Full Paper

www.afm-journal.de

Concepts of Spin Seebeck Effect in Ferromagnetic Metals

LiZhi Yi, Dongchao Yang, Min Liu, Hua-Hua Fu, Linjie Ding, Yunli Xu, Bingbing Zhang,
Liqing Pan,* and John Q. Xiao*

a linear temperature gradient. However,

Spin Seebeck effect (SSE) and related spin caloritronics have attracted great due to the different understanding and
interest recently. However, the definition of the SSE coefficient remains to be utilization of the chemical potential, the
established, let alone a clean experiment to measure the SSE coefficient in diffusion equations as well as results
ferromagnetic metals. The concept through a model based on the semi-clas- are different as reported in many litera-
tures,[8,9] resulting in contradictions and
sical Botlzmann transport equation has been clarified. The model includes the
confusions.
vital spin-flip process, which is frequent in metals, and points out that the The electronic transport in SSE is gen-
length scale of SSE is much larger than the spin diffusion length. The model erally described by the contributions of
reveals how the spin-flip process influences the transport equations and pro- two independent spin channels (denoted
vides the simple relationship between the different spin-flip relaxation times by the subscript ↑ and ↓), leading to the
charge current of Jc = J↑ + J↓ and the spin
for spin-up and -down electrons, which is very useful to understand the spin
current of Js  = J↑ − J↓. As for the SSE
transport properties. This understanding allows to redefine the expression of coefficient, most literatures define it as
the spin Seebeck coefficient. µ −µ
Ss  = S↑ − S↓ or Ss = ↑ ↓ directly,[15–17]
∆T
where S↑ (S↓) and μ↑(μ↓) are the Seebeck
1. Introduction coefficients and the chemical potentials for two spin channels,
respectively. This metaphysical definition seems to be obvious
and effective in dealing with certain transport problems in spin
The generation of electromotive force by a temperature gradient
caloritronics. However, when starting from the physical nature
has been known as the Seebeck effect (SE) for two centuries.[1,2]
of spin transport, one would find that this treatment is inappro-
More than 40 years ago, Johnson and Silsbee first proposed that
priate, which leads to inconsistent results because the influence
a temperature gradient can also lead to spin current.[1] More
of the spin-dependent conductivity on the transport properties
recently, Spin Seebeck effect (SSE) has attracted considerable
has been neglected.
interest due to the advent of spintronics that demands an effi-
In this manuscript, we proceed from the basic physical prin-
cient generation of spin current.[3–7] Many models have since
ciples. By using the existing spin caloritronic transport model,
been developed.[8–13]
we have clarified the physical significance and determined the
As illustrated in Figure  1, SSE leads to a spin current and
basic relationship between the spin current and spin accumula-
spin accumulation from a temperature gradient in a ferro-
tion and the correct definition of SSE coefficient.
magnetic metal (FM). The spin accumulation has mostly been
treated by Valet–Fert spin diffusion equation,[14] which is the
diffusion model of spin-dependent chemical potential under 2. Spin-Dependent Chemical Potential
of FMs under Temperature Gradient
Dr. L. Z. Yi, D. C. Yang, Prof. M. Liu, Prof. L. J. Ding, Dr. Y. L. Xu, In an equilibrium state, the chemical potential of different par-
B. B. Zhang, Prof. L. Q. Pan ticles should be equal. In this section, we first prove that the
Hubei Engineering Research Center of Weak Magnetic-Field Detection
and College of Science chemical potentials are equal for two spin channels in a FM
China Three Gorges University except at the boundary, that is, μ↑  = μ↓ . Before discussing
Yichang 443002, China the spin accumulation, it is necessary to clarify the concept of
E-mail: lpan@ctgu.edu.cn chemical potential, which is the basis for deriving SSE coeffi-
Prof. H.-H. Fu cient in various literatures,[14,18] including this paper. According
School of Physics
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
to thermodynamics, the physical meaning of the chemical
Wuhan 430074, China potential is the change of Gibbs energy of the system caused
Prof. J. Q. Xiao by the addition of one particle in an infinite system of a given
Department of Physics and Astronomy composition under constant temperature and pressure. For
University of Delaware metals, the physical meaning of the chemical potential is the
Newark, DE 19716, USA energy needed to be overcome when an electron is introduced
E-mail: jqx@udel.edu
into the metal. The Fermi energy of a nonmagnetic metal (NM)
The ORCID identification number(s) for the author(s) of this article
can be found under https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202004024.
is equal to its chemical potential at zero temperature. The
chemical potential of electrons in an FM is spin dependent. Its
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.202004024 electrical chemical potential µαe can be described as

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024 2004024  (1 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

Figure 2.  Schematic diagram of spin current generated by a temperature

Figure 1.  Schematic diagram of SSE in FMs. The spin polarized current
is produced because of the motion of spin polarized electrons under the
temperature gradient. At the thermal equilibrium state, the charge current
in open circuit is zero, but the spin current persists.
gradient. Under a linear temperature gradient, the spin accumulation
μs (green line) inside the FMs is negligible everywhere except near the
boundary. In the zone within several λsf away from the boundary, μs is no
longer zero and the spin accumulation appears because of asymmetric
spin reversal.

µαe = µα (T ) − eϕ (1) where L is the sample length. Figure  2 illustrates the diffu-
where the subscript α represents the spin orientation, that sion of μS as calculated from Equation (5). Near to the sample
is, α = ↑/↓. The first term of the right-hand side is the spin- sinh( x /λsf )
boundary (x  →  ±L/2), the ratio ≈ ± 1 , and the
dependent chemical potential and the second term is the cosh(L/2λsf )
energy caused by the applied electric field. The spin-dependent ∆T
spin accumulation µS ≈ ± e(S↑ − S↓ )λsf . At the position far
chemical potential at a finite temperature T can be described as L
sinh( x /λsf )
 π 2  K T  2 away from the boundary (|x| ≪ L/2), → 0 and the
cosh(L/2λsf )
µα (T ) ≈ µ 0α 1 −  B   (2) value of μS is negligible, that is, μ↑ = μ↓ , and there is no spin
 12  µ 0α  
accumulation inside the sample.
where μ0α  = εF,α − MαB  + Eα, εF,α is the Fermi energy at
0 K, − MαB is the Zeeman Energy, and Eα is the exchange split- 3. Spin Accumulation and Spin
ting energy between two spin channels. The Zeeman energy Continuity Equation
and the exchange energy shifted the sub-energy bands for spin-
up and -down, and the thermal equilibrium adjusted the spin- As indicated in Equation (5), the spin chemical potential μS ≠ 0
dependent Fermi energy to have the same chemical potential near the boundary/interface of FMs, that is, there will be spin
for both spins. A temperature gradient will drive the system accumulation under a linear temperature gradient. In this sec-
out of equilibrium and lead to a spatially dependent chemical tion, we will focus on the physical mechanism and the effect
potential. The understanding of the diffusion mechanism of of this spin accumulation. Considering the spin-flip scattering
the chemical potential is the key point to reveal the transport which is a random scattering process due to the spin-orbit
mechanism of SSE. In numerous articles, the standard spin dif- interaction, the number density of electrons at the Fermi level
fusion equation is used[9,19,20] in the system at any time can be described as
µ↑ − µ↓ n↑ = n↑0 e −t /τ↑↓ , and n↓ = n↓0 e −t /τ↓↑ (6)
∇ 2 (µ↑ − µ↓ ) = + (S↑ − S↓ )∇ 2T (3)
λsf2 where n↑0 and n↓0 are the number density at the Fermi Level
at t = 0 for spin-up and-down, respectively. At equilibrium, the
where λsf is the spin diffusion length of about several tens of
number of electrons with different spin orientations in the
nanometer for most FM metals and is assumed to be inde-
system remains constant, that is, the number of electrons from
pendent of the temperature. λsf  = (Dτsf )1/2, where D is the
spin-up to spin-down in unit time is equal to the number of
diffusion coefficient of electrons and τsf is the spin-flip relaxa-
σ D + σ ↑D↓ [19] electrons from spin-down to spin-up. The first derivative of the
tion time. In FMs, D = (1 − β ) D↑ + β D↓ = ↓ ↑ and number of electrons in different spin states should be the same
1 1 1 σ
= + according to Matthiessen’s rule for independent dn↑ dn↓
τ sf τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑ = (7)
scattering statistics, where D↑(D↓) and τ↑↓(τ↓↑) are the diffu- dt dt
sion coefficients for spin-up (down) and the spin-flip relaxation
This leads to
times, respectively. The second term of right-hand side of the
equation is zero under a linear temperature gradient, leading to dn↑ n e −t /τ↑↓ n
the spin diffusion equation of = − ↑0 = − ↑ (8a)
dt τ ↑↓ τ ↑↓
µS ( x )
∇ 2 µS ( x ) = (4) dn↓ −n↓0 e −t /τ↓↑ n
λsf2 = = − ↓ (8b)
dt τ ↓↑ τ ↓↑
where μS  μ↑ − μ↓ is the spin accumulation. The general solu-
tion to Equation (4) is The spin-flip relaxation time follows the relationship of

∆T sinh ( x /λsf ) τ ↑↓ n↑
µS ( x ) = e(S↑ − S↓ )λsf (5) = (8c)
L cosh (L/2λsf ) τ ↓↑ n↓

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024 2004024  (2 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

Let us look at the process of spin-flip scattering. The spin- where ds is the area element on the surface of the cylinder. The
flip relaxation time does not depend on the scattering from continuity equation of spin current requires that the flux of the
phonon. Spin-flip occurs only during the exchange of angular spin current js is equal to the spin accumulation rate at any
momentum between different spins. As a result, the spin-flip position in the system, that is,
relaxation times hardly depend on temperature. In addition, the
nµ s  1 1  
 
probability of spin-flip scattering is proportional to the number ∫∫∫ 2µ 
τ
+
τ
∫∫
 dV =  js ⋅ ds (13c)
0  ↑↓ ↓↑ 
of electrons with opposite spin. That means, the spin diffusion
time is inversely proportional to the number of electrons with Equation (13c) is the continuity equation of spins in FMs,
opposite spin. Therefore, the relationship between the different which relates the spin accumulation μs with the spin current js.
spin-flip relaxation times for the spin-up and -down can be According to Equation (5), the spin accumulation μs in an FM is
described as: negligible everywhere inside the system. Then the spin accumu-
nµ  1 1  
 
1 lation ∫∫∫ s  + ∫∫ js ⋅ d s = 0, which indicates that
 dV = 
2µ 0  τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑ 
τ ↑↓ n↓ n↑
= = (8d) the divergence

 of the spin current is zero inside the system,
τ ↓↑ 1 n↓ that is, ∇ ⋅ js = 0 represented by cylinder 1 in Figure 2.
n↑ At the positions near to the boundary where spin accumula-
This is the physical nature for this relationship. tion exists, the same method can be used to consider the cylinder
Considering a small disturbance of the spin polarization, 2 as shown in Figure  2. One can find that the flux of the spin
that is, n↑ changes to n↑ + Δn↑, then the number density of the current will no longer be zero. The vanishing or increasing spin
electrons with spin-down should be changed to n↓  −  Δn↑ due density is due to the unbalanced spin reversal at the boundary.
to the conservation of the number of particles. This changes
Equation  (8a) to
4. Concept and Definition of SSE Coefficient
dn↑ n + ∆n↑  n↓ − ∆n↑ 
=− ↑ − −  (9)
dt τ ↑↓  τ ↓↑  Here, we clarify the definition of SSE coefficient Ss, which has
different expressions in numerous literatures.[13,21] In this sec-
On the right-hand side, the first term is the number of the tion, we discuss the spin-dependent electron transport in FMs
electrons changing from spin ↑ to ↓ in unit time, and vice versa from the basic electronic transport theory such as Boltzmann
for the second term. By using n↑ = n↓ from Equation (8c), (9) equation and the relaxation time approximation. We then derive
τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑
can be rewritten as the SSE coefficient under the linear response theory.
In solid state materials, electrons are scattered by phonons,
dn↑  1 1  ∆n↑ electrons, or lattice defects, changing their wave vector k to k′. If
= −∆n↑  + =− (10) the system is macroscopically homogeneous and the scattering
dt  τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑  τ sf
is weak, the motion of the electron can be described by the
In metals, the total chemical potential of the system is the semi-classical Boltzmann equation with Fermi-Dirac distribu-
average of all electrons. We therefore have tion function f(k, r, t), where f(k, r, t) is the probability that a par-
ticular state (k, r) is occupied at time t. When scattering occurs,
2∆n↑µ 0 ∆V 2∆n↑µ 0 the transport equation becomes df/dt = ∂f/∂t|coll , leading to
µ s = µ↑ − µ↓ = = (11)
(n↑ + n↓ ) ∆V n
df ∂ f dk
 
dr ∂ f
= + ∇k f ⋅ + ∇f ⋅ = |coll (14)
where μ0 is the chemical potential of a single electron at μs = 0, dt ∂t dt dt ∂t
and n the number density of electrons at the Fermi level, that The Fermi-Dirac distribution function is
is, n = n↑  + n↓ . Substituting Equation (11) into Equation (10),
1
one obtains f (E ) = (15)
e (E −µ )/kBT + 1
dn↑  1 1  nµ s  1 1  where E is the energy of the electrons. Denoting f0 as the distri-
= − ∆n↑  + =−  +  (12) bution function of the equilibrium state, we have
dt  τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑  2µ 0  τ ↑↓ τ ↓↑ 
∂ f0
As shown in Figure  2, a small cylinder along the tempera- = 0 (16)
∂t
ture gradient at any point inside the FM metal has the spin
accumulation of In the transport calculation, the relaxation time τ approxi-
mation is generally used to deal with the collision process.
 1 Considering that the distribution function f has an offset com-
dn↑ nµ s 1 
∫∫∫ − dV = ∫∫∫ 2µ 0

τ
 ↑↓
+
τ
 dV (13a) pared with f0 and this offset decays exponentially with time, the
dt ↓↑  change in the distribution function due to collisions mentioned
in Equation (14) can be described as
The spin current flux passing through the cylinder is

  ∂f f − f0
|coll = −
∫∫ js ⋅ ds (13b)
Φ=  ∂t τ
(17)

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024 2004024  (3 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

According to the linear response theory, the distribution When we consider the contribution of spin-flip, Equation (21)
function f can be written as f = f0 +  Δf, where Δf is the offset will change to
from the equilibrium distribution function f0. For the electrons
of spin ↑ and spin ↓, the distribution function will be f = f0 + f↑ f↑ f ∂f  E − µ↑ 
−
 τ ↓τ ↓↑ + τ ↓τ ↑↓ + τ ↑↓τ ↓↑ 
≡ − ↑ = v 0 −∇µ↑e + (−∇T )
and f = f0 + f↓, respectively. By substituting f and Equation (16) τ ↑′ ∂E  T  (22a)
τ↑  
into Equations (14) and (17), one has  τ ↑τ ↓↑ + τ ↓τ ↑↓ + τ ↑↓τ ↓↑ 
 
dk dr f f↓ f ∂f  E − µ↓ 
∇k f 0 ⋅ + ∇f 0 ⋅ = − ↑ (18a) − ≡ − ↓ = v 0 −∇µ↓e + (−∇T )
dt dt τ↑  τ ↑τ ↓↑ + τ ↑τ ↑↓ + τ ↑↓τ ↓↑  τ ↓′ ∂E  T  (22b)
τ↓  
  τ τ + τ τ
 ↑ ↓↑ ↓ ↑↓ ↑↓ ↓↑  + τ τ
dk dr f
∇k f 0 ⋅ + ∇f 0 ⋅ = − ↓ (18b)
dt dt τ↓ With spin-flip, the relaxation time changes from
τ τ + τ τ + τ τ 
τλ to τλ′. Since τ ↑′ = τ ↑  ↓ ↓↑ ↓ ↑↓ ↑↓ ↓↑  ≈ τ ↑,
where τ↑ and τ↓ are the relaxation time of electron scattering  τ ↑τ ↓↑ + τ ↓τ ↑↓ + τ ↑↓τ ↓↑ 
for spin-up and -down, respectively. Consider the spin-flip τ τ + τ τ + τ τ 
τ ↓′ = τ ↓  ↑ ↓↑ ↑ ↑↓ ↑↓ ↓↑  ≈ τ ↓ due to τ↑↓ ≫ τ↑ and τ↓↑ ≫ τ↓,
events, the flip of spin-up electrons will contribute to the spin-  τ ↑τ ↓↑ + τ ↓τ ↑↓ + τ ↑↓τ ↓↑ 
down electrons, and vice versa. Therefore, Equations (18a) and the spin-dependent transport equation in the gradient tempera-
(18b) change to the following: ture can still be calculated from the distribution function fα as
   ∇µ e  1
dk dr f f −f Jα = K α0  α  − K α1 (−∇T ) (23)
∇k f 0 ⋅ + ∇f 0 ⋅ = − ↑ − ↑ ↓ (19a)  e  eT
dt dt τ↑ τ ↑↓
 1  ∂ f0 
dk

dr f f −f where K αn = e 2 ∫ 4π −
 ∂E 
 τ α E (k ) v 2 (k )[E (k ) − µ ]n dk .
∇k f 0 ⋅ + ∇f 0 ⋅ = − ↓ − ↓ ↑ (19b)
dt dt τ↓ τ ↓↑
Then the total charge current and spin current of the system
It is well known
 that ℏk is the crystal momentum of the elec- are
dk 1   
trons and = F, where F = − eε is the electric field force of
dt  J c = J↑ + J↓ ≈ − (σ ↑∇µ↑e /e + σ ↓∇µ↓e /e + σ ↑S↑∇T + σ ↓S↓∇T ) (24a)
the electron in the external electric field ε. The first term on the
left-hand side of Equations (19a) and (19b) can be written as J s = J↑ − J↓ ≈ − (σ ↑∇µ↑e /e − σ ↓∇µ↓e /e + σ ↑S↑∇T − σ ↓S↓∇T ) (24b)

dk 1   1 ∂ f0 ∂f In Equations (24a) and (24b), the first two terms of the right-
∇k f 0 ⋅ = F ⋅ ∇k f 0 = F ⋅ ∇kE = − eε v 0 (20a) hand side are the contributions of the inhomogeneous distri-
dt   ∂E ∂E
bution of spin-dependent chemical potential and the last two

where v is the velocity of the electrons. In a non-uniform terms are the contributions from the temperature gradient.
temperature field, both the distribution function f0 and the According to the previous conclusion, at equilibrium state, the
temperature T depend on the position. By using Equation (15) spin accumulation μs and Jc of open circuit should be zero.
and calculating the second term on the left-hand side of Defining ∇ µ↑e = ∇ µ↓e = ∇µ,e we have
Equation (19), the second term can be written as
 −(σ ↑ + σ ↓ )∇µ e / e = (σ ↑S↑ + σ ↓S↓ ) ∇T (25)
dr  ∂ f ∂f    ∂ f E − µ  ∂ f 0 
∇f 0 ⋅ =  0 ∇µ + 0 ∇T  ⋅ v = v  0 ∇µ +   ∇T  (20b)
dt  ∂E ∂T   ∂E  T  ∂E  By using the definition of Seebeck coefficient S0, one can
obtain
Substituting Equations (20a) and (20b) into Equation (19), we
can obtain  ∆V   dV dT  ∇µ e dT σ ↑S↑ + σ ↓S↓
S0 ≡   = /  =− / = (26)
 ∆T lim  dx dx  Jc =0 e dx σ↑ +σ↓
f↑ f↑ − f↓ ∂ f   ∇µ  E − µ↑ 
− − = v 0 −e ε + ↑  + (−∇T )
τ↑ τ ↑↓ ∂E   e  T  where S0 is the Seebeck coefficient and V is the Seebeck voltage
∂ f0  E − µ  (21a) caused by the temperature gradient. The charge current Jc
=v −∇µ↑e + ↑
(−∇T )
∂E  T  caused by the temperature gradient as present in Equation (24a)
can be written as
f↓ f↓ − f↑ ∂ f   ∇µ  E − µ↓  J c = J↑ + J↓ = − σ ∇µ e/e − σ S0 ∇T (27)
− − = v 0 −e ε + ↓  + (−∇T )
τ↓ τ ↓↑ ∂E   e  T 
∂ f0  E − µ↓  (21b)
=v −∇µ↓ +
e
(−∇T ) where σ = σ↑ + σ↓. Similarly, the spin current in Equation (24b)
∂E  T  should be rewritten as

 ∇µ λ  ∇µ e
where ε +  = ∇µ λe ≡ ε eff is the effective electrical field. J s = J↑ − J↓ = − (σ ↑ − σ ↓ ) − (σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓ ) ∇T (28)
 e  e

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024 2004024  (4 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Here, the key point is the definition of SSE coefficient Ss.
There are two possible ways: The first one is to use a defini-
tion similar to charge current conductivity σ, which defines
σs  σ↑ − σ↓, then the SSE coefficient should be
σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓
Ss′ = (29)
σ↑ −σ↓
σ −σ↓
In the second method, a polarization parameter P = ↑
σ↑ +σ↓
is introduced to clarify the difference between the σs and σ, by
which the spin current can be rewritten as
σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓
J s = − σ (P∇µ e /e ) − σ ∇T (30)
σ↑ +σ↓
where P∇μe/e can be regarded as the equivalent electric field
driving the spin current. Then the SSE coefficient is
σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓
Ss =
σ ↑ + σ ↓ (31)
Comparing the expressions of Equations (29) and (31), the
two only slightly differs in denominators. Next, we discuss
which expression is the better one for representing the ability
to generate spin currents from the temperature gradient.
Consider an FM under a linear temperature gradient, as
shown in Figure 1; the metal is in an open circuit state and the
charge current in Equation (27) should be zero. Substituting
Equation (27) into (28), the spin current can be calculated as
2σ ↑σ ↓
Js = − (S↑ − S↓ ) ∆T (32)
σ↑ +σ↓
The measurement of spin current is generally realized by
depositing an NM with large spin Hall angle (such as Pt) on
the FM sample and measuring the inverse spin Hall voltage in
NM caused by the injected spin current from the FM. However,
it is rather difficult to measure the spin current purely from a
temperature gradient since there is built-in internal field along
the temperature gradient that drives additional spin current as
shown in Equation (28). This internal field ∇µ can be removed
e
e
Figure 3.  a) The proposed experimental scheme to measure the spin current only caused by the temperature gradient. The two ends of an FM along
the temperature gradient are shorted by a superconductor, which eliminates the spin current due to the built-in electric field. The ANE can be directly
measured in a single FM (the bottom panel) which can be subtracted from U0. b) The different-defined SSE coefficients as a function of the ratio of
σ↑: σ↓, calculated from Equation (29) (pink lines), Equation (31) (blue line), and from (σ↑S↑ − σ↓S↓) (green line).
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024
www.afm-journal.de
by a superconductor that connects the top and bottom layers.
With a vertical temperature gradient, the voltages along the FM
are measured and denoted as U0 and U1, respectively. The meas-
urement results of U1 include the contributions from the spin
current from the temperature gradient and the anomalous
Nernst effect (ANE) of the FM. The latter can be removed using
U0  − U1 since U1 only measures ANE of the FM. Therefore,
this experiment can determine the spin current caused only by
σ S − σ ↓S↓
the temperature gradient, that is, J s = −(σ ↑ − σ ↓ ) ↑ ↑ ∆T
σ↑ −σ↓
σ S − σ ↓S↓
according to Equation (29) or J s = −σ ↑ ↑ ∆T according
σ↑ +σ↓
to Equation (31). In Figure  3, we plotted (σ↑S↑  − σ↓S↓) (green
σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓
curve in Figure  3b), Ss′ = or Equation (29) (pink
σ↑ −σ↓
σ ↑S↑ − σ ↓S↓
curve), and Ss = or Equation (31) (blue curve) as
σ↑ −σ↓
function of σ↑/σ↓. The SSE coefficient represents the ability
of a material generating spin current in the presence of a tem-
perature gradient, which is closely related to (σ↑S↑  − σ↓S↓).
For most FMs, the conductivity σ↑ ≫ σ↓; in this case, the two
expressions of SSE coefficient are not much different as seen
from Figure  3b. However, there are a few metals with mark-
edly different electron structure, the conductivity σ↑ and σ↓ are
almost equal, and σ↑  < σ↓ is also possible such as in the case
of Fe. Clearly Equation (29) is inappropriate since it diverges
at σ↑  ≈ σ↓ and shows negative values at σ↑  < σ↓. Therefore
σ S − σ ↓S↓
Ss = ↑ ↑ is the better definition for the SSE coefficient.
σ↑ +σ↓
Our proposed experiment will be an ideal method to confirm
using Fe as the FM.
5. Conclusions
We have investigated the SSE and the transport properties of
FMs under a linear temperature gradient. Based on the semi-
classical Boltzmann equation and the relaxation time approxi-
mation, the relationship among the spin relaxation time, spin
2004024  (5 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

accumulation, and spin current have been discussed. At a S. Zhang, K. He, Y. Wang, L. Lu, X. Ma, Q. Xue, Science 2013, 340,
steady state, the spin relaxation time is related to the electron 167.
density of different spin bands, and satisfies the equation of [4] F. K.  Dejene, J.  Flipse, B. J.  van  Wees, Phys. Rev. B 2012, 86,
τ ↑↓ n↑ 24436.
τ ↓↑ = n↓ . Inside the FMs, the spin continuity is guaranteed by [5] D. Qu, S. Y. Huang, J. Hu, R. Wu, C. L. Chien, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013,
nµ  1 1  
  110, 67206.
∫∫∫ 2µ s  τ + τ  dV = 
∫∫ js ⋅ ds . The expression of SSE coef- [6] R. G.  Bhardwaj, P. C.  Lou, S.  Kumar, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2018, 112,
0 ↑↓ ↓↑
ficient should be more accurate according to the weighted dif- 042404.
[7] D. Hinzke, U. Nowak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 107, 27205.
ference of spin-dependent conductivity. Among the different
σ S − σ ↓S↓ [8] K.  Uchida, S.  Takahashi, J.  Ieda, K.  Harii, K.  Ikeda, W.  Koshibae,
expressions of SSE coefficients, Ss = ↑ ↑ accurately S. Maekawa, E. Saitoh, J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 105, 07C908.
reflects the properties of materials. σ↑ +σ↓ [9] B.  Scharf, A.  Matos-Abiague, I.  Žutić, J.  Fabian, Phys. Rev. B 2012,
85, 85208.
[10] V.  Popescu, P.  Kratzer, P.  Entel, C.  Heiliger, M.  Czerner, K.  Tauber,
F.  Töpler, C.  Herschbach, D. V.  Fedorov, M.  Gradhand, I.  Mertig,
Acknowledgements R.  Kováčik, P.  Mavropoulos, D.  Wortmann, S.  Blügel, F.  Freimuth,
L.Z.Y. and D.C.Y. contributed equally to this work. This work was Y.  Mokrousov, S.  Wimmer, D.  Ködderitzsch, M.  Seemann,
supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant K. Chadova, H. Ebert, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2019, 52, 073001.
No: 51371105). J.Q.X. was supported by an NSF grant DMR1904076. [11] R.  Schmidt, F.  Wilken, T. S.  Nunner, P. W.  Brouwer, Phys. Rev. B
2018, 98, 134421.
[12] H.  Adachi, K.-I.  Uchida, E.  Saitoh, S.  Maekawa, Rep. Prog. Phys.
2013, 76, 036501.
Conflict of Interest
[13] A. B.  Cahaya, O. A.  Tretiakov, G. E. W.  Bauer, IEEE Trans. Magn.
The authors declare no conflict of interest. 2015, 51, 1.
[14] T. Valet, A. Fer, Phys. Rev. B 1993, 48, 7099.
[15] M.  Czerner, M.  Bachmann, C.  Heiliger, Phys. Rev. B 2011, 83,
132405.
Keywords [16] G. Z. Zuo, X. J. Liu, M. Fahlman, M. K. Kemerink, Adv. Funct. Mater.
spin caloritronics, spin-dependent chemical potentials, spin-dependent 2018, 28, 1703280.
transport, spin-flip relaxation time, spin Seebeck effect [17] T. Nomura, T. I Ariki, S. Hu, T. Kimura, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2017,
50, 465003.
Received: May 9, 2020 [18] R. Takahashi, M. Matsuo, M. Ono, K. Harii, H. Chudo, S. Okayasu,
Revised: May 28, 2020 J.  Ieda, S.  Takahashi, S.  Maekawa, E.  Saitoh, Nat. Phys. 2016,
Published online: July 23, 2020 12, 52.
[19] P. C.  Van Son, H.  Van Kempen, P.  Wyder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1987, 58,
2271.
[20] J.  Holanda, O.  Alves Santos, R. O.  Cunha, J. B. S.  Mendes,
[1] M Johnson, R. H. Silsbee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1985, 55, 1790. R. L.  Rodríguez-Suárez, A.  Azevedo, S. M.  Rezende, Phys. Rev. B
[2] Y. Xiong, L. Xu, P. Wu, L. Sun, G. Xie, B. Hu, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2019, 2017, 95, 214421.
29, 1900615. [21] S. M.  Rezende, R. L.  Rodríguez-Suárez, R. O.  Cunha,
[3] C. Chang, J. Zhang, X. Feng, J. Shen, Z. Zhang, M. Guo, K. Li, Y. Ou, A. R. Rodrigues, F. L. A. Machado, G. A. Fonseca Guerra, J. C. Lopez
P. Wei, L. Wang, Z. Ji, Y. Feng, S. Ji, X. Chen, J. Jia, X. Dai, Z. Fang, Ortiz, A. Azevedo, Phys. Rev. B 2014, 89, 014416.

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2004024 2004024  (6 of 6) © 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim