Jordan Wigner fermionization for spin 1 systems in two dimensions: A brief review arxiv:cond-mat/0101188v1 1 Jan 001 Oleg Derzho Institute for Condensed Matter Physics 1 Svientsitsii Street, L viv 11, 79011, Uraine and Chair of Theoretical Physics, Ivan Frano National University of L viv 1 Drahomanov Street, L viv 5, 79005, Uraine February 1, 008) We review the papers on the Jordan Wigner transformation in two dimensions to comment on a possibility of examining the statistical mechanics properties of two dimensional spin 1 models. We discuss in some detail the two dimensional spin 1 isotropic XY and Heisenberg models. PACS numbers: 75.10. b Keywords: D XY model, D Heisenberg model, Jordan Wigner fermionization Postal address: Dr. Oleg Derzho Institute for Condensed Matter Physics 1 Svientsitsii Street, L viv 11, 79011, Uraine tel/fax: 03) 76 19 78 email: derzho@icmp.lviv.ua I. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS A mapping of the spin 1 operators onto Fermi operators by means of the Jordan Wigner transformation was used by Lieb, Schultz and Mattis 1 to introduce the exactly solvable one dimensional spin 1 XY model. Later the famous Onsager s solution for the two dimensional Ising model was reproduced by using the Jordan Wigner transformation for the transfer matrix of that model. The Jordan Wigner transformation is the essential ingredient of the studies of the statistical mechanics properties of quantum spin chains 3. Much effort has been devoted to generalize the fermionization procedure for two 4 14 and three 15,16 dimensions. In the present paper we review the Jordan Wigner transformation in two dimensions as well as some existing applications of this mapping for the spin system theory. We shall consider a spin model consisting of N = N x N y N x, N y ) spins 1 on a square lattice of the size L x L y L x, L y ) governed by the Heisenberg Hamiltonian H = i,j Js i s j i hs z i = J s i,j s i1,j s i,j s i,j1 ) hs z i,j. 1) Here i, j denotes all different nearest neighbouring sites at the square lattice, J is the exchange interaction between
part and the Ising part = 1 ) s i s j s i s j ) s i s j = s x i s x j s y i sy j s z i s z j s i s i 1 ) s j s j 1 ), ) where we have introduced the spin raising and lowering operators s ± = s x ±is y and s z = s s 1. It is important to note that the operators s, s obey the Fermi commutation rules at the same site and the Bose commutation rules at different sites i j { s i, } { s i = 1, s i, } { s i = s i, } s i = 0 3) [ ] [ ] [ ] s i, s j = s i, s j = s i, s j = 0. 4) The aim of the Jordan Wigner tric is to transform the spin variables into pure fermion variables. We start the paper by giving a short reminder of the Jordan Wigner transformation in one dimension Section II). Then we discuss the extensions for two dimensions suggested by M. Azzouz 8 Section III), Y. R. Wang 5 Section IV), and E. Fradin 4 Section V). The mean field lie treatment of the Jordan Wigner fermions for the isotropic XY model is discussed in detail in Section VI. The consideration of a model with Ising term in fermionic language is given separately in Section VII. Finally, we summarize some of the results obtained using this approximate approach and comment on a comparison with the results derived using other methods Section VIII). II. THE JORDAN WIGNER TRANSFORMATION IN ONE DIMENSION With the help of the Jordan Wigner transformation we introduce instead of the operators s, s satisfying 3), 4) the operators c, c satisfying the Fermi commutation rules both at the same and different sites) in terms of which the Hamiltonian of the isotropic XY chain is a bilinear form and the Ising interaction yields the products of four Fermi operators. Explicitly the Jordan Wigner transformation reads c n = eiαn s n, c n = e iαn s n, s n = e iαn c n, s n = eiαn c n, n 1 α n = π n j, n j = c j c j. 5) The signs in the exponents and the order of the multipliers first line in 5)) are not important. To get the operator c n c n ) we must multiply s n s n ) by the exponent containing a sum of n j at all previous sites 0 j n 1 as can be seen from 5) and is shown symbolically in Fig. 1. j=0 0 1 3 n-1 n n1 FIG. 1. Towards the Jordan Wigner transformation in one dimension. To demonstrate how the transformation 5) wors we need the following equations for Fermi operators c j eiπc j cj = c j, eiπc j cj c j = c j, c je iπc j cj = c j, e iπc j cj c j = c j, 6)
which can be easily obtained since From 6) one finds that if n l, but Besides, e iπc j cj = 1 iπc j c j 1! iπ) c j c j... = 1 c j c j e iπ c j c j = 1 c j c j. e iπc n cn c l = c l e iπc n cn, e iπc n cn c l = c l eiπc n cn, 7) e iπc l c l c l = c l e iπc l c l, e iπc l c l c l = c l eiπc l c l. 8) e iπc l c l = 1. 9) Let us show that the commutation rules for the spin raising and lowering operators s, s 5) are given by 3), 4) if c, c are Fermi operators. At the same site we find s n s n = c n e iαn e iαn c n = c n c n, s n s n = c n c n, s n s n = c n c n = 0, s n s n = c n c n = 0, 10) and as a result Eq. 3) becomes evident. At different sites n and n m without any loss of generality m > 0) we have s n s nm = c ne iπ nm 1 l=n s nm s n = c nm eiπ nm 1 l=n etc. which immediately yields Eq. 4). c l c l c nm = c nc nm eiπ nm 1 c l=n l c l, c l c l c n = c nm c ne iπ nm 1 c l=n l c l, 11) Let us write down the transformed Hamiltonian. Besides s j s j = c j c j 10) we have s j s j1 = c j eiπc j cj c j1 = c j c j1, s j s j1 = c je iπc j cj c j1 = c jc j1, 1) and as a result the one dimensional spin 1 Heisenberg Hamiltonian 1), ) becomes H = 1 J c j c j1 c j c ) j1 J c j c j 1 ) c j1 c j1 1 )) h c j c j 1 ). 13) j j It is clear now to what extent the Jordan Wigner transformation simplifies further statistical mechanics calculations. A nontrivial in spin language isotropic XY chain transforms into tight binding spinless fermions and further rigorous treatment becomes possible. For the anisotropic XY chain the operators c j c j1, c jc j1 enter Eq. 13) besides, and therefore the Bogolyubov transformation is required in addition. The Ising term leads to an interaction between the Jordan Wigner fermions, however, the low energy properties may be analysed using the bosonization techniques 3. While interesting only in the low energy physics of s > 1 spin chains one may represent the spin s operators as a sum of s spin 1 operators and then, maing use of the Jordan Wigner representation for the latter operators, proceed in fermionic language. III. THE JORDAN WIGNER TRANSFORMATION IN TWO DIMENSIONS M. AZZOUZ, 1993) Consider the spin model 1) on a square lattice Fig. ).
i-1,j1 i,j1 i-1,j i,j i-1,j-1 i,j-1 y i-1,j- i,j- x FIG.. Towards the Jordan Wigner transformation in two dimensions 8. Two coordinates i and j are taen at the x and y axes, respectively, to specify a given site. M. Azzouz defined 8 the extended Jordan Wigner transformation as s i,j = c i,je iαi,j = e iαi,j c i,j, s i,j = c i,j = e e iαi,j iαi,j c i,j, i 1 j 1 α i,j = π n d,f, n d,f = c d,f c d,f 14) d=0 f=0 f=0 compare with Eqs. 5)). The signs in the exponents in 14) and the order of the multipliers in the first line in 14)) are not important. Let us show that the introduced transformation 14) enables one to construct a fermion representation for two dimensional spin 1 models. n i,f We start with the commutation rules. At the same site one has s q,ps q,p = c q,p e iαq,p e iαq,p c q,p = c q,p c q,p, s q,ps q,p = c q,pc q,p, s q,ps q,p = c q,pc q,p, s q,ps q,p = c q,p c q,p, 15) and the Fermi type commutation rules remain unchanged. To illustrate how transformation 14) wors in the case of different sites let us consider, for example, two sites q, p and q, p m, m > 0. Then, similarly to Eq. 11) one finds s q,p s q,pm = c q,pe iπ pm 1 f=p s q,pms q,p = c q,pme iπ pm 1 f=p n q,f c q,pm = c q,pc q,pm eiπ pm 1 n q,f f=p, n q,f c q,p = c q,pmc q,p e iπ pm 1 n q,f f=p 16) we have used an analogue of Eqs. 7), 8) in two dimensions) and hence the operators s q,p and s q,pm commute if the operators c q,p and c q,pm anticommute. Following the same reasoning one can chec the rest of the commutation rules. Consider further the transformed spin Hamiltonian. Let us treat somewhat more general nearest neighbour interactions than the one in Eq. 1). Namely, we assume different values of interaction in different directions on a
i,j1 J i-1,j J' i,j J i1,j J ' i,j-1 FIG. 3. Nearest neighbour interactions on a square lattice. Evidently, we can perform the fermionization presented below for a completely nonuniform model characterized by a set of intersite interactions {...,J i,j;i1,j,... ;..., J i,j;i,j1,...}.) If J = J = J = J one faces the uniform square lattice. To examine the effects of interchain interactions in quasi one dimensional systems one may consider the case J, J J, J with J not equal to J if the dimerised chain is considered). If J J, J, J one has a model of interacting two leg ladders. In the limiting case of J = 0 the noninteracting two leg ladders) the model may be reduced to a one dimensional system with interactions extending over the nearest sites. We begin with the isotropic XY interaction see Fig. 4). i,j1 i,j i1,j i,j FIG. 4. Towards the fermionization of H XY.
Inserting 14) into 1), ) one finds = 1 = 1 H XY = 1 Ji,j;i1,j s i,j s i1,j ) s i,j s i1,j Ji,j;i,j1 s i,j s i,j1 )) s i,j s i,j1 J i,j;i1,j c i,j e iπ f=j n i,f j 1 f=0 n i1,f )c ) f=j i1,j ci,j eiπ n j 1 i,f n i1,f f=0 )c i1,j )) J i,j;i,j1 c i,j e iπni,j c i,j1 c i,j c eiπni,j i,j1 J i,j;i1,j c i,j e iπ n j 1 i,f n i1,f f=j1 f=0 )c ) i1,j f=j1 ci,j eiπ n j 1 i,f n i1,f f=0 )c i1,j J i,j;i,j1 ci,j c i,j1 c i,j c )) i,j1 17) to get the last equality we have used an analogue of Eq. 6) in two dimensions). After introducing the notations j 1 φ i,i1 j) = π n i,f, the Hamiltonian 17) becomes as follows H XY = 1 = 1 φ i,i1 j) = π f=j f=j1 f=0 j 1 n i,f f=0 n i1,f n i1,f, ϕ j,j1 i) = πn i,j 18) ) J i,j;i1,j c i,j e iφi,i1j) c i1,j c i,j eiφi,i1j) c i1,j J i,j;i,j1 c i,j e iϕj,j1i) c i,j1 c i,j eiϕj,j1i) c i,j1 )) ) J i,j;i1,j c i,j e i φ i,i1j) c i1,j c i,j ei φ i,i1j) c i1,j J i,j;i,j1 ci,j c i,j1 c i,j c i,j1)). 19) Eq. 19) can be viewed as the Hamiltonian of a two dimensional tight binding lie spinless fermions with the hopping amplitudes 1 J i,j;i1,je i φ i,i1j) 0) in the x direction and 1 J i,j;i,j1 1) in the y direction. Those hoppings depend in a complicated way on a configuration of the intermediate sites. Their complexity explains how the isotropic XY model becomes difficult to examine in two dimensions in comparison with an obvious analysis in one dimension. There are no difficulties in rewriting the Ising interaction in fermionic language H Z = J i,j;i1,j s i,j s i,j 1 ) s i1,j s i1,j 1 ) J i,j;i,j1 s i,j s i,j 1 ) s i,j1 s i,j1 1 )) = J i,j;i1,j c i,j c i,j 1 ) c i1,j c i1,j 1 ) J i,j;i,j1 c i,j c i,j 1 ) c i,j1 c i,j1 1 )) )
H f = h s i,j s i,j 1 ) = h c i,j c i,j 1 ). 3) Formulas 19), ), 3) realize the fermionic representation of the spin 1 square lattice 1), ). isotropic Heisenberg model on a IV. THE JORDAN WIGNER TRANSFORMATION IN TWO DIMENSIONS Y. R. WANG, 1991) Let us turn bac to the Jordan Wigner transformation in one dimension 5) using this case as a guideline and define a particle annihilation operator as d i = e iα i s i, α i = B ij n j, 4) where B ij is the c number matrix element, n j = d j d j. A particle creation operator is given by d i = s i eiα i = e iα i s i, 5) whereas the inverse to Eqs. 4), 5) formulas read s i = e iα i d i = d i e iα i, 6) j i) s i = e iα i d i = d i e iα i. 7) We want the introduced operators d, d to obey the Fermi type commutation rules. They are indeed the Fermi operators at the same site due to Eq. 3). Consider further two different sites i j. Assuming that d, d are Fermi operators one finds [ ] s i, s j = e iα i d i eiα j d j e iα j d j e iα i d i = e in jb ij d i ein ib ji d j e in ib ji d j e in jb ij d i. 8) Since ) ) e in jb ij = 1 e ib ij 1 n j, e in ib ji = 1 e ib ji 1 n i one can easily proceed in calculation of the r.h.s. of Eq. 8) finally arriving at [ ] ) s i, s j = 1 e ib ij e ib ji d i d j. 9) The result equals to 0 as it should for the commutator of the operators s and s attached to different sites) if e ib ij = e ib ji. 30) Thus we assume that B ij s in 4), 5), 6), 7) satisfy relation 30) that yields the spin commutation relations for s, s 3), 4) if d, d are Fermi operators. Y. R. Wang suggested 5 the following choice for B ij. Consider two complex numbers τ i = i x ii y 31)
n r n r = s z 1 1. 41) τ j = j x ij y, 3) which correspond to the sites i = i x n x i y n y and j = j x n x j y n y, respectively. Here n x and n y are the unit vectors directed along x and y axes, respectively. Assume that B ij = argτ j τ i ). 33) Evidently e ib ji = e iargτ i τ j ) = e iargτ j τ i )±π) = e ib ij, 34) that is the required condition 30). Since τ i τ j = τ i τ j e iargτ i τ j ) Eq. 33) can be rewritten in the form B ij = Imln τ j τ i ), 35) and hence the introduced transformations 4), 5), 6), 7) contains α i = Imln τ j τ i ) n j. 36) j i) It is worth noting that the transformation of M. Azzouz 14) can also be written as Eqs. 6), 7) with B ij = π Θi x j x )1 δ ix,j x ) δ ix,j x Θi y j y ) 1 δ iy,j y )) 37) where Θx) is the step function, and a necessary condition for having spin to fermion mapping 30) fulfilled. The advantage of the choice of Y. R. Wang 36) becomes clear when one tries to introduce an approximate treatment of the transformed Hamiltonian. After inserting 6), 7) into 1), ) one finds H = 1 ) J i,j d i eiα j α i ) d j d i e iα i α j ) d j i,j J i,j d i d i 1 ) d j d j 1 )) i h d i d i 1 ). 38) Note that where Ar) = r α r and hence Ar) = r x r y α j α i = r r) r r) j i dr Ar) 39) n r Imln r x r x i r y )) r y n x n r Imln r x r x i r y r y = r r) n r )) n y r y r y ) nx r x r x)n y = r r) r r) The crucial approximation to proceed is to mae the change in 40) n z r r) n r r r). 40)
Here the angular bracets denote the thermodynamical canonical average with the Hamiltonian 1). Thus, we have postulated the mean field description of the phase factors in 38). A similar treatment was adopted in Refs. 17,18. Apparently, assuming further in 41) that s z r = 0 one should suppose that h = 0 although in Refs. 10,11 the uniform magnetic field was included into the Hamiltonian). In principle Eq. 41) simplifies the problem drastically since one faces a tight binding spinless fermions on a square lattice. However, in practice it is hard to proceed because of nonuniformity of that model. The Hamiltonian 38), 39), 40), 41) describes the charged) spinless fermions moving in a plane in an external uniform classical) magnetic field which is perpendicular to the plane. Due to 41) n r can be taen out from the summation and in the continuum limit the vector potential of the field Ar) can be written 7 in the following form = n r 1 Lx S 0 Ar) = n r Lx dr x Ly Ly r r) n z r r) r r) dr y n z r r) r r) where S 0 is the area of the elementary plaquette in the plane see Fig. 5) =... = n r π S 0 n z r, 4) H n z n y i,j S 0 Ar ) n x r 1 Ar 1 ) r FIG. 5. Fermions in the magnetic field, which appears within the mean field treatment of the phase factors in the Hamiltonian 38). and L x = L y = L. The corresponding magnetic field Hr) immediately follows from Eq. 4) Hr) = rotar) = n r π n x n y n z S 0 x y z = n r π n z, 43) S 0 r y r x 0 so that Ar) = 1 Hr) r. The flux per elementary plaquette equals to
The vector potential Ar) 4) shown schematically in Fig. 5 is not convenient to be concerned with. Because of the gauge invariance one may perform a gauge transformation introducing a new vector potential Ãr) which yields the same flux per elementary plaquette Φ 0 = π. Namely, assume that Ãr) is such that whereas α i1,j α i,j = i1,j i,j dr Ãr) = π, 45) α i1,j1 α i1,j = α i,j1 α i1,j1 = α i,j α i,j1 = 0 46) see Fig. 6). From Eqs. 45), 46) one finds that dr Ãr) = π, 47) and on the other hand dr Ãr) = ds rotãr) = ds Hr) = Φ 0, 48) and hence the flux per elementary plaquette Φ 0 remains equal to π. Let us turn bac to the Hamiltonian 38). Only now we are in position to proceed with the statistical mechanics analysis. Within the frames of the introduced mean field treatment of the phase factors 45), 46) the Hamiltonian 38) can be rewritten as H = i,j 1 ) J i,j d i d j d i d j H Z H f, 49) where even for initially uniform lattice J = J = J = J in the Hamiltonian H XY one has etc. see Fig. 6). J i,j;i1,j = J, J i,j;i,j1 = J, J i1,j;i,j = J, J i1,j;i1,j1 = J 50) i,j1 i1,j1 i,j i1,j
As can be seen from Eqs. 49), 50) the isotropic XY model can be examined now without maing any other additional approximations since it corresponds to a model of tight binding spinless fermions on a bipartite square lattice see Section VI). Conversely, the Heisenberg model requires further approximations to proceed because of the interaction between spinless fermions see Section VII). V. THE JORDAN WIGNER TRANSFORMATION IN TWO DIMENSIONS E. FRADKIN, 1989) The Fermi Bose correspondence in two dimensions, i.e., the Jordan Wigner transformation for two dimensional spin 1 systems on a lattice, was discussed even earlier4, however, without applications to the theory of concrete spin models. Consider a system of spinless fermions, i.e., a matter field, ar) on the sites of a square lattice Fig. 7) n y rn y n x r rn x 0 FIG. 7. Towards the Hamiltonian 51). and gauge field A x r), A y r) on the lins of the lattice Fig. 7). The Hamiltonian of the system is H = t r ) a r)e iaxr) ar n x ) a r)e iayr) ar n y ) h.c. 51) with the constraint a r)ar) = θ A y r n x ) A y r) A x r n y ) A x r)), 5) where θ is the parameter which will be defined later. E. Fradin showed 4 that the gauge field can be eliminated at the expense of a change in the commutation relations of the matter field. Namely, introducing 4 the Jordan Wigner operators ãr), ã r) which obey with 1 θ = π the Hamiltonian 51) is ãr )ã r) = δ r,r e i θ ã r)ãr ) 53) H = t r ã r)ãr n x ) ã r)ãr n y ) h.c. ). 54)
Eq. 54) is easily recognized as the Hamiltonian of the spin 1 isotropic XY model on a square lattice with exchange interaction between nearest sites J = t and the correspondence s r = ã r), s r = ãr), s z r = ã r)ãr) 1. Further discussions on the extension of the Jordan Wigner transformation to three or more dimensional cases can be found in Ref. 15. VI. D S = 1 ISOTROPIC XY MODEL Let us show how the two dimensional Jordan Wigner transformation with the mean field treatment of the phase factors can be used in the theory of spin models. As a result we come to an approximate approach to the study of D quantum spin models. We begin with the D isotropic XY model H Z = H f = 0) considering for concreteness the case of J = J, J = J. In accordance with 49), 50) we start from H XY = 1 J 1) ij d i,j d i1,j d i,j d ) i1,j J d i,j d i,j1 d i,j d ) ) i,j1 = 1 J... a i,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j a i,j...) 1 J... a i,j b i,j1 a i,j b i,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1...), 55) where, to emphasize a bipartite character of the square lattice that appeared, we have introduced notations a i,j = d i,j, b i1,j = d i1,j etc.. Notwithstanding the fact that we have an approximate theory, it contains the exact result in 1D limit if one puts in Eq. 55) either J = 0 or J = 0 coming to a system of noninteracting chains extended in either horizontal or vertical direction, respectively. In the latter case Eq. 55) corresponds to a system of noninteracting chains each with the XY part of the Hamiltonian 13) H XY i) = j=0 1 J d i,j d i,j1 d i,j d i,j1). 56) In the former case one gets a system of noninteracting chains each with the Hamiltonian H XY j) = 1) j i=0 and to recover the 1D limit explicitly the transformation 1 J 1)i d i,j d i1,j d i,j d ) i1,j 57) d i,j = eiπψi f i, d i1,j = e iπψi1 f i1,..., ψ 0 = 0, ψ i1 = ψ i i 58) e.g., d 0,j = f 0, d 1,j = f 1, d,j = f, d 3,j = f 3 After the Fourier transformation etc. or in short d i,j = 1 Nx N y etc.) should be performed. x, y e ixiyj) d x, y 59) d i = 1 e i i d, d i = 1 e i i d, d = 1 e i i d i, d = 1 e i i d i, N N N N x = π n x, n x = N x N x, N x 1,..., N x 1, y = π n y, n y = N y N y, N y 1,..., N y 1, { } { } i i
N x, N y are even), the Hamiltonian 55) becomes H XY = 1 = 1 where we have used the notations ij sin x b a a b ) J cos y b b a a )) E cosγ b b a a ) i sinγ b a a b )) 61) E = J cos y J sin x, cosγ = J cos y E b = d x, y, a = d x±π, y±π,..., E = J cos y ij sin x = E e iγ, sin γ = J sin x. 6) E The Hamiltonian 61) can be rewritten as H XY = E cosγ b b a a ) i sinγ b a a b )) 63) where the prime denotes that varies in the region shown in Fig. 8b. y π a y π b -π π x -π π x -π -π FIG. 8. The region in which varies in the sum in Eq. 61) see Eq. 60)) a) and in Eq. 63) b). At last one introduces the operators α = cos γ b i sin γ a, β = sin γ b i cos γ a, { α1, α } { = δ1,, β1, β } { = δ1,, α1, β } { = β1, α } = 0, 64) etc. to get from Eq. 63) the final form of the D spin 1 within approximation 41) isotropic XY model Hamiltonian in fermionic language Λ = E = H XY = Λ α α β β ), J sin x J cos y 0. 65) It is easy now to calculate the thermodynamic functions of the spin model which correspond to Eq. 65). For
E π 0 N = = 1 d x π x x d x π In 1D limit J = 0 or J = 0) Eq. 66) becomes E 0 N = 1 that is the well nown exact result. d y π d y π d x π J sin x = 1 J sin x J cos y J sin x J cos y. 66) d y π J cos y = J π It is remarable to note that the Hamiltonian 65) and hence the ground state energy per site 66)) arises also for the D spin 1 Heisenberg model and is nown as the uniform flux n r = 1 ) solution5. 67) VII. D S = 1 HEISENBERG MODEL In the remainder of the paper we consider the D spin 1 isotropic Heisenberg model 1), ) treating the phase factors which appear after maing use of the D Jordan Wigner transformation within the frames of the mean field approximation 41). The Heisenberg model besides the H XY term 55) includes the H Z term which contains d i d id j d j 1 d i d i 1 d j d j 1 4. 68) Thus, the Jordan Wigner spinless fermions interact and further approximations are required. The first term in 68) can be changed by d i d id j d j d i d i d j d j d i d i d j d j d i d i d j d j d i d j d i d j d i d j d i d j d i d j d i d j = d i d i n j d j d j n i n i n j d i d j i,j e iθ i,j d i d j j,ie iθ j,i i,j j,i e iθ i,jθ j,i ), 69) where we have introduced the notation d i d j = i,je iθ i,j = d j d i. 70) In accordance with 69) there may be four ways to treat the Ising interaction, i.e. assuming either i,j = 0, m = s z j = n j 1 = 0 71) or i,j 0, m = 0 7) or i,j = 0, m 0 73) or i,j 0, m 0. 74) The first possibility 71) yielding the uniform flux solution was considered in the previous Section Eqs. 65),
Let us consider the second possibility 7). In such a case the Ising term becomes H Z = i,j J i,j i,j e iθ i,j d i d j j,i e iθ j,i d i d j i,j j,i e iθ i,jθ j,i ) ), 75) where to get the in phase flux solution one puts i,j;i1,j = i1,j;i,j = i1,j;i,j = i,j;i1,j = Q, e iθi,j;i1,j = e iθi1,j;i,j = 1, e iθi1,j;i,j = e iθi,j;i1,j = 1, i,j;i,j1 = i,j1;i,j = i1,j;i1,j1 = i1,j1;i1,j = P, e iθi,j;i,j1 = e iθi,j1;i,j = e iθi1,j;i1,j1 = e iθi1,j1;i1,j = 1 76) see Fig. 9) i,j1 P Q i1,j1 P i,j -Q i1,j FIG. 9. Towards the in phase flux solution for the Heisenberg model; the values of i,j e iθ i,j are attached to the bonds. and the parameters Q and P are calculated self consistently see Eqs. 80), 81) below). Now the Heisenberg model Hamiltonian only slightly differs from that of the XY model 55) becoming H = 1 J 1 Q)... a i,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j a i,j...) 1 J 1 P)... a i,j b i,j1 a i,j b i,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1...) Acting along the line described in the Section VI one finds that Λ = The ground state energy per site is given by E 0 N = 1 NJQ NJ P. 77) H = Λ α α β β ) NJQ NJ P, J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y 0. 78) d x π d y π J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y
where the parameters Q and P are determined from the conditions E 0 Q N = 0 and E 0 P N = 0, i.e., and Q = 1 P = 1 d x π d x π d y π d y π J sin x 1 Q) J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y 80) J cos y 1 P) J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y. 81) Treating the Ising term 69) within assumptions 73) or 74) one assumes the Néel order with the sublattice magnetizations m and m n i,j = n i1,j1 =... = m 1, n i,j1 = n i1,j =... = m 1 8) see Fig. 10). -m m i,j1 i1,j1 m -m i,j i1,j FIG. 10. The Néel order for the Heisenberg model; the values of magnetization s z i are attached to the sites. The given assumption, by the way, apparently contradicts the mean field approximation 41) for the phase factors; this inconsistency, however, to our best nowledge has not yet been discussed.) Therefore, case 73), i.e., the uniform flux with the Néel order, is called the Néel flux solution and case 74), i.e., the in flux with the Néel order, is called the in phase Néel flux solution. In the latter case the Hamiltonian reads H = 1 J 1 Q)... a i,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j b i1,j a i,j b i1,j a i,j...) 1 J 1 P)... a i,j b i,j1 a i,j b i,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1 b i1,j a i1,j1...) J... ma i,j a i,j mb i1,j b i1,j mb i1,j b i1,j ma i,j a i,j... ) J... ma i,j a i,j mb i,j1 b i,j1 mb i1,j b i1,j ma i1,j1 a i1,j1... ) Performing the Fourier transformation 60) one gets NJQ NJ P N J J )m. 83) H = 1 J J )m ij 1 Q)sin x )b a
J J )m ij 1 Q)sin x )a b J 1 P)cos y b b a a )) NJQ NJ P N J J )m = J J )m ij 1 Q)sin x )b a J J )m ij 1 Q)sin x )a b J 1 P)cos y b b a a )) where b = d x, y, a = d x±π, y±π, etc.. Introducing the operators and then the operators NJQ NJ P N J J )m, 84) ã = a e iδ, ã = a e iδ, b = b, b = b ; J J )m ± ij 1 Q)sin x = 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x e ±iδ 85) α = cos ω b sin ω ã, β = sin ω b cos ω ã; cosω = J 1 P)cos y 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x, sin ω =, E E E = 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y 86) one gets the final form of the Heisenberg Hamiltonian in fermionic language H = Λ α α β β ) NJQ NJ P N J J )m 87) with Λ = E 0 defined by Eq. 86). The ground state energy per site which follows from 87) reads E 0 N = 1 d x π d y π 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y JQ J P J J )m, 88) where the values of the introduced parameters are determined by minimizing E0 N 88) with respect to Q, P and m Q = 1 d J sin x 1 Q) π), 89) 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y P = 1 d J cos y 1 P) π), 90) 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y m = d J J ) m π). 91) 4 J J ) m J 1 Q) sin x J 1 P) cos y The Néel flux solution see Eq. 73)) is given by Eqs. 83), 87), 86), 88), 91) in which P and Q are equal to zero.
VIII. THE D S = 1 HEISENBERG MODEL: A COMPARISON OF SOME RESULTS In the final Section we want to list out some problems of the two dimensional spin models theory which were attaced with the exploiting of the D Jordan Wigner transformation. The D antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with J = J = J = J without external field) was considered in Refs. 5,7,6. The main results obtained concern the ground state energy 5,7, the specific heat 7 and the Raman spectrum 6,7. A comparison with some experimental data for La CuO 4 was given. In Ref. 8 the effects of the interchain interaction on the one dimensional spin 1 antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model were examined. For this purpose the Heisenberg model with J = J, J = J was considered and the in phase Néel flux solution was analysed at zero temperature. The author found that the one dimensional limit is singular, i.e. the staggered magnetization m 0 m = 0.513) when J 0 although we now from exact results that for the antiferromagnetic chain m = 0). In the other limiting case J = J the theory based on the fermionization procedure yields m = 0.778 the spin wave result is m = 0.6; more accurate calculations predict m = 0.3074 see Ref. 19)). The result of Ref. 8 stays somewhat separately in the estimate of the value of J J at which the staggered magnetization appears. Different theories predict J J from 0 to 0. for details see Ref. 19). Ref. 8 predicts J J = 0, moreover m jumps from zero to 0.513 for any infinitesimally small J J. The antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model on a ladder within the frames of the in phase Néel phase solution the ground state energy, the singlet triplet energy gap) was discussed in Ref. 9. The effects of the interladder interaction and magnetic field on the susceptibility at nonzero temperatures were studied in Ref. 11. A consideration of the spin Peierls state under magnetic field was reported in Ref. 10. A study of the stepped spin Peierls transition for the quasi one dimensional XY and Heisenberg models using the D Jordan Wigner transformation was reported in Refs. 1,13. The D Jordan Wigner transformation was applied for a study of the zero temperature spin Peierls transition for the quasi one dimensional XY and Heisenberg systems in Ref. 14. In particular, the phase diagram between the dimerised and uniform states in the parameter space of interchain interaction and spin lattice coupling was constructed. Many more problems may be considered within the frames of the D Jordan Wigner fermionization approach. Probably, the D Jordan Wigner transformation should be of more use for the D spin 1 XY models since for such models no further approximations except the mean field lie treatment of the phase factors) are required. Besides, a more sophisticated treatment of the phase factors is desirable. The author acnowledges the ind hospitality of the Max Planc Institute for the Physics of Complex Systems, Dresden in the end of 1999 when the paper was launched. He thans J. Richter Magdeburg University) for the ind hospitality in the summer of 000 when the main part of the paper was prepared and discussed. Special thans go to T. Krohmalsii, T. Verholya, O. Zaburannyi and V. Derzho for helpful comments and suggestions. 1 E. Lieb, T. Schultz, and D. Mattis, Ann. Phys. N.Y.) 16, 407 1961); see also S. Katsura, Phys. Rev. 17, 1508 196). T. D. Schultz, D. C. Mattis, and E. H. Lieb, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 856 1964).
3 I. Afflec, Field theory methods and quantum critical phenomena. In: Fields, Strings and Critical Phenomena, E. Brézin and J. Zinn Justin, eds., Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., 1989, p.563 640. 4 E. Fradin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 3 1989). 5 Y. R. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 43, 3786 1991). 6 Y. R. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 43, 13774 1991). 7 Y. R. Wang, Phys. Rev. 46, 151 199). 8 M. Azzouz, Phys. Rev. B 48, 6136 1993). 9 M. Azzouz, L. Chen, and S. Mououri, Phys. Rev. B 50, 633 1994). 10 M. Azzouz and C. Bourbonnais, Phys. Rev. B 53, 5090 1996). 11 M. Azzouz, B. Dumoulin, and A. Benyoussef, Phys. Rev. B 55, R11957 1997). 1 Y. Ji, J. Qi, J. X. Li, and C. D. Gong, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9, 59 1997). 13 X. J. Fan and C. D. Gong, Eur. Phys. J. B 7, 33 1999). 14 Q. Yuan, Y. Zhang, and H. Chen, cond mat/9911119. 15 L. Huerta and J. Zanelli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 36 1993). 16 B. Boc and M. Azzouz, cond mat/000761. 17 V. Kalmeyer and R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 095 1987). 18 R. B. Laughlin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 677 1988). 19 D. Ihle, C. Schindelin, A. Weiße, and H. Fehse, Phys. Rev. B 60, 940 1999).