Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Shape descriptors of equilibrium states in a quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials: A geometric analysis near the phase transitions in Sn$_2$P$_2$S$_6$ ferroelectric crystals

S. Özüm, T. Akkurt, R. Erdem, N. Güçlü

TL;DR

This work analyzes equilibrium states of a quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials for $Sn_2P_2S_6$ ferroelectrics by embedding the free energy surface in differential geometry via mean curvature $H$, Gaussian curvature $K$, curvedness $C$, and shape index $S$. Using a mean-field formulation, the Gibbs free energy per site $φ$ is derived and self-consistent equations for the order parameter $η$ and deformation $u$ are solved as functions of energy gap $ε$, pressure $p$, and temperature $θ$, revealing FE and PE phases and a tricritical point. The authors show that $H$, $C$, and $S$ exhibit cusp singularities at criticality while $K→0$ near critical and tricritical points, indicating valley-like free energy surfaces; $K$'s vanishing behavior provides a practical route to sketch phase boundaries. The results offer a geometric lens on phase transitions in ferroelectric crystals and can extend to multi-order-parameter systems, connecting surface morphology to metastable behavior and Ising-like descriptions in related ferroelectric/ferrielectric materials.

Abstract

We analyze the equilibrium states of quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials for Sn$_2$P$_2$S$_6$ ferroelectric crystals using the mean and Gaussian curvatures ($H$, $K$), curvedness ($C$) and shape index ($S$). From the energy gap, pressure and temperature variations of $H$, $K$, $C$ and $S$, we have reported the geometric construction of the free energy surfaces for the ferroelectric and paraelectric phases. Their behaviors are explicitly observed near the ferroelectric-paraelectric phase transitions. It is found that $H$, $C$ and $S$ display a cusp singularity at the criticality while $K$ converges to zero on both sides of the critical and tricritical points.

Shape descriptors of equilibrium states in a quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials: A geometric analysis near the phase transitions in Sn$_2$P$_2$S$_6$ ferroelectric crystals

TL;DR

This work analyzes equilibrium states of a quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials for ferroelectrics by embedding the free energy surface in differential geometry via mean curvature , Gaussian curvature , curvedness , and shape index . Using a mean-field formulation, the Gibbs free energy per site is derived and self-consistent equations for the order parameter and deformation are solved as functions of energy gap , pressure , and temperature , revealing FE and PE phases and a tricritical point. The authors show that , , and exhibit cusp singularities at criticality while near critical and tricritical points, indicating valley-like free energy surfaces; 's vanishing behavior provides a practical route to sketch phase boundaries. The results offer a geometric lens on phase transitions in ferroelectric crystals and can extend to multi-order-parameter systems, connecting surface morphology to metastable behavior and Ising-like descriptions in related ferroelectric/ferrielectric materials.

Abstract

We analyze the equilibrium states of quantum lattice model with local multi-well potentials for SnPS ferroelectric crystals using the mean and Gaussian curvatures (, ), curvedness () and shape index (). From the energy gap, pressure and temperature variations of , , and , we have reported the geometric construction of the free energy surfaces for the ferroelectric and paraelectric phases. Their behaviors are explicitly observed near the ferroelectric-paraelectric phase transitions. It is found that , and display a cusp singularity at the criticality while converges to zero on both sides of the critical and tricritical points.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 5 sections, 9 equations, 7 figures, 1 table.

Figures (7)

  • Figure 1: (Colour online) (a), (b)$H$ and (c), (d)$K$ vs. $\varepsilon$ for several temperatures at $p=0$.
  • Figure 2: (Colour online) (a), (b)$H$ and (c), (d)$K$ vs. $p$ for several temperatures at $\varepsilon=-0.011$ eV.
  • Figure 3: (Colour online) (a), (b)$H$ and (c), (d)$K$ vs. $\theta$ for several pressures at $\varepsilon=-0.011$ eV.
  • Figure 4: (Colour online) (a), (b)$C$ and (c), (d)$S$ vs. $\varepsilon$ for several temperatures at $p=0$.
  • Figure 5: (Colour online) (a), (b)$C$ and (c), (d)$S$ vs. $p$ for several temperatures at $\varepsilon=-0.011$ eV.
  • ...and 2 more figures