# Comment on “Spin Transport properties of the quantum one-dimensional non-linear sigma model”

## Abstract

In a recent preprint (cond-mat/9905415), Fujimoto has used the Bethe ansatz to compute the finite temperature, zero frequency Drude weight of spin transport in the quantum $`\mathrm{O}(3)`$ non-linear sigma model in a magnetic field $`H0`$. We show here that, contrary to his claims, the results are in accord with earlier semiclassical results (Sachdev and Damle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 943 (1997)). We also comment on his $`1/N`$ expansion, and show that it does not properly describe the long-time correlations.

In a recent preprint , Fujimoto has considered non-zero temperature ($`T`$) transport in the one-dimensional quantum $`\mathrm{O}(3)`$ non-linear sigma model. He considers the frequency ($`\omega `$) dependent spin-conductivity, $`\sigma (\omega )`$, and tests for the possibility that it has a term of the form

$$\text{Re}\sigma (\omega )=K\delta (\omega )+\mathrm{}.$$
(1)   
In the presence of a non-zero magnetic field, $`H0`$, he uses a Bethe ansatz computation to show in the low-temperature limit that $`K\sqrt{T}e^{(\mathrm{\Delta }H)/T}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the magnitude of the $`T=0`$ energy gap.

Here we will show that, contrary to the claims of Fujimoto , this result is in precise accord with earlier semiclassical results . For a classical system, the dynamical spin conductivity is given in terms of the the time ($`t`$) autocorrelation of the total spin current $`J(t)`$ as

$$\sigma (\omega )=\frac{1}{TL}_0^{\mathrm{}}J(t)J(0)e^{i\omega t}𝑑t,$$
(2)   
where $`L`$ is the size of the system, and, in the notation of Ref , the spin current is

$$J(t)=\underset{k}{}m_k\frac{dx_k(t)}{dt},$$
(3)   
where $`m_k`$ are the azimuthal spins of classical particles on trajectories $`x_k(t)`$. Then the average over spins given in Eqn 3 of Ref  shows that

$$J(t)J(0)=A_1\underset{k,\mathrm{}}{}\frac{dx_k(t)}{dt}\frac{dx_{\mathrm{}}(0)}{dt}+A_2\underset{k}{}\frac{dx_k(t)}{dt}\frac{dx_k(0)}{dt}.$$
(4)   
We will now show that the first term proportional to $`A_1`$ above contributes only to $`K`$; the second term proportional to $`A_2`$ yields only regular diffusive contributions to $`\sigma (\omega )`$, and these latter terms were the focus of attention in Ref . The terms proportional to $`A_1`$ were also discussed in Ref , but Fujimoto appears to have overlooked them. In the semiclassical model, the set of velocities at time $`t`$ is simply a permutation of the velocities at $`t=0`$, and so in the first summation in (4) we can relabel the particles at time $`t`$ such that $`dx_{k=\mathrm{}}(t)/dt=dx_{\mathrm{}}(0)/dt`$. Then the average in the first term in (4) easily evaluates to an average over a single Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, and we get

$$J(t)J(0)=A_1\frac{L\rho c^2T}{\mathrm{\Delta }}+A_2(\mathrm{}),$$
(5)   
where $`c`$ is the velocity of ‘light’ in the sigma model, and $`\rho `$ is the total density of particles. Combining (1), (2) and (5), and using expressions in Ref , we have

$$K=\sqrt{\frac{\pi Tc^2}{2\mathrm{\Delta }}}e^{(\mathrm{\Delta }H)/T}\left(\frac{12e^{2H/T}+e^{4H/T}}{1+e^{H/T}+e^{2H/T}}\right).$$
(6)   
This result is valid for $`H,T\mathrm{\Delta }`$, but $`H/T`$ arbitrary. In the low $`T`$ limit at fixed $`H0`$ ($`TH\mathrm{\Delta }`$), (6) agrees precisely with Fujimoto’s result for $`K`$.

It is interesting that $`K`$ vanishes as $`H0`$ for fixed $`T\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and then the conductivity only has the diffusive contribution proportional to $`A_2`$ . Fujimoto has only quoted results in the low temperature limit for fixed $`H0`$, and it would be interesting to extend his computations to $`H=0`$ to access the complementary regime discussed in Ref . Strictly speaking, a purely semiclassical method cannot rule out the possibility that neglected quantum interference effects in special integrable systems will lead to a small non-zero $`K`$ at $`H=0`$, but we can expect that $`K`$ should at least be suppressed by factors of order (thermal de Broglie wavelength)/(spacing between particles) from its nominal $`H0`$ values. Purely diffusive transport is possible only at $`H=0`$, and more generally in models with strict particle-hole symmetry . It is interesting that a similar phenomenon has been noted in the interacting electron models by Zotos et al , who were able to prove ballistic transport only in models without particle-hole symmetry.

Next, we comment on the $`1/N`$ expansion of transport properties. Any kind of bare $`1/N`$ expansion , or even the solution of a $`1/N`$-derived quantum Boltzmann equation , is doomed to failure at low $`T`$ due to non-perturbative effects special to one spatial dimension. Transport involves collisions of particles, and at low $`T`$ two-particle collisions dominate. The exact $`S`$-matrix  for such collisions is known at general $`N`$ — it is $`𝒮_{m_1^{}m_2^{}}^{m_1m_2}(\theta )`$ where $`\theta `$ is a rapidity difference, and particles with spins $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$ scatter into particles with spins $`m_1^{}`$, $`m_2^{}`$. Now for large $`N`$, at fixed $`\theta `$, we have

$$𝒮_{m_1^{}m_2^{}}^{m_1m_2}(\theta )=\delta _{m_1m_1^{}}\delta _{m_2m_2^{}}+𝒪(1/N)$$
(7)   
which corresponds to ballistic transmission of spin, along with a small amount of scattering at order $`1/N`$. However at low $`T`$, small rapidities dominate, and we should really take the limit $`\theta 0`$ at fixed $`N`$. In this case we find, for any fixed $`N`$

$$\underset{\theta 0}{lim}𝒮_{m_1^{}m_2^{}}^{m_1m_2}(\theta )=(1)\delta _{m_1m_2^{}}\delta _{m_2m_1^{}}.$$
(8)   
This corresponds to total reflection of spin, and was the key effect behind the diffusive behavior discovered in Ref . This effect will not be captured at any finite order in the $`1/N`$ expansion; this makes all conclusions drawn from the $`1/N`$ expansion in Ref  unreliable.