![Arxiv:1611.06019V1 [Math-Ph]](http://data.docslib.org/img/1c2cca73c2ca7724c813f0cf61b24831-1.webp)
arXiv:1611.06019v1 [math-ph] 18 Nov 2016 h pnoeaosatn on acting operators spin The f eoe h oe sdfie nafiiesto ie ;teHletspa Hilbert the Λ; sites of set finite a on defined is model the before, o neatn pn nsc atc.Tecngrto pc ft of space configuration The lattice. a such counte Ω on quantum spins its interacting for for proved be stat also intere Gibbs can the with inequalities and these model, diagram phase of XY) the Some classical of study (or the correlat rotor in a Many consequences planar limits, the models. the various volume obtain for of an infinite established to temperatures classical of allows critical of the that existence cases tween the tool the invaluable magnetisation, to an spontaneous ourselves are restrict inequalities We Correlation years. recent in where ice ti ovnett ersn h pn ymaso nls n angles, of means by spins the represent to convenient is It circle. with with ORLTO NQAIISFRCASCLADQATMXY QUANTUM AND CLASSICAL FOR INEQUALITIES CORRELATION S Λ ntecngrto pc is space configuration the on 1 e eafiiesto ie.TecasclX oe o lnrrotor planar (or model XY classical The sites. of set finite a be Λ Let bee have that old of results some recall to is survey this of goal The enwdfieteqatmX oe.W etitorevst h sp the to ourselves restrict We model. XY quantum the define now We S , = φ J 2 A x Z {{ i Λ eas ics nepii oe on nteciia tempe critical the on bound the lower both explicit model. in an model, discuss temper Ising also critical the We of the that that than is smaller consequence necessarily A models. XY quantum Abstract. cl ∈ ∈ σ = ,β x [0 R } iS = , x o all for 2 ∈ 3 R π OTNABNSI EJMNLE,ADDNE UELTSCHI DANIEL AND LEES, BENJAMIN BENASSI, COSTANZA Λ .Teeeg faconfiguration a of energy The ]. n t ylcpruain,ad( and permutations, cyclic its and dφ : σ erve orlto nqaiiso rnae functions truncated of inequalities correlation review We e x A − βH ∈ ⊂ Λ cl S .Teepcainvlea nes temperature inverse at value expectation The Λ. ( 1 H φ ) ∀ Λ h cl f stepriinfnto and function partition the is x C ( i φ 2 Λ cl ∈ = ) 1. ,β r h he emta matrices hermitian three the are Λ = etn n results and Setting } − ahst ot nmdlrvco yn naunit a on lying vector unimodular a hosts site each : Z A σ σ X Λ 1 cl ⊂ x x 1 2 MODELS ,β Λ J Z cos = sin = A 1 1 dφ x Y ∈ A e σ − σ φ φ ∈ x βH S 1 x x 1 + Ω Λ ) cl Λ 2 J ( φ ( + A 2 ihangles with ) f x R Y lsia n unu cases. quantum and classical ∈ ( S dφ φ A aueo h unu XY quantum the of rature 2 ) tr fteX oe is model XY the of ature ) σ , 2 = x 2 , ( + o nqaiishv been have inequalities ion S s[,1,1,2,1,1,8]. 18, 17, 20, 19, 16, [4, es R o h lsia and classical the for 0 amely unu Ymodels. XY quantum d i 2 S , esse sdfie as defined is system he π φ pr 1,2,2,2]. 22, 25, [10, rpart tn plctosand applications sting i 3 . . . eis ce ) = 1 = dcmaiosbe- comparisons nd 2 ahrneglected rather n R = oe)i model a is model) { 0 , 2 β φ H oooiiyof monotonicity 2 π x , fafunctional a of Q Λ in- qu 3 4 ,ta satisfy that 3, } 1 x x ∈ hyare They . = 2 1 ∈ Λ Λ ae As case. ⊗ is dφ 2 x π ∈ x Λ . C (4) (1) (2) (3) 2 . 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]. P Theorem 2.1. Assume that J 1 ,J 2 0 for all A Λ. Then for all X Λ and all β > 0, A A ≥ ⊂ ⊂ 1 cl Is Classical: σx Λ,β sx Λ,{J1 },β. h i ≤ h i A x X x X Y∈ Y∈ 1 qu −|X| Is Quantum: Sx ,β 2 sx Λ,{J∗ },β, h iΛ ≤ h i A x X x X Y∈ Y∈ ∗ −|A| 1 with JA =2 JA. A review of the proof of the classical case is proposed in Section 3. In the quantum case, 1 this statement for spin- 2 is a straightforward consequence of Corollary 1.2, but interestingly this result has been extended to any value of the spin [21]. We review the proof of this general case in Section 4. 1 We now consider the case of spin- 2 and pair interactions, that is, the hamiltonian is Hqu = (S1S1 + S2S2). (12) Λ − x y x y x,y X∈Λ We define the spontaneous magnetisation m(β) at inverse temperature β by
2 1 1 1 qu m(β) = lim inf SxSy Λ,β. (13) ΛրZd Λ 2 h i x,y | | X∈Λ qu qu We define the critical temperature for the model Tc =1/βc as qu βc = sup β > 0 : m(β)=0 , (14) where βqu (0, ]. A consequence of Theorem 2.1 is the following. c ∈ ∞ Corollary 2.2. The critical temperatures satisfy T qu 1 T Ising. c ≤ 4 c CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 5
The critical temperature of the Ising model in the three-dimensional cubic lattice has Ising cl been calculated numerically and is Tc =4.511 0.001 [23]. It is Tc =2.202 0.001 [13] qu ± ± for the classical model and Tc =1.008 0.001 for the quantum model [29]. A major result of mathematical physics± is the rigorous proof of the occurrence of long- range order in the classical and quantum XY models, in dimensions three and higher, and if the temperature is low enough [9, 5]. The method can be used to provide a rigorous lower bound on critical temperatures; the following theorem concerns the quantum model.
Theorem 2.3. For the three-dimensional cubic lattice, the temperature of the quantum XY model satisfies T qu 0.323. c ≥ The best rigorous upper bound on the critical temperature of the three-dimensional Ising model is T Ising 5.0010 [27]. Together with the above corollary and theorem, we get c ≤ 0.323 T qu 1 T Ising 1.250. (15) ≤ c ≤ 4 c ≤ Proof of Theorem 2.3. We consider the XY model with spins in the 1-3 directions for con- venience. We make use of the result [26, Theorem 5.1], that was obtained with the method of reflection positivity and infrared bounds [9, 5]. Precisely, we use Equations (5.54), (5.57) and (5.63) of [26].
1 J3 1 1 qu K3 S0 Se m(β)2 4 − 2 h 1 i − β (16) K′ ≥ S1S1 qqu I3 S1S1 qu 3 h 0 e1 iΛ − 2 h 0 e1 i − β q ′ where e1 is a nearest neighbour of the origin, and J3, I3,K3,K3 are real numbers coming from explicit integrals. Their values are J3 = 1.15672; I3 = 0.349884; K3 = 0.252731; and ′ K3 =0.105107. Notice that β is rescaled by a factor 2 with respect to [26], due to a different choice of coupling constants in the hamiltonian. Let x = S1S1 qu; since we do not have h 0 e1 i good bounds on x, we treat it as an unknown. The magnetisationq m(β) is guaranteed to be positive if x t where t is the zero of 1 K3 J3 x; or x r , where r is the largest zero ≤ 4 − β − 2 ≥ + + K′ of x2 I3 x 3 . At least one of these holds true when r I2 4K′ 1 I3 + 3 + 3 < 1 1 2K3 (17) 2 2 4 β 2J3 − β J3 r This is the case for 1/β < 0.323 giving the upper bound Tc 0.323. ≥ 3. Proofs for the classical XY model The proofs require several steps and additional lemmas. The following paragraphs are devoted to a complete study of their proofs. Given local variables σx x∈Λ, we denote σi = σi for A Λ. { } A x∈A x ⊂ Q 3.1. Griffiths and FKG inequalities, and proof of Theorem 1.1. We start with The- orem 1.1. We describe the approach proposed in [16, 17], and use a similar notation. Their framework relies on some well known properties of the Ising model and on the so called FKG inequality. 6 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI Is Lemma 3.1 (Griffiths inequalities for the Ising model). Let f and g be functionals on ΩΛ such that they can be expressed as power series of x∈A sx, A Λ with positive coefficients. Then ⊂ Q f Is 0; h iΛ,{JA},β ≥ fg Is f Is g Is . h iΛ,{JA},β ≥ h iΛ,{JA},βh iΛ,{JA},β We do not provide the proof of this result — see [12, 11] for the original formulation and [6] for a modern description. An immediate consequence is the following. Corollary 3.2. Given f with the properties in Lemma 3.1, we have for any A Λ ⊂ ∂ Is f Λ,{JA},β 0. ∂JA h i ≥ Another result which is very useful in this framework is the so called FKG inequality. We π N formulate it in a specific setting. Let N = 0, for some N N. Any ψ N is then a I 2 ∈ ∈ I collection of angles ψ = (ψ ,...,ψN ). It is possible to introduce a partial ordering relation 1 on N as follows: for any ψ, ξ N , ψ ξ if and only if ψi ξi for all i 1,...,N . A I ∈ I ≤ ≤ ∈{ } function f on N is said to be increasing (or decreasing) if ψ ξ implies f(ψ) f(ξ) (or I ≤ ≤ f(ψ) f(ξ)) for all ψ, ξ N . The following result holds. ≥ ∈ I N Lemma 3.3 (FKG inequality). Let dν(ψ)= p(ψ) i=1 dµ(ψi) be a normalised measure on π N , with dµ(ψi) a normalised measure on 0, , p(ψ) 0 for all ψ N and I 2 Q ≥ ∈ I p(ψ ξ)p(ψ ξ) p(ψ)p(ξ), (18) ∨ ∧ ≥ where (ψ ξ)i = max(ψi, ξi) and (ψ ξ)i = min(ψi, ξi). Then for any f and g increasing ∨ ∧ (or decreasing) functions on N I fgdν fdν gdν. ≥ Z Z Z The inequality changes sign if one of the functions is increasing and the other is decreasing. We also skip the proof of this statement. We refer to [7] for the original result, to [24, 17] for the formulation above, and [6] for its relevance in the study of the Ising model. Before turning to the actual proof of the theorem, we introduce another useful lemma. Lemma 3.4. Let qx x∈Λ be a collection of positive increasing (decreasing) functions on 0, π . Then for any{ θ,} ψ and any A Λ, 2 ∈ I|Λ| ⊂ qA(θ ψ)+ qA(θ ψ) qA(ψ)+ qA(θ). ∨ ∧ ≥ We do not provide the proof here, see [24, 17] for more details. We can now discuss the proof of Theorem 1.1. Proof of Theorem 1.1. Since the temperature does not play any rˆole in this section, we set β = 1 in the following and we drop any dependency on it. The main idea of the proof is to describe a classical XY spin as a pair of Ising spins and an angular variable. The new 1 notation for σx S is ∈ 1 σx = cos(θx)Ux, (19) 2 σx = sin(θx)Vx, (20) CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 7 with Ux, Vx 1, 1 for all x Λ and θ = (θx1 ,...,θxΛ ) |Λ|. With this notation, it is ∈ {− }cl ∈ ∈ I possible to express H of Eq. (3) as the sum of two Ising hamiltonians with spins Ux x , Λ { } ∈Λ Vx x respectively: { } ∈Λ cl 1 2 H (θ,U,V ) = J cos(θx)UA + J sin(θx)VA (21) Λ − A A A x A x A ! X⊂Λ Y∈ Y∈ Is Is = H 1 (U)+ H 2 (V ). (22) Λ,{cos(θ)AJA} Λ,{sin(θ)AJA} 1 2 Let us introduce the notation: JA x∈A cos(θx) = JA(θ), JA x∈A sin(θx) = KA(θ), π π dθ = 2 ... 2 2 dθ . Then 0 0 x∈Λ π x Q Q Is Is Is R R R dθ Z Z cos(θ)X cos(θ)Y UX UY 1 1 Q Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Λ,{JA(θ)} σX σY Hcl = h i h i Λ dθ ZIs ZIs R Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Is Is Is Is dθ ZΛ,{ (θ)}ZΛ,{ (θ)} cos(R θ)X UX Λ,{ (θ)} cos(θ)Y UY Λ,{ (θ)} JA KA h i JA h i JA . ≥ dθ ZIs ZIs R Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} The inequality above follows from LemmaR 3.1. Moreover Is Is Is Is dθZ Z cos(θ)X UX sin(θ)Y VY 1 2 Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} σX σY Hcl = h i h i . h i Λ dθ ZIs ZIs R Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} R cos(θ)X and sin(θ)X are respectively decreasing and increasing on |Λ| for any X Λ. Let Is I ⊂ us now consider UX . By Corollary 3.2, it is a decreasing function on |Λ| for h iΛ,{JA(θ)} I any X Λ, since the coupling constants of HI are decreasing in θ. Analogously, ⊂ Λ,{JA(θ)} V Is is an increasing function on for any X Λ. Theorem 1.1 is then a X Λ,{KA(θ)} |Λ| h i I 2 ⊂ simple consequence of Lemma 3.3, with dµ(θx)= π dθx and Is Is ZΛ,{ (θ)}ZΛ,{ (θ)} p(θ)= JA KA . (23) dθ ZIs ZIs Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} The last step missing is to showR that p(θ) defined as above fulfills hypothesis (18) of Lemma 3.3. This amounts to showing ZIs ZIs ZIs ZIs ; (24) Λ,{KA(θ∨ψ)} Λ,{KA(θ∧ψ)} ≥ Λ,{KA(θ)} Λ,{KA(ψ)} ZIs ZI ZIs ZIs . (25) Λ,{JA(θ∨ψ)} Λ,{JA(θ∧ψ)} ≥ Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{JA(ψ)} Since the arguments to prove these inequalities are very similar, we prove explicitly only the first one. Eq. (24) is equivalent to Is −1 Is Z , θ Z , θ ψ Λ {KA( )} Λ {KA( ∨ )} 1 (26) ZIs ZIs ≥ Λ,{KA(θ∧ψ)} ! Λ,{KA(ψ)} ! Notice that Is −1 −H K K Is Is Λ,{ A(θ∨ψ)− A(ψ)} Is Z , θ Z , θ ψ e , ψ Λ {KA( )} Λ {KA( ∨ )} = h iΛ {KA( )} . Is Is −HIs Z Z Λ,{K (θ)−K (θ∧ψ)} Is Λ,{KA(θ∧ψ)} ! Λ,{KA(ψ)} ! e A A h iΛ,{KA(θ∧ψ)} Thanks to Lemma 3.4, the functions whose expectation value we are computing above fulfill the hypothesis of Lemma 3.1 and Corollary 3.2. Then, applying Lemma 3.4 and Corollary 8 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI 3.2, Is Is −H K K Is −H K K Is e Λ,{ A(θ∨ψ)− A(ψ)} e Λ,{ A(θ)− A(θ∧ψ)} h iΛ,{KA(ψ)} ≥ h iΛ,{KA (ψ)} Is (27) −H K K Is e Λ,{ A(θ)− A(θ∧ψ)} . ≥ h iΛ,{KA (θ∧ψ)} Hence p(θ) has the required property. 3.2. Proof of Theorem 1.3. Let us now turn to Theorem 1.3. We follow the framework described in [11, 20]. cl 1 2 Lemma 3.5. Let HΛ be the hamiltonian defined in (3). If JA JA for all A Λ and 2 ≥ | | ⊂ J =0 for A odd, then there exist non negative coupling constants KM ZΛ such that A | | { }M∈ cl H (φ)= KM cos(M φ) , (28) Λ − · ZΛ MX∈ Λ where, given M Z , M = (m ,m ,...,m ), M φ = mxφx. ∈ 1 2 Λ · x∈Λ Proof of Lemma 3.5. The statement follows from the twoP following identities: 1 cos(θ)cos(χ) = (cos(θ χ)+ cos(θ + χ)), (29) 2 − 1 sin(θ) sin(χ) = (cos(θ χ) cos(θ + χ)), (30) 2 − − θ,χ [0, 2π]. ∀ ∈ A necessary step for this lemma and for Theorem 1.3 is duplication of variables [11]: we consider two sets of angles (i.e. spins) on the lattice instead of just one, and denote them by φx x and φ¯x x . The hamiltonian for the φ¯x is { } ∈Λ { } ∈Λ { } H¯ cl(φ¯)= J¯1 σ¯1 + J¯2 σ¯2 Λ − A A A A A⊂Λ X = K¯M cos(M φ¯). (31) − · ZΛ MX∈ ¯ ¯i Here, σ¯x are related to φx as in Eq.s (1) and (2). The JA are non negative coupling { } ¯1 ¯2 { } ¯ constants with JA JA 0 and KM are as in Lemma 3.5. A composite hamiltonian can be defined as ≥ | | ≥ { } Hˆ (φ, φ¯)= Hcl(φ) H¯ cl(φ¯) − Λ − Λ − Λ K +K¯ K −K¯ (32) = M M cos(M φ) + cos(M φ¯) + M M cos(M φ) cos(M φ¯) 2 · · 2 · − · M∈M X Λ In the following we always suppose KM K¯M for all M Z .The expectation value of any functional f(φ, φ¯) can be written as ≥ ∈ 1 ˆ ¯ ¯ −βHΛ(φ,φ) ¯ f Hˆ ,β = dφ dφe f(φ, φ). (33) h i Λ ZH ,βZ ¯ Λ HΛ,β Z Lemma 3.6. Suppose f(φ, φ¯) belongs to the cone generated by cos(M φ) cos(M φ¯), M ZΛ, i.e. f can be written as product, sum or multiplication by a positive· scalar± of objects· of that∈ form. Then f ˆ 0. (34) h iHΛ,β ≥ CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 9 Proof of Lemma 3.6. Firstly, notice that n dφ dφ¯ (cos(Ms φ) cos(Ms φ¯) 0 (35) · ± · ≥ s=1 Z Y Λ for any M ,...,Mn Z and any sequence of ( ). This follows from 1 ∈ ± cos(M φ) + cos(M φ¯) = 2cos(M Φ) cos(M Φ)¯ , (36) · · · · cos(M φ) cos(M φ¯) = 2 sin(M Φ) sin(M Φ)¯ , (37) · − · · · 1 1 with Φi = (φi + φ¯i) and Φ¯ i = (φi φ¯i). The integral (35) can be formulated as 2 2 − 2 dΦ dΦ¯F (Φ)F (Φ)¯ = dΦF (Φ) 0, (38) ≥ Z Z with F (Φ) an appropriate product of sines, cosines and positive constants. Let us now turn to f . Since the partition function is always positive, we can focus HˆΛ,β on h i ˆ ¯ dφ dφ¯ e−βHΛ(φ,φ)f(φ, φ¯). (39) ˆ Z ¯ By a Taylor expansion of e−βHΛ(φ,φ) and by the properties of f, this can be expressed as a sum with positive coefficients of integrals in the form (35). Hence the nonnegativity of the expectation value. We have now all we need to prove Theorem 1.3. Theorem 1.3. In order to prove the first statement of the theorem we use the formulation 1 of the hamiltonian decribed in Lemma 3.5. Moreover, since σA can be clearly expressed as the sum (with positive coefficients) of terms of the form cos(M φ), M ZΛ, it is enough to prove that for any M,N ZΛ · ∈ ∈ ∂ cl cos(M φ) Λ,β ∂KN h · i (40) = cos(M φ) cos(N φ) cl cos(M φ) cl cos(N φ) cl 0. h · · iΛ,β − h · iΛ,β h · iΛ,β ≥ Consider now the hamiltonian HˆΛ introduced above and ˆ the corresponding Gibbs h·iHΛ,β state. From Lemma 3.6 we have cos(M φ) cos(M φ¯) cos(N φ) cos(N φ¯) ˆ 0. (41) h · − · · − · iHΛ,β ≥ If we take the limit K¯M KM , we find twice the expression in Eq. (40). Hence the result. Let us now turn to theր second statement of the theorem. In the case of two-body inter- cl action HΛ assumes the form (8), which, with a notation resembling the one introduced in Lemma 3.5 can be explicitly formulated as cl − + H (φ)= K cos(φx φy)+ K cos(φx + φy) (42) Λ − xy − xy x,y X∈Λ with ± Jxy K = (1 ηxy) . (43) xy 2 ∓ ± Λ Cleary K is analogous to the KM introduced in Lemma 3.5 for M Z such that all its xy ∈ elements are zero except mx =1, my = 1. Then we have ± ∂ 1+ ηxy ∂ 1 ηxy ∂ σA Hcl = − σA Hcl + − + σA Hcl . (44) ∂Jxy h i Λ 2 ∂Kxy h i Λ 2 ∂Kxy h i Λ 10 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI Due to Eq. (40) the expression above is the sum of two positive terms, hence it is positive. 3.3. Proof of Theorem 2.1. In this section we discuss the proof of Theorem 2.1 for the classical XY model. We use some of the concepts introduced in Section 3.2. The present proof has ben proposed in [16, 17]. Proof of Theorem 2.1. As for the proof of Theorem 1.1, we express the XY spins by means π of two Ising spins and an angle in 0, 2 - see Eq.s (19), (20) for the explicit expression of the spins and (22) for the new formulation of the hamiltonian Hcl. With the same notation: Λ Is Is Is dθ Z Z cos(θ)X UX 1 Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Λ,{JA(θ)} σX Hcl = h i h i Λ dθ ZIs ZIs R Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Is Is Is dθ Z R Z maxθ∈I UX (45) Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} |Λ| h iΛ,{JA(θ)} ≤ dθ ZIs ZIs R Λ,{JA(θ)} Λ,{KA(θ)} Is = UA Λ,{J1 }. R h i A 4. Proofs for the quantum XY model We now discuss the proof of Theorem 1.1 in the quantum case. This theorem has been proved for pair interaction in [10], and it has been proposed independently in various works for more generic interactions [25, 22, 2]. We describe here the simpler approach proposed in [2]. Since the temperature does not play any role from now on, we set β = 1 and omit any dependency on it in the following. As for the classical case we introduce the notation i i SA = x∈A Sx. ProofQ of Theorem 1.1. For the proof it is convenient to perform a unitary transformation on the hamiltonian (6) and consider its version with interactions along the first and third directions of spin, namely Hqu = J 1 S1 + J 3 S3 , (46) Λ − A A A A A X⊂Λ 3 2 with JA = JA for all A Λ. The proof of this theorem⊂ uses some techniques similar to the ones introduced for the classical Theorem 1.3. These were indeed introduced by Ginibre [11] in a general framework. As for the classical case, it is convenient to duplicate the model. We introduce a new doubled Hilbert space ¯Λ = Λ Λ. Given an operator acting on Λ we define two operators acting on ¯ ,H H ⊗ H O H HΛ = 1 1 . (47) O± O⊗ ± ⊗ O qu The hamiltonian we consider for the doubled system is HΛ,+: Hqu = Hqu 1 + 1 Hqu = J 1 (S1 ) + J 3 (S3 ) (48) Λ,+ Λ ⊗ Λ Λ ⊗ Λ − A A + A A + A X⊂Λ The Gibbs state is denoted as 1 qu −HΛ,+ O = qu 2 Tr O e , (49) hh ii (ZΛ ) CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 11 for any operator O acting on ¯ . It follows from some straightforward algebra that HΛ 1 qu qu qu = ; (50) hOPiΛ − hOiΛ hPiΛ 2hhO−P−ii 1 ( ) = ( + ) , (51) OP ± 2 O+P± O−P∓ for any , operators on Λ. O P2 H 2 2 Just as C constitutes the “building block” for Λ, so C C is to ¯Λ. We can provide an explicit basis of C2 C2 such that S1 , S1 , S3H, S3 have⊗ all non negativeH elements: ⊗ + − + − − 1 1 µ+ = ( ++ + ) , µ− = ( ++ ) , (52) | i √2 | i |−−i | i √2 | i−|−−i 1 1 ν+ = ( + + + ) , ν− = ( + + ) . (53) | i √2 | −i |− i | i √2 | −i−|− i Above by + and we denote the basis of C2 formed by eigenvectors of S3 with eigenvalues 1 1| i |−i 2 and 2 respectively, and i, j = i j . It can be easily checked that the basis above has the− required property. This| i result| iimplies ⊗ | i straightforwardly that there exists a basis of ¯ 1 1 3 3 Λ such that (Sx)+, (Sx)−, (Sx)+ and ( Sx)− have non negative element for all x Λ. LetH us consider the truncated correlation function− we are interested in: ∈ qu qu qu 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sx Sx Sx Sx = SX SY . (54) Λ − Λ Λ 2 hh − −ii x∈X x∈Y x∈X x∈Y D Y Y E D Y E D Y E We can evaluate the right hand side of the equation above by a Taylor expansion: 1 (Zqu)2 S1 S1 = Tr S1 S1 ( Hqu )n (55) Λ hh X − Y −ii n! X − Y − − Λ,+ n X≥0 qu Given the formulation of HΛ,+ as in Eq. (48) and relation (51), it is clear that it can be expressed as a polynomial with positive coefficients of operators with nonnegative elements. 1 1 The same holds for (SX )− and(SY )−. The trace of operators with nonnegative elements is non negative, hence the first inequality of the theorem. The second inequality can be 2 3 3 proved precisely in the same way (with SY substituted by SY ), by noticing that (SY )− has necessarily non positive elements. Let us now turn to Theorem 2.1. While in the classical case it is necessary to introduce an artificial framework, interestingly the proof for the quantum case does not require such a 1 construction. For spin- 2 the statement can be easily recovered by recalling that the classical Ising model can be recovered as a particular case of the quantum XY model (not of the classical one!). We review here a more general proof valid for any [21]. S Proof of Theorem 2.1. We reformulate the quantum Hamiltonian in order to have the in- teraction along the first and the third axis , as in Eq. (46). We prove here the following result, which is unitary equivalent to the statement of the theorem: 3 qu |X| Is SX sA Λ,{S|A|J3 },β. (56) Λ,β ≤ S h i A From now on we set β = 1 and drop all the dependencies on β since it does not play any role. Let S i = −1Si be the rescaled spin operators. The models we compare are the following: x S x Hqu = J 1 S 1 + J 3 S 3, (57) Λ,S − A A A A A X⊂Λ I 3 HΛ,{J3 } = JAsA. (58) A − A X⊂Λ 12 COSTANZABENASSI,BENJAMINLEES,ANDDANIELUELTSCHI Clearly, (56) is equivalent to 3 qu Is SX Λ, sX Λ,{J3 }. (59) h i S ≤ h i A This is what we aim to prove. Let us now build a composite system where each site of the lattice hosts a quantum degree of freedom and an Ising variable at the same time. Let qu I = HΛ,S + HΛ,{J3 }, i.e. H A 1 1 3 3 = J S + J (sA + S ). (60) H − A A A A A X⊂Λ The Gibbs state is the natural one given the Gibbs states for the two separated systems. We 3 denote it by Λ. We are interested in the expectation value sX SX Λ for some X Λ. Since the traceh·i is invariant under unitary transformations, weh can− applyi on each site⊂ the 1 2 3 1 2 3 unitary (S , S , S ) (S ,sxS ,sxS ) and find x x x → x s x 1 1 3 3 3 −H 3 P J S +J sA(1+S ) Tr sX S e = Tr sX (1 S )e A⊂Λ A A A A (61) − X − X s∈Ω s∈Ω XΛ XΛ The expression evaluated above is just the expectation value we are interested in multi- plied by the partition function of the system - which is positive and therefore not useful 3 in the evaluation of the sign of sX S . By a Taylor expansion and by the property h − X iΛ snx 0 with n N for all x Λ and any A Λ, it is clear that the expression s∈ΩΛ x∈A x x above is nonnegative.≥ This implies∈ that ∈ ⊂ P Q Is 3 qu 3 sX Λ,{J3 } SX Λ, = sX SX Λ 0. (62) h i A − h i S h − i ≥ This proves Eq. (59). Acknowledgements: The authors thank S. Bachmann and C.E. Pfister for useful com- ments. References [1] S. Bachmann, Local disorder, topological ground state degeneracy and entanglement entropy, and dis- crete anyons, arXiv:1608.03903 (2016) [2] C. Benassi, B. Lees, D. Ueltschi, Correlation inequalities for the quantum XY model, J. Stat. Phys. 164, 1157–1166 (2016) [3] M. Biskup, R. Koteck´y, True nature of long-range order in a plaquette orbital model, J. Statist. Mech. 2010, P11001 (2010) [4] F. Dunlop, Correlation inequalities for multicomponent rotors, Commun. Math. Phys. 49, 247–256 (1976) [5] F.J. Dyson, E.H. Lieb, B. Simon, Phase transitions in quantum spin systems with isotropic and non- isotropic interactions, J. Statist. Phys. 18, 335–383 (1978) [6] S. Friedli, Y. Velenik, Statistical Mechanics of Lattice Systems: a Concrete Mathematical Introduction, http://www.unige.ch/math/folks/velenik/smbook/index.html [7] C.M. Fortuin, P.W. Kasteleyn, J. Ginibre, Correlation inequalities on some partially ordered sets, Commun. Math. Phys. 22, 89–103 (1971) [8] J. Fr¨ohlich, C.E. Pfister, Spin waves, vortices, and the structure of equilibrium states in classical XY model, Commun. Math. Phys. 89, 303–327 (1983) [9] J. Fr¨ohlich, B. Simon, T. Spencer, Infrared bounds, phase transitions and continuous symmetry break- ing, Comm. Math. Phys. 50, 79–95 (1976) [10] G. Gallavotti, A proof of the Griffiths inequalities for the X-Y model, Stud. Appl. Math. 50, 8992 (1971) [11] J. Ginibre, General formulation of Griffiths’ inequalities, Commun. Math. Phys. 16, 310–328 (1970) [12] R.B. Griffiths, Correlations in Ising ferromagnets. I, J. Math. Phys. 8, 478–483 (1967) [13] M. Hasenbusch and S. Meyer, Critical exponents of the 3D XY model from cluster update Monte Carlo, Phys. Lett. B 241.2, 238-242 (1990) CORRELATION INEQUALITIES FOR CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM XY MODELS 13 [14] C.A. Hurst, S.Sherman, Griffiths’ theorems for the ferromagnetic Heisenberg model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 22, 1357 (1969) [15] A.Y. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. 303:1 2–30 (2003) [16] H. Kunz, C.E. Pfister, P.A. Vuillermot, Correlation inequalities for some classical spin vector models, Phys. Lett. 54A, 428–430 (1975) [17] H. Kunz, C.E. Pfister, P.A. Vuillermot, Inequalities for some classical spin vector models, J. Phys. A: Math.Gen., Vol.9, No.10, (1976) [18] A. Messager, S. Miracle-Sole, C. Pfister, Correlation inequalities and uniqueness of the equilbrium state for the plane rotator ferromagnetic model, Commun. Math. Phys. 58, 19–29 (1978) [19] J.L. Monroe, Correlation inequalities for two-dimensional vector spin systems, J. Math. Phys. 16, 1809–12 (1975) [20] J.L. Monroe, P.A. Pearce, Correlation inequalities for vector spin Models, J. Stat. Phys, 21:615 (1979) [21] P.A. Pearce, An inequality for spin-s X-Y ferromagnets, Physics Letters A, 70 (2), 117-118 (1979) 1 [22] P.A. Pearce, J.L. Monoroe A simple proof of spin- 2 X-Y inequalities, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and General, 12(7), L175 (1979) [23] T. Preis, P. Virnau, W. Paul and J.J. Schneider, GPU accelerated Monte Carlo simulation of the 2D and 3D Ising model, J. Comp. Phys. 228(12) 4468–4477 (2009) [24] C.J. Preston, A generalization of the FKG inequalities, Comm. Math. Phys. 36, 233–241 (1974) [25] M. Suzuki, Correlation inequalities and phase transition in the generalised X-Y model, J. Math. Phys., 14, 837-838 (1973) [26] D. Ueltschi, Random loop representations for quantum spin systems, J. Math. Phys. 54(8), 083301 (2013) [27] J.O. Vigfusson, Upper bound on the critical temperature in the 3D Ising model, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 18(17) 3417 (1985) [28] S. Wenzel, W. Janke, Finite-temperature N´eel ordering of fluctuations in a plaquette orbital model, Phys. Rev. B 80, 054403 (2009) [29] S. Wessel, private communication. Department of Mathematics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, University of Gothenburg, Sweden E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected]