Dynamical and Static Structure Factors in Hedgehog-Antihedgehog Order in Icosahedral 1/1 Approximant Crystal
Extracted source text ยท arXiv 2405.03968
%% ****** Start of file apstemplate.tex ****** %
%%
%%
%% This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
%% Version 4.1r of REVTeX, August 2010
%%
%%
%% Copyright (c) 2001, 2009, 2010 The American Physical Society.
%%
%% See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
%%
%
% This is a template for producing manuscripts for use with REVTEX 4.0
% Copy this file to another name and then work on that file.
% That way, you always have this original template file to use.
%
% Group addresses by affiliation; use superscriptaddress for long
% author lists, or if there are many overlapping affiliations.
% For Phys. Rev. appearance, change preprint to twocolumn.
% Choose pra, prb, prc, prd, pre, prl, prstab, prstper, or rmp for journal
% Add 'draft' option to mark overfull boxes with black boxes
% Add 'showpacs' option to make PACS codes appear
% Add 'showkeys' option to make keywords appear
%\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,groupedaddress]{revtex4-1}
\documentclass[aps,prb,twocolumn,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4-1}
%\documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4-1}
%%%%\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4-1}
%%%%%%\documentclass[aps,prb,preprint,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4-1}
%\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4-1}
%\documentclass[aps,prl,preprint,superscriptaddress]{revtex4-1}
%\documentclass[aps,prl,reprint,groupedaddress]{revtex4-1}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
\usepackage{bm}% bold math
\usepackage{amsmath}
%\usepackage{txfonts}
%\usepackage{multicol}
%\usepackage{nidanfloat}
\usepackage{color}
% You should use BibTeX and apsrev.bst for references
% Choosing a journal automatically selects the correct APS
% BibTeX style file (bst file), so only uncomment the line
% below if necessary.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\begin{document}
\def\gsim{\mathop {\vtop {\ialign {##\crcr
$\hfil \displaystyle {>}\hfil $\crcr \noalign {\kern1pt \nointerlineskip }
$\,\sim$ \crcr \noalign {\kern1pt}}}}\limits}
\def\lsim{\mathop {\vtop {\ialign {##\crcr
$\hfil \displaystyle {<}\hfil $\crcr \noalign {\kern1pt \nointerlineskip }
$\,\,\sim$ \crcr \noalign {\kern1pt}}}}\limits}
% Use the \preprint command to place your local institutional report
% number in the upper righthand corner of the title page in preprint mode.
% Multiple \preprint commands are allowed.
% Use the 'preprintnumbers' class option to override journal defaults
% to display numbers if necessary
%\preprint{}
%Title of paper
\title{
%Topological quasicrystal
%
%\textcolor{red}
%{
Dynamical and Static Structure Factors in Hedgehog-Antihedgehog Order in Icosahedral 1/1 Approximant Crystal}
%}
% repeat the \author .. \affiliation etc. as needed
% \email, \thanks, \homepage, \altaffiliation all apply to the current
% author. Explanatory text should go in the []'s, actual e-mail
% address or url should go in the {}'s for \email and \homepage.
% Please use the appropriate macro foreach each type of information
% \affiliation command applies to all authors since the last
% \affiliation command. The \affiliation command should follow the
% other information
% \affiliation can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
\author{Shinji Watanabe$^{*}$}
%\email[]{Your e-mail address}
%\homepage[]{Your web page}
%\thanks{}
%\altaffiliation{}
\affiliation{Department of Basic Sciences, Kyushu Institute of Technology, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka 804-8550, Japan
}
%Collaboration name if desired (requires use of superscriptaddress
%option in \documentclass). \noaffiliation is required (may also be
%used with the \author command).
%\collaboration can be followed by \email, \homepage, \thanks as well.
%\collaboration{}
%\noaffiliation
\date{\today}
\begin{abstract}
Recent discoveries of magnetic long-range orders in the icosahedral quasicrystal and topological magnetic structures on the icosahedron (IC) as the hedgehog state and the antihedgehog state have attracted great interest.
Here, we report our theoretical analysis of the dynamical as well as static structure of the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 approximant crystal (AC).
By constructing the effective magnetic model for the rare-earth based AC,
on the basis of the linear spin-wave theory, the excitation energy is shown to exhibit the reciprocal dispersion, as a consequence of preservation of the spatial inversion symmetry by the hedgehog-antihedgehog ordering.
The static structure factor is shown to be expressed generally in the convolution form of the lattice structure factor and the magnetic structure factor on the IC(s) and the numerical calculation reveals the extinction rule.
The dynamical structure factor shows that the high intensities appear in the low-energy branch along the $\Gamma$-X line and the R-$\Gamma$-M line in the reciprocal space.
\end{abstract}
% insert suggested PACS numbers in braces on next line
%\pacs{71.27.+a, 75.20.Hr, 71.10.-w, 71.20.Eh}
% insert suggested keywords - APS authors don't need to do this
%\keywords{}
%\maketitle must follow title, authors, abstract, \pacs, and \keywords
\maketitle
% body of paper here - Use proper section commands
% References should be done using the \cite, \ref, and \label commands
%%%\section{}
% Put \label in argument of \section for cross-referencing
%\section{\label{}}
%%%\subsection{}
%%%\subsubsection{}
% If in two-column mode, this environment will change to single-column
% format so that long equations can be displayed. Use
% sparingly.
%\begin{widetext}
% put long equation here
%\end{widetext}
% figures should be put into the text as floats.
% Use the graphics or graphicx packages (distributed with LaTeX2e)
% and the \includegraphics macro defined in those packages.
% See the LaTeX Graphics Companion by Michel Goosens, Sebastian Rahtz,
% and Frank Mittelbach for instance.
%
% Here is an example of the general form of a figure:
% Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
% that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
% Use the figure* environment if the figure should span across the
% entire page. There is no need to do explicit centering.
% \begin{figure}
% \includegraphics{}%
% \caption{\label{}}
% \end{figure}
% Surround figure environment with turnpage environment for landscape
% figure
% \begin{turnpage}
% \begin{figure}
% \includegraphics{}%
% \caption{\label{}}
% \end{figure}
% \end{turnpage}
% tables should appear as floats within the text
%
% Here is an example of the general form of a table:
% Fill in the caption in the braces of the \caption{} command. Put the label
% that you will use with \ref{} command in the braces of the \label{} command.
% Insert the column specifiers (l, r, c, d, etc.) in the empty braces of the
% \begin{tabular}{} command.
% The ruledtabular enviroment adds doubled rules to table and sets a
% reasonable default table settings.
% Use the table* environment to get a full-width table in two-column
% Add \usepackage{longtable} and the longtable (or longtable*}
% environment for nicely formatted long tables. Or use the the [H]
% placement option to break a long table (with less control than
% in longtable).
% \begin{table}%[H] add [H] placement to break table across pages
% \caption{\label{}}
% \begin{ruledtabular}
% \begin{tabular}{}
% Lines of table here ending with \\
% \end{tabular}
% \end{ruledtabular}
% \end{table}
% Surround table environment with turnpage environment for landscape
% table
% \begin{turnpage}
% \begin{table}
% \caption{\label{}}
% \begin{ruledtabular}
% \begin{tabular}{}
% \end{tabular}
% \end{ruledtabular}
% \end{table}
% \end{turnpage}
% Specify following sections are appendices. Use \appendix* if there
% only one appendix.
%\appendix
%\section{}
%---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\section{Introduction}
Quasicrystal (QC) has no periodicity of the lattice but possesses unique rotation symmetry forbidden in periodic crystals.
Since the discovery of the QC~\cite{Shechtman}, the understanding of the lattice structure has proceeded~\cite{Tsai,Takakura}.
However, the electronic state in the QC is far from complete understanding because the Bloch theorem based on the translational invariance can no longer be applied to the QC.
Hence, the clarification of the electronic states and the physical property in the QC is the frontier of the condensed matter physics.
One of the interesting questions about the QC has been whether the magnetic long-range order is realized in the three-dimensional QC.
Experimentally, the magnetic long-range order has been explored in the QC and also in the approximant crystal (AC) whose lattice is composed of the common local atomic structure to that in the QC with periodicity.
In the rare-earth based 1/1 AC where the 4f electrons are responsible for the magnetism, the magnetic long-range order has been observed by the bulk measurements such as the magnetic susceptibility and the specific heat ~\cite{Suzuki2021}.
The antiferromagnetic (AFM) order has been observed in the 1/1 AC Cd$_6$R (R=Tb, Y, Pr, Nd, Sm, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, and Lu) ~\cite{Tamura2010,Mori} and in the 1/1 AC Au-Al-R (R=Gd and Tb)~\cite{Ishikawa2018}.
The ferromagnetic (FM) order has been observed
in the 1/1 AC Au-SM-R (SM=Si, Ge, and Al; R=Gd, Tb, Dy, and Ho)~\cite{Hiroto2013,Hiroto2014,Ishikawa2016}
%\textcolor{magenta}
{(Note that Au-SM-R is the composition tunable compound which exhibits the FM order and AFM order depending on the composition ratio of Au and SM, e.g., Au$_x$Al$_{86-x}$Gd~[10].)}.
As for the QC, the spin-glass behavior has been observed in the QC Cd-R (R=Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, and Tm)~\cite{Goldman}.
Recently, the FM orders have been discovered in the QC Au$_{65}$Ga$_{20}$R$_{15}$ (R=Gd and Tb)~\cite{Tamura2021} and in Au$_x$Ga$_{85-x}$Dy$_{15}$ $(x=62$-$68)$~\cite{Takeuchi2023}, which have brought about the breakthrough.
Among these ACs and QCs, the neutron measurements have been performed recently in some Tb-based ACs and Ho-based AC, which have revealed the non-collinear and non-coplanar alignments of the 4f magnetic moments
of the ferrimagnet in the 1/1 ACs Au$_{70}$Si$_{17}$Tb$_{13}$~\cite{Hiroto} and Au-Si-R (R=Tb, Ho)~\cite{Gebresenbut} as well as the antiferromagnet in the 1/1 AC Au$_{72}$Al$_{14}$Tb$_{14}$~\cite{Sato2019}.
These ACs and the QCs are composed of the concentric shell structures of atomic polyhedrons, which is referred to as the Tsai-type cluster~\cite{Tsai,Takakura}.
Inside the Tsai-type cluster, the rare-earth atoms are located at the 12 vertices of the icosahedron (IC) [see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(a)].
To understand the magnetic property of the rare-earth based icosahderal QCs and ACs, the clarification of the crystalline electric field (CEF) at the rare-earth site is necessary.
Recently, theoretical formulation of the CEF at the rare-earth site in the QC and AC has been developed on the basis of the point charge model~\cite{WK2021}.
By applying this formulation to the QC Au-Al-Yb~\cite{WK2021} and Au-SM-Tb~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}, the CEF was analyzed theoretically. Then, it was shown that
the CEF ground state possesses the uniaxial anisotropy at each rare-earth site, giving rise to the unique magnetic structures on the IC~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}.
Interestingly, the magnetic structures which have finite topological charge $n$ defined on the IC such as the hedgehog state displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(a) have been shown to appear.
The topological charge has the physical meaning of the number of covering the whole sphere by the magnetic moments on the IC.
The hedgehog state, where all 12 magnetic moments are directed outward from the IC shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(a), has $n=+1$~\cite{WSR}.
The antihedgehog state, where all 12 magnetic moments are directed inward from the IC as displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(b), has $n=-1$.
The hedgehog state is regarded as the source of the emergent field while the antihedgehog state is regarded as the sink of the emergent field~\cite{Kanazawa,Tokura2021}.
Then, the effective model for the magnetism in the 1/1 AC and QC, where the magnetic easy axis at each Tb site arising from the CEF is taken into account, was constructed~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}.
By numerical calculations in the effective model applied to the Cd$_{5.7}$Yb-type QC~\cite{Takakura}, it has been shown that the uniform hedgehog state is stabilized in the ground-state phase diagram~\cite{WSR}.
This is the theoretical discovery of the topological magnetic state in the QC, which has attracted great interest.
Moreover, the recent analysis of the dynamical structure factor in the QC has revealed that the non-reciprocal excitation in the uniform hedgehog order emerges in the vast extent of the wave vector ${\bm q}$-energy $\omega$ plane, i.e., $S({\bm q},\omega)\ne S(-{\bm q},\omega)$~\cite{WHH2022}.
%%%%%%%% Fig.1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{HH_AHH_AC.eps}%
\caption{
(a) The hedgehog state on the IC. The number labels the Tb sites at the 12 vertices of the IC.
(b) The antihedgehog state on the IC.
(c) The hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
The frame box is the bcc unit cell.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
(d) The nearest-neighbor (N.N.) interactions $J_1$ (blue line) and next-nearest-neighbor (N.N.N.) interactions $J_2$ (green dashed line) for the intra IC and the inter IC are illustrated.
}
%%%%%
}
\label{fig:HAH}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
To get insight into the emergence mechanism of the nonreciprocal excitation, the dynamical structure factor in the 1/1 AC has been analyzed recently by assuming the uniform hedgehog order~\cite{W2023}.
Then,
the non-reciprocal energy dispersion of magnon has been shown to appear as a consequence of the inversion symmetry breaking by the uniform hedgehog ordering~\cite{W2023}.
In the ground-state phase diagram of the effective model applied to the 1/1 AC, it was shown that the hedgehog state forms the AFM order~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}.
Namely, the hedgehog state is formed on the IC located at the center of the unit cell of the body-centered cubic (bcc) lattice while the antihedgehog state is formed on the IC located at the corner of the bcc unit cell as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c)~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}.
In this study, we theoretically analyze the dynamical as well as static structure factor in the AFM hedgehog order in the 1/1 AC as the true ground state.
It is shown that the reciprocal excitation emerges, which is in sharp contrast to the case of the uniform hedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
This is understood as the alternative distribution of the hedgehog state and antihedgehog state preserves the inversion symmetry in the 1/1 AC.
Recently, the dynamical structure factors for the topological magnetic textures such as the Skyrmion and the hedgehog in periodic crystals have been studied~\cite{Kato2021,Eto2022}, which have attracted interest.
As for the QC, the lattice dynamics was studied in the Zn-Mg-Sc icosahedral QC and the 1/1 AC by inelastic X-ray- and neutron-scattering experiments~\cite{Boissieu}.
Theoretically, the dynamical spin structure factors were studied in the low-dimensional systems such as the Fibonacci chain~\cite{Ashraff1989} and the two dimensional QCs~\cite{Ashraff1990, Wessel2005}.
Hence, the present study in the three dimensional icosahedral AC considering the magnetic anisotropy arising from the CEF is expected not only to contribute to the understanding the dynamics of the topological magnetic texture but also to get insight into the unique magnetic structure in the icosahedral QC.
The organization of this paper is as follows: In section~II, we introduce the effective model for magnetism in the rare-earth based 1/1 AC. In section~III, we analyze the static structure factor of magnetism in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC. In section~IV, we explain the linear spin-wave theory applied to the 1/1 AC and show the results of the excitation energy and the dynamical structure factor in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC. In section~V, we summarize the paper and discuss the future issues.
%-----------------------------------------------------------------
\section{Effective model for magnetism}
By taking into account the effect of the magnetic anisotropy arising from the CEF,
the effective minimal model for magnetism in the rare-earth based QC and AC has been constructed~\cite{WSR,WPNAS}.
In this study, we consider the effective minimal model
%
\begin{eqnarray}
H=\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}J_{ij}{\bm S}_i\cdot{\bm S}_j-D\sum_{i}({\bm S}_i\cdot\hat{\bm e}^{i}_{3})^2
\label{eq:H}
\end{eqnarray}
%
in the 1/1 AC. As the atomic coordinates, we employ the lattice structure of the 1/1 AC identified
%experimentally
%\textcolor{magenta}
{by the X-ray measurement}
in Au$_{70}$Si$_{17}$Tb$_{13}$~\cite{Hiroto}.
The frame box shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) represents the unit cell of the bcc lattice with the lattice constant $a=14.726~{\rm \AA}$ where the two ICs are located at the center and the corner.
In Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}),
${\bm S}_i$ represents the magnetic moment of the total angular momentum $J=6$ at the $i$th Tb site with $S_i=6$, which is referred to as ``spin'' hereafter.
The second term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}) expresses the effect of the uniaxial anisotropy due to the CEF, where $\hat{\bm e}^{i}_{3}$ is the unit vector directed to the magnetic easy axis at each Tb site (see section IV and also Fig.~\ref{fig:local_e123} below).
In Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}), $J_{ij}$ is set to be the nearest neighbor (N.N.) interaction $J_1$ and the next N.N. (N.N.N.) interaction $J_2$ for the intra IC and also for the inter IC.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
In ref.~\cite{WPNAS}, the ground-state phase diagram of the model (\ref{eq:H}) for the large-$D$ limit was discussed, where the stability of the ground state in the 1/1 AC was analyzed by comparing the energy of the uniform distribution of the magnetic ground state on the IC and the staggered distribution. Recently, the numerical calculation for the ground state of the model for the large-$D$ limit in the 1/1 AC has been performed without assuming the ground state on the IC~\cite{W2023b}. Namely,
i}n
%%%%
the large-$D$ limit of the model (\ref{eq:H}), the ground state phase diagram was determined by numerical calculations, where the AFM hedgehog order, i.e., the hedgehog-antihedgehog order shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) is realized for $J_2/J_1< 0.284$ with the FM interaction $J_1<0$~\cite{WPNAS,W2023b}.
The strong N.N. interaction $J_{1}$ stabilizes the hedgehog state and antihedgehog state at the center IC and corner IC in the bcc unit cell in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) not only for the intra IC but also for the inter IC.
In this paper, we take $J_1$ as the energy unit, i.e., set $J_1=-1.0$ and mainly show the results for $J_2=-0.1$ as the typical parameter.
We note that the effective model which corresponds to the large-$D$ limit of the model (\ref{eq:H}) succeeded in explaining the magnetic structures of the FM order of the ferrimagnetism on the IC observed in the 1/1 AC Au$_{70}$Si$_{17}$Tb$_{13}$~\cite{Hiroto} and the AFM order of the whirling-antiwhirling states on the ICs observed in the 1/1 AC Au$_{72}$Al$_{14}$Tb$_{14}$~\cite{Sato2019,WPNAS}.
The model (\ref{eq:H}) is expected to be relevant to not only the Tb-based AC but also the broad range of the rare-earth based-ACs.
The interaction $J_{ij}$ in the first term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}) set in this study is explicitly noted as follows:
$J_1$ is set for 5 bonds for each Tb site with the bond length $0.374a$ (1 bond) and $0.378a$ (4 bonds) and $J_2$ is set for 5 bonds for each Tb site with the bond length $0.610a$ (4 bonds) and $0.612a$ (1 bond) for the intra IC
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
[see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(d)].
%%%%%
For the inter IC, $J_1$ is set for 5 bonds for each Tb site with the bond length $0.368a$ (4 bonds) and $0.388a$ (1 bond) and $J_2$ is set for 7 bonds with the bond length $0.528a$ (2 bonds), $0.530a$ (4 bonds), and $0.539a$ (1 bond)
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
[see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(d)].
%%%%%
%In this study, we analyze the dynamical and static structures of the AFM order of the hedgehog and antihedgehog states shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c).
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
In this paper, we analyze the property of the dynamics of the hedgehog-antihedgehog ordered state shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) by applying the liner spin-wave theory to the model (\ref{eq:H}) for large $D$. Namely, the excitation from the ground state of the classical limit of the model (\ref{eq:H}) is analyzed.
}
%%%%%
Hence, $\hat{\bm e}_{3}^i$ in the second term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}) is set as $(\pm\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau+2}},\pm\frac{\tau}{\sqrt{\tau+2}},0)$ for the $i=1, 3, 11$, and 12th site on the IC in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(a),
$(\pm\frac{\tau}{\sqrt{\tau+2}},0,\pm\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau+2}})$ for the $i=5, 6, 8$, and 9th site, and $(0,\pm\frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau+2}},\pm\frac{\tau}{\sqrt{\tau+2}})$ for $i=2, 4, 7$, and 10th site, respectively,
where $\tau$ is the golden mean $\tau=(1+\sqrt{5})/2$.
%------------------------------------------------------------------
\section{Static structure factor of magnetism}
First, let us analyze the static structure factor
%
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{s}({\bm q})=\left\langle\left|
\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i}{\bm S}_i e^{i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_i}
\right|^2
\right\rangle,
\label{eq:Fs}
\end{eqnarray}
%
for the ground state of the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
Here, $N$ is the total number of the Tb sites and ${\bm q}$ is the wave vector.
Since the position vector of the $i$th Tb site ${\bm r}_i$ is expressed as ${\bm r}_i={\bm R}_j+{\bm r}_{0m}$ where ${\bm R}_j$ is the position vector of the center of the $j$th unit cell [see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c)] and ${\bm r}_{0m}$ is the position vector of the $m$th Tb site inside the unit cell $(m=1, 2, \cdots, 24)$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:Fs}) is expressed as the convolution form
%
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{s}({\bm q})=F_{L}({\bm q})S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q}).
\label{eq:FLS}
\end{eqnarray}
%
Here, $F_{L}({\bm q})$ is the structure factor of the lattice and $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ is the magnetic structure factor of the 2 ICs inside the unit cell, which are defined as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{L}({\bm q})&=&\frac{1}{N_{L}^2}\sum_{j=1}^{N_L}\sum_{j'=1}^{N_L}e^{i{\bm q}\cdot({\bm R}_j-{\bm R}_{j'})},
\label{eq:FL}
\\
S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})&=&\frac{1}{24^2}\sum_{m=1}^{24}\sum_{m'=1}^{24}\langle{\bm S}_{m}\cdot{\bm S}_{m'}\rangle e^{i{\bm q}\cdot({\bm r}_{0m}-{\bm r}_{0m'})},
\label{eq:S2IC}
\end{eqnarray}
%
respectively. Here, $N_{L}=N_{1}^3$ is the number of the unit cell and $N=24N_{L}$ holds.
The position vector ${\bm R}_j$ is expressed as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bm R}_j=n_1{\bm a}_1+n_2{\bm a}_2+n_3{\bm a}_3,
\label{eq:R}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where ${\bm a}_i$ is the basic translation vector of the lattice defined by ${\bm a}_1=a(1,0,0)$, ${\bm a}_2=a(0,1,0)$, and ${\bm a}_3=a(0,0,1)$ with integer $n_i$ $(i=1, 2, 3)$.
The wave vector ${\bm q}$ is expressed as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bm q}=h{\bm b}_1+k{\bm b}_2+l{\bm b}_3,
\label{eq:q}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where ${\bm b}_i$ is the basic translation vector of the reciprocal lattice defined by ${\bm b}_1=\frac{2\pi}{a}(1,0,0)$, ${\bm b}_2=\frac{2\pi}{a}(0,1,0)$, and ${\bm b}_3=\frac{2\pi}{a}(0,0,1)$.
Under the periodic boundary condition along the $N_1{\bm a}_i$ $(i=1, 2, 3)$ directions, $h$, $k$, and $l$ are given by $h=\frac{m_1}{N_1}$, $k=\frac{m_2}{N_1}$, and $l=\frac{m_3}{N_1}$, respectively with integer $m_i$ $(i=1, 2, 3)$.
By substituting Eqs.~(\ref{eq:R}) and (\ref{eq:q}) into Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL}), $F_L({\bm q})$ is calculated as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{L}({\bm q})=\frac{1}{N_L^2}\frac{\sin^2(\pi hN_1)}{\sin^2(\pi h)}\frac{\sin^2(\pi kN_1)}{\sin^2(\pi k)}\frac{\sin^2(\pi lN_1)}{\sin^2(\pi l)}.
\label{eq:FL2}
\end{eqnarray}
%
For integer $h$, $k$, and $l$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:q}) becomes the reciprocal lattice vector ${\bm q}={\bm Q}_{hkl}\equiv h{\bm b}_1+k{\bm b}_2+l{\bm b}_3$.
Then, Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL2}) leads to $F_L({\bm Q}_{hkl})=1$.
As $h$, $k$, and $l$ deviate from the integer values, $F_L({\bm q})$ decays rapidly in the finite-size system.
In the bulk limit, namely for $N_1\to\infty$, we obtain
%
\begin{eqnarray}
F_L(\bm q)=\delta_{{\bm q},{\bm Q}_{hkl}}.
\label{eq:FL_bulk}
\end{eqnarray}
%
This implies that from the convolution form of Eq.~(\ref{eq:FLS}), the static structure factor $F_s({\bm q})$ can have the non-zero value for integer $h$, $k$, and $l$ where $F_{L}({\bm q})$ becomes non zero.
Next, let us analyze the magnetic structure factor of the 2 ICs inside the unit cell [see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c)] $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:S2IC}).
We have calculated $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:S2IC}) in the system for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=256$ numerically.
By searching the maximum of $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=h{\bm b}_1+k{\bm b}_2+l{\bm b}_3$ with integers $h, k, l\in[-10, 10]$ numerically, we find that the maximum value $0.2158$ appears at the 12 ${\bm q}$ points with $(h,k,l)=(\pm10, 0, \pm 9)$, $(0, \pm 9, \pm 10)$, and $(\pm 9, \pm 10, 0)$.
We plot $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,0)$ in the $h$-$k$
plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sq}(a).
We have confirmed that $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})=0$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,l)$
%with the even integers $h$, $k$, and $l$.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
in case that all $h$, $k$, and $l$ are even integers or one of $h$, $k$, and $l$ is even integer.
%%%%%
We have also calculated $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(0,k,l)$ and for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,0,l)$. The results are the same as Fig.~\ref{fig:Sq}(a) with $h$ and $k$ being replaced with $k$ and $l$ respectively and with $h$ and $k$ being replaced with $l$ and $h$ respectively.
The systematic absence of reflection $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ occurs for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,l)$
%for all even integers $h$, $k$, and $l$ and also for the case that the two of $h$, $k$, and $l$ are even integers.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
for all or one of even integer among $h$, $k$, and $l$.
%%%%%
%%%%%%%% Fig.2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Sq.eps}%
\caption{
(a) The intensity plot of the magnetic structure factor for the 2 ICs $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,0)$ in the $h$-$k$ plane.
(b) The intensity plot of the magnetic structure factor $F_s({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,0)$ in the $h$-$k$ plane.
The color scale is common to that in (a).
}
\label{fig:Sq}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:FLS}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL_bulk}), it turns out that $F_s({\bm q})$ in the bulk limit is equivalent to $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=h{\bm b}_1+k{\bm b}_2+l{\bm b}_3$ with integers $h$, $k$, and $l$.
Hence, the maximum of $F_s({\bm q})$ appears at $(h,k,l)=(\pm10, 0, \pm 9)$, $(0, \pm 9, \pm 10)$, and $(\pm 9, \pm 10, 0)$ for $h$, $k$, $l\in[-10,10]$.
We plot the static magnetic structure factor $F_s({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,0)$ in the
%%%%%
$h$-%$l$
$k$
%%%%%
plane in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sq}(b).
As noted above, $F_s({\bm q})$ for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(0,k,l)$ and ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,0,l)$ are obtained by replacing $h$ and $k$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sq}(b) with $k$ and $l$ respectively and with
%$h$ and $l$ respectively.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
$l$
%%%%%
and
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
$h$
%%%%%
respectively.
The systematic absence of reflection $F_s({\bm q})=0$ occurs for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,l)$ for the even integers $h$, $k$, and $l$ and also for the case that the two of $h$, $k$, and $l$ are
%even
%\textcolor{magenta}
odd integers.
%--------------------------------------------------------
\section{Linear spin-wave theory}
%%%%%%%% Fig.3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=3cm]{local_e123.eps}%
\caption{
Local orthogonal coordinate at the $i$th site spanned by unit vectors $\hat{\bm e}_i$ $(i=1, 2, 3)$.
The unit vector $\hat{\bm e}^{i}_3$ is set along the magnetic-moment direction at each site.
}
\label{fig:local_e123}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
To analyze the dynamical structure factor as well as the excitation energy in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC, we employ the linear spin-wave theory.
Since the hedgehog state and antihedgehog state are the non-collinear as well as non-coplanar magnetic state,
it is convenient to introduce the orthogonal coordinate at each Tb site.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:local_e123},
the local coordinate at the $i$th Tb site is spanned by the unit vectors $\hat{\bm e}^{i}_{\beta}$~$(\beta=1,2$, and $3)$, where $\hat{\bm e}^{i}_3$ points to the magnetic-moment direction.
The unit vector
$\hat{\bm e}^{i}_{\beta}$ and the unit vector $\hat{\bm r}_{\alpha}$ in the global coordinate $(\hat{\bm r}_1\equiv\hat{\bm x}, \hat{\bm r}_2\equiv\hat{\bm y}$, and $\hat{\bm r}_3\equiv\hat{\bm z})$ are related as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{\bm r}_{\alpha}=R_{\alpha\beta}^{i}\hat{\bm e}_{\beta}^{i},
\label{eq:r_e}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where the direction of $\hat{\bm e}^{i}_3$ is denoted by the polar angles $(\theta_i, \phi_i)$ and $R^{i}$ is the rotation matrix defined by~\cite{Haraldsen},
%
\begin{eqnarray}
R^{i}=
\begin{bmatrix}
\cos\theta_i\cos\phi_i & -\sin\phi_i & \sin\theta_i\cos\phi_i \\
\cos\theta_i\sin\phi_i & \cos\phi_i & \sin\theta_i\sin\phi_i \\
-\sin\theta_i & 0 & \cos\theta_i
\end{bmatrix}.
\label{eq:Rmat}
\end{eqnarray}
%
Then, the ``spin" interaction between the $i$th and $j$th sites in the first term of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}) is written as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}J_{i,j}({\bm S}_i\cdot{\bm e}_{\alpha}^i)({\bm S}_j\cdot{\bm e}_{\beta}^j)\sum_{\gamma}R_{\alpha,\gamma}^{i}R_{\gamma,\beta}^{j}.
\label{eq:hamil2}
\end{eqnarray}
%
After substituting the relations
${\bm S}_i\cdot\hat{\bm e}_1^i=(S_i^{+}+S_i^{-})/2$ and ${\bm S}_i\cdot\hat{\bm e}_2^i=(S_i^{+}-S_i^{-})/(2i)$ into Eq.~(\ref{eq:hamil2}), where $S_i^{+}$ is the raising ``spin" operator and $S_i^{-}$ is the lowering ``spin" operator, the Holstein-Primakoff transformation~\cite{HP} is applied to $H$.
In this way, the ``spin'' operators in Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}) are transformed into the boson operators as
$S_i^{+}=\sqrt{2S-n_i}a_i$, $S_i^{-}=a_i^{\dagger}\sqrt{2S-n_i}$ and ${\bm S}_i\cdot\hat{\bm e}_3^i=S-n_i$ with $n_i\equiv a_i^{\dagger}a_i$
where $a^{\dagger}_i$~$(a_i)$ is the creation (annihilation) operator of the boson at the $i$th site.
We keep the quadratic terms with respect to $a_i^{\dagger}$ and $a_i$, which are speculated to be valid at least for the ground state.
Since the hedgehog state and antihedgehog state have non-collinear ``spin'' alignments, the anomalous terms such as $a_{i}a_{j}$ and $a^{\dagger}_{i}a^{\dagger}_{j}$ emerge
besides the normal terms $a^{\dagger}_{i}a_{j}$ and $a_{i}a^{\dagger}_{j}$.
As noted below Eq.~(\ref{eq:Fs}),
the position vector of the $i$th site is expressed as ${\bm r}_i={\bm R}_j+{\bm r}_{0m}$ where ${\bm R}_j$ denotes the position of the center of the $j$th unit cell and ${\bm r}_{0m}$ $(m=1, 2, \cdots, 24)$ denotes the position of the $m$th Tb site inside the unit cell. Hence, by carrying out the Fourie transformations $a_{i}=a_{j,m}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_L}}\sum_{\bm q}e^{i{\bm q}\cdot({\bm R}_j+{\bm r}_{0m})}a_{{\bm q},m}$ and $a^{\dagger}_{i}=a^{\dagger}_{j,m}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N_L}}\sum_{\bm q}e^{-i{\bm q}\cdot({\bm R}_j+{\bm r}_{0m})}a^{\dagger}_{{\bm q},m}$ with ${\bm q}$ being the wave vector, the spin-wave Hamiltonian is expressed as the boson operators $a^{\dagger}_{{\bm q},m}$ and $a_{{\bm q},m}$.
Then, by executing the para-unitary transformation~\cite{Colpa} i.e., the Bogoliubov transformation, the spin-wave Hamiltonian is diagonalized as
%
\begin{eqnarray}
H=\sum_{\bm q}\sum_{m'=1}^{24}\omega_{m'}({\bm q})b^{\dagger}_{{\bm q},m'}b_{{\bm q},m'},
\label{eq:H_SW}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})(>0)$ is the energy of the $m'$th spin wave. Here,
$b^{\dagger}_{{\bm q},m'}$~$(b_{{\bm q},m'})$ is the creation (annihilation) operator of the boson which is composed of the linear combination of $a^{\dagger}_{{\bm q},m}$ and $a_{{\bm q},m}$.
%------------------------
\subsection{Energy dispersion of excitation from hedgehog-anti-hedgehog order}
%On the basis of the linear spin-wave theory, we analyze the energy of the excitation $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
We analyze the energy dispersion of the excitation $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
We have performed the numerical calculations for $J_1=-1.0$ and $J_2=-0.1$ in the systems for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=8$, 16, 32, 64, and 128.
The results of the excitation energy $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ for $N_1=64$ and $128$ are seen as the same and we show
the result in the system with $N_1=128$ for
%$D=\textcolor{red}{1.7836}$, $\textcolor{red}{2}.0$, $\textcolor{red}{5.0}$, and $50$ in Figs.~\ref{fig:w_q}(a), \ref{fig:w_q}(b), \ref{fig:w_q}(c), and \ref{fig:w_q}(d) respectively.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
for $D=50$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
%%%%%
Here ${\bm q}$ is plotted along the symmetry line (orange line) in the Brillouin zone
illustrated as the frame box with the side length $\frac{2\pi}{a}$ in the inset.
The coordinate of each symmetry point in the reciprocal space is as follows: $\Gamma$: $(0, 0, 0)$, X: $\frac{2\pi}{a}(\frac{1}{2}, 0, 0)$, M: $\frac{2\pi}{a}(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2}, 0)$, and R: $\frac{2\pi}{a}(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$.
Since there exist 24 Tb sites in the unit cell [see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c)], the 24 energy bands for the excitation appear in Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
%As noted in section IV.A,
%%%%%
Because of the uniaxial anisotropy $D$ arising from the CEF, the lowest excitation energy appears
%beyond
%\textcolor{magenta}
at the finite energy.
%%%%%
%For $D=\textcolor{red}{1.7836}$ and $D=\textcolor{red}{2}.0$, the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ is located at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point, whose concave band structure tends to be flattened as $D$ increases as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:w_q}(a) and \ref{fig:w_q}(b).
%\textcolor{red}
%{
%At the threshold value $D=D_0=1.7836$, the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ touches the zero energy at the $\Gamma$ point, around where the linear energy dispersion appears. This is considered to be the Goldstone mode associated with the spontaneously broken U(1) symmetry. Namely, the precession around the magnetic easy axis at each site propagates to the neighboring sites, which gives rise to the transverse wave of the excitation. At the critical $D=D_0$, this propagation can be generated by zero energy for ${\bm q}={\bm 0}$.
%}
%As the uniaxial anisotropy strength $D$ increases, not only the finite energy gap, i.e., the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$, increases but also the energy dispersion changes. This is due to the noncollinear alignment of the magnetic moments of the hedgehog-antihedgehog order shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c), which is in sharp contrast to the collinear magnetic order where $D$ merely shifts the energy bands.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
It is noted that the energy gap opens for $D\ge 1.7836$ which was obtained by the linear-spin-wave calculation assuming the hedgehog-antihedgehog order as the ground state.}
%\textcolor{green}
{
It is cofirmed that the overall features of the energy dispersions of the magnetic excitations $\omega({\bm q})$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q} are the same as long as $D\gsim 5$.
}
%%%%%
%as seen as $\omega/(SJ_1)=4.26$ at the M point.
%The positive excitation energy $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ indicates that the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) is the stable ground state for $J_1=1.0$, $J_2=2.3$, and $D=50.0$ within the linear spin-wave theory. This is consistent with the previous study based on the effective model corresponding to the large-$D$ limit of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H})~\cite{WSR}.
%\onecolumngrid
%%%%%%%% Fig.5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{w_q_mq_D_N1_128.eps}%
%\includegraphics[width=14cm]{w_q_mq_D_N1_128.eps}%
\caption{
The energy dispersion of the excitation in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC
%for (a) $D=\textcolor{red}{1.7836}$, (b) $D=\textcolor{red}{2.0}$, (c) $D=\textcolor{red}{5.0}$, and (d) $D=\textcolor{red}{50.0}$
for $D=50$
at $J_1=-1.0$ and $J_2=-0.1$.
The inset
%in (a)
illustrates the Brillouin zone of the cubic unit cell with the side length $\frac{2\pi}{a}$.
}
\label{fig:w_q}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\twocolumngrid
%In Figs.~\ref{fig:w_q}(a)-(d),
In Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q},
we also plot $\omega_{m'}(-{\bm q})$ as the blue dashed line for ${\bm q}$ along the symmetry line illustrated in the inset, where $-{\bm q}$ follows the blue line in the inset.
We see that all the blue dashed lines coincide with the orange solid lines, which indicates that the reciprocal energy dispersion $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})=\omega_{m'}(-{\bm q})$ is realized.
This is in sharp contrast to the nonreciprocal energy dispersion $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})\ne\omega_{m'}(-{\bm q})$ shown in the uniform hedgehog order in the QC~\cite{WHH2022} and 1/1 AC~\cite{W2023}.
This can be intuitively understood in terms of the symmetry operation as follows.
Let us consider the global coordinate in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) whose origin is set to be the center of the unit cell.
When the magnetic moment located at the position ${\bm r}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) is spatially inverted as $-{\bm r}$ with the moment direction being kept, the hedgehog state on the central IC is transformed to the antihedgehog state and the antihedgehog state on the corner IC is transformed to the hedgehog state, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:AHH}.
Since the magnetic structure shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:AHH} is regarded to be equivalent to that shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) as the global structure of the whole crystal, the spatial inversion symmetry is not broken by the hedgehog-antihedgehog ordering.
Hence, the reciprocal energy dispersion is understood to appear in Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
%%%%%%%% Fig.6 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{AHH_HH_AC.eps}%
\caption{
In the 1/1 AC,
the antihedgehog state on the center IC and the hedgehog state on the corner IC in the bcc unit cell illustrated by the frame box.
}
\label{fig:AHH}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
On the contrary, in the case of the uniform hedgehog order in the 1/1 AC, when the magnetic moment located at the position ${\bm r}$ is spatially inverted as $-{\bm r}$ with the moment direction being kept,
both the hedgehog states on the central IC and the corner IC are transformed to the antihedgehog states. Since the uniform hedgehog state and the uniform antihedgehog state are different magnetic states each other, this implies that the spatially inversion symmetry is broken by the uniform hedgehog ordering.
The same is applied to the uniform hedgehog order in the QC discussed in Ref.~\cite{WHH2022}.
Hence, nonreciprocal energy dispersions emerge, i.e., $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})\ne\omega_{m'}(-{\bm q})$, in these cases.
From these analyzes, it turns out that the pair formation of the hedgehog state and the antihedgehog state in the 1/1 AC [see Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) and Fig.~\ref{fig:AHH}] preserves the inversion symmetry.
%--------------------------------------------------------
\subsection{Dynamical structure factor of magnetism}
On the basis of the linear spin-wave theory,
we analyze the dynamics of the magnetic excitation in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
The magnetic dynamical structure factor is defined by
%
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\alpha\beta}({\bm q}, \omega)=-\frac{1}{\pi}{\rm Im}\langle{\rm GS}|S_{{\bm q}\alpha}\frac{1}{\omega+E_{0}-H+i\eta}S_{-{\bm q}\beta}|{\rm GS}\rangle,
\label{eq:Gij}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where $|{\rm GS}\rangle$ is the ground state with the energy $E_{0}$ and $S_{{\bm q}\alpha}$ is the Fourier transformation of the ``spin'' operator defined by
$S_{{\bm q}\alpha}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{i=1}^{N}e^{-i{\bm q}\cdot{\bm r}_i}S_{i\alpha}$.
In this study, we set $\eta=10^{-3}$.
Experimentally, the magnetic dynamical structure factor can be observed by the neutron measurement.
The intensity of inelastic neutron scattering is expressed by the dynamical structure factor
%
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)=\sum_{\alpha,\beta=x,y,z}(\delta_{\alpha\beta}-\hat{q}_{\alpha}\hat{q}_{\beta})S_{\alpha\beta}({\bm q},\omega),
\label{eq:S_perp}
\end{eqnarray}
%
where ${\bm q}$ is the incident wave vector and $\hat{q}_{\alpha}$ is defined as $\hat{q}_{\alpha}\equiv q_{\alpha}/|{\bm q}|$~\cite{Squires}.
We have performed the numerical calculations of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for $J_1=-1.0$ and $J_2=-0.1$ in the systems for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=8$, 16, 32, 64, and 128.
We have confirmed that the results in $N_1=64$ and 128 are almost the same and
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}{
the result for $D=50$
%}
%%%%%
%$D=\textcolor{red}{'}, \textcolor{red}{2}.0, \textcolor{red}{5.0}$, and $50$
%in the system with $N_1=128$ are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a), \ref{fig:Sperp}(b), \ref{fig:Sperp}(c), and \ref{fig:Sperp}(d) respectively.
in the system with $N_1=128$ is shown in
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}.
%%%%%
Here, the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ is plotted
for ${\bm q}$ along the symmetry line (orange line) illustrated in the inset of Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
%\onecolumngrid
%%%%%%%% Fig.7 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Sperp_qw.eps}%
%\includegraphics[width=15cm]{Sperp_qw.eps}%
\caption{
The intensity plot of
the dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$
%for (a) $D=\textcolor{red}{1.7386}$, (b) $D=\textcolor{red}{2}.0$, (c) $D=\textcolor{red}{5.0}$, and (d) $D=50$
for $D=50$
at $J_1=-1.0$ and (a)$J_2=-0.1$ and (b) $J_2=-0.2$
where ${\bm q}$ is plotted along the symmetry line illustrated in the inset of Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
}
\label{fig:Sperp}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\twocolumngrid
%In Figs.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a)-\ref{fig:Sperp}(d),the high intensity appears in the \textcolor{red}{lower} branches irrespective of the uniaxial anisotropy strength $D$. In Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a), the highest intensity appears at the minimum of the lowest excitation energy at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point.
%%The high intensity colored in light blue appears in the highest-energy and second-highest energy branches along the $\Gamma$-X line and in the vicinity of the $\Gamma$ point along the R-$\Gamma$-M line.
%The sharp intensity at the minimum of the lowest excitation energy at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point \textcolor{red}{persists} as the anisotropy strength $D$ increases from $D_0$.
%%(see Appendix~\ref{sec:App_B}).
%In Figs.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(b)-\ref{fig:Sperp}(d),
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp},
the high intensity appears in the lowest-energy branch along the $\Gamma$-X line and also in the
%second-highest
second-lowest
energy branch along the R-$\Gamma$-M line. The relatively-high to moderate intensities appear in the lowest- and second-lowest-energy branches along the X-M-R line.
%The emergence of the high intensity in the high-energy branch was also reported in the theoretical calculations of the dynamical structure factor in the uniform hedgehog order in the QC~\cite{WHH2022} and in the 1/1 AC~\cite{W2023}.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
We confirmed that this feature appears for $D\gsim 2$ by calculating $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ on the basis of the linear-spin-wave theory applied to the hedgehog-antihedgehog order.
}
%%%%%
Since it was shown that the hedgehog-antihedgehog order is realized for $J_2/J_1< 0.284$ in the effective magnetic model which corresponds to the large-$D$ limit of the model (\ref{eq:H}) in Ref.~\cite{WSR}, we have discussed the results of the linear spin-wave theory for $J_1=-1.0$ and $J_2=-0.1$ as the typical parameters.
Here, the $J_2$ dependence of the results is discussed.
We have calculated the dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ as well as the excitation energy $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ for various $J_2/J_1< 0.284$ with the FM interaction $J_1<0$.
%As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}, the lowest excitation energy, i.e., the minimum of $\omega_1({\bm q})$ shifts to the larger-$D$ direction, as $\textcolor{red}{|}J_2\textcolor{red}{|}$ increases. Figure~\ref{fig:Sperp_J2_4}(a) shows the dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$, $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$, and $D=\textcolor{red}{2.356}$ calculated in the system for $N_1=128$. Since $D=\textcolor{red}{2.356}$ is slightly larger than $D_0=\textcolor{red}{2.355}$ for $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}), the sharp intensity appears at the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point similarly to Fig.~10. We have confirmed that at the threshold value $D=D_0$ the sharp highest intensity appears at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point where the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ touches, similarly to Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a).
%%The high intensities appear in the high-energy branches around $\omega/(J_{1}S)\approx 27$ near the $\Gamma$ point along the $\Gamma$-X line and around $\omega/(J_{1}S)\approx 25$ the R-$\Gamma$-M line.
%As $D$ increases, the \textcolor{red}{linear} dispersion of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ around the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point tends to be \textcolor{red}{rounded} similarly to the case for $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$ as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a) and \ref{fig:Sperp}(b)\textcolor{red}{, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp_J2_4}(b) for $J_1=-1.0$, $J_2=-0.2$, and $D=5.0$}.
%%shows $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for $J_1=1.0$, $J_2=4.0$, and $D=10$. The high intensities appear in the high-energy branches around $\omega/(J_{1}S)\approx 38$ along the $\Gamma$-X line and around $\omega/(J_{1}S)\approx 35$ the R-$\Gamma$-M line.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
We calculated $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ of the excitation from the hedgehog-antihedgehog order for $J_2=-0.2$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(b). The energy dispersion and the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ are almost similar to the result for $J_2=-0.1$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}, where all blanches are slightly shifted to smaller $\omega$, i.e., the lowest-excitation energy is $\omega/(S|J_1|)=97.56$ and the highest-excitation energy is $\omega/(S|J_1|)=105.5$.
}
%%%%%
%---------------------------------------------
\section{Summary and Discussion}
We have theoretically analyzed the dynamical structure factor as well as the static structure factor in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
We have shown that
the static structure factor $F_s({\bm q})$ is generally expressed as the convolution form $F_s({\bm q})=F_L({\bm q})S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ of the lattice structure factor $F_L({\bm q})$ and the magnetic structure factor of the 2 ICs $S_{2{\rm IC}}({\bm q})$ in the unit cell.
In the bulk limit, $F_{s}({\bm q})$ can have a finite value for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h, k, l)$ with integer $h$, $k$, and $l$ because of the requirement from the lattice structure factor $F_L({\bm q})$.
By the numerical calculation for the hedgehog-antihedgehog ordered state, we have shown that the systematic absence of reflection $F_s({\bm q})=0$ occurs for ${\bm q}=\frac{2\pi}{a}(h,k,l)$
%for the even integers $h$, $k$, and $l$ and also for the case that the two of $h$, $k$, and $l$ are even integers.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
for case that all $h$, $k$, and $l$ are even integers or one of $h$, $k$, and $l$ is even integer}.
%%%%%
This extinction rule and the distribution of the intensities of $F_s({\bm q})$ revealed in this study is useful for identifying the hedgehog-antihedgehog order experimentally.
On the basis of the linear spin-wave theory, we have analyzed the excitation energy and the dynamical structure factor
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
by introducing the effective magnetic model with uniaxial anisotropy $D$ arising from the CEF.
}
%%%%%
The results
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
{
for large $D$
}
%%%%%
show that the reciprocal energy dispersion emerges, which is understood as the symmetry argument that the hedgehog-antihedgehog ordering preserves the spatial inversion symmetry.
This is in sharp contrast to the emergence of the non-reciprocal excitations in the uniform hedgehog order in the 1/1 AC and QC where the spatial inversion symmetry is broken by the hedgehog ordering.
%
%At the threshold value of the uniaxial-anisotropy strength $D=D_0$, the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$, which is located at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point, touches 0, where the sharp highest intensity of the dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ appears.
%%In the vicinity of the threshold value $D\gsim D_0$, the sharp peak in the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ appears at the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ located at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point. As $D$ increases, the minimum of the lowest excitation energy becomes finite, i.e., the energy gap opens with the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point rapidly decreasing while the high intensities appear in the high-energy branches along the $\Gamma$-X line and the R-$\Gamma$-M line. The latter feature persists irrespective of the strength of the uniaxial anisotropy $D$.
%In the vicinity of the threshold value $D\gsim D_0$, the sharp peak in the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ appears at the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ located at the \textcolor{red}{$\Gamma$} point. As $D$ increases, the minimum of the lowest excitation energy becomes finite, i.e., the energy gap opens with
%\textcolor{red}
%{
%the linear dispersion being changed to be rounded.
%}
%%%%%%
%%%%%
The high intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ appears in the low-energy branch in the vicinity of the $\Gamma$ point along the $\Gamma$-X line and the R-$\Gamma$-X line.
So far, the hedgehog and antihedgehog states have been theoretically shown in the 1/1 AC and QC~\cite{WSR,WPNAS} but have not been observed experimentally.
%\textcolor{red}{
To observe the dynamical as well as the static structure factor shown in this paper, it is necessary to identify the material which shows the hedgehog-anti-hedgehog state in the 1/1 AC.
%}
%\textcolor{red}{
The CEF in the Au-SM-Tb (SM=Si, Ge, Al, and Ga) was analyzed theoretically on the basis of the point charge model in refs.~\cite{WSR} and \cite{WPNAS}. It was shown that as the ratio of the valences of the screened ligand ions $\alpha\equiv Z_{\rm SM}/Z_{\rm Au}$ surrounding the Tb$^{3+}$ ion varies, the direction of the magnetic easy axis at each Tb site changes. This suggests that by changing the compositions of the non-rare earth elements in the ternary compounds Au-SM-Tb, there is the possibility that the hedgehog state and anti-hedgehog state are realized. It is also noted that the CEF in the Au-Al-Yb was analyzed theoretically in ref.~\cite{WK2021}. It was shown that the tendency of the $\alpha$ dependence of the magnetic easy axis in the CEF ground state is different from that in the Au-SM-Tb systems. Hence, there also exists the possibility that in the 1/1 AC Au-SM-R with the other rare-earth element(s), the hedgehog-anti-hedgehog state is realized. Hence, the synthesis of the rare-earth based Au-SM-R compounds is interesting future subject to realize the hedgehog-anti-hedgehog state.
%}
Since the effective model for magnetism (\ref{eq:H}) is considered to be relevant to the broad range of the rare-earth based ACs not only for Tb but also for the other rare-earth atoms, the results of the dynamical as well as static structure factor clarified in the present study are expected to be useful for identifying the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
Moreover, the observation of the magnetic dynamics of the ``spin'' structures on the IC has neither been reported in the icosahedral QCs and ACs, thus far.
The present study is expected to stimulate future experiments to detect the dynamical as well as static structure factor in the unique magnetic structure with the non-collinear and non-coplanar alignments of ``spins'' in the icosahedral 1/1 ACs and also QCs.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The author thanks H. Harima and T. Ishimasa for valuable discussion.
%%%%%
%\textcolor{green}
%{
The author greatly acknowledges K. Momma for providing the VESTA to draw magnetic moments in the 1/1 AC with kind instructions.
%}
%%%%%
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP18K03542, JP19H00648, JP22H04597, JP22H01170, and JP23K17672.
\end{acknowledgments}
%-------------------------------------------------------
%\section{Dynamical structure factor for $D> D_0$}
%\label{sec:App_B}
%In section IV~C, we have calculated the dynamical structure factor.
%In Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a), the dynamical structure factors $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ in the vicinity of the threshold value of the uniaxial anisotropy strength $D_{0}$ is shown for $J_1=1.0$ and $J_2=2.3$. Here, we show that as $D$ increases from $D_0$, the sharp intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ in the lowest excitation energy rapidly decreases. Figure~\ref{fig:Sperp_DgtD0} shows $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for $D=3.72$ at $J_1=1.0$ and $J_2=2.3$ calculated in the system for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=128$. The intensity at the minimum of the lowest-excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ located at the M point is relatively smaller than the high-to-moderate intensities in the high-energy branches. At $D=D_0$, the minimum of the lowest-excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})$ touches 0 at the M point, where the sharp highest intensity appears as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sperp}(a). As $D$ increases from $D_0$, the energy gap opens at the M point where the intensity of $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ rapidly decreases. We confirmed this tendency also for $J_2=2.0$, $3.0$, $4.0$, and $5.0$.
%%%%%%%% Fig.10 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\begin{figure}[t]
%\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Sperp_qw_J2m01_D018.eps}%
%\caption{
%The dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for $D=\textcolor{red}{0.18}$ at $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$ and $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$ calculated in the system for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=128$.
%}
%\label{fig:Sperp_DgtD0}
%\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\vspace{1cm}
%---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%\newpage
% Create the reference section using BibTeX:
%%%\bibliography{basename of .bib file}
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\bibitem{Shechtman} D. Shechtman, I. Blech, D. Gratias, and J. W. Cahn, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 53}, 1951 (1984).
\bibitem{Tsai} A. P. Tsai, J. Q. Guo, E. Abe, H. Takakura, and T. J. Sato, Nature {\bf 408}, 537 (2000).
\bibitem{Takakura} H. Takakura, C. P. G\'{o}mez, A. Yamamoto, M. De Boissieu, and A. P. Tsai, Nat. Mat. {\bf 6}, 58 (2007).
%\bibitem{Shechtman} Shechtman, D., Blech, I., Gratias, D. \& Cahn, J. W., Metallic phase with long-range orientational order and no translational symmetry, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 53}, 1951 (1984).
%\bibitem{Tsai} Tsai, A. P., Guo, J. Q., Abe, E., Takakura, H. \& Sato, T. J., A stable binary quasicrystal, {\it Nature} {\bf 408}, 537 (2000).
%\bibitem{Takakura} Takakura, H., G\'{o}mez, C. P., Yamamoto, A., Boissieu, M. De. \& Tsai, A. P., Atomic structure of the binary icosahedral Yb-Cd quasicrystal, {\it Nat. Mater.} {\bf 6}, 58 (2007).
%\bibitem{TKNN} D. J. Thouless, M. Kohmoto, M. P. Nightingale, and M. den Nijs, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 49}, 405 (1982).
%\bibitem{Muhlbauer} S. M{\"u}hlbauer, B. Binz, F. Jonietz, C. Pfleiderer, A. Rosch, A. Neubauer, R. Georgii, P. B{\"o}ni, Science {\bf 323}, 905 (2009).
%\bibitem{Yu} X. Z. Yu, Y. Onose, N. Kanazawa, J. H. Park, J. H. Han, Y. Matsui, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Nature (London) {\bf 465}, 901 (2010).
%\bibitem{Coffey} D. Coffey and S. A. Trugman, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 69}, 176 (1992).
%\bibitem{Tanigaki} T. Tanigaki, K. Shibata, N. Kanazawa, X. Yu, Y. Onose, H. S Park, D. Shindo, and Y. Tokura, Nano Lett. {\bf 15}, 5438 (2015).
%\bibitem{Fujishiro} 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, Nat. Commun. {\bf 10}, 1059 (2019).
%\bibitem{Ishiwata} 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, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 101}, 134406 (2020).
%\bibitem{Iwasaki} J. Iwasaki, M. Mochizuki, and N. Nagaosa, Nat. Nanotechnol. {\bf 8}, 742 (2013).
%\bibitem{Fert} A. Fert, V. Cros, and J. Sampaio, Nat. Nanotechnol. {\bf 8}, 152 (2013).
%\bibitem{Zhang} X. Zhang, M. Ezawa, and Y. Zhou, Scientific Reports {\bf 8}, 9400 (2015).
%\bibitem{Zhou} Y. Zhou, E. Iacocca, A. A. Awad, R. K. Dumas, F. C. Zhang, H. B. Braun, and J. {\rm \AA}kerman, Nat. Commun. {\bf 6}, 8193 (2015).
%\bibitem{Belavin} A. Belavin and A. Polyakov, ZhETF Pisma Redaktsiiu, {\bf 22}, 503 (1975).
%\bibitem{Shechtman} D. Shechtman, I. Blech, D. Gratias and J.W. Cahn, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 53} 1951 (1984).
%\bibitem{Yu2014} X. Yu, Y. Tokunaga, Y. Kaneko, W. Zhang, K. Kimoto, Y. Matsui, Y. Taguchi, and Y. Tokura, Nat. Commun. {\bf 5}, 3198 (2014).
%\bibitem{Zhang2016} X. Zhang, Y. Zhou, and M. Ezawa, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 93}, 024415 (2016).
%\bibitem{Leonov} A. Leonov and M. Mostovoy, Nat. Commun. {\bf 6}, 8275 (2015).
%\bibitem{Ozawa} R. Ozawa, S. Hayami, and Y. Motome, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 118}, 147205 (2017).
\bibitem{Suzuki2021} S. Suzuki, A. Ishikawa, T. Yamada, T. Sugimoto, A. Sakurai, and R. Tamura, Mater. Trans. {\bf 62}, 298 (2021).
%\bibitem{Suzuki} Suzuki, S. {\it et al}., Magnetism of Tsai-type quasicrystal approximants, {\it Mater. Trans.} {\bf 62}, 298-306 (2021).
%\bibitem{Suzuki2021} Suzuki, S. {\it et al}., Magnetism of Tsai-type quasicrystal approximants, {\it Mater. Trans.} {\bf 62}, 298-306 (2021).
\bibitem{Tamura2010} R. Tamura, Y. Muro, T. Hiroto, K. Nishimoto, and T. Takabatake, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 82}, 220201(R) (2010).
%\bibitem{Tamura2010} Tamura, R., Muro, Y., Hiroto, T., Nishimoto, K. \& Takabatake, T., Long-range magnetic order in the quasicrystalline approximant Cd$_6$Tb, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 82}, 220201(R) (2010).
\bibitem{Mori} A. Mori, H Ota, S. Yoshiuchi, K. Iwakawa, Y. Taga, Y. Hirose, T. Takeuchi, E. Yamamoto, Y. Haga, F. Honda, R. Settai, and Y. $\bar{\rm O}$nuki, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 81}, 024720 (2012).
%\bibitem{Mori} Mori, A. {\it et al}., Electrical and magnetic properties of quasicrystal approximants RCd$_6$ (R: Rare Earth), {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 81}, 024720 (2012).
%\bibitem{Ishikawa2018} Ishikawa, A. {\it et al}., Antiferromagnetic order is possible in ternary quasicrystal approximants, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 98}, 220403R (2018).
\bibitem{Ishikawa2018} A. Ishikawa, T. Fujii, T. Takeuchi, T. Yamada, Y. Matsushita, and R. Tamura
Phys. Rev. B {\bf 98}, 220403(R) (2018).
%\bibitem{Hiroto2013} Hiroto, T. {\it et al}., Ferromagnetism and re-entrant spin-glass transition in quasicrystal approximants Au-SM-Gd (SM = Si, Ge), {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 25}, 216004 (2013).
\bibitem{Hiroto2013} T Hiroto, G. H. Gebresenbut, C. P. Gomez, Y. Muro, M. Isobe, Y. Ueda, K. Tokiwa, and R. Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 25}, 216004 (2013).
%\bibitem{Hiroto2014} Hiroto, T., Tokiwa, K. \& Tamura, R., Sign of canted ferromagnetism in the quasicrystal approximants Au-SM-R (SM = Si, Ge and Sn/R = Tb, Dy and Ho), {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 26}, 216004 (2014).
\bibitem{Hiroto2014} T Hiroto, K. Tokiwa, and R Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 26}, 216004 (2014).
%\bibitem{Ishikawa2016} Ishikawa, A. {\it et al}., Composition-driven spin glass to ferromagnetic transition in the quasicrystal approximant Au-Al-Gd, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 93}, 024416 (2016).
\bibitem{Ishikawa2016} A. Ishikawa, T. Hiroto, K. Tokiwa, T. Fujii, and R. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 93}, 024416 (2016).
%
%\bibitem{Das} Das, P. {\it et al}., Crystal electric field excitations in the quasicrystal approximant TbCd$_6$ studied by inelastic neutron scattering, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 95}, 054408 (2017).
\bibitem{Das} P. Das, P.-F. Lory, R. Flint, T. Kong, T. Hiroto, S. L. Bud'ko, P. C. Canfield, M. de Boissieu, A. Kreyssig, and A. I. Goldman, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 95}, 054408 (2017).
%\bibitem{Goldman} A. I. Goldman {\it et al}., {\it Nat. Mater.} {\bf 12}, 714 (2013).
\bibitem{Goldman} A. I. Goldman, T. Kong, A. Kreyssig, A. Jesche, M. Ramazanoglu, K. W. Dennis, S. L. Bud'ko, and P. C. Canfield, Nat. Mater. {\bf 12}, 714 (2013).
%\bibitem{Tamura2021} Tamura, R. {\it et al}., Experimental observation of long-range magnetic order in icosahedral quasicrystals, {\it J. Am. Chem. Soc.} {\bf 143(47)}, 19938 (2021).
\bibitem{Tamura2021} R. Tamura, A. Ishikawa, S. Suzuki, T. Kotajima, Y. Tanaka, T. Seki, N. Shibata, T. Yamada, T. Fujii, C.-W. Wang, M. Avdeev, K. Nawa, D. Okuyama, and T. J. Sato, J. Am. Chem. Soc. {\bf 143(47)}, 19938 (2021).
\bibitem{Takeuchi2023} R. Takeuchi, F. Labib, T. Tsugawa, Y. Akai, A. Ishikawa, S. Suzuki, T. Fujii, and R. Tamura, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 130}, 176701 (2023).
%\bibitem{Hiroto} Hiroto, T. {\it et al}., Noncoplanar ferrimagnetism and local crystalline-electric-field anisotropy in the quasicrystal approximant Au$_{70}$Si$_{17}$Tb$_{13}$, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 32}, 415802 (2020).
\bibitem{Hiroto} T. Hiroto, T. J . Sato, H. Cao, T. Hawai, T. Yokoo, S. Itoh, and R. Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 32}, 415802 (2020).
%\bibitem{Gebresenbut} G. H. Gebresenbut {\it et al.}., Phys. Rev. B {\bf 106}, 184413 (2022).
\bibitem{Gebresenbut} G. H. Gebresenbut, T. Shiino, M. S. Andersson, N. Qureshi, O. Fabelo, P. Beran, D. Qvarngard, P. Henelius, A. Rydh, R. Mathieu, P. Nordblad, and C. P. Gomez, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 106}, 184413 (2022).
%\bibitem{Sato2019} Sato, T. J. {\it et al}., Whirling spin order in the quasicrystal approximant Au$_{72}$Al$_{14}$Tb$_{14}$, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 100}, 054417 (2019).
\bibitem{Sato2019} T. J. Sato, A. Ishikawa, A. Sakurai, M. Hattori, M. Avdeev, and R. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 100}, 054417 (2019).
%
%\bibitem{WK2021} Watanabe S. \& Kawamoto M., Crystalline electronic field in rare-earth based quasicrystal and approximant: Analysis of quantum critical Au-Al-Yb quasicrystal and approximant, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 90}, 063701(2021).
\bibitem{WK2021} S. Watanabe and M. Kawamoto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 90}, 063701(2021).
%\bibitem{WSR} Watanabe, S., Magnetism and topology in Tb-based icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it Sci. Rep.} {\bf 11}, 17679 (2021).
\bibitem{WSR} S. Watanabe, Sci. Rep. {\bf 11}, 17679 (2021).
\bibitem{Kanazawa} N. Kanazawa, Y. Nii, X. -X. Zhang, A. S. Mishchenko, G. De Filippis, F. Kagawa, Y. Iwasa, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Nat. Commun. {\bf 7}, 11622 (2016).
\bibitem{Tokura2021} Y. Tokura and N. Kanazawa, Chem. Rev. {\bf 121}, 2857 (2021).
%\bibitem{WPNAS} Watanabe S., Topological magnetic textures and long-range orders in Terbium-based quasicrystal and approximant, {\it Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.} {\bf 118(43)}, e2112202118 (2021).
\bibitem{WPNAS} S. Watanabe, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. {\bf 118(43)}, e2112202118 (2021).
%\bibitem{WHH2022} Watanabe, S., Magnetic dynamics of hedgehog in icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it Sci. Rep.} {\bf 12}, 15514 (2022).
\bibitem{WHH2022} S. Watanabe, Sci. Rep. {\bf 12}, 15514 (2022).
\bibitem{Kato2021} Y. Kato, S. Hayami, and Y. Motome, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 104}, 224405 (2021).
\bibitem{Eto2022} R. Eto, R. Pohle, and M. Mochizuki, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 129}, 017201 (2022).
\bibitem{Boissieu} M. de Boissieu., S. Francoual, M. Mihalkovi\v{c}, K. Shibata, A. Q. R. Baron, Y. Sidis, T. Ishimasa, D. Wu, T. Lograsso, L. P. Regnault, F. G$\ddot{\rm a}$hler, S. Tsutsui, B. Hennion, P. Bastie, T. J. Sato, H. Takakura, R. Currat, and A. P. Tsai, Nat. Mater. {\bf 6}, 977 (2007).
\bibitem{Ashraff1989} J. A. Ashraff and R. B. Stinchcombe, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 39}, 2670 (1989).
\bibitem{Ashraff1990} J. A. Ashraff, J. M. Luck, and R. B. Stinchcombe, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 41}, 4314 (1990).
\bibitem{Wessel2005} S. Wessel and I. Milat, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 71}, 104427 (2005).
%%%%%
%\textcolor{red}
%{
\bibitem{W2023b} S. Watanabe, in preparation.
%}
%%%%%
\bibitem{W2023} S. Watanabe, Sci. Rep. {\bf 13}, 14438 (2023).
%
%\bibitem{Haraldsen} Haraldsen, J. T., \& Fishman, R. S., Spin rotation technique for non-collinear magnetic systems: application to the generalized Villain model, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 21}, 216001 (2009).
\bibitem{Haraldsen} J. T. Haraldsen and R. S. Fishman, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 21}, 216001 (2009).
%\bibitem{HP} Holstein, T. \& Primakoff, H., Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf 58}, 1098 (1940).
\bibitem{HP} T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Phys. Rev. {\bf 58}, 1098 (1940).
%\bibitem{Colpa} Colpa, J. H. P., Diagonalization of the quadratic boson hamiltonian, {\it Physica A} {\bf 93}, 327 (1978).
\bibitem{Colpa} J. H. P. Colpa, Physica A {\bf 93}, 327 (1978).
%\bibitem{Squires} Squires, G. L., Introduction to the theory of thermal neutron scattering, 3rd ed. (Cambridge university press, 2012).
\bibitem{Squires} G. L. Squires, {\it Introduction to the theory of thermal neutron scattering}, 3rd ed. (Cambridge university press, 2012).
%
%\bibitem{Tamura2012} R. Tamura, Y. Muro, T. Hiroto, H. Yaguchi, G. Beutier, and T. Takabatake, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 85}, 014203 (2012).
%\bibitem{Tamura2012} Tamura, R. {\it et al}., Structural and magnetic transitions in the crystalline approximant Cd$_6$Sm, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 85}, 014203 (2012).
%\bibitem{aHiroto2013} T. Hiroto, G. H. Gebresenbut, C. Pay G\'{o}mez, Y. Muro, M. Isobe, Y. Ueda, K. Tokiwa, and R. Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 25}, 216004 (2013).
%\bibitem{Hiroto2014} T Hiroto, K Tokiwa, and R Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 26}, 216004 (2014).
%
%\bibitem{Wferri2022} Watanabe, S., Magnetic dynamics of ferromagnetic long range order in icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it Sci. Rep.} {\bf 12}, 10792 (2022).
\bibitem{Wferri2022} S. Watanabe, Sci. Rep. {\bf 12}, 10792 (2022).
%\bibitem{Kato2021} Kato, Y., Hayami, S., \& Motome, Y., Spin excitation spectra in helimagnetic states: proper-screw, cycloid, vortex-crystal, and hedgehog lattices, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 104}, 224405 (2021).
%\bibitem{Eto2022} Eto, R., Pohle, R. \& Mochizuki, M., Low-energy excitations of skyrmion crystals in a centrosymmetric Kondo-lattice magnet: decoupled spin-charge excitations and nonreciprocity, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 129}, 017201 (2022).
%\bibitem{Tokura2021} Tokura, Y. \& Kanazawa, N., Magnetic skyrmion materials, {\it Chem. Rev.} {\bf 121}, 2857 (2021).
%\bibitem{Iguchi2015} Iguchi, Y., Uemura, S., Ueno, K. \& Onose., Y., Nonreciprocal magnon propagation in a noncentrosymmetric ferromagnet LiFe$_5$O$_8$, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 92}, 184419 (2015).
%\bibitem{Gitgeatpong} Gitgeatpong, G. {\it et al}., Nonreciprocal magnons and symmetry-breaking in the noncentrosymmetric antiferromagnet, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 119}, 047201 (2017).
%\bibitem{Tokura2018} Tokura, Y. \& Nagaosa, N., Nonreciprocal responses from non-centrosymmetric quantum materials, {\it Nat. Commun.} {\bf 9}, 3740 (2018).
%\bibitem{SM2019} Sato., T. J., \& Matan, K., Nonreciprocal magnons in noncentrosymmetric magnets, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 88}, 081007 (2019).
%\bibitem{Kravchuk} Kravchuk, V. P., R{\"o}${\rm \beta}$ler, U. K., Brink, J. van den \& Garst, M., Solitary wave excitations of skyrmion strings in chiral magnets, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 102}, 220408(R) (2020).
%\bibitem{Seki} Seki, S. {\it et al}., Propagation dynamics of spin excitations along skyrmion strings, Nat. Commun. {\bf 11}, 256 (2020).
%\bibitem{Ogawa2021} Ogawa, N. {\it et al.}, Nonreciprocity of spin waves in the conical helix state {\it Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.} {\bf 118(8)}, e2022927118 (2021).
%\bibitem{MH2021} Matsumoto, T. \& Hayami, S., Nonreciprocal magnon excitations by the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction on the basis of bond magnetic toroidal multipoles, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 104}, 134420 (2021).
%\bibitem{Ishibashi2021} Ishibashi, M. {\it et al.}, Spin wave resonance in perpendicularly magnetized synthetic antiferromagnets, {\it Sci. Adv.} {\bf 6(17)}, eaaz6931 (2021).
%\bibitem{Nikuni} Nikuni, T. \& Shiba, H., Quantum fluctuations and magnetic structures of CsCuCl$_3$ in high magnetic field, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 62}, 3268 (1993).
%\bibitem{Zhitomirsky} Zhitomirsky, M. E. \& Zaliznyak, I. A., Static properties of a quasi-one-dimensional antiferromagnet in a magnetic field, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 53}, 3428 (1996).
%\bibitem{Miyahara2012} Miyahara, S. \& Furukawa, N., Nonreciprocal directional dichroism and toroidalmagnons in helical magnets, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 81}, 023712 (2012).
%\bibitem{MH2020} Matsumoto, T. \& Hayami, S., Nonreciprocal magnons due to symmetric anisotropic exchange interaction in honeycomb antiferromagnets, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 101}, 224419 (2020).
%\bibitem{Matsumoto2020} Matsumoto, M., Hayashida, S. \& Masuda, T., Analysis of field-induced nonreciprocal magnon in noncollinear magnet and application to S = 1 triangular antiferromagnet CsFeCl$_3$, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 89}, 034710 (2020).
%\bibitem{Jazbec} S. Jazbec, S. Kashimoto, P. Ko$\check{\rm z}$elj, S. Vrtnik, M. Jagodi$\check{\rm c}$, Z. Jagli$\check{\rm c}$i$\acute{\rm c}$, and J. Dolin$\check{\rm s}$ek, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 93}, 054208 (2016).
%\bibitem{Hiroto} T. Hiroto, T. J . Sato, H. Cao, T. Hawai, T. Yokoo, S. Itoh, and R. Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 32}, 415802 (2020).
%\bibitem{Hiroto} Hiroto, T. {\it et al}., Noncoplanar ferrimagnetism and local crystalline-electric-field anisotropy in the quasicrystal approximant Au$_{70}$Si$_{17}$Tb$_{13}$, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 32}, 415802 (2020).
%\bibitem{Sato2019} T. J. Sato, A. Ishikawa, A. Sakurai, M. Hattori, M. Avdeev, and R. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 100}, 054417 (2019).
%\bibitem{Sato2019} Sato, T. J. {\it et al}., Whirling spin order in the quasicrystal approximant Au$_{72}$Al$_{14}$Tb$_{14}$, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 100}, 054417 (2019).
%\bibitem{Axe} M. Axenovich and M. Luban, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 63}, 100407(R) (2001).
%\bibitem{Axe} Axenovich, M. \& Luban, M., Exact ground state properties of the classical Heisenberg model for giant magnetic molecules, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 63}, 100407(R) (2001).
%\bibitem{Wessel} S. Wessel, A. Jagannathan, and S. Haas, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 177205 (2003).
%\bibitem{Kons} N. P. Konstantinidis, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 72}, 064453 (2005).
%\bibitem{Jan2007} A. Jagannathan, A. Szallas, S. Wessel, and M. Duneau, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 75}, 212407 (2007).
%\bibitem{Hucht} A. Hucht, S. Sahoo, S. Sil, and P. Entel, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 84}, 104438 (2011).
%\bibitem{Thiem} S. Thiem and J. T. Chalker, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 92}, 224409 (2015).
%\bibitem{Komura} Y. Komura and Y. Okabe, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 85}, 044004 (2016).
%\bibitem{Sugimoto} T. Sugimoto, T. Tohyama, T. Hiroto, and R. Tamura, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 85}, 053701 (2016).
%\bibitem{Koga2017} A. Koga and H. Tsunetsugu, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 96}, 214402 (2017).
%\bibitem{Wessel} Wessel, S., Jagannathan, A. \& Haas, S., Quantum Antiferromagnetism in Quasicrystals, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 90}, 177205 (2003).
%\bibitem{Kons} Konstantinidis, N. P., Antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model on clusters with icosahedral symmetry, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 72}, 064453 (2005).
%\bibitem{Jan2007} Jagannathan, A., Szallas, A., Wessel, S., \& Duneau, M., Penrose quantum antiferromagnet, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 75}, 212407 (2007).
%\bibitem{Hucht} Hucht, A., Sahoo, S., Sil, S. \& Entel, P., Penrose quantum antiferromagnet, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 84}, 104438 (2011).
%\bibitem{Thiem} Thiem S. \& Chalker, J. T., Long-range magnetic order in models for rare-earth quasicrystals, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 92}, 224409 (2015).
%\bibitem{Komura} Komura, Y. \& Okabe, Y., High-precision Monte Carlo simulation of the Ising models on the penrose lattice and the dual Penrose lattice, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 85}, 044004 (2016).
%\bibitem{Sugimoto} Sugimoto, T., Tohyama, T., Hiroto, T. \& Tamura, R., Phenomenological magnetic model in Tsai-type approximants, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 85}, 053701 (2016).
%\bibitem{Koga2017} Koga, A. \& Tsunetsugu, H., Antiferromagnetic order in the Hubbard model on the Penrose lattice, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 96}, 214402 (2017).
%\bibitem{STS} S. Suzuki, R. Tamura, and T. Sugimoto, Mater. Trans. {\bf 62}, 367 (2021).
%\bibitem{STS} Suzuki, S., Tamura, R. \& Sugimoto. T., Classical and quantum magnetic ground states on an icosahedral cluster, {\it Mater. Trans.} {\bf 62}, 367-374 (2021).
%\bibitem{Tamura2021} R. Tamura, Japan Physical Society March meeting (2021) symposium 15pF2-3.
%\bibitem{Tamura2021} Tamura, R., Magnetism in hypermaterials, {\it Japan Physical Society March meeting symposium} 15pF2-3 (2021).
%%%%%
%\textcolor{red}
%{
%\bibitem{W2021} Watanabe, S., submitted.
%}
%%%%%
%\bibitem{WM2021} S. Watanabe and M. Kawamoto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 90}, 063701 (2021).
%\bibitem{WM2021} Watanabe, S. \& Kawamoto, M., Crystalline electronic field in rare-earth based quasicrystal and approximant: analysis of quantum critical Au-Al-Yb quasicrystal and approximant, {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 90}, 063701 (2021).
%\bibitem{Stevens} K. W. H. Stevens, Proc. Phys. Soc. A {\bf 65}, 209 (1952).
%\bibitem{Stevens} Stevens, K. W. H., Matrix elements and operator equivalents connected with the magnetic properties of rare earth ions, {\it Proc. Phys. Soc. A} {\bf 65}, 209-215 (1952).
%\bibitem{Pearson} W. B. Pearson, {\it The Crystal Chemistry and Physics of Metals and Alloys} (Wiley-Interscience, John Wiley \& Sons, Inc., New York-London-Sydney-Toronto, 1972).
%\bibitem{Pearson} Pearson, W. B., The Crystal Chemistry and Physics of Metals and Alloys, {\it Wiley-Interscience, John Wiley \& Sons, Inc., New York-London-Sydney-Toronto}, (1972).
%\bibitem{Mizutani} U. Mizutani, H. Sato, M. Inukai, and E. S. Zijlstra, Philos. Mag. {\bf 93}, 3353 (2013).
%\bibitem{Mizutani} Mizutani, U., Sato, H., Inukai, M. \& Zijlstra, E. S., $e/a$ determination for 4d- and 5d-transition metal elements and their intermetallic compounds with Mg, Al, Zn, Cd and In, {\it Philos. Mag.} {\bf 93}, 3353-3390 (2013).
%\bibitem{SM} (Supporting Information) for the antiwhirling-moments state and the ground-state phase diagram for $0<\alpha<0.37$.
%\bibitem{Eriksson} F. Eriksson, Math. Mag. {\bf 63}, 184 (1990).
%\bibitem{Eriksson} Eriksson, F., On the measure of solid angles, {\it Math. Mag.} {\bf 63}, 184-187 (1990).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\bibitem{Dirac} Dirac, P. A. M. Quantised singularities in the electromagnetic field. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A {\bf 133}, 60-72 (1931).
%\bibitem{Volovik} Volovik, G. E. Linear momentum in ferromagnets. {\it J. Phys. C Solid State Phys.} {\bf 20}, L83-L87 (1987).
%\bibitem{Kotiuga} Kotiuga, P. R. The algebraic topology of Bloch points. {\it IEEE Trans. Magn.} {\bf 25}, 3476-3478 (1989).
%\bibitem{Feldtkeller} Feldtkeller, E. Mikromagnetisch stetige und unstetige Magnetisierungskonfigurationen. {\it Z. Angew. Phys.} {\bf 19}, 530-536 (1965).
%\bibitem{Doring} D{\"o}ring, W. Point singularities in micromagnetism. {\it J. Appl. Phys.} {\bf 39}, 1006-1007 (1968).
%\bibitem{Kabanov} Kabanov, Y. u. P., Dedukh, L. M. \& Nikitenko, V. I. Bloch points in an oscillating Bloch line. {\it JETP Lett.} {\bf 49}, 637-640 (1989).
%\bibitem{Thiaville} Thiaville, A. \& Miltat, J. Experimenting with Bloch points in bubble garnets. {\it J. Magn. Magn. Mater.} {\bf 104-107}, 335-336 (1992).
%\bibitem{Milde} Milde, P. {\it et al.} Unwinding of a skyrmion lattice by magnetic monopoles. {\it Science} {\bf 340}, 1076-1080 (2013).
%\bibitem{Castelnovo} Castelnovo, C., Moessner, R. \& Sondhi, S. L. Magnetic monopoles in spin ice. {\it Nature} {\bf 451}, 42-45 (2008).
%\bibitem{Morris} Morris, D. J. P. et al. Dirac strings and magnetic monopoles in the spin ice Dy$_2$Ti$_2$O$_7$. {\it Science} {\bf 326}, 411-414 (2009).
%\bibitem{Aoyama} Aoyama, K. \& Kawamura, H., Hedgehog-lattice spin texture in classical Heisenberg antiferromagnets on the breathing pyrochlore lattice, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 103}, 014406 (2021).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\bibitem{Nagaosa} N. Nagaosa and Y. Tokura, Nat. Nanotechnol. {\bf 8}, 899 (2013).
%\bibitem{Nagaosa} Nagaosa, N. \& Tokura, Y., Topological properties and dynamics of magnetic skyrmions, {\it Nat. Nanotechnol.} {\bf 8}, 899-911 (2013).
%\bibitem{Kanazawa} Kanazawa, N. {\it et al}., Critical phenomena of emergent magnetic monopoles in a chiral magnet, {\it Nat. Commun.} {\bf 7}, 11622 (2016).
%\bibitem{Tokura} Y. Tokura and N. Kanazawa, Chem. Rev. {\bf 121}, 2857 (2021) and references therein.
%\bibitem{Tokura} Tokura., Y. \& Kanazawa, N. Magnetic Skyrmion materials, {\it Chem. Rev.} {\bf 121}, 2857-2897 (2021).
%\bibitem{Aoyama} K. Aoyama and H. Kawamura, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 103}, 014406 (2021).
%\bibitem{Tatara} G. Tatara and H. Kawamura, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 71}, 2613 (2002).
%\bibitem{Tatara} Tatara, G. \& Kawamura, H., Chirality-driven anomalous Hall effect in weak coupling regime {\it J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.} {\bf 71}, 2613-2616 (2002).
%\bibitem{Wannier} Wannier, G. H., Antiferromagnetism. The Triangular Ising Net {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf 79}, 357-364 (1950).
%\bibitem{Hutchings} M. T. Hutchings, Solid State Physics {\bf 16}, 227 (1964).
%\bibitem{Hutchings} Hutchings, M. T., Point-charge calculations of energy levels of magnetic ions in crystalline electric fields, {\it Solid State Physics} {\bf 16}, 227-273 (1964).
%\bibitem{Freeman} A. J. Freeman and J. P. Desclaux, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. {\bf 12}, 11 (1979).
%\bibitem{Freeman} Freeman A. J. \& Desclaux, J. P., Dirac-Fock studies of some electronic properties of rare-earth ions, {\it J. Magn. Magn. Mater.} {\bf 12}, 11-21 (1979).
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\bibitem{Shechtman} D. Shechtman, I. Blech, D. Gratias, and J. W. Cahn, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 53}, 1951 (1984).
%\bibitem{Tsai} A. P. Tsai, J. Q. Guo, E. Abe, H. Takakura, and T. J. Sato, Nature {\bf 408}, 537 (2000).
%\bibitem{Takakura} H. Takakura, C. P. G\'{o}mez, A. Yamamoto, M. De Boissieu, and A. P. Tsai, Nat. Mater. {\bf 6}, 58 (2007).
