Current-induced motion of nanoscale magnetic torons
over the wide range of the Hall angle

Kotaro Shimizu RIKEN Center for Emergent Matter Science, Saitama 351-0198, Japan    Shun Okumura Department of Applied Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan    Yasuyuki Kato Department of Applied Physics, University of Fukui, Fukui 910-8507, Japan    Yukitoshi Motome Department of Applied Physics, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan
(July 3, 2024)
Abstract

Current-driven dynamics of spin textures plays a pivotal role in potential applications for electronic devices. While two-dimensional magnetic skyrmions with topologically nontrivial spin textures have garnered significant interest, their practical use is hindered by the skyrmion Hall effect — a transverse motion to the current direction that occurs as a counteraction to the topological Hall effect of electrons by an emergent magnetic field arising from the Berry phase effect. Here, we explore current-driven dynamics of three-dimensional topological spin textures known as magnetic torons, composed of layered skyrmions with two singularities called Bloch points at their ends. Through extensive numerical simulations, we show that the torons also exhibit a Hall motion, but surprisingly over a wide range spanning from the zero Hall effect, a purely longitudinal motion, to the perfect Hall effect, a purely transverse motion accompanied by no longitudinal motion. Such flexible and controllable behaviors stem from anisotropic potential barriers on the discrete lattice, which can be particularly relevant for nanoscale torons recently discovered. Our results not only provide an experimental method to probe topology of three-dimensional magnetic textures but also pave the way for future developments in topological spintronics beyond the realm of skyrmions.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Schematic illustrations of the topological spin textures and their drift motions driven by an electron flow. a Real-space spin configuration of a skyrmion and the skyrmion Hall effect. The small arrows represent the spins and their color displays the z𝑧zitalic_z component (see the inset). Skyrmions show a transverse drift motion as well as a longitudinal one with the velocity 𝐯𝐯\mathbf{v}bold_v as a reaction to the topological Hall effect in the electron flow 𝐣~esubscript~𝐣𝑒\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. b Real-space spin configurations of a magnetic toron, given by a pair of hedgehog (magenta sphere) and antihedgehog (cyan sphere) connected by the skyrmion string (gray line) (left). Corresponding real-space distribution of the stream of the EMF (right). The hedgehog and antihedgehog correspond to a source and sink of the EMF, respectively. c Toron Hall effect. A magnetic toron shows a transverse drift motion similar to the skyrmion Hall effect. The blue wavy surface represents the potential for the torons from a discrete lattice structure. d Perfect toron Hall effect. Torons exhibit only a transverse motion without longitudinal one because of strong one-dimensional anisotropy in the lattice potential. e Zero toron Hall effect. Torons exhibit only a longitudinal motion accompanied by no transverse motion. The left and right panels correspond to the situations realized in Figs. 3d,e and 3ac, respectively.

Research in the field of topological spin textures has opened a new era for electronics and spintronics by leveraging the synergy between electronic and magnetic properties through topology. Of particular interest are two-dimensional magnetic skyrmions with swirling spin textures characterized by a topological invariant called the skyrmion number (Fig. 1a). The skyrmion was originally hypothesized in the field of particle physics [1, 2], and later theoretically predicted to be realized in chiral magnets [3, 4, 5, 6] and actually observed in experiments in a form of a triangular array [7, 8]. Owing to their inherent topological stability, skyrmions have drawn attention as entirely new information carriers in next-generation spintronic devices. They also offer a significant advantage in terms of energy consumption, as they can be driven at much lower electric current densities [9]. However, the current-driven skyrmions exhibit a transverse motion relative to the current direction, known as the skyrmion Hall effect [9, 10, 11, 12]. This is caused by the Magnus force as a counteraction to the topological Hall effect of electrons, as schematically shown in Fig. 1a, arising from the emergent magnetic field (EMF) by the Berry phase effect, 𝐛(𝐫)𝐛𝐫\mathbf{b}(\mathbf{r})bold_b ( bold_r ), given by bi(𝐫)=12ϵijk𝐒(𝐫)(j𝐒(𝐫)×k𝐒(𝐫))subscript𝑏𝑖𝐫12subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖𝑗𝑘𝐒𝐫subscript𝑗𝐒𝐫subscript𝑘𝐒𝐫b_{i}(\mathbf{r})=\frac{1}{2}\epsilon_{ijk}\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r})\cdot(% \partial_{j}\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r})\times\partial_{k}\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r}))italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_r ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S ( bold_r ) ⋅ ( ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S ( bold_r ) × ∂ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S ( bold_r ) ), where ϵijksubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖𝑗𝑘\epsilon_{ijk}italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the Levi-Civita symbol and 𝐒(𝐫)𝐒𝐫\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r})bold_S ( bold_r ) represents the spin at spatial position 𝐫𝐫\mathbf{r}bold_r [13, 14]. This lateral motion presents challenges in device applications of magnetic skyrmions, although various strategies have been proposed, such as utilizing antiferromagnetic skyrmions that do not exhibit the skyrmion Hall effect [15, 16].

In three-dimensional space, skyrmions manifest as string-like structures, stacked in the out-of-plane direction. This skyrmion string may terminate in some cases, and at these endpoints, unique three-dimensional topological spin textures emerge. They are known as the Bloch points and were observed by using 3D tomographic imaging techniques [17, 18, 19, 20]. These Bloch points are also characterized by a topological invariant Qmsubscript𝑄mQ_{\mathrm{m}}italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT called the monopole charge, which is defined by a surface integral of the EMF 𝐛(𝐫)𝐛𝐫\mathbf{b}(\mathbf{r})bold_b ( bold_r ) on a sphere surrounding the Bloch point, and classified into two types depending on the sign of the monopole charge: magnetic hedgehogs and antihedgehogs with positive and negative monopole charges, respectively [14, 21]. They typically appear in pairs at both ends of a skyrmion string and such a pair is called the magnetic toron (Fig. 1b[22]. Unlike skyrmions, the hedgehogs and antihedgehogs have singularities with vanishing spin length at their cores, which can be regarded as sources and sinks in terms of the EMF, thus acting as emergent magnetic monopoles and antimonopoles, respectively.

Recent experiments have demonstrated that such magnetic torons are stabilized by forming periodic arrangements called the hedgehog lattices (HLs) in chiral magnets MnSi1-xGex [23, 24, 25, 26] and a nonchiral magnet SrFeO3 [27]. Notably, these HLs have remarkably short magnetic pitches, with hedgehogs and antihedgehogs spanning only a few nanometers in size, suggesting a giant EMF around them caused by a strong twist of the spin textures. Due to the EMF as well as the topological robustness, Bloch points are expected to exhibit peculiar electromagnetic responses like skyrmions, but their current-driven dynamics remains largely unexplored, except for an isolated Bloch point or toron in the long-wavelength limit [28, 29]. Given that smaller texture sizes are preferable for EMF-based devices, it is imperative to investigate the current-driven dynamics of these short-pitch HLs to advance future spintronic devices beyond the capabilities of skyrmions.

Here, we examine the responses of nanoscale magnetic torons to an applied electric current by extensive numerical simulations. We show that, similar to skyrmions, the torons exhibit a Hall motion, which we call the toron Hall effect (Fig. 1c). Strikingly, we discover that the toron Hall effect can be controlled by the electric current and the magnetic field in a wide range including two extremes: a purely transverse motion without any longitudinal one (perfect toron Hall effect; Fig. 1d) and an exclusively longitudinal motion with no transverse one (zero toron Hall effect; Fig. 1e). These unique behaviors stem from the modulation of potential barriers on the discrete lattice, which is particularly relevant for the nanoscale torons realized in experiments. Furthermore, we reveal that the responses to the current act as efficient electrical probes for topological characteristics hidden behind the spin textures that are challenging to observe experimentally.

Toron Hall effect

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Hedgehog lattice and topological transition in the magnetic field. a-c Real-space spin configurations and distributions of magnetic torons in the 3Q𝑄Qitalic_Q-HL with Nt=4subscript𝑁t4N_{\mathrm{t}}=4italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 at H=0𝐻0H=0italic_H = 0 (a), the 3Q𝑄Qitalic_Q-HL with Nt=2subscript𝑁t2N_{\mathrm{t}}=2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 at H=0.3𝐻0.3H=0.3italic_H = 0.3 (b), and the topologically-trivial 2Q2𝑄2Q2 italic_Q state with Nt=0subscript𝑁t0N_{\mathrm{t}}=0italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 at H=1.0𝐻1.0H=1.0italic_H = 1.0 (c). Here, Ntsubscript𝑁tN_{\mathrm{t}}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the total number of the torons in the MUC represented by the black cubes. The graphical notations are common to those in Fig. 1. The lower bar displays the phase diagram while increasing the magnetic field H𝐻Hitalic_H. d-g Real-space distributions of the magnetic torons within the MUC for the ground state at H=0𝐻0H=0italic_H = 0 (d), H=0.3𝐻0.3H=0.3italic_H = 0.3 (e), H=0.45𝐻0.45H=0.45italic_H = 0.45 (f), and H=0.6𝐻0.6H=0.6italic_H = 0.6 (g). Here, dtsubscript𝑑td_{\mathrm{t}}italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the length of the skyrmion string in the y𝑦yitalic_y direction. As H𝐻Hitalic_H increases, the hedgehogs and antihedgehogs approach each other along the skyrmion strings (d-f), and half of them disappear with pair annihilation at the transition at H=Htopo0.465𝐻subscript𝐻toposimilar-to-or-equals0.465H=H_{\rm topo}\simeq 0.465italic_H = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_topo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0.465 (f,g).
Refer to caption
Figure 3: Toron Hall effect. a,b The velocities of spin textures for the longitudinal (a) and transverse motions (b) under the electron flow in the x𝑥xitalic_x direction (𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG) on the plane of the magnetic field H𝐻Hitalic_H and the current density j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The white lines represent the threshold current densities, j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (a) and j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (b). The dashed and solid gray vertical lines denote the values of H𝐻Hitalic_H where dtsubscript𝑑td_{\mathrm{t}}italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Ntsubscript𝑁tN_{\mathrm{t}}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT show discontinuous changes, respectively; see Fig. 2. c The Hall angle of the drift motion, θHallsubscript𝜃Hall\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [Eq. (1)]. In the black and white regions, the torons exhibit the zero and perfect Hall effects, respectively, while they are immobile in the gray region. d,e The velocities of spin textures for the longitudinal (d) and transverse (e) motions under the electron flow in the y𝑦yitalic_y direction (𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG). The latter is always zero in this parameter region, meaning that the zero toron Hall effect always occurs for j~e>j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e}>\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (above the white curve in d). vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT cannot be defined in the gray area. f j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT dependence of θHallsubscript𝜃Hall\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at three representative values of H𝐻Hitalic_H for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\mathbf{x}}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG (top) and 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\mathbf{y}}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG (bottom). For 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\mathbf{x}}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG, the perfect toron Hall effect with θHall=π/2subscript𝜃Hall𝜋2\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=\pi/2italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_π / 2 occurs for small 𝐣~esubscript~𝐣𝑒\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and it can be switched to the zero toron Hall effect with θHall=0subscript𝜃Hall0\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=0italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 by increasing j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at H=0.3𝐻0.3H=0.3italic_H = 0.3. In contrast, for 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\mathbf{y}}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG, only the zero toron Hall effect with θHall=0subscript𝜃Hall0\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=0italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 is observed.
Refer to caption
Figure 4: Potential barrier for magnetic torons. a,b Energy change per site, ΔEΔ𝐸\Delta Eroman_Δ italic_E, for an in-plane spatial translation of the 3Q𝑄Qitalic_Q-HL by 𝚫𝐫=(Δx,Δy,0)𝚫𝐫Δ𝑥Δ𝑦0\bm{\Delta}\mathbf{r}=(\Delta x,\Delta y,0)bold_Δ bold_r = ( roman_Δ italic_x , roman_Δ italic_y , 0 ) measured from that for the ground state at H=0𝐻0H=0italic_H = 0 (a) and H=0.5𝐻0.5H=0.5italic_H = 0.5 (b). The potential is equivalent in the x𝑥xitalic_x and y𝑦yitalic_y directions at H=0𝐻0H=0italic_H = 0, while it becomes almost one-dimensional at H=0.5𝐻0.5H=0.5italic_H = 0.5. The gray dashed lines denote the intersections of the xy𝑥𝑦xyitalic_x italic_y plane and the unit cubes composed of the lattice sites. ΔEΔ𝐸\Delta Eroman_Δ italic_E along the red and green dashed lines as well as the definitions of the potential barriers Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are presented in the top and right panels, respectively. c H𝐻Hitalic_H dependence of the potential barriers in the direction of μ𝜇\muitalic_μ, Vμsubscript𝑉𝜇V_{\mu}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The behaviors of Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT qualitatively explain those of the threshold current densities of vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG and 𝐲^^𝐲\hat{\bf y}over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG in Figs. 3a and 3d, respectively.

To elucidate the current-induced dynamics of magnetic torons, we consider a spin model for a metallic chiral magnet on a simple cubic lattice, and perform a real-time simulation in an electric current based on the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation. The model includes effective interactions of Ruderman-Kittel-Kasuya-Yosida and Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya (DM) types, which has been shown to approximately reproduce the HLs discovered in MnSi1-xGex [30, 31, 32] (see Methods). In the absence of the electric current, the model stabilizes a HL represented by the superposition of three spin density waves, called the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL, at zero magnetic field (Fig. 2a) (see Supplementary Note 1). The magnetic unit cell (MUC) contains eight Bloch points (hedgehogs and antihedgehogs), which are connected in four pairs by the skyrmion strings (Fig. 2d); namely, there are four torons denoted as Nt=4subscript𝑁t4N_{\mathrm{t}}=4italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4. In the magnetic field applied in the z𝑧zitalic_z direction, H𝐻Hitalic_H, the hedgehogs and antihedgehogs move toward each other along the skyrmion strings (Figs. 2e,f), and the half of them disappear with pair annihilation at H=Htopo0.465𝐻subscript𝐻toposimilar-to-or-equals0.465H=H_{\mathrm{topo}}\simeq 0.465italic_H = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_topo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0.465, leading to the topological transition to the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL with Nt=2subscript𝑁t2N_{\mathrm{t}}=2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 (Figs. 2b,g). By further increasing H𝐻Hitalic_H, the system turns into a 2Q2𝑄2Q2 italic_Q state at H=Hc0.935𝐻subscript𝐻csimilar-to-or-equals0.935H=H_{\mathrm{c}}\simeq 0.935italic_H = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0.935, which is topologically trivial with no Bloch points (Nt=0)N_{\rm t}=0)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 ) (Fig. 2c).

Let us first discuss drift motions caused by an electron flow 𝐣~esubscript~𝐣𝑒\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the x𝑥xitalic_x direction perpendicular to the skyrmion strings (see Methods). We find that the magnetic torons exhibit a transverse motion to the electron flow due to the Magnus force as well as a longitudinal one over the wide range of the HL phases under the magnetic field. We call this the toron Hall effect. Remarkably, however, the velocities of the longitudinal and transverse motions, vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, respectively, show largely different and complicated dependences on H𝐻Hitalic_H and j~e=|𝐣~e|subscript~𝑗𝑒subscript~𝐣𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}=|\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}|over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = | over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT |. Figures 3a and 3b summarize vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, respectively, on the H𝐻Hitalic_H-j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT plane. The longitudinal motion occurs above a certain threshold current density j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT represented by the white curve; j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT overall increases with H𝐻Hitalic_H, except significant reduction near the topological transition at Htopo0.465similar-to-or-equalssubscript𝐻topo0.465H_{\mathrm{topo}}\simeq 0.465italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_topo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0.465. Above j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT monotonically increases with j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Meanwhile, the transverse motion also occurs above a threshold j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, but it shows a sharp dip at H0.225similar-to-or-equals𝐻0.225H\simeq 0.225italic_H ≃ 0.225 and becomes vanishingly small for HHtopogreater-than-or-equivalent-to𝐻subscript𝐻topoH\gtrsim H_{\mathrm{topo}}italic_H ≳ italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_topo end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The dip corresponds to a shortening of the skyrmion strings (Fig. 2); we will discuss this later. In addition, vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT exhibits nonmonotonic behavior while increasing j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT across j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT; most significantly, around H=0.3𝐻0.3H=0.3italic_H = 0.3, it becomes nonzero above j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, but vanishes for j~e>j~e,c0.12\tilde{j}_{e}>\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}\sim 0.12over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 0.12. We also note that vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes in the weak field region where H0.2less-than-or-similar-to𝐻0.2H\lesssim 0.2italic_H ≲ 0.2 in this range of j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT due to the weak Magnus force stemming from small EMF (see Supplementary Note 1).

These distinct behaviors of vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT indicate that the system exhibits the toron Hall effect in a wide range including two extreme limits. One is a purely transverse motion without any longitudinal one (v=0subscript𝑣parallel-to0v_{\parallel}=0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 and v0subscript𝑣perpendicular-to0v_{\perp}\neq 0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0), appearing in the region where j~e,c<j~e<j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}<\tilde{j}_{e}<\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We call this the perfect toron Hall effect. The other is opposite: a purely longitudinal motion accompanied with no transverse one (v0subscript𝑣parallel-to0v_{\parallel}\neq 0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0 and v=0subscript𝑣perpendicular-to0v_{\perp}=0italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0), occurring in the region where vsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tov_{\perp}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes despite j~e>j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e}>\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We call this the zero toron Hall effect. These two extreme behaviors can be explicitly visualized by plotting the Hall angle defined by

θHall=arctan(vv),subscript𝜃Hallsubscript𝑣perpendicular-tosubscript𝑣parallel-to\displaystyle\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=\arctan\left(\frac{v_{\perp}}{v_{\parallel% }}\right),italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_arctan ( divide start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) , (1)

which represents the net direction of the drift motion with respect to the electron flow (Fig. 3c). The perfect and zero toron Hall effects correspond to θHall=π/2subscript𝜃Hall𝜋2\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=\pi/2italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_π / 2 and θHall=0subscript𝜃Hall0\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}=0italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, respectively, shown by the white and black regions. The former occurs in the wide range of H0.2greater-than-or-equivalent-to𝐻0.2H\gtrsim 0.2italic_H ≳ 0.2, especially for small j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL with Nt=2subscript𝑁t2N_{\mathrm{t}}=2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 after the topological transition, while the latter appears in the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL with Nt=4subscript𝑁t4N_{\mathrm{t}}=4italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 for j~e>j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e}>\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Notably, one can achieve the zero toron Hall effect over a wider range of H𝐻Hitalic_H and j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT simply by changing the current direction. We demonstrate this by taking the electron flow in the y𝑦yitalic_y direction along the skyrmion strings (𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG). In this case also, the longitudinal motion occurs above nonzero threshold j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (Fig. 3d); j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT shows a different H𝐻Hitalic_H dependence from the 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG case with characteristic dip structures, which will be discussed later. We note that vsubscript𝑣parallel-tov_{\parallel}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT cannot be defined in the 2Q2𝑄2Q2 italic_Q phase since the spin modulation in the y𝑦yitalic_y direction is absent (see Supplementary Note 1). In stark contrast, the transverse motion is not observed at all in this parameter region (Fig. 3e). Thus, with this current setting, the zero toron Hall effect appears in the entire region for j~e>j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e}>\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Our results show that the toron Hall effect is much more flexible than the skyrmion Hall effect. It can be controlled by the amplitudes and directions of the magnetic field and the electric current. Most strikingly, it includes two extremes, the zero and perfect toron Hall effects, which have never been reported in the skyrmion Hall effect. By choosing appropriate parameters, one can even achieve switching between the two extremes, as demonstrated in Fig. 3f: By increasing j~esubscript~𝑗𝑒\tilde{j}_{e}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG at H=0.3𝐻0.3H=0.3italic_H = 0.3, the perfect toron Hall effect is observed for 0.091j~e0.115less-than-or-similar-to0.091subscript~𝑗𝑒less-than-or-similar-to0.1150.091\lesssim\tilde{j}_{e}\lesssim 0.1150.091 ≲ over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≲ 0.115 (Supplementary Video 1), followed by the zero toron Hall effect for 0.115j~e0.181less-than-or-similar-to0.115subscript~𝑗𝑒less-than-or-similar-to0.1810.115\lesssim\tilde{j}_{e}\lesssim 0.1810.115 ≲ over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≲ 0.181 (Supplementary Video 2), and finally, the toron Hall effect with θHallπ5similar-tosubscript𝜃Hall𝜋5\theta_{\mathrm{Hall}}\sim\frac{\pi}{5}italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Hall end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 5 end_ARG appears for j~e0.181greater-than-or-equivalent-tosubscript~𝑗𝑒0.181\tilde{j}_{e}\gtrsim 0.181over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≳ 0.181 (Supplementary Video 3).

We note that the toron Hall effect vanishes when we turn off the DM-type interaction in our model for the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL (see Supplementary Note 5). Nonetheless, this does not mean that the toron Hall effect never occur in nonchiral magnets. In general, the net EMF can be nonzero even in nonchiral cases in the presence of spin-orbit coupling, leading to the topological Hall effect as observed in SrFeO3 [33], allowing the toron Hall effect as its counteraction.

Anisotropic potential barrier

The peculiar toron Hall effect originates from the energy potential for torons on the discrete lattice. Drift motions of nanoscale torons are strongly affected by the lattice discretization due to their short magnetic pitch and singular structures of constituting Bloch points. The magnetic field influences the spin textures, resulting in energy potential modulation in an anisotropic manner. This causes the different and complicated H𝐻Hitalic_H dependences of j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, as demonstrated below.

When H=0𝐻0H=0italic_H = 0, the energy potential for torons on the xy𝑥𝑦xyitalic_x italic_y plane is fourfold rotational symmetric reflecting the lattice symmetry (Fig. 4a). Here, we plot the energy increase per site ΔEΔ𝐸\Delta Eroman_Δ italic_E by shifting the spin texture with 𝚫𝐫=(Δx,Δy,0)𝚫𝐫Δ𝑥Δ𝑦0\bm{\Delta}\mathbf{r}=(\Delta x,\Delta y,0)bold_Δ bold_r = ( roman_Δ italic_x , roman_Δ italic_y , 0 ) from the ground state. The potential oscillates with the lattice period, and the heights of the potential barrier in the x𝑥xitalic_x and y𝑦yitalic_y directions are equivalent, Vx=Vysubscript𝑉𝑥subscript𝑉𝑦V_{x}=V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In this case, an electric current required for torons to overcome the potential barrier is equal for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG and 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG, resulting in j~e,c0.09\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}\simeq 0.09over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0.09 in both cases (Figs. 3a,d). By introducing H𝐻Hitalic_H, Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT increases but Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases; namely, the potential develops a one-dimensional anisotropy through the modulation of the spin texture, giving rise to different threshold current densities for the different current directions. Figure 4b represents an example at H=0.5𝐻0.5H=0.5italic_H = 0.5, where Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT almost vanishes. Such a highly anisotropic potential causes the unique drift motions including the zero and perfect toron Hall effects found above. On one hand, for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG, the longitudinal drift motion is hindered by large Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, while the transverse motion is easily driven with vanishingly small Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, resulting in j~e,c<j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}<\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This leads to the perfect toron Hall effect, as illustrated in Fig. 1d. On the other hand, for 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG, the longitudinal drift motion is caused by a small current density, while the transverse motion is largely suppressed, resulting in j~e,c<j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}<\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This brings about the zero toron Hall effect, as illustrated in the left panel of Fig. 1e. The zero toron Hall effect for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG in Fig. 3c is also caused by the anisotropic potential, but in more complicated competition between the longitudinal driving force from the electric current and the induced transverse Magnus force (the right panel of Fig. 1e).

Remarkably, the energy potential becomes almost one-dimensional (Vy0similar-to-or-equalssubscript𝑉𝑦0V_{y}\simeq 0italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≃ 0) in the entire 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL phase with Nt=2subscript𝑁t2N_{\mathrm{t}}=2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 after the topological transition (Fig. 4c). The origin of the vanishingly small Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT lies in the suppression of the higher harmonics of the spin structure factor in the y𝑦yitalic_y direction; the suppression beyond the Nyquist wave number makes the spin texture less susceptible to the lattice discretization (see Supplementary Note 2). It is worth noting that the H𝐻Hitalic_H dependences of the potential barriers qualitatively explain those of the critical current densities: Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT behaves as j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG (Fig. 3a), and Vysubscript𝑉𝑦V_{y}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG (Fig. 3b) and j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG (Fig. 3d) (for Vzsubscript𝑉𝑧V_{z}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, see Supplementary Note 3). This supports our argument based on the potential barrier on the discrete lattice. We note that Vxsubscript𝑉𝑥V_{x}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT does not follow the significant reduction of j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG near the topological transition in Fig. 3a, but this is accounted for by the Magnus force in the direction longitudinal to the current arising from the transverse drift motion of torons.

Probing hidden topology

Our results indicate that the H𝐻Hitalic_H dependences of the threshold current densities, j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, can be a sensitive probe of the topological transition with toron annihilation. This can be complementary to the elastic constant measurements [21]. Furthermore, they are useful for probing more detailed changes in the topological objects, namely the length changes in the skyrmion strings. For instance, for 𝐣~e𝐱^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐱\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf x}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_x end_ARG, j~e,csubscript~𝑗perpendicular-to𝑒cabsent\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\perp}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ⟂ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT exhibits a sharp dip at H0.225similar-to-or-equals𝐻0.225H\simeq 0.225italic_H ≃ 0.225 (Fig. 3b), where the lengths of the skyrmion strings change from dt=7subscript𝑑t7d_{\mathrm{t}}=7italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 7 to 6666 in two out of four torons and from 5555 to 4444 in the rest (Fig. 2). We also observe a small anomaly in j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (Fig. 3a). A similar sharp dip is also found in j~e,c\tilde{j}_{e,\mathrm{c}\parallel}over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e , roman_c ∥ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 𝐣~e𝐲^conditionalsubscript~𝐣𝑒^𝐲\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\parallel\hat{\bf y}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_y end_ARG (Fig. 3d), but in this case, a smaller dip is additionally seen at H0.765similar-to-or-equals𝐻0.765H\simeq 0.765italic_H ≃ 0.765 in the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL with Nt=2subscript𝑁t2N_{\mathrm{t}}=2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2, where the length of the skyrmion string reduces from 6666 to 5555 in the remaining two torons. These behaviors are understood as follows. The Bloch points locate at the interstitial positions on the lattice so that their cores with vanishing spin length avoid the lattice sites, and hence the energy potential is strongly modulated when the Bloch points traverse between the unit cubes of the lattice with the shortening of the skyrmion strings. Thus, the measurement of the threshold current densities can serve as a probe of not only topological transitions but also detailed changes of topological objects in the lattice spacing scale that are usually hidden in the macroscopic properties [32, 34]. We note that this holds even for nonchiral cases without the DM-type interaction (see Supplementary Note 5).

In experiments, the threshold current densities under the magnetic field can be measured straightforwardly. In the present simulation, j~e0.1similar-tosubscript~𝑗𝑒0.1\tilde{j}_{e}\sim 0.1over~ start_ARG italic_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 0.1 corresponds to the electric current density of 1012similar-toabsentsuperscript1012\sim 10^{12}∼ 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT A/m2, when assuming the energy unit as 1111 meV, the lattice constant as 0.50.50.50.5 nm, and the spin polarization of the current as 0.20.20.20.2 [11] (see Methods). This is comparable to a typical value required for magnetic domain walls to drive [35]. Thus, the threshold current measurements would provide microscopic information of the topology, complementary to the real-space measurements such as the Lorentz transmission electron microscopy [25] and 3D tomographic imaging techniques [19, 20]. Such measurements for nanoscale HLs discovered in MnSi1-xGex and SrFeO3 are eagerly awaited for the verification of our theoretical prediction.

Concluding remarks

Our comprehensive study of the current-induced dynamics of nanoscale magnetic torons has revealed the extensive controllability of their drift motions spanning from the zero to perfect toron Hall effect. We clarified that such prominent current-induced dynamics arises from the potential barrier on the discrete lattice which can be highly anisotropic through the modulation of the spin textures by the magnetic field. We also found that the field dependence of the threshold current serves as a concise and sensitive probe of the microscopic changes of topological objects.

While the measurement of the threshold currents is experimentally straightforward, their actual values as well as the H𝐻Hitalic_H dependences depend on the crystal structure and its symmetry of the real materials. Our results for the simple cubic lattice need modifications to apply to MnGe with the B20𝐵20B20italic_B 20 structure, while they will be rather straightforwardly extended to the cubic perovskite SrFeO3. Nevertheless, we believe that the flexible and controllable toron Hall effect in the wide range of the Hall angle is universally observed for HLs with nanoscale torons because of the short magnetic pitch comparable to the lattice constant and the singularity at the cores of the Bloch points. Extensions of our studies to crystallographic groups other than cubic are intriguing for further explorations. For instance, hexagonal systems may allow zero and perfect toron Hall effects even at zero field because of the symmetry of the energy potential.

Magnetic torons are promising information carriers due to their topological robustness. Our finding of flexible and controllable drift motions will increase their advantage over skyrmions. In the case of skyrmions, it was shown that the current-driven motions are almost free from the lattice discretization, and the Hall motion inevitably occurs, which has hindered the applications of skyrmions to spintronic devices [9, 10, 11]. The extremely high controllability of the toron Hall effect is expected to resolve these issues and lead to future device applications. We note, however, that such a skyrmion motion is partly due to the real-space scale of spin textures much larger than the lattice spacing. Recently, nanoscale skyrmions have been discovered beyond the conventional DM mechanism [36, 37, 38, 39]. Such short-pitch skyrmions would be more susceptible to the lattice discretization compared to conventional long-pitch ones, while they are anticipated to be less sensitive than magnetic torons due to the absence of singularities. Detailed comparisons, including other topological spin textures, will be left to future studies.

Acknowledgements.
The authors thank R. Arita, G.-W. Chern, N. Kanazawa, K. Kobayashi, M. Mochizuki, R. Takagi, and H. Yoshimochi for fruitful discussions. This research was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Grants (Nos. JP19H05822, JP19H05825, JP21J20812, JP22K03509, JP22K13998, and JP23H01119), JST CREST (Nos. JP-MJCR18T2 and JP-MJCR19T3), and the Chirality Research Center in Hiroshima University and JSPS Core-to-Core Program, Advanced Research Networks. K.S. was supported by the Program for Leading Graduate Schools (MERIT-WINGS). Parts of the numerical calculations were performed in the supercomputing systems in ISSP, the University of Tokyo.

Methods

Model for metallic chiral magnets

We adopt an effective spin model for metallic chiral magnets with itinerant electrons coupled to localized spins. The electron-spin coupling brings about effective long-range interactions between the localized spins known as the Ruderman-Kittel-Kasuya-Yosida interaction [40, 41, 42]. By extending the argument, the previous studies systematically derived the generalized and multiple-spin interactions in the presence of the spin-orbit coupling, and showed that such extensions stabilize HLs as well as skyrmion lattices with short magnetic pitches [43, 44, 45, 30, 31, 46, 32, 34]. In this study, we consider the symmetry-adapted two-spin interactions for a cubic chiral magnet by following the previous studies [31, 32]. The Hamiltonian reads

=i,jg3(𝐫ij)rc𝐒i𝖳(t)𝖩ij𝐒j(t)iHSi,z(t),subscript𝑖𝑗subscript𝑔3subscript𝐫𝑖𝑗subscript𝑟csuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖𝖳𝑡subscript𝖩𝑖𝑗subscript𝐒𝑗𝑡subscript𝑖𝐻subscript𝑆𝑖𝑧𝑡\displaystyle\mathcal{H}=\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}i,j\\ g_{3}({\bf r}_{ij})\leq r_{\rm c}\end{subarray}}{\bf S}_{i}^{{\mathsf{T}}}(t){% \mathsf{J}}_{ij}{\bf S}_{j}(t)-\sum_{i}HS_{i,z}(t),caligraphic_H = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL italic_i , italic_j end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≤ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) sansserif_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , (2)

where

g3(𝐫)=|x|+|y|+|z|,subscript𝑔3𝐫𝑥𝑦𝑧\displaystyle g_{3}({\bf r})=|x|+|y|+|z|,italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_r ) = | italic_x | + | italic_y | + | italic_z | , (3)

with

𝖡𝐐1=(J(1Δ)000J(1+2Δ)iD0iDJ(1Δ)),subscript𝖡subscript𝐐1𝐽1Δ000𝐽12Δi𝐷0i𝐷𝐽1Δ\displaystyle\mathsf{B}_{{\bf Q}_{1}}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccc}-J(1-\Delta)&0% &0\\ 0&-J(1+2\Delta)&\mathrm{i}D\\ 0&-\mathrm{i}D&-J(1-\Delta)\end{array}\right),sansserif_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 + 2 roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL roman_i italic_D end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - roman_i italic_D end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , (7)
𝖡𝐐2=(J(1Δ)0iD0J(1Δ)0iD0J(1+2Δ)),subscript𝖡subscript𝐐2𝐽1Δ0i𝐷0𝐽1Δ0i𝐷0𝐽12Δ\displaystyle\mathsf{B}_{{\bf Q}_{2}}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccc}-J(1-\Delta)&0% &-\mathrm{i}D\\ 0&-J(1-\Delta)&0\\ \mathrm{i}D&0&-J(1+2\Delta)\end{array}\right),sansserif_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - roman_i italic_D end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_i italic_D end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 + 2 roman_Δ ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , (11)
𝖡𝐐3=(J(1+2Δ)iD0iDJ(1Δ)000J(1Δ)),subscript𝖡subscript𝐐3𝐽12Δi𝐷0i𝐷𝐽1Δ000𝐽1Δ\displaystyle\mathsf{B}_{{\bf Q}_{3}}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccc}-J(1+2\Delta)&% \mathrm{i}D&0\\ -\mathrm{i}D&-J(1-\Delta)&0\\ 0&0&-J(1-\Delta)\end{array}\right),sansserif_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 + 2 roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL roman_i italic_D end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - roman_i italic_D end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL - italic_J ( 1 - roman_Δ ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , (15)
L¯γ(𝐪)=Lγ(qx)Lγ(0)Lγ(qy)Lγ(0)Lγ(qz)Lγ(0),subscript¯𝐿𝛾𝐪subscript𝐿𝛾subscript𝑞𝑥subscript𝐿𝛾0subscript𝐿𝛾subscript𝑞𝑦subscript𝐿𝛾0subscript𝐿𝛾subscript𝑞𝑧subscript𝐿𝛾0\displaystyle\bar{L}_{\gamma}({\bf q})=\frac{L_{\gamma}(q_{x})}{L_{\gamma}(0)}% \frac{L_{\gamma}(q_{y})}{L_{\gamma}(0)}\frac{L_{\gamma}(q_{z})}{L_{\gamma}(0)},over¯ start_ARG italic_L end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_q ) = divide start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_ARG , (16)
Lγ(q)=sinhγcoshγcosq.subscript𝐿𝛾𝑞𝛾𝛾𝑞\displaystyle L_{\gamma}(q)=\frac{\sinh\gamma}{\cosh\gamma-\cos q}.italic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_q ) = divide start_ARG roman_sinh italic_γ end_ARG start_ARG roman_cosh italic_γ - roman_cos italic_q end_ARG . (17)

Here, 𝐒i(t)subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) denotes the classical spin at the site i𝑖iitalic_i located at 𝐫isubscript𝐫𝑖\mathbf{r}_{i}bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and time t𝑡titalic_t (|𝐒i(t)|=1subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡1|\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)|=1| bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) | = 1); J𝐽Jitalic_J, ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Δ, and D𝐷Ditalic_D represent the coefficients for the isotropic exchange, anisotropic exchange, and DM interactions, respectively. The interactions exhibit spatial oscillations arising from the itinerant nature of electrons; we set the wave vectors 𝐐1=(Q,0,0)subscript𝐐1𝑄00\mathbf{Q}_{1}=(Q,0,0)bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_Q , 0 , 0 ), 𝐐2=(0,Q,0)subscript𝐐20𝑄0\mathbf{Q}_{2}=(0,Q,0)bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 0 , italic_Q , 0 ), and 𝐐3=(0,0,Q)subscript𝐐300𝑄\mathbf{Q}_{3}=(0,0,Q)bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 0 , 0 , italic_Q ), which are related with each other by threefold rotational symmetry about the [111] axis. Furthermore, we introduce the spatial decay of the interaction parametrized by γ𝛾\gammaitalic_γ as a function of 𝐫ij=𝐫j𝐫isubscript𝐫𝑖𝑗subscript𝐫𝑗subscript𝐫𝑖\mathbf{r}_{ij}=\mathbf{r}_{j}-\mathbf{r}_{i}bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and reduce the numerical cost by limiting the summation in real space for g3(𝐫ij)rcsubscript𝑔3subscript𝐫𝑖𝑗subscript𝑟cg_{3}(\mathbf{r}_{ij})\leq r_{\mathrm{c}}italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≤ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by following the previous studies [31, 47]. The second term in Eq. (2) represents the Zeeman coupling to the magnetic field 𝐇=(0,0,H)𝐇00𝐻\mathbf{H}=(0,0,H)bold_H = ( 0 , 0 , italic_H ). We take J𝐽Jitalic_J as the energy unit, set the lattice constant unity, and choose Δ=0.3Δ0.3\Delta=0.3roman_Δ = 0.3, D=0.3𝐷0.3D=0.3italic_D = 0.3, Q=π/6𝑄𝜋6Q=\pi/6italic_Q = italic_π / 6, γ=0.6Q𝛾0.6𝑄\gamma=0.6Qitalic_γ = 0.6 italic_Q, and rc=16subscript𝑟c16r_{\mathrm{c}}=16italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 16. We perform the calculations for the N=123𝑁superscript123N=12^{3}italic_N = 12 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT-site system under the periodic boundary condition, which corresponds to the single MUC. We confirm that the results are qualitatively intact for N=603𝑁superscript603N=60^{3}italic_N = 60 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation

To elucidate the current-induced dynamics of the HL, we study the real-time dynamics of spins by solving the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation given by

d𝐒i(t)dt=𝐒i(t)×𝐡ieff(t)α𝐒i(t)×d𝐒i(t)dt+𝝉i(t),𝑑subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑡subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡superscriptsubscript𝐡𝑖eff𝑡𝛼subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡𝑑subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡𝑑𝑡subscript𝝉𝑖𝑡\displaystyle\frac{d\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)}{dt}=-\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)\times\mathbf{h}_% {i}^{\mathrm{eff}}(t)-\alpha\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)\times\frac{d\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)}{% dt}+\bm{\tau}_{i}(t),divide start_ARG italic_d bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG = - bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) × bold_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) - italic_α bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) × divide start_ARG italic_d bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG + bold_italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , (18)

where α𝛼\alphaitalic_α is the Gilbert dam**, 𝐡ieff(t)subscriptsuperscript𝐡eff𝑖𝑡{\bf h}^{\rm eff}_{i}(t)bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is the mean magnetic field at time t𝑡titalic_t, defined as

𝐡ieff(t)=(t)𝐒i(t).subscriptsuperscript𝐡eff𝑖𝑡𝑡subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡\displaystyle{\bf h}^{\rm eff}_{i}(t)=\frac{\partial\mathcal{H}(t)}{\partial{% \bf S}_{i}(t)}.bold_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_eff end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG ∂ caligraphic_H ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG ∂ bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG . (19)

Note that the length constraint of |𝐒i(t)|=1subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡1|{\bf S}_{i}(t)|=1| bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) | = 1 is deferred only in the calculation of this derivative. In Eq. (18), 𝝉i(t)subscript𝝉𝑖𝑡\bm{\tau}_{i}(t)bold_italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is the torque arising from an electric current, which is given by [48, 11]

𝝉i(t)=[(𝐣~e𝜹^)𝐒i(t)+β(𝐒i(t)×(𝐣~e𝜹^)𝐒i(t))].subscript𝝉𝑖𝑡delimited-[]subscript~𝐣𝑒^𝜹subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡𝛽subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡subscript~𝐣𝑒^𝜹subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡\displaystyle\bm{\tau}_{i}(t)=-\left[\left(\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\cdot\hat{\bm% {\delta}}\right)\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)+\beta\left(\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)\times\left(% \tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}\cdot\hat{\bm{\delta}}\right)\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)\right)% \right].bold_italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = - [ ( over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ over^ start_ARG bold_italic_δ end_ARG ) bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) + italic_β ( bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) × ( over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ over^ start_ARG bold_italic_δ end_ARG ) bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ) ] . (20)

Here, the effect of the electric current is incorporated as the spin transfer torque; 𝐣~esubscript~𝐣𝑒\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT represents the normalized velocity of conduction electrons,

𝐣~e=pa22e𝐣,subscript~𝐣𝑒𝑝superscript𝑎22𝑒𝐣\displaystyle\tilde{\mathbf{j}}_{e}=-\frac{pa^{2}}{2e}\mathbf{j},over~ start_ARG bold_j end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG italic_p italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_e end_ARG bold_j , (21)

where p𝑝pitalic_p is the spin polarization, a𝑎aitalic_a is the lattice constant (we set a=1𝑎1a=1italic_a = 1), e>0𝑒0e>0italic_e > 0 is the elementary charge, and 𝐣𝐣\mathbf{j}bold_j is the electric current. In Eq. (20), β𝛽\betaitalic_β is the nonadiabatic coefficient, and 𝜹^=(δ^x,δ^y,δ^z)^𝜹subscript^𝛿𝑥subscript^𝛿𝑦subscript^𝛿𝑧\hat{\bm{\delta}}=(\hat{\delta}_{x},\hat{\delta}_{y},\hat{\delta}_{z})over^ start_ARG bold_italic_δ end_ARG = ( over^ start_ARG italic_δ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over^ start_ARG italic_δ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over^ start_ARG italic_δ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is introduced to approximate the spatial derivative on the discrete lattice as

δ^μ𝐒𝐫i(t)=12(𝐒𝐫i+𝝁^𝐒𝐫i𝝁^).subscript^𝛿𝜇subscript𝐒subscript𝐫𝑖𝑡12subscript𝐒subscript𝐫𝑖^𝝁subscript𝐒subscript𝐫𝑖^𝝁\displaystyle\hat{\delta}_{\mu}{\bf S}_{{\bf r}_{i}}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\left({\bf S% }_{{\bf r}_{i}+\hat{\bm{\mu}}}-{\bf S}_{{\bf r}_{i}-\hat{\bm{\mu}}}\right).over^ start_ARG italic_δ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + over^ start_ARG bold_italic_μ end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - over^ start_ARG bold_italic_μ end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . (22)

In this study, we numerically solve Eq. (18) by using the fourth-order Runge-Kutta method with the time step Δt=0.1Δ𝑡0.1\Delta t=0.1roman_Δ italic_t = 0.1. We take α=0.04𝛼0.04\alpha=0.04italic_α = 0.04 and β=0.02𝛽0.02\beta=0.02italic_β = 0.02, which are typical values for ferromagnets [48, 49].

Calculating velocity

We calculate the velocities of drift motions of the spin textures by using the time series of the Fourier components of spins. By assuming that spin structures in continuum space exhibit the rigid drift motion, a real-space and real-time spin configuration can be given by 𝐒(𝐫,t+Δt)=𝐒(𝐫𝐯Δt,t)𝐒𝐫𝑡Δ𝑡𝐒𝐫𝐯Δ𝑡𝑡\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r},t+\Delta t)=\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{v}\Delta t,t)bold_S ( bold_r , italic_t + roman_Δ italic_t ) = bold_S ( bold_r - bold_v roman_Δ italic_t , italic_t ), where 𝐒(𝐫,t)𝐒𝐫𝑡\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r},t)bold_S ( bold_r , italic_t ) is the spin at the position 𝐫𝐫\mathbf{r}bold_r and time t𝑡titalic_t, and 𝐯𝐯\mathbf{v}bold_v is the velocity of the spin texture. The Fourier transform of spins is then given by

𝐒(𝐪,t+Δt)=𝐒(𝐫,t+Δt)ei𝐪𝐫d3𝐫=𝐒(𝐪,t)ei𝐪𝐯Δt,𝐒𝐪𝑡Δ𝑡𝐒𝐫𝑡Δ𝑡superscript𝑒i𝐪𝐫superscript𝑑3𝐫𝐒𝐪𝑡superscript𝑒i𝐪𝐯Δ𝑡\displaystyle\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{q},t+\Delta t)=\int\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{r},t+% \Delta t)e^{-\mathrm{i}\mathbf{q}\cdot\mathbf{r}}d^{3}\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{S}(% \mathbf{q},t)e^{-\mathrm{i}\mathbf{q}\cdot\mathbf{v}\Delta t},bold_S ( bold_q , italic_t + roman_Δ italic_t ) = ∫ bold_S ( bold_r , italic_t + roman_Δ italic_t ) italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_i bold_q ⋅ bold_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT bold_r = bold_S ( bold_q , italic_t ) italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_i bold_q ⋅ bold_v roman_Δ italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (23)

where 𝐪𝐪\mathbf{q}bold_q is the wave vector. Hence, the velocity at t𝑡titalic_t can be calculated by the phase difference between 𝐒(𝐪,t)𝐒𝐪𝑡\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{q},t)bold_S ( bold_q , italic_t ) and 𝐒(𝐪,t+Δt)𝐒𝐪𝑡Δ𝑡\mathbf{S}(\mathbf{q},t+\Delta t)bold_S ( bold_q , italic_t + roman_Δ italic_t ). In the actual calculations, we use the above relation for the Fourier components for the ordering wave vectors 𝐐1subscript𝐐1\mathbf{Q}_{1}bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, 𝐐2subscript𝐐2\mathbf{Q}_{2}bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and 𝐐3subscript𝐐3\mathbf{Q}_{3}bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT calculated from 𝐒i(t)subscript𝐒𝑖𝑡\mathbf{S}_{i}(t)bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) obtained by the LLG simulation as

vμ=1Q(tfti)titfddtarg(S𝐐η,μ(t))𝑑t,subscript𝑣𝜇1𝑄subscript𝑡𝑓subscript𝑡𝑖superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖subscript𝑡𝑓𝑑𝑑𝑡subscript𝑆subscript𝐐𝜂superscript𝜇𝑡differential-d𝑡\displaystyle v_{\mu}=-\frac{1}{Q(t_{f}-t_{i})}\int_{t_{i}}^{t_{f}}~{}\frac{d}% {dt}\arg\left(S_{{\bf Q}_{\eta},\mu^{\prime}}(t)\right)dt,italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_Q ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG roman_arg ( italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ) italic_d italic_t , (24)

where η=1,2,3𝜂123\eta=1,2,3italic_η = 1 , 2 , 3 for μ=x,y,z𝜇𝑥𝑦𝑧\mu=x,y,zitalic_μ = italic_x , italic_y , italic_z, respectively, and μsuperscript𝜇\mu^{\prime}italic_μ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT denotes the largest component of 𝐒𝐐ηsubscript𝐒subscript𝐐𝜂{\bf S}_{{\bf Q}_{\eta}}bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT determined by the exchange anisotropy in the model in Eq. (2). For instance, at 𝐪=𝐐1𝐪subscript𝐐1{\bf q}={\bf Q}_{1}bold_q = bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the exchange anisotropy is strong in the Sysubscript𝑆𝑦S_{y}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT direction, leading to the largest amplitude in S𝐐1,ysubscript𝑆subscript𝐐1𝑦S_{{\bf Q}_{1},y}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The integral in Eq. (24) is taken from ti=500subscript𝑡𝑖500t_{i}=500italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 500 to tf=1000subscript𝑡𝑓1000t_{f}=1000italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1000.

Calculating potential barrier

We compute the potential barrier for magnetic torons by the energy change with shifting their positions from the ground state. For this calculation, we first approximately express the ground-state spin configuration by a superposition of three elliptical spirals using

𝐒iellip3Q(ψ2ε2sin𝒬2+ψ3cos𝒬3ψ1cos𝒬1+ψ3ε3sin𝒬3ψ1ε1sin𝒬1+ψ2cos𝒬2+m),proportional-tosuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖ellip3𝑄subscript𝜓2subscript𝜀2subscript𝒬2subscript𝜓3subscript𝒬3subscript𝜓1subscript𝒬1subscript𝜓3subscript𝜀3subscript𝒬3subscript𝜓1subscript𝜀1subscript𝒬1subscript𝜓2subscript𝒬2𝑚\displaystyle{\bf S}_{i}^{\mathrm{ellip}3Q}\propto\left(\begin{array}[]{c}\psi% _{2}\varepsilon_{2}\sin\mathcal{Q}_{2}+\psi_{3}\cos\mathcal{Q}_{3}\\ \psi_{1}\cos\mathcal{Q}_{1}+\psi_{3}\varepsilon_{3}\sin\mathcal{Q}_{3}\\ \psi_{1}\varepsilon_{1}\sin\mathcal{Q}_{1}+\psi_{2}\cos\mathcal{Q}_{2}+m\end{% array}\right),bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∝ ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_m end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , (28)

where 𝒬η=𝐐η𝐫i+φηsubscript𝒬𝜂subscript𝐐𝜂subscript𝐫𝑖subscript𝜑𝜂\mathcal{Q}_{\eta}={\bf Q}_{\eta}\cdot{\bf r}_{i}+\varphi_{\eta}caligraphic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = bold_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ bold_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, ψηsubscript𝜓𝜂\psi_{\eta}italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and εηsubscript𝜀𝜂\varepsilon_{\eta}italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT respectively represent the long axis and the ellipticity of the constituting spirals, and φηsubscript𝜑𝜂\varphi_{\eta}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the phase. We estimate these parameters by minimizing the cost function defined by

U({ψη,εη,φη},m)=𝑈subscript𝜓𝜂subscript𝜀𝜂subscript𝜑𝜂𝑚absent\displaystyle U(\{\psi_{\eta},\varepsilon_{\eta},\varphi_{\eta}\},m)=italic_U ( { italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , italic_m ) =
1Ni(1𝐒iLLG𝐒iellip3Q({ψη,εη,φη},m)),1𝑁subscript𝑖1subscriptsuperscript𝐒LLG𝑖subscriptsuperscript𝐒ellip3𝑄𝑖subscript𝜓𝜂subscript𝜀𝜂subscript𝜑𝜂𝑚\displaystyle\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i}\left(1-{\bf S}^{\rm LLG}_{i}\cdot{\bf S}^{{% \rm ellip}3Q}_{i}(\{\psi_{\eta},\varepsilon_{\eta},\varphi_{\eta}\},m)\right),divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_N end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 - bold_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_LLG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ bold_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( { italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , italic_m ) ) , (29)

where 𝐒iLLGsuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖LLG{\bf S}_{i}^{{\rm LLG}}bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_LLG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the ground-state spin configuration obtained by numerically solving the LLG equation and 𝐒iellip3Qsuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖ellip3𝑄{\bf S}_{i}^{{\rm ellip}3Q}bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is that generated from Eq. (28). The optimal state {𝐒iellip3Q}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖ellip3𝑄\{{\bf S}_{i}^{{\rm ellip}3Q}\}^{*}{ bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT shows the cost function less than 6×1046superscript1046\times 10^{-4}6 × 10 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for all H𝐻Hitalic_H, and hence {𝐒iLLG}superscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖LLG\{{\bf S}_{i}^{\rm LLG}\}{ bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_LLG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } is well reproduced by Eq. (28) (see Supplementary Note 4).

Then, once the parameters in Eq. (28) is obtained by minimizing Eq. (29), we introduce a spatial translation by Δ𝐫Δ𝐫\Delta{\bf r}roman_Δ bold_r through a phase shift from φηsubscript𝜑𝜂\varphi_{\eta}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to φηΔφηsubscript𝜑𝜂Δsubscript𝜑𝜂\varphi_{\eta}-\Delta\varphi_{\eta}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [50]. Specifically, for the present 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL case, a spatial translation by Δ𝐫=(Δx,Δy,Δz)Δ𝐫Δ𝑥Δ𝑦Δ𝑧\Delta{\bf r}=(\Delta x,\Delta y,\Delta z)roman_Δ bold_r = ( roman_Δ italic_x , roman_Δ italic_y , roman_Δ italic_z ) is represented by a phase shift as

Δ𝐫=1Q(Δφ1,Δφ2,Δφ3).Δ𝐫1𝑄Δsubscript𝜑1Δsubscript𝜑2Δsubscript𝜑3\displaystyle\Delta{\bf r}=\frac{1}{Q}\left(\Delta\varphi_{1},\Delta\varphi_{2% },\Delta\varphi_{3}\right).roman_Δ bold_r = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_Q end_ARG ( roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . (30)

Thus, by shifting the phase φηsubscript𝜑𝜂\varphi_{\eta}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_η end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the optimal spin state {𝐒iellip3Q}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖ellip3𝑄\{{\bf S}_{i}^{{\rm ellip}3Q}\}^{*}{ bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, we compute the energy change per site for the model in Eq. (2) measured from that for the optimal spin configuration {𝐒iellip3Q}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝐒𝑖ellip3𝑄\{{\bf S}_{i}^{{\rm ellip}3Q}\}^{*}{ bold_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ellip3 italic_Q end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, denoted by ΔEΔ𝐸\Delta Eroman_Δ italic_E.

In the ground state, the Bloch points are located at the interstitial positions of the lattice sites, and the energy increases when they traverse across the unit cubes composed of the lattice sites. This implies that the 3Q3𝑄3Q3 italic_Q-HL undergoes the potential energy approximately given by

ΔE(Δ𝐫)=μ=x,y,zVμ2(1cos(2πΔμ)).Δ𝐸Δ𝐫subscript𝜇𝑥𝑦𝑧subscript𝑉𝜇212𝜋Δ𝜇\displaystyle\Delta E(\Delta{\bf r})=\sum_{\mu=x,y,z}\frac{V_{\mu}}{2}(1-\cos(% 2\pi\Delta\mu)).roman_Δ italic_E ( roman_Δ bold_r ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ = italic_x , italic_y , italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( 1 - roman_cos ( 2 italic_π roman_Δ italic_μ ) ) . (31)

By assuming this form, we obtain the potential barrier Vμsubscript𝑉𝜇V_{\mu}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as Vμ=ΔE(𝝁^/2)subscript𝑉𝜇Δ𝐸^𝝁2V_{\mu}=\Delta E(\hat{\bm{\mu}}/2)italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_Δ italic_E ( over^ start_ARG bold_italic_μ end_ARG / 2 ).

References

  • Skyrme and Schonland [1961] T. H. R. Skyrme and B. F. J. Schonland, A non-linear field theory, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 260, 127 (1961).
  • Skyrme [1962] T. H. R. Skyrme, A unified field theory of mesons and baryons, Nucl. Phys. 31, 556 (1962).
  • Bogdanov and Yablonskii [1989] A. N. Bogdanov and D. Yablonskii, Thermodynamically stable “vortices” in magnetically ordered crystals. The mixed state of magnets, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz 95, 178 (1989).
  • Bogdanov and Hubert [1994] A. Bogdanov and A. Hubert, Thermodynamically stable magnetic vortex states in magnetic crystals, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 138, 255 (1994).
  • Bogdanov [1995] A. Bogdanov, New localized solutions of the nonlinear field equations, JETP Lett. 62, 247 (1995).
  • Rößler et al. [2006] U. K. Rößler, A. N. Bogdanov, and C. Pfleiderer, Spontaneous skyrmion ground states in magnetic metals, Nature 442, 797 (2006).
  • Mühlbauer et al. [2009] S. Mühlbauer, B. Binz, F. Jonietz, C. Pfleiderer, A. Rosch, A. Neubauer, R. Georgii, and P. Böni, Skyrmion Lattice in a Chiral Magnet, Science 323, 915 (2009).
  • Yu et al. [2010] 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, Nature 465, 901 (2010).
  • Jonietz et al. [2010] F. Jonietz, S. Mühlbauer, C. Pfleiderer, A. Neubauer, W. Münzer, A. Bauer, T. Adams, R. Georgii, P. Böni, R. A. Duine, K. Everschor, M. Garst, and A. Rosch, Spin Transfer Torques in MnSi at Ultralow Current Densities, Science 330, 1648 (2010).
  • Zang et al. [2011] J. Zang, M. Mostovoy, J. H. Han, and N. Nagaosa, Dynamics of Skyrmion Crystals in Metallic Thin Films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 136804 (2011).
  • Iwasaki et al. [2013] J. Iwasaki, M. Mochizuki, and N. Nagaosa, Universal current-velocity relation of skyrmion motion in chiral magnets, Nat. Commun. 4, 1463 (2013).
  • Jiang et al. [2017] W. Jiang, X. Zhang, G. Yu, W. Zhang, X. Wang, M. Benjamin Jungfleisch, J. E. Pearson, X. Cheng, O. Heinonen, K. L. Wang, et al., Direct observation of the skyrmion Hall effect, Nat. Phys. 13, 162 (2017).
  • Berry [1984] M. V. Berry, Quantal phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes, Proc. R. Soc. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 392, 45 (1984).
  • Volovik [1987] G. E. Volovik, Linear momentum in ferromagnets, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 20, L83 (1987).
  • Barker and Tretiakov [2016] J. Barker and O. A. Tretiakov, Static and Dynamical Properties of Antiferromagnetic Skyrmions in the Presence of Applied Current and Temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 147203 (2016).
  • Zhang et al. [2016] X. Zhang, Y. Zhou, and M. Ezawa, Magnetic bilayer-skyrmions without skyrmion Hall effect, Nat. Commun. 7, 10293 (2016).
  • Döring [1968] W. Döring, Point Singularities in Micromagnetism, J. Appl. Phys. 39, 1006 (1968).
  • Milde et al. [2013] P. Milde, D. Köhler, J. Seidel, L. M. Eng, A. Bauer, A. Chacon, J. Kindervater, S. Mühlbauer, C. Pfleiderer, S. Buhrandt, C. Schütte, and A. Rosch, Unwinding of a Skyrmion Lattice by Magnetic Monopoles, Science 340, 1076 (2013).
  • Donnelly et al. [2017] C. Donnelly, M. Guizar-Sicairos, V. Scagnoli, S. Gliga, M. Holler, J. Raabe, and L. J. Heyderman, Three-dimensional magnetization structures revealed with X-ray vector nanotomography, Nature 547, 328 (2017).
  • Hierro-Rodríguez et al. [2020] A. Hierro-Rodríguez, C. Quirós, A. Sorrentino, L. M. Álvarez-Prado, J. I. Martín, J. M. Alameda, S. McVitie, E. Pereiro, M. Velez, and S. Ferrer, Revealing 3D magnetization of thin films with soft X-ray tomography: magnetic singularities and topological charges, Nat. Commun. 11, 6382 (2020).
  • Kanazawa et al. [2016] N. Kanazawa, Y. Nii, X.-X. Zhang, A. S. Mishchenko, G. De Filippis, F. Kagawa, Y. Iwasa, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Critical phenomena of emergent magnetic monopoles in a chiral magnet, Nat. Commun. 7, 11622 (2016).
  • Leonov and Inoue [2018] A. O. Leonov and K. Inoue, Homogeneous and heterogeneous nucleation of skyrmions in thin layers of cubic helimagnets, Phys. Rev. B 98, 054404 (2018).
  • Kanazawa et al. [2011] N. Kanazawa, Y. Onose, T. Arima, D. Okuyama, K. Ohoyama, S. Wakimoto, K. Kakurai, S. Ishiwata, and Y. Tokura, Large Topological Hall Effect in a Short-Period Helimagnet MnGe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 156603 (2011).
  • Kanazawa et al. [2012] N. Kanazawa, J.-H. Kim, D. S. Inosov, J. S. White, N. Egetenmeyer, J. L. Gavilano, S. Ishiwata, Y. Onose, T. Arima, B. Keimer, and Y. Tokura, Possible skyrmion-lattice ground state in the B20 chiral-lattice magnet MnGe as seen via small-angle neutron scattering, Phys. Rev. B 86, 134425 (2012).
  • Tanigaki et al. [2015] T. Tanigaki, K. Shibata, N. Kanazawa, X. Yu, Y. Onose, H. S. Park, D. Shindo, and Y. Tokura, Real-Space Observation of Short-Period Cubic Lattice of Skyrmions in MnGe, Nano Lett. 15, 5438 (2015).
  • Fujishiro et al. [2019] Y. Fujishiro, N. Kanazawa, T. Nakajima, X. Z. Yu, K. Ohishi, Y. Kawamura, K. Kakurai, T. Arima, H. Mitamura, A. Miyake, K. Akiba, M. Tokunaga, A. Matsuo, K. Kindo, T. Koretsune, R. Arita, and Y. Tokura, Topological transitions among skyrmion- and hedgehog-lattice states in cubic chiral magnets, Nat. Commun. 10, 1059 (2019).
  • Ishiwata et al. [2020] S. Ishiwata, T. Nakajima, J.-H. Kim, D. S. Inosov, N. Kanazawa, J. S. White, J. L. Gavilano, R. Georgii, K. M. Seemann, G. Brandl, P. Manuel, D. D. Khalyavin, S. Seki, Y. Tokunaga, M. Kinoshita, Y. W. Long, Y. Kaneko, Y. Taguchi, T. Arima, B. Keimer, and Y. Tokura, Emergent topological spin structures in the centrosymmetric cubic perovskite SrFeO3Phys. Rev. B 101, 134406 (2020).
  • Hu et al. [2021] Q. Hu, B. Lyu, J. Tang, L. Kong, H. Du, and W. Wang, Unidirectional current-driven toron motion in a cylindrical nanowire, Appl. Phys. Lett. 118, 022404 (2021)https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article-pdf/doi/10.1063/5.0033239/13707239/022404_1_online.pdf .
  • Lang et al. [2023] M. Lang, S. A. Pathak, S. J. R. Holt, M. Beg, and H. Fangohr, Controlling stable Bloch points with electric currents, Sci. Rep. 13, 18934 (2023).
  • Okumura et al. [2020] S. Okumura, S. Hayami, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Magnetic hedgehog lattices in noncentrosymmetric metals, Phys. Rev. B 101, 144416 (2020).
  • Kato et al. [2021] Y. Kato, S. Hayami, and Y. Motome, Spin excitation spectra in helimagnetic states: Proper-screw, cycloid, vortex-crystal, and hedgehog lattices, Phys. Rev. B 104, 224405 (2021).
  • Kato and Motome [2022] Y. Kato and Y. Motome, Magnetic field–temperature phase diagrams for multiple-Q𝑄Qitalic_Q magnetic ordering: Exact steepest descent approach to long-range interacting spin systems, Phys. Rev. B 105, 174413 (2022).
  • Ishiwata et al. [2011] S. Ishiwata, M. Tokunaga, Y. Kaneko, D. Okuyama, Y. Tokunaga, S. Wakimoto, K. Kakurai, T. Arima, Y. Taguchi, and Y. Tokura, Versatile helimagnetic phases under magnetic fields in cubic perovskite SrFeO3subscriptSrFeO3{\mathrm{SrFeO}}_{\mathrm{3}}roman_SrFeO start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPTPhys. Rev. B 84, 054427 (2011).
  • Kato and Motome [2023] Y. Kato and Y. Motome, Hidden topological transitions in emergent magnetic monopole lattices, Phys. Rev. B 107, 094437 (2023).
  • Parkin et al. [2008] S. S. P. Parkin, M. Hayashi, and L. Thomas, Magnetic Domain-Wall Racetrack Memory, Science 320, 190 (2008).
  • Kurumaji et al. [2019] 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, Science 365, 914 (2019).
  • Hirschberger et al. [2019] M. Hirschberger, T. Nakajima, S. Gao, L. Peng, A. Kikkawa, T. Kurumaji, M. Kriener, Y. Yamasaki, H. Sagayama, H. Nakao, et al., Skyrmion phase and competing magnetic orders on a breathing kagomé lattice, Nat. Commun. 10, 5831 (2019).
  • Khanh et al. [2020] N. D. Khanh, T. Nakajima, X. Yu, S. Gao, K. Shibata, 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, Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 444 (2020).
  • Takagi et al. [2022] R. Takagi, N. Matsuyama, V. Ukleev, L. Yu, J. S. White, S. Francoual, J. R. Mardegan, S. Hayami, H. Saito, K. Kaneko, et al., Square and rhombic lattices of magnetic skyrmions in a centrosymmetric binary compound, Nat. Commun. 13, 1472 (2022).
  • Ruderman and Kittel [1954] M. A. Ruderman and C. Kittel, Indirect Exchange Coupling of Nuclear Magnetic Moments by Conduction Electrons, Phys. Rev. 96, 99 (1954).
  • Kasuya [1956] T. Kasuya, A Theory of Metallic Ferro- and Antiferromagnetism on Zener’s Model, Prog. Theor. Phys. 16, 45 (1956).
  • Yosida [1957] K. Yosida, Magnetic properties of cu-mn alloys, Phys. Rev. 106, 893 (1957).
  • Hayami et al. [2017] S. Hayami, R. Ozawa, and Y. Motome, Effective bilinear-biquadratic model for noncoplanar ordering in itinerant magnets, Phys. Rev. B 95, 224424 (2017).
  • Hayami and Motome [2018] S. Hayami and Y. Motome, Néel- and Bloch-Type Magnetic Vortices in Rashba Metals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 137202 (2018).
  • Okada et al. [2018] K. N. Okada, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Multiple-Q𝑄Qitalic_Q magnetic orders in Rashba-Dresselhaus metals, Phys. Rev. B 98, 224406 (2018).
  • Okumura et al. [2022] S. Okumura, S. Hayami, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Magnetic Hedgehog Lattice in a Centrosymmetric Cubic Metal, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 91, 093702 (2022).
  • Shimizu and Chern [2023] K. Shimizu and G.-W. Chern, Crystallization dynamics of magnetic skyrmions in a frustrated itinerant magnet (2023), arXiv:2305.16182 [cond-mat.str-el] .
  • Zhang and Li [2004] S. Zhang and Z. Li, Roles of Nonequilibrium Conduction Electrons on the Magnetization Dynamics of Ferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 127204 (2004).
  • Oogane et al. [2006] M. Oogane, T. Wakitani, S. Yakata, R. Yilgin, Y. Ando, A. Sakuma, and T. Miyazaki, Magnetic Dam** in Ferromagnetic Thin Films, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3889 (2006).
  • Shimizu et al. [2022] K. Shimizu, S. Okumura, Y. Kato, and Y. Motome, Phase degree of freedom and topology in multiple-Q𝑄Qitalic_Q spin textures, Phys. Rev. B 105, 224405 (2022).