Comprehensive ab initio investigation of the phase diagram of quasi-one-dimensional
molecular solids
Kazuyoshi Yoshimi1,†, Takahiro Misawa1,2,†, Takao Tsumuraya3,4, and Hitoshi Seo5,6
1Institute for Solid State Physics, University of Tokyo,
5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8581, Japan
2Beijing Academy of Quantum Information Sciences, Haidian District, Beijing 100193, China
3Priority Organization for Innovation and Excellence,
Kumamoto University, 2-39-1 Kurokami, Kumamoto 860-8555, Japan
4Magnesium Research Center, Kumamoto University, 2-39-1 Kurokami, Kumamoto 860-8555, Japan
5Condensed Matter Theory Laboratory, RIKEN, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
6Center for Emergent Matter Science (CEMS), RIKEN, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan and
†The authors contributed to this work equally.
(Dated: September 6, 2023)
An ab initio investigation of the family of molecular compounds TM2Xis conducted, where
TM is either TMTSF or TMTTF and Xtakes centrosymmetric monovalent anions. By deriving
the extended Hubbard-type Hamiltonians from first-principles band calculations and evaluating not
only the intermolecular transfer integrals but also the Coulomb parameters, we discuss their material
dependence in the unified phase diagram. Furthermore, we apply the many-variable variational
Monte Carlo method to accurately determine the symmetry-breaking phase transitions, and show
the development of the charge and spin orderings. We show that the material-dependent parameter
can be taken as the correlation effect, represented by the value of the screened on-site Coulomb
interaction Urelative to the intrachain transfer integrals, for the comprehensive understanding of
the spin and charge ordering in this system.
Introduction—. Molecular solids serve as textbook ma-
terials to study many-body physics in condensed mat-
ter, despite their complex crystal structures with many
atoms in the unit cell, owing to the success in modeling
the low-energy electronic properties based on the frontier
molecular orbitals [1,2]. A general challenge is to un-
derstand multiple symmetry-broken phases observed in
different systems in a systematic way, where the charge,
spin, and lattice degrees of freedom are coupled to each
other, based on the effective Hamiltonians and identify-
ing the factors governing them [3].
The family of compounds constituted by TMTSF (=
tetramethyltetraselenafulvalene) or TMTTF (= tetram-
ethyltetrathiafulvalene) molecules, which we call together
TM here, forming 2:1 salts with monovalent anions X−1,
TM2X, has been studied for decades as a typical example
showing such a rich variety of phases [2–5]. TMTSF2X
historically outstands as the first organic system under-
going superconductivity [6]. Unconventional supercon-
ductivity with an anisotropic gap function is realized,
whose ‘glue’ for the Cooper pair formation is the strong
spin fluctuation, supported by the pressure-temperature
phase diagram with the superconducting phase neigh-
boring an antiferromagnetic (AFM) phase driven by the
nesting of the Fermi surface [7–11].
Later, the isostructural TMTTF counterparts became
realized as strongly-correlated electron systems, owing to
the atomic substitution resulting in smaller bandwidths
than in the TMTSF compounds [5,12,13]. In particular,
at high temperatures of the order of 100 K, TMTTF2X
hosts a competition between a Mott insulating state, the
so-called dimer-Mott (DM) insulator, and a charge or-
dering (CO) state with electron-rich and poor molecules
spontaneously arranging to avoid the Coulomb repulsion:
a common framework for the understanding of correlated
quarter-filled systems [14–16]. In the low-temperature re-
gion (∼10K), on the other hand, where the magnetic in-
teractions start to develop between the localized spins in
the strongly correlated regime, the AFM state competes
with the spin-Peierls instability accompanying lattice dis-
tortion owing to the quasi-one-dimensionality [17–19].
The variation among the symmetry-breaking states,
in which both the charge and spin degrees of freedom
are involved, depending on the applied pressure to the
compounds and on the choice of the combination of TM
and X(chemical pressure), has been extensively dis-
cussed [20–24]. Nevertheless, there is room toward a
comprehensive understanding of them. There are dif-
ferent views on how the choice of Xand the amount
of applied pressure affect the microscopic parameters,
and the impact of the difference between TMTSF and
TMTTF is still obscure. Conventionally, the two sys-
tems are drawn in a unified pressure-temperature phase
diagram [4,5,22,23], as shown in Fig. 1(a). Although
there are different versions in the literature, here we sim-
ply draw the ‘ambient pressure’ positions of the represen-
tative compounds in an equally spaced manner, together
with the reported transition temperatures [13,27–30].
From the early days, in the TMTSF salts, it is dis-
cussed that the applied pressure increases the dimension-
ality [6]. On the other hand, the degree of dimeriza-
tion along the one-dimensional chain direction was also
pointed out to be an important factor, especially for the
TMTTF salts [31]. And more recently, to understand the
arXiv:2210.13726v2 [cond-mat.str-el] 4 Sep 2023