Subnanosecond spin-transfer switching : Comparing the benefits of free-layer or pinned-layer biasing

We analyze the statistical distribution of switching durations in spin-transfer switching induced by current steps, and discuss biasing strategies to enhance the reproducibility of switching durations. We use a macrospin approximation and model the effect of finite temperature as a Boltzmann distribution of initial magnetization states (adiabatic limit). We compare three model spin-valves: a spin-valve with a free layer whose easy axis is parallel to the pinned layer magnetization (standard geometry), a pinned layer with magnetization tilted with respect to the free layer easy axis (pinned layer biasing), and a free layer whose magnetization is pulled away from easy axis by a hard axis bias (free layer biasing). In the conventional geometry, the switching durations follow a broad regular distribution, with an extended long tail comprising very long switching events. For the two biasing strategies, the switching durations follow a multiply-stepped distribution, reflecting the precessional nature of the switching, and the statistical number of precession cycles needed for reversal. We derive analytical criteria to avoid switching events lasting much longer than the average switching duration, in order to achieve the highest reproducibilities. Depending on the current amplitude and the biasing strength, the width of the switching time distribution can be substantially reduced, the best reproducibility being achieved for free layer biasing at overdrive current of a few times unity.

[1]  D. Ralph,et al.  Time-Domain Measurements of Nanomagnet Dynamics Driven by Spin-Transfer Torques , 2005, Science.

[2]  D. Ralph,et al.  Microwave oscillations of a nanomagnet driven by a spin-polarized current , 2003, Nature.

[3]  J. Katine,et al.  Magnetization switching by spin torque using subnanosecond current pulses assisted by hard axis magnetic fields , 2006 .

[4]  Jonathan Z. Sun.  Spin-current interaction with a monodomain magnetic body: A model study , 2000 .

[5]  P. B. Visscher,et al.  Spin-torque switching: Fokker-Planck rate calculation , 2005 .

[6]  Z. Li,et al.  Thermally assisted magnetization reversal in the presence of a spin-transfer torque , 2003 .

[7]  J. Katine,et al.  Distribution of the magnetization reversal duration in subnanosecond spin-transfer switching , 2006, cond-mat/0609687.

[8]  Robert A. Buhrman,et al.  Spin-polarized current switching of a Co thin film nanomagnet , 2000 .

[9]  Ilya Krivorotov,et al.  Reducing the critical current for short-pulse spin-transfer switching of nanomagnets , 2005 .

[10]  Paul Crozat,et al.  Subnanosecond magnetization reversal in magnetic nanopillars by spin angular momentum transfer , 2004 .

[11]  J. Slonczewski.  Current-driven excitation of magnetic multilayers , 1996 .

[12]  S. Russek,et al.  Temperature and field dependence of high-frequency magnetic noise in spin valve devices , 2003 .

[13]  A D Kent,et al.  Current-induced excitations in single cobalt ferromagnetic layer nanopillars. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[14]  A. Tulapurkar,et al.  Temperature study of the spin-transfer switching speed from dc to 100ps , 2005 .

[15]  J. Katine,et al.  Thermal effects on the critical current of spin torque switching in spin valve nanopillars , 2007 .

[16]  Temperature dependence of spin-transfer-induced switching of nanomagnets. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[17]  J. W. Brown.  Thermal Fluctuations of a Single-Domain Particle , 1963 .

[18]  Eiji Saitoh,et al.  Current-induced resonance and mass determination of a single magnetic domain wall , 2004, Nature.

[19]  F. Lázaro,et al.  Langevin-dynamics study of the dynamical properties of small magnetic particles , 1998 .