Electronic structures of ternary iron arsenides AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr)
Abstract
We have studied the electronic and magnetic structures of the ternary iron arsenides AFeAs (A = Ba, Ca, or Sr) using the firstprinciples density functional theory. The ground states of these compounds are in a collinear antiferromagnetic order, resulting from the interplay between the nearest and the nextnearest neighbor superexchange antiferromagnetic interactions bridged by As orbitals. The correction from the spinorbit interaction to the electronic band structure is given. The pressure can reduce dramatically the magnetic moment and diminish the collinear antiferromagnetic order. Based on the calculations, we propose that the low energy dynamics of these materials is described effectively by a type model mafj ().
pacs:
74.25.Ha, 74.25.Jb, 74.70.b, 71.20.b, 71.18.+yI Introduction
The recent discovery of superconductivity in LaFeAsO by partial substitution of O with F atoms below 26Kkamihara () has stimulated great interest on the investigation of physical properties of ironbased pnictides. This type of quaternary compounds consists of alternative tetrahedral FeAs and LaO layers along the caxis. The LaO layers act mainly as a charge reservoir. The superconducting pairing occurs in the FeAs layers. More recently, it was reported that the ternary ironbased arsenides AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) become superconducting upon hole or electron dopingrotter2 (); sasmal (); boyer (); wu (). Similar as in LaFeAsOcruz (); mcguire (), these ternary iron arsenides also exhibit a spindensitywavelike anomaly and a structural transition from the tetragonal to the orthorhombic group at some temperature between 140 K and 200 K rotter (); bao (). Furthermore, it was found that the high pressures can drive these undoped ternary iron arsenides superconducting torikachvili (); park (); alireza ().
To investigate the mechanism of superconductivity in these materials, it is commonly believed that one needs to understand first the electronic and magnetic structures of the parent compounds. It has been shown that there is an essential similarity of electronic states nearby the Fermi level in AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) and LaFeAsO by studying the nonmagnetic statemafj (); nekrasov (). Moreover, the density of states at the Fermi energy is only weakly doping dependent and the main effect of doping is a change in the relative sizes of the electron and hole Fermi surfacessingh2 ().
In this paper, we report the electronic structures and magnetic orders and properties of AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) obtained from the firstprinciples electronic structure calculations. By comparison of the energy of the nonmagnetic state with those of a number of magnetic ordered states, we find that, similar as in LaFeAsO, the ground state of AFeAs is in a collinear antiferromagnetic order. We have also studied the spinorbit interaction and the pressure effect in these materials. The electronic and magnetic structure is found to be strongly affected by the pressure effect, but weakly by the spinorbit interaction.
Ii Computational Approach
AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) takes the ThCrSi type structure and an “A” layer plays a similar role as a LaO layer in LaFeAsO. Although AFeAs can be considered as a tetragonal crystal with two formula units included in the corresponding unit cell as shown in Fig.1(a), its primitive unit cell is constructed by considering AFeAs as a triclinic crystal, in which only one formula unit cell is included as shown in Fig. 1(b). In the calculations, we adopted the primitive cell as calculation cell with the experimental lattice constants as the input parameters. In the calculation of the electronic structures of the nonmagnetic, the ferromagnetic and the square antiferromagnetic Neel states, the FeAs cell is taken as the base cell (shown in Fig. 1(c)). In the calculation of the collinear antiferromagnetic state, the unit cell is doubled and the base cell is the FeAs cell as shown in Fig. 1(c).
In our calculations the plane wave basis method was used pwscf (). We used the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) of PerdewBurkeErnzerhof pbe () for the exchangecorrelation potentials. The ultrasoft pseudopotentials vanderbilt () were used to model the electronion interactions. After the full convergence test, the kinetic energy cutoff and the charge density cutoff of the plane wave basis were chosen to be 600eV and 4800eV, respectively. The Gaussian broadening technique was used and a mesh of kpoints were sampled for the Brillouinzone integration. The internal atomic coordinates within a cell were determined by the energy minimization.
Iii Results and analysis
iii.1 Nonmagnetic State
We first studied the nonmagnetic state of the compound AFeAs (A = Ba, Sr, or Ca), which is the high temperature phase of these materials. The electronic band structure of this state also provides a reference for studying of the low temperature magnetic phases. This can help us to understand the mechanism or the interactions that drive the magnetic phase transition and the related structural transition ma2 ().
BaFeAs
In our calculation, the experimental tetragonal crystal lattice parameters and rotter () were adopted for BaFeAs. Figs. 2 and 3 show the calculated density of states (DOS) of BaFeAs in the nonmagnetic, square antiferromagnetic Neel, and collinear antiferromagnetic states, respectively. As revealed by Fig. 2(a), similar to LaFeAsO, the density of states of BaFeAs consists of mainly the Fe states from 2eV to 2eV around the Fermi energy. Further analysis of the calculation (Fig. 3a) shows that the crystal field splitting of the Fe orbitals is much smaller than the one in transition metal oxides. This is not very surprising since the electronegativity of As is much weaker than O. This suggests that the Fermi surface may have the contribution from all the Fe orbitals.
The electronic band structure and the Fermi surface of BaFeAs in the nonmagnetic state are shown in Fig. 4. As shown in Fig. 4(a), there are four Fermi surface sheets, contributed from the four bands crossing the Fermi energy (Fig. 4(a)). Among them, the two cylinderlike Fermisurface sheets centered around XP are from the electron bands. They correspond to the two Fermi surface sheets around MA in LaFeAsO. The other two Fermi surface sheets centered around Z are from the hole bands. These results agree qualitatively with the experimental observation feng ().
The energy dispersion of the electronic bands along the axis is much larger than that in LaFeAsOsingh (); ma (). The sectional views parallel to (001) plane through point and point are different due to the large dispersion (Figs. 4(c) and (d)). There is one band just below the Fermi energy along Z in Fig. 4(a), which corresponds to the third hole Fermi surface sheet given in Ref. nekrasov, . The volumes enclosed by these Fermi surface sheets are 0.26 electrons/cell and 0.26 holes/cell, respectively. The electron carrier concentration is the same as the hole carrier concentration. Both are equal to . The compound BaFeAs is thus a semimetal with a low carrier concentration between normal metals and semiconductors, similar to what we found in LaFeAsO ma (). The density of states at the Fermi energy is 3.93 state per eV per formula unit cell. The corresponding electronic specific heat coefficient = and the Pauli paramagnetic susceptibility = . These calculated physical quantities are also summarized in Table 1, which are well close to the experimental valuesrotter (); dong (); ronning (); luo (); ni ().
We study the plasma excitation in the semimetal BaFeAs as well. The plasma frequency is computed as follows,
(1) 
where and are the hole and electron carrier densities, respectively and and are the effective masses of hole and electron, respectively. We use the second order polynomial fitting to estimate the effective masses of carriers from the calculated band structures. We obtain the hole and electron effective masses as and with being electron mass. Because of irregular and strongly anisotropic band structure, the estimated effective masses are with not small uncertainty. We then calculate the plasma frequency as in the nonmagnetic state. These values are also listed in Table 1 in comparison with the available experimental values.
AFeAs  State  Coupling  

hole  electron  Cal.  Exp.  Cal.  Exp.  
BaFeAs  NM  2.54  2.54  25392  12900hu ()  9.26  1.60  25.5  33.8  3.1  
Col  0.10  0.21  7717  4660hu ()  5.68 


SrFeAs  NM  3.33  3.33  27386  13840hu ()  7.71  6.5  1.33  14.7  33.4  7.8 
Col  0.13  0.04  4249  4750hu ()  3.63  
CaFeAs  NM  4.21  4.21  20883  9.31  8.2  1.60  1.4  26.8  14.8  
Col  0.09  0.09  5557  2.62 
SrFeAs
Like BaFeAs, SrFeAs can also become superconducting by chemical doping or by applying a high pressure. These two compounds have the same crystal structure. The tetragonal crystal lattice constants determined by experimental measurements are and for SrFeAs sasmal (). They are smaller than the corresponding parameters for BaFeAs, especially along the axis. The electronic band structure and the Fermi surface shown in Fig. 5, are similar as the ones for BaFeAs. The difference is that the band along Z, which is just below the Fermi energy in BaFeAs, moves slightly upward and intersects with the Fermi level. This results in the third holetype Fermi sheet centered around Z. Therefore, in SrFeAs, there are three holetype and two electrontype Fermi surface sheets.
The volumes enclosed by these Fermi sheets give 0.32 electrons/cell and 0.32 holes/cell for SrFeAs. The electron (or hole) carrier concentration is about . The density of states at the Fermi energy is about 3.27 state per eV per formula unit. The corresponding electronic specific heat coefficient and Pauli susceptibility are = and = , respectively. And the plasma frequency is computed as about . These calculated quantities are also reported in Table 1. The total and Fe projected density of states of SrFeAs are similar as the ones for BaFeAs. The low energy excitations are also dominated by Fe orbitals from 2eV to 2eV around the Fermi energy.
CaFeAs
The tetragonal crystal lattice parameters obtained by experimentsni (), and , are used in our calculation for CaFeAs. Fig. 6 shows the electronic band structure and the Fermi surface. Similar to SrFeAs, there are three holetype and two electrontype Fermi surface sheets for CaFeAs. Because the third holetype Fermi surface of CaFeAs expands into a cylinderlike shapes centered around Z, the cross section through and X in (001) plane has one more cutting line than that of SrFeAs. From the volumes enclosed by these Fermi sheets, we determine the electron and hole concentrations are 0.38 electrons/cell and 0.38 holes/cell, respectively. The corresponding electron (or hole) carrier density is about . The density of states at the Fermi energy is 3.95 state per eV per formula unit, and the electronic specific heat coefficient = and Pauli paramagnetic susceptibility = . And the plasma frequency is computed as about . These calculated quantities are summarized in Table 1. The total and Fe orbital projected density of states of CaFeAs are almost the same as the ones for SrFeAs.
iii.2 Antiferromagnetic Neel State
To study the electronic structures of AFeAs in a magnetic state, we break the spin updown symmetry by assigning a finite magnetic moment to each Fe atom. The ferromagnetic state is found to be not stable in AFeAs, similar as in LaFeAsO ma (). However, the antiferromagnetic Neel state is metastable. Its energy is lower than the corresponding nonmagnetic state by 0.232 eV, 0.175 eV, and 0.133 eV per formula unit for BaFeAs, SrFeAs, and CaFeAs, respectively. The magnetic moments in BaFeAs, SrFeAs, and CaFeAs are found to be respectively 2.3 , 2.2 , and 2.0 , similar as the one for LaFeAsOma (), while a moment of about 1.7 was found for all these three systems in the full potential localdensity approximation calculations krell (). The density of states for the antiferromagnetic Neel state of BaFeAs is shown in Figs. 2(b) and 3(b). The corresponding electronic band structure with the Fermi surface shapes is shown in Fig. 7. The electronic structures and the Fermi surface topology are similar for the other two ternary iron arsenides in the antiferromagnetic Neel state.
As shown in Fig. 2(b), the density of states around there is substantially reduced around 0.5eV in comparison with that in the nonmagnetic state (Fig. 2(a)). The missing states are pushed down to around 2.0eV. This change can be also seen by comparing the electronic band structures of the nonmagnetic and the square antiferromagnetic Neel states, shown in Fig. 4(a) and Fig. 7(a). In contrast to the nonmagnetic state, there are only two bands crossing the Fermi energy, forming a ringlike holetype shape around Z, a cylinderlike electrontype sheet centered around XP, and a smallpocketlike electrontype sheet around Z.
iii.3 Collinear Antiferromagnetic State
For BaFeAs, SrFeAs, and CaFeAs, the antiferromagnetic Neel state is a metastable state among the rich magnetic structures. It is found that the true ground state is in fact a collinear antiferromagnetic state with the interlayer Fe moments in antiferromagnetic alignment. The spin configuration of this state in FeAs layer is schematically shown in Fig. 1(c).
BaFeAs
For BaFeAs, the energy of the collinear antiferromagnetic state is lowered by 0.400 eV per formula unit than that of the nonmagnetic state. The magnetic moment is found to be about for each Fe ion in this state. The electronic band structure and the density of states are shown in Fig. 8(a) and Fig. 2(c), respectively. In contrast to the nonmagnetic state, the density of states of As orbitals in the low energy range from 2eV to 0eV is substantially enhanced in the collinear antiferromagnetic state.
Fig. 8(c) shows the Fermi surface shapes of BaFeAs in the collinear antiferromagnetic state. There are two bands crossing the Fermi level. They lead to a holetype Fermi surface and an electrontype Fermi surface, respectively. Here we remind that if we consider BaFeAs by a tetragonal unit cell, the axis MA in the Brillouin zone of the tetragonal unit cell is now folded into the Z, in which M point coincides with point. This means that the electrontype Fermi sheet around M point in the tetragonal unit cell in the nonmagnetic state will be gapped when the collinear antiferromagnetic order takes place. From the volumes enclosed by these two Fermi sheets, we find that the electron carrier concentration is 0.042 electrons/cell, namely . The corresponding hole carrier concentration is 0.021 holes/cell, namely . Thus the electron concentration dominates over the hole concentration, unlike in the nonmagnetic state. By using the second order polynomial to fit the calculated band structures, we estimate the electron effective masses as with being electron mass. We then calculate the plasma frequency as . Here the contribution of the holes to the plasma frequency is negligible. These values are also listed in Table 1 in comparison with the available experimental values.
In comparison with the nonmagnetic state, the electron effective mass becomes much lighter. Meanwhile, the carrier density is reduced by an order of magnitude, as shown in Table 1. This reduction is significantly smaller than that in LaFeAsO. In LaFeAsO, the carrier density is reduced by two orders of magnitude in the collinear antiferromagnetic state than in the nonmagnetic state ma2 (). The density of states at the Fermi energy E is 2.41 state per eV per formula unit cell. From this, we find that the electronic specific heat coefficient = 5.68. It should be emphasized that the calculated value of in the collinear antiferromagnetic state should be smaller than the intrinsic value of at zero temperature measured by experiments since the low energy quantum spin fluctuations are suppressed in the calculations, as discussed in Section IV. Therefore, the measured in the low temperature limit should be bound between the two calculated values obtained by our calculations for the nonmagnetic and collinear antiferromagntic states, respectively. In Table 1, we compare the calculated specific heat coefficients with the corresponding experimental values. For BaFeAs, there is a large variety in the measurement values. Experimentally, the first reported measurement value of is about 37 ni2 (), much larger than our DFT result. However, with the sample quality being improved, the second reported value of becomes 16 rotter (); and the latest reported value of is 6.1 dong (), which is in fact good consistent with our DFT calculation. For SrFeAs and CaFeAs, our calculated results are also consistent with the measurement values.
In the collinear antiferromagnetic state, there is further a small energy gain if the FeFe distance is reduced along the spin parallel alignment direction and expanded along the spin antiparallel alignment direction. This leads to a structural transition from tetragonal space group to orthorhombic space group , similar to that in LaFeAsO ma2 () and observed by the neutron scatteringbao (). This lattice relaxation is energetically favorable because the direct ferromagnetic exchange favors a shorter FeFe separation while the antiferromagnetic superexchange favors a larger FeAsFe angle. It turns out that the angle in abplane is no longer rectangular (Fig. 1(c)) and the energy gain is 3 meV per formula unit, when is about , similar as in LaFeAsO ma2 (). The correction from this lattice distortion to the electronic band structure as well as the Fe moments is very small.
Along the caxis, we find that the Fespins between the nearest neighbor FeAs layers interact antiferromagnetically and the energy gain by taking the antiparallel alignment is about 0.012eV per formula unit cell in comparison with the parallel alignment. This antiferromagnetic interaction between the nearest neighboring FeAs layers is significantly larger than that in LaFeAsO ma2 (). In Ref. mafj, , we reported the electronic band structure and the Fermi surface of AFeAs (A=Ba, Sr, Ca) in the collinear antiferromagnetic order with the parallel alignment along axis.
SrFeAs
For SrFeAs, the energy of the collinear antiferromagnetic state is lowered by 0.383 eV per formula unit than the one of the nonmagnetic state. The magnetic moment is about per Fe atom. The electronic band structure and the Fermi surface are shown in Fig. 9. From the volumes enclosed by the Fermi surface sheets, we find that the electron and hole carrier concentrations are about 0.008 electrons/cell and 0.025 holes/cell, namely about and , respectively. It turns out that the hole concentration dominates over the electron concentration, unlike the case of BaFeAs. And the plasma frequency is computed as about . In comparison with the nonmagnetic state, the carrier density is much reduced, by more than an order of magnitude. The density of states at the Fermi energy E is 1.54 state per eV per formula unit cell, and the electronic specific heat coefficient = 3.63. These calculated quantities are also reported in Table 1.
CaFeAs
For CaFeAs, the collinear antiferromagnetic ordering can lower the ground state energy by 0.352 eV per formula unit in comparison with the nonmagnetic state. There are about moment around each Fe atom. The electronic band structure and the Fermi surface are shown in Fig. 10. The electron (hole) carrier density is about 0.016 electrons/cell (0.016 holes/cell), or (). Thus the electron concentration and the hole concentration are in balance, different from the ones in BaFeAs and SrFeAs. And the plasma frequency is computed as about . Similar to SrFeAs, the carrier density is also much reduced by more than an order of magnitude in comparison with the nonmagnetic state. The density of states at the Fermi energy E is about 1.11 state per eV per formula unit cell and the electronic specific heat coefficient = 2.62. These calculated quantities are also reported in Table 1.
iii.4 SpinOrbit Interaction
The spinorbit interaction results from the relativistic effect. It is known that this interaction leads to many interesting features in transition metal oxides. To study how strong this interaction can affect electronic properties of these materials, we performed a relativistic calculation for BaFeAs. Fig. 11 shows the electronic band structures of BaFeAs by including spinorbit interaction in the nonmagnetic state. By comparison with Figs. 4(a) and 8(a), we find that the spinorbit interaction splits the band mainly along Z into two bands by about 50150 meV around the Fermi energy.
iii.5 Pressure Effect
Experimentally it was reportedtorikachvili (); park (); alireza () that the ternary iron arsenides AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) can become superconducting under high pressures without doping. This provides another route to study the salient features of these materials in connection with the intrinsic electronic structures and properties. The superconducting phase appears when the pressure is in the ranges of 2.58, 2837, and 2258 kbar for CaFeAs, SrFeAs, and BaFeAs respectively. The highest superconducting transition temperatures for these three compounds are 12K, 27K, and 29K, respectively.
Fig. 12(a) shows the pressure dependence of relative energies for the nonmagnetic, square antiferromagnetic Neel and collinear antiferromagnetic states of BaFeAs, respectively. The collinear antiferromagnetic state is robust against the pressure and has the lowest energy in the pressure range studied, consistent with the result reported in in Ref. xie, . Note that in this calculation, the lattice parameters are relaxed when the pressure is zero. Thus the energy differences are slightly different from that given before.
The lattice structure of FeAs layers, including the angle between Fe and As atoms and the bond lengths of FeFe, FeAs, and AsAs, is hardly changed by the pressure from 0 to 80 kbar. However, the contraction along the axis is much more pronounced, especially in the nonmagnetic state. This indicates that the distance between the neighboring FeAs and Ba layers is substantially reduced by pressure. This can strengthen the coupling between the neighboring FeAs layers and stabilize the long range antiferromagnetic correlation in the FeAs layer.
The magnetic moment in the magnetic states decreases almost linearly with pressure, as shown in Fig. 12(b). In our calculations, the magnetic moment is always larger than 2 in the collinear antiferromagntic state. The superexchange interaction thus remains dominant when a pressure is imposed.
Iv Effective Model
iv.1 Local Moment versus Itinerant Electrons
Physically the moments of Fe ions result from the onsite Coulomb repulsion and the Hund’s rule coupling of orbitals. An isolated Fe ion in a 2+ valency has a spin with a large magnetic moment of . In ironpnictide semimetals, the effective moment of a Fe ion (in a 2+ valency) will be reduced by its hybridization with other atoms and by the Coulomb screening of itinerant electrons. However, it will remain finite if the Hund’s rule coupling and the onsite Coulomb repulsion is strong enough in comparison with the hybridization and other screening effects, as we found in LaFeAsO ma2 ().
In our calculations, by projecting the density of states onto the five orbitals of Fe in the collinear antiferromagnetic state of BaFeAs (Fig. 3(c)), we find that the five orbitals of Fe are almost completely filled by upspin electrons and nearly halffilled by downspin electrons in one of the two sublattices (or completely filled by downspin electrons and halffilled by upspin electrons in the other sublattice). This indicates that the crystal field splitting imposed by As atoms is very small and the Fe orbitals hybridize strongly with each other. We can see that this is a universal feature for all iron pnictides, as we first found in LaFeAsO ma2 (). The strong polarization of Fe magnetic moments is thus due to the Hund’s rule coupling.
In low temperatures, the Fe moments will interact with each other to form an antiferromagnetic ordered state. These ordered magnetic moments have been observed by elastic neutron scattering and other experiments cruz (); bao (). However, they are not exactly the moments obtained by the DFT calculations, as we indicated first for LaFeAsO ma2 (). This is because the DFT calculation is done based on a small magnetic unit cell and the lowenergy quantum spin fluctuations as well as their interactions with itinerant electrons are frozen by the finite excitation gap due to the finitesize effect. Thus the moment obtained by the DFT is the bare moment of each Fe ion. It should be larger than the ordering moment measured by neutron scattering and other experiments. Our calculations show that the bare magnetic moment around each Fe atom is about in all iron pnictides and in different magnetically ordered states.
In high temperatures, there is no net static moment in the paramagnetic phase due to the thermal fluctuation, but the bare moment of each Fe ion can still be measured by a fast local probe like ESR (electron spin resonance). Very recently, the bare moment of Fe has been observed in the paramagnetic phase by the ESR measurement chen (). The value of the moment detected by ESR is about in good agreement with our DFT result, which is but significantly larger than the ordering moment in the antiferromagnetic phase.
Again similar to what we found in LaFeAsOma2 (), from the spatial distributions of electrons, we further find that there is a strong hybridization between neighboring Fe and As ions. This strong hybridization can mediate an antiferromagnetic superexchange interaction between the Fe moments. This superexchange interaction is antiferromangtic since the intermediated state associated with the hopping bridged by As ions is a spin singlet. On the other hand, there is a relatively small but finite hybridization between two neighboring Fe ions. This direct hybridization of Fe orbitals can induce a direct exchange interaction between the Fe moments. This direct exchange interaction is ferromagnetic due to the Hund’s rule coupling. Furthermore, there is a strong covalent bonding or hybridization between As orbitals although the separation between As atoms is relatively large. This hybridization gives rise to a broad As band below the Fermi level. Thus As states are not truly localized. They form an electron network connecting As ions through covalent bonding, similar to what we found in iron chalcogenides (FeSe and FeTe)ma5 (). However, there is difference that the band formed by As orbitals is insulating, as shown in Fig. 2, while the band formed by Te orbitals is metallic (see Ref. ma5, ). It turns out that the exchange interaction bridged by As orbitals is short ranged (just and ) while the one bridged by Te orbitals can be long ranged, as we found in FeTe in which there is a substantial third nearest neighbor antiferromagnetic superexchange interaction besides and ma5 ().
iv.2 Hamiltonian
For ironbased pnictides, the low energy spin dynamics could be approximately described by an antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model with the nearest and the nextnearest neighbor exchange interactions. However, the Fe spin (or magnetic moment) is not quantized since the electrons constituting the moment can propagate on the lattice, like in hole or electron doped high superconductivity cuprates. Besides these superexchange interactions, the onsite Hund’s rule coupling among different Fe orbitals is important. This is because the crystal splitting of Fe levels is very small and the spins of Fe electrons are polarized mainly by this interaction. Thus we believe that the lowenergy physical properties of these ironbased pnictides can be approximately described by the following effective Hamiltonian
(2)  
where and represent the summation over the nearest and the nextnearest neighbors, respectively. and are the indices of Fe orbitals. is the electron creation (annihilation) operator.
(3) 
is the spin operator of the orbital at site . The total spin operator at site is defined by . In Eq. (2), is the onsite Hund’s coupling among the five Fe orbitals. The value of is generally believed to be about 1 eV. are the effective hopping integrals that can be determined from the electronic band structure in the nonmagnetic stateccao ().
The nearest and the nextnearest neighbor antiferromagnetic coupling constants, and , in Eq. (2) can be calculated from the relative energies of the ferromagnetic, square antiferromagnetic, and collinear antiferromagnetic states with respect to the nonmagnetic state. For the corresponding detailed calculations, please refer to the appendix in our paper in Ref. ma2, . For BaFeAs, the energy of the ferromagnetic state is about 8meV per Fe lower than the nonmagnetic state and the Fe moment is about 2.3. From this and the relative energies of the two antiferromagnetic states, we find that the exchange constants are approximately given by = 25.5 meV/ per Fe and = 33.8 meV/ per Fe ( is the spin of the Fe ion) for BaFeAs. Meanwhile, we also find that the interlayer superexchange antiferromagnetic coupling =3.1 meV/ per Fe. In obtaining these values, we have assumed that the contribution of itinerant electrons to the energy is almost unchanged in different magnetically ordered states. Since the bare and can be considering independent of magnetic structures, the relative energies between different magnetic states are not affected by itinerant electrons. For SrFeAs and CaFeAs, the values of and with are determined as well and given in Table 1. As we notice, in CaFeAs is negative, namely ferromagnetic, which is unique among iron pnictides.
iv.3 Discussion
We plot the superconducting critical temperatures versus for these compounds with doping carriers or by applying high pressures in Fig. 13. Interesting, as we see, the maximum critical temperatures are in proportion to the nextnearest neighbor superexchange interaction . This suggests that there would exist an intrinsic relationship between the superconductivity and the Asbridged superexchange antiferromagnetic interactions. Here we have assumed that the value of does not change with doping or pressure in comparison with the ones of the parent compounds. This can be verified from Fig. 14. Fig. 14 shows how the superexchange interactions and change with the pressure, from which we find that slightly changes with the pressure. However, drops quickly with increasing pressure. This is because the energy difference between the nonmagnetic state and the square antiferromagnetic Neel state can be significantly reduced by the pressure, as shown in Fig. 12.
In comparison with the bare and , and are very small. When we study charge dynamics like charge transport happening in iron pnictides,  part will thus play a dominant role. In Eq. (2), if the and terms are ignore, the Hamiltonian will look similar to the double exchange model that was proposed for describing physical properties of colossal magnetoresistance (CMR) of manganese oxidesvon (); zener (). However, there is an essential difference. In manganese oxides the crystal field splitting between and orbitals is very large, the moments polarized by the Hund’s rule coupling on the orbitals are completely localized and only electrons can hop on the lattice. In contrast, in iron pnictides, all five orbitals of Fe have contributions to the moment and at the same time they can also hop on the lattice. Nevertheless, we believe that their charge dynamics shares a common feature. In manganese oxides there is a strong spindependent scattering on the conduction electrons due to the strong Hund’s coupling between and levels of Mn ions. If the localized core spins of Mn are aligned ferromagnetically, the scattering of the electrons due to the core spins will be dramatically reduced because of no spinflip, leading to a giant magnetoresistance and a sharp drop of resistivity with decreasing temperature in the ferromagnetic phase. In iron pnictides, there is also a strong spindependent scattering on conduction electrons caused by the Hund’s rule coupling. In low temperatures, the moments of Fe ions are in the collinear antiferromagnetic order, in which the Fe moments are aligned antiferromagnetically along one direction but ferromagnetically along the other direction perpendicular. Similar as in manganese oxides, the scattering of electrons along the ferromagnetic direction is significantly reduced, leading to a sharp drop of resistivity and a large magnetoresistivity in the collinear antiferromagnetic phase, in agreement with experimental measurementsluo (); cheng ().
V Conclusion
In conclusion, we have reported calculated results on the electronic band structures of AFeAs (A=Ba, Ca, or Sr) by using the firstprinciples electronic structure calculations. The ground state of AFeAs is shown to be a collinear antiferromagnetic semimetal with a large magnetic moment around each Fe ion. The electronic structure is weakly affected by the spinorbit interaction, but strongly altered by pressure. We have determined the density of states at the Fermi level, the specific heat coefficient and the Pauli susceptibility in both the nonmagnetic and collinear antiferromagnetic states. The effective antiferromagnetic coupling constants of the Fe moments are also estimated assuming that the lowenergy spin dynamics is approximately described by the Heisenberg model with the nearest and the nextnearest neighboring exchange terms. Based on the analysis of electronic and magnetic structures, we proposed that the lowenergy physics of AFeAs can be effectively described by the model, defined by Eq. (2).
This work is partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China and by National Program for Basic Research of MOST, China.
References
 Part of the calculations presented in this paper had been first reported in our paper arXiv:0806.3526v2
 Kamihara Y, Watanabe T, Hirano M and Hosono H 2008 IronBased Layered Superconductor La[OF]FeAs (x = 0.050.12) with = 26 K J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130 3296
 Rotter M, Tegel M and Johrendt D 2008 Superconductivity at 38 K in the Iron Arsenide (BaK)FeAs Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 107006
 Sasmal K, Lv B, Lorenz B, Guloy A, Chen F, Xue Y and Chu C W 2008 Superconducting FeBased Compounds (ASr)FeAs with A=K and Cs with Transition Temperatures up to 37 K Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 107007
 Wu G, Chen H, Wu T, Xie Y L, Yan Y J, Liu R H, Wang X F, Ying J J and Chen H H 2008 Different resistivity response to spin density wave and superconductivity at 20 K in CaNaFeAs Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 20 422201
 Boyer M C, Chatterjee K, Wise W D, Chen G F, Luo J L, Wang N L and Hudson E W 2008 Scanning tunneling microscopy of the 32 K superconductor (SrK)FeAs Preprint arXiv:0806.4400
 Cruz C de la, Huang Q, Lynn J W, Li J, Ratcliff W, Zarestky J L, Mook H A, Chen G F, Luo J L, Wang N L and Dai P 2008 Magnetic order close to superconductivity in the ironbased Layered La(OF)FeAs systems Nature 453 899
 McGuire M A, Christianson A D, Sefat A S, Jin R, Payzant E A, Sales B C, Lumsden M D and Mandrus D 2008 Phase transitions in LaFeAsO: Structural, magnetic, elastic, and transport properties, heat capacity and Mössbauer spectra Phys. Rev. B 78 094517
 Rotter M, Tegel M, Schellenberg I, Hermes W, Pöttgen R and Johrendt D 2008 Spindensitywave anomaly at 140 K in the ternary iron arsenide BaFeAs Phys. Rev. B 78 020503(R)
 Huang Q, Qiu Y, Bao W, Lynn J W, Green M A, Gasparovic Y C, Wu T, Wu G and Chen X H 2008 NeutronDiffraction Measurements of Magnetic Order and a Structural Transition in the Parent BaFeAs Compound of FeAsBased HighTemperature Superconductors Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 257003
 Torikachvili M S, Bud’ko S L, Ni N and Canfield P C 2008 Pressure Induced Superconductivity in CaFeAs Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 057006
 Park T, Park E, Lee H, Klimczuk T, Bauer E D, Ronning F and Thompson J D 2008 Pressureinduced superconductivity in CaFeAs J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20 322204
 Alireza P L, Gillett J, Ko Y T C, Sebastian S E and Lonzarich G G 2009 Superconductivity up to 29 K in SrFeAs and BaFeAs at high pressures J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 21 012208
 Nekrasov I A, Pchelkina Z V and Sadovskii M V 2008 Electronic Structure of Prototype AFeAs and ReOFeAs HighTemperature Superconductors: a Comparison JETP Letters 88 144
 Singh D J 2008 Electronic structure and doping in BaFeAs and LiFeAs: Density functional calculations Phys. Rev. B 78 094511
 Giannozzi P et al. http://www.quantumespresso.org
 Perdew J P, Burke K and Ernzerhof M 1996 Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 3865
 Vanderbilt D 1990 Soft selfconsistent pseudopotentials in a generalized eigenvalue formalism Phys. Rev. B 41 7892
 Ma F, Lu Z Y and Xiang T 2008 Arsenicbridged antiferromagnetic superexchange interactions in LaFeAsO Phys. Rev. B 78 224517
 Yang L X, Zhang Y, Ou H W, Zhao J F, Shen D W, Zhou B, Wei J, Chen F, Xu M, He C, Chen Y, Wang Z D, Wang X F, Wu T, Wu G, Chen X H, Arita M, Shimada K, Taniguchi M, Lu Z Y, Xiang T and Feng D L 2009 Electronic Structure and Unusual Exchange Splitting in the SpinDensityWave State of the BaFeAs Parent Compound of IronBased Superconductors Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 107002
 Singh D J and Du M H 2008 Density Functional Study of LaFeAsOF: A Low Carrier Density Superconductor Near Itinerant Magnetism Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 237003
 Ma F and Lu Z Y 2008 Ironbased layered compound LaFeAsO is an antiferromagnetic semimetal Phys. Rev. B 78 033111
 Dong J K, Ding L, Wang H, Wang X F, Wu T, Wu G, Chen X H and Li S Y 2008 Thermodynamic properties of BaKFeAs and CaNaFeAs New Journal of Physics 10 123031
 Ronning F, Klimczuk T, Bauer E D, Volz H and Thompson J D 2008 Synthesis and properties of CaFeAs single crystals J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20 322201
 Chen G F, Li Z, Dong J, Li G, Hu W Z, Zhang X D, Song X H, Zheng P, Wang N L and Luo J L 2008 Transport and anisotropy in singlecrystalline SrFeAs and AKFeAs (A=Sr, Ba) superconductors Phys. Rev. B 78 224512
 Ni N, Nandi S, Kreyssig A, Goldman A I, Mun E D, Bud’ko S L and Canfield P C 2008 Firstorder structural phase transition in CaFeAs Phys. Rev. B 78 014523
 Hu W Z, Dong J, Li G, Li Z, Zheng P, Chen G F, Luo J L and Wang N L 2008 Origin of the Spin Density Wave Instability in AFeAs (A=Ba,Sr) as Revealed by Optical Spectroscopy Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 257005
 Ni N, Bud’ko S L, Kreyssig A, Nandi S, Rustan G E, Goldman A I, Gupta S, Corbett J D, Kracher A and Canfield P C 2008 Anisotropic thermodynamic and transport properties of singlecrystalline BaKFeAs (x=0 and 0.45) Phys. Rev. B 78 014507
 Krellner C, CarocaCanales N, Jesche A, Rosner H, Ormeci A and Geibel C 2008 Magnetic and structural transitions in layered iron arsenide systems: AFeAs versus RFeAsO Phys. Rev. B 78 100504
 In Ref. mafj, , we had reported the electronic band structure and the Fermi surface of AFeAs (A=Ba, Sr, Ca) in the collinear antiferromagnetic order with the parallel alignment between interlayer Fe moments along axis.
 Xie W H, Bao M L, Zhao Z J and Liu B G 2009 Firstprinciples investigation of the effect of pressure on BaFeAs Phys. Rev. B 79 115128
 Ma F, Ji W, Hu J P, Lu Z Y and Xiang T 2009 FirstPrinciples Calculations of the Electronic Structure of Tetragonal FeTe and FeSe Crystals: Evidence for a Bicollinear Antiferromagnetic Order Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 177003
 Cao C, Hirschfeld P J and Cheng H P 2008 Proximity of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity in LaFeAsOF: Effective Hamiltonian from ab initio studies Phys. Rev. B 77 220506(R)
 LeitheJasper A, Schnelle W, Geibel C and Rosner H Superconductivity in SrFeCoAs: Internal Doping of the Iron Arsenide Layers Preprint arXiv:0807.2223
 Sefat A S, Jin R, McGuire M A, Sales B C, Singh D J and Mandrus D 2008 Superconductivity at 22 K in CoDoped BaFeAs Crystals Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 117004
 Helmolt R V, Wocker J, Holzapfel B, Schultz L and Samwer K 1993 Giant negative magnetoresistance in perovskitelike LaBaMnO ferromagnetic films Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 2331
 Zener C 1951 Interaction between the dShells in the Transition Metals. II. Ferromagnetic Compounds of Manganese with Perovskite Structure Phys. Rev. 82 403
 Cheng P, Yang H, Jia Y, Fang L, Zhu X, Mu G and Wen H H 2008 Hall effect and magnetoresistance in single crystals of NdFeAsOF (x=0 and 0.18) Phys. Rev. B 78 134508
 Chen G F, Li Z, Dong J, Li G, Hu W Z, Zhang X D, Song X H, Zheng P, Wang N L and Luo J L 2008 Transport and anisotropy in singlecrystalline SrFeAs and AKFeAs (A=Sr, Ba) superconductors Phys. Rev. B 78 224512
 Wu T, Ying J J, Wu G, Liu R H, He Y, Chen H, Wang X F, Xie Y L, Yan Y J and Chen X H 2009 Evidence for local moments by electron spin resonance study of polycrystalline LaFeAsOF (x=0 and 0.13) Phys. Rev. B 79 115121