Mott transition in the triangular lattice Hubbard model: a dynamical cluster approximation study

TL;DR

This study uses dynamical cluster approximation quantum Monte Carlo simulations to analyze the Mott metal-insulator transition in the frustrated triangular lattice Hubbard model, revealing how frustration affects the phase boundary and the nature of the insulating state.

Contribution

It provides a detailed quantitative analysis of the MIT phase boundary as a function of frustration and interaction strength, highlighting qualitative differences between unfrustrated and frustrated cases.

Findings

Change in the sign of the phase boundary slope with frustration.

Qualitative differences in the insulating state's nature.

Potential evidence for a quantum critical Mott transition.

Abstract

Based on dynamical cluster approximation (DCA) quantum Monte Carlo simulations, we study the interaction-driven Mott metal-insulator transition (MIT) in the half-filled Hubbard model on the anisotropic two-dimensional triangular lattice, where the degree of frustration is varied between the unfrustrated case and the fully frustrated, isotropic triangular lattice. Upon increasing the DCA cluster size, we analyze the evolution of the MIT phase boundary as a function of frustration in the phase diagram spanned by the interaction strength and temperature, and provide a quantitative description of the MIT phase boundary in the triangular lattice Hubbard model. Qualitative differences in the phase boundary between the unfrustrated and fully frustrated cases are exhibited. In particular, a change in the sign of the phase boundary slope is observed, which via an impurity cluster eigenstate analysis, may be related to a change in the nature of the insulating state. We discuss our findings within the scenario that the triangular lattice electron system might exhibit a quantum critical Mott MIT with a possible quantum spin liquid insulating state, such as considered for the organic charge transfer salts $\kappa$-(BEDT-TTF)$_{2}$Cu$_{2}$(CN)$_{3}$ and EtMe$_{3}$Sb[Pd(dmit)$_{2}$]$_{2}$.