Disorder and impurities in hubbard-antiferromagnets
We study the influence of disorder and randomly distributed impurities on the properties of correlated antiferromagnets. To this end the Hubbard model with (i) random potentials, (ii) random hopping elements, and (iii) randomly distributed values of interaction is treated using quantum Monte Carlo and dynamical mean-field theory. In cases (i) and (iii) weak disorder can lead to an enhancement of antiferromagnetic (AF) order: in case (i) by a disorder-induced delocalization, in case (iii) by binding of free carriers at the impurities. For strong disorder or large impurity concentration antiferromagnetism is eventually destroyed. Random hopping leaves the local moment stable but AF order is suppressed by local singlet formation. Random potentials induce impurity states within the charge gap until it eventually closes. Impurities with weak interaction values shift the Hubbard gap to a density off half-filling. In both cases an antiferromagnetic phase without charge gap is observed.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- M. Ma and E. Fradkin, Phys. Rev. B 28, 2990 (1983); A. M. Finkelshtein, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 84, 168 (1983) [Sov. Phys. JETP 57, 97 (1983)]; C. Castellani, C. Di Castro, P. A. Lee, and M. Ma, Phys. Rev. B 30, 527 (1984); C. Castellani, C. Di Castro, and M. Grilli, ibid. C. Castellani, C. Di Castro, and M. Grilli, 34, 5907 (1986).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- M. E. Tusch and D. E. Logan, Phys. Rev. B 48, 14 843 (1993).Google Scholar
- V. Janiš and D. Vollhardt, Phys. Rev. B 46, 15 712 (1992).Google Scholar
- R. Blankenbecler, D. J. Scalapino, and R. L. Sugar, Phys. Rev. D 24, 2278 (1981). J. E. Hirsch, Phys. Rev. B 28, 4059 (1983). G. Sugiyama and S.E. Koonin, Ann. Phys. 168, 1 (1986); S. Sorella, S. Baroni, R. Car, and M. Parrinello, Europhys. Lett. 8, 663 (1989). S. R. White, D. J. Scalapino, R. L., Sugar, E. Y. Loh, J. E. Gubernatis, and R. T. scalettar, Phys. Rev. B 40, 506 (1989).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- A. Singh, M. Ulmke, and D. Vollhardt, Phys. Rev. B 58 (to appear Oct. 1998); condmat/9803094.Google Scholar
- P. Sen, S. Basu, and A. Singh, Phys. Rev. B 50, 10 381 (1994); P. Sen and A. Singh, Phys. Rev. B 53, 328 (1996); A. Singh and P. Sen, Phys. Rev. B 57, 10598 (1998).Google Scholar
- N. Bulut, D. Hone, D. J. Scalapino, and E. Y. Loh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2192 (1989); D. Poilbanc, D. J. Scalapino, and W. Hanke, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 884 (1994); G. B. Martins, M. Laukamp, J. Riera, and E. Dagotto, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3563 (1997); Y. Motome, N. Katoh, N. Furukawa, and M. Imada, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 65, 1949 (1996).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- W. Brenig, and A. P. Kampf, Phys. Rev. B 43, 12 914 (1991); E. Manousakis, Phys. Rev. B, 45, 7570 (1992); C. C. Wan, A. B. Harris and D. Kumar, Phys. Rev. B 48, 1036 (1993).Google Scholar
- For a recent review see: F. Gebhard, The Mott Metal-Insulator Transition, Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, vol. 137, (Springer, Heidelberg 1997).Google Scholar