# On the thermodynamics of strongly correlated integrable electron systems

## Abstract

We reexamine the Yang-Yang-Takahashi method of deriving the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equations which describe strongly correlated electron systems of fundamental physical interest, such as the Hubbard, $`sd`$ exchange (Kondo) and Anderson models. It is shown that these equations contain some additional terms which may play an important role in the physics of the systems.

It is well known that many one-dimensional (1D) and effective 1D models describing strongly correlated electron systems of fundamental physical interest are diagonalized exactly by following set of the Bethe ansatz (BA) equations:

$`\mathrm{exp}(ik_jL)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{M}{}}}e_1(u_j\lambda _\alpha )`$ (2)   
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}e_1(\lambda _\alpha u_j)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\beta =1}{\overset{M}{}}}e_2(\lambda _\alpha \lambda _\beta ).`$ (3)   
Here, $`e_n(x)=(x+in/2)/(xin/2)`$, $`k_j`$ are electron momenta, $`u_ju(k_j)`$, $`N`$ is the total number of electrons on an interval of size $`L`$ and $`M`$ is the number of electrons with spin “down”. The eigenenergy $`E`$ and $`z`$ component of the total spin of the system $`S^z`$ are given by

$$E=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\omega _j,S^z=\frac{1}{2}NM.$$
(4)   
where $`\omega _j=\omega (k_j)`$ are electron energies.

At $`\omega (k)k^2`$, $`u(k)k`$ and $`\omega (k)\mathrm{cos}k`$, $`u(k)\mathrm{sin}k`$, Eqs. (1) correspond to a 1D electron gas with $`\delta `$-function interaction  and the 1D Hubbard model , respectively. In the theory of dilute magnetic alloys , these equations describe the excitation spectrum of a free host in terms of interacting Bethe excitations, while impurity terms, omitted in Eqs. (1), account for an elastic scattering of Bethe excitations at the impurity site. The case of $`\omega (k)=k`$, $`u(k)=0`$ corresponds to the $`sd`$ exchange (Kondo) model , while the case of $`\omega (k)=k`$, $`u(k)k^2`$ corresponds to the Anderson model . In addition, Eqs. (1) can be used to study the Anderson and Kondo impurities embedded in a host with a nonmetallic behavior of the density of band states .

The equations (1) correspond to a finite system of electrons. A general method of deriving the thermodynamic BA equations has been developed by Yang and Yang  for the case of spinless particles, and then generalized by Takahashi  to the case of particles with internal degrees of freedom.

In this Letter, we reexamine the Yang-Yang-Takahashi method and show that the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equations contain some additional terms which may play an important role in the physics of strongly correlated electron systems. These additional terms result from a more accurate computation of a contribution of spin degrees of freedom to a variation of the system’s energy.

The structure of the BA equations shows that it is natural to treat the system of $`NM`$ electrons with spin “up” and $`M`$ electrons with spin “down” in terms of $`N`$ charge excitations with “rapidities” $`u_j=u(k_j)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ and spin excitations (spin waves) with rapidities $`\lambda _\alpha `$, $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},M`$. In accordance with the Yang-Yang-Takahashi method, to derive the thermodynamic BA equations, one needs to note first that in the limit of a sufficiently large physical system Eqs. (1) admit bound spin complexes in which spin rapidities $`\lambda _\alpha `$ are grouped into “strings” of order $`n`$ in the complex $`\lambda `$ plane,

$$\lambda _\alpha ^{(n,j)}=\lambda _\alpha ^n+\frac{i}{2}(n+12j),j=1,\mathrm{},n.$$

In addition, for many of the above-mentioned physical systems the BA equations admit also charge complexes in which charge excitations are bond to spin complexes . Nevertheless, to avoid more tedious expressions we start our analysis with the case in which charge complexes are absent.

Then, Eqs. (1) take the form of equations for charge excitation (particle) momenta $`k_j`$ and rapidities of spin complexes, $`\lambda _\alpha ^n`$, $`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},M_n`$, where $`M_n`$ is the number of complexes of order $`n`$ and hence $`_nnM_n=M`$,

$`2\pi N_j`$ $`=`$ $`k_jL+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{M_n}{}}}p_n[u(k_j)\lambda _\alpha ^n],`$ (6)   
$`2\pi J_\alpha ^n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\theta _n[\lambda _\alpha ^nu(k_j)]{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\beta =1}{\overset{M_m}{}}}\mathrm{\Theta }_{nm}(\lambda _\alpha ^n\lambda _\beta ^m),`$ (7)   
where $`p_n(x)=\pi +\theta _n(x)`$, and $`N_j`$ and $`J_\alpha ^n`$ are sets of quantum numbers of the system corresponding to particles and spin complexes, respectively. Here, $`\theta _n(x)=2\mathrm{arctan}(2x/n)`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{nm}(x)=(1\delta _{nm})\theta _{|nm|}(x)+\theta _{n+m}(x)+2\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(n,m)1}{}}\theta _{|nm|+2k}(x).$$

In the continuous limit, $`L\mathrm{}`$, $`N\mathrm{}`$, $`M\mathrm{}`$, but $`N/L`$ and $`M/L`$ are constant, Eqs. (2) take the form of integral equations for the “particle” \[$`\rho (k)`$ and $`\sigma _n(\lambda )`$\] and “hole” \[$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_n(\lambda )`$\] density distributions of charge excitations and spin complexes, respectively,

$`\rho (k)+\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}+u^{}(k){\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda a_n[u(k)\lambda ]\sigma _n(\lambda )},`$ (9)   
$`\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_n(\lambda )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑ka_n[\lambda u(k)]\rho (k)}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda ^{}A_{nm}(\lambda \lambda ^{})\sigma _m(\lambda ^{})},`$ (10)   
where $`a_n(x)=(2n/\pi )(n^2+4x^2)^1`$, $`u^{}(k)=du/dk`$, and the matrix $`A_{nm}(x)`$ is given by

$$A_{nm}(x)=\delta _{nm}\delta (x)+(1\delta _{nm})a_{|nm|}(x)+a_{n+m}(x)+2\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(n,m)1}{}}a_{|nm|+2k}(x).$$

In terms of the densities, the energy of the system is found to be

$$\frac{1}{L}E=𝑑k\omega (k)\rho (k)$$
(11)   
The number of unknown functions in Eqs. (3) is twice bigger the number of equations. Needed additional equations for fundamental (renormalized) energies of Bethe excitations

$$\epsilon (k)=T\mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)}{\rho (k)},\kappa _n(\lambda )=T\mathrm{ln}\frac{\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_n(\lambda )}{\sigma _n(\lambda )},$$

are derived from the condition of a minimum of the thermodynamic potential of the system

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=ETSHS^zAN,$$
(12)   
where $`T`$, $`S`$, $`A`$, and $`H`$ are the temperature, entropy, chemical potential, and an external magnetic field, respectively. The condition $`\delta \mathrm{\Omega }=0`$, where the energy’s variation is given by

$$\frac{1}{L}\delta E=𝑑k\omega (k)\delta \rho (k),$$
(13)   
results in

$`\epsilon (k)`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (k){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}HA{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda a_n[u(k)\lambda ]F[\kappa _n(\lambda )]}`$ (15)   
$`F[\kappa _n(\lambda )]`$ $`=`$ $`nH+{\displaystyle 𝑑ku^{}(k)a_n[\lambda u(k)]F[\epsilon (k)]}`$ (17)   
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda ^{}A_{nm}(\lambda \lambda ^{})F[\kappa _m(\lambda ^{})]}`$   
where $`F[f(x)]T\mathrm{ln}\{1+\mathrm{exp}[f(x)/T]\}`$.

The analysis of the thermodynamic BA equations (7) in the limiting case of the Kondo system shows that the expression (6) is incomplete. Although, in accordance with Eq. (3a) the variation of the density distribution of particles is related to the variation of the density distributions of spin complexes by the relation

$$\delta \rho (k)+\delta \stackrel{~}{\rho }(k)=u^{}(k)\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\lambda a_n[u(k)\lambda ]\delta \sigma _n(\lambda ),$$

the latter contains only the derivative of the charge rapidity $`u^{}(k)`$. It is easy to see that if one sets $`u^{}(k)=0`$, as it takes place in the Kondo model, the dependence of the energy variation on the spin degrees of freedom completely disappears from Eq. (6), and Eq. (7b) immediately leads, therefore, to unphysical result: All $`\kappa _n(\lambda )`$ are positive, and hence spin excitations are absent in the ground state of the system. The expression (6) does not account thus for a total contribution of spin degrees of freedom to a variation of the energy of the system.

In the continuous limit for spin excitations only, Eq. (2a) for a particle momentum,

$$\frac{2\pi }{L}N_j=k_j+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\lambda p_n[u(k_j)\lambda ]\sigma _n(\lambda ),$$
(18)   
clearly shows, however, that the momentum of a charge excitation, and hence its energy $`\omega (k_j)`$, are determined by both the quantum number of charge excitations $`N_j`$ and the density distributions of spin complexes $`\sigma _n(\lambda )`$ even if $`u(k)=0`$. Therefore, the total variation of the system energy should be written in the form

$$\frac{1}{L}\delta E=𝑑k\omega (k)\delta \rho (k)+𝑑k\rho (k)\delta \omega (k),$$
(20)   
where $`\delta \omega (k)`$ is the variation of the energy of a particle at fixed quantum numbers of charge excitations, $`\delta N_j=0`$,

$$\delta \omega (k)=\frac{d\omega (k)}{dk}\delta k=\frac{d\omega (k)}{dk}\frac{_n𝑑\lambda p_n[u(k)\lambda ]\delta \sigma _n(\lambda )}{1+2\pi u^{}(k)_n𝑑\lambda a_n[\lambda u(k)]\sigma _n(\lambda )}.$$
(21)   
Making use of Eq. (3a) for the denominator in the right-hand side of Eq. (9b), one easily finds the final expression for the total variation of the energy of the system,

$$\frac{1}{L}\delta E=𝑑k\omega (k)\delta \rho (k)\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{d\omega (k)/dk}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\lambda p_n[u(k)\lambda ]\delta \sigma _n(\lambda ).$$
(22)   
Thus, while the energy of the system is given by Eq. (4a), its variation contains two terms. The first term corresponds to a contribution of a variation of charge quantum numbers at fixed spin quantum numbers of the system, while the second one corresponds to a contribution of a variation of spin quantum numbers at fixed charge quantum numbers.

Taking into account Eq. (10), we immediately find that the term

$$\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{d\omega (k)/dk}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}p_n[u(k)\lambda ]$$
(23)   
should be added to the right-hand side of Eq. (7a). Then, in the Kondo limit, where $`u(k)=0`$, $`d\omega (k)/dk=1`$, and

$$\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{1}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}=\frac{N}{L},$$

Eq. (7b) with the extra term (11) correctly reduces to the standard equation describing the thermodynamics of the Kondo model .

If the Bethe spectrum of a systems contains also charge complexes, Eq. (8) takes the form

$$\frac{2\pi }{L}N_j=k_j+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\lambda p_n[u(k_j)\lambda ]\left[\sigma _n(\lambda )+\sigma _n^{}(\lambda )\right],$$
(25)   
where $`\sigma _n^{}(\lambda )`$ stands for the density distribution of charge complexes of order $`n`$. The total variation of the energy of the system is then found to be

$$\frac{1}{L}\delta E=𝑑k\omega (k)\delta \rho (k)\frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{d\omega (k)/dk}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑\lambda p_n[u(k)\lambda ]\delta \left[\sigma _n(\lambda )+\sigma _n^{}(\lambda )\right].$$
(26)   
The Yang-Yang-Takahashi method results then in the following set of the thermodynamic Bethe ansatz equations:

$`\epsilon (k)`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (k){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}HA{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda a_n[u(k)\lambda ]\left\{F[\kappa _n(\lambda )]F[\xi _n(\lambda )]\right\}},`$ (28)   
$`F[\kappa _n(\lambda )]`$ $`=`$ $`nH{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{d\omega (k)/dk}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}p_n[u(k)\lambda ]}+{\displaystyle 𝑑ku^{}(k)a_n[\lambda u(k)]F[\epsilon (k)]}`$ (30)   
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda ^{}A_{nm}(\lambda \lambda ^{})F[\kappa _m(\lambda ^{})]},`$   
$`F[\xi _n(\lambda )]`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _n^{(0)}(\lambda )2nA{\displaystyle \frac{dk}{2\pi }\frac{d\omega (k)/dk}{1+\mathrm{exp}[\epsilon (k)/T]}p_n[u(k)\lambda ]}`$ (32)   
$`+{\displaystyle 𝑑ku^{}(k)a_n[\lambda u(k)]F[\epsilon (k)]}+{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\lambda A_{nm}(\lambda \lambda ^{})F[\xi _m(\lambda ^{})]}.`$   
where $`\xi _n(\lambda )=T\mathrm{ln}[\stackrel{~}{\sigma }_n^{}(\lambda )/\sigma _n^{}(\lambda )]`$ are the renormalized energies of charge complexes, while $`\xi _n^{(0)}(\lambda )`$ are their bare energies, which are different for different physical systems.

In summary, the additional terms in the thermodynamic BA equations, derived in this Letter, should essentially affect the thermodynamic properties of a system at finite temperature. It is clear that the additional terms affect essentially also the low-energy physics of such a system, in which particles (charge excitations unbuilt in charge complexes) essentially contribute to the ground state of the system, as it takes place in the Kondo and Hubbard models. If unpaired charge excitations are absent in the ground state of a system, as it takes place in the Anderson model  in the absence of an external magnetic field, the additional terms disappear from the zero-temperature limit of Eqs. (13). In a weak magnetic field, the ground state of the Anderson model contains also a small portion of unpaired charge excitations, and the additional term in Eq. (13c) should result in some small corrections to the standard solution.