% QC magnetic order
%\bibitem{Hattori1995a} Y. Hattori {\it et al}., Spin-glass behaviour of icosahedral Mg-Gd-Zn and Mg-Tb-Zn quasi-crystals, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 7}, 2313 (1995).
%\bibitem{Hattori1995b} Y. Hattori {\it et al}., Electronic specific heat coefficient and magnetic entropy of icosahedral Mg-RE-Zn (RE=Gd, Tb and Y) quasicrystals, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 7}, 4183 (1995).
%\bibitem{Charrier} B. Charrier, D. Schmitt, Dynamical and irreversible magnetic effects in i-R$_8$Mg$_{42}$Zn$_{50}$ quasicrystals (R=Tb, Dy), {\it J. Magn. Magn. Mater.} {\bf 171}, 106 (1998).
%\bibitem{Islam} Z. Islam {\it et al}., Reinvestigation of long-range magnetic ordering in icosahedral Tb-Mg-Zn, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 57}, R11047 (1998).
%\bibitem{Sato1998} T. J. Sato, H. Takakura, A. P. Tsai, K. Shibata, Anisotropic spin correlations in the Zn-Mg-Ho icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 81}, 2364 (1998).
%\bibitem{Fisher} I. R. Fisher {\it et al}., Magnetic and transport properties of single-grain R-Mg-Zn icosahedral quasicrystals [R=Y, (Y$_{1-x}$Gd$_x$), (Y$_{1-x}$Tb$_x$), Tb, Dy, Ho, and Er], {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 59}, 308 (1999).
%\bibitem{Sato2000} T. J. Sato {\it et al}., Antiferromagnetic spin correlations in the Zn-Mg-Ho icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 61}, 476 (2000).
%\bibitem{Dolinsek} J. Dolin{\v s}ek, Z. Jagli{\v c}i{\' c}, M. A. Chernikov, I. R. Fisher, P. C. Canfield, Unusual spin-glass phase in icosahedral Tb-Mg-Zn quasicrystals, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 64}, 224209 (2001).
%\bibitem{Sato2001} T. J. Sato, J. Guo, A. P. Tsai, Magnetic properties of the icosahedral Cd-Mg-rare-earth quasicrystals, {\it J. Phys.: Condens. Matter} {\bf 13}, L105 (2001).
%\bibitem{Sato2002} T. J. Sato, H. Takakura, J. Guo, A. P. Tsai, K. Ohoyama, Magnetic correlations in the Cd-Mg-Tb icosahedral quasicrystal, {\it J. Alloys Compd.} {\bf 342}, 365 (2002).
%\bibitem{Sebastian} T. Huie, I. R. Fisher, K. W. Dennis, M. J. Kramer, {\it Philos. Mag.} {\bf 84}, 1029 (2004).
%
%\bibitem{Suzuki} S. Suzuki, A. Ishikawa, T. Yamada, T. Sugimoto, A. Sakurai, and R. Tamura, Mater. Trans. {\bf 62}, 298 (2021).
%\bibitem{Quilchini} M. Quilichini and T. Janssen, Phonon excitations in quasicrystals, {\it Rev. Mod. Phys.} {\bf 69}, 277 (1997).
%\bibitem{Boissieu} M. de Boissieu {\it et al}., Lattice dynamics of the Zn-Mg-Sc icosahedral quasicrystal and its Zn-Sc periodic 1/1 approximant, {\it Nat. Mater.} {\bf 6}, 977 (2007).
%\bibitem{Ashraff} J. A. Ashraff, R. B. Stinchcombe, Dynamic structure factor for the Fibonacci-chain quasicrystal, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 39}, 2670 (1989).
%\bibitem{Ashraff1990} J. A. Ashraff, J. M. Luck, R. B. Stinchcombe, Dynamic structure factor for the Fibonacci-chain quasicrystal, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 41}, 4314 (1990).
%\bibitem{Wessel2005} S. Wessel, I. Milat, Quantum fluctuations and excitations in antiferromagnetic quasicrystals, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 71}, 104427 (2005).
%\bibitem{Hiroto} T. Hiroto, T. J. Sato, H. Cao, T. Hawai, T. Yokoo, S. Itoh, and R. Tamura, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter {\bf 32}, 415802 (2020).
%\bibitem{SM} See Supplementary Information for minimal model applied to the QC, magnetic structure factor, dynamical structure factor, and collinear FM order in the QC.
%\bibitem{Kanazawa} N. Kanazawa, {\it et al}., Critical phenomena of emergent magnetic monopoles in a chiral magnet, {\it Nat. Commun.} {\bf 7}, 11622 (2016).
%\bibitem{Sato2019} T. J. Sato, A. Ishikawa, A. Sakurai, M. Hattori, M. Avdeev, and R. Tamura, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 100}, 054417 (2019).
%\bibitem{Molina} A. Rold\'{a}n-Molina, M. J. Santander, \'{A}. S. N\'{u}$\tilde{\rm n}$ez, and J. Fern\'{a}ndez-Rossier, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 89}, 054403 (2014).
%%%%%
%\bibitem{Ashraff} Ashraff J. A. \& Stinchcombe R. B. Dynamic structure factor for the Fibonacci-chain quasicrystal, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 39}, 2670 (1989).
%\bibitem{Wessel} Wessel, S. \& Milat, I., Quantum fluctuations and excitations in antiferromagnetic quasicrystals, {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 71}, 104427 (2005).
%%%%%
%\bibitem{Yamamoto} A. Yamamoto, Crystallography of quasiperiodic crystals, {\it Acta Cryst.} {\bf A52}, 509 (1996).
\end{thebibliography}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%\begin{acknowledgments}
%\noindent
%{\bf Acknowledgments}
%\\
%The author thanks H. Harima and T. Ishimasa for valuable discussion.
%This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP18K03542, JP19H00648, JP22H0459, and JP22H01170.
%\end{acknowledgments}
%\noindent
%{\bf Author contributions}
%\\
%S.W. conceived the study and led the project. Theoretical calculation was performed by S.W. The manuscript was written by S.W.
%\noindent
%{\bf Competing interests}
%\\
%The author declares no competing interests.
%\noindent
%{\bf Additional information}
%\\
%{\bf Supplementary information} is available for this paper.
%\noindent
%{\bf Correspondence and requests for materials} should be addressed to S.W.
\end{document}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%
% ****** End of file apstemplate.tex ******
%------------------------
\subsection{CEF excitation gap}
\label{sec:CEF_gap}
On the basis of the linear spin-wave theory,
we numerically calculate the energy of the excitation $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ in the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC.
We have searched the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_{1}({\bm q})$ in the Brillouin zone for various $D$ at $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$ and $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$.
The results of the numerical calculation in the systems for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=8$ (filled diamond) and $N_1=16$ (open circle) are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
Both the data for $N_1=8$ and $N_1=16$ coincide within the symbol size, which indicates that the system size dependence is small.
%%%%%%%% Fig.4 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{w1_min_D_N1.eps}%
\caption{
The $D$ dependence of the minimum of $\omega_1({\bm q})$ for $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$ and $\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$ at $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$ in the systems for $N_L=N_1^3$ with $N_1=8$ (filled diamond) and $N_1=16$ (open circle).
The threshold value $D_0$ for each $J_2$ is plotted by the symbol of blue open square.
}
\label{fig:w1_min_D}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We find that the data of the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_{1}({\bm q})$ approaching $0$ behaves as $\sim(D-D_0)^{1/2}$ where $D_0$ is the threshold value.
Hence, by extrapolating the data to $0$ in the $[{\rm minimum}~\omega_1({\bm q})]^2$-$D$ plot as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fit_D} in Appendix~\ref{sec:App_D0}, we estimate the value of $D_0$, which results in $D_0=\textcolor{red}{'}$.
We have confirmed that both the extrapolated values in the systems with $N_1=8$ and $N_1=16$ give this value within the numerical accuracy (see Appendix~\ref{sec:App_D0}).
Then, we plot the symbol of blue open square at $D=D_0$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
The minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_{1}({\bm q})$, which corresponds to the CEF excitation gap, has the positive value for $D\ge D_0$.
The positive excitation energy $\omega_{m'}({\bm q})$ indicates that the hedgehog-antihedgehog order in the 1/1 AC shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:HAH}(c) is the stable ground state within the linear spin-wave theory. This is consistent with the previous study based on the effective model corresponding to the large-$D$ limit of Eq.~(\ref{eq:H}), where the hedgehog-antihedgehog order is realized for $J_2/J_1\textcolor{red}{< 0.284}$~\cite{WSR}.
We have also searched the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_{1}({\bm q})$ for the larger $J_2$, i.e., $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$ in the systems with $N_1=8$ and $16$.
%The obtained results are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
By performing the extrapolation of the data with small positive values to $0$ as noted above, we have estimated the threshold value $D_0$ (see Appendix~\ref{sec:App_D0} for detail).
The result \textcolor{red}{is} as follows: $D_0=\textcolor{red}{2.355}$ for $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$, which \textcolor{red}{is} plotted as the symbols of blue open square in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
We also confirmed that the positive excitation energy appears for $D>D_0=\textcolor{red}{2.355}$ at $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
%%%%%%%% Fig.8 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
%\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Sperp_qw_J2_4.eps}%
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Sperp_qw_J2_m02.eps}%
\caption{
The intensity plot of
the dynamical structure factor $S_{\perp}({\bm q},\omega)$ for (a) $D=\textcolor{red}{2.356}$ and (b) $D=\textcolor{red}{5.0}$ at $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$ and $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$
where ${\bm q}$ is plotted along the symmetry line illustrated in the inset of Fig.~\ref{fig:w_q}.
}
\label{fig:Sperp_J2_4}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%----------------------------------------------------------------------------
\appendix
\section{Threshold value of uniaxial anisotropy $D$ for the positive CEF excitation}
\label{sec:App_D0}
In section~\ref{sec:CEF_gap}, we have plotted the threshold value of the uniaxial anisotropy strength $D_0$, above which the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})/(SJ_1)$ becomes positive, as the symbol of blue open square in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}.
In this appendix, the procedure to obtain $D_0$ is explained.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}, the uniaxial anisotropy strength $D$ dependence of the minimum of the lowest excitation energy $\omega_1({\bm q})/(SJ_1)$ is shown for various $J_2$ at $J_1=1.0$.
As seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:w1_min_D}, all the data show the square-root like behavior as their values approach $0$.
Indeed, if we plot the data in the plane of the square of the minimum $\omega_1({\bm q})/(S\textcolor{red}{|}J_1\textcolor{red}{|})$-uniaxial anisotropy strength $D$, the data for $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$ and $\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$ are aligned along the straight line as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:fit_D}(a) and \ref{fig:fit_D}\textcolor{red}{(b)}, respectively.
Then, we have performed the least square fit of the data in the systems with $N_1=8$ (green diamond) and $N_1=16$ (pink open circle).
The fitting lines are plotted as the green line for the data in $N_1=8$ and the pink dashed line for the data in $N_1=16$.
The obtained results by the extrapolation to 0 are as follows: \textcolor{red}{ $D_0=1.7836$ for $J_2=-0.1$ and $D_0=2.355$ for $J_2=-0.2$.}
Here, we have confirmed that both the results of the extrapolation in the systems with $N_1=8$ and $N_1=16$ give the same value within the above accuracy.
These results imply that the minimum of the lowest excitation energy behaves as $\omega_1({\bm q})/(SJ_1)\sim (D-D_0)^{1/2}$ in the vicinity of $D\gsim D_0$.
%%%%%%%% Fig.9 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{fit_D.eps}%
\caption{
The least-square fit of the square of the minimum $\omega_1({\bm q})/(S\textcolor{red}{|}J_1\textcolor{red}{|})$ for uniaxial anisotropy strength $D$ at $J_1=\textcolor{red}{-}1.0$ and (a) $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.1}$ and (b) $J_2=\textcolor{red}{-0.2}$
in the systems with $N_1=8$ (green diamond) and $N_1=16$ (pink open circle). The fitting lines are plotted by the green line for $N_1=8$ and the pink dashed line for $N_1=16$.
}
\label{fig:fit_D}
\end{figure}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%