1: \documentstyle[espcrc2,fleqn,twoside,epsfig]{article}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \title{Thermodynamics and tunneling spectroscopy
6: in the pseudogap regime \\
7: of the boson fermion model}
8:
9: \author{T. Doma\'nski
10: \address[IFUMCS]
11: {Institute of Physics, Maria Curie Sk\l odowska
12: University, 20-031 Lublin, Poland}
13: \address[CRTBT]
14: {Centre de Recherches sur les Tr\`es Basses
15: Temp\'eratures CNRS, 38-042 Grenoble Cedex 9, France}
16: and J. Ranninger
17: \addressmark[CRTBT]
18: }
19:
20: \begin{abstract}
21: Motivated by the STM experimental data on Bi$_{2}$Sr$_{2}$CaCU$_{2}$O$_{8+x}$
22: which indicate the tunneling conductance asymmetry $\sigma(-V)\neq\sigma(V)$,
23: we report that such a behavior can be explained in terms of the boson
24: fermion model. It has been shown in the recent studies, based on various
25: selfconsistent techniques to capture the many-body effects, that the low
26: energy spectrum of the boson fermion model is featured by an appearance
27: of the pseudogap at $T^{*}>T_{c}$. We argue that the pseudogap structure
28: has to exhibit a particle-hole asymmetry. This asymmetry may eventually
29: depend on the boson concentration.
30: \end{abstract}
31:
32: \maketitle
33:
34: \section{Introduction}
35:
36: Recently there was a considerable amount of studies of the
37: pseudogap phenomenon observed in a variety of experiments on
38: the high temperature superconductors (HTSC) \cite{Timusk-99}.
39: There are two main theoretical interpretations which are
40: presently widely considered in the literature:
41: (i) the pseudogap as a precursor of the emerging
42: pairing fluctuations, and
43: (ii) the pseudogap understood in terms of some new (hidden)
44: ordering taking place in a vicinity of the superconducting
45: phase.
46: Some selective overview can be found e.g.\ in the recent
47: monograph \cite{Carlson-02}.
48:
49: Among theoretical attempts to explain the pseudogap effect
50: of HTSC materials there is a model of itinerant electrons
51: or holes which coexist and interact with the local bound
52: pairs (hard-core bosons) \cite{Ranninger-85}. It is worth
53: mentioning, that the pseudogap has been foreseen within
54: this boson fermion (BF) model a long time before the convincing
55: experimental data became available (see the last paragraph
56: in section IV of the Ref.\ \cite{Micnas-90}).
57:
58: Pseudogap phase of the BF model is a manifestation of the
59: pairing-wise correlations which start to appear in a system
60: when the transition temperature $T_{c}$ is approached from
61: above (the precursor type interpretation). On a microscopic
62: basis it means that below a certain temperature $T^{*}$
63: fermions start to couple into the pairs. These are, however,
64: weakly ordered in phase due to the small superfluid stiffness.
65: The phase coherence sets in at a sufficiently low temperature
66: $T_{c} \leq T^{*}$ and then the true superconducting transition
67: occurs. Presence of the incoherent ($T^{*}<T<T_{c}$) or the
68: coherent ($T_{c} \geq T$) fermion pairs is accompanied by
69: either the pseudogap or the true superconducting gap formed
70: around the Fermi energy $\varepsilon_{F}$.
71:
72: In general, some advanced methods of the many body theory are
73: required to explore a pseudogap phase within any model. It is
74: because the single-particle and the two-particle correlations
75: are then of equal importance. They should be properly treated
76: taking account of possible feedback effects between both channels
77: in a controlled way. In a context of the BF model such requirements
78: were obtained so far via: a) the selfconsistent perturbative
79: investigation \cite{perturbative,Ren-98}, b) the dynamical mean field
80: theory \cite{DMFT}, and c) the flow equation study \cite{Domanski-01}.
81: Some alternative way was studied by Micnas {\em et al}
82: \cite{Micnas-01} who considered the Kosterlitz-Thouless criterion
83: for determination of the superconducting transition $T_{c}=T_{KT}$
84: and identified $T^{*}$ with the mean field estimate $T_{c}^{(MF)}$.
85: Authors were able to reproduce qualitatively the Uemura type
86: plots $T_{c}$ versus $\rho_{s}$.
87:
88: In this short paper we extend our previous study \cite{Domanski-01}
89: to analyze the pseudogap shape and its variation with temperature.
90: Direct consequences of the particle-hole asymmetric pseudogap
91: are illustrated on an example of the STM current conductance.
92:
93: \section{Model and the origin of correlations}
94:
95: We consider the BF model which is described by the following
96: Hamiltonian \cite{Ranninger-85,Micnas-90}
97: %
98: \begin{eqnarray}
99: H^{BF} & = & \sum_{i,j,\sigma} \left( t_{ij} - \mu
100: \delta_{i,j} \right) c_{i\sigma}^{\dagger} c_{j\sigma}
101: + \sum_{i} E_{0} b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{i}
102: \nonumber \\ & + &
103: v \sum_{i} \left( b_{i}^{\dagger} c_{i\downarrow}
104: c_{i\uparrow} + b_{i} c_{i\uparrow}^{\dagger}
105: c_{i\downarrow}^{\dagger} \right)
106: \label{BF}
107: \end{eqnarray}
108: %
109: where $E_{0}=\Delta_{B}-2\mu$ and $\Delta_{B}$ is the boson energy,
110: $\mu$ is the chemical potential. The second quantization operators
111: $c_{i\sigma}^{(\dagger)}$ refer to the conduction band particles
112: (electrons or holes) and $b_{i}^{(\dagger)}$ to the composite hard-core
113: bosons (for instance they can represent the trapped electron pairs
114: $b_{i}=d_{i\downarrow}d_{i\uparrow}$). Itinerant fermions propagate
115: between the lattice sites $i$ and $j$ via the hopping integral $t_{ij}$
116: whereas bosons are assumed to be infinitely heavy. The hard-core
117: property of bosons means that either $0$ or $1$ boson is allowed
118: to occupy a given lattice site. This local constraint can be formally
119: expressed \cite{Micnas-90} through the following semi-bosonic commutation
120: relations $\left[ b_{i},b_{j}^{\dagger}\right] = \delta_{i,j}
121: \left(1-2b_{i}^{\dagger}b_{i}\right)$ and $\left[b_{i},b_{j}\right]
122: =0=\left[b_{i}^{\dagger},b_{j}^{\dagger}\right]$.
123:
124: Mechanism of superconductivity and all the other forms of
125: correlations in the BF model (\ref{BF}) are caused by the boson
126: fermion charge exchange potential $v$. By decaying into the fermion
127: pairs, bosons gain effectively some mobility. If temperature
128: decreases below the critical value $T_{c}$ then (for $dim>2$)
129: some fraction of bosons gets "frozen" into the BE condensate
130: $n_{0}(T) = \frac{1}{N} \left< b_{{\bf q}={\bf 0}}^{\dagger}
131: b_{{\bf q}={\bf 0}} \right>$. For $n_{0}(T)\neq 0$, fermions
132: are simultaneously driven into the broken symmetry superconducting
133: state. It can be shown \cite{Micnas-90,Domanski-01} that
134: the energy gap in the superconducting fermion subsystem
135: is $v \sqrt{n_{0}(T)}$.
136:
137: For temperatures slightly higher than $T_{c}$ there exist
138: many bosons which occupy the small momenta ${\bf q} \sim {\bf 0}$
139: states. Because of the interaction $v \sum_{{\bf k},{\bf q}}
140: \left( b_{\bf q}^{\dagger} c_{{\bf k}+{\bf q}/2\downarrow}
141: c_{-{\bf k}+{\bf q}/2\uparrow} + h.c. \right)$, these boson
142: states $\left| n_{\bf q} \right>_{B}$ are strongly mixed with
143: the fermion states $\left| n_{{\bf k}+{\bf q}/2\downarrow}
144: \right>_{F}$ $\left| n_{-{\bf k}+{\bf q}/2\uparrow} \right>_{F}$
145: and thereby the life time of fermions might be reduced,
146: especially for $|{\bf k}| \sim k_{F}$. In consequence,
147: we expect that the fermion density of states might be
148: suppressed near $\varepsilon_{F}$.
149:
150: With the on-site boson fermion interaction given in (\ref{BF})
151: one can generate only the isotropic gap/pseudogap. Of course,
152: the HTSC materials are characterized by the anisotropic order
153: parameters of the $d$-wave symmetry with a possible admixture
154: of the $s$-wave component \cite{mixed_symmetry}. To capture
155: this aspect it is enough to introduce the intersite coupling
156: $v_{i,j} b_{i}^{\dagger} \left( c_{i\downarrow} c_{j\uparrow}
157: + c_{j\downarrow}c_{i\uparrow} \right) + h.c.$ when both, the
158: superconducting gap \cite{Micnas-01,Domanski-02,anisotropicBF}
159: and the pseudogap \cite{Ren-98} become anisotropic. Here we
160: only discuss the results for the isotropic case but, at a price
161: of more difficult numerical computations, the same procedure
162: can be easily extended to the anisotropic pairing.
163:
164: \section{The effective spectra}
165:
166: In order to determine the effective fermion and boson spectra
167: of the model (\ref{BF}) we utilize the flow equation technique
168: proposed by Wegner \cite{Wegner-94}. The main idea behind is
169: to disentangle the coupled boson and fermion subsystems via
170: a sequence of canonical transformations $H(l)=e^{-S(l)}He^{S(l)}$,
171: where $l$ is a continuous parameter. We start at $l=0$
172: by putting $H^{BF} \equiv H(0)$, and proceed till $l=\infty$,
173: when we want to obtain $H(\infty)=H^{F}_{eff}+H^{B}_{eff}$.
174: All the way, from $l=0$ to $l=\infty$, we adjust the operator
175: $S(l)$ according to the Wegner's prescription \cite{Wegner-94}.
176: In practice, disentangling of fermion from boson subsystem can be
177: done within an accuracy of the order $v^{3}$ \cite{Domanski-01}.
178: To simplify the matters we neglect the hard-core constraint
179: and use the pure bosonic relations $\left[ b_{i},b_{j}^{\dagger}
180: \right] \simeq \delta_{i,j}$ which should be valid for small
181: boson concentrations $n_{B}=\left< b_{i}^{\dagger} b_{i}\right>$.
182:
183: After the disentangling procedure is finished we obtain
184: the following structure for the boson contribution to
185: the effective Hamiltonian $H^{B}_{eff}=\sum_{\bf q}
186: \left( E_{\bf q}-2\mu\right)$. The initial boson energy
187: $\Delta_{B}$ is thus transformed into the dispersion
188: $E_{\bf q}$ which is characterized by the width proportional
189: to $v^{2}$ and the effective boson mass comparable with
190: the mass of fermions \cite{perturbative,Domanski-01}.
191: $H^{F}_{eff}$ part, on the other hand, is given as
192: $H^{F}_{eff}=\sum_{{\bf k},\sigma} \left(\varepsilon_{\bf k}-\mu
193: \right) c_{{\bf k}\sigma}^{\dagger}c_{{\bf k}\sigma} + \frac{1}{N}
194: \sum_{{\bf k},{\bf p},{\bf q}} U_{{\bf k},{\bf p},{\bf q}}
195: c_{{\bf k}\uparrow}^{\dagger} c_{{\bf p}\downarrow}^{\dagger}
196: c_{{\bf q}\downarrow}c_{{\bf k}+{\bf p}-{\bf q}\uparrow}$.
197: Renormalization of $\varepsilon_{\bf k}$ with respect to the
198: initial dispersion $\varepsilon_{\bf k}^{0}$ takes place
199: mainly around ${\bf k}_{F}$. There is also induced the long range
200: fermion-fermion interaction $U_{{\bf k},{\bf p},{\bf q}}$
201: which has somewhat unusual resonant-like character as shown
202: in Figs 7 and 8 of \cite{Domanski-01} for the BCS
203: $U_{{\bf k},-{\bf k},{\bf q}}$ and for the density-density
204: $U_{{\bf k},{\bf q},{\bf q}}$ channels.
205:
206: Previously \cite{Domanski-01} we discussed the fermion
207: spectrum only on a basis of the quasiparticle energy
208: $\varepsilon_{\bf k}$. However, in some cases,
209: a considerable influence may also arise from the
210: fermion-fermion interactions. These interactions are in
211: principle small, $|U_{{\bf k},{\bf p},{\bf q}}|$ is of
212: the order $v^{2}$, so we can treat them perturbatively.
213: The effective dispersion $\overline{\varepsilon}_{{\bf k}\sigma}(l)$
214: is for $T>T_{c}$ given by
215: %
216: \begin{eqnarray}
217: \overline{\varepsilon}_{{\bf k}\uparrow} = \varepsilon_{\bf k}
218: + \frac{1}{N}\sum_{\bf q} U_{{\bf k},{\bf q},{\bf q}}
219: \left< c_{{\bf q}\downarrow}^{\dagger} c_{{\bf q}\downarrow}
220: \right> .
221: \label{correction}
222: \end{eqnarray}
223: %
224: At $T<T_{c}$ one should also consider the other contribution
225: coming from the BCS channel $U_{{\bf k},-{\bf k},{\bf q}}$.
226: We restrict our attention only to the normal phase ($T>T_{c}$).
227:
228: In the left h.s.\ panel of figure \ref{figure1}
229: we show the density of fermion states $\rho(\omega) \equiv
230: \frac{1}{N}\sum_{\bf k} \delta \left( \omega - \overline
231: {\varepsilon}_{\bf k} \right)$. Note, that there appears
232: a pseudogap which deepens with a decreasing temperature $T$.
233: The pseudogap structure has a clear particle-hole asymmetry
234: at all the temperatures. Asymmetry finally disappears
235: at very high temperatures $T \simeq 0.1$ (not shown here).
236: The boson density of states $\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\bf q} \delta
237: \left( \Omega - E_{\bf q} \right)$ is much less affected by
238: a varying temperature (see Fig.\ 4 in \cite{Domanski-01}).
239: However, upon decreasing $T$ we observe (see the right h.s.\
240: panel of figure \ref{figure1}) a considerable redistribution
241: of boson occupancy $N_{B}(\Omega)=\frac{1}{N} \sum_{\bf q}
242: \delta \left(\Omega - E_{\bf q} \right) f_{BE} \left(E_{\bf q}
243: -2\mu,T\right)$, here $f_{BE}$ is the Bose Einstein distribution.
244: By comparing both the panels of figure \ref{figure1} we notice
245: that the pseudogap builds up when bosons start populating
246: the low energy states $E_{{\bf q} \simeq {\bf 0}}$.
247: %
248: % ------------ Figure 1 ------------ %
249: \begin{figure}
250: \centerline{\epsfig{file=TDfig1.eps, width=8cm}}
251: \caption{The density of fermion states $\rho(\omega)$ and
252: the boson occupancy $N_{B}(\Omega)$ of the BF model with
253: $v=0.1$, $\Delta_{B}=0$ and concentrations $n_{F}=1$,
254: $n_{B}=0.3$. Energies $\omega$, $\Omega$, $\mu$, $v$
255: and $k_{B}T$ are all expressed in units of the femion bandwidth
256: $D$.}
257: \label{figure1}
258: \end{figure}
259: % ---------------------------------- %
260:
261: Asymmetry of the pseudogap structure is mainly controlled
262: by the boson concentration $n_{B}$. Here is a simple
263: argumentation. If the boson energy is located in a center
264: of the fermion band ($\Delta_{B}=0$), then for the exactly
265: half-filled fermion and boson subsystems they both must
266: have symmetric spectra. In particular, the pseudogap would
267: then become symmetric too. For the situation presented
268: in Fig.\ \ref{figure1} we have $n_{F} \simeq 1$, so it
269: can only be the boson concentration $n_{B}$ responsible
270: for the asymmetry of $\rho(\omega)$. A more detailed
271: analysis will be presented in the future publication.
272:
273:
274: \section{Single particle spectroscopy}
275:
276: Our results, in particular effects of the particle-hole
277: asymmetry, can be well illustrated by calculating
278: the single particle tunneling current $J$. The differential
279: conductance $\sigma(V)=dJ/dV$ as a function of bias
280: voltage $V$ is a direct probe of the density of states
281: below and above the Fermi energy. We use the following
282: expression for the STM current
283: %
284: \begin{eqnarray}
285: J(V) = const \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} d \omega \; \rho(\omega)
286: \; \left[ f_{FD}(\omega,T) \right.
287: \nonumber \\
288: \left. - f_{FD}(\omega-eV,T) \right] ,
289: \label{J}
290: \end{eqnarray}
291: %
292: where $f_{FD}$ stands for the Fermi Dirac distribution.
293: As usually, we neglect the energy $\omega$ and
294: ${\bf k}$-dependence of the tunneling matrix
295: %$M_{\bf k}(\omega)\simeq c$
296: \cite{Norman-00}.
297:
298: In figure \ref{figure2} we show the conductance $\sigma(V)$
299: of the STM current (\ref{J}) obtained for the same set of
300: parameters as in Fig.\ \ref{figure1}. We obtain
301: the negative-positive asymmetric characteristics because,
302: at low T, the conductance is roughly proportional to the
303: density of states $\rho(\omega)$. Our results agree very
304: well with the experimental data reported by Renner {\em et al}
305: \cite{Renner-96}. Unfortunately, we are unable to pass
306: through $T_{c}$ (we solve the flow equations using the one
307: dimensional tight binding dispersion $\varepsilon_{\bf k}^{0}$
308: \cite{Domanski-01} when $T_{c}^{dim=1}=0$). However,
309: for the realistic $dim>2$, we expect the asymmetry to
310: survive even at $T<T_{c}$ as seen experimentally
311: \cite{Renner-96}.
312: %
313: % ----------- figure 2 -------------
314: \begin{figure}
315: \centerline{\epsfig{file=TDfig2.eps, width=5cm}}
316: \caption{
317: The STM current conductance $\sigma(V)$ as a function
318: of bias voltage $V$ (in units of $D/e$) for the same
319: set of parameters as shown in Fig.\ \ref{figure1}.}
320: \label{figure2}
321: \end{figure}
322: % -----------------------------------
323:
324: Let us point out the main features of the pseudogap probed
325: experimentally by the STM conductance \cite{Renner-96}:
326: (i) it is asymmetric,
327: (ii) its magnitude (the peak to peak distance)
328: is almost temperature independent, and
329: (iii) the pseudogap deepens with a decreasing temperature
330: while the coherence peaks gradually start to appear.
331: The BF model is capable to reproduce all these features
332: (i)-(iii). Some other theoretical concepts discussed in
333: the literature to explain $\sigma(V)$, e.g.\ \cite{Norman-00}
334: and references cited therein, are dealing with the physics
335: which microscopically is very close to the BF model (\ref{BF}).
336:
337: {\bf Acknowledgment}
338: T.D.\ kindly acknowledges hospitality of the J.\ Fourier
339: University and Centre de Recherches sur les Tr\`es Basses
340: Temperatures in Grenoble, where this study was carried out.
341: The work was partly supported by the Polish State Committee
342: for Scientific Research, grant No.\ 2P03B 106 18.
343:
344:
345: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
346: \bibitem{Timusk-99}
347: T.~Timusk and B.~Statt, Rep.~Prog.~Phys.\ {\bf 62}, 61 (1999).
348: \bibitem{Carlson-02}
349: E.W.~Carlson, V.J.~Emery, S.A.~Kivelson and D.~Orgad,
350: cond-mat/0206217 (unpublished).
351: \bibitem{Ranninger-85}
352: J.~Ranninger and S.~Robaszkiewicz, Physica {\bf B 135}, 468 (1985).
353: \bibitem{Micnas-90}
354: R.\ Micnas, J.\ Ranninger and S.\ Ro\-basz\-kie\-wicz,
355: Rev.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ {\bf 62}, 113 (1990).
356: \bibitem{perturbative}
357: J.\ Ranninger, J.M.\ Robin, M.\ Eschrig,
358: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 74}, 4027 (1995);
359: J.\ Ranninger and J.M.\ Robin,
360: Solid State Commun.\ {\bf 98}, 559 (1996);
361: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf B 53}, R11961 (1996);
362: P.\ Devillard and J.\ Ranninger,
363: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 84}, 5200 (2000).
364: \bibitem{Ren-98}
365: H.C.~Ren, Physica {\bf C 303}, 115 (1998).
366: \bibitem{DMFT}
367: J.M.\ Robin, A.\ Romano, J.\ Ranninger,
368: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81}, 2755 (1998);
369: A.\ Romano and J.\ Ranninger,
370: Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf B 62}, 4066 (2000).
371: \bibitem{Domanski-01}
372: T.~Doma\'nski and J.~Ranninger, Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf B 63},
373: 134505 (2001).
374: \bibitem{Micnas-01}
375: R.~Micnas, S.~Robaszkiewicz and B.~Tobijaszewska,
376: Physica {\bf B 312}-{\bf 313}, 49 (2002);
377: R.~Micnas and B.~Tobijaszewska, Acta Phys. Pol.\
378: {\bf B 32}, 3233 (2001).
379: \bibitem{mixed_symmetry}
380: K.A.~ Kouznetsov {\em et al}, Phys.~Rev.~Lett.\
381: {\bf 79}, 3050 (1997);
382: A.G.~Sun {\em et al}, Phys.~Rev.~Lett.\ {\bf 72}, 2267 (1995);
383: J.~Ma {\em et al}, Science {\bf 267}, 862 (1995);
384: H.~Ding, J.C.~Campuzano and G.~Jennings, Phys. Rev. Lett.
385: {\bf 74}, 2784 (1995).
386: \bibitem{Domanski-02}
387: T.~Doma\'nski, Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf B} (2002) submitted.
388: \bibitem{anisotropicBF}
389: Ch.P.~Enz, Phys.~Rev.\ {\bf B 54}, 3589 (1996);
390: V.B.~Geshkenbein, L.B.~Ioffe and A.I. Larkin, Phys.~Rev.\
391: {\bf B 55}, 3173 (1997).
392: \bibitem{Wegner-94}
393: F.~Wegner, Ann.~Physik {\bf 3}, 77 (1994).
394: %\bibitem{Tripodi-02}
395: % L.~Tripodi, Ph.D.\ thesis at J.~Fourier Univ., Grenoble
396: % (2002) (unpublished).
397: \bibitem{Norman-00}
398: M.~Eschrig and M.N.~Norman, Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 85},
399: 3261 (2000).
400: \bibitem{Renner-96}
401: Ch.~Renner, B.~Revaz, J.Y.~Genoud and O.~Fischer,
402: J.\ Low Temp.\ Phys.\ {\bf 105}, 1083 (1996);
403: Ch.~Renner, B.~Revaz, J.Y.~Genoud, K.~Kadowaki and O.~Fischer,
404: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 80}, 149 (1998).
405: \end{thebibliography}
406:
407:
408: \end{document}
409:
410: