Phase transition properties of the spin-1 Blume–Emery–Griffiths model with random transverse crystal field

The Effects of the Random Transverse Crystal Field on the Spin-1 Model

“…In addition, it was also found that the model also yields critical end points and the end points for the rst-order phase transition lines for appropriate values of p which was not observed in the previous works i.e. [16,17]. The T t tail is short as seen in the inset of Fig.…”

“…The T t tail is short as seen in the inset of Fig. 2c that is why its existence might have escaped from the eye in [16,17]. Clearly, the transverse CF and its randomness aect the critical behaviors of the model considerably.…”

“…The phase transition properties of the spin-1 BlumeEmery Griths model with random transverse CF were studied by the EFT on simple cubic lattice. The phase diagrams were obtained in the T D x space with the ratio α between the biquadratic interaction and the exchange interaction as well as a tunable parameter l of the transverse CF [16]. The critical properties of random transverse CF Ising model with bond dilution were studied on a square lattice with EFT.…”

Terminological confusions and problems at the interface between the crystal field Hamiltonians and the zero-field splitting Hamiltonians—Survey of the CF=ZFS confusion in recent literature

“…Zaim et al [159]: Monte Carlo study of a mixed spin-1/2 and spin-1 Blume-Capel ferrimagnetic model with four-spin interaction; 'D is the crystal field interaction'. Qian and Yan [160]: Phase transition properties of the spin-1 Blume-Emery-Griffiths model with random transverse crystal field; 'D x,i represents the transverse crystal field'. Keskin et al [161]: Dynamic Phase Diagrams of a Mixed Spin-1 and Spin-5/2 Ising System in an Oscillating Magnetic Field; a single-ion potential or crystal-field interaction (D)'.…”

“…Had the authors attempted to utilize their theoretical results for description of any real transition ion systems, they would run into a dilemma, which 'CFP' values to adopt for calculations. One of us (CZR) has recently informed the authors [155][156][157][158][159][160][161] in private correspondence about the CF ¼ZFS confusion in their papers, however, regrettably, no response has been received so far.…”