• Chinese Physics B
  • Vol. 29, Issue 9, (2020)
Hamed Rezania and Farshad Azizi
Author Affiliations
  • Department of Physics, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
  • show less
    DOI: 10.1088/1674-1056/ab942e Cite this Article
    Hamed Rezania, Farshad Azizi. Charge structure factors of doped armchair nanotubes in the presence of electron–phonon interaction[J]. Chinese Physics B, 2020, 29(9): Copy Citation Text show less
    Crystal structure of honeycomb lattice with two different sublattices. Here a1 and a2 are the primitive unit cell vectors.
    Fig. 1. Crystal structure of honeycomb lattice with two different sublattices. Here a1 and a2 are the primitive unit cell vectors.
    Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of gap parameter Δ/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetic field is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2.
    Fig. 2. Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of gap parameter Δ/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetic field is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2.
    Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of doped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of chemical potential ω/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetization is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2. The gap parameter has been fixed at Δ/t = 0.8.
    Fig. 3. Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of doped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of chemical potential ω/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetization is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2. The gap parameter has been fixed at Δ/t = 0.8.
    Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of next nearest neighbor hopping amplitude t′/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetization is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2. The gap parameter has been fixed at Δ/t = 0.8.
    Fig. 4. Imaginary part of dynamical charge susceptibility (Imχ(q0,ω)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized frequency ω/t for different values of next nearest neighbor hopping amplitude t′/t for fixed temperature kBT/t = 0.05. The magnetization is assumed to be zero. The electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.2. The gap parameter has been fixed at Δ/t = 0.8.
    Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different values of gap parameter Δ/t in the absence of instantanous magnetization. The normalized electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.05.
    Fig. 5. Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different values of gap parameter Δ/t in the absence of instantanous magnetization. The normalized electron–phonon coupling constant has been fixed as g/t = 0.05.
    Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different electron–phonon coupling strength g/t in the absence of instantaneous magnetization. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Fig. 6. Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different electron–phonon coupling strength g/t in the absence of instantaneous magnetization. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different magnetization values of M at fixed g/t = 0.2. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Fig. 7. Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different magnetization values of M at fixed g/t = 0.2. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different normalized chemical potential values μ/t at fixed g/t = 0.2. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Fig. 8. Static charge susceptibility (S(q0,T)) of undoped armchair nanotube (5,5) as a function of normalized temperature kBT/t for different normalized chemical potential values μ/t at fixed g/t = 0.2. The normalized gap parameter has been fixed as Δ/t = 0.8.
    Hamed Rezania, Farshad Azizi. Charge structure factors of doped armchair nanotubes in the presence of electron–phonon interaction[J]. Chinese Physics B, 2020, 29(9):
    Download Citation