Hybrid Monte-Carlo simulations of electronic properties of graphene [ArXiv:1206.0619] P. V. Buividovich (Regensburg University) Graphene ABC • Graphene: 2D carbon crystal with hexagonal lattice • a = 0.142 nm – Lattice spacing • π orbitals are valence orbitals (1 electron per atom) • Binding energy κ ~ 2.7 eV • σ orbitals create chemical bonds Geometry of hexagonal lattice Two simple rhombic sublattices А and В Periodic boundary conditions on the Euclidean torus: The “Tight-binding” Hamiltonian { aˆ , X , aˆ ',Y } ' X ,Y Fermi statistics “Staggered” potential m distinguishes even/odd lattice sites Physical implementation of staggered potential Graphene Boron Nitride Spectrum of quasiparticles in graphene Consider the non-Interacting tight-binding model !!! One-particle Hamiltonian Eigenmodes are just the plain waves: 3 (k ) e a 1 Eigenvalues: i k e a Spectrum of quasiparticles in graphene Close to the «Dirac points»: “Staggered potential” m = Dirac mass Spectrum of quasiparticles in graphene Dirac points are only covered by discrete lattice momenta if the lattice size is a multiple of three Symmetries of the free Hamiltonian 2 Fermi-points Х 2 sublattices = 4 components of the Dirac spinor Chiral U(4) symmetry (massless fermions): right left ( L, R, L , R ) ( A , B , A , B ) Discrete Z2 symmetry between sublattices А В U(1) x U(1) symmetry: conservation of currents with different spins Particles and holes • Each lattice site can be occupied by two electrons (with opposite spin) • The ground states is electrically neutral • One electron (for instance ) at each lattice site • «Dirac Sea»: hole = absence of electron in the state Lattice QFT of Graphene Redefined creation/ annihilation operators Charge operator Standard QFT vacuum Electromagnetic interactions Link variables (Peierls Substitution) Conjugate momenta = Electric field Lattice Hamiltonian (Electric part) Electrostatic interactions Effective Coulomb coupling constant α ~ 1/137 1/vF ~ 2 (vF ~ 1/300) Strongly coupled theory!!! Magnetic+retardation effects suppressed Dielectric permittivity: • Suspended graphene ε = 1.0 • Silicon Dioxide SiO2 ε ~ 3.9 V (r ) 2e 2 ( 1) r 2 1 • Silicon Carbide SiC ε ~ 10.0 Electrostatic interactions on the lattice Discretization of Laplacian on the hexagonal lattice reproduces Coulomb potential with a good precision Main problem: the spectrum of excitations in interacting graphene Lattice simulations, Schwinger-Dyson equations ??? Renormalization, Large N, Experiment [Manchester group, 2012] Spontaneous breaking of sublattice symmetry = mass gap = condensate formation = = decrease of conductivity Numerical simulations: Path integral representation 𝑯 𝑻𝒓 𝐞𝐱 𝐩 − = 𝑻𝒓 𝒌𝑻 = 𝒆𝒙𝒑 −𝑯 ∆𝝉 = 𝒌=𝟏…𝒏 𝒅Ψ𝟏 … 𝒅Ψ𝒏 Ψ𝟏 |𝑷 𝒆𝒙𝒑 −𝑯 ∆𝝉 |Ψ𝟐 Ψ𝟐 |𝑷 𝒆𝒙𝒑 −𝑯 ∆𝝉 |Ψ𝟑 … 𝒅Ψ Ψ >< Ψ = 𝑰 |Ψ > = |𝜃𝑋𝑌 > |η𝑋 > <𝑋𝑌> Decomposition of identity 𝜃𝑋𝑌 |𝜃𝑋𝑌 > = 𝜃𝑋𝑌 |𝜃𝑋𝑌 > Eigenstates of the gauge field ψ𝑋 |η𝑋 >= η𝑋 |η𝑋 > Fermionic coherent states (η – Grassman variables) 𝑃= Gauss law constraint (projector on physical space) 𝛿( 𝑋 𝜋𝑋𝑌 − 𝑞𝑋 ) 𝑌 Numerical simulations: Path integral representation 𝝋𝑿 : • Electrostatic potential field • Lagrange multiplier for the Gauss’ law • Analogue of the Hubbard-Stratonovich field Numerical simulations: Path integral representation Lattice action for fermions (no doubling!!!): Path integral weight: Positive weight due to two spin components! Hybrid Monte-Carlo: a brief introduction Problem: generate field configurations φ(x) with probability 𝑷 𝝋 𝒙 ~𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑺[𝝋(𝒙)]) For graphene – nonlocal action due to fermion determinant Metropolis algorithm Propose new field configurations with probability 𝑷 𝝋 𝒙 → 𝝋′ 𝒙 Accept/reject with probability 𝜶 = 𝒆𝒙𝒑 −𝑺 𝝋′ 𝒙 + 𝑺 𝝋 𝒙 • Exact algorithm • Local updates of fields BUT: • Fermion determinant recalculation Hybrid Monte-Carlo: a brief introduction Molecular Dynamics Classical motion with 𝛑𝟐 𝒙 𝑯= +𝑺 𝝋 𝒙 𝟐 𝒙 • Global updates of fields ϕ(x) • 100% acceptance rate BUT: • Energy non-conservation for numerical integrators If ergodic: 𝑷 𝝋 𝒙 ~𝒆𝒙𝒑(−𝑺[𝝋(𝒙)]) 𝟏 𝑻 = 𝒅𝝉 𝜹 𝝋 𝒙 , 𝝋 𝒙, 𝝉 𝑻 𝟎 π(x) – conjugate momentum for φ(x) Hybrid Monte-Carlo = Molecular Dynamics + Metropolis • Use numerically integrated Molecular Dynamics trajectories as Metropolis proposals • Numerical error is corrected by accept/reject • Exact algorithm Molecular Dynamics Trajectories • Ψ-algorithm [Technical]: Represent determinant as Gaussian integral Numerical simulations using the Hybrid Monte-Carlo method • • • • Hexagonal lattice Noncompact U(1) gauge field Fast heatbath algorithm outside of graphene plane Geometry: graphene on the substrate Breaking of lattice symmetry Intuition from relativistic QFTs (QCD): Symmetry breaking = = gap in the spectrum • Anti-ferromagnetic state (Gordon-Semenoff 2011) • Kekule dislocations (Araki 2012) • Point defects Spontaneous sublattice symmetry breaking in graphene Order parameter: The difference between the number of particles on А and В sublattices ΔN = NA – NB “Mesons”: particle-hole bound state Differences of particle numbers Differences of particle numbers on lattices of different size Extrapolation to zero mass Susceptibility of particle number differences N N m m0 Conductivity of graphene Current operator: = charge, flowing through lattice links Retarded propagator and conductivity: Conductivity of graphene: Green-Kubo relations Current-current correlators in Euclidean space: Green-Kubo relations: Thermal integral kernel: Conductivity of graphene σ(ω) – dimensionless quantity (in a natural system of units), in SI: ~ e2/h Conductivity from Euclidean correlator: an ill-posed problem Maximal Entropy Method Approximate calculation of σ(0): G ( / 2) dw 2 0 2w sinh( w / 2 ) ( w ) ( kT ) ( 0 ) AC conductivity, averaged over w ≤ kT 2 Conductivity of graphene: free theory For small frequencies (Dirac limit): Threshold value w = 2 m Universal limiting value at κ >> w >> m: σ0 = π e2/2 h=1/4 e2/ħ At w = 2 m: σ = 2 σ0 Conductivity of graphene: Free theory Current-current correlators: numerical results κ Δτ = 0.15, m Δτ = 0.01, κ/(kT) = 18, Ls = 24 Conductivity of graphene σ(0): numerical results (approximate definition) Direct measurements of the density of states • Experimentally motivated definition • Valid for non-interacting fermions • Finite μ is introduced in observables only (partial quenching) Direct measurements of the density of states m/κ = 0.1 Direct measurements of the density of states m/κ = 0.5 Conclusions • Electronic properties of graphene at half-filling can be studied using the Hybrid Monte-Carlo algorithm. • Sign problem is absent due to the symmetries of the model. • Signatures of insulator-semimetal phase transition for monolayer graphene. • Order parameter: difference of particle numbers on two simple sublattices • Spontaneous breaking of sublattice symmetry is accompanied by a decrease of conductivity • Direct measurements of the density of states indicate increasing Fermi velocity see ArXiv:1206.0619 Outlook • Lattice simulations by independent groups: Spontaneous symmetry breaking in graphene at α ~ 1 (ε ~ 4 – SiO2) [Drut, Lahde; Hands; Rebbi; ITEP Group; PB] • Experimentally: suspended graphene is conducting, no signature of a gap in the spectrum [Elias et al. 2011] • What are we missing? Mass? Finite volume? • Our strategy works not so well as for Lattice QCD • Another interesting case: double-layered graphene, 𝑬 = 𝒌𝟐 𝟐𝒎