Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 81 references

Skyrmion generation via Laguerre-Gaussian beam irradiation in frustrated magnets

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that Laguerre-Gaussian beam irradiation, acting as a structured thermal field, can generate isolated skyrmions and skyrmion lattices in frustrated magnets without Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction.

desk verdict A solid sLLG simulation of thermal skyrmion nucleation in a frustrated magnet, but the LG-beam framing outruns the model: what is actually shown is doughnut-profile heating, not optical angular momentum transfer. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.03773 v1 pith:OL4DYTAM submitted 2026-03-04 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mes-hall

Reivienne Jei Laxamana , Satoru Hayami This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mes-hall
keywords skyrmionsfrustratedmagnetsLaguerre-GaussianbeamstochasticLandau-Lifshitz-Gilbertthermalnucleationtopologicalchargeskyrmionlatticeeasy-axisanisotropy
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 asks whether structured light can create skyrmionic textures in centrosymmetric frustrated magnets, where skyrmion stabilization comes from competing J1-J3 exchanges and easy-axis anisotropy rather than the DM interaction. By solving the stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation with a temperature profile that mimics an LG beam, the authors find two generation mechanisms: in the high-field ferromagnetic phase, local thermal fluctuations overcome the nucleation barrier to form isolated skyrmions; in the intermediate-field region, the beam acts as an annealer, relaxing a quenched ferromagnetic state into the equilibrium skyrmion lattice. The results establish a purely thermal, non-optical route to light-induced skyrmion generation, and show that bond-dependent planar anisotropy can select skyrmions over antiskyrmions and fix their helicity.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (sLLG) equation driven by a spatially and temporally dependent temperature field T(r,t)=u_LG T0 (1-t/t0), where u_LG is the LG beam intensity profile. This converts the beam's doughnut-shaped intensity into a non-uniform thermal bath that locally excites spin fluctuations. The paper uses the topological charge n_sk (summed over plaquettes) to detect isolated skyrmions and the spin structure factor S(q) to judge skyrmion-lattice order. The key identity is that the frustrated J1-J3 exchange sets a fixed skyrmion size ~2a, so large beam widths (rather than width-matching to skyrmion radius as in chiral magnets) maximize nucleation

What would settle it

A simple test: repeat the simulations with a Gaussian beam (or any radially varying intensity profile without the m-phase factor) at the same T0, w, and t0. If the skyrmion-generation probability and final textures are statistically indistinguishable from the LG-beam case, the paper's thermal-nucleation interpretation is supported; if the doughnut shape or azimuthal index changes outcomes, the model omitted a physical essential.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We demonstrate that LG-beam irradiation can induce two types of skyrmionic spin textures depending on the underlying magnetic ground-state phase: isolated skyrmions in the high-field ferromagnetic regime and skyrmion lattices in the intermediate-field regime. In the ferromagnetic region, isolated skyrmions arise through stochastic thermal nucleation, requiring higher temperatures and larger beam widths to overcome the nucleation barrier. In the skyrmion-lattice region, nucleation occurs via thermal annealing, where the system relaxes toward its true ground state. The generation probability is governed primarily by the thermodynamic phase, not by the beam's orbital angular momentum; the azimu

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a structured optical beam's only relevant effect is a scalar, spatially non-uniform temperature profile; if the beam's phase, orbital angular momentum, or non-thermal field coupling matters for nucleation (as it does in chiral magnets), the paper's central claim that LG-beam irradiation generates these textures is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Optical heating alone can write skyrmions in centrosymmetric magnets that lack the DM interaction, expanding the materials platform for skyrmionics.
  • In the ferromagnetic regime, isolated skyrmion generation improves with larger beam width and higher beam temperature, but degrades with increasing magnetic field.
  • Skyrmion-lattice generation is a thermal-annealing process: success is controlled by proximity to the equilibrium skyrmion-lattice phase, not by fine-tuning beam parameters.
  • A weak bond-dependent planar anisotropy suppresses antiskyrmions during nucleation, yielding selective skyrmion generation.
  • If planar anisotropy is switched on only after irradiation, it controls helicity (Bloch vs Néel) without reducing antiskyrmion count.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Since the model treats the beam as a pure thermal field and the authors report insensitivity to azimuthal/radial mode indices, the mechanism is likely generic: any localized heating profile with a central intensity dip (or even a simple Gaussian) might reproduce the same skyrmion generation. The 'LG-beam' label may be incidental to the physics.
  • The fixed skyrmion size ~2a set by frustration suggests a design rule: beam width should be chosen to encompass many nucleation sites rather than match a single skyrmion, opposite to the chiral-magnet strategy of Fujita and Sato.
  • A testable prediction is that laser pulses on frustrated triangular magnets with easy-axis anisotropy should create isolated skyrmions only when the heated region is large enough and the quench lands the system near the skyrmion-lattice phase; the OAM of the pulse should not affect the outcome.
  • The helicity-selection result (Bloch vs Néel for opposite signs of planar anisotropy) offers a path to optically writing skyrmions with controllable internal texture, which matters for applications where rotation sense couples to transport.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (sLLG) simulations of a frustrated J1-J3 triangular-lattice magnet with easy-axis anisotropy under Laguerre-Gaussian (LG) beam irradiation. The beam is modeled as a space- and time-dependent thermal field whose local temperature follows the LG profile. The authors find two regimes: in the high-field ferromagnetic regime, LG-beam heating nucleates isolated skyrmions from the uniform state; in the intermediate-field skyrmion-lattice regime, the same heating anneals a ferromagnetic initial state into a skyrmion lattice. They further show that adding a bond-dependent planar anisotropy lifts the skyrmion/antiskyrmion degeneracy and selects the helicity of the generated textures. The central claim is that structured optical heating can generate skyrmionic textures in centrosymmetric frustrated magnets without DM interaction.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a plausible numerical route to all-optical skyrmion generation in centrosymmetric frustrated magnets, extending prior work on chiral magnets (Fujita and Sato) to a different class of systems. The study is a direct simulation with no parameters fitted to the output; skyrmion success probabilities are measured from 50-trial ensembles, and the underlying model and phase diagram come from established prior work. The probability maps over (T0, w) and (A, H) are potentially useful for experimental optimization. The main weakness is that the model actually implements only the radial intensity envelope of the LG beam as a heat source, so the connection to the beam's orbital angular momentum is not established and the title/abstract overstate the LG specificity.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II.B, Eq. (3)] The temperature field is written as T(r,t) = u_LG(ρ,ϕ) T0 (1 - t/t0) θ(t0-t)θ(t). Since u_LG is complex, T(r,t) is not real, yet it is used in Eq. (4) to set the noise variance of the sLLG. If the simulations used the complex u_LG, the Langevin noise is complex and the stochastic equation is ill-defined. If, as Fig. 1 suggests, the modulus |u_LG| was used, the equation must say so. In addition, Eq. (2) contains a dimensional prefactor 1/sqrt(|w|); because w is quoted in lattice units, u_LG has dimension a^{-1/2} and T(r,t) is not a temperature. This needs correction and clarification: the text must specify the normalized, real intensity envelope actually used in the simulations.
  2. [Secs. II.B, III, and conclusions] The spin dynamics couples only to the scalar temperature field, so the orbital angular momentum phase e^{imφ} of the LG beam never enters the equations of motion. The azimuthal and radial indices m and p affect only the radial intensity envelope. Consequently, the statement that results are insensitive to (m,p) is expected and cannot be taken as evidence that LG beams are special; the simulations cannot distinguish an LG beam from any localized heat source with the same intensity profile. The title and abstract claim 'LG-beam irradiation' generation, but the actual mechanism is structured optical heating. To make the claim load-bearing, the authors should either explicitly reframe the paper as modeling thermal effects of structured light (which is a reasonable contribution) or add a comparison with a Gaussian beam or another heating profile to show what specifically the doughnut shape do
  3. [Sec. II.A / Sec. III] The assertion that 'Preliminary simulations on various lattice sizes and J3/|J1| ratios showed that the conclusive results were independent of these parameters' is unsupported by any data, and the simulations are all performed at N=60^2 and J3/|J1|=0.5. If this independence is part of the generality claim, it should be substantiated; otherwise, the parameter dependence should be described as untested. Similarly, the statement that 'different choices of p and m do not qualitatively alter the results' is not backed by probability maps or other quantitative evidence.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 6 caption] The caption states 'H=0.3' but the text and context suggest H=0.4 (the same as the A=0.7 panel of Fig. 5). Please check and fix the caption.
  2. [General typos] There are several typographical errors, e.g., 'it's' in Sec. II.B, 'latice' in Sec. IV, 'ferromangetic' in Sec. VI, 'N´eel' for Néel, and inconsistent hyphenation of 'skyrmion lattice'. These are cosmetic but should be cleaned up.
  3. [Eq. (12)] The success probability is defined as P = s/50 × 100%, but the symbol s is introduced only in the preceding sentence; please define explicitly and also specify how the random seed is chosen per trial (currently 'a seed to the random generator was set for each Heun step').
  4. [Sec. V, Fig. 13] The text says 'bottom graph' but the figure has panels; please use 'bottom panel'. Also, the statement that the planar anisotropy acts 'irrespective of the sign of J_a' in Fig. 12 is not obvious from the plot alone; consider quantifying the asymmetry.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's central claims are numerical outputs of sLLG simulations, not quantities defined by their inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a direct stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert simulation: the Hamiltonian (Eq. 1), the LG-beam thermal-field model (Eqs. 2-4), and the sLLG equation (Eq. 5) are inputs, and the generated spin textures, topological charges, and success probabilities (Eqs. 12, 13, 15) are measured outputs. No parameter is fitted to the target results; T0, w, m, p, t0, and t1 are set a priori or chosen from preliminary runs, and the success criteria (nonzero n_sk or six-peak structure factor) are independent of the beam parameters. The ground-state phase diagram in Sec. II C is computed by variational energy comparison using an ansatz from prior work [37,38], but the dynamical relaxation into isolated skyrmions or skyrmion lattices is not equivalent to that phase diagram by construction: simulations start from a ferromagnetic state with stochastic noise and are judged on structure factor/topological charge, not on energy comparison with the variational ansatz. Self-citations (e.g., [38,39,62,63]) support background or symmetry arguments and are corroborated by the paper's own numerical results; none is invoked as an unverified uniqueness theorem. The principal weakness is external validity rather than circularity: Eq. (3) uses u_LG as a temperature field, discarding the optical phase e^{imφ}, so the reported insensitivity to m and p is a statement about the thermal-envelope model and cannot by itself prove that orbital angular momentum is physically irrelevant. That is a modeling gap, not a self-referential reduction, and therefore does not raise the circularity score.

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

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its free parameters are simulation choices and a subjective success threshold. The principal axioms are the thermal mapping of the beam, the ansatz-restricted phase diagram, and the adequacy of sLLG. The most fragile choice is the reduction of the LG beam to a real scalar temperature: it discards the OAM phase that makes the beam 'LG' and leaves the mechanism as generic heating.

free parameters (5)
  • Irradiation time t0 = 500 (in units of ℏ/J)
    Chosen from 'initial simulations' as optimal; no derivation or sensitivity analysis shown.
  • Annealing time t1 = 500
    Same as t0; chosen for convenient total simulation time, not derived.
  • Skyrmion-lattice success criterion = 'clean separation of 6 peaks' in S(q)
    Subjective visual threshold; no quantitative cutoff value such as peak prominence or width is specified.
  • Beam mode indices (p, m) = p=0, m=5
    Fixed after claiming 'different choices of these parameters do not qualitatively alter the results'; no systematic scan is shown.
  • J3/|J1| ratio = 0.5
    Model input chosen for commensurate ordering Q=2π/5; the paper claims results are independent of this ratio but presents no supporting data.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The LG beam's effect is fully captured by a scalar thermal noise term (Eqs. 3-4), ignoring optical phase and non-thermal couplings.
    Load-bearing: all claims of LG-specific generation rest on this thermal mapping; if OAM phase matters, the model misses it.
  • domain assumption The T=0 ground state in the skyrmion-lattice region is captured by the six variational ansatz phases in Sec. II C.
    If the true minimum lies outside the ansatz, the interpretation of annealing 'toward the true ground state' in Sec. IV is invalid.
  • domain assumption The stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation with Heun integration and α=0.1 adequately models the spin dynamics (Eq. 5).
    Standard micromagnetics assumption; the noise discretization and time-step size are not fully specified.
  • standard math The Berg-Lüscher lattice topological charge (Eq. 13) correctly detects skyrmion presence.
    Standard lattice definition of skyrmion number, used to define successful trials.
  • ad hoc to paper Results are independent of lattice size N and J3/|J1| ratio.
    Stated in Sec. II A but no data shown; a load-bearing generality claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Skyrmion generation via Laguerre-Gaussian beam irradiation in frustrated magnets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OL4DYTAM

@misc{pith2026260303773,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Skyrmion generation via Laguerre-Gaussian beam irradiation in frustrated magnets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OL4DYTAM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.03773}
}
abstract

Since its discovery, the study of magnetic skyrmions has been on the rise. In this paper, we discuss our investigations on the light-induced mechanisms for skyrmion generation in a centrosymmetric triangular magnetic lattice with competing $J_1$-$J_3$ interactions, and easy-axis anisotropy. We solve the stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation for the lattice spin dynamics under Laguerre-Gaussian beam irradiation. Numerical results show that skyrmions are nucleated in two thermodynamic regions, each favoring different phases: the ferromagnetic phase and the skyrmion-lattice phase. In the ferromagnetic region, isolated skyrmions are generated mainly through stochastic thermal nucleation. In this regime, higher temperatures and larger beam widths are required to overcome the nucleation barrier. In contrast, in the skyrmion-lattice region, skyrmion nucleation occurs via thermal annealing, where the system relaxes toward its true ground state. These findings establish a comprehensive theoretical framework for optimizing optical control to generating light-induced skyrmionic textures in frustrated magnets.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.03773 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Beam profiles at different ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Phase diagram at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. An example of a skyrmion lattice from variational [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Time evolution of an isolated skyrmion at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Probability maps at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Time evolution of a skyrmion lattice at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: presents the skyrmion generation probability at varying values of the easy-axis anisotropy parameter A. We find that the probability remains almost insensi￾tive to A within the examined range. This can be under￾stood from the fact that easy-axis anisotropy generally su…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Probability maps at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Field dependence of the averaged skyrmion number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: measures the probability of forming an ordered skyrmion lattice, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Simulations wherein planar anisotropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    We setJ 1 =−1 to be the unit of energy and the lattice constantais the unit of length in the simulations

    The first term denotes the isotropic exchange in- teraction which includes the nearest-neighbor ferromag- netic couplingJ 1 <0 and third-nearest-neighbor antifer- romagnetic couplingJ 3 >0. We setJ 1 =−1 to be the unit of energy and the lattice constantais the unit of length in the simulations. The second term denotes the Zeeman coupling due to an externa...

  2. [2]

    1 displays the intensity profiles of LG beams for several representative modes characterized by differ- ent values ofpandw

    For visualiza- tion, Fig. 1 displays the intensity profiles of LG beams for several representative modes characterized by differ- ent values ofpandw. In the present study, the effect of LG-beam irradiation is incorporated as a thermal per- turbation through a spatially and temporally dependent temperature functionT(r, t) [53], T(r, t) =uLG(ρ, ϕ)T0 1− t t0...

  3. [3]

    Ferromagnetic: M z i = 1, M x i =M y i = 0 (6)

  4. [4]

    M x i =a 1 sin(q1 ·r i) M y i = 0 M z i =a 2 cos(q1 ·r i) + ¯m (7)

    Single-qvertical spiral: the variational parameters area 1,a 2, and ¯m. M x i =a 1 sin(q1 ·r i) M y i = 0 M z i =a 2 cos(q1 ·r i) + ¯m (7)

  5. [5]

    M x i =a 1 cos(q2 ·r i +ϕ)−a 1 cos(q3 ·r i −ϕ) M y i =−a 2 sin(q1 ·r i) M z i =a 2 cos(q1 ·r i) + ¯m (8)

    Multiple-qvertical spiral: the variational parame- ters area 1,a 2,ϕand ¯m. M x i =a 1 cos(q2 ·r i +ϕ)−a 1 cos(q3 ·r i −ϕ) M y i =−a 2 sin(q1 ·r i) M z i =a 2 cos(q1 ·r i) + ¯m (8)

  6. [6]

    The variational parameters are a1,a 2,a 3, and ¯m

    2qconical spiral: a multiple-qspiral configuration whereina 1 ̸=a 2. The variational parameters are a1,a 2,a 3, and ¯m. M x i =a 1 cos(q1 ·r i) +a 2 cos(q2 ·r i) M y i =−a 1 sin(q1 ·r i) +a 2 sin(q2 ·r i) M z i =a 3 cos(q3 ·r i) + ¯m (9)

  7. [7]

    The variational parameters are a1,a 3, and ¯m

    2q ′ conical spiral: a multiple-qspiral configuration whereina 1 =a 2. The variational parameters are a1,a 3, and ¯m. M x i =a 1 cos(q1 ·r i) +a 1 cos(q2 ·r i) M y i =−a 1 sin(q1 ·r i) +a 1 sin(q2 ·r i) M z i =a 3 cos(q3 ·r i) + ¯m (10)

  8. [8]

    Skyrmion lattice: the variational parameters are 4 a1,a 2, and ¯m. M x i =a 1 3X v=1 [sin(qv ·r i)]e v · ˆx M y i =a 1 3X v=1 [sin(qv ·r i)]e v · ˆy M z i =a 2 3X v=1 [cos(qv ·r i)]e v · ˆz+ ¯m (11) wheree 1 = ˆy− ˆz,e 2 =− √ 3/2ˆx−1/2 ˆy− ˆz, and e2 = √ 3/2ˆx−1/2 ˆy− ˆz. Figure 3 shows an exam- ple of a skyrmion lattice configuration from this ansatz. 1....

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    III and IV

    The nu- merical procedure in this section follows that in Secs. III and IV. To focus on the role of the bond-dependent pla- nar anisotropy without overwhelming the competing ex- change interactions or the beam-induced heating effects, we restrict its magnitude to a relatively ...

  2. [10]

    A. N. Bogdanov and D. A. Yablonskii, Thermodynami- cally stable ”vortices” in magnetically ordered crystals. the mixed state of magnets, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics68, 101 (1989)

    1989

  3. [11]

    A. N. Bogdanov and A. Hubert, Thermodynamically sta- ble magnetic vortex states in magnetic crystals, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials138, 255 (1994)

    1994

  4. [12]

    U. K. R¨ oßler, A. N. Bogdanov, and C. Pfleiderer, Sponta- neous skyrmion ground states in magnetic metals, Nature 442, 797 (2006)

    2006

  5. [13]

    Nagaosa and Y

    N. Nagaosa and Y. Tokura, Topological properties and dynamics of magnetic skyrmions, Nature nanotechnology 8, 899 (2013)

    2013

  6. [14]

    M¨ uhlbauer, B

    S. M¨ uhlbauer, B. Binz, F. Jonietz, C. Pfleiderer, A. Rosch, A. Neubauer, R. Georgii, and P. B¨ oni, Skyrmion lattice in a chiral magnet, Science (New York, N.Y.)323, 915 (2009)

    2009

  7. [15]

    X. Z. Yu, Y. Onose, N. Kanazawa, J.-H. Park, J. H. Han, Y. Matsui, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Real-space ob- servation of a two-dimensional skyrmion crystal, Nature 465, 901 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Quantised singularities in the electro- magnetic field, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Lon- don. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character133, 60 (1931)

    1931

  9. [17]

    T. H. R. Skyrme, A unified field theory of mesons and baryons, Nuclear Physics31, 556 (1962)

    1962

  10. [18]

    Y. Li, N. Kanazawa, X. Z. Yu, A. Tsukazaki, M. Kawasaki, M. Ichikawa, X. Jin, F. Kagawa, and Y. Tokura, Robust formation of skyrmions and topolog- ical hall effect anomaly in epitaxial thin films of mnsi., Physical review letters110, 117202 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Neubauer, C

    A. Neubauer, C. Pfleiderer, B. Binz, A. Rosch, R. Ritz, P. G. Niklowitz, and P. B¨ oni, Topological hall effect in the a phase of mnsi, Physical review letters102, 186602 (2009)

    2009

  12. [20]

    M. Lee, W. Kang, Y. Onose, Y. Tokura, and N. P. Ong, Unusual hall effect anomaly in mnsi under pressure., Physical review letters102, 186601 (2009)

    2009

  13. [21]

    J. Zang, M. Mostovoy, J. H. Han, and N. Nagaosa, Dy- 11 namics of skyrmion crystals in metallic thin films., Phys- ical review letters107, 136804 (2011)

    2011

  14. [22]

    Schulz, R

    T. Schulz, R. Ritz, A. Bauer, M. Halder, M. Wagner, C. Franz, C. Pfleiderer, K. Everschor, M. Garst, and A. Rosch, Emergent electrodynamics of skyrmions in a chiral magnet, Nature Physics8, 301 (2012)

    2012

  15. [23]

    Van Hoogdalem, Y

    K. Van Hoogdalem, Y. Tserkovnyak, and D. Loss, Mag- netic texture-induced thermal hall effects, Physical Re- view B87, 024402 (2013)

    2013

  16. [24]

    Mochizuki, X

    M. Mochizuki, X. Yu, S. Seki, N. Kanazawa, W. Koshibae, J. Zang, M. Mostovoy, Y. Tokura, and N. Nagaosa, Thermally driven ratchet motion of skyrmion microcrystal and topological magnon hall ef- fect, Nature materials13, 241 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Jonietz, S

    F. Jonietz, S. M¨ uhlbauer, C. Pfleiderer, A. Neubauer, W. M¨ unzer, A. Bauer, T. Adams, R. Georgii, P. B¨ oni, R. A. Duine, K. Everschor, M. Garst, and A. Rosch, Spin transfer torques in mnsi at ultralow current densities, Sci- ence (New York, N.Y.)330, 1648 (2010)

    2010

  18. [26]

    X. Yu, N. Kanazawa, W. Zhang, T. Nagai, T. Hara, K. Kimoto, Y. Matsui, Y. Onose, and T. Tokura, Skyrmion flow near room temperature in an ultralow cur- rent density, Nature communications3, 988 (2012)

    2012

  19. [27]

    Kong and J

    L. Kong and J. Zang, Dynamics of an insulating skyrmion under a temperature gradient., Physical review letters 111, 067203 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    S.-Z. Lin, C. D. Batista, C. Reichhardt, and A. Sax- ena, ac current generation in chiral magnetic insulators and skyrmion motion induced by the spin seebeck effect., Physical review letters112, 187203 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Shibata, J

    K. Shibata, J. Iwasaki, N. Kanazawa, S. Aizawa, T. Tani- gaki, M. Shirai, T. Nakajima, M. Kubota, M. Kawasaki, H. S. Park, D. Shindo, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Large anisotropic deformation of skyrmions in strained crystal., Nature nanotechnology10, 589 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Iwasaki, M

    J. Iwasaki, M. Mochizuki, and N. Nagaosa, Current- induced skyrmion dynamics in constricted geometries, Nature nanotechnology8, 742 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Zhou and M

    Y. Zhou and M. Ezawa, A reversible conversion between a skyrmion and a domain-wall pair in a junction geometry., Nature communications5, 4652 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    Tomasello, E

    R. Tomasello, E. Mart ´ ınez, R. Zivieri, L. Torres, M. Car- pentieri, and G. Finocchio, A strategy for the design of skyrmion racetrack memories, Scientific reports4, 6784 (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    A. Fert, V. Cros, and J. Sampaio, Skyrmions on the track, Nature nanotechnology8, 152 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    Zhang, Y

    X. Zhang, Y. Zhou, K. M. Song, T.-E. Park, J. Xia, M. Ezawa, X. Liu, W. Zhao, G. Zhao, and S. Woo, Skyrmion-electronics: writing, deleting, reading and pro- cessing magnetic skyrmions toward spintronic applica- tions, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter32, 143001 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak”ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Jour- nal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids4, 241 (1958)

    I. Dzyaloshinsky, A thermodynamic theory of “weak”ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics, Jour- nal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids4, 241 (1958)

    1958

  28. [36]

    Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism, Physical Review120, 91 (1960)

    T. Moriya, Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism, Physical Review120, 91 (1960)

    1960

  29. [37]

    Moriya, New mechanism of anisotropic superexchange interaction, Physical Review Letters4, 228 (1960)

    T. Moriya, New mechanism of anisotropic superexchange interaction, Physical Review Letters4, 228 (1960)

    1960

  30. [38]

    S. D. Yi, S. Onoda, N. Nagaosa, and J. H. Han, Skyrmions and anomalous Hall effect in a Dzyaloshinskii- Moriya spiral magnet, Phys. Rev. B80, 054416 (2009)

    2009

  31. [39]

    A. B. Butenko, A. A. Leonov, U. K. R¨ oßler, and A. N. Bogdanov, Stabilization of skyrmion textures by uniax- ial distortions in noncentrosymmetric cubic helimagnets, Physical Review B82, 052403 (2010)

    2010

  32. [40]

    U. K. R¨ oßler, A. A. Leonov, and A. N. Bogdanov, Chiral skyrmionic matter in non-centrosymmetric mag- nets, Journal of Physics: Conference Series303, 012105 (2011)

    2011

  33. [41]

    Okubo, S

    T. Okubo, S. Chung, and H. Kawamura, Multiple-q states and the skyrmion lattice of the triangular-lattice Heisenberg antiferromagnet under magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 017206 (2012)

    2012

  34. [42]

    Kurumaji, T

    T. Kurumaji, T. Nakajima, M. Hirschberger, A. Kikkawa, Y. Yamasaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, Y. Taguchi, T.-h. Arima, and Y. Tokura, Skyrmion lattice with a giant topological Hall effect in a frustrated triangular-lattice magnet, Science365, 914 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Hirschberger, T

    M. Hirschberger, T. Nakajima, S. Gao, L. Peng, A. Kikkawa, T. Kurumaji, M. Kriener, Y. Yamasaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, K. Ohishi, K. Kakurai, Y. Taguchi, X. Yu, T.-h. Arima, and Y. Tokura, Skyrmion phase and competing magnetic orders on a breathing kagome lattice, Nat. Commun...

    2019

  36. [44]

    Hirschberger, S

    M. Hirschberger, S. Hayami, and Y. Tokura, Nanomet- ric skyrmion lattice from anisotropic exchange interac- tions in a centrosymmetric host, New J. Phys.23, 023039 (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    Hayami and R

    S. Hayami and R. Yambe, Stabilization mechanisms of magnetic skyrmion crystal and multiple-qstates based on momentum-resolved spin interactions, Mater. Today Quantum3, 100010 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    A. O. Leonov and M. Mostovoy, Multiply periodic states and isolated skyrmions in an anisotropic frustrated mag- net, Nature Communications6, 8275 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    Lin and S

    S.-Z. Lin and S. Hayami, Ginzburg-landau theory for skyrmions in inversion-symmetric magnets with compet- ing interactions, Phys. Rev. B93, 064430 (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Hayami, S.-Z

    S. Hayami, S.-Z. Lin, and C. D. Batista, Bubble and skyrmion crystals in frustrated magnets with easy-axis anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B93, 184413 (2016)

    2016

  41. [49]

    C. D. Batista, S.-Z. Lin, S. Hayami, and Y. Kamiya, Frus- tration and chiral orderings in correlated electron sys- tems, Rep. Prog. Phys.79, 084504 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    Lin and C

    S.-Z. Lin and C. D. Batista, Face centered cubic and hexagonal close packed skyrmion crystals in centrosym- metric magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 077202 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    Hayami and Y

    S. Hayami and Y. Motome, Effect of magnetic anisotropy on skyrmions with a high topological number in itinerant magnets, Phys. Rev. B99, 094420 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Hayami, In-plane magnetic field-induced skyrmion crystal in frustrated magnets with easy-plane anisotropy, Phys

    S. Hayami, In-plane magnetic field-induced skyrmion crystal in frustrated magnets with easy-plane anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B103, 224418 (2021)

    2021

  45. [53]

    Kawamura, Frustration-induced skyrmion crystals in centrosymmetric magnets, J

    H. Kawamura, Frustration-induced skyrmion crystals in centrosymmetric magnets, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter37, 183004 (2025)

    2025

  46. [54]

    Finazzi, M

    M. Finazzi, M. Savoini, A. R. Khorsand, A. Tsukamoto, A. Itoh, L. Du` o, A. Kirilyuk, T. Rasing, and M. Ezawa, Laser-Induced Magnetic Nanostructures with Tunable Topological Properties, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 177205 (2013)

    2013

  47. [55]

    Mochizuki and Y

    M. Mochizuki and Y. Watanabe, Writing a skyrmion on multiferroic materials, Appl. Phys. Lett.107, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4929727 (2015)

    2015 doi

  48. [56]

    Mochizuki, Creation of Skyrmions by Electric Field on Chiral-Lattice Magnetic Insulators, Adv

    M. Mochizuki, Creation of Skyrmions by Electric Field on Chiral-Lattice Magnetic Insulators, Adv. Electron. 12 Mater.2, 1500180 (2016)

    2016

  49. [57]

    S.-G. Je, P. Vallobra, T. Srivastava, J.-C. Rojas-S´ anchez, T. H. Pham, M. Hehn, G. Malinowski, C. Baraduc, S. Auffret, G. Gaudin,et al., Creation of magnetic skyrmion bubble lattices by ultrafast laser in ultrathin films, Nano Lett.18, 7362 (2018)

    2018

  50. [58]

    Berruto, I

    G. Berruto, I. Madan, Y. Murooka, G. M. Vanacore, E. Pomarico, J. Rajeswari, R. Lamb, P. Huang, A. J. Kruchkov, Y. Togawa, T. LaGrange, D. McGrouther, H. M. Rønnow, and F. Carbone, Laser-Induced Skyrmion Writing and Erasing in an Ultrafast Cryo-Lorentz Trans- mission Electron ...

    2018

  51. [59]

    W. Lin, Y. Ota, Y. Arakawa, and S. Iwamoto, Microcavity-based generation of full Poincar´ e beams with arbitrary skyrmion numbers, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 023055 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Yambe and S

    R. Yambe and S. Hayami, Dynamical generation of skyrmion and bimeron crystals by a circularly polarized electric field in frustrated magnets, Phys. Rev. B110, 014428 (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    S. C. Furuya and M. Sato, Electric-field control of mag- netic anisotropies: Applications to Kitaev spin liquids and topological spin textures, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013228 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    Fujita and M

    H. Fujita and M. Sato, Ultrafast generation of skyrmionic defects with vortex beams: Printing laser profiles on mag- nets, Phys. Rev. B95, 054421 (2017)

    2017

  55. [63]

    Fujita and M

    H. Fujita and M. Sato, Encoding orbital angular momen- tum of light in magnets, Phys. Rev. B96, 060407 (2017)

    2017

  56. [64]

    X. Wang, Z. Nie, Y. Liang, J. Wang, T. Li, and B. Jia, Recent advances on optical vortex generation, Nanopho- tonics7, 1533 (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    G. F. Quinteiro Rosen, P. I. Tamborenea, and T. Kuhn, Interplay between optical vortices and condensed matter, Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 035003 (2022)

    2022

  58. [66]

    J. J. Liang, J. H. Yu, J. Chen, M. H. Qin, M. Zeng, X. B. Lu, X. S. Gao, and J. Liu, Magnetic field gradient driven dynamics of isolated skyrmions and antiskyrmions in frustrated magnets, New Journal of Physics20, 053037 (2018)

    2018

  59. [67]

    Ludbrook, G

    B. Ludbrook, G. Dubuis, A.-H. Puichaud, B. Ruck, and S. Granville, Nucleation and annihilation of skyrmions in mn2coal observed through the topological hall effect, Scientific reports7, 13620 (2017)

    2017

  60. [68]

    Berg and M

    B. Berg and M. L ´’uscher, Definition and statistical dis- tributions of a topological number in the lattice o(3)σ- model, Nucl. Phys. B190, 412 (1981)

    1981

  61. [69]

    Dzyaloshinskii, Theory of helicoidal structures in an- tiferromagnets

    I. Dzyaloshinskii, Theory of helicoidal structures in an- tiferromagnets. i. nonmetals, Sov. Phys. JETP19, 960 (1964)

    1964

  62. [70]

    Kataoka and O

    M. Kataoka and O. Nakanishi, Helical spin density wave due to antisymmetric exchange interaction, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.50, 3888 (1981)

    1981

  63. [71]

    Hayami and R

    S. Hayami and R. Yambe, Degeneracy Lifting of N´ eel, Bloch, and Anti-Skyrmion Crystals in Centrosymmet- ric Tetragonal Systems, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.89, 103702 (2020)

    2020

  64. [72]

    Hayami and R

    S. Hayami and R. Yambe, Helicity locking of a square skyrmion crystal in a centrosymmetric lattice system without vertical mirror symmetry, Phys. Rev. B105, 104428 (2022)

    2022

  65. [73]

    Kaplan, Single-band Hubbard model with spin-orbit coupling, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter49, 313 (1983)

    T. Kaplan, Single-band Hubbard model with spin-orbit coupling, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter49, 313 (1983)

    1983

  66. [74]

    Y.-D. Li, X. Wang, and G. Chen, Anisotropic spin model of strong spin-orbit-coupled triangular antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B94, 035107 (2016)

    2016

  67. [75]

    Becker, M

    M. Becker, M. Hermanns, B. Bauer, M. Garst, and S. Trebst, Spin-orbit physics ofj= 1 2 Mott insulators on the triangular lattice, Phys. Rev. B91, 155135 (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    Yambe and S

    R. Yambe and S. Hayami, Effective spin model in mo- mentum space: Toward a systematic understanding of multiple-Qinstability by momentum-resolved anisotropic exchange interactions, Phys. Rev. B106, 174437 (2022)

    2022

  69. [77]

    Amoroso, P

    D. Amoroso, P. Barone, and S. Picozzi, Spontaneous skyrmionic lattice from anisotropic symmetric exchange in a Ni-halide monolayer, Nat. Commun.11, 5784 (2020)

    2020

  70. [78]

    Hayami and Y

    S. Hayami and Y. Motome, Noncoplanar multiple-Qspin textures by itinerant frustration: Effects of single-ion anisotropy and bond-dependent anisotropy, Phys. Rev. B103, 054422 (2021)

    2021

  71. [79]

    O. I. Utesov, Thermodynamically stable skyrmion lattice in a tetragonal frustrated antiferromagnet with dipolar interaction, Phys. Rev. B103, 064414 (2021)

    2021

  72. [80]

    Z. Wang, Y. Su, S.-Z. Lin, and C. D. Batista, Meron, skyrmion, and vortex crystals in centrosymmetric tetrag- onal magnets, Phys. Rev. B103, 104408 (2021)

    2021

  73. [81]

    Yambe and S

    R. Yambe and S. Hayami, Skyrmion crystals in cen- trosymmetric itinerant magnets without horizontal mir- ror plane, Sci. Rep.11, 11184 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.