arxiv: v2 [cond-mat.str-el] 23 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 Journal o the Physical Society o Japan LETTERS Charge Transer Eect under Odd-Parity Crystalline Electric Field: Divergence o Magnetic Toroidal Fluctuation inβ-ybalb 4 Shinji Watanabe 1 and Kazumasa Miyake 1 Department o Basic Sciences, Kyushu Institute o Technology, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka 84-8, Japan Center or Advanced High Magnetic Field Science, Osaka University, Toyonaka, Osaka 6-43, Japan arxiv:191.66v [cond-mat.str-el] 3 Jan 19 A novel property o the quantum critical heavy ermion superconductorβ-ybalb 4 is revealed theoretically. By analyzing the crystalline electronic ield CEF) on the basis o the hybridization picture, odd parity CEF is shown to exist because o sevenold coniguration o B atoms around Yb, which breaks the local inversion symmetry. This allows onsite admixture o 4 and d waveunctions with a pure imaginary coeicient, giving rise to the magnetic toroidal ) degree o reedom. By constructing a realistic minimal model orβ-ybalb 4, we show that onsite 4-d Coulomb repulsion drives charge transer between the 4 and d states at Yb, which makes the luctuation as well as the electric dipole luctuation diverge simultaneously with the critical Yb-valence luctuation at the quantum critical point o the valence transition. Quantum critical phenomena not ollowing the conventional magnetic criticality 1 3) have attracted much attention in condensed-matter physics. The heavy-electron metal β- YbAlB 4 with an intermediate valence o the Yb ion 4) exhibits a new type o quantum criticality as the magnetic susceptibility χt) T., the speciic-heat coeicient CT)/T log T, and resistivity ρt) T. T) or T < 1 K T> 1 K). ) Furthermore, the T/B scaling where χ is expressed as a single scaling unction o the ratio o the temperature T and magnetic ield B over our decades was discovered. 6) These novel phenomena motivated theoretical studies. 7 1) The theory o critical Yb-valence luctuation CVF) explains not only the quantum criticality in each physical quantity but also the T/B scaling in a uniied way. 8, 9) Recently, the experimental evidence o the quantum valence criticality has been discovered inα-ybal 1 x Fe x B 4 x=.14). 11) The sister compoundα-ybalb 4 shows the Fermiliquid behavior at low temperatures. 6) However, by substituting Fe to Al 1.4%, the same unconventional criticality and the T/B scaling as those inβ-ybalb 4 emerges. A remarkable point is that at x=.14 a sharp Yb-valence crossover occurs that accompanies a sharp change in the volume. 11) This provides experimental veriication o the theory o the CVF and also valence crossover arising rom the quantum critical point 8, 9) QCP) o the Yb-valence transition. The CVF is the charge transer CT) luctuation between the 4 electron at Yb and the conduction electron. In this Letter, we clariy a unique nature o the CT eect under the odd parity crystalline electric ield CEF) arising rom local coniguration o atoms around Yb inβ-ybalb 4. By constructing the realistic minimal model, we reveal that onsite 4-d Coulomb repulsion drives the CT between the 4 and d states at Yb, which makes the magnetic toroidal ) luctuation as well as the electric dipole ED) luctuation diverge simultaneously with the CVF at the QCP o the valence transition. Let us start with the CEF inβ-ybalb 4. Since in Yb 3 the 4 13 coniguration is realized and in Yb the closed shell appears with the 4 14 coniguration, it is convenient to take the hole picture instead o the electron picture. The ground state o the CEF or the 4 hole state at Yb has been proposed the- c a) 7 b14 a Yb B Al 1 3 b) c b a Yb Yb1 Fig. 1. color online) a)yb surrounded by 7 B rings at upper and lower planes. The squares o absolute values o spherical parts o the 4 J = 7/, J z =±/ waveunction orange) and d J= /, J z =±3/ waveunction purple) at Yb are also shown. b) Unit cell is enclosed area by dashed lines. Arrows at Yb represent the dipole moments see text). oretically to be J = 7, J z =±,7) which accounts or the anisoropy o the magnetic susceptibility. The realization o the J= 7, J z=± ground state suggests that the CEF in β-ybalb 4 is to be understood rom the hybridization picture rather than the point-charge model. This view is compatible with the act that the conical waveunction o J z =± along the c axis spreads almost toward B rings, which acquires the largest 4-p hybridization, as shown in Fig. 1a). 7) On the basis o the hybridization picture, let us analyze the CEF at the Yb1 site in the i-th unit cell surrounded by seven B atoms at upper and lower planes in Fig. 1a) [in the unit cell, there are two equivalent Yb atoms labeled by Yb1 and Yb, respectively, as shown in Fig. 1b)]. The point group symmetry at Yb is approximately sevenold rotation C 7 and hence we take the p states at the B site as the basis unctions:ϕ pz andϕ p± ϕ px ± iϕ py )/. The CEF energy o the J z =± state is quantiied by the second-order perturbation E±,± )= ± H p H p ± ε with respect to the 4-p E H 1

2 hybridization H p =, j,m,σ,j z V p jmσ,j z p jmσ J z h.c. ), 1) where, j represents the nearest-neighbor N.N.) pairs between B sites and the Yb1 site in the i-th unit cell, i.e., j= ) or the upper lower) plane in Fig. 1a). Here, m=z,±,σ=,, and J z =±. The microscopic origin o the CVF is considered to be the onsite 4-d Coulomb repulsion U d at Yb. Actually, the irstprinciples calculation shows that the Yb d state contributes to the energy band near the Fermi level E F. 1) Since the d bands are shited down and orming the wide bandwidth more than 1 ev around E F, 1) the high-energy d-electron state in an isolate Yb ion within the atomic picture i.e. Hund s rule seems to be relevant to the low-energy state in the hole picture in the crystal. As shown in Fig. 1a), the d waveunction or J= /, J z =±3/ spreads most closely to the direction to the B rings, which can acquire the largest d-p hybridization among the J= / and J= 3/ maniolds. This is compatible with the hybridization picture mentioned above. Thereore, we proceed our analysis based on the hybridization picture by considering the 4 J z =± state and d J z=± 3 state at Yb site, which will be denoted as ± 4 and ± 3 d, respectively, below. Since the local inversion symmetry at the Yb site is broken owing to the sevenold coniguration o B atoms [see Fig. 1b)], the odd-parity CEF term can arise. This can be explicitly shown by calculating the o-diagonal term by the second-order perturbation E± 3,± ) = d ± 3 H pd H p 4 with respect to the d-p hybridization = H pd, j,m,σ,j z E H ± V pd jmσ,ij z p jmσ d J z h.c. ), ) or J z =± 3. In the hole picture, by considering the 4 and an extra p hole in vacant states as the intermediate state, E± 3,± ) can be calculated as E± 3 14,± )= j=1 mσ V pd V p jmσ,± 3 jmσ,± 1 n p jmσ ǫ p, jmσ where > ) is the excitation energy to the 4 -hole state i.e., 4 14 electron state), and n p jmσ andǫ p jmσ are the illing and energy o p hole, respectively. By inputting the Slater- Koster parameters 13, 14) to V pd V p and assuming jmσ,± 3 jmσ,± n p = n p jmσ andǫ p = ǫ p jmσ or simplicity, we ind that this o-diagonal term is expressed in the orm o pure imaginary: E± 3,± )=ia with A being a real number. We also have E± 3,± 3 )= d ± 3 H pd H pd E H ± 3 d ε d. Then, by diagonalizing the matrix E ± = ε ± 4 4 ± ε d ± 3 dd ± 3 ia ± 3 d4 ± ia ± 4 d ± 3, the CEF ground state is obtained as the Kramers doublet Ψ ± = u ± 4 Ai ± 3 ) d 1 3) u A, where u is given by u=ε ε d ε ε d ) 4A )/. The admixture o the pure imaginary term in Eq. 3) is also naturally understood rom the local geometry around Yb shown in Fig. 1b). Since seven B atoms surround each Yb atom symmetrically with respect to the bc plane at which the Yb atom is located, the electric ield should work at Yb along the b direction. I we calculate the ED moment Q x ex and Q y ey, whose operators are given by Q ζ = Q ζ Q ζ orζ = x, y with Q x = e d 3 Q h.c., x = e d 3 h.c., Q 1iy = ie d 3 h.c., and Q 1iy = ie d 3 h.c., respectively, by using a general orm Ψ ± =ũ ± ± 4 ṽ ± ± 3 d, we obtain Ψ ± Q x Ψ ± = e Reũ ±ṽ ± ) and Ψ ± Q y Ψ ± = e Reiũ ±ṽ ± ). This implies that when ũ ± is a real and ṽ ± is a pure imaginary, we obtain the symmetrically allowed orm as Ψ ± Q x Ψ ± = and Ψ ± Q y Ψ ±, which is indeed the case o Eq. 3). The ED moment or Eq. 3) is given by Ψ ± Q y Ψ ± = e ua/u A ). The result o Eq. 3) indicates that there exists the on-site 4-d hybridization, which is usually orbidden in centrosymmetric systems. The odd-parity CEF term is H opcef = ia d 3 d 3 ) h.c. 4) Recently, novel multipole degrees o reedom, the moment has been deined quantum-mechanically 1 17) as t l r i )= r ) i l1 li l σ i ) at the site r i, where l i and σ i are the orbital and spin angular-momentum operators, respectively. In the ± 4 ± 3 d maniold, the operators o the dipole are derived as T ζ = T ζ T ζ orζ = x, y with T x = 1 3 iµ B 14 1 d 3 h.c., T 1 3 x =iµ B 14 1 d h.c., T y = µ B 14 1 d 3 h.c., and T y = 1 3 µ B 14 1 d 3 h.c. For the CEF ground state in 1 3 Eq. 3) we obtain Ψ ± T x Ψ ± = µ B 7 1 ua/u A ) and Ψ ± T y Ψ ± =. The moments o the Kramers degenerated states are aligned to the ±x ±a) directions at the Yb1 site as illustrated in Fig. 1b). Since another Yb atom in the unit cell, Yb, which has opposite sign o A in Eq. 4), the moments are aligned oppositely as shown in Fig. 1b). At each Yb site, the net moment is zero due to the Kramers degeneracy. On the basis o these analyses, let us construct the Hamiltonian or the periodic crystal oβ-ybalb 4, which consists o the 4 J z =±/ and d J z =±3/ states at Yb and p z and p ± states at B: H= [ H H p H pd HU d ] H d H p, 6) whereα = 1, speciies the Yb1 and Yb sites, respectively. Here, the 4 part is given by H =ε J z =±/ n Un / n / The d part is given by H d = ε d i,i α, where U is the onsite Coulomb repulsion. α=1, J z =±3/ n d J z,j z=±3/ t dd,i α J z d d i α J z, where, i α takes

3 the N.N. Yb pairs. The 4-d Coulomb repulsion at Yb is given by H U d = U d n n d J. 7) z J z =±/ J z=±3/ The transer or p states is given by H p = j, j σ m,m =z,± t pp jm, j m p jmσ p j m σ, where j, j takes the N.N. B pairs in the ab plane and in the c direction [see Fig. 1a)]. Although H opcef is not included in Eq. 6) explicitly, the eect is expected to inhere via the p-4 and p-d hybridizations. To clariy the eect o the CT under the odd-parity CEF, we apply the slave-boson mean-ield theory 18) to Eq. 6). To describe the state or U= responsible or heavy electrons, we consider b instead o in Eq. 6) by introducing the slave-boson operator b to describe the -hole state and require the constraint λ J z =± n b b 1) withλ being the Lagrange multiplier. For H U d in Eq. 6), we employ the mean-ield decoupling as U d n n d J U z d n αn d J z R α n R α n α, where R α U d n d α and nη α 1 N ij z n η η=, d) with N being the number o unit cells. By approximating mean ields as uniorm ones, i.e., b α = b and λ α = λ, the set o mean-ield equations is obtained by H / λ α =, H / b α =, and H / R α = : 1 N kj z kαj z kαjz b α = 1, 1 [ N k J z ξmσ V p k,ξmσ,αj z kαj z p kξmσ h.c. ] λ α b α =, and n α = 1 N kj z kαj z kαjz. Here,ξ speciies the N.N. B sites or the Ybα site [see Fig. 1a)]. We solve these equations together with the equation or the illing n α=1, n α n d α )/4 8 j=1 n p j /16 with np j 1 3N kmσ p k jmσ p k jmσ selconsistently. As or the relation among the Slater-Koster parameters, ollowing the argument o the linear combination o atomic orbitals, 19) we set ppπ)= ppσ)/, pdπ)= pdσ)/ 3, p π) = p σ)/ 3, ddπ) = ddσ)/3, and ddδ) = ddσ)/6. In the hole picture, we take the energy unit as ppσ)= 1. and set pdσ)=.6, p σ)=.3, ddσ)=.4 as typical values. We ound that the calculated band structure orε d = 1 andε.3 at n=3/3 well reproduces the recent photoemission data near E ) F and then here we employ these parameters. We perormed numerical calculations in the ground state in the N= 8 3, 16 3 and 3 3 systems and the results in N= 3 3 will be shown below. We conirmed that Eq. 3) with these parameters reproduces the tendency o the anisotropy in the magnetic susceptibility observed in β- 6, 1) YbAlB 4. Figure a) shows theε dependence o the 4-hole number per Yb n = n 1 = n ). As U d increases, n changes steeply as a unction oε and or U d = 1.4 the slope n / ε diverges atε =.31. Since the valence susceptibility is deined asχ v n / ε, this result indicates that the CVF divergesχ v = at the QCP o the valence transition ε QCP, U QCP d ).31, 1.4). For U d > U QCP c, a jump in n appears, indicating the irst-order valence transition. Our realistic minimal model Eq. 6) shows that the QCP with an intermediate valence n =.71 as the measurements inβ-ybalb 4) 4 andα-ybal 1 x Fe x B 4 x=.14) 11) is realized by U QCP d = 1.4. This value is evaluated to be U QCP d 6.6 ev, i we employ the typical value ppσ) 4.7 ev estimated rom the band-structure calculation in B. ) Since U d is the n U d a) ε. T 1x, T 1y -. T 1x T 1y b) Q 1x Q 1y T 1x T 1x ε. Q, 1x Q 1y -. Fig.. color online) a) The 4-hole number n at Yb vs.ε or U d = 1., 1., 1.3, 1.4, and 1.4. b) Theε dependences o the moment and ED moment at the Yb1 site or U d = 1.4. We set e=1 µ B = 1) or the plot o the ED ) moment. In a) and b), the dashed line indicates ε =ε QCP. onsite interaction, this value seems reasonable. We propose that U d can be directly examined by recently-developed partial luorescence yield measurement o the Yb L 3 edge 3) in β-ybalb 4 andα-ybal 1 x Fe x B 4 x=.14). Figure b) shows theε dependences o the ED and moments at the Yb1 site, which are deined as X αζ X αζ X αζ with X αζ± = 1 N i X ζ± or X = Q, T andζ = x, y. The results o Q 1x = and Q 1y indicate that the ED moment along y direction exists. Interestingly, Q 1y becomes zero in the vicinity o the QCP and changes sign, i.e., Q 1y > Q 1y < ) orε < ε QCP ε > ε QCP ), whose absolute value has a maximum atε =.94>ε QCP. The moments along x direction or each Kramers state T 1x± also show the sign changes in the vicinity at the QCP, which are also enhanced orε >ε QCP with opposite signs while T 1y± =. We note that the relation Q 1y = 4e 3µ B T 1x± holds. Thus the total moment is zero T 1ζ = orζ = x, y. As or the Yb site, we obtained Q x =, Q y = Q 1y, T x =, and T y =. These results are consistent with the perturbation analysis, which indicates that the odd-parity CEF [see Eq. 4)] is actually generated in Eq. 6). Although T α = is the consequence o the time reversal symmetry o the paramagnetic PM) state, the luctuation can arise even in the PM state. Then, we calculate the susceptibility o the moment χ Tx T x q,ω)= i N dte iωt [T x qt), T x q)] 8) with Tq= x i e iq r i T x. Figure 3a) shows theε dependence oχ lim q χ Tx T x q, ) or U d = U QCP d. We ind that χ has a peak atε =ε QCP. This implies that the luctuation is enhanced at the QCP. Since the CVF i.e. CT luctuation diverges at the QCP, the luctuation is expected to diverge at the QCP i the eect o the CVF is taken into account. To quantiy this beyond the mean-ield theory, let us rewrite the susceptibility in the orm o χ Tx T x q,ω)= 9µ B 8 ν=± [ χ dd νν q,ω)χ dd νν q,ω) 3

4 χ a) ε dd,..1 b) ε dd Fig. 3. color online) a)χ vs.ε or U d = U QCP. b) Theε d dependences oχ 1 illed triangle),χ 1 dd illed diamond), andχ 1 d d square) or U d = U c see text). In a) and b), the dashed line indicates d ε =ε QCP and we setµ B = 1. χ d d νν q,ω) χ d d νν q,ω) ], 9) where χ βγδη νν q,ω) is deined by χ βγδη νν q,ω) dte iωt [ γδ qνt), ηβ qν)] with d q± = k d kq1± k1± 3 i N and d q±= k d kq1± 3 k1±. Since we are currently considering the PM state without applying magnetic ield so that χ βγδη =χ βγδη holds, we omit the indexνin the expressions o the susceptibility hereater. Near the QCP, the CT luctuation caused by U d is enhanced, 4) which can be calculated by the random phase approximation ) as the corrections or the mean-ield state ˆχq,ω)= ˆχ q,ω){ˆ1 Û ˆχ q,ω)} 1, 1) where ˆχ, ˆχ, and Û are given by ˆχ ) q,ω)= χ dd ) q,ω) χ d d ) q,ω) χ d d ) q,ω) χ dd ) q,ω), Û= [ ] U d, U d and ˆ1 is the identity matrix. Here, the index speciies the susceptibility calculated or the mean-ield state. The critical point within this ormalism, deined by the point where det{ˆ1 Û ˆχ q,ω)}= is satisied, is given by U c d = 1.63 andε =ε QCP. Then, by substituting U d = U c d and each ε in the vicinity oε QCP into Eq. 1) and using the resultant χ dd q,ω)[=χ dd q,ω)] andχ d d q,ω)[=χ d d q,ω)], we calculate theε dependence oχ lim q χ Tx T x q, ). As shown in Fig. 3b), the CT luctuations by χ dd lim q χ dd q, ) andχ d d lim q χ d d q, ) diverge at ε, which induce the divergence o the luctuation, i.e.,χ =. Since the moment is expressed in Eq. ), it can have a inite matrix element between the 4 and d states with the magnetic quantum numbers m and m±1, as the ED moment. Hence, the 4 ± and ± 3 d states gave the inite values T αx± and Q αy at the locally inversion-symmetry broken Yb site. By the eect o the onsite 4-d Coulomb repulsion U d at Yb, the CT luctuation is enhanced, which eventually diverges at the valence QCP. This causes the divergences o the and ED luctuations since they consist o the CT luctuations as Eq. 9), whose operators are expressed as linear combinations =ε QCP o the CT-type operators as ± d ± 3 and its Hermitian conjugate. It is also noted that the Yb d states, which consist o the spherical harmonics Y,± ˆr) and/or Y,±1 ˆr), can have the inite matrix elements o the as well as the ED moment. Hence, the similar eects are expected to appear also or the other d states than the J= /, J z =±3/ state. Since the relation χ Qy Q y q,ω)= 4e χ 9µ Tx T x q,ω) 11) B holds where χ Qy Q y q,ω) is deined as χ Qy Q y q,ω) = i N dte iωt [Q y qt), Q y q)] with Q y q= i e iq r i Q y, the ED luctuation along y is proportional to the luctuation along x. Hence, the ED luctuation diverges simultaneously with the luctuation at the valence QCP. Although the ED moments at the Yb1 and Yb sites [see Fig. 1b)] are cancelled Q 1y = Q y, their luctuations exist in the PM state. Equation 11) implies that the measurement o the ED luctuations by the dielectric constant can detect the luctuation. The detection o the as well as ED luctuation by using various experimental probes such as X-ray diuse scattering and Mössbauer measurements is an interesting subject in the uture. We also conirmed the tendency that even within the mean ield theory, by applying conjugate ield to the moment h α T x to Eq. 6), T αx / h α diverges at the QCP or a inite h α. This also supports that the luctuation diverges at the QCP. Inα-YbAl 1 x Fe x B 4, the coincidence o the valence QCP and the magnetic transition seems to occur at x=.14 as discussed in Re.. This suggests a possibility that the order occurs or x >.14 and the divergence o the uniorm luctuation with q= at the QCP aects the orders. Inβ-YbAlB 4, there is also a possibility that the order occurs. In that case, it is expected that the moment is aligned tox x) direction at the Yb1 Yb) site, or vice versa, giving the alignment o the staggered moments in the ab plane [see Fig. 1b)]. In summary, by constructing the realistic minimal model orβ-ybalb 4, we have shown that the 4-d Coulomb repulsion under the odd parity CEF is the microscopic origin to induce the divergence o the luctuation as well as the ED luctuation simultaneously with the divergence o the CVF at the QCP o the valence transition. Our study has revealed the underlying mechanism by which novel multipole degrees o reedom can be active as luctuations, which is a new aspect o the CT eect. Acknowledgment The authors thank H. Kusunose, S. Hayami, M. Yatsushiro, H. Kobayashi, and C. Bareille or useul discussions. This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP18K34, JP18H436, and JP17K. 1) T. Moriya, Spin Fluctuations in Itinerant Electron Magnetism Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 198). ) J. A. Hertz, Phys. Rev. B 14, ). 3) A. J. Millis, Phys. Rev. B 48, ). 4) M. Okawa, M. Matsunami, K. Ishizaka, R. Eguchi, M. Taguchi, A. Chainani, Y. Takata, M. Yabashi, K. Tamasaku, Y. Nishino, T. Ishikawa, K. Kuga, N. Horie, S. Nakatsuji, and S. Shin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14, 471 9). ) S. Nakatsuji, K. Kuga, Y. Machida, T. Tayama, T. Sakakibara, Y. Karaki, 4

5 H. Ishimoto, S. Yonezawa, Y. Maeno, E. Pearson, G. G. Lonzarich, L. Balicas, H. Lee, and Z. Fisk, Nat. Phys. 4, 63 8). 6) Y. Matsumoto, S. Nakatsuji, K. Kuga, Y. Karaki, N. Horie, Y. Shimura, T. Sakakibara, A. H. Nevidomskyy, and P. Coleman, Science 331, ). 7) A. H. Nevidomskyy and P. Coleman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1, 77 9). 8) S. Watanabe and K. Miyake, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1, ). 9) S. Watanabe and K. Miyake, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 83, ). 1) A. Ramires and P. Coleman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 11, ). 11) K. Kuga, Y. Matsumoto, M. Okawa, S. Suzuki, T. Tomita, K. Sone, Y. Shimura, T. Sakakibara, D. Nishio-Hamane, Y. Karaki, Y. Takata, M. Matsunami, R. Eguchi, M. Taguchi, A. Chainani, S. Shin, K. Tamasaku, Y. Nishino, M. Yabashi, T. Ishikawa, and S. Nakatsuji, Sci. Adv. 4, ). 1) M. Suzuki and H. Harima, private communications. 13) J. C. Slater and G. F. Koster, Phys. Rev. 94, ). 14) K. Takegahara, Y. Aoki, and A. Yanase, J. Phys.: Solid. St. Phys., 13, ). 1) S. Hayami and H. Kusunose, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 87, ). 16) S. Hayami, M. Yatsushiro, Y. Yanagi, and H. Kusunose, Phys. Rev. B 98, ). 17) H. Watanabe and Y. Yanase, Phys. Rev. B 96, ). 18) Y. Onishi and K. Miyake, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 69, 39 ). 19) O. K. Andersen and O. Jepsen, Physica B 91, ). ) C. Bareille, S. Suzuki, M. Nakayama, K. Kuroda, A. H. Nevidomskyy, Y. Matsumoto, S. Nakatsuji, T. Kondo, and S. Shin, Phys. Rev. B 97, ). 1) Y. Matsumoto, K. Kuga, T. Tomita, Y. Karaki, and S. Nakatsuji, Phys. Rev. B 84, ). ) D. A. Papaconstantopoulos, Handbook o the Band Structure o Elemental Solids Springer US, 1). 3) H. Tonai, N. Sasabe, T. Uozumi, N. Kawamura, and M. Mizumaki, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 86, ). 4) K. Miyake, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 19, 11 7). ) S. Watanabe and K. Miyake, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 3, ).