## 3 Experimental Results and Analysis
Additionally, its axial sensitivity allows for the displayed quantity to be interpreted as an individual component of the magnetic field in 3D space (\(H_{\mathrm{Z}}\) [A\(\cdot\)m\({}^{-1}\)]) from the perspective of the field's shape. All the waveforms presented are shown as differential waveforms obtained through a method that eliminates artifacts caused by various sources of interference. It is important to consider that the sensor's distance from the surface of the material being investigated significantly affects the quality of the obtained signals. As the distance increases, the sensor's detection capability decreases sharply. The results presented set the distance at \(h\) = 1.5 mm. This article does not include results obtained from different distances (\(h\) = 2 mm, 4 mm, 8 mm, and 10 mm). The individual graphs clearly show that the scanned field has a strong inhomogeneous character. When scanning from different sides of the sample, it is not possible to determine axial or central symmetry in the field. However, the material's behavior at different annealing temperatures is evident from the characteristics. The phenomenon of a decrease in field intensity with increasing annealing temperature, or the sharp decrease and sudden increase at a temperature around \(T\) = 1000 \({}^{\circ}\)C, is noteworthy and deserves further investigation. It is also important to note that, from an overall perspective, the magnetic field of the samples creates a dipole moment, which depends on the processing conditions. Based on the results, this phenomenon can be observed where the dominant effect occurs in the narrow vicinity of \(T\) = 1000 \({}^{\circ}\)C and suddenly disappears. Figure 11: Experimental results: intrinsic magnetic field of the selected samples for different annealing temperatures, L (left side): (**a**) \(T\) = 100 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**b**) \(T\) = 200 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**c**) \(T\) = 300 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**d**) \(T\) = 400 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**e**) \(T\) = 500 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**f**) \(T\) = 600 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**g**) \(T\) = 700 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**h**) \(T\) = 800 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**i**) \(T\) = 900 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**j**) \(T\) = 1000 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**k**) \(T\) = 1100 \({}^{\circ}\)C; (**l**) \(T\) = 1200 \({}^{\circ}\)C. The dashed lines indicate the location of the sample during the investigation. The graph in Figure 13 illustrates how the intensity of the intrinsic magnetic field (measured as the output DC voltage of the fluxgate sensor) of all examined samples changes based on the annealing temperature. Each curve on the graph represents the intensity on the left and right sides of the sample, scanned separately. The third curve shows the average of the recorded responses. Upon analyzing the results, it becomes evident that the intensity levels of the intrinsic magnetic field of the examined samples, as indicated by the sensor output signal values, are significantly influenced by the annealing temperature. The maximum intensity of the intrinsic magnetic field occurs when the sample is annealed at a temperature of \(T=100\)\({}^{\circ}\)C. Subsequently, the field intensity gradually decreases with increasing temperature. At specific temperature intervals, the intensity remains nearly constant. However, an increase is observed in the vicinity of the annealing temperature, \(T=1000\)\({}^{\circ}\)C, followed by a sharp decrease to almost zero. This points to a transition to the paramagnetic characteristic of the material structure at a macroscopic level. For samples annealed at higher temperatures, magnetic properties significantly decrease. This decrease is likely attributed to the material's recrystallization and the reduction of intrinsic stress. The gradual transformation of deformation martensite into austenite leads to alterations in the mechanical and magnetic properties of the analyzed samples. The magnetic property change can be attributed to deformation martensite exhibiting ferromagnetic properties, while austenite is paramagnetic.