Temperature-field phase diagram of extreme magnetoresistance in lanthanum monopnictides

Abstract: The recent discovery of extreme magnetoresistance in LaSb introduced lanthanum monopnictides as a new platform to study topological semimetals (TSMs). In this work we report the discovery of extreme magnetoresistance in LaBi, confirming lanthanum monopnictides as a promising family of TSMs. These binary compounds with the simple rock-salt structure are ideal model systems to search for the origin of extreme magnetoresistance. Through a comparative study of magnetotransport effects in LaBi and LaSb, we construct a triangular temperature-field phase diagram that illustrates how a magnetic field tunes the electronic behavior in these materials. We show that the triangular phase diagram can be generalized to other topological semimetals with different crystal structures and different chemical compositions. By comparing our experimental results to band structure calculations, we suggest that extreme magnetoresistance in LaBi and LaSb originates from a particular orbital texture on their qasi-2D Fermi surfaces. The orbital texture, driven by spin-orbit coupling, is likely to be a generic feature of various topological semimetals.

\section{\label{introduction}Introduction}

Materials with large magnetoresistance (MR) have applications in electronics as magnetic memories  \cite{daughton_gmr_1999, rao_giant_1996}, in spintronics as magnetic valves \cite{wolf_spintronics:_2001}, and in industry as magnetic sensors or magnetic  switches \cite{lenz_review_1990, jankowski_hall_2011}.
The magnitude of MR is determined by the ratio  $R(H)/R(0)$ where $R$ is the electrical resistance and $H$ is the magnetic field.
This ratio is large either when the numerator $R(H)$ is large or when the denominator $R(0)$ is small.
A large numerator is responsible for the well-known Giant and Collosal Magnetoreistance (GMR and CMR) in magnetic semiconductors \cite{rao_giant_1996, ramirez_colossal_1997-1}.
A small denominator is reponsible for the recently-found extreme magnetoresistance (XMR) in Dirac semimetals (DSMs) such as Na$_3$Bi or Cd$_3$As$_2$ \cite{xiong_evidence_2015, liang_ultrahigh_2015}, in Weyl semimetals (WSMs) such as NbP, NbAs, or TaAs \cite{shekhar_extremely_2015, ghimire_magnetotransport_2015, huang_observation_2015}, and in layered semimetals (LSMs) such as WTe$_2$, NbSb$_2$, or PtSn$_4$ \cite{ali_large_2014, ali_correlation_2015, zhu_quantum_2015, wang_anisotropic_2014, mun_magnetic_2012}.
DSMs are characterized by strictly linear band crossing at the Dirac point. \cite{borisenko_experimental_2014}.
WSMs are characterized by noncentrosymmetric structures, Fermi arcs, and chiral anomaly \cite{xiong_evidence_2015, weng_weyl_2015, xu_discovery_2015_NbAs}.
LSMs are characterized by nearly perfect compensation between electron and hole bands \cite{ali_large_2014, wang_anisotropic_2014, pletikosic_electronic_2014}.
The recent discovery of XMR in LaSb that lacks strictly linear band crossing, non-centrosymmetric structure, chiral anomaly, and perfect compensation shows that none of these factors control XMR.
This work presents a systematic study to understand the origin of XMR.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Structure
\caption{\label{Structure}
(left) NaCl-type crystal structure of LaSb/LaBi with space group $Fm\bar{3}m$.
Gray spheres represent La and pink spheres represent Sb/Bi.
(right) Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (ESEM) image of a single crystal of LaBi showing its cubic symmetry and the cleaved [100] surface of the crystal.
X-ray patterns and structural refinements are presented in Appendix A.
}
\end{figure}

We report the discovery of XMR in LaBi with similar crystal structure and chemical composition to LaSb.
A recent theoretical work has pointed out that the simple NaCl-type structure of lanthanum monopnictides (Fig. \ref{Structure}) makes them ideal model systems to study the properties of topological semimetals \cite{zeng_topological_2015}.
Through a comparative study of longitudinal and transverse magnetotransport effects in the two related materials, LaSb and LaBi, we construct a \emph{triangular} $T$-$H$ phase diagram for XMR in lanthanum monopnictides.
From band structure calculations, quantum oscillations, and Hall Effect measurements, we suggest that XMR is rooted in a $d$-$p$ orbital mixing on the quasi-2D electron pockets that dominate the low temperature electrical transport in lanthanum monopnictides.
Further, we show that similar quasi-2D Fermi surfaces with mixed orbital content exist in other TSMs and so does the triangular $T$-$H$ phase diagram.
These results provide compelling evidence for XMR being rooted in quasi-2D Fermi surfaces with mixed $d$-$p$ orbital texture.

\section{\label{methods}Methods}

Single crystals of LaBi were grown using Indium flux.
The starting elements La:Bi:In = 1:1:20 with purity $99.999\%$ were placed in an alumina crucible inside an evacuated quartz tube.
The mixture was heated to 1000 C, slowly cooled to 700 C, and finally decanted in a centrifuge.
Similar procedure was used to grow single crystals of LaSb from tin flux \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.
Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX) on each sample confirmed a 1:1 ratio of lanthanum to pnictogen with $\pm 1 \%$ error.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of both materials are presented in Appendix A.

Measurements were performed on two samples: one single crystal of LaSb with residual resistivity $\rho_0 = 0.6$ $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~and residual resistivity ratio RRR $= \rho(300 {\textrm K}) / \rho_0=$ 170 and one single crystal of LaBi with $\rho_0 = 0.1$ $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~and RRR = 610.
The resistivity measurements were performed in a Quantum Design PPMS using a standard four probe method.
Hall voltages were measured with transverse contacts in negative and positive fields with the data antisymmetrized to calculate the transverse resistivity $\rho_{xy}$ and the Hall coefficient $R_H$ $=\rho_{xy} / H$.

\section{\label{results}Results}

\subsection{\label{temperature}Temperature dependence of resistivity}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{RT
\caption{\label{RT}
(a) Resistivity as a function of temperature in LaSb at several magnetic fields as indicated on the figure.
Temperature of resistivity minimum $T_m$~and inflection $T_i$~are marked on the black curve at $H=9$ T.
(b) $\rho(T)$ in LaBi at the same fields as in LaSb.
Inset shows $\rho(T)$ at low $T$ and low $H$ to capture the onset of resistivity activation at $H_{\rm onset} = 0.4\pm 0.1$ T.
(c) $\partial \rho / \partial T$ as a function of temperature in several fields as indicated on the figure for LaBi.
Inset shows the sign change temperature $T_m$~and the peak temperature $T_i$~for the green curve at $H = 3$ T.
(d) Arrhenius plot of $\log(\rho)$ versus $T^{-1}$ used to extract the activation energy $E_a$~at several fields as indicated on the figure for LaBi.
}
\end{figure}

Fig. \ref{RT}(a) and \ref{RT}(b) show the temperature dependence of resistivity in LaSb and LaBi.
In both systems, with decreasing temperature, resistivity decreases initially until a minimum at $T_m$, then increases until an inflection at $T_i$~where it gradually saturates to a plateau.
Fig. \ref{RT}(c) is a plot of $\partial \rho / \partial T$ versus $T$ for LaBi which marks $T_m$~as the sign change temperature and $T_i$~as the peak temperature.
With increasing field, $T_m$~increases but $T_i$~remains unchanged.
Fig. \ref{RT}(d) is an Arrhenius plot of $\log(\rho)$ versus $T^{-1}$ for LaBi.
It shows that between $T_m$~and $T_i$~the material behaves like semiconductors with $\rho(T) \propto \exp(E_a/k_{\rm B}T)$ where $E_a$~is an activation energy and $k_{\rm B}$ is the Boltzmann constant.
The activation energy at each field corresponds to the slope of the linear fits in Fig. \ref{RT}(d)
The LaSb versions of Figs. \ref{RT}(c) and \ref{RT}(d) are presented in Ref. \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.

Inset of Fig.~\ref{RT}(b) shows that the resistivity activation in LaBi is absent at zero field; it is switched on with a small magnetic field $H_{\rm onset}$~$= 0.4\pm 0.1$ T similar to LaSb \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.
Both materials have potential application as low temperature magnetic switches.
Below $T_m$, $\rho(T)$ in LaSb and LaBi is analogous to $\rho(T)$ in topological insulators (TIs) such as Bi$_2$Te$_2$Se and SmB$_6$.
In TIs the resistivity activation comes from an insulating bulk, and the plateau from conducting surface states \cite{ren_large_2010, jia_defects_2012, kim_surface_2013, kim_topological_2014}.
In LaSb and LaBi, a similar activation and plateau appear only when time reversal symmetry is broken by a small magnetic field.
In section \ref{angular}, we show that the conduction in the plateau region of these materials is dominated by quasi-2D bulk states in analogy to the strictly 2D surface states of TIs.

\subsection{\label{phase}Phase Diagram}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{PD
\caption{\label{PD}
(a) $T_m$~(circles) and $T_i$~(squares) plotted as a function of $H$ in LaSb.
The two temperature scales merge at $H_{\rm onset}$~$\simeq 0.4$ T and diverge with increasing field giving rise to a triangle.
In the triangular region, $\rho(T)$ shows field-induced activation.
The silver region above the triangle is where $\rho(T)$ behaves like a metal.
The gold region below the triangle is where $\rho(T)$ plateaus.
(b) Similar triangular phase diagram for LaBi.
(c) Activation energy $E_a$~extracted from the Arrhenius analysis in the shaded triangular region and plotted as a function of magnetic field for LaSb.
(d) $E_a$~plotted as a function of field for LaBi with a behavior comparable to LaSb.
}
\end{figure}

By plotting $T_m$~and $T_i$~as a function of magnetic field, we construct the temperature-field phase diagram of LaSb and LaBi in Fig.~\ref{PD}(a) and \ref{PD}(b).
In both systems, $T_m$~increases with increasing field while $T_i$~stays unchanged.
The shaded triangle between $T_m$~and $T_i$~marks the region of activated resistivity.
Fig. \ref{PD}(c) and \ref{PD}(d) show that the activation energy $E_a$~starts from zero at $H_{\rm onset}$~and increases with a non-monotonic field dependence.
$E_a$~at each field is extracted from the Arrhenius analysis explained in section \ref{temperature} and Fig. \ref{RT}(d).
Notably $E_a$~is comparable in both systems and scales only with the magnetic field showing that the resistivity activation is controlled entirely by the magnetic field.

The triangular phase diagrams in Figs. \ref{PD}(a) and \ref{PD}(b) highlight three distinct resistivity behaviors in Figs. \ref{RT}(a) and \ref{RT}(b).
The shaded triangle is the region of activated resistivity with semiconducting behavior.
In the silver region above the triangle ($T>$ $T_m$) the semiconducting behavior is replaced with the metallic conduction.
In the gold region below the triangle ($T<$ $T_m$) the semiconduting behavior is replaced with the plateau.
$T_m$~and $T_i$~merge at $H_{\rm onset}$~and diverge as the field is increased.
In section \ref{universal} we show that a similar phase diagram can be constructed from the existing data in several transition-metal-based TSMs.

\subsection{\label{extreme}Field dependence of resistivity and extreme magnetoresistance}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{RH
\caption{\label{RH}
(a) Magnetoresistance as a function of field in LaSb sample with RRR = 170  at several temperatures indicated on the figure.
SdH oscillations appear at higher fields.
(b) MR as a function of field for LaBi sample with RRR = 610.
 %
(c) MR at $T = 2$ K and $H = 9$ T plotted as a function of RRR for several LaSb (square) and LaBi (circle) samples from this work and Ref. \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.
Empty symbols mark the two samples studied here in detail.
(d) Inset shows the oscillatory part of resistivity, $\Delta \rho (H^{-1})$, at several temperatures for LaBi.
Fast Fourier Transform of these data are plotted as a function of frequency with a peak at $F_0=217$~T.
}
\end{figure}

Figs. \ref{RH}(a) and \ref{RH}(b) show magnetoresistance, MR = $100\times[R(H)-R(0)]/R(0)$, as a function of magnetic field from $H=0$ to 9 T at several temperatures.
The black and the yellow curves at $T$ = 2 K and 5 K superimpose since both curves are in the plateau region where MR reaches its \emph{extreme} limit in excess of $10^5 \%$.
Comparing Figs. \ref{RH}(a,b) with the phase diagram Figs. \ref{PD}(a,b) shows that MR is small in the bulk metallic phase at $T>T_m$, it starts to increase in the semiconducting phase at $T_m>T>T_i$, and reaches the extreme limit in the plateau region at $T<T_i$.
Ref. \cite{tafti_consequences_2015} shows that the magnitude of XMR is sensitive to the residual resistivity ratio RRR {\it i.e.}~to the sample quality.
We quote RRR values for the LaSb and the LaBi samples in Fig. \ref{RH}(a) and \ref{RH}(b) to prevent the illusion that XMR in LaSb is smaller than LaBi.
Fig. \ref{RH}(c) is a plot of MR as a function of RRR for several LaSb and LaBi specimens with different RRR values.
Empty symbols mark the two samples presented in this work.
MR in both materials follows the same quadratic dependence on RRR showing a comparable XMR in both compounds given comparable sample quality.
A similar quadratic dependence of XMR on RRR is reported in the flux-grown WTe$_2$ samples \citep{ali_correlation_2015}.

The ripples at higher fields in Figs. \ref{RH}(a) and \ref{RH}(b) are Shubnikov-de Haas (SdH) oscillations.
The purely oscillatory part of resistivity $\Delta\rho (H)$ is obtained by subtracting a smooth $H^2$ background from $\rho(H)$.
$\Delta \rho$ is periodic in $H^{-1}$ as seen in the inset of Fig. \ref{RH}(d).
Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) of these data gives a peak at $F_0=271 \pm 5$ T in Fig. \ref{RH}(d) for LaBi.
Similar analysis gives $F_0=212 \pm 5$ T for LaSb \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.
The principal frequencies for LaSb and LaBi do not match the known frequencies of tin and indium ruling out flux inclusion \cite{deacon_ultrasonic_1973, cowey_quantum_1974}.

\subsection{\label{angular}Angle dependence of XMR and SdH oscillations}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Angle
\caption{\label{Angle}
(a) Resistivity as a function of magnetic field in LaSb at five representative angles as indicated.
MR decreases with increasing $\theta$.
Shubnikov - de Haas (SdH) frequencies vary non-monotonically with $\theta$.
LaSb data are adapted from Ref. \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}.
(b) $\rho(H)$ in LaBi at five representative angles as indicated.
MR stays positive at all angles in both systems.
(c) SdH frequency as a function of angle in LaSb.
Empty gray circles are de Haas-van Alphen (dHvA) data from Ref. \cite{kitazawa_haas-van_1983} limited to lower angles.
Solid lines are fits to Eq. \ref{cos} with $F_0 = 212$ T.
(d) SdH oscillation frequency as a function of angle in LaBi.
Solid lines are fits to Eq. \ref{cos} with $F_0 = 271$ T.
Empty gray symbols are dHvA data from Ref. \cite{hasegawa_fermi_1985}.
}
\end{figure}

Figs. \ref{Angle}(a) and \ref{Angle}(b) show the angle dependence of XMR in LaSb and LaBi.
The direction of magnetic field $H$ and electrical current $I$ with respect to [100] crystal plane are shown schematically.
XMR is maximum when $H\perp I$ and minimum when $H\| I$.
It remains positive at all angles.
Figs. \ref{Angle}(c) and \ref{Angle}(d) show that the principal frequency in LaSb and LaBi follows the angle dependence of a two dimensional Fermi surface:
\begin{equation}
F = \frac{F_0}{\cos \left( \theta - \frac{n \pi}{2} \right)}
\label{cos}
\end{equation}
where $n$ is an integer, $\theta$ is the angle, and $F_0$ is the principal frequency at $\theta = 0$.
These data show that the main frequencies at $F_0 = 212$ T in LaSb and $F_0 = 271$ T in LaBi belong to quasi-2D Fermi surfaces.
Fig. \ref{Angle}(c) shows a good agreement between our data and prior studies of magnetic oscillations (gray symbols) \cite{kitazawa_haas-van_1983, settai_acoustic_1993, yoshida_cyclotron_2001, hasegawa_fermi_1985}.
Similar angle dependence of quantum oscillations in topological insulators has been taken as evidence for strictly 2D surface states of TIs \cite{ren_large_2010, li_two-dimensional_2014, tan_unconventional_2015}.
SdH frequencies of LaSb and LaBi shown in Fig. \ref{Angle} come from quasi-2D bulk states and not from strictly 2D surface states (section \ref{bandstructure}).
As pointed out in Ref. \cite{tafti_consequences_2015}, the combination of 2D or quasi-2D Fermiology and band inversion gives rise to analogous transport phenomenology in TIs and TSMs.

\subsection{\label{bandstructure}Band structure and the orbital texture of the quasi-2D Fermi surface}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{Calc
\caption{\label{Calc}
(a) Band structure of LaSb with two hole pockets that cross $E_F$ near $\Gamma$ and one electron pocket that crosses $E_F$ near $X$.
The crossing between lanthanum $d$-states (thin bands) and Antimony $p$-states (thick bands) near $X$ gives a $d$-$p$ texture to the electron pocket due to spin-orbit coupling.
The inset shows a small gap at this crossing.
(b) Band structure of LaBi with the same $d$-$p$ crossing between La thin bands and Bi thick bands near $X$.
(c) Fermi surfaces of LaSb visualized in the first Brillouin zone with the central 3D hole pockets and the peripheral quasi-2D electron pockets.
SdH frequencies in Fig. \ref{Angle} correspond to these quasi-2D electron pockets.
(d) Similar Fermi surfaces for LaBi.
}
\end{figure}

Figs. \ref{Calc}(a) and \ref{Calc}(b) show the results of our band structure calculations on LaSb and LaBi using the WIEN2k code \cite{blaha_wien2k_2001}.
In both systems, two hole bands at the $\Gamma$-point and one electron band near the $X$-point cross $E_F$.
Figs. \ref{Calc}(c) and \ref{Calc}(d) visualize the corresponding Fermi surfaces with the two hole surfaces at the center of the Brillouin zone and the quasi-2D electron pockets crossing the faces.
Prior studies of quantum oscillations in the magnetic and acoustic channels have detected these hole and electron Fermi surfaces in both materials \cite{kitazawa_haas-van_1983, settai_acoustic_1993, yoshida_cyclotron_2001, hasegawa_fermi_1985}.
The principal SdH frequencies that we observe in LaSb ($F_0=212$ T) and LaBi ($F_0=271$ T) match the cross-sectional area of the quasi-2D surface at the X-point.
Therefore, electrical transport in the plateau region of these materials is dominated by the quasi-2D electron pocket.

We plot Antimony $p$-states as thick bands and lanthanum $d$-states as thin bands in Figs. \ref{Calc}(a) and \ref{Calc}(b).
These states cross near the $X$-point and form the quasi-2D electron pocket with a mixed $d$-$p$ orbital texture.
The inset in both Figures show a small gap at the crossing point driven by strong spin-orbit coupling similar to topological insulators.
Therefore, the quasi-2D pocket that dominates the low temperature transport could acquire topological protection against scattering similar to the surface states of TIs.
A magnetic field could interfere with the $d$-$p$ orbital mixing and activate strong scattering on these pockets giving rise to XMR.
Recent observations of circular dichroism by ARPES confirms the same orbital mixing in WTe$_2$ \cite{jiang_signature_2015}.
In Appendix \ref{DFTs} we show that the band structure of WTe$_2$ and several other topological semimetals have the same orbital texture as lanthanum monopnictides (Fig. \ref{Calc_All}).
In section \ref{universal}, we show that these other TSMs also have the same triangular phase diagram as lanthanum monopictides.
These observations strongly suggest that XMR in various TSMs is a result of orbital texture on quasi-2D Fermi surfaces.

\subsection{\label{SdH}Effective mass and Dingle temperature}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{QO
\caption{\label{QO}
(a) Amplitude of the Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of SdH oscillations with $F_0=212$ T plotted as a function of temperature for LaSb.
Solid line is a fit to the Lifshitz-Kosevich formula (Eq. \ref{lifshitz}).
The effective mass of carriers is extracted from the fit and reported on the figure.
(b) Lifshitz-Kosevich analysis for LaBi.
Effective mass in LaBi is slightly larger than LaSb.
(c) FFT amplitudes modulated by the Lifshitz-Kosevich factor plotted as a function of $H^{-1}$ for LaSb.
Solid line is a fit to the Dingle formula (Eq. \ref{dingle}).
Dingle temperature $T_D$ is reported on the figure.
(d) Dingle analysis for LaBi.
}
\end{figure}

Using the Onsager relation, we extract the Fermi wave vector and the density of carriers on the quasi-2D electron pocket from the frequency of SdH oscillations:
\begin{equation}
F = \frac{\phi_0}{2\pi ^2} A_{\rm ext} ~,~ A_{\rm ext} = \pi k_F^2 ~,~ k_F = \left(4 \pi n_{2D} \right)^{1/2}
\label{onsager}
\end{equation}
where $\phi_0$, $A_{\rm ext}$, $k_F$, and $n_{2D}$ are the quantum of flux, the extremal orbit area, the Fermi wave vector, and the two dimensional carrier density for spin filtered electrons.
Fig. \ref{RH}(d) shows $F = 271$ T in LaBi, therefore, $k_{\rm F} = 9.1\times 10^6$ cm$^{-1}$ and $n_{2D} = 6.6 \times 10^{12}$ cm$^{-2}$.
Corresponding values for LaSb are given in Table \ref{T1}.
The oscillation amplitude damps with increasing temperature and with decreasing magnetic field (Fig. \ref{RH}(d)) according to:
\begin{equation}
\Delta \rho = R_L R_D \sin \left( \frac{2 \pi F}{H} + \phi \right)
\label{damp}
\end{equation}
$R_L$ is the Lifshitz-Kosevich factor that captures damping with increasing temperature:
\begin{equation}
R_{L} = \frac{X}{\sinh(X)} \qquad , \qquad X = \frac{\alpha T m^*}{H}
\label{lifshitz}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha = 2 \pi ^2 k_B m_e / e \hbar$ is a constant made of Boltzmann factor $k_B$, bare electron mass $m_e$, electron charge $e$, and reduced Plank constant $\hbar$.
$m^*$ is the effective electron mass in units of $m_e$.
$R_D$ is the Dingle factor that captures damping with decreasing field:
\begin{equation}
R_D = \exp(-X_D) \qquad , \qquad X_D = \frac{\alpha T_D m^*}{H}
\label{dingle}
\end{equation}
where $T_D$ is the Dingle temperature from which the relaxation rate $\tau$, the mean free path $\ell$, and the mobility $\mu$ of charge carriers can be determined using:
\begin{equation}
k_B T_{D} = \frac{\hbar}{2 \pi \tau} \quad , \quad \ell = v_F \tau \quad , \quad \mu = \frac{e \tau}{m^*}
\label{mfp}
\end{equation}
with the Fermi velocity $v_F = \hbar k_F / m^*$.

Figs. \ref{QO}(a) and \ref{QO}(b) show the Lifshitz-Kosevich fit (Eq. \ref{lifshitz}) to the temperature dependence of the oscillation amplitude.
The resulting effective masses are $m^*=0.22\,m_e$ for LaSb and $m^*=0.35\,m_e$ for LaBi.
Figs. \ref{QO}(c) and \ref{QO}(d) show the Dingle fit (Eq. \ref{dingle}) to the field dependence of the oscillation amplitude that determines $\tau$, $\ell$, and $\mu$ for the carriers in the plateau region of LaSb and LaBi.
Table \ref{T1} summarizes all the parameters from SdH oscillations and compares them to the corresponding values in the topological insulator Bi$_2$Te$_2$Se~\cite{ren_large_2010}.

\begin{table*
\caption{\label{T1}
Fermi surface parameters are tabulated for LaSb, LaBi, and Bi$_2$Te$_2$Se~from the analysis explained in section \ref{SdH} (Eqs. \ref{onsager} to \ref{mfp}). Data for Bi$_2$Te$_2$Se~are adapted from Ref. \cite{ren_large_2010}.
}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
Material & $F$ & $m^*/m_e$ & $T_{\rm D}$ & $k_{\rm F}$ & $n_{\rm 2D}$ & $v_{\rm F}$ & $\tau$ & $\ell$ & $\mu_e$
\\
         & [T] &                  &     [K]     & [cm$^{-1}$] &  [cm$^{-2}$] & [cm s$^{-1}$]&  [s]   &  [nm]  & [cm$^2$V$^{-1}$s$^{-1}$]
\\
\colrule
LaSb & $212$ & $0.22$ & $7.8$ & $8.0 \times 10^6$ & $5.1 \times 10^{12}$ & $4.2 \times 10^7$ & $1.6 \times 10^{-13}$ & 66 & 1250
\\
LaBi & $271$ & $0.35$ & $3.7$ & $9.1 \times 10^6$ & $6.6 \times 10^{12}$ & $3.0 \times 10^7$ & $3.3 \times 10^{-13}$ & 98 & 1650
\\
Bi$_2$Te$_2$Se & 64 & 0.1 & 25.5 & $4.4 \times 10^6$ & $1.5 \times 10^{12}$ & $4.6 \times 10^7$ & $4.8 \times 10^{-14}$ & 22 & 760

\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}

\subsection{\label{halleffect}Hall effect and the two band model}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{RhT
\caption{\label{RhT}
(a) $R_H$ at $H=9$ T plotted as a function of temperature from $T = 2$ to 300 K in LaSb (red) and LaBi (blue).
There is one sign change in LaBi at $T \simeq 20$ K and two sign changes in LaSb at $T \simeq 40$ K and 170 K.
(b) $\rho(T)$ at $H=0$ T and $T<40$ K in LaSb and LaBi.
Solid lines are fits of the form $\rho = \rho_0 + AT^4$ to determine $\rho_0=0.6$ $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~in LaSb and 0.1 $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~in LaBi.
(c) $\rho_{xy}$ plotted as a function of field in LaBi from $H=-9$ to 9 T.
The blue curve at $T = 2$ K fits to the two band model Eq. \ref{twob} (solid yellow line).
The cyan curve at $T = 200$ K has a linear $H$ dependence.
(d) $\rho_{xy}$ plotted as a function of field in LaSb from $H=-9$ to 9 T.
The red curve at $T = 2$ K fits to the two band model Eq. \ref{twob} (solid yellow line).
The magenta curve at $T = 200$ K remains non-linear in $H$.
It is five times magnified for better visibility.
}
\end{figure}

Fig.~\ref{RhT}(a) shows temperature dependence of the Hall coefficient $R_H = \rho_{xy} / H$ at $H = 9$ T in LaSb (red) and LaBi (blue).
LaBi shows a clear two band behavior with positive $R_H$~above $T \simeq 20$ K and negative $R_H$~of comparable magnitude below $T \simeq 20$ K.
LaSb shows a strong negative $R_H$~signal below $T \simeq 40$ K and a weak positive signal above $T \simeq 40$ K that undergoes a second sign change at $T \simeq 170$ K.
Fig. \ref{RhT}(b) shows power law fits to the resistivity data at low temperatures from which we extract residual resistivity $\rho_0=0.1$ $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~in LaBi and $\rho_0=0.6$ $\mathrm{\mu\Omega\, cm}$~in LaSb.
Using the $T=0$ limit of $R_H$~from Fig. \ref{RhT}(a) and $\rho_0$ from Fig. \ref{RhT}(b) we can estimate the transport mobility from the single band expression $\mu=R_H/\rho_0=3.2\times 10^4$ cm$^2$V$^{-1}$s$^{-1}$~in LaSb and $\mu=2.5\times 10^4$ cm$^2$V$^{-1}$s$^{-1}$~in LaBi.
Single band estimates for TSMs need to be taken with caution due to their multi-band nature.
Note that these values are an order of magnitude larger than the more accurate values from quantum oscillations (table \ref{T1}).

Figs. \ref{RhT}(c) and \ref{RhT}(d) show the multiband behavior in the field dependence of the Hall resistivity $\rho_{xy}$ in LaBi and LaSb.
Solid yellow lines in both figures are fits to the two band expression for $\rho_{xy}$ at $T=2$ K \cite{takahashi_low-temperature_2011, xia_indications_2013}:
\begin{equation}
\rho_{xy} = \frac{H}{e}\frac{ ( n_h \mu_h^2 - n_e \mu_e^2 ) + ( n_h - n_e ) ( \mu_h \mu_e)^2 H^2}{ ( n_h  \mu_h + n_e \mu_e ) ^2 + ( n_h - n_e )^2 ( \mu_h \mu_e )^2 H^2}
\label{twob}
\end{equation}
where $n_{e/h}$ and $\mu_{e/h}$ are the electron/hole carrier density and mobility.
Since the electron carriers at low temperatures come from the quasi-2D Fermi surfaces, we use the values in table \ref{T1} for $\mu_e$ and use $n_e = n^{2D}/d$ to calculate the effective 3D electron density where $d$ is the inter-layer spacing.
The fit gives an estimate for the hole carrier concentration $n_h$ and mobility $\mu_h$ which we summarize in table \ref{T2}.
The concentration of the hole carriers in LaBi agrees with a rough estimate using the single band formula $n_H = 1/eR_H = 3.1 \times 10^{21}$ cm$^{-3}$ using $R_H = 2$ mm$^3$C$^{-1}$ from Fig. \ref{RhT}(a).
This single band estimate in LaBi at high temperatures is justified by the linear field dependence of $\rho_{xy}$ at $T = 200$ K as seen in Fig. \ref{RhT}(c).
On the contrary, $\rho_{xy}$ in LaSb remains nonlinear at high temperatures as seen in Fig. \ref{RhT}(d) which explains the second sign change at $T \simeq 170$ K in Fig. \ref{RhT}(a).

These results show that the details of electron-hole compensation is different between LaSb and LaBi, however, Fig. \ref{RH}(c) suggests that XMR has comparable magnitude in both systems.
Having electron-hole compensation is necessary for large MR as shown in Silver dichalchogenides \cite{xu_large_1997, lee_band-gap_2002} but the detailed degree of compensation does not determine the magnitude of XMR in TSMs.
Our hypothesis is that the orbital texture on the electron band plays the key role in determining the magnitude of XMR in topological semimetals.
Comparing the mobility of hole pockets from Table \ref{T2} with electron pockets from table \ref{T1} shows that $\mu_h$ is an order of magnitude smaller than $\mu_e$ proving that the quasi-2D electron pockets indeed dominate electrical transport at low temperatures where XMR appears.

\begin{table
\caption{\label{T2}
The hole carrier density $n_h$ and mobility $\mu_h$ from the two band fit (Eq. \ref{twob}) are listed for LaSb and LaBi.
}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
Material & $n_h$ & $\mu_h$
\\
         & [cm$^{-3}$] & [cm$^2$V$^{-1}$s$^{-1}$]
\\
\colrule
LaSb & $7.0\times 10^{20}$ & $650$
\\
LaBi & $2.7\times 10^{20}$ & $780$

\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}

\section{\label{universal}Triangular Phase Diagram in Topological Semimetals}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{UPD
\caption{\label{UPD}
(a) Triangular $T$-$H$ phase diagram of LaBi, same as in Fig. \ref{PD}(a), compared to three different topological semimetals in the subsequent panels.
(b) Triangular $T$-$H$ phase diagram in NbSb$_2$ constructed with the data from Ref. \cite{wang_anisotropic_2014}.
$T_m$~(circles) and $T_i$~(squares) are the temperatures of resistivity minimum and inflection as explained in section \ref{temperature}.
Empty symbols are used for all the adapted data.
(c) Triangular $T$-$H$ phase diagram in PtSn$_4$ constructed with the data from Ref. \cite{mun_magnetic_2012}.
(d) Triangular $T$-$H$ phase diagram in WTe$_2$ constructed wit the data from Ref. \cite{ali_large_2014}.
Aside from variations in the absolute values of $T_m$~and $T_i$~which depend on sample purity and XRM magnitude, these different topological semimetals share the same phase diagram.
}
\end{figure}

Our results in LaSb and LaBi can be summarized as below.\\
(1) $\rho(T)$ at zero field shows a nearly perfect metal with very small $\rho_0$ (Fig. \ref{RT}).\\
(2) $\rho(T)$ in field shows a particular profile with a field-induced activation at $T_m$~ and a plateau below $T_i$~(Fig. \ref{RT}).\\
(3) The field dependence of $T_m$~and $T_i$~constructs a triangular phase diagram where $T_m$~and $T_i$~diverge with increasing field and converge with decreasing field (Fig. \ref{PD}).\\
(4) The field-induced activation of resistivity results in extreme magnetoresistance (XMR) that correlates with RRR (Fig. \ref{RH}).\\
(5) The angle dependence of SdH oscillations shows that quasi-2D Fermi surfaces dominate electrical transport at low temperatures (Fig. \ref{Angle}).\\
(6) From the band structure, these quasi-2D surfaces have a mixed $d$-$p$ orbital texture due to spin-orbit coupling (Fig. \ref{Calc}).
XMR is possibly the consequence of disturbing such orbital texture by a magnetic field.\\
(7) The temperature and the field dependence of Hall effect show multi-band characteristics.
A better electron-hole compensation is observed in LaBi compared to LaSb (Fig. \ref{RhT}), however, XMR is comparable between the two compounds as shown in Fig. \ref{RH}(c).

These results suggest that XMR in LaSb and LaBi originate from the mixed orbital texture of their quasi-2D Fermi surfaces.
In Appendix \ref{DFTs} we show that a similar orbital texture exists in the Fermiology of other topological semimetals with XMR including NbSb$_2$, PtSn$_4$, and WTe$_2$ (Fig. \ref{Calc_All}).
The $\rho(T)$ and $\rho(H)$ profiles of these seemingly different materials are quite similar with a resistivity minimum at $T_m$~and inflection at $T_i$.
From the existing transport data in NbSb$_2$ \cite{wang_anisotropic_2014}, PtSn$_4$ \cite{mun_magnetic_2012}, and WTe$_2$ \cite{ali_large_2014}, we extract $T_m$~and $T_i$, construct their $T$-$H$ phase diagrams, and compare to the triangular phase diagram of LaBi in Fig. \ref{UPD}.
Remarkably, the same triangular phase diagram is observed despite the chemical and structural differences of these materials.
Figs. \ref{UPD} and \ref{Calc_All} provide compelling evidence to identify orbital mixing on quasi-2D Fermi surfaces as the origin of XMR in TSMs.

\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENTS}

We thank
S.~R.~Julian,
and
L. Muechler
for helpful discussions.
This research was supported by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation under the EPiQS program, grant GBMF 4412.
S.K.K is supported by the ARO MURI on topological insulators, grant W911NF-12-1-0461.


CaIrO3 post-perovskite, a j = 1/2 quasi-one-dimensional antiferromagnet

Abstract: The 5d5 iridate CaIrO3 is isostructural with the post-perovskite phase of MgSiO3, recently shown to occur under extreme pressure in the lower Earth's mantle. It therefore serves as an analogue of post-perovskite MgSiO3 for a wide variety of measurements at ambient conditions or achievable with conventional multianvile pressure modules. By multireference configuration-interaction calculations we here provide essential information on the chemical bonding and magnetic interactions in CaIrO3. We predict a large antiferromagnetic superexchange of 120 meV along the c axis, the same size with the interactions in the cuprate superconductors, and ferromagnetic couplings smaller by an order of magnitude along a. CaIrO3 can thus be regarded as a j = 1/2 quasi-one-dimensional antiferromagnet. While this qualitatively agrees with the stripy magnetic structure proposed by resonant x-ray diffraction, the detailed microscopic picture emerging from our study, in particular, the highly uneven admixture of t2g components, provides a clear prediction for resonant inelastic x-ray scattering experiments.

\section{Introduction}

Iridium oxide compounds are at the heart of intensive experimental and theoretical investigations
in solid state physics.
The few different structural varieties displaying Ir ions in octahedral coordination and
tetravalent $5d^5$ valence states, in particular, have recently become a fertile ground for
studies of new physics driven by the interplay between strong spin-orbit interactions and
electron correlations \cite{214Ir_kim_2009}.
The spin-orbit couplings (SOC's) are sufficiently large to split the Ir $t_{2g}^5$
manifold into well separated $j\!=\!3/2$ and $j\!=\!1/2$ states.
The former are fully occupied while the latter are only half filled.
It appears that the widths of the $j\!=\!1/2$ bands, $w\!\sim\!Nt$, where $t$ is an effective
Ir-Ir hopping integral and $N$ is the coordination number, are comparable to the strength
of the onsite Coulomb repulsion $U$.
For smaller coordination numbers, such as $N\!=\!3$ in the layered honeycomb systems
Li$_2$IrO$_3$ and Na$_2$IrO$_3$ and $N\!=\!4$ for square-lattice Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ and Ba$_2$IrO$_4$
and the post-perovskite CaIrO$_3$, the undoped compounds are insulating at all temperatures and a
$j\!=\!1/2$ Mott-Hubbard type picture seems to be appropriate
\cite{214Ir_kim_2009,213Ir_singh_2012,CaIrO3_ohgushi_2006}.
For larger coordination numbers like $N\!=\!6$ in the pyrochlore structure, the $t_{2g}^5$
Ir oxides are metallic at high T's and display transitions to antiferromagnetic (AF)
insulating states on cooling \cite{227Ir_matsuhira_2011}.
Here, a Slater type picture in which the gap opening is intimately related to the onset of
AF order might be more appropriate, as proposed for example for Os oxide perovskite systems with
$N\!=\!6$ \cite{NaOsO3_calder_2012}.
Nevertheless, also more exotic ground states such as a Mott topological insulator \cite{227Ir_pesin_2010} or
a Weyl semimetal \cite{227Ir_savrasov_2011} have been proposed for the pyrochlore iridates.

\begin{figure}[!b]
\includegraphics[width=0.90\columnwidth]{Fig_1.eps}
\caption{
Local coordination and the main, $\pi$-type $5d_{xz}$-$2p_x$-$5d_{xz}$ AF superexchange path
for corner-sharing IrO$_6$ octahedra along the $c$ axis in CaIrO$_3$, see text.
Nearest-neighbor O ions around the two Ir sites in the center of the figure are shown as small light-grey
spheres.
Ca ions above and below the IrO$_3$ layer are not displayed.
The O $2p$ tails of the active Ir $d_{xz}$ orbitals are overlapping at the bridging O site.
}
\label{fig01}
\end{figure}

Besides the SOC's and Coulomb interactions, one important additional energy scale is the magnitude
of the splittings within the Ir $t_{2g}$ shell.
Such splittings may arise from distortions of the O octahedron around the Ir site and also
from the anisotropy of the farther surroundings.
In this respect, highly anisotropic systems such as the post-perovskite CaIrO$_3$ provide
an ideal playground for new insights into the interplay between SOC's and lattice distortions.
In the layered post-perovskite structure, IrO$_6$ octahedra in the $ac$ layers share corners
along the crystallographic $c$ axis, see Fig.~\ref{fig01}, and have common edges along $a$ \cite{CaIrO3_rodi_1965}.
The Ir-O bonds along the corner-sharing chains are substantially shorter than for the edge-sharing
links, 1.94 vs.~2.07  \AA, which suggests a stabilization of the $xy$-like orbital with respect
to the $xz$ and $yz$ terms.
Additionally, small splittings between the $xz$ and $yz$ components may in principle arise due
to the $a$-$b$ crystal anisotropy.

The precise nature of the relativistic $5d^5$ ground-state wave function obviously depends on
the size of the Ir $t_{2g}$ splittings.
Further, the on-site $5d^5$ electron configuration and the kind of Ir-O-Ir path along a given
direction determine the sign and magnitude of the magnetic exchange couplings.
{\it Ab initio} calculations where all these effects and interactions are treated on equal footing
are therefore highly desirable.
For this, we focus on the post-perovskite phase of CaIrO$_3$, which has received significant attention
from geologists in recent years because the same crystalline structure is adopted by MgSiO$_3$ in
the lower Earth's mantle \cite{pPv_mgsio3_murakami04,pPv_mgsio3_oganov04}.
In contrast to MgSiO$_3$, the post-perovskite phase of CaIrO$_3$ can be synthesized even at ambient
pressure.
Since measurements are less complicated in ambient conditions, CaIrO$_3$ has been used extensively as
an analogue of MgSiO$_3$ post-perovskite for structural, mechanical, and transport studies
\cite{pPv_cairo3_miyajima06,pPv_cairo3_martin07,pPv_cairo3_ballaran07,pPv_cairo3_hunt12}.
To unveil the valence electronic structure of CaIrO$_3$ we here carry out {\it ab initio} wave-function
quantum chemical calculations.
With no SOC's, splittings as large as 0.8 eV are found for the $t_{2g}$ levels of CaIrO$_3$.
The $5d^5$ relativistic ground-state wave function therefore displays a highly uneven admixture of
$xy$, $xz$, and $yz$ character, which contradicts the interpretation of recent resonant x-ray
diffraction (RXD) experiments \cite{CaIrO3_ohgushi_2011}.
For the corner-sharing octahedra, the quantum chemical calculations further predict large AF
superexchange couplings \cite{superexchange_anderson59} of 120 meV, about the same size with the
magnetic interactions in the parent compounds of the high-$T_{\rm c}$ cuprate superconductors.
The lowest $d$-$d$ excited states are two doublets at approximately 0.7 and 1.4 eV, originating from the
$j\!=\!3/2$ quartet in an ideal cubic environment.
This is the largest splitting reported so far for the $j\!=\!3/2$ quartet in $d^5$ systems
and singles out CaIrO$_3$ as an unique material in which both the SOC and the non-cubic crystal
field splittings are of the order of half eV or larger.

To investigate the local Ir $d$-level splittings, multiconfiguration self-consistent-field
(MCSCF) and multireference configuration-interaction (MRCI) calculations \cite{bookQC_2000}
are performed on embedded clusters made of one reference IrO$_6$ octahedron, ten adjacent Ca
sites, and four nearest-neighbor (NN) IrO$_6$ octahedra.
That a realistic representation of ions at NN polyhedra guarantees highly accurate results for
the $d$-level electronic structure at the central site was earlier pointed out for correlated $3d^1$,
$3d^2$, and $3d^9$ oxide compounds \cite{CuO2_dd_hozoi11,TiVoxychlorides_dd_bogdanov11,QP_bands_cupr_hozoi07}.
The farther solid-state environment is modeled as a one-electron effective potential which in
an ionic picture reproduces the Madelung field in the cluster region.
All calculations are performed with the {\sc molpro} quantum chemical software \cite{molpro_brief}.
We employed energy-consistent relativistic pseudopotentials for Ir \cite{ECP_Stoll_5d} and Ca
\cite{ECP_Stoll_Ca_group} and Gaussian-type valence basis functions
\cite{ECP_Stoll_5d,ECP_Stoll_Ca_group,GBas_molpro_2p,ANOs_pierloot_95} (for details, see Supplementary Material \cite{ CaIrO3_supmat}).
For the ground-state calculations, the orbitals within each finite cluster are variationally
optimized at the MCSCF level.
All Ir $t_{2g}$ functions are included in the active orbital space.
Excitations within the Ir $t_{2g}$ shell are afterwards computed just for the central IrO$_6$
octahedron while the occupation of the NN Ir valence shells is held frozen as in the MCSCF
ground-state configuration.
Spin-orbit interactions are further accounted for as described in Ref.~\cite{SOC_molpro}.
The subsequent MRCI treatment includes all single and double excitations from the O $2p$ orbitals
at the central octahedron and the Ir $5d$ functions.
To partition the O $2p$ valence orbitals into two different groups, i.e., at sites of the
central octahedron and at NN octahedra, we employ the orbital localization module available with
{\sc molpro}.
Crystallographic data as reported by Rodi and Babel \cite{CaIrO3_rodi_1965} is used.

\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{
Ir $t_{2g}$ splittings and relative energies of the spin-orbit $t_{2g}^5$ states in CaIrO$_3$.
MCSCF and MRCI results with and without SOC's for 5-plaquette clusters, see text.
}
\label{dd_CaIrO3}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
$t_{2g}^5$ splittings (eV)
                      &MCSCF       &MRCI       \\
\hline
\\
$d_{xy}\!-\!d_{yz}$   &0.63        &0.68       \\
$d_{xy}\!-\!d_{xz}$   &0.76        &0.83       \\
\\
$|j\!=\!1/2, m_j\!=\!\pm\!1/2\rangle$
                      &0.00--0.12  &0.00--0.16 \\
$|j\!=\!3/2, m_j\!=\!\pm\!3/2\rangle$
                      &0.62--0.70  &0.66--0.76 \\
$|j\!=\!3/2, m_j\!=\!\pm\!1/2\rangle$
                      &1.25--1.27  &1.36--1.39 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}

With no SOC's, we find Ir $d_{xy}\!-\!d_{yz}$ and $d_{xy}\!-\!d_{xz}$ splittings of
0.63 and 0.76 eV by MCSCF calculations and slightly larger values of 0.68 and 0.83
eV at the MRCI level, with the $xy$ level the lowest (see the first lines in Table~\ref{dd_CaIrO3}).
The $j\!=\!1/2$ ground-state wave function therefore has dominant $xz$ character,
as much as $75\%$ by MRCI calculations with SOC (MRCI+SOC).
The four components of the $j\!=\!3/2$ quartet are split into groups of two by 0.6--0.7 eV
(lower lines of Table~\ref{dd_CaIrO3}).
The lower two $j\!=\!3/2$ terms have $72\%$ $yz$ character, the highest $j\!=\!3/2$ components
have $90\%$ $xy$ character.

When SOC's are not accounted for, the coupling to spin moments at NN Ir sites gives rise for
each particular orbital occupation to one sextet, four quartet, and five doublet states.
All those configuration state functions enter the spin-orbit calculations.
32 different spin-orbit states are therefore generated for each $j$ configuration at the
central Ir site and this causes a finite energy spread in Table~\ref{dd_CaIrO3}.
A simpler and more transparent picture can be obtained by replacing the four Ir$^{4+}$
$d^5$ NN's by closed-shell Pt$^{4+}$ $d^6$ ions.
In that case, the MRCI excitation energies for the $j\!=\!3/2$ states at the central Ir
site are 0.67 and 1.38 eV.
An instructive computational experiment which we can further make is to replace the distorted
post-perovskite structure by a hypothetical cubic perovskite lattice in which the Ir-O bond
length is the average of the three different bond lengths in post-perovskite CaIrO$_3$, i.e.,
2.03 \AA .
This allows to directly extract the SOC $\lambda$ for the Ir$^{4+}$ $5d^5$ ion because the
splitting between the spin-orbit $j\!=\!1/2$ doublet and the four-fold degenerate $j\!=\!3/2$
state is $3\lambda/2$ in cubic symmetry \cite{book_abragam_bleaney}.
The doublet-quartet splitting comes out as 0.70 eV by MRCI+SOC calculations for the idealized
cubic perovskite structure.
This yields a spin-orbit coupling constant $\lambda\!=\!0.47$, in agreement with values of 0.39--0.49 eV earlier
extracted for Ir$^{4+}$ impurities from electron spin resonance measurements \cite{lambda_Ir_andlauer76}.

The results of our {\it ab initio} calculations, i.e., the unusually large $t_{2g}$
splittings and the highly uneven admixture of $xz$, $yz$, and $xy$ character for the
spin-orbit $t_{2g}^5$ states, are in sharp contrast to the interpretation of recent
RXD experiments on CaIrO$_3$ \cite{CaIrO3_ohgushi_2011}.
In particular, the authors of Ref.~\cite{CaIrO3_ohgushi_2011} conclude from
the RXD data that the deviations from an isotropic $xz$-$yz$-$xy$ picture are marginal,
as also found for instance in the layered square-lattice material Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ \cite{214Ir_kim_2009}.
While for Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ we also obtain \cite{214Ir_vmk_2012} rather small $t_{2g}$ splittings
of about 0.1 eV, comparable weights of the $xz$, $yz$, $xy$ components in the $j\!=\!1/2$
ground-state wave function, and NN superexchange interactions in good agreement with resonant
inelastic x-ray scattering (RIXS) data, for the post-perovskite CaIrO$_3$ the quantum
chemical results point in a different direction.
These conflicting findings urgently call for Ir $L$-edge RIXS measurements on CaIrO$_3$.
The RIXS experiments have recently emerged as a most reliable technique for exploring the
charge, spin, and orbital degrees of freedom of correlated electrons in solids
\cite{RIXS_RevModPhys11,spin_orb_sep_schlappa12}.

\begin{figure}[b!]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{Fig_2.eps}
\caption{Sketch of the NN magnetic interactions in CaIrO$_3$.
}
\label{fig02}
\end{figure}

\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{
NN effective magnetic couplings in CaIrO$_3$, see text.
Positive values denote AF exchange.
}
\label{J_CaIrO3}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{crrr}
$J$ (meV)          &MCSCF    &MRCI      &MRCI+SOC \\
\hline
\\
$J_{\rm c}$        &$91.2$   &$163.4$   &$121.0$  \\
$J_{\rm a}$        &$-2.3$   &$4.2$     &$-7.3$   \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}

The presence of both corner-sharing and edge-sharing octahedra and the large splittings within
the $t_{2g}$ shell have important implications on the nature and the magnitude of the magnetic
interactions.
To determine the latter, we designed 8-octahedra clusters including two active Ir$^{4+}$ $d^5$
sites.
The six $5d$ NN's were modeled as closed-shell Pt$^{4+}$ $d^6$ ions.
All possible occupations were allowed within the set of $t_{2g}$ orbitals at the two active
Ir sites in the MCSCF calculations, which gives rise to nine singlet and nine triplet states
with no SOC.
The MCSCF wave functions were expressed in terms of orbitals optimized for an average of
those singlet and triplet states.
All eighteen singlet and triplet states entered the spin-orbit calculations, both at the MCSCF and MRCI
levels.
In MRCI, single and double excitations from the Ir $t_{2g}$ orbitals and the $2p$ orbitals of
the bridging ligand were included. Such a computational scheme provides $J$ values in very good
agreement with RIXS measurements in the layered iridate Sr$_2$IrO$_4$ \cite{214Ir_vmk_2012}.

Remarkably, with no SOC's, the NN AF exchange constant $J_{\rm c}$ for octahedra sharing
corners along the $c$ axis is as large as 91.2 meV by MCSCF calculations and 163.4 meV by
MRCI, see Table~\ref{J_CaIrO3}.
The $t_{2g}$ hole orbitals are here the $xz$ components, as discussed above.
Although the IrO$_6$ octahedra are tilted somewhat due to rotations about the $a$ axis, see
Fig.~1, this does not affect much the $\pi$-type $5d_{xz}$-$2p_x$-$5d_{xz}$ overlap and
superexchange \cite{superexchange_anderson59} interactions.
An AF $J$ of 163.4 meV is even larger than the values for $\sigma$-type superexchange paths
in two-dimensional $S\!=\!1/2$ $3d$ Cu oxide superconductors \cite{CuO_J_Illas_00} and points
to the role of the larger spatial extent of $5d$ functions in iridates.
With SOC's accounted for, the effective AF coupling $J_{\rm c}$ is reduced to 121.0 meV
(last column in Table~\ref{J_CaIrO3}).
The spin-orbit ground-state wave function now acquires sizable $yz$ character and since
the tilting of the IrO$_6$ octahedra does affect the out-of-plane $5d_{yz}$-$2p_y$-$5d_{yz}$
superexchange path, the effective magnetic coupling between the $j\!=\!1/2$ sites is
smaller.

For edge-sharing octahedra along the $a$ axis, we find a weak NN ferromagnetic (FM) coupling
$J_{\rm a}\!\approx -7.3$ meV in the spin-orbit MRCI calculations.
The three components of the $j_{\rm tot}\!=\!1$ triplet state in the two-site problem display
small splittings of $\approx\!1$ meV (see Supplementary Material \cite{ CaIrO3_supmat}), which shows that anisotropic
non-Heisenberg terms \cite{kitaev_213Ir_chaloupka10} should also be considered when mapping the
{\it ab initio} data onto an effective spin Hamiltonian.
In estimating the Heisenberg coupling constant $J_{\rm a}$ we neglected such terms and
used an average of the energies of the $j_{\rm tot}\!=\!1$ triplet components,
$J\!\approx\!\tilde E(j_{\rm tot}\!=\!1)\!-\!E(j_{\rm tot}\!=\!0)$.
The {\it ab initio} results, i.e., strong AF interactions along $c$ and weak FM couplings
along $a$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig02}), are in full agreement with the observed striped AF magnetic ordering and very
large Curie-Weiss temperature \cite{CaIrO3_ohgushi_2011}.
The MRCI+SOC $J$ values thus provide a firm quantitative basis in understanding the magnetic
properties of this material.

We have employed, in summary, a set of many-body quantum chemical calculations to unravel the $5d$ electronic
structure of the post-perovskite iridate CaIrO$_3$.
While electronic structure calculations have been earlier performed within the local density
approximation to density functional theory and the role of electron correlation effects
has been pointed out \cite{CaIrO3_subedi_2012}, we here make clear quantitative predictions for
the Ir $t_{2g}$ splittings, character of the entangled spin-orbit wave function, and
magnitude of the NN superexchange interactions.
Our results single out CaIrO$_3$ as a $5d^5$ system in which lattice distortions and
spin-orbit couplings compete on the same energy scale to give rise to highly anisotropic
electronic structure and magnetic correlations.
In particular, the present {\it ab initio} investigation yields a different picture than previously derived
on the basis of resonant x-ray diffraction experiments for the relativistic ground-state wave
function.
The large $t_{2g}$ splittings that we have found from the calculations give rise to dominant $xz$ hole character and
remarkably strong AF interactions along the $c$ axis.
Further, the large AF couplings along $c$ and weak FM exchange along $a$ characterize CaIrO$_3$ as a
$j\!=\!1/2$ quasi-one-dimensional antiferromagnet.

\begin{acknowledgments}
This paper is dedicated to Prof. Ria Broer to honour her devoted career in Theoretical and Computational Chemistry.
N.~A.~B. and L.~H. acknowledge financial support from the Erasmus Mundus Programme of the European Union
and the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG), respectively.
\end{acknowledgments}

Strongly Correlated Electrons (cond-mat.str-el)


Views, Program Transformations, and the Evolutivity Problem in a Functional Language

Abstract: We report on an experience to support multiple views of programs to solve the tyranny of the dominant decomposition in a functional setting. We consider two possible architectures in Haskell for the classical example of the expression problem. We show how the Haskell Refactorer can be used to transform one view into the other, and the other way back. That transformation is automated and we discuss how the Haskell Refactorer has been adapted to be able to support this automated transformation. Finally, we compare our implementation of views with some of the literature.

\section{Introduction
\input{Introduction}

\section{Modularity and Evolution}
\input{The_Problem}

\section{Views and Transformations
\label{sec-transformation}
\input{Our_Solution}

\section{Implementation of an Architecture Transformer with a Refactorer
\label{sec-refactoring-haskell}
\input{Implementation}

\section{Usage and Future Work
\input{Future_Work}

\section{Conclusion
\input{Conclusion}

\bibliographystyle{abbrv}

\begin{btSect}{websites}
\section*{Web Sites}
\btPrintCited
\end{btSect}

\begin{btSect}{biblio}
\section*{References}
\btPrintCited
\end{btSect}

\subsection{Contributions.}

The contributions of this report are the following:
\begin{itemize}

\item We give an example of use of multiple views in a functional programming language. That example
comes from the expression problem.

\item We implement that transformation with an existing refactorer, the Haskell Refactorer, and we automate it. To be able to do this, we extend the interface of the refactorer and add a few operations in it.

\end{itemize}

\subsection{Comparison to view tools}

Compared to some other multiple views implementations (in particular~\cite{Black2004}, \cite{Shonle2007}) and to the implementation of~\cite{Griswold1993}, our approach has the following pros and cons:

\begin{itemize}

\item $\oplus$ We rely on a previously existing refactorer. We had to implement few lines of code to adapt it to support views. The engineering effort is very small compared to building a dedicated tool. Moreover, the basic operations are already proved correct (yet not all of them, and not the concrete implementation).

\item $\ominus$ The  expression of the transformation is rather low level. It is imperative (as in~\cite{Griswold1993}) while in~\cite{Black2004} and~\cite{Shonle2007} it is declarative. Moreover, it is not automatically invertible.

\item $\not =$ We focus on dealing with fragments of business code
  while~\cite{Black2004} focuses on classes and method
  interactions and~\cite{Griswold1991} focuses on
  data-structure encapsulation (at least in the example from
  Parnas).

\end{itemize}

\subsection{Related Work}
\label{related-work}
Offering to the programmer (or designer or specifier) an appropriate view is not a new idea.
Here is a review of some relevant related work.

Before Wadler introduced the expression problem~\cite{expPb}, he had already proposed the notion of views~\cite{DBLP:conf/popl/Wadler87}.  His view feature makes it possible
to use pattern matching with different representations of a
data structure. At compile time different views of a data
structure are defined and their relationships are specified
by rewriting rules.  At run-time, a single data structure is
maintained and pattern matching on different representations
are translated to accessor functions that compute a (partial) view from another one.
This is closely related to our problem, but we do not focus on data structures but on code
structures and we extend and maintain programs before run-time.

Griswold~\cite{Griswold1991, Griswold1993} shows
that elementary refactoring operations can be chained to
provide architecture transformations. However, as already
said in section~\ref{refactoring-to-navigate}, while Griswold's goal is to improve the
structure of code, our goal is to dynamically adopt a
structure which is convenient for a given task.

We share with Black and Jones~\cite{Black2004} the same
motivation and the idea that multiple views solves the tyranny of dominant decomposition
problem.
However, the techniques are rather different. In their
implementation, the programmer describes properties of the
fragments of code which are used to compute the views.
In Shonle \emph{et al.}~\cite{Shonle2007}, it is the
transformation which is described. It is described
declaratively by rewriting rules. Both works handle mainly
object oriented language concepts (classes, methods, field
accesses).

Functional programs are prone to be transformed. Numerous program
transformations have been proposed. Some comes in pairs, or are invertible.
For instance, Danvy have studied relationship between the continuation passing style and the direct style \cite{190866}.
In general a program transformation is not invertible. Forster et al. \cite{DBLP:journals/toplas/FosterGMPS07}
have proposed a domain specific language to define invertible transformations. Once a transformation is specified, the
inverse transformation is automatically derived. This enables them, for instance, to share data between several
applications that require different representations. Note that, a view can be partial and the original representation
can be required in order to transform a modified view back to its original form by injecting the updated data.
This work has been extended in order to deal with classes of
equivalent representations (\eg two lists of associations (key,value) can be equivalent even if the order of the pairs
are different) \cite{DBLP:conf/popl/BohannonFPPS08}.

Views have also been introduced at the specification level. For instance,
Jackson \cite{226249} shows how to compose Z specifications  on different
views of the same state. At the specification level, the composition is not
computational (it does not require transformation) but declarative: invariants
relate the different views of the state.

Literate programming \cite{DBLP:journals/cj/Knuth84} proposes to invert the role of code and comments
(comments becomes the main view of a program and is commented by a few pieces of code). More
importantly, literate programming enables to decompose and reorder pieces of programs. This way,
the literate view for human has to be transformed into the code view for the compiler. However, the
transformation is single way. This does not help for the maintenance or the evolution problem
(since the code is not transformed but only reordered) but this proves its is important to present
alternative views for the programmer.

\subsection{Architectures equivalentes}

\label{sec-usage}

\paragraph{Development of the transformation.}

The first problem with our setting is that the
transformation has to be implemented.
We could ease this task by several means:
 \begin{itemize}

\item Compute automatically the transformation based on the
  hints of the designer, as done in~\cite{Black2004}
  and~\cite{Shonle2007} or provide a more high level
  transformation specific language.

\item Provide a list of examples to be used as transformation patterns.

\item Once a transformation is defined,
generate automatically the inverse transformation.

\item Record the sequence of commands used in an interactive refactorer (as Eclipse does~\cite{Eclipse-unsound2009}).

\end{itemize}

\paragraph{Maintenance of the transformation.}
 As the program evolves, the transformation may need to
 evolve too. We could study how an evolution impacts a
 transformation. Some simple examples seem to be directly
 tractable: for instance, if the evolution to be implemented
 is the renaming of a function, we can imagine that the
 refactoring tool that propagates the renaming could also
 propagate it into the transformation script.

\paragraph{Duration.}
The transformation of our example takes about 15 seconds (on
a 2.8 GHz Intel Pentium R processor) and 7 seconds for the
reverse transformation. This is longer than the compile time of the program
(less than 1 sec.).
We can suppose that the transformations can be
integrated into the build process that takes place once a
new version of the code is released, so that when a
programmer has to implement an evolution, all the designed
views are available. Of course, this supposes all the views
have been designed together with the initial program.

\paragraph{Availability of a tool for a given language.} We have chosen to use an existing refactoring tool instead or rebuilding one.
We have produced 615 LOC to implement missing refactoring
operations and 1160 LOC for the new interface. This has to
be compared to the size of a refactoring tool (11 KLOC for
Arcum~\cite{Shonle2007}).
So our approach depends on the tools available for the
language of interest.

\paragraph{Failures}
From an operational point of view, as each operation of the
chain requires some pre-conditions to be satisfied, it may
occur that the user is informed that the transformation
cannot be achieved only after some operations have been
applied.
In order to inform the user as soon as possible (statically instead of
dynamically) that the transformation cannot be applied, we could compute
the pre-condition of the transformation, for instance by following the work of Kniesel
and Koch~\cite{composition-of-refactorings2004}.
This would imply to provide a formal description of the pre-conditions
and effects (post-conditions or Kniesel and Koch's backward-descriptions) of all the
operations used.

\subsection{Decomposing the transformation into refactoring operations
\label{transformation-steps}
\input{Transformation_Steps.tex}

\paragraph{Soundness.}
If we use behavior preserving refactoring operations,
then the chain of refactoring operations is also behavior preserving (and $P_{\mathit{fun}}$ is equivalent to $P_{\mathit{data}}$).
Some Haskell Refactorer's operations's principles have been shown to be correct~\cite{Sultana-Thompson2008, HaRe-formalisation}.
However, there are some bugs left in the implementation, and not all
the available operations have been proved correct, including some of
the ones we are using\footnote{This problem is
  different from the problem in Eclipse for which the answer is :
\emph{``If the refactoring causes problems in other methods, these are
  ignored and you must fix them yourself after the
  refactoring.''}~\cite{Eclipse-unsound} and
\emph{``Note that some modifications you make to the method, such as
  adding a parameter or changing a return type, may cause the
  refactored code to contain compiler errors because Eclipse doesn't
  know what to enter for those new
  parameters.''}~\cite{Eclipse-unsound2009}.  }

\paragraph{Reverse transformation.
A simple approach to build the reverse transformation would be to
use the inverse of each operation used in the
$P_{\mathit{fun}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{data}}$ transformation in the reverse order (since $(f \circ g)^{-1} =
g^{-1} \circ f^{-1}$).
However, the Haskell Refactorer does not provide an inverse
for each operation, so our reverse
transformation cannot be automatically derived from the first
transformation.

We do not detail here the reverse transformation (the script is given in Figs~\ref{fig-reverse-script} and~\ref{fig-reverse-script-cont} ).
The key steps are to unfold the instances of \texttt{ConstMod.eval},
\texttt{ConstMod.toString}, \texttt{AddMod.eval},
\texttt{AddMod.toString} and to transform \texttt{eval} and
\texttt{toString}, which are defined by calls to \texttt{fold\_1}
and \texttt{fold\_2}, into plain recursive function definitions.
This particular step is done by using the \emph{Generative
Fold} operation of the Haskell Refactorer (\emph{folding} in~\cite{Burstall1977}, see~\cite{Brown2008}).
Note that to use the generative fold, a preliminary step has to be
done by hand: a function definition must be duplicated into a comment.
We have introduced in the Haskell Refactorer a feature to support this
duplication into comments in order to make the whole chain supported
by the tool and to be able to automate it.

We also have had to add some features to the refactorer to simplify the
code we get after unfolding some functions defined by
equations with patterns in order to reach the code of $P_{\mathit{data}}$ (see appendix~\ref{app-added-operations} for the list of  operations we have implemented into HaRe).

\subsection{Automation of the process.
\lstset{basicstyle=\small, frame=trBL, frameround=tfff, language=lisp, basicstyle=\ttfamily}

An engineering effort has been necessary to automate the
transformation since the API of the Haskell Refactorer does not match
our needs.
In particular, HaRe is designed to be used interactively with text editors as Emacs and the
parameters of the operations are cursor positions (line and column numbers) in
source files.
For this reason we have developed functions to locate
sub-expressions of interest in files before calling HaRe
operations with the computed parameters.
This allows us to provide new interfaces for HaRe operations
(at least for those we needed) that do not rely on the
particular layout in the source files (see appendix~\ref{app-added-interfaces} for the list of interfaces to HaRe operations we have implemented).
Like original HaRe operations, our interfaces to HaRe operations are available as Emacs-Lisp
functions in addition to interactive menu entries.
This allows to invoke them in Emacs-Lisp programs.

Our transformations can thus be expressed by Emacs-Lisp programs. Since these programs are reduced to sequences of operations with side-effects, we call them \emph{scripts}.
Fig.~\ref{fig-script} shows the script of the transformation $P_{\mathit{fun}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{data}}$ (we assume the definitions of Fig.~\ref{fig-script-definitions} are evaluated first).

\begin{figure}[htp]
\relsize{-2}
\lstinputlisting[firstline=1,lastline=17]{ELISP/transfo_pfun_pdata.el}
\caption{$P_{\mathit{fun}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{data}}$ script preliminary definitions}
\label{fig-script-definitions}
\normalsize
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[htp]
\relsize{-2}
\lstinputlisting[firstline=19]{ELISP/transfo_pfun_pdata.el}
\caption{$P_{\mathit{fun}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{data}}$  transformation script}
\label{fig-script}
\normalsize
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!htp]
\relsize{-2}
\lstinputlisting[firstline=19, lastline=99]{ELISP/transfo_pdata_pfun.el}
\caption{$P_{\mathit{data}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{fun}}$  transformation script (first part)}
\label{fig-reverse-script}
\normalsize
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!htp]
\relsize{-2}
\lstinputlisting[firstline=101]{ELISP/transfo_pdata_pfun.el}
\caption{$P_{\mathit{data}} \rightarrow P_{\mathit{fun}}$  transformation script (end)}
\label{fig-reverse-script-cont}
\normalsize
\end{figure}

\subsection{Programs and Views}

We call \emph{views} of a program two or more textual
representations of programs that have the same behavior (they
are semantically equivalent in a given calculus).
For instance, $P_{\mathit{data}}$ and $P_{\mathit{fun}}$ are two views of the same program
(this is justified later in the paper).

\subsection{A Solution to the Modular Maintenance Problem

\label{sec-solution}
 We illustrate the use of views to solve the problem of
 modularity in evolutions by building an automated
 transformation of $P_{\mathit{data}}$ into $P_{\mathit{fun}}$ and its reverse
 transformation.

With such a tool, the programmer can choose the view in
which the evolution he has to implement is modular.
Fig.~\ref{fig-ideal} illustrates the scenario
given in section~\ref{sec-scenario} with this approach.
For instance, when the programmer wants to add a new
constructor (evolution 1), the program is presented in
the data-centered view;
when the programmer wants to add a new function (evolution 2),
the program is presented in the operation-centered
view.
Since none of these evolutions has to be made transversely to the considered
axis of decomposition, the views of interest always keep a regular architecture.
This approach enables to solve the problems 1
and 2 described in section~\ref{sec-problem}.

This approach also has the following advantages compared to solutions to the expression problem:
\begin{itemize}

\item It does not rely on a particular programming language. As soon as two alternative programming structures can be expressed in a language, the corresponding transformation can be defined.

\item The programmer who implements the evolution
  does not have to learn a new language or possibly complex language
  features. Of course, he has to cope with several views.

\item The programmer does not have to learn a new type system. In particular, if the programming language is strongly typed, the different views are also strongly typed and the types they introduce are closely related. In this case, typing issues boil down to verify once for all that the program transformations do not break typing.

\item The approach is not limited to the data-centered view \textit{versus} the function-centered view. It is not even limited to two views.

\end{itemize}

Of course, this approach is not free from disadvantages:\begin{itemize}

\item The programmer who implements the evolution has to cope with several views.

\item The transformation has to be implemented, which requires some work from a ``transformation designer'' and a supporting tool.

\end{itemize}

\subsection{Refactoring tools to navigate between views
\label{refactoring-to-navigate}

Developing a program transformation from scratch is not easy.
Refactoring tools provide a simple, high-level way to transform
programs and are available for several kinds of languages.
For this reason, we have chosen to explore the use of a refactoring
tool to build our example of transformation.

\emph{``Refactoring is the process of changing a software system in such a way that it does not alter the external behavior of the code yet improves its internal structure''}~\cite{Fowler1999}

Given our definition of programs and views, a code refactoring changes
the views
of the considered program (a refactoring tool enables
to pass
from one view to another).
Griswold~\cite{Griswold1991} shows
that
refactoring tools can be used to change a function-centered
architecture into a data-centered architecture. In
particular, he exemplifies his technique with
the program
Parnas~\cite{Parnas1972} had employed to illustrate
different
architectures for a same program, each
with different advantages and disadvantages.
Griswold uses refactoring tools to improve the structure of code.
We adopt a more dynamical point of view,
where an improvement is not absolute, but driven by a
temporary need:  once the driving evolution is implemented, we
may need to revert to the initial architecture.

Some refactoring tools are provided with most popular IDEs, for several mainstream languages (Java in Eclipse~\cite{Eclipse-unsound} and NetBeans~\cite{netbeans}, C++, C\#, VB in Visual Studio~\cite{VisualAssistX}).
Refactoring tools have also found an interest in the academic
community, and some tools which are based on sound
foundations have been proposed, for instance for Haskell and Erlang~\cite{HaRe-Wrangler2008}, C~\cite{CScout2010}, Smalltalk~\cite{Smalltalk-refactoring-1997} or Lisp~\cite{Griswold1993}.
Finally, some refactoring tools have been specifically designed to support views in an object-oriented context~\cite{Black2004,Shonle2007} (see section~\ref{related-work}).

It is important to note that some refactoring tools are not
sound.
In particular, with the Eclipse refactoring tool for Java, after
refactoring operations have been applied, the user has to fix broken
code himself~\cite{Eclipse-unsound,Eclipse-unsound2009}.
For this reason, we focus in this paper on one of the refactorers which provides operations whose principles
have been proved correct:
the Haskell Refactorer
(HaRe)~\cite{HaRe-web, HaRe-formalisation, Sultana-Thompson2008}.
The formalism used in~\cite{HaRe-formalisation} is a
$\lambda$-calculus with \emph{let-rec} with a mixed
call-by-name/call-by-need strategy.
A relation of equivalence based on the reduction rules of
that calculus expresses the behavior preservation which is
used to prove the correctness of the operations.

Before applying a refactoring operation, the Haskell Refactorer
checks that the conditions to ensure its correctness are verified. For instance, it checks that a
renaming does not introduce a name clash. When these conditions
are not verified, the refactorer does not apply the changes
and explains why.

\subsection{Each Architecture privileges extensibility on a given axis
\label{sec-primary-decomposition}
\input{Primary_Decomposition.tex}

\subsection{The Expression Problem
\label{sec-expression-problem}

The problem we have described has been subject to many proposals
in the context of the so-called Expression Problem
(see~\cite{Zenger-Odersky2005} for a review of some
solutions).
The expression problem tries to tackle modular
extensibility from a language point of view and imposes
constraints that are coherent for this point of view. These
constraints are the following~\cite{expPb}:

\begin{itemize}

\item The extension should come as a separate file/module and should not require to modify existing files/modules.

\item The files/modules that were already in the program before the extension should not be recompiled.

\item The type system should be able to ensure that the extension is safe.

\end{itemize}

Several works (for instance those listed
in~\cite{Zenger-Odersky2005}) show that specific features of the host language makes it possible to
design a program structure where it is modular to extend the
data type, and also modular to extend the functionalities.
However, as we will see, these solutions share a drawback:
maintenance is not modular.
Indeed, successive
evolutions tend to break the initial structure~\cite{BeladyLehman1971}.
This is
not taken into account by the expression problem.

\subsection{Extension is only part of the problem
\label{sec-problem}
\input{Incremental_Development_Scenario}

Software Engineering (cs.SE); Programming Languages (cs.PL)


Quantum Measurement Theory as simply explained by N G van Kampen

Abstract: A translation is provided of the nonspecialist article by N G van Kampen which seeks to dispel much of the mysticism surrounding quantum measurement.

\section{Introduction}

Obscure describes those who are unable to express themselves clearly.  Obscurants denotes those who do not \emph{want} to express themselves clearly; those who, for what ever reason, present things in a murkier form than is necessary. Traditionally, that has been considered a hallmark [ characteristic, even a virtue,] of theologians, as one readily sees from a reading of the second part of the quotation above. But here we are talking about the first half (philosophy must here be understood as natural science) and the fact that this [the message in the first half of the quotation] is so often trampled underfoot. Often statements about physics are given a mystical aura, either to pull the wool over the reader's eyes [mislead the reader] so as to promote some religious or philosophical, but unscientific, opinion, or merely just to sound interesting. This phenomenon is not new, but, in recent years, there has been an explosion of popular literature in which physics has been presented as something mysterious. That is postmodern obscurantism.

Quantum mechanics is especially susceptible to this phenomenon due to slogan-like declarations such as the following. (i) \emph{During a measurement an observer intervenes in the natural course of events}; nature has no reality independent of the observer. (ii) \emph{The observer influences the observed system}; there is no objectivity. (iii) \emph{ The wave function does not describe the state of the system, but the knowledge the observer has about the system}; that is why the wave function jumps on measurement and becomes a completely new function consistent with the information acquired.

These slogan-like declarations are not entirely untrue, and in the right context can be useful to illustrate certain aspects of quantum mechanics. From the voluminous literature I can only refer to some reviews $^{[1]}$. But, to make an impression on philosophers and other outsiders, these declarations are often assigned an absolute truth, which causes much confusion. On the basis of such misunderstood declarations, quantum mechanics has incurred the displeasure of dialectic materialism $^{[2]}$.

Another aspect of this rise in obscurantism is that, in the world of physicists, interest in the foundations of quantum mechanics has been revived, stimulated by new experiments, which make it possible to probe further into the microscopic world $^{[3]}$. However, the present generation of physicists have been brought up largely just to apply quantum mechanics and have learnt to scorn discussing the foundations thereof. The former discussions of the [nineteen] twenties had not led to satisfactorily clear statements. Bohr had indeed given correct answers to most of the questions, but his formulation was too vague to give an unambiguous procedure in all cases that occur. His attempts to incorporate `complementarity' as a general fundamental principle of human thought unnecessarily increased the confusion, including among his followers. Moreover there were opponents ( Einstein, de Broglie , Bohm ) who found the Copenhagen interpretation unbearably dogmatic and sought a more classical tangible reality behind the phenomena.
\\
Such a clash of opinions within an exact science would only be astonishing, if we had not been familiar with it from earlier instances - when Newton introduced a hidden force that acted at a distance; when in the nineteenth century atoms and molecules were postulated; and when Einstein undermined the idea of absolute time. It is not strange or inappropriate that a new theory forces one to view phenomena in a new and unexpected way. It is, however, indeed inappropriate to mention such a `change of paradigm' as if on a par with a change in politics or women's fashion. For sure, the new theory and accompanying new interpretation are an ineluctable consequence of the phenomena. At the same time, however, that means that \emph{each difference of opinion concerning the interpretation can be settled by getting to grips with the actual phenomena}.
\\
The classical equations of motion for a particle are expressed in terms of its coordinates and momenta, and these can be observed directly. On the other hand, quantum mechanics describes the particle using a wave function and one must ask oneself how observations are made. This is the problem of \emph{measurement} and is the essence of the discussion, since it is here that scientific formulation and laboratory work meet full on. My intention here is to work through the simplest of possible realistic models of the measurement process and thereby test the above three declarations on real phenomena.

\section{Model of a measuring process}

If a lightwave is incident on a screen with two slits, there appears an interference pattern on a photographic plate placed behind it. According to quantum mechanics the same goes for a beam of electrons. In other circumstances however, such as the bending of cathode rays, those same electrons display themselves as particles, each with a position $\boldsymbol{r}$ and therefore also a trajectory. Applied to the two slit experiment, this picture leads to a paradox. Each electron passes through one or the other slit; how can it be influenced by the presence of another slit? How can it be that the darkening of the plate is not the sum of those caused by the separate slits, but, instead of that, an interference pattern; and further why is the latter dependent on the distance between the slits? Bohr's answer : as long as the measurement apparatus does not allow the path to be determined, it makes no sense to talk about a path. As soon as one chooses an experimental apparatus that is indeed able to determine through which slit the electron passes, then interference can no longer occur. I shall construct an apparatus that can observe the passage of the electron and can be described entirely by the usual laws of quantum mechanics. In this way the epistemological flavour is removed from Bohr's statement. For details see $^{[5]}$.

Place in the upper slit an atom that possesses a $1S$ ground state , but which is now excited into its $2S$ state. This state is metastable because the transition to the ground state is [dipole] forbidden. However, as the observed electron passes, the  $2S$ state becomes distorted, obtaining a $P$ component, via the transient Coulomb field [ of the electron ] and deexcitation is possible via photon emission. Thereby the passage of the electron is observed and recorded. One can, if desired, trap the photon on a photographic plate or afterwards check the state of the measuring atom. The essential point is that the apparatus is left permanently in another state [ and not the original one].

To forestall any misunderstanding : if no photon is emitted, one cannot as a result conclude that the electron went through the other slit. Also, if one closes the second slit, so that the electron certainly went through the first, there is a chance that the atom has not been deexcited. The efficiency of the measuring apparatus depends on the nature of the atom, the width of the slit, the speed of the electron etc., and is never $100$ \%. That only produces inessential complications which I will not go into here. Another caveat is needed in order to reasonably state that our observation may be described as a measurement. Each measurement of a variable can be formulated as a series of questions : “Does the value of the variable lie in the interval $(0,\Delta)$ ?" ; “Does the value lie in  $(\Delta,2\Delta)$ ?" ; and so on. Conversely, each question about the state can be formally regarded as the measurement of a variable, namely the variable which by definition is $1$ for the state for which the answer is `yes' and defined as $0$ if the answer if `no'. For example, the question whether a system is in its ground state , $|\Phi\rangle$ , corresponds to the measurement of the variable that is represented by the operator  $|\Phi\rangle\langle \Phi|$, that is the projection operator for the state. Thus may the question whether the electron has passed through the upper slit indeed be regarded as an example of a measurement.

\section{The measurement}

The description of an electron that passes by an atom and eventually results in the emission of a photon, is a standard problem in scattering theory. The atom is initially in the $|2S\rangle$ state without the presence of a photon. After the electron has passed by, the atom can still be in the same state or it can be in the state $|1S;\boldsymbol{k}\rangle$ i.e. with the atom in its ground state and with a photon $\boldsymbol{k}$ present. Each state of my apparatus is a linear superposition of all these states. Also, to include the electron in the description, we must take the coefficients as functions of the electron coordinate $\boldsymbol{r}$ :

\begin{equation*}
    \Psi = \phi(\boldsymbol{r})|2S\rangle + \sum_{\boldsymbol{k}}\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r})|1S;\boldsymbol{k}\rangle
\end{equation*}

This is the state vector for the whole system, that is to say the combination of the observed system ( that is the electron ) and the measuring apparatus ( that is to say the atom together with all the oscillators , $\boldsymbol{k}$ , of the electromagnetic field).

The evolution of $\Psi$ is given by the Schr{\"o}dinger equation   $i  \dot {\Psi} =H\Psi$, in which $H$ is the Hamiltonian for the total system. This is the sum of the kinetic energy of the electron , the excitation energy of the atom ( which has only two states of importance ), the energy of the field ( for which only the 0 and 1 photon states are included), and the interaction term. [Translator's note: it would appear that the interaction term is meant to refer collectively to both the interaction between the electron and the atom and that of the atom with the electromagnetic field.] This can only happen if the electron is in the neighbourhood of the atom and consequently the [part of] the interaction term [ corresponding to the interaction between electron and atom] contains a factor $u(\boldsymbol{r})$ , which only differs from zero if $\boldsymbol{r}$  is in the vicinity of the atom.

Long before the electron reaches the screen ( say at $t=-T$ ) the atom is certainly in the state  $|2S\rangle$. So $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},-T)=0$, while $\phi(\boldsymbol{r},-T)$ is a given incident wave. Solve the Schr{\"o}dinger equation with these initial conditions. When the electron has completely passed by, ( say at $t=+T$ )  the state is described by $\phi(\boldsymbol{r},+T)$ and $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},+T)$, which respectively correspond to the possibility that the electron leaves it [ the atom] behind in its original state $|2S\rangle$ and to the possibility that deexcitation has occurred with the emission of a photon $\boldsymbol{k}$.

The above conclusion can already be made without the complete solution of the Schr{\"o}dinger equation. The wave $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},t)$ was originally zero, but becomes non zero due to the presence of $\phi(\boldsymbol{r},+t)$ and the interaction. Since this is restricted to the vicinity for which $u(\boldsymbol{r}) \ne 0$, $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},t)$ is \emph{ a wave that fans out from the vicinity of the atom}, and hence from the upper slit. Such a wave produces a dark spot on the photographic plate , without interference fringes.

The purpose of this somewhat technical exposition was to make clear that \emph{the measuring process is completely described by the Schr{\"o}dinger equation of the total system }, object plus apparatus. No extra axiom, such as postulated by van Neuman $^{[6]}$, is needed. The intervention that declaration (i) talks about is restricted to the setting up of the experiment. The measurement then proceeds according to the normal laws of quantum mechanics.

We have found that the measuring process either registers that the electron has gone through the upper slit or does not do so. If a registration occurs, the result is permanently recorded, objective and immutable by whoever subsequently reads it. Declaration (ii) is untrue for observations that can actually be made. If the emission of a photon , $\boldsymbol{k}$, is registered, the subsequent state of the electron is described by $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},t)$ which produces no interference. That has nothing to do with the knowledge of the observer : even if he does not look at the result, $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}(\boldsymbol{r},t)$ still takes on the role of describing the electron state, because that is merely a physical consequence of the interaction with the measuring apparatus. Declaration (iii) must thus be answered as follows. As long as one describes the observed system in isolation, the `reduction of the wavefunction' is not to be derived from the equation of motion and must be introduced as an extra postulate. But if one combines it [ the observed system] with the apparatus, the reduction is  a direct consequence of the total Schr{\"o}dinger equation for this combined system. As soon as the apparatus measures something, it evolves into a new state and a new coefficient goes with it, which becomes the new wavefunction for the electron.

\section{Macroscopic Systems}

The permanent registration came about because the atom was prepared in a metastable state and therefore could make an irreversible transition. Irreversibility appears only in macroscopic systems , systems that have very many degrees of freedom, which can be treated with the help of statistical mechanics. Our measuring apparatus can be considered as macroscopic, because the electromagnetic field has numerous degrees of freedom and the emission process is consequently irreversible. Generally : a quantum mechanical measurement takes place when a macroscopic measuring apparatus, prepared in a metastable state, is pushed out of that state by a microscopic influence: Wilson cloud chamber, Geiger counter etc.

Macroscopic systems have the property that their energy levels lie unimaginably close to each other, so that such a system never exists in a single eigenstate. Because of that they appear to us to behave very differently from what we are accustomed to expect from atoms and other small objects, for which quantum mechanics was originally developed. \emph{For sufficiently large systems, indeed, it turns out that the quantum mechanical treatment leads to a classical description using probabilities $^{[7]}$ }, so that statistical mechanics is valid for them. That makes metastable states possible and consequently the macroscopic, permanent and objective recording of events which take place on the microscopic scale. The different positions of a pointer on a voltmeter are not different eigenstates of the apparatus : each position is a collection of unimaginably many eigenstates.

The point of view deserves further comment. Characteristically, quantum mechanics, besides probabilities , also features cross terms , which contain the interference of the probability amplitudes. The italicised statement above contains the fact that for macroscopic systems the cross terms [taken all together] are zero, or at least in practice removed, just as the interference terms prevent the interference of light from two incoherent sources. In passing, this is also the solution to the riddle of Schr{\"o}dinger's cat : it is indeed  certainly  dead or alive; the paradoxical interference terms between both possibilities are negligible because the cat is macroscopic. Willful mutilation of quantum mechanics to make these terms zero $^{[8]}$ is superfluous.

Microscopic equations of motion, such as the Schr{\"o}dinger equation for $\Psi$, are invariant under time reversal, but the transition of the macroscopic measuring apparatus from its metastable initial state to its stable final state is irreversible. \emph{This is the reason that the quantum mechanical measurement is irreversible.} It goes hand in hand with the entropy increase equal to the thermodynamic entropy change between the stable final state and the metastable initial state. Whoever wants to talk about information, must take into account that this transition goes hand in hand with an enormous loss of information, because the initial state is more narrowly confined in phase space than the stable final state. This thermodynamic information loss totally overwhelms that gained from knowledge that the electron has passed through the upper slit.

In our model the initial state of the apparatus consisted of a single microscopic state $|2S\rangle$ and the final state consists of a superposition of the states $|1S;\boldsymbol{k}\rangle$. The entropy increase comes about because no distinction is made between the different $\boldsymbol{k}$. Look now at the electron rather than at the apparatus. Its initial state is a single Hilbert vector $\phi$ ; its final state, that after the photon has been emitted, is the subspace spanned by all the $\psi_{\boldsymbol{k}}$ , because the photon is not specified. Because this final state is less specific than the initial state, the entropy is increased. Even for the apparatus the increase is caused by the mutual lack of distinction between the $\boldsymbol{k}$; this entropy increase then appears to be equal to that of the apparatus $^{[5]}$. One also now sees how it is possible that the pure initial state $\phi$ transforms into a mixture. That could not happen if the electron obeyed the Schr{\"o}dinger equation by itself, but its wavefunction is not autonomous  but a subspace of the total wavefunction $\Psi$.

\section{Final Remarks}

A measurement is a normal physical process, in which the system of interest interacts with an appropriately chosen measuring apparatus. On those grounds other questions can be investigated, besides the three declarations [i.e. those in the introduction] .

Is it true that each measurement splits the universe into many countless, equivalent, even actually existing, samples? This idea has been, in all seriousness, proposed as a way out of the difficulties with the measurement process $^{[9]}$. Putting aside the fact that this proposal is neither verifiable not falsifiable, it appears also not definable, because a measurement is not to be distinguished from the continuous welter of natural processes.

Is it true that in order to read a measuring apparatus, a second apparatus is needed, and so forth, up to the brain of the observer $^{[10]}$? No, the measurement is complete the moment the result is macroscopically recorded, so that someone afterwards can look at it without disturbing it. Where does the border between the microscopic and macroscopic lie?( A familiar sophism is to argue that the distinction does not exist.) Answer: a system is macroscopic if, within the required accuracy, its behaviour satisfies a macroscopic description. For something to serve as a measuring apparatus, it must moreover have different states that exist long enough for our purpose and stable enough so that it can be read without it being disturbed. Whoever demands a more absolute characterisation does not know what physics is.

Must a measurement be instantaneous? This is what for simplicity von Neumann had assumed, but it is not clear how his postulate of the reduction of the wavefunction can be other than instantaneous. We know now that the duration of the measurement is the time for which the interaction term is different from zero. In our model the measurement was a scattering process and the duration was therefore automatically determined. Before and afterwards the electron was free; the reduction of the wavefunction is found looking back to be the difference between the incident and outgoing waves. How the reduction gradually came into being during the measurement was described in detail by the Schr{\"o}dinger equation for $\Psi$.

Is the uncertainty principle broken by `experiments with negative results', that is measurements that demonstrate no change $^{[11]}$? The possibility of a negative result is described by the component $\phi(\boldsymbol{r},+T)$ of our outgoing wavefunction. Given that it emerged from a well defined Schr{\"o}dinger equation, one knows without further analysis, that the  uncertainty principle is safe - just as safe as for any scattering process.

Yet one more last cautionary word, about a subject that hardly sits naturally with the measurement process, but has recently received a lot of attention. In 1935 Einstein, Podolski and Rosen proposed a thought experiment, that never claimed to disprove quantum mechanics, but made very clear how much it was at odds with what classical physics expects and what Einstein demanded as a minimum requirement for a theory. (Pauli spoke of `Einstein's neurotic misunderstanding'.) With an ingenious calculation, J.S.Bell proved that the quantum mechanical result was inconsistent with any attempt to give quantum mechanics a classical background with the help of hidden variables - unless one allows that they interact instantaneously at a distance, and so with infinite speed. (That is not necessarily a violation of relativity theory because it is not possible by this means to achieve signalling.)

In 1982 the experiment was carried out by Aspect and others with the result that quantum mechanics was confirmed, which amazed no one. It is a useful experiment, carried out with great skill, but it is nonsense to label it as `one of the most significant discoveries of the century'$^{[12]}$. It is more appropriate to compare it to Foucault's pendulum experiment, which confirmed something already known, than with the experiment of Michelson and Morley, which revealed an unknown world. Also Bell's result is not `one of the most remarkable results of the twentieth century'$^{[13]}$ Unsuccessful experiments, that is to say experiments that do not give the expected results, are much more important than the successful ones which give precisely what one expected. The whole episode of the EPR paradox leads only to the conclusion that quantum mechanics is unsettling, but inescapable, unless one stubbornly clings to the hidden variables of de Broglie and Bohm, and accepts into the bargain [takes for granted] that they interact instantaneously$^{[14]}$.

\section{References}

1. M. Jammer \textit{The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics} (Wiley-Interscience, New York 1974); L.E. Ballantine, Amer. J. Phys. $\boldsymbol{55}$, 785 (1987).\\2. L.R. Graham, \textit{Science and Philosophy in the Soviet Union} (Allen Lane, London 1973)\\3. D.M. Greenberger ed., \textit{New Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory} ( New York Acad. Sci., New York 1986 ).\\4. P.C.W. Davies and J.R. Brown eds. \textit{The Ghost in the Atom} (Cambridge Univ. Press 1986).\\ 5. N.G. van Kampen, Physica A $\boldsymbol{153}$, 97 (1988)\\ 6. J. von Neumann, \textit{Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik} (Springer, Berlin 1932)\\7. N. G. van Kampen, Physica $\boldsymbol{20}$, 603 (1954)\\8. G.C.Ghirardi, A. Rimini, and T. Weber, Phys. Rev. D $\boldsymbol{34}$, 470 (1986).\\9. B.S. DeWitt and N. Graham eds., \textit{The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics} (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton 1973).\\10. F. London et E. Bauer, \textit{La th{$\acute e$}orie de l'observation en m{$\acute e$}chanique quantique} (Hermann, Paris 1939); E.P. Wigner, \textit{Symmetries and Reflections} (Indiana Univ. Press, Bloomington, 1967) p 171.\\ 11. M. Renniger, Z. Physik $\boldsymbol{158}$, 417 (1960).\\ 12. M. Talbot, \textit{Beyond the Quantum} ( Bantham Books , Toronto 1987) p 1.\\ 13. E. Squires, \textit{ The Mystery of the Quantum World} ( Adam Hilger, Bristol 1986)\\ 14. J.S. Bell, Lecture at Groningen 16 October 1989.

\begin{center}
    \textbf{\large{End of the translation of “Het Postmoderne Obscurantisme"}}
\end{center}

\begin{center}
    \textbf{\large{Translator's Acknowledgements}}
\end{center}

I am grateful to Prof Brad Foreman for suggesting, on seeing a draft, that such a translation be published and also for many helpful discussions on the quantum measurement problem generally. I also thank Prof Ubbo Felderhof for valuable comments and suggestions on the translation in an earlier version of the manuscript. Any shortcomings in the present version, of course, are the responsibility of the translator. And I thank Prof Stewart Clark for his interest and support.\\
This translation is published with the permission of the executor,
Mr drs. A.J.van der Sloot, of Prof N G van Kampen's estate whose ready willingness to help is much appreciated. I am also grateful to Prof Gerard 't Hooft, as nephew to Prof N G van Kampen, for correspondence on his aspirations for the proposed translation.

\end{document}