Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 90 references

Chiral breakdown engineered by mesoscale Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction in biaxial magnetic nanotubes

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read In biaxial magnetic nanotubes, curvature plus bulk-type Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction breaks the chiral symmetry of domain-wall motion, selecting one preferred wall handedness and changing the field at which steady motion fails.

desk verdict Solid analytics and a genuinely new local chiral-breakdown mechanism, but Eq. (12) has a factor-2 typo that should be fixed before this is cited. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08283 v1 pith:MZOYDE2R submitted 2025-02-12 cond-mat.mes-hall

Kostiantyn V. Yershov , Svitlana Kondovych , Denis D. Sheka This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords magneticnanotubedomainwallDzyaloshinskii-MoriyainteractionchiralitybreakingWalkerbreakdowncurvaturebiaxialanisotropymicromagnetics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to show that in a biaxial magnetic nanotube, the combination of curvature and bulk-type Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction makes domain-wall motion chiral: only one combination of topological charge and helicity (sign(pCd)<0) is dynamically favored. If true, this gives a local, curvature-assisted mechanism for chiral symmetry breaking in curved magnets, distinct from previously studied magnetostatic mechanisms, and it lets the sign and strength of DMI steer both the direction and the speed of a domain wall. The same analysis says interfacial-type DMI does not produce chiral breakdown but does shift the Walker field. A sympathetic reader would care because it turns DMI sign and tube curvature into practical control parameters for domain-wall devices.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a mesoscale DMI description built in a rotated ψ-frame: rotating the local reference frame diagonalizes the effective anisotropy and produces effective DMI coefficients Dβ3(α) in which intrinsic bulk DMI and curvature combine. The domain wall is represented by the variational ansatz cosθb=−p tanh(ξ2/Δ), φb=Φ, with width Δ and phase Φ as collective coordinates, and dynamics are derived from a q−Φ model with Gilbert damping. The chirality-breaking term pCπD13(2)sinΦ is what couples wall topological charge, helicity, and DMI; the parity of μ2 and μ3 under ξ2→−ξ2 is what suppresses the nonlocal chiral magnetostatic terms in the thin-shell limit.

What would settle it

Measure the average velocity of a domain wall with fixed topological charge in a vortex magnetic field for both initial helicities in a nanotube with known DMI sign: if the unfavorable helicity does not slow down and flip through vortex-antivortex pair creation near hbc≈hw0+pCη√2d/d0, or if both helicities have identical velocities below that field, the chiral-breakdown claim is wrong. Likewise, an axial field that fails to produce the finite steady velocity Vb≈−pdκh/η would disprove the axial-field result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that bulk-type DMI tilts the vortex ground state of a biaxial nanotube by an angle ψ≈−dκ/2, producing a mesoscale DMI energy term pCπD13(2)sinΦ that couples the wall topological charge p, the vortex helicity C, and the DMI strength d. This term makes sign(pCd)<0 energetically preferred, so one helicity is dynamically selected. In a vortex magnetic field h=he1, the traveling-wave solution exists only up to hbc=hw0+pCη√2d/d0, where hw0 is the DMI-free Walker field; for fields between hbc and the Walker field hbw, only the favorable helicity survives, while the unfavorable wall transiently nucleates vortex-antivortex pairs and flips its phase. In an axial magnetic field h=he2, the tilted ground state supports a finite steady wall velocity Vb≈−pdκh/η whose direction is set by the sign of the product pd.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the tube wall is thin enough (wκ≪1) for nonlocal magnetostatic terms to be dropped or subleading; the paper's parity argument says those terms conserve chirality, but if that argument fails for realistic tube parameters the chiral breakdown could weaken or shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a fixed sign(pd), a vortex field splits into two critical fields: a Walker field hbw=hw0+ηd/(√2d0) for one helicity and a chiral breakdown field hbc=hw0−ηd/(√2d0) for the other, so only one chirality propagates steadily between them.
  • In an axial field, the wall moves at Vb≈−pdκh/η, meaning the DMI sign and wall topological charge determine the direction of motion even though the field points along the tube axis.
  • Bulk-type DMI raises the Walker field linearly with DMI strength, extending the range of vortex fields that support steady wall propagation.
  • The unfavorable helicity switches by nucleating and annihilating vortex-antivortex pairs, not by gradual rotation, so the transient dynamics is topologically mediated.
  • Interfacial-type DMI produces no chiral breakdown; it only shifts the Walker field by a weaker term and leaves the wall's phase slope controlled by a competition between local DMI and nonlocal magnetostatics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • One testable extension: measuring the sign of the axial-field wall velocity in a tube of known curvature and topological charge would give a direct readout of the sign of the bulk DMI constant, which is often hard to determine independently.
  • The parity suppression of nonlocal chiral terms implies the predicted chiral breakdown should weaken or acquire nonlocal corrections as the ratio W/R grows; scanning tube thickness would mark where the thin-shell description fails.
  • The same chirality-selection mechanism could be combined with graded DMI or current pulses to build a domain-wall diode or chirality filter in a racetrack, though that application goes beyond the paper's own claims.
  • Because the preferred combination is sign(pCd)<0, reversing either the DMI sign or the wall charge should reverse which helicity wins; this offers a clean experimental signature of the mechanism.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an analytical study of domain-wall statics and dynamics in biaxial magnetic nanotubes with bulk- and interfacial-type Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction. Using a variational ansatz and a q–Φ collective-variable model, the authors derive ground-state DW profiles, effective equations of motion, and expressions for the Walker and chiral breakdown fields. The central predictions are that bulk DMI combined with curvature tilts the vortex state and selects the chirality sign(pCd)<0, producing a chiral breakdown in vortex fields and a finite axial-field DW velocity V_b ≈ -p d κ h/η; interfacial DMI only shifts the Walker field and does not break chirality. Analytical results are compared with OOMMF and spin-lattice simulations in Figs. 1–5.

Significance. This is a useful and mostly careful contribution to curvilinear magnetism. Its strengths are that the collective-variable derivations are analytic rather than fitted, the thin-shell and slave-variable approximations are stated explicitly, and the numerical cross-checks cover statics and dynamics for both DMI symmetries. The paper makes falsifiable predictions (the chirality selection rule, the linear DMI scaling of the breakdown-field shift, and the axial-field velocity proportional to dκ) that could guide experiments on nanotube racetracks. However, the displayed formula for the chiral breakdown field in Eq. (12) contains a factor-2 inconsistency with the text and with the equations of motion, which must be corrected before the central quantitative claim can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III B 1, Eq. (12)] The displayed formula h_b^c ≈ h_w^0 + pC η√2 d/d0 is inconsistent with the text two sentences later and with the fixed-point condition derived from Eq. (10). For sign(pd) = +1, the text defines h_b^w = h_w^0 + ηd/(√2d0) for C = +1 and h_b^c = h_w^0 − ηd/(√2d0) for C = −1, i.e. a coefficient 1/√2 instead of √2. Solving Eq. (10) for a traveling wave (Φ̇ = 0, q̇ = V) and maximizing the right-hand side over Φ gives the same 1/√2 coefficient. With the paper's display parameters (d = 0.25, ε = 0.5, κ = 0.2, η = 0.01), Eq. (12) as printed gives h_b^c ≈ −8×10⁻⁵, while the text formula and the inset of Fig. 2(a) give ≈ 1.3×10⁻³ ≈ 0.49 h_w⁰. Because the chiral breakdown field is the paper's foremost quantitative prediction, this discrepancy is load-bearing. Please correct Eq. (12) and check that no downstream expression or figure uses the incorrect √2 prefactor.
  2. [Appendix B 3] The exclusion of the nonlocal terms Eσ−ρ and Eg−ρ from the chiral analysis rests on the assertion that µ2 and µ3 have the same parity under ξ2→−ξ2 and therefore these terms conserve chirality. This parity statement is plausible but is not demonstrated; if wrong, nonlocal magnetostatics could contribute to the chiral breakdown or alter its field. Please include the explicit computation (or a rigorous scaling argument) showing that Eσ−ρ + Eg−ρ is independent of C and p for ansatz (5), and give its leading small-w contribution relative to the local term proportional to d. This would close the main gap in the otherwise careful thin-shell reduction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II] The word 'Eucledian' should be 'Euclidean'.
  2. [Eq. (7)] The square-root expression is typeset with a garbled radical ('/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex√1 ...'); please fix the typesetting.
  3. [Eq. (11b)] The term '−C h κ' inside the phase shift mixes the field amplitude h with the helicity label C; please check the intended expression and define all symbols.
  4. [Appendix D] The movies are described with κ = 0.25, whereas the main simulations use κ = 0.2; align the values or explain the difference.
  5. [Fig. 1 caption] The stated tilt ψ ≈ 0.025 appears to be the absolute value, whereas Eq. (B2) and the surrounding text give ψ ≈ −dκ/2 ≈ −0.025 for d > 0; please make the sign convention explicit.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: central chiral-breakdown and axial-velocity results are derived analytically from the micromagnetic energy; the noted Eq. (12) factor discrepancy is a correctness slip, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The static DW profile (5) is obtained from the micromagnetic energy (3) by variational minimization of Eq. (6), producing equilibrium Delta and Phi in Eq. (7) with no fitted parameters. The dynamical predictions (chiral breakdown field and axial velocity) follow from the collective-variable equations of motion (10) and (14), which are derived from the Lagrangian/dissipative function (B12)-(B13); the chiral term p D_13^(2) cosPhi comes from the explicitly derived mesoscale DMI coefficient D_13^(2) ~ d in Eq. (4) and is not imported as an output. The thin-shell magnetostatic treatment in Appendix B3 adds a local epsilon shift and argues by parity that nonlocal terms are chirality-neutral; this is a physical approximation, not a circular reduction. Numerical simulations in Appendix D solve the LLG equations with the same Hamiltonian, so they are consistency checks rather than external benchmarks, but the analytic results do not reduce to simulation outputs or fitted constants. The self-citations (e.g., Ref. [52] for the term 'mesoscale DMI') are terminological; the relevant coefficients are re-derived in Appendix B1. The factor-2 discrepancy between Eq. (12) and the immediately following h_b^w/h_b^c definitions is a real internal inconsistency and a correctness risk, but it is not a circular step: the surrounding text and numerics use the 1/sqrt(2) form, so the displayed sqrt(2) is an arithmetic/typographical slip rather than an input recycled as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. All predictions come from the standard micromagnetic energy functional with exchange, anisotropy, DMI, and magnetostatics. The main burden is on thin-shell and small-parameter approximations rather than on fitted coefficients.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Thin-shell limit W ≪ R and wκ ≪ 1, with the leading magnetostatic energy being the local surface-charge term Eσ−σ.
    Used in Section III and Appendix B 3 to drop nonlocal magnetostatic terms for bulk DMI; central to the claim that chiral effects are purely local.
  • domain assumption Magnetization is uniform along the shell thickness (no variation along e3).
    Stated in Section II; standard for ultrathin shells but not universally valid.
  • ad hoc to paper The domain-wall profile is captured by the variational ansatz (5) for bulk DMI and (19) for interfacial DMI, with collective variables q and Φ and slave variables ∆ and a.
    The ansatz is not derived from the full equations of motion but is validated against numerics; its completeness is assumed.
  • domain assumption Small curvature and small DMI, with expansions in κ and d and a tilt angle ψ ≈ -dκ/2.
    Used throughout to obtain closed-form expressions such as (7), (11), (15), and (25); results may change quantitatively for larger parameters.
  • domain assumption The critical DMI value d0 = 4/π, taken from planar easy-axial films [62], applies to the nanotube domain-wall problem.
    Imported from Rohart-Thiaville to normalize the DMI strength; the paper does not re-derive this constant for curved tubes.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chiral breakdown engineered by mesoscale Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction in biaxial magnetic nanotubes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MZOYDE2R

@misc{pith2026250208283,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chiral breakdown engineered by mesoscale Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction in biaxial magnetic nanotubes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MZOYDE2R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08283}
}
read the original abstract

Curvilinear geometries in magnetic nanostructures provide a unique platform for exploring the interplay of symmetry, topology, and curvature in magnetization dynamics. In this work, we analytically study the static and dynamic properties of domain walls in biaxial magnetic nanotubes with intrinsic Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction of different symmetries. We show that geometry-driven local and nonlocal interactions govern domain profiles and dynamics, enabling precise control over the wall propagation and Walker breakdown field. Furthermore, the combination of bulk-type Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction and curvature leads to chirality symmetry breaking and chiral breakdown in domain wall motion. These findings offer a framework for tailoring domain wall textures in cylindrical nanotubes, unlocking new functionalities for advanced applications in curvilinear magnonics and data storage technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08283 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    unfavorable

    The case of a vortex magnetic field First, we consider the dynamics of DWs in a nanotube in a vortex magnetic field. The magnetic field is oriented in the tangential direction to the nanotube’s surface, h =he1, which can be realized as Ørsted field induced by a current flowing along the tube symmetry axis. In the rotated reference frame, hψ = h ( cosψeψ 1...

  2. [2]

    h =he2, or, in the rotated frame of reference, hψ =h ( sinψeψ 1 + cosψeψ 2 )

    The case of an axial magnetic field Next, we study the dynamics of DWs in a nanotube with an external magnetic field oriented along the tube axis, i.e. h =he2, or, in the rotated frame of reference, hψ =h ( sinψeψ 1 + cosψeψ 2 ) . Note that here we consider magnetic fields below the Walker field ( h≪ hw). By substitution of ansatz (5) into the Zeeman ener...

  3. [3]

    The phase diagram of equilibrium states is shown in Fig

    the critical curvature is defined as κ0 = 2/π which is the same as for the nanotubes with easy-normal anisotropy [53] and analogous to the effect of spontaneous formation of the onion state in nanorings when curvature exceeds some critical value [69]. The phase diagram of equilibrium states is shown in Fig. 6. Appendix B: Magnetic nanotube with DMI of bulk type

  4. [4]

    so-called effective anisotropy in the form Eb(eff) a =Kαβmαmβ whereKαβ is the effective total anisotropy matrix with coefficients Kαβ =   κ2− 1 dκ/2 0 dκ/2 0 0 0 0 ε + κ2  

    Micromagnetic energy in a ψ-frame For the case of bulk-type DMI, one can obtain from the energy (1) a term which is quadratic with respect to the magnetization components, i.e. so-called effective anisotropy in the form Eb(eff) a =Kαβmαmβ whereKαβ is the effective total anisotropy matrix with coefficients Kαβ =   κ2− 1 dκ/2 0 dκ/2 0 0 0 0 ε + κ2  . (B...

  5. [5]

    (B5) Without DMI (d = 0) the vortex ground state of the system with energy (1) is doubly degenerated: θ = 0 and θ =π

    Static DW solution We consider the no-driving case h = 0, in which case the ground state is defined by the set of static equations δEb/δθ = 0 and δEb/δϕ = 0, which read: ∂11θ +∂22θ + cosϕ sin2θ [ Db(1) 13 ∂1ϕ +Db(2) 13 ∂2ϕ ] − sinθ cosθ [ (∂1ϕ)2 + (∂2ϕ)2Kb 1 +Kb 3 sin2ϕ +Db(1) 23 ∂1ϕ +Db(2) 23 ∂2ϕ ] = 0, ∂1 ( sin2θ∂1ϕ ) +∂2 ( sin2θ∂2ϕ ) + sinθ cosθ [ Db(1...

  6. [6]

    The non-trivial solution of the homogeneous Eq

    In (B8) prime denotes the derivative with respect to ζ. The non-trivial solution of the homogeneous Eq. (B8a) ϑ = dθ0 dw/dζ = 1/ coshζ corresponds to the Goldstone mode of the DW (B6). The functionφ(ζ) is exponentially localized, φ∝ βb exp(−αζ) when ζ→∞ , and tends to βb/(2−α2) when ζ→ 0

  7. [7]

    The corresponding energy termEσ−σ ms is local in the thin- shell limit, scaling as shell thicknessW

    Magnetostatic energy The most contribution to the magnetostatic energy is generated by the interaction of surface charges, induced by the magnetisation component normal to the tube’s surface,σ± = m· n± =±µ3 at surfaces R± =R±W/2. The corresponding energy termEσ−σ ms is local in the thin- shell limit, scaling as shell thicknessW . We can calculate this con...

  8. [8]

    Exact form of the equations of motion for DW The equations of motion can be derived from the La- grangianL and the dissipative functionR: L =− ∫∫ ϕ ˙θ sinθdξ1dξ2−E, (B12) R = η 2 ∫∫(˙θ2 + ˙ϕ2 sin2θ ) dξ1dξ2, (B13) where η is the Gilbert damping parameter. By substituting the ansatz (8) into (B13) one obtains Lb dw 2π/κ = 2pΦ ˙q− Eb dw 2π/κ, Rb dw 2π/κ = η...

Show all 90 references
  1. [9]

    (C1) Similarly to Sec

    Static DW solution In the no-driving case h = 0, the ground state is de- fined by the set of static equations δEi/δΘ = 0 and δEi/δΦ = 0, which read: − 2 (∂11Θ +∂22Θ) + sin 2Θ [ (∂1Φ)2 + (∂2Φ)2 +Ki 1 +Ki 3 sin2 Φ ] − 2Di(1) 13 cos Φ sin2 Θ∂1Φ +Di(2) 23 sin 2Θ∂2Φ = 0, − 2 [ ∂1 (...

  2. [10]

    (B8a), while the function φ(ζ) is also exponentially localized, φ∝ βi exp(−αζ) when ζ→∞ but has linear behavior φ∝βiζ/(2−α2) when ζ→ 0

    Equation (C3a) coincides with Eq. (B8a), while the function φ(ζ) is also exponentially localized, φ∝ βi exp(−αζ) when ζ→∞ but has linear behavior φ∝βiζ/(2−α2) when ζ→ 0. The set of equations (C3) was previously obtained for DWs in straight biaxial wires with bulk-type DMI [12]

  3. [11]

    Magnetostatic energy For the case of a DW in a nanotube with interfacial DMI given by ansatz (19), the surface-charge-induced magnetostatic energy term (B11), takes the form: Eσ−σ MS ≃ 1 2µ0M2 s 2πRW ∆ ( 1−πa cos 2Φ sinh (πa) ) , (C4) which can be accounted for by the renormal...

  4. [12]

    The preferable phase slope a is the same for anyp and any DW helicityC = cosΦ0 =±1

    However, the DW topological charge p =±1 defining the component m1 (19) plays no role in magne- tostatic energy of the studied system, which means the chiral effects are absent. The preferable phase slope a is the same for anyp and any DW helicityC = cosΦ0 =±1. In the local in...

  5. [13]

    Exact form of the equations of motion for DW By substituting the Ansatz (22) into (B13) one obtains Li dw 2π/κ = 2p [ Φ ˙q +ca ˙∆ ] − Ei dw 2π/κ, (C8) Ri dw 2π/κ = η ∆ [ ˙q2 + ( ˙qa− ˙Φ∆ )2 +c ( ∆˙a− ˙∆a )2 +c ˙∆2 ] , with total energy in an external magnetic field Ei dw 2π/κ ...

  6. [14]

    In simulations we consider tubes of total length 250 nm, inner radius 24 nm, and thickness 3 nm, with cell size 1× 1× 1 nm 3

    OOMMF simulations With OOMMF we consider only static problems [74]. In simulations we consider tubes of total length 250 nm, inner radius 24 nm, and thickness 3 nm, with cell size 1× 1× 1 nm 3. We use the following artificial mate- rial parameters: exchange constant A = 25 × 1...

  7. [15]

    Each node is characterized by a magnetic moment mk(t) which is located at the position rk

    Spin-lattice simulations We consider a cylindrical surface as a square lattice with lattice constant s. Each node is characterized by a magnetic moment mk(t) which is located at the position rk. Here k = (i,j ) is a two dimensional vector that de- fines the magnetic moment and...

  8. [16]

    The data in these movies correspond to results ob- tained via numerical simulations

    Movies of the domain wall motion For better visualization of the field-induced motion of magnetic DWs in a nanotube with bulk-type DMI, we have prepared movies [65] illustrating the wall dynamics: • video1 favorable DW.mp4 shows the dynamics of a DW with topological charge p =...

  9. [17]

    D. A. Allwood, G. Xiong, M. D. Cooke, C. C. Faulkner, D. Atkinson, N. Vernier, and R. P. Cowburn, Submicrom- eter ferromagnetic NOT gate and shift register, Science 296, 2003 (2002)

    2002

  10. [18]

    D. A. Allwood, G. Xiong, C. C. Faulkner, D. Atkin- son, D. Petit, and R. P. Cowburn, Magnetic domain–wall logic, Science 309, 1688 (2005)

    2005

  11. [19]

    S. S. P. Parkin, M. Hayashi, and L. Thomas, Magnetic domain-wall racetrack memory, Science 320, 190 (2008)

    2008

  12. [20]

    Z. Luo, A. Hrabec, T. P. Dao, G. Sala, S. Finizio, J. Feng, S. Mayr, J. Raabe, P. Gambardella, and L. J. Heyder- man, Current-driven magnetic domain-wall logic, Nature 579, 214 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    J. Yang, C. Abert, D. Suess, and S.-K. Kim, Intrinsic DMI-free skyrmion formation and robust dynamic behav- iors in magnetic hemispherical shells, Scientific Reports 15 11, 10.1038/s41598-021-81624-7 (2021)

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    Venkat, D

    G. Venkat, D. A. Allwood, and T. J. Hayward, Magnetic domain walls: types, processes and applications, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 57, 063001 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Thiaville, S

    A. Thiaville, S. Rohart, ´E. Ju´ e, V. Cros, and A. Fert, Dynamics of Dzyaloshinskii domain walls in ultrathin magnetic films, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 100, 57002 (2012)

    2012

  16. [24]

    Boulle, S

    O. Boulle, S. Rohart, L. D. Buda-Prejbeanu, E. Ju´ e, I. M. Miron, S. Pizzini, J. Vogel, G. Gaudin, and A. Thiaville, Domain wall tilting in the presence of the Dzyaloshinskii- Moriya interaction in out-of-plane magnetized magnetic nanotracks, Physical Review Letters 111, 2172...

    2013

  17. [25]

    Emori, U

    S. Emori, U. Bauer, S.-M. Ahn, E. Martinez, and G. S. D. Beach, Current-driven dynamics of chiral ferromagnetic domain walls, Nature Materials 12, 611 (2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    K.-S. Ryu, L. Thomas, S.-H. Yang, and S. Parkin, Chiral spin torque at magnetic domain walls, Nature Nanotech- nology 8, 527 (2013)

    2013

  19. [27]

    Brataas, Chiral domain walls move faster, Nature Nanotechnology 8, 485 (2013)

    A. Brataas, Chiral domain walls move faster, Nature Nanotechnology 8, 485 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    V. P. Kravchuk, Influence of Dzialoshinskii–Moriya inter- action on static and dynamic properties of a transverse domain wall, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Mate- rials 367, 9 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    K. V. Yershov, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, J. van den Brink, and A. Saxena, Domain wall diode based on func- tionally graded Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction, Ap- plied Physics Letters 116, 222406 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    O. V. Pylypovskyi, V. P. Kravchuk, O. M. Volkov, J. Fassbender, D. Sheka, and D. Makarov, Unidirectional tilt of domain walls in equilibrium in biaxial stripes with dzyaloshinskii-moriya interaction, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 53, 395003 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Thiaville, Y

    A. Thiaville, Y. Nakatani, J. Miltat, and Y. Suzuki, Micromagnetic understanding of current-driven domain wall motion in patterned nanowires, Europhysics Letters (EPL) 69, 990 (2005)

    2005

  24. [32]

    M. Yan, A. K´ akay, S. Gliga, and R. Hertel, Beating the Walker limit with massless domain walls in cylindrical nanowires, Physical Review Letters 104, 057201 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    K. V. Yershov, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, and Y. Gai- didei, Curvature-induced domain wall pinning, Physical Review B 92, 104412 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    K. V. Yershov, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, and Y. Gai- didei, Curvature and torsion effects in spin-current driven domain wall motion, Physical Review B 93, 094418 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    O. V. Pylypovskyi, D. D. Sheka, V. P. Kravchuk, K. V. Yershov, D. Makarov, and Y. Gaididei, Rashba torque driven domain wall motion in magnetic helices, Scientific Reports 6, 23316 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    J. A. Fernandez-Roldan and O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, Dy- namics of chiral domain walls under applied current in cylindrical magnetic nanowires, APL Materials 10, 111101 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    M. Yan, C. Andreas, A. K´ akay, F. Garc´ ıa-S´ anchez, and R. Hertel, Fast domain wall dynamics in mag- netic nanotubes: Suppression of Walker breakdown and Cherenkov-like spin wave emission, Applied Physics Let- ters 99, 122505 (2011)

    2011

  30. [38]

    Landeros and A

    P. Landeros and A. S. N´ u˜ nez, Domain wall motion on magnetic nanotubes, Journal of Applied Physics 108, 033917 (2010)

    2010

  31. [39]

    M. Yan, C. Andreas, A. K´ akay, F. Garcia-Sanchez, and R. Hertel, Chiral symmetry breaking and pair-creation mediated Walker breakdown in magnetic nanotubes, Ap- plied Physics Letters 100, 252401 (2012)

    2012

  32. [40]

    Ot´ alora, J

    J. Ot´ alora, J. L´ opez-L´ opez, P. Vargas, and P. Landeros, Chirality switching and propagation control of a vortex domain wall in ferromagnetic nanotubes, Applied Physics Letters 100, 072407 (2012)

    2012

  33. [41]

    Ot´ alora, J

    J. Ot´ alora, J. L´ opez-L´ opez, N. n. A.S., and P. Landeros, Domain wall manipulation in magnetic nanotubes in- duced by electric current pulses, Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter 24, 436007 (2012)

    2012

  34. [42]

    Ot´ alora, J

    J. Ot´ alora, J. L´ opez-L´ opez, P. Landeros, P. Vargas, and A. N´ u˜ nes, Breaking of chiral symmetry in vortex domain wall propagation in ferromagnetic nanotubes, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 341, 86 (2013)

    2013

  35. [43]

    Goussev, J

    A. Goussev, J. M. Robbins, V. Slastikov, and O. A. Tre- tiakov, Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya domain walls in magnetic nanotubes, Physical Review B 93, 054418 (2016)

    2016

  36. [44]

    M. C. Depassier, Speed of domain walls in thin nan- otubes: The transition from the linear to the magnonic regime, Physical Review B 100, 144402 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Mancilla-Almonacid, R

    D. Mancilla-Almonacid, R. Jaeschke-Ubiergo, A. S. N´ u˜ nez, and S. Allende, Ultrafast domain wall propaga- tion due to the interfacial dzyaloshinskii–moriya interac- tion, Nanotechnology 31, 125707 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Josten, D

    E. Josten, D. Raftrey, A. Hierro-Rodriguez, A. Sor- rentino, L. Aballe, M. Lipi´ nska-Chwa/suppress lek, T. Jansen, K. H¨ oflich, H. Kr¨ oncke, C. Dubourdieu, D. E. B¨ urgler, J. Mayer, and P. Fischer, Curvature-mediated spin tex- tures in magnetic multi-layered nanotubes, ArX...

    2021 doi arXiv

  39. [47]

    Landeros, J

    P. Landeros, J. A. Ot´ alora, R. Streubel, and A. K´ akay, Tubular geometries, in Topics in Applied Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2022) pp. 163–213

    2022

  40. [48]

    Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak” fer- romagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 4, 241 (1958)

    I. Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak” fer- romagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 4, 241 (1958)

    1958

  41. [49]

    Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism, Physical Review 120, 91 (1960)

    T. Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism, Physical Review 120, 91 (1960)

    1960

  42. [50]

    S. Woo, K. Litzius, B. Kr¨ uger, M.-Y. Im, L. Caretta, K. Richter, M. Mann, A. Krone, R. M. Reeve, M. Weigand, P. Agrawal, I. Lemesh, M.-A. Mawass, P. Fischer, M. Kl¨ aui, and G. S. D. Beach, Observation of room-temperature magnetic skyrmions and their current- driven dynamics...

    2016

  43. [51]

    Lemesh, F

    I. Lemesh, F. B¨ uttner, and G. S. D. Beach, Accurate model of the stripe domain phase of perpendicularly magnetized multilayers, Physical Review B 95, 174423 (2017)

    2017

  44. [52]

    B¨ uttner, I

    F. B¨ uttner, I. Lemesh, and G. S. D. Beach, Theory of isolated magnetic skyrmions: From fundamentals to room temperature applications, Scientific Reports 8, 4464 (2018)

    2018

  45. [53]

    Bernand-Mantel, L

    A. Bernand-Mantel, L. Camosi, A. Wartelle, N. Rouge- maille, M. Darques, and L. Ranno, The skyrmion-bubble transition in a ferromagnetic thin film, SciPost Physics 4, 10.21468/scipostphys.4.5.027 (2018)

    2018 doi

  46. [54]

    Sch¨ opf, A

    J. Sch¨ opf, A. Thampi, P. Milde, D. Ivaneyko, S. Kon- dovych, D. Y. Kononenko, L. M. Eng, L. Jin, L. Yang, L. Wysocki, P. H. M. van Loosdrecht, K. Richter, K. V. Yershov, D. Wolf, A. Lubk, and I. Lindfors-Vrejoiu, N´ eel 16 skyrmion bubbles in La0.7Sr0.3Mn1−xRuxO3 multilayers...

    2023

  47. [55]

    Carbou, Thin layers in micromagnetism, Mathemati- cal Models and Methods in Applied Sciences (M3AS) 11, 1529 (2001)

    G. Carbou, Thin layers in micromagnetism, Mathemati- cal Models and Methods in Applied Sciences (M3AS) 11, 1529 (2001)

    2001

  48. [56]

    R. V. Kohn and V. V. Slastikov, Effective dynamics for ferromagnetic thin films: a rigorous justification, Pro- ceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 461, 143 (2005)

    2005

  49. [57]

    D. D. Sheka, V. P. Kravchuk, D. Peddis, G. Varvaro, M. Krupi´ nski, M. Albrecht, D. Erb, S. Facsko, and D. Makarov, Curvilinear magnetic shells, in Curvilinear Micromagnetism, Vol. 146, edited by D. Makarov and D. Sheka (Springer Nature Switzerland, 2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    D. D. Sheka, Curvilinear magnetism, in Encyclopedia of Materials: Electronics (Elsevier, 2023) pp. 760–776

    2023

  51. [59]

    D. D. Sheka, O. V. Pylypovskyi, P. Landeros, Y. Gai- didei, A. K´ akay, and D. Makarov, Nonlocal chiral sym- metry breaking in curvilinear magnetic shells, Commu- nications Physics 3, 128 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    D. D. Sheka, O. V. Pylypovskyi, P. Landeros, A. Kakay, and D. Makarov, Micromagnetic description of symmetry-breaking effects in curvilinear ferromagnetic shells, in IEEE International Magnetic Virtual Confer- ence INTERMAG21 (26–30 April 2021) (2021) p. 632

    2021

  53. [61]

    M. P. Proenca, C. T. Sousa, J. Ventura, and J. P. Ara´ ujo, Cylindrical magnetic nanotubes: Synthesis, magnetism and applications, in Magnetic Nano- and Microwires (El- sevier, 2020) pp. 135–184

    2020

  54. [62]

    Streubel, E

    R. Streubel, E. Y. Tsymbal, and P. Fischer, Magnetism in curved geometries, Journal of Applied Physics 129, 210902 (2021)

    2021

  55. [63]

    Makarov and D

    D. Makarov and D. Sheka, eds., Curvilinear Micromag- netism: From Fundamentals to Applications , Topics in Applied Physics, Vol. 146 (Springer International Pub- lishing, 2022)

    2022

  56. [64]

    N. L. Schryer and L. R. Walker, The motion of 180 0 do- main walls in uniform dc magnetic fields, Journal of Ap- plied Physics 45, 5406 (1974)

    1974

  57. [65]

    M. Yan, A. K´ akay, C. Andreas, and R. Hertel, Spin- Cherenkov effect and magnonic Mach cones, Physical Re- view B 88, 220412 (2013)

    2013

  58. [66]

    J. A. Ot´ alora, M. Yan, H. Schultheiss, R. Hertel, and A. K´ akay, Curvature-induced asymmetric spin-wave dis- persion, Physical Review Letters 117, 227203 (2016)

    2016

  59. [67]

    Brevis, P

    F. Brevis, P. Landeros, J. Lindner, A. K´ akay, and L. K¨ orber, Curvature-induced parity loss and hybridiza- tion of magnons: Exploring the connection of flat and tubular magnetic shells, Physical Review B 110, 134428 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    O. M. Volkov, D. D. Sheka, Y. Gaididei, V. P. Kravchuk, U. K. R¨ oßler, J. Fassbender, and D. Makarov, Mesoscale Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction: geometrical tailoring of the magnetochirality, Scientific Reports 8, 866 (2018)

    2018

  61. [69]

    K. V. Yershov, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, and U. K. R¨ oßler, Curvature effects on phase transitions in chiral magnets, SciPost Physics 9, 43 (2020)

    2020

  62. [70]

    Y. Liu, N. Cai, X. Yu, and S. Xuan, Nucleation and sta- bility of skyrmions in three-dimensional chiral nanostruc- tures, Scientific Reports 10, 21717 (2020)

    2020

  63. [71]

    Zimmermann, T

    M. Zimmermann, T. N. G. Meier, F. Dirnberger, A. K´ akay, M. Decker, S. Wintz, S. Finizio, E. Josten, J. Raabe, M. Kronseder, D. Bougeard, J. Lindner, and C. H. Back, Origin and manipulation of stable vortex ground states in permalloy nanotubes, Nano Letters 18, 2828 (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    Cortes-Ortuno and P

    D. Cortes-Ortuno and P. Landeros, Influence of the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction on the spin-wave spec- tra of thin films, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 25, 156001 (2013)

    2013

  65. [73]

    Bogdanov and U

    A. Bogdanov and U. R¨ oßler, Chiral symmetry breaking in magnetic thin films and multilayers, Physical Review Letters 87, 037203 (2001)

    2001

  66. [74]

    H. Yang, A. Thiaville, S. Rohart, A. Fert, and M. Chshiev, Anatomy of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interac- tion at Co/Pt interfaces, Physical Review Letters 115, 267210 (2015)

    2015

  67. [75]

    G. D. Fratta, C. B. Muratov, F. N. Rybakov, and V. V. Slastikov, Variational principles of micromagnetics revis- ited, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 52, 3580 (2020)

    2020

  68. [76]

    O. M. Volkov, D. Wolf, O. V. Pylypovskyi, A. K´ akay, D. D. Sheka, B. B¨ uchner, J. Fassbender, A. Lubk, and D. Makarov, Chirality coupling in topological magnetic textures with multiple magnetochiral parameters, Nature Communications 14, 1491 (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    R. V. Kohn and V. V. Slastikov, Another thin-film limit of micromagnetics, Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 178, 227 (2005)

    2005

  70. [78]

    Rohart and A

    S. Rohart and A. Thiaville, Skyrmion confinement in ultrathin film nanostructures in the presence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction, Physical Review B 88, 184422 (2013)

    2013

  71. [79]

    J. C. Slonczewski, Dynamics of magnetic domain walls, AIP Conference Proceedings 5, 170 (1972)

    1972

  72. [80]

    Hillebrands and A

    B. Hillebrands and A. Thiaville, eds., Spin dynamics in confined magnetic structures III , Topics in Applied Physics, Vol. 101 (Springer, Berlin, 2006)

    2006

  73. [81]

    Reference to Supplemental materials provided by the publisher

  74. [82]

    Van Waeyenberge, A

    B. Van Waeyenberge, A. Puzic, H. Stoll, K. W. Chou, T. Tyliszczak, R. Hertel, M. F¨ ahnle, H. Bruckl, K. Rott, G. Reiss, I. Neudecker, D. Weiss, C. H. Back, and G. Sch¨ utz, Magnetic vortex core reversal by excitation with short bursts of an alternating field, Nature 444, 461 (2006)

    2006

  75. [83]

    Gaididei, V

    Y. Gaididei, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, and F. G. Mertens, Multiple vortex-antivortex pair generation in magnetic nanodots, Physical Review B 81, 094431 (2010)

    2010

  76. [84]

    Abramowitz and I

    M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of mathe- matical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathemat- ical tables, ninth Dover printing, tenth GPO printing ed. (Dover, New York, 1972)

    1972

  77. [85]

    D. D. Sheka, V. P. Kravchuk, and Y. Gaididei, Curva- ture effects in statics and dynamics of low dimensional magnets, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical 48, 125202 (2015)

    2015

  78. [86]

    D. D. Sheka, O. V. Pylypovskyi, P. Landeros, Y. Gai- didei, A. K´ akay, and D. Makarov, Non-local symmetry breaking effects, induced by magne-tostatics in curvilin- ear ferromagnetic shells, in DPG Spring Meeting of the Condensed Matter Section: Magnetism Division (2020) p. MA 23.8

    2020

  79. [87]

    The Object Oriented MicroMagnetic Framework (2006), developed by M. J. Donahue and D. Porter mainly, from NIST

    2006

  80. [88]

    Cort´ es-Ortu˜ no, M

    D. Cort´ es-Ortu˜ no, M. Beg, V. Nehruji, R. A. Pepper, and 17 H. Fangohr, OOMMF extension: Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction (DMI) for crystallographic classes T and O (2018)

    2018

  81. [89]

    Cort´ es-Ortu˜ no, M

    D. Cort´ es-Ortu˜ no, M. Beg, V. Nehruji, L. Breth, R. Pep- per, T. Kluyver, G. Downing, T. Hesjedal, P. Hatton, T. Lancaster, R. Hertel, O. Hovorka, and H. Fangohr, Proposal for a micromagnetic standard problem for mate- rials with Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction, New Jour-...

    2018

  82. [90]

    We were limited in computational facilities for dynamic problems

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.