Insulating phases of the d = ∞ Hubbard model
Journal of Physics Condensed Matter 9:20 (1997) 4211-4236
Abstract:
A theory is developed for the T = 0 Mott-Hubbard insulating phases of the d∞ Hubbard model at 1/2·filling. including both the antiferromagnetic (AF) and paramagnetic (P) insulators. Local moments are introduced explicitly from the outset, enabling ready identification of the dominant low-energy scales for insulating spin-flip excitations. Dynamical coupling of single-particle processed to the spin-flip excitations leads to a renormalized self-consistent description of the single-particle propagators that is shown to be asymptotically exact in strong coupling. for both the AF and P phases. For the AF case, the resultant theory is applicable over the entire U-range, and is discussed in some detail. For the P phase, we consider in particular the destruction of the Mott insulator, the resultant critical behaviour of which is found to stem inherently from proper inclusion of the spin-flip excitations.The metal-insulator transition in disordered tungsten bronzes. Results of an Anderson-Mott-Hubbard model
Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 205-207:1 (1996) 32-42
Abstract:
To understand the electronic properties - in particular the metal -insulator transition (MIT) - of cubic tungsten bronzes NaxWO3 and NaxTayW1-yO3, a microscopic model incorporating electron interactions and correlated disorder is presented and treated at the mean-field level of unrestricted Hartree-Fock. The conduction band is found to exhibit a pseudogap at the Fermi level for sufficiently large interaction strengths, in agreement with experiment. The pseudogap has a profound effect on localization properties of Fermi-level states and the position of the MIT. The lower band-edge states are found to be essentially two-dimensional, with a progressive crossover to three-dimensional character with increasing energy. An exception to this behaviour occurs in the pseudogap, where the states are virtually two-dimensional.Antiferromagnetic phase of the d = ∞ hubbard model
Physical Review Letters 76:25 (1996) 4785-4788
Abstract:
We describe a new approach to the ground state antiferromagnetic phase of the infinite-dimensional Hubbard model. The theory recovers correctly both the strong coupling Heisenberg limit at ½ filling and the t-J limit in the one-hole sector, appears applicable over a wide U range, and is readily extended to finite dimensions. © 1996 The American Physical Society.Magnetism in the Hubbard model: An effective spin Hamiltonian approach
Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 53:9 (1996) 5505-5517
Abstract:
We present an approach to the magnetic properties of the half-filled Hubbard model, based on an approximate mapping of its low-energy transverse spin excitations on to those of an effective underlying Heisenberg model, but with effective spin interactions which are self-consistently determined and not confined solely to nearest-neighbor couplings. The mapping is exact in strong-coupling and is found to be accurate over a very wide range of interaction strengths, down to weak coupling. At zero temperature, it permits ready evaluation at finite U of the one-loop effects of zero-point spin fluctuations on, e.g., the sublattice magnetization. At finite temperatures, thermodynamic properties of the system in the thermal paramagnet are studied via a physically transparent Onsager reaction field approach, which amounts to a self-consistent treatment of paramagnetic spin correlations. This is central not only in recovering the correct dimensionality dependence of antiferromagnetic long-ranged order, but also for the d=3 case of primary interest here yields a Néel temperature in close agreement with known strong- and weak-coupling limits. Spin correlation functions and magnetic susceptibilities also show very good agreement with quantum Monte Carlo calculations over an appreciable temperature range in which the low-lying transverse spin excitations are thermally dominant. © 1996 The American Physical Society.An important equation for the Anderson model - Comment
JOURNAL OF PHYSICS-CONDENSED MATTER 8:6 (1996) 769-770