发表机构
Texas Tech University; New Mexico State University（德克萨斯理工大学; 新墨西哥州立大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本文通过对比SrRuO3和GdAlSi，指出提取反常霍尔电导率时对普通霍尔背景的不同解释及转换处理会导致结果差异，并警示量子材料中提取额外霍尔贡献需谨慎。
AI 中文摘要
我们研究了使用SrRuO$_3$和GdAlSi提取反常霍尔电导率的不同方法。对于SrRuO$_3$，其普通霍尔背景定义明确且磁导率较小，在从电阻率转换到电导率之前或之后减去普通霍尔贡献，所得的反常霍尔电导率几乎相同。相比之下，在GdAlSi中，横向响应未表现出明显的饱和，低场和高场区域都可能近似线性。我们表明，将这些线性区域解释为普通霍尔背景的不同方式，以及在电阻率到电导率转换中对测量的纵向电阻的处理，可能产生完全不同的反常霍尔电导率估计值。我们还考察了非线性霍尔响应是否可以在不引入反常贡献的情况下，在普通霍尔框架内进行描述。我们的分析为在量子材料中提取额外霍尔贡献提供了实用警示。
英文摘要
We examine the different methods of extracting the anomalous Hall conductivity using SrRuO$_3$ and GdAlSi. For SrRuO$_3$, where the ordinary Hall background is well defined and the magnetoconductance is small, subtracting the ordinary Hall contribution either before or after conversion from resistivity to conductivity yields nearly identical anomalous Hall conductivities. In GdAlSi, in contrast, the transverse response does not exhibit clear saturation, and both low- and high-field regions can appear approximately linear. We show that different interpretations of these linear regions as the ordinary Hall background, together with the treatment of the measured longitudinal resistance in the resistivity-to-conductivity conversion, can produce completely different estimates of the anomalous Hall conductivity. We also examine whether the nonlinear Hall response can instead be described within an ordinary Hall framework without invoking an anomalous contribution. Our analysis provides practical cautions for extracting excess Hall contributions in quantum materials.
