scholarly journals Ground-state ordering of theJ1−J2model on the simple cubic and body-centered cubic lattices

2016 ◽  
Vol 93 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
D. J. J. Farnell ◽  
O. Götze ◽  
J. Richter
1972 ◽  
Vol 50 (23) ◽  
pp. 2991-2996 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. F. Collins ◽  
V. K. Tondon

The ground state energy, spin-wave energy, and sublattice magnetization have been calculated for a Heisenberg antiferromagnet at the absolute zero of temperature. The treatment extends the earlier work of Anderson, Kubo, and Oguchi to apply for any two-sublattice antiferromagnet with arbitrary range of interaction. It is shown that for each exchange interaction there is a different characteristic correction term to the energies. Explicit calculations are made of these terms for the simple cubic, body-centered cubic, and face-centered cubic lattices, with both first- and second-neighbor interactions. Applications are also made to NiO and MnO. An extra term in the magnetization series beyond that given by earlier workers is derived.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (32) ◽  
pp. 1850390
Author(s):  
Minos A. Neto ◽  
J. Roberto Viana ◽  
Octavio D. R. Salmon ◽  
E. Bublitz Filho ◽  
José Ricardo de Sousa

The critical frontier of the isotropic antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model in a magnetic field along the z-axis has been studied by mean-field and effective-field renormalization group calculations. These methods, abbreviated as MFRG and EFRG, are based on the comparison of two clusters of different sizes, each of them trying to mimic a specific Bravais lattice. The frontier line in the plane of temperature versus magnetic field was obtained for the simple cubic and the body-centered cubic lattices. Spin clusters with sizes N = 1, 2, 4 were used so as to implement MFRG-12, EFRG-12 and EFRG-24 numerical equations. For the simple cubic lattice, the MFRG frontier exhibits a notorious re-entrant behavior. This problem is improved by the EFRG technique. However, both methods agree at lower fields. For the body-centered cubic lattice, the MFRG method did not work. As in the cubic lattice, all the EFRG results agree at lower fields. Nevertheless, the EFRG-12 approach gave no solution for very low temperatures. Comparisons with other methods have been discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document