Abstract
Manipulation of the domain wall propagation in magnetic wires is a key practical task for a number of devices including racetrack memory and magnetic logic. Recently, curvilinear effects emerged as an efficient mean to impact substantially the statics and dynamics of magnetic textures. Here, we demonstrate that the curvilinear form of the exchange interaction of a magnetic helix results in an effective anisotropy term and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction with a complete set of Lifshitz invariants for a onedimensional system. In contrast to their planar counterparts, the geometrically induced modifications of the static magnetic texture of the domain walls in magnetic helices offer unconventional means to control the wall dynamics relying on spinorbit Rashba torque. The chiral symmetry breaking due to the Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction leads to the opposite directions of the domain wall motion in left or righthanded helices. Furthermore, for the magnetic helices, the emergent effective anisotropy term and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction can be attributed to the clear geometrical parameters like curvature and torsion offering intuitive understanding of the complex curvilinear effects in magnetism.
Introduction
Assessing spin textures of threedimensionally curved magnetic thin films^{1,2,3}, hollow cylinders^{4,5,6} or wires^{7,8,9,10} has become a dynamic research field. These 3Dshaped systems possess striking novel fundamental properties originating from the curvaturedriven effects, such as magnetochiral effects^{3,11,12,13} and topologically induced magnetization patterns^{13,14,15}. To this end, a general fully 3D approach was put forth recently to study dynamical and static properties of arbitrary curved magnetic shells and wires^{16,17}. Due to the curvature and torsion in wires^{17} (Gaussian and mean curvatures in the case of shells^{16}) two additional interaction terms appear in the exchange energy functional: a geometrically induced anisotropy term which is a bilinear form of the curvature and torsion, and an effective Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction (DMI) term (Lifshitz invariants), which depends linearly on the curvature and torsion. In the framework of this approach, the existence of topologically induced patterns in Möbius rings^{15} and new magnetochiral effects^{16,17} were predicted.
In addition to these rich physics, the application potential of 3Dshaped objects is currently being explored as magnetic field sensorics for magnetofluidic applications^{18,19}, spinwave filters^{20,21}, advanced magnetoencephalography devices for diagnosis of epilepsy at early stages^{22,23,24} or for energyefficient racetrack memory devices^{25,26}. The propagation of domain walls in a magnetic wire^{27} for racetrack memory^{25,28} or magnetic domain wall logic^{29,30} applications induced by spinpolarized currents is already widely explored^{31}. In contrast, spinorbitronics^{32,33}, based on currentinduced spinorbit torques, launches the new concept of low energy spintronic devices.
Caused by the structural inversion symmetry, multilayers consisting of magnetic metal with nonmagnetic metal and oxide on contralateral sides like Pt/Co/Al_{x}O can support spinorbit torques acting on the localized magnetic moments due to the Rashba and spin Hall effects^{34,35}. The Rashba field, produced by a charge current in these structures is considered to be one of the most efficient ways to act on the magnetization patterns^{34}. However, in widely used planar devices, transverse domain walls are not affected by the Rashba effect^{36}. Here, we demonstrate that the impact of the curvilinear effects on the magnetic texture of the domain walls in helical wires allows for their efficient displacement using spinorbit Rashba torque. The geometrically induced anisotropy and DMI affect both the spatial orientation of the transverse (headtohead and tailtotail) domain walls in helices as well as the magnetization distribution in the domain wall. As a consequence, the chiral symmetry breaking is characteristic for the wall structure: the direction of the magnetization rotation in the wall is opposite for the left and righthanded helices. The domain wall mobility is proportional to the product of curvature and torsion of the wire; it depends on the topological charge of the wall. The direction of the domain wall motion is determined by the sign of the product of the helix chirality and domain wall charge. Furthermore, a remarkable feature of this 3D geometry is that its curvature and torsion are coordinate independent. Therefore, all effects coupled with an interplay between the geometry of the system and the geometry of the magnetic texture may be presented here in a most clear and lucid style. The obtained results are general and valid for any thin wire with nonzero torsion.
Results
We describe a helix curve by using its arclength parametrization in terms of curvature–torsion:
where s is the arc length, R is the helix radius, P is the pitch of the helix, is the helix chirality and . A helix is characterized by the constant curvature and torsion .
The magnetic properties are described using assumptions of classical ferromagnets with uniaxial anisotropy directed along the wire. The energy of the helix wire reads^{37}
Here , where the positive parameter K is a magnetocrystalline anisotropy constant of easytangential type, the term stems from the magnetostatic contribution^{37}, M_{s} is the saturation magnetization, and S is the crosssection area. The exchange energy density reads , where m is the magnetization unit vector, is the characteristic magnetic length (domain wall width), and A is an exchange constant. The anisotropy energy density is where e_{an} is the unit vector along the anisotropy axis, which is assumed to be oriented along the tangential direction. The easytangential anisotropy in a curved magnet is spatially dependent. Therefore, it is convenient to represent the energy of the magnet in the curvilinear Frenet–Serret reference frame with e_{t} being a tangential (T), e_{n} being a normal (N) and e_{b} being a binormal (B) vector, respectively (TNB basis).
In the curvilinear frame, the exchange energy has three different contributions^{17}, . The first term , describes the isotropic part of the exchange expression, which has the same form as for a straight wire. Here and below the prime denotes the derivative with respect to the dimensionless coordinate u = s/ℓ. The second term, , is a curvature induced effective DMI, where the components of the Frenet–Serret tensor are linear with respect to the reduced curvature and torsion
respectively. The last term, , describes a geometrically induced effective anisotropy interaction, where the components of the tensor are bilinear with respect to the curvature and torsion, see Supplementary Materials for details. Two additional contributions (effective DMI and effective anisotropy) naturally appear in the curvilinear reference frame similar to contributions to the kinetic energy of the mechanical particle in the rotating frame with Coriolis force (linear with respect to velocity) and centrifugal force (bilinear with respect to velocity).
The emergent effective anisotropy leads to the modification of the equilibrium magnetic states^{37}. Here, we consider helices with relatively small curvature possessing quasitangential magnetization distribution shown in Fig. 1(a). For further discussion it is instructive to project the magnetization onto the local rectifying surface, which coincides with the supporting surface of the helix [yellow cylinder in Fig. 1(a)]. The top view is plotted for the righthanded helix [σ > 0, Fig. 1(c)] and for the lefthanded one [σ < 0, Fig. 1(d)].
The influence of the curvature and torsion can be treated as an effective magnetic field acting along the binormal direction^{17}. This field causes a tilt of the the equilibrium magnetization from the tangential direction by an angle^{37}:
see Fig. 1(b) and Supplementary Eq. (S3) for details. The symbols represent the results of the spinlattice simulations using the package SLaSi without magnetostatics and Nmag simulations of a magnetically soft wire, see Methods for details: the analysis shows that the model is adequate for soft magnets with .
Now we can rotate the reference frame in a local rectifying surface by the angle ψ (see Supplementary for details). The magnetization in the rotated ψframe {e_{1}, e_{2}, e_{3}} reads
where magnetization angular variables θ and ϕ depend on the spatial and temporal coordinates. Using this reference frame we can diagonalize the effective anisotropy energy density of the helix wire (Supplementary Eqs. (S3)–(S5) for details):
The coefficient characterizes the strength of the effective easyaxis anisotropy while gives the strength of the effective easysurface anisotropy. The parameters and are the effective DMI constants. We note that the energy (2) has the general form of the energy density for 1D biaxial magnets with an intrinsic DMI and contains the complete set of the Lifshitz invariants. Hence, effective DMI constants and can include other contributions, e.g. the intrinsic DMI or DMI due to the structural inversion asymmetry^{40,41,42}.
In the case of small curvature and torsion the geometrically induced anisotropy and DMI constants can be attributed to the geometrical parameters of the object:
The possible static magnetization structures can be found by variation of the total energy functional with density (2). The homogeneous equilibrium state (quasitangential state) is described by θ^{h} = 0 and θ^{h} = π, which corresponds to the two possible directions of the helix magnetization.
Static domain wall
One of the simplest inhomogeneous magnetization distribution in a nanowire is a transverse domain wall, which connects two possible equilibrium states. We start our analysis with general remarks about the domain wall described by the energy functional with the density (2), which can be applied for a wide class of 1D magnets also with the intrinsic DMI.
The structure of the domain wall can be described analytically for . This case corresponds to the uniaxial ferromagnet with an additional DMI term. For such a system there is an exact analytical solution of static equations of the domain wall type:
Here p = ±1 is a domain wall topological charge: p = 1 corresponds to kink (headtohead domain wall) and p = −1 corresponds to antikink (tailtotail domain wall). The domain wall width δ and the slope ϒ are as follows:
In the uniaxial magnet with the anisotropy parameter the typical domain wall width without DMI reads . One can see that the presence of DMI causes broadening of the wall. Furthermore, the domain wall is not perpendicular to the wire length and is titled by an angle determined by constant. The slope of the azimuthal angle . This behaviour is similar to the known domain wall inclination in magnetic stripes caused by the intrinsic DMI^{43}.
In the following we proceed with the investigation of the finite curvature effects on the magnetization distribution in domain walls in helices. We will apply a variational approach by using (3) as a domain wall Ansatz with the domain wall width δ, initial phase Φ, and the slope ϒ being the variational parameters. By inserting Eq. (3) into the energy density functional (2) and integrating over the arclength variable s, we obtain
The presence of the effective DMI with the constant breaks the symmetry of the domain walls with opposite topological charges p, which is coupled with the domain wall phase Φ: for the small enough torsion and curvature the energetically preferable domain wall with the topological charge p has the equilibrium phase Φ = (1 + p)π/2. In the case , one can find
The variational parameters (5) coincide with parameters (4) of the exact solution obtained in the case . Thus, the approximation of vanishing curvatures describe the domain wall statics for small enough ϰ and σ.
The comparison of these predictions with the 3D spinlattice simulations using package SLaSi^{44}, and micromagnetic simulations using Nmag^{45} confirms our theory, see Fig. 2 (the details of simulations are described in Methods). Figure 2(a) represents the untwisted view of the domain wall. The magnetization direction corresponds to the ground state along e_{1} inside two domains. Inside the headtohead domain wall the magnetization is directed outward the helix (opposite to e_{n}). Qualitatively this is explained by the fact that such a configuration minimizes the magnetization gradient and, therefore, the exchange energy. For the tailtotail domain wall the direction of the magnetization tilt is opposite to the headtohead one. The dependence of the phase slope ϒ (5) on the torsion σ is in good agreement with the simulation data, solid line in Fig. 2(b). Symbols correspond to the results of the simulations carried out for ϰ = 0.1. We performed the spinlattice simulations without magnetostatics (green circles) and with magnetostatics for a magnetically soft sample (blue filled triangles, the quality factor equals to zero) as well as magnetically hard sample with Q = 4. The micromagnetic simulations of a thin Permalloy wire (diamonds) are also in good agreement with the spinlattice simulations and theory. The static headtohead and tailtotail domain walls are well described by the Ansatz (3) with optimal parameters determined by (5), see solid lines in Fig. 2(cd), for ϰ = 0.1, σ = 0.5.
Domain wall dynamics driven by the Rashba spinorbit torque
Here, we describe the domain wall dynamics in the Rashba spinorbit system^{46}, where the magnetic wire is adjacent to a nonmagnetic conductive layer with a strong spinorbit interaction. Spinorbit interaction is well known to be a source of two possible symmetries of torques, acting on magnetization^{36}: Depending on the microscopic nature of the spinorbit interaction, the antidamping or Slonczewski torque^{36,47} can be caused by the spin Hall effect or indirect Rashba effect. In contrast, the fieldlike torque is due to the spin Hall effect or Rashba effect. The relative importance of these interactions depends on the geometry and types of interfacing materials. For example, in thin magnetic films with spinindependent electron scattering, the antidamping spin transfer torque vanishes^{48}. Accordingly to ref. 36 (see Table 1 of ref. 36), the antidamping torque relying on the spin Hall and indirect Rashba effects does not lead to the motion of headtohead domain walls independent of the injection geometry of charge current (parallel or perpendicular to the wire). Furthermore, headtohead domain walls can be moved by the fieldlike torque relying on the Rashba effect only in the case of perpendicular injection^{36}. In stark contrast to the planar systems, here, we demonstrate that the headtohead domain walls can be efficiently moved in helix wires relying on the Rashba effect even in the case of the parallel charge current injection.
The Rashba effect typically appears in systems with inversion symmetry broken spinorbit interaction^{49}. We consider the parallel geometry, in which the ferromagnetic wire is parallel to the spinorbit layer on the whole length of the wire^{36}. The sketch of the system is shown in Fig. 3(a). The magnetic wire is winded around the conductive layer forming a helix. The electrical charge current j flows along the magnetic wire in the tangential direction e_{t}. Under the action of the fieldlike torque caused by the Rashba effect, the magnetic subsystem is affected by the effective Rashba field^{36}
with α being the Rashba parameter, being the polarization of the carriers in the ferromagnetic layer, μ_{B} being the Bohr magneton and n being the unit vector perpendicular to the spinorbit layer. Note that the Rashba parameter, see Eq. (6), depends on the material properties of the interface and does not depend on the thickness of the conductive layer^{36,48}.
In such parallel geometry the Rashba field is always directed perpendicular to the wire. For a straight wire the direction of the Rashba field is transversal to the domain magnetization, hence the field can not push the wall^{36}. However for the helix geometry the equilibrium magnetization direction deviates from the wire direction. The energy density of the interaction with the effective Rashba field is , where h = H^{R}/H^{A} is the reduced field normalized by the anisotropy field . There are two components of the magnetic field: is parallel along the domain, hence it pushes the wall. Another one, is directed along e_{2}. In general, magnetic fields with the transversal component results in the deformation of the domain wall profile and other changes of the characteristic parameters like Walker field and maximal domain wall velocities^{50,51,52,53}. However, in the case of weak fields, we can limit our consideration to the parallel field only and neglect the dynamical changes of the wall width. Furthermore, we will not take into account the influence of Ørsted fields generated by the charge current.
Far below the Walker limit, we can use the generalized q − Φ model^{43}, cf. (3):
where and , γ_{e} being the gyromagnetic ratio.
Using as a pair of time dependent collective coordinates, we obtain the stationary motion of the domain wall (see Methods for details)
We checked the theoretically predicted velocities for the domain wall motion (8) by SLaSi and Nmag simulations in the range of effective fields, , see Fig. 3(b–d) and Methods for details. Symbols correspond to SLaSi and Nmag simulations, solid lines correspond to the theoretical predictions, obtained accordingly to Eq. (8), see also Supplementary Eq. (S3). The domain wall velocity is almost linear with the field, see Fig. 3(b) [with a fixed damping constant η = 0.1]. The inverse linear dependence is well pronounced in Fig. 3(c). The maximal velocity v = 0.1 shown in Fig. 3(b) for h = 0.02 corresponds to 35 m/s for Permalloy.
The most intriguing effect in the domain wall dynamics is the torsion dependence of the wall motion. The mobility of the domain wall μ = v/h as a function of the helix torsion is plotted in Fig. 3(d,e) for different helix curvatures. In the case of small curvature and torsion , the wall mobility, accordingly to (8), has the following asymptotic:
Therefore, the domain wall can move only under the joint action of the curvature and torsion. The direction of the domain wall motion depends on the helix chirality , see Fig. 4(a,b), where the headtohead domain wall position is shown at different time moments and Fig. 4(c,d), where the domain wall position is shown as a function of time for different torsions and values of p. The initial domain wall displacement occurs in the positive direction, while the steadystate motion is described by Eq. (8). That is why the close positions of the domain walls in Fig. 4(a,b) occur at different time of 9 ns and 14 ns.
In some respect, the effect of chirality sensitive domain wall mobility is similar to the recently found chiralinduced spin selectivity effect^{54,55} in helical molecules due to the Rashba interaction^{56}.
Discussion
First, we discuss the consequence of the interplay between the curved geometry of the helical wire with the magnetic texture of the transverse domain walls:
The geometrically induced effective anisotropy causes the tilt of the equilibrium magnetization by the angle ψ with respect to the tangential direction. This rotation angle depends on the product of the curvature and the torsion. Due to the nonzero value of ψ there appears a Rashba field component along the magnetization of one of the domains. The field pushes the domain wall and thus, the geometrically induced effective anisotropy is the origin of the Rashba field induced domain wall motion in a magnetic helix. There appears curvature induced easysurface anisotropy. For the helix geometry the anisotropy tends to orient the magnetization within the rectifying surface, i.e. tangentially to the cylinder surface. Additionally, the geometry caused easyaxis anisotropy, favours the orientation of the magnetization along e_{1} direction.
The more intriguing features of the geometry are connected to the curvatures induced Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction. Two effective DMI terms in the energy (2) correspond to all possible Lifshitz invariants in the 1D case. In this respect our analysis is valid also for 1D systems with an intrinsic DMI as well as for the DMI induced due to the structural inversion asymmetry. Using SI units, one estimates that . Using typical values A = 10 pJ/m, we obtain that D_{1} = 0.28 mJ/m^{2} for a helix with the radius R = 50 nm and the pitch P = 300 nm; D_{1} = 0.14 mJ/m^{2} for R = 100 nm, P = 600 nm. These values are comparable to those estimated from the ab initio calculations for multilayer systems^{57,58}.
It is instructive to compare the geometrically induced DMI in helices with the intrinsic DMI for the untwisted objects. In this work we restricted ourselves by considering the quasitangential ground state of the helix, which is realized for the relatively weak curvatures and torsions (weak effective DMI)^{37}. In case of strong DMI, the helix favours the onion ground state^{37}, where the magnetization is almost homogeneous (in the physical space) due to the strong exchange interaction. At the same time, the magnetization rotates in the curvilinear reference frame. Such a state is an analogue of the spiral state in straight magnets with intrinsic DMI.
The geometrically induced DMI drastically changes the internal structure of the transverse domain wall: the azimuthal magnetization angle ϕ rotates inside the wall, see Supplementary Fig. S1. While the domain wall orientation in its centre is determined by the domain wall topological charge p, the direction of the magnetization rotation (i.e. magnetochirality ) mainly depends on the helix torsion σ. One can interpret the sign of σ as the helix chirality (different for righthanded helix when σ > 0 and lefthanded one when σ < 0). Therefore, the magnetochirality of the domain wall is always opposite to the helix chirality, .
In order to elucidate the role of the geometrically induced DMI we compare the domain wall structure in a helix with the domain wall in a straight wire of a biaxial magnet without DMI. Figure 5 shows the comparison of the magnetization distribution for these two geometries obtained by the SLaSi simulations. The panel (b) represents the data for a straight wire with the energy (2), where the anisotropy coefficients , correspond to the effective anisotropies in the helix, and DMI constants . The panel (c) represents the data for a helix with ϰ = 0.1, σ = 0.5. While for the straight wire the magnetization always lies in the plane, m_{n} = 0, the competition between the easyplane anisotropy and DMI results in the essential coordinate dependence of both normal and binormal magnetization components.
The chiral symmetry breaking strongly impacts the domain wall dynamics and allows the motion of domain walls under the action of the Rashba spinorbit torque: the direction of motion if determined by the product of the helix chirality and the wall charge (v ∝ σp). Thus, domain walls can be moved only under the combined action of the Rashba effect and geometrical effects, caused by finite curvature and torsion. The wall does not move in the limit of a planar wire, see Fig. 3. The headtohead and tailtotail domain walls move in opposite directions, see Supplementary Video. Our theory describes the domain wall motion both in magnetically hard and soft helices, see comparison in Fig. 2(b) for the phase slope and 3(b,c) for the domain wall mobility, and also Supplementary Fig. S2. The results obtained for this test system are valid well beyond the considered here specific case of helical wires. The Rashba torque driven domain wall motion will be characteristic for any transverse wall present in a curvilinear system with nonzero torsion.
Methods
Spinlattice and micromagnetic simulations
Numerically we study the magnetization textures in a helix and its dynamics using the inhouse developed spinlattice simulator SLaSi^{44} for anisotropic samples and Nmag^{45} for magnetically soft samples.
When using SLaSi we consider a classical chain of magnetic moments m_{i}, with , situated on a helix (1). We use the anisotropic Heisenberg Hamiltonian taking into account the exchange interaction, easytangential anisotropy and Rashba field. The dynamics of this system is described by a set of N vector LandauLifshitz ordinary differential equations, see ref. 59 for the general description of the SLaSi simulator and ref. 37 for details of the helix simulations. To study the static magnetization distribution spin chains of N = 2000 sites are considered. The domain wall is placed in the centre of the chain. To simulate the magnetization dynamics spin chains of 4000 sites are considered. The domain wall is placed at the 300th site from one end of the helix and is pushed by the fieldlike torque to another end. The velocity is measured at the steady state of the domain wall motion before it is driven out off the helix. In all simulations the magnetic length ℓ = 15a with a being the lattice constant and damping η = 0.01 is used except the case when studying the velocity dependence on damping, where η = 0.01…0.1. For all simulations with magnetostatics the exchange length ℓ_{ex} is used to obtain the effective magnetic length .
The simulations using the Nmag are performed with the following parameters: exchange constant A = 13 pJ/m, saturation magnetization M_{S} = 860 kA/m and damping η = 0.01 which correspond to Permalloy (Ni_{81}Fe_{19}). These parameters result in the effective anisotropy field of T and exchange length nm. Samples of radius 5 nm and length 1 μm are studied. Thermal effects and anisotropy are neglected. The typical Rashba field h = 0.02 (using SI units H^{R} ≈ 10.8 mT) corresponds to the electrical charge current density j = 10.8 mA/μm^{2} for the polarization of carriers and Rashba parameter α = 100 peV m^{34}. The static and dynamical properties of the domain walls on a helix are studied in the same way as for the classical chain described above.
The simulations are performed using the computer clusters of the Bayreuth University^{60}, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv^{61}, Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine^{62}.
Domain wall dynamics
We use the generalized collective coordinate q − Φ approach^{43} based on the effective Lagrangian formalism. Inserting the Ansatz (7) into the “microscopic” Lagrangian with the density and the dissipative function , after integration over the wire, we obtain the effective Lagrangian and the effective dissipative function, normalized by , as follows:
Here and below overdot means the derivative over . The effective equations of motion are then obtained as the Euler–Lagrange–Rayleigh equations
These equation describe the steady motion of the domain wall with the constant velocity (8). The corresponding phase is determined by the equation .
Additional Information
How to cite this article: Pylypovskyi, O. V. et al. Rashba Torque Driven Domain Wall Motion in Magnetic Helices. Sci. Rep. 6, 23316; doi: 10.1038/srep23316 (2016).
References
 1.
Albrecht, M. et al. Magnetic multilayers on nanospheres. Nat Mater 4, 203–206, doi: 10.1038/nmat1324 (2005).
 2.
Ulbrich, T. C. et al. Magnetization reversal in a novel gradient nanomaterial. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 077202, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.077202 (2006).
 3.
Hertel, R. Curvature–induced magnetochirality. SPIN 03, 1340009, doi: 10.1142/S2010324713400092 (2013).
 4.
Streubel, R. et al. Imaging of buried 3D magnetic rolledup nanomembranes. Nano Lett. 14, 3981–3986, doi: 10.1021/nl501333h (2014).
 5.
Streubel, R. et al. Magnetic microstructure of rolledup singlelayer ferromagnetic nanomembranes. Adv. Mater. 26, 316–323, doi: 10.1002/adma.201303003 (2014).
 6.
Streubel, R. et al. Retrieving spin textures on curved magnetic thin films with fullfield soft Xray microscopies. Nat Comms 6, 7612, doi: 10.1038/ncomms8612 (2015).
 7.
Nielsch, K. et al. Hexagonally ordered 100 nm period nickel nanowire arrays. Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 1360, doi: 10.1063/1.1399006 (2001).
 8.
Buchter, A. & Nagel, J. & Rüffer. Reversal mechanism of an individual Ni nanotube simultaneously studied by torque and SQUID magnetometry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 067202, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.067202 (2013).
 9.
Rüffer, D. et al. Magnetic states of an individual Ni nanotube probed by anisotropic magnetoresistance. Nanoscale 4, 4989, doi: 10.1039/C2NR31086D (2012).
 10.
Weber, D. P. et al. Cantilever magnetometry of individual Ni nanotubes. Nano Lett. 12, 6139–6144, doi: 10.1021/nl302950u (2012).
 11.
Dietrich, C. et al. Influence of perpendicular magnetic fields on the domain structure of permalloy microstructures grown on thin membranes. Phys. Rev. B 77, 174427, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.174427 (2008).
 12.
Otálora, J., LópezLópez, J., Vargas, P. & Landeros, P. Chirality switching and propagation control of a vortex domain wall in ferromagnetic nanotubes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 072407, doi: 10.1063/1.3687154 (2012).
 13.
Kravchuk, V. P. et al. Outofsurface vortices in spherical shells. Phys. Rev. B 85, 144433, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.85.144433. (2012).
 14.
Smith, E. J., Makarov, D., Sanchez, S., Fomin, V. M. & Schmidt, O. G. Magnetic microhelix coil structures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 097204, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.097204 (2011).
 15.
Pylypovskyi, O. V. et al. Coupling of chiralities in spin and physical spaces: The Möbius ring as a case study. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 197204, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.197204 (2015).
 16.
Gaididei, Y., Kravchuk, V. P. & Sheka, D. D. Curvature effects in thin magnetic shells. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 257203, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.257203 (2014).
 17.
Sheka, D. D., Kravchuk, V. P. & Gaididei, Y. Curvature effects in statics and dynamics of low dimensional magnets. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 125202, doi: 10.1088/17518113/48/12/125202 (2015).
 18.
Mönch, I. et al. Rolledup magnetic sensor: Nanomembrane architecture for inflow detection of magnetic objects. ACS Nano 5, 7436–7442, doi: 10.1021/nn202351j (2011).
 19.
Müller, C. et al. Towards compact threedimensional magnetoelectronics–magnetoresistance in rolledup Co/Cu nanomembranes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 022409, doi: 10.1063/1.3676269 (2012).
 20.
Balhorn, F. et al. Spinwave interference in threedimensional rolledup ferromagnetic microtubes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 037205, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.037205 (2010).
 21.
Balhorn, F., Jeni, S., Hansen, W., Heitmann, D. & Mendach, S. Axial and azimuthal spinwave eigenmodes in rolledup permalloy stripes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 222402, doi: 10.1063/1.3700809 (2012).
 22.
Liu, L., Ioannides, A. & Streit, M. Single trial analysis of neurophysiological correlates of the recognition of complex objects and facial expressions of emotion. Brain Topogr 11, 291–303, doi: 10.1023/A:1022258620435 (1999).
 23.
Dumas, T. et al. Meg evidence for dynamic amygdala modulations by gaze and facial emotions. PLoS ONE 8, e74145, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074145 (2013).
 24.
Karnaushenko, D. et al. Selfassembled onchipintegrated giant magnetoimpedance sensorics. Adv. Mater. 27, 6582–6589, doi: 10.1002/adma.201503127 (2015).
 25.
Parkin, S. S. P., Hayashi, M. & Thomas, L. Magnetic domainwall racetrack memory. Science 320, 190–194, doi: 10.1126/science.1145799 (2008).
 26.
Yan, M., Kákay, A., Gliga, S. & Hertel, R. Beating the Walker limit with massless domain walls in cylindrical nanowires. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 057201, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.057201 (2010).
 27.
Catalan, G., Seidel, J., Ramesh, R. & Scott, J. F. Domain wall nanoelectronics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 119–156 doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.84.119 (2012).
 28.
Hayashi, M., Thomas, L., Rettner, C., Moriya, R. & Parkin, S. S. P. Direct observation of the coherent precession of magnetic domain walls propagating along permalloy nanowires. Nat Phys 3, 21–25, doi: 10.1038/nphys464 (2007).
 29.
Allwood, D. A. et al. Submicrometer ferromagnetic NOT gate and shift register. Science 296, 2003–2006, doi: 10.1126/science.1070595 (2002).
 30.
Allwood, D. A. et al. Magnetic domain–wall logic. Science 309, 1688–1692 doi: 10.1126/science.1108813 (2005).
 31.
Vázquez, M. Magnetic nano and microwires: design, synthesis, properties and applications (Woodhead Publishing is an imprint of Elsevier, Cambridge, UK, 2015).
 32.
Manchon, A. Spin–orbitronics: A new moment for Berry. Nat Phys 10, 340–341, doi: 10.1038/nphys2957 (2014).
 33.
Kuschel, T. & Reiss, G. Spin orbitronics: Charges ride the spin wave. Nature Nanotech 10, 22–24, doi: 10.1038/nnano.2014.279 (2015).
 34.
Miron, I. M. et al. Currentdriven spin torque induced by the Rashba effect in a ferromagnetic metal layer. Nat Mater 9, 230–234, doi: 10.1038/nmat2613 (2010).
 35.
Martinez, E., Emori, S. & Beach, G. S. D. Currentdriven domain wall motion along high perpendicular anisotropy multilayers: The role of the Rashba field, the spin Hall effect, and the Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 072406, doi: 10.1063/1.4818723 (2013).
 36.
Khvalkovskiy, A. V. et al. Matching domainwall configuration and spinorbit torques for efficient domainwall motion. Phys. Rev. B 87, 020402, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.87.020402 (2013).
 37.
Sheka, D. D., Kravchuk, V. P., Yershov, K. V. & Gaididei, Y. Torsioninduced effects in magnetic nanowires. Phys. Rev. B 92, 054417, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.054417 (2015).
 38.
Slastikov, V. V. & Sonnenberg, C. Reduced models for ferromagnetic nanowires. IMA J Appl Math 77, 220–235, doi: 10.1093/imamat/hxr019 (2012).
 39.
Yershov, K. V., Kravchuk, V. P., Sheka, D. D. & Gaididei, Y. Curvatureinduced domain wall pinning. Phys. Rev. B 92, 104412, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.104412 (2015).
 40.
Dzyaloshinsky, I. A thermodynamic theory of “weak” ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 4, 241255, doi: 10.1016/00223697(58)900763 (1958).
 41.
Moriya, T. Anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism. Phys. Rev. 120, 91–98, doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.120.91 (1960).
 42.
Crépieux, A. & Lacroix, C. DzyaloshinskyMoriya interactions induced by symmetry breaking at a surface. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 182, 341–349, doi: 10.1016/S03048853(97)010445 (1998).
 43.
Kravchuk, V. P. Influence of DzialoshinskiiMoriya interaction on static and dynamic properties of a transverse domain wall. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 367, 9, doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2014.04.073 (2014).
 44.
SLaSi spinlattice simulations package. Kyiv, Ukraine. URL http://slasi.knu.ua.
 45.
Fischbacher, T., Franchin, M., Bordignon, G. & Fangohr, H. A systematic approach to multiphysics extensions of finiteelementbased micromagnetic simulations: Nmag. IEEE Trans. Magn. 43, 2896–2898, doi: 10.1109/TMAG.2007.893843 (2007).
 46.
Obata, K. & Tatara, G. Currentinduced domain wall motion in Rashba spinorbit system. Phys. Rev. B 77, 214429, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.214429 (2008).
 47.
Sinova, J., Valenzuela, S. O., Wunderlich, J., Back, C. H. & Jungwirth, T. Spin hall effects. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1213–1260, doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.87.1213 (2015).
 48.
Qaiumzadeh, A., Duine, R. A. & Titov, M. Spinorbit torques in twodimensional Rashba ferromagnets. Phys. Rev. B 92, 014402, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.014402 (2015).
 49.
Manchon, A. & Zhang, S. Theory of spin torque due to spinorbit coupling. Phys. Rev. B 79, 094422, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.094422 (2009).
 50.
Sobolev, V., Huang, H. & Chen, S. Domain wall dynamics in the presence of an external magnetic field normal to the anisotropy axis. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 147, 284–298, doi: 10.1016/03048853(95)000658 (1995).
 51.
Bryan, M. T., Schrefl, T., Atkinson, D. & Allwood, D. A. Magnetic domain wall propagation in nanowires under transverse magnetic fields. J. Appl. Phys. 103, 073906, doi: 10.1063/1.2887918 (2008).
 52.
Lu, J. & Wang, X. R. Motion of transverse domain walls in thin magnetic nanostripes under transverse magnetic fields. J. Appl. Phys. 107, 083915 doi: 10.1063/1.3386468 (2010).
 53.
Goussev, A., Lund, R. G., Robbins, J. M., Slastikov, V. & Sonnenberg, C. Fast domainwall propagation in uniaxial nanowires with transverse fields. Phys. Rev. B 88, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.88.024425 (2013).
 54.
Göhler, B. et al. Spin selectivity in electron transmission through selfassembled monolayers of doublestranded DNA. Science 331, 894–897, doi: 10.1126/science.1199339 (2011).
 55.
Naaman, R. & Waldeck, D. H. Chiralinduced spin selectivity effect. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 3, 2178–2187, doi: 10.1021/jz300793y (2012).
 56.
Eremko, A. A. & Loktev, V. M. Spin sensitive electron transmission through helical potentials. Phys. Rev. B 88, 165409, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.88.165409 (2013).
 57.
Grigoriev, S. V. et al. Principal interactions in the magnetic system Fe_{1−x}Co_{x}Si: Magnetic structure and critical temperature by neutron diffraction and SQUID measurements. Phys. Rev. B 76, 092407, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.092407 (2007).
 58.
Yang, H., Thiaville, A., Rohart, S., Fert, A. & Chshiev, M. Anatomy of Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction at Co/Pt interfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 267210, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.267210 (2015).
 59.
Pylypovskyi, O. V., Sheka, D. D., Kravchuk, V. P. & Gaididei, Y. Effects of surface anisotropy on magnetic vortex core. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 361, 201–205, doi: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2014.02.094 (2014).
 60.
Bayreuth University computing cluster. URL http://www.rz.unibayreuth.de/ (Date of access:11/02/2016).
 61.
Highperformance computing cluster of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. URL http://cluster.univ.kiev.ua/eng/ (Date of access:11/02/2016).
 62.
Computing gridcluster of the Bogolyubov Insitute for Theoretical Physics of NAS of Ukraine. URL http://horst7.bitp.kiev.ua (Date of access:11/02/2016).
Acknowledgements
O. P. acknowledges a financial support from DAAD (Code No. 91530902FSK). O. P. and D. S. thank F. G. Mertens for helpful discussions, thank the University of Bayreuth, where part of this work was performed, for kind hospitality. O. P., D. S. and V. Kr. acknowledge the support from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. This work is financed in part via the ERC within the EU Seventh Framework Programme (ERC Grant No. 306277) and the EU FET Programme (FETOpen Grant No. 618083).
Author information
Affiliations
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 01601 Kyiv, Ukraine
 Oleksandr V. Pylypovskyi
 & Denis D. Sheka
Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 03680 Kyiv, Ukraine
 Volodymyr P. Kravchuk
 , Kostiantyn V. Yershov
 & Yuri Gaididei
National University of “KyivMohyla Academy”, 04655 Kyiv, Ukraine
 Kostiantyn V. Yershov
HelmholtzZentrum DresdenRossendorf e. V., Institute of Ion Beam Physics and Materials Research, 01328 Dresden, Germany
 Denys Makarov
Institute for Integrative Nanosciences, IFW Dresden, 01069 Dresden, Germany
 Denys Makarov
Authors
Search for Oleksandr V. Pylypovskyi in:
Search for Denis D. Sheka in:
Search for Volodymyr P. Kravchuk in:
Search for Kostiantyn V. Yershov in:
Search for Denys Makarov in:
Search for Yuri Gaididei in:
Contributions
O.P. and D.S. formulated the theoretical problem and performed the analytical calculations. O.P. performed spinlattice simulations. K.Y. performed micromagnetic simulations. O.P., D.S., V.K., K.Y., D.M. and Y.G. contributed to the discussion and writing of the manuscript text.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Denis D. Sheka.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
About this article
Further reading

Asymptotic model for twisted bent ferromagnetic wires with electric current
Zeitschrift für angewandte Mathematik und Physik (2019)

Mesoscale DzyaloshinskiiMoriya interaction: geometrical tailoring of the magnetochirality
Scientific Reports (2018)

Twophoton lithography for 3D magnetic nanostructure fabrication
Nano Research (2018)

Modeling magnetic domainwall evolution in trilayers with structural inversion asymmetry
Ricerche di Matematica (2018)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.