Quantum Phase Transitions


 Week 13

  4th -8th April,   2005

 Bloggers:  Dirk Morr & Piers Coleman



The thirteenth week! Quantum mayonnaise, and spin-eating superconductors were amongst the fascinating topics that came to light during this week.  For the informal theory discussion on Monday, Joerg Schmalian (Iowa State University) discussed the concept of "quantum Mayonnaise" that he has invented, in collaboration with Peter Wolynes of UCSD.   Making mayonaise quantum mechanical turns out to be of great interest to  materials where glassy, nano-scale phase separation occurs close to a quantum critical point. It may also be of great importance to a new metallic state of matter that has been recently discovered in the material MnSi.

Joe Thompson from Los Alamos was the experimentalist of the week. He  discussed some of the cutting edge properties of a class of heavy electron materials, where superconductivity, magnetism and heavy electron behavior compete  for the f-spins.  As part of his discussion he announced some fascinating new dHvA data by Onuki's group in Japan, which has observed a divergence in the dHvA masses at the pressure-induced antiferromagnetic phase transition (in finite fields) in CeRhIn5. Such a divergence has been infered from transport and specific heat measurements in the past, but these new dHvA measurents are the  first direct observation of the divergence of  heavy electron masses  at a quantum critical point.

On Thursday, the group took up the whole issue of the interplay between superconductivity and antiferromagnetism -
discussing the field-induced magnetism in CeRhIn5 and the nature of the field-induced non-Fermi liquid behavior that appears to be pinned to the upper critical field of CeCoIn5. Is this an example of a superconducting quantum critical point?  Joe Thompson thought not -  but others were not so sure....


Participants
Blackboard Seminar
Experimental Seminar
Thursday Discussion


Participants present. Click on participant to read questions that they have posed. 
Chubukov, Andrey
Coleman, Piers
Eshrig, Mathias
Hanke, Werner
Ho, Andrew
Khodel, Victor
Krotkov, Pavel
Le Hur, Karyn
Morr, Dirk
Pepin, Catherine
Posazhennikova, Anna
Ramazashvili, Revaz
Schofield, Andrew
Schmalian, Joerg
Si, Qimiao
Vekhter, Ilya
von Lohneysen, Hilbert
Weng, Zheng-Yu
Yakovenko,Victor
Zhu, Lijun



Top
Monday Blackboard Discussion.   10:00am Monday, April 4, 2005

Quantum Mayonnaise [Aud][Cam]

Dr. Joerg Schmalian, Iowa State University and Ameslab


Joerg Schmalian started his talk with a description of classical mayonnaise: when one mixes oil and vinegar, one obtains a rapid phase separation. However, when egg yolk is added, it acts as an emulsifier, and creates new phase boundaries.

Joerg then discussed the experimental motivation for his study of quantum mayonnaise: the glassiness observed in the underdoped region of the cuprate superconductors, as observed by NMR (Borsa, Curro + Hammel, Imai) and muSR (Panagopoulos) experiments, and the non-Fermi-liquid behavior observed above a critical pressure in MnSi by Pfleiderer+ Lohneysen and Lonzarich. The question is thus what is the quantum emulsifier that gives rise to possible phase separation and glassiness, and non-Fermi liquid behavior associated with them.

Joerg introduced the model he considered in order to study phase separation and glassiness in strongly correlated electron system. One introduces a scalar order parameter which is positive (negative) in phase A (B). The Hamiltonian of the system is given by a phi^4-theory with the constraint that the spatial average of the order parameter vanishes. Joerg considered a long-range interaction that decays algebraically in space as x^(-alpha) with alpha being smaller or equal to the dimension of the system. Assuming that alpha=d-2, one finds that the propagator is isotropic and peaked at some characteristic momentum q0. This model is similar to one developed by Brazovskii, which exhibits a fluctuation-induced first order phase transition into a density-wave state.

Joerg then discussed the role of disorder. For disorder given by a random mass term, Joerg argued that a critical disorder strength is required before the first order phase transition is replaced by a transition into a glassy state. He therefore considered random field disorder, for which a glassy state survives even in the limit of vanishing disorder strength. The glass transition is a random first order transition. Joerg studied this transition using three different theoretical approaches: (i) the replica method, (ii) the Schwinger-Keldysh formalism, and (iii) the cloned replicas approach developed By Remi Monnason. Joerg then briefly discussed the cloned replica approach which addresses the issue of self generated randomness. A test, or bias field is added to a system and selects certain metastable configurations. The averaged free energy of such configuration is then averaged over a Boltzmann weigted distribution governed by an effective temperature. All this becomes practicable since this average can again be formulated using replicas. It turns out that  non-ergodic solutions occur even in the limit of infinitesimal coupling to the test field.

Finally, Joerg discussed the role of quantum fluctuations on the transition into the glassy state and showed that the glassy state melts due to quantum fluctuations. For z<3, the random first order transition into the glass state becomes a (regular) first order transition (with a non-zero latent heat) above a critical fluctuation strength. Joerg derived the RG-flow equations in the limit z->3 which possess an unstable fixed point that corresponds to a tricritical point with new scaling properties. Close to the fixed point the system is in a new non-Fermi liquid state. C/T scales as 1/T^[(z-1)/z] and the imaginary part of the self-energy scales as omega^[(z-1)/z]. This model is therefore one example to obtain hyperscaling and non-fermi liquid physics in 3 space dimensions without deviating from the standard spin-boson coupling.



Top


Experimental Seminar, 12.30pm Tuesday, April 5th.

Quantum Phase Transitions and New Results in Heavy Electron Actinide and Rare Earth Systems [Aud][Cam][Slides]

Dr. Joe Thompson, LANL

CeRhIn5

Joe introduced us to the fascinating phase diagram of CeRhIn5, where superconductivity  competes with antiferromagnetism. 
At ambient pressure,  CeRhIn5 is an incommensurate antiferromagnet, but pressure is increased, the Neel temperature drops, suggesting that there may be a quantum critical point where TN goes to zero around 25kbar.
However!  around 9 kbar,  superconductivity appears, and its  transition temperature rises quickly  above the Neel temperature, masking the antiferromagnetism.  How can one reveal the magnetism, and is there a hidden quantum critical point?  These were central issues in this talk. 

This raises several fascinating questions:

  • Does antiferromagnetism co-exist with the superconductivity in the ground-state   beyond 10kbar?
  • Is there an antiferromagnetic  quantum critical point that is masked by the superconductivity? Extrapolation of the antiferromagnetic phase boundary might suggest a magnetic QCP around 25 kbar.
  • What happens when the superconductivity is suppressed by a field- does antiferromagnetism reappear?
  • Is the physics of CeRhIn5 relevant to the superconductivity seen in CeCoIn5? Some have suggested that CeCoIn5 is the "high pressure" analog of CeRhIn5.
thompson2
S. Kawasaki et al, PRL 91, 137001, (2003) and T. Mito et al, PRB, 63, 225007 (2001).

thompson4.jpg


The nature of the zero field phase diagram. The Joe Reviewed NMR 1/T1 measurements, which show two glitches at 16kbar, the first from AFM, the second from SC. However, by 21kbar, the AFM can not be seen, and if it is there, has slipped below 200mK.  This suggests that the afm phase boundary drops to zero at a rate that is much faster than the simple extrapolation shown above, and might even be vertical! One of the unsolved mysteries, is that NQR shows the vanishing of internal fields by 15 kbar.  The resistive transition temperaute is higher than the NMR sc glitch, suggesting inhomogenious superconductivity. See the phase diagram to the left.

Specific heat seems to support this view. A double bump is seen in Cv at 18kbar, which has certainly disappeared by 20kbar. 


 
thompson5
Re-emergence of AFM at finite fields. The next question - is what happens when you extend the phase diagram to finite magnetic fields?  At  17kB, the three temperatures of interest for the development of superconductivity, the resistive onset temperature, the temperature where resistivity vanishes and the thermodynamic transition temperature, are all different, suggesting inhomogenious superconductivity.  However, by a pressure of 18-19 kbar, these three temperatures have come together - suggesting homogenious superconductivity has finally established itself.

What happens in a field at these higher pressures? -  well - above about 2T,  a second feature emerges  in the specific heat - indicating the re-emergence of magnetism as superconductivity is suppressed by the field.

thompson6thompson7

(A) Divergence of the qp mass at the QCP              (B) Jump in the Fermi surface at the QCP.  (Onuki unpublished).


Onuki's dHvA exposes the break-up of the Fermi Surface. At high enough pressures, the superconductivity is fully suppressed to reveal the antiferromagnetism.  What happens to the antiferromagnetism as a function of pressure?  Joe told us that once the AFM is fully exposed, one is in a field range where de Haas van Alphen (dHvA) measurements can be carried out to examine the mass and the topology of the Fermi surfaces. Hot dHvA data from Joe'c collaborators - Onuki's group in Japan (see above) now reveal the pressure induced antiferromagnetic QCP.  The dHvA data from Onuki's group show that the masses of the heavy electrons diverge at this QCP (A), showing also, that the frequencies jump through the transition(B), suggesting a discontinous evolution of the Fermi surface as the system is driven through the QCP.  This is really hot and exciting stuff, providing some of the first direct evidence that
  • Quasiparticle masses diverge over the Fermi surface.
  • The topology of the Fermi surface changes suddenly at the QCP.

thompson8
 Bauer Ronning et al, (unpublished, 2005).


Probing the magnetic QCP using Sn substitution. What other way is there to suppress the superconductivity and reveal the magnetic QCP ?  Joe told us that the Los Alamos group, have thought hard about this, and have discovered that chmical substitution with tin (Sn) works very well.  Sn goes in preferentially into the Ce-In plane. Joe desribed the recent results of an experiment by Bauer, Ronning et al. Tin substitution drives the Neel temperature to zero
at a concentraion of x =0.35. At this point, Bauer et al observe

  • A Logarithmic (Lohneysian?) rise in C/T 
    for x=0.4
  • A possible linear resistivity at x = 0.48
It is interesting that the log C/T and linear resistivity appear to develop after TN has apparently gone to zero.



T-0.3 upturn in the specific heat coefficient C/T  of Sn doped CeRhIn5. Joe then shared some of their newest data with us. In the quantum critical material YbRh2Si2, the Dresden group discovered a few years ago that the C/T~log(T0/T) behavior  becomes a C/T~T-0.3 divergence at lower temperatures that was tentatively ascribed to the development of "more localized" spin excitations.  Well- it seems that Bauer, Ronning et al have now observed the same behavior in the Sn doped CeRhIn5.  If this is  a signature of the true quantum critical regime, then what kind of cross-over gives the Lohneysian C/T dependence?

Joe also reported that when a field is introduced, they observe T^2/3/H scaling in the
thompson9
    

thompson10

E. D. Bauer et   al, PRL  94, 047001 (2005)
CeCoIn5-xSnx:  to end his talk, Joe gave us a brief discussion of the remarkable quantum critical behavior that appears to develop at the upper critical field of CeCoIn5.  Remarkably, as tin is doped into the material, Tc and Hc2 go  down, but the quantum critical behavior remains pinned to Hc2.  Is this a superconducting quantum critical point - or - is it as Schofield has suggested - a non-Fermi liquid phase that is protected by superconductivity.  (What is the difference in practice, anyway?) 

Clearly - tremendous new experimental grist for the theorists.  Time for us to get to work!



Top

Discussion: 4:30 pm Thursday, April 7th Founders Room.


Superconducting and Antiferromagnetic quantum critical points
Composite order and Superconducting quantum critical points.

Piers Coleman started the discussion, arguing that heavy electron superconductors involve composite pairing between the conduction electrons and localized moments. Conventional superconductors involve Cooper pair formation between well-developed quasiparticles. In several heavy fermion systems
such as

  • UBe13 - here the resistance is very large and incoherent at the point where the superconductivity develops
  • CeCoIn5- here the resistance is linear in the normal state.
  • PuCoGa5- here the superconductor develops directly out of a local moment, Curie-Weiss paramagnet, and the moments seem to vanish in the superconducting state.
In each of these cases, the superconducting state develops before a Fermi liquid has had chance to form, and the entropy of condensation is derived from the local moments. These are then prime candidates for composite pairing.

discussion1
Direct transition from Curie paramagnet to Superconductor
in PuCoGa5 after Sarrao et al, Nature, 420, 297 (2002)






Piers gave two examples of composite pairing -

  1. Odd-frequency superconductivity, which in one realization gives rise to a bound-state between singlet cooper pairs and spins.
  2. Two-channel Kondo lattice, where the interference between the Kondo effect in the two channels leads to composite order - a singlet bound-state between triplet pairs and spins.
If this kind of pairing is present in heavy electron superconductors, he argued - then the competition between composite pairing and the formation of somposite heavy electrons- both of which compete for the f-spin - could lead to a superconducting quantum critical point. 

Piers pointed out certain similarities between the phase diagram of UBe_13, CeCu_2Si_2 and CeCoIn_5 that might be interpreted in this language- in each case there is a region of the H-T phase diagram with T1.5 resistivity.  Could this be due to the vicinity of a superconducting quantum critical point?
The discussion then turned to the nature of the field induced phase diagram in CeRhIn5.  Qimiao Si and Joe Thompson attemped to sketch the 3D phase diagram.  Here is the figure that they came up with:

cerhin5


Here the idea is that in the ground-state (T=0), the data are consistent with two second order lines- one magnetic, which has been crossed in the pressure tuned dHvA experiment, one superconducting, which is largely conjectured. These two lines must meet at multicritical point, which is also the end of two first order lines that define a region of co-existence.  Full lines mean second order, dashed, first order. Thick lines - basically established, thin lines - conjectured.  The red point shows the point where dHvA has shown a mass divergence and a jump in Fermi surface.
In closing the discussion, Catherine Pepin gave a brief resume of some of the work she has been doing during the workshop. Catherine cited three pieces of work

  • A calculation of the interplay between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic fluctuations in a field-induced quantum critical point.  With Indranil Paul, they have noticed that in a field, cubic terms that couple AFM and FM order parameters are allowed by symmetry, and these terms are relevant.
  • A calculation, with Maxim Dzero,  of the physics of a single Kondo spin in an antiferromagnetic environment using the scheme of Parcollet and Georges.  Since this method can deal with both overscreening and perfect screening, it should be the ideal method to test recent proposals that two-channel physics develops when a spin is in a critical antiferromagnetic environment.
  • A calculation with Jeorg Schmalian, Mike Norman and others, on a new scenario for the quantum critical behavior of YbRh_2Si_2.  This work is still under wraps and she wouldn't say more about it!
Top



Return to main page.