Arxiv:1611.06019V1 [Math-Ph]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS COSTANZA BENASSI, BENJAMIN LEES, AND DANIEL UELTSCHI Abstract. We review correlation inequalities of truncated functions for the classical and quantum XY models. A consequence is that the critical temperature of the XY model is necessarily smaller than that of the Ising model, in both the classical and quantum cases. We also discuss an explicit lower bound on the critical temperature of the quantum XY model. 1. Setting and results The goal of this survey is to recall some results of old that have been rather neglected in recent years. We restrict ourselves to the cases of classical and quantum XY models. Correlation inequalities are an invaluable tool that allows to obtain the monotonicity of spontaneous magnetisation, the existence of infinite volume limits, and comparisons be- tween the critical temperatures of various models. Many correlation inequalities have been established for the planar rotor (or classical XY) model, with interesting applications and consequences in the study of the phase diagram and the Gibbs states [4, 16, 19, 20, 17, 18, 8]. Some of these inequalities can also be proved for its quantum counterpart [10, 25, 22, 2]. Let Λ be a finite set of sites. The classical XY model (or planar rotor model) is a model for interacting spins on such a lattice. The configuration space of the system is defined as 1 ΩΛ = σx x∈Λ : σx S x Λ : each site hosts a unimodular vector lying on a unit circle.{{ It is} convenient∈ to represent∀ ∈ } the spins by means of angles, namely 1 σx = cos φx (1) 2 σx = sin φx (2) with φx [0, 2π]. The energy of a configuration σ Ω with angles φ = φx x is ∈ ∈ Λ { } ∈Λ cl 1 1 2 2 arXiv:1611.06019v1 [math-ph] 18 Nov 2016 H (φ)= J σ + J σ , (3) Λ − A x A x A x A x A X⊂Λ Y∈ Y∈ i R with JA for all A Λ. The expectation value at inverse temperature β of a functional f on the∈ configuration⊂ space is cl 1 −βHcl(φ) f = dφ e Λ f(φ), (4) h iΛ,β Zcl Λ,β Z cl 2π 2π dφ cl −βHΛ (φ) x where ZΛ,β = dφ e is the partition function and dφ = 0 ... 0 x∈Λ 2π . 1 We now define the quantum XY model. We restrict ourselves to the spin- 2 case. As R R R R Qqu 2 before, the model is defined on a finite set of sites Λ; the Hilbert space is = x C . HΛ ⊗ ∈Λ The spin operators acting on C2 are the three hermitian matrices Si, i =1, 2, 3, that satisfy 1 2 3 1 2 2 2 3 2 3 1 S ,S = iS and its cyclic permutations, and (S ) + (S ) + (S ) = 4 . They are 1 2 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI explicitly formulated in terms of Pauli matrices: 0 1 0 i 1 0 S1 = 1 , S2 = 1 , S3 = 1 . (5) 2 1 0 2 i −0 2 0 1 − The hamiltonian describing the interaction is Hqu = J 1 S1 + J 2 S2 , (6) Λ − A x A A A x A x A X⊂Λ Y∈ Y∈ i i 1 i with Sx = S Λ\{x}. The JA A⊂Λ are nonnegative coupling constants. The Gibbs state at inverse temperature⊗ β is { } qu 1 qu −βHΛ Λ,β = qu Tr e , (7) hOi ZΛ,β O qu −βHqu qu with Z =Tr e Λ the partition function and any operator acting on . Λ,β O HΛ The first result holds for both classical and quantum models. 1 2 Theorem 1.1. Assume that JA,JA 0 for all A Λ. The following inequalities hold true for all X, Y Λ, and for all β > 0. ≥ ⊂ ⊂ cl cl cl 1 1 1 1 Classical : σx σx σx σx 0, Λ,β − Λ,β Λ,β ≥ x X x Y x X x Y D Y∈ Y∈ E D Y∈ E D Y∈ E cl cl cl 1 2 1 2 σx σx σx σx 0. Λ,β − Λ,β Λ,β ≤ Dx∈X x∈Y E Dx∈X E Dx∈Y E Y Y qu Y qu Y qu 1 1 1 1 Quantum : Sx Sx Sx Sx 0, Λ,β − Λ,β Λ,β ≥ Dx∈X x∈Y E Dx∈X E Dx∈Y E Y Y qu Y qu Y qu 1 2 1 2 Sx Sx Sx Sx 0. Λ,β − Λ,β Λ,β ≤ x X x Y x X x Y D Y∈ Y∈ E D Y∈ E D Y∈ E In the quantum case, similar inequalities hold for Schwinger functions, see [2] for details. The proofs are given in Sections 3, 4 respectively. These inequalities are known as Ginibre inequalities — first introduced by Griffiths for the Ising model [12] and systematised in a seminal work by Ginibre [11], which provides a general framework for inequalities of this form. Ginibre inequalities for the classical XY model have then been established with different techniques [11, 16, 19, 17, 20]. The equivalent result for the quantum case has been proved with different approaches [10, 25, 22, 2]. An extension to the ground state of quantum systems with spin 1 was proposed in [2]. A straightforward corollary of this theorem is monotonicity with respect to coupling constants, as we see now. CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 3 1 2 Corollary 1.2. Assume that JA,JA 0 for all A Λ. Then for all X, Y Λ, and for all β > 0 ≥ ⊂ ⊂ ∂ Classical : σ1 cl 0, ∂J 1 h xiΛ,β ≥ Y x X Y∈ ∂ σ1 cl 0. ∂J 2 h xiΛ,β ≤ Y x X Y∈ ∂ Quantum : S1 qu 0, ∂J 1 h xiΛ,β ≥ Y x X Y∈ ∂ S1 qu 0. ∂J 2 h xiΛ,β ≤ Y x X Y∈ Interestingly this result appears to be not trivially true for the quantum Heisenberg ferromagnet. Indeed a toy version of the fully SU(2) invariant model has been provided explicitly, for which this result does not hold (nearest neighbours interaction on a three-sites chain with open boundary conditions) [14]. The question whether this result might still be established in a proper setting is still open. On the other hand, Ginibre inequalities have been proved for the classical Heisenberg ferromagnet [16, 4, 20]. Monotonicity of correlations with respect to temperature does not follow straightforwardly from the corollary. This can nonetheless be proved for the classical XY model. Theorem 1.3. 1 2 2 Classical model: Assume that JA JA for all A Λ, and that JA =0 whenever A is odd. Then for all A, B Λ, we have≥ | | ⊂ | | ⊂ cl ∂ 1 σx 0. ∂β Λ,β ≥ x B D Y∈ E cl Let us restrict to the two-body case and assume that HΛ is given by cl 1 1 2 2 H = Jxy σ σ + ηxyσ σ . Λ − x y x y x,y∈Λ X Then if ηxy 1 for all x, y, | |≤ ∂ 1 cl σz Λ,β 0. (8) ∂Jxy h i ≥ z A Y∈ This result has been proposed and discussed in various works [11, 20, 18] — see Section 3 for the details. Unfortunately we lack a quantum equivalent of these statements. We conclude this section by remarking that correlation inequalities in the quantum case can be applied also to other models of interest. For example, we consider a certain formula- tion of Kitaev’s model (see [15] for its original formulation and [1] for a review of the topic). 2 Let Λ Z be a square lattice with edges Λ. Each edge of the lattice hosts a spin, i.e. ⊂⊂ Kitaev E 2 the hilbert space of this model is = e C . The Kitaev hamiltonian is HΛ ⊗ ∈EΛ Kitaev 1 3 H = Jx S JF S , (9) Λ − e − e x∈Λ e∈EΛ: F ⊂Λ e⊂F X xY∈e X Y where F denotes the faces of the lattice, i.e the unit squares which are the building blocks of 2 i i Kitaev Z , Jx, JF are ferromagnetic coupling constants and S = S 1 . H has the same e ⊗ EΛ\e Λ 4 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI structure as hamiltonian (6) so Ginibre inequalities apply as well. It is not clear, though, whether this might lead to useful results for the study of this specific model. Another relevant model is the plaquette orbital model that was studied in [28, 3]; interac- i i tions between neighbours x, y are of the form SxSy, with i being equal to 1 or 3 depending on the edge. − 2. Comparison between Ising and XY models We now compare the correlations of the Ising and XY models and their respective critical temperatures. The configuration space of the Ising model is ΩIs = 1, 1 Λ, that is, Ising Λ {− } configurations are given by sx x∈Λ with sx = 1 for each x Λ. We consider many-body interactions, so the energy of{ a} configuration s ± ΩIs is ∈ ∈ Λ Is H (s)= JA sx; (10) Λ,{JA} − A x A X⊂Λ Y∈ we assume that the system is “ferromagnetic”, i.e. the coupling constants JA 0 are non- negative. The Gibbs state at inverse temperature β is ≥ Is 1 −βHIs f = f(s)e Λ,{JA} , (11) h iΛ,{JA},β ZIs Λ,{JA},β s∈ΩIs XΛ Is Is Is −βHΛ,{J } with f any functional on Ω and Z = Is e A is the partition function. Λ Λ,{JA},β s∈ΩΛ The following result holds for both the classical [17] and the quantum case [25, 21].