1:
2: \tolerance = 10000
3: \documentstyle[twoside,aps]{revtex}
4: %\documentstyle[aps]{revtex}
5: \def\REVTeX{REV\TeX}
6: %\documentstyle[preprint,eqsecnum,aps]{revtex}
7: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps]{revtex}
8: \oddsidemargin = -11.9mm
9: \evensidemargin = -17.9mm
10: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{equation}}
11: \begin{document}
12: \draft
13: \title{Phase Diagram of a Two-Dimensional Neutral Classical \\ Coulomb Gas
14: from a Non-perturbative sine-Gordon Expansion}
15: \author{Wen-Fa Lu$^{a,b,c}$, and Chul Koo Kim$^{a,c}$}
16: \address{$^a$ Institute of Physics and Applied Physics, Yonsei University,
17: Seoul 120-749, Korea \\
18: $^b$ Department of Applied Physics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
19: Shanghai 200030, \ \ \\ the People's Republic of China
20: \thanks{Permanent address, E-mail: wenfalu@online.sh.cn}
21: \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
22: \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\
23: $^c$ Center for Strongly Correlated Materials Research,
24: Seoul National University, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ Seoul 151-742, Korea
25: }
26: %\date{}
27: \maketitle
28:
29: \begin{abstract}
30: Within the sine-Gordon formalism of a two-dimensional neutral classical
31: Coulomb gas, a convergent expansion with non-perturbative nature is performed
32: to calculate the thermodynamic potential and construct the phase diagram. It
33: is shown that truncation at the first order yields the Gaussian approximation.
34: The second- and third-order corrections are analyzed for the case of small
35: fugacity and are shown that they substantially improve the
36: Gaussian-approximation phase diagram. In particular, these corrections
37: introduce a new conducting phase and make the insulator-conductor coexistence
38: phase end at the conducting phase. The latter result is in agreement with the
39: prediction made by generalized renormalization-group
40: calculations.
41: \end{abstract}
42: \vspace{24pt}
43: PACS numbers : 05.70.Fh; 64.60-i; 64.60.Cn; 68.18.Jk .
44:
45: Two-dimentional neutral classical Coulomb gas (2DNCCG) can be mapped into
46: a two-dimensional XY model \cite{1}, and provides a prototype model for
47: two-dimensional systems with which vortices are important thermal excitations
48: \cite{2}. These systems including superfluid films, superconducting films,
49: Josephson-junction arrays, two-dimensional melting, surface roughening,
50: liquid crystals and double-layer quantum Hall systems \cite{2,3} can undergo
51: Berezinski\v{i}-Kosterlitz-Thouless (BKT) phase transitions \cite{4}. Hence,
52: the 2DNCCG has wide applications in studying these systems and, thus, a
53: thorough understanding of its phase structure is of extreme importance. A
54: number of analytical and numerical investigations were made to construct
55: the phase diagram last three decades and they have greatly increased our
56: understanding on the 2DNCCG. However, the picture is still far from complete
57: and there remain several issues to be settled as described below.
58:
59: Both the analytical and simulative investigations have revealed some
60: universal features of the 2DNCCG. The Gas suffers a BKT phase transition when
61: the fugacity or particle density is very small or low; that is, for a very
62: samll fugacity, the gas remains as an insulator with a dipole phase when
63: temperature is low, whereas, when temperature increases, the dipole charge
64: becomes unbound, and, thus, the dipole phase becomes a conducting phase. This
65: kind of phase transition is continuous. Moreover, increasing the fugacity from
66: a small yet finite value, one encounters a first-order phase transition to an
67: insulator-conductor coexistence phase.
68:
69: Nevertheless, the concrete phase diagrams for the 2DNCCG constructed by
70: various methods have not reached a universal agreement. For example, the
71: Kosterlitz's renormalization group (RG) equations at the lowest \cite{4}
72: (1974) and higher orders \cite{5} of an expansion in fugacity showed
73: existence of just the BKT phase transion only, while Minnhagen's
74: generalized RG equations \cite{6}, Monte Carlo simulations \cite{7,8},
75: generalized Debye-H\"{u}ckel-Bjerrum theory \cite{9}, and Gaussian
76: approximation \cite{10} all led to both the BKT and the first-order phase
77: transions. Monte Carlo simulations gave even much richer phase structures
78: \cite{7}. For the connection between the BKT and the first-order phase
79: transition curves, the Gaussian approximation \cite{10} showed that, in the
80: fugacity-temperature plane, the first-order phase transition starts from the
81: end point of the BKT phase transition curve \cite{10}, and
82: Debye-H\"{u}ckel-Bjerrum theory \cite{9} produced the similar tricritical
83: point in the density-temperature plane, whereas Minnhagen's investigation
84: \cite{6} and Monte Carlo simulations \cite{7} indicated that the first-order
85: phase transition curve passes the end point of the BKT phase transition curve
86: and ends at a higher temperature and in the conducting phase. Another point of
87: dispute is the starting point of the BKT phase transition. Although majority
88: of the calculations \cite{4,5,6,9,10} support the BKT phase transition curve
89: starts from the point with the zero fugacity (or density) and the reduced
90: temperature 0.25, we note that in the diagrams obtained from Monte Carlo
91: simulations \cite{7}, the BKT phase transition curve starts from a slightly
92: lower, but evidently different temperature. Here, this value of temperature,
93: 0.25 corresponds to Coleman's critical point for the sine-Gordon (sG)
94: continuum field theory \cite{11}.
95:
96: The present disagreement on the phase diagram of the 2DNCCG is understandable.
97: Actually, none of the above methods are exact. The renormalization group
98: equations \cite{4} (1974) \cite{5} are valid just for low fugacity, so are
99: Monte Carlo simulations as reviewed in Ref.~\cite{12}. Although an infinite
100: subset of Feynman diagrams are re-summed up in Minnhagen's procedure \cite{6},
101: the generalized renormalization-group equations are also valid only for small
102: fugacities when the temperature is lower than 0.25. Truly, the Gaussian
103: approximation \cite{10} can work for both small and finite fugacities,
104: but one does not know how good the results are. As for the generalized
105: Debye-H\"{u}ckel-Bjerrum theory \cite{9}, it is of mean-field type
106: intrinsically.
107:
108: The above analysis motivates us to propose a systematic, non-perturbative
109: \footnote{Here, "non-perturbative" means that the coupling of the interacting
110: system needn't be weak.}, and, at the same time, convergent expansion
111: scheme on the 2DNCCG to construct the phase diagram. This paper reports our
112: effort of such an expansion which we call the non-perturbative sG expansion.
113: Exploiting the equivalence \cite{2,13} between the 2DNCCG and the sG field
114: theory \cite{11,14}, we perform an expansion on partition function of the
115: relevant sG field theory in Euclidean space to calculate the thermodynamic
116: potential of the 2DNCCG up to the third order. The truncated result at the
117: first order is equal to that obtained from the Gaussian approximation
118: \cite{10} and, accordingly, the truncated results at higher orders are
119: expected to provide systematic corrections to the Gaussian-approximation
120: result. Thus, this scheme can afford an access to the correct phase diagram of
121: the 2DNCCG. However, the higher-order corrections may give rise to additional
122: divergences. Therefore, we treat, in the present paper, just the
123: small-fugacity case for the second- and third-order corrections. In this case,
124: taking a finite ultraviolet cutoff in the integration over the momentum gets
125: rid of all the divergences appeared in the truncated expressions. Analysis of
126: a characteristic parameter which is inversely proportional to the Debye
127: screening length allows us to obtain phase diagrams of the 2DNCCG up to the
128: third order. Although our study is limited to the small-fugacity effects of
129: higher-order corrections, still, it provides systematic improvements towards
130: the correct phase diagram.
131:
132: Based on the equivalence between the 2DNCCG and the sG field theory, the
133: grand canonical partition function for a 2DNCCG consisted of point charges
134: $\pm q$ \cite{2} \cite{10}(1997) becomes a functional integral over a real
135: scalar field in the sG formalism,
136: \begin{equation}
137: {\cal Z}={\cal Z}_0^{-1}
138: \int {\cal D}[\phi] e^{-\int d^2 r {\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r})} \;,
139: \end{equation}
140: with ${\cal Z}_0=\int {\cal D}[\phi]\exp\{\int d^2 r
141: {\frac {1}{2}}[\nabla\phi(\vec{r})]^2\}.$ The effective Hamiltonian density
142: for the 2DNCCG, is given by
143: \begin{equation}
144: {\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r})={\frac {1}{2}}[\nabla\phi(\vec{r})]^2
145: -{\frac {2 z}{a^2}}\cos[\beta \phi(\vec{r})] ,
146: \end{equation}
147: where $z$ is the electron-self-energy-renormalized fugacity, $a$ an arbitrary
148: length scale, and $\beta=\sqrt{{\frac {2\pi}{T}}}$ with $T$ the demensionless
149: reduced temperature. Hereafter, we use $\phi$ instead of $\phi(\vec{r})$.
150: Calculating the partition function Eq.(1), one obtains the thermodynamic
151: potential density $\Omega=-T\ln[{\cal Z}]/\int d^2 r$, which is sometimes
152: called free energy.
153:
154: Non-perturbative sG expansion, we intend to perform, starts with a
155: modified Hamiltonian density,
156: \begin{equation}
157: {\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r},\delta)={\cal H}_{\mu} (\vec{r})+\delta \;\;
158: {\cal H}_D(\vec{r}),
159: \end{equation}
160: which is similar to what Refs.~\cite{15,16,17} did for the $\lambda\phi^4$
161: field theory, where $\delta$ is a parameter for the convenience of performing
162: the expansion. Here, ${\cal H}_\mu (\vec{r})=
163: {\frac {1}{2}}\phi (-\nabla^2+\mu^2) \phi$ and ${\cal H}_D (\vec{r})=
164: -{\frac {1}{2}}\mu^2\phi^2 - {\frac {2 z}{a^2}} \cos[\beta \phi]$. When
165: $\delta=1$, the mass parameter $\mu$ cancels out, and, consequently,
166: ${\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r},\delta)$ is reduced to Eq.(2). Letting
167: ${\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r},\delta)$ take the place of ${\cal H}_{sG}(\vec{r})$ in
168: Eq.(1), one can have the following modified partition function
169: ${\cal Z}_\delta$,
170: \begin{equation}
171: {\cal Z}_\delta={\cal Z}_0^{-1} {\cal Z}_\mu
172: <e^{-\delta\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r})}>_\mu \;,
173: \end{equation}
174: with
175: \begin{equation}
176: {\cal Z}_\mu=\int {\cal D}[\phi]\exp\{\int d^2 r {\frac {1}{2}} \phi
177: (-\nabla^2+\mu^2) \phi\}
178: \end{equation}
179: and
180: \begin{equation}
181: <O>_\mu={\cal Z}_\mu^{-1}
182: \int {\cal D}[\phi] O \exp\{\int d^2 r {\frac {1}{2}} \phi
183: (-\nabla^2+\mu^2) \phi\}
184: \end{equation}
185: for an operator $O$. Expanding the exponential function in Eq.(4) into a
186: Taylor series and, then, making a further expansion according to the series
187: expression of the function $\ln(1+x)$, one has
188: \begin{eqnarray}
189: \ln[{\cal Z}_\delta]&=& -\ln[{\cal Z}_0]+\ln[{\cal Z}_\mu]+
190: \sum_{l=1}^\infty {\frac {(-1)^{(l+1)}}{l}}
191: [\sum_{n=1}^\infty {\frac {(-1)^n}{n!}}
192: \delta^n <(\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r}))^n>_\mu]^l
193: \nonumber \\
194: &=& -\ln[{\cal Z}_0]+\ln[{\cal Z}_\mu]
195: -\delta <\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r})>_\mu
196: \nonumber \\
197: && +\delta^2 {\frac {1}{2}}
198: [<(\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r}))^2>_\mu
199: -(<\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r})>_\mu)^2]
200: \nonumber \\
201: && -\delta^3 [{\frac {1}{3!}}
202: <(\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r}))^3>_\mu
203: +{\frac {1}{3}} (<\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r})>_\mu)^3
204: \nonumber \\ &&
205: -{\frac {1}{2}}
206: <\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r})>_\mu
207: <(\int d^2 r {\cal H}_D(\vec{r}))^2>_\mu]
208: +\cdots \;.
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: This is a power series in $\delta$. Extrapolating the series to the case of
211: $\delta=1$ we can get the true thermodynamical potential density $\Omega$
212: which is independent of $\mu$. However, it is impossible to calculate the
213: above series exactly, and, therefore, one has to truncate the series at some
214: order of $\delta$ to obtain an approximation to $\Omega$. In the
215: approximation, arbitrary $\mu$ does not cancel out any more. Nevertheless,
216: it can be fixed according to the ``principle of minimal sensitivity''
217: \cite{18}, which means that, for a credible approximation, $\Omega$ should be
218: insensitive to variations in $\mu$. The general principle is to minimize the
219: approximate result with respect to $\mu$. Thus, we have a systematic tool to
220: approximate $\Omega$ order by order. Note that the above expansion is
221: similar to the sG expansion in Ref.~\cite{2,6} ($\lambda$ there corresponds
222: to $\mu$ here) where $\lambda$ remains same for all orders in the expansion.
223: However, we emphasize that, a crucial distinct point of our expansion is that
224: the optimized $\mu$ changes from one order to the next. It is this point that
225: ensures the present expansion convergent \cite{18}. In fact, our expansion is
226: just a generalization of the scheme proposed in Ref.~\cite{17}. We call it
227: non-perturbative sG expansion.
228:
229: Now, we give a concrete calculation of $\Omega$ up to the third order. In
230: the right hand of Eq.(7), the first two terms are easily calculated by
231: employing the result of Gaussian functional integral \cite{19}, and one can
232: find the results in Ref.~\cite{10}. As for the other terms, one can calculate
233: them with the help of the external source technique of functional
234: integration \cite{19}. In the calculation process, it is convenient to adopt
235: the exponential form of cosine function, and the calculations can be performed
236: as done in Ref.~\cite{10} (1990) and Ref.~\cite{20}. Note that the averages of
237: multi-cosine products can also be calculated in the same way in Ref.~\cite{10}
238: (1990) and Ref.~\cite{20}. Thus, a lengthy calculation leads to the following
239: thermodynamical potential density $\Omega$,
240: \begin{eqnarray}
241: \Omega T^{-1}&=&-\int {\frac {d^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}} \ln[p]
242: + {\frac {1}{2}}\int {\frac {d^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}} \ln[p^2+\mu^2]
243: \nonumber \\ &&
244: - {\frac {1}{2}}\mu^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]
245: -{\frac {2 z}{a^2}} \exp\{-{\frac {1}{2}}\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\}
246: \nonumber \\ &&
247: - {\frac {1}{4}}\mu^4 I^{(2)}[\mu^2]
248: +{\frac {1}{2}}{\frac {2 z}{a^2}} \beta^2\mu^2 I^{(2)}[\mu^2]
249: \exp\{-{\frac {1}{2}}\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\} \nonumber \\ &&
250: -{\frac {1}{2}} ({\frac {2 z}{a^2}})^2
251: \exp\{-\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\}
252: \sum_{k=1}^\infty {\frac {1}{(2k)!}}\beta^{4k}I^{(2k)}[\mu^2]
253: \nonumber \\ &&
254: -{\frac {1}{6}}\mu^6 I_{(3)}[\mu^2] +
255: {\frac {1}{2}}{\frac {2 z}{a^2}}\exp\{-{\frac {1}{2}}\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\}
256: [\beta^2\mu^4 I_{(3)}[\mu^2]-{\frac {1}{4}}\beta^4\mu^4 (I^{(2)}[\mu^2])^2]
257: \nonumber \\ &&
258: +{\frac {1}{2}} ({\frac {2 z}{a^2}})^2
259: \exp\{-\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\}[
260: \beta^2\mu^2 I^{(2)}[\mu^2]\sum_{k=1}^\infty {\frac {1}{(2k)!}}
261: \beta^{4k}I^{(2k)}[\mu^2] \nonumber \\ & &
262: -\beta^2\mu^2\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}
263: {\frac {1}{(2k+1)!}}\beta^{2(2k+1)}] I^{(2+2k+1)}[\mu^2]]
264: \nonumber \\ &&
265: -{\frac {1}{2}} ({\frac {2 z}{a^2}})^3
266: \exp\{-{\frac {3}{2}}\beta^2 I_{(1)}[\mu^2]\}[
267: {\frac {1}{4}}\sum_{i,j=1}^\infty
268: {\frac {3 (-1)^{j+1}+1}{2 (2i-1)!j!}}\beta^{2(2i+j-1)}
269: I^{(2i-1,j)}[\mu^2] \nonumber \\
270: && + {\frac {1}{4}}\sum_{i,j,k=1}^\infty
271: {\frac {(-1)^j}{(2i-1)!j!(2k)!}}\beta^{2(2i+j+2k-1)}
272: I^{(2i-1,j,2k)}[\mu^2] \nonumber \\
273: && + \sum_{i,j=1}^\infty
274: {\frac {(-1)^{i+j}}{i!j!}}\beta^{2(i+j)}
275: I^{(i,j)}[\mu^2]
276: +{\frac {1}{3}}\sum_{i,j,k=1}^\infty
277: {\frac {(-1)^{i+j+k}}{i!j!k!}}\beta^{2(i+j+k)}
278: I^{(i,j,k)}[\mu^2] ] \;,
279: \end{eqnarray}
280: where,
281: \begin{eqnarray*}
282: &&I_{(n)}[\mu^2]=\int {\frac {d^2 p}{(2\pi)^2}}[p^2+\mu^2]^{-n} \;,\\
283: &&I^{(n)}[\mu^2]=\int \prod_{j=1}^{n-1} {\frac {d^2 p_j}{(2\pi)^2}}
284: [p_j^2+\mu^2]^{-1} [(\sum_{j=1}^{n-1} p_j^2)^2+\mu^2]^{-1} \;,\\
285: &&I^{(2+n)}[\mu^2]=\int {\frac {d^2 p_1}{(2\pi)^2}}[p_1^2+\mu^2]^{-2}
286: [(\sum_{j=1}^{n} p_j^2)^2+\mu^2]^{-1}
287: \prod_{j=2}^{n} {\frac {d^2 p_j}{(2\pi)^2}}
288: [p_j^2+\mu^2]^{-1} \;,\\
289: &&I^{(l,m)}[\mu^2]=(\int d^2 r)^{-1}\int d^2 r_1 d^2 r_2 d^2 r_3
290: (\int {\frac {d^2 p_1}{(2\pi)^2}}
291: {\frac {e^{i \vec{p_1}\cdot (\vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2)}}{p^2+\mu^2}})^l
292: (\int {\frac {d^2 p_2}{(2\pi)^2}}
293: {\frac {e^{i \vec{p_2}\cdot (\vec{r}_2-\vec{r}_3)}}{p^2+\mu^2}})^m
294: \end{eqnarray*}
295: and
296: \begin{eqnarray*}
297: I^{(l,m,n)}[\mu^2]&=&(\int d^2 r)^{-1}\int d^2 r_1 d^2 r_2 d^2 r_3
298: (\int {\frac {d^2 p_1}{(2\pi)^2}}
299: {\frac {e^{i \vec{p_1}\cdot (\vec{r}_1-\vec{r}_2)}}{p^2+\mu^2}})^l
300: \nonumber \\ &&
301: (\int {\frac {d^2 p_2}{(2\pi)^2}}
302: {\frac {e^{i \vec{p_2}\cdot (\vec{r}_2-\vec{r}_3)}}{p^2+\mu^2}})^m
303: (\int {\frac {d^2 p_2}{(2\pi)^2}}
304: {\frac {e^{i \vec{p_2}\cdot (\vec{r}_2-\vec{r}_3)}}{p^2+\mu^2}})^n \;.
305: \end{eqnarray*}
306: In the right hand side of Eq.(8), the first four terms represent the
307: first-order result, next three terms the second-order correction and all
308: other the third-order correction.
309:
310: Eq.(8) has many integrals and series summations. Obviously, many integrals in
311: Eq.(8) are divergent. Introducing an ultraviolet cutoff in those integrals
312: can remove the divergences. This is similar to what occurs in the Gaussian
313: approximation \cite{10,21}. However, those series in Eq.(8) may still not be
314: convergent for larger $\beta$. In fact, this peculiarity is similar to the
315: celebrated divergent problem of the sG field theory in the Minkowski
316: space-time. For the (1+1)-dimensional sG field theory, Coleman's
317: normal-ordering procedure \cite{11} can get rid of the divergences in the
318: integrals in perturbation theory \cite{22} and Gaussian approximation
319: \cite{11,23}. But, at any higher order of the perturbation theory for the
320: range, $4\pi\le\beta^2\le 8\pi$, some series are still divergent. In the late
321: 1970s and 1980s, several papers proposed a special treatment to the divergent
322: problem of the sG field theory for the range $4\pi\le\beta^2\le 8\pi$ and
323: performed further renormalization procedure to turn it finite \cite{22,24},
324: in addition to Coleman's normal-ordering procedure. As afore mentioned, in
325: this paper, we do not intend to treat the low-temperature divergent problem in
326: Eq.(8). We note that in the Gaussian approximation, only linear terms in $z$
327: survive, and the connection between the transition curves of the first-order
328: and the BKT phase transitions involves only very small values of $z$. On the
329: other hand, in Eq.(8), there exist terms with $z^2$ or $z^3$, and only such
330: terms with $z^2$ or $z^3$ adhere to series summations. Here, we retain only
331: the linear terms in $z$, and neglect the higher-order terms of $z$ in Eq.(8).
332: This approximation allows us to compare the present result with the Gaussian
333: approximation and observe the improvement directly.
334:
335: Retaining just the linear terms of $z$ in Eq.(8) and carrying out the
336: integrals with ${\frac {1}{a}}$ as the ultraviolet cutoff, one can get the
337: dimensionless reduced thermodynamical potential density
338: $\bar{\Omega}\equiv\Omega a^2 T^{-1}$,
339: \begin{eqnarray}
340: \bar{\Omega}&=&{\frac {1}{8 \pi}}\ln[1+{\bar{\mu}}^2]
341: -2z(1+{\bar{\mu}}^{-2})^{-{\frac {\beta^2}{8 \pi}}} \nonumber \\
342: && -{\frac {1}{16\pi}}{\frac {{\bar{\mu}}^2}{1+{\bar{\mu}}^{2}}}
343: +{\frac {z \beta^2}{4\pi}}{\frac {1}{1+{\bar{\mu}}^{2}}}
344: (1+{\bar{\mu}}^{-2})^{-{\frac {\beta^2}{8 \pi}}} \nonumber \\
345: && -{\frac {1}{48\pi}}{\frac {{\bar{\mu}}^2 (1+2{\bar{\mu}}^{2})}
346: {(1+{\bar{\mu}}^{2})^2}}
347: +{\frac {z \beta^2}{4\pi}}{\frac {1}{(1+{\bar{\mu}}^{2})^2}}
348: (1+{\bar{\mu}}^{-2})^{-{\frac {\beta^2}{8 \pi}}}
349: [{\frac {1}{2}} (1+2 {\bar{\mu}}^2)-{\frac {\beta^2}{16 \pi}}]
350: \end{eqnarray}
351: with $\bar{\mu}=\mu a$. In Eq.(9), the first two terms are just the Gaussian
352: approximate result \cite{10}(PRE), the next two terms represent the
353: second-order correction and the remaining terms the third-order correction.
354: According to the ``principle of minimal sensitivity'', $\bar{\mu}$ can be
355: determined by minimizing $\bar{\Omega}$ over $\bar{\mu}$. That is to say,
356: $\bar{\mu}$ should be satisfied with both the stationary condition (${\frac
357: {\partial \bar{\Omega}} {\partial {\bar{\mu}}^2}}=0$) and the stabilized
358: condition (${\frac {\partial^2 \bar{\Omega}}{(\partial {\bar{\mu}}^2)^2}}\ge
359: 0$). Note that $\mu$ is inversely proportional to the Debye screening length
360: \cite{6,10}, and, accordingly, $\bar{\mu}=0$ implies that the gas becomes
361: charge-binding and insulating, whereas $\bar{\mu}\not=0$ signifies that the
362: gas is conducting. Thus, we can obtain the phase structure of the 2DNCCG from
363: calculated values of $\bar{\mu}$ and $\bar{\Omega}$. We have carried out a
364: careful analysis of the results order by order. Fig.1 is the $T$$-$$z$ phase
365: diagrams of the 2DNCCG of various orders constructed from the above
366: calculation.
367:
368: In Fig.1, the dotted, dashed and solid curves correspond to the first-, the
369: second- and the third-order results, repectively (As for the long-dashed line,
370: see the explanation in the next paragraph). In the first order which is the Gaussian
371: approximation, the $T$$-$$z$ plane is divided into four regions : I, II, III
372: and IV. The dotted curve between regions I and II is plotted from the
373: stationary condition and the critical stabilized condition
374: ${\frac {\partial^2 \bar{\Omega}} {(\partial \mu^2)^2}}= 0$. The dotted curve
375: between II and III is obtained from $\bar{\Omega}|_{\bar{\mu}=0}=
376: \bar{\Omega}|_{\bar{\mu}\not=0}$ and coincides with the solid curve in
377: Fig.1 of Ref.~\cite{10} (PRE). The other two dotted curves which form the
378: boundaries of region IV are obtained through calculation of $\bar{\Omega}$
379: point by point and, hence, are rough, but qualitatively correct. In region I,
380: $\bar{\mu}$ vanishes and the gas consists of dipole pairs. In region II
381: and III, every point have two values of $\bar{\mu}$, $\bar{\mu}=0$ and $\bar
382: {\mu}\not=0$, and, accordingly, the gas is in the insulator-conductor
383: coexistence phase. But in II, the reduced thermodynamical potential
384: $\bar{\Omega}$ at $\bar{\mu}=0$ is lower than $\bar{\Omega}$ at $\bar{\mu}
385: \not=0$, and, in III, $\bar{\Omega}$ at $\bar{\mu}=0$ is higher than
386: $\bar{\Omega}$ at $\bar{\mu}\not=0$. In region IV, $\bar{\mu}\not=0$ and the
387: gas is in the conducting phase. Analyzing the behaviour of the reduced
388: thermodynamical potential $\bar{\Omega}$, one can readily see that the dotted
389: curve between regions I and IV corresponds to a continuous phase transition,
390: $i.e.$, the BKT phase transition, and on other dotted curves, first-order
391: phase transitions occur. All of them meet at the tricritical point $\{$T,z$\}=
392: \{0.25,1/16 \pi\}$.
393:
394: An added feature in the second and third order results is the region V, which
395: is separated from the region III by the long-dashed line \footnote{It is
396: difficult to determine the left boundary of the region V. Here, the
397: long-dashed line is given just to qualitatively indicate the existence of the
398: region V.}. Therefore, up to the second and third orders, the dashed and solid
399: curves with the long-dashed line respectively divide the $T$$-$$z$ plane into
400: five regions: I, II, III, IV and V. Regions I, II, III and IV have the same
401: physical meanings respectively with those for the case of the Gaussian
402: approximation. As for region V, there exist two different non-vanishing
403: $\bar{\mu}$, and, accordingly, the gas consists in two different kinds of
404: plasma phases and is a conducting coexistence phase. Note that the long-dashed
405: line ends at the dashed curve for the second order and at the solid curve for
406: the third order.
407:
408: In addition to the introduction of a new phase and the substantial extension
409: of the insulator-conductor existence region, both the second- and the
410: third-order corrections change the tricritical point significantly from that
411: in the Gaussian-approximate phase diagram. The insulator-conductor
412: coexistence region passes the end point of the BKT curve and end at the
413: conducting phase. This peculiarity qualitatively agrees with the results from
414: the Monte Carlo simulations on a triangular and a square lattice \cite{7} and
415: also from a generalized renormalization-group method \cite{6}. We also
416: note that the value of $z$ at the lowest point of the dashed curve between
417: regions II and III is 0.0238 and the corresponding $z$ for the third-order
418: case is 0.0255. These values show clearly a tendancy of approaching the value
419: 0.0291, which is obtained from the generalized renormalization-group method
420: \cite{6}.
421:
422: Comparing our Fig.1 with Fig.1 in Ref.~\cite{10}(PRE), one can see that the
423: bottom of the dotted curve between regions I and IV, the BKT curve, in this
424: paper is shifted to the right of the line $T=0.25$, which is given in
425: Ref.~\cite{10}(PRE). In fact, to get the the BKT critical line,
426: Ref.~\cite{10} (PRE) made a further approximation to Eq.(7) there. However,
427: the present curve is obtained by directly checking the value of $\bar{\mu}$
428: from the Gaussian-approximation expression, without any further analytical
429: approximation, and the second- and third-order corrections confirm this shift.
430: We also note that the BKT critical curves obtained from the RG and
431: generalized RG equations \cite{4,5,6} start from the point $\{T,z\}=
432: \{0.25,0\}$. Nevertheless, We believe that the BKT critical curves in Fig.1
433: do not conflict with the Coleman's phase transition point \footnote{The
434: Coleman's phase transition means that, for the $1+1$-dimensional sG field
435: continuum, its vacuum-state energy becomes unbounded from below when the
436: coupling $\beta^2$ increases to $8\pi$, and hence the theory is ill-defined
437: at that coupling.} and the RG results. Actually, only when the ultraviolet
438: cutoff is enforced to infinity, the Coleman's phase transition occurs at
439: $\beta^2=8\pi$ \cite{11}. The RG and the generalized RG equations \cite{4,5,6}
440: take no such cutoff, whereas the present paper introduces a finite cutoff.
441: When a finite cutoff is taken, the Coleman's phase transition does not occur
442: and the sG continuum theory is well-defined at $\beta^2=8\pi$ and even over
443: \cite{25}.
444:
445: This paper has performed a non-perturbative sG expansion on the 2DNCCG whose
446: truncation at the first order is just the Gaussian approximation. We obtained
447: the phase diagram of the 2DNCCG with the small-fugacity effect of the second-
448: and the third-order corrections. Our result supports the prediction made
449: by Minnhagen $et\ al.$ \cite{6} that the insulator-conductor coexistence phase
450: ends at the conducting phase. Fig.1 shows that the correction to the Gaussian
451: approximation is important, and the smallness of the third-order correction
452: presages fast convergency of the expansion in the present scheme. Therefore,
453: we believe that our result for small fugacities is reliable within the
454: framework adopted in the present paper, although, as reviewed in
455: Ref.~\cite{10}(PRE), there is a source for uncertainty owing to the fact that
456: the mapping between the 2DNCCG and the 2-dimensional sG field theory is exact
457: only for the Euclidean sG field continuum without any finite cutoff \cite{2}.
458:
459: In closing the paper, we intend to point out that it is straightforward to
460: consider further higher order correstions. Moreover, Minnhagen's
461: RG method \cite{6} is based on a sG expansion, and therefore it is possible
462: to generalize Minnhagen's method based on the expansion in the present paper.
463: Perhaps, more interesting and meaningful, a complete treatment to Eq.(8),
464: $i.e.$, renormalization of the whole expression in Eq.(8) may yield a full
465: phase diagram of the 2DNCCG. Finally, we intend to emphasize that the scheme
466: here can be applied to other systems which is relevant to the sG model, for
467: example, the backward-scattering model, the massive Luttinger model and
468: Copper Benzoate \cite{25,26,27}, and more general, even to other similar exponential-type interaction systems,
469: such as, the massive sine-Gordon model \cite{23}, 2D superconductor \cite{28}
470: and finite-demensional site-disordered spin system \cite{29}.
471:
472: \acknowledgments
473: Lu acknowledges Dr. S. Y. Cho, Prof. M. H. Chung and Mr. M. D. Kim for
474: useful discussions. This project was supported by the Korea Research
475: Foundation (99-005-D00011). Lu's work was also supported in part by the
476: National Natural Science Foundation of China under the grant No. 19875034.
477:
478: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
479: \bibitem{1} J. Jos\'{e}, L. P. Kadanoff, S. Kirpatrick, and D. R. Nelson,
480: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 16}, 1217 (1977) .
481: \bibitem{2} P. Minnhagen, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 56}, 1001 (1987) .
482: \bibitem{3} D. R. Nelson and B. I. Halperin,
483: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 21}, 5312 (1980); S. T. Chui and J. D. Weeks,
484: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 14}, 4978 (1976); Y. Levin,
485: {\it ibid.} {\bf 43}, 10876 (1991); K. Yang, K. Moon, L. Zheng,
486: A. H. MacDonald, S. M. Girvin, D. Yoshioka, and S.-C. Zhang,
487: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 72}, 732 (1994) .
488: \bibitem{4} V. L. Berezinski\v{i}, Sov. Phys. JETP, {\bf 32}, 493 (1971);
489: J. M. Kosterlitz and D. J. Thouless,
490: J. Phys. C {\bf 6}, 1181 (1973);
491: J. M. Kosterlitz, J. Phys. C {\bf 7}, 1046 (1974) .
492: \bibitem{5} D. J. Admit, Y. Y. Goldschmidt, and G. Grindstein,
493: J. Phys. A {\bf 13}, 585 (1980); C. Timm,
494: Physica C {\bf 265}, 31 (1996).
495: \bibitem{6} P. Minnhagen and M. Wallins, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 36}, 5620 (1987);
496: {\it ibid.} {\bf 40}, 5109 (1989) .
497: \bibitem{7} J. R. Lee and S. Teitel, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 64}, 1483 (1990);
498: {\it ibid.}, {\bf 66}, 2100 (1991);
499: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 46}, 3247 (1992).
500: \bibitem{8} J. M. Caillol and D. Levesque, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 33}, 499 (1986);
501: P. Gupta and S. Teitel, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 55}, 2756 (1997).
502: \bibitem{9} Y. Levin, X. J. Li and M. Fisher,
503: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 73}, 2716 (1994).
504: \bibitem{10}G. J. Ni, S. Y. Lou, S. Q. Chen and H. C. Lee,
505: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 41}, 6947 (1990); B. W. Xu and Y. M. Zhang,
506: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 50}, 18651 (1994); A. Diehl, M. C. Barbosa and
507: Y. Levin, Phys. Rev. E {56}, 619 (1997) .
508: \bibitem{11}S. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 11}, 2088 (1975) .
509: \bibitem{12}J. Lidmar and M. Wallin, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 55}, 522 (1997) .
510: \bibitem{13}S. Samuel, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 18}, 1916 (1978) .
511: \bibitem{14}W. F. Lu, B. W. Xu and Y. M. Zhang,
512: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 309}, 109 (1993);
513: Y. M. Zhang, B. W. Xu and W. F. Lu,
514: Phys. Rev., B {\bf 49}, 854 (1994) .
515: \bibitem{15}A. Okopi$\acute{n}$ska, Phys. Rev. D {35}, 1845 (1987);
516: {\it ibid.} D {\bf 38}, 2498 (1988);
517: Ann. Phys.(N.Y.) {\bf 228}, 19 (1993) .
518: \bibitem{16}A. Duncan and M. Morshe, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 215}, 352 (1988);
519: H. F. Jones and M. Monoyos,
520: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 4}, 1735 (1989) ;
521: S. K. Gandhi, H. F. Jones, and M. B. Pinto,
522: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 359}, 429 (1991) .
523: \bibitem{17}I. Stancu and P. M. Stenvenson,
524: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 42}, 2710 (1990);
525: I. Stancu, {\it ibid.} D {\bf 43}, 1283 (1991) .
526: \bibitem{18}P. M. Stevenson, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 23}, 2916 (1981);
527: S. K. Kaufmann and S. M. Perez, J. Phys. A {\bf 17}, 2027 (1984);
528: P. M. Stevenson, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 231}, 65 (1984) .
529: \bibitem{19}P. Ramond, 1990 {\it Field Theory: a Modern Primer} Revised
530: Printing (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1990); B. Hatfield, {\it
531: Quantum Field Theory of Point Particles and Strings},
532: (Addison-Wesley, Redwood, California, 1992) .
533: \bibitem{20}W. F. Lu, B. W. Xu and Y. M. Zhang,
534: Z. Phys. C {\bf 58}, 499 (1993) .
535: \bibitem{21}Y. M. Zhang, B. W. Xu and W. F. Lu,
536: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 49}, 854 (1994) .
537: \bibitem{22}A. Lima-Santos and E. C. Marino,
538: J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 55}, 157 (1989)
539: \bibitem{23}W. F. Lu, Phys. Rev. D {59}, 105021 (1999);
540: J. Phys. G {\bf 26}, 1187 (2000).
541: \bibitem{24}J. A. Swieca, Fortschr. Phys. {\bf 25}, 303 (1977) ;
542: B. Schroer and T. Truong, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 15}, 1684 (1977);
543: T. Ohta, Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 60}, 968 (1978);
544: T. Ohta and D. Jasnow, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 20}, 139 (1979);
545: H. J. F. Knops and L. W. J. den Ouden,
546: Physica {\bf 103}, 597 (1980);
547: D. J. Amit, Y. Y. Goldschmidt and
548: G. Grinstein, J. Phys. A {\bf 13}, 585 (1980);
549: G. Benfatto, G. Gallavotti and F. Nicol\`{o},
550: Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 83}, 387 (1982); F. Nicol\`{o},
551: $ibid$. {\bf 88}, 581 (1983);
552: G. Gallavotti, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 57}, 471 (1985);
553: F. Nicol\`{o}, J. Renn and A. Steinmann,
554: Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 105}, 291 (1986) .
555: \bibitem{25}P. Minnhagen, A. Rosengren and G. Grinstein,
556: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 18}, 1356 (1978), its Ref.[16].
557: \bibitem{26}A. Luther and V. J. Emery, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 33}, 589 (1974) .
558: \bibitem{27}M. Oshikawa and I. Affleck, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 79}, 2883 (1997);
559: F. H. L. E$\beta$ler, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 59}, 14376 (1999),
560: or cond-mat/9811309 .
561: \bibitem{28}S. W. Pierson, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 61}, 663 (2000) .
562: \bibitem{29}D. S. Dean and D. Lancaster, Phys. Rev. Lett. {77}, 3037 (1996) .
563: \end{thebibliography}
564:
565: \figure{Fig.1 \ \ \
566: Comparison among the phase diagrams of the 2DNCCG obtained in the
567: Gaussian approximation, and with low-fugacity effects of second- and
568: third-order corrections. The dotted, dashed and solid curves
569: correspond to the Gaussian-approximation, second- and third-order
570: results, repectively. The dotted curves divide the $T$$-$$z$ plane into
571: four regions: I,II,III and IV, and both the dashed and the solid
572: curves with the long-dashed line yield an additional region V, besids
573: regions I, II, III and IV. Region I corresponds to an insulating
574: phase, regions IV and V to the conducting phases, and regions II and III
575: to the insulator-conductor coexistence phases. Detailed explanation of
576: this figure is given in the text.}
577:
578: \end{document}
579:
580:
581: