Magnon confinement in epitaxial antiferromagnetic oxide heterostructures

Nature Materials (2026)Cite this article Magnons, the quanta of spin waves, have been extensively studied in a range of materials for spintronics, particularly for non-volatile logic-in-memory devices. Controlling magnons in conventional antiferromagnets and harnessing them in practical applications, however, remains a challenge. Here we demonstrate highly efficient magnon transport in a LaFeO3/BiFeO3/LaFeO3 all-antiferromagnetic system, which can be controlled electrically, making it highly desirable for energy-efficient computation. Leveraging spin–orbit-driven spin–charge transduction, we demonstrate that this material architecture permits magnon confinement in ultrathin antiferromagnets, enhancing the output voltage generated by magnon transport by several orders of magnitude, which provides a pathway to enable magnetoelectric memory and logic functionalities. Additionally, the non-volatility of the output voltage enables ultralow-power logic-in-memory processing, where magnonic devices can be efficiently reconfigured via electrically controlled magnon spin currents within magnetoelectric channels.This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription $32.99 / 30 days cancel any timeSubscribe to this journal Receive 12 print issues and online access $259.00 per yearonly $21.58 per issueBuy this articleUSD 39.95Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkoutThe data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon request.Jungwirth, T., Marti, X., Wadley, P. & Wunderlich, J. Antiferromagnetic spintronics. Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 231–241 (2016).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Baltz, V. et al. Antiferromagnetic spintronics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015005 (2018).Article CAS Google Scholar Rimmler, B. H., Pal, B. & Parkin, S. S. Non-collinear antiferromagnetic spintronics. Nat. Rev. Mat. 10, 109–127 (2025).Duine, R., Lee, K.-J., Parkin, S. S. & Stiles, M. D. Synthetic antiferromagnetic spintronics. Nat. Phys. 14, 217–219 (2018).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Němec, P., Fiebig, M., Kampfrath, T. & Kimel, A. V. Antiferromagnetic opto-spintronics. Nat. Phys. 14, 229–241 (2018).Article Google Scholar Manz, S. et al. Reversible optical switching of antiferromagnetism in TbMnO3. Nat. Photon. 10, 653–656 (2016).Article CAS Google Scholar Šmejkal, L., Mokrousov, Y., Yan, B. & MacDonald, A. H. Topological antiferromagnetic spintronics. Nat. Phys. 14, 242–251 (2018).Article Google Scholar Dieny, B. et al. Opportunities and challenges for spintronics in the microelectronics industry. Nat. Electron. 3, 446–459 (2020).Article Google Scholar Wadley, P. et al. Electrical switching of an antiferromagnet. Science 351, 587–590 (2016).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Železný, J. et al. Relativistic Néel-order fields induced by electrical current in antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 157201 (2014).Article PubMed Google Scholar Bhattacharjee, S., Singh, S., Wang, D., Viret, M. & Bellaiche, L. Prediction of novel interface-driven spintronic effects. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 26, 315008 (2014).Article PubMed Google Scholar DuttaGupta, S. et al. Spin-orbit torque switching of an antiferromagnetic metallic heterostructure. Nat. Commun. 11, 5715 (2020).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Lebrun, R. et al. Tunable long-distance spin transport in a crystalline antiferromagnetic iron oxide. Nature 561, 222–225 (2018).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Wei, X.-Y. et al. Giant magnon spin conductivity in ultrathin yttrium iron garnet films. Nat. Mater. 21, 1352–1356 (2022).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Han, J., Cheng, R., Liu, L., Ohno, H. & Fukami, S. Coherent antiferromagnetic spintronics. Nat. Mater. 22, 684–695 (2023).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Parsonnet, E. et al. Nonvolatile electric field control of thermal magnons in the absence of an applied magnetic field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 087601 (2022).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Huang, X. et al. Manipulating chiral spin transport with ferroelectric polarization. Nat. Mater. 23, 898–904 (2024).El Kanj, A. et al. Antiferromagnetic magnon spintronic based on nonreciprocal and nondegenerated ultra-fast spin-waves in the canted antiferromagnet α-Fe2O3. Sci. Adv. 9, eadh1601 (2023).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Hamdi, M., Posva, F. & Grundler, D. Spin wave dispersion of ultra-low damping hematite (α-Fe2O3) at Ghz frequencies. Phys. Rev. Mater. 7, 054407 (2023).Article CAS Google Scholar Wang, H. et al. Long-distance coherent propagation of high-velocity antiferromagnetic spin waves. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 096701 (2023).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Fert, A., Ramesh, R., Garcia, V., Casanova, F. & Bibes, M. Electrical control of magnetism by electric field and current-induced torques. Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 015005 (2024).Article CAS Google Scholar Salahuddin, S., Ni, K. & Datta, S. The era of hyper-scaling in electronics. Nat. Electron. 1, 442–450 (2018).Article Google Scholar Manipatruni, S. et al. Scalable energy-efficient magnetoelectric spin–orbit logic. Nature 565, 35–42 (2019).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Vaz, D. C. et al. Voltage-based magnetization switching and reading in magnetoelectric spin-orbit nanodevices. Nat. Commun. 15, 1902 (2024).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Chai, Y. et al. Voltage control of multiferroic magnon torque for reconfigurable logic-in-memory. Nat. Commun. 15, 5975 (2024).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Cherifi, R. et al. Electric-field control of magnetic order above room temperature. Nat. Mater. 13, 345–351 (2014).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Chu, Y.-H. et al. Electric-field control of local ferromagnetism using a magnetoelectric multiferroic. Nat. Mater. 7, 478–482 (2008).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Merbouche, H. et al. Voltage-controlled reconfigurable magnonic crystal at the sub-micrometer scale. ACS Nano 15, 9775–9781 (2021).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Zhang, J. et al. Long decay length of magnon-polarons in BiFeO3/La0.67Sr0.33MnO3 heterostructures. Nat. Commun. 12, 7258 (2021).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Husain, S., Yao, Z. & Ramesh, R. Enabling magnetoelectric spin-orbit logic and memory. Newton 1, 100026 (2025).Article Google Scholar Husain, S. et al. Non-volatile magnon transport in a single domain multiferroic. Nat. Commun. 15, 5966 (2024).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Beairsto, S., Cazayous, M., Fishman, R. S. & de Sousa, R. Confined magnons. Phys. Rev. B 104, 134415 (2021).Article CAS Google Scholar Mundy, J. A. et al. Liberating a hidden antiferroelectric phase with interfacial electrostatic engineering. Sci. Adv. 8, eabg5860 (2022).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Caretta, L. et al. Non-volatile electric-field control of inversion symmetry. Nat. Mater. 22, 207–215 (2023).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Borisevich, A. Y. et al. Suppression of octahedral tilts and associated changes in electronic properties at epitaxial oxide heterostructure interfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 087204 (2010).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Weingart, C., Spaldin, N. & Bousquet, E. Noncollinear magnetism and single-ion anisotropy in multiferroic perovskites. Phys. Rev. B 86, 094413 (2012).Article Google Scholar Cheong, S.-W., Talbayev, D., Kiryukhin, V. & Saxena, A. Broken symmetries, non-reciprocity, and multiferroicity. npj Quantum Mater. 3, 19 (2018).Article Google Scholar Albrecht, D. et al. Ferromagnetism in multiferroic BiFeO3 films: a first-principles-based study. Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 81, 140401 (2010).Article Google Scholar Dong, S., Xiang, H. & Dagotto, E. Magnetoelectricity in multiferroics: a theoretical perspective. Nat. Sci. Rev. 6, 629–641 (2019).Article CAS Google Scholar Bertaut, E. Representation analysis of magnetic structures. Acta Crystallogr. A Cryst. Phys. Diffr. Theor. Gen. Crystallogr. 24, 217–231 (1968).Article CAS Google Scholar Heron, J. et al. Deterministic switching of ferromagnetism at room temperature using an electric field. Nature 516, 370–373 (2014).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Rahmedov, D., Wang, D., Íniguez, J. & Bellaiche, L. Magnetic cycloid of BiFeO3 from atomistic simulations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 037207 (2012).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Meisenheimer, P. et al. Switching the spin cycloid in BiFeO3 with an electric field. Nat. Commun. 15, 2903 (2024).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Meisenheimer, P. et al. Designed spin-texture-lattice to control anisotropic magnon transport in antiferromagnets. Adv. Mat. 36, 2404639 (2024).Article CAS Google Scholar Kohlrausch, R. Theorie des elektrischen rückstandes in der leidener flasche. Ann. Phys. 167, 179–214 (1854).Article Google Scholar He, H. & Tan, X. Raman spectroscopy study of the phase transitions in Pb0.99Nb0.02[(Zr0.57Sn0.43)1−yTiy]0.98O3 ceramics. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 19, 136003 (2007).Article Google Scholar Tan, X. et al. Transformation toughening in an antiferroelectric ceramic. Acta Mater. 62, 114–121 (2014).Article CAS Google Scholar Ishchuk, V., Belichenko, O., Nikolov, O. & Sobolev, V. Peculiarities of ferro-antiferroelectric phase transitions. 6. Experiments on low-frequency dynamics of interphase domain walls. Ferroelectrics 248, 107–122 (2000).Article CAS Google Scholar Nadaud, K. et al. Study of the long time relaxation of the weak ferroelectricity in PbZrO3.

Thin Solid Films 773, 139817 (2023).Article CAS Google Scholar Faye, R., Liu, H., Kiat, J.-M., Dkhil, B. & Janolin, P.-E. Non-ergodicity and polar features of the transitional phase in lead zirconate. Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 162909 (2014).Carcan, B. et al. Phase diagram of BiFeO3/LaFeO3 superlattices: antiferroelectric-like state stability arising from strain effects and symmetry mismatch at heterointerfaces. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 4, 1601036 (2017).Article Google Scholar Wang, D., Weerasinghe, J. & Bellaiche, L. Atomistic molecular dynamic simulations of multiferroics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 067203 (2012).Article PubMed Google Scholar Cheng, R., Xiao, J., Niu, Q. & Brataas, A. Spin pumping and spin-transfer torques in antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 057601 (2014).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Huang, X. et al. Novel spin-orbit torque generation at room temperature in an all-oxide epitaxial La0.7Sr0.3MnO3/SrIrO3 system. Adv. Mater. 33, 2008269 (2021).Article CAS Google Scholar Patri, A. S., Hwang, K., Lee, H.-W. & Kim, Y. B. Theory of large intrinsic spin Hall effect in iridate semimetals. Sci. Rep. 8, 8052 (2018).Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Cornelissen, L., Liu, J., Duine, R., Youssef, J. B. & Van Wees, B. Long-distance transport of magnon spin information in a magnetic insulator at room temperature. Nat. Phys. 11, 1022–1026 (2015).Article CAS Google Scholar Han, J. et al. Birefringence-like spin transport via linearly polarized antiferromagnetic magnons. Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 563–568 (2020).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar De Wal, D. K. et al. Long-distance magnon transport in the van der Waals antiferromagnet CrPS4. Phys. Rev. B 107, L180403 (2023).Article Google Scholar Tate, M. W. et al. High dynamic range pixel array detector for scanning transmission electron microscopy. Microsc. Microanal. 22, 237–249 (2016).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Wakonig, K. et al. Ptychoshelves, a versatile high-level framework for high-performance analysis of ptychographic data. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 53, 574–586 (2020).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Jiang, Y. Fold_slice (accessed 12 December 2024); https://github.com/yijiang1/fold_sliceThibault, P. et al. High-resolution scanning X-ray diffraction microscopy. Science 321, 379–382 (2008).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Thibault, P. & Guizar-Sicairos, M. Maximum-likelihood refinement for coherent diffractive imaging. New J. Phys. 14, 063004 (2012).Article Google Scholar Thibault, P. & Menzel, A. Reconstructing state mixtures from diffraction measurements. Nature 494, 68–71 (2013).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Tsai, E. H., Usov, I., Diaz, A., Menzel, A. & Guizar-Sicairos, M. X-ray ptychography with extended depth of field. Opt. Express 24, 29089–29108 (2016).Article PubMed Google Scholar Cao, M. C., Chen, Z., Jiang, Y. & Han, Y. Automatic parameter selection for electron ptychography via Bayesian optimization. Sci. Rep. 12, 12284 (2022).Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Yin, X., Shi, C., Han, Y. & Jiang, Y. PEAR: a robust and flexible automation framework for ptychography enabled by multiple large language model agents. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.09034 (2024).Li, Y., Hu, S., Liu, Z. & Chen, L. Phase-field model of domain structures in ferroelectric thin films. App. Phys. Lett. 78, 3878–3880 (2001).Article CAS Google Scholar Xue, F. et al. Composition-and pressure-induced ferroelectric to antiferroelectric phase transitions in Sm-doped BiFeO3 system. App. Phys. Lett. 106, 012903 (2015).Mentink, J. H., Tretyakov, M. V., Fasolino, A., Katsnelson, M. I. & Rasing, T. Stable and fast semi-implicit integration of the stochastic Landau–Lifshitz equation. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 22, 176001 (2010).Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar Zhang, Y., Bellaiche, L. & Xu, B. Ultrahigh energy storage density in lead-free antiferroelectric rare-earth-substituted bismuth ferrite. Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, L051401 (2022).Article CAS Google Scholar Patel, K., Prosandeev, S., Xu, B. & Bellaiche, L. Temperature dependence of polar modes in hybrid improper ferroelectrics. Phys. Rev. B 100, 214107 (2019).Article CAS Google Scholar Download referencesS.H., X.L., R.R. and L.W.M. acknowledge that this research was sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory and was accomplished under cooperative agreement no. W911NF-24-2-0100. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the US government. The US government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein. R.R., L.W.M., M.R., A.R., L.-Q.C., L.B. and D.G.S. are supported by the Army Research Office under the ETHOS MURI via cooperative agreement no. W911NF-21-2-0162. We acknowledge partial support from the US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Science and Engineering Division and the DOE, Office of Science, Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) programme under contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231. L.C. acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant no. OIA-2327352. X.L. acknowledges support from the Rice Advanced Materials Institute (RAMI) at Rice University as a RAMI Postdoctoral Fellow. S.K.O., L.W.M., Y.H. and R.R. acknowledge support from the NSF via grant no. DMR-2329111. A.R. acknowledges the support of the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under grant no. DGE1255832. K.D. and S.S. acknowledge support from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR) contract no. FA9550-25-1-001. Y.H. acknowledges the support of the Welch Foundation (C-2065).

This research used resources of the Advanced Light Source, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility, under contract no. DE-AC02-05CH11231. S.K.K. and H.W.P. are supported by the Brain Pool Plus Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea, funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (2020H1D3A2A03099291). R.d.S. acknowledges financial support from NSERC (Canada) through its Discovery Program (grant no. RGPIN-2020-04328). S.P., Y.N. and L.B. also thank the Vannevar Bush Faculty Fellowship (VBFF) grant no. N00014-20-1-2834 from the Department of Defense; the MonArk NSF Quantum Foundry supported by the NSF Q-AMASE-i Program under NSF award no. DMR-1906383 and technical support from the Arkansas High Performance Computing Center (AHPCC). S.P., Y.N. and L.B. also gratefully acknowledge stimulating discussions with B. Xu and M. Xia on model Hamiltonian calculations. B.Z. and H.W. were supported by the DOE, Office of Science (SC), Basic Energy Sciences (BES), Materials Sciences and Engineering Division for performing high resolution X-ray diffraction measurements in the Advanced Photon Source, a user facility operated for DOE-SC by Argonne National Laboratory, under contract no. DE-AC02-06CH11357. We thank Y. Jiang (Argonne National Laboratory) for helping to set up the ptychography imaging. We thank A. Surampalli (Rice) and Y. Kumar (UC, Berkeley) for helping with controlled sample characterizations. We acknowledge fruitful ongoing discussions with N. Spaldin (ETH Zurich), Y. Tserkovnyak (UC, Los Angeles), G. A. Fiete (Northeastern University), S. Prosandeev (University of Arkansas) and W. Roberts (Northeastern University).These authors contributed equally: Sajid Husain, Maya Ramesh.Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USASajid Husain, Peter Meisenheimer & Ramamoorthy RameshMaterials Science and NanoEngineering, Rice University, Houston, TX, USASajid Husain, Xinyan Li, Lane W. Martin, Yimo Han & Ramamoorthy RameshDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USAMaya Ramesh & Darrell G. SchlomRice Advanced Materials Institute, Rice University, Houston, TX, USAXinyan Li, Shashank Kumar Ojha, Lane W. Martin & Ramamoorthy RameshSmart Ferroic Materials Center, Physics Department and Institute for Nanoscience and Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USASergei Prokhorenko, Yousra Nahas & Laurent BellaicheDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering and Materials Research Institute, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USAAiden Ross & Long-Qing ChenDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USAKoushik Das & Sayeef SalahuddinDepartment of Chemistry, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USAKoushik DasMaterials Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, USABoyang Zhao & Haidan WenDepartment of Physics, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, KoreaHyeon Woo Park & Se Kwon KimSchool of Engineering, Brown University, Providence, RI, USALucas CarettaDepartments of Chemistry and Physics and Astronomy, Rice University, Houston, TX, USALane W. MartinApplied Mathematics and Computational Research Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USAZhi YaoAdvanced Photon Source, Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL, USAHaidan WenMaterials Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USASayeef Salahuddin & Ramamoorthy RameshRice Advanced Materials Institute, Smalley-Curl Institute, and Ken Kennedy Institute, Rice University, Houston, TX, USAYimo HanDepartment of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, CanadaRogério de SousaCentre for Advanced Materials and Related Technology, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, CanadaRogério de SousaDepartment of Materials Science and Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, IsraelLaurent BellaicheLaboratoire Albert Fert, CNRS, Thales, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, FranceManuel BibesKavli Institute for Nanoscale Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USADarrell G. SchlomLeibniz-Institut für Kristallzüchtung, Berlin, GermanyDarrell G. SchlomDepartment of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USARamamoorthy RameshSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarSearch author on:PubMed Google ScholarS.H., M.R., D.G.S. and R.R. conceived the idea. M.R. synthesized the samples and analysed the data, supervised by D.G.S.; S.H. designed and performed the synthesis, device fabrication, measurements and all the analysis. X.L. performed the electron microscopy and ptychography, supervised by Y.H.; S.K.O. helped with the microscopy. A.R. and L.-Q.C. performed the phase-field simulations. B.Z. and H.W. performed the synchrotron X-ray diffraction measurements. K.D. helped with the electron-beam lithography of controlled samples, supervised by S.S.; S.P. and Y.N. computed and analysed the ab initio-based magnon spectra and discussed the results with R.d.S. and L.B.; H.W.P., S.K.K., S.H., Z.Y. and R.d.S. developed an interpretation of the data based on models of confined magnons. S.H. and M.R. wrote the manuscript. M.B. helped with data analysis, interpretation and manuscript preparation. R.R. ran the whole project.Correspondence to Sajid Husain or Ramamoorthy Ramesh.The authors declare no competing interests.Nature Materials thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer reviewer reports are available.Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.a-c Reflection high energy electron diffraction (RHEED) patterns recorded right after the first LFO layer, LFO/BFO bilayer and LFO/BFO/LFO trilayer depositions during the trilayer growth. d,e Representative topography recorded on the bottom and top LFO layers. The streaky RHEED pattern and the steps in the topography show the layer-by-layer growth of the LFO and BFO layers. The scale bar is 5 μm. Data is shown here for the stack where each layer film thickness is 5nm.a,b Reciprocal space map of the 002 STO peak and the 002 trilayer peak on the LFO(5 nm)/BFO(5 nm)/LFO(5 nm) sample in qx and qz. The lattice parameter ‘c’ of BFO is estimated to be 3.9707 Å consistent with the lab XRD and TEM. c,d Reciprocal space map of the 002 STO peak and the 002 trilayer peak on the LFO(5 nm)/BFO(10 nm)/LFO(5 nm) sample. The white arrows indicate the satellite diffraction arising from the in-plane ordering (~ 21 nm) in the epitaxial heterostructure. Trilayer peaks indicate textures on the order of ~ 21 nm (the average lateral domain size). Arrows in c indicated the spacing between the trilayer peaks and corresponding domain size.Phase-field simulations of electrical switching in the LFO(5nm)/BFO(5nm)/LFO(5nm) trilayer. a A positive quadrant of the simulated polarization electric field loop for the BiFeO3 layer. Polar distribution in the b initial (ground) state, c intermediate state, d final remnant state. In the pristine state, the BFO layer is found to be an antipolar or mixed phase, identified by the doubling of the unit cell in the ground state. On application of an in-plane electric field, the polar phase emerges, as expected from the previous observations33 and consistent with our experiments.a Measurement geometry of the pristine and poled state by swapping the two electrodes through an automatic source/detector selection by the Keithley switch box. The raw data in a shows the sign reversal by swapping the direction of the thermal gradient. The supplied power was kept constant using the AC current magnitude of Iac=1.0 mA. The data corresponding to the pristine state was recorded before any electric field was imposed on the device. In RED, the device was measured after applying an electric field pulse of 300 kV/cm. The electric field scan data was done b and found to be hysteretic as seen in the single-layer BFO (GREEN data). The difference between the single-layer and trilayer is 2 orders of magnitude. The single-layer LFO does not show any spin transport that is a function of the electric field since the LFO is not magnetoelectric. The hysteresis measured in the trilayer is shifted to zero for better comparison.We carried out a comprehensive set of measurements in 3 sets of samples to eliminate spurious effects. In all cases, we carried out the same non-local measurements (cLvR configuration). First, we replaced the LFO/BFO/LFO with a ferroelectric heterostructure, STO/PTO/STO, that has no spins involved but have a ferroelectric layer, (a). Although we observe a measurable ferroelectric hysteresis loop, we do not observe a measurable VISHE(V1ω) in this case, as well as no voltage dependence (as expected). The second control sample consisted of a layer of BFO that is sandwiched between epitaxial layers of TbScO3 (which is nonmagnetic), (b). In this case, although we have an antiferromagnetic BFO layer, the spins launched from the Pt source have no way to reach the BFO due to the insulating, nonmagnetic nature of TbScO3. Thus, we do not observe a measurable spin Hall response that is voltage modulated. The third control system consists of the STO substrate (c), which also does not show any signatures of spin transport. Finally, we used Cu (which has a negligible spin Hall effect) as the source and detector and once again, we see a negligible spin Hall response (d). None of the test devices show any spin signal in the non-local measurements. The finite offset in these spin transport measurements is from the background signal, irrespective of the sign of spin Hall metal such as Pt or W.a,b cLvR and cRvL configurations to measure the non-local ISHE voltage in the first harmonic response shown in c pristine and poled states. d The retention in two oppositely poled states and its repeatability to check for deterministic switching of the polar/spin signal response. The data was collected in the same device continuously for several days without interrupting the electrical circuit.a Comparison of magnon dispersion of bulk materials and BFO/LFO/BFO trilayers. The difference of the in-plane group velocities (slope of the dispersion curve near the Γ point) between bulk BFO and LFO magnons is larger in the case where BFO is polar (R3c phase). This explains a pronounced confinement for the polar trilayer. Additionally, the polar trilayer exhibits more low-frequency spin excitation channels near Γ with higher in-plane group velocity. b Spin current: The upper panel shows the logarithm of out-of-plane (magenta) and in-plane (purple) components of the spin current (in the units of \(\frac{\hslash {G}_{r}}{e}\)) at zero in-plane momentum. Lower panels show the calculated amplitude modulation at different frequencies indicated with stars in the upper panel. The hybridization of magnons with different out-of-plane wavelengths in LFO and BFO layers results in a rather intricate confinement of spin waves in the trilayer. c Layer resolved spin dynamics in the LFO layer at 2.76 THz. The right panel shows a snapshot of the dynamical spin structure within the top 5 nm LFO layer of the 15nm trilayer. The left panel shows the top view of the sublattice spin fluctuations for different (001)p.c. planes (z = 0 and z = 12 correspond to BFO/LFO interface and the top surface, respectively). In both panels, the gray and magenta arrows indicate G-type antiferromagnetic sublattice spins, while the purple arrow and line in the left panel indicate layer-resolved net magnetization and its elliptical precession trajectory.ISHE voltage output as a function of the supply current to the source for various heterostructures. We use the log-log plot for a clear view of the data. We compare the two systems here to quantitatively differentiate the magnitude between the single layer BFO and the trilayer system discussed in this work with various SO metals. Since the BFO/Pt does not show spin Hall driven magnon output (that is, V1ω is absent), we compare the Seebeck voltage to illustrate the superiority of the trilayer antiferromagnets due to magnon confinement. We have also added the data corresponding to BFO/SIO which does give a measurable V1ω (ref. 44). Data corresponding to the LBFO/Pt31 and (BFO/Pt, BFO/SIO)44, respectively are presented for comparison. The data for BFO/Pt or LBFO/Pt is from the spin Seebeck-induced ISHE voltage. The magnitude in the BFO or LFO/BFO/LFO scales with the SO metal type and is indicative of the differences in the spin Hall angle between these metals. The data in the LFO/BFO/LFO trilayers are recorded for a device with 5 nm thick BFO and ~ 2μm spacing between the Pt wires. A single layer BFO or LBFO has a thickness of ~ 80nm. The error bar represents the standard deviation of the data recorded in the E-field values above saturation. Linear plots corresponding to this data set are presented in Supplementary Figure 20.Spin Hall resistance (R1ω = V1ω/(Iac × l), where Iac and l is the supply current and length of the SO metal wire) as a function of electric field in three different samples with SO metal: a SrIrO3 b W and c Pt. Data corresponding to W and Pt is magnified by 100X and 1000X in order to visually compare with SrIrO3 with the same scale (of 106). The bottom panel is a schematic of the film stack of LFO(5nm)/BFO(5nm)/ LFO(5nm) with three different SO metals. The differential Hall resistance data is reproduced in Fig. 4 (main text) for benchmarking to a 100mV output.a Electric field controlled ISHE voltage in the test structure of LFO(5nm)/BFO(5nm)/LFO(5nm) with variable spacing between the Pt electrodes. The data corresponding to ~2μm is magnified by 5X for comparison. b Inverse Spin Hall resistance (RISHE = VISHE/(I × l), I and l are the supply current and length of the wire, respectively) calculated from the first harmonic data measured for various spacing. RISHE is the ISHE resistance normalized to the supply current, and length of the wire used in the non-local device. This has been done to compare the non-local spin/magnon transport data from the published literature for various material systems. The relationship between spin and charge current, Js = ΘJc, is linear with constant Θ, spin charge interconversion efficiency. The ISHE voltage also scales with the length of the wire. Therefore, to compare systematically, we scale the observed ISHE voltage with these two parameters. The dotted line is a fit to the magnon diffusion model \({R}_{ISHE}=\frac{C}{\lambda }\frac{{e}^{d/\lambda }}{1-{e}^{2d/\lambda }}\), where d, is the spacing between the electrodes and λ is the magnon spin diffusion length in the trilayer. It is independent of the polarization direction. Our measurement strategy involves the measurement of the differential voltage under the two remanent polarization states (using E+ and E-). The data in b is the differential voltage measured between the two directions of polarization of BFO. C is a fitting parameter. The spin diffusion length is found to be 550 ± 15 nm, which is much higher than the single-layer BFO16 an indication of low-loss magnon transmission in the trilayer. However, this is still smaller than the YIG (ref. 14) which is possibly due to the relatively larger Gilbert damping in these complex oxide antiferromagnetsi, ii, as reflected in pioneering works13,iii. i. Nature Communications 11, 6142 (2020). ii. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 187201 (2021). iii. Nature Communications 13, 6140 (2022).Supplementary Figs. 1–20, Notes 1–10 and Table 1.Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.Reprints and permissionsHusain, S., Ramesh, M., Li, X. et al. Magnon confinement in epitaxial antiferromagnetic oxide heterostructures. Nat. Mater. (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-026-02531-8Download citationReceived: 16 August 2025Accepted: 05 February 2026Published: 06 March 2026Version of record: 06 March 2026DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-026-02531-8Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative