in the past few years , there has been a significant interest in the physics of quantum phase transitions in 2d spin systems  @xcite .
the purpose of the present communication is to study in detail the disordering transition in a two - layer @xmath3 heisenberg antiferromagnet described by @xmath4 here @xmath5 ; the first sum runs over nearest - neighbors , and the exchange couplings are assumed to be positive ( see fig .
[ figlay ] ) .    for small @xmath6 ,
the model describes two weakly interacting 2d heisenberg antiferromagnets .
each of them is ordered at @xmath0 and possesses goldstone excitations related to a spontaneous breakdown of a rotational symmetry . in the opposite limit , @xmath7 ,
pairs of adjacent spins from different layers form spin singlets separated from triplet states by a gap , @xmath8 .
the presence of a gap implies that the rotational symmetry is not broken .
thus one should expect a disordering phase transition at some critical ratio of @xmath6 .
the two - layer heisenberg model has attracted a lot of interest in the last few years  @xcite this interest was stimulated in part by the experimental observation that some of the high-@xmath9 superconductors contain pairs of @xmath10 layers which are separated from other layers by a charge reservoir  @xcite .
in addition , a two - layer antiferromagnet is probably the simplest @xmath11 spin system which displays a quantum disordering transition of the @xmath12 universality class .
several quantitative predictions about the behavior of observables near such a transition have been made recently  @xcite , and a two - layer antiferromagnet is an ideal candidate to test these predictions .
the phase diagram of eq .
( [ hamilt ] ) has been studied numerically , by quantum monte - carlo  @xcite and series expansion  @xcite techniques , and analytically , using spin - wave  @xcite and mean - field schwinger - boson theory  @xcite .
there are several issues which emerged from these studies .
some of them are related to the universal ratios of various observables and are discussed elsewhere  @xcite . here
we will focus on the properties of the system at @xmath0 , and on the corrections to scaling at finite @xmath13 .
the key issue we want to address at @xmath0 is the applicability of perturbative and self - consistent spin - wave approaches ( the latter is very similar to the schwinger - boson mean - field theory ) .
it is well known that spin - wave expansion works extremely well for a single - layer @xmath3 antiferromagnet . at the same time , for a two - layer system , spin - wave and schwinger - boson theories yield results which are inconsistent with numerical simulations . in particular
, the schwinger - boson mean - field theory yields a critical value of the interlayer coupling @xmath14  @xcite , which is nearly two times larger than @xmath15 obtained in series expansion  @xcite ( @xmath16 ) and quantum monte - carlo  @xcite ( @xmath17 ) studies . a self - consistent spin - wave theory ( see sec  [ sw ] ) also predicts a very large value of @xmath18 .
the spin - wave velocity at the critical point , @xmath19 is also inconsistent with the monte - carlo data which yield @xmath20 ( where we set the lattice constant @xmath21 equal to unity ) .
we will argue that the discrepancies between the spin - wave results and the numerical simulations have a physical origin and are related to the fact that in the spin - wave approach one neglects longitudinal spin fluctuations .
our analytical approach to the problem is based on the introduction of a triplet of @xmath22 bosons for a pair of @xmath3 spins ( see eq .
( [ ml ] ) below ) . in the disordered phase
, this triplet of bosons describes the excitations above the singlet ground state of a pair , while in the ordered phase , where we introduce a condensate for one type of boson , the excitations are split into two transverse and one longitudinal magnon modes .
we will show that the contributions from longitudinal fluctuations to @xmath23 and @xmath24 are substantial , which makes the @xmath25 expansion inapplicable .
however , we will also show that as @xmath26 decreases , the spin - wave approximation becomes more and more reliable , and at vanishing @xmath26 , longitudinal spin fluctuations do not contribute to the sublattice magnetization and susceptibility .
furthermore , we will discuss the temperature dependence of the uniform susceptibility , @xmath2 , at the transition point .
monte - carlo simulations have shown that the universal , linear behavior of @xmath2 at @xmath27 extends up to very high @xmath28 .
for comparison , in a single - layer antiferromagnet , the deviations from linearity become substantial already at @xmath29  @xcite . to understand this result
, we will compute the leading nonuniversal , @xmath1 correction to the susceptibility and show that it is numerically quite small for all @xmath30 .
we start in the next subsection with the spin - wave calculations for eq .
( [ hamilt ] ) . in sec
[ disord ] , we will introduce the transformation to bosons and consider in a systematic way the excitations in the disordered phase , the critical value of @xmath26 , and the spin - wave velocity at the critical point . in sec
[ ord ] , we extend the approach to the ordered state by introducing a condensate for one of the bosonic fields .
we will show how the triplet of excitations splits into two gapless transverse modes and a longitudinal mode with a finite gap .
we will obtain the @xmath0 sublattice magnetization and the uniform susceptibility at arbitrary @xmath26 and show how they deviate from spin - wave results for increasing @xmath26 .
finally , in sec  [ qc ] , we will compute the uniform susceptibility , @xmath31 at the critical point and show that the lattice - dependent , @xmath1 corrections to the scaling form of @xmath2 remain small up to @xmath32 .
our conclusions are stated in sec  [ concl ] .
we start our considerations with a brief discussion of the spin - wave calculations . at small @xmath26 ,
the spins are ordered antiferromagnetically in the layers and also between the layers .
introducing bosons via the holstein - primakoff transformation , and performing standard manipulations , we obtain two branches of spin - wave excitations with the dispersion @xmath33 , where to order @xmath25 , @xmath34^{1/2 } , \ ] ] and @xmath35 .
it is not difficult to show that the fluctuations near @xmath36 are in - phase fluctuations of the spins in the two layers , while those near @xmath37 correspond to out - of - phase fluctuations .
there is indeed a goldstone mode in @xmath38 at @xmath39 because of a spontaneous symmetry breaking .
the renormalized @xmath40 and @xmath41 differ from the couplings in ( [ hamilt ] ) due to the @xmath25 corrections : @xmath42 where @xmath43 the summation in ( [ 4 ] ) is over the whole brillouin zone .
the sublattice magnetization to order @xmath25 is given by @xmath44 .
evaluating @xmath45 with bare couplings @xmath46 , as it is required in the @xmath25 expansion , we obtain that @xmath45 reaches a value of @xmath47 only at a very large @xmath48 .
a somewhat better , though less justified estimate of @xmath49 can be obtained if one formally considers the expressions for the renormalized couplings as self - consistent equations , and solve them for @xmath3 .
this procedure is similar to the mean - field schwinger - boson theory , and the results we obtained are similar to those of millis and monien  @xcite : the sublattice magnetization first increases with @xmath26 , passes through a maximum , and then decreases ( see fig .
[ fign_0 ] ) .
there is a weak first - order disordering transition at @xmath50 .
still , the critical @xmath26 is much larger than @xmath51 obtained in numerical simulations .
we also computed the spin - wave velocity to @xmath52 order in @xmath25 , and obtained after straightforward but somewhat tedious calculations  @xcite @xmath53 where now @xmath54 are the solutions of ( [ 3 ] ) and ( [ 4 ] ) to order @xmath55 , and @xmath56 is a cumbersome function of @xmath6 whose explicit form we do not present . at @xmath57
, we obtained @xmath58 which completely agrees with the results of other studies  @xcite .
the spin - wave velocity remains finite at the critical point , and it is therefore reasonable to compute it at @xmath59 suggested by numerical simulations .
assuming for definiteness that @xmath60 , we obtained @xmath61 .
evaluating then @xmath54 and substituting them into ( [ csw ] ) , we find @xmath62 .
observe that the @xmath55 correction is very small .
for @xmath3 , we obtain @xmath63 .
as we mentioned earlier , this value is somewhat larger than @xmath64 extracted from the fit of the monte - carlo data for the uniform susceptibility @xcite to the scaling formula .
the main weakness of the spin - wave theory is that it assumes that the long - range order is well established , and only includes transverse spin fluctuations .
however , at the critical point , transverse and longitudinal fluctuations become indistinguishable and should be treated on equal ground .
we therefore proceed now to perturbative calculations which explicitly take the longitudinal spin fluctuations into account .
the key starting point of our consideration is an observation that for sufficiently large @xmath26 , pairs of adjacent spins from the two planes form spin singlets .
the excited state of a given pair is a three - fold degenerate triplet state .
it is then natural to introduce a triplet of bosons for any given pair .
each boson describes the transformation from a singlet state to one of the states with @xmath22 .
specifically , we introduce @xmath65 and three bosonic fields as @xmath66 where @xmath67 .
it is easy to check that the commutation relations for @xmath68 and @xmath69 are the same as for a vector and a generator of rotations : @xmath70= i \epsilon_{\alpha   \beta \gamma } m^{\gamma } ; ~ [ l^{\alpha},l^{\beta } ] = i \epsilon_{\alpha\beta\gamma}m^{\gamma } ; ~[m^{\alpha},l^{\beta } ] = i \epsilon_{\alpha\beta\gamma}l^{\gamma}$ ] .
this in turn implies that the spin commutation relations for @xmath71 and @xmath72 are satisfied .
the @xmath73 term , however , imposes the constraint that only one boson can be excited at each lattice site .
this indeed follows from the fact that there are only four physical states for a given pair of spins . for the physical states , we have @xmath74 as it should be .
notice that a similar restriction on the number of bosons holds also for the conventional holstein - primakoff transformation for @xmath3 . in this sense
, the transformation above can be viewed as an extension of the holstein - primakoff transformation to nonmagnetic states .
one can also introduce an analog to the dyson - maleev transformation , but we found that the latter is less convenient for practical purposes .    furthermore , a conventional way to perform spin - wave calculations for a nel - ordered state of a @xmath3 system is to extend a model to large @xmath75 , perform @xmath25 expansion , and set @xmath3 at the very end of the calculations .
we will now do the same for a disordered state . to this end , we modify the transformation to bosons by introducing a factor @xmath76 into the square root as @xmath77 , and simultaneously introducing an overall factor @xmath78 into all three components of @xmath79 .
it is not difficult to check that the commutation relations between @xmath80 and @xmath81 ( and , hence , the spin algebra ) do not change under this transformation ; however , the value of the spin on each site in the ground state is now @xmath82 .
below , we perform a systematic perturbative expansion in @xmath83 .
the physical results , however , correspond only to @xmath84 .
( [ ml ] ) has been applied before to study the dimerization in the @xmath3 heisenberg model on a square lattice with an interaction between first and second neighbors  @xcite , and also the dimerization transition in a @xmath22 chain  @xcite .
we believe that this approach has some advantages over the mean - field schwinger - boson theory .
for example , it correctly reproduces the fact that at the critical point and in the disordered phase , the magnon excitation spectrum is three - fold degenerate .
we now substitute ( [ sml ] ) and ( [ ml ] ) into the hamiltonian . to leading order in @xmath85 ,
the interaction between bosons can be neglected , and diagonalizing the quadratic form in bosons , we obtain a three - fold degenerate excitation spectrum with the dispersion @xmath86 where @xmath87 , and @xmath88 , and @xmath89 . for sufficiently large @xmath26 ,
the excitation energy is real ( which indicates a stability ) , and there is a finite gap in the spectrum whose minimum is at @xmath90 .
this gap vanishes at @xmath91 . below this point ,
the excitations near @xmath92 are purely imaginary which signals an instability and implies a need for a change of the ground state .    to obtain a better estimate for the critical value of @xmath26
, we included anharmonic terms into consideration , computed the self - energy terms by usual means , and obtained to order @xmath93 : @xmath94 we see that the first - order correction shifts the transition towards smaller @xmath26 .
if we had restricted the calculation to include only this term , we would obtain @xmath95 in a range between @xmath96 and @xmath97 , depending on whether we leave the correction in the numerator or put it into the denominator .
the second - order correction is _ positive _ and partly compensates the downshift renormalization due to the first - order term .
unfortunately , the second - order correction is logarithmically divergent at the transition  @xcite , and we can not obtain the precise value of @xmath23 to order @xmath98 .
we therefore can only argue that the actual value of @xmath23 is in between our zero - order and first - order results .
a somewhat better estimate of @xmath23 can be obtained approaching the transition from the ordered phase , and will be discussed in appendix a. notice , however , that the first - order estimate of @xmath23 is already closer to the numerical result than @xmath99 which was obtained in a self - consistent spin - wave approach .
we also computed the spin - wave velocity at the critical point .
to order @xmath100 , we obtained @xmath101 for the physical case of @xmath84 , this gives @xmath24 between @xmath102 and @xmath103 again depending on whether we keep the correction in the numerator or put it into the denominator .
the second order correction to the spin - wave velocity is again positive and partly compensates the @xmath100 contribution , but it is again of the form @xmath104 which prevents us from obtaining the precise value of @xmath24 to order @xmath93 .
alternatively however , we can reexpress @xmath24 in terms of the critical value of @xmath26 . doing this , we find that to order @xmath83 , @xmath105 . for @xmath84 ,
this yields @xmath106 . using then the numerical result @xmath60 , we obtain @xmath107 which is consistent with @xmath108 , extracted from the monte - carlo data . in any case , the velocity we found is smaller than that obtained in the spin - wave theory .
we now consider the case @xmath109 when the system possesses a nel order .
we assume that the sublattice magnetization , @xmath110 , is directed along the @xmath111-axis . in our approach
, a nonzero @xmath112 implies that there is a single - particle condensate of the @xmath113-quanta with momentum @xmath114 : @xmath115 . in a mean - field approximation
, we then have @xmath116 , where @xmath117 . introducing the condensate into the hamiltonian and evaluating the ground state energy , @xmath118 , in the mean - field approximation ( i.e. , to leading order in @xmath83 , but keeping @xmath119 fixed ) , we find @xmath120 minimizing the energy , we obtain @xmath121 . for @xmath122
, we have @xmath123 , and hence @xmath124 as it should be .
we then performed the standard computations for a bose gas with a condensate and obtained the quasiparticle spectrum .
it now contains two different branches of quasiparticle excitations . the excitation spectrum for fluctuations in the direction perpendicular to the condensate ( i.e. , for @xmath125 and @xmath126type bosons ) is doubly degenerate .
for these excitations , we obtained to leading order in @xmath83 @xmath127^{1/2 } \label{perpdisp}\ ] ] we see that the transverse fluctuations are gapless as they indeed should be .
for the spin - wave velocity near @xmath36 we have @xmath128 observe that for @xmath57 we recover the mean - field dispersion for the heisenberg antiferromagnet : @xmath129 .
for the dispersion relation of the fluctuations along the direction of the condensate ( i.e. , for @xmath113-type bosons ) , we found @xmath130 we see that the longitudinal fluctuations in the ordered phase have a finite gap at the antiferromagnetic momentum , @xmath131^{1/2}$ ] . also observe that at @xmath57 , the longitudinal mode becomes dispersionless : @xmath132 .
however , we do not know whether this result survives beyond the leading order in @xmath83 . the actual dispersion for a @xmath113-boson may also contain some finite imaginary part ( due to higher - order terms in @xmath83 ) which can be substantial at small @xmath26 .    the computations which lead to eq
( [ pardisp ] ) require some care .
the important point is that since @xmath133 , there is a cancellation of the overall factor @xmath134 in the n - th term in the expansion over density in @xmath73 , and all terms in the series are in fact relevant . in practice
, this implies that evaluating the contribution to the longitudinal dispersion from @xmath135 , one has to examine each term in the series , put all @xmath136bosons except for two into a condensate , compute the numerical combinatoric factor , and explicitly sum the resulting series .
we then used the results for the quasiparticle spectra and computed the sublattice magnetization and the uniform spin susceptibility beyond the mean - field level , to order @xmath100 .
the computations and the procedure of extending the first - order results to @xmath84 are discussed at some length in the appendix .
the results are presented in fig .
[ fign_0 ] and fig .
[ figchi ] . for comparison , in fig .
[ fign_0 ] , we also plotted the self - consistent spin - wave result for the magnetization .
it is essential that at @xmath57 , both our results are @xmath137 the same as obtained in the first - order @xmath25 expansion . in other words , for a single layer antiferromagnet , there are no independent contributions from longitudinal fluctuations .
this result provides a qualitative explanation of why the @xmath25 expansion works so well for a single layer antiferromagnet .
indeed , in our approach , we treat longitudinal fluctuation as a separate bosonic mode . at the same time , in the @xmath25 expansion , the longitudinal mode appears as a pole in the two - particle green function . to obtain this pole
, one has to sum an infinite number of the @xmath25 terms .
then , roughly speaking , the contribution from the longitudinal mode represents the contributions from high - order terms in the @xmath25 expansion .
the absence of the longitudinal correction in our effective
spin - wave theory " therefore implies that the series in @xmath25 converges rapidly , and the dominant contribution comes from the first - order term .
we emphasize however that the longitudinal fluctuations can be neglected only for @xmath138 . as @xmath26 increases ,
the deviation of our result for @xmath110 from the self - consistent spin - wave result becomes more and more substantial as seen in fig .
[ fign_0 ] . near the disordering transition ,
longitudinal and transverse fluctuations have nearly equal strength , and the actual behavior of sublattice magnetization and uniform susceptibility differs in an essential way from the prediction based on the spin - wave theory .    notice that in some range of small @xmath26 , both the sublattice magnetization and the uniform susceptibility are larger than for a single layer , i.e. , the system first becomes more `` classical '' , and only then , at larger @xmath26 , do quantum fluctuations push the system towards the disordering transition .
the region of more `` classical '' behavior at intermediate @xmath26 has been observed in the mean - field schwinger - boson approach  @xcite ; it is also present in the self - consistent spin - wave analysis ( see fig .  [ fign_0 ] ) .    near the transition point
, we obtained @xmath139 where @xmath140 , @xmath141 , and @xmath142 is the critical exponent for spin correlations at criticality .
the factor @xmath143 can not be obtained within the present approach because of the divergence of the gaussian corrections near the transition point in @xmath144 dimensions .
our estimates in the appendix place @xmath143 to be roughly equal to @xmath145 .
the ratio @xmath146 $ ] is an overall factor for the dynamical spin susceptibility . using ( [ nn ] ) and
the result for the spin - wave velocity at the transition point , we obtain @xmath147 = b / j_1^{1 + \eta}$ ] , where @xmath148 .
three different numerical estimates of @xmath149 all yield @xmath150  @xcite .
this is roughly consistent with our estimate @xmath151 , though we only approximately know that @xmath152 .
we also computed the quasiparticle dispersion to order @xmath100 near the transition , and explicitly obtained the goldstone mode in the transverse channel .
these calculations were performed only to leading order in @xmath119 , when one can neglect cubic terms . for a general @xmath119 ,
the goldstone modes arise as a result of cancellations between the the second - order contributions from the cubic terms and the first - order contributions from the quartic terms .
a similar situation is known to exist in frustrated spin systems  @xcite .
we did not perform explicit calculations of the spin - wave spectrum at arbitrary @xmath119 and therefore can not make a definite prediction about how longitudinal fluctuations influence the spin - wave velocity at small @xmath26 .
however , given the good agreement between our result and the spin - wave result for the susceptibility in a single layer antiferromagnet , and the consistency between the spin - wave result for the spin stiffness , @xmath153 , and the numerical data  @xcite , we expect the corrections due to longitudinal fluctuations to be zero or at least small at vanishing @xmath26 .
however , near the transition point , we have already shown that the corrections to the spin - wave velocity can not be reduced to only those due to transverse fluctuations .
thus the spin - wave result for @xmath24 , which neglects longitudinal contributions , is most probably not quite accurate even though the velocity remains finite at the transition point , and the @xmath154 correction to @xmath24 is much smaller than the @xmath155 correction ( see sec .
[ sw ] ) . in other words
, we argue that near the transition , the series of @xmath25 terms is @xmath156 rapidly convergent even if the first few terms in the series seem to indicate the contrary .
in a single - layer heisenberg antiferromagnet , the linear temperature dependence of the uniform susceptibility associated with quantum - critical behavior has been observed in the temperature range @xmath157 . at lower temperatures ,
there is a crossover to another linear behavior associated with the renormalized - classical regime ( which , however , has not yet been observed ) , while at higher temperatures , @xmath2 flattens and has a broad maximum at @xmath158  @xcite . how far the linear dependence extends at high @xmath13 depends on the lattice - dependent corrections to scaling .
the monte - carlo results for a two - layer antiferromagnet at the critical @xmath26 have shown that the linearity extends to sufficiently high temperatures , @xmath159 , i.e. , the corrections to scaling at @xmath27 are smaller than those of a single - layer antiferromagnet .
below we will compute these corrections perturbatively .
but first we consider the sigma - model description of a two - layer system , from which one can obtain the leading , universal , linear in @xmath13 term in the uniform susceptibility .
a simple way to obtain a sigma - model description of a spin-@xmath75 quantum antiferromagnet , which we will follow , was suggested by affleck  @xcite . in application to our system , one has to double a unit cell in each of the two layers and introduce @xmath160 . at large @xmath75 , @xmath161 becomes a classical unit field with commuting components , while the commutation relations between @xmath162 and @xmath163 are the same as for a vector and a generator of rotations .
introducing @xmath164 and @xmath165 into the heisenberg hamiltonian and making a transformation from the hamiltonian to the corresponding action which contains only the derivatives of @xmath164 , we obtain the action of two interacting @xmath12 sigma - models . in terms of @xmath162 and @xmath163 , the interaction term has the form @xmath166 , where @xmath167 .
the generator of rotations itself contains a derivative of @xmath162 : @xmath168 , and the @xmath169 term thus only leads to a velocity renormalization . neglecting this term , and also introducing the magnetic field into the action for susceptibility calculations , we obtain @xmath170 \label{nf}\ ] ] where @xmath171 is a coupling constant which depends on the ratio @xmath6 , and @xmath172
is measured in units of @xmath173 .
introducing @xmath174 , we can rewrite the sigma - model action as @xmath175 \label{sigma}\ ] ] the constraints on the @xmath176-fields are @xmath177 .
the evaluation of the susceptibility at the mean - field ( @xmath178 ) level is straightforward . using the results of  @xcite
, we obtain @xmath179 , where @xmath2 is a susceptibility _ per spin _ , and @xmath180 are the mean - field susceptibilities for the two sigma - fields @xmath181 \label{chim - f}\ ] ] where @xmath182 , and @xmath183 , where @xmath184 is the mass obtained from the second constraint equation . at @xmath185 where @xmath186 is the upper cutoff , we have @xmath187 , where  @xcite @xmath188 $ ] . at low @xmath189
, @xmath190 is exponentially small in @xmath13 and can be neglected compared to @xmath191 .
it is not difficult to show that the contributions related to the fluctuations of @xmath192 are exponentially small and persist even beyond the mean - field level . as a result ,
the universal term in the uniform susceptibility is solely due to @xmath193 , and @xmath2 is precisely @xmath194 of that in a single - layer model .
the sigma - model approach gives us the leading , universal , temperature dependence of the uniform susceptibility .
now we compute the leading nonuniversal correction to @xmath2 .
we will again use a microscopic approach based on a transformation to bosons .
however , this approach clearly has to be modified compared to what we did before at @xmath0 because the quasiparticle densities ( both normal and anomalous ) diverge at finite temperature , and the expansion in @xmath83 is no longer valid .
for this reason , we will perform a self - consistent , mean - field calculation of the susceptibility : we first assume that anharmonic contributions to the quasiparticle spectrum produce a @xmath195dependent gap which eliminates divergencies of quasiparticle densities at the transition point , then we evaluate the quasiparticle densities with the renormalized spectrum , and solve the self - consistent equations for the gap . in principle , one can perform these calculations using the same transformation to bosons as before .
this procedure is then equivalent to self - consistent `` @xmath25 '' calculations in 2d  @xcite .
however , we found it more convenient to use a similar but slightly different form of the transformation to bosons , introduced by bhatt and sachdev  @xcite . in their approach , one introduces an extra bosonic field instead of a @xmath196 term in ( [ ml ] ) : @xmath197 the expressions for @xmath81 are the same as before .
the commutation algebra for spins is again satisfied , while the constraint on the length of the spin now reduces to @xmath198 .
the advantage of this transformation is that one no longer needs to assume that the density of excitations is small .
however , we did not use this transformation for our @xmath0 calculations above because we found it difficult to perform a systematic expansion about the mean - field solution .
however , the mean - field calculation is straightforward : one has to put the @xmath199field into a condensate ( @xmath200 ) , neglect fluctuations of @xmath201 , and reduce the on - site constraint to a constraint imposed on average quantities .
we first list the @xmath0 results which are similar ( but not identical ) to the results we obtained to the zeroth order in @xmath83 . in the disordered phase ,
we indeed again find the three - fold degenerate quasiparticle spectrum with @xmath202 , where @xmath203 , @xmath204 , and the self - consistent equation for @xmath205 follows from the constraint on the length of the spin : @xmath206 . at the transition point
, we obtained @xmath207 .
the critical value of @xmath26 is then @xmath208 , and the @xmath0 spin - wave velocity at criticality is @xmath209 .
we now consider finite temperatures .
assume that the condensate of the @xmath199field has a form @xmath210 , such that at the critical point and near @xmath90 , @xmath211 .
substituting the full expressions for @xmath212 and @xmath38 into a self - consistency equation at finite @xmath13 , expanding in @xmath13 and evaluating the lattice sums , we obtain @xmath213 here @xmath214 is the same as in the sigma - model calculations , and the second term is a lattice - dependent correction which we found to be @xmath215 .
furthermore , we have checked that the mean - field formula for the uniform susceptibility is given precisely by eq .
( [ chim - f ] ) with no extra lattice - dependent corrections ( we applied a magnetic field , rediagonalized the quadratic form in bosons , and computed the magnetization along the field ) .
substituting then the result for the mass @xmath184 to order @xmath216 into ( [ chim - f ] ) , we obtained @xmath217 where @xmath218 in the mean - field approximation ( the @xmath219 correction extended to a physical case of @xmath220 reduces this value by about 20%  @xcite ) .
we see that the numerical factor in the subleading term in the susceptibility is very small , and , e.g. , at @xmath221 , constitutes only 5% of the mean - field value .
indeed , at @xmath28 , higher - order corrections in @xmath222 could also be relevant , but the fact that the leading correction to the scaling result is small is at least an indication that the universal linear dependence of the uniform susceptibility extends to sufficiently high @xmath28 .
as we already discussed , this is consistent with the monte - carlo data  @xcite .
in this paper , we considered a two - layer heisenberg antiferromagnet which can either be in the nel - ordered or in the disordered phase at @xmath0 depending on the ratio of the intra- and interlayer exchange constants .
we applied a transformation to bosons which is suitable for a singlet configuration of a pair of spins , and considered in a systematic expansion the quasiparticle excitations in the disordered phase , and the critical value of the interlayer coupling .
we then extended the approach to the ordered phase by introducing a single - particle condensate of one of the bose fields and computed the mean - field quasiparticle dispersion , the sublattice magnetization and the transverse susceptibility at arbitrary @xmath26 .
we then computed one - loop corrections to the sublattice magnetization and the susceptibility , and considered the relative strength of the longitudinal spin fluctuations .
we found that the contributions of these fluctuations are zero in a single - layer antiferromagnet , but are quite substantial near the transition point , where the transverse and the longitudinal fluctuations are equally important .
the results of our @xmath0 calculations are in a reasonable agreement with the monte - carlo and series expansion data .
we also computed the temperature dependence of the uniform susceptibility at the critical point , and found that the lattice - dependent corrections to the universal scaling behavior @xmath223 are small for all @xmath224 .
this is again consistent with the monte - carlo data which show that the linear behavior of @xmath2 extends to sufficiently high temperatures @xmath28 and flattens only at even higher temperatures .
it is our pleasure to thank a. millis , h. monien , s. sachdev , a. sandvik and a. sokol for useful conversations .
in this appendix , we compute the sublattice magnetization , the transverse susceptibility and the spin stiffness in the nel phase to order @xmath83 . we start with the calculations of the magnetization .
our point of departure is the expression for @xmath225 , eq .
( [ ml ] ) , extended to @xmath76 . in the ordered phase , @xmath226 , where the averaging is over the exact ground state .
the mean - field calculations in the ordered state were presented in sec .
[ ord ] . in these calculations
, we considered only the condensate piece of the @xmath136field , @xmath227 . here
we will need both , @xmath228 and the fluctuating component of @xmath113 .
substituting @xmath229 , into @xmath110 , expanding in @xmath73 up to an infinite order , and collecting all terms which contain at most one pair product of fluctuating fields , we obtain after some simple combinatorics @xmath230 \label{n_00}\ ] ] where , we recall , @xmath117 , and @xmath231 here @xmath232 @xmath89 , and the dispersions for transverse and longitudinal fluctuations are given by ( [ perpdisp ] ) and ( [ pardisp ] ) .
observe that near the critical point , @xmath233 .
the next step is to express @xmath119 in terms of @xmath234 and @xmath26 . to this end
, we compute the ground state energy , @xmath118 with the @xmath100 corrections which come from noninteracting spin - waves _ and _ from the normal ordering of @xmath136operators in the expansion of @xmath73 . combining the two contributions , we obtain @xmath235 \nonumber \\ & & - \lambda~\sum_k [ a_{\perp } ( k ) - \epsilon_{\perp } ( k ) ] - \frac{\lambda}{2}~\sum_k [ a_{\parallel } ( k ) - \epsilon_{\parallel } ( k)]\end{aligned}\ ] ] minimization with respect to @xmath119 then yields @xmath236 where @xmath237 notice that the correction terms @xmath238 and @xmath239 are due to fluctuations in the direction of the condensate , while the terms @xmath240 and @xmath241 come from transverse fluctuations .      at @xmath57 , @xmath123 , and
evaluating the lattice sums , we obtain @xmath244 , where @xmath245 is the density of transverse fluctuations ( spin waves )  @xcite .
this result is equivalent to the first order spin - wave result , i.e. , longitudinal fluctuations do not contribute to sublattice magnetization to first order in @xmath83 .
this is a direct consequence of the fact that the longitudinal mode is dispersionless at @xmath57 , and hence the @xmath136bosons on adjacent sites do not interact with each other .
it is essential , however , that the longitudinal fluctuations are small only for @xmath138 . near the disordering transition , longitudinal and transverse fluctuations have nearly equal strength , and the actual behavior of magnetization differs in an essential way from the prediction based on the spin - wave theory . in this limit
, we obtained @xmath246 where @xmath140 , and the fully renormalized @xmath119 satisfies the equation @xmath247 where @xmath248 is the same as we obtained approaching the critical point from the disordered phase .
we have checked that the two analytical expressions for @xmath23 are indeed also identical .
the subleading term in ( [ aa ] ) is a gaussian correction to the sublattice magnetization . in the theory of phase transitions
, it is usually assumed that the gaussian term is in fact expressed in terms of fully renormalized @xmath119 rather than @xmath249 .
the correction term then diverges as one approaches @xmath23 as it indeed should in 2 + 1 dimensions . due to this divergence
, the self - consistent approach is valid only at @xmath250 . in the opposite limit @xmath251
, scaling considerations predict that the sublattice magnetization should behave as @xmath252 , where @xmath253 .
the above considerations are also relevant as to how one should extend the perturbative result for @xmath110 at arbitrary @xmath119 to @xmath84 .
we have seen that near @xmath57 , one should keep @xmath254 in the @xmath100 terms . at the same time
, it is not difficult to make sure that in order to obtain the same @xmath23 on both sides of the transition , one has to perform calculations self - consistently , i.e. , evaluate the subleading terms in ( [ beta ] ) with the fully renormalized @xmath119 .
to first order in @xmath83 , both procedures are indeed equivalent . however , the extension to @xmath84 yields different results in the two cases
. the self - consistent solution of ( [ beta ] ) for @xmath84 is plotted in fig .
we see that there is a substantial downturn renormalization of @xmath119 in the region @xmath255 , where the self - consistent solution is in fact invalid .
if instead , we approximate the critical value of @xmath26 from the region of intermediate @xmath119 ( see fig .  [ fig3 ] ) , we obtain the larger @xmath256 , which is in better agreement with numerical results . on the other hand , the perturbative solution ( with @xmath249 in the subleading terms )
gives a correct description of the sublattice magnetization at small @xmath26 , shows no unphysical downturn renormalization near the transition , and yields @xmath257 , which is reasonably close to the numerical result .
for all these reasons , we plotted the perturbative solution for @xmath110 in fig .
[ fign_0 ] .
we will use a direct way to obtain the transverse susceptibility in the ordered phase , that is we will apply a homogeneous transverse magnetic field and compute the induced magnetization .
for definiteness , we will assume that @xmath110 is directed along the @xmath258axis , and apply a magnetic field in the @xmath259direction .    for the calculations of the transverse magnetization
, we found it convenient to introduce new bose - operators as linear combinations of the original @xmath125 and @xmath126bosons : @xmath260 in terms of these new operators , the transformation to bosons , extended to large @xmath83 , is @xmath261 where @xmath262 .
the advantage of using this new form of the transformation is that a magnetic field applied along @xmath263 , only introduces a condensate of the @xmath264field . as the expectation value of @xmath265 is obviously site - independent , the @xmath136 and @xmath264field condensates should have the same momentum , i.e. , the condensate of @xmath266 should also have a momentum @xmath267 .
let us first discuss the mean - field results .
in the mean - field approximation , the transverse magnetization per spin is @xmath268 , where we have introduced @xmath269 , and @xmath270 at the mean - field level .
the mean - field ground state energy depends on both , @xmath249 and @xmath271 , and is given by @xmath272 where @xmath118 is the energy per a pair of spins , and , as before , the magnetic field is measured in units of @xmath273 .
differentiating over @xmath271 and substituting the result into @xmath274 , we obtain @xmath275 to obtain the susceptibility , we need @xmath274 only at vanishing magnetic field . substituting @xmath276 into ( [ mm - f ] )
, we find @xmath277 observe that at @xmath57 , we recover the classical spin - wave result @xmath278 . for the spin - stiffness
we obtain using ( [ cswmf ] ) @xmath279 for @xmath57 , we again recover the classical spin - wave result . in the opposite limit , @xmath280 , @xmath281 $ ] .
finally , for the ratio @xmath282 we have @xmath283 independent of @xmath26 .
we now obtain the expression for @xmath284 to order @xmath100 . from ( [ mlnew ] ) we have @xmath285 , where @xmath286 .
to compute @xmath287 and @xmath288 to first order in @xmath83 , we will need the excitation spectra of quasiparticles in the presence of the field . to obtain them
, we substitute the transformation to bosons into the spin hamiltonian and restrict our calculations to the terms which are quadratic in bosons .
the fluctuations of the @xmath199field are decoupled from the other two modes , while the fluctuations of the @xmath136 and @xmath264fields are coupled in the presence of a field .
the computation of the quadratic form in the @xmath136 and @xmath264bosons again requires some care as one needs to carefully examine all terms in the expansion of the square root in ( [ mlnew ] ) , keeping in mind that both @xmath287 and @xmath119 are not small in @xmath83 . assembling the contributions from all terms in the series , we obtain @xmath289 where @xmath290 - 2 h_x \sqrt{\beta \gamma } + 8 j^*_{1 } \beta \gamma ( 1 + \lambda/(8(1 - \beta)^2 ) \label{echi}\ ] ] and @xmath291 diagonalizing then the @xmath292 matrix for @xmath199bosons and @xmath293 matrix for coupled @xmath136 and @xmath264bosons by usual means , we obtain three branches of quasiparticle excitations .
the dispersion of the @xmath199boson has a gap , @xmath294 .
this result is valid for any @xmath26 and is indeed the expected result since @xmath201-quanta describe the fluctuations of the transverse components of @xmath81 , and the @xmath36 mode of these fluctuations is a homogeneous precession of the magnetization around the direction of the field ( we recall that both condensates have momentum @xmath267 , and hence homogeneous ( @xmath37 ) modes of composite fields @xmath295 and @xmath265 correspond to @xmath36 mode of the @xmath199boson ) .
furthermore , we found after a diagonalization that one of the two coupled modes of the @xmath136 and @xmath264bosons remain gapless at @xmath36 , while the other has a gap which in the absence of the field is the same as the gap for the @xmath136quanta .
the presence of a gapless excitation is a direct consequence of the goldstone theorem .    for the calculation of the transverse magnetization
, we actually need only the ground state energy .
collecting the zero - point contributions , which appear after diagonalization , we obtain to order @xmath296 @xmath297 - \sum_k l^2_p~l^2_c~\frac{[c ( x_p + x_c ) + d ( 1 + x_p x_c)]^2}{\epsilon_p + \epsilon_c } \label{etot}\ ] ] where @xmath118 is given by ( [ echi ] ) , @xmath298 or @xmath113 , @xmath299 , and @xmath300 . simultaneously , substituting old bose operators in terms of new ones into @xmath301
, we also obtain @xmath302 evaluating @xmath303 from @xmath304 and using ( [ beta ] ) and ( [ dm ] ) , we obtain the result for @xmath305 to order @xmath100 .
the full expression is , however , too cumbersome to be presented here , so we analyze only the limiting cases and plot the result for arbitrary @xmath26 in fig .
[ figchi ] ( we used the same procedure of extending the result to @xmath84 as for the sublattice magnetization ) .
near the critical point , we found @xmath306 where @xmath307 , @xmath23 is given by ( [ eq21 ] ) , and we keep @xmath119 rather than @xmath249 in the @xmath100 terms . collecting the two contributions to @xmath274 , we obtain @xmath308 where @xmath141 .
the subleading term is a gaussian correction .
its divergence again implies that the self - consistent approach only works for @xmath309  @xcite . in the opposite limit , @xmath310
, a self - consistent theory is inapplicable . scaling considerations  @xcite
predict that in this limit @xmath311 , where @xmath142 is the critical exponent for spin correlations at criticality , and @xmath143 is a constant whose value can not be obtained in the present approach . at @xmath310 , we also have @xmath312 , where @xmath313 .    in the opposite limit , @xmath57 , we find @xmath314 where @xmath315 is the contribution from @xmath199 and @xmath264bosons , which is _ exactly _ the same as in the first - order spin - wave theory .
in other words , longitudinal fluctuations do not contribute to the susceptibility of a single - layer antiferromagnet .
this is consistent with the fact that the first - order @xmath25 result for @xmath284 agrees well with the numerical data  @xcite .
however , the longitudinal fluctuations are again small only for @xmath138 .
as @xmath26 increases , our expression for @xmath2 deviates from the spin - wave result , and eventually turns to zero much earlier than in the self - consistent spin - wave theory .
hertz , phys .
b * 14 * , 525 ( 1976 ) .
s.  chakravarty , b.  i.  halperin , and d.  r.nelson , phys .
* 60 * , 1057 ( 1988 ) ; phys .
b * 39 * , 2344 ( 1989 ) .
a.  v.  chubukov , s.  sachdev , and j.  ye , phys.rev .
b * 49 * , 11919 ( 1994 ) .
b. andraka and a.m. tsvelik , phys .
lett . * 67 * , 2886 ( 1991 ) ; a.m. tsvelik and m. reizer , phys .
b * 48 * , 9887 ( 1993 ) .
a.j . millis , phys . rev .
b * 48 * , 7183 ( 1993 ) .
a.  v.  chubukov , s.  sachdev , and a.  sokol , phys.rev .
b , to appear .
ioffe and a.j .
millis , preprint t. siegrist et al , phys .
b * 35 * , 7137 ( 1989 ) .
j.  m.  tranquada , g.  shirane , b.  keimer , s.shamoto , and m.  sato , phys .
b * 40 * , 4503 ( 1989 ) k.  hida , j.  phys .
* 61 * , 1013 ( 1992 ) a.  j.  millis and h.  monien , phys .
lett . , 2810 ( 1993 ) ; phys .
b * 50 * , 16606 ( 1994 ) .
a.  w.  sandvik and d.  j.  scalapino , phys .
rev.lett .
* 72 * , 2777 ( 1994 ) h. monien and a.  w.  sandvik , preprint .
a.  w.  sandvik , a.v .
chubukov , s. sachdev and d.  j.  scalapino , in preparation .
ding and m. makivic , phys .
b * 43 * , 3662 ( 1990 ) .
greven m. et al .
* 72 * , 1096 ( 1994 ) .
a.  v.  chubukov and th .
jolicoeur , phys .
b * 44 * , 12050 ( 1991 ) .
these calculations were performed in collaboration with d.  dalidovich .
a.  v.  chubukov , phys .
b * 43 * , 3334 ( 1991 ) .
canali , s.m .
girvin and m. wallin , phys . rev .
b * 45 * , 10131 ( 1992 ) ; g.e .
castilia and s. chakravarty , phys . rev . *
43 * , 13687 ( 1991 ) ; j. igarashi , phys .
b * 46 * , 10763 ( 1992 )
. a similar divergence of a perturbative correction to the critical value of the coupling was earlier found in the @xmath25 expansion for a square - lattice heisenberg model with the interaction between first and second neighbors [ a .. v .
chubukov , phys .
b * 43 * , 362 ( 1991 ) ] .
chubukov , phys .
lett . * 69 * , 832 ( 1992 ) ; rastelli e. , reatto r. , and tassi a. , jornal of physics c * 18 * , 353 ( 1985 ) ; a.v .
chubukov , s. sachdev and t. senthil , j. phys .
cm * 6 * , 8891 ( 1994 ) .
a.  v.  chubukov and s.  sachdev , phys .
lett . , 169 ( 1993 ) .
johnston , phys .
lett . * 62 * , 957 ( 1989 ) .
i. affleck , nucl .
b * 257 * , 397 ( 1985 ) .
s.  sachdev and j.  ye , phys .
lett .  * 69 * , 2411 ( 1992 ) .
m. takahashi , phys .
b * 36 * , 3791 ( 1987 ) .
s. sachdev and r. bhatt , phys .
b * 41 * , 9323 ( 1990 ) . notice that the square - root divergence of the gaussian term is consistent with the josephson relation @xmath316 where @xmath317 is a spacetime dimension . in the gaussian approximation , @xmath318 , i.e. , for @xmath319 , @xmath320 as in ( [ chirho ] ) .
singh , phys .
b * 39 * , 9760 ( 1989 ) .