4.

8 Ground State Phase Diagram 183

ing. Previously, we have convinced ourselves that at half-filling ( n = l),

a Mott-transition should set in at some critical value (U/t)cr, so the sys-
tem is metallic for ( U / t ) < (U/t)cr, and insulating for ( U / t ) > (U/t)cr.
What happens at n # l? Let us make the plausible assumption that
if the system is metallic at U / t = 00 then it is metallic at any finite U / t .
It is easy to argue that the ground state should be conducting for any
0 < n < 1 and 1 < n < 2.
For less electrons than sites N < L (or n < l), a large U forbids
double occupation, so some sites are empty (positively charged), while
others have one electron (neutral sites). It looks plausible25 that the
strong Hubbard U does not inhibit the jumping of an electron to a
neighbouring empty site:
n
(4.60)
The process can be looked upon as the hopping of the empty site which
is a charge carrier. This costs no energy thus the system is a metal.
This finding may raise doubts about the relevance of arguments for
the Mott transition as an observable phenomenon. Since n can vary
continuously between 0 and 2, it would seem that the point n = 1
is a set of zero measure, utterly without interest. This would be a
false conclusion. On the one hand, we have seen (Fig. 4.6) that the
filling tends to be pinned near integer values of n, thus n = 1 is not so
unexpected. On the other hand, for n sufficiently near to 1, disorder
effects (Anderson localization) come into play and make the system a
non-conductor by localizing the few (- In - 11) carriers implied by our
arguments. As a matter of experimental fact, Mott insulators (or if
you like, Mott-Anderson insulators) are robust, and their nature can
be largely understood by studying the case n = 1.
Next: which kinds of ordered ground states are possible? Expressly
avoiding the thorny question whether the positive4 Hubbard model
2'Actually, there is a subtle difficulty here. While it is true that we cannot identify
an activation energy of the order U ,the hopping of an empty site on the background
of spins may leave a trail of disturbed spin arrangement, so it does not look like the
free propagation of a hole, either. The argument works simply if we assume that all
spins are t.