text:
# Relation between Vortex Excitation and Thermal Conductivity in Superconductors

## 1 Introduction

Recent advance to synthesize new exotic superconducting materials further requires the experimental probes to precisely identify their pairing functions consisting of the orbital and spin components. The orbital part of the pairing function determines the nodal structure of the energy gap on the Fermi surface. Thermal conductivity is one of the standard techniques to probe the node of the gap structure Lussier ; Izawa ; Nishira ; Hirschfeld1996 ; Schmitt ; Suderow . One can basically extract the gap topology such as line or point nodes by analyzing its dependence on the temperature $`T`$.

In the vortex state under a magnetic field, the thermal conductivity is affected by the low energy quasiparticle state around the vortex Suderow ; Sousa ; Aubin1999 . So far, the thermal conductivity in the vortex state has been investigated by the theory of gapless superconductors at high field Houghton ; Yin , or the theory considering vortices as scattering centers Cleary . Recently, the thermal conductivity in the vortex state of high-$`T_\mathrm{c}`$ superconductors attracts much attention, because the quasiparticle states are qualitatively different in the vortex state between the $`d`$-wave pairing case and the conventional $`s`$-wave pairing cases. In the $`s`$-wave pairing, low energy quasiparticle states are bounded around the vortex core CdGM ; HayashiPRL . In the $`d`$-wave pairing, low energy quasiparticle states around the vortex extend outside of the vortex core due to the line node of the superconducting gap Volovik ; Ichioka96 ; Ichioka99A ; Ichioka99B ; FranzBdG ; Franz2000 . The contribution to the thermal conductivity from the quasiparticles outside of the core is investigated by the theory of the Doppler shift (or the Dirac fermion) in the $`d`$-wave pairing case Kubert ; Vekhter ; Franz01 . Since these theory neglect the contribution from the quasiparticle within the vortex core Volovik , they are not applied to the $`s`$-wave superconductors.

Here, we calculate the $`T`$-dependence of the thermal conductivity under a field. Our calculation is based on a microscopic theory of Bogoliubov-de Gennes (BdG) equation for describing the vortex state Wang ; TakigawaPRL ; TakigawaJPSJ  and standard linear response theory for the thermal conductivity Kadanoff ; Ambegaokar , assuming a clean-limit type II superconductors. Our calculation includes all contributions from the inside and the outside region of the vortex core. The spatial distribution of the thermal conductivity is calculated from the wave function of the vortex lattice state, and analyzed by compared with the spatial distribution of the local density of states (LDOS).

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 2, we describe our formulation based on the BdG equation and the linear response theory. In Sec. 3, we study the dependence of the thermal conductivity on the temperature in the vortex state. We also show the position-resolved thermal conductivity and its energy decomposition, and discuss the relation with the LDOS. In Sec. 4, we investigate the electric conductivity in the same formulation, and discuss the difference of the quasiparticle contribution between the thermal conductivity and electric conductivity. The summary and discussions are given in Sec. 5.

## 2 Formulation

### 2.1 Bogoliubov-de Gennes equation

We obtain the wave function in the vortex lattice state by solving the BdG equation for the extended Hubbard model Wang ; TakigawaPRL ; TakigawaJPSJ  defined on a two dimensional square lattice. From this model, we obtain qualitatively the same quasi particle structure as previous theoretical studies both for the $`s`$-wave CdGM ; HayashiPRL  case and for the $`d`$-wave Volovik ; Ichioka96 ; Ichioka99A ; Ichioka99B ; FranzBdG ; Franz2000  case. Here we briefly discuss the BdG equation for the $`s`$-wave pairing and the $`d`$-wave pairing cases, which is written as

$$\underset{j}{}\left(\begin{array}{cc}K_{i,j}& D_{i,j}\\ D_{i,j}^{}& K_{i,j}^{}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}u_\alpha (𝐫_j)\\ v_\alpha (𝐫_j)\end{array}\right)=E_\alpha \left(\begin{array}{c}u_\alpha (𝐫_i)\\ v_\alpha (𝐫_i)\end{array}\right),$$
(1)
where

$`K_{i,j}=\stackrel{~}{t}_{i,j}\delta _{i,j}\mu ,`$ (2)
$`\stackrel{~}{t}_{i,j}=t_{i,j}\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{\varphi _0}}{\displaystyle _{𝐫_i}^{𝐫_j}}𝐀(𝐫)𝑑𝐫],`$ (3)
$`D_{i,j}=\delta _{i,j}U\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,i}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}V_{i,j}\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,j}`$ (4)
with the on-site interaction $`U`$, the flux quantum $`\varphi _0`$ and the chemical potential $`\mu `$. The nearest neighbor (NN) transfer integral $`t_{i,j}=t`$ and the NN interaction $`V_{i,j}=V`$ for the NN site pair $`𝐫_i`$ and $`𝐫_{i\pm \widehat{e}}`$. The vector potential $`𝐀(𝐫)=\frac{1}{2}𝐇\times 𝐫`$ in the symmetric gauge. Since we assume an extreme type-II superconductor, the internal field term of $`𝐀(𝐫)`$ is neglected. The self-consistent condition for the pair potential is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,j}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\alpha }{}u_\alpha (𝐫_i)v_\alpha ^{}(𝐫_j)\mathrm{tanh}(E_\alpha /2T).$$
(5)
The $`s`$-wave pair potential is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_s(𝐫_i)=U\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,i}.$$
(6)
The $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-wave pair potential is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_d(𝐫_i)=\frac{V}{4}(\mathrm{\Delta }_{\widehat{x},i}+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\widehat{x},i}\mathrm{\Delta }_{\widehat{y},i}\mathrm{\Delta }_{\widehat{y},i})$$
(7)
with

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{\pm \widehat{e},i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,i\pm \widehat{e}}\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{i}\frac{\pi }{\varphi _0}_{𝐫_i}^{(𝐫_i+𝐫_{i\pm \widehat{e}})/2}𝐀(𝐫)𝑑𝐫].$$
(8)
We study the case of the square vortex lattice where the NN vortex is located in the direction of $`45^{}`$ from the $`a`$-axis. This vortex lattice configuration is suggested for $`d`$-wave superconductors and $`s`$-wave superconductors with fourfold symmetric Fermi surface Ichioka99B ; IchiokaGL ; DeWilde ; Kogan ; Won . The unit cell in our calculation is the square area of $`N_r`$2 sites where two vortices are accommodated. Then, $`H=2\varphi _0/(aN_r)^2`$ with the lattice constant $`a`$. Thus, we denote the field strength by $`N_r`$ as $`H_{N_r}`$. Since $`H`$ should be commensurate with the atomic lattice, our formulation does not treat the field dependence continuously. We consider the area of $`N_k`$2 unit cells. By introducing the quasi-momentum of the magnetic Bloch state, $`𝐤=(2\pi /aN_rN_k)(l_x,l_y):(l_x,l_y=1,2,\mathrm{},N_k)`$, we set $`u_\alpha (𝐫)=\stackrel{~}{u}_\alpha (𝐫)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}𝐤𝐫},v_\alpha (𝐫)=\stackrel{~}{v}_\alpha (𝐫)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}𝐤𝐫}`$. Then, the eigen-state of $`\alpha `$ is labeled by k and the eigenvalues obtained by this calculation within a unit cell.

The periodic boundary condition is given by the symmetry for the translation $`𝐑=l_x𝐑_x^0+l_y𝐑_y^0`$, where $`𝐑_x^0=(aN_r,0)`$ and $`𝐑_y^0=(0,aN_r)`$ are unit vectors of the unit cell for our calculation. Then, the translational relation is given by $`\stackrel{~}{u}_\alpha (𝐫+𝐑)=\stackrel{~}{u}_\alpha (𝐫)\mathrm{e}^{i\chi (𝐫,𝐑)/2},\stackrel{~}{v}_\alpha (𝐫+𝐑)=\stackrel{~}{v}_\alpha (𝐫)\mathrm{e}^{i\chi (𝐫,𝐑)/2}`$. Here,

$$\chi (𝐫,𝐑)=\frac{2\pi }{\varphi _0}𝐀(𝐑)𝐫2\pi l_x(l_xl_y)+\frac{2\pi }{\varphi _0}(𝐇\times 𝐫_0)𝐑$$
(9)
in the symmetric gauge. The vortex center is located at $`𝐫_0+\frac{1}{4}(3𝐑_x^0+𝐑_y^0)`$. The phase factor in Eq. (8) is necessary to satisfy the translational relation $`\mathrm{\Delta }_d(𝐫+𝐑)=\mathrm{\Delta }_d(𝐫)\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\chi (𝐫,𝐑)}`$.

The following parameter values are chosen in the calculation. The average electron density per site $`0.9`$ by appropriately adjusting the chemical potential $`\mu `$. We normalize all the energy scales by the transfer integral $`t`$. For the $`s`$-wave case, we set $`U=2.32t`$ and $`V=0`$. The resulting order parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=0.5t`$ at $`T=H=0`$, and the superconducting transition temperature $`T_c`$ $``$ $`0.27t`$. For the $`d`$-wave case, we set $`U=0`$ and $`V=4.2t`$. Then, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=1.0t`$, and $`T_c`$ $``$ $`0.42t`$. Our results do not qualitatively depend on the choice of these parameters.

### 2.2 Local density of states

In order to calculate physical quantities, we must construct the Green’s functions from $`E_\alpha `$,$`u_\alpha (𝐫)`$,$`v_\alpha (𝐫)`$ in the formulation of imaginary time $`\tau `$ and Fermionic Matsubara frequency $`\omega _n=2\pi T(n+\frac{1}{2})`$. The Matsubara Green’s functions is given by

$$\widehat{g}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_{11}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)& g_{12}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)\\ g_{21}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)& g_{22}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)\end{array}\right),$$
(10)
where matrix components are Fourier transformation of

$`g_{11}(𝐫,\tau ,𝐫^{},\tau ^{})=T_\tau [\psi _{}(𝐫,\tau )\psi _{}^{}(𝐫^{},\tau ^{})],`$ (11)
$`g_{12}(𝐫,\tau ,𝐫^{},\tau ^{})=T_\tau [\psi _{}(𝐫,\tau )\psi _{}(𝐫^{},\tau ^{})],`$ (12)
$`g_{21}(𝐫,\tau ,𝐫^{},\tau ^{})=T_\tau [\psi _{}^{}(𝐫,\tau )\psi _{}^{}(𝐫^{},\tau ^{})],`$ (13)
$`g_{22}(𝐫,\tau ,𝐫^{},\tau ^{})=T_\tau [\psi _{}^{}(𝐫,\tau )\psi _{}(𝐫^{},\tau ^{})].`$ (14)
The Green’s functions in Eq. (10) as follows,TakigawaJPSJ

$`g_{11}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\alpha (𝐫)u_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})}{\mathrm{i}\omega _nE_\alpha }},`$ (15)
$`g_{12}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_\alpha (𝐫)v_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})}{\mathrm{i}\omega _nE_\alpha }},`$ (16)
$`g_{21}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_\alpha (𝐫)u_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})}{\mathrm{i}\omega _nE_\alpha }},`$ (17)
$`g_{22}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_\alpha (𝐫)v_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})}{\mathrm{i}\omega _nE_\alpha }}.`$ (18)
From the LDOS is given by the thermal Green’s functions as

$`N_{}(E,𝐫)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}\mathrm{Im}g_{11}(𝐫,𝐫,\mathrm{i}\omega _nE+\mathrm{i0}^+)`$ (19)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}|u_\alpha (𝐫)|^2\delta (EE_\alpha )`$
for the up-spin electron contributions, and

$`N_{}(E,𝐫)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}\mathrm{Im}g_{22}(𝐫,𝐫,\mathrm{i}\omega _nE+\mathrm{i0}^+)`$ (20)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}|v_\alpha (𝐫)|^2\delta (E+E_\alpha )`$
for the down-spin electron contributions. Therefor, the LDOS is given by

$`N(E,𝐫)`$ $`=N_{}(E,𝐫)+N_{}(E,𝐫)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\{|u_\alpha (𝐫)|^2\delta (EE_\alpha )+|v_\alpha (𝐫)|^2\delta (E+E_\alpha )\}.`$
### 2.3 Linear response theory

We calculate the thermal conductivity following the method of Refs. Kadanoff  and Ambegaokar . According to the linear response theory, thermal current $`h_x(𝐫_1)`$ flowing to the $`x`$-direction at $`𝐫_1`$-site is given by

$`h_x(𝐫_1)=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐫_2}{}}\mathrm{Re}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{i}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }}}Q_{xx}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{i0}^+)\}_{\mathrm{\Omega }0}`$
$`\times (_xT(𝐫_2)),`$ (22)
when the small temperature gradient $`_xT(𝐫_2)`$ along the $`x`$-direction is applied at $`𝐫_2`$-site. The heat-heat correlation function is defined by

$`Q_{xx}(𝐫_1\tau _1,𝐫_2\tau _2)=T_\tau [h_x(𝐫_1\tau _1),h_x(𝐫_2\tau _2)]`$
$`=T{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n(\tau _1\tau _2)}Q_{xx}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n)`$ (23)
in the formulation of imaginary time $`\tau `$ and Matsubara frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_n`$. The heat current operator $`𝐡(𝐫_j,\tau )`$ is written as

$`𝐡(𝐫_j,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2m}}\left(𝐏_j{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau ^{}}}𝐏_j^{}^{}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}\right)`$ (24)
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}\psi _\sigma ^{}(𝐫_j^{},\tau ^{})\psi _\sigma (𝐫_j,\tau )|_{j=j^{},\tau =\tau ^{}}`$
in terms of the electron field operators $`\psi _\sigma (𝐫_j,\tau )`$. The $`x`$-component of the momentum operator $`𝐏_j`$ in the discretized square lattice is defined as

$$[𝐏_j\psi _\sigma (𝐫_j,\tau )]_x=𝐚\frac{2mt}{\mathrm{i}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}(\pi /\varphi _0)𝐚𝐀(𝐫_j+𝐚/2)}\psi _\sigma (𝐫_j+𝐚,\tau )$$
(25)
with $`𝐚=(a,0)`$. Four electron field operators in Eq. (23) are decomposed by using the Matsubara Green’s functions in Eqs. (15)-(18) .

For the study of the thermal conductivity, we have to introduce the dissipation term $`\eta `$ in the Green’s function. Then, the retarded and advanced Green’s functions are, respectively, given by $`\widehat{G}^\mathrm{R}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )=\widehat{g}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n\omega +\mathrm{i}\eta )`$ and $`\widehat{G}^\mathrm{A}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )=\widehat{g}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n\omega \mathrm{i}\eta )`$. Therefore, in the spectral representation, we obtain

$$\widehat{g}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\mathrm{i}\omega _n)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega }{2\pi }\frac{\widehat{A}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )}{\mathrm{i}\omega _n\omega },$$
(26)
where

$`\widehat{A}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{i}}}\left(\widehat{G}^\mathrm{R}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )\widehat{G}^\mathrm{A}(𝐫,𝐫^{},\omega )\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\delta _\eta (\omega E_\alpha )\left(\begin{array}{cc}u_\alpha (𝐫)u_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})& u_\alpha (𝐫)v_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})\\ v_\alpha (𝐫)u_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})& v_\alpha (𝐫)v_\alpha ^{}(𝐫^{})\end{array}\right)`$ (29)
with $`\delta _\eta (\omega )=\eta [\pi (\omega ^2+\eta ^2)]^1`$.

As a result, the heat-heat correlation function is reduced to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }}}Q_{𝐏_1𝐏_2}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{i0}^+)|_{\mathrm{\Omega }=0}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4m^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$
$`\times [𝐏_1u_\alpha (𝐫_1)u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})+u_\alpha (𝐫_1)𝐏_1^{}^{}u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})`$
$`+𝐏_1^{}v_\alpha (𝐫_1)v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})+v_\alpha (𝐫_1)𝐏_1^{}v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})]`$
$`\times [𝐏_2u_\alpha (𝐫_2)u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})+u_\alpha (𝐫_2)𝐏_2^{}^{}u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})`$
$`+𝐏_2^{}v_\alpha (𝐫_2)v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})+v_\alpha (𝐫_2)𝐏_2^{}v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})]|_{1=1^{},2=2^{}},`$ (30)
where

$`F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}\omega }{2\pi }\frac{\mathrm{d}\omega ^{}}{2\pi }\delta _\eta (\omega E_\alpha )\delta _\eta (\omega ^{}E_\beta )}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{P}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2f(\omega )\omega ^2f(\omega ^{})}{(\omega \omega ^{})^2}}+\mathrm{i}\pi \omega ^2f^{}(\omega )\delta (\omega \omega ^{})].`$ (31)
When the temperature gradient $`_xT(𝐫_2)`$ is uniform, the position-resolved thermal conductivity is written as

$`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫_1)={\displaystyle \frac{h_x(𝐫_1)}{_xT}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}\mathrm{Im}\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐫_2}{}}Q_{xx}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{i0}^+)\}.`$ (32)
The spatially averaged thermal conductivity

$$\kappa _{xx}=\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐫_1}{}\kappa _{xx}(𝐫_1)$$
(33)
is observed in the experiment. $`N`$ is the total number of sites. At zero field, our formulation for $`\kappa _{xx}`$ is reduced to the well-known formula for the uniform superconductors in the presence of impurity scattering Kadanoff .

Using the wave function $`u_\alpha (𝐫)`$, $`v_\alpha (𝐫)`$ and the eigen-energy $`E_\alpha `$ in Eq. (1), we calculate the dependence of $`\kappa _{xx}`$ on the temperature and the field. And to analyze this behavior, we also study the spatial structure of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$, i.e., the local contribution to $`\kappa _{xx}`$, Here, we neglect the principal value integral term $`\mathrm{Re}F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ in Eq. (31), because the contribution from this term vanishes in the spatial average of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$. We typically choose $`\eta =0.01t`$.

## 3 Thermal Conductivity

### 3.1 Temperature dependence of thermal conductivity

The $`T`$-dependence of $`\kappa _{xx}(T)`$ is shown in Figs. 1(a) and (b) for the $`s`$-wave and the $`d`$-wave pairing cases, respectively. For the $`s`$-wave pairing, it shows exponential $`T`$-dependence due to the full gap of the $`s`$-wave superconductivity at $`H=0`$. It changes into a $`T`$-linear behavior at low $`T`$ region in the vortex state at $`H0`$, reflecting low energy quasiparticle state around the vortex. We see also that the deviation from the expected $`T`$ dependence occurs by the impurity effect at very low temperature around $`T2\eta =0.02t`$. As for the $`d`$-wave pairing in Fig. 1(b), The zero field case shows the $`T^2`$-behavior Schmitt ; Hirschfeld1996 , which ischaracteristic of the line node of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-wave superconductivity. For $`H0`$, it is modified to the $`T`$-linear dependence Suderow ; Aubin1999  at low $`T`$ region.

It is seen in Fig. 1 that there exists a crossover temperature $`T^{}`$ both in the $`s`$-wave and the $`d`$-wave pairing cases, when we consider the dependence of $`\kappa _{xx}(T)`$ on the magnetic field. At lower temperature $`T<T^{}`$, $`\kappa _{xx}(T)`$ increases with raising magnetic field. However, at higher temperature $`T>T^{}`$, $`\kappa _{xx}(T)`$ decreases as a function of $`H`$. It is also noteworthy that $`\kappa _{xx}(T)`$ shows the $`T`$-linear behavior at $`T<T^{}`$, while it deviates from $`T`$-linear at $`T>T^{}`$. In our parameter, $`T^{}0.10t`$ in the $`s`$-wave case, and $`T^{}0.06t`$ in the $`d`$-wave case.

### 3.2 Position-resolved thermal conductivity

To understand the abovementioned difference between $`T<T^{}`$ and $`T>T^{}`$, we analyze the position-resolved $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ of Eq.(32), and investigate how the local thermal flow contributes to the total thermal conductivity. The spatial structures of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ are shown in Fig. 2 for the $`s`$-wave pairing and in Fig. 3 for the $`d`$-wave pairing from low temperature to high temperature. As for the vortex core size, the order parameter recovers at two or three lattice sites from the vortex center at low temperatures. It is seen for both pairing cases that the heat flows exclusively at the core region at low $`T`$. It comes from the available low energy excitations around the vortex core. Around the core region the heat flow extends to the NN vortex direction. It is due to the inter-vortex quasi-particle transfer effect. With increasing $`T`$, the the contributing region of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ becomes wider around the vortex core and the lines between NN vortices, as seen in Figs. 2(b) and 3(b). On the other hand, at higher temperature $`T>T^{}`$, the dominant contribution comes from the outside region of the vortex core. Since $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is suppressed at the vortex core, the vortex core behaves as if it is a scattering center for the thermal flow. Also along the line connecting NN vortices, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is slightly suppressed. At further high $`T`$, the heat flows rather uniformly at all region. These higher temperature structure of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ comes from the contribution of the scattering state at $`E>|\mathrm{\Delta }|`$, as discussed later.

Let us discuss important differences between the $`s`$-wave and the $`d`$-wave pairing cases. At lower temperature $`T=0.01t`$, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is well localized at the core region in the $`s`$-wave case (Fig. 2(a)) compared with the $`d`$-wave case (Fig. 3(a)). This difference comes from the line node contribution of the $`d`$-wave superconductivity. Due to the line node, the low energy quasiparticle states extend outside of the vortex core, especially to the $`45^{}`$ direction from $`a`$ and $`b`$ axis of the crystal lattice Ichioka96 ; Ichioka99B . At higher temperature $`T=0.09t`$, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is well suppressed at the core region in $`d`$-wave case (Fig. 2(c)), and it is not too suppressed at the core region in $`s`$-wave case (Fig. 3(c)). To understand these characteristic behavior of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$, we consider the relation between the thermal conductivity and the LDOS.

### 3.3 Relation with the local density of states

In Eq. (30), temperature dependence comes from the function $`F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ in Eq. (31). It determines which energy level dominantly contributes to the thermal conductivity. To see it, we show the $`E_\alpha `$ and $`E_\beta `$ dependence of $`\mathrm{Im}F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ in Fig. 4. From the figure, we see that $`\mathrm{Im}F(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ becomes large on the line $`E_\alpha =E_\beta `$. Along the line $`E_\alpha =E_\beta =E`$, we obtain

$`\mathrm{Im}F(E,E)=E^2f^{}(E).`$ (34)
Then, $`\mathrm{Im}F(E,E)`$ vanishes at $`E=0`$, and has two peaks at finite energy, which are symmetric with respect to $`E=0`$. The distance of these peaks is about $`5\sqrt{2}T`$. It means that the quasiparticle states at these peak energy $`E\pm 2.5T`$ dominantly contributes to $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$. At low temperature, the dominant contribution comes from the low energy quasiparticle state around the vortex core. However, at higher temperature, the scattering states at $`E>\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$ dominantly contribute to the thermal conductivity. In this respect, thermal conductivity is qualitatively different from other physical quantities such as electric conductivity, specific heat Volovik ; Ichioka99A ; Wang , nuclear magnetic relaxation time TakigawaPRL ; TakigawaJPSJ . In these quantities, the quasiparticles at $`E0`$ gives largest contribution in all temperature regions. We discuss the electric conductivity at Sec. 4.

At each energy level $`E_\alpha `$, the contribution to the spatial structure of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is determined from the spatial distribution of the wave functions $`u_\alpha (𝐫)`$ and $`v_\alpha (𝐫)`$. Then, we show the spatial structure of the LDOS at several energies for the $`s`$-wave pairing in Fig. 5 and for the $`d`$-wave pairing in Fig. 6. In the $`s`$-wave pairing, the low energy quasiparticle states are bounded within the vortex core region, and the quantized energy levels appear at half integer energy $`E_n=(n+\frac{1}{2})E_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ CdGM ; HayashiPRL . Here, $`E_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the level spacing of the order $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0^2/E_\mathrm{F}`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ is the superconducting gap at zero field and $`E_\mathrm{F}`$ is Fermi energy. With the BdG theory at clean limit, since the vortex core radius shrinks to the atomic scale with lowering temperature by the Kramer-Pesch effect Kramer ; Pesch , the quantization effect eminently appears at $`T0`$. Then, there are no states just at $`E=0`$ because of the small gap by the quantization in the $`s`$-wave pairing. At the lowest energy level $`E0.17t`$ in Fig. 5(a), the LDOS $`N(E,𝐫)`$ has sharp peak at the vortex center. It is a bound state in the vortex core. At higher energy, the LDOS has peak along a circle around each vortex (Fig. 5(b)). The radius of the circle increases with raising energy. We also see the small ridge between NN vortices. It is due to the inter-vortex transfer of the low energy bound states. At $`E\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the circle of the LDOS peak around the vortex overlaps each other (Fig. 5(c)). At higher energy than $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the LDOS are reduced to the uniform structure, though the LDOS is slightly suppressed at the vortex core region (Fig. 5(d)). These energy dependence is consistent with the results of the quasiclassical calculation Ichioka97 ; IchiokaJS .

For the $`d`$-wave pairing in Fig. 6, since the low energy states extends outside of the vortex core due to the node of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$-wave superconducting gap, energy levels becomes continuous FranzBdG ; Franz2000 ; Wang ; TakigawaPRL ; TakigawaJPSJ . In Fig. 6(a), there is a peak of the LDOS at the vortex core at $`E=0`$, which corresponds to the zero-bias peak in th spectrum at the vortex center. With increasing $`E`$, the peak of the LDOS is shifted to the outside of the vortex, and it is slightly suppressed at the vortex center, as shown in Fig. 6(b). In the $`d`$-wave case, the large LDOS region shows the fourfold symmetric structure instead of the circle structure of the $`s`$-wave case. At $`E\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the LDOS peak around the vortex is shifted to the boundary region between vortices (Fig. 6(c)). At higher energy than $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the LDOS are reduced to the uniform structure (Fig. 6(d)).

### 3.4 Energy decomposition of thermal conductivity

To discuss the contribution of the LDOS structure to the spatial structure of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$, We decompose $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ of Eqs. (30) and (32) into the low energy contribution from $`|E_\alpha |,|E_\beta |<\mathrm{\Delta }(T)/2`$ and the high energy contribution from $`|E_\alpha |,|E_\beta |>\mathrm{\Delta }(T)/2`$. The $`s`$-wave pairing case is shown in Fig. 8. The upper panels (a) and (b) present the low energy contribution of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$, which are localized around the vortex core and along the line connecting NN vortices. It is because the low energy states for $`|E|<\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$ are localized around the vortex core and there are some inter-vortex quasiparticle transfer along the NN vortices direction, as shown in Fig. 5(a) and (b). The lower panels (c) and (d) show the higher energy contribution of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ from $`|E_\alpha |,|E_\beta |>\mathrm{\Delta }(T)/2`$. In this energy range, the wave functions are dominantly located outside of the vortex core, as shown in Fig. 5(c) and (d). Then, the higher energy contribution of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is suppressed around the vortex core. The suppression along the NN vortices directions shown in Fig. 8(d) also reflects the spatial structure of the LDOS in Fig. 5(d). At low temperature in Fig. 8(c), spatial structure is determined by the wave function at $`E\mathrm{\Delta }(T)/2`$ in Fig. 5(b). However, at high temperature case in Fig. 8(d), the contribution of the wave function at $`E>\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$ in Fig. 5(d) is dominant.

The $`d`$-wave pairing case is shown in Fig. 8. In the upper panels (a) and (b) for the lower energy contribution, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is larger around the core and the lines connecting NN vortices. It is broadly extending around the vortex, compared with the $`s`$-wave case, because the wave functions are also broadly extending around the vortex core as shown in Fig. 6(a). At higher temperature, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is large outside of the core in Fig. 8(b), though LDOS at $`E=\mathrm{\Delta }(T)/2`$ are little localized around the core. In the lower panels (c) and (d) for the higher energy contribution, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is large outside of the core at every temperature.

Next, we investigate the weight of the energy-decomposed contribution for the spatially averaged $`\kappa _{xx}`$. The temperature dependence is presented in Fig. 9. For both pairing cases, we can see that the low (high) energy contribution is dominant at low (high) temperature. The low (high) energy contribution of the $`d`$-wave pairing case is larger (smaller) compared with the $`s`$-wave pairing case. It is because the $`d`$-wave pairing case has larger DOS at $`|E|<\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$ because the low energy excitation widely extends outside of the vortex core region due to the line node of the superconducting gap. These DOS difference between the $`d`$-wave and the $`s`$-wave pairing cases is also shown by the quasiclassical calculation (Fig. 18 of Ref. Ichioka99B ). The very low temperature behavior in Fig. 9 (a) in the $`s`$-wave pairing at $`T<10^2`$ reflects the small gap of the quantized energy level in the $`s`$-wave pairing.

## 4 Electric conductivity

We can also calculate the electric conductivity, if we consider the electric current operator instead of the thermal current operator. Following the same procedure in Sec. 2.3, the position-resolved electric conductivity is given by

$`\sigma _{xx}(𝐫_1)=\mathrm{Im}\{{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐫_2}{}}Q_{xx}^{\mathrm{el}}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{i0}^+)\}|_{\mathrm{\Omega }0}`$
(35)
with the correlation function

$`Q_{xx}^{\mathrm{el}}(𝐫_1\tau _1,𝐫_2\tau _2)=T_\tau [j_x(𝐫_1\tau _1),j_x(𝐫_2\tau _2)]`$
$`=T{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}e^{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n(\tau _1\tau _2)}Q_{xx}^{\mathrm{el}}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n)`$ (36)
of the electric current operator

$`𝐣(𝐫_j,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|e|}{2m}}(𝐏_j+𝐏_j^{}^{})`$ (37)
$`\times {\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}\psi _\sigma ^{}(𝐫_j^{},\tau )\psi _\sigma (𝐫_j,\tau )|_{j=j^{}}.`$
Using the wave functions of the BdG equation, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Omega }}}Q_{𝐏_1𝐏_2}^{\mathrm{el}}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2,\mathrm{i}\mathrm{\Omega }_n\mathrm{\Omega }+\mathrm{i0}^+)|_{\mathrm{\Omega }=0}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{|e|^2}{4m^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}F^{\mathrm{el}}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$
$`\times [𝐏_1u_\alpha (𝐫_1)u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})+u_\alpha (𝐫_1)𝐏_1^{}^{}u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})`$
$`𝐏_1^{}v_\alpha (𝐫_1)v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})v_\alpha (𝐫_1)𝐏_1^{}v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_1^{})]`$
$`\times [𝐏_2u_\alpha (𝐫_2)u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})+u_\alpha (𝐫_2)𝐏_2^{}^{}u_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})`$
$`𝐏_2^{}v_\alpha (𝐫_2)v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})v_\alpha (𝐫_2)𝐏_2^{}v_\beta ^{}(𝐫_2^{})]|_{1=1^{},2=2^{}},`$ (38)
where

$`F^{\mathrm{el}}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{d\omega ^{}}{2\pi }\delta _\eta (\omega E_\alpha )\delta _\eta (\omega ^{}E_\beta )}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{P}{\displaystyle \frac{f(\omega )f(\omega ^{})}{(\omega \omega ^{})^2}}+\mathrm{i}\pi f^{}(\omega )\delta (\omega \omega ^{})].`$ (39)
We show the $`E_\alpha `$ and $`E_\beta `$ dependence of $`\mathrm{Im}F^{el}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ in Fig. 10. The principal value part of Eq. (39) vanishes by the spatial average of $`\sigma _{xx}(𝐫_1)`$. Then, we consider only the contribution of $`\mathrm{Im}F^{\mathrm{el}}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$, neglecting $`\mathrm{Re}F^{\mathrm{el}}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$. The function $`\mathrm{Im}F^{\mathrm{el}}(E_\alpha ,E_\beta )`$ becomes large for $`E_\alpha E_\beta `$. Along the line $`E_\alpha =E_\beta =E`$, we obtain $`\mathrm{Im}F^{\mathrm{el}}(E,E)=f^{}(E)`$. It has maximum at $`E=0`$ in all temperature region. Then, the low energy quasiparticle states around the vortex core dominantly contribute to $`\sigma _{xx}(𝐫)`$ even at higher $`T`$. We present $`\sigma _{xx}(𝐫)`$ in Fig. 11(a),(b) for the $`s`$-wave pairing case and in Fig. 11(c),(d) for the $`d`$-wave pairing case. Even at higher temperature \[(b) and (d)\], the dominant contribution to $`\sigma _{xx}`$ comes from the vortex core region as in the low temperature case \[(a) and (c)\]. This is contrasted with the thermal conductivity case, whose dominant contribution comes from the outside of the vortex core at high temperatuer, as discussed in Sec. 3. Compared to the $`s`$-wave pairing case\[(a) and (b)\], $`\sigma _{xx}(𝐫)`$ widely extends toward the outside of the vortex core in the $`d`$-wave pairing case \[(c) and (d)\]. It reflects the extending low energy quasiparticles due to the line node of the $`d`$-wave superconducting gap.

## 5 Summary and Discussions

We have formulated thermal conductivity in mixed state based on a microscopic theory of BdG equation and linear response theory. The $`T`$-dependence of thermal conductivity $`\kappa _{xx}`$ for the $`s`$-wave and the $`d`$-wave pairing is calculated. Their behaviors are analyzed in terms of the position-resolved thermal conductivity $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$. And we discuss the relation between $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ and the LDOS of the quasiparticles around the vortex.

There is a crossover temperature $`T^{}`$. At lower temperature $`T<T^{}`$, $`\kappa _{xx}`$ is increased with raising magnetic field. In these temperature region, thermal flow is dominantly carried by the low energy quasiparticles around the vortex core and their inter-vortex transfer. Then, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is large around the vortex core and the lines connecting NN vortices. On the other hand, at higher temperature $`T>T^{}`$, $`\kappa _{xx}`$ is decreased at higher field. In these temperature, the contribution to the thermal conductivity comes from higher energy quasiparticles including the scattering state at $`E>\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$. Therefore, $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is suppressed at the vortex core region. Then, vortex core works as if the scattering center for the thermal flow. These contributions from the higher energy states at higher temperature is a characteristic of thermal conductivity. For other quantities such as electric conductivity, specific heat, nuclear magnetic relaxation time, the low energy state gives largest contribution at all temperature regions.

The difference between the $`s`$-wave pairing and the $`d`$-wave pairing comes from the node structure of the superconducting gap. The $`d`$-wave pairing case has larger contribution from the low energy quasiparticle states. The low temperature distribution of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ is broadly extending around the vortex in the $`d`$-wave case, because the wave functions are broadly extending around the vortex core due to the node structure.

Our caluclation has reproduced experimental results of the $`T`$-linear behavior at low temperature in the vortex states ($`H0`$), and the existance of the crossover temperature $`T^{}`$ in the field dependence. The crossover temperature $`T^{}`$ are reported both in the conventional $`s`$-wave superconductor such as Nb (Ref. Sousa ) and in the high-$`T_\mathrm{c}`$ superconductors such as $`\mathrm{Bi}_2\mathrm{Sr}_2\mathrm{CaCu}_2\mathrm{O}_8`$ (Ref. Aubin1999 ) and in the $`f`$-wave superconductor $`\mathrm{UPt}_3`$ (Ref. Suderow ). These experimental results have been explained as follows. At low temperature, vortex assist the thermal flow due to the low energy quasiparticle state around the vortex core. At higher temperature, vortex behaves as the scattering center for the thermal flow. Our numerical results of $`\kappa _{xx}(𝐫)`$ are consistent to this picture. While the field dependence of $`\kappa _{xx}`$ is important, our calculation cannot examine the contunuous field dependence because we consider the field $`H=2\varphi _0/(aN_r)^2`$ depending on the size of the unit cell. At higher temperature, there appears the effect of the $`T`$-depending $`\eta `$ due to the inelastic scattering by antiferro magnetic spin flactuations Yu ; Hirschfeld1986 ; Matsukawa . For the further extention of our calculation, we will examine the effect of the $`T`$-dependence or the position dependence (inside or outside of the vortex core) of the scattering parameter $`\eta `$.

## 6 Acknkowledgement

The authors thank N.Hayashi for useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Topological Confinement of Spins and Charges: Spinons as limit-from𝜋- junctions.

## I Introduction to solitons.

Topological defects: solitons, vortices, anyons, etc., are discussed currently, see , in connection to new trends in physics of quantum devices, see . Closest to applications and particularly addressed at this conference  are the $`\pi `$ junctions which, linking two superconductors, provide degeneracy of their states with phase differences equal to $`0`$ and $`2\pi `$. The final goal of this publication is to show that in quasi one-dimensional ($`1D`$) superconductors the $`\pi `$ junctions are produced already at the single electronic level extendible to a finite spin polarization. The effect results from reconciliation of the spin and the charge which have been separated at the single chain level. The charge and the spin of the single electron reconfine as soon as $`2D`$ or $`3D`$ long range correlations are established due to interchain coupling. The phenomenon is much more general taking place, in other respects, also in such a common system as the Charge Density Wave -CDW and in such a popular system as the doped antiferromagnet or the Spin Density Wave as its quasi $`1D`$ version . Actually in this article we shall consider firstly and in greater details the CDW which is an object a bit distant to the mesoscopic community. The applications to superconductors will become apparent afterwards. We shall concentrate on effects of interchain coupling $`D>1`$: confinement, topological constraints, combined symmetry, spin-charge recombination. A short review and basic references on history of solitons and related topics in correlated electronic systems (like holes moving within the antiferromagnetic media) can be found in .

Solitons in superconducting wires were considered very early , within the macroscopic regime of the Ginzburg - Landau theory, for the phase slips problem. Closer to our goals is the microscopic solution for solitonic lattice in quasi $`1D`$ superconductors  at the Zeeman magnetic field. This successful application of results from theory of CDWs, see , to superconductors provides also a link of pair breaking effects in these different systems. The solitonic structures in qasi $`1D`$ superconductors appear as a $`1D`$ version of the well known FFLO (Fulde, Ferrel, Larkin, Ovchinnikov, see ) inhomogeneous state near the pair breaking limit. Being very weak in $`3D`$, this effect becomes quite pronounced in systems with nested Fermi surfaces which is the case of the $`1D`$ limit.

To extend physics of solitons to the higher $`D`$ world, the most important problem one faces is the effect of *confinement* (S.B. 1980): as topological objects connecting degenerate vacuums, the solitons at $`D>1`$ acquire an infinite energy unless they reduce or compensate their topological charges. The problem is generic to solitons but it becomes particularly interesting at the electronic level where the spin-charge reconfinement appears as the result of topological constraints. The topological effects of $`D>1`$ ordering reconfines the charge and the spin *locally* while still with essentially different distributions. Nevertheless *integrally* one of the two is screened again, being transferred to the collective mode, so that in transport the massive particles carry only either charge or spin as in $`1D`$, see reviews .

## II Confinement and combined excitations.

### A The classical commensurate CDW: confinement of phase solitons and of kinks.

The CDWs were always considered as the most natural electronic systems to observe solitons. We shall devote to them some more attention because the CDWs also became the subject of studies in mesoscopics . Being a case of spontaneous symmetry breaking, the CDW order parameter $`O_{cdw}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{cos}[\mathrm{𝐐𝐫}+\phi ]`$ possesses a manifold of degenerate ground states. For the $`M`$ fold commensurate CDW the energy $`\mathrm{cos}[M\phi ]`$ reduces the allowed positions to multiples of $`2\pi /M`$, $`M>1`$. Connecting trajectories $`\phi \phi \pm 2\pi /M`$ are phase solitons, or ”$`\phi `$ particles” after Bishop et al. Particularly important is the case $`M=2`$ for which solitons are clearly observed e.g. in polyacethylene  or in organic Mott insulators .

Above the $`3D`$ or $`2D`$ transition temperature $`T_c`$, the symmetry is not broken and solitons are allowed to exist as elementary particles. But in the symmetry broken phase at $`T<T_c`$, any local deformation must return the configuration to the same (modulo $`2\pi `$ for the phase) state. Otherwise the interchain interaction energy (with the linear density $`F\mathrm{\Delta }_0\mathrm{\Delta }_n\mathrm{cos}[\phi _0\phi _n]`$ is lost when the effective phase $`\phi _0+\pi sign(\mathrm{\Delta }_0)`$ at the soliton bearing chain $`n=0`$ acquires a finite (and $`2\pi )`$ increment with respect to the neighboring chain values $`\phi _n`$. The $`1D`$ allowed solitons do not satisfy this condition which originates a constant confinement force $`F`$ between them, hence the infinitely growing confinement energy $`F|x|`$. E.g. for $`M=2`$ the kinks should be bound in pairs or aggregate into macroscopic complexes with a particular role plaid by Coulomb interactions .

Especially interesting is the more complicated case of coexisting discrete and continuous symmetries. As a result of their interference the topolological charge of solitons originated by the discrete symmetry can be compensated by gapless degrees of freedom originated by the continuous one. This scenario we shall discuss through the rest of the article.

### B  The incommensurate CDW: <br>confinement of Amplitude Solitons with phase wings.

Difference of ground states with even and odd numbers of particles is a common issue in mesoscopics. In CDWs it also shows up in a spectacular way (S.B. 1980, see . Thus any pair of electrons or holes is accommodated to the extended ground states for which the overall phase difference becomes $`\pm 2\pi `$. Phase increments are produced by phase slips which provide the spectral flow  from the upper $`+\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ to the lower $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ rims of the single particle gap. The phase slip requires for the amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x,t)`$ to pass through zero, at which moment the complex order parameter has a shape of the amplitude soliton (AS, the kink $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x=\mathrm{})\mathrm{\Delta }(x=\mathrm{}`$). Curiously, this instantaneous configuration becomes the stationary ground state for the case when only one electron is added to the system or when the total spin polarization is controlled to be nonzero, see Figure 1. The AS carries the singly occupied mid-gap state, thus having a spin $`1/2`$ but its charge is compensated to zero by local dilatation of singlet vacuum states .

As a nontrivial topological object ($`O_{cdw}`$ does not map onto itself) the pure AS is prohibited in $`D>1`$ environment. Nevertheless it becomes allowed even their if it acquires phase tails with the total increment $`\delta \phi =\pi `$, see Figure 2. The length of these tails $`\xi _\phi `$ is determined by the weak interchain coupling, thus $`\xi _\phi \xi _0`$. As in $`1D`$, the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ changes within the scale $`\xi _0`$ but further on, at the scale $`\xi _\phi `$, the factor $`\mathrm{cos}[Qx+\phi ]`$ also changes the sign thus leaving the product in $`O_{cdw}`$ to be invariant. As a result the 3D allowed particle is formed with the AS core $`\xi _0`$ carrying the spin and the two phase $`\pi /2`$ twisting wings stretched over $`\xi _\phi `$, each carrying the charge $`e/2`$.

### C Spin-Gap cases: the quantum CDW and the superconductivity.

We shall omit from consideration the case of repulsion which is relevant to the case of the incommensurate Spin Density Wave or to a hole within the antiferromagnetic media which is important for doped Mott insulators. These cases were emphasized in previous publications . Here we shall concentrate upon systems with attraction which originate the gap and the discrete degeneracy in the spin channel. Firstly we shall generalize the description of the CDW solitons to the quantum model. Secondly we shall use the accumulated experience to arrive at our final goal: the spin carrier in the SC media.

$`1D`$ electronic systems are efficiently treated within the boson representation, see  for a review. The variables can be chosen as $`\phi `$ which is the analog of the CDW phase and $`\theta `$ which is the angle of the $`SU2`$ spin rotation. These phases are normalized in such a way that their increments divided by $`\pi `$ count the electronic charge and spin.

For the incommensurate electronic systems the Lagrangian can be written as

$`_{atr}\{C_1(\theta )^2+V\mathrm{cos}(2\theta )\}+C_2(\phi )^2;C_1,C_2=cnst`$

where $`V`$ is the backward exchange scattering and $`(f)^2=v^2(_tf)^2(_xf)^2`$, $`vv_F`$ is the velocity. Elementary excitations in $`1D`$ are the spinon as a soliton $`\theta =0\theta =\pm \pi `$, hence carrying the spin $`\pm 1/2`$, and the gapless charge sound in $`\phi `$. It is important to recall the alternative description in terms of conjugated phases. We shall need only the one for the charge channel which is the standard gauge phase $`\chi `$ of the superconductivity. Phases $`\phi `$ and $`\chi `$ are related (Efetov and Larkin 79) since their derivatives determine the same quantity - the current $`j`$: $`_t\phi /\pi =j_x\chi `$. The term $`C_2(\phi )^2`$ is duel to $`\stackrel{~}{C}_2(\chi )^2`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{C}_21/C_2`$

#### 1 The Quantum CDW.

The CDW order parameter is $`O_{cdw}\mathrm{exp}[i(Qx+\phi )]\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. The spin operator $`\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ stands for what was the amplitude in the quasi- classical description and at presence of the spinon it changes the sign as it was for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Hence for the CDW ordered state in a quasi $`1D`$ system the allowed configuration must be composed with two components: the spin soliton $`\theta \theta +\pi `$ and the phase wings $`\phi \phi +\pi `$ where the charge $`e=1`$ is concentrated. Beyond the low dimensionality, a general view is: *the spinon as a soliton bound to the semi-integer dislocation loop*.

#### 2 The Singlet Superconductivity.

For the Singlet Superconductivity the order parameter is $`O_{sc}\mathrm{exp}[i\chi ]\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. In $`D>1`$ the elementary spin excitation is composed with the *spin soliton* $`\theta \theta +\pi `$ supplied with *current wings* $`\chi \chi +\pi `$. The quasi $`1D`$ interpretation is that the *spinon works as a Josephson* $`\pi `$ *junction* in the superconducting wire. The $`2D`$ view is a pair of superconducting $`\pi `$ vortices sharing the common core where the unpaired spin is localized. The $`3D`$ view is a half flux vortex loop which collapse is prevented by the spin confined in its center.

The solitonic nature of the spinon in the quasi $`1D`$ picture corresponds to the string of reversed sign of the order parameter left behind in the course of the spinon motion. The spin soliton becomes an elementary fragment of the stripe pattern near the pair breaking limit (FFLO phase). In a wire the $`\pi `$ wings of the spinon motion become the persistent current .

For this combined particle the electronic quantum numbers are reconfined (while with different scales of localization). But integrally over the cross-section the local electric current induced by the spinon is compensated exactly by the back-flows at distant chains. This is a general property of the vortex dipole configuration constructed above. Finally, the soliton as a state of the coherent media will not carry a current and itself will not be driven by a homogeneous electric field.

## III Conclusions.

Our conclusions have been derived for weakly interacting SC or CDW chains. Since the results are symmetrically and topologically characterized, they can be extrapolated to isotropic systems with strong coupling where a clear microscopical derivation is not available. Here the hypothesis is that instead of normal carries excited or injected above the gap, the lowest states are the symmetry broken ones described above as semiroton - spinon complex. This construction can be processed from another side considering a vortex configuration bound to an unpaired electron. Without assistance of the quasi one-dimensionality, a short coherence length is required to leave only a small number of intragap levels in the vortex core.

The existence of complex spin excitations in superconductors is ultimately related to robustness of the FFLO phase at finite spin polarization. It must withstand a fragmentation due to quantum or thermal melting at small spin polarization. Then any termination point of one stripe within the regular pattern (the dislocation) will be accompanied by the phase semiroton in accordance with the quasi $`1D`$ picture.