1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2: %%

3: %% Quasi-1d Paper

4: %%

5: %% D. Rohe and A. Georges

6: %%

7: %% Version 1.1: August, 3 2006

8: %%

9: %%

10: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

11: 

12: %\NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}

13: %\documentclass[12pt,aps,prb]{revtex4}

14: \documentclass[aps,prb,superscriptaddress,showpacs,twocolumn,a4paper]{revtex4}

15: \usepackage{epsfig}

16: \usepackage{amsmath}

17: 

18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% LAYOUT %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

19: 

20: \textwidth 160mm

21: \textheight 235mm

22: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.6}

23: \normalsize

24: 

25: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% DEFINITIONS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

26: \def\ba{{\bf a}}

27: \def\bd{{\bf d}}

28: \def\bG{{\bf G}}

29: \def\bi{{\bf i}}

30: \def\bj{{\bf j}}

31: \def\bk{{\bf k}}

32: \def\bn{{\bf n}}

33: \def\bp{{\bf p}}

34: \def\bq{{\bf q}}

35: \def\bG{{\bf G}}

36: \def\bQ{{\bf Q}}

37: \def\bS{{\bf S}}

38: \def\bv{{\bf v}}

39: \def\bz{{\bf z}}

40: \def\b0{{\bf 0}}

41: 

42: \def\cG{{\cal G}}

43: \def\cO{{\cal O}}

44: \def\cR{{\cal R}}

45: \def\cS{{\cal S}}

46: \def\cV{{\cal V}}

47: \def\cZ{{\cal Z}}

48: \def\tF{\tilde F}

49: \def\tG{\tilde G}

50: \def\tH{\tilde H}

51: \def\tn{\tilde n}

52: \def\tp{\tilde p}

53: \def\tP{\tilde P}

54: \def\tS{\tilde S}

55: \def\tq{\tilde q}

56: \def\tbp{\tilde\bp}

57: \def\tbq{\tilde\bq}

58: \def\tPi{\tilde\Pi}

59: \def\txi{\tilde\xi}

60: \def\btG{{\bf\tG}}

61: \def\xip{\xi_{\bp}}

62: \def\xik{\xi_{\bk}}

63: \def\Re{{\rm Re}}

64: \def\Im{{\rm Im}}

65: \def\bra{\langle}

66: \def\ket{\rangle}

67: \def\up{\uparrow}

68: \def\down{\downarrow}

69: \def\lra{\leftrightarrow}

70: \def\alf{\alpha}

71: \def\eps{\epsilon}

72: \def\gam{\gamma}

73: \def\Gam{\Gamma}

74: \def\lam{\lambda}

75: \def\Lam{\Lambda}

76: \def\om{\omega}

77: \def\Om{\Omega}

78: \def\sg{\sigma}

79: \def\Sg{\Sigma}

80: 

81: \def\lra{\leftrightarrow}

82: \def\sgn{{\rm sgn}}

83: \def\det{{\rm det}}

84: \def\dps{\displaystyle}

85: 

86: \def\mb#1{{\mathbf #1}}

87: 

88: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

89: \begin{document}

90: 

91: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% TITLE PAGE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

92: 

93: \title{Strong correlations and formation of ``hot spots''\\

94: in the quasi-one-dimensional Hubbard model at weak coupling}

95: 

96: \author{Daniel Rohe}

97: \affiliation{Centre de Physique Th\'eorique, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS-UMR 7644,

98: 91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France}

99: 

100: \author{Antoine Georges}

101: \affiliation{Centre de Physique Th\'eorique, Ecole Polytechnique, CNRS-UMR 7644,

102: 91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France}

103: 

104: \date{\small\today}

105: 

106: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ABSTRACT %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

107: 

108: \begin{abstract}

109: 

110: We study the anisotropic two-dimensional Hubbard model at and near half filling

111: within a functional renormalization group method, focusing on the structure of

112: momentum-dependent correlations which grow strongly upon approaching a critical

113: temperature from above. We find that a finite nearest-neighbor interchain

114: hopping is not sufficient to introduce a substantial momentum dependence of

115: single-particle properties along the Fermi surface. However, when a

116: sufficiently large second-nearest neighbor inter-chain hopping is introduced,

117: the system is frustrated and we observe the appearance of so-called ``hot spots'',

118: specific points on the Fermi surface around which scattering becomes particularly

119: strong. We compare our results with other studies on quasi-one-dimensional systems.

120: 

121: \end{abstract}

122: 

123: \pacs{71.10.-w, 71.27.+a, 71.20.Rv, 78.30.Jw}

124: 

125: \maketitle

126: 

127: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% PAPER %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

128: 

129: \section{Introduction}

130: 

131: The one-band Hubbard model serves as a minimal model for various correlated electron systems, since it is

132: capable of capturing a number of non-trivial phenomena which are due to the interplay between kinetic and

133: potential energy. In one dimension, numerous theoretical methods are available which have led to a thorough

134: understanding of the low-energy physics.\cite{Gia_book} In higher dimensions, however, rigorous statements are

135: scarce and many controversies remain. It is therefore natural to ask the question how the cross-over from one to

136: two or higher dimensions takes place. Furthermore, since the discovery of quasi-one-dimensional organic

137: conductors and superconductors we have access to materials which are realizations of this physical situation. In

138: these compounds many interesting observations were made during the last two decades, some of which are still

139: calling for a conclusive theoretical description.\cite{Bou_99}

140: 

141: In this work we

142: will consider the evolution of a model system near

143: half-filling, upon increasing the dimensionality via an increase in the perpendicular kinetic-energy coupling between

144: one-dimensional chains. To tackle this question, we employ a functional renormalization group (fRG)

145: technique, which provides a rigorous framework for the computation of low-energy properties starting from a

146: microscopic model.\cite{Sal_book} While this method reduces to the well-known g-ology RG in one dimension, it

147: has been applied successfully to the two-dimensional case, where the angular dependence of the coupling function

148: along the Fermi surface needs to be taken into account.\cite{Hal_00} By allowing for anisotropic hopping

149: parameters we are in principle able to access the complete region from the one-dimensional to the

150: two-dimensional case. In this work we will fix the degree of anisotropy and study the behavior of the system as

151: a function of other parameters.

152: 

153: %Status

154: 

155: The dimensional cross-over in quasi-one-dimensional systems (and the intimately related phenomenon of

156: ``deconfinement'', i.e the Mott insulator to metal transition induced by increasing the inter-chain kinetic

157: energy) have been investigated in recent years within several theoretical approaches. There is consensus on some

158: aspects, but some disagreements between these studies do remain (mainly due to the different theoretical tools

159: which have been employed, and the different regimes of parameters which have been investigated).

160: The issue as such was raised by experimental studies on Beechgard salts. In

161: particular, the optical spectroscopy experiments of Vescoli et al. revealed an insulator-to-metal transition as

162: a function of increasing interchain hopping parameter, which changes with chemical composition~\cite{Ves_98}. At

163: the same time, Bourbonnais and J\'{e}rome discussed these results within a scenario where a one-dimensional Mott

164: insulator evolves into a metallic state when the inter-chain hopping reaches the order of the Mott

165: gap.\cite{Bou_98}.

166: 

167: Subsequently, several model calculations where made to substantiate and verify this concept.

168: Biermann et al. employed an extension of dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT), the so-called chain-DMFT, which

169: replaces the original problem by a chain self-consistently coupled to a bath, while taking into account the full

170: intra-chain momentum dependence ([\onlinecite{Bie_01}], see also [\onlinecite{Arr_99}]).

171: They do indeed find a transition from an insulating to a metallic

172: state when the interchain hopping is increased, as well as a crossover from a Luttinger liquid to a Fermi

173: liquid at fixed interchain hopping, when the temperature is decreased.

174: %

175: %An important thing to note in these

176: %results is that in the metallic state the quasi-particle properties vary only very slightly along the resulting

177: %quasi-1d Fermi surface, and special points with exceptionally large scattering rates or small quasi-particle

178: %weights are absent.

179: %

180: Essler and Tsvelik considered this problem starting from a one-dimensional Mott insulator and using a

181: resummed expansion in the inter-chain hopping~\cite{Ess_02,Ess_05}. Using this approach, they

182: suggested that the metallic phase does not develop immediately with a large Fermi surface

183: resembling the non-interacting one. In contrast, close enough to the Mott insulating phase,

184: Fermi surface pockets appear in specific locations, while large parts of the

185: would-be Fermi surface remain gapped due to the influence of the one-dimensional Mott gap. Since they use a

186: particular dispersion in the interchain direction which is particle-hole symmetric, they eventually find that

187: this pocket Fermi liquid becomes unstable towards an ordered state, however at much lower temperatures as

188: compared to the Mott gap. The location of these pockets

189: %at $k_b=0$ ($k_b=\pi$), slightly above (below) the one-dimensional Fermi wave vector

190: %$k_a = \pi/2$, where $k_a$ refers to the momentum in chain direction and $k_b$ to the momentum

191: %perpendicular to the chains.

192: %

193: is such that the neighbourhood of the point $k_a=k_b=\pi/2$ (with $k_a$ the momentum along the chain direction and

194: $k_b$ perpendicular to it) is gapped out and not part of the Fermi surface.

195: This point thus corresponds to a ``hot spot'', at which the scattering rate is very large (and can

196: even lead to a complete suppression of quasiparticles at this point).

197: While the chain-DMFT studies of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Bie_01}] did not observe this phenomenon (perhaps because of the

198: range of coupling or temperature), more recent studies of an anisotropic spinless model using chain-DMFT

199: did observe a partial destruction of the Fermi surface with hot spots at the same

200: location~\cite{Ber_06}.

201: 

202: From the weak-coupling standpoint, early calculations suggested the occurrence

203: of hot spots from a simple perturbative calculations of the scattering rate\cite{Zhe_95}.

204: Within a renormalization group treatment, Duprat and Bourbonnais found that for a finite and fixed value of the

205: interchain hopping the influence of strong spin-density-wave fluctuations can lead to anisotropic scattering

206: rates along a quasi-one-dimensional Fermi surface, leading to the emergence of hot spots\cite{Dup_01}. However,

207: the locations of cold and hot regions are exactly exchanged with respect to the findings by Essler and Tsvelik, with

208: the hot spots found at $k_b=0$ and $k_b=\pm\pi$ in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Dup_01}].

209: It should be noted that these results were obtained for a system away from half filling, meaning that umklapp

210: processes are suppressed in the RG treatment. In the present work, we focus on the half-filled case or its

211: immediate vicinity, and use a functional RG technique which does take

212: umklapp processes into account.

213: 

214: Thus, there exists a consensus that ``hot spots'' might form in quasi one-dimensional systems, but the

215: various treatments do not agree on their location. It is tempting to speculate that this simply

216: reflects the different locations of these hot regions in the weak and strong coupling limits. At any rate,

217: there are some compelling experimental indications for strongly anisotropic scattering rates in

218: quasi one-dimensional organic conductors, as pointed out early on in Ref.~[\onlinecite{Cha_92}] and dicussed

219: further in the conclusion.

220: 

221: % Model

222: 

223: \section{Model}

224: 

225: We consider the one-band Hubbard model:

226: %

227: \begin{equation}

228:  H = \sum_{\bj,\bj'} \sum_{\sg}

229:  t_{\bj\bj'} \, c^{\dag}_{\bj\sg} c^{\phantom{\dag}}_{\bj'\sg} +

230:  U \sum_{\bj} n_{\bj\up} n_{\bj\down}

231: \end{equation}

232: %

233: with a local repulsion $U>0$ and hopping amplitudes $t_{\bj\bj'} = -t_a$ between nearest neighbors in the

234: a-direction along the chains, $t_{\bj\bj'} = -t_b$ between nearest neighbors in the b-direction perpendicular to

235: the chains, and $t_{\bj\bj'} = -t_{b}^{'}$ between second-nearest neighbors in the b-direction. The

236: corresponding dispersion relation reads

237: 

238: \begin{equation}

239:  \eps_{\bk} = -2t_a\cos k_a -2t_b \cos k_b - 2t_{b}^{'} \cos 2k_b .

240: \end{equation}

241: %

242: At half-filling and $t_{b}^{'}=0$ the non-interacting Fermi surface is perfectly nested. The introduction of a

243: finite $t_{b}^{'}$ will allow us to study the effects of deviation from this perfect nesting condition. It is

244: important to note that we do \emph{not} linearise the dispersion in the chain direction, as is commonly done in

245: RG treatments originating from the 1d g-ology setup.\cite{Dup_01} Therefore, the Fermi surface is perfectly

246: nested \emph{only} at half filling. Away from half filling perfect nesting is destroyed, even without a finite

247: value of $t_{b}^{'}$. In the following all energies are given in terms of $t_a$ which we set to unity.

248: 

249: %%% Method

250: 

251: \section{Method}

252: 

253: \begin{figure}

254: \center \epsfig{file=fig1.eps,width=9cm} \caption{Flow equations for the self energy $\Sg^{\Lam}$ and

255:  the two-particle vertex $\Gam^{\Lam}$, respectively;

256:  the internal lines without slash correspond to the bare propagator

257:  $D^{\Lam}$, the lines with a slash to its $\Lam$-derivative

258:  $\partial_{\Lam} D^{\Lam}$.}

259: \label{fig1.eps}

260: \end{figure}

261: 

262: \begin{figure}

263: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig2.eps,width=7cm} \caption{Patching scheme for $N=28$.} \label{7.eps}

264: \end{figure}

265: 

266: In direct analogy to the technique applied in reference [\onlinecite{Roh_05}] we use the Wick-ordered version of

267: the fRG to compute the one-loop flow of the interaction vertex and the two-loop flow of the self energy, as

268: depicted in Fig.\ 1. The internal lines without slash in the Feynman diagrams correspond to the bare propagator

269: %

270: \begin{equation}

271:  D^{\Lam}(k) = \frac{\Theta(\Lam - |\xi_{\bk}|)}

272:  {ik_0 - \xi_{\bk}} \; ,

273: \end{equation}

274: %

275: where $\xi_{\bk} = \eps_{\bk} - \mu$ and $\Lam > 0$ is the cutoff; the lines with slash correspond to

276: $\partial_{\Lam} D^{\Lam}$, which is proportional to $\delta(\Lam - |\xi_{\bk}|)$.

277: 

278: We parametrize the interaction vertex $\Gamma$ by its static values on a reduced number of points/patches on the

279: non-interacting Fermi surface, as illustrated in Fig.\ 2. It is thus parametrised by a momentum-dependent

280: singlet (triplet) component $\Gamma_{s (t)}(k_1,k_2,k_3)$, where the $k_i$ constitute a discrete set of momenta

281: on the Fermi surface. We stress that this does not correspond to treating a finite system, since internal

282: integrations are done in the thermodynamic limit.

283: 

284: In the present work, we do not directly compute the flow of the self-energy, but rather infer from

285: the properties of the two-loop diagram what the influence of a strongly renormalized vertex function on the self

286: energy will be. In the case of the two-dimensional Hubbard model this calculation has been done

287: explicitly,\cite{Roh_05} giving us confidence with respect to this reasoning.

288: 

289: 

290: \section{Results}

291: 

292: \subsection{$t_{b}^{'}=0$ - perfect nesting}

293: 

294: \begin{figure}

295: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig3.eps,width=8cm} \caption{Fermi surface and nesting vector for $t_b=0.1$ and

296: $t_{b}^{'}=0$, that is the case of perfect nesting (All energies in units of $t_a=1$). The picture on the right

297: shows the warping of the Fermi surface near $k_a=\frac{\pi}{2}$.} \label{fspn.eps}

298: \end{figure}

299: 

300: At $t_{b}^{'}=0$ and $\mu=0$ the non-interacting Fermi surface is perfectly nested with nesting vector

301: $\mb{Q}=(\pi,\pi)$ and defines the so-called Umklapp surface as illustrated in Fig.\ 3. For $t_{b}=0$ the

302: problem reduces to the one-dimensional half-filled Hubbard model. In this case the divergence of Umklapp

303: couplings at low energies signals the onset of the Mott insulating phase.\cite{Bou_04} When we analyze the

304: one-loop flow of the interaction vertex for finite values of the interchain hopping $t_{b}$, we find that the

305: divergence of Umklapp processes persists at all finite values of $t_{b}$, which we chose to be $t_b=0.1t_a$

306: throughout this work. Namely the one-dimensional Umklapp couplings connect to two-dimensional Umklapp processes

307: of the type $(k_F,k_F^\prime) \rightarrow (k_F+{\mb Q},k_F^\prime-{\mb Q})$ with momentum transfer $\mb{Q} = (\pi,\pi)$. The

308: crucial point is that this divergence is nearly perfectly homogeneous along the Fermi surface. Due to the

309: feedback of the interaction onto the self energy via the two-loop diagram, this implies that there are no

310: isolated hot spots at which the dominant scattering processes are dominant compared to other regions on the

311: Fermi surface. Instead, {\it the whole Fermi surface} is ''hot''. Along with Umklapp processes the interaction

312: develops divergences in the Cooper channel, also owing to the importance to scattering with wave vector

313: $\mb{Q}=(\pi,\pi)$. The behavior of the coupling function illustrates this very clearly. In the left plot of

314: figure \ref{nested} we display the singlet component of the interaction function $\Gamma_S(\mb{k},-\mb{k},-\mb{k}')$ on

315: the Fermi surface as a function of $k_b$ and $k'_b$ at the end of the flow, in direct analogy to the analysis

316: presented in reference [\onlinecite{Dup_01}]. The bare interaction is chosen in such a way that the temperature is

317: slightly above the pairing temperature, at which the flow of the vertex function diverges. The interaction is

318: homogeneously peaked along the lines $k'_b = \pi - k_b$ and  $k'_b = -\pi - k_b$. We name these lines ''Peierls

319: lines'' since they correspond to scattering processes in which a momentum $\mb{Q}$ is exchanged between the two

320: incoming particles and $\mb{Q}$ is the generalization of $2k_F$ in one dimension at half filling and perfect

321: nesting.

322: 

323: \begin{figure}

324: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig4.eps,width=7.5cm} \epsfig{file=fig4_2.eps,width=7.5cm}

325: \caption{\emph{Left}: Singlet Vertex in the Cooper channel on the Fermi surface as a function of $k_b$ and

326: $k'_b$. \emph{Right}: Singlet Vertex in the Twin-Umklapp channel on the Fermi surface as a function of $k^R_b$

327: and $k^L_b$. Here $t_b=0.1$, $t_b^{'}=0$, $T=0.011$, $\mu=0$, $U=2.45$ (All energies in units of $t_a=1$). In

328: this case the Fermi surface is essentially perfectly nested.} \label{nested}

329: \end{figure}

330: 

331: We thus see that \emph{all} points on the Fermi surface are equally strongly affected by strong correlations

332: appearing in the Cooper channel, which may eventually lead to a phase where \emph{all} one-particle states along

333: the Fermi surface exhibit a pseudogap. Since we look at a system at half filling it is essential to consider

334: Umklapp processes, as mentioned above. We therefore extend the analysis offered in reference [\onlinecite{Dup_01}]

335: and show in figure \ref{nested} in the right plot the interaction function $\Gamma_S(k_{b}^R,k_{b}^R,k_{b}^L)$

336: on the Fermi surface in the so-called twin-Umklapp channel, meaning that both incoming momenta are identical,

337: and $k_{b}^R (k_{b}^L)$ are momenta corresponding to right (left) movers in the standard terminology familiar

338: from the one-dimensional case. We see that along the lines $k_{b}^L = k_{b}^R - \pi$ and $k_{b}^L = k_{b}^R +

339: \pi$ the coupling function in this channel is also homogeneously peaked, confirming the conclusion drawn on the

340: basis of the Cooper channel. We recall that in contrast to the one-dimensional case the system will eventually

341: undergo a transition into an antiferromagnetic state at zero temperature. Here, however, we are concerned with

342: finite-temperature precursor effects, which may legitimately be compared.

343: 

344: These results are distinct from those obtained in other RG calculations\cite{Dup_01}. There, perfect nesting is

345: artificially introduced due to a linearization of the dispersion in the chain direction, and Umklapp processes

346: are neglected. The divergent couplings are then found only in the Peierls section of the Cooper channel for

347: sufficiently small $t_{b}^{'}$, leading to isolated hot spots at $k_b=0$ and $k_b=\pm\pi$.

348: 

349: 

350: \subsection{$t_{b}^{'}\neq0$ - effects of frustration}

351: 

352: \begin{figure}

353: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig5.eps,width=8cm} \caption{Fermi surface for $t_b=0.1$ and $t_{b}^{'}=0.1t_b$

354: (red, dotted line) and for $t_{b}^{'}=0$ (black line). The points at which the two intersect allow for Umklapp

355: scattering of the type $(k_F,k_F) \rightarrow (k_F+{\mb Q},k_F-{\mb Q})$ at arbitarily low energies and

356: therefore emerge as hot spots in the RG flow.} \label{fsnn.eps}

357: \end{figure}

358: 

359: 

360: \subsubsection{$\mu=0$ - half filling}

361: 

362: A finite second-nearest neighbor hopping $t_{b}^{'}$ will destroy the nesting condition for all wave vectors on

363: the Fermi surface, except for a few special points. We set the chemical potential to $\mu=0$ and use $t_b=0.1$

364: and $t_{b}^{'}=0.1t_b$. In this case the non-interacting system essentially remains half filled and the

365: frustrated Fermi surface intersects the Umklapp surface at $k_b=\pm\pi/4$ and $k_b=\pm3\pi/4$, as shown in Fig.

366: \ref{fsnn.eps}. Then, at arbitrarily low energies Umklapp scattering of the type $(k_F,k_F) \rightarrow

367: (k_F+{\mb Q},k_F-{\mb Q})$ is possible if and only if $k_F$ is located at the intersection between the

368: non-nested Fermi surface and the Umklapp surface. The resulting RG flow of the interaction vertex shows a

369: dominant divergence of the couplings corresponding to exactly these processes. This can best be seen in figure

370: \ref{frustrated}, where the coupling function is shown in analogy to figure \ref{nested}. In contrast to the

371: case $t'=0$ the coupling function in both channels shows a strongly peaked behavior which is not homogeneous

372: along the Peierls lines, but which is peaked at the points where the Fermi surface intersects the Umklapp

373: surface. This is reminiscent of a scenario in which there exist so-called hot spots, that is special points at

374: which the scattering rate is particularly large or a pseudogap may appear in the spectral function, in analogy

375: to the case of a two-dimensional system.\cite{Roh_05} Note that for the frustrated system the Peierls lines

376: defined above in the plots of the vertex function correspond to scattering processes with wave vector $\mb{Q}$

377: \emph{only} at hot spots. Elsewhere the momentum transfer on the Fermi surface is incommensurate.

378: 

379: \begin{figure}

380: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig6.eps,width=7.5cm} \hfill

381: \epsfig{file=fig6_2.eps,width=7.5cm} \caption{Same as figure \ref{nested}, but here $t=0.1$,

382: $t'=0.1t_b$, $T=0.011$, $\mu=0$, $U=3.08$. In this case perfect nesting is destroyed and the system is

383: frustrated.} \label{frustrated}

384: \end{figure}

385: 

386: \subsubsection{$\mu \neq 0$ - slightly doped system}

387: 

388: Upon changing the chemical potential the hot spots mentioned above move along the Fermi surface. When $\mu$ is

389: increased, the two points in each quadrant eventually merge until the Fermi surface touches the Umklapp surface

390: at $(\pm\pi/2,\pm\pi/2)$. In figure \ref{edp} we show plots for the vertex function in analogy to figures

391: \ref{nested} and \ref{frustrated}. Indeed, the vertex function along the Peierls lines in both Umklapp and

392: Cooper channel exhibits a strong increase in the diagonal region, corroborating the identification of the hot

393: spots as originating from the points where the Fermi surface intersects the Umklapp surface.  For even larger

394: values of the chemical potential these points do not exist anymore and thus Umklapp processes will not feed back

395: into the self energy. Similarly, upon decreasing $\mu$ the eight hot spots move towards the axis and eventually

396: merge to form four hot spots located at $k_b = 0$ and $k_b = \pi$. Once more the structure of the vertex

397: function reflects this, as can be seen in figure \ref{hdp}, although for the parameters chosen here the

398: variation along the Fermi surface is somewhat weaker. For small enough values of $\mu$ the hot spots will again

399: disappear.

400: 

401: \begin{figure}

402: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig7.eps,width=7.5cm} \epsfig{file=fig7_2.eps,width=7.5cm}

403: \caption{Same as Figure \ref{frustrated}, but here $\mu=0.02$, $U=3.126$. In this case the Fermi surface touches

404: the Umklapp surface at $(\pi/2,\pi/2)$.} \label{edp}

405: \end{figure}

406: 

407: \begin{figure}

408: \center \vskip 2cm \epsfig{file=fig8.eps,width=7.5cm} \epsfig{file=fig8_2.eps,width=7.5cm}

409: \caption{Same as Figure \ref{frustrated}, but here $\mu=-0.0197$, $U=3.75$. In this case the Fermi surface

410: intersects the Umklapp surface near $k_b=0$ and $k_b=\pi$.} \label{hdp}

411: \end{figure}

412: 

413: 

414: %In general, there are eight hot spots, i.e. two in each quadrant of the BZ. The locations

415: %of these hot spots neither agree with the scenario put forward by Essler and

416: %Tsvelik\cite{Ess_02,Ess_05}, nor with the RG calculations by Duprat and Bourbonnais \cite{Dup_01}.

417: %However, it is in perfect agreement with results obtained for the frustrated two-dimensional case\cite{Roh_05}.

418: 

419: %%% Conclusion

420: 

421: \section{Discussion and Conclusion}

422: 

423: In summary, we have studied a quasi one-dimensional model of coupled chains at and near

424: half-filling, using an fRG technique and focusing on the appearance of ``hot'' regions

425: on the Fermi surface. In the presence of perfect nesting, we have found that the whole

426: Fermi surface is hot. In contrast, in the presence of frustration ($t'_b\neq 0$), isolated

427: hot spots appear. The mechanisms for the formation of these hot spots is that the effective couplings

428: (vertex functions) in the various channels become large in an anisotropic manner.

429: The location of the hot spots corresponds to the intersection of the Umklapp surface with the

430: Fermi surface.

431: In general, there are eight hot spots, i.e. two in each quadrant of the Brillouin zone.

432: Their precise location depends on the doping level and on the ratio $t'_b/t_b$.

433: These results are perfectly consistent with previous weak-coupling fRG studies of the frustrated two-dimensional

434: case\cite{Roh_05}.

435: The location of these hot spots do not agree however with a previous weak-coupling RG study of

436: a quasi one-dimensional model~[\onlinecite{Dup_01}]. As we have seen, a proper treatment of

437: Umklapp processes, which are a key ingredient to the mechanism described in the present work, is essential. Because

438: Ref.[\onlinecite{Dup_01}] was motivated by the strongly metallic regime, it did

439: not explicitly include these processes in the RG treatment, besides

440: a mere renormalisation of the forward scattering amplitude.

441: %AG:

442: %[DO YOU AGREE w/ THE ABOVE SENTENCE ? FEEL FREE TO PHRASE IT DIFFERENTLY OR MORE MILDLY]

443: 

444: There are naturally also some limitation to our fRG calculation. First,

445: it is valid only in the weak-coupling regime. Second, the argument that a strongly peaked interaction can

446: create hot spots on the Fermi surface relies on the low-dimensional properties of the model, the reason being

447: that with increasing dimension the feedback of the interaction onto the one-electron self-energy via the

448: two-loop diagram weakens and is eventually washed out. The method does take transverse Umklapp processes into

449: account, which is essential to the main mechanism and observed features.

450: This can already be achieved by a much simpler RPA calculation. However, the fRG not only provides an

451: exact starting point relying on rigorous statements, it also

452: modifies the RPA results. The critical scales are lower and in contrast to RPA the properties in Cooper and

453: Umklapp channels are different at equal momentum transfer.

454: 

455: A different location of the hot spots was also found by strong-coupling techniques, such as

456: the resummation of the expansion in the inter-chain hopping of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Ess_02,Ess_05}] and

457: the recent chain-DMFT treatment of Ref.~[\onlinecite{Ber_06}]. This is less surprising, and

458: it is tempting to speculate that the hot spot location may be determined by the regions in

459: momentum space where the effective couplings are big in the weak coupling limit, while it is

460: associated with regions in which the inter-chain kinetic energy is small in the strong coupling

461: limit. Future studies at intermediate coupling are needed in order to elucidate this point and provide

462: a consistent picture of how the location of the hot spots evolve from weak to strong coupling.

463: 

464: The possibility that electron-electron Umklapp scattering may account for the emergence of hot spots along a

465: quasi-1d Fermi surface was first suggested by Chaikin in order to explain magic angles in the magnetoresistance

466: data of Beechgaard salts\cite{Cha_92}. Here we have shown on the basis of a microscopic model and a

467: functional renormalization group approach how such a

468: situation may arise. Angular dependent magnetoresistance oscillation experiments only provide

469: indirect evidence for the formation of hot spots however, through a momentum dependence of the scattering

470: rate on the Fermi surface which requires theoretical modelisation. Obviously, direct angular-resolved

471: spectroscopy experiments (e.g photoemission), although very difficult to perform on quasi one-dimensional

472: organic conductors, would be highly desirable in order to probe these effects experimentally.

473: 

474: %AG: I've suppressed this and displaced the ref to the introduction, do you agree ? cf my email

475: %It should be stressed that the mechanism at work, namely large and strongly anisotropic

476: %low-energy scattering processes, is different to a mechanism which involves a more sophisticated description of

477: %the one-particle band structure, while assuming that the interaction remains isotropic.\cite{Zhe_95}

478: 

479: \acknowledgments

480: We are grateful to T.~Giamarchi and C.~Bourbonnais for valuable discussions. Support for this work was provided

481: by CNRS and Ecole Polytechnique, and by the E.U. ``Psi-k $f$-electron'' Network under contract

482: HPRN-CT-2002-00295.

483: 

484: 

485: 

486: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% REFERENCES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

487: 

488: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

489: 

490: \bibitem{Gia_book} See. e.g. T. Giamarchi, \emph{Quantum Physics in One Dimension}, Oxford University Press (2004)

491: 

492: \bibitem{Bou_99} For reviews on this subject see e.g. C. Bourbonnais and D. J\'erome, in \emph{Advances in Synthetic Metals, Twenty Years of Progress in Science and Technology}, edited by P. Bernier, S. Lefrant, and G. Bidan (Elsevier, New York 1999), pp. 206, arXiv: cond-mat/9903101; D. J\'erome, Chem. Rev. {\bf 104}, 5565 (2004), and references therein

493: 

494: \bibitem{Sal_book} M. Salmhofer,

495:  {\em Renormalization} (Springer, Berlin, 1998).

496: 

497: \bibitem{Hal_00} C.J. Halboth and W. Metzner,

498:  Phys. Rev. {\bf 61}, 7364 (2000);

499:  Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}, 5162 (2000).

500: 

501: \bibitem{Ves_98} V. Vescoli et al., Science {\bf 281}, 1181 (1998)

502: 

503: \bibitem{Bou_98} C. Bourbonnais and D. Jerome, Science {\bf 281}, 1155 (1998)

504: 

505: \bibitem{Bie_01} S. Biermann, A. Georges, A. Lichtenstein, and T. Giamarchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 276405 (2001)

506: 

507: \bibitem{Arr_99} E.~Arrigoni, Phys. Rev. Lett {\bf 83}, 128 (1999)

508: 

509: \bibitem{Ess_02} F.H.L. Essler and A.M. Tsvelik, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 65}, 115117 (2002)

510: 

511: \bibitem{Ess_05} F.H.L. Essler and A.M. Tsvelik, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 71}, 195116 (2005)

512: 

513: \bibitem{Zhe_95} A.T. Zhelezniak and V.M. Yakovenko, Synth. Met. {\bf 70}, 1005 (1995)

514: 

515: \bibitem{Dup_01} R. Duprat and C. Bourbonnais, Eur. Phys. J. B {\bf 21}, 219 (2001)

516: 

517: \bibitem{Ber_06} C. Berthod, T. Giamarchi, S. Biermann and A. Georges, arXiv: cond-mat/0602304

518: 

519: \bibitem{Cha_92} P.M. Chaikin, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 69}, 2831 (1992)

520: 

521: \bibitem{Roh_05} D. Rohe and W. Metzner, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 71}, 115116 (2005)

522: 

523: \bibitem{Bou_04} C. Bourbonnais and R. Duprat, J. Phys. IV France {\bf 114}, 3 (2004)

524: %

525: %\bibitem{Dus_03} S. Dusuel and B. Dou\c{c}ot, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 67}, 205111 (2003)

526: 

527: \end{thebibliography}

528: 

529: \vfill\eject

530: 

531: \end{document}

532: