Two-impurity Anderson model at quantum criticality

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 78, Issue 3, 2008, Pages

  Mross, David F ^a,b   Johannesson, Henrik ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 49149086665     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.78.035449     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
2. For a review, see P. Coleman, Handbook of Magnetism and Advanced Magnetic Materials (Wiley, New York, 2007).
3. Michel Ferrero, Lorenzo De Leo, Philippe Lecheminant, and Michele Fabrizio, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter JCOMEL 0953-8984 10.1088/0953-8984/19/43/ 433201 19, 433201 (2007).
4. N. J. Craig, J. M. Taylor, E. A. Lester, C. M. Marcus, M. P. Hanson, and A. C. Gossard, Science SCIEAS 0036-8075 10.1126/science.1095452 304, 565 (2004).
5. C. Jayaprakash, H.-R. Krishna-murthy, and J. W. Wilkins, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.47.737 47, 737 (1981).
6. O. Sakai, Y. Shimizu, and T. Kasuya, Solid State Commun. SSCOA4 0038-1098 10.1016/0038-1098(90)90346-D 75, 81 (1990).
7. I. Affleck, A. W. W. Ludwig, and B. A. Jones, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.52.9528 52, 9528 (1995).
8. G. Zaránd, C.-H. Chung, P. Simon, and M. Vojta, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.166802 97, 166802 (2006).
9. C. Jayaprakash, H.-R. Krishna-murthy, and J. W. Wilkins, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.330760 53, 2142 (1982).
10. Y. Oreg and D. Goldhaber-Gordon, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.136602 90, 136602 (2003).
11. M. G. Vavilov and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.086805 94, 086805 (2005)
12. P. Simon, R. Lopez, and Y. Oreg, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.086602 94, 086602 (2005).
13. I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, Nucl. Phys. B NUPBBO 0550-3213 10.1016/0550-3213(91)90419-X 360, 641 (1991)
14. I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.48.7297 48, 7297 (1993).
15. For a review, see I. Affleck, Acta Phys. Pol. APPOAK 0001-673X 26, 1869 (1995).
16. For a review, see P. di Fransesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Sénéchal, Conformal Field Theory (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997).
17. Due to the special form (point-like hybridization and coupling of the subsystems via spins only) of the interactions in Eq. 3, we can use the trivial redefinitions c1α (x) → c1α (x- Ri) to formally obtain x=0 as the impurity position in both of the leads.
18. The statement that the boundary condition representing the impurity-electron interaction in the TIKM is obtained by fusion with the Ising field σ is strictly speaking a hypothesis within BCFT, and as such must be tested against independent results. This was done in Ref. where it was shown that fusion with σ produces a finite-size spectrum in excellent agreement with numerical results for the TIKM.
19. The boundary scaling dimensions Δn in the semi-infinite plane are connected to energy levels in a strip with the same boundary condition at the two edges. We are therefore effectively considering a finite-size energy spectrum with two quantum impurities present, one at each edge of the strip. Formally, this can be taken care of by performing fusion twice with σ× = σ (double fusion).
20. H. Johannesson, N. Andrei, and C. J. Bolech, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.075112 68, 075112 (2003).
21. The reason that L-1 does not contribute to the finite-temperature properties lies in the symmetry of the finite temperature geometry. The potential contributions of L-1 to the partition function are of the form 0β dτ L-1 (τ,0)... T, where the three dots in the correlator represent any other set of operators not depending on τ and the subscript T means that the correlator is evaluated in the finite-temperature geometry, i.e. a cylinder where τ=0 and τ=β are identified. Using L-1 (τ) = τ (τ) such terms are seen to vanish 0β dτ τ (τ,0)... = (β)... - (0)... =0.
22. For an example of how the scaling fields in a BCFT formulation of a quantum impurity model depend on the microscopic parameters of the model (specifically the impurity valences)-as determined by an exact Bethe Ansatz solution-see Ref..
23. P. Nozières and A. Blandin, J. Phys. (Paris) JOPQAG 0302-0738 10.1051/jphys:01980004103019300 41, 193 (1980).
24. B. A. Jones and C. M. Varma, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.40.324 40, 324 (1989).
25. I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, J. Phys. A JPHAC5 0305-4470 10.1088/0305-4470/27/16/007 27, 5375 (1994).
26. B. Menge and E. Müller-Hartmann, Z. Phys. B: Condens. Matter ZPCMDN 0722-3277 10.1007/BF01305740 73, 225 (1988)
27. S. Fujimoto, N. Kawakami, and S.-K. Tang, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. JUPSAU 0031-9015 10.1143/JPSJ.64.4552 64, 4552 (1995).