1: 

2: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

3: %%%%%%%%%%%% INTESTAZIONE STANDARD %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

4: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

5: 

6: \documentclass[a4paper,10pt]{article}

7: \usepackage{theorem}

8: 

9: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}

10: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

11: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}

12: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

13: 

14: \setlength{\textwidth}{32.4pc}

15: \setlength{\textheight}{51.6pc}

16: %\setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-1.5truecm}

17: 

18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

19: %%%%%%%%%%%% INTESTAZIONE CMP %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

20: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

21: 

22: %\documentclass[cmp,draft,numbook]{svjour}

23: 

24: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

25: %%%%%%%%%%%% INTESTAZIONE JSP %%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

26: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

27: 

28: %\documentclass{svjour2}

29: %\usepackage{graphicx}

30: %\smartqed

31: %\journalname{Journal of Statistical Physics}

32: 

33: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

34: %%%%%%%%%%%% MACROS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

35: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

36: %%%% Se si usa DVIPS porre \driver=1, se si usa DVIPDFM porre \driver=2 %%%%

37: 

38: \newcount\driver

39: \newcount\bozza

40: 

41: \font\cs=cmcsc10 scaled\magstep1                    \font\ottorm=cmr8 scaled\magstep1

42: \font\msxtw=msbm10 scaled\magstep1                  \font\euftw=eufm10 scaled\magstep1

43: \font\msytw=msbm10 scaled\magstep1                  \font\msytww=msbm8 scaled\magstep1

44: \font\msytwww=msbm7 scaled\magstep1                 \font\indbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep2

45: \font\grbold=cmmib10 scaled\magstep1

46: \font\amit=cmmi7 \def\sf{\textfont1=\amit}

47: \font\bigtenrm=cmr10 scaled \magstep2               \font\bigteni=cmmi10 scaled \magstep2

48: 

49: 

50: {\count255=\time\divide\count255 by 60 \xdef\hourmin{\number\count255}

51:         \multiply\count255 by-60\advance\count255 by\time

52:    \xdef\hourmin{\hourmin:\ifnum\count255<10 0\fi\the\count255}}

53: 

54: 

55: \let\a=\alpha \let\b=\beta    \let\g=\gamma     \let\d=\delta     \let\e=\varepsilon

56: \let\z=\zeta  \let\h=\eta     \let\th=\vartheta \let\k=\kappa     \let\l=\lambda

57: \let\m=\mu    \let\n=\nu      \let\x=\xi        \let\p=\pi        \let\r=\rho

58: \let\s=\sigma \let\t=\tau     \let\f=\varphi    \let\ph=\varphi   \let\c=\chi

59: \let\ps=\psi  \let\y=\upsilon \let\o=\omega     \let\si=\varsigma

60: \let\G=\Gamma \let\D=\Delta   \let\Th=\Theta    \let\L=\Lambda    \let\X=\Xi

61: \let\P=\Pi    \let\Si=\Sigma  \let\F=\Phi       \let\Ps=\Psi

62: \let\O=\Omega \let\Y=\Upsilon

63: 

64: \def\PP{{\cal P}}\def\EE{{\cal E}}\def\MM{{\cal M}}\def\VV{{\cal V}}

65: \def\CC{{\cal C}}\def\FF{{\cal F}}\def\HH{{\cal H}}\def\WW{{\cal W}}

66: \def\TT{{\cal T}}\def\NN{{\cal N}}\def\BB{{\cal B}}\def\ZZ{{\cal Z}}

67: \def\RR{{\cal R}}\def\LL{{\cal L}}\def\JJ{{\cal J}}\def\QQ{{\cal Q}}

68: \def\DD{{\cal D}}\def\AA{{\cal A}}\def\GG{{\cal G}}\def\SS{{\cal S}}

69: \def\OO{{\cal O}}\def\XXX{{\bf X}}\def\YYY{{\bf Y}}\def\WWW{{\bf W}}

70: \def\KK{{\cal K}}

71: 

72: \def\bfs{{\bf s}}

73: \def\pp{{\bf p}}\def\qq{{\bf q}}\def\ii{{\bf i}}\def\xx{{\bf x}}

74: \def\aaa{{\bf a}} \def\cc{{\bf c}} \def\bb{{\bf b}} \def\dd{{\bf d}}

75: \def\yy{{\bf y}}\def\kk{{\bf k}}\def\mm{{\bf m}}\def\nn{{\bf n}}

76: \def\zz{{\bf z}}\def\uu{{\bf u}}\def\vv{{\bf v}}\def\ww{{\bf w}}

77: \def\xxi{\hbox{\grbold \char24}} \def\bP{{\bf P}}\def\rr{{\bf r}}

78: \def\tt{{\bf t}}\def\gg{{\bf g}}\def\hh{{\bf h}}\def\bT{{\bf T}}

79: 

80: \def\ss{{\underline \sigma}}       \def\oo{{\underline \omega}}

81: \def\bfe{{\bf e}} %\def\ee{{\underline \varepsilon}}

82: \def\aa{{\underline \alpha}}

83: \def\un{{\underline \nu}}          \def\ul{{\underline \lambda}}

84: \def\um{{\underline \mu}}          \def\ux{{\underline\xx}}

85: \def\uk{{\underline \kk}}          \def\uq{{\underline\qq}}

86: \def\uaa{{\underline \aaa}} \def\ub{{\underline\bb}}

87: \def\uc{{\underline\cc}} \def\ud{{\underline\dd}}

88: \def\up{{\underline\pp}}           \def\ua{{\underline \a}}

89: \def\ut{{\underline t}}            \def\uxi{{\underline \xi}}

90: \def\umu{{\underline \m}}          \def\uv{{\underline\vv}}

91: \def\ue{{\underline \e}}           \def\uy{{\underline\yy}}

92: \def\uz{{\underline \zz}}

93: \def\uw{{\underline \ww}}          \def\uo{{\underline \o}}\def\oo{{\underline \omega}}

94: \def\xxx{{\underline\xx}}

95: \let\ciao=\bye

96: \def\qed{\raise1pt\hbox{\vrule height5pt width5pt depth0pt}}

97: \def\barf#1{{\tilde \f_{#1}}} \def\tg#1{{\tilde g_{#1}}}

98: \def\bq{{\bar q}} \def\bh{{\bar h}} \def\bp{{\bar p}} \def\bpp{{\bar \pp}}

99: \def\Val{{\rm Val}}

100: \def\indic{\hbox{\raise-2pt \hbox{\indbf 1}}}

101: \def\bk#1#2{\bar\kk_{#1#2}}

102: \def\tdh{{\tilde h}}

103: 

104: \def\RRR{\hbox{\msytw R}} \def\rrrr{\hbox{\msytww R}}

105: \def\rrr{\hbox{\msytwww R}} \def\CCC{\hbox{\msytw C}}

106: \def\cccc{\hbox{\msytww C}} \def\ccc{\hbox{\msytwww C}}

107: \def\NNN{\hbox{\msytw N}} \def\nnnn{\hbox{\msytww N}}

108: \def\nnn{\hbox{\msytwww N}} \def\ZZZ{\hbox{\msytw Z}}

109: \def\zzzz{\hbox{\msytww Z}} \def\zzz{\hbox{\msytwww Z}}

110: \def\TTT{\hbox{\msytw T}} \def\tttt{\hbox{\msytww T}}

111: \def\ttt{\hbox{\msytwww T}}

112: 

113: 

114: \def\tA{\tilde A}

115: \def\tit{\tilde t}

116: \def\tc{\tilde c}

117: %%%%%%%%%%%% figure

118: %

119: \def\ins#1#2#3{\vbox to0pt{\kern-#2 \hbox{\kern#1 #3}\vss}\nointerlineskip}

120: 

121: \newdimen\xshift \newdimen\xwidth \newdimen\yshift

122: \newcount\griglia

123: 

124: \def\insertplot#1#2#3#4#5#6{%

125: \xwidth=#1pt \xshift=\hsize \advance\xshift by-\xwidth \divide\xshift by 2%

126: \begin{figure}[ht]

127: \vspace{#2pt}

128: \hspace{\xshift}

129: %\begin{center}

130: \begin{minipage}{#1pt}

131: #3

132: \ifnum\driver=1 \griglia=#6

133: %

134: \ifnum\griglia=1

135: \openout13=griglia.ps

136: \write13{gsave .2 setlinewidth}

137: \write13{0 10 #1 {dup 0 moveto #2 lineto } for}

138: \write13{0 10 #2 {dup 0 exch moveto #1 exch lineto } for}

139: \write13{stroke}

140: \write13{.5 setlinewidth}

141: \write13{0 50 #1 {dup 0 moveto #2 lineto } for}

142: \write13{0 50 #2 {dup 0 exch moveto #1 exch lineto } for}

143: \write13{stroke grestore}

144: \closeout13

145: \special{psfile=griglia.ps}

146: \fi

147: %

148: \special{psfile=#4.ps}\fi%

149: \ifnum\driver=2 \special{pdf:epdf (#4.pdf)}\fi

150: \end{minipage}

151: %\end{center}

152: \caption{#5}

153: \end{figure}

154: }

155: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

156: 

157: \def\gtopl{\hbox{\msxtw \char63}}

158: \def\ltopg{\hbox{\msxtw \char55}}

159: 

160: \def\be{\begin{equation}}

161: \def\ee{\end{equation}}

162: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}\def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}

163: \def\bean{\begin{eqnarray*}}\def\eean{\end{eqnarray*}}

164: \def\bfr{\begin{flushright}}\def\efr{\end{flushright}}

165: \def\bc{\begin{center}}\def\ec{\end{center}}

166: \def\bal{\begin{align}}\def\eal{\end{align}}

167: \def\ba#1{\begin{array}{#1}} \def\ea{\end{array}}

168: \def\bd{\begin{description}}\def\ed{\end{description}}

169: \def\bv{\begin{verbatim}}\def\ev{\end{verbatim}}

170: \def\nn{\nonumber}

171: \def\Halmos{\hfill\vrule height10pt width4pt depth2pt \par\hbox to \hsize{}}

172: \def\pref#1{(\ref{#1})}

173: \def\Dim{{\bf Dim. -\ \ }} \def\Sol{{\bf Soluzione -\ \ }}

174: \def\virg{\quad,\quad}

175: \def\bsl{$\backslash$}

176: 

177: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

178: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

179: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

180: 

181: \driver=1 \bozza=1

182: 

183: \let\a=\alpha \let\b=\beta    \let\g=\gamma     \let\d=\delta     \let\e=\varepsilon

184: \let\z=\zeta  \let\h=\eta     \let\th=\vartheta \let\k=\kappa     \let\l=\lambda

185: \let\m=\mu    \let\n=\nu      \let\x=\xi        \let\p=\pi        \let\r=\rho

186: \let\s=\sigma \let\t=\tau     \let\f=\varphi    \let\ph=\varphi   \let\c=\chi

187: \let\ps=\psi  \let\y=\upsilon \let\o=\omega     \let\si=\varsigma

188: \let\G=\Gamma \let\D=\Delta   \let\Th=\Theta    \let\L=\Lambda    \let\X=\Xi

189: \let\P=\Pi    \let\Si=\Sigma  \let\F=\Phi       \let\Ps=\Psi

190: \let\O=\Omega \let\Y=\Upsilon

191: 

192: \def\PP{{\cal P}}\def\EE{{\cal E}}\def\MM{{\cal M}}\def\VV{{\cal V}}

193: \def\CC{{\cal C}}\def\FF{{\cal F}}\def\HH{{\cal H}}\def\WW{{\cal W}}

194: \def\TT{{\cal T}}\def\NN{{\cal N}}\def\BB{{\cal B}}\def\ZZ{{\cal Z}}

195: \def\RR{{\cal R}}\def\LL{{\cal L}}\def\JJ{{\cal J}}\def\QQ{{\cal Q}}

196: \def\DD{{\cal D}}\def\AA{{\cal A}}\def\GG{{\cal G}}\def\SS{{\cal S}}

197: \def\OO{{\cal O}}\def\XXX{{\bf X}}\def\YYY{{\bf Y}}\def\WWW{{\bf W}}

198: \def\KK{{\cal K}}

199: 

200: \def\pp{{\bf p}}\def\qq{{\bf q}}\def\ii{{\bf i}}\def\xx{{\bf x}}

201: \def\aaa{{\bf a}} \def\cc{{\bf c}} \def\bb{{\bf b}} \def\dd{{\bf d}}

202: \def\yy{{\bf y}}\def\kk{{\bf k}}\def\mm{{\bf m}}\def\nn{{\bf n}}

203: \def\zz{{\bf z}}\def\uu{{\bf u}}\def\vv{{\bf v}}\def\ww{{\bf w}}

204: \def\xxi{\hbox{\grbold \char24}} \def\bP{{\bf P}}\def\rr{{\bf r}}

205: \def\tt{{\bf t}}\def\bT{{\bf T}}

206: 

207: \def\ss{{\underline \sigma}}       \def\oo{{\underline \omega}}

208: \def\ee{{\underline \varepsilon}}  \def\aa{{\underline \alpha}}

209: \def\un{{\underline \nu}}          \def\ul{{\underline \lambda}}

210: \def\um{{\underline \mu}}          \def\ux{{\underline\xx}}

211: \def\uk{{\underline \kk}}          \def\uq{{\underline\qq}}

212: \def\uaa{{\underline \aaa}} \def\ub{{\underline\bb}}

213: \def\uc{{\underline\cc}} \def\ud{{\underline\dd}}

214: \def\up{{\underline\pp}}           \def\ua{{\underline \a}}

215: \def\ut{{\underline t}}            \def\uxi{{\underline \xi}}

216: \def\umu{{\underline \m}}          \def\uv{{\underline\vv}}

217: \def\ue{{\underline \e}}           \def\uy{{\underline\yy}}

218: \def\uz{{\underline \zz}}

219: \def\uw{{\underline \ww}}          \def\uo{{\underline \o}}

220: \def\us{{\underline \s}}           \def\xxx{{\underline \xx}}

221: \def\kkk{{\underline\kk}}          \def\uuu{{\underline\uu}}

222: \def\udpr{{\underline\Dpr}}

223: 

224: 

225: \def\III{\hbox{\msytw I}}

226: \def\MMM{\hbox{\euftw M}}          \def\BBB{\hbox{\euftw B}}

227: \def\RRR{\hbox{\msytw R}}          \def\rrrr{\hbox{\msytww R}}

228: \def\rrr{\hbox{\msytwww R}}        \def\CCC{\hbox{\msytw C}}

229: \def\cccc{\hbox{\msytww C}}        \def\ccc{\hbox{\msytwww C}}

230: \def\NNN{\hbox{\msytw N}}          \def\nnnn{\hbox{\msytww N}}

231: \def\nnn{\hbox{\msytwww N}}        \def\ZZZ{\hbox{\msytw Z}}

232: \def\zzzz{\hbox{\msytww Z}}        \def\zzz{\hbox{\msytwww Z}}

233: \def\TTT{\hbox{\msytw T}}          \def\tttt{\hbox{\msytww T}}

234: \def\ttt{\hbox{\msytwww T}}        \def\EE{\hbox{\msytw E}}

235: \def\eeee{\hbox{\msytww E}}        \def\eee{\hbox{\msytwww E}}

236: 

237: \let\dpr=\partial

238: \let\circa=\cong

239: \let\bs=\backslash

240: \let\==\equiv

241: \let\txt=\textstyle

242: \let\dis=\displaystyle

243: \let\io=\infty

244: \let\0=\noindent

245: 

246: 

247: \def\pagina{{\vfill\eject}}

248: \def\*{{\hfill\break\null\hfill\break}}

249: \def\bra#1{{\langle#1|}}

250: \def\ket#1{{|#1\rangle}}

251: \def\media#1{{\langle#1\rangle}}

252: \def\ie{\hbox{\it i.e.\ }}

253: \def\eg{\hbox{\it e.g.\ }}

254: 

255: \def\tilde#1{{\widetilde #1}}

256: 

257: \def\Dpr{\V\dpr\,}

258: \def\aps{{\it a posteriori}}

259: \def\lft{\left}

260: \def\rgt{\right}

261: \def\der{\hbox{\rm d}}

262: \def\la{{\langle}}

263: \def\ra{{\rangle}}

264: \def\norm#1{{\left|\hskip-.05em\left|#1\right|\hskip-.05em\right|}}

265: \def\tgl#1{\!\!\not\!#1\hskip1pt}

266: \def\tende#1{\,\vtop{\ialign{##\crcr\rightarrowfill\crcr

267:              \noalign{\kern-1pt\nointerlineskip}

268:              \hskip3.pt${\scriptstyle #1}$\hskip3.pt\crcr}}\,}

269: \def\otto{\,{\kern-1.truept\leftarrow\kern-5.truept\to\kern-1.truept}\,}

270: \def\fra#1#2{{#1\over#2}}

271: 

272: \def\sde{{\cs SDe}}

273: \def\wti{{\cs WTi}}

274: \def\osa{{\cs OSa}}

275: \def\ce{{\cs CE}}

276: \def\rg{{\cs RG}}

277: 

278: \def\lp{{\hskip-1pt:\hskip 0pt}}

279: \def\rp{{\hskip-1pt :\hskip1pt}}

280: \def\defi{{\buildrel \;def\; \over =}}

281: \def\apt{{\;\buildrel apt \over =}\;}

282: \def\nequiv{\not\equiv}

283: \def\Tr{\rm Tr}

284: \def\diam{{\rm diam}}

285: \def\sgn{\rm sgn}

286: \def\wt#1{\widetilde{#1}}

287: \def\wh#1{\widehat{#1}}

288: \def\hat#1{\wh{#1}}

289: \def\sqt[#1]#2{\root #1\of {#2}}

290: 

291: \def\ha{{\widehat \a}}\def\hx{{\widehat \x}}\def\hb{{\widehat \b}}

292: \def\hr{{\widehat \r}}\def\hw{{\widehat w}}\def\hv{{\widehat v}}

293: \def\hf{{\widehat \f}}\def\hW{{\widehat W}}\def\hH{{\widehat H}}

294: \def\hB{{\widehat B}}\def\hh{{\widehat \h}}\def\hu{{\widehat u}}

295: \def\hK{{\widehat K}} \def\hW{{\widehat W}}\def\hU{{\widehat U}}

296: \def\hp{{\widehat \ps}}  \def\hF{{\widehat F}}

297: \def\bp{{\bar \ps}}

298: \def\hc{{\hat \c}}

299: \def\jm{{\jmath}}

300: \def\hJ{{\widehat \jmath}}

301: \def\hJ{{\widehat J}}

302: \def\hg{{\widehat g}}

303: \def\tg{{\tilde g}}

304: \def\hQ{{\widehat Q}}

305: \def\hP{{\widehat P}}

306: \def\hC{{\widehat C}}

307: \def\hA{{\widehat A}}

308: \def\hD{{\widehat \D}}

309: \def\hDD{{\hat \D}}

310: \def\bl{{\bar \l}}

311: \def\hG{{\widehat G}}

312: \def\hS{{\widehat S}}

313: \def\hR{{\widehat R}}

314: \def\hM{{\widehat M}}

315: \def\hN{{\widehat N}}

316: \def\hn{{\widehat \n}}

317: 

318: 

319: \def\PP{{\cal P}}\def\EE{{\cal E}}\def\MM{{\cal M}}\def\VV{{\cal V}}

320: \def\CC{{\cal C}}\def\FF{{\cal F}}\def\HH{{\cal H}}\def\WW{{\cal W}}

321: \def\TT{{\cal T}}\def\NN{{\cal N}}\def\BB{{\cal B}}\def\ZZ{{\cal Z}}

322: \def\RR{{\cal R}}\def\LL{{\cal L}}\def\JJ{{\cal J}}\def\QQ{{\cal Q}}

323: \def\DD{{\cal D}}\def\AA{{\cal A}}\def\GG{{\cal G}}\def\SS{{\cal S}}

324: \def\OO{{\cal O}}\def\AAA{{\cal A}}

325: 

326: \def\T#1{{#1_{\kern-3pt\lower7pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern3pt}}

327: \def\VVV#1{{\underline #1}_{\kern-3pt

328: \lower7pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern3pt\,}

329: \def\W#1{#1_{\kern-3pt\lower7.5pt\hbox{$\widetilde{}$}}\kern2pt\,}

330: \def\Re{{\rm Re}\,}\def\Im{{\rm Im}\,}

331: \def\lis{\overline}\def\tto{\Rightarrow}

332: \def\etc{{\it etc}} \def\acapo{\hfill\break}

333: \def\mod{{\rm mod}\,} \def\per{{\rm per}\,} \def\sign{{\rm sign}\,}

334: \def\indica{\leaders \hbox to 0.5cm{\hss.\hss}\hfill}

335: \def\guida{\leaders\hbox to 1em{\hss.\hss}\hfill}

336: \mathchardef\oo= "0521

337: 

338: \def\V#1{{\bf #1}}

339: \def\pp{{\bf p}}\def\qq{{\bf q}}\def\ii{{\bf i}}\def\xx{{\bf x}}

340: \def\yy{{\bf y}}\def\kk{{\bf k}}\def\mm{{\bf m}}\def\nn{{\bf n}}

341: \def\dd{{\bf d}}\def\zz{{\bf z}}\def\uu{{\bf u}}\def\vv{{\bf v}}

342: \def\xxi{\hbox{\grbold \char24}} \def\bP{{\bf P}}\def\rr{{\bf r}}

343: \def\tt{{\bf t}} \def\bz{{\bf 0}}

344: \def\ss{{\underline \sigma}}\def\oo{{\underline \omega}}

345: \def\xxx{{\underline\xx}}

346: \let\ciao=\bye

347: \def\qed{\raise1pt\hbox{\vrule height5pt width5pt depth0pt}}

348: \def\barf#1{{\tilde \f_{#1}}} \def\tg#1{{\tilde g_{#1}}}

349: \def\bq{{\bar q}} \def\bh{{\bar h}} \def\bp{{\bar p}} \def\bpp{{\bar \pp}}

350: \def\Val{{\rm Val}}

351: \def\indic{\hbox{\raise-2pt \hbox{\indbf 1}}}

352: \def\bk#1#2{\bar\kk_{#1#2}}

353: \def\tdh{{\tilde h}}

354: 

355: \def\RRR{\hbox{\msytw R}} \def\rrrr{\hbox{\msytww R}}

356: \def\rrr{\hbox{\msytwww R}} \def\CCC{\hbox{\msytw C}}

357: \def\cccc{\hbox{\msytww C}} \def\ccc{\hbox{\msytwww C}}

358: \def\NNN{\hbox{\msytw N}} \def\nnnn{\hbox{\msytww N}}

359: \def\nnn{\hbox{\msytwww N}} \def\ZZZ{\hbox{\msytw Z}}

360: \def\zzzz{\hbox{\msytww Z}} \def\zzz{\hbox{\msytwww Z}}

361: 

362: 

363: \def\TTT{\hbox{\msytw T}} \def\tttt{\hbox{\msytww T}}

364: \def\ttt{\hbox{\msytwww T}}

365: 

366: 

367: %%%%%%%%%%%% figure

368: %

369: \def\ins#1#2#3{\vbox to0pt{\kern-#2 \hbox{\kern#1 #3}\vss}\nointerlineskip}

370: 

371: \newdimen\xshift \newdimen\xwidth \newdimen\yshift

372: \newcount\griglia

373: 

374: \def\insertplot#1#2#3#4#5#6{%

375: \xwidth=#1pt \xshift=\hsize \advance\xshift by-\xwidth \divide\xshift by 2%

376: \begin{figure}[ht]

377: \vspace{#2pt} \hspace{\xshift}

378: %\begin{center}

379: \begin{minipage}{#1pt}

380: #3 \ifnum\driver=1 \griglia=#6

381: %

382: \ifnum\griglia=1 \openout13=griglia.ps \write13{gsave .2

383: setlinewidth} \write13{0 10 #1 {dup 0 moveto #2 lineto } for}

384: \write13{0 10 #2 {dup 0 exch moveto #1 exch lineto } for}

385: \write13{stroke} \write13{.5 setlinewidth} \write13{0 50 #1 {dup 0

386: moveto #2 lineto } for} \write13{0 50 #2 {dup 0 exch moveto #1

387: exch lineto } for} \write13{stroke grestore} \closeout13

388: \special{psfile=griglia.ps} \fi

389: %

390: \special{psfile=#4.ps}\fi%

391: \ifnum\driver=2 \special{pdf:epdf (#4.pdf)}\fi

392: \end{minipage}

393: %\end{center}

394: \caption{#5}

395: \end{figure}

396: }

397: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

398: 

399: \def\gtopl{\hbox{\msxtw \char63}}

400: \def\ltopg{\hbox{\msxtw \char55}}

401: 

402: \newdimen\shift \shift=-1.5truecm

403: \def\lb#1{%

404: \ifnum\bozza=1

405: \label{#1}\rlap{\hbox{\hskip\shift$\scriptstyle#1$}}

406: \else\label{#1} \fi}

407: 

408: \def\be{\begin{equation}}

409: \def\ee{\end{equation}}

410: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}\def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}

411: \def\bean{\begin{eqnarray*}}\def\eean{\end{eqnarray*}}

412: \def\bfr{\begin{flushright}}\def\efr{\end{flushright}}

413: \def\bc{\begin{center}}\def\ec{\end{center}}

414: \def\bal{\begin{align}}\def\eal{\end{align}}

415: \def\ba#1{\begin{array}{#1}} \def\ea{\end{array}}

416: \def\bd{\begin{description}}\def\ed{\end{description}}

417: \def\bv{\begin{verbatim}}\def\ev{\end{verbatim}}

418: \def\nn{\nonumber}

419: \def\Halmos{\hfill\vrule height10pt width4pt depth2pt \par\hbox to \hsize{}}

420: \def\pref#1{(\ref{#1})}

421: \def\Dim{{\bf Dim. -\ \ }} \def\Sol{{\bf Soluzione -\ \ }}

422: \def\virg{\quad,\quad}

423: \def\bsl{$\backslash$}

424: 

425: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

427: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

428: 

429: \driver=1 \bozza=0

430: 

431: 

432: \title{Extended scaling relations for planar lattice models}

433: 

434: 

435: 

436: 

437: \author{G. Benfatto$^1$ \and P. Falco$^2$ \and  V. Mastropietro$^1$\\

438: \\

439: {\small $^{1}$ Dipartimento di Matematica, Universit\`a di Roma ``Tor Vergata''}\\ 

440: {\small via della Ricerca Scientifica, I-00133, Roma}\\

441: \\

442: {\small $^{2}$   Mathematics Department, University of British Columbia,}\\

443: {\small Vancouver, BC Canada, V6T 1Z2}}

444: %

445: \date{}

446: \begin{document}

447: \maketitle

448: %

449: 

450: \begin{abstract} It is widely believed that the critical properties

451: of several planar lattice models, like the Eight Vertex or the

452: Ashkin-Teller models, are well described by

453: an effective Quantum Field Theory obtained as formal scaling

454: limit.  On the basis of this

455: assumption several extended scaling relations among their

456: indices were conjectured. We prove the validity of some of them, among

457: which the ones by Kadanoff, \cite{[K]}, and

458: by Luther and Peschel, \cite{[LP]}.

459: \end{abstract}

460: 

461: \section{Introduction and main results}

462: 

463: Integrable models in statistical mechanics, like the Ising or the Eight vertex

464: (8V) models in two dimensions, provide conceptual laboratories for the

465: understanding of phase transitions. Integrability is however a rather delicate

466: property requiring very special features, and it is usually lost in more

467: realistic models.

468: 

469: The principle of {\it universality}, phenomenologically quite well verified,

470: says that the singularities for second order phase transitions should be

471: insensitive to the specific details of the model, provided that symmetry and

472: some form of locality are retained. From the theoretical side, a mathematical

473: justification of universality in planar lattice models is rather complex to

474: provide. Only very recently Pinson and Spencer established, see

475: \cite{[Sp],[PS]}, a form of universality for the 2D Ising model; they added to

476: the Ising Hamiltonian a perturbation breaking the integrability and showed that

477: the indices they can compute were {\it exactly the same} as the Ising model

478: ones.

479: 

480: While the critical indices of the Ising model are expressed by {\it pure

481: numbers}, there are other lattice models in which some of the critical

482: exponents vary continuously with the parameters appearing in the Hamiltonian. A

483: celebrated example is provided by the Eight vertex model, solved by Baxter in

484: [2]; even if it can be mapped in two Ising models coupled by a quartic

485: interaction, its critical indices are different from the Ising ones.

486: 

487: Several authors, starting from Kadanoff and collaborators \cite{[K],[KB],[KW]}

488: and Luther and Peschel \cite{[LP]} , have argued that many models, like the

489: {\it Askhin-Teller} (AT) model and several others, belongs to the class of

490: universality of the 8V model. The notion of universality in this case is much

491: more subtle; it does not mean that the indices are the same for all the models

492: in the same class (on the contrary, the indices depend on all details of the

493: Hamiltonian), but that there are {\it scaling relations} between them, such

494: that all indices can be expressed in terms of any one of them.

495: 

496: The notion of universality for models with continuously varying

497: indices has been deeply investigated over the years, see for

498: instance \cite{[KW],[N],[PB],[ZZ]}; it has been pointed out that such

499: models are well described in the scaling limit by an effective

500: Quantum Field Theory, and on the basis of this assumption several

501: extended scaling relations between their indices were derived.

502: While the assumption of continuum scaling limit description of

503: planar lattice models is very powerful, it is well known that a

504: mathematical justification of it is very difficult, see \eg

505: \cite{[Sm]}.

506: 

507: The aim of this paper is to provide a mathematical proof of some of the exact

508: scaling relations derived in the literature for planar lattice models. We will

509: focus mainly on the 8V and AT models, but, as we will explain after the main

510: theorem below, our result can be extend to several other models.

511: 

512: We start from the well known (see \cite{[Ba]}) Ising formulation

513: of the 8V and the AT models. Let

514: $\L$ be a square subset of $\ZZZ^2$ of side $L$; if $\xx=(x_0,x)\in \L$ and

515: $\bfe_0=(1,0)$, $\bfe_1=(0,1)$, we consider two independent configurations of

516: spins, $\{\s_\xx=\pm1\}_{\xx\in \L }$ and $\{\s'_\xx=\pm1\}_{\xx\in \L}$ and

517: the Hamiltonian

518: %

519: \bea\lb{111} &&H(\s,\s')=H_J(\s) + H_{J'}(\s')- J_4 V(\s,\s')\;,

520: \eea

521: %

522: where $J>0$ and $J'>0$ are two parameters, $H_J$ is the (ferromagnetic) Ising

523: Hamiltonian in the lattice $\L$,

524: %

525: \bea

526: H_J(\s)=- J\sum_{j=0,1}\sum_{\xx\in\L} \s_{\xx}\s_{\xx+\bfe_j}\;,

527: \eea

528: %

529: $V$ is the quartic interaction and $-J_4$ is the coupling. In the the AT model,

530: $J$ and $J'$ can be different (that case is called {\it anisotropic}) and

531: $V=V_{AT}$, with

532: %

533: \bea V_{AT}(\s,\s')=

534: \sum_{j=0,1}\sum_{\xx\in\L}\s_\xx\s_{\xx+\bfe_j} \s'_\xx\s'_{\xx+\bfe_j}\;.

535: \eea

536: %

537: In the 8V model $J=J'$ and $V=V_{8V}$, with

538: %

539: \bea V_{8V}(\s,\s')=

540: \sum_{j=0,1}\sum_{\xx\in\L}\s_{\xx+j(\bfe_0+\bfe_1)}\s_{\xx+\bfe_0}

541: \s'_{\xx+j(\bfe_0+\bfe_1)}\s'_{\xx+\bfe_1}\;.

542: \eea

543: %

544: %

545: \insertplot{240}{70}

546: {}%

547: {s5}{\lb{s5}: The quartic interaction in the 8V and in the AT case. The

548: gray and the black square are the same square of the lattice. }{0}

549: %

550: In this paper we will focus our attention on two observables,

551: %

552: \bea

553: &&O^\e_\xx=\sum_{j=0,1}\s_{\xx}\s_{\xx+\bfe_j}+

554: \e\sum_{j=0,1}\s'_{\xx}\s'_{\xx+\bfe_j}\virg \e=\pm\;,

555: \eea

556: %

557: and their truncated correlations in the {\it thermodynamic limit}

558: %

559: \be\lb{corr} G^\e(\xx-\yy)= \lim_{\L\to \io}\la O^\e_\xx O^\e_\yy\ra_{\L} -\la

560: O^\e_\xx\ra_{\L}\la O^\e_\yy\ra_{\L}\virg \e=\pm\;,

561: \ee

562: %

563: where $\la\cdot\ra_\L$ is the average over all configurations of the spins with

564: statistical weight  $e^{-\b H(\s,\s')}$. In the AT model, $\la O^+_\xx\ra$ is

565: called the {\it energy}, while $\la O^-_{\xx}\ra$ is called the  {\it

566: crossover}; in the 8V model is the opposite, see \eg \cite{[N]}.

567: 

568: Despite their similarity, an exact solution exists for the 8V model but {\it

569: not} for the AT model. In recent times the methods of {\it constructive}

570: fermionic Renormalization (see \eg \cite{[M4]} for an updated introduction) has

571: been applied to such models, using the well known representation of such

572: correlations in terms of {\it Grassmann integrals}, see \eg \cite{[Sa]}. It was

573: proved in \cite{[M0],[M1]} that both the 8V and the isotropic AT systems have a

574: nonzero {\it critical temperature}, $T_c$, such that, if $T\not= T_c$,

575: $G^\e(\xx-\yy)$ decays faster than any power of $\x |\xx-\yy|$, with

576: %

577: \be

578: \x \sim  C\,|T-T_c|^{\a} \;, \hbox{as\ } T\to T_c \;.

579: \ee

580: %

581: Moreover, at criticality, there are two constants $C_\e$, $\e=\pm$, such that

582: %

583: \be\lb{xpm}

584: G^\e(\xx-\yy)\sim {C_\e\over |\xx-\yy|^{2 x_\e}} \;, \hbox{as\ }

585: |\xx-\yy|\to\io\;,

586: \ee

587: %

588: where $x_\pm$ are critical indices expressed by {\it convergent series} in

589: $J_4$.

590: %

591: The analysis in \cite{[M1]} allows to compute the indices $\a,x_\pm$ with

592: arbitrary precision (by an explicit computation of the lowest orders and a

593: rigorous bound on the rest); the complexity of such expansions makes however

594: essentially impossible to see directly from them the extended scaling

595: relations.

596: 

597: In the case of the anisotropic AT model, it was proven in  \cite{[GM1]}

598: that there are two critical temperatures,

599: $T_{1,c}$ and $T_{2,c}$, and the corresponding critical indices are

600: the same as those of the Ising model. However as

601: $J-J'\to 0$:

602: %

603: \be \lb{tr}

604: |T_{1,c}-T_{2,c}|\sim |J-J'|^{x_T}\;,

605: \ee

606: %

607: with a {\it transition index}, $x_T$, different form $1$ if $J_4\neq 0$.

608: 

609: In this paper we will prove the following Theorem.

610: 

611: \begin{theorem}\lb{thm1}

612: If the coupling is small enough, the critical indices of the 8V or AT verify

613: %

614: \be\lb{2}

615: x_-={1\over x_+}\;, \ee

616: %

617: \be\lb{2a}

618: \a={1\over 2-x_+}\;;

619: \ee

620: %

621: and, in the case of the anisotropic AT model,

622: %

623: \be\lb{3}

624: x_T={2-x_+\over 2-x_-}\;.

625: \ee

626: %

627: Moreover, if $-J_4^{AT}$ and $-J_4^{8V}$ denote the coupling in the two models,

628: there exists a choice of $J_4^{AT}$ as function of $J_4^{8V}$ such that the

629: above critical indices coincide.

630: \end{theorem}

631: 

632: {\bf Remarks}

633: \begin{enumerate}

634: \item Equation \pref{2} is the {\it extended scaling law} first conjectured

635:     by Kadanoff for the AT and 8V models, mainly on the basis of numerical

636:     evidence (see eq.(13b) and (15b) of \cite{[K]}). The scaling relation

637:     \pref{3} was never conjectured before. Note that all the critical

638:     indices we consider can be expressed as simple functions of one of

639:     them, in agreement with the general belief.

640: 

641: \item A similar theorem can be proved for a number of other models

642: in the same class of universality. An example is provided by the

643: $XYZ$ model, describing the nearest-neighbor interaction of

644: quantum spins on a chain with couplings $J_1,J_2,J_3$. In

645: \cite{[BM1]}, by a rigorous Renormalization Group analysis valid

646: for small values of $J_3$, it was possible to write two critical

647: indices as a convergent series in $J_3$; there were the index

648: $1+\h_1$, appearing in the oscillating part of the spin-spin

649: correlation along the $z$ direction (see (1.20) of \cite{[BM1]}),

650: and $1+\h_2$, the index appearing in the decay rate (see (1.19) of

651: \cite{[BM1]}). In such a case the analogue of the second of (1.10)

652: can be written as

653: %

654: \be

655: 1+\h_2={1\over 2-2(1+\h_1)^{-1}}

656: \ee

657: %

658: The above relation for the $XYZ$ indices has been conjectured

659: by Luther and Peschel in

660: \cite{[LP]} (see eq.(16) and table I of that paper).

661: 

662: \item Our results could be easily extended to any Hamiltonian of the form

663:     \pref{111}, if the quartic interactions verifies some symmetry

664:     conditions, listed in App. O of \cite{[M1]}.

665: 

666: \item Several other relations are conjectured in the literature,

667: concerning critical indices which are much more difficult to study

668: with our methods, like the indices of the polarization

669: correlations. New ideas seems to be required to treat such cases.

670: \end{enumerate}

671: 

672: 

673: The paper is organized in the following way. In \S\ref{sec2} we summarize the

674: analysis given in [18,19], in which the correlations of the AT or 8V models are

675: written in terms of Grassmann integrals and are analyzed using constructive

676: Renormalization Group methods. The outcome of such analysis is that the

677: critical indices $x_+$, $x_-$, $\a$ and $x_T$ can be written, in the small

678: coupling region, as {\it model independent} convergent series of a single

679: parameter, $\l_{-\io}$, the asymptotic limit of the effective coupling on large

680: scale. Note that $\l_{-\io}$ is in turn a convergent series (that does depend

681: on all the details of the lattice model) of the coupling $J_4$.  Such

682: expansions allow in principle to compute the indices with arbitrary precision,

683: but this is not needed to prove \pref{2a} and \pref{3}, which simply follow

684: from dimensional arguments. On the contrary,  dimensional arguments are not

685: sufficient to prove \pref{2}; and  it is apparently impossible to check it

686: directly in terms of the series representing $x_+$ and $x_-$, as functions of

687: $\l_{-\io}$.

688: 

689: In \S\ref{sec3} we show that such indices are {\it equal} to the indices of the

690: Quantum Field Theory coinciding with the formal scaling limit of the spin

691: models, provided the {\it bare parameters} of such a theory are chosen properly

692: as suitable functions of the parameters of the 8V or AT models; such functions

693: are expressed in terms of convergent expansions depending on all details of the

694: spin models. On the other hand, the QFT verifies extra quantum symmetries with

695: respect to the original spin Hamiltonian \pref{111}, implying a set of {\it

696: Ward Identities} and closed equations allowing to get simple exact expressions

697: for the critical indices in terms of the coupling of the QFT; \pref{2} follows

698: from such expressions.

699: 

700: \section{RG analysis of spin models}\lb{sec2}

701: 

702: \subsection{Fermionic representation  of the partition function}

703: We begin with considering  the partition function of

704: the Ising model with a quadratic interaction, external sources $A_{j,\xx}$, and

705: periodic conditions at the boundary of $\L$:

706: %

707: \be\lb{pf1}

708: Z(I)=\sum_{\s}\exp\Big[

709: \sum_{j=0,1\atop \xx\in \L}I_{j,\xx}\s_\xx\s_{\xx+\bfe_j}\Big]

710: \ee

711: %

712: where $I_{j,\xx}=A_{j,\xx}+\b J$. The purpose of adding the external source is

713: twofold: by taking derivatives w.r.t. $A$, either we can write the partition

714: function for \pref{111} in terms of two non-interacting Ising models, or we can

715: generate the correlations of the quadratic observables.

716: 

717: Indeed, since $\s_\xx, \s'_\xx=\pm1$,

718: %

719: $$\exp\big(\a\s_\xx \s_{\xx+\bfe_j}\s'_\yy \s'_{\yy+\bfe_{j'}}\big)

720: =\cosh(\a)+\s_\xx \s_{\xx+\bfe_j}\s'_\yy \s'_{\yy+\bfe_{j'}}\sinh(\a)\;,$$

721: %

722: so that the partition function of the two models with external fields is given

723: by:

724: %

725: \bea\lb{int}

726: &&Z(J_4,I,I') = \lft[\cosh(\b J_4)\rgt]^{2|\L|}\cdot\nn\\

727: %

728: &&\cdot \prod_{j=0,1\atop\xx\in\L}\lft[1+\tanh(\b J_4){\dpr^2\over \dpr

729: \tA_{j,\xx} \tA'_{j,\xx}}\rgt] Z(I)Z(I')\;,

730: \eea

731: %

732: where $I'_{j,\xx}=A'_{j,\xx}+\b J'$; and,

733: in the AT case, $\tA_{j,\xx}=A_{j,\xx}$ and $\tA'_{j,\xx}=A'_{j,\xx}$,

734: while, in the 8V case, $\tilde A_{0,\xx}=A_{0,\xx}$, $\tilde

735: A'_{0,\xx}=A'_{1,\xx}$, $\tilde A_{1,\xx}=A_{1,\xx+\bfe_0}$, $\tilde

736: A'_{1,\xx}=A'_{0,\xx+\bfe_1}$.

737: 

738: For $Z(I)$, the partition function of the Ising model with periodic boundary

739: condition, a fermionic representation is known since a long time, see

740: \cite{[Sa]}.

741: %\cite{[T]},\cite{[SML]}.

742: %. There are two

743: %main routes to derive it (see introduction of \cite{[SML]}): either through the

744: %Pfaffian representation of the dimer model (follow appendix of \cite{[T]}, then

745: %switch to \cite{[Sa]}), or through the transfer matrix formalism and then the

746: %Jordan-Wigner transformation \cite{[SML]}.

747: 

748: The result is the following. Let $\g=(\e_0,\e_1)$, with $\e_0,\e_1=\pm$ and let

749: $\{H_\xx$, $\bar H_\xx$, $V_\xx$, $\bar V_\xx\}_{\xx\in \L}$ be a family of

750: Grassmann variables verifying the $\g$-boundary conditions, namely

751: %

752: \bea &&\bar H_{\xx+(L,0)}=\e_0\bar H_{\xx} \virg

753: \bar H_{\xx+(0,L)}=\e_1\bar H_{\xx}\nn\;,\\

754: \lb{c31} && H_{\xx+(L,0)}=\e_0 H_{\xx} \virg H_{\xx+(0,L)}=\e_1 H_{\xx}\;,

755: \eea

756: %

757: and similar relations for $V,\bar V$ (we are skipping the $\g$ dependence in

758: $H$'s and $V$'s). Then  we consider the {\it Grassmann functional integral}

759: %

760: \be \lb{2.11}

761: Z_\g= \int\! dH dV\; e^{S(t)}\;,

762: \ee

763: %

764: where the action $S(t)$ is the following function of the parameters

765: $t=\{t_{j,\xx}\}_{\xx\in \L\atop j=0,1}$ and of the Grassmann variables with

766: $\g-$boundary condition:

767: %

768: \bea \lb{16}

769: && S(t)= \sum_{\xx\in\L} \Big[t_{0,\xx}\bar H_{\xx} H_{\xx+\bfe_0}+

770: t_{1,\xx}\bar V_\xx V_{\xx+\bfe_1}\Big]+\\

771: %

772: &&+\sum_{\xx\in\L}\Big[ \bar H_{\xx} H_{\xx}+ \bar V_{\xx} V_{\xx}+ \bar

773: V_{\xx} \bar H_{\xx}+  V_{\xx} H_{\xx}+ V_{\xx} \bar H_{\xx}+ H_{\xx} \bar

774: V_{\xx}\Big]\nn\;.

775: \eea

776: %

777: Choosing $t_{j,\xx}=\tanh I_{j,\xx}$, and for $c_{j,\xx}=\cosh I_{j,\xx}$, the

778: partition function \pref{pf1} can be written in the following way:

779: %

780: \bea\lb{17}

781: Z(I) = (-1)^{|\L|} 2^{|\L|}\lft(\prod_{j,\xx}c_{j,x}\rgt) \sum_{\g}

782: {(-1)^{\d_\g}\over 2}Z_{\g}

783: \eea

784: %

785: where $\d_\g=1$ for $\g=(+,+)$, and $\d_\g=0$ otherwise.

786: 

787: By \pref{int},  $Z( J_4,I,I')$ can be written by doubling the above

788: representation and explicitly taking the derivatives w.r.t. $\tA_{j,\xx}$ and

789: $\tA'_{j,\xx}$. After some trivial algebra, we get the following result.

790: 

791: Let us call $\tit_{j,\xx}$, $\tc_{j,\xx}$ the expressions obtained from

792: $t_{j,\xx}$, $c_{j,\xx}$ by substituting $A_{j,\xx}$ with $\tA_{j,\xx}$; in a

793: similar way we define $\tit'_{j,\xx}$, $\tc'_{j,\xx}$. Let us now define:

794: %

795: \bea

796: && f_{j,\xx} = 1+\tanh(\b J_4) \tit_{j,\xx} \tit'_{j,\xx}\;,\nn\\

797: %

798: && g_{j,\xx}={\tit'_{j,\xx}\over (\tc_{j,\xx})^2 } {\tanh(\b J_4)\over

799: f_{j,\xx}} \virg g'_{j,\xx}= {\tit_{j,\xx}\over (\tc'_{j,\xx})^2 } {\tanh(\b

800: J_4)\over f_{j,\xx}} \;,\nn\\

801: %

802: && h_{j,\xx}= {1\over (\tc'_{j,\xx})^2 (\tc_{j,\xx})^2} {\tanh(\b J_4)\over

803:  f_{j,\xx}} - g_{j,\xx} g'_{j,\xx}\;.

804: \eea

805: %

806: Then we can write the partition function of the interacting models as

807: %

808: \bea \lb{2.10}

809: && Z( J_4,I,I') = 4^{|\L|} \lft[\cosh (\b J_4)\rgt]^{2|\L|}

810: \lft(\prod_{j,\xx}f_{j,\xx} c_{j,\xx} c'_{j,\xx}\rgt)\cdot\nn\\

811: %

812: &&\cdot \sum_{\g,\g'}{(-1)^{\d_{\g}+\d_{\g'}}\over 4} Z_{\g,\g'}( J_4)\;,

813: \eea

814: %

815: where $Z_{\g,\g'}(J_4)$ is the Grassmannian functional integral

816: %

817: \bea \lb{2.111a}

818: Z_{\g,\g'}( J_4)=\int\! dH dV dH' dV'\; e^{\tilde S(\tit+g)+ \tilde

819: S'(\tit'+g')+V(h)}\;,

820: \eea

821: %

822: with boundary conditions $\g=(\e_0,\e_1)$ and $\g'=(\e'_0,\e'_1)$ on the

823: variables $H$, $V$ and $H'$, $V'$, respectively. Moreover $\tilde S(t)$ and

824: $\tilde S'(t)$ have a definition which depends on the model. $\tilde S(t)$ is

825: equal to $S(t)$ in the AT model, while, in the 8V model, it is the function

826: which is obtained from $S(t)$, by substituting, in the first line of \pref{16},

827: $\bar V_\xx V_{\xx+\bfe_1}$ with $\bar V_{\xx+\bfe_0} V_{\xx+\bfe_0+\bfe_1}$.

828: $\tilde S'(t)$, in the AT case, is obtained from $S(t)$, by simply replacing

829: $H, V$ with $H', V'$, while, in the 8V case, we also have to substitute $\bar

830: H'_\xx H'_{\xx+\bfe_0}$ with $\bar V'_\xx V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}$ and $\bar V'_\xx

831: V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}$  with $\bar H'_{\xx+\bfe_1} H'_{\xx+\bfe_1+\bfe_0}$. Finally,

832: $V(h)$ is a quartic interaction that, in the AT case, is given by

833: %

834: \be V_{AT}(h) =\sum_{\xx\in\L}

835: \lft[h_{0,\xx}\bar H_{\xx} H_{\xx+\bfe_0} \bar H'_{\xx} H'_{\xx+\bfe_0}

836: +h_{1,\xx}\bar V_{\xx} V_{\xx+\bfe_1} \bar V'_{\xx} V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}\rgt]\;,

837: \ee

838: %

839: while, in the 8V case, is given by

840: %

841: \be V_{8V}(h) =\sum_{\xx\in\L}

842: \lft[h_{0,\xx}\bar H_{\xx} H_{\xx+\bfe_0} \bar V'_{\xx} V'_{\xx+\bfe_1} +

843: h_{1,\xx}\bar V_{\xx+\bfe_0} V_{\xx+\bfe_0+\bfe_1} \bar H'_{\xx+\bfe_1}

844: H'_{\xx+\bfe_1+\bfe_0}\rgt]\;.

845: \ee

846: %

847: 

848: 

849: We remark that

850: %

851: \be

852: g_{j,\xx},\  g'_{j,\xx},\ h_{j,\xx}={\rm O}(\b J_4)\;.

853: \ee

854: %

855: 

856: \subsection{Fermionic representation of the correlations}

857: 

858: The truncated correlations of the quadratic observables are obtained by taking

859: two derivatives of $\ln Z( J_4,I,I')$ w.r.t. the external sources in two

860: different points, and putting such external sources to zero. The

861: addends $2|\L|\ln [2\cosh(\b J_4)]$ and $\sum_{j,\xx} (\ln f_{j,\xx}+ \ln

862: c_{j,\xx} + \ln c'_{j,\xx})$ do not contribute when we take two derivatives in

863: the $A$ variables of two different points. Moreover, it has been proved in

864: \cite{[M1]} that all and 16 partition functions $Z_{\g,\g'}$ have the same

865: thermodynamic limit; hence, from now on we will substitute them with the same

866: one, that with $\g=\g'=(-,-)$. If we define $\dpr^\e_{j,\xx} = \dpr/\dpr

867: A_{j,\xx} +\e \dpr/\dpr A'_{j,\xx}$, we get:

868: %

869: \be

870: \la O^\e_\xx;O^\e_\yy\ra_\L^T= \lft.\sum_{i,j} \dpr^\e_{i,\xx} \dpr^\e_{j,\yy}

871: \ln Z_{\g,\g}\rgt|_{A\=0} = \lft. {\dpr^2\ln \bar Z (\bar A)\over \dpr \bar

872: A^\e_{\xx}\dpr \bar A^\e_{\yy}} \rgt|_{\bar A\=0}

873: \ee

874: %

875: where

876: %

877: \be\lb{25}

878: \bar Z(\bar A)=\int\! dH dV dH' dV'\; e^{S(s)+ S(s')+ 2\l V + B(\bar A)}\;,

879: \ee

880: %

881: $s$, $s'$ and $h$ are $j,\xx-$independent parameters, defined as

882: %

883: \bea\lb{stg}

884: &&s=\lft. t_{j,\xx}+g_{j,\xx}\rgt|_{A\=0}=\tanh(\b J) + {\rm O}(\b J_4)

885: \cr\cr

886: &&

887: s'=\lft.

888: t'_{j,\xx}+g'_{j,\xx}\rgt|_{A\=0}=\tanh(\b J') + {\rm O}(\b J_4)

889: \cr\cr

890: &&2\l=\lft. h_{j,\xx}\rgt|_{A\=0}={\rm O}(\b J_4)\;;

891: \eea

892: %

893: $B(\bar A)$ is an interaction with external sources $\bar A^\e_\xx$, given, in

894: the AT case, by

895: %

896: \bea

897: B(\bar A)&=&\sum_{\xx\in \L\atop \e=\pm}

898:  \bar A^\e_\xx\lft[q_\e\lft(\bar H_{\xx}H_{\xx+\bfe_0}+\bar V_{\xx}V_{\xx+\bfe_1}\rgt)

899: + q'_\e \lft(\bar H'_{\xx}H'_{\xx+\bfe_0}+\bar

900: V'_{\xx}V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}\rgt)\rgt]+\nn\\

901: %

902: &+&\sum_{\xx\in \L\atop \e=\pm} \bar A^\e_{\xx} p_\e\lft(\bar

903: H_{\xx}H_{\xx+\bfe_0} \bar H'_{\xx}H'_{\xx+\bfe_0}+ \bar V_{\xx} V_{\xx+\bfe_1}

904: \bar V'_{\xx}V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}\rgt)\;,

905: \eea

906: %

907: while, in the 8V case, it is given by

908: %

909: \bea

910: &&B(\bar A) = \sum_{\xx\in \L, \e=\pm} \bar A^\e_\xx \lft[q_\e\lft(\bar

911: H_{\xx}H_{\xx+\bfe_0}+\bar V_{\xx+\bfe_0} V_{\xx+\bfe_0+\bfe_1}\rgt) +\right.\nn\\

912: %

913: &&\left. +q'_\e \lft(\bar H'_{\xx+\bfe_1}H'_{\xx+\bfe_1+\bfe_0}+\bar

914: V'_{\xx}V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}\rgt)\rgt]+\\

915: %

916: &&+\sum_{\xx\in \L\atop \e=\pm} \bar A^\e_{\xx} p_\e\lft(\bar

917: H_{\xx}H_{\xx+\bfe_0} \bar V'_{\xx} V'_{\xx+\bfe_1}+ \bar V_{\xx+\bfe_0}

918: V_{\xx+\bfe_0+\bfe_1} \bar H'_{\xx+\bfe_1} H'_{\xx+\bfe_1+\bfe_0}\rgt)\;;\nn

919: \eea

920: %

921: finally, $q_\e$, $q'_\e$ and $p_\e$ are given by the $j,\xx-$independent

922: parameters

923: \bea

924: q_\e&=&\lft. \sum_i \left( {\dpr \over\dpr A_{j,\xx} } +\e {\dpr \over\dpr

925: A'_{j,\xx} }\right) (\tit_{i,\xx}+g_{i,\xx}) \rgt|_{A\=0} \virg

926: q'_\e=\{\tit,g \rightarrow \tit',g'\}\;,\nn\\

927: %

928: p_\e&=&\lft. \sum_i \left( {\dpr h_{i,\xx} \over\dpr A_{j,\xx} } + \e {\dpr

929: h_{j,\xx} \over\dpr A'_{j,\xx} } \right) \rgt|_{A\=0}\;.

930: \eea

931: %

932: Note that $q_\e=1-\tanh(\b J) + O(\b J_4)$, $q'_\e=\e[1-\tanh(\b J')] + O(\b

933: J_4)$ and $p_\e=O(\b J_4)$.

934: 

935: \subsection{Dirac and Majorana fermions}

936: In order to make more evident the analogy of the above functional integral with

937: the action of a fermionic (Euclidean) Quantum Field Model, it is convenient to

938: make a change of variables in the Grassmann algebra. This change of variables

939: is the analogous in the euclidean theories of the transformation from {\it

940: Dirac fermions} to {\it Majorana fermions} in real time QFT.

941: 

942: The new Grassmannian variables will be denoted by $\psi_\xx$, $\bar\psi_\xx$,

943: $\c_\xx$ and $\bar\c_\xx$ and are related to the old ones by the equations:

944: %

945: \bea \lb{2.12}

946: && \bar H_\xx+i H_\xx= e^{i{\pi\over 4}}\lft(\psi_\xx - \chi_\xx\rgt) \virg

947: \bar V_\xx+i V_\xx= \psi_\xx + \chi_\xx\;,\nn\\

948: %

949: && \bar H_\xx -i H_\xx= e^{-i{\pi\over 4}} \lft(\bar\psi_\xx -

950: \bar\chi_\xx\rgt) \virg \bar V_\xx-i V_\xx= \bar\psi_\xx + \bar\chi_\xx\;.

951: \eea

952: %

953: A similar transformation is done for the primed variables. After a

954: straightforward computation, we see that the action \pref{16}, calculated at

955: $t_{j,\xx}=s$, $\forall j,\xx$, can be written in terms of the Majorana fields

956: as

957: %

958: \be

959: S(s)=A(\ps,m_s)+A(\c,M_s)+Q(\ps,\c)\;,

960: \ee

961: %

962: where $m_s=1-\sqrt{2}+s$, $M_s=1+\sqrt{2}+s$ and, if we define $\dpr^i\psi_\xx

963: = \psi_{\xx+\bfe_i}-\psi_\xx$,

964: \bea

965: A(\ps,m)&=&{s\over 4}\sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\ps_\xx \lft(\dpr^0-i\dpr^1\rgt)

966: \ps_\xx + {\rm c.c.}\rgt] - i m \sum_{\xx\in \L} \bar\ps_\xx

967: \ps_\xx+\nn\\

968: %

969: &+&{s\over 4}\sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\bar\ps_\xx \lft(-i\dpr^0

970: -i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps_\xx +{\rm c.c.}\rgt]\;,

971: \eea

972: %

973: \bea

974: Q(\ps,\c)=&-& {s\over 4}\sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\ps_\xx \lft(\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt)

975: \c_\xx +\Big\{\ps\leftrightarrow \c\Big\}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt]-\nn\\

976: %

977: &-&{s\over 4}\sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\bar\c_\xx\lft(-i\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt) \ps_\xx

978: +\Big\{\ps\leftrightarrow \c\Big\}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt]\;,

979: \eea

980: %

981: where, in agreement with \pref{2.12}, we are calling complex conjugation (c.c.)

982: the operation on the Grassmann algebra which amounts to exchange $\psi_\xx$

983: with $\bar\psi_\xx$, $\c_\xx$ with $\bar\c_\xx$ and $i$ with $-i$.

984: %

985: 

986: 

987: The quartic interaction of the AT model becomes:

988: %

989: \bea

990: &&V_{AT} =-\l\sum_{\xx\in \L}\lft[\bar\ps_\xx \ps_\xx \bar\ps'_\xx \ps'_\xx +

991: \bar\ps_\xx \ps_\xx \bar\c'_\xx \c'_\xx +

992: \{\ps\leftrightarrow\c\}\rgt]-\\

993: %

994: &&-\l \sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\bar\c_\xx \ps_\xx \bar\c'_\xx \ps'_\xx +

995: \bar\c_\xx \ps_\xx \bar\ps'_\xx \c'_\xx + \{\ps\leftrightarrow\c\}\rgt] + {\rm

996: irr.}\;,\nn

997: \eea

998: %

999: where the {\rm irrelevant} part (irr.) is made of quartic terms with at least

1000: one (discrete) derivative; we will discuss later on why these term are less

1001: important. In the case of the 8V model, the second square bracket has $+\l$ in

1002: front, rather than $-\l$.

1003: 

1004: If we set $b_\e=(q_\e+ \e q'_\e)/2$ and $d_\e=(q_\e- \e q'_\e)/2$, the

1005: interaction with the external field is given by

1006: %

1007: \bea

1008: &&B(\bar A) = -i \sum_{\xx\in \L\atop\e=\pm}b_\e \bar A^\e_{\xx}

1009: \lft[\bar\ps_\xx \ps_\xx + \e\bar\ps'_\xx \ps'_\xx + \bar\c_\xx \c_\xx +

1010: \e\bar\c'_\xx \c'_\xx

1011: \rgt]-\nn\\

1012: %

1013: &&- i \sum_{\xx\in \L\atop\e=\pm}d_\e \bar A^\e_{\xx} \lft[ \bar\ps_\xx \ps_\xx

1014: - \e\bar\ps'_\xx \ps'_\xx + \bar\c_\xx \c_\xx - \e\bar\c'_\xx \c'_\xx\rgt]+{\rm

1015: irr.},\nn

1016: \eea

1017: %

1018: where the irrelevant terms are, in this case, either quartic in the fields or

1019: qua\-dratic  with derivatives. We remark that, if $J=J'$, then $d_\e=0$, while

1020: $b_\e=1-\tanh(\b J) + O(\b J_4)$.

1021: 

1022: We now make another change of variables, defined by the relations

1023: %

1024: \be

1025: \psi^\e_{\xx,+}= {\psi_\xx -\e i\psi'_\xx\over\sqrt{2}} \virg \psi^\e_{\xx,-}=

1026: {\bar\psi_\xx -\e i \bar\psi'_\xx \over\sqrt{2}} \virg \e=\pm\;,

1027: \ee

1028: %

1029: and the similar ones for the $\c$-variables. If we put $u=(s+s')/2$, $v=(s-s')/

1030: 2$ and $m_\e=(m_s+\e m_{s'})/2$, we get

1031: %

1032: \bea\lb{36}

1033: &&A(\ps,m_s)+A(\ps',m_{s'}) =\\

1034: %

1035: && = \sum_{\xx\in \L} \left\{ {u\over 4}

1036: \lft[\ps^+_{\xx,+}\lft(\dpr^0-i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^-_{\xx,+}+

1037: \ps^-_{\xx,+}\lft(\dpr^0-i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^+_{\xx,+}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt]+\right. \nn\\

1038: %

1039: && + {u\over 4} \lft[\ps^-_{\xx,+}\lft(i\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^+_{\xx,-}+

1040: \ps^+_{\xx,+}\lft(i\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^-_{\xx,-}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt]

1041: +\nn\\

1042: %

1043: &&+ {v\over 4} \lft[\ps^+_{\xx,+}\lft(\dpr^0-i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^+_{\xx,+}+

1044: \ps^-_{\xx,+}\lft(\dpr^0-i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^-_{\xx,+}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt] +\nn\\

1045: %

1046: &&+{v\over 4}  \lft[\ps^-_{\xx,+}\lft(i\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^-_{\xx,-}+

1047: \ps^+_{\xx,+}\lft(i\dpr^0+i\dpr^1\rgt)\ps^+_{\xx,-}+{\rm c.c.}\rgt] -\nn\\

1048: %

1049: &&- im_+ \left. \lft[\ps_{\xx,-}^+\ps^-_{\xx,+}-

1050: \ps^+_{\xx,+}\ps^-_{\xx,-}\rgt] + im_- \lft[\ps^-_{\xx,+}\ps^-_{\xx,-}+

1051: \ps^+_{\xx,+}\ps^+_{\xx,-}\rgt]\right\} \;,\nn

1052: \eea

1053: %

1054: where now the c.c. operation amounts to exchange $\psi^\e_{\xx,\o}$ with

1055: $\psi^{-\e}_{\xx,-\o}$ and $i$ with $-i$.

1056: 

1057: 

1058: The interaction with the external source is

1059: %

1060: \bea\lb{BA}

1061: &&B(\bar A) = i \sum_{\xx\in \L} (b_+ \bar A^+_\xx + d_- \bar A^-_\xx)

1062: [\ps^+_{\xx,+}\ps^-_{\xx,-}-\ps^+_{\xx,-}\ps^-_{\xx,+}+\\

1063: %

1064: &&+\c^+_{\xx,+}\c^-_{\xx,-}-\c^+_{\xx,-}\c^-_{\xx,+}]+i \sum_{\xx\in \L} (b_-

1065: \bar A^-_\xx + d_+ \bar A^+_\xx)\cdot\nn\\

1066: %

1067: &&\cdot [\ps^+_{\xx,+}\ps^+_{\xx,-}+\ps^-_{\xx,+}\ps^-_{\xx,-}

1068: +\c^+_{\xx,+}\c^+_{\xx,-}+\c^-_{\xx,+}\c^-_{\xx,-}] + {\rm irr.}\;.\nn

1069: \eea

1070: %

1071: Finally the quartic self interaction is given by

1072: %

1073: \bea\lb{int1}

1074: &&\VV(\psi,\c) =\l\sum_{\xx\in \L} \lft[\ps^+_{\xx,+} \ps^+_{\xx,-}

1075: \ps^-_{\xx,+} \ps^-_{\xx,-} +\c^+_{\xx,+}\c^+_{\xx,-}\c^-_{\xx,+}

1076: \c^-_{\xx,-}\rgt]+\nn\\

1077: %

1078: &&+v(\psi,\c) +{\rm irrel.\ terms}\;,

1079: \eea

1080: %

1081: where $v(\psi,\c)$ is a quartic interaction depending both on $\ps$ and $\c$,

1082: which has a different expression in the AT and 8V models, as well as the

1083: irrelevant terms.

1084: 

1085: \subsection{Multiscale integration}\lb{s2.4}

1086: 

1087: Let $\DD$ be the set of $\kk$'s such that $k_0={2\p\over L}(n_0+{1\over 2})$

1088: and $k_1={2\p\over L}(n_1+{1\over 2})$, for  $n_0, n_1=-{L\over

1089: 2},\ldots,{L\over 2}-1$, and $L$ and even integer. Then, the Fourier transform

1090: for the fermions with antiperiodic boundary condition is defined by

1091: %

1092: \be

1093: \ps^\e_{\xx,\o}\defi {1\over |\L|} \sum_{\kk\in \DD}

1094: e^{i\e\kk\xx}\hp^\e_{\kk,\o}\;.

1095: \ee

1096: %

1097: Therefore \pref{36} can be written as

1098: %

1099: \be\lb{2.29}

1100: A(\ps,m_s)+A(\ps',m_{s'}) = {u\over 2 |\L|}\sum_{\kk\in\DD}\F_\kk^+ S(\kk)

1101: \F_\kk\;,

1102: \ee

1103: %

1104: where

1105: %

1106: \bea

1107: \F_\kk &=& (\hp^-_{\kk,+},\hp^-_{\kk,-},\hp^+_{-\kk,+},\hp^+_{-\kk,-})\;,\nn\\

1108: %

1109: \F^+_\kk &=& (\hp^+_{\kk,+},\hp^+_{\kk,-},\hp^-_{-\kk,+},\hp^-_{-\kk,-})\;,

1110: \eea

1111: %

1112: and , if we define

1113: %

1114: \bea

1115: \hat D_\o(\kk) &=& -i\sin k_0+\o\sin k_1\;,\nn\\

1116: %

1117: \m(\kk) &=& (\cos k_0+\cos k_1-2) + 2{1-\sqrt2+u\over u}\;,\\

1118: %

1119: \s(\kk) &=& {v\over u}(\cos k_0+\cos k_1-2) +2{v\over u}\;,\nn

1120: \eea

1121: %

1122: the matrix $S(\kk)$ is given by

1123: %

1124: \be\lb{sds}

1125: S(\kk) = \pmatrix{ \hat D_-(\kk)& i\m(\kk)&{v\over u} \hat D_-(\kk) &i\s(\kk)

1126: \cr\cr -i\m(\kk)&\hat D_+(\kk)&-i\s(\kk)&{v\over u}\hat D_+(\kk) \cr\cr {v\over

1127: u}\hat D_-(\kk)&+i\m(\kk)&\hat D_-(\kk)&i\s(\kk) \cr\cr -i\m(\kk)&{v\over

1128: u}\hat D_+(\kk)&-i\s(\kk)&\hat D_+(\kk) }\;.

1129: \ee

1130: 

1131: From now until the end of the section we will only consider the case $J=J'$;

1132: some details about the anisotropic AT model are deferred to the appendix.

1133: 

1134: Hence we have $v=0$ and $\s(\kk)\=0$, so that we get the much simpler equation

1135: %

1136: \be

1137: A(\ps,m_s)+A(\ps',m_{s'}) = - {1\over |\L|} \sum_{\kk\in\DD} \sum_{\o,\o'}

1138: \hp^+_{\kk,\o} \hp^-_{\kk,\o'} T_{\o,\o'}(\kk)\;,

1139: \ee

1140: %

1141: with

1142: %

1143: \be

1144: T(\kk)= u \pmatrix{ i\sin k_0+\sin k_1& -i\m(\kk) \cr\cr i\m(\kk)& i\sin

1145: k_0-\sin k_1 }\;.

1146: \ee

1147: 

1148: In the same way and with similar definitions, we get also

1149: %

1150: \be

1151: A(\c,M_s)+A(\c',M_{s'}) = - {1\over |\L|} \sum_{\kk\in\DD} \sum_{\o,\o'}

1152: \hc^+_{\kk,\o} \hc^-_{\kk,\o'} T^{\c}_{\o,\o'}(\kk)\;,

1153: \ee

1154: %

1155: where $T^{\c}(\kk)$ is the matrix obtained from $T(\kk)$ by substituting

1156: $\m(\kk)$ with

1157: %

1158: \be\lb{sigc}

1159: \m^{\c}(\kk)= (\cos k_0+\cos k_1-2) + 2{1+\sqrt2+u\over u}\;.

1160: \ee

1161: 

1162: Hence, we can write the functional integral \pref{25} as

1163: %

1164: \be

1165: \bar Z(\bar A)= {1\over \NN} \int\! P(d\psi) P_\c(d\c)\; e^{\QQ(\psi,\c)+

1166: \VV(\psi,\c)+B(\bar A)}\;,

1167: \ee

1168: %

1169: where $\NN$ is a normalization constant and $P(d\psi)$ is the (Grassmannian)

1170: Gaussian measure with propagator

1171: %

1172: \be

1173: g(\xx)={1\over L^2}\sum_{\kk\in \DD} e^{-i\kk\xx} T^{-1}(\kk)\;,

1174: \ee

1175: %

1176: $P_\c(d\c)$ is the Gaussian measure with propagator $g_\c(\xx)$, which is

1177: obtained from $g(\xx)$ by replacing $T(\kk)$ with $T^\c(\kk)$, $\QQ(\psi,\c)$

1178: is the sum of the quadratic terms $Q(\psi,\c)$ and $Q(\psi',\c')$, represented

1179: in terms of the new variables; $B(A)$ and $\VV(\psi,\c)$ are defined in

1180: \pref{BA} and \pref{int1}.

1181: 

1182: If $J>0$ and $J_4$ is any real number, $u$ is a strictly increasing function of

1183: $\tanh(\b J)$ and has range $(0,1)$, as one can check by using the definition

1184: of $s$, see \pref{stg}. On the other hand, $\det T(\kk)=0$ only if $\kk=0$ and

1185: $\m(\kk)=0$; hence, $g(\xx)$ has a singularity at $u=u_c=\sqrt{2}-1$, which is

1186: an allowed value; moreover, if $\b |J_4|\ll 1$ (as we shall suppose in the

1187: following), $u=\tanh(\b J) + O(\b J_4)$. Since we expect that the interaction

1188: will move this singularity, it is convenient to modify the interaction by

1189: adding a finite {\it counterterm} $i\n{1\over L^2}\sum_{\o,\kk} \o

1190: \hp^+_{\kk,\o}\hp^-_{\kk,-\o}$, which is compensated by replacing, in the

1191: matrix $T(\kk)$, $\m(\kk)$ with

1192: %

1193: \be

1194: \m_1(\kk) = (\cos k_0+\cos k_1-2) + 2 (1- {u^*\over u}) \virg u^*=

1195: \sqrt{2}-1-\n\;.

1196: \ee

1197: %

1198: Let us call $T_1(\kk)$ the new matrix and $P_1(d\psi)$ the corresponding

1199: measure; we get

1200: %

1201: \be\lb{2.15}

1202: \bar Z(\bar A)= {1\over \NN_1} \int\! P_1(d\psi) P_\c(d\c)\; e^{\QQ(\psi,\c)+

1203: \VV^{(1)}(\psi,\c)+B(\bar A)}\;,

1204: \ee

1205: %

1206: where

1207: \be

1208: \VV^{(1)}(\psi,\c) = i\n{1\over L^2}\sum_{\o,\kk}\o

1209: \hat\psi^+_{\kk,\o}\hat\psi^-_{\kk,-\o}+ \VV(\psi,\c)\;,

1210: \ee

1211: %

1212: and $\n$ has to be determined so that the interacting propagator has an

1213: infrared singularity at $u=u^*$; the critical temperature is uniquely

1214: determined by the value of $u^*$.

1215: 

1216: Let us now remark that $\det T^\c(\kk)$ is strictly positive for any $\kk$, as

1217: one can easily see by using the fact that $u\in (0,1)$. On the other hand, it

1218: is easy to see that

1219: %

1220: \be

1221: \QQ(\psi,\c) = - {1\over |\L|} \sum_{\kk\in\DD} \sum_{\o,\o'}

1222: [\hp^+_{\kk,\o}\hc^-_{\kk,\o'} + \hc^+_{\kk,\o}\hp^-_{\kk,\o'}]

1223: Q_{\o,\o'}(\kk)\;,

1224: \ee

1225: %

1226: where $Q(\kk)$ is a matrix which vanishes at $\kk=0$. Hence, if we define

1227: %

1228: \be

1229: \tilde\psi^+ = \psi^+ Q T_\c^{-1} \virg \tilde\psi^- = T_\c^{-1} Q \psi^-\;,

1230: \ee

1231: %

1232: the change of variables $\c^+\rightarrow \c^+ +\tilde\psi^+$, $\c^-\rightarrow

1233: \c^- +\tilde\psi^-$, allows us to rewrite \pref{2.15} in the form

1234: %

1235: \be\lb{2.15a}

1236: \bar Z(\bar A)= {1\over \NN} \int\! P_{Z_1,\m_1}(d\psi) P_\c(d\c)\;

1237: e^{\VV^{(1)}(\psi,\c-\tilde\psi)+ \tilde B(\bar A)}\;,

1238: \ee

1239: %

1240: where $\tilde B(\bar A)$ is the functional obtained from $B(\bar A)$ by

1241: replacing $\c$ with $\c-\tilde\ps$ and $P_{Z_1,\m_1}(d\psi)$ is the Gaussian

1242: measure with propagator

1243: %

1244: \be\lb{lau}

1245: g(\xx)={1\over L^2}\sum_{\kk\in \DD} e^{-i\kk\xx} (T^{(1)})^{-1}(\kk)\;,

1246: \ee

1247: %

1248: where $T^{(1)}(\kk)=T(\kk) - Q(\kk) T_\c^{-1} Q(\kk)$. In order to agree with

1249: the conventions about fermion models we used in our previous papers, we make

1250: also the trivial change of variables

1251: %

1252: \be

1253: \hat\psi^+_{\kk,\o} \rightarrow -i\o \hat\psi^+_{\tilde\kk,\o} \virg

1254: \hat\psi^-_{\kk,\o} \rightarrow \hat\psi^-_{\tilde\kk,\o} \virg \kk=(k_0,k_1)

1255: \virg \tilde\kk=(k_1,k_0)\;.

1256: \ee

1257: %

1258: Hence, by an explicit calculation of $Q(\kk)$ and using the identity $u^*/u =

1259: 1-\m_1(0)/2$, one can see that  $T^{(1)}(\kk)$ is the matrix

1260: %

1261: \be\lb{cov1}

1262: C_1(\kk) \pmatrix{ Z_1 (-i\sin k_0 +\sin k_1)+\m_{+,+}(\kk)& -\m_1

1263: -\m_{+,-}(\kk) \cr -\m_1 - \m_{+,-}(\kk)& Z_1 (-i\sin k_0-\sin

1264: k_1)+\m_{-,-}(\kk) \cr}

1265: \ee

1266: %

1267: with $C_1(\kk)=1$, $\m_1=2 u^* \m_1(0)/(2 -\m_1(0))$ and $Z_1=u^*$; moreover

1268: $\m_{+,+}(\kk) = -\m_{-,-}(\kk)^*$ is an odd function of $\kk$ of the form

1269: $\m_{+,+}(\kk) = 2 u^* \m_1(0) (-i\sin k_0 + \sin k_1)/(4-2\m_1(0)) +

1270: O(|\kk|^3)$, while $\m_{+,-}(\kk)$ is a real even function, of order $|\kk|^2$,

1271: which vanishes only at $\kk=0$. Finally, $\det T^{(1)}(\kk)\ge C(2-\cos k_0 -

1272: \cos k_1)$, so that $P_{Z_1,\m_1}(d\psi)$ has the same type of infrared

1273: singularity as $P_1(d\psi)$.

1274: 

1275: The fact that $\det T_\c(\kk)$ is strictly positive implies that $g_\c(\xx)$ is

1276: an exponential decaying function; hence, we can safely perform the integration

1277: over the field $\c$ in \pref{2.15a}. The result can be written in the following

1278: form (see Lemma 1 of \cite{[M1]})

1279: %

1280: \be\lb{3.1}

1281: \bar Z(\bar A)\= e^{\SS(\bar A)} =\int P_{Z_1,\m_1}(d\psi) e^{L^2\NN^{(1)}+

1282: \bar\VV^{(1)}(\psi) + B^{(1)}(\bar A)}\;,

1283: \ee

1284: %

1285: where $\NN^{(1)}$ is a constant and the {\it effective potential}

1286: $\bar\VV^{(1)}(\ps)$ can be represented as

1287: %

1288: \be\lb{3.2aaa}

1289: \bar\VV^{(1)}= \sum_{n\ge 1}\sum_{\underline\a,\underline\o,\underline\e}

1290: \sum_{\xx_1,..,\xx_n}

1291: W_{\underline\o,\underline\a,\underline\e,2n}(\xx_1,..,\xx_{2n})

1292: \partial^{\a_1}\psi^{\e_1}_{\xx_1,\o_1}...

1293: \partial^{\a_{2n}}\psi_{\xx_{2n},\o_{2n}}^{\e_{2n}}\;.

1294: \ee

1295: %

1296: The kernels $W_{\underline\o,\underline\a,\underline\e,2n}$ in the previous

1297: expansions are analytic functions of $\l$ and $\n$ near the origin; if we

1298: suppose that $\n=O(\l)$, their Fourier transforms satisfy, for any $n\ge 1$,

1299: the bounds, see \cite{[M1]}

1300: %

1301: \be

1302: |\widehat W_{\underline\a,\underline\o,\underline\e,2n}(\kk_1,...\kk_{2n-1})|

1303: \le L^2 C^n |\l|^{n}\;.

1304: \ee

1305: %

1306: A similar representation can be written for the functional of the external

1307: field $B^{(1)}(\bar A)$.

1308: 

1309: As explained in detail in \cite{[M1]}, the symmetries of the two models we are

1310: considering

1311: imply that, in the r.h.s. of \pref{3.2aaa}, there are no local terms

1312: quadratic in the field, which are relevant or marginal, except those which are

1313: already present in the free measure and are all marginal. It follows that the

1314: integration in \pref{3.1} can be done by iteratively integrating the fields

1315: with decreasing momentum scale and by moving to the free measure all the

1316: marginal terms quadratic in the field. We introduce a scaling parameter $\g=2$,

1317: a decomposition of the unity $1=f_1+ \sum_{h=-\io}^0 f_h(\kk)$, with $f_h(\kk)$

1318: a function with support $\{\g^{h-1}\pi/4\le |\kk|\le\g^{h+1}\pi/4\}$, and the

1319: corresponding decomposition of the field $\psi=\sum_{j=-\io}^1 \psi^{(j)}$. If

1320: the fields $\psi^{(1)},..,\psi^{(h+1)}$ are integrated, we get

1321: %

1322: \be\lb{th1}

1323: e^{\SS(\bar A)} = e^{S^{(h)}(\bar A)} \int P_{Z_h,\m_h}(d\psi^{(\le h)})

1324: e^{\VV^{(h)}(\sqrt {Z_h}\psi^{(\le h)}) + \BB^{(h)}(\sqrt {Z_h}\psi^{(\le

1325: h)},\bar A)}\;,

1326: \ee

1327: %

1328: where $\psi^{(\le h)} = \sum_{j=-\io}^h \psi^{(j)}$ and $P_{Z_h,\m_h}(d\psi)$

1329: is the Gaussian measure with the propagator obtained from \pref{lau} by

1330: replacing in \pref{cov1} $C_1(\kk)$ with $C_h(\kk)=[\sum_{k=-\io}^h

1331: f_h(\kk)]^{-1}$, $\m_1$ with $\m_h$, $Z_1$ with $Z_h$ and the functions

1332: $\m_{\s,\s'}(\kk)$ with similar functions $\m^{(h)}_{\s,\s'}(\kk)$ (which turn

1333: out to be negligible for $h\to -\io$, as a consequence of the following

1334: analysis). The {\it effective interaction } $\VV^{(h)}(\psi)$ can be written as

1335: %

1336: \be\lb{5.8}

1337: \VV^{(h)}(\psi)= \g^h \n_h F_\n^{(h)} +\l_h F_\l^{(h)}+R^{(h)}(\psi)\equiv

1338: \LL\VV^{(h)}(\psi)+R^{(h)}(\psi) \;,

1339: \ee

1340: %

1341: where $\n_h$ and $\l_h$ are suitable real numbers,

1342: %

1343: \bea\lb{2.112}

1344: F_\n^{(h)} &=& {1\over L^2}\sum_\o \sum_{\kk}

1345: \hat\psi^{(\le h)+}_{\kk,\o} \hat\psi^{(\le h)-}_{\kk,-\o}\;,\\

1346: F_\l^{(\le h)} &=& {1\over L^8} \sum_{\kk_1,...,\kk_4} \hat\psi^{(\le

1347: h)+}_{\kk_1,+} \hat\psi^{(\le h)+}_{\kk_3,-} \hat\psi^{(\le h)-}_{\kk_2,+}

1348: \hat\psi^{(\le h)-}_{\kk_4,-}\d(\kk_1-\kk_2+\kk_3-\kk_4)\;, \nn\eea

1349: %

1350: and $R^{(h)}(\psi)$ is expressed by a sum over monomials similar to

1351: \pref{3.2aaa}, with $2n+\a_1+..+\a_{2n}> 4$ ; the kernels are bounded if

1352: $\sup_{k\ge h} (|\l_k|+|\n_k|)$ is small enough. According to power counting,

1353: $F_\n$ is relevant, $F_\l$ is marginal while all terms in $R^h$ are irrelevant.

1354: Moreover

1355: %

1356: \bea \lb{hhj}

1357: &&\BB^{(h)}(\sqrt{Z_h}\psi^{(\le h)},\bar A)=\sum_{\e,\xx} Z_h^{(\e)}  \bar

1358: A^\e_\xx O^{(\le h)\e}_\xx +R_1^{(h)}(\psi^{(\le h)},\bar A)\equiv\\

1359: && \LL\BB^{(h)}(\sqrt{Z_h}\psi^{(\le h)},\bar A)+R_1^{(h)}(\psi^{(\le h)}, \bar

1360: A)\;,\nn

1361: \eea

1362: %

1363: where

1364: %

1365: \bea\lb{curr}

1366: O^{(\le h)+}_\xx &=& \ps^{(\le h)+}_{\xx,+} \ps^{(\le h)-}_{\xx,-} +

1367: \ps^{(\le h)+}_{\xx,-} \ps^{(\le h)-}_{\xx,+}\;,\\

1368: %

1369: O^{(\le h)-}_\xx &=& i[ \ps^{(\le h)+}_{\xx,+} \ps^{(\le h)+}_{\xx,-} +

1370: \ps^{(\le h)-}_{\xx,+} \ps^{(\le h)-}_{\xx,-}]\;,\nn

1371: \eea

1372: %

1373: and $R_1^{(h)}(\psi^{(\le h)},\bar A)$ is a sum of irrelevant terms. Note that

1374: many other possible local marginal or relevant terms could be generated in the

1375: RG integration, which are however absent due to the symmetry of the problem, as

1376: proved in \cite{[M1]}, App.F (see also \cite{[GM1]}, \S A2.2). The above

1377: integration procedure is done till the scale $h^*$ defined as the maximal $j$

1378: such that $\g^j\le |\m_j|$, and the integration of the fields $\psi^{(\le

1379: h^*)}$ can be done in a single step. Roughly speaking, $h^*$ defines the

1380: momentum scale of the mass.

1381: 

1382: The propagator of the field $\psi^{(\le h)}$ can be written, for $h\le 0$, as

1383: %

1384: \be\lb{ffg}

1385: g^{(\le h)}(\xx,\yy)=g_T^{(\le h)}(\xx,\yy)+r^{(\le h)}(\xx,\yy)\;,

1386: \ee

1387: %

1388: where

1389: %

1390: \be\lb{ombo}

1391: g_T^{(\le h)}(\xx,\yy)={ 1\over L^2}\sum_{\kk\in \DD} e^{-i\kk(\xx-\yy)}

1392: {1\over Z_h} T_h^{-1}(\kk)\;,

1393: \ee

1394: %

1395: \be

1396: T_h(\kk)= C_h(\kk) \pmatrix{ -i k_0 +k_1 & -\m_h\cr \m_h& -i k_0-k_1\cr}\;,

1397: \ee

1398: %

1399: and, for any positive integer $M$,

1400: %

1401: \be

1402: |r^{(\le h)}(\xx,\yy)|\le C_M{\g^{2h}\over 1 + (\g^h|\xx-\yy|^M)}\;.

1403: \ee

1404: %

1405: The propagator $g_T^{(h)}(\xx,\yy)$ verifies a similar bound with $\g^{h}$

1406: replacing $\g^{2h}$. A similar decomposition can be done for

1407: $g^{(h)}(\xx,\yy)$.

1408: 

1409: The effective couplings $\l_j$ (which, by construction, are the same in the

1410: massless $\m=0$ or in the massive $\m\not=0$ case, see \cite{[GM1]}), satisfy a

1411: recursive equation of the form

1412: %

1413: \be\lb{bb}

1414: \l_{j-1}=\l_j+\b_\l^{(j)}(\l_j,...,\l_0)+\bar\b_\l^{(j)}(\l_j,\n_j;...;\l_0,\n_0)

1415: \ee

1416: %

1417: where $\b_\l^{(j)}$, $\bar\b_\l^{(j)}$ are $\m$-independent and expressed by a

1418: {\it convergent} expansion in $\l_j,\n_j..,\l_0,\n_0$; moreover

1419: $\bar\b_\l^{(j)}$ vanishing if at least one of the $\n_k$ is zero. From the

1420: decomposition \pref{ffg}, the smaller bound on propagators $r$ and because of a

1421: special feature of the propagator $g_T$, the following property, called {\it

1422: vanishing of the Beta function}, was proved in Theorem 2 of \cite{[BM3]} for

1423: suitable positive constants $C$ and $\th<1$:

1424: %

1425: \be\lb{beta}

1426: |\b_\l^{(j)}(\l_j,...,\l_j)|\le C |\l_j|^2\g^{\th j}\;.

1427: \ee

1428: %

1429: Moreover, it is possible to prove that, for a suitable choice of $\n_1=O(\l)$,

1430: $\n_j=O(\g^{\th j}\bar\l_j)$, if $\bar\l_j=\sup_{k\ge j}|\l_k|$, and this

1431: implies, by the {\it short memory} property ( see for instance A4.6 of

1432: \cite{[GM1]}), $\bar\b_\l^{(j)}=O(\g^{\th j}\bar\l_j^2)$ so that the sequence

1433: $\l_j$ converges, as $j\to -\io$, to a smooth function $\l_{-\io}(\l)= \l

1434: +O(\l^2)$, such that

1435: %

1436: \be\lb{2.42a}

1437: |\l_j- \l_{-\io}| \le C\l^2 \g^{\th j}\;.

1438: \ee

1439: %

1440: Moreover

1441: %

1442: \be\lb{ffg1}

1443: {Z_{j-1}\over Z_j}=1+\b_z^{(j)}(\l_j,...,\l_0)+

1444: \bar\b_z^{(j)}(\l_j,\n_j;..,\l_0,\n_0)\;,

1445: \ee

1446: %

1447: with $\bar\b_z^{(j)}$ vanishing if at least one of the $\n_k$ is zero so that,

1448: by $\n_j=O(\g^{\th j}\bar\l_j)$ and the short memory property,

1449: $\bar\b_z^{(j)}=O(\l_j\g^{\th j})$. Finally

1450: %

1451: \be\lb{lau11}

1452: \b_z(\l_j,...,\l_0)= \b_z(\l_{-\io},...,\l_{-\io})+O(\l\g^{\th h})\;,

1453: \ee

1454: %

1455: where the last identity follows from \pref{2.42a} and the {\it short memory}

1456: property. An important point is that the function

1457: $\b_z(\l_{-\io},...,\l_{-\io})$ is model independent. Similar equations hold

1458: for $Z^{(\pm)}_h,\m_h$, with leading terms again model independent.

1459: 

1460: By an explicit computation and \pref{lau11} there exist $\h_+(\l_{-\io})= c_1

1461: \l_{-\io} +O(\l_{-\io}^2)$, $\h_{-}(\l_{-\io})= -c_1 \l_{-\io}

1462: +O(\l_{-\io}^2)$, $\h_\m(\l_{-\io})= c_1 \l_{-\io} +O(\l_{-\io}^2)$ and

1463: $\h_z(\l_{-\io})= c_2 \l_{-\io}^2 +O(\l_{-\io}^3)$, with $c_1$ and $c_2$

1464: strictly positive, such that, for any $j\le 0$,

1465: %

1466: \bea\lb{lau12}

1467: &&|\log_\g( Z_{j-1}/ Z_j) - \h_z(\l_{-\io})| \le C\l^2 \g^{\th j}\;,\\

1468: %

1469: &&|\log_\g(\m_{j-1}/ \m_j) - \h_\m(\l_{-\io})| \le

1470: C|\l| \g^{\th j}, \nn\\

1471: &&|\log_\g( Z^{(\pm)}_{j-1}/ Z^{(\pm)}_j) - \h_\pm(\l_{-\io})| \le C\l^2

1472: \g^{\th j}\;.\nn

1473: \eea

1474: %

1475: The critical indices are functions of $\l_{-\io}$ only, as it is clear from

1476: \pref{lau11}; moreover from (6.28) ad (5.4) of \cite{[M1]},

1477: %

1478: \be \lb{pppp3}

1479: x_\pm=1-\h_\pm+\h_z \virg \h_\m=\h_+-\h_z=1-x_+\;.

1480: \ee

1481: %

1482: When the limit $\m\to 0$ is taken (after the limit $L\to\io$, so that all the

1483: $Z_{\g,\g'}$ have the same limit), the multiscale integration procedure implies

1484: the power law decay of the correlations given by \pref{xpm}.

1485: 

1486: If $\m\not=0$ (that is, if the temperature is not the critical one), the

1487: correlations decay faster than any power with rate proportional to $\m_{h^*}$,

1488: where, if $[x]$ denotes the largest integer $\le x$, $h^*$ is given by

1489: %

1490: \be\lb{2.45c}

1491: h^* = \left[ {\log_\g |\m| \over 1+\h_\m} \right] \;,

1492: \ee

1493: %

1494: so that

1495: %

1496: \be

1497: \a={1\over 2-x_+}\;.

1498: \ee

1499: %

1500: \section{Equivalence with an effective QFT}\lb{sec3}

1501: 

1502: \subsection{The effective QFT}

1503: 

1504: We introduce a QFT model, which has a large distance behavior of the same type

1505: as that of the formal scaling limit of the spin models with Hamiltonian (1.1).

1506: As a general fact, the relations between the critical indices and the coupling

1507: depend on the regularization procedure used to define the QFT model;

1508: the kind of regularization that we are going to use allows us

1509: to get expressions for the critical indices, simple enough to prove the

1510: extended scaling relations.

1511: 

1512: The QFT model is defined as the limit $N\to\io$, followed by the limit

1513: $-l\to\io$, to be called {\it the removed cutoff limit}, of a model with an

1514: infrared $\g^l$ and an ultraviolet $\g^N$ momentum cut-off, $-l,N\ge 0$. This

1515: model is expressed in terms of the following Grassmann integral

1516: %

1517: \bea\lb{th1111}

1518: &&e^{\WW_{N}(A,J,\f)}=\int\! P(d\psi^{[l, N]}) \exp\left\{ \VV^{(N)}(\psi^{[l

1519: ,N]})+

1520: \sum_\e \int\! d\xx A^{\e}_{\xx} O_{\e,\xx} +\right.\\

1521: %

1522: &&\left.+ \sum_\o \int\! d\xx\ [J_{\xx,\o} \psi^{[l,N]+}_{\xx,\o}

1523: \ps^{[l,N]-}_{\xx,\o} + \psi^{+[l ,N]}_{\xx,\o} \f^-_{\xx,\o} + \f^+_{\xx,\o}

1524: \psi^{[l ,N]-}_{\xx,\o}] \right\}\;,\nn

1525: \eea

1526: %

1527: where $\xx\in\tilde\L$, a square subset of $\RRR^2$, $O^+_\xx$ and $O^-_\xx$

1528: are defined in \pref{curr} and $P(d\psi^{[l,N]})$ is a Gaussian measure with

1529: propagator $g_T^{[l,N]}(\xx,\yy)$ given by \pref{ombo} with $\m_h=\m,Z_h=1$ and

1530: $C_h^{-1}(\kk)$ replaced by $C^{-1}_{l,N}(\kk)=\sum_{k=l}^N f_k(\kk)$.

1531: %

1532: The interaction is

1533: %

1534: \be\lb{gjhfk}

1535: \VV^{(N)}(\psi)={\l_\io\over 2} \sum_{\o}\int d\xx \int d\yy v_K(\xx-\yy)

1536: \psi^+_{\xx,\o} \psi^+_{\yy,-\o} \psi^-_{\xx,\o}\psi^-_{\yy,-\o}\;,

1537: \ee

1538: %

1539: where $K<N$ and $v_K(\xx-\yy)$ is given by

1540: %

1541: \be

1542: v_K(\xx-\yy)={1\over L^2}\sum_{\pp} \chi_0(\g^{-K}\pp) e^{i\pp(\xx-\yy)}\;,

1543: \ee

1544: %

1545: $\chi_0(\pp)$ being a smooth function with support in $\{|\pp|\le 2\}$ and

1546: equal to $1$ for $\{|\pp|\le 1\}$. The correlation functions are found by

1547: making suitable derivatives with respect to the external fields $A_\xx$,

1548: $J_\xx$, $\f_\xx$ and setting them equal to zero.

1549: 

1550: Note that $\lim_{K\to\io} v_K(\xx-\yy) = \d(\xx-\yy)$, so that the model

1551: becomes the Thirring model in the limit $K\to\io$ (taken after the limit

1552: $N\to\io$), if one also introduces an ultraviolet renormalization of the field,

1553: $\l_\io$ and $\m$. However, in the following we shall take $K$ fixed, for

1554: example $K=0$, so that no ultraviolet regularization is needed.

1555: 

1556: We shall study the functional $\WW_{N}(A,J,\f)$ by performing a multiscale

1557: integration of \pref{th1111}; we have to distinguish two different regimes: the

1558: first regime, called {\it ultraviolet}, contains the scales $h\in [K+1,N]$,

1559: while the second one contains the scales $h\le K$, and is called {\it

1560: infrared}.

1561: 

1562: \subsection{The ultraviolet integration}\lb{sec3.2}

1563: We shall briefly describe how to control the integration of the ultraviolet

1564: scales, without encountering any divergence We shall assume that the reader is

1565: familiar with the tree expansion, as described, for example, in \cite{[BM1]},

1566: and we only sketch the proofs, omitting many details. Moreover, for simplicity,

1567: we shall only consider the case $A=\f=0$ and $\m=0$, but the result is valid

1568: for the full problem; for more details in a similar case, see \cite{[M3],[M3b]}.

1569: 

1570: If the fields $\psi^{(N)},\psi^{(N-1)},...,\psi^{(h+1)}$ are integrated, we get

1571: an expression like \pref{th1} in which the fermionic integration is

1572: $P(d\psi^{[l, h]})$ with propagator $g^{[l,h]}_T$, and $V^{(h)}$ is sum of

1573: integrated monomials in $m$ $\psi^+_{\xx_i,\o_i}$ variables, $i=1,\ldots,m$,

1574: $m$ $\psi^-_{\yy_i,\o_i}$ variables and $n$ $J_{\zz_j,\o'_j}$ external fields,

1575: $j=1,\ldots,n$, multiplied by suitable kernels $W^{(n;2m)(h)}_{\uo';\uo}

1576: (\uz;\ux,\uy)$. These kernels are represented as power expansions in $\l$ and

1577: $\n$, with coefficients which are finite sums of products of delta functions

1578: (of the difference between couples of space variables) times smooth functions

1579: of the variables which remains after the constraints implied by the the delta

1580: functions are taken into account. With an abuse of notation, we shall denote by

1581: $\int\! d\uz d\ux d\uy\; \lft|W^{(n;2m)(k)}_{\uo';\uo}(\uz;\ux,\uy)\rgt|$ the

1582: expansion which is obtained by summing, for each coefficient, the $L^1$ norm of

1583: these smooth functions. We introduce the following norm

1584: %

1585: \be\lb{norm}

1586: \|W^{(n;2m)(k)}_{\uo';\uo}\| \defi \frac{1}{|\tilde\L|} \int\! d\uz d\ux d\uy\;

1587: \lft|W^{(n;2m)(k)}_{\uo';\uo} (\uz;\ux,\uy)\rgt|\;.

1588: \ee

1589: 

1590: \begin{theorem}\lb{t3.2}

1591: If $\l_\io$ is small enough, there exist two constants $C_1>1$ and $C_2$, such

1592: that, if $K\le h\le N$, the relevant or marginal contributions to the effective

1593: potential satisfy the bounds:

1594: %

1595: \bea

1596: \lb{hb1} &&\|W^{(0;2)(h)}_{\o}\| \le C_1|\l_\io|\g^{h}\g^{-2(h-K)}\;,\\

1597: %

1598: \lb{hb2} &&\|W^{(1;2)(h)}_{\o';\o}-\d_2\d_{\o,\o'}\| \le C_2|\l_\io|\g^{-(h-K)}\;,\\

1599: %

1600: \lb{hb3} &&\|W^{(0;4)(h)}_{\o,\o'}- \l_\io v\d_4 \d_{\o,-\o'}\| \le

1601: C_2|\l_\io|^2 \g^{-(h-K)}\;,

1602: \eea

1603: %

1604: where $\d_2(\zz;\xx,\yy) \= \d(\zz-\xx) \d_(\zz-\yy)$ and $v\d_4(\xx_1,\xx_2,

1605: \yy_1,\yy_2) \= \d(\xx_1-\yy_1)v_K(\xx_1-\xx_2) \d(\xx_2-\yy_2)$.

1606: \end{theorem}

1607: %

1608: {\bf\0Proof.} The proof is by induction: we assume that the bounds

1609: \pref{hb1}-\pref{hb3} hold for $h:k+1\le h\le N$ (for $h=N$ they are true with

1610: $C_1=C_2=0$) and we prove them for $h=k$.

1611: 

1612: The starting point is the following remark. Suppose that we build the tree

1613: expansion, by defining the {\it localization operation} so that it acts as the

1614: identity on the relevant or marginal terms, that is $W^{(0;2)(h)}_{\o}$,

1615: $W^{(1;2)(h)}_{\o';\o}$ and $W^{(0;4)(h)}_{\o,\o'}$, while it annihilates, as

1616: always, all the other contributions to the effective potential. Then, it is

1617: easy to see that the inductive assumption implies the following ``dimensional''

1618: bound, for $\l_\io$ small enough:

1619: %

1620: \be\lb{pc1}

1621: \|W^{(n;2m)(k)}_{\uo';\uo}\| \le C^{n+d_{n,m}}|C_1 \l_\io|^{d_{n,m}}

1622: \g^{k(2-n-m)}\;,

1623: \ee

1624: %

1625: where $d_{n,m}=\max\{m-1,0\}$, if $n>0$, and $d_{n,m}=\max\{m-1,1\}$, if $n=0$,

1626: and $C$ is a suitable constant larger, at least, of $\g$. In fact, the

1627: localization procedure and the bounds \pref{hb1}-\pref{hb3} imply that all the

1628: tree vertices have positive dimension and there are three types of endpoints,

1629: associated to $W^{(0;2)(h)}_{\o}$, $W^{(1;2)(h)}_{\o';\o}$,

1630: $W^{(0;4)(h)}_{\o,\o'}$, which contribute (up to dimensional factors and for

1631: $\l_\io$ small enough) a factor $C_1 |\l_\io|$, $1+C_2|\l_\io|\le C$ and

1632: $|\l_\io|[1+C_2|\l_\io|]\le C_1 |\l_\io|$, respectively. Note that the

1633: condition $C>\g$ comes from the bound of the trivial tree (that with only one

1634: endpoint) contributing to the tree expansion of $W^{(0;2)(k)}_{\o}$.

1635: 

1636: We need to improve the bound \pref{pc1} when $2-n-m\ge 0$. We can write, by

1637: using the properties of the fermionic truncated expectations and the fact that,

1638: by the oddness of the free propagator, $W^{(1;0)}_\o(\kk)=0$,

1639: %

1640: %

1641: \bea\lb{111b}

1642: &&W^{(0;2)(k)}_{\o}(\xx,\yy) =\\

1643: %

1644: &&= \l_\io \int\!d\ww d\ww'\; v_{K}(\xx-\ww)

1645: g_\o^{[k+1,N]}(\xx-\ww')W^{(1;2)(k)}_{-\o;\o}(\ww;\ww',\yy)\;,\nn

1646: \eea

1647: %

1648: \insertplot{190}{70}

1649: {\input p1.txt}%

1650: {p1}{\lb{p1}: Graphical representation of \pref{111b}}{0}

1651: %

1652: which can be bounded, by using \pref{pc1}, as

1653: %

1654: \bea\lb{111c}

1655: && \|W^{(0;2)(k)}_\o\| \le |\l_\io| \|v_K\|_{L^\io} \|W_{-\o;\o}^{(1;2)(k)}\|

1656: \sum_{j=k+1}^N \|g^{(j)}_\o\|_{L^1}\le\nn\\

1657: %

1658: && \le {c_1\over 1-\g^{-1}}\g^{2K} C |\l_\io| \g^{-k} \le C_1 |\l_\io| \g^{k}

1659: \g^{-2(k-K)}\;,

1660: \eea

1661: %

1662: where, for example, $C_1= \max\{2, {c_1\over 1-\g^{-1}} C\}$; hence \pref{hb1}

1663: is proved. Note that the condition $C_1\ge 2$ is introduced only because $C_1$

1664: is the same constant appearing in \pref{pc1}.

1665: %

1666: \insertplot{310}{140}

1667: {\input p2.txt}%

1668: {p2}{\lb{p2}: Graphical representation of

1669: $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\o';\o}(\zz;\xx,\yy)$}{0}

1670: 

1671: Let us now consider $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\o';\o}(\zz;\xx,\yy)$ and note that it can

1672: be decomposed as the sum of the five terms in Fig.\ref{p2},

1673: %

1674: The term denoted by $(a)$ in Fig.\ref{p2} can be bounded as

1675: %

1676: \bea

1677: \hspace{-0.5cm} \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(a);\o';\o}\| \le |\l_\io| \|v_K\|_{L^\io}

1678: \|W^{(2;2)(k)}_{\o',-\o;\o}\| \sum_{j=k+1}^N \|g^{(j)}_\o\|_{L^1} \le C C_1

1679: |\l_\io| \g^{-2(k-K)}\;.

1680: \eea

1681: %

1682: The bounds for the graphs $(c)$ and $(d)$ are an easy consequence of the the

1683: bound for $W^{(0;2)(k)}_\o$.

1684: 

1685: In order to obtain an improved bound also for the graph $(b)$ of Fig. \ref{p2},

1686: we need to further expand $W^{(2;0)(k)}_{\o,\o'}$ as done in Fig \ref{p3}, if

1687: we suppose that the arrows in the fermion lines of graph $(b2)$ can be

1688: reversed.

1689: %

1690: \insertplot{270}{100}

1691: {\input p3b.txt}%

1692: {p3a}{\lb{p3}: Graphical representation of graph (b) in Fig.\ref{p2} }{0}

1693: 

1694: The bound for the graph $(b2)$ can be done by using the previous arguments. We

1695: can write

1696: %

1697: \bea

1698: && W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(b2)\o';\o}(\zz;\xx,\yy) = \l_\io^2 \d(\xx-\yy)\int\! d\ww

1699: d\uu' d\zz'\ v_K(\xx-\ww) v_K(\uu'-\zz')\cdot\nn\\

1700: %

1701: &&\cdot\; \int\! d\uu  d\ww'\ g_{\o}^{[k+1,N]}(\ww-\uu) g_{\o}^{[k+1,N]}(\uu'-\ww)

1702: g_{\o}^{[k+1,N]}(\ww'-\uu') \cdot\nn\\

1703: %

1704: && \cdot W^{(2;2)(k)}_{\o',\o;-\o}(\zz,\zz';\ww',\uu)\;.

1705: \eea

1706: %

1707: In order to get the right bound, it is convenient to decompose the three

1708: propagators $g_\o$ into scales and then bound by the $L^\io$ norm the

1709: propagator of lowest scale, while the two others are used to control the

1710: integration over the inner space variables through their $L^1$ norm. Hence we

1711: get:

1712: %

1713: \bea\lb{27}

1714: && \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(b2)\o';\o}\|\le |\l_\io|^2 \|v_K\|_{L^\io} \|v_K\|_{L^1}

1715: \|W^{(2;2)(k)}_{\o',-\o;\o}\| \cdot\\

1716: %

1717: &&\cdot 3!\sum_{k+1 \le i' \le j \le i \le N} \|g^{(j)}_{\o}\|_{L^1}

1718: \|g^{(i)}_{\o}\|_{L^1} \|g^{(i')}_{\o}\|_{L^\io} \le C_3 |\l_\io|^2 \g^{-2(k-K)}\;.

1719: \eea

1720: %

1721: for some constant $C_3$.

1722: 

1723: The bound of $(b1)$ and $(b3)$ requires a new argument, based on a cancelation

1724: following from the particular form of the free propagator. Let us consider, for

1725: instance, $(b1)$:

1726: %

1727: \bea

1728: && W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(b1)\o';\o}(\zz;\xx,\yy) =\nn\\

1729: %

1730: && = \l_\io \d_{\o',-\o}\d(\xx-\yy)\int\!d\ww\ v_K(\xx-\ww)

1731: \lft[g^{[k+1,N]}_{-\o}(\ww-\zz)\rgt]^2\;.

1732: \eea

1733: %

1734: On the other hand, since the cutoff function $C_{k,N}(\kk)$ is symmetric in the

1735: exchange between $k_0$ and $k_1$, it is easy to see that $g^{[k,N]}_{\o}(x_0,x_1)=

1736: -i\o g^{[k,N]}_{\o}(x_1, -x_0)$; hence

1737: %

1738: \be\lb{mas3}

1739: \int\!  d\uu\ \lft[g^{[k+1,N]}_{-\o}(\uu)\rgt]^2=0\;.

1740: \ee

1741: %

1742: It follows, by using \pref{mas3} and the identity

1743: %

1744: \be \lb{idb}

1745: v_K(\xx-\ww)=v_K(\xx-\zz)+ \sum_{j=0,1} (z_j-w_j) \int_0^1\!\!d \t\ \big(\dpr_j

1746: v_K\big)\big(\xx-\zz+\t(\zz-\ww)\big)\;,

1747: \ee

1748: %

1749: that we can write

1750: %

1751: \bea

1752: && W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(b1)\o';\o}(\zz;\xx,\yy) = \l_\io \d_{\o',-\o}\d(\xx-\yy)

1753: \cdot\\

1754: %

1755: &&\cdot \sum_{j=0,1} \int_0^1\!\!d \t\ \int\! d\ww\ \big(\dpr_j v_K\big)

1756: \big(\xx-\zz+\t(\zz-\ww)\big) (z_j-w_j) \lft[g^{[k+1,N]}_{-\o}(\ww-\zz)\rgt]^2

1757: \;.\nn

1758: \eea

1759: %

1760: Hence,

1761: %

1762: \bea

1763: && \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{(b1)\o';\o}\| \le 4|\l_\io| \sum_{i=k}^N \sum_{j=k}^i

1764: \|g^{(j)}_{-\o}\|_{L^\io} \int\!d\xx\ \big| (\dpr_j v_K)(\xx) \big|\cdot\\

1765: %

1766: && \cdot \int\!d\ww\ |w_j||g^{(i)}_{-\o}(\ww)| \le C_4 |\l_\io| \g^{-(k-K)}\;.

1767: \eea

1768: %

1769: By summing all the bounds, we see that there is a constant $C_2$ such that

1770: %

1771: \be\lb{ab}

1772: \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\o';\o}-\d_{\o,\o'}\d_2\| \le C_2 |\l_\io| \g^{-(k-K)}\;,

1773: \ee

1774: %

1775: which proves \pref{hb2}. The bound \pref{hb3} for $W^{(0;4)(k)}$ follows from

1776: similar arguments.

1777: 

1778: 

1779: \subsection{Equivalence of the spin and the QFT models}

1780: 

1781: As a consequence of the integration of the ultraviolet scales discussed in the

1782: previous section, we can write the removed cutoffs limit of \pref{th1111}, with

1783: $\f=J=0$ and with the choice $K=0$, as

1784: %

1785: \be\lb{221}

1786: \lim_{l\to -\io}\lim_{N \to \io} \int P_{\m_0,Z_0}(d\psi^{(\le

1787: 0)})e^{\VV^{(0)}(\psi^{(\le 0)})+\BB^{(0)}(\psi^{(\le 0)}, A)}\;,

1788: \ee

1789: %

1790: where the propagator of the integration measure in \pref{221} coincides with

1791: $g_T^{(\le 0)}(\xx,\yy)$, defined in \pref{ombo}, $\LL\VV^{(0)}=\l_{0}

1792: F_\l^{(0)}$ and $\LL\BB^{(0)}$ is defined as in \pref{hhj}; from the analysis

1793: of the previous section it follows that $\l_{0}$ is a smooth function of

1794: $\l_{\io}$, such that $\l_{0}=\l_{\io}+O(\l_\io^2)$.

1795: 

1796: The multiscale integration for the negative scales can be done exactly as

1797: described in \S\ref{s2.4}, with the only difference that, by the oddness of the

1798: free propagator, $\n_j=0$ and

1799: %

1800: \be

1801: \l_{j-1}=\l_j+\hat \b^{(j)}_\l(\l_j,...\l_0)\;,

1802: \ee

1803: %

1804: where, by \pref{ffg} and the short memory property,

1805: \be

1806: \hat \b^{(j)}_\l(\l_j,...\l_0)=\b^{(j)}_\l(\l_j,...\l_0)+ O(\bar\l_j^2\g^{\th

1807: j})\;,

1808: \ee

1809: %

1810: $\b^{(j)}_\l(\l_j,...\l_j)$ being the function appearing in the bound

1811: \pref{beta}, so that we can prove in the usual way that

1812: $\l_{-\io}=\l_{0}+O(\l_{0}^2)$; since $\l_{0}=\l_{\io}+O(\l_\io^2)$, we have

1813: %

1814: \be \l_{-\io}=h(\l_{\io}) = \l_{\io}+O(\l_\io^2)\;,

1815: \ee

1816: %

1817: for some analytic function $h(\l_{\io})$, invertible for $\l_\io$ small enough.

1818: Moreover

1819: %

1820: \be\lb{ffg2}

1821: {Z^{\pm}_{j-1}\over Z^{\pm}_j}=1+\hat\b_\pm^{(j)}(\l_j,...,\l_0)\;,

1822: \ee

1823: %

1824: with

1825: %

1826: \be\lb{dx1}

1827: \hat\b_\pm^{(j)}(\l_j,...,\l_0)= \b^{(j)}_\pm(\l_j,...\l_0)+

1828: O(\bar\l_j^2\g^{\th j})\;,

1829: \ee

1830: %

1831: $\b^{(j)}_\pm$ being the functions appearing in the analogous equations for the

1832: model of \S\ref{s2.4}. This implies that

1833: %

1834: \be\lb{dx2}

1835: \h_\pm=\log_\g [1+\b^{(-\io)}_\pm(\l_{-\io},...\l_{-\io})]\;,

1836: \ee

1837: %

1838: that is {\it the critical indices in the AT or 8V  or in the model

1839: \pref{th1111} are the same as functions of $\l_{-\io}$}.

1840: 

1841: Of course $\l_{-\io}$ is a rather complex function of all the details

1842: of the models. However, if we

1843: call $\l'_j(\l)$ the effective couplings of the lattice model of the previous

1844: sections, the invertibility of $h(\l_{\io})$ implies that we can choose

1845: $\l_{\io}$ so that

1846: %

1847: \be\lb{dx3}

1848: h({\l_{\io}})=\l'_{-\io}(\l)\;.

1849: \ee

1850: %

1851: With this choice of $\l_{\io}(\l)$, the critical indices are the same, as they

1852: depend only on $\l_{-\io}$; the rest of this chapter is devoted to the proof

1853: that the critical indices have, as functions of $\l_{\io}$, simple expressions,

1854: which imply the scaling relations in the main theorem.

1855: %

1856: %\insertplot{320}{100}

1857: %{}%

1858: %{s6}{\lb{s6}: Qualitative flow of the effective coupling }{0}

1859: %

1860: \*

1861: {\bf Remark} \pref{dx2} and \pref{dx3} play a central role in our analysis;

1862: they say that the critical indices of the spin lattice models (1.1) are equal

1863: to the ones of the QFT model \pref{th1111}, provided that its coupling is

1864: chosen properly; such a model is defined in the continuum but the non locality

1865: of the interaction has the effect that no ultraviolet divergences are

1866: generated. On the other hand, the model \pref{th1111} verifies extra

1867: symmetries, involving Ward Identities and closed equation, which allow us to

1868: derive simple expressions for the indices in terms of $\l_\io$, as we will see

1869: in the following sections.

1870: 

1871: %

1872: \subsection{Ward Identities}\lb{sec3.4}

1873: %

1874: We consider the case $\m=0$ and we call $D_\o(\kk)=-i k_0+\o k$. We shorten the

1875: notation of  $\WW_N(0,J,\h)$ into $\WW_N(J,\h)$. By the change of variables

1876: $\psi^\pm_{\xx,\o}\to e^{\pm i\a_{\xx,\o}}\psi^\pm_{\xx,\o}$ we obtain the

1877: identity

1878: %

1879: \bea\lb{grez}

1880: && D_\o(\pp){\partial \WW_{N}\over \partial \hJ_{\pp,\o}}(0,\h) -\n\;

1881: \hv_K(\pp) D_{-\o}(\pp){\partial \WW_{N}\over \partial \hJ_{\pp,-\o}}(0,\h)=\\

1882: %

1883: &&= \int\!{d\kk\over (2\p)^2} \left[\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o} {\partial \WW_{N}\over

1884: \partial \hh^+_{\kk,\o}}(0,\h)- {\partial \WW_{N}\over \partial

1885: \hh^-_{\kk+\pp,\o}}(0,\h) \hh^-_{\kk,\o}\right] + {\partial \WW_\AAA\over

1886: \partial \ha_{\pp,\o}}(0,0,\h)\;,\nn

1887: \eea

1888: %

1889: where $\n$ is a constant to be chosen later,

1890: %

1891: \bea \lb{h11}

1892: e^{\WW_\AAA (J,\a,\h)} =\int\! P(d\ps^{[l,N]}) e^{\VV^{(N)}(\psi^{[l ,N]})+

1893: \sum_{\o} \int\! d\xx\ J_{\xx,\o}\psi^{[l,N]+}_{\xx,\o}\ps^{[l,N]-}_{\xx,\o}}

1894: \cr\cr \cdot e^{\sum_\o\int d\xx

1895: [\psi^{[l,N]+}_{\xx,\o}\h^-_{\xx,\o}+\h^+_{\xx,\o}\psi^{[l,N]-}_{\xx,\o}]}

1896: e^{\lft[\AAA_0 - \n \AAA_{-}\rgt]\lft(\a,\psi^{[l,N]}\rgt)}\;,\nn

1897: \eea

1898: %

1899: \bea

1900: && \AAA_0 (\a,\ps) \defi \sum_{\o=\pm}\int\! {d\qq\;d\pp\over (2\p)^4}\

1901:  C_\o(\qq,\pp)\ha_{\qq-\pp,\o}\hp^+_{\qq,\o}\hp^-_{\pp,\o}\;,\\

1902: %

1903: &&\hspace{-0.5cm} \AAA_-(\a,\ps) \defi \sum_{\o=\pm}\int\! {d\qq\;d\pp\over

1904: (2\p)^4}\ D_{-\o}(\pp-\qq)\hat v_K(\pp-\qq) \ha_{\qq-\pp,\o}\hp^+_{\qq,-\o}

1905: \hp^-_{\pp,-\o}\;,

1906: \eea

1907: %

1908: 

1909: \be

1910: C_\o(\qq,\pp) = [\c_{l,N}^{-1}(\pp)-1] D_\o(\pp) -[\c_{l,N}^{-1}(\qq)-1]

1911: D_\o(\qq)\;,

1912: \ee

1913: %

1914: and $\c_{l,N}(\kk)=\sum_{k=l}^N f_k(\kk)$.

1915: 

1916: \*

1917: 

1918: \0{\bf Remark} - As explained in \S 2.2 of \cite{[BM2]}, \pref{grez} is

1919: obtained by introducing a cut-off function $\c_{l,N}^\e(\kk)$ never vanishing

1920: for all values of $\kk\not=0$ and equivalent to $\c_{l,N}(\kk)$ as far as the

1921: scaling properties of the theory are concerned; $\e$ is a small parameter and

1922: $\lim_{\e\to 0^+} \c_{l,N}^\e(\kk)=\c_{l,N}(\kk)$. This further regularization

1923: (to be removed before taking the removed cutoffs limit) ensures that  the

1924: identity $[(\c_{l,N}^\e)^{-1}(\kk)-1]\c_{l,N}^\e(\kk) =1-\c_{l,N}^\e(\kk)$ is

1925: satisfied for all $\kk\not=0$. When this further regularization is removed, all

1926: the quantities we shall study have a well defined expression. \*

1927: %\vspace{0.2cm}

1928: The two equations obtained from \pref{grez} by putting $\o=\pm 1$ can be solved

1929: w.r.t. $\partial e^{\WW_{N}}/ \partial \hJ_{\pp,\o}$ and, if we define

1930: %

1931: \bea

1932: &&a(\pp) = {1\over 1- \n\,\hv_K(\pp)} \virg \bar a (\pp)= {1\over 1+

1933: \n\,\hv_K(\pp)}\;,\nn\\

1934: %

1935: \lb{Aeps} && A_\e(\pp) = {a(\pp) + \e\bar{a}(\pp)\over2}\;,

1936: \eea

1937: %

1938: we obtain the identity

1939: %

1940: \bea\lb{WT1} && {\partial e^{\WW_{N}}\over \partial

1941: \hJ_{\pp,\o}}(0,\h) -\sum_{\o'}{A_{\o\o'}(\pp)\over D_{\o}(\pp)} {\partial

1942: e^{\WW_\AAA}\over \partial \ha_{\pp,\o'}}(0,0,\h) =\\

1943: %

1944: &&=\sum_{\o'} {A_{\o\o'}(\pp)\over D_{\o}(\pp)} \int\! {d \kk\over (2\p)^2}\

1945: \left[\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o'} {\partial e^{\WW_{N}}\over

1946: \partial \hh^+_{\kk,\o'}}(0,\h)- {\partial e^{\WW_{N}}\over

1947: \partial \hh^-_{\kk+\pp,\o'}}(0,\h) \hh^-_{\kk,\o'}\right]\;.\nn

1948: \eea

1949: 

1950: Given a correlation function with $m$ external fields of momenta $\kk_1,

1951: \ldots, \kk_m$, we shall say that its {\it external momenta are non

1952: exceptional}, if, for any subset $I$ of $\{1,\ldots,m\}$, $\sum_{i\in I}

1953: \s_i\kk_i \not=0$, where $\s_i=+1$ for the incoming momenta and $\s_i=-1$ for

1954: the outcoming momenta. Note that our definitions are such that $\h^+$ is an

1955: incoming field, while $\h^-$, $J$ and $\a$ are outcoming.

1956: 

1957: 

1958: An important role in this paper will have the following lemma, which was

1959: already proved in \cite{[M3]}.

1960: %

1961: \begin{lemma}

1962: If $\l_\io$ is small enough, there exists a choice of $\n$, independent of $l$

1963: and $N$, such that

1964: \be\lb{61bb}

1965: \n ={\l_\io\over 4\pi}

1966: \ee

1967: %

1968: and, in the limit of removed cut-offs,

1969: %

1970: \be\lb{as}

1971: \sum_{\o'}{A_{\o\o'}(\pp)\over D_{\o}(\pp)} {\partial e^{\WW_\AAA}\over

1972: \partial \ha_{\pp,\o'}}(0,0,\h)=0\;,

1973: \ee

1974: %

1975: in the sense that the correlation functions generated by deriving w.r.t. $\h$

1976: the l.h.s. of \pref{as} vanish in the limit of removed cutoffs, if the external

1977: momenta are non exceptional.

1978: \end{lemma}

1979: 

1980: {\bf\0Proof.} We sketch here the proof, as it will be useful in the following,

1981: referring for more details to \cite{[M3]} (see also \cite{[FM]} and

1982: \cite{[BFM1],[BM3]}). The starting point is the remark that $\WW_\AAA(\a,0,\h)$

1983: is very similar to $\WW_N(J,\h)$, see \pref{th1111}, the difference being that

1984: $\int J_{\xx,\o}\psi^+_{\xx,\o}\psi^-_{\xx,\o}$ is replaced by $\AAA_0 - \n

1985: \AAA_-$. A crucial role in the analysis is played by the function

1986: $C_\o(\pp,\qq)$ appearing in the definition of $\AAA_0$; this function is very

1987: singular, but it appears in the various equations relating the correlation

1988: functions only through the regular function

1989: %

1990: \bea\lb{mjmj}

1991: \hU^{(i,j)}_\o(\qq+\pp,\qq) \defi \tilde\c_N(\pp) C_\o(\qq+\pp,\qq)

1992: \hg^{(i)}_\o(\qq+\pp) \hg^{(j)}_\o(\qq)\;,

1993: \eea

1994: %

1995: where $\tilde\c_N(\pp)$ is a smooth function, with support in the set $\{|\pp|

1996: \le 3\g^{N+1}\}$ and equal to $1$ in the set $\{|\pp| \le 2\g^{N+1}\}$; we can

1997: add freely this factor in the definition, since $\hU^{(i,j)}_\o(\qq+\pp,\qq)$

1998: will only be used for values of $\pp$ such that $\tilde\c_N(\pp)=1$, thanks to

1999: the support properties of the propagator. It is easy to see that

2000: $\hU^{(i,j)}_\o$ vanishes if neither $j$ nor $i$ equals $N$ or $l$; this has

2001: the effect that at least one of the fields in $\AA_0$ has to be integrated at

2002: the $N$ or $l$ scale.

2003: 

2004: As a matter of fact, the terms in which at least one field is integrated at

2005: scale $l$ are much easier to analyze, see below. In order to study the others,

2006: it is convenient to introduce the function $\hS_{\bar\o,\o}^{(i,j)}$ defined by

2007: the equation

2008: %

2009: \bea\lb{91}

2010: \hU_\o^{(i,j)}(\qq+\pp,\qq) =\sum_{\bar\o}D_{\bar\o}(\pp)

2011: \hS_{\bar\o,\o}^{(i,j)}(\qq+\pp,\qq)\;.

2012: \eea

2013: %

2014: One can show that, if we define

2015: %

2016: \be

2017: S_{\bar\o,\o}^{(i,j)}(\zz;\xx,\yy) =\int\!{d\pp\;d\qq\over (2\p)^4}\;

2018: e^{-i\pp(\xx-\zz)}e^{i\qq(\yy-\zz)}\hS_{\bar\o,\o}^{(i,j)}(\pp,\qq)\;,

2019: \ee

2020: %

2021: then, given any positive integer $M$, there exists a constant $C_M$ such that,

2022: if $j>l$,

2023: %

2024: \be\lb{61}

2025: |S_{\bar\o,\o}^{(N,j)}(\zz;\xx,\yy)| \le C_M {\g^{N}\over 1+[\g^N|\xx-\zz|]^M}

2026: {\g^{j}\over 1+[\g^j|\yy-\zz|]^M}\;,

2027: \ee

2028: %

2029: a bound which is used to control the renormalization of the marginal terms

2030: containing a vertex of type $\AAA_0$.

2031: %Note that a similar bound is not

2032: %satisfied by the function $S_{\bar\o,\o}^{(i,l)}(\zz;\xx,\yy)$, $i\ge l$, but

2033: %this bound is not needed, because of the bound

2034: %

2035: %\be\lb{61a}

2036: %\left| {\hU_{\o'}^{(i,l)}(\qq+\pp,\qq)\over D_\o(\pp)}\right| \le C\g^{-(i-l)}

2037: %{\g^{-l-i}\over Z_{i-1} Z_N} \virg \hbox{if\ } |\pp|\ge 2\g^{l+1} \;,

2038: %\ee

2039: %

2040: %In fact, the factor $\g^{-(i-l)}$ in the r.h.s. of this bound is an improvement

2041: %w.r.t. the dimensional bound and makes indeed irrelevant the marginal terms

2042: %containing a vertex of type $\AAA_0$, if one of the $\psi$ fields is contracted

2043: %on scale $l$ and $\pp$ has a fixed value different from $0$, as we are

2044: %supposing, see \cite{[BM3]}.

2045: We choose $\n$ as given by

2046: %

2047: \be\lb{61b}

2048: \n= \l_\io \sum_{i,j=l+1}^N \int\!{d\qq\over (2\p)^2}\

2049: \hS_{-\o,\o}^{(i,j)}(\qq,\qq)\;;

2050: \ee

2051: %

2052: by an explicit calculation one can see that, for any $l<0$ and $N>0$, $\n$

2053: satisfies \pref{61bb}. We remark that, to get this result, it is important to

2054: exclude from the sum in the r.h.s. of \pref{61b} the couples $(i,j)$ with one

2055: of the indices equal to $l$; without this restriction, $\n$ would be equal to

2056: $0$, for any $N>0$.

2057: 

2058: The fact that the external momenta are non exceptional is important to avoid

2059: the infrared singularities of the correlation functions. This condition on the

2060: momenta is taken into account by using the fact that, in the tree expansion of

2061: the correlation functions, there are important constraints on the scale indices

2062: of the trees. This allows us to safely bound the Fourier transforms of the

2063: correlation functions by the sum over the $L^1$ norms in the coordinate space

2064: of the contributions associated to the different trees; see \cite{[BFM1]},

2065: \S3.1, for an example of this strategy. Moreover, the tree structure of the

2066: expansion allows us to express the $L^1$ norm of the correlation functions in

2067: terms of the $L^1$ norm of the effective potential on the different scales;

2068: hence, in the following, in order to study the effect on the Fourier transform

2069: of the correlations of the ultraviolet region, we shall study the $L^1$ norm of

2070: the kernels in the coordinate space.

2071: 

2072: 

2073: 

2074: We will proceed as in the analysis of $\WW_N(J,\h)$, integrating first the ultraviolet scales

2075: $N, N-1, \ldots, h+1$, $h\ge K$, following a procedure very similar

2076: to the one described in \S\ref{sec3.2},

2077: the main difference being that there appear in the effective potential new

2078: monomials in the external field $\a$ and in $\psi$.

2079: 

2080: We consider first the terms contributing to $\WW_\AAA(\a,0,\h)$ in which at

2081: least one of the two fields in $\AAA_0$ or $\AAA_-$ is contracted at scale $N$.

2082: The marginal terms such that only one of these two fields is contracted are

2083: proportional to $W^{(0;2)(k)}$, so that one can use \pref{hb1} to bound them.

2084: Hence, we shall consider in detail only the terms such that both fields of

2085: $\AA_0$ or $\AA_1$ are contracted and we shall call

2086: $\hK^{(n;2m)(k)}_{\D;\o;\uo'}$ the corresponding kernels of the monomials with

2087: $2m$ $\ps$-fields and $n$ $\a$-fields. In the case $n=1$, we decompose them as

2088: follows:

2089: %

2090: \bea

2091: \hK^{(1;2m)(k)}_{\D;\o;\uo'}(\pp;\uk)=

2092: \sum_{\s}D_{\s\o}(\pp)\hW^{(1;2m)(k)}_{\D;\s,\o;\uo'}(\pp;\uk)\;,

2093: \eea

2094: %

2095: where $\pp$ is the momentum flowing along the external $\a$-field. As in \S

2096: \ref{sec3.2}, we have to improve the dimensional bound of

2097: $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,\o;\o'}$. We can write the following identity, which is

2098: represented the first line of Fig.\ref{p8b} in the case $\s=-1$:

2099: %

2100: \bea\lb{71ter}

2101: && W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,\o;\o'}(\zz;\xx,\yy) =\sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu d\ww\;

2102: S^{(i,j)}_{\s\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\ww)W^{(0;4)(k)}_{\o,\o'}(\uu,\ww,\xx,\yy)-\nn\\

2103: %

2104: &&- \n\, \d_{-1,\s}\int\! d\ww\;

2105: v_K(\zz-\ww)W^{(1;2)(k)}_{-\o;\o'}(\ww;\xx,\yy)\;.

2106: \eea

2107: %

2108: \insertplot{320}{230}

2109: {\input p8c.txt}

2110: {p8c}{\lb{p8b}: Graphical representation

2111: of $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;-1,\o;\o'}$}{0}

2112: 

2113: We can further decompose $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;-1,\o;\o'}$ as in the last there

2114: lines of Fig.\ref{p8b}. The term (c) can be written as

2115: %

2116: \bea

2117: &&\l_\io \sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu d \uu' d\ww d\ww'\;

2118: S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\ww)

2119: g^{[k,N]}_\o(\uu-\uu')v_K(\uu-\ww') \cdot\nn\\

2120: %

2121: && \cdot W^{(1;4)(k)}_{-\o;\o,\o'}(\ww';\uu',\ww,\xx,\yy)\;.

2122: \eea

2123: %

2124: Hence, if we put $b_j(\xx)\defi \g^j/(1+[\g^j|\xx|]^3)$, we recall that

2125: $S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}$ is different from $0$ only if either $i$ or $j$ is equal

2126: to $N$, and we use the bound \pref{61}, we see that the norm of (c) is bounded

2127: by

2128: %

2129: \bea

2130: && C_3 |\l_\io| \|v_K\|_{L^\io} \sum_{i,j,m=k}^{N\, *} \int\!  d \xx d \uu'

2131: d\ww d\ww'\; |W^{(1;4)(k)}_{-\o;\o,\o'}(\ww';\uu',\ww,\xx,\yy)| \cdot\nn\\

2132: %

2133: &&\cdot \int\!d\zz d\uu \; b_i(\zz-\ww) b_j(\zz-\uu) |g^{(m)}_\o(\uu-\uu')|\;,

2134: \eea

2135: %

2136: where $*$ reminds that $\max\{i,j\}=N$. Since the $L^1$ and the $L^\io$ norm of

2137: $b_j$ satisfy a bound similar to analogous bounds of $g^{(j)}_\o$, we can

2138: proceed as in the previous section to bound $\int\!d\zz d\uu \;

2139:  b_i(\zz-\ww) b_j(\zz-\uu)|g^{(m)}_\o(\uu-\uu')|$, by taking the $L^\io$ norm

2140: for the factor with the smaller index and the $L^1$ norm for the other two. By

2141: also using \pref{pc1}, we get the bound

2142: %

2143: \be

2144: C_\th |\l_\io|^2 \g^{-2(k-K)}\g^{-\th(N-k)}\;,

2145: \ee

2146: %

2147: for any $0<\th <1$ ($C_\th$ is divergent for $\th\to 1$). With respect to

2148: analogous bound in \S\ref{sec3.2} ((b2) in Fig.\ref{p3}), there is an

2149: improvement of a factor $\g^{-\th(N-k)}$.

2150: %The same bound  can be obtained for

2151: %the term (d), by taking the norm $\|\cdot\|_{L^1}$ of the interaction

2152: %$v_K(\uu-\uu')$ and the norm $\|\cdot\|_{L^\io}$ of one among the functions

2153: %$b_i(\zz-\ww)$, $b_j(\zz-\uu)$ and $g_\o(\uu-\ww')$, that of smallest scale,

2154: %then using, for $W^{(0;2)(k)}_{\o}(\ww,\ww')$, the bound \pref{111c} and, for

2155: %$W^{(1;1)(k)}_{-\o;\o'}(\uu';\yy,\xx)$, the bound \pref{pc1}.

2156: The term (d) can be bounded by

2157: %

2158: $$C |\l_\io| \|v_K\|_{L^\io}\ \sum_{i,j= k}^{N\ *}\|b_i\|_{L^1}\

2159: \|b_j\|_{L^1} \le C |\l_\io| \g^{-(k-K)} \g^{-(N-k)}\,;$$

2160: %

2161: for the term  (e) we get the bound $C |\l_\io|^2 \g^{-3(k-K)} \g^{-(N-k)}$. By

2162: putting together all the previous bounds, we get

2163: %

2164: \be\lb{222}

2165: \| (c) +(d) +(e)\| \le C_\th |\l_\io| \g^{-(k-K)} \g^{-\th(N-k)}\;.

2166: \ee

2167: 

2168: We consider now the terms (a) and (b), whose sum can be written as

2169: %

2170: \bea\lb{75} \int\! d\uu\; \lft[\l_\io \sum_{i,j=k}^N

2171: S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu) -\n \d(\zz-\uu)\rgt] \cdot\cr\cr\cdot

2172: \int\!d\ww\; v_K(\uu-\ww)W^{(1;2)(k)}_{-\o;\o'}(\ww;\xx,\yy)\;.

2173: \eea

2174: %

2175: By using the identity \pref{idb}, \pref{75} can be written also as

2176: %

2177: \bea\lb{125b}

2178: && \left[\l_\io \sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu \; S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu)

2179: -\n\right] \int\! d\ww\;  v_K(\zz-\ww) W^{(1;2),(k)}_{-\o;\o'}(\ww;\xx,\yy)

2180: +\nn\\

2181: %

2182: && + \l_\io \sum_{p=0,1}\sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu \;

2183: S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu)(u_p-z_p) \cdot\\

2184: %

2185: &&\cdot \int_0^1\!d\t\; \int\! d\ww\; (\dpr_pv_K)(\zz-\ww+\t(\uu-\zz))

2186: W^{(1;2),(k)}_{-\o;\o'}(\ww;\xx,\yy)\;.\nn

2187: \eea

2188: %

2189: The latter term is again irrelevant and vanishing for $N-k\to+\io$; in fact,

2190: its norm can be bounded by

2191: %

2192: \bea

2193: && 2|\l_\io| \|W^{(1;2),(k)}_{-\o;\o'}\| \, \|\dpr v_K\|_{L^1} \,

2194: \sum_{i,j=k}^{N\

2195: *}\int\! d\zz \; b_i(\zz-\uu) b_j(\zz-\uu)|\uu-\zz_p| \le\nn\\

2196: %

2197: &&\hspace{2cm} \le C|\l_\io| \g^{-(k-K)}\g^{-(N-k)} \;.

2198: \eea

2199: %

2200: Contrary to what happened for the graph (b1) of Fig\ref{p3}, the contribution

2201: of the graph (a) to the first term in the r.h. side of \pref{125b} is not zero

2202: (that is, {\it the fermionic bubble is not vanishing}); however, in this case

2203: its value is compensated by the graph (b), thanks to the explicit choice we

2204: made for $\n$. Indeed we have

2205: %

2206: \be\lb{78bis}

2207: \l_\io \sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu \; S^{(i,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu)-\n= -2

2208: \l_\io \sum_{j=l+1}^{k-1}\int\! d\uu \; S^{(N,j)}_{-\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu)\;,

2209: \ee

2210: %

2211: that easily implies that the first term in the r.h. side of \pref{125b} is

2212: bounded by $C|\l_\io|\g^{-(N-k)}$.

2213: 

2214: Let us finally consider $W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;+1,\o;\o'}$, for which we can use a

2215: graph expansion similar to that of Fig.\ref{p8b}, the only differences being

2216: that $\n$ is replaced by $0$ and the indices $-\o$ are replaced by $\o$. Hence

2217: a bound can be obtained with the same arguments used above, with only one

2218: important difference: the contribution that in the previous analysis was

2219: compensated by the graph (b) now is zero by symmetry reasons. Indeed, if we

2220: call $\kk^*$ the vector $\kk$ rotated by $\p/2$, it is easy to see that

2221: $\hS^{(i,j)}_{\bar\o,\o}(\kk^*,\pp^*)=-\o\bar\o\hS^{(i,j)}_{\bar\o,\o}(\kk,\pp)$,

2222: which implies that

2223: %

2224: \be\lb{79}

2225: \sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! d\uu \; S^{(i,j)}_{\o,\o}(\zz;\uu,\uu)=

2226: \sum_{i,j=k}^N\int\! {d\kk\over (2\p)^2} \; \hS^{(i,j)}_{\o,\o}(\kk,-\kk)=0\;.

2227: \ee

2228: %

2229: We have then proved that

2230: %

2231: \be\lb{de} \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,\o;\uo'}\| \le C|\l_\io|\g^{-\th(N-k)}\;,

2232: \ee

2233: %

2234: which implies, by dimensional bounds and the short memory property, that, for

2235: $K\le k\le N$,

2236: %

2237: \be\lb{de1}

2238: \|W^{(1;2m)(k)}_{\D;\s,\o;\uo'}\| \le (C|\l_\io|)^m \g^{(1-m)k}\g^{-\th

2239: (N-k)}\;.

2240: \ee

2241: %

2242: It remains to analyze the terms contributing to $\WW_\AAA(\a,0,\h)$ in which

2243: no one of the two fields in $\AAA_0$ is contracted at scale $N$.

2244: If $i\ge l$ we can use the bound

2245: %

2246: \be\lb{61a}

2247: \left| {\hU_{\o'}^{(i,l)}(\qq+\pp,\qq)\over D_\o(\pp)}\right| \le C\g^{-(i-l)}

2248: {\g^{-l-i}\over Z_{i-1}} \virg \hbox{if\ } |\pp|\ge 2\g^{l+1} \;,

2249: \ee

2250: %

2251: and the factor $\g^{-(i-l)}$ in the r.h.s. of this bound is an improvement

2252: w.r.t. the dimensional bound and makes indeed irrelevant the marginal terms

2253: containing a vertex of type $\AAA_0$, if one of the $\psi$ fields is contracted

2254: on scale $l$ and $\pp$ has a fixed value different from $0$, as we are

2255: supposing.

2256: 

2257: The contributions to the correlation functions generated by the l.h.s. of

2258: \pref{as}, such that one of the $\psi$-fields in $\AAA_0$ is contracted at

2259: scale $l$ (hence it is an external field at scale $k$), vanish in the limit

2260: $l\to-\io$, if the momentum $\pp$ of the $\a$ field is fixed at a value

2261: different from $0$, as we are supposing. This follows from the bound

2262: \pref{61a}, since the value of $i$ is essentially fixed at a value of order

2263: $\log_\g |\pp|$ and the extra factor $\g^{-(i-l)}$ vanishes for $l\to-\io$. The

2264: correlations generated by the terms containing $W^{(1;2m)(k)}_\D$ are vanishing

2265: in the limit of removed cut-offs, thanks to the extra factor $\g^{-\th (N-k)}$

2266: in \pref{de1}, with respect to the dimensional one, and the short memory

2267: property.

2268: % we see that the

2269: %correlations generated by \pref{as} are vanishing in the limit of removed

2270: %cut-offs. The argument is explained in details in \cite{[BFM1]}, \S3.1 for a

2271: %special case.

2272: 

2273: \subsection{Closed equations}

2274: The Schwinger-Dyson equations for $\m=0$ are generated by the identity, see

2275: \cite{[BFM2]},

2276: %

2277: \bea\lb{SDE}

2278: && D_\o(\kk) {\partial e^{\WW_{N}} \over\partial \hh^+_{\kk,\o}}(0,\h) =

2279: \c_{l,N}(\kk) \Bigg[ \hh^-_{\kk,\o} e^{\WW_{N}(0,\h)} - \nn\\

2280: %

2281: &&- \l_\io\int\!{d\pp\over(2\p)^2}\ \hv_K(\pp){\partial^2 e^{\WW_{N}}\over

2282: \partial\hJ_{\pp,-\o} \partial\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o}}(0,\h) \Bigg]\;.

2283: \eea

2284: 

2285: By using \pref{WT1} we easily get:

2286: %

2287: \bea\lb{ce}

2288: && D_\o(\kk) {\partial e^{\WW_{N}} \over\partial \hh^+_{\kk,\o}}(0,\h) =

2289: \c_{l,N}(\kk) \Bigg\{ \hh^-_{\kk,\o} e^{\WW_{N}(0,\h)} - \nn\\

2290: %

2291: && -\l_\io\sum_{\o'} \int\! {d \pp\over (2\p)^2}\, v_K(\pp)

2292: {A_{-\o\o'}(\pp)\over D_{-\o}(\pp)}\cdot \\

2293: %

2294: &&\cdot\int\! {d \qq\over (2\p)^2}\ \left[\hh^+_{\qq+\pp,\o'} {\partial

2295: e^{\WW_{N}}\over \partial \hh^+_{\qq,\o'}

2296: \partial\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o}}(0,\h) - {\partial e^{\WW_{N}}\over

2297: \partial\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o} \partial \hh^-_{\qq+\pp,\o'}}(0,\h)

2298: \hh^-_{\qq,\o'}\right] -\nn\\

2299: %

2300: &&-\l_\io\sum_{\o'}\int\! {d \pp\over (2\p)^2}\ v_K(\pp) {A_{-\o\o'}(\pp)\over

2301: D_{-\o}(\pp)} {\partial^2 e^{\WW_\AAA}\over \partial

2302: \ha_{\pp,\o'}\partial\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o}}(0,0,\h) \Bigg\} \;.\nn

2303: \eea

2304: %

2305: We now want to prove that the last term in the r.h.s. of \pref{ce} is

2306: negligible in the limit of removed cutoffs, if $\kk$ is fixed at a value far

2307: from the cutoffs.

2308: 

2309: \begin{theorem}

2310: In the limit of removed cutoffs, the correlation functions generated by

2311: deriving w.r.t. $\h$ the functional

2312: %

2313: \be\lb{ff}

2314: \sum_{\o'}\int\! {d \pp\over (2\p)^2}\ v_K(\pp) {A_{-\o\o'}(\pp)\over

2315: D_{-\o}(\pp)} {\partial^2 e^{\WW_\AAA(0,0,\h)}\over \partial

2316: \ha_{\pp,\o'}\partial\hh^+_{\kk+\pp,\o}}

2317: \ee

2318: %

2319: vanish, if the external momenta are non exceptional.

2320: \end{theorem}

2321: 

2322: {\bf Proof.} It is convenient to write \pref{ff} as $\sum_{\e=\pm} {\dpr

2323: \WW_{T,\e}\over \dpr \hb_{\kk,\o}}(0,\h)$, where

2324: %

2325: \bea

2326: e^{\WW_{T,\e} (\b,\h)} &=& \int\! P(d\ps^{[l,N]}) e^{\VV^{(N)}(\ps^{[l,N]}) +

2327: \sum_\o\int d\xx [\psi^{[l,N]+}_{\xx,\o} \h^-_{\xx,\o} + \h^+_{\xx,\o}

2328: \psi^{[l,N]-}_{\xx,\o}]} \cdot\nn\\

2329: %

2330: &\cdot& e^{\left[T^{(\e)}_{1} -\n T^{(\e)}_{-}\right]\left(\ps^{{l,N }},

2331: \b\right)}

2332: \eea

2333: %

2334: and

2335: %

2336: \bea\lb{80}

2337: T^{(\e)}_{1}(\psi,\b) &=& \sum_{\o} \int\! {d\kk\;d\pp\;d\qq \over (2\p)^4}\;

2338: \hv_K^{(\e)}(\pp) {C_{-\e\o}(\qq+\pp,\qq)\over D_{-\o}(\pp)} \cdot\nn\\

2339: %

2340: &\cdot& \hb_{\kk,\o} \hp^-_{\kk+\pp,\o} \hp^+_{\qq+\pp,-\e\o}

2341: \hp^-_{\qq,-\e\o}\;,

2342: \eea

2343: %

2344: \be\lb{80a}

2345: T^{(\e)}_{-}(\psi,\b)= \sum_{\o} \int\!{d\kk\;d\pp\;d\qq\over (2\p)^4}\;

2346: \hu_K^{(\e)}(\pp) \hb_{\kk,\o} \hp^-_{\kk+\pp,\o} \hp^+_{\qq+\pp,\e\o}

2347: \hp^-_{\qq,\e\o}\;,

2348: \ee

2349: %

2350: where

2351: %

2352: \be

2353: \hv^{(\e)}_{K}(\pp)\defi v_K(\pp) \hA_{\e}(\pp) \virg \hu_K^{(\e)}(\pp) =

2354: \hv_K^{(\e)}(\pp) \hv_K(\pp) {D_{\e\o}(\pp)\over D_{-\o}(\pp)}\;.

2355: \ee

2356: %

2357: Note that $v^{(\pm)}_{K}(\xx)$ and $u^{(-)}_{K}(\xx)$ are smooth functions of

2358: fast decay, hence they are equivalent to $v_K(\xx)$ in the bounds. This is not

2359: true for $u^{(+)}_{K}(\xx)$, whose Fourier transform is bounded but

2360: discontinuous in $\pp=0$. However, in the following we shall only need to know

2361: that $\|u^{(+)}_{K}\|_{L^\io} \le C\g^{2K}$ and that $|\hu_K^{(+)}(\pp)| \le

2362: |\hv_K^{(+)}(\pp) \hv_K(\pp)|$, which are easy to prove.

2363: 

2364: As in \S\ref{sec3.4}, we now perform a multiscale integration for the

2365: ultraviolet scales $N, N-1, \ldots, k+1$, $k\ge K$, very similar to the one

2366: described in \S\ref{sec3.2}, the main difference being that that there appear

2367: in the effective potential new monomials in the external field $\b$ and in

2368: $\psi$. As explained in the previous section, in order to control the Fourier

2369: transform at non exceptional momenta of the correlation functions, it is in

2370: general sufficient to control, in the ultraviolet region, the $L^1$ norm in

2371: coordinate space of the kernels appearing in the effective potential. This is

2372: in general true also in the proof of this theorem, except for a bound, where

2373: one has to be more careful, see below.

2374: 

2375: The contributions to the correlation functions such that one of the

2376: $\psi$-fields in $T^{(\e)}_{1}(\psi,\b)$ with momentum $\qq+\pp$ or $\qq$, see

2377: \pref{80}, is contracted at scale $l$ (hence it is an external field at scale

2378: $k$), vanish in the limit $l\to-\io$, if the momentum $\kk$ of $\b$ is fixed at

2379: a value different from $0$, as we are supposing. In fact, in this case either

2380: $|\pp|$ or $|\kk+\pp|$ is greater than $|\kk|/2$; hence, by using \pref{61a} or

2381: the short memory property, these contributions satisfy a bound containing the

2382: extra factor $\g^l |\kk/2|$, which vanishes for $l\to-\io$. We consider then

2383: just the terms contributing to $\WW_{T,\e}(\b,\h)$, in which at least one of

2384: the two $\psi$-fields in $T^{(\e)}_{1}(\psi,\b)$ with momentum $\qq+\pp$ or

2385: $\qq$ is contracted at scale $N$. We shall call $W^{(1;2m-1)}_{T,\e;\o;\uo'}$

2386: the corresponding kernels of the monomials with $2m-1$ $\ps$-fields and $1$

2387: $\a$-field. We claim that

2388: %

2389: \be\lb{ti}

2390: \|W^{(1;2m-1)(k)}_{T,\e;\o;\uo'}\| \le C \g^{(2-m)k}\g^{-\th (N-k)}\;.

2391: \ee

2392: %

2393: By the usual arguments, this is a consequence of the improved bounds:

2394: %

2395: \bea

2396: \lb{t1} \|W^{(1;1)(k)}_{T,\e;\o,\o}\| &\le& C |\l_\io| \g^k \g^{-\th (N-k)}

2397: \g^{-2 (k-K)}\;,\\

2398: %

2399: \lb{t2} \|W^{(1;3)(k)}_{T,\e;\o,\uo'}\| &\le& C |\l_\io| \g^{-\th (N-k)} \;.

2400: \eea

2401: 

2402: We prove first the bound \pref{t1}. We can write

2403: %

2404: \be

2405: W^{(1;1)(k)}_{T,\e;\o,\o} = W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o,\o} +

2406: W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o,\o}

2407: \ee

2408: %

2409: where

2410: 

2411: \0 a) $W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o,\o}$ is the sum over the terms such that the

2412: field $\b$ belongs only to a $T^{(\e)}_1$-vertex, whose $\psi$-field

2413: $\hp^+_{\qq+\pp,-\e\o}$ either is contracted with $\hp^-_{\kk+\pp,\o}$ (this

2414: can happen only for $\e=-1$) or is connected to it through a kernel

2415: $\hW_\o^{(0;2)(k)}(\qq+\pp)$.

2416: 

2417: \0 b) $W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o,\o}$ is the sum over the remaining terms.

2418: 

2419: Let us consider the first term. Given $\kk$, for $N$ large enough,

2420: $\c_{l,N}^{-1}(\kk)-1=0$; hence we can write:

2421: %

2422: \bea\lb{95}

2423: && \hW^{(1;1)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o,\o}(\kk) = \d_{\e,-1} \int\!{d\pp\over (2\p)^2}\;

2424: {\hv^{(-1)}_K(\pp)\over D_{-\o}(\pp)} [\c_{-\io,N}(\pp+\kk)-1]\cdot\\

2425: %

2426: && \cdot \lft[1+\hg^{[k+1,N]}_\o(\pp+\kk) \hW_\o^{(0;2)(k)}(\pp+\kk)\rgt]

2427: \lft[1+\hg^{[k+1,N]}_\o(\kk) \hW_\o^{(0;2)(k)}(\kk)\rgt]\;.\nn

2428: \eea

2429: %

2430: Moreover, since $\hv^{(-1)}_K(\pp)=0$ for $|\pp|\ge 2\g^K$, then

2431: $\c_{-\io,N}(\pp+\kk)-1=0$, if $\hv^{(-1)}_K(\pp) \not=0$ and $N$ is large

2432: enough. It follows that, given a fixed $\kk$, for $N$ large enough,

2433: %

2434: \be \hW^{(1;1)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o,\o}(\kk)=0\;.\ee

2435: 

2436: Let us now consider $W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o,\o}(\xx-\yy)$, which can be

2437: decomposed as in Fig. \ref{p9b}.

2438: %

2439: \insertplot{300}{60} {\input p9b.txt} {p9b}{\lb{p9b}: Graphical representation

2440: of $W^{(1;1)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o,\o}$}{0}

2441: 

2442: \0 By using \pref{71ter}, it can be written as

2443: %

2444: \be

2445: \sum_{\s} \int\! d\zz\ u^{(\e)}_K(\xx-\zz) g^{[k,N]}_\o(\xx-\ww)

2446: W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,-\e\o;\o}(\zz;\yy,\ww)\;,

2447: \ee

2448: %

2449: hence its norm, by using \pref{de}, can be bounded by

2450: \be

2451: \|u_K^{(\e)}\|_{L^\io}\, \sum_{j=k}^N |g_\o^{(j)}|_{L^1}

2452: \|W^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,-\e\o;\o}\| \le C |\l_\io| \g^k \g^{-2(k-K)}

2453: \g^{-\th(N-k)}\;.

2454: \ee

2455: 

2456: In order to prove the bound \pref{t2}, we write

2457: %

2458: \be\lb{fffg}

2459: W^{(1;3)(k)}_{T,\e;\o;\uo'} = W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o;\uo'}+

2460: W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o;\uo'}\;,

2461: \ee

2462: %

2463: where $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o;\uo'}$ contains the terms in which the field

2464: $\hp_{\kk+\pp,\o}$ of $T_1$ and $T_-$ is not contracted or is linked to a

2465: kernel $\hW^{(0;2)(k)}_\o$, while the other terms are collected in

2466: $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o;\uo'}$. Let us consider first

2467: $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o;\uo'}$; its Fourier transform, if we call $\kk^+$ and

2468: $\kk^-$ the momenta of the two fields connected to the line $u^{(\e)}_K$, can

2469: be written as (note that $\uo'$ is of the form $(\o,\o',\o')$):

2470: %

2471: \bea

2472: &&\hW^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,\e;\o;\uo'}(\kk;\kk^+,\kk^-)= \lft[1 +

2473: \hg^{[k+1,N]}_{\o}(\kk+\kk^+-\kk^-) \hW^{(0;2)(k)}_{\o}(\kk+\kk^+-\kk^-) \rgt]\cdot\nn\\

2474: %

2475: &&\cdot \hu^{(\e)}_K(\kk^+-\kk^-) \sum_\s

2476: \hW^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,-\e\o,\o'}(\kk^- +\kk^+-\kk^-,\kk^-)\;.

2477: \eea

2478: %

2479: Then, if $\e=-1$, since $\|v^{(-1)}_K\|_{L^1} \le C$, by using the bounds

2480: \pref{de} and \pref{hb1}, we find

2481: %

2482: \be\lb{w13}

2483: \|W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,-1;\o;\uo'}\| \le C|\l_\io| \g^{-\th (N-k) }

2484: \ee

2485: 

2486: This bound is not true in the case $\e=+1$, where it is necessary to take

2487: carefully into account that we are indeed bounding the Fourier transform of the

2488: correlation functions generated by \pref{ff}, at fixed (non exceptional)

2489: external momenta.

2490: 

2491: The terms contributing to these correlations and containing

2492: $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(a)T,+1;\o;\uo'}$ as a cluster can be of two different types.

2493: There are terms such that the line corresponding to $\hp_{\kk+\pp,\o}$ is

2494: connected to the rest of the graph only through the vertex of the field $\b$.

2495: In this case, we have to bound an expression of the type

2496: %

2497: \be

2498: \hu^{(+1)}_K(\kk-\qq) \hat G_1(\uk') \hat G_2(\uk'')\;,

2499: \ee

2500: %

2501: where $\uk'$ and $\uk''$ are a set of independent external momenta,

2502: $\qq=-\sum_i \s_i\kk'_i$, $\qq-\kk=\sum_i \s_i\kk''_i$ and $\hat G_2(\uk'')$

2503: contains the cluster associate to $\sum_\s \hW^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,-\o,\o'}$;

2504: this expression is bounded by $C \|G_1\|\,|\G_2\|$, the same result that we

2505: should get in the case $\e=-1$, by bounding the full expression with the

2506: $\|\cdot\|$ norm. Hence, the final bound is the same we would obtain by using

2507: \pref{w13} for $\e=+1$.

2508: 

2509: We still have to consider the terms such that the line corresponding to

2510: $\hp_{\kk+\pp,\o}$ is connected to the rest of the graph even if we erase the

2511: vertex of the field $\b$. Now we have to bound an expression of the type

2512: %

2513: \be

2514: \int\!{d\pp\over (2\p)^2}\; \hu^{(+1)}_K(\pp) \hg^{(j)}(\pp+\kk) \hat

2515: G(\pp,\uk')\;,

2516: \ee

2517: %

2518: where $\sum_i \s_i\kk_i=\kk$ and $\hat G(\pp,\uk')$ contains the cluster

2519: associate to $\sum_\s \hW^{(1;2)(k)}_{\D;\s,-\o,\o'}$; this expression can be

2520: bounded by $C\|\hg\|_{L^1} \|G\|$, the same result that we should get in the

2521: case $\e=-1$, by bounding the full expression with the $\|\cdot\|$ norm.

2522: 

2523: Let us finally consider $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o;\uo'}$, which can be

2524: represented as in Fig.\ref{p12}.

2525: %

2526: \insertplot{290}{120} {\input p12.txt} {p12}{\lb{p12}: Graphical representation

2527: of  $W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o;\o'}$}{0}

2528: 

2529: We can write

2530: %

2531: \bea

2532: && W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o,\uo'}(\xx,\yy, \uu,\vv) = \\

2533: %

2534: && =\int d\zz d\ww\; u_K^{(\e)}(\xx-\zz) g^{[k,N]}_\o(\xx-\ww)

2535: W^{(1;4)(k)}_{\D,\e;\o,\o'}(\zz;\ww,\yy, \uu,\vv)\;,\nn

2536: \eea

2537: %

2538: so that, by the bounds \pref{de}, $\|W^{(1;4)(k)}_{\D,\e;\o,\o'}\| \le C

2539: |\l_\io| \g^{-k} \g^{-\th(N-k)}$ and $\|u^{(\e)}_K\|_{L^\io}\le C \g^{2K}$, we

2540: get:

2541: %

2542: \be

2543: \|W^{(1;3)(k)}_{(b)T,\e;\o;\o'}\| \le C |\l_\io|\g^{-2(k-K)}\g^{-\th(N-k)}\;.

2544: \ee

2545: %

2546: Again, with respect to the analogous bound in \S 3.2,we have an extra factor

2547: $\g^{-\th(N-k)}$ and this implies, proceeding for instance as in \S4.1 of

2548: \cite{[BFM1]}, the proof of the Theorem.

2549: 

2550: \subsection{Solution of the closed equations and proof of $x_+ x_-=1$}

2551: 

2552: We want to solve the closed equations for the correlation functions

2553: %

2554: \bea

2555: \la \psi^-_{\xx,\o}\psi^+_{\yy,\o}\ra &\defi& S_\o(\xx-\yy)\;,\\

2556: %

2557: \lb{Gom}\la \psi^-_{\xx,\o} \psi^-_{\yy,-\o} \psi^+_{\uu,-\o}

2558: \psi^+_{\vv,\o}\ra &\defi& G_\o(\xx,\yy,\uu,\vv)\;,

2559: \eea

2560: %

2561: in the limit of removed cutoffs. By taking in \pref{ce} one derivative w.r.t.

2562: $\hh^-_{k,\o}$ and then putting $\h\=0$, we find

2563: %

2564: \be\lb{eqk}

2565:  D_\o(\kk)\hS_\o(\kk)

2566: =1 +\l_\io \int\!{d\pp\over (2\p)^2}\ \hF_{K,-}(\pp) \hS_{\o}(\kk+\pp)\;,

2567: \ee

2568: %

2569: where

2570: %

2571: \be

2572: \hF_{K,\e}(\pp)\defi {v_K(\pp) A_\e(\pp) \over D_{-\o}(\pp)}\;.

2573: \ee

2574: %

2575: In the space coordinates, equation \pref{eqk} becomes

2576: %

2577: \be

2578: \lft(\dpr_\o S_\o\rgt)(\xx) -\l_\io F_{K,-}(\xx) S_{\o}(\xx) =\d(\xx)\;,

2579: \ee

2580: %

2581: where $\dpr_\o=\dpr_{x_0}+i\o\dpr_{x_1}$ and $F_{K,-}(\xx) = \int d\pp/(2\p)^2

2582: e^{-i\pp\xx} \hF_{K,-}(-\pp)$. Hence, if we define

2583: %

2584: \be

2585: \D_{\e}(\xx|\zz) = \int\!{d\kk\over (2\p)^2} \ {e^{-i\kk\xx} - e^{-i\kk\zz}

2586: \over D_\o(\kk)} \hF_{K,\e}(-\kk)\;,

2587: \ee

2588: %

2589: its solution is:

2590: %

2591: \be\lb{Som}

2592: S_\o(\xx)= e^{\l_\io\D_{-}(\xx|0)}g_\o(\xx)\;.

2593: \ee

2594: 

2595: Note that, for large  $|\xx|$, thanks to \pref{Aeps},

2596: %

2597: \be\lb{delta}

2598: \D_{\e}(\xx|0)\sim -{A_\e(0)\over 2\p}\ln|\xx|

2599: = -{a(0) +\e\bar a(0)\over 4\p}\ln|\xx|\;,

2600: \ee

2601: %

2602: which implies, in particular, that the critical index $\h_z$, defined in

2603: \pref{lau12} is equal to $[a(0) - \bar a(0)]/(4\p)$.

2604: 

2605: Let us now consider the 4-point correlation \pref{Gom}. If we take in \pref{ce}

2606: three derivatives w.r.t. $\hh^+_{\qq,-\o}$, $\hh^-_{\kk+\qq-\bfs,\o}$ and

2607: $\hh^-_{\bfs,-\o}$, we find:

2608: %

2609: \bea

2610: &&D_\o(\kk)\hG_\o(\kk,\qq,\bfs) = \d(\qq-\bfs)\hS_{-\o}(\qq) +\l_\io \int

2611: {d\pp\over (2\p)^2}\ \hF_{K,-}(\pp) \hG_\o(\kk+\pp,\qq,\bfs)+\nn\\

2612: %

2613: &&+\l_\io \int {d\pp\over (2\p)^2}\ \hF_{K,+}(\pp)

2614: \Big[\hG_\o(\kk+\pp,\qq-\pp,\bfs) - \hG_\o(\kk+\pp,\qq,\bfs+\pp)\Big]\;,

2615: \eea

2616: %

2617: which, in the space coordinates, becomes:

2618: %

2619: \bea

2620: &&\lft(\dpr_\o^\xx G_\o\rgt)(\xx,\yy,\uu,\vv) = \d(\xx-\vv) S_{-\o}(\yy-\uu)+

2621: \cr\cr &&+\l_\io \Big[F_{K,+}(\xx-\yy)- F_{K,+}(\xx-\uu) +F_{K,-}(\xx-\vv)\Big]

2622: G_\o(\xx,\yy,\uu,\vv)\;.

2623: \eea

2624: %

2625: By using \pref{Som}, we find that the solution of this equation is given by

2626: %

2627: \bea

2628: G_\o(\xx,\yy,\uu,\vv) &=& e^{-\l_\io \Big[ \D_+(\xx-\yy|\vv-\yy) -

2629: \D_+(\xx-\uu,\vv-\uu)\Big]} \cdot\nn\\

2630: %

2631: &\cdot& S_\o(\xx-\vv) S_{-\o}(\yy-\uu)\;.

2632: \eea

2633: %

2634: If we put in this equation $\xx=\uu$ and $\yy=\vv$, we find, using also

2635: \pref{Gom} and \pref{delta}, that

2636: %

2637: \bea\lb{ppp1}

2638: &&\la\ps^+_{\xx,\o}\ps^-_{\xx,-\o}\ps^+_{\yy,-\o}\ps^-_{\yy,\o}\ra =

2639: \la\ps^+_{\xx,\o}\ps^-_{\xx,-\o}\ps^+_{\yy,-\o}\ps^-_{\yy,\o}\ra_0 e^{-2\l_\io

2640: [\D_+(\xx-\yy,0)-\D_-(\xx-\yy,0)] } \cr\cr &&{\sim \atop \raise6pt\hbox{

2641: $\scriptstyle |\xx-\yy|\to \io$}} \hspace{.5cm} {C\over |\xx-\yy|^{2[1-\bar

2642: a(0)(\l_\io/2\p)]}}\;.

2643: \eea

2644: %

2645: If we put instead $\xx=\yy$ and $\uu=\vv$, we get

2646: %

2647: \bea\lb{ppp2}

2648: &&\la\ps^+_{\xx,\o}\ps^+_{\xx,-\o}\ps^-_{\uu,-\o}\ps^-_{\uu,\o}\ra

2649: =\la\ps^+_{\xx,\o}\ps^+_{\xx,-\o}\ps^-_{\uu,-\o}\ps^-_{\uu,\o}\ra_0 e^{2\l_\io

2650: [\D_+(\xx-\uu,0)+\D_-(\xx-\uu,0)]} \cr\cr && {\sim \atop \raise6pt\hbox{

2651: $\scriptstyle |\xx-\uu|\to \io$}} \hspace{.5cm} {C\over

2652: |\xx-\uu|^{2[1+a(0)(\l_\io/2\p)]}}\;.

2653: \eea

2654: %

2655: By using \pref{ppp1}, \pref{ppp2}, the first line of \pref{Aeps}, \pref{61bb}

2656: and the definition \pref{xpm} of $x_\pm$, we finally get the first identity in

2657: \pref{2}.

2658: 

2659: 

2660: \section{Appendix: the anisotropic Ashkin-Teller model}

2661: 

2662: In this appendix, in order to derive \pref{3}, we briefly recall the analysis

2663: of the anisotropic Ashkin-Teller model in [13]. The integration procedure is

2664: similar to that described in \S\ref{sec2}, the main difference being that the

2665: quadratic part \pref{2.29} of the interaction now contains also terms of the

2666: form $\psi^{\e(\le h)}_{\xx,\o} \psi^{\e(\le h)}_{\xx,-\o}$. It follows, see

2667: \pref{3} (where different definitions of the fermion fields were used) for

2668: details, that we have to substitute the Grassmann integration

2669: $P_{Z_h,\m_h}(d\psi^{(\le h)})$ in \pref{th1} with a new measure

2670: $P_{Z_h,\m_h,\s_h}(d\psi^{(\le h)})$, where $\m_h$ and $\s_h$ are the constants

2671: multiplying, respectively, the quadratic {\it mass terms}

2672: %

2673: \bea

2674: 2\sum_{\o=\pm} \psi^{(\le h)+}_{\xx,\o} \psi^{(\le h)-}_{\xx,-\o} \qquad{\rm

2675: and}\qquad\ -2i\sum_{\e =\pm} \psi^{(\le h)\e}_{\xx,+} \psi^{(\le

2676: h)\e}_{\xx,-}\;.

2677: \eea

2678: One can see that

2679: %

2680: \bea

2681: &&|\log_\g(\m_{j-1}/ \m_j) - \h_\m(\l_{-\io})| \le C\l^2 \g^{\th j}\;, \cr\cr

2682: &&|\log_\g(\s_{j-1}/ \s_j) - \h_\s(\l_{-\io})| \le C\l^2 \g^{\th j}\;.

2683: \eea

2684: %

2685: Hence, since the two mass terms are clearly proportional, respectively, to the

2686: operators $O^+$ and $O^-$, we find that

2687: %

2688: \be

2689: \h_\m=\h_+-\h_z\;,\qquad \h_\s=\h_--\h_z\;.

2690: \ee

2691: %

2692: It turns out that the difference of the critical temperatures scales as

2693: $|v|^{x_T}$ where $x_T$, see (5.26) of [13] (where the indices are defined with

2694: a different sign and the definitions of $\m_h$ and $\s_h$ are exchanged), is

2695: given by

2696: %

2697: \be

2698: x_T={1+\h_\m\over 1+\h_\s}\;,

2699: \ee

2700: %

2701: which implies \pref{3}, since $\h_\m=1-x_+$ and $\h_\s=1-x_-$.

2702: 

2703: 

2704: \*

2705: \\

2706: 

2707: {\bf\0Acknowledgments} P.F. is indebited with David Brydges for stimulating his

2708: interest in the topic with the request of a review seminar on the papers

2709: \cite{[PS]} and \cite{[M1]}.

2710: 

2711: \begin{thebibliography}{999999}

2712: 

2713: 

2714: \bibitem{[AT]}Ashkin J., Teller E.: {\it Statistics of Two-Dimensional Lattices

2715:     with Four Components.} {Phys. Rev.} {\bf 64}, 178 - 184, (1943).

2716: 

2717: \bibitem{[Ba1]} Baxter R.J.: {\it Eight-Vertex Model in Lattice Statistics.}

2718:     Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 26}, 832--833, (1971).

2719: 

2720: \bibitem{[Ba]} Baxter R.J.: {\it Exactly solved models in statistical

2721:     mechanics.} Academic Press, Inc.  London, (1989).

2722: 

2723: \bibitem{[BB]} Barber M., Baxter R.J.: {\it On the spontaneous order of the

2724:     eight-vertex model.} J. Phys. C {\bf 6}, 2913--2921, (1973).

2725: 

2726: \bibitem{[BFM1]} Benfatto G., Falco P., Mastropietro V.: {\it Functional

2727:     Integral Construction of the Massive Thirring model: Verification of Axioms

2728:     and Massless Limit.} {Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf  273}, 67--118,  (2007).

2729: 

2730: \bibitem{[BFM2]} Benfatto G., Falco P., Mastropietro V.: {\it Massless

2731:     Sine-Gordon and Massive Thirring Models: proof of the Coleman's

2732:     equivalence.} {Comm. Math. Phys.}, to appear (2008).

2733: 

2734: \bibitem{[BM1]} Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.: {\it Rev. Math. Phys.} {\bf 13},

2735:     1323--1435, (2001).

2736: 

2737: \bibitem{[BM2]} Benfatto G., Mastropietro V.: {\it On the Density-Density

2738:     Critical Indices in Interacting Fermi Systems.} {Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf

2739:     231}, 97--134, (2002).

2740: 

2741: \bibitem{[BM3]} Benfatto G.,  Mastropietro V.: {\it Ward Identities and Chiral

2742:     Anomaly in the Luttinger Liquid.} {Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf  258}, 609--655,

2743:     (2005).

2744: 

2745: %\bibitem{[C]} Cardy J.:

2746: %\bibitem{[CRW]} Carey A.L., Ruijsenaars S.N.M., Wrigth J.D.:

2747: %{\it The massless Thirring model: Positivity of Klaiber's n-point

2748: %functions.}

2749: %{Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf 99}, 347--364, (1985).

2750: 

2751: %\bibitem{[DFZ]} Dell'Antonio G., Frishman Y., Zwanziger D.:

2752: %{\it Thirring Model in Terms of Currents: Solution and Ligth--Cone

2753: %Expansions.} {Phys. Rev. D} {\bf 6}, 988--1007, (1972).

2754: 

2755: %\bibitem{[D]} R.Ditzian {\it J.Phys. C} L250 (1972)

2756: 

2757: %\bibitem{[E]} I.G.Enting {\it J.Phys. C} 7 L35 (1974)

2758: 

2759: \bibitem{[FM]} Falco P., Mastropietro V.: {\it Renormalization Group and

2760:     Asymtotic Spin--Charge Separation for Chiral Luttinger Liquid.}

2761:     {J.Stat.Phys.} {\bf 131}, 79--116, (2008).

2762: 

2763: \bibitem{[GM1]} Giuliani A., Mastropietro V.: Anomalous Critical Exponents in

2764:     the Anisotropic Ashkin-Teller Mode {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 93},

2765:     190603--07, (2004).

2766: 

2767: \bibitem{[GM2]} Giuliani A., Mastropietro V.: {\it Anomalous Universality in

2768:     the Anisotropic Ashkin\^{a}€“Teller Model.} { Comm. Math. Phys.} {\bf 256},

2769:     681--725, (2005).

2770: 

2771: 

2772: %\bibitem{[Ha]} Hagen C.R.: {\it New solutions of the Thirring model}.

2773: %{N. Cimento}  {\bf 1}, 5861--5878, 1967.

2774: 

2775: 

2776: \bibitem{[K]} Kadanoff L.P.: {\it Connections between the Critical Behavior of

2777:     the Planar Model and That of the Eight-Vertex Model.} {Phys. Rev. Lett.}

2778:     {\bf 39}, 903--905, (1977).

2779: 

2780: \bibitem{[KB]} Kadanoff  L.P., Brown A.C.: {\it Correlation functions on the

2781:     critical lines of the Baxter and Ashkin-Teller models.} {\it Ann. Phys.}

2782:     {\bf 121}, 318--345, (1979).

2783: 

2784: \bibitem{[KW]} Kadanoff  L.P., Wegner F.J.: {\it Some Critical Properties of

2785:     the Eight-Vertex Model.} {\it Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 4}, 3989--3993, (1971).

2786: 

2787: %\bibitem{[Kl]} Klaiber B.: {\it The Thirring model}. In: Quantum theory and

2788: %statistical physics, Vol X A, Barut A.O. and Brittin. W.F.

2789: %editors. Gordon and Breach, (1968)

2790: 

2791: \bibitem{[LP]} Luther A., Peschel I.: {\it Calculations of critical exponents

2792:     in two dimension from quantum field theory in one dimension.} {Phys. Rev.

2793:     B} {\bf 12}, 3908--3917, (1975).

2794: 

2795: \bibitem{[M0]} Mastropietro V.: {\it Non-Universality in Ising Models with Four

2796:     Spin Interaction.} {J. Stat. Phys.}  {\bf 111},  201--259, (2003).

2797: 

2798: \bibitem{[M1]} Mastropietro V.: {\it Ising Models with Four Spin Interaction at

2799:     Criticality.} {Comm. Math. Phys.}  {\bf 244} 595--64 (2004).

2800: 

2801: \bibitem{[M3]} Mastropietro V.: {\it Nonperturbative Adler-Bardeen theorem}.

2802:     {\it J. Math. Phys} {\bf 48}, 022302, (2007).

2803: 

2804: \bibitem{[M3b]} Mastropietro V.: {\it Non-perturbative aspects of chiral

2805:     anomalies.} {J. Phys. A} {\bf 40}, 10349--10365, (2007).

2806: 

2807: \bibitem{[M4]} Mastropietro V.: {\it Non-perturbative Renormalization.} {World

2808:     Scientific}, (2008).

2809: 

2810: \bibitem{[N]} den Nijs M.P.M.: {\it Derivation of extended scaling relations

2811:     between critical exponents in two dimensional models from the one

2812:     dimensional Luttinger model.} {Phys. Rev. B} {\bf 23}, 6111--6125, (1981).

2813: 

2814: \bibitem{[PB]} Pruisken A.M.M. Brown A.C.: {\it Universality for the critical

2815:     lines of the eight vertex, Ashkin-Teller and Gaussian models.} {Phys. Rev.

2816:     B} {\bf 23}, 1459--1468, (1981).

2817: 

2818: \bibitem{[PS]} Pinson H., Spencer T.: {\it Unpublished}.

2819: 

2820: \bibitem{[Sa]} Samuel S. {\it The use of anticommuting variable integrals in

2821:     statistical mechanics. I. The computation of partition functions}. {J.

2822:     Math. Phys.} {\bf 21}, 2806, (1980).

2823: 

2824: \bibitem{[Sm]} Smirnov S.: {\it Towards conformal invariance of 2D lattice

2825:     models.} Proceedings Madrid ICM, Europ. Math. Soc, 2006 - arXiv:0708.0032

2826: 

2827: 

2828: \bibitem{[Sp]} Spencer T. {\it A mathematical approach to universality in two

2829:     dimensions.} {Physica A} {\bf 279}, 250--259, (2000).

2830: 

2831: 

2832: %\bibitem{[SML]} Schultz T.D., Mattis D.C.,  Lieb E.H.:

2833: %{\it Two dimensional Ising model as soluble problem of many fermions.}

2834: %{Rev. Mod. Phys.} {\bf 36}, 856 - 871 (1964)

2835: 

2836: %\bibitem{[T]} Thompson C.J.:

2837: %{\it Mathematical statistical mechanics.}

2838: %The Macmillian Company, New York, (1972)

2839: 

2840: %\bibitem{[W]} Wegner F J:

2841: %{\it Duality relation between the Ashkin-Teller and the eight vertex model}

2842: %{J. Phys. C} 5,181 (1972)

2843: 

2844: 

2845: \bibitem{[ZZ]} Zamolodchikov A.B.,  Zamolodchikov Al. B.: {\it Conformal field

2846:     theory and 2D critical phenomena, part 1.} {Soviet Scientific Reviews} A

2847:     {\bf 10}, 269, (1989).

2848: 

2849: \end{thebibliography}

2850: 

2851: \end{document}

2852: