arXiv:1103.3856 · Physical Review B

Frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: A candidate for deconfined quantum criticality

DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL, R. F. Bishop, P. H. Y. Li, Johannes Richter, C. E. Campbell

Published Jul 8, 2011• 65 citations

Abstract

We study the ground-state (gs) phase diagram of the frustrated spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ ${J}_{1}$--${J}_{2}$--${J}_{3}$ antiferromagnet with ${J}_{2}={J}_{3}=\ensuremath{\kappa}{J}_{1}$ on the honeycomb lattice using coupled-cluster theory and exact diagonalization methods. We present results for the gs energy, magnetic order parameter, spin-spin correlation function, and plaquette valence-bond crystal (PVBC) susceptibility. We find a N\'eel antiferromagnetic (AFM) phase for $\ensuremath{\kappa}<{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47$, a collinear striped AFM phase for $\ensuremath{\kappa}>{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60$, and a paramagnetic PVBC phase for ${\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\lesssim}\ensuremath{\kappa}\ensuremath{\lesssim}{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}$. The transition at ${\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}$ appears to be of first-order type, while that at ${\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}$ is continuous. Since the N\'eel and PVBC phases break different symmetries our results favor the deconfinement scenario for the transition at ${\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}$.

DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.84.012403

Related papers

Frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice with spin quantum numbers≥ 1

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, C. E. Campbell

arXiv:1511.00499Journal of Physics Conference SeriesMar 1, 20167 citations

Phase diagram of a frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: The J1 - J2 - J3 model

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL +1 more

arXiv:1204.2390Physical Review BOct 9, 201299 citations

Phase diagram of a frustrated quantum antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: Magnetic order versus valence-bond crystal formation

A. Fabricio Albuquerque, David R. Schwandt, Balázs Hetényi +3 more

arXiv:1102.5325Physical Review BJul 6, 2011204 citations

Ground-state phases of the frustrated spin- 12 J1 – J2 – J3 Heisenberg ferromagnet ( J1<0 ) on the honeycomb lattice with J3=J2>0

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL +2 more

arXiv:1109.6229Physical Review BFeb 21, 201231 citations

Ground state phases of the spin-1/2 J1–J2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice: A high-order coupled cluster treatment

R. Darradi, Oleg Derzhko, Ronald Zinke +3 more

arXiv:0806.3825Physical Review BDec 11, 2008183 citations

Competition between spin liquids and valence-bond order in the frustrated spin- 12 Heisenberg model on the honeycomb lattice

Francesco Ferrari, Samuel Bieri, Federico Becca

arXiv:1706.07810Physical review. B./Physical review. BSep 1, 201746 citations

arXiv:1103.3856 · Physical Review B

Frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: A candidate for deconfined quantum criticality

DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL, R. F. Bishop, P. H. Y. Li, Johannes Richter, C. E. Campbell

Published Jul 8, 2011• 65 citations

arXiv HTML PDF

Abstract

We study the ground-state (gs) phase diagram of the frustrated spin-

\frac{1}{2}

{J}_{1}

{J}_{2}

{J}_{3}

antiferromagnet with

{J}_{2}={J}_{3}=\ensuremath{\kappa}{J}_{1}

on the honeycomb lattice using coupled-cluster theory and exact diagonalization methods. We present results for the gs energy, magnetic order parameter, spin-spin correlation function, and plaquette valence-bond crystal (PVBC) susceptibility. We find a N'eel antiferromagnetic (AFM) phase for

\ensuremath{\kappa}<{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47

, a collinear striped AFM phase for

\ensuremath{\kappa}>{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60

, and a paramagnetic PVBC phase for

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\lesssim}\ensuremath{\kappa}\ensuremath{\lesssim}{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}

. The transition at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}

appears to be of first-order type, while that at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}

is continuous. Since the N'eel and PVBC phases break different symmetries our results favor the deconfinement scenario for the transition at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}

DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.84.012403

Related papers

Frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice with spin quantum numbers≥ 1

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, C. E. Campbell

The ground-state (GS) phase diagram of the frustrated spin- s J 1 -J 2 -J 3 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice is studied using the coupled cluster method implemented to high orders of approximation, for spin quantum numbers s = 1, 3/2, 2 , 5/2. The model has antiferromagnetic (AFM) nearest-neighbour, next-nearest-neighbour and next-next-nearest-neighbour exchange couplings (with strength J 1 > 0, J 2 > 0 and J 3 > 0, respectively). We specifically study the case J 3 = J 2 = κJ 1 , in the range 0 < κ < 1 of the frustration parameter, which includes the point of maximum classical (s → ∞ ) frustration, viz., the classical critical point at κ cl = 1/2 , which separates the Neel phase for κ < κ cl and the collinear striped AFM phase for κ > κ cl . Results are presented for the GS energy, magnetic order parameter and plaquette valence-bond crystal (PVBC) susceptibility. For all spins s > 3/2 we find a quantum phase diagram very similar to the classical one, with a direct first-order transition between the two collinear AFM states at a value κ c (s) which is slightly greater than κ c l [e.g., κ c (3/2) ≈ 0.53(1)] and which approaches it monotonically as s → ∞ . By contrast, for the case s = 1 the transition is split into two such that the stable GS phases are one with Néel AFM order for κ < κ c1 = 0.485(5) and one with striped AFM order for κ > κ c2 = 0.528(5), just as in the case s = 1/2 (for which κ c1 ≈ 0.47 and κ c2 ≈ 0.60). For both the s = 1/2 and s = 1 models the transition at κ c2 appears to be of first-order type, while that at κ c1 appears to be continuous. However, whereas in the s = 1/2 case the intermediate phase appears to have PVBC order over the entire range κ c1 < κ < κ c2 , in the s = 1 case PVBC ordering either exists only over a very small part of the region or, more likely, is absent everywhere.The ground-state (GS) phase diagram of the frustrated spin- s J 1 -J 2 -J 3 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice is studied using the coupled cluster method implemented to high orders of approximation, for spin quantum numbers s = 1, 3/2, 2 , 5/2. The model has antiferromagnetic (AFM) nearest-neighbour, next-nearest-neighbour and next-next-nearest-neighbour exchange couplings (with strength J 1 > 0, J 2 > 0 and J 3 > 0, respectively). We specifically study the case J 3 = J 2 = κJ 1 , in the range 0 < κ < 1 of the frustration parameter, which includes the point of maximum classical (s → ∞ ) frustration, viz., the classical critical point at κ cl = 1/2 , which separates the Neel phase for κ < κ cl and the collinear striped AFM phase for κ > κ cl . Results are presented for the GS energy, magnetic order parameter and plaquette valence-bond crystal (PVBC) susceptibility. For all spins s > 3/2 we find a quantum phase diagram very similar to the classical one, with a direct first-order transition between the two collinear AFM states at a value κ c (s) which is slightly greater than κ c l [e.g., κ c (3/2) ≈ 0.53(1)] and which approaches it monotonically as s → ∞ . By contrast, for the case s = 1 the transition is split into two such that the stable GS phases are one with Néel AFM order for κ < κ c1 = 0.485(5) and one with striped AFM order for κ > κ c2 = 0.528(5), just as in the case s = 1/2 (for which κ c1 ≈ 0.47 and κ c2 ≈ 0.60). For both the s = 1/2 and s = 1 models the transition at κ c2 appears to be of first-order type, while that at κ c1 appears to be continuous. However, whereas in the s = 1/2 case the intermediate phase appears to have PVBC order over the entire range κ c1 < κ < κ c2 , in the s = 1 case PVBC ordering either exists only over a very small part of the region or, more likely, is absent everywhere.

arXiv:1511.00499Journal of Physics Conference SeriesMar 1, 20167 citations

Phase diagram of a frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: The J1 - J2 - J3 model

