1: \documentstyle[twocolumn,epsf]{jpsj}
2:
3: \catcode`\@=11
4:
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: %symbols
7:
8: \def\simle{\mathrel{\mathpalette\@versim<}} % < over \sim
9: \def\simge{\mathrel{\mathpalette\@versim>}} % > over \sim
10: \def\@versim#1#2{\lower2.5pt\vbox{\baselineskip0pt \lineskip-.5pt
11: \ialign{$\m@th#1\hfil##\hfil$\crcr#2\crcr\sim\crcr}}}
12:
13: \catcode`\@=12
14:
15: \def\runtitle{
16: }
17: \def\runauthor{Yukitoshi {\sc Motome} and Nobuo {\sc Furukawa}}
18:
19: \def\sf{\rm}
20:
21: \title{
22: Non-equilibrium Relaxation Study of Ferromagnetic Transition\\
23: in Double-Exchange Systems
24: }
25:
26: \author{
27: Yukitoshi {\sc Motome} and Nobuo {\sc Furukawa}$^{1}$
28: }
29: \inst{
30: Institute of Materials Science, University of Tsukuba,
31: Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0006 \\
32: $^{1}$Department of Physics, Aoyama Gakuin University,
33: Setagaya, Tokyo 157-8572
34: }
35: \recdate{
36: }
37:
38: \abst{
39: Ferromagnetic transition in double-exchange systems is studied by non-
40: equilibrium relaxation technique combined with Monte Carlo calculations.
41: Critical temperature and critical exponents are estimated from
42: relaxation of the magnetic moment. The results are consistent with the
43: previous Monte Carlo results in thermal equilibrium. The exponents
44: estimated by these independent techniques suggest that the universality
45: class of this transition is the same as that of short-range interaction
46: models but is different from the mean-field one.
47: }
48:
49: \kword{
50: double-exchange system, ferromagnetic transition, non-equilibrium relaxation,
51: Monte Carlo, polynomial expansion, colossal-magnetoresistance manganites
52: }
53:
54: \begin{document}
55: \sloppy
56: \maketitle
57:
58: %%%% BODY %%%%%
59:
60: Since the proposal by Zener,
61: \cite{Zener1951}
62: the double-exchange (DE) mechanism has been studied
63: to explain ferromagnetic transition in doped manganites
64: which show the colossal magnetoresistance.
65: The ferromagnetism itself is well explained by the DE mechanism;
66: at low temperatures, itinerant electrons which interact with localized spins
67: through the strong Hund's-rule coupling
68: favor parallel configuration of localized spin
69: in order to gain the kinetic energy.
70: The colossal magnetoresistance is understood by this mechanism also,
71: at least, qualitatively.
72:
73: However, in spite of the long history of theoretical studies,
74: finite-temperature properties of the DE systems
75: have not been fully understood thus far.
76: At finite temperatures, especially near the ferromagnetic transition,
77: fluctuations are quite large
78: through the strong interplay between itinerant electrons and localized spins.
79: This makes it difficult to describe the thermodynamics quantitatively.
80: Approximational methods, for instance, the mean-field approximation,
81: have been known to be insufficient because they neglect the fluctuation effects.
82: \cite{Furukawa1999}
83:
84: Recently, the thermodynamics of the DE systems has been studied intensively
85: by using the Monte Carlo (MC) method which fully includes large fluctuations.
86: \cite{Motome1999,Motome2000,Motome2001}
87: A new algorithm is developed by using the moment-expansion technique
88: for the density of states to calculate the MC weight efficiently and
89: the computational speed is accelerated considerably
90: by using parallel computers.
91: This enables us to calculate large-size clusters and
92: take account of the finite-size errors systematically by the finite-size scaling.
93: The critical temperature $T_{\rm c}$ and the critical exponents are estimated
94: by applying the finite-size scaling analysis on the MC data.
95:
96: The previous MC studies are for thermal equilibrium.
97: Some initial MC steps (typically 1,000-10,000 steps) are discarded
98: for thermal equilibration, and
99: measurement of physical properties is performed
100: by taking the thermal averages for the grand canonical ensemble
101: using MC samples after the thermalization.
102:
103: There is another powerful technique to investigate the critical properties
104: by using the MC method, i.e., the non-equilibrium relaxation (NER) technique.
105: \cite{Kikuchi1986,Stauffer1992,Kohring1992,Ito1993}
106: In this technique, dependence on MC steps of the order parameter is studied
107: in the non-equilibrium relaxation
108: from an initial state which is chosen to be a symmetry-broken one.
109: The order parameter decays exponentially
110: above the critical temperature $T > T_{\rm c}$.
111: On the other hand, it approaches a constant for $T < T_{\rm c}$.
112: As a critical relaxation, a power decay is observed at $T = T_{\rm c}$
113: whose exponent relates to the critical exponents.
114:
115: One of the advantages of the NER technique is that
116: one can study larger-size clusters than by the equilibrium technique
117: since the relaxation is measured in the primary part of the MC samplings
118: which are discarded as a thermalization process in the equilibrium method.
119: The finite-size effect can be exponentially small and neglected in the relaxation
120: if one calculates a sufficiently large-size cluster.
121: The NER technique gives information on the critical temperature and
122: the critical exponents, independently of the equilibrium MC method.
123:
124: In this paper, we investigate the ferromagnetic transition in DE systems
125: by the NER technique combined with the MC calculations.
126: To our knowledge, this is the first application of the technique
127: to critical phenomena in itinerant electron systems.
128: The results are compared with those by the previous equilibrium technique.
129:
130: We study the DE model where itinerant electrons couple to
131: localized spins with Ising symmetry on square lattices.
132: This is a minimum model which shows the ferromagnetic transition
133: at finite temperatures by the DE mechanism.
134: We consider the limit of strong Hund's-rule coupling for simplicity.
135: The Hamiltonian is written by
136: \cite{Motome2001}
137: \begin{equation}
138: \label{eq:H}
139: {\cal H} = - \sum_{<ij>} \frac{t}{2}(1 + S_{i}S_{j}) \
140: c^{\dagger}_{i} c_{j},
141: \end{equation}
142: where $c_{i}$ ($c^{\dagger}_{i}$) annihilates (creates)
143: an electron at site $i$, and
144: $S$ describes the localized Ising spin which takes $S=\pm 1$.
145: The summation is taken for nearest-neighbor sites.
146:
147: We apply the moment-expansion MC method.
148: \cite{Motome1999}
149: We take the same computational conditions
150: as in ref.~[\citen{Motome2001}].
151: We study a square lattice of $24 \times 24$ sites
152: which seems to be large enough to observe the critical relaxation.
153: We will comment on the finite-size effect later.
154: The relaxation is measured for typically 100-1000 different
155: Markov sequences to estimate statistical errors.
156: The energy unit is the half-bandwidth of noninteracting electrons; $W = 4t$.
157:
158: We calculate the relaxation of the magnetic moment per site
159: from the perfectly polarized configuration of localized spins.
160: Figure~\ref{fig:relaxation} shows the results.
161: For $T/W \simge 0.059$, the moment decays exponentially.
162: This indicates that the system is in the paramagnetic state, i.e., $T > T_{\rm c}$.
163: On the contrary, the data at $T/W = 0.056$ seem to approach a constant,
164: which suggests the broken symmetry below $T_{\rm c}$.
165: Power-decay behavior is observed between these temperatures.
166: We estimate $T_{\rm c}/W = 0.0575 \pm 0.001$.
167: This result is consistent with the estimate
168: by the equilibrium technique,
169: $T_{\rm c}/W = 0.058 \pm 0.001$.
170: \cite{Motome2001}
171:
172: \begin{figure}[htb]
173: \epsfxsize=8.cm
174: \centerline{\epsfbox{fig1.ps}}
175: \caption{
176: Relaxation of the magnetic moment $m$ in Monte Carlo steps $t$
177: from the ferromagnetic state with perfect polarization.
178: The data are for $T/W = 0.056, 0.057, 0.0575, 0.058, 0.059$ and $0.06$
179: from top to bottom, respectively.
180: The gray lines are the least-squares fit
181: by power functions for the asymptotic behavior
182: of the data at $T/W = 0.057, 0.0575$ and $0.058$.
183: The dotted line is the asymptotic power decay
184: in the mean-field universality class, $m \sim t^{-2}$, for comparison.
185: }
186: \label{fig:relaxation}
187: \end{figure}
188:
189: The asymptotic exponent of the power decay gives
190: information on the critical exponents.
191: The magnetic moment $m$ depends on the MC step $t$
192: as $m \sim t^{-\lambda}$ in the limit of $t \rightarrow \infty$,
193: where $\lambda = \beta / \nu z$.
194: Here, $\beta$ and $\nu$ are the exponents
195: for the order parameter and the correlation length, respectively,
196: and $z$ is the dynamical exponent.
197: We fit the asymptotic tails of the data
198: at $T/W = 0.057, 0.0575$ and $0.058$ by power functions
199: as shown by the gray lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:relaxation} and
200: obtain the estimate $\lambda = 0.14 \pm 0.1$.
201:
202: The estimate of $\lambda$ is examined to identify
203: the universality class of this transition.
204: The mean-field universality class gives the exponents as
205: $\beta = \nu = z = 1/2$.
206: The dynamical exponent $z$ is obtained from the consideration that
207: the MC update from $n$ to $n+1$-th step at $T = T_{\rm c}$ is described by
208: $m_{n+1} = \tanh(m_{n})$ in mean-field models.
209: Thus, the exponent $\lambda$ is $2$ in the mean-field universality class.
210: On the other hand, in the universality class of the Ising model
211: with short-range interactions in two dimensions,
212: the critical exponents are estimated
213: as $\beta = 1/8$, $\nu = 1$
214: \cite{Kaufmann1944,Stephenson1964}
215: and $z = 2.16$.
216: \cite{Ito1993}
217: In this case, the exponent $\lambda$ becomes $0.058$.
218: Our estimate $\lambda = 0.14 \pm 0.1$ is consistent with
219: the universality class of the short-range Ising model, and
220: is distinct from the mean-field one.
221:
222: The present results are compared with the previous ones
223: obtained by the equilibrium MC calculations.
224: \cite{Motome2001}
225: The previous estimates of the critical exponents were
226: $\beta = 0.09 \pm 0.08$ and $\nu = 0.9 \pm 0.3$, which are
227: consistent with those for the short-range Ising model
228: but different from the mean-field ones.
229: Therefore, the present result by the NER technique
230: is consistent with those by the equilibrium technique.
231: It is suggested that the universality class of the ferromagnetic transition
232: in the DE system is the same as that of short-range interaction models
233: with the same spin symmetry, but different from the mean-field one,
234: from these independent techniques.
235:
236: We comment on the finite-size effect in the present NER study briefly.
237: One of the finite-size effects is an exponential decay
238: due to an energy gap inherent in finite-size systems.
239: This should decrease the temperature where the relaxation
240: shows the power-decay behavior.
241: Thus, the present estimate of $T_{\rm c}$ is considered to give a lower limit.
242: The agreement between the present estimate and the previous one
243: by the equilibrium technique indicates that
244: the finite-size effect is negligibly small
245: in the present precision of the data.
246:
247: To summarize, we have investigated the ferromagnetic transition
248: in the double-exchange systems
249: by the non-equilibrium-relaxation Monte-Carlo method.
250: To our knowledge, this is the first example of the application of this method
251: to the phase transition in itinerant electron systems.
252: From the relaxation of the magnetic moment,
253: we have estimated the critical temperature and the critical exponents.
254: The results are consistent with the previous ones
255: which are obtained by the finite-size scaling analysis on
256: the Monte-Carlo data in thermal equilibrium.
257: The exponents estimated by these independent techniques
258: indicate consistently that the universality class of this transition
259: appears to be the same as that of short-range interaction models
260: but is different from the mean-field one.
261:
262: %%%% ACKNOWLEDGMENT %%%
263:
264: The authors thank H. Nakata for helpful support
265: in developing parallel-processing systems.
266: The computations have been performed mainly
267: using the facilities in the AOYAMA+ project
268: (http://www.phys.aoyama.ac.jp/\\ \~{}aoyama+)
269: and in the Supercomputer Center, Institute for Solid State Physics,
270: University of Tokyo.
271: This work is supported by ``a Grant-in-Aid from
272: the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology''.
273:
274: %%%%% REFERENCE %%%%%
275:
276: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
277:
278: \bibitem{Zener1951}
279: C. Zener:
280: Phys. Rev. {\bf 82} (1951) 403.
281:
282: \bibitem{Furukawa1999}
283: N. Furukawa:
284: in {\em Physics of Manganites},
285: eds. T. Kaplan and S. Mahanti (Plenum Publishing, New York, 1999),
286: and references therein.
287:
288: \bibitem{Motome1999}
289: Y. Motome and N. Furukawa:
290: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 68} (1999) 3853.
291:
292: \bibitem{Motome2000}
293: Y. Motome and N. Furukawa:
294: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 69} (2000) 3785.
295:
296: \bibitem{Motome2001}
297: Y. Motome and N. Furukawa:
298: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 70} (2001) No.6 in press.
299:
300: \bibitem{Kikuchi1986}
301: M. Kikuchi and Y. Okabe:
302: J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 55} (1986) 1359.
303:
304: \bibitem{Stauffer1992}
305: D. Stauffer:
306: Physica A {\bf 186} (1992) 197.
307:
308: \bibitem{Kohring1992}
309: G. A. Kohring and D. Stauffer:
310: Int. J. Mod. Phys. C {\bf 3} (1992) 1165.
311:
312: \bibitem{Ito1993}
313: N. Ito:
314: Physica A {\bf 192} (1993) 604.
315:
316: \bibitem{Kaufmann1944}
317: B. Kaufmann and L. Onsager:
318: Phys. Rev. {\bf 76} (1944) 1244.
319:
320: \bibitem{Stephenson1964}
321: J. Stephenson:
322: J. Math. Phys. {\bf 5} (1964) 1009.
323:
324: \end{thebibliography}
325:
326: \end{document}
327:
328: