Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Tuesday, August 7th Part II
     Yong Baek Kim (U. Toronto)

      A Lightning review of quantum spin liquids

 

      Blogged by Andrey Chubukov

Hello, Yong Baek is ready to go. 

This will be a theorists (romantic) viewpoint on quantum spin liquids. The first issue is: what is a quantum spin liquid? Point -- it is different from a cooperative paramagnet.
In a classical cooperative paramagnet, there is a large number of equally unhappy classical ground states.
Classical spin liquid in a frustrated system -- paramagnetic state in between mean-field and the actual Kurie temperatures (the actual one is reduced due to frustration). Still, excitations are coherent (gapped spin waved) at intermediate T. 
Quantum spin liquid -- no coherent excitations, elementary excitations are S=1/2 spinons. Example -1D S=1/2 antiferromaget. Neutron scattering shows spinon continuum with a well-defined boundary. 

Higher dimensions.  Consider possible states with <S> =0. One possibility is valence bond solid state. This one breaks translational symmetry.  But one can make  a superposition    (resonating valence bonds, RVB).  As long as elementary excitations are spinons, the state is a quantum spin liquid. It can be in the form of short-range RVB, with exponential correlations, or in the form of long-range RVB, with power-law correlations.  At this stage, the talk is interrupted by many questions about the nature of RVB state, on the interplay between spin-spin correlations and correlations of spin pairs. 

Yong Baek next discussed examples -- systems which show insulating behavior in resistivity, yet the susceptibility is finite, and specific heat shows power-law behavior.  The materials are the same ones which  Hide Takagi discussed in his talk.    

Some of materials, mostly the ones on Kagome lattices,  are strong Mott insulators (Mot gap is >1eV). Others, like systems on triangular lattices, are close to metal-insulator transition. In terms of spin model., smaller charge gap implies that the spin interaction is more complex than the Heisenberg one (more long ranged).  The reasoning then is that the system looses long-range magnetic order before it becomes a metal. 

Many questions at this point.

One question is what constitutes the proof that a spin liquid excists in D >1.  Yong-Baek's point is that there is strong experimental evidence, but so far no "smoking gun" experiments. Theoretical evidence is also strong, both numerical and analytical  (blogger agrees that numerical evidence is strong, less certain about analytical evidence).  

Again, many questions, from all corners. 

Next item -- a "micky mouse" version of the theory (Yong Baek's terminology).   He began with variational wave function in slave-particle approach. Example: write spins in terms of fermions and replace Heisenberg interaction by 4-fermion interaction. Then use mean-field.   One can classify all possible mean-field states and characterize them using the notations of "topological" and "quantum" order.  One can further introduce a projected wave functionto get rid of doubly occupied states. This procedure partly (but only partly) takes care of the local constraint.

Next item: gauge theory. Yong-Baek discussed U(1) spin liquid (no anomalous <ff> term). Then there is U(1) gauge invariance. For Z_2 spin liquid (<ff> \neq 0), the only transformation allowed is Z_2 (f_{i,\alpha} ->  +- f_{i, \alpha}). For U(1) spin liquids, projected wave function is Gutzviller projector applied to free fermion wave function, for Z_2 spin liquid  the projection acts on BCS wave function.

SECOND TALK

Yong Baek started  by considering excitations in Z_2 spin liquid. His point is that one has to take a wave function of a BCS superconductor, formally set U to be infinite and use Gutzviller projection. This way, one obtains excitations with exactly zero charge and S=1/2. .   He went on to discuss that there are two  different states, one can be viewed as a projected state with no flux, another as a projected state with a flux. 

Predictions:  
1. U(1) spin liquid. At the mean-field level, this is like free fermions with a particular band structure.
Beyond mean-field, the powers of specific heat change. For example, in 2D case interaction with a gauge field changes C(T) from O(T) to T^{2/3}.  The discussion about the accuracy of T^{2/3} analysis emerged. 

2. Z_2 spin liquid.  Because of Z_2, there are visons -- topological defects,  with transform locally from one topological sector to the other.   

Next point -- how theory analysis is related to experiments on organic materials.  Yong Baek made an argument (originally due to Sethil) that near metal-insulator transition specific heat scales as T^{2/3} only at the lowest T. At higher T, it behaves as T log T.   There is another crossover line near the transition, at higher T. This last one is for transport.   Yong-Baek listed several specific predictors for transport which seem to be in quite reasonable agreement with the data. 

With respect to Kagome Herbersmithite material -- most recent numerical calculations for S=1/2 nearest-neighbor Heisenberg model are consistent with Z_2 spin liquid. Experiments show different behavior, what probably indicates that the underlying spin model is more complex than nearest-neighbor Heisenberg.

Final item on the agenda -- spin ice.


Overall impression of the blogger -- this is VERY rapidly developing field, with impressive achievements over the last few years.  Great talk(s). 

Post talk.  During the discussion with students, Yong Baek discussed the importance of entanglement entropy in characterizing spin liquids. He pointed out that the entanglement entropy of a Z2 spin liquid takes the form

S = a * perimeter - Log(2)

This second term has recently been observed in DMRG computations  on the Kagome Lattce
     

Tuesday, August 7th
Hide Takagi, ISSP Tokyo and Riken
An overview of quantum spin liquid: from toy of theorists to reality.

Blogging by Andy Schofield: Good morning blog watchers! We are good to go...

This talk will be about how experimentalists think about spin liquid states - with the theoretical detail following from Yong Baek Kim. Leon Balents' Nature paper (2010) provides a nice introduction. A decade ago, this topic was a toy for theorists but now we have more than one compound which seem to realized this: (2D triangular, Kagome and 3D hyperkagome).


The phases of correlated matter are many and various (solid, liquid, gas, superfluid). The electron in a material has multiple degrees of freedom (charge, spin, orbital) which behave almost independently so one quantum number could show one phase while the other degree of freedom is in another. We will be dealing with a charge solid, spin liquid phase.
We begin with the square lattice antiferromagnet with long range magnetic order. In 1972, Phil Anderson suggested that in a frustrated triangular system where geometry means the is no obvious way of minimizing the energy of every spin independently, then adding strong quantum effects (of spin 1/2) then this may lead to a spin-liquid state. There are many types of quantum spin liquid, but in essence they can be viewed as a superposition of spin-singlet pairs: RVB - resonating valence bonds). These can be short ranged singlets (where there could be a gap to making the first excitation) or longer range which could make the spin liquid gapless, with a spin-Fermi surface and even a transition into chiral ordering.
Question: what is a spin Fermi surface? Answer: excitations reminiscent of a fermi surface in momentum space
Question: How do you know long range RVB is gapless? Answer: experimentalist view point is of short range correlations so the decay is exponential, by contrast with long range single pairing: I expect we will hear more from Y.B. Kim later I guess.








Geometrical frustration: 2D triangular lattice or its 3D version - the pyrochlore lattice of corner sharing tetrahedra - are the exemplars. To think abut creating this: Start with a cubic lattice looked along the [111] direction then this has a triangular arrangement of atoms. NiO is an example (NaCl structure). The (111) plane is a triangular lattice of same atoms - the next layer is also triangular. This forms a stacked layer of triangles of the same atom: Ni then O in 2D planes. In NiO we have 8 equivalent directions [111], [1,-1,1] etc so the layers are intermixed. However we can space the layers out with cations: (Li_0.5 Ni_0.5) O. This then separates the Ni and O layers with a layer of Li to isolate.
Question (by AJS): How do you know the Li layer will order like this? Answer the more different the ionic radius the more likely they are to order rather than form a mixture.
Question: How do the Li atoms know which of the 8 planes to choose? Answer - long range ionic forces tend to drive this ordering.
Question: What is known about the orbital structure in the plane? Do electrons only hop locally? Answer: minimally you need to do p-p, d-p and d-d neighbour hopping.


Having made triangles we will now see that the pyrochlore is also related to a NaCl structure. Take the Na atoms in NaCl in one unit cell then it forms a tetrahedron. You then can construct a pyrochlore by connecting those tetrahedra (will not include all the Na atoms though). You can then make a Kagome by using the planes perpendicular to [111] in a pyrochlore. It alternates Kagome and triangular layers. So you can then use cation ordering to separate and isolate these layers.





Question: you have made the lattice, but how do you make the AFM coupling? Answer: the oxide helps but also the detail of the transition metal ion.
Question: Isn't the ground state of a triangular lattice the 120 degree phase? Answer: higher order interactions can destabilize this to a spin liquid state.
Question: It still looks 3D. Yes - you need the cation ordering (a combination of magnetic and non-magnetic layer).
These are the principles we can use to make lots of interesting frustrated lattices. Pyrochlores form in the spinel structure (AB_2O_4) and (A_2B_2O_7) where A and/or B can be magnetic. We also want to make these highly quantum so ideally spin 1/2.
Question: what about honeycomb lattice? This is not frustrated but bipartite for nearest neighbour - but can be frustrated with large next neighbour interaction - see later.

How do we capture the signature of a quantum spin liquid?  Look at the susceptiblity. At high temperature it is Curie-Weiss like whose intercept (of 1/chi) on the negative T=0 (-T_cw) axis gives the bare scale of the interaction. In 3D ordered systems you usually see a kink roughly at +T_cw which is the Neel ordering temperature T_N. The ratio f = T_N/T_cw indicates the degree of frustration. A gapless spin-liquid would have no kink but one still needs to look for the absence of order with neutrons, NMR, muSR, ...In the gapless case 1/chi as T->0 would be constant (like a metal) but in a gapped spin-liquid then 1/chi would diverge exponentially. Specific heat and thermal conductivity are other important probes.

Question: you cannot get to T=0 so how do you know if it is ordered/gapped etc?  
Answer: compare to the scale of J (which is usually 100-1000K) and we can get to experimental temperatures of 100mK so much less than J.

Question: what about electrical transport properties?  
Answer: today we will be confined to insulators - though many of these systems are actually quite weak insulators.

Question: clarifying the distinction between long range order and long range RVB.
Answered above I hope.

Question: If you have a valence bond solid how do you distinguish that from the gapped spin liquid?  Answer: the crystal structure will show the distortion of the dimers.


Candidates for some quantum spin liquids: 2D triangular - the best candidate is the organic materials of Kanoda's group like kappa-(BEDT-TTF)_2-Cu2(CN)_3. The two parts of this planar molecule forms dimers with one electron per dimer with pairs which form a 2D layers. They are called charge transfer salts. This forms a S=1/2 Mott insulator which looks triangular although the couplings are not identical so it is a t, t' model.




See susceptibility (Y. Shimizu et al, PRL, 91, 5th Sept 2003) - no anomaly for AFM ordering. NMR showed no internal magnetic fields down to 32mK with interaction strength of 100K - so system is paramagnetic. A reference compound shows a Neel temperature of 30K and you see it in NMR.

Question: does the dip in the susceptibility seen in this material indicate short range RVB? Could do.
Specific heat C/T v T^2 seems to show an intercept (ie like an itinerant metal - except it is an insulator) with a value of 13mJ/mol K^2 and a Wilson ratio of 1. [letter to Nature, Satoshi Yamashita et al]. So this could be evidence of a spinon Fermi surface.

Question (by AJS): do the spinons form a Fermi liquid - with a T^2 scattering rate perhaps visible in thermal transport. Answer: issue is complicated and not resolved (will discuss this afternoon).
Question (by AC): ratio of t and t'? Answer: about 1.4
This represents 25% of my talk but time is up, This afternoon we will be able to discuss issues and better compounds.
















OK - here we go. The afternoon session begins...

Takagi begins by asking why no 120 degree structure forming on the triangle? The answer appears to be the proximity to the Mott transition with higher order exchange processes leading to longer range interactions. Optical conductivity reveals a charge gap of order 0.1eV so this is indeed low.. We next turn to the thermal conductivity which seems to vanish quadratically (maybe cubically) in T (in contrast with kappa going like 1/3 C_v v l which would suggest linearly vanishing in T). Also mean free path l = 3a. So really hard to explain what is going on. The other puzzle is from NMR which shows an anomaly at about 6K - also seen in thermal expansion. Applying pressure you can close the gap and see superconductivity emerge in the metallic phase - with a Tc of 6K. So is the 6K anomaly the same/or connected to the superconductivity in the metallic phase.
We now have a new generation of spin liquid candidates - which will also challenge this bloggers ability to type: EtMe3Sb[Pd(dmit_2]_2 (see T. Itou, Nature Physics (2010)). Very similar physics with a fermi liquid type properties of chi and specific heat with a Wilson ratio of order 1. Thermal conductivity now looks much more like one we could understand. kappa/T looks like specific heat with mean free paths of order microns (like a metal!!). This is data from Matsuda's group in Kyoto - and is truly a thing of beauty.
However at high temperatures the data looks strange with a 1K anomaly  in T_1^-1. It is again not clear what is happening. A phase transition of a spinon fermi surface.
Question: Is there something happening above 10K - any opinion on that? Perhaps a precursor to the 1K anomaly.
Question: What about optical conductivity - is there a Drude peak? Resistivity is diverging as T->0 so there are no charged carriers - so the thermal conductivity is begin carried by non-charged particles.
A further candidate is NiGa2S4: an S=1 triangular antiferromagnet (Satoru Nakatsuji). However there is spin-freezing in NMR at 8.5K so not a spin liquid but there may be some interesting dynamics (T_CW ~ 100K).
We now move to the S=1/2 Kagome system: Hybertsmithite ZnCu_3(OH)_6Cl_2 [M.P.Shores, J. A. Chem. Soc. 127, 13462 (2005).] claimed to be a perfect system for this. J=180K but with no signature of ordering in neutron scattering nor in muSR. There are signatures of defects: Zn and Cu may intermix which can mess the system up so disorder is a matter of debate. Is there a spin-gap? Looking at the susceptibility (intrinsic using NMR to avoid the impurity contribution). The data is ambiguous at this stage since you can fit to gapped or ungapped right now so not yet resolved.
A new Kagome system: Volborthite Cu3V2O7(OH)2.2H2O but it has 2 Cu sites in the Kagome plane so it is not quite an ideal system. However Cu and V are very different so it makes a clean system (almost no hint of impurity contribution to the susceptibility). There is some anomalous magnetisation with a tiny transition at 1K. This structure actually looks more like a 1D chain with a bridge because of a distortion which means not all coppers are equivalent.
A candidate S=1/2 Kagome: Vesignieite BaCu3V2O8...lost it.
So we have lots of interesting candidates for Kagome but it is complicated by disorder and distortion when compared to the organic systems above.
Question (by AC): are there examples of Kagome systems with S>1/2? Yes - many and they tend to show classical order.
Third example: hyper-kagome lattice: Na4Ir3O8. Ir^4+ oxide. It is a B-cation ordered spinel with non-magnetic sodium occupying part of the pyrochlore lattice. So it forms a network of corner shared triangles rather than tetrahedra in a sort of twisted version of a Kagome. The ion has 5d5 so expect S=/12 but actually spin-orbit is strong so there may be that j is a better quantum number. The lattice itself has chirality too based on the orientation of these connected triangles.
Question (by AJS): is this spin isotropic? Good question - and answer is that we cannot exactly tell yet but there are examples of irridates which are very isotropic.
This is a Mott insulator with J=650K, a clear S=1/2 moment and no ordering in chi down to 1.8K and down to 4K in neutrons. The Knight shift shows chi being constant at T=0 (different from bulk susceptibility at low T but that just indicates the presence of impurities). 1/T1 and 1/T1T show power-law decay with 1/T1T constant below 10K which implies a gapless excitation spectrum. At low T there is no evidence for ordering in specific heat but does suggest a small gamma of 1 mJ/mol Ir K^2 but here the Wilson ratio is of order 40. However we are quite close to magnetism in this system and cannot rule out some indication of this.
Question (by AC): but I missed this question - sorry. Andrey perhaps you can add it at some point...? Answered by Yong Baek - spin orbit affects the specific heat.
Finally an alternative routes to spin-liquids but flashed too fast for the blogger to do anything...a part from a reference to spin-ice, charge analogues of spin-liquids. Nature always tries to lift degeneracy. In summary: clean systems close to a metal-insulator transition seems to be the key to spin-liquid formation and stabilisation.
Question: about the 6K anomaly above. The challenge is to measure stuff under pressure so it is very tough but it looks smoothly connected to 6K transition in the superconductor.
Question (by AJS): is there hope for an orbital liquid? Very interesting - may NaLi could be but there is nothing firmly established.




Monday, August 6, 2012

Monday, August 6th.
Andre-Marie TREMBLAY
Mott transition, Hubbard model and superconductivity: an introduction.
Link to Blog








Ali YAZDANI
Visualizing the emergence of heavy fermions and their exotic properties

  Link to Blog







Andre Marie began by discussing the great successes of the electronic theory of matter. Metals, band insulators and electron-phonon mediated metals. Metals and band-insulators - a triumph of Pauli's exclusion principle- even/odd no of electrons per unit cell gives an insulator/metal respectively.  He discussed how the mean-field description of the pair operator gives rise to the phase of the superconductor -




Gradients of the phase of this order parameter describe the remarkable phenomenon of superconductivity.

But he then moved onto  problems that can not be described using this framework.  Mott insulators, quantum criticality, non-Fermi liquid behavior. Mott insulators - an idea due to Peierls and Mott - that when the Coulomb interaction exceeds the hopping, electrons localize.  Quantum criticality - the strong quantum fluctuations that emerge at a zero temperature quantum phase transition. Non-Fermi liquid behavior - the departures from Fermi liquid behavior that appear to occur near a quantum critical point.

Andre introduced the phase diagram of the cuprates, which led to many questions.  Such as

(1) can't you have a linear resistivity from phonons and band electrons? (An
(2) why is the region of the Antiferromagnet much larger with electron than hole doping?  (Andre answered that hole doping is much more strongly coupled, and has more competing phases, such as charge order).
(3) is the critical temperature the same for hole and electron doping? (Andre-M. Yes it is if you chose (LaSr)CuO4 and (ReCe)CuO4 , as chosen in the figure).
(4) how does the phase diagram change with pressure? (Andre-M. Tc goes up with pressure holes, down with pressure, electrons).
(5) if you take anything that has antiferromagnetism, such as nickel or vanadium oxide,  and you dope it to remove the afm - do you get a superconductor? (Andre-M: The case of VaO, it does not happen, but there are heavy fermion examples where it does occur - occurs -often, but not all the time?)
(6) what is the key parameter that drives superconductivity? (Andre-M: I will show you that in the one band Hubbard model, it is J that drives the sc).

AM contrasted the organics and the high temperature superconductors.  In the former, pressure changes the bandwidth (ratio of t'/t), in the latter - it is doping controlled.

There are many properties he claimed, heavy fermions, high temperature supeconductivity, collosal magneto-resistance - that can not be explained with the Kohn Sham approach.  There are many factors here - low dimension enhancing quantum and thermal fluctuations - large residual interactions.  So how should one proceed in these cases?  Answer - identify important physical principles to constrain non-perturbative approx. Benchmark against exact results. Check that weak and strong coupling match up at intermediate coupling. Last but not least - compare with experiment!

AM gave a selection of various methods:
  • Weak coupling and renormalization. (FRG, Diagramatic methods, FLEX..)
  • Renormalized Mean Field Theory
  • Slave particles and Gauge Theories
  • Variational Approaches
  • Cluster and Dynamical Mean field approaches.
 Andrei Chubukov asked - is it settled that there is definitely d-wave superconductivity in the weak-coupling Hubbard model. AM said while nothing is certain in Science, at the 95% confidence level - the answer is "yes".

Are cuprate superconductors truly doped Mott Insulators? , AM asked. AM constrasted the spectral weight transfer of regular and Mott insulators. Doping removes one state from the lower and the upper Mott band  - not just a movement of chemical potential,  a transfer of spectral weight from the upper to the lower band. He showed ARPES data that shows that the number of low energy states as 2x, not as 1+x as in Fermi liquids.

Next, AM discussed the Dynamical Mean Field Theory approach(DMFT) and the Cluster DMFT (C-DMFT) approach. He introduced the self-consistency eqns, and discussed the many waves of arriving at the same approach.  In the Potthoff approach, one regards DMFT as a stationary point of a Luttinger-Ward functional F[G] under the restriction that the input Green  function  is local.

Q: Can one formalize a 1/D expansion beyond the infinite D limit as a way of correcting DMFT?
AM:  Problems with causality have been encountered?

Q: A theory in infinite D is above the upper critical dimension, so how can one use DMFT?
AM:  For critical phenomena, above the upper critical dimension, you would get mean-field phenomena, but below, you get non-mean field exponents. But here we're talking about fermions, so if you are in very large dimension, the main result is that the self-energy is only frequency dependent, not dependent on direction. If you just look at this fermion problem, as far as I can tell, there is no rigorous statement about what is the upper critical dimension.  If you look at D=3, it turns out that the local approx seems to be good. If you look at two dimensions, we know that here the self-energy is strongly momentum dependent, and this is why you need clusters. But the other answer concerns higher order Greens functions - but whenever you compute them - you will always get mean field. Nobody yet knows how to include the corrections, the long-wavelength fluctuations,  that become important below the upper critical dimension. This is one of the Frontiers of the field.

Q: What will happen if you're not exactly in 2D?
A: If you start from high temperature, the 3D aspects aren't important, but as you lower the T, they become more important.

Q: If you replace the k-integration by an integration over energy, this is fine for FL theory - and all information about the self-energy is lost. What happens here?
A: Lets discuss later.

Q: What is your opinion about the role of p-electrons in the cuprates?
AM: Indeed if we look at the pseudo-gap regime, you can see that the oxygen p-electrons are involved. Clearly, eventually it is important.  Very close to half filling there is the idea of the Zhang Rice singlet, which though it contains O and Cu orbitals, it behaves as an effective "hole" in a one-band Hubbard model. Of course ultimately, we will have a three-band model. 


AM then contrasted strong and weak-coupling in the Hubbard model at half filling, showing the spin-fluctuation scale versus U. At large U, for  4t^2/U < T < U, one has local moments. At low U, the transition is a Slater transition, but at high U, it is a Heisenberg phase transition.  The upper transition at T~U is a Mott transition. In DMFT, one finds that the cross-over ends at a first order phase transition. The high-temperature limit is insensitive to lattice structure, and is very well described by DMFT.  Clusters don't change much.

AM constrasted Fermi liquid based vs Mott insulator based approaches. In the DMFT/CDMT, one can treat long-range order in a mean-field way, but the detailed short-range dynamical and spatial correlations are well-described.  The long-wavelength p-h and p-p fluctuations are lost.

Q: How do "C-DMFT" and "Extended DMFT" compare when you have RKKY interactions.
AM: I don't precisely know, but I can try to find the answer.

Q: Is the self-consistency like RPA?
AM: No, its better! But both don't satisfy the Mermin Wagner theory in 2D.

Summary: in the presence of correlation, we have lots of interesting new physics. This is at the heart of the problem in Organics, high temperature superconductors, heavy fermions and giant magneto-resistance.  New methods to solve these problems are in very active development, and as time goes by, we start to understand the limitations of every method, and we're beginning to get convergence between strong and weak-coupling based approaches.  In organic and high temperature superconductors, we have band-width and doping driven systems, but both are connected to the Mott transition. 


Part II

In the afternoon, AM introduced the challenge of solving impurity problems, as a "solver" for C-DMFT.  How does one do this?  Conventional Monte Carlo has to deal with the fact that the weights for given quantum fluctuations are not positive definite. One has to factor out the sign of the
weight and include it into the observable

      <A(x)> = Sum [A(x) Sign(p(x)) Abs[p(x)]/ Sum[Sign[p[x]] Abs[p[x]]]

This has the problem that when the sign changes a lot, the denominator becomes small and the errors become too large.

Instead, an alternative method is Monte-Carlo sampling of  the diagramatic expansion of the partition function.

       Z = Sum_config k  Sum _other q nos  Integral dtau1 ...dtauN  w[k,tau]

The probabilities to add W[x->y] or remove a propagator W[y->x] is known, and one can use this to do a Monte-Carlo sampling of the perturbation theory.  Using this method, one can now sample the diagram theory and it leads to a practical Monte Carlo method for evaluating correlation functions in imaginary time.

AM presented a summary of the formidable calculations that have been made using C-DMFT and the continuous time Monte Carlo. As a function of chemical potential, they see a sequence insulator -> metal 1 ->1st order transition -> metal 2.  The metal 1 is interpreted as the pseudo-gap phase, and is seen to have a marked reduction in the density of states and the spin susceptibility. The first order transition forms a line that terminates at a finite T Ising transition.

AM mentioned that this approach does not include antiferromagnetism, which requires triplet correlations, which somehow are not included in this approach. There was a suggestion that the Mott phase captures the AFM region of the phase diagram.

AM also discussed superconductivity - here there is pairing at low doping, which I believe disappears at a rather low doping - AM suggested this is a consequence of using too small clusters.  The size of the gap is very weakly doping dependent, in contrast with the physical superconductors. AM mentioned that it is still unclear what mechanism controls the dependence of Tc on doping in the cuprates.








Ali YAZDANI
Visualizing the emergence of heavy fermions and their exotic properties 






Ali Yazdani introduced the basic ideas of tunneling. He stressed the importance of correlating observations with bulk measurements, to convince oneself that one is measuring bulk properties. Very important that the tip density of states and the tunneling matrix element is very weakly energy dependent.  He showed how one can use the method for imaging and spectroscopy as a function of position: 2D maps.  This sort of measurement takes a few seconds for a single spectrum, hundred energy points, 256 x 256 pixels over 1000 Angstroms takes four or five days, and one needs excellent vibration in a bunker. Low frequency noise is a particular problem. 

Q: How big is the tip at the end? How many atoms?
AY: You pick a simple tip, such as Iridium, which makes nice tips. You can heat the tip, sputter it to clean it. You can poke it into to copper to make it atomically sharp.  The identity of the tip atom is actually unknown. 

Ali showed the Friedel oscillation standing waves - in momentum space you can think of the electrons living on the Fermi surface - when they hit a defect, they backscatter around the simple Fermi surface. You can get info about the FS if you study how they scatter off defects. By Fourier transfering the real-space picture, you can for example, image the 111 surface state of Cu. More complex examples are the topological surface states of a topological insulator.  Regions of high density of states dominate the interference pattern.  

Q: Are you touching the surface of the sample?
AY: There is a gap of about 6A, you can stay fairly far away and get 100's of pA of current, easily measured? 

Q: Do you need to prepare the surface of the sample?
AY: You have to prepare a clean surface in a vacuum.  All these expts - surface mostly by breaking the crystal in a vacuum. 

Q: How do you distinguish structural from electronic features? 
AY: On samples that are cleaved flat, once you see a step, you can correlate that with structural features. But if there is structural reconstruction - it normally affects the spectrum over a large energy window, whereas electronic features are usually strongly energy dependent.

Q: How do you distinguish electrons, the Fermi surface and nearby states?
AY: We have excellent energy resolution. I can show you tunneling into semiconductors and s-wave scs, and they behave in ways we understand. You can also see the effects of defects, and these also behave in ways we can understand?

Now Ali turned to the cuprates.  He went over the main questions - the things that are poorly understood.  There is  a region of fluctuating superconductivity and at high temperatures the pseudogap phase, with some kind of competing order. Similar features are seen in iron-based and heavy fermion superconductors.  "Our group has developed the electronics to be able to take the measurements up to 100K, while maintaining atomic registry. "

At low doping there is evidence for exotic ordered phases, such as stripes at 12.5%.  He said we know that these are d-wave superconductors, from Josephson corner-junction measurements that determine the phase change across the pair wavefunction. What is really difficult to understand is the evolution of the Fermi surface from high doping to low doping. The Large Fermi surface seems to get partially lost in the antinodes at low doping, where a gap opens up in the pseudo-gap state, leaving nodal states ungapped. The key question is the pairing mechanism and how we connect this with the pseudogap physics?  What is the interaction of the pseudogap with the sc?  Is it a friend or Fo?

Most of the STM work on cuprates, is on the Bismuth Strontium Calcium Copper Oxide (Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+\delta), which cleaves very well to give images like the following. You can see the structural distortion which is strongest in the Bi-O layer.Different gaps develop at different temperatures corresponding to local gap and scattering rates.

Ali also showed the suppession of SC in underdoped cuprates. Corroborated with the most reecent ARPES. The nodal gap separates from simple d-wave in the under-doped systems.  The separation point in both ARPES and STM defines a "Fermi surface arc" which grows with doping, until it covers the entire Fermi surface.  Along the arc regions, one obtains a d-wave gap.What we could talk about in discussion, is the spatial structure - there's a lot of spatial structure probably connected with competing order - such as stripes. This afternoon we'll switch to another topic.


Part II: Heavy Fermions

In the afternoon, Ali turned to the study of Heavy Fermions, and in particular, the heavy fermion system CeCoIn5.  AY discussed the idea of the Kondo effect, in which a spin is screened by forming an entangled singlet with the surrounding conduction sea.  

He then discussed how this idea can be generalized to the idea of a "Kondo Lattice", in which the local moments delocalize their spin into the conduction sea to form a large Fermi surface of heavy fermions.  He pointed out that with the exception of the hidden order system URu2Si2, this process has never been microscopically imaged using STM methods. 

One of the important concepts for his talk, is the idea that tunneling into heavy fermions goes via two paths - a direct tunneling into the spd electrons, and a "cotunneling" into the f-electrons - a process that really involves the correlated addition of an electron and a spin-flip of a localized f-electron, which once coherent, can be thought of as tunneling into the f-state.   These two processes interfere.  When both processes are present, it leads to an interference or "Fano shaped" line. If the coupling to the spd electrons dominates, this produces a "dent" in the density of states. But if the cotunneling dominates, the process can image the Kondo resonance near the Fermi surface. (Strong coupling to f-electrons).


Ali then introduced the system CeCoIn5, which is a heavy fermion superconductor with a 2.5K transition temperature. This system appears to be almost quantum critical, as it displays a linear resistivity below about 40K. Ali showed the STM images of this system, showing that there are two important surfaces - the Ce-In surface ("A") and the Co surface ("B") . Surface C reconstructs and is not studied.






Remarkably, tunneling into the Ce layer is dominated by spd electrons, whereas tunneling into the Co surface is dominated by the co-tunneling, and shows a marked peak.  The antiferromagnetic compound CeRhIn5 does not appear to contain delocalized heavy electrons, and no Kondo peak is seen at the Fermi surface. 


Q: How can tunneling on the Co surface, which does not contain f-electrons be dominated by coupling to f-electrons.

AY: This is because of the cotunneling. The f-electrons are strongly hybridized with the Co layers, and cotunneling is dominated by the addition of electrons to the Co layers. 







  Ali then turned to the quasiparticle interference - the spatial structure of the tunneling.  By following the Friedel oscillations on surface A, he showed that it was possible to image the development of hybridization with f-electrons.  Surface B imaged the flat part of the band. In this way, it is possible to directly demonstrate the formation of a hybridized heavy fermion band.









Ali finished with a discussion of the temperature dependence.  Remarkably, the Kondo resonance imagaed on surface B (Co layer) narrows with temperature, and can be collapsed onto an E/T scaling plot.  This is the STM counterpart of E/T scaling seen in the dynamical spin susceptibilty  Au-doped quantum critical CeCu6-xAux.  Ali speculated that this suggests some kind of local quantum criticality. 






Whats next?  The Yazdani group are cooling down to try and observe the development of superconductivity in CeCoIn5. This requires a new setup, combining a dilution fridge and new STM rig (with lots of isolation).  We all look forward to seeing the results from this new machine (shown here).