This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

77Se NMR measurements of the πd\pi-d exchange field in the organic conductor λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4

Guoqing Wu,1 W. G. Clark,1 S. E. Brown,1 J. S. Brooks, 2 A. Kobayashi,3 and H. Kobayashi 4 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, UCLA, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA 2National High Field Laboratory and Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA 3Research Center of Spectrochememistry, University of Tokyo, Japan 4Institute of Molecular Science, Okazaki, Japan
(August 18, 2025)
Abstract

77Se-NMR spectrum and frequency shift measurements in the paramagnetic metal (PM) and antiferromagnetic insulating (AFI) phases are reported for a small single crystal of the organic conductor λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 as a function of temperature (TT) and field alignment for an applied magnetic field B0B_{0} = 9 T. The results show that in the low TT limit, where the localized Fe3+ spins (SdS_{d} = 5/2) are almost fully polarized, the conduction electrons (Se π\pi-electrons, spin sπs_{\pi} = 1/2) in the BETS molecules experience an exchange field (𝐁\bf{B}πd) from the Fe3+ spins with a value of - 32.7 ±\pm 1.5 T at 5 K and 9 T aligned opposite to 𝐁\bf{B}0. This large negative value of 𝐁\bf{B}πd is consistent with that predicted by the resistivity measurements and supports the Jaccarino-Peter internal field-compensation mechanism being responsible for the origin of field-induced superconductivity.

pacs:
74.70.Kn, 76.60.-k, 75.20.Hr

Correlations between conduction electrons and local magnetic moments in condensed matter physics are of considerable interest in situations where the properties of the conduction electrons are significantly tuned by the internal field generated by the local magnetic moments. These interactions can lead to a rich variety of phases, including superconductivity, density waves, and magnetic ordering. Many examples include low-dimensional organic conductors that have been synthesized in recent decades day ; coronado ; uji1 ; kobayashi1 . It is widely accepted that their physical properties are largely determined by the interaction between the donor HOMO (highest occupied molecular orbitals) band molecules and the anions mori1 ; ruderman ; mori2 .

An important example is the quasi-two dimensional (2D) triclinic (space group P1¯\bar{1}) salt, λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4, where BETS is bis(ethylenedithio)tetraselenafulvalene (C10S4Se4H8) uji1 ; kobayashi1 ; tokumoto ; brossard ; akutsu1 . Below an applied magnetic field (𝐁\bf{B}0) of about 11 T, as the temperature (TT) is lowered it has a transition from a paramagnetic metal (PM) to an antiferromagnetic insulating (AFI) phase. At higher fields and low TT there is a PM to field-induced superconducting (FISC) phase uji1 ; kobayashi1 ; tokumoto ; brossard .

Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a) Cartoon of the interactions causing the Jaccarino-Peter (JP) compensation mechanism. (b) Sketch of the needle-like shape λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 sample for the measurement.

A mechanism proposed for the FISC phase in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 is the Jaccarino-Peter (J-P) compensation effect jaccarino operating in a two-dimensional (2D) system uji1 ; balicas1 ; balicas2 , as illustrated in Fig. 1 (a) hiraki . In this model, the total (negative) exchange interaction (π\pi-d interaction, exchange constant JπdJ_{\pi d}) between the paramagnetic 3d Fe3+ moments (gμB𝐒g\mu_{B}\bf{S}d) (gg is the Landé gg-factor of the Fe3+ and μB\mu_{B} is the Bohr magneton) and the conduction π\pi-electrons at the Se sites in the BETS molecule uji1 ; akutsu1 generates a large exchange field (𝐁\bf{B}πd) at the Se electrons aligned opposite to 𝐁\bf{B}0 given by

𝐁πd(𝐁𝟎,T)=JπdgπμB<𝐒d(𝐁𝟎,T)>,\bf{B}_{\it{\pi d}}(B_{0},\it{T})=\frac{\it{J}_{\pi d}}{\it{g_{\pi}}\mu_{B}}<\bf{S}_{\it{d}}(B_{0},\it{T})>, (1)

where <𝐒<\bf{S}>d{}_{d}> is the average value of the Fe3+ spin polarization, and gπg_{\pi} is the Landé gg-factor for the π\pi-electrons. When 𝐁\bf{B}0 is aligned parallel to the acac plane, the orbital pair breaking effect for the π\pi-electrons is minimized. At low TT (TT << 5 K) for 17 T << 𝐁\bf{B}0 << 45 T [in the FISC phase] uji1 , <𝐒<\bf{S}>d{}_{d}> is nearly saturated and it is expected that ||𝐁\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| \simeq 33 T balicas1 . Thus, the magnitude of the effective field at the Se electrons, |𝐁|\bf{B}0 - 𝐁\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| = |𝐁|\bf{B}|0{}_{0}| - 33 T, is small enough to permit the FISC phase. Also, for |𝐁|\bf{B}|0{}_{0}| << |𝐁|\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| and |𝐁|\bf{B}|0{}_{0}| >> |𝐁|\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| the spin polarization of the conduction electrons is respectively antiparallel and parallel to 𝐁\bf{B}0, a feature that can be probed by the hyperfine frequency shift of the 77Se NMR signal.

This description in terms of the J-P mechanism is supported by the fact that its iso-structural nonmagnetic and non-3d-electron analog λ\lambda-(BETS)2GaCl4 exhibits a behavior kobayashi2 ; kobayashi3 that is completely different from that of λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. Even though the above model of FISC in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 is widely accepted, it needs further experimental confirmation.

Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is a versatile local probe that is capable of directly measuring the distribution of internal magnetic field and the electron spin dynamics on the atomic scale. Thus, it can be used as a tool to test the validity of the J-P mechanism for FISC in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4.

77Se-NMR measurments hiraki1 have been reported for a single crystal of λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 with 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 14.5 T aligned in the acac plane (PM phase) uji1 . But the value obtained for |𝐁|\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| is 23 T, which is \sim 30%\% smaller than the 33 T predicted by the electricial resistivity measurements uji2 ; balicas1 and a theoretical estimate mori2 . Also, these measurements do not include other alignments for 𝐁\bf{B}0.

In this paper, we report 77Se-NMR spectrum and frequency shift measurements in a single crystal of λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4, for 2.5 K \leq TT \leq 30 K over a range of alignments of 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T in the plane \perp to the cc-axis. At this value of 𝐁\bf{B}0, the PM-AFI transition is at 3.5 K. Analysis of these results gives |𝐁|\bf{B}|πd{}_{\pi d}| = (32.7 ±\pm 1.5) T aligned opposite to 𝐁\bf{B}0 at low TT and B0B_{0} \geq 9 T where the Fe3+ magnetization is almost fully saturated (the saturation value of <Sd><S_{d}> is slightly less than 2.5 at 9 T due to Fe3+ - Fe3+ antiferromagnetic interaction guoqing ), consistent with the predicted value 33 T uji2 ; balicas1 ; mori2 . It supports the J-P compensation as the mechanism for the FISC phase in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. An important input for this work is the Fe3+ magnetization that obtained from proton NMR measurements on λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 guoqing , which are not sensitive to conduction electron contributions.

The sample used for these measurements was grown using a standard method kobayashi1 without 77Se enrichment (77Se natural abundance = 7.5%\%). Its dimensions are aa^{\ast} ×\times bb^{\ast} ×\times cc = 0.09 mm ×\times 0.04 mm ×\times 0.80 mm [Fig. 1 (b)], corresponding to a mass of \sim 7 μg\mu g with \sim 2.0 ×\times 1015 77Se nuclei. Because of the small number of spins, a small microcoil with a filling factor (\sim 0.4) was used. For most acquisitions, 104-105 averages were used on a time scale of \sim 5 min for 104 averages. The gyromagnetic ratio of 77Se, γ\gamma = 8.131 MHz/T, is used for data analysis. The sample and coil were rotated on a goniometer (rotation angle ϕ\phi) whose rotation axis is along the lattice cc-axis (needle direction), which is \perp 𝐁\bf{B}0. Based on the crystal structure kobayashi1 , the direction of the Se pzp_{z} orbital is 76.4 from the cc-axis guoqing1 . Then, the minimum angle between pzp_{z} and 𝐁\bf{B}0 during the rotation of the goniometer is ϕmin\phi_{\text{min}} = 13.6.

Figure 2 shows the 77Se-NMR absorption spectrum (χ′′\chi^{\prime\prime}) of λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4, plotted as a function of the frequency shift ν\nu - ν0\nu_{0} (ν0\nu_{0} = 72.90 MHz) at a few TT from 30 to 2.5 K with 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel 𝐚\bf{a}, where ν\nu - ν0\nu_{0} has a weak TT-dependence as discussed in more detail later.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: (Color online) 77Se-NMR absorption spectrum χ′′\chi^{\prime\prime} as a function of frequency shift at ν\nu - ν0\nu_{0} (ν0\nu_{0} = 72.90 MHz) at different temperatures with 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel aa^{\prime} in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4.

These spectra measure the distribution of the local magnetic field at the different 77Se nuclei in the sample. As discussed in more detail later, the local field responsible for this distribution is dominated by the sum of 𝐁\bf{B}0, the dipole field from the Fe3+ spins (𝐁\bf{B}dip), and the hyperfine field from the Se conduction electrons, whose polarization is strongly influenced by 𝐁\bf{B}πd. The spectra are characterized by (1) the full width at half maximum (FWHM) linewidth (Δf\Delta f) which represents the internal magnetic field distribution, and (2) the frequency (ν\nu) of the center of χ′′\chi^{\prime\prime} which measures the average of the hyperfine field from the conduction electrons that coupled to the Fe3+ ions.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: (Color online) TT-dependence of the 77Se-NMR linewidth (FWHM) Δf\Delta f (solid red circles) and the modified Brillouin function fit of the Fe3+ magnetization guoqing Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}) (solid blue line) of λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 at 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel aa^{\prime}. The error bars are our estimated uncertainty.

Figure 3 shows Δf\Delta f as a function of TT for 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel aa^{\prime}. Also shown is a fit to the Fe3+ magnetization Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}) [unit: 103 emu/mol.Fe] provided by the modified Brillouin function guoqing BJM(x)B_{JM}(x) = BJ(x0+x)B_{J}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}), where BJ(x)B_{J}(x) is the standard Brillouin function ashcroft , JJ = SdS_{d} = 5/2, x0x_{0} = JgμBB0kBT\frac{Jg\mu_{B}B_{0}}{k_{B}T}, xx^{\prime} = JgμBBkBT-\frac{Jg\mu_{B}B^{\prime}}{k_{B}T}, the dd-dd Fe3+ exchange field BB^{\prime} \simeq |Jdd|JkBgμBBJ(x0)\frac{|J_{dd}|Jk_{\rm{B}}}{g\mu_{\rm{B}}}B_{J}(x_{0}), and JddJ_{dd} = -1.7 K is the dd-dd exchange parameter. The fit parameters for BJM(x)B_{JM}(x) are obtained from proton NMR measurements guoqing . In Fig. 3, Δf(T)\Delta f(T) increases from \sim 90 kHz to \sim 200 kHz as TT is lowered from 30 to 5 K. Also, Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}) provides a good fit. Since the susceptibility of the BETS molecules is small and nearly independent of TT, MdM_{d} is the main source of Δf(T)\Delta f(T) in the PM phase. The size of Δf(T)\Delta f(T) is attributed to a distribution of 𝐁\bf{B}dip and the hyperfine field of the Fe3+ across the different Se sites. Since measurements of the 77Se-NMR spin-echo decay indicate a homogeneous linewidth of \sim 10 kHz guoqing , it follows that χ′′\chi^{\prime\prime} is strongly inhomogeneously broadened.

A similar TT-dependence is also observed in ν\nu, which is plotted as a function of TT in Fig. 4 (a) and Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}) in Fig. 4 (b). In the PM state above \sim 7 K, a good fit to ν\nu (uncertainty ±\pm 3 kHz) is obtained using

ν[73.2213.0158×103Md(x0+x)]MHz.\nu\simeq[73.221-3.0158\times 10^{-3}M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime})]~~\rm{MHz}. (2)

This result is a strong indication that the TT-dependence of ν\nu is dominated by the hyperfine field from the Fe3+ magnetization. The negative sign of the contribution from MdM_{d} is very important. It indicates that the hyperfine field from the Fe3+ magnetization is negative, i.e., opposite to 𝐁\bf{B}0, as needed for the J-P comensation mechanism.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: (Color online) (a) TT-dependence of the 77Se-NMR resonance frequency ν\nu (solid red) for 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel aa^{\prime} in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. The solid line is a fit to the modified Brillouin function Fe3+ magnetization guoqing Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}). (b) ν\nu vs Md(x0+x)M_{d}(x_{0}+x^{\prime}) above 7 K for 𝐁\bf{B}0 = 9 T \parallel aa^{\prime} in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. The error bars are our estimated uncertainty.

A more informative result is shown in Fig. 5, where ν\nu - ν0\nu_{0} (ν0\nu_{0} = 72.90 MHz) is plotted as a function of both ϕ\phi and TT. As shown in the lower right of Fig. 5, the zz-axis is chosen to be parallel to the cc-axis, pzp_{z} is the zz-component of the BETS π\pi-electron orbital moment, the xx-axis is in the the cc-pzp_{z} plane, and 𝐁\bf{B}0 is in the xyxy-plane (\perp cc) rotated by ϕ\phi from the xx-axis. The angle ϕ\phi = 0 corresponds to 𝐁\bf{B}0 \parallel the cc-pzp_{z} plane and the minimum angle between 𝐁\bf{B}0 and pzp_{z} is ϕmin\phi_{\rm{min}} = 13.6. The solid lines are a fit to the following theoretical model based upon the hyperfine coupling to the BETS Se π\pi-electrons whose polarization is affected by the exchange field from the Fe3+ magnetization.

According to NMR theory slichter , the contributions to the Hamiltonian (HIH_{I}) of the 77Se nuclear spins can be expressed as

HI=HIZ+HII+HIπhf+HIdhf+Hddip,H_{I}=H_{IZ}+H_{II}+H_{I\pi}^{\rm{hf}}+H_{Id}^{\rm{hf}}+H_{d}^{\rm{dip}}, (3)

where HIZH_{IZ} is the Zeeman Hamiltonian of the 77Se nuclei in 𝐁\bf{B}0, HIIH_{II} is the S77e77{}^{77}Se-^{77}Se dipole-dipole interaction Hamiltonian, HIπhfH_{I\pi}^{\rm{hf}} is the direct hyperfine coupling of the 77Se nucleus to the BETS π\pi-electrons generated by 𝐁\bf{B}0, HIdhfH_{Id}^{\rm{hf}} is the indirect hyperfine coupling via the π\pi-electrons to the 3d Fe3+ spins (field 𝐁\bf{B}πd), and HddipH_{d}^{\rm{dip}} is the dipolar coupling to the Fe3+ which gives 𝐁\bf{B}dip. Here, 𝐁\bf{B}dip is calculated guoqing1 using the sum of the near dipole, the bulk demagnetization and the Lorentz contributions slichter ; carter . All of these terms contribute to the static local magnetic field at the 77Se sites and all but the first cause the 77Se-NMR frequency shifts.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: (Color online) 77Se-NMR resonance frequency ν\nu as a function of angle ϕ\phi at several TT for the rotation of B0B_{0} = 9 T about the cc-axis in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. The error bars are our estimated uncertainty.

Based upon the lattice structure and the shape and size of the sample, we calculated the angular dependence of 𝐁\bf{B}dip and estimated guoqing1 that the contributions of HIIH_{II} is negligible. Thus,

HIHIZ+HIπhf+HIdhf+Hddip,H_{I}\simeq H_{IZ}+H_{I\pi}^{\rm{hf}}+H_{Id}^{\rm{hf}}+H_{d}^{\rm{dip}}, (4)

and the corresponding value of ν\nu is hiraki1

ν(ϕ,B0,T)γ\displaystyle\frac{\nu(\phi^{\prime},B_{0},T)}{\gamma} =\displaystyle= [B0+Bdip(B0,T)][1+KC+Ks(ϕ)]\displaystyle[B_{0}+B_{\rm{dip}}(B_{0},T)][1+K_{C}+K_{s}(\phi^{\prime})] (6)
+Ks(ϕ)Bπd(B0,T)\displaystyle+K_{s}(\phi^{\prime})B_{\pi d}(B_{0},T)
\displaystyle\simeq B0(1+KC)+Bdip(B0,T)\displaystyle B_{0}(1+K_{C})+B_{\rm{dip}}(B_{0},T)
+Ks(ϕ)[B0+Bπd(B0,T)]\displaystyle+K_{s}(\phi^{\prime})[B_{0}+B_{\pi d}(B_{0},T)]

where ϕ\phi^{\prime} is the angle between 𝐁\bf{B}0 and the pzp_{z} direction, and KcK_{c} and KsK_{s} are respectively the (orbital) chemical shift and the (spin) Knight shift of the BETS Se π\pi-electrons. The approximation in the second line corresponds to dropping the terms Bdip(B0,T)[KC+KS(ϕ)]B_{\rm{dip}}(B_{0},T)[K_{C}+K_{S}(\phi^{\prime})], which are the product of small quantities. It can be shown hiraki1 ; metzger ; takagi ; guoqing1 that for rotation of the sample about the cc-axis with 𝐁\bf{B}0 in the plane \perp cc, Ks(ϕ)K_{s}(\phi^{\prime}) is given by

Ks(ϕ)\displaystyle K_{s}(\phi^{\prime}) =\displaystyle= Kiso+Kan(ϕ)\displaystyle K_{\rm{iso}}+K_{\rm{an}}(\phi^{\prime}) (7)
Ks(ϕ)\displaystyle K_{s}(\phi)~ =\displaystyle= Kiso+Kax[3cos2ϕcos2ϕmin1],\displaystyle K_{\rm{iso}}+K_{\rm{ax}}[3\cos^{2}\phi\cos^{2}\phi_{\rm{min}}-1], (8)

where KisoK_{\rm{iso}} and Kan(ϕ)K_{\rm{an}}(\phi) are the isotropic (independent of ϕ\phi) and axial (anisotropic) parts of the Knight shift, respectively. Kiso(ax)K_{\rm{iso}(\rm{ax})} is a constant determined by the isotropic (axial) hyperfine field [Aiso(ax)][A_{\rm{iso}(\rm{ax})}] produced by the 4pπp_{\pi} spin polarization of the BETS Se π\pi-electrons hiraki1 .

The quantities that determine KaxK_{\rm{ax}} are

Kax\displaystyle K_{\rm{ax}} =\displaystyle= AaxNAgπμBχBETS\displaystyle\frac{A_{\rm{ax}}}{N_{A}g_{\pi}\mu_{B}}~\chi_{\rm{BETS}} (9)
andAax\displaystyle\rm{and}~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A_{\rm{ax}} =\displaystyle= 25<r3>4pμBσSe,\displaystyle\frac{2}{5}<r^{-3}>_{4p}\mu_{B}\sigma_{\rm{Se}},~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (10)

where χBETS\chi_{\rm{BETS}} = 4.5 ×\times 10-4 emu/mol is the BETS π\pi-electron susceptibility tanaka , gπg_{\pi} = 2, NAN_{A} is the Avogadro’s number, and AaxA_{\rm{ax}} = + 38.6 kOe/μB\mu_{B} reported by S. Takagi etal.et~al. takagi . This value of AaxA_{\rm{ax}} is based on theoretical calculations <r3>4p<r^{-3}>_{4p} = 9.28 a03a_{0}^{-3} (a0a_{0} = 0.529 Å\AA , the Bohr radius) fraga , and σSe\sigma_{\rm{Se}} = 0.166 takagi1 obtained for λ\lambda-(BETS)2GaCl4, which has essentially the same BETS-molecules as λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4. By using these values, one obtains KaxK_{\rm{ax}} = 15.3 ×\times 10-4. Its uncertainty is not known to us and is not included in our analysis.

The angular dependence of the shift in Ks(ϕ)K_{s}(\phi) [Eqs. (7)-(8)] has been used for the fit of the 5 K data shown in Fig. 5 using the relation ν\nu - ν0\nu_{0} = a1[3cos2ϕcos213.6a_{1}[3\cos^{2}\phi\cos^{2}13.6^{\circ} - 1] + b1b_{1}, with the fit values a1a_{1} = - 313 kHz and b1b_{1} = + 221 kHz (uncertainty ±\pm 8 kHz).

From Eqs. (6)-(8), the formula for Bπ,dB_{\pi,d} at a fixed B0B_{0} and T0T_{0} from the difference in ν\nu (Δν\Delta\nu) at the two angles ϕ1\phi_{1} and ϕ2\phi_{2} is

Bπd(B0,T0)=Δν(T0,ϕ1,ϕ2)γΔKan(ϕ1,ϕ2)B0Bdip(ϕ1)Bdip(ϕ2)ΔKan(ϕ1,ϕ2),B_{\pi d}(B_{0},T_{0})=\frac{\Delta\nu(T_{0},\phi_{1},\phi_{2})}{\gamma\Delta K_{\rm{an}}(\phi_{1},\phi_{2})}-B_{0}-\frac{B_{\rm{dip}}(\phi_{1})-B_{\rm{dip}}(\phi_{2})}{\Delta K_{\rm{an}}(\phi_{1},\phi_{2})}, (11)

where

ΔKan(ϕ1,ϕ2)=3Kaxcos2ϕmin(cos2ϕ1cos2ϕ2).\Delta K_{\rm{an}}(\phi_{1},\phi_{2})=3K_{\rm{ax}}\cos^{2}\phi_{\rm{min}}(\cos^{2}\phi_{1}-\cos^{2}\phi_{2}). (12)

The conditions TT = 5 K, ϕ1\phi_{1} = 90, and ϕ2\phi_{2} = 0 give Δν\Delta\nu(5K, 90, 0) = 880 ±\pm 26 kHz (from Fig. 5) and ΔKan\Delta K_{\rm{an}} = 4.42 ×\times 10-3 (estimated error ±\pm 3%\%). Our calculated value of Bdip(0)B_{\rm{dip}}(0^{\circ}) - BdipB_{\rm{dip}}(90) at 5 K is 3.63×\times10-3 T and the field used was B0B_{0} = 9.0006 T. These values then give BπdB_{\it{\pi d}} = - 32.7 ±\pm 1.5 T at 5 K (aligned opposite to B0B_{0} = 9.0006 T), which is very close to the expected value of - 33 T obtained from the electrical resistivity measurement uji2 ; balicas1 and the theoretical estimate mori2 . Also, a small increase in <𝐒<\bf{S}>d{}_{d}> is expected as B0B_{0} is increased from 9 T to 33 T at 5 K. From the modified Brillouin function analysis used for the proton NMR linewidth guoqing , we expect this increase in <𝐒<\bf{S}>d{}_{d}> to be a factor 1.05 ±\pm 0.05, which corresponds to an adjustment to Bπd(33B_{\pi d}(33 T, 5 K)) = - 34.3 ±\pm 2.4 T.

Similar results for the exchange field BπdB_{\pi d} can also be obtained from the TT-dependence of ν\nu at a fixed ϕ\phi with the data in Figs. 4 and 5 using the same kind of fit as Eq. (2). But the uncertainty in the value obtained for BπdB_{\pi d} with this type of analysis is large enough that we do not present it here. An important test we plan to do in the future is to extend the measurements to B0B_{0} >> |Bπd||B_{\pi d}| to find the value of B0B_{0} = |Bπd||B_{\pi d}|, where the angular dependence in Fig. 5 disappears [Eqs. (6)-(8)] and above which the sign of Ks(ϕ)K_{s}(\phi^{\prime}) changes from negative to positive.

Figure 5 shows two values of ϕ\phi (ϕTI1\phi_{\rm{TI1}} and ϕTI2\phi_{\rm{TI2}}) where ν\nu becomes independent of TT. The measured difference ϕTI1\phi_{\rm{TI1}} - ϕTI2\phi_{\rm{TI2}} = 65.0 ±\pm 2.0, which should be symmetric around 90, or ϕTI1\phi_{\rm{TI1}} = 57.5 ±\pm 1.0 and ϕTI2\phi_{\rm{TI2}} = 122.5 ±\pm 1.0. By using Eqs. (6) and (8) and neglecting the very small contribution from BdipB_{\rm{dip}} (BdipB_{\rm{dip}} <<<< |Bπd||B_{\pi d}|), it can be shown that the condition for ϕTIi\phi_{\rm{TI\it{i}}} (ii = 1 , 2) is KisoK_{\rm{iso}} + Kax[3cos2ϕTIicos2ϕminK_{\rm{ax}}[3\cos^{2}\phi_{\rm{TIi}}\cos^{2}\phi_{\rm{min}} - 1] = 0. From this relation, the measured values of ϕTI1\phi_{\rm{TI1}} and ϕTI2\phi_{\rm{TI2}}, and KaxK_{\rm{ax}} = 15.3 ×\times 10-4, one obtains KisoK_{\rm{iso}} = (2.8 ±\pm 0.7) ×\times 10-4, or Kiso/KaxK_{\rm{iso}}/K_{\rm{ax}} = 1/(5.5 ±\pm 1.4).

In summary, our results of 77Se-NMR spectrum and frequency shift measurements in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4 indicate that the Fe3+ spins have a strong antiferromagnetic coupling to the BETS π\pi-electrons, and we determined the πd\pi-d exchange field to be BπdB_{\pi d} = Jπd<Sd>/gμBJ_{\pi d}<S_{d}>/g\mu_{B} = - 32.7 ±\pm 1.5 T at B0B_{0} = 9 T and 5 K, with an expected value of - 34.3 ±\pm 2.4 T at B0B_{0} \simeq 33 T and 5 K. This large negative value of BπdB_{\pi d} (or JπdJ_{\pi d}) is consistent with that predicted by the resistivity measurements, and supports the Jaccarino-Peter internal field-compensation mechanism being responsible for the origin of the FISC phase in λ\lambda-(BETS)2FeCl4.

This work at UCLA is supported by NSF Grants DMR-0334869 (W.G.C.) and 0520552 (S.E.B.), and work at NHMFL is supported by NSF under Cooperative Agreement No. DMR-0084173 and the State of Florida.

References

  • (1) P. Day etal.et~al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 𝟏𝟏𝟒\bf{114}, 10722 (1992).
  • (2) E. Coronado etal.et~al., Nature (London) 𝟒𝟎𝟖\bf{408}, 447 (2000).
  • (3) S. Uji etal.et~al., Adv. Mater. 𝟏𝟒\bf{14}, 243 (2002); S. Uji etal.etal., Nature 𝟒𝟏𝟎\bf{410}, 908 (2001).
  • (4) H. Kobayashi etal.et~al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 𝟏𝟏𝟖\bf{118}, 368 (1996).
  • (5) T. Mori etal.et~al., Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 𝟓𝟕\bf{57}, 627 (1984).
  • (6) M. A. Ruderman etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. 𝟗𝟔\bf{96}, 99 (1954).
  • (7) T. Mori etal.et~al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 𝟕𝟏\bf{71}, 826 (2002).
  • (8) M. Tokumoto etal.et~al., Synth. Met. 𝟖𝟔\bf{86}, 2161 (1997).
  • (9) L. Brossard etal.et~al., Eur. Phys. J. B 𝟏\bf{1}, 439 (1998).
  • (10) H. Akutsu etal.et~al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 𝟏𝟏𝟗\bf{119}, 12681 (1997).
  • (11) V. Jaccarino etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 𝟗\bf{9}, 290 (1962).
  • (12) L. Balicas etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 𝟖𝟕\bf{87}, 067002 (2001).
  • (13) L. Balicas etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. B 𝟕𝟎\bf{70}, 092508 (2004).
  • (14) K. Hiraki etal.et~al., unpublished.
  • (15) H. Kobayashi etal.et~al., Synthetic Metals 𝟕𝟎\bf{70}, 867 (1995).
  • (16) H. Kobayashi etal.et~al., Chem. Soc. Rev. 𝟐𝟗\bf{29}, 325 (2000).
  • (17) K. Hiraki etal.et~al., J. Low Temp. Phys. 𝟏𝟒𝟐\bf{142}, 185 (2006).
  • (18) S. Uji etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. B 𝟔𝟓\bf{65}, 113101 (2002).
  • (19) Guoqing Wu etal.et~al., Phys. Rev. B 𝟕𝟒\bf{74}, 064428 (2006).
  • (20) Guoqing Wu and W. G. Clark, unpublished.
  • (21) N. W. Ashcroft and N. D. Mermin, 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑃ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑠\it{Solid~State~Physics}, 1st ed.(Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1976).
  • (22) C. P. Slichter, 𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑓𝑀𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑅𝑒𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒\it{Principles~of~Magnetic~Resonance}, 3rd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1989).
  • (23) G. C. Carter etal.et~al., 𝑀𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑆ℎ𝑖𝑓𝑡𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑁𝑀𝑅\it{Metallic~Shifts~in~NMR} (Pergamon, London, 1977), part I.
  • (24) R. M. Metzger, J. Chem. Phys. 𝟕𝟓\bf{75}, 482 (1981).
  • (25) S. Takagi etal.et~al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 𝟕𝟐\bf{72}, 483 (2003).
  • (26) H. Tanaka etal.et~al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 𝟏𝟐𝟏\bf{121}, 760 (1999).
  • (27) S. Fraga etal.et~al., 𝐻𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑏𝑜𝑜𝑘𝑜𝑓𝐴𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑐𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎\it{Handbook~of~Atomic~Data} (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1976).
  • (28) S. Takagi etal.et~al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 𝟕𝟐\bf{72}, 3259 (2003), and references therein.