spin-torque diode based on the spin-valve structure mentioned above.

DOI: 10.1134/S0021364017240055

In the last decade, great attention has been paid to
the spin-transfer torque effects in magnetic spin-
valve-like (tunnel and conducting) structures [1],
which are promising for the creation of non-volatile
memory elements, nanogenerators [2], and highly
sensitive spin-torque microwave detectors [3–6]. The
further progress in this field is closely connected, in
particular, with the consideration of possible ways to
push the scaling limits of such devices down to less
than 10 nm technology node. This is important both
for determining the prospect of the miniaturization of
magnetoresistive memory cells and for the possibility
of an extreme increase in the microwave sensitivity of
spin diodes based on these structures. However, it is
well known that the reduction of the transverse
dimensions of a metallic conductor to values compa-
rable to the de Broglie wavelength leads to transverse
quantization of the energy levels of free electrons. As a
result, one-dimensional energy subbands appear,
which determine the features of the electrical conduc-
tance in magnetic nanocontacts [7, 8]. The ballistic
transfer of electrons in a magnetic nanobridge is char-
acterized by conductance jumps, which are described
by the Landauer theory [9]. The conductance quanti-
zation at room temperature was first observed in
Au/Au, Cu/Cu, Pt/Pt metallic nonmagnetic contacts
[10–12]. Further, magnetic nanocontacts and nano-
structures containing spin valves with a nonmagnetic
spacer were studied in a number of experimental and
theoretical works [13–17]. As an example, a nanosized
spin valve based on the Co/Au/Co structure seems
very promising [18–20], because the diameter of Au
nanoelectrodes can be technologically reduced down
to 0.6 nm, as was shown in [18]. Furthermore, the
authors of [19] demonstrated that such a nanocontact
has a sufficiently high magnetoresistance of about
73%.
In the magnetic nanobridge containing two ferro-
magnetic layers separated by a tunnel or metallic non-
magnetic spacer, not only the magnetoresistance but
also the spin-transfer torque is quantized. This can
additionally affect the spin dynamics in such nano-
structures. A nanoscale magnetic heterostructure acts
as a “quantum” spin valve, in which the bias voltage
between electrodes opens or closes the corresponding
spin-dependent channel for transfer of electrons and
their spin-angular momentum. The effects of quanti-
zation of the spin-transfer torque in nanostructures, as
well as the accompanying features of the spin dynam-
ics, have not yet been discussed.
Further, we calculate the charge and spin currents
in an Au/Co/Au/Co/Au nanostructure within the
spin-dependent Sommerfeld model for free electrons
taking into account effects of the transverse quantiza-
tion of their energy. On the example of a magnetic
nanostructure containing a Co/Au/Co spin valve with
a rectangular cross section, we theoretically analyze
the quantization of spin-transfer torques and their
effect on its microwave sensitivity.
We consider the features of the spin-transfer torque
phenomenon in a magnetic nanobridge with a rectan-
gular cross section, whose composite structure con-
sists of two ferromagnetic (FL and PL) layers with a

821
822 DEMIN, POPKOV

noncollinear magnetization orientation, which are

separated by a thin metallic spacer (S) and are con-
nected to nonmagnetic (N) electrical contacts. We
start from the quantum-mechanical model of ballistic
transport of free carriers in the nanobridge, based on !
the Sommerfeld approximation for the energy spec-
trum of conduction electrons with allowance for the S
exchange splitting in magnetic layers. We also assume
that the actual region of quantum-mechanical analysis
is the FL/S/PL spin-valve structure, at electrical con-
tacts of which the main drop of the applied voltage U
occurs [21].
Figure 1 shows the potential profile u( x ) of the bot- S
tom of the free-electron conduction band of the spin-
valve nanostructure obtained in the step approxima-
tion for low voltages e|U | ! εF in the nanobridge,
where e is the elementary charge. In Fig. 1, μL(R) is the
electrochemical potential in the left (right) metallic
contact; ds is the thickness of the metallic spacer;
uS = εF − εFS , where εF is the electrochemical poten-
tial of the magnetic system and εFS is the Fermi level in
the metallic spacer; ΔPL(FL) is the spin splitting of levels
in the PL (FL) ferromagnetic layer; m F (m P ) is the Fig. 1. (Color online) Schematic of the potential energy
magnetization unit vector of the free (fixed) ferromag- u( x) of conduction electrons in the nanobridge with the
FL/S/PL spin valve connected to bulk metallic N con-
netic layer; θ is the angle between m F and m P ; ad and tacts, where PL (FL) is the fixed (free) magnetic layer and
bd are the thickness and width of the cross section of S is the metallic spacer (in the low voltage approximation,
the bridge, respectively. For three considered regions when e|U | ! εF ). The lower inset shows the rectangular
of the structure x ≤ 0, 0 < x < dS, and x ≥ dS , where cross section of the bridge with the thickness ad and the
width bd . The vector mP is equivalent to mP = (1, 0, 0) and
dS is the thickness of the nonmagnetic metallic spacer,
we write u( x ≤ 0) = −σFL ΔFL , u(0 < x < dS ) = uS , e x ,e y , and e z are the unit vectors of the Cartesian coordi-
nate system.
u( x ≥ dS ) = −σPL ΔPL + δεF , where σFL(PL) = ±1 is the
sign of the exchange shift of the bottom of the conduc-
tion band corresponding to the spin polarization of wave function depending on the transverse coordi-
electrons (↑, ↓) with respect to the local magnetization nates y and z, where Cφ = 2/ ad bd , k y = πm/ad , kz =
in the FL (PL) layer; δεF = εFL − εPL is the difference
between the Fermi levels in the magnetic layers; πn/bd , and kmn = π m2ad−2 + n2bd−2 = 2meεmn / is the
εFL(PL) and ΔFL(PL) are the Fermi level and spin split- transverse wave vector, where εmn is the transverse
ting of levels in the FL (PL) layer, respectively; εFS is energy,  is the reduced Planck constant, me is the
the Fermi level in the metallic spacer; εF = εFL is the mass of the electron, and m, n = 1, 2, 3... are the quan-
Fermi level in the nanobridge. We also accept that tum numbers.
μL = εF and μR = μL − eU are the reference levels of The thermodynamically averaged spin current in
the electrochemical potential in left and right electri- each σ → σ' spin channel can be found as the differ-
s(PL →FL) s(FL →PL)
ence 〈I μ,σσ ' 〉 = 〈I μ,σσ' 〉 − 〈I μ,σ 〉 between the
cal contacts to the PL/S/FL structure, respectively. s
'σ
s(PL →FL) s(FL →PL)
The spinor wave function Ψ σi in each ith layer (the fluxes 〈I μ,σσ ' 〉 and 〈I μ,σσ ' 〉 from the PL to FL
subscript i describes the FL, S, and PL layers) at a magnetic layer and from the FL to PL magnetic layer,
given spin polarization of electrons σ =↑, ↓ is calcu- respectively, where μ = x, y, z is the projection on a
lated by solving the Schrödinger equation with the given coordinate axis. These spin fluxes are calculated
potential function indicated above. For the case of the by the formula:
bridge with the rectangular cross section ad × bd , the s(PL(FL)→FL(PL)) mPL(FL)∗
wave function can be factorized as Ψ σi ( x, y, z) = 〈I μ,σσ ' 〉=
2π2
ψ σi ( x)Φi ( y, z). Here, ψ σi ( x) = {ψ σ↑i ( x), ψ σ↓i ( x )} is the +∞ s(TR) (1)
jμ,σσ'PF(FP)
spinor component depending on the longitudinal
coordinate x, Φi ( y, z) = Cϕ sin(k y y) sin(kz z) is the
× ∑∫
m, n 0 k xσPL(FL)
SPF(FP)d ε,

JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017

 QUANTUM OSCILLATIONS OF THE MICROWAVE SENSITIVITY 823

where mPL(FL)∗ is the effective mass of the electron in conductance GS of the magnetic nanobridge at a low
the PL (FL) layer, σ, σ' =↑↓ is the spin direction voltage U → 0 across the electrodes takes the form:
“before” and “after” the transmission through εF
2
−∂f
'PF(FP) = (/mFL(PL)∗) ⋅ 〈GS 〉 = e ∑∑ ∫ PT σσ' ⎛⎜ PL ⎞⎟ d ε,
s(TR)
the metallic spacer, and jμ,σσ (3)
h σ,σ' ⎝ ∂ε ⎠
Im(ψ∗σ'FL(PL)σμ (∂ψ σ'FL(PL) /∂x )) is the quantum- m, n εmn + uσσ'

mechanical expression for spin fluxes transmitted to where εmn ≤ εF − uσσ' , h = 2π , PT σσ' is the transmis-
the FL (PL) layer, which are calculated taking into sion probability for the σ → σ' spin channel in the
account the Pauli matrices σμ (see, e.g., [22]). Here, nanobridge, and uσσ' corresponds to the bottom of the
SPF = fPL (1 − fFL ), SFP = fFL (1 − fPL ), where fPL = electron conduction band for a given σ → σ' spin
fPL (μR , T ) and fFL = fFL (μL , T ) are the Fermi distri- channel. In the case of zero temperature (T = 0 K), a
bution functions in the PL and FL layers, respectively, larger contribution to transmission comes from elec-
and T is the temperature. trons at the Fermi level, where the Fermi function fPL
turns into a delta function δ(ε = εF ) = 1. As a result,
The charge current 〈I σσ ' 〉 in the σ → σ' channel is
e
the electrical conductance can be given by the simple
calculated in much the same way as Eq. (1) with the sub- expression:
'PF(FP) ↔ e ⋅ jσσ'PF(FP) , where jσσ'PF(FP) =
s(TR) e(TR) e(TR)
stitution jμ,σσ 2
(/mFL(PL)∗) ⋅ Im(ψ∗σ'FL(PL)(∂ψ σ'FL(PL) /∂x)) is the quan- 〈GS 〉T =0 K = e
h σ,σ'
∑∑P m, n
T σσ' (εF , ε mn ) . (4)
tum-mechanical expression for the transmitted charge
flux. The total charge current 〈I ∑e 〉 , as well as the spin Consequently, at PT σσ' → 1, the quantum of surface
one, is obtained by summing the corresponding con- conductance is ΔGS = e 2 /h . In the case of nonzero
tributions over all four σ ↔ σ' spin channels. value PT σσ' < 1 and nonzero temperature, the quanti-
The expressions found for the charge current make zation steps will be insignificantly and nonuniformly
shifted in magnitude, as was indicated in [15]. By anal-
it possible to determine the resistance of the nano-
ogy, the μ -components of the averaged spin flux in the
bridge by the formula R = (∂〈I ∑e 〉 /∂U )−1 and, there- nanocontact, which determines the spin transfer in
fore, its magnetoresistance δMR = (R↑↓ − R↑↑ ) / R↑↑ , each σ → σ' spin channel at the voltage U → 0 , are
where R↑↑(↑↓) is the resistance of the bridge in the par- given by the formula:
allel (antiparallel) magnetic configuration of the ferro- ⎛ εF S ∂f
magnetic layers. The spin flux components determine 〈I μ,σσ
s
'〉 =
eU
∑ ∫ ⎜ Pμ,T σσ' ⎛⎜ − PL ⎞⎟ d ε
h ⎜ ⎝ ∂ε ⎠
the amplitudes of the in-plane τ|| and perpendicular τ⊥ m, n ⎝ εF − e|U |
εF
(5)
spin-transfer torque components [1, 22], which, e.g.,
∂f ⎞
at a positive voltage U ≥ 0 are given in the left mag- + ∫ Pμ,ST σσ' ⎛⎜ − PL ⎞⎟ d ε ⎟ ,
netic layer by the formulas: εmn + uσσ'
⎝ ∂ε ⎠ ⎠⎟

τ|| =  〈I x ∑ ( x = 0)〉[m F × (m F × m P )], where Pμ,ST σσ' are the coefficients corresponding to the
s

2 (2) spin flux, similar to the values of the transmission

τ⊥ =  〈I ys ∑ ( x = 0)〉[m F × m P ], probability PT σσ' .
2 It follows from Eq. (5) that the expressions for the
bias-voltage efficiency of the spin-transfer torques
where τ||,⊥ = τ||,⊥ (θ) , I ∑e = I ∑e (θ), I xs, y ∑ = I xs, y ∑ (θ) , χ||,⊥ = ∂τ||,⊥ /∂V at a low voltage U → 0 and at zero
and θ is the angle between the magnetization unit vec- temperature can be rewritten in the form:
tors m F and m P of the FL and PL magnetic layers,
respectively. χT|| =0 K = e ∑∑P
4π σ,σ' m, n
x,T σσ' (εF )|εmn ≤εF −uσσ' ,
S

According to the expressions given for the electrical (6)

current and spin-transfer torques, it follows that the
electron transport through each spin channel with the
χT⊥ =0 K = e ∑∑
4π σ,σ' m, n
PyS,T σσ'(εF )|εmn ≤εF −uσσ' ,
electron energy ε = ε(σ, σ', m, n) determines the quan-
where ∗ t k σ' / k σ } ,
PxS,T σσ' = (mPL∗ /mFL∗)Re{tσ↑
tization of not only electrical conductance and mag- σ↓ xFL xPL
netoresistance but also the derivative of the spin-trans- ∗ t k σ' /k σ ), and t are
PyS,T σσ' = (mPL∗ /mFL∗)Im(tσ↑ σ↓ xFL xPL σσ'
fer torque with respect to the bias voltage or the bias- the transmission coefficients through the nonmag-
voltage efficiency of the spin-transfer torque (“tor- netic spacer. Here, as well as for magnetoresistance,
quance”). In accordance with the Landauer formula
[9], it is well known that the expression for the surface when PxS( y),T σσ' → 1, the quantum of the bias-voltage

JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017

824 DEMIN, POPKOV
efficiency of the spin-transfer torque is Δχ||,⊥ = e/4π .
However, the quantum interference effects of the lon-
gitudinal transmission of electrons mask the latter
effect, which will be discussed in detail below. The
variation of the transverse dimensions of the bridge
results in the opening of spin channels allowed for the
transmission of electrons and in the corresponding
stepwise increase or decrease in the amplitudes of
spin-transfer torques, which depends on their sign.
Quantum jumps of the magnetoresistance and spin-
transfer torques will lead to a stepwise change and
oscillations of the magnetodynamic characteristics in
the spin system of a thin magnetic layer, e.g., the
amplitude of the spin-current resonance.
We performed numerical calculations of the mag-
netoresistance and the amplitude of the in-plane (per-
pendicular) components τ|| ( τ⊥ ) of the spin-transfer
torque in the Co/Au/Co magnetic metallic junction
with a nanosized rectangular cross section and non-
magnetic Au contacts with the thickness dc on both
sides of ferromagnetic layers. These calculations were
performed with the following parameters for the lay-
ers: mPL(FL)∗ = mS = me , where mS is the mass of the
electron inside the metallic spacer; εPL (Co) =
εFL (Co) = 2.79 eV; ΔPL (Co) = ΔFL (Co) = 1.02 eV;
εFS(Au) = 5.51 eV; dS = 5 nm, dc = 25 nm, dp = 4 nm,
and df = 0.5 nm, where dp(f) is the thickness of the PL
(FL) ferromagnetic layer.
It was assumed that the bridge has the rectangular
cross section with dimensions ad × bd and the aspect
ratio ζ = bd /ad = 2. The calculations of the magneto-
resistance showed that the variation of the bias voltage
insignificantly affects the amplitude δMR , whereas the
reduction of the cross section of the bridge at given ad
values (from 10 nm to 1 nm) results in the appearance
of oscillations of the magnetoresistance and their fast
increase. The maximum effect δMR ≈ 61% is reached
at the thickness ad = 1 nm, which is close to the exper-
imentally observed values of magnetoresistance in
symmetric magnetic Co/Au/Co nanocontacts [19]. It
is noteworthy that the magnetoresistance decreases to
about 29% and it is stabilized at a constant value of
28% with an increase in the thickness of the cross sec-
tion ad of the magnetic bridge to 10 and 100 nm,
respectively.
Figure 2 demonstrates the effect of scaling of the
transverse dimensions of the bridge on the magnitude
of spin-transfer torque components. The coefficients
PxS,T σσ' (εF ) and PyS,T σσ' (εF ) in Eq. (6) strongly oscillate
in the ballistic regime for every σ → σ' channel with
the variation in the thickness of the bridge ad that is
due to the effect of longitudinal quantum interference
during transmission through the rectangular quantum
well. For this reason, quantum-interference effects in
the metallic nanocontact mask the quantization of the
spin torque transferred by electrons, so that curves for
the efficiencies χ||,⊥ acquire a noisy character, which is
manifested in the behavior of the components τ||,⊥
shown in Fig. 2 for the Co/Au/Co structure. The
quantization of torques is the most pronounced when
the thickness of the bridge is varied in the range from
3 to 1 nm and becomes insignificant at large dimen-
sions, as is presented in the inset of Fig. 2. An increase
in the bias voltage leads to the opening of spin chan-
nels allowed for the transmission of electrons and to
the related increase in the amplitude of quantum
oscillations of spin-transfer torques.
Effects of transverse quantization, as well as longi-
tudinal quantum-interference effects, which control
the behavior of the spin-transfer torques and magne-
toresistance, will be manifested in the magnetic and
electrophysical parameters of spin-valve nanostruc-
tures at small transverse dimensions, namely, they will
affect the thresholds of spin-switching currents in
magnetoresistive memory cells and the microwave
sensitivity of spin-torque diodes based on such struc-
tures. In particular, Figure 3 shows the maximum
microwave sensitivity ξmax = Vdc /Pin calculated in the
macrospin approximation for the spin-torque diode
based on the Au/Co/Au/Co/Au nanostructure on
which the dc voltage Vdc = 〈R(t )I (t )〉 is generated in
response to its irradiation by a microwave signal with
the power:
Pin = 〈I 2(t )R(t )〉 /2 . (7)
Here, I (t ) = 〈I ∑e (t )〉 is the current through the nano-
structure, R(t ) = R /(1 + ρ cos θ(t )) is the resistance of
the magnetic nanostructure, R is the average resistance
of the nanobridge, and ρ = (R↑↓ − R↑↑ )/(R↑↓ + R↑↑ ) .
The alternating current, which varies in the considered
structure harmonically in time, is created by the elec-
tromagnetic wave incident on the spin-torque diode,
where the electric field is polarized along the nano-
bridge.
A typical scheme for connecting a nanocolumnar
structure to a microwave line is given, e.g., in [3]. The
presence of the alternating current will lead to reso-
nant oscillations of the relative angle θ between the
macrospins of neighboring magnetic layers. The
amplitude of macrospin oscillations will undergo res-
onance at a frequency close to the magnetic resonance
frequency of the corresponding layer. We believe that,
because of the difference in the geometric parameters
of magnetic layers, the resonance of the thin magnetic
layer is predominant, while the second layer is sup-
posed to be magnetostatically fixed.
The microwave response of the free magnetic layer
was calculated using the Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert
equation modified by Slonczewski and Berger [1] tak-
JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017
 QUANTUM OSCILLATIONS OF THE MICROWAVE SENSITIVITY
Fig. 2. (Color online) Amplitudes of the in-plane τ|| and
perpendicular τ⊥ components of the spin-transfer torque
in the Au/Co/Au/Co/Au magnetic bridge versus the
thickness ad of its rectangular cross section with the aspect
ratio ζ = 2 at the bias voltage U = 0.1 V. The inset shows
the amplitudes τ|| and τ⊥ versus ad varied in the range up
to 100 nm.
ing into account the spin-transfer torques (2), pro-
duced by the spin-polarized current:
m F = −m F × h eff + αm F × m F
(8)
− η||β(t )[m F × (m F × m P )] − η⊥β(t )[m F × m P ].
Here, h eff = −k⊥ M S(m Fe x )e x + k||M S(m Fe y )e y is the
effective magnetic field including the demagnetization
field along the normal direction to the layer plane
(unit vector e x ) and magnetic anisotropy field caused
by the shape anisotropy of the sample along the
direction corresponding to the maximum dimension
of the bridge cross section (unit vector e y ), k⊥ =
4π(N xf − N zf ), k|| = 4π(N zf − N yf ) , N μf are the demag-
netization factors for the free ferromagnetic layer cal-
culated for the aspect ratio ζ = bd /ad = 2 , η||,⊥ =
(2e/) × τ||,⊥ (π/2)/〈I ∑ (π/2)〉 is the efficiency of spin
e
transfer of the in-plane and perpendicular torque
components, α is the Gilbert damping coefficient,
and β(t ) = J (t )/J p is the density of the spin-polarized
JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017
825
Fig. 3. Maximum microwave sensitivity ξmax of the spin-
torque diode, which is presented as the Au/Co/Au/Co/Au
magnetic bridge, versus the thickness ad of its rectangular
cross section at ζ = 2 and U = 0.1 V. The inset shows the
logarithmic plot of the maximum microwave sensitivity
ξmax versus ad varied in the range up to 100 nm.
current J (t ) = I (t )/Sd , where J p = 2ed f M S2 / , M S is
the saturation magnetization, and Sd = ad ⋅ bd is the
cross- section area of the spin-torque diode.
In the magnetodynamic calculations, we assumed
that the thick (pinned) magnetic layer (PL) of the spin
valve has a fixed magnetization direction, whereas the
thin layer (FL) is a free magnetic layer, whose magne-
tization dynamics is described by Eq. (8). Thus, by
solving the linearized Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert–
Slonczewski–Berger equation (8) (see, e.g. [4, 6]),
one can obtain an analytical formula for the maximum
sensitivity ξmax that determines the microwave
response of the spin-torque diode with the mutually
perpendicular geometry of the magnetizations of mag-
netic layers at the resonance frequency:
κ pρ(η|| + αη⊥ )
ξmax ≈ . (9)
α(2k|| + k⊥ )
Here, κ p = ν/J pSd , ρ = δMR /(2 + δMR ) is the modi-
fied magnetoresistance, ν = 4Z 0R /(Z 0 + R )2 is the
matching factor, Z 0 is the impedance of the line,
826 DEMIN, POPKOV
∑ ∑ ∑ response with the variation of transverse dimensions at
R = 2R↑↑ (1 + δMR )/(2 + δMR ) , δMR = R↑↓ /R↑↑ − 1 is
the effective magnetoresistance of the nanobridge with
∑
the spin valve, and R↑↑ (↑↓) is the total resistance of the
spin-torque diode at the parallel (antiparallel) mag-
netic configuration (including R↑↑(↑↓) and resistances
of separate layers of the structure). It was also assumed
that Z 0 = 50 Ω, α = 0.01 , and M S = 950 kA/m.
The damping parameter α and the saturation mag-
netization M S of the magnetic material were chosen
using the results of microwave studies of Co-contain-
ing ferromagnetic layers in [23, 24]. The calculations
were performed with the resistivity of the ferromag-
netic layer (∼168 μΩ cm) close to the resistivity of
CoFeB taken from experimental work [25] and with
the resistivity of Au (2.42 μΩ cm) taken from [26] at
room temperature (T = 300 K). The resonance fre-
quency at which the sensitivity is maximal is given by
the formula ω0 = γM S (k|| + k⊥ )k|| , where γ is the
gyromagnetic ratio.
The calculations show that oscillations of the
microwave sensitivity of the spin-torque diode appear
in the nanoscale region of transverse dimensions of
the bridge, which is due to the quantization of the
magnetoresistance and spin-transfer torques. The
amplitude of these oscillations and the average sensi-
tivity increase with a decrease in the thickness of the
nanobridge. The maximum sensitivity ξmax =
1.79 × 105 mV/mW is achieved at a resonance fre-
quency of 8.6 GHz, when the bridge has a cross section
of 1 nm × 2 nm (at ad ≈ 1 nm, k⊥ = 3.45 , k|| = 1.88 ).
This value is more than twice as large as the maximum
sensitivity of the spin-torque diode based on the mag-
netic tunnel junction, which is reached only at the bias
current near its critical value [3]. With an increase in
the thickness of the cross section of the bridge above
5 nm, oscillations of ξmax and average sensitivity
decrease rapidly. In particular, the sensitivity for a
bridge thickness of 10 and 100 nm is about 10 4 and
2.6 mV/mW, respectively.
To summarize, we have shown that quantum jumps
of the magnetoresistance and spin-transfer torques
with a decrease in the rectangular cross-section
dimensions of a bridge with a metallic spacer to
nanoscales will result in oscillations of the spin flux.
Consequently, the corresponding variations will occur
in the electrophysical parameters of the spin-valve
structure in a magnetoresistive memory cell. In addi-
tion, we have found that there appear growing oscilla-
tions of the microwave sensitivity of the spin-torque
diode in the nanobridge with the mutually perpendic-
ular orientation of the magnetizations of magnetic lay-
ers of the spin valve. It is remarkable that thermal
noise effects and nonadiabaticity of scattering of elec-
trons on a step potential inside the bridge will smear
the presented picture of oscillations of resonant
the splitting of transverse quantization levels compara-
