1: \documentclass[prb,twocolumn,aps,showpacs,eqsecnum,amsmath]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{bm}
4:
5:
6: \begin{document}
7: \title{
8: Generalized two-leg Hubbard ladder at half-filling:\\
9: Phase diagram and quantum criticalities
10: }
11: \author{M.\ Tsuchiizu and A.\ Furusaki}
12: \affiliation{
13: Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University,
14: Kyoto 606-8502, Japan}
15: \date{\today}
16:
17: \begin{abstract}
18: The ground-state phase diagram of the half-filled two-leg Hubbard
19: ladder with inter-site Coulomb repulsions and exchange coupling
20: is studied by using the strong-coupling perturbation theory and the
21: weak-coupling bosonization method.
22: Considered here as possible ground states of the ladder model are
23: four types of density-wave states with different angular momentum
24: ($s$-density-wave state, $p$-density-wave state,
25: $d$-density-wave state, and $f$-density-wave state)
26: and four types of quantum disordered states, i.e., Mott insulating
27: states (S-Mott, D-Mott, S'-Mott, and
28: D'-Mott states, where S and D stand for $s$- and $d$-wave symmetry).
29: The $s$-density-wave state, the $d$-density-wave state, and
30: the D-Mott state are also known as the
31: charge-density-wave state, the staggered-flux state, and
32: the rung-singlet state, respectively.
33: Strong-coupling approach naturally leads to the Ising model in a
34: transverse field as an effective theory for the quantum
35: phase transitions between the staggered-flux state and the
36: D-Mott state and between the charge-density-wave state and
37: the S-Mott state,
38: where the Ising ordered states correspond to doubly degenerate ground
39: states in the staggered-flux or the charge-density-wave state.
40: From the weak-coupling bosonization approach it is shown that
41: there are three cases in the quantum phase transitions between a
42: density-wave state and a Mott state: the Ising (Z$_2$) criticality,
43: the SU(2)$_2$ criticality, and a first-order transition.
44: The quantum phase transitions between Mott states and between
45: density-wave states are found to be the U(1) Gaussian criticality.
46: The ground-state phase diagram is determined by integrating
47: perturbative renormalization-group equations.
48: It is shown that the S-Mott state and the staggered-flux state
49: exist in the region sandwiched by the charge-density-wave phase
50: and the D-Mott phase.
51: The $p$-density-wave state, the S'-Mott state, and the D'-Mott state
52: also appear in the phase diagram when
53: the next-nearest-neighbor repulsion is included.
54: The correspondence between
55: Mott states in extended Hubbard ladders
56: and spin liquid states in spin ladders
57: is also discussed.
58: \end{abstract}
59:
60: \pacs{71.10.Fd, 71.10.Hf, 71.10.Pm, 71.30.+h, 74.20.Mn}
61:
62: \maketitle
63:
64:
65: \section{Introduction}
66:
67: Ladder systems have been studied intensively over the years
68: as a simplified model system that shows
69: variety of quantum phenomena due to strong electron
70: correlations.\cite{Dagotto}
71: Since the ladder models can be analyzed with powerful nonperturbative
72: methods such as bosonization and conformal field theory
73: as well as with large-scale numerical calculations,
74: they provide a useful testing ground of various
75: theoretical ideas developed for the two-dimensional case.
76: Moreover, the studies of ladder systems have been strongly
77: stimulated by experimental developments in synthesizing
78: compounds with ladder structure that show superconductivity
79: and spin-liquid behavior.\cite{Azuma,Ishida,Kojima}
80: A good example is the ladder compound
81: Sr$_{14}$Cu$_{24}$O$_{41}$ that shows $d$-wave superconducting
82: order\cite{Uehara} under pressure with Ca doping and
83: charge-density-wave (CDW) order as recently suggested
84: experimentally.\cite{Blumberg,Gorshunov}
85: Theoretical studies on doped ladder models such as the Hubbard
86: and $t$-$J$ ladders
87: \cite{Dagotto1992,Finkelstein,Fabrizio,Noack,Sigrist,Tsunetsugu1994,%
88: Khveshchenko1994,Nagaosa,Dagotto,Gopalan,Sano,%
89: Schulz1996,Balents1996,Orignac,Yoshioka1997,Tsuchiizu2001}
90: have established that the dominant correlation is indeed
91: a $d$-wave-like superconducting order, a feature that is
92: reminiscent of the $d$-wave superconductivity in high-$T_c$ cuprates.
93: On the other hand, undoped half-filled Hubbard and
94: Heisenberg ladders are insulators that
95: have a gap in both charge and spin
96: excitations.\cite{Dagotto,Gopalan,Khveshchenko1994,Shelton,Lin,%
97: Noack,White1994,LeHur}
98: This spin-liquid behavior is caused by singlet formation on each
99: rung, and the state is said to be in the rung-singlet phase.
100: It is also named D-Mott phase\cite{Lin} because of its close
101: connection to the $d$-wave-like paring state.
102:
103: Recent theoretical interest on the ladder models has been focused on
104: the search of exotic phases in these systems.
105: In particular, the staggered-flux (SF) state,\cite{Marston}
106: which is also known as the orbital
107: antiferromagnet\cite{Halperin,Nersesyan1989,Schulz1989} and
108: the $d$-density wave,\cite{Nayak2000,Chakravarty}
109: has received
110: a lot of attention.\cite{Nersesyan1991,Nersesyan1993,Ivanov1998,%
111: Scalapino2001,Tsutsui2001,Fjaerestad}
112: For more than a decade the SF state has been intensively studied in
113: connection
114: with the pseudo-gap phase in the two-dimensional high-$T_c$
115: cuprates.\cite{Marston,Sachdev2000,Lee,Ivanov2000,Leung,Nayak2000,%
116: Chakravarty,Nayak2002}
117: The SF state has spontaneous currents flowing around
118: plaquettes, breaking the time-reversal symmetry.
119: Even though ladders are one-dimensional (1D), the long-range order
120: of the SF correlation is possible at half-filling, since the
121: symmetry broken in this state is discrete.
122: This point was emphasized recently in Ref.\ \onlinecite{Fjaerestad},
123: where it is also suggested that the SF phase should occur in the phase
124: diagram of the SO(5) symmetric Hubbard
125: model.\cite{Scalapino1998,Frahm}
126: Besides the SF phase, the ground-state phase diagram of the ladder
127: models can include the D-Mott phase mentioned above,
128: the CDW phase,\cite{Vojta1999} and other phases.
129:
130: Motivated by these developments, in this paper we attempt
131: systematic exploration of the ground-state phase diagram of
132: a generalized two-leg Hubbard ladder at half-filling
133: that has not only repulsive on-site and inter-site
134: interactions but also antiferromagnetic (AF) exchange interaction and
135: pair hoppings between the legs.
136: To map out the possible phases in the parameter space of the model
137: and to analyze various quantum phase transitions,
138: we employ both the strong-coupling perturbation theory and
139: the weak-coupling bosonization method.
140: We find that the inclusion of the additional interactions leads to
141: emergence of various new phases.
142:
143: In the strong-coupling approach, we describe the SF state
144: as an AF ordered state of pseudo-spins
145: that represent currents flowing on the rungs.
146: The effective theory near the phase boundary between the SF state
147: and the D-Mott state is then found to be the 1D Ising
148: model in a transverse field.
149: The D-Mott phase is thus interpreted as a disordered state of
150: the Ising model.
151: We also present a similar mapping to the 1D quantum Ising model
152: for the quantum phase transition between the CDW phase and the
153: S-Mott phase.\cite{Lin}
154: Here the CDW state and the S-Mott state correspond to the ordered and
155: quantum disordered states of the Ising model, respectively.
156: Furthermore, we show that a low-energy effective theory near the
157: phase transition between the D-Mott and the S-Mott phases is the
158: XXZ spin chain in a staggered field, which exhibits a U(1)
159: Gaussian criticality.
160:
161: In the weak-coupling limit,
162: we follow the standard approach of taking continuum limit and
163: bosonizing the Hamiltonian.
164: We obtain a coupled sine-Gordon model for four bosonic modes
165: (charge/spin \& even/odd modes) and analyze it by perturbative
166: renormalization-group (RG) method and a semiclassical approximation.
167: The scaling equations we derive are equivalent to those obtained
168: earlier by Lin, Balents, and Fisher.\cite{Lin}
169: We depart here from the earlier work.
170: We consider four types of density-wave states with different
171: angular momentum:\cite{Nayak2000} $s$-density wave (= CDW),
172: $p$-density wave (PDW, which is equivalent to the spin-Peierls state),
173: $d$-density wave (= SF), and $f$-density wave (FDW).
174: These density-wave states break Z$_2$ symmetry and can have
175: long-range order at zero temperature.
176: We find that in general there should appear four types of Mott
177: insulating phases (called S-Mott, D-Mott, S'-Mott, and D'-Mott
178: states), each of which can be obtained as a quantum
179: disordered state from one of the four Z$_2$-symmetry-breaking
180: density-wave states.
181: We then study quantum phase transitions among these 8 phases
182: and show that a transition between a density-wave state and a
183: Mott state is either second order (in the Ising or SU(2)$_2$
184: universality class) or first order.\cite{transitions}
185: Phase transitions between density-wave states and between Mott
186: states are U(1) Gaussian criticalities.
187: After classifying the phases and the quantum phase transitions,
188: we determine the ground-state phase diagram of the extended
189: Hubbard model with extra inter-site repulsion and the exchange
190: interaction.
191: We find that the S-Mott and the SF phases appear in the
192: parameter space of couplings where the D-Mott and the CDW phases
193: compete.
194: We also show that the next-nearest-neighbor repulsion stabilizes
195: the S'-Mott state and the PDW state; the latter state is connected to
196: the D-Mott state through the SU(2)$_2$ criticality.
197:
198: This paper is organized as follows.
199: In Sec.\ \ref{sec:model}
200: the model we analyze in this paper is introduced.
201: In Sec.\ \ref{sec:strongcoupling}
202: we study the ground-state phase diagram by
203: the strong-coupling perturbation theory, and
204: examine phase transitions between the competing
205: ground states: the SF, D-Mott, CDW, and S-Mott states.
206: In Sec.\ \ref{sec:weakcoupling} we apply the weak-coupling
207: bosonization method to study the ground-state phase diagram.
208: We derive effective low-energy theory for the charge mode and
209: for the spin mode that describe the Gaussian, Ising, and SU(2)$_2$
210: criticalities.
211: The connection of our results to the phase diagram of spin ladders
212: with spin liquid ground states is also discussed.
213: We then determine the phase diagram of the generalized Hubbard
214: ladder from perturbative RG equations.
215: Finally, the results are summarized in Sec.\ \ref{sec:summary}.
216:
217:
218: \section{Model}\label{sec:model}
219:
220: We consider a half-filled two-leg Hubbard ladder
221: with on-site and inter-site Coulomb repulsions
222: and rung exchange interaction.
223: The Hamiltonian we study in this paper is given by
224: %===================================================================
225: \begin{equation}
226: H
227: =
228: H_{t_\parallel}
229: +
230: H_{t_\perp}
231: +
232: H_{\mathrm{int}}
233: +
234: H_{V_\parallel}
235: +
236: H_{V'}
237: +
238: H_{\mathrm{pair}}.
239: \label{eq:H}
240: \end{equation}
241: %================================================================
242: The first two terms
243: describe hopping along and between the legs, respectively:
244: %===================================================================
245: \begin{eqnarray}
246: H_{t_\parallel} &=& - t_\parallel \sum_{j,\sigma,l}
247: (c_{j,l,\sigma}^\dagger \, c_{j+1,l,\sigma}^{}+\mathrm{H.c.})
248: ,
249: \\
250: H_{t_\perp} &=& - t_\perp \sum_{j,\sigma}
251: (c_{j,1,\sigma}^\dagger \, c_{2,j,\sigma}^{}+\mathrm{H.c.})
252: ,
253: \end{eqnarray}
254: %================================================================
255: where $c_{j,l,\sigma}$ annihilates an
256: electron of spin $\sigma(=\uparrow,\downarrow)$ on rung $j$ and
257: leg $l(=1,2)$.
258: The Hamiltonian
259: $H_{\mathrm{int}}=H_U+H_{V_\perp}+H_{J_\perp}$ consists of three
260: terms representing interactions within a rung: the on-site repulsion,
261: %===================================================================
262: \begin{equation}
263: H_{U}
264: =
265: U \sum_{j,l} n_{j,l,\uparrow} \, n_{j,l,\downarrow}
266: ,
267: \end{equation}
268: the nearest-neighbor repulsion on a rung,
269: \begin{equation}
270: H_{V_\perp}
271: =
272: V_\perp \sum_j n_{j,1} \, n_{j,2}
273: ,
274: \end{equation}
275: and the nearest-neighbor exchange interaction on a rung,
276: \begin{equation}
277: H_{J_\perp}
278: =
279: J_\perp \sum_{j} \bm{S}_{j,1} \cdot \bm{S}_{j,2} .
280: \end{equation}
281: %================================================================
282: The density operators are
283: $n_{j,l,\sigma}=c_{j,l,\sigma}^\dagger \, c_{j,l,\sigma}^{}$
284: and $n_{j,l}=n_{j,l,\uparrow}+n_{j,l,\downarrow}$, and
285: the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ operator is given by
286: %===================================================================
287: \begin{equation}
288: \mbox{\boldmath $S$}_{j,l} = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\sigma_1,\sigma_2}
289: c_{j,l,\sigma_1}^\dagger \, \bm{\sigma}_{\sigma_1,\sigma_2} \,
290: c_{j,l,\sigma_2}^{},
291: \end{equation}
292: %================================================================
293: where $\bm{\sigma}_{\sigma_1,\sigma_2}$ are the Pauli matrices.
294: The Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H}) also has nearest-neighbor repulsive
295: interaction within a leg,
296: %===================================================================
297: \begin{equation}
298: H_{V_\parallel}
299: =
300: V_\parallel \sum_{j,l} n_{j,l} \, n_{j+1,l}
301: ,
302: \label{eq:HVpara}
303: \end{equation}
304: and next-nearest-neighbor repulsion,
305: \begin{equation}
306: H_{V'}
307: =
308: V' \sum_{j}
309: \left(n_{j,1} \, n_{j+1,2} + n_{j,2} \, n_{j+1,1} \right)
310: .
311: \label{eq:HVprime}
312: \end{equation}
313: %================================================================
314: The last component of the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H}) is
315: the pair hopping between the legs,
316: %===================================================================
317: \begin{equation}
318: H_{\mathrm{pair}}
319: =
320: t_\mathrm{pair} \sum_j
321: \left(
322: c_{j,1,\uparrow}^\dagger \, c_{j,1,\downarrow}^\dagger \,
323: c_{j,2,\downarrow}^{} \, c_{j,2,\uparrow}^{}
324: + \mathrm{H.c.}
325: \right)
326: .
327: \label{eq:Hpair}
328: \end{equation}
329: %================================================================
330: The coupling constants, $U$, $V_\perp$, $V_\parallel$, $V'$,
331: $J_\perp$, and $t_{\mathrm{pair}}$,
332: are assumed to be either zero or positive.
333: (Most of our discussions are actually concerned with the case
334: $V_\parallel=V'=t_\mathrm{pair}=0$.)
335: In this paper we consider only the half-filled case where
336: $\sum_{j,l}n_{j,l}$ equals the number of total lattice sites.
337:
338:
339: \section{Strong-Coupling Approach}\label{sec:strongcoupling}
340:
341: In this section, we perform strong-coupling analysis starting from the
342: independent rungs and discuss transitions between various
343: insulating phases.
344:
345: We begin with eigenstates of $H_{\mathrm{int}}$ for decoupled
346: rungs at half-filling.
347: Convenient basis states for two electrons on a single rung (e.g.,
348: $j$th rung) with $S^z_{j,1}+S^z_{j,2}=0$ are
349: %===================================================================
350: \begin{eqnarray}
351: |1\rangle_j &=&
352: \left|
353: \begin{array}{c}
354: \uparrow \\ \downarrow
355: \end{array}
356: \right\rangle_j
357: \equiv
358: c_{j,1,\uparrow}^\dagger \, c_{j,2,\downarrow}^\dagger \, | 0 \rangle
359: ,
360: \label{eq:state1}
361: \\
362: |2\rangle_j &=&
363: \left|
364: \begin{array}{c}
365: \downarrow \\ \uparrow
366: \end{array}
367: \right\rangle_j
368: \equiv
369: c_{j,1,\downarrow}^\dagger \, c_{j,2,\uparrow}^\dagger \, | 0 \rangle
370: ,
371: \\
372: |3\rangle_j &=&
373: \left|
374: \begin{array}{c}
375: \uparrow\downarrow \\ -
376: \end{array}
377: \right\rangle_j
378: \equiv
379: c_{j,1,\uparrow}^\dagger \, c_{j,1,\downarrow}^\dagger \, | 0 \rangle
380: ,
381: \\
382: |4\rangle_j &=&
383: \left|
384: \begin{array}{c}
385: - \\ \uparrow\downarrow
386: \end{array}
387: \right\rangle_j
388: \equiv
389: c_{j,2,\uparrow}^\dagger \, c_{j,2,\downarrow}^\dagger \, | 0 \rangle
390: .
391: \label{eq:state4}
392: \end{eqnarray}
393: %================================================================
394: The interaction Hamiltonian $H_{\mathrm{int}}$ is diagonalized as
395: %===================================================================
396: \begin{eqnarray}
397: H_{\mathrm{int}} \frac{| 1 \rangle_j - | 2 \rangle_j }{\sqrt{2}}
398: &=&
399: \left(V_\perp - \frac{3}{4}J_\perp \right)
400: \frac{| 1 \rangle_j - | 2 \rangle_j }{\sqrt{2}}
401: ,
402: \label{eq:eigen1}
403: \\
404: H_{\mathrm{int}} \frac{| 1 \rangle_j + | 2 \rangle_j }{\sqrt{2}}
405: &=&
406: \left(V_\perp + \frac{1}{4}J_\perp \right)
407: \frac{| 1 \rangle_j + | 2 \rangle_j }{\sqrt{2}}
408: ,
409: \\
410: H_{\mathrm{int}} \, | 3 \rangle_j
411: &=&
412: U \, |3 \rangle_j
413: ,
414: \\
415: H_{\mathrm{int}} \, | 4 \rangle_j
416: &=&
417: U \, |4 \rangle_j
418: .
419: \label{eq:eigen4}
420: \end{eqnarray}
421: %================================================================
422:
423: Comparing the eigenvalues, we find that
424: the lowest-energy state of $H_{\mathrm{int}}$ for
425: $U>V_\perp -3J_\perp/4$ is
426: %===================================================================
427: \begin{eqnarray}
428: |\mbox{D-Mott}\rangle
429: =
430: \prod_j
431: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
432: \left[ \left|
433: \begin{array}{c}
434: \uparrow \\ \downarrow
435: \end{array}
436: \right\rangle_j
437: -
438: \left|
439: \begin{array}{c}
440: \downarrow \\ \uparrow
441: \end{array}
442: \right\rangle_j
443: \right]
444: .
445: \label{eq:D-Mott}
446: \end{eqnarray}
447: %================================================================
448: This state is a direct product of rung singlets and is nothing
449: but the strong-coupling limit of the D-Mott phase\cite{Lin} or the Mott
450: insulating phase of a half-filled Hubbard ladder.
451:
452: When $U<V_\perp -3J_\perp/4$, on the other hand, the doubly occupied
453: states $|3\rangle$ and $|4\rangle$ become lowest-energy states.
454: In this case, one of the possible ground states
455: is the on-site paired insulating state realized in the S-Mott
456: phase,\cite{Lin}
457: %===================================================================
458: \begin{equation}
459: |\mbox{S-Mott}\rangle
460: =
461: \prod_j
462: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
463: \left[
464: \left|
465: \begin{array}{c}
466: \uparrow\downarrow \\ -
467: \end{array}
468: \right\rangle_j
469: +
470: \left|
471: \begin{array}{c}
472: - \\ \uparrow\downarrow
473: \end{array}
474: \right\rangle_j
475: \right]
476: .
477: \label{eq:S-Mott}
478: \end{equation}
479: %================================================================
480: Another possible ground state is the CDW state:
481: %================================================================
482: \begin{subequations}
483: \begin{equation}
484: |\mathrm{CDW}\rangle_1=
485: \prod_j
486: \left[
487: \left|
488: \begin{array}{c}
489: \uparrow\downarrow \\ -
490: \end{array}
491: \right\rangle_{2j-1}
492: \left|
493: \begin{array}{c}
494: - \\ \uparrow\downarrow
495: \end{array}
496: \right\rangle_{2j}
497: \right]
498: \label{eq:CDW1}
499: \end{equation}
500: and
501: \begin{equation}
502: |\mathrm{CDW}\rangle_2=
503: \prod_j
504: \left[
505: \left|
506: \begin{array}{c}
507: - \\ \uparrow\downarrow
508: \end{array}
509: \right\rangle_{2j-1}
510: \left|
511: \begin{array}{c}
512: \uparrow\downarrow \\ -
513: \end{array}
514: \right\rangle_{2j}
515: \right].
516: \label{eq:CDW2}
517: \end{equation}
518: \label{eq:CDW}
519: \end{subequations}
520: %================================================================
521:
522: In the next subsections we study phase transitions between these
523: phases.
524:
525:
526: \subsection{CDW--S-Mott transition: Ising criticality}
527:
528: In this subsection we discuss the phase transition
529: between the S-Mott phase\cite{Lin} and the CDW
530: phase\cite{Lin,Vojta1999} for $U<V_\perp-3J_\perp/4$.
531: This can be analyzed by mapping
532: the system onto an effective spin model.
533: A similar analysis for the SO(5) symmetric ladder is reported
534: in Refs.\ \onlinecite{Scalapino1998} and \onlinecite{Frahm}.
535:
536: We restrict ourselves to the lowest-energy states
537: $|3\rangle$ and $|4\rangle$ and denote them as
538: %===================================================================
539: \begin{eqnarray}
540: |+\rangle_j
541: \equiv
542: \left|3\right\rangle_j
543: , \,\,\,
544: |-\rangle_j
545: \equiv
546: \left|4\right\rangle_j
547: \label{eq:Ising_spin}
548: \end{eqnarray}
549: %================================================================
550: to make the connection to a spin model more evident.
551: We regard $|\pm\rangle$ as the pseudo-spin up/down states.
552: In this picture, the antiferromagnetic ordering of the spins
553: corresponds to the CDW ordering.
554: We will treat the single-particle hopping terms $H_{t_\parallel}$ and
555: $H_{t_\perp}$ as weak perturbations to derive effective Hamiltonian
556: in the Hilbert space of $|+\rangle$ and $|-\rangle$.
557: The lowest-order contributions come from the second-order processes:
558: %===================================================================
559: \begin{eqnarray}
560: H^{(2a)}
561: &=&
562: H_{t_\parallel} \,
563: \frac{1}{E_0-H_\mathrm{int}} \, H_{t_\parallel},
564: \\
565: H^{(2b)}
566: &=&
567: H_{t_\perp} \, \frac{1}{E_0-H_\mathrm{int}} \, H_{t_\perp},
568: \end{eqnarray}
569: %================================================================
570: where $E_0=NU$ with $N$ being the number of rungs.
571: The nonzero matrix elements of $H^{(2a)}$ and $H^{(2b)}$
572: are given by
573: %===================================================================
574: \begin{eqnarray}
575: \langle \pm, \mp |
576: H^{(2a)} | \pm , \mp \rangle_j
577: &=&
578: \frac{4t_\parallel^2}{U-2V_\perp},
579: \\
580: \langle \pm | H^{(2b)} | \pm \rangle_j
581: =
582: \langle \pm | H^{(2b)} | \mp \rangle_j
583: &=&
584: \frac{2t_\perp^2}{U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4}
585: ,
586: \nonumber \\
587: \end{eqnarray}
588: %================================================================
589: where
590: $|s,s'\rangle_j \equiv |s\rangle_j |s'\rangle_{j+1}$ ($s,s'=\pm$).
591: The above Hamiltonian is written in terms of pseudo-spin operators as
592: %===================================================================
593: \begin{eqnarray}
594: H^{(2a)}
595: &=&
596: \frac{2t_\parallel^2}{2V_\perp-U} \sum_j
597: \left(\tau_j^z \, \tau_{j+1}^z -1\right),
598: \\
599: H^{(2b)}
600: &=&
601: \frac{2t_\perp^2}{U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4}
602: \sum_j \tau_j^x + \mathrm{const.}
603: ,
604: \end{eqnarray}
605: %================================================================
606: where $\tau_j^z$ and $\tau_j^x$ are Pauli matrices
607: acting on the pseudo-spin states:
608: $\tau_j^z|\pm\rangle_j = \pm |\pm\rangle_j$ and
609: $\tau_j^x|\pm\rangle_j=|\mp\rangle_j$.
610: Here we find that $H^{(2a)}$ favors \emph{antiferromagnetic} ordering,
611: while $H^{(2b)}$ prevents the order.
612: We thus find that the effective Hamiltonian for the doubly occupied
613: states $H^\mathrm{eff}_\mathrm{CS}=H^{(2a)}+H^{(2b)}$ is given by
614: the one-dimensional quantum Ising model,
615: %===================================================================
616: \begin{eqnarray}
617: H^\mathrm{eff}_\mathrm{CS}
618: &=&
619: \sum_j \left( K \, \tau_j^z \, \tau_{j+1}^z
620: - h \, \tau_j^x \right)
621: ,
622: \label{eq:H^eff_CS}
623: \end{eqnarray}
624: %================================================================
625: where the antiferromagnetic exchange coupling $K$ and
626: the magnitude of the transverse field $h$ are given by
627: %===================================================================
628: \begin{eqnarray}
629: K
630: =
631: \frac{2t_\parallel^2}{2V_\perp-U},
632: \,\,\,
633: h =
634: \frac{2t_\perp^2}{V_\perp-3J_\perp/4-U}
635: .
636: \end{eqnarray}
637: %================================================================
638: This model exhibits the Ising criticality at $K=h$ between
639: the ordered phase (i.e., the CDW phase)
640: for $K>h$ and the disordered phase for $K<h$.
641: The ground state in the disordered phase is essentially
642: the eigenstate of $\tau^x$ with eigenvalue $+1$, which is nothing
643: but the S-Mott phase:
644: %===================================================================
645: \begin{eqnarray}
646: |\tau^x\!=\!+1\rangle_j
647: =
648: \frac{|+\rangle_j + |-\rangle_j}{\sqrt2}
649: \to |\mbox{S-Mott}\rangle
650: .
651: \end{eqnarray}
652: %================================================================
653:
654: The condition for the CDW phase to appear is
655: given in terms of the Hubbard interactions as
656: %===================================================================
657: \begin{eqnarray}
658: V_\perp
659: >
660: \frac{1-(t_\perp/t_\parallel)^2}{1-2(t_\perp/t_\parallel)^2} U
661: + \frac{3}{4[1-2(t_\perp/t_\parallel)^2]} J_\perp
662: ,
663: \label{eq:CDW-Smott}
664: \end{eqnarray}
665: %================================================================
666: where $0<t_\perp/t_\parallel<1/\sqrt{2}$.
667: When $t_\perp/t_\parallel>1/\sqrt{2}$,
668: the CDW phase is not realized within our approximation.
669:
670: Here we briefly discuss effects of $H_{V_\parallel}$, $H_{V'}$, and
671: $H_{\mathrm{pair}}$, treating them as small perturbations.
672: The lowest-order contributions come from the first-order perturbation,
673: $H^{(1a)}=H_{V_\parallel}+H_{V'}$ and $H^{(1b)}=H_{\mathrm{pair}}$,
674: which can be written in terms of the pseudo-spin operators as
675: $H^{(1a)}=2V_\parallel \sum_j (\tau^z_j \, \tau^z_{j+1}+1)
676: -2V' \sum_j (\tau^z_j \, \tau^z_{j+1}-1)$
677: and $H^{(1b)}=t_{\mathrm{pair}} \sum_j \tau^x_j$.
678: The coupling constants in the quantum Ising model are modified to
679: %===================================================================
680: \begin{eqnarray}
681: K
682: \!\! &=& \!\!
683: \frac{2t_\parallel^2}{2V_\perp-U} + 2V_\parallel-2V',
684: \\
685: h
686: \!\! &=&\!\!
687: \frac{2t_\perp^2}{V_\perp-3J_\perp/4-U}
688: -t_\mathrm{pair}
689: .
690: \end{eqnarray}
691: %================================================================
692: Thus, $H_{V_\parallel}$, $H_{V'}$, and $H_{\mathrm{pair}}$
693: do not change the Ising universality and only affects the coupling
694: constants.
695: Their main effect is to move the phase boundary.
696: The $V_\parallel$ and $t_{\mathrm{pair}}$ interactions
697: favor the Ising ordered phase or the CDW phase, while
698: the $V'$ interaction is in favor of the S-Mott phase.
699:
700:
701: \subsection{D-Mott--S-Mott transition: Gaussian criticality}
702:
703: Next we discuss the parameter region $U\approx V_\perp-3J_\perp/4$.
704: In this case the low-energy states of $H_{\mathrm{int}}$ are formed
705: out of
706: $(|1\rangle_j-|2\rangle_j)/\sqrt{2}$, $|3\rangle_j$, and
707: $|4\rangle_j$; see Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:eigen1})-(\ref{eq:eigen4}).
708: The analysis in the previous subsection indicates that,
709: among the states made of $|3\rangle_j$ and $|4\rangle_j$, only
710: the S-Mott phase can appear for $U\approx V_\perp-3J_\perp/4$ due
711: to the large transverse field $h$.
712: We thus keep only the two states,
713: \begin{equation}
714: |+\rangle\!\rangle_j\equiv\frac{|1\rangle_j-|2\rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}},
715: \quad
716: |-\rangle\!\rangle_j\equiv\frac{|3\rangle_j+|4\rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}},
717: \label{eq:D-Mott S-Mott}
718: \end{equation}
719: for each rung and derive an effective
720: low-energy Hamiltonian for these states to study the competition
721: between the S-Mott and D-Mott phases.
722: In this basis,
723: $H_{\mathrm{int}}$ and $H_{t_\perp}$ on the $j$th rung read
724: %===================================================================
725: \begin{eqnarray}
726: H_{\mathrm{int}}
727: &=&
728: \left(
729: \begin{array}{cc}
730: V_\perp-\frac{3}{4}J_\perp & 0 \\
731: 0 & U
732: \end{array}
733: \right)
734: ,
735: \label{eq:Hint_G}
736: \\
737: H_{t_\perp}
738: &=&
739: \left(
740: \begin{array}{cc}
741: 0 & -2t_\perp \\
742: -2t_\perp & 0
743: \end{array}
744: \right)
745: ,
746: \end{eqnarray}
747: %================================================================
748: where $|+\rangle\!\rangle_j= {}^t(1 ,0)$ and
749: $|-\rangle\!\rangle_j= {}^t(0 ,1)$.
750: Since we are interested in the region near the level crossing point
751: $U=V_\perp-3J_\perp/4$, we split the Hamiltonian as
752: %===================================================================
753: \begin{equation}
754: H_{\mathrm{int}}+H_{t_\perp}+H_{t_\parallel}
755: = H^{(0)}_\mathrm{DS} + H'_\mathrm{DS} ,
756: \end{equation}
757: %================================================================
758: where the unperturbed Hamiltonian $H^{(0)}_\mathrm{DS}$ and
759: the perturbation term $H'_\mathrm{DS}$ are given by
760: $H^{(0)}_\mathrm{DS}=U\sum_j(n_{j,1,\uparrow} \, n_{j,1,\downarrow}
761: + n_{j,2,\uparrow} \, n_{j,2,\downarrow}
762: + n_{j,1} \, n_{j,2})$ and
763: $H'_\mathrm{DS}=(V_\perp-U)\sum_j n_{j,1} \, n_{j,2} + H_{J_\perp}
764: + H_{t_\perp} + H_{t_\parallel}$.
765: Up to second order in $H'_\mathrm{DS}$ the effective Hamiltonian is
766: obtained as $H^{(0)}+H^{(1)}+H^{(2)}$:
767: %===================================================================
768: \begin{eqnarray}
769: &&
770: H^{(0)}_j
771: =
772: \left(
773: \begin{array}{cc}
774: U & 0 \\
775: 0 & U
776: \end{array}
777: \right)
778: ,
779: \\
780: &&
781: H^{(1)}_j
782: =
783: \left(
784: \begin{array}{cc}
785: -(U-V_\perp+\frac{3}{4}J_\perp) & -2t_\perp \\
786: -2t_\perp & 0
787: \end{array}
788: \right)
789: ,
790: \label{eq:Gauss_H1}
791: \\
792: &&
793: H^{(2)}
794: =
795: H_{t_\parallel}
796: \frac{1}{E_0-H_0}
797: H_{t_\parallel},
798: \label{eq:Gauss_H2}
799: \end{eqnarray}
800: %================================================================
801: where $H^{(0)}=\sum_j H^{(0)}_j$, $H^{(1)}=\sum_j H^{(1)}_j$,
802: and $E_0=NU$.
803: Now we introduce spin-1/2 operators
804: $\widetilde{S}^x_j$, $\widetilde{S}^y_j$, and $\widetilde{S}^z_j$ and
805: identify the two states $|+\rangle\!\rangle_j$ and
806: $|-\rangle\!\rangle_j$ with up and down states of the pseudo-spin
807: $\widetilde{S}^z_j$.
808: The first-order term $H^{(1)}$ (\ref{eq:Gauss_H1}) is then written as
809: %===================================================================
810: \begin{eqnarray}
811: H^{(1)}
812: &=&
813: -\left( U-V_\perp+\frac{3}{4}J_\perp \right)
814: \sum_j \left(\widetilde{S}^z_j+\frac{1}{2}\right)
815: \nonumber \\
816: && {}
817: -4t_\perp \sum_j \widetilde{S}^x_j
818: .
819: \label{eq:H^1}
820: \end{eqnarray}
821: %================================================================
822: The energy difference between the $|\pm\rangle\!\rangle_j$ states and
823: the rung hopping
824: are represented as the longitudinal and
825: transverse magnetic fields, respectively.
826: The nonzero matrix elements of $H^{(2)}$ (\ref{eq:Gauss_H2}) are given
827: by
828: %===================================================================
829: \begin{eqnarray}
830: \langle\!\langle \pm, \pm | H^{(2)} | \pm , \pm \rangle\!\rangle_j
831: &=&
832: - \frac{2t_\parallel^2}{U},
833: \\
834: \langle\!\langle \pm, \pm | H^{(2)} | \mp , \mp \rangle\!\rangle_j
835: &=&
836: + \frac{2t_\parallel^2}{U},
837: \\
838: \langle\!\langle \pm, \mp | H^{(2)} | \pm , \mp \rangle\!\rangle_j
839: &=&
840: - \frac{t_\parallel^2}{2U},
841: \\
842: \langle\!\langle \pm, \mp | H^{(2)} | \mp , \pm \rangle\!\rangle_j
843: &=&
844: + \frac{t_\parallel^2}{2U},
845: \end{eqnarray}
846: %================================================================
847: where
848: $|s,s'\rangle\!\rangle_j\equiv
849: |s\rangle\!\rangle_j|s'\rangle\!\rangle_{j+1}$ ($s,s'=\pm$).
850: Thus the second-order contribution $H^{(2)}$
851: is written in terms of the pseudo-spin operators as
852: %===================================================================
853: \begin{eqnarray}
854: H^{(2)}
855: &=&
856: -\frac{t_\parallel^2}{U}
857: \sum_j \left(3 \widetilde{S}^z_j \widetilde{S}^z_{j+1}
858: +\frac{5}{4}\right)
859: \nonumber \\
860: && {}
861: +\frac{2t_\parallel^2}{U}
862: \sum_j \left( \widetilde{S}^+_j \widetilde{S}^+_{j+1}
863: + \widetilde{S}^-_j \widetilde{S}^-_{j+1} \right)
864: \nonumber\\
865: && {}
866: +\frac{t_\parallel^2}{2U}
867: \sum_j \left( \widetilde{S}^+_j \widetilde{S}^-_{j+1}
868: + \widetilde{S}^-_j \widetilde{S}^+_{j+1} \right)
869: .
870: \label{eq:H^2}
871: \end{eqnarray}
872: %================================================================
873: From Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:H^1}) and (\ref{eq:H^2}) we find that,
874: for $U\approx V_\perp-3J_\perp/4$,
875: the low-energy effective Hamiltonian
876: $H^{\mathrm{eff}}_{\mathrm{DS}}=H^{(1)}+H^{(2)}$
877: is given by the anisotropic spin chain under the longitudinal and
878: transverse magnetic fields:
879: %===================================================================
880: \begin{eqnarray}
881: H^{\mathrm{eff}}_{\mathrm{DS}}
882: &=&
883: \sum_j
884: \left[
885: J^x \, \widetilde{S}^x_j \widetilde{S}^x_{j+1}
886: -J^{yz} \left( \widetilde{S}^y_j \widetilde{S}^y_{j+1}
887: + \widetilde{S}^z_j \widetilde{S}^z_{j+1} \right)
888: \right]
889: \nonumber \\
890: &&{}
891: - \sum_j \left( h^x \widetilde{S}^x_j + h^z \widetilde{S}^z_j \right)
892: ,
893: \label{eq:Heff_Gaussian}
894: \end{eqnarray}
895: %================================================================
896: where $J^x=5t_\parallel^2/U$, $J^{yz}=3t_\parallel^2/U$,
897: $h^x = 4t_\perp$,
898: and $ h^z = U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4 $.
899: We are interested in the case where the Zeeman field in the $z$
900: direction $h^z$ is weak.
901: When $h^z=0$, $H^{\mathrm{eff}}_{\mathrm{DS}}$ is equivalent to the
902: XXZ model with the exchange anisotropy $\Delta=J^x/J^{yz}=5/3$ and
903: a uniform field in the $z$ direction.
904: It is known \cite{Alcaraz,Cabra} that the XXZ model is in the massless
905: phase governed by the $c=1$ conformal field theory (CFT) with a
906: compactification radius $R$ ($1/2\sqrt{\pi}<R<1/\sqrt{\pi}$), if
907: the uniform field is in the range
908: $0.175J^{yz} \lesssim h^x < \frac{8}{3}J^{yz}$.
909: The weak perturbation $h^z$ is acting on this gapless system.
910: From the transformation
911: $\widetilde{S}^{y,z}_j\to(-1)^j\widetilde{S}^{y,z}_j$ we see that
912: the Zeeman field $h^z$ acts as a staggered transverse field in the
913: antiferromagnetic XXZ model.
914: Since the scaling dimension of $(-1)^j\widetilde{S}^{y,z}$ is
915: $\pi R^2$, it is a relevant perturbation leading to the opening of
916: a gap.\cite{Oshikawa}
917:
918: Hence we find that, when $h^z \neq 0$,
919: the $h^z$ term is always relevant and generates a mass gap,
920: while for $h^z=0$ the system reduces to the $c=1$ CFT or the
921: Gaussian model.
922: Therefore the D-Mott--S-Mott transition
923: is a Gaussian U(1) criticality
924: with the central charge $c=1$.
925: The critical point is at $h^z=0$, i.e.,
926: %===================================================================
927: \begin{eqnarray}
928: U-V_\perp+ \frac{3}{4} J_\perp = 0.
929: \label{eq:crit-DS}
930: \end{eqnarray}
931: %================================================================
932: The character of the gapped phases at $h^z\ne0$ is deduced by looking
933: at the dominant $h^z$-term.
934: Since the gapped phases should correspond to states minimizing the
935: relevant $h^z$-term, $-h^z\sum_j\widetilde{S}^z_j$,
936: in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_Gaussian}),
937: we conclude that for $h^z>0$ ($h^z<0$)
938: the ground state is a ferromagnetically ordered state with positive
939: (negative) magnetization $\langle\widetilde{S}^z\rangle$,
940: or equivalently, in the D-Mott (S-Mott) phase
941: in the original Hubbard ladder model;
942: see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:D-Mott S-Mott}).
943: %======================================================================
944:
945: \begin{figure}[t]
946: \includegraphics[width=6.cm]{fig01}
947: \caption{
948: Strong-coupling phase diagram of
949: $H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}+H_\mathrm{int}$ at
950: $t_\perp=t_\parallel/2$ and
951: $J_\perp=0$.
952: The CDW--S-Mott transition is in the Ising universality class,
953: while the S-Mott--D-Mott transition is in the U(1)
954: (Gaussian) universality class.
955: The CDW (S-Mott) phase corresponds to the ordered (disordered) phase
956: in the effective quantum Ising model (\ref{eq:H^eff_CS}).
957: The S-Mott and D-Mott phases are the ferromagnetically ordered phases
958: of the effective spin model (\ref{eq:Heff_Gaussian}).
959: }
960: \label{fig:strong1}
961: \end{figure}
962: %======================================================================
963: The phase diagram obtained from the strong-coupling perturbation
964: theory is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:strong1}, where parameters are
965: taken as $t_\perp=t_\parallel/2$ and $J_\perp=0$.
966: The phase transition between the D-Mott state and the
967: S-Mott state is described as the Gaussian criticality,
968: while the phase transition between the S-Mott state and the CDW state
969: is in the universality of the Ising phase transition.
970: The phase diagram for nonzero $J_\perp$ is shown
971: in Fig.\ \ref{fig:strong2}.
972: The CDW phase is realized when the condition (\ref{eq:CDW-Smott}) is
973: satisfied.
974: We note that, within the strong-coupling expansion to second order,
975: the CDW phase does not exist for $t_\parallel=t_\perp$.
976: %======================================================================
977: \begin{figure}[t]
978: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig02}
979: \caption{
980: Strong-coupling phase diagram of
981: $H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}+H_\mathrm{int}$ at $t_\perp=t_\parallel/2$
982: on the plane of $V_\perp/U$ and $J_\perp/U$.
983: The CDW phase occupies the parameter region where the condition
984: (\protect{\ref{eq:CDW-Smott}}) is satisfied.
985: }
986: \label{fig:strong2}
987: \end{figure}
988: %======================================================================
989:
990: Finally we discuss effects of the remaining interactions,
991: $H_{V_\parallel}$, $H_{V'}$, and $H_{\mathrm{pair}}$.
992: We find that we may ignore $H_{V_\parallel}$ and $H_{V'}$ since they
993: yield only a constant
994: energy shift in the second-order perturbation theory.
995: By contrast, the pair-hopping term changes the phase boundary.
996: Since $H_{\mathrm{pair}}|+\rangle\!\rangle_j=0$ and
997: $H_{\mathrm{pair}}|-\rangle\!\rangle_j=
998: t_{\mathrm{pair}}|-\rangle\!\rangle_j$,
999: the interaction part of the Hamiltonian Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint_G})
1000: is modified as
1001: $H_{\mathrm{int}}'=H_{\mathrm{int}}+H_{\mathrm{pair}}$, where
1002: %===================================================================
1003: \begin{eqnarray}
1004: H_{\mathrm{int}}'
1005: &=&
1006: \left(
1007: \begin{array}{cc}
1008: V_\perp-\frac{3}{4}J_\perp & 0 \\
1009: 0 & U + t_{\mathrm{pair}}
1010: \end{array}
1011: \right)
1012: .
1013: \end{eqnarray}
1014: %================================================================
1015: The main effect of $t_{\mathrm{pair}}$ is to change the coupling
1016: constant $h^z$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_Gaussian}) to
1017: $h^z=U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4+t_{\mathrm{pair}}$.
1018: In this case, the critical behavior is still governed by the Gaussian
1019: theory, and the critical point appears at
1020: %===================================================================
1021: \begin{eqnarray}
1022: U-V_\perp+ \frac{3}{4} J_\perp + t_{\mathrm{pair}} = 0
1023: .
1024: \label{eq:crit-DS2}
1025: \end{eqnarray}
1026: %================================================================
1027: Thus, for $t_\mathrm{pair}>0$, the pair hopping term tends to
1028: stabilize the D-Mott phase.
1029: As shown in the last subsection, it also stabilizes the CDW phase,
1030: and the net effect of the
1031: pair hopping is to suppress the S-Mott phase sandwiched
1032: by the D-Mott and the CDW phases.
1033:
1034:
1035:
1036: \subsection{SF state as AF ordering of rung-current and
1037: SF--D-Mott transition}
1038:
1039: In this subsection, we study the SF state in the ladder system
1040: using the strong-coupling expansion.
1041: Our starting point is the pair-hopping Hamiltonian
1042: $H_{\mathrm{pair}}$ (\ref{eq:Hpair}).
1043: The eigenstates of $H_\mathrm{pair}$ are given by $|1\rangle_j$,
1044: $|2\rangle_j$, $(|3\rangle_j+|4\rangle_j)/\sqrt{2}$,
1045: and $(|3\rangle_j-|4\rangle_j)/\sqrt{2}$, satisfying
1046: %===================================================================
1047: \begin{eqnarray}
1048: H_{\mathrm{pair}} |1 \rangle_j
1049: &=&
1050: H_{\mathrm{pair}} |2 \rangle_j =0
1051: , \\
1052: H_{\mathrm{pair}} \frac{| 3 \rangle_j - | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1053: &=&
1054: -t_\mathrm{pair} \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j - | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1055: , \\
1056: H_{\mathrm{pair}} \frac{| 3 \rangle_j + | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1057: &=&
1058: +t_\mathrm{pair} \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j + | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1059: .
1060: \end{eqnarray}
1061: %================================================================
1062: We thus find that the pair hopping term favors the on-site singlet
1063: state $(|3\rangle_j-|4\rangle_j)/\sqrt2$.
1064: Anticipating competition between the on-site singlet state and the
1065: rung singlet state $(|1\rangle_j-|2\rangle_j)/\sqrt2$ that has an
1066: energy gain of $-3J_\perp/4$ from the exchange term $H_{J_\perp}$,
1067: we will consider in this subsection the situation where
1068: $t_\mathrm{pair}\simeq3J_\perp/4$ and $J_\perp$ is the largest
1069: energy scale in the problem.
1070: Introducing
1071: $\delta t_\mathrm{pair}=t_\mathrm{pair}-3J_\perp/4$
1072: $(|\delta t_\mathrm{pair}|\ll J_\perp)$,
1073: we define $\widetilde{H}_0$ and $\widetilde{H}'$ by
1074: %===================================================================
1075: \begin{eqnarray}
1076: \widetilde{H}_0
1077: &=&
1078: H_{J_{\perp}} + H_{\mathrm{pair}}^{(0)}
1079: ,
1080: \\
1081: \widetilde{H}'
1082: &=&
1083: H_{U} + H_{V_\perp} + H_{t_\parallel} + H_{t_\perp}
1084: + H_{\mathrm{pair}}'
1085: ,
1086: \end{eqnarray}
1087: %================================================================
1088: where
1089: $H_{\mathrm{pair}}^{(0)}$ and $H_\mathrm{pair}'$ are obtained from
1090: $H_\mathrm{pair}$ by replacing $t_\mathrm{pair}$ with $3J_\perp/4$
1091: and $\delta t_\mathrm{pair}$, respectively.
1092: The unperturbed Hamiltonian $\widetilde{H}_0$ has eigenstates,
1093: %===================================================================
1094: \begin{eqnarray}
1095: \widetilde{H}_0 \, \frac{| 1 \rangle_j - | 2 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1096: &=&
1097: -\frac{3}{4}J_\perp \, \frac{| 1 \rangle_j - | 2 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1098: , \\
1099: \widetilde{H}_0 \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j - | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1100: &=&
1101: -\frac{3}{4}J_\perp \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j - | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1102: , \\
1103: \widetilde{H}_0 \, \frac{| 1 \rangle_j + | 2 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1104: &=&
1105: + \frac{1}{4}J_\perp \,
1106: \frac{| 1 \rangle_j + | 2 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1107: , \\
1108: \widetilde{H}_0 \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j + | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1109: &=&
1110: + \frac{3}{4}J_\perp \, \frac{| 3 \rangle_j + | 4 \rangle_j}{\sqrt{2}}
1111: .
1112: \end{eqnarray}
1113: %================================================================
1114: We will focus on the degenerate low-energy states
1115: $(| 1 \rangle_j - | 2 \rangle_j)/\sqrt2$
1116: and $(| 3 \rangle_j - | 4 \rangle_j)/\sqrt2$
1117: and work with the following
1118: states that break time reversal symmetry,
1119: %===================================================================
1120: \begin{eqnarray}
1121: |\!\uparrow\, \rangle_j &\equiv&
1122: \frac{1}{2} \bigl[\bigl(|1\rangle_j - |2 \rangle_j\bigr)
1123: +i \bigl(|3\rangle_j - |4 \rangle_j\bigr)
1124: \bigr]
1125: ,
1126: \\
1127: |\!\downarrow\, \rangle_j &\equiv&
1128: \frac{1}{2} \bigl[\bigl(|1\rangle_j - |2 \rangle_j\bigr)
1129: -i \bigl(|3\rangle_j - |4 \rangle_j\bigr)
1130: \bigr]
1131: .
1132: \end{eqnarray}
1133: %================================================================
1134: We regard them as states with finite current running on
1135: the $j$th rung (Fig.\ \ref{fig:current}), as
1136: they are eigenstates of the ``rung-current operator'' defined by
1137: %===================================================================
1138: \begin{eqnarray}
1139: \hat{J}_j
1140: &\equiv&
1141: i\sum_\sigma
1142: \left(
1143: c_{j,1,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j,2,\sigma}
1144: - c_{j,2,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j,1,\sigma}
1145: \right)
1146: \end{eqnarray}
1147: %================================================================
1148: with eigenvalues $\pm2$,
1149: %===================================================================
1150: \begin{eqnarray}
1151: \hat{J}_j |\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j =+2\, |\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1152: ,\hspace*{.5cm}
1153: \hat{J}_j |\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j =-2\, |\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1154: .
1155: \end{eqnarray}
1156: %================================================================
1157: We note that $\hat{J}$ is not a true current operator for
1158: $\widetilde{H}_0$ due to the pair hopping term.
1159:
1160: %==================================================================
1161: \begin{figure}[t]
1162: \includegraphics[width=8.cm]{fig03}
1163: \caption{
1164: Schematic illustration of the states $|\!\uparrow\,\rangle$
1165: and $|\!\downarrow\,\rangle$.
1166: The arrow denotes a state with a finite current running in
1167: the arrow's direction.
1168: }
1169: \label{fig:current}
1170: \end{figure}
1171: %======================================================================
1172:
1173:
1174: The SF state has a long-range alternating order of
1175: $|\!\uparrow\,\rangle$ and $|\!\downarrow\,\rangle$ or,
1176: equivalently, of currents circulating around each plaquette
1177: (Fig.\ \ref{fig:SF}).\cite{Fjaerestad}
1178: To verify the existence of the SF phase, we derive a low-energy
1179: effective theory, in perturbation expansion in $H'$, for
1180: the low-energy states
1181: $|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j$ and $|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j$,
1182: which we regard as up and down states of a pseudo-spin.
1183: In this picture, the antiferromagnetic ordering of the
1184: pseudo-spins corresponds to the staggered flux phase.
1185: The lowest-order contribution in $\widetilde{H}'$ comes from the
1186: nonvanishing matrix elements in the subspace of
1187: $|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j$ and $|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j$,
1188: %===================================================================
1189: \begin{eqnarray}
1190: \langle\,\uparrow\!|\widetilde{H}'|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1191: =
1192: \langle\,\downarrow\!|\widetilde{H}'|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1193: \!\!&=&\!\!
1194: \frac{1}{2}(U+V_\perp - \delta t_\mathrm{pair}),
1195: \\
1196: \langle\,\uparrow\!|\widetilde{H}'|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1197: =
1198: \langle\,\downarrow\!|\widetilde{H}'|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1199: \!\!&=&\!\!
1200: -\frac{1}{2}(U-V_\perp- \delta t_\mathrm{pair}),
1201: \qquad
1202: \end{eqnarray}
1203: %================================================================
1204: from which we obtain the first-order effective Hamiltonian
1205: %===================================================================
1206: \begin{equation}
1207: H^{(1)}_\mathrm{SF}
1208: =
1209: - \frac{1}{2}\left(U-V_\perp- \delta t_{\mathrm{pair}}\right)
1210: \sum_j \tilde\sigma^x_j
1211: + \mathrm{const.}
1212: ,
1213: \label{eq:H^1_SF}
1214: \end{equation}
1215: %================================================================
1216: where $\tilde\sigma^a_j$ are the Pauli matrices ($a=x,y,z$).
1217: The lowest-order contributions in $t_\parallel$ and $t_\perp$ come
1218: from the second-order processes,
1219: %===================================================================
1220: \begin{eqnarray}
1221: H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF} &=&
1222: H_{t_\parallel} \, \frac{1}{\widetilde{E}_0-\widetilde{H}_{0}} \,
1223: H_{t_\parallel}
1224: ,\\
1225: H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF} &=&
1226: H_{t_\perp} \, \frac{1}{\widetilde{E}_0-\widetilde{H}_{0}} \,
1227: H_{t_\perp},
1228: \end{eqnarray}
1229: %================================================================
1230: where $\widetilde{E}_0=-3J_\perp N/4$ with $N$ being the number of
1231: rungs in the system.
1232: The nonzero matrix elements of $H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF}$ are given by
1233: %===================================================================
1234: \begin{equation}
1235: \langle\, \uparrow,\downarrow\!| H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF}
1236: |\! \uparrow,\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1237: =
1238: \langle\, \downarrow,\uparrow\!| H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF}
1239: |\! \downarrow,\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1240: =
1241: -\frac{8t_{\parallel}^2}{3J_\perp}
1242: ,
1243: \end{equation}
1244: %================================================================
1245: where $|\mu,\nu\rangle_j\equiv|\mu\rangle_j|\nu\rangle_{j+1}$
1246: ($\mu,\nu=\uparrow,\downarrow$).
1247: We can thus write $H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF}$ as
1248: %===================================================================
1249: \begin{equation}
1250: H^{(2a)}_\mathrm{SF}
1251: =
1252: \frac{4t_{\parallel}^2}{3J_\perp}
1253: \sum_{j} \left(\tilde\sigma_j^z \, \tilde\sigma_{j+1}^z -1 \right)
1254: .
1255: \label{eq:H^2a_SF}
1256: \end{equation}
1257: %================================================================
1258: On the other hand, the nonzero matrix elements of
1259: $H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}$ are
1260: %================================================================
1261: \begin{eqnarray}
1262: &&
1263: \langle\,\uparrow\!|H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1264: =
1265: \langle\,\downarrow\!|H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1266: \nonumber\\
1267: &&
1268: =
1269: \langle\,\uparrow\!|H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}|\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j
1270: =
1271: \langle\,\downarrow\!|H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j
1272: =
1273: -\frac{4t_\perp^2}{3J_\perp},
1274: \qquad
1275: \end{eqnarray}
1276: from which we obtain
1277: \begin{equation}
1278: H^{(2b)}_\mathrm{SF}=
1279: -\frac{4t_\perp^2}{3J_\perp}
1280: \sum_j\tilde\sigma^x_j +\mathrm{const}.
1281: \label{eq:H^2b_SF}
1282: \end{equation}
1283: From Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:H^1_SF}), (\ref{eq:H^2a_SF}), and
1284: (\ref{eq:H^2b_SF}), we find that the total effective Hamiltonian is
1285: the Ising chain in a transverse field,
1286: %===================================================================
1287: \begin{equation}
1288: H^\mathrm{eff}_\mathrm{SF}
1289: =
1290: \sum_{j}
1291: \left(
1292: \widetilde{K} \, \tilde\sigma_j^z \, \tilde\sigma_{j+1}^z
1293: -\tilde h \, \tilde\sigma_j^x
1294: \right)
1295: ,
1296: \end{equation}
1297: %================================================================
1298: where the antiferromagnetic exchange coupling $\widetilde K$ and
1299: the magnitude of the transverse field $\tilde h$ are given by
1300: %===================================================================
1301: \begin{equation}
1302: \widetilde{K}
1303: =
1304: \frac{4t_\parallel^2}{3J_\perp}
1305: ,\,\,\,\,
1306: \tilde h = \frac{1}{2}\left(U-V_\perp- \delta t_{\mathrm{pair}}
1307: +\frac{8t_\perp^2}{3J_\perp}\right)
1308: .
1309: \label{eq:SF_K-h}
1310: \end{equation}
1311: %================================================================
1312: This model exhibits an Ising criticality at $\widetilde K=|\tilde h|$:
1313: the N\'eel ordered phase ($\widetilde K>|\tilde h|$) corresponds to
1314: the SF phase,
1315: while for $\widetilde K < |\tilde h|$ the system is disordered.
1316: The disordered ground state for $\tilde h>\widetilde K>0$ is continuously
1317: connected with the ground state at $\tilde h\to\infty$, i.e.,
1318: the eigenstate of $\tilde\sigma^x$ with eigenvalue $+1$.
1319: This state corresponds to the D-Mott state in the original Hubbard
1320: ladder, since
1321: %===================================================================
1322: \begin{eqnarray}
1323: |{\tilde\sigma^x\!=+1}\rangle_j &\!\!=\!\!&
1324: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
1325: \left(|\!\uparrow\,\rangle_j + |\!\downarrow\,\rangle_j \right)
1326: \nonumber \\
1327: &\!\!=\!\!&
1328: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}
1329: \left(|1\rangle_j - |2\rangle_j \right)
1330: \to |\mbox{D-Mott} \rangle
1331: .
1332: \label{eq:sigmax}
1333: \end{eqnarray}
1334: %================================================================
1335: Hence we conclude that the Ising disordered phase corresponds to the
1336: D-Mott phase.
1337: %====================================================================
1338: \begin{figure}[t]
1339: \includegraphics[width=7.cm]{fig04}
1340: \caption{
1341: Staggered flux state described as a N\'eel
1342: ordered state of the pseudo-spin
1343: states, $|\!\uparrow\,\rangle$ and $|\!\downarrow\,\rangle$.
1344: }
1345: \label{fig:SF}
1346: \end{figure}
1347: %======================================================================
1348:
1349: It is interesting to rewrite the transverse magnetic field
1350: $\tilde h$ as
1351: %===================================================================
1352: \begin{eqnarray}
1353: \tilde h &=&
1354: \frac{1}{2} \left(U-V_\perp + \frac{3}{4} J_\perp
1355: -t_{\mathrm{pair}}
1356: +\frac{8t_\perp^2}{3J_\perp}\right).
1357: \end{eqnarray}
1358: %================================================================
1359: The SF phase is realized when the inequality
1360: \begin{equation}
1361: -\frac{16t^2}{3J_\perp}<
1362: U-V_\perp+\frac{3}{4}J_\perp-t_\mathrm{pair}<0
1363: \end{equation}
1364: is satisfied
1365: (assuming $t_\parallel=t_\perp=t$), where
1366: we have to keep in mind the assumption that
1367: $t_\mathrm{pair}\approx\frac{3}{4}J_\perp$.
1368:
1369:
1370: \section{Weak-Coupling Approach}\label{sec:weakcoupling}
1371:
1372: In this section, we study the phase diagram of the generalized Hubbard
1373: ladder, treating the two-particle interactions as weak perturbations.
1374: To diagonalize the single-particle hopping Hamiltonian, we define the
1375: Fourier transform,
1376: $c_{j,\sigma}({k_\perp\!=\!0})
1377: =(c_{j,1,\sigma}+c_{j,2,\sigma})/\sqrt{2}$,
1378: $c_{j,\sigma}({k_\perp\!=\!\pi})
1379: =(c_{j,1,\sigma}-c_{j,2,\sigma})/\sqrt{2}$, and
1380: $c_\sigma(\bm{k})=\sum_j e^{-ikj}
1381: c_{j,\sigma}(k_\perp)/\sqrt{N}$,
1382: where $\bm{k}=(k,k_\perp)$ and the lattice spacing $a$ is set equal
1383: to 1.
1384: The kinetic energy term then becomes
1385: %===================================================================
1386: \begin{equation}
1387: H_0
1388: \equiv
1389: H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}=
1390: \sum_{\bm{k},\sigma}
1391: \varepsilon(\bm{k}) \,
1392: c_{\sigma}^\dagger (\bm{k}) \, c_{\sigma} (\bm{k}) ,
1393: \end{equation}
1394: %================================================================
1395: where
1396: $\varepsilon(\bm{k}) = -2 t_\parallel \cos k - t_\perp \cos k_\perp$.
1397: For $t_\perp< 2t_\parallel$, both the bonding ($k_\perp=0$) and
1398: antibonding ($k_\perp=\pi$) energy bands are partially filled,
1399: and their Fermi points are located at $k=\pm k_{F,k_\perp}$ with
1400: $k_{F,0}=\frac{\pi}{2}+\delta$ and $k_{F,\pi}=\frac{\pi}{2}-\delta$,
1401: where $\delta\equiv \sin^{-1} (t_\perp/2t_\parallel)$.
1402: At these Fermi points the Fermi velocity takes the common value
1403: $v_{F} = 2t_\parallel [1-( t_\perp/2t_\parallel )^2 ]^{1/2}$.
1404: In the following analysis
1405: we restrict ourselves to the isotropic hopping case
1406: $t_\parallel=t_\perp(\equiv t)$.
1407:
1408:
1409: \subsection{Order parameters}
1410:
1411: Let us first define order parameters characterizing insulating phases
1412: studied in this section.
1413: We consider the CDW, SF, $p$-density-wave (PDW), and
1414: $f$-density-wave (FDW) states as possible density-wave ordered
1415: states.
1416: Their order parameters are written as
1417: %===================================================================
1418: \begin{eqnarray}
1419: O_{\mathrm{A}} \!\!&=&\!\! \frac{1}{2N}
1420: \sum_{\bm{k},\sigma} f_\mathrm{A}(\bm{k}) \,
1421: c_{\sigma}^\dagger(\bm{k}) \, c_{\sigma}(\bm{k}+\bm{Q})
1422: \nonumber\\
1423: &\equiv&\!\!
1424: \frac{1}{N}\sum_j(-1)^j\mathcal{O}_\mathrm{A}(j),
1425: \end{eqnarray}
1426: %================================================================
1427: where $\bm{Q}=(\pi,\pi)$ and A = CDW,
1428: SF, PDW, FDW.
1429: The form factor $f_\mathrm{A}(\bm{k})$ are given by
1430: $f_\mathrm{CDW} = 1$, $f_\mathrm{SF} = \cos k- \cos k_\perp$,
1431: $f_\mathrm{PDW} = \sin k$, and
1432: $f_\mathrm{FDW} = \sin k \, \cos k_\perp$.
1433: Order parameters for the spin density waves are
1434: not considered, since their correlations decay exponentially in the
1435: bulk of the phase diagram of our model.
1436: It is clear that the CDW order parameter,
1437: \begin{equation}
1438: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{CDW}=\frac{1}{2}(n_{j,1}-n_{j,2}),
1439: \end{equation}
1440: has nonvanishing average in the CDW states (\ref{eq:CDW1}) and
1441: (\ref{eq:CDW2}).
1442: The order parameter of the SF state is
1443: %===================================================================
1444: \begin{equation}
1445: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{SF}=
1446: \frac{1}{4i} \hat{J}_{\mathrm{P},j},
1447: \end{equation}
1448: %================================================================
1449: where the operator $\hat{J}_{\mathrm{P},j}$ denotes a current
1450: circulating around a plaquette:
1451: %===================================================================
1452: \begin{eqnarray}
1453: \hat{J}_{\mathrm{P},j}
1454: \!\!&\equiv & \!\!
1455: i \sum_\sigma
1456: \Bigl(
1457: c_{j,1,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j,2,\sigma}
1458: + c_{j,2,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j+1,2,\sigma}
1459: \nonumber \\ && {}
1460: + c_{j+1,2,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j+1,1,\sigma}
1461: + c_{j+1,1,\sigma}^\dagger \, c^{}_{j,1,\sigma}
1462: -\mathrm{H.c.}
1463: \Bigr).
1464: \qquad
1465: \end{eqnarray}
1466: %================================================================
1467: The PDW phase is a Peierls dimerized state along the
1468: leg direction with inter-leg phase difference $\pi$,
1469: characterized by the order parameter,
1470: \begin{equation}
1471: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{PDW}=
1472: \frac{i}{4}
1473: \sum_\sigma
1474: \biggl(
1475: c_{j+1,1,\sigma}^\dagger \, c_{j,1,\sigma}^{}
1476: -c_{j+1,2,\sigma}^\dagger \, c_{j,2,\sigma}^{}
1477: +\mathrm{H.c.}
1478: \biggr).
1479: \end{equation}
1480: The FDW state is a different kind of staggered current states.
1481: Its order parameter is
1482: \begin{equation}
1483: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{FDW}=\frac{1}{4}
1484: \left(\hat{J}_{+,j}-\hat{J}_{-,j}\right),
1485: \end{equation}
1486: where the operators $\hat{J}_{\pm,j}$ represent currents flowing
1487: along the diagonal directions of plaquettes:
1488: \begin{eqnarray}
1489: \hat{J}_{+,j}\!\!&=&\!\!
1490: i\sum_\sigma
1491: \left(c^\dagger_{j+1,2,\sigma}c^{}_{j,1,\sigma}
1492: -c^\dagger_{j,1,\sigma}c^{}_{j+1,2,\sigma}\right),\\
1493: \hat{J}_{-,j}\!\!&=&\!\!
1494: i\sum_\sigma
1495: \left(c^\dagger_{j+1,1,\sigma}c^{}_{j,2,\sigma}
1496: -c^\dagger_{j,2,\sigma}c^{}_{j+1,1,\sigma}\right).
1497: \end{eqnarray}
1498: The long-range order of staggered currents flowing
1499: along diagonals of the plaquettes has been examined in a spinless
1500: ladder system.\cite{Nersesyan1991}
1501:
1502: We also introduce order parameters of the
1503: $s$-wave and $d$-wave superconductivity,
1504: %=================================================================
1505: \begin{eqnarray}
1506: O_\mathrm{A}
1507: = \frac{1}{2N}
1508: \sum_{\bm{k}} f_\mathrm{A}(\bm{k}) \,
1509: c_{\uparrow}(\bm{k}) \, c_{\downarrow}(-\bm{k}) ,
1510: \end{eqnarray}
1511: %================================================================
1512: where A = SCs and SCd, and
1513: $f_\mathrm{SCs}=1$ and
1514: $f_\mathrm{SCd}=\cos k-\cos k_\perp$.
1515:
1516:
1517: \subsection{Bosonization}
1518:
1519: We bosonize the Hubbard ladder Hamiltonian in this subsection.
1520: Following the standard bosonization scheme, we linearize the energy
1521: bands around the Fermi points.
1522: The linearized kinetic energy is given by
1523: %===================================================================
1524: \begin{equation}
1525: H_0
1526: =
1527: \sum_{\bm{k},p,\sigma}
1528: v_F (pk-k_{F,k_\perp}) \,
1529: c_{p,\sigma}^\dagger (\bm{k}) \, c^{}_{p,\sigma} (\bm{k})
1530: ,
1531: \end{equation}
1532: %================================================================
1533: where the index $p=+/-$ denotes the right/left-moving electron.
1534: We introduce field operators of the right- and left-going
1535: electrons defined by
1536: \begin{subequations}
1537: \begin{eqnarray}
1538: \psi_{p,\sigma,+}(x)\!\!&=&\!\!
1539: \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}\sum_k e^{ikx}c_{p,\sigma}(k,0), \\
1540: \psi_{p,\sigma,-}(x)\!\!&=&\!\!
1541: \frac{1}{\sqrt{L}}\sum_k e^{ikx}c_{p,\sigma}(k,\pi),
1542: \end{eqnarray}
1543: \end{subequations}
1544: where $L$ is the length of the system: $L=Na$.
1545: The linearized kinetic energy now reads
1546: %===================================================================
1547: \begin{equation}
1548: H_0=
1549: v_F\int dx \sum_{p,\sigma,\zeta}
1550: \psi^\dagger_{p,\sigma,\zeta}
1551: \left(-ip\frac{d}{dx}-k_{F,k_\perp}\right)
1552: \psi^{}_{p,\sigma,\zeta},
1553: \end{equation}
1554: %================================================================
1555: where $k_\perp=0$ ($\pi$) for $\zeta=+$ ($-$).
1556:
1557: The interactions among low-energy excitations near the Fermi points,
1558: $H_I=H_\mathrm{int}+H_{V_\parallel}+H_{V'}+H_\mathrm{pair}$,
1559: are written as $H_I=\int dx\mathcal{H}_I$, where
1560: %===================================================================
1561: \begin{eqnarray}
1562: \mathcal{H}_I
1563: &\!\!=\!\!&
1564: \frac{1}{4}
1565: \sum_{p,\sigma}{\sum_{\zeta_i=\pm}}'
1566: \biggl[
1567: g_{1\parallel}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1568: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1569: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1570: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1571: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1572: \nonumber \\&& \hspace*{13mm} {}
1573: + g_{1\perp}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1574: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1575: \psi_{-p,-\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1576: \psi_{p,-\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1577: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1578: \nonumber \\&& \hspace*{13mm} {}
1579: + g_{2\parallel}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1580: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1581: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1582: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1583: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1584: \nonumber \\&& \hspace*{13mm} {}
1585: + g_{2\perp}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1586: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1587: \psi_{-p,-\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1588: \psi_{-p,-\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1589: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1590: \nonumber \\&& \hspace*{13mm} {}
1591: + g_{3\parallel}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1592: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1593: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1594: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1595: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1596: \nonumber \\&& \hspace*{13mm} {}
1597: + g_{3\perp}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon} \,
1598: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta_1}^\dagger \,
1599: \psi_{p,-\sigma,\zeta_2}^\dagger \,
1600: \psi_{-p,-\sigma,\zeta_4} \,
1601: \psi_{-p,\sigma,\zeta_3}
1602: \biggr]
1603: .
1604: \nonumber \\
1605: \label{eq:Hint_g-ology}
1606: \end{eqnarray}
1607: %==================================================================
1608: Here $\epsilon=\zeta_1\zeta_3$ and $\bar\epsilon=\zeta_1\zeta_2$.
1609: The primed summation over $\zeta_i$ ($i=1,\ldots,4$) is taken
1610: under the condition
1611: $\zeta_1 \zeta_2 \zeta_3 \zeta_4 = +1$,
1612: which comes from the momentum conservation condition
1613: in the transverse direction.
1614: The coupling constants $g_{i\parallel}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon}$
1615: and $g_{i\perp}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon}$
1616: are related to the
1617: original coupling constants in the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:H}):
1618: %==========================================================
1619: \begin{eqnarray}
1620: \frac{g_{i\parallel}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon}}{a}
1621: \!\!&=&\!\!
1622: l_\epsilon V_\perp
1623: + \frac{l_\epsilon}{4} J_\perp
1624: + m_{i,\epsilon} V_\parallel
1625: + l_\epsilon m_{i,\epsilon} V'
1626: ,
1627: \label{eq:gpara}
1628: \\
1629: \frac{g_{i\perp}^{\epsilon\bar\epsilon}}{a}
1630: \!\!&=&\!\!
1631: U
1632: + l_\epsilon V_\perp
1633: + \frac{l_{\epsilon,\bar\epsilon}}{4} J_\perp
1634: + l_{\bar\epsilon} t_{\mathrm{pair}}
1635: + m_{i,\epsilon} V_\parallel
1636: + l_\epsilon m_{i,\epsilon} V'
1637: \nonumber\\
1638: \label{eq:gperp}
1639: \end{eqnarray}
1640: %==================================================================
1641: with the numerical factors defined by
1642: $l_\pm = \pm 1$,
1643: $l_{\pm,+}=\mp 3$, $l_{\pm,-}=\pm 1$.
1644: $m_{1,+}=m_{3,+}=-1$, $m_{1,-}=m_{3,-}=-2$,
1645: $m_{2,+}=+2$, $m_{2,-}=+1$.
1646: We have neglected the so-called $g_4$ terms describing
1647: the forward scattering processes within the same branch
1648: (left-/right-mover), since including these terms would only cause
1649: nonuniversal quantitative differences to the ground state phase
1650: diagram.
1651: In Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:gpara}) and (\ref{eq:gperp}),
1652: we have estimated the coupling constants
1653: in lowest order in the interaction of the Hubbard model.
1654: The higher-order contributions can play a crucial role of changing
1655: topology of a phase diagram, if different kinds of quantum
1656: criticalities accidentally occur simultaneously when lowest-order
1657: coupling constants are used, as is the case in the 1D
1658: extended Hubbard model at half-filling.\cite{Tsuchiizu2002}
1659: This is not the case in the ladder model of our interest, and
1660: we will use the lowest order form, Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:gpara}) and
1661: (\ref{eq:gperp}).
1662:
1663: We apply the Abelian bosonization method\cite{Emery,Solyom,Gogolin_book}
1664: and rewrite the kinetic energy in terms of bosonic fields:
1665: $H_0=\int dx\mathcal{H}_0$, where
1666: %==========================================================
1667: \begin{equation}
1668: {\cal H}_0
1669: =
1670: \frac{v_F}{2\pi}
1671: \sum_{\nu=\rho,\sigma}\sum_{r=\pm}
1672: \left[
1673: \left(\pi \Pi_{\nu r}\right)^2
1674: + \left(\frac{d \phi_{\nu r}}{dx}\right)^2
1675: \right]
1676: .
1677: \end{equation}
1678: %==================================================================
1679: Here the suffices $\rho$ and $\sigma$ refer to the charge and spin
1680: sectors and $r=\pm$ refer to the even and odd sectors.
1681: The operator $\Pi_{\nu r}(x)$ is a canonically conjugate variable
1682: to $\phi_{\nu r}(x)$ and satisfies
1683: $[\phi_{\nu r}(x),\Pi_{\nu' r'}(x')] = i \, \delta(x-x') \,
1684: \delta_{\nu,\nu'} \, \delta_{r,r'}$.
1685: We then introduce chiral bosonic fields
1686: %==========================================================
1687: \begin{eqnarray}
1688: \phi_{\nu r}^{\pm}(x)
1689: \equiv
1690: \frac{1}{2}
1691: \left[
1692: \phi_{\nu r}(x) \mp \pi \int_{-\infty}^{x} dx' \, \Pi_{\nu r}(x')
1693: \right]
1694: ,
1695: \end{eqnarray}
1696: %==================================================================
1697: which satisfy the commutation relations
1698: $[\phi_{\nu r}^{\pm}(x),\phi_{\nu' r'}^{\pm}(x')] =
1699: \pm i(\pi/4) \, \mathrm{sgn}(x-x') \,
1700: \delta_{\nu,\nu'} \, \delta_{r,r'}$
1701: and
1702: $[\phi_{\nu r}^+(x),\phi_{\nu' r'}^-(x')] =
1703: i(\pi/4) \,
1704: \delta_{\nu,\nu'} \, \delta_{r,r'}$.
1705: The right-moving and left-moving chiral fields $\phi^+(x,\tau)$
1706: and $\phi^-(x,\tau)$ are functions of $\tau-i(x/v_F)$ and
1707: $\tau+i(x/v_F)$, respectively, where $\tau$ is imaginary time.
1708: The kinetic-energy density can also be written as
1709: %===================================================================
1710: \begin{equation}
1711: {\cal H}_0
1712: = \frac{v_F}{\pi} \sum_{p=\pm}\sum_{\nu=\rho,\sigma}\sum_{r=\pm}
1713: \left( \frac{d\phi_{\nu r}^p}{dx} \right)^2
1714: .
1715: \label{eq:H_harmonic}
1716: \end{equation}
1717: %==================================================================
1718: We also introduce the field $\theta_{\nu r}$ defined by
1719: $\theta_{\nu r}=\phi_{\nu r}^+ - \phi_{\nu r}^-$.
1720: The $\theta$ field satisfies the commutation relation
1721: $[ \phi_{\nu r}(x), \theta_{\nu' r'}(x') ] =
1722: -i \pi \Theta(-x+x')\delta_{r,r'}$,
1723: where $\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside step function.
1724:
1725: To express the electron fields in terms of the bosons, we define a new
1726: set of chiral bosonic fields
1727: %============================================================
1728: \begin{equation}
1729: \varphi_{p,s,\zeta}
1730: =
1731: \phi_{\rho +}^p
1732: + \zeta \phi_{\rho -}^p
1733: + s \phi_{\sigma +}^p
1734: + s \zeta \phi_{\sigma -}^p
1735: ,
1736: \end{equation}
1737: %===========================================================
1738: where $p=\pm$, $s=\pm$, and $\zeta=\pm$.
1739: The chiral bosons obey the commutation relations
1740: $[\varphi_{p,s,\zeta}(x),\varphi_{p,s',\zeta'}(x')]$
1741: $= ip\pi \, \mathrm{sgn}(x-x') \,
1742: \delta_{s,s'}\,\delta_{\zeta,\zeta'}$
1743: and
1744: $[\varphi_{+,s,\zeta},\varphi_{-,s',\zeta'}]
1745: = i\pi \,\delta_{s,s'}\,\delta_{\zeta,\zeta'}$.
1746:
1747: The field operators of the right- and left-moving electrons
1748: are then written as
1749: %============================================================
1750: \begin{equation}
1751: \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta} =
1752: \frac{\eta_{\sigma,\zeta}}{\sqrt{2\pi a} }
1753: \exp \left( ipk_{F,k_\perp} x
1754: + i p\, \varphi _{p,s,\zeta} \right),
1755: \label{eq:field}
1756: \end{equation}
1757: %===========================================================
1758: where $s=+$ for $\sigma=\uparrow$ and $s=-$ for
1759: $\sigma=\downarrow$.
1760: The Klein factors $\eta_{\sigma,\zeta}$, which satisfy
1761: $\{\eta_{\sigma,\zeta},\eta_{\sigma',\zeta'}\}
1762: =2\delta_{\sigma,\sigma'}\delta_{\zeta,\zeta'}$,
1763: are introduced in order to retain the correct anticommutation
1764: relation of the field operators between different spin and
1765: the band index.
1766: From Eq.\ (\ref{eq:field}) the density operator is given by
1767: %==========================================================
1768: \begin{equation}
1769: \rho_{p,\sigma,\zeta}(x)
1770: = \,
1771: :\! \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta}^\dagger\, \psi_{p,\sigma,\zeta}^{} \! :
1772: \, = \,
1773: \frac{1}{2\pi} \, \frac{d}{dx} \varphi_{p,s,\zeta}(x)
1774: .
1775: \label{eq:density}
1776: \end{equation}
1777: %================================================================
1778: The Hamiltonian and the order parameters contain
1779: only products of the Klein factors such
1780: as\cite{Schulz1996,Fjaerestad}
1781: $\Gamma \equiv
1782: \eta_{\uparrow,+} \, \eta_{\downarrow,+} \,
1783: \eta_{\uparrow,-} \, \eta_{\downarrow,-} $,
1784: $h_\sigma \equiv \eta_{\sigma,+} \, \eta_{\sigma,-}$,
1785: and
1786: $h'_\zeta \equiv \eta_{\uparrow,\zeta} \, \eta_{\downarrow,\zeta}$,
1787: which satisfy
1788: $ \Gamma = -h_\uparrow \, h_\downarrow = + h'_+ \, h'_- $.
1789: Since $\Gamma^2=+1$, $h^2=(h')^2=-1$,
1790: the eigenvalues are $\Gamma=\pm 1$,
1791: $h=\pm i$, and $h'=\pm i$.
1792: We will adopt the following convention:
1793: $\Gamma= + 1$, $h_\sigma = i$, $h_\zeta'= i\zeta$.
1794:
1795: In the bosonized Hamiltonian the phase field $\phi_{\rho-}$ appears
1796: in the form $\cos (2\phi_{\rho-}+4\delta x)$ with
1797: $\delta=\sin^{-1}(t_\perp/2t_\parallel)$.
1798: Since $t_\perp$ $(=t_\parallel)$ is not small,
1799: we can safely assume that the $\delta$ is relevant
1800: and the electrons are not confined in the legs.
1801: \cite{Tsuchiizu1999,LeHur,Tsuchiizu2001}
1802: In this case the $\cos (2\phi_{\rho-}+4\delta x)$ terms
1803: become irrelevant.
1804: We thus discard them as well as
1805: other terms with higher-order scaling dimensions.
1806: The interaction term Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint_g-ology}) reduces to
1807: %===============================================================
1808: \begin{eqnarray}
1809: \mathcal{H}_I
1810: &\!\!=\!\!&
1811: \sum_{\nu = \rho,\sigma} \sum_{r=\pm}
1812: \frac{g_{\nu r}}{2\pi^2}
1813: \left(\partial_x \phi_{\nu r}^+ \right)
1814: \left(\partial_x \phi_{\nu r}^- \right)
1815: \nonumber \\
1816: &&\!\!{} + \frac{1}{2\pi^2 a^2}\Bigl[
1817: g_{c+, \overline{c-}} \,
1818: \cos 2 \phi_{\rho+} \,
1819: \cos 2 \theta_{\rho-}
1820: \nonumber \\ && {}
1821: + g_{c+, s+} \,
1822: \cos 2 \phi_{\rho+} \,
1823: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+}
1824: \nonumber \\
1825: && {}
1826: + g_{c+, s-} \,
1827: \cos 2 \phi_{\rho+} \,
1828: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma-}
1829: \nonumber \\
1830: && {}
1831: + g_{c+, \overline{s-}} \,
1832: \cos 2 \phi_{\rho+} \,\,
1833: \cos 2 \theta_{\sigma-}
1834: \nonumber \\
1835: && {}
1836: + g_{\overline{c-},s+} \,
1837: \cos 2 \theta_{\rho-} \,
1838: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+}
1839: \nonumber \\
1840: && {}
1841: + g_{\overline{c-},s-}\,
1842: \cos 2 \theta_{\rho-} \,
1843: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma-}
1844: \nonumber \\
1845: && {}
1846: + g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}}\,
1847: \cos 2 \theta_{\rho-} \,\,
1848: \cos 2 \theta_{\sigma-}
1849: \nonumber \\
1850: && {}
1851: + g_{s+, s-}\,
1852: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1853: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma-}
1854: \nonumber \\
1855: && {}
1856: + g_{s+,\overline{s-}}\,
1857: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+}\,
1858: \cos 2 \theta_{\sigma-}
1859: \Bigr]
1860: ,
1861: \label{eq:Hint}
1862: \end{eqnarray}
1863: %===============================================================
1864: where the coupling constants
1865: for the bilinear terms of the density operators are given by
1866: \begin{subequations}
1867: \begin{eqnarray}
1868: g_{\rho+} \!\!&=&\!\! \sum_{\epsilon=\pm}
1869: ( g_{2\parallel}^{+\epsilon}+g_{2\perp}^{+\epsilon}
1870: -g_{1\parallel}^{\epsilon\epsilon}), \\
1871: g_{\rho-} \!\!&=&\!\! \sum_{\epsilon=\pm} \epsilon
1872: ( g_{2\parallel}^{+\epsilon}+g_{2\perp}^{+\epsilon}
1873: -g_{1\parallel}^{\epsilon\epsilon}), \\
1874: g_{\sigma+} \!\!&=&\!\! \sum_{\epsilon=\pm}
1875: ( g_{2\parallel}^{+\epsilon}-g_{2\perp}^{+\epsilon}
1876: -g_{1\parallel}^{\epsilon\epsilon}), \\
1877: g_{\sigma-} \!\!&=&\!\! \sum_{\epsilon=\pm} \epsilon
1878: ( g_{2\parallel}^{+\epsilon}-g_{2\perp}^{+\epsilon}
1879: -g_{1\parallel}^{\epsilon\epsilon}),
1880: \end{eqnarray}
1881: \end{subequations}
1882: and the coupling constants for
1883: the nonlinear terms are given by
1884: \begin{subequations}
1885: \begin{eqnarray}
1886: g_{c+,\overline{c-}} \!\!&=&\!\! - g_{3\perp}^{-+}, \\
1887: g_{c+,s+}\!\!&=&\!\! - g_{3\parallel}^{+-} + g_{3\parallel}^{--}, \\
1888: g_{c+,s-}\!\!&=&\!\! - g_{3\perp}^{+-}, \\
1889: g_{c+, \overline{s-}}\!\!&=&\!\! + g_{3\perp}^{--}, \\
1890: g_{\overline{c-},s+}\!\!&=&\!\! - g_{1\perp}^{-+}, \\
1891: g_{\overline{c-},s-}\!\!&=&\!\! - g_{2\perp}^{-+}, \\
1892: g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}}\!\!&=&\!\!
1893: + g_{2\parallel}^{-+} - g_{1\parallel}^{-+}, \\
1894: g_{s+,s-}\!\!&=&\!\! + g_{1\perp}^{++}, \\
1895: g_{s+,\overline{s-}}\!\!&=&\!\! + g_{1\perp}^{--}.
1896: \end{eqnarray}
1897: \end{subequations}
1898: We note that the umklapp scattering (the $g_3$ terms) generates cosine
1899: potentials that lock the $\phi_{\rho+}$ field.
1900:
1901: The coupling constants in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}) are not independent
1902: parameters.
1903: Imposing the global spin-rotation SU(2) symmetry on the interaction
1904: terms Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint_g-ology}), we find that the relations
1905: %================================================================
1906: \begin{subequations}
1907: \begin{eqnarray}
1908: && g_{2\parallel}^{++} - g_{2\perp}^{++} - g_{1\parallel}^{++}
1909: + g_{1\perp}^{++} =0, \\
1910: && g_{2\parallel}^{+-} - g_{2\perp}^{+-} - g_{1\parallel}^{--}
1911: + g_{1\perp}^{--} =0, \\
1912: && g_{2\parallel}^{--} - g_{2\perp}^{--} - g_{1\parallel}^{+-}
1913: + g_{1\perp}^{+-} =0,
1914: \label{eq:G_SU(2)}
1915: \\
1916: && g_{2\parallel}^{-+} - g_{2\perp}^{-+} - g_{1\parallel}^{-+}
1917: + g_{1\perp}^{-+} =0, \\
1918: && g_{3\parallel}^{+-} - g_{3\parallel}^{--}
1919: - g_{3\perp}^{+-} + g_{3\perp}^{--} =0,
1920: \end{eqnarray}
1921: \end{subequations}
1922: %================================================================
1923: must hold.
1924: In terms of the coupling constants in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}),
1925: these relations read
1926: %================================================================
1927: \begin{subequations}
1928: \begin{eqnarray}
1929: g_{\sigma+}+g_{\sigma-} + 2g_{s+,s-} = 0,&&
1930: \label{eq:su2_sigma}
1931: \\
1932: g_{\sigma+}-g_{\sigma-} + 2g_{s+,\overline{s-}} = 0,&&
1933: \\
1934: g_{\overline{c-},s+} - g_{\overline{c-},s-}
1935: -g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}}
1936: = 0,&&
1937: \label{eq:su2_c-}
1938: \\
1939: g_{c+,s+} - g_{c+,s-} - g_{c+,\overline{s-}} = 0.&&
1940: \label{eq:su2_c+}
1941: \end{eqnarray}
1942: \label{eq:su2's}%
1943: \end{subequations}
1944: %================================================================
1945: We have ignored Eq.\ (\ref{eq:G_SU(2)}) which is the constraint on the
1946: irrelevant cosine term $\propto\cos(2\phi_{\rho-}+4\delta x)$.
1947: Since the SU(2) symmetry of the original Hubbard Hamiltonian
1948: (\ref{eq:H}) cannot be broken, the coupling constants in
1949: Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}) must satisfy
1950: Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:su2_sigma})-(\ref{eq:su2_c+}) in the course of
1951: renormalization.
1952:
1953: Finally, the order parameters are written in terms of the phase fields:
1954: %===================================================================
1955: \begin{subequations}
1956: \begin{eqnarray}
1957: &&
1958: \mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{CDW}}
1959: \propto
1960: \cos \phi_{\rho+} \,
1961: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
1962: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1963: \cos \theta_{\sigma-}
1964: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\qquad
1965: {} -
1966: \sin \phi_{\rho+} \,
1967: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
1968: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1969: \sin \theta_{\sigma-} ,
1970: \label{eq:order_CDW}
1971: \\
1972: &&
1973: \mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{SF}}
1974: \propto
1975: \cos \phi_{\rho+} \,
1976: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
1977: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1978: \cos \theta_{\sigma-}
1979: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\quad
1980: {} +
1981: \sin \phi_{\rho+} \,
1982: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
1983: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1984: \sin \theta_{\sigma-} ,
1985: \label{eq:order_SF}
1986: \\
1987: &&
1988: \mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{PDW}}
1989: \propto
1990: \cos \phi_{\rho+} \,
1991: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
1992: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1993: \sin \theta_{\sigma-}
1994: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\qquad
1995: {} +
1996: \sin \phi_{\rho+} \,
1997: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
1998: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
1999: \cos \theta_{\sigma-} ,
2000: \\
2001: &&
2002: \mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{FDW}}
2003: \propto
2004: \cos \phi_{\rho+} \,
2005: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
2006: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2007: \sin \theta_{\sigma-}
2008: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\qquad
2009: {} -
2010: \sin \phi_{\rho+} \,
2011: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
2012: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2013: \cos \theta_{\sigma-} .\qquad\quad
2014: \\
2015: &&
2016: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{SCd}
2017: \propto
2018: e^{i \theta_{\rho+}}
2019: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
2020: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2021: \cos \phi_{\sigma-}
2022: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\qquad
2023: {} - i \,
2024: e^{i \theta_{\rho+}}
2025: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
2026: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2027: \sin \phi_{\sigma-}
2028: ,
2029: \\
2030: &&
2031: \mathcal{O}_\mathrm{SCs}
2032: \propto
2033: e^{i \theta_{\rho+}}
2034: \cos \theta_{\rho-} \,
2035: \sin \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2036: \sin \phi_{\sigma-}
2037: \nonumber \\ && \qquad\qquad
2038: {} - i \,
2039: e^{i \theta_{\rho+}}
2040: \sin \theta_{\rho-} \,
2041: \cos \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2042: \cos \phi_{\sigma-}
2043: .
2044: \label{eq:O_SCs}
2045: \end{eqnarray}
2046: \label{order-parameters}
2047: \end{subequations}
2048: %================================================================
2049:
2050:
2051: \subsection{Critical properties in the charge and spin modes}
2052:
2053: In this subsection, we study the ground state phase diagram through
2054: qualitative analysis of the bosonized Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:Hint}).
2055: First we classify the phases that can appear at half-filling, and
2056: then discuss (a) the Gaussian criticality in the charge sector and
2057: (b) the Ising and SU(2)$_2$ criticalities in the spin sector.
2058:
2059: \subsubsection{Classification of phases}
2060:
2061: \begin{table*}
2062: \caption{Pattern of phase locking.
2063: The $*$ symbol indicates that a bosonic field is not locked.
2064: $I_i$s are integers.
2065: }
2066: \label{table:phase-locking}
2067: \begin{ruledtabular}
2068: \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
2069: Phase &
2070: $\langle\phi_{\rho+}\rangle$ & $\langle\theta_{\rho-}\rangle$ &
2071: $\langle\phi_{\sigma+}\rangle$ & $\langle\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle$ &
2072: $\langle\theta_{\sigma-}\rangle$ \\
2073: \hline
2074: CDW &
2075: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_2$ &
2076: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $*$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ \\
2077: SF &
2078: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_2$ &
2079: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $*$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ \\
2080: PDW &
2081: $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_2$ &
2082: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $*$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ \\
2083: FDW &
2084: $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_2$ &
2085: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $*$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ \\
2086: S-Mott &
2087: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_2$ &
2088: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ & $*$ \\
2089: D-Mott &
2090: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_2$ &
2091: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ & $*$ \\
2092: S'-Mott &
2093: $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_2$ &
2094: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ & $*$ \\
2095: D'-Mott &
2096: $\frac{\pi}{2}(I_0+1)+\pi I_1$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_2$ &
2097: $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_3$ & $\frac{\pi}{2}I_0+\pi I_4$ & $*$ \\
2098: \end{tabular}
2099: \end{ruledtabular}
2100: \end{table*}
2101:
2102: In general all the modes become massive in the extended Hubbard ladder
2103: at half-filling.
2104: This means that in the bosonized Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:Hint})
2105: cosine terms are relevant at low energies and that the bosonic phase
2106: fields are locked at some fixed values (integer multiples of $\pi/2$)
2107: where the relevant cosine potentials are minimized.\cite{Lin}
2108: The locked phase fields can be treated as classical variables, and the
2109: average value of an order parameter is found by
2110: substituting the locked phases into Eq.~(\ref{order-parameters}).
2111: A nonvanishing order parameter signals which phase is realized.
2112: We can reverse the logic and find the configuration of the locked phase
2113: fields for each insulating phase by imposing its order parameter to
2114: have its maximum modulus.
2115: This is what we do in the following analysis.
2116:
2117: In the SF, CDW, PDW, and FDW phases the ground state breaks a Z$_2$
2118: symmetry.
2119: Therefore the order parameter of these phases can have a
2120: nonvanishing value at zero temperature even in one dimension.
2121: In each phase the bosonic fields $\phi_{\rho+}$, $\theta_{\rho-}$,
2122: $\phi_{\sigma+}$, and $\theta_{\sigma-}$ are pinned at a point where
2123: the modulus of the corresponding order parameter is maximized.
2124: From Eq.~(\ref{order-parameters}) we can easily find at which values
2125: the bosonic fields are locked for the four phases.
2126: The result is summarized in Table~\ref{table:phase-locking}.
2127:
2128: Once the configuration of locked phase fields is understood for the SF
2129: and the CDW phases, we can also find that for the
2130: D-Mott and the S-Mott phases using the following arguments.
2131: On the one hand, we know from the strong-coupling analysis that these
2132: two insulating phases are Ising disordered phases of the SF and the
2133: CDW phases, respectively, where
2134: the $\theta_{\sigma-}$ field is locked.
2135: On the other hand, the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:Hint}) has some cosine
2136: potentials that can lock the $\phi_{\sigma-}$ field.
2137: Since the $\phi_{\sigma-}$ field is a conjugate field to
2138: $\theta_{\sigma-}$, these two fields cannot be locked at the same
2139: time.
2140: In fact, it is known \cite{Schulz1996} that an Ising
2141: phase transition must be associated with switching of phase locking
2142: from one bosonic field to its conjugate field.
2143: We can thus obtain the D-Mott and the S-Mott phases from the SF and
2144: the CDW phases by exchanging the role of the $\phi_{\sigma-}$ field
2145: and the $\theta_{\sigma-}$ field,
2146: arriving at the phase locking pattern shown in Table
2147: \ref{table:phase-locking}.
2148: A brief comment on the connection to the superconducting states is
2149: in order here.
2150: If we ignore the $\rho+$ mode for the moment, the order parameter of
2151: the $d$-wave ($s$-wave) superconductivity takes nonzero amplitude
2152: when the locked phases ($\langle\theta_{\rho-}\rangle$,
2153: $\langle\phi_{\sigma+}\rangle$,
2154: and $\langle\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle$)
2155: of the D-Mott (S-Mott) phase are substituted into
2156: $\mathcal{O}_\mathrm{SCd(s)}$.
2157: This is consistent with the previous
2158: results\cite{Fabrizio,Noack,Sigrist,Tsunetsugu1994,Khveshchenko1994,%
2159: Nagaosa,Dagotto,Schulz1996,Balents1996,%
2160: Orignac,Tsuchiizu2001}
2161: that, upon doping, the D-Mott state turns into the $d$-wave
2162: superconducting state in the $t$-$J$ or Hubbard ladder.
2163: The effect of carrier doping is to make the umklapp term irrelevant
2164: and to leave the $\phi_{\rho+}$ field unlocked.
2165: The operator $e^{i\theta_{\rho+}}$ representing the superconducting
2166: correlation then becomes quasi-long-range ordered.
2167:
2168: It is possible to construct a disorder parameter that characterizes
2169: the Ising transitions and that has a nonvanishing expectation value in
2170: the D-Mott and the S-Mott phases.
2171: A candidate operator for the disorder parameter is
2172: \begin{eqnarray}
2173: \mu_j\!\!&=&\!\!
2174: \exp\left(
2175: i\frac{\pi}{2}\sum_{i=1}^j
2176: X_i
2177: \right),\nonumber\\
2178: X_i\!\!&=&\!\!
2179: c_{i,1,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{i,2,\uparrow}^{}
2180: +c_{i,2,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{i,1,\uparrow}^{}
2181: \nonumber\\
2182: &&
2183: {} -c_{i,1,\downarrow}^\dagger c_{i,2,\downarrow}^{}
2184: -c_{i,2,\downarrow}^\dagger c_{i,1,\downarrow}^{}
2185: .
2186: \label{eq:mu_j}
2187: \end{eqnarray}
2188: In the weak-coupling limit we take the continuum limit and express
2189: the operator (\ref{eq:mu_j}) in terms of the bosonic fields.
2190: We then obtain
2191: \begin{equation}
2192: \mu_j=\exp[i\phi_{\sigma-}(j)].
2193: \label{eq:mu_j_boson}
2194: \end{equation}
2195: Indeed, the disorder parameter $\mu_j$ takes a nonzero value in the
2196: D-Mott and the S-Mott phases where the $\phi_{\sigma-}$ field is locked.
2197: In the strong-coupling limit studied in Sec.\ III, we may impose the
2198: condition that
2199: $n_{i,1}+n_{i,2}=2$ and $S^z_{i,1}+S^z_{i,2}=0$ on every rung.
2200: Under this condition we find that
2201: $\exp(i\frac{\pi}{2}X_i)=1-\frac{1}{2}X_i^2$
2202: and $\mu_j$ reduces to
2203: \begin{eqnarray}
2204: \mu_j\!\!&=&\!\!
2205: \prod^j_{i=1}\biggl[
2206: \left(
2207: c^\dagger_{i,1,\uparrow}c^\dagger_{i,1,\downarrow}
2208: c_{i,2,\downarrow}^{}c_{i,2,\uparrow}^{}+\mathrm{H.c.}\right)
2209: \nonumber\\
2210: &&\quad
2211: -\left(S^+_{i,1}S^-_{i,2}+S^-_{i,1}S^+_{i,2}\right)
2212: \biggr],
2213: \end{eqnarray}
2214: which acts on the pseudo-spin states defined in Secs.\ IIIA and IIIC as
2215: $\mu_j|+\rangle_i=|-\rangle_i$ and
2216: $\mu_j|\!\!\!\uparrow\,\rangle_i
2217: =|\!\!\!\downarrow\,\rangle_i$ for $i\le j$.
2218: This means that we can write $\mu_j=\prod^j_i\tau^x_i$ and
2219: $\mu_j=\prod^j_i\tilde\sigma^x_i$ near the CDW--S-Mott and the SF--D-Mott
2220: transitions, respectively.
2221: They are indeed the disorder parameter of the quantum Ising
2222: model\cite{Gogolin_book} that
2223: describes the CDW--S-Mott and the SF--D-Mott Ising transitions.
2224:
2225: Since the PDW and the FDW phases break Z$_2$ symmetry, we can
2226: naturally expect that these two phases should also have their own
2227: Ising disordered phases.
2228: We shall call them S'-Mott and D'-Mott phases for the reason that will
2229: become clear below.
2230: The configuration of phase locking in the S'-Mott and D'-Mott phases
2231: can be obtained from that of the PDW and FDW phases by exchanging
2232: $\langle\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle$ and $\langle\theta_{\sigma-}\rangle$;
2233: see Table \ref{table:phase-locking}.
2234: We see immediately that the phase-locking pattern of the S'-Mott
2235: (D'-Mott) state differs from that of the S-Mott (D-Mott) only
2236: in the locking of the $\phi_{\rho+}$ field shifted by $\pi/2$.
2237: This implies that the phase transition between S'-Mott (D'-Mott) state
2238: and the S-Mott (D-Mott) state is a Gaussian transition in the
2239: $\phi_{\rho+}$ mode, and that the S'-Mott (D'-Mott) state should
2240: evolve into the $s$-wave ($d$-wave) superconducting state upon carrier
2241: doping as in the S-Mott (D-Mott) state.
2242:
2243: The nature of the S'-Mott state can be deduced through
2244: its similarity to the S-Mott state (\ref{eq:S-Mott}).
2245: We first note that, as mentioned above, the S'-Mott state is related
2246: to the S-Mott state by a $\pi/2$ shift of the $\phi_{\rho+}$ mode,
2247: which is equivalent to translation by half unit cell, in such a way
2248: that the PDW state is related to the CDW state.
2249: This suggests that the center of mass of a singlet in the S'-Mott state
2250: should be located at a center of a plaquette.
2251: Noting that $\cos k\cos k_\perp$ is positive ($s$-wave like) at all
2252: the Fermi points,
2253: $\bm{k}=\biglb(\pm(\frac{\pi}{2}+\delta),0\bigrb)$ and
2254: $\biglb(\pm(\frac{\pi}{2}-\delta),\pi\bigrb)$,
2255: of the ladder model, we speculate that the singlet-pair wave function
2256: (or the symmetry of a Cooper pair in the $s$-wave superconducting
2257: state realized upon doping) is of the form
2258: $\cos k\cos k_\perp
2259: c_\uparrow^\dagger(\bm{k})c_\downarrow^\dagger(-\bm{k})$
2260: in momentum space.
2261: In real space this corresponds to a linear combination of two singlets
2262: formed between diagonal sites of a plaquette.
2263: From these consideration we come to propose the following wave
2264: function as a representative of the S'-Mott state:
2265: \begin{eqnarray}
2266: |\mbox{S'-Mott}\rangle\!\!&=&\!\!
2267: \prod_j\frac{1}{2}(
2268: c_{j,1,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,2,\downarrow}^\dagger
2269: -c_{j,1,\downarrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,2,\uparrow}^\dagger
2270: \nonumber\\
2271: &&\quad {}
2272: +c_{j,2,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,1,\downarrow}^\dagger
2273: -c_{j,2,\downarrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,1,\uparrow}^\dagger
2274: )|0\rangle.
2275: \qquad
2276: \label{eq:S'-Mott}
2277: \end{eqnarray}
2278: This state mostly consists of singlets along the diagonal direction
2279: of plaquettes but also contains resonating singlets that are formed by
2280: two spins on different legs that can be separated far away.
2281:
2282: The D'-Mott state consists of singlets that would turn into $d$-wave
2283: Cooper pairs upon doping.
2284: Since the singlet-pair wave function in the D-Mott state is
2285: $\cos k_\perp$ in momentum space, we expect that the singlet pairs in
2286: the D'-Mott state should be of the form $\cos k$.
2287: In real space this corresponds to a linear combination of singlets
2288: formed in the leg direction.
2289: This leads to the following wave function
2290: \begin{equation}
2291: |\mbox{D'-Mott}\rangle=\prod_j\left[
2292: \sum_{l=1,2}
2293: \frac{
2294: c_{j,l,\uparrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,l,\downarrow}^\dagger
2295: -c_{j,l,\downarrow}^\dagger c_{j+1,l,\uparrow}^\dagger
2296: }{2}
2297: \right]|0\rangle
2298: \label{eq:D'-Mott}
2299: \end{equation}
2300: as a representative of the D'-Mott state.
2301: It is easy to see by expanding the product that this state is a resonating
2302: valence bond state in which some singlets can be formed out of two spins
2303: that are separated arbitrary far away along a leg.
2304: However, amplitude of the states having such a long-distance singlet is
2305: exponentially suppressed with the distance between the two spins.
2306:
2307: It is interesting to note that the wave function (\ref{eq:S'-Mott})
2308: can be constructed from the S-Mott wave function (\ref{eq:S-Mott}) by
2309: replacing $c^\dagger_{j,l,\sigma}$ with
2310: $c^\dagger_{j+1,\bar{l},\sigma}$, where $\bar{l}=2$ (1) for $l=1$ (2)
2311: such that
2312: $c^\dagger_{j,l,\uparrow}c^\dagger_{j,l,\downarrow}\to
2313: (c^\dagger_{j+1,\bar{l},\uparrow}c^\dagger_{j,l,\downarrow}
2314: +c^\dagger_{j,l,\uparrow}c^\dagger_{j+1,\bar{l},\downarrow})/\sqrt2$.
2315: This rule can also be used to construct the wave function of the
2316: D'-Mott state (\ref{eq:D'-Mott}) from that of the D-Mott state
2317: (\ref{eq:D-Mott}).
2318:
2319:
2320:
2321: Since the $\phi_{\sigma-}$ field is locked in the S'-Mott and D'-Mott
2322: phases, the operator (\ref{eq:mu_j_boson}) also serves as the disorder
2323: parameter in the PDW--S'-Mott and the FDW--D'-Mott transitions of the
2324: Ising universality class.
2325: In fact, the disorder parameter (\ref{eq:mu_j_boson}) takes a nonzero
2326: value in any of the Mott phases and vanishes otherwise.
2327:
2328:
2329:
2330: The various insulating phases and phase transitions among them are
2331: schematically shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram}.
2332: In this figure phase transitions between a phase in the left column
2333: and another in the right column, such as transitions between the Mott
2334: phases, are the $c=1$ Gaussian criticality.
2335: It would be interesting to find an order parameter that can distinguish
2336: different Mott phases.
2337: The transitions in the vertical direction within a column
2338: are, if continuous, either
2339: the $c=1/2$ Ising criticality or the $c=3/2$ SU(2)$_2$ criticality.
2340: The latter may be replaced by a first-order transition.
2341: We will discuss these transitions in more detail in the following
2342: subsubsections.
2343:
2344: A brief comment on the related earlier works is in order here.
2345: The top four phases (SF, CDW, S-Mott, and D-Mott) in
2346: Fig.~\ref{fig:diagram} and the Gaussian and
2347: Ising transitions between these phases
2348: have been found in the weak-coupling RG analysis of the SO(5)
2349: symmetric ladder model by Lin, Balents, and
2350: Fisher.\cite{Lin}
2351: The misidentification of the SF phase with the PDW phase made in
2352: this work has been corrected later by Fj{\ae}restad and
2353: Marston.\cite{Fjaerestad}
2354: We have pointed out the existence of four more phases in the
2355: generalized Hubbard ladder model
2356: and determined the universality
2357: class of the phase transitions between all the 8 phases.
2358:
2359:
2360: %====================================================================
2361: \begin{figure}[t]
2362: \includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{fig05}
2363: \caption{
2364: Schematic illustration of the phase diagram
2365: under the global SU(2) symmetry.
2366: The phase transitions indicated by the solid
2367: (dashed) arrows are the $c=1$ ($c=1/2$) criticality.
2368: The phase transitions indicated by the double arrows are
2369: either the $c=3/2$ SU(2)$_2$ criticality or first order;
2370: see discussion in Sec.\ IVC3 and Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-g}.
2371: The diagonal solid arrows denote the Gaussian transitions
2372: in the $\phi_{\rho+}$ mode.
2373: }
2374: \label{fig:diagram}
2375: \end{figure}
2376: %======================================================================
2377:
2378:
2379: \subsubsection{Gaussian criticality in the charge degrees of freedom}
2380:
2381: First we discuss the Gaussian criticality when all the modes except
2382: the relative charge mode ($\rho-$) become massive at some higher energy
2383: scale.
2384: This situation is relevant for the horizontal transitions in
2385: Fig.~\ref{fig:diagram}: SF--CDW, D-Mott--S-Mott, PDW--FDW, and
2386: S'-Mott--D'-Mott transitions.
2387: We take the D-Mott--S-Mott phase transition as an example.
2388: Without loss of generality we may assume that
2389: the phase variables are locked at
2390: $\langle\phi_{\rho+}\rangle=\langle\phi_{\sigma+}\rangle
2391: =\langle\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle=0$ mod $\pi$.
2392: Below the energy scale at which the three fields are locked,
2393: we can replace the cosine terms in the Hamiltonian
2394: Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}) by their average:
2395: $\cos 2\phi_{\rho+} \to
2396: c_{\rho+} \equiv \langle \cos 2\phi_{\rho+}\rangle$,
2397: $\cos 2\phi_{\sigma+} \to
2398: c_{\sigma+} \equiv \langle \cos 2\phi_{\sigma+}\rangle$, and
2399: $\cos 2\phi_{\sigma-}\to
2400: c_{\sigma-} \equiv \langle \cos 2\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle$,
2401: where $c_{\rho+}$, $c_{\sigma+}$, and $c_{\sigma-}$ are
2402: nonuniversal positive constants that depend on bare interactions.
2403: We then have the effective theory
2404: %================================================================
2405: \begin{eqnarray}
2406: \mathcal{H}_{\rho-}
2407: \!\!&=&\!\!
2408: \frac{v_F}{\pi}
2409: \left[
2410: (\partial_x\phi^+_{\rho-})^2 + (\partial_x\phi^-_{\rho-})^2
2411: \right]
2412: \nonumber\\
2413: &&\!
2414: {} +
2415: \frac{g_{\rho-}}{2\pi^2}
2416: \left( \partial_x \phi_{\rho-}^+ \right)
2417: \left( \partial_x \phi_{\rho-}^- \right)
2418: \nonumber\\
2419: &&\!
2420: {} +
2421: \frac{g_{\overline{c-}}}{2\pi^2 a^2} \, \cos 2\theta_{\rho-}
2422: ,
2423: \label{eq:Heff_gaussian}
2424: \end{eqnarray}
2425: %================================================================
2426: where the coupling constant $g_{\overline{c-}}$ is given by
2427: %================================================================
2428: \begin{equation}
2429: g_{\overline{c-}}
2430: =
2431: c_{\rho+} \, g_{c+,\overline{c-}} +
2432: c_{\sigma+} \, g_{\overline{c-},s+} +
2433: c_{\sigma-} \, g_{\overline{c-},s-}
2434: .
2435: \end{equation}
2436: %================================================================
2437: Since the canonical dimension of $\cos 2\theta_{\rho-}$
2438: is $1$, the $g_{\overline{c-}}$ term is a relevant
2439: perturbation and hence the system always becomes massive
2440: except when $g_{\overline{c-}}=0$.
2441: If $g_{\overline{c-}}>0$, then the phase field is locked as
2442: $\langle \theta_{\rho-}\rangle=\pi/2$ mod $\pi$, which corresponds
2443: to the S-Mott phase.
2444: When $g_{\overline{c-}}<0$, the phase field is locked as
2445: $\langle \theta_{\rho-}\rangle=0$ mod $\pi$, and
2446: the ground state in this case turns out to be the D-Mott state.
2447: The Gaussian criticality with the central charge $c=1$ is realized at
2448: $g_{\overline{c-}}=0$.
2449: In terms of the original Hubbard interactions
2450: the coupling constant $g_{\overline{c-}}$
2451: is given by
2452: %================================================================
2453: \begin{equation}
2454: \frac{g_{\overline{c-}}}{a}
2455: =
2456: -C
2457: \left(
2458: U-V_\perp + \frac{3}{4}J_\perp + t_\mathrm{pair}
2459: \right)
2460: +C'(V_\parallel-V')
2461: ,
2462: \label{eq:gc-}
2463: \end{equation}
2464: %================================================================
2465: where $C \equiv c_{\rho+}+c_{\sigma+}+c_{\sigma-}$ and
2466: $C'\equiv 2c_{\rho+}+2c_{\sigma+}-c_{\sigma-}$ are
2467: nonuniversal \emph{positive} constants.
2468: Thus, the D-Mott (S-Mott) state appears
2469: when $U-V_\perp + 3J_\perp/4 + t_\mathrm{pair}
2470: -C'(V_\parallel-V')/C >0$ ($<0$),
2471: and the Gaussian criticality shows up at
2472: %================================================================
2473: \begin{eqnarray}
2474: U-V_\perp + \frac{3}{4}J_\perp + t_\mathrm{pair}
2475: - \frac{C'}{C}(V_\parallel-V') = 0,
2476: \label{eq:critical_G}
2477: \end{eqnarray}
2478: %================================================================
2479: which is the same as the phase boundary obtained from
2480: the strong-coupling analysis, Eq.\ (\ref{eq:crit-DS2}),
2481: for $V_\parallel=V'=0$.
2482:
2483: The SF--CDW phase transition can be analyzed in a similar way.
2484: We consider a situation where
2485: the phase variable $\theta_{\sigma-}$,
2486: instead of $\phi_{\sigma-}$, is locked at
2487: $\langle\theta_{\sigma-}\rangle=0$ mod $\pi$.
2488: In this case we can replace the cosine factor in the Hamiltonian as
2489: $\cos2\theta_{\sigma-}\to c_{\overline{\sigma-}} \equiv
2490: \langle \cos 2\theta_{\sigma-}\rangle >0$.
2491: The effective theory is given by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_gaussian}) with
2492: the coupling constant
2493: $g_{\overline{c-}} =
2494: c_{\rho+} \, g_{c+,\overline{c-}} +
2495: c_{\sigma+} \, g_{\overline{c-},s+} +
2496: c_{\overline{\sigma-}} \, g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}}$.
2497: The SF (CDW) state is realized for $g_{\overline{c-}}<0$
2498: $(>0)$, where the phase $\theta_{\rho-}$ is locked at
2499: $0$ ($\pi/2$) mod $\pi$.
2500: In terms of the original Hubbard interactions,
2501: the coupling constant $g_{\overline{c-}}$
2502: is given by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:gc-}) with
2503: $C=c_{\rho+}+c_{\sigma+}>0$ and
2504: $C'=2c_{\rho+}+2c_{\sigma+}+3c_{\overline{\sigma-}}$.
2505: We thus conclude that the SF (CDW) state appears
2506: for $U-V_\perp + \frac{3}{4}J_\perp + t_\mathrm{pair}
2507: - C'(V_\parallel-V')/C
2508: >0$ ($<0$),
2509: and the condition for the Gaussian criticality is given by
2510: Eq.\ (\ref{eq:critical_G}).
2511:
2512: The other transitions of the $c=1$ Gaussian criticality can also be
2513: analyzed in the same manner.
2514: We note that in addition to the Gaussian criticality in the $\rho-$
2515: mode discussed above, there is another Gaussian criticality in the
2516: $\rho+$ mode that govern the SF--FDW, CDW--PDW,
2517: D-Mott--D'-Mott, and S-Mott--S'-Mott transitions.
2518:
2519:
2520: \subsubsection{Z$_2$ $\times$ O(3) symmetry
2521: in the spin degrees of freedom
2522: and the Ising and SU(2)$_2$ criticality}
2523:
2524: Here we focus on the case where the masses of the two charge modes
2525: ($\rho\pm$) are larger than those of the spin modes ($\sigma\pm$).
2526: Below the mass scale of the charge modes we may regard that the
2527: $\phi_{\rho+}$ and $\theta_{\rho-}$ fields are locked by cosine
2528: potentials.
2529: The effective low-energy theory is obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint})
2530: by replacing $\cos2\phi_{\rho_+}$ and $\cos2\theta_{\rho-}$ by their
2531: average values $c_{\rho+}\equiv\langle\cos2\phi_{\rho+}\rangle$
2532: and $c_{\overline{\rho-}}\equiv\langle\cos2\theta_{\rho-}\rangle$:
2533: %===============================================================
2534: \begin{eqnarray}
2535: {\cal H}_\sigma
2536: \! &=& \!
2537: \frac{v_F}{\pi}
2538: \left[
2539: \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma+}^+ \right)^2
2540: + \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma+}^- \right)^2
2541: + \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma-}^+ \right)^2
2542: + \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma-}^- \right)^2
2543: \right]
2544: \nonumber \\ &&{}
2545: +
2546: \frac{g_{\sigma+}}{2\pi^2}
2547: \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma+}^+ \right)
2548: \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma+}^- \right)
2549: +
2550: \frac{g_{s+}}{2\pi^2 a^2}\,
2551: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+}
2552: \nonumber \\ &&{}
2553: +
2554: \frac{g_{\sigma-}}{2\pi^2}
2555: \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma-}^+ \right)
2556: \left(\partial \phi_{\sigma-}^- \right)
2557: \nonumber \\ &&{}
2558: +
2559: \frac{g_{s-}}{2\pi^2 a^2}\,
2560: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma-}
2561: +
2562: \frac{g_{\overline{s-}}}{2\pi^2 a^2}\,
2563: \cos 2 \theta_{\sigma-}
2564: \nonumber \\
2565: &&{}
2566: +
2567: \frac{g_{s+, s-}}{2\pi^2 a^2}\,
2568: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+} \,
2569: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma-}
2570: \nonumber \\ &&{}
2571: +
2572: \frac{g_{s+,\overline{s-}}}{2\pi^2 a^2}\,
2573: \cos 2 \phi_{\sigma+}\,
2574: \cos 2 \theta_{\sigma-}
2575: ,
2576: \label{eq:Heff_spsm2}
2577: \end{eqnarray}
2578: %===============================================================
2579: where the coupling constants $g_{s+}$, $g_{s-}$, and
2580: $g_{\overline{s-}}$ are given by
2581: %===============================================================
2582: \begin{subequations}
2583: \begin{eqnarray}
2584: g_{s+}
2585: &\equiv&
2586: c_{\rho+} \, g_{c+,s+}
2587: + c_{\overline{\rho-}} \, g_{\overline{c-},s+}
2588: ,
2589: \label{eq:gs+}
2590: \\
2591: g_{s-}
2592: &\equiv&
2593: c_{\rho+} \, g_{c+,s-}
2594: + c_{\overline{\rho-}} \, g_{\overline{c-},s-}
2595: ,
2596: \\
2597: g_{\overline{s-}}
2598: &\equiv&
2599: c_{\rho+} \, g_{c+,\overline{s-}}
2600: + c_{\overline{\rho-}} \, g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}}
2601: .
2602: \label{eq:gs-}
2603: \end{eqnarray}
2604: \label{eq:gs's}%
2605: \end{subequations}
2606: %===============================================================
2607: The coupling constants in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_spsm2})
2608: are not completely free parameters,
2609: since the system has the spin-rotational SU(2) symmetry.
2610: From Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:su2's}) and (\ref{eq:gs's}),
2611: the constraints on the coupling constants read
2612: %===============================================================
2613: \begin{subequations}
2614: \begin{eqnarray}
2615: && g_{s+} - g_{s-} - g_{\overline{s-}} =0,
2616: \label{constraint1}
2617: \\ &&
2618: g_{s+,s-} = -\frac{1}{2} (g_{\sigma+}+g_{\sigma-}),
2619: \\ &&
2620: g_{s+,\overline{s-}} = - \frac{1}{2} (g_{\sigma+}-g_{\sigma-}).
2621: \end{eqnarray}
2622: \label{eq:SU2}%
2623: \end{subequations}
2624: %===============================================================
2625: To appreciate the SU(2) symmetry in the effective theory
2626: (\ref{eq:Heff_spsm2}), we fermionize it by introducing
2627: spinless fermion fields $\psi_{p,r}$ ($p=\pm$ and $r=\pm$):
2628: %===============================================================
2629: \begin{equation}
2630: \psi_{\pm,r}(x) = \frac{\eta_r}{\sqrt{2\pi a}}
2631: \, \exp\left[ \pm i \,2\phi_{\sigma r}^{\pm}(x)\right],
2632: \end{equation}
2633: %===============================================================
2634: where the index $r=+(-)$ refers to the total (relative) degrees
2635: of freedom of spin mode, and $\{\eta_r,\eta_{r'}\}=2\delta_{r,r'}$.
2636: The density operators are given by
2637: $ :\! \psi_{p,\pm}^\dagger \, \psi_{p,\pm} \!: \, =
2638: \partial_x \phi_{\sigma \pm}^p/\pi $.
2639: We then introduce the Majorana fermions $\xi^n$ ($n=1\sim 4$) by
2640: %===============================================================
2641: \begin{eqnarray}
2642: \psi_{p,+}
2643: =
2644: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\xi_{p}^1+i\xi_{p}^2\right),
2645: \hspace*{.2cm}
2646: \psi_{p,-}
2647: =
2648: \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\xi_{p}^4+i\xi_{p}^3\right)
2649: .
2650: \end{eqnarray}
2651: %===============================================================
2652: These fields satisfy the anticommutation relations
2653: $\{\xi_p^n(x),\xi_{p'}^{n'}(x')\} =
2654: \delta(x-x') \, \delta_{p,p'} \, \delta_{n,n'}$.
2655: With the help of the SU(2) constraints (\ref{eq:SU2}),
2656: we rewrite the effective Hamiltonian in terms of the Majorana
2657: fermions:
2658: %===============================================================
2659: \begin{eqnarray}
2660: \mathcal{H}_\sigma
2661: \!\!&=&\!\! {}
2662: -i\frac{v_F}{2}
2663: \left(
2664: \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \partial_x \bm{\xi}_+
2665: - \bm{\xi}_- \cdot \partial_x \bm{\xi}_-
2666: \right)
2667: - i m_t \,
2668: \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \bm{\xi}_-
2669: \nonumber \\ && {}
2670: -i\frac{v_F}{2}
2671: \left(
2672: \xi_+^4 \, \partial_x \xi_+^4
2673: - \xi_-^4 \, \partial_x \xi_-^4
2674: \right)
2675: - i m_s \,
2676: \xi_+^4 \, \xi_-^4
2677: \nonumber \\ && {}
2678: +\frac{g_{\sigma+}}{4} \,
2679: \left(
2680: \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \bm{\xi}_-
2681: \right)^2
2682: + \frac{g_{\sigma-}}{2}
2683: \left( \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \bm{\xi}_- \right)
2684: \, \xi_+^4 \, \xi_-^4
2685: , \qquad
2686: \label{eq:Heff_spin}
2687: \end{eqnarray}
2688: %===============================================================
2689: where we have introduced
2690: $\mbox{\boldmath $\xi$}_p=(\xi_p^1,\xi_p^2,\xi_p^3)$
2691: and
2692: \begin{equation}
2693: m_t\equiv -\frac{g_{s+}}{2\pi a},
2694: \qquad
2695: m_s \equiv -\frac{g_{s-}-g_{\overline{s-}}}{2\pi a}.
2696: \label{eq:mtms}
2697: \end{equation}
2698: Thus the effective theory for the spin sector becomes
2699: O(3)$\times$Z$_2$ symmetric, i.e.,
2700: the four Majorana fermions are grouped into a singlet $\xi^4$ with
2701: mass $m_s$ and a triplet $\bm{\xi}$ with mass $m_t$.
2702: We note that the O(3)$\times$Z$_2$ symmetry also appears in the
2703: low-energy effective theory of the isotropic Heisenberg
2704: ladder.\cite{Shelton,Nersesyan1997}
2705: It is known that, when $m_s,m_t\ne0$, the quartic marginal terms lead
2706: to mass renormalization, $m_s \to \widetilde{m}_s$ and
2707: $m_t \to \widetilde{m}_t$, where\cite{Shelton,Gogolin_book}
2708: %===============================================================
2709: \begin{eqnarray}
2710: \widetilde{m}_t \!\!&=&\!\!
2711: m_t
2712: + \frac{g_{\sigma+}}{2\pi v_F} m_t \ln \frac{\Lambda}{|m_t|}
2713: + \frac{g_{\sigma-}}{4\pi v_F} m_s \ln \frac{\Lambda}{|m_s|},
2714: \qquad
2715: \label{eq:mt_tilde}
2716: \\
2717: \widetilde{m}_s \!\!&=&\!\!
2718: m_s
2719: + \frac{3g_{\sigma-}}{4\pi v_F} m_t \ln \frac{\Lambda}{|m_t|}.
2720: \label{eq:ms_tilde}
2721: \end{eqnarray}
2722: %===============================================================
2723: Here $\Lambda$ is a high-energy cutoff.
2724: The effective theory then reduces to
2725: %===============================================================
2726: \begin{eqnarray}
2727: \mathcal{H}_\sigma
2728: &\!\!=\!\!& {}
2729: -i\frac{v_F}{2}
2730: \left(
2731: \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \partial_x \bm{\xi}_+
2732: - \bm{\xi}_- \cdot \partial_x \bm{\xi}_-
2733: \right)
2734: - i \widetilde{m}_t \,
2735: \bm{\xi}_+ \cdot \bm{\xi}_-
2736: \nonumber \\ && {}
2737: -i\frac{v_F}{2}
2738: \left(
2739: \xi_+^4 \, \partial_x \xi_+^4
2740: - \xi_-^4 \, \partial_x \xi_-^4
2741: \right)
2742: - i \widetilde{m}_s \,
2743: \xi_+^4 \, \xi_-^4
2744: .
2745: \label{eq:Majorana Hamiltonian}
2746: \end{eqnarray}
2747: %===============================================================
2748: It immediately follows from Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Majorana Hamiltonian}) that
2749: the Ising criticality with $c=1/2$
2750: emerges as $\widetilde{m}_s \to 0$.
2751: On the other hand,
2752: the critical properties for the O(3) invariant sector
2753: ($\widetilde{m}_t\to 0$)
2754: is known to be described by the SU(2)$_2$
2755: Wess-Zumino-Novikov-Witten model
2756: with the central charge $c=3/2$.
2757: \cite{Gogolin_book,Tsvelik1990}
2758:
2759: Let us examine the critical behavior in more detail using
2760: the scaling equations for the coupling constants appearing in
2761: the effective Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:Heff_spin}):
2762: \begin{subequations}
2763: \begin{eqnarray}
2764: \frac{dG_t}{dl}\!\!&=&\!\!
2765: G_t+G_tG_{\sigma+}+\frac{1}{2}G_sG_{\sigma-},
2766: \label{eq:dG_t/dl}\\
2767: \frac{dG_s}{dl}\!\!&=&\!\!
2768: G_s+\frac{3}{2}G_tG_{\sigma-},
2769: \label{eq:dG_s/dl}\\
2770: \frac{dG_{\sigma+}}{dl}\!\!&=&\!\!
2771: \frac{1}{2}G_{\sigma+}^2+\frac{1}{2}G_{\sigma-}^2+2G_t^2,
2772: \label{eq:dG_sigma+/dl}\\
2773: \frac{dG_{\sigma-}}{dl}\!\!&=&\!\!
2774: G_{\sigma+}G_{\sigma-}+2G_tG_s,
2775: \label{dG_sigma-/dl}%
2776: \end{eqnarray}
2777: \end{subequations}
2778: where $dl=da/a$, $G_t=-g_{s+}/2\pi v_F$,
2779: $G_s=-(g_{s-}-g_{\overline{s-}})/2\pi v_F$, and
2780: $G_{\sigma\pm}=g_{\sigma\pm}/2\pi v_F$.
2781: The coupling $G_s$ and $G_t$ are relevant,
2782: while $G_{\sigma\pm}$ are marginal.
2783: Within the one-loop RG we find 4 stable fixed points,
2784: $(G_t^*,G_s^*,G_{\sigma+}^*,G_{\sigma-}^*)
2785: =(\pm\infty,\pm\infty,\infty,\infty)$ and
2786: $(\pm\infty,\mp\infty,\infty,-\infty)$,
2787: which correspond to the 8 phases listed in Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram} and
2788: Table \ref{table:phase}.
2789: The Ising criticality is governed by the unstable fixed point
2790: $(G_t^*,G_s^*,G_{\sigma+}^*,G_{\sigma-}^*)=(\pm\infty,0,\infty,0)$,
2791: where the Majorana fermion $\xi^4$ is massless.
2792: The unstable fixed point
2793: $(G_t^*,G_s^*,G_{\sigma+}^*,G_{\sigma-}^*)=(0,\pm\infty,0,0)$
2794: corresponds to the SU(2)$_2$ criticality since the triplet $\bm{\xi}$
2795: becomes massless.
2796: Finally, we find another kind of unstable fixed points
2797: $(G_t^*,G_s^*,G_{\sigma+}^*,G_{\sigma-}^*)=(0,\pm\infty,\infty,0)$,
2798: where all the modes are massive.
2799: To understand the nature of these unstable fixed points, let us
2800: assume
2801: $(g_{s+},g_{\overline{s-}}-g_{s-},g_{\sigma+},g_{\sigma-})
2802: =(0,2\lambda_1,2\lambda_2,0)$,
2803: where $\lambda_{1,2}$ are constants
2804: ($\lambda_1\ne0$, $\lambda_2>0$).
2805: This, together with the SU(2) constraint (\ref{eq:SU2}), leads to
2806: $g_{\overline{s-}}=-g_{s-}=\lambda_1$ and
2807: $g_{s+,\overline{s-}}=g_{s+,s-}=-\lambda_2<0$.
2808: In this case the cosine terms in $\mathcal{H}_\sigma$
2809: (\ref{eq:Heff_spsm2}) become
2810: \begin{eqnarray}
2811: &&{}
2812: -\frac{\lambda_1}{2\pi^2a^2}(\cos2\phi_{\sigma-}-\cos2\theta_{\sigma-})
2813: \nonumber\\
2814: &&{}
2815: -\frac{\lambda_2}{2\pi^2a^2}\cos2\phi_{\sigma+}
2816: (\cos2\phi_{\sigma-}+\cos2\theta_{\sigma-}).
2817: \qquad
2818: \label{eq:first-order}
2819: \end{eqnarray}
2820: Suppose that $\lambda_1>0$ and
2821: $\langle\phi_{\rho+}\rangle=\langle\theta_{\rho-}\rangle=0$.
2822: We then find that the potential (\ref{eq:first-order}) has degenerate
2823: minima at, e.g.,
2824: $(\langle\phi_{\sigma+}\rangle,\langle\phi_{\sigma-}\rangle,
2825: \langle\theta_{\sigma-}\rangle)
2826: =(0,0,*)$ and $(\frac{\pi}{2},*,\frac{\pi}{2})$, where $*$ means that
2827: the phase field is not locked.
2828: Since these minima correspond to the D-Mott and PDW phases,
2829: the unstable fixed point describes a first-order
2830: transition between the D-Mott and PDW phases, respectively.
2831: Hence we conclude that the unstable fixed points
2832: $(G_t^*,G_s^*,G_{\sigma+}^*,G_{\sigma-}^*)=(0,\pm\infty,\infty,0)$
2833: correspond to a first-order phase transition.
2834: The phase transition at which the renormalized triplet mass $G_t^*$
2835: vanishes can be either SU(2)$_2$ criticality or first-order
2836: transition, depending on the sign of $G_{\sigma+}$
2837: \cite{Shankar}.
2838: The condition for the SU(2)$_2$ criticality is
2839: $G_t=0$ and $G_{\sigma+}<0$ below the energy scale where $G_s$
2840: becomes of order 1.
2841: On the other hand, the first-order transition is realized if
2842: $G_t=0$ and $G_{\sigma+}>0$.
2843:
2844: %====================================================================
2845: \begin{table}[t]
2846: \caption{
2847: Signs of the fixed-point coupling constants and the masses
2848: ($m_g$, $\widetilde m_s$, $\widetilde m_t$) in various phases.
2849: }
2850: \label{table:phase}
2851: \begin{ruledtabular}
2852: \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
2853: Phase & $(g_{\overline{c-}}^*,g_{s+}^*,
2854: g_{s-}^*,g_{\overline{s-}}^*,g_{\sigma+}^*,g_{\sigma-}^*)$
2855: & $m_g$ & $\widetilde{m}_s$ & $\widetilde{m}_t$ \\ \hline
2856: CDW & $(+,-,0,-,+,-)$ & $+$ & $-$ & $+$ \\
2857: SF & $(-,-,0,-,+,-)$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ \\
2858: PDW & $(-,+,0,+,+,-)$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
2859: FDW & $(+,+,0,+,+,-)$ & $+$ & $+$ & $-$ \\
2860: S-Mott & $(+,-,-,0,+,+)$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
2861: D-Mott & $(-,-,-,0,+,+)$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ \\
2862: S'-Mott & $(-,+,+,0,+,+)$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\
2863: D'-Mott & $(+,+,+,0,+,+)$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$
2864: \end{tabular}
2865: \end{ruledtabular}
2866: \end{table}
2867: %===================================================================
2868:
2869: The phase fields are locked at some multiples of $\pi/2$
2870: depending on signs of the relevant coupling constants at a fixed point,
2871: $(g_{\overline{c-}}^*,g_{s+}^*,g_{s-}^*,g_{\overline{s-}}^*)$,
2872: of the cosine potentials in
2873: Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_gaussian}) and (\ref{eq:Heff_spsm2}).
2874: Comparing the configuration of the locked phases and those listed in
2875: Table \ref{table:phase-locking}, we can find out to which phase
2876: the ground state belongs for given combination of the renormalized
2877: coupling constants,
2878: $(g_{\overline{c-}}^*,g_{s+}^*,g_{s-}^*,g_{\overline{s-}}^*)$.
2879: Table \ref{table:phase} summarizes for each phase the signs of
2880: these renormalized coupling constants including
2881: $g_{\sigma\pm}^*$, which is positive (negative) when
2882: $\phi_{\sigma\pm}$ ($\theta_{\sigma\pm}$) is locked.
2883: When writing Table \ref{table:phase}, we have used the fact (a) that
2884: either one of $g_{s-}^*$ and $g_{\overline{s-}}^*$ must vanish
2885: except at the Ising criticality because $\phi_{\sigma-}$
2886: and $\theta_{\sigma-}$ are conjugate fields, and (b) that
2887: Eq.\ (\ref{constraint1}) constraints possible combinations of signs
2888: of $g_{s+}$, $g_{s-}$, and $g_{\overline{s-}}$.
2889:
2890: The coupling constants listed in Table \ref{table:phase} also
2891: determine the signs of masses $m_g(=g_{\overline{c-}}/2\pi a)$,
2892: $\widetilde m_s$, and $\widetilde m_t$ through
2893: Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:mtms}), (\ref{eq:mt_tilde}), and (\ref{eq:ms_tilde}).
2894: The Gaussian ($c=1$), Ising ($c=1/2$), and SU(2)$_2$ ($c=3/2$)
2895: criticalities are realized when
2896: $m_g=0$, $\widetilde{m}_s=0$, and $\widetilde{m}_t=0$, respectively.
2897: From Table \ref{table:phase} we can therefore figure out which
2898: criticality can occur at each phase transition where the relevant
2899: mass changes sign.
2900: The universality class of the phase transitions is also summarized in
2901: Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram}.
2902: We find from Table \ref{table:phase} that the CDW--S-Mott and
2903: SF--D-Mott phase transitions
2904: are indeed in the Ising universality class and
2905: the D-Mott--S-Mott phase transition is in the Gaussian
2906: universality class, in agreement with
2907: the strong-coupling approach in Sec.\ III.
2908:
2909: Let us discuss implications of the above general qualitative analysis
2910: to the phase diagram of the extended Hubbard ladder.
2911: From Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:gs's}) and (\ref{eq:mtms}) we write the bare
2912: masses in terms of the coupling constants in the model:
2913: %===============================================================
2914: \begin{eqnarray}
2915: m_s
2916: \!\!&=&\!\!
2917: \frac{1}{2\pi}
2918: \biggl[
2919: 2c_{\rho+} (U-t_\mathrm{pair}+V')
2920: \nonumber\\
2921: && \quad
2922: {} + c_{\overline{\rho-}}
2923: \left(U-V_\perp+\frac{3}{4}J_\perp
2924: +t_\mathrm{pair}-4V'\right)
2925: \biggr]
2926: ,
2927: \nonumber\\ &&
2928: \label{eq:ms_bare}
2929: \\
2930: m_t
2931: \!\!&=&\!\!
2932: \frac{1}{2\pi}
2933: \left[
2934: 2 c_{\rho+} \left(V_\perp+\frac{1}{4}J_\perp
2935: -\frac{3}{2}V'\right)
2936: \right.\nonumber \\ && \quad \left.
2937: {} + c_{\overline{\rho-}}
2938: \left(U-V_\perp+\frac{3}{4}J_\perp
2939: +t_\mathrm{pair}+2V'\right)
2940: \right]
2941: .
2942: \nonumber\\ &&
2943: \label{eq:mt_bare}
2944: \end{eqnarray}
2945: %===============================================================
2946: To simplify the discussion,
2947: we assume here that $V_\parallel=V'=t_{\mathrm{pair}}=0$
2948: and that $\phi_{\rho+}$ is locked at
2949: $\langle\phi_{\rho+}\rangle=0$ (mod $\pi$), i.e., $c_{\rho+}>0$.
2950: If $U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4 >0$ ($<0$),
2951: the phase $\theta_{\rho-}$ is locked at $0$ ($\pi/2$)
2952: [see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:gc-})] and $c_{\overline{\rho-}}
2953: =\langle\cos 2\theta_{\rho-}\rangle >0$ $(<0)$.
2954: Thus, the product $c_{\overline{\rho-}} (U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4)$
2955: is positive for both positive and negative
2956: $U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4$,
2957: and hence the bare masses $m_s$ and $m_t$ are also positive.
2958: We argue, however, that the Ising criticality is possible
2959: due to the mass renormalization effect.
2960: The renormalized mass $\widetilde{m}_s$ can become negative since
2961: the coupling constant $g_{\sigma-}$ of the correction term
2962: in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ms_tilde}) is
2963: given by $g_{\sigma-}=2a(-V_\perp+J_\perp/4)$.
2964: We expect that sufficiently large $V_\perp$ can drive the system
2965: toward the Ising criticality in the $\xi^4$ mode,
2966: even when $t_{\mathrm{pair}}=0$.
2967:
2968: In addition to the Ising criticality at large $V_\perp$,
2969: the Gaussian criticality in the $\theta_{\rho-}$ mode
2970: should appear at $V_\perp=U+3J_\perp/4$.
2971: Let us find out which phase is realized near the Gaussian
2972: critical line.
2973: When $U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4=0$,
2974: the coupling $g_{\sigma-}$ equals $-2U-J_\perp$ and
2975: the renormalized Ising mass becomes
2976: \begin{equation}
2977: \frac{\widetilde{m}_s}{c_{\rho+}U}=
2978: 1
2979: -A\frac{U}{\Lambda}
2980: \left(1+\frac{3J_\perp}{U}+\frac{2J_\perp^2}{U^2}\right)
2981: \ln\left(\frac{\Lambda}{U+J_\perp}\right)
2982: ,
2983: \end{equation}
2984: where $A$ is a positive constant of order 1.
2985: For small $J_\perp/U$ this renormalized Ising
2986: mass should be positive, and we conclude that the D-Mott
2987: and the S-Mott phases are separated by the Gaussian critical
2988: line (Note that $\widetilde m_t>0$).
2989: As we increase $J_\perp/U$ (or $V_\perp/U$)
2990: along the Gaussian critical line,
2991: the negative correction ($\propto g_{\sigma-}$) in
2992: the mass renormalization increases and eventually $\widetilde m_s$
2993: can change sign.
2994: Across this Ising transition the D-Mott and S-Mott phases turn
2995: into the SF and CDW phases, respectively.
2996: This implies that a pair of phases surrounding the Gaussian
2997: critical line changes from (D-Mott,S-Mott) to (SF,CDW) at a
2998: tetracritical point as $J_\perp/U$ increases.
2999: This qualitative analysis will be supported in the next subsection
3000: by a more quantitative renormalization group analysis.
3001:
3002: Now we briefly discuss the effect of the
3003: pair hopping term $t_\mathrm{pair}$ and next-nearest-neighbor
3004: repulsion $V'$.
3005: When $V'=0$,
3006: the Gaussian transition
3007: takes place at $U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4+t_{\mathrm{pair}}=0$
3008: [see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:critical_G})].
3009: Thus for large $t_{\mathrm{pair}}$, we can have a situation
3010: where $m_s<0$ and $m_t>0$ with
3011: $U-V_\perp+3J_\perp/4+t_{\mathrm{pair}}\simeq 0$ [see Eqs.\
3012: (\ref{eq:ms_bare}) and (\ref{eq:mt_bare})], i.e.,
3013: $t_\mathrm{pair}$ can stabilize the SF state near the Gaussian
3014: critical line.
3015: In the case $t_{\mathrm{pair}}=0$, on the other hand,
3016: we expect that sufficiently large $V'$ can lead to
3017: a phase with $m_s>0$ and $m_t<0$ i.e., the PDW state,
3018: if $c_{\rho+}\gg c_{\overline{\rho-}}>0$.
3019:
3020:
3021:
3022: Finally, we discuss implications of our schematic phase diagram
3023: (Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram}) to the phase diagram of isotropic
3024: spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ ladder systems,
3025: which have been studied intensively in connection with the so-called
3026: Haldane's conjecture \cite{Haldane} about the existence of a finite
3027: energy gap in the integer-spin Heisenberg chain.
3028: By using the abelian bosonization method, it has been shown that four
3029: kinds of gapped phases can appear in spin ladder systems
3030: with various types of exchange interactions.
3031: \cite{Kim,Gogolin_book}
3032: The possible gapped phases are
3033: (1) the rung singlet state, which is known to be realized
3034: in the isotropic Heisenberg ladder with nearest-neighbor
3035: antiferromagnetic exchange couplings,
3036: (2) the Affleck-Kennedy-Lieb-Tasaki(AKLT)-like spin liquid state,
3037: in which short-range valence bonds couple spins on neighboring
3038: rungs, \cite{AKLT}
3039: (3) the dimerized state along chain with
3040: $\pi$ relative phase, and
3041: (4) the dimerized state along chain with zero relative phase.
3042: Both the rung single state and the AKLT-like state
3043: are Haldane-type spin liquids with unique ground state
3044: and no broken local symmetries.
3045: In the dimerized states
3046: which are known to be realized when a
3047: sufficiently strong four-spin interaction is included,
3048: \cite{Nersesyan1997,Gogolin_book}
3049: there is spontaneous breaking of the translation ($Z_2$) symmetry
3050: and the ground state is two-fold degenerate.
3051: In the limit of large $U$ the extended Hubbard ladder
3052: we analyze in this paper should reduce to a system with
3053: only the spin degrees of freedom.
3054: This situation corresponds to $g_{\overline{c-}}<0$
3055: [see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:gc-})], i.e., $m_g<0$,
3056: with $|m_g| \gg |\tilde{m}_s|, |\tilde{m}_t| $.
3057: Under this condition, we still have four phases:
3058: the SF, D-Mott, PDW, and S'-Mott phases.
3059: From Table \ref{table:phase} (see also
3060: Refs.\ \onlinecite{Nersesyan1997,Gogolin_book,Kim}),
3061: we can find correspondence
3062: between the phases in spin ladders and the phases which
3063: we have obtained in the extended Hubbard ladders:
3064: The rung-singlet and AKLT-like Haldane states correspond to the
3065: D-Mott and S'-Mott states, respectively, and
3066: the PDW (SF) state corresponds to the dimerized state along chain with
3067: $\pi$ (0) relative phase.
3068: We note that physical pictures of phases in the extended
3069: Hubbard ladder are consistent with those in spin ladder;
3070: for example, the D-Mott state is nothing bug the rung singlet state,
3071: as seen in the strong-coupling approach (see Sec.\ III).
3072: The AKLT-like Haldane state, which is known to be realized either
3073: with plaquette diagonal exchange coupling or with ferromagnetic
3074: rung exchange,\cite{Kim} would be smoothly
3075: connected to the S'-Mott state,
3076: in which the ground-state wave function consists of
3077: singlets formed between diagonal sites of plaquettes
3078: [see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:S'-Mott})] and, moreover,
3079: has the same topological numbers as the AKLT-like Haldane
3080: state.\cite{Kim}
3081: The PDW state is nothing but the dimerized state
3082: with interchain phase $\pi$ as seen in Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram},
3083: which is not a Haldane-type spin liquid since the PDW state
3084: spontaneously breaks translation symmetry and is two-fold
3085: degenerate.
3086: In order to discuss phase transitions in spin ladder systems,
3087: two kinds of string order parameters have been introduced
3088: which characterize hidden orders with different topological
3089: numbers, i.e., the parity of the number of dimers crossing a
3090: line perpendicular to the two chains. \cite{Nishiyama,Kim}
3091: These string order parameters are different from
3092: $\mu_j$ (Eq.\ (\ref{eq:mu_j})), since $\mu_j$ is associated with
3093: $\exp(i\phi_{\sigma -})$ in the bosonized form
3094: while the string order parameters
3095: introduced in Refs.\ \onlinecite{Kim} and
3096: \onlinecite{Nishiyama} are associated with
3097: the $\phi_{\sigma +}$ field in our notation.
3098: Since the phase transition associated with the $\phi_{\sigma +}$
3099: field is related to $\widetilde{m}_t \to 0$,
3100: we expect that
3101: the string order parameters introduced
3102: in Refs.\ \onlinecite{Kim} and \onlinecite{Nishiyama}
3103: characterize the SU(2)$_2$ criticality or the first-order phase
3104: transition (double arrows in Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram}).
3105: In our schematic phase diagram (\ref{fig:diagram})
3106: the phase transition from the rung singlet state to the AKLT Haldane
3107: state can take place (which is actually the case
3108: in the spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ ladder systems\cite{Kim,Hakobyan}),
3109: if the SU(2)$_2$ and the Ising criticalities
3110: appear simultaneously.
3111: This implies that the central charge for the continuous transition
3112: between the rung singlet and the AKLT states is given by
3113: $\frac{3}{2}+\frac{1}{2}=2$.
3114: This transition becomes first order when the marginal interaction
3115: in the triplet Majorana fermion sector is marginally relevant.
3116:
3117:
3118:
3119: \subsection{Renormalization group analysis}
3120:
3121: In this subsection, we study the ground-state phase diagram of
3122: the extended Hubbard ladder model using perturbative
3123: RG analysis of the 13 coupling constants appearing
3124: in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}).
3125: These coupling constants are, however, not independent because
3126: of the 4 constraints coming from the SU(2) symmetry,
3127: Eq.\ (\ref{eq:su2's}).
3128: Accordingly, we have 9 independent RG equations that describe
3129: how the coupling constants scale when we change the lattice constant
3130: $a\to a e^{dl}$.
3131: The 9 independent variables we choose to work with are:
3132: $G_{\rho+}\equiv g_{\rho+}/2\pi v_F$,
3133: $G_{\rho-}\equiv g_{\rho-}/2\pi v_F$,
3134: $G_{\sigma+}\equiv g_{\sigma+}/2\pi v_F$,
3135: $G_{\sigma-}\equiv g_{\sigma-}/2\pi v_F$,
3136: $G_{\alpha}\equiv (g_{c+,s-}-g_{c+,\overline{s-}})/2\pi v_F$,
3137: $G_{\beta}\equiv (g_{\overline{c-},s-}
3138: -g_{\overline{c-},\overline{s-}})/2\pi v_F$,
3139: $G_A \equiv g_{c+,\overline{c-}}/2\pi v_F$,
3140: $G_B \equiv g_{c+,s+}/2\pi v_F$, and
3141: $G_C \equiv g_{\overline{c-},s+}/2\pi v_F$.
3142: After some algebra we obtain the RG equations:
3143: %====================================================================
3144: \begin{eqnarray}
3145: \frac{d}{dl} G_{\rho+} \!\!&=&\!\!
3146: + G_A^2
3147: + \frac{3}{2} G_B^2
3148: + \frac{1}{2} G_\alpha^2
3149: ,
3150: \label{eq:RGrho+}
3151: \\
3152: \frac{d}{dl} G_{\rho-} \!\!&=&\!\!
3153: - G_A^2
3154: - \frac{3}{2} G_C^2
3155: - \frac{1}{2} G_\beta^2
3156: ,
3157: \\
3158: \frac{d}{dl} G_{\sigma+} \!\!&=&\!\!
3159: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\sigma+}^2
3160: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\sigma-}^2
3161: + G_B^2
3162: + G_C^2
3163: ,
3164: \\
3165: \frac{d}{dl} G_{\sigma-} \!\!&=&\!\!
3166: + G_{\sigma+} \, G_{\sigma-}
3167: + G_B \, G_{\alpha}
3168: + G_C \, G_{\beta}
3169: ,
3170: \\
3171: \frac{d}{dl} G_A \!\!&=&\!\!
3172: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho+} \, G_A
3173: - \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho-} \, G_A
3174: \nonumber \\ &&
3175: - \frac{3}{2} G_B \, G_C
3176: - \frac{1}{2} G_\alpha G_\beta
3177: ,
3178: \\
3179: \frac{d}{dl} G_B \!\!&=&\!\!
3180: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho+} \, G_B
3181: + G_{\sigma+} \, G_B
3182: \nonumber \\ &&
3183: - G_A \, G_C
3184: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\sigma-} \, G_\alpha
3185: ,
3186: \\
3187: \frac{d}{dl} G_C \!\!&=&\!\!
3188: - \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho-} \, G_C
3189: + G_{\sigma+} \, G_C
3190: \nonumber \\ &&
3191: - G_A \, G_B
3192: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\sigma-} \, G_{\beta}
3193: ,
3194: \\
3195: \frac{d}{dl} G_\alpha
3196: \!\!&=&\!\!
3197: + \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho+} \, G_{\alpha}
3198: + \frac{3}{2} G_B \, G_{\sigma-}
3199: - G_A \, G_\beta
3200: ,
3201: \\
3202: \frac{d}{dl} G_\beta \!\!&=&\!\!
3203: - \frac{1}{2} G_{\rho-} \, G_\beta
3204: + \frac{3}{2} G_C \, G_{\sigma-}
3205: - G_A \, G_\alpha
3206: .
3207: \qquad
3208: \label{eq:RGbeta}
3209: \end{eqnarray}
3210: %================================================================
3211: These equations are equivalent to the ones reported in
3212: Ref.\ \onlinecite{Lin},
3213: in which another set of 9 independent variables are used:
3214: $b_{11}^\rho = (g_{\rho+} + g_{\rho-})/8$,
3215: $b_{11}^\sigma = - (g_{\sigma+}+g_{\sigma-})/2$,
3216: $b_{12}^\rho = g_\beta/4$,
3217: $b_{12}^\sigma = g_C$,
3218: $f_{12}^\rho = (g_{\rho+}-g_{\rho-})/8$,
3219: $f_{12}^\sigma = -(g_{\sigma+}-g_{\sigma-})$,
3220: $u_{11}^\rho = -g_A/8$,
3221: $u_{12}^\rho = g_\alpha/8$, and
3222: $u_{12}^\sigma = g_B/2$, where $g_\nu=2\pi v_F G_\nu$.
3223:
3224: %====================================================================
3225: \begin{figure}[t]
3226: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig06}
3227: \caption{
3228: Weak-coupling phase diagram of
3229: $H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}+H_\mathrm{int}$ at
3230: $t_\perp=t_\parallel=t$
3231: and $J_\perp=0$ obtained from the 1-loop RG equations.
3232: There is a massless mode (C1S0) on the boundary between
3233: the D-Mott and the S-Mott states
3234: while the boundary between the S-Mott and the CDW state
3235: is C0S$\frac{1}{2}$.
3236: }
3237: \label{fig:phase-b}
3238: \end{figure}
3239: %======================================================================
3240:
3241:
3242: %====================================================================
3243: \begin{figure}[t]
3244: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig07}
3245: \caption{
3246: Weak-coupling phase diagram of
3247: $H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}+H_\mathrm{int}$ at $t_\perp=t_\parallel$
3248: and $U/t=1$.
3249: This corresponds to Fig.\ \protect{\ref{fig:strong2}}.
3250: Inset shows weak-coupling phase diagram of
3251: $H_{t_\parallel}+H_{t_\perp}+H_\mathrm{int}+H_{\mathrm{pair}}$
3252: at $t_\perp=t_\parallel=t$, $U/t=1$, and $t_{\mathrm{pair}}/t=0.5$.
3253: On the boundaries between the D-Mott and the S-Mott states
3254: and between the SF and the CDW states exists a massless mode C1S0.
3255: A massless mode C0S$\frac{1}{2}$ appears on the boundaries between
3256: the D-Mott and the SF states and between the S-Mott and the CDW states.
3257: The different choice of $U/t$ does not yield
3258: qualitative changes to this phase diagram.
3259: }
3260: \label{fig:phase-h}
3261: \end{figure}
3262: %======================================================================
3263:
3264:
3265: Integrating the RG equations (\ref{eq:RGrho+})-(\ref{eq:RGbeta})
3266: numerically with the initial condition set by the bare coupling
3267: constants in the extended Hubbard ladder model,
3268: we find that $G_{\rho+}(l)$ grows most rapidly and becomes
3269: of order unity first.
3270: At the length scale $l=l_{\rho+}$ where $G_{\rho+}(l_{\rho+})=2$,
3271: we stop the numerical integration.
3272: Below this energy scale the $\rho+$ mode becomes massive.
3273: We can assume without losing generality
3274: that the phase $\phi_{\rho+}$ is locked at
3275: $\langle \phi_{\rho+} \rangle=0$ mod $\pi$.
3276: The effective theory at lower energy scale ($l>l_{\rho+}$) is
3277: obtained from Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}) through the substitution
3278: $\cos 2\phi_{\rho+}\to1$,
3279: $g_{c+,\overline{c-}} \to g_{\overline{c-}}$,
3280: $g_{c+,s+} \to g_{s+}$,
3281: $g_{c+,s-} \to g_{s-}$, and
3282: $g_{c+,\overline{s-}} \to g_{\overline{s-}}$.
3283: We then derive and solve the RG equations for the coupling constants
3284: in the effective theory to understand the low-energy properties
3285: of the remaining modes.
3286: The pattern of phase locking can be found from asymptotic low-energy
3287: behavior of the $g_{\overline{c-}}$, $g_{s+}$,
3288: $g_{s-}$, and $g_{\overline{s-}}$ in the numerical solution of
3289: the RG equations.
3290: The phase field $\Phi$ ($=\phi_{\sigma\pm}$ or $\theta_{\rho(\sigma)-}$)
3291: is locked at $\langle \Phi \rangle =\pi/2$ or 0,
3292: if the coupling constant $g$
3293: ($g\in\{g_{\overline{c-}},g_{s+},g_{s-},g_{\overline{s-}}\}$) behaves
3294: as $g\to + C$ or $-C$ in the low-energy limit, respectively,
3295: where $C$ is a positive constant of order unity.
3296: Once the configuration of the locked phase fields is determined,
3297: the resulting ground state is found from
3298: Table \ref{table:phase-locking}.
3299: The phase diagram of the extended Hubbard ladder obtained in this way
3300: is shown in Figs.\ \ref{fig:phase-b}--\ref{fig:phase-g}.
3301: We note that this approach reproduces the phase diagram of the SO(5)
3302: symmetric ladder obtained in earlier studies.
3303: \cite{Lin,Fjaerestad}
3304: Since the exotic phases like the SF state and the S-Mott state appear
3305: only for a negative $U$ in this model, we will not further discuss
3306: it as we concentrate on the case with positive $U$ and $V$ in this
3307: paper.
3308:
3309:
3310: Let us first consider the simple case where $U$ and $V_\perp$ are
3311: the only electron-electron interactions.
3312: The phase diagram on the plane of $U/t$ and $V_\perp/t$ is shown
3313: in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-b}.
3314: In this and other phase diagrams shown below, all the modes are gapped
3315: everywhere except on the phase boundaries.
3316: With the standard notation C$n$S$m$ of representing a state having
3317: $n$ massless charge modes and $m$ massless spin
3318: modes,\cite{Balents1996} the three phases in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase-b}
3319: are characterized as the ``C0S0'' phase.\cite{Balents1996,Lin}
3320: The phase boundary between the D-Mott state and the S-Mott state
3321: is the U(1) Gaussian critical line of the $\rho-$ mode (C1S0),
3322: which is given by $V_\perp=U$; see
3323: Eq.\ (\ref{eq:critical_G}) with $J_\perp=0$.
3324: The phase boundary between the S-Mott state and the CDW state
3325: is the Ising critical line of the spin $\sigma-$ mode,
3326: which is C0S$\frac{1}{2}$.
3327: This weak-coupling phase diagram is similar to
3328: Fig.\ \ref{fig:strong1}
3329: obtained from the strong-coupling approach.
3330:
3331: Next, we include the AF exchange coupling $J_\perp$.
3332: The phase diagram on the plane of $J_\perp/U$ and $V_\perp/U$
3333: at $U/t=1$ is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-h}.
3334: A different choice of $U/t$ does not lead to qualitative changes
3335: in the $J_\perp/U$ vs $V_\perp/U$ phase diagram.
3336: An interesting new feature is that the SF phase shows up
3337: between the D-Mott phase and the CDW phase.
3338: This is in agreement with the qualitative analysis of
3339: the previous subsection, where it is found that
3340: the exchange interaction $J_\perp$ suppresses
3341: the S-Mott phase and helps the SF phase appear.
3342: The Gaussian criticality of the $\rho-$ mode (C1S0) emerges on
3343: the almost straight phase boundary between the D-Mott phase and
3344: the S-Mott phase and between the SF phase and the CDW phase.
3345: This critical line is given by $V_\perp/U=1+3J_\perp/4U$,
3346: in accordance with Eq.\ (\ref{eq:critical_G}).
3347: The phase boundary between the D-Mott phase and the SF phase and
3348: between the S-Mott phase and the CDW phase
3349: is the Ising criticality C0S$\frac{1}{2}$.
3350: A tetracritical point of C1S$\frac{1}{2}$ appears at the point
3351: where the two kinds of phase boundaries cross.
3352: The inset of Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-h} shows the phase diagram at
3353: $t_\mathrm{pair}=0.5t$.
3354: We see clearly that the pair-hopping favors the SF phase over the
3355: S-Mott phase.
3356: In the strong-coupling perturbation theory,
3357: we have introduced the pair-hopping term $H_{\mathrm{pair}}$
3358: to stabilize the SF state.
3359: This is not necessary, however, in the weak-coupling approach,
3360: where the pair-hopping process is effectively generated from
3361: the second-order process in the rung hopping $t_\perp$.
3362: In fact, we can show that positive pair-hopping terms are generated
3363: in the renormalization-group procedure in the SF
3364: phase.\cite{Tsuchiizu2001}
3365:
3366: %====================================================================
3367: \begin{figure}[t]
3368: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig08}
3369: \caption{
3370: Weak-coupling phase diagram of $H$ for $U/t=1$,
3371: $V_\parallel=V_\perp=V$, and $t_\mathrm{pair}=V'=0$.
3372: The tetracritical point with $C1S\frac{1}{2}$ is at
3373: $(J_\perp/t,V_\perp/t)\simeq(0.40, 0.43)$.
3374: }
3375: \label{fig:phase-e}
3376: \end{figure}
3377: %======================================================================
3378:
3379: Next we turn on the nearest-neighbor Coulomb repulsion in the
3380: leg direction, $V_\parallel$.
3381: The phase diagram for $V_\parallel=V_\perp(\equiv V)$ is shown
3382: in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-e}.
3383: Even though the additional $V_\parallel$ interaction strongly favors
3384: the CDW state, a small region of the S-Mott phase still remains in
3385: between the D-Mott phase and the CDW phase.
3386: Besides this quantitative modification the phase diagram is not changed
3387: qualitatively, and, in particular, the critical properties at the phase
3388: boundaries are the same as in Figs.\ \ref{fig:phase-b} and
3389: \ref{fig:phase-h}.
3390: Using the density matrix renormalization group method,
3391: Vojta \textit{et al.}\cite{Vojta1999} determined the phase boundary
3392: between the CDW state and a state with homogeneous charge density for
3393: the model we used for Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-e}.
3394: At $U=1.5t$ they observed a transition to the CDW state around
3395: $U/V\approx2.9$, which is not very different from the
3396: phase boundary at $J_\perp=0$ in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-e}.
3397: The transition is, however, found to be first order for $U\ge4t$ in
3398: their numerical results, which is different from the continuous
3399: transition we found in the weak-coupling analysis.
3400: A possible source of this discrepancy might be the neglect of
3401: irrelevant operators with canonical dimension 4 that could become
3402: important for strong couplings as in the single chain
3403: case.\cite{Tsuchiizu2002}
3404:
3405: %====================================================================
3406: \begin{figure}[t]
3407: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig09}
3408: \caption{
3409: Weak-coupling phase diagram of $H$ on the plane of $U/t$ and
3410: $V'/t$
3411: for $V_\parallel=V_\perp=0$, and $J_\perp=t_\mathrm{pair}=0$.
3412: The boundary between the D-Mott state and the PDW state
3413: is C0S$\frac{3}{2}$, and
3414: the boundary between the PDW state and the S'-Mott state
3415: is C0S$\frac{1}{2}$.
3416: }
3417: \label{fig:phase-c}
3418: \end{figure}
3419: %====================================================================
3420:
3421: %====================================================================
3422: \begin{figure}[t]
3423: \includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig10}
3424: \caption{
3425: Weak-coupling phase diagram of $H$ on the plane of $V'/U$ and $V/U$
3426: for $U/t=0.5$, $V_\parallel=V_\perp=V$, and
3427: $J_\perp=t_\mathrm{pair}=0$.
3428: The phase transition between the CDW and S-Mott phases and between the
3429: PDW and S'-Mott phases is in the Ising universality class
3430: (C0S$\frac{1}{2}$).
3431: The phase transition between Mott phases is a Gaussian transition (C1S0).
3432: The boundary between the D-Mott phase and the PDW phase
3433: is C0S$\frac{3}{2}$ [SU(2)$_2$ criticality].
3434: The transition between the CDW phase and the D'-Mott phase shown by
3435: the thick solid line is a first-order transition.
3436: }
3437: \label{fig:phase-g}
3438: \end{figure}
3439: %======================================================================
3440:
3441: Finally, we include next-nearest-neighbor Coulomb
3442: repulsion $V'$, Eq.\ (\ref{eq:HVprime}).
3443: Figures \ref{fig:phase-c} and \ref{fig:phase-g} show
3444: the $V'$-$U$ and $V$-$V'$ phase diagrams.
3445: In agreement with the discussion in the previous subsection,
3446: the PDW phase appears as $V'$ is increased.
3447: At even larger $V'$ the S'-Mott phase and the D'-Mott phase appear
3448: in Figs.\ \ref{fig:phase-c} and \ref{fig:phase-g}.
3449: On the phase boundary between the D-Mott state and the
3450: PDW state appears the SU(2)$_2$ criticality;
3451: we have confirmed in our numerical calculation that the coupling
3452: $g_{\sigma+}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_spin}) is negative, i.e.,
3453: marginally irrelevant.
3454: We have thus established that the two-particle interaction $V'$ can
3455: drive the system to the SU(2)$_2$ criticality.
3456:
3457: Figure \ref{fig:phase-g} shows a rich phase diagram containing the
3458: four Mott phases and the two density-wave phases.
3459: We note that in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-g} the six phase boundaries
3460: meet at $V=V'=U$, which corresponds to C2S2.
3461: This happened because, within our approximation, all the coupling
3462: constants in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Hint}) except $g_{\rho+}$ vanish
3463: when $U=V=V'$,
3464: $t_\perp=t_\parallel$, and $J_\perp=t_\mathrm{pair}=0$.
3465: If $t_\perp\ne t_\parallel$, or if higher-order contributions to the
3466: $g$'s are included,\cite{Tsuchiizu2002} this special situation might
3467: not occur.
3468: In Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-g} the phase boundaries between the Mott
3469: phases are C1S0 (Gaussian criticality), while the CDW--S-Mott
3470: and PDW--S'-Mott phase boundaries are C0S$\frac12$ (Ising criticality).
3471: The phase boundary between the PDW phase and the D-Mott phase is
3472: C0S$\frac32$ [SU(2)$_2$ criticality] as in Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-c}.
3473: Finally, the phase transition between the CDW phase and the D'-Mott
3474: phase is found to be first order; we have confirmed that the coupling
3475: $g_{\sigma+}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Heff_spin}) is positive and marginally
3476: relevant.
3477: Even though Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-g} is obtained from the weak-coupling
3478: RG equations, we think that the phase diagram is reliable since we
3479: have confirmed that the $V/U$-$V'/U$ phase diagram is not changed much
3480: when $U/t$ is varied.
3481:
3482:
3483: \section{Conclusions}\label{sec:summary}
3484:
3485: In this paper
3486: we have studied the half-filled generalized
3487: Hubbard ladder with the inter-site
3488: Coulomb repulsion and the exchange interaction
3489: by using the strong-coupling perturbation theory and
3490: the weak-coupling bosonization method.
3491: In the strong-coupling approach the SF state is described as an AF
3492: ordered state of the Ising model where pseudo-spins
3493: represent the currents flowing along the rungs.
3494: We have shown that the SF state can appear next to
3495: the CDW state and the D-Mott state in the phase diagram and that
3496: the quantum phase transition between the SF state and the D-Mott state
3497: is in the Ising universality class.
3498: We have also established the Ising transition between the S-Mott and
3499: the CDW phases and the Gaussian transition between the D-Mott and the
3500: S-Mott phases.
3501: In the weak-coupling approach we have shown that in general the model
3502: can accommodate total of eight insulating phases at half-filling,
3503: four density-wave phases and four Mott phases (Fig.\ \ref{fig:diagram}).
3504: The universality class of the phase transitions among these phases is
3505: determined.
3506: In particular, we have shown that the SU(2)$_2$ criticality
3507: with the central charge $c=3/2$ is induced by
3508: the next-nearest-neighbor Coulomb repulsion $V'$, which drives
3509: the system from the D-Mott phase to the PDW phase (Figs.\
3510: \ref{fig:phase-c} and \ref{fig:phase-g}).
3511: When $V'$ is further increased, the S'-Mott phase and the D'-Mott
3512: phase, which correspond to the quantum disordered states of the PDW
3513: phase and the FDW phase, show up (Fig.\ \ref{fig:phase-c}).
3514:
3515: When this manuscript was almost completed, we became aware of the
3516: work by Wu \textit{et al.},\cite{Fradkin2002} where the 8 insulating
3517: phases in Sec.\ IV are obtained independently.
3518:
3519:
3520:
3521: \acknowledgments
3522:
3523: We thank M.\ Sigrist, C.\ Mudry, and H.\ Tsunetsugu for
3524: helpful discussions.
3525: We also thank E.\ Orignac for pointing out to us the importance of the
3526: marginal operator in the analysis of the SU(2)$_2$ criticality.
3527: One of the authors (AF) thanks S.\ Chakravarty and M.\ Troyer for
3528: enlightening discussions at the Aspen Center for Physics.
3529: This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for
3530: Scientific Research on Priority Areas (A) from The Ministry of
3531: Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (No.\ 12046238).
3532:
3533:
3534:
3535: \begin{thebibliography}{}
3536:
3537: %--------------------------
3538: \bibitem{Dagotto}
3539: For a review,
3540: E.\ Dagotto and T.M.\ Rice,
3541: Science \textbf{271}, 618 (1996),
3542: and references therein.
3543: %--------------------------
3544: %--------------------------
3545: \bibitem{Azuma}
3546: M.\ Azuma, Z.\ Hiroi, M.\ Takano,
3547: K.\ Ishida, and Y.\ Kitaoka,
3548: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{73}, 3463 (1994).
3549: %--------------------------
3550: %--------------------------
3551: \bibitem{Ishida}
3552: K.\ Ishida, Y.\ Kitaoka, K.\ Asayama,
3553: M.\ Azuma, Z.\ Hiroi, and M.\ Takano,
3554: J.\ Phys.\ Soc.\ Jpn.\ \textbf{63}, 3222 (1994).
3555: %--------------------------
3556: \bibitem{Kojima}
3557: K.\ Kojima, A.\ Keren, G.M.\ Luke, B.\ Nachumi, W.D.\ Wu,
3558: Y.J.\ Uemura, M.\ Azuma, and M.\ Takano,
3559: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{74}, 2812 (1995).
3560: %--------------------------
3561: \bibitem{Uehara}
3562: M.\ Uehara, T.\ Nagata, J.\ Akimitsu, H.\ Takahashi,
3563: N.\ M\^{o}ri, and K.\ Kinoshita,
3564: J.\ Phys.\ Soc.\ Jpn.\ \textbf{65}, 2764 (1996).
3565: %--------------------------
3566: \bibitem{Blumberg}
3567: G.\ Blumberg, P.\ Littlewood, A.\ Gozar, B.S.\ Dennis,
3568: N.\ Motoyama, H.\ Eisaki, and S.\ Uchida,
3569: Science \textbf{297}, 584 (2002),
3570: and references therein.
3571: %--------------------------
3572: \bibitem{Gorshunov}
3573: B.\ Gorshunov, P.\ Haas, T.\ R\~o\~om, M.\ Dressel,
3574: T.\ Vuletic, B.\ Hamzic, S.\ Tomic, J.\ Akimitsu, and
3575: T.\ Nagata,
3576: cond-mat/0201413.
3577: %--------------------------
3578: %--------------------------
3579: \bibitem{Dagotto1992}
3580: E.\ Dagotto, J.\ Riera, and D.\ Scalapino,
3581: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{45}, 5744 (1992)
3582: %--------------------------
3583: \bibitem{Finkelstein}
3584: A.M.\ Finkel'stein and A.I.\ Larkin, Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{47},
3585: 10461 (1993).
3586: %--------------------------
3587: %--------------------------
3588: \bibitem{Gopalan}
3589: T.M.\ Rice, S.\ Gopalan, and M.\ Sigrist,
3590: Europhys.\ Lett.\ \textbf{23}, 445 (1993);
3591: S.\ Gopalan, T.M.\ Rice, and M.\ Sigrist,
3592: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{49}, 8901 (1994).
3593: %--------------------------
3594: %--------------------------
3595: \bibitem{Fabrizio}
3596: M.\ Fabrizio,
3597: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{48}, 15838 (1993).
3598: %--------------------------
3599: %--------------------------
3600: \bibitem{Sigrist}
3601: M.\ Sigrist, T.M.\ Rice, and F.C.\ Zhang, Phys.\ Rev.\ B
3602: \textbf{49}, 12058 (1994).
3603: %--------------------------
3604: \bibitem{Tsunetsugu1994}
3605: H.\ Tsunetsugu, M.\ Troyer, and T.M.\ Rice,
3606: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{49}, 16078 (1994);
3607: M.\ Troyer, H.\ Tsunetsugu, and T.M.\ Rice,
3608: \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{53}, 251 (1996).
3609: %--------------------------
3610: %--------------------------
3611: \bibitem{Khveshchenko1994}
3612: D.V.\ Khveshchenko and T.M.\ Rice,
3613: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{50}, 252 (1994);
3614: D.V.\ Khveshchenko, \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{50}, 380 (1994).
3615: %--------------------------
3616: %--------------------------
3617: \bibitem{Noack}
3618: R.M.\ Noack, S.R.\ White, and D.J.\ Scalapino,
3619: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{73}, 882 (1994);
3620: Physica C \textbf{270}, 281 (1996).
3621: %--------------------------
3622: %--------------------------
3623: \bibitem{Nagaosa}
3624: N.\ Nagaosa, Solid State Commun.\ \textbf{94}, 495 (1995).
3625: %--------------------------
3626: %--------------------------
3627: \bibitem{Schulz1996}
3628: H.J.\ Schulz,
3629: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{53}, 2959 (1996); in
3630: \textit{Correlated Fermions and Transport in Mesoscopic Systems},
3631: edited by T.\ Martin, G.\ Montambaux, and T.\ Tr\^an Thanh V\^an
3632: (Editions Fronti\`eres, Gif-sur-Yvette, France, 1996), p.\ 81.
3633: %--------------------------
3634: %--------------------------
3635: \bibitem{Balents1996}
3636: L.\ Balents and M.P.A.\ Fisher,
3637: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{53}, 12133 (1996).
3638: %--------------------------
3639: \bibitem{Sano}
3640: K.\ Sano, J.\ Phys.\ Soc.\ Jpn.\ \textbf{65}, 1146 (1996).
3641: %--------------------------
3642: \bibitem{Orignac}
3643: E.\ Orignac and T.\ Giamarchi,
3644: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{56}, 7167 (1997).
3645: %--------------------------
3646: \bibitem{Yoshioka1997}
3647: H.\ Yoshioka and Y.\ Suzumura,
3648: J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys.\ \textbf{106}, 49 (1997).
3649: %--------------------------
3650: \bibitem{Tsuchiizu2001}
3651: M.\ Tsuchiizu, P.\ Donohue, Y.\ Suzumura, and T.\ Giamarchi,
3652: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ B \textbf{19}, 185 (2001);
3653: P.\ Donohue, M.\ Tsuchiizu, T.\ Giamarchi, and Y.\ Suzumura,
3654: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{63}, 045121 (2001).
3655: %--------------------------
3656: %--------------------------
3657: \bibitem{White1994}
3658: S.R.\ White, R.M.\ Noack, and D.J.\ Scalapino,
3659: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{73}, 886 (1994).
3660: %--------------------------
3661: %--------------------------
3662: \bibitem{Shelton}
3663: D.G.\ Shelton, A.A.\ Nersesyan, and A.M.\ Tsvelik,
3664: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{53}, 8521 (1996).
3665: %--------------------------
3666: %--------------------------
3667: \bibitem{Lin}
3668: H.H.\ Lin, L.\ Balents, and M.P.A.\ Fisher,
3669: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{58}, 1794 (1998).
3670: %--------------------------
3671: %--------------------------
3672: \bibitem{LeHur}
3673: K.\ Le Hur,
3674: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{63}, 165110 (2001).
3675: %--------------------------
3676: %--------------------------
3677: \bibitem{Marston}
3678: I.\ Affleck and J.B.\ Marston, Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{37}, 3774
3679: (1988); J.B.\ Marston and I.\ Affleck, \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{39},
3680: 11538 (1988); T.C.\ Hsu, J.B.\ Marston, and I.\ Affleck,
3681: \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{43}, 2866 (1991).
3682: %--------------------------
3683: %--------------------------
3684: \bibitem{Halperin}
3685: B.I.\ Halperin and T.M.\ Rice,
3686: in \textit{Solid State Physics},
3687: edited by F.\ Seitz, D.\ Turnbull, and H.\ Ehrenreich
3688: (Academic Press, New York, 1968), Vol.\ 21, p.\ 115.
3689: %--------------------------
3690: %--------------------------
3691: \bibitem{Nersesyan1989}
3692: A.A.\ Nersesyan and G.E.\ Vachnadze,
3693: J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys.\ \textbf{77}, 293 (1989).
3694: %--------------------------
3695: %--------------------------
3696: \bibitem{Schulz1989}
3697: H.J.\ Schulz, Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{39}, 2940 (1989).
3698: %--------------------------
3699: %--------------------------
3700: \bibitem{Nayak2000}
3701: C.\ Nayak,
3702: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{62}, 4880 (2000).
3703: %--------------------------
3704: %--------------------------
3705: \bibitem{Chakravarty}
3706: S.\ Chakravarty, R.B.\ Laughlin, D.K.\ Morr, and C.\ Nayak,
3707: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{63}, 094503 (2001).
3708: %--------------------------
3709: %--------------------------
3710: \bibitem{Nersesyan1991}
3711: A.A.\ Nersesyan,
3712: Phys.\ Lett.\ A \textbf{153}, 49 (1991).
3713: %--------------------------
3714: %--------------------------
3715: \bibitem{Nersesyan1993}
3716: A.A.\ Nersesyan, A.\ Luther, and F.V. Kusmartsev,
3717: Phys.\ Lett.\ A \textbf{176}, 363 (1993).
3718: %--------------------------
3719: %--------------------------
3720: \bibitem{Ivanov1998}
3721: D.A.\ Ivanov and P.A.\ Lee,
3722: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{57}, 2118 (1998).
3723: %--------------------------
3724: %--------------------------
3725: \bibitem{Scalapino2001}
3726: D.J.\ Scalapino, S.R.\ White, and I.\ Affleck,
3727: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{64}, 100506 (2001).
3728: %--------------------------
3729: %--------------------------
3730: \bibitem{Tsutsui2001}
3731: K.\ Tsutsui, D.\ Poilblanc, and S.\ Capponi,
3732: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{65}, 020406 (2001).
3733: %--------------------------
3734: %--------------------------
3735: \bibitem{Fjaerestad}
3736: J.O.\ Fj{\ae}restad and J.B.\ Marston,
3737: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{65}, 125106 (2002);
3738: J.B.\ Marston, J.O.\ Fj{\ae}restad, and A. Sudb{\o},
3739: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{89}, 056404 (2002).
3740: %--------------------------
3741: %--------------------------
3742: \bibitem{Sachdev2000}
3743: S.\ Sachdev,
3744: Science \textbf{288}, 475 (2000).
3745: %--------------------------
3746: %--------------------------
3747: \bibitem{Ivanov2000}
3748: D.A.\ Ivanov, P.A.\ Lee, and X.G.\ Wen,
3749: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{84}, 3958 (2000).
3750: %--------------------------
3751: %--------------------------
3752: \bibitem{Leung}
3753: P.W.\ Leung, Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{62}, R6112 (2000).
3754: %--------------------------
3755: %--------------------------
3756: \bibitem{Lee}
3757: P.A.\ Lee, cond-mat/0201052 (to appear in J.\ Phys.\ Chem.\ Solids).
3758: %--------------------------
3759: %--------------------------
3760: \bibitem{Nayak2002}
3761: C.\ Nayak and E.\ Pivovarov,
3762: cond-mat/0203580.
3763: %--------------------------
3764: %--------------------------
3765: \bibitem{Scalapino1998}
3766: D.\ Scalapino, S.C.\ Zhang, and W.\ Hanke,
3767: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{58}, 443 (1998).
3768: %--------------------------
3769: %--------------------------
3770: \bibitem{Frahm}
3771: H.\ Frahm and M.\ Stahlsmeier,
3772: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{63}, 125109 (2001).
3773: %--------------------------
3774: %--------------------------
3775: \bibitem{Vojta1999}
3776: M.\ Vojta, R.E.\ Hetzel, and R.M.\ Noack,
3777: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{60}, 8417 (1999);
3778: M.\ Vojta, A.\ H\"ubsch, and R.M.\ Noack,
3779: \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{63}, 045105 (2001).
3780: %--------------------------
3781: \bibitem{transitions}
3782: It is well known that
3783: the universality classes of critical properties in quantum 1D
3784: systems are classified by the conformal field theory
3785: (CFT).
3786: For example,
3787: the free boson theory (the Gaussian model) is a conformal theory
3788: with the central charge $c=1$, while
3789: the free (real) fermion theory, which is known to describe
3790: the Ising criticality, has the central charge $c=1/2$.
3791: \cite{Gogolin_book}
3792: In the ladder model we consider, the system can have massless
3793: excitations on the phase transition boundaries.
3794: Thus the critical properties of the various quantum phase transitions
3795: are classified in terms of the CFT.
3796: The possible transition types in our model are
3797: the $c=1$ Gaussian criticality in the charge sector, and
3798: the $c=1/2$ Ising and $c=3/2$ SU(2)$_2$
3799: criticalities in the spin sector.
3800: The SU(2)$_2$ criticality is described by a $k=2$ SU(2)
3801: Wess-Zumino-Witten model and is equivalent to 3 massless Majorana
3802: fermions.
3803: The critical exponents of these critical theories are known and can be
3804: found in the literature.
3805: %--------------------------
3806: \bibitem{Alcaraz}
3807: F.C.\ Alcaraz and A.L.\ Malvezzi, J.\ Phys.\ A \textbf{28}, 1521
3808: (1995).
3809: %--------------------------
3810: %--------------------------
3811: \bibitem{Cabra}
3812: D.C.\ Cabra, A.\ Honecker, and P.\ Pujol, Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{58},
3813: 6241 (1998).
3814: %--------------------------
3815: %--------------------------
3816: \bibitem{Oshikawa}
3817: M.\ Oshikawa and I.\ Affleck, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{79}, 2883
3818: (1997).
3819: %--------------------------
3820: %--------------------------
3821: \bibitem{Tsuchiizu2002}
3822: M.\ Tsuchiizu and A.\ Furusaki,
3823: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{88}, 056402 (2002).
3824: %--------------------------
3825: %--------------------------
3826: \bibitem{Emery}
3827: V.J.\ Emery, in
3828: \textit{Highly Conducting One-Dimensional Solids},
3829: edited by J.\ Devreese, R.\ Evrard, and V.\ van Doren
3830: (Plenum, New York, 1979), p.~247.
3831: %--------------------------
3832: %--------------------------
3833: \bibitem{Solyom}
3834: J.\ S\'olyom,
3835: Adv.\ Phys.\ \textbf{28}, 201 (1979).
3836: %--------------------------
3837: \bibitem{Gogolin_book}
3838: A.O.\ Gogolin, A.A.\ Nersesyan, and A.M.\ Tsvelik,
3839: \textit{Bosonization and Strongly Correlated Systems}
3840: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998).
3841: %--------------------------
3842: %--------------------------
3843: \bibitem{Tsuchiizu1999}
3844: M.\ Tsuchiizu and Y.\ Suzumura,
3845: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{59}, 12326 (1999).
3846: %--------------------------
3847: %--------------------------
3848: \bibitem{Nersesyan1997}
3849: A.A.\ Nersesyan and A.M.\ Tsvelik,
3850: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett. \textbf{78}, 3939 (1997).
3851: %--------------------------
3852: %--------------------------
3853: \bibitem{Tsvelik1990}
3854: A.M.\ Tsvelik,
3855: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{42}, 10499 (1990).
3856: %--------------------------
3857: %--------------------------
3858: \bibitem{Shankar}
3859: R.\ Shankar,
3860: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{55}, 453 (1985);
3861: Y.\ Y.\ Goldschmidt,
3862: \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{56}, 1627 (1986).
3863: %--------------------------
3864: %--------------------------
3865: \bibitem{Haldane}
3866: F.D.M.\ Haldane,
3867: Phys.\ Lett. \textbf{93A}, 464 (1983);
3868: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{50}, 1153 (1983).
3869: %--------------------------
3870: %--------------------------
3871: \bibitem{Kim}
3872: E.H.\ Kim, G.\ F\'ath, J.\ S\'olyom, and D.J.\ Scalapino,
3873: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{62}, 14965 (2000);
3874: G.\ F\'ath, \"O.\ Legeza, and J.\ S\'olyom,
3875: \textit{ibid}.\ \textbf{63}, 134403 (2001).
3876: %--------------------------
3877: %--------------------------
3878: \bibitem{AKLT}
3879: I.\ Affleck, T.\ Kennedy, E.H.\ Lieb, and H.\ Tasaki,
3880: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ \textbf{59}, 799 (1987);
3881: Comm.\ Math.\ Phys.\ \textbf{115}, 477 (1988).
3882: %--------------------------
3883: %--------------------------
3884: \bibitem{Nishiyama}
3885: Y.\ Nishiyama, N.\ Hatano, and M.\ Suzuki,
3886: J.\ Phys.\ Soc.\ Jpn. \textbf{64}, 1967 (1995).
3887: %--------------------------
3888: %--------------------------
3889: \bibitem{Hakobyan}
3890: T.\ Hakobyan, J.H.\ Hetherington, and M.\ Roger,
3891: Phys.\ Rev.\ B \textbf{63}, 144433 (2001).
3892: %--------------------------
3893: %--------------------------
3894: \bibitem{Fradkin2002}
3895: C.\ Wu, W.V.\ Liu, and E.\ Fradkin,
3896: cond-mat/0206248.
3897: %--------------------------
3898:
3899:
3900:
3901: \end{thebibliography}
3902:
3903: \end{document}
3904: