Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Intra-unit-cell resolved intertwining of multi-$Q$ charge and spin textures in an itinerant skyrmion magnet

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 GdRu2Ge2, the atomically resolved charge texture at the Ge surface is set by nearest-neighbor Gd spin alignment, so each multi-Q magnetic phase carries a corresponding multi-Q Ru 4d charge pattern.

desk verdict Valuable STM dataset and a solid NUDFT methodology, but the central claim of a tight spin–charge correlation is not quantitatively supported, and the model's own acknowledged failures are the key issue. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05528 v1 pith:2ZGAZE6S submitted 2026-08-06 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.mes-hall

Christopher J. Butler , Katsuki Nihongi , Haruto Yoshimochi , Nguyen Duy Khanh , Rina Takagi , Tetsuo Hanaguri , Shinichiro Seki This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.mes-hall
keywords skyrmionmulti-Qmagnetismspin-chargecouplingscanningtunnelingmicroscopyGdRu2Ge2RKKYinteractionlocaldensityofstates
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 establish that in GdRu2Ge2, a centrosymmetric magnet hosting atomic-scale skyrmions, the charge density seen by a scanning tunneling microscope is not an independent electronic pattern but a direct image of nearest-neighbor Gd spin alignments. Using atomically resolved conductance maps in five magnetic phases, the authors show that the local density of states on the two Ru bond-centered sublattices of the Gd square net follows the nearest-neighbor spin-spin dot products $P_{i,j,\mu}$ of Eq. (1). A simple convolution model built from those dot products reproduces each phase's distinctive LDOS motif, including the 'basketweave' pattern of the elliptical skyrmion phase. If correct, this gives a concrete microscopic spin-charge relationship in an itinerant skyrmion magnet and implies that multi-$Q$ magnetism and multi-$Q$ charge textures are two sides of the same electronic reconstruction.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the bond-centered spin-spin dot product $P_{i,j,\mu}=(1-\mu)(\mathbf S_{i,j}\cdot \mathbf S_{i+1,j})+\mu(\mathbf S_{i,j}\cdot \mathbf S_{i,j+1})$ defined on the two inequivalent bonds of the Gd square net (Eq. 1), together with the weight image $W(\mathbf r)=\sum_{i,j,\mu}[P_{i,j,\mu}K_\mu(\mathbf r)]*\delta(\mathbf r-\mathbf r_{i,j,\mu})$ (Eq. 2). The kernels $K_\mu(\mathbf r)$ are negative-valued and elongated along the bond axis, chosen to match the observed 'trenches' of low LDOS along Gd-Ru-Gd bonds. This construction turns the spin structure of each magnetic phase into a predicted real-space charge texture whose Fourier amplitudes and phases can be compared directly with STM conductance maps; the comparison is what carries the argument that spin alignment controls the LDOS.

What would settle it

A neutron or resonant x-ray measurement of the GdRu2Ge2 ground state that finds a pure single-Q spin screw, with no perpendicular modulation, would falsify the revised Phase I model and therefore the claimed correspondence between nearest-neighbor Gd spin alignment and the LDOS in that phase.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the relationship between magnetism and charge in GdRu2Ge2 is local and quantitative: the normalized tunneling conductance $L(\mathbf r, V)$ at the Ge surface is governed by the nearest-neighbor Gd spin-spin dot product $P_{i,j,\mu}$ evaluated on the two bond-centered sublattices of the Gd square net. The weight image $W(\mathbf r)$ obtained by placing those dot products on bond-centered delta functions and convolving with anisotropic, negative-valued kernels $K_\mu(\mathbf r)$ reproduces, phase by phase, the measured LDOS motifs: bond-order-like stripes in Phase I, the basketweave in Phase II, checkerboard-like patterns in Phases III and IV, and a crossed-stripe sum in Phase V. The same construction reproduces the Fourier phases of the measured patterns, in particular the satellite phases that encode the basketweave. Because the kernels resemble the in-plane projections of Ru $d_{xz}$ and $d_{yz}$ orbitals and are centered at Ru sites, the paper concludes that the Ru $4d$ itinerant states that mediate the magnetic interactions also carry the observable charge modulations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the input spin structures are correct: Phases II–V come from prior resonant x-ray analysis, while the revised Phase I structure is adjusted by ad hoc trial-and-error to reproduce the anomalous LDOS peaks, so if any of these spin structures is wrong the inferred spin-charge relationship fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The five magnetic phases of GdRu2Ge2 each reconstruct the Ru 4d bands near the Fermi level, producing distinct multi-Q LDOS superstructures.
  • The basketweave motif in Phase II is generated by specific phase relations among Bragg and satellite Fourier components, not by amplitudes alone, and the same phase relations are reproduced by the dot-product model.
  • The ground state of GdRu2Ge2 is a double-Q structure, a spin screw plus a perpendicular in-plane sinusoid, with topological charge stripes but zero net skyrmion number.
  • Electronic band reconstructions accompanying each magnetic phase feed back into the interactions that stabilize the magnetism, forming a coupled spin-charge problem.
  • Because the kernels resemble Ru $d_{xz}$ and $d_{yz}$ orbital projections, the Ru sites are the active mediators: the charge texture is carried by the same Ru 4d states that mediate the magnetic interactions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same dot-product construction could be applied to other centrosymmetric skyrmion hosts such as GdRu2Si2 or EuAl4 to test whether bond-centered spin alignment universally governs the STM-visible charge texture.
  • If the correspondence is quantitative rather than qualitative, measured LDOS maps could be inverted: atomically resolved conductance images might be used to reconstruct the underlying spin structure with unit-cell resolution.
  • The energy-dependent 90-degree rotation of the basketweave bond-order pattern near -150 meV hints at an electronic nematic instability coupled to the magnetic order, which goes beyond the paper's static dot-product model.
  • A systematic iterative scheme that refines spin structures against predicted LDOS images could replace the ad hoc trial-and-error revision of Phase I, turning the method into a general spin-structure refinement tool.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports atomically resolved scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) measurements of the LDOS on the Ge-terminated surface of GdRu2Ge2 across five magnetic phases, including two skyrmion crystal phases. It introduces a model in which the LDOS at bond-centered Ru sites is expressed as the convolution of nearest-neighbor Gd spin-spin dot products P_{i,j,μ} (Eq. 1) with anisotropic kernel functions K_μ(r) (Eq. 2), and claims that this quantity 'tightly correlates' with the measured LDOS. The authors also propose a revised double-Q ground state for Phase I, motivated by the observation of modulations not expected for the previously proposed single-Q screw, and show that the model reproduces broad qualitative features of the measured patterns and their Fourier phases.

Significance. If the claimed relationship were quantitatively established, it would provide a concrete microscopic connection between multi-Q spin textures and intra-unit-cell charge patterns in an itinerant skyrmion magnet, with implications for understanding the electronic mechanisms behind centrosymmetric skyrmion stability. The paper's strengths include a well-described non-uniform DFT (NUDFT) phase-referencing procedure that correctly handles multiple incommensurate wavevectors, careful field- and energy-dependent measurements that show clear phase boundaries, and a transparent discussion of the model's limitations in the Supplemental Information. However, the central claim of a 'tight' correlation rests on qualitative visual comparison, and the paper's own Supplementary Information concedes that the dot-product model does not capture the relevant LDOS physics at certain wavevectors. Establishing the central claim will require quantitative residual analysis, tests against alternative descriptors, and independent support for the revised Phase I spin structure.

major comments (3)
  1. [§6, Eq. (2) and SI Sec. IX] The model generates Fourier components at wavevectors such as Q_A+Q_B that are absent from the measured L(r) at V = -100 mV, as shown in SI Sec. IX and Fig. S9(i). The SI correctly notes that kernel functions cannot create or destroy wavevectors, so these spurious components cannot be dismissed as a kernel artifact; they indicate that nearest-neighbor spin dot products alone do not determine the LDOS at these wavevectors. The main text (Fig. 6) nevertheless summarizes the comparison as reproducing features 'reasonably well' and the abstract claims 'tightly correlates.' To support the central claim, the authors should provide a quantitative metric (e.g., normalized residuals per Fourier component, a correlation coefficient in real space, or a weighted phase/amplitude error) for each phase, and should explicitly test whether a linear spin model, a chirality-based descriptor, or higher-order spin correlations gives a better account of the data.
  2. [SI Sec. VII B and Fig. 6(a)] The revised Phase I spin structure is obtained by an ad hoc trial-and-error adjustment of the modulation amplitudes and phases to reproduce the 'anomalous' LDOS peaks that are then used to justify the revision. This is partially circular: the same data are used to fit the spin structure and to claim agreement between the model and the measurement. The authors should either verify the revised structure with an independent measurement (e.g., resonant x-ray scattering in the same field/phase regime, or neutron diffraction), or clearly demonstrate that the comparison is robust by showing that the key qualitative features of the measured L(r) and its Fourier phases are reproduced across a range of plausible parameter sets rather than a single fitted set.
  3. [Figs. 4 and 6; abstract] The evidence for the claimed 'tight' correlation between P_{i,j,μ} and the measured LDOS is visual: Fig. 6(b/c) is stated to reproduce 'broad qualitative features' and phases 'reasonably well.' No quantitative figure of merit (e.g., Pearson correlation between W(r) and L(r), residual amplitude spectra, or phase error distributions) is reported for any of the five phases. The authors should quantify the agreement per phase and per wavevector, and specify what threshold they would take as support for the claim made in the abstract. Without such quantification, the central claim is not established at the level the paper asserts.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Main text, Results section] In the paragraph introducing the NUDFT, the phrase 'quan- titatively' is broken across a line in the supplied text; this is a formatting issue, not a substantive one.
  2. [Reference list, Ref. [39]] The DOI for reference [39] appears malformed ('10.1103/q853-plvr'); please verify and correct the identifier.
  3. [Supplementary Information, Sec. III B] The description of the NUDFT target set would benefit from a table or explicit list of all 84 members of Q (or the 42 unique wavevectors), rather than relying on ellipses in the text, to allow the reader to reproduce the analysis.
  4. [Fig. 3 caption and SI Fig. S1] The term 'Na¨ıvely' in the main text is spelled with a nonstandard ligature and should be written as 'Naively' or 'Naïvely.'

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Phase I spin structure and bond kernels are fitted to the same LDOS images they are claimed to reproduce; Phases II–V forward model retains independent content, so partial circularity.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Supplementary Information Sec. VII B; main text Fig. 3(b) and Fig. 6(b)]
    "Note that here we consider a revised spin structure for Phase I, which includes an additional modulation propagating perpendicular to the spin screw. This is motivated by the observation of unexpected modulations highlighted in Fig. 3(b). ... Through a process of trial-and-error, we find that it is possible to model the 'anomalous' L(r) modulations highlighted in Fig. 3(b) by adding only one extra magnetic modulation to our representation of the ground state, and then calculating its W(r) image."

    The Phase I spin structure is adjusted, by explicit trial-and-error, until the model reproduces the anomalous Fourier peaks in the same measured LDOS image that is later presented as the agreement. The 'well represented' Phase I comparison in Fig. 6 is therefore a report on the fitting target, not an independent prediction. Because the spin structure is the physical input and is modified using the LDOS output, the claimed spin-charge relationship for Phase I is partly secured by construction.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Main text, 'Modeling magnetic field-dependent LDOS textures', around Eq. 2 and Fig. 5(d)]
    "The choice of the kernel functions K µ(r) is informed by a close inspection of the basketweave pattern. ... From this we infer that the bond-centred kernels should be i) negative-valued and ii) elongated along the bond axis."

    The kernels in Eq. 2 are the adjustable linear filter that converts spin dot products into W(r); their sign and anisotropy are extracted from the Phase II LDOS image. The later statement that the 'essential features of the basketweave pattern' are reproduced by the model is thus partly a restatement of the design criterion. The convolution theorem limits the kernels to phase rotations, so the satellite phase configuration remains a nontrivial check, but the intensity motif used as evidence is encoded in the kernel choice.

full rationale

The paper is not wholly circular: for Phases II–V, the spin structures are taken from Yoshimochi et al. [30], which were determined by resonant x-ray scattering and magnetization measurements, not from the STM data used here; the overlapping authorship of [30] is normal self-citation and the underlying x-ray data are external evidence, so I do not score that as load-bearing circularity. Two components are circular, however. First, the Phase I spin structure is revised by ad hoc trial-and-error specifically to reproduce anomalous LDOS peaks in the same images later shown as agreement (SI Sec. VII B; Fig. 6). Second, the kernel functions in Eq. 2 are designed from the Phase II basketweave image, so Fig. 6(b) reproduces the motif used to set the kernel's sign and shape. The paper's own SI Sec. IX concedes that the model generates QA+QB-type Fourier components absent from experiment and that 'the spin-spin dot product approach does not capture the relevant physics determining the LDOS.' That admission is not itself circularity, but it underscores that the 'tightly correlates' claim is a qualitative visual match rather than a quantitative derivation. Overall score reflects partial circularity in the fitted Phase I spin structure and kernel calibration, while the Phases II–V forward modeling retains nontrivial content.

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

The central model rests on a small number of hand-chosen kernels, an ad hoc revised ground state, and spin structures inherited from prior work by overlapping authors. No new physical entities are introduced. The honesty of the SI in listing shortcomings is commendable, but it confirms the paper is an empirical inference with a toy model, not a derivation.

free parameters (3)
  • Kernel functions K_mu(r) = Negative-valued, elongated along the bond axis; no analytical form given
    Chosen by inspection of the Phase II basketweave pattern to reproduce the observed trenches and hollow-centered maxima; hand-tuned and not derived from a microscopic calculation.
  • Phase I revised spin-structure amplitude and phases (nu=2 modulation) = mtilde=(0.02, 0.02, 0.5); theta=(pi, pi/2, 3pi/2)
    Ad hoc trial-and-error adjustment added to reproduce the anomalous LDOS Fourier components in the ground state (Supplementary Information Sec. VII B).
  • Spin-structure parameters for Phases II-V = m0_c = 0.23, 0.41, 0.57, 0.72; amplitudes and phase vectors in Table II
    Inputs from the prior resonant x-ray analysis by Yoshimochi et al.; not independently measured in this work, and the W(r) model inherits them.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Magnetic interactions in GdRu2Ge2 are mediated by Ru 4d-derived itinerant bands (Kondo lattice / RKKY picture).
    Invoked in the Introduction and Fig. 1(e) to motivate STM at the Ge surface; not proven by this paper.
  • domain assumption The normalized tunneling conductance L(r,V) is a fair proxy for the surface LDOS at energy E_F + eV.
    Standard STM assumption used in Methods and throughout; tip artifacts are mitigated by normalization but not eliminated.
  • domain assumption The spin structures for Phases II-V reported by Yoshimochi et al. are accurate inputs for the model.
    Table II reproduces these structures; if they are incorrect, the dot-product model comparison fails. Authors overlap with the present paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The LDOS at a bond-centered site depends on the nearest-neighbor spin-spin dot product, with negative anisotropic kernels.
    Adopted after ruling out TMR and TAMR in the main text; this is the central model ansatz and is not derived from a Hamiltonian.
  • ad hoc to paper Fourier components at QA+QB that appear in W(r) but not in L(r) are model shortcomings rather than disqualifying mismatches.
    Supplementary Information Sec. IX lists possible sources but does not resolve the discrepancy; the paper proceeds with the model despite it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Intra-unit-cell resolved intertwining of multi-$Q$ charge and spin textures in an itinerant skyrmion magnet." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2ZGAZE6S

@misc{pith2026260805528,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Intra-unit-cell resolved intertwining of multi-$Q$ charge and spin textures in an itinerant skyrmion magnet},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2ZGAZE6S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05528}
}
abstract

The mechanisms stabilizing non-collinear magnetism in centrosymmetric crystals remain unclear, but likely involve spin-spin interactions mediated by itinerant electrons, such as the RKKY interaction. Finite-$Q$ magnetic order may then be accompanied by electronic modulations that are observable using a scanning tunneling microscope. In five successive magnetic phases of GdRu$_{2}$Ge$_{2}$, including two nano-scale skyrmion crystal phases, we show that multi-$Q$ magnetism among Gd 4$f$ spins entails a corresponding multi-$Q$ texture among the Ru 4$d$ orbitals that contribute itinerant electron bands. With atomically-resolved images of each electronic texture's motif, and a simple numerical modeling scheme drawing on the underlying spin structures, we infer their key relationship: The alignment between nearest-neighbor Gd spins tightly correlates with the local density-of-states of the Ru 4$d$ orbitals on the two bond-centered sublattices of the Gd square net. These analyses offer a microscopic view of the atomic-scale intertwining of charge and spin degrees-of-freedom in non-collinear itinerant magnets.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dzyaloshinskii,A thermodynamic theory of “weak” ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics.J

    I. Dzyaloshinskii,A thermodynamic theory of “weak” ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics.J. Phys. Chem. Solids4, 241–255 (1958).https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0022-3697(58)90076-3

    work page 1958

  2. [2]

    (c) Fourier spectra ˜FQ[W(r)] obtained using the same processes as for the measuredL(r) data as shown in Fig. 4. is shown and discussed in the Supplementary Informa- tion, Sec. IX. DISCUSSION The observations presented above show that the series of multi-Qmagnetic phases in GdRu 2Ge2 are accompa- nied by corresponding multi-Qpatterns in the LDOS at an ene...

    work page

  3. [3]

    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.Science323, 915–919 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1166767

    doi:10.1126/science.1166767 2009

  4. [4]

    Moriya,Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism.Phys

    T. Moriya,Anisotropic Superexchange Interaction and Weak Ferromagnetism.Phys. Rev.120, 91–98 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.120.91

    doi:10.1103/physrev.120.91 1960

  5. [5]

    Heinze, K

    S. Heinze, K. von Bergmann, M. Menzel, J. Brede, A Ku- betzka, R. Wiesendanger, G. Bihlmayer, and S. Bl¨ ugel, Spontaneous atomic-scale magnetic skyrmion lattice in two dimensions.Nature Physics7, 713–718 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2045

    doi:10.1038/nphys2045 2011

  6. [6]

    X. Z. Yu, Y. Onose, N. Kanazawa, J. H. Park, J. H. Han, Y. Matsui, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura,Real-space observation of a two-dimensional skyrmion crystal.Na- ture465, 901–904 (2010).https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature09124

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    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 lat- tice with a giant topological Hall effect in a frustrated triangular-lattice magnet.Science365, 914–918 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau0968

    doi:10.1126/science.aau0968 2019

  8. [8]

    N. D. Khanh, T. Nakajima, X. Yu, S. Gao, K. Shi- bata, M. Hirschberger, Y. Yamasaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, L. Peng, K. Nakajima, R. Takagi, T. Arima, Y. Tokura, and S. Seki,Nanometric square skyrmion lattice in a centrosymmetric tetragonal magnet.Nature Nan- otechnology15, 444–449 (2015).https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41565-020-0684-7

    work page 2015

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Ishiwata, T

    S. Ishiwata, T. Nakajima, J.-H. Kim, D. S. In- osov, N. Kanazawa, J. S. White, J. L. Gavilano, R. Georgii, K. M. Seemann, G. Brandt, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, S. Seki, Y. Tokunga, M. Kinoshita, Y. W. Long, Y. Kaneko, Y. Taguchi, T. Arima, B. Keimer, and Y. Tokura,Emergent to...

    2020

  2. [10]

    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 kagom´ e lat- tice.Nature Co...

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    Takagi, N

    R. Takagi, N. Matsuyama, V. Ukleev, L. Yu, J. S. White, S. Francoual, J. R. L. Mardegan, S. Hayami, H. Saito, K. Kaneko, K. Ohishi, Y. Onuki, T.-h. Arima, Y. Tokura, T. Nakajima, and S. Seki,Square and rhombic lattices of magnetic skyrmions in a centrosymmetric binary com- pou...

    2022 doi

  4. [12]

    S. Gao, H. D. Rosales, F. A. G. Albarrac ´ ın, V. Tsurkan, G. Kaur, T. Fennell, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, P. ˇCerm´ ak, A. Schneidewind, E. Ressouche, D. C. Cabra, C. R¨ uegg, and O. Zaharko,Fractional antiferromag- netic skyrmion lattice induced by anisotropic couplings. Nature5...

    2020

  5. [13]

    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).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.017206

    2012 doi

  6. [15]

    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).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.103.104408

    2021 doi

  7. [16]

    A. O. Leonov and M. Mostovoy,Multiply periodic states and isolated skyrmions in an anisotropic frustrated mag- net.Nature Communications6, 8275 (2015).https: //doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9275

    2015 doi

  8. [17]

    Nomoto, T

    T. Nomoto, T. Koretsune, and R. Arita,Formation Mechanism of the HelicalQStructure in Gd-Based Skyrmion Materials.Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 117204 (2020).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125. 117204

    2020 doi

  9. [18]

    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).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.93.064430

    2016 doi

  10. [19]

    Hayami, R

    S. Hayami, R. Ozawa, and Y. Motome,Effective bilinear- biquadratic model for noncoplanar ordering in itinerant magnets.Phys. Rev. B95, 224424 (2017).https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.224424

    2017 doi

  11. [20]

    D. S. Inosov, D. V. Evtushinsky, A. Koitzch, V. B. Zabolotnyy, S. V. Borisenko, A. A. Kordyuk, M. Frontzek, M. Loewenhaupt, W. L¨ oser, I. Mazilu, H. Bit- terlich, G. Behr, J.-U. Hoffmann, R. Follath, and B. B¨ uchner,Electronic Structure and Nesting-Driven En- hancement of th...

    2009 doi

  12. [21]

    Z. Wang, Y. Su, S.-Z. Lin, and C. D. Batista,Skyrmion Crystal from RKKY Interaction Mediated by 2D Electron Gas.Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 207201 (2020).https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.207201

    2020 doi

  13. [22]

    Ozawa, S

    R. Ozawa, S. Hayami, and Y. Motome,Zero-Field Skyrmions with a High Topological Number in Itinerant Magnets.Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 147205 (2017).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.147205

    2017 doi

  14. [23]

    Mitsumoto and H

    K. Mitsumoto and H. Kawamura,Replica symmetry breaking in the RKKY skyrmion-crystal system.Phys. Rev. B104, 184432 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevB.104.184432

    2021

  15. [24]

    Yasui, C

    Y. Yasui, C. J. Butler, N. D. Khanh, S. Hayami, T. Nomoto, T. Hanaguri, Y. Motome, R. Arita, T. Arima, Y. Tokura, and S. Seki,Imaging the coupling between itinerant electrons and localised moments in the centrosymmetric skyrmion magnet GdRu2Si2.Nature Communications11, 5925 (2...

    2020

  16. [26]

    Hayami and Y

    S. Hayami and Y. Motome,Square skyrmion crystal in centrosymmetric itinerant magnetsPhys. Rev. B103, 024439 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB. 103.024439

    2021 doi

  17. [27]

    Bouaziz, E

    J. Bouaziz, E. Mendive-Tapla, S. Bl¨ ugel, and J. B. Staunton,Fermi-Surface Origin of Skyrmion Lattices in Centrosymmetric Rare-Earth Intermetallics.Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 157206 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.128.157206

    2022

  18. [28]

    Hayami and Y

    S. Hayami and Y. Motome,Topological spin crystals by itinerant frustration.J. Phys.: Condens. Matter33, 443001 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-648X/ ac1a30

    2021 doi

  19. [29]

    Y. Dong, Y. Kinoshita, M. Ochi, R. Nakachi, R. Hi- gashinaka, S. Hayami, Y. Wan, Y. Arai, S. Huh, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, M. Tokunaga, Y. Aoji, T. D. Mat- suda, and T. Kondo,Pseudogap and Fermi arc induced by Fermi surface nesting in a centrosymmetric skyrmion magnet.Science388, ...

    2025 doi

  20. [30]

    Y. Dong, Y. Arai, K. Kuroda, M. Ochi, N. Tanaka, Y. Wan, M. D. Watson, T. K. Kim, C. Cacho, M. Hashimoto, D. Lu, Y. Aoji, T. D. Matsuda, and T. Kondo,Fermi Surface Nesting Driving the RKKY Interaction in the Centrosymmetric Skyrmion Magnet Gd2PdSi3.Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 016401 ...

    2024 doi

  21. [31]

    D. N. Rathnaweera, X. Huai, K. R. Kumar, Y. Wang, J. Schlesinger, C. J. Bartel, S. Tewari, M. J. Winiarski, R. Dronskowski, and T. T. Tran,Antibonding and electronic instabilities in GdRu 2X2 (X = Si, Ge, and Sn): a new pathway toward developing centrosymmetric skyrmion materi...

    2026 doi

  22. [33]

    Julli` ere,Tunneling between ferromagnetic films.Phys

    M. Julli` ere,Tunneling between ferromagnetic films.Phys. Lett. A54, 225–226 (1975).https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0375-9601(75)90174-7

    1975

  23. [34]

    and non-collinear magneto-resistance (NCMR) ef- fects [35, 36]. These phenomena are distinct from TMR because they impact the conductance not through vary- ing tunneling probabilities, but rather through the vari- ation of the spin-integrated DOS or LDOS intrinsic to a junctio...

  24. [35]

    Spethmann, N

    J. Spethmann, N. D. Khanh, H. Yoshimochi, R. Takagi, S. Hayami, Y. Motome, R. Wiesendanger, S. Seki, and K. von Bergmann,SP-STM study of the multi-Q phases in GdRu2Si2.Phys. Rev. Mater.8, 064404 (2024).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.8.064404

    2024 doi

  25. [36]

    Gould, C

    C. Gould, C. R¨ uster, T. Jungwirth, E. Girgis, G. M. Schott, R. Giraud, K. Brunner, G. Schmidt, and L. W. Molenkamp,Tunneling Anisotropic Mag- netoresistance: A Spin-Valve-LikeTunnel Magnetore- sistance Using a Single Magnetic Layer.Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 117203 (2004).https://d...

    2004

  26. [37]

    Hanneken, F

    C. Hanneken, F. Otte, A. Kubetzka, B. Dup´ e, N. Rom- ming, K. von Bergmann, R. Wiesendanger, and S. Heinze,Electrical detection of magnetic skyrmions by tunnelling non-collinear magnetoresistance.Nature Nan- otechnology10, 1039–1042 (2015).https://doi.org/ 10.1038/nnano.2015.218

    2015 doi

  27. [38]

    Kubetzka, C

    A. Kubetzka, C. Hanneken, R. Wiesendanger, and K. von Bergmann,Impact of the skyrmion spin texture on mag- netoresistance.Phys. Rev. B95, 104433 (2017).https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.104433

    2017 doi

  28. [39]

    Hayami and Y

    S. Hayami and Y. Motome,Charge density waves in multiple-Q spin states.Phys. Rev. B104, 144404 (2021). 10 https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.144404

    2021 doi

  29. [41]

    Sarkar, R

    S. Sarkar, R. Pathak, A. Mukherjee, A. Delin, O. Eriks- son, and V. Borisov,Magnetic exchange and dipolar in- teractions in GdRu 2Si2: Three-dimensional magnetism in a layered magnet.Phys. Rev. B112, 144414 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/q853-plvr

    2025 doi

  30. [42]

    Hanaguri,Development of high-field STM and its application to the study on magnetically tuned critical- ity in Sr 3Ru2O7.J

    T. Hanaguri,Development of high-field STM and its application to the study on magnetically tuned critical- ity in Sr 3Ru2O7.J. Phys. Conf. Ser.51, 514 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/51/1/117

    2006 doi

  31. [43]

    Kohsaka, C

    Y. Kohsaka, C. Taylor, K. Fujita, A. Schmidt, C. Lupien, T. Hanaguri, M. Azuma, M. Takano, H. Eisaki, H. Tak- agi, S. Uchida, and J. C. Davis,An intrinsic bond- centered electronic glass with unidirectional domains in underdoped cuprates.Science315, 1380–1385 (2007). https://d...

    2007 doi

  32. [44]

    A. J. Macdonald, Y.-S. Tremblay-Johnston, S. Grothe, S. Chi, P. Dosanjh, S. Johnston, and S. A. Burke,Dispers- ing artifacts in FT-STS: a comparison of set point effects across acquisition modes.Nanotechnology27, 414004 (2016).doi:10.1088/0957-4484/27/41/414004

    2016 doi

  33. [45]

    K. M. Thyng, C. A. Greene, R. D. Hetland, H. M. Zim- merle, and S. F. DiMarco,True Colors of Oceanography: Guidelines for Effective and Accurate Colormap Selec- tion.Oceanography29, 9–13 (2016).https://doi.org/ 10.5670/oceanog.2016.66 Supplementary Information for ‘Intra-unit-...

    2016 doi

  34. [46]

    Perform a two-dimensional Gaussian fit to the Bragg peaks in the simultaneously acquired topog- raphy, obtaining provisional coordinates forGa and Gb

  35. [47]

    Make an initial guess for the complete set ofq-space vectorsQusing the estimates ofq 1 andq 2 listed in Table I

  36. [48]

    Improve upon this initial guess using a Markov chain Monte Carlo-inspired gradient-ascent algo- rithm. This works as follows: (a) Take a small Gaussian random step in the six- dimensional space formed byG a,x,G a,y,G b,x, Gb,y,q 1 andq 2, (b) Generate a new set of wavevectors ...

    2000

  37. [49]

    Having arrived close to the configuration ofQthat maximizes the total Fourier amplitude, return the final Fourier spectrumF Q[L(r)]

  38. [50]

    Results of this procedure applied to a single measure- ment, i.e

    Move on to the nextL(r) image in the series and repeat. Results of this procedure applied to a single measure- ment, i.e. for both the simultaneously acquired topog- raphy,F Q[Z(r)] and for the conductance,F Q[L(r)], are shown in Figs. S4(a) and S4(b). C. Phase-referencing of ...

  39. [51]

    The spin structures underpinning the construction ofW(r) maps are inaccurate,

  40. [52]

    The dot product scheme does not fully capture the physics controlling the LDOS weight at each bond (certainly true),

  41. [53]

    The kernel functions that represent the contribu- tion to the LDOS at each bond are poorly designed. Of these possibilities, the third can be easily dismissed: As long as the kernel functions remain realistically sim- ple, they cannot generate new Fourier components in the con...

  42. [54]

    M. J. H¨ ytch, E. Snoeck, and R. Kilaas,Quanti- tative measurement of displacement and strain fields from HREM micrographs.Ultramicroscopy74, 131– 146 (1998).https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3991(98) 00035-7

    1998 doi

  43. [55]

    M. J. Lawler, K. Fujita, J. Lee, A. R. Schmidt, Y. Kohsaka, C. K. Kim, H. Eisaki, S. Uchida, J. C. Davis, J. P. Sentha, and E.-A. Kim,Intra-unit-cell elec- 12 tronic nematicity of the high-T c copper-oxide pseudogap states.Nature466, 347–351 (2010).https://doi.org/ 10.1038/nature09169

    2010 doi

  44. [56]

    C. J. Butler, Y. Kohsaka, Y. Yamakawa, M. S. Bahramy, S. Onari, H. Kontani, T. Hanaguri, and S. Shamoto, Correlation-driven electronic nematicity in the Dirac semimetal BaNiS2.119(49), e2212730119 (2022).https: //doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2212730119

    2022 doi

  45. [57]

    Yoshimochi, R

    H. Yoshimochi, R. Takagi, J. Ju, N. D. Khanh, H. Saito, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, S. Itoh, Y. Tokura, T. Arima, S. Hayami, T. Nakajima, and S. Seki,Multistep topological transitions among meron and skyrmion crystals in a centrosymmetric magnet.Na- ture Physics20, 1001–1008 (2024)...

    2024 doi

  46. [58]

    Hayami, T

    S. Hayami, T. Okubo, and Y. Motome,Phase shift in skyrmion crystals.Nature Communica- tions12, 6927 (2021).https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-021-27083-0

    2021

  47. [59]

    Taguchi, Y

    Y. Taguchi, Y. Oohara, H. Yoshizawa, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura,Spin chirality, Berry phase, and anomalous Hall effect in a frustrated ferromagnet.Science291, 2573 (2001).https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1058161

    2001 doi

  48. [60]

    Taguchi and Y

    Y. Taguchi and Y. Tokura,Enhancement of anomalous Hall effect in a filling-changed pyrochlore-type molybdate. Europhys. Lett.54, 401 (2001).https://doi.org/10. 1209/epl/i2001-00255-3

    2001

  49. [61]

    Tokura and N

    Y. Tokura and N. Kanazawa,Magnetic skyrmion mate- rials.Chem. Rev.121, 2857 (2020).https://doi.org/ 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00297

    2020 doi

  50. [62]

    N. D. Khanh, T. Nakajima, S. Hayami, S. Gao, Y. Ya- masaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, R. Takagi, Y. Motome, Y. Tokura, T.-h. Arima, and S. Seki,Zoology of multiple- Qspin textures in a centrosymmetric tetragonal mag- net with itinerant electrons.Adv. Sci.9, 2105452 (2022). https:...

    2022 doi

  51. [63]

    G. D. A. Wood, D. D. Khalyavin, D. A. Mayoh, J. Bouaziz, A. E. Hall, S. J. R. Holt, F. Orlandi, P. Manuel, S. Bl¨ ugel, J. B. Staunton, O. A. Petrenko, M. R. Lees, and G. Balakrishnan,Double-Q ground state with topo- logical charge stripes in the centrosymmetric skyrmion candi...

    2023 doi

  52. [64]

    Spethmann, N

    J. Spethmann, N. D. Khanh, H. Yoshimochi, R. Takagi, S. Hayami, Y. Motome, R. Wiesendanger, S. Seki, and K. von Bergmann,SP-STM study of the multi-Q phases in GdRu 2Si2.Physical Review Materials8, 064404 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials. 8.064404

    2024 doi

Pith tools

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