Ising models of quantum frustration

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 63, Issue 22, 2001, Pages

  Moessner, R ^a   Sondhi, S L ^a  

^a PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FERROMAGNETIC MATERIAL;

ARTICLE; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; MAGNETIC FIELD; MODEL; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; QUANTUM CHEMISTRY; SIMULATION; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY;

EID: 0034896225     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.224401     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. G. H. Wannier, Phys. Rev. 79, 357 (1950).
2. R. M. F. Houtappel, Physica (Amsterdam) 16, 425 (1950).
3. In truth, the issue is somewhat delicate in this particular case with the zero-temperature limit of the spin correlations being critical (Ref. 4). A better example is the kagomé-lattice Ising antiferromagnet (Fig. 22); we will return to these subtleties below.
4. J. Stephenson, J. Math. Phys. 11, 413 (1970);
5. J. Math. Phys.J. Stephenson11, 420 (1970).
6. J. Villain, Z. Phys. B 33, 31 (1979).
7. For a review, see R. Moessner, cond-mat/0010301, Can. J. Phys. (to be published).
8. We should note that there is considerable laxity in the literature regarding the meaning of the term “frustrated magnet” even for classical systems. It would be best to restrict it to systems that have an extensive entropy or ground-state dimensionality at (Formula presented) but it is not unusual to use it to describe all systems with bond interactions that are not simultaneously satisfiable. An instance of the latter, but not of the former is the triangular-lattice Heisenberg model. We should also note that even with the more restricted usage it is not synonymous with absence of ordering—a constrained four-states Potts model on the square lattice [J. K. Burton and C. L. Henley, cond-mat/9708171 (unpublished)] appears to be an example of an ordered system with extensive entropy at (Formula presented) as is a three-leg ladder that we discuss below.
9. D. A. Huse and A. D. Rutenberg, Phys. Rev. B 45, 7536 (1992).
10. J. Villain, R. Bidaux, J. P. Carton, and R. J. Conte, J. Phys. (Paris) 41, 1263 (1980).
11. E. F. Shender, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 83, 326 (1982) [Sov. Phys. JETP 56, 178 (1982)].
12. For a review, see M. F. Collins and O. A. Petrenko, Can. J. Phys. 75, 605 (1997).
13. See, e.g., J. T. Chalker and J. F. G. Eastmond, Phys. Rev. B 46, 14 201 (1992);
14. Phys. Rev. BC. Zeng and V. Elser, 51, 8318 (1995);
15. Phys. Rev. BP. Lecheminant, B. Bernu, C. Lhuillier, L. Pierre, and P. Sindzingre, 56, 2521 (1997);
16. F. Mila, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2356 (1998), and references therein.
17. P. W. Anderson, Mater. Res. Bull. 8, 153 (1973);
18. P. Fazekas and P. W. Anderson, Philos. Mag. 30, 23 (1974).
19. In the future we hope to explore other instances of single-spin quantum dynamics involving either larger values of spin or the extension of classical continuous-spin models to quantum-rotor models. The quantum dynamics of mobile holes in a frustrated Ising background is discussed in Ref. 15.
20. R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. B 62, 14 122 (2000).
21. R. Moessner, S. L. Sondhi, and P. Chandra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 4457 (2000).
22. For some work on one-dimensional models, see B. K. Chakrabati, A. Dutta, and P. Sen, Quantum Ising Phases and Transitions in Tranverse Ising Models (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996).
23. S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 2000).
24. D. S. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 534 (1992).
25. G. Aeppli and T. F. Rosenbaum, in Dynamical Properties of Unconventional Magnetic Systems, edited by A. R. Skjeltorp and D. Sherrington (Kluwer Academic, Amsterdam, 1998).
26. P. W. Anderson, Science 235, 1196 (1987).
27. D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2376 (1998).
28. N. Read and S. Sachdev, Nucl. Phys. B 316, 609 (1989);
29. N. ReadS. SachdevPhys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1773 (1991).
30. X. G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 44, 2664 (1991).
31. C. Mudry and E. Fradkin, Phys. Rev. B 49, 5200 (1994);
32. Phys. Rev. BC. MudryE. Fradkin50, 11 409 (1994).
33. S. Sachdev and M. Vojta, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 69, Suppl. B, 1 (2000).
34. T. Senthil and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B 62, 7850 (2000).
35. R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 1881 (2001).
36. M. Suzuki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 46, 1337 (1971);
37. Prog. Theor. Phys.M. Suzuki56, 2454 (1976);
38. E. Fradkin and L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2637 (1978).
39. H. F. Trotter, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 10, 545 (1959).
40. R. H. Swendsen, J. S. Wang, and A. M. Ferrenberg, Top. Appl. Phys. 71, 75 (1992).
41. H. Rieger and N. Kawashima, Eur. Phys. J. B 9, 233 (1999).
42. We note that the existence of a dimer mapping has interesting topological consequences (Ref. 22), which however will not be discussed in this work.
43. We thank David Huse for a useful discussion of this point.
44. This is related to the fact that in layered, ferromagnetically stacked frustrated magnets, fluctuations will determine which state is selected as the ground state in the limit (Formula presented) The importance of fluctuations for such stacked magnets was pointed out by S. N. Coppersmith, Phys. Rev. B 32, 1584 (1985). In our formulation, fluctuations are naturally included and the mapping to the stacked magnets provides a formal connection between these results.
45. More precisely, the graph on which hopping occurs can be defined as a high dimensional but finite lattice. For a system of N spins, it is a subgraph of an N-dimensional hypercube.
46. (a) R. Moessner and J. T. Chalker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2929 (1998);
47. R. MoessnerJ. T. Chalker(b) Phys. Rev. B 58, 12 049 (1998).
48. D. Blankschtein, M. Ma, A. N. Berker, G. S. Grest, and C. M. Soukoulis, Phys. Rev. B 29, 5250 (1984).
49. D. Blankschtein, M. Ma, and A. N. Berker, Phys. Rev. B 30, 1362 (1984).
50. D. J. Priour, Jr., M. P. Gelfand, and S. L. Sondhi, cond-mat/0005185 (unpublished).
51. Note that the columnar dimer state is disordered in dimer language as it breaks no symmetries of the lattice. Had the hierarchical state been selected, there would have been breaking of translational symmetry.
52. A phase diagram of the quantum-dimer model with these features has been obtained before, see Refs. 22 and 43.
53. S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B 40, 5204 (1989);
54. Phys. Rev. BN. Read and S. Sachdev, 42, 4568 (1990).
55. M. H. Waldor, W. F. Wolff, and J. Zittartz, Phys. Lett. 106A, 261 (1984);
56. M. H. WaldorW. F. WolffJ. ZittartzZ. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 59, 43 (1985).
57. H. W. J. Blöte and H. J. Hilhorst, J. Phys. A 15, L631 (1982);
58. J. Phys. AB. Nienhuis, H. J. Hilhorst, and H. W. Blöte, 17, 3559 (1984).
59. P. Orland, Phys. Rev. B 47, 11 280 (1993)
60. This mapping was independently noted by C. L. Henley, in Book of Abstracts of STATPHYS 20, edited by A. Gervois, M. Gingold, and D. Iagolnitzer (IUPAP Commission on Statistical Physics, Paris, 1998).
61. J. V. Jose, L. P. Kadanoff, S. Kirkpatrick, and D. R. Nelson, Phys. Rev. B 16, 1217 (1977).
62. M. E. Fisher, Phys. Rev. 124, 1664 (1961).
63. R. A. Jalabert and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B 44, 686 (1991).
64. P. Orland, Phys. Rev. B 49, 3423 (1994).
65. P. W. Leung, K. C. Chiu, and K. J. Runge, Phys. Rev. B 54, 12 938 (1996).
66. P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. 102, 1008 (1956).
67. E. H. Lieb, Phys. Rev. 162, 162 (1967).
68. For a review, see R. Liebmann, Statistical Mechanics of Periodic Frustrated Ising Systems (Springer, Berlin, 1986).
69. Different representations of the ice model are explained in G. T. Barkema and M. E. J. Newman, Phys. Rev. E 57, 1155 (1998).
70. K. Kano and S. Naya, Prog. Theor. Phys. 10, 158 (1953).
71. L. Pauling, The Nature of the Chemical Bond (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1938).
72. J. N. Reimers, A. J. Berlinsky, and A.-C. Shi, Phys. Rev. B 43, 865 (1991).
73. A. B. Harris, C. Kallin, and A. J. Berlinsky, Phys. Rev. B 45, 2899 (1992).
74. A. Suto, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 44, 121 (1981);
75. Z. Phys. B: Condens. MatterW. F. Wolff, P. Hoever, and J. Zittartz, 42, 259 (1981).
76. W. F. Wolff and J. Zittartz, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter 44, 139 (1982).