The 3-band Hubbard-model versus the 1-band model for the high-Tc cuprates: Pairing dynamics, superconductivity and the ground-state phase diagram

被引:28
|
作者
Hanke, W. [1 ]
Kiesel, M. L. [1 ]
Aichhorn, M. [2 ]
Brehm, S. [1 ]
Arrigoni, E. [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wurzburg, Inst Theoret Phys, D-97074 Wurzburg, Germany
[2] Ecole Polytech, CNRS, Ctr Phys Theor, F-91128 Palaiseau, France
[3] Graz Univ Technol, Inst Theoret & Computat Phys, A-8010 Graz, Austria
关键词
TRANSITION-TEMPERATURE SUPERCONDUCTOR; MAGNETIC EXCITATIONS; FLUX-QUANTIZATION; CHARGE-TRANSFER; LIQUID HE-3; RESONANCE; INSULATOR; SYSTEMS; OXIDES;
D O I
10.1140/epjst/e2010-01294-y
中图分类号
O4 [物理学];
学科分类号
0702 ;
摘要
One central challenge in high-T (c) superconductivity (SC) is to derive a detailed understanding for the specific role of the Cu-d (x2-y2) and O-p (x,y) orbital degrees of freedom. In most theoretical studies an effective one-band Hubbard (1BH) or t-J model has been used. Here, the physics is that of doping into a Mott-insulator, whereas the actual high-T (c) cuprates are doped charge-transfer insulators. To shed light on the related question, where the material-dependent physics enters, we compare the competing magnetic and superconducting phases in the ground state, the single- and two-particle excitations and, in particular, the pairing interaction and its dynamics in the three-band Hubbard (3BH) and 1BH-models. Using a cluster embedding scheme, i.e. the variational cluster approach (VCA), we find which frequencies are relevant for pairing in the two models as a function of interaction strength and doping: in the 3BH-models the interaction in the low- to optimal-doping regime is dominated by retarded pairing due to low-energy spin fluctuations with surprisingly little influence of inter-band (p-d charge) fluctuations. On the other hand, in the 1BH-model, in addition a part comes from "high-energy" excited states (Hubbard band), which may be identified with a non-retarded contribution. We find these differences between a charge-transfer and a Mott insulator to be renormalized away for the ground-state phase diagram of the 3BH- and 1BH-models, which are in close overall agreement, i.e. are "universal". On the other hand, we expect the differences - and thus, the material dependence to show up in the "non-universal" finite-T phase diagram (T (c)-values).
引用
收藏
页码:15 / 32
页数:18
相关论文
共 4 条
  • [1] Ground-state phase diagram of the repulsive SU(3) Hubbard model in the Gutzwiller approximation
    Rapp, Akos
    Rosch, Achim
    PHYSICAL REVIEW A, 2011, 83 (05)
  • [2] Ground-state phase diagram of the three-band Hubbard model from density matrix embedding theory
    Cui, Zhi-Hao
    Sun, Chong
    Ray, Ushnish
    Zheng, Bo-Xiao
    Sun, Qiming
    Chan, Garnet Kin-Lic
    PHYSICAL REVIEW RESEARCH, 2020, 2 (04):
  • [3] Ground-state phase diagram of the three-band d-p model
    Yanagisawa, Takashi
    Miyazaki, Mitake
    Yamaji, Kunihiko
    EPL, 2021, 134 (02)
  • [4] Phase diagram and single-particle spectrum of CuO2 high-Tc layers: variational cluster approach to the three-band Hubbard model
    Arrigoni, E.
    Aichhorn, M.
    Daghofer, M.
    Hanke, W.
    NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, 2009, 11