L-9: Difference between revisions
| (11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Eigenstates= | = Eigenstates = | ||
Without disorder, the eigenstates are delocalized plane waves. | Without disorder, the eigenstates are delocalized plane waves. | ||
In the presence of disorder, three scenarios can arise: | In the presence of disorder, three scenarios can arise: | ||
* '''Delocalized eigenstates''', where the wavefunction remains extended over the whole system. | |||
* '''Localized eigenstates''', where the wavefunction is exponentially confined to a finite region. | |||
* '''Multifractal eigenstates''', occurring at the '''mobility edge''' of the Anderson transition, where the wavefunction exhibits a complex, scale–dependent structure. | |||
In three dimensions, increasing the disorder strength leads to a transition between a metallic phase with delocalized eigenstates and an insulating phase with localized eigenstates. The critical energy separating these two regimes is called the mobility edge. Eigenstates at the mobility edge display multifractal statistics. | |||
In | |||
To characterize these different regimes it is useful to introduce the inverse participation ratio (IPR) | |||
IPR | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q)=\sum_n |\psi_n|^{2 q}. | |||
</math> | |||
For a system of linear size <math>L</math>, one typically observes a scaling | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q) \sim L^{-\tau_q}. | |||
</math> | |||
The exponent <math>\tau_q</math> characterizes the spatial structure of the eigenstate. | |||
The exponent <math>\ | |||
== Delocalized eigenstates == | |||
In a delocalized state the probability is spread uniformly over the system: | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
|\psi_n|^{2} \approx L^{-d}. | |||
</math> | |||
</math> | |||
=Larkin model= | Therefore | ||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q) | |||
= | |||
\sum_n |\psi_n|^{2q} | |||
\sim L^d (L^{-d})^q | |||
= | |||
L^{d(1-q)}. | |||
</math> | |||
Thus | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\tau_q=d(q-1). | |||
</math> | |||
== Localized eigenstates == | |||
In a localized state the wavefunction is concentrated within a region of size <math>\xi_{\text{loc}}</math>. | |||
Roughly | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
|\psi_n|^2 \sim \xi_{\text{loc}}^{-d} | |||
</math> | |||
on <math>\xi_{\text{loc}}^d</math> sites and negligible elsewhere. Hence | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q)\sim \text{const}, | |||
\qquad | |||
\tau_q=0. | |||
</math> | |||
Thus localized states do not scale with system size. | |||
== Multifractal eigenstates == | |||
At the mobility edge the eigenstates are neither extended nor localized. Instead, the amplitudes fluctuate strongly across the system. | |||
The scaling of the IPR is characterized by a nonlinear function | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\tau_q. | |||
</math> | |||
The corresponding multifractal dimensions are defined as | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
D_q=\frac{\tau_q}{q-1}. | |||
</math> | |||
It is useful to contrast fractal and multifractal scaling. | |||
* In a '''fractal object''', a single exponent describes the scaling of the measure. If the wavefunction amplitudes scale with a single exponent <math>D</math>, then | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q)\sim L^{-D(q-1)} . | |||
</math> | |||
All moments are controlled by the same dimension <math>D</math>. | |||
* In a '''multifractal object''', different regions of the system scale with different exponents. In this case there is no single fractal dimension: different moments probe different effective dimensions of the wavefunction. | |||
== Multifractal spectrum == | |||
To describe this structure it is useful to introduce the '''multifractal spectrum''' <math>f(\alpha)</math>. | |||
We assume that the wavefunction amplitudes scale as | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
|\psi_n|^2 \sim L^{-\alpha} | |||
</math> | |||
on approximately | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
L^{f(\alpha)} | |||
</math> | |||
sites. | |||
The function <math>f(\alpha)</math> therefore describes the fractal dimension of the set of sites where the wavefunction has exponent <math>\alpha</math>. | |||
Using this representation, | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\mathrm{IPR}(q) | |||
= | |||
\sum_n |\psi_n|^{2q} | |||
\sim | |||
\int d\alpha \, | |||
L^{-\alpha q} L^{f(\alpha)} . | |||
</math> | |||
For large <math>L</math>, the integral is dominated by the saddle point, giving | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\tau(q)=\min_{\alpha}\left(\alpha q-f(\alpha)\right). | |||
</math> | |||
Thus <math>\tau(q)</math> and <math>f(\alpha)</math> are related by a Legendre transform. | |||
If <math>\alpha^*(q)</math> satisfies | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
f'(\alpha^*(q))=q, | |||
</math> | |||
then | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\tau(q)=\alpha^*(q)q-f(\alpha^*(q)). | |||
</math> | |||
Multifractal wavefunctions exhibit a smooth spectrum with maximum | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
f(\alpha_0)=d, | |||
</math> | |||
which corresponds to the most typical amplitude of the wavefunction. | |||
It is useful to contrast this situation with the case of a simple fractal. | |||
In a fractal object, the measure has a single scaling exponent. In our notation this means that the wavefunction amplitudes scale with a single value <math>\alpha_0</math> on a set of fractal dimension <math>D</math>: | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
|\psi_n|^2 \sim L^{-\alpha_0} | |||
</math> | |||
on approximately | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
L^{D} | |||
</math> | |||
sites, and are essentially negligible elsewhere. | |||
In terms of the multifractal spectrum this corresponds to a trivial spectrum | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
f(\alpha_0)=D, | |||
\qquad | |||
f(\alpha\neq\alpha_0)=-\infty. | |||
</math> | |||
By contrast, in a multifractal state the amplitudes are broadly distributed and many values of <math>\alpha</math> contribute. The function <math>f(\alpha)</math> then becomes a smooth curve describing the distribution of scaling exponents of the wavefunction. | |||
<!-- = Larkin model = | |||
In your homework you solved a toy model for the interface | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\partial_t h(r,t) = \nabla^2 h(r,t) + F(r). | |||
</math> | |||
For simplicity, we assume Gaussian disorder | For simplicity, we assume Gaussian disorder | ||
<math>\overline{F(r)}=0 | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\overline{F(r)}=0, | |||
\qquad | |||
\overline{F(r)F(r')}=\sigma^2 \delta^d(r-r'). | |||
</math> | |||
You proved that: | You proved that: | ||
In the real depinning model the disorder is however a non-linear function of h. The idea of Larkin is that this linearization is | * the roughness exponent of this model is <math>\zeta_L=\frac{4-d}{2}</math> below dimension 4 | ||
* the force per unit length acting on the center of the interface is <math>f= \sigma/\sqrt{L^d}</math> | |||
\overline{(h(r)-h(0))^2}= | * at long times the interface shape is | ||
</math> | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\overline{h(q)h(-q)} = \frac{\sigma^2}{q^{d+2\zeta_L}}. | |||
\overline{(h(\ell_L)-h(0))^2}= r_f^2 \ | </math> | ||
</math> | |||
Above | In the real depinning model the disorder is, however, a non-linear function of <math>h</math>. The idea of Larkin is that this linearization is valid only up to a scale <math>r_f</math>, the correlation length of the disorder along the <math>h</math> direction. This defines the '''Larkin length'''. | ||
f_c= \frac{\sigma}{\ell_L^{d/(2 \zeta_L)}} | Indeed, starting from | ||
</math> | |||
In <math>d=1</math> we | <math display="block"> | ||
\overline{(h(r)-h(0))^2} | |||
= \int d^d q \,\overline{h(q)h(-q)}\,(1-\cos(q r)) | |||
\sim \sigma^2 r^{2\zeta_L}, | |||
</math> | |||
we obtain | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\overline{(h(\ell_L)-h(0))^2}= r_f^2, | |||
\qquad | |||
\ell_L=\left(\frac{r_f}{\sigma}\right)^{1/\zeta_L}. | |||
</math> | |||
Above this scale the roughness changes and pinning sets in with a critical force | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
f_c= \frac{\sigma}{\ell_L^{d/(2 \zeta_L)}}. | |||
</math> | |||
In <math>d=1</math> we therefore obtain | |||
<math display="block"> | |||
\ell_L=\left(\frac{r_f}{\sigma}\right)^{2/3}. | |||
</math> | |||
--> | |||
Latest revision as of 22:07, 23 March 2026
Eigenstates
Without disorder, the eigenstates are delocalized plane waves.
In the presence of disorder, three scenarios can arise:
- Delocalized eigenstates, where the wavefunction remains extended over the whole system.
- Localized eigenstates, where the wavefunction is exponentially confined to a finite region.
- Multifractal eigenstates, occurring at the mobility edge of the Anderson transition, where the wavefunction exhibits a complex, scale–dependent structure.
In three dimensions, increasing the disorder strength leads to a transition between a metallic phase with delocalized eigenstates and an insulating phase with localized eigenstates. The critical energy separating these two regimes is called the mobility edge. Eigenstates at the mobility edge display multifractal statistics.
To characterize these different regimes it is useful to introduce the inverse participation ratio (IPR)
For a system of linear size , one typically observes a scaling
The exponent characterizes the spatial structure of the eigenstate.
Delocalized eigenstates
In a delocalized state the probability is spread uniformly over the system:
Therefore
Thus
Localized eigenstates
In a localized state the wavefunction is concentrated within a region of size .
Roughly
on sites and negligible elsewhere. Hence
Thus localized states do not scale with system size.
Multifractal eigenstates
At the mobility edge the eigenstates are neither extended nor localized. Instead, the amplitudes fluctuate strongly across the system.
The scaling of the IPR is characterized by a nonlinear function
The corresponding multifractal dimensions are defined as
It is useful to contrast fractal and multifractal scaling.
- In a fractal object, a single exponent describes the scaling of the measure. If the wavefunction amplitudes scale with a single exponent , then
All moments are controlled by the same dimension .
- In a multifractal object, different regions of the system scale with different exponents. In this case there is no single fractal dimension: different moments probe different effective dimensions of the wavefunction.
Multifractal spectrum
To describe this structure it is useful to introduce the multifractal spectrum .
We assume that the wavefunction amplitudes scale as
on approximately
sites.
The function therefore describes the fractal dimension of the set of sites where the wavefunction has exponent .
Using this representation,
For large , the integral is dominated by the saddle point, giving
Thus and are related by a Legendre transform.
If satisfies
then
Multifractal wavefunctions exhibit a smooth spectrum with maximum
which corresponds to the most typical amplitude of the wavefunction.
It is useful to contrast this situation with the case of a simple fractal.
In a fractal object, the measure has a single scaling exponent. In our notation this means that the wavefunction amplitudes scale with a single value on a set of fractal dimension :
on approximately
sites, and are essentially negligible elsewhere.
In terms of the multifractal spectrum this corresponds to a trivial spectrum
By contrast, in a multifractal state the amplitudes are broadly distributed and many values of contribute. The function then becomes a smooth curve describing the distribution of scaling exponents of the wavefunction.