1: \documentclass[prl,aps,twocolumn,amsmath,amssymb,showpacs]{revtex4}
2: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3: %TCIDATA{Created=Fri Jun 29 10:42:43 2001}
4: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Mon Oct 22 09:58:51 2001}
5: %TCIDATA{Language=American English}
6:
7: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
8: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
9: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
10:
11: \begin{document}
12: \title{Hysteresis and Anisotropic Magnetoresistance in Antiferromagnetic $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_{4}$}
13: \author{X. H. Chen$^1$}
14: \altaffiliation{Corresponding author} \email{chenxh@ustc.edu.cn}
15: \author{C. H. Wang$^1$, G. Y. Wang$^1$, X. G. Luo$^1$, J. L. Luo$^2$, G. T. Liu$^2$ and N. L.
16: Wang$^2$} \affiliation{1. Hefei National Laboratory for Physical
17: Science at Microscale and Department of Physics, University of
18: Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui 230026, People's
19: Republic of China\\ 2. Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed
20: Matter Physics, Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Science,
21: Beijing 100080, People's Republic of China}
22:
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: The out-of-plane resistivity ($\rho_c$) and magnetoresistivity
26: (MR) are studied in antiferromangetic (AF) $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_{4}$
27: single crystals, which have three types of noncollinear
28: antiferromangetic spin structures. The apparent signatures are
29: observed in $\rho_c(T)$ measured at the zero-field and 14 T at
30: the spin structure transitions, giving a definite evidence for the
31: itinerant electrons directly coupled to the localized spins. One
32: of striking feature is an anisotropy of the MR with a fourfold
33: symmetry upon rotating the external field (B) within ab plane in
34: the different phases, while twofold symmetry at spin reorientation
35: transition temperatures. The intriguing thermal hysteresis in
36: $\rho_c(T,B)$ and magnetic hysteresis in MR are observed at spin
37: reorientation transition temperatures.
38: \end{abstract}
39: \vskip 15 pt
40:
41:
42: \pacs{ 74.25.Fy, 74.72.Jt, 74.25.-q}
43:
44: \narrowtext
45:
46: \maketitle
47:
48:
49: High-$T_c$ superconductivity occurs in cuprates when doping
50: introduces sufficient holes or electrons into the $CuO_2$ planes.
51: It is generally believed that the pairing necessary for
52: supercoductivity involves the interplay between the doped charges
53: and the AF spin correlation. In this sense, the study of lightly
54: doped, insulating AF state is important because the density of the
55: carriers can be sufficiently low that the interaction between them
56: is small relative to their interaction with the $Cu^{+2}$ spins.
57: Many intriguing and anomalous phenomena show up in lighly doped AF
58: cuprates due to the strong coupling between charges and magnetic
59: order of the $Cu^{2+}$ spins\cite{thio,ando1,ando2,ando3}.
60:
61: In the hole doped cuprates, the Neel order is rapidly suppressed by doped
62: hole, resulting in a "spin-glass" state \cite{kastner} and a
63: strong tendency to form spin-charge textures or "stripes"
64: \cite{tranquada}. However, the long-rang AF order in
65: electron-doped $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_4$ persists to much larger x
66: ($\geq$0.12) \cite{tokura}, and coexists with superconductivity
67: for even the optimal doping material (x=0.15) with Tc=25 K
68: \cite{yamada}. In addition, the $Cu^{+2}$ spins order in an AF
69: collinear structure for the parent compounds (such as: $La_2CuO_4$
70: and $YBa_2Cu_3O_6$) of hole-doped cuprates
71: \cite{vaknin,tranquada1}, while in AF noncollinear structure for
72: that of electron-doped cuprates: $Pr_2CuO_4$ and $Nd_2CuO_4$
73: \cite{skanthakumar,sumarlin}. All spins point either parallel or
74: antiparallel to a single direction in AF collinear structure,
75: while the spins in adjacent layers are orthogonal in AF
76: noncollinear structure. Magnetic-field induced a transition from
77: noncollinear to collinear spin arrangement in adjacent $CuO_2$
78: planes for lightly electron-doped $Pr_{1.3-x}La_{0.7}Ce_xCuO_4$
79: with x=0.01 crystals affects significantly both the in-plane and
80: out-of-plane resistivity \cite{ando3}. In $Nd_2CuO_4$, the
81: $Cu^{2+}$ spins order in three phases with two different AF
82: noncollinear spin structures and experience two reorientation
83: phase transitions
84: \cite{skanthakumar1,matsuda,skanthakumar,skanthakumar2} as shown
85: in Fig.1. Such reorientation phase transition is absent in
86: $Pr_2CuO_4$\cite{sachidanandam}.
87:
88: Magnetoresistance (MR) provides new insight into the coupling
89: between the charges and the background magnetism. Previous
90: experiments \cite{thio,ando2,ando3} have demonstrated that
91: \begin{figure}[b]
92: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig1.eps}\vspace{-2mm}
93: \caption{\label{fig:epsart} Spin structure models for the AF
94: noncollinear structure at zaro field and the relative orientation
95: of spins for the AF collinear structure at high field. (a)
96: Noncollinear Phase I (75 $<$ T $<$ 275 K) and Phase III (T$<$30
97: K); (b) Phase II (30$<$ T$<$75 K); (c) Collinear Phase (type-I and
98: III) induced by the field along the [110] from Phase I and III;
99: (d) Collinear Phase (type-II) from Phase II. Here the open circles
100: are Cu ions and the solid ones Nd ions.}\vspace{-2mm}
101: \end{figure}
102: out-of-plane resistivity is sensitive to the interlayer magnetic
103: order of the $Cu^{2+}$ spins. This is particularly valuable
104: because, as shown in this work, the spin-flop or flip transition
105: occurs at fields in which magnetization measurements are
106: difficult. In this letter, we systematically studied out-of-plane
107: MR and angular dependence of out-of-plane MR for lightly doped
108: $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_4$. It is found that $\rho_c(T)$ is surprisingly
109: sensitive to the spin reorientation, giving a definite evidence
110: for the itinerant electrons directly coupled to the localized
111: spins. A thermal hysteresis in $\rho_c(T)$ at field and magnetic
112: hysteresis in MR are observed. Another striking feature is the MR
113: anisotropy with a fourfold symmetry in different AF spin
114: structures, while with a twofold symmetry at the spin
115: reorientation temperatures.
116:
117: The NCCO single crystals were grown by flux method over a wide
118: range of Ce concentration $0\leq x \leq 0.13$. The actual Ce
119: concentration was determined by inductively coupled plasma
120: spectrometry (ICP) analysis experiements, and by the
121: energy-dispersive x-ray analysis (EDX) using a scanning electron
122: microscopy, respectively. All samples were annealed in flowing
123: helium with purity of 99.999\% for 10 hours at 900 $^oC$ to remove
124: the interstitial oxygen. The resistivity and magnetoresistance
125: were performed in Quantum Design PPMS systems.
126:
127: \begin{figure}[t]
128: \includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{fig2.eps}\vspace{-6mm}
129: \caption{\label{fig:epsart} (a) In-plane and out-of-plane
130: resistivity as a function of temperature for
131: $Nd_{1.975}Ce_{0.025}CuO_4$ crystal. (b)-(c) Temperature
132: derivative of out-of-plane resistivity. In (b), the zero field
133: data are multiplied by 2 between 50 to 80 K. }\vspace{-5mm}
134: \end{figure}
135:
136: The magnetic properties in $R_2CuO_4$ (R=Nd, Pr) are mainly
137: dependent on the coupling between Cu and R magnetic subsystem
138: which exhibits a large single-ion anisotropy \cite{sachidanandam}.
139: Unlike $Pr_2CuO_4$, in $Nd_2CuO_4$ the spin reorientation
140: transition takes place due to a competition between various
141: interplanar interactions which arises because of the rapid
142: temperature dependence of the Nd moment below about 100 K
143: \cite{sachidanandam}. The Cu spins first order in the noncolinear
144: AF structure [phase I: Fig.1a] below $T_{N1}$=275 K. On further
145: cooling, the Cu spins reorder into the noncollinear structure at
146: $T_{N2}$=75 K [phase II: Fig.1b], and at $T_{N3}$=30 K the Cu
147: spins experience another reorientation into phase III which has
148: the same noncollinear order as phase I \cite{endoh,skanthakumar}.
149: As shown in Fig.1, the Cu and Nd moments along c-axis are parallel
150: in phase I and III, while antiparallel in phase II
151: \cite{petitgrand}. A magnetic field applied within ab planes
152: induces a transition from the noncollinear to collinear AF
153: structure with a spin flop. Fig.1(c) and (d) show the collinear AF
154: structures transformed from the noncollinear structures shown in
155: Fig.1(a) and (b) at the B applied along [110] direction.
156:
157: Figure 2a shows temperature dependence of in-plane ($\rho_{ab}$)
158: and out-of-plane ($\rho_c$) resistivity for the crystal
159: $Nd_{1.975}Ce_{0.025}CuO_4$. $\rho_{ab}(T)$ shows the insulating
160: behavior in the whole temperature range, while $\rho_{c}(T)$ shows
161: a weak metallic behavior above 130 K, and a weak insulating
162: behavior with decreasing temperature, and a diverging below 30 K.
163: At a first glance, no anomaly is detected at $T_{N1}$, $T_{N2}$
164: and $T_{N3}$ in the zero field $\rho_{ab}(T)$ and $\rho_c(T)$.
165: However, a derivative plot for out-of-plane resistivity shown in
166: Fig.1(b) and Fig(c) helps to observe the anomalies at the
167: different $T_N$. As shown in Fig.1(b) and 1(c), the clear peaks
168: are observed at $T_{N2}$$\sim$69 K and $T_{N3}$$\sim$30 K
169: for the spin reorientation transition, while a weak peak shows up at
170: about 260 K for the AF order. Compared to $Nd_2CuO_4$, the $T_{N1}$ and $T_{N2}$
171: slightly decreases. It suggests that doping of Ce suppresses the AF order and spin reorientation at
172: $T_{N2}$, while does not affect the $T_{N3}$ remarkably.
173: At $T_{N2}$ and $T_{N3}$, the width of the spin
174: reorientation transition is very narrow (less than 10 K), indicating
175: the high quality of our crystals. It should be pointed out that
176: no anomaly is observed in ab-plane resistivity, even in its derivative.
177: It suggests a strong coupling between the charge and spin degree of
178: freedom, and that out-of-plane resistivity is more sensitive to the spin
179: structure than in-plane resistivity. It should be pointed out that the anomalies
180: shown in $d\rho_{c}/dT$ can be observed only for the $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_4$
181: crystals with x$<$0.06. In order to investigate the effect of
182: collinear AF structure transition on $\rho_{c}(T)$, the
183: $\rho_{c}(T)$ is measured at the B of 14 T along [110] direction in the
184: heating and cooling process. As shown in the inset of Fig.2a, a remarkable feature
185: is observed in $\rho_{c}(T)$ at $T_{N2}$ and $T_{N3}$, and the transition from the type-I collinear
186: structure to the type-II leads to a decrease in $\rho_{c}$.
187: Very sharp peaks show up in a derivative plot ($\rho_c(T)/dT$) at $T_{N2}$ and
188: $T_{N3}$, respectively. The peak position at $T_{N2}$ remains
189: unchanged, while at $T_{N3}$ obviously shifts to low
190: temperature. A intriguing feature is that a hysteresis behavior
191: at 14 T is clearly observed at $T_{N3}$ and the peak temperature difference between heating and cooling process
192: is about 1.5 K,
193: while a hysteresis behavior can be ignored at $T_{N2}$.
194: These results give the definite evidence for the itinerant
195: electrons directly coupled to the localized spins. The similar
196: hysteresis behavior
197: cannot be observed at zero field. Therefore, the hysteresis is
198: induced by the external field.
199:
200: \begin{figure*}[t]
201: \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{fig3.eps}\vspace{-14mm}
202: \caption{\label{fig:wide} (a) The isothermal MR for x=0.025 with
203: the B along Cu-O-Cu and Cu-Cu direction at 20 K (open) and 40 K
204: (solid), respectively; (b)-(e) The isothermal MR as a function of
205: the B at 50 K in FC and ZFC process with B$\|$Cu-Cu direction for
206: the $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_4$ crystals with x=0.025, 0.033, 0.06 and
207: 0.13, respectively.}\vspace{-5mm}
208: \end{figure*}
209:
210: Figure 3(a) shows the isothermal MR for x=0.025 with the B along
211: Cu-O-Cu and Cu-Cu direction at 20 K and 40 K, respectively. The MR
212: behavior shown in Fig.3(a) is similar to that observed in
213: $Pr_{1.3-x}La_{0.7}Ce_xCuO_4$ with x=0.01 crystals by Lavrov et
214: al\cite{ando3}. As explained by Lavrov et al., the MR behavior
215: arises from the spin origin and is closely related to the
216: noncollinear-collinear transition induced by B. The steplike
217: increase of resistivity corresponds to the noncollinear-collinear
218: transition with increasing the field up to critical field $B_c$,
219: above the $B_c$ (in collinear structure) the MR shows different
220: behavior. As shown in Fig.3(a), the Cu-Cu direction is easy axis
221: in the collinear spin structure with relatively small $B_c$.
222: Figure 3(b)-(e) shows the isothermal MR
223: at 50 K with B applied within ab-plane Cu-Cu direction
224: for the $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_4$ crystals with x=0.025, 0.033, 0.06 and 0.13.
225: An intriguing result is that magnetic hysteresis of MR is observed in the
226: for x=0.025, 0.033 and 0.06 crystals. The magnetic field dependence of isothermal MR
227: shows two branches. The branch of larger MR is obtained with field-cooled (FC) process, that is, the B of 14 T or -14 T
228: is applied within ab-plane at 290 K, then the sample is cooled to 50 K with B,
229: and the isothermal MR is measured with decreasing B. The branch of the smaller MR is got
230: with increasing B from zero to 14 T, then with decreasing B the MR shows the same behavior as shown in
231: Fig.3(b). The isothermal MR shows the same behavior as the smaller MR branch
232: in zero-field cooled (ZFC) process. It suggests that the isothermal MR is
233: strongly dependent on the B applied history. In $Pr_2CuO_4$, no similar magnetic hysteresis of the MR is observed.
234: While the difference of their magnetic structure is the absence of
235: the spin reorientation in $Pr_2CuO_4$. Therefore, the unique
236: feature of the magnetic hysteresis in MR is closely related to the
237: spin reorientation. As pointed out by Sachidanandam et
238: al.\cite{sachidanandam} the spin reorientation transition
239: originates from the competition between various interplanar
240: interactions because of the rapid temperature dependence of the Nd
241: moment below 100 K. It is possible that the magnetic field has an
242: effect on various interplanar interactions. So the different
243: effect of the field on the interplanar interactions exists in the
244: different collinear spin structure, and leads to the different MR
245: behavior between the ZFC and FC process. No magnetic hysteresis
246: observed in ab-plane MR supports this explanation. No magnetic
247: hysteresis is observed in Fig.3(e) for the x=0.13 crystal. This
248: may be due to two possibilities: (1) antiferromagnetic order is
249: completely suppressed by doping, or the $T_{N1}$ is below 50 K;
250: (2) the spin reorientation temperature $T_{N2}$ is suppressed to
251: be less than 50 K with doping, so that no spin orientation occurs
252: above 50 K as the case of $Pr_2CuO_4$. There exist two important
253: differences between the MR branch I and II. First is the MR
254: behavior above $B_c$ and the sign of the anomalous MR, which is
255: always positive for branch I, while negative at high fields for
256: branch II. Second, the critical field $B_c$ for the noncollinear
257: to collinear spin structure transition is larger in branch I than
258: that in branch II. Which could originate from the effect of the B
259: on the interplanar interactions in the FC process enhances the
260: critical field for the noncollinear-collinear spin transition. It
261: should be pointed out that the hysteresis in MR is not observed
262: below $T_{N3}$, and only can be observed at temperature between
263: $T_{N2}$ and $T_{N3}$.
264:
265: In order to make out effect of spin reorientation
266: transition on the MR, the MR as a function of angle at different
267: temperatures is studied. The angular dependence of the MR was
268: determined by rotating the sample under a fixed field of 12 T
269: within ab-plane. Figure 4 shows the evolution of the MR with angle
270: between B and [100] (Cu-O-Cu) direction for the 0.025 crystal. The
271: MR is always positive for all temperatures. A striking feature is
272: that the MR shows a strong anisotropy with fourfold symmetry in
273: different AF phases, while twofold symmetry around $T_{N2}$ and
274: $T_{N3}$. The similar anisotropy with \textbf{\emph{d-wave-like}}
275: symmetry has been observed in $Pr_{1.3-x}La_{0.7}Ce_xCuO_4$ with
276: x=0.01 crystal \cite{ando3}. The fascinating MR oscillations shown
277: in Fig.4 has been explained to arise from the relative orientation
278: of spins with respect to the crystal axes because the spin
279: structure always stays collinear at high fields. The total energy
280: does not change due to the interplane pseudo-dipolar interactions
281: when the spin sublattices of the adjacent $CuO_2$ planes rotate in
282: opposite directions \cite{petitgrand1,plakhty,sachidanandam}. Such
283: continuous spin rotation can be induced by B because the spins
284: gradually rotate toward a configuration perpendicular to the B at
285: high fields. Therefore, the hard and easy spin axes are tuned by
286: the field. A intriguing feature is the evolution of MR diagram
287: with temperature. With decreasing temperature, the fourfold
288: oscillations in type-I collinear phase are replaced by a twofold
289: sine wave like feature at $T_{N2}$; consequently a new fourfold
290: oscillations show up in type-II phase, and are replaced by another
291: twofold symmetric wave like feature across $T_{N3}$; with further
292: cooling fourfold symmetric oscillations develop. The MR diagram is
293: fairly
294: \begin{figure}[t]
295: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig4.eps}\vspace{-14mm}
296: \caption{\label{fig:epsart} The out-of-plane MR as a function of
297: angle for $Nd_{1.975}Ce_{0.025}CuO_4$ crystal at different
298: temperatures and polar plot of the same data.}\vspace{-5mm}
299: \end{figure}
300: symmetric in type-I and type-III collinear phase, while is
301: asymmetric in type-II phase. The MR diagram rotates by 45 $^oC$ in
302: the type-II collinear phase relative to the type-I collinear
303: phase, and the MR diagram with twofold symmetry at $T_{N2}$ and
304: $T_{N3}$ rotates by 90 $^oC$ each other. Surprisingly, this is
305: quite consistent with the spin reorientation from Phase I to II
306: (all the Cu spins rotated by $90^o$ about the c-axis). However, it
307: is strange that the MR diagram does not change from type-II to
308: type-III collinear structure. So the maximum MR is observed with B
309: along Cu-O-Cu direction in type-II and type-III collinear
310: structure, while with B along Cu-Cu direction in type-I phase.
311: This is consistent with the magnetic hysteresis in MR observed in
312: Phase II and no magnetic hysteresis in MR observed in Phase III.
313: These results should be closely related to the Nd and Cu ion
314: interaction, so that the MR shows different behavior for the same
315: Cu spin order in phase I and III. It suggests that the MR effects
316: are quite sensitive to the differences in the different collinear
317: spin structures.
318:
319: It should be pointed out that no MR anomaly and no hysteresis
320: behavior in MR and in $\rho_c(T)$ are observed when a c-axis
321: aligned field is applied, consistent with no transformation from
322: noncollinear to collinear spin structure for such field
323: orientation\cite{matsuura}. Compared to the lightly doped
324: Pr-Ce-Cu-O material, the MR behavior is similar to each other due
325: to the transition from noncollinear to collinear spin structure.
326: However, the unique feature is the thermal hysteresis in
327: $\rho_c(T)$ and the magnetic hysteresis in MR. The thermal
328: hysteresis at spin reorientation transition cannot be observed at
329: zero field $\rho_c(T)$, suggesting that the field has effect on
330: the interplanar interactions since the spin reorientation
331: transition arises from the competition of the various interplanar
332: interactions. It is the effect of B on various interplanar
333: interactions to lead to the FC MR behavior different from the ZFC
334: MR case as shown in Fig.3. In addition, the evolution of the MR
335: diagram with the temperature shown in Fig.4 is consistent with the
336: spin structure transition at $T_{N2}$. The maximum MR appears with
337: B along Cu-O-Cu direction in type-II collinear phase, while with B
338: along Cu-Cu direction in type-I collinear phase. It suggests that
339: the hard and easy spin axes are different in type-I and -II
340: collinear spin structures. Which could be the origin for the
341: different MR behavior between FC and ZFC processes shown in Fig.3.
342: The MR diagram does not change across $T_{N3}$, so that no
343: magnetic hysteresis in MR is observed. But a remarkable thermal
344: hysteresis is observed at $T_{N3}$. It suggests that the thermal
345: hysteresis observed in Fig. 2 has a different origin from the
346: magnetic hysteresis in MR shown in Fig.3.
347:
348: In summary, the transport properties and the MR behavior are
349: systematically studied in antiferromagnetic $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_{4}$.
350: The transport properties is very sensitive to the subtle changes
351: of the spin structure. We give a direct evidence for the itinerant
352: electrons directly coupled to the localized spins. The thermal
353: hysteresis in $\rho_c(T,B)$ and the magnetic hysteresis in MR are
354: found. The hysteresis arises from the effect of the field on the
355: interplanar interactions, such as: coupling between Cu and Nd
356: ions, and the different hard and easy spin axes in the collinear
357: spin structures.
358:
359: Upon preparing this Letter, we became aware of a
360: similar hysteresis observed in neutron scattering and MR
361: experiments for $Nd_{2-x}Ce_xCuO_{4}$ \cite{li}.
362:
363: We would like thank Pengcheng Dai, X. G. Wen, Tao Xiang and Qianghui Wang for helpful discussions.
364: This work is supported by the grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China
365: and the Knowledge Innovation Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences.\\
366: \vspace{-8mm}
367:
368: \begin{references}
369: \bibitem{thio}
370: T. Thio et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 38}, 905(1988); {\bf 38},
371: 905(1988); {\bf 41}, 231(1990).
372: \bibitem{ando1}
373: Y. Ando et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 2813(1999).
374: \bibitem{ando2}
375: Y. Ando et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 247003(2003).
376: \bibitem{ando3}
377: A. N. Lavrov et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92}, 227003(2004).
378: \bibitem{kastner}
379: M. A. Kastner et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 70}, 897(1998).
380: \bibitem{tranquada}
381: J. M. Tranquada et al., Nature (London) {\bf 375}, 561(1995).
382: \bibitem{tokura}
383: Y. Tokura, H. Takagi, and S. Uchida, Nature (London), {\bf 337},
384: 345(1989); Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 62}, 1197(1989).
385: \bibitem{yamada}
386: K. Yamada et al., J. Phys. Chem. Solids {\bf 60}, 1025(1999).
387: \bibitem{vaknin}
388: D. Vaknin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 58}, 2802(1987).
389: \bibitem{tranquada1}
390: J. M. Tranquada et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 60}, 156(1988).
391: \bibitem{skanthakumar}
392: S. Skanthakumar et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 47}, 6173(1993).
393: \bibitem{sumarlin}
394: I. W. Sumarlin et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 51}, 5824(1995).
395: \bibitem{skanthakumar1}
396: S. Skanthakumar et al., Physica C {\bf 160}, 124(1989)
397: \bibitem{matsuda}
398: M. Matsuda et al., Phys. Rev. B {42}, 10098(1990).
399: \bibitem{skanthakumar2}
400: S. Skanthakumar et al., J. Appl. Phys. {\bf 73}, 6326(1993).
401: \bibitem{sachidanandam}
402: R. Sachidanandam et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 56}, 260(1997).
403: \bibitem{endoh}
404: Y. Endoh et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf40}, 7023(1989).
405: \bibitem{petitgrand}
406: D. Petitgrand et al., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. {\bf 104-107},
407: 585(1992).
408: \bibitem{petitgrand1}
409: D. Petitgrand et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf59}, 1079(1999).
410: \bibitem{plakhty}
411: V. P. Plakhty et al., Europhys. Lett.{\bf 61}, 534(2003).
412: \bibitem{matsuura}
413: M. Matsuura et al., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 68}, 144503(2003).
414: \bibitem{li}
415: S. L. Li et al., cond-mat/0411694.
416:
417:
418:
419:
420: \newpage
421:
422: \noindent
423:
424:
425: \end{references}
426:
427:
428:
429:
430: \end{document}
431: