Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 69 references

Bimerons as Edge states in Thin Magnetic Strips

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Bimerons can be driven along the edge of a thin magnetic strip without annihilation when the strip's easy-axis anisotropy is perpendicular to the current, according to micromagnetic simulations and an analytic model.

desk verdict Solid simulation result showing bimeron edge-state propagation with orthogonal anisotropy, but the orientational stability that carries the mechanism is unexplained and the analytic model is partly fitted. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00483 v1 pith:W4KQH3LZ submitted 2024-11-30 cond-mat.mes-hall

Mario Castro , David Gálvez , Sebastián Castillo , Vagson L. Carvalho-Santos , Álvaro S. Núñez , Sebastián Allende This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords bimeronedgestateracetrackmemoryspin-orbittorqueHalleffectThieleequationmicromagneticsimulationthinferromagneticstrip
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

This paper seeks to show that the sideways drift of a current-driven bimeron—the bimeron Hall effect, normally the reason these solitons crash into strip edges and vanish—can instead trap them in a stable edge state. The central claim is that with the strip's easy-axis anisotropy perpendicular to the driving current, a bimeron drifts to the boundary, is repelled rather than absorbed, and then slides along the edge at a higher speed than in the bulk, surviving even U-shaped bends. Bimeron chains do the same, moving parallel to the current. If the claim is right, bimerons become plausible bits for racetrack memory that can be moved over long distances without annihilation.

What carries the argument

The bimeron itself—a topological soliton made of a meron (half-skyrmion core) and an antimeron, the in-plane-magnet analogue of a skyrmion—is the carrier. The propagation mechanism is modelled with Thiele's equation, treating the bimeron as a rigid particle with gyrocoupling vector $\mathbf{G}$, dissipation dyadic $\hat{D}$, and an effective edge potential $U=\frac{1}{2}\kappa Y^2$ that approximates the strip-boundary repulsion. Solving the equation gives a terminal velocity along the edge $V_x \propto RJ$, proportional to the bimeron radius times the current density, matching the simulated linear dependence on diameter times current. This potential-plus-topology picture is what turns the Hall drift into a confined, stable edge channel.

What would settle it

A sharp test is to fix the current at $J=-1\times10^{11}\,\mathrm{A/m^2}$ and rotate the easy-axis angle $\theta$: the paper predicts propagation for $\theta\le30^\circ$ and annihilation for $\theta\ge45^\circ$, so observing annihilation near $35^\circ$, or survival near $50^\circ$, would contradict the claimed orientation window. A complementary observable is the skyrmion number $Q$, a measure of the soliton's topological charge, which should stay nonzero while the bimeron slides along the edge and drop to zero only above the threshold current.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the bimeron Hall effect, instead of necessarily destroying the texture at the strip border, can trap it into an edge state. Under a spin-orbit current with the easy axis perpendicular to the current direction, the bimeron drifts toward the boundary, shrinks, and is repelled because the edge magnetization opposes its lower meron core; only this lower core touches the edge, so the soliton survives and then moves along the edge faster than it moved in the bulk. The texture is destroyed only when it rotates—which happens for currents above a threshold or for anisotropy angles beyond about 45 degrees—so that both cores contact the edge and the skyrmion number falls to zero. The same stable edge propagation is observed for bimeron chains and in U-shaped strips.

Load-bearing premise

The whole effect depends on the bimeron keeping its internal orientation while the current pushes it, so only the bottom half of the pair touches the strip edge and the edge magnetization repels it; if the bimeron rotates instead, both halves reach the edge and it is destroyed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Isolated bimerons can travel the entire strip and navigate U-shaped bends without annihilation when the easy axis is perpendicular to the current and the current stays below threshold.
  • Edge propagation is faster than bulk propagation—simulated speed ratios of 6.12 at J = 1×10^11 A/m² and 4.59 at J = 2×10^11 A/m²—and the edge velocity grows linearly with the bimeron diameter times the current density.
  • Bimeron chains keep their stability and propagate parallel to the current, so multiple bits can be moved together along the same strip.
  • The stabilization also works with perpendicular anisotropy when a magnetic field of −120 mT in the y-direction is applied, which widens the set of usable materials.
  • The operating window for safe propagation is bounded: the easy-axis angle should stay near 30 degrees or below and the current below threshold, since rotation sets in beyond these limits and destroys the bimeron.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper reports the orientation-stability condition as a simulation observation rather than a derivation from the energy functional, so the practical design rule would be a predictive criterion for when current-induced rotation destroys the edge state.
  • Because edge speed grows linearly with bimeron diameter times current density, the edge channel could double as a readout or sorting mechanism: measuring the edge velocity of a bimeron train would report the sizes or identities of the solitons.
  • The threshold between edge propagation and annihilation could be used deliberately as a current-controlled switch—below threshold a bit passes, above threshold it is destroyed—rather than treating annihilation only as a failure mode.
  • The parabolic edge potential $U \propto Y^2$ was validated for one strip width and one parameter set; narrower strips, stronger Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction, or sharper bends could make the potential non-parabolic and change the velocity law.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports micromagnetic simulations (Mumax3) of bimeron dynamics in thin Co/Pt-type ferromagnetic strips with in-plane easy-axis anisotropy perpendicular to the applied current. The central claim is that, below a threshold current, the bimeron is repelled from the strip edge instead of being annihilated, so that it propagates as an edge state along the strip, with a terminal velocity that is several times larger than its bulk velocity. The authors further report that this behavior persists in U-shaped strips and for bimeron chains, and they propose a Thiele-equation model with a harmonic edge potential U = (1/2)κY² to account for the velocity enhancement and the linear dependence of the edge velocity on the product of bimeron diameter and current density.

Significance. If the claimed edge-state mechanism is generic, it would offer a practical route to suppress the bimeron Hall-effect annihilation that limits bimeron racetrack devices, and the extension to chains and curved strips is important for device-oriented work. The paper is based on standard Co/Pt micromagnetic parameters and provides falsifiable simulation predictions; the qualitative threshold behavior is internally consistent. However, the quantitative support is weakened by the fact that the Thiele model imports parameters fitted from the same simulations it is then used to explain, and the central stability mechanism depends on an orientational lock that is observed but not derived or characterized. The significance is therefore conditional on a stability criterion for the internal bimeron orientation near the edge.

major comments (4)
  1. [Motion of bimeron driven by SOT, Fig. 2(c)] The central mechanism rests on the claim that, below threshold, the bimeron retains its orientation near the edge so that only the bottom meron core touches the edge, whose magnetization is opposite to that core, while the top core remains in the bulk. This orientational lock is presented as a simulation observation ('the top region never comes into contact with the edge'), but no energy, symmetry, or topological argument is given for why the orientation is preserved at J = -1e11 A/m² yet lost at J = -4e11 A/m² or for easy-axis angles above about 45°. Because the scalar potential in Eq. (3) contains no dependence on the internal orientation angle, the Thiele model as written cannot predict the threshold current or explain the stability boundary. This is load-bearing: without a stability criterion, the claimed generic edge-state propagation is not established, and the paper's own data show that modest anisotropy misalignment destroys the mechanism.
  2. [Motion of bimeron driven by SOT, Eq. (3) and Fig. 3(b,e)] The quantitative claims are partially circular: the harmonic edge potential U = (1/2)κY² uses κ fitted from the simulated energy profile in Fig. 3(e), and the terminal-velocity linear fit in Fig. 3(b) uses χ = 0.038676 m²/(A·s) fitted to the same simulation data. The subsequent prediction V ∝ RJ then reproduces the fitted proportionality constant, and the velocity-ratio estimate V ∼ GRe[Dα√2R]⁻¹ ≳ 2 involves unquantified parameters (εx, η, Re, and the dissipative-dyadic corrections) for which no independent values or error bars are provided. The authors should either present a genuinely parameter-free derivation, or clearly label the Thiele calculation as a fitting exercise and give uncertainties; as it stands, the model does not independently confirm the simulation results.
  3. [Motion of bimeron driven by SOT, Fig. 3(d) and text after Eq. (3)] The reported velocity ratios (vf/v0 = 6.12 for J = 1e11 A/m² and vf/v0 = 4.59 for J = 2e11 A/m²) are presented as key quantitative outcomes, but the supporting data appear to be from individual trajectories without error bars, and the number of independent runs is not stated. Given that the velocity depends on the dynamically changing bimeron diameter d, the product d × J used in Fig. 3(b) is not an independent control variable unless the diameter is measured and reported for each point. The authors should specify how d is defined and measured, and provide at least a few repeated simulations or a clear statement of numerical uncertainty.
  4. [Bimeron in magnetic memory devices, Fig. 4] The demonstration of propagation through a U-shaped strip and of bimeron-chain propagation is qualitative: the current-density distribution in the curved regions was computed with Comsol, but the simulations do not analyze how the local current direction relative to the easy axis changes around the bend, nor whether the edge-state mechanism is locally preserved. Since the easy axis is fixed in the laboratory frame while the strip direction changes, the condition 'easy-axis anisotropy and electric current are orthogonal' cannot hold uniformly in a U-shaped strip; the authors should explain why the mechanism still operates in the curved sections.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Stabilization of isolated bimeron, paragraph 2] The text says 'In a strip with w ≪ h', but the strip dimensions are width w = 256 nm and height h = 1 nm, so the inequality should be h ≪ w (or w ≫ h); as written, the condition is inverted.
  2. [Stabilization of isolated bimeron, paragraph 1] There are several typographical errors: 'anisotopy' should be 'anisotropy', 'pining' should be 'pinning', and 'anihilation' should be 'annihilation'; the manuscript would benefit from a careful proofread.
  3. [Motion of bimeron driven by SOT, Eq. (3)] The notation in the Thiele equation is unclear: τDL is defined as a scalar in the preceding sentence, but Eq. (3) uses τDL TDL, where TDL is never defined; please clarify whether TDL is a vector or a tensor and define it explicitly.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption] In Fig. 3(b) and 3(e), the fit curves and the extracted parameters are reported without uncertainties or the number of data points; adding this information would make the fitting procedure more transparent.
  5. [Introduction, Ref. [61]] The statement that an asymmetric bimeron-edge interaction potential was found in Ref. [61] should be double-checked, since the cited work concerns shuttlecock-like motion of non-axisymmetric chiral skyrmions; the connection to bimerons should be made explicit in the text.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the edge-state result is established by the micromagnetic simulations themselves; the Thiele model restates the fitted V∝dJ trend but is not used to derive the central claim.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'Motion of bimeron driven by SOT'; Fig. 3(b) caption and the model paragraph following Eq. (3).]
    "(b) Terminal velocity of the bimeron as function of d × J. The dashed line shows the fit curve with χ = 0.038676[m2/A· s]. ... Notably, we observe that this velocity increases when the bimeron moves at the edge depends linearly on the product of the bimeron diameter and the current density... It is worth noticing that Vx ∝ RJ, and consequently, in the edge state, we obtain V = ... ∝ RJ"

    The linear relation V∝dJ is first obtained as a fit to the simulations (χ is the fitted slope), then the Thiele equation is invoked to 'obtain' Vx∝RJ with undetermined parameters εx and η. Without a first-principles evaluation of εx, η, and the deformed radius Re, this is the same empirically fitted linear relation restated rather than an independent prediction. The central edge-state propagation claim, however, does not depend on this model: it is established by the micromagnetic simulations themselves, and the model is presented as an explanation of an already-observed trend. Hence this is a minor fitted-input restatement rather than a forced circularity.

full rationale

The paper's primary claims—edge-state propagation below a threshold current, annihilation at higher currents, propagation through U-shaped strips, and bimeron-chain transport—are direct micromagnetic-simulation results obtained from the LLG equation with SOT, material parameters, and the Mumax3 solver. They are self-contained simulation findings and do not reduce to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation chain. The Thiele model is explicitly introduced 'to explain' an already-observed linear velocity-versus-dJ behavior, and its parameters (κ fitted from the energy profile, χ fitted from the velocity data) are taken from the same simulations; the model's result Vx∝RJ reproduces the fitted proportionality rather than predicting an independent consequence. The unexplained orientational lock (bimeron rotation at high current or for anisotropy angles above about 45°) is a robustness and correctness limitation, but it is reported as a simulation observation, not as a derivation from the energy functional, so it is not itself a circular step. No load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem is present. Score 2 reflects one minor fitted-input restatement while the central claim retains independent simulation content.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard micromagnetic modeling plus a fitted harmonic edge potential and unquantified deformation parameters. Free parameters are kappa and chi, both fitted to the simulations of this paper, plus epsilon_x, eta, and R_e introduced without values. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • kappa (edge potential curvature) = nu = kappa/2 = 7.1215e-5 J/m^2
    The harmonic edge potential U = 1/2 kappa Y^2 is fitted to the simulated magnetic energy as a function of the bimeron position across the strip width (Fig. 3e); this fitted curvature enters the Thiele dynamics and the predicted velocity decay.
  • chi (velocity proportionality) = 0.038676 m^2/(A s)
    The linear relation between terminal edge velocity and d*J is fitted to simulation data in Fig. 3b; the theoretical model is then said to predict V proportional to RJ, which reproduces this fitted relation rather than deriving it from independent inputs.
  • model asymmetry parameters epsilon_x, eta, R_e = not quantified
    The Thiele model introduces epsilon_x (SOT asymmetry), eta (dissipative dyadic deformation), and R_e (edge radius) without measured or derived values; the final relation V ~ G R_e [D alpha sqrt(2) R]^-1 > 2 is asserted rather than computed.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption LLG equation with spin-orbit torque (Eqs. 1-2) describes the magnetization dynamics of the Co/Pt strip.
    Standard micromagnetic model for ferromagnet/heavy-metal bilayers; parameters theta_SH = 0.19, alpha = 0.1, and material constants are taken from literature.
  • domain assumption Bimeron can be treated as a rigid particle obeying Thiele's equation with a conservative edge potential (Eq. 3).
    The Thiele rigid-body approximation is standard for skyrmionic textures but ignores internal deformation; deformation is acknowledged through eta and epsilon_x but not modeled.
  • ad hoc to paper Edge potential U = 1/2 kappa Y^2 is a good approximation for the simulated energy landscape.
    The text asserts this approximation for a strip with w << h (likely a typo for h << w) and justifies it only by the fitted curve in Fig. 3e; no independent derivation is provided.
  • domain assumption Topological charge Q of the bimeron is conserved unless both meron cores touch the edge.
    Used to explain the annihilation threshold; based on known topology of meron-antimeron pairs but not quantified in the paper.
  • domain assumption The easy-axis anisotropy along y fixes the bimeron orientation such that only the bottom core approaches the edge.
    Central mechanism from Fig. 2c; stated for the simulated configuration without a general energetic argument.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bimerons as Edge states in Thin Magnetic Strips." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W4KQH3LZ

@misc{pith2026241200483,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bimerons as Edge states in Thin Magnetic Strips},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W4KQH3LZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00483}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetic bimerons are potential information carriers in spintronic devices. Bimerons, topologically equivalent to skyrmions, manifest in chiral magnetic systems with in-plane magnetization due to anisotropies or external magnetic fields. Applications demanding their current-driven motion face significant challenges, notably the bimeron Hall effect, which causes transverse movement and annihilation at nanomagnet borders. This study addresses the problem of stabilizing bimeron propagation under current-driven conditions. We demonstrate that bimerons can propagate through thin ferromagnetic strips without annihilation when the easy-axis anisotropy and the electric current are orthogonal. Our findings indicate that below a threshold value of current, the repulsion between the bimeron and the strip boundary allows for stable soliton propagation, even in bent regions. This phenomenon extends to bimeron chains, which propagate parallel to the current flow. By enabling stable long-distance propagation, our results open new avenues for developing bimeron-based racetrack memory devices, enhancing the efficiency and reliability of future spintronic applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00483 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic representation of the geometrical dimensions of a magnetic strip on which a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Panels (a) and (b) depict the trajectories of a magnetic bimeron under current densities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Diagram shows the origin of the coordinate system at the initial position of the bimeron. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Isolated bimeron and bimeron chain motion in a U-shaped nanotrack. (a) and (b) depict [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S.-H. Yang, R. Naaman, Y. Paltiel, and S. S. P. Parkin, Chiral spintronics, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 328–343 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Lavrijsen, J.-H

    R. Lavrijsen, J.-H. Lee, A. Fern´ andez-Pacheco, D. C. M. C. Petit, R. Mansell, and R. P. Cowburn, Magnetic ratchet for three-dimensional spintronic memory and logic, Nature 493, 647 (2013)

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Hrkac, J

    G. Hrkac, J. Dean, and D. Allwood, Nanowire spintronics for storage class memories and logic, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 3214 (2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Hirohata, K

    A. Hirohata, K. Yamada, Y. Nakatani, I.-L. Prejbeanu, B. Di´ eny, P. Pirro, and B. Hillebrands, Review on spintronics: Principles and device applications, J. Magn. Mag. Mat. 509, 166711 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Q. L. He, T. L. Hughes, N. P. Armitage, Y. Tokura, and K. L. Wang, Topological spintronics and magnetoelectronics, Nature Materials 21, 15–23 (2021). 11

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

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

    2008

  7. [7]

    Parkin and S.-H

    S. Parkin and S.-H. Yang, Memory on the racetrack, Nat. Nano. 10, 195 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Sampaio, V

    J. Sampaio, V. Cros, S. Rohart, A. Thiaville, and A. Fert, Nucleation, stability and current- induced motion of isolated magnetic skyrmions in nanostructures, Nature Nanotechnol. 8, 839 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Blasing, A

    R. Blasing, A. A. Khan, P. C. Filippou, C. Garg, F. Hameed, J. Castrillon, and S. S. P. Parkin, Magnetic racetrack memory: From physics to the cusp of applications within a decade, Proceedings of the IEEE 108, 1303–1321 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Parkin, Racetrack memory: a high capacity, high performance, non-volatile spintronic memory, in 2022 IEEE International Memory Workshop (IMW) (IEEE, 2022)

    S. Parkin, Racetrack memory: a high capacity, high performance, non-volatile spintronic memory, in 2022 IEEE International Memory Workshop (IMW) (IEEE, 2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    K. Gu, Y. Guan, B. K. Hazra, H. Deniz, A. Migliorini, W. Zhang, and S. S. P. Parkin, Three- dimensional racetrack memory devices designed from freestanding magnetic heterostructures, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 1065–1071 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    Fern´ andez-Pacheco and C

    A. Fern´ andez-Pacheco and C. Donnelly, The racetrack breaks free from the substrate, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 1038–1039 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    Kumar, T

    D. Kumar, T. Jin, S. A. Risi, R. Sbiaa, W. S. Lew, and S. N. Piramanayagam, Domain wall motion control for racetrack memory applications, IEEE Trans. Magn. 55, 2300708 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    L. D. Geng and Y. M. Jin, Magnetic vortex racetrack memory, J. Magn. Mag. Mat. 423, 84 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    Tomasello, E

    R. Tomasello, E. Martinez, R. Zivieri, L. Torres, M. Carpentieri, and G. Finocchio, A strategy for the design of skyrmion racetrack memories, Sci. Rep. 4, 6784 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    Tomasello, V

    R. Tomasello, V. Puliafito, E. Martinez, A. Manchon, M. Ricci, M. Carpentieri, and G. Finoc- chio, Performance of synthetic antiferromagnetic racetrack memory: domain wall versus skyrmion, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 50, 325302 (2017)

    2017

  9. [17]

    Liang, G

    X. Liang, G. Zhao, L. Shen, J. Xia, L. Zhao, X. Zhang, and Y. Zhou, Dynamics of an antifer- romagnetic skyrmion in a racetrack with a defect, Phys. Rev. B 100, 144439 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Zhang, J

    X. Zhang, J. Xia, Y. Zhou, D. Wang, X. Liu, W. Zhao, and M. Ezawa, Control and manipu- lation of a magnetic skyrmionium in nanostructures, Phys. Rev. B 94, 094420 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Vigo-Cotrina, S

    H. Vigo-Cotrina, S. Navarro-Vilca, and S. Urcia-Romero, Skyrmionium dynamics on a race- track in the presence of a magnetic defect, Appl. Phys. Lett. 135, 163903 (2024). 12

    2024

  12. [20]

    Y. Liu, W. Hou, X. Han, and J. Zang, Three-dimensional dynamics of a magnetic hopfion driven by spin transfer torque, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 127204 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    X. S. Wang, A. Qaiumzadeh, and A. Brataas, Current-driven dynamics of magnetic hopfions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 147203 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    S. K. Kim, Dynamics of bimeron skyrmions in easy-plane magnets induced by a spin super- current, Phys. Rev. B 94, 224406 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Castro, D

    M. Castro, D. Altbir, D. Galvez-Poblete, R. Corona, S. Oyarz´ un, A. Pereira, S. Allende, and V. Carvalho-Santos, Skyrmion-bimeron dynamic conversion in magnetic nanotracks, Phys. Rev. B 108, 10.1103/PhysRevB.108.094436 (2023)

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    X. Li, L. Shen, Y. Bai, J. Wang, X. Zhang, J. Xia, M. Ezawa, O. A. Tretiakov, X. Xu, M. Mruczkiewicz, M. Krawczyk, Y. Xu, R. F. L. Evans, R. W. Chantrell, and Y. Zhou, Bimeron clusters in chiral antiferromagnets, NPJ Comput. Mat. 4, 169 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    Liang, J

    X. Liang, J. Lan, G. Zhao, M. Zelent, M. Krawczyk, and Y. Zhou, Bidirectional magnon-driven bimeron motion in ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 108, 184407 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    N. L. Schryer and L. R. Walker, The motion of 180 o domain walls in uniform dc magnetic fields, J. Appl. Phys. 45, 5406 (1974)

    1974

  19. [27]

    Mougin, M

    A. Mougin, M. Cormier, J. P. Adam, P. J. Metaxas, and J. Ferr´ e, Domain wall mobility, stability and walker breakdown in magnetic nanowires, Europhys. Lett. 78, 57007 (2007)

    2007

  20. [28]

    Lee, K.-S

    J.-Y. Lee, K.-S. Lee, S. Choi, K. Y. Guslienko, and S.-K. Kim, Dynamic transformations of the internal structure of a moving domain wall in magnetic nanostripes, Phys. Rev. B 76, 184408 (2007)

    2007

  21. [29]

    Thomas, M

    L. Thomas, M. Hayashi, X. Jiang, R. Moriya, C. Rettner, and S. S. P. Parkin, Oscillatory dependence of current-driven magnetic domain wall motion on current pulse length, Nature 443, 197 (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    H. Y. Yuan and X. R. Wang, Domain wall pinning in notched nanowires, Phys. Rev. B 89, 054423 (2014)

    2014

  23. [31]

    S. Woo, T. Delaney, and G. S. D. Beach, Magnetic domain wall depinning assisted by spin wave bursts, Nat. Phys. 13, 448 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    K. V. Yershov, V. P. Kravchuk, D. D. Sheka, and Y. Gaididei, Curvature-induced domain wall pinning, Phys. Rev. B 92, 104412 (2015)

    2015

  25. [33]

    G. H. R. Bittencourt, S. Castillo-Sep´ ulveda, O. Chubykalo-Fesenko, R. Moreno, D. Altbir, 13 and V. L. Carvalho-Santos, Domain wall damped harmonic oscillations induced by curvature gradients in elliptical magnetic nanowires, Phys. Rev. B 106, 174424 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Iwasaki, M

    J. Iwasaki, M. Mochizuki, and N. Nagaosa, Universal current-velocity relation of skyrmion motion in chiral magnets, Nat. Commun. 4, 1463 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Litzius, I

    K. Litzius, I. Lemesh, B. Kr¨ uger, P. Bassirian, L. Caretta, K. Richter, F. B¨ uttner, K. Sato, O. A. Tretiakov, J. F¨ orster, R. M. Reeve, M. Weigand, I. Bykova, H. Stoll, G. Sch¨ utz, G. S. D. Beach4, and M. Kl¨ aui, Skyrmion hall effect revealed by direct time-resolved x-r...

    2017

  28. [36]

    Litzius, J

    K. Litzius, J. Leliaert, P. Bassirian, D. Rodrigues, S. Kromin, I. Lemesh, J. Zazvorka, K.-J. Lee, J. Mulkers, N. Kerber, D. Heinze, N. Keil, R. M. Reeve, M. Weigand, B. V. Waeyenberge, G. Sch¨ utz, K. Everschor-Sitte, G. S. D. Beach, and M. Kl¨ aui, The role of temperature an...

    2020

  29. [37]

    Jiang, Y

    A. Jiang, Y. Zhou, X. Zhang, and M. Mochizuki, Transformation of a skyrmionium to a skyrmion through the thermal annihilation of the inner skyrmion, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013229 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    S. Yang, Y. Zhao, K. Wu, Z. Chu, X. Xu, X. Li, J. Akerman, and Y. Zhou, Reversible conversion between skyrmions and skyrmioniums, Nat. Commun. 14, 3406 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    Sutcliffe, Skyrmion knots in frustrated magnets, Phys

    P. Sutcliffe, Skyrmion knots in frustrated magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett 118, 247203 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    Sutcliffe, Hopfions in chiral magnets, J

    P. Sutcliffe, Hopfions in chiral magnets, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51, 375401 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    X.-S. Wang, A. Qaiumzadeh, and A. Brataas, Current-driven dynamics of magnetic hopfions, Phys. Rev. Lett 123, 147203 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    Y. Liu, H. Watanabe, and N. Nagaosa, Emergent magnetomultipoles and nonlinear responses of a magnetic hopfion, Phys. Rev. Lett 129, 267201 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Toscano, J

    D. Toscano, J. Mendon¸ ca, A. Miranda, C. de Araujo, F. Sato, P. Coura, and S. Leonel, Suppression of the skyrmion hall effect in planar nanomagnets by the magnetic properties engineering: Skyrmion transport on nanotracks with magnetic strips, J. Magn. Mag. Mat. 504, 166655 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Luo, B. Yan, J. Ou-Yang, X. Yang, S. Chen, B. Zhu, and L. You, Mag- netic skyrmions without the skyrmion hall effect in a magnetic nanotrack with perpendicular anisotropy, Nanoscale 9, 10212 (2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    J. Guo, Y. Hou, X. Zhang, P. W. Pong, and Y. Zhou, Elimination of the skyrmion hall effect 14 by tuning perpendicular magnetic anisotropy and spin polarization angle, Phys. Lett. A 456, 128497 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Purnama, W

    I. Purnama, W. L. Gan, D. W. Wong, and W. S. Lew, Guided current-induced skyrmion motion in 1d potential well, Sci. Rep. 5, 10620 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    C. Jin, Y. Ma, C. Song, H. Xia, J. Wang, C. Zhang, Z. Zeng, J. Wang, and Q. Liu, High- frequency spin transfer nano-oscillator based on the motion of skyrmions in an annular groove, New J. Phys. 22, 033001 (2020)

    2020

  40. [48]

    G¨ obel, A

    B. G¨ obel, A. Mook, J. Henk, I. Mertig, and O. A. Tretiakov, Magnetic bimerons as skyrmion analogues in in-plane magnets, Phys. Rev. B 99, 060407(R) (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    M. A. Amaral, R. L. Silva, A. R. Pereira, and W. A. Moura-Melo, Discrete double core skyrmions in magnetic thin films, J. Magn. Mag. Mat 321, 3360 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    I. A. Iakovlev, O. M. Sotnikov, and V. V. Mazurenko, Bimeron nanoconfined design, Phys. Rev. B 97, 184415 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    H. D. Rosales, F. A. G. Albarrac ´ ın, P. Pujol, and L. D. C. Jaubert, Skyrmion fluid and bimeron glass protected by a chiral spin liquid on a kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 106703 (2023)

    2023

  44. [53]

    Ohara, X

    K. Ohara, X. Zhang, Y. Chen, S. Kato, J. Xia, M. Ezawa, O. A. Tretiakov, Z. Hou, Y. Zhou, G. Zhao, J. Yang, and X. Liu, Reversible transformation between isolated skyrmions and bimerons, Nano Letters 22, 8559 (2022), pMID: 36259745

    2022

  45. [54]

    Amari, C

    Y. Amari, C. Ross, and M. Nitta, Domain-wall skyrmion chain and domain-wall bimerons in chiral magnets, Phys. Rev. B 109, 104426 (2024)

    2024

  46. [55]

    X. Yu, N. Kanazawa, X. Zhang, Y. Takahashi, K. V. Iakoubovskii, K. Nakajima, T. Tanigaki, M. Mochizuki, and Y. Tokura, Spontaneous vortex-antivortex pairs and their topological tran- sitions in a chiral-lattice magnet, Advanced Materials 36, 10.1002/adma.202306441 (2023)

    2023 doi

  47. [56]

    Gao, S.-G

    N. Gao, S.-G. Je, J. Choi, M. Yang, T. Wang, S. Lee, H.-K. HAn, K.-S. Lee, W. Chao, C. Hwang, J. Li, and Z. Qiu, Creation and anihilation of topological meron pairs in in-plane magnetized films, Nat. Commun. 10, doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13642-z (2019)

    2019 doi

  48. [57]

    Nagase, Y.-G

    T. Nagase, Y.-G. So, H. Yasui, T. Ishida, H. K. Yoshida, Y. Tanaka, K. Saitoh, N. Ikarashi, 15 Y. Kawaguchi, M. Kuwahara, and N. Masahiro, Observation of domain wall bimerons in chiral magnets, Nat. Commun. 12, doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23845-y (2021)

    2021 doi

  49. [58]

    Zarzuela, V

    R. Zarzuela, V. K. Bharadwaj, K.-W. Kim, J. Sinova, and K. Everschor-Sitte, Stability and dynamics of in-plane skyrmions in collinear ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 101, 054405 (2020)

    2020

  50. [59]

    A. S. Ara´ ujo, R. J. C. Lopes, V. L. Carvalho-Santos, A. R. Pereira, R. L. Silva, R. C. Silva, and D. Altbir, Typical skyrmions versus bimerons: A long-distance competition in ferromagnetic racetracks, Phys. Rev. B 102, 104409 (2020)

    2020

  51. [60]

    L. Shen, X. Li, J. Xia, L. Qiu, X. Zhang, O. A. Tretiakov, M. Ezawa, and Y. Zhou, Dynamics of ferromagnetic bimerons driven by spin currents and magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. B 102, 104427 (2020)

    2020

  52. [61]

    Murooka, A

    R. Murooka, A. O. Leonov, K. Inoue, and J. i. Ohe, Current-induced shuttlecock-like move- ment of non-axisymmetric chiral skyrmions, Sci. Rep. 10 (2020)

    2020

  53. [62]

    R. Saha, K. Wu, D. Su, and J.-P. Wang, Tunable magnetic skyrmions in spintronic nanos- tructures for cellular-level magnetic neurostimulation, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 52, 465002 (2019)

    2019

  54. [63]

    Vansteenkiste, J

    A. Vansteenkiste, J. Leliaert, M. Dvornik, M. Helsen, F. Garcia-Sanchez, and B. V. Waeyen- berge, The design and verification of mumax3, AIP Adv. 4 (2014)

    2014

  55. [64]

    Tomasello, E

    R. Tomasello, E. Martinez, R. Zivieri, L. Torres, M. Carpentieri, and G. Finocchio, A strategy for the design of skyrmion racetrack memories, Scientific Reports4, 10.1038/srep06784 (2014)

    2014 doi

  56. [65]

    B¨ uttner, I

    F. B¨ uttner, I. Lemesh, M. Schneider, B. Pfau, C. M. G¨ unther, P. Hessing, J. Geilhufe, L. Caretta, D. Engel, B. Kr¨ uger, J. Viefhaus, S. Eisebitt, and G. S. D. Beach, Field-free deterministic ultrafast creation of magnetic skyrmions by spin–orbit torques, Nature Nan- otech...

    2017

  57. [66]

    Zhang, W

    W. Zhang, W. Han, X. Jiang, S.-H. Yang, and S. S. P. Parkin, Role of transparency of platinum–ferromagnet interfaces in determining the intrinsic magnitude of the spin hall effect, Nature Physics 11, 496–502 (2015)

    2015

  58. [67]

    A. A. Thiele, Steady-state motion of magnetic domains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 230 (1973)

    1973

  59. [68]

    B¨ uttner, C

    F. B¨ uttner, C. Moutafis, M. Schneider, B. Kr¨ uger, C. M. G¨ unther, J. Geilhufe, C. v. Ko- rff Schmising, J. Mohanty, B. Pfau, S. Schaffert, A. Bisig, M. Foerster, T. Schulz, C. A. F. Vaz, J. H. Franken, H. J. M. Swagten, M. Kl¨ aui, and S. Eisebitt, Dynamics and inertia of...

    2015

  60. [69]

    polymerization

    N. Mukai and A. O. Leonov, “polymerization” of bimerons in quasi-two-dimensional chiral magnets with easy-plane anisotropy, Nanomaterials 14 (2024)

    2024

  61. [70]

    Retrieved (2023)

    Comsol modeling software, https://www.comsol.com (2023), cOMSOL, Inc. Retrieved (2023). 17

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.