ble with the energy of thermal excitations, i.e., when
εmn ∼ κBT , where κB is the Boltzmann constant. Nev-
ertheless, the demonstrated tendency of a sharp
increase in the microwave sensitivity in the nanobridge
that acts as the spin-torque diode with small dimen-
sions can be promising for the development of new
types of microwave spintronic detectors for microwave
imaging [27].
This work was supported by the Russian Science
Foundation (project no. 16-19-00181).
REFERENCES
1. J. Slonczewski, in Progress in Magnetic Nanostructures
in Modern Technology: Spintronics, Magnetic MEMS
and Recording, Ed. by B. Azzerboni, G. Asti, L. Pareti,
and M. Ghidini (Springer, Dordrecht, 2008), p. 1.
2. N. Locatelli, V. Cros, and J. Grollier, Nat. Mater. 13, 11
(2014).
3. B. Fang, M. Carpentieri, X. Hao, H. Jiang, J. A. Ka-
tine, I. N. Krivorotov, B. Ocker, J. Langer, K. L. Wang,
B. Zhang, B. Azzerboni, P. K. Amiri, G. Finnocchio,
and Z. Zeng, Nat. Commun. 7, 11259 (2016).
4. A. F. Popkov, N. E. Kulagin, and G. D. Demin, Solid
State Commun. 248, 140 (2016).
5. S. Miwa, S. Ishibashi, H. Tomita, T. Nozaki, E. Ta-
mura, J. Ando, N. Mizuochi, T. Saruya, H. Kubota,
K. Yakushiji, T. Tanuguchi, H. Imamura, A. Fuku-
shima, S. Yuasa, and Y. Suzuki, Nat. Mater. 13, 50
(2014).
6. A. F. Popkov, N. E. Kulagin, G. D. Demin, and
K. A. Zvezdin, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Elektron.
22, 109 (2017).
7. N. Agräit, A. L. Yeyati, and J. M. Ruitenbeek, Phys.
Rep. 377, 81 (2003).
8. G. B. Lesovik and I. A. Sadovskyy, Phys. Usp. 54, 1007
(2011).
9. R. Landauer, IBM J. Res. Dev. 1, 223 (1957).
10. N. Agräit, J. C. Rogrigo, and S. Vieira, Phys. Rev. B 47,
12345(R) (1993).
11. M. Brandbyge, J. Schiotz, M. R. Sorensen, P. Stoltze,
K. W. Jacobsen, J. K. Norskov, L. Olesen, E. Laegs-
gaard, I. Stensgaard, and F. Besenbacher, Phys. Rev. B
52, 8499 (1995).
12. H. Ohnishi, Y. Kondo, and K. Takayanagi, Nature
(London, U.K.) 395, 780 (1998).
13. H. Imamura, N. Kobayashi, S. Takahashi, and
S. Maekawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1003 (2000).
14. A. K. Zvezdin and A. F. Popkov, JETP Lett. 71, 209
(2000).
15. L. R. Tagirov, B. P. Vodopyanov, and B. M. Garipov,
J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 258–259, 61 (2003).
16. H. D. Chopra, M. R. Sullivan, J. N. Armstrong, and
S. Z. Hua, Nat. Mater. 4, 832 (2005).
17. R. Requist, P. P. Baruselli, A. Smogunov, M. Fabrizio,
S. Modesti, and E. Tosatti, Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 499
(2016).
18. Y. Kondo and K. Takayanagi, Science 289, 606 (2000).
JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017
 QUANTUM OSCILLATIONS OF THE MICROWAVE SENSITIVITY
19. S. Egle, C. Bacca, H. F. Pernau, M. Huefner, D. Hinzke,
U. Nowak, and E. Scheer, Phys. Rev. B 81, 134402
(2010).
20. P. Ogrodnik, T. Stobiecki, J. Barnaś, M. Frankowski,
J. Cheçiński, F. A. Vetró, and J.-P. Ansermet,
arXiv:1706.01036v1.
21. M. Büttiker, Y. Imry, R. Landauer, and S. Pinhas,
Phys. Rev. B 31, 6207 (1985).
22. D. C. Ralph and M. D. Stiles, J. Magn. Magn. Mater.
320, 1190 (2008).
23. E. Barati, M. Cinal, D. M. Edwards, and A. Umerski,
Phys. Rev. B 90, 014420 (2014).
JETP LETTERS Vol. 106 No. 12 2017
View publication stats
827
24. S. Perna, R. Tomasello, T. Scimone, M. d’Aquino,
C. Serpico, M. Carpentieri, and G. Finocchio, IEEE
Trans. Magn. 53, 1400107 (2016).
25. C.-F. Pai, L. Liu, Y. Li, H. W. Tseng, D. C. Ralph, and
R. A. Buhrman, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 122404 (2012).
26. J. Sun, Ph.D. Thesis (King Abdullah Univ. Sci. Tech-
nol., Thuwal, Saudi Arabia, 2013).
27. W. Skowroński, S. Ziętek, M. Cecot, T. Stobiecki,
J. Wrona, K. Yakushiji, T. Nozaki, H. Kubota, and
S. Yuasa, in Proc. of the 21 International Conference on
Microwave, Radar and Wireless Communications
MIKON-2016, Poland, Krakow, 2016.