arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.str-el] 17 Dec 2007

Transcription

1 Importance of on-site interaction in graphene. Hari P. Dahal,,2 Jean-Pierre Julien, 3,2 and A. V. Balatsky 2,4 Department of Physics, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National Laoratory, Los Alamos, New Maxico Institute Neel, CNRS, Associated to Unviersity J. Fourier, B.P. 66, Grenole Cedex 9, France 4 Center for Integrated Nanotechnology, Los Alamos National Laoratory, Los Alamos, New Maxico (Dated: August 7, 208) arxiv: v [cond-mat.str-el] 7 Dec 2007 We use the Gutzwiller method to investigate the importance of the on-site Coulom interaction in graphene. We apply it to Huard Hamiltonian to study the renormalization of the kinetic energy in graphene due to the on-site Coulom interaction. We find that a reasonale strength of the interaction has a very weak effect in reducing the kinetic energy. Hence we predict that the Brinkmann-Rice metal-insulator transition in graphene is not possile. The effect is understood in terms of the high kinetic energy in graphene. PACS numers: Graphene is a two dimensional (2D) crystal of caron atoms. It is an allotropy form of Caron in which the atoms form a honeycom lattice. The experimental success of creating the graphene [, 2] has renewed the interest of studying the electronic properties of the two dimensional electron system. It is ecause the 2D crystals were predicted to e thermodynamically unstale at finite temperature.[3, 4] Graphene is stailized y strong covalent onding etween caron atoms and a small crumpling in the third dimension which increases the elastic energy. It was known theoretically that the low energy excitations of graphene ehave as massless Dirac fermion[5]; which leads to different electronic properties in this system compared to that of the conventional two dimensional electron system. In fact, the oservation of the half integer quantum Hall effect in graphene is one of the examples.[2] In graphene the nearest neighor hopping, which sets a scale to the kinetic energy, is very high. In such case we need to understand how important the role of the Coulom interaction will e in determining the electronic properties. Our previous study shows that the effect of the long range Coulom interaction is not important in single layer graphene. We have shown that this system can not have charge inhomogeneous states ([6, 7]). It has also een shown that this system can not undergo a ferromagnetic transition([8]). Even if there is a consensual agrement aout the fact that the Coulom interaction does not have a strong effect on the electronic properties of graphene, we do here an explicit calculation to enchmark this statement. We study the importance of the on-site Coulom interaction using Huard model in Gutzwiller approach.[9, 0] In Gutzwiller frame work the Huard model leads to the possiility of a metal insulator transition at half filling, which is also known as the Brinkmann-Rice transition. The idea is to look at the effect of the on-site Coulom repulsion on the renormalization factor of the kinetic energy which is a direct measure of the correlation effect. In graphene we find that the renormalization in the kinetic energy is very small. Hence we infer that the system can not e even close to the Brinkmann-Rice Metal-Insulator transition. First, we introduce the Gutzwiller method riefly for which we closely follow Ref. []. Among numerous theoretical approaches, the Gutzwiller method provides a transparent physical interpretation in terms of the atomic configurations of a given site. Originally, it was applied to the one-and Huard model Hamiltonian. [2] In graphene also the electronic and close to the Fermi level is formed y the hyridization of neighoring p z orital. So introducing single Slater Koster [3] parameter ppπ 3.0eV it is straight forward to use the method in this system. We egin with the Huard Hamiltonian, with, and, H = H kin +H int, () H kin = t ij c iσ c jσ, (2) i j,σ H int = U i n i n i. (3) TheHamiltoniancontainsakineticpartH kin with ahopping integral t ij from site j to i, and an interaction part with a local Coulom repulsion U for electrons on the same site. c iσ (c jσ) is the creation (annihilation) operator of an electron at site i with up or down spin σ. n iσ = c iσ c iσ measures the numer (0 or ) of electron at site i with spin σ. The Hamiltonian, Eq., contains the key ingredients for correlated up and down spin electrons on a lattice: the competition etween delocalization of electrons y hoping and their localization y the interaction. It is one of the mostly used models to study the electronic correlations in solids. In the asence of the interaction U, the ground state is characterized y the Slater determinant comprising the Hartree-like wave functions (HWF) of the uncorrelated electrons, ψ 0. When U is turned on, the weight of the douly occupied sites will e reduced ecause they cost

2 2 an additional energy U per site. Accordingly, the trial Gutzwiller wave function (GWF) ψ G is uilt from the HWF ψ 0, ψ G = g D ψ 0. (4) The role of g D is to reduce the weight of the configurations with douly occupied sites, where D = i n i n i measures the numer of doule occupations and g(< ) is a variational parameter. In fact, this method corrects the meanfield (Hartree)approachforwhich up anddown spin electrons are independent, and, some how, overestimates configurations with doule occupied sites. Using the Rayleigh-Ritz principle, this parameter is determined y minimization of the energy in the Gutzwiller state ψ G, givinganupper ound to the true unknownground state energy of H. Note that to enale this calculation to e tractale, it is necessary to use the Gutzwiller s approximation which assumes that all configurations in the HWF have the same weight. Nozieres [4] proposed an alternative way which shows that the Gutzwiller approach is equivalent to the renormalization of the density matrix in the GWF. It can e formalized as ρ G = T ρ 0 T. (5) The density matrices ρ G = ψ G ψ G and ρ 0 = ψ 0 ψ 0 are projectors on the GWF and HWF respectively. T is an operator which is diagonal in the configuration asis; T = Π i T i where T i is a diagonal operator acting on site i, T i L i,l p(l i ) = p 0 (L i ) L i,l. (6) Here, L i is an atomic configuration of the site i, with proaility p(l i ) in the GWF and p 0 (L i ) in the HWF respectively, whereas L is a configuration of the remaining sites of the lattice. Note that this prescription does not change the phase of the wave function as the eigenvalues of the operators T i are real. The correlations are local, and the configuration proailities for different sites are independent. The expectation value of the Hamiltonian is given y, H G = Tr(ρ G H). (7) The mean value of the on-site operators is exactly calculated with the doule occupancy proaility, d i = n i n i G. d i is the new variational parameters replacing g. Using Eqs. (5,6), the two-sites operator contriution of the kinetic energy can e written as, c iσ c jσ G = Tr(ρ G c iσ c jσ) = c iσ c jσ 0 L ρ p(l σ,l σ) p 0 (L σ) p(l σ,l σ ), (8) p 0 (L σ ) where L σ and L σ are the only two configurations of spin σ atstiesiandj that givenon-zeromatrixelementtothe operator in the rackets. The summation is performed over the configurations of opposite spin L σ. The proailities p 0 in the HWF depend only on the numer of electrons, whereas the p in the GWF also depends on d i. After some elementary algera, one can show that the Gutzwiller mean value can e factorized into, c iσ c jσ G = q iσ c iσ c jσ 0 qjσ, (9) where these renormalization factors q iσ are local and can e expressed as, qiσ = ( n iσ n i σ +d i + d i ) n i σ d i. niσ ( n iσ ) (0) We used n iσ as a shorthand notation for n iσ, the average numer of electrons on the considered orital-spin in the HWF, which could e site and/or spin independent if the state is homogeneous and/or paramagnetic; this is the case we consider here. As seen in Eq. 9, the kinetic energy of the noninteracting electrons state, c iσ c jσ 0 = ε 0 kin, is renormalized y a factor of q which is smaller than one in the correlated state, and equal to one in the HWF. This factor can e interpreted as a direct measure of the correlation effect. Indeed Vollhardt[5] hasshownthat /q = m /m where m is the effective mass and m is the are mass of the electron. Thus a q close to corresponds to less correlated electron system and smaller q value reflects enhancement of the correlation effect. Eq. 7 leads to the variational energy, E(d) = H G = 2qε 0 kin +Ud, () which can e minimized with respect to the variational parameter d. In the case of half filling (n=/2), we can show that the minimization condition is given y, d = 4 ( U 6ε 0 ), (2) kin

3 3 and, q = ( U 2 (6ε 0 kin )2). (3) It implies that if the Coulom repulsion U exceeds a critical value U c = 6ε 0 kin, q is equal to zero, leading to an infinite quasiparticle mass with a Mott-Huard Metal-Insulator transition which is also known as the Brinkmann-Rice transition [6], as these authors first applied the Gutzwiller approximation to the Metal- Insulator transition. To determine the magnitude of U c we need to calculate thekineticenergyofthep z -electronsingraphene. Weuse the recursion method to first calculate the local density of states (LDOS), i.e., projected on a given orital: N ψ (E) = δ(e E n ) ψ n 2 n = π lim ψ η 0 E +iη H ψ, (4) where n are the eigenstates associated with eigenvalues E n, and using it we calculate the kinetic energy. Let us riefly remind the recursion method of finding the density of states. We follow Ref. [7] in descriing the recursion method. For a given normalized state ψ in which we want to calculate the LDOS, we can always associate a recursion asis which is constructed y a Schmidt orthogonalizationprocedurestartingfromthe setofstates ψ, H ψ, H 2 ψ,...,h N ψ... Let us consider H ψ. We can decompose it in a component parallel to ψ and a component orthogonal to ψ. So we can write, H ψ = a ψ + ψ 2. (5) If the coefficient is chosen real and positive then ψ 2 canedefinedinauniqueway. ConsiderthenH ψ 2, this vector can e decomposed in a component parallel to the space spanned y ψ, ψ 2 and a component orthogonal to this space. Then we get, H ψ 2 = a 2 ψ 2 + ψ + 2 ψ 3. (6) Furthermore, since H is a hermitian operator we deduce that =. If the coefficient 2 is chosen real and positive then ψ 3 can also e defined in a unique way. We can repeat the process leading to the construction of a set of states ψ n which are orthonormal and satisfy, H ψ n = a n ψ n + n ψ n + n ψ n+. (7) In the asis of ψ n the Hamiltonian is tridiagonal. An important property of the sates ψ n is that they spread progressively from the initial state. For example if ψ is located on an atomic orital p z then the state ψ n can have non-zero components only on orital that is reached y n applications of the Hamiltonian H, i.e., n hopping from initial orital KE and DOS as a fucntion of filling DOS KE FIG. : (Color online) The density of states (DOS) and the kinetic energy (KE) as a function of filling factor in graphene. Energy is measured in unit of t. The recursion asis estalishes an order etween states that are attained at shorter or longer times when the initial states is ψ. Thus, roughly speaking one expects that it is important to treat properly the states with smallest indices n, and in general it will have smaller effect if states with larger indices are approximated or simply not considered. Fromatechnicalpoint ofviewthe interestoftherecursion asis is that it can e used to calculate vectors like f(h) ψ where f(h) is any operator that is a function of the Hamiltonian H. This vector can e decomposed in the asis of the states ψ n as, f(h) ψ = n ψ n ψ n f(h) ψ. (8) When one applies this method to a function, f(h) = (z H), one can show that, R(z) = ψ z H ψ = z a 2 z a z a 3... (9) In the simplest case where the spectrum does not have a gap, the coefficients a n and n tend to a limit a and respectively. If these limits are otained to a good precision one can write R(z) = z a where, 2 z a z a 3... n z an 2 n R T (z) z a 2 z a 2 z a...., (20), (2)

4 4 q Once we get the density of states as a function of filling factor, we can calculate the kinetic energy per spin using, ε 0 kin = εf a 2 EN(E)dE. (26) U ev FIG. 2: The kinetic energy renormalization factor as a function of on-site Coulom potential. For practical values of potential the renormalization of the kinetic energy is very small. is known as the terminator of the series. This infinite expansion means that R T (z) oeys a simple relation, from which one deduces, z a 2 R T (z), (22) z a± (z a) (23) So R T (z) is the resolvent for a semi-elliptic density of states with energies in the range a 2 E a + 2. In the case of graphene, due to the the symmetry of the honeycom lattice, all a n = 0. On another hand the presence of the pseudo gap in the middle of the and leads to two alternating limits for odd and even. Thus we use a second order terminator, which can e written as, z a 2 z a 2 R T(z), (24) which can e easily solved. This continued fraction expansion of the diagonal element of the resolvent provides an efficient way of computing the LDOS using the relation, N(E) = ImR(E). (25) π The calculated density of states and kinetic energy as a function filling factor is presented in Fig.. The energy is measured in terms of t = 3.0eV(= ppπ), the nearest neighor hopping energy. From the figure we can see that the kinetic energy per spin at half filling, ε 0 kin = 2.4eV. So the critical on site repulsion required for the Brinkmann-Rice transition is U C = 38.4eV which is far from eing a plausile magnitude of the Coulom interaction in graphene. We also calculate the kinetic energy renormalization factor q as a function of the on site Coulom energy. The result is shown in Fig. 2. We can clearly see form the figure that the renormalization of the kinetic energy due to the on-site Coulom interaction is very small for practical values of the interaction. For example, even for the interaction as high as 0eV the kinetic energy is reduced y only aout 5%. In conclusion, we used Gutzwiller method to study the Brinkmann-Rice transition in single layer graphene. We calculate the density of states and the kinetic energy of electrons at half filling using recursion method. We find that the kinetic energy of electrons in graphene is very high such that the potential energy required to have the metal insulator transition is unpractically high. The on-site Coulom interaction has very small effect on the renormalization of the kinetic energy. Acknowledgements: This work was carried out under the auspices of the National Nuclear Security Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laoratory under Contract No. DE- AC52-06NA Financial support from CNLS, and Theoretical Division, T-, as well as Delegation Generale Pour L Armement (DGA) under the contract are gratefully acknowledged. One of us (H.D.) is grateful to K. Bedell and the Boston College for financial support. [] K. S. Novoselov, V. V. K. D. Jiang, T. Booth, S. M. Morozov, and A. K. Geim, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 02, 045 (2005). [2] K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M. I. Katsnelson, I. V. Grigorieva, S. V. Duonos, and A. A. Firsov, Nature 438, 97 (2005). [3] R. E. Peierls, Ann. I. H. Poincare 5, 77 (935). [4] L. D. Landau, II. Phys. Z. Sowjetunion, 26 (937). [5] P. R. Wallace, Phys. Rev. 7, 622 (947). [6] H. P. Dahal, Y. N. Joglekar, K. S. Bedell, and A. V. Balatsky, Phys. Rev. B 74, (2006). [7] H. P. Dahal, T. O. Wehling, K. S. Bedell, J.-X. Zhu, and A. V. Balatsky, cond-matt/ (2007). [8] N. M. Peres, F. Guinea, and A. H. Castro Neto, Phys. Rev. B 72, (2005). [9] M. C. Gutzwiller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0, 59 (963).

5 5 [0] M. C. Gutzwiller, Phys. Rev. 37, A726 (965). [] J.-P. Julien and J. Bouchet, Prog. Theor. Chem. Phys. B 5, 509 (2006). [2] J. Huard, Proc. Roy. Soc. London A 276, 238 (963). [3] J.C. SlaterandG.F. Koster, Phys.Rev.94, 498 (954). [4] P. Nozieres, Magnetisme et localisation dans les liquides de Fermi (Cours du College de France, Paris, 986). [5] D. Vollhardt, Rev. Mod. Phys. 56, 99 (984). [6] W. F. Brinkmann and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 2, 324 (970). [7] R. Haydock, Solid State Physics (Academic Pres, New York, 980, 980).