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL +1 more

We use the coupled-cluster method in high orders of approximation to make a comprehensive study of the ground-state (GS) phase diagram of the spin-1/2 ${J}_{1}$ - ${J}_{2}$ - ${J}_{3}$ model on a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with antiferromagnetic (AFM) interactions up to third-nearest neighbors. Results are presented for the GS energy and the average local onsite magnetization. With the nearest-neighbor coupling strength ${J}_{1}\ensuremath{\equiv}1$, we find four magnetically ordered phases in the parameter window ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, namely, the N\'eel, striped, and N\'eel-II collinear AFM phases, plus a spiral phase. The N\'eel-II phase appears as a stable GS phase in the classical version of the model only for values ${J}_{3}<0$ . Each of these four ordered phases shares a boundary with a disordered quantum paramagnetic (QP) phase, and at several widely separated points on the phase boundaries the QP phase has an infinite susceptibility to plaquette valence-bond crystalline order. We identify all of the phase boundaries with good precision in the parameter window studied, and we find three tricritical quantum critical points therein at (a) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{1}})=(0.51\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the N\'eel, striped, and QP phases; (b) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{2}})=(0.65\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.02,0.55\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the striped, spiral, and QP phases; and (c) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{3}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{3}})=(0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.12\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the spiral, N\'eel-II, and QP phases.We use the coupled-cluster method in high orders of approximation to make a comprehensive study of the ground-state (GS) phase diagram of the spin-1/2 ${J}_{1}$-${J}_{2}$-${J}_{3}$ model on a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with antiferromagnetic (AFM) interactions up to third-nearest neighbors. Results are presented for the GS energy and the average local onsite magnetization. With the nearest-neighbor coupling strength ${J}_{1}\ensuremath{\equiv}1$, we find four magnetically ordered phases in the parameter window ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, namely, the N\'eel, striped, and N\'eel-II collinear AFM phases, plus a spiral phase. The N\'eel-II phase appears as a stable GS phase in the classical version of the model only for values ${J}_{3}<0$. Each of these four ordered phases shares a boundary with a disordered quantum paramagnetic (QP) phase, and at several widely separated points on the phase boundaries the QP phase has an infinite susceptibility to plaquette valence-bond crystalline order. We identify all of the phase boundaries with good precision in the parameter window studied, and we find three tricritical quantum critical points therein at (a) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{1}})=(0.51\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the N\'eel, striped, and QP phases; (b) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{2}})=(0.65\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.02,0.55\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the striped, spiral, and QP phases; and (c) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{3}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{3}})=(0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.12\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the spiral, N\'eel-II, and QP phases.

arXiv:1204.2390Physical Review BOct 9, 201299 citations

Phase diagram of a frustrated quantum antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice: Magnetic order versus valence-bond crystal formation

A. Fabricio Albuquerque, David R. Schwandt, Balázs Hetényi +3 more

We present a comprehensive computational study of the phase diagram of the frustrated $S=1/2$ Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice, with second-nearest $({J}_{2})$ and third-neighbor $({J}_{3})$ couplings. Using a combination of exact diagonalizations (EDs) of the original spin model, of the Hamiltonian projected into the nearest-neighbor short-range valence-bond basis, and of an effective quantum dimer model, as well as a self-consistent cluster mean-field theory, we determine the boundaries of several magnetically ordered phases in the region ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, and find a sizable magnetically disordered region in between. We characterize part of this magnetically disordered phase as a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase. At larger ${J}_{2}$ , we locate a sizable region in which staggered valence-bond crystal correlations are found to be important, either due to genuine valence-bond crystal (VBC) ordering or as a consequence of magnetically ordered phases, which break lattice rotational symmetry. Furthermore, we find that a particular parameter-free Gutzwiller projected tight-binding wave function has remarkably accurate energies compared to finite-size extrapolated ED energies along the transition line from conventional N\'eel to plaquette VBC phases, a fact that points to possibly interesting critical behavior---such as a deconfined critical point---across this transition. We also comment on the relevance of this spin model to model the spin liquid region found in the half filled Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice.We present a comprehensive computational study of the phase diagram of the frustrated $S=1/2$ Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice, with second-nearest $({J}_{2})$ and third-neighbor $({J}_{3})$ couplings. Using a combination of exact diagonalizations (EDs) of the original spin model, of the Hamiltonian projected into the nearest-neighbor short-range valence-bond basis, and of an effective quantum dimer model, as well as a self-consistent cluster mean-field theory, we determine the boundaries of several magnetically ordered phases in the region ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, and find a sizable magnetically disordered region in between. We characterize part of this magnetically disordered phase as a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase. At larger ${J}_{2}$, we locate a sizable region in which staggered valence-bond crystal correlations are found to be important, either due to genuine valence-bond crystal (VBC) ordering or as a consequence of magnetically ordered phases, which break lattice rotational symmetry. Furthermore, we find that a particular parameter-free Gutzwiller projected tight-binding wave function has remarkably accurate energies compared to finite-size extrapolated ED energies along the transition line from conventional N\'eel to plaquette VBC phases, a fact that points to possibly interesting critical behavior---such as a deconfined critical point---across this transition. We also comment on the relevance of this spin model to model the spin liquid region found in the half filled Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice.

arXiv:1102.5325Physical Review BJul 6, 2011204 citations

Ground-state phases of the frustrated spin- 12 J1 – J2 – J3 Heisenberg ferromagnet ( J1<0 ) on the honeycomb lattice with J3=J2>0

P. H. Y. Li, R. F. Bishop, DAMIAN J. J. FARNELL +2 more

We study the ground-state (GS) properties of the frustrated spin- $\frac{1}{2}$ ${J}_{1}$ -- ${J}_{2}$ -- ${J}_{3}$ Heisenberg model on the two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor (${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) exchange and frustrating antiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor ( ${J}_{2}>0$ ) and next-next-nearest-neighbor ( ${J}_{3}>0$ ) exchanges, for the case ${J}_{3}={J}_{2}$ . We use the coupled-cluster method implemented to high orders of approximation, complemented by the Lanczos exact diagonalization of a large finite lattice with 32 sites, in order to calculate the GS energy, magnetic order parameter, and spin-spin correlation functions. In one scenario we find a quantum phase transition point between regions characterized by ferromagnetic order and a form of antiferromagnetic (``striped'') collinear order at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.1095\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.0005$, which is below the corresponding hypothetical transition point at ${J}_{2}^{\mathrm{cl}}=\frac{1}{7}$ ($\ensuremath{\approx}0.143$) for the classical version of the model, in which we momentarily ignore the intervening noncollinear spiral phase in the region $\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}$ . Hence we see that quantum fluctuations appear to stabilize somewhat the collinear antiferromagnetic order in preference to the ferromagnetic order in this model. We compare results for the present ferromagnetic case (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) to previous results for the corresponding antiferromagnetic case (with ${J}_{1}=+1$ ). The magnetic order parameter is found to behave similarly for the ferromagnetic and the antiferromagnetic models for large values of the frustration parameter ${J}_{2}$ . However, there are considerable differences in the behavior of the order parameters for the two models for ${J}_{2}/|{J}_{1}|\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.6$. For example, the quasiclassical collinear magnetic long-range order for the antiferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=+1$ ) breaks down at ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60$, whereas the ``equivalent'' point for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) occurs at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.11$. Unlike in the antiferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=+1$ ), where a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase intrudes between the two corresponding quasiclassical antiferromagnetic phases (with N\'eel and striped order) for ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}<{J}_{2}<{J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}$ , with ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47$, we find no clear indications at all in the ferromagnetic model for an intermediate magnetically disordered phase between the corresponding phases exhibiting ferromagnetic and striped order. Instead the evidence for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) points to one of two scenarios: either there is a direct first-order transition between the two magnetically ordered phases, as mentioned above; or there exists an intervening phase between them in the very narrow range $0.10\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.12$, which is probably a remnant of the spiral phase that exists in the classical counterpart of the model over the larger range $\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}$ .We study the ground-state (GS) properties of the frustrated spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ ${J}_{1}$--${J}_{2}$--${J}_{3}$ Heisenberg model on the two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor (${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) exchange and frustrating antiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor (${J}_{2}>0$) and next-next-nearest-neighbor (${J}_{3}>0$) exchanges, for the case ${J}_{3}={J}_{2}$. We use the coupled-cluster method implemented to high orders of approximation, complemented by the Lanczos exact diagonalization of a large finite lattice with 32 sites, in order to calculate the GS energy, magnetic order parameter, and spin-spin correlation functions. In one scenario we find a quantum phase transition point between regions characterized by ferromagnetic order and a form of antiferromagnetic (``striped'') collinear order at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.1095\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.0005$, which is below the corresponding hypothetical transition point at ${J}_{2}^{\mathrm{cl}}=\frac{1}{7}$ ($\ensuremath{\approx}0.143$) for the classical version of the model, in which we momentarily ignore the intervening noncollinear spiral phase in the region $\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}$. Hence we see that quantum fluctuations appear to stabilize somewhat the collinear antiferromagnetic order in preference to the ferromagnetic order in this model. We compare results for the present ferromagnetic case (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) to previous results for the corresponding antiferromagnetic case (with ${J}_{1}=+1$). The magnetic order parameter is found to behave similarly for the ferromagnetic and the antiferromagnetic models for large values of the frustration parameter ${J}_{2}$. However, there are considerable differences in the behavior of the order parameters for the two models for ${J}_{2}/|{J}_{1}|\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.6$. For example, the quasiclassical collinear magnetic long-range order for the antiferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=+1$) breaks down at ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60$, whereas the ``equivalent'' point for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) occurs at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.11$. Unlike in the antiferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=+1$), where a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase intrudes between the two corresponding quasiclassical antiferromagnetic phases (with N\'eel and striped order) for ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}<{J}_{2}<{J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}$, with ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47$, we find no clear indications at all in the ferromagnetic model for an intermediate magnetically disordered phase between the corresponding phases exhibiting ferromagnetic and striped order. Instead the evidence for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) points to one of two scenarios: either there is a direct first-order transition between the two magnetically ordered phases, as mentioned above; or there exists an intervening phase between them in the very narrow range $0.10\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.12$, which is probably a remnant of the spiral phase that exists in the classical counterpart of the model over the larger range $\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}$.

arXiv:1109.6229Physical Review BFeb 21, 201231 citations

Ground state phases of the spin-1/2 J1–J2 Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice: A high-order coupled cluster treatment

R. Darradi, Oleg Derzhko, Ronald Zinke +3 more

Using the coupled cluster method for high orders of approximation and complementary exact diagonalization studies we investigate the ground state properties of the spin-1/2 ${J}_{1}--{J}_{2}$ frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice. We have calculated the ground state energy, the magnetic order parameter, the spin stiffness, and several generalized susceptibilities to probe magnetically disordered quantum valence-bond phases. We have found that the quantum critical points for both the N\'eel and collinear orders are ${J}_{2}^{c1}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.44\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$ and ${J}_{2}^{c2}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.59\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$, respectively, which are in good agreement with the results obtained by other approximations. In contrast to the recent study by [Sirker et al. Phys. Rev. B 73, 184420 (2006)], our data do not provide evidence for the transition from the N\'eel to the valence-bond solid state to be first order. Moreover, our results are in favor of the deconfinement scenario for that phase transition. We also discuss the nature of the magnetically disordered quantum phase.Using the coupled cluster method for high orders of approximation and complementary exact diagonalization studies we investigate the ground state properties of the spin-1/2 ${J}_{1}--{J}_{2}$ frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice. We have calculated the ground state energy, the magnetic order parameter, the spin stiffness, and several generalized susceptibilities to probe magnetically disordered quantum valence-bond phases. We have found that the quantum critical points for both the N\'eel and collinear orders are ${J}_{2}^{c1}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.44\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$ and ${J}_{2}^{c2}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.59\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$, respectively, which are in good agreement with the results obtained by other approximations. In contrast to the recent study by [Sirker et al. Phys. Rev. B 73, 184420 (2006)], our data do not provide evidence for the transition from the N\'eel to the valence-bond solid state to be first order. Moreover, our results are in favor of the deconfinement scenario for that phase transition. We also discuss the nature of the magnetically disordered quantum phase.

arXiv:0806.3825Physical Review BDec 11, 2008183 citations

Competition between spin liquids and valence-bond order in the frustrated spin- 12 Heisenberg model on the honeycomb lattice

Francesco Ferrari, Samuel Bieri, Federico Becca

Using variational wave functions and Monte Carlo techniques, we study the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with first-neighbor ${J}_{1}$ and second-neighbor ${J}_{2}$ antiferromagnetic couplings on the honeycomb lattice. We perform a systematic comparison of magnetically ordered and nonmagnetic states (spin liquids and valence-bond solids) to obtain the ground-state phase diagram. N\'eel order is stabilized for small values of the frustrating second-neighbor coupling. Increasing the ratio ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}$ , we find strong evidence for a continuous transition to a nonmagnetic phase at ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\approx}0.23$. Close to the transition point, the Gutzwiller-projected uniform resonating valence-bond state gives an excellent approximation to the exact ground-state energy. For $0.23\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.36$, a gapless ${Z}_{2}$ spin liquid with Dirac nodes competes with a plaquette valence-bond solid. In contrast, the gapped spin liquid considered in previous works has significantly higher variational energy. Although the plaquette valence-bond order is expected to be present as soon as the N\'eel order melts, this ordered state becomes clearly favored only for ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\gtrsim}0.3$. Finally, for $0.36\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\le}0.5$, a valence-bond solid with columnar order takes over as the ground state, being also lower in energy than the magnetic state with collinear order. We perform a detailed finite-size scaling and standard data collapse analysis, and we discuss the possibility of a deconfined quantum critical point separating the N\'eel antiferromagnet from the plaquette valence-bond solid.Using variational wave functions and Monte Carlo techniques, we study the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with first-neighbor ${J}_{1}$ and second-neighbor ${J}_{2}$ antiferromagnetic couplings on the honeycomb lattice. We perform a systematic comparison of magnetically ordered and nonmagnetic states (spin liquids and valence-bond solids) to obtain the ground-state phase diagram. N\'eel order is stabilized for small values of the frustrating second-neighbor coupling. Increasing the ratio ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}$, we find strong evidence for a continuous transition to a nonmagnetic phase at ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\approx}0.23$. Close to the transition point, the Gutzwiller-projected uniform resonating valence-bond state gives an excellent approximation to the exact ground-state energy. For $0.23\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.36$, a gapless ${Z}_{2}$ spin liquid with Dirac nodes competes with a plaquette valence-bond solid. In contrast, the gapped spin liquid considered in previous works has significantly higher variational energy. Although the plaquette valence-bond order is expected to be present as soon as the N\'eel order melts, this ordered state becomes clearly favored only for ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\gtrsim}0.3$. Finally, for $0.36\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\le}0.5$, a valence-bond solid with columnar order takes over as the ground state, being also lower in energy than the magnetic state with collinear order. We perform a detailed finite-size scaling and standard data collapse analysis, and we discuss the possibility of a deconfined quantum critical point separating the N\'eel antiferromagnet from the plaquette valence-bond solid.

arXiv:1706.07810Physical review. B./Physical review. BSep 1, 201746 citations

We study the ground-state (gs) phase diagram of the frustrated spin-

\frac{1}{2}

{J}_{1}

{J}_{2}

{J}_{3}

antiferromagnet with

{J}_{2}={J}_{3}=\ensuremath{\kappa}{J}_{1}

\ensuremath{\kappa}<{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47

, a collinear striped AFM phase for

\ensuremath{\kappa}>{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60

, and a paramagnetic PVBC phase for

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\lesssim}\ensuremath{\kappa}\ensuremath{\lesssim}{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}

. The transition at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{2}}

appears to be of first-order type, while that at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}

is continuous. Since the N'eel and PVBC phases break different symmetries our results favor the deconfinement scenario for the transition at

{\ensuremath{\kappa}}_{{c}_{1}}

We use the coupled-cluster method in high orders of approximation to make a comprehensive study of the ground-state (GS) phase diagram of the spin-1/2

{J}_{1}

{J}_{2}

{J}_{3}

model on a two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with antiferromagnetic (AFM) interactions up to third-nearest neighbors. Results are presented for the GS energy and the average local onsite magnetization. With the nearest-neighbor coupling strength ${J}_{1}\ensuremath{\equiv}1$, we find four magnetically ordered phases in the parameter window ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, namely, the N\'eel, striped, and N\'eel-II collinear AFM phases, plus a spiral phase. The N\'eel-II phase appears as a stable GS phase in the classical version of the model only for values

{J}_{3}<0

. Each of these four ordered phases shares a boundary with a disordered quantum paramagnetic (QP) phase, and at several widely separated points on the phase boundaries the QP phase has an infinite susceptibility to plaquette valence-bond crystalline order. We identify all of the phase boundaries with good precision in the parameter window studied, and we find three tricritical quantum critical points therein at (a) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{1}})=(0.51\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the N\'eel, striped, and QP phases; (b) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{2}})=(0.65\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.02,0.55\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the striped, spiral, and QP phases; and (c) $({J}_{2}^{{c}_{3}},{J}_{3}^{{c}_{3}})=(0.69\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01,0.12\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01)$ between the spiral, N\'eel-II, and QP phases.

We present a comprehensive computational study of the phase diagram of the frustrated

S=1/2

Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the honeycomb lattice, with second-nearest

({J}_{2})

and third-neighbor

({J}_{3})

couplings. Using a combination of exact diagonalizations (EDs) of the original spin model, of the Hamiltonian projected into the nearest-neighbor short-range valence-bond basis, and of an effective quantum dimer model, as well as a self-consistent cluster mean-field theory, we determine the boundaries of several magnetically ordered phases in the region ${J}_{2},{J}_{3}\ensuremath{\in}[0,1]$, and find a sizable magnetically disordered region in between. We characterize part of this magnetically disordered phase as a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase. At larger

{J}_{2}

, we locate a sizable region in which staggered valence-bond crystal correlations are found to be important, either due to genuine valence-bond crystal (VBC) ordering or as a consequence of magnetically ordered phases, which break lattice rotational symmetry. Furthermore, we find that a particular parameter-free Gutzwiller projected tight-binding wave function has remarkably accurate energies compared to finite-size extrapolated ED energies along the transition line from conventional N\'eel to plaquette VBC phases, a fact that points to possibly interesting critical behavior---such as a deconfined critical point---across this transition. We also comment on the relevance of this spin model to model the spin liquid region found in the half filled Hubbard model on the honeycomb lattice.

We study the ground-state (GS) properties of the frustrated spin-

\frac{1}{2}

{J}_{1}

{J}_{2}

{J}_{3}

Heisenberg model on the two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor (${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) exchange and frustrating antiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor (

{J}_{2}>0

) and next-next-nearest-neighbor (

{J}_{3}>0

) exchanges, for the case

{J}_{3}={J}_{2}

. We use the coupled-cluster method implemented to high orders of approximation, complemented by the Lanczos exact diagonalization of a large finite lattice with 32 sites, in order to calculate the GS energy, magnetic order parameter, and spin-spin correlation functions. In one scenario we find a quantum phase transition point between regions characterized by ferromagnetic order and a form of antiferromagnetic (``striped'') collinear order at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.1095\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.0005$, which is below the corresponding hypothetical transition point at

{J}_{2}^{\mathrm{cl}}=\frac{1}{7}

($\ensuremath{\approx}0.143$) for the classical version of the model, in which we momentarily ignore the intervening noncollinear spiral phase in the region

\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}

. Hence we see that quantum fluctuations appear to stabilize somewhat the collinear antiferromagnetic order in preference to the ferromagnetic order in this model. We compare results for the present ferromagnetic case (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) to previous results for the corresponding antiferromagnetic case (with

{J}_{1}=+1

). The magnetic order parameter is found to behave similarly for the ferromagnetic and the antiferromagnetic models for large values of the frustration parameter

{J}_{2}

. However, there are considerable differences in the behavior of the order parameters for the two models for ${J}_{2}/|{J}_{1}|\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.6$. For example, the quasiclassical collinear magnetic long-range order for the antiferromagnetic model (with

{J}_{1}=+1

) breaks down at ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.60$, whereas the ``equivalent'' point for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) occurs at ${J}_{2}^{c}\ensuremath{\approx}0.11$. Unlike in the antiferromagnetic model (with

{J}_{1}=+1

), where a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase intrudes between the two corresponding quasiclassical antiferromagnetic phases (with N\'eel and striped order) for

{J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}<{J}_{2}<{J}_{2}^{{c}_{2}}

, with ${J}_{2}^{{c}_{1}}\ensuremath{\approx}0.47$, we find no clear indications at all in the ferromagnetic model for an intermediate magnetically disordered phase between the corresponding phases exhibiting ferromagnetic and striped order. Instead the evidence for the ferromagnetic model (with ${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) points to one of two scenarios: either there is a direct first-order transition between the two magnetically ordered phases, as mentioned above; or there exists an intervening phase between them in the very narrow range $0.10\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.12$, which is probably a remnant of the spiral phase that exists in the classical counterpart of the model over the larger range

\frac{1}{10}<{J}_{2}<\frac{1}{5}

Using the coupled cluster method for high orders of approximation and complementary exact diagonalization studies we investigate the ground state properties of the spin-1/2

{J}_{1}--{J}_{2}

frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice. We have calculated the ground state energy, the magnetic order parameter, the spin stiffness, and several generalized susceptibilities to probe magnetically disordered quantum valence-bond phases. We have found that the quantum critical points for both the N\'eel and collinear orders are ${J}_{2}^{c1}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.44\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$ and ${J}_{2}^{c2}\ensuremath{\approx}(0.59\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.01){J}_{1}$, respectively, which are in good agreement with the results obtained by other approximations. In contrast to the recent study by [Sirker et al. Phys. Rev. B 73, 184420 (2006)], our data do not provide evidence for the transition from the N\'eel to the valence-bond solid state to be first order. Moreover, our results are in favor of the deconfinement scenario for that phase transition. We also discuss the nature of the magnetically disordered quantum phase.

Using variational wave functions and Monte Carlo techniques, we study the antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with first-neighbor

{J}_{1}

and second-neighbor

{J}_{2}

antiferromagnetic couplings on the honeycomb lattice. We perform a systematic comparison of magnetically ordered and nonmagnetic states (spin liquids and valence-bond solids) to obtain the ground-state phase diagram. N\'eel order is stabilized for small values of the frustrating second-neighbor coupling. Increasing the ratio

{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}

, we find strong evidence for a continuous transition to a nonmagnetic phase at ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\approx}0.23$. Close to the transition point, the Gutzwiller-projected uniform resonating valence-bond state gives an excellent approximation to the exact ground-state energy. For $0.23\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\lesssim}0.36$, a gapless

{Z}_{2}

spin liquid with Dirac nodes competes with a plaquette valence-bond solid. In contrast, the gapped spin liquid considered in previous works has significantly higher variational energy. Although the plaquette valence-bond order is expected to be present as soon as the N\'eel order melts, this ordered state becomes clearly favored only for ${J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\gtrsim}0.3$. Finally, for $0.36\ensuremath{\lesssim}{J}_{2}/{J}_{1}\ensuremath{\le}0.5$, a valence-bond solid with columnar order takes over as the ground state, being also lower in energy than the magnetic state with collinear order. We perform a detailed finite-size scaling and standard data collapse analysis, and we discuss the possibility of a deconfined quantum critical point separating the N\'eel antiferromagnet from the plaquette valence-bond solid.