1: \documentclass[12pt]{iopart}
2: \usepackage{iopams}
3: %\usepackage{graphicx}
4: \begin{document}
5: %\jl{1}
6:
7: \title[Exact partition functions of the Ising model on $M\times N$ planar lattices]
8: {Exact partition functions of the Ising model on $M\times N$
9: planar lattices with periodic-aperiodic boundary conditions}
10:
11: \author{Ming-Chya Wu\dag\footnote[3]{Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Nankang,
12: Taipei 11529, Taiwan, Republic of China.\\
13: E-mail: mcwu@phys.sinica.edu.tw\\
14: Tel: 886-2-2789-6762\\
15: Fax: 886-2-2782-2467}\ and Chin-Kun Hu\dag\footnote[7]{E-mail:
16: huck@phys.sinica.edu.tw}}
17:
18: \address{\dag Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei 11529,
19: Taiwan, Republic of China}
20:
21: %\ead{mcwu@phys.sinica.edu.tw (Ming-Chya Wu)}
22:
23: \begin{abstract}
24: The Grassmann path integral approach is used to calculate exact
25: partition functions of the Ising model on $M\times N$ square (sq),
26: plane triangular (pt) and honeycomb (hc) lattices with
27: periodic-periodic (pp), periodic-antiperiodic (pa),
28: antiperiodic-periodic (ap) and antiperiodic-antiperiodic (aa)
29: boundary conditions. The partition functions are used to calculate
30: and plot the specific heat, $C/k_B$, as a function of the
31: temperature, $\theta =k_BT/J$. We find that for the $N\times N$ sq
32: lattice, $C/k_B$ for pa and ap boundary conditions are different
33: from those for aa boundary conditions, but for the $N\times N$ pt
34: and hc lattices, $C/k_B$ for ap, pa, and aa boundary conditions
35: have the same values. Our exact partition functions might also be
36: useful for understanding the effects of lattice structures and
37: boundary conditions on critical finite-size corrections of the
38: Ising model.
39: \end{abstract}
40:
41: %\submitto{\JPA} \pacs{05.50.+q, 05.70.Jk, 64.60.Cn}
42:
43: \maketitle
44:
45: \section{Introduction}
46:
47: Universality and scaling are two important concepts in the theory of
48: critical phenomena \cite{stanley71,kadanoff90} and the Ising model \cite
49: {onsager} has been a model widely used in such studies. Recently, exact
50: universal amplitude ratios and finite-size corrections to scaling in
51: critical Ising model on planar lattices have received much attention \cite
52: {mcwu,ckhupre99,queiroz,ivashkevich,izmailian,izmailianletter,salas,jankeprb,izmailianep}%
53: . This may be due to the fact that the hypothesis of universality
54: leads naturally to the consideration of universal critical
55: amplitudes and amplitude combinations \cite{barber}, and for the
56: comparison between experiment and theory in relation to scaling
57: and universality, it is often a more rigorous test to use
58: amplitude relations rather than critical exponent values.
59: Moreover, it is also well known that the finite-size scaling
60: functions depend on the boundary conditions \cite{huck94}, and
61: there has been considerable recent interest in studying lattice
62: model with various boundary conditions
63: \cite{hu,ckhuprl96,okabe,fywu,ko,okabepre99,tomita}. The study of
64: exact universal amplitude ratios and finite-size corrections to
65: scaling in critical Ising model is usually based on the analytical
66: solutions of the model on finite lattices. Although the exact
67: solution of the Ising model on $M\times N$ square (sq) lattice had
68: been obtained long time ago \cite{kaufman}, and the exact
69: expression of the partition function of the Ising model on
70: $M\times N$ plane triangular (pt) lattice has been obtained by
71: lattice field theories recently \cite{nash}, there is still no
72: published results for the exact solutions of the Ising model on
73: $M\times N$ pt and honeycomb (hc) lattices with periodic-aperiodic
74: boundary conditions. The purpose of this paper is to fill this
75: gap. In the present paper we use the Grassmann path integral to
76: calculate exact partition functions of the Ising model on $M\times
77: N$ sq, pt and hc lattices with periodic-periodic (pp),
78: periodic-antiperiodic (pa), antiperiodic-periodic (ap) and
79: antiperiodic-antiperiodic (aa) boundary conditions. The partition
80: functions are used to calculate and plot the specific heat,
81: $C/k_B$, as a function of the temperature, $\theta =k_BT/J$. We
82: find that for the $N\times N$ sq lattice, $C/k_B$ for pa and ap
83: boundary conditions are different from those
84: for aa boundary conditions, but for the $N\times N$ pt and hc lattices, $%
85: C/k_B$ for ap, pa, and aa boundary conditions have the same values. Our
86: exact partition functions might also be useful for understanding the effects
87: of lattice structures and boundary conditions on critical finite-size
88: corrections of the Ising model.
89:
90: Two-dimensional Ising model on the sq lattice at vanishing magnetic field
91: was first solved by Onsager by the use of Lie algebra \cite{onsager}. The
92: exact solution he obtained was Ising model on an infinite lattice. The
93: original method was rather complicated, and it was later improved by Kaufman
94: \cite{kaufman} who obtained the exact solution of the Ising model on a
95: finite torus by using the theory of spinor representation. The successful
96: treatments of the two-dimensional Ising model brought the studies of phase
97: transition into the modern era. Onsager's solution in one hand showed the
98: previous classical theories were unreliable in their quantitative
99: predictions, and on the other hand provided a great stimulus to explore the
100: true behaviour near the critical point. After Onsager's original solution,
101: many quite different mathematical approaches were developed, but the
102: approaches were still complicated. Among them, Schultz, Mattis and Lieb gave
103: explicitly the fermionic treatment in the framework of transfer-matrix
104: formalism \cite{shultz}, and Kac and Ward developed the combinatorial method
105: \cite{kac,green}. Both methods reformulated the two-dimensional Ising model
106: as a free-fermionic field theory in terms of anticommuting Grassmann
107: variables, which enclosed the fact that the Ising model on two dimensional
108: regular lattices may be viewed as free-fermionic theory. The other
109: alternative method in literature was the Pfaffian representation, which was
110: introduced by Kasteleyn \cite{kasteleyn} to translate Ising spins into
111: dimers that can be reduced to some Pfaffian \cite{fisherjmp}. Stephenson has
112: used the Pfaffian representation to solve the Ising model on the pt lattice,
113: but the solution was restricted to $6L\times 6L$ lattice due to its $6\times
114: 6$ basic nonvanishing matrix elements and was exact only in the limit of $%
115: L\rightarrow \infty $ \cite{stephenson}. Recently, by using the connections
116: between Pfaffian, dimer and Ising model, Nash and O'Connor have obtained the
117: exact expression of the partition function of the pt lattice Ising model on
118: a finite torus \cite{nash}. They first employed the lattice field theories
119: to obtain the exact partition function of the Gaussian model, and then
120: established the exact expression of the partition function of the pt lattice
121: Ising model from the analysis of the appropriate lattice determinants and
122: the parameterization according to the results in \cite{stephenson}.
123:
124: On the other hand, in view of the simplifying the approach, a remarkable
125: progress was achieved by Plechko who modified the traditional fermionic
126: interpretation and introduced a nonstandard approach \cite{plechko1}. By the
127: use of this approach, Plechko himself has not only rederived Onsager's and
128: Kaufman's results in a relatively simple way \cite{plechko1}, but also
129: obtained the partition functions of a class of triangular type decorated
130: lattices \cite{plechko2}, and a triangular lattice net with holes \cite
131: {plechko3}. Quite recently, by using the same approach, Wu \textit{at al}.
132: have obtained the $M\times N$ sq lattice Ising model with periodic-aperiodic
133: boundary condition \cite{mcwu}, and Liaw \textit{at al}. have successfully
134: solved triangular and hexagonal lattices on a cylinder geometry ($M\times
135: \infty $) with periodic and antiperiodic boundary condition \cite{liaw}.
136: This approach is based on the integration over the anticommuting Grassmann
137: variables and the mirror-ordered factorization principle in two-dimensional
138: density matrix \cite{plechko1,plechko2,plechko3,liaw}, and does not involve
139: the traditional transfer-matrix or combinatorial considerations. The whole
140: scheme of the method can be illustrated schematically as shown below \cite
141: {plechko1}:
142: \[
143: Z=\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{ Z\left( \sigma
144: \right) \right\} \rightarrow \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \left|
145: \chi \right. \right) }\left\{ Z\left( \sigma \left| \chi \right. \right)
146: \right\} \rightarrow \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi \right) }\left\{
147: Z\left( \chi \right) \right\} =Z,
148: \]
149: where $^{\backprime \backprime }\mathrm{Sp}^{\prime \prime }$ stands for the
150: average over spin variables ($\sigma $) or Grassmann variables ($\chi $).
151: The original partition function $Z$ is expressed purely by spin variables ($%
152: \sigma $) at each lattice site. With a set of anticommuting Grassmann
153: variables ($\chi $) being introduced to factorize the local bond Boltzmann
154: weight such that spin variables are decoupled, the partition function passes
155: to a mixed $Z\left( \sigma \left| \chi \right. \right) $ representation.
156: Then, by eliminating the spin variables in the mixed $Z\left( \sigma \left|
157: \chi \right. \right) $ representation, the fermionic interpretation $Z\left(
158: \chi \right) $ of the two-dimensional Ising model can be obtained, and after
159: carrying out the Grassmann integral, the analytic solution for the partition
160: function and free energy can be achieved \cite
161: {plechko1,plechko2,plechko3,liaw}.
162:
163: In the present paper, we work in this framework to obtain exact partition
164: functions of $M\times N$ pt and hc lattices with different boundary
165: conditions, including pp, pa, ap and aa boundary conditions. We used these
166: results to calculate and plot the specific heat, $C/k_B$, as a function of
167: the temperature, $\theta =k_BT/J$. Our results show that for the sq lattice,
168: $C/k_B$ for pa and ap boundary conditions are different from those for aa
169: boundary conditions, but for the pt and hc lattices, $C/k_B$ for ap, pa, and
170: aa boundary conditions have the same values. Beside these analyses, our
171: exact partition functions may also be used for understanding the effects of
172: lattice structures and boundary conditions on critical properties and
173: critical finite-size corrections of the Ising model.
174:
175: This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we set up a general form
176: of the partition function for pt and hc lattices. Then, three pairs of
177: conjugate Grassmann variables are introduced for a lattice site to factorize
178: the Boltzmann weights, and the principle of mirror ordering are used to
179: rearrange the Grassmann factors so we can perform the summation over Ising
180: spins to obtain a pure fermionic expression of the partition function. In
181: section 3, using the Fourier transform technique we complete the
182: integrations over the Grassmann variables to obtain the exact solution of
183: the partition function. Then, the solution is subjected to
184: periodic-aperiodic boundary conditions, including pp, pa, ap and aa boundary
185: conditions. We further consider the shift behaviours of the maximum of the
186: specific heats of these systems in section 4. Finally, we discuss some
187: problems for further studies in section 5.
188:
189: \section{The Partition Function}
190:
191: Consider Ising ferromagnets on $M\times N$ pt and hc lattices as shown in
192: figure 1, in which the former is considered as a sq lattice with a single
193: second-neighbor interaction, and the latter contains an inner spin in each
194: lattice cell. The corresponding Hamiltonians, respectively, read as
195: \begin{equation}
196: H_t=-\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{n=1}^N\left( J_1\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{m+1n}+J_2\sigma
197: _{mn}\sigma _{mn+1}+J_3\sigma _{m+1n}\sigma _{mn+1}\right) ,
198: \end{equation}
199: and
200: \begin{equation}
201: H_h=-\sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{n=1}^N\left( J_1\sigma _0\sigma _{mn}+J_2\sigma
202: _0\sigma _{mn+1}+J_3\sigma _0\sigma _{m+1n}\right) ,
203: \end{equation}
204: where $J_i$ with $i=1,2,3$ are the coupling constants ($J_i>0$ for
205: ferromagnetic lattices), $\sigma _{mn}=\pm 1$ is the Ising spin located at
206: the site $(m,n)$, and $\sigma _0$ denotes the inner Ising spin in hc
207: lattice. Using the identity of the Boltzmann weight,
208: \begin{equation}
209: \exp \left( \beta J_i\sigma _\mu \sigma _\nu \right) =\cosh \left( \beta
210: J_i\right) \left[ 1+\tanh \left( \beta J_i\right) \sigma _\mu \sigma _\nu
211: \right] ,
212: \end{equation}
213: $\beta =\left( k_BT\right) ^{-1}$, and performing the sum over $\sigma _0$,
214: the partition functions of two lattices can be formulated in a single three
215: spin-polynomial representation,
216: \begin{eqnarray}
217: \fl Z &=&2^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta J_i\right)
218: \right] ^{N_s} \nonumber \\
219: \fl && \times \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{
220: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^N\left( \alpha _0+\alpha _1\sigma _{mn}\sigma
221: _{m+1n}+\alpha _2\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{mn+1}+\alpha _3\sigma _{m+1n}\sigma
222: _{mn+1}\right) \right\} ,
223: \end{eqnarray}
224: where $N_s$ is the numbers of lattice sites ($N_s=MN$ for sq and pt lattice,
225: $N_s=2MN$ for hc lattice) and $n_b$ is the number of bonds per lattice cell (%
226: $n_b=2$ for sq lattice, $n_b=3$ for pt and hc lattice), symbol $^{\backprime
227: \backprime }\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }$ $^{\prime
228: \prime }$ stands for spin average defined by
229: \begin{equation}
230: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _i\right) }\left[ \cdots \right]
231: =\frac 12\sum_{\left( \sigma _i=\pm 1\right) }\left[ \cdots \right] ,\quad %
232: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _i\right) }\left[ 1\right] =1,\quad %
233: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _i\right) }\left[ \sigma _i\right] =0
234: \end{equation}
235: and $\alpha _i$'s are defined as
236: \begin{equation}
237: \alpha _0^T=1+t_1t_2t_3,\ \alpha _1^T=t_1+t_2t_3,\ \alpha _2^T=t_2+t_3t_1,\
238: \alpha _3^T=t_3+t_1t_2, \label{tricoef}
239: \end{equation}
240: $t_i=\tanh \left( \beta J_i\right) $ with $i=1,2,3$, for pt lattice, and
241: \begin{equation}
242: \alpha _0^H=1,\ \alpha _1^H=t_1t_3,\ \alpha _2^H=t_1t_2,\ \alpha _3^H=t_2t_3,
243: \label{honcoef}
244: \end{equation}
245: for hc lattice.
246:
247: To factorize the partition, we rewrite the partition function as
248: \begin{eqnarray}
249: \fl Z_H &=&2^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta J_i\right)
250: \right] ^{N_s} \nonumber \\
251: \fl &&\times \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{
252: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^Nr_0\left( 1+r_1\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{m+1n}\right)
253: \left( 1+r_2\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{mn+1}\right) \left( 1+r_3\sigma
254: _{m+1n}\sigma _{mn+1}\right) \right\} ,
255: \end{eqnarray}
256: where $r_i$ with $i=0,1,2,3$ vary from one lattice to the other, and are
257: related to $\alpha _i$'s from
258: \begin{equation}
259: \fl \alpha _0=r_0\left( 1+r_1r_2r_3\right) ,\alpha _1=r_0\left(
260: r_1+r_2r_3\right) ,\alpha _2=r_0\left( r_2+r_1r_3\right) ,\alpha
261: _3=r_0\left( r_3+r_1r_2\right) . \label{coef}
262: \end{equation}
263: For pt lattice, the relation between $r_i$ and $t_i$ is trivial, i.e. $r_0=1$
264: and $r_i=t_i$, but for hc lattice, the relation is nontrivial and is
265: determined by equations (\ref{honcoef}) and (\ref{coef}).
266:
267: It is more convenient to define the generalized reduced partition function
268: as
269: \begin{equation}
270: Q=r_0^{MN}\tilde Q,
271: \end{equation}
272: with
273: \begin{equation}
274: \fl \tilde Q=\prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^N\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma
275: _{mn}\right) }\left[ \left( 1+r_1\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{m+1n}\right) \left(
276: 1+r_2\sigma _{mn}\sigma _{mn+1}\right) \left( 1+r_3\sigma _{mn+1}\sigma
277: _{m+1n}\right) \right] .
278: \end{equation}
279:
280: To construct the fermionic representation of the generalized partition
281: function, we associate each lattice site $\left( m,n\right) $ with three
282: pairs of conjugate Grassmann variables, $\left\{
283: a_{mn},a_{mn}^{*};b_{mn},b_{mn}^{*};c_{mn},c_{mn}^{*}\right\} \in \chi $.
284: All of these Grassmann variables are anticommuting, and their square are
285: zero. Their integral obeys the basic rules \cite{berezin}
286: \begin{equation}
287: \int d\chi =0,\quad \int d\chi \cdot \chi =1,
288: \end{equation}
289: \begin{equation}
290: \int d\chi \cdot \Omega \left( \chi +\eta \right) =\int d\chi \cdot \Omega
291: \left( \chi \right) ,
292: \end{equation}
293: for an arbitrary vector $\eta $ with anticommuting components, and there is
294: the relation
295: \begin{equation}
296: 1+r_i\sigma _\mu \sigma _\nu =\int d\chi ^{*}d\chi e^{\chi \chi ^{*}}\left(
297: 1+\chi \sigma _\mu \right) \left( 1+r_i\chi ^{*}\sigma _\nu \right) .
298: \end{equation}
299: Using these Grassmann variables, we can rewrite the reduced partition
300: function as\cite{plechko1}
301: \begin{equation}
302: \fl \tilde Q=\prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^N\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma
303: _{mn}\right) }\left[ \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left(
304: a_{mn},b_{mn},c_{mn}\right) }\left(
305: A_{mn}A_{m+1n}^{*}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}C_{mn+1}C_{m+1n}^{*}\right) \right] ,
306: \end{equation}
307: where $^{\backprime \backprime }\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi
308: _i\right) }$ $^{\prime \prime }$ stands for the averaging with Gaussian
309: weight
310: \begin{eqnarray}
311: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi _i\right) }\left[ \cdots \right] =\int
312: d\chi _i^{*}d\chi _ie^{\chi _i\chi _i^{*}}\left[ \cdots \right] ,
313: \end{eqnarray}
314: with the rules
315: \begin{eqnarray}
316: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi _i\right) }\left[ \chi _i\chi
317: _i^{*}\right] &=&-\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi _i\right) }\left[ \chi
318: _i^{*}\chi _i\right] =1, \\
319: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi _i\right) }\left[ \chi _i\right] &=&%
320: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \chi _i\right) }\left[ \chi _i^{*}\right] =0,
321: \end{eqnarray}
322: and the Grassmann factors, $A,A^{*},B,B^{*},C,$ and $C^{*}$, are defined as
323: \begin{equation}
324: A_{mn}=1+a_{mn}\sigma _{mn},\quad A_{mn}^{*}=1+r_1a_{m-1n}^{*}\sigma _{mn};
325: \end{equation}
326: \begin{equation}
327: B_{mn}=1+b_{mn}\sigma _{mn},\quad B_{mn}^{*}=1+r_2b_{mn-1}^{*}\sigma _{mn};
328: \end{equation}
329: \begin{equation}
330: C_{mn}=1+c_{mn-1}\sigma _{mn},\quad C_{mn}^{*}=1+r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}\sigma _{mn}.
331: \end{equation}
332: In this way, a Boltzmann weight is decoupled to the product of two factors
333: of separated spins.
334:
335: For simplicity, we express the reduced partition function as
336: \begin{equation}
337: \tilde Q=\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left\{
338: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^N\Psi _{mn}^A\Psi _{mn}^B\Psi _{mn}^C\right\} ,
339: \end{equation}
340: where $\Psi _{mn}^A$, $\Psi _{mn}^B$ and $\Psi _{mn}^C$ are defined by
341: \begin{eqnarray}
342: \Psi _{mn}^A &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mn}\right) }\left(
343: A_{mn}A_{m+1n}^{*}\right) , \\
344: \Psi _{mn}^B &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mn}\right) }\left(
345: B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right) , \\
346: \Psi _{mn}^C &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mn}\right) }\left(
347: C_{mn+1}C_{m+1n}^{*}\right) .
348: \end{eqnarray}
349:
350: We first treat the boundary weight and consider periodic boundary condition
351: in both directions:
352: \begin{eqnarray}
353: \Psi _{Mn}^A &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{Mn}\right) }\left[
354: \left( 1+a_{Mn}\sigma _{Mn}\right) \left( 1+r_1a_{Mn}^{*}\sigma
355: _{M+1n}\right) \right] \nonumber \\
356: &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{Mn}\right) }\left[ \left(
357: 1+r_1a_{0n}^{*}\sigma _{1n}\right) \left( 1+a_{Mn}\sigma _{Mn}\right) \right]
358: \nonumber \\
359: &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{Mn}\right) }\left(
360: A_{1n}^{*}A_{Mn}\right) ,
361: \end{eqnarray}
362: which implies
363: \begin{equation}
364: a_{0n}^{*}=-a_{Mn}^{*}.
365: \end{equation}
366: Similarly, from
367: \begin{eqnarray}
368: \Psi _{mN}^B &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mN}\right) }\left(
369: B_{mN}B_{mN+1}^{*}\right) =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma
370: _{Nn}\right) }\left( B_{m1}^{*}B_{mN}\right) , \label{b1} \\
371: \Psi _{Mn}^C &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{Mn}\right) }\left(
372: C_{Mn+1}C_{M+1n}^{*}\right) =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma
373: _{Mn}\right) }\left( C_{1n}^{*}C_{Mn+1}\right) , \label{b2} \\
374: \Psi _{mN}^C &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mN}\right) }\left(
375: C_{mN+1}C_{m+1N}^{*}\right) =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma
376: _{mN}\right) }\left( C_{m1}C_{m+1N}^{*}\right) , \label{b3}
377: \end{eqnarray}
378: we have
379: \begin{eqnarray}
380: b_{m0}^{*} &=&-b_{mN}^{*}, \\
381: c_{0n}^{*} &=&-c_{Mn}^{*}, \\
382: c_{m0} &=&c_{mN}. \label{am1}
383: \end{eqnarray}
384: Since $c_{m0}=c_{mN}$, $\Psi _{mN}^C$ need not to be treated as a boundary
385: weight, and only $\Psi _{Mn}^A$, $\Psi _{mN}^B$ and $\Psi _{Mn}^C$ should be
386: considered. However, this situation becomes ambiguous when we take Fourier
387: transform of these Grassmann variables with single set of exponential
388: factors in equations (\ref{fourier1}) and (\ref{fourier2}). Because the
389: Fourier exponential factors are associated with directions in $M$ and $N$,
390: the sign factor in front of $b_{mN}^{*}$ takes effects simultaneously on $%
391: b_{mN}^{*}$ and $c_{mN}$. Therefore, the real situation is that instead of
392: the relation in equation (\ref{am1}), we must take
393: \begin{equation}
394: c_{m0}=-c_{mN}. \label{am2}
395: \end{equation}
396: A self-consistent way to assign a minus sign to $c_{m0}$ and obtain the
397: relation in equation (\ref{am2}) is interchanging $C_{m1}$ in equation (\ref
398: {b3}) with another Grassmann factor. An equivalent but more convenient
399: approach is to consider the rearrangement of $B_{m1}^{*}$ in the boundary
400: weight together with the rearrangement of $C_{m1}$ in the reduced partition
401: function. To see this, we express the reduced partition function as
402: \begin{equation}
403: \fl \tilde Q=\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left\{ %
404: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left[ \left(
405: \prod_{m=1}^{M-1}\prod_{n=1}^N\Psi _{mn}^A\Psi _{mn}^C\right) \cdot \Psi
406: _B\cdot \left( \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^{N-1}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right)
407: \right] \right\} .
408: \end{equation}
409: with the boundary weight $\Psi _B$
410: \begin{eqnarray}
411: \fl \Psi _B &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left[ \left(
412: \prod_{n=1}^N\Psi _{Mn}^A\right) \left( \prod_{m=1}^M\Psi _{mN}^B\right)
413: \left( \prod_{n=1}^N\Psi _{Mn}^C\right) \right] \nonumber \\
414: \fl &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left[ \left(
415: \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{B_{m1}^{*}}}\right) \left(
416: \prod_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{C_{1n}^{*}A_{1n}^{*}}}\right)
417: A_{M1}\left( \prod_{n=2}^N\stackrel{n}{\overrightarrow{C_{Mn}A_{Mn}}}\right)
418: C_{M1}\prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overleftarrow{B_{mN}}}\right] , \label{bw}
419: \end{eqnarray}
420: and
421: \begin{eqnarray}
422: \fl \prod_{m=1}^{M-1}\prod_{n=1}^N\Psi _{mn}^A\Psi _{mn}^C
423: &=&\prod_{m=1}^{M-1}\prod_{n=1}^NA_{mn}C_{mn+1}C_{m+1n}^{*}A_{m+1n}^{*}
424: \nonumber \\
425: \fl &=&\prod_{m=1}^{M-1}A_{m1}\left( \prod_{n=2}^N\stackrel{n}{%
426: \overleftarrow{C_{mn}A_{mn}}}\right) C_{m1}\left( \prod_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{%
427: \overrightarrow{C_{m+1n}^{*}A_{m+1n}^{*}}}\right) . \label{gw}
428: \end{eqnarray}
429: Here, arrows have been used to indicate the orders of the products in $m$
430: and $n$. When we move $B_{m1}^{*}$ from left of $\prod\limits_{n=1}^N%
431: \stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{C_{1n}^{*}A_{1n}^{*}}}$ to right of $%
432: \prod\limits_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{C_{1n}^{*}A_{1n}^{*}}}$ in
433: equation (\ref{bw}), $B_{m1}^{*}$ passes $2N$ Grassmann factors, but for
434: moving $C_{m1}$ from right of $\prod\limits_{n=2}^N\stackrel{n}{%
435: \overleftarrow{C_{mn}A_{mn}}}$ to left of $A_{m1}$ in equations (\ref{bw})
436: and (\ref{gw}), $C_{m1}$ passes only $2N-1$ Grassmann factors. Then by
437: moving $B_{m1}^{*}$ from left to right, and simultaneously moving $C_{m1}$
438: from right to left, we can assign to the Grassmann variable in $C_{m1}$ an
439: additional minus sign comparing with the Grassmann variable in $B_{m1}^{*}$,
440: and hence obtain the relation of equation (\ref{am2}).
441:
442: Accordingly, we interchange $B^{*}$ and $C^{*}A^{*}$ in equation (\ref{bw})
443: to obtain the arrangement of $C^{*}A^{*}B^{*}$ according to the identity
444: \cite{plechko1}
445: \begin{equation}
446: \fl B^{+}\left( CA\right) ^{+}=\frac 12\left[ \left( CA\right)
447: ^{+}B^{+}+\left( CA\right) ^{+}B^{-}+\left( CA\right) ^{-}B^{+}-\left(
448: CA\right) ^{-}B^{-}\right] , \label{exchange}
449: \end{equation}
450: with superscripts $+$ and $-$ being the sign factors in boundary Grassmann
451: factors $A_{1n}^{*}$, $B_{m1}^{*}$ and $C_{1n}^{*}$, and simultaneously move
452: $C_{m1}$ from right of $\prod\limits_{n=2}^N\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{%
453: C_{mn}A_{mn}}}$ to left of $A_{m1}$ in equations (\ref{bw}) and (\ref{gw}).
454: Here we note that the superscripts $+$ and $-$ respectively correspond to
455: periodic and antiperiodic boundary condition imposed on the spin variables
456: and in turn on the Grassmann variables. Hence, the reduced partition
457: function becomes
458: \begin{equation}
459: \tilde Q=\frac 12\left( \left. \tilde Q_\gamma \right| _{\Gamma _1}+\left.
460: \tilde Q_\gamma \right| _{\Gamma _2}+\left. \tilde Q_\gamma \right| _{\Gamma
461: _3}-\left. \tilde Q_\gamma \right| _{\Gamma _4}\right) , \label{pppart}
462: \end{equation}
463: with
464: \begin{equation}
465: \fl \tilde Q_\gamma =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left\{ %
466: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left[ \left(
467: \prod_{m=1}^{M-1}\stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{\Theta _m\Theta _{m+1}^{*}}}%
468: \right) \cdot \Psi _\gamma \cdot \left(
469: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^{N-1}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right) \right] \right\} ,
470: \end{equation}
471: and
472: \begin{equation}
473: \Psi _\gamma =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left\{ %
474: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left[ \Theta _1^{*}\left(
475: \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{B_{m1}^{*}}}\right) \Theta
476: _M\left( \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overleftarrow{B_{mN}}}\right) \right]
477: \right\} .
478: \end{equation}
479: where we have defined
480: \begin{equation}
481: \Theta _m=\prod_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{\overrightarrow{C_{mn}A_{mn}}}\quad
482: \mathrm{and\quad }\Theta _m^{*}=\prod_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{%
483: C_{mn}^{*}A_{mn}^{*}}},
484: \end{equation}
485: and the boundary conditions $\Gamma _1$, $\Gamma _2$, $\Gamma _3$, $\Gamma
486: _4 $ are defined as
487: \begin{eqnarray}
488: \Gamma _1 &=&\left( a_{0n}^{*}=-a_{Mn}^{*},\ b_{m0}^{*}=-b_{mN}^{*},\
489: c_{0n}^{*}=-c_{Mn}^{*}\right) , \label{bc1} \\
490: \Gamma _2 &=&\left( a_{0n}^{*}=-a_{Mn}^{*},\ b_{m0}^{*}=+b_{mN}^{*},\
491: c_{0n}^{*}=-c_{Mn}^{*}\right) , \label{bc2} \\
492: \Gamma _3 &=&\left( a_{0n}^{*}=+a_{M,n}^{*},\ b_{m0}^{*}=-b_{mN}^{*},\
493: c_{0n}^{*}=+c_{M,n}^{*}\right) , \label{bc3} \\
494: \Gamma _4 &=&\left( a_{0n}^{*}=+a_{M,n}^{*},\ b_{m0}^{*}=+b_{mN}^{*},\
495: c_{0n}^{*}=+c_{M,n}^{*}\right) . \label{bc4}
496: \end{eqnarray}
497: In this way, the configurations of the reduced partition function can be
498: further rearrangement and expressed as
499: \begin{eqnarray}
500: \fl \tilde Q_\gamma &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }%
501: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{ \left(
502: \prod_{m=1}^{M-1}\stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{\Theta _m\Theta _{m+1}^{*}}}%
503: \right) \Theta _1^{*}\left( \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{%
504: B_{m1}^{*}}}\right) \Theta _M\left( \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{%
505: B_{mN}}}\right) \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^{N-1}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right\}
506: \nonumber \\
507: \fl &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\mathop{\rm Sp}%
508: \limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{ \left( \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{%
509: \overrightarrow{\Theta _m^{*}B_{m1}^{*}\Theta _m}}\right) \left(
510: \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{B_{mN}}}\right) \left(
511: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^{N-1}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right) \right\} .
512: \end{eqnarray}
513:
514: To have a complete mirror-ordered form, we have to rearrange the terms in
515: the last two brackets. To achieve this, first we note that
516: \begin{eqnarray}
517: \fl \tilde Q_\gamma &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }%
518: \mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{ \prod_{m=1}^M%
519: \stackrel{m}{\overrightarrow{\Theta _m^{*}B_{m1}^{*}\left( \prod_{n=1}^{N-1}%
520: \stackrel{n}{\overrightarrow{C_{mn}A_{mn}}}\right) C_{mN}A_{mN}}}\left(
521: \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overleftarrow{B_{mM}}}\right)
522: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^{N-1}B_{mn}B_{mn+1}^{*}\right\} \nonumber \\
523: \fl &=&\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\mathop{\rm Sp}%
524: \limits_{\left( \sigma \right) }\left\{ \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{%
525: \overrightarrow{\Theta _m^{*}\left( \prod_{n=1}^{N-1}\stackrel{n}{%
526: \overrightarrow{B_{mn}^{*}C_{mn}A_{mn}B_{mn}}}\right) B_{mN}^{*}C_{mN}A_{mN}}%
527: }\left( \prod_{m=1}^M\stackrel{m}{\overleftarrow{B_{mN}}}\right) \right\} .
528: \end{eqnarray}
529: The boundary term of with $m=M$, denoted by $T$, can be formulated
530: \begin{eqnarray}
531: T &=&\Theta _M^{*}\left( \prod_{n=1}^{N-1}\stackrel{n}{\overrightarrow{%
532: B_{Mn}^{*}C_{Mn}A_{Mn}B_{Mn}}}\right) B_{MN}^{*}C_{MN}A_{MN}B_{MN} \nonumber
533: \\
534: &=&\left( \prod_{n=1}^N\stackrel{n}{\overleftarrow{C_{Mn}^{*}A_{Mn}^{*}}}%
535: \right) \left( \prod_{n=1}^{L_y}\stackrel{n}{\overrightarrow{%
536: B_{Mn}^{*}C_{Mn}A_{Mn}B_{Mn}}}\right) \nonumber \\
537: \ &=&\prod_{n=1}^NC_{Mn}^{*}A_{Mn}^{*}B_{Mn}^{*}C_{Mn}A_{Mn}B_{Mn},
538: \end{eqnarray}
539: due to the fact that $\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mn}\right)
540: }\left[ C_{Mn}^{*}A_{Mn}^{*}B_{Mn}^{*}C_{Mn}A_{Mn}B_{Mn}\right] $ for a
541: given $n$\ is a commutable object. By continuing such construction from $m=M$
542: down to $m=1$, we can obtain the expression
543: \begin{equation}
544: \tilde Q_\gamma =\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( a,b,c\right) }\left\{
545: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^N\mathop{\rm Sp}\limits_{\left( \sigma _{mn}\right)
546: }\left[ C_{mn}^{*}A_{mn}^{*}B_{mn}^{*}C_{mn}A_{mn}B_{mn}\right] \right\} .
547: \end{equation}
548:
549: For this partition function, the factors containing the same spin are
550: grouped together and we can perform the average over spins. As a result, we
551: have
552: \begin{equation}
553: \fl \tilde Q_\gamma =\int
554: \prod_{m=1}^M%
555: \prod_{n=1}^Nda_{mn}^{*}da_{mn}db_{mn}^{*}db_{mn}dc_{mn}^{*}dc_{mn}\exp
556: \left( \sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{n=1}^NF_{mn}\right) ,
557: \end{equation}
558: with
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: F_{mn} &=&a_{mn}a_{mn}^{*}+b_{mn}b_{mn}^{*}+c_{mn}c_{mn}^{*} \nonumber \\
561: &&+r_1r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}a_{m-1n}^{*} \nonumber \\
562: &&+\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1a_{m-1n}^{*}\right) r_2b_{mn-1}^{*} \nonumber
563: \\
564: &&+\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1a_{m-1n}^{*}+r_2b_{mn-1}^{*}\right) c_{mn-1}
565: \nonumber \\
566: &&+\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1a_{m-1n}^{*}+r_2b_{mn-1}^{*}+c_{mn-1}\right)
567: a_{mn} \nonumber \\
568: &&+\left(
569: r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1a_{m-1n}^{*}+r_2b_{mn-1}^{*}+c_{mn-1}+a_{mn}\right)
570: b_{mn}.
571: \end{eqnarray}
572: Since there is no mix on $a_{mn}$ and $b_{mn}$, the integral in the above
573: expression can be simplified by integrating out the $a_{mn}$ and $b_{mn}$
574: fields by means of the identity
575: \begin{equation}
576: \int dbda\exp \left( \lambda ab+aL+L^{\prime }b\right) \ =\lambda \exp
577: \left( \lambda ^{-1}LL^{\prime }\right) ,
578: \end{equation}
579: where $a$, $b$ are Grassmann variables, $L$, $L^{\prime }$ are linear
580: fermionic forms independent of $a$, $b$ and $\lambda $ is a parameter. The
581: result then becomes
582: \begin{equation}
583: \tilde Q_\gamma =\int
584: \prod_{m=1}^M\prod_{n=1}^Ndg_{mn}^{*}dg_{mn}dc_{mn}^{*}dc_{mn}\exp \left(
585: \sum_{m=1}^M\sum_{n=1}^NG_{mn}\right) ,
586: \end{equation}
587: with
588: \begin{eqnarray}
589: \fl G_{mn} &=&c_{mn}c_{mn}^{*}+g_{mn}g_{mn}^{*} \nonumber \\
590: \fl &&+r_1r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}g_{m-1n} \nonumber \\
591: \fl &&-\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1g_{m-1n}\right) r_2g_{mn-1}^{*} \nonumber
592: \\
593: \fl &&+\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1g_{m-1n}-r_2g_{mn-1}^{*}\right) c_{mn-1}
594: \nonumber \\
595: \fl &&-\left( r_3c_{m-1n}^{*}+r_1g_{m-1n}-r_2g_{mn-1}^{*}+c_{mn-1}\right)
596: \left( g_{mn}+g_{mn}^{*}\right) , \label{fermionic}
597: \end{eqnarray}
598: where we have changed the notations for the fields by $\left(
599: a_{mn}^{*},b_{mn}^{*}\right) \rightarrow \left( g_{mn},-g_{mn}^{*}\right) $.
600: This is the pure fermionic representation of the reduced partition function.
601:
602: \section{Exact Solution}
603:
604: Next, to carry out the integration, we have to use the technique of Fourier
605: transform to treat the Grassmann variables which mix together with the
606: variables at different sites. The Fourier transformation is defined as
607: \begin{equation}
608: X_{mn}=\frac 1{\sqrt{MN}}\sum_{p=0}^{M-1}\sum_{q=0}^{N-1}X_{pq}e^{-i\frac{%
609: 2\pi }Mmp}e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Nnq}, \label{fourier1}
610: \end{equation}
611: and
612: \begin{equation}
613: X_{mn}^{*}=\frac 1{\sqrt{MN}}\sum_{p=0}^{M-1}\sum_{q=0}^{N-1}X_{pq}^{*}e^{i%
614: \frac{2\pi }Mmp}e^{i\frac{2\pi }Nnq}, \label{fourier2}
615: \end{equation}
616: where the variables $X_{mn}$ and $X_{mn}^{*}$ denotes one of the variables $%
617: \left\{ c_{mn},g_{mn}\right\} $ and $\left\{ c_{mn}^{*},g_{mn}^{*}\right\} $
618: respectively.
619:
620: After performing the Fourier transformation, the partition function becomes
621: \begin{equation}
622: \tilde Q_\gamma =\prod_{p=0}^{M-1}\prod_{q=0}^{N-1}\int dV_{pq}\exp \left(
623: H_{pq}\right) , \label{int1}
624: \end{equation}
625: with the measure $dV_{pq}$ defined as
626: \begin{equation}
627: dV_{pq}=dg_{pq}^{*}dg_{pq}dc_{pq}^{*}dc_{pq},
628: \end{equation}
629: and the function $H_{pq}$ is given by
630: \begin{eqnarray}
631: \fl H_{pq} &=&\left( 1-r_3e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Mp}e^{i\frac{2\pi }Nq}\right)
632: c_{pq}c_{pq}^{*} \nonumber \\
633: \fl &&+\left( r_2-e^{i\frac{2\pi }Nq}\right) c_{pq}g_{pq}^{*}+r_3\left(
634: r_1-e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Mp}\right) c_{pq}^{*}g_{pq} \nonumber \\
635: \fl &&-e^{i\frac{2\pi }Nq}\left( 1+r_1e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Mp}\right)
636: c_{pq}g_{M-pN-q}-r_3e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Mp}\left( 1+r_2e^{i\frac{2\pi }%
637: Nq}\right) c_{pq}^{*}g_{M-pN-q}^{*} \nonumber \\
638: \fl &&+\left( 1-r_1e^{i\frac{2\pi }Mp}-r_2e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Nq}-r_1r_2e^{i%
639: \frac{2\pi }Mp}e^{-i\frac{2\pi }Nq}\right) g_{pq}g_{pq}^{*} \nonumber \\
640: \fl &&-r_1e^{i\frac{2\pi }Mp}g_{pq}g_{M-pN-q}+r_2e^{-i\frac{2\pi }{L_y}%
641: q}g_{pq}^{*}g_{M-pN-q}^{*},
642: \end{eqnarray}
643: Because $H_{pq}$ contains not only the variables, $X_{pq}$ and $X_{pq}^{*}$%
644: ,\ but also the variables, $X_{M-pN-q}$ and $X_{M-pN-q}^{*}$, instead of
645: calculating $\tilde Q_\gamma $ it is easier to calculate $\tilde Q_\gamma ^2$
646: given by
647: \begin{equation}
648: \tilde Q_\gamma ^2=\prod_{p=0}^{M-1}\prod_{q=0}^{N-1}\int
649: dV_{pq}dV_{M-pN-q}\exp \left( H_{pq}+H_{M-pN-q}^{*}\right) . \label{int2}
650: \end{equation}
651: Here $H_{M-pN-q}^{*}$ can be obtained from $H_{pq}$ by replacing $p$ by $M-p$
652: and $q$ by $N-q$ for the Grassmann variables and replacing the coefficient
653: in front of Grassmann variables by its complex conjugate. Completing the
654: integration yields
655: \begin{equation}
656: \fl Q_\gamma =\prod_{p=0}^{M-1}\prod_{q=0}^{N-1}\left[ A_0-A_1\cos \frac{%
657: 2\pi p}M-A_2\cos \frac{2\pi q}N-A_3\cos \left( \frac{2\pi p}M-\frac{2\pi q}%
658: N\right) \right] ^{1/2},
659: \end{equation}
660: with
661: \begin{eqnarray}
662: A_0 &=&\alpha _0^2+\alpha _1^2+\alpha _2^2+\alpha _3^2, \\
663: A_1 &=&2\left( \alpha _0\alpha _1-\alpha _2\alpha _3\right) , \\
664: A_2 &=&2\left( \alpha _0\alpha _2-\alpha _1\alpha _3\right) , \\
665: A_3 &=&2\left( \alpha _0\alpha _3-\alpha _1\alpha _2\right) ,
666: \end{eqnarray}
667: where $\alpha _0$, $\alpha _1$, $\alpha _2$, and $\alpha _3$ are given by
668: equations (\ref{tricoef}) and (\ref{honcoef}) for pt and hc lattices,
669: respectively.
670:
671: \subsection{Periodic-periodic boundary condition}
672:
673: According to equation (\ref{pppart}), the reduced partition function for
674: ferromagnetic lattices with pp boundary condition is
675: \begin{equation}
676: Q^{pp}=\frac 12\left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
677: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}-\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
678: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] ,
679: \end{equation}
680: where the superscript $p$ refers to periodic boundary condition and
681: \begin{equation}
682: \fl \Omega _{\mu \nu }=\prod_{p=0}^{M-1}\prod_{q=0}^{N-1}\left[ A_0-A_1\cos %
683: \case{2\pi \left( p+\mu \right) }M-A_2\cos \case{2\pi \left( q+\nu \right) }%
684: N-A_3\cos \left( \case{2\pi \left( p+\mu \right) }M-\case{2\pi \left( q+\nu
685: \right) }N\right) \right] ^{1/2}. \label{exact}
686: \end{equation}
687: The sign factor in front of the last term is a result of the standard
688: consideration of the Grassmann integral over the zero-mode variable $p=q=0$
689: for ferromagnetic couplings \cite{plechko1,thesis}. When the integral of
690: equation (\ref{int2}) is carried out, it is always positive, but this is not
691: the case for equation (\ref{int1}). There are unpaired terms from zero-mode
692: in equation (\ref{int1}) under various boundary conditions and they
693: contribute a sign factor to $Q_4$ for $0\leq t_i\leq 1$. The partition
694: function for pp boundary condition then becomes
695: \begin{equation}
696: \fl Z^{pp}=\frac 122^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta
697: J_i\right) \right] ^{N_s}\left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
698: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}-\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
699: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
700: \end{equation}
701:
702: Furthermore, the free energy density per $k_BT$ of the system defined by
703: \begin{equation}
704: f^{pp}=-\frac 1{N_s}\ln Z^{pp},
705: \end{equation}
706: then takes the form
707: \begin{eqnarray}
708: f^{pp} &=&-\frac{\left( N_s-1\right) }{N_s}\ln 2-\sum_{i=1}^{n_b}\ln \left[
709: \cosh \left( \beta J_i\right) \right] \nonumber \\
710: &&-\frac 1{N_s}\ln \left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
711: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}-\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
712: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
713: \end{eqnarray}
714:
715: \subsection{Periodic-antiperiodic boundary condition}
716:
717: For pa boundary condition, equation (\ref{exchange}) is replaced by
718: \begin{equation}
719: \fl B^{-}\left( CA\right) ^{+}=\frac 12\left[ \left( CA\right)
720: ^{+}B^{+}+\left( CA\right) ^{+}B^{-}-\left( CA\right) ^{-}B^{+}+\left(
721: CA\right) ^{-}B^{-}\right] ,
722: \end{equation}
723: and the partition function has the form
724: \begin{equation}
725: \fl Z^{pa}=\frac 122^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta
726: J_i\right) \right] ^{N_s}\left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
727: 12,0}-\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
728: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] ,
729: \end{equation}
730: where the superscript $a$ refers to antiperiodic boundary condition. The
731: corresponding free energy density per $k_BT$ is
732: \begin{eqnarray}
733: f^{pa} &=&-\frac{\left( N_s-1\right) }{N_s}\ln 2-\sum_{i=1}^{n_b}\ln \left[
734: \cosh \left( \beta J_i\right) \right] \nonumber \\
735: &&-\frac 1{N_s}\ln \left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
736: 12,0}-\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
737: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
738: \end{eqnarray}
739:
740: \subsection{Antiperiodic-periodic boundary condition}
741:
742: Similarly, for ap boundary condition, equation (\ref{exchange}) is replaced
743: by
744: \begin{equation}
745: \fl B^{+}\left( CA\right) ^{-}=\frac 12\left[ \left( CA\right)
746: ^{+}B^{+}-\left( CA\right) ^{+}B^{-}+\left( CA\right) ^{-}B^{+}+\left(
747: CA\right) ^{-}B^{-}\right] ,
748: \end{equation}
749: and
750: \begin{equation}
751: \fl Z^{ap}=\frac 122^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta
752: J_i\right) \right] ^{N_s}\left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}-\Omega _{\frac
753: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
754: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
755: \end{equation}
756: The corresponding free energy density per $k_BT$ is
757: \begin{eqnarray}
758: f^{ap} &=&-\frac{\left( N_s-1\right) }{N_s}\ln 2-\sum_{i=1}^{n_b}\ln \left[
759: \cosh \left( \beta J_i\right) \right] \nonumber \\
760: &&-\frac 1{N_s}\ln \left[ \Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}-\Omega _{\frac
761: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
762: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
763: \end{eqnarray}
764:
765: \subsection{Antiperiodic-antiperiodic boundary condition}
766:
767: For aa boundary condition, equation (\ref{exchange}) becomes
768: \begin{equation}
769: \fl B^{-}\left( CA\right) ^{-}=\frac 12\left[ -\left( CA\right)
770: ^{+}B^{+}+\left( CA\right) ^{+}B^{-}+\left( CA\right) ^{-}B^{+}+\left(
771: CA\right) ^{-}B^{-}\right] ,
772: \end{equation}
773: and the partition function is
774: \begin{equation}
775: \fl Z^{aa}=\frac 122^{N_s}\left[ \prod_{i=1}^{n_b}\cosh \left( \beta
776: J_i\right) \right] ^{N_s}\left[ -\Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
777: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
778: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
779: \end{equation}
780: The corresponding free energy density per $k_BT$ is
781: \begin{eqnarray}
782: f^{aa} &=&-\frac{\left( N_s-1\right) }{N_s}\ln 2-\sum_{i=1}^{n_b}\ln \left[
783: \cosh \left( \beta J_i\right) \right] \nonumber \\
784: &&-\frac 1{N_s}\ln \left[ -\Omega _{\frac 12,\frac 12}+\Omega _{\frac
785: 12,0}+\Omega _{0,\frac 12}+\mathrm{sgn}\left( \frac{\theta -\theta _c}{%
786: \theta _c}\right) \Omega _{00}\right] .
787: \end{eqnarray}
788:
789: Note that by taking $t_3=0$, $n_b=2$ and $N_s=N_b=MN$, we have $A_3=0$,
790: \begin{equation}
791: \Omega _{\mu \nu }=\prod_{p=0}^{M-1}\prod_{q=0}^{N-1}\left[ A_0-A_1\cos %
792: \case{2\pi \left( p+\mu \right) }M-A_2\cos \case{2\pi \left( q+\nu \right) }%
793: N\right] ^{1/2},
794: \end{equation}
795: and all the results we obtained reduce to those of sq lattice.
796:
797: Accordingly, the critical temperature can be determined in the thermodynamic
798: limit from the zero of the free energy contributed by the zero mode,
799: \begin{equation}
800: A_0-A_1-A_2-A_3=0.
801: \end{equation}
802: It follows that for isotropic coupling, we have
803: \begin{equation}
804: \theta _c=\left[ \frac 12\ln \left( 1+\sqrt{2}\right) \right]
805: ^{-1}=2.269185...,
806: \end{equation}
807: for sq lattice with $\theta =\left. k_BT\right/ J$,
808: \begin{equation}
809: \theta _c=\left[ \frac 12\ln \left( \sqrt{3}\right) \right]
810: ^{-1}=3.640956...,
811: \end{equation}
812: for pt lattice and
813: \begin{equation}
814: \theta _c=\left[ \frac 12\ln \left( 2+\sqrt{3}\right) \right]
815: ^{-1}=1.518651...,
816: \end{equation}
817: for hc lattice.
818:
819: \section{Specific heat}
820:
821: The specific heat per spin $C/k_B$ for the Ising model on $M\times N$ sq, pt
822: and hc lattices with isotropic couplings are shown, respectively, in figure
823: 2(a), 3(a), 4(a) for $M/N=1$, and in figure 2(b), 3(b), 4(b) for $M/N=1/2$.
824: Figure 3(c) and 4(c) show, respectively, results for pt and hc lattices
825: under pa and aa boundary conditions and for $M/N=1,1/2,1/4$. In general, for
826: three lattices with the same lattice size, the specific heat under $pp$
827: boundary condition is always larger than those under other boundary
828: conditions. Note that for sq lattices with $M/N=1$, $C^{pa}$ and $C^{aa}$
829: are distinct in figure 2(a), but for pt and hc lattices with $M/N=1$ in
830: figure 3(a) and 4(a), they coincide and are non-distinguishable due to the
831: last term in the bracket of equation (\ref{exact}), which is associated with
832: the structure symmetries of pt and hc lattices. These behaviours can be
833: violated by taking aspect ratio $\xi =M/N\neq 1$, and the results are shown
834: in figures 3(b), (c) and 4(b), (c).
835:
836: We further study the displacements of the maximum of $C^{pp}$ and $C^{pa}$.
837: The shift behaviours of the maximum in $C_{NN}\left( T\right) $ are shown in
838: figure 5. The slopes of the curves implies the rates of approach of $C^{pp}$
839: and $C^{pa}$ to their limiting behaviours. For periodic-periodic boundary
840: condition, these lattices have linear behaviours in $N\rightarrow \infty $
841: and can be described by the formula \cite{ffpr},
842: \begin{equation}
843: \frac{\left( T_c-T_{\max }\right) }{T_c}\sim \frac aN,\quad \mathrm{as}\
844: N\rightarrow \infty . \label{shift}
845: \end{equation}
846: For periodic-antiperiodic boundary condition, the corresponding formula is
847: also provided by finite-size scaling ansatz. However, for numerical
848: analysis, instead of equation (\ref{shift}), we use
849: \begin{equation}
850: \frac{\left( T_c-T_{\max }\right) }{T_c}=\frac aN+\frac{b_1}{N^2}+\frac{b_2}{%
851: N^3}+....
852: \end{equation}
853: As a result, we have $a_s^{pp}=0.360$, $b_{1,s}^{pp}=-0.47$, $a_s^{pa}=0.18$, $b_{1,s}^{pa}=-2.19$, for the sq lattice, $%
854: a_t^{pp}=0.363$, $b_{1,t}^{pp}=-0.91$, $a_t^{pa}=0.09$, $b_{1,t}^{pa}=0.60$ for the pt lattice, $a_h^{pp}=0.268$, $b_{1,h}^{pp}=0.24$, $%
855: a_h^{pa}=0.09$, $b_{1,h}^{pa}=0.87$ for the hc lattice, and the value of $b_2$ is of the order of $1$. The values of $a^{pp}$ is larger than $%
856: a^{pa}$ for three lattices, and this implies the approach to
857: limiting behaviour for $pp$ boundary condition is faster than $pa$
858: boundary conditions. Since the logarithmic divergence of the
859: specific heat is independent of boundary conditions and can not be
860: used to distinguish $C^{pp}$ and $C^{pa}$ of large lattice, then
861: the values of $a$ may be used to distinguish two boundary
862: conditions.
863:
864: \section{Discussion}
865:
866: We have solved the exact partition functions of $M\times N$ pt and hc
867: lattices with different boundary conditions. These results can provide the
868: analytical background for further studies on the effects of lattice
869: structures and boundary conditions on critical properties and critical
870: finite-size corrections of the Ising model.
871:
872: Firstly, universal finite-size scaling functions for critical systems have
873: received much attention in recent years \cite
874: {hu,ckhuprl96,okabe,okabepre99,tomita,hphsu,watanabe}, and it is well known
875: that the finite-size scaling functions depend on the boundary conditions
876: \cite{huck94}. Hu, Lin and Chen, and Okabe and Kikuchi have discussed the
877: difference in the finite-size scaling functions for lattice models under
878: periodic boundary and free boundary conditions in connection with the
879: universal finite-size scaling function for percolation problem \cite{hu} and
880: Ising model \cite{okabe}, respectively. Other boundary conditions, such as
881: the Ising model on an $M\times N$ simple-quartic lattice embedded on a
882: M\"obius strip and Klein bottle also has been studied \cite{fywu}. Kaneda
883: and Okabe found that there is interesting aspect ratio dependence of the
884: value of the Binder parameter at criticality for various boundary conditions
885: \cite{ko}. It is then interesting to have a rigorous test of finite-size
886: scaling function and critical finite-size corrections for different planar
887: Ising model under various boundaries.
888:
889: In addition, by using Monte Carlo method, Hu, Lin and Chen \cite
890: {hu,ckhuprl96}, Tomita, Okabe and Hu \cite{tomita} have found that the
891: universal finite-size scaling functions of the scaled quantities for sq, pt
892: and hc lattices depend on the aspect ratios and have very good universal
893: finite-size scaling behaviours when the aspect ratios of these lattices have
894: the proportions $1:\sqrt{3}/2:\sqrt{3}$. This further implies
895: lattice-structure-dependence of the universal finite-size scaling function
896: and it would be a rigorous test from analytical aspect. To aforementioned
897: topics, we have found finite-size scaling behaviours for sq, pt and hc
898: lattices under period-aperiodic boundary conditions. By selecting a very
899: small numbers of nonuniversal metric factors, we have further found very
900: good universal finite-size scaling behaviours for these lattices, and the
901: results will be presented in other paper.
902:
903: Finally, the discussion of the specific heat in this paper also inspire
904: another problem. Quite recently, Izmailian and Hu have found exact amplitude
905: ratio and finite-size corrections for the $M\times N$ sq lattice Ising mode
906: on a torus \cite{izmailian}, and new sets of the universal amplitude ratios
907: of subdominant correction to scaling amplitudes \cite{izmailianletter}. The
908: results of section 4 suggest that $a^{pp}/a^{pa}$ for sq, pt and hc lattices
909: are roughly $2$, $4$, and $3$. The question is $^{\backprime\backprime}$is
910: there exact relations between $a^{pp}$ and $a^{pa}$ for these lattices ?$%
911: ^{\prime\prime}$ It is interesting to study this question and to have a
912: heuristic argument for this simple relation.
913:
914: \ack{The authors wish to thank V. N. Plechko for valuable discussions and a
915: critical reading of the paper. This work was supported in part by the
916: National Science Council of the Republic of China (Taiwan) under Grant No.
917: NSC 90-2112-M-001-074.}
918:
919: \newpage
920:
921: \section*{References}
922:
923: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
924: \bibitem{stanley71} Stanley H E 1971 \textit{Introduction to Phase
925: Transitions and Critical Phenomena} (New York: Oxford University Press)
926:
927: \bibitem{kadanoff90} Kadanoff L P 1990 \textit{Physica} A \textbf{163} 1
928:
929: \bibitem{onsager} Onsager L 1944 \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{65} 117
930:
931: \bibitem{mcwu} Wu M C, Huang M C, Luo Y P and Liaw T M 1999 \textit{J.
932: Phys. A: Math. Gen.} \textbf{32} 4897
933:
934: \bibitem{ckhupre99} Hu C K, Chen J A, Izmailian N Sh and Kleban P 1999
935: \textit{Phys. Rev. E} \textbf{60} 6491
936:
937: \bibitem{queiroz} de Queiroz S L A 2000 \textit{J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.}
938: \textbf{33} 721
939:
940: \bibitem{ivashkevich} Ivashkevich E V, Izmailian N Sh and Hu C K 2001
941: Kronecker's Double Series and Exact Asymptotic Expansion for Free
942: Models of Statistical Mechanics on Torus \textit{e-print}
943: cond-mat/0102470
944:
945: \bibitem{izmailian} Izmailian N Sh and Hu C K 2000 \textit{e-print}
946: cond-mat/0009024; 2002 \textit{Phys. Rev. E} \textbf{65} 036103
947:
948: \bibitem{izmailianletter} Izmailian N Sh and Hu C K 2001 \textit{Phys. Rev.
949: Lett.} \textbf{86} 5160
950:
951: \bibitem{salas} Salas J 2001 \textit{e-print} cond-math/0110287; 2002
952: \textit{J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.} \textbf{35} 1833
953:
954: \bibitem{jankeprb} Janke W and Kenna R 2002 \textit{Phys. Rev. B} \textbf{65%
955: } 064110
956:
957: \bibitem{izmailianep} Izmailian N Sh, Oganesyan K B and Hu C K 2002 \textit{%
958: e-print} cond-mat/0202282; 2002 \textit{Phys. Rev. E} \textbf{65},
959: in press.
960:
961: \bibitem{barber} Barber M N 1983 \textit{Phase Transitions and Critical
962: Phenomena}, edited by Domb C and Lebowitz J L Vol 8 (New York: Academic)
963:
964: \bibitem{huck94} Hu C K 1994 \textit{J. Phys. A: Math and Gen.} \textbf{27}
965: L813
966:
967: \bibitem{hu} Hu C K, Lin C Y and Chen J A 1995 \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett}.
968: \textbf{75} 193; 1995 \textbf{75} 2786E; 1995 \textit{Physica A} \textbf{221}
969: 80
970:
971: \bibitem{ckhuprl96} Hu C K and Lin C Y 1996 \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.}
972: \textbf{77} 8
973:
974: \bibitem{okabe} Okabe Y and Kikuchi M 1996 \textit{Int. J. Mod. Phys.} C
975: \textbf{7 }287
976:
977: \bibitem{fywu} Lu W T and Wu F Y 2001 \textit{Phys. Rev.} E \textbf{63}
978: 26017
979:
980: \bibitem{ko} Kaneda K and Okabe Y 2001 \textit{Phys. Rev. Let.} \textbf{86}
981: 2134
982:
983: \bibitem{okabepre99} Okabe Y, Kaneda K, Kikuchi M and Hu C K \textit{Phys.
984: Rev. E} \textbf{59} 1585
985:
986: \bibitem{tomita} Tomita Y, Okabe Y and Hu C K 1999 \textit{Phys. Rev.} E
987: \textbf{60} 2716
988:
989: \bibitem{kaufman} Kaufman B 1949 \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{76} 1232
990:
991: \bibitem{nash} Nash C and O'Connor D 1999 \textit{Ann. Phys.} \textbf{273}
992: 72
993:
994: \bibitem{shultz} Schultz T D, Mattis D C and Lieb E H 1964 \textit{Rev.
995: Mod. Phys.} \textbf{36} 856
996:
997: \bibitem{kac} Kac M and Ward J C 1952 \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{88} 1332
998:
999: \bibitem{green} Green H S and Hurst C A 1964 \textit{Order-Disorder
1000: Phenomena} (New York: Interscience )
1001:
1002: \bibitem{kasteleyn} Kasteleyn P W 1963 \textit{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{4}
1003: 287
1004:
1005: \bibitem{fisherjmp} Fisher M E 1966 \textit{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{7} 1776
1006:
1007: \bibitem{stephenson} Stephenson J 1964 \textit{J. Math. Phys.} \textbf{5}
1008: 1009
1009:
1010: \bibitem{plechko1} Plechko V N 1985 \textit{Theor. Math. Phys.} \textbf{64}
1011: 748
1012:
1013: \bibitem{plechko2} Plechko V N 1988 \textit{Physica} A \textbf{152} 51
1014:
1015: \bibitem{plechko3} Plechko V N and Sobolev I K 1991 \textit{Phys. Lett}. A
1016: \textbf{157} 335
1017:
1018: \bibitem{liaw} Liaw T M, Huang M C, Lin S C and Wu M C 1999 \textit{Phys.
1019: Rev.} B \textbf{60} 12994
1020:
1021: \bibitem{berezin} Berezin F A 1966 \textit{The Method of Second Quantization%
1022: } (New York: Academic)
1023:
1024: \bibitem{thesis} Wu M C 1999 \textit{Analytical analyses of
1025: coupling-anisotropy and finite-size effects on interfacial tensions and
1026: specific heats for a class of Ising strips} Ph.D thesis (Taiwan: Chung-Yuan
1027: Christian University)
1028:
1029: \bibitem{ffpr} Ferdinand A E and Fisher M E 1969 \textit{Phys. Rev.}
1030: \textbf{185} 832
1031:
1032: \bibitem{hphsu} Hsu H P, Lin S C and Hu C K 2001 \textit{Phys. Rev. E}
1033: \textbf{64} 016127
1034:
1035: \bibitem{watanabe} Watanabe H et al. 2001 \textit{J. Phys. Soc. Japan.}
1036: \textbf{70} 1537
1037: \end{thebibliography}
1038:
1039: \newpage
1040: \Figure{(a)The global structure of the triangular lattice used in this
1041: paper. A basic cell of the lattice site is given by $(m,n)$, and the
1042: coupling constants are $J_1$, $J_2$ and $J_3$. (b)The global structure of
1043: the honeycomb lattice used in this paper. Each basic cell contains an inner
1044: Ising spin $\sigma_0$.}
1045:
1046: \Figure{The specific heat per spin for (a) $N\times N$ square Ising lattices
1047: with isotropic couplings under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $aa$ boundary
1048: conditions, and (b) $M\times N$ square Ising lattices with isotropic
1049: couplings and aspect ratio $M/N=1/2$ under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $aa $
1050: boundary conditions. The critical point $\theta _c$ is marked by a vertical
1051: line. }
1052:
1053: \Figure{The specific heat per spin for (a) $N\times N$ plane-triangular
1054: Ising lattices with isotropic couplings under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $aa$
1055: boundary conditions, (b) $M\times N$ plane-triangular Ising lattices with
1056: isotropic couplings and aspect ratio $M/N=1/2$ under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $%
1057: aa $ boundary conditions, and (c) $M\times N$ plane-triangular Ising
1058: lattices with isotropic couplings and aspect ratio $M/N=1,1/2,1/4$ under $pa$
1059: and $aa$ boundary conditions. The critical point $\theta _c$ is marked by a
1060: vertical line.}
1061:
1062: \Figure{The specific heat per spin for (a) $N\times N$ honeycomb Ising
1063: lattices with isotropic couplings under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $aa$ boundary
1064: conditions, (b) $M\times N$ honeycomb Ising lattices with isotropic
1065: couplings and aspect ratio $M/N=1/2$ under $pp$, $pa$, $ap$ and $aa$
1066: boundary conditions, and (c) $M\times N$ honeycomb Ising lattices with
1067: isotropic couplings and aspect ratio $M/N=1,1/2,1/4$ under $pa$ and $aa$
1068: boundary conditions. The critical point $\theta _c$ is marked by a vertical
1069: line.}
1070:
1071: \Figure{(a) Variation of $\left( T_{\max }-T_c\right) $ with finite $N$ for $%
1072: N\times N$ square Ising lattices with isotropic couplings under $pp$ and $pa$
1073: boundary conditions. The broken lines are given by $\left( T_{\max
1074: }-T_c\right) /T_c=a/N$ and indicate the limiting behaviour as $N\rightarrow
1075: \infty $. (b) Variation of $\left( T_{\max }-T_c\right) $ with finite $N$
1076: for $N\times N$ plane-triangular Ising lattices with isotropic couplings
1077: under $pp$ and $pa$ boundary conditions. (c) Variation of $\left( T_{\max
1078: }-T_c\right) $ with finite $N$ for $N\times N$ honeycomb Ising lattices with
1079: isotropic couplings under $pp$ and $pa$ boundary conditions.}
1080:
1081: \end{document}
1082: