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
J1−−J2 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.
The ${J}_{1}\text{\ensuremath{-}}{J}_{2}$ Heisenberg model is a ``canonical'' model in the field of quantum magnetism in order to study the interplay between frustration and quantum fluctuations as well as quantum phase transitions driven by frustration. Here we apply the coupled cluster method (CCM) to study the spin-half ${J}_{1}\text{\ensuremath{-}}{J}_{2}$ model with antiferromagnetic nearest-neighbor bonds
J1>0 and next-nearest-neighbor bonds
J2>0 for the simple cubic (sc) and body-centered cubic (bcc) lattices. In particular, we wish to study the ground-state ordering of these systems as a function of the frustration parameter
p=z2J2/z1J1, where
z1(z2) is the number of nearest (next-nearest) neighbors. We wish to determine the positions of the phase transitions using the CCM and we aim to resolve the nature of the phase transition points. We consider the ground-state energy, order parameters, spin-spin correlation functions, as well as the spin stiffness in order to determine the ground-state phase diagrams of these models. We find a direct first-order phase transition at a value of
p=0.528 from a state of nearest-neighbor N\'eel order to next-nearest-neighbor N\'eel order for the bcc lattice. For the sc lattice the situation is more subtle. CCM results for the energy, the order parameter, the spin-spin correlation functions, and the spin stiffness indicate that there is no direct first-order transition between ground-state phases with magnetic long-range order, rather it is more likely that two phases with antiferromagnetic long range are separated by a narrow region of a spin-liquid-like quantum phase around
p=0.55. Thus the strong frustration present in the ${J}_{1}\text{\ensuremath{-}}{J}_{2}$ Heisenberg model on the sc lattice may open a window for an unconventional quantum ground state in this three-dimensional spin model.
We investigate the influence of an interchain coupling on the spiral ground-state correlations of a spin-1/2 Heisenberg model consisting of a two-dimensional array of coupled chains with nearest-
(J1) and frustrating next-nearest-neighbor
(J2) in-chain exchange couplings. Using the coupled cluster method we calculate the transition point between the commensurate and the incommensurate (spiral) ground states as well as the quantum pitch angle of the spiral ground state. In addition, we provide a simple empirical formula which describes the relation between the quantum pitch angle and the frustration parameter
J2/J1.
In this article we study the ground-state properties of two square-lattice Heisenberg quantum spin models with competing bonds using a high-order coupled cluster treatment. The first model is a spin-half model with competing nearest-neighbour bonds with and without frustration. We discuss the influence of quantum fluctuations on the ground-state phase diagram and in particular on the nature of the zero-temperature phase transitions from phases with collinear magnetic order at small frustration to phases with noncollinear spiral order at large frustration. The second model is a highly frustrated ferrimagnet, which contains one sublattice (A) entirely populated with spin-one spins and an other sublattice (B) entirely populated with spin-half spins. Sublattice A sites are nearest-neighbours to sublattice B sites and vice versa and frustration is introduced by next-nearest-neighbour bonds. The model shows two collinear ordered phases and a noncollinear phase in which (classically) the spin-one spins are allowed to cant at an angle. Both examples show that the coupled-cluster method is able to describe the zero-temperature transitions well and provides a consistent description of collinear, noncollinear, and disordered phases, for cases in which other standard techniques (e.g. the quantum Monte Carlo technique for spin systems which are frustrated) are not applicable.
A high-order coupled cluster method (CCM) for the zero-temperature ground states of quantum lattice spin systems of general spin quantum number
(s> 1/2) is described and illustrated via the spin-1 anisotropic Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the square lattice. Results for the ground-state energy and sublattice magnetization are seen to be in excellent agreement with the best of other approximate methods. Furthermore, we are able to follow the solution to the CCM equations at a given level of approximation with respect to the anisotropy parameter $\ensuremath{\Delta}$ from the trivial Ising limit $(\stackrel{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}}{\ensuremath{\Delta}}\ensuremath{\infty})$ down to a critical value ${\ensuremath{\Delta}}_{c},$ at which point the physical solution terminates. The results for the ground-state energy, sublattice magnetization, and phase transition point thus support our choice of this model as a good nontrivial test case of our CCM formalism.
We study the ground-state (GS) properties of the frustrated spin-
21 J1--
J2--
J3 Heisenberg model on the two-dimensional honeycomb lattice with ferromagnetic nearest-neighbor (${J}_{1}=\ensuremath{-}1$) exchange and frustrating antiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor (
J2>0) and next-next-nearest-neighbor (
J3>0) exchanges, for the case
J3=J2. 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
J2cl=71 ($\ensuremath{\approx}0.143$) for the classical version of the model, in which we momentarily ignore the intervening noncollinear spiral phase in the region
101<J2<51. 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
J1=+1). The magnetic order parameter is found to behave similarly for the ferromagnetic and the antiferromagnetic models for large values of the frustration parameter
J2. 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
J1=+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
J1=+1), where a plaquette valence-bond crystal phase intrudes between the two corresponding quasiclassical antiferromagnetic phases (with N\'eel and striped order) for
J2c1<J2<J2c2, 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
101<J2<51.