1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%
3: %%
4: %% Heisenberg model on pyrochlore lattice
5: %%
6: %% A. Koga and N. Kawakami
7: %%
8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: %\documentclass[a4paper,aps,twocolumn]{revtex4}
10: \documentclass[prb,twocolumn]{revtex4} % Physical Review B
11: \usepackage{graphicx}
12:
13: \begin{document}
14:
15: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
16: \title
17: {Frustrated Heisenberg antiferromagnet on a pyrochlore lattice}
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
19:
20: \author
21: {
22: Akihisa Koga and Norio Kawakami
23: }
24:
25: \affiliation
26: {
27: Department of Applied Physics, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
28: }
29:
30: \date{\today}
31:
32: \begin{abstract}
33: We investigate quantum phase transitions for the
34: $s=1/2$ antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model on a pyrochlore lattice.
35: By means of a series expansion starting from isolated tetrahedra,
36: the ground-state phase diagram is determined.
37: When the ratio of the two competing exchange couplings is varied,
38: the first-order (second-order) quantum phase transition occurs between
39: the two spin gap phases (the spin-gap and the antiferromagnetic phases).
40: We also discuss some properties expected for
41: the $s=1$ pyrochlore spin system.
42: \end{abstract}
43:
44: \pacs{Valid PACS appear here}%
45:
46: \maketitle
47: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
48: %\section{Introduction}
49: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
50: Geometrically frustrated magnetic materials
51: have been the subject of considerable interest recently.
52: A typical example is a class of transition-metal oxides
53: with pyrochlore structure. In particular, it was
54: reported that the specific-heat coefficient is
55: exceptionally large for a metallic
56: compound $\rm LiV_2O_4$.\cite{LiV2O4}
57: It was recently pointed out that the frustration caused by a tetrahedral
58: network of vanadium ions may
59: be important to understand the heavy-fermion behavior in
60: this compound, \cite{Kaps}
61: stimulating further intensive studies on the related
62: systems with pyrochlore structure.
63: Such frustration effects should be much more prominent for
64: quantum spin systems.
65: Theoretical studies \cite{Harris,Canals,Isoda}
66: for the $s=1/2$ quantum spin model
67: on a pyrochlore lattice were first done by Harris et al.,\cite{Harris} who
68: pointed out the possibility of the dimerized ground state
69: by exploiting a field theoretic approach.
70: Canals and Lacroix\cite{Canals} clarified that the ground state of the model
71: is a spin-liquid state with the spin gap.
72: They found that the neutron diffraction cross section\cite{Y(Sc)Mn2} observed
73: in $\rm Y(Sc)Mn_2$ is in fairy good agreement
74: with their results.\cite{Canals}
75: Isoda and Mori,\cite{Isoda} however, used a bond-operator approach to
76: suggest that the ground state may be described by a
77: RVB-like tetrahedral (plaquette) singlet state,
78: which is different from the dimer-singlet state known so far.
79: Furthermore, the possibility of the "topological spin glass" was
80: pointed out in $\rm Y_2Mo_2O_7$,\cite{Y2Mo2O7} making
81: this issue more attractive and challenging.
82:
83: In this paper, we investigate the $s=1/2$ quantum spin model
84: on a pyrochlore lattice with competing antiferromagnetic
85: interactions shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pyrochlore} (a).
86: Our system may describe some pyrochlore-lattice compounds
87: such as
88: $\rm Y(Sc)Mn_2$\cite{Y(Sc)Mn2} as well as
89: $\rm GeCu_2O_4$\cite{GeCu2O4} found recently.
90: We study the ground-state phase diagram
91: and clarify the role of the geometrical frustration
92: by studying quantum phase transitions
93: by means of series expansion techniques.\cite{series}
94: We also discuss the $s=1$ case briefly.
95:
96: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
97: %\section{series expansion approach}
98: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
99: Let us first consider the $s=1/2$ spin model
100: on a pyrochlore lattice, which is described by the following Hamiltonian
101: \begin{eqnarray}
102: H=J\sum_{(i,j)}{\bf S}_i\cdot{\bf S}_j+J'\sum_{<i,j>}{\bf S}_i\cdot{\bf S}_j,
103: \label{eq:H}
104: \end{eqnarray}
105: where $(i,j)$ denotes a pair of two adjacent sites connected by the
106: thick bond in Fig. \ref{fig:pyrochlore} (a), whereas $<i,j>$
107: is that for the thin bond. Both of the exchange couplings
108: $J$ and $J'$ are assumed to be antiferromagnetic.
109: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
110: \begin{figure}[htb]
111: \begin{center}
112: \includegraphics[height=4cm]{pyrochlore.eps}
113: \end{center}
114: \caption{(a) Frustrated antiferromagnetic spin model on a pyrochlore lattice.
115: Bold and thin-solid lines represent
116: the exchange couplings $J$ and $J'$, respectively.
117: (b) Initial configuration for the series expansion:
118: Broken lines represent the perturbed bonds, $\lambda J$ and $\lambda J'$
119: (see text).
120: }
121: \label{fig:pyrochlore}
122: \end{figure}
123: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
124: For the compound $\rm Y(Sc)Mn_2$,
125: we may take $J/J' \sim 1$,\cite{Y(Sc)Mn2} while for
126: $\rm GeCu_2O_4$, it is to be $J/J' \sim 6$.\cite{GeCu2O4}
127:
128: Before proceeding with the analysis, we
129: note that, in some limiting cases, the spin system
130: is reduced to simple models whose nature can be easily understood.
131: For $J'=0$, it is equivalent to the $s=1/2$ massless Heisenberg spin chain,
132: whereas an antiferromagnetically ordered state is stabilized for $J=0$
133: since the model has a three-dimensional structure
134: without frustration in this case. To determine the phase diagram,
135: we study what kind of quantum phase transition occurs
136: when the competing interactions are varied. For this purpose,
137: we use the series expansion method, \cite{series}
138: which has an advantage to deal with frustrated spin systems
139: in higher dimensions.
140: In fact, it was successfully applied to frustrated spin systems
141: such as $J_1-J_2$ model,\cite{J1J2} plaquette system,\cite{plaquette}
142: orthogonal-dimer system.\cite{dimer}
143: To apply the series expansion method to the pyrochlore-lattice system,
144: we first divide the original Hamiltonian eq. (\ref{eq:H}) into two parts as
145: $H=H_0+\lambda H_1$ by introducing an auxiliary parameter $\lambda$,
146: where $H_0 (H_1)$ represents the unperturbed (perturbed)
147: Hamiltonian. Note that the system is reduced to the original
148: model for $\lambda=1$.
149: We here choose a tetrahedron composed of four spins
150: as a starting configuration ($H_0$),\cite{Harris,Canals}
151: and then connect each tetrahedron
152: via tetrahedral bonds labeled by $\lambda J$ and $\lambda J'$
153: [see Fig. \ref{fig:pyrochlore} (b)].
154: The Hamiltonian $h$ for an isolated tetrahedron in $H_0$ is given by
155: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
156: \begin{eqnarray}
157: h&=&J\left({\bf S}_1\cdot{\bf S}_2+{\bf S}_3\cdot{\bf S}_4\right)+
158: J'\left({\bf S}_1+{\bf S}_2\right)\cdot\left({\bf S}_3+{\bf S}_4\right).
159: \label{eq:iso}
160: \end{eqnarray}
161: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
162: The energy eigenvalues, $E$, of the tetrahedron for a given $j=J/J'$
163: are listed in Table \ref{I},
164: where $S_{12} (S_{34})$ represents the combined spin
165: $S_1+S_2 (S_3+S_4)$, and $S_{\rm total}$ is the total spin.
166: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
167: \begin{table}[htb]
168: \caption{Eigenvalues of the $s=1/2$ spin system on
169: an isolated tetrahedron.}\label{I}
170: %\begin{ruledtabular}
171: \begin{tabular}{cccc|cccc}
172: \toprule
173: $S_{12}$ &0&1&0&\multicolumn{3}{c}{1}\\
174: $S_{34}$ &0&0&1&\multicolumn{3}{c}{1}\\
175: $S_{\rm total}$&0&1&1&0&1&2\\
176: \colrule
177: $E/J'$&$-\frac{3}{2}j$&$-\frac{1}{2}j$&$-\frac{1}{2}j$&
178: $-2+\frac{1}{2}j$&
179: $-1+\frac{1}{2}j$&$1+\frac{1}{2}j$\\
180: \botrule
181: \end{tabular}
182: %\end{ruledtabular}
183: \end{table}
184: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
185: It is seen in this table that for $0<j<1$,
186: the isolated tetrahedron has a plaquette-singlet ground state
187: with $S_{12}=S_{34}=1$ and $S_{\rm total}=0$.
188: On the other hand, for $j>1$ we have
189: the dimer ground state with $S_{12}=S_{34}=S_{\rm total}=0$.
190: The phases specified by these singlets are referred to
191: as the plaquette and dimer phases, respectively.
192:
193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
194: %\subsection{First-order transition}
195: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
196: Keeping the above properties in mind, we now discuss how
197: the plaquette and the dimer states compete with each other
198: when the inter-tetrahedron couplings $\lambda J$ and $\lambda J'$ are
199: introduced. We expand the ground state energy
200: up to the sixth order in $\lambda$ for several values of $j$.
201: We show the obtained energy in Fig. \ref{fig:eg}, for which
202: the first-order inhomogeneous differential method \cite{Pade}
203: is applied to the bare series.
204: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
205: \begin{figure}[htb]
206: \begin{center}
207: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{eg.eps}
208: \end{center}
209: \caption{Ground state energy for the dimer (right-side)
210: and the plaquette (left-side) phases
211: for various values of $\lambda$.
212: The energy for $\lambda=0.0, 0.5$ and $1.0$ is shown as the dot-dashed,
213: dashed and solid lines, respectively.
214: }
215: \label{fig:eg}
216: \end{figure}
217: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
218: As mentioned above, for $\lambda\rightarrow0$,
219: the first-order quantum phase transition occurs between the
220: plaquette and the dimer phase at the critical point $j_c=1$.
221: It is seen in the Fig. \ref{fig:eg} that
222: the critical value for the phase transition is little changed
223: even if we increase $\lambda$.
224: In fact, the energy up to the second order in $\lambda$
225: is same for both states near $j=1$,
226: as pointed out by Harris et al.\cite{Harris} For small $\lambda$,
227: the first-order transition point is given by
228: $j_c\sim1-0.021\lambda^3$. Remarkably enough,
229: the first-order transition point is estimated
230: as $j_c\sim1.0$ even for $\lambda=1$, where our generalized model
231: is reduced to the original one.
232: Therefore, we arrive at a quite interesting conclusion that
233: the homogeneous spin system $(\lambda=j=1)$ with pyrochlore structure
234: is located quite closely to the phase boundary of the first-order
235: quantum phase transition, although
236: it is difficult to definitely conclude which phase the ground state
237: really belongs to within our accuracy. This fact clarifies the reason why
238: Harris et al. and Isoda et al. had different conclusions
239: on the nature of the
240: ground state for the same $j=1$ model, where the former (latter)
241: claimed that the ground state is a dimer singlet (plaquette singlet).
242: As mentioned above, the energy for two phases is very close
243: to each other, so that the mean-field type treatment may not
244: correctly specify the ground state. Furthermore,
245: there even remains the possibility that the system is
246: just on the boundary, and thus the
247: ground state could be
248: degenerate at $j=1$. In any case, it is
249: instructive to notice
250: that unusual dual-properties reflecting both natures of
251: the plaquette- and dimer-states should emerge around $j=1$ in various
252: physical quantities such as the excitation spectrum, etc.
253:
254: The results obtained above do not necessarily imply that
255: a disordered ground state is always realized in the whole range of $j$.
256: It is needed to study how the disordered phases compete with
257: possible antiferromagnetic phases driven by the three-dimensional (3D)
258: exchange couplings.
259: We first recall that for $j=0$ and $\lambda=1$,
260: the system should have an antiferromagnetic order,
261: as mentioned before.
262: On the other hand, in the case $j\rightarrow\infty (J'\rightarrow 0)$
263: the spin system is reduced to the $s=1/2$ massless Heisenberg chain
264: characterized by the Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid phase.\cite{Bethe}
265: In the parameter regime ($j>1)$, a different type of the magnetic
266: order was observed experimentally
267: for $\rm GeCu_2O_4$ ($j\sim 6$).\cite{GeCu2O4}
268: Therefore, we have to carefully check whether
269: the above different antiferromagnetic
270: orders are indeed stabilized in our model.
271:
272: We first study the magnetically ordered phase
273: in the region $0<j<1$.
274: To this end, we compute the susceptibility for a staggered field and
275: the triplet excitation energy
276: up to the fourth order in $\lambda$ for various values of $j$.
277: To observe the second-order transition to the magnetically ordered phase,
278: we study the spin gap at ${\bf k}={\bf 0}$ in the Brillouin zone,
279: which should vanish at the phase transition point.
280: By applying Pad\'e approximants to computed series, \cite{Pade}
281: we obtain the phase boundaries shown in Fig. \ref{fig:phase}.
282: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
283: \begin{figure}[htb]
284: \begin{center}
285: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{phase.eps}
286: \end{center}
287: \caption{Phase diagram for the $s=1/2$ quantum Heisenberg model with
288: pyrochlore structure. Bold line represents the phase boundary
289: which separates the dimer and the plaquette phases.
290: Solid (dashed) line indicates the phase boundary between
291: the plaquette and the magnetically ordered phases, which is
292: determined by the spin gap (staggered susceptibility).
293: %%%with Dlog [1/2] Pad\'e approximants.
294: }
295: \label{fig:phase}
296: \end{figure}
297: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
298: When $(j,\lambda )=(0,0)$, the system is reduced to an assembly of isolated
299: tetrahedra. With the increase of $\lambda$, the 3D network develops, enhancing
300: the antiferromagnetic correlation.
301: At last, the second-order quantum phase transition occurs to
302: the magnetically ordered phase (e.g. the critical value
303: is given by $\lambda_c\sim0.4$ for $j=0$).
304: The increase of $j$ suppresses the magnetic
305: correlation due to strong frustration, and thus favors the plaquette
306: phase. The critical value is estimated as $j_{c}\sim0.9$ for $\lambda=1$,
307: where our generalized model is reduced to the original system.
308: As seen in this figure, the boundaries determined in two
309: distinct ways slightly differ
310: from each other, which may be
311: due to the lower-order (fourth) series expansion done here.
312: Although it is desired to perform a
313: higher-order calculation
314: to determine the phase boundary more precisely,
315: its essential feature is certainly given by the present calculation;
316: e.g. the magnetic phase is not dominant for $j=1$, but its phase
317: boundary is rather close to $j=1$.
318:
319: We next examine another possibility of the antiferromagnetic order
320: observed for $\rm GeCu_2O_4$ \cite{GeCu2O4} in the region $j>1$.
321: For this purpose, we calculate the susceptibility for
322: the corresponding staggered field
323: up to the third order in $\lambda$. As a result, we find that
324: the divergent singularity around $\lambda=1$ is gradually suppressed,
325: as $j$ is decreased from the value $(j=\infty)$ for
326: the isolated spin chain.
327: This tendency implies that in the region $j>1$,
328: the system does not enter the antiferromagnetically ordered phase,
329: but always stays in the dimer phase with spin gap.
330: Therefore, it is seen from the above analysis that
331: the magnetic order observed for the
332: compound $\rm GeCu_2O_4$\cite{GeCu2O4} ($j \sim 6$)
333: may not be simply explained in terms of the isotropic
334: Heisenberg model employed here. This in turn suggests that
335: anisotropic interactions may be important
336: to realize an ordered state in this compound.
337:
338: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
339: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
340: % S=1 MODEL
341: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
342: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
343:
344: Let us now turn to the $s=1$ system
345: on a pyrochlore lattice. \cite{Yamashita,mean-field}
346: %In the system with isotropic interactions,
347: %the possibility of the chiral order due to the phonon
348: %has been discussed by Yamashita and Ueda. \cite{Yamashita}
349: Although the series-expansion calculation
350: becomes much more difficult in this case,
351: we can still deduce some instructive comments on the $s=1$ pyrochlore lattice.
352: In order to use series expansion techniques,
353: we again start with an isolated $s=1$ tetrahedron,
354: whose eigenvalues are listed in Table \ref{II}.
355: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
356: \begin{table}[htb]
357: \caption{Eigenvalues of an isolated $s=1$ tetrahedron:
358: $E_{\rm D}$ ($E_{\rm P}$)
359: is the energy for the first (second) part in eq. (\ref{eq:iso}).
360: %%%the total energy is given by $E=E_{\rm D}+E_{\rm P}$.
361: }\label{II}
362: %\begin{ruledtabular}
363: \begin{tabular}{c|ccc|c|ccc|ccc|c|ccc|ccccc}
364: \toprule
365: $S_{12}$&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{0}&\multicolumn{7}{c|}{1}&\multicolumn{9}{c}{2}\\
366: $S_{34}$&0&1&2& 0&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{1}&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{2}&
367: 0&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{1}&\multicolumn{5}{c}{2}\\
368: $S_{\rm total}$&0&1&2& 0&0&1&2&1&2&3& 2&1&2&3&0&1&2&3&4\\
369: \hline
370: $E_{\rm D}/J$&-4&-3&-1& -3&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{-2}&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{0}&
371: -1&\multicolumn{3}{c|}{0}&\multicolumn{5}{c}{2}\\
372: $E_{\rm P}/J'$&0&0&0& 0&-2&-1&1&-3&-1&2& 0&-3&-1&2&-6&-5&-3&0&4\\
373: \botrule
374: \end{tabular}
375: %\end{ruledtabular}
376: \end{table}
377: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
378: It is seen that the $s=1$ plaquette-singlet
379: with $S_1+S_2=S_3+S_4=2$ and $S_{\rm total}=0$ is the ground state for
380: $0<j<1$ , whereas
381: the dimer singlet
382: state with $S_1+S_2=S_3+S_4=0$ and $S_{\rm total}=0$ is the
383: ground state for $j>1$. In contrast to the $s=1/2$ model,
384: an isolated tetrahedron in the homogeneous point $(j=1)$
385: has three-fold degenerate ground states,
386: which are composed of the above-mentioned singlet states together with
387: another singlet state with $S_1+S_2=S_3+S_4=1$ and $S_{\rm total}=0$,
388: which may be regarded as a $s=1/2$ plaquette-singlet
389: state (see Table \ref{I}).
390: By turning on the inter-tetrahedron coupling,
391: we observe how the above three-fold singlet states evolve
392: on a pyrochlore lattice.
393: To investigate the first-order quantum phase transitions among
394: three phases, we estimate the ground state energy
395: up to the fourth order in $\lambda$.
396: This expansion claims that in contrast to the
397: $s=1/2$ case, there exists an intermediate
398: ($s=1/2$ plaquette) phase between
399: the $s=1$ plaquette phase and the dimer phase in
400: small $\lambda$: two phase boundaries are estimated as
401: $j_c=1-0.42\lambda^3$ and $j_c=1+0.084\lambda^3$, which are
402: shown as the bold dashed lines in Fig. \ref{fig:s1phase}.
403: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
404: \begin{figure}[htb]
405: \begin{center}
406: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{s1phase.eps}
407: \end{center}
408: \caption{Schematic phase diagram for the $s=1$ antiferromagnetic
409: Heisenberg model with pyrochlore structure.}
410: \label{fig:s1phase}
411: \end{figure}
412: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
413: Although we do not have a definite answer to the question
414: whether this intermediate state
415: can survive as the ground state even for $\lambda=1$,
416: it may be a possible candidate which competes with other states
417: at fully frustrated point $j=1$ with $\lambda=1$.
418: We next calculate the spin gap
419: to see how stable the magnetically ordered phase for
420: the $s=1$ case is in comparison with the $s=1/2$ case.
421: By applying the
422: %%%%Dlog [1/1]
423: Pad\'e approximants to the third-order results,
424: \cite{Pade} we deduce the phase boundary shown as the solid
425: line in Fig. \ref{fig:s1phase}.
426: It is seen that the area of the magnetically ordered phase is
427: more extensive than the $s=1/2$ case.
428: By recalling the phase diagram for the $s=1/2$ case, it is thus
429: expected that the magnetically ordered phase may be more dominant
430: around the homogeneous point $j=1$. Finally, we make a brief comment on the
431: small $J'$ (large $j$) case. For $J'=0$, the system is reduced to
432: the $s=1$ spin chain with bond alternation,
433: where the dimer phase and the Haldane phase are separated
434: at the critical point $\lambda_c=0.6$.\cite{S1}
435: Although it is difficult to estimate the phase boundary
436: between these spin-gap states in the presence of
437: interchain coupling, it is naively expected
438: that the Haldane phase may disappear when $j$ is decreased
439: down to $j=1$.
440:
441: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
442: %\section{Summary}
443: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
444: In conclusion, we have discussed the ground-state phase diagram
445: for the $s=1/2$ Heisenberg model
446: with pyrochlore structure by means of the series expansion method.
447: In particular, it has been found that
448: the two different spin-gap states
449: strongly compete with each other around $j=1$, where the compound
450: $\rm Y(Sc)Mn_2$\cite{Y(Sc)Mn2} may be located.
451: Also, the antiferromagnetic
452: phase has been shown to be extended rather closely to the phase boundary.
453: Concerning $\rm GeCu_2O_4$\cite{GeCu2O4}, for which $j \sim 6$,
454: it has turned out that
455: the present model may not describe its magnetic order,
456: suggesting that some other mechanism
457: should be considered for the magnetism.
458: For the $s=1$ system, we have not been able to deduce the
459: definite conclusion on the phase diagram, but have checked that
460: the magnetically ordered phase may be more dominant
461: around $j=1$ in comparison with the $s=1/2$ case. Also,
462: besides the known states such as dimer, plaquette and
463: magnetically ordered states, another intermediate spin-gap state
464: may also be a candidate for the ground state
465: around $j=1$. Since this argument has been based on
466: the calculation for small $\lambda$,
467: it is desired to confirm whether this spin-gap state
468: really takes part in the strong competition
469: around $j=1$, which is now under consideration.
470:
471: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
472: %\acknowledgments
473: We would like to thank K. Ueda, Y. Yamashita, K. Okunishi and
474: Y. Imai for useful discussions.
475: The work is partly supported by a
476: Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports,
477: and Culture.
478: A.K. is supported by the Japan Society
479: for the Promotion of Science.
480: %A part of numerical computations in this work was carried out
481: %at the Yukawa Institute Computer Facility.
482:
483:
484: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
485: % REFERENCES %
486: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
487: %
488: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
489:
490: \bibitem{LiV2O4}
491: %S. Kondo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 3729 (1997).
492: S. Kondo, D. C. Johnston, C. A. Swenson, F. Borsa, A. V. Mahajan, L. L. Miller,
493: T. Gu, A. I. Goldman, M. B. Maple, D. A. Gajewski, E. J. Freeman, N. R. Dilley,
494: R. P. Dickey, J. Merrin, K. Kojima, G. M. Luke, Y. J. Uemura, O. Chmaissem
495: and J. D. Jorgensen, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 3729 (1997).
496:
497: \bibitem{Kaps}
498: H. Kaps, N. B\"uttgen, W. Trinkl, A. Loidl, M. Klemm and S. Horn,
499: cond-mat/0004493.
500:
501: \bibitem{Harris}
502: A. B. Harris, A. J. Berlinsky and C. Bruder,
503: J. Appl. Phys. {\bf 69}, 5200 (1991).
504:
505: \bibitem{Canals}
506: B. Canals and C. Lacroix, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 80}, 2933 (1998);
507: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 61}, 1149 (2000).
508:
509: \bibitem{Isoda}
510: M. Isoda and S. Mori, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 67}, 4022 (1998).
511:
512: \bibitem{Y(Sc)Mn2}
513: R. Ballou, E. Leli\'evre-Berna and B. F\aa k,
514: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 76}, 2125 (1996).
515:
516: \bibitem{Y2Mo2O7}
517: M. J. P. Gingras, C. V. Stager, N. P. Raju, B. D. Gaulin and J. E. Greedan,
518: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 947 (1997).
519:
520: \bibitem{GeCu2O4}
521: T. Yamada, Z. Hiroi, M. Takano, M. Nohara and H. Takagi,
522: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 69}, 1477 (2000).
523:
524: \bibitem{series}
525: M. P. Gelfand and R. R. P. Singh, Adv. Phys. {\bf 49}, 93 (2000).
526:
527: \bibitem{J1J2}
528: M. P. Gelfand, R. R. P. Singh and D. A. Huse,
529: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 40}, 10801 (1989);
530: M. P. Gelfand, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 42}, 8206 (1990);
531: J. Oitmaa and Z. Weihong, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 54}, 3022 (1996);
532: R. R. P. Singh, Z. Weihong, C. J. Hamer and J. Oitmaa,
533: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 60}, 7278 (1999);
534: O. P. Sushkov, J. Oitmaa and Z. Weihong,
535: cond-mat/0007329.
536:
537: \bibitem{plaquette}
538: M. P. Gelfand, Z. Weihong, R. R. P. Singh, J. Oitmaa and C. J. Hamer,
539: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 77}, 2794 (1996);
540: Y. Fukumoto and A. Oguchi,
541: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 67}, 2205 (1998);
542: Z. Weihong, J. Oitmaa and C. J. Hamer, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 58}, 14147 (1998).
543:
544: \bibitem{dimer}
545: Z. Weihong, C. J. Hamer and J. Oitmaa, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 60}, 6608 (1999);
546: E. M\"uller-Hartmann, R. R. P. Singh, C. Knetter and G. S. Uhrig,
547: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 1808 (2000);
548: A. Koga and N. Kawakami, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 4461 (2000);
549: C. Knetter, A. B\"uhler, E. M\"uller-Hartmann and G. S. Uhrig,
550: cond-mat/0005322.
551:
552: \bibitem{Pade}
553: A. J. Guttmann, {\it Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena},
554: ed. C. Domb and J. L. Lebowitz
555: (Academic, New York, 1989) Vol. 13.
556:
557: \bibitem{Bethe}
558: H. A. Bethe, Z. Phys. {\bf 71}, 205 (1931);
559: J. des Cloizeaux and J. J. Pearson,
560: Phys. Rev. {\bf 128}, 2131 (1962).
561:
562:
563: \bibitem{Yamashita}
564: Y. Yamashita and K. Ueda, preprint.
565:
566: \bibitem{mean-field}
567: A. J. Garcia-Adeva and D. L. Huber, cond-mat/0008233.
568:
569: \bibitem{S1}
570: R. R. P. Singh and M. P. Gelfand,
571: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 61}, 2133 (1988);
572: Y. Kato and A. Tanaka,
573: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 63}, 1277 (1994);
574: K. Totsuka, Y. Nishiyama, N. Hatano and M. Suzuki,
575: J. Phys. Condens. Matter. {\bf 7}, 4895 (1995);
576: S. Yamamoto,
577: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 52}, 10170 (1995).
578:
579:
580: \end{thebibliography}
581:
582: %%%
583:
584:
585:
586: \end{document}
587: