Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Defination of biquadratic exchange #65

Open
jingzhouphy opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Defination of biquadratic exchange #65

jingzhouphy opened this issue May 7, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@jingzhouphy
Copy link

jingzhouphy commented May 7, 2021

@tsdev Hi, Dr. Toth

I am trying to use the 'type' option to add biquadratic exahange in my model (bcc lattice) :

LaSrCrO4.addcoupling('mat','Biq','bond', 4, 'type', 'biquadratic');

I assume this add a Q*(Si * Sj)^2 type term to the Hamiltonian. However the spinwave calculated by SpinW is a little different from my analytic calculations. And I found that if the defination of biqudratic is 0.5Q(Si * Sj)^2 , these two results fit perfectly.

I read your tutorial document "tutorial28.m". This document also compared the results of analystic calculation and SpinW on fcc lattice.

fcc.addmatrix('label','B','value',-0.5*Q/S^3*2)

fcc.addcoupling('mat','B','bond',1,'type','biquadratic')

According to the paper ''PHYSICAL REVIEW B 85, 054409 (2012)'' mentioned in "tutorial28.m", their Hamiltonian is:

image

In this example, we also have to add another factor 2 in SpinW to get consistent results.

So I want to confirm that when we use command

fcc.addcoupling('mat','B','bond',1,'type','biquadratic')

we actually add 0.5Q(Si * Sj)^2 instead of Q*(Si * Sj)^2 to Hamiltonian?

JingZhou

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant