This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Exact Demonstration of pair-density-wave superconductivity in the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model

Xingchuan Zhu111These authors contributed equally to this work Interdisciplinary Center for Fundamental and Frontier Sciences, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, Jiangyin, Jiangsu 214443, P. R. China    Junsong Sun School of Physics, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, China    Shou-Shu Gong School of Physical Sciences, Great Bay University, Dongguan 523000, China, and
Great Bay Institute for Advanced Study, Dongguan 523000, China
   Wen Huang Shenzhen Institute for Quantum Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China    Shiping Feng Department of Physics, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China    Richard T. Scalettar Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA    Huaiming Guo [email protected] School of Physics, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, China
Abstract

Describing and achieving ‘unconventional’ superconductivity remains a forefront challenge in quantum many-body physics. Here we use a unitary mapping, combined with the well-established properties of the attractive Hubbard model to demonstrate rigorously a Hamiltonian with a low temperature pair-density-wave (PDW) phase. We also show that the same mapping, when applied to the widely accepted properties of the repulsive Hubbard model, leads to a Hamiltonian exhibiting triplet dd-wave PDW superconductivity and an unusual combination of ferro- and antiferro-magnetic spin correlations. We then demonstrate the persistence of the dd-wave PDW in a Hamiltonian derived from the mapping of the extended tt-JJ model in the large-UU limit. Furthermore, through strategic manipulation of the nearest-neighbor hopping signs of spin-down electrons, we illustrate the attainability of PDW superconductivity at other momenta. The intertwining of different magnetic and exotic pairing correlations noted here may have connections to experimental observations in spin-triplet candidates like UTe2.

pacs:
71.10.Fd, 03.65.Vf, 71.10.-w,

Introduction.— Conventional BCS superconductivity describes the pairing of a singlet (ss-wave) pair of fermions with zero momentum, that is, a non-zero expectation value of the off diagonal order parameter Δs(k)=ckck\Delta_{s}(k)=c_{-k\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}c_{k\uparrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}. This low temperature phase is typically achieved through an effective retarded attractive interaction mediated by electron-phonon coupling. Shortly after BCS theory, the possibility of non-zero momentum pairs was noted by Fulde and Ferrell Fulde and Ferrell (1964), and by Larkin and Ovchinnikov Larkin and Ovchinnikov (1965). Achieving such ‘FFLO’ pairing proved very challenging but has been reported in heavy fermion systems such as CeCoIn5 Bianchi et al. (2003); Matsuda and Shimahara (2007), and in ultracold atoms Partridge et al. (2006); Parish et al. (2007); Kinnunen et al. (2018).

Other ‘unconventional’ superconductors include those in which the Cooper wavefunction exhibits more complex patterns in real space, such as the nodes in the dd-wave symmetry pairs of the cuprate materials  Tsuei and Kirtley (2000); Damascelli et al. (2003); Lee et al. (2006), triplet superconductors which have nonzero total spin Mackenzie and Maeno (2003), pair density waves Agterberg et al. (2020) in which the order parameter varies spatially with vanishing spatial average, and η\eta-pairs which are exact (high energy) eigenstates of the Hubbard Hamiltonian exhibiting off diagonal long range order Yang (1989); Singh and Scalettar (1991); Yang and Zhang (1990), etc.

Some of the unconventional superconductors noted above are (easily) achieved experimentally; others are less so. A key question for theory is what Hamiltonians give rise to the different types of ‘exotic’ pairing. For example, in the case of the cuprates, the sufficiency of the repulsive Hubbard model continues to be debated Arovas et al. (2022); Qin et al. (2022). As for a PDW phase, obtaining a stable one in two dimensions is even a greater challenge Himeda et al. (2002); Corboz et al. (2014); Huang et al. (2021); Loder et al. (2010); Lee (2014); Berg et al. (2009); Wårdh and Granath (2017); Setty et al. (2023); Wu et al. (2023); Jiang and Yao (2023). In this paper, we present a pathway towards realizing PDW superconductivity in the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model. Our key observation is that a unitary transformation combined with known results of the conventional Hubbard model, allows us to identify Hamiltonians which rigorously must exhibit low temperature unconventional PDW superconductivity.

The Hubbard model.— We begin with the celebrated Hubbard model

=\displaystyle{\cal H}=- tijσ(ciσcjσ+cjσciσ)μi(ni+ni)\displaystyle t\sum_{\langle ij\rangle\sigma}\big{(}c_{i\sigma}^{\dagger}c_{j\sigma}^{\phantom{\dagger}}+c_{j\sigma}^{\dagger}c_{i\sigma}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\big{)}-\mu\sum_{i}\big{(}n_{i\uparrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}+n_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\big{)}
+\displaystyle+ Ui(ni12)(ni12)\displaystyle U\sum_{i}\big{(}n_{i\uparrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}-\frac{1}{2}\big{)}\,\big{(}n_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}-\frac{1}{2}\big{)} (1)

which describes spin σ=,\sigma=\uparrow,\downarrow fermions hopping on a lattice and interacting with an on-site interaction UU. When the interaction is attractive (U<0U<0) the phase diagram on a square lattice is well-understood qualitatively and quantitatively Moreo and Scalapino (1991); Scalettar et al. (1989); Paiva et al. (2004): At half-filling (μ=0\mu=0) the ground state exhibits simultaneous long range charge density wave (CDW) and ss-wave superconducting (SC) orders. When doped (μ0\mu\neq 0) the SC-CDW degeneracy is broken, and there is a finite temperature (Kosterlitz-Thouless) transition to a SC phase. This description has been confirmed by Quantum Monte Carlo (QMC) calculations which, owing to the absence of a sign problem, can be carried out to arbitrarily low temperatures.

Full understanding of the repulsive model with a large U>0U>0 is more elusive. At half-filling there is long range antiferromagnetic (AF) order which occurs only at T=0T=0 on a square lattice owing to the continuous Heisenberg spin symmetry and the Mermin-Wagner theorem Mermin and Wagner (1966). However, when doped, QMC fails to reach low TT because of the sign problem. A dd-wave SC phase, with intricate ‘striped’ charge and spin patterns is suggested by many calculations [sometimes with the addition of further next-near-neighbor (NNN) hopping], but the final determination of the various orders remains under discussion LeBlanc et al. (2015); Huang et al. (2017); Zheng et al. (2017); Jiang and Devereaux (2019); Jiang et al. (2020); Chung et al. (2020); Qin et al. (2020); Xu et al. (2022, 2023); Jiang et al. (2024).

Before introducing the main results of this work, it is useful to review the well-known (partial) particle-hole transformation ci(1)ix+iycic_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\rightarrow(-1)^{i_{x}+i_{y}}\,c_{i\downarrow}^{\dagger} which links the descriptions of the properties of the attractive and repulsive cases. Here (1)ix+iy(-1)^{i_{x}+i_{y}} indicates opposite phases on the two sublattices of the (bipartite) square lattice. Under this transformation, the kinetic energy remains unchanged. The down spin density ni1nin_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\leftrightarrow 1-n_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}} and, as a consequence the sign of UU is reversed, mapping attraction to repulsion and vice-versa. The roles of charge and spin operators are interchanged ni+nininin_{i\uparrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}+n_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\leftrightarrow n_{i\uparrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}-n_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}, so that chemical potential μ\mu and Zeeman BzB_{z} terms map into one another (to within an irrelevant energy shift) and correlations of the ZZ component of spin map onto density correlations. Finally, the XYXY spin operators map onto ss-wave pairing cicicicic_{i\uparrow}^{\dagger}c_{i\downarrow}^{\phantom{\dagger}}\leftrightarrow c_{i\uparrow}^{\dagger}c_{i\downarrow}^{\dagger}.

With those mappings in place, the connections between the attractive and repulsive Hubbard models become clear. The fact that the square lattice repulsive Hubbard model has degenerate ZZ and XYXY spin order in its ground state and half-filling immediately implies the degenerate CDW and SC patterns in the attractive case. Likewise, the fact that a Zeeman field BzB_{z} causes AF Heisenberg spins to ‘lie down’ and order in the XYXY plane perpendicular to the field is then connected to the preference for SC correlations over CDW ones in the attractive Hubbard model for μ\mu nonzero. We will now show how an alternate canonical transformation lends similar insight into exotic superconductivity.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a) A schematic view of the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model on a square lattice, where t1t_{1}(t1-t_{1}) is the NN hopping parameter of the spin-up (spin-down) fermion, t2t_{2} represents the NNN hopping amplitude and UU is the on-site Hubbard interaction. Up and down arrows correspond to spin-up and spin-down electrons, respectively. (b) Band structures of the non-interacting terms in Eq.(1) with t2=0t_{2}=0 (dotted line) and t2=0.25t_{2}=0.25 (solid line). Inset displays the first Brillouin zone, on which the high-symmetry points are marked.

Attractive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model.— We then apply the unitary transformation, cisgn(i)cic_{i\downarrow}\rightarrow\text{sgn}(i)c_{i\downarrow}, to the attractive Hubbard model, resulting in the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model defined by the Hamiltonian Kudo et al. (2019); Otsuka et al. (2021); Wen et al. (2022),

σz=\displaystyle{\cal H}_{\sigma_{z}}=- tijαβciασzαβcjβμi,αniα\displaystyle t\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\sum_{\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^{\dagger}\sigma^{\alpha\beta}_{z}c_{j\beta}-\mu\sum_{i,\alpha}n_{i\alpha} (2)
+\displaystyle+ Ui(ni12)(ni12)\displaystyle U\sum_{i}(n_{i\uparrow}-\frac{1}{2})(n_{i\downarrow}-\frac{1}{2})

where σz\sigma_{z} represents the ZZ-component of the Pauli matrix, resulting in opposite signs in the hopping amplitudes for the spin-up and spin-down subsystems [see Fig. 1(a)].

The phase diagram of the attractive Hubbard model can be transformed back to derive that of the attractive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model. It is observed that while the CDW remains unaffected, the ss-wave SC phase is altered. Specifically, the on-site pairing transforms back as Δj=cjcjΔj=sgn(j)cjcj\Delta_{j}=c_{j\downarrow}c_{j\uparrow}\rightarrow\Delta_{j}=\text{sgn}(j)c_{j\downarrow}c_{j\uparrow}. Therefore, the pairing remains on-site but with an alternating sign, indicating that the system displays ss-wave PDW superconductivity. The pairing function can be written as Δ=1Nj(1)jx+jycjcj=1N𝐤c𝐤c𝐤+𝐊0\Delta^{\dagger}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{j}(-1)^{j_{x}+j_{y}}c_{j}^{\dagger}c_{j}^{\dagger}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\sum_{\bf k}c_{\bf k}^{\dagger}c_{{\bf-k}+{\bf K}_{0}}^{\dagger} with 𝐊0=(±π,±π){\bf K}_{0}=(\pm\pi,\pm\pi). Therefore a PDW state, in which an electron at momentum 𝐤{\bf k} pairs up with another at momentum 𝐤+𝐊0-{\bf k}+{\bf K}_{0}, resulting in a Cooper pair carrying net momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}, must rigorously be the low temperature phase of the attractive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model.

It has been well established that the Fermi surface topology plays a crucial role in Cooper pair formation. To investigate the origin of PDW in the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model, we plot the non-interacting Fermi surface in Fig. 2(a). In contrast to the normal spin-independent hopping scenario where the Fermi surface is spin-degenerate, the σz\sigma_{z} hopping term generates a spin-dependent Fermi surface. Since the dispersion of the two spin species satisfies the condition ξ,𝐤\xi_{\uparrow,\bf k} = ξ,𝐤+𝐊𝟎\xi_{\downarrow,-\bf k+\bf K_{0}}, the spin-up and spin-down Fermi surfaces are of identical shape and are centered around the Γ\Gamma and KK points, respectively. The above relation also indicates perfect nesting in the particle-particle channel with center of mass momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}. Hence, in the presence of on-site attractive interaction, a PDW order with modulation wavevector 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0} will develop.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: (a) Fermi surfaces of the spin-up and spin-down electrons at μ=0.3\mu=-0.3, in which a pair of electrons with different spins on the nested Fermi surface is demonstrated. The Fermi surfaces are C4C_{4} symmetric, therefore only left (right) half of them are shown for t2=0t_{2}=0 (t2=0.25)(t_{2}=0.25). (b) A schematic view of the ss-wave PDW with center of mass momentum (π,π)(\pi,\pi) in the attractive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model on a square lattice.

Repulsive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model.— We next consider the repulsive case, U>0U>0. Introducing a NNN hopping term t2t_{2} into the Hamiltonian in Eq. (2), the total Hamiltonian becomes:

=\displaystyle{\cal H}= t1ijαβciασzαβcjβ+t2ijαc^iα+c^jα\displaystyle-t_{1}\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\sum_{\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^{\dagger}\sigma^{\alpha\beta}_{z}c_{j\beta}+t_{2}\sum_{\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle\alpha}\hat{c}_{i\alpha}^{+}\hat{c}_{j\alpha} (3)
+Ui(ni12)(ni12)μi,αniα,\displaystyle+U\sum_{i}(n_{i\uparrow}-\frac{1}{2})(n_{i\downarrow}-\frac{1}{2})-\mu\sum_{i,\alpha}n_{i\alpha},

where ij\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle denotes next-nearest neighbors, and t2t_{2} is the NNN hopping amplitude. Under the same unitary transformation in the previous section, the above extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model transforms into a normal extended one. The inclusion of the NNN hopping term is essential at large UU as it may play a key role in generating long-range SC correlation and establishing a delicate balance between CDW, spin density wave, and superconductivity Xiao et al. (2023); Mai et al. (2023); Jiang et al. (2020, 2024). Recent comprehensive density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) studies have revealed the intertwined CDW and SC correlations on 4-leg systems Jiang and Devereaux (2019); Jiang et al. (2020); Chung et al. (2020), as well as an emergent dd-wave SC phase on wider systems with a moderate t2>0t_{2}>0 Jiang et al. (2024).

The magnetic order can be characterized by the spin correlation functions defined as Cz(ij)=SizSjz=(nini)(njnj)C^{z}(ij)=\langle S^{z}_{i}S^{z}_{j}\rangle=\langle(n_{i\uparrow}-n_{i\downarrow})(n_{j\uparrow}-n_{j\downarrow})\rangle and Cxy(ij)=Si+Sj=ci+cicj+cjC^{xy}(ij)=\langle S^{+}_{i}S^{-}_{j}\rangle=\langle c_{i\uparrow}^{+}c_{i\downarrow}c_{j\downarrow}^{+}c_{j\uparrow}\rangle. Under the transformation, Cxy(ij)C^{xy}(ij) will change its sign when ii and jj belong to different sublattices, whereas Cz(ij)C^{z}(ij) will remain unchanged. The magnetic properties of the normal extended Hubbard model [connected to Eq. (3) through the unitary transformation] have been well established at half filling, exhibiting an AF ground stateVarney et al. (2009); Zheng et al. (2017); Arovas et al. (2022); Qin et al. (2022). Consequently, the Hamiltonian in Eq. (3) will exhibit unconventional long-range magnetic order, which is ferromagnetic (antiferromagnetic) in the XYXY plane (ZZ direction).

Similarly, in diagnosing the SC order, if the pair correlation function involves the spin-singlet pair annihilation operator Δ(ij)=12(cicjcicj)\Delta(ij)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_{i\uparrow}c_{j\downarrow}-c_{i\downarrow}c_{j\uparrow}), it is straightforward to infer that the transformation will convert the spin-singlet pair operator to Δ(ij)=±12(cicj+cicj)\Delta(ij)=\pm\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c_{i\uparrow}c_{j\downarrow}+c_{i\downarrow}c_{j\uparrow}) for the nearest-neighbor (NN) pairing [as is the case for the most-studied dd-wave in the normal repulsive Hubbard model], where +()+(-) corresponds to the negative sign of the transformation situated on site i(j)i(j). Then, the NN pairings cicjc_{i\uparrow}c_{j\downarrow} and cjcic_{j\uparrow}c_{i\downarrow}, which are equivalent in the spin-singlet scenario, will exhibit a sign difference under the unitary transformation, giving rise to a spin-triplet state. Therefore, the additional symbol ±\pm will not only produce a net momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0} for the dd-wave pairs but also alter the nature of the pairing, leading to the emergence of a dd-wave PDW triplet superconductor with a center of mass momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0} Chen et al. (2020).

The various types of correlations mentioned above can be transformed back by the gauge transformation and are used to characterize the ground-state properties of the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model. While the charge density correlations and spin-zz correlations remain unchanged, the SC correlations transform into those of spin-triplet dd-wave pairings at momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}, and the transverse spin correlation transitions to be ferromagnetic (FM). Therefore, considering that spin-singlet dd-wave superconductivity dominates in the doped normal extended Hubbard model Jiang et al. (2020); Chung et al. (2020); Xu et al. (2023); Jiang et al. (2024), it is reasonable to suggest that the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model may support a spin-triplet dd-wave PDW SC ground state with the center of mass momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}. It is noted that the conversion of the pairing symmetry is accompanied by changes in the transverse magnetic property, i.e., from AF to FM corresponding to the shift from singlet to triplet pairings. This may imply the significant role of FM spin fluctuations in mediating the formation of spin-triplet pairs of electrons.

To confirm the existence of the dd-wave triplet SC at momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0} in the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model given by Eq. (3), we conduct DQMC calculations of the dd-wave pairing susceptibility at momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}, defined as follows White et al. (1989):

Pd=1N0β𝑑τijΔid(τ)Δjd(0)ei𝐊0(𝐫j𝐫i),P_{d}=\frac{1}{N}\int_{0}^{\beta}d\tau\sum_{ij}\left\langle\Delta_{i}^{d}(\tau)\Delta_{j}^{d\dagger}(0)\right\rangle e^{i{\bf K}_{0}\cdot({\bf r}_{j}-{\bf r}_{i})},

where Δid(τ)=jfijdeτHcicjeτH\Delta_{i}^{d}(\tau)=\sum_{j}f_{ij}^{d}e^{\tau H}c_{i\uparrow}c_{j\downarrow}e^{-\tau H} represents the time-dependent pairing operator with a form-factor fijd=1(1)f_{ij}^{d}=1(-1) for the bond in the X(Y)X(Y) direction between sites ii and jj. The interaction vertex Γd\Gamma_{d} can be extracted from PdP_{d} and the uncorrelated susceptibility P¯d\bar{P}_{d} as follows: Γd=1Pd1P¯d\Gamma_{d}=\frac{1}{P_{d}}-\frac{1}{\bar{P}_{d}} Mondaini et al. (2012); Ying et al. (2014). When ΓdP¯d<0\Gamma_{d}\bar{P}_{d}<0, the corresponding pairing interaction is attractive. As ΓdP¯d1\Gamma_{d}\bar{P}_{d}\rightarrow-1, PdP_{d} tends to diverge, indicating a SC instability. Figure 3(b) illustrates the product ΓdP¯d\Gamma_{d}\bar{P}_{d} for the dd-wave pairing susceptibility at momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0}. As the temperature decreases, we find ΓdP¯d\Gamma_{d}\bar{P}_{d} is the most negative, suggesting this pairing will dominate the SC instability. For comparison, we also calculate ΓαP¯α\Gamma_{\alpha}\bar{P}_{\alpha} for the pp-wave triplet at zero momentum, which is less dominant.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: (a) A schematic demonstration of the dd-wave PDW with center of mass momentum (π,π)(\pi,\pi) in the extended repulisive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model on a square lattice. (b) The measured ΓαP¯α\Gamma_{\alpha}\bar{P}_{\alpha} of the pairing instability as a function of temperature for various paring symmetries at a filling of ρ=0.95\rho=0.95. The parameters used are t/t=0.25t^{\prime}/t=0.25 and U/t=4U/t=4, with a lattice size of L=8L=8.

The large-UU limit.— In the large-UU limit, the double occupancy on a lattice site is excluded, and the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model is reduced to an extended σz\sigma_{z}-tt-JJ-like Hamiltonian Cleveland and Medina A. (1976),

=\displaystyle{\cal H}= t1ijαβciασzαβcjβ+t2ijαc^iα+c^jα\displaystyle-t_{1}\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}\sum_{\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^{\dagger}\sigma^{\alpha\beta}_{z}c_{j\beta}+t_{2}\sum_{\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle\alpha}\hat{c}_{i\alpha}^{+}\hat{c}_{j\alpha} (4)
ij[J1(SixSjx+SiySjy)J1SizSjz+J114n^in^j]\displaystyle-\sum_{\langle ij\rangle}[J_{1}\left(S^{x}_{i}S^{x}_{j}+S^{y}_{i}S^{y}_{j}\right)-J_{1}S^{z}_{i}S^{z}_{j}+J_{1}\frac{1}{4}\hat{n}_{i}\hat{n}_{j}]
+ijJ2(𝐒^i𝐒^j14n^in^j),\displaystyle+\sum_{\langle\langle ij\rangle\rangle}J_{2}(\hat{\mathbf{S}}_{i}\cdot\hat{\mathbf{S}}_{j}-\frac{1}{4}\hat{n}_{i}\hat{n}_{j}),

where the exchange coupling is J1(2)=4t1(2)2UJ_{1(2)}=\frac{4t_{1(2)}^{2}}{U} with the ratio J2/J1=t22/t12J_{2}/J_{1}=t^{2}_{2}/t^{2}_{1}. Here, the FM nature of the XYXY component of the NN Heisenberg term J1J_{1} aligns with the magnetic properties observed in Eq. (3). Under the transformation, the above Hamiltonian becomes the normal extended tt-JJ model, on which recent DMRG calculations have been conducted for six- and eight-leg cylinders, uncovering a robust dd-wave SC phase in the case of electron doping (t2>0t_{2}>0Gong et al. (2021); Jiang and Kivelson (2021); Jiang et al. (2021, 2023); Lu et al. (2024); Chen et al. (2023). It has been demonstrated that the SC phase exhibits a power-law pairing correlation that decays much slower than the charge density and spin correlations. Furthermore, it is found that spin-singlet dd-wave superconductivity can also emerge at the hole-doped side (t2<0t_{2}<0) near the optimal 1/81/8 doping level on the wider 88-leg system Lu et al. (2024); Chen et al. (2023). Correspondingly, it is reasonable to propose that the σz\sigma_{z}-tt-JJ-like model in Eq. (4) could potentially give rise to a dd-wave PDW triplet superconductor with a center of mass momentum 𝐊0{\bf K}_{0} within the proper parameter region of the normal extended tt-JJ model, where the SC phase is observed Gong et al. (2021); Jiang and Kivelson (2021); Jiang et al. (2021, 2023); Lu et al. (2024); Chen et al. (2023); Qu et al. (2022); Lu et al. (2023); Jiang et al. (2022).

The (π,0)(\pi,0) PDW superconductivity.— The PDW SC ground state with a different center of mass momentum can be achieved by appropriately manipulating the NN hopping signs of the spin-down electrons. In the case of (π,0)(\pi,0), we can select the NN hoppings as follows:

(π,0)=ti,αβciασzαβci±x^βti,σciσci±y^σ,\displaystyle{\cal H}_{(\pi,0)}=-t\sum_{i,\alpha\beta}c_{i\alpha}^{\dagger}\sigma^{\alpha\beta}_{z}c_{i\pm\hat{x}\beta}-t\sum_{i,\sigma}c_{i\sigma}^{\dagger}c_{i\pm\hat{y}\sigma}, (5)

where an additional sign is present when the spin-down electrons hop in the xx direction. This additional sign can be eliminated by the following unitary transformation:

ci(1)ixci.\displaystyle c_{i\downarrow}\rightarrow(-1)^{i_{x}}c_{i\downarrow}. (6)

Through a similar analysis, the corresponding attractive Hubbard model supports a ss-wave PDW state with a center of mass momentum of (π,0)(\pi,0). Similarly, the dispersion of the two spins has the relation ξ,𝐤\xi_{\uparrow,\bf k} = ξ,𝐤+𝐊𝟎\xi_{\downarrow,-\bf k+\bf K_{0}} with 𝐊𝟎=(π,𝟎)\bf K_{0}=(\pi,0) and their Fermi surfaces are again nested in the particle-particle channel with center of mass momentum 𝐊𝟎\bf K_{0} [see Fig. 4(b)]. By substituting the NN hopping term with the one in Eq. (5) in the Hamiltonian Eq. (3), the modified repulsive Hubbard model exhibits an extended ss-wave PDW state with a center of mass momentum of (π,0)(\pi,0). The pairings in the XX direction transition to triplet, accompanied by FM spin correlations in the XX component along this direction. These results extend to the corresponding model in the large-UU limit, which deviates from Eq. (4) in the NN hoppings [replaced by Eq. (5)] and NN exchange couplings (FM for the XX component along the XX direction). Finally, by rotating the Hamiltonian by 9090 degrees, PDW superconductivity with a center of mass momentum (0,π)(0,\pi) can also be realized.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: (a) Band structures of the non-interacting Hamiltonian in Eq. (5). (b) Fermi surfaces of the spin-up and spin-down electrons at filling ρ=0.95\rho=0.95, in which the nesting of the Fermi surface is illustrated. Schematic views of the ss-wave (c) and dd-wave (d) PDWs with center of mass momentum (π,0)(\pi,0) in the modified σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model on a square lattice.

Conclusions.— We explicitly demonstrate the presence of PDW superconductivity in the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model and its related extensions, such as incorporating long-range hoppings and the large-UU limit. These modified Hubbard or tt-JJ models can be transformed into normal ones through unitary transformations, where their physical properties have been thoroughly established. The attractive σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model supports an ss-wave PDW phase, whereas the repulsive extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model features a dd-wave PDW state. Both PDW phases possess a center-of-mass momentum at (π,π)(\pi,\pi). Specifically, the dd-wave PDW at momentum (π,π)(\pi,\pi) is triplet, corresponding to which the spin correlations in the XYXY component are ferromagnetic. The dd-wave PDW persists in the extended σz\sigma_{z}-tt-JJ-like model derived from the extended σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model in the large-UU limit. Finally, we discover that a PDW superconductivity at momenutm (π,0)(\pi,0) can also be achieved by appropriately manipulating the NN hopping signs of the spin-down electrons. Our study provides a microscopic mechanism for the PDW superconductivity, and will deepen the understanding of this exotic SC state Aoki et al. (2019); Aeppli et al. (1988); Joynt and Taillefer (2002); Chen et al. (2021); Gu et al. (2023); Duan et al. (2021). Specifically, while recent experiments have identified UTe2 as a candidate for a spin-triplet PDW state near an FM instabilityGu et al. (2023), the AF fluctuations detected by inelastic neutron scattering seem highly unusualDuan et al. (2021). Nonetheless, the dd-wave PDW at momentum (π,π)(\pi,\pi) mentioned here inherently exhibits a coexistence of these intertwined orders. Therefore, the σz\sigma_{z}-Hubbard model proposed here may have a connection to such quantum materials, a topic we leave for further study.

Acknowledgments.— The authors thank M. Franz for helpful discussions. X.Z. acknowledges support from the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province under Grant BK20230907 and the NSFC grant No. 12304177. J.S. and H.G. acknowledge support from NSFC grant Nos. 11774019 and 12074022. S.F. is supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China under Grant Nos. 2023YFA1406500 and 2021YFA1401803, and NSFC under Grant No. 12274036. S.S.G. is supported by the NSFC Grant No. 12274014, the Special Project in Key Areas for Universities in Guangdong Province (No. 2023ZDZX3054), and the Dongguan Key Laboratory of Artificial Intelligence Design for Advanced Materials (DKL-AIDAM). W. H. is supported by NSFC under Grants No. 11904155 and No. 12374042. R.T.S. is supported by the grant DOE DE-SC0014671 funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science.

References